Jun 08, 2026 City Council

AND THAT'S A REQUEST OF COUNCIL, CORRECT? WE CAN JUST REQUEST THE TERS? YES.

IT CAN BE A STAFF, COUNCIL, BOARD, ANYONE.

BUT IT WILL STILL GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS, GO THROUGH THE TERS BOARD FIRST, AND THEN ULTIMATELY BE CONSIDERED BY COUNCIL.

THERE'S NO QUESTION TO OPEN UP PUBLIC HEARING.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, THERE'S NO QUESTIONS.

THE TIME IS 822 AND THIS WILL OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYBODY FROM THE CROWD THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? I'M GONNA GIVE IT A MINUTE THEN WE'LL CLOSE IT.

CAN I DO A POINT OF INFORMATION? I THOUGHT DURING, AT A PREVIOUS PUBLIC HEARING, IT WAS STATED THAT IF THEY DIDN'T TURN IN THE FORM PRIOR TO THE MEETING STARTED, THEY COULDN'T TALK ANYWAY.

SO WE'RE WAITING RIGHT NOW FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS TO, I JUST, ARE WE, WE'RE WAITING FOR ANYONE TO TALK? NO, WE'RE WAITING FOR THE MINUTE TO CHANGE BECAUSE, LIKE, WE HAVE TO HAVE A DIFFERENTIATION.

FROM THE TIME WE STARTED AND THE TIME THAT WE END.

SO WE STARTED AT 822 AND IT'S 823 AND THIS WILL CLOSE.

OKAY, BUT FOR CLARIFICATION, DID YOU SAY ANYONE FROM THE AUDIENCE? I WAS JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY THAT RULE OF THE PAPER THING.

YEAH, SO THE WAY THE RULE IS STATED IS WE STILL HAVE TO OPEN IT UP AND WE STILL HAVE TO ASK, BUT IT ALSO SAYS THAT YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT A FORM BEFOREHAND.

SO IT HAS BOTH OF THEM IN THERE, SO I'M JUST FOLLOWING WHAT THE WORDS SAY.

OKAY, I JUST WANTED TO...

YEAH, IT IS CONFUSING.

I DON'T KNOW WHY WE HAVE BOTH IN THERE, BUT IT STATES THAT YOU HAVE TO, AND THEN ALSO THEY HAVE TO TURN IN A FORM.

I GUESS THAT GOES TO KEVIN.

CAN YOU LOOK INTO THAT SO WE CAN KNOW? YEAH, WE'LL LOOK INTO THAT.

I DIDN'T BRING A PROCEDURES COPY IN FRONT OF ME TONIGHT, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A, I THINK THE PROCEDURES NOW DO REQUIRE A FORM, WHETHER IT'S FOR THE.

I KNOW YOU'D GO BACK.

IT'S NOT A NEW PROCEDURE.

LIKE, IT WAS WRITTEN THAT WAY IN THE PREVIOUS ONE.

AND I THOUGHT WE GOT RID OF IT WHEN WE DID AD HOC, BUT APPARENTLY IT CARRIED OVER.

I'M JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKE WE FOLLOWED IT.

WE'LL CHECK THAT FOR THE FUTURE.

THANKS.

AND AT THIS TIME, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR L1.

I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM L1.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I'LL SECOND.

MR. DEFFENBACH SECOND.

AND MOTION PASSES 4-2.

AND I JUST WANT TO GO ON RECORD AS TO WHY I VOTED AGAINST THIS.

I CATEGORICALLY OPPOSE THE USE OF THIS TERS.

I BELIEVE IT'S IRRESPONSIBLE THE WAY THIS TERS WAS USED AT THIS POINT.

INCENTIVIZING GROWTH FURTHER IS IRRESPONSIBLE.

SO I WILL...

CONTINUE TO OPPOSE THE TERMS IN THE WAY THAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY USED.

AND I WILL SECOND THAT.

[L2. ORD-2026-06-08-01 Public Hearing on the Levy of Assessments in Eastridge PID for Improvement Areas Number 6A and 6B and consider an ordinance levying assessments for the costs of certain improvements to be provided in the Eastridge Public Improvement District Improvement Area No. 6 Project; fixing a charge and lien against all properties within Improvement Area Nos. 6A and 6B of the district, and the owners thereof; providing for the manner and method of collection of such assessments; making a finding of special benefit to property in Improvement Area Nos. 6A and 6B of the district; approving a service and assessment plan; providing a severability clause; and take appropriate action.]

ALL RIGHT, THIS WILL TAKE US TO ITEM L2.

L2, ORDINANCE 2026-06-08-01, PUBLIC HEARING ON THE LEVY OF ASSESSMENTS IN EACH RED PIT FOR IMPROVEMENT AREAS, NUMBER AND 6B AND CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR THE COST OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS TO BE PROVIDED IN THE EASTRIDGE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT AREA NUMBERS 6 PROJECT, FIXING A CHARGE AND LIEN

[00:30:02]

AGAINST ALL PROPERTIES WITHIN IMPROVEMENT AREA NUMBERS 6A AND 6B OF THE DISTRICT AND THE OWNERS THEREOF, PROVIDING FOR THE MANNER AND METHOD OF COLLECTIONS OF SUCH ASSESSMENTS.

MAKING A FINDING OF SPECIAL BENEFIT TO PROPERTY AND IMPROVEMENT AREAS 6A AND 6B OF THE DISTRICT, APPROVING A SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN, PROVIDING A SERVABILITY CLAUSE, AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

JEFF GOLDIS WITH MCCALL PARKERS FOR THE CITY'S BOND COUNCIL.

MAYOR, DID YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH MY SLIDES, EXPLAIN THE ORDINANCE, AND THEN Y'ALL DO THE PUBLIC HEARING AND HOLD THE VOTE? YEAH, JUST HANDLE IT.

THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE WHAT WAS HERE EARLIER.

CERTAINLY.

SO I CAN GO THROUGH THE SLIDES AND THEN IF YOU'D LIKE.

THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS AN ORDINANCE LETTING ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN EASTRIDGE IMPROVEMENT AREA 6.

GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL.

TECHNICALLY 6A AND 6B, BUT FOR NOMENCLATURE, IT'S COMBINED AS IMPROVEMENT AREA 6.

THIS IS THE LAST OF THE EASTRIDGE PHASES.

SO FOLLOWING TONIGHT, WE WILL BE DONE ON ANY FINANCINGS AS IT RELATES TO EASTRIDGE.

QUICK REMINDER FOR Y'ALL AND THE PUBLIC, EASTRIDGE WAS CREATED IN 2021.

IT'S A 568-ACRE DEVELOPMENT.

WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY FINANCED IMPROVEMENTS ON PHASES 1 THROUGH 5.

DEVELOPERS ARE BRINGING BEFORE YOU THE...

FINANCING FOR IMPROVEMENT AREAS 6A AND 6B.

SO THIS ASSESSMENT ORDINANCE DOES COMPLETE THE PROCESS FOR THE BOND SALE ONCE WE BRING THAT NEXT ITEM BEFORE Y'ALL.

THESE IMPROVEMENT AREAS 6A IS A LITTLE OVER 40 ACRES AND 6B IS A LITTLE OVER 48 ACRES.

6A HAS...

SCHEDULED TO HAVE 155 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, FIVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION LOTS, AND 6B HAS 298 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS AND SEVEN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION LOTS.

INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA AND ALSO PREPARED, WE HAVE MUNICAP HERE TONIGHT AS WELL WHO PREPARED THE SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE COUNCIL'S AGENDA PACKETS.

THE SAP, LIKE THEY ALL DO, DESCRIBES THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS, THE AMOUNTS OF THE ASSESSMENTS, AND THE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY.

NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH WILL BE CONDUCTED AFTER I SIT DOWN, HAS BEEN PUBLISHED AND MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS IN IMPROVEMENT AREAS 6A AND 6B AS REQUIRED BY LAW.

SO THE ASSESSMENTS, AND THIS IS BASED ON THE PRELIMINARY AMOUNTS, LIKE I SAID, MUNICAP IS HERE TONIGHT WITH ANY UPDATES ON THESE, IS THIS IS $336,000 FOR THE 60-FOOT LOTS, AND FOR 6B IS $2,441 FOR THE 40-FOOT LOTS.

I'VE LISTED BEFORE YOU THE 60-FOOT LOTS HAVE A FINISHED LOT VALUE OF $83,500 AND AN ESTIMATED COMPLETED HOME VALUE OF A LITTLE OVER $417,000.

THE 40-FOOT LOTS IN 6B HAVE A FINISHED LOT VALUE OF $61,000 AND A COMPLETED HOME VALUE OF $305,000.

TOTAL BUILD-OUT IS ESTIMATED TO BE A LITTLE OVER $64 MILLION FOR 6A AND A LITTLE OVER $90 MILLION FOR 6B.

AND BEFORE YOU IS A SNAPSHOT OUT OF THE SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED BEFORE Y'ALL AT THE PRIOR COUNCIL MEETING SHOWING THOSE FIGURES THAT I JUST DESCRIBED.

I KNOW IT'S IMPORTANT FOR Y'ALL AND THE PUBLIC TO GET AN IDEA OF LOT SIZES, NUMBER OF LOTS PER PHASE, AND THEN IMPORTANTLY WHAT HOMEOWNERS ARE GOING TO BE PAYING ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.

AND THIS IS THE SAME FIGURES AS I WENT OVER WITH Y'ALL BUT FOR IMPREGNATION 6B.

AND AGAIN, IF YOU ALL APPROVE THIS ASSESSMENT ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU ALL, THIS DOES LEVY THE ASSESSMENTS ON THIS LAST PORTION OF EAST RIDGE TO SECURE THE BOND SALE, WHICH IS THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM.

THIS QUESTION GOES TO MS. ROOS.

FOR THIS AREA, THIS IS THE NORTHERN PART OF EVERYTHING.

PIDS, THEY COVER LIKE THE ROADS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.

HOW MANY RIGHT-OF-WAYS DO WE HAVE FROM THAT AREA TO ENSURE THAT THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE GOING IN CAN HAVE BETTER TRAFFIC FLOW AND EASE OF ACCESS FOR OUR FIRST RESPONDERS? SO THIS WHOLE AREA HAS RESIDENTIAL ROADWAYS ONLY.

THERE IS NOT MANY COLLECTORS OR ARTERIALS IN THIS AREA.

SO ALL OF THESE PIDS ARE GOING INTO BASICALLY JUST LIKE THE SIDE STREET TYPE OF THINGS THAT YOU GET IN THE COMMUNITY,

[00:35:01]

NOT ANY MAIN TYPES OF ROADS FOR THEM? THERE IS.

NO.

HAS THERE BEEN DISCUSSIONS TO GET RIGHT-OF-WAYS FROM EASTRIDGE OR ANY OF THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS OVER THERE? I'M NOT SURE WHAT WAS DISCUSSED EARLIER, BUT SINCE...

I'VE BEEN HERE ALL OF THESE WERE PRELIMINARY PLATTED BEFORE SO RIGHT NOW THEY'RE JUST COMING FOR FINAL PLATS AND YOU CAN'T ASK FOR THAT WE SHOULD HAVE ASKED FOR IT AT PRELIMINARY FLAT BASICALLY OKAY THANK YOU ALL RIGHT NO FURTHER QUESTIONS I WILL OPEN UP THIS TO PUBLIC HEARING THE TIME IS 831 ANYBODY FROM THE CROWD I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK GIVE THIS A MINUTE BEFORE WE CLOSE IT.

ALL RIGHT, THE TIME IS 8.32, AND THIS WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

AT THIS TIME, I ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

YOUR HONOR, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE L2, ORDINANCE 2026060801.

I SECOND.

MS. DAVID GRAY, SECOND.

ALL RIGHT, MOTION PASSES 4-2.

[H2. 2026-144 Consider a request from AFK Wash Investments, LLC to final plat a property being a 1.184-acre tract of land located at 1732 East Princeton Drive, Princeton, Texas; and take appropriate action.]

AND THIS WILL TAKE US TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA.

WE WILL START WITH THE ITEMS THAT WERE PULLED.

THE FIRST ITEM WOULD BE H2.

MS. FALLON? H2, ITEM 2026-144, CONSIDER A REQUEST FROM AFK WASH INVESTMENTS LLC TO FINAL PLOT OF PROPERTY BEING A 1.184 ACRE TRACK OF LAND LOCATED AT 1732 EAST PRINCETON DRIVE, PRINCETON, TEXAS.

AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

SHOULD I GO THROUGH THE CASE, OR DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION I CAN ANSWER? I THINK IT WAS JUST A QUESTION, YEAH.

YEAH, I JUST HAD A QUESTION ON THIS.

HOW YOU DOING? GOOD EVENING, SEAN.

ON THIS ONE, I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM IF ALL THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PLAT WERE SATISFIED AND COLLECTED ON THIS ONE.

OH.

THIS IS JUST ONE PROPERTY, SO THEY DIDN'T HAVE MUCH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, BUT A LITTLE BIT OF SEWER THAT THEY HAD TO DO, THEY'VE SATISFIED IT.

PERFECT.

I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM ON RECORD THAT THAT WAS NOT...

YES.

AND THAT WAS THE ONLY...

EVERYTHING'S BEING CHECKED ON THEIR SITE PLAN DEVELOPMENT, SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, CIVIL INFRASTRUCTURE, PRELIMINARY PLAT, AND NOW THE FINAL PLAT.

I DIDN'T SEE HOW THAT WAS ACCEPTED OR IF IT WAS EVEN NEEDED BECAUSE IT WAS SO SMALL.

I JUST WANTED TO...

BECAUSE I DIDN'T...

I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM.

SO REALLY IT'S NOT PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE NEED TO ACCEPT.

IT'S ON THEIR PROPERTY.

THEY WILL BE MAINTAINING IT.

IT'S PRIVATE.

PERFECT.

AND THAT WAS ALL I HAD.

THERE'S NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION AT THIS TIME.

YOUR HONOR, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM H2-2026-144.

THIS WILL TAKE US OUT ITEM H3.

MS. TODD SECOND.

[H3. 2026-133 Consider a request from Forestar (USA) Real estate Group Inc. to final plat Crossmill Phase 1A; and take appropriate action]

HURRY MOTION PASSES 6-0.

H3 2026-133.

CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR FOUR-STAR USA REAL ESTATE GROUPS IN FINAL PLAT CROSS MAIL PHASE 1A AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

PRETTY MUCH THE SAME QUESTION IS THE...

THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT FOR THIS ONE, WE'RE SATISFIED AS FAR AS THE PUNCH LIST, EVERYTHING THAT WE NEEDED THERE, IS SATISFIED FOR THAT? SO YOU HAVE THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT INFRASTRUCTURE ACCEPTANCE LATER ON IN THIS AGENDA ITSELF.

SO, YES, ALL THE PUNCH LIST AS FAR AS, YES, IT'S GOOD TO GO.

AND AS FAR AS THE BROOKSIDE BOULEVARD FOR THIS ONE, THAT'S THE NEXT STEP? THAT'S THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, YES.

ALL RIGHT, IT'S TIME TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM H3-2026-133.

ALL RIGHT, MS. TODD SECOND.

[H4. 2026-06-08-R01 Consider Resolution No. 2026-06-08-R01 suspending SiEnergy Gas, LLC’s rate increase and approve the associated resolution; and take appropriate action.]

MOTION PASSES 6-0.

SO TAKE US TO ITEM H4.

ITEM H4-2026-06-08-R01.

CONSIDER RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-06-08.

R01, SUSPENDING SITE ENERGY GAS, LLCS, RATE INCREASE, AND

[00:40:02]

APPROVE THE ASSOCIATED RESOLUTION AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

HEY, MS. KELLY.

IT'S GOOD TO SEE THAT SUSPENSION HERE ON THE AGENDA, BUT I WANTED TO ASK, BASED ON VOLUMETRIC DELIVERY COSTS AND CUSTOMER CHARGE, AND BASED ON FLUCTUATIONS IN THE PRICE OF GASOLINE, WILL THIS OR DOES THIS HAVE A CLAUSE OR IS THERE ALREADY ANY ALLOWANCES FOR EQUITABLE FLUCTUATION SHOULD THE PRICE OF GASOLINE DECREASE? SO THERE ARE TWO COMPONENTS IN YOUR GAS RATE, THAT BEING THE BASE RATE AND THAT ALSO BEING THE FUEL ADJUSTMENT RATE.

WHAT WE ARE ASKING IS TO SUSPEND THE BASE RATE, WHICH IS THE...

REQUIREMENT THAT WE'RE ASKING TO SUSPEND THAT AND MONITOR THAT.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE FUEL ADJUSTMENT, THERE IS NO REGULATION THAT CAN BE DONE ON THAT.

IT DOES FOLLOW THE MARKET.

SO, AND IT GOES UP, SO WILL THE FUEL ADJUSTMENT AS WELL AS GO DOWN.

SO, IT WILL NOT BE A FIXED COST SO THAT IF IT GOES DOWN, WE WILL BE PAYING A HIGHER COST? ON THAT COMPONENT UNIT OF THE GAS RATE, YES, IT WILL NOT BE A FIXED COST.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

IF THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS, I ENTERTAIN A MOTION AT THIS TIME.

I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM H4-2026-06-08-R01 AS SUBMITTED.

I'LL SECOND THAT.

MR. WASHINGTON, SECOND.

[M1. ORD-2026-06-08-02 Consider an ordinance authorizing the issuance of the "City of Princeton, Texas, Special Assessment Revenue Bonds, Series 2026 (Eastridge Public Improvement District Improvement Area No. 6 Project)"; approving and authorizing an indenture of trust, a bond purchase agreement, a continuing disclosure agreement and other agreements and documents in connection therewith; received from a business prospect that the governmental body seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in or near the territory of the governmental body and with which the governmental body is conducting economic development negotiations; or (2) to deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect described by Subdivision (1). Project Bread Sec. 551.074. Personnel Matters; Closed Meeting. (a) This chapter does not require a governmental body to conduct an open meeting: (1) to deliberate the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of a public officer or employee; or (2) to hear a complaint or charge against an officer or employee. (b) Subsection (a) does not apply if the officer or employee who is the subject of the deliberation or hearing requests a public hearing. Litigation CC Memo-Eastridge TIRZ 3-06.08.2026.pdf Ordinance No. 2026-06-08-TIRZ #3 5th Amended PFP.pdf CC Presentation-TIRZ 3 PFP Amendment-06.08.2026.pptx CC Memo-Eastridge PID Levy Assessment IA 6A & 6B-06.08.2026.pdf Ordinance No. 2026-06-08-01-Eastridge Assessment IA 6A & 6B.pdf CC Presentation-Eastridge Assessment Ordinance-06.08.2026.pptx making findings with respect to the issuance of such bonds; and take appropriate action.]

ITEM PASSES 6-0.

PLEASE TAKE US TO OUR REG LEGEND ITEM, STARTING WITH M1.

M1, ORDINANCE.

2026-06-08-02, CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF THE CITY OF PRINCETON, TEXAS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT REVENUE BONDS SERIES 2026 EASTRIDGE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT AREA NO.

6 PROJECT, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AN INDENTURE OF TRUST, A BOND PURCHASE AGREEMENT, A CONTINUING DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT, AND OTHER AGREEMENTS AND DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH.

MAKING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO THE ISSUANCE OF SUCH BONDS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL, ANDRE AL WITH HILLTOP SECURITIES, PART OF THE FINANCIAL ADVISORY TEAM FOR THE CITY.

MY PARTNER JASON HUGHES IS HERE AS WELL THIS EVENING WITH US.

SO I'M GOING TO SIMPLIFY THIS A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT EASTRIDGE A LOT.

SO WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF AREA 6 BONDS FOR EASTRIDGE.

THIS IS THE LAST SERIES OF BONDS FOR EASTRIDGE.

THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT IS 200, 344 LOTS.

THIS LAST PHASE, WHICH IS WHAT WE CALL AREA 6, IS DIVIDED INTO AREA 6A AND 6B.

AREA 6A, 155 LOTS.

AREA 6B, 298 LOTS, FOR A TOTAL OF 453 LOTS IN WHAT WE CALL AREA 6.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS THE LAST BOND FOR EASTRIDGE.

YOU JUST LEVY THE ASSESSMENTS.

THOSE ASSESSMENTS ARE WHAT PAYS FOR THESE BONDS.

A FEW THINGS TO NOTE HERE, COUNCIL, BESIDES THIS BEING THE LAST SERIES OF EASTRIDGE, IS THAT IT CARRIES A TERSE OFFSET, AS YOU GUYS DISCUSSED BEFORE.

IT IS 45% OF THE CITY'S TAX RATE.

RIGHT NOW, IT WOULD BE ABOUT $0.1981 FOR $100.

AND THERE IS, PART OF YOUR AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER, IN THIS CASE GREENBRICK, A FEE THAT THEY WILL BE PAYING AT CLOSING OF THE BOND TRANSACTION IN JULY IN THE AMOUNT OF $815,400.

SO I'M GOING TO FOCUS ON THE BONDING, COUNCIL AND MAYOR.

SO WHAT WE ENDED UP WITH THIS MORNING WHEN WE TOOK THESE BONDS TO THE MARKET WAS A FINAL PAR AMOUNT OF $16,141,000.

SO THIS IS THE LAST BOND, AGAIN, FOR EASTRIDGE.

IT IS DIVIDED INTO 6A AND 6B.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S $6,625,000 ALLOCATED TO AREA 6A, $9,516,000 ALLOCATED TO AREA 6B.

THESE BONDS WERE SOLD AT A FIXED RATE, NOMINAL FIXED RATE FOR 30 YEARS OF 5.45%, WHICH IS AN EXCELLENT RATE FOR THIS BOND IN THIS MARKET.

THIS IS A 30-YEAR FIXED RATE BOND.

AS YOU KNOW, THE SECURITY FOR THIS BOND ARE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND SOME TERSE OFFSETS THAT THE CITY CONTRIBUTES AS PART OF THE AGREEMENT WITH THE EAST RIDGE DEVELOPER.

THE AVERAGE PAYMENT ON THIS ONE COUNCIL IS ABOUT $1,243,000.

AGAIN, THAT NUMBER IS FIXED.

IT DOESN'T CHANGE REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE MARKET DOES IN THE FUTURE.

IF INTEREST RATES GO DOWN OR UP, THAT AMOUNT IS FIXED.

THIS IS A 30-YEAR BOND AND IT CAN BE PREPAID IF THAT'S THE CASE BY SEPTEMBER 1ST OF 2034.

IF THIS COUNCIL DECIDES TO MOVE FORWARD TONIGHT, THE BONDS WOULD BE PAPERED UP BY YOUR BOND ATTORNEY AND THEY WILL TAKE THAT TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS IN AUSTIN AND WE SHOULD BE ALL SET TO CLOSE AROUND JULY 8TH OF THIS YEAR.

AGAIN, COUNCIL, THERE'S BEEN A LOT

[00:45:01]

OF DISCUSSION ABOUT EASTRIDGE, SO I'LL JUST PUT THE TIMELINE HERE AND I'LL STOP HERE AND ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

I JUST WANT FOR CLARIFICATION.

I KNOW FOR THE TERS IT IS.

I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE PID.

WHEN WE DID THE AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT TO CHANGE THAT 30-YEAR THING WITH THE CLAUSE THAT IF WE PAY IT OFF ANYWAY, WE STILL HAVE TO PAY INTO IT ANYWAY BECAUSE PAYING IT OFF EARLY DOES NO GOOD, THAT DOESN'T IMPACT THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

IT'S JUST THE TERS.

SO THE...

JUST, KEVIN, I'M NOT SURE IF YOU KNOW, SO WE...

IT PREDATES ME A LITTLE BIT.

YEAH, SO WHAT HAPPENED WAS, CAN WE SPEAK ABOUT IT? THE AGREEMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE, SO IT'S NOW PUBLIC RECORD.

OKAY, SO WE MADE AN AGREEMENT.

I'M TRYING TO THINK EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS.

THE ORIGINAL DA, 30-YEAR PAYMENT, BUT IN THE EVENT WE PAY OFF THE BALANCE EARLY, IT DIDN'T MATTER.

THE MONEY WOULD STILL GET POOLED FOR THE REMAINING 30 YEARS, SO WE'D BE ENDING UP PAYING MORE THAN WHAT WAS ASKED, IN A SENSE, AND WE COULDN'T TOUCH IT UNTIL THE 30TH YEAR.

IT WAS SOME WILD WRITING.

YEAH, SO ONCE THE PID WAS PAID OFF.

THE TERS WOULD TERMINATE ONCE THE BONDS WERE PAID OFF.

AND THE ORIGINAL DEAL, THE EXTRA MONEY WOULD HAVE WENT TO THE BACK.

WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT GOT COVERED.

CORRECTED AND EVERYTHING AND WE'RE NOT STUCK WITH THAT AS THE TERMS RIGHT NOW I DON'T I DON'T THINK SO YEAH I MEAN YEAH I WOULDN'T THINK SO LIKE KEVIN SAID UM THAT AMENDMENT WAS HANDLED BY GRANT I I DO KNOW THAT THAT AMENDMENT DID COME TO COUNCIL IT WAS APPROVED WHETHER THAT REFLECTS MS. TODD, YOUR BELIEFS, I COULDN'T SAY, BUT I DO KNOW THAT THAT DA WAS AMENDED, AND IN FACT, I THINK 2025, BEFORE WE DID PHASE FOUR, THAT WAS A CONDITION FOR Y'ALL TO MOVE FORWARD.

I ALSO ASK THIS BECAUSE I KNOW IN ORDER TO ENFORCE AMENDMENTS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY GET FILED WITH THE COUNTY, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF OUR AMENDMENTS AND ALL OF OUR AGREEMENTS...

WHEN I LAST CHECKED, THEY WEREN'T ALL THERE.

WE ARE FILING THEM SO THAT WE CAN ENFORCE ANY CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS THAT WE MAKE, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THIS IS SUCH A SIGNIFICANT TYPE OF CHANGE THAT'S BENEFICIAL FOR THE PEOPLE IN REGARDS TO THAT LOCKED-IN 30 YEARS OF MONEY.

I COULDN'T SPEAK TO CERTAINTY, BUT I KNOW WE SOLD EASTRIDGE BONDS IN DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR, AND THEN SOME ALSO IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR.

THE AMENDMENT WAS DONE BEFORE THAT SEPTEMBER SALE LAST SUMMER.

IT WAS HANDLED BY, BUT SINCE WE'VE DONE TWO SUBSEQUENT BOND SALES, I'M GOING TO PRESUME.

I DON'T WANT TO PRESUME, BUT I DO KNOW THAT THE AMENDMENT WAS A CONDITION OF YALMA AND FORWARD.

THAT PAYS FOR IT.

IT WAS APPROVED.

OKAY, BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S ON THE STAFF SIDE, AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE'VE DONE OUR PART, BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER DID THEIRS COMING TO US WITH THE AGREEMENT AND EVERYTHING.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DID OUR SIDE.

AND HAVE THAT ALL PUT IN PLACE APPROPRIATELY.

YEAH, AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, ONCE THE PAID ASSESSMENT IS PAID OFF, THE TERS ENDS AND THAT GETS RELEASED TO THE CITY BECAUSE I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY ON THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO GO BACK TO THE DEVELOPER FOR 30 YEARS REGARDLESS, BUT I JUST WANT TO PUT IT ON RECORD.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN FOR THIS ONE.

SO AT THIS TIME, IF THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

YEAH, AND I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM M1.

SECOND.

I MISS DAVID GRAY SECOND.

MISSING ONE VOTE.

ALL RIGHT, MOTION PASSES 4-2.

SO TAKE US TO ITEM M2.

MAYOR, IF I MAY REAL QUICK, JUST TO CONFIRM FROM THIS TIME, THOSE AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN RECORDED.

[M2. 2026-142 Presentation by Lennar Homes providing updates on development within the Serenity Public Improvement District.]

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING...

WE'RE DOING OUR PART ON THAT SO THANK YOU ITEM M2 2026-142 PRESENTATION BY LENAR HOLMES PROVIDING UPDATES ON DEVELOPMENT WITHIN SERENITY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

[00:50:03]

GREG, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? THANK YOU.

MY NAME IS GREG URICH.

I'M PRESIDENT OF LAND FOR LENAR.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

I WAS ASKED TO COME AND PRESENT AN UPDATE ON OUR PROJECT.

SINCE WE HAD LAST GOTTEN IT APPROVED BY ZONING, WE'VE BEEN UNDER DEVELOPMENT, AND YOU'LL HAVE A NEW PROCESS, I THINK, THAT'S IN PLACE WHERE YOU WANT THE DEVELOPERS TO COME AND PRESENT MAYBE AN UPDATE ON WHAT WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO, AND HOW WE HELD OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE, AND HOW Y'ALL HELD US ACCOUNTABLE.

BEFORE YOU CONSIDER ISSUING PID BONDS IN THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEETING.

SO I WAS TOLD TO COME AND GIVE YOU A PRESENTATION ON OUR PROJECT AND WHAT WE'VE DONE SINCE WE GOT APPROVED FOR ZONING, CLOSED, AND STARTED DEVELOPMENT.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR, I THINK? YEAH.

AND THIS IS THE PROJECT THAT WAS APPROVED IN 24, I BELIEVE, RIGHT? CORRECT.

SO, LENNAR, FOR THOSE OF YOU ALL THAT MAY NOT KNOW, WE'RE A PUBLIC COMPANY.

CORRECT.

OUR MISSION STATEMENT REALLY IS JUST THREE WORDS, QUALITY, VALUE, INTEGRITY, AND IT WAS REALLY DOING THE RIGHT THING FOR THE RIGHT REASON.

AS A PUBLIC COMPANY, WE'RE ACCOUNTABLE FROM THE START TO THE FINISH.

IT'S PART OF OUR ORIGINAL PRESENTATION TO YOU, WHICH MEANS WE DON'T JUST BUY IT AND DEVELOP IT, BUT WE ALSO MAINTAIN THE HOA AND SEE THE COMMUNITY THROUGH ALL THE WAY UNTIL WE HAND IT OVER TO HOMEOWNERS.

SO DEFINITELY ACCOUNTABLE FOR THAT AND WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T JUST...

DO A GOOD JOB FOR THE COMPANY, BUT WE DO A GOOD JOB FOR OUR CUSTOMERS AND YOUR CITIZENS.

SO WE'RE IN IT WITH YOU, FOR SURE, AS A PARTNER.

AND THANK YOU FOR APPROVING THE ZONING ON THIS ONE.

IT'S CALLED SERENITY.

THE ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL, OVER 180 ACRES, HAD ABOUT 710 HOME SITES, 26 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE THAT INCLUDES USABLE AND NON-USABLE ACREAGE, INCLUDING OUR AMENITY CENTER, AND THEN A DEAL THAT WE WERE GOING TO SELL.

AT A DISCOUNT, A STEEP DISCOUNT, TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, A 12-ACRE SCHOOL SITE THAT WAS PART OF OUR PROPERTY, AS YOU CAN SEE IN RED ON THE TOP RIGHT.

SINCE THE PROJECT'S BEEN DEVELOPED AND WE UPDATED OUR ENGINEERING, KIMLEY HORNER, OUR ENGINEER, LOST 10 HOME SITES, AND OPEN SPACE INCREASED BY AN ACRE AND A HALF, WHICH IS GOOD.

AND WE DID CLOSE WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.

THEY OWN THAT SCHOOL SITE, WHICH IS GOOD.

OUR HOME SITES ARE ALL 50-FOOT HOME SITES, AND NOTHING REALLY CHANGED IN OUR REGULATIONS WITH YOU, OF COURSE.

SOMETHING THAT YOU ASKED EARLIER, MS. TODD, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ACCESS ON THE MAIN ROAD THERE.

WE HAVE THREE ACCESS POINTS, WHICH IS GOOD.

AGAIN, THAT'S YOUR FIRST PHASES AT THE TOP, AND THEN PHASE TWO AND THREE ARE AT THE BOTTOM.

WE HAVE A PHASE BREAKOUT FOR THIS, BUT YOU'LL SEE CERTAIN PHASES DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO MAIN COLLECTORS BECAUSE THEY'RE IN THE BACK.

CAN I ASK YOU ONE QUESTION, IF YOU GO BACK TO THAT ONE SLIDE? YEAH, OF COURSE.

UP THE NORTHWEST CORNER THERE, THERE WAS A COUNTY ROAD, SHORT COUNTY ROAD, THAT RUNS OFF OF FM 75 AND GOES UP TO THE NEXT COUNTY ROAD THERE.

ARE YOU ALL GOING TO ABANDON THAT? I'LL HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK.

BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'RE BUILDING A, I GUESS IT'S GOING TO BE FOUR-LANE OR WHATEVER, THE CONCRETE ON THE NORTH SIDE THAT GOES DOWN TO THE SCHOOL.

BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S LIMITING THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE GOING TO...

I'LL VERIFY WITH OUR ENGINEERING TEAM.

WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR TEAM ON THAT AS WELL, MAKING SURE WE DO THE RIGHT THING, BUT I WILL VERIFY THAT.

AND THAT ROAD DOES GO ALL THE WAY TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.

THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THE SCHOOL SITE'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE ONCE IT'S DONE.

THIS IS A PICTURE.

CROPPED AND CUT FROM A PREVIOUS PRINCETON SCHOOL SITE, ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE.

SO THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT OUR OPEN SPACE IS, 27.5 ACRES.

WE HAD A TYPEWAY THERE ON 26, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY 27.5, OF WHICH 18 IS USABLE AND 9 IS IN THE FLOOD.

I'M BEING TOLD BY MY TEAM THAT THERE'S SOME DISCUSSION THAT YOU WANT TO CONSIDER THE HOA MAINTAINING THAT.

WE'RE TOTALLY OPEN TO THAT.

AGAIN, AS A PARTNER, WE WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

THE CITY ORIGINALLY WANTED IT, SO DEFINITELY OPEN FOR DISCUSSION.

WE LIKE TO MOVE QUICK, MAKE GOOD DECISIONS WITH YOU ALL IN UNISON, SO I JUST NEED YOU ALL TO LET ME KNOW DIRECTLY WHAT YOU WANT TO DO THERE, OFFLINE, WHENEVER YOU ALL WANT.

BUT THIS IS WHERE THE OPEN SPACE AREA IS.

THERE WILL BE A TRAIL SYSTEM THROUGHOUT THE MAIN AREA.

CAN I? OF COURSE.

THERE WAS A DRAWING BEFORE THIS SLIDE.

WE CAN GO BACK A COUPLE MORE.

THAT SHOWS THE WHOLE THING RIGHT THERE.

WHEN I SEE THAT, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE BUILDING? OR GO BACK TO THE CURRENT SLIDE THAT YOU ARE ON NOW.

GREAT CATCH.

WHICH ONE ARE YOU BUILDING? SO I THINK THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN,

[00:55:01]

OR IS THIS THE NEW ONE? OKAY, SO THIS IS THE CURRENT PLAN.

AGAIN, IT'S A CONCEPT PLAN, SO IT'S NOT EXACT.

BUT THIS IS IDEALLY WHAT WE'RE BUILDING.

THE AMENITY CENTER SITE DOES MATCH.

THE SITE IN PHASE ONE, SO YOU CAN SEE THE TRAIL SYSTEM CONNECTING TO THAT.

WE'LL PUT THE TRAILS IN.

LET'S BUMP UP TO THE CURRENT.

THAT WAS WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED.

YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT.

THIS IS THE OLD ONE.

I SEE A LOT MORE GREEN RIGHT THERE, AND I KNOW YOU ALL ARE SAYING THAT.

I SEE IT.

YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? I UNDERSTAND THAT ACREAGE MAY BE THE SAME, BUT THE GREEN WAS A LITTLE BIT SPREAD OUT.

I'D HAVE TO TALK TO MY TEAM ABOUT WHY.

AND NOW IT'S NOT.

YOU KNOW, I SEE YOUR POINT RIGHT THERE.

WELL, WHEN I SEE THIS POINT, I SEE WE WERE SOLD SOMETHING, AND NOW WE'RE GETTING SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

THAT'S WHAT I SEE.

SO IF WE'RE GOING TO BE VALUED PARTNERS.

WELL, I NEED TO GET THE ANSWER TO WHY.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING.

AGREED.

AND THEN MAYBE A CITY QUESTION IS HOW THAT CAN HAPPEN IN OUR PROCESS AND HOW THAT KIND OF CHANGE CAN HAPPEN.

I SEE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE.

OKAY, I SEE MINOR DIFFERENCE ON THE CONCEPT PLAN.

THIS IS THE CURRENT ONE, AND THIS IS THE ORIGINAL SPACE IN PHASE ONE, PARALLEL TO THE ROAD COMING IN, AND THEN PERPENDICULAR UP AT THE TOP NEAR THE SCHOOL.

BUT YOU ACTUALLY HAVE MORE OPEN SPACE WHERE THE MAIN PARK IS.

AND WE JUST NEED TO ASK WHY.

WHY WAS THAT CHANGED? I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER, BUT YOU DO STILL GET MORE ACREAGE ORIGINALLY.

BUT I'LL GET THE ANSWER FOR YOU.

WE'LL FIND OUT.

THIS IS THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE AMENITIES THERE.

IT'S AN OPEN AIR, SAME COMMITMENT THAT WE MADE PREVIOUSLY.

POOL, GRILL STATIONS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

THIS IS WHAT PHASE ONE PLAT IS GOING TO SHOW.

WE'RE FINALIZING IT, GOING THROUGH THE CITY ACCEPTANCE PROCESS, INSPECTIONS, AND HOPE TO BE BACK FOR FINAL PLAT LATER THIS MONTH.

THE MEDI-G CENTER IS LOCATED IN THIS PHASE.

FOR THE BONDS, WE ORIGINALLY ASSESSED IT POTENTIALLY AT $400,000.

WITH THE RATES GOING UP SINCE THEN, WE THINK THE AVERAGE PRICE RIGHT NOW MIGHT BE $375.

AGAIN, IT'S JUST THE BEGINNING OF THE DEAL, SO WE STILL THINK IT'S GOING TO GO UP IN VALUE OVER TIME.

IT'S THE SAME PRODUCT, BUT JUST BASED ON THE MARKET FACTORS, THAT'S WHAT WE THINK IT MIGHT HAPPEN.

WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU A FULL BOND PRESENTATION AS WELL WHEN WE'RE READY TO PRESENT THOSE NEXT TIME, SO WE'LL HAVE MORE CALCULATIONS AND MORE DETAIL ON IT, BUT NOTHING'S CHANGED HERE FROM THE PREVIOUS ZONING SUBMITTAL.

THAT IS OUR PRESENTATION.

I'M OPEN TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

YES.

THANK YOU FOR COMING TONIGHT AND GIVING THAT PRESENTATION.

LOOKING AT THIS AGREEMENT, THIS AGREEMENT GIVES YOU, LENORE, THE DISCRETION REGARDING THE TIMING AND PHASING OF THE IMPROVEMENTS.

JUST BASED ON WHAT WE JUST SAW HERE, WHAT COUNCILMAN LONG BROUGHT UP, WHAT ASSURANCES DO WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS DELIVERED IN THE SEQUENCE THAT WILL BE PRESENTED TO US OR THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO APPROVE? YOU MEAN...

OR THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

AS WE DEVELOP EACH PHASE? YES, LIKE WHAT ASSURANCES DO WE HAVE THAT IT'LL BE...

WELL, SO AS A PUBLIC COMPANY, WE'VE GOT A BUSINESS PLAN, RIGHT? AND WE OWN THIS ENTIRE PROPERTY WITH OUR FINANCE PARTNER.

AND SO WE'VE PROJECTED THAT WE NEED THIS THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF OUR PROJECT.

WE'VE ALREADY STARTED ON FUTURE PHASES.

AND SINCE THE AMENITY IS IN PHASE ONE...

IF WE BUILD JUST PHASE ONE AND DON'T BUILD THE REST, WE'RE GOING TO LOSE MONEY ON THE PROJECT.

SO THERE'S NOT A TRUE COMMITMENT THAT WE GUARANTEE WE'RE GOING TO DEVELOP ALL THE WAY THROUGH PHASE THREE BY A CERTAIN DATE.

BUT IF WE DON'T MEET OUR OWN OBJECTIVES, WE WON'T MAKE MONEY, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO DELIVER A BAD COMMUNITY FOR OUR CUSTOMERS AS WELL.

BUT I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING THAT WOULD GUARANTEE ME, THAT WOULD ALLOW ME TO GUARANTEE YOU A DATE IF THE MARKET...

FREEZES UP RIGHT NOW AND MORE CONTINUE TO INCREASE, WE WOULD SLOW DOWN OUR PROJECT.

IN REGARDS TO YOUR OPEN SPACE, IS THAT JUST REGULAR OPEN SPACE OR ANY OF THOSE AREAS CONSIDERED FLOODPLAIN? YES.

OUT OF 27.5 ACRES, 8 OR 9 ARE FLOODPLAIN.

18 ARE USABLE.

[01:00:01]

I GUESS THEN I GO TO CHASE ON THIS BECAUSE...

ACCORDING TO YOUR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE OPEN SPACE IS WHAT YOU'RE GIVING TO THE CITY IN PLACE OF THE PARKLAND.

SO, AND YOU SAID THE CITY WAS TALKING TO YOU ABOUT NOT TAKING IT.

SO I'M JUST CURIOUS IF CHASE COULD CHIME IN, OR DOES HE EVEN KNOW THAT THE LAND WAS SUPPOSED TO GO TO PARKS AND REC OR NOT? YES, I HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP TO SPEED.

I'VE BEEN THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT.

LOOKING AT THIS, TO COUNCILMAN LONG, YOU KNOW, FROM WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED WITH PHASE 1, THROUGH WHAT IS THE CURRENT PROPOSAL, THERE IS THE SAME AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE.

HOWEVER, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT HOA MAINTAINED PROPERTIES VERSUS CITY OWNED AND OPERATED, IF IT'S CITY OWNED AND OPERATED, THOSE NEED TO BE FUNCTIONS FOR THE PUBLIC AND NOT NECESSARILY JUST FOR THAT HOA.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FROM A COST PERSPECTIVE OF MAINTAINING THAT AREA.

THIS IS DESIGNED AS OPEN SPACE TRAIL SYSTEM.

CREATES CONNECTIVITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY, ESPECIALLY TO THE NORTH.

HOWEVER, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THAT IT'S NOT A PUBLIC FACILITY SUCH AS OPEN FIELDS OR SPORTS COMPLEX AND SO FORTH.

OKAY, SO THEN GIVEN THAT THE WAY THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS WRITTEN CURRENTLY, AND THE FACT THAT THIS WILL ACTIVATE OUR ORDINANCES REGARDING PARKS AND REC.

SHOULD WE NOT BE AMENDING THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BEFORE MOVING FORWARD? BECAUSE THE AGREEMENT STATES THAT THE OPEN SPACE IS GOING IN LIEU OF THE LAND THAT IS REQUIRED TO BE GIVEN TO PARKS AND REC FOR THOSE PUBLIC FACILITIES.

AND IF WE ARE NOW LOOKING AT THIS AND A DECISION IS BEING MADE WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF COUNCIL CHANGING THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, I FEEL LIKE WE ARE THEN ACTING IN OPPOSITION OF THE AGREEMENT THAT HAS BEEN SIGNED AND IS ON RECORD.

SO WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE? WELL, I MEAN, AGAIN, YOU'RE CATCHING ME KIND OF COLD IN THE MIDDLE OF A MEETING WHEN I HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN THE AGREEMENT.

I HAVE NEVER EVEN READ THE AGREEMENT.

AND SO IT'S KIND OF DIFFICULT FOR ME TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS YOU'RE ASKING.

SO THEN FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, WHAT IS YOUR OPINION THEN ON US MAKING ANY DECISIONS TONIGHT KNOWING THAT THIS DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE THEN? WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT IS OR NOT BECAUSE I HAVEN'T READ THE AGREEMENT.

AND WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY DECISION TO BE MADE EITHER.

WE'RE TRYING TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THE PRESENTATION SO WE CAN WORK THROUGH SOME OF THE QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

QUESTION? YES, MA'AM.

AS I LOOK THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, I SEE THAT IT SAYS THAT LENNAR'S COMMITMENT TO QUALITY, VALUE, AND INTEGRITY IS THE UNDERLYING FOUNDATION UPON WHICH WE WERE BUILT.

WE LOOK FOR QUALITY, WE LOOK FOR VALUE, WE LOOK FOR INTEGRITY.

WHAT ASSURANCE CAN YOU GIVE THAT THE STRUCTURES WILL HOLD AFTER YOU BUILD THEM? I AM A LENNAR HOMEOWNER.

I'VE BEEN IN MY HOME FOR YEARS AND IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, I HAVE PICTURES TO SHOW YOU HOW THE WALLS ARE CRUMBLING AND I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT THE NEW STRUCTURES THAT ARE BEING BUILT WILL NOT BE OF THE SAME QUALITY AND NEITHER WILL WE HAVE, THE HOMEOWNERS HAVE THE SAME PROBLEMS THAT I CURRENTLY DO.

SO WHAT ASSURANCE CAN YOU GIVE THAT SERENITY IS GOING TO HOLD UP FOR MORE THAN FIVE YEARS AFTER THE HOMES ARE PURCHASED? WE STAND BEHIND OUR WARRANTY, AND YOU CAN GET IN TOUCH WITH ME, AND I'LL PUT YOU DIRECTLY IN TOUCH WITH CUSTOMER CARE WARRANTY SERVICES, SO YOU CAN COME OUT AND LOOK AT THAT.

BUT WE USE THE BEST TRADE PARTNERS.

THE ONES THAT HANDLE THE MOST

[01:05:01]

VOLUME, DO THE MOST WORK, HAVE THE MOST EXPERIENCE.

WE ALSO BUY THE BEST PRODUCTS, THE BEST QUALITY PRODUCTS OUT THERE.

DESIGN IS DIFFERENT, RIGHT? SIZE OF HOME ARE DIFFERENT, BUT THE QUALITY OF THE MATERIALS AND THE TRADE LABORS THAT PUT THOSE MATERIALS TOGETHER IN THOSE HOMES ARE TOP NOTCH, AND WE STAND BEHIND IT.

WE STAND BEHIND OUR WARRANTY.

I JUST GOT ONE COMMENT.

I GUESS ON THE OPEN SPACE, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, MOST OF THAT'S GOING TO BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY? THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL INTENTION AND REQUEST FROM THE CITY, BUT WE'RE OPEN TO CHANGING THAT.

OKAY, FOR PUBLIC USE.

AND I DON'T KNOW, AND MR. BRYANT JUST GOT THROUGH SAYING THAT I DON'T THINK THERE WILL BE ANY SOCCER FIELDS OR BASEBALL PARKS THERE, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WOULD BE THERE UNLESS IT'S A PLAYGROUND.

NOW, AND I'M SPEAKING PERSONALLY, I DON'T LIVE IN AN HOA, THANK GOODNESS.

BUT IF I LIVED IN HOA, I WOULDN'T WANT EVERY TOM, DICK, AND HARRY AND FAMILY TO COME INTO MY SUBDIVISION FOR THE KIDS TO PLAY ON THE PLAYGROUND.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST MY POINT OF VIEW, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH PARKING SPACE THAT'S GOING TO BE PROVIDED.

YOU'RE RIGHT.

YOU KNOW, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A GOOD THING TO DO OR NOT.

WELL, THERE'S AN ALTERNATIVE WHERE PARKS AND REC GETS FINANCIAL, LIKE THERE'S A PAYMENT IN LIEU OF THAT.

I UNDERSTAND, BUT I WOULD WANT, IF I LIVED THERE, I WOULDN'T WANT EVERYONE IN THE CITY TO COME UP THERE AND DECIDE TO GO HAVE A PARTY UP THERE.

IN THE PARK IN MY SUBDIVISION AND DRIVING IN THERE.

AND WHILE THEY'RE DRIVING IN THERE, THEY'RE SCOPING OUT MY HOUSE TO DECIDE IF THEY'RE GOING TO COME AND BURGLARIZE IT OR NOT.

I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOUR ASSESSMENT ON THAT.

MY THING IS OUR ORDINANCE SAY THAT IF WE'RE NOT GETTING THAT, THEN PARKS AND REC GETS MONEY IN LIEU OF THAT.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE'RE NOT GETTING PARKS AND REC LAND THERE, THAT THEY'RE GETTING THE MONEY THAT IS OWED TO THEM SO THAT THEY CAN IMPROVE MORE THINGS IN OTHER PARKS SO THAT...

THAT IS WHERE THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IS THEN LOCATED.

WE'RE HAPPY TO DISCUSS THAT WITH YOU ALL IN A SEPARATE MEETING TO WORK THROUGH THIS AND UNDERSTAND IT FROM BOTH SIDES.

YEAH, AND I THINK THAT WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING.

BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE COMING FOR BOTH THE NEXT MEETING, CORRECT? YES.

AND WE'RE WORKING THROUGH OUR RECORDED PLAT FOR PHASE ONE RIGHT NOW, WHICH WE DO NOT WANT TO BE DELAYED.

ABSOLUTELY OPEN TO WORKING ON THIS AFTER THAT.

JUST TO CLARIFY, I SEE THESE TWO PONDS.

THESE ARE THESE ARE PONDS THAT ARE GOING TO HOLD WATER CONTINUOUSLY NO NO IT'S IT'S A DETENTION, SO IT'S NOT GOING TO HOLD WATER OKAY, SO THAT'S MY QUESTION IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL?

[M3. 2026-143 Consider an Agreement for the Construction and Funding of Authorized Improvements and Reimbursement of Advances between the City of Princeton and Lennar Homes of Texas Land and Construction; and take appropriate action.]

I THINK THEY WERE GOOD.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THIS WOULD TAKE US TO ITEM M3 ITEM M3, 2026-143, CONSIDER AN AGREEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION FUNDING OF AUTHORIZED IMPROVEMENTS AND REIMBURSEMENT OF ADVANCES BETWEEN THE CITY OF PRINCETON AND LENNAR HOMES OF TEXAS LAND AND CONSTRUCTION AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, JEFF KOVAS.

THIS IS A...

CONSTRUCTION FUNDING REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT RELATED TO SERENITY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.

I'VE BEEN ASKED TO PRESENT THIS ITEM.

THIS HAS BEEN PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY THE DEVELOPERS.

QUICK REMINDER, PRINCETON 180 WAS CREATED IN 2025.

IT'S 166 RESIDENTIAL THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.

YOU ALL JUST HEARD AN OVERVIEW OF THAT.

NO ASSESSMENTS HAVE BEEN LEVIED.

NO BONDS HAVE BEEN ISSUED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.

DEVELOPERS HAVE ASKED FOR COUNCIL TO APPROVE A REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION WHICH PRESCRIBES THE MANNER IN WHICH THE CITY INTENDS TO REIMBURSE THE DEVELOPER FOR CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING OF CERTAIN AUTHORIZED IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DISTRICT, SPECIFICALLY IMPROVEMENT AREA ONE OF THAT DISTRICT, IF AND WHEN PID ASSESSMENTS AND OR PID BONDS ARE ISSUED TO FUND THOSE COSTS.

DEVELOPER CAN ADVANCE FUNDS AND CONSTRUCT THIS DEVELOPMENT IN PHASES.

AS WAS JUST DISCUSSED, TIMING AND PHASING IS A DEVELOPER'S DISCRETION.

THE CITY AGREES IN THIS AGREEMENT TO REIMBURSE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN AUTHORIZED IMPROVEMENT COSTS FROM EITHER PROCEEDS OF PID BONDS IF PID BONDS ARE ISSUED OR THE ASSESSMENTS, WHICH ARE THE PID ASSESSMENTS THAT ARE COLLECTED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AND LEVIED ON THE PROPERTY IF NO PID BONDS ARE ISSUED.

Y'ALL'S OBLIGATION TO REIMBURSE IS CONDITIONAL.

IT'S LIMITED TO THE ASSESSMENT COLLECTIONS.

IT'S NOT A GENERAL OBLIGATION OR TAXING OBLIGATION OF THE CITY.

AND THE AGREEMENT DOES SPECIFY THE CITY INTENDS

[01:10:01]

TO UNDERTAKE GOOD FAITH EFFORTS TO ISSUE PAID BONDS AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS.

IF BONDS ARE NOT ISSUED, THEN THOSE ASSESSMENTS DO INCUR INTEREST.

RIGHT NOW IT'S 5% OF THE TAX EXEMPT BOND INDEX FOR WHATEVER THE INDEX IS FOR THAT WEEK FOR THE FIRST FIVE YEARS, AND THEN 2% OF THAT INDEX FOR YEAR SIX AND FOLLOWING.

IF PID BONDS ARE ISSUED, THEN THAT REIMBURSEMENT OBLIGATION GENERATES OR INCURS INTEREST AT THE RATE OF THE PID BONDS.

DEVELOPMENT, THE DEVELOPER AGREES TO SUBMIT REQUESTS FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS PAID.

THE CITY HAS TO REVIEW AND APPROVE.

AND AFTER A COST IS SUBMITTED, THE CITY HAS 10 BUSINESS DAYS TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THOSE COSTS.

THAT IS THE SUMMARY.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? YEAH, DO WE HAVE A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THEY'RE, SORRY.

GO AHEAD.

YOU CAN GO AHEAD, MAYOR.

DO YOU HAVE A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT WE'RE REIMBURSING? YES, MAYOR.

I'M GOING TO ASK THE DEVELOPER TO SPEAK TO THAT SINCE THIS IS THEIR AGREEMENT.

IT'S GENERALLY AUTHORIZED IMPROVEMENT OF STREETS, ROADS, AND THOSE AS THEY'RE INCURRED OVER TIME.

THE ONE OF OUR FOLKS WANTS TO SPEAK TO WHAT MIGHT BE REIMBURSED.

AND THERE'S NO FIXED COST ON THIS EITHER.

IT'S JUST A I DIDN'T HEAR THE QUESTION.

I APOLOGIZE.

WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING TO REIMBURSE FOR, AND WHAT'S THAT FIXED COST? I CAN PULL THE FIXED COST FOR YOU, BUT I DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT NOW.

BUT IT'S FOR THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE INSTALLED FOR PHASE 1.

I THINK THERE'S ALSO A LIFT STATION, SOME OFF-SITE SEWER LINES AS WELL.

BUT I'D WANT TO ANSWER IT IN DETAIL.

I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME.

SORRY.

AND THIS IS FOR THE SAME DEVELOPMENT WE WERE JUST SPEAKING ABOUT, THE PREVIOUS ITEM, RIGHT? THIS IS THE ONE THAT'S...

CORRECT, CORRECT, BECAUSE PHASE 1 IS ALMOST DONE.

SO IT'S ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S TIED TO PHASE 1 AS WELL AS ANY OFF-SITE WATER AND SEWER LINES.

MS. TODD HAS A LIST OF WHAT THOSE ARE READY TO GO.

I HAVE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

TRYING TO SEE IF IT'S JUST BASIC VERBIAGE OR IF THERE'S ACTUAL STUFF.

AND TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND EASEMENTS RIGHT AWAY ARE NEEDED WITHIN THE PROPERTIES.

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE INSTALLED WITHIN EASEMENTS GRANTED TO THE CITY OR IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY.

THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT SHALL BE SIZED TO SERVE THE DEVELOPMENT ONLY.

AND THAT WILL BE AN EXHIBIT A OR B OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

WHY ARE YOU LOOKING FOR THAT? THAT'S MY QUESTION.

AND I'LL GO TO THE CITY SHY, IF YOU COULD.

I KNOW THAT THE...

THE REIMBURSEMENT HAS A TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND ON WHATEVER THE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE.

WE JUST HAD A RECENT EVENT WHERE WE WERE OUTSIDE OF THE MAINTENANCE BOND FOR THE BEECHAM ROAD, WHERE THE ROAD KIND OF BUCKLED.

I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT PROCEDURES THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT AS THESE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ARE BEING MADE, THAT WE ARE MAKING SURE WE DON'T HAVE A REPEAT OF THE BEECHAM ROAD INCIDENT.

MAYOR, COUNCIL, PRESTON JONES, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.

SO THE BEECHAM BOULEVARD PHENOMENON WITH THE ROAD HEAVED, THAT HAPPENS A COUPLE TIMES THROUGHOUT OUR CITY, A COUPLE TIMES A YEAR.

WHAT IT IS, IS WE ARE ON A LINE OF HOUSTON BLACK CLAY, RUNS FROM SAN ANTONIO UP THROUGH OUR AREA, ACTUALLY NORTH OF US.

AND THAT, WHENEVER IT EXPANDS AND CONTRACTS WITH THE WEATHER, IT CAN PUT UPWARDS OF 20,000 POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT ON THE CONCRETE, CAUSING IT TO HEAVE.

SO THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THAT THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.

NO MATTER WHAT WE DO AS THE PEOPLE THAT INSPECT THE INFRASTRUCTURE, ANY SORT OF ORDINANCES WE PUT IN PLACE, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS, THE GROUND BENEATH IT'S GOING TO WIND UP DOING WHAT IT IS BECAUSE THE LAYER THAT WE ARE AT CAN GO DOWNWARD DOWN AND UPWARDS OF 12 FEET DEEP, AND WE DON'T OBVIOUSLY HAVE THEM RECONDITION THE SOIL 12 FEET DEEP.

THAT WOULD STOP CONSTRUCTION THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE STATE OF TEXAS.

MAKES SENSE.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY EARTHBENDERS ON STAFF THAT COULD DO ANYTHING.

THAT'S A JOKE.

DON'T ANSWER THAT.

NOT ANY THAT WE COULD AFFORD RIGHT NOW.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS REQUEST IS A, IT'S NOT THAT COUNCIL WILL BE APPROVING MONEY TONIGHT.

THIS IS JUST FOR THAT THE...

THE NOR CAN USE THEIR OWN FUNDS TO, AND THE REIMBURSEMENT WILL TAKE PLACE AFTER THE BONDS ARE SOLD, AM I CORRECT? CORRECT.

AND THAT'S IF THE BONDS ARE SOLD,

[01:15:01]

BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT'S SAYING, BASICALLY, COUNCIL AS A CITY WILL REIMBURSE CASH OR THROUGH A BOND, AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT THE AGREEMENT IS.

YEAH, BUT WE GET THE INFRASTRUCTURE DONE NOW AS A PROJECT ON IF WE APPROVE THIS TONIGHT.

YOU'RE OBLIGATING TO REIMBURSE FOR THE COSTS.

MAYOR'S CORRECT.

SO IT'S EITHER PID BONDS OR IF NO PID BONDS ARE ISSUED, LIKE WE LEVY ASSESSMENTS FOR EVERY PROJECT.

AND THOSE ASSESSMENTS CAN BE LEVIED AND COLLECTED ANNUALLY.

EVEN IF NO PID BONDS ARE ISSUED, IT'S STILL AN OBLIGATION OF THAT HOMEOWNER.

AND THEN THOSE ASSESSMENTS ARE REPAID OVER A PERIOD OF TIME.

SO THAT WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH, IF WE DON'T DO BONDS, THAT WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH A CIP BOARD, RIGHT? IS THAT IT'S NOT CONSIDERED A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT IF THE CITY IS PAYING CASH? I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.

JUST TO CLARIFY, THE AGREEMENT DOESN'T OBLIGATE YOU ALL TO SPEND YOUR OWN CASH.

NOR ANY AD WARM PROPERTY.

YOU DON'T COME TO YOUR GENERAL FUND FOR IT.

YOUR SOLE LIMITATION ON THE SOURCE OF THE REIMBURSEMENT IS PROCEEDS OF BONDS OR THE ASSESSMENT.

SO, LIKE I SAID, YOU HAVE THE CITY DOES STATE IN THERE YOU'LL USE GOOD FAITH EFFORTS.

TO LEVY THE ASSESSMENTS, AND OR ISSUE THE PAID BONDS.

ONE OF THOSE TWO METHODS IS GOING TO BE YOUR REPAYMENT SOURCE.

THAT WORKS.

YEAH, MAYOR, I THINK I'M, ME PERSONALLY, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS JUST FOR THIS WHOLE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T, IT'S GOING TO EXPEDITE THE BUILD AND GET THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE SO IT'S NOT SITTING FOR LONG PERIODS OF TIME.

SO, YEAH, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS.

I AM AS WELL, COUNCILMAN JOHNSON.

I WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT THIS WAS ALSO ONE OF OUR PURPOSEFUL PARTNERSHIPS.

WE ENTERED INTO THIS IN ORDER TO WORK WITH OUR ISD TO GET THEM ANOTHER SITE, SO I JUST WANTED TO LET THAT BE KNOWN AS WELL.

SO IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, WE'RE READY.

I THINK MS. TODD HAS ONE.

SO THERE'S AN AGREEMENT IN HERE FOR WHAT THOSE...

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ARE, BUT IT IS NOT ATTACHED TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

AND OBVIOUSLY WE'VE CHANGED OUR LEGAL TEAM AND WHATNOT OVER THIS TIME PERIOD.

IF IT'S POSSIBLE, IT'S A SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN, I GUESS IS WHAT IT IS.

CAN YOU SEND THAT OVER TO US? YES.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, THIS TIME I ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM M3-2026-143. I'LL SECOND.

ALL RIGHT, MR. WASHINGTON, SECOND.

HEARING MOTION PASSES 6-0.

MAYOR, IF I CAN JUST OFFER MY THANKS TO LENORE BECAUSE OF THAT PURPOSEFUL PARTNERSHIP WITH OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT.

LET'S TAKE HIS ITEM.

OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT IS ON THE WAY TO GETTING A VERY CRITICAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OPEN.

AS FAST AS WE CAN.

SO WE DO APPRECIATE IT, AND WE APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING YOUR INFORMATION FORWARD TO US BECAUSE I THINK ALL OF US AGREE THAT TRANSPARENCY IS THE ONLY WAY, AND YOU GUYS ARE HELPING LEAD THE WAY WITH OUR PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE DEVELOPERS.

SO THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS.

[M4. 2026-06-08-R Consider Resolution 2026-06-08-R to issue a contract to Hayes Construction, LLC. for on-call road construction for one three-year term and two one-year renewals; and take appropriate action.]

THANKS FOR MENTIONING IT.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

OUR PLEASURE.

ALL RIGHT, LET'S TAKE ITEM M4.

M4 2026-06-08-R, CONSIDER RESOLUTION 2026-06-08-R TO ISSUE A CONTRACT TO HAYES CONSTRUCTION LLC FOR ON-CALL ROAD CONSTRUCTION ONE THREE-YEAR TERM AND TWO ONE-YEAR RENEWALS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

FOR YOU TODAY IS A RESOLUTION FOR AN ON-CALL ROAD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT.

FROM TIME TO TIME, PUBLIC WORKS DOES OUTSOURCE ITS ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION AND REPAIR, AND THIS CAN INCLUDE CONCRETE STRUCTURES, SIDEWALKS, ADA RAMPS, DRIVEWAYS, MEDIAN SAFETY, TREATMENTS, INLETS, CONCRETE PADS, ET CETERA, AS OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE IS NEEDED.

FOR BACKGROUND, TO LET YOU KNOW, WE ISSUED A...

COMPETITIVE SEAL PROPOSAL BACK IN MARCH WITH SUBMISSIONS DUE BACK IN APRIL 2026.

IT WAS PUBLICLY POSTED IN THE PRINCETON HERALD AND ALSO ONLINE PER TEXAS LEGISLATURE

[01:20:01]

FOR PUBLIC NOTICES.

IT WAS ALSO DIRECTLY MAILED TO 748 COMPANIES NATIONWIDE.

WHEN WE STILL HAD NO RESPONSES, THE COMPETITIVE SEAL PROPOSAL EXTENDED TO MAY 1ST AND AN ADDITIONAL 74 PRE-QUALIFIED CONTACTS WERE CONTACTED THROUGH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WEBSITE.

WE DID RECEIVE ONE RESPONSE FROM HAYS CONSTRUCTION LLC, WHICH IS A CURRENT CITY VENDOR AND THEY ARE A RESPONSIBLE AND QUALIFIED VENDOR.

THEY PROVIDED 180 UNIT PRICE LINE ITEMS FROM SQUARE FOOTAGE TO . . .

SQUARE YARD TO LINEAR FOOT PER HOUR ACROSS MULTIPLE DIVISIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION, WHICH IS EARTHWORK BASED IN SURFACE, CONCRETE, CONCRETE SURFACES, STORM SEWERS, INCIDENTALS LIKE GUARDRAILS, REVEGETATION, AND ALSO TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND MARKINGS.

THE PENDING ROAD PROJECTS WOULD BE FURTHER DELAYED IF THIS INITIATIVE IS NOT APPROVED.

AND WITH THAT, IT IS REQUESTED THAT YOU PLEASE APPROVE RESOLUTION 2026-0608-R.

PUBLIC WORKS MAY DETERMINE THAT ONE PROVIDER IS INSUFFICIENT AND MAY CHOOSE TO RE-SOLICIT IN THE WINTER TO OBTAIN AN ADDITIONAL ON-CALL ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION PROVIDER.

BUT FOR THE MEANTIME, THIS PROVIDER CAN DO THE JOB.

AND THIS, YEAH, THIS IS A THREE-YEAR TERM.

DID THIS MAKE IT SO THEY'RE EXCLUSIVE TO THE CITY? THEY'RE NOT EXCLUSIVE.

WE CAN ALWAYS STILL GO OUT AND GET BIDS.

WE CAN GET ADDITIONAL BIDS.

AND JUST BECAUSE WE ARE ON CALL, WE MAY NOT FIT IN HAYES' SCHEDULE.

IT'S JUST TO TAKE OUT A LOT OF THE PAPERWORK AT THE GET-GO.

IT WOULD BE LIMITED TO OUR BUDGET, AND AS LONG AS THEY COULD PROVIDE THE WORK AND WE HAVE MONEY, IT WOULD BE A GOOD PARTNERSHIP.

BUT THAT WOULD NOT LIMIT US FROM GOING OUTSIDE, DOING A SPECIAL PROJECT, DOING ANOTHER BID, OR EVEN GETTING MORE VENDORS.

WITH THIS, AND THIS IS JUST A QUESTION FOR ME, CURIOUS, DO WE HAVE THIS VENDOR CURRENTLY WORKING ON BEACHUM, OR ARE WE AT THE CITY WORKING ON BEACHUM OURSELVES? BEELINE? OKAY.

YEAH, I DON'T THINK WE CAN AFFORD NOT TO APPROVE THIS.

ESPECIALLY IF YOU DON'T WANT TO GET BEAT UP ONLINE ABOUT THESE ROADS.

OKAY, AT THIS TIME, IF THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS, THEN I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY MOTION.

I HAVE A QUESTION.

OKAY, THERE YOU GO.

FOR THE ROADS, AS I WAS THINKING ABOUT WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE SOIL, AND YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT, MOST OF OUR ROADS ARE CONCRETE.

DOES IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE WHETHER WE USE CONCRETE OR ASPHALT? IS ONE MORE DURABLE THAN THE OTHER AND TOLERANT OF THE CHANGES IN THE SOIL? SO YOUR CONCRETE, IT IS MORE DURABLE, BUT UNFORTUNATELY CONCRETE, UNLIKE ASPHALT, WHENEVER THE CHANGES SUBGRADE ARE HAPPENING BELOW ASPHALT, THEY'RE MORE NOTICEABLE IN THE SHORT TERM, SO IT DOESN'T HAVE THAT.

SO BEECHLAND WAS AN OVERNIGHT, YOU KNOW, MORE OR LESS IMPLOSION.

SO THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE IS CONCRETE DOESN'T GIVE OVER TIME.

IT'S A SUDDEN REACTION.

TO THAT PRESSURE.

SO CONCRETE ULTIMATELY IS BETTER, HAS A LONGER LIFESPAN AS FAR AS DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS AND EVEN THE PRESSURES OF THE GROUND UNDERNEATH IT, IT DOES HAVE MORE SUSTAINABILITY WITH IT BEING PUSHED AGAINST.

BUT THE ASPHALT, WE WOULD CATCH IT SOONER BECAUSE IT WOULD HAPPEN A LITTLE LESS AGGRESSIVELY AND MORE IMMEDIATE AS FAR AS WE WOULD CATCH IT, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY THIS WOULD BE GOING OVER SIX MONTHS AS FAR AS THE UPWARDS PRESSURE.

WE HAD NOTICED IT WITHIN A FEW WEEKS VERSUS, YOU KNOW, SIX TO EIGHT MONTHS LATER WHENEVER IT ALL OF A SUDDEN DID WHAT IT DID AS FAR AS UPHEAVING.

SO WOULD IT BE PRUDENT THEN FOR US TO CONSIDER CHANGING TO ASPHALT? NO, MA'AM, I DO NOT THINK SO BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE TO A CURVED AND GUTTER SYSTEM, WHICH ALLOWS THE DRAINAGE FROM RAIN EVENTS TO GO INTO THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM AND INTO THE CREEKS VERSUS RUNOFF INTO DITCHES.

THAT INCREASES OUR SEDIMENT LOAD ON RIVERS AND STREAMS, WHICH LOWERS OVERALL CAPACITY OF THE LAKE.

I KNOW WE'RE A LITTLE DIFFERENT TO PLANO IN THAT WE HAVE MORE WATER AROUND US, AND I'VE BEEN NOTICING IN PLANO THEY'RE RESURFACING THE STREETS, AND IT SEEMS AS IF THEY'RE LARGELY MOVING TOWARDS ASPHALT.

SO THAT WAS ALSO A REASON FOR MY QUESTION, BECAUSE I KNOW THEY HAVE SOME SIMILAR ISSUES AS WELL.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING I'M OPEN TO, IS WE CAN ALWAYS DISCUSS THESE ISSUES WITH OTHER CITIES AND SEE WHAT THEIR POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS ARE.

I WAS LOOKING AT SOME CASE STUDIES, AND THIS GOES ALL THE WAY BACK TO A TXDOT STUDY IN 1971.

SO CONCRETE UPHEAVING IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN AROUND SINCE WE'VE BEEN PUTTING CONCRETE ON THIS HOUSTON BLACK CLAY.

IT'S NOT NEW, AND IT HAPPENS IN ALL CITIES,

[01:25:01]

NOT JUST HERE.

ALL RIGHT, THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS.

YES, MA'AM.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION AT THIS TIME.

YEAH, I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION TO APPROVE GENITUM M4-2026-06-08.

THAT'S ALL.

A SECOND.

ALL RIGHT, MS. DAVID GRAY, SECOND.

YOUR HONOR, BEFORE WE GO ON ABOUT THE BEECHAM INCIDENT, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE KUDOS TO PRESTON AND THE PUBLIC WORKS TEAM FOR THEIR RESPONSE ON THAT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

OH, AND CHIEF WATERS.

I MEAN, CHIEF.

CHIEF, YOU'RE A MAN.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IT ALL GOES TO CHIEF AND HIS LEADERSHIP.

SEE? ALSO, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ASSISTED IN THAT ALSO.

IS IT HAPPENING RIGHT OUTSIDE OF THEM? YEAH.

KUDOS ALL AROUND.

I WANT TO GIVE KUDOS TO THE ENTIRE CITY STAFF FOR THE RESPONSE TO THE

[M5. 2026-06-08-R02 Consider Resolution No. 2026-06-08-R02 establishing and adopting a Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Fund Policy; and take appropriate action.]

BEECHAM ROAD INCIDENT.

CONSIDER RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-06-08.

THIS IS THE ITEM M5.

ITEM M5, 2026-06-08-R02.

R02, ESTABLISHING AND ADOPTING A VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND POLICY AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

I WILL GET IT DOWN.

WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IS A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AN INTERNAL POLICY FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT.

WE ARE CALLING IT THE VRF.

THE PURPOSE OF THE VRF IS TO PROVIDE A TRANSPARENT AND SUSTAINABLE METHOD FOR ACCOUNTING AND THE CITY'S FLEET VEHICLES OF EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT.

THIS ACTION WOULD REQUIRE THE FRAMEWORK AND STREAMLINE INTERNAL PROCESSES FOR FLEET MANAGEMENT.

REPLACEMENT PROGRAMS LIKE THIS ARE ACTUALLY REALLY COMMON AND IT PROVIDES BUDGETARY CONSISTENCY, IT ENHANCES FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, AND ALSO IT'S A COMPREHENSIVE FOR CITY ASSETS.

THE VRF PROGRAM WAS ACTUALLY ESTABLISHED IN 2024 AND IT'S INTENDED TO REDUCE LARGE ONE-TIME EXPENDITURES AND IN FAVOR OF LONG-TIME CAPITAL PLANNING.

THIS IS INTENDED TO TRACK AND ALLOCATE COSTS BACK TO DEPARTMENTS WITH THE GOAL OF BUILDING SUFFICIENT REVENUES FOR FUTURE REPLACEMENT.

CITY ESTABLISHED THE FLEET REVIEW AND POLICY STEERING COMMITTEE, AND IT WAS COMPRISED OF KEY STAKEHOLDER DEPARTMENTS THAT COLLABORATED TO DEVELOP A PROPOSED POLICY AND TO ALSO MANAGE THE EXISTING FLEET AND PROACTIVELY PLAN FOR ADDITIONS, REPLACEMENTS, AND DISPOSALS.

THE DEPARTMENTS THAT COLLABORATED ON THIS ARE THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT, PARKS AND RECREATION, POLICE, FLEET, AND PUBLIC WORKS.

THIS COMMITTEE MET BETWEEN FEBRUARY TO MARCH 26TH, AND THAT IS THE POLICY THAT'S PRESENTED TO YOU TODAY FOR ADOPTION.

CITY ADMINISTRATION IS REQUESTING THAT THE PROPOSED POLICY BE ADOPTED SO WE CAN USE IT AS A GUIDE, AND ALSO THE PROPOSED POLICY WOULD ENSURE THAT UPCOMING FLEET REQUESTS ARE ONLY THE MOST VITAL AND WOULD SAVE TIME AND OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY AND JUST WE CAN SHARE OUR ASSETS AMONG OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND BEFORE COMING TO YOU FOR NEW REQUESTS.

SO IN CONCLUSION WE ARE REQUESTING THAT YOU PLEASE APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THIS TYPE OF POLICY AND AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE CITY ADMINISTRATIONS TO FOLLOW.

ANY QUESTIONS? HOW WOULD THIS AFFECT THE BUDGET CURRENTLY COMPARED TO WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW AND MOVING TO THIS PROGRAM? WELL, WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW IS JUST, YOU KNOW, THE MOST URGENT IS GOING VERSUS A PROACTIVE APPROACH THAT WOULD HAVE A FIVE-YEAR FORECAST OF IDENTIFYING WHAT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED.

AND THEN, AS A COLLABORATIVE OF ALL THE DEPARTMENTS WORKING TOGETHER IN HAND, BEING ABLE TO PRIORITIZE WHAT WE ALL NEED TOGETHER.

THAT DOES NOT LIMIT JUST BECAUSE IT'S ON A FIVE-YEAR PLAN THAT IF SOMETHING IS NEEDED IN YEAR FIVE THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT EVERY YEAR WE DON'T REVISIT THIS PLAN TO DETERMINE AND REPRIORITIZE WHAT THE NEEDS ARE ACROSS ALL THE DEPARTMENTS.

AND SINCE WE'VE BEEN MEETING TOGETHER, IT'S A VERY COLLABORATIVE AND OPEN PROCESS.

WE FOUND SOME SHARING HAS ALREADY TAKEN PLACE.

IT'S BEEN VERY BENEFICIAL, VERY GOOD OPEN DIALOGUE AND COMMUNICATION FROM ALL THE DEPARTMENTS.

SO THAT SHOULD HELP US SAVE MONEY.

YEAH SAME IN THE LONG RUN OKAY I'LL MAKE SURE THAT THE PROGRAM'S NOT GOING TO COST US MORE TO KIND OF MAINTAIN WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE OKAY IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS I WILL ENTERTAIN ANY EMOTIONS AT THIS TIME YEAH I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA ITEM M5 20 2606 08 R02 I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION I MISSED THAT ONE SECOND

[01:30:03]

MAYOR FOR MY COMMENT THE MOTION PASSES 6-0.

THERE YOU GO.

BEN.

CAN WE, NOW THAT WE'RE DOING THIS, CAN WE WORK ON THE ROADWAY FUTURE REPLACEMENT FUND? BECAUSE ALL THESE ROADWAYS HAVE LIVE SKYHOOKS.

SO LET'S MOVE TOWARDS THAT NEXT.

I'M SERIOUS.

EVERY ONE OF THESE ROADS IS ONLY GOING TO LAST ABOUT 30 YEARS, AND IT WILL HAVE TO BE REPLACED.

GO DOWN TO PLANO, YOU SEE THEM GETTING REPLACED.

[M6. 2026-06-08-R03 Consider Resolution 2026-06-08-R03 to approve and adopt the City’s revised Purchasing Policy and Procedures; and take appropriate action.]

THIS WOULD TAKE US TO ITEM M6.

YES, BEFORE YOU IS A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT AND REVISE THE 24 PURCHASING POLICY AND CONSIDER SOME UPDATES.

THE PROPOSED REVISION WOULD ATTEMPT TO REMOVE AMBIGUITY AND GIVE EXAMPLE SCENARIOS AND SUMMARIES FOR IMPROVED COMPREHENSION.

IT IS ALSO GOING TO REFLECT THAT MOST CURRENT TEXAS LAWS ARE APPLICABLE TO MUNICIPALITIES.

THE MOST NOTABLE IS UNDER THE TEXAS BUSINESS AND COMMERCE CODE THAT QUOTES NEED TO BE IN WRITING OVER $500.

THE REVAMPING OF THE STATE'S HISTORIC UNDERUTILIZED BUSINESS PROGRAM TO VETERAN HEROES UNITED IN BUSINESS, VET HUB.

ALSO, VALUES OF MORE THAN $3,000 BUT LESS THAN $100,000 SHOULD CONTACT AT LEAST TWO VET HUBS.

ALSO, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE.

SECTION 418.004 TO DEFINE WHAT IS AN EMERGENCY AND TO MIRROR THE DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES TO FOLLOW DURING A DISASTER EQUAL TO THE STATE OF TEXAS.

AND ALSO INCORPORATE TEXAS SENATE BILL 1173, WHICH TOOK EFFECT SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2025, WHICH WOULD INCREASE THE FORMAL PROCUREMENT THRESHOLD FROM 50,000 TO 100,000.

PEER CITIES THAT HAVE ALREADY ADOPTED THIS LIMIT ARE MCKINNEY, GREENVILLE, ANNA, SALINA, FARMERS BRANCH, ALLEN, THE COLONY, AND WILEY.

THE NEW POLICY WOULD ALSO STANDARDIZE AND ADOPT SIMILAR FORMS OF WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE.

FOR THE COMPETITIVE EXEMPTIONS FOR CONSISTENCY.

WE WOULD USE THE SAME FORM EACH TIME, EVERY TIME FOR SOLE SOURCE AND ALSO HAVE A METHOD FOR WHERE THERE ARE APPLICABLE EXEMPTIONS TO COMPETITIVE BIDDING, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO CHECKBOX THAT FORM.

THE ACTION REQUESTED BEFORE YOU IS TO APPROVE AND ADOPT THIS REVISED POLICY WHICH TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION ALL OF THE CHANGES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN TAKEN BY SOME OF OUR PEERS AND ALSO WHICH IS IN EFFECT BY THE STATE.

ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION.

SO THIS CHANGES THE $50,000 THAT YOU GUYS HAVE TO COME TO COUNCIL TO $100,000? CORRECT.

THE CURRENT THRESHOLD WE'RE USING IS FROM 2007.

AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO ASK THIS QUESTION.

WOULD IT BE AND THIS IS GOING TO BE DOCUMENTED.

I GUESS ANYTHING OVER THE $100,000, EVERYTHING WILL BE DOCUMENTED TO THE T.

SO IF I KIND OF PUT IN A REQUEST FOR WHAT WE SPENT.

ABSOLUTELY.

FOR THIS AMOUNT, WE'LL BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY THIS IMMEDIATELY.

ABSOLUTELY.

SO ONE OF THE NEW CHANGES IN THE POLICY IS THAT PAPER TRAIL.

EVERY QUOTE NEEDS TO BE IN WRITING, ANYTHING OVER $500.

WE NEED TO ESTABLISH A PAPER TRAIL TO BE ACCOUNTABLE, AND FOR TRANSPARENCY REASONS, WE NEED TO HAVE A PROCEDURE IN PLACE THAT MIRRORS CURRENT STATE LAW, AND WE MAINTAIN THE OLD POLICY THAT IS NOT THERE, IT'S ABSENT.

SO BY ADOPTING THIS POLICY, WE WOULD HAVE THAT PAPER TRAIL, WE WOULD HAVE THE RECORD, AND I HOPE YOU SEE THAT FROM WHAT I BROUGHT BEFORE YOU OR WHAT'S BEEN PREPARED BY FINANCE SINCE I'VE BEEN EMPLOYED BY THE CITY OF PRINCETON, YOU'RE SEEING BIG TABS, YOU'RE SEEING THIS DOCUMENTED PAPER TRAIL, YOU'RE SEEING THE EVIDENCE OF WHAT IS AT STATE LEVEL HERE TODAY.

MS. TODD? SO I'VE ONLY HEARD GREAT THINGS ABOUT...

WHAT'S CHANGING ON THIS TO HAVE THAT TRANSPARENCY, TO HAVE THAT PAPER TRAIL? I'VE HEARD IT FROM A FEW PEOPLE, AND I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I GREATLY APPRECIATE IT, ESPECIALLY WHEN I WAS GOING BACK FOR THE LAST BUDGET AND WENT ALL THE WAY BACK TO 2017.

NOT EVERYTHING WAS CLEAR, AND TO KNOW NOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A POLICY IN PLACE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT DOCUMENTATION, WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO LOOK BACK AND SAY, AH, THIS IS WHERE THE MONEY WENT.

THIS IS WHY THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I KNOW THE THREE OF US RAN ON OF WANTING TO BRING TO THE PEOPLE, AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU HAVE BROUGHT THIS FORWARD BECAUSE IT WAS NECESSARY.

YOU SAID THIS ONE ALSO INCREASES THE THRESHOLD, RIGHT, FROM THE $50,000 TO THE $100,000 IS FOR THE THRESHOLD.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS IN THERE.

ALL RIGHT, IF THERE'S NO OTHER

[01:35:01]

QUESTIONS, I CAN TAKE ANY MOTION.

YOUR HONOR, I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM M6-2026-0608.

AND I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

ALL RIGHT, MR. DEFFENBACH, SECOND? MOTION PASSES 6-0.

[M14. 2026-145 Discussion regarding the land selection for the future Princeton Police Department building and provide direction.]

YOUR HONOR, FOR THE NEXT ITEM, EXCUSE ME IF I'M SPEAKING OUT OF TURN HERE, BUT WOULD IT BE MORE PERTINENT TO DISCUSS M7 AFTER WE'VE DISCUSSED M14? ARE THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE BOTH IN RELATION TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING? YEAH.

I MEAN, WE CAN GO OUT OF ORDER.

CAN WE PULL M14 UP? YEAH, WE CAN JUMP INTO M14 NOW.

YEAH, WE'LL JUMP INTO M14.

M14, ITEM 2026-145.

DISCUSSION REGARDING THE LAND SELECTION FOR THE FUTURE PRINCETON POLICE DEPARTMENT BUILDING AND PROVIDE DIRECTION.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL, TIFFANY WEST, PRINCETON POLICE DEPARTMENT.

I'M HERE TO KIND OF JUST DISCUSS THE LAND.

FOR WHICH WE'RE CURRENTLY LOOKING AT TO PROCEED WITH FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING.

SO A FEW MONTHS BACK WE CAME TO Y'ALL AND DISCUSSED ALL THREE OPTIONS THAT WE HAD FOR THE POTENTIAL.

AT THE TIME IT WAS GOING TO BE PUBLIC SAFETY HEADQUARTERS.

SINCE THEN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS COME OUT FOR US TO BE ABLE TO ADD DISPATCH TO THAT BUILDING.

SO WE LOOKED AT ORIGINALLY GOING TO BEECHAM AND MONTE CARLO.

THERE WAS ABOUT A SIX ACRE TRACK THERE.

IT JUST WASN'T FEASIBLE TO ALLOW US TO HAVE PARKING FOR OUR CITY VEHICLES WITHOUT GOING TO A PARKING GARAGE.

AND THAT WAS NOT FEASIBLE BACKING UP TO A NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE THEN LOOKED AT OUR CURRENT GUN RANGE, WHICH IS IN THE 3,000 BLOCK OF HIGHWAY 380 DOWN CLOSER TO THE LAKE.

BUT WITH THE NEW BYPASS COMING IN, THAT ALSO BECAME NOT FEASIBLE DUE TO A ONE-WAY SERVICE ROAD BEING IN THE FRONT AND HAVING TO LOOP AROUND INTO FARMERSVILLE TO COME BACK.

SO THEN WE STARTED TALKING TO THE EDC ABOUT THE LAND AT THE CORNER OF CORPORATE DRIVE AND MYRICK.

YOU'LL SEE IN THE IMAGE ON THE FAR LEFT SIDE, THE PROPERTY TO THE RIGHT OF THAT IS WHERE THE PARK BUILDING IS GOING, SO THE PARKS AND REC CENTER.

SO ESSENTIALLY ON THAT BLUE DIAMOND AREA WHERE THAT TREE LINE IS IN THE CENTER, THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BECOME A ROADWAY THAT WOULD GO INTO THE WHOLE ENTIRE HUB OF THE PARK AND THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING.

SO ONCE WE LOOKED AT ALL THAT AND WE DECIDE.

DESIRE THAT THAT WAS THE LAND FOR US TO BE OUR NEW HOME.

WE CAME TO COUNCIL, IT WAS APPROVED AT THAT TIME, AND WE PROCEEDED AT THAT TIME TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE EDC.

WE WENT INTO A LEASE CONTRACT WITH THEM, WHICH WILL THEN PULL THE FIRST INITIAL PAYMENT OUT OF THE FY27 BUDGET, AND THAT BUDGET IS IN THE GENERAL FUND.

THIS IS JUST A LIST OF ALL THE ISSUES THAT WE HAD WITH EACH ONE OF THE LOCATIONS.

CURRENTLY, WE ARE BEING SOUGHT AFTER TO POTENTIALLY MOVE TO A 17-ACRE TRACK THAT IS ALSO ON CORPORATE DRIVE IN THAT SAME BUSINESS PARK AREA.

THE DOWNSIDE TO THAT FOR US IS WE DO HAVE A CURRENTLY SIGNED LEASE THAT COMES OUT TO A LITTLE OVER $2 MILLION A YEAR.

AT THE SAME RATE THAT THAT PROPERTY WAS LEASED TO US AT, IF WE LOOK AT MOVING TO THE 17-ACRE TRACK, WE'RE LOOKING AT A LITTLE OVER $4.6 MILLION.

WE'VE ALREADY BEEN DESIGNATED OUR FUNDS TO USE THE LAND TO DEVELOP AND TO BUILD THE PUBLIC SAFETY HEADQUARTERS BUILDING.

SO IF WE MOVE ANY OF THAT, WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE $171,000 THAT WE'VE ALREADY SPENT AT THE CURRENT LOCATION AT MYRICK INCORPORATE, AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH GOING TO JUST GO AWAY.

AND THAT'S ANYTHING FROM THE TOPO STUDIES.

DETENTION ASSESSMENTS, GRADING, REPLATTING, UTILITIES, AND SO FORTH.

AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS, OR MAJORITY OF THOSE THINGS, HAVE BEEN SPLIT WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT BECAUSE WE'RE SHARING THAT LAND.

SO A LOT OF THE DRAINAGE ISSUES, A LOT OF THE SOIL STUFF, HAS ALL BEEN A SHARED COST BETWEEN THE TWO OF US.

SO IF WE LOOK AT ANY OF THOSE THINGS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO EAT THAT COST THAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE, BUT THEN BY MOVING, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO ALL THAT AGAIN AND EAT THE FULL COST OURSELVES.

AND WE'RE ALREADY LOOKING AT WITH THE BUILDING TO GET US IN JUST A PHASE ONE TO INCLUDE DISPATCH.

WE'RE RIGHT AT WHAT OUR BUDGET SITS WITH THE CURRENT LAND,

[01:40:02]

WITH THE BUILDING TO HOUSE WHAT WE NEED IT TO HOUSE, THE PARKING LOT.

YOU'LL SEE ON THIS DIAGRAM ON THE NORTHERN SIDE BETWEEN THE POTENTIAL BUILDING AND PARKING LOT AND THE NEXT LOT, THERE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE A FIRE LANE, WHICH IS ALSO GOING TO BE REQUIRED FOR THE REC CENTER ANYWAY.

SO ALL OF THOSE SHARED COSTS WOULD GO AWAY FOR THE BOTH OF US.

BUT BY MOVING, IT'S GOING TO MESS WITH OUR BUDGET THAT WE HAVE FOR OUR WHOLE PROJECT.

SO ESSENTIALLY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET EVERYTHING THAT WE NEED TO IN PHASE ONE, AND THERE'S NO GUARANTEE OF A PHASE TWO OR PHASE THREE BOND LATER ON DOWN THE ROAD.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO HOUSE AS MUCH OF IT AS WE CAN UP FRONT.

IT WOULDN'T JUST BE YOUR PROJECT IMPACTED.

PARKS AND REC WOULD THEN BE TAKING ON THE FULL COST THEMSELVES AS WELL.

AND I GUESS THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION AT THAT TIME WITH KELLY AND CHIEF AND EVERYTHING, IS THE $171,000 THAT WE'VE ALREADY PUT INTO THE CURRENT PROPERTY, THE ONES THAT ARE SHARED COSTS, WOULD THOSE THEN ROLL OVER TO THE PARKS BOND? AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO CONTINUE TO TAKE THOSE, JUST BRING IT BACK INTO OUR BUDGET, IF IT'S STUFF THAT WAS SOLELY JUST FOR THAT PROPERTY.

WOULD YOU GIVE US SOME HISTORY? WHY ARE WE CONSIDERING THE OPTION? IT'S BEEN BROUGHT TO...

BROUGHT TO US FROM COUNCIL TO ENTERTAIN THE 17 ACRES TO SEE IF THE SEVEN ACRES WAS ACTUALLY FEASIBLE FOR US AND THE BEST OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING.

YEAH, AND IT WAS BROUGHT UP BY A RESIDENT AS WELL, AND WE'RE JUST KIND OF ADDRESSING THE CONCERN.

AND IT'S JUST, THIS IS A CONVERSATION, AND JUST TO BRING UP, I GUESS.

WHAT ALL IS, WHAT ALL, HOW WE GOT HERE AND JUST ON WHAT WE WANT TO DO MOVING FORWARD, JUST KIND OF GET ALL THE FACTS.

BUT I KNOW THIS WAS A CONCERN THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY A RESIDENT THAT CAME TO COUNCIL.

AND NOT SO MUCH JUST A RESIDENT, I ALSO HAD A CONCERN WITH IT AS WELL.

WITH ME BEING A LIAISON TO EDC, I KNOW WHY THIS LAND WAS OFFERED TO THE, FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING AT THAT TIME.

AND THERE WERE SOME OTHER THINGS HAPPENING IN THE BACKGROUND THAT FELL THROUGH AND THE OTHER PARTIALS WEREN'T.

AVAILABLE.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU RECALL THE MEETING THAT WE HAD WITH THE PREVIOUS CITY MANAGER WHERE THIS DISCUSSION WAS HAPPENING, AND THERE WAS SOME OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO POTENTIALLY SAVE MONEY OVER TIME AS FAR AS WITH THE LEASING AND ALL THAT AS WELL.

BECAUSE OF THE $2 MILLION LEASE, I BELIEVE THAT WASN'T DONE CORRECTLY FROM WHAT WE WERE TOLD IN THAT MEETING.

I DO KNOW THERE IS SOME COST THAT WE WILL HAVE TO EAT HERE, BUT ANOTHER GOOD EXAMPLE IS...

WE HAD TO EAT $500,000 ON THE PARKS REC BUILDING TO INITIALLY SAVE $15 MILLION ON THAT.

SO YOU MAY TAKE A HIT UP FRONT, BUT TO SAVE SOME MONEY ON THE END.

THE REASON I THINK THAT IT'S WORTH THE DISCUSSION NOW IS BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE COUNCIL WAS PRIVY TO OR WAS PROVIDED IN THE CONVERSATION WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THIS MYRICK LANE, THE EXPANSION OF THAT.

AND WITH THE...

COMMERCIAL LAND EVER SHRINKING IN PRINCETON, WE HAVE TO KIND OF HOLD ON TO THAT COMMERCIAL LAND FOR SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO PRODUCE SALES TAX TO PRODUCE SALES FUNDS, SALES TAX MONEY FOR POLICE AND ALL THAT SO WE CAN BUILD A BUILDING.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THE PLANS TO CONTINUE? TO GROW THE FORCE IF WE ARE SHRINKING THE COMMERCIAL.

AND THAT IS GOING TO BE BASICALLY 382.0 AS FAR AS THAT'S A CORNER LOT ON A MAIN FREEWAY ON AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LAND.

AND IF THERE ARE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES IN THERE, YES, WE MAY LOSE $170,000.

BUT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS, IF WE LOOK FURTHER OUT FIVE TO TEN YEARS FROM NOW, THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE WOULD GAIN FROM PRESERVING THAT LAND.

TO PUT IT MAYBE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

SO THAT'S JUST ME PERSONALLY.

I JUST FEEL LIKE PUTTING IT HERE WILL BE A SHORT-SIGHTED WIN, AND WE WILL LOSE IN THE LONG TERM IF WE WERE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS WITHOUT AT LEAST EXPLORING OTHER OPTIONS NOW THAT THOSE OTHER PARTIALS MAY BE AVAILABLE.

SO, MR. JOHNSON, REAL QUICK.

TRANSPONDER SHEET, PLEASE.

I UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE STATING.

AND SO WHENEVER WE FIRST WERE INITIALLY LOOKING AT THESE OTHER PARCELS, THAT 17 ACRES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US AS ANOTHER BIG DEVELOPMENT WAS GOING TO END UP GOING IN THERE.

AND SO THIS WAS ONE OF THE ONLY PIECES OF PROPERTY THAT WAS SOMEWHAT RELATIVELY LEFT FOR US.

WE HAVE TO LOOK AT ANYTHING OTHER THAN THIS SITE.

WE HAVE TO START LOOKING AT ABOUT 10 PLUS ACRES.

AND THE REASON WHY THAT IS, IS BECAUSE THE APPROXIMATE BUILD OUT OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS GOING TO BE ROUGHLY ABOUT 109,000 TO 110,000 SQUARE FEET.

AND SO WHENEVER WE'RE LOOKING AT 10 PLUS ACRES, WE HAVE TO PAY FAIR MARKET VALUE.

SO THAT'S WHERE SOME OF THAT BUDGET STUFF THAT YOU'RE SITTING THERE TALKING ABOUT.

WE COULDN'T JUST DO LAND SWATHS BETWEEN THE CDC AND THE CITY OR ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

WE HAD TO GO

[01:45:02]

IN BECAUSE THE CDC OR EDC, I'M SORRY, RATHER, THEY HAD TO END UP PURCHASING THAT LAND.

AND SO WE FROM THE CITY HAVE TO PAY THE FAIR MARKET VALUE ON TOP OF THAT AS WELL.

SO ANYTIME THAT WE ARE GOING TO EITHER RELINQUISH THE LAND, BREAK UP THE LEASE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, IF WE'RE GOING TO GO AFTER ANOTHER 10 ACRES, WE HAVE TO PAY THE FAIR MARKET VALUE ON THAT.

SO WE'RE NOT JUST LOSING THE $170,000 IN THE FAIR MARKET.

ORIGINALLY, I DIDN'T WANT THIS LAND.

ORIGINALLY, I WANTED TO GO SOMEWHERE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER AND STAY A LITTLE BIT MORE NEUTRAL.

BUT THE MORE THAT I WORKED WITH CHASE AND THE MORE THAT I WORKED WITH NATHAN, WHO'S BACK THERE IN THE CORNER AND ALL THIS STUFF, WE KIND OF PROCESS THIS LAND, AND SO IF YOU LOOK A LITTLE BIT AT THE FORMAT, THIS IS ONE PIECE THAT I FEEL LIKE THAT WE'RE TOTALLY MISSING OUT ON.

IT'S GOING TO BE THAT COMMUNITY-CENTRIC FEEL.

AND SO HOW WE REPOSITION THIS PD, SO THIS IS APPROXIMATELY SIX TO SEVEN ACRES WORTH OF LAND HERE.

SO HOW WE REPOSITION THIS PD IS YOU'LL NOTICE THE FRONT SIDE OF THAT PD IS ACTUALLY FACING THAT PARKING LOT.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT THAT ONE BIG CAMPUS FEEL TO WHERE WE HAVE A COMMUNITY-CENTRIC FEEL, SO WHERE IT'S NOT JUST CITIZENS THAT'S DRIVING UP TO THE PARKS AND REC CENTER OVER HERE, AND THEN EVENTUALLY COME DOWN.

LATER ON DOWN THE ROAD TO GO TO THE POLICE STATION OVER HERE IS WE'RE TRYING TO BUY ONE COMMUNITY CENTRIC FEEL, ONE PRINCETON RATHER.

AND SO THAT WAY, WHENEVER PEOPLE GO INTO PARKS AND REC, YOU'LL SEE SOME WALKING TRAILS IN THAT LITTLE COVERED AREA.

THAT'S TO THE BASKETBALL COURT.

AND SO I WANNA MAKE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT KINDA MORE APPROACHABLE AS WELL.

AND SO WE'RE UTILIZING THAT FRONT AREA PARKING LOT THAT THE PARKS AND REC CENTER IS GONNA BE USING TO ONE, SAVE SPACE ON THIS SIDE.

SO THAT WAY WE CAN FIT APPROXIMATELY 109,000 SQUARE FEET ON THIS SIDE.

BUT ALSO, TOO, DRAWING COMMUNITIES.

WE'RE LOOKING AT COMMUNITY BLOCK PARTIES, NATIONAL NIGHT OUT EVENTS, AND OTHER THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES.

SO I UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHERE YOU'RE STANDING ABOUT THE MONEY AND KIND OF LOSING SOME OF THAT COMMERCE, BUT I DON'T WANT TO LOSE TOUCH OF THAT COMMUNITY, THOUGH, TOO, AS WELL.

SO ONE, THERE'S A PRICE ON.

THE OTHER ONE IS PRICE LESS.

SO IT'S JUST SOME OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE'VE GOT TO WEIGH OUT.

YEAH, AND I THINK THAT.

I MEAN, TO BE HONEST, I THINK THAT THAT WHOLE CAMPUS FEEL, I THINK THAT THAT IS AN ECONOMIC DRAW AT SOME POINT BECAUSE, I MEAN, WHAT BETTER PLACE WOULD A BUSINESS WANT TO BE THAN BY SOMETHING LIKE THAT? AND YOU SEE THIS IN A LOT OF OTHER CITIES.

I KNOW GRAND PRAIRIE IS ONE THAT HAS THE HUGE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING, AND THEN THEY HAVE ALL THE ECONOMIC THINGS AROUND IT AND SO FORTH.

AND I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, MR. JOHNSON.

AND, I MEAN, DON'T GET ME WRONG, WE'VE GOT THE BUSINESS PARK OVER THERE AND SOME OTHER THINGS.

BUT I THINK WE DID OUR DUE DILIGENCE ON THIS ONE.

THE OTHER THING THAT I WANT TO BRING UP IS JUST THE SAFETY FACTOR.

WITH US BEING RIGHT THERE AT THE PARKING LOT, KIDS THAT ARE COMING IN AND OUT OF THE REC CENTER, FEMALES THAT ARE COMING IN AND OUT WITH THEIR CHILDREN, THINGS OF THAT ASPECT, OUR OFFICERS ARE GOING TO BE IN AND OUT OF THAT FACILITY 24 HOURS A DAY.

SO IN THE EVENT THAT THERE ARE BEING COMMUNITY EVENTS HELD AT THAT LOCATION AND THAT HUB, IT JUST GIVES THEM AN EXTRA SENSE OF SAFETY AND SECURITY THAT THE OFFICERS ARE THERE.

AFTER HOURS, WHEN IT'S DARK OUTSIDE, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

SO IF YOU'RE PARKING FAR AWAY, ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

ALSO WITH THE KIDS THAT ARE GOING TO BE AROUND THAT FACILITY, IF ONE GETS LOST FROM A PARENT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, IT'S EASY TO WALK.

WE EXPERIENCE THAT HERE.

KIDS ROAM OFF FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD DIRECTLY BEHIND US THINKING THEY'RE COMING TO THE PARK WITHOUT MOM AND DAD.

I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY KIDS WE HAVE WALKED INTO THE FRONT DOOR BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN SEPARATED FROM A PARENT JUST FROM THIS NEIGHBORHOOD TO THIS POND.

SO HAVING US THERE FOR THAT SENSE OF SECURITY IS ALSO A GREAT BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY.

I RECENTLY WAS IN MURPHY FOR SPORT ACTIVITIES FOR MY CHILD, AND ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THAT CAUGHT MY EYE IS THEY'RE DOING EXACTLY THAT.

THEY'VE DONE THIS EXACT SAME THING WHERE THEY HAVE A BIG COMMUNITY CENTER, PARKS, POLICE, FIRE, THEY HAVE BIG PUBLIC CENTERS.

SO THE FIRST THING I THOUGHT OF IS I'M EXCITED BECAUSE WE'RE DOING THAT.

AND SO I'M IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH CHIEF ON THE COMMUNITIES.

HAVING IT IN THAT HUB, AND I LOVE THE PUBLIC SAFETY, THE EXAMPLES YOU JUST HIGHLIGHTED, BECAUSE THOSE ARE REAL.

YOU GUYS HAVE HAD THAT HAPPEN.

SO I THINK THE DUE DILIGENCE WAS DONE.

AND I GO BACK TO CHIEF.

WHEN WE WERE PRESENTED THIS, I'M NOT REAL SURE ABOUT THE 17-ACRE PROPERTY.

THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, IT WOULD BE NICE TO KNOW WHERE THAT'S AT.

BUT AT THAT TIME, WE DIDN'T HAVE LAND TO BE ABLE TO DO IT, SO WE'D HAVE TO BUY IT.

AND SO HERE WE ARE TRYING TO FIND THE COST SAVINGS.

AND WORKING WITH THE EDC, SPLITTING THE COST WITH PARKS AND REC, IT JUST MADE SENSE.

AND EVEN AFTER THIS PRESENTATION, IT STILL MAKES SENSE.

SO I LIKE THE WAY IT IS.

JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, THE 17 ACRES IS ACTUALLY JUST NORTH.

AND WEST ON CORPORATE FROM THE CURRENT LOCATION.

IT'S TWO LOTS OVER.

SO, WHAT I'M ABOUT TO SAY, EVERYONE'S GOING TO BE LIKE,

[01:50:01]

WHAT? AS MUCH AS I DON'T LIKE TERS, IT'S BECAUSE WE'VE USED THEM IN THE WORST WAY POSSIBLE.

HOWEVER, THIS BEING DIRECTLY NEXT TO WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE BUSINESSES AND CORPORATE AND ALL OF THAT, IT DOES OPEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUT A TERS OVER THAT TO THEN USE THAT MONEY TO HELP FUNDING WITH THE FUTURE EXPANSIONS WITHIN THE PD, WHICH WOULD THEN REDUCE THE BONDS WE WOULD HAVE TO GET FROM THE PEOPLE AND THROUGH TAXES AND WHATNOT FOR THOSE EXPANSIONS BY UTILIZING THOSE FUNDS.

SO THERE IS A BENEFIT OF IT BEING IN THAT PROXIMITY.

TO ALLOW US TO PUT THE MONEY TOWARDS A PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY.

YEAH, I CAN SAY THE TURS IS A GOOD IDEA, AND THAT WILL BE USING THE TURS RESPONSIBLY.

THAT'S ACTUALLY HOW THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE USED IN THAT EXAMPLE.

AND I AM ALL FOR THE COMMUNITY-CENTRIC PORTION OF WHY THIS IS HAPPENING.

MY THING IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PRINCETON AND MURPHY IS MURPHY IS NOT HAVING A FINANCIAL ISSUE WITH PAYING OFFICERS.

WE ARE ASKED TO BE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE IN TERMS OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO PAY FOR PUBLIC SERVICE.

AND WE ARE, YOU KNOW, BUSINESSES HAVE TO PIVOT ALL THE TIME.

BUSINESSES HAVE TO BUILD IN CONTINGENCIES FOR OPPORTUNITIES LIKE THIS.

YES, THE 17 ACRES WAS NOT AVAILABLE DURING THIS TIME, BUT WE HAVEN'T STARTED MOVING DIRT ON THIS YET.

SO WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COURSE CORRECT AND, YOU KNOW, FIX SOME THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO COME.

IN THE FUTURE FOR THIS CITY.

BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE CONSENSUS WITH COUNCIL IS THEY WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.

I JUST WANT TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE ON RECORD FOR A FUTURE, I TOLD YOU SO, WHEN WE MISS SOME OPPORTUNITIES WITH THIS PARCEL OF LAND HERE.

I AGREE THAT THIS IS A PRIME PARCEL OF LAND.

HOWEVER, BASED ON HOW WE ARE GROWING, AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAD EARLIER DISCUSSIONS AND MS. TODD WAS MAKING, SHE MADE QUITE AN ARGUMENT FOR FUNDING FOR THE POLICE FORCE.

AND I THINK HAVING THIS CENTRAL LOCATION, BEING CLOSE TO THE REC CENTER AND JUST CENTRAL, I THINK THAT WILL ALSO BE A PULL FOR BUSINESSES.

I DON'T THINK THAT IT WILL, BEING IN THIS AREA, WILL IN ANY WAY HARM OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

I ACTUALLY THINK THAT IT WILL BE AN INCENTIVE TO ATTRACTING INVESTORS TO OUR DEVELOPERS TO DEVELOPING AROUND THAT AREA.

IT PROMOTES SAFETY, AND WHEN THIS AREA IS BUILT OUT, I THINK WE'LL SEE THE DIFFERENCE.

ANOTHER THING, I BELIEVE IT'S EPT WHO SAVED US MONEY.

ON A RECENT THING WITH PARKS AND REC.

SO I ALSO SEE THE BENEFIT OF THE PROPERTIES BEING TOGETHER.

BECAUSE THERE IS THAT POTENTIAL THAT WHILE THEY'RE DOING TWO PROJECTS THAT ARE TOUCHING, THERE MAY BE OPPORTUNITIES THAT THEY CAN FIND WAYS FOR US TO SAVE MORE MONEY WITH THESE PROJECTS.

CORRECT.

SO I SEE THOSE BENEFITS.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR KELLY.

AND I DON'T KNOW HOW THESE THINGS WORK, SO I'M JUST GOING TO ASK.

GO AHEAD.

YES.

SO.

EPT HAS WORKED ON BOTH OF THESE FACILITIES, AND THERE'S ACTUALLY A LOT OF COST SAVINGS AND ECONOMIES THAT COME IN TOGETHER WITH BOTH.

THE SAME WITH THE SITE CIVIL, AS CHIEF MENTIONED AND AS TIFFANY MENTIONED.

WHEN YOU'RE SHARING THE COST FOR ALL OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE PARKING, THE UTILITIES, WHAT WOULD BE AN INTERSECTION IF I HAD THE...

CURSOR, I WOULD SHOW THE MAIN ENTRANCE, THE FIRE LANE.

THERE'S A LOT OF COST SAVINGS THAT GO INTO THAT INITIAL UPFRONT WORK.

AND WE'RE TALKING MILLIONS, NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, $100,000 HERE OR THERE.

WE'RE TALKING IN THE SEVERAL UPWARDS TO $10 MILLION.

SO BY BOTH FACILITIES JOINING INTO ONE SITE, THAT'S COST SAVINGS THAT GO BACK INTO THE RESIDENCE.

THAT WE'RE NOT PULLING TWO SEPARATE BONDS.

WHILE ONE'S PAYING FOR ONE AND THE OTHER'S PAYING FOR THE OTHER, THOSE SAVINGS GO BACK TO THE RESIDENTS.

DID WE DO AN ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH SALES TAX

[01:55:01]

THAT WE'RE SAVING MONEY, WE'RE MILLIONS, DID WE DO AN ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH MONEY THAT WE WILL GAIN FROM THESE BEING HERE, SALES TAX? WILL WE MAKE ANY MONEY WITH THESE HERE? FROM SALES TAX? FROM THESE BUILDINGS BEING HERE, WILL WE MAKE ANY MONEY WITH THOSE BEING THERE? I MEAN, ONE OF THEM IS GOING TO BE BASED ON MEMBERSHIP IN A COST RECOVERY MODEL.

PUBLIC SAFETY, I CAN'T SAY THAT'S GOING TO GENERATE REVENUE, BUT PUBLIC SAFETY IS PUBLIC SAFETY FOR THE CITY.

SO THAT'S MY THING IS WE WILL STILL SAVE LIVES BECAUSE WE'RE NOT SAYING NO TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING.

I'M JUST BASICALLY SAYING, DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO LOSE PRIME REAL ESTATE FOR COMMERCIAL? FOR SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T GAIN ANY FUNDS IN THE FUTURE, WHICH, I MEAN, WE ALL LOOKED AT THE MAP, AND THERE'S LIMITED SPACE FOR COMMERCIAL, AND THIS IS PRIME COMMERCIAL.

THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING.

AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE IN TERMS OF THIS AREA BECAUSE WE HAVE CONSENSUS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.

SO WE'RE GOOD.

MY QUESTION FOR KELLY.

SO THE EDC, CDC, THEIR MONEY COMES FROM TAX MONEY BECAUSE THEY GET A LITTLE BIT.

SHAVED OFF AND IT GOES INTO THEIR FUNDS.

SELF-TAX.

SO I'M JUST CURIOUS ON HOW THEY'RE NOT GIVING THEM A DISCOUNT OR ANYTHING.

WE'RE USING TAX DOLLARS TO PAY FOR PROPERTY THAT WAS ALREADY PURCHASED USING TAX DOLLARS.

I KNOW THAT'S NOT THE SAME CATEGORY OF TAX DOLLARS.

I MEAN, I THINK THIS WAS A LEGAL ISSUE AND SAYING ABOUT THE SALES TAX DOLLARS BOUGHT THE LAND, THEREFORE I WILL DEFER TO LEGAL ON THAT.

I JUST WANTED A CLARIFICATION ON IT BECAUSE, AGAIN, THAT'S NOT MY AREA.

IT'S ALSO WHY IT WAS DONE AT FAIR MARKET VALUE INSTEAD OF LIKE A RETAIL VALUE.

AND THAT WOULD BE WITH EITHER ONE OF THEM SINCE THE EDC PURCHASED EITHER ONE OF THEM.

AGAIN, SADLY, IT WASN'T PART OF THE TRANSACTION, SO I DON'T KNOW.

BUT WHAT I CAN SAY IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT UNUSUAL FOR CITIES TO PURCHASE PROPERTY FROM EDCS.

I'VE DONE IT NUMEROUS TIMES IN OTHER CITIES.

IF THE EDC OR CDC, WHOEVER OWNS THE PROPERTY, IF IT'S NOT AN ELIGIBLE PROJECT, AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WAS OR NOT, BUT THEN YOU CAN'T REALLY DISCOUNT BECAUSE THEN YOU'D BE USING A GRANT OF THE FUNDS THAT WERE ORIGINALLY PURCHASED.

SO EDC WOULD HAVE TO SELL FOR FAIR MARKET VALUE.

IT'S ALSO NOT UNUSUAL FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS TO PURCHASE PROPERTY AND HOLD IT MORE OR LESS AS AN INVESTMENT AND THEN TURN AROUND AND SELL IT, SOMETIMES MAKING MONEY ON IT FROM TIME TO TIME.

IF IT'S NOT BEING USED FOR A PROJECT, OR THEY CAN USE IT FOR A PROJECT AND DISCOUNT IT AS PART OF AN EDC GRANT.

SO, AGAIN, NOT KNOWING THE SPECIFICS OF THIS PARTICULAR TRANSACTION, I CAN'T.

GIVE AN OPINION ON ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, BUT THAT'S KIND OF GENERALLY SOMETIMES WHAT DOES HAPPEN.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

MR. BRYANT, IF I COULD ASK YOU A QUESTION.

AND IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THE PROPERTY WHERE THE REC CENTER AND THE PARKS AND REC AREA, THAT SIDE, EAST SIDE, THAT WAS PURCHASED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, WAS IT NOT? BACK MANY YEARS AGO? IS THAT THE SIDE I'M THINKING ABOUT? NO, THIS IS...

OR IS IT FURTHER EAST? I DON'T BELIEVE THIS...

WE'D ACTUALLY PURCHASED ONE FOR A FUTURE PARK.

YES, I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND TAKE A LOOK.

AS FAR AS THIS, THE PURCHASE OF GTLC, THIS ENTIRE SITE, SHOULD HAVE BEEN DEVELOPMENT.

BUT WE PURCHASED IT, BUT THE CDC ACTUALLY PURCHASED THAT FROM THEM.

THE GREATER LANT, TEXAS, WHATEVER IT WAS, CATTLE COMPANY.

BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO.

LIKE I SAID, I MAY BE WRONG, BUT I'M PRETTY SURE WE DID.

BUT I WILL NOTE THAT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS HOLISTICALLY, WE'RE ACTUALLY BREAKING THIS OUT INTO ONE LARGE.

FACILITY IN ONE LARGE SITE, NOT BREAKING IT UP INTO TWO SEPARATE PARCELS, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE PARK, WHICH IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY

[02:00:01]

WITH THE LARGE PARKING, AND THEN THE PD ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.

WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM A GRADING ASPECT AND AN ENGINEERING, IT'S ALL JUST ONE SITE WITH TWO SEPARATE FACILITIES.

SO JUST TWO THINGS.

MY RECALL IS THAT COUNCIL IS THE ONE THAT ACTS FOR THIS LAND, RIGHT? I THINK IT WAS COUNCIL THAT WE ASKED FOR THIS LAND.

IT WAS NOT? OKAY.

ALSO, ABOUT HOW BIG WILL BE THIS BUILDING, AROUND THE SIZE OF THIS ONE? THE POLICE DEPARTMENT? YES.

PHASE ONE, JUST TO GIVE YOU A VISUAL, IS GOING TO BE VERY SIMILAR TO THE SIZE OF WHAT CITY HALL IS.

BUT YOU ARE DOING THE FOUNDATION IS GOING TO BE STRONGER SO YOU CAN BUILD UPWARDS, WHEREAS WHEN THEY DID THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING, THEY DID NOT DO THAT FOUNDATION.

SO WE'RE STUCK WITH A SINGLE LAYER.

SO YOU GUYS WILL BE ABLE TO BUILD UP AND NOT BE RELYING ON BUILDING OUT, CORRECT? IT'S GOING TO BE BOTH.

SO WE ARE LOOKING AT PROPORTIONS OF IT TO GO UP DURING POTENTIAL PHASES LATER ON.

AND WITH THE FLEXIBILITY, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IN THIS.

RENDERING THAT'S UP THERE NOW COMING MORE TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY IF WE HAVE TO BECAUSE WITH A JAIL WHICH IS WHAT WE WOULD HOPE FOR LATER ON IN PHASE TWO OR PHASE THREE A JAIL CAN'T GO UP THEORETICALLY, IT'S TOO HEAVY.

SO IT IS CHEAPER FOR A JAIL TO GO OUT BUT ADMINISTRATIVELY CID PROPERTY ROOMS THINGS LIKE THAT THEY CAN GO UP AND WE'VE DONE ALL THAT IN OUR NEEDS ASSESSMENT BASED ON THIS PROPERTY.

ALL RIGHT,

[M7. 2026-06-08-R04 Consider Resolution 2026-06-08-R04 authorizing a contract execution with EPT Commercial to perform Construction Project Management Services for the new Public Safety Building in a not-to-exceed amount of $384,367.60; and take appropriate action.]

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

THAT WAS TICKETS TO ITEM M.

I BELIEVE WE WERE AT M7.

ITEM M7, 2026-06-08-R04.

CONSIDER RESOLUTION 2026-06-08-R04, AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT EXECUTION WITH EPT COMMERCIAL TO PERFORM CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE NEW PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING.

AND NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $384,367.60 AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

SO TO GET TO THE QUICK, SINCE WE'VE ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSING IT, THIS IS A CONTRACT FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING.

THAT IS GOING TO BE AS AN OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.

IT'S TO INTERFACE WITH THE ARCHITECTURE FIRM.

IT'S TO ASSIST WITH CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR BIDS.

IT IS TO MONITOR CONSTRUCTION AS A PROGRESSIVE.

IT'S TO REVIEW THE DAVIS-BACON COMPLIANCE FOR SUBCONTRACTOR PAYMENTS.

IT'S TO CONFIRM PAYMENT APPLICATIONS AND ALSO, ONCE BUILT, TO ASSIST WITH BUILDING OCCUPANCY AND MOVE-IN OF A 24-7 OPERATION.

A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS WAS ISSUED BACK IN JANUARY OF 2026.

FOUR PROPOSALS WERE RECEIVED FROM THE ONE THAT'S BEING PRESENTED TODAY UP TO $1.1 MILLION.

PROPOSAL EVALUATION WAS TEMPORARY PUT ON HOLD TO CONFIRM THAT SERVICES COULD NOT INDEED BE PERFORMED IN-HOUSE.

OR NOT ALREADY PART OF A CURRENT CONTRACT UNDERWAY.

EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP CONSIDERED HIRING AN EMPLOYEE TO PERFORM THESE SERVICES, BUT IT WAS DETERMINED THAT EMPLOYEE CANDIDATES WOULD NEED A SPECIALIZED SKILL SET AND EXPERIENCE MORE COMMON IN A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT FIRM, AND ALSO SHORT-TERM COMMITMENT WAS BETTER THAN A LONG-TERM INVESTMENT IN A FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE.

IN TRYING TO ATTRACT A QUALIFIED EMPLOYEE FOR RAPID INTEGRATION NECESSARY TO STAY ON TARGET, HER PROJECT COMPLETION WOULD BE UNTIMELY.

THE PROPOSAL RESPONDENTS WERE ASKED TO PROPOSE AN ESTIMATED NUMBER OF HOURS FOR THE DEFINED PROJECT TASKS AND INCLUDE A GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE.

THE EVALUATION TEAM CONSISTED OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, POLICE, AND FINANCE DEPARTMENTS WHO SCORED AND EVALUATED AND FOUND THAT EPT COMMERCIAL PROPOSAL TO BE THE MOST ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE CITY.

AND IT IS REQUESTED THAT CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZE A CONTRACT EXECUTION WITH EPT COMMERCIAL FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $384,367.60 AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

ANY QUESTIONS? SO THIS WILL MAKE THEM THE GC? I'M GUESSING THEY'LL BE OUR POINT OF CONTACT FOR THE WHOLE PROJECT? YES, AND THAT WOULD BE FOR ALL THE PHASES.

THAT WOULD BE WITH DESIGN ENGAGEMENT, PRE-CONSTRUCTION, PROJECT MANAGEMENT, AND REPORTING PROJECT CLOSEOUT TO BUILDING OCCUPATION.

WOULD THEY BE SELECTING THE SUBCONTRACTORS

[02:05:02]

FOR THIS OR NO? IT WOULD BE ASSISTING WITH THE PRIME CONTRACTOR, AND THE CONTRACTOR THAT WOULD BE SECURED AT A LATER DATE, THEY PICK THE SUBCONTRACTORS.

IT WOULD JUST BE IN CASE SOMETHING COMES UP WITH THE DAVIS-BACON ACT FOR THE PAYMENTS.

SO HE'S NOT GOING TO BE THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR, HE'S THE PROJECT MANAGER.

MY QUESTION IS, I LOOK AT THE OTHER PROPOSALS, AND THEY'RE SO MUCH, THEY'RE SO SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPENSIVE, ALMOST THREE TIMES AT LEAST, THE COST OF THIS.

ARE WE SACRIFICING QUALITY FOR COST? IT'S NOT BELIEVED SO.

THE SELECTED RESPONDENT IS FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY, FAMILIAR WITH THE LAND, HE'S FAMILIAR WITH THE PLAYERS.

AND THERE'S SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS THAT ARE PROPOSED WITH SOME OF THE OTHER VENDORS, BUT THAT JUST ADDS ON MORE LAYER AND MORE COST.

AND EPT COMMERCIAL HAS BEEN A QUALIFIED VENDOR, A VENDOR THAT HAS BEEN WORKING WITH US ON A NUMBER OF PROJECTS.

AND I THINK IT'S KIND OF LIKE...

WHEN YOU GO TO GET INSURANCE AND YOU GET YOUR CAR INSURANCE AND YOUR HOME INSURANCE AND EVERYTHING ON ONE PLAN, BY USING THIS ONE COMPANY TO BE DOING THESE MULTIPLE PROPERTIES, IT REDUCES THE COST, KIND OF LIKE A BUNDLE AND SAVE DEAL.

I DON'T THINK IT'S SO MUCH AS LOSING QUALITY ON THAT, SUCH AS BEING FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE.

ALL RIGHT, THERE'S NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

I ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION.

APPROVE ITEM M7-2026-06-08-R04.

I'M SORRY, SECOND.

[M8. 2026-06-08-R05 Consider Resolution No. 2026-06-08-R05 authorizing a third contract amendment with EPT Commercial; and take appropriate action.]

ALL RIGHT, MS. TODD, SECOND.

05, CONSIDER RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026-06-08-R05 AUTHORIZING A THIRD CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH EPT COMMERCIAL AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

SO MOVE US TO ITEM M8.

ITEM M8-2026-06-08-R.

GOOD EVENING AGAIN.

WHAT THIS IS IS BASICALLY VERY SIMILAR TO THE LAST AGENDA ITEM WITH EPT COMMERCIAL.

AS YOU MENTIONED, MS. TODD, IT'S KIND OF LIKE YOUR INSURANCE.

YOU GET MORE WHEN YOU BUNDLE.

THAT'S THE SAME HERE.

SO A LOT OF THESE ECONOMIES AND COST SAVINGS THAT WE GET COME FROM ONE PROJECT MANAGER HANDLING MULTIPLE SITES.

THIS IS FOR THE PARKS BOND PROJECTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY UNDERWAY.

AS MENTIONED, WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS THIS IS THE THIRD AMENDMENT LOOKING AT THE ORIGINAL.

SO THE ORIGINAL AT THE 161, THAT WAS...

BASICALLY FINDING THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, DESIGN TEAMS, FIRMS, CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES, PROJECT MANAGING, AND THEN IN 2024, 12-9-105, THAT WAS REALLY THE FIRST CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION.

AND WHAT YOU'VE SEEN IS YOU SEE CALDWELL ENFIELDS, CALDWELL PHASE 2.

PARKS AND REC BUILDING AND JJ BOOK UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

SINCE THAT TIME, ALONG WITH ALL OF THE DESIGNS AND FEES ASSOCIATED TO PARK THE BRINSON AQUATIC AND RECREATION CENTER.

THESE ARE THE CURRENT PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THE PIPELINE AS WE SPEAK.

THIS IS THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT IS FUNDED THROUGH DEVELOPMENT FEES, SO THOSE ARE THE SOFT COSTS, NOT THE HARD COSTS.

MR. JOHNSON, YOU SPOKE EARLIER AS FAR AS SOME COST SAVINGS, YOU KNOW, SAVING ON THE FRONT END, YOU KNOW, SPENDING MORE ON THE FRONT END VERSUS SAVING ON THE BACK END.

I WILL MENTION, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS AT A PARK AND REC FACILITY, WHEN WE WERE PUSHING AROUND THAT $80 MILLION RANGE.

I GAVE AN UPDATE A FEW WEEKS AGO, ABOUT A MONTH AGO OR SO, ON PARK ITSELF.

WE'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT EVEN DRIVING THAT COST EVEN FURTHER DOWN.

AND THESE ARE THE VALUE ENGINEERING OPTIONS THAT EPT BRINGS TO THE TABLE.

SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS THAT AROUND THAT 45, 48 RANGE? WE'RE LOOKING TO TRY TO EVEN CUT THAT EVEN FURTHER.

SO THESE COST SAVINGS THAT YOU'RE SEEING BASED ON THE CONTRACT, HE'S WORKING WITH THESE DEVELOPERS, HE'S WORKING WITH THE SUBCONTRACTORS, HE'S WORKING WITH THE GENERAL CONTRACTORS.

THE ENGINEERS AND THE

[02:10:01]

ARCHITECTS TO VALUE ENGINEER THE BEST QUALITY PRODUCT FOR THE RESIDENTS IN FORT PRINCETON WITHOUT SACRIFICING THE INTEGRITY.

I MEAN THE DIFFERENCE IS YOU KNOW IT'S $35,800 BUT AS WE JUST HEARD EARLIER IN THE MEETING WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT THAT'S NOT PROVIDING PARK STUFF SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO BACK TO THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

THERE IS A POTENTIAL THAT WE'RE GOING TO BREAK, LIKE, MORE THAN BREAK EVEN HERE WHEN WE REDRESS THE PARK MONEY WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE GETTING, BECAUSE THAT GOES TO YOUR PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES.

SO I CAN KIND OF SEE TODAY'S MEETING BREAKING EVEN A LITTLE BIT LIKE WE DID THE LAST TIME WE HAD THEM COME BEFORE US.

AND IT'S NOT THAT, FOR THE $35,000, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET FOR IT AND THE SAVINGS WE CAN GET IN ADDITION TO, I THINK IT'S BENEFICIAL FOR US.

YES, AND THE TIME ON THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT FOR EACH PROJECT.

AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT FOUR OF THEM, THE AMOUNT OF MEETINGS, THE TIME ON THE GROUND, YOU KNOW, ENSURING THAT PROGRESS IS MOVING ALONG AT A, YOU KNOW, RAPID BUT QUALITY RATE AND NOT GOING STAGNANT, NOT SITTING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S KEY AND THAT'S IMPORTANT TO THE RESIDENTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING TOP-OF-THE-LINE PROJECT.

FINISHED ON A TIMELY SCHEDULE.

J.J.

BOOK, YOU KNOW, FOR INSTANCE, IS EXPECTED TO BE FINISHED THIS CALENDAR YEAR.

YOU KNOW, THAT WE BROKE GROUND THIS YEAR, SO THAT'S A 10-MONTH PROCESS FROM GROUNDBREAKING TO RIBBON-CUTTING.

BUT ENSURING THAT, HEY, THIS IS THE TAXPAYER DOLLARS, THESE ARE THE PROJECTS THAT THEY WANTED, THEY WANTED TO SEE, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTS ARE STARVING FOR SOMETHING TO DO, AND THAT...

PROJECT MANAGER ENSURES THAT WE'RE GETTING THE QUALITY IN A TIMELY FASHION.

I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING HERE, CHASE, TOO, SOUNDS VERY FAMILIAR WITH ANOTHER PROJECT.

AND I WON'T HOLD YOU LONG HERE, BUT I DID HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.

I DID NOTICE THAT IN THE LIST OF IN-SCOPE ITEMS FOR EPT, BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING SOUNDS LIKE THEY DO AN AWESOME JOB FOR US HERE, BUT THEY DID LIST SOME THINGS THAT WERE IN-SCOPE THAT SOUNDS LIKE IT OVERLAPS WITH THINGS THAT WE...

KIND OF DO ALREADY WITH OUR CITY STAFF.

SO I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU, LIKE, IS THERE VALUE IN HAVING THEM BECAUSE THEY HELP WITH PROCUREMENT DEVELOPMENT, LIKE THAT PROCESS, AS WELL AS RFQS, CONTRACT EVALUATION, BUDGET MANAGEMENT, SCHEDULE MANAGEMENT, COUNCIL SUPPORT, PROJECT OVERSIGHT? IT'S NOT THAT WE CAN'T DO IT INTERNALLY.

IT'S THAT EXTRA HELP, LIKE STAFF SUPPORT, IS WHAT WE'RE IN NEED AND WHY WE'RE REALLY USING EPT.

YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THAT.

OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, AS WE'RE GROWING, I MEAN, WE ALL KNOW THE RAPID RATE THAT PRINCETON IS GROWING.

WE DON'T WANT TO SEE ANY OVERSIGHTS OR MISS ANYTHING, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S COMING INTO BUDGETS AND TO TIME.

A PROJECT MANAGER, WHICH A THIRD PARTY, I'M GOING TO SAY IT, THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE AS WELL AS ENSURING THE CITY IS...

TRANSPARENT WITH THE RESIDENTS ON WHAT THESE TOTAL COSTS ARE.

UNFORTUNATELY, AT THE RATE THAT WE'RE GROWING...

WE DON'T HAVE THE TIME AND THE CAPACITY FROM A STAFFING LEVEL TO KEEP UP WITH THE DEMAND.

THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO CONFIRM.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ALL RIGHT, NO MORE QUESTIONS.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM M8-2026-006-08-R05 AS SUBMITTED.

ALL RIGHT, MR. DEFFENBACH, SECOND.

[M9. 2026-136 Consider the infrastructure installed within Whitewing Trails 3E; and take appropriate action.]

SO LET'S TAKE IT TO ITEM M9.

ITEM M9, 2026-136, CONSIDER INFRASTRUCTURE INSTALL WITHIN WHITE WING TRAILS 3E AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

PRESTON JONES, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.

SO THE INFRASTRUCTURE ON WHITE WING, OR SORRY, YEAH, WHITE WING TRAILS.

3E HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY CITY STAFF AND OUR ENGINEERS WE DID CONDUCT MULTIPLE WALKS IN THIS AREA BEFORE THE ACCEPTANCE WAS ACTUALLY ISSUED THEY HAVE COMPLETED ALL PUNCH LIST ITEMS AND WE HAVE RECEIVED ALL BOND PACKETS AND THEY ARE ATTACHED ON THE PRESENTATION OR ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA ANY QUESTIONS YES AND NO I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE HOW, COINCIDENTALLY, WHITE

[02:15:01]

WING'S HERE.

CAN WE ADD THEM TO THE LIST OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT WE WANT TO REVISIT THOSE TURS ON? BECAUSE THE PROPERTY WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR THAT LIBRARY FALLS WITHIN THEIR DISTRICT.

SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE OTHER TURS, LIKE FOR EAST RIDGE, CAN WE ALSO BRING WHITE WING BACK BEFORE US AS WELL? LET'S HOLD OFF ON DISCUSSING THAT WHILE WE'RE DOING THIS, BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF AN OFF-TOPIC.

MAYBE BRING THAT UP UNDER...

YOU TURNED IT ON? YOU TURNED IT ON.

I GOT IT, YEAH.

YOUR HONOR, IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM M9-2026-136.

I SECOND.

[M10. 2026-146 Consider the infrastructure installed within Whitewing 4A-1; and take appropriate action.]

ALL RIGHT, MS. DAVID, DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? ALL RIGHT, MOTION PASSES 5-0.

MR. WASHINGTON STEPPED AWAY FOR A SECOND, BUT MOTION PASSES 5-0.

LET'S TAKE US TO ITEM M10.

ITEM M10, 2026-146, CONSIDER THE INFRASTRUCTURE INSTALLED WITHIN WHITE WING 4A-1 AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

MAYOR, COUNCIL, AGAIN, THIS IS TO ACCEPT INFRASTRUCTURE INSIDE OF WHITE WING TRAILS 4A-1.

ALL WALKTHROUGHS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED, ALL BOND DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED, AND LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM THE ENGINEERS HAS BEEN SUBMITTED.

STAFF RECOMMENDS ACCEPTANCE AT THIS TIME.

I HAVE A QUESTION.

YES, SIR.

I JUST WANT TO BE SURE, BECAUSE ON THE AGENDA ITEM IT SAYS 4A-1, BUT THE ACCEPTANCE LETTER SAYS 4A WITHOUT THE DASH 1.

IT'S 4A-1.

OKAY, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE 4A-1 ON THE ACCEPTANCE LETTER? MAKE SURE THAT IT MATCHES BECAUSE THE ACCEPTANCE LETTER DOESN'T HAVE THE DASH ONE ON IT NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF BUT THAT'LL BE A ATTORNEY QUESTION TO CLARIFY BUT IF NEED BE I CAN GET KIMLEY HORN TO SUBMIT ANOTHER ACCEPTANCE LETTER TO US IF THAT MAKES UH COUNCIL FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS LET'S MAKE SURE THEY MATCH BECAUSE I ASSUME 4A AND FOUR OR FOUR AND FOUR FOUR WHAT IS IT FOUR ONE DASH ONE 4A DASH ONE 4A DASH ONE IT MAY BE DIFFERENT THAN 4A SO LET'S JUST MAKE SURE THEY MATCH.

MATT CLARK, ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT.

4A WAS SPLIT INTO 4A1 AND 4A2.

SO THE SECOND PIECE WILL BE 4A2 WHEN THAT COMES OUT.

IT'S A PIECE THAT'S GOT A LOMAR ASSOCIATED WITH IT THAT'S DELAYED.

WE DEFINITELY WANT IT TO THEN BE SPECIFICALLY MATCHED.

BUT IF THE ACCEPTANCE LETTER SAYS 4A, THEN THAT WOULD ENCOMPASS 4A1 AND 4A2, THEN WE'RE NOT READY TO DO 4A2, THEN WE NEED A CORRECT LETTER.

4A IS A GENERALIZED PHASE WAS ABANDONED.

SO THERE IS 4A1 AND THERE IS 4A2.

THERE IS NO 4A. WELL, THEN THE LETTER, IF THE LETTER SAYS 4A, THEN THE LETTER NEEDS TO REFLECT 4A1.

AND WE GET THE LETTER REISSUED WITH JUST THE DASH 1? YEAH.

YEAH, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THE SUBDIVISION NAMES MATCH.

AND I KNOW WE DON'T LIKE TO CONDITIONALLY APPROVE STUFF, BUT IS THIS A SITUATION WHERE A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL WITH THE LETTER BEING TURNED IN, IS THAT OKAY? THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE.

IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM M10-2026-146, PENDING REVISION OF THE ACCEPTANCE LETTER TO REFLECT PHASE 4A1 INSTEAD OF 4A.

[M11. 2026-141 Consider the infrastructure installed within Lowry Trails Phase 2; and take appropriate action.]

SECOND. MR. JOHNSON, SECOND.

LET'S TAKE THIS TO ITEM M11.

ITEM M11, 2026-141, CONSIDER THE INFRASTRUCTURE INSTALLED WITHIN LOWRY TRAILS PHASE 2 AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

MAYOR, COUNCIL, SAME SONG WE JUST WENT THROUGH.

SO WE HAVE LOWRY TRAILS PHASE 2 INFRASTRUCTURE ACCEPTANCE.

ALL INFRASTRUCTURE HAS GONE THROUGH MULTIPLE WALKTHROUGHS AND BEEN ACCEPTED.

BONDS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND A LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED FOR ACCEPTANCE.

HAS BEEN ISSUED BY OUR CITY ENGINEERS.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AT THIS TIME.

ALL RIGHT, THERE'S NO QUESTIONS.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION AT THIS TIME.

YOUR HONOR, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE M1, M1, I'M SORRY, M11.

ALL RIGHT, MR. WASHINGTON, SECOND.

[M12. 2026-137 Consider the infrastructure installed within Lowry Trails Phase 3; and take appropriate action.]

MISSED M1 VOTE.

ITEM M12-2026-137, CONSIDER THE INFRASTRUCTURE INSTALLED WITHIN LOWRY TRAILS PHASE 3 AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

TO TAKE IS ITEM M12.

[02:20:02]

MAYOR, COUNCIL, THIS IS TO ACCEPT THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR LOWRY TRAILS PHASE 3.

MULTIPLE WALKTHROUGHS HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED WITH CITY STAFF AND ENGINEERS.

ALL BONDS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND ARE INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA.

THE LETTER FOR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACCEPTANCE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AT THIS TIME.

I ACTUALLY DO HAVE A QUESTION, KIND OF AN OVERALL QUESTION, JUST TO MAKE SURE.

THE INFORMATION FOR THE START DATE OF THESE BONDS, THE END DATE OF THE BONDS, IS GETTING SENT OVER TO KELLY FOR HER LITTLE SPREADSHEET? YES, MA'AM.

I KNOW SHE'S SETTING UP THAT WE DO CHECKS NOW REGULARLY TO MAKE SURE BEFORE THE BONDS EXPIRE.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE SHE'S GOT ALL THAT.

YES, MA'AM.

I'LL ENSURE TO SEND THESE OVER TO KELLY AS WELL.

THEY'RE ALSO ON THE G-DRIVE FOLDER AND OUR CIVIL INSPECTOR.

WE ALSO HAVE...

MEETING REMINDER SET UP ABOUT A MONTH PRIOR TO THE TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND RUNNING OUT WITH SEVERAL STAFF MEMBERS.

THAT WAY WE CAN CONDUCT THOSE WALKS BEFORE THE MAINTENANCE PERIOD EXPIRES.

ALL RIGHT, THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS.

I ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM M12-2026-137.

ALL RIGHT, I SECOND THAT.

I'M MR. JOHNSON, SECOND.

[M13. 2026-138 Consider the infrastructure installed within Crossmill Phase 1A; and take appropriate action.]

MISSING ONE VOTE.

I MOTION PASSES 6-0.

I TAKE THIS ITEM M13.

ITEM M15.

M13.

M13, APOLOGIES.

2026-138, CONSIDER THE INFRASTRUCTURE INSTALLED WITHIN CROSS MILLS PHASE 1A AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

MAYOR, COUNCIL, WE'RE HERE TO ACCEPT THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

OR RECOMMEND THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ON CROSS-MAIL PHASE 1A AND WE HAVE CONDUCTED MULTIPLE WALKTHROUGHS AND ALL BOND PAPERWORK HAS BEEN SUBMITTED WE RECOMMEND OUR STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AT THIS TIME IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM M13 2026-138 AS SUBMITTED.

CROSS MILL, I DID HAVE A QUESTION.

SO WE HAVE A SECOND, BUT YOU STILL HAVE TO ASK A QUESTION BEFORE WE VOTE.

CROSS MILL, THAT IS OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS, CORRECT? SO WE'RE LIMITED ON WHAT EXACTLY WE CAN CONTROL THERE.

THAT IS CORRECT.

INFRASTRUCTURE IS VERY LIMITED IN THIS PROJECT.

WE DO HAVE MAINTENANCE BONDS FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE REGARDING PAVING, ET CETERA.

BUT AS FAR AS OTHER THAN THE MAIN THOROUGHFARE THROUGH, WHICH I BELIEVE IS, OR I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER THE NAME OF THE ROADWAY.

IT'D BE PROBABLY BROOKSIDE IS THE MAIN THOROUGHFARE.

WE DON'T MAINTAIN OUR OWN ANY OF THE STREETS IN THE REST OF THE SUBDIVISION.

ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A SECOND BY MR. DEFFENBOG, AND WE CAN TAKE A

[M15. ORD-2026-06-08-03 Consider an ordinance authorizing the issuance of a new ordinance establishing regulations for electric micro-mobility devices within the City.; consider approving and authorizing, and take appropriate action.]

VOTE.