[Call to Order, Invocation, and Pledge of Allegiance.]
[00:00:12]
>>> GOOD EVENING, IT IS 6:00 P.M., TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 28TH, I CALL THIS SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER. COUNCILMAN COFFMAN IF YOU'LL LEAD US IN THE INVOCATION AND PLEDGES, PLEASE.
>> LORD, WE COME BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING AND GIVE YOU ALL OF THE HONOR, GLORY, AND PRAISE. WE THANK YOU FOR THE BEAUTIFUL WEATHER WE'RE EXPERIENCING. WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE NEXT SEASON OF FALL AND I PRAY THAT THAT WOULD BE A GOOD SEASON FOR OUR COMMUNITY, FOR THE CITIZENS OF MIDLOTHIAN, AND FOR ALL OF US AS WE ATTEMPT TO MAKE DECISIONS REGARDING OUR COMMUNITY.
LORD, WE THANK YOU FOR ALL OF OUR FIRST RESPONDERS THAT SO GRACIOUSLY AND SACRIFICIALLY GIVE OF THEIR TIME AND SERVE OUR COMMUNITY SO WELL. THANK YOU FOR OUR CITY STAFF.
THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE CITIZENS WHO LIVE HERE AND CALL THIS PLACE HOME. I PRAY THAT THIS COUNCIL WOULD BE A COUNCIL THAT DELIVERS ON WHAT YOUR WILL FOR OUR COMMUNITY IS. SO HELP GUIDE US AS WE MAKE THESE DECISIONS. WE GIVE YOU TONIGHT'S MEETING.
IN JESUS NAME WE PRAY, AMEN. >>> ITEM 2021-440.
[2021-440]
RECEIVE QUARTERLY UPDATE REPORTS FROM THE AIRPORT.>> NOT THIS PAST WEEKEND BUT THE WEEKEND BEFORE, WE DID THE WINGS AND WHEELS OUT THERE AT THE AIRPORT A MIXTURE OF CAR SHOW AND AIR SHOW. ALSO OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS WE'RE FORMULATING AN AIRPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE THAT INVOLVES SOME MIDLOTHIAN INDIVIDUALS AND SOME WAXAHACHIE INDIVIDUALS THAT WE CAN TARGET BUSINESSES AND FUTURE PLANNING AND FUTURE VISIONING FOR THE AIRPORT ITSELF.
THAT'S THINGS WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON.
>> THANKS. >> FOR P&Z'S ASPECT WE HAVE TRENTON TRYING TO STRAIGHTEN EVERYTHING OUT.
WE HAVE THE PARKING REGULATIONS AND SOME OF THE THINGS WE ASKED ARE WE STILL VOTING ON THIS? WHY ISN'T THIS AN AUTOMATIC THING? TRENTON HAS BEEN WORKING ON THAT AND GETTING THE PAPERWORK AND THROUGH P&Z STRAIGHTENING EVERYTHING OUT. IT WILL COME TO US LATER FOR VOTING. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT'S GOING
ON RIGHT NOW. >> SUN RIDER IS MOVING FORWARD WITH CONSTRUCTION AND THEY'RE FINALIZING EMERGENCY ACCESS PROVIDENCE. THEY SHOULD BE CLOSE IN OCTOBER.
UNFORTUNATELY VISION ENGINEERING WILL NOT HAVE THEIR BUILDING ON TIME. SO THEY'RE LOOKING FOR EXISTING FACILITY. GIRDEAU WE HAD THE GR GROUNDBREAKING THIS PAST WEEK. AND NAVARRO COLLEGE THE GRANT FOR THE CCMA PROGRAM. THAT IS IT FOR THE REPORTS AT THIS TIME. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD 2021-441.
WE HAVE NO CITIZENS TO BE HEARD AT THIS POINT.
[CONSENT AGENDA]
WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER LATER IN THE AGENDA.CONSENT AGENDA, ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED TO BE RETAINED BY CITY COUNCIL AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, AN ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. DO I HAVE A MOTION OR A REMARK?
>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND SECOND.
PLEASE VOTE. CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVED 7-0.
[2021-444]
PUBLIC HEARINGS. OPEN ITEM 2021-444.CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING A PETITION FOR VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION, ANNEXING APPROXIMATELY 31.387 ACRES E TENDING THE BOUNDARY
[00:05:05]
LIMITS OF THE CITY TO INCLUDE SAID TERRITORY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS GRANTED TO ALL INHABITANTS AND OWNERS OF THE TERRITORY, ALL OF THE RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES OF OTHER CITIZENS AND BINDING THE INHABITANTS BY ALL OF THE ACTS, ORDINANCES, AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY ADOPTING A SERVICE PLAN FOR TERRITORY AND PROVIDE AN EFFECTIVE DATE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF FM-75 BETWEEN MCALPIN ROAD.>> THIS IS PART OF ANOTHER PROPERTY JUST TO THE NORTH.
IF YOU ALL RECALL BACK IN JULY 21 A ZONING CASE CAME BEFORE ALL OF YOU WHERE THE NORTH PORTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS.
THE SOUTH PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WAS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF WAXAHACHIE'S ETJ. IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS DEVELOPMENT A LITTLE BIT CLEANER, A LOT EASIER TO PROCESS BUILDING PERMITS, ENFORCING CODE ISSUES, ET CETERA, WE REACHED OUT TO THE DEVELOPER. WE'VE WORKED WITH THEM AND THE CITY OF WAXAHACHIE, THE COUNTY, FIRST OF ALL WE WENT THROUGH A PROCESS TO TRADE ETJ BOUNDARIES WITH THE CITY OF WAXAHACHIE, TO GET THIS AS PART OF OUR ETJ. THEN THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A VOLUNTARY PETITION TO ANNEX WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS.
THIS DOES MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER. IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 42, IT REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST TO BE ANNEXED INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS.
AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
>> I MAKE NOTES THAT COUNCILMAN HARTSON HAS EXCUSED HIMSELF FROM THIS ITEM. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? THE APPLICANT IS HERE, BUT I'LL TAKE A MOTION.
>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> OH I'M SORRY. >> CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THE ITEM PASSES 6-0. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> MOTION TO APPROVE.
ITEM PASSES 6-0. >> THANK YOU.
[2021-445]
>> THANK YOU. OPEN ITEM 2021-445, ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP RELATED TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF APPROXIMATELY 31.387 ACRES OUT OF THE NNJJ ABSTRACT 340, EXHIBIT A.
HERETO ADOPT THE INITIAL SAID ZONING PROPERTY BY ZONING SAID PROPERTY AS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 142 AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE REGULATIONS OF PD142 ASSET FORTH IN ORDINANCE NUMBER 2021-54 BY AMOUNTING THE DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AMOUNT OF REQUIRED OPEN SPACE AND THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF FM-875 BETWEEN MCALPIN AND SKINNER ROADS.
>> THIS CASE IS IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION CASE WE HAD JUST PRIOR TO THIS ITEM.
THIS IS FOR THAT 31 ACRES LOCATED TO THE SOUTH.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER TWO OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, WE'RE REQUIRED TO ASSIGN IT A ZONING DESIGNATION AT THE TIME OF ANNEXATION. THAT'S WHAT THE CASE IS ABOUT.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO BRING IN EXISTING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 42. ALTOGETHER IT WILL HAVE A TOTAL OF 58 RESIDENTIAL LOTS. WHEN WE FIRST PRESENTED THIS CASE IN JULY OF 2021, THE OPEN SPACE WAS ALL, THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT WAS PROPOSED TO YOU. AT THE TIME A MAJORITY OF THE OPEN SPACE WAS LOCATED IN THE NORTH PORTION.
NONE OF THAT HAS CHANGED. THEY ARE MAINTAINING THE OPEN SPACE THAT WAS APPROVED IN THE NORTHERN HALF.
THE ONLY CHANGE WOULD BE TO ALLOW FOR THE LOTS TO THE SOUTH AS PART OF THIS PD WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO BE.
STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. WE SENT OUT A PROPERTY NOTICE TO EVERYONE WITHIN 250 FEET. 0 CAME BACK.
>> WHAT IS THE YELLOW LINES? >> THIS IS OUR ZONING.
[00:10:15]
>> COUNCIL, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> MY ONLY QUESTION IS THE PROPERTY TO THE REAR OF IT. IS THAT, I KNOW IT HAS TO HAVE ACCESS SOMEHOW, BUT HOW IS THAT ACCESSED?
>> THIS PROPERTY HAS ACCESS THAT CURRENTLY GOES THROUGH.
THE LOT EXTENDS ALL THE WAY DOWN HERE AND GETS OUT TO MCALPIN ROAD. THEY MEET THE MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS TO NOT HAVE A SECONDARY ACCESS POINT.
IF THEY FOR SOME REASON ADD ON OR REQUEST ADDITIONAL LOTS, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A SECONDARY ACCESS POINT.
>> AND THEY WOULD PROBABLY GO THROUGH THE GREEN SPACE, I GUESS
THAT'S THE NORTH SIDE? >> THEY WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A DEAL WITH THIS DEVELOPER TO HAVE ACCESS BETWEEN THE TWO LOTS.
>> THE NEXT POINT OF ACCESS WILL ACTUALLY BE LOCATED TO THE EAST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HEADING TOWARDS SKINNER ROAD.
>> THANK YOU. >> TO PIGGYBACK ON THAT, WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO ASK THIS. THE GREEN SPACE THAT'S PROPOSED HERE, WHAT'S THE PERCENTAGE ON THAT PROPOSED VERSUS REQUIRED?
>> THEY DO EXCEED THE AMOUNT, THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE. IT DOES REQUIRE IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS, IT REQUIRES A TOTAL OF 5% AND THEY'RE EXCEEDING THE REQUIREMENT OF THAT.
THE PROPOSED OPEN SPACE ON THIS LOT OF THIS ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT IS -- IT WOULD BE ALL USEABLE OPEN SPACE.
>> THE ONLY GREEN SPACE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS IS THIS HOA
GREEN SPACE. >> THERE'S ANOTHER PORTION THAT
COMES DOWN RIGHT -- >> I DON'T SEE ANYMORE.
>> I'M A LITTLE BIT FUZZY ON THIS, BUT I WOULD ASSUME THAT IN THE FUTURE THERE MAY BE A CROSS ACCESS DESIRE FROM THAT PROPOSED HOA GREEN SPACE INTO THE DEVELOPMENT BEHIND IT, WHICH WOULD THEN MODIFY WHAT WE'RE PROVING TODAY AND MAKE IT LESS APPEALING SO TO SPEAK. AND NOW WE'RE POTENTIALLY GIVING THEM CREDIT FOR GREEN SPACE ALONG THE PIPELINE.
>> IN ORDER FOR THEM TO DO THAT, THEY HAVE LOTS PLANNED RIGHT
HERE. >> THIS IS ALREADY CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION. THEY'RE RIGHT NOW GRADING, THEIR HOUSE PERMITS ARE ALREADY PULLED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.
IT WAS NEVER THEIR INTENTION TO EVER HAVE ACCESS TO THE SOUTH.
WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO DEVELOPED BOTH OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS.
FROM EVERYTHING WE'VE HEARD, EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN PLANNED OUT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO REDO BOTH OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS IN
ORDER FOR THAT TO WORK OUT. >> CRAZIER THINGS HAVE HAPPENED
THOUGH. >> THE ONLY THING I WILL SAY, WE PASSED THAT AND THE CITY REQUIRED IT TO DEAD END THERE AT THE TIME. THAT WASN'T OR ONE OF THOSE DEAD ENDS, WE HAD A HUGE FIGHT ABOUT ALL WHERE THESE WERE PUT IN AT.
>> FOLLOW UP QUESTION. SO THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH OF THAT IS BEING CURRENT DEVELOPED. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IF THE BACKYARD SEGMENT WOULD MATCH UP, YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT PREPARED.
>> THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED ON THIS DEVELOPMENT.
THEY PUT THE BIGGER LOTS BACK HERE BECAUSE OF THE COMPLAINT.
[00:15:04]
>> IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?
I'LL TAKE A MOTION -- >> JUST ONE QUICK COMMENT.
IT'S ACTUALLY A GOOD ONE. I LOVE THAT WE HEAR EVERY DAY THAT WE HAVE TO SLAM IN AS MANY HOUSES AS POSSIBLE TO MAKE THINGS PROFITABLE. THIS DEVELOPER HAS PROVEN IN PARTICULAR OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT WE CAN HAVE ONE ACRE DEVELOPMENTS AND HE'S CLEARLY STILL MAKING MONEY.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE, SECOND?
ITEM PASSES OR CLOSE 6-0. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR DO I
HAVE A MOTION? >> MOVE TO APPROVE.
>> I'LL SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.
ITEM PASSES 6-0. WALTER WILL YOU GET HIM -- HUD, PLEASE. WALTER, THANK YOU FOR YOUR
[2021-446]
COMMENT. ITEM 2021-446, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12 TITLED TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES BY AMENDING ARTICLE 12.03 TITLED PARKING, STOPPING, AND STANDING BY AMENDING SECTION 12.03.014 TITLED NO SCHOOL DROP OFF, PICK UP, OR PARKING DURING SPECIFIC TIMES.TRVG A REPEALING CLAUSE, PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE, PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF $200 AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. >>> THANK YOU.
I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S SO SOFT. >> WE'VE HAD SOME COMPLAINTS FROM THE RESIDENTS, THEY'VE MADE REQUESTS TO THE MIDLOTHIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT WHO HAVE LOOKED AT IT.
SO FROM LOOKING AT THE AREA AND WHAT THEY WERE SEEING FROM A TRAFFIC PICK UP STANDPOINT, WE WERE LOOKING TO CONTINUE WITH WHAT WE HAVE ACROSS THE WAY AT HYDE PARK AND ALSO ACROSS TO THE NORTH AND RESTRICT THE PICKING UP AND THE PARKING ALONG THESE THREE ROADS WHICH ARE THE CLOSEST TO THE SCHOOL AND THAT'S GOING TO BE BETWEEN HOURS OF 3:30 TO 4:30.
AGAIN IT'S BEEN AMENDED TO INCLUDE THESE THREE STREETS.
WE CURRENTLY HAVE SOME OTHERS WITH THE OTHER SCHOOLS AND WITH THAT I ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL MAY HAVE.
>> I CAN SAY FOR A FACT THAT IT DOESN'T WORK ON 5TH STREET.
>> IS THERE GOING TO BE ANY SIGNAGE LETTING PEOPLE KNOW?
>> YES, SIR. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS, ONCE WE ADD IT TO THE ORDINANCE IF THE ORDINANCE PASSES, WE WILL GET SIGNS MADE UP AND POST SIGNS ALONG THESE STREETS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GOING TO GO ALL THE WAY DOWN.
WE'RE GOING TO SEE HOW FAR DOWN WE NEED TO GO AND IF CARS KEEP MOVING DOWN, WE'LL PUT SIGNS AS FAR DOWN AS WE NEED TO, BUT THE INTENT WOULD BE TO MAKE SURE THEY KNOW THERE'S NO PARKING
THERE. >> DO YOU KNOW IF IT WOULD BE THE SRO OFFICERS OR THE REGULAR PATROL OFFICERS ENFORCING THIS?
>> I WOULD IMAGINE IT WOULD BE --
>> PROBABLY PATROL. >> I DON'T KNOW, I'M JUST CURIOUS. WHERE DO YOU HAVE TO GO NOW FOR DROP OFF. I'M NOT SAYING PEOPLE SHOULD BE PARKING IN NEIGHBORHOODS NOW SO WHERE ARE THESE PEOPLE GOING TO
GO? >> TYPICALLY THEY GO THROUGH SCHOOL SITES. THE SCHOOL HAS IT SET UP WELL FROM THAT STANDPOINT. WE HAVE A LOT OF DEVELOPMENTS CLOSE TO THE SCHOOLS, IT'S A LITTLE MORE CONVENIENT TO PARK HERE BECAUSE THEY MAY LET THE KIDS GET OUT A LITTLE BIT SOONER OR THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT IN LINE, IT'S EASY TO GET IN AND GET OUT. BUT IT CREATES ISSUES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IT WASN'T REALLY SET UP FOR.
>> IT'S A 4 LANE ROAD, IT WOULD BE GREAT TO MOVE TRAFFIC A LITTLE BETTER. BUT FOR RIGHT NOW, I'M LIKE MAN THAT'S GOING TO BE INTERESTING. BUT I UNDERSTAND THE NEED.
>> I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW TO ASK THIS QUESTION, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SIGN THAT SAYS NO STANDING?
>> THAT'S WHAT THE SIGNS ON 5TH STREET SAY.
[00:20:02]
ANYBODY ELSE THINK THAT'S STRANGE?>> AS SOMEONE WHO LIVES RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO AN ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL, I APPRECIATE THE SIGNS. >> NO STANDING?
>> IT'S BAD. >> I GET IT, ALL RIGHT.
>> I THINK THE CONCERN WOULD BE YOU HAVE STUDENTS WAITING FOR THE PARENTS OR THE PARENTS AREN'T REALLY STOPPING, SO THE STUDENT WILL WAIT FOR THE PARENT TO COME BY, THE PARENT SLOWS
DOWN ENOUGH AND THEY GET IN. >> I DON'T LIKE THAT, BUT IF MOM AND DAD IS RUNNING LATE AND IT'S THEIR NORMAL PICKUP SPOT, THOSE KIDS ARE HANGING OUT IN FRONT OF PEOPLE'S HOUSES.
YEAH, IT'S A MESS. POTENTIALLY A MESS.
I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. I GUESS IT'S MORE OF A POLICING QUESTION. WILL THERE BE SOME SORT OF BUFFER PERIOD WHERE WE'RE JUST SHOWING PEOPLE THE SIGNS INSTEAD OF JUST AUTOMATICALLY WRITING THEM A TICKET? GREAT, THANK YOU. COUNCIL, ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE.
MOTION TO APPROVE, SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.
AND ITEM PASSES 6-1. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL.
[2021-447]
>> ITEM 2021-447, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $409,800 TO BE AWARDED BY THE MIDLOTHIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 4B TO THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT TO FUND THE 14TH
STREET BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. TODAY YOU HAVE THE HEATHER AND ALLEN SHOW THIS EVENING. LAST WEEK I WENT TO MCDC AND DISCUSSED WITH THEM WORKING ON ANOTHER PROJECT THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT FOR QUITE SOMETIME TO DO LANDSCAPING ON 14TH STREET SUCH AS WE DID ON MIDLOTHIAN PARKWAY.
SO I ATTENDED THEIR MEETING VIA PHONE AT LEAST AND WE HAD A DISCUSSION, THIS PROJECT WILL INCLUDE APPROXIMATELY 375 TREES FROM GEORGE HOPPER TO MCALPIN. IT WILL HIT ALL OF THE MEDIANS, THERE'S ALSO TWO BEDS, WHERE THERE'S TWO DECOMPOSED GRANITE LITTLE MEDIANS RIGHT NOW THAT WE JUST TEND TO PULL WEEDS OUT OF CONSTANTLY. SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE THOSE INTO T TWO ATTRACTIVE LITTLE BEDS UTILIZING PLANT MATERIAL TO TIE IT ALL IN.
SO THIS PROJECT IS APPROXIMATELY $331,500 FOR TREES, LANDSCAPING, BORING, AND IRRIGATION. $10,000 FOR ELECTRICAL PEDESTALS TO PUT IN THE CONTROLLERS, THE CLOCK CONTROLLERS WITH THE 20% CONTINGENCY ON IT OF 68,300 FOR A TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED $409,800.
SO THIS PROJECT WAS APPROVED BY MCDC.
WITH THAT SAID, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU
HAVE. >> HOW WILL THESE TREES AFFECT THE LIGHTING POLES THAT WE HAVE UP AND DOWN THE MEETING?
>> THEY ARE ALL SET. ANY OF THE LARGE TREES ARE ALL 50 FEET AWAY FROM OUR LIGHTING AND ANY OF THE ORNAMENTALS ARE 35 FEET, 30 TO 35 FEET AWAY JUST LIKE ON MIDLOTHIAN PARKWAY.
SO WE'RE ACTUALLY WHILE WE'RE WORKING ON THAT, WE'RE WORKING TO CREATE OUR ROAD STANDARDS FOR LANDSCAPING, THAT GIVES US PLENTY OF ROOM NOT TO GET INTO THE LIGHTING AND FOR TRUCKS TO
COME BY AND REPAIR ANY LIGHTING. >> SO WILL THIS PROJECT END AROUND THE SAME TIME THE PARK IS OPEN?
SINCE I HAVE TO STAY ON TOPIC. >> WE WAIT 60 DAYS ON THIS ONE, TAMMY? 60 DAYS FOR THIS BEFORE THE FUNDING COMES THROUGH. BUT EVEN BEFORE THE FUNDING COMES THROUGH AFTER WE GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION PROCESS, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND PUT THIS OUT TO BID AND BE READY TO GO AS SOON AS IT'S DONE. SO 60 DAYS FROM NOW WE CAN START SO IT WILL BE THIS WINTER, FEBRUARY PROBABLY.
[00:25:02]
ABOUT THE SAME TIME. THE PARK WILL BE DONE IN JANUARY. BUT THIS ONE SHOULD BE PRETTY>> YES, SIR. >> I'M JUST ASSUMING THE LANDSCAPE THAT GOES IN DURING THE WINTER, SHOULD WE HAVE ANY OTHER INSTANCES THAT WILL BE COVERED IN WARRANTY SO WE CAN
ENJOY IT IN THE SPRING? >> IT WILL BE WARRANTIED AND WILL BE REPLACED IN THE SPRING. YOU SHOULD SEE THE BEDS ON MIDLOTHIAN PARKWAY CHANGE VERY SOON TO UPDATE THAT PLANT MATERIAL. THIS ONE WILL BE SIMILAR BECAUSE WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GET EVERYTHING WE WANT IN WINTER, SO WE'LL COME BACK AND CHANGE IT OUT IN THE SPRING AND HOPEFULLY WE WON'T HAVE ANOTHER SNOW-POCOLYPSE.
>> I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
I THINK IT'S GOING TO REALLY DRESS UP THE CITY.
>> I LOVE WHEN YOU COME UP, ALLEN, BECAUSE YOU'RE GIVING US MONEY BACK THAT YOU'VE COLLECTED.
I LOVE IT. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.
ITEM PASSES 7-0. ITEM 2021-448, CONSIDER AND ACT
[2021-448]
UPON A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $57,553.20 TO BE AWARDED BY 4B TO THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT TO FUND THE HERITAGE PARK BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT.HEATHER. >> WE MET ON THIS ONE LAST WEEK AS WELL. AND THIS HAS BEEN IN DISCUSSION FOR A LITTLE BIT. AND I THINK SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT BURLESON AND HOW THEY HAVE A FUN LITTLE SET UP OUTSIDE OF THEIR CITY HALL.
SO WE'RE DOING A SMALLER VERSION OF THAT TO COINCIDE WITH THE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN WHICH IS ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO COME DOWNSTAIRS OR DOWNTOWN, DOWNSTAIRS, DOWNTOWN AND HAVE IT MUCH MORE WALKABLE, PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY AND ENCOURAGE THE COMMUNITY TO COME OUT. THIS PROJECT WOULD PUT IN SOME NEW FESTIVAL LIGHTING ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PARK CLOSEST TO AVENUE F DOWN TO THE CABIN AND IT WOULD HAVE THE FESTIVAL LIGHTING COVERING THE TOP OF THE LAWN.
THEN IT WOULD INCLUDE INCLUDE SOME DECOMPOSED GRANITE SEATING AREAS WITH SOME RECYCLED LUMBER ADIRONDACK CHAIRS AND FOOD SO PEOPLE CAN EAT. THERE WILL BE CORN HOLE SO PEOPLE CAN ENJOY THE LAWN WITH THEIR FRIENDS.
AND THEN IT WILL REFRESH THE LANDSCAPING.
WE LOST A GOOD DEAL OF PLANT MATERIAL DURING THE WINTER STORM. IF YOU NOTICE WHEN YOU WALK AROUND THE PARK, THE GRANITE HAS SLOUGHED OFF AND YOU'RE SEEING THAT WEED BLOCKING SO WE WOULD COME IN AND REFRESH ALL OF THAT, COVER IT UP, AND CLEAN IT UP SO IT'S A MUCH MORE INVITING AREA TO WELCOME PEOPLE DOWNTOWN. AND WITH THAT 4B DID APPROVE THAT. THAT IS $57,553.20.
AND THAT DOES INCLUDE THE 20% CONTINGENCY JUST IN CASE.
SO WE'RE VERY THANKFUL FOR 4B SUPPORTING THESE BEAUTIFICATION EFFORTS AND WITH THAT I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS
YOU HAVE. >> WHAT'S THE TIMEFRAME ON THIS?
>> WE HAVE TO WAIT THE 60 DAYS AGAIN FOR THE FUNDING TO COME AVAILABLE. BUT THAT CAN BE DONE IN LESS
>> SO ONCE WE REACH OUR 60 DAYS, WE'LL HAVE EVERYTHING ALREADY BID OUT READY TO GO AND THEN AS SOON AS WE CAN, WE CAN PULL THE TRIGGER. THIS WAS A QUICK ONE.
>> YOU WON'T MAKE THE HOLIDAY -- >> NOT WITH THE 60 DAY, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. WE'LL PUT OUR EFFORT OUT.
BUT IT'S WAITING ON THAT 60 DAYS.
WE'RE AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER, SO WE'RE ALREADY GOING TO BE THE
END OF THAT. >> ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE A TREE
THIS YEAR? >> I SURE HOPE IT MAKES IT FROM CHINA. WE'RE WAITING.
>> HOW DOES THIS -- >> IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE HERE
HOW DOES THIS ALIGN WITH THE FARMERS MARKET?
>> IT WON'T IMPACT IT. THE BOARDS CAN BE SET TO THE THE LIGHTING WILL BE ABOUT 12 FEET IN THE AIR SO THE TENTS CAN STILL BE SET UP AND IT SHOULDN'T IMPACT ANY OF OUR FUTURE EVENTS THAT WE HAVE OUT THERE. IT WILL JUST ADD TO IT, A LITTLE
BETTER AMBIENCE. >> THERE WE GO.
GENTLEMEN? >> I'M KIND OF MISSING THE SCOPE
[00:30:02]
HERE. IS THIS LIKE TEMPORARY INSTALLING STUFF THAT WOULD BE UTILIZED AT PARTICULAR TIMES,PERMANENTLY INSTALLED STUFF? >> THE SEATING AND EVERYTHING WILL BE INSTALLED, THE CHAIRS CAN BE MOVED.
THIS IS A TRIAL AND ERROR, WE'RE GOING TO SEE HOPEFULLY EVERYONE RESPECTS OUR PROPERTY AND LEAVES IT WHERE IT IS.
THE CORN HOLES WILL NOT BE PERMANENTLY INSTALLED.
BUT IT CAN BE USED AT ANY TIME. WE'LL LEAVE IT OUT JUST TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO COME DOWNTOWN.
THE FESTIVAL LIGHTING WILL BE UP YEAR ROUND.
IT WILL BE ON THEIR OWN SEPARATE POLES AND ELECTRICAL TIMING SYSTEM. SO THEY'LL BE ON AND OFF.
>> WHAT IS FESTIVAL LIGHTING? >> YOU KNOW, YOU'LL SEE IT AROUND. MAYOR, DO YOU HAVE SOME AT YOUR SHOP OUT FRONT? IT'S THE FUN LITTLE BULBS, THE BLACK CORDS WITH THE FUN LITTLE WHAT YOU PUT OUT AT A FESTIVAL.
A LOT OF THE RESTAURANTS AROUND HERE HAVE IT OUTSIDE ON THEIR
PATIOS. >> AND IN THE UNFORTUNATE EVENT THAT THIS GETS DAMAGED AS SOON AS IT GOES OUT, DO WE HAVE A
PLAN IN PLACE FOR THAT? >> WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. AND THE CORN HOLE CAN BE REPLACED EASILY, IT'S THE LEAST EXPENSIVE.
THE FURNITURE WILL BE MORE CHALLENGING.
BUT IF WE'RE FINDING THAT IT MOVES AWAY, I DO HAVE A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT IN HERE SO WE COULD ORDER SOME ADDITIONAL AS LONG AS 4B APPROVES US TO MOVE FORWARD.
IF WE PUT THIS OUT AND IMMEDIATELY THINGS WALK AWAY, WE CAN COME BACK IN AND DIG A LITTLE CONCRETE PIER IN THE GROUND AND ATTACH IT. WE'RE JUST HOPING THAT WE CAN BE A LOVING COMMUNITY AND RESPECT OUR CITY PROPERTY.
>> HOW IS THAT WORKING OUT IN THE PARKS?
>> IT'S REAL GREAT RIGHT NOW. JUST STAY OFF OF TIKTOK, PLEASE, BECAUSE IT'S KILLING US AT THE MOMENT.
BUT THIS IS MUCH MORE, AND THE REASON WE'RE WILLING TO MAKE MORE OF A CHANCE IS THIS IS VERY NOTICEABLE.
SO YOU'RE RIGHT DOWNTOWN WHERE THERE'S ACTIVITY, WHEREAS ONCE YOU GET IN THE PARK IT'S FURTHER OFF THE STREET, PEOPLE CAN'T SEE
WHAT'S GOING ON. >> I GOT TO MEET WITH THE CITY LEADERSHIP IN BURLESON ALONG WITH CHRIS AND CLYDE.
AND HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT VERY THING, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY DAMAGE THIS STUFF OR IF THEY DAMAGE, THEY BASICALLY SAID IN A NUTSHELL THAT IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A TRAINING PERIOD FOR THE COMMUNITY. THEY WERE LEARNING THERE'S SOMETHING NEW THERE AND THERE WAS SOME DAMAGE IN THE BEGINNING, BUT THEY FELT THAT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO THEM TO HAVE TOTALLY MOVABLE AND NOT ANCHORED TO THE GROUND AND ADJUSTABLE SET UP. AND THEN EVENTUALLY THE COMMUNITY RECOGNIZED THAT IT'S A VALUABLE PIECE OF THEIR PARKS SO THEY DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF DAMAGE NOW.
I'M HOPEFUL THAT OUR COMMUNITY WILL RESPOND IN THE SAME WAY.
>> JUSTIN AND I WERE THERE, ONE THING THAT WAS PRETTY NEAT ABOUT IT, THEY HAD TAKEN ASTROTURF THE WHOLE THING.
THERE WAS A MOTHER AND KIDS, BABY YOGA OUT THERE IN THE ASTRO TURF. AND THEY HAD A FOOSBALL TABLE.
THEIR WHOLE SET UP WAS JUST WONDERFUL.
>> FOOSBALL, PING-PONG, THEY HAD CITY OF BURLESON PING-PONG BALLS
THAT WERE FREE. >> YOU PUT A QUARTER IN YOU GET
>> I BELIEVE AS OUR CITY HALL DEVELOPS AND DOWNTOWN DEVELOPS, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A BREEDING GROUND AND WE CAN
EXPAND UPON IN THE FUTURE. >> IT MIGHT BE A GOOD TEST TO SEE HOW THE COMMUNITY RESPONDS TO THE ENTIRE THING.
>> GIVES YOU SOMETHING INTERACTIVE TO DO AFTER YOU HAVE DINNER AT BRANDED BURGER OR ONE OF THE ITALIAN PLACES OR WHATEVER, TO COME AND PLAY IN THE YARD WITH KIDS AND THROW SOME CORN HOLE AROUND. IT'S A GOOD TIME.
>> IT'S A SMALL START. THIS ALLOWS US TO SEE WHAT THE NEW FOOTPRINT LOOKS LIKE WHEN THE NEW BUILDINGS COME IN AND CAN ALLOW US TO REALLY IMPROVE THE PLAZA AND MAKE IT TIE IN TOGETHER SO WE HAVE A COHESIVE DESIGN WHEN THE NEW BUILDING
COMES IN. >> WITH THAT, DO WE HAVE A
MOTION? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO
>> MOTION APPROVED AND SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.
ITEM PASSES 7-0. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
THANK YOU 4B. >> AND THANK 4B.
[2021-449]
[2021-450]
ITEM 2021-449, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH HOEFER[00:35:03]
WELKER FOR THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE CITY HALL/LIBRARYFACILITY PROJECT. >> I FIGURED IT WOULD BE A PERFECT SEGUE INTO THIS AGENDA ITEM.
SINCE MAY OF 2020 THE CITIZENS PASSED A BOND FOR A DOWNTOWN CITY HALL LIBRARY, WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF SELECTING AN ARCHITECT. I THINK ON SEVERAL REPORTS KIND OF OUTLINED HOW CITIES ARE SUPPOSED TO SELECT AN ARCHITECT, ACTUALLY ANY PROFESSIONAL SERVICE ARCHITECT, ENGINEER, ET CETERA. IT'S A LITTLE BIT BIZARRE, BUT ONCE WE THROW OUT REQUESTS FOR QUALIFICATIONS, HOPEFULLY SEVERAL PEOPLE SUBMIT THEIR QUALIFICATIONS.
WE SELECT THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE BASED ON THEIR QUALIFICATIONS. AT THAT POINT WE BEGIN NEGOTIATING A PRICE. SO REALLY BEFORE THEN, STATE LAW SAYS YOU CAN'T TALK PRICE. SO WE GOT 14 RESPONDENTS ON THAT. WE HAD A SELECTION COMMITTEE, CHRIS, MYSELF, CARL SMITH, MIKE ADAMS, SHERYL ADDISON ARE THE GROUP, THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY THAT YOU APPROVED TO HELP US THROUGH THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR THE ARCHITECT.
WE DID HAVE 14 ARCHITECTURAL FIRMS RESPOND WITH THEIR REQUESTS FOR QUALIFICATIONS. A VERY POSITIVE OUTCOME ON THIS.
WE SHORTLISTED FIVE FOR THE INTERVIEW PROCESS SO WE CAME IN HERE AND WE HAD FIVE INTERVIEWS THROUGHOUT THE DAY.
ABOUT AN HOUR, HOUR AND 15 MINUTES EACH INTERVIEW.
WE DID SELECT HOEFER WELKER. THEY'RE A TEXAS FIRM WITH NATIONAL EXPERIENCE. ACTUALLY THE PROJECT MANAGER, THE ARCHITECTURAL WILL BE THE PROJECT MANAGER ON THIS IS FROM MIDLOTHIAN. HE GREW UP IN MIDLOTHIAN, HIS MOM WAS AN ELEMENTARY TEACHER HERE FOR A WHILE AND HIS FATHER A PASTOR. THEY ALSO HAVE NATIONAL LIBRARY EXPERTISE. AND THE ENGINEERING CONSULTANT IS NICHOLS WHO DID OUR DOWNTOWN PLAN.
THEY'LL BE DOING THE URBAN PLANNING OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA.
EXCUSE THE SCREEN ON THIS, BUT WE'VE GOT ABOUT TWO MONTHS PREDESIGN. EIGHT MONTHS DESIGN PHASE.
TWO MONTHS TO BID PERMANENT AND THEN CONSTRUCTION.
ALL OF THAT IS DEPENDENT UPON SEVERAL FACTORS BUT THIS IS AN OUTLINE OF THE TIME AND THE SCHEMATIC.
THANK YOU FOR CATCHING ME ON THAT.
THAT WOULD BE A VERY RAPID BUILD, WE DON'T WANT THAT.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE HOEFER WELKER ASSESSMENT, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR FROM THE CITY ASSESSMENT AND THE LIBRARY.
THEY'LL BRING ALL OF THE COUNCIL IN, COMMUNITY MEMBERS, AND ASK WHAT DO THEY LIKE, WHAT WOULD THEY LIKE TO SEE.
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEN THE ACTION PLAN AND BUDGET TIMELINE. THAT WILL GET US TO THE DESIGN DOCUMENTS FOR THAT. SO THE BASIC SERVICES, ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL, AND ENGINEERING SERVICE, AND THAT IS $1,502,700. WITH THAT IS INCLUDED THE PREDESIGN PROGRAMMING CONCEPT DESIGN, BENCHMARKING TOOLS, URBAN DESIGN, DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN CONSULTING, LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION, AUDIO/VISUAL AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, ACOUSTICS AND SECURITY LIBRARY CONSULTANT AND SPECS AND INTERIOR DESIGN. WITH THAT, I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. BUT OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO GO
WITH HOEFER WELKER. >> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SELECTION COMMITTEE? HOW DID THAT COMMITTEE COME TO
BE? >> I GUESS CHRIS AND I JUST KIND OF FIGURED THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ADAM IS GOING TO BE WORKING CLOSELY WITH IT. MIKE WITH HIS ENGINEERING EXPERIENCE AND EVERYTHING. CARL HAVING BEEN HERE FOR QUITE A WHILE AND ALSO HE WAS ON THE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR THE POLICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING.
SHERYL IS OUR PURCHASING AGENT SO SHE WAS VERY INVOLVED IN THE PURCHASING AND SHE'LL BE INVOLVED IN THE CONTRACT AND NEGOTIATION AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND THEN JOHN AND TONY ARE VERY INTIMATELY INVOLVED AND THEY DO THIS FOR A LIVING FOR SEVERAL DIFFERENT ENTITIES ET CETERA.
>> I'M FAIRLY CERTAIN YOU KNOW WHAT MY NEXT QUESTION IS, BUT I DON'T SEE ANYBODY FROM OUR OWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN THERE.
>> WELL THIS IS A SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR THE ARCHITECT.
SO AT THE NEXT PART WE'LL GET THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT INVOLVED AND THEN THEY'LL HELP US WITH THE SITE DESIGN, THE DISCUSSION, THINGS LIKE THAT. SO IT'S NOT ALWAYS AN ARCHITECTURAL THING, WE NEED TO SEE THE FIT WITH THE CITY AND MAYBE TO YOUR POINT WE SHOULD HAVE HAD A PLANNER ON THERE.
[00:40:01]
BUT WE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS IS MORE OF A PURCHASING AVENUE.AND I REALLY DIDN'T THINK TO PUT A PLANNER ON THERE OR SOMEBODY FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. BUT WE DO HAVE ADAM AND MIKE ON THERE, MYSELF ALSO FROM A DESIGN PERSPECTIVE.
>> I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT, THANKS.
>> JUSTIN? >> SO THEY PUT IN QUITE A FEW HOURS AND A LOT OF WORK IN THIS AND I'M NOT GOING TO SIT UP HERE AND VOTE NO TO THIS BECAUSE I HAVE NO IDEA.
SO WITH THAT CAN I MAKE A MOTION, MAYOR?
>> ARE THERE ANY -- >> I WAS JUST GOING TO SECOND
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.
>> PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 7-0.
>> THANK YOU. >> I DO COMMEND THE STAFF.
THE WHOLE BOND SITUATION IS MOVING ALONG VERY NICELY AND PROGRESS IS BEING MADE. I KNOW YOU'RE COMING BACK NEXT TIME. ITEM 2021-450, REVIEW AND DISCUSS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS CREATED IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE 2017 SOUTHEAST THREE YEAR ANNEXATION PER CITY COUNCIL'S REQUEST.
AND THERE IS ONE SPEAKER WHEN TRENTON, YOU FINISH, WE'LL HAVE
IN 2017 WE COMPLETED THE THREE YEAR ANNEXATION PROCESS.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW, WE'RE REQUIRED TO OFFER A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR ANY PROPERTIES THAT HAD SPECIAL VALUATION FOR VARIOUS CATEGORIES SUCH AS TIMBERLAND, AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTIONS. THROUGH THOSE AGREEMENTS THERE WAS VARIOUS THINGS PUT IN PLACE, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS HAD A TIME PERIOD THAT AFTER THAT TIME PERIOD HAD EXPIRED.
THE AGREEMENTS OF THAT, THERE'S A VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR ANNEXATION. AT THE TIME OF IN 201734 TOTAL AGREEMENTS WERE CREATED. CURRENTLY WE HAVE 30 STILL IN PLACE. THERE HAVE BEEN PROPERTIES SINCE 2017 THAT HAVE VOLUNTARILY ANNEXED INTO THE CITY LIMITS SUCH AS SUMMER CREST. THERE'S A PROPERTY OFF OF PLAINVIEW ROAD. ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT THAT ALSO REQUESTED TO BE VOLUNTARILY ANNEXED INTO THE CITY LIMITS.
THIS WAS REQUESTED BY CITY COUNCIL TO PUT ON THIS AGENDA.
I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
THE MAJORITY OF THE AGREEMENTS EXPIRE OCTOBER 1, 2023.
DEPENDING ON WHEN THE AGREEMENTS WERE SIGNED.
ANOTHER PORTION OF THE AGREEMENTS EXPIRE ON DECEMBER 12, 2023. AND TWO AGREEMENTS EXPIRE ON JANUARY 1, 2024. ONCE AGAIN IT WAS ALL DEPENDENT UPON WHEN THESE AGREEMENTS WERE SIGNED.
>> WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER. IF YOU'LL COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
>> MY NAME IS LEWIS PONDER, MY ADDRESS IS 3480 MT. ZION ROAD.
I'M GOING TO READ A STATEMENT BECAUSE FOLLOWING BULLET POINTS DON'T WORK FOR ME. AGENDA MAKES REFERENCE TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, THEY WERE NEVER REALLY AGREEMENTS, THEY WERE ULTIMATUMS. WE WERE NEVER GIVEN A CHOICE.
THE PRESENTATION TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WAS ALSO DONE UNDER FALSE PRETENSES. THE FIRST LINE IN THE CITY'S LETTER SAYS THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN ACKNOWLEDGES YOUR REQUEST FOR A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OPTION IN LIEU OF ANNEXATION. NONE OF US EVER ASKED FOR AN AGREEMENT. THE AGREEMENT WAS REQUIRED BY THE CITY TO GET TO US BY THE STATE.
I DON'T KNOW A PERSON THAT WOULD HAVE WILLINGLY SIGNED THESE ULTIMATUMS HAD THEY HAD ANOTHER CHOICE.
THE LANGUAGE AND THESE AGREEMENTS ALSO VIOLATED THE SPIRIT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 4305 THAT REFERENCED PROVISIONS FOR LONGER TERMS UP TO 15 YEARS RENEWABLE UP TO 45 YEARS.
THE CITY CLOSE TO SELECT FIVE YEARS AND INCLUDE A CLAUSE ALSO NOT PROVIDED IN 43.05 THAT SAYS THAT WE AGREE TO BE VOLUNTARILY ANNEXED AT THE END OF FIVE YEARS WITH NO GUARANTEE OF RENEWAL.
NO PROPERTY OWNER WOULD EVER WILLINGLY MAKE SUCH AN AGREEMENT. WE WERE FORCED INTO THESE ULTIMATUMS. NOTHING IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE ALLOWED FOR SUCH A CLAUSE, THEREFORE THESE AGREEMENTS ARE NOT VALID. SIGNING WAS THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS. SOME OF US ATTEMPTED TO NEGOTIATE THESE AGREEMENTS. THE CITY ATTORNEY ACTED AS IF HE
[00:45:01]
WAS WILLING TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH.HOWEVER WE WERE STRUNG ALONG IN THE FINAL HOUR AND THEN WERE TOLD TO TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT. SINCE THE CITY STAFF WAS UNWILLING TO NEGOTIATE, OUR FINAL OPTION WAS TO GO BEFORE THE COUNCIL TO PRESENT OUR CASE. THE COUNCIL REFUSED ANY NEGOTIATIONS. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN MILLER.
BECAUSE OF THEIR REFUSAL TO NEGOTIATE, THE AGREEMENTS ARE INVALID AND IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT THIS COUNCIL VOTES TO ELIMINATE THESE AGREEMENTS FOR ALL WHO REQUEST THEM.
IT WILL COST YOU, THE CITY, NOTHING TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
SOME OF YOU MAY ASK WHY IS THIS GOOD FOR THE CITY? WE'RE RAPIDLY LOSING GREEN SPACE IN OUR COMMUNITY EVER SINCE THE LAND BETWEEN MY PROPERTY WAS STRIPPED FOR ITS TREE, GRASS, AND GROUND COVER, I'VE SEEN DEER, WILD TURKEY, AND FOXES ON MY PROPERTY FOR THE FIRST TIME. I'VE NEVER SEEN THESE ANIMALS IN THAT AREA EVER. THEY HAD TO HAVE LEFT THAT PROPERTY BECAUSE THEY CAME AS SOON AS IT GOT STRIPPED.
AS LONG AS THESE LANDS, MINE AND THE OTHERS UNDER AGREEMENT STAY IN AG TIMBER OR WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, THE TAX REVENUE FOR THIS FORCED ANNEXATION WOULD BE OF MINIMAL IMPACT FOR THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN. THOSE SAME TAXES FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER COULD BE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STAYING ON A PROPERTY THAT'S BEEN IN THEIR FAMILY FOR GENERATIONS VERSUS WALKING AWAY. IT WOULD FORCE ME TO BREAK THE PROMISE I MADE TO OUR PARENTS AND TO OUR CHILDREN AND HAVE TO
SELL OUT AND WALK AWAY. >> LEWIS, WRAP IT UP, PLEASE.
>> SO I'LL JUST FINISH WITH ITEMS 444 AND 445 IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHY YOU DON'T HAVE TO FORCE US INTO THE CITY.
IT'S OBVIOUS THE PROPERTY OWNERS IF THEY WANT TO DEVELOP ARE GOING TO ASK TO BE IN THE CITY SO THEY CAN DEVELOP AND USE THE CITY SEWAGE SYSTEMS AND SUCH LIKE AS THAT.
IT'S HAPPENING, IT'S COMING TRUE.
YOU'RE SEEING IT ALL THE TIME. AND SO WITH THAT, I HUMBLY REQUEST THAT YOU ELIMINATE THESE AND I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY
>> WERE YOU THE CITY ATTORNEY DURING THESE NEGOTIATIONS? AND CAN YOU BRING ME YOUR STATEMENT JUST SO I CAN, I'M NOT GOING TO TRY AND PUT YOU ON THE SPOT BUT I DO ASK THAT YOU JUST TAKE A FEW NOTES. SO LEWIS REFERENCED LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 43.05 WHICH I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH CALLING OUT PROVISIONS FOR LONGER TERMS UP TO 15 YEARS AND RENEWABLE UP TO 45 YEARS. HE STATED THAT THE CITY SELECTED FIVE YEARS AND INCLUDED A CLAUSE NOT PROVIDED IN 43.05 THAT SAYS THAT WE AGREE TO BE VOLUNTARILY ANNEXED AT THE END OF THE FIVE YEARS. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THIS AT
ALL? >> I DON'T HAVE THE CODE IN FRONT OF ME, BUT WHEN WE DID THESE AGREEMENTS, THE COUNCIL AT THAT TIME AND WHEN YOU'RE DOING, AS OPPOSED TO INVOLUNTARY, WHEN YOU'RE DOING VOLUNTARY AND YOU'RE DOING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THERE'S NEGOTIATIONS THAT CAN GO BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE LANDOWNERS.
AT THE TIME THE COUNCIL WAS SET ON THE FIVE YEARS, THAT WAS THEIR DECISION WAS TO KEEP IT AT THE FIVE YEARS AS I RECALL.
AND OF COURSE YOU CAN CHIME IN IF THAT'S DIFFERENT, NOT TO HAVE A LONGER TERM. SO THAT'S WHERE THEY STAYED AND THAT'S WHERE THE AGREEMENTS WERE NEGOTIATED WERE AT FIVE YEARS.
CORRECT IT CAN GO UP TO 15 YEARS.
>> 15 OR 45? HE'S REFERENCING 45.
>> I CAN PULL THE STATUTE UP. >> AND WE CAN ROUND ROBIN IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT YOU ALMOST SAID INVOLUNTARY ANNEXATION BUT YOU CAUGHT YOURSELF AND THEN YOU REFERENCED THE NEGOTIATION AND YOU ALMOST SAID DEVELOPER, BUT YOU CHANGED IT TO LANDOWNER.
SO I WOULD MAKE THE STATEMENT THAT WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH DEVELOPERS, WE'RE DEALING WITH LARGE PARCEL LANDOWNERS THAT LIVE IN THE CITY THAT HAVE LIVED IN THE CITY FOR SOME TIME AND THEY'RE NOT CURRENTLY. AND AT THE TIME OF THESE AGREEMENTS INTERESTED IN DEVELOPING THEIR PROPERTY.
[00:50:01]
IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THEY MAY JUST AS IT STANDS WE HAVE 30 REMAINING, WE HAVE 30 REMAINING LANDOWNERS THAT WANT TO REMAIN LANDOWNERS. CAN YOU NOW OR CAN YOU IN THE FUTURE AND GET BACK TO US, EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT NEGOTIATIONCONVERSATIONS AND -- >>> YOUR PROPERTY WILL REMAIN AG, YOU CAN USE IT AND PUT IN THAT AGREEMENT, WE DID THIS WITH CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNERS. LEAVE THEM NONCONFORMING USES.
YOU CAN USE IT FOR X PERIOD OF TIME.
THE STATUTE GAVE A PERIOD OF TIME THOSE AGREEMENTS COULD BE FOR. ONE YEAR, UP TO 15 YEARS I BELIEVE. IF YOU SAID 45.
THE STATUTE IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT NOW.
>> SURE. >> BUT AGAIN THAT IS WHAT THE
STATUTE ALLOWED FOR. >> BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON THE NEGOTIATION BETWEEN THE LANDOWNERS AND THE
CITY? >> I GUESS I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEAN INFORMATION, NOTES THAT WERE TAKEN?
>> NO, YOU SAID THAT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS A CONTRACT THAT'S ENTERED INTO BETWEEN A DEVELOPER AND THE CITY THAT GOES THROUGH A PROCESS OF NEGOTIATIONS.
SO WHAT WAS THE NEGOTIATION AFFORDED TO THESE LANDOWNERS TO
SIGN THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? >> THE AGREEMENT AS I RECALL THE AGREEMENTS WERE SENT TO THEM IN A LETTER SAYING HERE'S WHAT THE
CITY IS OFFERING. >> SO THERE WAS NO NEGOTIATION BEYOND WHAT THE INITIAL OFFERING WAS --
>> LET ME THROW IN SOMETHING RIGHT HERE --
>> WE SAT DOWN. >> WE WENT BACK DOWN HERE --
>> WAYNE. >> I HAD PROPERTY INVOLVED IN
THAT. >> YOU HAD A LOT OF PROPERTY.
>> AND I CHOSE TO GO AHEAD AND LET IT GET ANNEXED.
WHAT'S THE TERM USED ABOUT ANNEXATION, FORCED ANNEXATION.
ALL OF THESE PROPERTIES WERE GOING TO BE ANNEXED, PERIOD.
NOW FOR YOU PROPERTY OWNERS YOU WANT TO SIGN THIS AGREEMENT THAT YOU'LL TAKE IT IN FIVE YEARS, YOU'LL GO AHEAD AND VOLUNTARILY AT THAT TIME, WE'LL LET YOU OFF AND WE WON'T ANNEX YOU RIGHT NOW. THAT'S WHAT THAT WAS ALL ABOUT.
>> I GET THE PREMISE, I WAS ANNEXED AT THE SAME TIME.
>> I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHERE THE QUESTION IS.
WE WERE TOLD WE'RE GOING TO BE ANNEXED.
>> MHM. >> WE'RE GOING TO BE EITHER ANNEXED RIGHT NOW, YOU'RE GOING TO SIGN A PIECE OF PAPER THAT SAYS I'LL HOLD IT AND I'LL VOLUNTEER IN FIVE YEARS.
>> SO IN OTHER CIRCLES, IN OTHER SITUATIONS THAT'S CALLED COERCION. YOU EITHER DO THIS OR --
>> YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND. >> I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
>> YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE LAW AT THE TIME WAS EITHER SIGN THIS PAPER OR YOU'RE GOING TO BE FORCED TO ANNEX INTO THE CITY.
>> THAT WAS WHAT THE LAW -- >> I GET THAT BUT TO SAY WE'RE TAKING IT EITHER WAY, THE LAW HAS CHANGED AND WE STILL HAVE ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. SO THOSE TOO CAN BE CHANGED IF WE CHOOSE TO DO SO AND WE NOW HAVE A CITIZEN OR POTENTIALLY A GROUP OF CITIZENS WHO ARE ASKING US TO EXPLORE THAT AVENUE.
>> SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT EVEN THOUGH THE LAW HAS CHANGED, WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DOES AT THIS POINT IS IT'S STILL ACTS AS THEIR, I'M JUST STATING THE FACT THEY'RE A VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR ANNEXATION.
FOR EXAMPLE IN MR. PONDER'S CASE IT'S DECEMBER 12, 2023, THE CITY THEN TREATS THIS AS THE PETITION DATE AND CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH
THE THEN CALLED ANNEXATION. >> ABSOLUTELY.
>> THE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION AS A RESULT OF A DEVELOPMENT
[00:55:02]
AGREEMENT THAT WAS SIGNED. >> I'M WITH YOU.
>> BUT YOU CAN AMEND THESE, YOU CAN CHANGE THESE.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT I'M AFTER.
WE DO PDS, WE DO DEVELOPMENTS, WE DO ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT GET APPROVED, EVERYBODY AGREES UPON IT AND THEN AT A LATER DATE WE COME BACK AND SAY YOU KNOW WHAT, THIS ISN'T REALLY WORKING OUT OR THIS ISN'T REALLY WHAT WE WANTED TO DO, WE WANT TO MAKE THESE CHANGES. SO MR. PONDER IS ASKING THAT IT BE THROWN OUT, I'M NOT MAKING A CLAIM THAT THAT MAYBE BE THE ROUTE THAT I WANT TO GO. BUT CHANGES ARE MADE TO AGREEMENTS ALL THE TIME. SO TO ME THIS IS NO DIFFERENT.
HE'S TAKEN THE OPPORTUNITY AFFORDED TO HIM TO PUT THE TIME IN, HE'S APPROACHED COUNCIL MEMBERS, IT TOOK THREE OF US TO BRING IT UP HERE. I'M JUST GIVING HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION AND I FOR ONE I WAS ANNEXED DURING THAT TIME. I ONLY HAVE ONE ACRE, SO I DIDN'T GET FIVE YEARS, BUT I'M OPEN TO THE CONVERSATION.
>> WALTER, WOULD YOU YIELD FOR A MOMENT? I OBJECT TO THE USE OF THE WORD COERCION BECAUSE I WAS FORCE ANNEXED, I WAS NOT GIVEN THE CHOICE OF SOMETHING ELSE.
THAT ANNEXATION, FORCED THOUGH IT WAS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN BY LAW. THEY WERE GIVEN, THESE PEOPLE WERE GIVEN AN OPTION TO DELAY FOR FIVE YEARS.
THEY WEREN'T COERCED INTO DOING THAT, THEY HAD AN OPTION.
THERE WAS NO THREAT, UNLESS YOU WANT TO SAY THAT FORCED ANNEXATION IN AND OF ITSELF IS A THREAT.
THAT WASN'T A THREAT, THAT WAS A RIGHT THE CITY HAD BY LAW.
>> I THINK WE MADE A MISTAKE AT THAT TIME IN OFFERING THAT.
ALL OF THESE PROPERTIES WERE GOING TO BE ANNEXED AND YET WE CAME BACK AND SAID WELL LET'S TAKE SOME OF THESE OFF.
>> I THINK THAT THE COUNCIL DID WELL IN OFFERING PEOPLE THAT
>> THE VOLUNTARY WORD, THAT WORD VOLUNTARY, THE DEFINITION OF VOLUNTARY IS WHAT WE'RE AFTER HERE.
SO IF WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT WAS ENTERED INTO VOLUNTARILY, IT
CAN BE CHANGED VOLUNTARILY. >> NO I AGREE WITH THAT POINT.
YEAH. >> SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND SO MY QUESTION FOR THE COUNCIL IS DO WE WANT TO HOLD TO THE VISION AND TIMELINE OF THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL OR TO MR. PONDER'S POINT DO WE WANT TO GIVE OPTIONS, DO WE WANT TO CHANGE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, PARTICULARLY HIS IF HE'S INTERESTED OR SOMEBODY ELSE WHO BRINGS FORWARD A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO PLEAD THEIR CASE OR DO WE WANT TO ESTABLISH SOME SORT OF POLICY THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF A PREVIOUSLY AGREED UPON DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT?
WE DO IT ALL THE TIME. >> RIGHT.
YOU HAVE A COMMENT? >> I HAVE A SIDE QUESTION RELATED TO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WHAT'S THE BENEFIT TO OR WHAT'S THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THE FIVE YEAR TIME PERIOD OR THREE YEAR TIME PERIOD THEY HAVE TO VOLUNTARY ANNEX IN?
>> AT THAT TIME? >> YEAH, I GUESS THE STATE --
>> IT WAS TO GIVE THEM A FIVE YEAR BREAK.
>> IT WAS 15 AND THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL CHOSE IT.
>> THAT'S ON THE LOCAL LEVEL, NOT THE STATE LEVEL THAT
MANDATES THAT. >> I HAVE TO LOOK AT THE STATUTE
BUT I THINK IT WAS UP TO 15. >> WHY THOSE NUMBERS? WHY THAT TIME PERIOD? WHAT DOES THAT TIME PERIOD
CHANGE? >> MAY I SPEAK TO BEING ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THOSE MEETINGS, BECAUSE I WAS HERE WHEN THAT WAS GOING ON. THEY BROUGHT US ALL OF THE INFORMATION AND THEY GAVE US OUR OPTIONS TO CHOOSE FROM.
WE HAD 60 AT THE TIME I THINK. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY BUT THERE WAS A BUNCH OF PEOPLE THAT HAD PROPERTY OVER TEN ACRES IS WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT. ONE GUY WANTED TO FINISH HIS BUILDINGS, GET A COUPLE OF BUILDINGS BUILT.
>> OKAY. >> WE HAD ONE GUY THAT A FIREWORKS STAND. I'M DOING THIS FOR MEMORY FROM FIVE YEARS AGO SO I'M JUST TRYING TO REMEMBER A FEW OF THE THINGS THAT THEY HAD SAID AND WE ALL KIND OF AGREED WELL A FIVE YEAR NUMBER WAS A GOOD ROUND NUMBER BECAUSE PRIOR TO THIS ANNEXATION WE HAD BEEN TRYING TO CLEAN UP OTHER ANNEXED PARTS WHERE ALL OF THESE LITTLE DONUT HOLES WERE HAD.
IF WE LEAVE A DONUT HOLE AND THERE'S A ROAD IN THE DONUT HOLE, THAT'S NOT OUR ROAD. SO THE COUNTY HAS TO GO FIX 200
[01:00:02]
FEET OF ROAD, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT.>> I DON'T FOLLOW THAT. >> IT'S NOT IN THE CITY, IT'S
NOT OUR ROAD. >> WELL LET'S TAKE THE ROAD OUT IN FRONT OF MR. PONDER'S HOUSE, THAT'S A CITY ROAD REGARDLESS IF HIS PROPERTY IS CITY OR NOT, AM I RIGHT OR WRONG?
>> AS WE WERE TRYING TO REBUILD WALNUT GROVE ROAD, WE HAD COUNTY PARTICIPATION AND CITY PARTICIPATION, AND IT KIND OF STAIR STEPPED DOWN AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS TALKING DURING THESE MEETINGS THE FIRE DEPARTMENT GAVE US GOOD REASONS, ADAM GAVE US GOOD REASONS, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ALL GAVE US GOOD REASONS THEIR CONCERNS AND WHY IT WAS DONE THIS WAY.
AND WE MADE THE DECISION AT THAT TIME FIVE YEARS WAS A GOOD, ROUND NUMBER TO START WITH AND TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I WOULD HAVE A LOT MORE WITH THESE 30 PEOPLE THAT ARE LEFT IF 25 OF
THEM WERE OUT IN THE AUDIENCE. >> I DON'T THINK 25 OF THEM KNEW THAT THIS IS WHAT WE WERE DOING TONIGHT.
>> WELL, I'M JUST SAYING WE HAVE ONE.
>> SURE. >> I'LL ALSO STATE I'M NOT GOING TO DOWNPLAY THAT ONE BECAUSE THAT ONE TOOK THE WHOLE FORCED ANNEXATION TO AUSTIN AND GOT IT PASSED IN ELLIS COUNTY.
THAT'S A BIG ONE SITTING OUT THERE.
>> I UNDERSTAND. >> AND MR. PONDER -- DO WE HAVE
OTHER COMMENTS? >> ARE WE VOTING ON THIS
TONIGHT? >> NO, THERE'S NOT A VOTE.
BUT WE ARE PONDERING, PARDON, CONSIDERING HOW TO GO FORWARD.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE TWO YEARS, DON'T WE, BEFORE --
>> NEXT YEAR. >> IS IT NEXT YEAR?
>> DECEMBER 12, 2023. >> I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THESE REQUESTS SERIOUSLY ESPECIALLY THE ONE FROM LEWIS PONDER WHO HAS PUT IN THE TIME AND EFFORT AND SHOWN UP HERE TONIGHT.
I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THESE ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS AND NOT
AS A WHOLE. >> WELL I WOULD THINK WE NEED A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF CONSISTENCY IN HOW WE APPROACH.
>> AGREED, BUT THERE'S ONLY 30 LEFT.
THERE'S 30 LEFT AND LIKE WE SAW TONIGHT THERE ARE DEVELOPERS THAT ARE CHOMPING AT THE BIT TO TAKE OVER WHAT'S LEFT OF THESE PARCELS IN MIDLOTHIAN. SO I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS THESE ARE GOING TO DWINDLE DOWN AND IT WILL BE A SELF-CORRECTING ISSUE. BUT WHAT I DON'T WANT TO SEE HAPPEN WHICH WE HAVE SEEN IS IF YOU TAKE THESE PLOTS OF LAND INTO THE CITY JUST ARBITRARILY AND SAY YOU MIGHT BE FORCING THE HAND OF SOME OF THESE LANDOWNERS THAT I THINK LEWIS PONDER PROBABLY HAS FIVE DIFFERENT PONDER HOUSEHOLDS ON YOUR PROPERTY, SOMETHING LIKE THAT? AND HOW LONG HAS THE PROPERTY BEEN IN YOUR FAMILY? SO I MEAN, I KIND OF HATE TO, I THINK THAT CASE BY CASE DISSECTION OF WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE REMAINING PROPERTIES WOULD NOT BE OUT OF THE REALM OF
A POSSIBILITY. >> DID I HEAR CORRECTLY THAT ALL OF THESE PARCELS ARE AT LEAST TEN ACRES IN SIZE?
>> THERE'S A FIVE ACRE TRACK IN HERE.
>> FIVES AND SEVENS AND 4.97. >> YOU HAVE THE LIST?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> JUSTIN.
>> FIRST OF ALL THANK YOU FOR NOT BRINGING A POWERPOINT TONIGHT. AND THEN SECONDLY HAVE ANY OF THESE AGREEMENTS ENDED SINCE THE LAW HAS CHANGED? HAVE WE FILLED ANY OF THE DONUT HOLES SINCE THE LAW HAS CHANGED? OKAY, BUT ANY THAT WERE FORCED FOR LACK OF BETTER TERM LIKE SIMILAR TO WHAT MR. PONDER WOULD HAVE DONE, JUST DIDN'T COME AND BRING THE FIGHT TO COUNCIL? THEY WERE ALL DEVELOPED OR VOLUNTARY? OKAY.
I THINK MY OPINION IS THAT IF YOU'VE GOT 30 OR SO OF THEM, YOU
[01:05:01]
VIEW IT AS A GROUP FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE LAW CHANGED AND THEN YOU HAVE CONSISTENCY THAT WAY, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, YOU HAVE CONSISTENCY. EITHER YOU LET THE CONTRACTS HAVE THE SUNSET AND FILL OUT OR YOU DO AWAY WITH THEM OR SOMETHING IN BETWEEN. I THINK THERE DEFINITELY NEEDSTO BE CONSISTENCY. >> WAS THIS DONE IN PRIOR ANNEXATIONS BEFORE 2017? I THINK ULTIMATELY ALL OF THESE PEOPLE NEED TO COME IN TO THE CITY, TO ME BECAUSE THEY ARE BECOMING DONUT HOLES. BUT I THINK MR. PONDER HAS MADE SEVERAL GOOD POINTS THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER.
AND I HEARD SOMEBODY SAY A WORKSHOP, I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO A WORKSHOP TO COVER THE POLICY TO CONSIDER SOME OF THE POINTS MADE. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW. I THINK WE HAVE SOME TIME TO CONSIDER AGAIN SOME OF WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER VALID POINTS.
BUT AS FAR AS COMING INTO THE CITY I DON'T THINK THAT'S
NEGOTIABLE. >> I DISAGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE LAW HAS CHANGED AND THAT CHANGED THINGS FOR ME.
I RAN ON PLATFORM IN 2018 THAT I WOULD NEVER VOTE FOR A FORCED ANNEXATION. FORTUNATELY THE STATE GOVERNMENT TOOK THAT OUT OF OUR HANDS. BUT THIS IS THE CLOSEST THING TO
IT FOR ME. >> I AGREE, JUSTIN.
>> DID YOU -- >> I WAS SAYING I AGREE WITH
WHAT JUSTIN SAID. >> I DON'T THINK IN THE FUTURE WE WILL CREATE DONUT HOLES BECAUSE THE LAW HAS CHANGED.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE ENGULF AN AREA. I BELIEVE ALL OF THESE AREAS ARE ENGULFED, AREN'T THEY? ALL 30.
>> I THINK THE STATE HAS TAKEN STEPS TO CORRECT IN MY OPINION A WRONG AND I WOULDN'T WANT TO BE THE ONE THAT CHANGES THAT WITH
ANY INFLUENCE THAT I MAY HAVE. >> IF YOU GO BACK IN TIME IN DALLAS COUNTY, THE ANNEXATIONS CAME UP TO ALLOW THE CITIES TO PROTECT THEMSELVES AGAINST DEVELOPMENTS AND WE PROVIDE SERVICES TO PEOPLE AND THEY BENEFIT FROM BEING IN THE CITY.
>> I TOTALLY AGREE. I'M AN ADVOCATE FOR THE CITY AND I UNDERSTAND ALL OF IT. I JUST TO BE TRUE TO WHO I AM AND MYSELF AND THE CAMPAIGN THAT I RAN AND WHAT I STOOD FOR, I
CAN'T GET BEHIND IT. >> LET ME CLARIFY HERE, ARE YOU IN FAVOR OF ANNEXING SOME OR ALL OF THESE 30 PEOPLE?
>> ABSOLUTELY NOT DEANNEXING. >> IT'S NOT DEANNEXING BECAUSE
THEY'RE NOT IN THE CITY. >> TERMINATING THE CONTRACTS IS
WHAT I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF. >> I AGREE.
>> YOU WOULDN'T COMPLETE THE ANNEXATION ON THESE?
>> RIGHT. SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THE LAW
CHANGED. >> BUT THE LAW CHANGED, YOU CAN'T UNSCRAMBLE THE EGGS. IF THE LAW HAD BEEN CHANGED EARLIER YOU WOULDN'T HAVE SOME OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS.
>> RIGHT, SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE THIS ISSUE.
>> I JUST HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. IF WE AN EXTEND THE CONTRACT FIVE YEARS, TEN YEARS, WHATEVER IT MAY BE, I GUESS THE CLAUSE IN THERE THAT YOU COULD EXTEND FOR ANOTHER 20 YEARS OR 15 YEARS WOULD STILL BE IN THERE AND THIS COULD GO ON AND ON AND NEVER END UNTIL THE PROPERTY SELLS OR THEY COME IN?
>> THAT'S WHAT WE'RE IN THESE AGREEMENTS, THERE WAS TRIGGERING MECHANISMS. OBVIOUSLY ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS WAS TO PREVENT SOMEBODY WHO HAD A LARGER TRACK OF LAND OBVIOUSLY IF THEY WERE NOT IN THE CITY FROM SUBDIVIDING IT AND PUTTING THEM MULTIFAMILY OR SOMETHING THAT WAS INCONSISTENT WITH YOUR ZONING REGULATIONS BECAUSE YOUR ZONING REGULATIONS AS FAR AS ARE NOT GOING TO BE ENFORCEABLE IN YOUR ETJ TERRITORY. SO SOMEONE COULD PUT IN A TYPE OF BUSINESS IN THAT AREA THAT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE OR DOES NOT HAVE TO COMPLY WITH YOUR CODES. WHEN I SAY COMPLY I'M TALKING
ABOUT -- >> WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF WE SIGN
A FIVE YEAR EXTENSION TODAY. >> WHAT I'M ASKING THOUGH IS WE CAN NEGOTIATE AND LET'S SAY WE NEGOTIATE FIVE YEARS, TEN YEARS, THE NUMBERS ARE RELEVANT. AT THE END OF THAT TIME, CAN YOU JUST KEEP ON RENEGOTIATING AND RENEGOTIATING, RENEGOTIATING AND HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT NEVER ENDS.
>> YOU JUST DO AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT.
[01:10:03]
>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING AT, IS THIS LIKE SOMETHING THAT JUST
>> I'M JUST ASKING IN THE THE PROPERTY DEVELOPS OR SELLS, WE'RE CONTINUALLY AMENDING THIS AGREEMENT?
>> WHAT ARE THE TRIGGERING EVENTS THAT WOULD CAUSE ANNEXATION UNDER THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT?
>> ONE SECOND. JOE YOU SAID SOMETHING I THINK
WE ALL NEED TO UNDERSTAND. >> WALTER, HOLD ON.
>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT YOU HEAR THIS.
>> I THINK I GET MY QUESTION ANSWERED.
>> GO AHEAD, ASK THE QUESTION. >> I DID.
>> EVERYBODY MISSED WHAT JOE SAID.
>> WALTER, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL.
WHAT ARE THE TRIGGERING EVENTS THAT CAUSE THE ANNEXATION?
>> PLEASE SAY NONE. GO AHEAD, SAY NONE.
>> IF WE VOID THIS CONTRACT THERE IS NO TRIGGERING.
THAT'S WHAT JOE SAID THAT EVERYBODY MISSED.
>> IF YOU LEAVE THE AGREEMENT IN PLACE, IF HE DEVELOPS THE LAND,
HE'S ANNEXED, CORRECT? >> ASK YOUR QUESTION AGAIN IF HE DEVELOPS THE LAND -- SO THERE'S TRIGGERING MECHANISMS IF YOU WILL IN THIS AGREEMENT. ONE OF THE THINGS, THE OWNER WILL NOT FILE ANY TYPE OF SUBDIVISION PLAT OR RELATED DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENTS FOR THE PROPERTY OF ELLIS COUNTY OR THE CITY WITHOUT PROVIDING THE CITY 30 DAY WRITTEN NOTICES TO THE CITY. THERE'S OTHER AGREEMENTS IN HERE OR OTHER STIPULATION IN HERE AS FAR AS TYPES OF USES, THE OCCURRENCE OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING EVENTS SHALL CONSTITUTE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION. VIOLATORS SHALL TERMINATE IMMUNITY FROM OR WRITTEN NOTICE OF PRUDENT TO FILE TO ANY TYPE OF SUBDIVISION PLAT, RELATED DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT, SO WHAT IT WAS DOING IS IF HE GOES AND SELLS TO DEVELOPERS I'M OUT OF HERE, THAT TRIGGERS BEING SUBJECT TO THE CITY'S ORDINANCE.
>> IF WE STRAIGHT TEAR UP THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WE LOSE THAT PROTECTION? SO EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE WOULD GO OUT THE WINDOW BECAUSE HE WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT BEING AN ETJ PROPERTY TO PUT UP WHATEVER IS ALLOWED IN THE ETJ. SO STRAIGHT GETTING RID OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS IS NOT THE BEST OPTION BECAUSE WE LOSE THE PROTECTION OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WHICH IS ALLOW FOR GENERATIONAL GREEN SPACE LAND UNDER AG EXEMPTION.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING AT. >> BUT WALTER, HOW ARE YOU
SUGGESTING DOING THAT? >>> GIVEN THE LEGAL CLARIFICATION ON THAT STATEMENT, I RETRACT MY DESIRE TO TEAR THEM UP. AND I'M ON THE SAME WAVELENGTH
AS WHAT YOU'RE PRESENTING. >> AGAIN JUST SO EVERYONE IS CLEAR, THOSE THAT ARE LISTENING OR DECIDING TO LISTENING TO THIS AT SOME POINT, WE PERMITTED USE OF SOME OF THESE AGREEMENTS.
I'M USING PONDER'S AGREEMENT AS AN EXAMPLE.
AGAIN ONE OF THE EVENTS THAT TERMINATES IMMUNITY FROM ANNEXATION IS IF OWNER ALLOWS DEVELOPMENT OR USE OF PROPERTY FOR ANY USE OTHER THAN THE PERMITTED USES.
>> IT BASICALLY SAYS THE SAME THING.
ISN'T THAT THE BOTTOM LINE? >> YES, ABSOLUTELY.
>> MR. PONDER, YOU HAVE A THOUGHT ABOUT THIS? COULD WE HEAR HIM, HIS THOUGHTS ABOUT WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT?
>> MR. PONDER, COULD YOU COME BACK UP, PLEASE.
>> OKAY, SO YES IF YOU JUST TEAR UP THE AGREEMENT, YOU DO STAND THE RISK OF ME OR ONE OF THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS COMING IN AND SAYING I'M JUST GOING TO DEVELOP THIS AND TO WHATEVER, I'M GOING TO PUT A PIG FARM IN, WHATEVER.
[01:15:04]
THE LIKELIHOOD OF THAT IS SLIM TO NONE.MOST LIKELY IT LEAVES FOR ME SAKE AND THE OTHER PEOPLE I KNOW WHO ARE ALSO ON GENERATIONS LONG FAMILY LAND IS THEY DON'T WANT TO SELL AT ALL. IF THEY SELL OR IF THEY DO SOMETHING WITH IT OTHER THAN KEEP IT AS IT IS, THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT AS A DEVELOPMENT AND WHEN THEY DO THAT, THEY'RE GOING TO COME TO THE CITY AND SAY I WANT THIS PROPERTY ANNEXED SO I CAN DEVELOP IT AND CRAM AS MANY HOMES ON THIS PROPERTY AS YOU'LL ALLOW ME TO CRAM ON THIS PROPERTY SO I CAN GET THE ULTIMATE PROFIT OUT OF THE COMPANY SINCE I'M GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE SOMEWHERE ELSE. THAT'S ONE THING.
THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT THAT THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, THERE CAN BE NO TRIGGER AND I WILL BE ANNEXED IN 2023, NO TRIGGER. AND THE IDEA THAT THAT'S OKAY, THAT WE WERE NEVER GIVEN A CHOICE OTHER THAN WELL WE CAN SHOOT YOU IN THE HEAD TODAY OR WE CAN SHOOT YOU IN THE HEAD IN FIVE YEARS IS REALLY NOT A CHOICE.
I MEAN IT WAS AN ULTIMATUM. WHO'S GOING TO CHOOSE OH YEAH GO AHEAD AND ANNEX ME NOW AS OPPOSED TO AT LEAST I GET FIVE YEARS. AND IT WASN'T A THING OF GRACE THE CITY DID BY DOING IT, IT WAS REQUIRED BY THE STATE.
THEY HAD NO CHOICE. AND IF I REMEMBER RIGHT AND BY THE WAY 43.05 I DON'T THINK EVEN EXISTS ANYMORE.
>> IT DOESN'T, I JUST CHECKED. >> IF I REMEMBER RIGHT THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM WAS FIVE YEARS. SO THE CITY CHOSE WE'RE ONLY GOING TO GIVE THESE GUYS THE MINIMUM AND WE'RE GOING TO LAY IT OUT THERE SO THERE'S NO WAY THEY CAN BE OUTSIDE OF ANNEXATION IN FIVE YEARS AND THAT'S WHEN THEY PUT THAT CLAUSE IN THERE THAT SAYS I AM CHOOSING TO BE VOLUNTARILY ANNEXED AT THE END OF THIS TERM. I DID NOT CHOOSE TO BE VOLUNTARILY ANNEXED, I MADE SURE AND PUT ON THERE, I DID NOT WANT TO BE ANNEXED, I NEVER WANTED TO BE ANNEXED AND I WOULD NEVER VOLUNTARILY CHOOSE TO BE ANNEXED.
I GOT FORCED INTO THIS AS DID THE REST OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS.
>> IF I MAY, IF YOU WERE IN OUR SHOES, MR. PONDER, HOW WOULD YOU MOVE FORWARD AS FAR AS THESE AGREEMENTS? WOULD YOU SEEK TO TEAR THEM UP OR WOULD YOU SEEK TO MODIFY THEM
TO PROTECT THE CITY FROM -- >> OR WOULD YOU EXTEND THEM?
>> SO I'M A DIFFERENT KIND OF GUY, I'M NOT A POLITICIAN, I DON'T THINK LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE DOES.
I WOULD TEAR THEM UP BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THE ANNEXATION SHOULD HAVE EVER HAPPENED IN THE FIRST PLACE.
BUT I CAN SEE IN YOUR POSITION WHERE YOU NEED TO CREATE SOME KIND OF PROTECTIONS. AND I WOULD THINK THAT YOU COULD EASILY CREATE THAT PROTECTION BY NOT PUTTING A TIME LIMIT AT ALL ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BUT PUT AN ACTION REQUIREMENT.
SO IF I CHOOSE TO PLAT IT, DEVELOP IT, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, ANNEXATION. BUT IF I WANT TO KEEP IT AS THE FAMILY FARM AND I WANT TO HAND IT DOWN TO MY KIDS AND THEY HAND IT TO THEIR KIDS AND THEIR KIDS AND THEIR KIDS, 500 YEARS FROM NOW, IT'S STILL NOT ANNEXED AS LONG AS THEY DON'T DEVELOP IT.
>> SO MR. PONDER, WITH THAT -- >> THAT IS THE RIGHT THING TO
>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> APPROACH OR LOGIC, AS TIME GOES ALONG, WOULD YOU NOT SEE THAT YOU WILL BE BENEFITED FROM
CITY SERVICES? >> I'VE BENEFITED FROM NOTHING.
>> THOSE ROADS OUT THERE WERE THERE BEFORE THE CITY --
>> THE POLICE AND FIRE -- >> SHERIFF, FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS
ALREADY COMING OUT THERE. >> SO YOU SEE NO --
>> I SEE ZERO BENEFIT. I SEE ZERO BENEFIT.
>> SO, WHAT YOU WERE SAYING WITH HUD'S QUESTION WOULD PROBABLY BE MORE IN LINE WITH A NEGOTIATION IN LINE WITH HOW WE TYPICAL UTILIZE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. WOULD YOU AGREE? SO BASICALLY YOU'RE SAYING YOU WOULD LIKE TO THROW IT OUT ENTIRELY, BUT YOU COULD SEE THE VALUE IN MODIFYING IT TO ALLOW ITS CONTINUED USE POTENTIALLY INDEFINITELY AS LONG AS THERE'S
NO TRIGGER CHANGE? >> THROWING IT OUT WOULD BE MY FIRST CHOICE, BUT I'M WILLING TO NEGOTIATE IF I CAN ACTUALLY GET
>> WELL TO MOVE THIS ITEM ALONG, IF WE'RE ASKING EVERYONE'S OPINION, MINE IS WE'RE ELECTED TO REPRESENT EVERYONE, THE 30 HERE AND THE 30,000. I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO THE 30,000 TO TERMINATE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.
I ALSO DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO YOU TO NOT GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD OUT TO NEGOTIATE AN EXTENSION OF ONE OF
[01:20:03]
THESE AGREEMENTS. BECAUSE I DO SEE THE SIDE OF IF I BACK UP TO ONE OF THESE PROPERTIES, YOURS IS KIND OF ISOLATED, BUT THERE'S SOME OTHER ONES OUT HERE THAT AREN'T AND THEY START USING THE PROPERTY FOR USES THAT WE DON'T ALLOW AND NOW A NEIGHBOR IS CALLING US FOR A PROPERTY WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT AS GROWTH GOES ON, IT DOES BECOME AN ISSUE.SO TO BE FAIR TO THE 30,000 RESIDENTS BUT TO ALSO BE FAIR TO THE 30 LEFT HERE, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR TO HAVING A WORKSHOP OR SOMETHING TO TALK MORE ABOUT THIS.
BUT THE ROUND ROBIN TONIGHT IS NOT GOING TO GET IT SOLVED.
>> I AGREE TO A POINT, BUT I WAS HERE WHEN THIS WAS DONE AND I AGREED TO IT AT THAT TIME. YOU WERE GOING TO BE ANNEXED.
NO QUESTION ABOUT IT. AND YOU WERE GETTING THE OPPORTUNITY TO HOLD ON FOR FIVE YEARS BEFORE YOU WOULD GET ANNEXED. AS WERE THE OTHER PEOPLE OUT THERE. BECAUSE PEOPLE CAME IN AND SAID GIVE US A CHOICE, GIVE US A CHOICE.
WE GAVE A CHOICE. NOW YOU'RE SAYING WE JUST REACHED UP AND PULLED SOMETHING OUT OF THE AIR AND SAY HERE, YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE IT AND LEAVE IT.
THAT'S NOT THE WAY IT WENT DOWN. >> IT DIDN'T GO DOWN THE WAY YOU'RE SAYING EITHER. PEOPLE DIDN'T COME IN AND SAY GIVE US A CHOICE. THE CITY SAID THIS IS YOUR
CHOICE. >> YEAH, WE SAID YOU'RE GOING TO
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE TO POINT OUT THE LIE HE TOLD.
>> THERE'S NO LIE BEING TOLD HERE.
>> YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
>> MAYBE TO BRING THIS -- I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN WICKLIFFE.
IF COUNCIL IS AGREEABLE WE SHOULD MOVE THIS TO A WORKSHOP TO DISCUSS THIS AND CLOSE THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
>> AGREED. >> WOULD YOU MIND GIVING TIME TO THINK ABOUT THAT AND RESPOND TO YOU INDIVIDUALLY AND WORK TOWARDS A WORKSHOP. I STILL THINK WE HAVE A YEAR OR
TWO TO WORK THIS OUT. >> JUST SOMETHING WITH THE STANDARD VERBAGE IN IT. I KNOW THERE'S ONE IN THIS PACKET, I GUESS I CAN JUST USE THAT.
>> WHICH BASICALLY SAID AFTER ANNEXATION THEY COULD STILL USE IT AS A FIREWORKS STAND. IS THAT ALL RIGHT FOR DIRECTION OF STAFF OR DO YOU WANT CLARIFICATION? CAN I HAVE A MOTION, WE DON'T CLOSE THIS ITEM, THERE'S NO ACTION TO TAKE. SO AT THIS TIME WE'RE GOING TO
[EXECUTIVE SESSION]
CEASE THE REGULAR AGENDA AND WE'RE MOVING TO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 7:23 TO CONSIDER ITEM 3 SECTION 11.002 MCALPIN RIGHT OF WAY, SECTION 551.071, CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY AND SECTION 551.074 PERSONAL MATTERS.WE WILL BE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. FOR THOSE WHO ARE HERE, THIS MAY NOT BE SHORT, SO I THANK YOU. WE WILL BE BACK AND AT 7:24 WE STAND.
>>> GOOD EVENING, IT IS 8:32, WE'RE BACK INTO REGULAR SESSION.
ON THE MCALPIN, THERE WAS NO ACTION.
AND WE HAVE ONE ACTION TO TAKE THAT COUNCILMAN MILLER WILL.
>> I MOVE THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE AUTHORIZED TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH SILKAN INCORPORATED TO PURCHASE A .2347 TRACT OF LAND FOR A RIGHT OF WAY.
AND A .2606 ACRE OF LAND FOR A 20-FOOT WIDE PERMANENT WATER LINE EASEMENT. AND A .0675 ACRE OF LAND FOR A
[01:25:05]
5-FOOT WIDE PERMANENT CITY UTILITY EASEMENT, ALL LOCATED WITHIN THE MARTHA BRENNAN SURVEY AB TRACT NUMBER 43, CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS, PURCHASE PRICE $20,000 IN ASSOCIATION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE MCALPIN ROAD INTERSECTION PROJECT, PLUS PAYMENT OF ALL RELATED CLOSING COSTS.THE CITY MANAGER IS FURTHER AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE SUCH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED BY SUCH AGREEMENT AND THE TITLE COMPANY AS NECESSARY TO CLOSE THE TRANSACTION.
>> I SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.
HAS EVERYBODY VOTED, PLEASE? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
I'LL TAKE A MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT.
>> MOVE TO ADJOURN. >> SECOND.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.