May 27, 2025 City Council

[Call to Order, Pledges, and Invocation]

[00:00:09]

>>> GOOD EVENING. IT'S 6:00 P.M., MAY 27, 2025. WE HAVE A QUORUM. I CALL THIS MEETING OF THE MIDLOTHIAN CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER. WE'LL BEGIN WITH INVOCATION AND PLEDGES.

>> WE ARE SO BLESSED TO COME TOGETHER AND DISCUSS ALL THE TOPICS ON OUR AGENDA AND WITHIN OUR AGENDA. WE'RE THANKFUL FOR OUR EMERGENCY SERVICES THAT SERVE OUR NEEDS AND ALL OUR EMPLOYEES AND FOLKS THAT HELP US ALL THROUGHOUT THE WEEK TO KEEP MIDLOTHIAN THE GREAT CITY THAT IT IS. WE'RE THANKFUL FOR OUR BOARD MEMBERS WHO PROVIDE SO MUCH OF THEIR FREE TIME TO HELP TRY TO MAKE MIDLOTHIAN A GREATER, BETTER PLACE TO LIVE.

AND WE WANT TO TAKE THIS TIME, THE DAY AFTER MEMORIAL DAY ESPECIALLY TO REMEMBER ALL THOSE WHO HAVE FALLEN AND GIVEN OF THEIR LIVES WITHIN PROVIDING US THESE FREEDOMS THAT WE EXERCISE TONIGHT TO BE ABLE TO FREELY ASSIMILATE AND OPERATE AND DECIDE WHAT'S BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITY, AND WE'RE SO THANKFUL AND BLESSED BY ALL THOSE MEN AND WOMEN. BLESS US AS WE CARRY ON AND WALK IN A WAY PLEASING TO YOU. IN JESUS' NAME

WE PRAY, AMEN. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH

LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE

AND INDIVISIBLE. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN RODGERS. IF YOU'RE HOT, MAYBE WE CAN MAKE IT A SHORT MEETING.

[2025-159]

LOCAL ENTREPRENEUR, LOCAL FAMILY-RUN BUSINESS THAT'S SOME OF THE BEST ITALIAN FOOD IN THE CITY LOCATED IN OUR DOWNTOWN SECTOR. IT'S MY PRIDE TO ISSUE A PROCLAMATION ON THEIR BEHALF.

THEIR SUPPORT OUR COMMUNITY IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE. THEY OFTEN PROVIDE MEALS FOR THE LION'S CLUB, AND THEY DO ALL THAT THEY CAN DO TO SERVE OUR FAMILIES AND CITIZENS WELL. I APPRECIATE MAURICE OSBORNE WITH BRIAN HARRISON'S OFFICE SO WE COULD DO THIS TONIGHT. I WANT YOU TO COME UP, MR. OSBORNE, IF YOU WOULD. IF YOU'D LIKE TO PRESENT WHAT YOU HAVE AND AS WELL AS THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IS HERE THIS EVENING. AND THEN I WANT TO INVITE AL AND THE OMANSI FAMILY TO COME UP HERE WITH US. WE'LL READ THESE THINGS OR MAKE THESE PRESENTATION, AND THEN I'LL READ THE PROCLAMATION IN THE RECORD. THEN WE CAN GET THE COUNCIL DOWN HERE WITH US AND MEMBERS FROM THE LION'S CLUB

AND WE'LL TAKE A GIANT PHOTO. >> IT'S AN HONOR TO MAKE THIS PRESENTATION. THIS IS ACTUALLY A FOLLOW UP. REPRESENTATIVE HARRISON PRESENTED AL AND HIS FAMILY WITH A FLAG FLOWN OVER THE CAPITOL. ALSO A MEMBER RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THEIR SERVICE. TONIGHT, WE WANT TO GIVE THEM A CERTIFICATE OF CONGRATULATIONS FOR THE 30 YEARS. AND SO I HAVE FOR YOUR FROM THE TEXAS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES A CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION. REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN HARRISON CONGRATULATES AL AND FAMILY OF VILLA ITALIANA RESTAURANT IN CELEBRATING ITS 30TH ANNIVERSARY OF OFFERING MIDLOTHIAN A PLACE WITH GREAT ITALIAN FOOD WITH MENU ITEMS CENTERED AROUND FAMILY.

CONGRATULATIONS.

>> IN ADDITION, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, I'D LIKE TO ISSUE THIS PROCLAMATION HONORING A LEGACY OF TRADITION. VILLA ITALIANA HAS SERVED THE CITIZENS OF MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS FOR 30 YEARS NOW. WHEREAS VILLA ITALIANA HAS CONSISTENTLY DEMONSTRATED A COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE, QUALITY, AND CUSTOMER SATISFACTION, BECOMING A VALUED PART OF OUR COMMUNITY, AND WHEREAS THE DEDICATION AND HARD WORK OF THE FAMILY HAS

[00:05:03]

FURTHERMORE , THEIR UNWAIVERING COMMITMENT TO MIDLOTHIAN AND THEIR COUNTLESS CONTRIBUTIONS TO OUR COMMUNITY ON THIS DAY MAY 27, 2025.

>> I WANT TO INVITE THE LION'S CLUB TO JOIN US BECAUSE THEY'RE SO COMMUNITY MINDED. IF ANY COUNCIL WANTS TO FILE IN BEHIND US OR JOIN US ON THE FILE, YOU'RE WELCOME.

>> CASEY, GET IN FRONT.

>> THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR PATIENCE. I THINK IT'S GOOD TO GIVE HONOR WHERE HONOR IS DUE, AND THESE FOLKS HAVE SERVED OUR COMMUNITY WELL FOR THE PAST 30 YEARS. WITH THAT, ON THAT NOTE, I'D LIKE TO OPEN UP 2025-159 AND GIVE THE CITY COUNCIL AN OPPORTUNITY TO REPORT ANY ITEMS THEY'VE NOTICED IN THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE OF INTEREST TO THEM. COUNCIL, ANY THINGS OF

NOTE OVER THE LAST COUPLE WEEKS? >> I WAS ABLE TO ATTEND A COUPLE OF THE MIDLOTHIAN PANTHER BASEBALL PLAYOFF GAMES AS YOUNG MEN MADE IT TO THE FOURTH ROUND OF THE PLAYOFFS, WHICH IS NO SMALL FEAT. OUR CITY MANAGER'S SON WAS A LARGE CONTRIBUTOR TO THAT. SO A LITTLE SHOUT OUT TO DYLAN. A PRETTY GOOD PITCHER AND DESIGNATED HITTER FOR THE PANTHERS. IT WAS AMAZING TO WATCH THE LEVEL OF TALENT AND THE CALIBER OF CHARACTER THAT THOSE YOUNG MEN DISPLAYED ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN AND THE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT.

>> ABSOLUTELY. THEY REPRESENTED US WELL. I GOT TO ATTEND THE ANNUAL PANCAKE BREAKFAST. IT'S TWICE A YEAR NOW. IT WAS A FANTASTIC EVENT AND MANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS, JUST A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO GATHER AROUND THE TABLE AND ENJOY PANCAKES, SUPPORT A GREAT ORGANIZATION THAT DOES SO MUCH FOR OUR COMMUNITY. SHOUT OUT TO THE LION'S CLUB. APPRECIATE YOU

GUYS. ANYBODY ELSE? ALLEN? >> I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THE UPCOMING FISHING DERBY THAT'S COMING UP THIS SATURDAY. I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S ALREADY FILLED UP OR NOT. BUT DEFINITELY CHECK THAT OUT. I'LL HAVE MY YOUNGEST SON OUT THERE, AND WE'LL SEE WHAT HE CAN DO. I KNOW IT'S ALWAYS A REALLY FUN TIME AND IT'S FUN WATCHING THE KIDS. WHETHER YOU'VE GOT A KIDDO IN IT OR NOT, MAKE SURE YOU SWING BY, AND JUST JOIN IN THE

FESTIVITIES. >> ABSOLUTELY. A GREAT EVENT, INDEED. HEARING NO OTHER, WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM C, AND THAT'S TO RECEIVE A PRESENTATION FROM MIDLOTHIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ON THEIR FACADE

GRANT PROGRAM. MELISSA? >> OOH, I THINK THEY GOT THE AIR BACK ON JUST IN TIME FOR ME TO TAKE MY TIME. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT. MIDLOTHIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IS REALLY EXCITED TO PRESENT TO YA'LL OUR FACADE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. WE WORKED WITH JOE TO CREATE THIS APPLICATION AND THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. IT IS AN ALLOWABLE TYPE B EXPENDITURE UNDER STATUTE 501-1.3 AS A SITE IMPROVEMENT. THE PURPOSE IS TO PROVIDE

[00:10:01]

SIGNAGE, ACCESSIBILITY, LIGHTING, AND OTHER VISUALLY APPEALING IMPROVEMENTS. IT IS A 50/50 MATCHING GRANT, MEANING WE'LL REIMBURSE HALF OF THE COST, ELIGIBLE COST IN IMMOVEMENTS WITH A MAXIMUM GRANT AMOUNT OF $25,000. SO SIMPLE MATH, THEY SPEND 50, AT THE CONCLUSION OF THEIR PROJECT, THEY PROVIDE RECEIPTS, AND A FINAL WALK THROUGH AND WE WILL REIMBURSE THEM FOR HALF OF THEIR EXPENSES UP TO $25,000. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT A COUPLE OF CRITERIA THAT ARE PERTINENT TO COUNCIL AND CITY AS A WHOLE THAT ARE WITHIN THE POLICY AND THE APPLICATION, AND THAT IS THAT APPLICANTS MUST COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND LOCAL LAWS, REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO LICENSING, PERMITS, BUILDING CODE, AND ZONING REQUIREMENTS.

AND SECONDLY, ANOTHER ONE THAT IS INCLUDED IN THERE IS THAT IMPROVEMENTS MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER AND ARCHITECTURE OF THE INDIVIDUAL BUILDING AS WELL AS MEET CITY BUILDING STANDARDS. SO WE HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TO ENSURE THAT THIS APPLICATION AND THIS FACADE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM IS GONNA ALIGN WITH THE CITY. IT ALSO ALIGNS WITH MCDC'S FIVE-YEAR PLAN UNDER TWO OF OUR SIX PRIORITIES. ONE BEING DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION AND THE OTHER BEING SMALL BUSINESS. SO THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE PROGRAM IN A NUTSHELL. JUST WANTED TO SHARE IT WITH YA'LL AND GET YOUR, YOU KNOW, GET IT ON YOUR

RADAR. IT WILL BE LIVE FRIDAY. >> YOU MAY HAVE SAID THIS. MY MIND WAS STILL THINKING ABOUT VILLA ITALIANA'S PIZZA. IS

THERE A MAX, A CAPPED AMOUNT? >> FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL APPLICANT, IT'S GOING TO BE $25,000. AND WE HAVE ALLOTTED

$125,000 TO THAT PROGRAM. >> AND IT'S A REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM BASED ON THE RECEIPTS THEY SUBMIT?

>> CORRECT. >> QUESTIONS?

>> $125,000 ANNUALLY OR JUST A ONE-TIME PILOT?

>> SO WE ARE PILOTING THIS YEAR, AND WE DO HAVE IN OUR APPLICATION THAT IT STOPS ON SEPTEMBER 30TH OF THIS YEAR. WE WILL REVIEW IT AND SEE WHEN WE GO BACK AS A BOARD AND LOOK AT OUR PRIORITIES FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. WE'LL SEE WHAT KIND OF SUCCESS WE HAD WITH IT AND IF THEY WANT TO CONTINUE IT

OR ADD MORE MONEY TO IT. >> WHAT OTHER CRITERIA ARE BEING APPLIED AS FAR AS THE APPLICATION AND VETTING PROCESS? SO IS IT JUST ANY BUSINESS THAT'S DOING EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS, OR IS THERE AN AGE COMPONENT, A LOCATION COMPONENT?

>> SO THE PRIORITY IS GIVEN TO DOWNTOWN, BUT THEY DO NEED TO BE A SALES TAX DRIVER. SO IT'S NOT GONNA BE FOR NON-PROFITS, ALTHOUGH KIND OF HEAVEN'S ATTIC WOULD FALL IN THERE BECAUSE THEY DO CREATE SALES TAX. SOME OF THE OTHER ONES, LET'S SEE, WE DIDN'T PER SE PUT A DATE AS TO HOW LONG THEY HAD TO BE IN BUSINESS, BUT WE DID STATE THAT THEY HAVE TO BE SUCCESSFUL. SO THERE'S SOME VARIANCE THERE. IT DOES ALSO IN HERE SAY PERSPECTIVE BUSINESS OWNERS WITH DETAILED BUSINESS PLAN AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT. SO IT DOESN'T EXCLUDE SOMEONE, LIKE IF SOMEONE WAS COMING IN AND BUYING A BUILDING TO REFURBISH IT AND PUT IN A NEW BUSINESS, THEY WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO

APPLY. >> AND IS THIS PURELY FOR AESTHETIC ITEMS, OR CAN IT BE FOR STRUCTURAL ITEMS AS WELL?

>> UH, I DON'T THINK THAT IT REALLY, I MEAN LET ME LOOK.

WINDOW REPLACEMENT, WINDOW FRAMING, SOME ELECTRICAL. I MEAN, REALLY WE DIDN'T DIVE INTO THAT TYPE OF STRUCTURAL TYPE THINGS. IT'S REALLY MORE ABOUT THE OUTSIDE FACADE SO THAT WE CAN SEE THAT VISUAL IMPROVEMENT. BUT IT DOES COVER ACCESSIBILITY INTO THE BUILDING. SO.

>> SO THE EMPHASIS WOULD BE ON AESTHETICS AND ACCESSIBILITY?

>> CORRECT. WITH PREFERENCE GIVEN TO DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES. ON

THIS FIRST ROUND. >> AND THIS RUNS THROUGH

SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR? >> YES, SIR. SEPTEMBER 30TH.

>> AND THEN AT THAT POINT, THE BOARD WILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON WHETHER THEY THINK IT SHOULD BE CONTINUED OR INCREASED,

DECREASES, WHATEVER IT MAY BE? >> CORRECT. WE'VE ALREADY HAD FOUR ENTITIES EXPRESS INTEREST IN THIS FACADE PROGRAM AS WE

WERE WRITING THE APPLICATION. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> ALLEN? >> DOES THE, THAT ANSWERED SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD. BUT ONE OF THEM IS DOES THE, WHENEVER IT

[00:15:08]

TOP TIER OF CANDIDATE FOR THAT? >> SO THE PROCESS TO APPLY IS GONNA BE PRETTY IN DEPTH. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PROVIDE SKETCHES OR PHOTOS. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PROVIDE DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS, AND THEY WILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE CITY PERMITTING AND OTHER THINGS. SO WE WILL HAVE A SUBCOMMITTEE. THERE'S A CUT-OFF DATE. IT WILL BE TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO EVERY MEETING. THAT WILL GIVE US TWO WEEKS TO VET THAT APPLICATION AND SPEAK WITH THE CITY TO ENSURE THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO DO SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T FALL IN LINE WITH CODE, AND THEN SEE IF THEY NEED TO PRESENT ANYTHING ELSE TO US SO THAT WE CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OR MAKE A DECISION. AND THEN THEORETICALLY, IT WOULD GO TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE, THEY WOULD VET IT, AND THEN IT WOULD GO TO OUR BOARD TO BE VOTED UPON. EITHER WITHIN A TWO TO A SIX-WEEK

PERIOD. >> SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THE WORK COMPLETED BY SEPTEMBER? THEY JUST HAVE TO HAVE EVERYTHING PROPERLY, UM, PROPERLY APPLIED FOR BY SEPTEMBER? AND THEN THEY HAVE A CERTAIN PERIOD IN WHICH THEY

NEED TO COMPLETE THAT WORK? >> THAT'S CORRECT. THEY HAVE

ONE YEAR TO COMPLETE THE WORK. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> HAS YOUR BOARD ALREADY TAKEN ACTION ON THIS?

>> YES, THEY'VE ADOPTED THIS. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IT'S A NON-ACTIONABLE ITEM. JUST FOR INFORMATION AND QUESTIONS. THANK

[2025-160]

YOU, MELISSA. >> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE YOUR

TIME. >> 2025-160, CITIZENS TO BE HEARD.

HEARD. THE CITY COUNCIL INVITES CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ANY TOPIC NOT ALREADY SCHEDULED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.

CITIZENS WISHING TO SPEAK SHOULD COMPLETE A CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FORM AND PRESENT IT TO THE CITY SECRETARY PRIOR TO THE ITEM BEING OPENED FOR DISCUSSION. SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, THE CITY COUNCIL CANNOT ACT ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA.

>> STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU'LL HAVE

THREE MINUTES. >> HELLO, EVERYONE. LISA HEALY.

I LIVE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS, AND I'M HERE TONIGHT TO TALK ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR THE $15 MILLION CO FOR A NEW FIRE HOUSE.

I UNDERSTAND WE'VE BEEN NEEDING A FEW FIRE HOUSE FOR FIVE YEARS, AND I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT HAVE WE DONE OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS TO OFFSET HAVING TO GO FOR A $15 MILLION CO? AT ONE OF THE WORKSHOPS, SHOPS, COUNCILMEMBER WEAVER STATED PEOPLE VOTED FOR HIM TO MAKE THIS DECISION WHETHER TO DO A $15 MILLION CO OR GO OUT FOR A BOND. WELL, I GOT THIS MAILER WHEN YOU WERE RUNNING, AND IT SAID YOU WOULD LOWER TAXES. EITHER WAY, YOU WON'T BE LOWERING OUR TAXES, SO YOU DID NOT DO WHAT YOU SAID IN THIS MAILER. THAT'S FIRST. I HAVE SOME SUGGESTIONS ON WAYS WE CAN OFFSET THE CO. HOW ABOUT WE USE SOME OF OUR GENERAL FUND, THE UNRESERVED GENERAL FUND? MAYBE HALF OF IT OUT OF THE $15 MILLION. WE COULD DO THAT. YOU'RE ALREADY REALLOCATING $120,000 TONIGHT. ONE ON CONSENT AGENDA FOR A MESS UP ON 7TH STREET PARKING. AND $88,000 FOR NEW GUNS THAT'S NOT IN THE BUDGET FOR OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. SURE. THEY SHOULD HAVE THEIR NEW GUNS. BUT HOW ABOUT WE WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE AND NOT USE UNRESERVED FUNDS? ANOTHER SUGGESTION IS USING THE A BOARD. THEY CAN SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTURE.

B BOARD CAN GIVE MONEY TO A BOARD FOR INFRASTRUCTURE. HOW ABOUT WE USE THOSE FUNDS INSTEAD OF BUILDING A NEW PARK THAT'S

[00:20:01]

>> THANK YOU. TAMMY, ANYBODY ELSE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? OKAY. NO

[CONSENT AGENDA]

ITEMS FROM CONSENT THIS EVENING? >> I'D LIKE TO REMOVE ITEM E.

>> REMOVING ITEM E. ANY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS, ANY ITEMS? I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA MINUS

ITEM E. >> MOVE IT. OR APPROVE AS

PRESENTED. >> OKAY.

>> SECOND. >> GOT A MOTION FROM THE MAYOR PRO TEM SECONDED BY COUNCIL COUNCILMAN WEAVER. ITEM PASSES

[2025-161 E. Consider and act upon an ordinance amending the City of Midlothian’s Fiscal Year 2024- 2025 General Fund Budget Appropriations in an amount not to exceed $40,000 from the Unreserved Fund Balance to fund the design of the parking lot along 7th Street and sidewalk extension.]

5-0. WE WILL OPEN ITEM E. >> E. CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN'S FISCAL YEAR 2024- 2025 GENERAL FUND BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $40,000 FROM THE UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE TO FUND THE DESIGN OF THE PARKING LOT ALONG 7TH STREET AND SIDEWALK

EXTENSION. >> QUESTIONS FOR ANNE OR CHRIS?

>> DID WE GET AN ANSWER BACK FROM THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER?

>> YEAH, WE DID, BUT IT DID NOT INCLUDE THE ORIGINAL WE GOT BACK DID NOT INCLUDE THE ADA ACCESSIBILITY OF THE SIDEWALKS.

WE WERE WAITING TO HEAR BACK, SO WE JUST DECIDED TO MOVE FORWARD

WITH WHAT THE COUNCIL APPROVED. >> OKAY. THAT'S MY ONLY

QUESTION. >> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. SO IF WE WERE WAITING ON THAT RESPONSE, HAVE WE GIVEN UP ON

WAITING? >> WELL, WE GOT THE ORIGINAL RESPONSE. WE WERE WAITING FOR THE FOLLOW-UP RESPONSE, AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WE HAVE NOT GOT THAT.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT ITEM E? TAMMY, CAN YOU RESET THE VOTING?

>> IF THEY DO THE PRIVATE ENGINEER PART OF THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT AND SAYS HEY, WE'RE READY TO DESIGN THIS, WE'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO SPEND THE $40,000 IF THE WORK HAS NOT BEEN PERFORMED. THEY'LL BEGIN WORKING, BUT IF WE GET A WEEK IN AND WE HAVE PLANS THAT WORK WITH ADA COMPLIANCE AND EVERYTHING ELSE, WE CAN STOP, AND NOT SPEND ANY MORE FUNDS?

>> I'M SURE WE CAN STOP IT AT THAT POINT. THE OTHER THING IS, I MEAN, WE DID APPROVE UP TO 40. I THINK WE'LL BE REMOVING 10 OF THAT DEPENDING ON HOW WE END UP CONTRACTING IT OUT. IF WE USE THE CONTRACTOR THAT WE'VE APPROVED FOR CONCRETE WORK, IF THEY CAN DO ALL THAT, THEN WE WON'T HAVE TO GO OUT AND DO THE BIDDING, THEN THAT REMOVES SOME OF THIS $40,000.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> TAMMY, JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS VOTE BUTTON UP RIGHT NOW IS FOR ITEM E. COUNCIL, A MOTION ON ITEM E? I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. DO I HAVE A SECOND? MOTION MADE BY MYSELF TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN WEAVER. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 3-2. ALL RIGHT. WE

[2025-162]

[00:25:01]

GRIMES SURVEY, ABSTRACT 1327, CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS. THE SITE IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON HAYES ROAD, SOUTH OF MULBERRY LANE. Z07-2025-010.

>> THIS REQUEST IS TO AMEND AN EXISTING PLAN DEVELOPMENT, PLAN DEVELOPMENT 157. THE SITE PLAN WILL BE REPLACED, THE ELEVATIONS WILL BE REPLACED, AND IT WILL INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LOTS FROM 108 TO 157 LOTS. THIS WILL INCREASE THE DENSITY FROM 1.46 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE TO 1.50 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, AND ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS WILL BE ADDED TO OFFSET THOSE CHANGES IN DENSITY. THE LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS WILL BE MODIFIED TO ALLOW FOUR-INCH, FROM FOUR-INCH TO THREE-INCH CALIPER TREES. THE EXISTING MATURE TREES IN THE PRESERVATION AREA WILL REMAIN.

THIS IS THE LOT CONFIGURATION THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING, AND IT INCLUDES DIFFERENT SIZES OF LOTS TO PROVIDE SOME VARIETY AND SIDE ENTRY GARAGES. THE EXISTING PLAN DEVELOPMENT HAS TWO LOT TYPES.

AND THE LOT WIDTH IS 80 FEET WIDE AND 70-FOOT WIDE RESPECTIVELY. THE CURRENT PD PROHIBITS FRONT-FACING GARAGES.

ALL THE GARAGE DOORS HAVE TO BE SIDE OR REAR-FACING. SO THE PROPOSED PD HAS TWO LOT TYPES, 9,100 SQUARE FEET AND 13,000 SQUARE FEET. THESE ARE 70 FEET AND 90-FOOT WIDE RESPECTIVELY.

THEY HAVE A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF 25% GARAGE DOORS AS SIDE ENTRY. SIDE SETBACKS ARE FIVE FOR INTERIOR LOTS, 10 FOR SIDE LOTS, SIDE LOTS THAT FACE THE STREET, AND 20 IF THERE'S A GARAGE THAT FACES A SIDE STREET. AND THEN SEVEN, 10, AND 20 FOR THE OTHER LOT TYPE. THERE'S AMENDMENT OF 2,000 SQUARE FEET OF AC SPACE, AND 34 LOTS WILL BE ALLOWED TO HAVE THREE VEHICLE BAY WITH AN OFFSET OF A FOOT FOR THE THIRD BAY. SO THIS IS WHAT THE FRONT ENTRY FACADES WILL LOOK LIKE. AT THE MEETING, THE APPLICANT PROVIDED SOME MODELS OF SIDE ENTRY TYPES OF PRODUCTS THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO BE INTEGRATED INTO EXHIBIT C. IN ADDITION, HE WANTS TO UPGRADE THE LIGHTING STANDARD TO BE TOP SHIELDED AND BE THE ACORN-STYLE LIGHT FIXTURE THAT WE RECOMMEND.

SO HE'D LIKE THIS SPECIAL CONSIDERATION GIVEN FOR THESE CHANGES BECAUSE THE LOT HAS EXISTING CONDITIONS THAT USE A LOT OF THE OPEN SPACE. THERE ARE TWO LARGE EASEMENTS. THERE'S 130-FOOT WIDE EASEMENT AND 100-FOOT WIDE ON-COURT EASEMENT.

SOME OF THE THINGS HE'S DONE TO PROVIDE BETTER AESTHETICS, HE'S HAVING THE HOUSES ALONG HIS ROAD FACE THE ROADWAY WITH A SLIP STREET. HE'S GOT AN EIGHT-FOOT WIDE CONCRETE SIDEWALK THAT WILL CONNECT HIS ROAD THROUGH THE ON-COURT EASEMENT TO LAGA VISTA TO THE WEST. HE'LL WORK WITH STAFF TO PROPOSE A PARK FOR THE LAGA VISTA SUBDIVISION. 20 LETTERS WERE MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SITE. WE'VE RECEIVED THREE OPPOSITION LETTERS. ONLY ONE WAS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY.

STAFF IS CHANGING UP THE RECOMMENDATION. INSTEAD OF A THUMBS UP, THUMBS DOWN, WE'RE GOING TO PRESENT THE CRITERIA WE USED TO EVALUATE LAND USE DECISIONS. THE FIRST THING WE DO IS LOOK AT THE SURROUNDING LAND USE COMPATIBILITY. SO TO THE NORTH OF THE SITE, YOU HAVE HAYES CROSSING, WHICH IS A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS A DENSITY OF THE.4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. TO THE EAST IS UNDEVELOPED LAND THAT IS CURRENTLY ZONED AG. IT IS FOR COMMERCIAL USE. TO THE SOUTH, YOU HAVE PD-145, WHICH IS LIKE A VISTA. IT HAS A DUA OF ABOUT ONE, BUT IT ALSO HAS A WHOLE LOT OF OPEN SPACE ASSOCIATED WITH THE LAKE AND THE EASEMENTS. AND LAGO VISTA EXTENDS TO THE SOUTH

[00:30:02]

THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> THANK YOU, MARY. I'M SURE THERE WILL BE. ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE PUBLIC HEARING?

>> KYLE GALL. >> KYLE GALL?

>> LISA HEALY. >> MISS HEALY, WELCOME BACK.

STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, WHETHER OR NOT YOU LIVE IN THE CITY LIMITS, AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

>> HAPPY TO DO SO. LISA HEALY. I LIVE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS, AND MY REQUEST IS TO NOT APPROVE THIS PROJECT AND THE INCREASE IN DENSITY. I KNOW THE NUMBERS DON'T LOOK LIKE IT'S A LOT, BUT EVERY TIME YOU MAKE A REVISION INCREASING DENSITY, IT HAS A COMPOUNDING EFFECT. AND THEN YOU'RE TAKING AWAY FROM THE INTEGRITY OF OUR PLANS. THIS PD WAS APPROVED FOR 108 HOUSES.

THAT SHOULD REMAIN. THE LOT SIZES SHOULD REMAIN AS TO WHAT IT WAS APPROVED FOR. WE SHOULD NOT BE CHANGING THESE PDS. THANK

YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION. >> YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE] >> IS THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS ON THIS CASE? OKAY. WITH NO OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOTION MADE BY WICKLIFFE. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 4-0.

ALL RIGHT. IF THE APPLICANT'S HERE AND WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, YOU'RE WELCOME TO DO SO, OR STAND FOR QUESTIONS AS NEEDED.

AND THEN I'LL OPEN IT UP. DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION, MR.

WEAVER? >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR AND COUNCILMAN. MY NAME IS TERRY WEAVER. I REPRESENT THE OWNERS.

I THINK MARY DID A GREAT JOB HERE LAYING IT OUT. BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I KNOW WHEN WE WENT TO PNZ ON THE CONTINUANCE, WE DID LOWER OUR DENSITY. WE TOOK THEIR DIRECTION AND WENT WITH THE 75% FRONT ENTRY, 25% SIDE. AND WE PASSED THERE 7-0. ONCE AGAIN, I THINK MARY DID A GOOD JOB ON THE PRESENTATION, AND I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS YA'LL

HAVE. >> DOES THE CURRENT PD HAVE ALL THE SLIP STREETS AND THE UPGRADED LIGHTING AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS? WHAT OTHER ADDITIONS, OTHER THAN THE

ADDITIONAL LOT COUNTS? >> WELL, THE CURRENT PD, THE SAME LANDSCAPE PLAN WHERE WE HAVE THE LARGE BUFFER ALL ALONG HAYES STAYS, AND THERE WILL BE TREES PLANTED ALL ALONG THERE.

WE STILL HAVE THE CONCRETE TRAIL THAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL PD GOING AND TYING INTO LAGO VISTA, WHICH WILL CONTINUE DOWN TO THE CURRENTLY AN HOA PARK ON THE LAKE. WE'VE BEEN IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CITY. THEY'D LIKE TO TALK TO US ABOUT THAT BECOMING A CITY PARK IN THE FUTURE. WE'RE UNDER DISCUSSION ON THAT. THE GREEN SPACE WILL STAY ALL ALONG THE TRA LINE. AND WE'LL HAVE A SMALL PARK AVAILABLE, HOA PARK FOR PLAYGROUND. THAT STAYS. THE TREE PRESERVATION ALONG THE NORTH STAYS LIKE IT WAS BEFORE. IT WILL TIE IN NICELY TO WHAT'S BEEN DONE OVER AT HAYES CROSSING NOW. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE SEEN WHAT THEY'VE DONE DOWN THERE, BUT IT'S NICE. OURS WILL MIMIC THAT. WHAT WE'RE BASICALLY CHANGING IS GOING FROM 108 LOTS TO 157 LOTS. WE'LL HAVE 25% SIDE ENTRY, AND BEFORE EVERYTHING WAS SIDE ENTRY, WE ALSO ADJUSTED THE HOME SIZE DOWN FROM THE LARGER HOUSES TO THE 2,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM. ONE

[00:35:04]

ADJUSTING TO THAT. >> OKAY. COUNCIL, QUESTIONS?

>> YOU MOVED THE SETBACKS ON THIS 25-FOOT.

>> YES, SIR. >> TO ALLOW FOR BETTER SETBACK OFF THE STREET FOR TRUCKS AND WHATNOT. ARE YOU ABLE TO WORK WITH US ON THE FRONT ENTRY GARAGE PERCENTILES TO BRING THAT DOWN SOME TO AT LEAST OUR CAP OF 65?

>> YES, SIR. WE WERE FOLLOWING PNZ'S LEAD. YOU KNOW, THEY GAVE US 75. SO, YOU KNOW, WE THOUGHT THAT WAS GOOD. WE WANT TO, COUNCILMAN RODGERS, I'VE BEEN DEVELOPING PROPERTY IN THIS TOWN FOR A LONG TIME. I WANT ANOTHER QUALITY DEVELOPMENT HERE FOR MY CLIENT. SO YES, SIR, WE WOULD DEFINITELY, IF THAT'S WHAT YA'LL WOULD LIKE TO SEE US DO, WE WOULD MOVE IT FROM 75% TO 65% FRONT ENTRY WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL QUALITY OF THE GARAGES AND EVERYTHING STAYING JUST LIKE THEY ARE. AND YES,

SIR, WE WOULD DO THAT. >> SO YOU MIGHT HAVE MENTIONED THIS A MOMENT AGO AND I MISSED IT, BUT WHAT'S YOUR TOTAL

ACREAGE OF GREEN SPACE? >> 14 ACRES, I BELIEVE, FROM

MEMORY. >> THAT'S OUT OF A GROSS OF?

>> 73 LOTS. 73 ACRES, EXCUSE ME. >> WE HAVE A GROSS 73 ACRES.

THAT'S WHY OUR DENSITY'S DOWN. EVEN WITH 157 LOTS, WE WOULD PROBABLY BASED ON WHAT YOU ASKED, OUR LOT COUNT, I DON'T KNOW IF WE REWORK IT, IT'S GOING TO GO BELOW. WE MAY TRY TO KEEP IT AT 157, BUT I HAVE A FEELING OUR TOTAL LOT COUNT MAY

GO DOWN BELOW. >> THERE'S SITE CONSTRAINTS ON

THIS PIECE, HUH? >> OH, YES, SIR. YES, SIR. A%-ÚY MORE. WE MAY ADD MORE OF THE TAM LOTS YOU SEE NOW, WHICH ARE THE 100 FRONT FEET. WE DON'T WANT TO GET IT SQUEEZED DOWN TOO MUCH WHERE THE ARCHITECTURE LOOKS HORRIBLE. IT'S NOT GARAGES. WE DON'T HAVE ANY. WE DON'T WANT ANY J SWINGS, BUT WE COULD LIVE

WITH THAT. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?

>> I'VE GOT JUST ONE QUESTION I ALWAYS LIKE TO ASK WHENEVER WE HAVE THESE AMENDMENTS TO THESE PDS. SO WHY NOT SINCE YOU ALREADY HAD THE PRIOR PD APPROVED, WHY NOT JUST BUILD TO THOSE SPECS? WHAT'S THE BIG CHANGE OVER THE FOUR YEARS?

>> WELL, BEING A MEMBER OF THE TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF BUILDERS, WE TRY EVERY YEAR TO CREATE A MORE AFFORDABLE HOME FOR PEOPLE IN TEXAS. SO A SMALLER LOT MEANS A MORE AFFORDABLE HOME. AS I SAY THAT, EVEN OUR 70 FRONT-FOOT FRONT ENTRIES AT 2,000 ARE GOING TO BE $400,000 HOUSES, COUNCILMAN. WE'RE CALLING THAT

AFFORDABLE THESE DAYS. >> SURE.

>> IF I GO SIDE ENTRY AND THE OLDER HOUSE SIZES IN TODAY'S MARKET, THESE THINGS WOULD BE $800-$900,000. AND WE KNOW THAT'S REALLY NOT OUR TYPICAL MARKET. BUT WE'LL HAVE SOME OF THOSE IN THERE, BUT THAT'S THE REASON IS WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE THROUGH A QUALITY FRONT ENTRY 70-FOOT LOT A HOUSE THAT WOULD HOPEFULLY STAY HIGH 390S, 400.

>> GOTCHA. THANK YOU. I'VE GOT ONE QUESTION FOR MARY AS WELL.

>> ALLEN, YOU MADE ME THINK OF A QUESTION FOR MR. WEAVER. THE AFFORDABILITY THING, IT'S KIND OF INTERESTING BECAUSE I HAVE QUITE A FEW PEOPLE WHEN I WAS RE-RUNNING COME UP TO ME ABOUT HOW TO MAKE HOUSING MORE AFFORDABLE FOR THEIR KIDS TO MOVE BACK HERE. SO IS THE 2,000 SQUARE FOOT THAT YOU'RE COMING DOWN TO BECAUSE STAFF OR COUNCIL HAS INDICATED IT WANTS THAT? OR WHY NOT TAKE IT DOWN TO 1,800 FEET AND LEAVE THE LOT SIZE?

>> I ARRIVED AT THE 2,000 LOOKING AT THE MARKET. I'M STILL TRYING TO KEEP THIS NOT AS A VOLUME BUILT, APOLOGIES TO MY

[00:40:08]

AND THE REASON BEING IS I THINK WE COULD HOPEFULLY ACHIEVE A $400,000 HOUSE OUT THERE ON A 70-FRONT FOOT LOT WITH A 2,000 MINIMUM. IF YOU NOTICED BEFORE, I THINK WE HAD 2,600 AND 3,000 WHEN WE GOT IT APPROVED ORIGINALLY. THAT WAS ALL WE COULD GET. AND YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE IN THE MARKETS. AND SO NO, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CREATE ONCE AGAIN ANOTHER QUALITY DEVELOPMENT HERE FOR MY CLIENT THAT I'LL BE THE DEVELOPMENT MANAGER ON AND TRY TO CREATE IT TO THE QUALITY I'VE DONE IN RED OAK AND ELSEWHERE WITH OUR CONSULTING COMPANY.

>> BEFORE WE GET TO STAFF, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT?

I KNOW YOU DID A TIA. >> YES, SIR, I DID. CORRECT ME, MIKE, ON ANYTHING I'M FIXING TO SAY WRONG. WE SPENT $18,000, DID A TIA ON THIS. THEY CAME BACK AND SAID THAT NOT ONLY US INCREASING OUR LOTS FROM 108 TO 157 BUT ALSO THE CURRENT 167 LOTS TO THE SOUTH OF US, IT'S ALREADY BEEN ZONED LAGO VISTA THAT WE WOULD HAVE NO UPGRADES REQUIRED FOR THE TRAFFIC TO BE HANDLED. THE ONLY ITEM IN THE LONG TERM IS THE STREET LIGHT, EXCUSE ME, THE SIGNAL LIGHT AT 1387. THEY ASKED US IF WE WOULD ADD IN AND WE DID ON OUR NICKEL. THEY WANTED TO DO A TRAFFIC COUNT ALSO DOWN WHERE LONG BRANCH IS. THEY LOOKED AT THAT BECAUSE MIKE WANTED THEM TO LOOK AT THAT ALSO. IS THAT CORRECT, MIKE? HAVE I SAID ANYTHING WRONG? THANK YOU, SIR. SO REALLY, WE HAVE NO IMPACT. THIS ADDITION AND THE FUTURE

ADDITION. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCIL, QUESTIONS OF MARY OR STAFF? ALLEN?

>> I JUST HAD A QUESTION ABOUT I'M READING THIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION, AND I'M TRYING TO -- TYPICALLY WHEN WHEN I'M READING THOSE, IT SAYS STAFF RECOMMENDS OR APPROVES OR DENIES. I WANT TO UNDERSTAND. WHAT'S THE REASON THIS PARTICULAR ONE DOESN'T HAVE A, LIKE A PARTICULAR

RECOMMENDATION? >> SO I'VE SEEN IT DONE BOTH WAYS IN CITIES WHERE IT'S BEEN A THUMBS UP OR THUMBS DOWN, APPROVAL OR DENIAL RECOMMENDATION. AND I THINK THAT LOOKING AT, BREAKING IT DOWN AND LOOKING AT THE FUNDAMENTAL THINGS THAT WE LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW GIVES COUNCIL MORE TO WORK WITH IN TERMS OF MAKING THEIR DECISION. SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HAPPY TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THIS APPLICATION IF YOU REALLY WANT TO KIND OF GET A SENSE OF WHERE STAFF IS COMFORTABLE.

>> I'M SAYING IS THAT PARTICULAR TO THIS CASE, OR IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, WE'RE NOT GOING TO SEE RECOMMENDATIONS

ANYMORE? >> THAT'S UP TO THIS BODY.

WE'VE INTRODUCED THIS TO YOU, AND WE'D LOVE TO HEAR BACK FROM COUNCIL AS TO WHETHER YOU PREFER THIS WAY OR YOU WOULD RATHER GO BACK TO THUMBS UP, THUMBS DOWN. WE'RE HAPPY TO DO IT WHATEVER

WAY YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE. >> I'M ASKING SO IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO SPECIFIC TO THIS CASE. IT'S JUST A MODEL

CHANGE? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> GOT IT. THANK YOU. >> OKAY.

>> MARK? >> I GOT REALLY TURNED UP. MY QUESTION WAS I GUESS SAME AS ALLEN'S. I WANTED TO KNOW IF THIS IS GOING TO BE A CONTINUANCE IN THE FUTURE OR IF THIS WAS JUST FOR THIS ITEM. SINCE YOU'RE ASKING OR KIND OF ASKED, I WILL SAY I FEEL LIKE FROM UNDERSTANDING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S PERSPECTIVE IS SPELLED OUT IN THE PLANNING ANALYSIS ON THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SHEETS. I PREFER THE THUMBS UP, THUMBS DOWN WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF. JUST

SINCE YOU ASKED. >> OKAY.

>> BUT I DO HAVE QUESTIONS ON THIS DEVELOPMENT, THOUGH. SO ON THE, AND IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME. I WAS HERE WHEN ALL THIS ORIGINALLY GOT APPROVED. IS THIS 100 LOTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS JUST FOR THIS PHASE, RIGHT? WHEN IT FIRST GOT APPROVED, DIDN'T WE APPROVE ALL OF IT AT ONCE AND IT WAS LIKE FOUR OR 500 AND WE APPROVED IT IN SECTIONS? THAT WORKS.

>> A LOT OF HISTORY ON THIS PROJECT. WE CAME IN FIVE YEARS AGO, AT LEAST, AND GOT LAGO VISTA APPROVED. THEN MY CLIENT

[00:45:02]

>> OKAY. NO. I REMEMBER FOUR YEARS AGO THEY WERE ALL COMING

IN AROUND THE SAME TIME. >> YOU'RE RIGHT. IT WAS GOING TO BE PROBABLY, WASN'T GOING TO BE 500, BUT IT WAS PROBABLY GOING TO BE 167 PLUS. MAYBE 400 LOTS TOTAL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT OR MORE. WE WERE GOING TO DO SOME ALLEY LOADS, 50-FOOT FRONT. THEY DIDN'T WANT ALLEYS AT THAT TIME, SO THAT DIDN'T WORK. THERE WERE A LOT OF REASONS WHY WE WITHDREW THAT, STAYED WITH OUR EXISTING PD FOR LAGO VISTA, CAME BACK, AND DID A TOTALLY SEPARATE PD ON THIS. AT THAT TIME, YA'LL WANTED THE WIDER, PLUS THIS NEW COMP PLAN, WE WEREN'T EVEN MEDIUM DENSITY.

WE WERE TRANSITIONAL. WE WERE IN THE CORPORATE MODULE BACK THEN.

SO THAT WAS A LOT OF IT. WE NOW MEET THE CURRENT COMP PLAN, AS MARY LAID OUT. WE'RE WAY UNDER THE FOUR UNITS. SO I THINK WE HAVE A QUALITY DEVELOPMENT HERE AND WOULD REALLY LIKE YA'LL IF WE CAN, LET'S APPROVE IT TONIGHT AT THE 65%. AND YOU KNOW, IF WE DO, THAT'S WHAT I'M HOPING WE GET TONIGHT. BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

>> CLARK, YOU GOOD? >> OUT OF THE TWO, HAS ANYONE

HAD AN UPDATE FROM TEXDOT? >> WE HAD A WORKSHOP WITH THEM LAST WEEK, AND THEY SAID 2031, GIVE OR TAKE.

>> IT'S GOING TO BE ANYWHERE FROM LIKE 12-18 MONTHS ON A TRAFFIC SIGNALMENT SIGNAL. IF YOU'RE HEADING WESTBOUND, THEY'LL DO A TURN LANE. IT'S STILL A WAYS OUT MONTHS WISE,

BUT IT IS ON THEIR RADAR TO DO. >> THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE IT

COMPLETED IN THE NEXT 18 MONTHS? >> JUST THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL.

>> AGAIN, WE'VE HEARD ANYWHERE FROM 12 TO 18 TO 24 MONTHS. THEY HAVE COME BACK AND SAID THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING, AND THEY'RE HAVING TO FIGURE IN THE LANE IMPROVEMENTS AS WELL.

>> OKAY. >> SO WITHIN THAT TEXDOT MEETING, WE TALKED ABOUT POTENTIAL OTHER AVENUES TO PURSUE WITH TEXDOT, EVEN CABLES TO HOLD TRAFFIC LIGHTS, ANYTHING TO BREAK TRAFFIC UP UNTIL OTHER POSITIONS LONG BRANCH AREA, FOR EXAMPLE, IS ANOTHER BREAK-UP AREA. ARE WE PURSUING THAT RIGHT

NOW SLOWLY? >> SO IF YOU REMEMBER, THE ENGINEERS STARTED LOOKING INTO THAT. I'M NOT SURE. IT STILL HAS TO WARRANT THE SIGNALS. THEY WON'T PUT THEM OUT THERE IF IT DOESN'T WARRANT SIGNALS. HE'LL START LOOKING AT IF THERE'S A WAY TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENTLY TO ALLOW THE SCHEDULE TO BE

SHORTENED. >> YOU WERE GOING TO BE GETTING WITH TEXDOT. WE MIGHT HAVE AN ADDITIONAL DOWN THE LINE WHETHER IT BE LONG BRANCH, SOMEWHERE TO GET A SECOND BREAKUP TO GIVE THESE FOLKS THE ABILITY TO GET OUT AND GET ON THE ROAD. I KNOW IT WAS LITERALLY JUST, WHAT, A WEEK AGO?

>> IT WAS WEDNESDAY. >> SO THIS IS REAL QUICK. I JUST WANT TO PUT A LITTLE BIT OF PRESSURE THAT WE ARE PURSUING THIS TO STAY AWAY FROM THIS UTOPIAN IDEA THAT SEEMS TO BE AROUND THAT WHEN ALL THE PLANNING'S RIGHT, ALL THE STARS ARE ALIGNED, ALL THE MONEY'S THERE, ALL THE RIGHT OF WAYS BOUGHT, THEN WE COMPLETE THE LIGHT, WHICH COULD BE WHO KNOWS

WHEN. >> YEAH. THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT. THE ISSUE WITH THE SIGNAL IS GOING TO BE THE TIMING ON MATERIALS. THAT'S TYPICALLY WHAT THE LONG LEAD TIME IS, IS

GETTING THE MATERIALS. >> FOR THAT ONE CROSSING. WHAT I'M INTERESTED IN IS IF WE ARE PURSUING SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO WAIT ON EVEN PERHAPS A SECOND CROSSING, A MAKESHIFT

[00:50:01]

OF THE BOX. >> SO WE HAVE, I MEAN WE'VE DONE REQUESTS. WE'VE ASKED AT LEAST THREE TIMES FOR HAYES AND 1387. THE THIRD TIME WE ASKED, WE ALSO ASKED THEM TO LOOK AT 1387 FOR A POTENTIAL SIGNAL. WE CAN LOOK AND SEE WHEN WE GET TO LONG BRANCH TO VERIFY OUR CITY LIMIT BOUNDARY, IF THAT'S OUR

JURISDICTION. >> I'M NOT SAYING THAT WOULD BE THE SPOT. I'M LOOKING TO GIVE THE FOLKS TRAFFIC BREAKS.

>> AGAIN, TEXDOT WILL HAVE THEIR POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. IF AN INTERSECTION DOESN'T WARRANT THE SIGNAL, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO PUT A SIGNAL IN EVEN TEMPORARILY.

>> I FELT AS THOUGH WE WERE HEADED DOWN AN AVENUE ONCE EVERYTHING IS PERFECT, THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT, AND I'M LOOKING TO APPLY ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS THAT AREN'T IN A PERFECT WORLD.

THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING FOR. >> SURE.

>> BUT IT DID APPEAR TO ME IN THAT MEETING THAT HAYES AND PERHAPS THE SPOTLIGHT TOWER, THEY'RE WITHIN A YEAR, 12-18 MONTH TIME PERIOD WITH MATERIALS AVAILABILITY ON HAND, IT WILL BE

COMPLETED. >> CORRECT.

>> WARRANTED MEANING TRAFFIC COUNTS MEET THE STANDARDS THAT WE NEED RIGHT NOW, BUT NOW WE'RE GOING TO ORDER IT 24 MONTHS UNTIL WE GET IT INSTALLED. NOT MUCH PROACTIVITY FROM THEIR STANDPOINT. VERY PROACTIVE FROM THE CITY POINT. VERY REACTIVE

FROM TEXDOT. >> WE COULD ALWAYS HAVE ANOTHER

COMMITTEE. >> YEAH. THANK YOU, MIKE.

>> FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS CASE? ALL RIGHT. WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON IT. IF ANYBODY HAS ONE. I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE 65% FRONT ENTRY GARAGE

RECOMMENDATION. >> WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? THAT WAS IT, THE 65%? I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> OKAY. MOTION MADE BY MYSELF TO APPROVE WITH 65% FRONT ENTRY GARAGE, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN RODGERS. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM

PASSES 4-0. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MARY.

WE'LL GIVE ROSS A PAUSE UNTIL HE GETS BACK.

[2025-163]

>>> WE WILL MOVE TO REGULAR AGENDA. OPENING ITEM 2025-163.

CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR AN EXEMPTION TO MIDLOTHIAN ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PRIMARY ROOF OF A BUILDING WITH A PITCH LESS THAN THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF 8:12. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 43 AND LOCATED ON PLUS OR MINUS ACRES LOCATED AT 3820 MAZE COURT. WICKLIFFE HAS STATED A CONFLICT

AND STEPPED OUT. >> THIS IS A MISCELLANEOUS REQUEST. IT'S AN UNDEVELOPED LOT . RESIDENTIAL, LOW DENSITY.

AND IF YOU LOOK TO THE RIGHT OF YOUR SCREEN OR TO THE PICTURE, IT'S IN THE YELLOW OUTLINE. OH. IN THE YELLOW OUTLINE DID NOT SHOW UP. IT'S IN THE BLUE OUTLINE ON THIS. 3820 MAYES COURT. THIS IS THE PROPOSED PLAN FOR THE HOME. AND THE OUTSIDE LINE IS GOING TO BE THE PROPERTY LINE, JUST A LITTLE ZOOMED OUT.

THIS IS WHAT THE HOME IS PROPOSED TO LOOK LIKE. MAYES DOES HAVE AN HOA. THE APPLICANT DID RECEIVE SUPPORT FROM THE HOA SAYING THEY WILL APPROVE THE DESIGN WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE ROOF PITCH FROM THE CITY. THESE ARE A COUPLE OF IMAGES OF WHAT THE HOME IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE. FROM 2018 TO 2023, CITY STAFF HAS PRESENTED FIVE ROOF PITCH CASES TO CITY COUNCIL TYPICALLY

[00:55:03]

ALSO HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. >> TAMMY, ANYBODY SIGN UP TO SPEAK? THE APPLICANT'S HERE AND WANTS TO SPEAK, YOU'RE WELCOME TO MAKE A PRESENTATION NOW OR STAND FOR QUESTIONS LATER. SO STANDBY IF NEEDED. COUNCIL, QUESTIONS OF ARDEN, MARY, OR THE

APPLICANT? >> MY ONLY QUESTION, IT'S PROBABLY MORE FOR JOE. APPROVING THIS EXCEPTION, IS IT PREDICATED ON THE SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION? OR IS IT JUST APPROVING THE ROOF

PITCH IN GENERAL? >> APPROVAL OF ROOF PITCH IN

GENERAL. >> OKAY. SO I GUESS THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. IS THERE ANY CONCERN ABOUT LIMITING THIS, YOU KNOW, APPROVAL TO THE ELEVATIONS IN

THE SITE PLAN PRESENTED? >> WOULD YOU MIND COMING UP TO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE APOLOGIES. WE WANT PEOPLE ONLINE

TO SEE IF THEY'RE INTERESTED. >> ARE YOU ASKING IF WE'RE OKAY WITH YOU APPROVING IT AS IT LOOKS? THAT IS THE PROPOSED DESIGN. THERE ARE TWEAKS THAT NEED TO BE MADE, BUT IN GENERAL THAT'S WHAT THE EXTERIOR IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE. WE HAVEN'T FULLY DEVELOPED IT ONLY BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A PROJECT YET. MY HOMEOWNER IS TRYING TO DO ENOUGH TO PRESENT TO YOU WHAT WE WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE WITHOUT DOING A FULL SET OF

DRAWINGS. BUT YES. >> THANK YOU. ALLEN?

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION WHEN YOU'RE READY.

>> NO OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS CASE? MOTION?

>> MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED.

>> MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMAN MOORMAN.

>> THEY'RE ASKING FOR AN EXCEPTION FROM THE ROOF PITCH.

>> RIGHT. >> SO AS LONG AS, I KNOW THOSE ARE DRAWINGS YOU SUBMITTED. AS LONG AS THEY ARE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THEY WOULD BE APPROVED. THIS ISN'T ASKING FOR THE APPROVAL OF THOSE OTHER ELEVATIONS.

>> BUT IT IS ASKING FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.

>> JUST TO THE ROOF PITCH. FOR ROOF PITCH.

>> EVERYTHING ELSE COMPLIES WITH ZONING AND THE GUIDELINES BY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. SO THE ONLY THING THAT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE AT THIS POINT IS THE ROOF PITCH.

>> ALL RIGHT. FAIR ENOUGH. >> THIS IS HOW WE APPROVED THE MAJORITY OF THE FEW THAT HAVE GONE IN THIS DIRECTION IN THE

PAST. >> WITHDRAWN THE AMENDMENT.

ALLEN, YOUR MOTION WAS TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED? SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN RODGERS. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 4-0. THANK YOU, ARDEN. SOMEBODY GRAB CLARK FOR ME.

[2025-164]

>> 2025-164, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC. FOR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING DESIGN AND OTHER RELATED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH IMPROVEMENTS AT THE TAYMAN WATER TREATMENT PLANT IN A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $996,400.

>> THIS IS THE FIRST STAGE I GUESS OR FIRST PHASE IN REGARDS TO THE EXPANSION OF THE TAYMAN WATER TREATMENT PLANT. IT'S CURRENTLY RATED AT A CAPACITY OF 12 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY. WHEN THAT PLANT WAS BUILT TO THE BEST OF STAFF'S UNDERSTANDING AND KNOWLEDGE, IT WASN'T ANTICIPATED THAT PLANT WOULD BE EXPANDED. SO WITH THE ADDITIONAL REUSE RIGHTS FROM THE MOUNTAIN CREEK SYSTEM, WE'LL BE EXCEEDING WHAT WE CAN PULL AND TREAT FROM THE PLANT.

THIS IS REALLY THE FIRST STEP IN REGARDS TO LOOKING TO GET THAT PLANT HOPEFULLY UP TO 24 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY. IT DOESN'T INVOLVE QUITE A BIT OF PRELIMINARY DESIGN, HYDRAULICS OF THE PLANT, NEW SED BASINS, FILTERS, ALONG WITH THE HEADER AT THE HIGH-SERVICE PUMP STATION. WE DO HAVE AN ITEM THAT ALSO WOULD INCLUDE THE DISCHARGE PIPE AS WELL. AGAIN, REALLY

[01:00:01]

WE HAVE THIS BUDGETED WITHIN THE UTILITY FUND. WITH THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS COUNCIL MAY HAVE.

>> ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? >> THIS IS A 10-MONTH PROCESS, AND THAT GETS US TO 25%. WHAT DO WE ANTICIPATE THE TIMEFRAME ON THE REMAINING 75% DESIGN IMPLEMENTATION AND BUILD VERSUS THE DEMAND AND NEED FOR THE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY?

>> AT THE CURRENT RATE WE ARE RIGHT NOW, WE ARE AHEAD. AGAIN, WITH WHAT WE HAVE AT THE PLANT AND THE EXPANSION WE'VE DONE, WE CAN ROUGHLY TREAT ABOUT 22 COMFORTABLY ALONG WITH 10-11 AT THE TAYMAN PLANT. SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE ARE AHEAD. THE SAME THING WITH THE RETURN FLOWS THAT ARE GOING BACK TO JOE POOL.

RIGHT NOW, THE MAXIMUM IS 2.8 WE CAN TAKE FROM PRA. THAT CAN GROW, BUT WE'LL HAVE TO CONTRACT FOR THAT. WE HAVE THE RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL ON THAT. IT DEPENDS ON THE NUMBER OF ITEMS WE ARE GOING TO IMPLEMENT AND DO ON THE EXPANSION SIDE. I WOULD THINK FROM NINE TO 12 MONTHS WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE

THE DESIGN COMPLETED. >> OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR.

>> YES, SIR. >> MIKE?

>> SO THE RETURN SIDE, DOES THAT PEAK OUT AROUND 10 MGDS IN THE

LONG, LONG-TERM? >> THEY ARE LOOKING AT POSSIBLY THE NEXT EXPANSION IS BETWEEN 12, I'M SORRY, BETWEEN 9-12 MILLION, POTENTIALLY GOING TO 18 POSSIBLY.

>> BUT THAT WOULD BE GROSS WATER AND RETURNS ALSO?

>> NO. THAT WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLAN.

THE PLANT RIGHT NOW, THEY ARE ACTUALLY EXPANDING IT TO GO TO SIX. THEY ARE WORKING ON THE DESIGN TO GO TO NINE MILLION PER DAY. WHAT WE CAN DO, WE HAVE THE RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL FOR THE CONTRACT OF THOSE RETURN FLOWS UP TO 93.5% OF WHAT THEY'RE

DISCHARGING. >> 17-22 MGD RANGE LONG TERM?

>> YES, SIR. >> DO YOU CONTINUE TO UTILIZE TAYMAN FOR CONTINUOUS BUILD OUT AS YOU'RE BUILDING OUT TO GET [INDISCERNIBLE]. SO THAT WHEN WE GET TO THE GROSS EVALUATION OF 17-20, WE'RE ABLE TO TAKE THEM AND UTILIZE IT? OR WILL WE NEED

THAT MUCH WATER UTILIZATION? >> YES, SIR. WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT AGAIN ON OUR SIDE OF IT FOR OUR OVERALL SYSTEM. WHAT MIDLOTHIAN'S DEMANDS AND NEEDS ARE GOING TO BE LONG TERM, THAT WILL MEET WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ON OUR SIDE OF IT ALONG WITH WHAT WE'RE TREATING FROM THE AUGER PLANT. YOU TAKE IT OR YOU LOSE IT EACH DAY. WHAT JOE DOES AT THE PLANT IS THE VOLUME WE'RE SUPPOSED TO TAKE, WE'RE ALREADY TAKING THAT. WE CAN TAKE WHAT WE WANT FROM OUR JOE POOL ALLOTMENT. WE CAN HOLD IT AND PEAK OFF IT. WE'RE TAKING IT CONSISTENTLY EVERY DAY.

>> THANK YOU. >> YES, SIR.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS CASE? TAKE A MOTION.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> MOTION MADE TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED BY COUNCILMAN RODGERS, SECONDED BY MOORMAN. ITEM PASSES

[2025-165]

5-0. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL.

>> 2025-165, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONSENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS AND CIRCLE S. MIDLOTHIAN, LLC. HAB 3336, LLC, BUFFALO HILLS DEVELOPMENT, LLC., MISKIMON MANAGEMENT III, LLC.,

AND 67213, LLC. >> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, BACK IN NOVEMBER THE COUNCIL ENTERED INTO THIS AGREEMENT WITH VARIOUS DEVELOPMENTS. AT THAT TIME, IT WAS SET FOR BASICALLY 3.78 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY, WHICH THE CITY WOULD CONTRACT WITH MOUNTAIN PEAK. MOUNTAIN PEAK WOULD RETAIL THAT TO THE DEVELOPMENT. THE DEVELOPMENT DROPPED THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY TO 4,300 WITHIN MIDLOTHIAN'S BOUNDARIES. AND WITH THIS, THE DEVELOPER IS NOW ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL 3.5 MILLION. WHICH FALL UNDER THE SAME PREMISE WE WOULD NEED TO CONTRACT WITH

[01:05:01]

LOTS. >> 1,600 LOTS TOTAL?

>> YES, SIR. >> 1,600 LOTS WITHIN THE MISD BOUNDARY. SO THEY TOOK, SO IF YA'LL REMEMBER CIRCLE S WAS IN THE MISD BOUNDARY. THAT WAS WHAT THEY REMOVED AND PUT IT DOWN TO 1,600. OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS ADDITIONAL LOTS OUT IN JOHNSON COUNTY. THAT'S THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEING ADDED TO THIS AGREEMENT. MOUNTAIN PEAK ARE INTERESTED IN TALKING TO US ABOUT THE MODIFICATIONS WE'D HAVE TO MAKE TO THEIR CONTRACT

TO MAKE THIS POSSIBLE. >> JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE'RE JUST WHOLESALING ADDITIONAL WATER TO MOUNTAIN PEAK AND THEY'LL SERVE IT. WE'RE NOT SERVING OUTSIDE OF OUR MISD BOUNDARIES?

>> I THINK I JUST ANSWERED MY OWN QUESTIONS. WHEN WE DID THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, DID WE SET MINIMUM LOT SIZE ON THE REMAINING? OR IS IT JUST A LOT COUNT? OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I

THOUGHT. >> I JUST WANTED TO GET, MAKE SURE I'VE GOT IT CLEAR. SO THEY WANT MORE WHOLESALE WATER. AND IN RETURN, WHAT STARTED OUT AT WHATEVER IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN, 8-10,000, WE REDUCED IT TO 4,300. NOW THEY'RE COMING BACK FROM MORE WATER AND WILLING TO REDUCE IT DOWN TO, WHAT WAS THE NUMBER? 1,600. IS THAT IN LAYMAN'S TERMS WHAT'S

HAPPENING? >> YES, SIR.

>> ALL RIGHT. WELL, I WILL SAY WHEN THIS ALL CAME ABOUT, I WAS A LITTLE BIT SKEPTICAL OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE DEAL. THERE WAS A LOT OF MY COUNTERPARTS HERE THAT THOUGHT SOMETHING LIKE THIS MAY BE THE ROAD WE WERE HEADED DOWN, AND I'LL JUST SAY THIS IS A PLEASANT SURPRISE, AND I'M EXCITED THAT IT WORKED THE WAY IT WAS INTENDED TO WORK. SO I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.

>> OKAY. >> I'LL ONLY ADD, NOT TO GO INTO ANY GREAT DETAIL, BUT 1,600 BALANCE, THERE'S SOME WORK LEFT TO BE DONE. IT'S LOOKING AS THOUGH THAT WILL BE ELIMINATED ALSO, VERY LIKELY. I CAN'T ALLUDE TO THAT YET, BUT THAT'S BEING WORKED ON NOW. THE LAST 1,600 LOTS.

>> OKAY. AND JUST FOR CLARITY FOR ANYBODY THAT MIGHT BE WATCHING, IT DOES MENTION BUFFALO HILLS DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S NOT WHAT'S KNOWN AS THE BUFFALO HILLS COMMUNITY IN MIDLOTHIAN? JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO CONFUSION THERE. ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS CASE? TAKE A

MOTION. >> MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMAN WEAVE WEAVE. SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN RODGERS. PLEASE

VOTE. ITEM PASSES 5-0. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL.

[2025-166]

>> 2025-166, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON THE PURCHASE OF NEW FIREARMS WITH RED DOT OPTICS FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO ENHANCE ACCURACY, OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY, AND OFFICER SAFETY FROM GT DISTRIBUTORS, INC. AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $66,488.49.

>> COMMANDER, WELCOME. >> THANK YOU. GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL. SO WE DO A LOT OF TRAINING WITH OUR OFFICERS AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. AND OFFER GREAT TRAINING AND EVERYTHING THEY NEED TO BE A POLICE OFFICER. BUT WE CERTAINLY GIVE THEM A LOT OF TRAINING IN ACTIVE SHOOTER INCIDENTS AND MASS CASUALTY INCIDENTS. WITH ALL THAT TRAINING, WE WANT TO PROVIDE OUR OFFICERS WITH THE BEST POSSIBLE EQUIPMENT. WHAT WE'RE SEEING ACROSS THE COUNTRY IS THAT THESE INCIDENTS STILL CONTINUE TO HAPPEN, THESE ACTIVE ATTACKER, ACTIVE SHOOTER INCIDENTS. GIVING OUR OFFICERS THIS RED DOT OPTIC ON THEIR PISTOL WILL HELP WITH THEIR ACCURACY. IT HAPPENS A LOT OF TIMES IN WHAT THE SUSPECTS CALL A TARGET-RICH ENVIRONMENT, WHICH ARE OPEN AIR ENVIRONMENTS.

WE'VE SEEN IT IN OUR SCHOOLS ACROSS THE COUNTRY, AND SO OFFICERS ARE NOT WALKING AROUND WITH, OF COURSE, A RIFLE SLUNG ACROSS THEIR CHEST IN ANY OF THESE EVENTS THAT WE'RE

[01:10:02]

>> TAMMY, ANYBODY SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS? QUESTIONS FOR

COMMANDER HICKS? >> I NOTE THE FUNDING SOURCE IS FEDERAL FORFEITURE PROGRAM. SO HOW MUCH CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN TAX DOLLARS ARE BEING SPENT ON THESE WEAPONS?

>> I DON'T THINK ANY. IT'S ALL FROM FEDERAL FORFEITURE FUNDS.

>> ZERO? THESE ARE THE ISSUE DUTY WEAPONS. THESE ARE

CITY-OWNED WEAPONS? >> THESE ARE. THESE ARE THE GLOCKS. IT HAS A DIFFERENT SLIDE TO PUT THIS RED DOT OPTIC ON THERE. YOU HAVE TO BUY THE NEW WEAPON SYSTEM, NOT JUST THE RED

DOT ITSELF. >> PERFECT. THANK YOU, SIR.

>> NO OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS CASE?

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> I GOT TWO QUESTIONS.

>> OKAY. QUESTIONS, ALLEN. >> ONE IS WHAT HAPPENS TO, THIS IS JUST FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. WHAT HAPPENS TO THE PRIOR WEAPON STOCK, DO WE OFFLOAD THAT THROUGH SOME PROCESS TO GET RESOURCES BACK IN? OR HOW DOES THAT WORK?

>> WITH THE GUNS WE CURRENTLY CARRY, WE TURN THEM IN FOR A DISCOUNT, AND HOW WE GET THIS PRICING HERE. A LOT OF TIMES GT, ONCE THIS PROGRAM HAPPENS, THEY WILL ALLOW THE OFFICER TO BUY THEIR WEAPON BACK AT A REDUCED PRICE. BUT THEN THEY OWN IT.

>> GOT IT. OKAY. SO THERE'S A PROCESS?

>> IF I WANT TO, A COUPLE MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD, THEY HAVE OUR SERIAL NUMBERS, AND THEY OFFER IT BACK TO THE OFFICER AT A REDUCED PRICE. IT BECOMES THEIR WEAPON THEY OWN.

>> SO IT'S NEVER A SITUATION WHERE WHEN WE GO TO GET ALL NEW FIREARMS WHERE WE'RE ALREADY GETTING CREDIT IN THOSE VARIOUS WAYS FOR THE FIREARMS WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN STOCK?

>> YES, SIR. >> AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION WAS YOU MENTIONED, AND I AGREE WITH YOU, I'VE NEVER SEEN REALLY ANYBODY OUT ON PATROL AT ANY OF THESE PLACES WITH A RIFLE ON, BUT JUST FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES PERTAINING TO, YOU KNOW, THIS BEING THE WAY, WHY DON'T WE SEE THAT? I MEAN, JUST OUT OF PURE CURIOSITY, IS THAT JUST SOMETHING THAT IS DEPLOYED ONLY WHEN NEEDED? I MEAN, IS THAT JUST NOT STANDARD TO HAVE

ANYBODY CARRY THAT? >> YES, SIR. IT'S NOT STANDARD REALLY ACROSS THE NATION. AND I THINK BECAUSE IT ALSO PUTS A LITTLE BIT OF FEAR IN OUR CITIZENS WHEN YOU'RE WALKING AROUND WITH A RIFLE SLUNG ACROSS YOU. BUT HAVING THAT LARGE OF A WEAPON AND IF WE'RE JUST AT, LET'S SAY IT'S AT A CITY CONCERT, AND SOMEONE IS INTOXICATED AND NEEDS TO BE TAKEN AWAY. YOU'VE GOT TO PUT THAT THING BEHIND YOU. IF YOU HAVE TO GO HANDS ON AND GET CONTROL OF SOMEBODY, IT'S REALLY IN THE WAY AT THAT POINT. SO WE REALLY ONLY WANT TO DEPLOY THOSE ON A CRITICAL INCIDENT, USUALLY WHERE THERE'S AN ACTIVE SHOOTING GOING ON, OR IT COULD BE AT A HOUSE TYPE INCIDENT. AND OF COURSE OUR OFFICERS THAT ARE ON S.W.A.T., THAT IS SOMETHING THEY CARRY TO EVERY EVENT. AT THAT POINT, YOU HAVE A CRITICAL INCIDENT, YOU'RE CALLING S.W.A.T. OUT.

[01:15:02]

>> THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE. THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I'VE GOT IS WHEN YOU PUT THESE ON THE SIDEARMS, DO YOU SEE ANY CORRELATION BETWEEN, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY AS YOU MENTIONED, IT'S A LOT MORE ACCURATE HAVING THAT TOOL. DOES THAT TAKE ANYTHING AWAY FROM THE THOROUGHNESS OF TRAINING THEY WOULD BE GOING THROUGH TO BECOME ACCURATE WITHOUT IT, IN THE CASE THAT SOMETHING MALFUNCTIONED OR MAYBE IT WASN'T OPERATING

PROPERLY? >> YEAH.

>> DO THEY GET LAZY DOING IT WITHOUT?

>> WE HOPE NOT. BECAUSE THEY'LL STILL HAVE TO QUALIFY WITH THEIR

IRON SIDES. >> THAT'S BASICALLY MY

QUESTION. >> SAME THING WITH OUR RIFLE. WE MAKE THEM QUALIFY WITH AND WITHOUT. IN CASE THAT OPTIC GOES DOWN LIKE YOU'RE SAYING, BATTERIES LAST A LONG TIME, BUT IF THEY'RE NOT CHECKING IT, THEY CAN STILL PICK UP THE

REGULAR IRON SIDE. >> PERFECT. THANK YOU.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE STAND? >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 5-0.

[2025-167]

>>2025-167 CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN'S FISCAL YEAR 2024- 2025 GENERAL FUND BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $80,744 FROM THE UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE TO PURCHASE APPROXIMATELY 16 PATROL RIFLES, EIGHT SHOTGUNS, AND ACCOMPANYING HARDWARE AND OPTICS. THE AMOUNT WILL BE REPAID BY PARTICIPATING CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN POLICE OFFICERS PARTICIPATING IN THE PURCHASE

PROGRAM. >> COMMANDER HICKS?

>> YES, SIR. IF THEY HAVE TIME AS I STATED EARLIER TO GET THAT RIFLE OR SHOTGUN OUT IN A CERTAIN SITUATION, THAT'S WHAT WE WANT THEM TO DEPLOY. CURRENTLY AT THE PD, WE HAVE SOME SHOTGUNS BUT NOT ENOUGH. WE DON'T HAVE A POOL OF RIFLES.

RIFLES ARE SO UNIQUE TO HOW YOU ARRANGE THAT STOCK, WHERE YOU WANT THAT OPTIC, YOUR FLASHLIGHT. SO WE REALLY DON'T WANT TO PULL THOSE AND THAT WOULD COST THE CITY QUITE A BIT OF MONEY TO BUY ENOUGH RIFLES TO WHERE EVERY TIME PATROL COMES IN, THEY'D HAVE TO CHECK THE RIFLE OUT, READJUST THE STOCK, MAKE SURE THE FLASHLIGHT'S WHERE IT'S AT. YOU TAKE A FEW MINUTES TO TAKE THOSE PIECES OFF, READJUST THEM, BUT YOU CAN'T TAKE THE OPTIC OFF. ONCE YOU'VE ZEROED IT OUT AND YOU SEE YOU'RE ON TARGET, YOU'D HAVE TO ZERO THAT RIFLE OUT AGAIN. WE WANT TO ALLOW THE OFFICERS THE OPPORTUNITY SINCE INFLATION AND THESE FIREARMS ARE SO EXPENSIVE TO BUY IT THROUGH THE CITY. IT WOULD BE TAKEN OUT IN EQUAL INSTALLMENTS OUT OF 26 PAYCHECKS I BELIEVE, AND THEN THEY WILL THEN OWN THE RIFLE OR THE SHOTGUN. AGAIN, RIFLES ARE GREAT FOR LONG DISTANCE SITUATIONS WHEN YOU HAVE THE TIME TO DEPLOY THEM. ALSO SHOTGUNS ARE GOOD IN CLOSE QUARTERS IF WE'RE IN A HOUSE OR A CLOSER ENVIRONMENT WHERE YOU DON'T WANT TO RISK THAT RIFLE ROUND GOING THROUGH SHEET ROCK AND GOING THROUGH AND NOT KNOWING WHAT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT WALL OF THAT ROOM, THEN YOU CAN DEPLOY A SHOTGUN. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE, AGAIN, THEY HAVE THE TOOLS THEY NEED AND THAT THESE RIFLES WE'RE NOT HAVING TO BUY THEM WITH CITY MONEY TO WHERE IT'S NOT THEIRS, BUT THEY CAN BUY THEM, MAKE IT THEIR OWN, PRACTICE WITH IT IN THEIR OFF TIME, AND GET BETTER WITH IT. WE GIVE THEM TRAINING THEY HAVE TO ATTEND, BUT WE ENCOURAGE THEM TO GO TO THE RANGE ON THEIR OWN AND PRACTICE WITH THESE WEAPONS.

>> IN THE EVENT, SORRY, ANYBODY SIGN UP TO SPEAK? IN AN EVENT THAT AN OFFICER IS TERMINATED, HOW DOES THAT WORK?

>> I KNOW THERE'S A PLAN IN PLACE, BUT I'M NOT SURE. WE

HAVE DISCUSSED THAT. >> THERE IS A PLAN?

>> YES, SIR. BECAUSE IT'S COMING OUT OF THEIR PAYCHECKS.

>> THEY SIGN AN AGREEMENT SAYING THEY'RE GOING TO REPAY THAT

AMOUNT. >> COUNCIL, QUESTIONS ON THIS

CASE? >> JUST FOR POINT OF CLARIFICATION BECAUSE IT WAS ALLUDED TO EARLIER THAT CITY BUDGET WAS BEING AMENDED TO SPEND $88,000. WE'RE PROVIDING OUR OFFICERS THE ABILITY TO PURCHASE PERSONAL WEAPONS THAT CAN BE USED IN THE LINE OF DUTY USING OUR COLLECTIVE DISCOUNT THAT WE CAN BUY FIREARMS FOR AS THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN?

>> YES, SIR. THEY'RE PAYING THIS MONEY BACK, SO THE CITY IS

RECOUPING THE MONEY. >> SO ESSENTIALLY NET ZERO TO THE CITY BUDGET BUT WE'RE FINANCING THEM FOR A YEAR. HAVE WE HAD A LOSS RELATED TO THIS PROGRAM?

>> [INDISCERNIBLE] >> I THINK IT'S A GREAT PROGRAM AND WORTHWHILE. YOU KNOW, I WISH WE COULD AFFORD TO OUTFIT EVERY

[01:20:05]

>> YES, SIR. >> TAKE A MOTION.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED.

>> MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMAN MOORMAN. SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN WEAVER. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 5-0. THANK YOU, COMMANDER.

[EXECUTIVE SESSION]

>> THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. >>> EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE CITY COUNCIL WILL CONVENE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS ARE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION. ANY AND ALL ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IN REGULAR OPEN SESSION. TONIGHT WE'RE ADDRESSING ITEM NUMBER TWO, SECTION 551-72 REAL ESTATE, DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF

>>> ALL RIGHT. WE ARE BACK OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 7:38 P.M. THERE ARE THREE MOTIONS THIS EVENING RESULTING FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION, WHICH WAS REAL ESTATE DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF MIDLOTHIAN. WHO WANTS TO GO FIRST?

>> I MOVE THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE AUTHORIZED TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTIVE AN AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE 0.214 ACRES TRACT OF LAND FOR RIGHT OF WAY AND GENERAL UTILITY EASEMENT BEING LOCATED IN THE SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 43 CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS IN CONSIDERATION OF A PURCHASE PRICE OF $49,575 IN ASSOCIATION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF MCALPIN ROAD PROJECT. THE CITY MANAGER IS FURTHER AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY SUCH ADDITIONAL CLOSING DOCUMENTS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED BY SUCH AGREEMENT AND TITLE COMPANY AS NECESSARY TO CLOSE

THIS TRANSACTION. >> WE HAD A MOTION FROM MAYOR

PRO TEM. IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN WEAVER. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES

5-0. WHO'S NEXT? >> I MOVE THE CITY MANAGER BE AUTHORIZED TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH GARY LEE AND MARTHA SUE SMITH FOR PUBLIC STREET RIGHT OF WAY AND GENERAL UTILITY EASEMENT BEING LOCATED OUT OF THE MARTHA BRENNAN SURVEY ABSTRACT AND A .060-ACRE TRACT OF LAND FOR PERMANENT DRAINAGE EASEMENT LOCATED OUT OF THE MARTHA BRENNAN SURVEY ABSTRACT 43. IN CONSIDERATION OF A PURCHASE PRICE OF $70,000 IN ASSOCIATION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE MCALPIN ROADWAY PROJECT PLUS PAYMENT OF ALL RELATED CLOSING COSTS. THE CITY MANAGER IS FURTHER AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY SUCH AS CLOSING DOCUMENTS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED

BUT SUCH AGREEMENT. >> MOTION MADE AND SECONDED.

PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 5-0. COUNCILMAN MOORMAN?

>> I MOVE THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH JOHN A AND NATALIE D TO PURCHASE A 1.25-ACRE TRACT OF LAND FOR A PUBLIC STREET RIGHT OF WAY AND GENERAL UTILITY EASEMENT BEING LOCATED OUT OF THE JOHN H JONES SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 586 IN CONSIDERATION OF A PURCHASE PRICE OF $35,000 IN ASSOCIATION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE MCALPIN ROADWAY PROJECT PLUS PAYMENT OF ALL RELATED CLOSING COSTS. THE CITY MANAGER IS FURTHER AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY SUCH ADDITIONAL CLOSING DOCUMENTS AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY SUCH AGREEMENT AND THE TITLE COMPANY AS NECESSARY

TO CLOSE THIS TRANSACTION. >> MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMAN MOORMAN. IS THERE A SECOND? MULTIPLE SECONDS. TAKE COUNCILMAN RODGERS' SECOND. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 5-0. NO FURTHER BUSINESS ON THE DOCKET FOR THIS EVENING. WE ARE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.