City Council - Regular Meeting

Welcome, everybody, to the City of Farmers Branch City Council meeting for Tuesday, September 1st. Our first order of business will be our invocation and pledges. And our invocation this evening is going to be led by the Reverend Danielle Kim. And I'm going to invite her to come up, say a few words, introduce yourself, and then you can lead us in prayer.

Thank you, Mayor Lynn. Good evening, Mayor, members of City Council, City staff. and residents of Farmer's Branch, what an honor it is to be with you this evening. I am Reverend Danielle Goon Kim. I am an ordained clergy from the United Methodist Church, and I am appointed as community clergy to Carrollton Farmer's Branch area. And just a little bit about what I do. My role as the community clergy is to serve and desires of our neighbors so that we can co-create a stronger community together. So the Methodist Church kind of works like a Catholic Church in that we do have a bishop, and he or she appoints different clergy to different parish, like military. And instead of appointing me to a parish, I am appointed to this particular geographical area so that I to serve the community in that way. So it is an honor to serve you in this role, and thank you, Mayor, again for your invitation to offer invocation this evening. So why don't we all go to God and pray together this evening. Gracious and eternal Creator, we gather this evening in a spirit of deep gratitude. for the vibrant community of Farmer's Branch, for all who dwell in this beautiful city. We ask for your blessing and guidance upon this city council, Mayor Lin, and every public servant who has dedicated their time and talents to the betterment of this community. Grant these leaders wisdom, clarity, and compassion as they deliberate on the matters before them tonight. May the actions taken here tonight strengthen the foundation of Farmer's Ranch and serve as a beacon of good governance for all of us. In your holy name we pray. Amen. Amen.

If you would, please join me for the Pledge of Allegiance. 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. And now the Texas Pledge. Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one and indivisible. Once again, thank you, Reverend Kim. Appreciate having you. And for everybody else who's here or watching, if you all would like to have your faith leader come and lead our invocation, please get in touch with me. More than welcome to have folks come. any faith, come and lead our invocation at our next council meeting or any future council meeting. So thank you. Next up are items of community interest.

Good evening. My name is Ariel Wallace, communications manager, and here are your items of community interest for the week. Register for the Citizens Police Academy. What really happens on a police call and how are decisions made in the moment? Find out at our Citizens Police Academy starting Thursday, September 24th, where residents will meet officers, explore day-to-day operations, ask questions, and engage in interactive reality-based scenarios using real training equipment. Register now as space is limited. Sign up online at farmersbranchtx.gov slash citizenspoliceacademy. Metro Crest Services Mobile Food Bank on the move. Residents in need can receive assistance from the Metro Crest Services Mobile Food Bank, available on the second Monday of every month at the Bridge Connection, located at 14055 Dennis Lane. The next distribution is scheduled for September 14th between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. Safely dispose of household hazardous waste. The household hazardous waste collection event takes place on September 26th from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. at 13333 Selleck Drive. Residents can drop off unwanted household chemicals, paints, cleaners, and automotive fluids for safe disposal. Review the full list of eligible drop-off items at the city's recycle webpage. Paw Plunge returns to the Frog Pond. Join us for an awesome event with your furry friends on September 12th at 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the Farmer's Branch Frog Pond located at 14032 Hartside Place. Admissions is $8 per dog with the limit of up to two people per dog and all dogs must be accompanied by a handler age 16 or older. Don't miss the chance to make unforgettable memories with your pup. For questions, call us at 972-919-8720 or visit FarmersBridgeTX.gov slash 567 slash aquatics. Spooky Dash community meeting set for September 9th. Residents are invited to attend a community meeting scheduled to discuss race logistics for the affected neighborhoods, volunteer opportunities, and more on September 9th at 5 p.m. at Venue 1842 at the Historical Park. Registration is now open for the family-friendly Spooky Dash 5K and One Mile Fun Run on the city's website at farmersbranchtex.gov slash spookydash. For additional details and updates, visit farmersbranchevents.com. And as always, you can sign up for City E-News at farmersbranchetx.gov or by scanning the QR code on the screen. Have a great evening.

Thank you very much. Next up are public comments. Let me remind everybody, when I call your name, please come up to the podium. You'll have three minutes to speak. There is a... I just said that, three minute time limit for each speaker. All speakers shall comply with the city's rules of decorum and conduct for public hearings. And with that, our first speaker is Renee Berries.

Hello, good evening.

My name is Renee Barris, and I live at 3264 Brencrest Drive. I was born and raised in Farmers Branch, and in 2019, I purchased my childhood home. I returned because this community has always represented safety, familiarity, and a genuine hometown feel and connection. I know the streets, the people, and the culture. Recently, I discovered that the house three doors down from me on an adjacent street is operating as an Airbnb. I became aware of this due to the constant rotation of unfamiliar people and multiple vehicles arriving each week. During the evening walk, I encountered a group of young men gathered in the front yard, revving their car engines so loudly it was deafening. Behavior completely out of character for a quiet neighborhood. Another incident occurred one night around midnight when my ring camera recorded a couple arguing on the corner under the streetlight for ten minutes. They were yelling, pushing each other, stumbling and falling into my yard, and the man eventually threw the woman over his shoulder and walked back into the house. I could hear the commotion through my windows and question whether I needed to call the police. These are not the types of individuals we want cycling through our community or around our children. The property is openly advertised on Airbnb as a party house, featuring disco lights around the pool, a game room, a movie room, etc. The photos show groups of young people partying, a stark contrast to the family-oriented hometown character of Farmer's Branch. I've spoken to Elizabeth about this house, as well as another house on my street that is listed as an Airbnb. She confirmed that short-term rentals are allowed on the adjacent street, but not allowed on my street, which suggests this property is operating in violation of city requirements. My neighbors and I have seen multiple people living there, as well as four to six different cars in the driveway and parked on the street at all times. I strongly encourage further investigation of the house on my street. I am proposing that Farmers Branch eliminate short-term rentals in Farmers Branch entirely. Long-term rentals are not an issue. Tenants who stay six to 12 months or more invest in the community, maintain their homes, and respect the peace and quiet that defines our area. In contrast, the average short-term rental lasts only three to five days. bringing no value, constant turnover, and unpredictable behavior. Short-term visitors spend their money on attractions outside of Farmer's Branch in the short time they are here. Even Farmer's Branch apartments require a minimum of a 12-month lease. Our neighborhoods deserve the same level of protection. I respectfully ask the city to preserve the safety and integrity of Farmer's Branch by removing all short-term rentals and their permits within the Farmer's Branch city limits. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up is David Silver.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members. My name is David Silver. I live on Millwood Circle. I am here to talk about ordinance 4013. That is the ordinance with regard to oversize and other vehicle restrictions, correct? Okay, so I'm not allowed to say this directly to anyone in particular, but it's taken now four and a half years to get this passed. And I think that's, hopefully it will pass tonight. And I think that's a little long. I think that's a lot of long. But I'm very happy that it's gonna happen. I pray that it's going to happen. And I have some questions about it that I really hope somebody will respond to me with the answers to. Okay, so question number one, how do we measure eight feet in width on vehicle and 21 feet in length okay does that mean from hub to hub on a wheel does that mean from the at the back end of the vehicle and or what is on it could it so a boat and or a motor to the to the trailer hitch how is that going to get measured to figure out how these are going to work That is found in B number one. On B number three, it says all points along the public right of way, which means that if it can be seen from the public right of way and it's not covered, then it's a no-no. My question there is, If I look out my window and I look at a neighbor and I see one of these oversized vehicles, am I looking at that vehicle from a public space or a private space? And if I have to look at that vehicle from my window, This is trash, absolute trash. So I want to know how that's going to work. If it's going to work the way I think it's going to work and my window is private, then this code, in my personal opinion, and since I was one of the people who instituted it, It needs to be completely reworked. Then we're going to go down to 3B, which is vegetation. How long do people have for the to plant something to get to six feet tall and become a fence? That needs to be defined as well. The reason I'm complaining about this is this happened to us. Our neighbor was a renter, long term, and put a lot of trailers in the back, they had rats, and we just spent $15,000 to get abated because of their rats over time. And this is not how a longtime citizen should have to deal with their home, their property, their values, and their residents. Thank you very much. Let's try to do better. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up is John Buffer. John Buffer.

John Butler?

Yeah. Thank you. Butler.

Yes, sir, good to see you.

It looked like two Fs, so that's what threw me.

John Butler, 3065 Topaz Lane. I was born and raised in Farmer's Branch, kind of old town Farmer's Branch. I'd like to talk about J2, also the trailers. I do not have a trailer at my house, however, A lot of people on my street do, and I have some issues with this, not only as it's written, but as what the people actually want. I was a member of the Trailer Committee. I believe Roger was there for the last meeting. It was hosted by Terry. Elizabeth, you attended. We also put out a survey, and the results of the survey seemed to state that this was not something that we wanted as a whole. So I'm not really certain why this is being pushed through. I know we use the city of Richardson as our example. However, they have alleys and not easements, a completely different infrastructure so they can park behind their houses without any issues whatsoever. Another thing people talked about were property values. Well, Flower Mound, they don't care. You can do whatever you want. The median home here in Farmer's Branch is 450,000 to 472,000. Flower mound is 635 to 650. So there doesn't seem to be any correlation whatsoever there. Now, Coppell has gone ahead and said no trailers screened, that sort of thing. However, they have an exception for everybody that lives in houses akin to mine. If you are not able to park a trailer in your backyard, then you don't have to. You can have it in your front yard. The sides of my house are very narrow. I don't have an alley. I have an easement. It would not be possible to put any vehicle in my backyard. So I'm kind of speaking on behalf of not only myself, but everybody in Old Farmer's Branch, Rawhide, where I grew up on, further south, that area, they have no access whatsoever, no way to meet these requirements. Additionally, I'd like to go ahead and just kind of take this on as it's written. I'm not sure how many people have read it fully, but I do have a couple of issues with it. B3 is written in a fashion that says no vehicle can park without being screened. It does not say oversized, if we check that out. Also, Ordinance 4013 states width of eight foot is what we're addressing. Well, state law is eight and a half foot. Um, so I'm not sure why we're there. Also, we have 21 foot long. Well, a full size crew cab pickup with an eight foot bed is 22 to 25 feet long. A dually factory pickup is yet again over eight foot. So that's under state legal requirements. Everybody around here, at least everybody in my neighborhood, probably everybody here, we're hardworking people. Some people work with our hands. Some people need tools to do our jobs. I think that outlawing trailers or hiding them from view, as it's not possible for everybody, is not the right decision for this city. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up is Price Chosin.

Good afternoon, evening, Price-Strozen, 2711 Mountview, Farmer's Branch. Just a quick thing. I received the email from the city regarding the budgets, and when I saw the budget, The police budget is more than double that was a little bit taken aback because that's a pretty significant increase and. We all have our priorities, you know, I would have preferred that we scraped together that $80,000 a year to keep open the triple C for something like that. That all sounds like couch change in the. in the police budget. We all want a safe neighborhood. We all support our police officers. They do a great job. I've had nothing but positive interactions with our police department. But with a lot of the I haven't had a chance to dive really into the budget yet. I just got it, and I was just going through, and that was the number that jumped out at me. I've worked on budgets before, just working in different capacities in management. So that was something that kind of stood out. I haven't verified, but someone told me that there's a lot of new technologies, so technologies that are concerning to me as someone who likes to take his walks, be left alone, not be tracked by a camera, like to drive to where I want to drive, not have to worry about my license plate or them people knowing. where I'm going when it's really not their business. People say, if you're not doing anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about. And my response to that, if I'm not doing anything wrong, why do you need to take pictures of my photo of my car? Let me know where I'm going. Again, I'm not from here. I'm from Wisconsin. I'm a political junkie from Wisconsin who follows things very closely. And I will tell you that in Wisconsin, they put up a flock camera next to a gun store. People were going, they were shooting, they were going and buying their handguns and shooting their handguns and doing their constitutional rights. And they were concerned that They were being tracked. Okay, I'm at the gun store. I'm doing what I want to do. And then they found out that there was a flat camera pointed directly at the parking lot of this legal business. So that's something that I'm concerned with. With anything that goes into the police department, we need to know what's going on with this data. How long is this data being saved? How long is this data, how is this data being used? Is this data being wiped? Is it being stored? I believe that that's another thing that the whole data center argument is. If you have this giant data center, are you the consumer or are you the product? That's what I'd say. Thank you. Thank you.

That is all the speakers that I have for this evening. So we will move on to our consent agenda. There are two changes to the consent agenda. Item J5 will move to regular agenda and become L7. And item J2 will move to regular agenda and become L8. So with that,

Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we approve the consent agenda, less items J2 and J5. I second.

Thank you. A motion and a second. If you would, please indicate your vote. Motion passes. Thank you very much. So next up will be our regular agenda items. Item L1, consider adopting ordinance number 4011, approving an annual update of the service and assessment plan and assessment role for the Mercer Crossing Public Improvement District pursuant to Chapter 372 of the Texas Local Government Code and take appropriate action.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council members. My name is Jay Patel. I'm the Finance Director for the City, and the item before you today is our annual state-required update to our service and assessment plan for the Mercer Crossing Performance Improvement District, otherwise known as the Mercer Crossing PID. This district was established by council in 2017 to ultimately stimulate economic development within the area. The developer for the project, Centurion, invested $44.5 million in approved reimbursable agreements towards the development, which are to be paid by assessments over time through property owners within that district. At this time, I'll introduce Mark Furman with Municap, who is our PID administrator, who will walk us through an update to the project's budget, as well as the assessments being applied to property owners for the upcoming year. Upon completion of Mark's presentation, both he and I will be available for any questions you all may have. And with that, I'll turn it over to Mark.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Mark Furman. I'm a vice president with Municap. Here to present and answer any questions about the service and assessment plan update for the Mercer Crossing PID.

Mark, where's your office address?

Oh, sorry. We're at 600 East John Carpenter Freeway in Irvin. Thank you. You're welcome. This is a routine update pursuant to Chapter 372 of Texas Local Government Code. This... updates three main pieces of information for the PID. First is the authorized improvement budget for the PID. So that's the infrastructure being financed by those assessments we're collecting from property owners. It updates the budgets for the PID, so that's debt service and administrative expenses for the coming assessment year. And then we allocate those annual budgets across each property that benefits from the public infrastructure. So this first slide here shows the updated authorized improvement budget for the initial infrastructure that was financed by the PID. If you were here last year, this budget will look very familiar. There's been no changes since the infrastructure has been completed for some time. Now the city also entered into a reimbursement agreement for an additional, assessment levy. So this is the townhome site area. So the city levied additional assessments and these assessments financed infrastructure specific to these 69 townhome lots. That infrastructure is also completed and has been completed for a couple of years now. This is the annual budget for the initial assessments and the townhome site assessments. So up top, we have the initial assessments. You'll see there's a decrease of about $100,000 compared to last year. That's largely as a result of an increased TERS credit. So MUNICAP is the Public Improvement District Administrator. We are also the administrator Farmers Branch TERS number three. So TERS number three shares the same properties as the PID. The way the TERS works is the city has committed to use a portion of the incremental city property taxes collected from each individual property as an offset on their PID annual installments the following year. So that $1.877 million figure you see there is as a result of 2025 city property taxes. The townhome site assessment budget is pretty similar to last year with just a very slight increase. You'll see a TERS line item there. The TERS credit, it's not that these properties in the townhome site area don't have a TERS credit. It's that those properties also have an initial assessment. So the TERS credit is tied to that initial assessment. So they are also benefiting from the TERS. And lastly, here we have how those annual installments are allocated to each individual property within the PID. We have that separated into the townhome site, the Kensington addition and non-Kensington addition. For the largest lot class, those 60 foot lots, that's about a $4 increase from last year. And these are the gross annual installments. They do not include the tourist credit since those tourist credits are property specific based on what each individual property earned, we wouldn't be able to provide that in a summary table. So next steps, should council approve this ordinance and report, is we would send the assessment roll over to Utility Tax Service, who bills and collects the pit annual installments, and then we'd also assist the city with recording the SAP update and ordinance in Dallas County Records, which is a requirement. Happy to answer any questions about the report.

Thank you very much. You're welcome. I'm just gonna start down here at my right, Councilman Gonzales.

Nothing for me. Thank you, Mark.

Councilman Bennett.

Nothing for me. Thank you.

Councilman Reed. Nothing here. Councilwoman Villafranca.

Thanks for the information. Appreciate you.

Councilman Neal. Nothing, Mayor. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay.

Well, thank you very much, Mark. You're welcome. This item is marked for action.

All right, Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve Ordinance 4011. Second.

Thank you. We have a motion and a second. If you would, please indicate your vote. Motion passes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next up is item L2, consider approving resolution 2026-115, authorizing an administrative services agreement with UMR Incorporated for medical plan administration services for three years and increasing the city's self-funded health plan budget by $600,000 and take appropriate action.

All right, good evening, Mayor and Council. Jeffrey Ross, Director of Human Resources. It's good to see everybody. So we're bringing this discussion back. We came two or three weeks ago with some initial information about what we were looking at after the results of an RFP for renewing or awarding our medical and pharmacy administrator contracts. and now we're bringing back kind of the final piece to you. We are still moving towards the end of our plan design processes, where we're looking at what benefits are gonna look like in the next year, open enrollment will be starting next month, so this is really kind of that last puzzle piece that we have that we need, that we need to figure out the final stages of that. So a lot of the information that's in here, I kind of covered last time, so I'm not going to go through it all again. This is the same information we brought to you the last time about how our self-funded health plan works. And just the quick 30 second highlights is a self-funded health plan. What we put into it, it funds three primary things. That's claims incurred for both medical and pharmacy expenses, as well as our stop loss insurance. Just a quick overview of the plan and a reminder that with the way the plan is set up, it's called a high deductible health plan. That means that employees have to spend at least $2,000 or $4,000 based on the level of coverage that they have before the city starts paying anything for this plan. Before we pay any claims incurred at all, employees have that responsibility. Right now, we currently pay somewhere between... $74 to $404 a month out of each paycheck. I'm sorry, yeah, that's out of basically two paychecks a month. The other thing I would highlight on this one is down in the bottom right corner of this table, we do have very high enrollment on our plan. So between the general employees, the police employees, and fire staff, we do have pretty significantly high enrollment on this plan. This is the information that we brought to you last time about the vendors. I'm keeping it strictly to the ones for consideration. So we are proposing consideration of transferring to Serve URX for pharmacy administration needs and retaining UMR for a three-year agreement for both. This will, looking at our plan spins and trends data, we are looking in the next year and then there forward trends that are indicating that we're going to need somewhere around $600,000 increase to the self-funded plan budget to be able to maintain the self-funding for the plan. So the information here that we received back from the RFP is highlighted, both for Serv-U-RX and the savings that we can anticipate reasonably from them, along with some of the savings from medical, which would be primarily on third party administration fees and information such as that. So some new information I kind of want to just bring back to the front as we do get questions about it. split between what essentially the city pays for to maintain the plan and what the employees pay to maintain the plan, to fund the plan. So what that looks like right now, you can see in the second column there, that's per paycheck. The first number is what comes out of the employee's paycheck. The second number is what comes out from the city every pay period. And broken down in that third column there, traditionally you can see what the split is here between that total funding between what employees put in and the city puts in. Traditionally, this number for the longest time really kind of has been the target, the market target has been around an 80-20 split between those numbers there, where the employers take it about 80% of that cost and employees are shouldering about 20% of that cost. So currently, we're a little bit above that right now. And I do want to also note that in January of 2025, just last year, we did increase the employee rates somewhere between 15.5% to 32% as part of the update that we had in the previous year. So you can see in the final column there, the absorption of the $600,000, what our new rates look like with that $600,000 addition. And just looking kind of out there at the market, when I say it's traditionally been somewhere around 80-20, over really the last five years, five to six years, we've noticed a trend change in the Metroplex. And really with... a lot of different cities where the cities are becoming a little more shouldering of that cost of it. And we see a shift kind of away from that 80-20 and see cities start to take on a little bit more of that cost. So looking at some of the cities surrounding us that have some of the same type of plan, I've only compared the HDHP plan, I haven't compared other types of plans. that we don't have, we are paying, city employees do pay higher for their share than other cities comparably. So I just wanted to kind of bring that information forward about it, just so that you can have it as part of the consideration. And I'm happy to take any questions. So L2 and L3, the item immediately following this, L3 is the pharmacy item, but they both share the same presentation and they both share the same kind of discussion points. But I can answer questions about either one, but they do need separate action as they are two uniquely distinct resolutions. So with that, I'm happy to take any questions.

Thank you very much.

Anything else we need to know about L3? It's pretty much all the same information. I can answer any questions about that one as well.

All right. Well, we'll let the council deal with that. So Councilman Gonzalez.

So they're going to be paying a little more, but we're having a new pharmacy and a different I mean, sorry. Yes, a new pharmacy and the same medical.

Correct. The pharmacy is going to be changing and there will be a little bit of disruption with that for people who have current prescriptions. They'll basically just have to give their new prescription or the new pharmacy information to wherever they go, you know, Walgreens, CVS, wherever. They'll have to give that information so they can continue filling their prescriptions. On the medical side, nothing would change. So they don't have to do anything new with their doctor, with what they're already doing, seeking care. It all stays the same.

OK, thank you. Councilman Bennett on the prescription side. So are there any changes in the list of what is covered in the formulary?

So that's something that we're still looking here at plan design. One of the changes that we are making and it's I'll highlight it on this slide. So looking at something called biosimilars. So these are going to be drugs that are biologically similar to the name brand of a drug. And it's a little bit different than a generic, because a generic could be made for almost anything. But a biosimilar is made using actual living human cells to replicate the exact formula of the higher cost drug. So switching to these biosimilars is going to save money, but they will work the same. So if there is a change to the pharmacy on the types of drugs, those categories of drugs are still covered, but we're going to default the plan prescriptions to the biosimilars first.

So the staff will not be stuck paying for prescriptions that they've had for years that has been covered for a chronic condition?

Right. None of the drugs, we're not looking at changing any of those drugs. The only thing that if we are carving anything out, it's going to be the GLP-1 drugs, which is also covered on here. The GLP-1 drugs, which have been traditionally used for diabetic weight loss management, are now used for routine weight loss management purposes. And that's something that we're not necessarily going to cover under the plan. We will still continue to cover it for medically necessary and diabetic weight loss management purposes.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Councilman Reid. Nothing for me. Councilman Villafranca.

So this is the winner, Jeff. This is what's in the best interest of all of the staff, then, is the one that you think is the right one.

This is based on everything that we have, based on the information back from the RFQ, based on feedback we've received from employees. This is going to be the best route for us to go for now.

So prescriptions will not increase? Did I understand that correctly?

No, so I can't talk about the price of prescriptions because we don't necessarily control that. We're not looking to make changes to what drugs are covered under the plan, with the exception of kind of the two things that I just talked about. Nothing else on the plan, you know, if somebody is getting this drug today, then with the new vendor, the same drugs will be available. As far as how much they will cost is always going to be something that's dependent on factors we unfortunately have no influence over.

And I remember last time you talked to us, you talked about having sort of more education so people can take full advantage. So I hope you'll be working on that so people can save on there.

It's part of our strategy.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Councilman Neal. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Jeff. This impacts all the employees that utilize the plan?

Everyone who's on the plan, yes.

And about how many employees total would you say that is, roundabout numbers? Roundabout 380.

About 380?

Yes, sir. Okay. So we're talking about $600,000 here. My question is, is the $600,000 for the total three-year period or is it $600,000 for each of the three years?

It would not be for each of the three years. So the $600,000 is what we're looking at to be able to... pay the bills that are gonna come in, keep the lights on.

So if I averaged it out, I could say 200,000 for the next three years, right?

Around, maybe, yes. With a self-funded health plan, it's always going to be variable based on what happens in the plan during that year, high-cost claims, things like that. But if adjustment is needed, that's something that we're going to work on throughout the year. We're gonna monitor it quarterly. We're gonna have the finance team sit in with our broker so that we can make sure that we're managing the plan in a in a facility so this this amount is not sort of locked in for three years or 600 000 is what we're asking for an increase to the budget now okay if something changes in the market and the the price of of medical care just across the board goes up x percent we would have to look at our plan and can it still maintain can it absorb those costs do we need to look at adding additional funding to it. But from the discussions we've had and from what we're looking at with TRNS and our traditional, how our plan has worked and the costs for it, the 600K is expected to take us through the three years.

And so how does this, I know you had the slide there showing the percentages that employees pay versus what the city pays. Is the total amount more than 600 and the employees are picking up that other extra or what's the breakdown here?

Sure. So from the beginning when we started building this into the budget back in February, we have built it kind of around the frame of at the time we started building it, we were building around the frame of employees weren't going to be receiving a compensation increase. Right. So in order to kind of avoid hitting them with a double whammy of no raise plus your insurance rates going up, from the beginning we've been planning the 600,000 addition to be absorbed by the city. And where we're making some of the trade off for that is that there's a number of different ways to share cost among the plan. Increasing paycheck contributions that employees pay to fund the plan is one method of cost sharing. But if we want something that's going to grow with the plan, that comes from plan design changes. And we are looking at some plan design changes. exploring and modeling what those might look like, and they do save more money on the plan overall, and they also grow with the plan as more claims come in. It's designed to save the city additional money with increased utilization of the plan, whereas just increase in paycheck contributions is basically a one-time shot of money, and the plan can still go and do whatever it's going to do with with no buffer.

So are they going to have an increase in contribution to facilitate this component of the $600,000?

That's not what we've built in to this point. What we are looking at as a trade-off instead is to look at the plan design changes that would essentially, if we made some changes to say the out-of-pocket maximum, increasing that amount. If we made changes to the coinsurance to where they're paying maybe 10% more on that coinsurance, That would absorb more money on the actual cost driver of the plan, which is claims incurred, and it would end up saving the city additional funds somewhere in the neighborhood.

So that's some plan adjustments that you're working on or considering?

Plan adjustments that we're looking at, modeling, seeing what that can save us. Yes, sir.

Okay. All right. Yeah, that's all I have. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you.

Alrighty, thank you. Any other comments from council? Seeing none, we're going to vote on these two things individually. So if somebody would like to make a motion on L2.

Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve item R2026-115. I second.

Thank you. We have motion and second. If you would, please indicate your vote. Motion passes. Thank you very much.

Mr. Mayor, make a motion that we approve item R2026-116.

I second. Thank you. Motion and a second. Again, if you would, please indicate your vote. Motion passes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Next up is item L4. Consider approving Resolution 2026-117, establishing the legislative platform for the City of Farmers Branch for the upcoming 90th legislative session and take appropriate action.

Hello, Mayor, Council, Erin Flores, Senior Management Analyst, and with me is Management Analyst Maddie Cooper. She has also helped a lot with research needed for this legislative platform, so I have her here just in case. So tonight we're going to talk about the proposed platform for the 90th legislative session. As you know, these issues can move very quickly in the legislative session, so staff has been researching, working, talking with the school district, other important stakeholders, and gathering feedback from the city council to put together this proposed legislative platform for council's consideration. So our overarching themes that we're proposing is gonna be local control, which is gonna be the items that we wanna promote. We wanna make sure that our city can retain as much local authority as possible. And we want to oppose anything that might take away that authority for us to do what we need to do as a city. We want to promote items that enhance our financial stability. We want to make sure that those items that help with our funding for essential services are protected, and we want to defend any issues that might arise that might threaten that. And then we also want to support our public safety and infrastructure. Any items that are coming up in this legislative session that would support the funding for that, we want to make sure that we're promoting that. And then we also want to support items that would help us with our redevelopment goals, economic development, bringing new businesses in. We want to make sure that we're defending those priorities. So here are our city positions. So some of our proactive items, we want to make sure, like I said, our economic development tools are protected. And we also want to make sure that our transportation items are being promoted as far as safety, equitable governance, excuse me, that's a hard word, equitable governance related to DART is protected. And then here in the middle, you see our defensive priorities. These are items that have routinely come up in legislative sessions. We wanna make sure that we're taking a defensive stance when it comes to these items. And then over on the far right, you'll see the items that we're going to be continuously monitoring. And if there's something that comes up that's of concern, we wanna be able to act quickly and defend our priorities. And that is it, council. We're here for any questions. The resolution that you have before you tonight, this would approve our legislative platform, which includes our council's direction and identified priorities. And also, we have, in this year's budget, we budgeted for a consultant for items that are gonna be important for us as a city, that we can use them to leverage for transportation items, funding items, local authority, things that are very important to us as a city, and we're gonna be using those resources as needed. And I'm here for any questions.

Thank you. Council Member Natales.

No questions for me, Erin, but thank you. I think you guys have some great themes on there. Appreciate it.

Councilman Benn.

I've sat through no less than at least five updates in the last two months. Even today, we sat through one. So this is a great item. I appreciate it. Thank you for all of your work.

Thank you. Councilman Reid. Yeah, it hits all the hot buttons that were concerns of mine. So I appreciate it's a very comprehensive list. And I look forward to see what the consultant has to say as well.

Yes.

Council Member de Villafranca.

Thank you. Are you able to tell me off the top of your head how much was budgeted for the consultant slash lobbies?

I will check to be sure. I'm pretty sure it was $100,000, but I'll check to be sure.

And is there any one particular topic that he'll be zoning in on or?

So we actually have, there are two consultants that we have been looking into based on the council's direction as far as what our priorities are. One is just general overall for anything that might be an issue for us, and one is specifically related to transportation.

Fantastic. Is it too late to add anything? just depending on what it is we could definitely look into it I think it's important to speak to the legislature about people that come to our city and establish residency when they do not live here nor have any intention of living here simply by skirting the system and I don't know if that's something that the consultants would be able to speak to to the ledge about

Okay, I'm not sure. If you could talk with Ben a little bit more about that and we'll kind of see exactly what that's about. Thank you.

Councilman Neal? Nothing, thank you. Thank you, Erin. Okay.

Aaron I do have one thing that I would like to specifically call out and that is regarding sales tax and the Opposition of changing the sales tax from point of origination appointed destination, okay, so I think we need to be very Deliberate on spelling that out, okay? That's if council approves Morgan, well, he doesn't speak for Morgan Meyer. Morgan Meyer has brought this up in three sessions previously, and I have no reason not to believe he's going to try again. So if he does, I just want to make sure that we're on record opposing this. Right. You know, we've already established that this... that would affect our city about five to $7 million loss in sales tax on an annual basis. Coppell, they would lose $30 million a year in sales tax if that happens. So there are cities that are opposing this and as mayors, we all talk about it. So I just wanna make sure that we don't let that slip by.

Okay, so if all of council agrees, we could add that to the council directives that are in the memorandum. That's part of this item, and so let's make sure it's documented.

Good, good, good, good, good, okay.

Okay.

All right.

It does need action.

Okay, so yes, this item is marked for action, so. Mayor. Hold on.

Well, if the council is going to be amending the ordinance, then that needs to be stated in the actual motion itself.

I'm sorry, David. For the resolution, the memorandum is actually not part of the resolution. It's a standalone resolution.

So then staff can make that change all by itself.

Right.

Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve item R2026-117.

I'll second.

Thank you. We have a motion and a second. If you would, please indicate your vote. Motion passes, thank you very much.

Thank you.

All right. Next up is item L5, receive an update regarding the issuance of a request for qualifications for a city's legal services. I'd like to request that we table this item this evening if council sees fit.

May I make a motion, Mayor?

You may.

I'd like to make a motion to table L5 and L6.

Is there a second?

I'd like to amend the motion if you're receptive to tabling it for a period of four months. If that is an acceptable amendment, then I would second the motion.

I accept the modification.

Okay. So we have a motion and a second with a friendly amendment. Is there any discussion? Councilman Gonzalez.

I would like to keep it on the agenda and discuss it.

Councilman Bennett. Councilman Reed. Councilman Reed.

I'm torn on this one.

Do we need to take a break? Do we need to take a break?

Yeah, can we take a ten-minute break? Or a five-minute break?

We're going to take a ten-minute break. If you have any discussion, we'll go in the city manager's conference room. bearing with us so we have a motion and wait as part of discussion oh sorry okay all right thank you for bearing with us we have a motion and a second to motion is the table with an amendment for a four month period that was accepted so we're Having discussion.

Okay, I just want to confirm. We're not entertaining the motion at this second. We're still in discussion. With that, I would like to call an executive session to further discuss.

You would say again?

Can I do that?

I'm trying to figure out how to do it. We can call an impromptu executive session for legal advice, because if you have a caveat to do with the bill of the motion, it would be to postpone the consideration of the motion to reopen the executive session that we had. We just called it. Yeah, I say we just vote on the current motion.

And then if we need to do executive session after that, we can continue the executive session from D1 after the vote. That'd be the simplest way.

Point of order, Mayor. The last discussion we had before the 10-minute break was that a councilwoman from District 2 wanted to hear Councilman Reid's thoughts.

And my thoughts are we go to the vote. Calling the question. Thank you. It ends discussion.

Calling the question is effectively a motion to end debate. When someone calls the question and makes that motion, it has to be seconded and voted on by a two-thirds majority under Robert Schwartz.

Thanks, David. I believe there was a motion and a second. And then there was discussion. And now I believe Councilman Reed is wanting that to go to a vote, as he called the...

Councilman, he called the question. There's been a motion. The motion has been seconded. In lieu of debate, Councilman Reid has called the question.

Yes, exactly.

Which means the motion to end debate.

I understand that.

That has to be seconded.

I second to end the debate.

It requires a two-thirds majority vote. All in favor of ending the discussion?

So we're voting to end discussion, correct?

This is just the end discussion.

Voting to end the discussion.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.

SO THE MOTION DOES NOT PASS TO END DISCUSSION SO WE ARE BACK ON DISCUSSION. COUNCILMAN NEAL?

YES, I DID WANT TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS REGARDING THE MOTION EARLIER TONIGHT. We're in an executive session, and there were some items and issues discussed during that time that I feel need additional time for any possible resolution. So I'm trying to amend this motion in such that we can allow more time for those concerns that were presented to be addressed and are resolved, and if they're not resolved in a three or four month period, then I think we should reconsider this item. So that's one comment. Second thing, I'd just like to make note and go on record and express my objections to the conversations that were occurring during the break time regarding this issue.

Go ahead.

Mayor, I would like to just let all of our residents know exactly what is going on. There was an email that Councilwoman from District 2 sent out and you nor Councilman Neal nor I were privy to see it until this evening with 15 points indicating why the Councilwoman from District 2 would like to have, you know, make changes I just want to point out very clearly, and even though it is upsetting, it is upsetting to me too, to say that there is a shadow government. This is another instance of the power of three. This is the voting majority. I don't know whether or not this is illegal, but certainly I believe that this is unethical. I don't think that it's appropriate for a voting majority to be able to submit points without the rest of the council being made aware of things. In any job, in any job, you would give someone an opportunity to make any corrections if there were any corrections to be made. And I feel very strongly that this is inappropriate and that this should more than be tabled. I think it should be dismissed, but at the very least, it should be tabled for four months.

I'd like to remind the councilwoman that there's been a couple of occasions when she wanted to participate or did participate in, as we call the power of three, when the topic was in alignment with what she wanted to see happen. But now that it's something that's not in alignment with what she wants to see happen. I'd like to call a point avoider here that's off topic from this motion. I disagree. I'm responding to the comments that were made.

Councilman, go ahead and finish your point.

Thank you. Thank you. So I just wanted to bring that up. So now at this point, I have no more, nothing to discuss regarding the motion. Vote on the motion.

I just have a comment to what Mr. Neal said over there. Some of these concerns are concerns that have happened. It's been a buildup. It's not a random, I think I'm going to type up an email today. And you won't know because we can't speak to more than three people. So you're not going to know, you're not going to have that email. Again, but this shadow government that we're in, you know, that's what we like to do.

I'm just trying to offer an opportunity for this council to have some time to work through those issues. I realize there may have been some concerns here recently. I'm just trying to give us some additional time here before we move into something as drastic as this might be. That's all.

So, council, if you'll indulge me, I would like, I too would like, to ask the Council to consider allowing some time. Ladies and gentlemen, this Council has a number of issues. It's no secret, and I don't want this necessarily to come out tonight, but there is dysfunction on the council and while we are trying to get to a better place, I believe it's important that we do have the benefit of a knowledgeable and experienced city attorney. Does everybody do everything perfect? I certainly do not. Nor do I believe everybody else does. I think having a cooling off period would be beneficial to the city. There is a tremendous amount of institutional knowledge that is maintained by the law firm that has represented us for I don't know how many years. And I would just like to ask the council to consider tabling this issue as Councilman Neal suggested for four months since we just got a letter or a copy of what are our issues and there may be some that are of merit and there may be some that are just singular in nature to one person. But let us have the opportunity to do a deeper dive and review them and at the same time, work towards what we are hiring a consultant to try to help us with, which is to get back on track so folks can have respectful dialogue without possible violence, have meaningful discussion, and taking care of the business of moving the city forward instead of the infighting that has been going on on the council. Everybody shares in it and we should all be working to try to end it. And I hope that you'll consider that in your vote because the alternative is putting the city in a very precarious position. You don't just replace a city attorney overnight. So I would like to see us do what we're supposed to do, which is to work through issues and have constructive dialogue to get us to a better point. Thank you. So with that, I'll entertain a motion. We have a motion. Okay, was it seconded? I can't remember. Yes, it was seconded. OK, so we have motion second. Any more discussion?

I just want to make one final comment. We are here as city council persons to do what is in the best interest of the city, not our own best interest, not the interest of, you know, my best friend. What is in the best interest of the city? and the institutional knowledge that we have, the word has gotten out about City of Farmers Branch, and I do not see how we are going to be able to hire someone as competent as David Berman and his firm based on what has been going on here. No one is going to come to work here.

Thank you. Any other comments? All right, we do have a motion and a second.

I was going to make a comment. It is so easy to say that you want to table this when he has been answering y'all's emails and answering your phone calls, but when I'm not getting a response back, I should just let it go and be like, oh, I'm sorry, he forgot. But when he's taking me off emails instead of answering me, that's not what our city's paying for. He is all of our attorney, not just you two. And when our residents are going on social media and posting comments that they can tell that our city attorney is not giving us good legal advice, that is not what our residents are paying for.

Councilman I would remind you our residents are not city attorneys and men most of them don't know the law I the city attorney serves all the council and I believe he acknowledged earlier that if he Did not respond to you he apologized for that but the supers the city attorney doesn't super serve me or anybody else that I know of. There are people that have made inquiries to the attorney and probably some more than others. We thought that we had corrected this situation once before when Nicole Carr was here and because we did have a bad situation with the city attorney at that time, but I think this council needs to remember at one time they voted and agreed to work all issues first through the city manager. That is our employee. And then if it needs to be escalated to the next level, then things could go to the city attorney. The city attorney has already said you could call him any time you want, but... I think that's part of the problem is we need to make sure our contractors have lives and can live their life also. So again, I'm asking you for consideration so we can have a time, a period of cooling off. And I don't believe that's unreasonable to ask in this situation. We do have a motion.

Just a final comment. I've made a call to Mr. Berman last week. He hasn't returned my call yet, but he doesn't serve just me, and that's not a reason to fire somebody. We have to give people grace.

Yeah. So with that, the motion seconded. If you would, please indicate your vote. Motion does not pass.

Okay, Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we reopen Executive Session Item D1.

Do we want to take care of the two citizen events first? That way we can take five and... Sure. Would you accept that?

Yeah, so I'll make a motion that we entertain J5 and J2 prior to reentering executive session.

All right, so we will continue at the moment. Oh, yeah, we do. Is there a second?

I'll second.

Okay, all in favor of moving forward with J5 and J2?

Mayor, could you repeat the motion, please?

The motion is to move forward with items J5 and J2 first before we have executive session, then we'll come back to executive session last. Can we just do a show of hands?

All right, so because this is simply changing the order of the agenda and reopening an item that we've already talked about, the mayor can make the judgment call to go ahead and tell you all that we're doing it, subject to a point of order to reject the proposal that he's making. So we don't really need a motion. You can if you want, but if the mayor wants to do it, then you all can call a point of order and object. Otherwise, we're going to do it.

I understand.

Mayor Pro Tem is recommending to the mayor that we reconvene or reopen the executive session. But before we reopen the executive session, I believe, and you've got to say that this is okay, we're also going to discuss as a prerequisite the consent agenda items that were moved into open session.

That is of course subject to a point of order by any council member who objects Yes, so if you if we want to go to executive session I'm happy to do that, but I would like to have the two Consent agenda items that were moved to regular agenda first that way As a courtesy to our audience all right Good with that okay, so I First up is item J5, which is consider approving resolution 2026-100, authorizing the city manager to execute a contract with American Traffic Construction LLC for construction of a Valley View Lane and Mercer Parkway intersection improvements in the amount of $226,104 and take appropriate action.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Council. How's everyone doing this afternoon? My name is Corey Lawson, Public Works Director. I would like to present the construction of Valley View Mercer Parkway for your consideration. As you know, Council in 2023 directed staff to engage with TxDOT to try to find funding for this project. TxDOT subsequently approved that funding. In 2024, staff reengaged council to get a contract with Kimberly Horn, which we did. After we completed that design, took it out to bid, we got six bids. And the lowest responsive bidder was American Traffic Construction LLC in the amount of $226,103.50. We took that information back to TxDOT, make sure they concurred with the contractor, and they did. With that, that brings us to today, re-engaging council to see if we can move forward with construction with that specific contractor. What this construction will do, it will enhance our pedestrian safety in that area. It will actually move forward with all the enhancements of a pedestrian crosswalk, all traffic improvements, some ADA ramps, pedestrian movement going east and west, in addition to north and south, which will connect the trail to the preserve for pedestrians. And with that, I will take any questions from council.

Thank you. Councilman Neal, you had asked for this.

Actually, I did.

Who?

I did.

Oh, Councilman Reid, I'm sorry.

Thank you very much. I appreciate that. My primary reason for taking it off consent agenda, I just wanted people to know those... at home or who will view the recording or here in the audience just to realize what it was. We're enhancing the intersection of Valley View and Mercer, like you said, because we have that walk that's currently under construction and connecting that to the nature preserve. So I just wanted to let folks know exactly what the project was, why we're doing it, And that's it.

Yes, sir.

Any other comments, questions? Okay, this item is marked for action.

Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve item R2026-100.

I'll second.

We have a motion to second. If you would, please indicate your vote. Motion passes. Thank you. Next up is item J2. Consider adopting ordinance number 4013, authorizing an amendment to the city's code of ordinances related to parking regulations for oversized vehicles in residential areas and take appropriate actions.

Good evening, Mayor, Council Members. My name is Tara Bradley with Community Service in the Planning Department. And also for this item tonight, I will have our Code Enforcement Manager with Community Service, Barry Boyd, with me as well to address any additional questions you may have. But for tonight, we're bringing this item back for Ordinance 4013. We did review this through a study session on August 18th, and so this evening we're bringing back forward the ordinance for approval. Just to provide just an overview of last time, it did provide the definition of what an oversized vehicle will be and also will entail the proposed amendments for these issues prohibiting oversized vehicles over 8 feet width or 21 feet in length on residential property unless fully screened inside a rear yard. And then also prohibiting vehicles that exceed 10,000 pound towing capacity or gross vehicle weight Rating excluding non-commercial vehicles and providing also a 12-month grace period to allow residents to comply with this item So also with this last meeting was acid home-based businesses would not be able to would not comply with this, they will be able to comply as long as they meet the requirements within this code as well. So tonight, if approved, staff will distribute updated regulations through multiple communication channels, and Code Enforcement Division will work directly with residents throughout the 12 month grace period to educate, monitor oversized vehicles, parking, and support compliance. So at this time, their staff, at this time, It's on the table for adoption of this ordinance. And staff is available to answer any questions you have.

Very good. Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzalez.

It was Bennett.

Oh, that's okay. I'd like to hear from council.

Okay. Councilwoman.

So last time we actually asked if before you brought it back, if you could have some ideas on how you were going to be able to help the the residents before this was implemented. So have you guys done any research into that?

Research into it? Through this process, it could be an opportunity to hear what residents may need assistance with to make sure that we're meeting their needs. Within this, there was not exactly items that we have been able to research within the timeframe prior to make a confirmation of what needs to be done.

Okay. And then is it in accordance with the state law?

I mean, the eight foot, the eight and a half foot? That one, I would need to do a little bit more research on that. Right now, the code speaks to farmer's branch. But we don't supersede state law? Not this time, no. Whichever one is stricter.

All right. The reason I asked for it to be pulled was very specifically... I wanted to know if you guys had done any research as to what had been requested for actually helping the residents because we are an older community. They don't have access to their, you know, there's not really alleys. There's the side yards are minimal. So I understand the need for it. I do. But how are you going to help them before we punish them? And I know we promised a 12 month grace period, but 12 months from, from when, and you know, so, my experience, four years here, in 12 months, are we gonna be scrambling to figure that component out before we vote on that? You know, kind of like with the garage conversion, you know, how that kept moving on because we hadn't helped people, we hadn't, I don't know, communicated, whatever. And I know that we had, I know that staff had. It's just, you know, instead of finding us at the end of the road, Pivoting I wanted to be more clear on the front end Correct.

Okay.

That was all.

Thank you Oh, I wanted to hear from my colleagues here on council first if you have any thoughts I

Well, for me, as was pointed out earlier, we've been kicking this can down the road for four and a half years. We've got something in front of us that's functional. Is it perfect? No. But with 12 months of lead time, we can make adjustments as they come up. So my consideration would be to move forward with it, take feedback that was provided earlier from others and see what we can do to incorporate it as a, almost like a dynamic ordinance until we finish up the 12 months.

Councilman Villafranca.

No additional questions, thank you.

Councilman Neill?

Just for clarification, this is L7?

This is item J2, which is L8.

L8, okay, L8. Yeah, no, I would concur with Councilman Reed. This has been under discussion for many years. multiple or at least a task force city staff has worked on it over and over repeatedly so I and much like the garage program I think we gave that was a 12 months and then we extended it another six months and I wouldn't expect this to be any different than that certainly we may have to make some adjustments or additional help after the 12 months I don't know where that'll be but I just think it might be worth moving forward here with L8. So with that, I would move to...

Sorry, I didn't get to make my comments.

I'm sorry.

No, it's okay. Sorry, I passed it over to Tina since she's the one that took it out from consent. I also wanted to know, like the resident mentioned about the state law, also about the vegetation, about how long you're going to give them for that to grow. and not because we're a shadow government, but because we do have the two older neighborhoods, my concern is still they do not fit in our neighborhoods, but some residents still have them. You know, they need it for work. So I had asked if it was possible, if they have a single driveway, can we at least ask them to make it a double to reduce the amount of cars that they have on the street? if that's a possibility. If we can find a little more common ground there for those, our older neighborhood that we have, then I'd be willing to move forward once we get more information on how to help those residents.

Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to approve ordinance 4013 as presented.

I second.

Thank you, we have a motion and a second. If you would please indicate your vote. Motion passes. Thank you. With that, there was no action out of earlier executive session, but we are going to go back into executive session at this time. So we will recess to the city manager's conference room.

Karen, do you want to just raise your hands on this one?