City Council - Regular Meeting

But if everyone will silence their cell phones and please take their seat. We're getting ready to start the meeting. All righty. All right. At 6 o'clock p.m. I'm going to call the council to order. Please rise for the invocation and pledge of allegiance. Councilman Easley is going to have our prayer. We'll bow our heads. Dear heavenly father, we come to you this evening looking for wisdom. I pray that you would give each and every one of us the thoughts and the mentality to make the right decisions for the best interests of the city of King. May everything we do bring glory to you, glory to our citizens. 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. And now the Texas flaggis.

Y'all may be seated. I want to thank everyone for being here tonight. It is September 4, 2025. I just have one announcement just to let everyone know. September 16 is National Voter Registration Day. Volunteers will be here at city hall from 10:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. to get residents registered or to update their registration. Otherwise, forms are available in the lobby. October 6 is the last day to register to vote to participate in the November 4 election. There are several Texas constitutional amendments on the ballot. All right. At this time, I have a proclamation to present and I believe I have Ernest Aaron here, chairman of the Texas Koba Marin community and other leadership of the TKMC. If you will meet me at the podium. stand right here. That's fine. I'm not gonna present them to you. Want to stand here beside me. All right. All right. So, this is a city of teen proclamation. I'm going to go ahead and read it and then I'll hand it to you and if they want to take a picture. Whereas the United States of America is a vibrant nation strengthened by the diverse cultures, traditions, and contributions of its many ethnic communities. And whereas the Marshall community has enriched our city with its unique history, culture, and achievements since their settling in Johnson County in the 1980s in search of better education, health care, and employment opportunities. And whereas the month of September brings the citizens of Keen in

opportunity to honor and celebrate the invaluable contributions of Marshall Americans to our collective society. And whereas members of the Marshall community have made significant contributions to student enrichment by lending their heritage and principles to Keen ISD for development of programs that instill the principles of community and citizenship. And whereas their rich cultural heritage including traditions, cuisine, and arts has woven a vibrant thread into the fabric of our community, fostering mutual understanding and resp and respect. And whereas it is our duty to maintain communities where all people have the opportunity to succeed regardless of their ethnic background by offering events that engage and give back to the public and showcase the many talents and skills of the Marshall citizens. And whereas recognizing the visit of dignitaries such as Laney Kab Kabau

Kabua

Kabua Kaboua and master canoe builder Rice Sinlight to the city of Keen encourages all residents to learn about the history and experiences of their neighbors and to celebrate the shared values that strengthen our city. Now therefore, I, Lisa Parish, mayor of the city of Keen, Texas, proclaim the month of September as a time to recognize the Marshall community in Keen, Texas. All residents are called upon to observe this month with programs, ceremonies, and activities that celebrate the heritage and contributions of the Marshall community. In recognition whereof, I affix my hand and seal this fourth day of September, 2025. Thank you. [Applause] Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thanks. Okay, that is all that I have for mayor comments at this time and mayor announcements. Uh, council members, do you have any announcements that you would like to make before we move on? Okay, we're going to move on to public comments. Agenda item number three. I have received two yellow cards. I'm going to call the first one. Paul not

okay good excuse me good evening mayor and councel and I'm here to talk about the 13th annual 13 candidates form it'll be Tuesday October 14 Tuesday October 14 early voting is Monday October 20 through Friday, October 31st. So, this candidates forum will be the Tuesday before early voting begins. Just as important to those watching and to you here, on Tuesday, September 9, Tuesday, September 9, we're going to have a public input meeting at 6 PM in the small meeting room here at city hall. This is the meeting where any member of the public can suggest a different format for the candidates form questions to be asked. We had this meeting last year and it was very productive meeting. Some uh some good ideas came out of that and some uh changes were made to the format of the candidates form. So that's Tuesday, September 9th, and you're invited. I certainly hope you are there because we need your input. This is your meeting. Then on Monday, September 15th, the questions decided on at the September 9th meeting will be certified mailed to the candidates or even handd delivered. So that gives the candidates four full weeks to prepare their presentation or uh to prepare their responses to the questions because in this candidates's form, they do get the questions in advance. There's no surprises. So, okay. So, that candidates form is Tuesday, October 14th. Gives you plenty of time to arrange your schedule and for you to be there. Yes, Mr. Foster.

6 p.m. 6 pm for both meetings. Thank you very much. Yes, we made a mistake and start a little bit too late last year, so we're going to start just when the council starts 6 pm. So, any other questions? Okay. Thank you, council. All right. Thank you, Mr. KN. All right. Councilman uh Smith would like to also speak during public comments.

Thank you, Mayor. All right. I had to write this down because uh if I didn't, it wouldn't sound good. So, here goes. Good evening, everyone. I had something weighing on my heart since our last council meeting, and I felt it's important to share it with you. In 1802, Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association. In that letter, he referenced a phrase that I along with many others misunderstood for years. The idea of a wall of separation between church and state was uh was talked about. The history behind this was that the Danbury Baptists were worried the government might one day interfere with the right to freely worship. Jefferson's response assured them that government had no authority to intrude upon the church. The wall was never meant to silence faith in a public square. It was meant to protect it. For a long time, I mistakenly believed that this phrase meant we should not speak about God in places like this very council chamber. I thought quoting scripture or giving God credit for what he's done in our lives somehow crossed the line in this building. But a couple weeks ago, someone stood in this room and boldly declared what their God, our God, was doing in Keen. As I listened, something stirred inside me. Conviction boiled in my heart. I realized that not only I had discouraged others from openly sharing their faith, I had silenced myself. I pushed down spirit-led words and moments of inspiration out of fear of breaking a rule that doesn't even exist. That ends today for me. from this

microphone or wherever I'm at in these chambers. When I feel the Lord stirring me, I will not hesitate to exercise my faith. I will share scriptures if they drive home a point. I will speak about God's goodness when he compels me. The truth is, life has a way of distracting us. We get caught up in business, politics, and routines. And without realizing it, we place God on a shelf until we walk out of this room. But I will not do that anymore. As Romans 1:16 says, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes." I won't say that I failed, but I will admit that I have fallen short. So to my fellow citizens and staff, the ball is now in your court as well. If you feel led to share, to speak a word of encouragement, to remind us of what God is doing, then speak. I for one am listening. And who knows what you say may be the very thing we all need to hear. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Smith. [Applause] Okay, that's all the yellow cards that I have for tonight. Is there anybody that's present that would like to speak that did not fill out a yellow card? Okay, we're going to move on to agenda item number four, reports, city manager comments. Mr. Sites.

Um, good evening, council members, mayor, citizens. Um, just just some kind of housekeeping things that I think some people are curious about. uh Fair View Street um update. The east side curbs are all done. They're working on the west side curbs now and all utilities are done. So, the hardest part, the utilities was kind of it took Atmas just like a month to even find all where all their lines and everything were. And so, the utilities part really kind of set this project back longer than we thought. Um so, once the curbs are the the west side curb is done, it it should be done really really quick. So um we are I asked for an ETA. Contractors don't want to give you an ETA. Uh but the good news is the hard part is the hard parts are done. So anyway, so that that that is progressing. Um Santa Fe Street um so um they have started on that. And it was funny because a citizen actually that I was talking to a citizen um and he said you know back when these streets were made in Keen it's very apparent to me that they definitely prayed on these streets and I kind of laughed and I said well why do you say that and he says well because we complain about these streets but they should be a whole lot worse because underneath this asphalt there is no road base. And I kind of didn't want to believe that. So when our crew got in there and started digging up Santa Fe Street, sure enough, right underneath the asphalt was nothing but dirt. So um we don't want to just patch. We are trying to as we repair these infrastructural things, we want to make sure that it's it's going to last and then we will still pray over them because we want them to last a long time. Um but but it's having to get dug down a lot more um road bases coming in. So the way it's looking, as long as rain doesn't delay Santa Fe, that what we're doing on Santa Fe should be done by the end of next week. So we were hoping it would be a week job. It's turned into a two and a half week job, but it is being done right. Um and then the marquee sign

is still in California. We're just waiting for it to clear customs. As soon as that is done, the the crew is ready to get that installed as well. So a lot of lot of things getting and then um also in October I've started we've started prepping um for this next year. So October we'll also be talking about some pretty exciting grant um really strong possibilities that address a lot of things that this community wants which is sidewalks and you know designating downtown and anyway so as I'm bringing those details together just be prepared in October we'll be having that conversation. So good things are continuing to happen for our wonderful little city and and the Lord is leading as as my staff knows I like to say. So and thank you for your comments. Councilman Troy.

Any questions for Mr. Sides? So I have a question. Yeah. Regarding Fair View Street. Yeah. I think it's my understanding that um around March 6, 2020 this year, uh 2025, we did have a bid of 416,000 and then we did had in the next meeting where we separated the two items from the street fund where we were supposed to go 100 ft um where we we approved $50,000. So, does Fair View uh go all the way to Fourth Street in terms of uh fixing or

No, because that was going to be an additional $250,000 to go all the way to Fourth Street.

But that information was not related to the understanding was like we going to finish everything from where it was supposed to stop at up to fourth street. And if you I mean we can go back and look at the minutes, but um the way I understood it was to go all the way was going to require us to pay another $250,000. And last I knew, we did not vote on that to happen. I I can't just do these things randomly. I'm we we go by whatever is directed. So our staff um so I'm just saying we were never told that it would take 250 to go all the way to Fourth Street. the information we were given 50,000 additional 50,000 from street fund will take it all the way to fourth street I'll go back and look but I'm pretty confident that the our meeting will I mean that was the we would have loved for that to have happened but based on the grant amount it was for almost to what is that

just past third street yeah yeah just past third street and then Almost to what's the one that goes by the elementary school? Pan. Pon. Okay. Yeah. So almost to Pan and almost a fourth. But again, my memory reminds me saying that that little bit left, that part of the road was not that bad. So it didn't make sense to spend $250,000 for that little last section. So I'll go back and look. That's all I can. Thank you. 50,000. Every every 100 feet was $50,000.

And so we only did an additional 100 ft because we only felt that next 50 feet section was the worst part of the road. We wanted to take care of the worst part of the road, but we didn't think it was necessary to spend an additional because it was still going to be 400 500 feet, which was going to be an additional $250,000. So, you hear me joke all the time about it'll only take me $394 million to replace all the roads in Keen. And that's based on that number from that evening. That's when I went home and I said, "Huh, I wonder how much it would cost me to do all the roads in Keen." So, I took that $50,000 number and figured out the miles in Keen. So, okay.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Sites. Any other questions, Mr. Sites? Okay. Moving on. Agenda item number five. We do not have any public hearings scheduled for tonight. So, we're going to move on to a consent agenda. Um, I do need to let council know that we need to remove item 6D from the agenda. There's actually, if you notice, a duplicate. C and D are actually the exact same wording and it should have been two different wordings for two different things. So, the contract that was supposed to be done under 6D, we're going to push to the next meeting. So, we need to approve the consent agenda without D. Okay. Mayor, by excluding D. Does anybody else would like to pull something? I'd like to pull item E.

Item E. Okay. 6E. Yes. Okay. Council, do you have anything else that you'd like to pull for further discussion? Okay. So, at this time, I'll make a motion to approve consent agenda items A, B, and C as presented. Second. I'll second that.

Okay. easily seconded. Any Okay, that's what I thought. Okay, we have a motion on the floor to approve consent agenda items A, B, and C by Foster and a second by Easley. All in favor, raise your hand. It's unanimous. Motion is carried. All right. Now, we have removed 6D and it's going to be pushed to the next meeting. So, now we are going to discuss item 6E. Consider approval of an updated organizational chart for the city of Keen. Yes, mayor. Uh the reason why I'm asking this item to be pulled from the consent agenda is because I remember in the previous uh last year's budget, we were given a chart, but you had to use a magnifying glass for you to be able to see what was going on. Um and thank you this time to for blowing it up to make it uh readable. So the reason why I I I brought this one up, maybe somebody might have another question or addition to other departments, but under the city secretary, we can see the city attorney answers to um the mayor and city council. Uh municipal judge answers to the mayor and city council, city manager, mayor and city council. So when it comes to under the city manager there's this line that is running down and then also touching the city secretary going to marketing coordinator but my question is regarding the city secretary and u when I when I read the city charter I think this chart is in conflict with uh the city charter section 5.03 03. Uh under additional positions which says the city council shall appoint the city secretary who shall be an officer of the city by

affir affirmative vote of of at least four council members and shall you know shall is not a very light word shall report the city council. So I don't know what this means. That's I I can adjust that. That is no intention of me of her reporting to me or vice versa. It's simply with the in the new budget, we have a marketing coordinator in there. And that marketing coordinator obviously has to work really close with me and the city secretary since she's also Yeah. She's the certified what?

The certified public communicator. And so, um, it's not meant to tie us together. That line is, that line is meant to go down to the marketing coordinator. Has nothing to do with me. So, I can adjust that so that there's a line going there's no need. It's crystal crystal clear to those who see it. Well, you It's not crystal clear. Usually organizational charts flow down, not up. So, that's why That's why it's crystal clear. Yeah, it's it's crystal clear, Mr. Goowall. It's not crystal clear. It is. if you understand flowcharts. Okay. So, do you agree that this it needs to be fixed so that it doesn't look like the other department, city attorney, municipal judge, and city manager?

I I am happy to adjust it however will make the most sense. But again, with flowcharts, typically they flow down, not up. So, the flowing down says that it's going down, not her coming back up to me or down and up to me. Correct. And if he he he doesn't disagree or agree, it's us as a council that should formulate this. So he he's supposed to work for us. So we're the ones that need to be the deciding factor. I know you're you're asking him a question. Okay. But the question needs to be asked to people here.

Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Troy. I'm just saying shall report to the city council. That's not us deciding. It's the city charter. So we are following it. When I see something in conflict, it looks good. I mean to us we can say oh um the maybe finance director needs to work with a certain team that we have already hired as city council. But for me when I'm looking the chart I'm reading you know charts speak louder than words. You can look this attachment means either the marketing coordinator is answering to the city manager and also is answering to the city secretary or the city secretary. That's what it means. It's exactly there's no

but the city secretary is also answering to the city manager or the marketing coordinator. I mean ju just if you can fix that so it looks like the other ones. I'm okay with that. I I still don't see the conflict. Mr. So who is the marketing coordinator answering to? Who's their direct supervisor? Well, they that individual would ideally report well to both of us because if I'm giving direction, she also has to prove anything the marketing person Yeah.

Um uh anything the marketing person wants to put out. The same thing we did with Orna. It's the this is the exact same way. I would give direction to Ora on what to do, but Ora would have to go to her being as because of her position to approve anything that went out. So, it's kind of, you know, I know the problem is is that you both answer to the council. So, we're just trying to figure out how that would work then because what if the council then if this is an employee of the secretary, what if the council wants to tell the secretary to tell the marketing coordinator something, but it's in conflict with what you're telling the secretary to tell the marketing coordinator to do, then we've got an issue. That I think is what he's saying. But don't we tell both of them at the same time?

Because the the charter only allows us to tell the secretary what to do. So, it doesn't allow us to tell a marketing coordinator what to do. So, we've got a problem under the charter because we only have four designated employees. city manager, the judge, the city c the city secretary. That's what we're saying. We don't have in the charter a marketing coordinator. It's not reporting to us. It's reporting to the city manager and the city secretary. But if it's reporting to her and she reports to us, then theoretically we're telling the marketing coordinator what to do through Holly. No, we we just hold on. No, that's not correct because that would be just like me telling Yeah.

We've come to a an idea here. The marketing coordinator will report to me and she will proofread anything that goes out. So I will remove the line from the city secretary to the marketing coordinator. Okay. I think that would satisfy our Yeah. I mean it it's that would satisfy our confusion. Were working with Orna and it was working really well. So you know but we'll the line to the marketing person. You know I really feel like this is micromanagement

way bad. I think we need to just stick with what we do best, which is not really much, but pointing out little id idiosyncrasies in a flowchart for crying out loud. I make a motion that we accept E as written.

Second. and and your last um chart too, just FYI, it took me I had to find the original just so I could read it and find it. And it was way overdetailed. It was down to every single name of every single employee. And that's I'd never seen anything like it. So, I appreciate you appreciating that it's been simplified. All right. I have a motion on the floor to accept uh item 6D as recommended by Foster and a second by Easley. I'm sorry, E. Did I say I'm sorry. I said D. E. Any further discussion on this motion?

Okay. Mayor, I know we tend to ignore what's in black and white. This the attorney is here. Uh it might not be a big deal, but if somebody comes here and ask, so this chart shows this marketing coordinator is answerable to two people, but this person, he doesn't match. It's like in the city charter, we say the city manager shall appoint one person that might be an interim city manager in case is sick or is away for a few weeks or a few days. With all due respect, Council Well, we just agreed to take that line off of the city secretary. Correct. You just motion to accept it as presented

as as presented with the Okay. You didn't say take the line out. Okay. Okay. In your motion. I don't want to take the line out. So, you're amending your motion? No. No, he's not amending his motion. He wants to leave it as presented as there's no conflict in my book. I don't see how you where you're going. I don't I don't understand your method of thought process. It might not be an issue to you. It's like the city charter says the the city manager shall appoint one person that shall be in place of as an act as an interim city manager and you're worried and then and then clarify this I have the floor clarify that would you please let Mr. goes.

Okay. So, and then here the city manager comes with two people or three people. The city charter says one. Will you have a problem with that? Are you are you asking if he's going to appoint the marketing director as interim city manager? I'm saying the city charter says we shall pick one person that shall take place of the the city manager. That doesn't and then you have three people or four people. Point of order. That has nothing to do with this flowchart. You're talking about appointing an interim city manager. That's not this flowchart. No, the city charter says shall report to the council, but the chart, the way I'm looking at it, it looks like the city secretary is reporting to the city manager. That's not what the charter says.

No, that's not what this flowchart says at all. Maybe the attorney can help.

I don't I don't see that there's a legal issue here. I charts managers chief administrative and executive offic I'm the mayor the The way I'm looking at it, the city attorney looks fine. Municipal judge looks fine. City manager looks fine. And this was even in the last budget without the marketing coordinator.

Okay. Thank you. All right. We have a motion on the floor to accept item 6E as recommended by Foster and a second by Easley. All in favor of the motion. Those opposed? Motion is carried.

Okay, that's it for the consent agenda. Okay. Agenda number seven, review, discuss, and consider possible action or direction to staff on updating Keen City ordinances section 272.10 parking certain vehicles, trailers, and mobile homes within zoning districts on city-owned property. All right. Who would like to speak to this?

So, I'm So, I'm I'll preface this. Um I'm the one who asked for this. Um so, I'll give you some history. So, I did I had a boat in front of my yard and I got a notice to remove that boat um for whatever reason or another. And so, I talked to chief about it. I didn't understand the verbiage in the way that it was written. Um, and the the language wasn't as clear as I would have liked it to be. And so talking to Chief Kid, uh, he did not like some of the things that were said in there as well. And so this was part of my uh my being on council was to start going through some of these ordinances that have been done a long time ago and see if we can update some language. And so I'm not sure if Mr. Steel has that information. Did he give you that information? Well, come on up here, sir. Take over for me. Uh so I'll let Mr. Steel give whatever comments that Chief Kidd had for for this meeting.

Okay.

Afternoon, mayor, council. Um, basically all I was told that there was an issue when I started reading this particular um, ordinance. It is very lengthy and it does have a lot in it. you know, sometimes speaks to, you know, confusion when you start reading it. But what I did was kind of look at what the best practices are. That being said, the reasons that, you know, we have these type ordinances in the first place and all I can really say is you got, you know, putting something on a street, especially narrow streets of a residence, creates a lot of problems far as visibility. you know, obstructs visibility whenever, you know, you got kids playing or something could happen to where somebody darts out in front and an accident happens. Creates the blind spots and also it's a hazard for emergency vehicles. I mean, that brand new fire truck, you know, can't get down there because obviously not enough room, especially if somebody was to park across the street at their residence. So, those are kind of what they're designed for for emergency traffic. And um of course it also reduces that wind width of the lane and the access to that area. Um makes it turning difficult depending on where it's at. Um it also hinders street cleaning or street repair or whatever because you got something that's permanently sitting on the street. So there's just a lot of different things out there why it's best practices not to do it. That being said, there is exceptions in the city ordinance that do provide time frames for people to, you know, temporarily leave a vehicle there or a trailer or a boat or whatever it needs to be. Now, when I was reading this, you know, it talks about the confusing part is, you know, you got continuous period of 72

hours. Well, if you were to hook it up according to the policy or the ordinance and drive off for I don't know, you could just drive around the block really and then park it back there. It resets your time. So, it's kind of a kind of a weird way that it's written. I can only say to that is I don't know when this was written exactly, but I mean you could probably stand to look at the whole statute and probably update that part because it is a little confusing and redundant in some areas. Lieutenant Seal, I have a question. Yes, sir. Did you just say that the time limit was 72 hours according to the ordinance? In the ordinance. Okay.

7210 part C. says should be unlawful if occupied as such owner occupant for longer period than time frame of 72 hours provided that the removal for less than 24 hours is not interrupted the continuous 72 hours. So it starts to go down this rabbit hole and I get the confusion. So, okay, if I was looking at that, I would say, you know, we need to as a city make a good decision based on safety, emergency vehicles, and come up with a good time frame to make it a little bit cleaner because it is confusing.

Would your recommendation be to keep the 72 hours or shorten it, lengthen it? really the I mean for me it's it's anytime there's a vehicle or any kind of thing on there that's going to obstruct or create problems it could happen in five minutes you know so I can't really say you know everybody's got their life they got things going on they've got to drop a trailer and go do something I mean there's some you know time frames that are reasonable I guess and in my mind 72 hours is more than reasonable to leave something that you probably need to u you know figure out where you're going to store it. You know they have storage facilities. They have all kinds of places if your property is not large enough or you don't want to put it on your actual property to store some of these things. So I think it's adequate but like I said it bounces back and forth between well if you take it out and now you can go back 72 hours and it's just a give and take. So, uh, my recommendation would be for council to look at this statute in a way to maybe simplify it and make it a little more clean.

Okay. Thank you. Just a matter of information, most subdivisions are 24 hours, meaning you can bring your trailer, unload and load and stuff or your truck, whatever, but 24 hours is what most of the subdivisions HOA's rules say. So,

one of the uh one of the things that I talked to Chief Kit about was um kind of like what he mentioned, but I'll I'll go a little deeper into it. You could essentially park your trailer, boat, whatever it is in front of your house. You have 72 hours. You could take that boat, bring it to your friend's house in Alvarado for 24 hours, and then bring that back over and your time would start again. And the way that we were interpretating that was, okay, so out of 365 days, I can have my boat there for in my house for 220 days. I just have to find another place for it to go for 24 hours and then bring it back. So, we were wanting to tighten up that to where it's a 3 days max and there is no return, you know, for that boat. So, that or or whatever monstrosity you've got out in your front yard, right? based on what the what the provisions say. Um so that way it kind of limits the the person that is wanting to find that loophole in the system to to have a boat there every weekend or or in the middle of the week and then but you're going to take that boat out every weekend so I can have it there for three days a week and then take it to the lake. So that's that was the whole emphasis on uh my conversation with the chief was to tighten up that portion of it and clean it up a little bit as Mr. Steel referenced.

Is there somebody in your neighborhood doing that? Taking a boat out and bringing it back? Not that I'm aware of. I mean, I'm I wasn't doing that myself either, but

I was just wondering since you said you brought this up, so I didn't know if somebody brought this to your attention. Did you get a complaint from somebody? No, no. It's just something that I mean I I got a I got a notice. So, of course, I was directly affected and and they the city actually gave me more time than the notice even allowed, which I did find out later that the person who did complain complained over and over and over. But because the city gave me a 10day notice instead of a three-day notice, I was able to exercise the 10day because that's what the city gave me. Um, so of course that would that might need to be changed too because if you're getting repeat calls from the city and they're saying, "Look at the ordinance. Look at the ordinance. It only says three days and yet the city gave me 10." Well, then that's that would be that that's the city's responsibility or that would be on us, right? So, we would need to fix that. But obviously, I I did I did the right thing. I moved it on day number nine and rented the storage right here across the street. So for 4 days till I till I sold the boat which is the reason why I had it in my property anyway. So um but no there was no complaints. It's just something that as we were going through that I asked Chief Kidd to look at the ordinance um because the way it was described to me um it didn't make sense. And so you know again just to clean it up and make it more you know just more direct I guess would be the right approach.

Okay. Well I haven't read the ordinance. It's not in our packet. Do we have a copy of the ordinance? Because I I think the council should have a copy of the ordinance so they can figure out how to change the language and clean it up or we can give direction to him to clean it up in a particular way and then have them bring it back a newly written ordinance for you guys approval the next meeting. Yeah, there wasn't actually it wasn't an ordinance that you had in your packet. It was a link to go to the ordinance. So, it was in the email that was provided which I did look up. So, All right, council. What would you like to do on this matter? We are giving review, discuss, and giving possible action or direction to staff on updating this ordinance. I would say let Jonathan look at it

with chief whoever needs to be involved after we get the budget stuff done and then bring it back to us. You want to table this then maybe and bring it back when chief's here and we can go through the ordinance and actually have it in front of us. Yeah, cuz I got a letter, too. Like Troy said, I mine sitting in Mine's sitting in my driveway. Hey, our people are doing their job. That's okay. I got Hey, I put covers on mine. They're just crystal clear. Would you be okay with that, Mr. Smith, if they made a motion to wait until October after the budget? Yeah. And I'm And I'm fine with that. We'll bring it back one more time. Yep. And then look at it.

I'm good with that. Do we do we need to bring it back with corrections from Jonathan and Chief Kid or just bring it back and then we'll start fresh? If you want to tell them what direction you want them to bring it back in, what form? I want them to correct it. Well, you got to tell them how to correct it. We'll review what they do. I'm not going to micromanage their job. We see a problem. Let them correct it and then we'll look at it. Okay. But they still have to get their direction from you. You have to tell them how to correct it. That's not micromanaging. that's doing your job as a council member. Well, they Mr. Chief K has already said that there's issues with it. Isn't that correct? Okay. Well, then

council should bring it back and it's in for is in its way and let you guys, you know, go through it and redline it, whatever you want to do. Mayor, we have a audience, too. Oh, go ahead. We're just go ahead. I just going to I was just going to make a motion that we table this until after all until the budget is passed. This is not something that's mission critical to be attacked right now. I think that our staff has enough on their plate. So, I appreciate officer Steeling tonight, but let's table it until after the budget's passed. I'll second that motion.

Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a second. Any further discussion? Yes, sir. Mr. Johnson, would you like to come now come up and have discussion? Ray Johnson, 109 Christine Street. Before all this, when Johnny Koger was here, you could park anywhere you want. Who's in charge of all this? Enforcement. I mean, who's going to do it? The police or code enforcement? Code enforcement used to do it all? What's that?

Okay. So, he whatever he does, most of the time he's pretty right. The cars are jacked up. Cars set in the driveway with all flat tires. Tags are expired out here on the street. Somebody need to do something about because I see it all over. So, I agree with him. I mean, if he sees something, he should write it up. Okay. You know, I agree with you.

All right. We have a motion on the floor to table this item until after the budget is finished on updating the Keen City Ordinances section 72.10 by Foster and a second by Chapman. All in favor of tableabling until after the budget's finished. All motion is carried. It's unanimous. Okay. Agenda item number 7B. Review, discuss, and consider directing staff to create a resolution reflecting the process for designating which council member shall preside or should preside over council meetings. Should the mayor and the mayor pro Tim both be unavailable to attend a called meeting? And before we discuss this, my health is not in jeopardy, right? I'm okay to sit here and Mr. J was okay to sit here. There's no plans. No, it's this was just brought up

to eliminate us so that one of y'all can take over. Who wants to be mayor? I can make you mayor for a day. Would you like to be mayor for a day? This was just I think Rob Foster's our man. I just want to make sure I'm safe. I'm safe. Okay. There's no plans of anybody. Well, it's never been brought up before this discussion and I think since 1955 when the city's incorporated. Everybody keeps telling me don't go with the past. Okay. What would y'all like to discuss about this? Who do you think should be in charge? Well, it I think it should be the most senior senior officer. Senior councilman if for some reason you're gone and Thomas is gone. So, senior officer who has served on council the longest.

Yeah. consecutive years, non-consecutive, how are you going to calculate it? Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter. Just totality. Totality of years will be the senior officer, the senior council member. Totality of the years they've served will preside as the next person and then it would go down until we have no quorum and the committee gets canceled to the next person. If Rob wasn't available, it'd go to the next person. Yes. It's not saying that anything's going to happen to anybody. We hope like hell nobody gets hurt or anything. But if you were on a trip and your plane got stuck and Thomas was out of town and couldn't be here, it could happen. It could happen. It could happen. I mean, I think there isn't there a state law precedence for this? Not for home. Not for home world cities. Okay. Okay. Because I thought there was for

Okay. But it would give us somebody organizational. Yeah. Organization if y'all were both gone for whatever reason. And it should go to the senior council. Okay. All right, council. Well, give me a motion then. I wanted We're still discussing. Go ahead. I wonder she she just made a good point. Can we add that to our rules and procedure? So then that way it's not a document that we have to actually do on its own. We can just amend the document that's already there to add that language. I mean, we already have a document in place. We just want to amend it. You could do that too.

We have a rules and order procedure in place. Yes, we adopted the one that there's a two-page that the attorney recommended. Asked to add um explanation of call to order. That was the only piece we were waiting on and then so this could I guess just be added to it as well. Add this. Okay. I haven't received a copy of it though either. So I need a copy. We haven't received the draft back yet. Okay. Oh, okay. Okay. Well, then we could just add this and he can put it in the draft since we're still drafting it. Okay. Okay. Then I need a motion. Council, mayor and council. Um,

I know I've I've looked at big cities and small cities. They have some kind of provision that goes along that. The only issue that most some of the cities have run into is when you use seniority as an option to be the mayor um the preciding officer if the mayor is not there and the mayor prom is not there. Is that sometimes you might run into somebody who is senior. Yes. But they they're not comfortable running the meeting which you'll expect as elected official you should be able to conduct the meeting and then it becomes a problem. Now what do we do next? Do we go back and select somebody

the next if say Rob's a senior person if Rob does not feel comfortable with it he can turn it down and whoever the next one is. Yes. And that's why I'm saying we only got six so we can only do it four times. Yes. And that I'm saying that the our our statement whatever it is should also consider that so that it's flexible so it doesn't bring that confusion. I've seen it happen where some people you want to give somebody somebody's younger that can run a meeting but because seniority kicks in and it becomes a problem. But I don't think we're going to have a problem. Yes. In keen we might not have a problem. Exactly. Yes. Add this to the resolution we'll be good. Yeah. All right. Thank you.

I'd like to make a motion that we amend the two-page document that we already currently have to add in a provision that that puts this language in there that says that we can uh nominate the person with the most years in service. I second. Okay. Who seconded? Me. Okay. Since I started it.

Okay. Okay, we have a motion on the floor to amend the two-page document, which I'm going to say is the rules of order and procedure by and add in that the senior officer, the senior council member, senior council member shall preside over council meetings should the mayor and the mayor pro Tim both be unavailable. Okay. By Smith, second by Shaw. All in favor of this motion? It's unanimous. Motion is carried. And typically, just so you all know, when I am going to be absent and I know that usually a little bit in advance, sometimes it's been close to the meeting, but a lot of times I know if I'm going to be on vacation, it'll be well in advance. Then I report that to the city manager and I also contact my mayor pro Tim to see if he's available to serve. So once I know this, I'll just make sure that if he tells me he's not available, then I will go to the senior council member, give them a call. That way they have a little prep time because that way they I don't want you to show up and then say, "Oh, I gotta run a meeting and I don't know what I'm doing." So, catch you off guard. That way you can prepare just a little bit. Okay. All right. Moving on. Agenda item number 7 C. Review, discuss, and give direction to city staff on the fiscal year 2025 2026 or fiscal year 26 proposed budget giving feedback and direction concerning fleet management. Well, this is the first of

So, this is the big one. This is the meeting, the first of

one of two meetings where this is the opportunity to dive in and and obviously, you know, there there's a lot of little I don't want well smaller things in there that we're going to get accomplished this next year with this budget. But the two the two big ones um are obviously the fleet and then of course you know our city's been 33 roughly 33 35% understaffed and and we are going to be adding positions which will make us about 22% under underst under staffed. Um, some of the good news is is is um and I'm going to be leaning on Meera through this process as well because um I don't by the time it was all over I think we'd looked at over well it's over 3,000 lines of of literally analyzing every single one. So, um so the good news is is is I'm excited about the budget and I hope you're excited about the budget. I hope our our community is excited about it because it addresses immediate concerns. It also addresses future concerns as well as putting things away so that whether the good Lord says grants or we just have to pay out of pocket, you know, we can take care of things that we know are going to need to get fixed. So, um, you know, with that being said, um, at this point, this is kind of your opportunity to to share concerns or, you know, um, now, and I will say, and the biggest reason the fleet's a big issue is because it requires a major undertaking in our software. And again, I vowed that we're going to set things up right. And so the reason the fleet section was in a spreadsheet and not in the budget was because I wasn't going to waste my team spending hours and hours setting up a system properly just to have it shot down and then it's just, you know, out of 3,000 lines, I

guarantee you there's another thousand lines of data there that have a bunch of zeros behind it because there's nothing in there and I'm not going to add another 500 lines um you know to our general ledger. So, so that's kind of the biggest reason. Um, you know, uh, it is what it is when it comes to the reporting. Um, I can assure you that if this is a direction that we all feel is a good direction to go, then we will start building the back end um, of it. But until then, it's a spreadsheet. So, for that, I do apologize because you all know how much I don't love spreadsheets. So, um, let's see. Okay. So, um this is your time now to start. Go ahead.

Mayor. All right. Well, let's start, I guess, with the first page. If everyone will turn to page 23. This is just the general fund comprehension comprehensive summary. We can just let the citizens know what's what the bottom line is. Can I ask a question first? On the You have a different way to Huh? Go ahead. On the initial page, page 54, this page where it kind of has an overview like an outline of the motion and the background and the staff recommendations and whatnot. If I read this correctly, does are you saying that we're going to have a a budget surplus of 320,000 if we implement the fleet program?

So, so either either direction we go, the city will have a surplus. Um, and this is factoring everything in enterprise and you know the taxpayer side of of of our business. And so this is everything lumped in together. This is the ultimate overview. So with the fleet program, there would be a surplus of $320,000. And without the fleet, if you were to pull it out, would be $381,000. So either way, there is a surplus. It's just how much do you want? And do we want to move forward?

Is it too soon to make a motion? Hey, where are you getting that surplus at? Show me again. What are you talking about? We're looking in the packet.

Discussion at the item 7C cover page.

Is he talking about this page? It's a summary. Okay. Hold on just a minute. Oh, okay. Well, I'm looking at the budget and I don't see that 381 in here. I saw like 174,000. So, where is the 381 coming from? Uh I do believe you're just looking at the water and sewer. The the total 381 is combining. Oh, you're counting water and sewer enterprise and okay

putting it all together. That's and if you and if you you know in the next the next slides it kind of breaks it down by so that's all the surplus we'd have with both accounts combined. It's just 381. Just Yeah, just Yeah, we've actually had more surplus in our water sewer accounts in previous years. There's been times we've had a million. There's been times we've had half a million. This one, but mayor, we're trying to fix things. I know this is the money that's supposed to fix our streets. So, when we drain the water sewer account and pull money from it for other expenses, then we don't have money to fix the streets and we've got to save for that sewer plant upgrade. So, we need to be holding on to some money to set aside for that. Fixing streets doesn't come from our water sewer fund.

Yes, it does. Comes from our general fund. That's why we made a separate account. Mr. Gwa started a couple years ago fund. And it's also supposed to handle our sewer plant upgrade that we're supposed to be saving for in 10 years. $20 million. Make a motion. Mor, can I make a motion? I'd like to make a motion that we go ahead and approve the using the fleet management for the fiscal year 2026 and moving forward. I'll second that motion. Sorry, that's that's the next agenda item. I think give direction. No, there's seven.

We are looking at the budget. We haven't even talked about the budget. Unless I'm missing. The item is review, discuss, and give direction to city staff on the fiscal year 2025 26 or FY26 proposed budget giving feedback and direction concerning the fleet management. And I said I'm in favor of the fleet management. Yes. But I'm just saying we were talking about the budget first and then the fleet management was supposed to be the last item I think. So, but we haven't talked about the budget. I thought that's what the mayor wanted to go through some of the pages on the agenda. Budget's on the agenda. That is the budget.

I mean, it it's kind of here's the thing. Again, this is new. This is my first budget season. Um, and if we want to talk about budget, let's talk about budget. But

talk about how this impacts the budget. the the two the two big things, like I said, that we're trying to address in this year's budget is getting city staff personnel closer to where we need to be, a city our size, and then also addressing a what I consider, like I said, when I have five police cars in the shop in the same week, um, and a fleet that's 17 years old, I'm trying to solve what I consider a big problem that helps all departments. So, those are the two things, but that doesn't mean that you all haven't gone home and looked at things on the budget and have more questions about other line items because and again, we have this meeting, we have next week's meeting, and do we do we approve next week or is it the week after? So, we technically have two additional meetings. So, I'm just trying to get feedback from you all so that we know what do we want to talk about the next two meetings before we approve it. And and again, I don't want my staff spending time setting up a backend if we don't feel this is what's good for the city. That's that's all I'm trying to that's why this is on here because if we feel good about it, then I want us to move forward and and get to working because I you we have to completely set up a whole new revenue. Um it's it's a lot of GL numbers that have to get set up not just in fund view but also in clear gov so that we can get this into the actual budget with everything else.

So so from Anderson and and mayor just for clarification there's only a $60,000 delta between with the fleet or without the fleet. So in your reference to the streets that'll get us an extra hundred just a shade over hundred more feet of street for that $60,000. I think this fleet is a much better idea. Okay. Well, just so we're clear, we are not approving the budget tonight, correct? You're making a motion that you want to to look at the budget with the fleet management program in it so that the city manager can move on and now actually add the numbers into the budget because we still have to have a public hearing. So, we haven't we've got a public hearing that's been posted in Cleveland Times. So, we're not approving the budget yet. This

we have to still continue. Yeah. He just wants to know about the fleet. I need to know that this the So, you're just giving direction to add the fleet management program into this proposed budget. That's your motion. And is that what Mr. Chapman has seconded? Okay. That's what we're doing. We're not approving the budget. I just want to make sure that's clear. I'm just make sure we're feeling good about this before I spend a lot of manhour. Yeah.

So, it's my understanding. I know there's a motion on the floor, but it's my understanding the way it's written and I I I get what you're trying to get to uh Councilman Roer for making the motion. So there's review, discuss and give direction to the city staff on physical year the budget which is proposed and then there's a comma there's give feedback and direction. So I thought we are going to look at the budget if I have any questions and then we can move to the the second comma which is another you know uh topic of its own about either if you need to add the fleet management into the budget and then bring back the fleet management plus maybe some of the questions that we might have tonight

regarding the budget. I'm not saying that you don't need to make a motion. I'm just saying we might some of us might have questions who have gone through the budget. This is the time. No, it's not to ask question if I have Sorry to interrupt, but you're going to have to stick to what your agenda says or you're going to violate the open meetings act. So, the agenda is very explicit. It states that you're going to review, discuss, and give direction to city staff on the fiscal year budget, giving feedback and direction concerning fleet management. This is a component of the budget so that your city manager can come back and so you can have that discussion. But you you do not have a separate item to talk to about just your budget and online items. So you violating the open meetings act.

It just sounds general to me that there's discussion about the physical year the budget that we have proposed budget and then also give direction. Yeah. It's how the it's how the fleet program affects the budget. Yeah. And that's limited to that end. Nothing else. So if somebody has a question about the budget, we can't ask. If it reflects to the to the fleet management,

I mean anything regarding the fleet management or anything that's in the agenda summary, you can discuss that because you have given notice to your residents of your city that that's what you're going to discuss. Yes. But you haven't given notice to the pursuant to the open meetings that that you're going to discuss something else. So you have to stick to the topic and then I would just say that for your next meeting we'll just make sure if if it is not if you don't like the wording we'll just make another agenda item. Okay? You know what I'm saying? But for tonight we have it's very narrow. Okay.

So for so for clarification I'm just trying to make sure we get this right. So next week we are having a public uh forum for public to come and talk about anything on the budget. So now that we've given deliberation to add the fleet then next week we can talk about any component of the budget. Correct. And public andor us. Okay. All right. There we go.

We all got it. Okay. So I'm going to repeat the motion again. Uh, we have a motion on the floor to and see if I'm going to word this correctly because I want to make sure we're not approving the budget. I have a motion on the floor to give direction to the city manager to add the fleet management um into the proposed fiscal year budget 26 budget. The fiscal year 26 budget by Foster and a second by Chapman. Hey Lisa. All right. Any further discussion on this motion? Mr. Johnson, go ahead. On this fleet deal, I've talked to people about it.

Okay. And uh you council people need to check all this. Talk to the chiefs and all that. And Derek, somebody that supposedly know what they're doing. You guys need to check and see what they all need. Only one that need cars from what I see is the cops. Public works, they don't take care of their stuff. So you guys all need to look at that and see what you think. But that no ways to go with all that. Okay. That's my thing. All right. Thank you, Mr. Johnson.

Okay. Mayor, so since there's a motion on the floor, I've spoken to several taxpayers out there and I know the word did get out that we are trying to go into leasing uh selling all our vehicles, giving it to a third party enterprise to be able to manage our fleets. And you know, we have to be very honest in this room. There's a big number of taxpayers that are against this. And this is the reason why I can say this and then we can vote whichever way we might go. So I don't want us spending time and then we make something and then the voters will speak otherwise. So it's good to know that that's what that's going on. So from the observation and the uh time I've taken to speak to some of the voters and some of the taxpayers uh they do normally sometimes watch YouTube our council meetings some of not not in large numbers but you know people talk and people want to know what's going on and when they ask you know I have obligation to tell them what's going on without um being biased. I have to be honest. This is what's going on and this is where we are. So general as we make this to spend time the taxpayer you say you are you are you you don't have a lot of time on your hand to do the budget and all those things. I have the data here for the fleet but I can share my words and then we can move on. So, leasing vehicles for 10 years on average, according to what I'm seeing here, uh, from a leasing company or long-term lease can be a bad idea for a small city like Keen for several practical, financial, and operation reasons. Cost over time, leasing versus buying. We have had this question in during our budget, even though I'm seeing some kind

of savings here that we have been talking about. Leasing generally spreads payments out and keeps the city's upfront cost. What we are seeing here like 446,422 looks manageable upfront cost low but over a long period of time like 10 years according to this fleet management the city often ends up paying more than the purchase price of the vehicle. There's another problem. no equity at the end of the lease. The city does not horn the vehicles. For a small city like Keen, that means repeatedly paying for assets without building capital. There's another problem. unexpected cause uh repair for older lease vehicles which I haven't even seen the contract may fall on the city on the city like in especially if the lease terms cap mileage or wear and tear allowances. Another problem long-term lease locks the city into outdated vehicles if the city wants to switch to other options like electric vehicle uh who knows maybe uh These are great

more than five years arguments, but this is not valid. I'd like to see the source of your data. Okay, I have the floor. I'm almost done. And then we can source for your data.

So long-term obligation. A 10-year lease is a significant recurring obligation which can limit budget flexibility for a small city like Keen. Capital versus versus operating expenses. leasing uh because because leasing normally classifies uh expenses as uh payment of operation expenses. So it can make us a little bit unflexible in terms of the city. Okay. Capital versus operating expenses. leasing classified payments of operating expenses which might seem easier the way I'm looking at it here on short-term like the first payment looks very manageable and then it bumps up to 600 and something thousand here budget but over 10 years this can strain recurring operation budget gets without creating long-term um without creating long-term assets Okay, I'll answer that question. Let me finish.

I'll answer it. Councilman for I tell you what, he's making his accusations just like they're truth and there's no rebuttal. I'll answer I'll answer that question.

Hang on. Hang on. There's no rebuttal. I would like I don't mind you making your statements, but make one statement and then let's clarify what you're saying rather than just continuously reading this stuff that you've talked to 17 people around town. Okay. So, say the first one. Let me answer let let me answer the question you know. So a vehicle and lease expenses under this page 59 section 7 items item C go to 2030 we 2030 2030 we are going to pay 657,655 I don't know if that's correct according

no that's not true Mr. Gwa, the city is going to pay in 2030 $489,646. You're looking at the wrong data, sir. Unless you gave me wrong data. No, no, no, no. Just hang on because I had this question, too. Okay. All right. Let me finish.

No, no, no. I'm I'm going to address your question. I went and spoke with Mr. Sites because I had the same question. It didn't make sense to me either. and he and then maybe I suggest you do that in the future as well because the city payment is at the bottom the bottom graph going across and so the top is the income from selling those cars back that's the equity that we have it's not a long-term lease as I recall it's every three years the average the average age of the fleet is supposed to remain under four years okay so it's not a long when you say a long-term lease it's not a long-term lease that's the first fallacy the second thing is we turn the cars back in. There's obviously equity because there's resale that happens.

That's the top number. So you take that top number, subtract the bottom number, and that's what we end up paying. So that's where you're you're It never reaches 600,000. The most it ever gets is So on average, you are paying how much? 400, 500, 400. So the highest it ever gets is 480. I didn't do the average, but we're looking at probably So let me finish and then I can answer that.

Two. Sure. We keep saying this number like the taxpayers are paying this. That's not 100% true either because we are running this like a business now. The enterprise is actually going to pay for about 35% of this cost. And so so here's here's the thing. We can sit here and go, "Yeah, we're going to buy five police cars next year." Okay, with this fleet, it's basically like getting five free cars for one year. And and the thing is is that what I don't want taxpayers to think is that we're out here, we're going to bankrupt the city because we're spending half a million dollars on fleet. No, we're not. Taxpayer dollars never exceeds more than like $340,000. And oh, by the way, we're fixing a problem.

So,

okay. So, let me finish and then we can move on. So bottom bottom line for a small city like Keen leasing vehicles for on average the projection that I'm having here up to 20 34 ties up recurring operation funds offers little little flexibility risks higher maintenance cost and ultimately can be far more expensive than ownership. And to answer your question, a very good example, go back to 2019 in this room. Uh we we had during the budget session, we bought a a a skis here. That's when Don Martin was under public works, 43,000. And there was a vehicle that you bought for 22,000. That was during that budget year. So we have never spent more than 300,000 every single year because we are always running on a thin margin. So, but now committing the city for all these years, let's say you're saying it's not 600,000, it's 400,000. How many vehicles is this? If the one vehicle is 55,000

No, I'm saying 400 for one year. 446. So, the city I've looked at the the way we spend and what normally remains at the end as you say surplus. This year we have that some years we have had 700,000 1 million and other stuff. And so if you are 400 and something every single year you are making a commitment which means those are almost eight vehicles somehow we have a deficit and sometimes maybe somehow we might tell employees we have to cut some we have to we did that a few years ago. So I'm just saying committing 400,000 every single year or a half a million every single year for the for the next 10 years for according to our budget and we haven't hired businesses. I mean it's a very tricky road to you know to travel. Thank you.

So if I could just interject first of all maintenance is not a expense item with a fleet lease. That's your first thing you need to understand. Okay. No, I'm I'm talking about overall cause. When we had our maintenance plus the vehicles we normally purchase every single year, sometimes we'll go, okay, talk about the fire department. We spent 1.4 million with the help from the county. So that's a one expense that we the taxpayer through the bond we have to pay. But now here you are saying we write a check for one year on average. Let's say it's 400 throughout. They're not going to come back with some other issues. So, we are we are committing ourselves to buy almost eight vehicles every single year.

No, no, no, no. You're not going to get a car for $50,000. No, I'm saying we are committing to spend under fleet 400 to Councilman. You're you're you're really your numbers are not I can't track your numbers. Okay. So, okay. I mean, I'm tracking the 400,000. I got that. But you got that. because I have 446. On please, sir.

You've I've listened to you for the last 18 minutes. I'd like to clarify a few things. Okay. Number one, I want the taxpayers to know that their maintenance will be maintained by enterprise for these vehicles for the life of the lease. Okay? The vehicles are new every 3 to four years. There is no mileage cap. There is no depreciation. These the numbers will be essentially what we have here because Enterprise has been doing this since what Moby Dick was a minnow. I mean it's been a while. This is their business, right? So these facts that you're throwing out there are not facts. They're supposition there. I don't know where you get this stuff. But I used Hang on. I got say one more thing. Yes. You said

400,000 was eight vehicles. You're not going to get eight vehicles for 400,000 on average. We are average. No, not even on average. A car is probably going to run 70 thou a cop a police car. 85,000. You're going to get five at best. Okay, I'm not talking about hang on. I'm not quite. Just follow my logic here. I know it's going to be tough, but just hang on.

So, five cars a year, five vehicles a year. We have 30 vehicles in our fleet, give or take. So, in four years with the lease, we'd be getting new cars. Now, we got to start buying new cars. We're going to keep going down the road and only replacing four cars a year instead of six. We're going to wind up in the same place. It's never going to end. It's always going to perpetuate where we're always going to spend 400, $500,000. Why not let someone else take care of the maintenance, someone else take care of this headache? It just makes sense. Yes. And as you have said, I'm just I'm just saying I'm bringing you what the taxpayer or the voters are talking out there.

No, but the voters need to understand Councilman Gwis that you're not presenting it in the correct light. Of the 400,000, $150,000 of that is going to be coming out of the enterprise fund. Doesn't te touch a taxpayer dollar at all. That's not correct. Yes, it is. That's not correct. Huh? 180. Okay. Excuse me. $180,000 comes from Enterprise because our finance director, and bless her heart, we're so glad to have her, has allocated funds based on utilization of the vehicles. That's where we can draw from enterprise because that's where the majority of these vehicles are going to be or at least public works, that type of thing.

And so the tax the don't don't shoot the messenger. I'm just telling you they are not happy with this because I know but messenger you need to send the message that the No, they are sending me to tell you so you can ignore that and move on. They tell me and I'm like okay so we look at the numbers and it doesn't make I've looked at these numbers. I've looked at this. Okay. But I think we'll both agree that you're wrong on the numbers. Right. I'm not wrong. This is promise. You said $600,000 was a payment. You're wrong. Okay. I get that you're wrong. Okay. vehicle and lease X unless you have a different data. I don't. I've got it right here in front of me.

2025 446,245. 2026 486,926. I got the number. 2027 half a million. Hang on. So, it keeps going. So, on average, we're going to spend 400,000. It's a commitment. Okay. And we have never spent that money on a single year. I know. But you can ignore that. I'm just telling you. I'm not ignoring it. Yes. All right. I have one question since we're talking about this. Did we not say that did not fleet say that we do have to pay for the maintenance on police and fire? That that's not like included in this payment. They're going to bill us. They said dollar for dollar, which I think Mr. Smith told them they were not. I got him to acknowledge he was not. Well, it's not dollar for dollar. But

so again, I think I there's this perception that if we do away with the fleet plan, all of a sudden we just get to add $400,000 back into the budget. That's not the case. um which is you can see by the revenue amount, right? The the difference in the revenue amount because you're still going to have to pay for maintenance. Maintenance cost is only going to go up. And again, when you factor everything in that still has to go to running the fleet with or without it. And and here's the thing, I want to be clear. I just need direction. This to me is the best solution to solve a problem that is only going to get worse with an average age of 17year-old vehicles. Okay. And so for me, it's a it's a way to solve a problem that will continually be solved so that we don't ever have to worry about this. Um, and if we want to do away with the fleet or not do the fleet, that's fine. If we want to buy five vehicles, I'm with Rob. We're going to find ourselves in this exact same boat two years later when council doesn't want to commit to the fleet issue and say, "Well, let's save money and let's not do it." You know, that's that's the whole reason we got here is because it's an easy thing to look at and go, "H, let's just save a couple hundred thousand dollars." Everything comes home to roost. And either we solve it or we're going to pay for it later. So, and and here's here's how we're going to pay for it. I'm going to tell you right now, now that they've changed legislation where guess what? I get to approve $100,000. A vehicle blows up. Guess what? We have to have vehicles. It's what our people use to do their jobs around this city. And so guess what? Now I get to be the bad guy because now I'm having to stroke a check for $90,000 to replace a vehicle and oh wait, there's three or four of them that blew up. So again, if you don't want it, that's fine. But I don't want the taxpayers to think for a minute that just because

we're not doing it, we're saving $400,000. We're not. Okay. So did you answer my question? And so the city payments that we see here, this line that goes all the way to 2034, does that include the maintenance for the police and fire? Everything factored in. It's already been factored in. That's my question. It is factored in. So this payment should not change. We're not going to play maintenance on top of this figure. That's all everything in everything included. This is what Everything is in here. Okay. Everything's in the budget.

That's what I want to make sure. Okay. And please note that it the number that says with um without fleet guess what the difference is is absorbed quickly. I mean just in maintenance costs for the for the non-fleet stuff. No, no, no. In fact, council, just FYI, I called Alvaredo, Granberry, and I believe Joshua, and I spoke personally with the with the either the city secretary or the city manager, and they all three said this was the best. They all went with enterprise and they all three said this was the best thing that we ever did. I said what's the negative? I said there's got to be something that's you know everything everything has a con. They said no we really can't think of one. They said this we should have done this a while back.

So

okay Councilman I know Councilman Bob Chapman just walked out. There is a way. I mean, I'm not saying that leasing is bad. If you if you get me wrong like that, that there is a way if you have a long kind of high mileage vehicles that every day you're driving maybe 40, 200, 100, maybe 80 miles every day. There is a chance you might convert some of those few vehicles into leasing. Keen, you can drive here within less than an hour. you're back to where you started. We don't have high mileage unless there's an option. Especially police and fire. Yes, I understand. They go to Alfredo. They go they drop people at the hospital.

High mileage is the worst time to do a lease. And I will argue. No, I'm just saying the vehicles that do cons most cities when they look at those vehicles, they'll cons they they'll have an option to lease. Do you see the list of cars with high mileage on here? That's No, I'm I'm just You're wrong. What I'm saying you're flat wrong has been flat wrong, Mr. You're uninformed. You can prove otherwise. I'm saying long long. Well, you need to spend some time talking to Mr. Jonathan Scythe in his office. Every one of these council members except you visit with Mr. Sites on a weekly basis and we get this information. We get this. I visit weekly basis. I'm here.

Excuse me. I'm talking. need to take some time and and inform the voters of how good this system can be instead of googling what could be bad. Johnson County Sheriff Department other cities do this lease program and it benefits them benefits. Okay, I'm I'm just I'm a taxpayer. I pay this part of this where it's not like I'm I'm living all taxpayers. Okay, that's good. But this is the thing though. This is the thing. You are consider you are comparing other city. I've talked to them. I've talked to all these cities even outside Johnson County who have fleet who' you talk to because I listed mine. Who' you talk to? Yeah, I've I I don't need to disclose. No, no, no. Let's find out. Liar. Liar. I I I don't

I disclose who I talked to. You tell me who you talked to. Okay. I've talked to the uh one of the cities here that is outside that did just name it. What is it? I can send you the list. No, I'll send you the list. I can tell you the list. But let me finish what I was saying. No, no, no, no. I'm waiting. I think the taxpayers want to know. You brought it up. Okay. Tell the taxpayers what city you talked to. I don't need to disclose. I can share that if you need that. But let me tell you this. I've spoken. This has no credibility if you won't disclose your source.

Let me let me just tell you this. We are saying Venus has this. Alfred has this. We don't compare Apple to Apple because they have more businesses and traffic. they can absorb when they have a deficit. Keen does not has that advantage. We are buying water which we are paying through whatever s. But they have more business buys more water than we do. Okay. They have more traffic than us. No, they don't the developments wise. So if you say that okay with us we are borrowing from our war and seiwa to pay the deficit for general fund. We're not borrowing.

Yes. And if we run into that problem and we have this Tajimahol or the city hall is also under payment. So the issue that I'm having with this is we are saying because Alfredo does it let's commit the taxpayer a half a million or 400,000 for the next 10 years. We're doing it any that's not a very good uh we're doing it.

I didn't say that at all. I what I said was that they said that there was not a negative associated with the lease program and and here and you made a statement about high mileage vehicles being good candidates for a lease. And I will tell you from personal experience that I had to pay for mileage because I ran my leased vehicle over the assigned mileage and it cost me 10 15 cents a mile for every mile over the lease. But these hang on just I'm almost done. These vehicles don't have a mileage cap. I'm not saying I ask that question specifically. Okay. We don't have the cap. But from the city point of view, when you are deciding which vehicle to lease, which vehicles to buy outright?

No, no, no. We're not buying vehicles outright. We're not going to buy vehicles outright, but we are making a decision to go with fleet management. Right. Yeah. So, one of the things you look at which vehicles has does drive high mileage and which ones are low mileage. If you put the low mileage in, you know what? I just want to call the question. We're we're leaving them all. This is just I'd like to kind I want to chime in real quick if possible. Go ahead, Mr. Smith. You You cool? Are you Mr. Foster? Sure. Go ahead. As long as somebody else talks.

Okay. So, I I did spend some time with the gentleman who came here. I don't remember his name, Nick. And so, the math works out like this. We buy a $60,000 vehicle. I don't care what vehicle it is. It's just $60,000. Our payment from the city for a lease is $1,000 a month. And this is just a number so that way people get an idea of what we're spending. Okay? So for transparency, right? So in 12 months, that's $12,000, right? So 3 years from now, oh hey, that vehicle needs to sell. We're going to go ahead and replace that vehicle. So, you're going to get another $60,000 vehicle, but you're still only paying $1,000 a month for that one. Correct. So, in three years, I spent $36,000. The city did for that vehicle. Okay. Before it it it got turned over. So, when they sell that car, when Enterprise sells that car, let's say that we only get half the money back from the $60,000 purchase. Okay? That's $30,000 we just sold that for. So then what do you have left? We have $6,000 left. And that's actually what we actually paid for that vehicle for the three years, which is absolutely amazing when you think about it. $6,000 in 36 months. Do the math on that and tell me where you can get a car payment for that. So that's that's the goal for this this whole fleet program is to design it to where we maximize the value and then and he talked about that maximize the value in two years if that car's if if that car is hot they're going to they're going to take it from you because they're going to get the max value out of it. That's what their whole system is designed to do is to max out the the the amount of money our return is going to be on that vehicle that we

purchased. So that's that's that's the reason why 2, three, four years is the max that we'll ever go. And then I agree with Mr. Foster. You look at this list. I mean, I'm looking at a vehicle that's from 2005 and only has 146,000 miles. I'd buy that tomorrow because I put 30,000 miles in a year on my own truck just driving around. So, I mean, these are these are gold mines sitting here that that we can sell and and that's why the first year is actually so good to us. But but that's the math in essence. And of course, the numbers are going to change based on the amount of vehicle that's purchased, but that's the math that we're dealing with.

Okay. Then my question is mayor and council if we have known all these years that if you sell your vehicle within 3 to 5 years you get maximum return on the vehicle why have we ever not do it? Great question because we never have money to buy replace those vehicles. We should have done this a long time ago. The budget will not allow. I've I've listened to the last 15 years budget but the budget will allow us now so we can move forward. No, for the next 10 years, you're committing half a million every year, next 20 years, next 50 years. It's it's money in the bank. You're not going to get a vehicle for $6,000 for three years, no matter where you buy it from or what vehicle it is.

Okay. Mr. Foster called the question. I'd like to second it. All right. I'd like to hear from Yeah, we we can hear what Mr. B has to say.

Caleb Bull, 202 Shady Oak Road. So, I know I heard Mr. Foster uh talking about Rio Vista, Alvaredo, Burlson, Joshua. I have one question. What's the difference with those towns versus ours? They're not landlocked. We have no more room to grow. What we have, we can alter things here and there just like Arlington can do. They're landlocked. They cannot expand. they can go up which means they're tearing down stuff to do that. That is our situation. We don't have room outside of the ground. We have right now. So this year, okay, you approved this budget. Next year we still have another what is it 54 miles of roads to do and then is it 2030 we have that big uh waste management system that's got to be done

potentially. We have all of that that we have to be thinking about as well. How much revenue is this town going to bring in with all these other projects going on when we're landlocked? That means no more growth. That means again, even if you fill up every bit of this and you go, "Oh, we've got $400 million to work with every single year," which I know that's not realistic. What do we do at that point? We've already spoken for all that budget with all these other issues that have to be fixed. Before that, like I said, I've already said several times, I've watched our maintenance guys out there. I've done road maintenance myself. What I see with these guys doing it last maybe 30 days. I plowed for six months in Pennsylvania on roads. I personally fixed that last, you know, they lasted longer. These guys do not put the quality in that they could. We have a very poor maintenance program in this town. Adding more expenses every single year, such as the fleet management program. Hey, that's good for the vehicles, but when the people aren't actually doing anything, and I'm not meaning not totally doing anything, but doing the job that they should be doing, the job that they're hired for. Okay, the rest of us citizens out here, we pay that. You know, this next year 27 budget comes out. What happens if you don't have the revenue come in from all the taxes that you think you're going to get? Right now, I've watched two developments. You've got one development that has a few homes in it. Plenty of room for more. You got another one has a model home in it and then another model home. No more building going on there. That's going to take a few years before all of that revenue starts coming in before we start spending money we don't have yet.

We need to make sure that we are not going into the red. And I do not think right now is the time to be doing that. It's it's insane. I mean, look at the state level. Look at the federal level. They're constantly spending money they don't even have and saying it's not the taxpayers money. This building is taxpayer. These lights on taxpayer money. Everything about this town started with taxpayers. Period. Saying it's not taxpayer money. How do you think a government operates? It's all taxpayer money. Period. Including the water. That's taxpayer money. Period. People need to start realizing that government does not operate on free money. Okay? Yeah, that our federal government might print more money, but it ain't free money. We all need to be looking at that. That's all I see. Your personal budgets, you don't do that, do you? You don't go, "Well, I think I've got this budget. I'm going to go and just start spending this and not knowing what next year is going to hold. I've talked to Troy about this numerous times. He's a business owner. You're a business owner. You don't know what next year is going to hold for you. You both might be out of business. This town could be bankrupt by the end of next year. I know several people that have already left Keen because of the stupid drama that happens in this very building right now and more that are saying if things aren't fixed they're leaving. That's all I've got to say on that.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Paul. Thank you. I do believe that uh the other subdivision has quite a number of homes, not just the two model homes on 67. All right. And I and and I would add too that the the medium price of these homes that are coming in are very very reasonable, much much less than most other cities that are around us. So we're going to attract them just for that reason. We're going to attract buyers for that reason.

And water and sewer are a business entity. So yes, it comes from a taxpayer, but if it wasn't us, it would be Bethesda providing that water and sewer. So, those aren't really taxpayer dollars. It's you have to have that.

One thing I'd like to add um is uh the last time we were in budget talks, we did talk about the fact that there were so many permits and I can't remember how many permits that she talked 90ome home permits that were done. So, it I'm talking for me. I'm not looking at this data without understanding what what the ramifications of the city is bringing in for the next year. So, so there's a that's why all these conversations are happening and there's more budget information out there every every council meeting that we have till we get to this point or next week, right? Is all this information is coming at us from this angle. So, it's like, okay, can we afford the fleet? Yes. based on these 91 homes, you know, that that are supposed to come online. And then, of course, we were told that next year around the same amount of homes are coming online, right? So then you so then you're projecting and you're saying, "Okay, so this is feasible as long as the sustainability of of the projections hold up. Could there be a crisis?" You bet. But then that's that's where we would have to go to the table, do a budget amendment at, you know, mid year and say we're going to have to cut some costs if we want to keep the fleet or if we say we going to need to get rid of this fleet because we can't afford that. So So I don't want I don't want the citizens to think that we're not that I'm not thinking of the the the total cloud, right? I mean, there's there's all these clouds, but when you bring them all together, that's where the whole thing fits together and you say, "Can this be possible?" Because let's face it, budget is just a is just a fictional number based on previous data.

Best guess. Best guess. Exactly. So, we're all learning as we do this together uh year by year because it is based on previous year's data and potential growth in the next year. I mean, we change presidents, things happen. We change governors, things happen. So, so we're not susceptible to to ups and downs. But the fact of the matter is we have to look at the data that we're given which tells me that I I believe this is a good thing for right now. Okay. Ma'am,

something that you uh Caleb that you weren't privy to which we I referenced earlier but you hadn't seen it is the financial impact of the fleet. So in our material that we have here, it shows that with the fleet without the fleet, we'd have a surplus in the budget of $381,000. 381572. Now, if we do with the fleet, it's 320,930. So, there's a deficit there. Uh, I mean, a delta there of about $60,000 that we're arguing about here tonight. It's not like we're going to add $450,000 to the city. It's just that in order to maintain our fleet of cars, which our police cars, our our public works, you you got to replace that stuff sooner or later. And I've been on council for seven years and we've never really expended much money on our fleet. Am I right, Mayor?

Maybe bought one car a year. We bought one or two or sometimes we'll buy one at the beginning of a budget season and then we'll budget for another one like in March. Like in March or May only have to budget for half a car. Yep. Charles has done that a lot.

So So as you can see, some of these cars, you can't see, I'm sorry, sir, but the data that we have here shows some of these vehicles are 20 years old. We had five uh police cars in the shop at one time here a week or two ago. So yes, if I was doing my personal budget at home, I'd say, "Okay, babe, it's time to get a new car, right? Either going to lease it or we're going to buy it. We got to do something." The beauty part about leasing a car, whether it's for the city or for my own personal budget, which I've done myself. I've leased my own cars and I put a lot of miles on my personal car, my my work car. I'll run 50,000 miles a year just for work. So, I'm not going to lease that car, but my wife's car I'll lease it. And you only pay for the part of the car that you use. And that's the beauty part of a lease. So, I think that's what people taxpayers and what people need to understand is with the lease, your own, like Councilman Smith pointed out, it's got a residual value that we will recoup at the end of the three years or four years when we turn the car in. So, in my mind, it I I don't understand why we're we've got a uh with without the fleet, it's 331. With the fleet, it's or 381 versus 320. We're looking at $60,000. We spend an hour deliberating it.

Mayor, th this is serious. I'll talk this and then you we can do whatever we need to do. So, our budget right now, we are in trouble. Go back to 2019. The only thing we did cut was this is 2025. Okay, let's talk about now. Go to 7 page 97 on our budget. We are in trouble because we are borrowed so much from the water and sewer which is almost $372,000 were it not for that will be in red. So fleet is not going to help us.

But Charles that's not I'm Mr. Gwall that's not borrowing from a bank. That's not borrowing from an outside entity. That's taking from my left pocket and putting it in my right pocket. No. Yes, it is. We can't talk about that because and I know we can't talk but I'm just saying we are talking about the money. We are saying we are in surplus 300. We are in deficit. If we did not borrow this money from here to move it to the general fund, we'll be in red. That's how we balance the budget. But you're using the wrong term, sir. It's not a borrow finance director Mera. Are we borrowing money from Peter to pay Paul?

We are transferring normally you transfer you know you transfer money to general fund from war and sewer to cover deficit. We are in deficit again Mr. Google to cover that if you would visit with Mr. Sites and our uh Mera you'd understand that they're doing proper accounting. I know there's a certain percentage of Jonathan's job. There's a certain percentage of of Mirror's job that's paid for by water and sewer. It's never been accounted for and that's what we're doing here. Proper accounting. And I'd have to remind us we are going way off of the reservation here. Sorry, you're making the city attorney really nervous.

So anyway, so what I'm saying is don't say that we are saving so much money with the fleet management. I've just brought you what I've heard from out there like the the the taxpayer doesn't want this thing the way they were against. We have to inform the taxpayer of the proper ways we're doing things. We're doing proper accounting now. All right. Thank you. And we'll get things done correctly.

All right. Let me go back and call for a motion. Can we end this discussion? Okay. I have a motion on the floor by Foster to give direction of the city manager to add the fleet management program into the proposed fiscal year 26 budget. Bring it back to council. Seconded by Chapman. All in favor, raise your hand. Those opposed. Motion is carried. All right. Agenda item number eight, executive session. We do not have an executive session scheduled tonight, so we can skip agenda item number nine. Now, we're on to agenda item number 10, requests for future agenda items. Um, scheduled for I'm just going to say what's on the port on the uh paper here. Scheduled for the next meeting. We are scheduled for a council meeting September 11, next Thursday. Uh we have a personnel policy update holiday leave that was tabled from the August 28 21st meeting, sorry. So that will be on the next meeting. Do you have anything else to add to the next meeting besides the budget that will also be on it with the proposed hearing?

I do. Yes, sir. I talked with Jonathan earlier this week and I don't know who who we need to do or how we need to go about it, but we have a serious traffic problem at 805 Pioneer and at South at North College. We need to be considering talking to text dot about extending the turn lane from the duck pond to city hall. And this is something we need to attack after budget season, but we need to start looking into that because we've had serious wrecks on that area. Okay. So 805 and what now? 805 Pioneer and North College. The three streets between where we don't have a turn lane. Since I live behind city hall, I'm exiting that a lot in the mornings. Okay. With school traffic

and and there's people passing on the shoulders. There's no so we need a turn lane to connect the turn. You want to discuss asking text stop for a turn lane. Connect the turn lanes. Okay. Anything else? Council. All right. It's 7:44 p.m. meeting is adjourned.