City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. how um Thank you.

No, I'm doing...

all right we will call this regular city council meeting to order um roll call mayor attorney here april rn here jane ridgeway here alex guesquivel here dr pam sardo here gary chapel here all right if you'll stand for the pledge of allegiance please

states of america into the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all you want to do the invocation pam thank you please bow your heads with me tonight

Gracious God, we thank you for the opportunity to gather today and serve our community. We ask for your wisdom and unity as we make decisions for the needs of the city. Please grant us the opportunity to have great dialogue that represents the citizens. And dear Lord, please always protect the first responders who are taking care of those in need and bless our country and our city. In your name we ask, amen. Amen.

Amen. Alright, one adjustment for the agenda tonight. Item 4.5 is being removed from the agenda. I'll make note of that. And we'll move to citizens comments. Do we have any place cards? Could you just come up and state your name and address, please? I have three minutes.

Good evening. My name is Rhonda Reyes, and I'm from Wiley. But I just want to say to the council here, thank you so very much for opening up your doors for a ministry that God's given me a heart in your city for. I appreciate it, and I hope you will continue to keep the doors open, that we can do what we need to do to help this city be better, to do better, and just to be a blessing. Thank you. That's all I wanted to say.

Thank you. anybody else in the audience who would like to come up and speak tonight we will move to the consent agenda I'm going to do that first Lisa and then

move the other one all right consent agenda council questions or discussion thank you jason i have a couple questions um i'd like to pull the water report And I also have one question. In the July agenda, item 4.10, it said to postpone the MDD interim budget decision until August, but it's not included in this agenda. And there could be multiple reasons for that, but I just wanted to make a note of that. And then for the water report, I had a couple of questions. Are you good? Good. Okay, a couple questions. I noticed, thank you for a wonderful report. I noticed that there was a request for street signs to be upgraded, and the last time, about a year and a half ago, that the street signs were upgraded, it was bought before city council for a formal vote of 28,000. This time it's not. Can you share what's changed?

It wasn't a request. It was just stating that that's the work that we did out in Liberty Ranch. That was one of the subdivisions that were not built yet. So we finished requesting all those to make those match the rest of the city.

Okay. So whenever a developer, so my question is whenever a developer comes in, and puts up signs, you're going to take them down and replace them?

No, ma'am. So anything that's been prior approved, we can't go back and do that already. So if it's been approved two years ago, even though we've already changed it, we can't require them to go back and change it for the .

Okay.

All right.

That helps a little bit. Okay. I also saw a note about a safe. And did we already have a safe? Is this going to be a bigger safe?

It's for the utility building. It's the safe that we just put on there. It's just for up here. I'm not sure. We just ran the electrical for it.

OK. All right. Thank you. And the very last one is about the community center floor. Is there a floor guarantee by the people who did the work?

Yeah. We're actively working on repairs right now. OK. And that's all I have.

So if nobody else has questions, I'm ready to vote on a consent agenda. Thank you, Garrett.

We have a motion. move that we accept the consent agenda reports second all voting signs in favor all in favor okay new business we're gonna move item four point two three to the top which is yeah the building code yeah building codes

4.2.

Which one is that, Lisa?

4. Okay.

All right. Yeah. Building code.

Could you repeat which item this is now?

4.23. Okay. Okay. So.

Oh, yeah.

at this time i'll open the public hearing for at 6 0 7 p.m for case number ca-26-002 adoption of updated technical and construction codes anybody who would like to come up and speak not I will close the public hearing at 6 0 7 p.m. discussion you said we have

sorry this is a routine update to our building codes we're currently using the 2015 codes codes usually lag a little bit behind so we're adopting proposing to adopt the 2021 building codes so you have international building code residential code plumbing code mechanical code, energy code, international property maintenance code, fuel gas code, and the 2023 National Electric Code, and all of those with COG amendments associated with those codes.

Council, do you have questions for him?

i have a question as to does the cog require us to do this is this something as far as their amendments no it's um so amendments are local to an area so if you have an international building code and it's used throughout the country what you need in the northeast might be a little bit different than what the needs are here locally so cog comes up with amendments and typically cities will follow those unless there's some reason not to

I would like to investigate a little bit more with Cattle Mills and Nevada and Royce City just to see how they're doing, the same codes, if you will. Because some of the things, and I didn't get a chance to read all of it, but there's things in there that talk about psychiatric wards. I think I would need to digest it a little bit more than maybe I had time to look at.

And I agree. I did look at page 274, 275, and 276 of the packet. And if we have assisted living and psychiatric centers on page 274, In my opinion, I just would like more time, a delay, to look at this deeper because it may require significantly more public safety or EMS support, increasing cost to taxpayers. On 275, I also had a question of who is the building official who will determine the special inspector qualifications. Also on page 276, I was perplexed about the comment of buildings more than 120 foot height, which is 10 to 12 stories, which in my opinion, I'm only one person, does not seem to be aligned with our city vision, and my understanding is Even LaVon fire trucks only go up to five feet, I mean five stories. So how would we put out a fire at 10 to 12 stories?

This is only building codes.

Dr. Sarto, I think Miguel would like to address the questions.

So these are construction codes for actual construction projects. This is not zoning. So even if a use is listed here, if it is not allowed by our zoning code, on the use chart then it cannot be built this is to govern any type of construction as permitted by a city's zoning ordinance and these are just regional amendments aimed at providing consistency amongst jurisdictions make things simpler for responders who typically move from jurisdiction to jurisdiction it provides a unified approach and a vision So I understand the concerns, but this is not a zoning consideration.

And these builders and developers, they already follow these codes.

Well, council can certainly vote, however council wishes, but I would like to simply delay to review in a deeper way because this is a lot of documentation, only three business days ahead of the meeting.

Any other questions from Council? I just have one. Are these the latest codes?

No. So the latest codes is 2024 for the I codes, and it is the 2023 NEC. Typically in practice, building officials tend to ask cities to adopt the one before the current one. it gives time to address concerns or things that came up in that three-year cycle. So that's the normal practice is we adopt just one before to ensure that any things that could come up has been addressed. Sometimes the three-year cycles don't address every single thing.

Yeah, I was just looking at some of the fire code stuff, and I'm sure, Fire Chief, you're fully aware that 2024, I think, actually has better rules around sprinkler systems and fire suppression that I'd almost think we'd want to adopt sooner than later just for public safety. So I don't know if this goes far enough in my mind that we need to be looking at the 2024s, right? overall yeah and just to clarify the fire code will be treated as a separate matter and that one even has its own options within the amendment so that that's why I was pulled from this yeah I notice it's not in the list yes but that that was one of the reasons I was asking the question so I mean from a city perspective I mean those codes are because somebody got hurt or injured and the reason the code is there is for safety and for our citizens so

all right any other questions or discussion do we have a motion if we decide to vote for this tonight and then we find out something on the amendment that we didn't like can we go back just a question

I mean, council could direct staff to initiate amendments at any time. We'll schedule the public hearing accordingly.

But does this really have to be done tonight?

Not if we don't have a motion.

In my mind, this is a safety issue. I mean, if you guys want to keep going with stuff from 2015, but I know a lot has changed in 11 years with building materials. 2015, right? Wasn't it 2015 was the last time we did anything?

We are using the 2015 codes and 2017, I believe, electrical code. So we're overdue for a change.

Yeah, we're way overdue for safety here, guys.

I believe one of our building officials, Brian, would like to address you.

Brian? There he is.

My name is Brian Sergi. I do inspections and plan review for the city. We do most of the commercial stuff for you guys. I also work with West on the residential. I'd just like to add, you can, if you're concerned about the COG amendments, first of all, we work in multiple cities around here, Farmersville, We work in Levine. They've all adopted these same amendments, the same COG amendments, the same version of code. What you can choose to do, though, is just not adopt the COG amendments yet. If you have some reservations about it, just pull in the codes, the 21 codes, and then read through the COG amendments. But as this gentleman was saying, the COG amendments are just amending the building code. They're not changing anything with use here. So I just wanted to kind of make that, let you guys understand.

So we could bring the code in, but not do this cog part.

That's correct. Some cities do that. Some cities choose to... not adopt part of the COG amendments, like maybe not the fire part of it, just the IBC, the IRC. The COG is just a group of cities in this part of Texas that have regionalized changes that needed to be made to the codes based off of environmental, you know, situations could be because of the weather, the wind here. So that's all there. That's all they're doing.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you. do we have a motion I'll make a motion that we it'll be modified a motion that we bring in the most current codes but delay on the in North Texas cog amendments

Could I recommend that you specify the international codes versus the TACOG codes?

Okay. I'll amend my motion to say let's bring in the 2021 National Residential Code. Hang on. 2021 Construction Codes and Standards and the 2021 International Building Code, 2021 International Residential Code, 2021 International Plumbing Code, 2021 International Mechanical Code, 2021 International Energy Conservation Code, 2021 International Property Maintenance Code, 2021 International Fuel and Gas Code, and 2023 National Electrical Code without the North Texas cog amendments at this time we have a second do you want us to bring those amendments back at the next meeting to consider I'd like to be able to go through them a little bit more than what I had a chance to do we don't have a second we have a motion do we have a second

no second that motion doesn't carry you have any other motions I'm not reading all those codes I'll make a motion to approve all the international codes as written in the minutes I'll second them amendments correct with the amendments yes I'll second that motion all right we have a motion and a second voting signs in favor

voting signs opposed motion passes 3-2 we'll go back to the beginning of the packet all right item 4.1 this is Order of election for November 3rd, 2026 for Collin County and Hunt County. Any questions? If not, we need a motion.

I'll make a motion to accept the order of election for November 3rd, 2026 for Collin County and for Hunt County.

I'll second.

I have a second. Voting signs in favor? All in favor? Motion passes. all right 4.2 this is discussed considering a professional service agreement between the city of josephine and tc tcci hunt county mud number three llc

yes mayor this is similar to an agreement we saw at the last meeting for another mud but this is mud three it is adjacent to the magnolia muds it's just east and this is it's not a development agreement it's a professional services agreement that would allow for the mud to reimburse the city for professional services such as engineering review and or legal review so it's passed through yes sir just cost pass through

Questions, council?

I did not realize that we were going to have this come available, but I need to let the council know that we do have residents in the muds that are not interested in having more housing in the area, that this is going to be a lot more housing and traffic, et cetera. I just wanted to bring that forward to you thank you just to be clear though the mud already exists no I know I don't I know it exists and it's been out there since 2019 and now now is the time that all of a sudden it's going to start and and that's fine but I just wanted the council to know that there are citizens in the etj which is the magnolia muds and waverly and we have houses that are up for sale already and rented and nobody really wanted another bunch of houses right now and i just needed to make that statement any discussion on the item in front of us it's not we need a motion

I move that consistent with the council's action last month that the applicant and the pending annexation, this isn't passed through, right?

Correct.

Okay. Consistent with the council's action last month that the applicant identify an additional attorney firm as consistent with the vote last month within, I guess it was by December, which was consistent with the vote last month.

I'm not even sure. Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand your motion. What are you saying?

Okay, the public, there was public comment last month. I made a motion that did not pass. It was two to three. And then Gary made a motion to allow the agreement to move forward, that when the agreement ended, which is basically 90 days around December it was worded, that they find another for an attorney firm. And so I would like to be consistent, because that's the fair thing to do, and have the same approach here for consistency purposes. So I move that consistent with the council's action last month that the applicant, similar to last month's vote, be required to submit a different attorney firm within the 90-day period by December.

Would you like to hear from the applicant? Do we have a representative from TCCI present? Thank you.

My name is Kyle Krupa and I'm with TCCI. I don't, I didn't understand the comment. I wasn't here last month regarding the law firm. But we use, we have two law firms engaged. One of them is Coats Rose that represents. the actual mud, but we then also have a Winstead which represents us as an entity, which is the entity that represents us and that will be working with Ms. Ross on the legal items.

The reason for the, and I appreciate your added information, which is very helpful, because both firms are in a situation with the Attorney General, and the goal was to wait and see what happens with that. And so if there's a, both of those firms are involved in certain scenarios that, you know, I don't have all the details on, but I know that it needs, we made a vote last month, and I'd like to be consistent with that vote. And in this case, both law firms are impacted, unfortunately.

Now, Winstead is a family member to us. That's Tommy's daughter that works there. Now, keep in mind, Winstead, on the district representation side, that's different than the real, Winstead has, 150 attorneys in Dallas and so they do represent us on the real estate side so I don't if we need to look at coats Rose on the mud side we can we'll be happy to do that but I do think that we probably wouldn't could not make a change on the on the private side on the real estate because she handles all of our items But she has had no conversation with the city or the down in Austin. She doesn't do any district work. It's strictly real estate, transaction, title work, that type of thing. So I just wanted to be transparent.

So she's involved when you sell your properties to somebody else? That's right. Is that what you're saying? OK. Exactly.

And so like contract, like if we go buy a piece of property, she'll prepare the contract. She's not having any conversation with anyone.

A buyer of your property.

That's right. Yeah.

thank you she is involved with the attorney general scenario no she's not i have paperwork that says otherwise maybe we could discuss it after okay thank you she made a motion do we have a second no second do we have any other motions

I'll make a motion to approve the professional service agreement between the City of Josephine and TCCI Hunt County MUD number 3, LLC.

We have a motion. Do we have a second? No second. All right. Any other motions? Okay. Item does not pass, so we'll just carry on to the next item.

Is there anything else that, I didn't understand the item, I guess, on not moving forward with the attorneys, with Winstead or Coats Rose. I don't understand the item, I guess. If you give me some parameters, I'm happy to work with it, but I don't understand the item.

We'll just have a follow-up, I guess. We'll move on.

OK, thank you.

Thank you. No action on the report. Motion's not carried. Next item is 4.3, receive the monthly engineering report from Dunaway.

This is Jacob.

yes good afternoon mayor council jacob dupuy with dunaway hopefully have a somewhat short update for you all this month on the development status of things i've been working with miguel to review the minor plat for fm 1777 in addition to helping them move a few things through on their text.driveway permit I know Garrett and his team had a pre-construction meeting on 610 East Cook Street, the detention pond and some other items kind of back beyond that building that we worked to successfully get their plans reviewed and approved for. And then the status of projects in design or construction. The half a million wildflower elevated tower, we are working to renew our FAA permit. We had one before and then this project got put on hold for a little bit so it expired. We're renewing it and we should have that final determination next week and then we're working with Caldwell to get started on that project. And then in addition, I mentioned last month, we're working to get the ground storage tank project rolling. It's currently advertised. We have a bid opening scheduled for August 20th. And so we'll come back next month, ideally with some good bids in hands and recommend award of that project so we can get started. Any questions on any items?

Oh, I just had one question. I couldn't remember. Bad memory on mine.

Yes, ma'am.

Magnolia wastewater treatment plant. That one handles Riverfield?

Yes.

Okay.

Yes, ma'am.

That's what I thought. I just wanted to check my memory.

That is correct, yes.

Okay. You can see how it would confuse me with the magnolia.

Any other questions? I understand.

Thank you. I move that we accept the Dunaway status report.

Second.

We have a second motion. Voting signs in favor? All in favor?

Thank you.

All right. Next item. This is 4.4. Receive the monthly planner report from City Planner McGill.

Sorry. Honorable Mayor, members of the City Council, Miguel Inclan for the record. It's been a relatively quiet month. Do you have any questions on the report? I'll be happy to answer.

Any questions for Miguel?

I just have one teeny one. Thank you for the report, Miguel. You have a mention of a change in fees, and I was just trying to make sure that's a change in fees that we're discussing later in the meeting versus a change in fees with the university.

The fee schedule that's on the agenda tonight has the recommendations from the student project with UTD. Okay. And we decided to just implement all the fees at once to avoid confusion for developers down the road.

Thank you very much.

that's it we have a motion I move that we accept the planning report second voting signs in favor all in favor all right item 4.5 has been pulled from the agenda so we're moving to 4.6 This is discussed. Consider an act on consideration of an annexation service agreement between the City of Josephine and Marvin Rector for a .84-acre tract of land, contingent to the city limits, also known as 5792FM6.

Okay. So 4.6 is an annexation services agreement. These are required prior to annexing a property. You considered the, I believe, the public hearing at the last meeting.

Lisa, thank you, but can I clarify? We're talking about 4.6 and not 4.5, right?

Yes. Yes.

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Can you pull up the map, Jerrica? She's going to pull up a map for reference. The map is on the next item. The annexation services agreement is required as part of the annexation.

This is for a 0.84 acre tract on the Hunt County side of the city limits. It's the rector tract. This annexation services agreement has to be signed before the council can act on the actual annexation, which is item 4.7.

Do we have city services that are already reached out to that parcel? Yeah. OK.

It's just confirming that there are services and any development will require their own provision of services like extensions and so forth.

Okay. Gary, just let me explain. This is when this property was annexed into the city, I guess, years and years ago or for whatever reason. I'm still not quite sure. But my property is the same way. Part of it's in the ETJ. Part of it's in the city. Same way with mine.

So we're just fixing them.

We're just fixing. That's what we're doing.

Okay. All right. I'm good.

motion I make a motion that we we see I make a motion that we accept the annexation services agreement between the City of Josephine and Marvin Rector for a .84 acre tract of land continuous to the city limits known as 5792 FM6.

I'll second.

Voting signs in favor? All in favor? So 4.7 is still on there? Lisa?

It would be the public hearing for this tract, yes.

So I think I put withdrawn, and that was supposed to be 4.5, so I'm sorry I did that quickly.

So now we open the public hearing for 4.7.

Just clarifying, that's still on there, because I had other notes.

I apologize, that should have been on 4.5.

well i had double notes all right i will open a public hearing at 6 34 p.m for the annexation for 0.84 acres located in a0170 copeland john track 11-1 this track is one half mile in width or less and is within the exclusive extracurricular jurisdiction of city of josephine is there anybody who would like to speak anybody in the public And I will close the public hearing at 6.35 p.m. This one needs a motion. Is this on the next item, Lisa?

This needs a motion.

Okay. it's for the annexation ordinance okay the ordinance number is the rector track okay so we're making a motion to accept the annexation ordinance 5792 fm6 dash rector track i'll second yours was a motion yeah okay we have a second voting signs in favor all in favor Okay.

Jason, can I ask a question on this 4.8 as to where that property is on 637?

Which one?

That is, that was a zoning case that after review it was determined that the property is not within the city limits so the case was withdrawn. We put it on the agenda because it was advertised on the newspaper So we just wanted to make sure that the public was aware that it was withdrawn.

It was just a teeny tiny little bit.

There's nothing to be taken on this item, though, correct? No.

We can move on. I can explain afterwards. All right.

Thank you. That also includes the item 4.9. No.

No? No. This is back to Mr. Ryder's.

Oh, okay. I see that now. All right. Wow, too many public hearings all mixed together. All right, 4.9, I will open a public hearing at 6.37 p.m. for case number zone-26-002-A for 5792FM6. If anyone here would like to speak. We are conducting a public hearing to consider your testimony and act on the rezoning request to amend the zoning ordinance and zoning map of the city of Josephine, each being a part of the code of ordinance to provide initial zoning classification of Class C general commercial business other than local retail to a parcel of land under a petition for voluntary annexation totaling approximately 0.84 acres located at 5792 FM 6.

no one in the public would like to speak i'm going to close the public hearing i'll close the public hearing at 6 38 p.m all right council discussion action this is the property that we just annexed or we did the annexation into the top part of it right there commercial correct and then the next item is the bottom half of it yes okay correct I don't have any questions.

When properties come into the city, originally they're usually, sometimes they're just classified as ag for a while until there's some sort of permanent zoning. They're requesting commercial. Yeah.

It's just there's so many different ones, it's confusing.

I just wanted to make sure I knew what I was approving.

Do we have a motion if there's no discussion? Yes.

I move that we approve the ordinance for case number zone 26-002-B as presented. A.

A.

A. A. Sorry.

I know. That's the confusion. Yeah.

A. I'll second.

All right. We have a second. Voting signs in favor? All in favor? All right. Item 4.10. We're going to open the public hearing at 6.39 p.m. for case number zone-26-002-B, 5792 FM 6. Conduct a public hearing to consider testimony and act on rezoning requests to amend the zoning ordinance and zoning map of the City of Josephine, each being a part of the code of ordinances from M1, Manufacturing, Industrial, Light to see general commercial businesses other than local retail on a parcel of land totaling approximately 1.16 acres located at 5792 FM 6. Public hearing is open. Does anybody want to come up and speak in the public? If not, I will close the public hearing at 6.40 p.m. Council? It's open for discussion.

I'm ready to vote.

Make a motion.

I'm sorry, I'm ready to make a motion. I move that we approve the ordinance for case number zone 26-002-B as presented.

I'll second.

Voting signs in favor? All in favor? surprise surprise item 4.11 open a public hearing at 641 p.m. and receive public input for a fiscal year 2026 2027 budget this budget will raise more revenue from property taxes than last year's budget by an amount of one hundred and seventy seven thousand seven hundred eighty five dollars which is a twelve point two percent increase from last year's budget and of that amount seventy four thousand four hundred eighty two dollars is tax revenue to be raised from new property added to the tax roll this year public hearing is open if anybody would like to speak If not, I will close the public hearing. Public hearing is closed at 6.41 p.m. All right.

Jerry, did you want to play that presentation? I created just a really quick condensed version of the presentation that I gave you last month, just some highlights, and I'm here for any questions you have.

Anyone have any questions?

I've got a couple. When I looked at the budget, can you use your mic? Sorry, moved over here. Thank you. I don't want to get new mics. I want to just be told to speak into the mic because I want to save $9,000, okay? That's me. Maybe fix one or two. I went through and did a comparison of what was in the budget for employee salaries, since this is like $8 million worth of employee expenses in the budget, which is pretty much as great as whatever else we do in the city. And I just took the salaries out and compared with what reports that I have with what's in the budget itself, which I went through the budgeted positions with what I could get out of the system. And I came up with 80 positions. I'm sure there's a few less than that. I think you said we were looking at maybe 70 positions. adding that many and i couldn't remember from the last meeting exactly how many are we adding 60 up to 60 from 42 there's a another slide that goes into that but what worried me right now all of those balances were still in there on the budget even though we might not be adding them

what we are looking at is 14 new positions and that is what is in the budget we did eliminate a few of them and they are not included in there okay so the five million that's in there is not

part of this budget?

Yes, it is. That $7.8 million is the total personnel budget, which includes benefits, taxes, everything. Everything? Yes. For all positions. Retirement, FICA, blah, blah, blah. Correct. Everything.

OK. Next question.

answered that part of the question the next thing i did was compare and compared the percent of increases that we were going to be given and it came out to like an average of 17.51 percent and i thought that was a little bit more than what was discussed earlier i don't know that anybody's getting a 17 cost of living now that doesn't account for cost of living cost of living plus whatever on an on and that doesn't count if somebody

um, gets an accreditation or they've gotten, you know, I agree.

I agree with that, but I'm talking evaluation. We don't have a program that actually says, you know, like a normal company would have a, a matrix like we did two years ago, which I thought was coming forward, but it didn't. So we just kind of, do windage and elevation on some of the things that we do.

We do have a matrix for the police and fire department.

For the police and fire department, yes, but not for everybody else.

We do not have one for public works. It is something that we have discussed. Our manpower is stretched thin. It has not been something that we have been able to put together. We go off of the previous salary compensation analysis that we have had completed, and we roll from there.

That was kind of not the information that I got from Lisa, but that's fine if that's what you do. So with that being said, because some of the employees had already gotten increases along, then the budget comes along with more budgeting. My question is then do we hit that budget amount after there's more evaluations then we have the budget approved and then throughout the year then they get the rest of that budget amount that's what i didn't really know how that works the budget amount for personnel is the maximum amount there are extra things built into it like for example i'm talking individual people on their evaluations okay but

What is built into the budget, in the personnel budget, is the maximum amount. It doesn't mean that everybody's going to get the maximum amount, but I also have to account for GASB 101 and compensated absences. I have to put an amount in there to account for that, which I don't even know what that's going to be for an entire year. So I have to put that in there. So that's on top of the regular salary increase that goes in? Correct. So that might be how you're getting some different calculations. We are doing a 2.8% COLA. And then per employee evaluations, it's going to be between 2% and 5%. and separate police and fire structure for the merit.

If you're doing a COLA, wouldn't a COLA be the same for all the people instead of a 2%?

It is. Everybody's getting COLA. Even the police and fire merit structure, sorry, their step plan has increased by that COLA adjustment, then plus they get their step plan. And then everybody else that's not on a step plan gets the COLA plus their merit increase.

But when you say 2.8, to 5%, are we saying 2.8 COLA for everybody? Correct. That's what I wanted to know.

And then there's a merit that you can get based on performance. Correct. Which is standard. That's how most municipalities work. That's based on performance. But the 2.8 is basically the COLA is the cost of living.

Correct. And that was set last year. So next month, the cost of living for next year will be set. We'll bring that back next year. We don't get that for a full 10 months until after it's been approved by the US government.

Because before, it was said 5%. And I was like, OK. Correct. Very good. OK. Thank you.

Do you have any more questions?

I'll show you the rest of this afterwards, just so you'll know where the salaries will be in 10 years if we don't change some things that are going on. But we can take that offline, and I'll talk to you about that later.

Go ahead, Pam.

Thank you. It seems to be that the total operating budget is increasing by 33%. That seems to be a lot to me, a $4.9 million, $5 million change. And I only have the little version here of the itemized issues that are requested. I'd like to propose removing some of these. The capital items? That's what you're looking at right there? I believe so, yes. And I have some questions there. So for example, the The replacement microphones, if we could take those off and just work with a new system, I think my microphone's working fine. So I'd like to remove the 9,900 from microphones. I'd also like to separate out the flock cameras and the drones. And maybe the chief is a good one to ask, because there have been numerous reports inaccurate reading of license plates and the wrong person getting pulled over. And also questions about how long the data is kept with the flock cameras, not saying they're not needed, but how long the data is kept and who gets access to that data. And also I guess you're going to tell me you can't share a drone with fire, right?

I believe they have their own.

Two different systems.

Cool. All right, so with the flock cameras, can you just share?

for transparency, how long the data is kept, who has access to it, and how the accuracy is improving to prevent or minimize or mitigate inaccurate license plates from being read and the wrong person, oops, accidentally being pulled over?

I'm sure it has happened, but I don't think it's a high number at all. I've never seen it. Maybe in my whole time of working with the cameras maybe once or twice total that I've seen it done. I would think that the information that's in FLOC would be kept there for, it's probably in a cloud somewhere that you could retain that information at any point. Nope.

Okay, so maybe you could follow up. I would appreciate it if you'd be willing to follow up with us at a future meeting and tell us how long it's stored, how long the data is stored, and who has access to it, just for transparency. Not personnel, but just overarching titles or groups or agencies, that's all.

I know that in...

uh to the councilman i don't jeff i don't know if you don't you don't have the answer to that it's fine we'll just move to the next so flock's going to have a retention that retention period for 30 days in regards to your question about um invalid plate reader systems um regardless if it's a it's a black bad plate read peace officers still need to develop their own probable cost to make contact with that vehicle okay um the other thing too this is a budget item so this is i thought we were getting this through grants

The majority of it is going to be grants, but it's the match.

But we still pay for part of the grant.

And that's only if we get the grant.

Only if we get the grant.

So this is just a budget item if we get the grant. And then we still have to decide to move forward with the grant. Okay. So this is strictly just a budget item.

I'd also like to remove the work truck, the Ford 250. And I'd also like to ask why the Fountain View Lift Station SCADA is needed now. Maybe something's broken or it's not working right.

What would you want to move the truck for? What would be your reasoning?

For removing the truck?

Yeah.

How many miles? I'd like to know what's wrong with the current trucks and how many miles are on the current trucks.

we answered this and a whole email we answered all of this about the work truck about the extra personnel and the two different plants and needing a new needing an additional vehicle most of these questions have already been answered the the difference on the truck and i can answer that one is the fact he wants the bigger truck because it's easier to carry tools in it inside with the people and my my take was

I thought the extended cab was fine, but not the extended cab. This is the extended extended cab.

Yeah. They need the transportation.

Service vehicle to be able to keep our tools on it. We have a Ford Ranger, which is not sufficient to maintain what we were trying to maintain properly. That was the request for the truck. It's a utility truck with a bed on it. Ford Ranger's not feasible. They're working out of a little toolbox right now, and that's not manageable. Especially with four guys running out of a single vehicle.

Four guys in one vehicle. I thought he said two in a vehicle.

That's the goal with this vehicle.

Is to be able to split two and two to operate both plants and be able to manage more.

And then as your crews grow, most crews run a crew leader and two to three guys. So as they grow, their crews are going to become three to four man crews. Therefore, you know, four people.

Thank you. And for the Fountain View Lift Station SCADA, that's a remote situation where you can monitor that remotely, right?

Is it something wrong with the one we've got? It's outdated and it's not manageable, so it's more or less getting it up to par with all of our other SCADA lift stations. We only have two that's now out of date and unable to. We can't see anything, so the only way we know that it's inoperable or something's not functioned is if a resident calls in and says, hey, the alarm's going off, there's a red light or something like that. We can't catch any issues beforehand without having the SCADA on it.

This was also answered.

Correct.

OK, thank you.

Well, no, that wouldn't have worked. I was going to say- Any other questions? Like the water main that broke down on our end of town, but that's not a SCADA. That's some different.

OK. And I have one more question. And thank you for the detail on all this. There are five places where the word bond is listed. And so I'm just trying to confirm that this is previous bond money, not new bond money being requested.

Correct. It is held bond money that has not been spent that is specific for these purposes. Thank you. That's perfect. Thank you.

All right. That's all I have.

May I respond?

The line that does say the replacement microphones for council chambers is not y'all's microphones. It's these additional microphones for the joint work sessions as well as all the additional employees we've had to make sure we hear everyone. So they're not sharing one. And these are on, that's a longer stem instead of the shorter stem because they don't pick up the same. And so that's why it includes another base is what IT quoted us. It's not those microphones. Those are perfectly fine. And a new software would not resolve that issue. So it's all those out there? Yes.

And also this budget does not include the Civic Plus that we're going to discuss later, right?

Not the full amount, but it does replace, it would replace the agenda minutes software that we pay now about a little over the 7,000 and the website that was listed at 6,000. So 13 of that thousand would be already covered.

Okay. Thank you very much.

All right.

Are there any other budget questions?

Nope.

Thank you. So this is 4.12, right?

Correct.

I'll make a motion to accept the proposed ordinance number 26-08-10. Hang on. We're on 4.12, right?

Or 4.11, I thought. 11. 11. Yeah, okay. Okay. I'll make a motion to approve the fiscal 2027 proposed budget, 8-4-2026.

I'll second. all right we have a second voting signs in favor okay voting signs opposed okay hold on just a second what are we correct hold on just one second one 4.11 yeah yeah i said one one i did he corrected it though i corrected i said one two in the beginning and then i got corrected did y'all see the votes okay so um 4.12 or 4.11? It is 1.2.

1.2 will require a roll call vote.

Okay, so this is going to require, so we're going to do the motion. Hold up. So we're going to do the motion on 4.12, correct? And this will be a roll call. Okay. So we have a motion and we have a second. We have a motion by Gary.

And I second it.

And he's second. So now we need a roll call vote. Roll call. Should we call your name?

April Allrand? Yes. Jane Ridgway? Yes. Alex Escudel?

Yes.

Dr. Pam Sardo? Nay. I'm sorry, he's been here.

She said nay.

Okay. Gary Chappell?

Yes.

Okay.

Mayor Turney present and now voting.

Correct. Now we need a

um a second motion or we have to make a motion to call a special meeting if we don't make the motion to ratify the uh so this this one may help just a little bit so this one is required to ratify the property tax increase reflected in the budget so we don't always have this one but in this case it does apply so this would be a second motion in addition to the one you just made regarding the budget and then you're not adopting the tax rate at this one it's a little confusing the way the state makes us do it for truth and taxation laws But this is just acknowledging or ratifying the property tax increase reflected in the budget you're adopting. And then you'll have a separate vote on the tax rate at a later date.

So this one is not for the tax rate. It's for the tax increase.

It's to ratify for the budget because the budget is currently representing that tax rate.

Okay, thanks.

So everybody okay with the motion? Okay. I'll motion to ratify the property tax increase reflected in the budget. I'll second.

This is also a roll call. Yeah, this is a roll call.

Let's pass the mic. April Arand?

Yes.

Jane Ridgway? Yes. Alex Esquivel?

Yes.

Dr. Pam Sardo? Yes. Gary Chappell?

Yes.

Okay. item 4.13 we'll open the public hearing at 7 0 1 p.m receive public input for the fiscal year 2026 2027 budget for the municipal development district public hearing is open do we have anybody who would like to speak in the public

Honorable Mayor Jason Kearney, City Council, and City staff, my name is Kevin McKinnon. I'm the President of the Board of Directors for the Josephine Municipal Development District. I'd like to open up comments by saying how much we are grateful for the work session last Tuesday night. I think we cleared a lot of misconceptions we had between the two of us i also was grateful for the conversation that we had i think mayor turner and i agree we got a lot accomplished in that meeting i look forward and the board does too to continue working with the city council and the city staff in putting forward a vision for the city planner and for bringing in more businesses to create better tax base so that the city can then take the monies and use them as a field that will help improve the community in the city of Josephine. And we are definitely committed to doing that. we're a year to go our budget sets in on October 1st and this is what you're looking at although Tuesday was not a formal meeting I believe the consensus in the air at the time was that we would prefer budget number five as opposed to budget number one and so I leave that with you to make that decision and again I thank you again for that session thank you anyone else who would like to come up and speak

I will close this public hearing at 7.03 p.m. the budget option you guys have in your packet that was obviously published before that joint meeting so option number five I do have that on that slide Jerica as the second to last slide so you guys can see it up close It is the one I printed out at that joint meeting.

Is option one the one we have in our packet and you're showing us option five?

Option one was in the packet. That's what previously had been discussed. Option five was from the joint session, what everybody agreed on. It was just saving the majority of the funds to build up that fund balance. Okay. And it's on the screen now.

We had to publish the agenda due to requirements prior to that meeting, so... That's why there's a difference.

There it is.

All right. So we will move to item 4.14. This discuss consider an act on adoption of an ordinance approving the budget for fiscal year 2026-2027 for the MDD.

council discussion i'm sorry jason do we vote on the mdd budget that's what we're doing right now okay sorry i missed it okay i mean just for the record i think we could just state that that's uh option number five that you're looking at versus the one in the packet

I don't have any questions.

No. We're open for a motion.

I'll make a motion to adopt the physical 2027 budget worksheet option 5 for the 2026-2027 budget for the admissible, the MDD.

Second.

I have a second. Voting signs in favor? All in favor? Okay. Item 4.15, discuss, consider, and take appropriate action regarding approval of an agreement between the City of Josephine and Schaumburg and Polk Incorporated for engineering and related professional services for two previously identified and funded drainage improvement projects located on County Road 640 and County Road 596, West Hubbard Road.

Yes, Mayor, we have a representative from SPI here, I believe. And this is a follow-up to what we discussed at the last meeting regarding those drainage projects that were previously funded by bonds. So this is a scope for the agreement that would provide engineering and professional services related to those, at least two of those drainage projects, one on 640 and the other one on 596.

and we have the engineer here to discuss the scope of work if you'd like council do you have questions for them um i only have a tiny question um it looked like there were at least four projects on there okay we're going to start with two but the price is over two hundred thousand so is that two hundred thousand for all four two hundred thousand for two so we're just looking at two uh so originally kimley horn had identified four possible projects

One was determined just not feasible, and the other three, we thought three would be a little bit much to take on at this particular time, so we prioritized two. So that's what you're seeing in your packet.

So the two is $200,000, or is that the four is $200,000?

No, there's not four anymore. The one was completely taken off because it was just out of scope on cost. So there was three that were deemed. So yes, that is two that you're seeing the cost of.

okay and i i appreciate the detail thank you jason um there was a discussion that there might be a way to trim trim the expenses a little bit with documentation and other things that are already available at the city level is that going to be feasible to at least look at

I think Jeremy's going to approach. Can you be a little bit more specific for me about what might have been trimmed?

There were pictures already done. There were some previous work from a previous council member who came to give public comment, Brad. There were some other things that were already available from the last iteration of the extra water. And I just didn't know if there might be an opportunity to trim a little bit based on the information that the city's already gathered.

I'll have to defer to Jeremy for that.

No problem. Good evening, Mayor, Council. Good to be here with you tonight. Jeremy White with Schaumburg and Polk. Yes, while developing our scope and fee for this project, we took into consideration all the previous study that Kimley Horne and Associates did, as well as any documentation that the city has provided us thus far. So that's reflected in the scope and level of effort there. But we'll gladly take any additional information that

council citizens or staff has on this project thank you very much any other questions no all right do we have a motion i move that we um accept the schaumburg project um for the two situations that had the top priorities 640 and is it milton street is this uh 596 okay for those two

move second we have a second voting signs in favor all in favor all right this item 4.16 this is discussing consider proposed community center reservation options intended to balance resident and taxpayer access with recurring organizational use and provide direction to staff regarding which option or combination of options is should be incorporated in the community center rental policy.

Okay, just going from the last meeting, y'all want to kind of see some options. I put four of them in there. I felt like option one or two might be more towards the taxpayer and the residents focused, and then three and four might be more organizational focused. If y'all had any questions about maybe what I meant or just kind of need direction on which options y'all would like to see the community center operate as.

I like option two. Just put that out there. I'll open it up to council.

I like option four.

How many people actually rent the community center on Sunday morning?

Currently only one can. They have it rented out every day. Has anybody asked to rent it out on Sunday morning? How many people? We don't keep up with the number when they call in per se, but I would say at least weekly people are trying to get in.

Citizens or organizations?

Citizens call more than organizations. Currently we have from 10 to 12 on Sunday morning. I guess that's my question.

It's typically about 10 to 4. It's your baby showers, birthday parties, things like that that want to come in. Right now we have two on Sundays, two churches. I have one in the morning, one in the afternoon, and then we have a church every Friday, and then we have another church looking at every Saturday. Isn't that great? So it's just a matter of whether y'all want residents to be able to book it on the weekends or if you're okay with churches or any organization, really.

The issue is if when they tie it up long-term, then it's not open. Residents can't use it. I mean, to me, it kind of defeats the purpose of what the location was for. The location is for residents to be able to use it also, not just one entity, whether it's a church or it's a business. They come in and they can just tie it up for six months and then nobody can use it. That's the way I see it. I'm not opposed to them being able to use it, but I think, you know.

I'm going to agree with the mayor on that on option number two, on floor number two.

And that one is, I kind of did that twice on the weekends, but they can still rent out during the week if y'all would let them, if that's something that organization's open to. That way, if the weeks they couldn't do the weekend, they might be able to do a weekday. I was like, because the weekend is where obviously the favor is for any kind of events for the residents. So.

Could you give me, I'm a little confused on three. Allow reservations up to six months in advance with full payment. What's different?

That's currently what we do now.

Yeah, that's what I thought.

Besides the full payment, we've been a little bit leaning on that. Like if they pay at least a month in advance, we'll work with them. Because six months, depending on their hourly rate, could be a lot at one time. So.

think initially this was you know council just kind of like hey let's just see how it goes and let it you know and now we've kind of seen how it went and you know people are wanting to call and rent it and they just it's I mean they can't use it I mean most people have baby showers and stuff like that they do it on weekends Saturdays Sundays it's not available

yeah and and i i struggle with this one because i i do like option four but i also like option two but i the problem that i have is that this is publicly funded for everyone to use and it seems like we're tying it up with just a couple of organizations i love the fact that churches want to come to this town i i do but i i think we need to look

I mean, the school has a rentable, the school's rentable. I mean, you can rent those. If we had three or four different rooms or, you know, like, you know, a bigger area, it would be different. Yeah, you can tie that one up, but it's one location. Multiple people can't be in there.

I think option four would only be achievable if we had some kind of roadmap on when they were going to have a permanent building in Josephine. And we can look at it on that regard. But just to come and say I want to take it every single Sunday with no plan or roadmap on how to do it, I don't know if option four is feasible. And we'd almost have to default to two and then have some way of if there's... plans and they could bring it to the council as an exception that it's only going to be you know X amount of months and then we could actually evaluate it and but I kind of have to look at option two is the best one that that we have right that's my option because my ultimate goal was for the residents to be able to use it and I don't feel like um it's not it's not being utilized In a previous life, I was a Boy Scout leader, and finding a place to meet was extremely difficult in this area. I was one of the people that pushed Lloyd and everybody else to get the community center, and it needs to be used for the community. And I think tying it up with a couple organizations is defeating the purpose of bringing the boy scout to town, unfortunately.

That's nothing against...

So for option two, is it only the weekends that anything is going to change?

It means twice per month on weekends?

Like if there was a four, let's say four, let's do Sundays because that's our double bookings. If there's four Sundays in the month, they would only be allowed to book two. Let's say it's the first and third they choose. The second and fourth week, they could pick another day with the way I wrote this one was the intention.

But that doesn't change anything during the week, right? Correct. Okay. all right an option for um gary i hear you and i understand um it does say that city council can approve and city council can review the agreement um so we could change it at any time so we could are you saying like compromise let's do option two with the ability that city council can review it on a case by case or do we let the city review it on case by case

i was looking at four to say that the very bottom two items say city council can approve it and there can be a review of the agreement on option the bottom two bullets of option four i still think we need to keep this option two you're gonna run back into the same thing that we have now yeah it's it's got to be case by case and that's why i said i think from from my perspective option four isn't viable unless we we know they have a longer term of setting routes in josephine with the building okay

does anybody want to make a motion now I'll make a motion for option two I'll second so we have a motion for the community center for option two we have a second do we have voting signs in favor voting signs opposed motion passes for option two

And this was a hard one, guys. This was a struggle.

And we'll keep the current, anyone currently booked or paid or even pending, we'll keep for 2026. So this might be more effective essentially starting for 2027. Thank you. Thank you. That's really nice.

Thank you. Okay.

We are on 17, 4.17. Discuss, consider and act upon adopting the revised City of Josephine Donation Acceptance Policy and Associated Resolution.

Yes, mayor. I believe the two chiefs worked with our city attorney on this. This is a donation acceptance policy that would allow specifically donations up to $1,000 for police and fire department purposes. So if someone wanted to donate something, either money or something of value up to that amount without having to come back to council to accept it.

You've looked this over? Yes. Council.

I have a couple of teeny weeny questions. I clearly read, and thank you for the great work on this, I did read $1,000, which sounds very reasonable, but I did not read a time frame. So is that $1,000 per year? Is it $1,000 per event? So they could donate to the fire department in June, donate to the police in July, donate to the shop with a cop in December. That adds up.

and the way it's curtain currently written that would be accurate okay it's per occur I could donate to the fire department one you know $900 in one instance and then donate to the police department in a different instance okay I think there should be again we're just in discussion phase right now but I think there should be an annual limit

I mean, I certainly want everybody to get donations, but there could be a, it could get out of hand.

You're talking per company or per whoever? Per entity, whatever that entity is.

I think there needs to be an annual limit to the entire municipality, whoever that goes to.

Can you go into detail why?

Yeah, why? Why would you not?

Because somebody could end up donating $20,000.

That would be fantastic. The fire department would appreciate that very much, would you not? Yes. And I'm sure the PD would too. Yay, new uniforms. I don't understand why you would be opposed to that.

Because I don't want it to turn into strings. The words that were in the document was strings attached. Quid pro quo was not in there. But I just don't want anybody to feel obligated that we have to respond. It's clear in the documents that that's what it says.

So the chief or the administration would be the ones who know who donated. The officers in the field, 90% of the time, they don't know what's going on in the operation.

Okay, I'm just bringing it up. Also, item number eight indicates that the donation would be held. So it sounds like that's responding to cash, but I've also known multiple entities that have donated items. like motorcycles, not saying kidneys or something, but there could be something that could be traded for cash remuneration. And I didn't see anything about that in the document.

And so the way that this is written right now, before we had a very comprehensive policy at some point and it kind of got riddled down. If it's for non-monetary donations, being held and accepted it just means that the before those can be transferred or required through some other means it would have to come through city council okay like that the city wouldn't accept it it has to hold those items and residents because if it's a physical asset that has to come would you say that it has to come through the council this is written that's correct because the city cannot dispose of assets without city council approval

And my last question is on item...

I want to actually agree with you on number four, because I think the dollar amount that you got as $1,000 before it has to come to council, shouldn't it be if I do it in June, $1,000, and I do $100 in July, that would exceed the $1,100 for that organization, right, or the $1,000 limit? To me, this seems like it's a workaround where I can just get $1,000 a month and never have

That can be changed. I mean, this is just something for you all day.

Absolutely. Okay, I'm open. I just...

I just don't, because what you said makes actually... I do a lot of finance stuff, and this is a financial thing, so I'm right there with you. It seems like it's kind of a shady way to do the work around, and I don't know... If they wanted to donate $12,000, they'd want to reach back from council and just do $1,000 a month. Yeah.

As long as it comes to council. Again, I would love us to get tons of donations, Jason. Oh, absolutely.

I agree.

But I just want it to be transparent.

Yeah. Because to me, you lose transparency if they do that, right?

So you would prefer that, say, a donation valued at $1,000 or more in a fiscal year?

In a fiscal year.

And let's be clear it's not that it's this is not gonna be like under the table a thousand though but just just for the record I'm still it's still gonna be on record it's just not gonna be coming it wouldn't be coming to council the way it's presented is all.

I appreciate the discussion and the last item sorry

So I'm not sure exactly where that came from, but I mean, a lot of the cities that have these policies in place find it to be 500, 1,000, 1,500. So again, that's just completely up to the council if y'all want to set a difference.

Do you have any concerns with what I had actually brought up with that, or is this normal?

I think it's a good call to have it more clear if y'all want to come back to council or I mean some places do it where like every quarter there has to be an update to council from the fire department or the police department on any donations that have been accepted. So there's just a lot of different ways to do it. The whole purpose is that the city council wants to make sure that everything is accounted for, that it's actually being used for the public purposes, that it was donated for. it can get a little bit different you know when like when we talk about the small routine donations or the recurring donations if it's like toys for tots or something like that and somebody comes in and brings a whole lot of toys like are y'all going to want to have staff saying okay they brought in a whole bunch of toys but they're valued at twelve hundred dollars altogether we can't accept this sorry until it is the council yeah no

I like the quarterly bringing it to council that works I like that my last question has to do with number 11 certainly council we're going to do the quarterly now but there's nothing about an approved use or an unapproved use do you have any thoughts about that item 11 I just did not find the words approved use. And that could be flexible. Maybe that's why you didn't put it in there. It could be for many different things.

I think that's going to be at the discretion of the police chief and the fire chief. They own their budgets. I trust them.

I just want yeah I agree I think that's the whole quarterly they can they can state what they spent the money okay perfect so the only change we're looking at is the forward bringing a quarterly to quarterly report yes thank you thank you very much do we want to adopt that resolution with the amendment now yes please that would be awesome

Okay, so this is item 4.17. Okay, so I move that we adopt the revised City of Josephine donation acceptance policy and associated resolution with the added factor that they'll be quarterly reporting to Council.

Second.

We have a second. Voting signs in favor? All in favor?

And thanks for all the work on that.

4.18 discuss consider an act to adopt a resolution to adopt the new master fee schedule for physical year 2026-2027 I have the new minimum rates I don't have any questions this is following the fee schedule we set up last year and the year before

Yes, the only change I did make was from the last meeting that the main thing is that connection fee, I was able to get it to $35 instead of $75, which covers the cost all the way around if there's public works involved for a same-day turn-on. There would be a same-day charge not charging essentially every utility customer that if they filled out their application an ample amount of time.

Which was a request from the council, correct?

Correct.

Just for the record.

And I have a couple of things. Go ahead. Yes. It talked about $200 for an illuminated wall. So the question is, is that intended for yet-to-be-built entity businesses, or is that going to include the food trucks?

I'm going to refer to Miguel, maybe. I don't do that portion of it. I do all the utilities, sanitation, community center.

What item are you looking at?

It said the illuminated wall, $200. Where you at? believe me i've read 300 pages oh those are those are the sign fees yeah that i'm not touching those so those have been there so who that is not changing anything i'm sorry it's my ignorance i don't understand does it mean illuminated wall sign so it's it's uh you know building yes for a food truck for a business any business including food trucks these are built

future are you talking about that on the side of a food truck that's what it says it has several it says illuminated wall and it also says 90 degree pivot sign and so could I have an answer back before we I mean okay these are already in the system that's that's answer number one I'm going through the definition of the illuminated wall signs okay and I Forgive me. I mean, I normally don't handle the permits for signs, but I'll be happy to go over those definitions if needed.

Yeah, because I don't understand.

The intent of that originally was for buildings, not for food trucks. Brick and mortar. I mean, this is for brick and mortar. Okay, brick and mortar is fine. Yeah, Jane, you remember this when we did the sign ordinance.

Hey, Lloyd and I can go back to this one. All right, I'm sorry. I didn't realize that. No food trucks. Okay, one more. There's also a fee on page 223 of the packet for commercial menu board. Same thing. Is that only for drive-through? Yeah. Or does that also mean the food trucks?

That'll be like a drive-through.

Right now, all of our signs cover only brick and mortar establishments. Or just hypothetically, if this food truck park, the private park, decides to put a monument sign to advertise the park itself, that's covered here. That's clear. Right now, food trucks are kind of on their own little world at the moment.

Thank you. I like them on an island. And my last question is it also talks about solar panel fees, and I want to make sure that's in the future and not retroactive to all the people who already have them.

need to know that the solar panel didn't change yeah okay so it's already on those are just new installations okay thank you all right all done thank you so if you didn't you installed them and didn't pay you owe money thank you very much and then just for the record the inside rate at the minimum rate would raise um about three dollars and eighteen cents the mud um minimum would raise about a dollar and 39 cents for this year

I can use that much less water.

So I'll make a motion to approve the master fee schedule for fiscal year 2026-2027. I'll second.

Voting signs in favor? All in favor? Okay, 4.9, this is Civic Plus, so there's no action, but you're here to talk about the option?

Yes, and then I can pull up some of the websites too because I know I had a couple of questions in regards to what the difference is between the premium and the standard. We talked about it a little bit in the joint work session about what the difference would include, but just for overall, The easiest way to look at it as standard is you have to pick a layout that's given to you. We don't get all the customization premium. There's anything you want basically can be built as far as a template that we would like to see. Um, they're both mobile friendly, um, and the premium it's clear. So those are the two main differences. Um, and then

The question I have is for the premium, is this the one that we were talking about at a previous work session where the MDD, if they wanted to create their own sub-tab and we have multiple sub-tabs, that premium will allow us to do that, not the standard?

That is correct. And I couldn't even include the police logo, fire logo, our logo, MDD logo on the standard. You would get the City of Josephine logo.

And we're, this is a, you know, this is a pretty low, a lot of municipalities use, so if we're moving this direction.

So the premium is probably going to be the better fit.

Correct.

Got it.

If you want the customization, it would be, rather than going with the standard and redesigning it later and adding it.

Will they train you on that customization part during that whole training thing is what I figured.

Yes, ma'am.

And then our IT will do it too, right?

The IT is going to sit on with me. They'll also be, because they have to be there for, I don't know the IT words, but the back end and the cloud version and the storing. And because it does, if we adopt everything with it, the dock access, there's a lot of AI and compliance that we have to be with with that. so which makes it very user friendly to search documents if you just typed in joint work session it would pull up every agenda even if it's in the agenda if that specific word so there's a lot with the it and the implementation of sit with plus with that so staff's looking to answer questions but also the direction your councils want to go correct Yeah, so we can, or did you want to bring it back to the consent? What did you want to do with this?

So I thought that might be the easiest way. So there was some language left off. I thought if you all seem generally happy with it, we could just put it on the consent agenda for next time.

My only question, and I think, and I don't know if you got back to me on that, when I went to their website and actually clicked into like all the legalese, if it's a legal document that y'all are getting to sign, is it going to include all the legalese that you can actually read it? Or you just click on that little link on the website and it's really hard.

Are you talking about acknowledging like a contract? Yes. Yes. We, I mean, we don't just hit sign on any, like any agreement beforehand.

I was like starting to read it and I'm like I could print it out and it's going to be this big. Yes. I'm not going to do that. But I'm like that's a lot of legalese and normally you get a contract like the. Yes, we would have a contract this year. I knew you would.

And we're going with the premium on the consent agenda, correct?

One of the questions I had, it starts out with that list price of $38,000 and then it dropped. And I double-checked with Derek and I double-checked with them because I couldn't back into their numbers. And they said that it would be going forward on the $25,000, not the $38,000. And so that...

that's a setup and I got you know I was like I got their numbers when I read it myself because we weren't in I wasn't exactly sure where you were getting the portion of your numbers but I was able to run everything and I did the implementation cost the year one discounts comparing both of them and then a five-year projection of each one so council how much did you say we were already paying for about 13

just just a little bit a year right 13 a year that is correct our city attorney is advising that there's enough information in the packet that if you wanted to make a motion on this tonight you could okay council so we just need to make a motion on premium or standard

PREMIUM, STANDARD, EVERYTHING INCLUDED IS THE AGENDA AND MINUTES SOFTWARE, THE WEBSITE, AUDIO I, MASK NOTIFICATIONS, AND DOC ACCESS. IF YOU'RE GOOD WITH THE BUNDLE, THEN I JUST NEED THE PREMIUM AND STANDARD.

AND THAT BRINGS US UP TO THE ADA STANDARDS AS WELL. YES, MA'AM.

Which is the premium?

That's what started this, I think.

Either one would take us to the ADA standards.

I'm talking about for having the multiple tabs and the premium.

That would have to be the premium if you want multiple of that.

Okay, so I'll make a motion to approve the Civic Plus bundle premium service.

okay when we got a second voting signs in favor all in favor okay and then just next month i'll bring you the diligent side that we have now to get that cancelled okay thank you okay next item is 4.20 this discuss and receive an update from the city administrator regarding legislative priorities advocacy efforts and related matters um just so council's aware this was in your um this update was also in your packet

Yes, Mayor and Council, I'm happy to go over any part of this you would like, but just in brief to start with, we are in between the 89th and the 90th regular legislative sessions. The 90th session will not start until January. What we found from the last two sessions is that the interim is a great time to approach our legislators. They're not as in a frenzy as they are during the middle of the session. What we found out last time is that if we wait until the session starts, it's really too late, that they really already have their priorities lined up. So approaching them this time of year seems appropriate, and they seem willing to sit down and listen to us. So I have made some efforts since we last adopted the legislative agenda. So that was in April on the legislative agenda, and these were very broad ideas. May and June, I prepared some materials to present to our legislators. Most of these are about muds or related. They're not anti-mud. They're just so that we can work with the muds better. So for instance, we had that issue a year or so ago when, you know, People in the mud didn't really want to pay the same for services because they weren't getting exactly the same service. We couldn't provide the same services that we were asking them to pay for equal services. So this would be for things like being allowed to, for our officers but to extend municipal ordinances by mutual agreement and then have that be enforceable by our officers. So I think there's a lot of thought that you can do that by interlocal agreement already, but I don't have anything that says that we can actually extend our ordinances so our officers can patrol and they can do certain things. But if they wanted to adopt our fireworks ordinance or our noise ordinance or something else, they can adopt it all day long, but we can't enforce it. So this would be to, these are kind of, some of these are just very simple things that would just make it a lot easier for us to work with the MUD since two thirds of our customers are outside city limits. And there's a list of those. I did attend a TML advocacy boot camp. It was a one-day kind of crash course on how to communicate effectively with your legislators and how to also coordinate with other agencies such as TML staff. And then since I was down in Austin on the 17th, I was trying to make good use of the time, and I did meet with some representatives. Chairman Gates, who's the House Land and Resource Management Committee. uh chairman and uh met with him his staff and then um also the committee clerk and i rep i met with brent money's staff on that and i had previously talked to representative candy noble's office on that so those are the efforts so far and we also have in addition to those state efforts we also well let me go through a couple others i did mention a couple other concerns they weren't legislative items but just issues that we could use some help with One is coordination on TxDOT projects such as FM6 expansion because Hunt County and Collin County don't seem to coordinate very well. So they were actually going to have some conversations with TxDOT on that because FM6 is going to be an issue for us. TCEQ permitting, we expressed our frustration about how the enforcement side doesn't really talk to the permitting side and where we landed with that. And Representative Nobles asked me to pull all that information together and she was actually going to look into it for us. So I'm working on that. TML did ask me to attend the, and be a delegate at the legislative, I'm sorry, the TML Policy Summit on August 27th to 28th. So I do plan to attend that. I think last year or the year before, whenever we did the original, for the last session, legislative agenda, most of what we had that TML adopted, we did a resolution and they adopted that resolution with those points on it. Those are still in there. We've kind of refined it just a little bit. So at the Policy Summit, I would only suggest that we, some things that we've learned over the last couple of years and things that we've heard from legislators about what's more willing to be approved. versus what is more idealistic. So the first resolution had like what we'd really like to have, and the second one are the same things, but maybe we've toned it down or adjusted just a bit to what might reasonably pass or be approved or sponsored. And most of those items are mud. As far as federal advocacy, we've got the zip code initiative still going on. That still is held up in a committee. But we did submit a new letter on July 7 supporting that we would like to see that leave the committee and actually get voted on on the floor. And at the moment, they have other priorities. So they just haven't gotten to it yet. But we are on a bill to see if we can get one unified zip code versus five. And that's been an effort that you can actually thank your previous councils and staff because they pursued this for a very long time. So if this gets passed, it's for many years of people participating and trying to get that done. So that's kind of where we are. I'm happy to answer questions. I did include the testimony that I provided to that House Land and Resource Management Committee when they had a hearing on the 21st. And there's also a TML legislative advocacy publication that I included in your packet as well.

Well, since this is an update, unless you just have small questions, I'd prefer you email your questions and ask for updates through Lisa.

I just want to ask one question. A citizen brought this to my attention that it went right over my head. And I think I need to bring this out so we can be prepared. Because we were talking about the zip code being an issue for years. But some citizens have said, oh my gosh, they changed their zip code. We've got to change everything else. And it's very true. I mean, between your medical and your social security and all the rest of it. So when this happens, We need to, if we think this is going to happen, we need to get everybody on notice because it's going to be a major issue. And I just needed to throw that out.

So I think, thank you, I agree. I think this would have to go through such a process that we'll have plenty of time and opportunity to let people know and we'll certainly communicate that if it happens.

Thank you.

And I just have one question. Because commissioners and representatives come to Josephine events, Fireworks in the Park, Christmas in the Park, ISD events, and even Fall Festival in Lavon and other nearby places, could you please send us the packets that you're going to share with legislators just one day in advance? And just to all the city council. Thank you. Just so we're transparent. For like testimony and... Whatever you're going to present, whether it's a packet or a testimony, just so if we see somebody, which you and I both do a lot, there'll be no surprises. We'll be aligned. It'll be transparent. Thank you.

Mm-hmm. We'll be aligned. Yes, if you're going to meet with someone, just let me know, and I'll be happy to pass on whatever the latest is. At this point, it's not really changing. It's just being refined here and there. Yeah, just one day in advance is all I'm asking. Perfect.

Thank you. Next item is 4.21. This is discuss considering an act to adopt a resolution to rename Josephine Volunteer Fire Station to be the Wayne Allen EMS Station.

I just want to thank the council for allowing this motion to come forward. I think this is a great thing. Wayne Allen has done amazing things for our community, and this is a great way to honor him.

Do you want to be the honor one to make the motion?

We could fight, Gary. Make a motion.

I make a motion to adopt a resolution naming Wayne Allen EMS Station. I'll second.

motion and a second voting signs in favor all in favor energetic motion passes thank you okay 4.22 receive a staff briefing on alcohol related land uses and provide policy direction to staff Miguel

Honorable Mayor, members of the City Council, Miguel Inclan for the record. As you know, the public voted to allow alcohol sales for mixed beverages in our community. There have been concerns raised at the council level and amongst the public regarding what types of alcohol related uses would be permitted. And to be clear, the use chart in section 22 of our zoning ordinance governs what land uses can go in the city limits. So if a use is not listed there explicitly, then it is not allowed. So just to confirm, bars, you know, pure bars and liquor stores are not a permitted use within the city limits. Doesn't mean that somebody can go out just outside the city limits and open up as has been the historic pattern in Texas for years. The only concern, as I was reading through everything, and to be transparent, is that restaurants can now legally serve alcohol in the city based on the approvals from the public. But our zoning ordinance needs to be more clear as to what restaurants could be allowed to serve alcohol. Do you want to basically break up the uses to allow restaurants that do not serve alcohol and restaurants that do in different zoning districts? Or if you want to require specific use permits if they're closer to residential districts? Those are the kinds of questions that I need some guidance and direction on before I can proceed with actual amendments down the road.

Thank you for that thoughtful presentation. I love it. Okay. My personal opinion, and I'm only one, is I believe that we love our margaritas with our tacos. Personally, I would like to have us continue the ban on just bars, if that's my opinion. And we've got some dangerous intersections and curves nearby. And if somebody imbibes too much, it could be very dangerous. We had a neighbor mayor go on social media with actual tears in his eyes because people are dying. And I want to take care of safety. I want to take care of the public. I want to be family friendly. And that's just my opinion.

Can you bring something back to the council for the next meeting or, you know, put something together with different options, you know, and then council can use that to give you yes, no directions or?

Yeah, I'll put something together for a future date.

I think a lot of it's going to come down to definitions of how we define some things. Yeah, you did ask questions. So can we put in there that every place that serves alcohol has to serve food, period, and the majority of their business has to be food?

So that's already... I think that's covered. That got already approved by you all. It was actually the ordinance that you had requested over the summer, late spring and summer.

It's in the business regulation.

It's in the business regulation. So this is just about zoning. So regardless of where it goes, the rules that were put in place regarding restaurants that serve alcohol, those are already in place.

OK. So did we not talk about how far away they have to be from schools and churches?

So yes, but that is independent of zoning. And, you know, you have to also be prepared for after the fact, right? So if you just hypothetically say, hey, we do want to allow liquor stores by specific use permit in the commercial zoning district and, you know, set additional conditions that they would have to meet by ordinance.

We just want restaurants.

well, just throwing it out there, right? That gives you more latitude to control where they go, right? Because you can have a commercial zoning right next to a house where there's a child.

Exactly. My personal opinion is no bars in any zone. And my personal opinion is item three, which zoning district should they be eligible at use. And it would not be single family and not be mixed use. So I mean, if you've got apartments, it's the same as residents in a lot of cases. In my opinion, I'm just one person. But yes, I'll leave it. I agree that if you can bring something back But those are just two of my opinions. And I agree with April. food must be served. And some places have that you must serve over 50% of the total sales, over 50% of the total sales must be food.

I think that's a state thing.

That's already in place at the state level and locally. But if we define the restaurant with alcohol, we can add that to the definition just to be clear.

Thank you.

So we ended up having a little place that's got stores or restaurants at the bottom and apartments above.

I'll have to come up with some regulations about that.

There are some places that have... You could also have like, you know, like the trailer that's set up at events and stuff that sell margaritas. You know, then that would kind of knock them out of being able to sit over there and sell margaritas.

And I'll need to address the to-go places. Some of those want to come in sometimes and

i know cities have a hard time with those so i can also address that here thank you thank you but special use permit for liquor i don't think we need a special use permit for liquor if we're going to go to all this trouble to get this done well special special use permit with that um like if we had a cinco de mayo festival in the park

Would that be a special use? No, I would call it a special event. Special use is forever. A specific use permit is you're allowing this in a particular zoning district only if they meet certain conditions, which gives you a lot of latitude because you're not obligated to approval. So if it's say across the street right here at the corner there's commercial, right, and there's a house where there's a child right across the street, You can reject that as hypothetical.

It gives the council a little bit. It doesn't immediately deny it. It gives you the ability to look at the situation and make a decision.

On a case-by-case basis. Yeah, I think it should be done in special permit.

So I think answer some of these questions and then come back. The council can send their, you can either email them or bring them back to the next council member at a meeting.

So probably one more, at least one more discussion here before we bring it back as any kind of ordinance. Okay. Does that sound? Do you want to see the answers to our questions?

I mean, if you can email them to me, that'd be great.

Yeah, email your answers to Miguel.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miguel.

Okay, we already did 4.23, so we are now on 4.24, which is...

request from council members for future items on the agenda and don't remember you have to make a motion to add something I'd like to have the work session documents the Josephine MDD draft and the PowerPoint alignment with the city in the next city council packet meeting just in the packet in the packet

Like as a report?

Yes. That doesn't really have to be a motion. We can just direct council to do that. I mean council, staff.

Thank you.

Does anyone else have anything they want to add to the next agenda?

I don't know how to handle it. I really don't.

for agenda item 4.2 there was no motion for tcci in hunt county number three do we want to put that on agenda to give him more direction to talk to him more i don't think that's a good idea

I think we need something to address the request one way or the other.

Something needs to be addressed, that's it.

I do think if he was to go back and watch the last council meeting and see all the concerns that were brought up, that he may come back with agreeing to what we did with the last guy. So I would say, yeah, put it on the agenda. and give him the opportunity to come back. My motion is...

If he wants to put it on...

I'm not making a motion. I'm just simply talking. I'm just asking.

I will.

I will, Drew. Lisa will talk to him.

Yeah.

Okay. Do we have a motion to adjourn?

Yes, I have a motion to adjourn.

Do we have a second?

I'll second.

Voting signs in favor?

Council members, don't go anywhere.

This meeting is adjourned.

We need your signatures.