Good afternoon and welcome to this meeting of the Denton City Council.

Today's date, October 14, 2025.

It's Tuesday.

It's 301 p.m.

We do have a quorum, so I'll call the meeting to order.

And the first thing on the uh agenda are uh citizen comments on the consent agenda seeing none that takes us to a request for clarification of agenda items listed on the this agenda for public hearing and individual consideration.

Yes.

I beg your point.

Perhaps I missed that.

I would like to pull item D for individual consideration.

Yeah, you did um well you did say public.

Nonetheless, I'd like to do that.

Any and let me take that on any other questions on um public hearing and individual consideration.

Any questions?

Seeing none Mr.

City Attorney, uh I know the answer to this.

Yeah, um the council's I guess I'd say unwritten rules have been that the consent agenda items have to be pulled prior to the meeting in order to set have a separate vote on them.

And so that has been the practice of the council, and the mayor's re-emphasized that many times to have those items pulled before the meeting.

Uh mayor, it's it's within your discretion, I guess if you want to make some of kind of a deviation from that at this point, but that's been this the council's rule.

Oh man.

Uh yeah, so question the state your question.

And this is about the same topic, I'm not moving on to anything else.

Um so when we uh come into meeting and you know the meeting is open.

One of the questions is there anything that we have for clarification.

Is that coming from the consent agenda?

That question is that coming from us looking at the consent agenda or any or everything.

The clarification as a whole.

Prior to the meeting, there's an opportunity for council to send in questions about any agenda item, but that's the time when the staff is looking for clarification on consent agenda items is prior to the meeting.

So this gentleman is wanting to move this to you say you were moving it to consent agenda or something.

What is it?

Remove it from the consent agenda.

Correct.

And that is for just a particular question.

Are we trying to move to do something?

That's I think what the reason we do this is we want to have the questions and any items pulled prior to the council meeting because we've told our staff who are the experts that they don't need to be here.

Right.

So when we have a council member pull an item that we're not aware of, then we have to call that employee and tell them you've got to come down here.

We don't have that employee here right now, so we'd have to wait and have that employee show up.

That's why we wait.

We don't uh if you recall the whole reason was we had all the directors sitting in a room for all the time waiting on if anyone pulled an item.

So the whole idea is to let us know in advance you want to pull something, right?

Then we can say this item's been pulled.

I need that staff member to be available so they could come in here right now and answer your question.

Christine, it depends at the mayor's discretion.

Right now, uh, you know, we might be able to answer it.

I just don't know.

So just may I please uh continue on with a furthering thoughts?

Um is it really necessary for the question to be asked then?

Are we just add asking it for semantics here?

So the questions relating to individual consideration and public hearing items from tonight.

That's what the agenda items about.

Is do you have questions about those items tonight?

Not about the consent agenda.

Those should have been brought in already in advance.

Right, I understand.

So I think that's what the clarification at this point, you know, needs to be made.

It's like there's a question that ask, and it appears as though if we ask a question in in regards to pulling something or doing something at this particular time, then we get this lecture.

Yeah.

Which we all most of us, I think we've all been here and we know that because we're the ones that said it, you know, into motion.

I was here.

Right.

So I just wanted to make sure that the clarification is there, so we won't have to have this kind of conversation.

Okay.

That's all I'm that's my statement.

Um so I'm enforcing the rules that we that we have created the body.

So that said, if it's a separate vote, I can get there.

There's other violations of the rules that happen on a regular basis.

So I uh it's not a one-off, uh, but I I'm fine with a separate vote.

If you're asking for a presentation and all those things, I'm not I'm not comfortable with that.

I'll leave it in intact.

I I don't want a staff member having to come up here unnecessarily so for three minute presentation and a one minute vote.

I'd hate that as well, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh I would I would with respectfully, I would like a separate vote on item D.

All right.

So yeah, we'll we'll just I'll call and I will try to do better in the future.

I'll call that separate, uh, but there no need for a presentation.

Um for those tracking along item H was pulled in advance.

So H and D have been pulled uh for those tracking along.

We'll take those up individually.

Uh no questions on the other things takes us to a first work session.

Uh 3A ID 251857 receive report whole discussion, give staff direction regarding the city's federal legislative efforts.

Good afternoon, Council Christy Fogle, Chief of Staff, uh, here to provide an update on our legislative efforts as an overview for our presentation.

I'll go over our general advocacy objectives, um, our community project funding requests, um, as well as our 2025 accomplishments and grants, and then turn it over to Ralph and Deborah uh from Capital Edge, who are visiting here from DC to provide a briefing um on their efforts in DC.

Um, our federal advocacy objectives are to secure federal grant funding, engage legislators on areas of legislation that impact the city, and monitor and participate in the federal rulemaking process.

The community project funding um requests, also called earmarks, allow legislators to allocate funding in their districts.

Uh, this practice was discontinued back in 2011 and then reinstated by Congress in 2021.

Um, but until 2024, none of the Denton delegation members accepted earmark requests in their office.

Now Congressman Ronnie Jackson and Brandon Gill accept earmark requests, and this year we actively engaged in the earmark request process by submitting three proposals to Representative Ronnie Jackson's office.

As a little bit of a reminder from last year, we submitted three requests to Congressman Jackson's office.

Um, one for 1.2 million for protective bollards on the downtown square, um, and then two wastewater expansion projects.

Um we had the North Mosh branch wastewater improvement project um accepted into the 2024-25 budget process.

It made it all the way through the process and was set to be included in the final budget last year at $2 million.

Um, but unfortunately uh they passed a year-long continuing resolution instead of a budget, and meant uh that meant that no earmarks were allocated.

So this year we resubmitted that uh that project to Congressman Jackson's office um as well as a public safety real-time information EOC improvement project and the downtown bollards again.

Um and the North Marsh branch was included in the appropriation subcommittee markup um of the budget, but a final budget has yet to be passed in um past years.

Whenever they've passed a continuing resolution, there has not been um any inclusion of earmarks in those continuing resolution budgets.

Uh but this year there has been discussion of that.

So this Mosh branch uh two million dollars is not considered dead yet.

Um, but we're we're still watching the federal government to see what happens.

And then just running through um some of our accomplishments and grants this year.

Uh, we're at 2.9 million dollars in grant funding.

Um, our grants team has done a great job, and um Ralph and Deborah assist with finding those opportunities and helping us uh provide those applications.

And with that, um I'm happy to take any questions over those few things, um, but then I'll turn it over to Ralph to give his side of the presentation.

Okay, any questions for staff representative district one?

Are those grants to be used?

Um 25-26, or are these extended grants?

Correct, these have been granted in the 25 year um, not necessarily yet actively used.

Yeah.

That was the other question.

Thank you.

Okay.

Anyone represent Far?

Um Mayor, the next part of the presentation is Debra and Ralph, so I have a question about the opportunity zone.

Should I build that to Christy while she's up here now?

Or later.

I think Ralph and Deborah are better suited to answer that whenever they get to it.

Okay.

Any questions for staff?

Okay.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

It's uh good to see you, Ralph Garbushin with Capital Edge, and my colleague uh Deborah De Haney Howard is with me as well.

It's it's always good to come to Denton and visit.

It's it's especially fun to come here at Halloween.

Um I I'm not sure any other city does quite has so much fun with Halloween as you all do.

Um and it's been great to see the kids uh walking around.

Um so going to provide uh we're here at an interesting time.

I don't think um I'm I'm giving any news there um on what's happening in Washington.

I'll try to go through this uh presentation as quickly as possible to leave time for QA.

Uh so just a quick overview.

I'm gonna talk about budget and tax issues, do a quick overview of the budget reconciliation bill or the one big beautiful one big beautiful bill act as it's called.

Um that's a really long acronym, by the way.

It's the OBBBA.

Um budget reconciliation.

Talk about where we are in the FY2026 appropriations process.

Um, as part of that discussion, I'm gonna talk about some of the executive actions with the federal workforce, grant and grant pauses, disbursement freezes, that kind of thing, um, which is has heated up in the last few weeks.

And then one that if you'd asked me back in February or March, would I be including this in this presentation?

I would have probably laughed.

But housing and community development, there's been a lot of action on housing and community development.

And going to hit really quickly surface transportation reauthorization.

And since we prepared this presentation, another issue has come up that I'll I'll talk about briefly, and that's in the in the telecommunications world.

And I'll talk briefly about that at the end.

So just the delay of the land.

I think this is always important, and it's especially important when we have such a closely divided Congress.

Uh the House is a 219 Republicans, 213 Democrats, and three vacancies.

Um two of those vacancies, one of those vacancies is um is Mayor Turner from from Houston.

Um, and then uh the 7th district in Tennessee, well, they'll be having a special election uh next month.

And then um, and then uh the district in Arizona where they had a special election a few weeks ago.

So when she is uh sworn in, um and I I think that election was certified, so I think it she'll be she will be sworn in.

Um it'll be 219 um to 214.

But you know, really in the house, as long as you have a majority.

Um the the general rule of thumb is what can the house do, whatever a majority of them agree to do.

Uh it gets a little bit trickier in the Senate, and that's that's I think that's where the lay of land becomes really important.

53 Republicans, 47 Democrats.

Most bills you need 60 votes to pass in the Senate.

But but some bills, budget reconciliation bills, including the one big beautiful bill act, need 51.

And then this will be important, rescissions, and it's particularly important to the to the discussions on the government shutdown and the path forward.

Resilions bills uh need 51 votes in the Senate.

So a regular appropriations bill needs 60 votes, or rescinds bill needs only 51 votes.

So the on the one big beautiful bill act, the budget reconciliation, that that's a that's a massive bill.

Um it's it's about five trillion dollars in new spending over 10 years.

We included in our handouts kind of a broad overview of that.

Um about $2 trillion in spending reductions, mostly in Medicaid and SNAP.

Um, and then um, but it's a massive bill, and and that just kind of zeroing in on the provisions that are particularly um particularly impact local governments.

Uh then this was a big win.

I can't overstate this, and I think uh we we local governments in general did a really good job of of on this message preserving the tax exemption for municipal bonds, including private activity bonds.

In 2017, we almost lost private activity bonds, um, and and could have lost uh municipal bonds in general.

We're at the point now that by the time they started marking up the budget reconciliation bill, when you said municipal bonds, congressional staff, yeah, yeah, yeah, we know.

And that's exactly where so I think local governments, the conference of mayors, the League of Cities, the Government Finance Officers Association, individual cities just did a really good job on that message.

There was no question about touching municipal bonds.

And when you're looking for offsets, municipal bonds are attempting target.

Um the bill included an extension and enhancement of the low-income housing tax credit, including a provision that should make it easier to build um build low income housing properties with with um revenue bonds.

Um a permanent extension of the new markets tax credit.

That's uh that's a federal program that provides tax incentives for for economic development in in low moderate income census tracts, including a lot in Denton.

And then a permanent extension of opportunity zones, those were created in 2017, and and some key reforms to the opportunity zone program.

That was enacted kind of haphazardly and quickly, I think I could say in 2017, and so they they made they fine-tuned that program.

Um, an increase in the salt deduction from from $10,000 to 40,000.

And then uh, and this is important because Denton is a is a base camp city, um, $625 million in in urban area security initiative funding, specifically for FIFA World Cup host cities.

Uh the two X's um, I think were two that the city was focused on.

Um, preservation of inflation reduction act grant programs, which which covered a lot of clean energy, a lot of a lot of um clean energy, some transportation, those were all unobligated balances were rescinded.

And then the inflation reduction act um included uh a whole array of clean energy tax incentives and set those up so that the entities without any tax liability could claim those, the direct pay energy tax incentives, those were repealed in the inflation reduction act.

Um so this is this is just quick summary of what what the budget reconciliation act did to the direct pay clean energy.

So under the original law, um the inflation reduction act, you had to begin construction by this is general, I mean the the details are all out, but you generally had to begin construction by 2020 by 2032.

Um they moved that up and they moved it up drastically.

So you have to be under construction by July 4th, 2026 or be completed by the end of 2027 if you start construction after July 4th, 2026.

So the window, the clock is ticking quickly on on a lot of those clean energy tax incentives, particularly for wind and solar.

That those are the ones that phase out the most quickly.

Opportunity zones, uh the budget reconciliation law, it makes them permanent.

Um they were first authorized in 2017.

So that first round of opportunity zones is set to expire.

There, it's a 10-year designation.

Um, makes them permanent, allows the governor to designate a new round every 10 years.

The next designations will take place next year.

Um it enhances the tax benefits for investors, creates new reporting opportunities, both for opportunity zone investors.

Um, one of the criticisms of that program was what are these tax incentives going to exactly?

Um, and also on the Treasury Department side, it creates reporting requirements for the Treasury Department on that, and and actually appropriates, I think 15 million dollars for the Treasury Department to do that reporting.

So they they treat the reporting requirements seriously for opportunity zones.

Um I address uh you had a question about opportunity zones, or should I do that at the end?

Uh sure, we can just do it now.

Okay.

Thanks, Ralph.

So we'll have another crack at the governor doing this again next year.

Yes.

And perhaps you don't know the the answer to this, but how did this current map come out come about?

What's the process between the interaction of the city and the governor's office and designating these?

So this is now the law, this is now federal law, but now it is all in the governor's hands.

So next year the governor, there's there's eligible census tract eligibility is based on poverty and median family income.

And this is a map here of Denton census tracts that are eligible.

The governor can designate 25% of eligible census tracts in the state is opportunity zones.

So I I between now and 2026, um, I think the city needs to let the governor know which of your census tracts.

I think it's about eight census tracts in Denton.

Um you would like to be um designated as opportunity zones, and it's it's fully in the hands of the governor.

So the current map here this happened 10 years ago.

Yeah, the no, this is the new map.

These this is the map of eligible census tracts.

Oh, okay.

So but it's up to the governor.

Um, and if you zoom this out, you you would see all the eligible census tracts in Texas.

The governor can designate 25% of those as opportunity zones.

So this being the new map.

How did exactly did this come about?

Oh, that's just the law.

The way the law is written.

Um a census tract is eligible.

Uh, and forgive me, but I think it's if it has a poverty rate of 20%, or a median household income of 125% or less of the metropolitan area median household income.

And I assume I assume that's based on census data.

Yes.

The most recent census.

Uh actually it's based on the most recent American community community survey data, which I think they do every two years.

Okay, so this is more regularly updated than 10 years.

Yes.

Okay.

Yes.

That that's where I was getting at.

I was I was looking at I'm looking at population growth of the city growing very fast, and I was thinking this might be 2020 census data.

That's why this is where I was going with this question.

And and I'd have to look at the data that this was used to create this map, but it's 2025.

So it might be based on 20.

Forgive me, but I think in the the ACS data we have now is probably 2023 data.

Um they update that every two years, and I'm not sure if the new 2025 data has come out yet.

Um but but it's the it's the most recent census data.

Okay, last question.

Is there um any opportunity for advocacy from this body on this map?

Yeah, no, I I think the the of everything I say today, um, the one takeaway is between now and July, I think, of 2026, um letting the governor know which of your census tracts.

He's not gonna, I mean, he can only do 25% of them in the whole state.

So of your, I think eight or so eligibus tracts, which one would the city like to see designated?

And and then lobbying to make sure there's a dent and census.

You know, and in opportunity zones, I I should, you know, not the end all be all.

I I like to describe them as as an extra tool in the economic development toolkit.

Thank you, Ralph, very much.

And so this is the map of of your eligible census tracts under the new legislation.

Um FY2026.

Um we all know where we stand.

Um uh the government is shut down.

Um and in the the standoff is is the house has passed a clean quote unquote clean CR.

There's no such thing as a clean CR.

Every continuing continuing, I shouldn't say CR, continuing resolution, which is a short-term funding bill to keep the government open until Congress can enact a final budget.

Um but it's a it's a generally clean CR that the House has passed.

The Senate has not garnered 60 votes to pass that or an alternative that the Democrats have put forward.

And the Democrats kind of their line in the sand is um uh uh um expanded uh premium subsidies under the Affordable Care Act are set to expire at the end of this year.

So they want an extension of those expanded premium subsidies.

They want um assurances that the administration will will spend money appropriated by Congress as directed by Congress, and then going back to the rescinders, they are saying we don't want any more rescisions bills, and that gets to you need 60 votes to pass an appropriations bill, but only 51 to pass a rescons bill.

So they're saying we could negotiate this, we could get 60 votes, and then a rescinds bill could come and undo all that work.

So that's kind of their line in the sand.

Um and just this just a quick overview of a rescissions bill.

Uh Congress did pass a rescissions bill earlier this year.

It was $8 billion, mostly for foreign aid and in public broadcasting, so nothing that directly impacts the city.

Um and that this is all outlined in the budget act.

Um, it's an expedited process, it can't be filibustered in the Senate, hence the 51 votes.

And before this year, the last rescissions bill that actually um became law was an FY 1999 under President Clinton.

So it's not something that's been used often.

And um the most recent rescissions bill was eight billion dollars.

That one was a grand total of and I mean federal budget, this is around a year or 16.8 million dollars.

Um I'd love to go back and learn about what the thinking was behind that 16.8 million dollar rescissions bill.

Um so and then I I think it's been pretty widely reported that that the administration, particularly the director of off of man of the office of management and budget, believes that that the administrate the executive should have a lot more authority to cancel spending and to and to change the direction of money appropriated by Congress.

So that's that this is really kind of an existential standoff.

Um that's different from previous federal government shutdowns.

So the path forward, I honestly I don't know, and I think anyone who who says I think this is how this is gonna end, is probably um full of it.

So I have no idea.

I do I do think that this is different from previous shutdowns.

I think it's going to last a long time.

Um so we'll see.

Um in past years, um the last really long government shutdown, I think was in 2019.

Um and that what brought that to a head was people started complaining about um weights at the airport because TSA workers were calling in sick and air traffic controllers were calling in sick.

So I I think one of the things the Democrats are counting on to maybe bring things to a head is on November 1st, people will start getting their their notices about renewing um their affordable care act plans.

So I think part of their strategy is to hold out for that.

I don't know, but but that's trying to read their thinking.

I think that might be part of it.

But if and when they do um reach an agreement on a continuing resolution, because they're not gonna reach an agreement on the final budget.

Um they will be looking to do a full year FY 2026 budget.

Um they have been working all year, they've made surprising progress on the appropriations bills in both the House and the Senate more than they've made in in recent years at this point.

Um but even then, once they get past the shutdown, the House and Senate are very far apart on the overall discretionary spending cap.

Um the federal government spends about give or take $6.00 trillion a year, and a small portion of that $1.6 trillion is discretionary spending.

And um of that $1.6 trillion, about $900 billion is defense.

So $700 billion is non-defense, and most of this disagreement is about that $700 billion for non-defense.

And the House budget resolution, and this is the number the House is working with, would cut that $700 billion by $180 billion, which is a pretty drastic cut.

The Senate is working on the previous spending cap, so there's a big gap between the House and the Senate.

So they still have to resolve that, which is um easier said than done.

Um it's it's easier said than done to to actually cut 25% from non-defense discretionary spending, and easier said than done to reconcile the House numbers with the Senate numbers.

Um and and I I talked about that $6.8 trillion budget, give or take, and and how of that $1.6 trillion is discretionary, and of that discretionary about $700 billion is non-defense.

And and kind of this is an old joke.

The federal government is an insurance company with an army.

If you look at its budget, um most of the spending goes to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, other health care programs, and then defense.

And I think this is a really interesting chart.

Um and I think looking at the one big beautiful bill act, most of its cuts came from that second box on the top health.

Um a little bit came from um from nutrition programs.

Um and then you see though, where even if you got rid of all non-defense discretionary spending, the federal budget deficit last year would still have been, which is impossible to do.

Non-defense discretionary spending covers HUD, um, the National Park Service, it covers HHS.

Um you would still have a budget deficit of about a trillion dollars.

So all of this shutdown is focused on that 700 billion dollar or so piece, which I know is a big number, but in the federal budget is a small part of the federal budget.

So all of that said, local government priorities, and I think you're all are familiar with these.

Um CDBG, uh, both the House and Senate would fund CDBG at last year's level in their appropriations bills.

Home, um the administration proposed eliminating home, the house bill would eliminate home, the Senate bill funds it.

Umeless assistance, the administration proposed consolidating homeless assistance grants into a state block grant and cutting the funding.

Both the House and Senate um reject that proposal.

And then always important for the city homeland security, the urban area security initiative and the state homeland security grant program.

Both of those are okay in the House and Senate.

So most of the local priorities except home are in good shape, and I think even home in any final bill will be okay.

Um Christie mentioned community project funding.

Um Representative Jackson, he's in the pending House Transportation HUD Appropriations Bill, he secured $2 million for uh a wastewater improvement project along MASH Branch.

And I know um, and we're working with staff, and and Christie's working with staff.

I know this sounds um a little bit wild because they still haven't finished FY2026, but now is the time for the city to start thinking about and developing its FY2027 um yearmark requests.

So I mentioned housing and community development.

And just to put that into context, the last major housing and community development bill was in the Cranston Gonzalez Housing and Community Development Act of 1992.

So that's the last time.

Yeah.

I mean, um, may they rest in peace.

Mr.

Cranston and Mr.

Gonzalez have long left us.

So if any programs are due for reauthorization and update, it's it's it's housing and community development programs.

Um I'm gonna start with a second bullet because I this is really interesting.

The the chair and ranking member of the House Housing and Insurance Subcommittee of the Financial Services Committee back in March, uh Mike Flood from Nebraska and Emmanuel Cleaver from Kansas City sent out a letter to stakeholders and said, we'd like some feedback on how can we improve the home investment partnership program.

And they took that feedback and then they had a series of stakeholder sessions where the two members of Congress themselves sat at the table and took notes and they put out a draft bill that would reauthorize the home program and make uh make a whole bunch of um reforms and changes to it.

I think most of which the city would support.

Um, and then they kind of had their uh the rug yanked out from under them.

All of a sudden, out of nowhere in late July, the Senate banking committee approved a pretty broad comprehensive housing bill, the road to housing bill, and that was introduced by Senator Scott, the chair of the ranking committee, and Senator Warren, the ranking member, and it passed the banking committee unanimously.

And it's and it's it's a broad comprehensive housing bill, and it's essentially proposals from across the banking committee and outside the banking committee focused on housing.

Um it kind of came out of nowhere.

It was incredibly surprising.

I think when you talk to Representative Flood and Representative Cleaver, they say, well, that's they put a positive spin on it and say it's so we're glad that we sparked the Senate to focus on housing.

But um the momentum is now with the Road to Housing Bill.

Last week, the Senate included it.

They voted to include it in the Defense Authorization Act.

That's that's important.

The Defense Authorization Act at the end of a session is often the last train out of town, so everybody tries to attach their bill to the Defense Authorization Act.

And now the Road to Housing Act is in the Senate version of the Defense Authorization Act.

So and we include in our handouts a summary of the Road to Housing Act and of the House draft bill to reauthorize home.

And uh last week in our weekly report, we had a comprehensive summary of the Road to Housing Act again.

Um I won't go get into the weeds on that, but but it would be a pretty major so highway transit reauthorization.

That is upon us.

You all remember the infrastructure investment and jobs act that was President Biden's kind of signature legislation.

It was a comprehensive infrastructure bill, but at its core, it was the regular five-year reauthorization of highway and transit programs, and that expires at the end of FY2026, so at the end of next year, September 30th.

Um and they are already having both both House and Senate authorizing committees have held hearings.

Um the U.S.

Department of Transportation actually did an RFI asking for stakeholder input on what should the next bill look like.

Um so that is very much happening.

Last I spoke with House Committee staff, they were um they had been looking at a November markup, but they think that's now gonna slip into January.

And and Congress has not in recent history done a highway transit bill on time, so I don't expect this one to be done on time.

But but things are moving.

Um and the local government um priorities there are our localization of the highway program, and I'll expand on that a bit.

I know there was a question about that.

Um the the infrastructure law had a new program, the Safe Streets and Roads for All program.

That was a competitive grant program that only local governments and MPOs could apply for, no state DOTs.

That's a billion dollars a year.

Um preserving the transportation alternatives program.

That's that's a program that half the funding goes to the state, half the funding goes to MPOs, and they make that available competitively.

I think last year Denton got uh 10 million dollars from that for for the trail along uh Pecan Creek.

Um preservation of the tra of transit programs, and then avoiding what they call the funding cliff because IAJA upped the baseline for surface transportation programs, and we could be facing if if that goes back to its old baseline.

So and I just this is just a I put this down because um I I'm working with a a co the there's a group, the local officials on transportation, that's the League of Cities, the Conference of Mayors, Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, Association of Regional Councils, you get the idea, all the local government organizations, and they have a coalition on reauthorization.

And I'm I've been part of their little working group, and I just put this down because I think it kind of captures what we're trying to do here.

There's always been a tension between how much of the federal highway um funding goes to state DOTs, how much comes down to the local level.

And and that that's partly about this.

Um and we're always of course pushing for maximizing how much comes down to to at least the MPO level.

Um but I think there's also a thought that the federal highway and transit program, well, the federal highway program in particular is is overdue for an update.

It doesn't address the the current need um of our nation.

And and I think particularly if you look at the what the pandemic has done to commute patterns to where people work, and then to deliveries, um people get the livings delivered to their house.

Um it's putting a lot more pressure on the part of the surface transportation network that's owned by local governments, but the current funding structure doesn't reflect that.

Um so the broadest goal is to get is certainly to preserve the transportation alternatives program, preserve safe streets and roads for all.

But but the federal government spends about $60 billion a year on highway.

That's with a B, $60 billion a year.

It's it's one of the biggest non-defense programs, non-defense, non-health care programs that the federal government does.

So $60 billion a year for highways, $12 billion a year on transit.

Um the transit money goes by formula to transit agencies.

It's pretty simple.

Um DCTA gets its share of federal formula funds.

The highway money, that's $60 billion a year, mostly goes to state DOTs.

Um, a small pot, and there's there's the of the of all the federal highway programs, the two big ones are the National Highway Performance Program, that goes entirely to state DOTs for the national highway system.

I-35, US 380, those kinds of roads.

Then there's a smaller program, 23% of that 60 billion is a surface transportation block grant.

55% of that 23% goes to MPOs, and MPOs decide how that money was spent is spent.

Um but if you look at ownership of the network, about 75% of the network is owned by local governments.

So there's a big imbalance in where federal surface highway money goes and to versus where the need is necessarily.

So the goal is to up that share that goes to local governments at the broadest level.

How many how many more slides do you have?

Uh yeah, go ahead and finish your slide.

It's only four.

Okay, and I'm just gonna hit really quickly that it's not on the I don't have a slide for it, it's come up recently.

But the Federal Communications Commission last week or the week before voted on two proceedings.

Um that each one on its own is just a massive preemption of local government authority to manage your rights of way, to collect compensation for the use of your rights of way, to regulate the placement of cell phone towers, to regulate the placement of equipment on your on city-owned utility poles.

Um both of those came out last week.

Comments on those are due in November.

And it's it's I there's another way to describe it.

It is a massive preemption of local government authority, and I think poses a real threat to the city's available ability to manage its rights of way and collect compensation for their use.

Um so I know I know that the League of Cities, the conference of mayors are all gonna be filing comments on those proceedings.

Um, and I'd encourage the city to do that as well.

Um we need to cover that in our weekly report as well.

Okay, thank you.

Representative district one um the discretionary non-defense 700 billion dollars.

Uh-huh.

Um there used to be a term called pork.

Yes.

Is that what this is?

No.

So that when we talked about earmarks, yeah.

That's that's kind of what people would call pork.

And so uh Congress has capped earmarks at one half of one percent of that 700 billion.

Oh.

So it's a yeah, tiny bit.

Yeah, so it's a small part of that.

No, that's non-defense discretionary is so without getting too into the weeds, the most federal spending of that six point some trillion dollars in federal spending, most of it is what they call mandatory spending.

You know, I turn 65, I'm eligible for social security unless Congress changes the laws.

I'm eligible for Medicare unless Congress changes the laws.

Okay.

My income is below a certain limit, I'm eligible for SNAP.

Okay, and so that would be that's that's considered discretionary.

No, that's even though it's mandatory.

No, that's mandatory.

So the discretionary is the National Institutes of Health, CUD, um, you know, that could the National Park Service.

It's a it's a small part of the federal budget.

Okay, thank you.

Representative District 6.

Thank you.

Hi, Council Person Jester.

Uh thank you for all of this information and the backup material was very helpful as well.

So thank you for all the work in summarizing a lot of uh really big complex matters.

Um I've got a couple of questions.

First, I want to start with the most recent, the telecommunications bill that you were mentioning.

Um I mean, I I can understand the rationale for the federal government wanting whatever fees uh that local governments normally are able to recoup from uh renting out space.

Uh but what do you understand the rationale to be for taking away the power to decide where and where cell towers go?

I mean that the city is the one that suffers if people don't have good cell service, et cetera.

But what do you know what the rationale is uh behind passing this bill?

So it's been a long running um, it's been a long-running battle between industry and local governments.

Uh and and I guess the the best way to sum it up, um, I don't think I'm out of out of line saying this is industry would like to have as little if or no local say in where that equipment goes.

So they maybe just have the best lobbyists.

Oh, yeah, there's no um we face threats on on local authority both in Congress and at the FCC, and we have for a long time.

Um but I've never quite seen such a comprehensive set of proceedings is what the FCC approved last week.

I agree with you that this is incredibly concerning and could lead to many, many problems in the future.

So uh I feel confident that uh our city will be weighing in with our legislators as well as others as to what damage this could do.

Uh and I'm I'm equally as confident that that when your citizens are upset about the placement of uh of some new equipment, they're not going to direct their their complaints to the FCC.

You are correct.

Um the second question I have is in regards to transportation.

Um, you know, I know that the the formula uh determines where a lot of the passenger rail and this federal and state partnerships.

Uh I noticed that the transit infrastructure grants seem to be down uh more significantly than some of the other programs.

Um and if this is getting too in the weeds, no, no, I know I can so that's concerning also because transportation is such a so capital investment grants under transit.

Um I don't want to say this is not a concern, but that pro that's most transit money goes out by formula, but that is a that is a competitive grant program, and that funds new rail transit projects.

Um and I don't think Denton is building a new rail transit project.

So I I that's but um but the rationale there is is um the infrastructure law infused a lot of money into the CIG program.

So the House said, well, we can back off on that program a little bit this year.

Um that's the rationale.

That's disappointing because something um I think we all recognize is in the entire Dallas Fort Worth area, some kind of mass transit in particular rail connecting some of the individual uh rail transit authorities.

Um, you know, missing out on Olympics and missing out on uh businesses because of that.

So that's something that I know is being discussed at the uh North Texas Central Council.

And I will then so it could be timely, and and I I hate to make predictions, but I think the capital investment grant program.

Um back in his first term, President Trump proposed eliminating that every year in his budget, and every year Congress, both when it was controlled by Republicans and Democrats said, no, we think we'll fund it.

And it's interesting in his first budget this time, the president actually proposed fully funding the capital investment grant program.

And the the House is kind of giving it a haircut.

But I think the capital investment grant program is on pretty safe ground.

But it's always been oversubscribed.

So I I appreciate the discussion.

Thank you very much.

Of course.

Anyone else?

Any other questions?

Representative from District 2.

Thank you.

But one of the things that staff has done in the past, and and I uh is prepare um various programs and and and budgetary items and said uh um with or without this federal program, you know, which ones are impacting into what level.

Um it was sort of a really helpful cheat sheet that we did about a year ago.

I uh I'd love to get that back again.

I don't know that it needs to be super in the weeds, but sort of ballpark so that we know which of our programs are uh sort of most in danger and or and and or would need the most uh um engagement from council to provide direction if we wanted to do something with less funding or more funding.

So that that cheat sheet y'all did about a year ago was super helpful, and I I'm I'm asking for us to do that again, please.

Any mayor for Tim in the talks of of highways, have you heard any hint that um like I know in the past I've heard chatter about um we've got a lot of streets and or highways and bridges that are starting to fall apart, um but the the funding tends to emphasize adding additional infrastructure rather than uh replacing and and renewing old infrastructure.

Have you heard any chatter of of trying to shift more of the of this federal funding towards maintenance and maybe not so much adding additional infrastructure when we're not maintaining that that's been a perennial discussion?

Yeah, um but so far Congress has shied away from and again since most money goes to the state DOTs, right?

Telling the state DOTs let's focus on maintenance of what we have.

Um that there's always been discussion of that.

Um but but even in IAJA, um, because that tends to not entirely break down on Democratic Republican lines, but somewhat does.

Um but even on IAJA written by a Democratic Congress and signed by a Democratic president.

I I would say the IAJA had some, you know, had the safe treats and roads for all program, it had some other innovative programs, but at the end of the day it was a status quo bill.

Right.

Um so that's always a discussion.

Um and and something locals will always say when we're making our argument that we'd be better stewards of these funds.

We'll focus on on maintenance of what we have.

Um, but that's um so I think someone mentioned the telecom industry having good lobbyists.

Um the state DOTs had a very powerful lobby on Capitol Hill.

Thank you.

Okay, any any other questions?

Okay, I I'll just say uh message to not a question message to the city staff.

I I think we may need to, depending on how that bill goes with the utility polls attachments, etc.

etc.

Come up with a strategy to to do the math to start under undergrounding uh not the whole thing, right?

Just the span, right?

So if you have a span that they can't span uh that's underground all of a sudden, uh it doesn't you don't incur the entire cost of undergrounding everything, but you kneecap some of the uh opportunities to just attach to our polls uh and and make us foot the bills for those things.

So it may just be a strategy around here's a a creative way we can uh be prepared for those that would want to circumvent working with us uh by just having a span that says okay, they have to span they have to connect this many feet, and oh, by the way, we're we'll have that available to you.

Uh so then and but yeah, thank you for the work you do.

Uh um and and your help uh just generally on things uh don't have many questions.

I mean it for me it's just it's good to know, right?

But they I mean you have precious little control over it.

Uh and so I just it's a good it's a good update.

Uh really really insightful work you're doing and and making adjustments where you can.

We appreciate that.

We saw that with the uh uh transformers, that sort of thing, you know.

Uh so appreciate that that work.

Uh okay.

Anything okay all right?

Thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Um that takes us to item B, which is ID 251537 receiver report whole discussion, give staff direction regarding audit project 043 animal services.

Follow-up and review.

Hello, Mayor and Council, Madison Rorshaw, Denton City Auditor.

I'm here today to present our follow-up review results from the audit of animal services.

Well, sorry.

Keyboard change places on me.

All right.

As reminder, audit follow-up reviews are intended to provide information on what changes have been made in response to an issued audit.

This review was based on the recommendations and management responses originally compiled in the audit of animal services issued issued in January of this year, 2025.

This report reviewed animal care activities, animal services officer response and asset management, as well as the accuracy and appropriateness of fees for the animal uh for animal services.

In general, this follow-up review found that most of the 34 recommendations were in progress.

Significant improvements were made to animal care monitoring and live outcomes during the first six months of 2025.

To begin, the original audit found that animal services did not have enough dedicated staff to provide basic care to all animals.

In addition, while standard operating procedures existed, there were discrepancies between these documents.

These issues required animal services officers to perform care-related tasks, taking their focus away from field activities and hindered animal monitoring and staff accountability.

Since the original audit, significant improvements have been made to daily care activity documentation and SOPs have been streamlined.

However, additional staff may still be needed to provide increased care levels to all animals as directed.

Specifically, animal services implemented a daily health and wellness monitoring system and wellness monitoring directive that allows staff to document completion of basic care activities and wellness and behavioral information for each animal each day.

If concerns are noted, staff are required to indicate that an animal needs attention in the system.

In addition, daily feeding and cleaning SOPs have been streamlined to provide more consistent written guidance to staff.

Still, based on review of a sample, only about 50% of animals had a documented daily care check for every day they were in the shelter.

And on-site observation indicated that there may still be some points of confusion in the streamlined SOPs.

While these processes should be further refined to improve documentation and care consistency, these changes are significant improvements to the animal monitoring and staff accountability in the animal shelter.

Finally, animal services received two additional animal care technician positions at the beginning of fiscal year 2025.

However, these positions have not yet been filled due to managerial turnover based on uh estimated staffing needs when these budgeted positions are filled.

Animal services should no longer regularly need field officer assistance to complete daily minimum care activities.

However, staff indicated that they received direction to provide increased care levels to all animals through additional enriched uh enrichment and attention.

During the summer of 2025, animal services began partnering with the Denton Community Shelter to provide additional animal care support.

However, it's not clear if this additional staffing will allow for advanced care to be provided to all animals without additional resources at this time.

In addition to basic care activities, the animal shelter must provide medical care to animals.

The city has contracted with veterinary services provider for this medical care.

The original audit found that while animal services SOP required all recommended vaccines and parasite preventatives, documentation of the administration of these medicines was inconsistent.

In addition, animals with long-term stays, meaning more than 30 days in the shelter did not regularly uh receive health rechecks further.

While non-euthanasia drugs were generally physically secure, no inventory procedures had been established, increasing the risk of loss or theft.

Since the original audit, we issued documentation of vaccine since the original audit was issued, I'm sorry, documentation of vaccines has generally improved for cats.

However, vaccine documentation rates have remained similar or fallen for dogs.

While a monthly rehealth re health recheck process has not been implemented for animals with long-term stays, the animal monitoring system ensures that each animal's health and wellness is evaluated daily, and the percentage of booster shots had uh being administered has significantly increased.

Lastly, potential contract payment concerns with the veterinary services provider have generally been resolved.

Though an independent process to verify hours build has not been created.

Further inventory procedures for non euthanasia drugs have not been have not yet been created due to resource constraints.

The city auditor's office agrees that active inventory monitoring and verification procedures for all non euthanasia drugs is currently operationally burdensome.

However, non-euthanasia drugs stored by animal services include medications that are prescribed to humans as well as animals, and so these are at a high risk of theft or misuse.

For that reason, we provided a list of high-risk non-euthanasia drugs, specifically those classified as Schedule 1 or dangerous drugs under Texas regulations for inventory prioritization.

As reported in the original audit, the animal shelter primarily attempts to place animals either back with their original owner or with a new owner to reduce the number of stray animals in the community.

The success of this process is generally measured by the live release rate, with a goal of 90% being generally recommended.

Since the original audit was issued, the animal shelter has regularly surpassed this recommended goal.

Live release rates, live releases generally include adoptions, returns to owners, transfers to other shelters or rescues, and releases as part of a cat trap a cat community cat trap neuter return program.

The original audit found that adoption requirements were generally documented, but return to owner documentation requirements, including vaccines and ID verifications were not always documented.

In addition, the city had not established a formal trap neuter release program, but was releasing some community cats.

Since then, the city's established city established a microchipping fee and began advertising this program to increase the likelihood that lost animals are returned to their owners.

In addition, the city's website has been updated to clarify how a resident can schedule a lost animal search when the shelter is staffed but not but not open to the public.

The return to owner standard operating procedure was updated in August of 2025.

So implementation effectiveness will be evaluated as part of the next follow-up review.

Also, based on the discussion with city management, potential operating hour changes were delayed until the upcoming upcoming shelter remodel is completed.

The state of Texas allows animal shelters to humanely euthanize animals under its control.

Further, the drug required to euthanize an animal is considered a controlled substance by the federal government and must be stored securely and usage tightly monitored.

For industry standards in some situations, like when handling a dangerous animal, shelter personnel may use a pre-euthanasia sedation drug to assess in the process.

This drug is not a controlled substance and so has looser monitoring requirements.

The original audit found that animal services euthanasia standard operating procedure addressed all requirements and most best practices, though some minor updates were needed.

Further, all staff who performed euthanasia procedures were appropriately certified.

However, some procedure information was not consistently documented and use of the pre euthanasia sedation drug was not consistently recorded.

Since then, the city has adopted a euthanasia policy that provides criteria and requires additional review before an animal is euthanized.

While animal services staff indicated that they were in formally using this process during the first six months of 2025, compliance with this policy will not be evaluated until the next follow-up review since it was implemented on July 1st of 2025.

In addition, the SOP was updated to correct minor issues and now requires documentation of sedation drug usage.

Based on review of 55 documented euthanasia procedures, documentation has generally improved as shown in the table on the slide.

While some minor discrepancies existed, usage was generally documented effectively.

However, based on review of security camera footage of completed euthanasia procedures, sedation drug usage does not seem to be recorded consistently still.

Staff members who perform these activities are required by the state of Texas to receive basic animal control officer training within one year of hire.

Further, while calls for animal services field officers were received by animal services front desk staff, written guidance on how quickly and how these calls should be entered into the dispatching system had not been created.

Similarly, animal services had an SOP that provided exceptions regarding field operations, including home quarantines, but there was no guidance, uh written guidance on what details from a call should be documented and no process to reconcile citations.

Since the original audit, animal services has implemented a centralized training and certification tracking spreadsheet, though could be further refined.

In addition, a field operation handbook was implemented in September 2025 and includes specific response time expectations for received calls, general safety practices for field officers, and required timelines for completing reports.

Animal services officers have also begun fully using an electronic case management software to document case details.

Still call taking expectations for front desk staff have not been established yet, and a process to track or reconcile citations has not been created.

Lastly, the original audit found that written criteria on granting animal services, staff, and volunteers access to the animal management system, and animal shelter facility did not exist at the department level, though no significant access issues were identified.

Similarly, information about vehicle key management and inspections was not formalized.

And while continuity of operations plan existed, additional details could be added to increase usefulness per best practices.

Additionally, the animal services fee scheduled had not been updated in almost 10 years, and the department was charging some unauthorized fees.

Since then, written criteria on granting access to staff and volunteers has not yet been created, and the continuity of operations plan has been has not been updated to include additional details regarding animals and foster care, managing controlled substances and volunteer usage during emergencies, though it was updated to be accurate for the employees currently in those positions.

In addition, the field operations handbook provides additional guidance on vehicle inspections.

Finally, an updated fee schedule was authorized in July 2025, and information about the schedule is readily available online and in the shelter.

This fee schedule expands the discount program and animal services now requires documentation of managerial approval through periodic review of dis uh though periodic review of discount usage would further ensure this program is not misused.

Fee calculation accuracy will be evaluated during the next follow-up review due to the July 1st implementation date of the new uh fee schedule.

So, in summary, we found that five of the 34 originally issued recommendations are now implemented, and 28 are in progress as summarized on the slide.

One recommendation regarding inventory procedures for non-euthanasia drugs has not been implemented.

As previously discussed, this is primarily due to current resource constraints, and audit has provided animal services with a prior prioritization list to help focus these limited resources.

So, based on this information, we plan to perform a second follow-up review in fiscal year 2027.

Okay, thank you.

Questions for staff.

Mayor Protein.

Thank you for your presentation, Madison, and as always for all of the thorough work that your office does.

Um a lot of as I was reading the the review.

Um, a lot of things seem to depend on when the expansion is completed.

You may not know this, but uh, can I we get a reminder of generally when we're expecting that expansion to be complete?

Yeah.

Nikki Sasson is director of animal services.

Um, in regards to the expansion, we're still working through the design process with the contractor and the architect.

We are receiving our 75% schematic drawings, so that has pushed back our timeline a little bit.

We are looking to break ground uh in 26 about March.

Okay.

So some of these things won't really be addressed until after that, pretty much is what I understood.

Some of them, a lot of them we've implemented already.

A few of the things like the expansion of the hours and the staffing will be addressed afterwards because we're going to have to shift things around.

It doesn't make sense to add FTEs right now, and then have to take them away and try to put them back.

So absolutely.

All right, thank you so much.

That's all I had.

Okay.

Representative from District 2.

Thank you.

Uh yeah, I I once again I appreciate the audit.

Uh we had the a couple different audits that illuminated some issues that we needed to take care of.

And I'm and I'm so heartened to see that we are moving in the right direction.

All the vectors seem to be going.

We're we we were most of your report is this is being addressed, this is being covered, these these issues.

So, you know, that's that's excellent.

Good good job, Nikki.

Appreciate you covering all those bases.

As we distilled down the sort of where we have yet to go, what I noticed was a lot of it was the FTEs that you just mentioned.

And that was going to be the the crux of my uh questioning was uh where are we in the FTEs?

But so can you color a little bit more what you just said about what you think about the timelines for where we are on getting more FTEs and the ebb and flow of that because it sounds like that's the bulk of your need is your your work to the max, so it's hard to get to all the audit issues if you don't have more staffing.

That is correct.

But we've also had compounding issues with staffing.

We had a lot of turnover, we did not have a management team for a while.

Um, and so filling those positions has allowed other staff to take on the animal care duties.

So we were missing front desk staff, administration staff, we didn't have a volunteer coordinator, foster coordinator, uh, a manager, so a lot of those duties were being dueled out and handled by multiple people.

So a lot of those duties were being dueled out and handled by multiple people.

Um we now have partnered with our daily bread, as Madison mentioned, and we have two separate crews that come in and they provide four hours of service each day.

So they help with the cleaning and the feeding and the walking of the animals in the morning, which allows staff to then be able to do the enrichment, the handling, um, the adoption placement, those sorts of things.

Uh so we we still are struggling a little bit on staffing, but that was the best solution we had for right now in not being able to add FTEs.

We've had the the contract with our daily bread, and so we have um 10 additional staff, five each day on on each shift, and they're consistent, so we don't have to retrain every day, they're there every day, they show up, they have a supervisor, and so that is help supplement.

Does it so I want to I want to touch on the comment that I heard to Mayor Pro Temps' question?

I I heard it, and maybe I heard wrong or misunderstood that you didn't want additional FTEs right now.

Can you cover that a little bit?

I'll I'll take them all.

Uh honestly, no, I I would take more.

Um, you know, we have two officers a shift to cover the entire city, so there's definitely room for more uh FTEs.

Once we start uh the addition expansion in um March ish, that will be about a year where we are building, and then after that, we will move into the new addition where we'll have to scale down a little bit.

That'll give us time to really focus out in the field and education and programming and compliance.

Uh and so those FTEs will then focus instead of a lot of animal care, it'd be mostly out in the the field.

Um as far as FTEs, we have 29 right now.

That includes all of our uh front desk staff, all of our administrative staff, um, our behaviorist, our foster coordinator.

What we typically have on a daily basis for animal care is about eight people, and that is to be very honest.

If we're trying to put more into care for the animals, you know, there's a metric that's like 15 minutes per animal.

Well, that's basic care.

That's feeding and cleaning their kennel.

We're also looking at second walks, any type of behavior intervention plans, medication, um, and that we're looking more at like 35 minutes in animal, and so we are really stretched thin as far as being able to provide that.

We we can't um you need more FTEs for that.

And and um am I clear that you're utilizing animal control officers to fulfill other functions that are sort of more external to their normal job description, in the shelter?

Yes and no, I think they're being used um more fully than they have in the past.

So uh they've been out in the field primarily.

We have now pulled them in to help with leadership and develop our ACOs internally in the kennel.

Previously, our ACO1s spent about 90% of their time in the shelter and only maybe 10% of their time out in the field, and so they didn't get a lot of training, and they would go on call and then they wouldn't they you know they wouldn't know what to do.

Um and so right now we have our ACO2s kind of leading in our shelter as well, so that allows our ACO1s to go out into the field during operation times, and so if they have questions, they get more experience, they can ask uh a senior member or they can call management staff because it's during normal operating hours.

And so, yes, we typically have two people out in the field at any given time, our ACO2s, yes, are taking on a bigger leadership role, but I think that's also helping develop them, kind of our succession plan because they're understanding what does it take to check each area, making sure that animals um have all the things that they need, that all the suppliers are back up, managing our staff in-house along with our supervisors.

So I don't know if that answers your question.

Um I guess I you I was asking more in the would it be a more ideal better for the animals if our ACOs were more in the field or in this mix, and it I'm hearing you say you like the mix, but make correct me if that's the wrong impression.

I do like the mix because it gives our ACO1s more opportunity to train and learn in the field so that they can be better servers later.

Okay, all right.

I appreciate it.

So I don't we're not stealing from the field that's completely I guess that's where you're getting.

Yeah, we're not stealing from the field completely, no.

All right, thank you.

Any other questions for staff?

Seeing none.

Oh representative Mr.

Frog.

Nikki picking up right there.

I heard you say we have 29 FTEs.

Yes, sir.

So I'm looking at um page three, looking at that chart there.

So we've got five more employees than would be necessary for advanced care and and four less for enhanced care.

So is it safe to assume that we are providing somewhere between advanced and enhanced care?

Yeah, you first far as yeah, so just so it's clear the 29 are not all dedicated to animal care, and that's what this chart represents.

Is how many we need just dedicated to animal care.

So there's also the field officers who are actually out in the field, and then there's also the customer service representatives.

There's also the management team.

Those people are not included in this calculation.

That helps.

So what should that number be including everybody?

Do we have that?

Well, it would be the 18 plus the additional staff, or I guess 33, because 18 would be daily, plus the administrative and management team.

I can get you that number.

I don't want to give you a wrong number off the top of my head.

Okay, thank you.

I'd uh I'd appreciate that.

I'm sorry, I was a little confused by that.

So get to my notes here.

Um why are we what's the ideology behind waiting a full two years to do this again?

It seems like we've done this more frequently in the past, and now we're gonna be waiting, you know, a bit longer for the next audit.

Like what's the ideology there?

Yeah, so we we just started fiscal year 2026.

You just approved that audit plan.

This another follow-up was not on it, so the fiscal year 2027 audit plan is the next audit plan that we could do the second follow-up.

And then some of it is like Mayor Pro Tem was mentioning, some of these things just are have have to wait until the shelter remodel is complete.

And so we're trying to make sure that they have time to do those things.

I was actually gonna ask if this coincided with construction being finished and being in the new facility.

Hopefully, we will not come back until the construction is complete.

Yeah, the um you mentioned about some case management software to document calls.

What what case management software is that?

They're using the same case management.

There's a case management module in their animal management system, and so they've they've begun using that module.

So does that software um does that software talk to pet point?

It is pet point.

It is pet so it's pet point.

Okay, all right.

I remember obviously that was a pain point when we went through this this last time.

Um so talking about the the drugs, I mean, it's a bit I'm glad we're doing better.

It's concerning that you know the euthanasia drugs, since they are controlled substances, that that there is some opportunity there.

So just to be clear, the euthanasia drugs are fine.

It's the other drugs, the non-euthanasia drugs.

Like the drugs for sedation.

Correct.

Okay, okay, all right.

If that that's only one though, and there that is kept in in physical, there are physical controls for that one.

We have implemented um actually in pet point where we can record it now, so we don't have the separate log, it's actually gonna be required to be put into pet point when we use the um sedation drug, but that is not considered we are compliant 100% with DEA requirements.

Um the other drugs that Madison mentioned and that are in the audit are more they can be used for human use, I guess, or theft, and but we have implemented physical controls there.

So they're behind badge access, they're in locked cabinets.

We have a uh locked key uh cabinet that only certain people have the combination to our vet staff, um, and those are you know, like GRDM medications and things for GI issues, and um so they're not they're not euthanasia type or controlled substances, so just to provide some color there.

Are all the drugs generally kept near each other?

Yes, sir.

So if in the event that there was an audit to like you know, if the state came in and audited this today, we'd be good.

Yes.

Okay, all right.

And my last couple questions are just about the behavioral.

So given that we are on you know a hiring freeze, this it was important for us to hire an animal behaviorist how has that working out so far?

Um, our behaviorist is Trinity.

She started January 3rd, and so it took her a little while to spin up just because she was brand new to the shelter world.

Uh she is a graduate of UNT.

She is working on her master's right now.

She's also the vice president of the Orchid group over there, which I uh uh forgive me, I don't remember exactly what that stands for, but they work with animals and uh behavior and training, basically.

It's a it's a group over there.

Um and Trinity has had a challenge in that she came in right before the start of kitten season, and she's also in charge of the foster program.

So if you want to give me another FTE, I would love a foster coordinator to be able to handle that because kitten season is we get slammed with a huge number of underage kittens who can't stay in the shelter.

Right now in our foster program, I just looked, we have 115 animals in foster care.

A majority of those are kittens who cannot stay at the shelter because they require 24 hour care.

They have to be fed every two hours like an infant.

And so our foster program, uh, people they provide that care for us so that we don't have to euthanizer, we don't have to um staff the shelter overnight because that's not really possible.

Um so in beh in addition to the behavior, she's been working through that.

She's done a great job with the foster program as far as streamlining communication, bringing new fosters on board, training, organizing supplies, um making appointments, follow-up appointments a lot easier for people.

Um as far as the behavior side of her job, she's been working on implementing behavior intervention plans.

So uh Madison mentioned our daily monitoring system, which we sh we shared in our update the last time we were here, and in that system, staff notate daily if there's any issues with an animal, whether it's a medical issue, a behavior issue, um, maybe the animal is uh lunging at the kennel door or seems withdrawn, whatever it is, then those notes are addressed each day.

But then additionally, we have a weekly population management meeting.

We do that on Wednesdays when we're closed, we bring our leadership team in, and so our behaviorist, um, our beh our uh senior animal services specialist, our vet team, our manager, our two supervisors.

Uh we sit in a room and we go through each animal that has the needs attentions where we see a pattern there for the week.

And so if they have three or more, we we start talking about what is our intervention plan for this animal.

And so Trinity helps in prescribing those intervention plans, and then we have staff that implement them, and then we follow up and circle back around.

So whether it's we need additional advertising or we need to find placement and reach out to X, Y, and Z fosters or rescue partners, or let's try this intervention plan, or let's talk to vet team about um medication, anxiety medication, those sorts of things.

And so um Trinity has been leading those.

It is still a work in progress, and there's not a whole lot of um shelters that do that.

We're kind of blazing our own trail, and so we're refining how that works as far as documenting that process and the intervention plans at Pet Point.

We now have specific uh memos that we put in there from the population meeting that then generate a report that we can follow up on.

So we're continuing to get better uh all the time, and Trinity is helping to lead that effort.

She also serves on the EU review committee, she provides the uh expertise as far as the behavior side.

So um she puts her input there, and then she's also been working on training with our staff, and so anything from uh working on handling to leashing, she works with our volunteers.

She provided input on training for our volunteers as well.

Uh, and then we also recently implemented the woofful house.

It's um, I know it's uh it's an enrichment station uh for our volunteers, and so there's a whole menu of items that happen each week, and volunteers who maybe are too young to handle animals directly.

Uh, they come in and they make treats, and then Trinity has a schedule of what's dueled out when to different animals.

So whether it's a scent enrichment or a food enrichment or a toy enrichment or a busy box, um, she has been instrumental in developing that, and so we provide that enrichment to our animals as well to help them stay healthy, mentally healthy while they're in the shuttle shelter.

So she's busy.

It sounds like Trinity is doing everything.

Well, yeah, we you know, we have all of our staff wear a lot of hats, and we have over 300 animals in our care daily on average.

Um, it is, and we we keep getting more in, and we do our best to get them out and get them placed.

Um, but it is I don't think people quite realize how much each of our staff members do.

And I have a fantastic team, uh, and they really do a lot of the work.

One of the things I know that you did when you took over this this uh role was you had to come in and write a lot of SOPs.

Yes, sir.

Are you having to write the animal behavior of SLPs or is she able to write those herself?

She are the SLPs around animal behaviors.

I I guess it kind of depends as far as the intervention plans.

She writes those, you know.

I look at it more like she's the doctor writing the the prescription plan, and then the staff or the nurses implementing it or the therapist implementing it, and then she comes back and checks in and how's it going.

Um, as far as SOP specifically for behaviors, I don't know.

I mean, we I'd have to go back and look.

I don't know that we I can name a few off the top of my head.

I think the SOPs that we've been focusing on are more documentation and um, you know, like the the euthanasia policy, uh daily monitoring, um schedule of fees, etc.

Okay.

I appreciate your work, Sarah.

Sounds like you need a Trinity in every department in the city.

Yeah, we won't do that.

And if you want to bring some kittens for us home during council meetings, it might calm us all down.

Ms.

City Manager.

I think you will have something oh, yes.

Um not a question, just um a public acknowledgement of the progress that's been made on top of everything that has to happen every day.

Uh the fact that there are so many items that are in progress or completed, and and what you've laid out here today.

I just want to say uh thank you, and that it's so great to have the trust restored uh in animal services in the city of Denton.

And um I you you and your team have done a wonderful job, and I just want to say thank you.

Thank you very much.

Our team is fantastic.

I'm very lucky that they're great at what they do.

All right, Miss City Manager.

Uh I just this you know, I don't usually, and I know it was gonna do this one, and I gotta not, it records me.

Um if you go back to when we were dealing with all of this, um it was very painful.

Uh Nikki just started out, it was painful for the staff that we had there, but um we have great staff because Nikki hired good people.

Um you're only as good as the people you hire.

And so kudos go to her for building a great team, uh hiring the right people that are looking at the number one um important thing, which is what's in the best interest of the animal.

And um I I do want to say we're monitoring Cassie is over this area, she's monitoring on a regular basis the need for staffing, and uh we're well aware that we probably need to add one or two ASAP, and so we are monitoring that and looking at ways to provide at least a another bit of relief for animal services.

I think Nikki's working on a plan maybe.

Um, but the other thing is to say that there is no accreditation to current in in pro there's no accreditation whatsoever in animal services, no best practices.

Uh there's best friends, there's all sorts of uh, you know, animal support groups and things that'll tell you what's best practices, but uh there's not uh out there like there is for parks and recreation or for water, wastewater, or planning.

There's no accreditation.

Um what you're seeing here that they're doing is best practices.

I will I can attest to that, having been over now three different animal services out of California, Austin, and then here it's a struggle.

But if you look at how many animals are being fostered, 140 some odd, that is unbelievable.

Um it's a testament to the staff and how they're getting people to take them and to foster them, and then some adopt.

Um I assure you that I assure you that that they will continue to improve, they will continue to address these issues, and when Madison and her team come back to to do another audit, it'll be even better because um they all that have been hired have the number one item in their mind, which is what's in the best interest of the animal.

And and so I want to thank Nikki and and I want to send a shout out to the staff because they've worked extremely hard.

I mean, if you've watched videos on Facebook or on TikTok where there's you know the animals dressed up or they do a special the mayor's spotlight, you don't realize just how much that gets that gains attention and how many people really like oh, we should go get that dog, he's so cute, or she's so cute.

Um but also the work that they're doing for people to keep their animals, the food pantry, our friends at the Denton Animal Base Animal Services Friends of what do we call them?

Denton Animal Support Animal Support Foundation.

They've been wonderful, but all the other friends groups, you can't do it alone, and and that's why it's so important that we continue our relationships with these uh nonprofit support groups because that's how we get animals in and out of the out of the shelter quickly by getting them out to these uh rescue groups, but it takes a lot of work, and I can't tell you how proud I am of where we are, and and a good sign of that is we don't see a lot of issues out there knock on wood, but um kudos go to you and your staff.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you very much.

Any other questions?

Seeing none that concludes that work session.

We the closed session was just a placeholder, so we will transition to the chambers to take up the votes on the uh consent and take up individual items for consideration.

So we'll just go straight there.

Welcome back to this meeting.

Didn't city council is 4 30.

We have a quorum, so I'll call the meeting back to order at the portion of the consent agenda.

We have two items that were pulled.

I'll take a motion for the consent agenda, but for items D and H.

Representative from District 2.

I move approval of the consent agenda, excepting for items D and H.

Representative from District 5.

Second.

I have a motion and a second regarding the consent agenda, but for items D and H.

Any discussion?

See none, let's vote on the screen.

Yeah, can we just mark him absent something?

Thank you.

That passes 6-0.

I know he pulled D, so we'll skip down to H momentarily.

Let me get there.

Item H is ID 251727 consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton granting JPI construction LLC a noise exception pursuant to section 17-20 C3F of the City of Denton Code of Ordinances with respect to sound levels and hours of operation for approximately 12 concrete pours, concrete pumps, and generations from to run pumps and lights related to construction of new multifamily development.

So let's let's see.

I don't know if we need a let's see if the if we can answer the questions without representative from district two.

Thank you.

Um the backup materials and everything we saw said this is going to be running from from two to um seven in the morning.

And when while I appreciate the answers from staff about this, um, and I I understand that the the response was it'll it'll delay it approximately a month.

Uh that's that's really early, and that's a number of families uh with lots of heavy equipment and lots of noise.

So I I I don't think I can be supporting this exception um unless I hear something different in our discussion here.

But so I'll I'll be voting though.

Mayor Proteil.

This is in my district, and I and I did check with the neighborhood just to kind of get their thoughts on the trade-offs.

Um I uh you know said it it could end a little faster, this particular construction project um if we were to approve this.

Um, but you know, it could start as early as 2 a.m.

I tried to explain as well what the noise levels would be.

Um what I heard back, I heard back from six people, uh, five were against, one was in favor.

Uh the reasons against were one of the homes that's going to be close to this project.

Um she's being induced today, so she will have a newborn in her household.

Um there's other folks with with young kids, um, and just the idea of you know, maybe it doesn't wake the kid up, but it keeps them awake once they do wake up.

Um also this this neighborhood is surrounded by construction right now.

They got Bonnie Bray, they got Rhiney Road, they just dealt with Reeves Elementary waiting for that to open.

They've lost internet multiple times because of road construction.

Uh they got Westgate going on, and they've got this project going on near them.

So they're dealing with a lot of construction.

Um kind of their their thought was um that you know it going on for a little longer, this particular project, you know, the trucks being around during school zone time, you know that it's not gonna make a big difference was sort of the the thought that I heard from the residents.

Um so overall, they they would prefer that um that we not approve this ordinance.

Um at best, I would be willing to consider.

Um I know that the start time just changed um starting October 1.

I think during the summer they can start at 6 a.m.

on the weekdays.

Um and now I think it's it's 7 a.m.

Um the only thing I'd be willing to do is to sort of uh approve the sort of the summer hours um until uh through December, basically.

Okay, and anyone else.

Uh I'll I'll move approval.

Is there a second representative district five?

I'll second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second.

Any discussion.

I'll just say uh noted, but uh you know, I I want these people uh as far away from high school traffic and elementary school pri traffic as humanly possible, and I think this achieves that, and it's really remote.

I mean, there's it's far to get and I don't even know if the yard leave they just have their ribbon cutting.

I don't know if anyone's living there.

The other rental uh division by the the um fire station deals with a fire station.

Uh so this will will pale in comparison to a busy day at that fire station.

Um, and that's again pretty far away.

And so for me, the safety component and the advantage to have them in and out as fast as possible.

Uh anyone that's traveled, Bonnie Bray.

I mean, any extra cars, it's just it's just bad.

So for me, it's important from a safety standpoint from an expeditio standpoint, from a conflict standpoint, from a you know, uh so for those reasons I'm I'm supportive.

Um any other discussion reference in district one.

This seems rather odd to me these times for uh, you know, 2 a.m.

to 7 a.m.

I think this is the first time that I may have heard that there was construction uh going on, but I do also understand that things need to be built and they're being built, and they're wanting to be built and needed to be built in a timely fashion.

I'm just um also the other thing I was thinking about is um you know the the um the time of day, it's gonna start getting darker earlier um in the winter time.

I understood that Mayor Pro Tem mentioned something about you know December.

Um I was you know just wondering if the work can be done earlier.

I mean, is this work?

Is this like ongoing work over through the from like 6 p.m.

until 7 a.m.

or is it starting at 2 a.m.

to 7?

How does it am I?

12 times it will happen.

Oh, and it's just and how many and it's 12 times that it's gonna happen.

So I'm I'm I think I'm just gonna uh approve this.

Uh you know, from my perspective, I'll approve this because it's just not long going, and we can get it and get it done.

Sorry, sorry, community.

I didn't want to do that, but it seems necessary.

Okay, representative from district five.

Um, I I appreciate the thoughts of uh my colleagues up here.

Um, I just want to um just detail the fact though why pours happen at the time they happen.

Um it's cooler and it's faster, right?

When the sun's not up, it's easier for the guys to work because it's in the cool of the day.

It's faster because there's less traffic.

We're in a city that already does not allow for engine breaks, so that already reduces the noise.

So for those reasons, I think that this is absolutely the time we should be doing this.

Pouring it now will lead to a faster overall time construction project.

What we don't want to do is we want to drag this out because of delays about things happening during the day, other type of traffic traffic difficulties.

The reason company not every company can work 24 hours a day is because some of these contractors are smaller, they don't all have staff that works 24 hours a day.

My company's 24 hours a day, but it doesn't mean that every company is 24 hours a day.

A lot of concrete companies are operating with 50 or so or 50 or less guys, and they're spread out doing contracts all over the Metroplex.

So we also have to be sensitive to make to the staffing needs of the company.

So for those reasons, that's why the pour is happening at this time.

For those reasons, that's why I second of the mayor's motion.

Okay.

Uh Mayor Pur Tim.

Just wanted to speak to two items.

Um I I have heard complaints already from some of the residents near this project of being woken up to the beeping and such.

So I know they can hear it.

Um I don't know that it's waking them up, but it's certainly I think agitating once you do wake up.

And then just one more item on um safety.

Um I I've heard reports of some of those large stabilization stones.

So at the entrance of a of a site, there's those really, really large stones.

Um sometimes they're getting knocked into the roadway, and there was some concern from the residents that um that could happen in the dark of night, and somebody may not see it versus they can see it during the day.

So I just wanted to add those two items as well.

Got it.

Thank you.

Yeah, and and I I'll just say briefly, uh, I think all valid concerns, questions, things to be mindful of, uh, can't can't stress that enough, especially on the safety component, but then also in this case in point, there's a church in the middle of the neighborhood there in Southeast Enton, and so trash pickup is seven in the morning for carts, but then you have a church, which is commercial, so then you have this loud dumpster that starts at whatever, five in the morning, six in the morning, whatever time they get going.

So you have these conflict points, uh, and that's a challenge.

And and so those of us that were here before, that's the same multifamily unit that maybe we heard from is went through this exact same process across the street from Reeves.

And so it's the same thing.

And so for that that I mean, it is a challenge, all valid concerns, certainly.

Uh, but uh I think everyone's done uh as best they can to navigate those things.

Um, but didn't didn't want to discount any of those concerns.

I think they're all valid.

Uh okay, with that we have a motion and a second.

Any other discussion?

Seeing none, let's vote on the screen.

That passes five to two.

That takes us to item D, which is ID 251769 consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton waiving roadway impact fees in amount not to exceed 140,600.

Yeah, 140,600 for McAdams Haven's apartments to be located at approximately 900, 914, 920 Lindsay Street and 1518 Bernard Street.

Uh and I'll I'll move approval.

Uh there you go.

Representative from District 2 approval.

Um, or I'll let him say it.

Representative from District 2, he had a floor.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Yes, I I move approval of the item.

And Mayor Pratin.

This is an item that that is sort of that step after homelessness where we get people into housing and we give them services.

This is that type of project.

We really need this type of project, so anything the city can do to facilitate this project happening will be um very helpful.

And so I I second.

Okay, motion and a second and any other discussion.

Yes, representative from district four.

Mayor, I rise raise this, and and again, I apologize for not being timely earlier.

I certainly didn't intend to do that, but uh I don't see that this affects the project to Mayor Pro Tim's point.

Uh I don't see that this affects the project at all.

All I see that it affects is in a in a time where we're uh we're experiencing budget shortfalls and having a lot of good momentum in doing street repair, that this is taking 140,000 out of that out of that budget to uh to to give people a further break.

They're already getting a tax break, that's why they're doing this project.

And uh I I just I I don't understand the logic of this, except except to give people another tax break.

Uh we don't we don't we don't do this with other projects, and I think it I think it sets a bad precedent.

Um and again, the the the project is gonna go on regardless.

It's not it's not that it's just that it's gonna take money out of the uh the street repair coffers to uh to do it.

And uh, and I will not support this.

Thank you.

Thank you, representative from district uh five per your per your um enforcement of unwritten council rules.

Can I ask staff a question or not?

Yes, yeah, if they're if they're here, yeah.

Can I ask one of you two a question about um additional taxes that they might be getting a break on?

I know that we okay them seeking the federal tax credits.

Anything beyond that uh this project is for our Christine Taylor Assistant City Manager.

This project is McAdams Havens, which is in the um is in the 9% competitive.

They were highly ranked, so they are receiving the nine percent federal tax credits.

They have partnered with DAC, so they will receive a partial property tax exemption for the development.

And this project is do you have a rough breakdown of how much is 80, 50, and 30 percent area median income?

I don't have for each one, but I can tell you almost 80 percent.

It was at least 75 percent of the proposed units are at that 30 percent AMI, which is the deepest affordability, plus they have the supportive services.

Is it fair to say that most of the affordable housing projects this is one of the top scoring given that we don't have the other projects don't have a higher a usually a percentage as high in the 30 percent AMI category?

Of all the housing tax credits that we brought forward for council consideration earlier this year, from the nine percent housing tax credit, this one was ranked the highest competitively for the region.

Okay, thank you, Christine.

Um exactly what um Ms.

Taylor just said.

Most of this project is at 30% affordability, 30% AMI.

We don't have too many projects that have this much affordability this deep.

We're talking about the most vulnerable among us, people who are perhaps transitioning out of bad situations out of homelessness into homes.

These are the exact people that we say we want to help every year when we do our council retreat, and this very body says that affordable housing is a goal, a stated goal of this body.

This is the exact project that we should be doing everything we can to meet.

Because my hope is that when this body later this year decides on the allotted tools that we could use, that we will look at a range of different tools to give us options about how to make how to attract more projects like this to come to our city to help the most vulnerable among us.

Waiving roadway impact fees is explicitly said in state law.

In fact, this in this in the backup.

So this is explicitly allowed by law.

Why would we not take advantage of everything that is explicitly allowed by law?

Again, these are the most vulnerable among us.

I'll be voting for it.

I hope that we can all find our way to have compassion for people who are the least of loss and the left behind.

Thank you, Mayor.

Okay.

Uh so we have a motion and a second.

Any other discussion, let's vote on the screen.

And that passes six to one.

That takes us to our first item for individual consideration.

And please note uh there's no vote required on this first one.

And please note we're not going to take up this the third until uh after 6 30.

So we'll take up 7A, 7B, then we'll brought you.

Yeah, we have to take 5A.

Five.

Oh, got it.

Yeah, I forgot it's segregated.

Um, but when we get to seven, it's only those two.

And let me get there.

And then we'll take a break.

So clarification there is action on this one.

Yes.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah, no, 7A, there's no action.

5A action.

Action packed.

Um, so it's 5AA25001.

Consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton, Texas, regarding a municipal service agreement pursuant to Texas local government code section 43 dot 0672 between the city of Denton and Double R DEVCO LLC.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, good evening or afternoon, Mayor, members of the council, uh, Mia Hines, senior planner.

Um, this item as stated in the caption is the consideration of a municipal services agreement for approximately or just over 15 acres located north of West University uh US 380 uh drive and approximately half a mile west of Golden Hoof Drive.

Um, this is the as a part of the annexation process.

This is the first item um of three that'll be on your agenda tonight.

Um, with this, uh, we are uh proposing to approve the municipal services agreement as well as the schedule of annexation.

Um here, uh the background.

Uh the applicant here is double RDEFCO development, and this property was re previously a part of the Legends Ranch MUD.

Uh, it has since been excluded from that MUD.

Um, and they are just proposing to annex this and have this subject to the city's um uh standards.

Uh the municipal services agreement uh um uh mentions those requirements for uh providing police and uh drainage fire service, the typical uh services that we have in those agreements.

Um, this is the proposed annexation, of course.

Like I said, this is the first of those three items, so action is required on this item uh this afternoon.

Following this, uh the notification or the annexation uh public hearing will be this evening as well as the first reading of the annexation ordinance.

Um, the uh annexation ordinance will be published for uh the 30 days required by state law, and then it uh the completion will come back on November 18th for the final uh adoption of the annexation ordinance and um um a full annexation of the property into the city.

Um that pretty much concludes my presentation.

Are there any questions or comments at this time?

Thank you.

Questions for staff, Mayor Pro Tim.

Thank you for your presentation, Mia.

Um, as I was reading all the backups, it wasn't clear to me why they got excluded from the mud or kind of how they got separated out and how we got to where we are right now.

It was it's uh initially a part of the agreement when it was uh originally made.

I'm not sure what the the conversation was to um uh split the two, but I do know that this property uh initially in the agreement, the idea was to develop it and then request to annex it.

Um in this case, they are uh um wanting to avoid any potential um um pass of of nonconformity if the body does decide to annex it at that point, so they have decided to apply for this annexation at this time.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Uh any other questions for staff representative from district six.

Let's go ahead.

Hi.

Uh council person just to us.

Can you tell me uh briefly what kind of due diligence is done as far as determining uh I mean, I think what we've seen with the uh flash flooding we've had with other types of uh weather related incidents.

Um do you all look and say, okay, if these are the services they're going to want, here's where we're starting from, and it makes sense to accept as is.

Within the agreement, the services within the agreement.

Yes, correct.

And well, we do have like a standard template of an agreement, and we do adjust it depending on um what's available, what sort of utilities are currently available to the property, what kind of was either approved or uh required per previous development agreements that are still applicable.

So it is site site specific based on what services are needed for the area and things like that.

Wonderful, thank you.

I very much appreciate that.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions?

Seeing none, representative district six.

I move approval as presented.

Is there a second?

Representative district one.

I'll second.

We have a motion and a second.

Any other discussion?

Seeing none, let's vote on the screen.

That passes 70.

Takes us to now to 7a, which uh we'll hear, but there's no action required.

And that is ID 251217 consider approval of a resolution of the city of pardon me, city council of the city of Denton, Texas, consenting to the annexation of certain land into Denton County Municipal Utility District number 16 and providing an effective date.

Um good evening, Mayor and City Council.

This presentation is for items 7A and 7B.

Um, so 7A is for a resolution um consenting to additional land into the meadows MUD.

Um, item B is for the first amendment of a uh amended and restated development agreement for the same MUD.

Um so the request um from the MUD is to add an additional 19.62 acres into Denton County MUD number 16 or the Meadows MUD.

Um as a reminder, a MUD is a special purpose district created um in order to finance and provide infrastructure like listed on the screen.

Um some some background, long background here on the meadows MUD.

Um it was originally brought to us in 2020.

Um we've had uh development agreement that was approved in 2020 that's been amended um a couple times since um most recently it was amended um in 2024 or uh sorry in 2025 in January.

Um we received a petition in April to include this additional uh 19.62 acres.

Um so you can see here in purple um the additional acreage that would be included.

Um currently the mud is a thousand acres.

Um it's got 2700 single family units and then a mixture of multifamily and commercial acreage.

Um what we would be consenting to is the additional 20 acres, which is approximately 96 slots.

Um the development agreement that exists today would apply to this new area.

Um, and then the first amendment would also include um a funding contribution to the Jackson Road.

It's a Denton County roadway that they would be helping fund.

Um so the item today is two separate items.

It's for uh consent for the resolution um for the additional acreage, and then also an ordinance for the amendment to the agreement.

Um, if this is approved, it includes a strategic partnership agreement um for the additional acreage that we would bring forward in future council meetings.

Okay, thank you.

Uh any questions?

Representative from district two.

Thank you.

Uh Charlie, um, in the backup, I didn't really see a rationale to approve or deny just that this is a thing and we're presented with it, but can you give me some clarity on why the staff recommendation was favorable?

What is what is going to be to the benefit of the voters of Denton for this?

Because I I didn't really see that in the backup.

Yeah, so we have very limited authority when it comes to MUDs um related to this.

So we received the position for consent.

If if we were to deny it, then they have the opportunity to go and um go to TCQ and attempt to bring that MUD into compliance.

So what we've been doing is when we receive these consent petitions, we have negotiations with the MUD, and in this one particular, we have the additional um standards that we've already gone through the development agreement process for, and the um the county doesn't have a way um to fund some of these roadways.

So they have planned improvements to Jackson Road, so in working with our county partners, um, we've negotiated that the MUD would also contribute to the those improvements.

So in working with our county partners, um, we've negotiated that the mud would also contribute to the those improvements.

All right, so uh what what I hear and and help me make sure that I'm I'm thinking properly is this benefits the the this provides a mechanism for the county and benefits the county, and we're all citizens of the county, so that's being a team player and sort of the regional water and wastewater is to the benefit of the region, so that's being a team player, but there's not to my understanding a direct pro or con, other than that those team player aspects for this.

We get enhanced development standards that we wouldn't otherwise get through the development agreement for this area.

They could they could build in the county without um the additional standards that are in the development agreement.

So we have that benefit, and then also the strategic partnership agreement allows potential annexation at the city's discretion in the future.

Okay, I appreciate thank you, Charlie.

Okay, any other questions for staff?

Great.

So this comes back for action later or no.

There's there's two action items on the agenda today, item A and B.

And then once the item B is for the um the agreement, and then once that's approved, it includes a strategic partnership agreement.

So you'll have a public hearing, two public hearings for the strategic partnership agreement.

Okay, got it.

Thank you.

But that's that's everything there.

Anything to close it out or this one, I don't think.

Yeah, yeah.

Action on item 7A and 7B.

Oh, C is not action B sir.

No, well, no, we'll just take it.

Okay.

I thought you said no action here as well.

Okay, got it.

That's my bad.

Representative from District 6.

Uh Councilperson Jester, uh, move approval as presented.

Representative District 4.

I second.

Okay, we got a motion and a second.

Any other discussion?

Uh seeing none, let's vote on the screen.

Bless you.

That passes six to one.

And item B no new presentation, right?

Perfect.

Thank you.

All right.

So that's item B, ID 251218.

Consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton authorizing the city manager to execute a first amendment to the amendment amended and restated development agreement with VS Development LLC and Denton County Municipal Utility District number 16.

Uh so I'll take uh there's no presentation, uh, any questions for staff, or I'll take a motion.

Representative from district six.

Uh I move approval as presented.

Representative district four.

And I will second this one.

We have a motion and a second.

Any other discussion?

Seeing none, let's vote on the screen.

And that passes uh six to one.

That leaves item C for later this evening, and that leaves the public hearings for 6:30.

So it is 458.

We're adjourned until 6:30.

All right.

Welcome back to this meeting of the Denton City Council.

It is still October 14th, and it is 6 30, and we do have a quorum, so we'll work to begin our public hearings for this evening's meeting.

And the first item is section six there, 6A public hearings.

A 25001A, hold a public hearing and consider our a petition for voluntary annexation of approximately one 15.011 acres of land generally located north of West University and approximately half a mile west of Golden Hoof Drive in uh Denton, Denton County, Texas.

Golden Hoof, Cobroncos.

Thank you.

Good evening again, uh Mayor, members of the council, Mia Hines, senior planner.

Um, this item estimated in the caption is the public hearing for the annexation item on the um for the property that you heard the municipal services agreement uh on earlier today.

Um, this is step two of the process uh for this evening.

Um and this again is just a public hearing for that property.

Um the property again is stated in the caption is located north of West University Drive, approximately half of a mile west of Golden Hoof Drive.

Um currently the property is located within the um city's ETJ, but surrounding zoning includes um R2.

Uh the future land use map designation for the property is currently um agriculture.

Um and again, this is step two or the second item on tonight's um agenda regarding this property.

And this is that public hearing item.

There is no action required.

Following this item, there is a first reading of the actual ordinance and then publication of the annexation ordinance and a second reading plan for the November 18th, 2025 meeting.

With that, I will take any questions or comments that you have.

Okay, I'll open a public hearing and anyone can speak if they'd like to.

You just fill out a card after the fact.

Just making sure you said no action required.

Great, thank you.

One question, representative from district two.

I think I know the answer to this already, but there's no current vertical development.

It's still agricultural land at the moment, correct?

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions for staff?

Okay, it is a public hearing.

So if anyone would care to speak, you can come up and speak and fill out a card after the fact.

Seeing no subtent movements, I'll close the public hearing.

And that concludes that item.

Takes us to item six B, which is CA 250002A, hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton, Texas regarding a comprehensive plan amendment on approximately 33.5 acres from rural area future land use designation to light industrial future land use designation.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council, Aaron Stanley Assistant Planner.

This is a request for a city initiated future land use map amendment of approximately 55.3 acres.

The area we'll talk about, we'll talk about in two different areas, area one and area two.

They're circled in yellow and orange, respectively on these maps.

Overall, the area is located in the far northeast side of town, indicated by the yellow star in the top right-hand corner map.

The first area circled in yellow is approximately 33.5 acres, and this is existing today as rural areas, future land use designation.

And the proposed change would be to light industrial future land use designation.

Area two, approximately 21.8 acres, is today low residential, and we are proposing an amendment to community mixed use.

Before we dive in, I wanted to kind of cover some background of why we're here today looking at this specific area and what we did prior to coming here today.

So in the last couple years, staff has received several development inquiries in this subject area that do not match the current zoning nor the future land use designations of that rural res rural areas and low residential.

This area is also identified in the comprehensive plan as a gateway for study of this area to look closer at this and see if what uses might be appropriate here and how that should be designed.

Looking at those existing conditions, these three images are from the subject area.

We see single-family homes with driveways directly on to US 380 today.

Their trash service pickup is directly onto 380.

And this is the type development that would be encouraged by the future land use map uh designation today of that low residential and rural areas.

We also see vacant properties and commercial properties, more so located in the ETJ, but take access off 380 and through city property to get to those properties.

So you you probably are familiar with the anticipated 380-288 connector.

Um that is anticipated around 2030.

In the subject area, Tex Dot also plans to uh do a freeway conversion.

So this would be a free-flowing freeway where 380 is today with service roads both on the north and south.

Um that's anticipated 2035 to 2040.

Um, this would is already happening further east of the subject site, out in Little Elm and further east towards towards McKinney.

Um, that's already happening today, and so that would be mirror what that looks like out there.

Um, staff also did take this to the planning and zoning commission back in April as a work session.

Uh we got some feedback, very similar uh presentation was given to them as as today, and they said to keep going, have some community outreach.

Uh, we did have a total of four meetings over the summer, uh, two in person and two virtual, and everyone who came out was in support of staff's recommendation as well.

And we'll we'll cover that a little bit more in in the presentation.

Um, so to get into the request that area one, so east of North Trinity Road.

Um, staff is proposing to amend this designation to light industrial.

This designation includes light manufacturing and warehousing, but it also includes those supporting uses such as office, retail, restaurants, um, and the comprehensive plan says that this should come with a strong transportation network to support it.

out was in support of staff's recommendation as well and we'll we'll cover that a little bit more in in the presentation so to get into the request that area one so east of North Trinity Road staff is proposing to amend this designation to light industrial this designation includes light manufacturing and warehousing but it also includes those supporting uses such as office retail restaurants and the comprehensive plan says that this should come with a strong transportation network to support it staff does believe that this area would be appropriate for light industrial future land use one of the reasons is it's consistent with the current development pattern you see some of this blue color light industrial already out further east or further west of this subject area it's consistent with the uses that we already see out in the ETJ both north and south of this site there already are light industrial uses here in the area and it would also consider the future 380 roadway design and improvements with those service roads it would support this even as today as it is low residential is not appropriate in the area even without these future text dot improvements and this this change would support uses like this within the city um this top right map does show where we see light industrial today it's that light blue color and I wanted to highlight that besides out west of I 35 um this is already an area we where we do see a lot of light industrial we also wanted to highlight these generally aligned zoning districts this is a future land use designation it does not narrow the property down to any one zoning district but generally we see light industrial general office and suburban corridor associated with this designation area two here in the comprehensive plan community mixed use is intended to be predominantly uh commercial but where residential service and other uses could be complementary and it's intended to embrace existing uses in the area and create that sense of place.

Staff did look at originally making this all light industrial but we decided to recommend community mixed use for a variety of reasons.

So the area in yellow on the map there already are single family homes there directly off of 380 as well as south of the subject area is Lakeview Estate's neighborhood entrance and so this community mixed use designation would provide neighborhood services that are at an appropriate scale for 380 while also being compatible with that residential development we already see here.

This would also buffer industrial uses and traffic from that residential providing a lower not as low as industrial but it's more office service those type uses along 380 and provide higher design standards than a light industrial district would and better design than than the low residential that we see there today.

Within the city um community mixed use is found throughout but it's primarily clustered around arterials and text art roadways such as this area would be or already is and generally we see community mixed use aligned with suburban corridor district and mixed use regional zoning districts so staff did evaluate how this amendment would fit with a comprehensive plan.

The comprehensive plan goal number L U1 does say to grow compactly staff believes that this is growing compactly in the sense that out east of the subject area past the Denton city limits this is already the type development that we see out there today and further west of the subject area is developing in this manner as well and this keeps the development closer to 380 rather than sprawling into the ETJ out here.

Today as developments come in for requests they cannot do this in the city limits here so they just do it further behind in the ETJ where the city does not have land use authority this would allow us to grow compactly closer to those roadways and also would development when they come in to align with the comprehensive plan and that future land use designation this recommendation or request does meet the criteria for approval it does not conflict with the comprehensive plan it's consistent with the existing development pattern in the area and will continue to encourage compatible land uses with the with existing uses and with the 380 design and would consider that that existing infrastructure and and uses as with all of our amendments such as this we did conduct notification in accordance with the comp with the debt and development code both digitally and signs posted in the area we did mail notices as well to all the residents and owners within 2500 feet and we did receive one response in favor it's not highlighted on here necessarily because it was from a business tenant rather than the whole lot it was just the property sort of right above where the 200 foot buffer area is just north of that.

And we did at those two public here uh public meetings that we held in person in the subject area, uh, we had two residents and one uh property owner, and all were in support of staff's recommendation.

Um staff is recommending approval, and the planning and zoning commission did also recommend approval four to zero, um, and I'll be happy to answer any questions.

Okay, thank you very much.

Any questions for staff, and I'll open to public hearing.

Uh if you care to speak, you can fill out a card afterward after the fact, but you're welcome to speak.

Mayor Pretun.

Erin, thank you for your presentation.

Um one question I had is I'm on the Vision Zero task force.

And so one of the things we've been looking at is some of our deadliest roadways.

Uh and typically those are the roads that are multi-lane, high speed, and have a lot of uh development alongside.

So University 380 is one of those, South Loop 288 is is high injury as well.

Um so my I guess my biggest concern, you said that the frontage roads would maybe come online 2035, 2040, something like that.

Um my concern would be uh I'm good with the light industrial.

Um it's the the frontage along 380.

If that were to develop before the frontage roads, I start to have some concerns.

It's creating conflict of vehicles slowing, speeding up, turning in and out, um, and it and it's creating development along that corridor.

So it's it's congesting, but also creating more of that potential for those deadly collisions.

Um and so I have some concerns of allowing that type of development prior to the frontage roads, specifically the um the the portion, the pink portion there.

Um again, industrial I'm good with.

Um so I don't know if you or I see that we have uh Farhan and Chandra in the room as well that can speak to um some of the concerns I have with adding frontage like that with with driveways and such um on this high-speed multi-lane road at the same time that we're trying to make our roads safer.

It kind of creates um potentially a more dangerous situation.

Sure.

Um I I will let them if they would like to speak.

I I would just like to add that a lot of the development requests that we have been receiving, um they can always go into the ETJ and develop those same uses.

Um, and so if they were to develop in in the city limits in this property, um under these future land use designations and then zonings that would support that, they would be required all of the traffic studies, um, trip generation uh reports and all of that, and all often those come with turn lanes, multiple points of access.

Um if they're in the ETJ, that doesn't necessarily always happen how they're how they're taking access with the existing driveways there today.

Um so so that could help with your question.

I don't know if they want to add anything.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

Chandra Morganandum, City Traffic Engineer.

I would like to add what Erin said if developments coming uh in the specific areas you see.

Uh Trinity would qualify for a signal, so we could have driveways connecting to Trinity and a signal would control until the freeway section is built by Techstar.

So we could regulate traffic at that intersection.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Um representative from District 4.

Thank you.

Um Aaron, where'd you go?

There we are.

I I see that one uh person opposed this.

Do you know if they were the the 200 foot or the 500 foot and what their opposition was?

So the one person in opposition that was actually an e-comment that was uh given to the planning and zoning commission.

Um I think I updated this presentation since what you had received.

Um so that one in opposition, I don't believe they live in the subject area.

Um they didn't give an address.

Um I have the comments.

It was traffic concerns as well, but they from what they said, they didn't indicate that they live in uh the area at all.

Interesting.

Okay, thank you so much.

Representative for district two.

Thank you.

Um I have some of the same concerns that Mayor Pro Tam has.

Um I I think I've I've mentioned some of them to you before, and and and that is again not not the use or the envisioned expansion of some of the areas that are sort of east of town now.

I mean, ideal that's not as L L U1 as I think the actual comp plan kind of intends.

I think that's that's kind of sprawling out.

But we might we might be in a gray area there.

But with the bypass coming right there with access roads and feeder roads, it it feels cart before the horse to um promote development in that region when we are going to get um six-lane highway with access roads and a bridge over to 288, all in that location.

It it feels like we're encouraging development that will then either get impacted from state in Text Dot or the federal government with U.S.

core just right there as well.

Um in the green.

So uh can you can someone address some of those concerns about ordering?

Not so much the the land use, but the ordering.

Because this feels cart before the horse kind of thing.

Sure.

Um it is we can't speak for Text Dots timing of the roadway improvements.

Um I can't say this is not granting any of those uses to be allowed after today.

Um, this is only that future land use designation, and all rezonings would come.

The applicants would come forward with a rezoning request, and this they would come before this body again.

Um I think it's certainly fair if if you wanted to approve this, but hold off on rezonings.

That's always a future decision.

Um, and so in terms of timing, I guess it doesn't have to be before necessarily if this was approved.

All right, thank you.

Representative from district six.

Hi, um, council person.

Um, and I I hope it's uh appropriate, it's not really a question, but um I did uh receive a same uh I think email that some other city council members received regarding concerns with the traffic.

I therefore reached out to our transportation services division, uh, a couple of which we have here, and with their permission, it's just a couple of sentences, but I just want to read what their uh analysis after looking at the citizen concerns and the the plans.

Um and it says transportation services staff would support approving this item.

Text dot would eventually build the frontage roads along US 380, and as such, staff do not see any disruption in traffic flows after the completion of the widening project.

This will also resolve issues linked to direct access to US 380 after the widening project is complete and the frontage roads are added.

It's important to note that Text DOT will control the schedule of this implementation.

Um and I think that because of that and the fact that we're going to vet each and every project as it comes through and have a second uh bite at the apple, uh, shall we say um uh that's why I'm voting in favor, and thank you very much for letting me make my comments and and thank you for your presentation.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions for staff?

Seeing none representative from district six.

Um I move approval as presented.

No, representative from district one.

I'll check it.

I have a motion and a second.

I'll close the public hearing.

Uh any discussions?

Representative from district two.

Yeah, I I I appreciate the the email from staff and and some of the comments, but I I've seen some of the impacts.

Uh there's a logistics bar on Mingo, there's some other places where it it is hamstrung the f the necessary flexibility for the city to and not encourage because that's not what staff do, but to uh because there's property rights.

So I I want to make sure I say this correctly, but to not fail to discourage in places where we know there's going to be these potential developments.

Um I I just can't get behind it this time.

I think it it creates uh problems for the city later on that then we have to solve.

So I I'm not gonna be supporting this change um maybe in a few years, but not right now.

Represent uh Mayor Pro Tim Um again.

I appreciate all the time that staff have put into this.

Um and I and I absolutely understand um all the arguments for um while the changing the flume doesn't really you know commit us to doing this at any particular time and we can revisit it.

Um I I have observed that whatever the flume says kind of increases the chance of a rezoning whenever those come up.

Um so for that reason I won't be able to support this at this time as it currently is.

But um just for future um light industrial again, I'm okay with thank you.

Okay again, we have a motion and a second any other discussion.

Seeing none, let's vote on the screen.

That passes 43.

Uh takes us to item C, which is Z2501, pardon me, Z25012A.

Hold a public hearing, consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of Denton, Texas regarding a change in zoning district and use classification from mixed use neighborhood zoning district to suburban suburban corridor zoning district on approximately one acre of land, generally located all south of loop 288 service road.

Good evening again, Aaron Stanley Assistant Planner.

Um and this is going to be presented as two both items C and D.

I'm not sure if you need to read the second one.

Um item 6D is Z25016A, hold a public hearing and consider adoption of ordinance of the city of Denton, Texas regarding a change in zoning district and use classification of uh portion of mixed use zoning district and zoning district on an approximately one acre land to subordinate suburban corridor zoning district, generally located south of loop 288 service road.

Thank you.

Um so this will be two requests in one.

Um as I go through the presentation, you'll see an A and a B to indicate the two items.

Um, A being Z25-12 and B being uh 25-16.

Uh both of these are requests to rezone uh properties from mixed use neighborhood district to suburban corridor.

Each property is about one acre in size, and the purpose is to facilitate development of commercial uses consistent with those uh with the suburban corridor zoning district.

Um currently, these properties, all of property A and a majority of property B are zoned, mixed use neighborhood district.

Um this is intended to be a primarily pedestrian oriented zoning district.

Uh we see that in the maximum set building setback that is required in the MN district.

Um this is unusual.

Usually you have the minimum setback requirement.

Um this is to and to encourage that pedestrian atmosphere to bring the building closer to the street.

Um in this case, that primary street frontage would be loop 288.

So it would be encouraging that the building is located close to 288 service road.

Um activity happened close to that service road, and that's really not the intent of this area as it as it's developing today.

Um the suburban corridor being requested is more of an auto-oriented zoning district and would have uh greater setbacks from all of the front yard and side and rear yards, um, and no maximum setback from loop 28.

Um this request does meet the criteria for approval.

Um, it would be consistent with the suburban corridor purpose statement, uh, which we will get into in the presentation, um, consistent with the comprehensive plan goals and policies.

And all development that comes forward on these properties would be required to submit all of their development plans, site plans, and we reviewed in compliance with the DDC.

Um, and this rezoning is not expected to generate significant uh adverse environmental infrastructure or fiscal impacts.

Umridor purpose statement.

Um, again, this district is to provide moderate to high intensity commercial office and retail along high traffic corridors.

Um, it should provide elevated building design and landscape design and be auto-oriented, but still provide that safe environment for pedestrians and cyclists.

Um staff is supporting this because of its location for one, uh being located in a commercial block at the corner of a freeway and primary arterial.

Um, but it is also close to these multifamily apartments, uh both already developed and underway of development.

Um, and the development standards for suburban corridor would require safe and accessible design for pedestrians and cyclists, um, including access to the south to uh to Randall Street there.

Uh the request is also consistent with the community mixed use comprehensive plan future land use map amendment or uh designation.

Um promoting the mix of uses where commercial is predominant, but residential service and other uses are complementary.

Um this would grow compactly where we already see development.

Um transportation and infrastructure systems are already in place here, and this would also create new workplaces workplaces close to existing and proposed residential, um, increasing the city's job to worker ratio, which is a goal of the comprehensive plan.

Both projects conducted notifications in accordance with the DDC, posting online and on the proper on the subject properties and mailing notices to residents and owners within 200 and 500 feet.

No responses were received for either request.

Um for property owners and residents of the adjacent multifamily.

And staff is recommending approval of both cases, and PNZ also recommended approval four to zero, and I'll be happy to answer any questions.

Okay.

Thank you.

And that's one presentation for both, right?

Okay, great.

So open the public hearing for 6C initially.

And uh questions for staff representative from district two.

Thank you.

Um considering the the similarity in uses, what uh what why is the applicant pursuing SC instead of MN?

I I mean what what does what advantage does that confer?

I mean, I heard of some of what you said about the differences and why you know you know for for an exit ramp, it might the city might be interested in it, but talk to me a little bit about through why is this being brought to us.

So the MN district um requires that pedestrian-oriented design.

So that's really having the building close to the street with this being platted as five lots here at this corner where you see the A and B plus the three pink lots here.

Um it would be difficult to align with the part that is already suburban corridor based on those design differences.

Um in the MN district, since buildings have to be closer to the street, um, having a front drive aisle is not an option there.

Um that would be difficult to align with any commercial uses that come in adjacent to them that do have a front drive aisle.

Um and again, it wouldn't be in their best interest to have those um you know, more pedestrian and customer outdoor dining so close to 288.

Um that's not the intent of the applicants and and in their design.

So when you have multiple frontage, when you have uh an exit ramp and a primary uh arterial like Randall, the the frontage is on the frontage restrictions are on both.

Is that correct?

So the setbacks are on both both the north and the south?

Yes, in this case, they wouldn't be able to have it so close.

So the ten 10 foot front set front yard setback would be for both.

Um, but the maximum building setback would be typically taken off of the the primary street that it would front um and usually the larger street, and so that would be the loop 288 side would should be their front where they have the building closer to the street.

And and last question, there's and there's no issues with the in on parcel A in terms of I mean developing that area for uh suburban corridor use they um I know the applicant has already already looked at some designs and and they managed to do that.

They have not submitted those plans to the city yet, so all of the drainage would review would be when they formally submit those plans.

All right, appreciate that.

Thank you, Erin.

Okay, any other questions for representative district four.

Thank you.

Uh how how would one approach the the property from what is that from the the northwest?

What what street would would one need to be on to get to get to that?

Because you can't you can't do it from Sherman Drive unless you turn on Randall.

If you were on Halbara, how do I phrase this?

What the westerly street to get to to get to the loop 288 service route.

So property you're referring to property A?

Is that correct?

Well, either one either one.

Um they likely will not have access off of this um exit ramp, but they will have driveways off Randall and they would have through streets uh interior to this block.

So the property is not accessible from loop 288.

It has frontage, but I I'm not sure they wouldn't be allowed to have each of these lots have a driveway off of 288.

No, um I don't think that would meet spacing requirements.

So uh this development uh instead of A and B, they will have an access in between B and the next lot, and they will build the turn lanes to turn into the uh driveway from there.

They will have driveways on the site to access, so they don't have to go if they're coming from the northwest, they don't have to go to the Sherman's signal or done here.

They will have an access one.

So they will have access to the one access.

Okay.

Just far away from the Sherman.

The minimum criteria is 200, so they will get one driveway here.

Okay, okay.

And I'm hearing that this is an automotive related business.

Is that is that correct?

So this is a straight rezoning request.

Um there's no use associated with it.

Um both the applicants are here today if you would like to ask them about their intended uses.

Um but I would like to ask that.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay, any other questions for staff?

Well, excuse me.

I I do want to ask.

Yeah, but I'm gonna get all the I'm gonna get all the staff questions.

Okay, so that they don't have to come up and down.

Any other questions for staff?

Okay.

Uh so I have one card, and it's a public hearing.

Anyone can come up to speak with Patrick if you can come up.

And then uh as I tell everyone, you you have a right to remain silent, and then you say can and will be used against you.

So far as the straight zoning, and then you you have options after that.

So uh Councilmember Holland, you have the floor.

Please.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Uh tell me what you have in mind.

Uh our proposed use, so I'm lot A.

We will be looking to do a uh fast food Mexican restaurant, Chipotle Mexican Grow.

Okay, so I misunderstood completely.

I thought it was auto services.

Uh no, sir.

Business.

Okay, okay.

That's that's fine.

Thank you.

See how easy that was?

Okay.

And you you do you fill out the you have anything?

You have the time if you want it.

Uh no, but here to answer any other questions you guys might have.

Got it.

Okay, we'll see.

Okay.

Uh any other questions for staff.

It's a public hearing.

Anyone can come up to speak, just fill out a card after the fact.

Seeing none, uh, I will close a public hearing.

Mayor Mayor Pro Tim.

I think it makes sense to make it all consistent.

It does not make sense to have the building super close to that particular roadway.

So for that reason, I uh motion approval.

Uh representative from district six.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

Any other discussion?

Seeing none, let's vote on the screen.

This is item C passes 70.

I'll take a motion on item D.

I'm not doing a call hearing.

Okay.

Yep.

So this is uh item D.

I'll open the public hearing.

Anyone care to speak on item six D.

Seeing no sudden movements, I'll close the public hearing.

I'll take a motion on six D.

Mayor Pro Tim.

Motion to approve.

Uh representative from district six.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

Any other discussion?

Any questions?

Seeing none, let's vote on the screen.

That passes 70 takes us to our individual consideration.

Item 7C.

And this one's no action, right?

So, but we do have I'll call it.

It's item 7CA2501B.

Conduct the first of two readings of an ordinance of the city of Denton, Texas, annexing approximately 15.011 acres of land generally located north of West University Drive and approximately half a mile west of Golden Hoof Drive, Go Broncos to the city of Denton, Denton County, Texas.

Thank you again.

Good evening, Mayor, members of the council, Mia Hines, senior planner.

Um, this is the uh first of two readings of the ordinance related to an annexation of the 15-acre property that we've discussed a couple of times this evening.

Um reminder, it is located north of West University US 380, approximately half a mile west of Golden Hoof Drive.

Um and this item um uh has uh the same background and applicant as the uh previous two items related to this annexation.

Um the developer uh is uh Kimley Horn on behalf of the property owner double RDEFCO.

Um this was previously a part of a uh municipal utility district, um, and they are proposing to annex this property.

Um following this, we will publish the annexation ordinance uh in the uh newspaper this weekend, and uh we are scheduled or sensitively scheduled to host the second reading uh of the ordinance on November 18th.

So with that, I'll just read the caption here.

Um this is an ordinance of the city of Denton, Texas, an annexing approximately 15.011 acres of land generally located north of West University Drive, US 380, and approximately half a mile west of Golden Hoof Drive to the city of Denton, Denton County, Texas, providing for a correction to the city map to include the annexed land and providing for a savings calls and an effective date.

There are is no action on this item, and that concludes my presentation.

Are there any questions?

Okay, thank you.

Any questions for staff?

Seeing none, thank you very much.

I appreciate it.

That takes us to concluding items.

Any concluding items.

Mayor Pro Tim.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, so last week I got to be keynote for the induction of the National Junior Honor Society at Calhoun Middle School.

Uh they were adorable.

Um they seem so proud of themselves, their parents are proud.

It was it was so fun to get to to see them being honored and and think about what they're gonna do in the future.

So shout out to uh the new members of the junior national junior honor society at Calhoun Middle School.

Uh UNT football.

I think several of us got to go to that game this past weekend.

Um, unfortunately, it wasn't the outcome we wanted, but I did want to remind I I might be stealing Council Member Holland's uh thunder here.

But um, we do have homecoming coming up this uh Saturday, October 18th.

The football game will be at 2 30.

Hopefully, we have another good turnout for that game as well.

Uh, I think this one will be a success.

Thank you.

Excellent, thank you.

Any anyone else?

Representative from District 6.

Just want to say, don't forget boot at the U at TWU.

Uh, they are still looking for volunteers and have a record number that have signed up to do the thriller dance and break the Guinness Book of World Records once again putting Denton on top.

Uh, in addition, there's a witches ride uh that I'm participating in should be interesting.

So lots of things for everyone to do, not just the students, uh staff and faculty at TWU, uh, but please check that out.

Thank you.

Representative from District 4.

Uh Mayor Pro Tim, thank you for that shout out to North Texas football.

That was a wonderful evening.

Um, I'm convinced had the band not left the field at halftime that we would still have still been in that game.

But it was it was heartening seeing City of Denton turn out to see big league football.

And uh, and I was very, very proud.

The mayor was on the was on the field leading Gomin Green, and uh and it was just a wonderful evening.

Saturday, uh 2 30.

UT San Antonio.

I hate those guys.

Oh thank you.

Awesome.

Awesome.

Uh any anyone else, any concluding items.

Okay, so uh I want to say I'm gonna combine these two.

So my dad, my brother, and then two year two days afterwards, my dad had their birthday.

So happy birthday to dad and my brother.

Uh he's oh my brother's okay as much as you can be okay as older brother.

Uh and dad is dad, so they're that get that.

And then also uh please uh I can't say enough about Boo with the U.

It's it's a great opportunity.

Take advantage of that.

Uh take your kids, and it's just a great event.

And we're gonna wreck break a record, so that's great.

Then I will say, I'm looking, I got a reminder here.

So you support uh the uh serve Denton and it's October 3rd.

Get your atomic bingo bash uh tickets before they run out.

That'll be a great thing.

Again, that's uh 23rd.

Uh, but get those in advance.

They're going fast.

And then this week, Friday is uh the pro Pride and class truck parade.

So Peterbilt hosts a parade.

It's very unique if you're not familiar with it.

Uh lots of 18-wheelers, lots of honking, so bring your earplugs.

Uh but they lit up and it's amazing night, and it's for a great cause to support the United Way.

So please plan on being at the square.

Uh they'll go down, they'll make the block, so they'll start on Hickory, go around so there's not a bad seat in the house.

Uh, but please plan to be there and let's support the Denton County United Way.

And at 7 11, uh everyone go get a Slurpee and we'll conclude tonight's meeting.