OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Carrollton, Texas/City Council
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Carrollton City Council Regular Worksession & Meeting - June 4, 2024

City Council — Tuesday, June 4, 2024
BodyCarrollton, Texas
SessionCity Council
DateTuesday, June 4, 2024
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:05:41

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording. Names come from transcript evidence. “Possibly” marks uncertain attribution.

Speaker 1

8:58

There is a customary tradition at the city of Charlton where the mayor puts in to run one meeting a year.

9:05

I didn't remind the mayor, but somehow the mayor remembered.

9:08

So tonight, while he would normally be here and he would be happy to be here is my opportunity to understand what he goes through every

Unassigned speaker

9:18

time

Speaker 1

9:21

with me.

9:51

Any questions or comments?

10:01

So I'll go

Unassigned speaker

10:01

back.

Speaker 2

10:03

Yes.

10:03

So what what are we uh doing on this particular item?

10:08

Andrew, can you answer?

Unassigned speaker

10:10

I'll

Andrew Cone · Speaker 3Inferred

10:11

address it.

10:11

I'm Andrew Cone, capital improvement manager.

10:14

What this is is this is the Hebrew Parkway screening wall project.

10:19

Uh the during the course of design, uh the the consultant will generally will do the calculate the quantities.

10:28

They missed a quantity on this.

10:30

They didn't miss the work.

10:31

This wasn't a design error, this was just a calculation as far as the number of square yards of concrete of some sidewalk that we're gonna need on the project.

10:40

And so we did we recently discovered this in the field, it was checked with the contractor with the and with the engineer of record and determined that that the quantity was was higher.

10:51

So we're adding this in there.

10:53

This is being added in at the same unit price as what the original bid is.

10:57

So we're not paying in pre you know the change order premium.

11:00

We would have we would have paid for this anyhow if it were in the original bid.

Unassigned speaker

11:06

Uh uh,

Speaker 2

11:06

so I I get my question is what uh what amount was in the original contract?

Andrew Cone · Speaker 3Inferred

11:12

The original contract for the the 10-inch the original contract for we had 490 square yards for 10 inch concrete sidewalk.

11:26

This is increases that to 630 square yards.

11:31

Now the four-inch concrete, the small the sidewalk, that one is what the where they yeah, they really missed it.

11:38

Uh that was they had eight square yards in the in the original quantity sheet, and that's been increased to 84.

Speaker 2

11:46

Um so this it came before the councilman, what June of 2023?

11:52

Correct.

11:52

Um and we we did a contract with them, I guess, after the RP process.

11:57

So

Unassigned speaker

11:58

I

Speaker 2

11:58

guess from from a year now, what has changed?

12:02

I mean, they just went back and just saw that this error saw that was the error of what

Andrew Cone · Speaker 3Inferred

12:05

they reached that level of work.

12:07

It took a while for us to get the project started, and then once they got out and started doing their construction staking, that's when they discovered uh that the quantities were quite a bit different than what was in the original bid.

Speaker 2

12:20

Gotcha.

12:21

And we did a contract based upon the original bid, correct?

12:25

Yes, yes.

12:26

Okay.

Unassigned speaker

12:28

I

Speaker 2

12:29

guess I'm just a little puzzled as to um I do understand there's mistakes, but uh I would think that if we did a if they did a bid and we did a contract for that bid that they would be obligated to perform that contract.

Andrew Cone · Speaker 3Inferred

12:42

On a lump sum contract, you're absolutely correct.

12:45

If this were say a building and we had the sheets in there for say the air conditioning system, and they forgot to add that in there, then technically they'd be on the on uh the hook for it because the way this was bid this has quantities line item quantities, and so we had a particular quantity for in this case you know 10-inch concrete sidewalk at this amount, that amount was what they are their bid was for.

13:11

So they and they they supplied a unit cost for that, and so all we've done is increase the overall amount, and we have contract provisions that say that if we increase or decrease this amount, then it's increased by their original unit price, and so they don't come back with the you know the the change order or the the premium on change orders.

13:34

So

Speaker 2

13:34

I guess my my question is what prevents any other similar situations to happen?

13:39

Yeah,

Andrew Cone · Speaker 3Inferred

13:41

we can be a little more diligent with our with our consultants and just verify with them.

13:46

This this will happen for one thing we have.

13:49

This wasn't a huge project, but a lot of projects you know, they're dealing with a lot of numbers and a lot of sheets, and so it's not uncommon.

13:55

Uh sometimes we even will uh include if if the calculated amount say is 600 yards, we may include a buffer in that uh for variations in the field.

14:05

This one didn't have that.

Speaker 2

14:07

Uh so this was a calculation error made by the engineers for that particular company.

14:12

Correct.

14:12

Am I correct?

Speaker 4

14:13

Well, that and so it's for the engineer, and then this is the contractor, so it's not the same entity, correct?

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning And Land Use███████████████████████23%
Community Engagement█████████████13%
Emergency Management█████████████13%
Procedural████████████12%
Fiscal Sustainability███████████11%
Engineering And Infrastructure█████████9%
Public Engagement█████5%
Public Safety█████5%
Technology and Innovation████4%
Summary of Proceedings

Carrollton City Council Regular Worksession & Meeting - June 4, 2024

The Carrollton City Council held a combined Worksession and Regular Meeting on June 4, 2024. The Worksession began at 5:45 PM with a presentation on the city's 2024 bond sale results and council reports, including an extended briefing on storm recovery operations following severe weather on May 28, 2024. Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Cline presided over the Regular Meeting, which convened at 7:00 PM. The council acted on three public hearing items, approving a candle manufacturing special use permit, denying a vape and smoke shop permit, and accepting the withdrawal of a tattoo parlor request.

Consent Calendar

  • Item 7: Approved the minutes of the May 14, 2024 regular meeting.
  • Item 9: Approved a resolution authorizing a professional services contract with Iteres Group, LP for auditing the Utility Customer Service billing system (not to exceed $100,000 for 600 hours of services across approximately 39,000 accounts and 80,000 active services).
  • Item 10: Approved a resolution authorizing an economic development grant incentive agreement with Fenway Development, Inc. for tree removal and replacement at Carroll Crest Subdivision along Crosby Road (not to exceed $52,691.75 from the Tree Reforestation Fund).
  • Item 11: Approved a resolution reappointing Dr. Rufino Talatala to the Metrocrest Hospital Authority Board.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Item 13 – Vape and Smoke Retail SUP: Four residents spoke in opposition. Eddie Lopez (2835 Color Springs Road) urged denial citing concerns about preserving historic downtown character, tourism, health risks, crime, and property values. Paula McDonald, president of the Historic Downtown Carrollton Association (HDCA), stated the shop is "not conducive to the vision" for downtown and asked for disapproval. Adam Poulter, former councilmember, argued that a smoke and vape shop is not the appropriate tenant mix for downtown, especially during the ongoing master planning process, and requested denial. John Osborne (2118 Daniel Way) cited health concerns and the need to maintain a family-friendly atmosphere for the downtown square.
  • Public Forum – Item 15: James Herring, Director of Football Operations for the Women's Football League (WFL), presented plans for the first professional women's football league based on the NFL model, including a documentary series starting with the Dallas Gems. Ishawn Patel, representing BAPS Charities of Dallas, invited the community to the annual "In the Joy of Others" Walk/Run event on June 8, 2024, at Sound at Cypress Waters, supporting Irving Cares and Metrocare.

Discussion Items

  • Bond Sale Results (Worksession): Blake Roberts from PFM presented the final results of the sale of $29.18 million in General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2024, and $8 million in Waterworks and Sewer System Revenue Bonds, Series 2024. Both issuances achieved AAA/AAA credit ratings, affirmed by Fitch and S&P. The GO bonds carry a 15-year repayment period and the revenue bonds a 20-year period. Interest rates were locked on May 29, 2024, with closing scheduled for June 20, 2024. The city's strong financial management, reserves, low debt, and location in the DFW region were cited as supporting factors.
  • Item 8 – Hebron Parkway Change Order (Pulled from Consent): Councilmember Fleming pulled Item 8 for discussion. The item authorized Change Order No. 2 with C. Green Scaping, LP for the Hebron Parkway Guardrail and Live Screening Improvements Project in the amount of $93,316, increasing the total contract to $872,559 (a 12.9% increase from the original $772,501). Andrew Cone, Capital Improvement Manager, explained the engineer's original quantity estimates undercounted concrete needed (10-inch sidewalk: 490 to 630 sq yds; 4-inch sidewalk: 8 to 84 sq yds). The error was in quantity calculation, not design. The additional work is priced at the original bid unit rates. The project is 50% complete, and the timeline extends by 21 calendar days. Councilmember Axberg raised concerns about accountability for the estimating error; staff indicated the issue would factor into future decisions about utilizing the engineering firm. The change order was approved with a 6-1 vote.
  • Item 13 – Vape and Smoke Retail SUP: Staff presented the request for a special use permit for a smoke shop retailer at 1014 S. Broadway Street, Suite 104, in the Downtown Transit Center District and Historic Square Sub-District. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval on May 2, 2024 (6-1 vote). Applicant Malik Velani addressed the council, stating no on-site consumption would occur, the store caters primarily to adults with an average visit of 2-5 minutes, and existing locations in Denton and The Colony have operated without issues. Following public testimony in opposition, Councilmember Palacios moved to deny the permit. The motion to deny passed unanimously.
  • Item 14 – Candle Manufacturing SUP: Staff presented the request for a special use permit for miscellaneous manufacturing (candle manufacturing) at 3218 Skylane Drive, Suite 102, in the Light Industrial District. The use occupies approximately 2,000 sq ft of warehouse space in a building constructed in 1988. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval unanimously (7-0) on May 2, 2024. No public comments were received. The applicant was not present to answer questions. The permit was approved unanimously.
  • Item 12 – Kultura Tattoo SUP: Staff reported that the applicant withdrew the special use permit request for a tattoo parlor at 1621 W. Hebron Parkway on May 28, 2024, after public hearing notices had been mailed. The council accepted the withdrawal and took no action.
  • Mayor and Council Reports (Worksession): Councilmembers reported on community events including Memorial Day wreath laying, summer activities, and an AED training initiative. Councilmember Fleming proposed the city observe Juneteenth as a paid holiday for city staff, receiving support from multiple councilmembers. He also announced awarding his sixth annual Richard Fleming scholarships to two students. Councilmember Palomo suggested exploring an Arbor Day or tree planting initiative to replace trees lost in the storm. Councilmember Watters noted flooding issues at Jimmy Parker Park and McCoy.
  • Storm Response Update: Emergency Management Coordinator Elliot Reeb presented an extended report on the severe storm on May 28, 2024, at approximately 5:30 AM. The storm brought straight-line winds equivalent to a Category 1 hurricane across the entire city. At its peak, 32,283 Oncor customers (over 60% of Carrollton) were without power. The city activated sirens, received over 250 damage reports from the public, and Public Works cleared 99% of streets of safety hazards within just over a day. A debris management contract with Crowder Gulf was activated; cleanup is estimated at 3-4 weeks. Wellness checks were completed on all 148 registered medically vulnerable residents within 24 hours. City Manager Erin Rinehart praised staff response and noted that debris removal challenges include landfill lines and the need for patience as the significant cleanup continues.

Key Outcomes

  • Consent Items (7, 9, 10, 11): Approved unanimously.
  • Item 8 – Hebron Parkway Change Order: Approved (6-1).
  • Item 12 – Kultura Tattoo SUP: Withdrawal accepted; no action taken.
  • Item 13 – Vape and Smoke Retail SUP: Denied unanimously.
  • Item 14 – Candle Manufacturing SUP (Umbrella Scents): Approved unanimously.
  • Next Steps: Staff to follow up on Juneteenth holiday consideration and tree planting proposals. Debris cleanup from the May 28 storm continues citywide. The downtown Carrollton community engagement event is scheduled for June 12, 2024, along with the Metrocrest Chamber "Coffee with the Council" event.

Meeting Transcript

There is a customary tradition at the city of Charlton where the mayor puts in to run one meeting a year. I didn't remind the mayor, but somehow the mayor remembered. So tonight, while he would normally be here and he would be happy to be here is my opportunity to understand what he goes through every time with me. Any questions or comments? So I'll go back. Yes. So what what are we uh doing on this particular item? Andrew, can you answer? I'll address it. I'm Andrew Cone, capital improvement manager. What this is is this is the Hebrew Parkway screening wall project. Uh the during the course of design, uh the the consultant will generally will do the calculate the quantities. They missed a quantity on this. They didn't miss the work. This wasn't a design error, this was just a calculation as far as the number of square yards of concrete of some sidewalk that we're gonna need on the project. And so we did we recently discovered this in the field, it was checked with the contractor with the and with the engineer of record and determined that that the quantity was was higher. So we're adding this in there. This is being added in at the same unit price as what the original bid is. So we're not paying in pre you know the change order premium. We would have we would have paid for this anyhow if it were in the original bid. Uh uh, so I I get my question is what uh what amount was in the original contract? The original contract for the the 10-inch the original contract for we had 490 square yards for 10 inch concrete sidewalk. This is increases that to 630 square yards. Now the four-inch concrete, the small the sidewalk, that one is what the where they yeah, they really missed it. Uh that was they had eight square yards in the in the original quantity sheet, and that's been increased to 84. Um so this it came before the councilman, what June of 2023? Correct. Um and we we did a contract with them, I guess, after the RP process. So I guess from from a year now, what has changed? I mean, they just went back and just saw that this error saw that was the error of what they reached that level of work. It took a while for us to get the project started, and then once they got out and started doing their construction staking, that's when they discovered uh that the quantities were quite a bit different than what was in the original bid. Gotcha. And we did a contract based upon the original bid, correct? Yes, yes. Okay. I guess I'm just a little puzzled as to um I do understand there's mistakes, but uh I would think that if we did a if they did a bid and we did a contract for that bid that they would be obligated to perform that contract. On a lump sum contract, you're absolutely correct. If this were say a building and we had the sheets in there for say the air conditioning system, and they forgot to add that in there, then technically they'd be on the on uh the hook for it because the way this was bid this has quantities line item quantities, and so we had a particular quantity for in this case you know 10-inch concrete sidewalk at this amount, that amount was what they are their bid was for. So they and they they supplied a unit cost for that, and so all we've done is increase the overall amount, and we have contract provisions that say that if we increase or decrease this amount, then it's increased by their original unit price, and so they don't come back with the you know the the change order or the the premium on change orders. So I guess my my question is what prevents any other similar situations to happen?

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com