July 7, 2026 Regular City Council Meeting and Work Session
July 7, 2026 Regular City Council Meeting and Work Session
The meeting included discussion and action on a water service line replacement contract, a presentation on e-bike and e-moto usage, and a comprehensive presentation on police department operations, staffing, equipment, and training. The council also entered executive session to discuss the city manager's contract and took action afterward.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No members of the public addressed the council on items not on the agenda.
Discussion Items
-
Water Service Line Replacement Contract (Item 4A): The city manager presented a construction contract with N ANA Site Construction, LLC for $6,570,491.50 to replace approximately 5,300 copper service lines with HDPE lines. The original estimate was $8 million, but first bids came in at $10 million. The project was re-bid after changes: extending the contract from 12 to 18 months, removing replacement of meter boxes, lids, curb stops, and tapping saddles, and reducing labor by using existing taps. The new bid was $3.5 million lower than the previous low bid. Council asked questions about the workflow and cost savings. The contract was approved unanimously.
-
E-Bike and E-Moto Usage in Murphy (Item 5A): Staff presented an overview of e-bike classifications (Class 1,2,3) and e-motos (electric dirt bikes). Current ordinances do not specifically address e-bikes, but e-motos are illegal on public property. The main issue is e-motos damaging parks and riding illegally. Staff recommended an education campaign (signage, social media, HOA meetings, school outreach via SROs) rather than immediate regulation. Council discussed the difficulty of enforcement, the difference between pedal-assist e-bikes and e-motos, and supported the education approach. The chief noted that chasing e-motos is dangerous.
-
Police Department Presentation (Item 5B): The city manager and police chief presented a holistic assessment of the police department, covering take-home vehicle policy, a pulse check on morale, staffing, equipment, and training.
- Take-Home Vehicles: Three detectives currently have permanent take-home vehicles (cost $5,225.90 fuel, $903 maintenance over past year). The practice was expanded in June 2025. Options discussed: maintain current practice, establish a residency radius, set a response time requirement (currently 1 hour), or return with alternatives. Council discussed potential liability and personal use concerns. The city manager noted that 88% of peer agencies provide detective take-home vehicles.
- Staffing: Two proposals: reclassify dispatch supervisor to telecommunications manager and create a senior telecommunicator position (cost $20,000, no new FTEs) to address understaffing on the floor. Also, implement shift differential pay of $100 per month for night shift officers and dispatchers (16 employees, total $22,500 annually). Council discussed the need for overtime reduction and supported the reclassification and shift differential.
- Equipment: Concerns about Tesla patrol vehicles (50% approval, 50% dislike). Action plan: no new Teslas, but continue exploring EVs. Officers will not be forced to drive Teslas. Rifles: age concerns, proposed a rifle reimbursement program (city purchases, officers pay back via payroll). Council preferred a phased replacement over 3 years rather than reimbursement. Less-than-lethal: Burna vs. Taser. Burnas implemented October 2025; only 3 taser deployments in 5 years (2 unsuccessful). Action plan: evaluate burnas after 18 months of use. Council discussed officer safety and comfort with the tool.
- Training: Over 2 years, Murphy PD completed 7,327 training hours (68% patrol, 16% CID, 11% dispatch). Compared to peer agencies, Murphy trains significantly more. However, officers perceive training is denied. Action plan: link training to department-wide goals rather than individual requests.
Key Outcomes
- Approved water service line replacement contract with N ANA Site Construction, LLC in the amount of $6,570,491.50 (unanimous).
- Directed education campaign for e-bike/e-moto usage, including signage, social media, HOA meetings, and school outreach.
- Indicated support for dispatch reclassification and shift differential pay; these items to be included in the final FY27 budget recommendation on August 4, 2026.
- No action on take-home vehicle policy, rifle program, or less-than-lethal equipment; further analysis requested.
- Executive Session: Council discussed evaluation of city manager Aretha Adams under Texas Government Code §551.074. After reconvening, the council unanimously voted to reconsider the amendments to the city manager's contract adopted on June 16, 2026, and to withdraw those amendments and restore the original contract.
Note: The transcript names the city as Murphy, Texas; the meeting was recorded as Idaho Falls, Idaho per the user's instruction.
Meeting Transcript
Welcome everyone to the July 7th regular city council meeting or city council work session meeting. The time is 602. I'll turn the time of city secretary for roll calling certification on point. Mayor Scott Bradley? Here. Mayor Pro 10 W. Scott Smith? Here. Deputy Mayor P10 Ken Otman? Here. Councilmember Elizabeth Abraham? Here. Councilmember Debbie Ison? Here. Councilmember Kevin Collie? Here. Councilmember Jenny Butler. All right, I certify a form. Thank you, Brian. Alright. With that, we'll move on to public comments. Public comments at the time we set aside on the agenda, allow residents to uh address council item not on the agenda this evening. Would anyone like to address council item not on the agenda this evening? Okay. Good, good, good, good, good. All right. With that, I'll turn it over to item four, individual consideration, consider interact and resolution authorize the city manager, execute a construction contract with N ANA site construction, LLC, the amount of six million five hundred and seventy thousand four hundred and ninety-one dollars and fifty cents for water service line replacement. Okay, final mayor, members of council. Most of y'all are very familiar with this project. It's simple, it's a simple project to replace about 5300 uh copper service lines with HDP lines. We took this project to or we opened it on this project the first time in April, those bids pay in a little bit on that and just over 10 million dollars, which is about two million dollars over budget. We came to council in May and asked if we could recommend it to you to reject those bids and allow us time to work with our engineers to uh make some tweaks that would allow us to get a similar product but make it uh uh much more affordable. Uh y'all rejected those bids. We worked with our engineer. We reopened bids on in June. Uh low bid was A site construction, the contract you had in front of you, which was six million five hundred and seventy thousand dollars uh four hundred and ninety-one dollars and fifty cents. That's a difference of about three point five million dollars uh from the previous low bid. Uh the uh engineer of record BHC has vetted the contractor. They found him to be excellent, had great references. Uh we feel that you're gonna get a uh a quality product even with the changes that we made. And uh we recommend that uh we uh council approves this award or approves this contract. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. What was the original uh estimate again? Original estimate was right at 8 million. Eight million. So that's where our budget was. We're coming about 1.5 under the original estimate. Yes. That's good because we tend to flow our estimate sometimes. Anyone else have any questions?
openpublica.com