* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          [00:00:05]
          OKAY. 
          GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. 
          [1. Call Meeting to Order and Announce that a Quorum is Present]
IT IS FIVE THIRTY ONE AND WE'LL CALL TO ORDER THIS MEETING OF THE ADDISON CITY COUNCIL FOR A WORK SESSION MEETING ON FEBRUARY 3RD, 2026. 
          WE DO HAVE A QUORUM OF THE COUNCIL PRESENT WITH ALL MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE THIS EVENING, AND IF YOU ALL WOULD PLEASE RISE AND JOIN US FOR THE PLEASURE OF BOTH OF OUR FLAGS. 
          I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE. 
          FOR HONOR, THE TEXAS FLAG OF PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD. 
          ONE AN INDIVIDUAL. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK Y'ALL FOR BEING HERE THIS EVENING. 
          WE HAVE A LOT TO GET TO TONIGHT. 
          AND, UH, WE'LL GO 
          [3. Public Comment. The City Council invites citizens to address the City Council on any matter, including items on the agenda, except public hearings that are included on the agenda. Comments related to Public Hearings will be heard when the specific hearing starts. Citizen comments are limited to three (3) minutes, unless otherwise required by law. To address the Council, please fill out a City Council Appearance Card and submit it to a staff member prior to the Public Comment item on the agenda. The Council is not permitted to take any action or discuss any item not listed on the agenda. The Council may choose to place the item on a future agenda.]
AND JUMP RIGHT INTO ITEM NUMBER THREE, PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          CITY COUNCIL INVITES CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ANY MATTER, INCLUDING ITEMS ON THE AGENDA EXCEPT PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT ARE INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA. 
          COMMENTS RELATED TO PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HEARD WHEN THE SPECIFIC HEARING STARTS. 
          CITIZEN COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES UNLESS OTHERWISE REQUIRED BY LAW. 
          THE COUNCIL IS NOT PERMITTED TO TAKE ANY ACTION OR DISCUSS ANY ITEM NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. 
          AND COUNCIL MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA. 
          I HAVE A FEW COUNCIL APPEARANCE CARDS, SO WE'LL JUST CALL THOSE IN THE ORDER THAT I RECEIVED THEM. 
          AND WHEN YOU COME TO THE LECTERN UP HERE, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. 
          AND, UH, YOU CAN KINDA KEEP AN EYE ON ME SINCE THE CLOCK IS BEHIND YOU AND I'LL KINDA WAVE WHENEVER YOUR, YOUR TIME IS UP IF YOU DON'T, IF YOU'RE NOT SEEING IT. 
          SO FIRST UP, WE'LL CALL FOR PHYLLIS SILVER. 
          HELLO, MY NAME IS PHILLIP SILVER. 
          I LIVE ON AN ARTIST WAY IN ADDISON AND LAST WEEK I, UH, ADDRESSED THE REASONS WHY RELIANCE ON MICROT TRANSIT IN AN AREA AS LARGE AND AS EXTENSIVE HOURS IS A TERRIBLE IDEA AND WOULD LEAD TO MAJOR INCONVENIENCE AND HARDSHIP TO RIDERS. 
          TONIGHT I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE SURVEY THAT THE TOWN HAS POSTED AT THE ADDISON STATION. 
          THE IDEA OF A SURVEY IS GREAT SINCE I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE TRAVEL PATTERNS OF BUS RIDERS HERE IN IN ADDISON AND THE AREA. 
          I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT YOU WILL NOT BE CAPTURING THE MAJORITY OF RIDERS WORKING OR VISITING ADDISON BY TARGETING ONLY THE ADDISON STATION. 
          SOME RIDERS WORKING IN ADDISON TAKE A BUS ALONG BELT LINE COMING FROM CARROLLTON AND IRVING IN THE WEST AND ALSO ALONG BELTLINE FROM RICHARDSON AND DALLAS FROM THE EAST. 
          RIDERS TAKE BUSES TO ADDISON ALONG MIDWAY SPRING VALLEY AND THE TOLLWAY FROM CITIES INCLUDING DALLAS AND GARLAND. 
          MANY OF THESE RIDERS WILL NOT END UP GOING TO THE ADDISON STATION AT ALL. 
          THEY'LL BE TRAVELING ROUTES FROM OTHER CITIES AND GOING THROUGH OUR TOWN, BUT NOT TO THE STATION. 
          MOST OF THE RIDERS AT THE ADDISON STATION ARE EITHER ORIGINATING IN ADDISON TO GO TO ANOTHER CITY OR THEY ARE TRAVELING FROM ANOTHER CITY AND TRANSFERRING IN ADDISON TO GO TO A CITY OTHER THAN ADDISON. 
          IF YOU WANT TO OBTAIN MORE COMPLETE DATA, I SUGGEST THAT YOU ALSO OBSERVE ADDISON, UH, UH, THAT YOU ALSO OBSERVE THE PATTERNS BEYOND ADDISON STATION, ONE OF THE BUS ROUTES FROM DOWNTOWN DALLAS TO ADDISON TRAVELS ON THE TOLLWAY INWARD ROAD, THE SERVICE ROAD, UH, QUORUM DRIVE, AND THEN ONTO THE ADDISON STATION. 
          PERSONALLY, I HAVE OBSERVED BOTH ON WEEKDAYS AND WEEKENDS WHILE RIDING THIS BUS FROM DOWNTOWN DALLAS, UH, THAT, THAT, THAT PEOPLE GET OFF TO GO TO WORK IN HOTELS ON QUORUM, ON BOTH SIDES OF BELTLINE. 
          OTHERS GET OFF ON QUORUM NEAR BELTLINE TO WORK OR TO MEET OTHERS AT BELTLINE RESTAURANTS ALSO, OR SO. 
          I ENCOURAGE YOU TO EXPAND YOUR SURVEY AUDIENCE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, PHYLLIS. 
          NEXT UP WE HAVE TYLER WRIGHT. 
          GREAT. 
          GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. 
          UH, TYLER WRIGHT, 15 7 2 5 ARTIST WAY. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, LET'S GET DOWN TO BRASS TACKS, RIGHT? WE HAVE MOBILITY ON THE BALLOT FOR MAY AND TONIGHT WE'RE DECIDING WHAT WE WANT OUT OF DART. 
          JUST SOME QUESTIONS I GUESS MAYBE I'M HOPING YOU GUYS WILL BE ABLE TO ASK. 
          UM, FIRST THINGS FIRST IS IF THERE'S A, IF THERE'S AN ELECTION THAT'S SUCCESSFUL AND DART IS REMOVED FROM ADDISON AND WE ALSO HAVE A CONTINGENT CONTRACT TO PAY SOME VENDOR FOR IT, WHERE'S THAT MONEY COMING FROM? LIKE, THAT'S NOT A RHETORICAL QUESTION THAT WHERE 
          [00:05:01]
IS IT COMING FROM? I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW, UM, OUT OF WHAT BUDGET IS IT BEING TAKEN? WHO NEEDS TO BE FIRED? WHO NEEDS TO HAVE A HIRING FREEZE? LIKE WHERE IS THAT COMING FROM IF WE DIDN'T BUDGET FOR IT IN THE LAST CYCLE? UM, SECOND IS, SO TODAY I HAD TO VISIT A COUPLE OF CAMPUSES 'CAUSE IT'S MY LAST DAY OF MY CURRENT JOB AND, UH, DROP OFF SOME STUFF, SAY BYE TO MY TEAM. 
          SO I TOOK A BUS RIDE, TWO GO LINKS AND ANOTHER BUS RIDE HOME DOES, IS THERE GONNA BE A LIMIT ON THE AMOUNT I COULD USE IN AN ADDISON SYSTEM IN A DAY? 'CAUSE THAT'S, IF IT'S 21 A MONTH, THAT'S FOUR IN A DAY. 
          I GUESS I CAN'T REALLY GO TO WORK THAT OFTEN, UM, ON AN ADDISON SYSTEM. 
          AND, AND, AND THAT WAS IN PLANO. 
          MY NEW JOBS IN UPTOWN DALLAS. 
          IS IT GONNA TAKE ME THERE OR IS IT GONNA GET ME IN TIME FOR CONNECTION? OTHER QUESTIONS? I'M, I'M, I'M CURIOUS ABOUT, UM, ANOTHER THING FOR VENDORS IF, IF DART IS CRITICIZED 'CAUSE IT'S NOT PROFITABLE VIA HAS NEVER BEEN PROFITABLE, UM, CIRCUIT AND RIDE CO DON'T SHARE THEIR PROFITABILITY 'CAUSE THEY'RE PRIVATE. 
          BUT I IMAGINE IF THEY WERE, THEY WOULD PROBABLY BE BEATING THE DRUM THAT THEY'RE DOING PRETTY DAMN WELL. 
          UM, THE ONLY ONE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE MENTIONED THAT'S PROFITABLE IS, UH, TRANSITIVE. 
          COOL. 
          HOW DO THEY MAINTAIN THAT? WHAT'S VIA PLAN OF PROFITABILITY? IF, IF WE'RE GONNA GIVE GOOD GOVERNMENT MONEY TO PRIVATE BUSINESSES THAT AREN'T PROFITABLE, HOW DO WE JUSTIFY THAT? THAT SORT OF THING. 
          UM, FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T USE AN APP, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW ON DART YOU CAN ENTER WITH A CREDIT CARD OR, OR A DOLLAR BILL AND PAY FOR A BUS RIDE. 
          YOU CAN HAVE PAPER SCHEDULES. 
          YOU DON'T NEED TO CALL ANYBODY. 
          YOU JUST KNOW WHERE THE BUS IS COMING IN. 
          UM, IF I NEED AN APP, WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A CELL PHONE OR A PHONE? PHONE? I HEARD AT T IS CANCELING LANDLINE SERVICE IN ADDISON, SO THEY CAN'T EVEN CALL IT BEFORE THEY LEAVE HOME. 
          HOW, HOW DO THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE TECHNOLOGY REQUEST A RIDE? THAT'S ANOTHER ONE. 
          UM, TRYING TO THINK OF ANYTHING ELSE OFF, OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD HERE. 
          YEAH, WILL MY RIDE TO THE AIRPORT BE $3? THAT'S ANOTHER GOOD ONE. 
          UM, WILL IT, WILL IT TAKE BIKES? 'CAUSE A LOT OF TIMES I USE DART TO GET ME TO A BIKING TRAIL OR SOMETHING. 
          WILL I BE ABLE TO PUT MY BIKE ON THIS SERVICE? UM, THAT'S ALL I CAN THINK OF OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. 
          BUT THESE ARE QUESTIONS I HOPE YOU GUYS ARE ASKING BECAUSE YOU'VE PUT MY MOBILITY ON THE BALLOT AND, UH, I DON'T KNOW. 
          YOU KNOW, I, I WAS JUST THINKING AS I WALKED UP HERE, I KIND OF WISH YOU GUYS DID A NOVEMBER ELECTION 'CAUSE I COULD AT LEAST TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE TOYOTATHON DEALS. 
          UM, BUT I GUESS I'LL HAVE TO SETTLE FOR VETERAN'S DAY. 
          UM, BUT HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS ASK THESE GOOD QUESTIONS, COME TO ME. 
          I'M GONNA BE A LITTLE BUSY FOR THE NEXT THREE MONTHS, SO COME TO ME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, ASK THE RIGHT ONES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU TYLER. 
          NEXT UP WE HAVE RON WHITEHEAD, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. 
          RON WHITEHEAD, 39 19 BOBBIN LANE. 
          UM, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS FOUR A ON YOUR AGENDA. 
          UH, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU TO CALL FOR THE ELECTION FOR THE POLICE STATION IN MAY. 
          UH, THE REASON BEING IS IF, IF YOU WAIT AND IF THERE'S SOME, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, OUR COMMITTEE THAT YOU APPOINTED 13 OF US VOTED, UH, ASKING YOU TO CALL THIS IN MAY AND SETTING SOME THE PARAMETERS FOR THAT ELECTION. 
          WE WERE LED BY ARMANDO GUDO, WHO'S AN INTERNATIONALLY KNOWN, UH, ARCHITECT. 
          UH, HE'S TRAVELING TODAY. 
          BUT, UH, WE HAD SOME VERY COMPETENT PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE THIS EVENING THAT SPENT A LOT OF TIME LOOKING AT OTHER, UH, POLICE STATIONS AROUND THE AREA. 
          AND WE'VE MADE A RECOMMENDATION TO YOU AND, UH, IN CONJUNCTION WITH YOUR FORMER CONVERSATIONS, UH, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU LET THE VOTERS DECIDE, UH, IN MAY, UH, YOU'VE DONE THAT ON THE DART ISSUE. 
          I'D ASK THAT YOU DO THE SAME THING ON THIS ISSUE. 
          UH, AND I WOULD, I WOULD APPRECIATE YOU GOING FORWARD WITH THAT. 
          WE, LIKE I SAID, IF YOU WAIT AND THIS GETS POLITICIZED, UM, THEN IT WILL PROBABLY DELAY THE PROJECT BY FIVE TO SEVEN YEARS. 
          AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT NEEDS A NEW POLICE STATION NOW. 
          UH, IT'S 43 YEARS OLD AND I HOPE THAT YOU ACT IN THE BEST INTEREST, UM, OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, RON. 
          NEXT WE HAVE FRAN POWELL. 
          GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 
          UM, MY NAME IS FRAN POWELL, 1 4 7 9 6 LOCKEN BAR COURT. 
          UM, TWO SUB TWO SUBJECTS FOR ME TONIGHT. 
          UM, AS A MEMBER OF THE BOND COMMITTEE, A NEW POLICE STATION IS ESSENTIAL AND IT'S ESSENTIAL NOW THE BOND SHOULD BE PUT TO THE VOTERS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE IN MAY. 
          CAN'T AFFORD TO KICK THIS CAN DOWN THE ROAD ANYMORE BECAUSE 
          [00:10:01]
IF WE DELAY UNTIL NOVEMBER, THAT'S SIX MORE MONTHS BEYOND THE TIME THAT WE'RE FINISHING. 
          WE'RE ALREADY ALREADY LOOKING AT 2029 FOR THE POLICE TO BE ABLE TO MOVE INTO THE NEW STATION. 
          WE NEED TO DO IT NOW. 
          I'M SURE ALL OF YOU WHO VISITED THE CURRENT STATION, YOU KNOW HOW ESSENTIAL IT IS THAT WE GET A NEW ONE. 
          UH, MY SECOND SUBJECT IS, I AGREE WITH PHYLLIS. 
          PUTTING SURVEYS UP AT THE BUS STATION IS NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU THE RESULT OF OF PEOPLE WHO REALLY RIDE THE BUS AND THE TRAIN AROUND TOWN. 
          UM, BETTER DART SURVEYS NEED TO BE CONDUCTED. 
          SENDING SURVEYS OUT TO BUSINESSES AND HOPING THAT YOU'RE GONNA GET A GOOD RESPONSE DOESN'T WORK. 
          YOU THE TOWN HAS PLENTY OF VOLUNTEERS WHO COULD HELP BY GETTING SURVEYS OUT TO THE BUSINESSES IN THE TOWN, THE RESTAURANTS IN THE TOWN, AND THE HOTELS IN THE TOWN SO THAT YOU GET MEANINGFUL SURVEYS ON HOW MUCH.IS USED WITHIN THE TOWN. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FRAN. 
          NEXT WE HAVE NANCY. 
          CRAIG. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MY NAME IS NANCY CRAIG. 
          4 1 1 2 RUSH CIRCLE. 
          UM, ACTUALLY, UH, RON AND FRAN HAVE, UH, PRETTY WELL SUMMED UP WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY AND SOME OF THE POINTS THAT I WANTED TO EMPHASIZE, BUT PLEASE DO NOT BE MISTAKEN. 
          I THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT TO VOTE FOR MAY, UH, SO PLEASE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. 
          THE, UM, THE DELAY WOULD BE JUST COSTLY, UNNECESSARY, AND PROBABLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE TOWN AND, UH, OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. 
          SO, UM, REMEMBER TOO THAT THIS COUNCIL SET 14 COMMITTEE MEMBERS, 13 OF THEM ALL AGREED. 
          ALL OF THESE COMMITTEE MEMBERS WERE VERY, VERY ACTIVE IN THE PROCESS. 
          WE SPENT MANY HOURS, HAD LENGTHY DISCUSSION, IN DEPTH DISCUSSION, DID A LOT OF DELIBERATION OVER IT. 
          13 OF THE 14 THAT YOU SELECTED MADE THE RECOMMENDATION TO PUT THIS ON THE MAY BALLOT. 
          PLEASE LISTEN TO THOSE THAT YOU APPOINTED. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          THANK YOU NANCY. 
          THOSE ARE ALL THE COUNCIL APPEARANCE CARDS THAT I HAVE. 
          IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL AT THIS TIME? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THAT PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 
          [a.  Present and discuss the Bond Advisory Committee's recommendation to include the calling of a bond election regarding a capital project to address the Town's Police and Courts facility.]
AND MOVE ON TO ITEM FOUR, OUR WORK SESSION REPORTS FOR A PRESENT AND DISCUSS THE BOND ADVISORY COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION TO INCLUDE THE CALLING OF A BOND ELECTION REGARDING A CAPITAL PROJECT TO ADDRESS THE TOWN'S POLICE AND COURTS FACILITY. 
          PASSION. 
          THANK YOU MAYOR COUNCIL, PASSION HAYES, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER. 
          THIS EVENING WE ARE BRINGING BACK FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION THE BOND ADVISORY COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE ADDISON POLICE FACILITY FOR TONIGHT'S PRESENTATION, WE WILL BEGIN WITH THE REMINDER OF THE FORMATION OF THE BOND ADVISORY COMMITTEE, THEIR CHARGE FROM COUNSEL, AND THEIR RECOMMENDATION FOR A BOND ELECTION IN MAY, I'LL THEN HAVE CHIEF FREEZE COME UP AND WALK THROUGH THE CONCEPTUAL OPTIONS THAT LED TO THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION. 
          WE ALSO RECEIVED SOME QUESTIONS FROM OUR LAST MEETING REGARDING THE GUN RANGE IN OTHER RECENT PUBLIC SAFETY PROJECTS THAT WE'VE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS PRESENTATION. 
          THEN FINALLY, WE WILL HAVE OUR CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER COME UP AND TALK ABOUT THE FINANCIAL IMPACT OF A BOND ELECTION AND ASSOCIATED PROPOSITION LANGUAGE AS WE DISCUSS NEXT STEPS. 
          AS A REMINDER, AT THE OCTOBER 14TH MEETING, COUNCIL ESTABLISHED AND APPOINTED A BOND COMMITTEE WITH EACH OF YOU APPOINTING TWO RESIDENTS. 
          YOUR CHARGE TO THE COMMITTEE WAS TO ASSESS AND REVIEW INFORMATION AND OPTIONS TO ADDRESS THE TOWN'S AGING POLICE AND COURTS FACILITY AND TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNSEL CONCERNING THE PROJECT, THE MONETARY AMOUNT, AND WHETHER A BOND ELECTION SHOULD BE CALLED. 
          IN MAY, THE COMMITTEE CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS TO REMODEL THE EXISTING FACILITY OR BUILD A NEW ONE AT THE EXISTING SITE TO PURCHASE AND REMODEL A VACANT BUILDING TO CONSTRUCT A NEW FACILITY ON PROPERTY CURRENTLY OWNED BY THE TOWN AND OR THROUGH THE ACQUISITION OF NEW PROPERTY. 
          AS SHARED AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING, THE COMMITTEE HELD FOUR MEETINGS DATING BACK TO OCTOBER 
          [00:15:02]
AND MANY ALSO PARTICIPATED IN OPTIONAL TOURS AT THE CARROLLTON, ROANOKE, AND FARMERS BRANCH POLICE DEPARTMENT FACILITIES AS PRESENTED TO YOU BY THE BOND ADVISORY COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON. 
          THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL INCLUDES CALLING A BOND ELECTION IN MAY FOR THE REMODEL OF AN EXISTING BUILDING OR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW BUILDING FOR THE POLICE FACILITY IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $55 MILLION. 
          AS COUNSEL CONSIDERS THIS RECOMMENDATION, I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND HAVE CHIEF FREEZE COME UP AND ONCE AGAIN, WALK THROUGH THOSE CONCEPTUAL OPTIONS THAT LED TO THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION AS WELL AS TALK THROUGH SOME FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS. 
          CHIEF, GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 
          CHRIS FRIES, CHIEF OF POLICE. 
          UH, AS MS. HAYES SAID TONIGHT I'LL GO OVER THE CONCEPTUAL OPTIONS THAT WE PRESENTED LAST MEETING AND ALSO GO THROUGH, UM, SOME FOLLOW UP DISCUSSIONS THAT WE HAD FROM DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL DURING THAT LAST MEETING AS WELL. 
          UH, SO AS A FOLLOW UP, UH, THE TWO CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS, UH, THAT WE, UH, WENT THROUGH WITH THE BOND COMMITTEE, AND AGAIN, I WANT TO, UM, REITERATE THAT THESE ARE CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS, ONE BEING THAT EXISTING STRUCTURE. 
          UM, SO THIS IS THE IDEA THAT WE BROUGHT FORWARD, UH, WITH OUR TEAM TO PRESENT THE THE BOND COMMITTEE. 
          THE SECOND CONCEPTUAL DESIGN WAS A NEW BUILD AND WHAT A PROJECT OF THAT SCOPE COULD LOOK LIKE. 
          AND DURING THE LAST, UH, MEETING ALSO WE HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, WHAT WOULD THE PROJECT LOOK LIKE, UH, WHENEVER WE GET DOWN TO A DETAILED PROJECT BUDGET OF HOW WE GOT TO THAT $55 MILLION PRICE POINT. 
          UM, SO THIS WAS PUT TOGETHER, THIS WOULD BE AN OPTION OF A NEW BUILD, UM, THAT BREAKS IT DOWN INTO CONSTRUCTION COSTS, KIND OF OUTLINES THOSE SOFT COSTS, UM, GIVES YOU THE OWNER'S BUDGET AND THEN ALSO CALCULATES PROJECTED ESCALATION FROM THE TIME OF A MAY ELECTION THROUGH ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS BEING RELEASED AND THEN INEVITABLY MOVING INTO THE FACILITY. 
          THE MILESTONES, UH, FOR THE PROJECT REMAIN THE SAME. 
          IF WE WERE TO CALL THE MAY ELECTION, UM, AFTER A SUCCESSFUL ELECTION IN MAY, WE WOULD THEN MOVE TO SELECT A SITE. 
          WE WOULD THEN BEGIN ARCHITECT DESIGN, FOLLOWED BY THE RELA THE, UH, RELEASE OF THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS CONSTRUCTION TO BEGIN OCTOBER OF 2027 WITH THE HOPES TO BE FULLY OPERATIONAL Q1 OF 2029. 
          ANOTHER QUESTION THAT WE RECEIVED IN THE LAST MEETING WAS, WERE THERE ANY OTHER INDOOR POLICE FAC UH, POLICE FACILITIES THAT HAD INDOOR RANGES? SO IN REACHING OUT TO OUR COUNTERPARTS, UM, THERE ARE SOME SITES AROUND THE DFW AREA THAT DO HAVE 50 AND 100, UH, YARD INDOOR RANGES ATTACHED TO THEIR FACILITIES. 
          UH, THIS IS ALSO ANOTHER QUESTION WE GOT JUST AN OVERVIEW OF RECENT POLICE PROJECTS ACROSS THE METROPLEX. 
          UM, WE'VE ADDED THE YEAR THE CONTRACT WAS SIGNED AND THEN ALSO THE YEAR THAT CONSTRUCTION WAS COMPLETED AND THOSE AGENCIES WERE ABLE TO BECOME OPERATIONAL. 
          UM, WE ALSO BROKE IT DOWN BY THE FACILITY COSTS, SQUARE FOOTAGE AND OBVIOUSLY PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT. 
          UM, TWO OF THE ONES I WANTED TO CALL OUT THAT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ESCALATION ON THE FAR RIGHT, OBVIOUSLY WITH THOSE CONTRACTS BEING SIGNED IN 2019, YOU SEE THOSE THAT PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT INCREASE OVER TIME, WHICH IS EXPECTED WITH INFLATION, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF MIDLOTHIAN AND ALSO DECATUR. 
          SO I REACHED OUT TO THE DECATUR CHIEF, UM, AND KIND OF ASKED HIM, HEY, HOW DID YOU GET YOUR COSTS SO LOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION? UM, AND IT WAS THE SAME RESPONSE FOR MIDLOTHIAN. 
          THEIR FACILITIES WERE BUILT ON BEDROCK, SO IT JUST, THAT WAS A HUGE COST SAVING THAT THEY ONLY HAD TO DRILL A FEW FEET DOWN TO LAY THEIR FOUNDATION AND THEIR PEERS. 
          WHEREAS IN THIS AREA, USUALLY YOU DON'T HAVE THAT. 
          SO YOU'VE GOTTA DRILL DOWN APPROXIMATELY 25, 30, 35 FEET SOMETIMES TO GET THOSE, THAT FOUNDATION, THOSE PEERS LAID. 
          UM, SO THAT WAS A HUGE COST SAVINGS FOR THEM. 
          WE ALSO, UH, SHOWED WHAT THE PROJECT COULD LOOK LIKE, UM, WITHOUT, OBVIOUSLY WE DIDN'T INVOLVE THE LAND ACQUISITION, THAT'S THAT FIRST NUMBER. 
          SO WE SHOWED RIGHT NOW WHAT THE CONTINGENCIES THAT HAVE BUILT INTO THE PROJECT AND THEN ALSO WHAT THAT PROJECT TOTAL COULD LOOK LIKE WITHOUT THE CONTINGENCIES, JUST TO KINDA GIVE A RANGE OF WHAT THIS PROJECT COULD LOOK LIKE. 
          AND WITH THAT, I'M GONNA ASK STEVEN TO COME UP AND GO THROUGH HIS PORTION OF THE PRESENTATION. 
          UH, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, STEVEN GLICKMAN, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. 
          SO, UM, KIND OF IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION THAT, UH, CAME UP AT THE LAST MEETING REGARDING THE PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT, UH, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS A REALLY GOOD QUESTION. 
          UH, WE HAD THIS DATA FROM ALL OF THESE OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE RECENTLY COMPLETED PROJECTS. 
          AND I THINK THE INTERESTING THING IS THAT SOME OF THESE ARE BEING COMPLETED 
          [00:20:01]
NOW, SOME OF THEM HAVE RECENTLY BEEN COMPLETED, BUT REALLY THAT PRICING IS BASED ON THAT CONTRACT DATE. 
          SO WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT WHEN THESE ACTUAL PROJECTS WERE CONTRACTED BECAUSE THAT'S THE PRICING YOU'RE ACTUALLY GETTING. 
          UM, SO WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS, IS THE CONTRACT YEAR THAT THESE CONTRACTS WERE AWARDED ALL OF THESE PROJECTS. 
          WE HAVE THE PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT OF EACH OF THESE PROJECTS. 
          UH, AND KIND OF WHAT I DID IS A TREND LINE. 
          SO I BASICALLY WANTED TO SEE WHAT'S THE TREND IN THE OVERALL PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT OF THESE PROJECTS. 
          SO THAT BLUE LINE THAT YOU SEE IS A TREND LINE OF WHAT ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR ACTUAL PROJECTS SIMILAR TO, UH, WHAT THIS PROJECT WOULD LOOK LIKE FOR ADDISON, UH, WHAT THOSE PRICES HAVE BEEN IN IN THE DFW AREA. 
          UM, SO I LOOKED AT THAT AND THEN I ALSO WANTED TO SAY WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE OVERALL NON-RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION INFLATION LOOK LIKE FROM THAT SAME TIMEFRAME? SO THAT GREEN LINE IS THE ACTUAL, UH, NON-RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION INFLATION RATE. 
          UM, AND THE RATE GOES THROUGH 2025. 
          AND THEN FOR 2026 THERE, THERE'S A SMALL ESTIMATE IN THERE, BUT IDEALLY YOU WOULD WANT THOSE TO GO FAIRLY PARALLEL TO EACH OTHER. 
          THAT SHOWS THAT THE ACTUAL COST OF SOME OF THESE PROJECTS HAVE GONE IN LINE WITH WHAT THE ACTUAL INFLATION DATA HAS BEEN. 
          UM, AND AT THE END OF, OF THIS, UH, IN 2027, YOU SEE WHAT CHIEF KIND OF JUST ALLUDED TO, THERE'S TWO BLUE DOTS, UH, LISTED THERE. 
          ONE IS THE ADDISON PROJECT WITH THE ESCALATION AND CONTINGENCIES AND ONE IS THE ADDISON PROJECT WITH NO ESCALATION AND NO CONTINGENCIES. 
          SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE TREND LINE, WHICH IS THE BLUE LINE OF THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COST OF, OF PREVIOUS PROJECTS, KIND OF COMES IN, UH, IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO, WHICH TELLS ME THAT, THAT THE, THE ESTIMATES THAT WE HAVE ARE IN LINE, UH, SOMEWHAT WITH WHAT WE'VE SEEN, UH, ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COST TO BE, UH, OVER THE LAST REALLY EIGHT YEARS WITH PROJECTS IN DFW OF A SIMILAR SCOPE. 
          SO I KNOW THERE'S A LOT ON THAT SLIDE. 
          UM, ANY QUESTIONS I CAN ASK ANSWER ABOUT, ABOUT WHAT'S SHOWN WITH THIS DATA? GO AHEAD CHRIS. 
          SO WE WERE GIVEN THE BOND COMMITTEE NARROWED IT DOWN TO, UM, A B AND A C, BASICALLY THE RED RENOVATION OF AN EXISTING BUILDING, NOT OF THE EXISTING BUILDING, OF AN EXISTING BUILDING AND NEW CONSTRUCTION. 
          AND THE ONLY DETAILED BUDGET WE GOT WAS FOR UM, NEW CONSTRUCTION. 
          SO WHY IS THAT? WE, WE CAN GIVE YOU THE OTHER ONE. 
          IT'S, IT COMES OUT AT ALMOST THE EXACT SAME DOLLAR AMOUNT AND AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU'RE, YOU'RE JUST PICKING A TOTAL DOLLAR. 
          SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET YOU COMFORTABLE WITH IS 55 MILLION THE RIGHT NUMBER TO GO FORWARD WITH THE DETAILED BUDGET WE HAVE IN THE FUTURE? IT COULD EVEN BE AT THE CURRENT SITE, RIGHT? WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE. 
          SO WE CAN CERTAINLY GIVE YOU THAT WE DECIDE TO BE EASIER JUST TO GIVE YOU ONE TABLE. 
          AND THEN IF WE DO GO WITH A NEW BUILD, I KNOW WE HAVE SOME LAND WHERE WE'RE, WE'RE THINKING ABOUT PUTTING IT, WOULD IT REQUIRE THE ACQUISITION OF ADDITIONAL LAND? IT WOULD, YES. 
          DO WE KNOW THE BREAKOUT OF THAT COST? AND I KNOW WE'RE ONLY TRYING TO GET TO A NUMBER TODAY, BUT ANY IDEA? I, I THINK WHAT THE ESTIMATE THAT'S IN, THAT'S IN THE BUDGET THAT'S SHOWN. 
          SO 55 MILLION, IF I GO BACK TO THIS SLIDE, YOU SEE 52.1 MILLION IS THE CONSTRUCTION COST. 
          SO THAT LAND ACQUISITION ESTIMATE WAS REMOVED FROM THAT. 
          SO APPROXIMATELY 2.9 MILLION IS WHAT'S WHAT'S INCLUDED AS AN ESTIMATE. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YEAH, SO BACK ON SLIDE 18, UM, I'M GLAD YOU PUT THIS IN THERE 'CAUSE THIS DOES HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE ESCALATION OF THE COSTS OVER TIME. 
          AND UM, SO THE INFLATION, UH, THAT YOU'RE PROJECTING AND THAT YOU'VE SEEN THAT THE LINE SHOWS IS, IS TWO AND A HALF PERCENT THAT THAT'S WHAT I USE. 
          AND I KNOW THAT, THAT CHRIS, UH, IS USING A DIFF A DIFFERENT NUMBER. 
          SO I THINK THEY'RE USING CLOSER TO, UH, ABOUT HALF A PERCENT PER MONTH, 44 BASIS POINTS PER MONTH. 
          SO ABOUT FIVE, 5% A YEAR. 
          UM, I JUST USED A HISTORICAL, BASICALLY THE, THE TARGET INFLATION NUMBER. 
          SO YES, FOR 26 AND 27, THAT'S NOT ACTUAL DATA ON THAT GREEN LINE. 
          IT COULD IN THEORY BE HIGHER. 
          UM, BUT THAT IS THE TREND THAT THAT THE LINE SHOWS TOO. 
          THE TREND SHOWS AT LEAST THIS SHOWS 2.5% SURE THE PROJECTION THAT'S, THAT'S BASICALLY INCLUDED IN THAT ESCALATION IS CLOSER TO 5%. 
          SURE. 
          [00:25:01]
UH, ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK ABOUT IS, UH, THE COSTS, UH, PROJECTS OVER THE LAST, UM, YOU KNOW, EIGHT YEARS OR SO, LIKE MIDWAY AND LAY LOCKS POND AND STUFF. 
          JUST THE INITIAL ESTIMATES WERE SO LOW AND WE CAME OUT, UH, DOUBLE IN TRIPLE SOME OF THEM AND SOME I'M REALLY GUN SHY AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE REALLY CLEAR ON THIS. 
          AND WHAT I SEE BACK OVER TO THE PREVIOUS SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE WHOLE PROJECT COST BREAKDOWN PER FOOT. 
          UM, NOT THAT ONE, THE ONE THAT'S GOT THE REALLY SMALL TABLE ON IT WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT PARTS. 
          KEEP ON THAT ONE. 
          I HAVE 14 THAT ONE. 
          THIS ONE? YEAH. 
          YES. 
          SO THAT ONE, UH, TO ME IS, UH, LOOKING AT ANSWERING THE QUESTION WHY IS IT SO HIGH AND WHAT PIECES OF IT ARE, ARE THE BIG PIECES AND UM, IS THERE ANYTHING OUTTA WHACK? AND THAT'S ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I ASKED AND THE, AND THE COUNCIL QUESTIONS. 
          I HAVEN'T READ 'EM YET 'CAUSE WE GOT 'EM BACK LATER. 
          UH, BUT UM, SO THAT I'M, I, UH, I I APPRECIATE YOU PUTTING THAT CHART IN THERE ON UH, SLIDE 18 AS WELL. 
          SO TWO AND A HALF PERCENT. 
          OKAY. 
          ANYTHING ELSE AT THIS POINT? DAN, I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU. 
          SO WHEN YOU GO BACK, STEVEN, ON THAT SCALE, OR MAYBE DAVID, THIS QUESTION FOR YOU AND STAFF CHIEF MIGHT KNOW, PROSPER, WEATHERFORD, BEN BENFIELD, MIDLOTHIAN, THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR THAT AWARDED THOSE CONTRACTS. 
          IS IT 1 2 10 GCS? DO WE KNOW HOW MANY DIFFERENT PEOPLE LANDED THOSE CONTRACTS IN TERMS OF COMPARATIVELY SHOPPING RFPS IN TERMS OF GETTING A BETTER RATE, KNOWING THERE'S A SLIDING SCALE GOING SO HIGH, SO FAST? OR WAS IT, DO WE KNOW THAT ANSWER AT ALL? I I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GONNA KNOW ON EACH ONE OF THOSE. 
          I MEAN, I'M SURE THERE ARE MULTIPLE DIFFERENT CONTRACTORS WHO DID THE WORK, THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTORS. 
          UM, WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS AS WE GO FORWARD, WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING A COMPETITIVE, A COMPETITIVE PROCESS R AS WE GET MANY PROPOSALS, RIGHT. 
          AND GET THE LOWEST BUDGET. 
          I WOULD JUST LOVE TO KNOW THAT BACKGROUND OF, IS IT TWO CONTRACTORS THAT DID THOSE 10 POLICE STATIONS OR 14 DIFFERENT CONTRACTORS GOT 14 DIFFERENT POLICE STATIONS. 
          JUST YOU MAY HAVE AN ANSWER. 
          I GO TO RANDY FIRST. 
          RANDY, OKAY. 
          OH, PAUL, HE'S COMING UP. 
          OH, HE HAD SOMEBODY. 
          OKAY. 
          YOU WANT UP TO ANSWER HIS QUESTION? SO I WORKED START TO FINISH ON EIGHT OF THOSE 11 PROJECTS FROM THE VERY INITIAL CONCEPTUAL ALL THE WAY THROUGH. 
          TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I THINK I QUICKLY WAS RUNNING THROUGH MY HEAD. 
          THERE'S AT LEAST EIGHT OR NINE DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS ON ALL THOSE PROJECTS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I WAS HOPING YOU WERE GONNA SAY VERSUS A MONOPOLY ON CONSTRUCTING POLICE DEPARTMENTS. 
          CORRECT. 
          THAT'S WHY, THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR. 
          THANK YOU, RANDY, WHILE YOU'RE STANDING THERE, YOU MIGHT BE THE PERSON TO ANSWER MY QUESTION. 
          SO, UM, OF ALL OF THESE PROJECTS, HOW MANY OF THESE PROJECTS HAVE A JAIL? UM, MIDLOTHIAN HAS A DECENT SIZED JAIL IN MANSFIELD, HAS A DECENT SIZED JAIL. 
          I THINK ALL THE REST OF THOSE, AT LEAST ALL THE OTHER ONES I WORKED ON, THE EIGHT OF THE 11 DO NOT HAVE A JAIL. 
          ALLEN DOES NOT HAVE A JAIL. 
          I TAKE THAT BACK. 
          GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT A, A JAIL ALAN DOES. 
          WELL IT STARTED OUT HUGE AND IT WAS CUT ALMOST BY TWO THIRDS TO GET IT IN BUDGET. 
          RIGHT. 
          THEY STARTED OUT WITH A JAIL AND THEY WANTED A CAPACITY ABOUT 80 OR 90 PRISONERS AND I THINK IT'S DOWN TO 35 OR 40 PRISONERS. 
          OKAY? OKAY. 
          BUT THERE, THERE IS A HARDENED JAIL THERE, THERE IS, UM, SALINA ROY CITY DOES NOT, DID NOT HAVE A JAIL BUILT INTO THEIR FACILITY. 
          I CAN'T NECESSARILY SPEAK FOR SALINA ROY CITY. 
          I WORKED ON, ON THE OWNER SIDE AS THE PROJECT MANAGER DOES NOT HAVE A JAIL, DOES NOT HAVE A DISPATCH CENTER. 
          OKAY. 
          PROSPER HAS A DISPATCH CENTER, NO JAIL. 
          WEATHERFORD HAS A DISPATCH CENTER. 
          NO JAIL. 
          ROY CITY, NO DISPATCH CENTER, NO JAIL. 
          LEWISVILLE HAS A HUGE DISPATCH CENTER. 
          THEY HAD AN EXISTING JAIL. 
          MIDLOTHIAN HAS BOTH A JAIL AND A DISPATCH CENTER. 
          ROANOKE HAS A DISPATCH CENTER. 
          NO JAIL. 
          ALLEN HAS A DISPATCH CENTER AND A JAIL. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU SIR. 
          AND IN TALKING TO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, IT, IT'S THE JAILS THAT ARE MAKING THESE PRICE PER SQUARE FEET. 
          IT'S FAR MORE EXPENSIVE TO BUILD A JAIL THAN IT IS A HEADQUARTERS BUILDING A BUILDING, UH, JUST A POLICE STATION. 
          SO I'M, I'M, I'M STILL STRUGGLING WITH THE PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT. 
          UH, NOT TO INCLUDE A JAIL IN THIS, I UNDERSTAND A HARDENED STRUCTURE WON ALL OF THAT. 
          BUT EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT'S, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE IN A POLICE, A HARDENED POLICE STATION, A POLICE STATION OVER A HARDENED OFFICE BUILDING? THERE IS, IT'S BASICALLY AN OFFICE BUILDING IF WE DON'T HAVE A JAIL OR A DISPATCH CENTER THERE. 
          [00:30:01]
SO WHAT, WHAT IS DRIVING THIS PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT UP SO MUCH ON THIS? YOU, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE ARE JUST ODD ANOMALIES. 
          YOU TAKE A ROY CITY, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS ONE OF THE HIGHER ONES THAT I WORKED ON. 
          $935 A SQUARE FOOT AND THAT BID THREE YEARS AGO. 
          YES SIR. 
          IT COULD HAVE BEEN. 
          IT'S JUST SORT OF THE LOCATION, IT'S SORT OF OUT THERE. 
          SO THE TRADES WEREN'T NECESSARILY BEING AGGRESSIVE OR THEY DIDN'T ATTRACT AS MANY TRADES AS SAY ONE OF THE OTHER CITIES. 
          YOU ARE A HUNDRED PERCENT CORRECT THAT THE THREE MOST EXPENSIVE COMPONENTS IN A POLICE HEADQUARTERS IS THE JAIL DISPATCH CENTER AND THE STORM SHELTER. 
          YES, SIR. 
          BUT ON SOME OF THESE, THE JAILS, YOU KNOW, PERCENTAGE WISE, IF YOU LOOK AT MIDLOTHIAN, THE JAIL WAS I THINK 6,500 SQUARE FEET ON CLOSE TO A HUNDRED THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT BUILDING SIMILAR IN MANSFIELD. 
          AND SO WHILE THEY ARE A GREAT UPTICK, IT'S SUCH A SMALL COMPONENT OF THE WHOLE OVERALL BUILDING, BUT THE HARDENING OF A POLICE FACILITY COMING RIGHT OUTTA THE CHUTE, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY ARE CONSIDERED A CRITICAL, YOU KNOW, FACILITY. 
          SO OVER A REGULAR OFFICE BUILDING POLICE FACILITY HAS STARTED OUT AT 1.25 FOR ALL SYSTEMS, ALL STRUCTURE, EVERYTHING ELSE. 
          IT'S INCREASED TO A LEVEL OF 25% ABOVE ANY NORMAL OR REGULAR BUILDING. 
          AND THEN YOU GET INTO THE HARDENING OF THE GLASS, THE BALLISTIC IN THE WALL, ALL THE SECURITY SYSTEMS, UH, AND IT JUST, AND AND THE REDUNDANCY OF COOLING, HEATING, ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS. AND SO THERE'S A LONG LAUNDRY LIST FOR A LOT OF THESE THAT WOW, WHEN YOU WOULD LOOK AT IT, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY 25 OR 30 ITEMS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE AN OFFICE BUILDING. 
          HOW ABOUT SCHOOLS? THEY'RE STARTING TO BUILD SCHOOLS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          SCHOOLS NOW AS THEY DO FALL IN THAT CATEGORY, THERE'S FIVE NOW PROJECT TYPES IN TEXAS, OR AT LEAST IN THE ZONE OF TORNADOES THAT HAVE TO HAVE A HARDENED STORM SHELTER AND IT'S POLICE, FIRE DISPATCH CENTERS, HOSPITALS, AND SCHOOLS. 
          RIGHT. 
          A LOT OF THE SCHOOLS ARE CREATIVELY DOING THE GYMNASIUM AS A STORM SHELTER. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND, AND BUT THEIR SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR BUILDING THESE NEW SCHOOLS ARE NOT WHERE WE'RE AT ON BUILDING THIS. 
          CORRECT. 
          THERE, THERE ARE A LOT OF LARGE VOLUMES IN A SCHOOL AND A LOT OF REPETITIVE, YOU KNOW, OKAY, WE HAVE 20 CLASSROOMS THAT ARE IDENTICAL AND IT'S JUST GYPSUM BOARD WALLS AND YOU KNOW, A FLOORING TYPE AND A CEILING TYPE, YOU KNOW, A POLICE FACILITY, JUST THE DURABILITY AND THE ABUSE THAT TYPICALLY IN THE CORRIDORS THERE'S SETTINGS, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ALL DIFFERENT UNIQUE SETTINGS. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, YOU CAN'T JUST SAY IN SCHOOL, WE HAVE A CAFETERIA, WE HAVE CLASSROOMS, WE HAVE A GYMNASIUM, AND WOW, WE'VE COVERED PROBABLY MOST OF THE STUFF. 
          POLICE IS ALL THESE LITTLE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS THAT FEED INTO PULLING TOGETHER THAT HEADQUARTERS. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          AND ARE THESE PRICES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT BASICALLY THAT YOU'RE GIVING US PER OR SOMEONE IS GIVING US PER SQUARE FOOT, DON'T MEAN TO POINT THE FINGER AT YOU? NOPE. 
          THAT THAT IS BEING PRESENTED TO US PER SQUARE FOOTAGE, PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT, ISN'T THAT A PROJECTED PRICE AT THAT TIME? AREN'T WE, AS MR. GLICKMAN WAS TALKING ABOUT, WE'RE WE'RE KIND OF PROJECTING IN THE INFLATION WITH THAT NUMBER FOR YOUR PROJECT? YES. 
          THE NUMBERS THAT ARE UP THERE NOW REFLECT WHAT THEY PAID FOR THAT PROJECT. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND IT'S THE ALL IN NUMBER. 
          I, I FEEL THE ONLY FAIR NUMBER TO EVER PRESENT TO YOU OR ANYONE IS THE ALL IN. 
          I I I SEE SO MANY PROJECTS GO FORWARD AND THEY LOOK AT JUST THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S CONTRACT AND WELL, WE FORGOT ABOUT FURNITURE AND WE FORGOT ABOUT THIS. 
          AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, YEAH, YOU HAVE A PROJECT THAT'S GONNA HAVE A HUGE OVERRUN. 
          SO ALL EVERYTHING REPRESENTED ON THERE IS THE ALL IN NUMBER, ARCHITECTS FEES, FURNITURE, YOU KNOW, THE SPECIALTY SYSTEMS, THE, THE FITNESS EQUIPMENT, EVERYTHING THAT BROUGHT THAT BUILDING TO OPEN UP ON, YOU KNOW, THE RIBBON CUTTING. 
          OKAY. 
          IF, IF, IF THAT IS FIGURED INTO TO THIS THOUGH. 
          YES. 
          WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO THE SLIDE. 
          IN OUR LAST PRESENTATION THERE WAS A SLIDE WITH THE THREE DIFFERENT TYPES OF STRUCTURES AND THERE THERE IS A NUMBER, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE OFFICIAL INSTRUCTION TERM FOR IT IS, BUT I CALL IT A FUDGE FACTOR. 
          AND I ALMOST THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY CALLED IT WHEN THEY TOLD US. 
          AND IT, IT WAS A NUMBER THAT WAS BUILT IN FOR COST OVERRUNS. 
          ONE OF 'EM WAS THREE. 
          UH, I, ONE OF THEM WAS A $10 MILLION FIGURE IN THERE. 
          SO IF WE'RE FIGURING IN FOR INFLATION, WHY DO WE STILL HAVE THAT FUDGE FACTOR IN THERE, UH, FOR, FOR EXTRA MONEY? EVERY PROJECT I FEEL IN CHRIS WILL BACK IT UP, NEEDS CONTINGENCIES THAT IF YOU GO IN DAY ONE WITH ZERO FOR THE WHAT IFS, IT COULD BE THE FIRST TIME YOU DRILL THAT VERY FIRST PIER, YOU HIT WATER, YOU HIT AN UNKNOWN CONDITION, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU'RE RIGHT OUT OF THE SHOOT GOING, WE NEED 200,000 MORE JUST TO GET FOUNDATIONS DONE. 
          YOU KNOW, THERE'S USUALLY THE THREE THRESHOLDS OF EVERY PROJECT FOR RISK. 
          GET OUT OF THE GROUND, GET THE BUILDING COMPLETELY ENCLOSED AND WRAPPED ENVELOPE THE ROOF, AND THEN THE FINAL DELIVERED PRODUCT. 
          AND SO IT'S REALLY ABOUT JUST THAT RISK 
          [00:35:01]
PROTECTION FOR THE WHAT IFS. 
          AND IT COULD VERY WELL BE EVERYTHING GOES COMPLETELY SMOOTH. 
          I, I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER LAST ME, I'VE, I'VE HAD ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS WHERE THERE WARRANT UNKNOWNS AND HICCUPS. 
          NEVER HEARD OF A MUNICIPAL PROJECT LIKE THAT. 
          ? YES. 
          I HOPE YOU'VE HAD ONE. 
          NO, I HAVEN'T THAT I CAN THINK OF. 
          UH, BUT WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA DO RESEARCH ON THE GROUND BEFORE WE EVER DRILL A HOLE IN IT. 
          ARE WE NOT, WE'RE WE'RE GONNA HAVE A GOOD IDEA OF WHAT'S UNDER THERE. 
          WE, WE WILL TO A CERTAIN LEVEL. 
          YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU DO A GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AT A LARGE SITE, THEY MIGHT DRILL SIX TO 10, YOU KNOW, BORINGS THAT THEN THEY GET THE SAMPLINGS FROM THAT DOESN'T COVER THE WHOLE FOOTPRINT OF THE SITE. 
          AND WE HAVE SEEN TIME AND TIME AGAIN, EVEN WITH THE KNOWLEDGE FROM THOSE BORINGS, WHEN YOU'RE DRILLING BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE BORINGS WERE, YOU HIT A SURPRISE. 
          I GET THAT. 
          BUT IF, IF WE'VE GOT, LET'S SAY ONE OF 'EM WAS A $10 MILLION FUDGE FACTOR ON THAT, SO WE'RE STILL GONNA HAVE 55 MILLION. 
          AND THE FUDGE FACTOR IS BASICALLY IS THAT BUILT INTO THAT 55? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE COME IN AT 45, WE'VE GOT 10 MILLION LEFT OVER. 
          I WOULD MUCH RATHER DO A BOND AT 45. 
          AND THEN IF WE NEED MORE, COME BACK FOR A CO FOR ANOTHER LITTLE BIT OF MONEY RATHER THAN PUT THAT MUCH, PUT 10 MILLION MORE ON TAXPAYERS ON OUR, ON OUR PROPERTY TAXES AND HAVE THEM PAYING OFF AND THEN COME BACK LIKE WE'VE DONE MULTIPLE TIMES, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT ALL THIS BOND MONEY LEFT, WE CAN SPEND IT ON THIS. 
          I JUST WANT THIS TO BE FOR A POLICE STATION. 
          SO I WOULD MUCH RATHER DO A 45 AND THEN HAVE TO COME BACK TO US FOR A CO TO FINISH. 
          I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULDN'T DO WHAT WE'RE WANTING TO DO. 
          I JUST DON'T WANT A BUNCH OF LEFTOVER MONEY. 
          THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO BE PAYING TAXES ON THEIR PROPERTY TAXES AND THEN, YOU KNOW, FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, I, WE GOT THIS EXTRA MONEY WE CAN SPEND IT ON THIS. 
          SO, UH, SO IN THAT SCENARIO, WE WOULD JUST NOT ISSUE THAT $10 MILLION. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE WOULDN'T ISSUE IT, WE WOULDN'T BE PAYING ON IT. 
          AND I GET IT AND I THINK IT'S, IT BRINGS OUT A GOOD CONVERSATION AS YOU LOOK AT THE CONTINGENCY AND THE ESCALATION BECAUSE SOME OF THE IS A RISK TOLERANCE CONVERSATION OF WHAT ARE WE WILLING TO DO TO GO TO THE VOTERS. 
          I WOULD SAY TO YOUR POINT ON ISSUING THE COS AFTER THE FACT, I THINK THE ISSUE YOU COULD RUN INTO IN THAT IS YOU'RE TELLING THE VOTERS, HERE'S HOW MUCH YOU'RE TELLING THE VOTERS. 
          HEY, WE'RE IN THAT SCENARIO. 
          WE'RE GONNA DO A $45 MILLION PROJECT THAT'S GONNA HAVE THIS IMPACT ON YOUR TAX RATE. 
          SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO RIGHT MIDWAY AND EXAMPLES, YOU DON'T WANT TO BE IN A SITUATION WHERE YOU ISSUE COS ON TOP OF IT BECAUSE THEN YOU'RE, I CERTAINLY YOU'RE DOING MORE, DID NOT WANT TO BE THERE, BUT YOU'RE DOING MORE THAN YOU TOLD THE VOTERS WHEN THEY VOTED ON IT. 
          SO THAT'S WHY YOU IN THESE SCENARIOS, YOU TRY TO THROW IN THE ESCALATION FOR THAT PURPOSE. 
          I WOULD SAY IN THE SCENARIO YOU LAID OUT, IF WE SAY 45 MILLION AND IT COMES IN AT 55, WE COME AND HAVE TOUGH CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT THE BUILDING LOOKS LIKE AND WE PROBABLY HAVE TO GIVE UP SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANT IN THE BUILDING. 
          THAT WOULD BE A CONVERSATION FOR COUNCIL AT THAT POINT. 
          BUT I DO HAVE HEARTBURN OF GOING TO THE VOTERS WITH A NUMBER THAT'S LOWER THAN WE THINK WE NEED. 
          OKAY. 
          AND AND I I RESPECT AND APPRECIATE THAT. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          I JUST DON'T WANT, AND IF YOU'RE TELLING ME WE WOULDN'T ISSUE THAT AND IT WOULDN'T BE PUT ON THE, THE PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE, FOR THE RESIDENTS TO HAVE TO PAY ANYWAY. 
          YOU'VE, YOU'VE JUST ABOUT ALLEVIATED THAT WITH ME. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT I, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE 55 BUILD IT FOR 45 AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN WE COME BACK AND SAY, OH, THAT'S JUST ABOUT THE PRICE OF A GUN RANGE THAT WE DIDN'T THINK THAT WE COULD AFFORD AND WE GOT ALL THIS EXTRA MONEY LAYING AROUND, LET'S JUST DO IT. 
          SO IF, IF THAT'S THE ISSUE THAT WE CAN NOT ISSUE IT AND NOT COME BACK 10 YEARS AND SAY, WELL WE'VE GOT THIS APPROVED, IS THAT A SCENARIO TO WHERE WE COULD COME BACK AND SAY, WELL, I MEAN A COUNCIL COULD DO THAT. 
          YES. 
          BUT THAT WOULD BE UP TO A COUNCIL AT THE TIME. 
          I DON'T THAT AT ALL. 
          I, I WANT IT FOR THIS ONE PROJECT AND ONE PROJECT ALONE. 
          SO ANYWAY, THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS WHEREVER YOU WENT. 
          I THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          YOU'RE WELCOME. 
          SO, SO JUST, JUST TO ADD TO DAVID'S POINT, SO THIS IS FOR VOTER AUTHORIZATION, SO IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE'RE SELLING THE BONDS IMMEDIATELY, IT'S NOT GONNA IMPACT THE TAX RATE IMMEDIATELY. 
          AND WE DON'T SELL BONDS UNTIL WE, WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE SELLING THEM FOR MM-HMM . 
          UM, SO WE WOULDN'T JUST GO OUT AND SELL THE 55 MILLION BASED ON THIS. 
          WE WOULD GET MORE HARD NUMBERS CONTRACT COMING FORWARD AND THAT TYPE OF THING AND HAVE A HARD COST. 
          CHRIS, IT, IT'S REALLY JUST A COMMENT. 
          I HOPE WE DON'T ABANDON THE IDEA OF CONTINUING TO LOOK FOR EXISTING SPACE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH TO REALIZE WHAT OFFICE BUILDINGS AND ADDISON OFF THE TOY ARE GOING FOR. 
          I MEAN THAT'S 80 OR 90 BUCKS A SQUARE FOOT. 
          AND IF YOU DO THE MATH ON JUST THE ACQUISITION OF A BUILDING THAT SIZE, THAT GETS, I MEAN YOU'RE, YOU'RE AT LIKE BETWEEN FIVE AND $6 MILLION AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF BUILDINGS IN TOWN THAT HAVE PROBABLY SEEN BETTER DAYS. 
          UM, I KNOW THAT THAT TAKES IT OFF THE TAX ROLL, BUT IF WE CAN GET IN REALLY CHEAP, AND I KNOW IT GETS CHALLENGING WHEN YOU START RIPPING THROUGH WALLS AND, AND I HEARD YOU CHIEF WHEN YOU SAID YOU WANT A FOOTPRINT WHERE YOU CAN 
          [00:40:01]
HAVE EVERYONE ON ONE FLOOR, BUT IF WE CAN DO THAT AND MAKE SOME SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS, I THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO PURSUE IT. 
          YEAH. 
          HOLY SUPPORT YOU ON THAT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO CAN WE GET THE, UH, THE NAME AND, AND FUNCTION OF A GENTLEMAN THAT WAS TALKING ABOUT CONSTRUCTION FOR THE RECORD NAME WAS DON BERGER WITH SEVEN 20 DESIGN. 
          I'VE SPENT MY WHOLE LIFE CAREER 48 PLUS YEARS CAREER DOING JUST PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES IN . 
          I THINK I RECENTLY PASSED ABOUT 250 POLICE PROJECTS IN TEXAS AND NATIONALLY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YOU'RE WELCOME. 
          LIKE YOU WAS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECTS AS YOU JUST RATTLE 'EM OFF WHAT THEY HAD. 
          UM, SO A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. 
          UM, I TOOK SOME OF THE OPTIONS ON THERE THEN. 
          THE FUDGE FACTOR'S, NOT $10 MILLION. 
          THE FUDGE FACTOR IS 7% OWNER'S CONSTRUCTION. 
          CONSI CONTINGENCY IS 7%, 2.6 MILLION. 
          CAN YOU ZOOM IN ON THE BOTTOM OF THAT, UH, CHART ON POWERPOINT? YOU CAN JUST ZOOM IN ON THE SCREEN JUST RIGHT ON THE OKAY THEN YEAH, YOU GOTTA GET REALLY BIG IN THAT SCREEN. 
          SO THOSE ONES, THAT'S THE CONTINGENCY. 
          ONE OF THEM IS, UM, THERE'S 14% TOTAL, RIGHT? SEVEN AND 7% OF THOSE. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AS FAR AS THE UNKNOWNS AND CONTINGENCIES, THAT'S CONTINGENCY. 
          AND THEN THERE'S ALSO AN ESCALATION. 
          UM, OKAY, WHERE'S THE ESCALATION? UH, IF YOU SCROLL SLIGHTLY. 
          OH, THERE IT IS. 
          IT'S SLIGHTLY LOWER. 
          SLIGHTLY LOWER, GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          I SEE IT ON HERE. 
          AND THAT'S OKAY. 
          THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE POINT. 
          THAT'S THE ESCALATION FROM NOW UNTIL A CONSTRUCTION START DATE IN JULY OKAY. 
          OF 27. 
          AND THAT'S ABOUT 7% ANNUAL ALSO. 
          SO I, I TOOK THE, THE LAND ITSELF TO CHRIS'S POINT IS $64 A SQUARE FOOT AT THE COST THAT THEY HAVE IN THERE. 
          2.8 MILLION. 
          THAT'S, THAT'S, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CANOPIES 3.7 IS THAT, UM, AND I KNOW THAT'S FOR A PARTICULAR SITE IF WE HAVE TO HAVE IT IN THOSE LOCATIONS. 
          IS THAT, UH, TYPICAL OF OTHER, OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, UH, IN THE ONES YOU'VE WORKED ON? EVERY PROJECT, EVERY, EVERY POLICE PROJECT STARTS OUT WITH THAT AS A GOAL. 
          UNFORTUNATELY. 
          IT USUALLY BECOMES ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS TO, YOU KNOW, GET TO, TO THE WAYSIDE FOR BUDGET, YOU KNOW, TO KEEP EVERYTHING IN BUDGET OF PROBABLY THE POLICE PROJECTS I'VE WORKED ON, MAYBE 10 TO 15% END UP WITH COVERED PARKING, BUT ALSO THE COST OF THE ASSETS OF THE CRUISER. 
          THE SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE IN THAT CRUISER JUST KEEP RISING AND RISING. 
          SO TO PROTECT THEM FROM HAIL, SUNSHINE, SOME CRUISERS ARE NOW INCORPORATING BALLISTIC GLAZING, WHICH DOESN'T PLAY WELL WITH ULTRAVIOLET RAYS THAT HAS TO BE IN THE SHADE WHEN IT'S BEING PARKED AT THE FACILITY. 
          AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE CORRECT FOR THAT ONE SCHEME BECAUSE OF THE HIGHER APARTMENTS IS WHERE THAT ENTERED IN AS A LINE ITEM WAS THE CANOPIES. 
          UM, SO ONTO THE CMAR, UM, I THINK WE USED THAT CONSTRUCTION, UH, MANAGEMENT MODEL ON THE, UM, UP, UH, THE, UH, REMODEL OF THIS CENTER HERE, CMAR. 
          IS THAT, IS THAT TYPICAL NOW TO USE THE CMAR MODEL? IT IS FOR POLICE PROJECTS. 
          UH, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T SPEAK NECESSARILY FOR OTHER, OTHER PROJECT TYPES, BUT ALL THOSE ONES THAT WERE UP THERE ON THAT LIST OF THE 11, ALL 11 WERE CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS. 
          AND PROBABLY THE PAST 20, 25 YEARS OF PROJECTS I'VE BEEN WORKING ON IS THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER DELIVERY PROCESS AND THAT THAT GIVES US SOME EXTRA, UM, UH, PLACES TO HOLD THAT, THAT PRICE IN, IN LINE WITH THAT CONSTRUCTION MANAGER GUARANTEES THAT PRICE. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          MANAGES THAT PRICE. 
          OKAY. 
          I GOT IT. 
          I THINK THAT'S ALL FOR NOW, BRANDY, THANK YOU. 
          UH, JUST TO GO ALONG WITH CHRIS, I, I ALSO HOPE THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT OTHER ALTERNATIVES. 
          THIS, AND YOU SAID, I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, WE KIND OF NARROWED DOWN TO WHERE WE WOULD HAVE THE LAND TO DO THIS OTHER ONE AND YOU SAY, NOW FIND THE LAND. 
          WE DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF LAND IN ADDISON ANYMORE THAT WOULD BE OF THIS SIZE. 
          SO IT'S PRETTY EASY TO NARROW THAT DOWN. 
          BUT THIS, THIS CANOPY AT $3.8 MILLION, $3.75 MILLION, UM, THAT, THAT'S ONE OF MY BIGGEST ISSUES ABOUT THIS PIECE OF LAND THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT WITH THE OVER, WITH THE, WITH THE VIEW FROM THE OTHER, I WANT OUR OFFICERS PROTECTED. 
          I I WANT THAT, UH, THAT THAT IS A, A REAL HEARTBURN ISSUE. 
          I MEAN THAT'S MORE THAN LAND'S GONNA COST US TO PUT A NO, ABSOLUTELY. 
          AND TO THE POINT, I MEAN THAT, THAT'S A, FOR NOT JUST THIS SITE, BUT ANY SITE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT'S GONNA HAVE, NOT EVEN MULTIFAMILY, BUT ANY HIGH RISE ADJACENT, RIGHT? IT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT WE WOULD HAVE FOR OUR OFFICERS. 
          BUT YEAH, THAT'S, IT IS AN EXPENSIVE PIECE OF, OF A PROJECT AND THAT'S DUE TO THE HIGH DENSITY OF, OF ADDISON TO YOUR POINT. 
          [00:45:01]
THERE'S NOT A LOT OF OPTIONS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT, WE'VE LOOKED AT EVERYTHING. 
          WE WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK AT EVERYTHING. 
          AGAIN, THESE ARE JUST CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS OF WHAT A PROJECT AT THAT 59 MILLION PRICE POINT COULD LOOK LIKE, WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE FOR A RENOVATION, WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE FOR A NEW BUILD. 
          BUT YEAH, EVERY SITE'S GONNA HAVE DIFFERENT CHALLENGES THAT WE'RE GOING TO MEET IN. 
          BUT OFFICER SAFETY IS ALWAYS GONNA BE AT THE, THE TOP OF THAT, OF EACH SITE AND, AND WHICH IS THE REASON THAT I AM ADAMANT ABOUT THE POLICE STATION IS IN THE PERFECT LOCATION RIGHT NOW. 
          I WOULD LIKE THAT LOCATION TO BE WHERE OUR POLICE STATION STAYS. 
          WE DON'T HAVE A BUNCH OF OVERHANGS OVER IT. 
          UH, THERE'S THREE THINGS THAT DON'T MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND A POLICE STATION IS ONE OF THEM BECAUSE OF THE NOISE IN THE COMBUSTION AROUND, YOU KNOW, AIRPORTS, FIRE STATIONS AND POLICE STATIONS ARE NOT GOOD NEIGHBORS IF YOU'RE TRYING TO GET SOME SLEEP AT NIGHT. 
          SO, UM, WHERE THE POLICE STATION CURRENTLY SETS, IN MY OPINION, IS THE ONLY OPTION WE'VE GOT. 
          NOT ONLY IS IT A GREAT PIECE OF LAND BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TO DO A LOT OF THIS STUFF LIKE THIS, BUT IT'S NOT TAKING SOMETHING AWAY FROM FUTURE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. 
          AND WE DON'T HAVE, WE BOTH AGREED THERE'S NOT A LOT OF LAND LEFT TO DEVELOP IN ADDISON. 
          AND EVERY INCH THAT WE TAKE AWAY FROM FUTURE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NOT ONLY PUTS IT ON OUR TAX BURDEN FOR PROPERTY TAXES, BUT ALSO TAKES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AWAY THAT CAN HELP US ON OUR TAX BURDEN LATER. 
          SO I I, I'M NOT ONE THAT'S GONNA BE IN FAVOR OF MOVING THE POLICE STATION, UH, AWAY FROM IT'S AT, WHETHER IT BE TEAR IT DOWN, BUILD A NEW ONE OR RENOVATE IT AND WHERE IT'S AT AND ME. 
          AND YOU'VE HAD MANY OH YES SIR. 
          REALLY GOOD CONVERSATIONS. 
          AND IT, THIS IS NOTHING NEW TO YOU FOR ME STAYING THERE, CORRECT? ABSOLUTELY, YES SIR. 
          THIS, I WANT IT WHERE IT'S AT NOW. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WELL, WE'RE, WELL WE'RE, WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT HERE TO DECIDE THE LOCATION OF THIS TONIGHT OR ANY OF THE DETAILS OF THESE CONCEPTUAL CONSTRUCTION, THE PROJECTS. 
          SO WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DECIDE ON IS DO WE WANNA MOVE FORWARD WITH, UH, WITH, WITH THE BOND AND IF SO THEN HOW MUCH? AND MARLON, I'LL GO TO YOU FIRST. 
          YEAH, I THINK YOU ANSWERED PART OF MY QUESTION. 
          I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY IN MY MIND, UM, THE, HOW MUCH IS KIND OF DICTATED BY WHAT ARE WE, WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO, CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION OR THE SITE. 
          SO I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY, UM, IF WE WERE GONNA CONCLUDE SOMETHING TONIGHT WITH THIS, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? WELL, AND BECAUSE, BECAUSE THE AMOUNT AND TO THE POINT EARLIER, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT GONNA ISSUE $55 MILLION BOND RIGHT OUT OF THE GATE. 
          THAT'S, THAT'S FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD WHEN WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO AND IT WON'T ALL BE AT ONE TIME, MOST LIKELY. 
          OKAY. 
          DAVID, YOU WERE GONNA SAY SOMETHING? YEAH, I MEAN ULTIMATELY WHAT ARE WE LOOKING FOR? WE'RE LOOKING FOR ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THE 55 MILLION? 'CAUSE YOU'RE VOTING ON THIS NEXT WEEK. 
          SO YEAH, SO, AND TO THAT POINT AS FAR AS LOCATION WHERE IT, IT DOES COME INTO, INTO PLAY IS WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CURRENT SITE WITH THE WAY THE CURRENT SITE, WE SHOWED THE NUMBERS FOR THE WAY THE CURRENT SITE EXISTS RIGHT NOW TO KNOCK IT DOWN AND BUILD THE NEW ONE IS GONNA BE OVER THE 55 MILLION. 
          NOW, IF WE CAN FIND A WAY TO GET MORE LAND ON THE AIRPORT AND, AND BUILD, LIKE THAT'S AN OPTION WE CAN CONSIDER IN THE FUTURE, BUT IF WE WERE GONNA SAY THE ONLY OPTION WAS TO BUILD IT ON THE CURRENT SITE, WE WOULD NEED MORE. 
          YEAH, WELL THAT'S MY CONCERN. 
          SO, SO I, I AGREE WITH RANDY IN THAT, UM, THAT LOCATION I THINK IS IDEAL. 
          UM, I DON'T LIKE, UH, TAKING COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OFF THE MARKET. 
          UM, UM, AND, AND SO I'M STRUGGLING WITH A $55 MILLION AMOUNT IF, UH, IN THE LAST, I THINK IT WAS THE LAST MEETING, UH, I THINK THE ANSWER WAS ROUGHLY 63 MILLION IF WE WERE TO STAY WHERE WE'RE AT ADD LAND AND THEN NEW CONSTRUCTION, UH, ROUGHLY. 
          AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, MY CONSTERNATION IS, I, IT'D BE HELPFUL IF WE COULD KIND OF GET SOME SORT OF CONSENSUS, THE LOCATION CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION, UM, WHICH WOULD LEAD TO THE DOLLAR FIGURE THAT HOPEFULLY WOULD HELP US, UH, MAKE SOME SOME DECISION MAKING. 
          I, I THINK I, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POINT. 
          WHAT I WOULD SAY IS, UM, IF TWO THINGS, IF YOU, IF YOU, IF YOU'RE SAYING, HEY, WE WANT TO BE AT THE AIRPORT IN THAT SITE NO MATTER WHAT, THEN YOU PROBABLY SHOULD THINK ABOUT A HIGHER NUMBER. 
          BUT WHAT 55 MILLION DOES NOT LIMIT YOU TO NOT CONSIDER AN, AN OPTION THAT COULD POP UP AT THE AIRPORT. 
          SAY WE'RE ABLE TO EXPAND INTO THE AIRPORT MORE THROUGH A NUMBER OF, OF MEANS. 
          IF WE'RE ABLE TO GET MORE LAND AND WE DON'T HAVE TO DISPLACE ALL THE OFFICERS, WE MAY BE ABLE TO GET THAT PROJECT IN FOR $55 MILLION. 
          SO THERE ARE VARIABLES THAT COULD EXIST THAT HAVE US STAY THERE. 
          BUT IF, IF YOU'RE SAYING WE NEED TO BE THERE NO MATTER WHAT, WHAT WE WOULD TELL YOU IS 55 WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO DO THAT WITHOUT KNOWING HOW THOSE VARIABLES ARE GONNA PLAY OUT. 
          [00:50:02]
AND COULD WE GET A, UH, IF, IF, IF THIS PASSED, COULD WE ORDER A CO AT A LATER DATE IF WE FOUND OUT THAT THERE'S SOME VARIABLES THAT WE NEEDED TO, TO ADD TO THAT? OR DID YOU JUST KIND OF ANSWER THAT WITH RANDY'S? WE, WE, ONE OF RANDY'S PREVIOUS QUESTIONS? NO, WE, WE, WE ABSOLUTELY CAN. 
          I MEAN WE DID, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE DID ON MIDWAY, RIGHT? THE PRODUCT WAS HIGHER AND YOU ISSUED ADDITIONAL COS THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN HAPPEN. 
          YEAH, I JUST, I I'M, I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT UP MIDWAY. 
          UM, SO MIDWAY, MIDWAY ROAD, AS WE ALL KNOW WAS VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE. 
          BUT, UM, WE, THE COUNCILS I WAS ON PUT ON A A PUT IN A LOT OF GOOD WORK AND UM, YOU KNOW, WE GOT, WE GOT TO A POINT WHERE WE WERE VERY COMFORTABLE WITH SPENDING THAT MONEY BECAUSE WE KNEW IT WAS GONNA BE A GREAT PRODUCT AND IT WAS GONNA BE THERE FOR A LONG TIME. 
          UM, AND, UM, AND WE NEVER LOOKED BACK. 
          AND I, I NEVER, I, I THINK I HEARD FROM ONE RESIDENT, UM, YOU THINK ABOUT THAT A $42 MILLION PROJECT. 
          I ONLY HEARD FROM ONE RESIDENT THAT COMPLAINED ABOUT THAT ONE TIME. 
          THAT WAS IT. 
          UM, BUT I, I JUST THOUGHT, BOY, I'M GONNA GET A LOT OF INPUT OVER THIS AND A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE UPSET. 
          BUT I, UM, FOR ME, AND I THINK A LOT OF OUR COMMUNITIES, WE DID, WE DID IT RIGHT. 
          UM, AND, AND I, NOBODY HAS EVER COME TO ME LATER AND SAID, GOSH, YOU GUYS REALLY COULD HAVE SHA YOU COULD HAVE SAVED, UH, 2 MILLION OR 5 MILLION OR A LITTLE BIT ON THAT. 
          UM, AND SO THAT'S THE WAY I LOOK AT THIS THING IS, IS, UM, IN THE LONG RUN, IF THIS IS GONNA LAST 40 YEARS, I, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO BE SKIMPING ON, ON, UH, CERTAIN THINGS. 
          I THINK WE OUGHT TO, TO, UH, PUT FORTH WHAT WE WANT AND WHAT WE THINK MAKES SENSE. 
          UM, AND, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT WE, WE DON'T, WE DON'T DO THAT OVER SKIMPING, OVER 5 MILLION OR SO. 
          SO I, I WOULD LOVE TO, TO SEE US DO NEW CONSTRUCTION AT THE, AT THE SAME SITE. 
          AND IF WE CAN GET MORE LAND, THEN GET THE MONEY THAT WE'RE THERE, WE THINK WE MIGHT NEED TO GET THAT DONE. 
          AND, AND LIKE YOU SAID, WE'RE GONNA, WHEN WE TAKE THE BONDS, WE TAKE WHAT WE NEED, NOT, NOT THE TOTAL AMOUNT APPROVED. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO I, I GUESS WHERE I'M AT IS, IS SAME SITE, NEW CONSTRUCTION, WHATEVER THAT AMOUNT WAS. 
          I BELIEVE IT WAS 62 MILLION SOMETHING, 63 MILLION. 
          UM, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I'M AT. 
          SO RANDY ASKED EARLIER ABOUT THOSE PRICES. 
          IT'S NOT THIS SLIDE. 
          DID THEY INCLUDE A JAIL? AND, AND, UM, TH SAID THESE DID THESE DIDN'T, UH, DID ANYONE ASK DID THEY INCLUDE A GUN RANGE? 'CAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER THAT QUESTION AND, AND OURS AT 55 MILLION DOES NOT INCLUDE A GUN RANGE. 
          DID ALL THOSE OTHER PROJECTS HAVE GUN RANGES OR, OR SOME DID OR SOME DIDN'T? I'M JUST, I KNOW IT'S HARD TO COMPARE BACK TO 2019 AND 2020 TIMES ARE DIFFERENT. 
          BUT DID THEY ROANOKE, THE PROJECT YOU TOURED ALONG WITH MYSELF AND UH, STAFF DID HAVE A GUN RANGE. 
          UH, MIDLOTHIAN DOES NOT. 
          MANSFIELD HAD AN EXISTING GUN RANGE. 
          WEATHERFORD DID NOT PROSPER, DID NOT. 
          ROY CITY DID NOT. 
          LEWISVILLE HAS AN EXISTING RANGE. 
          I CAN'T SPEAK FOR DECATUR. 
          AND ALAN'S NEW PROJECT DOES NOT INCLUDE ONE, BUT THEY MIGHT HAVE AN EXISTING ONE IN, IN PLACE MOSTLY. 
          THEY DON'T HAVE GUN RANGES, JUST A FEW DO CORRECT. 
          THE THE ONLY, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE ONLY PROJECT UP THERE THAT INCLUDE THE BRAND NEW, YOU KNOW, 50 YARD GUN RANGE, I THINK, UH, SEVEN LANES, 50 YARDS WAS ROANOKE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, DO WE KNOW THE COST OF THE AIRPORT LAND IF WE WERE TO ACQUIRE THE LAND OR IS THAT THAT LAND SWAP? WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A DEVICE AND LAND SOMEWHERE ELSE IN TRADE. 
          THAT'S THE LAND SWAP THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          A NUMBER OF POTENTIALS. 
          WE, IN, IN THE ANALYSIS, WE PUT A PLACEHOLDER OF THREE AND A HALF MILLION. 
          WE DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA BE THAT. 
          WE HOPE IT'S NOT THAT. 
          BUT WE DID A PLACEHOLDER OF THREE AND A HALF WHEN THREE AND A HALF FRAME AS WE THROUGH THE ANALYSIS. 
          SO THAT WAS THE NUMBER THAT WE PLUGGED IN. 
          WHEN, WHEN, IF YOU LOOKED AT THE DETAIL OF THE PREVIOUS, UM, EXAMPLES, SO IF WE LOOK AT THE CANOPIES ARE 3.7 50, DO WE NEED CANOPIES? IF WE LEAVE IT WHERE IT IS, WOULD THE CANOPIES CO TAKE THE COST OF THE LAND? I MEAN THAT'S WHAT I'M, WHERE I'M HEADED. 
          I MEAN I, THEY WOULDN'T BE AS NECESSARY. 
          I'LL LET CHIEF SPEAK TO THEM. 
          NO, SIR. 
          THE, THE CURRENT SITE, YOU WOULDN'T NEED CANOPIES. 
          BUT THE CURRENT SITE, WITHOUT EXPANDING THAT COST WOULD DOING OTHER THINGS, YOU WOULD NEED A PARKING STRUCTURE JUST TO GET THE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC PARKING THAT WE NEED. 
          JUST STAY ON THAT SITE BECAUSE THE CURRENT SITE THAT WE'RE ON IS APPROXIMATELY 2.7 ACRES. 
          SO IT'S, EVEN IF YOU TEAR DOWN THAT BUILDING AND BUILD, YOU'VE STILL GOTTA HAVE SOMETHING FOR ALL THE PARKING AND THAT'S WHERE THE PARKING STRUCTURE COMES IN, WHICH HELPS DRIVE THAT COST UP IF YOU'RE GOING TO STAY ON THAT PARTICULAR 
          [00:55:01]
SITE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IF WE COULD ACQUIRE MORE LAND, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE, AND EXPAND THE FOOTPRINT OF THE LAND WHERE IT CURRENTLY IS, WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THE CANOPIES THAT MIGHT COVER THE COST OF THE LAND WE'RE SITTING ON. 
          AND THEN THE ACQUISITION COST FOR THE LAND OF 2.8 OR 2.9. 
          SO ANOTHER SIGNIFICANT COST OF THE, OF, OF RIGHT, OF THE RENOVATING WHERE IT IS NOW IS THERE'S JUST NOT ENOUGH SPACE FOR US TO KEEP THE OFFICERS THERE. 
          SO THERE'S, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT RENOVATING, BUT, OR KNOCKING IT DOWN AND STARTING OVER, WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE ALL OF OUR OFFICERS OUT AND THAT'S 5 MILLION. 
          IT ROUGHLY CAME UP TO ABOUT, YEAH, FIVE TO 6 MILLION OF RELOCATION IN A SITUATION WHERE WE GOT MORE LAND AND WE COULD EXPAND, THEN MAY, THEN POSSIBLY WE COULD KEEP THE STATION AND DO IT. 
          SO THAT'S WHAT IN, I WAS GIVING THAT AS AN EXAMPLE IN THAT SCENARIO, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT COMES IN ABOUT 55 MILLION. 
          THAT'S WHERE I'M HEADED. 
          IF WE COULD ACQUIRE THE LAND AND OUR COST FOR THE LAND WHERE WE ARE, PLUS AN ADDITIONAL LAND WOULD NOT COST ANY MORE THAN THIS CANOPIES PLUS ACQUIRING THE LAND ON THIS. 
          I'M BACK ON SLIDE 14. 
          UM, WOULD WE STILL NEED A PARKING STRUCTURE IF WE HAD MORE LAND OR COULD WE NO, SIR. 
          HE, IF WE GOT ADDITIONAL LAND, YOU WOULDN'T NEED THE PARKING STRUCTURE. 
          THE PARKING STRUCTURE WAS IF YOU KEPT THE EXACT SAME FOOTPRINT THAT'S EXISTING RIGHT NOW. 
          OKAY. 
          THE RE I'M, I'M GOING THAT DIRECTION BECAUSE I AGREE WITH SOME OF THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT I LIKE WHERE IT SITS AND I DON'T WANNA HAVE TO MOVE TWICE. 
          I KNOW YOU'RE OPPOSED TO THAT, BUT IF WE COULD BUILD IT RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO WHERE IT SITS AND YOU COULD STAY OPERATING IN THE ONE BUILDING WHILE WE'RE BUILDING, THEN MOVE OVER AND THEN LEVEL IT AND MAKE YOUR PARKING LOT. 
          I THINK THAT MIGHT BE, UM, FEASIBLE. 
          HOPEFULLY. 
          I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF UNKNOWNS, BUT THEN MY NEXT QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH THIS BOND AND, UM, WE HEARD A LOT OF CONVERSATION TONIGHT ABOUT HAVING THE BOND ELECTION IN MAY. 
          I HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AND I KNOW 13 OR 14 THINK MAY IS BETTER AND THAT'S FINE. 
          BUT MY QUESTION IS, LIKE WHEN RANDY WAS TALKING ABOUT 45 MILLION VERSUS 55 MILLION, IF WE HAVE A BOND ELECTION IN MAY AND IT FAILS, LET'S SAY IT'S FOR 55 MILLION, CAN WE HAVE ANOTHER BOND ELECTION IN NOVEMBER? YES. 
          SO, SO WE CAN DO THAT NOW, IF, UM, IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT IF YOU HAVE A BOND ELECTION OF 45 MILLION, IT HAS HIGHER LIKELIHOOD OF PASSING THAN 55 MILLION JUST 'CAUSE OF THE NUMBER. 
          I MAY BE WRONG, BUT IF YOU, IF IT FAILS, ARE WE PREVENTED FROM BEING ABLE TO, TO OFFER COS YES WE ARE. 
          SO IF WE, FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS, IF YOU, IF YOU HAVE A BOND ELECTION FOR EITHER NUMBER AND IT FAILS, THEN WE COULD STILL A BOND ELECTION IN NOVEMBER, BUT WE COULD NOT OFFER COS FOR FIVE YEARS. 
          WELL IF YOU HAD A BOND, IF YOU HAD A BOND ELECTION IN NOVEMBER AND IT PASSED, THEN YOU CAN, THEN YOU CAN ISSUE COS FOR, FOR A SIMILAR PROJECT. 
          OKAY. 
          CAN'T JUST HAVE A FAILED BOND ELECTION AND THEN GO OUT AND DO COS BY THEMSELVES. 
          SO AND SO IF, IF WE, IF WE PASSED A, A BOND ELECTION OF 45 MILLION AND IT CAME UP SHORT WHEN WE'RE ACTUALLY BUILDING IT, BUT IT HAD PREVIOUSLY FAILED, CAN, CAN WE ISSUE COS FOR THE DIFFERENCE OR NO COS AT ALL IF, IF A BOND ELECTION FAILED, YOU CAN, IF YOU HAVE A SUB SUBSEQUENT ONE THAT PASSES EVEN A LOWER NUMBER OR HIGHER NUMBER DOESN'T MATTER. 
          YES. 
          IF IT PASSES THIS, I'VE ACTUALLY BEEN IN THIS SITUATION, UM, SO YES, YOU CAN DO, AND ACTUALLY FOUR POLICE STATIONS, SO HAD ONE FAIL, WENT BACK TO THE VOTERS, HAD ONE PASS AND THEN THEY WANTED TO DO SOME, SOME, UH, COS BACKED BY SALES TAX. 
          SO THEY DID THAT AND THAT WAS, THAT WENT THROUGH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. 
          SO AS LONG AS WE HAVE A SUCCESSFUL BOND ELECTION, WE CAN ISSUE COS IF THE, IF THE NUMBER'S TOO LOW, CORRECT, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'RE GONNA BE AND HOW MUCH IT'S GONNA, WE DON'T KNOW. 
          NOW I'LL ALSO SAY THAT IT'S AT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S DISCRETION AS WELL, SO, UM, COS ARE GETTING MORE SCRUTINY THAN THEY WERE FIVE, 10 YEARS AGO. 
          SO, UM, ANYTHING THAT'S A CO UH, IS GONNA BE SCRUTINIZED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS, CAN WE TALK ABOUT, UM, IF IN A MAY ELECTION, A MAY BOND ELECTION FOR DART THAT COULD PASS OR FAIL IF IT, IT, DEPENDING ON THE RESULT OF THAT ELECTION, COULD THAT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THIS ONE? THAT'S WHY I WOULD PREFER NOVEMBER, NOT DIRECTLY. 
          SO WE WOULDN'T, YOU KNOW, ANY, ANY BONDS THAT YOU'RE GONNA DO A A GEO BOND ELECTION FOR ARE GONNA HAVE THE BACKING OF PROPERTY TAXES. 
          NOW IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT YOUR PROPERTY TAXES THAT YOU'RE RECEIVING HAVE TO GO DIRECTLY TO PAY THOSE, UH, PAY THE, THE, THE LOAN OFF. 
          [01:00:01]
BUT IT DOES MEAN THAT IT HAS THE BACKING OF PROPERTY TAXES AND WE DO THAT SO THAT WE'RE GETTING THE BEST POSSIBLE INTEREST RATE. 
          I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING, AND MAYBE YOU ANSWERED IT AND I DIDN'T FOLLOW THE, IF WE'RE, I, I KNOW WE HAVE TO PAY THREE YEARS TO EXIT DART IF THE ELECTION GOES THAT WAY AND THIS, THIS POLICE AND COURTS FACILITY IS ABOUT THREE YEARS OFF BEFORE IT STARTS ANYWAY, COULD THE DOLLARS FROM, UM, A SUCCESSFUL DART EXIT ELECTION IF I SAID THAT RIGHT, CAN THOSE BE USED INSTEAD OF A BOND ELECTION FOR THE POLICE STATION? AM I ASKING THAT? RIGHT? SO I THINK, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS IN AFTER, IN A, IN A SCENARIO WHERE WE HAVE A DART ELECTION AND WE EXIT DART AND WE PAY OFF OUR EXIT OBLIGATION AND SAY THAT'S IN THREE YEARS, AT THAT TIME, THE VOTERS WOULD DECIDE, DO WE WANT FIRST, DO WE WANT TO HAVE THE ADDITIONAL SALES TAX AND WHAT DOES IT GO TO THROUGH, THROUGH AN ELECTION? THERE ARE, THEY COULD DO A PUBLIC SAFETY DISTRICT, THEY COULD DO, UM, ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX REDUCTION THAT WOULD GO TO THE GENERAL FUND. 
          THEY COULD DO ANO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD OFFSET SOME COSTS. 
          IN AN EXAMPLE, IN AN EXAMPLE, YOU'RE GOING THROUGH THAT SCENARIO WHERE THEY DO A, A PUBLIC SAFETY DISTRICT, SOME OF THAT REVENUE COULD GO TO PAY THE DEBT SERVICE. 
          SO IN THAT SITUATION, YES, IT WOULD PAY THE DEBT SERVICE FOR THIS. 
          WHAT I WOULD SAY IS IT DOESN'T CHANGE WHAT WE WOULD DO IN MAY OR NOVEMBER THOUGH, BECAUSE EVEN IN THAT SCENARIO, WE WOULD STILL ISSUE THE DEBT. 
          NOW WE WOULD STILL ISSUE THE DEBT FOR THE POLICE STATION. 
          COULD THERE BE A SCENARIO IN THREE YEARS WHERE WE CHANGE THE FUNDING SOURCE FOR THAT DEBT AND THE DEBT SERVICE IS PAID THROUGH ANOTHER DISTRICT THAT COMES ABOUT THROUGH AN ELECTION. 
          THAT LEAST THAT IS POSSIBLE, BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE WHAT WE WOULD DO IN 2026 AS FAR AS IN 2026 WE WOULD ISSUE DEBT FOR A POLICE STATION. 
          THE FUNDING SOURCE FOR THAT DEBT SERVICE COULD CHANGE IN THE FUTURE JUST LIKE IT COULD FOR ANY PROJECT THAT WE ISSUE . 
          OKAY, SO SO YOU'RE SAYING IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER IT'S MAY OR NOVEMBER OR DOES IT MATTER? UH, I THINK THAT DEPENDS ON, ON PERSPECTIVE, RIGHT? I MEAN IT DOESN'T MATTER IN HOW WE WOULD PLAY IT OUT. 
          IF SOMEONE WANTS TO TRY TO PROJECT HOW IT WOULD IMPACT OUR TAX RATE WITH IF, IF DOMINO'S FALL IN A CERTAIN WAY. 
          I MEAN THERE'S A DIFFERENT WAY DOMINO'S COULD FALL OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS. 
          IT DOES NOT IMPACT HOW WE WOULD HANDLE IT IN 2026. 
          SO, OKAY. 
          I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S STRATEGY OR LOGIC IN HAVING DART'S ALREADY SET FOR MAY TO HAVE THIS ONE IN NOVEMBER BECAUSE THE BOND COMMITTEE DID NOT KNOW WHEN THEY DECIDED ON MAY THAT WE WERE GONNA HAVE A DART EXIT THAT THAT WASN'T PART OF THE EQUATION. 
          SO THINGS HAVE CHANGED, SO I JUST WANTED TO CALL IT OUT THAT I THINK PERSONALLY, I THINK NOVEMBER'S BETTER, BUT I'M JUST, THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANSWER, DAN. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA LEAN ON THE BOND ADVISORY COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          I'M NOT GONNA GET STUCK AND I THINK RON WHITEHEAD AT ONE POINT SAID, I'M NOT GONNA GET STUCK ON THE NUMBER JUST BECAUSE OF WHAT STEVEN'S POINTED OUT. 
          INFLATION'S INFLATION, THERE'S NO STOPPING IT. 
          STEEL PRICES WENT UP. 
          UM, I WAS SOME FRIENDS IN THE BUSINESS THAT WENT UP $30 A FOOT OR SOMETHING, RIDICULOUS THING IN 24 HOURS. 
          SO IT'S SO FLUCTUATING AND MOVING THAT I CAN'T PIN MYSELF ON A NUMBER. 
          I'D RATHER GET THE PROJECT BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE ADVISORY, UM, NOT GET STUCK ON THE NUMBER. 
          I KNOW THE 55 WAS THE NUMBER, BUT I'M OKAY GOING, I'M OKAY GOING HIGHER IF IT'S THE RIGHT PLACE AT THE RIGHT TIME, WHICH I DON'T THINK WE CAN CONTROL THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN DO A LAND SWAP WITH THE AIRPORT. 
          I WOULD PREFER US TO DO THAT AND KEEP IT ON THE EXISTING SITE, BUT THAT'S A BIG IF WITH THE FAA AND GETTING THAT LAND SWAPPED. 
          IT SEEMS LIKE ON PAPER YOU GET THIS, WE TAKE THAT WIN-WIN, WE START KNOCKING THINGS DOWN, BUT UNLESS YOU CAN TELL ME 100% I CAN'T MOVE, I CAN'T WORRY ABOUT THE NUMBER IF I'M MAKING THAT CLEAR. 
          BRUCE, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THAT HELPFUL OR NOT FOR YOUR CONSENSUS TONIGHT. 
          THANK YOU DAN. 
          CHRIS, I HAVE TO AGREE WITH, UM, PART OF WHAT, WHAT DAN SAID, I LOOK AT A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION BUDGETS AND WHETHER IT'S THE COST OF RAW MATERIAL, WHETHER IT'S THE COST OF LABOR, UM, YOU, YOU NAME IT, THERE'S SO MUCH TO GO INTO THESE BUDGETS. 
          I WOULD NOT WANNA MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT A CONTINGENCY IN OUR BUDGET. 
          SO I WOULD SUPPORT THE 55 AND UM, YOU KNOW, IF WE COME IN LOWER, THAT'D BE GREAT. 
          I DON'T, I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF HOPING IT'S 45 AND THEN WE HAVE TO ISSUE ADDITIONAL DEBT. 
          SO I THINK WE NEED TO INCLUDE THE CONTINGENCIES IN EVERY WHATEVER WE DO. 
          [01:05:01]
YEAH, THANKS CHRIS. 
          AND I AND I I, I AGREE WITH THAT LAST COMMENT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, PUTTING IT OUT THERE AND SAY, WELL LET'S, LET'S DO 45 AND THEN WHEN WE GET THAT DOWN THE ROAD, IT'S LIKE, WELL, WE KIND OF KNEW IT MIGHT BE 55, SO NOW WE NEED TO ISSUE 10 MILLION IN CO. 
          I THINK IT'S A LITTLE, UM, SOME, SOME MIGHT SEE IT AS BEING A LITTLE DISHONEST ALMOST. 
          IF, IF WE, IF WE KNOW GOING IN IT'S A, IT'S A GOOD LIKELIHOOD IT'D BE 55. 
          I THINK DOING A 45 JUST DOESN'T, DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT. 
          DOESN'T LOOK RIGHT. 
          DARREN, UH, TWO THINGS. 
          UM, SO THE, UH, OF 7% A YEAR, UH, MOVING IT FROM MAY TO NOVEMBER COSTS YOU $1.9 MILLION. 
          JUST TO KEEP THAT CLEAR, THAT WAS A SIMILAR CONVERSATION WITH THE DART TIMING AS WELL, SO, OKAY. 
          I'M IN FAVOR OF KEEPING IT IN MAY GET IT MOVING, GET IT GOING. 
          UM, I LEAN ON THE BOND, UH, COMMITTEE. 
          THERE ARE A LOT OF SMART PEOPLE ON THAT COMMITTEE FROM ALL DIFFERENT PHILOSOPHIES AND, AND ANGLES AND 13 OUTTA 14, WE APPOINTED THEM GO WITH IT. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS I THOUGHT IS, UM, I THINK WE'LL COME IN AT THE 55 OR LESS AND I THINK THAT'S, WE'VE GOT GOOD MANAGEMENT UNDER IT. 
          WE'VE GOT GOOD PROJECTIONS, WE'VE GOT GOOD BUFFERS IN THERE. 
          SO I WAS UNDER THE ASSUMPTION IF WE COULD FIND THE MONEY THAT WE, AND WE HAD MAYBE CAME IN AT THE 55 OR A LITTLE LESS THAT WE WOULD INCLUDE A GUN RANGE AND DO IT ONCE INSTEAD OF, UM, AN ADDITIONAL PROJECT. 
          THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING. 
          AND I DON'T KNOW THE REST OF THE COUNCILS BUT THE 55 AND I, I WOULDN'T WANT TO GO TO THE TOWN, THE CITIZEN, THE VOTERS AND SAY, YEAH, 55 MILLION, WE'RE JUST GONNA ASK FOR 45 BECAUSE IT IS DISINGENUOUS TO ME. 
          UH, I THINK THAT 55 MILLION IS, YOU KNOW, I I REALLY HATED THAT WE BUDGETED TWO AND A HALF FOR, UH, LAY LOCK'S POND AND IT WAS SEVEN, SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND THEN HALF OF WHAT MIDWAY ENDED UP BEING. 
          THAT'S LIKE, HOW DID WE MISS THAT? SO THIS IS DEFINITELY, UM, BEING CONSERVATIVE ON THAT. 
          SO, UH, QUESTIONS, UM, I ABOUT PROBABLY THE GUN RANGE, IF WE CAN FIND THE MONEY IN OTHER FUNDS, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TEMPERATURE ON THAT IS OF, OF THE COUNCIL. 
          I'M, I'M ASSUMING I, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, PUT THAT IN IF WE CAN, BUT I'M STICKING WITH THE 55 FROM THE COMMITTEE. 
          ANOTHER THING IS, UM, IF YOU ASK FOR TOO MUCH THEN THE VOTERS GET STICKER SHOCK AND SO YOU CAN'T, UM, GO TO THE 63 OR THE 70 OR WHATEVER SOME OF THE OTHER, YOU KNOW, WISHLISTS WOULD BE. 
          SO I THINK 55 IS A CONSERVATIVE NUMBER, BUT REALISTIC. 
          YEAH, AND DARREN, AND I AGREE WITH YOU. 
          I MEAN, THE COUNCIL DID A GOOD JOB OF APPOINTING THE COMMITTEE THAT WE HAD THAT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF REALLY GOOD FOLKS THAT WERE VERY ENGAGED, THEY WORKED HARD AND UH, THEY, THEY SPENT A LOT OF TIME, UH, GOING THROUGH THE ALL THE OTHER THAT YOU HAVE TO GET TO, TO GET TO THE END FOR A RECOMMENDATION. 
          AND UH, AND I I THINK IF WE'RE, WHEN WE APPOINT A COMMITTEE LIKE THAT, IT'S, THEY GIVE US A, A RECOMMENDATION AND, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO RESPECT THAT RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE THEY DID IT, UH, UH, WITH A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT WE, WE PROBABLY DON'T HAVE EVERY BIT OF INFORMATION THAT THEY'VE HAD BECAUSE THEY HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS THAT WE WEREN'T PART OF. 
          UM, BUT I, BUT I DO HAVE A LOT OF TRUST IN THEM AND, AND, UH, AND IF, IF WE CAN DO IT FOR LESS THAN 55, THAT THAT'S GREAT, BUT I, BUT I'M ALL ON BOARD FOR DOING IT, UH, AT THE, AT THE 55 BRANDY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, JUST A QUESTION FOR DAVID. 
          I'M, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ON THE DEBT AND THE ISSUING OF THE DEBT, UH, TO HOWARD'S POINT, I, I THOUGHT YOU HAD EXPLAINED TO ME THAT WE WOULDN'T BE ISSUING THE DEBT UNTIL WE WERE IN CONSTRUCTION AND WERE NEEDING IT, BUT THEN YOU CAME BACK AND SAID WE'D BE ISSUING THE DEBT IN 26. 
          SO I'M, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED THERE AS TO WHEN, IN 26 AND WHY IT WOULD BE ISSUED THEN AND HOW MUCH OF THAT 55 WOULD BE ISSUED IN 26. 
          NO, I, I WAS, I WAS JUST TALKING THROUGH A SCENARIO. 
          WE WOULD ISSUE THE DESIGN, THE, THE DEBT FOR THE DESIGN CONTRACT. 
          SO THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST DEBT THAT WE WOULD ISSUE WOULD BE IN 26. 
          OKAY. 
          WE WOULD ISSUE THE REST AT CONSTRUCTION. 
          GOTCHA. 
          YEP. 
          GOTCHA, GOTCHA. 
          AND, AND I AGREE WITH, WITH, UM, UH, EVERYONE THAT SAID ABOUT THE COMMITTEE, WE PUT GOOD PEOPLE ON THE COMMITTEE AND, AND THAT, I JUST DON'T THINK OUR COMMITTEE WAS GIVEN ENOUGH TIME AND ENOUGH OPTIONS TO REALLY GO THROUGH ALL OF THIS. 
          UH, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY'S EVER BUILT A HOUSE, BUT I, I HAD MORE THAN FOUR MEETINGS WITH MY CONTRACTOR WHEN I BUILT A HOUSE. 
          SO I MEAN, THAT'S A SMALL, A LOT SMALLER PROJECT THAN, THAN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. 
          UM, I JUST WISH WE WOULD, UM, UH, I'M, I'M WITH HOWARD ON, I WOULD PREFER NOVEMBER SIMPLY NOT TO KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD, BUT TO GIVE US MORE TIME TO FIGURE THIS LAND, SWAP OUT WITH THE AIRPORT, GET MORE OPTIONS OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, JUST SAYING WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU A $55 MILLION CHECK WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO. 
          [01:10:01]
CONSTRUCTION, REMODEL, OR MOVE, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT TOO BROAD FOR ME. 
          AND I KNOW WE DON'T WANT TO GET TOO SPECIFIC BECAUSE WE, WE PAINT OURSELF INTO A CORNER, BUT I WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC THAN JUST, HERE'S A CHECK, GO DO WHAT YOU WANT TO WITH IT. 
          THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING. 
          WE'RE, THAT'S WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING. 
          WE'RE JUST DOING A DOLLAR FIGURE AND WE'RE GIVING ALL THESE OTHER OPTIONS. 
          WE'RE NOT WRITING A BLANK CHECK TO ANYBODY HOWARD, OH, THIS MIGHT BE FOR CHRIS FREEZE AGAIN, THE, UH, CURRENT LOCATION. 
          IF WE CAN ACQUIRE THE LAND AND BUILD, UH, A NEW POLICE STATION WHILE THE OLD ONE STAYS IN PLACE, WHAT ABOUT THAT GUN RANGE? WILL WE BE LOSING IT AND HAVE TO BUILD ANOTHER ONE? OR CAN WE STILL KEEP THE GUN RANGE, THE EXISTING GUN RANGE? YEAH, THE EXISTING GUN RANGE WOULD BE THERE UNTIL THAT FACILITY WAS DEMOLISHED. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S 25 YARDS. 
          IF WE WERE TO EXPAND ON THE SITE THROUGH ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, WE WOULD WORK AND IF THE COUNCIL WANTED TO COME BACK AND SAY, HEY, WE WANT TO COMMIT TO DOING THIS, WE'D WORK WITH THE TEAM TO SAY, OKAY, HOW DOES THAT FIT IN TO THAT FOOTPRINT? AND WE WOULD GO FORWARD THERE AND THEN HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS. 
          BUT REGARDLESS, THE, THE RANGE THAT WE HAVE NOW STAYS INTACT WHILE THAT BUILDING IS THERE. 
          WE STILL HAVE ACCESS TO IT NOW. 
          I'M WONDERING CAN THAT GUN RANGE BE OUR GUN RANGE IN THE FUTURE OR IS THAT GUN RANGE YOU JUST SAID 25 YARDS? YEAH, SO THAT, IN THAT SCENARIO, WHENEVER THE NEW FACILITY WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED TO, IN THAT SCENARIO TO PLAY OUT TO THE WEST, UM, ONCE THE CURRENT FACILITY WAS TORN DOWN, THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT BECAUSE YOU WOULD NEED THAT FOR THE PARKING AND THE REST OF THE FACILITY. 
          THE GUN RANGE WILL BE GONE. 
          YES SIR. 
          WE HAVE TO BUILD A NEW ONE. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          OKAY, GOOD DISCUSSION PASTOR. 
          YOU GOT SOME NEXT STEPS FOR US? YES SIR. 
          JUST UM, A REMINDER BASED ON THE CONVERSATION WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT, WE WILL BE BACK NEXT TUESDAY AT THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND IF COUNCIL DOES WISH TO CALL A MAY BOND ELECTION FOR THE $55 MILLION, AN ORDINANCE WILL BE PRESENTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. 
          SO WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER AN ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, BUT BASED ON WHAT WE'VE HEARD, WE WILL BE BACK NEXT TUESDAY WITH THAT ORDINANCE FOR YOUR AGAIN CONSIDERATION. 
          OKAY. 
          DO YOU HAVE DIRECTION FROM US NOW TO DO THAT? WE DO. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          VERY GOOD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU PASSION. 
          THANKS EVERYBODY. 
          I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY BEFORE WE CLOSE THAT ONE. 
          SO THERE WILL BE OTHER OPTIONS THAT WE GO THROUGH. 
          WE CAN DIVE DEEPER INTO, UH, THE SAME LOCAL, SAME LOCATION AS WELL. 
          I MEAN THEY SUGGESTED BOND COMMITTEES SUGGESTED B AND C, BUT WE CAN STILL LOOK AT, UM, REBUILDING ON THAT CURRENT SITE IF IT FITS IN THE BUDGET. 
          YEAH, SO, UM, EVEN THE EXAMPLE THAT WE'VE REFERENCED THAT HAVE VAGUELY REFERENCED UP HERE A FEW TIMES OF ACQUIRING DIFFERENT ADDITIONAL LAND AT THE AIRPORT, THAT WAS NOT AN OPTION WHEN WE MET WITH THE BOND COMMITTEE JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE DIDN'T GO THROUGH THAT EXAMPLE. 
          WE HAVEN'T COME UP WITH EVEN SCHEMATICS OF WHAT THAT COULD LOOK LIKE, BUT IT IS INDICATIVE OF THINGS COULD HAPPEN, OTHER OPPORTUNITIES COULD COME UP, THERE COULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY AT THE AIRPORT, UM, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL WANTED TO LOOK AT. 
          SO THEY DIDN'T LOOK AT THAT EXAMPLE BECAUSE THAT WASN'T A POSSIBILITY AT THE TIME. 
          OKAY. 
          I'M GOOD. 
          I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IT'S STILL AN OPTION. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          THANK YOU PASTOR. 
          THANK YOU MA'AM. 
          AND REAL, REAL QUICK, MAYOR, I NEED SOME CLARIFICATION. 
          DID YOU SAY MAY? CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          OKAY, VERY GOOD. 
          ALRIGHT, MOVEMENT ON TO ITEM 
          [b.  Present and discuss the new Comprehensive Plan, Advance Addison, which will replace the 2013 Comprehensive Plan, but maintain special area plans, as amended; establishing policy goals for land use, housing, transportation, economic development and community facilities.]
FOUR B. 
          IS EVERYBODY OKAY? ANYBODY NEED A LITTLE BREAK OR OKAY. 
          TO MOVE ON? OKAY. 
          TO MOVE ON. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          ALRIGHT, ITEM FOUR B PRESENT AND DISCUSS THE NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADVANCE ADDISON, WHICH WILL REPLACE THE 2013 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT MAINTAIN SPECIAL AREA PLANS AS AMENDED, ESTABLISHING POLICY GOALS FOR LAND USE, HOUSING, TRANSPORTATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES. 
          LESLIE, THANK YOU. 
          UH, GOOD EVENING LESLIE. 
          AND I'M DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES FOR THE TOWN. 
          UM, THIS EVENING WE'LL BE TALKING A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UM, A FEW UPDATES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE PLAN, UM, AND KIND OF NEXT STEPS. 
          UM, AND THERE ARE A COUPLE OF, OF ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION FOR, UM, COUNCIL MEMBERS AS WELL. 
          SO, UH, ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE KIND OF IN THE, WE'RE IN THE LAST PHASE OF THIS PROJECT, UM, SINCE WE KICKED OFF A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO IN FALL OF 23. 
          UM, AND WE'RE IN THE ADOPTION PHASE, UH, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE PLAN IN OCTOBER OF 2025. 
          UM, PRIOR TO THAT THE, UH, CPAC OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE ALSO RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE DOCUMENT, UM, PRIOR TO PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          SO, UM, ONCE AGAIN AT THE TAIL END OF THIS PROJECT. 
          SO, UH, A COUPLE OF THINGS TO DISCUSS SINCE WE'VE HAD OUR LAST DISCUSSION. 
          THE LAST TIME WE, UM, CONTINUED WAS JANUARY, UH, TO, TO DISCUSS THE ITEM WAS JA THE BEGINNING OF JANUARY. 
          UM, AND BETWEEN THEN AND JANUARY 27TH, UH, 
          [01:15:01]
STAFF DID GO BACK AND MAKE SOME ADDITIONAL CHANGES. 
          UM, AND THIS IS KIND OF A SUMMARY OF THE CHANGES WE MADE, UM, BOTH FROM SOME ITEMS THAT WE IDENTIFIED THAT NEEDED CORRECTION, BUT ALSO FROM SOME OF THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED AT THOSE DISCUSSIONS AS WELL. 
          UM, SO BEFORE, UH, WE TOUCH ON THE FIRST BULLET POINT, WHICH IS, UM, A BIG DISCUSSION, UM, TOPIC FOR THIS, THE COUNCIL. 
          I WANNA TALK, UH, JUST QUICKLY ABOUT SOME OF THE OTHER ITEMS. UM, SO WE DID UPDATE THE RELATED PLANS AND INITIATIVES GRAPHIC, WHICH I'LL SHOW IN A LATER SLIDE BASED UPON FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED. 
          UH, WE ALSO MADE SURE AND DID ANOTHER UPDATE OF ALL OF THE CITATION INFORMATION, UH, WHICH WE SHARED AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THAT UPDATED CITATION LOOKS LIKE TO MAKE SURE IT'S VERY CLEAR OF WHERE THIS INFORMATION IS BEING PULLED FROM. 
          UM, AND THE DATA SOURCE ADDITIONALLY, UM, STAFF UPDATED ANY, UH, LANGUAGE RELATED TO, UH, THE TENS FOR CLARITY AND CONSISTENCY THROUGHOUT THE DOCUMENT. 
          UM, BECAUSE SOME ITEMS HAVE SURPASSED THE TIMELINE THAT WE ANTICIPATED WITH THE COMP PLAN. 
          UM, SO JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN LINE WITH WHERE WE ARE IN RELATION TO OTHER PROJECTS. 
          UM, FOR EXAMPLE, THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN, IT WAS IDENTIFIED AS THE 2025 MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN. 
          WE REMOVE THAT TO AVOID ANY CON CONFUSION IN THE FUTURE, UM, SINCE WE DID NOT ADOPT A NEW MTP IN 2025, THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          UM, AND THEN ONCE AGAIN, SOME MINOR, UM, FORMATTING AND CAPITALIZATION ERRORS THAT WERE CORRECTED. 
          UM, STAFF DID PREPARE A RED LINE INCLUDING ALL OF THESE CHANGES. 
          UH, AND IT WAS IN THE PACKET, IT WAS PREVENTED. 
          SO YOU CAN PHYSICALLY IDENTIFY ALL CHANGES THAT WERE MADE, UM, UH, TO THE DOCUMENT. 
          SO CIRCLING BACK TO THE FIRST, UM, BULLET POINT, UM, THERE WAS A, A PRETTY BROAD CONVERSATION ABOUT THE NAME ADVANCED ADDISON 2050 AND, UM, HOW IT, IT COULD POTENTIALLY GIVE SOMEONE A FALSE, UH, PERSPECTIVE OF THAT. 
          UM, THIS PLAN MAY NOT EVOLVE WITH THE COMMUNITY AS CHANGE AS IT CHANGES OR GROWS, UH, OR THE NEEDS CHANGE. 
          AND SO WE WANTED TO POSE THE OPTION TO, UM, MODIFY THE NAME AND REMOVE 2050 TO ADVANCE ADDISON TO ONCE AGAIN PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CLARITY ON, UH, THE INTENT OF THE DOCUMENT. 
          SO WELCOME ANY FEEDBACK FOR WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, AND THE RED LINE DID INCLUDE THOSE CHANGES IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. 
          UM, BUT WE'D BE HAPPY TO TO ACCEPT FEEDBACK ON THAT. 
          THANK YOU LESLIE. 
          YES, PLEASE. 
          MARLON. 
          YEAH. 
          THANK YOU MAYOR. 
          UM, YEAH, MY FEEDBACK IS, IS THIS IS A VISION DOCUMENT AND WE'RE VISIONING OUT TO 2050. 
          UM, AND I GET SOME PEOPLE MIGHT UM, NOT REALIZE THAT THERE COULD BE UPDATES, MOST LIKELY WILL BE UPDATES, BUT I DO, I DO LIKE, UM, THE NAME ADVANCE ADDISON 2050 P 'CAUSE IT DOES, IT DOES REFLECT, HEY, THIS IS WHEN WE CREATED THIS, UM, AND ADOPTED IT. 
          THIS IS, THIS IS, WE'RE VISIONING OUT TO 2050. 
          YEAH, I I AGREE WITH YOU A HUNDRED PERCENT ON THAT. 
          MARLON IT'S FOR ME, I MEAN, ADVANCED ADDISON IS VERY VAGUE AND IF YOU LOOK AROUND CITIES, ALL DIFFERENT KIND OF ORGANIZATIONS, WHEN THEY DO THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, THEIR, THEIR, THEIR VISIONING WITH VERY FEW EXCEPTIONS, THEY'LL HAVE A YEAR THAT THEY REFERENCE IN THE FUTURE KNOWING THAT THEY WILL UPDATE IT BETWEEN NOW AND THEN. 
          AND, AND IF NOTHING ELSE, IF SOMEBODY'S LOOKING FOR ADDISON'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THEY FIND IT ONLINE, IT JUST AS ADVANCED ADDISON, WELL THEN THEY GOTTA GO AND FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE IS IT, WHICH DOES IT REFERENCE 2025 OR 20 40 20. 
          THEY JUST WON'T KNOW. 
          SO THIS MAKES IT REALLY EASY TO IDENTIFY WHICH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THIS IS. 
          SO I AGREE WITH YOU MARLON. 
          YEAH, AND I AGREE AS WELL. 
          I'D LIKE TO SEE 2050 IN THERE. 
          THERE. 
          THE ONLY OBJECTION I'VE GOT TO THE 2050, I AGREE THAT A DATE LETS SOMEONE KNOW THIS IS THE LATEST, THIS IS THE LATEST VERSION. 
          NO COMPANY IS DOING A 25 YEAR PLAN ANYMORE. 
          AND THE WAY AI AND THE WAY THE WORLD IS CHANGING 25 YEARS TO ME IS JUST WAY TOO FAR IN THE FUTURE TO SAY THIS IS WHAT'S GONNA GUIDE US FOR THAT. 
          UM, I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT. 
          WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT COMPANIES, I'M TALKING ABOUT GOVERNMENT ENTITIES, LARGER NGOS. 
          THIS IS, THIS IS, THIS IS KIND OF THE STANDARD PRACTICE. 
          THE CITY RAN MORE LIKE A COMPANY. 
          WE MIGHT BE MORE EFFICIENT. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE NOT IN THIS, WE'RE NOT A FOR PROPER PROFIT OPERATION. 
          I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE ARE, BUT I, THAT'S WHAT A BUSINESS DOES. 
          NO, WELL, I'M JUST SAYING THE LAST ONE THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE 25 YEARS HAS LASTED 10. 
          WELL, THAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE RANDY, WHY WE JUST DON'T ADMIT THAT THIS IS NOT GONNA BE A 25 YEAR PLAN AND MAKE 
          [01:20:01]
IT ADDISON 2030 OR 2035. 
          I, I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE LOOKING SO FAR OUT WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S CHANGING. 
          MARLON. 
          YEAH, ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE THOUGHTS, UM, I'VE GOT REGARDING, REGARDING YOUR QUESTION IS, SO WHEN WE APPOINTED THIS COMMITTEE, UM, LESLIE HELPED ME WITH THIS, BUT, BUT THEY WERE, THEY WERE TASKED WITH, HEY, WHAT DO WE WANT THE COMMUNITY LOOK TO LOOK LIKE? TO FEEL LIKE, TO BE LIKE IN 25 YEARS OR 2050. 
          2050, RIGHT? IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. 
          IT WAS, THEY SAY YOU DIDN'T SAY, HEY, YOU JUST VISION IT HOWEVER LONG YOU WANT TO OR FIVE YEARS OR 10 YEARS OR, UH, WHATEVER YOU WANNA DO. 
          THEY WERE ALL TOLD, HEY, THIS IS, THIS IS A VISION PLAN FOR 2050. 
          CORRECT. 
          IT WAS VERY, UM, THE VISION WAS EXTREMELY OPEN-ENDED WITHOUT ANY, UM, I'M GONNA SAY CARE FOR FINANCIALS OR OTHER THINGS THAT ARE PERTINENT TO, TO CITY COUNCIL TO DETERMINE. 
          UM, AND OBVIOUSLY THAT WHEN WE HAD ALL OF THOSE, THAT LONG WISH WISHLIST OF THAT WAS, UH, I'M GONNA SAY EXTREME, UH, THAT WAS WHEN WE STARTED GOING THROUGH AND DISCUSSING, OKAY, WHAT IS REALISTIC FOR ADDISON? WHAT FITS WITHIN THE CHARACTER OF OUR COMMUNITY? WHAT ARE THE PRIORITIES FOR OUR COMMUNITY? AND THAT'S WHERE YOU STARTED TO SEE THAT, THAT FRAME UP. 
          UM, SO I KNOW ONE OF THE, I REMEMBER ONE OF THE, I'M GONNA SAY PROBABLY THE BIGGEST, UM, CONCEPT THAT WAS DISCUSSED WITH THE, UH, CPAC WAS A DECK PARK OVER THE DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY AND THROUGH MANY CONVERSATIONS THAT WAS A, UM, IDENTIFIED AS A DREAM, IF YOU WILL, IF THAT'S A GOOD TERM TO USE. 
          UH, THAT COULD EXTREMELY BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY IN MANY WAYS. 
          OBVIOUSLY THERE WAS A LOT OF, UM, BOUNDARIES, UH, THAT RESTRICTED THAT AS A VISION. 
          UM, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS DESIRED, IT OBVIOUSLY WAS NOT RE REALITY EVEN IN 2050. 
          SO JUST AS AN IDEA THERE WAS, UH, WE STARTED OFF WITH, UM, NO BOUNDARIES AND SLOWLY TAILORED TO TO, TO FIT WHAT COULD BE FEASIBLE WITHIN 2050. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM THE REST OF THE YEAH, THE MEMBERS YOU HAVE COMMENT, YOU CAN YOU GUYS JUMP IN ON THE 2050? DAN? OR SORRY. 
          OKAY. 
          WHOEVER. 
          YOU GOOD? YEAH. 
          SO AGAIN, CONCEPTUALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS IS DOING. 
          THIS AGAIN, I'M GONNA LOOK AT THE TOWN AS A FOR PROFIT EITHER, UM, I'M OKAY WITH THE 2050 VISION 'CAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT WHAT WE HAVE LEFT AS LAND TO BE DEVELOPED IS PROBABLY OUR BIGGEST OPEN-ENDED QUESTION. 
          I GUESS. 
          AM I SAYING THAT PROPERLY? SO I'M TOTALLY FINE WITH 2050. 
          UH, I, I SEE PROBLEMS WITH BOTH. 
          SO I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW TO COMMENT ON THE 2050. 
          I JUST, I FEEL LIKE, LIKE AS RANDY SAID, IT'S HARD TO PROJECT OUT 25 YEARS AND REALLY IT'S GETTING HARD TO PROJECT FIVE YEARS. 
          UM, WE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH SOMEONE ON THE DART BOARD AFTER THE LAST MEETING AND I ASKED HIM A QUESTION ABOUT THE DEBT THEY ISSUED AND I SAID, HAS IT BEEN UNANIMOUS ON THE DEBT? AND HE GOES, WE DON'T ISSUE THE DEBT, THE STAFF DOES IT. 
          AND I SAID, THE STAFF DOES IT. 
          AND HE GOES, YEAH, WE HAVE A 20 YEAR VISION PLAN AND IN THE PLAN WE LAY OUT WHAT WE WANT FOR 20 YEARS AND THEN THE STAFF HANDLES THAT. 
          SO I SEE THIS AS A ROADMAP. 
          THAT'S WHAT IT FEELS LIKE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME DOING IT, SO MAYBE THE FIRST TIME FOR ALL OF US 'CAUSE IT WAS 2013 BEFORE. 
          BUT, UM, YOU TALK ABOUT MOBILITY AND WE ALREADY HAD ISSUES WITH MOBILITY JUST IN THE LAST YEAR OR SO OVER THE BIKE LANES. 
          WE HAVE ISSUES WITH, WITH BAR DART AND, AND BUS ROUTES WE HAVE. 
          IT IS HARD TO TELL. 
          SO I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH 2050, BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY POINT IN SAYING TILL 2030, THAT'S JUST TOO SOON. 
          AND 2040, I MEAN, I GUESS AS MUCH AS I'M CONFUSED WITH THE 2050, I'M GONNA SAY, OKAY, LEAVE IT AT 2050. 
          'CAUSE I THINK IT'S BETTER THAN NOT HAVING A DATE AT ALL. 
          BUT I DON'T REALLY LIKE IT THERE, THERE, I'M NOT STUCK TO EITHER ONE OF THEM. 
          I COULD GO EITHER WAY. 
          2050. 
          I DO LIKE, I I I TALKED ABOUT TA TAKING THAT DATE OFF LAST TIME, 2040, YOU KNOW, IT'S A VISION AND IT DOESN'T HAVE THE CLARITY AT THE END OF THE VISION. 
          SO 20 FIFTY'S FINE WITH ME. 
          WHAT, UH, BEFORE I SAY THAT, UM, SO WHAT WAS THE LAST, WAS IT 2013 MM-HMM . 
          CORRECT. 
          SO WAS THERE ANY DATE ON THAT ONE? WAS IT THE 2040? WAS IT THE 20? THERE WAS, UH, NO DATE ON THE LAST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 
          SO IT WAS THE 2013 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 
          I TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT IN OUR LAST DISCUSSION. 
          THAT PLAN WAS NOT, UM, IT WAS MORE INVENTORY FOCUSED OF OPPORTUNITY FOR REDEVELOPMENT. 
          THAT WAS REALLY THE FOCUS OF THAT PLAN. 
          THIS FOCUS OR THIS, UH, PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS, TAKES A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT APPROACH AS IT FOCUSES ON 
          [01:25:02]
MORE, WHETHER IT'S PRESERVATION OR CREATION, DEPENDING UPON YOUR SCENARIO OF MAINTAINING THE ADDISON, UM, CHARACTER AND PROLONGING ADDISON CULTURE. 
          THAT'S REALLY MORE SO THE FOCUS AND NOT SO MUCH SAYING, YOU KNOW, THIS PARTICULAR STRIP CENTER IS RIPE FOR REDEVELOPMENT. 
          WE BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE REDEVELOPED. 
          SO THAT THE, I THINK THERE'S, UM, IT'S REALLY HARD TO COMPARE THE TWO. 
          I WOULD NOT SAY THAT THE 2013 PLAN WAS NEARLY AS VISIONARY AS THE, THE ONE THAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY. 
          WHAT WAS THE ONE BEFORE 2013? THE ONE BEFORE 2013 I BELIEVE WAS 1992. 
          WASN'T THAT A 93? EXCUSE ME. 
          20. 
          20 ADDISON. 
          2020 PLAN. 
          AND WAS THAT SOMETHING IN THE TITLE? I THOUGHT THERE WAS LIKE A VISION 2020 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          YEP. 
          KIND OF GO BY THE WAY THAT WE'VE, UH, POSITIONED THIS IN THE PAST AND, UH, OTHER, YOU KNOW, OTHER TOWNS AND CITIES HAVE, UH, THIS, THIS SAME. 
          SO I WOULD LEAN TO THE 2050. 
          I'M NOT STUCK TO IT. 
          I'M JUST LEAN TO IT. 
          2050. 
          THANKS FOR THAT COMMITMENT. 
          HEY , I'M LEANING THAT WELL. 
          THERE'S THINGS THAT I DON'T LEAN TO AND SO JUST LET YOU KNOW THERE. 
          OKAY. 
          I THINK WE HAVE AT LEAST FOUR OF US THAT ARE GOOD ON 2050. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          I HAVE A FEW MORE SLIDES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YOU'LL ENTERTAIN ME? YES. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          SO, UH, I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT THERE WAS SOME FEEDBACK ON THIS PARTICULAR GRAPHIC WHICH TALKS ABOUT RELATED PLANS AND HOW ALL OF THESE THINGS, UH, WORK TOGETHER WITH, UM, CITY COUNCIL TO, UH, INFLUENCE DECISIONS AND PRIORITIES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. 
          UH, WE DID MAKE A COUPLE OF CHANGES TO THIS SLIDE BASED UPON THAT FEEDBACK. 
          SO WE ADDED A NOTE THAT SAYS THAT THERE, THERE, UM, COULD BE ADDITIONAL, UM, RELEVANT INFORMATION THAT IS NOT INCLUDED ON THIS, ESPECIALLY AS PLANS EVOLVE OR WE GET NEW PLANS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. 
          UM, AND THEN WE DID GO BACK THROUGH AND, UM, ADDED THE WATER MASTER PLAN, WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN, AS WELL AS THE STORM WATER MASTER PLAN AS WELL, WHICH WERE PREVIOUSLY MISSING FROM THE MASTER PLAN LIST THAT WE IDENTIFIED. 
          UM, AND THEN THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO MENTION IS WE DID ADD A REFERENCE TO OUR PLANS AND STUDIES SECTION OF THE DOCUMENT, WHICH IF YOU SELECT THAT IT'S ACTUALLY A LINK. 
          SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT DIGITALLY, IT'LL ACTUALLY TAKE YOU TO THAT SECTION, WHICH EXPANDS UPON OUR OTHER PLANS AND, UH, STUDIES WHICH ARE DIRECTLY REFERENCED HERE. 
          SO IT'S ALL INTENDED TO BE INTERLINKED. 
          A QUESTION ON THE LINKS. 
          ON THE LINKS NOW, THEY CURRENTLY LINK BACK TO THE CONVO CONVEO CONVEO. 
          YES. 
          CONVEO. 
          WILL THEY LINK BACK TO THEMSELVES IN THE PDF? CORRECT. 
          YES. 
          SO RIGHT NOW IT'S IN WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, AND EVEN IN THE DOCUMENT, IT'S ALL IN DRAFT FORM BECAUSE IT'S ALL LINKED WITHIN THE PDF AND TO YOUR RIGHT NOW TO BACK TO YOUR CONVEO. 
          BUT ONCE IT'S, UH, FINAL PUBLISHED DOCUMENT, ALL OF THE LINKS WILL, WILL TAKE YOU DIRECTLY TO THAT SPECIFIC PAGE WITHIN THE DOCUMENT. 
          OKAY. 
          DOES THE PUBLIC HAVE A CURRENT VERSION OF THE DRAFT THAT WE'RE ON? IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE MEETING PACKET, YES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IT WAS INCLUDED LAST WEEK WHEN THIS WAS, UM, INITIALLY INTENDED TO, UM, BE DISCUSSED AND THEN IT WAS INCLUDED FOR THIS WEEK AS WELL. 
          SO WHEN WE HAD IT OPEN FOR A COMMENT THAT WAS ALL THE PUBLIC COULD COMMENT ON IT BACK IN CONVEO BACK IN THE FALL. 
          IS THAT RIGHT? SO AS FAR AS, UM, OR WAS IT JUST PNZ AND UH, COUNSEL? NO, WE HAD A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. 
          IT WAS OPEN FOR, I BELIEVE IT WAS APPROXIMATELY 32 DAYS. 
          UM, THAT WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. 
          AND WE DID HAVE A, UM, PUBLIC MEETING DURING THAT TIME AS WELL, UM, TO GATHER INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY. 
          I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY, YOU KNOW, UH, CITIZENS THAT ARE FOLLOWING IT. 
          SOME OF 'EM ARE MM-HMM . 
          THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE THE CURRENT VERSION UNTIL, UM, IT COMES OUT IN THE COUNCIL MEETING. 
          I DIDN'T KNOW IF ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA, I DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE, UH, WISE TO PUT IT ON THE WEBSITE AS DRAFT. 
          UH OH, IT IS ON, IT IS, WE HAVE A PROJECT WEBSITE AS WELL AND IT IS ON THE PROJECT WEBSITE AS WELL. 
          UM, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY IT HAS BEEN, UM, I FEEL LIKE FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, BEEN VERY CRITICAL THAT WE MAKE THIS RED LINE DOCUMENT SO PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO, IT'S A VERY, IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL DOCUMENT . 
          SO FOR, FOR THE AVERAGE PERSON TO HAVE THE EXTRA TIME TO READ THROUGH THAT DOCUMENT EVERY SINGLE TIME AND TRY TO DECIPHER WHAT CHANGES WERE MADE, THAT'S WHY THE RED LINE'S CREATED. 
          SO YOU CAN THE RED LINE'S ON THE WEBSITE TOO. 
          MM-HMM . 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S THE RED LINE WAS VERY HELPFUL FOR ME IN THIS PACKET, BY THE WAY. 
          'CAUSE I REFERENCED IT A LOT. 
          UM, GOOD. 
          I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IT'S OUT THERE ALSO. 
          AND, UH, ONCE IT'S WHOLE THAT IT WILL REFERENCE ITSELF AND THE PDF ON THE LINKS, UM, IT, GOING BACK TO CONVEO IS, IS, UH, KIND OF A PAIN, UH, TO LOOK BACK? YEAH, BECAUSE IT'S, YOU HAVE TO DO THE, SINCE IT'S AN EMBEDDED PDF, THE LINKS DON'T WORK AS THEY ARE INTENDED TO, AS A STANDALONE PDF DOCUMENT. 
          OKAY, THANKS. 
          ROLLING. 
          UH, ONE MORE TIME, LESLIE, ON THE, UH, BOTTOM RIGHT OF THIS SLIDE MM-HMM . 
          DID YOU SAY THAT THAT WILL BE A LINK? MM-HMM . 
          AND THAT WILL 
          [01:30:01]
LINK TO ALL OF, ALL OF THE PLANS. 
          SO THAT LINKS TO OUR PLANS AND STUDIES PAGE. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          THAT'S GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YEAH, SO ANYTIME YOU SEE, UM, THAT LITTLE ORANGE BOOKLET THAT IS ACTUALLY AN EMBEDDED LINK IN THE DOCUMENT THAT TAKES YOU, WHETHER IT'S WITHIN ANOTHER SECTION WITHIN THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN OR ANOTHER WEBSITE WITHIN OUR, WITHIN OUR, UM, TOWN WEBSITE OR EVEN ANOTHER SOURCE OF INFORMATION AS WELL. 
          YEAH, THAT'S EXTREMELY HELPFUL. 
          MM-HMM . 
          THANK YOU CHRIS. 
          UM, JUST A QUESTION. 
          SO YOU'RE RIGHT, THIS IS LIKE A REALLY SIGNIFICANT DOCUMENT MM-HMM . 
          AND I WORRY THAT SOME THINGS WILL GET LOST MM-HMM . 
          IF WE USE THIS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR IF YOU WANT TO USE IT TO MAYBE SEND TO POTENTIAL DEVELOPERS MM-HMM . 
          I MEAN, HAVE YOU GIVEN THAT ANY THOUGHT, IS THERE LIKE A, A SUMMARY OR AN APPENDIX THAT WE COULD SEND OUT THAT MIGHT GET THE POINT ACROSS WITHOUT HAVING THIS SOMEONE GO THROUGH 800 PAGES? YEAH, SO WE DO HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IN THE DOCUMENT. 
          UM, I CAN'T TELL YOU THE PAGE NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT IT'S IN THE FIRST COUPLE PAGES. 
          UM, SO THAT COULD BE AN OPTION. 
          I THINK THERE'S ALSO A LOT OF VERY, THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT. 
          A LOT OF IT, UM, IT HAS DIFFERENT AUDIENCES. 
          SO FOR EXAMPLE, SOME OF THE IMPLEMENTATION IS MORE TAILORED, GEARED TOWARDS STAFF AS, UH, WHAT, WHAT PROJECTS DO WE NEED TO WORK ON? WHAT ARE OUR PRIORITIES? WHO DO WE NEED TO COLLABORATE WITH? UM, I THINK THERE ARE, UM, VERY SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF THE DOCUMENT OR EVEN PAGES MAPS THAT ARE MORE PERTINENT TO DEVELOPERS. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DEFINITELY CREATE A MORE OF A SNAPSHOT LIKE BOOKLET, IF YOU WILL. 
          THAT CAN BE A, HERE'S THE LINK TO THE FULL DOCUMENT, BUT HERE'S REALLY BIG HIGHLIGHTS. 
          UM, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN EASILY DO AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE'LL DO ANYWAYS ON OUR WEBPAGE. 
          UM, AND THAT WE CAN ASSIST ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITH THAT. 
          THAT'S GREAT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT, I GOT A FEW MORE SLIDES. 
          UM, SO ONCE AGAIN THIS, THIS IS JUST THE COMPLETE UPDATED GRAPHIC, UM, WITH THE CHANGES SHOWED ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE. 
          UM, SO BEFORE I TALK ABOUT NEXT STEPS, THERE WERE FOUR COMMENTS RECEIVED, RECEIVED IN CONVEO, UM, I BELIEVE ONE FROM DARREN AND THREE FROM THE MAYOR. 
          AND I BELIEVE WE WERE ABLE TO, UM, INCORPORATE ALL OF THE MAYOR'S COMMENTS. 
          AND THEN THERE WAS, UM, I THINK, UM, DARREN, YOUR COMMENT WAS ASKING ABOUT, UH, WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A LINK THAT WAS RELEVANT OR NOT AND IT WAS REFERENCING CONNECTIVITY AND THAT LINK TOOK YOU BACK TO THE CONNECTIVITY CHAPTER. 
          'CAUSE THAT PARAGRAPH TALKED ABOUT CONNECTIVITY. 
          SO THAT WAS, UM, ONCE AGAIN GOING BACK TO WHERE THOSE LINKS AND REFERENCES WERE TO TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTOOD WHAT THAT WAS. 
          CON THE CONVEYOR CONFUSION. 
          MM-HMM . 
          I TRIED TO DELETE THAT COMMENT. 
          SORRY. 
          GOTCHA. 
          NO, YOU'RE GOOD. 
          I COULDN'T, UH, I APPRECIATE, I APPRECIATE THAT YOU, THAT YOU PROVIDED FEEDBACK, SO I JUST WANTED TO THROW THAT OUT THERE AS WHERE AS WELL THAT THOSE WERE INCORPORATED IN THE RED LINE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, AND SO LOOKING AT NEXT STEPS, SO OBVIOUSLY WE'RE, UM, BEFORE YOU, IT IS FEBRUARY 3RD. 
          I APOLOGIZE THAT DID NOT GET UPDATED FROM THE LAST MEETING, UM, TO TALK ABOUT ANY EDITS OR POTENTIAL UPDATES. 
          WE'VE RECEIVED FEEDBACK ON KIND OF OUR ONE SIGNIFICANT OUTSTANDING QUESTION REGARDING THE 2050 ITEM. 
          AND SO RIGHT NOW, UM, IT IS THE INTENT THAT WE WILL COME BACK NEXT WEEK ON FEBRUARY 10TH FOR, UM, POTENTIAL ADOPTION OF THE PLAN. 
          BUT WE'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS AT THIS POINT. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS AT, AT THIS TIME, HOWARD? JUST, JUST ONE ON THE PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT I'VE BEEN A PART OF UP UNTIL NOW, IT'S LIKE WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE VOTE TO ADOPT IF THE PUBLIC HEARING BRINGS UP ISSUES THAT IF WE HAVE THINGS THAT MAYBE NEED TO BE CHANGED, SOMEONE BRINGS SOMETHING UP, WE HAVEN'T THOUGHT OF, DO WE HAVE TIME TO CHANGE IT OR DO WE ADOPT IT WITH THE CHANGE? OR HOW, HOW'S THAT ADOPTION PROCESS WORK WHEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS, THERE'S NO TIME IN BETWEEN THE TWO SAME DAY. 
          YEAH. 
          SO I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE OF OPTIONS, UM, THAT COULD BE ADOPTED WITH CHANGES AS RECOMMENDED WITHIN THE, THE MOTION BY COUNSEL. 
          UM, THERE COULD BE, DEPENDING UPON THE AMOUNT OF CHANGES THAT COULD BE TABLED TO A LATER DATE, UM, FOR ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AND OR EDITS, I BELIEVE THOSE ARE LIKELY THE OPTIONS ARE. 
          YEAH, I MEAN ULTIMATELY IT'S COUNCIL'S DECISION, YOU AND LESLIE'S, RIGHT? IF IT'S SOMETHING MINOR AND EVERYONE AGREES, JUST YOU CAN JUST ADOPT IT AND SAY WITH THIS CHANGE AND WE MAKE THE CHANGE. 
          BUT IF YOU ALL ARE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH ADOPTING IT AT THE TIME, THEN DON'T ADOPT IT. 
          TABLE IT FOR ANOTHER TIME. 
          SO I MEAN, THAT'S ULTIMATELY A COUNCIL'S DISCRETION. 
          YOU'RE NOT FORCED TO VOTE FOR IT ON THE 10TH WHERE THERE'S GONNA BE A PUBLIC HEARING, YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO VOTE FOR IT OR YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO NOT VOTE FOR IT, IF THAT IS HELPFUL. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, RANDY HOWARD WAS JUST TALKING, I UNDERSTAND, 
          [01:35:01]
UNDERSTAND A LOT, UM, WITH ALL OF THE TRANSPORTATION THINGS MM-HMM . 
          THAT ARE GOING ON RIGHT NOW CURRENTLY. 
          UH, WOULDN'T IT BE MORE PRUDENT TO PUT THIS OFF UNTIL WE CAN FIGURE IN OUR TRANSPORTATION SITUATION AFTER THE MAY ELECTION? UM, SO I GUESS I'LL SAY BROADLY THAT THIS, BECAUSE THIS PLAN IS VISIONARY, IT DOES, IT'S NOT AS PRESCRIPTIVE AS SOME OF THE OTHER DOCUMENTS OR PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING WORKED ON. 
          UM, SO FOR EXAMPLE, AND I CAN'T GIVE YOU A PAGE, I CAN TELL YOU A PAGE NUMBER. 
          UM, THERE'S AN ENTIRE SECTION ABOUT HOW ADDISON SHOULD CONSIDER THE CREATION OF AN INTERN, YOUR INTERNAL CIRCULATOR TO HELP SUPPORT LOCAL BUSINESSES AND GET PEOPLE, UM, AROUND TOWN WITHIN ADDISON. 
          UM, AND I THINK THAT'S, UM, I DON'T WANNA JUMP AHEAD, BUT MAYBE PART OF THE CONVERSATION RELATED TO MOBILITY. 
          UM, SO I DON'T NECESS AND IT'S MY OPINION, UM, THAT THIS DOES IS NOT PRESCRIPTIVE AND THAT WE HAVE OR UTILIZING DART, BUT THAT WE SHOULD MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON MICRO MOBILITY, A CIRCULATOR, THINGS LIKE THAT, WHICH I BELIEVE IS STILL THE INTENT. 
          IT JUST MAY LOOK DIFFERENT OR UNIQUE, WHICH ONCE AGAIN, THIS DOCUMENT'S NOT PRESCRIPTIVE AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. 
          WELL, AND I, I APPRECIATE YOU SAYING THAT AND I I WASN'T GOING TO USE THAT FOUR LETTER WORD THAT YOU USED, BUT WE ARE, I THINK LATER IN THE NIGHT GONNA TALK ABOUT POSSIBLY OTHER THINGS COMING FORWARD MM-HMM . 
          AND, UH, TO POSSIBLY REPLACE AND, AND HAVE OPTIONS AND, UH, AS, AS LONG AS, AS LONG AS IT IS FLEXIBLE AND MALLEABLE, UH, GOING FORWARD, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT A HILL I WANNA DIE ON, BUT IT'S, UH, WE, WE ARE JUST IN THE MIDDLE RIGHT NOW. 
          YOU KNOW, WHAT, TWO MONTHS AGO WE COULD HAVE SAID WE, WE KIND OF KNOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE RIGHT NOW. 
          EVERYTHING IS, UH, IS BEING MOLDED AND SHAPED AND TALKED ABOUT AND, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT, WHY A PLAN LIKE THIS, WHAT THE ISSUE WOULD BE IN, IN PUSHING IT BACK A COUPLE OF MONTHS SO WE CAN IRON IT OUT. 
          I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY, LIKE YOU SAY IT'S VISIONARY MM-HMM . 
          SO IT'S NOTHING THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE NEXT WEEK. 
          SO WITH THAT, I'LL JUST LEAVE, LEAVE IT WITH YOU. 
          YEAH, I GUESS MY, SO MY RESPONSE TO THAT, UM, SO JUST TO FOLLOW UP THE CIRCULATOR IF YOU WANNA LOOK AT IT, IS ON ONE PAGE, 1 58, UH, THAT'S WHERE THAT DISCUSSION IS, BUT OF THE DOCUMENT. 
          BUT I GUESS MY FEEDBACK ON WAITING IS THAT, SO THIS PROJECT KICKED OFF IN FALL OF 2023 AND A LOT OF THE INFORMATION YOU SEE, ESPECIALLY AT THE, THE FRONT END, THE MARKET STUDY FOR THIS DOCUMENT WAS CREATED IN 2024. 
          UM, IT'S NOW 2026 AND WE'RE ACTUALLY PROBABLY AT THE POINT WHERE WE NEED TO FOCUS ON REVISITING A LOT OF THAT INFORMATION SO THAT WE CAN PUT OUT AND UM, SPOILER, ONE OF THE, THE ITEMS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION IS TO DO A PERIODIC, UH, LIKE MARKET REPORT, MARKET STUDY DEMOGRAPHIC REPORT THAT WE WOULD PUBLISH FROM OUR DEPARTMENT, UM, FOR THE PUBLIC. 
          SO WE'RE AT THE POINT WHERE WE'RE NEEDING TO DO SOME SIGNIFICANT UPDATES ON THIS INFORMATION. 
          SO AS WE CONTINUE TO PUSH, THIS INFORMATION'S GETTING OUTDATED. 
          SO I GUESS THAT'S MY LIKE FEEDBACK IS WE CAN CONTINUE TO KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD, BUT IT'S JUST GONNA CONTINUE TO GET OUTDATED AS WE PROCEED. 
          I WOULD JUST, I WOULD ADD, YOU KNOW, AND I, LESLIE DESCRIBED WELL FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE HOW WE FELT ABOUT THIS PLAN, BUT WE ALSO, AS WE MENTIONED AT STRATEGIC PLANNING MEETING, WE ALSO LOOKED AT THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND SAID THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT IMPACTED BY THE DECISION ON DART. 
          SO WE'VE DECIDED TO DELAY THAT AND REVISIT IT IN THE SUMMER. 
          SO THAT WAS, AS WE LOOKED AT THOSE TWO DOCUMENTS, THAT'S WHERE WE LANDED. 
          WELL THAT'S WHAT WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST. 
          THEY'RE ALMOST SITTING, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE AKIN DOCUMENTS AND UH, SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT INFORMATION THAT WAS DEVELOPED IN 2024 TO USE YOUR WORDS, ARE BECOMING OUTDATED IN 2026? SORRY, NOT WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO A PLAN FOR 2050 AND THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE OUTDATED. 
          SORRY, I'M TALKING ABOUT DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION, RIGHT? I'M JUST SAYING YEAH, SO LIKE POPUL, WELL, POPULATION INFORMATION. 
          YES. 
          UM, MY INTENT WAS THE FIRST SECTION, WHICH IS THE INTRODUCTION, WHICH IS DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION. 
          THE MARKET REPORT, WHICH IS OUR CURRENT, FOR EXAMPLE, IT, THE MARKET REPORT IDENTIFIES AT THE TIME THAT WAS A SNAPSHOT IN TIME OF WHAT OUR CURRENT, UM, LIKE PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT, WHICH WAS LEASING AND BUILD ON THE PARKWAY, THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          THAT'S UNDERSTANDS YEAH. 
          WE'RE ALREADY OUTDATED ON YOUR INFORMATION IS GOOD. 
          MY POINT IS THINGS CHANGE RAPIDLY. 
          YEP. 
          ALRIGHT, THANKS. 
          ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS, LESLIE? SO I HAVE A, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          QUESTIONS. 
          YEAH. 
          SO ON SOME THE 
          [01:40:01]
MARKET REPORT, UM, IF WE DELAY THIS, IT'S JUST GONNA BE OUTDATED AGAIN. 
          I MEAN THAT'S, THAT'S JUST THE FACT. 
          IT'S A MOVING TARGET. 
          IT'S A MOVING TARGET. 
          WE'VE GOTTA, WE'VE GOTTA FREEZE IT AND MOVE ON. 
          MM-HMM . 
          UM, SO HOW DO YOU HAVE A MECHANISM IN THIS REPORT? I, I DIDN'T SEE IT. 
          UM, SO I, I MUST, I MIGHT HAVE JUST MISSED IT AND I WASN'T LOOKING FOR IT. 
          SO IT'S PROBABLY IN THERE, UM, THAT DOES, UH, POINT TO AN UPDATED MARKET INFORMATION. 
          'CAUSE YOU MENTIONED THAT THAT IS SOMETHING PLANNED TO PERIODICALLY DO LIKE EVERY TWO YEARS ANYWAY. 
          YEAH, SO THE MARKET REPORT IS ACTUALLY AN APPENDIX TO THIS DOCUMENT. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S REFERENCED BUT IT'S NOT ACTUALLY ADOPTED AS POLICY. 
          IT'S JUST INFORMATION JUST AS ANY OTHER LIKE DEMOGRAPHIC, UM, REPORT WOULD BE. 
          UM, SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD PUBLISH ON OUR WEBSITE AND SO IT WOULD BE LINKED AND SO WE COULD ACTUALLY GO IN AND UPDATE THE LINKS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT REFERENCES THE UPDATED OKAY. 
          UM, REPORT. 
          UM, AND THAT'S SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, WE COULD POTENTIALLY IDENTIFY AND ADD TWO LINKS SO IT IDENTIFIES THE 2024 MARKET REPORT AND THEN THE 2027 MARKET REPORT AS AN EXAMPLE. 
          UM, BUT THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT WE'RE JUST, UM, LINKING INFORMATION THAT TYPICALLY DOES NOT COME BACK BEFORE COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION WHEN IT'S NOT CHANGING ANY OF THE CONTENT OF THE DOCUMENT. 
          AND REGARDING, UH, THE CIRCULATOR, FOR EXAMPLE, ON SOME OF THE MOBILITY COMPONENTS. 
          MM-HMM . 
          IT IS AGNOSTIC. 
          IT'S, IT'S, IT DOESN'T POINT TO DART NECESSARILY ON THAT PAGE. 
          AND I, I WAS LOOKING FOR THAT TO SEE HOW TIGHT IT IS TO A PARTICULAR VENDOR AND I, I DIDN'T SEE THAT IT WAS, THERE WAS SOME OTHER REFERENCES ALONG THE WAY IN SOME SIDEBARS ABOUT DART, BUT THE ONE ON, UH, 1 58, WHICH I'M LIKE, OH WOW, WE ALREADY HAVE THAT KIND OF IGNORANT SOMETIMES THAT'S OKAY. 
          BUT WE FIND ALL THE INFORMATION IT'S ALREADY THERE, UM, IS NOT SPECIFICALLY TIED TO DART AS A VENDOR. 
          SO I KNOW YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE HAPPY WITH ME, BUT COULD WE CHANGE THE NAME TO ADVANCE THAT ADDISON 2040 AND BEYOND? COULD WE ADD JUST THE BEYOND? SO WE, I THINK 2050 IS TOO FAR. 
          I THINK WE ALREADY DECIDED THAT HOWARD, I I KNEW YOU WERE  SUGGEST. 
          ALRIGHT, ANYTHING ELSE LESLIE ON THIS ONE? I DON'T HAVE ANY. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR FEEDBACK. 
          PROBABLY A GOOD TIME FOR A 10 MINUTE BREAK. 
          SO IT'S, UH, SEVEN 14, SO WE'LL START BACK UP. 
          7 24. 
          OKAY. 
          IT IS 7 25 AND WE WILL COME BACK INTO, UH, SESSION AFTER OUR BREAK AND UH, WE'LL MOVE RIGHT INTO ITEM 
          [c.  Present and discuss City Council goals and communication with Dallas Area Rapid Transit System (DART).]
FOUR C, UH, FOUR CS PRESENT AND DISCUSS CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND COMMUNICATION WITH THE DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM DARTS. 
          AND, UH, JUST FOR COUNCIL'S REFERENCE, THERE'S A DOCUMENT AT YOUR PLACE, UH, SAYS ADDISON DART DRAFTED THE TOP AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS PROVIDED BY, UH, DARREN GARDNER. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? YES. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU DARREN ASHLEY, GOOD EVENING, MAYOR COUNCIL ASHLEY SCHROER, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER. 
          UM, LIKE THE MAYOR SAID, WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT, UM, COUNCIL GOALS AND ANY COMMUNICATION THAT WE WANT TO HAVE FROM COUNCIL TO DART. 
          SO ON THE JANUARY 27TH MEETING, COUNCIL CALLED AN ELECTION TO WITHDRAW FROM DART IN MAY OF 2026. 
          WITH THAT, WE'VE HAD SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT DOES COUNCIL WANT TO SEND A LETTER TO DART AND WHAT DOES THAT LETTER NEED TO SAY? SO BEFORE I BORE YOU WITH ANOTHER ONE OF MY PRESENTATIONS, 'CAUSE I'M SURE Y'ALL ARE ENJOYING ALL OF MY PRESENTATIONS, UM, DO YOU WANT TO SEND A LETTER TO DART IF, IF THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL DOES, I'LL GO THROUGH, GIVE THE REST OF MY PRESENTATION. 
          IF YOU DON'T, THEN IT'S THE LAST, YOU'LL SEE ME TONIGHT AND I'LL BE BACK UP HERE NEXT WEEK. 
          MARLON, THANK YOU MAYOR. 
          UM, I WOULD LIKE TO, I WOULD LIKE US TO. 
          AND UH, ONE OF THE THOUGHTS BEHIND THAT IS OVER, OVER THE LAST, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE SINCE FOR SOME TIME AT SOME POINT OR ANOTHER, I'VE HEARD EVERY, EVERY SINGLE COUNCIL MEMBER, EVERY SINGLE ONE THAT HAS SAID, SAID TO ME, ARE, YOU KNOW, IN SOME FORM OR ANOTHER, HEY, WE WANT TO WORK WITH DART. 
          NOW WE ALL HAVE OUR OWN DI IDEAS OF HOW THAT MIGHT WORK, BUT EVERY, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU HAS SAID, WE WANNA WORK WITH DART. 
          SO IF WE WANNA WORK WITH DART, I MEAN, WHAT'S THE, LET'S LET'S PUT TOGETHER THIS, THIS A SOLUTION OF HOW WE CAN DO THAT. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          SO MY QUESTION, CAN I, LEMME JUST COMMENT ON THAT REAL QUICK, CHRIS. 
          UM, SO MY QUESTION TO, TO THE COUNCIL THEN WOULD BE, OKAY, GOOD. 
          LET'S, LET'S, WE HAVE TO ASK THAT QUESTION. 
          UH, BUT THE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS IF PUT, PUT A LETTER TOGETHER, SEND IT TO DART, AND WE COME TO AN AGREEMENT WITH DART ON WHATEVER THAT CONTENT IS, WOULD THAT CHANGE ANYTHING IN REGARDS TO THE MAY ELECTION? YES, FOR ME, DEPENDING 
          [01:45:01]
ON WHAT WE PUT TOGETHER. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, I AGREE WITH WHAT MARLIN IS SAYING. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE NEED TO HAVE THOSE GOALS DOWN ON PAPER. 
          WE, WE, WE HAVE THIS ELECTION COMING UP IN MAY. 
          I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH IT, BUT YOU KNOW, WE ALL HAVE SAID TO MARLIN'S POINT THAT WE WANNA WORK WITH DART. 
          SO THIS WILL BE A START OF, HEY, WHAT DO WE REALLY WANT? IF WE'RE GONNA NEGOTIATE? I MEAN, WE CAN'T NEGOTIATE UNLESS WE REACH OUT TO THEM AGAIN, THAT CONVERSATION. 
          BUT THEN ALSO THE THING THAT I DON'T WANT TO HAPPEN IS I, I WANT US TO STAY INTO DART. 
          YOU GUYS KNOW THAT. 
          UM, BUT IF THE VOTE GOES THE WAY I HOPE IT DOES, I DON'T WANT THE CONVERSATION WITH DART TO STOP BECAUSE I DO THINK THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS THAT DART CAN DO AND DO BETTER, AND I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GOOD WAY TO START THAT PROCESS AS WELL. 
          OKAY. 
          GOOD POINTS. 
          UH, I, I DO WANT THE LETTER, UH, I DID DRAFT SOME POINTS TO START WITH AND, UM, SO WHAT WOULD WE DO WITH IT IF, UM, IF, IF DART IS AGREEABLE TO THESE THINGS? I MEAN THAT'S, THAT'S A PRETTY SERIOUS ASK. 
          UM, UH, I, I WOULD CONSIDER, I WOULDN'T BE REAL, REAL STRONG, BUT I WOULD CONSIDER, AND I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE BEFORE WE WOULD HAVE TIME TO RESCIND, BUT I THINK IT, IT WOULD GIVE THE, UH, VISIBILITY, UH, TO THE, TO THE VOTERS OF WHAT DART'S WILLING TO DO. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. 
          AND IT DOESN'T STOP THIS, THIS, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT. 
          WHATEVER WE COME UP WITH IS, IS WHAT WE WANT FOR ADDISON WITH DART AS AS A PARTNER. 
          UM, SO IT GOES PAST, UH, YES OR NO VOTE IN MAY TO, UH, CHRIS'S POINT. 
          OKAY. 
          DAN? UH, AGAIN, IN SUPPORT OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, 100%. 
          I DEFINITELY WANT US TO DRAFT A LETTER OF POINTS OF INTEREST OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN THAT MAY CONTINUE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT RESCINDING IF IT COMES BACK IN TIME AND I DON'T THINK IT WOULD EITHER, BUT CERTAINLY WANT THE LETTER DRAFTED. 
          OKAY. 
          VERY GOOD. 
          LET'S MOVE FORWARD. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          SO AS WE'VE DISCUSSED IN THE PAST SURE. 
          I THINK THERE WAS FOUR , WELL YOU ALREADY HAD FOUR. 
          WAS THAT WELL, WE'RE, WE'RE GOING. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE'RE GOING FORWARD. 
          I WAS GONNA SAY, I, I I'M FINE WITH THE LETTER, BUT I FEEL LIKE THE CITIES, THE SIX CITIES OR FOUR OR FIVE OF THE CITIES NEED TO COME TO ONE AGREEMENT THAT DART CAN'T, UH, YOU KNOW, GIVE A DIFFERENT DEAL TO EACH CITY. 
          IT HAS TO BE ONE. 
          SO WE CAN DRAFT OUR LETTER, BUT IT'S NOT GONNA BE EXACTLY LIKE THE OTHER CITY'S LETTERS AND THEY'RE NOT ALL THE SAME AS EACH OTHER EITHER, SO. 
          CORRECT. 
          I DON'T SAY IT'S A WASTE OF TIME. 
          I THINK WE SHOULD LET DART KNOW WHAT WE WOULD LIKE, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY'LL BE ABLE TO MEET WHATEVER WE'RE, OUR REQUESTS ARE WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME. 
          AND THEY PROBABLY WOULDN'T ANYWAY. 
          IT WOULD BE A BACK AND FORTH NEGOTIATION, BUT I'M IN FAVOR OF THE LETTER. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE HAVE, ARE WE JUST SAYING A LETTER OR WILL THIS COUNCIL THEN SEE THE LETTER AND APPROVE THE LETTER BEFORE IT'S SENT? WE'LL SEE. 
          WELL, I MEAN, WE CAN, WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. 
          I, I, I THINK IN INTEREST OF TIME WE WOULD HEAR THE DIRECTION TONIGHT AND TODAY WE WOULD DRAFT A LETTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT DIRECTION. 
          IF YOU ALL WANT TO COME BACK AND SEE THE LETTER BEFORE IT GOES OUT, WE CAN DO THAT. 
          IT JUST ADDS SOME MORE TIME. 
          IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A DELAY. 
          SO I THINK IF, IF WE GIVE GOOD DIRECTION, I THINK THAT CAN, THEY CAN, UH, CRAFT WHATEVER LETTER WE NEED. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT SPEAKING OF DELAY, I DON'T CARE WHAT LETTER GOES OUT AND WHAT DART AGREES TO, I MEAN, THEY COULD AGREE TO, TO CUT EVERYTHING AND, AND TO AGREE TO EVERYTHING THAT EVERY CITY AGREES TO, BUT THERE'S TOO MANY LAYERS TO THAT ONION. 
          DALLAS CITY COUNCIL'S GOTTA APPROVE, LEGISLATURE'S GOTTA APPROVE, THE GOVERNOR'S GOTTA APPROVE. 
          AND AT ANY POINT ALONG THAT CHAIN SOMEONE SAYS, NO, WE'RE STUCK FOR ANOTHER SIX YEARS. 
          SO YOU TALK ABOUT DELAY THAT, THAT THERE'S WHERE YOUR DELAY IS. 
          WELL, WE'RE NOT. 
          OKAY. 
          ANYWAY, GO AHEAD. 
          SO AS PART OF THE ONGOING CONVERSATIONS, AND WE DISCUSSED THIS LAST WEEK, THE CITY OF FARMERS BRANCH SENT A LETTER, AND I'M JUST GONNA GO THROUGH THESE VERY HIGH LEVEL I YOU'VE SEEN THE LETTERS. 
          UM, THEY REQUESTED, UH, A PHASED RETURN OF THEIR SALES TAX STARTING AT 25%, UM, AND THEN INCREASING TO 50% BY 2031. 
          AND THEN, UM, ALSO THE ONE CITY ONE VOTE, BASICALLY CHANGING THE GOVERNANCE. 
          UH, THE CITY OF IRVING REQUESTED A 5% ANNUALLY FOR THE FIVE YEAR TERM, UM, AND THEN HAD DIFFERENT, UM, DIFFERENT RETURNS AS FAR AS 5% RETURN OF THE 1 CENT SALES TAX WOULD BE SUSPENDED IF THEY MET CERTAIN RIDERSHIP NUMBERS. 
          AND THEN ALSO WANTING THE GOVERNANCE REFORM, PLANO HAD THEIR OWN, WHICH WAS A RETURN ON THE GENERAL MOBILITY PLAN, 25% IN 2026, INCREASING TO 50% 
          [01:50:01]
ANNUALLY BY 2029 TO 2031 AND CHANGES IN THE GOVERNANCE REFORM. 
          SO WHAT DO WE WANT OUR GOALS TO BE FOR DART FINANCIAL REFORM? DO WE WANNA REDUCE OUR MEMBER CONTRIBUTION BY A CERTAIN PERCENT? DO WE WANT A CERTAIN PERCENT BACK AS PART OF A GMP PROGRAM? DO WE WANT SERVICE FLEXIBILITY SO THAT WAY WE CAN PROVIDE THINGS LIKE THE MICRO MOBILITY, THE CIRCULATOR AT OUR COST VERSUS AT DART'S COST, UM, AND THEN CHANGES TO THE GOVERNANCE. 
          SO THESE ARE THE KIND OF JUST SOME THINGS THAT WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER BASED ON WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM COUNCIL, BASED ON WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING. 
          UM, ONE THING THAT I WILL SAY IS I THINK WE DO NEED TO BE VERY SPECIFIC IN THE ASK AS FAR AS WHAT ARE WE LOOKING FOR BACK FROM DART? IS IT A A, A CONTINUED GMP PROGRAM? IS IT A REDUCTION IN OUR 1 CENT THAT WE CONTRIBUTE DOWN TO 75% HALF? WHAT DOES THAT NEED TO BE SO THAT WHEN WE DRAFT THIS LETTER, IT CAN BE VERY DETAILED IN WHAT COUNSEL IS EXPECTING. 
          OKAY. 
          WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO START THIS DISCUSSION? I WONDER? SO I WOULD SAY, LET'S START WITH THE BIG, UM, WHICH IS THE, THE FINANCIAL SIDE OF IT. 
          WHAT ARE WE LOOKING FOR ON THE FINANCIAL SIDE? OKAY. 
          I'D LIKE TO START JUST BY ASKING, ASKING A QUESTION. 
          SO WHY ARE SOME OF THESE OTHER CITIES USING THE GMP TO GET THE REFUND IF YOU DO IT THAT WAY, IS THAT WHATEVER THAT ENDS UP BEING, A QUARTER OR HALF A CENT, DOES THAT HAVE TO GO TOWARDS MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION? THERE IS A GOOD, SO YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. 
          THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE THAT DART COULD PUT RESTRICTIONS ON THAT, THAT SAY IT HAS TO GO BACK TO MOBILITY, TRANSPORTATION, YOU KNOW, TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS. 
          UM, SOME CITIES WANT IT IN THE, IN THE WAY OF REDUCING THE OVERALL CONTRIBUTION THAT THEY HAVE TO MAKE SO THAT THEY CAN DEDICATE THAT TO HOWEVER THEY WANT, THE STREET MAINTENANCE TAX, HOWEVER THEY WANNA DO, UM, EVERY CITY THAT, THAT'S THE PART I THINK THAT'S DIFFICULT OF THIS IS EVERY CITY KIND OF HAS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT ASK, UM, BUT HOPEFULLY THIS MANAGER GROUP CAN GET TOGETHER AND WE CAN MAYBE GET TO ONE ASK. 
          I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. 
          SO IN, IN IRVING'S, THEY, THEY TALK ABOUT, UM, BEGINNING IN THE SECOND YEAR OF THE ILA, WHAT, WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE ILA? IT'S AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT. 
          IT'S BASICALLY THE CONTRACT WITH DART THAT SAYS WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEY'RE SPECIFICALLY ASKING JUST 5% RETURN ON THE 1 CENT SALES TAX, NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GMP, SO THAT THAT'S THEIRS TO USE ANYWAY. 
          THEY WOULD LIKE. 
          WELL THAT'S AN SO SORRY. 
          I WOULD JUST MAYBE TO THAT POINT. 
          AND I THINK IT'S A REALLY GOOD DISTINCTION TO MAKE. 
          UM, SO WHEN WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ILAS, THAT'S JUST AN, THAT'S AN AGREEMENT JUST WITH DART TO SAY YOU'RE GONNA GIVE US A PERCENTAGE BACK, WHICH WILL BE USED AS A GMP PROGRAM, WHICH MEANS IT HAS TO BE USED ON MOBILITY, TRANSPORTATION. 
          ULTIMATELY IT HAS TO BE APPROVED BY DART. 
          HOW THOSE ARE SPENT. 
          UM, I WOULD JUST SAY SPECIFICALLY TO IRVINGS THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY, THEY START AT 5%, BUT THEN IT INCREASES, IF THEY DON'T HIT METRICS, IT GOES 10 15. 
          RIGHT. 
          INCREASES OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS. 
          I WOULD ALSO SAY DART ULTIMATELY, AND THEY'VE SAID THIS IN OUR CONVERSATIONS AS OF LAST WEEK AS WE MET WITH THE C MANAGERS, THE NEGOTIATION CONTINUE. 
          THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A ONE SIZE FIT ALL FIT. 
          IF THEY HAVE A SOLUTION AT ALL, IT WILL BE A ONE SIZE FIT ALL FITS ALL SOLUTION. 
          THEY'RE NOT GONNA HAVE DIFFERENT ILAS WITH DIFFERENT CITIES, SO UNDERSTANDABLY. 
          UM, SO IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE ADD TO THAT. 
          I, BUT I THINK THAT DISTINCTION OF THE ILA VERSUS WHAT HAPPENED AT THE LEGISLATURE IS REALLY IMPORTANT. 
          UM, I THINK SOME OF WHAT YOU SEE AS FAR AS ASKING FOR ILAS IS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT DART CAN ACTUALLY DO RIGHT NOW. 
          THEY CAN COMMIT TO GO TO THE LEGISLATURE AND WORK TOGETHER WHEN THE LEGISLATURE CONVENES NEXT TIME. 
          BUT THAT'S ALL THAT WOULD BE IS A COMMITMENT. 
          UM, SO I THINK THAT'S SOME OF WHAT YOU SEE BY THE, BY DIMENSIONS OF THE ILAS THROUGHOUT HERE, THROUGHOUT THE DOCUMENTS. 
          RIGHT? 'CAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT, AT THE DATES THAT THEY HAVE ON THERE, IT'S OVER THE NEXT FIVE TO SIX YEARS, WHICH WOULD GET US TO THAT NEXT SIX YEAR POINT. 
          SO I HAD INCLUDED MY NOTES HERE AND I, I JUST WANT TO JUST KINDA EXPLAIN IT FIRST OF ALL, LIKE THE, IF YOU NOTICED ON THE TOP SECTION ADDISON DART DRAFT, UM, THAT'S KIND OF THE THOUGHTS THAT I PUT TOGETHER. 
          UH, BASED ON THE BOTTOM SECTION, ADDISON TRANSPORTATION, THAT'S, SO THAT'S KIND OF JUST SCRATCH. 
          SO ADD SOME TRANSPORTATION AND BELOW AND ON THE BACK THAT'S JUST SCRATCH THOUGHTS. 
          SO ENHANCED UP ON THE TOP PART YOU SEE ENHANCED 
          [01:55:01]
ON BULLET NUMBER THREE AND BULLET NUMBER FIVE. 
          BULLET NUMBER FIVE IS AN ACCIDENT, DUPLICATE. 
          SO TAKE THAT OUT. 
          BUT, SO THAT'S WHAT THIS DOCUMENT IS, IS PICKING OUT OF WHAT THE OTHER CITIES, UH, HAD ALREADY COME UP WITH. 
          AND THEN SOME THINGS SPECIFIC FOR ADDISON, UH, WE CAN'T DO THE SILVER LINE 'CAUSE IT'S IT'S INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S ALREADY THERE. 
          SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT DART WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE. 
          SO THAT'S WHY I SUGGESTED THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD ASK FOR CONSIDER, UH, EXPRESS BUS SERVICE TO DOWNTOWN. 
          UH, WE HAD THAT, IT WENT AWAY. 
          I DON'T KNOW THE DETAIL BEHIND WHY THAT WENT AWAY. 
          AND THEN PARATRANSIT, THEY'RE ALREADY DOING PARATRANSIT AND THEN, YOU KNOW, TALKING ABOUT A SALES TAX, UH, RETURN, UH, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THAT'S A GMP OR SOME OTHER MECHANISM THAT GOES THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE WHENEVER IT'S, IT IS TIME TO GO THERE. 
          UM, THE, UH, THE COST FOR THE SILVER LINE THAT WOULD BE APPLIED TO ADDISON IS LIKE FIVE TO $8 MILLION IS WHAT IT IS. 
          AND THAT'S WHY I, UM, AND THAT'S THE LARGEST PART OF WHAT THIS WE COULD BE ASKING, YOU KNOW, DART TO, TO, UH, INCLUDE IN THIS, UH, AGREEMENT. 
          THE REST OF IT WE CAN PRETTY MUCH DO BY OURSELF. 
          WE COULD DO PARATRANSIT WITH THE VENDOR THEY'RE USING OR DO IT THROUGH DART. 
          UH, AND THEN OTHER POINTS IN HERE, ALL THE WAY DOWN TO, UM, IF YOU LOOK, THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT PEOPLE AREN'T THINKING ABOUT SEAMLESSLY INTEGRATE WITH OTHER TRANSIT SERVICES LIKE VIA RIDE KILL AND OTHER FUTURE PROVIDERS. 
          THEY HAVE AN APP CALLED GO PASS AND GO PASS IS ACTUALLY A VERY GOOD APP AND IT CAN INTERFACE WITH THE OTHER, THE OTHER TYPES OF SYSTEMS AS WELL. 
          UM, BUT THE, THESE ARE JUST LAYING OUT THE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD START WITH THINKING ABOUT INCLUDING IN A LETTER. 
          SO I THOUGHT I WOULD, YOU KNOW, HELP US GET A, AT LEAST A, A STARTING POINT TO CONSIDER. 
          SO GO BACK TO YOUR COMMENT ABOUT PARATRANSIT AND ADDISON PROVIDING THAT. 
          SO, UH, DART APPARENTLY USES A VENDOR TO PROVIDE PARATRANSIT, UH, FEDERALLY, UH, REQUIRED PARATRANSIT. 
          UM, SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE, YOU KNOW, WE COULD EITHER, I HAD INCLUDED IT WITH, UH, ASKING DART FOR AN ILA, UH, WITH THAT INCLUDED AND THE EXPRESS BUSES AND THE SILVER LINE ACCESS. 
          SO WHY WOULD, WHY WOULD WE PAY FOR PARATRANSIT WHEN THEY'RE ALREADY FEDERALLY REQUIRED TO, AND WE WOULDN'T, WE WOULDN'T DO REGIONAL PARATRANSIT, BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. 
          AND THOSE, THOSE ARE THE DETAILS THAT, THAT I DON'T HAVE, UH, THE INFORMATION ON. 
          SO THIS IS JUST A STARTING POINT OF, FROM AN AMATEUR COUNSEL GUY, BUT CONSIDERING ADDISON THINKING ABOUT THIS FOR A LONG TIME, AS WELL AS ALL OF US HAVE JUST STARTING THOUGHTS ON THE PAPER. 
          AND, AND IF YOU NOTICE, I DID HAVE THAT ON THE DART SIDE, THEM DOING THE PARATRANSIT AND ON OUR SIDE WE WOULD DO CIRCULATOR ROUTES, UM, POTENTIALLY POINT TO POINT SERVICE AND, UM, OTHER TRANSPORTATION RELATED PROJECTS. 
          THAT'S IF WE'RE DOING A GMP REBATE ALSO, OR A REVENUE RETURN ON SALES TAX. 
          SO THERE'S A LOT TO THAT IF, IF YOU GET THE, THE GMP BACK AND IT HAS TO BE TIED TO TRANSPORTATION AND, UM, WE WANNA OFFSET OTHER COSTS WE COULD USE FOR OTHER TRANSPORTATION, WALKABILITY, SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS, STUFF LIKE THAT. 
          THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF THE, THE THOUGHT PROCESS ON THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I'VE GOT A, I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU DURING, CAN I GET SOME CLARIFICATION FROM DAVID BEFORE YOU GO, MARLON, WOULD THAT BE OKAY? ON THE, UM, CIRCULATOR, WHAT'S THE, BEEN THE PROPOSAL, THERE'S A 50 50 SPLIT THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED, RIGHT? THEY'RE 50 50. 
          YEAH, THEY, THEY PROPOSED WHAT IT'S 700,000, 8,800 AND CLOSER TO NINE. 
          IT WAS LIKE 1.8 SOMETHING AND THEN PAID HALF SO THAT, THAT'S WHAT THEY PROPOSED. 
          I, WE BELIEVE THAT WE COULD FIND SOMETHING CHEAPER THAN EVEN THE HALF. 
          SO WE WOULD WANT TO GO OUT, EVEN IF WE STAY WITH DART, WE WOULD WANT TO GO OUT FOR AN RFP. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, AND SEE IF WE COULD FIND SOMETHING TO DO THE SAME SERVICE FOR CHEAPER THAN WHAT IT WOULD COST OUR PORTION OR GO TO DART AND ASK THEM TO PAY FOR THE FULL AMOUNT. 
          GOT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          MARLON, THANK YOU DARREN. 
          I, I, ON BULLET POINT NUMBER TWO, UM, ARE YOU SUGGESTING, UM, THAT, THAT IF WE, IF WE, IF WE CAME TO AN AGREEMENT, UM, WE WOULD DO SOME TYPE OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WHERE WE GET A REBATE BACK RATHER THAN WAITING FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO APPROVE? UM, THAT'S WHAT WE ASKED FOR. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE. 
          AND THIS, THIS FOLLOWS THE SAME MODEL, I THINK AS PLANO HAD IN THEIRS, UM, EXCEPT FOR, YOU KNOW, I PUT IT UP TO 65% BECAUSE WE WOULD BE USING REALLY VERY LITTLE DART SERVICE. 
          WE'D BE USING THE SILVER LINE AND WE'D BE USING MAYBE EXPRESS BUS IF WE CHOSE THAT. 
          AND THEN THE PARATRANSIT. 
          SO THOSE ARE JUST REALLY SMALL PIECES OF, UM, WHAT ADDISON WOULD BE USING. 
          AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, IF IT EVEN IS AT THAT 65% RETURN THAT WE GET, WE WOULD ASK FOR THAT. 
          35% 
          [02:00:01]
WOULD STILL PAY, WELL PAY FOR EVERYTHING WE, WE USE PLUS EXTRA TO RUN THE SYSTEM, PLUS EXTRA TO, FOR THE REGIONAL ASPECT OF THE BENEFIT THAT'S NOT INSIDE OF ADDISON. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT ALSO. 
          BUT, BUT WE WOULDN'T HAVE JUST SILVER LINE PARATRANSIT AND EXPRESS BUS BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE THE ADDISON TRANSIT CENTER, WHICH IS A MAJOR HUB. 
          THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION. 
          WELL DO WE THAT'S GONNA BE THERE, UH, REGARDLESS, AND IT'S, UH, I'M SUGGESTING THAT THE CIRCULATOR ROUTES CAN COVER MOST OF THE DARK BUS TRANSIT. 
          WE'RE A SMALL TOWN. 
          THE GO AHEAD. 
          THE, THE BUSES THAT GO FROM, THEY DON'T JUST STAY WITHIN ADDISON, THEY GO TO, TO SOUTH DALLAS, THEY GO TO DOWNTOWN, THEY GO TO PLANO. 
          IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T COVER. 
          I, I AGREE, BUT I'M NOT SAYING THAT, I'M SAYING THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY THAT WHAT WE WOULD ASK FOR. 
          IT WOULD BE THERE BY CONVENIENCE FOR DART AND EVERYBODY THAT RIDES IT WITHIN ADDISON, IT COULD BE THE RIDERS THAT DO RIDE IT FROM THERE. 
          OKAY. 
          I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. 
          UM, HOWARD, BEFORE YOU LEAVE, I'LL, I'LL, SO I'LL LEAVE ANOTHER PIECE HERE. 
          IS ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT US DOING MORE SERVICES OURSELVES IS WE'RE NOT A TRANSIT DEPARTMENT. 
          NO. 
          BUT IF WE CONTROL THE, THE PRODUCT, THEN WE CONTROL THE QUALITY. 
          WE CONTROL MAKING CHANGES. 
          WE CONTROL WHAT IT FEELS LIKE A CIRCULATOR IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. 
          CIRCULATOR. 
          SO I, I THINK WE SHOULD INSOURCE A CIRCULATOR FOR SURE. 
          UM, WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO A LESS EXPENSIVE, A BETTER PRODUCT. 
          UM, AND THE ADDISON WAY, I HATE TO THROW THAT AROUND. 
          PLEASE DON'T. 
          I KNOW, BUT I HAD TO, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD DO IT THE WAY THAT WE WANT IT DONE, THE QUALITY THAT WE WANTED. 
          WE'D HAVE A LOT MORE CONTROL. 
          AND LOCAL CONTROL IS OBVIOUSLY WHAT YEAH. 
          A CIRCULATOR IS A MUCH SIMPLER OPERATION THAN A TRANSIT SYSTEM. 
          AGREED. 
          AND FOR US TO GET INTO THE TRANSIT BUSINESS, IT'S A VERY ACCOMPLISHED, COMPLICATED THING. 
          AND FOR US TO THINK THAT WE CAN DO IT BETTER OURSELVES WHEN WE'RE NOT TRANSIT EXPERTS, THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'RE IN THE TRANSIT BUSINESS IN A BUSINESS THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE IN. 
          THAT'S WHY IF YOU SEE THE THREE BULLETS, THEY'RE NOT REALLY, THEY'RE NOT MUCH, THEY'RE NOT MORE EXCEPT FOR THE POINT TO POINT THAN THE CIRCULATORS CIRCULATORS. 
          POINT TO POINT IS TWO, TWO AND THREE. 
          THIRD BULLET IS OTHER TRANSPORTATION, UH, PROJECTS, WHICH I MENTIONED WOULD BE WALKABILITY, POSSIBLY. 
          HOWARD, LET'S GO TO YOU. 
          I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, AND DARREN HIT ON IT IN, IN THIS LIST, ONE OF MY MAJOR ISSUES IS DART ISSUING DEBT OR ISSUING CONTRACTS. 
          AND THEN THE MEMBER CITIES ARE RESPONSIBLE TO HAVE TO PAY THAT BACK. 
          IF WE EXIT, WE, WE, THEY'RE PUTTING DEBT ON US AND WE DON'T HAVE A SEAT AT THE TABLE. 
          AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED. 
          GARY REPRESENTS US ALONG WITH RICHARDSON AND THE PARK CITIES. 
          I, I HATE THIS GOVERNANCE MODEL. 
          I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THAT WHAT WE HAD UNTIL LAST YEAR. 
          AND SO THE, UM, THE IDEA OF ONE, UH, ONE REPRESENTATIVE PER CITY APPEALS TO ME BECAUSE I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW SOMEONE CAN HAVE FOUR CITIES AND IF THIS CITY, THIS WOULD BE GOOD FOR THAT CITY, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE GOOD FOR THE OTHER CITY. 
          AND I CAN HE VOTE A FOURTH OF A VOTE? OR I, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW THAT WORKS. 
          TO ME, GARY IS, IS A VERY NICE MAN, KNOWLEDGEABLE. 
          I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST GARY. 
          GARY'S FOCUS FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN IS HE IS PRO DART. 
          NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT WHO WE WANT AS A LIAISON. 
          I WANT A PRO ADDISON LIAISON. 
          SO THE ONE-TO-ONE, I MEAN ONE PER CITY IS IMPORTANT. 
          I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THIS WAITING THING. 
          UH, IF YOU'RE GONNA WAIT DALLAS, WHERE THERE ONE HAS MORE THAN 50%, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT. 
          AND, AND I'VE HEARD PEOPLE ON THE DALLAS BOARD HAVE SAID, IF THEY DON'T HAVE CONTROL, THEY'RE NOT GONNA EVER APPROVE ANYTHING THAT DOESN'T KEEP CONTROL. 
          SO I KNOW WE HAVE FRICTION HERE. 
          IF, IF WE'RE GONNA GIVE OUR WISHLIST, I WOULD SAY WE ONE COUNCIL MEMBER, I MEAN ONE DART BOARD MEMBER PER CITY, I WOULD SAY I WANT OUR CITY TO BE ABLE TO VOTE ON APPROVING ANY DEBT THAT THEY WANNA FLOAT, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT LATER IF WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT HAVING PUT IT ON TO BEGIN WITH. 
          UM, I AGREE WITH SOME OF DARREN'S POINTS. 
          I, I'M, I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT NOTHING ELSE, THAT IF WE EXIT, HOW ARE WE GONNA HANDLE THIS? AND I'M THINKING OF GET OUR OWN VANS, SHUTTLE VANS, WHATEVER, PAINT 'EM WITH THE DART, I MEAN THE ADDISON LOGO ON 'EM. 
          AND WE RUN OUR OWN SYSTEM THROUGHOUT ADDISON AND WHERE DART GETS TO THE EDGES OF ADDISON, WE CAN TRANSFER PEOPLE BACK AND FORTH AND, AND BASICALLY IT'S SEAMLESS WITH MAYBE ANOTHER STOP. 
          BUT IF WE'RE, I WASN'T PLANNING TO WRITE A LETTER TO DART BECAUSE I'M LISTENING OR READING THE OTHER LETTERS, AND I'M LIKE, DART CAN'T MAKE ENDS MEET NOW, 
          [02:05:01]
HOW ARE THEY GONNA GIVE UP 25% OR 50% AND STILL MAKE ENDS MEET? UNLESS THEY'RE GONNA GET MORE CITIES INVOLVED, GET MORE GRANTS, THEY NEED TO CUT STUFF. 
          THEY'RE LOOKING AT CUTTING ROUTES INSTEAD OF CUTTING SALARIES. 
          I THINK THEIR PAYROLL'S TOO HIGH. 
          I MEAN, I'VE GOT SO MANY ISSUES WITH THIS, I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHERE TO START, BUT, BUT MY MAIN ONE RIGHT NOW IS I WANT ADDISON TO BE ABLE TO APPROVE ANY DEBT THAT'S GONNA BE PLACED ON ADDISON. 
          I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN DO THAT WITHOUT THAT BEING THE CASE FOR ALL OF THEM. 
          BUT WE'VE ALREADY SAID WHATEVER THEY COME UP WITH IS GONNA HAVE TO BE ONE SIZE FITS ALL. 
          BUT I DO WANNA, I, I WANT DART TO KNOW THAT I'M NOT ANTI-ART. 
          I'M CERTAINLY NOT ANTI-PUBLIC TRANSIT. 
          I'M ANTI-ART AS IT IS. 
          IT HAS TO GET FIXED OR I'D RATHER WE WERE OUT, THERE'S DOZENS, PROBABLY HUNDREDS OF CITIES I'VE BEEN LOOKING IN. 
          UM, DALLAS COUNTY, DENTON COUNTY, COLLIN COUNTY, THEY HAVE TONS OF CITIES. 
          20, 30 CITIES IN EACH COUNTY. 
          40 I THINK IN DENTON. 
          AND THERE'S ONLY 13 OF US CARRYING THE WEIGHT OF THIS ON OUR BACK. 
          SO THESE OTHER CITIES ARE DOING FINE WITHOUT BEING A MEMBER OF DART. 
          SO I JUST FIGURED WE CAN, WE CAN'T FIX THE PROBLEM. 
          SO I WASN'T GONNA SEND A LETTER, BUT I'M PERFECTLY FINE TO SEND A LETTER IN GOOD FAITH. 
          I JUST HOPE THEY CAN COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT MEETS IT. 
          SO I, I DO WANT TO COME BACK TO THE GOVERNANCE AND TRY TO GET SOME CONSENSUS BECAUSE I'M CURRENTLY IN CONVERSATIONS WITH CITY MANAGERS RIGHT NOW, HAVING THOSE NEGOTIATIONS AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MAKES SENSE. 
          BUT MAY MAYBE IF I COULD ASK IF Y'ALL ARE WILLING TO FOCUS ON THE FINANCIAL FIRST AND TRY TO GO ON THE LIST, BECAUSE THERE'S THERE, TO YOUR POINT, THERE'S SO MANY THINGS WE CAN TALK ABOUT. 
          IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE TO TRY TO KNOCK THAT PIECE OUT AND THEN GO TO SERVICE DELIVERY, THEN GOVERNANCE AND WHATEVER ELSE YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT. 
          TAKE THAT FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH. 
          BUT I THINK THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL AS YOU'RE GOING FORWARD. 
          SO ARE YOU ASKING FOR US TO SAY YEAH. 
          WHAT WE WOULD ACCEPT FROM A FINANCIAL PART? JUST THAT, YEAH, AND I THINK THERE'S TWO QUESTIONS TO THAT. 
          ONE, IF YOU, IF YOU WANT SAY A PERCENTAGE, YOU WANNA SAY, HERE'S OUR GOAL, WE WANT TO GET TO, DARREN SAID 25 UP FRONT. 
          WE WANNA GET TO ANOTHER NUMBER IN A NUMBER OF YEARS. 
          BUT WHAT WE DO WANT TO HEAR IS ULTIMATELY, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH A LONG OR LONG-TERM PLAN THAT IS A GMP WHERE THE MONEY IS JUST COMING BACK TO US FROM DART ON MOBILITY? OR IS YOUR, IS YOUR GOAL TO GO TO THE LEGISLATURE AND SAY THE CONTRIBUTION RATE NEEDS TO BE LOWERED TO HALF A PENNY, 75% OF WHAT IT, I THINK THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT CONVERSATIONS AND IT, IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR US TO HEAR THAT FROM YOU ALL AS WE BOTH GET THIS LETTER, BUT ALSO HAVE OTHER CONVERSATIONS NO MATTER HOW THINGS TURN OUT TO THE POINTS EARLIER. 
          MY RESPONSE TO THAT IS, I GUESS I'D, I'D WANT TO GO TO THE, THE LEGISLATURE BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO BE RESTRICTED ON HOW THAT MONEY CAN BE USED. 
          SO IF THE MONEY COMES BACK TO US EITHER BECAUSE THEY NEVER TOOK IT TO START WITH AND THEY ONLY TOOK A QUARTER OR A HALF OF A PENNY, THEN THE REST OF THOSE SALES TAX DOLLARS CAN BE USED HOWEVER YOU WANT. 
          I LOVE THE IDEA OF A PUBLIC SAFETY FUND. 
          I LOVE HELPING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. 
          I, I MEAN, IT'D BE GREAT IF WE COULD LOWER PROPERTY TAXES, BUT THAT PROBABLY WON'T HAPPEN. 
          BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IF WE DO THE GNP PROGRAM, DART HAS THEY, THEY GET THEIR 1% AND THEN GIVE US BACK WHATEVER WE'VE AGREED TO AND THERE'S RESTRICTIONS ON IT. 
          AND THAT COULD BE CHANGED. 
          AND I WOULD RATHER SEE IT GO THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE SO THAT IT'S SET, THEY DON'T TAKE IT TO START WITH. 
          THEY GET THEIR PART, WE GET OUR PART AND WE CAN DO WHATEVER WE WANT WITH IT. 
          IF, DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES. 
          ON THAT PART. 
          THANK YOU, CHRIS. 
          SO I, I AGREE WITH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID. 
          THE GOVERNANCE I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT AND WE NEED, AND WE AND WE NEED TO FIND A SOLUTION TO THAT, RIGHT? I'VE BEEN SAYING FOR A WHILE THAT I THINK WE SHOULD GO BACK AND ASK FOR THE CIRCULATOR AT A HUNDRED PERCENT. 
          AND IF WE CAN'T GET THAT, I DO THINK THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO THAT MIGHT BE MORE EFFECTIVE. 
          UM,  WHEN WE FOCUS ON THE COST, UM, YOU KNOW, DARREN HAD MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT GOING TO A SYSTEM THAT HAS EXPRESS BUSES ONLY. 
          I DON'T THINK I'D BE IN FAVOR OF THAT. 
          I KNOW PLANO HAS SUGGESTED THAT AS WELL AS WHAT THEY WANT RAIL AND EXPRESS BUSES. 
          I DON'T WANT TO GET RID OF AWAY FROM HAVING STANDARD BUS SERVICE. 
          AND I DON'T KNOW HOW WE COULD GET AWAY FROM THAT WITHOUT CAUSING A LOT OF INCONVENIENCES FOR THE FOLKS THAT EITHER TAKE DART INTO ADDISON AND WORK AT RESTAURANTS OR HOTELS OR WHEREVER THEY'RE WORKING, OR FOR OUR RESIDENTS THAT WANNA TAKE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE. 
          IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THE SYSTEM'S NOT DEVELOPED AS MUCH AS LIKE A NEW YORK OR, UH, YOU NAME THE CITY UP NORTH, BUT THOSE SYSTEMS ARE A HUNDRED YEARS OLD AND OURS IS STILL BEGINNING TO DEVELOP AND YOU NEED BUSES TO 
          [02:10:01]
GET TO POINT TO POINT. 
          SO I DON'T WANT TO GET RID OF THAT. 
          IT'S THE COST THAT I STRUGGLE WITH. 
          IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY CITY WANTS SOMETHING BACK AND MAYBE I NEED SOMEONE TO HELP ME WITH THIS, BUT WHY IS EVERYONE ASKING FOR MONEY BACK? BUT THEY WANT IT TO, IN THE FORM OF WHAT SOUNDS LIKE A GMP PROGRAM DEDICATED TO LOCAL TRANSPORTATION MOBILITY. 
          I THINK PART OF THAT, AND DAVID CAN SPEAK TO THAT, IS THAT, UM, THAT'S IMMEDIATE. 
          SO DOING THE GMP NOW GETS, YOU CAN SEE MOST OF THESE START THIS YEAR GOING OUT TO 2031 MM-HMM . 
          THAT GETS AN IMMEDIATE REFUND OF SOME OF THAT MONEY BETWEEN NOW AND THE LEGISLATURE. 
          IT'S, I THINK THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S RIGHT. 
          IT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S SOMETHING DART CAN ACTUALLY AGREE TO AS THEY GET TO SOLUTIONS. 
          AND I THINK YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT WHERE THESE CITIES ARE. 
          A LOT OF 'EM ARE LOOKING AT EIGHT, NINE YEAR PAYBACKS. 
          SO WHILE I THINK THEY, WHAT THEY WANT IS A LEGISLATURE OPTION TO STEP IN AND TRY TO MAKE IT ALL RIGHT TO TRY TO, YOU CAN MAKE IT ALL RIGHT. 
          TRY TO SAY, HEY, THE, THE CONTRIBUTION RATE GOES DOWN FROM LESS THAN A GOES LESS THAN A PENNY ONE BECAUSE IT, IT HITS A LOT OF THE GOALS THAT THEY WANT, BUT ALSO BECAUSE IT DOES MAKE IT MORE ATTRACTIVE FOR OTHER CITIES TO JOIN. 
          RIGHT? LIKE THAT COULD BE AN ULTIMATE GOAL. 
          I THINK THAT'S THE ULTIMATE GOAL FROM A LOT OF FOLKS. 
          HOW DO WE MAKE IT LESS OF A BURDEN TO ENTER AND FOR THE FOLKS THAT ARE IN THE MEMBER CITIES, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THERE IS REALISTICALLY WHAT CAN DART DO RIGHT NOW? AND THEY'RE TRYING TO LAY OUT AN OPTION THAT WHAT CAN DART ACTUALLY AGREE TO, AND THIS IS WHAT DART CAN ACTUALLY AGREE TO. 
          THEY CAN'T AGREE TO WHAT THE LEGISLATURE IS GONNA DO IN THE NEXT SESSION. 
          THEY COULD COMMIT TO WORKING WITH A CITY TO GO DOWN AND TRY TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION. 
          BUT I THINK EVEN THE ASK IN HERE ARE BIG ASK FOR DART. 
          I MEAN, SO YEAH. 
          AND THAT'S WHERE MY HEAD IS TO HOWARD'S POINT, IF, IF THEY'RE CUTTING SERVICES NOW AND YOU HAVE ALL THESE CITIES ASKING FOR A 25% REDUCTION IN 2026, I MEAN, IS THAT REALLY REASONABLE? I MEAN, I THINK WE HEARD WHEN NADINE SPOKE ON THE TWO MEETINGS AGO AT OUR WORK SESSION IN THE, IN THE BIGGER ROOM. 
          I MEAN, SHE KIND OF SAID WHAT THEIR ANSWER WAS. 
          THEIR ANSWER IS THEY WANT TO FIND MORE REVENUE TO DO THAT. 
          UM, SHE SAID, OH, THE CITIES ARE SAYING THIS, WE'RE IN THE SAME BOAT. 
          SO THEY WANT TO GO TO THE, YOU KNOW, THE LEGISLATURE THROUGH THE COG. 
          THEY WANT TO GO THROUGH SOME OTHER MECHANISM TO FIND ADDITIONAL REVENUE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. 
          I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S THE RIGHT SOLUTION, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM DART TO THIS POINT. 
          AND IN ADDITION WITH EACH ONE OF THEIR ASK IS A REDUCTION IN SERVICE THAT THAT COMMUNITY IS EITHER GONNA TAKE ON THEMSELVES OR WOULD BE A REDUCTION IN, NOT NECESSARILY IN RAIL, BUT IN BUS AND THE OTHER SERVICES LIKE GOLINK. 
          SO THAT'S WHY THEY DO WANT IT BACK IN, INTO A FORM OF A GMP REDUCED SERVICES FROM DART. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO LESS COST. 
          MM-HMM. 
          THEY GET SOME OF THAT MONEY BACK AND THEN THEY FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO IT THEMSELVES ON THEIR OWN. 
          MM-HMM . 
          OKAY. 
          HEY, CAN I GET SOME CLARIFICATION? THIS IS A REALLY, UM, BIG ISSUE. 
          SO, UM, GOING BACK TO THE LEGISLATURE, DAVID, I'M HOPING YOU'LL GET ME SQUARED AWAY ON THIS TO GET US ALL SQUARED AWAY. 
          SO IF WE DID THAT, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD WAIT UNTIL THE, THE TEXAS STATE LEGISLATURE MET AGAIN, CORRECT? CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO FURTHER VOTE ON WHATEVER, WHATEVER CHANGE IN 2027. 
          YEAH. 
          IN 20 AND MAYBE, MAYBE THEY APPROVE IT, MAYBE THEY DON'T. 
          BUT AT, AT EARLIEST 2027. 
          CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND SO THIS, UM, INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT VIA WHAT WE'RE CALLING IT, WHAT A GENERAL MOBILITY PROGRAM, IT'S A REBATE THAT CAN HAPPEN NOW. 
          WE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UM, SO I WANT TO, IF I COULD, I, I THINK DARREN, I APPRECIATE YOU, YOU SPENT A LOT OF QUALITY WORK ON THIS, BUT I, I'VE GOT A COUPLE QUESTIONS THAT I JUST KIND OF WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS AND HOPEFULLY IT'LL GET US ON THE SAME PAGE. 
          BUT THIS GOVERNANCE REFORM WHERE YOU'VE GOT MEMBER CITY APPROVAL OF NEW DEBT, I THINK IT, I THINK IT'D BE KIND OF NUTS TO ASK EVERY CITY COUNCIL THAT WAS A MEMBER CITY TO APPROVE ANY PARTICULAR DEBT ITEM. 
          SO THAT WAS ME TALKING. 
          WERE YOU, WERE YOU MEANING LIKE, LIKE, LIKE AT THAT POINT WE ALL HAVE A A A A VOTE LIKE EACH, EACH CITY HAS A, A MEMBER ON THE DART BOARD IN THAT DART BOARD MEMBER WOULD GET A VOTE ON THE DEBT. 
          IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE MEANING? ARE YOU MEANING EVERY CITY COUNCIL WOULD VOTE FOR THE DEBT ALONG WITH THE, ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT DAVID'S TALKING ABOUT THE CITY MANAGERS ARE TALKING ABOUT, OR THE MODEL THAT'S BEEN ROLLED OUT OR FLOATED OUT THERE IS ONE CITY ONE VOTE WITH DALLAS LESS THAN 45% OR FOUR 
          [02:15:01]
BETWEEN 40 AND 50%, BUT LESS THAN 50%. 
          OKAY. 
          SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT, THAT WOULD BE THAT GOVERNANCE. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND OKAY, YOU KNOW WHAT THIS, THE, THESE ARE, YOU KNOW, BROAD STATEMENTS THAT WE'RE SENDING IN A LETTER TO DART, THAT'S, IT'S, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA WORK FOR EVERYBODY. 
          MM-HMM . 
          YEAH. 
          AND I LOVE THAT IDEA BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE PUT A LOT OF, UH, TIME AND ENERGY INTO, INTO THAT. 
          UM, YES. 
          AND IT SEEMED TO MAKE A LOT OF SENSE. 
          IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S GOING RIGHT. 
          AND I AGREE WITH YOU. 
          I THINK IT'S UNREASONABLE FOR, FOR DALLAS TO HAVE A 50% CORRECT WEIGHTED VOTE. 
          I THINK THAT'S CRAZY. 
          UM, I I THINK 40% WITH THE SIZE OF DALLAS AND THE MONEY AND AND SO FORTH IS REASONABLE. 
          SO I'M, I'M ON BOARD WITH WHAT EVERY WHAT WHAT THE OTHER CITIES WHO HAVE KIND OF, UH, PUT THAT TOGETHER. 
          I I'M IN SUPPORT OF OF THAT. 
          I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU WERE, WHAT YOU WERE SPELLING OUT IN THAT BULLET POINT. 
          SO I LIKE, I I LIKE WHAT YOU'VE PUT TOGETHER, UNDERSTANDING IT. 
          I I WOULD ADD THOUGH, WE, WE DO HAVE THIS, AND I DON'T WANNA FORGET ABOUT IT 'CAUSE IT'S NOT A, A SMALL AMOUNT. 
          IT'S LIKE WE'VE GOT THIS, UH, GMP, THIS AGREED UPON GMP AMOUNT OF, IS IT 2.97 MILLION AND IT'S A, IT'S, IT'S, I, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, DART HAS AGREED THAT, THAT THAT'S THE AMOUNT THAT'S OWED, BUT THEY'RE JUST LOOKING FOR, FOR SOME, WE JUST NEED TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON, ON THE, ON, ON THE AGREEMENT OF THE TERMS TO RECEIVE THAT MONEY. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. 
          YEAH. 
          THIS GOES BACK TO KIND OF, OF THE LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT WE, THAT US, IN ADDITION TO EVERY OTHER CITY, WAS NOT HAPPY WITH. 
          UM, THE CHAIR DID TALK TO THE MAYOR AND I AND SAID, HEY, HE AGREES AND THEY WANNA MAKE THE CHANGE. 
          IF YOU WATCH THE LAST DART BOARD MEETING, IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE DART BOARD. 
          THEY SAID, HEY, THESE, ALL THESE CITIES, INCLUDING US, HAVE SENT FORMAL LETTERS ASKING FOR THIS CHANGE IN RE IN REVISIONS. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, THE DART BOARD DID NOT SPEAK ABOUT IT AFTER IT WAS PRESENTED TO DART. 
          THEY DIDN'T SPEAK ABOUT IT. 
          SO WE WEREN'T ABLE TO HEAR WHAT THE BOARD HAD TO SAY ABOUT THAT. 
          AND I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY OTHER CONVERSATIONS. 
          THEY DIDN'T TALK ABOUT IT AT ALL. 
          IT JUST KIND OF GLAZED OVER. 
          THEY HAD OTHER TOPICS, YOU KNOW, UM, REGARDING NEGOTIATIONS AND OTHER THINGS. 
          SO THEY JUST DIDN'T GET TO THAT AT THAT TIME. 
          SO WE COULDN'T HAVE AN UPDATE ON THAT. 
          IS THAT REASONABLE FOR US TO ASK FOR, FOR THIS IN, IN, IN, IN A LETTER SUCH AS THIS? I THINK YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. 
          WE'VE ALREADY ASKED FOR THINK REITERATE. 
          I JUST THINK THAT, TO ME THAT'S A VERY OBVIOUS THING THAT NEEDS TO BE, I I THINK DARREN PUT A GREAT LIST TOGETHER, BUT I WOULD ADD THAT TO, TO THE LIST AND I'M, I'M IN SUPPORT OF, OF WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, WHICH, WHICH IS REDUCE, REDUCE, UH, COST AND, AND BUT ALSO REDUCE SCOPE OF WORK THAT COMES WITH THAT AMONG THE OTHER, OTHER THINGS YOU YOU'VE PUT HERE. 
          AND I'M TALKING ABOUT THE BULLET POINT OF EVERYTHING ABOVE ADDISON TRANSPORTATION ITEMS TO CONSIDER. 
          IS THAT FAIR, DARREN? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          ONE THING THING I WOULD SAY ANSWER QUESTION, I COULD JUST ADD ONE POINT REAL QUICK. 
          ONE THING I WOULD SAY ON GOVERNANCE, BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED IT SINCE THE MODEL THAT WE PRESENTED THAT CAME THROUGH THE COMMITTEE AND THEN DALLAS HAD THEIR MEETING. 
          THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER MODELS THAT HAVE FLOATED AROUND THAT ARE NOT AS BENEFICIAL TO ADDISON. 
          IF YOU WANTED TO PUT YOUR, AS A BOARD AS A COUNCIL, SAY WE STAND BEHIND THE MODEL THAT WAS PRESENTED PREVIOUSLY, I THINK THAT, OR AT LEAST A MODEL SIMILAR TO THAT, THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A GOOD THING TO PUT IN HERE REGARDLESS TO PICK A STAND ON IT. 
          BECAUSE I'VE SEEN OTHER MODELS IN THE PAST WEEK THAT HAVE NOT BEEN HAVE, THAT HAVE CAUSED ME CONCERN. 
          SO I THINK HAVING SOMETHING FROM THIS, THIS COUNCIL WOULD BE A POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT. 
          UH, I I STAND BEHIND THAT MODEL THAT WE LOOKED AT AT THE LAST MEETING. 
          I, ALTHOUGH I THINK IT SAID SOMETHING, THERE WAS LIKE A WIGGLE ROOM FOR DALLAS, RIGHT? WEIGHTED 40 TO 50% OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT. 
          YEAH, THAT WAS, IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, IT WAS APPROVED. 
          THAT WAS THE ONE THAT WAS DEVELOPED THEN WHEN DALLAS APPROVED IT. 
          THEY SAY, WE LIKE THIS MODEL, BUT WE REALLY WANT TO GET ABOVE 40%. 
          YEAH. 
          I LIKE, THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER MODELS FLOATED AROUND THAT, UM, DON'T PUT US IN AS ADVANTAGEOUS OF A POSITION. 
          SO THEY DID, DID THEY HAVE US AT LESS THAN 4% OR SOMETHING THAT, THAT WAS SHOWN TO US LAST TIME? CORRECT. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          I, YEAH, I SUPPORT THAT MM-HMM . 
          THAT MODEL WE LOOKED AT LAST TIME. 
          OKAY. 
          RANDY, THANK YOU. 
          I'M GONNA TRY TO BE RESPECTFUL FOR, FOR DAVID'S REQUEST WHILE AGO ON, LET'S TAKE THESE ONE AT A TIME. 
          SO I, I WANT TO CONCENTRATE MY COMMENTS NOW ON FINANCE, BUT I DO HAVE COMMENTS ON THE OTHER TWO. 
          UH, I WOULD ABSOLUTELY NOT BE IN FAVOR OF ANY, UM, REIMBURSEMENT FROM DART THAT WOULD REQUIRE US TO USE IT THE WAY THEY TELL US THAT, THAT IT HAS TO BE USED. 
          I AND I, I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANYTHING SHORT OF LEGISLATIVE ACTION WITH THE, WITH THE WITHDRAWAL ELECTION THAT THEY CAN DO THAT. 
          I THINK ANYTHING THAT DART AGREES TO ANY KIND OF REFUND, THEY CAN TELL US HOW TO USE THE MONEY AND I WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE OPPOSED TO THAT. 
          UM, HEY. 
          HEY RANDY, 
          [02:20:01]
CAN I INTERRUPT? I JUST WANTED TO ASK, IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING TOO? DAVID DID, DID IF DAR, EVEN IF DAR WANTED TO GIVE US A REFUND FOR AND ALLOW US TO USE IT FOR NON MOBILITY, THAT THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT, NOT WITHOUT GOING TO THE LEGISLATURE. 
          THAT WOULD THE, THAT FIX WOULD BE THE ONE THAT WOULD GO TO THE LEGISLATURE AND REDUCE THE CON CONTRIBUTION COMMITMENT. 
          THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          SORRY RANDY. 
          NO, NO PROBLEM. 
          THAT WAS A GOOD CLARIFICATION. 
          THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING, BUT I WAS GLAD THAT YOU ASKED IT. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S HARD JUST TO TALK ABOUT FAST BECAUSE FINANCE COVERS EVERYTHING. 
          I MEAN, IT, IT ALL COMES DOWN TO MONEY. 
          UM, IT, ADDISON, YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS, YOU LOOK AT THE PAPERWORK FINANCIALLY SPEAKING ON THE FACT WE ARE IN ABSOLUTELY THE BEST POSITION IN ALL 13 CITIES AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT WITH A WITHDRAWAL. 
          UH, AND THEY, THEY COULDN'T COME BACK WITH ANY PERCENTAGE TO ME THAT THAT, THAT I WOULD BE HAPPY WITH ON FINANCING BECAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE TO DICTATE THAT. 
          AND AT THIS POINT, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ARE CONCENTRATING ON US WRITING A LETTER. 
          UH, THEY HAVEN'T EVEN RESPONDED TO THE CITIES THAT HAVE WRITTEN LETTERS BACK IN NOVEMBER. 
          SO WHAT MAKES US THINK WE'RE GONNA GET OUR LETTER BROUGHT TO THE, TO THE FOREFRONT? UH, I WOULD MUCH PREFER TO SEE A UNIFIED LETTER AS SOMEONE HAS SPOKEN TO EARLIER WITH THE CITY MANAGERS THAT ALL ARE COMING TOGETHER AND MEETING ON THIS TOPIC. 
          I WOULD MUCH RATHER SEE A UNIFIED LETTER COME, COME BEFORE US. 
          UH, BUT, UH, WE, WE ARE ABSOLUTELY THE BEST POINT BECAUSE WE HAVE THE SILVER LINE A QUARTER OF A MILE DOWN THE WAY, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. 
          FINANCING WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF NOTHING THAT WE ARE MANDATED ON HOW TO SPEND. 
          THANK YOU. 
          RANDY. 
          UH, HOWARD, I THINK YOU WERE NEXT. 
          I JUST HAD CLARIFICATION ON SOMETHING. 
          I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FINANCE, BUT WHEN YOU SAID WE STAND BEHIND THE MODEL PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE GOVERNANCE MODEL OF ONE PER CITY AND SOME ARE WEIGHTED AS TWO AND SOME DARTS WEIGHTED AS OKAY. 
          THAT OKAY, I UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          AND THEN ON THESE ORDINANCE, IF IT'S AN IOA, I REMEMBER THE LETTER FROM GARY SLAGEL SAYING THAT IF WE ACCEPT IT, WE HAVE TO SEND AN ORDINANCE THAT WE'LL NEVER GO AGAINST ART AGAIN IN AUSTIN. 
          IS THAT OFF THE TABLE NOW? DID THEY RESCIND THAT OR IS THAT STILL PART OF AN I A THAT WAS THE ANSWER I GAVE TO MARLIN EARLIER. 
          THEY HAVE, ALL THE CITIES HAVE AGREED TO THAT ESSENTIALLY AND SENT REVISED LANGUAGE. 
          THEY HAVE PRESENTED TO THEIR BOARD, BUT WE HAVE NOT HEARD A RESPONSE FROM THEIR BOARD IN, YOU MEAN STAR HASN'T RESPONDED TO US. 
          IF THEY'RE TAKING THAT OUT, THE, THE BOARD HAS NOT RESPONDED. 
          IN SPEAKING WITH THEIR CHAIR, HE SEEMED LIKE HE UNDERSTOOD AND HE KIND OF MADE A VERBAL ANSWER THAT HE, HE BELIEVED IN THAT. 
          BUT THE BOARD'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE BOARD'S DECISION. 
          UM, SO THEY DIDN'T SAY ONE WAY OR ANOTHER IT WAS PRESENTED TO THEM AND WE JUST HAVEN'T HEARD A RESPONSE YET. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL I WOULDN'T BE IN FAVOR OF ANY ILA THAT HAD THAT LANGUAGE IN IT THERE. 
          SO THE FINANCE, UH, PIECE OF IT IS THE GMP IS A STOP GAP BEFORE IT GETS TO THE LEGISLATURE. 
          AND LEGISLATURE CERTAINLY WOULD WANT, UH, NO STRINGS ATTACHED ON HALF A CENT OR WHATEVER THAT WOULD BE. 
          THAT'S A MUCH BIGGER PICTURE. 
          EVERYBODY HAS TO AGREE ON THAT. 
          THE WHOLE STATE DOES, YOU KNOW, THE LEGISLATURE DOES. 
          SO THAT'S IN, THAT'S A STOPGAP GMP STOP GAP. 
          WE GET THAT MONEY BACK, WE CAN USE IT FOR OUR OWN TRANSIT AND TRANSFER RELATED PROJECTS, ARGUABLY. 
          UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO, UH, AND THEN 25% STARTING AND THEN THE 65% UP TO 2031. 
          HOPEFULLY WE WOULDN'T GET THERE. 
          HOPEFULLY THE STATE WOULD FIX THE PROBLEM BY THEN. 
          THAT'S ANSWERING THE FINANCE QUESTION. 
          DID YOU, UH, ANY REASON WHY YOU CHOSE 65? IT'S NEGOTIATION ARBITRARY. 
          YEAH. 
          WELL, I SAID THE OTHER LETTER SAID 50% HONESTLY, BECAUSE WE USE LESS SERVICES. 
          THAT'S HONESTLY WHAT HE IS. 
          WE'RE, AND YOU KNOW, IF DART'S GONNA, THE FUNDING'S GONNA CUT. 
          WE, WE, THE SCOPE OF WORKS LIKE MARLON SAID, IT IS THE SCOPE WOULD, WOULD LESSEN. 
          WE WOULDN'T BE HAVING IN ALL OF THAT BUS COVERAGE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I I WOULD SAY THAT WE, WE TAKE CARE OF ALL THAT OURSELVES, BUT YES, 65% BECAUSE WE'RE USING LESS, MOSTLY THE SILVER LINE AND I KNOW USING LESS THAN WHO, UH, THEN, UH, WHAT WE'RE PAYING FOR WHAT WE'RE AND MOST OTHER, UH, CITIES AS WELL. 
          WE DON'T HAVE A LIGHT RAIL. 
          WE, WE, SO PLANO FOR EXAMPLE, HAS LIGHT RAIL COUPLE STATIONS AND THEY HAVE THE HEAVY RAIL, THE REGIONAL RAIL ALSO SILVER LINE MM-HMM . 
          SO THEY, THEY HAVE A HIGHER, UM, UH, INVESTMENT THERE. 
          YEAH. 
          THEY, THEY MIGHT ARGUE THAT POINT WITH YOU BECAUSE THEY'RE THE, THE NET THE LARGEST NET DONOR CITY. 
          SO THEY, THEY WOULD PROBABLY ARGUE THAT I WAS, YEAH, I MEAN THAT WOULD BE UP FOR DISCUSSION. 
          I MEAN IF THERE WAS A NEGOTIATION ON THAT. 
          BUT IT'S STILL GONNA COME TO A CONSENSUS ON ALL OF THE, UH, CITIES IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS. 
          YEAH. 
          AGREEMENT. 
          YEAH, THERE'S NO, THERE'S NOT, THERE'S NOT. 
          I DON'T, I DON'T SEE A, A CUSTOM ILA WITH EACH 
          [02:25:01]
CITY. 
          THEY'RE GONNA DO A ONE SIZE FITS ALL. 
          BUT ON THIS, I THINK IT IS, IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO PUT OUT THERE WHERE WE STAND AND THIS IS PART OF THE PROCESS AND THEN THERE'S GONNA BE A UNIFIED. 
          YEAH, I DON'T DISAGREE. 
          YEAH, DAN, THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO FOR CLARIFICATION, BRUCE, YOU MENTIONED THE TRANSIT CENTER. 
          SO EDUCATE ME AND DAVID, YOU AND I HAD THIS CONVERSATION. 
          WHO OWNS THAT TRANSIT CENTER? IT'S A DARK PROPERTY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IF, IF THIS GOES FORWARD IN ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, IF THERE IS A WITHDRAWAL, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE TRANSIT CENTER IF THERE IS A FULL WITHDRAWAL TO THAT TRANSIT CENTER? DAVID HAS MORE THAN THAT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO ULTIMATELY, BECAUSE WE WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY PAYING FOR THAT, OUR EXIT OBLIGATIONS, IT WOULD BECOME THE TRANSIT CENTER AREA WOULD BECOME OUR PROPERTY. 
          NOW THAT WE, WE WOULD HAVE SOME ARRANGEMENTS WITH THEM TO CONTINUE OPERATING IT IF THEY NEED TO. 
          BUT, UM, ULTIMATELY IT WOULD BECOME TOWN OF ADDISON PROPERTY. 
          AND I'LL LET WIT ANY CORRECTIONS TO THAT. 
          APOLOGIES. 
          YEAH, THAT'S, UH, CORRECT. 
          SO THEN AT, IF I'LL USE THE WORD, IF, IF IT BECOMES ADDISON PROPERTY AND DART YOU'RE SAYING IS STILL GOING TO WANT TO USE THAT TRANSIT CENTER, WHAT DOES THAT COST LOOK LIKE? TO WHOM? TO DART? DART WOULD HAVE A LEASE WITH US AS THE PROPERTY OWNER. 
          YEP. 
          SO THAT BECOMES A RECOVERY MECHANISM FOR THE PAYBACK. 
          I, I WHAT'S THE R WOULD HAVE TO PAY US TO. 
          AND HOW DOES THAT, HOW DOES THAT GET NEGOTIATED THROUGH LEGAL VALUE ONLY OR IT'S, I THINK IT'S DEFINED PRETTY OR VAGUELY, I GUESS. 
          I DON'T KNOW WIT IF YOU WANNA JUMP IN ON THAT. 
          YEAH, I, I I MEAN I THINK WE SHOULD ALL MAKE ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT, THAT THESE STATUTES OBVIOUSLY BEING UNTESTED SINCE THIS HASN'T OCCURRED BEFORE, UM, THE STATUTES ARE A LITTLE BIT VAGUE ON JUST WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE. 
          AND SO I DO THINK IT WOULD BE LARGELY, WILL LARGELY BE NEGOTIATED BY THE PARTIES IN THAT SCENARIO. 
          AND SO WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, WHAT COST DART CAN ASSERT TO OFFSET WHAT COST WE CAN ASSERT TO OFFSET, UH, FOR MAINTAINING THE PROPERTY. 
          IT'S, IT'S STILL LARGELY AN UNKNOWN AT THIS POINT. 
          SO WOULD HAVE YOU COME ACROSS THIS IN ANY OTHER CITY OR STATE WHERE YOU KNOW THAT, THAT IT'S, IT'S NOT TENS OF DOLLARS, IT'S NOT HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS, IT'S, IS IT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO LEASE BACK A, A SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF PROPERTY LIKE THAT WITH THAT KIND OF A FUNCTION? I, I WOULD BE THE WRONG PERSON TO TELL YOU. 
          I'M, I'M JUST A LOWLY ATTORNEY. 
          BUT, UM, IT WOULD, IT WOULDN'T BE MILLION, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ANNUALLY. 
          I MEAN, IT WOULD BE, I IT WOULD NOT BE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. 
          IT WOULD BE BASED ON MARKET VALUE. 
          UM, BUT IT WOULD BE AN ANNUAL AGREEMENT. 
          YEAH. 
          SO, SO BACK TO TROOPER BRUCE. 
          TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE FINANCIAL COMPONENT TO THIS, WHETHER WE'RE IN OR WE'RE OUT ONCE THE, ONCE THE VOTERS VOTE FOR ME, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M TIED UP IN THIS, THE GMP, IT'S CERTAINLY ENTICING TO GET SOMETHING BACK IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE THEN AGAIN, BACK TO THE POINT, IF WE'RE GOING TO BE DILIGENT ABOUT PROVIDING SERVICES TO OUR CITIZENS AND POTENTIALLY GATEWAYS TO PLANO GATEWAYS TO IRVING GATEWAYS TO FARMERS BRANCHES, CITIZENS TO COME INTO OUR TOWN AND WORK OR PLAY REGARDLESS, I, I WOULD BE WILLING TO GO ALONG WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT WHAT THAT UNIFIED PERCENTAGE IS. 
          IS IT 25, IS IT 50? THAT'S NOT FOR ME TO DECIDE. 
          I THINK THAT'S IMPLORING THE CITY MANAGERS TO GET ON THE SAME PAGE SO THAT WE AS COUNCILS CAN THEN SUPPORT THAT AND VOTE THAT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. 
          SO THAT'S MY STANCE. 
          RANDY, THANK YOU. 
          UH, ON FINANCES AGAIN, ANYTHING THAT, THAT WE GOT IMMEDIATE RETURN BACK FROM WOULD INDICATE THAT WE ARE STAYING IN THE SYSTEM OF DART. 
          YEAH, THEY, IF THEY AGREED TO THAT, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO REMAIN IN DART FOR THAT. 
          UM, JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT. 
          TO MARLIN'S POINT, WHEN HE WAS ASKING DARREN ABOUT, WELL FOR THE, FOR THE DEBT, WHAT WOULD, IS HE SUGGESTING THAT IT COME TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE? WELL WHY NOT THAT THAT'S SOME OF OUR PENNY THAT THEY'RE GETTING INTO WHEN THEY PUT DEBT ON. 
          AND IF THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL GETS TO VOTE ON IT, WHY DOES EVERY CITY COUNCIL NOT THEY DON'T, OF COURSE THEY DO. 
          THEY VOTE ON EVERYTHING FOR DART. 
          THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF THE BIG LAYERS IN DART. 
          WELL, DART COUNCIL DOES NOT SURE THEY DO. 
          WELL THEY DON'T. 
          ANYWAY, IF THAT, DO THEY HAVE A COMMITTEE THAT VOTES ON IT? I THEY HAVE INPUT. 
          THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL HAS INPUT ON EVERYTHING DART DOES. 
          I'M NOT SAYING THEY DON'T HAVE INPUT, THEY DON'T VOTE. 
          SO LET'S HAVE INPUT AND EITHER WE HAVE INPUT EQUAL TO DALLAS'S INPUT OR THEY DON'T HAVE INPUT AT ALL. 
          THEY HAVE INPUT TO THEIR BOARD MEMBER, BOARD MEMBERS AND WE WOULD'VE INPUT TO OUR BOARD MEMBER. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S NOT THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD IT, BUT I'LL, I'LL ACCEPT THAT AS AS TRUTH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ARE WE ONTO GOVERNANCE NEXT? 'CAUSE I CAN TELL YOU WHERE I, 
          [02:30:01]
I WOULD LAND ON GOVERNANCE IF WE'RE HEADED DOWN THAT ROAD. 
          HOLD ON. 
          SEEMED LIKE WE KIND OF WENT DOWN THAT PATH A LITTLE BIT, BUT WE CAN GO DOWN MORE. 
          SO, UH, ON THE GMP RIGHT, THE GMP THAT'S ON THE TABLE. 
          IF WE CAN GET THAT WITH NO STRINGS ATTACHED, WHY WOULD WE NOT ACCEPT IT? WELL, THERE IS, BUT WE CAN'T. 
          RIGHT? WELL THERE'S, WHAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD IS THAT WE'RE GOING DOWN THIS PATH WHERE THE, YOU DIDN'T YOU JUST SAY THAT THE, YOU HEARD FROM THE BOARD CHAIR AND YOU THINK THAT THAT'S ALL WORKED OUT. 
          SO THERE'S $2.9 MILLION THAT WE COULD GET BACK. 
          YEAH. 
          SO YEAH, THE BOARD CHAIR SAID THAT TO US VERBALLY, BUT THEN WHEN IT WAS, IT WAS PRESENTED TO THEIR BOARD LAST WEEK AND THEIR BOARD JUST DID NOT DISCUSS IT, DIDN'T TAKE ANY ACTION ON IT. 
          SO IT'S SITTING AT THE BOARD LEVEL AND WE'RE JUST WAITING FOR THEM TO TAKE ACTION ON IT. 
          BUT THAT'S 2.9 MILLION THAT WE COULD GET BACK AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER WE STAY IN OR OUT. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? NO, WE HAVE TO GIVE IT BACK IF, IF WE LEAVE, YEAH. 
          IT WOULD'VE TO BE USED FOR MOBILITY MM-HMM . 
          AND WE HAVE TO REPAY IT. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          THE GMP THAT'S ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW, WE WOULD HAVE TO PAY BACK IF WE EXITED. 
          CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN ON, ON THE LAND, THE, THE TRANSIT STATION, I THOUGHT WE WERE TOLD THAT DART WOULD HAVE THE OPTION TO, UM, HOLD OWNERSHIP OF IT, SO TO SPEAK, BUT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO USE IT. 
          I THOUGHT IT WAS SOMETHING LIKE 15 YEARS THAT THEY COULD SORT OF CONTROL IT, NOT NECESSARILY USE IT. 
          ISN'T THAT WHAT WE WERE TOLD? YEAH, BUT THAT WOULD BE THROUGH A LEASE WITH US AS THE PROPERTY OWNER. 
          THEY WOULD'VE THAT 15 YEARS TO CONTINUE TO USE IT AND WE WOULD HAVE TO ALLOW THEM TO THROUGH THAT, THROUGH A LEASE OR SOME OTHER MECHANISM WITH CERTAINLY JUMP IN ON THAT. 
          MM-HMM . 
          YEAH. 
          DID I ASK HER THAT QUESTION SPECIFICALLY AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT WOULD THEY CONTINUE TO USE THAT TRANSIT SYSTEM AND SHE SAID NO, THE DAY AFTER THAT TRANSIT SYSTEM WOULD SHUT DOWN. 
          SO IT'S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE IT COULD, BUT, AND I DON'T THINK, DON'T THINK SHE USED THE WORD ENTIRELY POSSIBLE. 
          I KNOW WHAT YOU SAID. 
          I KNOW WHAT SHE SAID. 
          I KNOW WHAT SHE SAID. 
          I KNOW WHAT SHE SAID. 
          I WOULD'VE PREFERRED THEM CONTINUE USING THAT. 
          YEAH. 
          'CAUSE THAT WOULD MEAN THEY'D LEAVE THE, THE, THE STATION OPEN. 
          YEAH, BUT I THINK, I THINK ANYTHING'S POSSIBLE WITH THAT. 
          DAVID, YOU YOU KNOW MORE ABOUT THAT OR? OH, ON THE, I I I THINK IT'S ALL UP. 
          YEAH. 
          WE'LL JUST HAVE TO SEE HOW, HOW THEY REACT. 
          WE GET TO THAT POINT. 
          I THOUGHT SHE SAID ABOUT, I THOUGHT SHE SAID BY STATUTE THEY WOULD HAVE TO CLOSE THAT SOON AS THE VOTE WAS CANVASSED. 
          SHE USED THE WORD BY STATUTE THEY WOULD'VE TO DO THAT, NOT BY THEIR CHOICE. 
          THAT COULD BE, YEAH. 
          THE, I THINK IT'S A MATTER OF SEMANTICS WHERE THE STATUTE ADDRESSES THAT SERVICE WILL DISCONTINUE IMMEDIATELY. 
          AND I THINK IT DOESN'T PROVIDE A CLARIFICATION AS TO WHAT SERVICE MEANS, BUT I, I THINK A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION IS THAT SERVICE MEANS THE SERVICE TO THAT COMMUNITY, TO THAT CITY WILL CEASE, BUT THROUGH SERVICE, FOR INSTANCE, AT THE ADDISON TRAIN, UH, BUS STATION MAY CONTINUE OBVIOUSLY THROUGH THE ADDISON TRAINS AT CENTER UNDER THAT INTERPRETATION AS SERVICES TO OTHER MEMBER CITIES THAT ARE STILL WITHIN DART. 
          UM, AND I WOULD ALSO JUST CLARIFY ON THE LAST POINT ABOUT, UM, 15 YEARS AND WHY THEY MAY HAVE TO OR ENTER INTO A LEASE FOR THAT PROPERTY. 
          THERE'S GOING TO BE FEDERAL GRANT ASSURANCES THAT ATTACH TO ALL OF DART'S ASSETS THAT ARE ATTACHED TO ALL OF OUR DART'S ASSETS THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO, UM, WORK THROUGH IF AND WHEN MEMBER CITIES LEAVE. 
          'CAUSE THOSE REAL PROPERTIES COULD BE, UM, COULD BE NECESSARY ASSETS TO, TO ESSENTIALLY BACK THE FEDERAL GRANT ASSURANCES SO THEY COMPLY WITH WHATEVER PENDING GRANTS THEY MAY HAVE, WHICH ARE COULD BE 15, 20 YEAR LONG GRANTS. 
          SO, OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          DAN, SORRY. 
          OR DAVID, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? WELL MAYBE I'LL TRY TO HEAR SOME CONSENSUS ON A COUPLE ON ONE THING. 
          YEAH. 
          AND, AND TRY TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          UM, I THINK I'VE HEARD A MAJORITY SAY, HEY, WE WANT TO REDUCE THIS IN SOME FORM OR FASHION AND WE CAN SAY 25, WE CAN SAY 50. 
          WE CAN, IF ANYBODY HAS A STRONG PREFERENCE ON THAT. 
          I THINK ONE THING THAT WOULD, IF I HAD TO COUNT NOSES, I CAN, I COULD CAN SEE A COUPLE THAT WOULD PROBABLY GET ON BOARD WITH SOMETHING THAT SAID, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE HAVE A GMP PROGRAM OR NOT, WE WANT A FUTURE LONG-TERM SOLUTION AT THE LEGISLATURE. 
          I GUESS MAYBE I WANNA HEAR FROM DAN AND MARLIN ON IS THAT, DO YOU WANT IT TO BE THAT CONCRETE OR ARE YOU OKAY WITH JUST A GMP PROGRAM FOR THE LONG TERM? I'D LIKE THE STARTING POINT TO BE WITH THE GMP, BUT EVENTUALLY ONCE THEY GET TO THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION, THIS NEEDS TO GO, THIS NEEDS TO GO TO LEGISLATURE FOR SURE. 
          THAT MAY BE THE ONLY WAY IT GETS REALLY RESOLVED. 
          BIG PICTURE, LONG TERM REGIONALITY. 
          CORRECT. 
          WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T HOLD UP THE BOAT FOR THE ENTIRE NORTHERN REGION. 
          ONLY AGREED, AGREED WITH HE, WHAT HE SAID. 
          BUT AS FAR AS THE AMOUNT, UM, UM, 50% 
          [02:35:02]
SEEMS REASONABLE WITH THE REDOSE REDUCED SCOPE OF WORK AS OUTLINED AS DARREN OUTLINED. 
          UM, AND UM, THAT'S KIND OF A HARD, UH, PERCENTAGE FOR ME. 
          YEAH, I I'M, I'M WITH YOU ON THE 50%. 
          THAT SEEMS REASON, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S REASONABLE, BUT, UH, DEPENDS ON WHO YOU ARE I GUESS. 
          BUT IT ALIGNS ALSO WITH WHAT PLANO IS DOING ON THEIRS AND, AND THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME. 
          UM, NOT THAT WE JUST WANNA DO WHAT SOMEBODY ELSE IS DOING, BUT, UM, IT SEEMS REASONABLE. 
          SAY TALK ABOUT REDUCED SCOPE OF SERVICE. 
          WHAT WERE YOU, WHAT YOU, WHAT WERE YOU REFERENCING? SO IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT, UM, WHAT DARREN HAS OUTLINED, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ASKING TO RETAIN USAGE OF THE RAIL, RIGHT? ALRIGHT. 
          WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UH, RETAINING THE FEDERALLY REQUIRED PARATRANSIT MM-HMM . 
          UM, THE EXPRESS, EXPRESS BUS SERVICE TO DOWNTOWN. 
          UM, IF THEY'RE STILL OFFERING THAT, UM, I'VE ALSO HEARD THAT THEY MAY DISCONTINUE THAT PRODUCT, UM, AT LEAST FOR OUR ADDISON DIRECT SHOT TO DOWNTOWN. 
          IF THEY'RE STILL OFFERING THAT PRODUCT, UM, WE WOULD RETAIN THAT. 
          WELL THAT'S NOT A REDUCED SCOPE. 
          THAT'S AN ADDITION. 
          'CAUSE THAT'S, THAT LINE'S ALREADY BEEN CUT MY, IS MY UNDERSTANDING. 
          AND AGAIN, IF IT'S BEEN CUT, IT'S BEEN CUT. 
          YEAH. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          HAS IT BEEN CUT HUNDRED PERCENT SURE OF THAT THAT PARTICULAR LINE IS CUT? YEAH. 
          SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS IF WE DON'T HAVE, UH, ONE GOING THROUGH GOING THROUGH ADDISON THAT IS EXPRESS BUS SHUTTLE, WE CUT IT BE, WE JUST CUT IT 'CAUSE IT'S NOT BEING OFFERED RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T HAVE THAT. 
          SO BASICALLY I'M TALKING ABOUT RAIL, SILVER LINE AND, AND PARATRANSIT AND NO BUS SERVICE. 
          NO, NO. 
          SAME SAME ANSWER DARREN GAVE YOU. 
          IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? NO BUS SERVICE IN ADDISON. 
          YEP. 
          THAT WE DO THE CIRCULATORS AND REPLACE THE BUSES WITH THAT. 
          UM, AND IF, IF WE'RE, YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD LIKE AND WHETHER THEY AGREE TO IT OR NOT, THEY WON'T. 
          BUT, UM, WE COULD PUT IN THE POINT TO POINT SERVICE 'CAUSE THEY ALREADY PROVIDE THAT, UH, GO LINK. 
          UH, SO I, I MIGHT MOVE THAT ONE UP ALSO. 
          BUT NOT NECESSARILY BUS SERVICE. 
          NO, BUT CIRCULATOR BECAUSE IT KILLS TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE WITH US BEING ABLE TO OPERATE THAT IN THE CITY, OUR OWN CIRCULATORS. 
          BUT THE CIRCULATOR RIGHT, THAT WE WERE TALK THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IS JUST AS EXPANDED. 
          EXPANDED, YEAH. 
          NOT JUST THAT ROUTE. 
          THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING. 
          I MEAN IT WOULD COVER MOST OF ADDISON POINT TO POINT WOULD COVER THE REST. 
          I I THINK THAT'S, UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S A REALISTIC EXPECTATION BECAUSE POINT TO POINT IS I THINK THE GOLDLINK WHAT I'VE HEARD, THE GOLD LINK IS NOT THE MOST RELIABLE AND THERE'S A LOT OF DELAYS WITH IT. 
          I I'VE NOT EVER DONE GOLDLINK, SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO IT. 
          UM, AND WITH THE CIRCULATOR WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, THAT'S BEEN LIKE ONE VEHICLE RUNNING AROUND. 
          I DON'T KNOW HOW SOMEBODY THAT GETS TO THE TRANSIT CENTER, GETS TO METHODIST HOSPITAL OR TRINITY CHRISTIAN ACADEMY WHILE THEY WAIT FOR 45 MINUTES FOR THE BUS, FOR THE CIRCULATOR TO MAKE IT BACK TO THE TRANSIT CENTER. 
          THE BUS FREQUENCY IS AN HOUR, SOMETIMES IT'S 20 MINUTES. 
          OTHER TIMES IT'S, IT DEPENDS ON THE DEMAND TIME OF DAY. 
          I MEAN IT'S 45 MINUTES AS AN AVERAGE IS NECESS NOT, I MEAN NOT NECESSARILY OUT OF, UH, CONFORMITY WITH WHAT THAT WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY. 
          AGAIN, I DON'T DO, I DON'T DO TRANSFERS AT ADDISON STATION. 
          UM, BUT I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THE PEOPLE. 
          THOSE ARE, I MEAN THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE GOOD POINTS. 
          THIS IS WHY I PUT THIS ON HERE FOR BECAUSE, BECAUSE IF WE'RE TRYING TO HAVE A TRANSIT SYSTEM THAT'S MORE EFFICIENT AND THAT MORE PEOPLE WILL RIDE, REDUCING THE SCOPE AND REDUCING THE LEVEL OF SERVICE IS, IS BACKWARDS. 
          IT, IT DOESN'T ACCOMPLISH THAT AT ALL. 
          IT, IT'S, IT GOES THE OPPOSITE WAY. 
          'CAUSE BECAUSE IF EVERYBODY'S SAYING THAT TRANSIT'S IMPORTANT, AND IT IS, I, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS KNOW I'M A HUNDRED PERCENT ON BOARD FOR, FOR TRANSIT. 
          IF IT'S IMPORTANT, WE SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR WAYS TO INCREASE THE LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION. 
          NOT LOOK FOR WAYS TO, WELL WE'RE GONNA CUT THE LEVEL OF SURFACE AND, UH, SERVICE AND THE FREQUENCY SO THAT FEWER PEOPLE ARE GONNA RIDE BECAUSE THEN, THEN SOMEBODY LOOKS AT IT AND SAYS, IT'S ONLY GONNA COME BY HERE EVERY 45 MINUTES. 
          NOT A CHANCE IN THE WORLD. 
          I'M GONNA RIDE IT. 
          I THINK, I THINK WE KIND OF HAVE CONFLICTING GOALS HERE. 
          WE WANNA, WE WANNA SAVE ALL, WE WANNA GET ALL THIS MONEY BACK. 
          WE WANT THEM TO DO EVERYTHING, WANT EVERYTHING TO BE CLEANER AND SAFER, WHICH IS CLEANER, SAFER IS A HUNDRED PERCENT. 
          I'M ON BOARD FOR THAT. 
          BUT, BUT WE CAN'T REDUCE SERVICE AND REDUCE THE SCOPE OF WHAT THEY'RE OFFERING AND PROVIDE BETTER SERVICE. 
          I JUST, I JUST A CHRIS I FOR, FOR CLARITY. 
          SO IF WE DECIDE TO GET RID OF THE STANDARD BUS BUS SERVICE, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? 
          [02:40:01]
I MEAN, CAN CAN YOU STILL TAKE A BUS INTO ADDISON AND GET OFF ON BELTLINE IF YOU NEEDED TO? SO THIS IS KIND OF THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE TYPE OF DEAL BECAUSE THE CONVERSATION NEXT MEETING IS GOING TO TALK ABOUT WHAT'S, WHAT SOME OF THE OPTIONS ARE, RIGHT? CORRECT. 
          SO MY ASSUMPTION IS, UM, WE CAN'T FULFILL THAT OBJECTIVE BY COMING INTO ADDISON. 
          THERE WOULD BE SOME, SOME TRANSFER POINT THAT OUR CIRCULATORS OR, OR POINT TO POINT GOES OUT TO OUTSIDE OF ADDISON THAT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT ALSO. 
          I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S OFF THE, OFF THE TABLE NOW, NOW, I MEAN NOT, NOT 10 MILES OUTSIDE, BUT A MILE OUTSIDE TO THIS TRANSIT. 
          I MEAN THIS IS, THIS IS, IT'S NOT BEEN DONE BEFORE, BUT THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          I THINK IT'S A VERY INEFFICIENT WAY TO MOVE PEOPLE AROUND. 
          AND, AND IT GETS BACK TO MY QUESTION IS WE, WE STILL DON'T KNOW WHO TAKES HOW MANY COME INTO ADDISON ON DART. 
          YOU KNOW, WE, WE TALKED OUR LAST MEETING, WE'VE SENT 300 FLYERS OUT AND THAT REALLY DOESN'T EVEN SCRATCH THE SURFACE OF THE NUMBER OF BUSINESSES THAT WE HAVE AND HOW IMPORTANT IT MIGHT BE TO OUR RESTAURANTS AND OUR HOTELS IN THE HOSPITAL. 
          UM, I I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU, TO THE MAYOR'S POINT, REDUCE THE SERVICE. 
          I I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF REDUCING THE NUMBER OF BUSES WE HAVE GOING THROUGH TOWN. 
          YEAH. 
          AND, AND, AND THIS IS, I MEAN I I APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT YOU PUT IN ON THIS. 
          I THINK IT'S VERY HELPFUL. 
          UM, BUT I THINK IT'S PART OF IT ALSO IS A REALLY GOOD EXAMPLE OF, OF WHY, WHY WE'RE NOT IN A TRANSIT BUSINESS. 
          'CAUSE WE'RE NOT TRANSIT PROFESSIONALS. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF GUESSING AT IT AND IT'S TOO IMPORTANT TO TOO MANY PEOPLE FOR US TO JUST GUESS AT AND, AND WELL, I HOPE THIS WORKS AND AND WE'LL PLUG THIS IN HERE AND THERE AND WHEN WE HAVE A SYSTEM IN PLACE THAT GRANTED THE SYSTEM NEEDS A LOT OF WORK, BUT TO, BUT JUST TO DISMANTLE AND SAY, WELL, WE'LL WE'LL FIGURE IT ALL OUT. 
          WE'LL DO IT OURSELVES. 
          UM, I JUST, I DIDN'T THINK WE'RE SETTING OURSELF UP FOR FAILURE AND REALLY FAILING THE PEOPLE THAT DEPEND ON, ON THE TRANSIT. 
          I GUESS PART OF MY, MY THOUGHT PROCESS HERE IS THEY'RE ALLOCATING $9 MILLION TO US AND THAT'S ALL BUS SERVICE IN THIS, IN THIS REPORT. 
          IT'S, I KNOW IT'S OLD, BUT IT'S, IT'S STILL, IT'S ALL BUS SERVICE. 
          AND I, I WOULD WAGER THAT 5% OF THAT CAPACITY IS BEING USED. 
          THAT'S PART OF THE PREMISE. 
          MAYBE THERE'S A, A, A REALIGNMENT OF SOME BUSES THAT WE AUGMENT WITH THE CIRCULATORS. 
          UH, MAYBE THAT'S, THAT'S THE WAY THAT WE GO ABOUT IT. 
          BUT WHEN THE BUSES ARE, YOU KNOW, 5% UTILIZED, THAT'S KIND OF, THAT'S HARD TO, IT IT'S HARD TO, UM, TO SEE THAT AS, AS A, AS A VALUE FOR ADDISON. 
          I MEAN IT'S A VALUE, BUT YOU CAN, WE DO IT A DIFFERENT WAY. 
          THAT'S THE POINT. 
          WELL, AND AND THAT'S THE VALUE OF A REGIONAL SYSTEM IS THAT IT, THAT IT, IT GOES ACROSS THE REGION. 
          UM, THERE'S PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING HERE FROM GARLAND ETTE, SOUTH DALLAS, IRVING, AND THEY'RE COMING IN HERE AND THAT'S THE ONLY WAY THEY HAVE TO GET AROUND. 
          WE, FOR US TO TRY TO, YOU KNOW, CO COBBLE SOMETHING TOGETHER AND MAKE THOSE CONNECTIONS, IT JUST MAKES THE SYSTEM WORSE. 
          I MEAN, IT, AGAIN, THE SYSTEM NEEDS TO WORK, BUT WE CAN, WE CAN MAKE IT A LOT WORSE. 
          MAYOR, I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WHETHER TO SEND A LETTER OR NOT HOW TO AND NOT HOW TO FIX. 
          WELL, WE'RE JUST HAVING A GOOD DISCUSSION, RANDY. 
          JUST I GET IT. 
          YOU'D TO HAVE A GOOD DISCUSSION. 
          WHY DON'T YOU? I CERTAINLY DO. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON TOPIC. 
          WHY DON'T YOU JUST LET US HAVE ON, HAVE OUR DISCUSSION. 
          I'LL BE HERE ALL NIGHT. 
          I, I'D HAVE ZERO ISSUE WITH THAT IF YOU'LL LET EVERYBODY TALK. 
          BRUCE, IF I CAN CHIME IN TO YOUR POINT ABOUT THE SYSTEM ITSELF. 
          SO BACK TO THE POINT OF QUESTION I HAD ASKED NA AND LEE, WHEN DID THE TEMPERATURE NOT INCREASE IN THEIR BOARDROOM? WHEN DID IT NOT, WHEN DID THEY REALIZE THERE WAS EVEN AN INKLING OF AN ISSUE? WAS IT TWO YEARS AGO? WAS IT A YEAR AGO? DID THEY TRY AND GET TO THE LEGISLATURE IN THE 89TH? DID THEY TRY AND GET IT SIX YEARS AGO? PRIOR TO THAT, AGAIN, THE BOARD, FROM WHAT DAVID JUST TOLD ME, THAT THE BOARD MET AND IT WAS PASSED OVER THAT IT WAS NOT EVEN DISCUSSED. 
          OR HOW DO, CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT AGAIN ONE MORE TIME JUST SO I'M WITH YOU? SO IT WAS PRE, IT WAS IN THE PRESENTATION THAT, UM, THAT NADINE MADE TO THE BOARD AS A, AS A LIST OF ALL THE POINTS. 
          THE BOARD PRIMARILY FOCUSED THEIR DISCUSSION ON THE GOVERNANCE, UM, SLIGHTLY ON THE GOVERNANCE AND ON THE FINANCIAL MODEL. 
          AND REALLY JUST KIND OF TALKED ABOUT THE NEGOTIATIONS OVERALL. 
          BUT IN THAT DISCUSSION, THEY JUST DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THE CHANGE TO THE GMP LANGUAGE. 
          SO I DON'T WANNA SAY THAT MEANS THAT THEY'RE AGAINST IT. 
          I DON'T WANNA, I JUST, THEY JUST DIDN'T SPEAK TO IT. 
          I'VE ASKED A FOLLOW UP QUESTION AND THERE WAS NO DIRECTION GIVEN AT THE TIME. 
          SO I'M JUST BEING TRANSPARENT. 
          IF YOU WATCH THE MEETING, YOU'LL SEE THE SAME THING. 
          I'M JUST BEING TRANSPARENT THAT WE JUST DID NOT GET, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT. 
          I THINK, I THINK THE, THE SENSE OF URGENCY, IN MY OPINION FROM WATCHING THAT MEETING, THAT LENGTH THAT YOU SENT AND HEARING THE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT LETTERS BEING 
          [02:45:01]
SENT TO DART FROM NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR THAT ARE GOING UNANSWERED IS IRRESPONSIBLE. 
          I, I DON'T, I COULDN'T UNDERSTAND IF I'M, IF I'M RUNNING THAT BUSINESS AND I IGNORED THESE TYPES OF LETTERS FROM MAYORS OF CITIES, I'D BE FURIOUS. 
          I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT. 
          WHAT, WHAT? I JUST THINK IT'S WHAT, WHAT ARE YOU SUGGESTING WE DO WITH THAT THOUGH? THAT'S JUST A FACT. 
          I THINK WE WRITE A LETTER OF DEMANDS AND STAND FOOT ON THAT AND NOT WORRY ABOUT THE FACT THAT THEY'VE DILUTED THEIR OWN SERVICE. 
          GETTING PEOPLE FROM POINT A TO POINT B IS HIGHLY, HIGHLY IMPORTANT. 
          I DON'T THINK THEY LOOK AT IT THE SAME WAY THAT WE DO. 
          I TAKE IT VERY SINCERELY, THE FACT THAT PHYLLIS SILVER IS, IS UPSET ABOUT THE POTENTIAL OF LOSING BUS SERVICE OR CERTAIN SERVICES, A BUS, BUT I DON'T WANNA LEAVE HER AROUND THE COLD. 
          I'D RATHER UPGRADE HER SERVICE MM-HMM . 
          AND MAKE HER FEEL LIKE, WOW, ADDISON IS LISTENING TO ME AND GONNA GIMME THE BEST SERVICE POSSIBLE AT A MORE AFFORDABLE PRICE. 
          AND WE'LL NEVER KNOW THAT IF WE NEVER GO TO THIS NEXT ACTION STEP, WHICH WAS TAKE IT TO THE VOTERS, LET THEM DECIDE, LET US GET OUR ACT TOGETHER, LET THE CITY MANAGERS GET ON BOARD AND DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE. 
          BUT BY GOLLY, IF I'M DART AND I'M SITTING HERE WATCHING AND LEAVING THIS MEETING OR ANY OTHER MEETING FROM ANY OF THEIR CITY, I WOULD THE TEMPERATURE HAVE TO GO UP AND WE'D HAVE TO BE SAYING, LET'S FIX THIS. 
          LET'S DO SOMETHING FOR THESE CITIES. 
          'CAUSE ALMOST HALF WANT OUT POTENTIALLY. 
          DAN, WHAT'S THE SERVICE THAT, THAT WE'RE GONNA DO BETTER AND CHEAPER? THAT'S, I'M NOT A TRAFFIC ENGINEER. 
          I'M JUST SAYING THAT TO THE POINT I MADE WITH DAVID. 
          THE CITY MANAGERS NEED TO GET ON BOARD TODAY, YESTERDAY, AND TONIGHT OR TOMORROW MORNING AND START THAT PLAN. 
          NOW, IF WE DO VOTE OUT OR WE STAY IN, WE STILL NEED TO PUSH FOR BETTER SERVICE AT A MORE AFFORDABLE PRICE. 
          'CAUSE IT'S CERTAINLY IS NOT AFFORDABLE. 
          BACK TO THE POINTS THAT HOWARD MAY MAKE. 
          DO I AGREE OR DO PEOPLE THAT I'VE DONE MY HOMEWORK WITH AGREE WITH THE LAYERS OF THE ONION AND THE COSTS. 
          I CAN'T RUN DART, BUT I WOULD TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, ON THAT SILVER LINE OR ON THE RED LINE OR THE GREEN LINE, IF I WANTED TO PAY FOR A $6 TICKET ONE WAY, $12 TICKET, ONE WAY TO GO TO THE AIRPORT AND IN A LOCKED CAR THAT'S SECURED OR CLEAN WITH UN HOMED PEOPLE NOT ON THAT CAR, I'D PAY IT. 
          BUT THEY'RE NOT EVEN GIVING ME THE OPTION TO PAY THAT. 
          IT'S NOT A PART OF THEIR MODEL. 
          AND THAT'S, TO ME, ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH THEIR RE THEIR REVENUE DRIVING, KNOWING THAT WE WERE GOING TO FIFA WORLD CUP IS SHAME ON THEM THAT THEY DIDN'T DO THEIR HOMEWORK FASTER TO GIVE LEVELS OF SERVICE ON THE BUS. 
          GO LINK, EVEN, EVEN INE ADMITTED TO US AT THE, UM, NORTH DALLAS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, THEIR OWN KIOSK SYSTEMS ARE NOT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR FIFA WORLD CUP PEOPLE TO COME IN HERE AND USE. 
          OKAY. 
          THEY GOTTA FIX SOME OF THOSE ISSUES. 
          SO, TO MY POINT, DART NEEDS TO, IN MY OPINION, NEEDS TO WAKE UP, RESPOND TO LETTERS WRITTEN IN NOVEMBER, TAKE THE BOARD DIRECTION WITH A LITTLE MORE SINCERITY OF A LITTLE MORE URGENCY AND, AND, AND GET CONVERSATIONS GOING WITH CITY MANAGERS. 
          NOW, NOT, LET'S SEE IF THEY VOTE IN OR OUT. 
          I DON'T DISAGREE WITH ANY OF THAT, DAN. 
          NOW THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE HERE. 
          WE'RE TRYING TO DECIDE. 
          WE'RE CONVERSATION. 
          I'M JUST TO LET HER IN CONVERS IF WE DO, WHAT DOES THIS SAY YOUR POINT? I'M JUST TRYING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT'S, WHAT'S ON MY MIND. 
          THAT'S WHAT'S ON MY MIND. 
          UNDERSTAND MARLEY. 
          UM, YEAH, I I WOULD LOVE TO MOVE FI MEAN I KNOW YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT HAPPY WITH THIS BUS DISCUSSION, BUT I, AND I GET IT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GET A CONSENSUS SO HOPEFULLY WE COULD MOVE FORWARD RATHER THAN BACK AND FORTH DEBATE ALL NIGHT. 
          SO WHAT'S THE CONSENSUS YOU'RE LOOKING FOR? DO WE WANT TO NOT HAVE BUS SERVICE? DO WE, DO WE WANT TO GO WITH WHAT DARREN IS PROPOSING FOR SILVER LINE STOP IN ADDISON AND AND PARATRANSIT OR, OR DO WE NOT? WELL, THAT'S, THAT'S THE PLANO MODEL. 
          WELL, THEY JUST WANNA DO RAIL AND I BELIEVE IT'S, I BELIEVE IT IS, WHAT ARE THEY GONNA DO ABOUT MOVING PEOPLE AROUND THE TOWN? THEY DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT EITHER. 
          THAT'S A PROBLEM. 
          WELL, I, EVEN, EVEN THE COMMITTEE THAT THEY HAD THAT WENT THROUGH THIS, THEY COULDN'T COME TO AN AGREEMENT. 
          I, I WOULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE THAT WE, THEY STREAMLINE THE BUS SERVICE AND WE FILL IN THE GAPS WITH, AND IT WOULD MAKE A BETTER PRODUCT WITH CIRCULATORS AND POINT TO POINT. 
          UM, WE, WE CAN PUT WHAT'S ON HERE AND, AND THEN THAT'S A STANCE. 
          AND IT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, SOME, UH, VERSION OF THAT. 
          UM, I'M NOT, I'M, I MEAN, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO LEAVING BUS SERVICE IN THERE FOR SURE. 
          IT'S, I MEAN, THEY PROVIDE A GOOD BUS SERVICE. 
          IT'S JUST NOT, NOT, IT'S, IT'S O IT'S OVERKILL. 
          UM, BUT YOU REALLY CAN'T GET TO OVERKILL BECAUSE THEIR MODEL IS, IS ONE SIZE FITS ALL. 
          AND THAT'S, I GUESS MORE, AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO. 
          I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT TRANSIT, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING TOO, THAT, THAT THEY HAVE TO OVER HAVE, OVER CAPACITY. 
          JUST LIKE WE HAVE HIGHWAYS THAT HAVE OVER CAPACITY AND SOMETIMES THE, HOW HIGHWAYS ARE FULL, MOST OF THE TIMES THEY'RE NOT. 
          SO FOR THE LETTER, UH, I'D SAY SILVER LINE STOP, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN THE, THE BUS SERVICE DOWNTOWN, UM, AND THE PARA TRANSIT. 
          UH, AND THEN WE, WE CAN TALK ABOUT HOW WE WANT TO PHRASE 
          [02:50:01]
THE BUS SERVICE IN, IN THE TOWN. 
          WELL, WHEN, WHEN YOU, SO THE ONLY THING I HEARD YOU SAY THERE WAS THAT TO ADD THE EXPRESS BUS, 'CAUSE EVERYTHING ELSE THEY'RE ALREADY DOING. 
          THEN I SAID, UH, TALK ABOUT THE BUS SERVICE IN TOWN. 
          BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE BUS ROUTES IN TOWN, I, AND I, I'M SURE THERE'S PEOPLE THAT, MORE EXPERTS THAN I AM. 
          UM, THERE'S A LOT OF BUS COVERAGE IN TOWN. 
          THERE'S A LOT. 
          THE REASON IS 'CAUSE WE HAVE THE TRANSIT CENTER RIGHT THERE, RIGHT. 
          SO WE HAVE MORE BUS SERVICE, YOU KNOW, THAN WE NEED EXCEPT FOR, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT A THOUSAND PERSON CAPACITY ON THIS ROUTE AND ONLY FOUR PEOPLE ARE USING IT. 
          THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE DO YOU GET NUMBERS LIKE THAT THOUGH? WHEN YOU SAY 5%? WAIT, LET GET THE QUESTION OUT. 
          WHEN YOU SAY 5% UTILIZATION, WHEN YOU SAY FOUR PEOPLE ON A BUS, LIKE, WHERE DO YOU GET THAT? BECAUSE I, I SEE STATIONS WHERE THERE'S MORE PEOPLE. 
          I CAN SEE BUSES COMING THROUGH ON BELTLINE AND MORE THAN FOUR PEOPLE GET OFF. 
          SO WHERE DID YOU GET YOUR 5%? SO THAT'S THE PROBLEM IS WE DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS. 
          SO I WOULDN'T SAY THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT TRUE. 
          WELL, IT'S JUST, JUST MY OBSERVATION AND, AND MY OBSERVATION IS VERY SPOTTY FOR SURE. 
          BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY NUMBERS. 
          I MEAN, DART DOESN'T HAVE THE TRACKING AND, AND THEY SHOULD HAVE THAT. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF, I DON'T THINK I HAD THAT IN HERE, BUT THAT'S, UH, I DID COMPLETE AND ACCURATE REPORTING OF ADDISON'S USAGE OF DART RESOURCES, WORKERS, VISITORS, AND RESIDENTS COMING INTO AND OUT OF ADDISON. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I'D LIKE TO SEE IN THE LETTER. 
          WE WOULD EXPECT THAT. 
          BUT SO, SO THERE'S SO MANY ASSUMPTIONS THAT ARE MADE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION FOR. 
          AND THAT'S, THAT'S JUST THE, THAT'S JUST THE FACT. 
          OKAY. 
          TOMORROW'S POINT. 
          HE WANTS TO LOOK FOR SOME CONSENSUS ON, SAY AGAIN, WHAT YOU WANT TO GET CONSENSUS ON. 
          IT'S CLEAR. 
          UM, WE JUST NEED TO LET SOME OF THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS SHARE THEIR, THEIR THOUGHTS. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND DARREN PUT IT ON PAPER AND I WOULD SAY SCRATCH, UH, DARREN, ARE YOU SAYING CONTINUE PUT DOWNTOWN? THAT'S, THAT'S IT. 
          UP TO THE COUNSEL. 
          I MEAN, YOU'RE ASKING DART, RIGHT? WE'RE ASKING DART IN THIS LETTER. 
          WELL, IT'S UP TO THE COUNSEL TO SEE IF WE WANT TO ASK DART. 
          AND IT'S, I'M ASKING YOU FOR ME PERSONALLY, UM, I, I, UH, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT, THAT COULD BE OPTIONAL. 
          I MEAN, IT'S JUST A MATTER OF, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW USAGE, I DON'T KNOW, USAGE AND DEMAND. 
          THAT WAS A SUGGESTION TO PUT IN THERE. 
          OKAY. 
          LETTERS OF DRAFT. 
          WE'VE REQUESTED USAGE. 
          WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN A RESPONSE. 
          I ALSO SENT A REQUEST TODAY TO ASK, UM, I BELIEVE THE EXPRESS BUS STOPPED TWO YEARS AGO. 
          SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT. 
          YESTERDAY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, AND THEN THAT WAS PART OF, I THINK THE TWO, THE STUDY THAT WAS DONE TWO YEARS AGO. 
          SO I'VE ASKED FOR WHAT THE REASONING WAS BEHIND THAT. 
          IF IT WAS RIDERSHIP. 
          I MEAN, IF IT WAS LOW RIDERSHIP, THEN, THEN THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THEN OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH RIDERS TO GO BACK AND FORTH. 
          SO I SENT THAT REQUEST TODAY AND THAT WOULD BE SOME OF THE INFORMATION WHERE I, I WOULD GO, YOU KNOW, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. 
          IF IT'S LOW RIDERSHIP, THAT'S FINE. 
          THAT'S, BUT WE'RE NOT HERE TO DECIDE ROUTES THAT THEY, THAT THEY HAVE EITHER THOUGH. 
          THAT'S SERVICE. 
          RIGHT? RIGHT. 
          YEAH. 
          HOWARD, YOU'VE HAD YOUR LETTER ON FOR A LITTLE WHILE. 
          SO THIS, I HAD SEVERAL THINGS, BUT TO ANSWER CHRIS'S POINT, AND MAYBE TO HELP DARREN WITH THIS, THERE WAS SOMETHING DART PUT OUT THAT SAID WE HAD 50,000 BOARDINGS A MONTH. 
          ANYBODY REMEMBER THAT? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IF THERE'S 50,000 A MONTH, 30 DAYS IN A MONTH, AND, AND GRANTED SUMMER WEEKDAYS, SUMMER WEEKENDS. 
          BUT THAT COMES TO 1,667 A DAY AND ADDISON HAS 17,800 PEOPLE. 
          SO THAT'S BETWEEN NINE AND 10% OF OUR POPULATION. 
          NOW, I KNOW THIS IS ROUGH, BUT TO, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT JUST GONNA PULL A NUMBER OUT. 
          FOUR PEOPLE GOT OFF THE BUS. 
          I'M TAKING THEIR NUMBER AND APPLYING A FORMULA TO TRY AND MAKE SOME KIND OF SENSE OUT OF IT BECAUSE THEY WON'T OR CAN'T GIVE US THE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. 
          WE DO NOT KNOW IF THE 1,667 PEOPLE ARE ALL ADDISON RESIDENTS, BUT I'M SURE THEY'RE NOT. 
          WELL, WE KNOW THEY'RE NOT. 
          SO THEY'RE NOT. 
          SO THEY'RE COMING THROUGH, THEY'RE TRANSFERRING AND GOING ON. 
          SO IF HALF OF THEM WERE ADDISON RESIDENCE, THAT WOULD BE THE 5%. 
          I I QUESTION THAT IT'S EVEN 5%, WHICH WOULD BE ABOUT 850 PEOPLE POINT. 
          IT'S NOT YOUR MIC'S OFF, PLEASE. 
          IT'S NOT ABOUT THE TRANSFER STATION. 
          IT'S ABOUT THE FOLKS THAT COME INTO TOWN AND MAYBE GET OFF A BELT LINE. 
          THEY GET OFF AT THE HOSPITAL. 
          IT SAYS 50,000 BOARDINGS IN ADDISON. 
          IT DOESN'T SAY IT TRANSIT. 
          I THINK THAT REALLY HAS TO DO WITH THE, THE TRANSFER STATION, DOESN'T IT? THAT DOESN'T IT GET BACK TO THE 600,000? YEAH, IT'S TRANSFER. 
          YEAH, THAT'S AT THE TRANSIT CENTER. 
          I THOUGHT THAT WAS ALL BOARDINGS IN ADDISON TRANSIT CENTER. 
          AND, AND THAT'S WHERE WE SAID WE, WE DON'T KNOW AT THE TRANSIT CENTER IF THOSE PEOPLE ARE JUST CHANGING BUSES THERE AT THE TRANSIT CENTER. 
          'CAUSE IT'S A VERY HIGHLY USED TRANSIT CENTER. 
          ARE THEY STOPPING IN ADDISON? ARE THEY COMING TO ADDISON? UM, WHICH IS WHY WE'VE STARTED THE SURVEY THAT WE'RE DOING TO TRY TO CAPTURE SOME OF THAT DATA. 
          'CAUSE WE'RE NOT GETTING GOOD ANSWERS RIGHT NOW FROM 
          [02:55:01]
DART. 
          YOUR OPINION IS WELL TAKEN. 
          I AGREE WITH YOU THAT WE NEED BETTER INFORMATION. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE GET OFF AT BELTLINE OR WHEREVER IN TOWN AND GO TO WORK OR GO GO TO A RESTAURANT. 
          WE JUST DON'T KNOW. 
          BUT WE DO SEE THE BUSES. 
          WE ALL SEE THEM AND THEY'RE NOT FULL, I DON'T WANNA SAY THEY'RE EMPTY, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF EMPTY SEATS ON THE BUSES. 
          SO THE UTILIZATION IS LOW FOR THE VOLUME OF BUSES THAT WE HAVE RUNNING. 
          SO I HAD KIND OF, I DIDN'T WRITE IT ALL UP LIKE DARREN DID, BUT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO COME UP IN MY MIND, HOW DO WE SOLVE THIS PROBLEM? AND I'M THINKING IF ADDISON PURCHASED 6, 8, 10, 12 BUSES, AND WHEN I SAY BUS, I MEAN A VAN THAT HAS 8, 10, 12 SEATS IN IT. 
          I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THEY COST. 
          50,000, 75,000, A HUNDRED THOUSAND. 
          WE MIGHT SPEND A MILLION DOLLARS ON THE VEHICLES, BUT WE'RE ONLY GONNA PAY THAT THE FIRST YEAR. 
          THEY'RE GONNA LAST MORE THAN TWO OR THREE YEARS. 
          WE HIRE DRIVERS TO DRIVE THEM MAYBE $50,000 ANNUALLY. 
          SALARIES, I DON'T KNOW. 
          BUT WE START ADDING THIS UP IN MY MIND, I'M NOT GETTING TO 18 MILLION. 
          I'M NOT GETTING ANYWHERE CLOSE TO THAT. 
          WE HAVE INSURANCE, WE HAVE FUEL. 
          IF THESE VANS WOULD JUST DIVIDE THE CITY INTO EIGHTHS AND THEY RUN CIRCULATORS ALL OVER TOWN USING THE ADDISON TRANSIT CENTER AND CONNECTING WITH THE DART STOPS THAT ARE ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF ADDISON, PEOPLE COULD COORDINATE TO GO FROM THE TRANSIT CENTER TO WHEREVER THEY NEED TO GO. 
          IT WOULD BE A MINI TINY LITTLE TRANSIT SYSTEM. 
          NOT, NOT LIKE DART COVERING NINE CITIES OR 13 CITIES, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE OTHER FIVE CITIES ARE GONNA DO EITHER. 
          IF THEY PULL OUT THEN TRYING TO CONNECT TO PLANO OR TRYING TO CONNECT TO FARMER'S RANCH, I DON'T KNOW. 
          WE NEED TO WORRY ABOUT ADDISON. 
          WE NEED TO WORRY ABOUT OUR RESIDENTS AND WHATEVER'S LEFT OF DART AFTER MAY 2ND, TRY AND CONNECT TO IT. 
          IF THE OTHER CITIES PULL OUT, WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THAT. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT, SO ALL WE CAN DO IS DEAL WITH ADAMS. WE, WE GOTTA TRY TO FIGURE OUT IF WE CAN GET TO SOME, SOME END TO THIS. 
          SO HERE'S WHAT I WOULD SAY. 
          I THINK, I THINK MARLON DID PHRASE IT RIGHT. 
          WE DO NEED TO KNOW IF WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT SERVICE REDUCTION, WHAT KIND OF GO POINT BY POINTS? WHAT ARE WE COMFORTABLE WITH? WHAT I WOULD SAY IS WE ARE COMING BACK ON THE 10TH AND THEN THESE FUTURE CONVERSATIONS TO TALK ABOUT WHAT MOBILITY COULD LOOK LIKE WITHOUT DART. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA BE GOING DOWN THAT ROUTE. 
          SO I THINK TODAY IT'S WE REGARDING BUSES, IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH SAYING TO DART, HEY, WE, IN OUR LETTER, WE WANT A PROPOSAL THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE BUS BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA FIGURE THIS OUT. 
          WE HAVE NOT FIGURED IT OUT YET. 
          SO THAT IT HAS, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE SOME COMFORT LEVEL THAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A SOLUTION THAT YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH PERSONALLY. 
          SO THAT'S JUST ON YOU AS YOU'RE MAKING THAT DECISION RIGHT NOW, AS YOU GIVE DIRECTION ON WHAT WE PUT ON THE LETTER. 
          WELL, I GUESS THE ONE THING THAT WE NEED TO REMEMBER IS THE ONLY, THE ONLY REASON ANYTHING LIKE THIS REALLY MATTERS IS IF WE DECIDE TO STAY IN DARK. 
          IF WE DECIDE TO STAY IN DART, THAT MEANS OUR RESIDENTS WENT TO THE POLL AND VOTED AND SAID WE NEED TO STAY IN DART. 
          SO THE LAST THING I'D WANT TO DO, IF THAT'S THE WAY THE VOTE GOES IS, IS CUT SERVICE. 
          YEAH. 
          I DON'T, CUTTING SERVICE TO ME IS NOT AN OPTION. 
          AND, AND GOING AND, AND SENDING A LETTER SAYING THAT WE DON'T WANT BUS SERVICE. 
          I AM NOT EVEN CLOSE TO ON BOARD WITH THAT. 
          CAN WE, CAN WE GO DOWN THE LINE REAL QUICK? DO YOU, DO YOU WANNA WEIGH IN? I WAS GONNA WAIT FOR RANDY. 
          A COMMENT LOOKS LIKE. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          THEIR LIGHTS ARE NOT ON THIS. 
          OKAY. 
          SO YOU'RE LOOKING FOR CONSENSUS ON MARLON'S TOPICS OF, SO THIS IS, UH, THREE POINTS. 
          DARREN, ORIGINALLY, HIS ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS IN ADDITION TO THE FINANCE WE SAY, AND WE ALSO WANT TO REDUCE OUR SERVICE TO JUST THE SILVER LINE AND PARATRANSIT. 
          INITIALLY HE HAD THE EXPRESS BUS TO DALLAS. 
          I THINK THAT'S UP FOR YOU ALL TO, TO OPINE ON. 
          SO I THINK THE QUESTION FOR YOU IS, IS THAT SOMETHING YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH? IF IN A SITUATION WHERE WE STAY IN DART, THEY COME TO US AND THEY SAY, HERE'S A PROPOSAL TO STAY IN DART. 
          ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT HAS MONEY COME BACK TO US BUT DOES NOT HAVE BUS SERVICE? THE ANSWER IS YES. 
          SO TO, TO ELABORATE ON THAT TO THOSE POINTS. 
          IF THE VOTERS KEEP US IN DART, I STILL WANT THESE WISHES TO BE BROUGHT TO THE DART BOARD. 
          WHATEVER GOVERNANCE LOOKS LIKE, I STILL THINK THAT THE TOWN NEEDS BETTER SOLUTIONS THAN JUST DART AS IS TODAY. 
          SO YOU DON'T WANT DART BUS SERVICE? NO. 
          OKAY. 
          MARLON, I DON'T WANT BART UH, BUS SERVICE IN THIS LETTER. 
          SO I DON'T WANT DART BUS SERVICE EITHER. 
          HOWEVER, IF WE'RE GONNA BE PAYING 1% GOING FORWARD, AND I DON'T MEAN VOTE IT OUT AND HAVE TO PAY ONE PER, IF WE STAY IN DART, I DON'T WANNA STAY IN AT THAT LEVEL AND NOT HAVE DART BUS SERVICE. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WRITE THIS LETTER. 
          IT'S VERY, THAT'S VERY HARD. 
          I THINK, I THINK THIS LETTER IS, IF WE DO HAVE A WITHDRAWAL, I THINK IF, IF THE VOTERS DON'T 
          [03:00:01]
VOTE TO WITHDRAW, EVERYTHING STAYS THE SAME MM-HMM . 
          CORRECT. 
          I I I THINK THIS LETTER HAS TO DO WITH, TO KEEP US FROM WITHDRAWING. 
          THAT'S, AND THAT'S, AND THAT GOES BACK TO MY QUESTION AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS SEGMENT TO KEEP IT TO, TO, TO HAVE A VOTE OR TO NOT HAVE A VOTE TO KEEP US WITH, WITH FROM WITHDRAWING. 
          THAT WAS WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION. 
          WILL WILL ANY KINDA LETTER CHANGE ANYTHING? SEE, I DON'T THINK SO. 
          THAT'S WHY I WOULDN'T WANT 'EM TO DO A LETTER. 
          I DIDN'T THINK SO. 
          AND I APPRECIATE THAT AND I WOULD BE THE NUMBER FOUR ON NO BUS SERVICE, JUST FOR THE RECORD. 
          BUT, BUT WE'VE TAKEN IT, UH, A CONSENSUS THAT WE ARE GONNA DO A LETTER. 
          CORRECT. 
          AND I'M ON BOARD WITH THAT. 
          I'M OKAY WITH DOING THAT PAST THAT. 
          I MEAN, NO, I'M OKAY WITH DOING A LETTER, BUT, BUT THAT'S THE POINT. 
          SO NO BUS SERVICE, WE WOULD REPLACE THE BUS SERVICE, NO BUS SERVICE. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARITY. 
          WHY WOULD WE CUT, WHY WOULD WE CUT BUS SERVICE IF OUR VOTERS WENT TO THE POLLS AND SAID WE WANT DART. 
          WHY WOULD WE SAY, OKAY, FINE, WE'RE GONNA CUT SERVICES. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SAYING DOESN'T MAKE THAT'S WHAT I, I'M HEARING THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. 
          BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT, WAIT, LISTEN TO ME. 
          THE ONLY REASON THIS LETTER MEANS ANYTHING IS IF WE CONTINUE TO STAY IN DARK. 
          IF OUR VOTERS GO TO THE POLLS AND THEY VOTE OUT, THEN WE'RE OUT. 
          THERE'S NOTHING TO NEGOTIATE. 
          RIGHT? WELL, SO, SO THE ONLY WAY THAT WE'D REALLY NEED ANYTHING TO NEGOTIATE WITH IS IF WE DECIDED TO STAY IN DARK. 
          SO I, I MEAN I'M, I'M STILL SPENDING 15 HOUR A LOT OF TIME GOING THROUGH NEGOTIATION MEETINGS RIGHT NOW WITH THE POTENTIAL TO WITHDRAW AN ELECTION. 
          SO THAT'S WHAT THE MAIN PURPOSE OF THIS LETTER IS. 
          TO THE POINT EARLIER, IF THAT'S NOT THE PURPOSE OF THIS LETTER, THEN I CAN NOT SPEND ALL THAT TIME GOING THROUGH THOSE NEGOTIATIONS. 
          SO THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THIS LETTER IS TO HERE'S WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO WITHDRAW THE ELECTION TO, TO THE MAYOR'S POINT EARLIER. 
          IF THAT'S NOT, TO NOT HAVE A WITHDRAWAL ELECTION, CORRECT. 
          TO WITHDRAW. 
          YES. 
          YEAH. 
          SO I GUESS I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT, BUT I, WHEN I LOOK AT THIS LETTER AND I THINK ALL, HOW ALL THE OTHER CITIES LOOK INTO THEIR LETTERS, IT'S FOR A, HERE'S WHAT IT WOULD TAKE FOR US TO NOT HAVE THE ELECTION. 
          AND, AND I DON'T THINK WE CAN EVER GET TO THAT PLACE WITH THIS COUNCIL THAT, THAT WE COULD HAVE, FOUR OF US WOULD SAY, WELL IF WE GET ALL THIS, THEN WE WON'T HAVE THE WITHDRAWAL ELECTION. 
          BUT TO CHRIS POINT, I DISAGREE, BUT I DISAGREE. 
          BUT TO CHRIS'S POINT, IF THEY, IF THE VOTERS ELECT TO STAY IN DART, WE GOT THE SAME THING AS WE GOT NOW. 
          RIGHT? THEY'RE GONNA BE BUS SERVICE. 
          WE'RE NOT SAYING IF THE VOTERS ELECT TO STAY IN, WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE BUS SERVICE. 
          RIGHT. 
          THIS IS ALL A LETTER TO KEEP FROM HAVING AN ELECTION. 
          RIGHT. 
          THE WAY THAT I LOOK AT IT, AND I, AND I GET, I GET IT. 
          I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT, BUT I, IF WE, IF WE VOTE TO STAY IN, I STILL THINK THERE ARE SOME THINGS WE NEED TO HOLD. 
          UH, WELL THEY GOT A LOT OF WORK TO DO. 
          THEY GOT A LOT OF WORK TO DO FOR SURE. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          THAT'S WHAT I, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AT. 
          CHRIS. 
          I, I AGREE. 
          THEY HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO. 
          AND THE FACT THAT, THAT WE, THE FACT THAT WE SEND REQUESTS IN FOR INFORMATION, I DON'T KNOW HOW IT SITS WITH YOU. 
          I WOULD HOPE SHE GETS AN ANSWER TOMORROW MORNING TO HER QUESTIONS TODAY. 
          I DON'T THINK IT'S THAT COMPLICATED TO KNOW. 
          IT'D BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHAT, WHAT, WHAT STAFF COMES BACK WITH WITHIN A WEEK. 
          I WOULD NOT BE WILLING, I I DON'T WANT TO CUT BUS SERVICE. 
          YEP. 
          I DON'T EITHER. 
          I'D LIKE TO GO BACK AND SAY, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 50% REDUCTION, UH, IN, IN THE SALES TAX, LIKE A GMP, UM, I THINK WE COULD KEEP BUS SERVICE IN THERE. 
          WE CAN ASK FOR IT, KEEP IT IN THERE. 
          BECAUSE IF WE DO STAY IN IN, IN DART THE ELECTION GOES THAT WAY. 
          YOU KNOW, I, I KIND OF THINK IT WILL THAT THE VOTERS WANNA STAY IN DART THEN TO CHANGE THE BUS SERVICE. 
          I I, I, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT IT FROM THAT ANGLE, IT IS A SLIPPERY SLOPE. 
          SO IF WE KEEP THE BUS SERVICE IN THERE AND WE STILL ASK FOR THIS, THIS, UH, REDUCTION, THEN, UM, I DON'T SEE WHY NOT. 
          BUT I WOULD BE UP FOR, UM, STREAMLINING THE BUS SERVICE, LIKE I SAID, A HYBRID, THE BUS SERVICE AND THE CIRCULATOR. 
          SO IT'S, I I THINK, I THINK WE CAN GET TO IT AND I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THE LETTER HAS TO HAVE ALL OF THE, ALL THE SOLUTIONS IN THERE. 
          NO, IT CAN'T. 
          NO IT WON'T. 
          NO, BUT WE COULD LEAVE THE BUS SERVICE IN THERE. 
          WE COULD SAY 50% BUS SERVICE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE ROUTES THAT ARE THE, THE MOST USED AND THEN WE PICK UP THE REST WITH CIRCULATORS. 
          I MEAN THAT'S, THAT'S OUR, THAT'S PLAUSIBLE. 
          THAT'S, IT'S HARD TO DO THAT. 
          'CAUSE YOU SAY THE ROUTES THAT ARE MOST USED, WELL MAYBE THERE'S THREE OR FOUR PEOPLE ON IT, IT ON, ON THE, ON THE 2 39 BUS AS IT COMES UP ADDISON ROAD. 
          BUT WHEN IT GETS INTO PLANO, MAYBE THERE'S 10, 15, 20 AS IT GOES UP ON UP TO PLANO PARKWAY OR WHEREVER. 
          I THINK IT'S PLANO PARKWAY. 
          I BELIEVE THAT'S A, A PROBLEM TO SOLVE. 
          AND THAT'S THEN THAT'S WHAT A REGIONAL SYSTEM DOES. 
          ITS YOU, YOU'RE GONNA SEE IT AT ONE POINT IN TIME ALONG THE ROAD AND IT, IT'S NOT THE SAME THING FIVE MILES OFF THE ROAD. 
          BUT THIS LETTER IS JUST A LETTER OF, OF WHAT WE 
          [03:05:01]
WOULD LIKE AND, AND IT'S UM, NOT COMPLETELY PRESCRIPTIVE. 
          IT CAN'T BE PRESCRIPTIVE. 
          YEAH, THAT'S MY POINT. 
          IT'S JUST I WANT TO GET OUT THERE WHAT OUR STANCE IS AND UM, IF WE STAY IN DART AND, AND, AND THIS GMP DOESN'T COME THROUGH, THEN OBVIOUSLY WE WE'RE KEEP ALL THE SERVICES STILL THERE. 
          THERE'S NO QUESTION. 
          IT'S JUST WE GOTTA, WE, WE NEED TO SAY WHAT WE WANT. 
          AT LEAST THE ESSENCE OF IT. 
          YEAH, I'D LIKE FOR US TO STAY IN DART WITH ALL THE SERVICES WE HAVE NOW AND GET THE GMP. 
          WELL, I WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO THAT. 
          YEAH. 
          20 50%. 
          ALRIGHT, WELL YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THERE, THERE. 
          WELL, THERE WERE FOUR THAT SAID TO REMOVE THE BUS SERVICE AND JUST ASK FOR SILVER LINE PARATRANSIT. 
          AND I COMMENT ON THAT. 
          IF, IF WE'RE GONNA ASK FOR OUR DEMANDS AND THEN TAKE OUT THE BUS SERVICE, I MIGHT AS WELL LEAVE THE BUS SERVICE IN. 
          IT'S NOT GONNA COST US ANYMORE IF WE MEET THE DEMANDS. 
          SO I'D SAY LEAVE THE BUS SERVICE IN. 
          THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          I WAS GOING BACK TO, SO I'M CHANGING MY VOTE. 
          AT WHAT PERCENTAGE OR WHAT? I MEAN, WHAT WOULD BE YOUR 50%? I THOUGHT IT WAS 65. 
          WHAT DO YOU MEAN 50%? WHAT? WE TALKED ABOUT 50. 
          OKAY. 
          55, 50, 50%. 
          WHAT ON THIS LINE? THE SECOND BULLET, IT'S OH, 25. 
          25 TO 50, 25% TO 50%. 
          YES, BECAUSE THAT'S OKAY. 
          SO I JUST 1, 2, 3, 4. 
          THAT'S THE FOUR. 
          ABOUT 7%. 
          YES. 
          WITH THE SAME PERCENTAGES. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          WHAT ELSE YOU NEED? BOY, THAT'S, I KNOW THAT'S ALL OVER THE PLACE. 
          LUCK WITHOUT WHAT ABOUT OTHER POINTS OF THE I JUST LOOK, I I DO, I JUST WANT TO ASK TO GO TO 50% WITHOUT A SERVICE REDUCTION AT ALL IS GOING TO BE UNREALISTIC. 
          WELL, OKAY, SO THEY WERE STARTING GOLINK AND THEY WERE PAYING FOR HALF THE CIRCULATOR DART WAS, SO IF WE'RE SAYING WE'RE GONNA COVER THAT OURSELVES, THEN THAT'S PART OF THAT. 
          I'M JUST TELLING YOU, I'M JUST TELLING YOU IT'S, THEY'RE NOT GONNA DO 50% WITH THE SAME SERVICE LEVEL. 
          NO. 
          SO IF THAT'S WHERE Y'ALL WANNA PUT IN THE LETTER, THE REASON THE OTHER CITIES DID BOTH IS TO GO IN TANDEM TO SAY, HEY, WE WANT TO GO DOWN TO 50, WE WANNA GO DOWN TO 50%. 
          AND THE NEXT PARAGRAPH WAS, AND WE, WE WANT TO REDUCE OUR SERVICE LEVELS IN TANDEM. 
          SO IF WE WANNA PUT IN THE LETTER, THAT'S FINE. 
          I'M JUST, YOU, WE CAN'T SAY GO TO 50% AND NOT HAVE ANY SERVICE REDUCTIONS. 
          YEP. 
          WE'VE GOT CIRCULATOR AND WE'VE GOT THE POINT TO POINT. 
          OKAY. 
          MY GUT ISSUE WITH THE WHOLE, THIS WHOLE CONVERSATION IS WE VOTED TO CALL THE ELECTION. 
          'CAUSE WE WANT OUR VOTERS TO HAVE A RIGHT TO SPEAK. 
          AND IF WE GO TO DART AND THEY, THEY SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU EVERYTHING YOU WANT. 
          HOW DO WE TELL OUR VOTERS? WELL NOW WE DON'T CARE WHETHER YOU VOTE OR NOT. 
          I STILL THINK THE VOTERS SHOULD HAVE A VOTE. 
          SO, SO I'M REALLY NOT IN FAVOR OF THE LETTER OTHER THAN TO SHOW GOOD FAITH. 
          BUT IT, IT'S JUST, IT'S A REAL PROBLEM. 
          IT MAY NOT BE SHOWING GOOD FAITH THOUGH, HOWARD THEN I, I MEAN I WOULD BE OPPOSED TO THE LETTER FROM, FROM THAT STANDPOINT. 
          AND THAT'S REALLY HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT. 
          AND I ALSO DON'T THINK DART'S GONNA AGREE TO ALL THIS BECAUSE THIS STUFF'S BEEN GOING ON FOR FIVE YEARS. 
          AND THE ONLY REASON WE'RE AT THIS POINT IS BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T REALLY NEGOTIATED. 
          THEY HAVEN'T, THEY HAVEN'T SETTLED ANYTHING WITH ANY OF THESE CITIES. 
          ALL THESE CITIES PUSHED AND PUSHED AND PUSHED TILL THEY GOT THAT, THAT ERNST AND YOUNG STUDY AND THEN IT PROVED WHAT THEY THOUGHT WAS THE PROBLEM. 
          AND HERE WE ARE BECAUSE DART DART HASN'T BEEN WILLING TO NEGOTIATE. 
          THEY REALLY CAN'T BECAUSE THEY CAN'T MAKE ENDS MEET WITH WHAT THEY HAVE. 
          SO I DON'T SEE HOW THEY'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO MEET ANY OF THESE DEMANDS. 
          AND I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE IT TO THE CITIZENS AND LET THEM VOTE. 
          DO WE WANNA STAY IN THIS IS THE WAY IT IS, OR DO WE WANNA DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT OURSELVES AND AND BE LIKE ALL THE OTHER CITIES THAT DON'T HAVE DART. 
          SO I GUESS MY, I'M SAYING DON'T SEND A LETTER. 
          THAT'S MY DIRECTION, IF THAT MAKES ANY SENSE TO YOU. 
          AND I'M SORRY IT'S SO COMPLICATED. 
          AND I DON'T THINK IT IS THAT COMPLICATED, HOWARD. 
          'CAUSE THAT'S, AGAIN, THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION AT THE BEGINNING BECAUSE IF, IF, IF THE STANCE IS, WELL, WE WANT TO HAVE LET THE CITIZENS HAVE A RIGHT TO VOTE AND THEY DO HAVE A RIGHT TO VOTE ON THINGS THAT ARE ON THE BALLOT. 
          AND THAT'S KIND OF THE NUANCE OF THIS AND THE, THE WHOLE SIX YEAR THING. 
          IT'S NOT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, GIVING THE, THE, THE VOTERS A RIGHT TO VOTE ON SOMETHING EVERY SIX YEARS IS THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD CALL AN ELECTION. 
          IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT ELECTION IS GOING TO BE CALLED EVERY SIX YEARS. 
          SO, SO IT'S, IT'S NOT LIKE YOU'RE TAKING IT RIGHT AWAY. 
          IT'S JUST WE'RE NOT HAVING AN ELECTION ON IT. 
          IT'S LIKE EVERY YEAR THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GO VOTE ON A BOND ELECTION IF WE DIDN'T CALL A BOND ELECTION. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANALOGY WORKS. 
          I I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT WE, WE DID SET UP, WHEN WE GOT INTO THIS MARRIAGE 43 YEARS AGO, THAT EVERY SIX YEARS WE WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO CALL THESE ELECTIONS AND LET THE CITIZENS, THE CITIZENS VOTE US TO GET 
          [03:10:01]
IN. 
          AND THE CITIZENS ARE THE ONES THAT CAN VOTE TO GET US OUT. 
          AND 43 YEARS LATER, THERE ARE A LOT OF PROBLEMS TODAY THAT MAYBE DIDN'T EXIST SIX OR 12 OR 18 YEARS AGO, BUT THEY EXIST NOW. 
          YEAH. 
          AND IT'S A VERY DIFFERENT SYSTEM TOO, OVER THAT TIME. 
          IT'S DIFFERENT. 
          AND SO I BELIEVE THAT THE PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO, TO WEIGH IN ON THIS. 
          IT'S TOO BIG OF AN ISSUE FOR US TO JUST VOTE NOT TO CALL THE ELECTION, WHICH BASICALLY IS SAYING WE'RE LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE WHO WANT US TO STAY IN DART AND SILENCING THE PEOPLE THAT MIGHT WANT US TO GET OUT. 
          AND THESE ARE TAX DOLLARS THAT THE TAXPAYERS SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO WEIGH IN ON HOW THEY'RE BEING SPENT. 
          SO I, I THINK WE'VE GOTTEN DOWN THIS FAR DOWN THE ROAD BECAUSE OF WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON THE LAST FOUR OR FIVE YEARS. 
          AND I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT MOST OF IT UNTIL JUST THE LAST FEW MONTHS. 
          AND THEN IN ALL THE RESEARCH AND STUDYING I'M DOING, IT'S OPENED MY EYES. 
          AND I THINK THE ONLY CHOICE IS LET THE VOTERS DECIDE AND THEN WHAT THEY DECIDE IS WHAT WE'LL DO, IT'S THEIR MONEY. 
          SO THE VOTERS STAY, STAY IN, WE STAY IN. 
          IF THE VOTERS TAKE IT OUT, WE GET OUT AND WE JUST DEAL WITH THAT. 
          THESE NEGOTIATIONS WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE. 
          DART CAN'T AGREE TO SOME OF THIS STUFF. 
          I MEAN, I SEE THE BIG PICTURE AND I, I FEEL BAD, I'M GLAD I'M NOT IN THEIR SHOES, BUT I FEEL LIKE THEIR MANAGEMENT, I'LL USE THAT TERM OF THE SYSTEM. 
          IT'S, IT'S, I SAID EARLIER, IT'S BECOME A MACHINE THAT JUST, IT'S CONSUMING MONEY. 
          IT JUST, IT IT'S JUST EATING UP TOO MUCH. 
          IT COSTS TOO MUCH TO RUN IT, IT NEEDS A WHOLE REVAMP. 
          AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE, THIS IS KIND OF A WASTE OF TIME SENDING A LETTER THAT THEY'RE NOT GONNA ACCEPT. 
          BUT I WOULD SAY DON'T SEND THE LETTER. 
          THAT'S MY VOTE NOW, HARLAN. 
          YEAH, I I'M JUST GONNA RESPOND TO WHAT YOU JUST SAID. 
          SO GROUP DECISION MAKING IS VERY DIFFICULT, RIGHT? AGREED. 
          AND SO WHEN WE ALL START THIS AGENDA ITEM WITH ARE WE GONNA SEND A LETTER OR NOT? AND WE GET THAT CONSENSUS AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO, EVEN IF WE DON'T LIKE IT, WE HAVE TO SHAPE THE THE NEW THOUGHT. 
          AND IT JUST SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE DISREGARDING WHAT WE ALREADY DECIDED AND TALKING ABOUT ALL KINDS OF STUFF FOR AN HOUR. 
          AND THEN YOU COME BACK TO, HEY, I, YOU KNOW, I JUST KINDA WANNA DISREGARD THE CONSENSUS AT THE FIRST OF THE AGENDA ITEM. 
          SO I DON'T MENTALLY WITH ALL MY BOARD WORK, I, I DON'T, I DON'T, I GET WHAT YOU WANT, BUT I DON'T TRACK YOUR GROUP THOUGHT. 
          SO MY QUESTION IS DO WE WANNA SEND A LETTER OR DO WE NOT? AND IF WE DO, THEN LET'S GET ON BOARD. 
          I MEAN, CONSENSUS DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU CAN'T CHANGE YOUR MIND, BUT IT'S BECAUSE IT'S JUST A DISCUSSION. 
          YOU CAN BECAUSE YOU CAN START IN A PLACE AND, BUT HE DIDN'T CHANGE HIS MIND. 
          SORRY. 
          UM, I DON'T THINK YOU WANTED TO SEND A LETTER TO START WITH, IS THAT CORRECT? I DID NOT, BUT I WAS TRYING TO GO ALONG WITH THE GROUP THAT OKAY, LET'S TRY AND DO THE LETTER NOW. 
          SEEING HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO COME UP WITH A LETTER. 
          I JUST DON'T THINK WE CAN AGREE TO A LETTER. 
          SO MAY THE BEST THING IS DON'T SEND IT. 
          YEAH, I DON'T THINK THAT'S, YEAH, I DON'T AND I CAME CHANGE YOUR MIND AT ALL. 
          I THINK YOU JUST INSERTED YOURSELF AGAIN TO, TO CHANGE THE, THE CONSENSUS OF WHERE WE WERE GOING. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST, IT'S SOME POINT WE'VE GOTTA LISTEN TO THE GROUP AND, AND HOPEFULLY SHAPE, SHAPE THE THOUGHT OF, OF THE GROUP TO GET TO WHEREVER WE'RE GONNA GET TO, WHETHER IT BE THIS ITEM OR WHATEVER, WHATEVER ITEM. 
          SO, UM, ARE YOU WANTING TO, TO, FOR THE GROUP TO VOTE AGAIN ON THE CONSENSUS OF WHAT DO WE DO, WHETHER WE SHOULD DO THE LETTER AGAIN? I THINK RANDY AND I PROBABLY WOULD PREFER NOT TO SEND THE LETTER FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD TONIGHT, CHRIS PROBABLY WOULD. 
          YES. 
          AND IT SEEMS LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE WOULD YOU STILL HAVE FOUR? WE CAN'T AGREE ON WHAT THE LETTER SHOULD SAY. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT THEY SHOULD APPROVE DEBT WITHOUT US WEIGHING IN ON THAT. 
          AND I DON'T LIKE THE GOVERNANCE AND I THINK WE SHOULD GET AT LEAST A QUARTER QUARTERBACK. 
          SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE GOING FROM A QUARTER TO HALF. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, I WILL GO ALONG WITH THAT. 
          I JUST, I'M JUST AS HAPPY TO NOT SEND A LETTER BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA DO ANY GOOD ANYWAY. 
          BUT I YOU HAVE FOUR, WE ALREADY HAVE A, I THINK IF YOU TOOK NOTES, WE HAVE A CONSENSUS ON THE LETTER. 
          I DID. 
          RIGHT? I DID TAKE NOTES. 
          BUT WE'RE STILL, WE'RE STILL NOT IN LINE ON WHETHER WE'RE GONNA HAVE BUSES, WHETHER WE'RE NOT, WE HAVE TO GIVE SOMETHING UP IF WE'RE GONNA ASK FOR LESS. 
          I MEAN, I I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAD THE CONSENSUS ON FOUR. 
          I GUESS WE DID, WE DID. 
          WE'RE GIVING UP THE BUSES. 
          SO YEAH, ORDER CAN TO I CAN, I CAN SUMMARIZE BOTH WHAT WE, WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY GIVEN CONSENSUS ON AND THINGS I THINK THAT THERE'S GONNA BE AGREEMENT ON, AND IT ALMOST WRAPS US UP. 
          SO FINANCIAL REFORM, WHAT I'VE HEARD IS 50%, I'M GONNA ASSUME THAT'S A GRADUAL 50%, 25 TO 50, 25 TO 50. 
          GRADUAL. 
          YES. 
          [03:15:01]
BUT IT IS A PER, IT INVOLVES A PERMANENT CHANGE AT THE LEGISLATURE, NOT JUST A GMP. 
          THAT'S WHAT I HEARD FROM A, FROM FOUR. 
          UM, WE WANT TO CONTINUE OUR SERVICE OUTSIDE OF, UH, GOLINK, CIRCULATOR, ANYTHING LIKE THAT. 
          GOVERNANCE. 
          AND THIS IS WHERE I'LL INSERT SOME WHAT I'M HEARING. 
          WE ARE IN FAVOR OF THE GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE THAT WAS PRESENTED THAT HAD US AT FOUR HAD A SINGLE MEMBER AT A 4% VOTE. 
          AND SOME CORRECT ME IF YOU, IF YOU DIDN'T HEAR THAT ALICE, AT LESS THAN LESS THAN WE GOTTA FIGURE OUT THE PERCENTAGE. 
          YEAH. 
          UH, SO WE CAN SAY LESS THAN 45%, LESS THAN 50% SURE. 
          LESS THAN 45%. 
          UM, I THINK EVERYONE HERE IS GONNA AGREE WITH THE CLEANLINESS, THE DATA, HAVING BETTER DATA SECURITY. 
          I MEAN, I THINK WE CAN EASILY INSERT THOSE THINGS. 
          I DON'T THINK THERE'S GONNA BE ANY DISAGREEMENT WITH THAT. 
          CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. 
          SO WE HAVE A GOOD BONES OF A LETTER BASED ON ALL THAT. 
          BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I THINK, I THINK IT'S, IT'S AN ARGUABLE CASE THAT LOWERING IT DOWN, IF THIS GOES FLIES, IF THIS FLIES THAT LOWERING OUR, UM, PARTICIPATION DOWN TO 50% OR GETTING THE 50% GMP AND KEEPING THE BUS SERVICE, UM, HONESTLY TO THE VALUE TO ADDISON, THE USAGE, UH, ALL OF THAT WOULD WOULD FLY. 
          SO I DON'T, THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN. 
          I'M NOT GONNA CUT. 
          THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO ASK FOR. 
          AND BUT IF WE, IF WE TOOK THE 50% AS GMP AND WE HAVE BUS SERVICE AND WE HAVE GOLINK AND WE HAVE A CIRCULATOR, WHAT ELSE COULD WE USE THAT MONEY ON? WELL, THE LONG GAME ON THAT ONE WOULD BE THE LEGISLATURE, RIGHT? AND WE WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE FREED UP TO BE USED FOR MORE OF A GENERAL USAGE FROM PUBLIC SAFETY TO AND SO ON THE ONE QUESTION THAT I HAVE, DAVID DID, DID YOU, DID YOU FINISH YOUR SUMMARY OF WHERE YOU THOUGHT THAT'S MY SUMMARY, BUT OKAY. 
          JUMPING CORRECT. 
          WELL, BUT THE ONE THING THAT I, THE ONE QUESTION I HAVE THAT I I GET ASKED A LOT IS IN MAY IF OUR VOTERS VOTE TO EXIT AND THEN LET'S JUST SAY THE OTHER, OTHER CITIES VOTE TO STAY IN AND WE TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND GO, WAIT A MINUTE, MAYBE THAT WAS THE WRONG DECISION. 
          HOW DOES THAT WORK? DO WE, DO WE HAVE TO WAIT ANOTHER SIX YEARS? COULD WE HAVE AN ELECTION IN NOVEMBER? HOW DOES THAT WORK? WE ACTUALLY GOT THAT QUESTION AND WE CAN, OR WE TALKED ABOUT THAT QUESTION AT LEAST AND WE CAN HOLD ANOTHER VOTE TO GO BACK INTO DARK. 
          NOW WE CAN'T DO THAT INDEPENDENTLY, RIGHT? WE WOULD BE A NON-MEMBER CITY AT THAT POINT. 
          SO WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH DART TO BECOME A MEMBER CITY. 
          UM, BUT THERE IS A, WHICH IS, WHAT IS THAT? IS THAT MORE EXPENSES? UH, I THINK IT'S JUST THEY HAVE TO, YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH DART. 
          THEY HAVE TO INVITE YOU, RIGHT? I MEAN, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS OF MUTUAL WANT, YOU KNOW, MUTUAL AGREEMENT TO JOIN DART AND THEN HAVE THE ELECTION. 
          BUT I, I'M NOT FAMILIAR, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT PROCESS, BUT THERE IS, THERE IS A PROCESS TO JOIN BACK IN WITH DART. 
          SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO WAIT SIX YEARS. 
          NO. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          WE NEED TO START WRAPPING THIS UP, Y'ALL. 
          I THINK THEY HAD IT PRETTY CLOSE. 
          I THINK SO TOO. 
          I THINK THEY HAD A PRETTY GOOD SUMMARY. 
          DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING COMPELLING THAT, THAT WE REALLY NEED TO TALK ABOUT THAT WE HAVEN'T ALREADY? ARE ARE YOU TRYING TO JUST WRAP UP THE FINANCIAL PART OR NOW WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO THE SERVICE FLEXIBILITY AND THE GOVERNANCE. 
          WELL I THINK WE, I WAS TRYING TO BE RESPECTFUL WHEN YOU SAID YOU WANTED TO, SEEMED LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT ALL OF IT AS WE WENT THROUGH. 
          YEAH, I THINK WE WERE, I THINK MOST OF THE CONVERSATION WE HAD THE ONLY ONE BEING RESPECTFUL OF YOUR REQUEST. 
          IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? I GAVE UP ON THAT A WHILE AGO. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL ON THE GOVERNANCE PART, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THE ONE CITY ONE VOTE IS A MUST FOR ME. 
          AND ADDISON MUST BE ABLE TO PUT THAT PERSON ON THE BOARD. 
          ONE OF THE BIGGEST FLAWS TO THIS GOVERNANCE IS THAT WE HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED A REPRESENTATIVE FOR ALL OF THESE YEARS THAT WE MIGHT AS WELL HAVE BEEN UNDER DALLAS 'CAUSE HE VOTED THE WAY DALLAS DOES EVERY TIME I WANTED AN ADDISON ADVOCATE ONE CITY ONE VOTE. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S WHAT TO DAVID SAID. 
          I'VE ASKED THE QUESTION SEVERAL TIMES HOW WE WERE ASSIGNED THE PERSON OR HOW DID ADDISON GET ASSIGNED HOW WE'RE ASSIGNED. 
          AND NOBODY CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION AS FAR AS HE, UM, I'M TALKING ABOUT HOW DID, HOW DID THE RICHARDSON REPRESENTATIVE GET FORCE IS IT'S, SO WE CLUMPED INTO THAT GROUP. 
          SO THERE IS A PRESCRIBED PROCESS FOR THAT WHERE, AND IT'S EVERY NUMBER OF YEARS WHERE THEY GET TOGETHER, CITIES GET TOGETHER AND THEY AGREE ON A STRUCTURE. 
          AND SO IT WAS AGREED ON THAT THOSE CITIES WOULD JOIN TOGETHER FOR ONE REPRESENTATIVE. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH? I HAVE ENOUGH. 
          UNLESS Y'ALL HEARD ANYTHING I SAID THAT YOU HAD HEARTBURN ON OR YOU WANTED TO ADD IN. 
          I GUESS MAYBE ANOTHER THING I COULD ADD, I THINK ARTHUR STARTED REITERATING THE POINT ON THE GMP LANGUAGE. 
          I THINK I HEARD THAT. 
          SO WE CAN ADD THAT OKAY. 
          IN THERE AS WELL. 
          OKAY. 
          AND, AND ONE, ONE MORE CLARIFICATION. 
          SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT WE WOULD ACCEPT A GMP OF 50%, UM, INTO 2031? 
          [03:20:01]
OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE LEGISLATURE? WHAT I HEARD FROM THE MAJORITY WAS, UH, GMPS A TEMPORARY MEASURE. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          I GOT IT. 
          I GOT IT. 
          PERFECT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND IF THE LEGISLATURE DECIDES THEY DON'T WANT TO TAKE THIS UP, I LIKE THEY DID THIS LAST LEGISLATURE WE'RE STUCK ANOTHER SIX YEARS. 
          I THINK THE WAY IT WOULD BE WRITTEN IS A COMMITMENT FROM DART TO PARTNER ON LEGISLATION. 
          UM, BUT NOTHING'S GUARANTEED. 
          YEAH, NOTHING IS GUARANTEED. 
          I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT. 
          IT'S CALLED LIFE NO GUARANTEES. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION TO BRING UP. 
          THAT WAS IN MY NOTES. 
          IT REALLY HASN'T COME UP YET. 
          BRIEFLY, PLEASE, I'LL BE BRIEF. 
          THE DEBT AND THE CONTRACTS WITH DART, I'VE HEARD SO MANY NUMBERS, I'M TOTALLY CONFUSED THAT I THINK STEVE GLICKMAN SAID THE DEBT WAS 8.5 BILLION. 
          THAT OUR, OUR PART WOULD BE FIGURED OFF OF 8.5 BILLION. 
          I'VE FOUND DEBT OF 9.7 BILLION. 
          I'VE GOT A LETTER FROM NADINE FROM A YEAR AND A HALF AGO THAT SAYS IT'S 3.6 BILLION LAST WEEK. 
          RANDY MET WITH HER AND SHE TOLD HIM IT'S 2.6 BILLION. 
          DO WE KNOW WHAT WE OWE DART? DO WE KNOW WHAT THE, BECAUSE 'CAUSE IF WE'RE GONNA EXIT AND HAVE TO PAY A LOT OF MONEY, I'M TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION ON REALLY WHAT IS THE NUMBER. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT'S RELEVANT TO THIS DISCUSSION, IS IT? I REALLY DON'T BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LETTER AND WE GOT, WE GOT THE, I THOUGHT WE WERE HAVING A DISCUSSION. 
          MAYOR. 
          THE ONLY THAT'S WHAT I SAID. 
          YOU SAID WE'RE HAVING A ROBUST DISCUSSION. 
          GIVE A ONCE CENT EXPLANATION. 
          I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE PRESENTATIONS, STEVEN HAS COME UP WITH HIS OWN CALCULATION BASED ON THE, THEY READ IT IN 2024, HIS OWN CALCULATION. 
          THE GENERAL OBLIGATION NUMBER IS NOT ONLY DEBT, IT'S ALSO CONTRACTS. 
          SO SOME, BUT WE CAN ANSWER YOUR SPECIFIC QUESTION IN MORE DETAIL. 
          BUT AS FAR AS WE'VE CALCULATED IT BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW TO THIS POINT, AND IT WAS AT THAT, YOU KNOW, 2.8 YEARS. 
          UM, BUT THAT COULD CHANGE UNTIL IN MAY. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE NOT GONNA KNOW UNTIL WE GET THE NUMBER FROM MAY, UM, FROM DART IN MAY. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING UP WITH A LETTER TO SEND TO DART TO SHOW TO WHERE OUR STANCE IS. 
          I APPRECIATE, I THINK IT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD DO. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S ALL FOR THIS ITEM. 
          THANK YOU, ASHLEY. 
          YES. 
          [d.  Present and discuss potential amendments to the Unified Development Code (UDC) pertaining to the creation of Parks Zoning District(s).]
UH, ON ITEM FOUR D, WE'RE GONNA PUSH THAT TO A LATER MEETING DUE BASED DUE TO A LATE HOUR. 
          UH, FINAL 
          [5. Items of Community Interest. The City Council will have this opportunity to address items of community interest, including: expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; information regarding holiday schedules; an honorary or salutary recognition; a reminder about an upcoming event organized or sponsored by the Town of Addison; information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event that was or will be attended by an Addison City Council member or an official; and, announcements involving an eminent threat to public health and safety in Addison that has arisen since posting this agenda.]
THING WE HAVE IS ITEM FIVE, ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST FOR, UH, COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ADDRESS, UH, EXPRESSION OF THANKS, CONGRATULATIONS, CONDOLENCES AND SO FORTH. 
          ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING? UH, MAYOR? I DO. 
          THANK YOU ALL HONOR. 
          UM, SO TWO, TWO THINGS. 
          UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, UH, WE HAD A REALLY BUSY BUSY DAY, GREAT DAY TODAY. 
          A LOT OF GOOD THINGS GOING ON IN ADDISON, BUT ALSO THE AREA. 
          AND SO, UM, UH, WE CELEBRATED THE RETIREMENT FOR TRACY EUBANKS. 
          UM, AND, AND, UH, I WISH EVERYBODY COULD HAVE SEEN THE ROOM. 
          I'M, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE THERE IN TOTAL COMING AND GOING, BUT IT HAD TO BE 200, 300, 400 PEOPLE, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          SO IT REALLY, IT REALLY SAYS A LOT ABOUT EVERYTHING HE'S DONE AND GIVEN TO OUR COMMUNITY. 
          UM, AND THE OTHER THING, UM, I WANNA SHARE IS, UM, FRIDAY, LAST FRIDAY WE HAD OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING MEETING. 
          AND, UH, WE, WE DID A LOT OF GREAT WORK AS A COUNCIL, BUT THAT'S THE BEST. 
          UM, FRIDAY WAS THE BEST, UH, THAT I'VE SEEN FROM OUR GROUP WORKING AS A TEAM, LISTENING TO EVERYBODY, UM, AND HELPING SHAPING THOUGHT. 
          SO THAT WAS, THAT WAS AWESOME, UH, TO SEE THAT. 
          AND I'M REALLY APPRECIATIVE. 
          THANK YOU, MARTIN. 
          READY? THANK YOU, SIR. 
          UM, THIS IS A CONDOLENCE OR A VERY SAD ONE FOR ME AND FOR OUR COMMUNITY. 
          I REALLY, UM, WANT OUR NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES IN THE METROPLEX, AND I WOULD LIKE TO NAME THEM INDIVIDUALLY, IF I COULD TAKE AN EXTRA MINUTE. 
          FRISCO, COLLEYVILLE, BONHAM PONDER AND FORT WORTH FOR THE LOSSES THAT THEY'VE SUFFERED THROUGHOUT THIS WINTER STORM WITH, UH, YOUNG PEOPLE, MOSTLY, UM, TRAGIC, TRAGIC EVENTS IN THOSE CITIES. 
          AND MY HEART GOES OUT TO 'EM. 
          I KNOW ALL OF OUR HEARTS GO OUT TO THEM, AND I JUST WANT 'EM TO KNOW THEY'RE NOT SUFFERING ALONE, THAT, THAT WE'RE WITH THEM. 
          AND I, I WOULD TRULY LIKE TO TAKE THIS ONE STEP FARTHER AND HAVE A CITY PROCLAMATION, UH, FROM THE TOWN OF ADDISON SENT TO EACH OF THOSE TOWNS TO LET THEM KNOW THAT WE'RE IN THIS TOGETHER. 
          AND I KNOW THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO, BUT IF THERE WAS SOMETHING WE COULD DO, WE WOULD. 
          AND, UH, IT JUST A TRAGIC, TRAGIC EVENT. 
          AND I, I'M SO SORRY FOR ALL OF THE, THEIR LOSSES. 
          YEAH. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT, RANDY. 
          THAT'S, UH, WELL SAID. 
          UH, JUST 
          [03:25:01]
ONE THING I HAVE, MARLON KIND OF COVERED A COUPLE THINGS I WANTED TO MENTION, BUT I DO WANT TO ALSO THANK THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TEAM, WAYNE EMERSON AND DAVID CHAVEZ, WHO SET UP A MEETING FOR US TO GO TO TOPAZ LABS TODAY IN OUR NEW LOCATION OVER AT VILLAGE ON THE PARKWAY. 
          IT'S BEAUTIFUL. 
          THE TWO FULL FLOORS OF THAT BRAND NEW OFFICE BUILDING OVER THERE, IT'S REALLY AMAZING. 
          THE TECHNOLOGY THAT THEY'RE, THAT THEY'RE PUTTING OUT OVER THERE IS INCREDIBLE. 
          AND WE'RE SO FORTUNATE TO HAVE THEM HERE IN ADDISON, WHERE THAT WE'RE THANKFUL THAT THEY, UH, THAT THEY CHOSE TO MOVE, BUT THEY MOVED WITHIN ADDISON. 
          SO THEY, THEY, THEY WERE IN ADDISON AND THEY STAYED HERE. 
          SO WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THAT AND UH, WE WANNA SEE A WHOLE LOT MORE OF THAT COMING TO ADDISON. 
          SO THANKS TO, UH, WAYNE AND DAVID FOR THAT. 
          AND WITH THAT IT'S 9 0 8 AND WE WILL ADJOURN FOR THE EVENING EVERYBODY. 
          THANK YOU.
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.