[0:04] It is 8:44 am and, uh, we'll call to order this, uh,

[0:09] addison strategic plan meeting of this addison city council. And

[0:13] it is, uh, friday, the 30th of january.

[0:17] and, uh, good morning everybody. Good, good to see everybody. And we have a nice, full productive day

[0:21] ahead of us. And, uh, I hope we'll have, I know we'll have some good discussion.

[0:26] and then we have, uh, nick here to lead us through that. Uh, david, do you have anything to say

[0:30] before we get started? Just a couple words. Uh, good morning everyone. We're happy

[0:34] to be here at a cu and, um, to use this great facility again. Uh, this will be

[0:38] nick's third time with us. Uh, he's done a great job so

[0:42] far. I know this will be a, a great session for everybody. I know we've also had a lot of time

[0:46] together over the past few weeks, so thank you to council for spending this extra time.

[0:51] um, as we all know, this is a very important piece of what we do every single year

[0:55] as we go throughout the rest of the year budget and otherwise. So, um, thank

[0:59] you for being here. I know everyone will take it seriously. Um, I will tell

[1:04] you, you'll see we jump straight in. We jump straight into the material and,

[1:08] um, and, and hope we have some really good conversation right off the

[1:12] bat. Uh, we also have staff here as we go, as appropriate staff will be available

[1:16] for questions to interact and, and some of the exercises that we do.

[1:20] uh, one piece of housekeeping, if you could just, whenever you speak, make sure you hit

[1:24] the green button on your mic. It's not to amplify in the room, but for

[1:28] the recording so we can ensure everyone's heard on the recording. With that

[1:32] said, I will hand it over to nick to get started. Thanks, david. Appreciate that. Thank

[1:36] you, counsel. I appreciate your time over. And I want to re re echo that

[1:40] comment, which is to say thank you so much for the time over the course of the last few weeks to sit down and have

[1:44] those one-on-ones for the time filling out the survey. I really do appreciate that. It helps

[1:49] me gain some understanding of where we are currently, and I appreciate the honor and the opportunity to be back again

[1:53] for my third time. So, uh, look forward to some robust discussion. Uh,

[1:58] my goal today is to help us get where we need to go in terms of strategic plan. So

[2:02] I hope that we can go ahead and make sure that we're moving forward in a

[2:06] productive conversation. We're gonna have some great conversations today. I understand where we

[2:10] have some alignment. I understand where we have some misalignment, might be the

[2:14] opportunity, but I think the conversations we'll have today will help flesh some of that out. And my hope is

[2:18] that we're gonna gain some action. As, as david mentioned, this is the guiding principles

[2:23] and the guiding documents that allow us to move forward in the city in achieving the outcomes that council

[2:27] wishes to see. And so we're gonna get into some of these discussions today. Uh, with that said,

[2:31] I'm gonna jump right into it, so, uh, hopefully we can have a good time along the

[2:35] way or feel free to do that when I'm done either way. Uh, but with that said, let's

[2:39] get into it here. So a little bit of a reminder, the elements of a strong strategic plan. You've seen this

[2:43] before, for those of you that have been on council, for those of you that have not, this is basically

[2:48] the elements of a strategic plan and where we're intending to live at today, which is, uh,

[2:52] our key focus areas and our strategic objectives. So that is our goal today, is

[2:56] to make sure that we really got those as locked down as we can get them. Uh, throughout the course

[3:00] of, of that, uh, we're gonna talk a little bit about the initiatives. That's where staff comes back and

[3:04] says, here's how we're going to accomplish what you would like us to accomplish.

[3:09] so you are the, what, what would we like to see happen here? And you gave us some great comments when,

[3:13] uh, the vision for the future of the community and some of those. But we're not going after mission vision values.

[3:17] we're not going after initiatives and measures, although staff will be here to make sure if there

[3:21] are specific comments, we can go ahead and capture those as well. Along the way,

[3:26] we're focused on the key focus areas and the strategic objectives. After that, we can get

[3:30] into some other topics too. These are the other ways that we go about building in a strong strategic plan,

[3:34] which are things like funding and staff. We do that resource allocation part, uh,

[3:38] plan implementation. So collecting the data, are we successful with what

[3:42] we said we were going to do? That's the execution phase, which was a clear, a clear

[3:47] indicator coming out of the conversations with you all is that we're in an execution phase. We

[3:51] are, we're big on the execution and making sure that we're achieving the vision and the things that were

[3:55] stated there. And then of course, assessing the progress and sharing the results, that accountability and going

[3:59] back to the public to make sure the public understands what it is we're doing, how we're doing with

[4:03] what we're doing, um, and making sure that we're building that trust with the community itself.

[4:08] so those are the kind of elements. Again, these two green areas are what we're focused on today

[4:12] for these discussions. Um, a little bit of the definition space,

[4:16] just so we have some clarity around that for those who might need it. Uh, key focus

[4:20] areas. These are the 3, 7, 3 to seven words or phrases that we build around.

[4:25] and so these are how we cluster our concepts and ideas that we build around those things.

[4:29] and then, of course, the strategic objectives, the goals to have three to seven of those

[4:33] per focus area. Um, I believe we may, I think we're exactly on

[4:37] that with maybe one or two of them. So we're right up on it with where we'd like to be. Ultimately,

[4:41] we'd like to see somewhere between 30 to 40 strategic objectives total. And we wanna make

[4:45] sure that everybody's job is reflected somewhere in there. So we wanna make sure

[4:49] that all the functions that we're performing as a city are reflected somewhere in the plan itself,

[4:54] whether it's through financial excellence or organizational excellence, those kinds

[4:58] of things. We wanna make sure that that's reflected as well. Um, with that said,

[5:02] initiatives and projects, that's maybe a level below the discussion we're gonna have today, but those are more specific

[5:06] things. That is how we accomplish what you would like to see us accomplish.

[5:10] and so that's just a little bit of that refresher right here. So again, modifying

[5:15] key focus areas if needed. Uh, refining our strategic objectives

[5:20] under the key focus areas, removing or adding, modifying if necessary.

[5:24] I captured all of your comments related to modifications. If I miss

[5:28] something, keep me intellectually honest and say, hey, you missed this. I'd like to have

[5:32] that as a part of the discussion. Okay. Um, the other thing I'd like to emphasize is today is the

[5:36] day to have the discussion. So, uh, speak now or forever hold

[5:40] your pieces. I think maybe one of the ways to say it, but we want to hear from you today what you would like

[5:44] to hear, what you would like to say regarding any one of the initiatives. This is your

[5:49] time to be able to do that. So if you have questions, comments, thoughts, this is the

[5:53] time to bring 'em up. And that's my hope is that we're having a robust discussion around that so

[5:57] that we're landing in a good place moving forward. Uh, with that said again,

[6:01] the strategic plan initiatives, key focus areas, strategic objectives, initiatives. These

[6:05] are the kind of layers that we're getting into. I just wanna highlight this, and I'm gonna skip through

[6:10] this relatively quickly, but 18 completed initiatives here in the last year

[6:14] on the plan. 73 are being rolled over. And so there are a continuation and that makes

[6:18] sense. There's some work that is ongoing work, so that's still there as well. And then there were 16 new

[6:23] initiatives added. So the idea of here being that as initiatives sunset

[6:27] off the plan, we're adding new initiatives back into continue progress. And that's

[6:31] something that's reflected, uh, that's something that's reflected on your website,

[6:35] by the way. I think you do an excellent job. And I reference addison with a lot of the communities I work with.

[6:40] your visualizations related to the progress made on the strategic plan,

[6:44] I think is is one of the best I've ever seen across the country. And again, I've worked with about 130

[6:48] different communities across the country, but I reference you all as an example. 'cause you do a great job

[6:53] updating on the progress. Here's the good, the bad, and the ugly. Let's talk about it all. Um, but we're

[6:57] making a lot of progress. And I just wanted to underscore that these are the initiatives that were finished, the

[7:01] 18 initiatives that were, uh, taken off the plan because they were completed. Um,

[7:06] so again, you'll have o uh, opportunity and access to these slides as well. So

[7:11] if you'd like to be able to review this, I imagine many of you have seen this before. If you haven't,

[7:15] you'll have an opportunity with the powerpoint itself to be able to take a look through specific initiatives. But

[7:20] 18 of these completed, these were the 16 that were added,

[7:24] and again, we completed the 16, uh, completed, the 1873 rolling

[7:28] over 16 added. So we're continuing that evolution. Again,

[7:33] it's an ever evolving plan, and that's part of what we want as we go through this

[7:37] as well. Um, getting into this, I wanna remind

[7:41] us what is the strategic plan? What do we have in here? So here are

[7:45] the key focus areas and strategic objectives as they were most

[7:49] recently adopted. So I want to give us a chance to kind of take a look at those. I don't

[7:53] know that I need to read all of these. I just want to give you a chance to take a look through these. So

[7:57] we'll start here and I'll just give you a chance to read it. We'll get into the next section and the next section, and

[8:02] then we'll move on with the conversation here. So ben, our key

[8:06] focus area, public safety. We've got five different strategic objectives

[8:10] under that. Can I, uh, ask a question? Yes,

[8:14] sir. For clarifying, just to

[8:18] make sure we're all on the same page of what this is for. Um, what

[8:22] I understand, and just correct me, what when I'm not on the right course, um,

[8:26] that this strategic plan is, is an annual direction for

[8:31] the staff to go execute. And that starts, um,

[8:35] this causes what we come out of today, causes the staff to build a budget and start

[8:39] tooling to, to, and for us to, uh, adopt a budget that

[8:44] reflects what we came up with here and then they start on october 1st.

[8:50] yeah. So yes, that is the most kind of direct

[8:54] impact is, or immediate impact is as we are about to

[8:58] start the budget process, it helps us to cope with what those decision packages could be. Changes,

[9:02] could be alterations, could be, um, but it also has a bigger impact than just that.

[9:07] I mean, as you look at the initiatives, it's more than just an annual budget. It's also more

[9:11] are we gonna focus on. So if you think about it, we're gonna be, we constantly

[9:15] bring projects, ideas, uh, to council and

[9:19] for your direction. At that point, council can decide, we wanna do this or not, or

[9:23] not do this project or not do this project. But as we are coming up with

[9:28] those before we bringing the council, this is the plan that lets us know, is

[9:32] this something we should even be working on at this point? How does it align with the plan?

[9:36] are we, how do we ensure that everything we're doing every day aligns with what this

[9:40] council wants us to be doing? And I think then you'll see that come to fruition

[9:44] with the, the projects, the budget that comes before you. But I wanna

[9:49] say at that time, the council could not wanna do

[9:53] that, could not, could decide to go a different direction. But that's why this document's important

[9:57] because it helps us to know what do we want to, what do we bring forward to council at budget or otherwise,

[10:01] right? Right. And there's a long timeframe from now until budget, until we start,

[10:06] until the annual, the new annual fiscal starts is october 1st.

[10:10] um, and I do understand, and just my colleagues hopefully that

[10:14] this is not just this annual, but some of the, some things are very annual focused

[10:19] and certainly it drives the budget, but it is beyond, uh, this year it's, it's,

[10:23] it's a couple years out where some of them, and maybe even longer term forever, uh,

[10:27] uh, for that matter. Um, so the key focus areas are all more,

[10:32] uh, foundational is what kind of I get out of

[10:36] that. Just want to, to, uh, make sure I had

[10:40] that clear and, and have it open for anybody else to a ask any questions on how this, what

[10:44] this means and what this does.

[10:50] question for you, nick. Can you go back two slides? Uh, maybe there's a

[10:54] third one there. It is. So your a hundred plus

[10:58] cities you travel to annually and meet and do the exact same thing. When I look at the numbers

[11:02] of 73 continued carried over initiatives and

[11:07] 18 completed, is that a good ratio from what you experienced year over year from

[11:11] city to city? Are we behind or ahead or right on par? I, I would say that

[11:15] we're ahead. In all honesty, the the, the type of initiative that's

[11:19] being sunsetted matters a great deal, of course. Right? But at the same time, if we've got specific initiatives,

[11:24] some of these are incredibly large in scale and scope, so it's

[11:28] really the size and the scale and the scope. But having taken a look through your initiatives, you have crossed

[11:32] off some pretty big things off the list, which is why I reference you as an example, because

[11:36] these are not small things that are coming off. Some are the majority are large. Um,

[11:40] so I'll say that you're, you're on par or above it, in my opinion. Um,

[11:45] in terms of what I've seen when I work with other organizations, lots of times

[11:49] they have a lot of these rollovers that continue to happen and there's no, what

[11:53] I'll say meaningful progress being made in something that's a demonstrable way.

[11:57] um, they like the words, they roll the words over and they're not actually making the real

[12:01] progress, which I'm here to call you out on. That's why I'm asking the question. Yep. So you would've

[12:05] told us right there on that slide, like, hey, you guys are 10% behind or 15%

[12:10] behind as a percentage to be used of where I think you should have been by

[12:14] now. What I tend to see is I would tend to see something more like 10 that

[12:18] have been sunsetted. Usually those are not, then many communities

[12:22] that I work with don't go back and add in initiatives even mid-year to continue that,

[12:26] which is something that you do here and I really appreciate. So it's

[12:31] not like something comes off and then we're done until the next strategic planning effort. We're constantly

[12:35] rolling new ones in to make sure that we're moving forward on the plan itself.

[12:39] thank you. Yep. I'll just add one comment and we took notes there

[12:43] as well. If you look the actual initiatives, some of them are multi-year projects, right?

[12:47] so we're moving the phases. Some of them are never gonna go away. I was just, I

[12:51] pulled it up. I was looking at one, um, conduct education and outreach programs to residents,

[12:56] property owners and businesses regarding our, um, zoning and build.

[13:00] we're never gonna stop doing that. So that initiative will never fall off. So there is some context

[13:04] with each initiative. Maybe, maybe we'll get through it today, but I would love to have seen

[13:08] maybe some sort of scale or yeah, sure. They just break it down, down more time. Like, hey,

[13:12] 50 of these are always gonna be right. Yeah, that's a great point. So it changes the dynamic for my visual

[13:17] yeah. Of that number. Yeah, that's a great point. That's a great perspective. Yep. I appreciate that. Can

[13:21] we get kind of an overview of the structure of today so that I don't ask questions that will

[13:25] be asked later? Sure. Yeah. So

[13:30] in terms of the structure for today, my intent is to provide a lot of information

[13:34] upfront as stage setting. So what I'm going to do is I'm gonna walk through,

[13:38] uh, one, I wanna walk through where we are currently with the strategic plan, let you absorb that.

[13:42] then I want to get into the data, what happened with the survey, what happened with the one-on-one

[13:46] conversations, and where do we have agreement and alignment? Where do we have

[13:50] some areas where we need to have more robust discussion? I'm gonna walk us through, not

[13:55] in order of these 1, 2, 3, I'm gonna walk us through the process

[13:59] in terms of we have complete alignment about this because we do, there

[14:03] are several of these key focus areas and strategic objectives where we are completely aligned.

[14:08] and I'd like to start with those and then move into conversations that are, uh,

[14:13] require increasing levels of discussion might be the right way of saying it. So we'll get into

[14:17] things where we need to have more and more discussions so that you can have that. But I'd like to start in

[14:21] the areas where we agree with each other and then we can have those discussions, hopefully

[14:25] building a little bit momentum. You know, what I can say is we are largely in

[14:29] agreement. At the point where we get into more robust discussions,

[14:33] we might get into some breakout activities involving, let's go ahead and get the actual

[14:38] wording and smithing that we've done for some of us that are in years past. We've written those

[14:42] down. We'll get into some of that as well. I just wanna make sure that we save enough time for

[14:46] the discussions that need to be had and get as much off of our plate that we agree on as

[14:50] possible. So that's a little bit of the intent of how I was going to do this.

[14:54] I'll also say it's a little bit of a choose your own adventure too, friends. So

[14:59] the conversations you need to have are the conversations I want you to have. The things that we're looking

[15:03] to accomplish today, my hope is we can get through as many strategic objectives and key

[15:07] focus areas as we possibly can and gain as much alignment as possible. That

[15:11] may not be possible on certain topics, um, in which case we may have to pause and come back to

[15:15] that at some point in the future. But, um, that's my hope is that we can get that far.

[15:20] is that acceptable in terms of yes. That good for me? Okay. I just would

[15:24] like to know kind of, so I don't jump the gun on something. Yep. No, fantastic. Yep.

[15:31] moving right along. All right. Uh, with this right here, again, I'm

[15:35] sure you're familiar with your strategic plan, but just wanted you to have a chance to absorb a little bit more of

[15:39] it when it came to this, make sure you had a chance to see it. Um, I'm gonna

[15:43] talk through some of the common themes of the discussions and the one-on-ones as well as the

[15:47] survey results. So we're gonna get into common themes and some of that I just wanted you all to have a

[15:51] baseline. Here's three, four, and five for you to have a chance to review and to the point

[15:55] of ongoing financial health and organization that's never going away.

[15:59] so that's why I picked yeah. Polo out and now zipper set is set. So

[16:04] set it up. So headache would be helpful. Yep. I see what you're saying with that. I follow you this

[16:08] new rep. Yeah. Yep, that's a great point.

[16:13] really helpful context.

[16:19] and six and seven,

[16:39] good to move on. Feeling. Okay. All right.

[16:43] um, one of the things, if I'm belaboring a point, you just

[16:47] want me to move on, you can just yy me, which means, nick, we get it.

[16:51] keep going. Okay. So feel free to yep. Y me if that's the case. Um, my

[16:55] wife does it to me now and it's a really useful way for me to stop talking and keep going.

[17:00] there we go. Uh, board governance guidelines,

[17:04] we've talked about this before and I just wanna reemphasize this, reiterate this, but this

[17:08] is good governance when it comes to how we go about this, which is to say you are,

[17:13] uh, the organization's roles to focus on the means. You're telling us

[17:17] the ends. What is it you would like us to accomplish? Staff will come back and say, here's how

[17:22] we think you would like us to accomplish that. So that's part of the interplay that we've got here.

[17:26] the point of the board is a, is a downward extension of man, uh, downward extension of

[17:30] ownership, not an upward extension of management. And that's kind of where they meet in the middle. Part of your responsibility

[17:34] is to make sure that the city manager is held rigorously accountable for achieving the outcomes that you would

[17:39] like for him to achieve. So that's part of the relationship and how we craft that relationship

[17:43] here in terms of effective governance, making sure that we've got that. So today you're

[17:47] telling us the ends, we're working on the how, making sure that we've come back with

[17:51] what that looks like. I'm gonna be big on this today. This is going to

[17:55] be a conversation that I'm big on. And, uh, I've said this before, and for this

[17:59] group, I will say it again. There's a difference between consensus and consent. Consensus

[18:04] means that we have complete agreement on something that is not what we are after today.

[18:08] consensus is an nearly impossible task in this current state. Uh, that's

[18:13] just the nature of the world at this moment. So I'm not after consensus, which means agreement

[18:17] on everything. That is not what we're after. What I'm after is consent,

[18:21] in this case, informed consent, which means no significant objections. So there

[18:25] is going to be times during the course of the day where you're gonna be like, hey, I have a really strong

[18:29] feeling about that. Great, I want to hear what that says. Now, if we don't have general

[18:34] agreement with your viewpoint, I'm sorry, but we do need to make a decision

[18:38] and we do need to move forward. So what I'm after is informed consent in this space,

[18:42] which means no significant objection. So if you don't have a strong objection to something,

[18:46] be willing to take a step back and say, you know what? I'm willing to let this go. This isn't

[18:51] something I have incredibly strong feelings about. Um, and that's part of

[18:55] what I'd ask for you to do too. So I'm going to get into that at different points I'm sure today and say, hey,

[18:59] I understand we don't have agreement or support for what you're saying. I understand that that's

[19:04] something you feel passionate about. We do need to move the conversation forward. And that's going to be

[19:08] my request, is that you honor that my role as a facilitator is to get us where we're looking to go.

[19:13] questions about that? Yes, sir. Uh, real quick on consent, uh, can we talk about silence equaling consent?

[19:17] uh, for example, three counsel members might say,

[19:22] I don't want that, or I want that. And if the others are silent,

[19:27] then they're basically consenting to what, what, in this example,

[19:31] those three council members were suggesting, is that, is that

[19:35] the way you view it? Or how should we view it? I, I think that's a great point that you're bringing up, and that's why I

[19:39] was really encouraging us to speak up. If you have a strong opinion, let's hear it. We would love to hear from

[19:43] you today about this, and you're absolutely right, which is silence is ascension in my

[19:47] world. And, and the bottom line is, if you're holding your tongue and saying, I don't have a strong

[19:51] opinion about this, then I'm gonna say that's good enough for us to move forward with. 'cause I, I can't

[19:55] interpret your silence. Um, but please help me not do that.

[20:00] I would like to encourage us to have active consent so that we are, uh,

[20:05] instead of just being silent and saying, you know, assuming the consent, that we either

[20:09] say, yep, I do have a significant objection, or

[20:13] I don't, and we can move on. That's, that's what I'd like to see, because I don't

[20:17] like surprises. We'll do our best with that as well. I appreciate

[20:21] that. Absolutely. And thank you for that comment. I, I, that is the conversation

[20:26] I hope we have today is I like what we're doing. We're in the right direction.

[20:30] that feels better to me than nothing at all. Um, but my hope is we're hearing your

[20:34] voice today in the best way we can. With that

[20:38] said, let's get into the key focus areas here. Um, talking through these,

[20:42] these are the data. And so what I'll say is one council member, and

[20:47] I don't know who, because this is something that I could not tell from the

[20:51] survey didn't complete the survey, so I don't know the answer on who did not.

[20:55] but I will say that I have six outta the seven of your, of your, uh,

[20:59] uh, selections reflected here. So that is what I have, and

[21:03] that's what I'm projecting and presenting today. I can't tell who,

[21:07] um, in future years, I will probably ask for names if I'm invited back

[21:11] so that I know who and I can do a specific outreach to whomever did not. Okay? But

[21:16] that's where we are today. So I just want you to know that the six outta seven voices are reflected in this. That's what I've

[21:20] got. Um, so with this said in these particular areas, one of those questions in that

[21:24] survey was key focus areas. What's your, what you're feeling about these? You'll notice

[21:28] in the, uh, no objections or supportive category, we have a lot of support.

[21:32] so we've got pretty much, uh, financial health and organizational health. Six, infrastructure

[21:37] development maintenance, six, public safety, six, when it comes to economic

[21:41] development of revitalization, we've got strong feelings

[21:45] about that. We have a really positive thing. The comments that were made about that one are

[21:49] things related to the branding and the addison way, and some of the things I think in the

[21:53] strategic objectives were some of the commentary related to that. We'd like to see some bolstering of this because

[21:57] economic development was incredibly important to us. So that's top of the list of importance,

[22:02] uh, when it came to mobility and connectivity. That will be our last discussion for the day. Um,

[22:07] four obvious reasons. We don't have agreement on this. And so that's a conversation that's

[22:11] going to be more robust. That's it. That's where we're at on that one. And then this one, community

[22:15] engagement and vibrant and active community down here as well. Um, several different

[22:20] kinds of comments related to these, and I'll reemphasize this, but it wasn't that we

[22:24] disagree and I had conversations with all of you around community engagement. We don't disagree

[22:28] with it. We just think maybe it could be rolled up under vibrant active community. In some cases,

[22:32] it was what's the right type of engagement. That's what we care about. It wasn't that

[22:36] we're doing anything wrong, it was, we just want the right type of engagement. We want it before we're

[22:41] doing a vote. We want it targeted to the neighborhood that's being affected and impacted by

[22:45] it. Um, and so there was more specific discussion. I don't think any disagreement

[22:49] with it necessarily on anything that was underneath here. More just the how,

[22:53] how we're going about those things. So we'll get into that discussion as well. But I don't even know that that one's

[22:58] all that sticky or tricky for us. So just wanted to give you a sense on the key focus areas as

[23:02] a larger bucket, what that looks like. Uh, this was your waiting.

[23:06] I asked which of these creates the greatest impact for the success of the town of addison.

[23:11] these are your comments related to how you collectively would wait this out.

[23:15] so I wanna give you a chance to absorb this, but this is where you feel the greatest

[23:19] impact is created. As a result,

[23:28] we can get all these results. Yes, sir. Yep. I will make

[23:32] sure that all of these slides are provided and, uh, yep.

[23:41] was that a yep, yep. Or a yep. I'm just giving everybody a moment. Yeah, no, you're on it. You're on it.

[23:45] marlon. Appreciate you, sir. This is one of those things I, I think what's interesting here

[23:49] is I also have your last year results as well, from a comparisons

[23:53] perspective. And you haven't shifted all that much in terms of this public safety was

[23:57] still number one. Economic development was still number two. And financial and organizational

[24:01] health was number three. So in terms of like the overall priorities, we

[24:06] didn't shift in overall priorities, maybe just the volume of that. Yes,

[24:10] sir. Remind me again. Ali scored that, like where does the 21 come from?

[24:14] was it, was it one, was it one to 20? I can't remember. Yeah, you had, so

[24:18] the idea was which of these creates the greatest impact for

[24:22] the town of addison? And that was the question. You had a hundred points to be able to assign

[24:26] to the different categories. Okay. So these were the a hundred points assigned

[24:31] to, to the categories. Okay. Yep. Good feature

[24:35] survey. That was the last . And now

[24:39] we know . Come on now. I just kidding. Just

[24:44] that one friendly

[24:48] reminder to turn your mic for everybody. Yeah. So what was the question again?

[24:53] the greatest impact to the town of addison, which of these key focus areas has

[24:57] the greatest impact on the town of addison? That, uh,

[25:04] yes. I, I I'm 90%, lemme check that here real quick.

[25:08] I'll get you the exact wording. I'm 90% sure that was the exact wording of it, though. I didn't know if it was

[25:12] in the coming year, in the coming years currently. Um, just kind

[25:16] of a temperature I got, I took it kind of as a, as a temperature is what I, it was, it

[25:20] was a temperature question. Um, and to your point about the one year horizon

[25:25] versus the longer term, I asked longer term questions in there. The vision

[25:29] for the future. What would you like most associated with your 20 years? So there's this

[25:33] element of us kind of planning on the one year horizon, which is the more actionable, that's where we

[25:37] get into objectives and initiatives. Three years is, I used to,

[25:41] when I do strategic planning, you know, I mean five years ago when I do strategic planning, my horizon

[25:45] for folks to consider was more in the five to eight year horizon.

[25:49] and here in the last few years, I'd moved it back to three years. And I think that's

[25:54] probably the mind frame I kind of wanna send because there are multi-year projects in here and that's part

[25:58] of it as well as we do have this. So we're looking at that one to three year horizon,

[26:02] not that 5, 7, 9 year horizon. It's just an untenable

[26:07] timeline to be looking that far out into the future anymore. Um, so

[26:11] yes, in terms of thinking about it. Yep. Yes sir.

[26:15] I guess, uh, as I answered those questions, the a hundred

[26:19] points for me was difficult because

[26:24] public safety was number one. Economic development was number

[26:28] two, infrastructure was number three. Those align with my thoughts. But

[26:32] what happens is you start using these points up and then you get to community

[26:37] engagement and vibrant active community and you don't have many points left.

[26:42] so I went back and took away from the other points because those

[26:46] two at the bottom are more important than what that shows, in my opinion.

[26:50] yes. And I don't know how to tell you to structure the question differently,

[26:54] but I feel like if we had 500 points, it probably would still come out the same, but

[26:58] I would've felt better about it. Okay. Because last year I didn't like that

[27:02] those two came out so small at the end. So this year I changed the way

[27:07] I, I allocated the points and I, I still did what

[27:11] I wanted with one, two, and three, but I took away and put more in, in the bottom

[27:15] two because they're more important than we, we gave them last year. My

[27:19] opinion. Thank you, sir. So if I can make one note just on community engagement,

[27:23] I think some of what you probably experienced is what nick was mentioning earlier, because community

[27:27] engagement really is across all of these, we want community engagement to be

[27:31] involved in everything we do in all these key focus areas. So part of a discussion we can

[27:36] have today is do we pull it out from being its own key focus area

[27:40] and just incorporate it in all the other key focus areas? Because to

[27:44] your point, how do you weight it against something when it should be a part of those

[27:48] key fo key focus areas? So, um, part of that pitching you may have felt could have been

[27:52] because of just the nature of, of that key fo key focus areas

[27:56] by itself. Uh, but that's for discussion for you all. It, it could be, it

[28:00] could be that we only have a hundred points to divide over, what is it, six or

[28:05] seven areas. Maybe we needed 150 points.

[28:09] I, I don't know. I just struggled. I ran out of points. And those two

[28:13] were important too. So I took away and added, and I don't know if

[28:17] you could fix that up. Giving my, and what, what I'll add is my perspective is I love the

[28:21] way that this question is formed because it forces you to prioritize. We have to prioritize.

[28:26] so for me, um, it helps me, forces

[28:30] me to prioritize what it, we've got a hundred percent where,

[28:35] you know, what's the most important, what's the least important of the, of the

[28:39] seven key focus areas. And if I could chime in,

[28:43] I, I would almost prefer if we had seven questions. You gave us 10 points.

[28:48] so you really can go 0.2, five, 0.5, one full point to really

[28:52] weigh it so you really understand the prioritization. And I was one of the folks

[28:56] you and I spoke about, vibrant, active community and community engagement need

[29:00] to be, in my opinion, need to be rolled into one. So you can then spend those points

[29:05] more targeted, more focused on exactly what is important versus fluff.

[29:09] yep. Just my opinion and the challenge I have with, with this,

[29:13] hold on a second. Go ahead. Thank you.

[29:20] with with this is in my mind, if we get economic

[29:24] development right, then we get financial health. Correct.

[29:28] so that, that's where I challenge, we're trying to divvy up points because in

[29:32] my mind, the economic development piece gets to be really important. If we get that right,

[29:36] then financial health will take care of itself.

[29:41] agreed. And I agree with, with howard, I don't care if it was a hundred points or

[29:46] a thousand, it would've probably came out in the same order. 'cause I'd have waited them all the same. I'm,

[29:50] I'm almost on dan's thinking that

[29:54] just one through seven. And what is your most important, put it one number two

[29:58] down, down the way line. I'm not faulting what you've done here at all, but

[30:02] I do see where a couple of these can be rolled in together. And I don't want

[30:06] any of our departments or staff to think anyone else is

[30:10] more important than their department. 'cause I think the people that do the community

[30:15] engagement are just as important as the rest of it.

[30:19] just not in a out front and good. I, I want 'em to know that they're

[30:23] appreciated. Um, but they're just not yep. At

[30:27] the top of the a hundred point list. Yep. I I think the a hundred points is,

[30:31] is good. It forces you to do the distribution of what's important. 'cause everything can

[30:35] be important. Um, and I would agree with,

[30:39] so the context is a couple years ago there was, um, a lot of concern

[30:43] from the citizens about the lack of engagement, the lack of us being involved, hearing

[30:48] our voices and things like that. So these things have a life cycle and

[30:52] community engagement. Now we're doing it a lot better and we realize it needs to be in

[30:56] all the other kfa, all the other activities. So it's a

[31:00] natural thing for this to evolve out. Now I'm a fan of c uh, combining

[31:05] or maybe distributing community engagement among all the other ones. Um,

[31:09] and then, or combining it with vibrant active community. Uh, I have

[31:14] some further thoughts on that further in the session. I really

[31:18] appreciate all this feedback. I really do. And I think that's part of what I'm attempting to do here

[31:22] is help you have a mirror. That's what I'm after, is just being the mirror today in, in terms of showing

[31:26] you some of this, let me editorialize for a moment here on the why and the what with this,

[31:30] which is to say that one of the challenges I do find with communities that I work with is

[31:34] things are listed in the strategic plan and given equal priority. And we do have to make decisions

[31:39] at the end of the day as staff. Which of these is going to, when, when I have limited

[31:43] time, which of these should I be working on? Which of those should, should be funding it? Everything

[31:47] in your strategic plan is important. And I wanna be perfectly clear, if it is in this

[31:51] document, it is a priority for this community. So that is something

[31:56] that is stated. It is a difficult decision to go through a process like this. And that

[32:00] is absolutely what I intended is that there's some difficulty inside of this

[32:04] equation. What I haven't discovered with other communities that I've worked with, and let's say community

[32:08] engagement as a, as a thing, what if that came back as a two?

[32:13] what that would say to me is that that is a key focus area that you don't actually prioritize.

[32:17] and when it's listed in the same verbiage as public safety, which might be a 25

[32:21] and that's a two, that means it's 12 and a half times more important. Which is why one through seven

[32:25] isn't the way that I do it, which is an ordinal ranking. Uh, this is a card, excuse me,

[32:30] this is a cardinal ranking, it's an ordinal ranking. So in this case, I can see how

[32:34] percentage-wise more valuable something is in there. This doesn't

[32:38] indicate anything wrong to me at all. And like you all have said, and this is a common theme from

[32:42] the discussions vibrant act, the community engagement,

[32:47] let's break it up and make it a part of others or let's combine it with vibrant active community.

[32:51] and that was a conversation that I had with several of you as a priority. So

[32:56] it just says to me that this is an opportunity, one, that the things up here are important

[33:00] to us. If that was a two that would say that we need to discuss that, then that's what I would bring

[33:04] up. But the fact that it's an eight, hey that's okay. And now we just need to discuss where

[33:08] that would go and to the point of maybe having more points so it didn't feel so restrictive. I totally hear

[33:12] you on that. Um, this is a process that I go through with a lot of communities

[33:17] just to help them see the differences in terms of how you're collectively supporting or

[33:21] approaching something. And uh, if you have a huge disagreement with certain elements

[33:25] of this, you might be able to tell how out of alignment with

[33:29] others on the team that you might be. Again, what I'd say is this is very similar

[33:33] to where you landed last year, which is encouraging to me, which is we have a

[33:38] lot of support for the things that we do support, that's a really positive thing. So really

[33:42] great feedback. Uh, really appreciate the difficulty of the task that you were given

[33:46] and I appreciate your willingness to lean in on something that's not easy. I know these are all priorities to

[33:50] you. Let's make sure that it's reflected that way too when we go forward with the plan. So thank you for

[33:54] that. Appreciate that feedback. Um, let's get into strategic

[33:59] objectives. If we're okay with this. I, we will come just to be clear to this conversation about

[34:03] community engagement and vibrant active community and whether they should be combined, whether we take community

[34:07] engagement and, and make it parts of others or whether we leave it as is. So I

[34:11] want to clarify, we will get into that discussion. Um, before we roll on, I just

[34:15] wanted to make that clear. I'd like to provide a little bit of information related to the

[34:19] strategic objectives too here, which is in general I ask for strong agreement,

[34:23] agreement, neutral, minor objection or strong objection to each of the different initiatives.

[34:28] so every strategic object, excuse me. Every objective. So every single

[34:32] strategic objective you had the opportunity to weigh in. I strongly agree with the

[34:36] strategic objective. I strongly object to this strategic objective.

[34:41] this is the overall collective. So I just wanted you to see that in general, there

[34:45] is a lot of strong agreement with what you have in the strategic plan as a general

[34:49] group. Um, we have good agreement with it too. As I

[34:53] mentioned, consent in this space, in the informed consent space, we

[34:58] have a hundred and what is that 47 in that strong in the agreement

[35:02] category. Those are areas where I'd say, hey, let's not lean in and really push back on those we, we like

[35:06] what we've got maybe a little wordsmithing if we need to totally understand that.

[35:11] areas where we're neutral, I think I understand the why. When I looked at the neutral,

[35:15] they were these common themes that kept coming up the addison way

[35:20] being overused in elements of the strategic plan that came up as an,

[35:24] as an element of this. This becomes a a problem. Um, community engagement

[35:28] should be included. We want the right type of community engagement. Those were common themes.

[35:33] that's where I saw neutrality. And then there was minor objections and strong objections

[35:37] and those predominantly, predominantly related to mobility and connectivity,

[35:41] which is why we're gonna get into those discussions a little more robustly. Um, but I wanted

[35:45] you to see that we do have a lot of agreements about the plan in general, which is really encouraging. It

[35:49] wasn't all on the opposite side, which would be a scrap it and rework everything. We've got

[35:53] a lot we can build off of here. So I just wanted you to see that before I kept going.

[35:58] um, are you, are we gonna drill down to the strategic objectives

[36:02] in which we, you know, those ones that are, we most strongly object to

[36:06] those two or three or four? I don't know how many yes sir. We are gonna look at, yes sir. Okay.

[36:11] yep. Thank you. Um, yes

[36:15] and give good definitions of what they mean,

[36:19] uh, mobility and connectivity. Yeah. Being one. Are

[36:23] we trying to connect two buildings together or are we trying to put bike lanes all over town

[36:27] and take car lanes out? Right. I, that's all I'm saying tho those can be

[36:33] misconstrued and put into the same category and

[36:37] definitions on what they truly mean would help for me.

[36:41] absolutely. Appreciate that. Great feedback. Yep. So this slide is on

[36:46] strategic objectives versus the kfa. That's correct. So these are all the

[36:50] more granular pieces. That's correct. Okay. So this was every

[36:54] strategic objective and this is on those we're beyond the key focus areas and into

[36:59] the strategic objectives that next layer down. Okay. Yep. Yes. If

[37:03] I can ask the council a question that I had to wrestle with what I was doing this

[37:07] and have my conversation with nick in the past 12 months,

[37:11] I would ask that o open ended question when we talk about the addison way of how

[37:15] we handle business interactions, engagement with businesses, interaction,

[37:20] engagement with community citizens, visitors. Was there,

[37:24] was there a moment in time in the past 12 months where I had it multiple times where someone

[37:28] had made a mention in business, um, about the way our staff

[37:32] has treated folks? I, I don't know how, how do we incorporate

[37:37] that conversation of the addison way within that work? David, you and I have had that conversation,

[37:41] but I think that's something that I was wrestling with. I'm trying

[37:45] to get communicated to nick, is just about how, what is the addison

[37:49] way and how do we break that down when we're literally physically engaging

[37:53] our businesses and our citizens? Yeah.

[37:58] was there a question there? Yeah. Did, have you experienced anything in the past 12

[38:03] months from any personal feedback from business or residents

[38:07] of frustration? Yeah, I think there's a lot of ways that you can

[38:11] define what the addison way is, but like to me it's,

[38:15] it's the level of service. It's service beyond expectation. I think that's

[38:19] what all of our residents expect. Um, and on, on the

[38:24] business side, um, how we're engaging, I mean, I, I have heard that,

[38:28] um, on the development side, we're, we're at times making

[38:32] it a little more difficult. And I do feel like we've started to have those conversations

[38:37] and address some things with staff and added, um,

[38:41] added an employee that would maybe help as a liaison between some

[38:45] of those things. So I mean, I, I think your point's well taken. That's what I'm trying to get at for, for if you could

[38:49] each each answer that for me, it would help me understand where our headspace is at,

[38:53] if that's necessary. I can jump in real, real quick. David, we do have that defined

[38:58] on a particular webpage. Do we? Not the addison way.

[39:03] we have the addison way defined. Correct. Okay. So, so a lot of people depending

[39:07] on who you talk, talk to, they, they, they have their own interpretation

[39:12] of what it is. And um, you know, to me it's really important

[39:16] that you go to the, um, the real definition other than

[39:21] polling everybody in town, what's, what's their definition? So I,

[39:26] I always wanna start with that. Like, what, what is it really mean? And,

[39:30] and I go to the webpage that defines that and then work, work

[39:34] from there. Does that, does that kind of answer your, I

[39:38] just didn't know if you had a per, I didn't know if you had a personal engagement with someone in business,

[39:43] not, not necessarily a resident, but more business owners or business processes where

[39:47] you had somebody say something to you negative about our addison

[39:51] way. Um, not on the business side.

[39:55] not, not about the addison way. They don't, they don't, I haven't really heard

[39:59] 'em bring that up. Okay. Um, all I've heard is, hey, it's

[40:04] um, you know, to, to go through development,

[40:08] you know, there's a lot of things, um, that are required and, and

[40:12] we're one of the cities that makes 'em fulfill those requirements.

[40:16] so if you don't mind if I could, so I mean, the answer is yes, we hear that and

[40:21] I think we've been very, very transparent about that. And we talked to council about that. That's

[40:25] a concern that we have. And here's what we're doing to improve it. Bringing charles's

[40:29] position in, um, looking at our entire building inspection process to

[40:34] ensure that it is meeting what we expect it to meet. If there are any improvements

[40:38] we need to make to the make, to the code, we're gonna bring those forward to council. So I'm just,

[40:42] I'm supporting everything you're saying. I think that is a concern that we've had. We've

[40:46] done a number of steps to resolve it where I think we're in a good place right now of having

[40:51] solutions to all those. I think that's a great point of conversation for the group. 'cause we

[40:55] can talk about what we're doing and sure. That's reflected in the strategic plan. But

[40:59] I mean, if your question is have we heard that? Absolutely. We've heard it. Yeah, that, I just wanna

[41:03] get that. I just wanna make sure I wasn't crazy and thinking, I'm hearing it, hearing it differently

[41:07] than any one of you or any one of our staff for that matter. I just wanna make sure that

[41:11] was a point that we discussed today. That's all. Yep. So I,

[41:15] I'm gonna weigh in just for a sec. The complaints I've heard from business or

[41:20] residents is in the way that, I

[41:24] guess I'm gonna call it out, code enforcement, um,

[41:28] interprets what the code is. So we have codes, we have the

[41:32] u, new udc, we had codes before that, but, but there's

[41:37] codes and then, then the enforcement interprets

[41:41] that and is very, uh,

[41:45] I don't know what the word is, harsh. When they, when they

[41:50] speak out to the businesses or the people, instead of having

[41:54] a friendly approach to try and explain to someone, our

[41:58] code is this and we need you to comply nicely. It's

[42:02] like, this is the code. If you don't do it, we're gonna find you and we're gonna start tomorrow.

[42:07] that's the problem. That's, that's what I hear. And every time I hear it, david

[42:11] gets a call from me. So I, I relate it when I get that because

[42:15] to me that is not the addison way to, to

[42:19] be harsh with our residents or our businesses in trying to

[42:23] enforce the code. I just think we need a softer approach then if someone's defying

[42:28] it and we've tried and we've tried and they're just defying it within the level in

[42:32] of intensity, should, should match the level

[42:36] of defiance, if that's the right word. When I hear

[42:40] the addison the way can, can we, can we move on? Wait, fox, I make, let me make this

[42:44] comment to support our, to, to support our staff.

[42:49] what we're, what we're hearing here is I don't believe we're hearing complaints about the addison

[42:54] way. I think we start hearing complaints when the addison way is not

[42:58] presented the way we would like the addison way presented. And I think the addison, you

[43:03] know, for instance, I think the addison way is not to the first letter that

[43:07] you get. You're gonna get a $500 a day fine in 10 days if you start. I

[43:11] don't think that's what we intend the addison way to be. But there

[43:15] again, the addison way can be described in many different ways to me, and I don't think it's the,

[43:20] what frustrates me is when I hear it's the addison way that we have to spend 10 times more

[43:24] than what a project should take because it's the addison way to do it that way. But

[43:28] when the addison way is followed, I don't think we get complaints. I think it's when

[43:33] the addison way is not applied in a

[43:37] kind and friendly manner that we start getting those. Thank you mayor,

[43:42] go ahead. Okay. Thank you for the discussion on this. It's

[43:47] part of what came up through the discovery process as we went through this. And so

[43:51] it was worth discussion and I'm sure we'll have more as we get into this. These

[43:55] were the areas to the point about, uh, this is the stuff with most agreement.

[43:59] so just so you could see this, I want to clarify that a five means strong agreement. So five

[44:04] is the highest possible score, one would be the lowest possible score out of that. So as

[44:08] we're kind of looking at these numbers, anything above a three would mean we're generally in agreement

[44:12] with it as an overall group. Um, with this said, we

[44:16] see strong agreement. What you'll notice is you'll notice the areas themselves, and I mentioned this, right,

[44:20] uh, financial health and organizational excellence, tons of alignment and agreement around that.

[44:25] uh, area four, which is infrastructure, lots of alignment and agreement around that.

[44:29] um, two economic development and revitalization. Lots of agreement around that. Public

[44:33] safety, lots of agreement around that. So I don't think anything too shocking here,

[44:37] but wanted you to see that this is kind of where everything shook out. We have two areas with perfect fives

[44:42] across the board and we love financial and organizational excellence, financial health and

[44:46] organizational excellence. So just wanted you to see this, this is the areas of lease agreement.

[44:51] so the area where we have less agreement, um, this one down here, mobility and connectivity,

[44:55] the east west pedestrian. So now we start to get into three. Um,

[44:59] this one, six, this was the addison way conversation we were just having and sort of where

[45:03] that falls into it. Um, but you can see here with mobility and connectivity, that is

[45:07] the one that seems to be the, the conversation that we need to center around in terms of

[45:11] most disagreement. So just wanted you to have a sense of that. Also, the number three

[45:15] is sort of our neutral space. So three would be neutral answers are

[45:19] still mod, modestly supportive, above that line as a collective.

[45:24] however, these are the numbers. And again, because we have one person's

[45:28] score not represented in here, that could shift entirely where this lands at. And I wanna be clear

[45:32] about that as well. Yes, sir. I think to randy's point, some of these are kind of squishy,

[45:37] uh, not well-defined. And that may be part of, um, the neutral or

[45:41] minor objection, uh, like the east west pedestrian connectivity

[45:45] that could be defined as getting across a belt line in the north dallas tollway.

[45:49] yep. Or could be defined as getting from vitruvian to

[45:53] village on the parkway. So it's just a vast interpretation. Um,

[45:58] so I I think that's, that's part of it. And just better, uh, better definition

[46:02] probably going forward would be, um, of, of what the results look like for

[46:06] us would probably be wise. I I'm with you a hundred percent on that. And I think that

[46:10] in, in cases where we have a lack of clarity, the discussion today can inform

[46:15] the initiatives and the projects underneath that as well, which is hugely important in terms

[46:19] of giving you what you're after. And so let's do have those discussions

[46:23] when they need to come up because it is the way that staff can understand what you mean

[46:27] when you talk about this connectivity. Um, I crossed beltline

[46:31] and midway yesterday. It was a joy. , you're alive.

[46:36] I am. There you go. I am. My toes are doing well. Um, as a matter of fact could just,

[46:40] yes sir. I I'll use the east west connectivity as an example because you're

[46:44] right, it is broad. But that was a decision that was made during this

[46:48] process a few years ago. That's correct. To make it broad on purpose. 'cause the conversation that accounts

[46:52] all the time was we could fit a lot of different things in here. If this council believes

[46:56] something different or wants it worded differently or wants us to focus on something different, change

[47:01] it. We need to hear that as we go through the process. So we're here to, to change and

[47:05] alter whatever we need to that aligns with this council, um, with the

[47:09] plan. Absolutely. One of the things I've seen in the past is

[47:13] kind of, we, we want to interpret it our own way. Um,

[47:18] and leaving it that broad leads to ambiguity, which can,

[47:22] uh, result in lack of consent. And um,

[47:26] it says, so david, we were wise to leave it broad, but

[47:30] if we can define better what each of us are thinking under these priorities,

[47:36] I mean to, to capture that, then that would allow for, uh, probably better,

[47:40] better movement forward. Does that make sense?

[47:45] makes sense to me. I I would like to comment on that last one because

[47:50] east west pedestrian connectivity is what gives me the heartburn

[47:55] connecting the east and west sides of the toll road pedestrian.

[47:59] I agree with that. But if you're talking about from midway to wynwood

[48:04] when we're talking east, west, pedestrian doesn't even make

[48:08] sense to me. People aren't gonna walk that. I think we have a disconnect between

[48:12] the east and west sides of town. And I would like those connected.

[48:16] I would like the people to be one addison instead of an east and a west pedestrian

[48:20] and com connectivity is where I have heartburn with that because it's, to me, it's just the

[48:25] toll road and I don't wanna spend $10 million to fix it. I,

[48:29] I wanna fix it, but I don't know how we can fix it reasonably. But, but

[48:33] the broadness or the, I don't, I don't know. I had problems with it because

[48:37] it's pen pedestrian connectivity. These are discussions

[48:41] we're gonna get into. And I think these, this is exactly what I wanted to hear, though, which is to say,

[48:46] I just want one as a starting condition for you to see, hey, this is an area where we have less

[48:50] agreement. Now we know those areas where we have less agreement. These are areas

[48:54] where we have a ton of agreement and we got a lot of those. So we do have a lot of alignment

[48:58] over a lot of really important topics here. When we get into some of these discussions,

[49:02] it's the how and the what that are really gonna be the things that are gonna be kind

[49:06] of the, the discussion that we need to have. And david's right, that

[49:11] was intentionally vague or less specific

[49:15] with the idea being that initiatives underneath that could help create definition around what

[49:19] that objective meant. If we don't love it, we change it. That's it.

[49:24] this is reflective of what you want this council wants. That's what we're after today. I

[49:28] wanted you to see that alignment just so you had a sense of where it is. Um, I'm gonna get into each one

[49:32] of these. Um, if we need to in the middle of this,

[49:36] I'll take a break just so we can stretch our legs. 'cause I know how it is because, um, but

[49:40] let's get into it here a little bit. I want you to be able to see this. So I've got several data sources.

[49:45] one, you know, I've reviewed about, let's call it 180

[49:49] pages of information in order to do this. So that's a lot to synthesize to be able to bring to a

[49:53] conversation here. Um, all I'm gonna do is help provide flavor, and it's the mirror. That's all I'm

[49:57] trying to do is hold the mirror up the data sources, the priority waiting. Question two, the agreement

[50:02] with the current objectives, immediate priorities, and then the open-ended survey

[50:06] responses as well as your one-on-ones. So we'll do some summary related to all of those

[50:10] things in, in what I want to do. 'cause that provides us with complete context for this. Um,

[50:15] keep modifying, remove. So I have labeled these

[50:19] as things that you are fine with. If you're fine with it, let's go onto the

[50:23] next, right? If it's modify, let's talk about the modifications that were being proposed by any

[50:27] one of you. And if it's removed, let's talk about whether there's general support for the removal

[50:31] of something or the combination of something as we discussed. So there's a lot of data on these slides.

[50:36] the key legacy themes. These were the things when I asked you a legacy question, what

[50:40] would you like your legacy to be when people look back 20 years from now on this council?

[50:45] and these were the key themes that came out of those answers that you gave here.

[50:49] um, one is fiscal responsibility and resident first. That was a very loud and

[50:53] clear theme. I don't think I talked to anybody who didn't believe in those things as

[50:57] well. So a lot of alignment on that. Um, economic reinvention and competitiveness,

[51:03] office towers, hotel space, the reinvention or the reinvigoration

[51:07] of those became really important. Discussion, uh, discussion points. Um,

[51:12] competing successfully with the newer suburbs. And some of us felt that

[51:16] maintaining addison as a destination, a target destination was critically important

[51:20] as well. Um, public safety is a differentiator,

[51:24] but what I'd say is strong public safety was considered to be the backbone of every

[51:28] conversation. We can't have the other conversations without that conversation coming first.

[51:33] and that was the commitment that was, uh, pretty red, uh, readily available if

[51:37] you read the comments related to your legacy. So we believe in public safety,

[51:41] we know that that's important for us. And then connectivity. Um, this

[51:45] was selective and there was, again, a lot of variation in terms of the importance of

[51:49] this being something that council members felt was part of the legacy.

[51:53] so about half of us felt this was critically important. About half of us felt the

[51:57] opposite of that. So that's all I'm getting at with this one is that that was a theme

[52:02] that came out of some of these conversations. We disagreed maybe about what that

[52:06] meant. Some of us felt like it meant transit. Some of us felt like it was connecting major roadways,

[52:10] uh, crossing arterials, those kinds of things. Uh, verti port was mentioned, future mobility.

[52:14] the airport was a discussion as well. So lots of different meanings behind

[52:18] this kind of space of connectivity. But these were the legacy themes, the one-on-one

[52:23] interviews. These are, again, I had great interviews and great discussions with all of you, and I

[52:27] really appreciate your time with this. It is hard to encapsulate so many different

[52:31] viewpoints. This is my best attempt at that. Okay? So

[52:36] happy to be beat up for something if I did it, please recorrect me if I got something

[52:40] incorrect in this. But these were key themes. Um, addison is in an execution

[52:44] phase. That was part of what we talked about. We're past some of the visioning stuff. We have

[52:48] a sense of a lot of these things. We're here to get the results done, and we want to see that

[52:53] execution continue to happen. So one, a lot of agreement

[52:57] and a lot of support for staff and the work that they've done. A lot of,

[53:01] we are in an execution phase. Let's keep making progress. And I would like to see that progress.

[53:05] I would like to know that we are making that progress happen. So that was a lot of discussion that I had.

[53:10] um, dart is a proxy issue. So dart was an important one.

[53:14] I had a discussion with everybody here on dart. I'm sure you've had more discussions on that. That was an issue that

[53:18] was of, of importance for everybody here. So at some

[53:22] point that discussion became a discussion and it meant something different to

[53:27] everyone, is what I can tell you about that. So that's how I looked at

[53:31] that one. Um, some of us were about fiscal trust, some of us were about the

[53:35] location that we are and how we connecting things. Um, and then engagement was about trust, not volume.

[53:39] nobody indicated support for more engagement of the wrong

[53:43] type. That's just it. It was like, hey, let's not hold town hall for town hall's sake. However,

[53:48] when we do a project in this neighborhood, let's make sure we're doing everything we can in

[53:52] some cases door to door, let's knock door to door. In some cases, it was like, what can we

[53:56] do to increase the engagement before a vote comes before council?

[54:00] and that was really the key underpinning of the discussion was there had been a few

[54:05] specific examples where it was felt like that didn't occur. Um, staff didn't

[54:09] do anything wrong. That was never the statement. I did not hear that from folks. What I heard was,

[54:14] I'd love it if the residents engaged more. I have no idea how to make that happen.

[54:19] and there were a few ideas, but it was door to door knocking was basically

[54:23] the best that anybody could come up with that I heard. Um, but it was, hey, we're doing

[54:27] the social media stuff, we're doing the town halls, we're doing the in the parks,

[54:31] we're doing that. And we still don't get the right types of engagement from the community, which

[54:35] is why that community engagement discussion was so robust, um, with all of you

[54:39] as well. So I just wanna pause there because one I'd like for you to have the opportunity to

[54:43] correct anything that you feel is a misrepresentation if I did that, or two

[54:48] say that. We'll get into some of these discussions as well. But I also just wanted you to see kind of things that

[54:52] were themes in the discussions that I had with you before I kept going.

[54:58] uh, can you explain number two? Dart is a proxy issue. What do you mean

[55:02] by proxy issue? I understand all the bullet points. Yeah. In

[55:06] this case, everybody's feeling was different about dart straight up. Everybody had a different

[55:10] viewpoint on dart, whether it was the underpinnings for successful mobility throughout the entire

[55:14] community, uh, whether it was the backbone or the future of what we're doing. Whether it

[55:18] was the thing that would recruit and allow economic development and revitalization, whether it

[55:23] was fiscal irresponsibility, whether it was signaling to the public,

[55:27] our desire to make sure that they have the right to vote, whether it, so everybody

[55:31] had a slightly different viewpoint. Some of us were in the space of the residents should have the right

[55:35] to vote. That's what we're about when it comes to dart. If they vote to keep it, they vote to

[55:39] keep it, but they should have the right to vote. And some of us were like, this is the thing that underlies

[55:44] all the rest of what we're trying to do with economic development and revitalization. So

[55:48] dart was the topic, but the issue changed depending on who I talked to

[55:53] about why it was important to you. So what I

[55:57] was saying with this is that it's not that dart's not important, it's incredibly important. We just all

[56:01] have very different viewpoints on why that topic is so important to us.

[56:05] fiscal responsibility, connectivity,

[56:09] we all just had a different viewpoint on why dart was important. So that's why I call it a proxy issue because it wasn't,

[56:15] it wasn't fully dart. It was what dart means in

[56:19] the larger context of all the other discussions. Thank you. Yes.

[56:27] so on the execution phase, uh, I agree. I think we're doing a lot of things right and going in

[56:31] the right direction in general. Um, just my own thought

[56:35] is, uh, we should weigh very strongly on economic development to revitalization.

[56:40] um, and just, I suppose maybe it's, it's just executing that if,

[56:45] if that's right. I just wanna make sure it's not missed, uh, up there.

[56:50] yeah. Thank you for that. Absolutely. Execution. Yeah. Okay. There were strong,

[56:54] um, strong support from everybody when it came to staff

[56:58] is doing a great job. We have a great staff. Like that was a common theme from

[57:02] all the conversations I had. It was a handful of, we could do this a

[57:06] little better, we could do this, but definitely with you on that. Yep. Great.

[57:12] okay. We can have more discussion on this, but I just wanted you to see those conversations

[57:17] as a, as a whole. Um, when we get into the strategic objectives, like I said, I'm gonna do

[57:21] this in sort of order of most agreement to areas

[57:26] of leased agreement. My hope is to build a little love and momentum as we get into some of

[57:30] those areas where we might have a little more of that disagreement. Let's just start with this

[57:34] one. Public safety bottom line is, it's our highest priority across the board. Had

[57:38] 20.8% when it came to the points overall, that 100 points scale. So

[57:42] it's hugely important to us. It has complete and unanimous support from the council. There

[57:46] was not a single objection or change requested in this. With that said,

[57:52] yep, yep, yep, yep. Look at us. Go look at us.

[57:56] go. That was an easy one. It was. That's why I'm throwing out softballs

[58:00] to start with here. That way we can knock 'em out of the park. . I knew it. That's

[58:05] the fun part though, right? We do have complete agreement on this. So for my public safety team

[58:09] in the room. Yeah. And let's go. All right. Um,

[58:13] with that said, so economic development, right? Uh, revitalization also a huge

[58:17] priority for us. It's a great, it's a great conversation that we had. All we want

[58:22] is more and better. That was it, right? How do we go about doing it? There

[58:26] was some how and some discussions in this. Okay. Um, 83% supportive,

[58:30] 17% neutral, which basically means one vote out of this was a neutral vote.

[58:34] everything else was, uh, very supportive. Um, these ones had,

[58:38] again, no objection to them. These were ones where we had a lot of alignment and

[58:42] support. I've truncated them so they'll fit on a slide. Okay. So remember there's a longer wording

[58:46] there. I apologize for that. Hopefully you understand which ones. These were the conversations

[58:50] when it came to modifying, um, basically the addison way conversation

[58:55] was part of it. We had that in there. Some folks felt like it makes it more expensive for us to

[58:59] do construction on given projects. And that was the, the maybe the consternation

[59:04] around some of it. Um, the phrase is unclear, and again, addison

[59:08] way, addison brand might be misunderstood, but there was a little bit of that discussion.

[59:12] and so I think there's some clarification that could occur there. But that was the discussion.

[59:16] okay. Um, and then add and strengthen, um, economic

[59:21] development, uh, resources and tools for redevelopment. So redevelopment in

[59:25] particular was a discussion that came out in one-on-ones. Also came out through the survey,

[59:29] how many incentives and what types of incentives should we put in place to create the

[59:33] right kind of redevelopment that we're after. The one specifically mentioned were, uh,

[59:38] aging office buildings and aging hotels. Those were the two

[59:42] that kind of received the highest level of sort of visibility throughout the discussions in

[59:46] the survey. And the other one is how can we leverage the airport more and

[59:50] the opportunities to leverage the airport more was a discussion as well. Um,

[59:55] so I'll pause there for thoughts on this. Again, these right here as

[59:59] overarching themes, we had a lot of agreement on maybe the, how

[1:00:03] underneath those is something that initiatives might be the space

[1:00:07] where we could backfill some of that. Um, but I'm just saying we don't have objections

[1:00:12] to this. I'll stop, I'll stop here because it is probably worth a little bit of

[1:00:16] discussion to have about economic development. But, um, that's

[1:00:20] what the data said. So,

[1:00:25] uh, I'm in total agreement with this slide. The only, the only thought

[1:00:29] I shared with you, and probably in the survey also is, um,

[1:00:34] uh, just modify 2.4. It just seemed a little redundant the addison way,

[1:00:38] when we're talking about economic development and revitalization. It just,

[1:00:42] to me, it just, I would just change it to optimize and market,

[1:00:46] uh, the addison brand and just leave it short and

[1:00:50] succinct and, um, clear. Yep.

[1:00:56] I'll make a point. Um, to marlon's point about brand

[1:01:00] versus way, I would a hundred percent agree with that comment. The other thing that,

[1:01:05] when I think about marketing and I see 2.8 business and realtor relationships,

[1:01:10] um, I don't, and I like to see us play that up more because

[1:01:14] ultimately when people always pull maps out, nobody uses the old mapsco. But when

[1:01:18] we use virtual maps in our ed packet that we've left behind at some

[1:01:22] of these conferences, um, it's amazing. I love how we've highlighted the

[1:01:27] platinum corridor and we are the bullseye on the map. So if you're a potential

[1:01:31] relocating business from colorado or east coast, and you were

[1:01:36] to pull a map out and say, we wanna move to dfw, where do we look? How does,

[1:01:40] how do we market? And I guess it is realtors or, um, brokers.

[1:01:44] how do we get that bullseye more as a brand symbol

[1:01:48] than just the blue dot? It would be my ask of the group in the room.

[1:01:53] okay. Yep. Yeah. And I, I'll agree with marlon regarding

[1:01:58] the addison way being part of this. And I, I recall the conversation from

[1:02:02] last year there, there was mixed feelings about it

[1:02:06] where there was some interest in that. The addison way needed to be almost

[1:02:11] in every everything, every everything. Correct. And so that's us, us

[1:02:15] overusing it ourselves. And so I think, I think taking

[1:02:19] it out of that, I think that would be, that would be helpful. And, and, and to look, to

[1:02:23] look at, look at, look at other places where we might be overusing it as well. Because

[1:02:27] it, it does get diluted whenever, whenever it's, uh, everywhere like that.

[1:02:32] yep. Well, I feel very strongly

[1:02:36] about, um, the economic development side of things. I think

[1:02:40] it's the most important thing that we can do. And I think it's where we,

[1:02:44] you know, can all agree that we can do better. I mean, this time last year we had

[1:02:48] the same conversation. So when the budget came around, we added another employee

[1:02:52] to that office, and we also added a little more as far as dollars.

[1:02:57] um, but I don't know how, how deep

[1:03:01] you want to go in that conversation. I mean, um, I don't

[1:03:05] wanna get too much in the weeds, but I have my own ideas on what we should be doing,

[1:03:10] um, you know, to dan's questions about, um,

[1:03:14] you know, what are we doing, you know, the business and realtor relationships. We had

[1:03:18] a good conversation about that last year, but there's so many things that I feel like we should

[1:03:22] be doing, and I don't know what the role of council would be. You know, it's like a fine line between

[1:03:27] like micromanaging and just sitting back and let you know staff

[1:03:31] do their thing. So that's where I have a, a problem with that.

[1:03:36] yep. So, I mean, I would, I would encourage you to,

[1:03:40] to have the conversation right now. Yep. I mean, even if we get into detailed questions, let's answer

[1:03:44] 'em. And we can, we can parse out what makes sense for the strategic plan, but we have

[1:03:48] staff here. I would, I would get it all out. Ask your questions, give your thoughts, and then

[1:03:52] what we can do is react to that and say either, hey, here's maybe what we're doing

[1:03:56] to that effort. Here's how we can change, here's how it could be a new strategic objective. We

[1:04:00] can react to your comments. But we wanted, this is the chance to, to hear 'em.

[1:04:07] I, I'm with you on that point, which is to say, this is the room for the discussion, and

[1:04:11] let's have a little bit of that discussion. When you talk about revitalization, economic development,

[1:04:15] we had a robust discussion about this. What does it mean to you? Help staff understand

[1:04:20] the intent and then they can help with projects and initiatives underneath

[1:04:24] these objectives that will help accomplish the intent that you're after. I would just like

[1:04:28] to see, because we did have this specific, one of the addison wave removal on that particular

[1:04:32] phrase. Can I get a temperature check outta the room? We don't take votes, we take preferences,

[1:04:37] votes happen later in formal settings. But just in terms of that, is that

[1:04:41] an acceptable concept to remove the addison way as a phrasing from this? And that moves

[1:04:45] that one across the finish line for us right there on that particular objective. Would

[1:04:49] that be okay with everybody? Does that feel okay? Yep, yep, yep. Getting

[1:04:53] yeses in general. Okay. With that said, we're gonna remove the addison way from that particular

[1:04:58] one. Um, with that said, let's have the discussion. What are the things when it

[1:05:02] comes to economic development and revitalization, which are important to us, we have these right here.

[1:05:06] what does it mean to you? Tell me that one of the things, this is more tactical and it may be sub,

[1:05:11] uh, objective and more of an initiative, but really focused on

[1:05:15] getting a nice hotel or two in towns, high premium hotels.

[1:05:20] and that may be, uh, taking what we've got in some way, pushing, uh,

[1:05:24] a, a big remodel of the hotel. We don't need. And we've heard

[1:05:28] from so many, uh, engagements with, uh, our existing visits, uh, in the c-suite.

[1:05:33] they send their folks down the street out of addison to, to stay at different hotels.

[1:05:37] and we, we've gotta fix that. So I'd like to see a, a, a strong

[1:05:41] push, uh, to, to get a nice hotel

[1:05:45] or two. And I, I know we have a couple new ones coming online, uh, remodeled

[1:05:49] once. So I'll stop that. Thank you. Mm-hmm . On that

[1:05:54] topic of, of hotels, and, you know, it's easy to say,

[1:05:58] let's get a nice hotel or two that's four or five years

[1:06:02] down the road. An idea I've had since before I got on

[1:06:06] council and, and since I've been on it, and I want to get an agenda item put on so we can truly discuss this.

[1:06:13] we need to nourish what we have. And we have

[1:06:17] two really nice hotels that at one point in their lives

[1:06:21] were really nice, that that would accommodate people that

[1:06:25] are, that come in that are now bypassing us. And I would truly like to

[1:06:29] see us discuss, uh, rather than just spend our

[1:06:33] hotel and tax money on different things, why can't

[1:06:38] we give them a, a refund on their

[1:06:42] own tax money? Call it a grant, a city grant back to,

[1:06:47] uh, the hotels that pay into that fund and get them to

[1:06:51] agree to spend that money on that building.

[1:06:55] get, and, and they would be using their own money with

[1:06:59] city assistance on a grant back to that hotel and get them to do some refurbishment

[1:07:04] to bring them up to a more cosmetic

[1:07:08] level. And, um, it, it would just be a way of using

[1:07:12] their own and, and embracing what we've got. And it would be a faster way

[1:07:17] to get our hotels back online. And I have many more ideas on that

[1:07:21] may not be the place to put 'em all out, but I would truly like to get an agenda item put on where we

[1:07:25] can talk about reutilizing, the hot tax, a hotel and

[1:07:29] tax fund, uh, in a more productive way in our

[1:07:34] buildings, in our town. If we're gonna talk just hotels.

[1:07:38] I, I think, I think you bring up a good point, but for me, it's

[1:07:42] all about highest and best use. We have, what, 23, 24

[1:07:48] hotels. And to your point, two of them are probably still working.

[1:07:52] I wanna know why the, the rest aren't working, right? Um, average

[1:07:58] revenue per night is like $60, right? That's pitiful.

[1:08:02] that attracts a certain type of client, thank

[1:08:06] you client or creates issues for us. So

[1:08:10] I almost think it needs to go a step further. And I don't know how you do this, but you know,

[1:08:14] some of those properties have outlived their useful life, and that's why,

[1:08:19] and I'm not sure investing in them is the best thing. And

[1:08:23] that's one of the things I think from an economic development perspective, we can do,

[1:08:27] be aware when those properties hit the market. And, you know, we need to have,

[1:08:32] you know, some developers in our back pocket that we could say, hey,

[1:08:36] here's our vision, you know, here's our comprehensive plan. We think

[1:08:41] that hotel will be great for you. Name it. Um, and we do the, and,

[1:08:45] and we do the, do the things needed to maybe entice them. So I don't know if that's, um,

[1:08:50] infrastructure or, or, or some way of getting

[1:08:54] that to turn. So I guess my point is, some of the hotels we have,

[1:08:58] it might not make sense for 'em to continue to be hotels. And I agree with that completely,

[1:09:02] but part of my plan would be they would present us with

[1:09:07] what they would like to do to basically plans for some type of

[1:09:11] renovation or freight up, and then we would approve them just like a grant tool.

[1:09:15] they wouldn't, every one of them wouldn't get an automatic percentage

[1:09:20] of their money back unless they were willing to put it in. And we all approve that it would come

[1:09:24] through the council or through economic, whoever to approve that. But just

[1:09:28] a way of, of getting some of their money back

[1:09:32] to them to make everything better for all of us.

[1:09:36] to the point you make, randy, and we, we do have a program, david, clarify me if I'm wrong on

[1:09:41] the facade program, we discussed a few years back about grants. Exactly.

[1:09:45] to your point is, is something we've made available or have had

[1:09:49] discussions and made policy about the second part, to chris's point about

[1:09:53] what about the clientele of some of that $60 a night hotel? That's

[1:09:57] what I'm thrilled most about, is the fact that chief freeze came in. We've all approved this. We

[1:10:01] have a tier one, tier two program, which I cannot wait to

[1:10:06] see how that pans out as long as we are willing to hold their feet to the fire. And if

[1:10:10] they go tier two, the co gets pulled. I mean, there's one way of

[1:10:14] cleaning things up back to brand or way, it's enforcement.

[1:10:18] and our code enforcement has to just lock and buckle down. Because

[1:10:22] I think you'll find that owners of these, let's call

[1:10:26] 'em certain tiered hotels, don't need to be refurbished. They don't, they don't need a dollar

[1:10:30] of our money because their ownership and or management don't

[1:10:34] care. They just flat out don't replace light bulbs. So I'd like to see

[1:10:38] it split apart where you're, if you're tiered one and you want to have a serious conversation with

[1:10:43] this council and this town staff about reinvestment, like, like looking

[1:10:47] at the renaissance up the way, um, at legacy

[1:10:51] west versus our renaissance as an example, it's night and day. So they

[1:10:55] are, they are there to be saved, ie marriott. But when you talk about,

[1:11:00] you know, not having a program, we do, correct me if I'm wrong, david, we do have a program.

[1:11:04] so, um, so yeah, so I think this is a really good conversation. I

[1:11:08] think I, I think actually there are a couple different conversations going on. I think to randy's

[1:11:13] point, yes, we can model something after the program you're mentioning,

[1:11:17] but we can do one tailored to hotels if that's what council wants, and we can look at using

[1:11:21] hot funds. And I mean, that's something, if we wanna make that a strategic strategic objective,

[1:11:25] we're gonna start working on it and we'll bring it back as what could that look like. So I think

[1:11:30] that would be a template for it structure wise to start and then have a conversation with

[1:11:34] council. But I do wanna say to, to chris's point, maybe this, just to kind

[1:11:38] of go back to what I think you're saying, hopefully, and maybe try to help that a little bit is yes,

[1:11:42] dan, well, you're the programs we have right now to help ensure that the hotels

[1:11:46] are living up to the quality we expect is a line that we're going down.

[1:11:51] but correct me if I'm wrong, maybe what you're asking is something a little bit different and something might

[1:11:55] be in more in line with what we just did on multifamily or, or I'm sorry.

[1:11:59] yeah. On, on, on multifamily where we, and, and sin, um,

[1:12:03] and be simple ownership where we're brought somebody in and we present it to you all,

[1:12:08] here's what the reality is right now, and here are some steps that we

[1:12:12] can do moving forward. If that was the desire from council, we could use something

[1:12:16] similar to hotels, bring someone to come in and try or, or ourselves

[1:12:21] try to, I define why we're in the situation that we're in, and then

[1:12:25] have a step moving forward and make that an initiative as we go forward. Which is

[1:12:29] in conjunction with the other two conversations. But I do think it's a distinct of what you're asking. Yeah.

[1:12:33] I I I think the discussion we had on, um, just housing

[1:12:38] products was a, was a, was a really a, a good one, right? And I walked away with,

[1:12:42] one of the things that I heard him say was, we need to identify what the next

[1:12:46] neighborhood's gonna be. And, you know, um, we need to

[1:12:50] be sort of aspirational. We, you know, build something that maybe we don't have, maybe

[1:12:54] at a higher price point. But what I meant by my comment was,

[1:12:58] and, and I won't get into specifics, but you know, there's a property that is,

[1:13:03] you know, right on the trail right next to the dog park that would've been

[1:13:07] perfect for, you know, I think, I can't remember how many acres it is, but,

[1:13:11] um, you know, it would've been perfect, um, for

[1:13:15] some sort of ownership product, right? It's right next to the dog park right on the trail.

[1:13:20] um, I feel like just those two things right there are enough

[1:13:25] to make whatever was developed there successful, it, and that

[1:13:29] property went on the market. That's, that was an opportunity for us. Someone else bought

[1:13:33] it, and it's continuing to, you know, charge the 60 or $80 a night.

[1:13:37] and I don't know how we get better at that. But, um, you know, I

[1:13:42] to your point, I think identifying the sites and then having a few things in

[1:13:46] our toolbox, and part of that might be the vision and sharing that vision might

[1:13:50] be a good place to start, if I can add to that. So back to chris's

[1:13:54] question, which was the biggest question of all, why are people not checking into our hotels

[1:13:58] and the rate driving the rate up by occupancy? I would ask

[1:14:02] the question of our town staff and ourselves, have we gotten

[1:14:06] to the top 20 business owners, mary

[1:14:11] kay being one, the hospital being two, when they have conferences,

[1:14:15] when they have visitors coming in town, have we pulled them to ask, by

[1:14:19] the way, when you have your board coming in for a meeting of 12 to 20 people, where do you

[1:14:23] put them up? Where are you recommending they stay? Do we know that information? And if we do,

[1:14:27] if we do, great question. I think the mayor, other folks who've been on

[1:14:32] the business retention meetings, we know the answer to that. And they're not staying in addison,

[1:14:36] they're going to frisco, they're going uptown. Um, that's the answer. And that

[1:14:40] is really what's driving a lot of this conversation. But I'll open that up to anyone else. When we do kaboom

[1:14:44] town or we sell bundles and packets, hey, you tickets and stay at our hotels,

[1:14:49] you get ticket. How do we maybe maybe make that an enticement to the

[1:14:53] business owners to say, hey, if you're holding, if you're holding a conference or

[1:14:57] you're gonna have 20 doctors in for a meeting and you stay in addison, you get

[1:15:01] xi don't know what that is. Is it a, is it a coupon to a restaurant, which I would

[1:15:05] think would happen because we have so many restaurants? Or is it the bat box? Is it the

[1:15:10] put shack? I don't know. But we have so many resources, right? On beltline,

[1:15:14] it's a tragedy that they would go stay at up north or down south, I

[1:15:18] think. I think all those things help, but ultimately it's, they're looking for the quality of the

[1:15:22] hotel, uhhuh, that they wanna stay at. So that's

[1:15:26] the fundamental issue. So some of these other conversations we're having, I think can help that. But

[1:15:31] I think all those pieces are gonna help on the margins. But to try to get

[1:15:35] folks to really want to do their conferences here, and it should, it's gonna be us working with

[1:15:39] our partners to try to improve those. But I don't think that's how you define success

[1:15:43] by saying, let's get 20 doctors in here and have one successful

[1:15:47] weekend. Or let's have one successful week where we have a nice conference.

[1:15:53] I think you get to the point where you ask the question, do we have too many

[1:15:57] hotels? And like I said before, can, can those properties that have

[1:16:01] probably seen better days be repurposed to something else?

[1:16:06] or apartments? Yeah, I, yeah, I mean, I know randy's a big fan

[1:16:10] of apartments and I mean, that's always something that we can discuss. ,

[1:16:14] some of your hotels were apartments. As somebody who stays here,

[1:16:19] I'll just say the first time I stayed here, I always used hilton properties.

[1:16:23] first time I stayed here, somebody did not tell me which properties to stay at. I stayed

[1:16:27] at the one next to oaked, the oaked restaurant, right? Right. Next door

[1:16:31] is a hilton property. Used to be a hilton property. It's now something else. It was,

[1:16:36] I, I'll say this, , I've stayed in some interesting places,

[1:16:40] , that was one of the more interesting places I'd stayed in. And it was effectively an apartment complex.

[1:16:45] that was a very unusual experience for me. I've stayed at other properties here,

[1:16:49] and now I don't have a problem staying in town. And I was staying at a hilton garden inn, which is just fine.

[1:16:53] but to your point of having nice, upscale, it is an interesting one to have those upscale

[1:16:57] hotels, I think that is something that really pulls folks in. And the revitalization

[1:17:01] of existing assets, I think is a really great conversation to have. Um, you do have

[1:17:05] some older and outdated units, and that's just the truth of it. It, and doing something

[1:17:09] about that, whatever you decide is the, is a, to my mind, a step in the right direction.

[1:17:14] so that's my, I I'll editorialize a little bit on that, but I'll say the first time,

[1:17:18] that was an adventure less than I wanted.

[1:17:22] yeah. And, and from what, from what I heard is, is, uh, as we're coming

[1:17:26] outta the pandemic, you know, a lot of these limited service hotels,

[1:17:31] this, that, that was the only way they, they could stay alive was to go to this

[1:17:35] extended stay, uh, business model. Um, and

[1:17:39] if, if that's, it wasn't really a choice that they, that they had, it's, they

[1:17:44] couldn't just say, well, we're gonna keep charging 80, 90, $120 or whatever.

[1:17:48] uh, but we, we need to get heads and beds and to, to keep

[1:17:52] the place alive. And so that's, that's where we are. And I don't

[1:17:56] get turning, making a turn away from that is, is hard, you know? 'cause it's, you

[1:18:01] know, we don't, we don't own those businesses. They're, they're,

[1:18:05] they're, they're complying with what they're, what they're approved for. They're, it's a, it's

[1:18:09] a, it's a legal business that they're doing. So, um, it's

[1:18:13] a, it's a challenging thing and I think it's, it's a good discussion to have going forward to see,

[1:18:17] you know, what, what opportunities do we have? It's not, there's no quick solution to it

[1:18:21] in any, any kinda way. For sure. Do, do you think

[1:18:26] in agreeing with your point that it just gets with the competitiveness,

[1:18:30] do you think 30 years ago we may have

[1:18:36] approved too many of these and, and rather, you know, rather than been more

[1:18:41] selective. So going forward from this, you know, there's nothing we can do about 30 years

[1:18:45] ago mm-hmm . But from this day forward, being more

[1:18:50] selective and making sure that we don't oversaturate

[1:18:55] one particular business over, over another one going forward. Sorry. Yeah. And it,

[1:18:59] to chris's point, if there is a way that we can get that redeveloped

[1:19:04] mm-hmm . Then you know that that's a great thing to do yeah. In, in all

[1:19:08] of the old stuff. So yeah. Anytime those projects come up, that's, that's the conversation that needs to be had.

[1:19:12] correct. I agree. Um, that's what I'm going forward. There's nothing we can do absolutely. Right.

[1:19:16] in the past. Yeah. Yeah. Bruce, when you had your, your, um, one-on-one

[1:19:21] business meetings when you're going door to door with economic development,

[1:19:25] bless you. Um, did you notice, like when we used to have the hampton, that became

[1:19:29] something other than on beltway, are you, are you seeing that there's more responsiveness

[1:19:33] to marriott type properties in, into nick's point that I'm umbrella, ihg

[1:19:38] properties, marriott properties, hilton properties? I'm not, I'm not, I don't think I've heard people

[1:19:42] mention particular brands, you know, okay. Of, of hotels,

[1:19:46] but it's just about the quality. So when they're, when their executives come in, uh, yeah,

[1:19:50] they're, they're taking 'em to newer, uh, you know, nicer, nicer properties.

[1:19:55] gotcha. You know, and the, you know, the, the two full service hotels that we have,

[1:19:59] um, they're good, but they, they, they both need some, some love and,

[1:20:04] and, uh, so they're not being chosen by these, by these, uh, the local, uh,

[1:20:08] businesses. Dan, I would, I would echo that exactly what he is saying,

[1:20:12] because we, we've been in these meetings and we're saying,

[1:20:16] hey, we have these two hotels, and they, they basically

[1:20:20] say, no, you don't understand. We, we want something more premium

[1:20:25] than that, and we're willing to drive 15 miles

[1:20:30] to and from each day so that we can have that. So, um,

[1:20:34] that, and the other thing I've heard, um, is maybe not the marriott

[1:20:39] flag, but being able to tap into the marriott rewards program

[1:20:43] being affiliated, somehow that's really important. Is, is what I'm

[1:20:47] hearing is, is that, uh, hotel, hotel, what is it? Dax

[1:20:51] dax, yeah. Um, you know, that, that I believe they're tapped into the marriott reward

[1:20:55] program. And, and apparently that's a very important thing. So those are the, those

[1:21:00] are the two things I'm hearing. Um, at the higher level, obviously, we've

[1:21:04] already discussed the, the ones who are just trying to survive from covid and

[1:21:08] nobody could have predicted. Yeah. That's, that's the point I'm trying to get at bruce, or,

[1:21:12] or, or marlin is exactly that. Fly it under the flag. They have 40 names

[1:21:16] under certain flags, and that does give street cred when you're a business traveler,

[1:21:20] like myself or randy just chimed in. Yeah. I, I do not stay at properties

[1:21:25] that I'm not earning something with because I stay a hundred plus nights out of to addison.

[1:21:29] right. So I think that's what I'm asking, should we be targeting leadership,

[1:21:33] let's call it, of those flag flying brands to reinvest

[1:21:37] in our town? That was the bigger opening. I think the market will drive that,

[1:21:42] right? Yeah. And it, and it just, your question kinda leads me back to darren's thought,

[1:21:47] you know, is, is we're already, we're already targeting

[1:21:51] a premium boutique, um, hotel property, right

[1:21:55] at the tod where you can kind of see it in various, various places.

[1:22:00] but do we wanna, you know, your, your question is, do we want to add it

[1:22:05] as a strategic objective? Is that correct? Is that where we're, because I just would love

[1:22:09] to answer that, if that is your question and kind of move on. Uh, my thought

[1:22:13] the fastest way to get there is to incent and, and to negotiate remodels of,

[1:22:17] of the nice hotel. So to, to your point, randy, yes. Not just build one from scratch.

[1:22:21] we already got one of those on the books. That's great. Uh, I like your idea, david, as

[1:22:25] kind of an initiative is to get in that, uh, presentation that talks about our

[1:22:29] hotel stock that we have, the choices we have and the reality, and give us,

[1:22:34] uh, some, uh, information to make strategic direction changes.

[1:22:38] um, but yeah, I think talking to the, the top tier, I think that we

[1:22:42] should be targeting it just like we do 2.8 up there, business and, uh, realtor

[1:22:46] relationships. Okay. So, uh, I'm just trying to understand

[1:22:51] what you're saying. Do you, do you feel like we need to modify any of these strategic objectives

[1:22:55] or change 'em, or I would say we should add one. Um,

[1:22:59] if it's not up there, just looking at this revitalize hotels and

[1:23:03] meeting space, I'm not too sure that doesn't encompass it. So

[1:23:08] I'm thinking 2.6 probably. Does we just, um,

[1:23:12] give some of the, uh, patients that's

[1:23:16] alright. Do you want us to do that? Do you want us to give

[1:23:21] the, the dis our initiatives? The, the discussion is, is providing

[1:23:25] initiatives. Right now, this discussion is providing initiatives underneath there, but part of it

[1:23:29] is, uh, perhaps a study session. It sounds like could be the right way to go ahead and discuss what

[1:23:33] the hotel stock looks like. So there's some stuff underneath, but it doesn't sound like

[1:23:37] we're actually creating necessarily a new in, uh, a new strategic objective.

[1:23:41] it sounds like we've got some desires to see some specific

[1:23:45] suggestions underneath some of these objectives and say, hey, you know, we'd like to see this

[1:23:49] type of incentive. We would like to see us talk with the top 20 of this, or,

[1:23:54] so it seems like we're already stating some of these and I'm confident somebody on staff is

[1:23:58] capturing some of these initiatives as they come up, or we've got video proof of that. Yes.

[1:24:02] I'd make one suggestion just based on a conversation I'm hearing. You might say,

[1:24:07] revitalize or re you do the microphone, microphone

[1:24:11] revitalize or redevelop because revitalize is

[1:24:15] a much softer yeah, I was gonna suggest that's

[1:24:20] exactly what I was doing, but stronger language. Yep. Okay. That was like

[1:24:24] hang out with chair. So we might take a look at 2.6, make some stronger language about that particular

[1:24:28] item itself. And the, the other, the other thing that, um, if

[1:24:32] you look at initiative, the initiative, 2.2 0.1, um,

[1:24:36] alright. You know, there could be some added, added more descriptive

[1:24:40] wording than just something like, um, develop the tod properties.

[1:24:47] yep. Thanks for that suggestion. Okay. I'm jumping in. I think that's a great, yes. I lit

[1:24:52] this up a long time ago. So we kept going down the hotel,

[1:24:56] uh, slope, which nobody mentioned the, uh, crown plaza, which

[1:25:00] is being redeveloped. I think, aren't we gonna have a really nice,

[1:25:04] okay. Sorry, I didn't know that was the name. But what I wanted to say is

[1:25:08] tying this into some of the other strategic, um, incentives

[1:25:13] here is that we, we said,

[1:25:17] uh, public safety's number one, and we said economic development's number

[1:25:21] two and mobility was somewhere down toward the bottom. And

[1:25:25] yet the biggest thing that we're spending money on is dart.

[1:25:30] and I wanna, I wanna relate the dart back to this conversation because

[1:25:35] 1% or 50% of our, um,

[1:25:40] a sales tax revenue is going into dart, which is mobility. And

[1:25:44] we can't change that. The public has to change that if it's gonna get changed. But if we

[1:25:49] were to re-look at that and those dollars

[1:25:53] became available to the town, everything costs money and all of

[1:25:57] this redevelopment, all of this is, it's a, it's a money thing. So

[1:26:02] in, in the decision whether or not to call an election, which we just did,

[1:26:07] part of that is we are spending so much money on mobility,

[1:26:11] and yet mobility was near the bottom. And here where

[1:26:15] we want economic development, we're in competition with all these other cities that are

[1:26:19] non to art cities that have a hundred percent of their sales tax

[1:26:23] revenue, and we only have 50% of ours. So I do want to equate that

[1:26:27] those two things are connected. That these are not all independent

[1:26:32] issues. Mobility is an issue, economic development's an issue.

[1:26:36] dart is a part of that. I know it was on a previous slide and I'm getting into

[1:26:40] a different area, but I think it needs to be brought into this

[1:26:44] conversation because that would give us money that could go toward

[1:26:48] economic development to fix a lot of the things that we're talking about. The

[1:26:53] citizens have to vote on it, it's up to them, but not calling an election

[1:26:57] would have prevented them from doing it. So I think we made the right decision. Well, here's

[1:27:01] the thing that gets lost, right? And this is my biggest argument

[1:27:05] behind staying into art is

[1:27:10] all, all of this is connected, right? And the 17 million

[1:27:14] we pay in, we, we can do one to two things. We can, we can exit

[1:27:19] dart and we can take that money

[1:27:23] and lower the tax rate, right? Use some

[1:27:27] of that money like you're saying now and try to

[1:27:32] bring in developers or use it for economic development.

[1:27:38] the way that I'm approaching dart is I would much rather make

[1:27:42] that $17 million investment because

[1:27:46] that investment makes us more competitive, right? So if you

[1:27:50] look what happened last month, right? There's this company outta fort worth, lone cypress. They,

[1:27:55] they purchased 15 3 0 1 spectrum drive, right? 118,000

[1:27:59] square foot office tower. That is, that is what we

[1:28:03] need, right? So I know everyone in this room knows it, right? We did the

[1:28:07] comprehensive plan, the part of the comprehensive plan. Comprehensive plan is who we wanna be in

[1:28:11] 50 years. The market position report that we did

[1:28:16] associated with that just tells us where we are right now. And it's scary,

[1:28:20] right? Office is tired. We already talked about the hotel and

[1:28:24] how tired it is to me. We're not gonna outspend mckinney,

[1:28:28] we're not gonna outspend frisco, right? You said it the other night. Well, you know,

[1:28:32] people are going to mckinney and frisco, they're going there because it's cheaper. They're going

[1:28:36] there because it's a blank slate. There's vacant land with utilities

[1:28:40] already there. Developers can come in and they can build much cheaper. What we need, because we're

[1:28:45] developed in the eighties, we need redevelopment, right? To wayne's point, we need people to

[1:28:49] come in and knock down some of those hotels and put a product there that fits with

[1:28:53] our comprehensive plan. That's the differentiator,

[1:28:57] is that rail is a differentiator. It makes us different. We're, we're not

[1:29:01] gonna compete dollar wise with mckinney and frisco, but if we make it easier for

[1:29:05] people to come into the town, we get more people like l type or spying the

[1:29:10] spectrum. There's this flight to quality, right?

[1:29:14] we're try, businesses are trying to get people back into the office.

[1:29:18] how do they do that? They, they put 'em in places that have workout

[1:29:23] facilities, right? Um, it's walkable to restaurants and bars.

[1:29:28] we have that. We just need people to make that investment. And I think the thing

[1:29:32] to do it is the rail make it easier to get into the town. We,

[1:29:36] we got some great ideas to connect the station to all those office

[1:29:41] towers. And I think that's the thing that does it. I'm, I'm, I'd like to spend maybe

[1:29:45] five more minutes and then take a break. Yeah. I, we can continue the discussion. I just wanna make sure we take

[1:29:49] a break here and stretch it out for a second. I just want to add 30 seconds to chris's comment. And, and maybe it's

[1:29:53] an open-ended question for the, for everyone in the room is if

[1:29:57] we, if we look at the vendor, which vendor is dart and we are the

[1:30:02] customer, and if we, if we were to be flipping the flipping the

[1:30:06] script addison runs, let's call it addison, instead of calling it dart

[1:30:10] and we were the ceos and we were the cfos and we were the board, um,

[1:30:14] we would probably, probably take a hard look in the mirror and say, wait, like to randy's

[1:30:19] point at one point was I should not be allowed to ride this product for a dollar 50.

[1:30:23] it's a brand new, $2 billion train. How we got to 2 billion is up for discussion.

[1:30:27] however, should, should there be a process as any

[1:30:31] of those have traveled in europe, you can upgrade your car. I can go into a

[1:30:36] secured more fancy, I don't care what the amenities are, I can get into a locked

[1:30:40] car for $5 or $20, whatever that looks like. I don't think

[1:30:44] that that product, that that vendor has challenged themself

[1:30:48] to, to draw the audience you're talking about, that

[1:30:52] audience and that surveys have been done, doesn't feel safe getting on that product

[1:30:56] enough of the time. Whether the optics of it, regardless, I'm not here to argue

[1:31:01] that point. I don't think that vendor has challenged themself to

[1:31:05] be competitive with that customer that we want coming into our town

[1:31:09] to not go to, let's say potbelly, but to go to chamberlains for lunch

[1:31:14] or to go to hudson or to go to a full service

[1:31:18] restaurant versus, I call it fast service, whether that be chipotle and on

[1:31:22] and on and on. Chick-fil-a. I, I I would don't, I'll leave it at that.

[1:31:27] I just want that to be part of the discussion. If this is gonna be had, uh, I'm gonna

[1:31:31] just say this back to chris and I don't really want to get in a

[1:31:35] match here with you, but you're a banker

[1:31:39] and if any business came to you and showed you the financials

[1:31:44] that dart has, I do not believe you would approve them

[1:31:48] for a loan. They have taken on a ton of

[1:31:52] revenue and they've borrowed $9.7 billion

[1:31:56] and their model doesn't work. And as a banker, you would not approve that, in my opinion.

[1:32:01] I, when you're done, I'd look to okay. I I just, I was saying there's

[1:32:06] pot of money. I think that we should be looking at my, my que

[1:32:10] so so wayne brought up a good point on 2.6. Do we want to

[1:32:14] change rev, uh, change that to revitalize and

[1:32:18] redevelop hotels and meeting space or no?

[1:32:22] yes. I mean, I think it's a great idea. Um, I'd just love to

[1:32:27] figure that out and I think that's a good direction to go on now. Yeah, that's

[1:32:31] what I agree. Four. I'd like to talk about 2.5 also if we're done with that one. All right.

[1:32:35] so leverage just kind of seems mediocre, um,

[1:32:40] on leverage. Addison airport, I wrote down a phrase here, position addison

[1:32:44] airport as a signature corporate gateway and powerful driver of both economic growth.

[1:32:49] that's too long. But the essence of that, I mean,

[1:32:53] not thinking the airport is so much of a transportation means, but

[1:32:57] more of an economic driver and an e economic attraction,

[1:33:01] um, from a corporate standpoint, that's what I would like, that we think

[1:33:05] of mo mo many things in addison as a, uh,

[1:33:10] a driver of the economy. Like they add some performing arts center that's the driver

[1:33:14] of the economy also in a lot of different ways. I, I think that

[1:33:18] may be something that needs to go on our objective level as well. Just, just f yi

[1:33:23] performing arts center. Yeah, no, I like it. I just, um, I think when we get

[1:33:27] into this more, it won't, we won't, we won't put it in there, but maybe not,

[1:33:32] not under e well, yes, but maybe not under this. I agree.

[1:33:36] kfa, darren, darren is the word optimize instead of leverage? Is maybe that

[1:33:40] a better word to use as a descriptor? I, I don't know. Maybe. Um, well,

[1:33:44] the full verbiage of that is, is leverage the addison airport to maximize business growth and expansion.

[1:33:49] is that the, oh, is, that is. Okay. These are trunk versions in order to fit

[1:33:53] on the slide, please. Thanks nick. Like mayor is doing referred to. I thought it was bigger than that.

[1:33:57] okay. And at this point, I'm gonna go ahead and just hit the pause button and say, let's

[1:34:01] take a break here right now. It's 20 after. I'm gonna call us back at 30 after. So

[1:34:05] take 10 minutes to stretch it out here and we'll continue the conversation. Thank you.

[1:34:10] alrighty. I appreciate the robustness of the discussion on this topic. Thank you so much for

[1:34:14] that. Thanks for the participation in the discussion this morning. Um,

[1:34:18] comments are being captured. So again, just know as we're talking, those comments are being captured

[1:34:23] as you're indicating preferences as you're talking through potential initiatives that's

[1:34:27] getting captured. Okay. Um, also, I just wanna remind you, this is not your last bite of the apple.

[1:34:31] so there is additional time in february where things will come back to you. So just know that

[1:34:36] it's not inked today, right? There's another opportunity for, for you to see things,

[1:34:40] to weigh in on things. So that's just not, I just want to clarify that as well. So as we go

[1:34:44] through these discussions, we wanna get the bulk of the work done today. Just know that there's gonna be a little bit

[1:34:48] of work that happens after this as well. Uh, with that said, let's go move on from economic development

[1:34:53] and revitalization, um, and get into this one, which is financial health and organizational

[1:34:57] excellence. Uh, so again, when it came to this, we have strong agreement, a hundred percent supportive.

[1:35:01] so nothing here that was being flagged as a major issue. Um, keep

[1:35:05] these, uh, so these three were basically straight upkeep, no objections,

[1:35:09] full support, nothing here. And again, truncated words

[1:35:14] up here. The actual phrasing is sitting in front of you. So if you need to flip to that

[1:35:18] for the actual phrasing of it, um, modify. One of the suggestions to

[1:35:22] modify was on five four, it was remove and or expanding

[1:35:26] and or expanding. Um, and then in this case, the next bond,

[1:35:30] uh, the next bond election, there was a suggestion to make it

[1:35:35] specific to police department and municipal court facilities. So there was the desire

[1:35:39] to potentially make it a little more prescriptive. And in this one, um, potentially

[1:35:43] remove and or expanding. I opened these up for discussion

[1:35:48] in this case. Are we okay? Yep. Yep. And on these, generally speaking, 'cause there

[1:35:52] wasn't any objection to those. Seemed like we were supportive of them.

[1:35:56] felt like we were okay. Yeah. Okay. Getting that yep. Preference

[1:36:00] out of that. Feeling good. Yep. But some guidance under initiatives under there. Um,

[1:36:05] I think it's important to, uh, to measure performance. Bless you. To measure

[1:36:09] performance. The town staff does an incredible job

[1:36:13] and I'd like to see it measured. I'd like to see, uh, the, um,

[1:36:18] some of the measurements be by private sector performance,

[1:36:23] um, so that we, uh, we can be kind of,

[1:36:27] um, have the view broader than, uh, government, um,

[1:36:31] public level, but private sector performance also. So you have the same

[1:36:35] or other, other measures in there. Okay. Like I've been talking to david

[1:36:39] also, so I think think that's good to carry forth, but it, it does fit under

[1:36:43] 5.2. Okay. Sorry. So some potential initiatives

[1:36:48] in there. Thank you for that. Thank you for that. You know, um,

[1:36:53] 'cause I, I think everyone agrees with the language on 5.2. Uh, certainly, but I do wanna

[1:36:57] highlight some of the work that we have done there. And it, this, it could lead to further conversation.

[1:37:02] so obviously we've done our resource maximization the ca past couple of years that

[1:37:06] will continue seeing really good significant improvements on that

[1:37:10] for the bottom line and just the way we operate. And the next step, which I mentioned to council briefly,

[1:37:15] that we will be kicking off is going, uh, division by division,

[1:37:19] function by function, and doing deep analysis of are there more efficient ways,

[1:37:24] better ways, cost, saving ways, can we share resources

[1:37:28] division by division and providing a report on what that looks like. So

[1:37:32] I don't want to, obviously that's been there for a while and it will continue to be there, but I want to sh just

[1:37:37] note when you see those initiatives, that is a huge focus for us as we go forward.

[1:37:42] and so a continuing resource maximization, the next step will be doing those

[1:37:46] division by division manage competition type analysis of

[1:37:51] are we operating in the best possible way that makes the most fiscal sense?

[1:37:55] am I hearing you say re reduce redundancy,

[1:38:00] reduce redundancy, just common sense ways to be more efficient.

[1:38:04] can we share resources? All of that. Absolutely. Yeah. Thanks

[1:38:08] for that clarification. That's important. Yep. Absolutely. That's big undertaking and it's

[1:38:12] a good one. Thank you. Um, help me with 5.4.

[1:38:17] let's maybe hit that one for a second. Yeah, yeah. Thank you nick. Um, so

[1:38:21] I was on council back in two th 2018 when we, we created

[1:38:25] a, uh, strategic objective to conduct a

[1:38:29] facilities consolidation study. And, um, so that was

[1:38:33] our, that was our focus then. And, um, not sure how we

[1:38:37] got to, uh, expanding, expanding the word expanding

[1:38:42] facilities, um, expanding town facilities

[1:38:46] specifically. So right now, 5.5

[1:38:50] 0.4 in our strategic objectives reads as follows,

[1:38:55] explore opportunities for consolidating and or expanding

[1:38:59] town facilities. And, um, I'm, I'm proposing

[1:39:04] we change that. We modify it just to explore opportunities for,

[1:39:08] um, town facility consolidation or facility consolidation

[1:39:13] rather than, because I don't think we're looking to, to add

[1:39:17] or expand, expand town facilities right now.

[1:39:21] I think the context of that was before we, when we were kind of,

[1:39:25] uh, loosely con considering, uh, maybe a, a new town hall.

[1:39:30] uh, and one of the options was retooling the, uh,

[1:39:35] the, uh, what are the words, uh,

[1:39:39] where we're at now. . Yeah. Conference center. Thank you. Mm-hmm . Um, so that

[1:39:43] was the legacy on that. That was the history there. But it's, it's not, it didn't go

[1:39:47] expanding. It meant it went into retooling and reusing what we have. And

[1:39:51] I agree with you. We need to take off expanding. Are we expanding the

[1:39:55] police department remaining bigger? Well,

[1:40:00] I think an item of is expanding the police department's different than, let's say expanding

[1:40:05] other buildings. I think the general premise that marlin's getting at is the buildings,

[1:40:09] the mass of the buildings we have already not looking to expand those. Correct.

[1:40:13] correct. Not adding buildings. We're not adding facilities.

[1:40:18] the next one addresses the police department.

[1:40:22] so does anybody, uh, have any other thoughts on 5.4? I don't,

[1:40:28] I'm fine to take it off. Do you want me to modify it?

[1:40:32] no, to modify my so go ahead david. So I mean,

[1:40:36] it is a good time just to talk about this in, in and of itself.

[1:40:41] is there still a desire from counsel that we're looking at further consolidation right

[1:40:45] now? We have having the conversation on the police station. We've done what we've done with, with

[1:40:49] town hall. When you say consolidation, is that a 10 year, hey,

[1:40:53] 10 years we wanna look at something? Or is there still a desire to look at some kind of consolidation today?

[1:40:58] yeah, I think it's just year to year. Each council is going to modify this

[1:41:02] any which way they want to. But obviously we have the finance building to consider.

[1:41:06] um, that's an obvious one. Um, and, and, um,

[1:41:11] you know, there there's going to be situations. I don't, I don't know what they are right

[1:41:15] now, but I, I can see, uh, situations where it is possible that

[1:41:19] we could, um, have two f have two facilities

[1:41:24] come together. Right. Like that's what we've been doing a, a great job of that.

[1:41:28] so, okay. Um, that, yeah. Well, so I think david makes a good point

[1:41:32] though. 'cause 'cause we're looking at, we're not looking long term here, but we're

[1:41:36] talking about what could we, you know, possibly implement this year.

[1:41:40] I don't see, I don't see us doing any new consolidation this

[1:41:44] year, or even getting something started unless something, somebody

[1:41:48] has something on their mind that, uh, that they would be thinking about. Maybe we don't

[1:41:53] need to have that for this year. It'll, it can always come back. Right.

[1:41:57] and again, the finance building is an obvious one. Um, but that's not really consolidation. They're

[1:42:01] just gonna, we gotta figure out what to do with that property.

[1:42:05] so you're saying just eliminate by 0.4, maybe take it on? Yeah.

[1:42:09] or maybe something that, something that, uh, has a place to

[1:42:14] consider town facilities, uh, because we have the finance building

[1:42:18] to consider and then we have some other things. Do we have any, what what

[1:42:22] else is left on the, the plan for the town facilities that we did?

[1:42:26] I, I mean, have having a, having a conversation on the finance building and the finance

[1:42:31] property is the next one to discuss. Um,

[1:42:35] so that, that's the next big conversation to have from facilities outside of obviously the police station.

[1:42:39] right. So after those two, is there, is there a, a distant

[1:42:43] third? I think the, there, the other items that you'll see

[1:42:47] in years to come would be, you know, renovations

[1:42:52] changes to the fire stations, but that's not a new time soon. Yeah, I'm as

[1:42:56] well. No, I'm, I'm good with removing it. Is this not

[1:43:00] one of them that we talked about earlier that just kind of rolls over every year and

[1:43:04] it, and it's just kind of a, something to keep on there to

[1:43:08] where it's at the front of our mind. I agree with the mayor that it won't happen in the

[1:43:12] next year, but there's many of these that is just kind of a, a continually

[1:43:17] process of keep this in mind for when we do start thinking about it.

[1:43:22] other than that, I, I agree. If, if this is only one year plan,

[1:43:27] I would agree. Yeah. But well, 'cause because when, when, when we're looking at that dashboard

[1:43:31] and we'll say, well, what kind of progress are we making on this? Well, there's no progress. So

[1:43:35] if, if we know we're not gonna make any progress on it this year, why not? We,

[1:43:39] you know, we could, you know, put it on, on the, uh, back burner and it can come back any other time. We,

[1:43:43] we start seeing a need for, for consolidation.

[1:43:48] but I just don't see, I don't see us even having a conversation about that this year.

[1:43:52] I'm the direction that yeah. But then there

[1:43:56] probably is gonna be a lot of these that were, if, if it's not a one year thing, the next 12

[1:44:00] must take 'em all off. I'd like to hit the pause button on that for a second, because what we're talking about is a one

[1:44:04] to three year, like, I want you thinking of three year horizon for this. So one

[1:44:08] year is the actionability timeline. We're looking at the next year and how we're gonna achieve action three

[1:44:13] years is the mental horizon. I kind of want, you're working on, because there are some of these that are longer term, shorter

[1:44:17] term. So some of these are gonna be in the first year. Some of these are gonna be 3, 4, 5 years.

[1:44:21] but what's the action we could take in the horizon that we've got here? Not that we will take

[1:44:25] that action, but if you are intending to consolidate town facilities

[1:44:29] or that kind of thing in the next three years, and that is something that is

[1:44:33] in the foreseeable future, let's have that discussion. If that's not the case, then it would

[1:44:37] make sense to possibly remove that. Yes. So if I could offer one thing, possibly, if you kind

[1:44:42] of look at what we've done with this, um, strategic objective, we've tried to

[1:44:46] try to use it as a catchall to some degree too. Like we didn't have a, we're doing our security enhancements

[1:44:50] at the buildings and we didn't have a place for that. So we had, we put it under this one so we

[1:44:54] could just, you could make it more broad of, hey, we want to improve and

[1:44:58] modernize our facilities and something like that. Which if you say

[1:45:02] something like, if an opportunity comes up to consolidate, maybe we, it can still fit in there, but maybe

[1:45:06] you just change the verbiage so it can incorporate more of improvements we

[1:45:10] can make up. Yeah. That seems to fit a little bit more with what we're doing. Do we, we could just

[1:45:15] rename that. Yeah, I agree. Because ultimately you don't want a building that's

[1:45:20] not waterproofed or secure tight meaning safety. You don't want our employees coming

[1:45:24] to work feeling they're not safe. So I agree with you. I think I like what

[1:45:28] david just said better, but I was gonna say why not put explore opportunities for

[1:45:32] the finance building and the police department. That's what we're working on. That's gonna

[1:45:36] be the next one to three years. But if you want to include modernizing

[1:45:41] existing building is in that, and maybe what you just said could be under the initiatives

[1:45:45] and not the uh. Okay. Yeah. I, I would agree with that. That seems like a thoughtful way

[1:45:49] to do it because we know what facilities we're targeting. We can get specific at that next layer,

[1:45:54] that short of a window, one to three years. Those two are gonna come into that.

[1:45:58] yep. There's not anything else we're looking at. Right. So, okay, so,

[1:46:03] so can you repeat the, the phrasing that you just gave david? 'cause you gave a

[1:46:07] phrasing there. This is, this is what happens to me all the time. So I'm just putting you on the spot right

[1:46:11] back by you. Right. Can we, we run the tape? We should check with our scribe. Think I said, uh, I think I said

[1:46:15] something like improve and modernize, um, uh, town facilities.

[1:46:20] um, so leave something like that. We can, we

[1:46:24] can wordsmith it a little bit. It sounded a lot better first. I know, I know well,

[1:46:28] I I didn't say it with confide, you know. Yeah. I gotta say it with confidence. Yeah. Try it again. Say it with the confidence

[1:46:32] that we're yeah. Improve and modernize these facilities.

[1:46:37] yeah, yeah. Little four score and seven years ago style. Yeah. Um,

[1:46:41] gen generally speaking, do we have some support for that rephrasing

[1:46:45] of this? Yep. Yep. Yep, yep. Yep. Okay. Again, later on,

[1:46:49] we will give you copies of what the, what these changes look

[1:46:53] like. So you'll have the chance to react to all these changes and be able to see them all. So you

[1:46:58] have another opportunity to look at them all. Okay. Um, hey, nick, could just for

[1:47:02] for a moment, could we jump back to 5.2? Yes, sir. Because the, the, the full objective is,

[1:47:06] is is, uh, implement continuous improvement of business process

[1:47:10] efficiencies, maximizing the addison way in brand. Mm-hmm . Yeah. So again, we

[1:47:14] have the addison way in that, should we just say maximizing the addison brand?

[1:47:18] yeah. I should keep addison way in there because this is very much internal and

[1:47:22] the addison way is kind of an internal culture. Um,

[1:47:26] and it helps keep it in focus. Meaning that we're not gonna cut

[1:47:30] to the, to the, to the bone. We know that we're gonna label a little extra on there

[1:47:34] because doing things, the thought will way, thoughtful way that we do in addison

[1:47:39] requires a little extra. That

[1:47:43] was, that's my thought. This was one of the

[1:47:47] referenced addison way. It's been baked into several different points. So this

[1:47:51] is the discussion yes. To, to me, it's, it's

[1:47:55] just, it seems redundant. I, when I read it, I just kind of include it with all the other

[1:48:00] stuff that's part of our brand. I agree. Okay.

[1:48:05] you agree with removing it? Removing, okay. Yeah. Just

[1:48:09] remove towards way and, and, um, brand.

[1:48:13] yeah. Maximizing the brand. Yeah. Way. Yeah. Way. And

[1:48:18] just take the two words yeah. And take, take out

[1:48:22] way. And, and so generally supportive

[1:48:27] again, did you have a thought?

[1:48:31] okay. I'm good. Good. I'm good with it. Okay. So we're gonna remove addison, that we're

[1:48:35] gonna keep brand in there though. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. Thank you for that great

[1:48:40] point of clarification. Uh, how about this for 5.5 developed plan for next bond

[1:48:44] election, uh, police department and municipal courts facilities was

[1:48:48] kind of the specific

[1:48:52] addition requested to this? Yeah, I, I

[1:48:57] proposed that. I was just trying to figure out what we're talking about. Are we talking about what we're doing now or are we talking about

[1:49:01] some, some future bond elections? So, uh, I just want clarification.

[1:49:05] yeah. Yeah. I mean, I, I think we all need that. Right. Staff definitely needs that,

[1:49:11] that settled into the police station. Sure.

[1:49:15] so can we just be specific and just, um, I mean, I think we're pretty close

[1:49:19] to the finish line, but hopefully develop a

[1:49:24] police department, uh, bond

[1:49:28] election. Well, something to that nature. It doesn't need to

[1:49:32] be that specific wording. Please. Do you mean develop a

[1:49:36] plan to implement what? The bond election, what the

[1:49:40] results of the bond election are imple implement a, uh, police department bond election,

[1:49:45] something. Oh, I think, yeah, I would say, um, either imple

[1:49:49] implement with a, proceed with a, a bond election. Because if

[1:49:53] at first, if you all call an election and if it passes, it would be mid-year, we'd

[1:49:57] probably do next steps of, we're gonna go for design and things like that. So I

[1:50:01] think something that we just move forward with the process so we could add initiatives

[1:50:06] that would be appropriate, get those things happen. Yeah. And I, my focus was is I

[1:50:10] just wanna make sure we're talking about the , right? Yeah. Rather than

[1:50:14] just like anything, something, another bond election

[1:50:19] needs to be specific, right? So, so that's suggestions been put out there, discussion

[1:50:23] related to the suggestion of making it more specific versus leaving it

[1:50:27] as is a fan of more specific.

[1:50:31] okay. Great. Thank you.

[1:50:36] it's fine with me. It does. I'm not, either way, I'm fine either way is okay

[1:50:40] for you. You, I feel like that captures the lock, the both the plan.

[1:50:45] so are you in support of the, the rephrasing or is it more just leave it as is?

[1:50:49] I'm, I'm follow looking at as it is. Okay.

[1:50:55] half a dozen to 1 6, 1 half a dozen dozen me. Yeah.

[1:50:59] okay. I, I personally would like

[1:51:04] that this bond election to be in the fall. I don't know if that's

[1:51:08] needs to come in here or not. And maybe this develops a plan.

[1:51:13] is enc cumbersome of could be may, could be november. I'm in favor

[1:51:17] of the fall on this one. It's not, not specific to it. We'll just

[1:51:21] decide. Okay. Later. Okay.

[1:51:26] at this point I'm not seeing the point to modify it. We're just seeing, basically

[1:51:30] leave it as is seems to be the status quo. We seem to be okay with that, generally speaking.

[1:51:35] can, can we just go real quick because I think we, uh, what I heard is two

[1:51:39] specific, two, two people say, hey, I wanna modify it. Two

[1:51:43] said, leave it as is and the others or seem to be indifferent. Okay. So, so we'd

[1:51:47] like to hear some preference around the room. Well, I'd like to know exactly, um, where we

[1:51:51] stand, because right now it just seems like we haven't figured that out. Fair enough.

[1:51:56] I'd like it to be specific, obviously. Well, I, I don't, I don't see a need to, to make a change.

[1:52:00] okay. Okay. No change. Specific, specific.

[1:52:05] I'm okay with adding police to it specific. Okay. Specific.

[1:52:12] I had zero preference. You gotta give one,

[1:52:18] develop a plan.

[1:52:22] we've already developed a plan for the next bond last, correct. I think that's done.

[1:52:27] oh, thank you. We've already developed the plan for the

[1:52:31] next bond election minus vote

[1:52:36] mode, minus the council vote to take it to an election. Yes.

[1:52:40] so I think that's done. So, but it's not complete though.

[1:52:45] it's not complete. You're right. Because we're, we're still in development on it. So I think keeping

[1:52:49] that verbiage is probably the right thing to do. I, I think you make a, I think you make

[1:52:53] a good point that it is still in development. Yeah, I would,

[1:52:57] I would, this is not a voting arena, but I would, I would leave it as is.

[1:53:04] leave it as is. Yeah. I, I'm fine with the way it is. Okay.

[1:53:09] as is, has it? No strong objects. Okay.

[1:53:13] thanks for that discussion on this.

[1:53:18] at this point, we're feeling generally supportive of this. It feels like we can yep. Yep. And move on.

[1:53:23] okay. Again, this one right

[1:53:27] here, there is no objection. There's no significant objection. We have consent

[1:53:31] on this in general. We have support on this. There's nothing here that's causing

[1:53:36] anybody to flag out. Just figured I'd throw it up there and see if we have general support to move on. Yep. Yep.

[1:53:40] yep, yep. Yep. You look at us rolling

[1:53:44] friends. This is fantastic. Fantastic. This is fantastic. Alright,

[1:53:49] now we get into the fun stuff. Yeah. Alright. So

[1:53:54] I just wanna preface this by saying we've discussed two different variations on community engagement. One, I'll say nobody's

[1:53:58] against community engagement. I have not heard that. I had discussions with you in one-on-one

[1:54:03] specific to this topic because it has come up every year. We've meant something different

[1:54:07] in different viewpoints, but what I've heard is the exact same thing. So I just wanna stage that, which

[1:54:11] is to say, staff's doing a good job in general outreach.

[1:54:15] we would like more participation from the public related to specific topics.

[1:54:19] we would like something a little more aggressive, door to door style. Something that

[1:54:23] is a little more, get into the community and really get after it before it

[1:54:28] comes to a vote with counsel. That was the general nature of the conversation. Not that

[1:54:32] anything's happening wrong, just that we encourage more of the right behaviors in this. So

[1:54:36] there was no desire to get rid of any of these either.

[1:54:41] so it wasn't that we didn't, we value community engagement. That's just it. The question was

[1:54:45] whether it should be rolled into

[1:54:50] vibrant active community or whether it should be separated

[1:54:54] out and imbued in other elements of the strategic plan.

[1:54:59] so do we take community engagement and start to put it in other areas of the strategic plan?

[1:55:04] or do we take elements of this and wrap it into vibrant active community? Those

[1:55:08] were two suggestions that have come up so far. That's the starting point for the discussion. So

[1:55:13] I'd love to hear your thoughts related to this. So again, um, nothing here that's, and again,

[1:55:17] the addison way conversation came up again here. Um,

[1:55:22] that's the discussion. Have that, yeah,

[1:55:26] I'd love to jump in here. Um, I don't know about others, but it was definitely an idea

[1:55:30] of mind. First of all, I think we do an excellent job of community

[1:55:34] engagement. Is it perfect? No, it'll never be perfect. There's a lot of things,

[1:55:39] um, reaching out to people. But, but as far as our efforts,

[1:55:43] um, I feel that they're perfect and we, and, and we've got a ton of,

[1:55:47] uh, community engagement. But, um, I don't, I don't really,

[1:55:52] two things. I don't really see it when I have to prioritize

[1:55:57] as the top seven. And, and I think

[1:56:01] a vibrant, active community has, has good community

[1:56:05] engagement. So I, I don't wanna remove it. I just think we should

[1:56:10] place it as a strategic objective under vibrant active

[1:56:14] community. Thank you. Thanks for that.

[1:56:22] what's a, what is a vibrant active community? It's

[1:56:26] a community supply. Bingo, .

[1:56:30] when I read that, that's just one of those things. Are we talking about a physically

[1:56:35] active and vibrant community? Right. Or are we uh,

[1:56:39] uh, that is just so broad

[1:56:43] that it's hard for me to put yeah.

[1:56:47] so, so when you're looking at this, are you looking at it also by looking at

[1:56:52] the strategic objectives underneath that and the initiatives underneath

[1:56:56] that? Because when you do, I think that help will help you kind

[1:57:00] of better understand and define what we're, what we're driving at.

[1:57:04] but you have to look at as a, as a whole rather than just, um,

[1:57:10] three words. But it's the bullet point. A

[1:57:14] lot of people, when they read the newspaper, they read the headlines. Mm-hmm . Then you gotta get into

[1:57:18] the article. Can't. I'm not sure I can help all those. I'll, I'll, uh, so I, I think I

[1:57:22] can some context though, from, from my recollections from a couple years ago when

[1:57:26] we came, when we kind of, we scrapped the strategic plan, strategic plan and started over,

[1:57:31] we went through all the items that we talked about up front, said, public

[1:57:35] safety is one, economic developments two fiscal. Those were the top three were the top

[1:57:39] three. And then we came up with mobility and these other ones. And then we got

[1:57:43] down to the end and we said, okay, well where are we gonna put arts

[1:57:48] and parks and recreation and these thing and commun those type of functions?

[1:57:52] and it was kind of a, well, we need somewhere to put these things that are important

[1:57:56] to addison together. And I, so it was kind of one of those we worked,

[1:58:00] I think council at, I worked backwards to say we wanted to get these things included and came

[1:58:04] up with the language. If there is better language, let's change

[1:58:08] it. Um, but I think hopefully that helps a little bit. We were, at the time, council was

[1:58:13] trying to figure out how do we fit all these other things that we do in addison, but that aren't

[1:58:17] public safety and economic development. And those, I I accept that. And,

[1:58:21] and I think that's a, an excellent point is, you know, is a vibrant, active community.

[1:58:25] one that goes to the theater, one that goes, you know, walks to get a hamburger,

[1:58:29] right? Or right. Uh, I I think it's just a such a large

[1:58:34] conant, um, with the community engagement. God, it's

[1:58:38] so important. And, and I, that's just the biggest question we've got in the room today.

[1:58:43] how do you do that any better than we do? And you know, we go to all

[1:58:47] these events and we have all these pretty pictures on the

[1:58:51] walls of renderings and put a sticker on it if you like it. Well, everybody's

[1:58:55] gonna love a beautiful picture. Yeah. Yeah. That's pretty. Put a green sticker on it.

[1:59:00] well, then they don't get the full picture of, that's

[1:59:04] $10 million. You wanna spend $10 million. Is it pretty enough to spend $10 million

[1:59:08] on, uh, community engagement, I

[1:59:12] think has to be more of a complete education of

[1:59:16] the public and engaging. Uh,

[1:59:21] we've had several that we've been told that there were public engagement, and I think there was

[1:59:25] true effort to have public engagement, but when we actually got out

[1:59:29] and started knocking on doors and talking to people down the street, they'd never

[1:59:33] heard of this stuff before. Not faulting our staff because they did what they

[1:59:37] did in, in their public arenas and all. Uh,

[1:59:41] I, I just think this is the hardest thing that a town can do, is

[1:59:46] how do you get community engagement to a level? It,

[1:59:51] you know, when you have 8% of your population that votes, how do you get the voting up? So

[1:59:55] it's all, how do you get more engagement? And that's right.

[2:00:00] I think that's the million dollar question that every, every, every city asks that. It's not unique because

[2:00:04] we all want everybody to get involved and be part of the community. And the bottom line

[2:00:08] is, and the truth is that the overwhelming majority of folks, they don't want to

[2:00:13] yeah. They don't wanna be involved. They, they have their own lives. They're very busy. They don't

[2:00:17] have time to follow what the city council's doing. You know, as long as the water turns on

[2:00:21] and el least they there and fire's there. Happy as the plant you

[2:00:25] were describing, most city council people, we were really happy

[2:00:29] until we weren't. And we got on council. You can speak for yourself on that. Okay.

[2:00:33] because, because that, that does not describe me. Well, I agree. I agree with the mayor.

[2:00:38] um, I, I, I think every community struggles with this. We all, we all get

[2:00:42] so busy. Um, I mean, I'm on this council and I, and I, I miss

[2:00:46] things. Um, so I can only imagine when some of our residents, um,

[2:00:50] you know, go through sometimes just because again, like life gets so busy. But I

[2:00:54] do wanna say that I think we do a better job than most cities in trying

[2:00:58] to get the word out and educate. So kudos to the staff on that. Yeah.

[2:01:03] and, and even some of the things that we've done where we've, we've put signs in, in the parks,

[2:01:07] you know, to, you know, do this qr code and fill out the survey, you know,

[2:01:11] online, we make it as easy we possibly can and people just walk

[2:01:15] past it, you know? Yeah. You can't force, you know, people to be, to be involved

[2:01:19] in and engaged in their community. And, you know, as much as we, we might want to.

[2:01:23] and, and the idea of going door to door,

[2:01:27] knocking on people's door and saying, you need to be engaged. You here's this thing coming up. And,

[2:01:31] and, and how often do you do that? And quite frankly, I think people would be upset.

[2:01:36] why do they, why is the city come knocking on my door? Yeah. I think, I think you

[2:01:40] get a different kind of engagement then. Absolutely. Yeah. Not so, not so, uh, loving.

[2:01:44] yeah. And, and, and, and which things do you do that for then? We'd

[2:01:48] have a constant flow. You know, people out and walking in the neighborhoods, knocking on doors,

[2:01:52] harassing people. I, I agree with you. To comment on, on aggravating people at

[2:01:56] the door. I I, even when you're campaigning, I hate to do that. It, that's not a popular

[2:02:00] thing to do. No, nobody wants you doing that. But when we start talking about the signs and the

[2:02:05] parks and that type thing, I am more concerned about

[2:02:09] what my residents think. And the largest

[2:02:13] majority of those people walking on our trails, speaking from my neighborhood

[2:02:17] and going through the parks, are people that don't live in addison.

[2:02:21] and I really don't care that they get on that qr code and tell me

[2:02:26] they want a bridge across a creek that runs into the apartment complex. And

[2:02:30] we should spend a lot of money on something to get the dallas people into addison

[2:02:34] on that. And then the people that walk through my park in north addison park, uh,

[2:02:39] probably 99.5% addison residence. Correct. Now I'm, I'm ju that's why

[2:02:43] I've prefaced it. Mm-hmm. In, in my park. It's different all over town. It's, yeah. And

[2:02:48] I have no good answers. Yeah. I don't think anybody does. Or we'd have them silver bullet, but I

[2:02:52] would just like that to be a good point of emphasis

[2:02:56] is all I'm saying there. And I wonder, I wonder how much somebody that's

[2:03:00] walking through addison circle park and they see a qr code to do, to do some

[2:03:04] online survey. I wonder how many, if if I didn't live here, I wouldn't even consider

[2:03:08] that to do it in another city. So I think that's, I think that's probably pretty low number of folks that do

[2:03:12] that. Well, I think we can look at, at our discussion that we've had on dart,

[2:03:17] I think the large majority of the people that was sending us emails and talking

[2:03:22] were people that didn't live in addison that had no vote. Well, that's, that's

[2:03:26] the regional aspect of that. Yeah. I, I'm just saying because they're not just addison folks that

[2:03:30] are affected. We are very unique that we are surrounded and we, we are a community

[2:03:35] that draws people in. Mm-hmm . I, I'm gonna add to that, if I can jump

[2:03:39] in. So we get to go as council members, we get to go and sort of town staff

[2:03:43] to these tml conferences, nick. Yep. So you get 1200 municipalities

[2:03:48] under one rooftop. Um, and I spend my time sort of not just buckled

[2:03:52] to one of these guy goofballs, but sort of communicating at lunch or a break

[2:03:57] or on a way to get a coffee with, I'll look at the names on the polos,

[2:04:01] right? Oh, you're from x, y, or z town. And some are big and some are small and some are on,

[2:04:05] not quite unincorporated, but they're right on that precipice. And they have the exact

[2:04:09] same sentiment, whether they have a million, whatever, whatever the size.

[2:04:14] houston to addison, the exact same argument, which is

[2:04:18] we try our best. And to, to his point, there is no silver bullet. But

[2:04:22] to the point of having two separate, we're community in two different

[2:04:26] strategic kfa. I just think we need to roll it into one back to his point.

[2:04:30] what is vibrant? Is it walking? Is it how pretty the flowers are?

[2:04:35] that can all be put in community engagement, in my opinion. So there's

[2:04:39] a vibrant act of community, vibrant act community points of

[2:04:43] interest. Ie parks can roll into community engagement. 'cause you are gonna ask

[2:04:47] them to engage, uh, the obj project. What do you, what do you, we had this whole thing put,

[2:04:51] put stickers on the thing, which, which is prettiest regardless of cost.

[2:04:56] but that could have been right under community engagement. So it's either take community engagement,

[2:05:00] put it on a vibrant, active, or flip it. In my opinion. I would, I would

[2:05:04] recommend the opposite in terms of the direction. Exactly. I, yep. I would go community. I'll leave it to the experts

[2:05:08] and I'm with you. Community engagement under vibrant, active community. If you were gonna against that would be where I would put it.

[2:05:12] exactly. If that's what you're gonna do, can we rename it possibly by

[2:05:17] vibrant and engaged community that way? You,

[2:05:21] because I think engagement is important. I, and I'm, I'm not stuck to it. Uh,

[2:05:25] the, the community engagement, like I said, was because, uh, a lot of residents

[2:05:29] felt like they weren't being heard. Um, and, and those strategic objectives.

[2:05:33] and I, I'll, um, uh, I'll give, uh, staff kudos for all the different ways they're trying

[2:05:37] to figure out how to communicate with residents, uh, the signs

[2:05:41] in the parks, you know, great idea. Maybe it's not working now. Maybe we put it on the shelf

[2:05:45] and try something else. But community engagement is important. Uh,

[2:05:50] but I'm for combining 'em. And I think vibrant and engaged community may be,

[2:05:54] uh, a good name for that. Kfa. We keep it as vibrant, active, fine with

[2:05:58] that. Combine 'em. I'd love to hear some

[2:06:02] discussion around that suggestion. I don't, I don't love you losing the word active

[2:06:06] though. Okay. I think that's an important part of, I like, of who we are. We are, I think vibrant is

[2:06:10] active, but I'm not opposed to losing or not. It could be

[2:06:14] vi vibrant, active, and engaged community.

[2:06:19] I don't see anything wrong with that. I I was thinking the opposite of what you were thinking. Uh,

[2:06:23] take clean engagement and rolling it up under vibrant,

[2:06:27] active. And if we want to throw engagement, I would be okay with that too. Yeah.

[2:06:31] that's what I'm getting. You just consolidate these points down is the key point we're getting at.

[2:06:36] how do you name it? It's up to you guys.

[2:06:43] okay. I like adding them together. Vibrant

[2:06:47] and engaged. Uh, active community is fine or vibrant. Active and

[2:06:51] engaged. The problem is staff's doing their job. Doing

[2:06:55] our job. Hey howard. Oh, I, sorry, go ahead. I, I think the

[2:06:59] problem is that staff's doing their job and we're doing our job and the community is not

[2:07:04] doing their job. Correct. Although we are getting it out there. I

[2:07:08] they're not, they're not, uh, getting the in, they're

[2:07:12] not absorbing the information. They are busy. They have families, they have jobs. They,

[2:07:16] they're busy. And if it doesn't, if whatever the issue is doesn't

[2:07:20] concern them or they don't think it concerns them, they're not gonna show up. That's right.

[2:07:25] so, um, this is a tough one, but I

[2:07:29] think we need to keep, keep on keeping on. And I, I think maybe

[2:07:33] snail mail is probably better than email. I think the friday reports

[2:07:38] are important. They're long. And I don't know if people are reading stuff that's

[2:07:42] coming through email or, or text. You know, I, I'm surprised these days that when

[2:07:46] I talk to so many people that say, you know, I, I, I don't, I never check my mailbox.

[2:07:51] they don't even, they don't check their regular snail mailbox. You know, old, old guys like

[2:07:55] us. You know, we, we check our mailbox 'cause that's what we've always done that. But hey,

[2:07:59] , randy, what, what? But a lot of people, because,

[2:08:04] 'cause most people are not getting important things in their, in their snail mail that they, that that's

[2:08:09] encourages them to, to check that. So that, I mean, that's been, that's a very

[2:08:13] expensive thing to do too. Mm-hmm . Yeah. I haven't checked mine in two weeks.

[2:08:17] yeah. , randy, where are you with rolling community engagement

[2:08:21] under vibrant active community and or some wordsmith of that?

[2:08:26] I'm, I, I'm certainly in favor of consolidating. Okay. Consolidate, consolidating

[2:08:30] that. And I, I think our,

[2:08:35] as big a in community engagement that is becoming more popular,

[2:08:40] I think is the friday newsletter that we're putting out. Mm-hmm . I am getting

[2:08:44] far more positive comments mm-hmm . From that friday newsletter than

[2:08:48] I ever have before. People are actually starting to realize there's valuable

[2:08:53] lot of value there. So I really like that. And maybe even,

[2:08:57] I don't know how you expand that and make it more, but I, I really think,

[2:09:02] I think that's been a valuable tool mm-hmm . And, and I do agree that the

[2:09:06] c mail is too expensive, number one. And most

[2:09:10] of the time mine goes from the mailbox to the recycling den. So that same,

[2:09:14] I I open it over my recycling veterinary garage. Yeah. Oh, you don't? Thanks for recycling,

[2:09:18] uh, . No, no. Um, so do you have what,

[2:09:22] what you need vibrant, active, and engaged community seems to be the kind of place we're

[2:09:26] landing. It seems to be that there's a general tone and tenor that we'd like to do this. It also

[2:09:31] very consistent with the conversation. We'd love the community to be more engaged, however they're apathetic

[2:09:35] up and until the point where something impacts or affects them, which case they have incredibly strong feelings.

[2:09:40] right. And very little information typically. Right. Am I, yep. This is by

[2:09:44] the way, incredibly typical for most communities I deal with. Uh, there's one

[2:09:48] community that has an overly engaged populace, and that is los alamos,

[2:09:52] new mexico. And that's because they're a bunch of retired nuclear physicists with nothing to do. . Okay.

[2:09:57] and that is a problem on a different scale. Okay. Um, careful

[2:10:01] what ja for it is, it is they have what they call their, the nifty 50 and the nifty 50 show up

[2:10:05] to every discussion. And they actually have a, uh, a, a premium that consultants

[2:10:09] charge to work in los alamos to deal with those folks because they're

[2:10:13] so overly engaged on everything under the sun. So I'll say it's

[2:10:18] an interesting conversation to have, but this is a conversation that 99% of the communities I

[2:10:22] have is how can we get the residents more engaged? And it is a trick. Um,

[2:10:26] you know, there are things, you're doing the right behaviors. Honestly, the newsletter, if that's hitting for you and you're

[2:10:30] getting traction, do it. You know, get after that. Um, if, if

[2:10:34] snail mail's the right way, well, it's kind of being phased out a little bit. Social media's its own

[2:10:38] dynamically hot bed playground, it's not gonna get a, there's just

[2:10:42] so much you can do. And then there's gorilla chalking neighborhoods and gorilla

[2:10:47] marketing for things that are targeted campaigns. I mean, there's only a handful of

[2:10:51] things you could do. You can't make the public care until something impacts them

[2:10:55] is my experience. So I'll just say that. But if vibrant, active and engaged

[2:10:59] community allows us to better encapsulate what we're after, which it sounds

[2:11:03] like maybe it does, is that something that we could work on or, or live

[2:11:07] with in, in terms of this? 'cause I, I see them being connected as well.

[2:11:12] um, it's just where we want to kind of elevate and, and create, create

[2:11:16] that focus. Are we creating an un undue burden

[2:11:20] on staff by, by combining those? Or are we combining different departments

[2:11:24] or do different departments work on the different areas? Or is that still one basic department

[2:11:29] that might even make it easier for them? That's it. It's easier to have

[2:11:33] less ks. Okay. Perfect. I just don't wanna put an undue burden on staff if that,

[2:11:37] if that's the case. Thanks for asking that. Yes. And we're not, we're not done

[2:11:41] with the process either. Yeah, yeah. Right. Yeah. And this will give howard

[2:11:45] more points with less ffas, howard gets a win.

[2:11:50] so, so vibrant, active and engaged community. Vibrant, active and engaged community.

[2:11:54] that was the recommendation. If that's, we okay with that? I feel good with that. I'm good. Yeah. Yeah.

[2:11:59] I like it. Yep, yep, yep. Okay. So outside of the language, um, maybe

[2:12:03] just provide a little context and example of how we

[2:12:07] can and should prioritize community engagement. And by putting priority on

[2:12:12] priority on it, it could lead to some of our projects. When you look at the coloring being

[2:12:16] red, because we want to go back and do additional community engagement.

[2:12:21] so take that and circle park vision study, we add a committee.

[2:12:26] we had 4, 5, 6 public meetings. Did a

[2:12:30] lot of, we was in the newsletter, did a lot of engagement on that. And we got to a point where we're ready

[2:12:34] to kind of take the next steps spoke. We've stepped back and we've heard

[2:12:38] folks that still are saying they didn't have that, they didn't feel like there was enough. Their opinion

[2:12:42] wasn't heard and it wasn't coming from the ground up. So we're resetting that project

[2:12:47] and we're gonna go back out and do more engagement, more pops up popups in the park

[2:12:52] to try to ensure that we have that. So by prioritizing that, you

[2:12:56] may see some on some of these notes, hey, we're gonna delay this a little bit because

[2:13:00] we want to do additional feedback. And that's just us trying to listen to you

[2:13:04] all trying to listen to the public to ensure that especially on projects

[2:13:08] like that, that they are, they have that community basis support as they go forward. So

[2:13:12] I, I just wanted to pro provide that as, as an example of one of how we're trying to ensure

[2:13:17] we're not only doing everything we can, but we're listening to was it successful?

[2:13:22] and two, while you may see some of those notes on the projects as they

[2:13:26] go forward. That's great. So an obs observation I see on that one in

[2:13:30] particular, it's a really good case study for a lot of them. Like the buy lanes or

[2:13:34] like the quorum or many things is you've got,

[2:13:38] uh, you've got a momentum or philosophy of council that's

[2:13:43] going this direction and like addison circle, and

[2:13:47] then you're doing all the work, and then it starts getting time

[2:13:51] to start putting these things into action. And people say, wait a minute, now you're gonna

[2:13:55] activate a quiet park that I like, that I moved here for. So they,

[2:13:59] they now they're starting to take, uh, take up arms about it.

[2:14:03] and now they get very vocal. They, and, and they say, okay, we gotta stop

[2:14:08] this. When in actuality there was, there was complete engagement and there

[2:14:12] was, there was very much a direction from the, uh, the

[2:14:16] council. But now that's tide has changed.

[2:14:21] so that happens on many projects. And I, I want to just

[2:14:25] point that out. I don't know what we do with it. But then that's

[2:14:29] a reality. You did engage, you did do everything. But now when you

[2:14:33] actually start doing something, it stirs people up. They get active changes the,

[2:14:37] the temperature of, of the, of the council.

[2:14:42] so that's how I throw that out there. I've got another one, but I'll wait.

[2:14:46] thank, thank you for that. Very typical,

[2:14:50] not uncommon. What do we do with it? Yep. And, and

[2:14:54] it's a reasonable question. At the point when we've done the engagement and we've gone through the process of engagement,

[2:14:58] and in this case even reone through the process of engagement to ensure we've received that,

[2:15:02] there will still, in my experience, be many people who are dissatisfied

[2:15:06] because the outcome isn't the outcome that they wanted, at which point they'll contact you all

[2:15:11] and tend to try and work around that process. And that's, we just have to

[2:15:15] recognize the rules of engagement when those moments happen. Did we do what we said we were going to do in

[2:15:19] the right ways to get the right type of engagement to the best of our abilities? What it does is,

[2:15:23] it is you recently here stopped progress in addison and

[2:15:27] it paralyzes yep. The staff. So I,

[2:15:32] I'm frustrated with it. Not that I agree with any of those particular points

[2:15:36] or, or case studies that I'm talking about. I'm just saying that I, it's, it is frustrating. Yep.

[2:15:40] david, so for clarification, you're talking about the obj project that I referenced earlier is gonna

[2:15:44] be scrapped and start over? No, we're not. That's, I wouldn't say scrapped or start

[2:15:49] over. Start over. Our, we were, and in the budget we had, our next bill was to go in and start having

[2:15:53] conversations with council about funding possibilities and taking

[2:15:57] those. And in, in that we would be saying, hey, here's what it's going to look like

[2:16:01] based on the studies that we had and council direction. But we,

[2:16:05] as staff said, we're still hearing from the community

[2:16:09] that there's some folks that have questions that wanna get their thoughts heard, even from council.

[2:16:14] and so I think it's worth it for us to pause for six months, nine

[2:16:18] months, do do some more of those popups, get some more feedback, come back to

[2:16:22] you all with that. Um, because in that project in particular,

[2:16:27] that's one that has a huge impact on us going forward. It's a long range project,

[2:16:31] let's get it right and ensure we're hearing from everybody going forward. Now,

[2:16:35] I don't want that to dilute the, what we've heard to this point,

[2:16:39] the work of the committee and things like that. But I do think it's worth it to get as much engagement

[2:16:43] as possible to bring forward through you all. And maybe there's some changes that are made to it.

[2:16:48] um, but I wouldn't say it's scrapping the project. Okay. Thank you. Yep. For people that

[2:16:52] may watch this later, can you just tell 'em what obj stands for? So

[2:16:56] they, so they know what project you're referring to? You're gonna quiz me on? No,

[2:17:00] I'm just, it's actually ojb. It's the offices of james

[2:17:04] fett is the co name yeah. The add

[2:17:08] farm. Yes. Yeah. And, and, and what it's gonna be affecting. So it's the, yeah. So it's

[2:17:13] the addison circle park vision study. It's saying what addison circle park

[2:17:17] as it exists now, what could it look like in 10 years? Um, and then

[2:17:21] what are the steps to get okay. I, I could just see people saying, what are they talking about?

[2:17:25] question. Thank you for that point of clarification. Yep.

[2:17:29] alright. We have general ascension to move this to vibrant, active, and engaged community.

[2:17:34] okay. And thank you for the robust discussion around this. I think the shared understanding of

[2:17:39] what we're after as a group is really important. 'cause it helps staff out when we go through these processes

[2:17:43] going forward and understand the challenges with that. So david asked the question of how can

[2:17:47] we better engage our citizens? Yes. Did you ask that question, david? You wanted a

[2:17:51] conversation here? I heard it. Maybe actually I didn't ask

[2:17:55] the question, but it's okay. Yeah, I didn't hear the question because we've been talking about I like that there's a

[2:18:00] question that you wanna ask though. Like, let's put it out there just on the strategic, um, the

[2:18:04] initiative level. Um, I think equipping one of the

[2:18:08] best, uh, community, uh, community, um, uh, engagement

[2:18:12] is council people. We're not only on council to set direction,

[2:18:17] we're kind of, um, information sources for all the folks that we know.

[2:18:21] and, um, if we get better equipped with information

[2:18:26] that we can readily have available to share with our residents and our

[2:18:30] spheres of influence, then that allows us to, to be more of a, uh, information

[2:18:34] source, right? Accurate information source. It's better equipping counsel with information,

[2:18:39] easy information. Um, and we get a lot of information,

[2:18:43] but maybe it's just the way it's packaged. Maybe it's the way it, it's, uh, the top 10 and

[2:18:47] faqs, or what are we hearing? Um, those sorts of things. I, I thought that for

[2:18:51] a long time, the better I'm equipped, the better I can be a better council. We're we're ambassadors in a lot of way

[2:18:55] to the town, to the town people. A big interface point.

[2:19:00] so initiative level. Mm-hmm . Thank you for that. Thank you for that.

[2:19:07] yep, yep, yep, yep, yep, yep, yep. All right. Y'all are doing great. Really appreciate

[2:19:11] it. Stick with me here. We, the next one up is vibrant, active, and now engaged community.

[2:19:16] yeah. Good stuff. Um, so what I'll say is in, in terms of the council

[2:19:20] support, 50% supportive, 50% neutral on this one. So a little

[2:19:24] more in the, eh, I'm okay about it. Um, I think some of it was related

[2:19:28] to the wording and of course this issue of community engagement inside of it, there was a little bit of that discussion,

[2:19:33] um, keep or modify. There was one disagree vote on each of these three

[2:19:38] things. So again, it's, is it keep, is it modified? That doesn't mean there wasn't support, just one disagree.

[2:19:42] so let's just make sure that voice is heard. Uh, activate parks and town assets, gateways

[2:19:46] and streetscapes and special moments and events. Were kind of these right here. Let

[2:19:50] me just, uh, finish this thought real quick. Um, these were the signals overall that you gave

[2:19:55] related to this. These are both in one-on-one discussions as well as open-ended commentary

[2:19:59] in this. And so I kind of consolidate these into sentiments so that I could give you some idea of what your signals

[2:20:03] look like. So generally positive sentiment. We like the concept of a vibrant active

[2:20:07] in community. We don't have any problem with it. Um, high general support, but low overall urgency.

[2:20:12] so this just didn't fall in the list of like, hey, in terms of things we gotta be really after this

[2:20:16] wasn't just top of the list for that. So let's recognize that as well. Um, again, that community

[2:20:20] engagement part and then the narrowing the scope to branding and experience was

[2:20:24] the other kind of comment. We're back into the brand discussion a little bit here, um,

[2:20:28] with this one. So that's the discussion. I just wanna open it up in

[2:20:33] terms of keep modify. I think we maybe understand the intent behind this a little bit better now,

[2:20:37] but let's talk it through here. So the please. Yeah. The, the only question I had

[2:20:41] on this was 7.2 and I'm just gonna read it. So we can also enhance

[2:20:45] addison's gateways and visual appeal of streetscapes to optimize,

[2:20:49] uh, addison brand. And I love it, but I just, to me, I

[2:20:53] just thought, shouldn't that be under infrastructure, um,

[2:20:57] and development. Okay. So I love the,

[2:21:02] the objective. I'm just thought it might be misplaced. Where does

[2:21:06] it belong? Yeah. Infrastructure and developed. Correct. Okay. Alright.

[2:21:12] so let's, let's start with that one, since that's kind of being brought up first in this discussion.

[2:21:17] what are your thoughts related to it? It, it, it could be moved to infrastructure and

[2:21:21] that could make some sense to us, or we might think that this is okay

[2:21:26] where it's at. Yeah. So for me actually, this is the, the aesthetics

[2:21:30] of the, of the town as you're driving through, what does it look like as, as you as, as,

[2:21:34] as visitors and residents are going through it. Where I think of infrastructure

[2:21:39] as those, those necessary things that

[2:21:43] we, that we have to have the water, sewer, all those different things, the roads.

[2:21:47] um, I, I, I, I see, I, I see this as different than,

[2:21:51] than infrastructure. Okay. I, I don't think I would love to, uh, combine them. Appreciate

[2:21:56] that. Thank you. Other

[2:22:02] thoughts, feelings, confessions?

[2:22:06] nobody ever takes me up on confessions, but I think the,

[2:22:10] the intent of this vibrant, active community in this, uh, objective was, uh,

[2:22:14] what it feels like addison addison's image. And that was

[2:22:18] the original intent. It was what, two or three years ago? And, um,

[2:22:23] now that we've kind of changed the tone of the vibrant, active and engaged community,

[2:22:28] uh, the vibrant community part was to make this something where

[2:22:32] addison is alive. And when people, visitors want to come here and

[2:22:36] experience the things that we do, we have, uh, performing arts, uh, the art that

[2:22:40] we have around here, uh, nice parks, uh, appropriately

[2:22:45] in public places, uh, to, to come to addison and to

[2:22:50] spend money here and to want to live here or move their office here. So that was the the

[2:22:54] an intent. It was an attraction. That's correct. So I I'm fine with

[2:22:58] leaving it there. Uh, it, to me it could move to economic development and revitalization.

[2:23:04] some of the objectives that are under there enhanced addison gateways because it's,

[2:23:08] it's your he image your brand. Yeah. I, and I don't

[2:23:12] see this as going into ed either, just because, because I think this is the

[2:23:16] vibrancy of the town because we've talked about this for years. That when you are

[2:23:20] surrounded by multiple cities and we really have, have expressed

[2:23:25] the, the desire to have, uh, the experience when somebody enters addison,

[2:23:29] they notice something different that they, that they, that there's a change. And that's,

[2:23:33] that's where I see this fitting in. And that's the vibrancy of the town. Um,

[2:23:38] and it is just, it's a feeling that you get when, when you, when you come in,

[2:23:42] uh, that, that, you know, there's something different. Yeah. That I agree with that it's just, you know,

[2:23:46] if it's, if it doesn't, if it moves, then ed would be a better place for me to revitalization.

[2:23:51] 'cause it's, you know, not just revitalizing hotels and office spaces and retail facades

[2:23:55] and so on. It's, it's the whole place. It's the street scapes and stuff like that. I mean,

[2:24:00] but again, it's a crossover. I agree with

[2:24:04] the two comments that I heard that, you know, it, it's, it's visual and it creates

[2:24:08] this feel, um, experience. And that's why I think it

[2:24:13] deserves to be under the vibrant active engagement community.

[2:24:18] okay. So we'll just do kind of a straight up preference indicator

[2:24:22] here. Would you like to see it moved?

[2:24:27] if you'd like to see it moved, gimme the hands up in which

[2:24:32] case we're gonna leave it where it's at and that's okay. We understand the con. Thank you. It

[2:24:36] is one of those things that ties us together and it helps to, so it does have a lot of

[2:24:40] relationships to a lot of the other items. And thanks for bringing that, that conversation. Thank you.

[2:24:44] uh, other topics about this right here. So we're gonna keep it where it's at. Yes sir. So I'm

[2:24:48] hearing from residents on 7.1 that

[2:24:53] the ones around the circle do not want all that

[2:24:57] activity put into that park. They want to keep the park like

[2:25:01] it is and they don't want activating it with all those

[2:25:06] enhancements that we've talked about, um, coming into the park, a beer garden

[2:25:10] and whatever they, they like it the way it is. And, um,

[2:25:15] that's just my comment on that park. I, I don't know about other assets.

[2:25:19] they also were very active and, um, loud about

[2:25:23] their trees and cutting those trees down. And I'm hearing that

[2:25:27] constantly that they do not want our staff coming in and

[2:25:31] cutting their trees down without them being engaged in the process. They

[2:25:36] feel like those parks are their backyard and they wanna know

[2:25:40] what's, what's gonna happen to those parks. And so

[2:25:44] when we have people come to the staff, uh, to the council in a work session

[2:25:49] and tell us about all these great plans for the park, those meetings need to be

[2:25:53] happening with the neighbors that are adjacent to the park and get

[2:25:57] their feedback and then bring it to the cows. Okay. That's

[2:26:01] just my howard, if I can ask a point of clarification on that. So when you're talking about,

[2:26:06] I'll, I'll use, I've used that reference before, is addison circle park,

[2:26:11] our want to be central park in new york where it's active people riding bikes,

[2:26:15] they're walking dogs. The community members you've

[2:26:19] spoken to also, correct me if I'm wrong, want more engagement for their

[2:26:24] businesses in the circle. Meaning more human beings get into that circle for one

[2:26:28] reason or another, and then go shop, eat, dine, play, whatever that looks like. Get their

[2:26:32] hair done, nails done. So am I hearing you correctly that

[2:26:36] they, they wanna leave it alone, which means low populace or you

[2:26:40] saying they want both ends? They want specific people to come in,

[2:26:44] spend money and leave without growing that population at the park. So you think

[2:26:48] they're conflicting goals? I do. Mm-hmm . You can't have one without the other. You want more

[2:26:53] people. You want that to become central park. We need to re reimagine that park.

[2:26:57] it's stale. It's sort of like some of our restaurants or hotels.

[2:27:01] so then maybe that message needs to be delivered by

[2:27:06] staff to those people who live there. Because the,

[2:27:10] the pro what I'm hearing from them, I've now got a lot of friends in the circle. I didn't use

[2:27:14] to have that, so I didn't know anything. Now I hear it. They

[2:27:19] would like all those empty, uh, spaces

[2:27:23] to be leased. They, they want more business in those in

[2:27:27] their neighborhood and the park. They,

[2:27:32] I, I don't know what I'm getting from them. They like being able to take the dogs in the

[2:27:36] park and play frisbee and walk the park and enjoy the park. And

[2:27:40] they don't want a lot of stuff built on the park that changes

[2:27:46] the park. I I I it is too different, um,

[2:27:51] conflicting issues. So, so we need more engagement with those

[2:27:55] people and, and, and get a consensus from them. And

[2:27:59] maybe I'm hearing from just the small group that I'm hearing from, I certainly

[2:28:03] don't know thousands of people in the park. And you have property owners, you have

[2:28:07] business owners, and you have, uh, tenants in the apartments and it's, it's three

[2:28:11] different groups. Well, and you know, as we were going through that whole project with

[2:28:15] that, uh, with the consultant on, on the park, there was a lot of community

[2:28:19] engagement, a lot of opportunities. And it still goes back to, you know,

[2:28:25] you can't force people to get engaged. And there's the problem from

[2:28:29] what we were just talking about, how long has it been since we've had a briefing on this project to

[2:28:33] council? 'cause I, I'll be honest with you, I'm, I'm behind the power curve on this. I don't know

[2:28:37] a lot about it. I don't think I've been on, we have a, it was prior to you coming on. We

[2:28:41] don't talk about it since you been, I would love to, to get more in involved and, and learn

[2:28:45] more, whether it be coming to the office and just sitting down with somebody and, and

[2:28:49] get it explained or to have a work session item put on it to kind of,

[2:28:53] if we're going to kind of, not restart, but shift

[2:28:57] back and reimagine, possibly have some kind of work

[2:29:01] session on it again. Uh, and and was all of the,

[2:29:06] were these plans brought before our new project

[2:29:10] development project? Is, is the new development there

[2:29:14] going to take some of these things that you're wanting to do in the park and

[2:29:18] put 'em in the new project where we can keep our park and still have the entertainment

[2:29:23] area that you're talking about? It there was all, all together? Yeah. Okay. Yeah, it

[2:29:27] was, how, how do we integrate them? Really? I don't know that I'd want a beer garden in the park if we're gonna have

[2:29:31] a beer garden in this new development is what I'm saying. Right. And make them work

[2:29:35] more hand in hand. I have been briefed on the tod mm-hmm . But I haven't

[2:29:40] been briefed on this part deal, so I, I'd like to get caught brought up to speed on it's what I'm

[2:29:44] saying. I'll just ask ashley to send us, send us a link since you're new and chris. No,

[2:29:48] I'd love that. I'd love that. So help me, howard, are you suggesting we modify,

[2:29:53] um, 7.1 or somehow can

[2:29:57] I, can I give some input before we well, I just would love to, he,

[2:30:01] he started the thought and I'm just trying to make sure I understood what

[2:30:05] he's communicated. I don't know. I wasn't, I wasn't looking at

[2:30:09] whether we should keep it change. I'm just making the comment that

[2:30:13] that issue has, I've been hearing from people okay. That they

[2:30:17] are comment, sorry. Yeah. Alright. Yeah, so like for me, 7.1 is

[2:30:21] just to what level do we activate the park? I, I, I think,

[2:30:26] I think that's, that ton circle area is very dense and that park becomes the

[2:30:30] backyard to a lot of people that live there. So it is very important to listen to them. And,

[2:30:34] and that's the feedback that I'm getting is I do want some enhancements, like we're gonna plant a bunch

[2:30:38] of trees over there, which I think will be great. Um, but it could be that we're

[2:30:42] over activating it a bit. So I think that's kind of, for me, where we need to

[2:30:47] pay attention to. I, I do think the, the trail that comes through that's gonna be

[2:30:51] run parallel to the, uh, dart rail, I think we will get people in

[2:30:55] and hopefully that'll be just enough to get those, um, on, you

[2:30:59] know, the underutilized spaces to get activated. Yeah. There's certainly

[2:31:03] more discussion to be had on, on what the, uh, the final project may,

[2:31:07] may look like. And, and it, again, it's a long term project too. That's not

[2:31:11] a, not a this year or next year. It's a multi-year

[2:31:15] project. And yeah. I just wanna add, you know, we've got a lot of parks and some

[2:31:19] of them are meant to be very active and some of them aren't. Some

[2:31:24] of them are for children to play. So it's just like, depending on which

[2:31:28] park you're talking about, it has different, they all have their own purpose.

[2:31:33] so from a tactical, this is very broad, right? This is, we're we're strategic planning, right? Yeah.

[2:31:37] so from a tactical perspective, it sounds like we'd like more information on the part and that

[2:31:41] seems like a, we'd like more information about what's happening. Well, I hear an update.

[2:31:45] I hear an update. Or you want some updates on addison circle. I want visionary study,

[2:31:49] right? Is that what you're, is that what you're kind of, is that howard, I mean you're just kind

[2:31:53] of, you guys wanting some updates on some isn't that what, uh, I

[2:31:57] forgot the initials again. J that's what we're

[2:32:01] talking about. So ab we need to,

[2:32:06] I don't know. You said we have a lot of engagement. I only learned about it when I got my counsel. I

[2:32:10] didn't know. So I get like everybody else. So just to be clear, when I was talking

[2:32:14] earlier about paus a project and reengaging that this is the project I was talking about.

[2:32:19] so we're already okay. Yeah. So's in the process that I, I love

[2:32:23] our parks and we've had several discussions on parks, I think through their, they're one of addison's

[2:32:28] crown jewels on our parks area. And I want 'em all activated

[2:32:32] and I want people to enjoy 'em. However,

[2:32:37] I don't, I, I don't think if activating

[2:32:41] our parks means turning them into a commercialized district.

[2:32:45] I am opposed to that. I, I don't think putting commercial businesses

[2:32:50] inside of our green space parks is where we should

[2:32:54] be going. We should be keeping our parks to a level that everyone expects

[2:32:58] 'em to be, to where they can get out to. I agree. Completely agree with what chris has said. This

[2:33:02] is some people's backyards. So, uh, I, I

[2:33:07] love our parks. I would like to see our parks activated as a park, not

[2:33:11] as a commercial, uh, space, is what I'm saying. Yeah. You don't, you don't wanna overdo it, randy, but it, but

[2:33:15] I also think that a lot of the folks that live in the, in the circle, they really enjoy the fact that javin

[2:33:19] hops is there. Oh, absolutely. And that's, and that's a commercial, but you gotta, you gotta

[2:33:23] do the right things. But it's not in that green space. It's kind of on the periphery, but it is on park

[2:33:28] property. I understand. Yeah. I get it. And I really like to, like someone else said,

[2:33:32] I'd love to try to get some of those empty spaces that are connected

[2:33:36] to that part. Mm-hmm . Filled up. Yeah. You know? Yeah. I would rather

[2:33:41] concentrate our commercial activity, trying to fill those spaces rather than build

[2:33:45] our own. You just have to be thoughtful about how you do it. Yeah. I certainly look forward to

[2:33:49] the discussion. I really wanna find out more about it. Are we good? David, can you inform the conversation a little bit?

[2:33:53] it looks like maybe you have a little bit of con con context around this, or

[2:33:58] no? I, I think we'll come back and discuss it. I, I just, I guess for folks

[2:34:02] watching, I also don't wanna mischaracterize what the project is today 'cause it's not, I mean, it

[2:34:06] is, it adds a lot. It has a, it has a significant open space in the middle.

[2:34:10] it's not commercial activity throughout. It adds a lot of trees. It has some more activation spaces

[2:34:14] so that folks can use that. We need to go have discussion and if we need to remove

[2:34:19] things, change things. Let's, that's why we wanna engage more. But I also don't want folks to

[2:34:23] listen to this and think it's just gonna be like, shops everywhere. That's not what it, right. Yeah. Thank

[2:34:27] you for that. And that's me not being fully up to speed on it. That's what I was trying to

[2:34:31] avoid. So thank you for that context too. And this is great. This is the discussion we want to

[2:34:35] have. And let's have more discussion about this. 'cause it sounds like it's a really valuable opportunity for us.

[2:34:40] it doesn't sound like we've got an objection to this particular, when coming back to strategic objectives

[2:34:45] when we talk about this really activate parks and town at, we don't have an objection to that. I'm

[2:34:49] not hearing one. At least we like it. There's also, what's the right level, what's

[2:34:53] the right location acceptable. That's, that's the how we get it. The

[2:34:57] what? So I'm not hearing objections to that. Yep. I'm not hearing

[2:35:01] objections to 7.2. We already decide we're gonna keep that where it's at. We like that as well.

[2:35:05] 7.3. We haven't had a conversation about yet. Special moments and events. 7.2.

[2:35:10] yes, sir. Just one real quick thing, 7.2 to, to marlin deal on moving

[2:35:15] this. And I know we've already said we don't wanna move it, but that almost somewhat sounds

[2:35:19] to me like to be something that should maybe be under parks.

[2:35:23] if we're talking about the green spaces between the streets and, and that type stuff.

[2:35:28] uh, it seems like that should fall. And, and you're talking about when

[2:35:32] you move, come into town, you wanna know you're in addison. It it has to do with the greenery

[2:35:36] and, and the spaces in the middle. And anyway, that's just a comment. So,

[2:35:41] okay. Um, special

[2:35:45] moments and events.

[2:35:49] any comment? I mean, again, we had one person object to this, that, which is why I

[2:35:53] bring this up for discussion. Is this something that needs to have modification or have we discussed

[2:35:58] the reason for the modification to the point where we feel okay about what's happening here? Well, that's a special

[2:36:02] moment. Well, I, I think so. I, yeah, I had to read, I had to read the whole

[2:36:06] thank you. So, so the whole, the whole objective, it says vision and create

[2:36:10] special moments that make people want to be in addison arts

[2:36:15] events, uh, addison athletic club markets. So yeah, it's, so

[2:36:19] instead of, it's not events. We got events, but special moments. I'm

[2:36:23] not sure how we came up with that. Right. That verbiage for that. Yeah, that was, but, but

[2:36:27] I get the point of it. That was a specific inclusion by one of

[2:36:31] the, uh, I, I think council members who's no longer here, that was a specific inclusion

[2:36:35] that was requested as a result of a previous discussion. So I could, I could

[2:36:39] see that happening. Yep. Yeah. That's how that came be to your

[2:36:43] point that you had to read it. Yeah, I would too. Yeah. People at home don't have this advantage

[2:36:47] of having their act, but, but it is all on the website. It is all there if they want

[2:36:51] did. And because they're likely not gonna see this powerpoint. Correct.

[2:36:56] I just love special mo. I mean, I have a lot of special abuse of town. So

[2:37:02] different kind of special moments. Maybe we're after here. No, really? Yeah. I, I have

[2:37:06] no feeling. Okay. Yeah. Yep. I'm okay with it. Nick. Okay. With it as

[2:37:10] well. Can we change moment to occasion? I, I don't

[2:37:14] see it as a moment. I see someone coming in and having an experience

[2:37:18] or something. I, I think occasion or experience, I don't know who came up

[2:37:22] with that before, but I would, that, that don't, that word doesn't fit either.

[2:37:26] with occasion. I don't wanna have occasion, occasion, occasions, special

[2:37:31] occasion seems better than moments. Yeah. Yes. We're feeling okay. Yeah.

[2:37:35] especially moments. Sounds a little hallmarky. It does. It does. And, uh, I, this one made me

[2:37:39] smile when I read it, you know, like, it was great, you know. Um, all right, good. But let's change that to, okay.

[2:37:44] good idea. All. Thanks. We're good. I, I don't find good on that. I don't care either way. I do care.

[2:37:49] all right. Yeah, I'm not seeing any more objections to this or any

[2:37:53] further discussion that needs to occur with this one in particular. With that said,

[2:37:57] I'm gonna hit the pause button here. We've been at it for an hour and 15 hour and a half. So let's

[2:38:01] go ahead and stretch it out here again for a second. Uh, what are we looking at? 11 36 46.

[2:38:06] we'll be back. Okay. It is, uh, are we on? It is

[2:38:10] 1217, and we will come back in, uh, into our session

[2:38:14] from our lunch break and turn it back over to nick. All right. Thanks everybody. Thanks

[2:38:18] for a great morning. Let's keep rolling. Uh, we're making some great progress here, and like I said, we

[2:38:22] saved the best for last, so that's right.

[2:38:27] where's the greatest degree of, let's say, uh, opportunity

[2:38:32] for conversation? And it would be right here. So given what we,

[2:38:36] uh, given what we looked at in the survey, uh, this ranks at about 10% in terms of q

[2:38:40] uh, that, that question one, uh, 10%. And then council agreement, 50%

[2:38:44] support of 33%. Strong objection. Lowest overall weighted

[2:38:49] average in the overall equation. Um, we had one

[2:38:53] that really had no significant objections to it, and that was

[2:38:57] improved pedestrian safety. So that's one that I think we have a lot of

[2:39:01] alignment. Now, some of the question may be about where and how. We actually had some discussion around

[2:39:06] that. What types of areas should we be doing pedestrian and safety efforts in,

[2:39:10] those kinds of things. But there was an objection to this. So this is an area where it feels like we have

[2:39:14] a lot of alignment and agreement. I wanna keep this in the context of the larger conversation,

[2:39:18] uh, which is to say, requests to remove

[2:39:22] requests to modify or reframe. And this is the general counsel feedback, so I'll

[2:39:26] let you take that in for a second here. Um, again, I'm just

[2:39:31] being the mirror.

[2:39:48] so in terms of the general feedback, it was, some folks felt market should solve

[2:39:52] connectivity. There was discussions around things like waymo and lyft and

[2:39:57] uber as being mechanisms inside of this. There was discussion about

[2:40:02] scooters and roller blades. Heck, I, I mean, I'm just kidding about

[2:40:06] the roller blades. Nobody brought that up. But at the same time, it felt like everything under the sun was a topic

[2:40:10] with at least one of you. Um, so the lots of sort of

[2:40:14] differing viewpoints on this. I talked about dart being that proxy issue before.

[2:40:19] so that conversation was very fluid and flexible, depending on which council member

[2:40:23] I was speaking with. So a lot of thoughts about that. Um, the bike lanes

[2:40:27] really was the sticking point for a lot of this. There was, I'll say

[2:40:31] general and, and again, please, the, the eloquency

[2:40:35] with words is a hard one to walk with this one. Okay? But we're not opposed to

[2:40:40] bike lanes. We might be opposed to bike lanes on certain thoroughfares, though, on these streets.

[2:40:44] we don't love bike lanes. We like 'em as trails. We like

[2:40:48] 'em segregated from the roadway. We like 'em on non-major arterial streets. We don't

[2:40:52] like to lose car functionality in lieu

[2:40:56] of bike lanes was some of the conversation. And in others,

[2:41:00] the conversation was that is critical to signaling that we are a community,

[2:41:04] uh, who is ready for this. Sustainability is important to us. It is what younger

[2:41:09] families and younger residents want. It's part of attracting people to the community. It's

[2:41:13] an economic driver. So it came under both of these headers and, and it came with very

[2:41:17] different voices in this space. So that was the bike lanes discussion. There were specific

[2:41:21] issues with at least one or two projects were bike lanes were brought into the

[2:41:25] equation. And uh, and I think this came back to that community engagement discussion.

[2:41:30] residents in the area, seemingly were not engaged in the way, um, when they found out about

[2:41:34] it, obviously it changed the perspective of several council members related to bike

[2:41:38] lanes on one roadway in particular, or two roadways in particular. So that came

[2:41:42] back and we found out that wasn't wanted. It was just something we were going forward with.

[2:41:47] um, and the other thing was the opposition to car

[2:41:51] reduction framing. And so some of the framing and the plans themselves, I believe it was the transportation plan,

[2:41:56] the perception is there that there's an anti-car framing going on. Um,

[2:42:00] whereas the perception is also that everything in dallas relates to roads.

[2:42:05] um, you all are a concrete jungle. We love our cars here. That's

[2:42:09] what we do. We do cars in dallas and the dallas metro area. So quit trying to make

[2:42:13] me get outta my car and walk somewhere. I'm generalizing. But that's the

[2:42:17] kinds of conversations I was having. So, yes, go ahead. I can, it might be, uh, on this,

[2:42:21] just given the conversation so far for this point, it might be good to go strategic object,

[2:42:26] like actually pull each objective up. Um, perfect. Uh,

[2:42:30] for example, there's no, none of these objectives say by claims, right? That's correct. So

[2:42:35] I think what we, what would be really good, and I'm sure you're gonna get to this is what we wanna hear, is what

[2:42:39] language are you opposed to exactly. That would lead leads to that.

[2:42:43] um, so I just wanna provide a little bit of that. I think, I think it's wise to go to it one

[2:42:47] by one. A hundred percent. And I agree with you. Um, so this is the exact wording and the exact

[2:42:52] language in there. As you mentioned, there's nothing specific to bicycle infrastructure, bicycle

[2:42:56] plans inside of this. Um, however, we're back to the how

[2:43:01] and the how we go about this, I think is the discussion that needs to be had. Also, the varying

[2:43:05] perspectives. Everybody here had a great perspective. It was wonderful

[2:43:09] to hear that. It's also just very different. We all had a different viewpoint on this and, and

[2:43:14] the connectivity. And does this drive economic development? Does it not? Is it a waste of money?

[2:43:18] is it a good spending of funds? Right? So that's the discussion. But these are the

[2:43:22] specific ones here. I, I would offer up that improved pedestrian safety

[2:43:26] had support. Again, nobody was opposed to improving pedestrian

[2:43:31] safety. It was maybe a little bit of the what and the where,

[2:43:35] but nobody was opposed to it. So I wonder if that one's an easy one

[2:43:39] to kind of step back from out of the conversation. Say, you know what? We don't actually have objection

[2:43:43] to that. I'd like to add something to that one or maybe somewhere else. Please not add,

[2:43:47] but at least have, uh, input from council is, um,

[2:43:52] so walkability in texas is like,

[2:43:57] so walkability in texas is like trying not to fry when you're walking. Yes.

[2:44:01] 'cause it's very hot. Um, so it's, it's walkability and comfort.

[2:44:05] it's safety and comfort is, is one of the things I'd like to put somewhere

[2:44:09] in here. Maybe it's in initiative level, uh, but we're talking about trees

[2:44:14] shade. So it's not just safety, it's, it's a, it's a not, and, and, you know, it would

[2:44:18] cover things like crossing the, uh, belt line and tollway intersection.

[2:44:23] not just safely, but comfortably also. Okay. Um, so that's

[2:44:28] kind of something that came up with, with my thoughts on walkability. I'm thinking somebody

[2:44:32] walking from the colonnade over to, um, astoria,

[2:44:36] you know, making it not just, uh, and, and that's gonna make

[2:44:40] us think about planting trees and, and other sorts of, um, nicer

[2:44:45] sidewalks or things like that. Something very functional. So I don't know where that goes, but

[2:44:49] I'd like it to live somewhere. For now. I'd like to just have maybe

[2:44:53] a gen general discussion about this and get, but I appreciate what you're saying, which is when we talk about it,

[2:44:57] we want walkability to include some level of comfort with that walkability. So appreciate

[2:45:01] that. Uh, edit to the thought. But I, I agree with where he is going with

[2:45:06] that, because I think, I think we need to do a deeper dive on

[2:45:10] the improved pedestrian safety. And I think there are some initiatives

[2:45:15] that we're missing. And maybe that's not a, a conversation for now, but I do think

[2:45:19] that needs to happen. It is a conversation for now, and I wanna encourage it.

[2:45:23] I think that this is where we should spend our time is having this discussion. 'cause it is the most meaningful

[2:45:27] discussion for staff to have some understanding about what do we mean? Because

[2:45:32] we are going to go through an adoption process at some point with this, and I wanna make sure

[2:45:36] that we have an understanding of where we're all coming from. You probably already do

[2:45:40] on some level, but it is a worthwhile discussion. So if you have specific initiatives,

[2:45:44] let's talk about what some of those might look like. Not to say they make it in or don't, but at least we

[2:45:48] can understand the perspective. Well, first of all, I think all of this, anything that we can do

[2:45:54] to address all of these points is its own form of economic development. I think it welcomes people

[2:45:58] into the community. I think people pay a premium, um,

[2:46:02] to live in residential areas that are connected. Um, and I think, I

[2:46:06] think, you know, businesses wanna relocate where their employees can come in

[2:46:11] and walk to lunch or walk to pick up dry cleaning or whatever. So I, I do think

[2:46:15] that connectivity matters on the pedestrian safety.

[2:46:19] one of the things that always comes to my mind is just, we talk about the

[2:46:23] trail system, but I know we have this toolbox that we're

[2:46:28] working with. Um, but we, we really need

[2:46:32] better crosswalks, like getting people across some of our major thefor fairs.

[2:46:36] and we've, we, we've talked about it. We've, we're trying to address it, but I I don't see it

[2:46:40] as an initiative unless I'm missing it. 3 6 1.

[2:46:45] give me an example of one of the intersections. You're talking about wanting people

[2:46:49] to cross safer. Yeah. So I mean, we, we've talked about getting

[2:46:53] people across the tollway, right? And that's got its own challenges. But,

[2:46:57] you know, one of the ones that comes to mind is like, in my area, we, we've built out

[2:47:01] some great, um, sidewalks. Um, there's

[2:47:06] some bike paths there, but then you get to like beltway and midway

[2:47:10] and that's it. There's not even a crosswalk there right now. So randy loves

[2:47:14] to make fun of me because I wanna walk to grab a beer and a hamburger. But, you know, if I

[2:47:18] wanted to go across midway, um, there's really not a safe way

[2:47:22] to do it. It's broader. Yeah. I mean, they need to be well lit

[2:47:27] that, you know, there, there needs to be, you know, dedicated something

[2:47:31] there. Uh, something more than just paint that gives everyone

[2:47:35] maybe a false sense of security. Okay. And

[2:47:39] those intersections that, that you're referring to, you can completely

[2:47:44] get me on board with looking at alternatives when you start talking about

[2:47:48] going across the tollway. That's dallas. And I would

[2:47:52] be all on board of getting of, of working with dallas to

[2:47:56] encourage them to spend dallas money on dallas, on a dallas road.

[2:48:01] I think that rather than addison tax dollar well on there, if,

[2:48:05] if we're talking about getting dallas to do something there, I'm uh, absolutely

[2:48:09] in agreement with you. But you still, in any of these roads that

[2:48:13] you're talking about, even if we wanna talk about crossing the tow

[2:48:17] lake, you still have to go across the service road, walk across yeah. And then

[2:48:21] cross the other service road. Unless you're talking about exorbitant money of

[2:48:26] going up and over, then you're going to have the same issues

[2:48:31] with safety, with the, with the crosswalks. I understand.

[2:48:35] I agree. And going across, but going across midway at beltway,

[2:48:41] same thing. How, how do you, how, I'd love to

[2:48:45] have that conversation on what you think would be more safe than a crosswalk and

[2:48:49] minding the, the, the walk sites. Yeah. And I never make

[2:48:53] fun of you. 'cause I walk to get a beer and burger. I love to walk. Okay. But it's,

[2:48:58] it's what do we do and how do we do it in a fiscally

[2:49:03] responsible way? And, and I think that's my point. Exactly. Like we, we gave

[2:49:07] becky $150,000 to implement her toolbox, which

[2:49:11] I think there's some great things in there, but I, I wanna have deeper conversations

[2:49:16] and figure out what is the best way to get across midway. What is the best way to

[2:49:20] get across beltline? Because I, I do think people want to do it.

[2:49:25] zero problem with that talk. And, and let, let, let's look at it.

[2:49:29] but you still have to cross the street. There are still cars driving on that street.

[2:49:33] so what is the best way, you know, mining the sidewalks

[2:49:38] and, and, and that type of thing. I'm all for crosswalk in places. Mm-hmm

[2:49:42] . Uh, in addison with addison

[2:49:46] tax dollars. Okay. I think we agree. Yeah. Absolutely. And

[2:49:50] I think there's many places that we could look at putting

[2:49:54] sidewalks along streets that don't have sidewalks to

[2:49:58] where you can walk. Uh, I welcome those conversations

[2:50:03] to be had. Okay. And in a prudent way.

[2:50:07] so, uh, maybe I'll just jump on one of the specific points. And I, and I don't

[2:50:11] wanna jump mention chris's points, but not divert the conversation too much on the,

[2:50:15] um, the toy, because I think it's, that really is, when it's talking about east west, it's two conversations,

[2:50:19] which I think, which fleshed out earlier, which we need to have total east west connectivity.

[2:50:24] but it was in a large part talking about over the tollway.

[2:50:28] well, fir first a portion of that is addison. And,

[2:50:32] um, the conversation we had previously was a larger project

[2:50:37] of closing the u-turn and doing something bigger. We don't see that being something that's

[2:50:41] gonna move forward this time for a number of reasons. So we can look

[2:50:45] at a smaller project that makes it safer to get across in addison,

[2:50:49] because, uh, the south side is addison, right? Right. By the u-turn, if

[2:50:53] you look at the line. So we can do things in addison, that's not a, not a hugely expensive

[2:50:58] project, but make improvements to that. So I just don't want this conversation

[2:51:02] because of a previous project we discussed, have us say we're never gonna

[2:51:06] try to make pedestrian improvements over the tollway because there are things we can

[2:51:10] do in addison. And that's not to shut down that conversation. Just to give a little bit of insight

[2:51:14] into that. Um, to the other conversation of just overall, we,

[2:51:18] we do have the one initiative that says, hey, we're gonna fi fi we're gonna finish the toolkit

[2:51:23] and go forward with it if we want, if we want more initiatives that work

[2:51:27] fairly state, we're going to bring back these discussions on intersections in the next

[2:51:31] few months. Something like that. That sounds, I mean, I'm, I'm listening to you and we can do more

[2:51:35] clear things like that as well. Just make it more obvious when those discussions

[2:51:40] are coming, how we're gonna decide where we go. So, um, hopefully that

[2:51:44] helps you a little bit. And, um, we're listening to you as we think about what those initiatives could be. I have a

[2:51:48] question then, david, you, while you're on that, um, let's talk sidewalks, 'cause that's an easy one. We're

[2:51:52] not talking about crosswalks, but sidewalks leading on

[2:51:56] going east on beltline. As you get to inwood,

[2:52:00] the sidewalk is as narrow as this table. Then you go further

[2:52:05] east and you have a section that would be montfort

[2:52:09] almost probably be back to the tollway. It's also as

[2:52:13] wide as this. Are we talking about widening those areas of sidewalks

[2:52:17] with or without ownership of the, uh, business centers? Yeah. Uh,

[2:52:22] I mean there's just, we would love to absolutely. I mean, I, I walk on

[2:52:26] the sidewalks and they're, I do too. They're difficult. But some of those are tight quarters,

[2:52:30] like between by the vop mm-hmm . We,

[2:52:35] we are continue to look at solutions there, but it's hard to find solutions that doesn't take

[2:52:39] part those parking spots away from village on the parkway. So I

[2:52:43] think that's gonna be a partnership with the owners of village on the parkway as we hope they improve the

[2:52:47] pedestrian access throughout the entire project. Working also on

[2:52:51] that part, on that sidewalk. But, you know, I think it's similar in other spots. It's just

[2:52:55] a difficult conversation of working with the private industry, with the business owner

[2:52:59] or I extent, and how do we do it. But I think the more that we emphasize it

[2:53:03] from a council level, the more that we can use that as we're, as we go forward

[2:53:08] and have conversations and look at, look at what those options are. Okay. Thank

[2:53:12] you. Yeah.

[2:53:16] so, and I would just make a comment about the, the crossing of the tollway. Yeah. We've had a lot of conversation,

[2:53:21] all different kind of, uh, visions for that. And some very

[2:53:25] expensive and some not possible to do. And I think where we've really kinda landed with that

[2:53:29] is that, uh, is getting it to where creating, uh, an environment where

[2:53:34] there's more awareness that there's pedestrians, crossing there, making it more visible

[2:53:38] could to the drivers. 'cause right now, the, you know, drivers are

[2:53:42] fairly inattentive already. So what can you do to, uh, to create something

[2:53:47] that, that alerts them, say, I need to pay, I need to be paying attention here.

[2:53:51] so, so that, and, and I think we, we can do some of those things that are not hugely expensive,

[2:53:55] but can, can take some of our apprehension away every time we see somebody

[2:53:59] crossing over there and just hoping they make it. So, so I think it is definitely

[2:54:04] a discussion, but I think it's important for us to do that. Um, because, you know,

[2:54:08] for, for the folks that are in the hotels that, that, that, that they're trying to

[2:54:12] get over the village on the parkway and back, um, it's, I think we owe it,

[2:54:16] uh, owe them a responsibility to try to do something to make that as, as,

[2:54:20] as safe as possible. I think the number one thing is lighting. It's

[2:54:24] so dimly lit where you're talking about yeah. Lighting and, and I think street

[2:54:28] markings and things like that, you know? Yeah. If it was lit up, you can do some different things. Yeah. Yeah.

[2:54:32] smarter people than me. I would wholly look forward to that conversation.

[2:54:37] and this is, and I appreciate you saying it. This is the first time I've heard that

[2:54:42] removing the u-turn lane has been taken off the table. Uh,

[2:54:46] all this canopy over the top and all that is no longer the vision of that. If,

[2:54:51] if the vision is truly trying to just improves

[2:54:55] safety going across with lighting or some kind of

[2:54:59] crosswalk activity, you, you won't have a bigger fan. Yeah. Some

[2:55:03] of those things really might not have been, might not have been a, a vision or

[2:55:07] maybe I used the wrong word, but it was part of the discussion, right. What are the different options we

[2:55:11] could look at, you know? But once upon a time people talked about, you know, putting a deck park

[2:55:15] over the, over the tow weight and that that was it. Probably put a green

[2:55:19] dot on that picture when they saw it. Big green dot, big green dot .

[2:55:24] yep. Great discussion. Yeah. Other thoughts? Yes. Yeah, I'm gonna

[2:55:28] jump in. Um, I think, I think when the, uh, the cotton

[2:55:32] belt trail gets completed, specifically the portion, uh, traversing

[2:55:37] over the tollway, we'll we'll share a lot of insights

[2:55:42] as to some other things that, that can be done when we're talking about, uh,

[2:55:47] crossing, crossing the tollway, um, in the, in the

[2:55:51] feeders and so, so forth that, that connect with that. Um, when I, when

[2:55:55] I look at 3.2 and 3.6, it's just, I just wonder

[2:56:00] with what we're talking about, it just seems like we're we're wanting to improve

[2:56:05] pedestrian safety and then also maybe add something that to the

[2:56:09] level of comfort to that. So I just, I, I just, I don't see

[2:56:13] this major focus with improve east west

[2:56:18] as a need as much as just overall throughout the town. Um,

[2:56:22] and produ improve pedestrian safety. So that's, that's one thought.

[2:56:26] um, the other, the other thought I had is we did the, we did the survey

[2:56:31] and, and we, and we spoke, nick, what was that, three weeks or a month ago or

[2:56:35] something like that? Um, doesn't sound like that that long, but

[2:56:39] a lot has changed, right? A ton has changed. So,

[2:56:43] so, um, you know, where I had some, some different thoughts

[2:56:48] on 3.4 and 3.5, you know, those, those thoughts have changed.

[2:56:53] um, and, and I no longer

[2:56:58] want to change or edit that at this point because we just, we've

[2:57:02] got a lot up in the air that we need to, uh, resolve. Um,

[2:57:07] so, so I was one of the ones that said, hey, let's let the

[2:57:11] market, uh, figure out first mile, last mile, let's let

[2:57:15] entities like waymo, that kind of thing. Let, right now, I just kind of feel like we need

[2:57:19] to keep that up there and, and that's our problem, our problem to solve.

[2:57:24] and until it's solved, it's not solved. And, and, and we shouldn't remove it

[2:57:28] or modify at this point. I think that'd be premature, but, um,

[2:57:32] um, my change would be strike

[2:57:36] 3.2. And if we want to add some, some wording that darren suggested,

[2:57:41] um, I'm, I'm open to that. You said a strike

[2:57:45] 3.2. Well, I think it's covered in 3.6.

[2:57:49] there, there was a specific discussion when this about the east west being

[2:57:54] the priority inside of the, the, the connectivity. And, and I think what you're suggesting

[2:57:58] is that it no longer needs to be specifically called out. It could be placed under 3.6

[2:58:03] or, or implied inside of 3.6 that east west is the type of connectivity

[2:58:08] or that we're doing with it. So it could be improve

[2:58:12] pedestrian safety and connectivity, or improve

[2:58:16] pedestrian safety, comfort and connectivity or something to that

[2:58:20] that encapsulates the east west. The other discussion that was had at that time, if

[2:58:25] I recall correctly, and this is why the addison way and some of these other things had made it in there, was

[2:58:29] we wanted to specifically signal to the community certain things, hence why

[2:58:33] community engagement was called out separately as a key focus area. 'cause we wanted this document, which

[2:58:37] is public facing, to be something that indicated our level of

[2:58:42] interest in certain activities. So that's why that was called out separately,

[2:58:46] is we wanted folks to know east west was the priority when we were talking.

[2:58:50] so just flavoring the conversation a little bit. But so the two, uh,

[2:58:54] strategic in the initial, I'm sorry, the initiatives underneath the objectives on

[2:58:59] 3.2, uh, two of 'em are striked out. So they're they're gone. Yep.

[2:59:03] they've been discontinued. Uh, 3 2, 2 3, 2 3. What about 3, 2, 1

[2:59:07] and 3, 2, 1. Um, is the only one left.

[2:59:11] um, you know, I I think striking

[2:59:16] what the title of that is, improve east west pedestrian connectivity, that was

[2:59:20] so vague, um, to we, we could

[2:59:25] rename it to, uh, improve strategic, uh, pedestrian

[2:59:29] connectivity. And one of 'em would be specifically for that intersection.

[2:59:34] 'cause even though, uh, the dallas, uh, ntta in dallas

[2:59:38] owns part of, uh, the crossing at the tollway, it's still in our best

[2:59:42] interest to get people across there. And it, it's for, uh, for addison's good,

[2:59:46] uh, for village on parkway for the hotels, for other, uh, parts

[2:59:50] out on montford addison's side. So

[2:59:54] maybe that will be so that we're specific about those because there's

[2:59:59] a very important business process for pedestrians. Think about that. That's,

[3:00:03] that's just not top. I'm stuck here. One more time. Um, just

[3:00:07] if we keep it as three, two improve, um,

[3:00:12] strategic pedestrian conductivity or business focused pedestrian conductivity,

[3:00:16] uh, you know, thinking about crossing that intersection at the tollway.

[3:00:21] um, and other places may be getting across,

[3:00:26] uh, belt line, you know, towards the west end of addison

[3:00:30] walk. So that's really crazy. Um, things like that.

[3:00:34] maybe what we keep up there, but it, it easily could go under three six also. Well,

[3:00:38] yes, you're talking about initiatives with those though. And I think, I think marlin makes a

[3:00:42] good point that you could probably get rid of three, two and make it three six in. That's

[3:00:46] what I understand. Safety and connectivity. We keep it at the strategic objective level,

[3:00:50] then we would wanna rename it if we don't, uh, and we just strike it. I'm not opposed

[3:00:54] to that. Yeah. Saying that. And I think you could, you could combine it with 3.6 and then move

[3:00:59] that initiative over to that. I completely agree with that. Yeah.

[3:01:03] I'm on board with that too. And then on board with that. Okay. We're getting a lot of support

[3:01:07] for that, that concept. So let's talk about how three six should read. Let's talk about

[3:01:11] we're striking three, two, let's talk about how three six should read so that

[3:01:15] it encapsulates it. So we had strategic connectivity, I believe improve pedestrian safety

[3:01:19] and strategic connectivity. No, I love it. Just the way it is. Improve

[3:01:23] pedestrian safety. That's what we're talking about. Yeah. Keep it simple. Whether it be, keep

[3:01:28] it simple, whether it means getting across midway, whether it means getting across or

[3:01:32] coming down beltway. Whether it means putting in a sidewalk,

[3:01:37] the less is more, in my opinion on this kind

[3:01:41] of stuff. Okay. And, and I'm bringing this up because we had this discussion earlier.

[3:01:45] lack of specificity caused us to go ahead and say we need more definition around certain terms.

[3:01:50] I'm just making sure that we're clear enough that, and we are having the discussion so

[3:01:54] staff understands what we're after with this. I just wanna make sure we're, we're dialing it in at the right

[3:01:59] level. Well, if the, with east west pedestrian connectivity, if, if that

[3:02:03] was intended to be more specific. That's where the confusion to

[3:02:07] me comes in because it's so broad. We've got it. Not if I don't, I don't think you include east, west.

[3:02:11] I, I, I'd like to see improved pedestrian safety and connective connectivity.

[3:02:16] 'cause it's, it's two, two separate things. I agree with that one. Okay. So 3.6,

[3:02:20] improved pedestrian safety and connectivity and connectivity. Yeah. Alright. And I'm going now wait a minute. You're gonna have

[3:02:25] to define connectivity for me on that then. What are we connecting? I it's

[3:02:29] pedestrian safety is my concern. Business centers is what we're connecting. Yeah.

[3:02:33] I think restaurants to employees, I think they're already connected.

[3:02:37] we just need to make them safer. But, but can we improve the connectivity? Well, it

[3:02:41] improve pedestrian safety is what I'm saying. Well, and I'm saying connectivity because we wanna, we wanna

[3:02:46] make it better and easier for people to get around as pedestrians

[3:02:50] as connectivity. But the connectivity to me, meaning we're connecting, you know, it

[3:02:54] could be the end of a trail to the beginning of a trail as they get across

[3:02:59] a road. I mean the, the, the connectivity I think is important. I just think

[3:03:03] you're throwing mud, mud into the water when you look at that. Pedestrian safety is, is

[3:03:07] where my concern would be. And that would include

[3:03:11] if they're trying to walk someplace, put a sidewalk in or trying to walk across the street,

[3:03:16] we got a good cross street. Well, I think it's you whether connectivity's

[3:03:20] a priority for us or not. And and for me, for me it's a priority.

[3:03:25] and I mean, and to have it separately mentioned I think is important. I agree.

[3:03:29] when it comes to this connectivity conversation, and I'm just throwing this out here, does connect major destinations

[3:03:33] in town. Thank you. Also, that's kind of help to that gap gap for us. Yeah.

[3:03:37] and then when we're dealing with the safety issue, does pedestrian safety target the

[3:03:41] type of this that we're after? I only bring that up. Just I think we're being redundant

[3:03:46] if we put that in six. I I get your point and I get your point.

[3:03:51] connecting major destinations is an important thing. Con it

[3:03:55] does, it doesn't connectivity's a bigger thing than just that because you, it's talking

[3:03:59] about connecting trails with neighborhoods and those other parts of connectivity.

[3:04:03] those are not major destinations. Those are just making it easier for those folks that

[3:04:07] do wanna get out and walk or ride a bike or whatever. And we are doing it. Yeah.

[3:04:12] right. Every time we get some development and we, we it's happening. Correct.

[3:04:16] we're just putting in and writing now. Yeah. No, I think, I think it's important to keep the keep and

[3:04:20] connectivity as, as part of 3.6. Agreed. What I'm hearing though is we agree

[3:04:24] that 3.2 should go yes, correct. Yes, correct. We do have general ascension on that. Yes,

[3:04:29] yes. Correct. Okay, so 3.2 and now the

[3:04:33] question becomes how 3.6 reads. I, I think, uh, to your

[3:04:37] point, it could fit under 3.5. The pedestrian connectivity

[3:04:42] things could, you know, we could say, okay, that's connect major destinations.

[3:04:46] that's the west side of the tollway to the east side of the tollway.

[3:04:50] and in this case that's, um, initiative would be, uh, pedestrian connectivity

[3:04:55] and the next initiative under there may be a, uh, circulator, which

[3:04:59] frankly the circulator could solve that problem also. I wanna propose something else.

[3:05:04] um, I, I wanna propose that we would keep what

[3:05:08] the mayor suggested on 3.6, improve pedestrian safety and connectivity,

[3:05:12] but that we consider rewording 3.5

[3:05:17] and, and strike major destinations and insert points of interest. So

[3:05:21] connect points of interest in town. So we're talking about something much larger

[3:05:26] than village on the parkway. And it, because it could be the mo

[3:05:30] it could be the addison athletic club. It could, you know what I mean? I think if you did that then

[3:05:34] you, then you wouldn't necessarily have to include connectivity in three six. 'cause that

[3:05:38] might cover it then that one's, well, one, one I'm thinking pedestrian. And then another one

[3:05:42] I'm thinking, um, some type of shuttle, uh, shuttle service or sonder

[3:05:46] side, two different, two different, uh, products. I understand. Okay. But yeah, I mean I

[3:05:50] think you could do that in three five, make that change. And then you could leave three six just

[3:05:54] as it is. Uh, if you did that, your support, just so you,

[3:05:58] what you suggest is support. Yes, yes. Absolutely. So what's I'm looking, what's

[3:06:02] being put out there is that three five would change too. And can you say it again for us? Points of just remove

[3:06:07] major destinations and insert connects points of interest in town. Yeah. And then

[3:06:11] we leave this as improved pedestrian safety. Yeah. Yes. I have written

[3:06:15] down and comfort. Did we talk about that? We kind of said

[3:06:19] that can go under initiative, initiative level, but

[3:06:23] uh, you know, comfort would kind of be

[3:06:27] like, uh, moments. So it's kind of a little squishy.

[3:06:31] okay. Yeah. And, and comfort that, because that can also go with some of the, uh, the other, uh,

[3:06:36] what was the last one we were talking about with the, with the, uh, the vibrant inactive community? The vibrancy. Yeah. Yeah.

[3:06:40] I mean I think that should be something under the points of interest

[3:06:44] or on a tree. Five or three, six. Okay. That comfort is is and it rolls into parks

[3:06:49] and trees, I mean right. Yep. Just it's more of a, it

[3:06:53] weaves through a couple of different places. I appreciate that. And I think there's ways to put

[3:06:57] that in there. I think it does fall embedded inside of initiatives as opposed to being

[3:07:01] a specific call out in this case. That is my perspective, you guys. Yeah. And I know they're taking notes here,

[3:07:05] so that's good. Yep, we are. And uh, that's perfect. And so connect points

[3:07:09] of interest in town. Okay. We're feeling good about that. Yeah. General

[3:07:14] preferences. Yes. Yes, yes. And then we've got improved pedestrian safety. We are still liking

[3:07:18] that. Yeah. As is. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

[3:07:22] okay. We're plowing through it. Friends. All right. We, I, yes. Oh,

[3:07:26] I wanna talk. Go ahead. You got something else on that? Oh, he said we were plowing through

[3:07:31] 3.1. I wanna talk 3.1. Thank you. I do too. Yep. What does that mean? Give

[3:07:35] me a definition of that. Exactly. Thank you, randy. I'd prefer not to. No, you, no,

[3:07:39] you're just, 'cause I'm the person in front of the room. I mean, you know, I would like to strike

[3:07:43] that. Yeah. Well it's not his document, so, so somebody else I'd like that I'm a mirror, you

[3:07:47] know, mirror, mirror on the wall. Um, you know, let's talk it through three. One, one is

[3:07:51] done, isn't it? Almost done. Well, that's what I'm saying. So why is it there? If

[3:07:55] we're going much of this will,

[3:08:01] it's almost outdated. Well, it's done since we first

[3:08:05] talked about it because things could change. It could get put back in later.

[3:08:09] I would like to strike 3.1. I think marlon would disagree with. Yeah, I just totally,

[3:08:13] yeah, sorry. That means then tell me. Yeah, I I just think we've got

[3:08:18] a ridiculous amount of work coming, uh, all around the tod oh, I, um,

[3:08:23] uh, I see other transportation options that aren't here yet, whether that be

[3:08:27] waymo or verti port, I don't think that falls under the category of

[3:08:31] major north dallas transportation. Now, if you wanna reword it

[3:08:36] into transportation to our points of interest, uh,

[3:08:40] that could do that. But being a major north dallas transportation

[3:08:44] hub is the words that that have me. Correct.

[3:08:49] didn't you kind of drive this one last year? Do I remember that? Um,

[3:08:53] I drove it. Yeah. I, yes, yes, yes. And, and I thought we also covered it when

[3:08:57] we covered mobility, um, a few weeks back on that, on that

[3:09:01] we do item. Um, but, but yeah, I, I view us having

[3:09:05] an opportunity. Um, uh, I'm not saying we're

[3:09:09] gonna be bigger than dfw airport or love field, right?

[3:09:13] but, but with all the various, uh, mobility options that

[3:09:17] we already have and that we're adding to the mix, um, the, the

[3:09:21] more we can con uh, connect people that are coming

[3:09:25] off the airport, some of them to maybe some other mobility option,

[3:09:30] uh, that we might add in the future, I think, I think that's

[3:09:34] very, very powerful. And that's, that's one of the ways where we become

[3:09:39] maybe the most, uh, relevant, uh, place along the silver line.

[3:09:43] I'm still not following you on a major north dallas transportation hub. If

[3:09:47] you wanna say have an addison transportation hub,

[3:09:51] I can go with that. But I, I, I, I'm just,

[3:09:56] I guess I'm not grasping your vision on what you're talking about in three one.

[3:10:00] so, yeah. Uh, I see that as what we have now

[3:10:04] in dart with their transit station right there

[3:10:09] as, as being the hub. Everything coming in. Yeah. Yeah. So I

[3:10:13] don't know. I so what if, help me help see your vision. Yeah. Multiple points. Yeah.

[3:10:17] so what if we had a, um, in the future, what if we had our own

[3:10:21] circulator, right? That was, that was, um, connected

[3:10:25] throughout addison and maybe just a little bit outside addison. What if we had

[3:10:30] a, um, you know where a verta port is? Okay. So what if we had

[3:10:34] a verta port, um, somewhere over there by the,

[3:10:38] uh, south of, of addison circle park that's not coming in the next year

[3:10:42] or next three years, but go ahead. Right. But, but we, no, we do

[3:10:46] have to plan for it now. Right? We've got a addison airport master plan, and

[3:10:50] if, if things like that aren't in the master plan, then, then we're then staff's

[3:10:55] not focused on pursuing that. Well, I thought we'd agreed earlier that we were talking about

[3:10:59] in the next year to three years. So is your challenge with

[3:11:03] the word major, major north dallas? Yeah. So what if it just, what?

[3:11:08] it's just, if we dropped, uh, major north dallas and just said significant

[3:11:14] and, and hub, to me it seems like we're just taking a big swing and we're trying to think

[3:11:18] big, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Yeah.

[3:11:22] so that's my aspiration. Yeah. Yeah. That's the way that I see it. I just look at as vague.

[3:11:26] I don't like north dallas. Yeah. We're into addison. What, what were you

[3:11:30] we're talking about what addison's going to do, but we rely on north dallas to

[3:11:35] rely absolutely only 17,000 people, you know, will make

[3:11:39] my points go ahead. That that's what I'm telling . But I mean,

[3:11:43] it's just like everything else. I mean, we're not gonna get there if we just think about addison

[3:11:47] alone. I mean, we need to, but this plan is for addison track

[3:11:51] people here. No, I agree with that completely. I just,

[3:11:55] major north dallas transportation hub just

[3:12:00] doesn't ring true with me. Okay. It needs to have a,

[3:12:04] an addison heart

[3:12:09] and I'm having trouble with build out and hub. Yes. What's build out precisely

[3:12:13] what is build out and hub to you? Um, kinda like

[3:12:17] what I just described. I mean, some of it is gonna be infrastructure. I mean, uh,

[3:12:22] verti port is gonna require some infrastructure, right? You're

[3:12:26] gonna need to land someplace, someplace safe, someplace relevant. They're

[3:12:30] gonna need charging, uh, for something like that. Um,

[3:12:34] uh, also talking about circulators, um,

[3:12:39] we may need to have a a, a certain

[3:12:43] main, main hub for those circulators. I don't know what that's gonna look like yet, but,

[3:12:47] but I do believe that, um, that we can, this

[3:12:51] is, this is not something we have right now, but I don't think it's something we're that far

[3:12:55] from not in the, not in the next three years in the airport.

[3:13:00] um, they need things like this right now and in the master transportation

[3:13:04] plan, if we're even gonna start marching down that path of ver deport. So in

[3:13:08] a hypothetical, fast forward a year from now, and there is no dark transit

[3:13:12] center that goes away. Is that the area? You're talking about redevelopment as a,

[3:13:17] to land these aircraft and to have these waymo's secured and things of

[3:13:21] that nature in that, in that area. Okay.

[3:13:26] basically you're talking about the center, the center of the town and the new heart of the town.

[3:13:31] okay. And I don't have a problem with the word hub. I just don't know that it needs to be in all caps.

[3:13:36] well, yeah, that is like a big is. Yeah. I'm, yeah. I I just,

[3:13:40] I understand where you're coming from. I like that vision. I just don't think it's within the next

[3:13:45] foreseeable future of this particular connectivity thing.

[3:13:50] I I, I'm not, I'm not gonna fight you on it because I could live with it

[3:13:54] or without it. I'm just saying north dallas build out of

[3:13:58] a north dallas transfer state hub, I don't think's gonna happen in the next three years. Yeah. It's,

[3:14:02] it's, it's just hard to know what, what, I'm now on your page. I'm, I'm in agreeance

[3:14:06] now I understand where your head space is at. Another way of saying it for me is if

[3:14:11] our voters decide to stay in dart, like I don't, I don't want that site

[3:14:15] to be average. I want it to be the best it possibly can be. And if we can become

[3:14:20] a major north dallas transportation hub, why wouldn't we try to get there?

[3:14:24] well, I agree, but then we'd be at to dart amir better than make than major

[3:14:28] premier. Yeah. Okay.

[3:14:32] I withdraw my objection on that. Simply, I just want

[3:14:36] to say, I would prefer to say addison and then

[3:14:41] this was designed to be more aspirational. That was the discussion around it was, it was going for

[3:14:45] more aspirational also the, if I recall, the reflections were along

[3:14:49] the lines of we have to start planning for this now in order to actually make

[3:14:54] progress on it if we wanted to. And this was one of those discussions related to

[3:14:58] if we have folks coming here and we're the place where they connect, then they'll stay, they'll shop, they'll

[3:15:02] work. That kind of thing. That's the nature of the discussion that I recall

[3:15:06] was it is more aspirational. It also has some real deliverables that happened on

[3:15:10] a shorter timeframe that needed to be addressed in order for it to make the plan. That's what I recall

[3:15:14] around it. Yeah. And, and, and I think the, uh, the having it there and keeping it there as,

[3:15:19] as part of our strategic plan is, is good. And it important to do that

[3:15:23] one, it keeps, keeps the top of mind for us. And if those

[3:15:27] people that are in that, in that world, in that space with that technology

[3:15:31] are looking for a, a location, they see that as part of our

[3:15:35] strategic plan that might help them in their decisions. Okay.

[3:15:40] I have no problem with that. Mayor, that I withdraw my call

[3:15:45] to x there. Good discussion though. Oh, this is, this is the discussion we should be having. We could

[3:15:49] a fork in there. We could change it to north texas transportation

[3:15:53] hub, premier north texas transportation. I think we were good. We that too big. I'll, I

[3:15:57] think it's swinging big man. Yeah. . Okay. I prefer premier to major. I

[3:16:01] agree with mark. Sorry, dear. Whatever. Okay.

[3:16:06] I don't know if anybody cares. It's one word float to har. Hmm.

[3:16:10] a har what do you need? Damn.

[3:16:14] I just, am I going?

[3:16:18] I working my, there you go. Uh,

[3:16:22] so just a couple points about the initiatives on this. And this is, so, I mean, I think you

[3:16:27] all basically saying this. I think this is obviously as we go

[3:16:31] through the year one, where the initiatives are gonna change depending on where everything

[3:16:35] lands. Um, particularly on the ones that we've been talking about. I mean, first mile, last mile,

[3:16:39] can the, the way we've changed 3.5, that's gonna be dependent on how everything plays out

[3:16:44] for the rest of the year. So I think you're gonna see a lot of changes on that. But I also think on

[3:16:48] 3.1, this conversation, this conversation has been very helpful for us.

[3:16:52] I think there's things we're already doing that we can actually highlight as initiatives

[3:16:56] in three one, but to hear this conversation helps me to crystallize some

[3:17:00] of the things we can do with initiatives on that. So it was helpful to hear this as we start

[3:17:04] to develop that, I think you'll see some changes to those as we go forward. You know,

[3:17:10] my, my opinion has changed on first mile, last mile

[3:17:14] before going forward with our vote to po to have a a

[3:17:18] a vote. I, I, I would be adamantly opposed to first mile, last

[3:17:23] mile, that's somebody's responsibility to get himself to and from the bus. Now

[3:17:27] that we, that we are going to be looking at other alternatives

[3:17:31] to transportation, first mile, last mile is what I'm hoping we can provide

[3:17:35] our residents. So I I, my my opinion has certainly changed

[3:17:39] on, on that and, and I wanna keep that in. Okay.

[3:17:44] yeah. So based on what I'm hearing, we're moving through this and I really appreciate

[3:17:48] the thoughtful conversation. I know this is where the devil's in the details and the way that we go about

[3:17:52] and the, what we're doing is the big part of this conversation. What I'll say is we've

[3:17:57] talked, one, I didn't, I heard some suggestions for change. I heard motions withdrawn.

[3:18:01] I don't hear premier north texas, texas, the world. I don't

[3:18:06] know where we are in this, but I'll say that it sounds like there's not a really strong, and again,

[3:18:10] remember this again, agreement or record. That's, that's the space

[3:18:14] we're after. No significant objection. It didn't feel like there's an objection to keeping it as is

[3:18:18] for now. So let's keep it as is unless anybody really wants to hammer me on that.

[3:18:22] we're gonna roll on your word visionary changed my mind. So I'd like to see visionary

[3:18:27] put in ex in marks up there, but I'll leave it at that. Okay.

[3:18:32] okay. Good. Okay, good. Yep,

[3:18:36] yep, yep. We're not feeling it on in. We're out with, uh, east,

[3:18:40] west pedestrian connectivity that is gone. Yep. Correct. Three, three is something we haven't

[3:18:44] discussed. Three, four, we have not discussed. Three. Five. We're okay with three. Six.

[3:18:48] we're okay with, uh, I thought three with modifications. Points of

[3:18:53] interest with points of interest. That's right. Correct. Points of interest is the change that we made there. I'm sorry. Three. Three and three

[3:18:57] four are the only other ones up there. Uh, when it comes to this, any significant objections to

[3:19:01] update and implement the master transportation plan?

[3:19:06] I'm sorry, can we, can we jump back to three five again? I thought we made another change with that. It

[3:19:10] was, uh, it was, we were gonna add connectivity to that one. It was connect points of interest

[3:19:14] in town. Points of interest. That's all right. What I said. Yeah. Yes,

[3:19:18] it was your exact phrasing, so I'm glad yeah, you agree

[3:19:22] with you. And that is what's important here is that, you know, uh, that's good. So mimicking me,

[3:19:27] , I love that. I love that. Look at that. Uh,

[3:19:31] but, but help me with this. Uh, three, three and three four. Well, lemme try three, four real quick. It

[3:19:35] sounded like we maybe had, because again, three weeks ago maybe we had some objections. Now we

[3:19:39] don't have the same objections we did to that. So are we okay with three four? Correct.

[3:19:43] we're okay. I, uh, okay. And maybe, um,

[3:19:48] does the circulator fall under there? It does for me. Does for everybody

[3:19:52] else? Yeah, it does for me. Cell microt transit, uh, point

[3:19:57] to point falls under there. That's, that's the definition of all that. Yeah. Points of interest. I just wanna make sure.

[3:20:01] yeah. Okay. Which is all of that is why I would yeah, right.

[3:20:05] continue to have this in for myself. Yeah. Okay. Good.

[3:20:09] good. I I have a question on three three. Does it, uh, address

[3:20:14] bike lanes under three three that would I, as I would assume that that

[3:20:18] is where bike lanes exist at. There's only one now. Not, not in the initiative level. Really.

[3:20:22] I was so wrong. The only initiative in three three is to complete the plan

[3:20:26] and implement it. Um, that I will tell you all

[3:20:31] at this point. We were on a schedule to wrap that up very soon. We

[3:20:36] are gonna delay that until we see how everything plays out with dart.

[3:20:40] I'll give some caveats to that. We're gonna, yeah, we're gonna delay to say, oh, because the plan

[3:20:44] will change naturally. Our master transportation plan will change if

[3:20:49] we are not in dart, that is not gonna delay the pedestrian

[3:20:53] toolbox and the toolbox implementation. We are gonna continue on that. We may bring that,

[3:20:57] we'll bring that separately. We'll approve that separately. So we are gonna kind of separate those

[3:21:01] two. But it, it would not make sense for us to adopt a master transportation

[3:21:05] plan that we could potentially have to revise in six months.

[3:21:09] but that is not stopping the toolkit, I think. Okay. That would've been less. Okay.

[3:21:14] I, I do have a question though. Where in, um,

[3:21:18] these initiatives are we picking up, like possibly having to find

[3:21:22] replacement for dart? So based on

[3:21:26] my impression in this discussion, it would be both three four and three five, really. Three five is

[3:21:31] where it would primarily live. We're saying connect major points in town. Um,

[3:21:35] and three, three will be part of inside the master ation. So I, I think you

[3:21:39] could probably see different pieces of the initiatives all the way from three three to three five. Um,

[3:21:43] you know, we're, some of that will be fleshed out as, as we have the discussion on february 10th

[3:21:48] about what those options could look like. Um, but if there needs to

[3:21:52] be verbiage changes to make that more clear, I mean, that's something that we're open

[3:21:56] to. Just, just did, did you have thoughts on that?

[3:22:00] um, well, you know, the, the first mile,

[3:22:04] last mile and connecting major destinations in town, I don't know if that really

[3:22:09] picks it up. I mean, but before we even put an initiative

[3:22:13] on there, I, we probably need to have a conversation on what

[3:22:17] do we really wanna provide? Is it something just to addison residents? Is it

[3:22:22] providing someone who might live in richardson but works in addison?

[3:22:27] I think that's what's coming up on our february 10th. Yeah. So I, I guess that's where I'm going. It is

[3:22:31] I part of it. We'll have that conversation and then I guess at some point that'll become an initiative.

[3:22:35] yeah. 'cause the initiatives can change. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Okay. And,

[3:22:39] and yeah, and that's what you would see is you would see the initiatives be modified as a

[3:22:43] result of the discussions you're having on the 10th. Then you would be able to come back and

[3:22:48] the plan would still function. However, you'd have a few initiatives underneath that that might

[3:22:52] address exactly what you're referring to. I got it. Okay. That makes sense. Thank you. Uh, and I, I guess I just want one

[3:22:56] piece of clarification. As you were wrapping everything up, you did a good job and you said, hey, three,

[3:23:00] two is going away, but I wanna make sure what I am hearing is

[3:23:04] that, is that become synonymous for the beltline crossing. We're still gonna have an initiative that's

[3:23:08] literal away the toy. Sorry. Yeah. We're still gonna have an initiative that's looking at a

[3:23:12] smaller scale safety focused crossing that we may bring

[3:23:17] back. I just don't want you to see that as initiative and say, well, I thought we could wrap that up. Three

[3:23:21] six, I think is where I'm with that. Yeah, perfect. Absolutely. With you on that.

[3:23:25] so something, um, so there'll be other items

[3:23:30] with the, uh, transportation solutions with or without dart.

[3:23:34] uh, that may, that we'll define further in a council meeting coming

[3:23:39] up. If they don't particularly fit under one of these, are we just gonna make 'em fit somewhere?

[3:23:43] initiatives or we're gonna create a new objective? It's possible that you could

[3:23:47] create a new objective as you guys have that, as y'all have that discussion. Um, it

[3:23:51] could be that they fit very neatly into one of these. It could be a part of, and I think that's the catch,

[3:23:55] which is, is it actually implied inside of one of these or something that could get rolled up

[3:23:59] under there? I think it's a little cart before the horse. It's hard to make that call

[3:24:03] because it is such a major call. It would be more of a placeholder. It

[3:24:08] it is a little bit. Okay. And, uh, it could we add in another objective, but it also could be

[3:24:12] that we're taking some initiatives underneath there and saying, hey, they belong under

[3:24:16] connecting a, a, again, the, the points of interest in town. Just wanna make sure

[3:24:20] we're, we're okay with adding an objective versus, um, not

[3:24:24] having a place to put something. If it needs to be the case, I would say yes. And you'd wanna do

[3:24:28] that before you do formal adoption. I would say in general though, if it does fit under here,

[3:24:32] and then of course next year, once we know where things are going, we can

[3:24:37] have a much clearer conversation about some of these things that have a little ambiguity right

[3:24:41] now because of the vote. Is there something specific in mind right now? Or just

[3:24:45] just the thought? Yeah, some of the things that may not fall directly under it, like the, um,

[3:24:49] paratransit, um, express bus downtown. Some of those things that's,

[3:24:53] you know, kind of just not up there right now. I've got a

[3:24:57] list of them. The other one is, um, with regard to what you mentioned,

[3:25:01] david, about making sure that the tollway and belt line crossing

[3:25:05] is still on the radar and is still an active. Um, do we,

[3:25:10] and I it is kind of an initiative level. Do we have like an inventory of, of

[3:25:14] the pedestrian crossings that we want to address? I think we do.

[3:25:18] it looks like it's in 3 6 1. That's the toolkit. That is the toolkit,

[3:25:22] yep. Okay. 'cause I know we have a tool, but part, it's a toolkit, but part of the toolkit. But the toolkit will be how we

[3:25:26] address them, but as an inventory of not inventory of tools, but in

[3:25:30] inventory of crossings that, that are gonna be the ones and sidewalks, other pedestrian

[3:25:35] things. 'cause I, I mean there's a lot around there. I'd like to get an inventory. I wanna

[3:25:39] hire a consultant to do it. Maybe we can walk around, have howard walk around with the notepad and murder

[3:25:43] it. Law. Law. Well it's beers and burgers. Hold on. I'll do it too. .

[3:25:49] by the third beer and the third burger. The crosswalks are gonna get real interesting. But yeah. Inventory

[3:25:53] inventory's there of all the things, all the places we need to do.

[3:25:58] yeah. That's what we're bringing. Okay. We're good. Thanks. Excellent.

[3:26:05] the perfect at this point,

[3:26:09] I think we've hit a nice point here for a second. What I'm gonna do is I'm gonna call a break. We're gonna compile

[3:26:13] all of the changes that we're discussed today. We're gonna print out

[3:26:17] copies so that you can see those. And we will do one more review of the thing. So I understand

[3:26:21] what you see in there. That's not what we're doing. What we're doing is we're gonna have a review of

[3:26:25] everything. We just came up the modifications, so you have one more chance to take a look at it.

[3:26:30] one more chance to make comment on it. And we're gonna wrap up the day after that. So that's my intent is

[3:26:34] we'll have your actual wording changed on the fly. Some printouts

[3:26:38] will be coming. So we'll take a 15 minute break here just so we can stretch our legs unless

[3:26:42] we have one form. Yeah. Nick, I've got an idea. Yes, sir. Um, so we removed one of our key focus

[3:26:46] areas. Yes, sir. And we can just leave it at that and, and be more focused

[3:26:51] on, on six key focus areas rather than seven.

[3:26:55] or we could add, add another key focus area

[3:27:00] and we would retain seven. And my thought coming into this meeting

[3:27:04] is that we would do what we did, but also add, uh, addison airport,

[3:27:09] um, as the seventh key focus area, just because it's such a major,

[3:27:13] um, part of our okay. Our economy. And it's

[3:27:18] a major, uh, differentiator. This is the point

[3:27:22] for that discussion. So you're suggesting adding a seventh related to the airport. I'm suggesting adding,

[3:27:26] adding, uh, addison airport as

[3:27:30] as a key focus area. Is it currently fall

[3:27:34] in yeah, I was looking, I think there's various things, uh,

[3:27:38] active out across apple economic development. Yeah.

[3:27:42] because it's in the leverage addison airport. So you're just wanting on the

[3:27:47] strategic specific. Yeah, it, it, I think it, um, deserves, uh,

[3:27:52] big, big focus that it, it's not getting right now. It's a really big deal.

[3:27:56] um, there's already, um, initiatives we have that are scattered around,

[3:28:01] um, in other key focus areas. Um, but obviously

[3:28:06] complete the addison airport master plan, stuff like that. Um,

[3:28:10] um, complete taxiway bravo. We just, I don't

[3:28:14] feel that that we as a council are focused in on

[3:28:18] that as much as it deserves. We do a lot of work with it, but,

[3:28:22] but I think we should be more focused. I think it's a big asset and

[3:28:26] I think we overlook it. Like I mentioned earlier, there's, it's a, it's a corporate gateway and it's a driver

[3:28:30] of economic growth, not just on the airport economic, I mean, not really on the airport

[3:28:35] economic growth, but on the whole town economic growth that it's, it's an asset

[3:28:39] for the corporates that, uh, are here, are nearby, do business in addison.

[3:28:44] so, uh, I'm, I mean I'm not stuck to it, but I'm in favor of a good conversation of it

[3:28:48] being a k of a. Yeah. I'm not opposed to that

[3:28:52] if I'm not opposed to it.

[3:28:58] so then we have to take that a hundred points and now we got

[3:29:02] another one that next year, if I was trouble year next year we will. Yep. Next

[3:29:06] year. Now that it was a fine boys not to do issue

[3:29:10] selling next year, it was hard. I was happy we went to six, but I, the airport's

[3:29:15] important. I'll make it 500 points next to your council member. Okay.

[3:29:19] absolutely. The math is too hard. It may not be, that may not be enough.

[3:29:23] marla. You come up to 104%. There we go. Marlon, do you have any four, do

[3:29:27] you have any flowery language to go with that or do you want us to come up? Um,

[3:29:31] I go, are we gonna do some wordsmithing? We could, we could, uh, with

[3:29:35] all this stuff, are we probably not the key focus areas, but I don't need,

[3:29:40] I mean for me, addison airport, it's as, it's as for the

[3:29:44] key focus area. Wording or, or what strategic objectives, key focus area. We,

[3:29:48] we'll just try to think of words to make it have the same tense as the other ones. Something like that. Yep. We'll, we'll figure

[3:29:52] something out. Addison airport works for me, but if you've

[3:29:56] got something better, great. Okay. Thank you. Would would federal control

[3:30:00] or federal funding of that airport, or, or would,

[3:30:04] would that cause us any problem in doing this? I, I agree that it is, it is an asset that

[3:30:09] we need to constant, it needs to be one of our concentrations. But

[3:30:13] is that it's a, it's a different animal too. It's, it's

[3:30:17] an animal of a different shape and color, so. Correct. Um, is there

[3:30:21] anything that would prevent us from having that as a key focus area? Well, then

[3:30:25] I would support it if that's a no. So what all kind of things do we want under it?

[3:30:30] so, so let's start with, first of all, ascending it to a key focus area. I'm hearing general, but I want

[3:30:34] to, I want to have a preference indication that we are on board with it being

[3:30:38] elevated to the level of a key focus area. Yep. So if you're on board with that. Yes. Alright.

[3:30:43] I'm getting the general yeses. So the air. Yep. And we're gonna give you 500 points next year. And I hear you on

[3:30:47] that. I just, just for howard, for howard, how you're gonna, I'm the, I'm the ignorant one

[3:30:51] here. 'cause I really don't know anything about this airport. Not at all. So it seems like the airport

[3:30:55] kind of runs as its own entity and, and

[3:30:59] we approve a lot of stuff for the airport. 'cause they're funding it. They're self-funded. We,

[3:31:04] I mean, I'm not opposed to putting it in here, but it, these things seem to

[3:31:08] be like we have direct input in the airport, seems to operate independently.

[3:31:13] I don't know if that makes a difference to whether it's, I mean there really is no they or not,

[3:31:17] there is. No, they we are the airport. You are the airport. So

[3:31:21] you're the airport just like your parks and rec, just like your public safety. So,

[3:31:25] um, and that's, I mean, and I think whatever we can do to help, to not

[3:31:29] think of it that way, if this helps us to not think of it that way, then I think it's a good improvement is because,

[3:31:34] um, you're just as much the airport as you are. That's one reason I'm supporting this

[3:31:38] is because I don't think we think of it that way as much as we should.

[3:31:43] and it will give us more of a inclusionary feeling for the airport.

[3:31:47] and I mean, going back to your major north texas hub deal, is that where that would fit

[3:31:52] up underneath? Yes. I mean, yeah. Mm-hmm . Part of that. So both of those

[3:31:56] would be good. And I also think there's some contributions to the general fund

[3:32:00] that the airport has now that we could grow. That's why I would support it being a,

[3:32:04] a focus. Right. David? I, david, I'd ask that and maybe bruce, you

[3:32:08] chime in on this. Um, is it a part of, and maybe I

[3:32:13] missed it, our friday newsletters, could that be a part of what was happening at the airport

[3:32:17] call? What's happening at the airport maybe once a month? Some people that

[3:32:21] do read that newsletter versus being passed over so much.

[3:32:26] yeah, we do. We can continue to, to do that. We could be emphasizing it more. We

[3:32:30] have a lot of stepping to friday reports that go to you all. We do do newsletters and

[3:32:34] frequently, but we can make sure we do, we can, yeah. Just if something exciting is happening at the

[3:32:38] airport, that'd be great. Absolutely. I'd like to suggest then that we're taking this

[3:32:42] one right here related to the addison airport 2.5 and moving it immediately underneath that

[3:32:47] seventh. Yeah. So it area and then work on drafting

[3:32:51] additional strategic objectives underneath that. Is, is it acceptable

[3:32:55] to move this? I think there, yeah. And I mean I think there's a clear one that marlon mentioned. It

[3:32:59] was complete the airport master plan that will be certainly a strategic, you know, strategic objective.

[3:33:04] okay. Complete the airport master plan. Yeah. Okay. And

[3:33:08] right there, that's not dissimilar to number four, which is we've got two under

[3:33:12] it as a starting condition, which gives us a place to start the discussion from as

[3:33:16] it comes to the airport and, and how we're valuing it or what we're

[3:33:20] doing with it as a focus area. One more time. I'm sorry, could

[3:33:24] you repeat that? What I was saying is that we're, we're not being inconsistent. We've got number four, it's got two

[3:33:28] strategic objectives under it. We've got the airport now that has two strategic objectives under it. And so we've

[3:33:32] got complete the airport master plan and then this one that we had here, which is leverage the add

[3:33:37] addison airport. Those two feel like strong starts in terms of

[3:33:41] strategic objectives for the airport in general. Yeah. Yeah, definitely in the master

[3:33:45] hub transportation hub. I mean, wouldn't that fit up underneath the it

[3:33:49] is partially, but, but transportation not just the airport. It so

[3:33:53] it, it's connected to that. Yeah. Yep. Yep.

[3:33:58] if we're, okay, I'd like to hit the pause button here and let's try printing out what we've come

[3:34:02] up with here and have a just a moment to read it and react. Yes sir. So

[3:34:07] initiative 5.26, like I'm trying to, I'm, I'm having a hard time

[3:34:13] figuring out where that 5.2 3 6 6, 5 0.26.

[3:34:17] you're, you're, you're looking at a sub-bullet. You're looking at an initiative, you're looking at the initiative level

[3:34:22] initiative. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So I mean we're, I don't have the initiative levels up here. Yep. What I'm getting at is

[3:34:26] sustainability. I know we had a really good conversation on that last year. Yep. And I feel like we haven't

[3:34:30] really done much. So. Yep. I

[3:34:34] mean, I would like to bring forward more sustainable efforts. I think it can

[3:34:38] be part of our brand. I think it attracts people to the town. I don't know where all

[3:34:42] that fits in. Again, we haven't done much from last year, but you'd

[3:34:46] like to see the conversation on sustainability elevated and you'd like to see more progress made on those fronts

[3:34:50] is that I would, in, in encapsulation, I would. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. And I know we've got a, an initiative

[3:34:55] out there. I'm, I'm guessing it focus it, is it

[3:34:59] falling under, well, if it's under five two, this one, organizational excellence.

[3:35:04] yes. That's financial health and organizational excellence. It looks like if it's 5, 2, 6, that's

[3:35:08] where you would have it at. It's right here. So I don't know how we get there. Um,

[3:35:12] well that's an initiative, chris, so I assume that's certainly something we could probably put on the work session at

[3:35:16] some point and get an update on where we're with that. Okay.

[3:35:21] well, fair enough. I mean that's, I think if there's, so

[3:35:25] that initiative we're gonna continue to do because it's on the plan. But if,

[3:35:29] if your goal is to ask council if they want to elevate sustainability

[3:35:34] to a strategic objective with more initiatives, I think this is the time. If that's what, not

[3:35:38] trying to put words in your mouth, but if that's what you're trying to do, I think that would be maybe a way to ask council.

[3:35:43] yeah. I do think there are some things that we can do, um,

[3:35:47] to improve on what we're doing. You know, uh, you know,

[3:35:51] we've got plenty of older or multi-family properties that

[3:35:55] don't recycle at all. I know we had years ago looked

[3:35:59] into some pilot programs to see if we could

[3:36:04] offer that and that kind of fell along the wayside. Um,

[3:36:08] you know, I I, I don't know if we recycle in every single town

[3:36:12] building, but I'd like to make sure that we are, um,

[3:36:16] you know, I, I just, I know we talked about last year had a, had a decent conversation

[3:36:21] and I'd like just to maybe take the pulse of everyone and see if there's any concern or

[3:36:26] would like to elevate that. I I would, but where would it go? Under

[3:36:30] what? Kfai know, I, I guess that's why I'm asking.

[3:36:34] I mean, the fact, fact that it's just an initiative right now. I mean, I I, I'm,

[3:36:38] I'm good with that, but I wanna do more than just have it

[3:36:42] as an initiative. I, I would love to just see what we can do,

[3:36:46] you know, as a council, um, to maybe elevate that a bit. So, so

[3:36:51] if it were a strategic objective, would you put it under five?

[3:36:55] like organizational excellence or, or what? Um, well, that's where it is,

[3:36:59] right? That's where it is right now. There we've, we've got one that just says elevate potential opportunities

[3:37:03] to improve the waste and recycling contract at the town. And that's an initiative,

[3:37:08] right? That's right. Yeah. And so, so you're talking about elevating

[3:37:12] something, sustainability, uh, as a strategic objective

[3:37:16] objective under five, right? I'm just trying to understand the thought.

[3:37:21] yes, yes. So, okay. So what, how would you word that

[3:37:25] sustainability, um, focus on sustainability? Um, improve sustainability?

[3:37:30] something, something broad? Um, yeah, I think so because, yeah, because

[3:37:35] I'm not a hundred percent sure what that would look like. There's probably some low hanging fruit,

[3:37:40] like trying to find a way to get some of our multi-family properties that aren't

[3:37:44] recycling to recycle. Uh, what about improved sustainability

[3:37:48] options? I think that's a good, I mean, I'm just spit balling here. I'm, yeah, I've

[3:37:52] got a better idea. Choose your efforts. Efforts,

[3:37:57] I think is a better word. Yeah. Efforts. Yeah. Okay. If, if

[3:38:01] you were talking about trying to get people to recycle and things that we already have going,

[3:38:06] I absolutely agree. And I, I almost would think that would be

[3:38:10] just direction to staff to say, start recycling at, at our facilities

[3:38:15] and, uh, approach apartments with it. If you are talking about

[3:38:19] this sustainability in the way of we're going to increase,

[3:38:24] uh, uh, building codes that we're builders have to start,

[3:38:29] uh, building at a higher level in, in expense,

[3:38:33] uh, um, and getting rid of cars because they have

[3:38:38] emissions. I would be absolutely opposed to any of those efforts. But if you're

[3:38:42] talking about simple recycling efforts or picking up trash

[3:38:46] efforts, things that we already have in place and

[3:38:50] we're just trying to encourage people to use. There you go. You have a, you don't have a

[3:38:54] bigger fan than yeah, that exactly what I'm saying. But I don't want to impose upon our businesses

[3:39:00] that they have to meet these higher no, I would, and I would never do that. I never, I've

[3:39:04] never want to you increase the cost of doing business in addison. But I would like to know, I

[3:39:08] think that's a great point. Do all of our office towers recycle? Do they offer,

[3:39:12] is there something really simple we could do to allow them to do that? Do we have commercial

[3:39:18] entities in town that might have a product that they're throwing in a dumpster that we might be able

[3:39:22] to help them recycle? I I, I'd like to know that like all the restaurants

[3:39:26] we have, I was just gonna, there's a way to reduce waste in some of the restaurants. Some

[3:39:30] restaurants have ling. If we, what if we added 5.6

[3:39:35] improved sustainability options, efforts or efforts? Efforts. Pardon?

[3:39:39] I efforts said options. Just one.

[3:39:44] 'cause obviously great conversation, but you're most mainly focused on recycling.

[3:39:49] sustainability can be a loaded term for some folks. Would you be okay with just

[3:39:53] saying recycling or do you want to keep it maybe where other things could fit in with, I guess that's

[3:39:57] where sustainability is what triggered me. Yeah. I guess that's just where I'm

[3:40:01] challenged. I, you know, yes, recycling is part of sustainability.

[3:40:06] um, I just don't know what else is out there. I was trying to, and, and we can, and we can,

[3:40:10] we can start by saying, hey, let, let's try to improve

[3:40:14] our recycling efforts and then see what steps come, pops up next baby

[3:40:18] steps and say explore recycling sustainability.

[3:40:22] sustainability is the slippery slope that then we start talking about in other

[3:40:26] places of the world, trying to get rid of gas appliances and,

[3:40:30] and, and putting different emission levels on

[3:40:35] buildings and it starts stifling things. Yeah. And I don't, that's what triggered me.

[3:40:39] if you are talking about the, the let baby steps. Somebody said

[3:40:43] that. I said we can start doing that. Baby steps all supporting.

[3:40:47] I think if we can start with one. Oh, sorry, I didn't mean to, yeah, I just want, want to kind of back

[3:40:51] up just a little bit from that. Really good, good, good discussion. And

[3:40:55] and the idea is great and, and I like that we have the initiative here

[3:40:59] for me. I don't, I don't, I don't see, I, I don't, I don't feel like that's important

[3:41:04] for us to move that up as a strategic objective. Rather

[3:41:08] we should, we, we could give staff direction to kind

[3:41:12] of elevate this on their priority list because it's already here. I don't,

[3:41:17] I I, I don't really see, if you look at that initiative, two, uh, 5, 2, 6,

[3:41:21] um, it's, it's already there. You know, I mean, I just think we should

[3:41:26] maybe just implement it at a, at a higher level or give it a higher priority.

[3:41:30] that's just my thought on it. Or maybe just add to that initiative. Improve recycling

[3:41:34] efforts. We could add other in, because I mean, I could,

[3:41:38] I could I, let's support that. Yeah. Recycling efforts from initiative perspective. If we're getting some

[3:41:42] reports back from staff on what's happening and we obviously want a little more visibility into

[3:41:47] the topic. And if staff is coming back and reporting out on that as an initiative

[3:41:51] to you, we would just like a better understanding what's happening. What are the impediments

[3:41:55] that are created? And having worked in a number of communities, there's always impediments when it gets into that conversation. So it's

[3:41:59] like, what can we do to remove barriers? What are the opportunities available? How can we enhance

[3:42:03] what we're doing? We'd like a greater understanding of that. Does that help elevate it on this? And

[3:42:08] I, I think part of what could be the future, it's a baby step

[3:42:12] now, but let's take a look too at, you know, what are the other opportunities for enhancement

[3:42:16] that create choices? 'cause it sounds like we're a choice based council, right?

[3:42:20] we're not looking to mandate, we're looking to create opportunities for folks that might otherwise

[3:42:25] prohibit it. Is that, yeah, that sounds good to me. Okay, so, so let's recognize that

[3:42:29] that's an initiative that's important and we do need, need some more discussion on it. Yeah. And I would, but I probably would

[3:42:33] like to change the initiative or at least add, improve recycling efforts. 'cause it gets into

[3:42:37] improve the waste and recycling contract for the town,

[3:42:41] including commercial recycling. Recycling. I think we can, I think we have two initiatives. I just,

[3:42:46] we're gonna take this and I think based on this conversation we're gonna have multiple initiative related.

[3:42:50] I agree. I appreciate good. Yeah. Yeah. Quick question, david. Um, like give quick

[3:42:54] example to this point, and I, I should know this answer, but in our, in our own

[3:42:58] city, in our own town parks, if I throw away a water bottle, I don't

[3:43:02] remember if it says just, just a circular trash bin or it says recycling goes here

[3:43:06] and the other half is waste it. It does. It has,

[3:43:10] they they are there. They are there. I just, maybe I haven't paid attention to park or it should be a

[3:43:14] trash you have, but maybe that's that effort he's talking about where you, every park

[3:43:19] has a split trash can going forward space. Okay. Thank

[3:43:23] you. Thank you guys. Okay. Thanks for raising that issue. Appreciate

[3:43:27] that. 15. 15. Alright, so we're looking at 25

[3:43:31] according to that, which means we're coming back at 40. After at 40 after we'll be reviewing what

[3:43:35] we discussed today. Okay.

[3:43:41] ha having to do with the airport that the big discussion we had on moving it

[3:43:45] over to an objective here. I,

[3:43:50] is that appropriate to have such a broad category

[3:43:54] just airport in there? Uh, being, being that,

[3:43:58] or is there a better way of saying that

[3:44:03] other than airport? There's a better way of saying that other than airport.

[3:44:07] I don't know off the top of my head what that might be, but it could be something like activate airport

[3:44:12] or, you know, I think there's some additional phrasing you could throw

[3:44:16] into that. I think it could be something where staff comes back and makes a recommendation

[3:44:20] on how to rephrase the key focus areas so it's consistent with others in terms of that. Okay.

[3:44:24] um, and we can do that through this process. Do you have any ideas

[3:44:28] on that? Is there, is there a better way of saying that than an airport or? Well, I'm, I've been having

[3:44:32] the same thoughts. I can't think of anything yet, but we are gonna have a work, so

[3:44:36] we'll have a work session in february where we just touch base on this and then we'll adopt it at

[3:44:41] the subsequent one. So maybe homework february. Right? We'll, we're gonna think about

[3:44:45] it. I really like the fact that we're putting an emphasis and focusing on it, but

[3:44:49] it just doesn't, you can suggest it feel right the way that that

[3:44:53] was lifted for a moment. I was kind of saying public safety is similar, but public

[3:44:57] safety also means, right. So as long as we can come back and address it and

[3:45:01] have a, have a further conversation on, okay. I own at least like it changed to addison

[3:45:05] airport. Correct? Yeah. Because it's not just airport

[3:45:10] like a movie, isn't it? Right. And if it went to activate addison

[3:45:14] airport, it turns into aaa. That's like a battery. But this sounds like a

[3:45:18] credit rate or a car. Maybe not. Maybe not. Yeah. Yeah. So addison airport maybe is a

[3:45:22] starting condition. We move it to that call, call that the, the kfa

[3:45:26] for now and we can, as you said, maybe some homework is to think about a, a better

[3:45:31] phrasing for that key focus area for that february 10th discussion. But, but having

[3:45:35] it listed as an individual one, I mean, that's

[3:45:39] not indicating to anyone that there's a problem. 'cause I don't think there's a problem with our

[3:45:43] airport or management or running a public safety or, yeah. Uh, especially

[3:45:47] there's that it's the high priority. Right? And, and we don't have, you know,

[3:45:52] any other department or deal listed and I just don't want

[3:45:57] the airport people to think, we think there's a problem with the airport either. So

[3:46:01] anyway, further conversation would be appreciated on that. Yep.

[3:46:05] thank you for that. How would we name it?

[3:46:09] addison field? You know, no death. No. How about

[3:46:14] addison runway? Addison air airport?

[3:46:18] what step

[3:46:23] say where you want.

[3:46:29] thanks

[3:46:33] tap

[3:46:37] seems like it captured what we were I captured what we did. Yeah. Yeah. I like it. We're feeling it.

[3:46:41] yep, yep, yep, yep,

[3:46:46] yep. You try. How you gonna yy up through the last moment of the thing? We're

[3:46:50] outta here. Yep, yep. I love it. But hey friends, if

[3:46:54] we're there, then we are. Yep. Yep. Um,

[3:46:58] so with that said, I wanna say thank you for the thoughtful discussion. I really enjoy

[3:47:02] visiting this community that you all are leading here. It's always exceptional to come

[3:47:06] back to addison and spend some time doing that. I look forward to some safer road crossings next time

[3:47:11] I'm back in town. Just kidding. Just having some fun. Uh, and that, that was 'cause of the ice. That

[3:47:15] was 'cause of the ice, you know, that's not it. He was like, that's right. Look

[3:47:19] forward to recite. I don't wanna make it across the street on my third burger and beer. I just wanna make sure

[3:47:23] I'm crossing safely. All right. He's listening. He's listening.

[3:47:27] so with that said, that's my time with you all. I appreciate all your dedication today.

[3:47:31] thanks for the thoughtful commentary and discussions. I really appreciated the one-on-ones, the survey, the

[3:47:35] time and all of that. So thank you for that. I'm sorry I, before the end here,

[3:47:39] uh, I wanted to discuss on council is, is this the time to do

[3:47:43] this? Do we want to consider doing this in february? 'cause when I came on council,

[3:47:48] we did this strategic planning right after election,

[3:47:52] like in may and I had asked to to move it to this time. So when I thought every several

[3:47:56] years, we should consider if it makes sense changing the

[3:48:00] timing of this. Um, I like it now. He gives staff plenty

[3:48:05] of time to, to prepare. Just wanted to throw that out there as a, any conversation

[3:48:10] if anybody's really, I prefer this timing actually. Yeah. I prefer it. It gets

[3:48:14] hard too compressed after election. Yeah, I would just provide some contact. I would tell

[3:48:18] you every city in texas battles this because of our elections in may

[3:48:22] and our budget in october or you know, in september as we're going through the budget process.

[3:48:27] so the benefit of doing it now is it is in advance of the budget process

[3:48:31] and it really helps us to guide that. But it also means we could have election turnover

[3:48:35] in may, not just a few months after. The negative of doing it

[3:48:40] in after the election is we're right in the middle of a budget. So you don't have a document that helps us guide the budget. So

[3:48:44] there's no easy answer. So I think it is good periodically

[3:48:48] to bring that question up to say, is this a time that works? Um, there's a lot

[3:48:52] of benefits to doing it now, but there is that big drawback of, of the election. You know, the

[3:48:56] one idea I had was, um, we could just push it

[3:49:00] back maybe two weeks, something like that. And sometimes it would just

[3:49:05] remove the question of, of the, the new counsel turnover, if any.

[3:49:09] um, it's just a thought two weeks after,

[3:49:13] after filing. Oh, that's about what, after half filing? After filing

[3:49:18] deadline. It's about the same. We're do we'd doing it the same time a year. Roughly.

[3:49:22] you still could have turnover. Well, I would, I would. You still could, but sometimes you'd know you're not and you'd take,

[3:49:26] remove that question. Yeah. If it, I think if somebody's got it in their head that they're thinking about

[3:49:30] running, that if it's important then they wanna be here, that they would be here.

[3:49:34] uh, but most people don't come anyway. Yeah. And, and, and it's uh, it's

[3:49:39] one thing to be in the room, but if you don't have a voice, it's just kind of, but

[3:49:43] those are my thoughts. So if anybody's not, but they wouldn't have a voice anyway. Correct.

[3:49:48] yeah. I like this time of year. Yeah. Before you get

[3:49:52] too busy, right, everybody. Exactly. I'm out. It's february, I'm out. Yeah. So

[3:49:56] good then. And I've said it before, it is hard when,

[3:50:01] you know, especially if you raise your hand, you, you wanna be involved in

[3:50:05] the town, you have to run an election, sometimes incur that expense,

[3:50:09] and then you get on council and you don't have, you really don't, you didn't have a voice. You're

[3:50:13] operating under a strategic plan where you, you didn't have a voice. You inherited it.

[3:50:18] and, and we've talked about that before and I, I heard you everything that you just said. So

[3:50:22] I mean, I don't know if I'm opposed to it, but I just thought I mentioned there is, there is

[3:50:26] something to be said about pushing it back to after the election to give someone who

[3:50:30] spent the money, spent the time getting elected, have a voice in that strategic plan their

[3:50:34] first year. Well, and you know what though, chris, I think if somebody's

[3:50:39] gets elected for the first time, and if you went to, to do this right after you

[3:50:43] got elected, you, you'd be lost anyway. You, you, you'd be, you wouldn't

[3:50:47] have that much input. So your voice might be kind of quiet for, for some

[3:50:51] folks. Hunters, sometimes some folks might not. I wouldn't have known anything. Yeah, agree.

[3:50:56] I mean, ma'am and I think it's a way better, I just thought I'd throw

[3:51:00] that out there, that there is another side to it. But I, well, I came on to council, I was exactly in

[3:51:04] that position. I didn't know anything yeah. About anything. And the o other effect

[3:51:08] is like randy came on and he inherited a strategic plan that the

[3:51:12] budget was coming up for and nothing to change. So a lot of questions and,

[3:51:16] and you get to inherit something you may not have had any voice in. But, um,

[3:51:21] coming on right after council is literally a waste of me being there. I I just,

[3:51:25] uh, felt so uninformed, ineffective. So I I I'm in favor of having it now. I just

[3:51:29] wanted to bring it up for con conversation. No, that's good. I like this for people

[3:51:33] watching this at home and thinking about being on council or on one day,

[3:51:38] I would highly encourage them to try to get involved in processes

[3:51:42] like this. Correct. If only sitting in the room because there is a different

[3:51:46] feel and you get more out of being in the room than you do watching on your

[3:51:50] computer. Absolutely. As much as I appreciate them watching at home. Yeah. Yeah. It's a different feel.

[3:51:55] and it's, it's, I I would highly encourage them to get involved in a lot of that stuff. Yeah. And, and this,

[3:51:59] and doing it, you know, offsite like this. And, and it's a, it's a more comfortable

[3:52:03] conversation and it is just discussion. I think it's really helpful. Yeah. But

[3:52:07] yeah. You're hilarious person. Alright. Everybody good? I'm good.

[3:52:11] we good? Alright. It is 1 55.

[3:52:15] we are everybody. Thanks. Are we.

Jan 30, 2026 2026 City Council Strategic Planning Session

Agenda

Transcript