[4:18] [crowd]

[4:21] [chatter] No Nah

[4:24] That was kind of the same with

[4:27] out

[4:30] Karate crab

[4:32] Oh, good. We got water.

[4:34] Praise God.

[4:36] Did you need it?

[4:38] Are you sure?

[4:39] Oh, okay. Wait here.

[4:45] I just need the page.

[4:47] Thank you.

[4:48] [crowd]

[5:00] [crowd]

[5:05] I call to order the City Council meeting for September 14th,

[5:11] 2026 at 6:00 p.m.

[5:14] Ladies and gentlemen, in a few moments I'll ask you to join me

[5:17] in the Pledge of Allegiance and remain standing for the invocation.

[5:22] Our pledge tonight will be led by Jack Atkinson.

[5:27] from Fannon Elementary and we're glad to have him tonight.

[5:31] And Pastor J. Frazy from the First Methodist Church of Corsicana

[5:38] will lead us in the invocation.

[5:41] Ladies and gentlemen, please stand.

[5:42] [chairs scraping]

[5:51] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,

[5:56] and to the Republic for which it stands,

[5:59] one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[6:06] [laughter] Pastor Jay.

[6:10] And I asked for permission for a two minutes of personal privilege

[6:15] because on September 15th of 1851, 175 days and one day ago,

[6:23] the deed was signed for the property of First Methodist Church, what is was then First Episcopal

[6:28] Methodist Church.

[6:30] And uh formalizing what had been taking place for four years in this community

[6:35] as Reverend Hampton McKinney and several others were gathering for worship.

[6:40] Uh 20 years later, the building, a building was built there,

[6:44] and then in 1896, the building, the historic Gothic Revival building that we have today was constructed.

[6:51] Uh that building is the oldest church building in Corsicana today,

[6:58] and quite possibly that is the oldest, longest continuously meeting congregation in Corsicana.

[7:07] On October 18th, we will be celebrating our 175th.

[7:10] We want to invite everyone to come out. We'll be having a celebration.

[7:14] We'll be having worship starting at 10, uh tours of the building, the windows, uh the meal and everything.

[7:20] So I hope uh that this will be something that honors this city and the history of this city.

[7:26] Now, if you would join me in prayer.

[7:29] Holy and gracious God, thank you for these servants who have given

[7:32] their time and talents to lead this city.

[7:36] May your hand be upon them.

[7:38] You are the God of this city, you are the light in this darkness.

[7:43] You are the hope to the hopeless. You are the peace to the restless.

[7:49] As lyrics to the song continue,

[7:51] greater things are yet to come in this city, oh Lord.

[7:55] I pray for your hand of guidance to be upon these servants.

[7:59] I pray for you to be honored in the discussions in this chamber

[8:03] and throughout their work.

[8:05] Lord, protect your city servants, the police and fire department,

[8:09] the city workers and volunteers. And may we, the citizens, join with these great servants

[8:14] to bring about the greater things that you have for this city.

[8:19] All this we pray in the mighty name of Jesus Christ

[8:22] who lived and loved, who walked among us and taught us to live

[8:26] in love and relationship with one another and with you,

[8:28] who gave himself for us and was buried, rose again

[8:31] and ascended into heaven.

[8:34] All glory to you, Almighty God, now and forever.

[8:38] Amen. Amen.

[8:39] Please be seated.

[8:41] [chair moving]

[8:45] Mr. Pennell, I understand that you have a few introductions to make

[8:49] and maybe a presentation.

[8:51] I do. Thank you.

[8:53] [crowd]

[8:55] [microphone adjusting]

[9:02] [microphone adjusting]

[9:06] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[9:08] I appreciate this time tonight and as you know,

[9:12] we're resuming our student pledge program.

[9:18] Involvement in our community is so vitally important and

[9:21] it warms my heart to see such

[9:25] Such youth and vitality involved in our civic government. And I'm not just talking about me. [laughter]

[9:31] Um, we are very glad that Jack is here this evening.

[9:36] Let me tell you a little bit about Jack, our student tonight, who led our pledge.

[9:40] Um, he is nine years old. He's in fourth grade at Fannon Elementary.

[9:44] Uh and the school is represented tonight by Assistant Principal Jessica Benz.

[9:50] Um, let me tell you a little bit about Jack.

[9:53] Jack loves all things sports and outdoors.

[9:57] He loves baseball and golf and football.

[10:00] fishing out of all those which are your favorites.

[10:04] All of the above maybe?

[10:06] He participates in the gifted and talented program at Fannon Elementary

[10:10] and has enjoyed participating in UIL storytelling.

[10:14] He's been an AB student honor student throughout all four years at Fannon,

[10:19] and listen to this.

[10:20] He's maintained perfect attendance since kindergarten.

[10:24] [applause] That deserves a round of applause.

[10:25] [applause]

[10:31] While he is very proud to have been chosen to lead the pledge today,

[10:34] he admits he's a little nervous.

[10:36] But I think he did a fantastic job.

[10:39] With Jack today are his parents, William and Haley,

[10:42] his brother Nicholas and his little sister Charlie.

[10:46] Um, his favorite food are tacos from the school cafeteria.

[10:51] And his favorite sport again is baseball.

[10:54] When asked what his favorite thing is about Corcana,

[10:57] he said OMI,

[10:59] the Oks golf course and that all my friends and family live here.

[11:03] So, on behalf of the student council, we thank you Jack for being here

[11:07] [applause] and Gallery Council, let's give him a round of applause.

[11:13] [applause]

[11:18] I'm going to invite his family and the mayor to come down

[11:21] for a photo

[11:22] and we've got a certificate

[11:23] that acknowledges that Jack participated in our pledge program

[11:27] this evening.

[11:29] So Jack, congratulations.

[11:30] Thank you.

[11:32] Mr. Mayor.

[11:35] [crowd]

[11:42] [chatter] [camera clicks] holding the pose.

[11:43] Okay, There you go. this is great.

[11:46] Okay. Here we go, ready? One, two, three.

[11:49] [crowd][camera clicks]

[11:56] All right, thank you very much.

[11:57] [applause]

[12:21] And might I add, Jim, before we move on, uh,

[12:24] the entire family voted for you to have another

[12:27] Fourth of July parade next year.

[12:29] Okay, great.

[12:30] We'll do it.

[12:37] We'll move to item four on your agenda.

[12:40] Council will please consider approving the minutes

[12:43] of the City Council work session

[12:45] of August 24th, 2026

[12:49] and the City Council regular session of August 24th, 2026.

[12:58] May I have a motion?

[13:00] Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve the minutes for both the workshop

[13:02] and the City Council meeting.

[13:06] Ms. Johnson's motion,

[13:07] do I have a second?

[13:10] Second. Second for Mr. Panell.

[13:13] Discussion, please.

[13:16] Do we have any additions, corrections?

[13:20] Any additions, deletions?

[13:25] Hearing none, we'll call the question.

[13:27] All in favor of adopting the minutes as presented, please say I.

[13:35] Any opposed?

[13:39] And the motion carries.

[13:42] Before we move to item five on public forum,

[13:45] I'd like to take this opportunity to invite Amy Tidwell,

[13:49] the director of tourism for Corsicana

[13:52] to come to the podium and talk about the recent award received by the

[13:56] Destinations Texas conference.

[14:01] Yes, thank you, Mayor.

[14:02] Good evening, Council, City Manager, City Attorney.

[14:05] Thank you for letting me have the opportunity to come before you

[14:07] tonight. I know you have a full agenda.

[14:09] I'm excited to share that Visit Corsicana was recently recognized

[14:11] at the Destinations Texas conference

[14:13] a few weeks ago

[14:15] with the Destinations Excellence Award for Sports Tourism Promotion

[14:20] for our work with the Heritage Bowl.

[14:23] The Heritage Bowl powered by Riot is one of only three NCAA Division 2

[14:27] sanctioned ball games in the entire country,

[14:31] and over the years, it has grown into much more than a football game.

[14:36] Through our partnership with the Heritage Bowl powered by Riot organization,

[14:40] we have intentionally worked to make this a three-day

[14:42] destination experience

[14:44] that brings student athletes, coaches, families and fans into Corsicana

[14:49] and encourage them to experience our community beyond the stadium.

[14:54] The results really demonstrate why sports tourism has become such an

[14:58] important part of our

[15:00] tourism strategy.

[15:01] The most recent Heritage Bowl generated approximately 800

[15:12] hotel room nights and contributed to 100% hotel occupancy in

[15:18] Corsicana for three consecutive days. Demand was so strong that

[15:27] it extended into neighboring communities because our local

[15:32] hotels were so full. We also welcomed approximately 4,600

[15:38] spectators, more than 200 players, coaches and athletic

[15:46] staff, and approximately 300 band members, cheerleaders and

[15:54] spirit squad participants. Beyond those visitors physically

[16:01] here in Corsicana, the event generated more than 10,000,

[16:05] I'm sorry, 100,000 social media video views and both the

[16:07] Heritage Bowl website and game live stream received more than

[16:12] 8,000 views. What I think makes this recognition especially

[16:15] meaningful is that it validates the city's strategic investment

[16:21] in sports tourism. Several years ago, we identified sports tourism

[16:25] as one of the areas producing the greatest return on our tourism

[16:29] investment. And the Heritage Bowl is a great example of what

[16:32] that looks like in practice. Filling hotel rooms, bringing

[16:34] visitors into our community, generating economic activity

[16:37] and putting Corsicana in front of audiences well beyond our

[16:42] city limits. This award really belongs to the partnership behind

[16:46] the event. We are proud to work alongside the Heritage Bowl

[16:49] organization and all of the community partners who helped

[16:53] make Corsicana a destination that teams and visitors want to

[16:56] return to year after year.

[16:58] So I'd like to ask our Heritage Bowl um board members to come up

[17:02] and we'd like to take a photo with them.

[17:04] Um, I don't know if I had any CVB board members?

[17:07] Thomas, my see uh, my chairperson's gonna also come up.

[17:10] Our CVB is instrumental in issuing the grant funding to help

[17:16] make the uh Heritage Bowl possible.

[17:18] Um, I got so excited to come to this that I actually left my award

[17:24] at my office, but [laughter] it's just a piece of paper.

[17:27] I think the words say well more than the piece of paper that I have

[17:31] for the photo. So we're going to take a photo with them and then I'll

[17:34] ask the chairperson uh of the board Eric Bonner to come forward

[17:36] if you want to share any any words.

[17:39] Or none.

[17:39] Okay.

[17:43] Three minutes, Eric.

[17:44] [laughter]

[17:47] Hush.

[17:48] Well, thank you for giving us this opportunity and we we really

[17:53] appreciate you sharing Amy with us. Uh, the Heritage Bowl, powered

[17:56] by right, would you know, we do a lot of great work, but the only

[18:00] things that I do is just stay out of the way and let all my great

[18:02] board members do the work. So I am the chairman of the board, I

[18:05] retire every year, but they tell me I can't quit.

[18:07] Uh, so we've got vice chairman, Richie Car.

[18:10] Um,

[18:11] Go ahead there you go.

[18:12] Uh

[18:13] [applause]

[18:17] Secretary, Joshua Tackett.

[18:19] [applause]

[18:21] Our Treasurer is uh, Steven Nutt with Community National Bank and

[18:24] Trust and uh, board members, I'm sorry, executive director of

[18:27] communication, Raymond Lennox.

[18:30] Um

[18:31] He's at school board meeting.

[18:33] Um, Rusty Hit with Community National Bank and Trust.

[18:36] [applause]

[18:39] Of course, Amy Tidwell.

[18:41] We've got uh, Michelle Hogan is also on our Board of Directors.

[18:45] Here, here.

[18:46] Oh, there she is.

[18:46] [applause]

[18:48] Michelle Hogan.

[18:49] Didn't she come in?

[18:50] Uh, Brandon Owen, uh is also on our board directors.

[18:54] I think he got ever.

[18:55] Okay.

[18:56] He's got a football game tonight.

[18:58] So it's a very small group, but it's a very hardworking group.

[19:01] And we are excited about showcasing Corsicana.

[19:04] Uh, we have a lot of people come in, so if you've never attended

[19:08] the game, I encourage you to attend the game. It's the first

[19:12] Friday of December, every year. So this year is December 5th.

[19:15] The teams arrive on Thursday night, we start with a banquet,

[19:18] then they visit the schools on Friday morning to do high five

[19:22] Friday, then we have uh community Pepperrally at 5:30 on Friday night.

[19:27] So, if you haven't been to the game, we encourage you to come.

[19:30] Uh, it's it's a great time, we've got teams coming in from outside

[19:34] of the area to visit Corsicana. And the response has always been

[19:36] the same. They love what Charlotte and her group does with downtown

[19:40] and you know, they've been a great partner with us with allowing

[19:43] us to set up the Pepperrally, bringing out stands, um to welcome

[19:47] the team. So just for instance, last year, we had West Texas A&M

[19:51] from Canyon, Texas. And Arkansas Tech University from Jonesboro,

[19:53] Arkansas. So, we've got people coming in from a long ways, we

[19:57] encourage them to bring their their band, their cheerleaders, their pep

[20:00] [applause]

[20:14] Yeah. It's shiny.

[20:24] Did you make a snow for me?

[20:34] [applause] Thank you all.

[20:48] Thank you, Heritage Bold. If you do a dynamite job,

[20:51] we're grateful for your efforts.

[20:59] If we will uh rejoin the agenda at item number five,

[21:02] the public forum.

[21:05] We have several people to sign up for tonight.

[21:09] Um, I will fresh everybody. Um, as your name is called,

[21:13] please come to the podium.

[21:18] State your name and full address at the start of your comments.

[21:23] Each speaker will be given up to three minutes,

[21:27] and by law the council cannot respond to any comment

[21:30] or questions asked by a speaker during the public

[21:34] comment period.

[21:40] Our first uh speaker tonight is uh Margaret Evans.

[21:54] Good evening.

[21:57] It's kind of quiet in the room. Is everybody alive? [laughter]

[22:02] First of all, I want to thank God for this day.

[22:05] To the Mayor, Mayor Joe Hill,

[22:09] and his step and to everyone that's in the in the room today.

[22:16] My name is Margaret Evans. I live at 713 South 42nd Street,

[22:20] Corsicana, in precinct three.

[22:25] And I just have a few things I would like to say. I know it's

[22:28] three minutes, I could go on, but then

[22:30] I'm going to start with West Park Row

[22:37] in the 3100 block, uh the lighting is it's very dark at night time.

[22:45] We're needing some lighting down that way all the way past 45th Street

[22:49] and beyond Walmart.

[22:55] Also, the uh Rome Road we was checking out.

[23:01] Pastor Cat and I, um of the single believers ministry, believers on

[23:05] Rich Ministry.

[23:07] We do we go out uh precinct two is where we first started.

[23:11] That's our first love.

[23:15] You know, we live in precinct three, but we're concerned about a lot of

[23:19] things that are going on in precinct two and three.

[23:23] And so we just here today to see if we could get some assistant.

[23:27] The lighting is real bad and the roads.

[23:32] on West Park Road all the way past since they built the behind OK Mart,

[23:37] which is the new uh stores, it's very the road is really messed up.

[23:45] So we're asking if they could work on the on the roads as well as

[23:49] the lighting.

[23:51] I usually don't drive at night, but lately, I've been driving at night

[23:55] and I cannot see the lines at all.

[23:59] So we're just asking each and every one who's responsible to to help us

[24:03] to get that taken care of in precinct three.

[24:07] Precinct two, there's a lot of

[24:09] there's a lot of help that is needed over there as well.

[24:15] So we're just asking who who it whoever is responsible for that.

[24:22] We left our phone number, you can give us a call

[24:24] and we'll do whatever we can do to help you.

[24:28] We have got to a point where we got up in age, so we don't move

[24:31] around as much as we used to.

[24:34] But we do love the city Corsicana, and again,

[24:38] we want to tell Pastor

[24:40] [laughter]

[24:42] Mayor Joe Hill.

[24:46] Thank you so much.

[24:49] Not only he's busy here in the city, he's busy on Friday. We saw him at

[24:54] the 9/11 program. Then on he turned around on Saturday.

[25:00] on his days off, y'all.

[25:02] And he was a part, and we just really appreciate him.

[25:07] Even before he was elected,

[25:09] he was there to help whatever was needed.

[25:14] So we thank you from

[25:17] single believers ministry, believers I reach.

[25:20] Pastor Cat, thank you and we love you.

[25:22] And that is all that I have at this time.

[25:25] I know my time is it.

[25:27] [applause]

[25:32] Next speaker is uh Shayla Johnson.

[25:34] [shuffling]

[25:41] [shuffling]

[25:44] [shuffling]

[25:54] Good evening, Mayor.

[25:55] My fellow council members, City staff and citizens of Corsicana.

[25:59] Tonight I want to address the use of flock cameras in our community.

[26:03] Let me be very clear, I am not against flock cameras.

[26:06] Based on reports from the Corsicana Police Department

[26:08] and the results we have seen in precinct 2,

[26:11] I recognize that these cameras can be effective,

[26:14] uh, for reducing crime,

[26:17] identifying stolen vehicles and helping law enforcement

[26:20] investigate serious offenses.

[26:21] I previously voted in favor of a grant that added

[26:25] flock cameras,

[26:27] not because we need more,

[26:29] but the grant provided other important public safety resources

[26:33] supported by information presented by our police department.

[26:37] I stand behind supporting tools that help protect our neighborhoods.

[26:42] However, voting for a public safety tool does not mean

[26:47] giving anyone unlimited authority to use it without oversight.

[26:52] Cities across the country have raised serious concerns

[26:55] about flock cameras.

[26:57] Uh, flock camera data being assessed and unauthorized purposes,

[27:03] shared outside the original purpose of an investigation

[27:05] or used to track people who were not suspected of committing a crime.

[27:09] These concerns should be served as a warning to Corsicana.

[27:12] We should not wait until someone's rights have been violated

[27:14] before establishing safeguards.

[27:16] Public safety and constitutional rights should never be treated

[27:19] as competing priorities.

[27:22] We can protect our citizens from crime while also

[27:24] protecting them from unreasonable surveillance and misuse

[27:28] of their personal information.

[27:29] This is why I am requesting that the city of Corsicana

[27:32] adopt a local ordinance governing the use of flock cameras

[27:36] and other automatic license plates readers.

[27:38] This ordinance should clearly establish who authorizes

[27:41] the access of this system,

[27:43] who legitimate law enforcement purposes permits a search,

[27:46] how long information may be retained,

[27:48] when data may be shared with another agency,

[27:51] requirements for documenting every search,

[27:54] regular audits to identify improper access,

[27:57] consequences for anyone who misuses the system,

[28:00] and a public report showing how the cameras are being used

[28:03] without compromising active investigations.

[28:07] The ordinance should also prohibit using the technology to monitor

[28:10] individual based solely on their race, religion, political activity,

[28:15] immigration status, or participation in lawful protests,

[28:18] except in a genuine genuine emergency.

[28:21] Searches such that track a person's past movements

[28:25] should should follow all applicable warrants and probable cause

[28:28] requirements.

[28:30] This is not an accusation against Corsicana Police Department,

[28:33] it is a responsible government.

[28:35] Good policies protect our citizens, our citizens, our officers and the city of Corsicana.

[28:39] Technology can help us fight crime, but technology must also remain

[28:43] under human accountability and the constitutional authority.

[28:47] If these cameras are are helping reduce crime and precinct 2,

[28:50] let us continue using them.

[28:51] But let us use them with clear boundaries, transparency and respect

[28:55] for our people we are elected to serve.

[28:58] I'm asking the council to direct our city attorney

[29:01] and police leadership to bring forward a flock camera ordinance

[29:04] for public discussion.

[29:07] concludes your three minutes.

[29:10] Thank you guys.

[29:13] Thank you.

[29:14] [applause]

[29:19] Our next speaker is Barbara Kelly.

[29:23] [shuffling]

[29:30] Barbara Kelly, 800 Northwood.

[29:32] Mayor Hill, Council, my council, Jim Penel.

[29:37] I just came up here to say to say two things.

[29:40] When you guys do the comprehensive plan

[29:43] because I'm now 60, I'm a senior citizen.

[29:46] Please put some younger people on the comprehensive plan.

[29:52] The 30 something-year-old, the 20 something-year-old,

[29:55] we need youth on the to be able to come to the table

[29:58] because in 20 years,

[30:01] I'll be 80. You get what I'm saying?

[30:04] We need the young people to be a part of this the comprehensive plan.

[30:08] So y'all start thinking about who can be who can come to the table

[30:12] because we need to use their we need their voice.

[30:14] It's always the same people all the time serving on these

[30:16] different committees. We do need these young people.

[30:20] My second thing is, y'all know I was a 35 I'm

[30:22] I've been a 35-year police dispatcher.

[30:28] And I'll take pride in that.

[30:31] And when I was a dispatcher, I ran T-Lex, I ran

[30:34] criminal histories, I did a lot of stuff.

[30:38] And one thing about our departments is that we did have rules.

[30:43] We had to sign thing sign sign off that we weren't

[30:45] going to go and spread the information that I looked up.

[30:49] And so I trust that, you know, our local law enforcement is going to

[30:53] have policies and procedures in place regarding flock cameras.

[30:56] Because if because you can abuse anything.

[30:59] And believe you me in my 35 years of police dispatching,

[31:02] I have seen law enforcement abuse things.

[31:06] And they got in trouble. There isn't a there is internal affairs.

[31:10] And so, I trust Chief McGayhey that they're going to have rules

[31:14] in place for somebody that may abuse the system.

[31:17] But flock cameras are needed.

[31:19] They are. And I know I've used the system.

[31:24] And if it can help, you know, solve crimes, I'm for it.

[31:29] But don't argue with me about I've had two people kind of argue with me about flock cameras,

[31:33] but I'm like, I'm law enforcement. I'm law enforcement.

[31:38] And I'm going to be that till I die, okay?

[31:41] So I just wanted to get up here and say that these two little things.

[31:43] But don't forget the young people, okay? Thank you. Thank you.

[31:47] [applause]

[31:53] Mr. Terry Garner.

[32:02] Terry Garner, 1401 Bowie Circle.

[32:06] Mr. Mayor and council members.

[32:08] Tonight I'm asking you to do more than stop expansion of flock cameras.

[32:12] I'm asking you to remove the cameras that are already installed.

[32:17] We hear that flock cameras is about public safety. Nobody in this room is against public safety.

[32:22] We want our police to have the tools they need to solve the

[32:24] crimes and recover the stolen vehicles.

[32:27] But public safety does not require putting an entire community

[32:29] under surveillance.

[32:31] A flock camera doesn't know whether the person driving is a criminal

[32:34] or an innocent citizen.

[32:36] It records everybody.

[32:37] It records parents taking their children to school,

[32:40] workers going to their jobs, families going to church,

[32:43] and visitors coming into our community, and ordinary citizens

[32:46] going about their daily lives.

[32:48] The question we need to ask is not can flock help solve a crime? Of course it can.

[32:53] The real question is, does the benefit justify creating an ever

[32:56] expanding database of where innocent people drive.

[33:00] Before we add another camera, I believe Corsicana should answer

[33:03] some basic questions about the cameras we already have.

[33:06] How many searches have been conducted?

[33:09] Who has conducted those searches? Which outside agencies can access our data?

[33:13] How many times our information has been shared and how long is

[33:16] the information retained?

[33:18] And most importantly, what measurable evidence do we have

[33:21] that these cameras have actually made Corsicana safer?

[33:25] If these cameras are essential, show us the results.

[33:28] If they're being responsibly used, show us the safeguards.

[33:31] If our information is to protect, show us exactly how.

[33:34] Don't simply tell us to trust you.

[33:36] Transparency is how you earn trust.

[33:39] And we should pay attention to what's happening elsewhere.

[33:42] In Kendall County, Commissioners recently voted 5 to 0 to not

[33:45] renew their flock camera,

[33:47] raising concerns about access to data, information sharing

[33:49] and oversight.

[33:51] That's a warning Corsicana should take seriously.

[33:54] And now we're talking about adding 10 more cameras through grant funding.

[33:58] But let me make one thing very clear, grant money does not make

[34:00] surveillance free.

[34:03] The cost can be to our privacy.

[34:05] And one of these cameras are installed and the system safeguards,

[34:08] getting it rid of it becomes even more harder.

[34:11] So I'm asking this council for three things.

[34:13] First, reject the expansion and don't install additional cameras.

[34:17] Second, conduct complete public audit of the existing flock system,

[34:20] its searches, access, data sharing and results.

[34:23] Third, begin the process of removing the flock cameras

[34:26] already operating in Corsicana.

[34:28] And I want each council member to answer one simple question.

[34:31] Will you support removing flock cameras from Corsicana, yes or no?

[34:34] Not will study it, not will look into it, not let's wait

[34:37] and see, yes or no?

[34:41] Because opposing flock does not mean opposing law enforcement.

[34:44] I mean, it means believing that we can fight crime without treating

[34:47] every citizen like a suspect.

[34:49] We can protect our community without creating a surveillance grid.

[34:52] We can give our police effective tools without sacrificing the

[34:55] privacy of everyone else.

[34:57] Corsicana is a community, not a database.

[35:00] So reject.

[35:01] exact the expansion audit the system

[35:03] and remove the cameras and protect the people

[35:05] who trusted you enough to put you in these seats. Thank you.

[35:08] [applause]

[35:17] Mr. Kurt Bennett.

[35:33] Mayor Hill, members of the City Council.

[35:35] My name is Kurt Burnett, 619 N 25th Street.

[35:37] Corsicana, Texas.

[35:39] I'd like to address item 8A regarding the proposed waiver

[35:42] of liquidated damages for the property at 1402 East 9th Avenue.

[35:46] I want to begin by acknowledging that the Infill

[35:49] Lot program is a worthwhile initiative, encouraging the

[35:52] timely construction of affordable housing.

[35:54] Corsicana is something most residents can support.

[35:57] However, tonight's item raises serious questions about

[36:00] administrative accountability and oversight within city

[36:03] operations that I believe this council needs to address

[36:05] before voting.

[36:06] The facts are present, presented in tonight's

[36:08] agenda are straightforward.

[36:10] The developer purchased this property August 3rd, 2021.

[36:13] The contract required construction to begin within

[36:16] six months, making the deadline January 31st, 2022.

[36:19] That deadline was missed.

[36:21] Under the terms of the contract, the city had the

[36:23] right to reacquire the property at that point.

[36:25] Instead, the city's own staff issued a building permit

[36:28] on this developer on June 13th, 2024.

[36:31] More than two years after the deadline had already passed.

[36:34] Tonight's agenda acknowledges directly,

[36:36] and I am quoting from the packet: "He should not have

[36:39] been granted a permit on June 13th, 2024,

[36:41] due to the six-month time frame to start construction

[36:44] already having been passed."

[36:46] This is the city admitting that its own staff made

[36:49] significant administrative error, as a result of that

[36:52] error, a developer who was in clear violation of his

[36:54] contract was allowed to pursue with construction.

[36:56] The city is now before this council tonight asking

[36:58] to reduce the developer's penalty from $64,900

[37:01] to $12,700.

[37:03] A reduction of over $52,000, effectively asking taxpayers

[37:06] to absorb the consequences a staff made.

[37:10] I have several questions I would ask this council to

[37:13] consider before voting tonight.

[37:14] First, which department was responsible for issuing that

[37:16] permit in June 2024,

[37:19] and what review processes exist to prevent permits

[37:21] from being issued on properties with active

[37:23] contract violations?

[37:25] Second, what accountability measures have been put in place

[37:28] since this error was discovered to ensure it does

[37:30] not happen again in the infill program or in another

[37:32] city program with similar contractual requirements?

[37:36] Third, the city's admin error is the primary

[37:39] justification for reducing this penalty.

[37:41] Why is the developer not being held to the original

[37:43] contract terms while the city separately addresses

[37:46] its internal process failures. The two issues.

[37:49] Staff error and developer accountability are being

[37:52] conflated in a way that ultimately benefits developer

[37:54] at the expense of the program's integrity.

[37:56] This council appropriately holds citizens and developers

[37:59] to the terms of their contracts with the city.

[38:02] I would ask that you hold city operations to the same

[38:04] standard of accountability.

[38:06] An administrative error of this magnitude,

[38:09] one that went undetected for over two years, deserves more

[38:11] than a quiet line item and a resolution,

[38:13] it deserves a transparent accounting to this council

[38:16] and to the residents of Corsicana about how it happened

[38:18] and what has changed.

[38:20] I want to close with a broader point that I believe

[38:22] is critical for the future of the city.

[38:24] Corsicana is at a turning point, we have larger developers

[38:27] and significant economic opportunities

[38:28] on the horizon for this community.

[38:30] The stakes of the admin oversight failure will only

[38:32] grow as those projects come to Corsicana.

[38:34] If the city cannot properly track a contractual deadline

[38:36] on a single infill lot, a relatively

[38:38] straightforward program,

[38:40] and that error goes undetected for over two years,

[38:43] what confidence can this council and this community have?

[38:45] The residents of Corsicana deserve a city administration

[38:47] that is prepared for growth.

[38:49] Tonight is an opportunity for this council to send a

[38:51] clear message that accountability counts. Thank you.

[38:53] [applause]

[39:03] Mr. Scott Davis.

[39:07] He's gonna speak on one of the ordinances.

[39:09] I'm sorry.

[39:11] Speak on one of the ordinances.

[39:18] He's going to speak in the public hearing part.

[39:23] Are there any other speakers that was not aware that we

[39:27] have the sign-in?

[39:29] We want to hear from anybody that has something to share

[39:32] with the council.

[39:39] If there's no other speakers, I'll close the public forum.

[39:43] Move to item six, public hearings.

[39:47] We have one more.

[39:50] I will now open the public hearings.

[39:54] Miss Rossen, would you leave read the caption for item 6A.

[39:59] Received.

[40:01] receive public input regarding adopting the budget for fiscal year 2027.

[40:06] Chair recognizes Mr. Val Rich, Director of Finance for the city.

[40:16] Good evening, Council.

[40:18] Tonight I'm here to present uh

[40:19] for your vote and adoption our

[40:21] budget and proposed tax rate.

[40:23] Uh just to recap from our prior

[40:25] work sessions, this is our

[40:27] budgeted revenues that we're projecting.

[40:29] Uh we can kind of see year over

[40:31] year from 25 to 2027, so our

[40:33] 2027 proposed revenues is

[40:35] $72.1 million.

[40:37] This is a 21% decrease from prior year.

[40:40] The bulk of that decrease is

[40:41] actually because of a bond

[40:43] issuance last year that we're not looking to do another

[40:45] issuance this year.

[40:47] Uh this is in accordance with our capital improvement plan

[40:50] as we'll present further through this presentation.

[40:54] For our expenditures tonight,

[40:56] the appropriated budget as presented is the $95.2 million

[41:01] proposed budget for 2027.

[41:03] This is a 7% decrease, some of

[41:05] that is related to the capital project funding.

[41:08] Uh as we completed capital

[41:10] projects this last year, we don't have as much to continue

[41:13] to uh put forward in our budget.

[41:15] Uh and so there is a small decrease in that budget, again,

[41:18] primarily related to capital improvements and our capital plan.

[41:24] Uh just to recap of some highlights, the infrastructure

[41:27] spending is continuing to be increased.

[41:29] So year over year, last year to this year, we're continuing to

[41:33] put forward about $20 million

[41:35] to address our aging and

[41:36] urgently needed uh infrastructure.

[41:39] Uh so we're seeing a large uh street effort this year.

[41:43] I know that started on Beaten Street already.

[41:44] Uh that'll continue into next year according to this plan

[41:48] and we've seen a lot of uh water and sewer line

[41:50] replacements both this year and into next year.

[41:54] And so making sure we can continue to uh service those

[41:58] infrastructures going to be a critical point of both this

[42:01] year's budget and last year's.

[42:03] We're continuing to make investments into our workforce

[42:06] and so we want to make sure that our public safety is competitive,

[42:10] uh so that way we can uh continue to attract qualified

[42:13] talent, uh as well as make City of Corsicana a place people

[42:16] want to work for.

[42:20] And then a big component in our budget this year was

[42:22] improved financial literacy.

[42:23] And so if anybody has taken the time to glance through the

[42:26] 300 page uh budget document that we've prepared here,

[42:30] uh you've made big strides to make sure that as much of it

[42:34] as possible is as friendly as possible.

[42:36] So uh while tonight we're just looking at the highlights,

[42:40] we have gone in depth through the budget, through our

[42:41] communication and different work sessions and we've put

[42:44] a put out a comprehensive document uh for the citizens

[42:48] to look at and see all the details.

[42:53] A big piece of this budget is going to be our General

[42:55] Fund revenues.

[42:59] Here is kind of the year over year total for General Fund

[43:02] revenues, and so from 2025,

[43:04] $26.7 million to our projected 2027 of $29.4 million.

[43:09] This is about a 4.5% increase from prior year.

[43:12] The bulk of that is going to be from our sales tax and our

[43:15] franchise tax collections.

[43:17] Uh so sales in the city and then the utility users that use

[43:22] the city right of ways generating most of our

[43:25] additional revenue for this year.

[43:27] Uh one thing we'll see is that our city service charges,

[43:30] especially related to the General Fund are saying

[43:32] consistent this year and that's one thing we're seeing as well

[43:35] in our revenues.

[43:39] I did want to look a little bit at that tax revenue because

[43:42] that is the bulk of our revenue for the General Fund.

[43:44] Uh about half of it is coming from sales tax,

[43:47] uh so that is a primary revenue source for the city.

[43:50] There's a total 8.25% sales tax on all qualified sales.

[43:54] 6.25% of that's imposed by the state and collected and retained

[43:57] by the state.

[43:59] The remaining 2% stays local.

[44:01] Now that 2% that's local varies by jurisdiction.

[44:05] Here in Corsicana, it's broken down as follows.

[44:07] And so the city retains 1%,

[44:10] a half percent, the city uses for property tax reduction,

[44:14] and then another half percent is collected by the County of

[44:17] Navarro.

[44:18] So for every $100 purchased,

[44:21] $8.25 cents of sales tax is added to that.

[44:24] Uh the state collects $6.25 cents, the city $1.50, but

[44:29] 50 cents goes to reducing property tax rate and then

[44:32] Navarro County collects another 50 cents.

[44:36] On to the big item which is our property tax revenue, again,

[44:39] this is another primary revenue source.

[44:42] It's comprised of a lot of moving components.

[44:44] The first piece is that your property value is established

[44:47] by the Navarro Central Appraisal District.

[44:49] So that is a separate governmental entity away from

[44:51] the city, away from the county, uh that independently determines

[44:56] the values of the properties inside Navarro County.

[44:59] Tax assessing

[45:01] collecting is performed by Nevara County. They collected all for all

[45:04] jurisdictions and then remit that to the appropriate jurisdictions.

[45:08] I have updated this total tax rate here with the proposed

[45:12] and adopted tax rates for 2027.

[45:14] Uh so we can see of course, Canana ISD is the biggest at 1.16.

[45:19] Uh City of Corsicana 5208, County of Nero 4245

[45:25] and then Nero College 0.1077.

[45:28] And so we can see kind of some quick math that if a home was

[45:32] appraised at $200,000.

[45:35] the total tax is going to be $4,439.80.

[45:40] And then we can kind of see that's broken down proportionally of which

[45:43] each jurisdiction is collecting from that property tax.

[45:52] A little bit about the city's property tax.

[45:55] So our current tax rate in this fiscal year is 0.5034,

[45:59] comprised of a MNO of 0.3555.

[46:02] This is the portion of the property tax that is the revenue for the

[46:06] city that we use to uh for maintenance and operations.

[46:09] So this is the piece that helps provide the expenditures,

[46:13] provide for the expenditures.

[46:15] Then we also have debt service, which is any debt we've used, some of that debt

[46:19] goes towards things like the capital improvement program.

[46:21] And so that debt there is 0.1479 for the current year.

[46:27] Uh the tax assessor calculates our tax rates for us.

[46:31] And so they calculated the no new revenue rate for our current year

[46:34] as 0.5208 and a maximum voter

[46:37] approval rate of 0.5430.

[46:40] Tonight we're proposed and the no new revenue rate is our tax rate

[46:44] for this next fiscal year. 0.5208.

[46:47] This is comprised of a maintenance and operating of 0.3675 and a

[46:52] debt service of 0.1533.

[46:56] Uh as pointed out in some of our other ordinances,

[46:58] this is a small increase.

[46:59] The MNO specifically increases by 3.38% from prior year.

[47:04] And the total rate increases by 3.46 from prior year.

[47:08] Now a little bit behind this calculation and how this works out.

[47:12] And so there on the right hand side we have uh some other information.

[47:15] Uh like I said, the CAD determines that taxable value for us

[47:18] up there at the top.

[47:20] And so last year's taxable value was $2.7 billion.

[47:25] When we look at the same properties,

[47:27] that becomes our 2026 adjusted taxable value.

[47:30] So from 25 taxable to the adjusted taxable, that's the same properties,

[47:34] it reduced to 2.6, down $114 million from prior year in value.

[47:40] So this reduction in value is what's driving uh the increase

[47:43] in our no new revenue rate percentage there.

[47:49] After that, we add in any new value generated in the year, and so we

[47:53] added $52.9 million for a new 2026 total taxable value of 2

[47:57] point $6 billion.

[48:00] or $2.69 billion.

[48:03] Uh and we can kind of see some of this math here with how these rates stack up.

[48:07] And so there in the top box is our current year tax rate of 5034

[48:11] times our 2025 total taxable value, which generates a total of

[48:15] $13.8 million in total collections.

[48:18] Our proposed rate and our no new revenue rate as calculated compares

[48:23] against the adjusted taxable value.

[48:26] And so this is kind of the hard part about the tax rate for us,

[48:30] uh is that it looks at the same properties as last year compared

[48:33] to this year, and so those values decreased, and so our tax rate is

[48:38] increasing on the same values.

[48:40] And so that's where the 0.5208

[48:42] that we're presenting tonight comes from.

[48:44] And as you can see our total collections is down based off of that.

[48:48] So even with the tax rate increase, we're still losing out on about

[48:51] $115,000 in revenue from this year to next year.

[48:56] Now once we add in the new values, uh it does increase up, so about

[49:00] $160,000 total value, or total revenue gain to $14 million.

[49:09] This one kind of explains that no new revenue tax rate

[49:12] uh a little bit more graphically, but basically as values go up,

[49:15] then our no new revenue can decrease.

[49:17] If values decrease, then our no new revenue tax rate has to increase

[49:21] in order for us to maintain the same revenue dollars from year over year.

[49:24] Uh and so this is just a little bit of a breakdown

[49:26] to kind of help explain that a little bit better.

[49:30] I do want to provide some property tax rate comparisons, these are

[49:34] updated proposed tax rates for all of our comparison cities.

[49:36] Uh so we can see Corsicana at 0.5208

[49:39] and then some of our neighboring cities and comparison cities around

[49:43] the state in our area here.

[49:45] Uh selected for either population size or similar geographics

[49:49] or uh county seat.

[49:52] things like that.

[49:56] What I will say from updating this spreadsheet,

[49:58] pretty much all cities are faced with the same

[50:01] thing is that all of their values also decreased.

[50:03] Uh and so most of them are either having to increase

[50:07] or their MNOs increasing to compensate for for that

[50:09] loss in value.

[50:14] The other significant portions are sales tax and so here's

[50:18] my math behind our sales tax projection

[50:21] and why it's increasing from 11.3 to this year to 11.9

[50:24] next year or 11.6 as I have budgeted.

[50:28] Uh and so we just have a very strong trend, a lot of the new

[50:30] businesses are helping drive this as well.

[50:38] A big piece is our five-year capital plan and so again,

[50:40] capital planning matters, it helps us allocate our

[50:42] resources for growth.

[50:44] And so as the city continues to look towards growth, having

[50:46] a good solid plan that's flexible but provides

[50:48] guidance,

[50:50] is going to be important to make sure we're addressing all the

[50:52] needs that we have for that growth,

[50:54] especially as that growth impacts the older infrastructure.

[50:59] Uh helps us with investment opportunity prioritization.

[51:02] And so as we look out forward,

[51:03] we can see when we need the money,

[51:05] when we need to take out debt, when we need to make sure

[51:06] we're investing our money

[51:08] so that way we can potentially earn interest as opposed to

[51:10] needing to take out debt.

[51:12] All this is part of a strategy.

[51:15] And of course, improved fiscal responsibility.

[51:16] It helps us communicate that clearly to our uh residents,

[51:19] to the citizens,

[51:21] uh to the council, and as well as maintain

[51:23] our accountability internally.

[51:27] For the general fund, these are our projects from 2027

[51:29] to 2031.

[51:34] We can see about 15.9 right under right under 16 million

[51:38] dollars in proposed projects for this next fiscal year.

[51:43] Uh we do have about 18.8 million dollars in funding

[51:45] between debt issuances, donations, general fund, uh not

[51:48] general fund, but fund balances from various funds that are

[51:50] supporting these projects.

[51:57] Here are some of the major projects, a lot of infrastructure

[51:59] projects, both streets, out at the airport, city facilities,

[52:03] some equipment purchases, like an ambulance power stretchers,

[52:08] uh and then some projects that are in progress that were

[52:09] closing out.

[52:11] Uh things like the animal shelter that are in progress,

[52:13] a fire training tower, as well as a Quint fire apparatus.

[52:20] On the utility side, we're continuing to be pretty

[52:22] aggressive with our improvements here

[52:23] 11.6 million in projected expenses supported by 11.9

[52:25] uh in bonds issued.

[52:32] We have significant progress on completing pipe bursting

[52:34] projects, working on our 287 bridge utility relocations,

[52:38] and then continuing to improve our aging wastewater, water and

[52:40] utility system infrastructure.

[52:47] Any questions that I can answer at this time?

[52:52] Yes, I have a few.

[52:55] So looking at the um looking at some of the items,

[53:01] I noticed that uh the municipal court Truancy

[53:04] Prevention Fund is 7,000.

[53:08] I'm trying I didn't know we had truancy.

[53:13] That is a mandatory fee that the state mandates that

[53:16] municipal court collects.

[53:18] So for certain offenses, a portion of the fine has to be

[53:21] allocated to a bunch of different buckets,

[53:23] such as court security, court technology, truancy,

[53:27] uh rules of the road.

[53:30] Uh and so there's a lot of little buckets that every fine

[53:32] that the city assesses has to go to as well as a portion that

[53:35] has to be remitted back to the state.

[53:38] So that is a special revenue fund that's comprised of

[53:41] finds from those finds.

[53:45] So they get to get fine for traffic.

[53:49] Well, just from fine money is divided up, you know, like if

[53:51] you pay a fine for a speeding ticket,

[53:53] the law designates what some of the fees go to, what you have

[53:56] to use it for.

[53:59] Got you.

[54:00] Correct, is that

[54:01] Yes. So it's titled truancy because that's what it was

[54:03] established as when the state said a portion of these

[54:06] fees or fines has to go into this bucket to address this

[54:10] issue. And that's what it is for.

[54:16] Okay.

[54:17] The other um question I had was what we're looking at the

[54:20] uh the fees and cost of services.

[54:23] I noticed that like the commercial water rates, um and

[54:25] the residential water rates are the same.

[54:32] Um, I thought we had a discussion that they should

[54:35] pay, I guess because they use it more gallons or something

[54:41] like that?

[54:46] I thought that we

[54:48] Are you referring to our last uh work session?

[54:50] Yes.

[54:51] So, if correct me if I'm wrong, Val, the the information

[54:53] that was presented in that rate study was not necessarily for

[54:56] this budget year.

[54:58] Um, it was something for us to look at.

[55:01] we could either amend the fees later,

[55:03] but it wasn't necessarily going to be

[55:05] uh considered in this particular budget at this time. Was that correct?

[55:08] Yes, we ran out of time to make sure we all were on the same page there.

[55:12] but there are two separate pieces presented. One was

[55:15] uh just the rates as they exist today.

[55:17] what kind of revenue we needed to remain uh

[55:23] with our heads above water and what that looked like,

[55:25] and then a separate piece, which was that construction in progress

[55:29] additional fee.

[55:31] And so I know from the end of that meeting, we wanted to look at

[55:34] how that was structured instead of something uniform across the board.

[55:36] We wanted to look at applying different rates to different

[55:40] user groups to assess, you know,

[55:43] senior citizen is not using near as much water as a major industry.

[55:47] and so it's not equitable for them both to be saying the same for our

[55:51] CIP costs.

[55:52] It would make a lot more sense for the heavy users to pay

[55:55] a larger share of that.

[55:58] And so uh yes, we wanted to make sure that that's being addressed

[56:02] and so nothing presented tonight is addressing that

[56:05] particular side of the issue.

[56:06] to where we're that is for a future budget year.

[56:12] Uh the only other thing that I kind of notice is that

[56:15] uh we're doing deposits for water.

[56:19] Our residents are paying 250 if you rent, 150 if you're owner.

[56:26] And industrial is only pay- they're paying the same amount

[56:28] as a residential renter.

[56:31] Um, to me it doesn't really make sense,

[56:34] cuz industrial make millions of dollars and they're

[56:37] only paying 250 for a deposit.

[56:40] And so my only thing with that would be if we

[56:43] in the future can look at possibly changing that part.

[56:47] But other than that, um, that's all I kind of notice.

[56:51] said.

[56:54] Any other questions from the council?

[56:58] From the audience, any questions?

[57:04] If not, we'll move to uh Ross, would you read the

[57:07] Mr. Mayor.

[57:08] Yes.

[57:09] We have a question.

[57:12] If you have a question, please come forward, state your name

[57:17] and uh your address, and you have three minutes.

[57:20] public hearing.

[57:26] Yes, Kirpernet 619 N 25th Street.

[57:30] Of course, Cannas.

[57:31] I just it's more of a an issue I saw when I was reading through this

[57:36] about some of the verbs we were using.

[57:39] Um, and correct me if I'm wrong because it kind of was kind of

[57:42] confusing going through it all.

[57:43] But you know, the tax rate ordinance under item 6C states,

[57:47] the proposed tax rate is not greater than the no new revenue tax rate.

[57:52] This means that the city of Corsicana is not proposing to increase

[57:55] poverty taxes for the 2026 tax year.

[57:59] So that was last year's, correct?

[58:04] So, the uh from the same properties as last year. Correct.

[58:09] Because then further on, the same ordinance goes on to state this

[58:12] tax rate will raise more taxes for maintenance and operations

[58:16] than last year's tax rates.

[58:17] And then further the tax rate will effectively be raised by 3.46%

[58:21] and will raise taxes for maintenance and operations

[58:24] I went off a $100,000 home by approximately $12,

[58:26] but you are a $200,000 up there.

[58:29] So on the board where it says the 3.46 increase and also

[58:32] down below the 3.38% increase.

[58:36] Reading the agenda, it directly contradicts one another

[58:40] and I don't think the city can simultaneously tell residents

[58:43] it's not proposing to increase property taxes

[58:45] while acknowledging the rate will raise more taxes

[58:47] and effectively be raised.

[58:49] So I'm just making sure there's not a clerical issue.

[58:56] So, on this note, a lot of it's going to have to do with the

[58:59] mandatory way the state makes us say the verbage in there.

[59:03] So anything that looks out of place in the ordinance, all capitalized,

[59:07] larger font and things like that, that's required verbage from the state.

[59:10] Uh in this case, the the math kind of doesn't 100% make sense.

[59:15] And so when we look at the math has presented here,

[59:20] uh from 2025 total taxable value to the 2026 adjusted taxable value,

[59:24] these are the same properties year over year.

[59:27] And so this is where it states that the no new revenue rate

[59:31] that we're not going above it.

[59:33] And so because we're locking in at that 0.5208, which was

[59:36] calculated off of the adjusted taxable value,

[59:39] that's where that piece comes in.

[59:41] Now, when you add in the new value, our 2026 total taxable value does

[59:46] go up from the adjusted taxable value by about 53 million in value.

[59:51] And so that's where the MNO is going to generate more.

[59:55] Um now, this is unfortunately, we look at the whole city, we

[1:00:01] I can't look at an individual and assess anything individually.

[1:00:03] And so, uh, overall our property values decreased by 114 million.

[1:00:10] Some of that was a mandatory exemption from the state, the personal business property exemption.

[1:00:16] Uh, that reduced it by about 53 million,

[1:00:18] and then the Central Pasel district also helped

[1:00:21] us out reducing some people's property values further.

[1:00:25] Uh, to get us to where we are at today and why our no new

[1:00:27] revenue rate is increasing over last year's adopted tax rate.

[1:00:31] I just want to make sure that

[1:00:33] the city we're not going to get in trouble for

[1:00:35] I know you're supposed to use the boilerplate that the was it

[1:00:38] 26.05 the Texas code requires, but

[1:00:43] I flied it because they contradict each other.

[1:00:45] I just want to make sure that we're taking out something if it

[1:00:48] was copy and paste from last year into this year's.

[1:00:51] We are.

[1:00:52] Uh, I also because of how confusing it is, I do utilize

[1:00:56] other means and other checks to make sure that we're including

[1:00:59] everything that we're supposed to.

[1:01:00] And so, because of the way the math works out in the total,

[1:01:03] it is an increase and there is a larger M&O revenue generated.

[1:01:08] Um, but based off of last year's adjusted values are the current

[1:01:12] year adjusted values being less than last year's total tax rate.

[1:01:17] We are locked in at the no new revenue rate.

[1:01:20] That was the only thing I saw that I was kind of concerned about.

[1:01:22] Thank you. Thank your suit, please.

[1:01:26] Is there anyone else?

[1:01:28] Anyone else?

[1:01:30] Hearing none, we'll move to the next item.

[1:01:32] Mayor, I was I was going to ask if you want me to talk now or if

[1:01:35] you wanted me to talk on one of these future ones.

[1:01:37] Uh, we've got you in the next one.

[1:01:39] In the next one? Okay.

[1:01:43] Um.

[1:01:45] Okay, we will go to

[1:01:50] item 6C.

[1:01:53] Or were we?

[1:01:57] Marcy, were the last one that you read for us was

[1:02:01] We're on 6B.

[1:02:04] All right.

[1:02:06] 6B.

[1:02:07] Uh, would you read that caption, please, ma'am?

[1:02:10] Yes. Receive public input regarding

[1:02:13] ratifying the property tax increase reflected in fiscal

[1:02:17] year 2027 adopted budget and acknowledging that the increase

[1:02:22] raises more in tax revenue than the fiscal year 2026 adopted budget.

[1:02:29] Mr. Ridge.

[1:02:37] Uh, I won't labor this too much.

[1:02:38] This is a mandatory step by the state to ratify that there

[1:02:42] is a increase in revenue being generated.

[1:02:45] Uh, we we kind of addressed that there in the last comment.

[1:02:48] But basically because our values decreased when we look at the

[1:02:52] same properties, we had to raise our no new revenue rate, our the

[1:02:55] no new revenue rate raised by 3.34, excuse me, 3.46% in total.

[1:03:02] Uh, the maintenance and operations also increased by 3.38 from prior

[1:03:07] year and this is going to generate more money than last year because

[1:03:10] of the new values are the new properties added to our valuation.

[1:03:14] Input or questions for the from the council?

[1:03:20] Anything for Val?

[1:03:23] Any input or questions from the audience?

[1:03:27] Hearing none, we'll move to item C, Miss Rossen.

[1:03:31] Receive public input regarding adopting the tax rate of 0.5208

[1:03:37] for fiscal year 2027.

[1:03:41] Mr. Ridge.

[1:03:44] This is the actual adoption of the tax rate and so we are

[1:03:48] presenting the no new revenue rate as calculated 0.5208.

[1:03:52] We can see the math as presented.

[1:03:58] Mr. Holsou.

[1:04:00] Sure.

[1:04:01] Um, so, I I'd ask the mayor, um, since we're talking about all of

[1:04:06] these things with the property tax rate and the dollars

[1:04:09] collected and everything.

[1:04:10] Um, if he'd be okay if I just kind of gave us a property tax

[1:04:13] system 101, so everyone could

[1:04:15] uh, maybe understand this a little bit better.

[1:04:18] Um, because the the point that the city of Course Can is in,

[1:04:22] um, is kind of a unique situation within the the property tax code.

[1:04:26] And so I wanted to be able to explain this to everybody to to

[1:04:29] help you understand it a little bit better.

[1:04:32] Um, unfortunately, I have to join the club here now.

[1:04:35] Um, so, uh, Val, could you go to the the next slide, the one

[1:04:38] with the arrows?

[1:04:40] Yeah.

[1:04:42] Um, so, the the way that the system works and this is not a

[1:04:45] defense of the system, this is not an endorsement of it, this

[1:04:49] is just the way that it works.

[1:04:51] Is, um, the the city receives, uh, the certified totals from the

[1:04:55] appraisal district and then the city receives from the tax assessor

[1:04:59] collector the no new revenue rate.

[1:05:01] and the voter approval rate.

[1:05:03] And so that no new revenue rate, that is calculated as the same dollars from

[1:05:09] the same properties as the year before, and then any new builds, any new

[1:05:16] businesses, houses, development, what have you, gets added onto that. And so same

[1:05:23] dollars from same pockets is, uh, is left steady with the no new revenue rate from

[1:05:29] the previous year, and then the way that a city or a county or a school district

[1:05:33] recognizes growth is from the new development that comes with it. And so,

[1:05:42] um, when we receive those those rates, uh, the the city and, and I'll just say

[1:05:48] the city as any government entity. This applies to school districts, junior

[1:05:52] colleges, counties, what have you. Um, that no new revenue rate, anything higher

[1:06:01] than the no new revenue rate is a tax dollar increase. Anything below the no

[1:06:06] new revenue rate is a tax dollar cut. And then the voter approval rate is the

[1:06:11] maximum amount allowed by law before voters have to vote to raise their taxes

[1:06:13] that amount. And so, um, it's in that scenario that any government, the city in

[1:06:18] our case, we can choose the no new revenue rate and that is same dollars

[1:06:22] from same pockets as the year before. Anything higher is a tax increase. Uh,

[1:06:25] the city can, can pass any rate up to the city can, can pass any rate up to the voter approval rate, um, without without

[1:06:31] voter approval. It's a little backwards, but that's how it works. Uh, the city can

[1:06:33] also pass a rate all the way down to zero. The city could decide to abolish

[1:06:40] property taxes right here and now if we wish. But you always have to be careful

[1:06:47] what you wish for, right? Um, you kind of have to pick, okay, what what $9 million

[1:06:50] worth of services are we no longer going to offer? Um, but the the way that this

[1:06:56] works, um, is a lot of times people focus on tax rate from year one and compare it

[1:07:00] to tax rate from year two. And so, uh, in in this scenario, um, what's happened is

[1:07:09] because property values have come down, that no new revenue rate is actually

[1:07:14] higher than the previous year's tax rate. And, uh, like what Val said, a good

[1:07:20] portion of that reduction in value that reduction in value that caused the rate to go higher than last

[1:07:24] year's rate, um, was due to, I think it was proposition nine, um, on the November

[1:07:30] 2025 ballot. Um, where Texas voters approved $125,000 business personal

[1:07:32] property tax exemption for commercial users, um, who have to render that business

[1:07:40] personal property tax. And so because of that, and then some some other appraisal,

[1:07:42] um, decisions, um, that value was reduced. And so normally when values

[1:07:47] continue to increase, that no new revenue rate typically drops below the previous

[1:07:53] year's rate to account for that increase in value. When total values go down,

[1:07:57] that's when the no new revenue rate comes up. Because we as a city, we don't levy

[1:08:03] taxes on that house or that business, we have one bucket of value that we can levy

[1:08:09] a tax on. And that's the, uh, that that that is the non-exempt, uh, taxable value. And

[1:08:18] so when that, uh, when that bucket of value reduces, you get the situation

[1:08:20] where we have. So in the uh, in the ordinance where it says, um, the tax

[1:08:25] rate will be effectively raised by 3.4% and will raise taxes from maintenance and

[1:08:29] operations on a $100,000 home. What this is doing is it's, it's not necessarily

[1:08:34] a $100,000 home. This is the wording, um, that the the state legislature chose

[1:08:41] to be used, but it's on each $100,000 portion of that taxable value. So our

[1:08:46] total taxable value decreased, therefore we have fewer $100,000 portions on which

[1:08:53] to levy a tax. And so if you want to go back to the previous slide here. So our

[1:09:00] total taxable value, um, that top green line in 2025, uh, 2.75 million. The 2026

[1:09:05] adjusted taxable value, and I know Val talked about this before, um, but sometimes

[1:09:13] I think it's good for people to hear, you know, the same thing from two different

[1:09:20] people, maybe one of us will make sense. Um, the 2026 adjusted taxable value is

[1:09:29] the same properties as at 2025 taxable value. So the same properties, there you

[1:09:36] go. Um, the same properties reduced in value by 114 million. So when that happens,

[1:09:45] in order for the city to collect the same dollars from the same pockets, that's how

[1:09:57] the no new revenue rate increases. And then we get the 2026 total taxable value,

[1:10:01] city that is growing to realize new dollars

[1:10:04] while the same pockets from the same year or from the previous year, um

[1:10:08] are having a reduced tax burden.

[1:10:10] Um, or or the equal tax burden.

[1:10:13] So if you want to scroll down a little bit here, Val.

[1:10:16] Um, so what I want to point out here so you see that first box

[1:10:19] where it says current year tax rate.

[1:10:22] So that's fiscal year 2026.

[1:10:24] Um, you can see the total levy between the debt service and the M&O.

[1:10:28] Uh, debt service, that is the portion of your property tax bill

[1:10:32] that goes to uh to paying debts.

[1:10:34] So when we have road bonds, we have construction bonds, whatever um bonds,

[1:10:40] you know, to uh, you know, build a water treatment facility or,

[1:10:42] you know, what have you.

[1:10:44] Um, things like that come out of the debt service.

[1:10:47] And so your total property tax rate is actually split into two.

[1:10:52] So maintenance and operation, that is for day-to-day operations.

[1:10:54] So that's police, fire, roads, uh, keeping City Hall standing, right?

[1:11:00] That's that's what all comes out of maintenance and operations.

[1:11:03] And so those two rates come together for your total tax rate.

[1:11:06] And so the total levy for 2020, for fiscal year 2026,

[1:11:11] uh was 13.8 million, so that's 13 million 883. Yes.

[1:11:16] So, if you look at the uh, the no-new revenue rate and the proposed rate,

[1:11:20] so box uh two and box three.

[1:11:23] Um, the total levy for the no-new revenue rate, that is going off of

[1:11:26] the 2026 adjusted total.

[1:11:29] So that's the total levy on the same properties from the year before.

[1:11:33] Um, and so that that's where I say same same pocket, same dollars.

[1:11:37] So that amount uh went down by a $115,085.

[1:11:43] If you look at the top right where it says rate,

[1:11:45] Um that $115,085 is the difference

[1:11:48] between the current year total levy and the no-new revenue rate total levy.

[1:11:53] So when you pass the no-new revenue rate,

[1:11:55] it is it is mathematically within, you know, a margin of error

[1:11:59] of being the same dollars.

[1:12:02] Um and so where the the increase in dollars to the city is coming from,

[1:12:07] is when you look at the proposed rate at total value,

[1:12:10] um that's the bottom box here.

[1:12:12] So, as you can see, the the rate we're adopting is the no-new revenue rate.

[1:12:16] Um, when you take in the proposed rate at total value,

[1:12:20] that is now including the new development, new houses,

[1:12:23] new companies, what have you.

[1:12:25] And so by adding in those new dollars,

[1:12:28] um, you can see in the the bottom right, uh $275,500.

[1:12:33] So that is $275,000 from new development that's getting added.

[1:12:38] So you subtract 115,000, you add 275,000.

[1:12:43] So it's a net gain of what is that? 160, 165, something like that.

[1:12:49] So, because of how the no-new revenue rate works and how the new development

[1:12:52] works,

[1:12:54] you actually bring in more dollars than the previous year.

[1:12:58] Um, and then because of that no-new revenue rate going up but collecting

[1:13:01] the same dollars from the same pockets,

[1:13:04] um because all of the appraised value came down,

[1:13:07] that's where you get the tax rate going up.

[1:13:09] And so in all of the state mandated reporting,

[1:13:13] that's what we have to say.

[1:13:15] So it's this is not meant to be, you know, trying to, you know, weasel

[1:13:18] our way out of whatever it is that we're doing, right?

[1:13:21] This is to try and help you explain help you understand how the system

[1:13:24] works because in, you know, what I've always told people

[1:13:27] when I do my property tax education events whatever,

[1:13:31] is that the property tax system to me is intentionally broken.

[1:13:34] Um, it's meant to be something that's very difficult to understand.

[1:13:37] And as you can see from here, like it it it takes a minute

[1:13:40] to get used to it.

[1:13:43] So, um, when we read these things, uh, remember that it's it's not saying,

[1:13:48] you know, we have to say $100,000 home.

[1:13:50] in all of these disclosures, but what it really means is $100,000

[1:13:54] portions of the total taxable value.

[1:13:57] And when there are less of those $100,000 portions, that's what makes

[1:14:01] the no-new revenue rate go up.

[1:14:02] So that when the city levies taxes on the city as a whole,

[1:14:07] the city is gaining the same dollars from the same pockets and then gaining

[1:14:10] new dollars from new pockets.

[1:14:13] So I wanted to make sure that everyone understood how this worked.

[1:14:16] Because it it is true that the city is gaining more tax dollars from

[1:14:19] property taxes.

[1:14:22] It is also true that those dollars are coming from new development

[1:14:26] and they are not necessarily coming um from existing uh residents,

[1:14:30] businesses, what have you.

[1:14:33] And so one of the other common misconceptions

[1:14:36] um is is people tend to think that, you know, oh, the city's raising my

[1:14:38] property taxes or,

[1:14:40] oh, you know, they cut my neighbors, why did they raise mine?

[1:14:42] is that the city cannot decide um

[1:14:46] I'm raising that one, I'm cutting that one.

[1:14:47] Whatever that total value is, is what what the city has to work with.

[1:14:53] And so under the no-new revenue rate, some properties can see an increase.

[1:14:59] Some properties can

[1:15:01] see a decrease. And so

[1:15:03] we are not able to control uh

[1:15:06] what property sees what increase or decrease with the no new revenue rate.

[1:15:09] We're just saying that the city taxable value as a whole is going to collect

[1:15:14] the same dollars from the same pockets as the year before and then gain that

[1:15:18] new value from the new development.

[1:15:21] Um, so I wanted to make sure we took a minute to try and understand some of this.

[1:15:25] I know it's complicated.

[1:15:27] Um, I know some of it might not make sense.

[1:15:30] Um, but I wanted to do my best to try and explain that to everybody so that

[1:15:34] when you see all of this, um hopefully it makes a little bit more sense.

[1:15:39] That's your budget. Thanks, Chris.

[1:15:42] Anything else, any input or questions from the council?

[1:15:46] From the audience?

[1:15:47] Just my only input is I know, you know,

[1:15:51] some of us some are going to fill it,

[1:15:55] Um, especially our low economic income families.

[1:15:59] And so my only input is that as a council, as a city, like we have to make

[1:16:04] sure and I understand the whole no new revenue Act, uh but

[1:16:09] we have got to make sure that we have some type of security for our citizens

[1:16:15] to provide better jobs, um and services so they can afford,

[1:16:18] you know, when we have to raise our taxes, like they can afford it.

[1:16:23] Because we're hurting, like this economy is hurting our citizens.

[1:16:26] And uh we got to make sure that our families can have some great paying jobs,

[1:16:31] we got to create some some great jobs for them to be able to afford it because

[1:16:35] we don't want them to leave and go somewhere else and pay taxes in another city.

[1:16:39] We want to keep them here.

[1:16:40] So we got to do our good diligence to make sure that

[1:16:44] when we raise it, that we take care of them.

[1:16:47] And that's just where I'm going to leave it.

[1:16:53] Anyone else?

[1:16:55] Miss Rossom, would you read the caption for 6D?

[1:16:59] Receive public input regarding a proposed amendment to chapter 13,

[1:17:03] entitled municipal fees of the city Code of Ordinances to provide changes,

[1:17:07] additions, and deletions of certain fees.

[1:17:12] Mr. Rich.

[1:17:15] So, I guess I drew picked pulled the uh short straw on this one, so I'm

[1:17:18] presenting the chapter 13 municipal fees update for our new fiscal year.

[1:17:24] So, as presented in the agenda packet, these are just the portions that we

[1:17:27] are adjusting.

[1:17:30] Um, on the administrative side, we're raising our returned check fee

[1:17:33] from $25 to $35.

[1:17:37] A lot of these one-off fees outside of the utility rates is going to be

[1:17:40] attached to kind of punitive measures.

[1:17:44] Our utility billing and other services are seeing a lot of people bounce checks,

[1:17:48] uh have ACH's get withdrawn and all of

[1:17:53] this adds fees to us that we have to pay

[1:17:57] on top of fees you have to pay as an individual.

[1:18:00] And so we want to try to reduce that, I know that's the word out of our

[1:18:03] utility billing department and so we're adjusting these to hopefully try to

[1:18:06] curtail some of those delinquent payments.

[1:18:10] Uh, we thought it was redundant to have this stop payment fee,

[1:18:13] so looking to delete that.

[1:18:15] Uh beer and wine fees, this is something that the state changed, we can no longer

[1:18:19] assess those at the local level, it's entirely handled at the state level.

[1:18:23] Uh so we just want to go ahead and clean those up off of our fee schedule.

[1:18:26] We haven't been assessing those at all, but there's no reason to even have them on there.

[1:18:33] As mentioned our utilities, water and wastewater from that rate study, we found

[1:18:37] that we do need at least a 9% both water and wastewater in order to keep us

[1:18:42] uh even with our operating expense and fighting against the inflation

[1:18:46] that we've seen.

[1:18:49] Uh and so the city is not unfamiliar with the same burdens as the citizens,

[1:18:54] gas increases, so do our costs to get the materials and chemicals to our facilities.

[1:19:01] And so as well as getting the cruise in order to fix our infrastructure.

[1:19:05] And so this is all to kind of address that and dig us out of that hole.

[1:19:09] And so what we'll see here from all the way across the board is a 9% increase

[1:19:12] both water and wastewater.

[1:19:15] Here are the residential rates and their increases.

[1:19:18] Hey, Val.

[1:19:19] Yes.

[1:19:20] Um, I was under the impression that the impression that the stuff from the rate study was not going

[1:19:25] to be considered yet, that we were going back to the drawing board on that.

[1:19:29] The rate increase is separate from the construction or the CIP fee that was

[1:19:33] what he was presenting that was adding like the $11 or the two

[1:19:37] adjusting and flat rate.

[1:19:40] Uh, so this is kind of the at minimum what we need and we'll kind of look at

[1:19:44] a slide after this that kind of shows this that kind of shows this rate adjustment gets us out of a hole.

[1:19:48] right now we're bleeding about $1.2 million at our current rates.

[1:19:53] Uh and so we've kind of held off on really adjusting rates because of the

[1:19:56] 50 cent increase the last two years.

[1:20:00] But the rate study

[1:20:01] point where we are woefully insufficient in our rates.

[1:20:06] Uh and so that's what this presents is just enough to get us out of that hole,

[1:20:10] uh and back to uh kind of positive ground.

[1:20:13] Now the construction progress piece has presented

[1:20:15] and that was

[1:20:20] what we need to make sure is equitable across the board,

[1:20:23] that the industry is paying a more fair share for their usage and things like that.

[1:20:27] That is a piece that we have postponed. There is no impact to this year related to that.

[1:20:33] Okay, because I, I was under the impression that was all connected.

[1:20:38] Um.

[1:20:40] Yeah, I I thought that we were taking the whole thing back to the drawing board.

[1:20:44] not that we were just gonna go ahead with one piece of it and then come back and talk about another piece.

[1:20:49] And that's fine for us to discuss. I just wanted to let you know that

[1:20:52] this piece is a separate issue completely from

[1:20:57] going back to the drawing board.

[1:20:58] Our existing rates already differentiate from one class to another.

[1:21:02] Um, this is just a uniform across the board, raise,

[1:21:08] in order to address, like I said, the the revenue deficit.

[1:21:11] we're just not seeing any growth

[1:21:13] uh on the utility side and expenses are continuing to increase.

[1:21:17] And so if we continue with our current progress of postponing

[1:21:21] or only adjusting water rates,

[1:21:22] uh it's going to continue to hemorrhage until it can't support itself.

[1:21:28] Uh, some other punitive changes, tampering and damage to broken lock.

[1:21:32] Uh, cutoff list, trip charge, service transfer fee.

[1:21:36] Uh, and then a little bit of adjustment on the sanitation side.

[1:21:39] So refuse hauling, a 50 cent increase there.

[1:21:42] Um, and then residential monthly rate or business rate,

[1:21:45] another 50 cent or 55 cent increase there.

[1:21:48] uh to kind of close the gap in the increased charges from Republic

[1:21:51] for managing that contract.

[1:21:55] Uh, this should be familiar, but this does show exactly what

[1:21:58] uh this increase does.

[1:22:01] And so the proposed stepped increase did not include that CIP

[1:22:05] during the work session that presented this information.

[1:22:08] This is just the 9% increase that we need in order to stop hemorraging

[1:22:12] our fund.

[1:22:15] Um, and so it takes us from the 7660, which is the current average

[1:22:18] bill for 5,000 gallons a month,

[1:22:21] up to 8350 is what this does.

[1:22:25] Uh, that 9523 way up there, that's the proposed level that levels out

[1:22:29] that CIP and includes it in this current fiscal year.

[1:22:33] Again, the step plan had no CIP,

[1:22:35] we're taking that back to the drawing board and making sure that's equitable

[1:22:37] and something well discussed.

[1:22:39] Uh, this is just the 9%.

[1:22:46] And if this is something that needs more discussion,

[1:22:48] that's we can do that as well,

[1:22:50] but we do have a limitation here that, you know,

[1:22:53] deferring revenue increases continues to put us in a hole

[1:22:56] and then postpones that increasing further revenue needs in the future.

[1:23:04] So 9% today turns into a 10, 12% six months to a year from now.

[1:23:10] I, if I was a resident and I was looking at this,

[1:23:13] I would be highly upset.

[1:23:15] to know that if I'm a resident and I want to get my water cut on,

[1:23:20] I'm going to be paying the same amount as a an industrial that

[1:23:23] is making millions of dollars.

[1:23:27] Like to me, that doesn't look like we are helping.

[1:23:31] And correct me if I am wrong, but if I am a citizen

[1:23:33] and I'm looking at this,

[1:23:36] I would be upset.

[1:23:37] Because I'm paying the same amount as

[1:23:41] a factory that's coming in.

[1:23:45] And so my, my take on it is I know we in a rut,

[1:23:49] but why not make the businesses that are coming in,

[1:23:52] the industrial businesses pay more than our citizens

[1:23:57] instead of them paying the same.

[1:24:00] This is just the portions that are changing.

[1:24:03] The full schedule is in our code of ordinances

[1:24:06] and so that does have varying rates

[1:24:08] for meter sizes and so if an industry needs something bigger

[1:24:11] than a residential user,

[1:24:12] they're paying sufficiently more equitable amount for that

[1:24:15] to get their service initiated.

[1:24:18] Uh, once it is initiated, then these are the the rates.

[1:24:23] Yeah, I'm talking about the deposit. Like even to get my water cut on,

[1:24:27] the residential's paying 250, the industrial's paying 250.

[1:24:30] Like to me, it would be, it, it will make sense if

[1:24:33] to charge them more than you're charging a resident.

[1:24:37] That's where the deposits, that is just to initiate the water.

[1:24:40] Uh, those have mostly been adjusted in accordance to what delinquent bills.

[1:24:45] Uh, and so the 150 is if someone is delinquent and fails to pay

[1:24:48] their bill, fails to inform us that they need to close out

[1:24:50] their account and settle with us.

[1:24:53] Then that 150 is the average that utility billing has calculated

[1:24:56] for those accounts.

[1:25:00] Uh, the 250 is

[1:25:01] is the average for those accounts.

[1:25:05] the purpose of the of the deposit is to ensure that the person

[1:25:10] is paying their bill. If if the person doesn't pay their bill,

[1:25:13] that means all the other customers are going to have

[1:25:15] to pay more themselves. I I get that.

[1:25:17] Um, I'm I'm just looking at even like a deposit to get your water

[1:25:24] cut on, the citizens are paying the same as a million dollar

[1:25:30] industry that's coming in. I'm gonna say they have a

[1:25:33] different size meter. Well, the note on

[1:25:34] the deposit, they paying the same for the deposit.

[1:25:36] The note on the deposit is that that's not revenue coming into us,

[1:25:40] that's just money you sitting holding.

[1:25:42] Once you close your account, you get your deposit back.

[1:25:44] So while we are holding on to it in the meantime for your service

[1:25:48] to get cut on, that is not the total cost of having your service

[1:25:54] turned on and use of your service. That's just a deposit that we sit

[1:25:58] on to avoid other users of the system from having to pay delinquent

[1:26:02] fees and bills and stuff like that for water theft.

[1:26:11] Val, can you talk to me about the um the property tax revenue

[1:26:18] increase from new construction

[1:26:20] uh in this budget. And then did you say a while ago that there's not

[1:26:28] an increase in utility revenue? As presented in our budget, the

[1:26:35] revenue there is very flat and that was confirmed by the rate study

[1:26:40] as well. Can you talk about that discrepancy, help me understand that?

[1:26:41] Well, I mean, if if we're getting new property tax revenue from new

[1:26:49] growth, somebody's building a building, they're turning on some

[1:26:56] water. Um, some of that is maybe they're an existence and so they've

[1:27:03] been renting, now they've bought a house, their usage is consistent

[1:27:07] from one location to another location, uh, could be businesses,

[1:27:11] industries, commercial properties as they're growing out there along

[1:27:17] 31, don't typically use as much water as like an industry or a

[1:27:25] resident, uh, especially if it's like a shopping facility, hotel

[1:27:30] lobby, academy, there's just not a whole lot of water usage there.

[1:27:35] So the correlation from new growth as far as that's concerned could

[1:27:37] just be additional a few additional businesses, it could be values

[1:27:40] of houses improving, um, uh things like that. And so that's

[1:27:45] where property tax could increase, it may not necessarily be more

[1:27:46] residents, more properties, it could just be more value in the

[1:27:51] existing properties. And so it doesn't necessarily correlate to a

[1:27:54] population growth, more people using more water. Okay. Thank you.

[1:27:58] Uh, another side of that is also usage and so the last several years

[1:28:02] have been pretty wet, cooler summers and so that can add to that and skew

[1:28:06] some of our results. And so that's, I know like last year was a very

[1:28:10] wet summer, a lot of rain, a lot of water usage decreased from that.

[1:28:15] And so we're just not seeing uh a history that supports continuing

[1:28:20] to increase revenue or that revenue will increase. Like we've talked

[1:28:25] about before, the water to produce a gallon of water costs more and

[1:28:28] more every year. And when you defer the rate increased to correspond

[1:28:34] with the increasing costs, it just means it's going to build up for

[1:28:37] higher rates later. So it's I think it's important to make adjustments

[1:28:41] in the rates so that you have smaller increases in the future.

[1:28:43] For example, if you look at the projection here, this 9% has followed

[1:28:47] in year two, three, four with just three and 4% increases.

[1:28:51] Smaller, uh, smaller amounts.

[1:28:54] But uh, the city like the citizens out here are being impacted by the

[1:29:01] the rising rising costs. Whether it's gasoline, whether it's chemicals,

[1:29:05] whether it's the variety of things in producing a gallon of water,

[1:29:11] electricity, etcetera, etcetera. Well, that cost has to be met

[1:29:13] and the only way to meet that cost is in fact to adjust the rates.

[1:29:19] Yeah, my question wasn't about um increased cost in producing a gallon.

[1:29:24] It was clarification on the fact that in property taxes we project

[1:29:30] an increase in revenue, and yet utility stays flat.

[1:29:36] That makes that didn't make sense to me.

[1:29:38] Well, it doesn't make sense if in fact those businesses really didn't

[1:29:43] have anything more than a restroom. Well, and the utility stuff, that's

[1:29:47] an enterprise fund. Yes. And so that's going to be different than

[1:29:49] property taxes. Now, I guess the thing I thought about when he asked

[1:29:53] that, Val, so did this budget, did you budget with the existing rates

[1:29:58] or with these proposed rates? I budget with the existing rates.

[1:29:59] And so we have a very

[1:30:02] conservative budget, both revenue side as well as expenditure side.

[1:30:05] but I mean, we have to have the chemicals we need to

[1:30:08] produce the water we're using.

[1:30:10] And so there's always a risk that even our conservative budget and

[1:30:13] conservative revenue rates are going to be insufficient depending on,

[1:30:17] you know, inflation and the nature of the world as it is.

[1:30:21] Uh, this 9% does address that in an aggressive way.

[1:30:24] The first year.

[1:30:26] And so again, you know, if 9% is too much uh, in one year,

[1:30:30] it does adjust

[1:30:31] to where next year instead of a 2 to 3% fighting inflation,

[1:30:35] you know, we can stagger this out a little bit.

[1:30:38] And so I did want to put this in front of the council for

[1:30:40] conversation, communication, uh,

[1:30:43] with hope that, you know, we can come to some agreements and

[1:30:47] represent this maybe in the next one,

[1:30:49] uh, with a better plan that is more digestible.

[1:30:56] Anything else, council?

[1:31:00] Anything from the audience?

[1:31:02] Oh, mirror, I did have something.

[1:31:03] Um, Val, the other thing I saw in here, um, that I I did not

[1:31:09] know that, um, we were talking about till I saw the agenda,

[1:31:12] um, on the sanitation for the, uh, for the residential

[1:31:15] and the business monthly rates.

[1:31:17] Um, that there's an increase on that as well.

[1:31:21] And uh, that is that is not something I recall that we talked about at all.

[1:31:26] So the rate study was just for the water side of things.

[1:31:31] Uh, sanitation was not included in that. We're going to do a

[1:31:34] separate sanitation rate study this fiscal year,

[1:31:37] um, now that the utility side's done.

[1:31:41] Now, that's going to be primarily

[1:31:43] on like going and doing the refuse hauling out at the landfill.

[1:31:45] Making sure we're comparable on rates there.

[1:31:47] The residential and business monthly rates here, this is for our contract.

[1:31:50] With Republic. And so they continue to increase their annual costs

[1:31:53] they charge the city.

[1:31:55] And so we're getting to where we're upside down by about $2

[1:31:58] per resident on that contract.

[1:32:01] So our utility rates are have not our our sanitation fund

[1:32:05] is having to kind of eat those costs.

[1:32:07] And so this is a a step to kind of close that gap

[1:32:10] between what Republic charges us and what we charge the citizens.

[1:32:13] Okay.

[1:32:14] Um, that Republic contract, if I remember right, um, we capped

[1:32:18] their increases at no more than 4% per year?

[1:32:22] If I remember correctly?

[1:32:24] Yes.

[1:32:25] Okay. 4 to 5%. It may be tied to like a um, consumer pricing index.

[1:32:31] Okay.

[1:32:31] Um, so yeah, I remember that's probably been what,

[1:32:34] two or three years ago now.

[1:32:36] Um, how long is this current Republic contract run?

[1:32:39] That would be a better question

[1:32:41] for our environmental service director.

[1:32:43] Okay.

[1:32:44] And I mean, that's that's fine.

[1:32:46] That's a that's a topic for another time.

[1:32:48] Um, yeah, my my thought would be because I I see some of these

[1:32:51] things that, um, I'm I'm not entirely comfortable with yet.

[1:32:55] I think maybe if we had a work session, um, where we

[1:32:59] could revisit the water side, uh, and then maybe revisit

[1:33:02] the sanitation side.

[1:33:05] Because to me, um, what, you know, we can talk about each

[1:33:07] of these rates individually,

[1:33:10] um, but what, I mean, what matters to the end user is what are

[1:33:12] all of the line items on my water bill? What is the total thing add up to?

[1:33:17] Like, I don't care, you know, that this this one went down 10 cents,

[1:33:19] this one went up 10 cents, you know, I care what is that final number

[1:33:23] that I'm writing a check for, right?

[1:33:26] Um, and so I I think it may be in our best interest to look

[1:33:29] at that and see how all of these things together, um, are gonna

[1:33:33] gonna impact that total bill.

[1:33:36] Um, because that like that, I mean, just yeah, the sanitation, that

[1:33:40] that's one that I I didn't even know about it until I saw

[1:33:43] this agenda packet.

[1:33:44] And uh, was from from my memory of the Republic negotiations,

[1:33:49] um, that was an increase that I I did not expect that we were

[1:33:53] going to have.

[1:33:56] I don't believe we've adjusted that rate for a few years now.

[1:34:00] And so it's just kind of gotten to where Republic's continuing

[1:34:02] to increase theirs annually,

[1:34:05] but we haven't matched that for what we're assessing to the citizens.

[1:34:07] Yeah. So that's why it's such a substantial amount.

[1:34:10] Um, I will say that on average, it's probably going to be less

[1:34:14] than $8 of an increase all all considered.

[1:34:17] The sanitation increase as well as the rate increase for a bill

[1:34:21] of about 5,000 gallons per month.

[1:34:24] Okay.

[1:34:30] Is there anything further? I'll assume we move along to item 6E.

[1:34:38] Receive public input regarding a request for a zone change

[1:34:42] from single family residential district 3 to the light

[1:34:45] industrial district for properties located at block

[1:34:49] 1470, part of lot 5 and lot

[1:34:52] 6 through 14, block 1472,

[1:34:56] lots 4 through 13 and 19 through 27.

[1:35:02] block 1473, lot one, and the unplat- unplated

[1:35:09] property at blocks 1473 through 1475.

[1:35:14] Also known as uh PIDs

[1:35:17] 27231, 27242,

[1:35:21] 34159, 34160,

[1:35:26] 51615 through 51617,

[1:35:32] and 124265 being approximately 10.8 acres

[1:35:37] off of G.W. Jackson Avenue and including

[1:35:40] 2015 and 2017 G.W. Jackson Avenue.

[1:35:46] Mr. Clayton Taylor, our city planning

[1:35:48] and zoning manager.

[1:35:51] Hello, good evening.

[1:35:52] I apologize for the long title on that.

[1:35:54] Uh, trying to be very specific for future reference.

[1:35:58] So, uh, this is a zone change from the existing

[1:36:01] zoning of single family three

[1:36:04] to light industrial or I1.

[1:36:08] Uh, the applicant is requesting a zone change

[1:36:10] from the single family three residential zoning district

[1:36:13] to the light industrial zoning district

[1:36:15] to develop properties for parking.

[1:36:16] It was also discussed that at some point in the future

[1:36:18] batch plants to supplement the existing use at

[1:36:21] Enterprise Precast are planned.

[1:36:24] Uh, let's see if we have the location.

[1:36:26] So, uh, this is the location of the properties.

[1:36:28] Uh, it's a set of properties to the west of uh,

[1:36:31] Enterprise Precast.

[1:36:34] off of Interstate 45 and G.W. Jackson.

[1:36:38] City staff have reviewed the application and can

[1:36:41] recommend a zone change to the I1 zoning district.

[1:36:44] The initial request that was brought to the Planning and Zoning Commission

[1:36:48] on August 20th, 2026, was for a zone change

[1:36:51] to the heavy industrial or I2 zoning district.

[1:36:54] The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended instead for a zone change from R3 to I1,

[1:36:59] due to the property's adjacency to a city park, residential areas,

[1:37:04] portions of the properties, uh, being within the 100-year flood plain

[1:37:07] and other permitted uses in the I2 zoning district.

[1:37:12] not being appropriate for the area.

[1:37:14] Uh, it's also stated that indoor batch plants are able to be permitted in the light industrial or I1

[1:37:19] zoning district with a specific use permit and will be required

[1:37:23] before any batch plants are uh, installed

[1:37:26] or begin a project on these properties.

[1:37:31] Uh, and a parking lot is permitted

[1:37:33] in the light industrial or I1 zoning district.

[1:37:36] Uh, a hydraulic study will be required for all of the parcels before development

[1:37:39] is permitted due to its adjacency to the flood plain.

[1:37:44] Let me see if I can't have a picture of that.

[1:37:47] So these are the properties and portions of them are in the flood plain.

[1:37:51] Uh, there are concerns that uh, any in- uh,

[1:37:55] installations on there and development could have some impact to it.

[1:38:01] So we want uh, the city's requesting a hydraulic study

[1:38:03] before development's done to the properties.

[1:38:07] Staff have reviewed the application and determined

[1:38:10] that the property does meet the requirement

[1:38:12] for requesting a zone change.

[1:38:14] Uh, the future land use shows this property and the surrounding property

[1:38:17] to be commercial center mixed residential.

[1:38:20] Uh, the definition of that is a residential designation that describes

[1:38:23] the mixed residential fabric of higher density

[1:38:26] mixed use residential areas.

[1:38:28] adjacent to major commercial nodes, these areas are,

[1:38:32] these are areas of new development and land use

[1:38:34] mix includes small lot single family, attached single family

[1:38:37] including townhouse and multi-family development.

[1:38:41] The typical residential density of this land use classification

[1:38:45] is five units per acre for single family,

[1:38:46] eight to ten for townhouse

[1:38:48] and 15 to 20 units per acre for multi-family.

[1:38:52] And we have the surrounding properties or the uh,

[1:38:55] future land use here.

[1:38:58] Notification letters were sent to 14 surrounding

[1:39:01] property owners within 200 feet.

[1:39:02] There's one approval that was left blank beyond the approval

[1:39:05] and zero protests have been returned.

[1:39:08] Uh, the recommendation is to consider the request and the applicant,

[1:39:11] uh, is here with us if the Council has any questions for them.

[1:39:18] I do.

[1:39:19] [chair moving]

[1:39:24] Good evening. Good evening, Councilman Justin, I am in your precinct.

[1:39:28] Um, so the properties, because I, I've been through

[1:39:30] there since I saw it on the agenda.

[1:39:34] Um, my, I guess concern is

[1:39:39] you guys are now going to be like right in front of uh,

[1:39:42] individuals' homes across the street.

[1:39:47] And so I know that your property, um, has concrete

[1:39:50] and rocks and I think dirt or something else, uh,

[1:39:54] I guess right there in that area.

[1:39:58] Is there going to be some type of prevention from

[1:40:00] like a gate or something?

[1:40:02] like that that kind of prevents it

[1:40:04] from going into the

[1:40:05] across the street to the residents.

[1:40:07] dust mitigation? Yes.

[1:40:09] we use uh uh water trucks to mitigate dust on our property.

[1:40:13] Okay.

[1:40:14] Um, have you guys

[1:40:15] is that your fence that you guys have

[1:40:17] already a wooden fence? Is that your

[1:40:18] fence or is that a resident's fence?

[1:40:20] We did. We built the uh uh privacy

[1:40:22] fence on that side of the property at the request of the church there.

[1:40:27] Got you. Okay.

[1:40:30] Um, so besides a parking lot,

[1:40:32] what else are you wanting to do with

[1:40:34] this property?

[1:40:35] Currently mostly parking for uh trucks, trailers and uh our employees

[1:40:40] so we can continue to grow.

[1:40:48] I guess my other issue is that like you guys are right in the backyard of

[1:40:54] some of these residents and

[1:40:59] I wish that they'd kind of had more space right there.

[1:41:04] Um,

[1:41:07] If I may.

[1:41:08] Uh-huh.

[1:41:10] Uh, I'm pretty sure the law I'm probably going to respond to it, but

[1:41:13] You can, I'm sorry.

[1:41:14] Yeah, no, we uh we had one of these properties that we purchased had

[1:41:18] Mr. Benny lived there for uh the first eight years that we were here.

[1:41:21] We were great neighbors to him and he was to us as well as we helped him

[1:41:24] maintain his ditch line and other things.

[1:41:27] Uh, we've been good neighbors in the area and plan to continue to do that.

[1:41:31] And I know you mentioned Cton that uh doing a hydraulic um study or

[1:41:35] something because they're close to the water, that's what your

[1:41:39] Yes. We we have engaged in a an uh uh hydrologist to do that study.

[1:41:44] We we planned to have that within the next 30 to 90 days.

[1:41:50] Okay.

[1:41:53] Shayla with going with I1 and having to do a special use permit

[1:41:57] that allows us to put in certain restrictions that we may want.

[1:42:01] So that's something we could look at at that time.

[1:42:03] Okay.

[1:42:06] they had gone I2, we wouldn't have been able to do that.

[1:42:09] Say it again?

[1:42:10] If they'd have gone I2, we wouldn't have been able to do that, but since

[1:42:12] it's I1, it requires a special use permit that gives us the levity to

[1:42:14] do restrictions or, you know, whatever we want to do and try to

[1:42:17] watch something out.

[1:42:20] Okay.

[1:42:21] If um, if the batch plant does come around to being uh developed, the

[1:42:25] council will see this again with the set of plans as part of that specific

[1:42:29] use permit for any any building permits can be granted.

[1:42:33] Yeah, the only thing I'm kind of hesitant of is no offense because I

[1:42:37] I I think your establishment is great. I know what you guys do. Um, it's just

[1:42:42] taking away from the residential areas right there that could

[1:42:45] potentially be homes in our community.

[1:42:47] Um, that's the only thing.

[1:42:48] But, uh if it's if it's for the good cause, I'm I'm all for it. for

[1:42:53] development.

[1:42:54] But uh I just I just see it as being we're we're changing a single family

[1:43:00] resident area where we can potentially build homes to industrial, but

[1:43:07] I'm sorry, what was your name again?

[1:43:09] Scott Davis.

[1:43:10] Last name? Davis.

[1:43:11] Mr. Davis, uh just just for your information, uh I got a call from

[1:43:14] another uh citizen a couple of weeks ago and said one thing I would be

[1:43:19] looking at on a possible resolution of things that we're we're doing for

[1:43:23] parking lots, for industrial properties, is instead of water trucks,

[1:43:25] that that might be one, but also washed rock

[1:43:28] or maybe crushed granite or something to to eliminate the the dust from

[1:43:33] every from there.

[1:43:35] Yeah, if you come into our our main drive, we've used crushed granite

[1:43:38] inside the the main drive, it's more of the parking lot where there's heavy

[1:43:42] uh trucks that just presses that granite right down in and it's

[1:43:45] worthless after a month.

[1:43:48] Right, would wash rock work under the heavy?

[1:43:49] But no, it's the same thing. I mean, that's the same thing.

[1:43:52] We use aggregate in all of our mixes so we're very familiar with what it

[1:43:55] does and how how it helps.

[1:43:56] We're using it in some of the uh areas where it's uh long-term mitigation

[1:44:02] uh available, but in the other areas, it just it just

[1:44:06] What about asphalt millings?

[1:44:08] That's cheap and it does cover the dust.

[1:44:11] Yes, but it stains our our finished product.

[1:44:13] Got you. Got you.

[1:44:15] Okay.

[1:44:16] Thank you.

[1:44:20] Yeah, where they at is where they at now, um, I know it's noise there, but

[1:44:25] the the closer you move to those homes, the louder it's going to be

[1:44:29] for those residents.

[1:44:31] And so that was just kind of my thing is we got to make sure that um we are

[1:44:39] basically being respectful and and and helping the citizens across the

[1:44:44] street because I don't want that dust and stuff to go into their their

[1:44:47] residents. So

[1:44:51] So I guess the question I would have on that to uh to kind of alleviate

[1:44:55] uh someone that Shayla has brought up. Um, I don't know what your plan for an

[1:45:00] entrance into that area would be,

[1:45:03] Um, it looks like there's an entrance there, kind of where

[1:45:06] it says, uh, property ID 51616.

[1:45:09] Um, would it be something where

[1:45:10] you could, uh, could kind of minimize the entrances where

[1:45:15] they kind of go east on GW Jackson, so

[1:45:17] there's not as much in and out right there around the residential

[1:45:20] houses that are further west on GW Jackson.

[1:45:23] Yes, sir. We're done with entrances.

[1:45:24] We've we've the second entrance there that you're referring to.

[1:45:27] We just had that approved approximately three years ago

[1:45:30] and put that entrance in and we're done.

[1:45:32] Okay. Yeah, we would not be moving west with traffic in and

[1:45:35] out of our property.

[1:45:37] Awesome.

[1:45:38] [chair scraping]

[1:45:41] Thank you.

[1:45:49] All right, let's uh move to item 6F, Miss Rossom.

[1:45:53] Receive public input regarding a request for a zone change from

[1:45:58] single family residential District 3 to

[1:46:01] the two family residential district for

[1:46:04] the properties located at block 232, lots C D E F.

[1:46:10] Property IDs 32658, 32659,

[1:46:15] 32660,

[1:46:17] also known as 717, 731 and 735 North Commerce Street.

[1:46:26] Hello again.

[1:46:27] Uh, this is another zone change this time from the single family

[1:46:31] residential 3 zoning district

[1:46:32] to uh the two family zoning district for the purpose of in

[1:46:35] uh developing duplexes on

[1:46:38] three properties.

[1:46:42] So, this is a zoning map, the surrounding area.

[1:46:45] Uh you can see while most of this area uh that the property is in

[1:46:49] uh is zoned R3.

[1:46:51] It's kind of a uh mix of different uses.

[1:46:54] Even across the street, we there's general retail.

[1:46:57] Uh, just down the street to the south, it becomes office and

[1:47:01] commercial and then to the central area and then to the north and east,

[1:47:06] uh is light industrial or I1.

[1:47:09] So, uh, this went to the Planning and zoning Commission on August

[1:47:14] 20th, 2026, uh the planning and zoning Commission

[1:47:18] recommended that this zone change be made.

[1:47:20] Staff have found uh reviewed the application and determined that the

[1:47:23] property does meet the requirement for requesting a zone change.

[1:47:27] The future land use shows this property and the surrounding

[1:47:30] property to be core city mixed residential,

[1:47:34] uh, which is a special residential designation that describes the

[1:47:37] mixed residential fabric of most inner city areas of Corsicana.

[1:47:42] Inner city being the areas immediately around the older

[1:47:45] historic core areas of downtown and its two flanking

[1:47:48] uh historic neighborhoods.

[1:47:50] The age of structures when within this area varies and the land use

[1:47:54] mix includes single family attached and detached and a limited

[1:47:57] percentage of multi-family development.

[1:48:00] The typical residential density of this land use classification is

[1:48:03] 4.5 units to the acre for single family, 8 to 10 for attached

[1:48:07] single family, uh and 15 to 20 for multi-family.

[1:48:13] Notification letters were sent to 21 surrounding property owners

[1:48:16] within 200 ft. Uh zero approvals and zero protests

[1:48:18] have been returned.

[1:48:21] Uh the city is recommending that the council consider the request.

[1:48:26] Uh just to reiterate, this is, these are three properties, they're

[1:48:30] four lots but three properties, three property IDs uh that they're

[1:48:34] requesting be changed to 2F.

[1:48:38] Uh they are sized appropriately for duplexes.

[1:48:42] This is just north of downtown uh and east, I will or west of

[1:48:47] the railroad and 45 business.

[1:48:53] And the app, I believe the applicants are here, yes, if you

[1:48:56] have any questions for them.

[1:49:02] I did have a couple questions for you.

[1:49:04] Um, first, are there any existing properties, uh, or any existing

[1:49:07] buildings on this property?

[1:49:10] No, there's not. Okay.

[1:49:12] One of them does, but it's very dilating, so it would be upon the

[1:49:15] state to be taken out.

[1:49:17] Okay. That the other two aren't vacant.

[1:49:20] Yeah, cuz I was trying to look on here and it it looked like there

[1:49:22] might have been something that was kind of old and small.

[1:49:24] Yes. Okay.

[1:49:25] Um, and then second, uh, how many duplexes are you expecting to build

[1:49:28] on this property?

[1:49:30] Eight. You just be

[1:49:32] Just one duplex.

[1:49:34] Yeah. Okay.

[1:49:36] Okay.

[1:49:38] one for a lot.

[1:49:39] Yeah. One one per lot.

[1:49:42] Okay.

[1:49:43] I will double check this, but there are it shows three properties

[1:49:47] but those are four separate lots.

[1:49:49] So plat lots.

[1:49:51] But so that could be four duplexes.

[1:49:54] So four four duplexes total.

[1:49:57] I know that we're just speaking for the entity that owns the

[1:50:00] property.

[1:50:01] Okay. The the decision.

[1:50:03] building it or been anything and taking to an engineer or anything like that.

[1:50:07] They draw plans or going plans just to see what it would look like and then they got approval.

[1:50:11] But her idea was to only build one on it.

[1:50:14] It is possible to have more if it was approved and she may go that route.

[1:50:17] But I think the idea was just to build one.

[1:50:22] duplex per lot.

[1:50:23] Gotcha.

[1:50:24] Okay.

[1:50:26] Mayor, that's all my questions.

[1:50:29] Anything else?

[1:50:30] Are these one story or two story?

[1:50:32] This one story.

[1:50:33] two duplexes just double stock.

[1:50:36] I believe that speaking with her,

[1:50:39] Ma'am, uh, would you come forward, please, ma'am?

[1:50:42] to the podium.

[1:50:46] I do believe in speaking with her.

[1:50:49] She's out of the country right now, but I do believe in speaking with her, it was not intended to be two-story.

[1:50:55] I won't say 100%, but I don't think that was the thought.

[1:50:57] It it may go back into the depth of the depth of the lot if allowed per building lines, anything like that. I don't even know if there's easements in the front and the back.

[1:51:05] But there was no talk with me to go up, it was to go back and out.

[1:51:10] Okay.

[1:51:11] Thank you.

[1:51:13] Anything else while we have her?

[1:51:17] All right.

[1:51:21] We'll move to item seven, ordinances.

[1:51:26] Miss Rossom, would you read the caption for item 7A?

[1:51:31] Consider adopting the budget for fiscal year 2027.

[1:51:36] Do I have a motion?

[1:51:38] Mr. Mayor, I move to approve the budget appropriation ordinance as presented.

[1:51:42] Motion by Mr. Parnell, do we have a second?

[1:51:45] Second.

[1:51:47] By Mr. Smith.

[1:51:51] Any discussion?

[1:51:57] Any discussion?

[1:51:59] Hearing none,

[1:52:02] call the question.

[1:52:03] Miss Rossom, please call the roll.

[1:52:06] Councilman Pennell.

[1:52:07] Aye.

[1:52:08] Councilwoman Johnson.

[1:52:10] Aye.

[1:52:10] Councilman Woolsey.

[1:52:12] Aye.

[1:52:13] Councilman Smith.

[1:52:14] Aye.

[1:52:15] Mayor Hill.

[1:52:16] Aye.

[1:52:19] The motion is approved.

[1:52:25] Miss Rossom, would you read the caption for 7B?

[1:52:29] Consider ratifying the property tax increase reflected in the fiscal year 2027 adopted budget

[1:52:36] and acknowledging that the increase raises more in tax revenue than the fiscal year 2026 adopted budget.

[1:52:44] Do I have a motion?

[1:52:46] Mayor, I move to approve the ordinance ratifying the property tax rate increase reflected in the fiscal year 2027 adopted budget and acknowledge that it raises more in tax revenue than the fiscal year 2026 adopted budget.

[1:52:58] Motion by Mr. Woolsey, a second?

[1:53:03] Second.

[1:53:05] Second by Mr. Smith.

[1:53:07] Any discussion?

[1:53:10] Any discussion?

[1:53:15] Hearing none, we'll call the question.

[1:53:17] Miss Rossom, please call the roll.

[1:53:20] Councilwoman Johnson.

[1:53:21] Aye.

[1:53:22] Councilman Woolsey.

[1:53:23] Aye.

[1:53:24] Councilman Smith.

[1:53:25] Aye.

[1:53:26] Councilman Pennell.

[1:53:27] Aye.

[1:53:28] Mayor Hill.

[1:53:29] Aye.

[1:53:31] The motion is approved.

[1:53:36] Miss Rossom, would you read the caption for 7C?

[1:53:39] Consider adopting the tax rate of 0.5208 for fiscal year 2027.

[1:53:48] Do I have a motion?

[1:53:51] Mr. Mayor, I move to approve the property tax rate being increased by the adoption of a tax rate of .5208, which is effectively a 3.46% increase in the tax rate.

[1:54:02] Motion by Mr. Smith, do I have a second?

[1:54:05] Second.

[1:54:07] Second by Mr. Woolsey.

[1:54:09] Discussion, please.

[1:54:12] Any discussion?

[1:54:16] Any discussion?

[1:54:18] Miss Rossom, please call the roll.

[1:54:21] Councilman Woolsey.

[1:54:22] Aye.

[1:54:23] Councilman Smith.

[1:54:24] Aye.

[1:54:24] Councilman Pennell.

[1:54:25] Aye.

[1:54:26] Councilwoman Johnson.

[1:54:28] Nay.

[1:54:29] Mayor Hill.

[1:54:30] Aye.

[1:54:33] The motion is approved.

[1:54:37] Miss Rossom, would you read the caption for 7D?

[1:54:41] Consider amending Chapter 13, entitled Municipal Fees, of the City Code of Ordinances to provide changes, additions, and deletions of certain fees.

[1:54:53] Do I have a motion?

[1:54:56] Mayor, I move to table the amendments as shown to Chapter 13 of the City Code of Ordinances.

[1:55:04] Second.

[1:55:05] Second by Mr. Smith.

[1:55:08] Any discussion?

[1:55:11] Any discussion?

[1:55:14] So my my only discussion on this would be I I think it's in probably

[1:55:19] everyone's best interest if we sit down and revisit all these things

[1:55:24] and have time to talk through the options that are available and make

[1:55:28] sure we understand everything that's being considered that's going to uh

[1:55:32] I mean, to me that's going to impact the total water bill and uh

[1:55:34] make sure we're we're choosing the right path forward.

[1:55:36] And if I may a point of order, I I I believe uh council member

[1:55:40] Johnson erroneously voted contrary to what she her intent on 7C.

[1:55:47] Her intent was 7D. So I think if if we can have, I'm not sure the

[1:55:52] procedure, but she would like to amend the record to reflect a vote

[1:55:55] in favor of 7C.

[1:55:58] I can

[1:56:00] recall.

[1:56:01] [laughter] Sorry.

[1:56:03] Mayor, I move that we recall the roll vote on item 7C.

[1:56:08] Thank you.

[1:56:09] 7C.

[1:56:10] Correct. 7C, Shayla?

[1:56:12] Yes. 7D. It's been a long meeting. It has. Sorry.

[1:56:15] Councilman Woolsey. I.

[1:56:18] Councilman Smith. I.

[1:56:21] Councilman Pennell. I.

[1:56:23] Councilwoman Johnson. I.

[1:56:26] Mayor Hill. I.

[1:56:32] The motion is approved.

[1:56:35] 7D.

[1:56:37] We have a motion by Mr. Wolsey and a second by Mr. Smith.

[1:56:42] Discussion, please.

[1:56:48] Anything further than Mr. Wolsey's comment?

[1:56:54] Anything else?

[1:56:58] Miss Roson, would you call the roll, please?

[1:57:02] Councilman Smith. I.

[1:57:06] Councilman Pennell. I.

[1:57:08] Councilwoman Johnson. I.

[1:57:10] Councilman Woolsey. I.

[1:57:12] Mayor Hill. I.

[1:57:15] Motion is approved.

[1:57:19] Miss Roson, uh the caption for item 7 E, please.

[1:57:25] Receive public input regarding a request for a zone change from single

[1:57:31] family residential 3 to the light industrial district for properties

[1:57:36] located at block 1470, part of lot 5 and lot 6 through 14, block

[1:57:40] 1472, lots 4 through 13 and 19 through 27, block 1473 lot 1,

[1:57:46] and the unplatted property at blocks 1473 through 1475.

[1:57:55] Also known as property IDs 27231, 27242, 34159, 34160, 51615 through

[1:58:00] 51617, and 124265. Being approximately 10.8 acres off of

[1:58:06] GW Jackson Avenue and including 2015 and 2017 GW Jackson Avenue.

[1:58:25] Do I have a motion?

[1:58:27] Mayor, I move to approve a request for zone change from the single family

[1:58:31] residential district 3 or R3 to the light industrial I1 district from

[1:58:36] properties located at block 1470, part of lot 5, lot 6 to 14, block

[1:58:40] 1472, lots 4 through 13 and 19 through 27, block 1473, lot 1,

[1:58:46] and the unplatted property at blocks 1473 to 1475. Call lots 1 and 2,

[1:58:51] also known as his 27231, 27242, 34159, 34160, 51615, 51617, and

[1:58:56] 124265. Being approximately 10.8 acres off GW Jackson Avenue including

[1:59:01] uh 2015 the 2015 and 2017 GW Jackson Avenue.

[1:59:30] Woo! Can you repeat that, please?

[1:59:33] No. [laughter]

[1:59:35] Mayor, I'd like to give Shayla the award for reading the longest motion

[1:59:40] I think I've ever experienced in my time on council.

[1:59:42] Thank you.

[1:59:44] Do we have a second to that heroic effort?

[1:59:47] Second.

[1:59:48] Second by Mr. Pennell. You get a gold star too, sir.

[1:59:52] Do we have any discussion?

[1:59:54] Any discussion?

[1:59:58] Hearing none, we'll call the question. Miss Roson, please call the roll.

[2:00:03] Councilman Penell? I.

[2:00:05] Councilwoman Johnson? I.

[2:00:06] Councilman Woolsey? I.

[2:00:08] Councilman Smith? I.

[2:00:10] Mayor Hill? I.

[2:00:12] The motion is approved.

[2:00:16] Miss Rosson, would you read the caption for 7F?

[2:00:22] Receive public input regarding a

[2:00:26] request for a zone change from

[2:00:28] single family residential district

[2:00:31] 3 to the two family residential district for the properties located

[2:00:36] at block 232, lot C D E F

[2:00:38] and property IDs 32658,

[2:00:41] 32659 and 32660, also known as

[2:00:44] 717, 731 and 735 North Commerce Street.

[2:00:49] Do I have a motion?

[2:00:52] Mayor, I move to approve a request for a zoning change

[2:00:55] from the single-family residential

[2:00:58] District R3 district to the two- family residential District 2F

[2:01:00] for the properties located at block 232, lots C, D, E and F

[2:01:04] property IDs 32658, 32659

[2:01:07] and 32660, also known as 717,

[2:01:12] 731 and 735 North Commerce Street.

[2:01:19] Do I have a second?

[2:01:20] Second.

[2:01:22] Second, by Mr. Smith.

[2:01:24] Any discussion?

[2:01:29] [laughter] Other than the fact that Mr. Woolsey had the second longest.

[2:01:34] Congratulations.

[2:01:37] [laughter]

[2:01:39] Miss Rosson, would you please call the roll?

[2:01:42] Councilman Penell?

[2:01:44] Say again?

[2:01:45] Councilman Penell? I.

[2:01:47] Councilwoman Johnson? I.

[2:01:50] Councilman Woolsey? I.

[2:01:51] Councilman Smith? I.

[2:01:53] Mayor Hill? I.

[2:01:55] And the motion is approved.

[2:02:00] Mr. Rosson, would you read the caption for item 8?

[2:02:06] Consider approving, waving of a portion of the reversionary interest

[2:02:10] on block 508, lot 8R, also known as 1402 East 9th Avenue,

[2:02:13] in the City of Corsicana and authorizing execution by the Mayor

[2:02:18] and providing for an effective date.

[2:02:25] Plate.

[2:02:28] To clarify, this is 8A. I'm on the correct one, right? Okay.

[2:02:32] Okay.

[2:02:33] So, um, this is a, uh, resolution to waive a portion

[2:02:38] of liquidated, liquidated damages,

[2:02:43] uh, from a infill lot that was on the previous section of the program

[2:02:47] that was, uh, done in 2021.

[2:02:52] So, Mr. Alexis, Eloa, and you're here with us,

[2:02:55] and I apologize for missing your name.

[2:02:58] Alim Homes, uh, Investment Homes Incorporated purchased the property

[2:03:01] at block 508, lots, uh, nine and a half of eight.

[2:03:06] replat into lot 8R, uh, 1402 East 9th Avenue,

[2:03:10] in August, uh, on August 3rd, 2021 as an infill lot.

[2:03:15] Infill program is designed to encourage timely construction of affordable housing.

[2:03:20] The contract for the infill lot program includes a reversionary right and penalty

[2:03:25] addendum in which the buyer has six months from the closing date to start

[2:03:29] construction and be issued a building permit by the City of Corsicana.

[2:03:33] If construction is not started within the six months,

[2:03:35] then the seller has the right to reacquire title to the property.

[2:03:38] The buyer then has 18 months after that six-month time frame assuming

[2:03:42] a, uh, construction is started.

[2:03:45] Uh, 18 months from the closing date to complete the construction and obtain

[2:03:49] a certificate of occupancy from, uh,

[2:03:52] for the residential structure from the City of Corsicana.

[2:03:56] There is a liquidated damage of $50 per day for each day that the construction

[2:03:59] is not complete over the 18-month time frame.

[2:04:04] So the history of this lot is that, uh, the six-month deadline from the closing

[2:04:08] date of August 3rd, 2021 to start construction was January 31st,

[2:04:11] 2022.

[2:04:15] Uh, but Mr. Uoa, Uoa, Uoa?

[2:04:19] Alex. You spelled me Alex. Alex.

[2:04:21] , um, was granted a permit on June 13th, uh, 2024.

[2:04:27] Construction has completed and the certificate of occupancy was and is

[2:04:31] able to be granted as of August 24th, 2026.

[2:04:37] Mr. Alex would owe liquidated damages of $64,900 due to the

[2:04:41] 1,298 days over the 18-month deadline

[2:04:46] from the date of the closure of the contract.

[2:04:52] However, he should not have been granted a permit on June 13th, 2024

[2:04:56] due to the six-month time frame to start construction already having been passed.

[2:05:02] If the 18.

[2:05:03] 18 month time frame where to be considered the start at to start at the time

[2:05:07] he was granted a permit, which is June 13th, 2024.

[2:05:10] Uh the construction time would be 254 days over that 18-month deadline,

[2:05:16] which would be December 13th, 2025.

[2:05:19] and would instead owe liquidated damages of 12,700

[2:05:23] from the 64,900 which it currently stands.

[2:05:27] So the city is requesting that uh the council consider waving

[2:05:31] a portion of the liquidated damages and the removal

[2:05:34] of a portion of the reversionary interest for the property

[2:05:38] located at block 508 lot 8R,

[2:05:41] 1402 East 9th Avenue from $64,900 to $12,700.

[2:05:46] And if you have any questions for myself or uh Alex,

[2:05:49] uh we'd be happy to answer them.

[2:05:51] I do. I do have because this is actually in my precinct. Mr. Alex.

[2:05:55] Um, my question to um, you, Clayton is, how do we miss this? Because

[2:06:01] I know that we started reverting lots back, the ones who did not meet

[2:06:07] the deadline, and so how did this property slip through the cracks?

[2:06:11] That's my first question.

[2:06:15] I can't exactly say because this was the permit was done before I

[2:06:20] started.

[2:06:22] And the the infill lots, the reversions uh of lots

[2:06:25] that have made no progress was started.

[2:06:30] Um, I want to say six months ago, probably a little more.

[2:06:35] Uh, but this, the permit was granted in 2024, June 13th of 24.

[2:06:40] I did not, I looked, I couldn't find any documentation or um,

[2:06:44] any special comments or anything as to why a permit was

[2:06:47] granted for this property.

[2:06:51] Uh, I don't know if there was a conversation that was had

[2:06:53] that is not recorded anywhere,

[2:06:55] but I couldn't say why a permit was granted on this property.

[2:07:02] Okay.

[2:07:06] Can Mr. Alex address that? Who granted you the permit?

[2:07:11] And that process for receiving the permit?

[2:07:14] Okay, number one, thank you very much.

[2:07:17] Mayor Joe, everybody in the council.

[2:07:20] Um, long history short.

[2:07:23] I um, I was traveling quite a bit at that moment.

[2:07:27] I had some other folks working for me.

[2:07:31] And therefore, I just remember talking to somebody uh from the city.

[2:07:37] About the fact, um, we didn't even, my understanding was that it was a

[2:07:41] five-year at some point, I read on some documents

[2:07:44] that it was a five-year period to build.

[2:07:51] Nevertheless, I I last the the the documentation that it says

[2:07:55] anything about that.

[2:07:58] I now noticed that I did sign a a document that he says that it

[2:08:03] was within 18 month that I that I had to start uh six month

[2:08:08] to start building and 18 month to build it.

[2:08:12] Long history short.

[2:08:16] I had a a manager that was supposed to be at the front of the project.

[2:08:24] He miss did the project.

[2:08:28] It is obviously it is my fault. I'm the one who's responsible for it.

[2:08:33] Uh, therefore, at one point back in last year in January was when I

[2:08:38] finally find out that uh, well,

[2:08:41] not that I finally find out, I came to the conclusion that I

[2:08:44] didn't have enough money

[2:08:45] to continue and finish the building.

[2:08:49] At that um, because I was trying to finish some other uh some other

[2:08:54] projects that I had.

[2:08:58] But I was already in contract with some other investors over here

[2:09:04] that we were going to do the investment.

[2:09:08] Because of the mismanagement of the project, what I end up happening

[2:09:12] was that some of the contractors didn't do their work that's

[2:09:16] supposed to be doing.

[2:09:19] So I have to end that paying double for the same job.

[2:09:23] And as it turns out, obviously the project went way beyond

[2:09:29] beyond uh the the the budget.

[2:09:35] Therefore, as it is right now, we're in in the budget on the project

[2:09:38] itself, we're like 20, 30,000 above what the market price

[2:09:43] would be for a finished house right now.

[2:09:49] Just the way it is.

[2:09:51] And I know that does not nobody's fault over here, it is all my fault.

[2:09:57] But one of the things that I wanted to ask you, and I know that this is

[2:10:00] just going to be something that will be just

[2:10:03] on the kindness of your heart

[2:10:05] is because these other investors over here

[2:10:07] they're they're really trusted me

[2:10:10] and they're in the hole over $30,000

[2:10:14] above the project.

[2:10:16] and they still have to go finish

[2:10:19] another house on on the block of 600 on E 17th Street.

[2:10:26] Which I'm I'm already out, meaning,

[2:10:29] I already know that I'm not making anything.

[2:10:33] I'm beyond all spending all my money.

[2:10:38] If I'm asking you to be, you know, to to consider that.

[2:10:44] And even to go as far as even considering lowering

[2:10:48] or not having to pay that

[2:10:52] is because in their case

[2:10:55] the total amount is going to be over 100,000

[2:10:58] that they're in the hole.

[2:11:01] And they just hoping

[2:11:04] to actually be able to at one point be able to recuperate their money.

[2:11:11] So, I don't know if that was kind of like a long, long answer, but

[2:11:15] I wanted to mention that.

[2:11:17] Clayton, you mentioned that um the revision of these

[2:11:20] infill lots didn't start till recently.

[2:11:25] So, when he was in violation of starting on time,

[2:11:30] what was the common practice was was the city just ignoring that

[2:11:34] for everybody?

[2:11:36] For lots that have not started and maybe pulled a permit.

[2:11:42] I'm only, I went through so the the I'm

[2:11:47] I didn't haven't seen

[2:11:51] most of the lots that were in the infill program that didn't get

[2:11:53] executed from what I've seen

[2:11:56] were for uh the applicant pulling out.

[2:11:59] I don't think I've seen any that have had the reversionary

[2:12:02] finalized,

[2:12:05] um or let me take a step back from that.

[2:12:11] I don't know what the process was before.

[2:12:13] I didn't none of 'em have been uh reverted when we started

[2:12:16] going through the reversions.

[2:12:19] Um it was a backlog of

[2:12:23] not so many, I think like 12 to 15 if I'm recalling correctly.

[2:12:27] Uh, but I hadn't seen any documentation on certified

[2:12:30] letters being sent

[2:12:32] that you were in possession of a lot that you failed to

[2:12:36] execute your part of the deed on or the contract.

[2:12:41] Clayton, let's I mean, the reality is, uh it's difficult for us

[2:12:44] to speak to whatever happened back then

[2:12:47] but we did have about a year ago, we changed the process

[2:12:50] and we tightened it up

[2:12:52] and as you all know, we also changed some of the rules

[2:12:54] and some of our practices relative to the infill program.

[2:12:57] But we also understand that the infill program's main purpose

[2:13:00] is to get a house built.

[2:13:02] And that's what we're really trying to do here versus

[2:13:05] enforcing a contract.

[2:13:07] Uh, but our recommendation here is to uh uh give up some of the

[2:13:12] fines, if you will, that are there for the purpose of speeding up

[2:13:18] the project itself, but not all of them.

[2:13:22] And uh that and we are glad that you built a house on that site.

[2:13:27] And we hope to get more of these infill lots filled

[2:13:31] and we'll do, we will continue our due diligence to tighten up

[2:13:34] the process so that these things don't slip through the cracks, so to speak.

[2:13:38] Um, Miss Alex, I will say, uh standing in the precinct, I'm very

[2:13:41] familiar with that house that you are referring to.

[2:13:45] Um, some of the disappointments

[2:13:46] that I've seen on that property is that

[2:13:48] it took for code enforcement to come out several times because

[2:13:51] the trash that the builders had on that property were blowing

[2:13:55] into a property next door,

[2:13:57] um, which is a senior citizen and

[2:14:00] it took quite a while for them to come and fix that.

[2:14:05] Um, the grass, they would leave the grass unmowed where code enforcement

[2:14:09] has to come out and give warnings.

[2:14:11] And so I'm all about grace because we have given grace for these

[2:14:15] infill lots before.

[2:14:19] Um, what I am what I am implying is

[2:14:23] when you want grace, you have to make sure that you're crossing your tees

[2:14:27] and dotting your eyes as far as helping

[2:14:29] keep the maintenance up, keep the trash out.

[2:14:32] like if to me, they whoever was building it was leaving it for

[2:14:35] months at a time.

[2:14:37] Because I watched the progress of that house.

[2:14:39] And they would leave for months, two, three months and then they would come

[2:14:42] back and work on a little piece and then they'll leave again.

[2:14:45] And my question was, is this a probably own lot or

[2:14:50] That I'm I'm sorry, go ahead.

[2:14:53] No, and then I saw it was for, you had a for sale sign on it.

[2:14:57] Um, and then you took the for sale sign down and now it's a rental

[2:15:00] property, correct?

[2:15:01] You're putting that up as a rental.

[2:15:03] property. And so what I was saying

[2:15:06] if someone rent your property out,

[2:15:08] you're probably going to make that 12,000 back in a year.

[2:15:11] because I'm pretty I'm not.

[2:15:13] Unless actually what happens is

[2:15:16] I got my hard money lender over here,

[2:15:18] who was for closing on the house last month.

[2:15:22] He didn't for close because that penalty was there.

[2:15:27] And he knew that if he for closed the house,

[2:15:30] and then that debt was not going to be forgiven.

[2:15:34] Now, I got them over here, they trusted me on on building the house.

[2:15:40] And again, I I agree with you.

[2:15:42] and one of the reasons why literally now, I have no employees.

[2:15:48] is because part of the reason on how they mismanage the project.

[2:15:54] Obviously, again, it's my fault.

[2:15:56] I'm not I'm not blaming somebody else, okay?

[2:16:00] And anything that you do,

[2:16:02] forgive, I am not getting not a penny.

[2:16:07] My my the guys that invested with me.

[2:16:11] They're hoping.

[2:16:14] They're hoping that at one point down the road,

[2:16:18] they can at least get their money back.

[2:16:23] Now, him in the other hand, he already knows.

[2:16:27] No matter what, he's getting his his money.

[2:16:30] Because if he for closes on the house right now,

[2:16:35] he didn't, you know, the amount of money that we paid to end that building it.

[2:16:41] And I'm not blaming him.

[2:16:43] Don't give me wrong. I'm not saying he, you know, it's something wrong with him.

[2:16:45] He's he's doing his business and that that is what he's doing.

[2:16:49] All I'm asking is for forgiveness, not for me.

[2:16:53] I'm already losing way over.

[2:16:56] I'm out.

[2:16:58] They're the ones who completely going to lose with me.

[2:17:03] So when I'm asking for you to forgive me,

[2:17:06] is not for me. I'm already out.

[2:17:09] Meaning, I already know I'm losing.

[2:17:12] I have lost everything.

[2:17:14] But you know, excuse me. I'm going to stop it just a minute.

[2:17:16] What sort of extension do you have from your investor that says that

[2:17:20] he's not going to or whoever is not going to for close?

[2:17:23] Well, that was one of the things that I was trying to arrange

[2:17:26] just before we got here.

[2:17:28] I was like, look, if you don't work with them,

[2:17:32] I'm going to tell them not to forgive the loan because

[2:17:37] you're going to get a house for less.

[2:17:41] So, that was something that I was talking to him and and

[2:17:44] just before we got here, he's like,

[2:17:46] you're treating me like a mafia guy, you know, torturing me.

[2:17:50] I'm like, I'm not torturing you.

[2:17:52] I'm telling you, these guys are going to lose their, you know,

[2:17:55] all their investment.

[2:17:56] All I'm asking you is to help work with them.

[2:18:00] And that's what I'm, you know, basically asking you.

[2:18:03] I'm taking 100% responsibility

[2:18:06] and that's why I'm not making any money on this thing.

[2:18:10] If you were taking 100% responsibility, you'd pay them 649.

[2:18:13] Oh, no, I'm I'm I still going to be paying them some.

[2:18:17] Uh,

[2:18:20] I think I have a bit of an issue of of an issue of of us the city reducing by however much

[2:18:26] I just, you know, from 649 to 127.

[2:18:30] So an investor can sit around and for turn around and for close and then

[2:18:33] make that extra money. I'm not doing that.

[2:18:36] So, I'm going to vote to table this until you get some sort of agreement

[2:18:39] with your investor that he's not going to for close his property.

[2:18:42] for six months, eight months, something like that.

[2:18:45] Thank you. problem. Thank you. Sure.

[2:18:52] And while he's on his way to the podium, I will say that investment involves risk.

[2:18:58] Truth. Investment involves risk.

[2:19:00] And while I may have compassion on someone losing their money on an

[2:19:03] investment,

[2:19:05] I'm really not crazy about passing that on to taxpayers, the loss

[2:19:08] on the taxpayers. I understand.

[2:19:12] I will say the $12,000, if we were if we would have granted you $12,000,

[2:19:18] whoever was ringing your house out, I know I know for sure is going to pay

[2:19:21] that back in the first year.

[2:19:22] So you're really not.

[2:19:24] I mean, that somebody's paying that that fee. I'm not for that.

[2:19:28] Is this house for rent or for sale?

[2:19:30] Yeah, I'm so I'm not for that.

[2:19:33] Is this house for sale? speak up here.

[2:19:37] Why don't you come up first?

[2:19:40] Sorry, I'm not trying to take control.

[2:19:42] So, the initial idea was to build a home and sell it

[2:19:48] because of all the delays, the price increases on

[2:19:52] not only labor, but also materials.

[2:19:57] increased the cost of building it.

[2:20:00] He delayed the project for too long.

[2:20:04] We kept asking what's going on.

[2:20:07] We never got a straight answer.

[2:20:09] But now we're stuck with the property.

[2:20:11] In terms of the mowing, I've been doing that myself.

[2:20:14] We're not, it's me and my wife.

[2:20:16] We're not a big company with millions of dollars.

[2:20:20] Can you state your name, sir?

[2:20:22] Oh, sorry. Lenin Aguilar.

[2:20:24] Lenin, L E N I N.

[2:20:26] Aguilar, A G U I L A R.

[2:20:30] And so,

[2:20:30] are you the one that you moved

[2:20:33] No.

[2:20:35] No, so I'm one of the investors on [inaudible] with Eloa to build the home.

[2:20:41] And so, if the Harmony lender had foreclosed on the property,

[2:20:46] we would have lost all the money we put in the property.

[2:20:50] Even after we knew there was an issue in finishing up the house,

[2:20:55] I took money out of my 401k to finish the home

[2:20:58] in order to get the occupancy code,

[2:21:01] be able to either sell it or rent it.

[2:21:04] We put up the sign saying coming up soon for rent.

[2:21:08] And I've had probably 20 calls.

[2:21:10] And I've got their phone number saved because

[2:21:12] there's a need for rental properties in that area.

[2:21:16] We also, once we figure this property out, we would like to finish

[2:21:21] the other property that we invested with him as well.

[2:21:24] And another lot, that we're trying to finish both of them.

[2:21:30] And we're not going to get our money back right away.

[2:21:32] It won't be a year.

[2:21:33] Even if you rent it, we're taking a loan from a bank

[2:21:37] to be able to pay him,

[2:21:40] so we don't have to worry about him foreclosing

[2:21:42] and we take ownership of the house and try to manage that

[2:21:45] while we work full-time jobs.

[2:21:47] This was not our plan from the beginning.

[2:21:50] It was just to build it and sell it.

[2:21:52] [rustling]

[2:21:54] So, when you talk about mowing,

[2:21:56] I've been doing that myself on both homes.

[2:21:58] Okay.

[2:21:59] Okay. Yeah, so trying to keep it clean and try to, uh,

[2:22:03] try to be ready for after this,

[2:22:07] think the wheels start turning to try to

[2:22:10] get it done and either sell it or rent it.

[2:22:13] But I think because of how much money we put into it,

[2:22:15] we won't be able to sell it and get all of our investment.

[2:22:20] We will have to rent it.

[2:22:21] Probably keep it for three to five years,

[2:22:24] and then up and see what the market says and then maybe look at selling it.

[2:22:30] Okay. And who's the gentleman behind you?

[2:22:32] Yes.

[2:22:33] [inaudible]

[2:22:34] My name is Daniel Jones.

[2:22:35] Um, I'm the uh, I originally funded the property with uh, Mr. Eloa.

[2:22:43] Um, I was never aware there was another investor involved.

[2:22:46] Uh, we we went through, we have a promissory note,

[2:22:49] we have a deed of trust with Mr. Eloa is the owner of the property,

[2:22:54] and I'm listed on the deed as a lender.

[2:22:57] Um, it just came to my attention about three months ago

[2:22:59] that there was a reversionary clause that's

[2:23:01] that he had a certain time to build.

[2:23:03] I didn't know that I wasn't aware there was a $50 a day fine.

[2:23:07] Excuse me, sir, but can you speak into the microphone?

[2:23:09] We can't hear you.

[2:23:10] Oh, sorry.

[2:23:12] So I wasn't aware that there was a reversionary clause

[2:23:14] and there was a $50 a fine.

[2:23:16] And that's why I've given Mr. Eloa more time than I normally do

[2:23:20] to finish the project.

[2:23:23] And three months ago, he made me aware

[2:23:25] that there was an investor involved.

[2:23:27] Um, because I was going to foreclose because Mr. Eloa

[2:23:29] hasn't been making his monthly payments on the note.

[2:23:33] So in order to help Mr. Aguilar

[2:23:36] and also the reversionary clause that came,

[2:23:38] well, first before I decided to foreclose,

[2:23:41] I was trying to work with both

[2:23:43] and told him if you start making payments today,

[2:23:46] you know, I'll postpone, I won't foreclose.

[2:23:49] Okay, they made one payment, then they went two months without.

[2:23:52] And I finally said, you know, because this been going on for years.

[2:23:55] Normally my loans are six months with a three-month extension,

[2:23:59] and I've been letting it go on for two years.

[2:24:01] Trying to help Mr. Eloa, and now

[2:24:04] I was trying to help Mr. Aguilar now that I know he's involved.

[2:24:07] And so with the reversionary clause with that amount of fine

[2:24:11] and the amount of money that is owed to me on the original loan

[2:24:15] and the amount of money that's owed Mr. Aguilar,

[2:24:18] it is way upside down.

[2:24:19] Even if you don't include the money that's Mr. Aguilar has put

[2:24:22] in,

[2:24:23] which I don't I've never verified how much that is,

[2:24:26] the matter that he owes me plus the $65,000 fine,

[2:24:28] if I go to foreclosure,

[2:24:30] that house and it's you know, it's brand new,

[2:24:33] but it's only a thousand something square feet.

[2:24:35] It's only worth 200,000.

[2:24:37] There's more that's owed on it than, you know, it's upside down.

[2:24:43] And that's why with the reversionary fine, you know,

[2:24:46] I don't know what would happen in foreclosure.

[2:24:49] Uh,

[2:24:51] if the house sells for a certain dollar amount,

[2:24:52] whoever picks up that house, I assume they inherit that fine.

[2:24:57] So Mr. Eloa, the person that's responsible for this,

[2:25:00] won't he won't be responsible for the fine.

[2:25:04] And if Mr. Oh, it wouldn't be paid at closing. So it would be paid at closing. So somebody's going to pay it at closing.

[2:25:11] Well, if it goes to foreclosure, um, whatever the price sells for.

[2:25:18] Right.

[2:25:19] I I don't know. I don't know for sure if they would know

[2:25:21] about the fine, whoever's bidding on the house.

[2:25:24] Right.

[2:25:25] What what's the status of you

[2:25:26] being able to get another loan to pay this man off?

[2:25:30] Have you gotten that far? You just mentioned it, have you gotten that far?

[2:25:33] He he has the loan approved.

[2:25:35] Yeah, so

[2:25:37] we were going to close on the purchase on August 31st.

[2:25:42] And that's when we found out about what it was owed to the city.

[2:25:49] And so we couldn't close.

[2:25:52] The bank is waiting to hear what the final decision is today.

[2:25:55] to close on the house and move forward with it and be done with it.

[2:26:01] Okay, Mr. Panell.

[2:26:04] I agree with you that you don't want the taxpayers to not have a burden or absorb whatever.

[2:26:09] But this is a penalty, it's not something that is costing the taxpayers anything?

[2:26:15] I think I still would like to table this to get documentation from the bank saying we will do this if the city does whatever.

[2:26:23] Because right now there's just a whole bunch of excuses flying around the room and it's been two and a half, three years.

[2:26:28] So,

[2:26:29] Anybody else have anything else?

[2:26:30] The only thing I would say about not costing the taxpayers anything is any lack of revenue to the city, we still it comes from somewhere.

[2:26:38] True.

[2:26:39] So,

[2:26:41] And I don't want to sit up here and be the arbiter of these disputes, and I don't want to set a precedent that we're going to do this.

[2:26:46] Right.

[2:26:47] Right.

[2:26:48] I do want to house, I I want to generate some income for the city for that property, but this is a mess.

[2:26:54] This is what I can't count on.

[2:26:55] and I feel inadequate making a decision tonight based

[2:27:00] there there's a lack of due diligence on everybody's part here.

[2:27:04] Yep.

[2:27:05] And um,

[2:27:07] So,

[2:27:10] I support taling it.

[2:27:12] I do too.

[2:27:13] You support what?

[2:27:14] Taling the the motion and not deciding tonight.

[2:27:18] It would be two weeks.

[2:27:19] Next meeting will be at two weeks.

[2:27:21] If if that's

[2:27:22] So there'll be another hearing?

[2:27:24] Oh, yes.

[2:27:25] Oh, okay.

[2:27:27] Do you have something else you'd like to say?

[2:27:29] Well, I mean, it's been brought to my attention by the permitting department that

[2:27:33] he should have never been given, you know, the permit to begin with,

[2:27:37] since he didn't follow the conditions of the contract.

[2:27:40] Agreed.

[2:27:41] So if that would have happened, none of us would be in any of this mess.

[2:27:44] I agree.

[2:27:45] Here, so in my eyes, the city kind dropped the ball.

[2:27:49] And the only person that's not going to pay is Mr. Yola.

[2:27:51] It's either going to be Mr. Aguilar or me as a lender that's going to end up paying the fine.

[2:27:56] Because the house isn't worth as much as much as it's owed on it and and including the fine.

[2:28:03] Yeah.

[2:28:04] Clayton, Sue signatures are on that paperwork.

[2:28:06] Yeah. On the permit.

[2:28:10] The permit.

[2:28:12] Um,

[2:28:24] So I did not print out the permit.

[2:28:27] I printed out the issued permit, but it doesn't have signatures on it.

[2:28:31] I can get that. We do have it in our system, but I don't have it right here with me.

[2:28:37] I think I remember, but I would rather come back and send a copy or something like that than just guess.

[2:28:44] Yeah, we're going to table it.

[2:28:46] The original contract was signed when?

[2:28:48] 2021.

[2:28:50] Did any of you read the contract?

[2:28:53] I mean, this is really about an extension of time that you all wanted in order to finish the house.

[2:29:02] But whatever the circumstances are in terms of your investment and your understanding of it, it's clear on the contract originally what

[2:29:09] the what in fact was expected.

[2:29:13] So it had gone two years without being built already before, in fact, that

[2:29:18] whether it was wrong or right to issue a permit, to give you more time to finish the house.

[2:29:23] So I don't know that the city is at fault here, I think it's basically,

[2:29:27] you know, that's your issue, your investment and the risk that come with the investment.

[2:29:33] And we here today are really dealing with the contract itself that's in front of us.

[2:29:38] and what we're willing to in fact defer in terms of that, in terms of that fine.

[2:29:43] Clayton, how big is this lot?

[2:29:46] 75 by 125, I believe.

[2:29:49] Oh, so just kind of a normal, what a .18 acre lot or something like that.

[2:29:55] A little wider than a standard R3.

[2:29:57] Okay.

[2:29:58] What's

[2:30:00] I mean, I'm going to say this just just just to get some resolution because this just seems like lots of mistakes.

[2:30:06] were made on lots of parts and this is a mess.

[2:30:08] Um, to me, I would say cut this to 30,000.

[2:30:12] that if if I am a, you know, private seller with a lot that

[2:30:16] size, 30 to 35 is gonna be roughly market value.

[2:30:19] In my mind, I would just treat that as a market sale rather

[2:30:21] than an infill lot and just be done with it.

[2:30:24] [paper rustling]

[2:30:31] Do you wish to make a motion on that?

[2:30:33] What what percentage completion is the house?

[2:30:35] I don't agree with that one.

[2:30:36] It's it's got to it's ready to have the CO signed,

[2:30:40] but we wanted to bring it to the council first to have this resolved or some kind of discussion.

[2:30:45] It's it's finished for all intents and purposes.

[2:30:49] It's had its final inspections all done.

[2:30:51] [paper rustling]

[2:30:55] Now I will say um as part of that six-month thing in the contract, the reversionary right and penalty,

[2:31:02] Uh if buyer does not begin the construction within six months

[2:31:06] of closing date, the sellers reserve the right to require the title

[2:31:09] uh to the property pursuant to the special warranty deed provisions,

[2:31:12] so on and so forth.

[2:31:15] So the the logic behind treating the the date of the permit

[2:31:19] being issued as that start

[2:31:22] and then 18 months and then $50 a day beyond that,

[2:31:25] is assuming that when the permit was granted,

[2:31:29] that extension past the six month, the the reserving the right to

[2:31:36] either take it or leave it, it was left for some reason.

[2:31:43] Can I say a motion?

[2:31:45] That's why I'm requesting that the fine be dropped

[2:31:48] to 12,700 because that's 18 months

[2:31:50] from the time that the permit was granted and that's per the contract.

[2:31:54] is 18 months after the permit is contracted.

[2:31:56] Now, it was permitted way late,

[2:31:59] but according to the contract, it should it's 18 months after the permit.

[2:32:04] that the $50 a day.

[2:32:06] Pardon me? It's 18 months after the closing date. After the closing date.

[2:32:11] Well, I'm just asking that since he shouldn't have never been granted

[2:32:14] a permit because he waited two years instead of what is it, three

[2:32:18] months to start?

[2:32:18] Six months. Since he waited two years to start instead of six months,

[2:32:22] that you be lenient and just and do the 12,700 to 18 months after the permit.

[2:32:28] 24. That's 20,600. 20,000. It's a penalty.

[2:32:33] Uh because basically, like I said, the person that's going to end up paying for this is not the person that caused the problem.

[2:32:39] It's going to be this investor here or me as a lender, who we're just finding out about this.

[2:32:44] right when we can.

[2:32:45] gen is the permit permitting office required to look at what? If you get

[2:32:52] If you wish to speak, ma'am, you have to speak, ma'am, you have to come up up forward and talk at the podium so that we can hear you.

[2:32:58] Well, and and

[2:33:00] um someone in the audience had a very good question: Can the council constitutionally forgive it that?

[2:33:06] I I don't know the answer to that.

[2:33:08] That's a good question.

[2:33:10] Well, then we need to we need that answer before

[2:33:13] Absolutely. Anything else. Absolutely. time to one.

[2:33:16] Did did you Anybody hear what she said?

[2:33:18] Can you can you restate?

[2:33:19] constitutionally forgive it like this?

[2:33:22] We've had some some mowing leans and things like that where we can compromise

[2:33:25] a little bit, but you need to look carefully at whether we can just forgive that.

[2:33:30] I think yeah, I think I think

[2:33:31] Mowing lanes don't have contracts. This has a contract.

[2:33:33] further

[2:33:34] Mowing lanes don't have a contract, this has a contract.

[2:33:37] So we may be state bound to do this.

[2:33:39] the city. You can't just forgive a debt. It doesn't work that way.

[2:33:41] The Constitution says you can't.

[2:33:45] I'll make a motion to table this. Second.

[2:33:49] Motion been made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Wolsey, that we table

[2:33:54] this subject for further consideration.

[2:33:58] Any questions to this motion?

[2:34:03] Nope.

[2:34:05] call the question all in favor of tabling the subject, please say I.

[2:34:09] Aye.

[2:34:10] Opposed, no.

[2:34:11] Motion carries.

[2:34:16] Good point. Thank you.

[2:34:19] Clayton, if I may ask, did Planning and Zoning see this issue?

[2:34:25] Did the Planning and Zoning Committee see this issue?

[2:34:30] This uh the the the infill lot?

[2:34:33] No, they have not. I didn't

[2:34:36] it wasn't as far as I understand it previous ones where debt was

[2:34:39] forgiven on infill lots, we're not brought to planning and zoning.

[2:34:42] They were brought as a resolution to City Council.

[2:34:47] Okay.

[2:34:50] I'd like to get a copy of that permit, that signed permit.

[2:34:52] I'll send that to you. Thank you.

[2:34:56] We almost there.

[2:35:00] there's nothing further on this subject but due to the motion, uh Miss Rossen, would you read the caption for item 8B.

[2:35:07] Consider authorizing award of bids for water wastewater chemicals

[2:35:11] for fiscal year 2027.

[2:35:15] Chair recognizes Mr. Jason Beard, our environmental services director.

[2:35:22] Yes, good evening, Mayor and Council.

[2:35:24] I'll bring to you tonight the chemical bids

[2:35:27] for the fiscal year 2027.

[2:35:29] We did receive bids again this year.

[2:35:32] I believe we received a good number of qualified bids.

[2:35:36] Uh we do have some recommendations in here for the bids to move forward with.

[2:35:43] And just a note, uh fiscal year 26 chemicals cost around 1,169,000.

[2:35:49] And this year we're looking at right around that 1,154,000.

[2:35:56] Uh so, kind of interesting to see them stay a little bit flat this year.

[2:36:01] Um, I don't know if that's just because they've gone up so much in the last

[2:36:05] five years and they're just kind of high enough they figure or but

[2:36:08] uh good good news for us though and not seeing a major increase this year.

[2:36:13] [laughter]

[2:36:21] Anything further, Jason?

[2:36:22] Not unless y'all have any questions.

[2:36:24] Any any questions?

[2:36:26] Just thank you for all you do.

[2:36:28] Thank you.

[2:36:30] Not sure how you pull that off, but well done.

[2:36:32] [laughter]

[2:36:34] Brief. We like this.

[2:36:36] [laughter]

[2:36:38] because you got them so tired that they didn't question.

[2:36:41] Do we have a motion?

[2:36:42] Mayor, I move to approve award of bids for water and wastewater

[2:36:47] chemicals to the recommended bidders.

[2:36:48] Motion by Mr. Woolsey. Do we have a second?

[2:36:51] Second.

[2:36:52] Second by Mr. Panell.

[2:36:54] Any further discussion?

[2:36:57] Hearing none, all in favor, please say I.

[2:37:00] Aye. Aye.

[2:37:02] Oppose no.

[2:37:03] And the motion is approved.

[2:37:08] Miss Rawson, the uh caption for 8C, please.

[2:37:13] Consider approving a development agreement between the City of Corsicana

[2:37:17] and the Humane Society of Navarro County.

[2:37:20] Mr. Holgerson.

[2:37:22] Yes, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. This this is a slight revision to the

[2:37:26] original development agreement that extends the piece of property a little

[2:37:29] to the east.

[2:37:31] Uh and it's about 7 .72 acres total.

[2:37:35] As you recall, we had the footprint for the building at 2500 square feet

[2:37:37] in the beginning.

[2:37:38] The Humane Society would like they have some plans for future development

[2:37:43] that relate to their to the Humane Society function and purpose.

[2:37:46] And we would recommend that this development agreement be approved.

[2:37:54] Any questions?

[2:37:56] Any comments for Mr. Holgerson?

[2:38:02] Hearing none.

[2:38:05] All in favor, please indicate by saying I.

[2:38:08] Oh, no. We don't make a motion. We don't have a motion.

[2:38:10] Mayor, I move to approve the resolution for development agreement

[2:38:13] with the Humane Society of Navarro County.

[2:38:15] Okay, here we go.

[2:38:16] [chuckles] Second.

[2:38:17] Second.

[2:38:19] Third.

[2:38:20] [laughter] No.

[2:38:21] I'm going to even vote.

[2:38:22] [laughter]

[2:38:23] Okay.

[2:38:25] Um, any questions for Mr. Holgerson on his presentation?

[2:38:31] Do we have a motion?

[2:38:35] [laughter]

[2:38:36] Mayor, I made the motion and Jeff seconded.

[2:38:38] Mr. Woolsey, Mr. Smith.

[2:38:40] Second, Mr. Smith.

[2:38:41] And Mr. Pennell third discussion.

[2:38:44] Any further discussion?

[2:38:47] All in favor, please indicate, say again.

[2:38:50] Uh, I.

[2:38:52] Aye. Aye.

[2:38:54] Oppose no.

[2:38:56] Motion pair is approved.

[2:38:59] Miss Rawson, the uh caption for 8D, please.

[2:39:05] Consider declaring a public necessity for the acquisition of real property

[2:39:09] along Starboard Way, authorizing the city manager to contract

[2:39:13] on behalf of the city.

[2:39:14] Concerning the acquisition of real property and authorizing eminent

[2:39:18] domain proceedings concerning the acquisition of real property to obtain

[2:39:23] a permanent easement for the construction of a water line.

[2:39:28] Mr. Terry Jacobson.

[2:39:30] [laughter] I've been waiting for my moment.

[2:39:32] [laughter]

[2:39:35] patiently, I might add.

[2:39:36] [laughter]

[2:39:38] Yeah, um, the water club development uh subdivision sits on the will be

[2:39:42] the northeast side of the BNSF railroad right there.

[2:39:45] You know, there's a new road that goes over the railroad there.

[2:39:49] And uh they need a water line coming from the south to complete the proper

[2:39:53] engineering of the water delivery system within that subdivision.

[2:39:58] There's probably a 100 lots there plus or minus, something like that

[2:40:00] Jeff, I guess.

[2:40:01] And we have tried and tried and tried to get an easement from

[2:40:05] Uh

[2:40:06] BNSF railway to just give us an easement.

[2:40:09] Because what we're actually taking is

[2:40:11] 100 feet long from place to place, 4 feet wide and 2 feet tall.

[2:40:17] We're going to be about 20 feet down below the grade of the top of the track.

[2:40:21] We're going to bore underneath it and put a water line in there

[2:40:23] so they can complete the system.

[2:40:25] have a closed loop system, good functioning water system.

[2:40:29] And we worked with uh BNSF but they what they were offering us

[2:40:31] was just a permit or a license.

[2:40:33] where every 25 years they would have to we have to pay pay for

[2:40:36] it again.

[2:40:39] And then they offered to give us a permanent one.

[2:40:41] And all these costs by the way are being passed on to the

[2:40:42] waterfront club.

[2:40:43] The city will ultimately bear none of this cost.

[2:40:45] Uh but but it's right now it's ours but they they'll pay us back for it.

[2:40:49] But they also other provisions in their eight page permit and

[2:40:51] license agreement.

[2:40:54] like uh we have to maintain perpetual insurance on the uh

[2:40:56] on the easement itself.

[2:41:00] Not not just while we're building it, but there has to be a CGL

[2:41:02] policy that covers that property in perpetuity.

[2:41:06] And that's a cost that the city simply should not have to bear.

[2:41:10] Because what'll happen as a practical matter is, 40 years

[2:41:12] from now, the waterfront club will forget that they need to pay

[2:41:15] for the insurance.

[2:41:17] And if something goes wrong, it'll be on the city.

[2:41:20] So my advice, Jim, and I think it's the right way to approach it is,

[2:41:23] we'll just condemn it.

[2:41:24] We we'll take from you what it is we need.

[2:41:27] and we'll it took three months of negotiation to get to this point.

[2:41:30] And so uh Jim authorized me to hire an appraiser, which I did.

[2:41:35] And we have an appraisal.

[2:41:36] And the process requires you all to make a finding of public

[2:41:38] necessity.

[2:41:40] And the public necessity is to deliver water to the people who

[2:41:42] live in that subdivision, very much a public necessity.

[2:41:45] Uh then I have to make an offer and eventually if they don't take

[2:41:47] the offer, then we'll go ahead and condemn.

[2:41:50] Um the appraisal came in, I think at $17.

[2:41:54] That's the that's what's overtaking $17 worth the property.

[2:41:57] So it's not much. They're just being hardheaded and they just

[2:41:58] are the big

[2:41:59] 900-pound gorilla in town and they don't want to give us something.

[2:42:03] So we're just going to go take it then.

[2:42:05] So that's what I need you all to do is authorized uh Jim to

[2:42:07] authorize me to send the initial and final offer letters and

[2:42:10] initiate eminent domain proceedings.

[2:42:14] Any questions?

[2:42:15] No. Sounds fine. Do what?

[2:42:17] Any questions? Any concerns?

[2:42:20] No, sir. Hearing none.

[2:42:24] May we have a motion to uh to proceed?

[2:42:27] Mr. Mayor, I move to approve authorizing the city manager to

[2:42:30] proceed with acquisition of property required for waterline.

[2:42:35] Motion by Mr. Smith, we have a second.

[2:42:37] Second. Second by Mr. Woolsey.

[2:42:40] Any further discussion?

[2:42:44] All in favor, please indicate by saying aye.

[2:42:46] Aye. Opposed no.

[2:42:49] And the motion is approved.

[2:42:54] Next item number nine is appointments, confirm the city

[2:42:57] manager's appointment to the Civil Service Commission.

[2:43:03] Do we have a motion?

[2:43:08] Mayor, I move to approve the city manager's appointment as

[2:43:10] stated.

[2:43:13] Do we have a second?

[2:43:14] I'll second.

[2:43:23] Mr. manager, do you have anything that you'd like to

[2:43:25] comment?

[2:43:26] Oh, uh

[2:43:27] course, Melissa Butler is the individual that I we nominated.

[2:43:32] And of course she has about 27 years of experience in the legal

[2:43:34] field, which we think

[2:43:37] really will work well with the Civil Service Commission.

[2:43:39] Uh graduate, associate degree from uh

[2:43:41] Navarro College, a bachelor's degree from Texas A&M.

[2:43:47] Uh and she's got uh she'd been working there with the district

[2:43:49] court for about 27 years.

[2:43:55] Do we have a motion to approve?

[2:44:02] We have it. That was discussion.

[2:44:05] Mr. Woolsey makes the motion, a second by Miss Johnson.

[2:44:12] The motion is to approve the city manager's appointment of

[2:44:15] Miss Butler.

[2:44:18] All in favor, please say aye. Aye.

[2:44:21] Opposed no.

[2:44:22] Motion carries.

[2:44:36] Item number 11, miscellaneous announcements.

[2:44:39] Uh the only thing I have is National Library Card week is uh

[2:44:43] uh sign up month now.

[2:44:47] And uh if you apply for a new card or you currently have one,

[2:44:50] visit the library and there'll be some prizes available.

[2:44:57] Anything else uh council?

[2:45:00] I just want to thank the citizens of course of Cana. Um,

[2:45:03] Mayor Joe, thank you, Amy, thank you for

[2:45:06] your hard work this weekend, the historical, uh, the East

[2:45:11] neighborhood historical committee did a tour of the churches

[2:45:16] and precinct two and it was so amazing. Uh we met at the

[2:45:19] Legacy Park and we walked to the historical churches and they got

[2:45:22] a lot of history. We got a lot of history.

[2:45:23] And we just want to say it was a great out, it was a really, really,

[2:45:30] really good um, event that was put on. So we appreciate it.

[2:45:34] We have people coming, we actually had a couple uh that came from

[2:45:38] Houston. He got up at five with his two daughters. They saw it on

[2:45:43] Facebook and came down and did the tour. Come to find out he had

[2:45:46] family that was his grand his grandmother and his mother is from

[2:45:49] Corcana. And what was so nice, he is considering moving to Corcana.

[2:45:53] I think he did. Yeah.

[2:45:55] Anything else?

[2:45:56] [chair squeaking]

[2:46:00] Uh, Mr. City manager, anything?

[2:46:04] I don't have anything, no.

[2:46:06] Having nothing else on our agenda,

[2:46:08] we are adjourned.

[2:46:11] Longest meeting ever.

[2:46:12] [laughter]

[2:46:13] Oh Jesus.

City Council Meeting Sep 15 2026

Transcript