[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:02] Spring Hill Board of Mayor and Alderman meeting will come to order on Monday, December 1st at 6 p.m.
[0:06] Let the record reflect that all the members are present, except for Alderman Kanapari.
[0:10] At this time, we will recess for an executive session.
[1:01:18] Spring Hill Board of Mayor and Alderman will reconvene at 7-0-1. Let the record reflect that
[1:01:22] all the members that are still present except for Alderman Carey, Pastor Doe.
[1:01:29] Lower is yours,
[1:01:30] ma'am.
[1:01:36] Thank you very much. It's an honor to be here. We can pray. Heavenly Father,
[1:01:42] we come before you today with open hearts and open minds seeking your
[1:01:47] guidance and wisdom as those in this room conduct the business of our
[1:01:51] community. Grant them clarity in the decisions, compassion and their actions
[1:01:56] and the courage to do what is right even when it is difficult. Lord may the work
[1:02:02] today strengthen the well-being, safety and unity of all who call this
[1:02:07] community home. Bless our leaders our residents keeping us mindful of those
[1:02:12] in need, and strengthen our commitment to the common good.
[1:02:17] We ask for your blessing on this meeting and on the work to be done in Jesus' name, Amen.
[1:02:25] Please stand with me for the Pledge of Allegiance.
[1:02:30] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for
[1:02:36] for which it stands, one nation under God,
[1:02:40] indivisible, with liberty and justice to all.
[1:02:47] Thank you ma'am.
[1:02:48] I'm looking for approval of the agenda.
[1:02:49] Vice Mayor Linville.
[1:02:50] Move to approve the agenda.
[1:02:51] Motion by Vice Mayor Linville.
[1:02:55] Second by Alderman Murray.
[1:02:56] All those in favor of the agenda, please say aye.
[1:02:59] Agenda is approved.
[1:03:04] Mayor's comments.
[1:03:06] Board, I'm gonna bore you with a quick history lesson
[1:03:08] if you're okay with that.
[1:03:09] that. Back in December of 1944, right, General MacArthur was preparing for the Philippines
[1:03:17] campaign when a major typhoon struck the U.S. Navy's third fleet. And the storm sank
[1:03:24] three of the destroyers, killed 790 soldiers, damaged nine aircraft, swept about 100 aircraft
[1:03:32] off the carriers and into the sea. It's one of the larger losses of battleship
[1:03:37] and men outside of combat in World War II.
[1:03:40] And the damage could have been worse and would have been worse
[1:03:43] if it hadn't been for the leadership
[1:03:44] of five-star Admiral William Bull Halsey,
[1:03:48] because Admiral Halsey ordered the fleet to sail
[1:03:51] into the center of the storm.
[1:03:53] Rather than allow the storm to steer the ships,
[1:03:57] Admiral Halsey took control,
[1:03:59] let the ships ride the waves instead
[1:04:01] of being rolled by them, because he knew
[1:04:03] that you don't survive storms by running from them.
[1:04:06] You meet them head-on, courage, discipline, and unity.
[1:04:11] So we have a very difficult decision coming up in two weeks when it comes to sewer allocation.
[1:04:16] And I'm not trying to equate, you know, our remaining wastewater capacity to a military
[1:04:23] wartime loss, but regardless of what we do, someone, likely many someone's, are going
[1:04:29] to be dissatisfied.
[1:04:31] I think we're all aware of what the consequences may be regardless of what different decisions
[1:04:35] we make. The lessons here are the same as Admiral Halsey, though. Our professional
[1:04:41] staff has done all they can to analyze and advise us and prepare us, but the
[1:04:45] decision and whatever comes with it are for this board to own. So we're not going
[1:04:50] to run from the decision. We're not going to defer it. We're not going to
[1:04:53] delegate it. We're going to give it our focus, act with courage, be disciplined,
[1:04:57] be united, meet ahead on. We're all elected to make hard decisions, not
[1:05:02] just comfortable ones. This is going to be one of those moments, unfortunately. So we
[1:05:07] need to sail into the storm, not because it's easy, not because it's popular,
[1:05:13] because it's necessary and the right thing to do. Come out on the other side,
[1:05:18] having taken responsibility and acting as needed, Spring Hill is going to be
[1:05:22] better for it.
[1:05:26] Any department head comments or administrator comments, Mr.
[1:05:28] Napier, any department heads, seeing none, any citizen comment,
[1:05:38] seeing none, any
[1:05:39] any acknowledgments from the board.
[1:05:44] Any none, consent agenda, Ms. Goad please.
[1:05:51] Consider resolution 25269 designating a schedule
[1:05:55] for the city of Spring Hill public meetings
[1:05:57] for the 2026 calendar year.
[1:06:03] Consider resolution 25270 to authorize the purchase
[1:06:07] of replacement FRP weirs and scum baffles
[1:06:11] for clarifier number one
[1:06:13] at the Water Reclamation Facility.
[1:06:15] Consider Resolution 25271 Authorizing Expenditure for the Microsoft Office 365G1 Subscriptions
[1:06:25] for Additional Users.
[1:06:29] Consider Resolution 25272 to award the bid for the wastewater treatment plant demolition
[1:06:35] and grading.
[1:06:38] Consider Resolution 25273 to vacate a 10-foot portion of a dedicated drainage easement
[1:06:44] to the rear of lot 240 Cherry Grove Edition Phase 5 better known as 2975
[1:06:50] Stewart Campbell Point.
[1:06:54] Consider resolution 25275 to authorize the
[1:06:58] disposal of public works vehicles and equipment on Gov deals.
[1:07:06] Consider
[1:07:07] resolution 25277 to authorize the issuance of a request for proposals
[1:07:12] RFP and the solicitation of sealed quotations for the Pickett Ridge sewer
[1:07:16] Lift Station Improvement Project.
[1:07:22] Consider Resolution 25278 to authorize the creation of
[1:07:26] a new project titled Decentralized Treatment System Number 1 and to Allocate Initial Design
[1:07:31] Funding in Budget Amendment Number 2.
[1:07:36] Consider Resolution 25279 to authorize creation of a
[1:07:40] new project titled Decentralized Treatment System Number 2 and to Allocate Initial Design
[1:07:46] funding in Budget Amendment No. 2.
[1:07:51] Consider Resolution 25280 to authorize the creation
[1:07:55] of a new project titled Decentralized Treatment System No. 3 and to allocate initial design
[1:08:01] funding in Budget Amendment No. 2.
[1:08:08] Consider Resolution 25281 to authorize the creation
[1:08:11] of a new project titled Reclamation Plan Assessment and Corrective Action Plan and
[1:08:17] to declare initial planning funds in Budget Amendment No. 2.
[1:08:23] Consider Resolution 25280
[1:08:25] to authorize the creation of new project title reclamation plant and advanced purification
[1:08:30] facilities plan and to declare initial planning funds in budget amendment number two.
[1:08:39] Consider Resolution 25283 to amend the Resolution 25236 for the Reservoir project.
[1:08:52] Consider Resolution 25284 to amend Resolution 24253 to increase the project budget by
[1:08:59] $2,140,391.31 for a total of $3 million.
[1:09:11] Consider Resolution 25285 to amend Resolution 25267 to authorize the Mayor to execute a
[1:09:18] lease agreement for the temporary relocation of Water and Sewer Division staff to the former
[1:09:23] police headquarters.
[1:09:25] Thank you, Ms. Goode.
[1:09:26] Move to approve the consent agenda.
[1:09:27] Motion by Vice Mayor Linville.
[1:09:29] Second.
[1:09:29] Second by Alder and Murray.
[1:09:30] Please vote on the consent agenda.
[1:09:31] The consent
[1:09:56] agenda is approved, 8 to 0.
[1:09:58] New business, item number one, consider resolution 25-274,
[1:10:03] formally requesting a third Williamson Health ambulance
[1:10:05] to be based in Spring Hill.
[1:10:08] Move to approve resolution 25-274.
[1:10:10] Motion by Vice-Marie Linville.
[1:10:12] Second.
[1:10:12] Second by Alderman Murray.
[1:10:14] Chief Temple, floors yours.
[1:10:16] Thank you.
[1:10:17] This resolution just simply allows
[1:10:20] staff to have a more in-depth conversation
[1:10:23] with the Williamson Health and Williamson County to try to establish a base for a third EMS unit.
[1:10:29] Currently we have two that are in the city, Medics 16 and Medics 17.
[1:10:34] We also house one of their EMS supervisors as well within the city.
[1:10:38] It is a benefit to city residents to have another ambulance.
[1:10:42] Currently there's about one for every 34,000 people and obviously the faster we're growing.
[1:10:48] The call volume increases and so forth and we need another EMS transport unit.
[1:10:52] Timing for this is ideal because obviously they're going to be going into
[1:10:56] budget prep just as we are. We built station four specifically for another
[1:11:01] unit as well where we have two dedicated bunk rooms as well as a storage
[1:11:05] room and base space for another EMS unit. So we preemptively have already had
[1:11:10] those discussions that we want to make sure that we're able to absorb
[1:11:14] another unit and staff. Again I think timing is ideal for this resolution to
[1:11:19] move forward thank you chief before I open the floor for questions or comments
[1:11:23] I'm going to make a motion to amend resolution 25274 to add an additional
[1:11:32] now therefore be it further resolved the city of Spring Hill board of mayor and
[1:11:36] alderman direct staff to distribute copies of this resolution to the eight
[1:11:39] members of the Williams and County Commission who represent districts that
[1:11:43] includes Spring Hill district one commissioners Lisa Lennox and
[1:11:46] Commissioner Ricky Jones district to Commissioner Betsy Hester and Commissioner Judy Herbert
[1:11:53] District 3 Commissioner Jennifer Mason and Commissioner Guy Cardin and District 9 Commissioner Chas Morton and Commissioner Matt Williams
[1:12:00] second by
[1:12:02] Vice Mayor Linville any discussion on the amendment
[1:12:06] His voice vote on the amendment all those in favor of the amendment say aye
[1:12:10] Vice Mayor Linville back to the motion as amended thank you mayor
[1:12:14] I just wanted to share a couple quick points on this one.
[1:12:18] Obviously, you know, we've laid the groundwork with Fire Station 4 to be able to accommodate these sort of requests.
[1:12:25] You know, we're a quickly growing city.
[1:12:27] The quarter that Fire Station 4 serves is very densely populated with residential homes,
[1:12:32] and that will only continue to increase as June late continues to build out.
[1:12:36] And so, you know, response times are crucial in those sort of situations.
[1:12:41] So my hope is that as Williamson County is going through their budget cycle, that they
[1:12:47] would take a look at all the data, take a look at the numbers that would really necessitate
[1:12:53] this sort of investment from them, and also provide service and improvement to how our
[1:12:59] citizens are being served here in Springfield.
[1:13:01] Thank you, Vice Mayor Linville, Alderman Fuqua.
[1:13:04] Thank you, Mayor.
[1:13:05] You had mentioned an increase of call volume.
[1:13:09] What is the average call volume between the two on a daily basis, Chief?
[1:13:15] It's really a moving target.
[1:13:17] What I did provide you in your packet is just a summation from 2022 to present actually November 24th.
[1:13:24] And you can see the call increases every single year we're going up.
[1:13:28] Some days are obviously busier than others.
[1:13:31] I think a normal call day would be seven to ten calls per day.
[1:13:37] We're running first responder calls, so we're running parallel with the EMS Transport Unit
[1:13:42] with the paramedics that are on the ambulances.
[1:13:44] So these numbers are reflective only of our first response calls.
[1:13:48] That does not also include other calls for service that Williamson Health handles where
[1:13:53] we're not responding.
[1:13:55] There are some real basic medical calls that we don't send fire apparatus to.
[1:13:59] And there's also calls outside the jurisdiction that those two medic units are having
[1:14:03] to handle as well.
[1:14:04] So this is just our data, the fire department's data, first responder calls
[1:14:09] that we assist Williamson Health on. We've been seeing anywhere from a four to
[1:14:13] seven percent increase of calls per year and that's pretty consistent with what
[1:14:17] I'm looking at with the MS data. I appreciate that and you actually answered
[1:14:21] one of my questions. I see in the what was provided in the packet is in
[1:14:25] 2022 we were looking at roughly about 2,000 calls a year and then this
[1:14:32] year we're running for almost 2,300. The citizens around the new fire station
[1:14:41] obviously by this edition are going to see quicker response times because we're
[1:14:45] talking about one of the most densely populated areas and I think for a
[1:14:49] Williamson County base it being right there on Buggner it also gives a
[1:14:53] quicker response time and access to rural Williamson County and one that's
[1:14:58] densely populated.
[1:15:00] For county standards as well, so I think that this makes sense. I appreciate this before
[1:15:04] us tonight and fully support it, and I hope Williamson County does the same. Thank you.
[1:15:08] Thank you Alderman Fuqua, Alderman Murray. Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, I just want to say
[1:15:14] that I believe this would be a great win for the city, for our citizens, obviously
[1:15:22] to reduce response time to to have the actual vehicles to do that and not
[1:15:29] necessarily burden fire. I realize it's not on every call but when you do run
[1:15:36] parallel that could pose a problem if there were some issues at the same
[1:15:40] time. So I think it'd be a great win for our citizens and for obviously we
[1:15:45] continue to grow the calls are just gonna be there's gonna be more so I
[1:15:50] I think it's it's impeccably good timing I would encourage Williamson County to support this as well I'm going to support it and I hope they do.
[1:16:00] Thank you Alderman Murray Alderman Hartwell.
[1:16:05] Thank you Mayor.
[1:16:06] Question.
[1:16:07] And I was just asking my colleague here with the new hopefully EMS system that we're going to try to implement for a station for.
[1:16:17] Will that one also service the more county side.
[1:16:21] So we are under an interlocal agreement with Williamson Health to cover the city, and it's at no cost to the city.
[1:16:29] So the ambulances that are stationed here currently do not cost the city anything to have that covered.
[1:16:35] It's all with an interlocal agreement.
[1:16:37] In the past there have been different variations of privatized ambulances,
[1:16:42] and I can speak from my 32 years as a paramedic that very problematic,
[1:16:48] And we're definitely not dealing with a caliber of EMS providers that we have with Williamson Health.
[1:16:54] I'm very, very comfortable with those providers providing EMS to the city.
[1:16:59] We also have a supervisor in place that also runs from our city.
[1:17:05] And we are going to be moving them from Port Royal Station, Station 2 to Station 3 on the Williamson side to allow them better coverage.
[1:17:13] So with with the opening of station for we've been able to shuffle some resources around and give them some additional space
[1:17:19] So that's also a benefit to Williamson County as well
[1:17:22] This just makes sense as was mentioned earlier as our population increases
[1:17:27] Both with medical conditions and age and things like that
[1:17:31] People continually rely on 9-1-1 for their health services, which is problematic because then it causes the call volume to go up
[1:17:38] uh, Alderman, uh, weren't mentioned something that, that, you know, really reminded me earlier
[1:17:42] is that the call volume here is also problematic because when they transport to Vanderbilt
[1:17:48] or to Williamson Health up in Franklin, you know, they're out of, out of pocket time
[1:17:53] is up to two hours where we don't have a replacement ambulance. And it isn't until
[1:17:59] they, they enter what's called system status management where they, both ambulances
[1:18:02] are committed before they, they have another ambulance from another jurisdiction come
[1:18:06] down to cover the city. So operationally we do a really good job with it obviously
[1:18:10] with our first responders as well but another ambulance is absolutely needed.
[1:18:15] This is amazing so we're excited. I know I am. Thank you Alderman Hartwell, Alderman
[1:18:20] Davis. Thank you mayor.
[1:18:25] First of all I think this is wonderful it's at no
[1:18:27] cost of the city. Our city is growing so we need this to do the health of our
[1:18:35] constituents for the health of our community right. Also you mentioned that
[1:18:41] these will service the Murray County side but I imagine and please do correct
[1:18:45] me if I'm wrong a Long Thompson Station road those neighborhoods are
[1:18:51] growing as well right so it's it's station four is right there so we're
[1:18:56] going to be servicing that area as well so not only are we talking about Spring
[1:19:02] Hill here but we are also talking about Thompson Station as well and servicing
[1:19:06] them and you know ensuring that they have a better chance at survival should
[1:19:11] something happen should something happen to one of their children or
[1:19:14] anything like that because being a mom that's really important that we're
[1:19:18] there that if we have an aging parent that we you guys are able to to get
[1:19:22] they're two hours out of pocket so I think it would be in that everybody's
[1:19:26] best interest if Williamson supports this I know that I feel like most of our
[1:19:31] board is you know we're in support of this because we're always in support of
[1:19:36] something that's going to help our community so thank you for bringing this
[1:19:39] up and kind of taking on this charge we really appreciate it thank you all
[1:19:44] them and Davis Alderman Warner thank you mr. Mayor in context I am a
[1:19:49] paramedic for Williamson health and I do work medic 16 medic 17 here in spring
[1:19:54] hill and service the citizens of spring hill and I know firsthand the need for a
[1:20:01] third ambulance in our city possibly a fourth very soon we're the fastest
[1:20:06] growing city in the county and we have been behind most of the cities in the
[1:20:11] county do have more ambulances than Spring Hill, and our population needs that third ambulance.
[1:20:21] This does come to a cost for the county.
[1:20:25] County personnel, people who live in the county of Williamson, do pay for this service.
[1:20:31] That ambulance cost, the people on board cost, the equipment cost.
[1:20:35] So there is a cost that is incurred by the county and thankfully the city
[1:20:42] historically has negotiated that it costs the city nothing. So I think that's a
[1:20:48] fantastic deal and adding a fire station and allowing those ambulances to be
[1:20:54] housed in those stations at no cost is extremely effective. So I implore you
[1:21:01] pleased to contact your county commissioner and explain the situation
[1:21:07] here to add that third ambulance which is definitely needed here for the for the
[1:21:14] future and the health of our citizens and we are in a strange area that we
[1:21:19] work two counties it's a Williamson health working in Murray County so it is
[1:21:23] a little odd and we do not charge Murray County either for that service so
[1:21:28] Williamson health has has rightfully given that service to us and we're very
[1:21:34] thankful for that and thankful for the city for the housing and allowing them
[1:21:39] to be here so please contact your county commissioner thank you all of them and
[1:21:44] Warner all of them in a minute thank you mayor I'm not sure you keep track of
[1:21:49] every one of the order they went in but this is a no-brainer right we we
[1:21:55] We demand this for our citizens, especially to have a vacancy like we currently do in
[1:21:59] a house that's empty, essentially the fire station.
[1:22:03] As being an individual that lives in the war that this would service primarily being a
[1:22:08] taxpayer in Williamson County, I fully expect everybody that represents Williamson County
[1:22:14] on our behalf to stand up and say, hey, we need this.
[1:22:18] Nothing's worse than having a child that falls or something that happens to them
[1:22:22] and you have no way to transport them to a hospital.
[1:22:26] I've been fortunate, my child has fallen,
[1:22:28] the fire department has come and take care of them,
[1:22:30] it's nothing that required transport,
[1:22:32] but heaven forbid if it did,
[1:22:34] we wouldn't have that opportunity, right?
[1:22:36] I think this goes without question.
[1:22:39] The city of Spring Hill deserves this.
[1:22:41] The fact that the people here,
[1:22:43] even though we're a split county, like you said,
[1:22:45] there should be no denial of opportunity
[1:22:50] for safety for transport regardless of what side of the city that they're on.
[1:22:55] So I would fully expect my commissioners to stand for this to make a lot of noise to make this happen.
[1:23:00] If there's anything that we can do to help out, please follow me and let us know.
[1:23:04] Thank you Alderman Jimenez. Let me say the city does pay for ambulance services.
[1:23:09] City residents do play county property taxes and the county property tax rate is higher than the city property tax rates.
[1:23:16] We're absolutely paying for this service already
[1:23:19] Not only that but the vast vast vast majority of the county sales tax revenues comes from within municipalities
[1:23:25] So again, it's municipalities generating revenues for the county to provide these services
[1:23:30] I think anybody can look at the ambulance distribution around the six municipalities in Williamson County
[1:23:36] And it is very obvious that we are on a population basis the greatest underserved
[1:23:42] And so while this will have the most immediate impact in Spring Hill, it will have a positive impact across Williamson County because that ambulance at Thompson Station, that ambulance in Bethesda will stay out in those districts and service those residents more than the need to come into Spring Hill as it is today.
[1:23:59] And Alderman Jimenez, you're absolutely correct. There's eight county commissioners that represent all or part of Spring Hill.
[1:24:05] 13 is what it takes to get this done on the county commission level of five
[1:24:10] extra votes of five reasonable people who are looking to benefit the entire
[1:24:13] county doesn't seem like a very big lift to me so thank you for bringing this to
[1:24:17] us to use Temple. Any other questions or comments? Seeing nothing please vote on
[1:24:21] resolution 25274.
[1:24:45] Item is approved 8-0. Item number two consider first
[1:24:48] ruin of ordinance 25-27 in acting and adopting a supplement S6 to the
[1:24:53] Code of Ordinance. Move for approval of the first reading of Ordinance 25-27.
[1:24:59] Motion by Vice Mayor Lindell. Second by Alderman Murray. Ms. Goode, do you have
[1:25:04] anything for us on this?
[1:25:07] Any comments or questions for Ms. Goode?
[1:25:11] All right, please
[1:25:12] vote on first reading of Ordinance 25-27.
[1:25:30] First reading of Ordinance 25-27 has
[1:25:32] approved 8-0. Item number three, consider resolution 25-276, establishing
[1:25:37] and authorizing the Employee Service Appreciation Award for Elderville City of
[1:25:42] Spring Hill employees for the 2025 eligibility year.
[1:25:46] Move to approve Resolution 25-276.
[1:25:49] Motion by Vice Mayor Lindblum. Second by Alderman Murray. Mr. Napier.
[1:25:54] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the Board, this is an opportunity to improve the
[1:26:00] end-of-the-year awards that we do for the employees wherein we generally will
[1:26:05] have what has historically been called a Christmas bonus program wherein the more
[1:26:13] tenured employees get a higher pay allocation and pursuant to the amount
[1:26:20] of years that they've served as compared to those in the lower end of their
[1:26:24] tenure with the organization. The proposal as before you tonight is to
[1:26:29] change that program in such a way that all full-time employees would
[1:26:34] receive a $500 single payment at the end of the year. That would be a $500 post-tax benefit
[1:26:43] as well as for part-time employees a $250 post-tax single payment at the end of the
[1:26:50] year. The idea being that for those that have been in the organization longer, they
[1:26:57] certainly will benefit more by looking at this program in terms of the amount of dollars
[1:27:03] that they actually take home relative to what previously they've been awarded, and furthermore
[1:27:09] with respect to those who have been in the organization a shorter amount of time or on
[1:27:13] the lower end of the income bracket, they will actually be benefited more substantially
[1:27:20] than historically with the current program that's in place.
[1:27:23] And so it does benefit those that have been in the organization longer with respect
[1:27:31] to what they currently receive and then secondly again to restate those that earn less will
[1:27:37] actually be benefited proportionately more effectively with this program.
[1:27:42] Now this is a more expensive program than what we currently do.
[1:27:48] We will be needing $250,000 more from the general fund as well as $75,000 more from
[1:27:54] the enterprise funds, but we do we do believe that this is a better approach
[1:28:00] and something that will benefit employees more effectively. Thank You Mr.
[1:28:06] Napier. Comments or questions from the board? Alderman Davis. I know this is the
[1:28:12] bonus. Is that going to be, is that going to affect their Christmas party or
[1:28:19] anything like that? I just wonder because I think that's that's important
[1:28:22] for employees to get together during the holidays
[1:28:27] and to really have that time to mingle and get to know each other.
[1:28:33] Mr. Mayor.
[1:28:34] Mr. Napier.
[1:28:35] Alderman, thank you for that question.
[1:28:37] The answer is no, none of that will change.
[1:28:39] The only thing it changes is replacing the old program with the new program.
[1:28:44] Alderman Jimenez.
[1:28:46] Thank you, Mayor.
[1:28:47] Mr. Napier, is there anybody that's currently on the more vetted side
[1:28:51] of the current employees that receives more than $500
[1:28:55] into your bonus?
[1:28:57] I don't believe so.
[1:28:59] Okay.
[1:29:00] My only thing is as long as we have no one
[1:29:02] that currently exceeds that, this is great.
[1:29:05] If we have somebody that does, is there a way
[1:29:07] we could grandfather them in?
[1:29:08] If you don't believe so, I believe that no one does.
[1:29:11] But could there be a way to where we're not taking away
[1:29:13] from those people who may have earned more
[1:29:15] through tenureship?
[1:29:17] Thank you.
[1:29:18] Mr. Mayor, go ahead, Mr. Mayor.
[1:29:19] To respond briefly.
[1:29:20] I really don't think we're going to have an adverse impact in any way.
[1:29:25] Vice Mayor Lendville.
[1:29:27] Thank you Mayor.
[1:29:28] Mr. Napier.
[1:29:29] Cool question.
[1:29:30] So I know in the memo says that funding for the partial year cost is available within
[1:29:34] the existing fiscal year budget.
[1:29:36] Is that basically for roles that have been approved?
[1:29:41] Mr. Mayor, Mr. Vice Mayor, thank you for that question as well.
[1:29:45] That is primarily funded through what we call slippage.
[1:29:49] However, with respect to the budget that you hopefully and favorably approve for the next
[1:29:55] fiscal year, we will not have to rely on slippage in order to fund this.
[1:30:00] This effort.
[1:30:01] My next question, so I appreciate it. Appreciate it. Yeah, beating me there. Thank you.
[1:30:05] Thank you, Alderman Hartwell.
[1:30:07] Thank you, Mayor. Mr. Carter, instead of, and you may have already started mind boggling
[1:30:14] about this, but instead of funding for a bonus financially, have you thought about days off
[1:30:22] instead and then that way it's not, it's just a day off and all of them not together
[1:30:27] and I don't know that's just what I would do is that is that an option instead of financially
[1:30:35] just dishing out money. Mr. Napier. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Madam Alderman thank you. The
[1:30:45] answer is by replacing the current program with a day off I would argue that employees
[1:30:55] would probably adversely impacted in that the the financing that they
[1:31:02] historically have received would go away. They can choose. You can even give them
[1:31:06] the option to choose if they want three days off that equals up to $500 or I'd
[1:31:13] rather have three days off and take a vacation. I'll spend $500 on some shoes.
[1:31:21] just options. I have to play devil's advocate. Mr. Mayor, Madam Alderman, I love your perspective.
[1:31:32] I really do. And I think it's employee centric. And I have to confess I did not think as broadly
[1:31:39] as you are suggesting this evening. But I do have an idea with respect to ways in
[1:31:45] which we can enhance time off as well and it certainly would be less expensive than
[1:31:51] what we're talking about this evening but you know I I can't say that I went
[1:31:59] down those roads as it relates to the brainstorming that we did as staff
[1:32:02] well. Thank you Alderman Hartwell Alderman Murray. Thank you Mr. Napier
[1:32:10] just quick question it does say for the 2025 eligibility year are you
[1:32:14] looking at this I mean a lot obviously a lot of places have kind of set bonuses
[1:32:22] not always guaranteed but they may have a set are you is this like an
[1:32:29] alternative to say this is what I'd like to do this year and moving forward or is
[1:32:34] this something we just want to do this year and reevaluate for that. Mr. Mayor
[1:32:39] Mr. Alderman, thank you.
[1:32:42] The answer that I would offer is that if you support this program,
[1:32:48] this is likely the standard that I would suggest that we budget for every year.
[1:32:53] Without a doubt, however, if there were budget reasons that the program couldn't be funded,
[1:32:59] the BOMA retains the authority and ability to make that consideration each budget year.
[1:33:05] But I would suggest that this is the plan that we would bring forward year after year
[1:33:13] Thank You alderman Murray
[1:33:17] Mr. Napier did you anything further? No, sir any further comments or questions from the board?
[1:33:24] Please vote on resolution 25276
[1:33:35] Item is approved 8 to 0
[1:33:36] I'm number four consider resolution 25-286 to to accept the arbitrage compliance report and authorized payment of IRS
[1:33:45] tax liability for general obligation of bonds. Move to approve resolution 25-286.
[1:33:51] Motion by Vice Mayor Linville. Second by Alderman Murray. Ms. Holden. Good
[1:33:57] evening. We had a regular check-in with our municipal advisor Cumberland
[1:34:04] securities a couple months ago. They recommended that we did do an arbitrage
[1:34:09] study on our 2020 bonds okay so a third party company did that arbitrage study
[1:34:15] they do it for a living they do it all day long and they came back with saying
[1:34:20] that we owed arbitrage on our 2020 bonds now what is arbitrage arbitrage means
[1:34:26] you earned too much interest on bond proceeds it is not a penalty you're
[1:34:32] not being penalized by the federal government but you are saying they
[1:34:36] saying that we earned too much interest, okay? So the arbitrage report is saying
[1:34:43] that we owe a little over a hundred thousand dollars to the IRS in unearned
[1:34:49] interest that we should have not earned, okay? How does this happen? Typically this
[1:34:56] happens because you don't meet spend down requirements and bonds, so you have
[1:35:00] like a 24 month spend down 36 month 48 month spend down requirements and
[1:35:06] bonds. We did not meet those spin-downs, so therefore we came into the arbitrar
[1:35:12] situation where we're earning interest that we should have not earned. Okay? It
[1:35:18] happened. We have to accept it. It sucks. I know.
[1:35:25] But going forward with future
[1:35:27] bond issuance is how do we prevent this? First of all, we meet the
[1:35:31] spin-downs. So when we borrow money, we know what projects we're going to
[1:35:35] spend it on, we have timelines, we have cash spend-downs. The other part of that is that
[1:35:39] the finance office is keeping detailed records of when money is being spent, when it's being
[1:35:44] taken out of the accounts, what it's being invested in, all of those things so that way
[1:35:50] we can meet those spend-down requirements. I do not suspect that this will be an issue
[1:35:55] going forward. This is just unfortunately what has happened. I will be happy to
[1:36:00] answer any questions Scott Warner was here to do a presentation to BFAC earlier
[1:36:05] today so hopefully BFAC can help with the conversation as well. Thank you Ms.
[1:36:10] Holden, Mr. Napier. Thank you Mr. Mayor and thank you Ms. Holden for that
[1:36:14] information. I think it's important to note and the BFAC talked quite a bit
[1:36:19] about this earlier today that that this is indeed not a penalty hence the
[1:36:24] reason we're not going to see any of this in the qualifications if you will
[1:36:29] or qualifying statements that the audit is being prepared for now.
[1:36:34] And so I really appreciated the word that was used
[1:36:39] by the consultant earlier today wherein he said we are obligated
[1:36:43] to rebate the federal government with regard to this money
[1:36:47] that we should, you know, we shouldn't have earned essentially.
[1:36:50] So to be clear and to be purposely emphatic, not a penalty,
[1:36:54] but rather a rebate that we're obligated to pay
[1:36:57] And furthermore it closes this issue for us from here on out. Thank you. Mr. Napier vice mayor Linville anything from the BTEC perspective
[1:37:06] Yeah
[1:37:07] Misholding and mr. Napier have done a good job summarizing the conversation of beef ag
[1:37:11] One thing I would add is one of the one of the reasons this happens often is because we borrowed at a lower rate and interest rates on
[1:37:17] deposits came in a lot higher than we expected and so
[1:37:21] That's why we had additional interest income
[1:37:23] So, that was part of the wonkiness of 2020 with rates being low for a period and actually
[1:37:29] thereafter.
[1:37:30] Thank you Vice Mayor Linville Alderman Jimenez.
[1:37:33] Thank you Mayor.
[1:37:34] This is the reason why the IRS shouldn't exist in the first place but beyond that we asked
[1:37:41] and they did explore every avenue possible to keep the money that we could to explore
[1:37:46] loopholes that we needed to.
[1:37:48] I have a lot of faith that they look to keep as much money as possible so we're
[1:37:52] We're not just surrendering this money.
[1:37:54] If we don't give it to the IRS, they're going to show up at our front door, and it doesn't
[1:37:57] sound like we have a good list of ways that we need to keep it, so this keeps us out of
[1:38:01] some trouble.
[1:38:02] I don't like giving up 100 grand, but we'll do what we've got to do, so.
[1:38:06] Thank you, Alderman.
[1:38:07] Jimenez, it's a bit of a racket, right?
[1:38:09] The IRS gets it instead of the bank getting it back.
[1:38:13] Seeing nothing further, please vote on Resolution 25-286.
[1:38:27] Item is approved 8-0, Vice Mayor Linville for the work session, please.
[1:38:42] All right, we will open up work session discussion with item number one, which is the decentralized sewer system standards briefing. Mr. Allen,
[1:38:52] turn it over to you.
[1:38:57] All right, I'm going to apologize in advance. This is by far going to be one of the driest presentations you guys have gotten. There are 21 slides, but there are a lot of people wanting a lot of details.
[1:39:07] So we're going to put this out and go through it at a high level tonight
[1:39:11] And then we will distribute this PowerPoint out for comment to the development community through our list that we've developed with
[1:39:18] development service and comms and
[1:39:19] Keep that open for feedback for a couple weeks while we're finalizing our submittal to the state. So
[1:39:26] As you guys are aware, this has come out of the sewer moratorium discussions
[1:39:31] There's some provisions in state law that talk about under a moratorium if you can't allow public connection to a public system
[1:39:37] You have to make provision for some other alternatives.
[1:39:40] After multiple site visits with other utilities, consultation with folks at TDEC, this is our
[1:39:47] draft for you guys that we promised we would deliver at the 1st of December.
[1:39:51] So we are primarily talking about the Bioclear Treatment System.
[1:39:56] It's a decentralized alternative sewer system and it's produced by a company called Aquapoint.
[1:40:04] you can see in this picture you've got the kind of the four settling tanks so
[1:40:10] the first part of it as well as the control building so we're not talking
[1:40:13] about a terribly large or complex system it's fairly self-contained there are
[1:40:19] basically the water comes in it goes through these tanks it's pumped out
[1:40:22] there's a little bit of UV that's done it's taken to a level that's
[1:40:25] acceptable to then be dripped out into underground pipes that are in the
[1:40:30] soil, and it settles in from there. This is just an example of a few of the
[1:40:35] different configurations. You can run these systems in series to get higher
[1:40:39] treatment standards. You can also run them in parallel to get more treatment, so
[1:40:43] we really like that part of it, and this is primarily what the city of the town
[1:40:48] of Thompson Station to the north of us uses. This shows you photo on the
[1:40:53] left, the drip dispersal field being put in the native soils, and then you
[1:40:58] You have a larger diagram on the right that kind of shows how it's all interconnected.
[1:41:02] So you have treatment first, and then dispersal into the soils through these drip systems
[1:41:06] in these little pipes.
[1:41:09] So your main system components, you've got these primary septic settling tanks that
[1:41:14] are partially buried.
[1:41:15] You just saw the tips of them sticking out of the ground.
[1:41:17] You have the fiberglass and PVC treatment units.
[1:41:21] Those are also partially buried.
[1:41:22] They have a small vent that's visible, they have a 50-year useful life.
[1:41:26] There's a pump and recirculation tank required for flow management.
[1:41:29] There's a small operation building that houses these pumps as well as the control panels in the UB treatment system and
[1:41:37] It can be connected to SCADA for monitoring alarms so we can look at it remotely if something happens
[1:41:42] We can get a signal set back to home base and send somebody out to get on it quick to take a look at it
[1:41:48] Operations and maintenance they treat up to 20,000 gallons per day in a single unit. It's a relatively low maintenance system requires periodic inspections
[1:41:57] Maintenance must be performed by a licensed operator.
[1:42:00] We have several on staff that have the qualifications to do that.
[1:42:03] We do have to do some pumping every few years as part of the maintenance of the tanks themselves.
[1:42:08] That's how we manage the solids portion of it.
[1:42:11] Relatively low energy usage compared to some other options that we're looked at.
[1:42:15] So we're looking at almost less than 1.3 watts per gallon treated.
[1:42:20] And then ultimately, this gets us to a point where we've got a clean effluent that we can basically disperse through the subsurface pipes.
[1:42:30] You guys still with me so far?
[1:42:33] Is there anything that you don't understand? I know I'm using a lot of technical terms, so it's okay to interrupt me and ask a question.
[1:42:41] All right, we're going to keep going.
[1:42:43] So general site requirements, you've got to have the right kind of soils on the site for the system to work.
[1:42:49] You can't just go put this system in on any site anywhere.
[1:42:53] It has to have some very specific criteria on the site that it has to meet.
[1:42:58] And so not every site will be able to use these.
[1:43:02] So basically those soils have to be able to support that dispersal.
[1:43:07] That has to be confirmed by a soil scientist.
[1:43:09] You'll hear me talk several times as we go through these requirements in these slides.
[1:43:14] we will have a requirement for a Tennessee licensed soil scientist to vet and
[1:43:20] review all these things. That's going to be that's almost as important as a
[1:43:24] licensed engineer signing off on the design of it. The ultimate footprints
[1:43:29] need to be determined by those two professionals working together and no
[1:43:33] final design decisions really get made until that soil testing is complete.
[1:43:38] If you don't have the soils right, then you really don't have a system.
[1:43:43] And that is what we heard loud and clear from the divisions of TDEC Water Resources Group
[1:43:47] that review these.
[1:43:49] We heard it loud and clear from Consolidated Utilities District and we heard it loud and
[1:43:53] clear from the town of Thompson Stations.
[1:43:55] You have to get the soils right.
[1:43:58] If you don't, you're going to have problems.
[1:44:01] And when we talk about that report that was referenced about some failing systems
[1:44:05] and things like that in places around the state it's the design requirements and not having enough
[1:44:10] contingency of reserve soils and getting those loading rates right on the front end combined
[1:44:15] with poor maintenance and operations that led to stuff basically overflowing and sitting on the ground
[1:44:20] we're just not going to have that here in Spring Hill. So after talking with everybody and looking
[1:44:26] at lots of options from an ownership and permitting standpoint it's going to be important
[1:44:30] to the state that the system be owned by the city of Spring Hill, they're looking for us to
[1:44:35] permit it through TDEC under our operating permit. The land for the drip fields as well as the
[1:44:42] facility itself are going to be required to be dedicated to the city of Spring Hill.
[1:44:46] You will get lots of feedback on that comment. We've already had some conversations with some
[1:44:51] folks. Well hey, if I'm doing a temporary system, why do I have to give you this land if
[1:44:57] it's going to be essentially decommissioned.
[1:45:00] And taken out of service later on.
[1:45:02] The conversation that we've had with the folks that asked that question is, we believe that
[1:45:06] there are ways to draft up the documents as part of the memorandum of understanding process,
[1:45:11] to have them dedicate that land to us, use it temporarily for the time being, and when
[1:45:15] the additional capacity on the larger system is available that they can connect back into,
[1:45:21] when we decommission the system, they can get the land reverted back to their ownership.
[1:45:25] So we'll handle that in the MOU process.
[1:45:28] That's going to be a question that some people are probably going to hit you guys with.
[1:45:33] So the development community would bear the cost of design permitting and construction
[1:45:37] until dedication and acceptance by the city.
[1:45:40] Performance of maintenance and bond requirements from the UDC would be applied.
[1:45:43] We're going to treat this just like any other piece of public infrastructure.
[1:45:46] They're going to do everything that they normally would, just like they would a water line or a fire hydrant.
[1:45:51] They're going to follow that same process.
[1:45:52] we're not going to get out of that or deviate away from that.
[1:45:56] And then the city would hold and maintain the operating permit and we would be the sole
[1:46:01] operator.
[1:46:02] So we will likely retain some third-party services to assist us and be a backup to
[1:46:06] our staff and have training resources and backups available to them, but we're going
[1:46:11] to take this on and run it.
[1:46:13] That's the clear expectation we're hearing from everybody.
[1:46:16] As far as the governance and approval sequence, the developer will submit a Memorand of
[1:46:21] Understanding to that we'll refer to as the MOU
[1:46:25] They will submit that to be reviewed and evaluated by Boma. Boma shall approve or disapprove that in a public meeting
[1:46:34] The upon the approval of that the developers engineers submits design documents to TDAC to get the issuance in the city's name
[1:46:42] City there the system plans would need to receive written approval for myself the city wastewater operator that has a license over it
[1:46:50] And then that would be submitted on to TDEC for the Division of Water Resources to do the formal final silo.
[1:46:57] TDEC is not going to waive their right to approve it.
[1:47:02] We are allowed to adopt standards that are stricter than the state,
[1:47:05] which is what we are doing by adopting the Bioclear system.
[1:47:09] So basically they're looking for us to say that it meets what we've adopted that's more stringent
[1:47:14] and then they'll do the final review on the official permitting of it.
[1:47:18] Until that process is done, no applications to Planning Commission will be accepted.
[1:47:24] So, they have to have the BOMO approved MOU and follow through on all of that to go to the Planning Commission.
[1:47:33] Now, before I go on, let's clarify that and make sure everybody understands that.
[1:47:37] Earlier on, before we really started going around and visiting and doing research and talking about it,
[1:47:42] We had some conversations about a possibility of maybe doing a higher conceptual level analysis
[1:47:48] based on soil maps, doing an MOU approval, and then figure out the details at the Planning
[1:47:54] Commission and going from there, you know, not having to do as much design up front.
[1:48:00] I have been universally told that that was a terrible idea and a terrible suggestion
[1:48:04] that I gave you guys.
[1:48:06] Every utility district we've talked to, folks at the state, absolutely not because
[1:48:11] you're risking not getting the soils right. So that is a significant change from
[1:48:16] what we had initially talked about based on all the advice that our staff has
[1:48:20] received. So we will be expecting that MOU package to have the full blown design
[1:48:25] with all the details from the soil scientists and the engineer and the
[1:48:28] system fully designed so that you guys know absolutely what can go on the
[1:48:34] ground and serve on a site.
[1:48:38] Within that the, do you guys have any questions
[1:48:41] questions about that.
[1:48:44] Alderman Warnett.
[1:48:46] Thank you, Chair. I just have one question, and you may have answered it, but so the Bioclear
[1:48:52] System will be purchased and installed by the developer, and the City of Spring Hill will
[1:48:58] maintain that from that point on.
[1:49:01] Once it's turned over to us and accepted, we'll take on the operations and maintenance
[1:49:05] of it.
[1:49:05] Correct.
[1:49:06] Thank you.
[1:49:09] The wastewater is going to be collected via gravity or small diameter pressure
[1:49:15] mains to a centralized bio-clear system on these sites. We're clarifying that
[1:49:21] because some of the utilities we visited with they use recirculating sand
[1:49:25] filter systems and those systems actually have larger tanks that are
[1:49:30] individually in each lot oftentimes in the front yard and we had a lot of
[1:49:36] concerns about we were advised that there's some long-term maintenance
[1:49:42] concerns in terms of being able to get updated media and maintain those over
[1:49:46] time it's getting harder and harder to do that and then also in some of these
[1:49:50] neighborhoods that we're looking at that are considering retrofitting you may
[1:49:55] already have 200 houses in there that don't have anything in the front yard
[1:49:59] and switching to have one or two of these very large tanks with these
[1:50:03] I mean, we're talking something that's as big around as this podium, right?
[1:50:08] It is not small, and so two of them kind of next to each other in a front yard, 200 houses
[1:50:14] with that and maybe 200 houses without that.
[1:50:17] We think that that's going to create a lot of issues within the market and within people
[1:50:22] trying to still go on and carry on with that.
[1:50:25] So that's why we've shifted more towards bio-clear because it doesn't require those
[1:50:28] individual tanks in the actual yards themselves and will create that visual ice ore, especially
[1:50:34] on – and a lot of these situations we're looking at folks trying to adapt to already
[1:50:38] established neighborhoods that have multiple phases on the ground.
[1:50:43] The tree deffluent goes through the shared drip subsurface disposal fields, and again,
[1:50:48] no individual tanks actually on the residential lots themselves.
[1:50:51] It's going to go separately to the bio-clear facility itself.
[1:50:56] Design flow, we're looking at the same assumption that we've made in all of our calculations
[1:51:04] in terms of our allocations that we've been talking about.
[1:51:06] So we'll be looking at actual based on 250 gallons a day per equivalent dwelling unit.
[1:51:11] And then the design has to include 100% of the design flow for the primary field and
[1:51:16] a 50% reserve field area.
[1:51:18] And that's based on guidance from Consolidated Utility District, who's widely regarded
[1:51:22] it as having some of the best specifications.
[1:51:27] Sight and soil evaluation, again, this is very important.
[1:51:30] We need to have the evaluation and certification by a Tennessee licensed soil scientist that's
[1:51:35] got to be a requirement, lifted, you know, some specifications in terms of number of
[1:51:40] borings per acre and depth and things like that, again, based on consolidated utility
[1:51:45] districts requirements.
[1:51:46] And then ultimately, you know, their soil scientist report has to document all the specific things about why they believe the loading rate can be supported that they're going to recommend in the design.
[1:51:59] This is the first pass at a table for soil suitability and loading rates.
[1:52:04] I currently have our consultant that we retain to do the specifications.
[1:52:08] They're double checking this to make sure that this is reasonable for our area.
[1:52:13] but this is largely taken off of, again, CUD's specifications and some other old textbooks that I've got.
[1:52:23] The reserve area, so you're going to have an area set aside for the treatment facility itself.
[1:52:29] You're going to have a primary drip field and then we're going to have a requirement for another 50% of reserve areas.
[1:52:36] So this is one of those things that's really important.
[1:52:39] They're going to go out there, they're going to make all these evaluations, but it depends
[1:52:43] on native undisturbed soils.
[1:52:45] What happens if during construction, even though they do everything right, they put
[1:52:49] their fences up, they protect it, all it takes is one person on the grading crew to
[1:52:55] not pay attention and they go and run a heavy piece of equipment through there and they
[1:53:00] obliterate a third of the drip field area before it's actually installed.
[1:53:05] Well, if that happens, you might lose the actual loading capacity and the treatment capacity
[1:53:11] of that section of soil.
[1:53:13] So that combined with things happen over time, what if it clogs, what if something happens,
[1:53:18] what if it's, you know, all kinds of different things.
[1:53:20] Having these reserve fields in these reserve areas are important so that we make sure
[1:53:25] that the loading rates that they put in there and the amount of flow that they
[1:53:28] put in, we don't just have enough for the design, we have reserve in case some
[1:53:32] of that ceases to function or we have some maintenance issues.
[1:53:34] So this is your backup field essentially and this this came on heavy guidance from Consolidated Utility District
[1:53:41] who actually hired and retained their own soil scientist on staff to help keep up with all this.
[1:53:46] They have well over a hundred different systems that they're monitoring and maintaining.
[1:53:52] So 50% of the primary field equal or superior soils talking about having it planted, fenced
[1:53:58] and marked reserve for future disposal use no construction or grading.
[1:54:01] So this has got to be sectioned off and left alone.
[1:54:06] That, I think that we will get a lot of feedback on.
[1:54:10] That is what we're getting feedback on is considered best practice, but it is just full
[1:54:17] disclosure.
[1:54:18] It does appear to be a little bit more conservative and will put us right up there with CUD as
[1:54:25] opposed to being more middle of the road, so I would definitely expect some feedback
[1:54:29] on that front.
[1:54:30] And people will come at it from terms of, okay, I have this much area, but if I
[1:54:35] have to have this reserved area. I've got to lop this piece off so my primary field
[1:54:38] is actually only this and I can only do this off of it. That's the general nature I
[1:54:42] believe of how that feedback is going to go. Any questions about that?
[1:54:52] So if my
[1:54:53] primary drip field is this, I need a reserve field of that.
[1:55:00] Got it.
[1:55:05] So just
[1:55:06] again first pass at a table you know this is a fixed-film biologic
[1:55:11] treatment system, clarify recirculation disinfection, we've got
[1:55:16] influent screening for pretreatment, we're looking at sizing the EQ basins for
[1:55:21] four hours of peak flow, hydraulic loading is going to be per manufacturer
[1:55:25] certified data, anti-deck approval, there's redundancy for greater than or
[1:55:29] equal to a day's average flow, recircular ratios based on manufacturer
[1:55:33] specs are three to one to a five to one minimum, disinfection, UV or tablet
[1:55:39] coronation. We will likely lean towards, pretty heavily towards UV on that front.
[1:55:44] We feel better about that. And then there are the performance standards for
[1:55:48] milligrams per liter in terms of BOD, TSS, and some nitrogen stuff if required,
[1:55:54] which we'll have to have that conversation with TDAC to see how
[1:55:57] strict that part's going to be.
[1:56:01] On the disposal systems themselves, we're
[1:56:03] looking again at subsurface drip or shallow pressure dose trenches. The
[1:56:08] depth to the limiting layer we're looking at you know 24 to 36 inches again
[1:56:14] design flow basis a hundred percent of design flow field construction we're
[1:56:19] looking roughly 18 to 24 inches deep 2 feet wide 6 feet on center spacing that's
[1:56:24] straight down line manufacturers recommendations drip tubing half inch
[1:56:28] to 1 inch diameter with the minors at roughly 2 foot spacing and then
[1:56:33] they'll have to be some pressure testing to show that there's no leaks at
[1:56:37] 100 psi for 15 minutes and then the reserve field needs to be fully
[1:56:41] cleared and ready for future activation and fully protected. We talked about
[1:56:46] site setbacks and buffers. I expect this is something that we'll also get some
[1:56:50] feedback on so don't be surprised if folks call you on this one. In terms of
[1:56:55] setting minimum distance and buffers looking at making sure that the field
[1:56:59] is any point on the field is at least 200 feet away from a residential
[1:57:03] structure, 50 feet away from a property line, 100 feet from a potable well, 10 feet
[1:57:09] from a water storm main, 100 feet from a stream, sea coal, or drainage way, and
[1:57:15] then 50 feet in terms of away from the disposal field to the bio-clear
[1:57:20] plant. And so that's a combination of things from a variety of places,
[1:57:25] manufacturers recommendations, as well as some other standards from Thompson
[1:57:29] station and some other research that we did on that.
[1:57:33] On the construction inspection side, we expect to include in the specifications a requirement
[1:57:37] for a pre-construction meeting with the city engineer and the inspectors.
[1:57:41] The key inspection points will be the bio-clear structure excavation and foundation.
[1:57:45] We want to make sure we get it right before we set it down.
[1:57:48] We want to make sure we get the pipe bedding and testing correct.
[1:57:51] That drip field installation is going to be very critical that we handle that right
[1:57:54] and we don't over disturb those native soils while we put them in.
[1:57:58] On the control panel, electrical side, we just make sure that startup goes correctly
[1:58:02] and all that gets installed right, and then ultimately there'd be a system startup and
[1:58:07] demonstration that we'd have to go through and clear before we release bonds and took
[1:58:10] acceptance and ownership of it.
[1:58:12] We'll require record drawings with GIS's GPS requirements, as well as AS builds that
[1:58:19] have to be signed and sealed, all that has to correlate to the standard operating
[1:58:23] permit conditions that TDEC gives on those plans.
[1:58:27] And then from an operations and maintenance standpoint, we've got to have a licensed
[1:58:30] wastewater operator, at least class two.
[1:58:33] We'll have to have some monthly sampling at each of those sites.
[1:58:36] We can run that through our lab up at the plant, or we can farm it out.
[1:58:40] Either way, we've got the things in place to get that done.
[1:58:44] Maintenance is going to require a quarterly cleaning of the filters, pumps, and blowers.
[1:58:48] And then for the systems larger than 10,000 gallons a day, we will likely spend
[1:58:53] a little extra money of our own probably and put those on SCADA telemetry so that we
[1:58:57] can there's a problem we can get alarm signal back at home base and dispatch a crew to work
[1:59:02] on it.
[1:59:03] As far as easements dedication and financial assurances, the system parcel itself is like
[1:59:09] we talked about at the beginning, it's got to be dedicated to the city at or before
[1:59:11] first final plat, we'll be looking at a minimum 20 foot access easement so if it's set
[1:59:17] back on a parcel that's not right on the road or something like that we need access,
[1:59:20] We need at least 20 feet to get back to it.
[1:59:25] Performance bonds will likely be per UDC requirements, maintenance bonds will be per UDC requirements.
[1:59:30] We're not looking to reinvent the wheel there.
[1:59:33] And then we'll likely have insurance maintained by the developer until the city accepts it.
[1:59:39] Smiddle requirements for the MOU, you know, concept plan of generally what they're doing
[1:59:44] on the site as well as an application, they'll have to have the soils evaluation
[1:59:49] report that will be from the licensed soil scientists, the engineering design
[1:59:53] report that will come from their licensed engineer, the full set of
[1:59:56] construction drawings sealed with any easement dedications or
[2:00:00] Land dedications that need to be taken care of, the standard operating permit application
[2:00:05] listed in the city as the applicant, the operation and maintenance manual for the specifics of what
[2:00:11] they're proposing, and then ultimately to come off of it as built drawings and certifications
[2:00:18] will have them sign a form committing to doing that as part of the MOU process.
[2:00:22] And any other unique conditions or things like that that apply to that site. I know
[2:00:27] one of the things that was discussed early on was folks saying hey if I'm
[2:00:32] changing you know I'm changing my plan you know I had this financial plan put
[2:00:36] together I was planning on building it this way I'm trying to adapt to put this
[2:00:39] system in please don't penalize me by making me go through you know a whole
[2:00:45] extra process with BOMA or opening up my entitlements or things like that if
[2:00:49] all I'm doing is just reworking an area in a future phase to put this
[2:00:54] system in, you know, can we figure out a way to do that? Staff's proposal for that is to,
[2:01:00] in those situations through the MOU process for the board to use their discretion and
[2:01:05] adding a condition to those MOUs to basically say, if it really is truly just, I'm making
[2:01:11] an adjustment to put this in temporarily to get us over the hump until we get the
[2:01:14] bigger expansions done, then maybe we could consider doing administrative approvals at
[2:01:19] the staff level to expedite them and move them forward.
[2:01:22] We don't want to overly penalize people
[2:01:24] that are trying to collaborate
[2:01:25] and work through a difficult situation.
[2:01:29] And with that, I think that's it, so I'll take any questions.
[2:01:34] Back to the board for questions or comments
[2:01:35] from Mr. Allen,
[2:01:39] Alderman Davis.
[2:01:40] Thank you, Chair.
[2:01:42] So I know it depends on how many units, right?
[2:01:45] They put in there, but on average,
[2:01:46] what do you think our developers
[2:01:49] are going to have to allocate as far as land goes?
[2:01:52] Generally, the rule of thumb, when you're just
[2:01:56] kind of first looking at it, before you really
[2:01:58] get the soil scientists out there doing their thing
[2:02:01] and really evaluating it, is usually
[2:02:03] about 10 residential units per one acre of good soils.
[2:02:08] So it's usually about a 1 to 10 ratio.
[2:02:10] That's usually where it's done.
[2:02:11] Now, if you have better soils, it can be better.
[2:02:13] But that's what I've always used
[2:02:15] when I've done them on the private side.
[2:02:17] and that's usually been pretty close.
[2:02:21] And we're going to ask that they also have connections
[2:02:25] to our sewer system, so they'll either,
[2:02:29] so they're going to be putting horizontal end
[2:02:32] as well as these units,
[2:02:34] and I'm just trying to understand that as well.
[2:02:37] That, I think, really is going to be on a case-by-case basis.
[2:02:40] Some of the systems that are being talked
[2:02:42] about and considered may not be temporary. We may work with them to just make them permanent parts
[2:02:49] of our system and we may even consider bringing forward an offset agreement of their sewer development
[2:02:55] fees. You know if they were going to pay you know $1.5 million in sewer development fees and
[2:03:00] we're going to leave it as a permanent system then we may just offset those sewer fees
[2:03:04] toward that capital investment and give them a credit on their building permits as they come
[2:03:08] through. There are lots of things that we can do like that. Try to take the sting
[2:03:15] out of it while people are trying to collaborate and work with us.
[2:03:20] Alderman
[2:03:20] Morgan. The 50% rule that you're adding on to the field, is that a T-deck
[2:03:29] requirement or just a good practice? That's a best management practice. So I
[2:03:36] can see from the developer's point of view that they're potentially could be
[2:03:39] large portion of their lots that are going to be allocated just to the strip field where
[2:03:47] they might have put houses or businesses. In the future, when these are removed, they're
[2:03:54] able to build on that piece of property. Is that correct? That this is an unusual piece
[2:03:59] of property after the system is removed. That's my understanding. Yes. Thank you.
[2:04:06] Mayor fitter. Thank you chair. Mr. Allen. Talk to us about what expected next steps from here could look like
[2:04:13] would we be looking at resolution to adopt this is is policy and kick it off and then we go get approval from T
[2:04:22] deck. What's what's that? What's next? I'd like to get a resolution in front of you guys with the
[2:04:29] the formalized formatted standards document that has it all formally documented everywhere and
[2:04:34] get approval on that and then we kick off the approval process with TDEC and get that going.
[2:04:38] Any any guesses you want to make on what that the length of that process with TDEC?
[2:04:47] Typically our spec updates have only taken between 30 and 40 days so I would guess about a month
[2:04:54] is based on past experience. Are we thinking we would want to be through that process before
[2:05:01] before we start receiving any of these potential MOUs.
[2:05:09] Ultimately, that's the board's discretion.
[2:05:11] I'm comfortable with taking them early.
[2:05:13] We've had a few folks ask, and I basically told them,
[2:05:16] if they're comfortable with working in the gray area,
[2:05:19] while we're working out the final details,
[2:05:21] I mean, a lot of this stuff is pretty free.
[2:05:23] A lot of it's pretty cut and dry,
[2:05:25] but I think you'd have to be comfortable with the idea
[2:05:27] that you have to go rework some of this.
[2:05:30] There may be a tweak here.
[2:05:31] they're based on a comment we get from somebody or somebody.
[2:05:33] The folks I've talked to seem to be comfortable with that, starting the process earlier, so
[2:05:37] as long as they're comfortable with it, I am.
[2:05:39] I would anticipate there'd be a bit of an early demand, right, and then six months
[2:05:49] a year from now, that flow of applications would be something less is kind of how
[2:05:56] I think this would go.
[2:05:58] I would welcome it because it would also help plug any holes.
[2:06:02] Yeah, what if we miss something and what if they go? Hey, we thought about this or we need this or something like that
[2:06:06] It gives us a chance to kind of stress test this out of the gate and tweak it before it gets final. Yeah
[2:06:11] See, I was thinking about it as workflow coming in
[2:06:13] You know if you're if you're able to space these out a little bit on the front end and then you're able to still process these in a
[2:06:19] timely manner
[2:06:23] I think I would generally support
[2:06:26] accepting applications as soon as we adopt a policy which I would assume would be on the
[2:06:31] 15th then? Is that when we meet next? Yeah. You know that would give you a chance to stress
[2:06:37] test some and maybe stretch out the work a little bit while we're waiting on some final
[2:06:43] TDEC approvals. I would anticipate the first one or two that come in front of us are probably
[2:06:51] going to get a lot more discussion and questions and then we'll probably have the process
[2:06:56] walk down pretty good after that. Thank you, Chair.
[2:07:03] Alderman Jimenez. Thank you, Chair.
[2:07:06] What would you estimate? I know Alderman Davis said how many homes he said about 10 homes per system, per acre, so to speak.
[2:07:13] What would you estimate the cost of that? If you were to throw a wild dart and hit someone on the board, where would you estimate that cost to be?
[2:07:22] I've not built a bio-clear system, so I don't have a great feel for what the cost is.
[2:07:27] Makes sense. I asked that because
[2:07:30] Being in the housing market being a lender
[2:07:33] Spring Hill is not the most affordable place that you can buy a home at if we want to look at affordability for our citizens
[2:07:40] we have to figure out a way that I
[2:07:44] Don't want to say help developers
[2:07:46] Bury this cost, but if not it goes in the cost of the home, right? They got to pass it on somewhere
[2:07:52] What can we do as a city to promote keeping housing affordable for the new
[2:07:57] developments that will come up without skyrocketing them through the roof based
[2:08:01] on the needs that they have to have in order to build? Does that make sense?
[2:08:06] Yeah, it makes sense. You can you have some measure of discretion in a few
[2:08:15] different areas in the municipal code to soften things a little bit if it's
[2:08:20] related to an affordable housing issue.
[2:08:23] Let me stop you real quick.
[2:08:25] I apologize, I wasn't super clear.
[2:08:27] I mean specifically towards the additional sewer work
[2:08:29] that they would have to do.
[2:08:31] I think your best tool on that is offering offset agreements
[2:08:35] for sewer development fee.
[2:08:37] They have to pay a fee with every building permit
[2:08:39] that's essentially an impact fee for sewer.
[2:08:41] So if you offset that and say, hey,
[2:08:43] instead of charging you that for your building permit,
[2:08:46] since you're putting this in on the front end,
[2:08:47] we're basically gonna add up all those fees for all of your permits they're
[2:08:51] eligible under the system will apply those fees toward that system then when you
[2:08:57] come in and get your building permit you get a credit on your building but you
[2:09:00] don't have to pay that part of the building right with okay and and for
[2:09:07] those of you on the board I'm bringing that up because we have to keep
[2:09:10] housing semi-affordable here like we can pass this on but someone's gonna pay
[2:09:15] for it and it's not going to be us with existing houses, it's going to be the people that are
[2:09:19] looking to purchase their new home, their first home, something of that nature. It'll help
[2:09:23] home values, I'm sure, because it's going to bring the houses of Spring Hill up in
[2:09:27] value because they're going to have to charge more. But how do we offset this cost as
[2:09:31] a negotiation factor to make this maintain an affordability down the road? So just
[2:09:37] a thought, it's something I would like to discuss more in depth. Again, I don't
[2:09:41] want to surrender the farm to the developers and say, here, you can have this all
[2:09:44] for free but I'm thinking about the end user when I think about this. It's all
[2:09:48] thank you. On the the 110 is that what the 50%
[2:09:55] reserve so you talking say that again sorry so in acres 43,000 some odd
[2:10:01] square feet so easy math let's just say that the 110 one acre for 10 units is
[2:10:06] that including the 50% reserve on that so you need 21,000 square feet 22,000
[2:10:11] square feet for 10 units or do you need the entire acre so it's technically it
[2:10:17] would be two acres per 10 units if I remember correctly and it's been about
[2:10:26] six years since I've done one so the last one I did was in another city
[2:10:34] in Williamson County how about that if I remember correctly the initial
[2:10:39] estimate was for 120 houses and that was backed in on a 1 to 10 ratio and then
[2:10:47] the reserve number was added on to that as extra. Okay, so it's technically a two
[2:10:53] two acres for 10 units that way that you can accommodate the 50%. Right, you
[2:10:58] figure out what you need for that and then you have the extra reserve
[2:11:01] requirement on top of it. So if we're talking about this for short term and
[2:11:08] and then discussing some, we have short term, medium range with our long term
[2:11:15] goals of opening up the plant, I can see where this becomes viable but I'm
[2:11:26] really curious to Alderman Jimenez's point on you know if you're gonna
[2:11:32] to try to build it out for say a couple hundred units.
[2:11:36] A, it's going to take a lot of land,
[2:11:37] it's going to take a big investment.
[2:11:39] I've mentioned several times on ensuring that those
[2:11:43] that are up-running this cost to ensure
[2:11:45] that their development survives, that they get that back
[2:11:47] and that there's some accessibility to that land
[2:11:51] for whatever phase it's placed on,
[2:11:53] that way it can be developed.
[2:11:55] Do we have any encouraging insight
[2:11:57] that that can be done?
[2:11:59] I think last time we spoke about it,
[2:12:01] once it's rededicated systems pulled up can it be built on I think that was a
[2:12:07] question that we had asked previously that's my understanding I've got I've
[2:12:13] got that out to a few people to get multiple opinions make sure we got it
[2:12:18] covered but the feedback I've gotten so far it doesn't seem to be any issue
[2:12:22] with it because remember it's getting treated a good bit of the way before
[2:12:26] then dispersed. Thank you, Mr. Allen.
[2:12:31] Mayor Fitter. Thank you, Chair. Alderman Jimenez,
[2:12:35] you said something about affordability and it reminded me of the conversation we had
[2:12:41] several months ago. We had some presentations around infrastructure development districts
[2:12:47] And I would fully anticipate these systems potentially being part of IDDs as well.
[2:12:57] You know, there's another municipality within Williamson County that is very, very close to adopting a framework around their IDD policy.
[2:13:04] So I think we'll start to hear again requests for that and requests for these systems to be included in the IDDs.
[2:13:13] they could easily trigger that investable number that we heard from the presenters several
[2:13:19] months ago, especially as the other municipality wrapped up their policy here.
[2:13:24] I think they're trying to wrap it up this month.
[2:13:31] Any additional comments?
[2:13:32] I have a couple quick questions on this as well.
[2:13:35] First thing I want to do is give a shout out to the staff because that was an incredibly
[2:13:38] detailed presentation.
[2:13:40] We gave you all the charge of coming back to us in 90 to 120 days with these standards
[2:13:44] and you all hit that timeline so I appreciate the perseverance and the
[2:13:50] level of detail you all put in so thank you for that. Big props to the
[2:13:54] Spring Hill water leadership team the Spartan team there were there are a lot
[2:13:58] of people to thank. Second question I've got is is the Bioclear system a
[2:14:04] single vendor like provided by a single vendor? I believe so I believe the
[2:14:08] company name is Aquapoint. Okay is there any fear of that by limiting to
[2:14:13] one standard from one vendor but it would increase the cost because there's
[2:14:18] market inefficiency there for that specific system in Spring Hill. I don't
[2:14:25] think so. I'm not anticipating us just doing tons of these and they're already
[2:14:30] approved in other jurisdictions around us so it's not like we're doing a
[2:14:34] first-of-its-kind where they can jack the price up and say oh hey this is
[2:14:37] we're at but if you know I don't I could be wrong but I don't believe so and then
[2:14:44] one just one other note just to Mayor Fitter's point I would be comfortable
[2:14:47] accepting applications you know in advance of a formal approval from TDEC
[2:14:51] as long as that's disclosed to the parties who are pursuing that sure any
[2:14:57] additional comments on this item all right thank you mr.
[2:15:00] Mr. Allen, I guess you're still up for item number two, sewer moratorium update. So we'll
[2:15:05] take it back to you, Mr. Allen. Mr. Napier and Ms. Sanders, if you have anything to add.
[2:15:11] Did you want to lead it all for your major's role?
[2:15:16] So on this one, after last BOMA meeting, you know, we had gotten direction from the
[2:15:24] board to go meet with the development community. So we went and had that meeting. As you can
[2:15:30] imagine it was a bit tense at times. But overall I think it was a pretty productive conversation.
[2:15:38] Really out of that we took the feedback. We showed a first draft of the tier one allocation
[2:15:46] groups that we came up with. Definitely got some feedback there. We've captured
[2:15:50] that in a memo that's in the packet. I'm going to go ahead and hit the highlights of that just
[2:15:56] for folks that may not have been able to attend or just watching to try and keep up with it.
[2:16:02] Lots of questions out there about how we came up with the allocation tiers, what's the basis
[2:16:06] for it, so I'll try and cover that as best I can. Feel free to pop in with questions as we go
[2:16:11] through it. Really the the core issue that we've got it down to is after doing all of our
[2:16:19] research and taking feedback from everybody and trying to be as fair and
[2:16:22] equitable as possible. Staff is making a recommendation that Boma vacate a portion
[2:16:29] of sewer reservations dedicated legacy point as well as Spring Hill Commerce
[2:16:32] Center. It's our opinion that there is not a significant reasonable set of
[2:16:37] criteria to apply equitably in order to justify these two projects consuming
[2:16:42] all the remaining sewer capacity available when other projects have
[2:16:45] similar situations that merit consideration in a fair and equitable distribution.
[2:16:52] Where we find ourselves at is when we've done the math and we'll go over it again here in
[2:16:56] the memo.
[2:16:58] If you hold to a line that says we're going to hold the full reservation for Legacy Point
[2:17:04] as well as the full reservation for Spring Hill Commerce Center, then there's really
[2:17:12] nothing left for anybody else.
[2:17:14] Vesting doesn't matter, capacity letters doesn't matter. If you hold that, that's
[2:17:20] all that's left. So you're allocating all that's left just to those two projects
[2:17:25] and nobody gets anything else. In our research of it, you know, the initial
[2:17:32] thought that we had was that Legacy Point and Spring Hill Commerce Center
[2:17:39] perhaps merited some higher consideration because they had specific
[2:17:43] conditions in their entitlement documents that were adopted by
[2:17:47] ordinance and then they also have essentially a public-private financing
[2:17:52] structure through tax increment finance districts for infrastructure
[2:17:56] primarily associated with some economic development targets that came
[2:18:00] through at the time of their approval. In our research of that and working
[2:18:04] with Mr. Carter's team and getting lots and lots of feedback about that we
[2:18:12] have changed our allocation approach and so regardless of whether it has a TIF
[2:18:18] district with it or a separate development agreement if a project has
[2:18:23] another agreement outside of their initial entitlement approval where they
[2:18:28] got their zoning and their plans put in place we're generally trying to treat
[2:18:32] those all at the same level and that's the basis for the group one
[2:18:35] tier and so some examples that we have in there you have Barton Hills who
[2:18:41] who has a substantial development agreement
[2:18:43] separate from their entitlement approval
[2:18:45] to prepay fees towards, I believe,
[2:18:48] a booster station as well as the Arbor Valley water tank.
[2:18:51] You also have Arbor Valley,
[2:18:53] who did a development agreement
[2:18:55] separate from their entitlement approvals
[2:18:57] to put millions of dollars into building the water tank
[2:19:00] that we have out there,
[2:19:01] similar situation with June Lake.
[2:19:03] John Mayor Builders as well as Bell Springs
[2:19:06] are being given credit for the development agreement
[2:19:10] they did with the city in 2014 when they partnered with the city to build
[2:19:14] reserve boulevard which was built to provide access to those properties and
[2:19:19] open up that roadway if they hadn't done that there wouldn't be any access there
[2:19:24] and it's a similar line of reasoning on down the line in that group that takes
[2:19:31] up about 207,000 gallons a day so that leaves us then with this permit ready
[2:19:37] vacant lot and so talked about all these different ways of organizing this
[2:19:41] right like do they have construction approval did they have site plan
[2:19:44] approval what level of besting are they at have they started horizontal
[2:19:47] construction have they gone vertical well we already addressed the issue of if
[2:19:51] you've got a building permit you're getting a CEO we're not going to be that
[2:19:55] city we're not gonna be the city that gives somebody a building permit it
[2:19:58] says oh now that you're halfway done or you're completely done with the
[2:20:01] building you don't get to move in that family doesn't get to close on
[2:20:04] that house that tenant doesn't get to start their business in that building
[2:20:06] That's that's not who we are. So we've already set that. So that took about
[2:20:10] 365,000 gallons off-table so that we can honor the commitments that we made as a
[2:20:15] city to those people that made those investments. This allocation of what's
[2:20:20] left is this group one of what's left about 207 goes to that and then you've
[2:20:25] got about 6,200-500 left over that we're talking about just making
[2:20:30] available for permit ready vacant lots. So if you got allocation in
[2:20:34] group one you don't get to double dip and get anything out of group two there's
[2:20:39] about sixty two thousand five hundred left over to try to allocate to some of
[2:20:42] these these projects that are left and so why this matters when you subtract
[2:20:49] these amounts and you run the math of the math on this thing the 207 plus the
[2:20:56] 62 five that's pretty much everything that's left and so either give it all
[2:21:01] the legacy point and project suitcase or we spread it around and then within the
[2:21:06] 62.5 left try and satisfy as many of the builders as possible and help them
[2:21:11] survive long enough for some alternative systems to come online. The
[2:21:15] basis for that group one allocation comes from a legal opinion that was
[2:21:20] researched. The notion of that is that plan developments whether it's a
[2:21:24] PD or a PUD we have both right depending on which version of the
[2:21:28] zoning ordinance we've looked at over the last decade,
[2:21:30] they're zoning tools and they're not contracts.
[2:21:33] They don't create special promises
[2:21:35] between the city and a developer
[2:21:37] unless a separate development agreement exists.
[2:21:40] So only actual development agreements
[2:21:42] create binding obligations.
[2:21:43] For it to be a contract,
[2:21:45] both sides have to make promises.
[2:21:47] That is the city and the developer.
[2:21:49] The zoning approvals alone do not constitute a contract.
[2:21:53] And so because of this,
[2:21:55] that is the basis for staff
[2:21:56] placing only true development agreement projects in Group 1. We believe this protects the city from
[2:22:01] allegations of contract zoning risks as well as keeping the process as fair and equitable as
[2:22:07] possible.
[2:22:10] Any questions on that part?
[2:22:14] All right. So when we do the capacity math,
[2:22:17] we start at 5 million gallons a day, which is our rating for average flow.
[2:22:21] Existing flows are at 4.2, so we subtract that off. We subtract off 100,000 gallons a day
[2:22:28] for a safety reserve. You pull off 65,000 gallons a day for the critical
[2:22:32] infrastructure exemption. That's the hospital and the public works relocation
[2:22:36] which we have to do to expand the sewer plant. Then you pull off another 365,000
[2:22:42] gallons a day for the active building permits, right? You've got a building
[2:22:44] permit, you get a CEO. Then you pull off 207.403 for that group one
[2:22:50] allocation and then group two has 62,500 left gallons per day. That's only
[2:22:56] 97 gallons per day remaining. So that basically allocates everything that we
[2:23:00] have left. We're completely allocated at that point.
[2:23:05] That's why fairness, clarity,
[2:23:08] and legal consistency are so important in how we discuss this and go about this.
[2:23:13] So the follow-ups are we've asked the development community to provide their
[2:23:20] 18 months sewer needs by Wednesday December 3rd this week. We plan to
[2:23:25] circulate this memo we've already you know we published in the packet we're
[2:23:30] having this conversation tonight about it and then we are gonna publish our
[2:23:36] crack at group two allocations to try and fairly and equitably distribute
[2:23:41] that of what's left. Really tonight what it comes down to and I think this
[2:23:46] alludes to the mayor's comments at the beginning of the meeting. We
[2:23:50] We got to have a key policy question answered.
[2:23:52] Staff's gone about as far as we can go in terms of making proposals and what's the fairest
[2:23:59] and most equitable way to try and distribute this.
[2:24:02] None of that means anything if you guys make a decision and you decide we're going to
[2:24:07] fully honor the legacy point reservation and we're going to fully honor the suitcase
[2:24:11] reservation.
[2:24:13] If you honor both of those, none of this work on these allocations in these proposals
[2:24:17] those matters because there's nothing left for anybody else so all those other
[2:24:21] projects as well as all the stuff that could be in group two they don't get
[2:24:24] anything they stop they're done and so both situations have consequences both
[2:24:32] have conditions but the question is does Boma intend to fully honor the legacy
[2:24:36] point in Spring Hill Commerce Center sewer reservations if your answer to
[2:24:41] that is yes like I said those commitments consume the remaining
[2:24:45] available capacity. There's no capacity left for any other project regardless of
[2:24:49] status or regardless of vested. It eliminates the entire staff proposal
[2:24:54] that we just discussed. It's off the table. If your answer is no, then we can
[2:25:00] attempt to share what remains across the development community in the farthest
[2:25:04] way possible as proposed in section one and then going through the group two
[2:25:07] allocations. That's the policy decision you guys have got to wrestle with and
[2:25:12] that you have to make.
[2:25:14] That choice defines what we do next and how we proceed.
[2:25:19] And we really can't go forward until we have that conversation
[2:25:22] and make that decision.
[2:25:24] So whichever path you choose in the discussion tonight,
[2:25:27] we're obviously not voting on it, but we
[2:25:29] need some guidance on where you'd like us to take this.
[2:25:33] That will steer what we prepare for the next BOMA meeting
[2:25:36] in terms of putting some sort of legislative action
[2:25:40] in place so that we can memorialize this and officially take action so that
[2:25:46] ultimately we can open back up the development services department and
[2:25:49] start processing application applications again and get people back to
[2:25:53] work.
[2:25:56] I think with that we'll take questions. Alright we'll bring you back to the
[2:25:59] board for discussion.
[2:26:03] Alderman Werner. Thank you chair. I think this
[2:26:08] proposes outstanding the staff did a fantastic job. It's a terribly
[2:26:12] difficult decision. I mean there's no getting around this and where we're
[2:26:18] going to move forward. I fully support moving forward with this proposal and I
[2:26:25] know it's going to be difficult with legacy and with the Spring Hill Commerce
[2:26:31] Center there'll be some discussion but I think this proposal is as fair as
[2:26:38] possible at this time and I support them for with that.
[2:26:45] Alderman Davis. Thank you
[2:26:48] Chair. Yeah, very hard decision but I just want to thank our staff. This was
[2:26:59] hard. I know you all had to field a lot of questions from us, from our
[2:27:08] different scenarios together to help us think through this. And I appreciate that. But I
[2:27:14] also want to look at our development community and thank you all too. I know everybody has
[2:27:19] been a part of these meetings and stepped up to help each other out in some way. We're
[2:27:25] not all getting what we want here. We would love to say yes to everybody. You
[2:27:31] guys would love to have your full development built out. But it's a collaboration of
[2:27:37] working together and I feel like as this sewer moratorium and our sewer system
[2:27:43] evolves things will change and I feel like the city of Spring Hill will be
[2:27:47] better but I also feel like our developers that worked with us and
[2:27:51] through this we will remember that and we will appreciate that and that will
[2:27:57] make you stronger within our community as well so thank you because everybody's
[2:28:01] not getting what they want but I feel like everybody's coming to the table
[2:28:04] with something for us to work with while we're putting ideas together and solutions together
[2:28:11] to move forward in this new terrain we're in. So I would be in favor of this because I think it's
[2:28:17] more fair than what we were able to do, but thank you.
[2:28:24] Thank you, Chair. Mr. Allen, I've got a question on the second category. Has it been
[2:28:32] considered by staff you've got some that are going to be in that category you're
[2:28:37] going to have some some developments that are fairly new that are going to be
[2:28:43] spread out I mean I know that we've got several that are under development we've
[2:28:49] got one that's 2014 I think another one that's 2016 one that's 2017 is tenure
[2:28:54] are going to be counted in that last remaining allocation and then in some
[2:29:01] of those older developments to answer that yes yes and then my second question is through
[2:29:07] the life of those projects you know they they evolve have we thoroughly looked at some of
[2:29:12] those documents and different development agreements to ensure that we're we're not missing something
[2:29:18] because like the one from 2014 over the life of that project their quote unquote investment
[2:29:25] to the city should be significant enough to warrant, you know, first categorization.
[2:29:31] So I just want to make sure that post the decision that's made in two weeks that we're considering
[2:29:39] tenure, be making sure that we're looking at well over a decades worth of documentation
[2:29:45] to ensure there's not something that we're missing.
[2:29:48] I have confidence in the staff.
[2:29:50] I'm just looking for record.
[2:29:52] We've done the best we can in a very, very challenging situation.
[2:29:58] Not all those developed.
[2:30:00] Agreement are written to the same standard, same level of expertise, so we've tried to take
[2:30:06] into account context and timing and things like that. For instance, I think I'm the only
[2:30:12] person left, I think it's just me, Patrick, and John Mayer that were involved in the crafting
[2:30:17] of the reserve boulevard agreement.
[2:30:23] John can punch me if he wants later for this, but
[2:30:25] feel pretty confident that if John had known there were going to be a sewer
[2:30:29] issue like this 10 years later he would have inserted a stipulation into his
[2:30:33] development agreement about some sort of guarantee your capacity. In 2014 when
[2:30:37] that was done we had just commissioned and opened the expansion of this the
[2:30:43] last major expansion of the sewer plant. All this coming to the level that
[2:30:48] happened back then. So that agreement is not written nearly to the
[2:30:53] sophistication level of some of the more recent ones in the last last two or
[2:30:57] three years, but does that warrant them being treated different differently, right?
[2:31:02] They had the same intent. He still put millions of dollars with multiple
[2:31:05] properties in to build the road to create access that we only had to then
[2:31:09] come back in atop. So we're trying to honor the spirit and the principle of
[2:31:12] things, even though like if we can give you the list of all the development
[2:31:17] agreements that have been looked at, they very wildly in their
[2:31:21] sophistication in their documentation. So at the end of the day we had to make
[2:31:25] judgment calls and just do the best we could on it. Okay and then I'm gonna pick
[2:31:29] on one specifically because they're well represented in the room but if you
[2:31:33] look at harvest point you have it's it's not on the tier one but you know
[2:31:39] the development of and I forget the roadway but the partnership between the
[2:31:44] county them the city when Mr. Lay sat as administrator being one number two
[2:31:50] I think there's a development agreement as recent as 2022 so it's looking at like some
[2:31:57] of that context and I don't know about everybody in the room but that's the calls that I've
[2:32:01] been fielding you know and try to understand the logic and how we've gotten to the point
[2:32:09] of making this decision so I appreciate it it's been very complicated but looking for
[2:32:15] two weeks in the recommendation that's kind of what I will be looking for is how
[2:32:22] that that second round is staged out to be as equitable as first harvest point
[2:32:27] is going to be addressed in group two thank
[2:32:32] you all to make a quaint Alderman
[2:32:34] him and I thank you chair I'm gonna steal the mayor's example at the
[2:32:41] beginning of the session about us being on a ship together going towards
[2:32:44] eye of the storm. I don't think there's a better example of that from our
[2:32:49] community, from you as developers and builders and from us as a board, but to
[2:32:54] divide it up like it states here on this document. I think it shows that all of us
[2:32:58] are going to give some in hopes that we can keep people working, keep people
[2:33:02] moving forward, keep amenities coming to the city, homes coming to the city
[2:33:06] for the people that want to live here.
[2:33:10] I think this is a great way to
[2:33:12] divide it up. I think that some of the other projects that we have may
[2:33:14] They take a lot longer, and there's no sense in just waiting around and keeping things
[2:33:18] still in the meantime.
[2:33:20] There's no sense of having people that can't work because we have no projects for them.
[2:33:24] This was never intended to bankrupt developers, but if we put a stop to it, it could.
[2:33:31] I would like to see, there is one gentleman, he was in here a couple of sessions back.
[2:33:36] He had 1200-ish, or maybe he had 12 units used, but I think his name was Hank.
[2:33:41] You guys may remember him.
[2:33:42] His name's Hank.
[2:33:43] His name's Hank.
[2:33:43] I would love to see, we were all small people
[2:33:46] at one point, right?
[2:33:48] And now we've become something bigger.
[2:33:49] I would love to see his numbers added on here
[2:33:51] as an allocation, I'm assuming as developers
[2:33:54] we could find a way to make him fit.
[2:33:57] So maybe that's one thing that we could potentially
[2:33:59] throw in there so we don't bankrupt
[2:34:01] one of those smaller places I can't take
[2:34:03] the brunt of this ride to the eye of the storm
[2:34:06] so to speak, that's it.
[2:34:13] Any additional comments, questions?
[2:34:15] I have a couple of thoughts as well.
[2:34:18] I think one thing that I would just encourage the development of community is the note in
[2:34:24] the memo about providing 18 months sewer needs by December 3rd.
[2:34:28] I think it's incredibly important because I think just most people have done that.
[2:34:35] That's great to hear.
[2:34:36] But if there is anyone who hasn't, I think the timing of the need is almost as important
[2:34:39] as the need itself to make sure that we're not in a spot where we're allocating capacity
[2:34:46] that may not be buildable for five years.
[2:34:49] And so I think that's important because that allows us to explore other potential solutions
[2:34:55] like we saw on the agenda tonight.
[2:35:00] My hope is that the development community has shown an incredible amount of willingness
[2:35:06] to partner with us as we find solutions for everyone right now.
[2:35:09] I appreciate that and we'll need to continue that sort of that sort of
[2:35:15] spirit over the next you know few years as we work through the situation. I agree
[2:35:20] with many of my colleagues here that what was laid out by staff in the memo
[2:35:24] makes a lot of sense in helping everyone move forward. That would be my direction as well.
[2:35:31] Aldermen Murray. Yeah thank you Chair not not to pile on but I want to thank our
[2:35:36] development community for their patients, their collaboration. Obviously lots
[2:35:45] aren't even said that I agree with to revisit it, but I just want to thank you
[2:35:50] what you do. And my hope is that we get to a place to where we're never in a
[2:35:59] situation like this again and so that everyone can thrive and not just survive
[2:36:06] but thrive and be great partners like you currently are so thank you for that and
[2:36:13] as that's already been mentioned I appreciate most fair and equitable way
[2:36:21] to to do this to to help our partners out so that's that's any
[2:36:29] additional
[2:36:30] comments on this item. Thank you board. We'll move on to Mr. Allen. Just make sure. So we're
[2:36:38] going to prepare an ordinance in two weeks that will commemorate this as well as we'll
[2:36:44] release the group two allocations before them but we'll prepare an ordinance to basically
[2:36:48] document spreading it around.
[2:36:54] And then we will also bring back resolution on the
[2:36:58] alternative systems at the same time so we can give folks some clarity on that so
[2:37:04] they can start doing some stuff. All right thank you Mr. Allen. I'll go too far
[2:37:09] because item number three is yours as well. SHW-SFR funding update and next
[2:37:14] round submissions. Oh yeah so on that that's the state revolving loan fund
[2:37:20] program so around this time of year every year they open up for
[2:37:24] applications. We found out that we are gonna get three projects worth five, five
[2:37:36] and a half million dollars in this last go around. So we'll be coming to you how
[2:37:43] to originally toss it to Rebecca. Hey let's put that in the budget amendment.
[2:37:47] She's like, yeah, you haven't actually taken that from the board to approve the
[2:37:50] contracts yet. So let's hold off on that. So she was right on that one. But
[2:37:54] So we'll be bringing that as we get that dialed in, but we'd like to keep the momentum going.
[2:38:00] So I'll likely be bringing a resolution either early January.
[2:38:05] I might try and get it in December if we've got time, but basically just outlining some
[2:38:09] project proposals, some of the ones that we didn't get last year that I think still
[2:38:12] are worthy of merit that we could put in there again related to a variety of things,
[2:38:18] some smaller some of our distribution and collection projects that you know
[2:38:23] don't necessarily have to be rate funded you know we can wait a little while
[2:38:26] longer and take the federal funds route and go a little slower and do the
[2:38:30] process to get those things funded so we'll try and pick up somewhere between
[2:38:33] another three and five million again so we'll start that with the resolution
[2:38:36] authorized staff to submit and then it takes about a year to go through the
[2:38:40] process as we go through it then we'll bring it back to actually adopt
[2:38:43] the contracts and then we'll go and put them in the budgets and keep
[2:38:46] Thanks, Bill.
[2:38:47] So that's very good.
[2:38:48] Any questions or comments from Mr. Allen?
[2:38:52] Thank you.
[2:38:53] I'll move on to item number four, Development Services Department Update.
[2:38:57] This is Sanders.
[2:38:57] Thank you, Vice Mayor.
[2:38:59] Given that it is so late, I'm just going to get the HDMI cord.
[2:39:03] I'm going to give you my presentation from this chair if that's okay.
[2:39:07] For me.
[2:39:07] Okay.
[2:39:21] I'm just going to give the presentation from here.
[2:39:23] That chair.
[2:39:23] Yes.
[2:39:45] I wanted to give you a presentation version of the director's report that was included
[2:39:56] in your last agenda packet.
[2:39:59] The reason being is at the beginning of this year I presented to the BOMA my six month
[2:40:10] needs assessment of the Development Services Department.
[2:40:16] Through my assessment, I had found that the department was essentially incomplete.
[2:40:25] The analogy that I've been using is that I was hired to fly a plane that was incomplete.
[2:40:33] We hadn't finished building it.
[2:40:34] It was operating under a skeleton crew, and the systems and the equipment were outdated.
[2:40:42] So while flying the plane, we had to rebuild it.
[2:40:50] We had several vacancies at the beginning of this year.
[2:40:53] We had no onboarding procedures, no training plan for our new employees or existing employees,
[2:41:00] no standard operating procedures.
[2:41:03] We had no document management system.
[2:41:06] Our filing system was essentially based on planning commission round.
[2:41:11] So in order to access project approvals or files, you had to know which planning commission
[2:41:17] meeting that particular project went to.
[2:41:23] Application review processes and tracking practices were disjointed, incomplete, or
[2:41:30] sometimes non-existent, the engineering division, for example.
[2:41:36] staff wasn't effectively enforcing the Planning Commission's and the BOMA's
[2:41:42] approvals or the Unified Development Code to the degree that we should have been.
[2:41:48] We also had no long-range planning program. So moving forward now that we
[2:41:54] understood the needs and we've assessed the needs of the department in order to
[2:41:59] fulfill our responsibilities and our obligations to this board, but also to the citizens and
[2:42:04] our development partners.
[2:42:07] We established several department goals to work towards over the year.
[2:42:13] Among those was to establish onboarding training and standard operating procedures,
[2:42:18] to implement information sharing and document management systems, to improve our responsiveness,
[2:42:26] our review practices and our turnaround times for our customers, and to prepare
[2:42:32] and implement a long-range planning program.
[2:42:36] Well, first you have to start
[2:42:37] with the vacancies, right? In order to effectively achieve those goals, we had
[2:42:44] to fill our vacancies. We went 18 months without a city engineer. We
[2:42:51] had essentially a part-time contract engineer who was helping to supervise
[2:42:57] an associate engineer. Our building official was a vacancy that happened this spring. We
[2:43:07] didn't have an engineering technician, but you gave us one in the budget. We had vacant
[2:43:13] building inspector positions, electrical inspector positions, planning positions. We needed
[2:43:19] plans examiners to widen or deepen our bench for building permit plans review.
[2:43:24] All of these vacancies had negative impacts on our ability to support our customers, on
[2:43:31] our ability to respond to our customers in a timely manner, to generate reviews in a
[2:43:38] timely manner, to it created a bottleneck in the reviews because we had more people
[2:43:44] applying for approvals than we had staff to review them.
[2:43:50] Our review quality had diminished, we had unmanageable case loads, we had employee fatigue
[2:43:59] and burnout, we had serious morale issues and all of those things made it difficult for
[2:44:06] us to achieve our goals.
[2:44:09] So I want to talk to you a little bit tonight about our staffing accomplishments.
[2:44:14] The Development Services Department, for the first time ever, is fully staffed.
[2:44:22] You helped me to reclassify several positions in the Codes Division that helped to deepen
[2:44:30] our bench.
[2:44:31] So now instead of just one person reviewing all building permits, or any permits coming
[2:44:37] through the Codes Division, is now three.
[2:44:40] That's a huge increase for us.
[2:44:42] you'll see next why in my next slide. So among those reclassified positions you
[2:44:50] gave me the opportunity to promote three employees. One of those employees has
[2:44:56] worked for the City of Spring Hill for 20 years in the same position.
[2:45:02] We finally were able to fill the city engineer position. We filled the engineering tech position,
[2:45:11] that administrative support position for the engineering division, and we filled all of
[2:45:16] our vacancies in the planning division. This is why it was so important for us to add more
[2:45:23] plan reviewers to staff. In the third quarter, the codes division processed and reviewed
[2:45:32] and issued permits for 938 applications. During the majority of this time, we only had one
[2:45:40] person, Victor Woods, reviewing these applications.
[2:45:46] This doesn't even include inspections. So
[2:45:49] Dex, patio covers, patios, patio covers, pools, those things don't take much time, but apartment
[2:45:57] complexes, you know, multifamily developments, commercial developments, industrial developments,
[2:46:05] those take a lot of time to review because we're dealing with life safety.
[2:46:11] Similarly,
[2:46:12] the engineering division reviewed 137 applications. The engineering division touches a project
[2:46:18] constructed every stage.
[2:46:21] Construction plans, for example,
[2:46:26] that's a large and substantial
[2:46:28] review. We're reviewing water and sewer infrastructure that the city is eventually going to accept
[2:46:34] and maintain. We're reviewing roads that the city is eventually going to accept and
[2:46:39] maintain. We're reviewing stormwater infrastructure that prevents property damage. We're reviewing
[2:46:47] drainage reports that have hundreds of pages of technical information, but then the engineer
[2:46:54] who reviews all of those construction plans has to take all of that information and make
[2:46:59] sure that it's not conflicting with another piece of the project.
[2:47:05] We had one associate engineer performing the bulk of those reviews, and our contract
[2:47:12] engineer was overseeing him and his work to ensure that it was correct.
[2:47:21] Planning division reviewed 361 applications. A lot of those went to Planning
[2:47:27] Commission. A lot of them were just zoning compliance reviews for building
[2:47:31] permits, sign permits, administrative approvals, you know, all of the things
[2:47:37] that keep the projects moving throughout the entire development review process.
[2:47:48] During this time though, I'm sorry to say that we didn't meet our turnaround time goal.
[2:47:54] At the, I guess in July of this year, the Development Services Department established
[2:48:02] a goal of turning around permits or reviews within 30 working days so not
[2:48:09] the weekends.
[2:48:13] A lot of the reviews that we performed during this time, yeah we
[2:48:16] did but there were some that extended 50, 60 plus days. A lot of that has to
[2:48:24] do with just the sheer volume of the applications that we that we received
[2:48:31] but a lot of it was because of the things that I've talked about, the staffing, the bottleneck.
[2:48:40] The next thing I want to talk to you about in terms of progress on achieving our goals are
[2:48:45] department systems, organization, and operations. This is improvements to our application review processes.
[2:48:52] It's improvements to our customer service and our customer support.
[2:48:56] Improvements to project management and our improvements to our software needs.
[2:49:02] So,
[2:49:07] in the third quarter, we made several improvements to application review.
[2:49:14] Prior to the third quarter of this year, there was no zoning compliance performed for single
[2:49:20] family residential, for multi-family residential, any sort of development.
[2:49:28] There was no zoning compliance review.
[2:49:30] We have now changed those procedures to require zoning compliance for single-family residential
[2:49:37] building permits, for sign permits, and other miscellaneous permits like pools and fences
[2:49:42] and decks and all of the things that allow our existing property owners to invest and
[2:49:50] improve their properties.
[2:49:53] We implemented application completeness reviews and compliance reviews.
[2:49:57] So prior to the third quarter, if your application was incomplete, we would still take it to Planning Commission.
[2:50:08] And that would result in the Planning Commission having to review the same project on multiple agendas.
[2:50:15] State also changed the Vested Property Rights Act and says that you are now vested in the codes,
[2:50:22] adopted at the time that you submitted the application once your application is
[2:50:27] deemed substantially compliant. So it is very important for this staff to
[2:50:34] perform that completeness review and ensure that applications are complete
[2:50:38] before we even do a compliance review for vesting law purposes. We also have
[2:50:45] a technical review team a lot if you don't know what the technical review
[2:50:50] team is it's it's multiple city staff members from Spring Hill water so we
[2:50:54] have water sewer public works fire parks planning codes engineering I'm gonna
[2:51:05] leave folks out capital improvements all of these are are your your staff who
[2:51:11] are participating in in development review to ensure that the codes that
[2:51:16] that you have adopted by ordinance are being implemented through development requests. Every
[2:51:25] project, every application type has a checklist, and that checklist identifies information.
[2:51:31] We have never gone through the exercise of saying, okay, technical review team, who's
[2:51:36] reviewing which item on this checklist? So there were some oversights, right? There
[2:51:41] are blind spots there. So we've closed those blind spots. We now know we have
[2:51:46] assignments for the various aspects of development that need to be reviewed for
[2:51:50] compliance with the regulations that you've adopted.
[2:51:54] The second is to customer
[2:51:56] service and support.
[2:52:01] We have implemented planner of the day, inspector of the day,
[2:52:05] technician of the day. What does that mean? It means that planner of the day
[2:52:11] for example means that anyone with a planning or zoning question can swing
[2:52:15] by development services can pick up the phone and call us and they can expect to be connected
[2:52:20] with a planner that day and answer their questions, whether it's a real estate agent or a small
[2:52:25] business owner or just a property owner wanting to know what they can and can't do in their
[2:52:31] backyard.
[2:52:34] That provides predictability, that improves our responsiveness, and it improves our
[2:52:39] customer support.
[2:52:40] The
[2:52:44] next improvement that we are currently working on implementing is this idea of Planner
[2:52:50] as Project Manager.
[2:52:52] This is an emerging industry practice where a planner essentially becomes the project
[2:53:01] manager on behalf of the city side, not to replace the development or the applicant's
[2:53:06] project manager.
[2:53:10] Why?
[2:53:10] Why should we do this?
[2:53:11] Well, Spring Hill's development review process moves a project through three divisions.
[2:53:18] You first initiate your request through planning.
[2:53:22] Once you get your planning approval, then you got to get your construction and plan
[2:53:25] approval through engineering.
[2:53:27] Then once you have that construction plan approval and you've had your preconstruction
[2:53:31] meeting and you've installed your erosion control, then you're eligible for your
[2:53:36] building permit to be issued.
[2:53:37] And so for most folks who have experienced the development review process in
[2:53:44] Spring Hill or elsewhere, they're used to that. But for other folks who, you
[2:53:50] know, development isn't their primary profession. It's a small business owner or
[2:53:57] it's a single-family homeowner. They get very confused by the process.
[2:54:06] Our
[2:54:07] But everyone else hasn't had that luxury or that opportunity.
[2:54:12] So this idea of planner as project manager will actually benefit our development community,
[2:54:17] but also our small businesses, also our real estate agents, also our private property owners.
[2:54:23] So basically when an application is submitted, your assigned planner, your project manager,
[2:54:29] is going to reach out to you and greet you and say, I'm here to walk you through the process.
[2:54:35] They are going to coordinate with the technical review team and assist you with getting those comments from the technical review team.
[2:54:43] They are going to then guide you through the planning commission process, the post-approval process, right?
[2:54:52] If you had any conditions of approval or modifications that you had to make to your project or your planning commission approval, they're going to guide you through that process.
[2:54:59] They're then going to hand you off to engineering.
[2:55:05] They're going to continue to coordinate with you as engineering is reviewing your construction plans.
[2:55:11] Same with building permit. Once engineering is good to go with your construction plans,
[2:55:16] your assigned planner is going to reach out to you and say, hey, great news.
[2:55:20] You're eligible for a building permit now.
[2:55:23] And then they're going to continue that through the modification process.
[2:55:27] there's a final plot that has to be filed, right?
[2:55:30] So all of these different processes,
[2:55:32] they're going to shepherd you.
[2:55:33] It's essentially a personalized service tailored
[2:55:36] to your project, your application,
[2:55:39] and the requirements that you have to fulfill
[2:55:40] in order to get that certificate of occupancy.
[2:55:45] So right now, we are currently training
[2:55:49] all of our planners on project management
[2:55:52] so that when we implement this practice in January of 26,
[2:55:56] they'll be able to hit the ground running.
[2:56:03] Second to last, review and permitting software.
[2:56:07] Development services worked with our current software provider for the last 18 months
[2:56:13] to improve functionality, features and processes.
[2:56:19] We've been unsuccessful.
[2:56:22] Our current deficiencies include that our software is not customized to Spring Hill's needs.
[2:56:29] needs.
[2:56:32] You can only email or drop off a paper application in order to apply for a building
[2:56:36] permit. None of our neighbors. All of our neighbors have moved past that. There's no
[2:56:43] public-facing side to the review process. I think we've mentioned to you before that
[2:56:50] the software is insufficient in tracking and reporting based on our needs. I've had
[2:56:56] to retask many staff members and development services
[2:57:00] to support Spring Hill Water and understanding
[2:57:03] what our vested obligations are for sewer capacity.
[2:57:08] Planning and engineering aren't even integrated
[2:57:11] into our current software program.
[2:57:13] Project review and management is absent
[2:57:15] and anytime we need to update it, we have to pay a fee.
[2:57:22] So city staff, multiple city staff departments
[2:57:26] and the administration are working through the process of reviewing other software providers
[2:57:33] with the expectation that they improve our customer service or in our customer's experience.
[2:57:40] So it's easier for someone to apply for a permit.
[2:57:43] They can apply at two o'clock in the morning if they wanted to.
[2:57:48] Online submittal, transparency, permitting history, tracking, viewing comments in
[2:57:54] in real time, say, Ryan, associate engineer makes comments on the plans that were submitted
[2:58:01] for construction plan review, there are software programs out there that will notify the applicant
[2:58:07] and they can see those comments in real time and start to address them.
[2:58:12] We need something that's affordable and self-customize, has a self-customization opportunity, application
[2:58:19] review function, enterprise capabilities.
[2:58:23] We intend to bring something for you to consider in, perhaps, February for moving towards a
[2:58:35] different software provider to meet those needs and expectations.
[2:58:38] The other thing I wanted to give you an update on is long-range planning.
[2:58:42] So we've issued the request for qualifications for that community engagement plan.
[2:58:46] We're responding to questions about that RFQ.
[2:58:50] Those answers will be posted on our website, and the city staff have already started preparing a needs assessment for Spring Hill Rising.
[2:58:59] Next steps, consultant interviews, BOMA contract award, preparation of that community engagement plan.
[2:59:06] And then we're going to be ready to start assembling an advisory committee to help guide the preparation of the plan to be a sounding board
[2:59:14] and to be ambassadors of the Spring Hill Rising update effort.
[2:59:24] I'm not done tinkering though.
[2:59:28] You know, we still have a lot of work to do to improve this department,
[2:59:32] to get it where it needs to be, to adequately support our customers,
[2:59:36] to align with industry standards.
[2:59:40] We're going to continue to monitor and improve outlying review times.
[2:59:44] times. We are in the process of implementing a document management system, so you don't
[2:59:50] have to be clairvoyant or have been here for years and years and years to remember when
[2:59:56] then the Legacy Point project went to Planning Commission in Beaumont.
[3:00:00] So that you can track down those approvals and those obligations, those conditions of approval.
[3:00:06] We're going to continue to improve customer service and offer training to our employees so that they're meeting our customer service expectations.
[3:00:16] We're going to implement our document standard operating procedures.
[3:00:21] We are going to work with our geographic information system staff to improve all of our data to ensure that they are up, that they are receiving the data that they need to have our computer information up to date and in real time.
[3:00:39] And we are going to work with other departments on an integrated department coordination so that we're not operating in silos anymore.
[3:00:47] more.
[3:00:50] So with that I will be preparing a round of 2026 department goals and I will likely
[3:00:56] bring them to you in January for feedback. I fully anticipate that they will include a
[3:01:03] lot of these but more goals to improve our processes.
[3:01:12] Thank you.
[3:01:13] Sanders. I'll bring it back to the board. Any questions or comments from the
[3:01:17] Sanders? Mayor Fitter. Thank you Chair. I don't have any questions Miss Sanders. I
[3:01:24] just want to acknowledge that you know things have been very difficult in
[3:01:29] development services in the past year and I just want to express my
[3:01:34] appreciation for your focus on process improvement within your department
[3:01:40] and focusing on improving the customer experiences despite all the challenges
[3:01:44] that we've had both internal and external with your department. So I don't want it
[3:01:49] to go unacknowledged or unspoken but it's very much appreciated.
[3:01:56] I know many of your customers have expressed frustration at times with
[3:02:02] your department and I think you've acknowledged those rightfully so at
[3:02:07] But I think they're hearing tonight as well the efforts that you've made to improve and we'll all look to continue to see so thank you.
[3:02:15] Thank you.
[3:02:17] Additional comments on this item. Alderman Hartwell.
[3:02:20] Thank you chair. I just want to say is it as you continue to lead the pack we have your back.
[3:02:24] Hey that rhymes. Thank you.
[3:02:27] Alderman Davis.
[3:02:29] I'd like to echo that, but I'm very excited about being able to sync everything and do
[3:02:35] it online.
[3:02:36] I think that's going to be really, really, really helpful for our community and it's
[3:02:43] needed.
[3:02:46] It's about meeting their needs, not ours.
[3:02:50] Thank you.
[3:02:51] Thank you.
[3:02:52] We'll move on to item number five, discussion of the 2026-2027 budget calendar, Mr. Napier.
[3:02:58] Thank you, Mr. Chairman members of the board. Thanks for hanging in there with for these critical conversations
[3:03:05] We've got a couple more. We want to go over with you real quickly
[3:03:09] the budget calendar is one that I think is a real pivotal step that we need your
[3:03:15] Support for as it relates to preparing the next budget as you are probably aware
[3:03:22] We are gearing up for that work to take place and as you can tell by looking at your calendar
[3:03:26] that tonight's work actually is the first step with respect to a number of
[3:03:32] steps that most specifically include the board all along the way so that by the
[3:03:40] time we get to formal delivery of the budget you have had numerous touch
[3:03:45] points that help us to create the budget to the extent that when we sit
[3:03:52] down with you at the formal delivery, we are simply reviewing the work that you told us
[3:03:57] to do and the means by which we have accomplished what it is that you've asked us to put together
[3:04:04] by way of budget design.
[3:04:05] And you can tell that by looking at all of the green spaces on your calendar if you
[3:04:11] printed it in color like I have here tonight, there are a number of places along the
[3:04:17] way where we're coming to you for feedback, we're coming to you for direction.
[3:04:21] So that, again, the effort to approve it on a formal basis is hopefully streamlined and very much a review for your purposes of formally adopting the budget.
[3:04:35] And so with that, Mr. Chair, either myself or the very capable finance team that helped put this together can hopefully answer any questions you might have.
[3:04:45] We'll bring it back to the board. Any questions on the budget calendar?
[3:04:51] I know according to the timeline we did review this at BFAC last month and we had great discussions.
[3:04:57] The only thing that we discussed at the time was in the past we've previously had some
[3:05:02] standalone work sessions on the budget.
[3:05:05] It looks like the ones here integrated into the meetings, hopefully with this new process
[3:05:09] we won't be doing any more work sessions, so I'd love to see that.
[3:05:15] Any additional comments?
[3:05:19] Bring it to item number six, discussion of the ordinance for budget amendment number
[3:05:23] fiscal year 2526 thank you Mr. Chairman members of the board what you're
[3:05:30] looking at in terms of your support and adoption is a 14.6 million dollar
[3:05:36] amendment that covers a number of direction items that the the board has
[3:05:42] weighed in heavily on already and a number of things that we believe you've
[3:05:47] told us to try to accomplish with respect to the authority that this
[3:05:51] amendment would create. Namely, a few items here. The traffic calming program. The board
[3:05:59] has discussed this program a number of times prior to tonight, not the least of which was
[3:06:04] one of the discussions that we took up during the special session a few weeks back. We
[3:06:10] have some numbers, as you can see in your memo, that puts that together and puts
[3:06:15] it into motion if, of course, you approve the budget authority that this amendment asks
[3:06:21] for.
[3:06:22] In short, we're talking about two positions for the police department, some equipment
[3:06:26] purchases that would help the department do the job and consistent with the resolution
[3:06:33] that you passed a number of months ago to adopt this program and get it rolling.
[3:06:40] Just to be clear, Tyler's department will also be involved, as you well know, with regard
[3:06:47] to the warrant studies that are pivotal for this program to take place.
[3:06:52] Secondly, we also cover in this amendment the development of the Public Works Construction
[3:06:58] Crew.
[3:06:59] You can see that that total package with respect to equipment and personnel is in the
[3:07:06] neighborhood of $4.3 million.
[3:07:07] dollars not unlike what we talked about also in the special session that took
[3:07:12] place a couple weeks ago we would contend that by adopting this effort you
[3:07:20] will recoup your expenses for this program particularly as it relates to the
[3:07:25] equipment purchases necessary for this program to work in the CSA project alone
[3:07:30] and the site development costs that you are allowed to defer if if indeed
[3:07:35] you would continue to adopt this budgetary authority that this program is created by.
[3:07:42] A number of other things, CSA for example, with the passage of this amendment, we will be able
[3:07:49] to move forward with 1.3 million dollars in orders that need to take place right away
[3:07:56] in order to accommodate the lead times that are necessary for some of the fixtures at CSA
[3:08:01] and the site development work specifically were required to be in place.
[3:08:07] Furthermore, there's been a lot of talk about the transaction that took place with respect to the county commission
[3:08:14] in Murray County and the school board to support the work needed over at Battle Creek and Malinmore.
[3:08:23] This amendment allows for $400,000 to be advanced toward that project
[3:08:28] project, and certainly that project has been identified as a pretty high priority for this
[3:08:33] group, and hopefully we can get started right away.
[3:08:37] A number of other things that this amendment covers as well, but those are certainly the
[3:08:41] larger touch points and highlights, and with your blessing we can get forward on,
[3:08:48] get moving forward on a number of programs that you have identified as being as important,
[3:08:54] As well as some capital efforts that we'd like to get underway with
[3:09:04] Cool, I will
[3:09:07] comment on
[3:09:09] The traffic calming had several conversations with mr. Scroggins and chief bright today in regard if you'll remember when we did that
[3:09:16] Resolution, I think that the board's intent was to transfer funds from public works to the police department
[3:09:23] For the number of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars
[3:09:27] couple months ago, I emailed Ms. Holden to get that done.
[3:09:31] There's been internal conversations of, okay,
[3:09:33] well, what do we do about vehicles
[3:09:34] and truly outfitting these?
[3:09:37] We'll commend the team, the police department,
[3:09:40] public works or finance department.
[3:09:43] They found all of those funds internally,
[3:09:45] made some unique transfers.
[3:09:48] That way they can make this happen today,
[3:09:51] rather than coming back to us in the 2627
[3:09:54] for the ask of the asset portion of that so I commend them for that my one
[3:10:00] thing that I am going to ask from this board in regard to that is that this is
[3:10:05] a completely separate new creation within Chief Breit's department to
[3:10:13] accommodate the goal of traffic safety uniquely in neighborhoods so this
[3:10:20] reflect the way that we judge the ask for budget year 2627 so please keep that
[3:10:26] in mind. Thank you all.
[3:10:31] Your fitter. Thank you chair. Request of
[3:10:35] misholding I think I heard the number at the beginning this nets out to 14.6
[3:10:40] in total. Do you have that broken out by fund? My pen just exploded up here so
[3:10:48] We can email it. Yeah, we have it on several different Excel spreadsheets
[3:10:52] broken out by funds. We'll have to combine that all together but we can
[3:10:55] email that out to the board tomorrow.
[3:11:02] So I don't see any other light so I'm
[3:11:05] gonna go to item number two if I can pull it up really quick. I got a text
[3:11:14] from Alderman can a party with a couple of questions in regards to the
[3:11:20] construction team and despite his absence I'd like to address those if the
[3:11:27] board would oblige those those concerns in the the text exactly says no
[3:11:35] discussion please but I hope we will have questions tonight concerning
[3:11:38] cost benefits and project size limits how we address purchasing contracting
[3:11:46] I feel like that is something
[3:11:50] that a constituent sent him and
[3:11:52] then he just forwarded it on.
[3:11:54] So I feel like, you know, let's
[3:11:56] let's hash that out real quick.
[3:11:58] So I've provided the board one
[3:12:00] this document that shows Buckner
[3:12:02] Lane south just a bid sheet to
[3:12:05] move earth and do other things
[3:12:07] also found an excavation
[3:12:09] company in the northeast that
[3:12:11] had their bid sheet.
[3:12:12] So I feel like that is
[3:12:13] that was available so I'm going to pass that around. Some of those numbers that we had talked about
[3:12:16] our Saturday work session a couple of weeks ago was a little off to the market compared to this.
[3:12:24] So we're showing excavator usage at $290 plus dollars per hour,
[3:12:33] dozers $190 to $225. So I backed into some math of what it's going to cost us in labor
[3:12:40] talking with Mr. Scroggins, we're probably going to be in the neighborhood of
[3:12:43] twenty to twenty-five dollars an hour for the employees that operate these
[3:12:47] machines. If you back into what it costs us to provide those benefits, you can
[3:12:55] add an additional ten dollars per hour on a two thousand and eighty hour work
[3:13:00] year. So we're, our laborers can cost us roughly say twenty-five dollar an
[3:13:04] hour. Employees can cost us thirty-five an hour. Then you take the
[3:13:08] machine depreciation fuel maintenance we're operating these machines at roughly
[3:13:13] $95 an hour be able to accomplish some of the tasks throughout the city not
[3:13:20] only under budget but significantly so these calls that passing around here show
[3:13:27] about a 220% increase in what we'll be able to operate this team with so I
[3:13:34] I think that that's significant.
[3:13:36] The commitment on what we tackle again
[3:13:38] in that Saturday session I had requested
[3:13:41] that from Mr. Napier that we do the construction team,
[3:13:46] if fully approved, their own CIP
[3:13:48] that guarantees operate it like a business,
[3:13:50] make sure that one project's done,
[3:13:53] we go immediately to the next.
[3:13:56] And while development is obviously gonna slow down
[3:13:59] to the sewer moratorium,
[3:14:01] we'll still be able to execute projects
[3:14:04] for our constituents that we always hear stop development but get things done so this is it
[3:14:10] Mr. Napier if you kind of take over what it looks like on maybe this department
[3:14:15] do we still go to bid being that we're going internally do we not have to do that is there
[3:14:21] a policy that we need to follow in terms of guidelines or any type of context to again
[3:14:28] answer this constituents questions.
[3:14:34] Mr. Chairman, Mr. Alderman, thank you for
[3:14:38] that very thorough discussion and detail. The fact is with respect to the
[3:14:46] development of this of this unit within the organization, the site development
[3:14:54] work that many of our projects will require along with street work and so
[3:14:59] forth that
[3:15:00] We are hopeful with the right equipment this team will be able to adopt into their daily
[3:15:06] practices. There won't be a need to bid out work pertaining to site development or street
[3:15:15] projects of various magnitudes. Now certainly there will be street projects that will be
[3:15:21] outside the scope of this unit built into the organization. And from that standpoint
[3:15:28] point we will still need to bid certain projects because of their breadth that will be outside
[3:15:34] of our expertise.
[3:15:36] But for the most part site development work, street work, and even flat work will be things
[3:15:43] that this unit will be able to accomplish.
[3:15:46] To give you a few statistics that will hopefully help you feel good about moving in this
[3:15:51] direction from a financial standpoint.
[3:15:53] We believe that we will be saving somewhat in the neighborhood of 25 percent from a profit margin standpoint that would otherwise be paid out to, you know, bid projects of this nature.
[3:16:10] And so if indeed you're interested in reinvesting that work into other projects that need to be done in order to benefit the public, then this is a good move that you would want to make.
[3:16:23] Again, additionally, as I mentioned earlier, with the site development work and CSA alone,
[3:16:29] we believe that you will be saving money enough to pay for the equipment that will have a 10
[3:16:35] to 12-year life amortized over time.
[3:16:38] And so in that one project, you'll be able to buy the equipment, if you will, that
[3:16:45] will enable us to do work from here on out for the next decade or so.
[3:16:49] And so as your as your administrator and from the the finance team and and of course
[3:16:56] You know Tyler's efforts, we think it's a good move
[3:17:05] Thank you chair in addition to what you were saying about the bid and about whether or not this makes sense financially
[3:17:11] All of us are ran up to Home Depot and picked up a piece of wood to fix a project around the house because it was cheaper
[3:17:16] than calling Mr. Mayor's crew out there to fix it, right?
[3:17:19] That means if we have to bid it out when we can fix it internally cheaper, it's better
[3:17:22] off to do so, which is why some of us do at-home repairs and things like that.
[3:17:28] Essentially, this is going to provide us an avenue to do those at-home repairs.
[3:17:31] We have the handyman or women, so to speak, in-house to accomplish this,
[3:17:35] and many cities around us currently do this.
[3:17:38] We don't need to be able to pick up the phone every time we need something fixed.
[3:17:43] This will allow us to do that.
[3:17:44] This will allow us to stay ahead of the needs of what our community requires of us in order
[3:17:50] to keep everything up to speed, everything up to date, and everything maintained.
[3:17:54] In addition to that, heaven forbid, we have some big catastrophic emergency.
[3:18:00] We have the equipment that we will have on hand to start moving stuff immediately.
[3:18:04] We don't have to wait for other people to show up to start moving stuff.
[3:18:07] This won't just benefit us today, not a project tomorrow, not a project a year
[3:18:13] from now.
[3:18:13] this is going to benefit us for the lifetime of the city of Spring Hill and
[3:18:17] hopefully it's something that we adopt and continue through the lifetime of the
[3:18:20] city of Spring Hill and it's something that grows. In addition, it employs
[3:18:24] people. I know I talk about employing people quite a bit, but it employs people
[3:18:28] and keeps money within our community. It puts paychecks in people's mailboxes,
[3:18:33] allows them to spend money at the diner up the street or the Wakin House or the
[3:18:38] insurance company in order to bring money back into our community. So
[3:18:41] So it's not just about whether or not we can have a construction crew and a bunch of cool
[3:18:46] equipment that moves stuff around.
[3:18:48] It's about what it does to fuel our community as well.
[3:18:51] So that's all I have.
[3:18:54] Thanks, Mayor Fitter.
[3:18:55] Thank you, Chair.
[3:18:57] I think I just want to call it attention to the fact that this is a budget allocation
[3:19:01] discussion.
[3:19:02] This isn't an expenditure of funds.
[3:19:04] There's additional steps that have to be taken before any of these personnel
[3:19:09] are hired or any of this equipment is purchased. There is plenty of time to draft a policy
[3:19:17] around how this personnel and equipment will be deployed.
[3:19:23] I'm with you in favor of having
[3:19:26] a dedicated schedule around this barrel city crew and work policy around what they take
[3:19:32] on and what they don't as well. But that not being in place isn't a reason to not
[3:19:38] allocate the funds within a budget amendment. We can certainly take the time to do that
[3:19:43] before we expend any of these funds, make any of these hires, or set the crew out on
[3:19:48] project number one. So I think I understand where the citizen's question is coming from,
[3:19:56] but I don't know that it impacts a ballot allocate, a budget allocation discussion.
[3:20:05] Any additional comments on the sign-up?
[3:20:09] All right. With that, we'll move to a
[3:20:11] I'm sorry, Alderman Hammond has anything for me?
[3:20:13] Alderman Warner, Alderman Hartwell,
[3:20:16] Alderman Foucault, Mayor Fitter, Alderman Murray,
[3:20:20] Alderman Davis, nothing for myself either.
[3:20:24] Any citizen comments?
[3:20:28] With that, we will adjourn at 9.20 p.m.