Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:18]

THIS MEETING MAYBE CONVENED TO EXECUTIVE COUNCIL. THE CITY OF ROWLETT ALLOWS FOR RECONVENING OR REASSIGNING. WE HAVE TWO EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL CONVENE TO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO 551-071. CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY TO RECEIVE ADVICE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY RELATING TO A LAWSUIT REGARDING SB 1152 PERTAINING A PORTION OF FRANCHISE FEES PAID TO THE CITY BY CERTAIN FRANCHISE FACILITIES.

AND 2 B. THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL CONVENE TO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS COMMERCIAL OR FINANCIAL INFORMATION IN WHICH THE CITY IS CONDUCTING RELEVANT NEGOTIATION.

IT IS 6:25. WE'RE COMING OUT OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.

ON ITEM 2 A, WE WILL BE CONSIDERING THIS AN INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION IN THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING TONIGHT. ITEM 2 B NO FORMAL ACTION WAS TAKEN.

[3A. Presentation of Dallas County Major Capital Improvement Grant Program. (20 Minutes)]

ITEM 3 A. DALLAS COUNTY MAJOR CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

I GUESS I GET TO GO FIRST. JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ABOUT THE MAJOR CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT THROUGH DALLAS COUNTY. DALLAS COUNTY HAS DONE THIS.

THEY CALL FOR PROJECTS EVERY TWO TO THREE YEARS AND TO BE ELIGIBLE THE PROJECTS MUST IMPROVE CAPACITY AND SAFETY ON REGIONAL ROADWAYS AND PATHWAYS WITHIN DALLAS COUNTY.

DALLAS COUNTY CAN PARTICIPATE UP TO 50% OF THE ELIGIBLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND THE CITY OF ROWLETT SUBMITTED SIX PROJECTS FOR THIS GRANT PROGRAM. THIS IS A SCHEDULE SO FAR.

WE SUBMIT THE APPLICATIONS IN OCTOBER. IN THE FALL AND WINTER OF THIS YEAR, DALLAS COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS WILL COME OUT, DO FIELD EVALUATIONS OF PROJECTS.

THEY WILL THEN LOOK AT THE COST ESTIMATES THAT WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER AND EVALUATE THOSE AND SEE IF ANY CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE TO THAT. AFTER THEY GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, BY THE SPRING OF 2020, THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OF DALLAS COUNTY WILL BE READY TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE DALLAS COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S COURT AND IS EXPECTED TO THE SUMMER TO DALLAS COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S COURT FOR FUNDING.

SO THE PROJECTS HAVE TO FIT INTO ONE OF FOUR CATEGORIES. ROADWAY CAPACITY CONNECTIVITY.

BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, ALTERNATIVE MOBILITY SOLUTIONS. ALL OF THE ROADWAY PROJECTS WE DID, THE PRIMARY WAS PROVIDE CAPACITY. THE SECONDARY STANDPOINT, THEY ALSO FULFILL THE NEEDS FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN AND THERE IS A HIKE AND BIKE APPLICATION SPECIFIC FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN. SO THIS IS A MAP AND I APOLOGIZE IT DOESN'T SHOW UP VERY WELL THERE. THESE ARE THE ROADWAY PROJECTS WE DID SUBMIT APPLICATIONS FOR. IT MIGHT BE EASIER TO GO THROUGH EACH PROJECT INDIVIDUALLY TO POINT THEM OUT ON THE MAP. SO THE FIRST ONE IS THE INTERROAD CONNECTER.

THAT IS BEING DESIGNED CURRENTLY. WE DID KNOW THAT WAS GOING TO BE A VERY EXPENSIVE PROJECT. WE'RE ESTIMATING THAT'S ABOUT A $17 MILLION PROJECT.

WE ACTUALLY DID HAVE A CONFERENCE CALL WITH THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS TODAY TO TALK ABOUT THIS PROJECT TO MAKE SURE IT WAS ON THEIR RADAR AND HELP US WITH ANY POTENTIAL FEDERAL FUNDS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN THE FUTURE.

SO, THIS WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE DALLAS COUNTY PROJECT AS WELL. NOW THE ONE THING ABOUT THIS, WE DO NOT HAVE THE MATCH FOR THIS. WE WOULD HAVE TO DEDICATE FUTURE BONDS OR OTHER REVENUE TO MAKE THAT MATCH. NOW MILL ROAD WIDENING ACROSS LAKE RAY HUBBARD.

THERE'S NO DOLLARS FOR THIS RIGHT NOW. IT WOULD REQUIRE FUTURE BONDS AND OTHER REVENUE SOURCES TO COME UP WITH THE CITY MATCH. THIS IS PROBABLY A BIT PREMATURE TO SUBMIT THIS, WE AT LEAST WANTED TO GET IT ON THE RADAR AND GET THE ATTENTION OF DALLAS

[00:05:05]

COUNTY WITH IT. RON AND I MET WITH MICHAEL MORRIS AND THE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AND TIME BACK AND THERE ARE HELPING US WITH THE TRAFFIC MODELS OF MILLER ROAD.

WHAT MICHAEL WANTS TO DO IS DO TRAFFIC MODELLING BASED ON THE IMPROVEMENTS COMPLETED ON I-30

TO SEE IF MILLER ROAD HAS A DECREASE OF TRAFFIC. >> EVEN IF THERE'S A DECREASE

OF TRAFFIC, THAT BRIDGE IS NOT SAFE. >> THAT COULD POTENTIALLY LEAD TO FEDERAL FUNDS AND OTHER FUNDS. WE'RE GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS

NOW PROVIDING DATA. >> DOES THAT MEAN THEY'RE NOT GOING TO TOUCH IT UNTIL 2023

UNTIL 30 IS DONE? >> NOT NECESSARILY. DALLAS COUNTY CAN POTENTIALLY AWARD THAT GRANT, BUT IF NOT, WE WOULD PROBABLY NEED THAT DATA WITH THE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS TO SEE IF THERE'S A NEED FOR THAT. THE MODELLING WOULD GIVE YOU A

MODEL OF WHAT IT WOULD BE LIKE BEFORE IT'S COMPLETED. >> IT'S JUST, I MEAN IT JUST SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE SAYING WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT IN OUR 2040 PLAN.

>> IT'S A DELAY TACTIC. >> GUYS, THIS IS ALL PART OF THE PROCESS TO GET THE BALL ROLLING ON THIS, AND SOME OF THESE OTHER PROJECTS ARE A LITTLE CLOSER TO BEING SHOVEL READY SO TO SPEAK.

WE HAVEN'T EVEN STARTED A DESIGN PLAN YET AND I THINK THE MODELLING THAT COG OFFERED TO DO

WILL HELP US TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE SOLUTION MAY BE. >> YEAH, THERE'S NO WAY TO PUSH US OFF. THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S DATA THERE AND WE COULD GET FUNDING FOR THAT. NEXT PROJECT. THE NEXT PROJECT IS DALROCK ROAD AND ADDITIONAL LANES. WHERE THE MEDIAN IS NOW, THAT CALLS FOR 2 ADDITIONAL TRAVEL LANES THERE. WE DID SUBMIT THIS. AGAIN, FUTURE BOND FUNDS WOULD BE NEEDED FOR THAT. THIS DALROCK TO STATE HIGHWAY 66, THIS IS A GREAT WAY TO BE ABLE TO DO AN APPLICATION FOR A PROJECT LIKE THIS. WE CURRENTLY HAVE THE BOND FUNDS FOR THE WIDENING FROM MILLER TO DALROCK. IN THIS SITUATION COULD SERVE AS A MATCH TO WIDEN. SHE'S ALL THE WAY DOWN TO 66 AND BEYOND.

THE MATCH IS ESSENTIALLY BUILT IN RIGHT THERE. THAT TOTAL COST ESTIMATE FOR THAT IS $25.6 MILLION. AND HICKOCK TO MERIT. WHEN YOU GO DOWN HICKCOCK TO DALROCK, THERE'S TWO DIVISIONS, HOMES ARE BEING BUILT AND OCCUPIED, THE OTHER IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. WE WILL SEE MORE TRAFFIC THERE IN FUTURE.

WE THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD PROJECT TO PUT IN THE MIX. AND THE LAST ONE IS THE LAKE HIGHLAND HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL. ANGIE PRESENTED THIS AND THIS IS UNDER DESIGN.

WE COULD USE THE CURRENT BOND FUNDS FOR THAT PROJECT TO SERVE AS A MATCH AND EVEN DO MORE TRAILS ELSEWHERE. SO IT WOULD ESSENTIALLY DELVE INTO THE MONEY IN THAT SITUATION. AND THAT'S A QUICK RUN DOWN OF THE PROJECTS.

I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. >> HOW WE SUBMITTED IT FROM LIKE

ONE TO, HOW MANY PROJECTS THERE ARE? >> SIX TOTAL.

IT WASN'T FROM MOST TO LEAST IMPORTANT? >> WE DID PUT MERIT FIRST.

HOWEVER THE ONE THING WE HAD DISCUSSIONS CAN DALLAS COUNTY, THEY SAID ONCE THEY DO THE FIELD WORK AND GET CLOSER. IF THEY FEEL LIKE ONE PROJECT WILL RANK HIGHER, THEY MIGHT WANT FURTHER INFORMATION AND MOVE UP THE PROJECT. THE ONE THING WE WANTED TO KNOW IF SURE, IF YOU PICK THIS AS NUMBER ONE AND THIS IS NUMBER FOUR, ARE YOU GOING TO IGNORE IT

AND THEY SAID NO. >> MERIT IS NUMBER ONE >> HOW IS THE FUNDING OUTLOOK? MY UNDERSTANDING IT'S A SEVEN-YEAR PLAN. ARE WE EXPECTING IF ACCEPTED INTO THE PLAN, IT WOULD BE FUNDED INTO ONE OF THREE YEARS OR ON THE BACK END OF SEVEN?

>> SURE, IT REALLY WOULD DEPEND. IF WE HAD THE MATCHING DOLLARS FOR THAT PROJECT, OF COURSE IT WOULD BE UP TOWARD THE FRONT. IF IT WAS GOING TO BE ONE WE HAD TO WAIT UNTIL 2021 BOND ELECTION, IT WOULD BE PUT ON HOLD UNTIL THAT ELECTION OCCURRED.

[00:10:03]

>> BUT THERE IS IN THE FUTURE IF WE WANTED TO REPRIORITIZE, WE AS A CITY WOULD BE ABLE TO ASK

DALLAS COUNTY TO DO THAT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH.

IF IT CAME DOWN TO, WE HAVE CHOICES TO MAKE AND WE COULD REPRIORITIZE.

SO THE DALROCK CORNER THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED AND WAITING PERIOD WOULD HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS

SAME PROCESS? >> WAS THAT TIF FUNDS, GARY? >> THE DALROCK AND HIGHWAY 66.

SO IT WAS DALLAS COUNTY? >> I THINK SO. >> AND MILLER ROAD WOULD HAVE

BEEN AS WELL. >> AND THAT PROJECT IF Y'ALL REMEMBER TOOK A LONG TIME TO

PULL TOGETHER BECAUSE SO MANY ENTITIES. >> AND IT'S STILL TO BE DONE.

>> YES. AND JUST FOR THE PUBLIC'S UNDERSTANDING, THE SERVICE ROADS ON THE TOLL WAY ARE NOT ON THIS LIST BECAUSE THAT'S NOT HOW THESE WOULD BE FUNDED.

>> MOST LIKELY, THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCE. >> YOU DON'T KNOW IF THOSE WERE

HIGH PRIORITY? >> OKAY. COUNCIL.

WE GET ALL THIS FIXED, WE'RE IN GOOD SHAPE. >> I DO WANT TO SAY THANKS TO GARY AND TOM AND TIM FOR DOING THE ROADWAY PROJECTS. TIM DID THE BULK OF THE APPLICATION AND ANGIE FOR THE TRAIL. THEY PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO

THIS. >> IF YOU GET THOSE FUNDS, WE WILL GO DOWN TO BAY SIDE.

>> OKAY. THANK Y'ALL. >> REAL QUICK, WHEN DO WE START

TALKING TO OUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS? >> THE PUBLIC WORKS WOULD SUBMIT

IN THE SPRING AND LIKELY VOTE IN THE SUMMER. >> WE WILL SEE OUR COUNTY

COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE. >> WE TAKE THEM TO THESE LOCATIONS.

HEY COME SEE MILLER WITH US. >> YEAH, IN FACT, HE MENTIONED HE KNEW SEVERAL OF THE PROJECTS.

>> CAN YOU TAKE US TO >> THE MAP? >> NO.

THE DATES. SO SUMMER 2020 IS WHEN THEY SELECT.

>> YEAH. WE MAY WANT TO HAVE ANOTHER LITTLE OUTING.

>> YEAH, I THINK WE NEED TO SET UP ANOTHER. LET'S TAKE JAY TO MILLER ROAD AT RUSH HOUR. CALL IN A FIRE. SHUT DOWN 30.

YEAH. THAT CAN HAPPEN. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. PAUL. THANK YOU ALL.

GOOD LUCK GETTING HOME. ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT ITEM IS 3 B PROVIDE

[3B. Provide update to City Council regarding a meeting with the customer cities of the NorthTexas Municipal Water District (30 minutes)]

UPDATE TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING WITH CUSTOMERS IN THE NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO KICK IT OFF AND I WILL HIT THE HIGHLIGHTS. >> SO VERY HAPPY TO BE ABLE TO REPORT THE INFORMATION AND THE RESULTS AND THE PATH FORWARD THAT WE THINK WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO HAVE. YOU KNOW WE HAVE BEEN REALLY STRUGGLING AS A CITY AND OUR RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN STRUGGLING WITH HIGH WATER RATES FOR MANY REASONS, PRIMARY REASON IS YOU KNOW THE TAKE OR PAY CONTRACT WITH NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT AND THE CASE OF ROWLETT WE CAN ONLY TWO-THIRDS OF OUR WATER THAT WE PURCHASE FROM NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OUR CUSTOMERS USE. AND WE'RE ABLE TO PASS THAT BILLING ON TO OUR RESIDENTS.

ONE THIRD OF THE WATER THAT WE ARE REQUIRED UNDER OUR CONTRACT UNDER THE TAKE OR PAY

[00:15:01]

PROVISIONS, WE'RE NOT ABLE TO SELL TO OUR RESIDENTS. THEREFORE, OUR RESIDENTS ARE OVERBURDENED ON A PER GALLON PRICE OF WATER TO ABSORB THAT COST THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO PAY TO NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT. THE TAKE OR PAY CONTRACT IS ONE AREA OF CONCERN FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND FOR OUR CITY. THERE ARE OTHERS.

WE ARE A CUSTOMER CITY OF NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT. NOT A MEMBER CITY, AS A RESULT WE DON'T HAVE REPRESENTATION IN DECISIONMAKING AND ON THE BOARD FOR NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT. SO THESE ARE, THERE'S OTHERS AND BRIAN WILL GO THROUGH A LITTLE MORE DETAIL BUT THESE ARE AREAS OF CONCERN THAT WE HAVE HAD. ALL OF US HAD AROUND THE TABLE.

SO, WE REQUESTED A MEETING WITH CUSTOMER CITIES AND HAD THE MEETING YESTERDAY.

IT WAS A VERY PRODUCTIVE MEETING. SHARED INFORMATION AND SHARED IDEAS AND SHARED CONCERNS. KIND OF SET FORTH A PRELIMINARY PATH FORWARD THAT MAY BE THE CUSTOMER CITIES MIGHT WANT TO TAKE AS A COALITION. I WILL LEAVE IT AT THAT.

>> SO, WHAT I WANTED TO DO WITH COUNCIL TONIGHT IS KIND OF TAKE YOU THROUGH SOME OF THE SAME INFORMATION THAT WE SHARED WITH THE CUSTOMER CITIES. WE HAVE VERY GOOD ATTENDANCE.

JUST SO YOU KNOW INCLUDING ROWLETT. THERE ARE 14 CUSTOMER CITIES.

13 MEMBER CITIES. AND THEN THERE'S ABOUT EQUALLY SOMEWHERE AROUND A DOZEN WHAT THEY CALL SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICTS OR SUDS. KIND OF OUR AGENDA, WE, THAT WE WENT OVER, WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE HAD HELP THEM UNDERSTAND THAT WE SHARE THE SAME ISSUES ISSUE GUYS. THAT'S WHY WE'RE DOING THIS. PARTICULARLY AS CUSTOMER CITIES.

A LITTLE BRIEF HISTORY, THE DISTRICT WAS CREATED IN '51 WITH 32,000 CUSTOMERS.

TODAY THEY SERVE 1.2 MILLION. IT'S A HUGE GROWTH OVER TIME. BUT ---1.7 MILLION.

>> YES. DID I HEAR TWO? >> YOU SAID 1.2 I THINK.

>> WHAT WAS THE LAST TIME THEY ADDED A CUSTOMER CITY? >> I HAVE THAT ON THE NEXT ITEM.

>> JUST A BIG NUMBER AND YOU CANNOT SEE THIS WITHOUT GASPING BUT 2019, THE DISTRICT DELIVERED A HUNDRED BILLION GALLONS OF WATER TO 1.2 MILLION PEOPLE. THIS IS A MAP SHOWING THE MEMBER CITY VERSUS THE CUSTOMER CITIES. THIS IS THE LIST. TO YOUR QUESTION, MATT, OUR EXCUSE ME, WHITNEY, RICHARDSON JOINED IN '93, ALLEN '93 AND FRISCO THE LAST CITY TO JOIN.

THERE HAS BEEN A PROCESS IN THE PAST FOR THE CITIES TO BE MEMBER CITIES.

>> WHEN WAS THE LAST CUSTOMER CITY ADDED? I UNDERSTAND THE MEMBER CITY.

>> THOSE WOULD HAVE BEEN CUSTOMER CITIES, '98 FRISCO AND RICHARDSON.

>> THEY CAME ON AS CUSTOMERS AND CAME ON AS MEMBER CITIES. >> WHEN WAS THE LAST CUSTOMER?

>> I'M SORRY. I DO NOT KNOW THAT. THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

I DON'T KNOW. THIS IS WHAT THEIR STRATEGY IS AND THOUGHT IT WOULD BE INTERESTING THAT CONSERVATION AND RE-USE IS A FOURTH OF THE THEIR STRATEGY.

YOU MAY REMEMBER AFTER A SEVERE FOUR-YEAR DROUGHT IN 2015, OBVIOUSLY THE LAKES FILLED BACK UP. MAY OF 2015 IT RAINED FOR 31 STRAIGHT DAYS.

WE HAD WATER EVERY DAY THAT MONTH. OUR CURRENT TAKE OR PAY AGREEMENT, THE CONSERVATION BUILT INTO THERE IS DUE TO DROUGHT.

NOW THERE'S A PERMANENT CONSERVATION AND IT IS ONE OF THINGS THAT THE MEMBER CITIES ARE NOTED, THE FOUR MEMBER CITIES THAT ARE TAKEN THE ACTION WITH THE PUC WHICH WE WILL COVER IN A MINUTE. IN ADDITION TO THE CONSERVATION REUSE, THERE ARE FIVE EXISTING RESERVOIRS, BOBARK IS BEING BUILT NOW. THAT IS THE ONE RIGHT HERE.

THAT ONE WILL BE ONLINE ACTUALLY SHORTLY. THIS REUSE PROJECT WITH EAST FORK, THAT PROJECT IS ALSO ON GOING AND OF COURSE, I THINK WE ALL REMEMBER THE WORK WE HAD TO

[00:20:01]

DO WITH LAKE TEXOMA TO BRING SOME NEW LINES DOWN TO LAKE, TO LAKE LAVON AND THE MAIN REASON FOR THAT WAS BECAUSE OF THE ZEBRA MOSS AND WHAT HAPPENED WITH THAT.

THERE WAS A LONG-STANDING DISPUTE BETWEEN TEXAS AND OKLAHOMA AS TO WHERE THEIR ACTUAL BORDER WAS. FINALLY, A FEW YEARS AGO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WEIGHED IN ON THAT AND THAT DECISION WAS MADE AND AS A RESULT, IT SHIFTED THE OKLAHOMA BORDER A LITTLE BIT FURTHER SOUTH AND THEY HAD THE DISTRICT HAD FIVE GIANT PUMP STATIONS IN LAKE TEXOMA AND FOUR OF THOSE ENDED UP BEING IN OKLAHOMA. THE ZEBRA MUSSELS, AN INVASIVE SPECIES AND UNDER THE FEDERAL ACT, YOU CANNOT TRANSPORT INVASIVE SPECIES ACROSS STATE LINES. WHEN THAT HAPPENED, THEY COULD NOT PROVE THEY COULD NOT DELIVER THAT WATER WITHOUT ALSO DELIVERING ZEBRA MUSSELS WHICH CONTAMINATES LAVON LAKE AND GET INTO THE NEXT. THAT'S THE REASON WHY. THAT WAS A HUGE PROJECT THEY HAD TO DO TO REBUILD THE PUMP STATIONS AND UPGRADE THEIR LINES AND THEN UPGRADE THE PLANT.

IT WAS A LOT OF WORK. YOU WILL SEE WHY I'M GOING TO GET TO THIS IN A MINUTE.

A LOT OF THIS WORK HAS BEEN DONE OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS WHEN OUR RATES HAVE REALLY JUMPED.

THIS SLIDE I BUILT, THERE'S A DATA CHART I FOUND WITH THE DISTRICT SHOWING WHAT THE RATES HAVE BEEN SINCE THE BEGINNING. CUSTOMER CITIES WERE ADD IN 1959.

JUST A FEW YEARS AFTER THEY STARTED. SO ALL THE YEARS THAT YOU SEE HERE FROM 1959 ALL THE WAY TO 2008, ALL THOSE YEARS THE AVERAGE INCREASE WAS ABOUT 3%.

BUT YOU COULD SEE THAT HUGE SPIKE IN THE 10-YEAR WHERE IT AVERAGED 10%.

THAT'S A 100% INCREASE OVER THAT PERIOD OF TIME. YOU WILL SEE NUMBERS THAT WILL REALLY SPEAK TO THAT IN TERMS OF COST. NOW THEY'RE SAYING THAT FUTURE RATE INCREASES ARE PROJECTED TO BE MORE MODEST AT 4 TO SIX % PER YEAR.

HALF OF THE RATE OF INCREASE IT HAD BEEN. THE OTHER NUMBER WE THOUGHT WAS INTERESTING IS THAT CAPITOL FUNDING NOW MAKES UP 62%, ALMOST 2 THIRDS OF THE TOTAL RATE.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE RATES OVER HERE, FOR 20, THE VARIABLE RATE, FIXED RATE AND CAPITOL RATE.

THE CAPITOL IS ALMOST TWO-THIRDS OF THE TOTAL COST. WHICH OBVIOUSLY THAT BECOMES OUR RATE. SO, THIS WAS AN INTERESTING SLIDE, IN 2019, WE TALKED, WE MENTIONED THAT ALMOST 100 BILLION GALLONS WERE DELIVERED. 92.7 MILLION.

CUSTOMER CITIES ARE GROWING FASTER THAN MEMBER CITY, AT LEAST SINCE 2010.

CUSTOMER CITIES PAID $45 MILLION IN 2019 COMPARED TO $16 MILLION IN 2010.

THERE'S YOUR 10% A YEAR INCREASE. SO FROM 2010 TO 2019 -- AND

VOLUME. >> BUT $45 MILLION IS A LOT OF MONEY TO PAY.

THE RED CITIES ARE THE CUSTOMER CITIES. I WILL TELL YOU THAT I DID NOT INCLUDE THE SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICT BUT IF YOU COMBINED ALL 20 SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICTS AS ONE, THEY WOULD BE THE LARGEST CUSTOMER CITY BECAUSE THAT TOTAL USAGE WOULD BE EVEN MORE THAN

ROWLETT, BUT AGAIN INDIVIDUALLY, THEY ARE EXTREMELY SMALL. >> THIS IS USAGE.

NOT TAKE OR PAY CONTRACT >> THAT'S RIGHT. THIS IS JUST TOTAL USAGE.

>> YOU HAVE SEEN THIS CHART BEFORE. WE INCLUDE IT IN OUR BUDGET MEMO AND A LOT OF PRESENTATIONS. YOU CAN SEE THAT OVER 18 YEARS ROWLETT HAS PAID NEARLY $20 MILLION FOR WATER WE DID NOT SELL. THE ANNUAL COST RIGHT NOW IS UP TO $2.8 MILLION. ALMOST $3 MILLION A YEAR IS THE COST TO ROWLETT FOR NOT SELLING THIS WATER. NOW, JUST WE HAVE THE OTHER CITIES TOO.

I WANT Y'ALL TO SEE THIS CHART IN A MINUTE. SO THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT WAS UNSOLD BY CUSTOMER CITIES LAST YEAR WAS THREE MILLION GALLONS AND THAT WAS $9.1 MILLION.

COMPARED TO $2.5 MILLION IN WATER LOSSES IN 2010. SO, I SAY WATER NOT SOLD.

THE OTHER THING IS, OF COURSE THE MEMBER CITIES DO TOO. THERE WAS 21 HALF BILLION

[00:25:07]

GALLONS THEY DID NOT SELL. IN THIS SENSE, WE ARE IN THE SAME GAME IN TERMS OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF TAKE OR PAY. THIS IS THE CHART I WANTED TO SHOW YOU GUYS WITH JUST THE CUSTOMER CITIES THEMSELVES. SO ON AVERAGE, CUSTOMER CITIES DID NOT USE 21% OF THEIR CONTRACT CAPABILITIES IN 2019. THAT MEANT THAT CUSTOMER CITIES SOLD 80% OF THE WATER.

AND 20% WAS UNSOLD. OF COURSE, EVER CITY IS DIFFERENT, JUST LIKE THE MEMBER CITIES. EVERY, BUT THE THING ABOUT TAKE OR PAY IT DOES CREATE WINNERS AND LOSERS. DEPENDS ON WHERE THE CITY IS WITH THEIR LIFE CYCLE PLANO, MESQUITE, GARLAND ARE TAKING THIS. THEIR ABILITY TO GROW RIGHT NOW IS BASED ON ONLY INFILL. ROWLETT, FRISCO MCKINNEY ARE GROWING CITIES.

AND EVEN ROWLETT TO SOME EXTENT GROW INTO THIS BILLION GALLONS ALTHOUGH IT'S GOING TO STILL TAKE A NUMBER OF YEARS BEFORE WE GET THERE. SO, AND UNDER THE WATER CONSERVATION STRATEGY BY THE DISTRICT, THEY'RE DISCOURAGING US FROM GETTING TO THAT NUMBER AT EVERY CITY ON HERE. THE MAYOR POINTED OUT YESTERDAY, WE'RE SCREAMING OVER THIS ONE THIRD WE COULDN'T SELL, BUT FATE WAS HALF. THERE'S IS 50%.

IT'S A MUCH BIGGER NUMBER. JUSTINE HIT WHAT THEY HAD AND PRETTY MUCH EVERY OTHER CITY LEFT WATER ON THE TABLE. SO THE PUC ACTION WAS TAKEN IN 2016 BY THE FOUR CITIES WE JUST MENTIONED. AND THIS WAS AT THIS TIME THEY STATED THAT THEY HAD PAID $178 MILLION FOR WATER THEY DIDN'T USE. YOU HEAR US SAYING ALMOST $20 MILLION OVER 18 YEARS, THIS IT WAS INTERESTING WHAT THE CITY MANAGER OF PLANO SAID AT THE TIME, HE SAID WE FILED THIS WATER RATE REVIEW TO SEEK A METHOD THAT'S SERVES THE REGION'S LONG-TERM INTEREST. SO THE NORTH -- THE QUOTE I LIKE WAS THE NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT METHODOLOGY IS OUT DATED. WE WERE IN THE DROUGHT AND REALLY IT WAS LONGER THAN FOUR YEARS. 2011 WAS VERY SEVERE.

THE LAKES FILLED BACK UP IN 2012 AND WE WENT RIGHT BACK INTO THE DROUGHT.

FOR THREE YEARS, WE WERE DAYS AWAY FROM GOING TO STAGE FOUR >> THE HIGHEST LEVEL WATER RESTRICTION THERE IS. SO, ONE THING THAT THE DISTRICT DID IS THEY SAID, YOU KNOW, THE EXPANSIVE BUILDING NEW RESERVOIRS ALL THE TIME IS VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE.

WHY NOT ADOPT A POLICY THAT REQUIRES CONSERVATION TO BE PART OF THE STRATEGY.

AGAIN, THAT WASN'T PART OF WHAT WE ALL SIGNED UP FOR. WHEN I SAY CUSTOMER CITIES, I'M SAYING THE MEMBER CITIES TOO. WATER CONSERVATION WAS NOT A PERMANENT PART AT LEAST NOT AT THE LEVEL THEY HAVE IT NOW. THEY ADOPTED A POLICY EQUIVALENT TO WHAT STAGE TWO USED TO BE.

WE'RE NOW IN A PERMANENT STAGE TWO. PART OF THIS AND I KIND OF JOKED WITH THE GROUP, WHEN IT'S RAINING, PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BUY WATER AND WHEN IT'S NOT RAINING, THE DISTRICT DOESN'T WANT US TO SELL WATER. THAT'S REALLY WHAT I THINK THE CUSTOMER CITIES FEEL LIKE. SO THE REAL ISSUE HERE IS HOW TO SPREAD THE CAPITAL COST AMONG THE CITIES. REGARDLESS OF WHERE THE CITY IS IN THEIR GROWTH CYCLE.

ANY TAKE OR PAY CHANGE CREATES WINNERS AND LOSERS AMONG THE MEMBER CITIES.

THE WILLINGNESS OF CITIES TO VOTER IS COUNTER PRODUCT YOU HAVE WHEN EACH AREA REPRESENTS A DIFFERENT TAXPAYER. IN ORDER FOR A CHANGE OF RE-ALLOCATION OF HOW THIS WORKS, AND YOUR CITY IS GOING TO BE ONE WHERE YOU HAVE TO TELL YOUR TAXPAYERS THEY'RE GOING TO PAY MORE, THEN WHY WOULD THEY AGREE TO THAT? WHY WOULD THEY AGREE TO THAT?

[00:30:04]

AND CUSTOMER CITIES FEEL THE SAME WAY. >> I KNOW Y'ALL KNOW THIS BUT I WILL SAY THIS FOR THE SAKE OF THE PUBLIC. IT TAKES A UNANIMOUS VOTE BY THE BOARD TO CHANGE ANY OF THIS. AND THAT'S THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE.

PLANO, EXCUSE ME, RICHARDSON HAS KIND OF TAKEN THEIRS MORE PUBLIC.

THEY CAME OUT WITH AN ARTICLE WHICH I THOUGHT WAS REALLY INTERESTING.

THEY'RE SAYING THE COST OF WATER AND SEWER TODAY IS HIGHER THAN THEY'RE PAYING FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. THAT'S A STAGGERING STAT. ABSOLUTELY STAGGERING.

THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY TRUE FOR ROWLETT. RICHARDSON, IF YOU REMEMBER, I THINK WE SAID THIS BEFORE. 50% OF THEIR UTILITY CUSTOMER USAGE IS COMMERCIAL.

AND THE OTHER HALF IS RESIDENTIAL. WE'RE LIKE 95% RESIDENTIAL AND THEN 5% COMMERCIAL. IT'S VERY DIFFERENT IN RICHARDSON.

AND LET'S SEE. SO, WHAT IS THE PUC ACTION MEAN TO CUSTOMER CITIES? I CONSULTED WITH OUR CITY ATTORNEY ON THIS ISSUE. THIS PARTICULAR SECTION DOWN HERE SECTION 13, IS PRETTY MUCH GOING TO BE IN ALL CONTRACTS. AND ESS IT IS SAYING IS SHORT OF YOU KNOW A JUDICIAL OR LEGAL RULING, WE HAVE ALL AGREED TO THIS VOLUN VOLUNTARILY. WE SIGNED THE AGREEMENT SAYING THIS PROVISION IS IN THERE. AND LITIGATION AS A RESULT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT GIVEN TO THE AGREEMENT THAT THE LANGUAGE WE AGREED TO. HOWEVER, A PUC REGULATORY FILING MUCH LIKE THE FOUR MEMBER CITIES DID, COULD FALL WITHIN THE SCOPE OF SECTION 13.

AND WE DID RECOMMEND THAT EVERY CITY CONSULT WITH THEIR LEGAL TEAM.

THE PUC ACTION AT THIS POINT, THERE'S BEEN SEVERAL STAGES WHERE THE PARTIES HAVE ACTUALLY AGREED TO EXTEND THEIR DEADLINE FOR MEDIATION AND NEGOTIATION. THE CURRENT DEADLINE IS DECEMBER 13TH. 2019. SO, THESE WERE THE ISSUES THAT WE BELIEVE THAT ALL THE CUSTOMER CITIES SHARE. TAKE OR PAY.

IT'S ARCHAIC AND AGREED TO LONG BEFORE A PERMANENT WATER CONSERVATION STRATEGY WAS IMPLEMENTED. BOARD MEETINGS LIKE RIGHT NOW, WE'RE LIVE.

BOARD MEETINGS WITH THE DISTRICT HAVE NOT BEEN FILMED OR LIVE IN THE PAST.

THERE WAS A, SOME CONCERNS THAT THE WATER DISTRICT WHEN THEY DID THEIR ANNUAL COST ALLOCATION WAS OVERWEIGHTING THE COST ALLOCATION TO WATER CUSTOMERS BENEFITTING WATER WASTE.

THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE WASTEWATER-ONLY CUSTOMERS. SO, THEY SUPPOSEDLY FIXED THAT.

THAT WAS ONE OF CONCERNS. OF COURSE, PERMANENT WATER CONSERVATION AS A STRATEGY WE MENTIONED. THERE WAS A RUMOR THAT THE DISTRICT BOARD DISCUSSED CHARGING CUSTOMER CITIES MORE THAN THE CURRENT $0.05 DIFFERENTIAL THEY CHARGE US NOW.

SO IF YOU'RE A CUSTOMER CITY, WE'RE PAYING $0.05 PER THOUSAND GALLONS MORE THAN MEMBER CITIES.

THEY WERE TALKING AND THEY HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT INCREASING THAT.

I ASKED TOM COOLA ABOUT THAT IN OCTOBER AND HE DID CONFIRM THAT THEY WERE DOING THAT.

BUT HE ALSO STATED THAT THE BOARD HAD DECIDED TO WAIT UNTIL THE PUC ACTION IS SOLVED BEFORE THEY PICKED THAT ISSUE BACK UP ON. MEMBER CITY STATUS.

WE RAISED THAT ISSUE. MAY INDICATED THEY HAVE PARKED THAT DECISION AS WELL TO DETERMINE WHAT IT WOULD TAKE FOR OTHER CITIES TO JOIN UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THIS ACTION, THIS PUC ACTION IS TAKEN. CITIES DON'T HAVE A VOICE. AND QUITE FRANKLY, WHETHER MEMBER CITY OR NOT, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A VOICE. AND WE OFTEN FEEL LEFT OUT OF THE COMMUNICATION. SO, WHAT THIS SLIDE KIND OF SHOWS, SOME OF THE UPDATES.

SO, THE BOARD MEETINGS, WHAT THE DISTRICT HAS TOLD US IS THAT THEY ARE FILMING, THEY WILL BE FILMING AND PUTTING ONLINE THEIR FUTURE MEETINGS. SO, THEY WON'T BE LIVE.

BUT THEY WILL BE TAPE DELAYED. AT LEAST THAT PART WILL BE DONE. THE RATE PORTIONALITY HAS BEEN FIXED. AND THEIR COMMUNICATION, THEY HAVE STATED TO DO DISTRICT THAT

[00:35:03]

THEY WOULD LIKE TO MEET WITH THE CITY OR CUSTOMER CITIES COUPLE TIMES A YEAR AND THAT HELPS.

THESE OTHER ISSUES ARE STILL ON THE TABLE. THERE'S NOT A SOLUTION ON TAKE OR PAY. NOBODY SEEMS TO BE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THE PERMANENT WATER CONSERVATION POLICY. WATER RATES, I DO BELIEVE THAT THE MEMBER CITIES ARE ABSOLUTELY GOING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT CHARGING THE CUSTOMER CITIES MORE.

I DO BELIEVE THAT'S COMING. MEMBER CITIES STATUS. WE DON'T EVEN GET TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH THE DISTRICT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT'S PARKED. AND THEN OF COURSE, REPRESENTATION, TOM DID INDICATE HE WOULD BRING THE ISSUE BACK TO THE BOARD.

WE BROUGHT THIS UP FOR YEARS NOW. THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE NO VOICE, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE AND WE HAVE EVEN SUGGESTED AT THE VERY MINIMAL CAN THE CUSTOMER CITIES YOU KNOW MAYBE ELECT AN EX-OFICIO. WE BROUGHT THAT BACK UP AGAIN WHEN WE MET WITH THE OTHER CUSTOMER CITIES AND THE DISTRICT.

SO, WE ASKED AT THAT POINT, WHAT OTHER ISSUES MAYBE WE MISSED. MAYBE THERE'S SOME.

THERE WAS A GOOD RECOMMENDATION THAT THERE BE SOME WAY THAT THE CUSTOMER CITIES COULD HAVE MORE VOICE OR INPUT OR AT LEAST BE ABLE TO INSPECT THE BOOKS IN TERMS OF THE ANNUAL BUDGET.

SO, THAT WOULD BE ONE WAY. THAT WE COULD DO THAT. AND THEN THERE WAS A CONCERN I THINK BY ONE OF CITIES ABOUT THEIR CHLORINE RESIDUAL. IN OUR DISCUSSION AND WRAP UP, WE ASKED IS THERE INTEREST TO FORM A MUTUAL POSITION OR APPROACH.

IF YES, WHAT ARE THE TOPICS THE GROUP FEELS STRONGLY ABOUT AND WHAT FORM SHOULD OUR MUTUAL POSITION OR FORM BE. MAYOR, THESE WERE THE NEXT STEPS.

>> SO, IT WAS INTERESTING, YOU KNOW I WAS WATCHING THE YAUD -- AUDIENCES.

THEY WERE CUSTOMERS IN THE ROOM THAT DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE NEGATIVE IMPACT BECAUSE THEIR RESIDENTS DON'T EXPERIENCE THAT. IT'S VERY MINIMAL. YOU SAW THE CHART OF WHAT THE CUSTOMER CITIES TAKE OR PAY IS. I THINK THERE'S MORE WINNERS IN THE MEMBER CITIES THAN THERE ARE IN THE CUSTOMER CITIES. BUT, THE MEMBER CITIES HAVE THE SAME ISSUE TOO.

SO, THE ANSWER TO THE FIRST QUESTION. CAN YOU GO BACK ONE SLIDE, BRIAN. IS THERE AN INTEREST IN FORMING A MUTUAL POSITION.

ITEMS OF CONCERN WAS AN OVERWHELMING YES. GREAT APPRECIATION EXPRESSED IN THE ROOM THAT ROWLETT TOOK THE INITIATIVE TO PULL THIS GROUP TOGETHER.

I THOUGHT THERE WAS INTERESTING INSIGHT OF ARE WE A DAY LATE AND A DOLLAR SHORT? A FEW PEOPLE EXPRESSED NO BECAUSE THEY DON'T THINK THEY WOULD HAVE HAD THE SUPPORT MONTHS OR YEARS AGO. THAT EVERYBODY IS FED UP. NOT EVERYBODY IS FED UP.

I CAN'T REPRESENT EVERYBODY'S POSITION. ENOUGH CUSTOMER CITIES ARE FED UP THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME TO TRY TO HAVE A MUTUAL POSITION. I THOUGHT THAT WAS INTERESTING.

TAKE OR PAY WAS AN ISSUE FOR SOME. WAS A MAJOR ISSUE FOR SOME.

WAS A IRRITANT FOR SOME. AND WAS NOT AN ISSUE FOR ONE. REPRESENTATION ON THE BOARD WAS OVERWHELMINGLY THE BIGGEST CONCERN OF THE GROUP. AND NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENTATION ON THE BOARD OF HAVING A VOICE AND HAVING A PRESENCE AND HAVING A KNOWLEDGE BASE OF WHAT IS GOING ON. WHAT IS THE BIG ISSUE. YOU KNOW, SPENT A LOT OF TIME ABOUT OKAY, TALKING ABOUT OKAY, WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THIS? AND I THINK IT WAS US ROWLETT THAT PUT FORTH A SUGGESTION OF YOU KNOW DO WE FORM A COALITION AND THEN IF THAT IS A SOMETHINGY WE WOULD LIKE TO DO, WHAT DOES THAT COALITION LOOK LIKE? AND WHAT IS YOU KNOW THE CHARGE

[00:40:02]

OF THAT COALITION? SO WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME SPEAKING ABOUT THAT.

THE OVERALL CONCLUSION WAS, THIS NEEDS TO BE A COALITION OF THE CUSTOMER CITIES TO START DISCUSSING POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS TO THE ISSUES WE'RE HAVING. YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T, WE HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

AND THAT HAS NOT AFFECTUATED CHANGE. HOW CAN WE AS A GROUP TRY TO COME TOGETHER AND TRY TO EFFECT CHANGE? WE'RE NOT READY TOMORROW TO STORM AND GO THIS IS WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN. WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAY TO MEET THE INTEREST OF EVERYBODY. SO, WHAT WE, WHAT I EXPRESSED TO THE GROUP IS THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT A RESOLUTION IN FRONT OF MY COUNCIL TO JOIN A COALITION OR NOT AT THE DESIRE OF COUNCIL. AND THAT SEEM TO BE VERY WELL RECEIVED BY THE REST OF THE GROUP. THEY WERE, WOULD WELCOME THAT TYPE OF RESOLUTION.

AND IT WOULD BE A RESOLUTION OF YOU KNOW, OUR INTENT TO FORM A COALITION OF CUSTOMER CITIES AND WE WOULD INCLUDE THE SPECIAL USE DISTRICTS BY INVITATION. IT WOULD BE AN INDIVIDUAL CITY OR SPECIAL USE DISTRICT DECISION ON WHETHER THEY WANTED TO JOIN THE COALITION.

THE PURPOSE IN THE RESOLUTION WOULD BE STATED BROADLY. TAKE OR PAY.

RATE DIFFERENTIALS. REPRESENTATION ON THE BOARD. COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE WATER DISTRICT AND THE CITIES. NOT SPECIFYING IN THIS RESOLUTION EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT REPRESENT SOME OF THE AREAS OF CONCERN. BRIAN VOLUNTEERED TO WRITE A PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF THAT RESOLUTION AND HE WILL CIRCULATE IT AMONGST THE CUSTOMER CITIES FOR COMMENTS. I WOULD LIKE US TO CONSIDER THAT RESOLUTION IN THE FIRST MEETING OF DECEMBER. WHICH I THINK WOULD BE DECEMBER 2ND.

DECEMBER 3RD. AND WHICH TIME WE WILL PUT ON WORK SESSION AGENDA.

TALK ABOUT THE RESOLUTION >> WE CAN OBVIOUSLY TALK ABOUT IT NOW HERE.

AND THEN THE OTHER CITIES ARE NOT QUITE AS READY TO ACT AS FAST AS WE ARE.

BUT, WE INITIATED THIS WHOLE CONVERSATION AND THIS WHOLE MEETING SO WE'RE A LITTLE AHEAD OF THE GAME. I THINK PRETTY MUCH THEY WERE ALL ON BOARD OF TAKING THIS BACK TO THEIR COUNCILS. THEY WERE SEVERAL CUSTOMER CITIES THAT SAYS THEIR COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE BASE WE HAVE IN THE ROOM AND THEY NEEDED TIME.

TO EDUCATE THEIR COUNCIL. IF YOU LOOKED AT SOME OF THE CITIES MORE OF THE LOSERS UNDER THE TAKE OR PAY, I THINK THEIR COUNCILS ARE A LITTLE MORE EDUCATED

>> THE ONES THAT AREN'T, THEIR COUNCILS AREN'T NEAR AS EDUCATED.

ONE OF US SUGGESTED, BRIAN OR ME, I DON'T KNOW. DOING A JOINT PRESS RELEASE.

THIS PART, I WANTED TO DO A JOINT PRESS CONFERENCE. THIS PART OF THE CONVERSATION I THOUGHT WAS VERY INTERESTING BECAUSE A CITY THAT DOES NOT HAVE AS BIG ISSUES FROM THE TAKE OR PAY AS WE DO SAID THAT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THEM. WHY WOULD THEY BRING TO THEIR RESIDENTS A BIG ISSUE TO COST WHEN THEY DON'T HAVE A BIG ISSUE IN REGARDS TO COST BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE OVER BURDEN OF TAKE OR PAY. WE BACKED OFF THAT AS FAR AS A JOINT PRESS RELEASE. AND KIND OF WENT DOWN THE PATH OF YOU KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE UP TO EACH INDIVIDUAL CITY IF THEY WANT TO JOIN THE COALITION AND HOW THEY WANT TO PUBLICIZE THE INFORMATION. THAT'S THE RIGHT APPROACH. WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT DOES THE COALITION LOOK LIKE? DO WE HIRE AN OUTSIDE PROFESSIONAL TO HELP US WITH OUR COALITION INVOLVEMENT WITH NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT? WE DO WITH ENCORE AND ATMOS.

WE REALLY DIDN'T GET THAT FAR. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT AS A POSSIBILITY.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE AGREED THAT WE WOULD HAVE A MEETING, THE FIRST MEETING OF THE COALITION IN FEBRUARY OF 2020. AT THAT TIME, WE WOULD KNOW WHAT CUSTOMER CITIES DECIDED TO JOIN THE COALITION AND WHAT SPECIAL USE DISTRICT. AND YOU KNOW THAT ONE A BIG

[00:45:03]

TOPIC OF THE FIRST SEVERAL MEETING OF WHAT IS THE COMPOSITION OF THIS LOOK LIKE.

WHAT IS THE GOALS AND PURPOSES AND HOW DOES THIS OPERATE. WHAT AM I MISSING?

>> MAYOR, I THINK YOU'VE GOT IT. I MEAN THE MAIN THING THAT TAMMY AND I WERE HOPING FOR AND I THINK IS THERE, THE TIMING IS JUST REALLY GOOD. JUST I THINK THAT YOU KNOW THE DISTRICT OVER THE YEARS, EVERY COUPLE YEARS THEY APPOINT SOMEONE TO TALK TO THE CITIES.

WE TALK OVER AND OVER. GUYS INDIVIDUALLY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO EVER MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

JUST WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE IS YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF LIKE ONE PERSON WHY NOT DO THIS? IT'S ALMOST LIKE THE NATURAL PROGRESSION AND THE INTERESTING THING THAT THEY STATED, I DON'T THINK I SAID THIS TAMMY, YOU KNOW, LET'S NOT GO TO THE DISTRICT TO ASK, WE'RE GOING TO CREATE THIS COALITION BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET OUR ACT TOGETHER TO DECIDE WHAT THOSE ISSUES ARE.

HOW WE WANT TO SEE THOSE RESOLVED LONG BEFORE WE EVER GO TALK TO THE DISTRICT.

GET OUR MESSAGE OUT. >> SO THAT'S KIND OF THE OVER VIEW.

COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

ASSUMING THE TAKE OR PAY SAYS OKAY. WE WILL BRING DOWN TO THE CURRENT LEVEL OF WATER USAGE. WOULD THEY PROBABLY RAISE THE RATES TO COMPENSATE FOR THE --

>> YOU HAVE TO. >> I MEAN, TO SOME EXTENT IT'S A SEESAW.

IF THEY'RE TRYING TO HIT THE SAME BUDGET LEVEL, THEN TO LOWER IT FOR SOME HAS TO RAISE FOR

OTHERS. >> THAT'S WHY YOU NEVER GET IT VOTED ON BY THE BOARD, THE CITIES THAT DON'T HAVE A NEGATIVE TAKE OR PAY WILL HAVE TO PAY MORE.

BECAUSE WE HAVE SUCH A HIGH TAKE OR PAY, OUR RATES WOULD COME DOWN FROM THE CURRENT LEVEL.

BUT FRISCO'S WOULD GO UP AND ALLEN'S WOULD PROBABLY GO UP. THE PROBLEM IS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SUCH AN ARCHAIC PRICING METHOD TO COVER CAPITAL COSTS FOR A REGION LIKE NORTH TEXAS THAT IS GROWING LEAPS AND BOUNDS AND EVERYTHING ELSE WE DO, WE DO A REGIONAL BASIS.

TRANSPORTATION IS DONE ON A REGIONAL BASIS. IT JUST, IT'S BEYOND ME TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS GOOD FOR NORTH TEXAS AND HOW THIS IS GOOD FOR THE REGION.

IT'S NOT GOOD FOR THE RESIDENTS OF ROWLETT. OR GARLAND AND RICHARDSON AND MESQUITE AND SEVERAL OTHERS. BUT, WE'RE NOT AFFECTUATING CHANGE.

WE TRIED FOR YEARS AND IT HASN'T HAPPENED. >> I THANK YOU GUYS FOR STEPPING UP AND PUSHING THAT ISSUE. THIS IS ONE OF BIGGEST ISSUES THERE.

I SUPPORT YOU. I THINK EVERYBODY ELSE IN HERE SUPPORTS YOU.

THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT AND ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO HELP. ME PERSONALLY, I'M HERE TO HELP.

>> ONE OF MY BIGGEST CONCERNS AND EXPRESSED THIS TO THE CUSTOMER CITIES.

ALL THIS DISCUSSION IS GOING ON. THIS IS WHAT PROMPTED ME TO FORCE THIS MEETING.

ALL THIS DISCUSSION IS GOING ON WITH THE MEMBER CITIES AND THE PUC ACTION AND NEGOTIATIONS, CUSTOMER CITIES ARE JUST SITTING BACK HERE WAITING FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN.

THAT CAN'T HAPPEN ANYMORE. WE HEARD THE CONCERNS. THE MEMBER CITIES ARE INCREASING THE GAP TO CUSTOMER CITIES. THAT'S A HUGE RED FLAG. WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER CUSTOMER CITIES? ONE JUST APPROVED THEIRS WITHIN THE LAST TWO YEARS.

ONE OF THEM IS IN THAT NOW AND SHE SAID THAT YOU KNOW THEY HAVE BEEN REVIEWING THE NEW CONTRACT.

THE DISTRICT DID MENTION TO US, YOU REMEMBER HOW ENCORE DID THE SAME THING.

THEY WANT ALL THE CITIES TO HAVE THE SAME AGREEMENT AND SO, THEY'RE STANDARDIZING THE AGREEMENT. IT'S BEING REVIEWED BY THIS OTHER CITY.

MAKE NO MISTAKE, ALL MEMBER CITIES PAY THE SAME PRICE AND ALL CUSTOMER CITIES PAY THE SAME PRICE. THERE'S STANDARDIZATION IN THE CURRENT CONTRACTS.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO BRING, IF WE CAN GET THE RESOLUTION WRITTEN. I KNOW IT'S HOLIDAY SEASON.

IF WE CAN GET THE RESOLUTION WRITTEN AND WE CAN GET COMMENTS BACK FROM THE OTHER CUSTOMER

[00:50:05]

CITIES AND HAVE A FINAL DRAFT OF THE RESOLUTION, I WOULD LIKE US TO CONSIDER THAT RESOLUTION IN THE DECEMBER 3RD MEETING. AND AGAIN A RESOLUTION TO JOIN A COALITION OF CUSTOMER CITIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVIEWING AM WHYS OF MUTUAL CONCERN INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO X, Y AND Z.

I THINK WE'RE ALL IN FAVOR. >> I AGREE. ALL RIGHT.

ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT ITEM? ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL, IF YOU WILL, WE BE

[4. DISCUSS CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS]

CONSIDERING ITEM 2 A FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. IS THERE ANYTHING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ANYBODY HAS QUESTIONS ABOUT OR WANTS TO CONSIDER FOR CONSIDERATION? ALL RIGHT. WE WILL

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.