[00:00:04] ALL RIGHT. WELCOME EVERYONE. IT IS OFFICIALLY FEBRUARY 25TH, 2025, 6 P.M. [1. CALL TO ORDER – 6:00 PM] TO THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR THE CITY OF BOERNE, TEXAS. WOULD YOU PLEASE JOIN ME IN A MOMENT OF PRAYER? GRACIOUS AND LOVING GOD, WE GIVE YOU THANKS FOR A GLORIOUS DAY AND A WONDERFUL COMMUNITY TO LIVE AND TO SERVE IN. OPEN OUR HEARTS AND MINDS TO THE HOLY SPIRIT TODAY AS WE HAVE DISCUSSIONS THAT CONCERNS OUR COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE, THAT WE MAKE WISE DECISIONS, DISCERN IT WITH GOOD DISCERNMENT FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ETHICAL DECISIONS AND CONTINUE TO GUIDE OUR HEARTS AND OUR MINDS, AND BE WITH OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF THIS COMMUNITY AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH, WITH DECISIONS AND VOTES THAT ARE WHAT'S BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITY. AND YOUR PRECIOUS NAME, WE PRAY. AMEN. WOULD YOU JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? AND THEN THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE. TEXAS. ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE INDIVISIBLE. THANK YOU. I INVITE YOU ALL TO BE SEATED. MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO. [2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST] CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. COUNCIL MEMBERS, DO WE HAVE ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA? NO. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST? NO. OKAY. MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE. PUBLIC COMMENTS. [3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is the opportunity for visitors and guests to address the City Council on any issue, in compliance with LGC Section 551.007. City Council may not discuss any presented issue, nor may any action be taken on any issue at this time. (Attorney General opinion – JC-0169)] WHEN I STATE YOUR NAME, WE HAVE TWO SPEAKERS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. WHEN I STATE YOUR NAME, YOU COME TO THE PODIUM. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES AFTER YOU GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS TO SPEAK TO WHAT'S ON YOUR MIND THIS EVENING. SO OUR FIRST SPEAKER THIS EVENING IS NOLAN KUHN. NOLAN. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS NOLAN KEENE. I'M A RESIDENT OF FAIR OAKS RANCH, AND I'M ALSO VERY MUCH A AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE PICKLEBALL AND TENNIS COMMUNITIES. THERE ARE GROUPS OUT AT BOERNE CITY PARK. I STOPPED BY ON THE WAY OVER HERE TO LOOK AT THOSE NEW FORMER TENNIS COURT. SEVEN AND EIGHT NOW BEING RESTRIPED, OR HAVE BEEN RESTRIPED FOR PICKLEBALL ONLY TO TWO TENNIS COURTS RESULTING IN EIGHT PICKLEBALL COURTS. UNFORTUNATELY, IN RECENT TIMES WE'VE HAD FAR TOO MUCH CONTROVERSY, I GUESS, BETWEEN THE TWO GROUPS. AND I GUESS I SHOULD PREFACE ANY STATEMENT TONIGHT THAT I'M NOT HERE AS AN OFFICIAL MEMBER OF OF EITHER ONE OF THOSE GROUPS. BUT I WANT TO, YOU KNOW, WE'LL GET TO IT. SOME THOUGHTS THAT I HAVE ON WHAT WE COULD DO THAT WOULD RESULT IN TENNIS PLAYERS HAVING A GOOD TENNIS COURT OR COURT COURTS THAT WOULD WITH THE PROPER ORIENTATION. AND I GUESS, TO SET THE STAGE, YOU KNOW BURNIE CITY PARK. THE THE EAST WEST ORIENTATION AT BURNIE CITY PARK IS WRONG FOR THIS. IT SHOULD BE NORTH SOUTH. AND IT'S MORE DISRUPTIVE FOR THE TENNIS PLAYERS BECAUSE SO MUCH OF IT WITH THE OVERHEAD SERVE. FAR MORE LOBS AND TENNIS IN AND IN PICKLEBALL THAT THAT WE HAVE TO CONTEND WITH. WHEREAS PICKLEBALL, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE AN UNDERHAND SERVE. MOST OF THE ACTIVITY IS KIND OF AT EYE LEVEL. AND WE AND ADOPTED A SYSTEM WHEREBY THE COUNTER, THE INCURSION FROM THE SUN IS TO AFTER SIX POINTS IN PICKLEBALL, SWITCH IN SO EVERYBODY GETS AN EQUAL DOSE OF THE SUN. BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT WOULD RESULT IN TENNIS PLAYERS HAVING A QUALITY. I'VE BEEN PLAYING TENNIS FOR 72 YEARS, SO I KNOW A GOOD TENNIS COURT WHEN I SEE ONE. I KNOW A BAD WHEN I SEE ONE. AND I'M SORRY TO SAY THAT TENNIS PLAYERS AT BURNIE CITY PARK HAVE ENDURED SOME REALLY ADVERSE CONDITIONS BECAUSE TWO EGREGIOUS PROBLEMS. ONE, I'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE ORIENTATION AND SECONDLY, THE LACK OF PROPER COMPACTION WHEN THEY BUILT THE BURNIE CITY PARK. I ALWAYS SAY, IF DONALD TRUMP HAD BEEN HERE AT THE TIME, HE'D SAY, YOU'RE FIRED. BUT ANYWAY I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WERE THE ADLER FACILITY WILL HAVE HERETOFORE SAID EIGHT COURTS. I UNDERSTAND THAT BEN THATCHER SAID THEY'RE GOING TO PLAN ON 12 COURTS. AND BASICALLY WHAT THAT THAT WOULD I'D SAY, WHY NOT TURN THOSE 12 PICKLEBALL COURTS INTO SIX TENNIS COURTS WITH THE RIGHT ORIENTATION. BERNIE. PICKLEBALL TENNIS PLAYERS OVER THE DECADES HAVE ENDURED SOME WHAT I CONSIDER ADVERSE CONDITIONS. BUT ANYWAY, THEN LONG STORY SHORT, I GUESS IS THAT WE WOULD TURN BERNIE CITY PARK [00:05:08] INTO BERNIE PICKLEBALL FACILITY WHERE WE WOULD WIND UP WITH 32 PICKLEBALL ONLY COURTS. YOU KNOW, WITH THE SIX TENNIS COURTS. THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR LEAGUE PLAY, TWO LESSONS AND INDIVIDUAL PLAY. AND THE WHOLE SCHEDULE WOULD BE CONTINGENT ON FINISHING THOSE COURTS AND WHERE WE WOULD THEN TAKE TENNIS COURTS FIVE, SIX AND THEN ONE THROUGH FOUR WITH THE END RESULT. PICKLEBALL PLAYERS WILL REALLY TRAVEL AND SPEND MONEY AND THIS WOULD BE A GOLD MINE, I THINK, FOR THE CITY OF BERNIE, WITH ALL OF THE STUFF MONEY COMING INTO THE CITY COFFERS, OUR GROUP WOULD PROBABLY BE WILLING TO RUN IT AT NO COST BECAUSE WE'RE RUNNING IT FOR OUR OWN GROUP ANYWAY. AND AND JUST TO THINK ABOUT THE TOURIST DOLLARS THAT WOULD FLOW INTO THE CITY. SO AND I GUESS IN CLOSING, I'D LIKE TO LEAVE YOU WITH ONE. WE'VE BEEN KEEPING A LOT OF STATISTICS, AND WE FOUND THAT VISITORS TO PICKLEBALL OR TENNIS PLAYERS, THE BERNIE CITY PARK 10% PLAY TENNIS, 90% PLAY PICKLEBALL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU ALL. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS DALE MAZUREK. DALE, YOU COME FORWARD, PLEASE, AND GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. AND YOUR THREE MINUTES WILL BEGIN AFTER YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. I BUTCHER YOUR NAME. IT'S EDDIE MAZUREK. BILL IS MY OLDER BROTHER. HE MAY HAVE SIGNED UP ALSO. I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, IT'S HARD TO READ YOUR WRITING. MY APOLOGIES SIR. MISS LATTIMORE, MY SECOND GRADE TEACHER, TOLD ME I'D NEVER MAKE IT ANYWAY. MY NAME IS EDDIE MAZUREK AND I HAVE PROPERTY AT 205 CASCADE CAVERNS ROAD. MYSELF AND FOUR OF MY SIBLINGS OWN SOME OF THE LAND ON CASCADE CAVERNS ROAD THAT YOU ALL ARE WANTING TO ANNEX. WE OWN THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION FROM THE CATEGORY THAT IS THERE TO THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE OF SOUTH GLEN SUBDIVISION. WE ARE HERE TO ASK THAT YOU POSTPONE THE DECISION ON TO ANNEX THAT PROPERTY UNTIL WE HAVE HAD TIME TO MEET WITH THE CITY, COUNTY AND OUR FAMILY TO DISCUSS THIS. I WATCHED THE VIDEO OF THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING WITH THE FIRST READING CAME UP FOR THE ANNEXATION, AND IN THE VIDEO, WHEN RICKY PFEFFER MENTIONED THAT SOME OF THE PROPOSED EASEMENT IS ON PRIVATE LAND, THE COMMENT WAS MADE BY, I THINK, CHERYL ROGERS. I'M NOT MISTAKEN THAT WE USUALLY ANNEX LAND IN THIS SITUATION, BUT THAT GOT ME THINKING. IS IT ALWAYS OR JUST USUALLY? ALSO, SOMEONE ASKED AGAIN, MAYBE CHERYL TO LOOK INTO THIS BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO TAKE ANYONE'S PRIVATE LAND. THE VIDEO WAS SEEN ON THE MONITOR AND NOT ON THE DAIS UP HERE, SO I WASN'T SURE WHO WAS TALKING AT THAT POINT IN TIME. BUT SOMEBODY SAID THAT BUT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO. SOMEBODY WAS SUPPOSED TO LOOK INTO THIS. MY COMMISSIONER TOLD ME THAT THE LAND WAS NOT GOING TO BE ANNEXED. JUST THE MAINTENANCE OF THE EASEMENT. BUT LOOKING AT THE BACKUP DOCUMENTS ONLINE FOR THIS, IT CLEARLY STATES THAT OUR LAND WILL BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY, AND THE CITY LIMITS WILL BE ADJUSTED FOR THIS. WE DID NOT RECEIVE NOTICE OF ANY. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY NOTIFICATION OF THIS ANNEXATION. BUT FOR ME, SEEING IT IN THE BERNIE STAR A FEW WEEKS AGO, THAT THAT WAS ON THE AGENDA, WE WOULD NEVER KNOWN THAT THAT THE CITY WAS LOOKING AT ANNEXING PART OF THAT LAND. AND I REALIZE YOU'RE NOT TAKING OUR LAND FROM US, YOU'RE JUST ANNEXING IT INTO THE CITY. BUT BY DOING THAT, YOU'RE RESTRICTING WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THAT WITHOUT HAVING TO COME BEFORE YOU ALL TO MAKE ANY TYPE OF IMPROVEMENTS OR WHATEVER, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE IN THE CITY LIMITS. I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT THAT PROPERTY CAN BE ANNEXED WITHOUT AT LEAST NOTIFYING THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN ADVANCE. AND LIKE I SAID, IT JUST HAPPENED TO SEE THIS IN THE IN THE BERNIE STAR A FEW WEEKS AGO. SO I ASK THAT YOU ALL CONSIDER POSTPONING IT TILL WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT AMONGST THE THREE ENTITIES. THANK YOU. I AGREE. NO ONE ELSE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, BUT I DID SEE SOME LATE COMERS THIS EVENING. IF ANYBODY CAME IN LATE, WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK FOR PUBLIC PERFORMANCE. PLEASE COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOUR THREE MINUTES WILL BEGIN ONCE YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. GOOD AFTERNOON. RICKY PFEIFFER, 213 CASCADE CAVERN. I SPOKE TO LAST TIME ON THIS. I'VE GOT THREE CONCERNS. ONE OF THEM BEING EMERGENCY SERVICES. ON THE PART THAT IS. BEYOND THAT, THE CITY WOULD ANNEX IN. IT MAKES FOR CONFUSION WITH DISPATCH. IF SOMEONE WOULD CALL IN 911 WHO IS TO RESPOND. THE SECOND THING IS THE MAINTENANCE COUNTY WOULD HAVE TO GO ACROSS CITY PORTION TO GET TO A SMALL PORTION OF COUNTY TO MAINTAIN THE ROAD. AND THE THIRD THING IS THE NON ACCESS EMERGENCY EXIT. IF THIS ANNEXED, WOULD IT BE OPENED UP TO THAT PORTION OF THE ROAD ALSO. [00:10:05] AND THAT'S ALL I HAD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU RICKY. NO OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR. [4. CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed below within the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and may be enacted with one motion. There will be no separate discussion of items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests, in which event the item may be moved to the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence.] CONSENT AGENDA ITEM. COUNCIL MEMBERS, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS FOR CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FOR A AND FOR B? IF NOT, CAN I GET A MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN SCOTT? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT A CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN WILLISON. PLEASE VOTE. AND CONSENT AGENDA PASSES FIVE ZERO. THANK YOU EVERYONE. MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE A 2025 073 THE BURNIE POLICE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL 2024 ANNUAL [A. RECEIVE THE BOERNE POLICE DEPARTMENT 2024 ANNUAL REPORT AND THE ANNUAL REPORT ON RACIAL PROFILING.] REPORT FOR THE ANNUAL REPORT FOR RACIAL PROFILING. SAY THAT FIVE TIMES FAST. FRANK WRIGHT PRESENTING. CHIEF. POLICE CHIEF. HI. GOOD EVENING. MAYOR, COUNCIL STAFF AND GUESTS. I'M HERE TODAY TO PRESENT OUR ANNUAL REPORT ALONG WITH OUR RACIAL PROFILING REPORT, WHICH IS REQUIRED OF US TO DO EVERY YEAR. AND SO BEFORE WE BEGIN, HERE'S OUR STRATEGY MAP THAT WE'RE ALIGNED WITH. SAFETY AND SECURITY, OBVIOUSLY, BUT ALSO THE FOSTERING A STRONG CULTURE OF COMMUNITY EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT, ALONG WITH UTILIZING THE DATA, WHICH YOU'LL SEE A LOT OF DATA STUFF TO MAKE SMART DECISION MAKING. SO TO KIND OF START OUT WITH OUR ACTIVITY FOR 2024. THIS IS SOME OF THE STUFF THAT WE PRESENT. GENERAL CALLS FOR SERVICE WENT UP ABOUT 3% FROM 2023. OUR ACTUAL 911 CALLS CAME DOWN A LITTLE BIT FROM ABOUT 17% FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR. AS FAR AS THE TRAFFIC STOPS, I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT JUST BECAUSE WE RECENTLY HAD THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SURVEY GO OUT TO THE PUBLIC. AND SO ONE OF THE COMMENTS OR THERE WAS A LOT OF COMMENTS AND STUFF ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AND WANTING US TO BE OUT THERE MORE ENFORCING TRAFFIC. AND SO WE'VE HEARD THAT EVEN BEFORE THE SURVEY CAME OUT. AND SO SOME OF THE STUFF WE DID WAS INCREASE THAT TRAFFIC. SO WE WENT UP ABOUT 36% IN TRAFFIC STOPS JUST FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR. AND 50% OF THAT WAS CITATIONS. AND SO WE'RE HERE, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE OUT THERE ENFORCING THOSE LAWS. THE SURVEY WAS GOOD BECAUSE IT KIND OF GAVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE NARROW PICTURE WHERE WE CAN FOCUS OUR EFFORTS. THERE WAS A LOT OF STUFF ON MAIN STREET AND RIVER ROAD AND STUFF LIKE THAT. SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO BE OUT THERE WORKING. IN TRAFFIC ARRESTS KIND OF WENT DOWN JUST JUST SHY OF 10% IN COMPARED TO LAST YEAR AS WELL. SO THE CRASH DATA I INCLUDED THIS ONE ON THIS YEAR BECAUSE AGAIN, GOING BACK TO A LOT OF THE MOBILITY ISSUES, THE TRAFFIC ISSUES, ALONG WITH US BEING OUT THERE ENFORCING, WE DID OUR OWN DATA ANALYSIS BASED ON OUR CRASH REPORTS THAT WE DO. AND SO YOU CAN SEE WE DID GO UP ABOUT 31% IN CRASH REPORTS. A LOT OF THIS TOO, WAS EARLY ON IN THE YEAR. WE KIND OF MADE SOME MODIFICATIONS TO OUR POLICY INTERNALLY AS FAR AS WHEN WE WERE GOING TO TAKE THOSE REPORTS. A LOT OF IT THE OLD WAY WAS IF IT'S OVER A THOUSAND OR UNDER A THOUSAND, YOU COULD JUST EXCHANGE INFORMATION AND BE AND MOVE ON. BUT IN THIS DAY AND AGE OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, THIS PARTS ARE A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE. SO THE SLIGHTEST FENDER BENDER COULD EASILY BE OVER THE THOUSAND. AND WE'RE NOT THE BODY REPAIR GUYS. SO MOST OF OUR CRASHES AND PLUS THEY ADDED A BOX OF BITS IF WE THINK IT'S UNDER OR OVER. SO WE DID INCREASE THE NUMBER OF REPORTS. OUR ANALYSIS ALSO SHOWED THAT MOST OF OUR HIGHEST CONCENTRATION OF ACCIDENTS, IF YOU CAN SEE, IS THE 700 BLOCK TO 1700 BLOCK OF RIVER ROAD OR STATE HIGHWAY 46 EAST. AND SO A LOT OF COMMENTS WERE MADE ABOUT THE ESSER RIVER INTERSECTION. AND SO THAT'S SOME OF THE STUFF THAT WE, WE LOOKED AT. AND THAT'S WHERE THIS SLIDE, YOU CAN SEE, THAT'S WHERE MOST OF OUR CRASHES. THIS IS KIND OF JUST A BREAKDOWN OUT OF EVERYTHING BUT SOME OF THE MAIN ONES. BUT MAIN STREET, RIVER HARTFORD, ESSER THOSE ARE SOME OF OUR BIGGER AREAS WHERE WE'RE SEEING SOME OF THESE CRASHES AT THOSE INTERSECTIONS. A LOT OF IT IS EITHER RUNNING RED LIGHTS FAIL TO YIELD RIGHT OF WAY, OF COURSE, SPEEDING, THOSE KIND OF THINGS DRIVER INATTENTION A LOT. SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT BASED ON ALL THIS ANALYSIS THAT WE HAVE NOW, WE CAN KIND OF LIKE AGAIN, FOCUS OUR EFFORTS ON THOSE PARTICULAR AREAS, OUR ANNUAL CRIME REPORT. SO THESE CRIMES THAT YOU SEE HERE ARE MORE OF OUR SERIOUS CRIMES. IF YOU REMEMBER, A COUPLE OF YEARS, FBI USED TO HAVE THEIR UNIFORM CRIME REPORT AND THEIR NATIONAL INDEX CRIMES. SO THIS IS KIND OF WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE. NUMBER WISE, PERCENT WISE, YOU CAN SEE SOME WENT UP. BUT AS FAR AS THE NUMBERS OUR MOTOR VEHICLE THEFTS THAT WENT UP 39 FROM 32 LAST YEAR. WE DID INSTALL THOSE LICENSE PLATE READER CAMERAS, AND SO THOSE ARE PAYING OFF. WE'VE GOTTEN SEVERAL INFORMATION ALERTS ESPECIALLY INVOLVING BURGLARIES. [00:15:03] AND SO WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO USE THAT TECHNOLOGY TO MOVE FORWARD. THESE ARE MINOR CRIMES OR WHAT I WOULD SAY SOME OF THEM ARE MOSTLY ARE MISDEMEANOR TYPE CRIMES. THERE'S ALL KINDS OF STUFF IN THERE. THE ASSAULTS KIND OF STAYED ABOUT THE SAME THE LIQUOR LAWS THOSE KIND OF WENT UP. THOSE ARE LIKE YOUR MINOR CONSUMPTIONS. WHAT DO YOU CALL IT? MINOR POSSESSIONS. THOSE KIND OF LAWS TALKS TO PUBLIC INTOXICATION THAT WENT, JUST UP ABOUT 12%, BUT NOT NOT TOO MUCH MERCY DETENTIONS. AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN WORKING MENTAL HEALTH. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF FOCUS OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS ON THE MENTAL HEALTH AND CRISIS. AND SO WITH THE KENDALL COUNTY BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ADVISORY COALITION THAT WE'RE PART OF TEAMING UP WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, HILL COUNTRY FAMILY SERVICES, AND SEVERAL OTHER NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS WITHIN THE CITY AND THE COUNTY. THAT NUMBER DID GO DOWN. OUR EMERGENCY DETENTIONS WENT DOWN BY 36%. SO THAT'S GOOD. WE ALWAYS WANT TO SEE THAT NUMBER DECREASE. THE OTHER NUMBERS WERE AS YOU CAN SEE, THOSE ARE KIND OF CLOSE TO THE SAME. SO WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK AWAY AT THIS WORKING WITH THOSE OTHER PARTNERS TO HOPEFULLY KEEP THESE NUMBERS LOW. AS FAR AS THE DETECTIVES, THAT'S OUR CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION DIVISION STATISTICS. SO YOU CAN SEE THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT WERE ASSIGNED WENT UP ABOUT 45%. BUT THROUGHOUT THEIR INVESTIGATIONS, THEY CLEARED ABOUT 68% THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, SO IT'S A GOOD THING. MARRIAGE COMPLAINTS. THIS IS MORE STUFF THAT WE TRACK. WE WANT TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE. AS FAR AS MARRIAGE SALES WENT UP 41%. OUR COMPLAINTS WENT UP 80% AS WELL. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE KIND OF BROKE IT DOWN. SOMETIMES THE COMPLAINTS ARE JUST PEOPLE UPSET BECAUSE THEY GOT CITED. ARRESTED. AND SO EVERY COMPLAINT THAT COMES INTO OUR OFFICE, WE LOOK AT, WE DO THE INVESTIGATION, AND THEN WE KIND OF DETERMINE WHAT THE DISPOSITION IS, AND THAT'S HOW WE TRACK THAT. THE RACIAL PROFILING REPORT WE DO THIS EVERY YEAR. THE FULL REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE ON OUR WEB PAGE. AND I SUBMITTED THAT TO Y'ALL. BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, WE DID THE 8900 TRAFFIC STOPS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. OUT OF THAT, THE 547 SEARCHES AND DISCOVERED CONTRABAND, 328. THE GOOD THING TO REPORTED THERE WAS NO REPORTS OF ANY RACIAL PROFILING FROM ANY CITIZENS. SO, CAN'T FORGET ANIMAL CONTROL. THEY'RE PART OF OUR DEPARTMENT AS WELL. AND SO I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF SHOW THEM SOME OF THE NUMBERS THAT THEY'RE DOING. THEY'VE BEEN STEADILY BUSY WITH EVERYTHING GOING ON. THE SHELTER COUNT, IF YOU SEE THAT NUMBER WENT DOWN 56%, THAT'S ACTUALLY GOOD. THE WHAT THE SHELTER COUNT MEANS IS THOSE ARE THE DOGS THAT ACTUALLY BECOME PROPERTY OF THE CITY. EITHER, HOWEVER, WHICH WAY THEY GET TO THE SHELTER. BUT THEY BECOME OURS. AND SO WITH THAT, WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR, OF COURSE, MEDICAL AND EVERYTHING ELSE. SO WE WANT THAT NUMBER DOWN. BUT ALL THE OTHER NUMBERS WENT UP. YOU CAN SEE THE STRAYS IS 27%. WILDLIFE IS ANYTHING OTHER THAN PRETTY MUCH A CAT OR A DOG DOMESTIC THAT WE'RE BRINGING IN. SOME OF THE OTHER STUFF TO THE RESCUE NUMBER. YOU SEE, THAT IS DOWN 78%. THE TRANSFER TO RESCUE. WHEN WE GET THESE ANIMALS IN, WE'RE TRYING TO FIND A PLACE FOR THEM TO GO. WHETHER THEY'RE ADOPTED, WE PREFER ADOPTION. RIGHT. THAT WENT UP 17%. OF COURSE, WE GOT A LOT OF FOSTER FAMILIES THAT TAKE IN THESE PETS TEMPORARILY. THE TRANSFER TO RESCUE IS THOSE RESCUE ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE OUT THERE, THAT'S MOST OF THEM, LIKE, YOU HEAR ABOUT THE PIT BULL TYPE CLUBS AND, YOU KNOW, BELGIANS AND RETIRED CANINES, AND THOSE ARE ALL DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS THAT IF WE GET THOSE TYPE OF BREEDS, WE REACH OUT TO THEM AND SAY, HEY, CAN YOU TAKE THIS ANIMAL? ESPECIALLY IF IT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF WEEKS, IT'S BEEN IN THE SHELTER, WE CAN'T GET IT ADOPTED. AND SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THAT NUMBER GOES TO. SO WITH THAT I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS COUNCIL MEMBERS. NO. NO. APPRECIATE IT. I THINK YOU HAVE SOME OTHER INFORMATION YOU WANT TO SHARE WITH US THIS EVENING. SOME GOOD NEWS. THERE'S NO QUESTIONS. WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE THE STARS OF THE SHOW. SO A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, WE HAD OUR. I'M SORRY. CAN WE GO AHEAD AND RECEIVE THE REPORT FIRST? OH, SORRY. MY BAD. ALL RIGHT. CAN WE GET A MOTION TO RECEIVE? CAN WE RECEIVE A REPORT FOR FIVE. A MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN WILSON. I'D LIKE TO RECEIVE THE BURNIE POLICE DEPARTMENT 2024 ANNUAL REPORT AND THE ANNUAL REPORT ON RACIAL PROFILING. SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN BUNKER. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT MOTION PASSES FIVE ZERO. THANK YOU EVERYONE. SORRY FOR JUMPING THE GUN. NO. YOU'RE GOOD. ALL RIGHT, NOW GO AHEAD. STEVE. I GOT ALL EXCITED. SO HERE WE ARE. BACK TO MY EXCITEMENT. SO A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, WE HAD OUR EVERY YEAR AFTER THE NEW YEAR BEGINS, WE WE GO BACK AND WE SELECT OUR OFFICER OF THE YEAR, A DISPATCHER OF THE YEAR. AND ONE THING THAT WE ADDED THIS YEAR WAS THE SUPERVISOR OF THE YEAR. [00:20:01] WE GOT ABOUT 2021 SUPERVISORS THROUGHOUT OUR DEPARTMENT. AND THAT'S BETWEEN OF COURSE, DISPATCHED PATROL SIDE, OF COURSE. ANIMAL. SO OUR WHOLE EVERYTHING UNDER OUR UMBRELLA. SO WE FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO START RECOGNIZING SOME OF THESE SUPERVISORS. THEY DO A LOT OF WORK. AND SO THIS YEAR, OUR OFFICER OF THE YEAR WAS OFFICER ERIC GOMEZ. THESE GUYS CAN COME ON UP. SO ERIC IS CURRENTLY ONE OF OUR SROS AT BALBOA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. AND HE'S ACTUALLY GOING TO BE OUR NEW MENTAL HEALTH OFFICER KIND OF WHEN SCHOOL GETS OUT. AND THEN ALSO DISPATCHER LEADERS DANIELLE RAY I DON'T THINK SHE'S HERE. I DON'T THINK SHE MADE IT. BUT SAME THING. SHE'S SHE'S BEEN WITH US FOR NOT TOO LONG OF A TIME, BUT SHE'S BEEN DOING GOOD. SHE'S GOT EXPERIENCE. AND THEN OUR FIRST SUPERVISOR OF THE YEAR IS NO OTHER THAN CORPORAL DAVID CHAVEZ. CORPORAL CHAVEZ IS ALSO A SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER AT NORTH. AND SO WE DIDN'T PLAN THIS, BUT IT WAS KIND OF LIKE THE SROS TOOK THIS YEAR. AND SO AND SO ANYWAY THESE THESE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, THESE GUYS ARE WORKING ON AND OFF DUTY. OFFICER GOMEZ DOES A LOT WITH IF ANYBODY WAS THERE THIS PAST WEEKEND, WE DID THE POLAR PLUNGE FOR THE SPECIAL OLYMPICS OF TEXAS. AND HE'S DOES A LOT OF STUFF WITH THAT FROM DEEJAYING FOR THEM, GOING TO THE EVENTS OF TORCH RUN, THOSE KIND OF THINGS. AND CORPORAL CHAVEZ AGAIN, HE'S LEADING OUR EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM THAT WE HAVE WITH THE OTHER CITIES WITH KERRVILLE AND FREDERICKSBURG. AND SO HE DOES A LOT OF THE LESSONS PLANS, A LOT OF THE TRAINING LIVE SPOTS WITH THE SCHOOLS. BUT THESE GUYS, EVERYBODY KNOWS THESE ROADS WORK MORE THAN JUST A 7 TO 4 OR 8 TO 5 AT THE SCHOOLS. THEY'RE OUT THERE FOR ALL THE GAMES AND THE EVENTS AND EVEN WEEKENDS. AND SO KUDOS TO ALL THESE PEOPLE. AND THIS IS A HAPPY OCCASION. SO WE DON'T WANT TO SEE OUR BEAUTIFUL EMMA GO. BUT IT'S TIME FOR HER. SHE HEARD ABOUT TMS BENEFITS AND ALL THE TREATS SHE GETS. AND SO EMMA HAS DECIDED TO RETIRE. SO SHE'S BEEN WITH US ALMOST SEVEN YEARS, AND I THINK SHE'S A LITTLE OVER SEVEN YEARS. SHE'S BEEN. OFFICER. GOUDREAU'S BEEN HER HANDLER FOR ALL THIS TIME. AND SO SHE'S DONE A LOT OF GREAT WORK, AS YOU CAN SEE ON SOME OF THE PICTURES ON PATROL. EVEN DID SOME STUFF WITH FBI. SO SHE'S HAD A GOOD CAREER, AND NOW SHE WANTS TO BE THE FUN LOVING DOG THAT THESE DOGS WERE MADE TO DO. SO I'M SURE SHE'LL MISS THE WORK. BUT ANYWAY, I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THESE ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND PROVIDE YOU ALL THIS INFORMATION. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU GUYS. WE APPRECIATE IT. DON'T GO AWAY. WE'RE GOING TO GET A PHOTO OP. BUT AGAIN. GET THEM IN THE FRONT. ANYONE WANTS TO COME UP HERE. SHE WANTS UP HERE. UP HERE. THERE. SHE LEARNED IT. DOCTOR, I MUST HAVE TREATS, BUT I DON'T KNOW. OKAY. THERE SHE GOES. EVERYBODY OKAY? ONE. TWO. THREE. PERFECT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT GUYS. THANK YOU ALL. CONGRATULATIONS TO OUR OFFICERS OF THE YEAR AND OUR DISPATCHER OF THE YEAR. AND TO EMMA ON A HAPPY RETIREMENT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SEVEN YEARS OF HARD WORK AND DEDICATION. I'M JUST EXCEPTIONALLY PROUD OF OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND OUR AND OUR SERVICES THAT WE PROVIDE FOR THIS COMMUNITY. SO THANK YOU ALL FOR A GREAT JOB AND A SERVICE WELL APPRECIATED. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM FIVE B 2024 606. [B. CONSIDER ON SECOND READING ORDINANCE NO. 2025-02; AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING APPROXIMATELY 0.927 ACRES OF COUNTY ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, BEING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN 1.382 ACRE TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO KENDALL COUNTY IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN VOLUME 533, PAGES 728-734, OFFICIAL RECORDS, KENDALL COUNTY, TEXAS, AND A PORTION OF THE REMAINING PIECE OF A 50.78 ACRE TRACT OF LAND (KAD PARCEL# 11550) DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN VOLUME 79, PAGES 225-226, DEED RECORDS, KENDALL COUNTY, TEXAS, INTO THE CITY OF BOERNE, KENDALL COUNTY, TEXAS, AND EXTENDING THE BOUNDARY LIMITS OF SAID CITY SO AS TO INCLUDE SAID HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED PROPERTY WITHIN SAID CITY LIMITS, AND GRANTING TO ALL THE INHABITANTS OF SAID PROPERTY ALL THE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OF OTHER CITIZENS AND BINDING SAID INHABITANTS BY ALL OF THE ACTS, ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, AND REGULATIONS OF SAID CITY. (Roadway annexation at the request of Kendall County)] CONSIDER A SECOND READING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2020 5-02 AN ORDINANCE ANNEXATION ANNEXING APPROXIMATELY 0.927 ACRES OF COUNTY ROAD RIGHT OF WAY BEING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN 1.382 ACRE TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO KENDALL COUNTY IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN VOLUME 533, PAGES 728 THROUGH 734 OFFICIAL RECORDS KENDALL COUNTY, TEXAS AND A PORTION OF THE REMAINING PIECE OF A 50.78 ACRE TRACT OF LAND CALLED PARCEL 11550, DESCRIBED IN THE INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN VOLUME 79, PAGES TWO 220 502 26. PRESENTING JEFF CARROLL, JEFF. EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. SO HERE TO TALK ABOUT THIS ANNEXATION OF A RIGHT OF WAY. SO OBVIOUSLY THAT'S INVESTING AND MAINTAINING HIGH QUALITY INFRASTRUCTURE, ASSET INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS AND PUBLIC ASSETS. SO THIS IS ON THE EAST END OF THE SOUTH GLEN DEVELOPMENT ON CASCADE, ON KIND OF THE NORTH SOUTH PORTION OF CASCADE CAVERNS ROAD. JUST SOME, SOME HISTORY. I HAVE MAPS IN THE 1920S THAT SHOW THIS AS A ROADWAY. 1943. WE HAVE IT IN A ROADWAY. THERE'S A LIST THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ISSUED IN 1992 THAT DEFINED WHAT OUR COUNTY MAINTAINED RIGHT OF [00:25:04] WAYS. AND THEN LATER IN 2007 THE COUNTY FOLLOWING STATE LAW ISSUED BECAUSE MANY OF THE RIGHT OF WAYS, EVEN TODAY, MANY OF THE RIGHT OF WAYS ALL THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY ARE PUBLICLY OWNED LAND UNDERNEATH THE RIGHT OF WAY. A RIGHT OF WAY REALLY IS MORE OF AN EASEMENT THAN IT IS A TRUE LAND TRANSFER. AND SO ALL THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, EVEN TODAY, THERE'S RIGHT OF WAYS THAT THE COUNTY HAS LEGAL ACCESS FOR RIGHT OF WAYS TO THE PUBLIC. AND THERE'S A PRIVATE LANDOWNER THAT HAS THE LAND UNDERNEATH OF IT. BUT WITH 2007, THE COUNTY OFFICIALLY TOOK ALL OF THOSE RIGHT OF WAYS THAT THEY HAD BEEN MAINTAINING FOR YEARS, AND THEY OFFICIALLY BECAME PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS. AND SO NOW, 2005 SO IT'S THE ROAD. IT'S BEEN A ROAD FOR 100 YEARS. IT'S BEEN AN OFFICIAL COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY FOR 20 SOMETHING YEARS NOW. 18. SO TODAY THE COUNTY HAS COME TO US ASKING US TO ANNEX THIS SECTION OF ROADWAY ON THE SOUTH GLEN. DEVELOPMENT WAS ANNEXED OVER MANY PIECES OVER YEARS. SO THERE'S THE YELLOW PART WAS IN 2016, THE BLUE PARTS WERE IN 2017, AND THE GREEN PART WAS 2018. IT WAS BEFORE MY TIME AT THE CITY. DON'T REALLY KNOW WHY, BUT PER STATE LAW, YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO ANNEX THE RIGHT OF WAYS ADJACENT TO YOU WHEN YOU DO DEVELOPMENT. LATER IN 2021, WE ANNEXED THE LOWER PART OF CASCADE CAVERNS. AND THEN NOW TODAY, THE COUNTY HAS APPROACHED US ABOUT ANNEXING THAT EASTERN PART. THE SOUTH GLEN PHASE 11 B PLAT, ACTUALLY DEDICATED CITY RIGHT OF WAY. KIND OF THOSE HIGHLIGHTED RED AREAS. SO IF YOU GO OUT THERE TODAY, WE HAVE A COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY. AND THEN RIGHT NEXT TO IT WE HAVE THESE SLIVERS OF CITY RIGHT OF WAY. AND SO OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS, THE CITY HAS BEEN GOING AND MAINTAINING THE LITTLE AREA IN RED WITH THE WEED EATER LITTLE MOWERS, WHILE THE COUNTY HAS BEEN MAINTAINING THE ROAD TO THE LEFT OF IT. AND THAT HAS CREATED SOME ISSUES OF WE MAINTAIN IT AND THEY MAINTAIN IT AND WE'RE WE CUT OUR LITTLE PORTION OF GRASS, BUT THEN THE COUNTY PART DOESN'T LOOK CUT AND THEN THE COUNTY CUTS THEIR PART AND OUR PART DOESN'T LOOK CUT. SO IT HAS CREATED SOME ISSUES OVER TIME JUST TRYING TO MAKE IT LOOK A NICE CLEAN PRODUCT. BUT AGAIN, THE CITY CREWS HAVE BEEN MAINTAINING THAT LITTLE PORTION OF RED. SO AGAIN, IN 2015, I MENTIONED THAT THE 2015 THE STATE LAWS CHANGED ABOUT ANNEXING THAT. IT'S THE CITY'S REQUIREMENT TO ANNEX ADJACENT RIGHT OF WAYS WHEN WE ANNEX LAND. SO THE CITY RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AT THE END OF LAST YEAR, BASICALLY BRINGING THIS TO OUR ATTENTION THAT FOR SOME REASON, THIS PORTION OF RIGHT OF WAY WAS NOT ANNEXED AND ASKED US WHAT WE WERE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT TO FIX THIS ISSUE. SO AS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW, THE CITY SENT A LETTER BACK TO THE COUNTY BECAUSE IT'S A COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY. SO WE SENT THE LETTER TO THE COUNTY ON OCTOBER 31ST, AND WE GAVE THEM 60 DAYS NOTICE. IN THE MEANTIME, WE'VE PUT THE AD IN THE NEWSPAPER AS REQUIRED FOR THE ANNEXATION PROCESS. SO THERE'S KIND OF HIGHLIGHTED IN TWO PARTS HERE. SO THE GREEN PART AND THE BLUE PART. AND WHEN YOU READ THAT BIG PREAMBLE, IT MENTIONED TWO SEPARATE PARCELS. SO THE GREEN PARCEL IS ONE LANDOWNER, AND THEN THE BLUE PART IS THE MAZUREK FAMILY, WHO SPOKE EARLIER TONIGHT. SO THE JANUARY 14TH IS WHEN WE SPOKE AT COUNCIL HERE TONIGHT, WHERE WE ACCEPTED THE REQUEST AND SET A TIME AND DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING. FEBRUARY 11TH WAS THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING AND TONIGHT IS THE SECOND HEARING. AND I WANTED TO GO SINCE MR. MAZUREK SPOKE. I WANTED TO BRING THIS SLIDE UP AS WELL. SO THEY'RE THEY'RE FAMILY PROPERTY. IS THE AREA HERE AND WHAT WE'RE ANNEXING, IF YOU CAN SEE THIS LITTLE PART HERE, THE KIND OF BLACK CROSS-HATCHED AREA, THAT SECTION IS THE COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY THAT WE ARE ANNEXING, BECAUSE THERE'S A LINE HERE WHERE THE SOUTHGLENN DEVELOPMENT COMES IN HERE. SO THE REST OF THEIR 50 ACRE REMAINING 50 ACRE PARCEL. AND EVEN THERE'S CASCADE CAVERN THAT CONTINUES TO THE SOUTH ALL THE WAY THROUGH HERE. THAT'S STILL ON THEIR PROPERTY. WE'RE NOT ANNEXING THAT. ALL WE'RE ANNEXING IS THE LITTLE PIECE OF LAND THAT'S DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO SOUTH GLEN TO COMPLY WITH STATE LAW. SO THAT'S ABOUT 0.3 ACRES OF THE 50 ACRE PARCEL. IT'S REALLY SO HERE AGAIN, THIS IS A STATE LAW REQUIREMENT. AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CLEAN UP THIS ISSUE THAT HAPPENED MANY YEARS AGO. I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH COMMISSIONER WIESEN ABOUT A POTENTIAL AGREEMENT OF SOME KIND, BECAUSE OF THE CATTLE GUARDS TO LOOK AT HOW WE'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN THOSE CATTLE GUARDS IN THE FUTURE. THE CITY TODAY DOES NOT HAVE ANY CATTLE GUARDS, SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH MAINTAINING. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COMMISSIONER TALKED TO ME ABOUT, AN AGREEMENT THAT WE CAN COME TO AT A LATER DATE. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? BUT WE'RE LOOKING TO APPROVE THIS ANNEXATION. [00:30:02] ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? YEAH GO AHEAD, COUNCILOR WILSON. JUST OBVIOUSLY SOME CLARIFICATIONS BECAUSE OF EARLIER QUESTIONS. ONE AND MIGHT LOOK TO LEGAL COUNCIL FOR THIS. WE PER STATE LAW WE CAN'T FORCEFULLY ANNEX SOMEONE'S PROPERTY. MY GUESS IS THAT A ROAD EASEMENT IS DIFFERENT THAN PER STATE LAW. YES, STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT YOU ANNEX ABUTTING ROADS, AND IT HAS SINCE 2015. AND THE IT'S AT LEAST MY OPINION THAT THE RECENT CHANGES IN ANNEXATION LAW DID NOT CHANGE THAT REQUIREMENT. YOU STILL HAVE TO ANNEX. AND THEN IF WE WERE HYPOTHETICALLY TRYING TO ANNEX THEIR PROPERTY THAT WASN'T A ROADWAY WE WOULD BE REQUIRED BY LAW FOR THEY WOULD HAVE TO ASK TO BE ANNEXED. IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE I'M THE ONE THAT MADE THE COMMENT ABOUT PRIVATE PROPERTY. THIS THIS IS ALREADY AN EASEMENT, CORRECT? THE RIGHT OF WAY IS ACTING AS AN EASEMENT. SINCE THAT 2007 DATE AGAIN, IT'S BEEN A ROAD FOR 100 YEARS, BUT 2007 IS WHEN THE COUNTY OFFICIALLY DEFINED IT AS A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND NOTHING'S CHANGING EXCEPT WHO HAS THE EASEMENT, BASICALLY. BASICALLY THE EASEMENT. WE'RE ANNEXING IT. SO THE EASEMENT WILL GO FROM THE COUNTY TO THE CITY. SO WE AS A CITY WILL START HAVING TO MAINTAIN THIS SECTION OF ROADWAY THAT THE COUNTY HAS BEEN MAINTAINING FOR 100 YEARS. THE COUNTY JUST DOESN'T WANT TO PAY TO MAINTAIN THAT SECTION OF ROADWAY PER STATE LAW. THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT I'M THEY'RE THE ONES THAT SENT US THE LETTER AT BRINGING THIS TO OUR ATTENTION AND ASKING US TO ANNEX IT. I JUST WANT TO SAY THIS IS NOT A UNIQUE PROBLEM. IN MY DISTRICT, ALONG UPPER BALCONIES, WE'VE HAD THAT ISSUE WHERE THERE WAS COUNTY, CITY, COUNTY, CITY. AND WE ACTUALLY, I THINK, ANNEXED A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THAT TO. YES, SEVERAL. SEVERAL YEARS BACK, WE ANNEXED TO TRY TO CLOSE SEVERAL GAPS THAT WE HAD ON SCHOOL AND UPPER BALCONIES AND ELSEWHERE. WE STILL HAVE A HANDFUL OF GAPS OUT THERE ON ON I-10. THERE'S A LITTLE GAP ON CASCADE KIND OF OVER IN FRONT OF ALL CAT. THERE'S A LITTLE GAP. SO THERE'S SEVERAL GAPS THAT STILL EXIST THAT WE NEED TO CLEAN UP OVER TIME. BUT WE DID, AND WE CLOSED MANY OF THEM A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. HAS THERE BEEN ANY INPUT FROM, OTHER THAN THE CATTLE GUARD ISSUE WITH COMMISSIONER WISEMAN? ANY INPUT FROM COMMISSIONERS COURT IN REGARD TO THE CITIZENS CONCERNS? I KNOW THEY SPOKE ABOUT THIS SEVERAL COMMISSIONERS COURTS AGO. I WASN'T THERE, I JUST HEARD THAT THEY DISCUSSED IT. AND THEN THAT'S WHEN BASICALLY WE GOT OUR LETTER ASKING US TO ANNEX THIS. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? COUNCILMAN WRIGHT. JUST REAL QUICK. I WAS GONNA SAY MY GUESS, AND I'M SURE CHIEF COULD SPEAK ON THIS. THERE'S WON'T BE ANY ISSUES WITH EMERGENCY SERVICES GOING TO THIS AREA BECAUSE OF CHANGE OF AN EASEMENT. I MEAN, I THINK ALL THE CALLS STILL GO TO YOU ALL. AND THEN ABOUT 911 CALL COMES OUT. IF IT'S RIGHT OUTSIDE OUR CITY LIMITS AND WE KNOW COUNTY SAY THEY'RE UP IN COMFORT. CORDELIA SOMEWHERE ELSE. THEY'RE NOT NEARBY. WE DON'T WAIT. WE'LL STILL GET TO GO RESPOND TO THE CALL AND MAKE SURE EVERYTHING'S TAKEN CARE OF. SECURED, AND THEN WE'LL LET THEM COME BACK AND DO THEIR STUFF. BUT ANYTHING WITHIN OUR OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS WILL WE STILL RESPOND? THANKS, CHIEF. SO WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO. THAT'S JUST AN AGREEMENT. WE HAVE WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE COUNTY. COUNCILWOMAN RIGHT. MY QUESTION IS THE THE CONCERNS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY THE CITIZEN WHO SPOKE CITIZENS WHO SPOKE. GIVEN WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US. NOW, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT THIS WILL NOT. NOTHING'S CHANGING. NOTHING'S GOING TO IMPACT THEM ANY DIFFERENTLY IN THE FUTURE BASED ON THIS. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. THE ONLY THING THAT'S CHANGING IS IT WILL BE A CITY TRUCK MAINTAINING THE ROAD INSTEAD OF A COUNTY TRUCK. OKAY. AND THEN THAT'S IN MY UNDERSTANDING OF STATE LAW FOR TAXES THAT THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM TAXATION FOR ANYTHING UNDERNEATH THE RIGHT OF WAY. SO THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY ANY CITY TAXES, BECAUSE THE ONLY PART WE'RE ANNEXING IS THE RIGHT OF WAY. SO IT SHOULDN'T SUBJECT THEM TO ANY CITY TAXES. AND IF THAT'S SOMETHING THEY CAN COORDINATE WITH THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT IF NEED BE. MY OTHER QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANY HARM IN DELAYING TO HAVE CONVERSATION WITH THE LANDOWNER JUST SO THAT THEY HAVE PEACE OF MIND AND FEEL COMFORTABLE? WELL, ACTUALLY TWO QUESTIONS. IF THE IF THE THAT RIGHT OF WAY FOR THAT STRIP OF EASEMENT. THERE'S. DO NOT CONTACT THE PROPERTY OWNER TO LET THEM KNOW THAT, HEY, SOMETHING THAT'S ABUTTING TO YOUR LAND IS GOING TO BE GOING, [00:35:03] OR THEY'RE JUST HAVE TO SEE IT IN THE PAPER OR HOPE THAT WE WE HOPE THEY SEE IT IN THE PAPER. AND THEN IS THERE ANY HARM IN MEETING WITH THEM AND THEN, YOU KNOW, GOING FORWARD. SO YES, THE STATE LAW REQUIREMENT IS JUST TO NOTIFY THE COUNTY, WHICH WE DID, AND TO PUT THE ADS IN THE NEWSPAPER, WHICH WE DID. I DID HAVE SOME EMAIL COMMUNICATION WITH MR. MAZUREK YESTERDAY AND TODAY. BUT IT'S IN THEORY, IT'S BEEN TRYING TO GET MY DATES TO MAKE SURE I TELL YOU THE RIGHT DATES. IT'S BEEN SEVEN YEARS NOW THAT IT HASN'T BEEN ANNEXED, THAT IT WAS REQUIRED TO BE ANNEXED FOR STATE LAW. SO IT'S ANOTHER I MEAN, THAT'S NOT ANOTHER HANDFUL OF WEEKS. I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE. BUT AGAIN, THE COUNTY IS THE ONE WHO APPROACHED US AND TOLD US TO DO THIS. ANY QUESTIONS? ANY MORE QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION PUT FORWARD. I CAN'T MAKE A MOTION. I'M. THIS IS UNFORTUNATE. I MEAN, I HAVE EASEMENTS ON MY PROPERTY, AND YOU CAN USE YOUR PROPERTY, BUT I. BUT IT'S NO DIFFERENT, RIGHT? JUST SO I JUST WANT TO GET THIS OUT THERE. I MEAN, THERE IS AN EASEMENT RIGHT NOW. SO IF THE COUNTY WANTED TO COME OUT THERE AND DIG UP THAT EASEMENT FOR WHATEVER REASON WAS A PUBLIC NECESSITY, THEY WOULD DO THAT. CORRECT? CORRECT. IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE LAND IS BEING TAKEN, BUT YOU HAVE TO KNOW THAT. SO I MEAN, I HAVE STUFF ON MY EASEMENT. IF THEY CAME AND RIPPED UP A TREE OR SOMETHING, I COULDN'T STOP THEM BECAUSE IT'S AN EASEMENT. AND IT WOULD HAVE TO OBVIOUSLY JUSTIFY THAT. BUT I'M SAYING EVEN RIGHT NOW, THE COUNTY CAN DO THAT REGARDLESS OF WHO HAS JURISDICTION OVER THAT PARTICULAR EASEMENT. I MEAN, SO I'M NOT I'M VERY SENSITIVE TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, BUT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FEAR IS, OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT THE CITY WOULD HAVE IT VERSUS THE COUNTY BECAUSE THE EASEMENT IS THERE NO MATTER WHAT. CORRECT. AND SO THE CITY CAN'T PUT ANYTHING THERE OF SIGNIFICANCE BECAUSE THE REST OF THE EASEMENTS ARE ALL IN THE COUNTY. CORRECT. AM I SAYING SOMETHING INCORRECT? NO, SIR. OKAY. I'M JUST TRYING TO. I MEAN, I'M TRYING TO FIND A COMFORT FOR THE FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS BECAUSE I DON'T I THINK THIS IS THE COUNTY HAS ACTUALLY CREATED THIS IN A WAY. I'M NOT BLAMING THEM. THEY'RE FOLLOWING STATE LAW. BUT, I MEAN, IT'S WE'RE KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL CONCERNS? CAN WE GET A MOTION? MR.. COUNCILMAN WILSON. SORRY. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ON SECOND READING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2020 502, AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING AND ANNEXING APPROXIMATELY. ANNEXING. EXCUSE ME. APPROXIMATELY 0.927 ACRES OF COUNTY ROAD. RIGHT OF WAY. BEING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN 1.382 ACRE TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO KENDALL COUNTY AND INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN VOLUME 533, PAGES 7283734. OFFICIAL RECORDS KENDALL COUNTY, TEXAS IN A PORTION OF THE REMAINING PIECE OF A 50.78 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, DESCRIBED AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN VOLUME 79, PAGES 2253226. DEED RECORDS KENDALL COUNTY, TEXAS INTO THE CITY OF BOERNE, KENDALL COUNTY, TEXAS, AND EXTENDING THE BOUNDARY LIMITS OF SAID CITY AS TO INCLUDE SAID HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED PROPERTY WITHIN SAID CITY LIMITS AND GRANTING TO ALL THE INHABITANTS OF SAID PROPERTY ALL THE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OF OTHER CITIZENS AND BINDING SAID INHABITANTS BY ALL OF THE ACTS, ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND REGULATIONS OF SAID CITY. SECOND, FROM COUNCILMAN SCOTT, PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT MOTION PASSES FIVE ZERO. THANK YOU EVERYONE. THANK YOU JEFF. I JUST WANT TO MAKE ONE OTHER COMMENT. I WANT TO BE CERTAIN THAT THEY DO NOT RECEIVE A TAX BILL FROM THE CITY OF BURNIE FOR AN EASEMENT. I WANT TO BE CERTAIN OF THAT. SO AGAIN, WE DON'T SEND THE TAX BILL, BUT WE CAN WORK WITH THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE COMMUNICATE THAT TO THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT, THAT THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. CAN DO. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM FIVE C 2020 5-046. [C. CONSIDER THE UN-TABLING OF ORDINANCE NO. 2025-01, AS DESCRIBED BELOW. (tabled on 1/28/2025)] CONSIDER THE TABLING OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 2020 5-01 AS DESCRIBED BELOW, TABLED ON 128 2025. MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN WILLISON. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE TABLING OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 2020 501. SECOND, FROM COUNCILMAN SCOTT, PLEASE VOTE. THIS IS THE PROBLEM. MOTION PASSES. EVERYONE. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM FIVE D 2020 5-044. [D. CONSIDER ON FIRST READING ORDINANCE NO. 2025-01; AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF BOERNE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 3. ZONING, SECTION 3.2, ZONING MAP, ZONING 71.12 ACRE TRACT FROM A HOL-INTERIM HOLDING ZONING DISTRICT TO R2-M MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, LOCATED AT WEST STATE HIGHWAY 46 (KAD NO. 307605 AND 316184; A10360 - SURVEY 179 NEWTON & TAYLOR 71.12 ACRES) TO ALLOW FOR A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION. (FORESTAR (USA) REAL ESTATE GROUP INC. AND CONTINENTAL HOMES OF TEXAS, LP) (SPENCER RANCH)] [00:40:04] CONSIDER FIRST READING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2020 501 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF BURNIE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER THREE ZONING. SECTION 3.2 ZONING MAP ZONING 71.12 ACRE TRACT FROM A HOME ENTERING HOLDING ZONING DISTRICT TO AN R2M MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED AT WEST STATE HIGHWAY 46. CARD NUMBER 307605 AND 316184A10360179 NEWTON AND TAYLOR 71.12 ACRES TO ALLOW FOR A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION FOR STAR REAL ESTATE GROUP INCORPORATED AND CONTINENTAL HOMES OF TEXAS. IS PRESENTING NATHAN CRANE. NATHAN. THANK YOU. MAYOR. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. AS WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS IN THE PAST, I HOPE TO DO A SHORTER PRESENTATION THAN THE PREAMBLE, BUT WE'LL SEE HOW THIS GOES HERE. JUST A REMINDER OF WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED. AS MAYOR MENTIONED WEST TO THE INTERSECTION OF COCHRAN ROAD AND HIGHWAY 46, 71.12 ACRES. THE MASTER PLAN, WHICH KICKED OFF THIS PROJECT, WAS APPROVED BACK IN OCTOBER OF 2018 BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THE REQUEST AS LISTED IN YOUR AGENDA IS FOR R2M ZONING. THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO AMEND THAT REQUEST TO R2 N THIS WOULD BE TO ALLOW FOR 201 LOT SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION. UTILITIES ARE PROVIDED BY TEXAS WATER. THEY ARE NOT PROVIDED BY THE CITY. WE DO HAVE A TEMPORARY AGREEMENT FOR SEWER. AS YOU'RE AWARE THE LAST COUNCIL ACTION WAS ON JANUARY 28TH, AND THE COUNCIL VOTED TO CONTINUE THIS REQUEST. JUST A REMINDER, HOW THIS PROJECT MEETS OR IS CONSISTENT WITH OR COMPARES TO IS A BETTER WORD. COMPARES TO OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. YOU'LL NOTICE IT HAS AN OVERALL DENSITY OF 2.82, WHICH IS COMPARABLE TO RANCHES AT CREEKSIDE, CHAMPION HEIGHTS, WOODS OF BERNIE, AND A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN REGENT PARK. DECIDED THAT IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO DISCUSS A LITTLE BIT OF A THE TRAFFIC AND MOBILITY REQUIREMENTS. IN 2018, A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WAS COMPLETED. THAT ANALYSIS REQUIRED IT WAS JUST FOR SPENCER RANCH SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS THIS AREA HERE OR THE 201 ONE? LOTS ARE THAT ANALYSIS DID REQUIRE A PORTION OF CENTRAL RANCH BOULEVARD TO BE COMPLETED, AS WELL AS A RIGHT TURN LANE ON HIGHWAY 46. THE FRONTAGE PARCELS WHICH ARE THIS AREA HERE IS ACTUALLY ADDRESSED SEPARATELY WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. ONCE A TIA IS DONE BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN THOSE FRONTAGE AREAS, THE DEVELOPER WILL HAVE TWO OPTIONS. ONE IS TO COMPLETE THE REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS OR MITIGATION, EXCUSE ME, MITIGATION IMPROVEMENTS OR PROVIDE WHAT WE CALL A TRAFFIC IMPACT FUNDS, WHICH IS WHICH WOULD BE EQUAL TO THE PROPORTIONATE SHARE. THINK OF IT HOW WE DO OUR PARKLAND DEDICATION. SIMILAR TO THAT THE R-2 AND ZONING DISTRICT AGAIN 201 LOTS, 147 OF THE 201 LOTS WOULD COMPLY WITH THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 5400FT². IMPERVIOUS COVER SETBACKS ALL THE SAME BETWEEN OUR TWO N AND AN HOUR TO M. THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IS 6280FT². AND WITH THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS? COUNCILWOMAN RIGHT. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE DENSITY. SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS R2. SO R2 M LIKE MIKE WOULD BE ABOUT 4000FT², WHICH IS ACTUALLY 0.09 ACRES, WHICH IS MORE COMPARABLE TO HAMPTON COVE, CHAMPION HEIGHTS AND R2 N IS 5400FT². SO 0.12 ACRES, WHICH IS ACTUALLY COMPARABLE TO WOODS OF BERNIE. WHICH SEEMS FAIRLY DENSE. AND SO MY CONCERN, I KNOW IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW, BUT I MEAN, I HAVE TO LOOK AT HOW DOES DENSITY IMPACT OUR CITIZENS. AND SO, YOU KNOW, SOME THINGS I WONDER ABOUT IS HOW MANY MORE LOTS ARE APPROVED AND PENDING BEING BUILT IN BERNIE. AND I KNOW THAT THE WATER IS SUPPLIED BY TEXAS WATER, BUT TEXAS WATER [00:45:02] IS ALREADY ON STAGE FOUR RESTRICTIONS. AND THEY PROVIDE WATER TO SHORELINE AS WELL, AND THEY CAN'T EVEN WATER THEIR GRASS. AND THEY HAVE AN EMPTY POOL RIGHT NOW. SO THAT LEVEL OF DENSITY, I REALLY DO WORRY ABOUT THE STRAIN ON THE WATER, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT THE ONES PROVIDING IT. AND, YOU KNOW AND ARE THERE ANY ESTATE? LOTS YOU KNOW, PLANNED IN FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS OR ARE THEY ALL GOING TO BE SIMILAR DENSITY? SO THESE ARE THINGS THAT I THINK ABOUT WHEN I, WHEN I LOOK AT DENSITY, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A HISTORY HERE AND THAT SOME THINGS WERE ALREADY AGREED TO AND THAT THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE 2018. BUT CAN YOU SPEAK TO ANY OF THAT? YES. I THINK THOSE ARE THINGS OBVIOUSLY, TO TO CONSIDER. I DON'T HAVE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD THE NUMBER OF LOTS THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE BASED ON LOT SIZE. WE CAN CERTAINLY GET THAT. WE ARE NOT CURRENTLY REVIEWING ANYTHING THAT WOULD CALL A STATE. LOTS THAT ARE UNDER REVIEW TODAY. BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY GET YOU THE INFORMATION ON ON THE LOT COUNTS AND WHAT WE HAVE COMING AND AVAILABLE. I JUST I'M REALLY I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE LEVEL OF DENSITY BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, CITIZENS SURVEY, NOT JUST CITIZEN SURVEY, BUT OUR MASTER PLAN. WE ALREADY DECIDED WHAT BERNIE SHOULD LOOK LIKE IN THE MASTER PLAN. AND IT JUST LOOKS LIKE WITH THIS PROJECT, THERE'S IT'S ONLY BEEN LOOKED AT LIKE ONE LITTLE PIECE OR CHUNK AT A TIME. AND, YOU KNOW, IS IT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE OTHER MOVING PARTS OF DENSITY AND YOU KNOW, IN THE, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT TRYING TO BE DIFFICULT, BUT THE REASON THAT I STRUGGLE WITH IT IS BECAUSE I CAME FROM I MOVED TO STONE OAK 20 YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS IN THE MILITARY, AND THEN I MOVED TO BULVERDE BECAUSE I WANTED LESS DENSITY. AND OVER THE TIME THAT I LIVED THERE, IF YOU LOOK WEST ON BULVERDE ROAD, YOU SEE WAVES OF ROOFTOPS FROM THE SAN ANTONIO SIDE OF POVERTY. IF YOU LOOK TO THE RIGHT, YOU SEE WHAT YOU KNOW PEOPLE WOULD EXPECT BERNIE TO LOOK LIKE, WHICH IS HOUSES POKING UP BETWEEN THE TREES, WHICH IS LOW DENSITY, LOWER DENSITY. AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S IS WAVES OF ROOFTOPS. ONE OF THE TOP FIVE THINGS IN OUR CITIZENS SURVEY. ONE OF THEM WAS THE CHARM OF BERNIE. AND DOES THAT FIT IN WITH WITH OUR STRATEGIC PLAN AND OF, YOU KNOW, MEETING WHAT THE CITIZENS WANT IS, YOU KNOW, WITH THIS LEVEL OF DENSITY. SO I JUST WANT TO PUT THE CAVEAT OUT THERE THAT THAT I'M STRUGGLING EVEN WITH THIS LEVEL OF DENSITY. COUNCILWOMAN. RIGHT. GO AHEAD. OH, JUST REAL QUICK. IN THE D.R., WHAT IS THE FRONTAGE LOT? WHAT WAS WRITTEN INTO THAT FOR LIKE, SIZES THAT WERE JUST SAID 209 LOSS. 200 HAD THE MASTER PLAN. MAXIMUM OR MINIMUM FRONT FRONTAGE SIZE OR DISTANCE. I DON'T RECALL OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT IT DID HAVE THIS MASTER PLAN WITH IT WHICH OUTLAID THE NUMBER OF LOTS, BUT I DON'T REQUIRE THE SIZES. IT SAID IT HAD A MINIMUM, BUT IT DIDN'T. OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK IT WAS 52. I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING LIKE THAT. DO YOU REMEMBER JOSH? MINIMUM LOT SIZE. IF YOU GIVE ME A MINUTE, I CAN LOOK IT UP FOR YOU. I THINK IT'S IN THE REPORT. I CAN FIND IT FOR YOU. I WAS CURIOUS IF. I MEAN, I THINK. SORRY, CHRISTIE. I'LL LET YOU JUST REAL QUICK. I THINK THE DA DICTATES A LOT OF PROBABLY WHAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT, BUT I'LL LET YOU GO BEFORE I GO FURTHER. AND IT GOES TO THIS AND ALSO TO YOUR QUESTION. COUNCILWOMAN. RIGHT IS, YOU KNOW, ONE THING TO CONSIDER THAT MAY GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF ASSURANCE IS THAT THE NUMBER OF LOTS, YOU KNOW, AKA THE DENSITY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT WAS INCLUDED IN NOT ONLY THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, BUT ALSO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AND THOSE WERE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN THE CITY WAS DOING ITS LAND USE PLAN, WHICH IS PART OF OUR OUR MASTER PLAN, AS WELL AS THOSE ARE ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR WITHIN OUR ESTIMATIONS FOR OUR FINAL BUILD. OUT OF ALL THE LOTS THAT WE THAT WE HAVE ENTITLED WITHIN BURNIE. SO DIRECTOR MAN ALREADY HAS THOSE. AT LEAST 209 LOTS ACCOUNTED FOR IN OUR WATER USAGE AND OUR SEWER USAGE. SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. THOSE ARE ALREADY TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT SINCE WE HAD ALREADY HAD THE AGREEMENTS IN PLACE. SO THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE WAS IDENTIFIED AS 5400FT² IN THE MASTER PLAN, AND 5400FT² IS MOST SIMILAR TO N [00:50:01] AS IN NANCY, OR M AS IN MARY. AND IT IS IT IS LESS THAN NANCY. NANCY. THE MINIMUM IS 5400. WELL, THE SAME EXCUSE ME, BUT BUT ALL THE LOTS IN THE SUBDIVISION IS MORE SIMILAR TO M AS IN MARY. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? NO, IT DOESN'T, BECAUSE M OKAY, SO M IS 4000FT². YEAH, I THINK I THINK THEY WOULD BE MORE SIMILAR TO N 5400FT². RIGHT. WHAT I'M SAYING IS WITH AN AVERAGE, YOU ALWAYS HAVE LOTS LESS THAN 50 400FT². YOU POINT YOU'RE POINTING OUT HERE THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE IS OVER 6000FT². BUT THAT'S ALL THE LOTS COMBINED. CORRECT. IF I MAY, I. IT'S GONNA TAKE ME A SECOND. THIS IS A COMPLICATED ISSUE. IN A PERFECT WORLD, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT COUNCILWOMAN WRIGHT SAID. EVERYTHING. I WOULD NEVER HAVE KNOWINGLY APPROVED THIS DENSITY. BUT THAT'S NOT THE WORLD WE LIVE IN. THE WORLD WE LIVE IN IS A WORLD DICTATED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE. NOW, LET ME EXPLAIN WHY I SAY THAT. IF THIS WAS A PROPERTY WHICH WOULD BE THE COUNTY'S AND THE CURRENT KYLE CREEK RULES BE TEN ACRE IN A WELL, BUT IT'S IN THE COUNTY AND THEY ALREADY HAD WATER. I UNDERSTAND THE TEXAS WATER ISSUE. I UNDERSTAND CANYON LAKE. I UNDERSTAND ALL OF IT. BUT OUR RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THE CITY ARE BURNING NOW. I'VE BEEN ASSURED TO THE EXTENT THAT ONE CAN, THAT WE HAVE SUFFICIENT WATER, AND THESE THINGS HAVE BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, INCLUDING WHATEVER IS LEFT TO BE BUILT OUT IN SOUTH GLEN OR REGENT PARK, OR POTENTIALLY EVEN ESPERANZA. REMEMBERING THAT ESPERANZA BROUGHT 1200 ACRE FEET OF WATER. THEY HAD ALREADY CONTRACTED FROM GBRA, WHICH WE DID NOT HAVE. THE CITY HAS NOW. SO, I MEAN, I WOULD AGREE THAT I WOULD MUCH PREFER THIS TO BE ONE ACRE OR MORE LOTS, BUT THAT WAS IN THE COUNTY. SO THE CITY RESPONDED TO THE COUNTY'S FAILURE, FAILURE AND DENIAL OF ACCEPTING RESPONSIBILITY FOR CERTAIN ROADS, BECAUSE THAT'S ALSO ONE OF THE BIG. THAT IS THE BIGGEST ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES IN THE CITIZEN SURVEY IS TRAFFIC, CONNECTIVITY AND ROADS. THE COUNTY REFUSED THOSE ROADS. THE CITY STEPPED IN IN 2018 BEFORE WE WERE HERE AND SAID, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO FIGURE THIS OUT. AND THEY ACCEPTED RESPONSIBILITY FOR THOSE ROADS BUILT AT THE DEVELOPER'S EXPENSE, NOT THE TAXPAYERS EXPENSE, WHICH HAS BEEN A CONSTANT THEME. THAT'S WHY THERE'S ONLY BEEN ONE ROAD BUILT AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE IN THE LAST, WHAT, 50 YEARS? HERFF ROAD, BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET DEVELOPERS TO BUILD THOSE ROADS. AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A PERFECT SCENARIO BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION. THE PLANNING THAT WAS DONE, TO BE CLEAR, AND PNC DID THEIR JOB, BUT THE PLANNING WAS APPROVED, I THINK FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES OVER THE LAST SIX YEARS. UNANIMOUSLY. IT'S ALL PLATTED NOW. WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS ABOUT THE 59 LOTS IN THE FRONT THAT ARE ALREADY, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO SAY IT, THEY'RE ENERGIZED WHERE THEY HAVE ACTUAL UTILITIES TO THEM. THE REMAINDER OF PHASE TWO AND THREE IS NOT ENERGIZED IN THAT SENSE, BUT THEY'VE ALREADY BUILT OUT THE SUB INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT THAT. I DON'T I DON'T SEE A LEGAL SOLUTION. WE CANNOT ZONE IT. BUT THE PLANNING DOESN'T GO AWAY. AND I DON'T BELIEVE THE CITY CAN REFUSE PERMITTING IF I'M. MAYBE I'M INCORRECT. I DON'T THINK THE CITY CAN REFUSE PERMITTING OF PLATTED PROPERTY EVEN IF WE DON'T ZONE IT, I DON'T KNOW, I MEAN, I'M ASKING, RIGHT? YOU HAVE AGREED TO 209 LOTS IN THIS LOCATION. AND YOU. THEIR PERMITS WOULD BE ISSUED EVEN IF. EVEN IF THE LOT SIZE IS LOWER THAN THAN THE ZONING. SO RIGHT NOW, THERE'S 147 LOTS THAT MEET THE R N NANCY N, AS IN NANCY, WHICH MEANS THERE'S APPROXIMATELY WHAT'S AT 54 LOTS THAT ARE NON-CONFORMING. HOW DO YOU CORRECT. HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH THAT. SO THOUGH SO AS I MENTIONED, MY BIGGEST CONCERN WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH TWO DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICTS OFTEN REVOLVES AROUND IMPERVIOUS COVER AND SETBACKS. AND SINCE THEY'RE THE SAME, I'M NOT AS CONCERNED WITH THAT. WHAT I HAVE DONE IN THE PAST IN SIMILAR SITUATIONS WHERE YOU HAD ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE SIMILAR LIKE THIS IS IF IF NEEDED, WE ISSUE WHAT I CALL A REBUILD OR A BUILD LETTER TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ALLOWS THEM TO KNOW THAT THEY, IN THE EVENT OF A DISASTER, THAT THEY CAN REBUILD THEIR HOME. WE HAD PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED SPLIT ZONING. IS THAT LEGAL TO DO IN THE FRONT PHASE IN R.N. IN PHASE TWO AND THREE? THE REASON I'M ASKING IS AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IF YOU DO MBE IN THE FRONT WHICH IS ALREADY ENERGIZED, PLUMBING, BLAH BLAH BLAH, IT'S ALL THERE. THAT WOULD ONLY LEAVE ABOUT 10 OR 15 NONCONFORMING LOTS. [00:55:02] IS THAT LET ME LOOK THAT UP FOR YOU. SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS THAT INSTEAD OF 54, THERE'D BE MUCH LESS. THERE WOULD BE. 45. STILL 45. AND THEN WHAT ARE WE CONSIDERING? ENERGIZED THAT THE UTILITIES ARE RUN TO THE CURB OF EACH LOT? OR THAT THE UTILITIES ARE THERE AT THE ENTRANCE AND THE ABILITY TO ENERGIZE EACH HOME TO THE LOT? OKAY. SO HOW MANY LOTS ACTUALLY ARE ENERGIZED IN PHASE ONE? THERE'S 59. THEY HAVE THE UTILITIES ARE ALL UP TO THE HOUSE. OKAY. SO THOSE CAN'T BE REPLANTED THEN? NO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET A REPLY. WELL THE REPLANTING IS NOT AN ISSUE. SO WE'RE ARGUING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT NEEDED TO BE ARGUED ABOUT SEVEN YEARS AGO. I MEAN, WE'RE WE'RE TALKING IN CIRCLES HERE ABOUT SOMETHING THAT IS ALREADY THE HORSE IS OUT OF THE BARN. IT'S TIME WE JUST, YOU KNOW, WE MADE WHEN WE MADE THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE CITY AGREED TO 209 LOTS. THE DEVELOPER ACTED ON THAT BUILT OUR ROAD AS PART OF OUR MASTER PLAN BECAUSE AND THAT WAS 52% OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE COUNTY IN THAT SECTION RESPOND TO OUR SURVEY AS A TRAFFIC BEING AN ISSUE. NOW THEY'RE LOOKING AT THIS AS TRAFFIC IS GOING TO BE A GREATER ISSUE, BECAUSE THERE'S 209 OR 201 HOUSES BEING BUILT OUT THERE. AND THAT IS TRUE IN THE SHORT AND MEDIUM TERM. BUT WE'RE ALSO GETTING THAT ROAD WHICH EVENTUALLY WILL SOLVE OR HELP WITH THAT TRAFFIC ISSUES. WITHOUT THAT ROAD, WE'RE NOT EVEN HERE WITHOUT THAT ROAD, THOSE 209 HOUSES GET BUILT. THIS IS A PART OF THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER DOESN'T HAVE THESE HEADACHES. THE DEVELOPER IS $2 MILLION RICHER BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO BUILD THE ROAD THEY BUILT FOR THE CITY AND FOR THAT TRAFFIC ISSUE. SO AT THIS POINT, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY OPTION BUT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT WE'VE AGREED TO. NO, I WASN'T PART OF THE COUNCIL. MOST OF US WEREN'T PART OF THE COUNCIL. BUT THE CITY AGREED TO THIS YEARS AGO. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S BEEN CONFUSION. THE P AND Z COMMITTEE DID ITS JOB. THEY CONSIDERED THE ZONING IN WITH WITH BLINDERS ON, ESSENTIALLY, AND SAYING IF THIS WAS BEING ZONED DE NOVO, WOULD WE ZONE IT R2. AND THEY ANSWERED, NO, AND I AGREE WITH THAT. BUT THEN WE GET BACK TO THE WHOLE THING. I JUST TALKED ABOUT THE SEVEN, SIX, SEVEN YEARS OF HISTORY. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY PREVIOUS CITY. ET CETERA. ET CETERA. SO I THINK THE SOLUTION OF R2 N IF YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THE THE ABILITY TO DEAL WITH THE NONCONFORMING LOTS, I STILL WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE DEVELOPER TO STRONGLY CONSIDER REDUCING PHASE TWO AND THREE SLIGHTLY, WHICH I HAVE ASKED IN PERSON. THAT'S WITHIN THEIR PURVIEW, NOT OURS. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. I MEAN, TO ME, THAT'S IT. JUST REAL QUICK I THINK GREAT, GREAT POINTS EVERYONE. I THINK SHARON, YOU'RE RIGHT ON IN THE PERFECT SCENARIO, I THINK YOU HIT IT RIGHT OFF OF GET PUT IN THESE SITUATIONS AND YOU HAVE TO MAKE THESE CHOICES. JOE WRIGHT ON ON P AND Z. I TALKED TO THE CHAIR ABOUT MY DISCUSSIONS WITH THE DEVELOPER AND JOHN MARK AND AND TALKED ABOUT ALL THAT. P AND Z DOESN'T GET TO LOOK AT THE DA. IT'S ILLEGAL. THAT'S SO IMPORTANT TO THIS. I KNOW SAFETY WAS THE OTHER CONCERN. THE ROAD. IT SOUNDS LIKE WHEN THE GAS STATION GOES IN AT THE CORNER, THAT WILL TRIGGER THE TRAFFIC LIGHT TO COME THERE. I DID TALK TO THE DEVELOPER WITH A VERBAL AGREEMENT THAT ALL PARTIES, MEANING CITY, COUNTY, TXDOT DEVELOPER, WOULD WORK TOWARDS SOME SORT OF TEMPORARY YELLOW BLINKING LIGHT TO HELP WITH SAFETY CONCERNS. AGAIN, THAT'S JUST A VERBAL AGREEMENT. I UNDERSTAND THAT'S NOT A WRITTEN AGREEMENT, BUT I THINK THAT IS PART OF OUR JOB WOULD BE TO TRY TO GET THAT THERE. I HOPE STAFF WILL HAPPY TO WORK WITH THEM ON THAT. I THINK A TEMPORARY FLASHING YELLOW LIGHT, ALTHOUGH IT SOUNDS SILLY, IS STILL WILL HELP PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S AN INTERSECTION COMING UP. AND OUTSIDE OF THAT, I THINK EVERYONE'S COVERED THE POINTS I HAD. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT P AND Z DID THEIR JOB. THEY DIDN'T GET TO FINISH DOING THEIR JOB BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER EMPHATICALLY SAID NO VOTE ON IT AS IS RIGHT NOW. AND THEY SAID NO TO R TO N, AND I'M AND I'M GLAD THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT IT AND COME BACK AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT. ON SECOND THOUGHT, WE YOU KNOW, WE'LL DO THAT. BUT P AND Z STILL HAD MORE DISCUSSION TO HAVE. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WE AS A BODY HAVE THE ABILITY, BUT I EQUATE THAT TO IF YOU LOOK AT THE, YOU KNOW, PRESIDENTIAL JUDICIAL BRANCH AND YOU? [01:00:05] TO ME, IT'S THE EQUATION. IT'S THE EQUATES TO US MAKING AN. EXECUTIVE ORDER VERSUS ALLOWING A BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT WHICH IS P AND Z TO. CONTINUE DOING WHAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT BECAUSE CONGRESS IS ELECTED IS APPOINTED. SO I GET YOUR POINT. BUT IT'S NOT EXACTLY THE SAME. WE ARE THE ELECTED BODY WHO APPOINTS P AND Z. P AND Z, BY LAW CANNOT LOOK AT THE DA IN THIS THIS PROJECT, SPECIFICALLY THE DA UTILITY AGREEMENT. THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT WITH NOT BEING ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT. I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY COULD MAKE THE CHOICE THEY NEEDED TO. YES. COULD THEY HAVE WORKED WITH THEM TO GET SOMETHING ELSE? YES. BUT WITHOUT THAT DA THEY MAY COME UP WITH THE SAME AGREEMENT, LIKE JOE SAID, BECAUSE WE ALL AGREE WITH THAT. WELL, AND THE OTHER PROBLEM IS THAT THE DEVELOPER, I MEAN, THEY'RE WITHIN THEIR RIGHT TO APPEAL TO THE COUNCIL. I UNDERSTAND WHAT P AND Z DID, AND I THINK PERHAPS HAD THEY AGREED TO R TO N TO THE PN, AND THEN IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN RESOLVED RIGHT THERE. WE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN GOING THROUGH ALL THIS, BUT NEVERTHELESS, THAT'S THE APPROACH THAT WAS TAKEN. AND SO HERE WE ARE. SO I DON'T I DON'T THINK THEY'VE DONE ANYTHING WRONG. I WOULD PREFER THEM HAVE DONE IT THE OTHER WAY, BUT THEY DIDN'T. AND THEY'RE WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS TO DO THAT. SO I DON'T THINK KICKING IT BACK TO P AND Z IS GOING TO CHANGE ANYTHING, RIGHT? MY ONLY COMMENT IS I'LL JUST MAKE IT SIMPLE. WE'RE OVERLY COMPLICATING THE ISSUE, I THINK, AND I'LL PUT IT REALLY SIMPLY, THIS I ASKED FOR THIS. THIS IS OUR UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. THIS IS THE BIBLE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT ALL OF OUR DEVELOPERS LIVE BY. AND WE REQUEST AND REQUIRE THEM. HECK, WE FIND THEM IF THEY DON'T IN SOME IN SOME CASES IT'S OUR PROBLEM IS SOLVED BY THIS RIGHT HERE IT'S ZONING. IT'S 2.5 ZONING PROCEDURES. SO IT'S A SECTION B ZONING NEWLY ANNEXED LAND PROPERTY THAT IS INCLUDED IN AN APPROVED PLAT, WHICH THESE ARE APPROVED PLATS AND THEY'RE DONE. THAT'S APPROVED. SHALL BE ZONED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAT. AND SO IT'S WE'VE ALREADY WE ALREADY HAVE OUR THE RULES IN PLACE THAT HOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO ANNEX THESE IN AND HOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO ZONE THEM. IT REALLY CLEARLY STATES RIGHT THERE THEY SHOULD BE ZONED TO THE PLAT. AND SO TO ACCORDING TO OUR RULES, WE SHOULD APPLY M AS IN MARY ZONING BECAUSE THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD IMPLY THAT EVERY LOT WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE, OF THE ZONING THAT IT'S FITTING IN. AND THE N IS A NANCY. THAT GIVES THERE'S THEY WOULD END UP WITH WITH 50 DIFFERENT NON-CONFORMING LOTS. IS THAT THE NUMBER 52, 54, 54. SO, I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE CAUSING OURSELVES FURTHER PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE TO GET, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO FIX DOWN THE ROAD IF WE THE PLATES ARE NOT, CAN THE PLATES BE CHANGED? I MEAN, IF THEY DECIDED THEY WANTED TO COME BACK AND PLAT 211 LOTS INSTEAD OF 201, COULD THEY? THEY COULD NOT GO ABOVE THAT 209. RIGHT. WE HAVE ALL UNDER AGREEMENTS. BUT TO YOUR POINT, QUINTON. ALSO THE FRONTAGE SIZE WOULD RESTRICT THEM FROM BEING ABLE TO DO ALL OUR TWO M LOTS. THEY HAVE TO STICK BY THEIR MINIMUM SIZE. SO TO YOUR POINT, THAT DICTATES THINGS TOO. YEAH. I MEAN YOU'RE CORRECT, SURE. BUT BUT I'M SAYING I WOULD I WOULD SAY THIS SINCE WE'RE STUCK HERE, I PREFER THE N AS IN NANCY FOR ONE REASON. I KNOW, I KNOW THE PROBLEM. THAT'S WHY I ASKED ABOUT HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH THE NONCONFORMING. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE WE'RE MAKING A STATEMENT THAT IT IS NOT OUR PREFERENCE THAT THIS DENSITY EVEN I DON'T EVEN LIKE THAT DENSITY. I WOULD PREFER MUCH HIGHER, MUCH LOWER DENSITY AT LEAST R1 L OR R1 M, WHICH IS 1700 SQUARE FEET. R1 L IS WHAT I'M LOOKING AT THE ZONING CATEGORY. IS IT A QUARTER ACRE? I MEAN, THIS IS STILL BASICALLY EIGHT LOTS PER ACRE, WHICH IS WHAT WE JUST CHANGED THE UDC AT MY REQUEST, TO GO FOR MULTIFAMILY HOUSING. SO IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THAT'S I DON'T WANT TO GO LOWER THAN THAT, BECAUSE IN THAT ORIGINAL DA IN THE ORIGINAL PLAN OF THIS PROJECT, CONCEPTUALLY ON THOSE FRONTAGE AREAS ON ON THE 46 EAST, THERE IS AN AREA THAT WAS IDENTIFIED AS MULTIFAMILY MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL. I WILL NOT SUPPORT MULTIFAMILY ON 46. I WILL NOT TELL YOU THAT NOW THEY CAN COME FORWARD WITH IT. I WON'T VOTE FOR IT. SO I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S WHY I WANT THE R2 IN. AND THEN THAT'S CLARIFICATION TO THIS IS JUST STRICTLY FOR THIS SECTION OF PARCEL FOR THIS SECTION. THE REST OF THAT DEVELOPMENT OR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT HAS TO COME BACK. IT'S NOT EVEN WELL, IT'S NOT EVEN IN THE CITY. OKAY. SO THAT'S A WHOLE NOTHER ISSUE. BUT I'M JUST SAYING. I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THAT'S WHY I WANT THE END. I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT OUR POSITION IS GOING TO BE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO SUPPORT HIGH ANY MORE HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT IN THAT SPECIFIC AREA. [01:05:06] IF WE'RE INVOLVED, IF WE'RE NOT INVOLVED WITH THEM, WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. IS THAT REASONABLE? I THINK IT'S ONLY REASONABLE THE FACT THAT THE DEVELOPMENT GROUP HAS COME TO US AND SAID THAT THEY CAN LIVE WITH THAT. I, I THINK WE'RE JUST MAKING A LITTLE BIT OF A MESS DOWN THE ROAD FOR US TO CLEAN UP WITH THE NONCONFORMING LOT ISSUE. IT'S OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF WHAT OUR THE DEVELOPMENT CODE SAYS WE SHOULD BE PLATTING, OR WE SHOULD JUST BE ZONING IT TO THE PLAT. AND THAT WOULD BE M AS IN MARY. BUT IT DOESN'T CREATE ANY WORK WORK FOR ANYBODY. IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT. IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE DENSITY OF THE PROJECT. IT WOULD JUST BE ZONED. IT WOULD BE FOLLOWING THE RULES. SO N AS IN NANCY IS WHAT THEY'VE AGREED TO. AND SO I DON'T I'M NOT GOING TO THAT'S NOT THE HILL I WANT TO DIE ON IF THEY'VE AGREED TO IT. IF ALL THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED AND AGREED TO IT, THEN THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO GO. SO ANYWAY, IF IF YOU KNOW, I'M FINE WITH THE END IS IF BECAUSE I THINK THE END IS MAYBE JUST NOT FEASIBLE AT THIS POINT, BUT IT'S. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S NECESSARY. ALL RIGHT. ANY MORE QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? JUST ONE COMMENT IS THAT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SAID THAT WE ARE PROVIDING WATER. JOE ALREADY POINTED THIS OUT. NATHAN, TEXAS WATER IS PROVIDING WATER. THAT'S CORRECT. NOT THE CITY OF BOERNE. CORRECT. AND PERMANENT SEWER WOULD BE TEXAS WATER AS WELL. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. WATER IS PERMANENT. PERMANENTLY. TEXAS WATER. IT'S NOT. YES, MA'AM. EVEN THOUGH THAT WE'RE WE'VE ANNEXED THEM. IT DOESN'T SWITCH OVER TO US. IT'S IN THEIR SERVICE AREA. TEXAS WATER SERVICE AREA. SO THEY'RE PROVIDING IT. I HAVE SOMETHING I'M GOING TO POST ABOUT THAT ISSUE LATER. GOOD. ALL RIGHT. CAN WE GET A MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN SCOTT. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ON FIRST READING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2025, DASH ZERO ONE. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF BOERNE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER THREE ZONING. SECTION 3.2 ZONING MAP ZONING 71.12 ACRES TRACT FROM A HOLDING. INTERIM. HOLDING. ZONING. HOLDING. ZONING. DISTRICT TWO TO R TWO. N AS IN NANCY. MODERATE DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED AT THE WEST. STATE HIGHWAY 16. CARD NUMBER 30766. DID I SAY 46? YOU SAID 16. 16. SORRY. 46. CAD NUMBER 307605 AND 31618 FOR A10360 SURVEY. 179 NEWTON AND TAYLOR 71.12 ACRES TO ALLOW FOR A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION. FORESTAR USA REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC. AND CONTINENTAL HOMES OF TEXAS, L.P., SPENCER RANCH. SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN BUNKER. ONE OTHER COMMENT PLEASE. JUST TO CLARIFY R2N IS NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL. IT IS NOT MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. AND IS NANCY. AND IS IT NANCY? JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU GOT THAT RIGHT. SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN BUNKER. PLEASE VOTE. MOTION PASSES 4 TO 1. THANK YOU EVERYONE. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND ENERGY ON THAT. MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX A 2020 5-063. [A. CONSIDER RESOLUTION NO. 2025-R12; A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AND MANAGE A CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOERNE AND BENNETT PAVING, INC. FOR THE 2022 BOND ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION TO INCLUDE EAST BLANCO UTILITY PATCH FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $51,750.] CONSIDER RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025 R 12. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AND MANAGE A CHANGE ORDER NUMBER ONE, TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOERNE AND BENNETT PAVING INCORPORATED FOR THE 2022 BOND ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION TO INCLUDE EAST BLANCO UTILITY PADS FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $51,750. PRESENTING JEFF CARROLL. MAYOR AND COUNCIL. HERE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT A ITEM THAT WILL BE INVESTING IN MAINTAINING OUR HIGH QUALITY INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS AND PUBLIC ASSETS. AS YOU KNOW, WE MIGHT HAVE DRIVEN BY THE DOWNTOWN SQUARE. WE HAVE A CONTRACTOR GOING, BENNETT PAVING. THEY STARTED LAST WEEK AND GOT A COUPLE DAYS IN BEFORE IT GOT COLD. AND THEY'VE CONTINUED YESTERDAY AND TODAY. AND IN THEORY, THEY'RE DOING A GREAT JOB WITH US SO FAR. WE'RE SUPER HAPPY WITH THEM. IF YOU RECALL, FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT DRIVE BLANCO ROAD OVER BY PLANT AT THE END OF LAST YEAR, THERE WAS A WATER MAIN BREAK. THAT REALLY BUBBLED UP THE PAVEMENT PRETTY BAD. BLANCO ROAD IS FM 474. THAT'S A TXDOT ROAD. AND SO WE THE STREET DEPARTMENT, THE UTILITY DEPARTMENT FIXED THE WATER MAIN LEAK AND THEN THE STREET DEPARTMENT DID THEIR TEMPORARY PATCH. BUT WE ALL KNEW ALL ALONG THAT WE NEEDED TO DO A PERMANENT PATCH PATCH AT THIS LOCATION. REALLY, THE UTILITY DEPARTMENT HAD BEEN WORKING TOWARDS TRYING TO FIND THEIR OWN CONTRACTOR TO GO FIND AND DO THIS UTILITY PATCH. AND I KIND OF SAID, HEY, I HAVE A STREET CONTRACTOR OUT HERE DOING A GREAT JOB. LET'S CHANGE ORDER THIS PATCH INTO MY CONTRACT INSTEAD OF GOING AND FINDING A NEW CONTRACTOR. ALL THEIR EQUIPMENT IS HERE IN TOWN. THEY'LL PROBABLY BE THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE ITEM. [01:10:03] SO WE APPROACHED THE CONTRACTOR. THEY LET US CARRY AND USE OUR UNIT PRICES FROM OUR EXISTING CONTRACT. SO WE ALREADY HAD PRICES PER SQUARE YARD OF PAVEMENT. SO REALLY IT WAS A COST EFFECTIVE METHOD FOR THE CITY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT HAVING TO PAY A CONTRACTOR TO MOBILIZE ALL THEIR EQUIPMENT OUT HERE. SO IT'S A COST EFFECTIVE. AND SO IT TOOK US SEVERAL MONTHS TO TALK WITH TXDOT TO GET AN AGREED PAVEMENT PATCH SECTION FOR THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PAVEMENT THAT WOULD GO THERE. AT THE SAME TIME, THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT BUBBLED UP UNDERNEATH THE ROAD. WE'VE PURPOSELY BEEN TRYING TO LET THAT AREA DRY BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF WATER IN THAT AREA. SO WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO LET IT DRY WHILE WE WERE WORKING THROUGH WITH TXDOT TO GET THE SECTION. SO SEVERAL SEVERAL WEEKS BACK, WE FINALLY GOT AN AGREED UPON SECTION WITH WITH TEX DOT. AND SO HERE WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS. SO THE PLAN IS IF THIS GETS APPROVED TONIGHT EARLY NEXT WEEK, THE STREET DEPARTMENT WILL GO DIG THE HOLE BACK UP AND PUT A CONCRETE CLSM FLOWABLE FILL TYPE PRODUCT IN THE HOLE THAT'LL BRING THAT UP. AND THEN THE STREET CONTRACTOR WILL COME WITH THEIR MILLING MACHINE AND KIND OF PAVE OUT THE BIG AREA THAT'S GREEN, WHICH THAT'S MUCH BIGGER THAN THE PATCH THAT'S THERE TODAY. AND WE'LL HOPEFULLY END UP WITH A NICE CLEAN LOOKING PRODUCT AT THE END. SO THIS IS A UNIT PRICE CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE. SO WE'RE ASKING FOR A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA FUNDS BECAUSE AS WE ALL MEASURED IT OUT, BUT WE JUST IN CASE IT ENDS UP BEING 1 OR 2 YARDS EXTRA OR THEY NEED TO DO A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THING. SO WE'RE ASKING THE CONTRACTOR ASKED FOR 49,233 WHICH IS SIGNIFICANTLY CHEAPER THAN THE COST THAT THE UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WAS THINKING THE PATCH WAS GOING TO BE. AND SO WE'RE ASKING FOR 51 750, WHICH WOULD BE A 4.4% INCREASE. JUST TO GIVE US A LITTLE BIT EXTRA IN CASE WE DECIDE TO MAKE THE PATCH A LITTLE BIT BIGGER WHEN WE'RE OUT THERE ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK. AGAIN, THE WORK INCLUDES ALL THE ROADWAY EXCAVATION AND REPLACEMENT. AND THEN THIS CHANGE ORDER, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE PAYING FOR ALL THE OTHER PATCHES THAT WERE ONGOING OUT OF OUR BOND PROJECT, THIS PARTICULAR CHANGE ORDER WILL GET PAID THROUGH THE UTILITY FUND, SEPARATE FROM THE BOND ITSELF. SO IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, WE'D LIKE TO GET THIS CHANGE ORDER APPROVED SO WE CAN GET THEM GOING. COUNCILMAN WILKERSON. ONE COMMENT BEFORE I MAKE A MOTION IF SOMEONE ELSE DOES. BUT AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT LAST SLIDE, I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT THE SCHOOL TRAFFIC TIMES BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY BLANCO IS SO IMPORTANT THOROUGHFARE FOR SCHOOL, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT AT A NON IMPACTFUL TIME. CORRECT. SO WHEN WE'RE ON OUR MAJOR STREETS, WE LIKE TO DO WORK FROM BETWEEN 9 A.M. AND 3 P.M.. STREET TRAFFIC REALLY DIES DOWN. SO THE STREET DEPARTMENT WILL SHOW UP, BUT WE'RE PLANNING ON TODAY IS THE STREET DEPARTMENT WILL SHOW UP IN THE MORNING OF MONDAY AND DO THEIR WORK, AND THEN IT'LL PROBABLY BE TUESDAY AFTERNOON OR WEDNESDAY AT THAT AFTER 6 P.M.. THE UTILITY CONTRACTOR WILL COME IN AND DO FROM 6 TO 8 OR 9 P.M.. WE'LL DO THE STREET PATCH. IT'S REALLY MOST OF OUR STREETS. AFTER 6 P.M., THE TRAFFIC DIES DOWN PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY. BENIGN QUESTION. BUT JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, THE REASON I ASK FOR THIS QUESTION IS ESSER ROAD ALREADY IS BUCKLING. PROBABLY FROM THE SCHOOL BUSSES. THERE'S DEEP GOUGES. DIVOTS. WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS FAIL? IS THERE, LIKE, A GUARANTEED TIME WHERE THEY WILL REDO IT? IF WE HAVE ANY FAILURE OR SO, WE DO HAVE A WARRANTY WITH OUR CONTRACTOR FOR WORK. AT THE ESSER IS A VERY DIFFERENT SITUATION THAN THIS, BUT THIS, THIS WE'RE PUTTING IN AGAIN, IT'S TEX DOT ROAD, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY VERY SIMILAR TO THE PAVEMENT SECTION ON BLANCO. SO WE'RE ACTUALLY PUTTING MORE PAVEMENT IN THAN WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE. SO IT'S GOING TO BE A THREE INCH HOT MIX ON TOP OF A 11 INCH HOT MIX BASE SECTION. SO IT'S 14IN OF TOTAL PAVEMENT. SO IT'S A MUCH THICKER PAVEMENT SECTION THAN WHAT'S THERE TODAY. AND ESSER THE STREET DEPARTMENT IS PLANNING IF YOU'VE BEEN GONE UP AND DOWN SCHOOL STREET, OUR STREET DEPARTMENT IS USING OUR ZIPPER RECLAIMING MACHINE. WE'VE BEEN WORKING THAT ON SCHOOL STREET, AND THEY'RE PLANNING WHEN THEY'RE DONE WITH SCHOOL STREET. WE STILL HAVE SEVERAL MORE PATCHES ON SCHOOL STREET. THEY'RE PLANNING TO DO THAT ON ESSER AS WELL. BUT THEY'VE JUST BEEN KIND OF PUTTING TEMPORARY PATCHES IN ON ESSER. THANKS. THIS COLD WEATHER AND THE DRIZZLE WATER IS THE ENEMY OF STREETS. AND SO ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO KEEP THE WATER OUT ON THESE STREETS IS BENEFICIAL. ANY COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? A MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN WILSON, PLEASE. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025, DASH R 12, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER AND MANAGE A CHANGE ORDER NUMBER ONE, TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURNIE AND BENNETT PAVING, INC., FOR THE 2022 BOND ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION TO INCLUDE EAST BLANCO UTILITY PATCH FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $51,750. SECOND. SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN BUNKER. [01:15:05] PLEASE VOTE. MOTION PASSES FIVE ZERO. THANK YOU EVERYONE. MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM SEVEN, A CITY MANAGER REPORT UPDATE ON THE 89TH LEGISLATIVE SESSION. [A. UPDATE ON THE 89th LEGISLATIVE SESSION.] 2020 5-048 CHRISTIE STARK. CHRISTIE. GOOD EVENING. COUNCIL. AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, WE ARE CURRENTLY IN THE 89TH LEGISLATIVE SESSION FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS. AND SO EVERY TWO YEARS OUR LEGISLATOR LEGISLATIVE, LEGISLATIVE GROUP CONVENES IN AUSTIN AND THE SESSION BEGAN IN JANUARY. SO ON JANUARY THE 14TH IS WHEN THEY CONVENED. ON THAT DAY, ACTUALLY, WE HAD A NEW SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE REPRESENT. REPRESENTATIVE DUSTIN BURROWS OF LUBBOCK TOOK THE OATH AS THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE. THE SESSION LASTS FOR SIX MONTHS, WHICH YOU THINK, WELL, THAT'S PROBABLY A DECENT ENOUGH TIME, BUT ACTUALLY IT GOES REALLY, REALLY QUICK. SO RIGHT NOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS YOU'VE GOT THE THE SENATE IN THE HOUSE BOTH SIDES OF THE OF, OF THE CONGRESS, THERE ARE FILING BILLS. AND SO THEY'RE SUBMITTING ALL THE DIFFERENT BILLS THAT THEY, THAT THEY WANT TO BE CONSIDERED. AND THEN DURING THIS TIME, WHAT THEY'LL DO AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE. THEY ACTUALLY WILL WORK TOGETHER. THEY'LL COLLABORATE. THEY'LL FIND BILLS THAT ARE SIMILAR, AND SOMETIMES THEY'LL COMBINE THOSE. SO THIS THIS RIGHT NOW IS EVERYBODY'S JUST TRYING TO SEE WHAT BILLS ARE BEING PUT FORWARD. THERE'S ABOUT 4000, MORE THAN 4000 BILLS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED IN THE LAST DAY FOR FILING WOULD BE MARCH 14TH. THE SESSION DOES END JUNE 22ND, JUNE 2ND, AND THEN ON THE 22ND. THAT'S THE LAST DAY FOR THE GOVERNOR TO SIGN OR VETO BILLS PASSED DURING REGULAR SESSION. SO THAT'S ALWAYS AN INTERESTING DAY TO SEE WHAT ACTUALLY MAKES IT THROUGH. OR, YOU KNOW, THINGS MAY BE VETOED. SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE LESS THAN 100 DAYS LEFT IN THE SESSION RIGHT NOW. IT SEEMS LIKE IT JUST STARTED. BUT WE HAVE LESS THAN 100 DAYS. AND SO THE ONLY THING THAT COULD ACTUALLY MOVE FORWARD RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A SPECIFIC LEGISLATIVE PROCESS, A CONSTITUTIONAL GUIDELINES FOR BILL CONSIDERATION FOR THOSE BILLS THAT RUN THROUGH THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE. BUT THE GOVERNOR CAN DECLARE EMERGENCY ITEMS. AND SO IN HIS STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS, WHICH WAS ON SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 2ND, HE IDENTIFIED 77 DIFFERENT TOPICS. AND THOSE ARE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF, WATER INFRASTRUCTURE, TEACHER PAY, CAREER TRAINING, THE EDUCATION SAVINGS ACCOUNTS, WHICH ARE THE SCHOOL VOUCHERS, BAIL REFORM, AND THEN ALSO TEXAS CYBER COMMAND. SO THOSE ITEMS, BILLS RELATED TO THAT ARE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD. AND THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL ONE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF BILL THAT HAS MOVED FORWARD IS THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION. SO THAT HAS GONE THROUGH THE TEXAS SENATE. AND THEY'RE PROPOSING THAT THERE WOULD BE AN INCREASE FOR SENIORS AND DISABLED HOMEOWNERS OF 150 TO 150,000 OF HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION. AND THEN JUST FOR GENERAL RESIDENCES, IT WOULD INCREASE TO 140. AND THAT'S JUST BEEN 100 FOR GENERAL RESIDENCES IN THE PAST. SO IF THEY GO AHEAD AND SIGN THIS ONE INTO LAW, IT WOULD COME FORWARD IN THE ELECTION IN NOVEMBER, AND SO WE WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON THAT, TO HAVE THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION INCREASED. LET'S GO AHEAD AND JUST TALK ABOUT SOME OTHER BILLS. KNOWING THERE'S 4000, I'M OBVIOUSLY NOT GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH ALL 4000 BILLS. I PICKED TEN THAT SOME OF THEM HAVE SPECIFIC BILL NUMBERS, EITHER THROUGH THE SENATE OR THE HOUSE. SOME OF THEM ARE TOPICS THAT MAY HAVE MORE THAN ONE BILL THAT IS OUT THERE RIGHT NOW. OR MAYBE A BILL HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED THAT THAT WILL ACHIEVE THE PURPOSE. SO THAT'S THE CASE WITH THE GOVERNOR'S TAX PROPOSAL. THERE'S NOT A SPECIFIC BILL YET THAT HAS INCLUDED ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS TALKED ABOUT. BUT THIS ONE, HIS TAX PROPOSAL IS THAT HE WOULD HE'S PROPOSING TO MOVE ALL TAX RATE ELECTIONS AND DEAD ELECTIONS TO NOVEMBER, AND THAT ANY KIND OF TAX INCREASE WOULD REQUIRE A TWO THIRDS VOTER APPROVAL. AND WHAT'S DIFFERENT ABOUT THAT IS THE GOAL IS TO ACTUALLY JUST REMOVE THE 3.5% REVENUE CAP THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW AND GO TO ZERO. SO THAT WOULD BE VERY IMPACTFUL FOR CITIES. PROBABLY REQUIRE A CHARTER CHANGE. IT COULD EVEN IMPACT A CITY'S FISCAL YEAR. SO WE'LL KEEP AN EYE ON THAT ONE. THAT ONE COULD BE VERY, VERY IMPACTFUL TO CITIES. THE UNIFORM ELECTION DATE. THIS ACTUALLY ELIMINATES THE MAY DATES FOR ELECTIONS AND REQUIRES ALL CITY ELECTIONS TO OCCUR IN NOVEMBER. [01:20:04] AND THIS IS KIND OF A PARTNER TO THE GOVERNOR'S TAX PROPOSAL. THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, THIS ONE REQUIRES AGENDAS TO BE SUFFICIENTLY SPECIFIC. IT'S IT ADDRESSES EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS. AND THE GOOD THING TO KNOW IS THAT OUR FANTASTIC CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE REALLY ALREADY COMPLIES WITH WHAT THIS LAW WOULD BRING TO FRUITION. THEY'RE JUST MAKING IT. THEY'RE CODIFYING THAT THE ZONING CHANGE. SO THIS ONE IS EXTENDING. THIS IS SENATOR CAMPBELL EXTENDING THE REQUIRED NOTICE AREA FOR ZONING CHANGES FROM 200FT TO 1500 FEET OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMIT LINE. SO THAT WOULD INCREASE NOTIFICATION AREAS SIGNIFICANTLY. AND THEN ALSO PUBLICATION OF NOTICES. BILL, THIS IS A GOOD ONE FOR CITIES. IT WOULD ALLOW US TO PUBLISH NOTICES IN DIGITAL NEWSPAPERS, WHICH WE ALL KNOW THAT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT NOW MANY TIMES TO ESPECIALLY IN OUR AREA, TO HAVE A PHYSICAL PAPER THAT YOU CAN PUBLISH NOTICES IN. SO THIS WOULD PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO USE DIGITAL ONLINE OPTIONS. YOU KNOW, YOU STILL MAY USE YOUR YOUR LOCAL PAPER, BUT YOU WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO USE DIGITAL OPTIONS, WHICH WE CANNOT USE NOW. ALSO MANY OF THESE BILLS TO YOU'VE SEEN BEFORE THEY CAME THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION CAME FORWARD AND MAYBE DID NOT PASS, DIDN'T MAKE IT THROUGH THE WHOLE COMMITTEE PROCESS. AND THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THIS IS A COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT THRESHOLD IT WOULD RAISE CURRENTLY. RIGHT NOW THE THRESHOLD IS $50,000. ANYTHING OVER $50,000 WE BRING TO TO CITY COUNCIL. THIS WOULD ALLOW MUNICIPALITIES TO INCREASE THAT TO $100,000. AND BASICALLY IT JUST ALLOWS FOR GREATER EFFICIENCY IN PROCUREMENT. AND SO WE'LL SEE HOW THAT ONE, HOW THAT ONE DOES THIS TIME. THERE ARE NUMEROUS LAND USE AND HOUSING BILLS. SEVERAL OF THESE WE'VE SEEN BEFORE THE PROPOSAL TO REDUCE LOT SIZES, THE MINIMUM LOT SIZES FROM TO ANYWHERE BETWEEN 1500 TO 2500FT², WHICH IS MUCH SMALLER THAN IS ALLOWED NOW. IT WOULD ALSO, BY RIGHT, ALLOW ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS IN CERTAIN ZONING AREAS. AND THERE'S ALSO SOME LEGISLATION RELATED TO MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AS WELL AS COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. SO WE'LL SEE IF ANY BILLS MAKE IT THROUGH COMMITTEE ON THOSE THOSE ITEMS. THE LAST THREE, THIS ANNEXATION OF PROPERTIES, THIS IS A HOUSE BILL, AND IT'S RELATED TO THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN AREAS OF A MUNICIPALITY. SO IF YOU ANNEX A PIECE OF PROPERTY IN BUT YOU FAIL TO PROVIDE SERVICES THAT ARE LISTED WITHIN THE SERVICE PLAN THAT YOU THAT YOU'VE PROVIDED TO THAT PROPERTY OWNER, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PETITION TO BE DIS ANNEXED. IT'S KIND OF A VAGUE BILL RIGHT NOW. IT DOESN'T REALLY HAVE A TIME LIMIT IN IT. SO THAT MIGHT JUST FALL BACK TO STATE LAW, BUT WE'LL SEE HOW THAT ONE GOES. THIS ONE ALSO IS A BILL THAT HAS COME BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE, BEFORE THE COMMUNITY ADVOCACY AND LOBBYING. THIS WOULD RESTRICT OR ELIMINATE A CITY'S ABILITY TO HIRE A LOBBYIST. SO ANYONE WHO HAS TO REGISTER AS A LOBBYIST. BUT IT WAS ALSO EFFECT AFFECT ORGANIZATIONS LIKE HTML. SO, YOU KNOW, CITIES IN TEXAS ARE ABLE TO BE MEMBERS OF THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE AND THEY ADVOCATE ON BEHALF OF CITIES. SO THIS IS SPECIFICALLY AIMED AT AT NOT ALLOWING CITIES TO DO THAT. SO WE'LL SEE IF IT MAKES IT THROUGH THIS TIME. AND THEN THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER BILLS. I PUT THE COTTAGE FOOD PRODUCTION DEREGULATION BILL ON HERE. BUT THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER BILLS THAT THE PURPOSE IS TO KEEP CITIES FROM REGULATING OR LICENSING OR ENFORCING DIFFERENT IN THIS CASE, THIS WOULD BE A SMALL HOME BASED FOOD BUSINESS. IT COULD POSSIBLY ALSO APPLY TO FOOD TRUCKS, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE TO HAVE A COMMISSARY OR AN AREA THAT THEY GO TO AND PREPARE THEIR FOOD. SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE A LOT OF BILLS LIKE THIS. AND WE'LL JUST HAVE TO WATCH AND SEE HOW THEY ACTUALLY MAKE IT THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS. SO WHAT'S NEXT? WHAT WE'LL DO IS JUST PLAN TO COME BEFORE YOU ALL AND GIVE A VERY BRIEF UPDATE. EACH MONTH WE ACTUALLY PARTICIPATE. BEN, DANNY AND I IN TCMA AS WELL AS TEXAS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE CALLS AND WEBINARS THAT THEY HAVE. AND SO WE GET SOME REALLY GOOD UPDATES AND SOME REALLY GOOD CURRENT INFORMATION THAT WE'LL BE SURE TO SHARE. THE COMMITTEE HEARINGS IN BOTH THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE WILL BEGIN IN MID MARCH AND THEN GO THROUGH APRIL, AND THAT'S WHEN WE'RE REALLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE WHICH BILLS RISE TO THE FOREFRONT AND GAIN SUPPORT. AND SO THAT WILL GIVE US MORE INDICATION AND MORE INFORMATION TO BE ABLE TO SEE WHICH OF THOSE BILLS IS GOING TO OR WILL AFFECT CITIES AND MAYBE WHICH WILL JUST AFFECT US AS RESIDENTS OF, OF THE STATE OF TEXAS. AND THEN, OF COURSE, OUR REGULAR SESSION ENDS IN JUNE. [01:25:05] BUT IF YOU ALL REMEMBER BACK FROM THE LAST SESSION, THE GOVERNOR ACTUALLY CALLED SEVERAL SPECIAL SESSIONS. SO WE'LL SEE HOW EVERYTHING GOES AND IF THAT MIGHT BE THE CASE AGAIN THIS YEAR. BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. BUT JUST NOTE THAT WE WILL COME BACK EACH MONTH AND GIVE YOU A BRIEF UPDATE. THANK YOU. THANKS, CHRISTIE. ANY QUESTIONS FROM CHRISTIE? NO. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO SEVEN B 2020 5-012 MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT. [B. MONTHLY PROJECTS REPORT.] DANNY. HELLO, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I'LL PITCH IT FOR BENT AND FOR BEN TONIGHT. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO THE MOBILITY SLIDE. SO NOTHING HERE IN PARTICULAR TO HIGHLIGHT. I WILL POINT OUT THAT A LOT OF THESE DESIGN PROJECTS SHOW TO BE ON TRACK, TO BE COMPLETED IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. SO HOPEFULLY THIS SLIDE WILL START SEEING SOME SOME BLUE AS THOSE START TO TO FINISH UP. NEXT KIND OF SAME THING HERE. NOTHING. NOTHING TO POINT OUT, BUT A LOT OF THESE DESIGN PROJECTS AGAIN, ARE SHOWN TO BE COMPLETED IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. SO WE'LL SEE SOME OF THESE PROJECTS FINISHING UP NEXT. TWO THINGS WE WANT TO HIGHLIGHT HERE. THE CITY PARK PLAYGROUND ENHANCEMENTS. I KNOW YOU HAD SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AT YOUR LAST AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING. THAT PROJECT IS FINISHING UP KIND OF DOING THE LAST FINAL, FINAL TOUCHES OF THAT. AND WE'RE HOPING TO DO THE RIBBON CUTTING THIS NEXT MONTH IN MARCH. EXCITED ABOUT THAT. AND THE CIBOLO TRAIL UPDATE TO THE INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE. THEY'RE WORKING ON THOSE NOW. I THINK THEY GOT DELAYED A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE OF THE COLD WEATHER, AND WE HAD SOME LINES BREAK, AND SO THEY HAD TO MOVE OVER AND DO SOME OTHER THINGS, BUT THEY WILL BE WRAPPING THOSE UP IN THE NEXT WEEK OR TWO. SO THOSE WILL BE COMPLETING NEXT. ON HERE I'LL POINT OUT I SPOKE WITH DIRECTOR CARROLL TODAY ABOUT THE DAM VEGETATION REMOVAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. THAT PROJECT IS COMPLETE AND THIS WILL BE TURNING BLUE. THAT'S A MULTI-YEAR PROJECT, BUT THE WORK THAT'S SCHEDULED FOR THIS YEAR HAS BEEN COMPLETED. NEXT, THE DEVELOPMENT SLIDE. I HAVE NOTHING TO UPDATE HERE. NEXT. ON THE FINANCIAL SIDE, I'LL JUST POINT OUT THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL AUDIT HAS BEEN COMPLETED. DIRECTOR BUCKALEW WILL BE BRINGING THAT REPORT TO COUNCIL AT THE NEXT MEETING SO THAT YOU CAN REVIEW THAT AUDIT. BUT THAT THAT PROCESS IS COMPLETED. AND, OF COURSE, WE'VE STARTED OUR ANNUAL ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY. OF COURSE, TONIGHT WE RECEIVED THE ANNUAL REPORT FOR PD. WE ARE EXPECTING ON FIRE STATION TWO, THE NEW DESIGN PACKAGE NEXT WEEK. SO WE'LL WE'LL GET THAT FOR REVIEW. AND WE BRING IN SOME UPDATES TO YOU GUYS ON THAT PROJECT. IN THE NEXT MONTH PROBABLY. AND NOTHING HERE TO HIGHLIGHT. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. SAME THING HERE. NOTHING HERE TONIGHT. HAPPY TO COVER ANY OTHER PROJECTS THAT YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT. THANK YOU. DANNY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR DANNY? ALL RIGHT. WE WILL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL. [8. COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL – No discussion or action may take place.] ANY COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS THIS EVENING? WE'LL START WITH DOCTOR MACALUSO. RAISE YOUR HAND. JUST ONE. I THINK I THINK WE ALL MADE IT CLEAR ABOUT NZ'S ROLE. AND I'M SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME PEOPLE THAT FEEL LIKE WE SIDESTEP THEM. I THINK, AS JOE POINTED OUT, THEY DID THEIR JOB HOW THEY SAW IT. COULD THEY HAVE TAKEN SOME MORE TIME TO HELP MAKE A DIFFERENT DECISION? PERHAPS. BUT THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. BUT I WANT THEM TO KNOW WHOEVER'S LISTENING. I'M SURE A FEW OF THEM ARE, THAT WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THEM. I'M FRIENDS WITH MANY. ALWAYS HAPPY TO CHAT AND TALK TO THE CHAIR BEFORE YOU KNOW, THIS MEETING, BUT I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS WORTH MAKING AN EXTRA NOTE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THAT I CERTAINLY ENJOY ALL OF THE ALL OF THE PNC THAT'S CURRENTLY THERE. EXCELLENT, CHAIR. EXCELLENT MEMBERS. I KNOW THAT THEY DO THEIR HOMEWORK AND WORK HARDER THAN MAYBE STAFF EVEN WANTS THEM TO SOMETIMES, BUT NOT IN A BAD WAY. SO IF THEY'RE LISTENING, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTAND THAT PNC HAS A THANKLESS, DIFFICULT JOB. MY ONLY COMMENT IS THERE WAS A MISSIVE FROM THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER, WHICH I WILL BE RESPONDING TO ON MY COUNCIL PAGE ON FACEBOOK. IT'S A GOOD MISSIVE. IT'S A LOT OF INTERESTING INFORMATION, BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE EXPOUNDED ON A LITTLE BIT TO CLARIFY A NUMBER OF THINGS IN THERE AND A NUMBER OF ISSUES WHICH MANY OF WHICH DO NOT EVEN AFFECT THE CITY DIRECTLY. ANY COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? YEAH, I JUST WANT TO SAY CONGRATULATIONS TO COACH SAWYER BEING PROMOTED TO HEAD FOOTBALL COACH OF THE GREYHOUNDS. SO HOPEFULLY HE'LL KEEP THE EXCELLENCE WE GOT WITH COACH HENDRICKS. AND MAYBE JUST AS IMPORTANTLY, WE KEEP HIS WIFE HERE WHO'S A VERY VALUABLE TEACHER IN OUR AG DEPARTMENT. SO CONGRATULATIONS TO THEM ON THEIR NEW ROLE WITH THE FOOTBALL TEAM. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL COMMENTS. ALL RIGHT THEN WE ARE OFFICIALLY GOING TO ADJOURN AT 7:29 P.M.. [01:30:03] THANK YOU EVERYONE. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.