City Council - Special Meeting

Thursday, July the 30th, 2026. I now call the city council special meeting to order. The time is 6 0 2 PM and Troy Smith is going to give our invocation.

All right. If you'll bow your heads. Dear Heavenly Father, God, we just want to thank you for the day, even though it's scorching hot. We do appreciate you just keeping us above ground one more time, God, and we just thank you for it, God. We're here to deliberate business, God, for the city of Keene, and God, we just ask that you would give us the words and the... the confidence to be able to speak clearly and concisely about the business of this city and for the betterment of that as well. And we just ask these in Jesus' name. Amen.

Amen.

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. On the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one and indivisible.

On the mayor announcements, don't forget that tomorrow is the last day for the King Police Department School Supply Drive. Get your donations to them as soon as you possibly can. And cell phones are to be placed on vibrate or silent only. No conversations or comments from the audience is permitted unless specifically called upon by the mayor. And any person in attendance who wishes to speak to the city council on an item Not posted on the agenda shall speak during that time. A speaker card must have already been filled out and given to the city secretary before the meeting. Each speaker will be allotted three minutes. The Texas Open Meetings Act prohibits the city council from deliberating or taking action on the item not listed on the agenda. City council may, however, receive your comments, ask clarifying questions, respond with facts, and explain policy. Anyone who wishes to speak to the City Council on an item that is posted on the agenda can speak when the item is discussed. Thank you. No yellow cards, okay. General business items to discuss. A, to review, discuss, and take action to approve the ordinance and official city limits map that includes all recent annexations extraterritorial jurisdiction ETJ changes as of June the 30th, 2026. Pursuant to Texas local government code section 41.001.

Okay, good evening, council. It's been kind of a trail of how we got around to doing this, but we had someone who filed for their voter registration in a newly annexed area, which prompted us to have to revisit the ward map. But to do the ward map, you have to update your city limits map. So you all received that draft from our engineers. We dug through the records room, through the development services department. I mean, if you've seen my office, it still kind of looks like the papers just exploded. But we dug out every single ordinance we could get our hands on going back to 1955 when the city was incorporated so that we could have a city limits map that one represented every annexation since incorporation and also had the correct boundaries because like our um the 2021 map that council approved was an annexation exhibit map and it looks like So it's this blue and green map here and it's on our website. It was approved by council but not by ordinance and again it was just an annexation exhibit and it did not include like half of the annexation ordinances that we have in our records. So what you've been presented now has every single ordinance that we've ever passed for annexation. We have also corrected the ETJ boundary lines that are on this map to your draft. They are based on the agreements that we have made with Cleburne, Alvarado, and Burleson, and they have reviewed those and confirmed those boundary lines as well. So are there any questions about the city limits map? It does include the new developments on the west side and then the canyons, which is over near KISD. I can show you a few.

Now we did look at these at the last meeting as well, so. Not these?

No, I handed them out to you at the last meeting.

Okay.

So over here on the west side you can see the blue map does not show, help me with the development names, it's Sunset Ridge. and Ashton Home Place and then even the Covington Acres area are not on the blue map, of course. They were annexed and so now they are on the new map. Then this area here is where the canyons are. I don't know if you can see the numbers in red for 2002, question mark, question mark, question mark. They knew it was annexed, but they couldn't find the ordinance. So well, we found the ordinance and it's now reflected correctly on this map. So those are the two big additions to the boundary lines. Oh, okay. But we do need to approve this by ordinance, and you've been provided the ordinance in your packet. So if you would like to approve the map, you would be actually approving the ordinance for this map.

I do have a, just a, here's a couple, here's just one question. I see two areas that are completely surrounded by the city. One right here by 67 where that vacant lot is that is not for sale, but it's just west of Old Betsy if you're driving south to the 67. Same side as Hopps right before you get to 67. That's still country or county, sorry. But if I'm mistaken, I thought Isn't there some sort of rule that once it's surrounded, you can actually just encapsulate that on our own? That doesn't exist anymore? God bless it.

They took away a lot of those laws because cities were just annexing and so several.

It was never annexed. They were considered. We actually have agreements on file from the late 60s, early 70s, because those areas wanted sewer city water. They petitioned to be annexed, but for some reason they were never considered. They were never added. So they've just never been annexed and they've never been on the tax roll. They've never they're not registered voters for the city.

So they We have no records as to why they weren't annexed This is just a follow-up stupid question But what stops us as a city from saying hey, would you like to be annexed? Like do we have that? Are we allowed to? quote, you know, venture out and ask people if they would love to be part of the city? Is there a law against petitioning for that?

Oh, your microphone.

But I can't imagine why anybody would want to pay more taxes. God bless.

Because they get access to all the city services, right?

They were given city services, yes. You have to make sure we have them in the city services.

Well, and the reason I ask that question is because that vacant area here, that vacant land, I mean, if they annex that, then they can make that into commercial property, which then brings their value up, which in turn just looks way better for potential buyers for that corner. And then same with back here on Pecan, you got the same thing. If there's housing there, I mean, there's streets there, so something's there. Okay. And if they were all annexed, their property values would probably go up because now they're part of city services.

Would there be some kind of benefit for the residents to be annexed at all?

They do pay a higher utility rate. People inside the city limits do pay lower water bills than outside. So there is that.

We need to run the numbers on that.

They're still getting a good deal.

They actually get city services just higher than the ones who are actually in the city. OK. Here's what it is.

Do you have a motion to accept this?

I make a motion to approve ordinance number 2026-694. adopting an amended official map of the municipal boundaries and extraterritorial jurisdiction of the city of Keene.

Second. Second, aye. Chuck, that was you? Okay. Okay, all those that are for this? Okay, any against? Okay, it's carried. Okay, second, review and discuss and take action to adopt an ordinance on an update to the city ward boundaries as required by the Texas election code and the city charter. City of Keene, 1.02.c, so. This is on the ordinances.

So this is me again. So again, we had a resident in one of their new areas register for their voter registration, and the elections office cannot assign their ward, because we have not assigned that area into a ward, so therefore they cannot finish the voter registration. We sought out Jacob and Martin, engineers to assist with this map and it is based on the one that you just approved so it does have the updated boundaries but to keep things even and to not disrupt our ward boundaries as much as possible it did cause a little bit of a change in some of the boundaries in the center of the city but it did of course even it out to about one thousand and three voters or lots, residential lots per ward. So we can view the map. So this is the part of that area that I was talking about. So the one on the left is the current ward boundary. And then, I know it's very hard to see, but that's why I gave you your paper versions. On the right is the new boundaries. As you can see, ward two kind of extends a little bit more east and to the south. And then in this area, Ward 2 kind of takes over the block from, or no, sorry, Ward 3 comes down to Magnolia, from East Walnut down to Magnolia, and then also takes those two little blocks to the right of Elm Street. This is the newly annexed area for the canyons. It's going to be... divided between ward three and ward one. And then over to the west, we have this new area will be, this one was way too big to do a split screen. So you have ward two is your green, pink is your ward one. The biggest change is gonna be here off of John Thomas Drive So this section of John Thomas is going to go to Ward 2, but the rest of it is being proposed to stay Ward 1. And then all of this new annexation area is going into Ward 2. We will have to do this process again after the federal census in 2030, and we will have better demographics at that point from the census. But this, again, with the information that we have and with what the engineers have reviewed as residential areas, this was the most even split among the wards that we could get.

Okay.

Any questions? The least disruptive. And the least disruptive, yes. That's key.

I make a motion we approve ordinance number 2026-695, adjusting the municipal ward boundaries of the city of Keene, Texas, and adopting a revised ward map.

Second.

Okay. Okay, I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Okay, it's carried.

Well, you're kind of getting pushed out of ward one there.

I'm still there.

Barely, yeah.

Barely.

I saw that.

Don't expand your house. Okay, and then on C, review, discuss, and consider possible action to approve a contract with the Johnson County Elections Office to administer the November 3 general elections and runoff election if needed for the city of Keene. Ms. Russell?

It's me again. All right. So once again, we're just proposing contracting with the county again because there have been some significant changes in Johnson County. But I also provided for you, I was speaking with the county administrator today. She caught some errors in the contract she provided. They had submitted a contract based on four precincts, but we are now, as of this spring, under five precincts. So that did adjust the total estimated cost just a teeny tiny bit, and it also added a voting location, a voting day, because of that new precinct being added. Keene now has, we are required by state code to use the county's voting precincts. because we use the November election. So therefore, we have to use their locations, whether we conduct our own elections or we contract with them. So again, if we are going to be doing our own election or whether we contract, we will be having to staff judges, alternate judges, polling staff, voting equipment ballots, the various different ballots based on those precincts to all of those locations. And those numbers that she has provided would be, if we did it ourself, would pretty much be 100% on us. When we do this in November and we contract, it's shared among the other entities that also contract. And what we learned this last election is when we do a runoff, that's mostly all on us. And that is why the runoff election was way more expensive than the general election. So unfortunately, election costs are rising. More precincts as we grow are being we're being divided into more precincts and more elections workers are going to be needed the big issue there is we are competing with the county for those election workers if we don't contract with them and it's going to be difficult to get And we have to pay to train we have everything of those workers. So is it easier to contract? Yes, so But the decisions are if anyone else would like to question or comment

Do we, let's say we do try to do this on our own. We don't have any voting machines, so we would have to purchase all that stuff. So the very first election would be out of sight, cost-wise.

You have to either rent or purchase the equipment. Okay.

Yes. And you all have heard me say this before. I, like I said, prefer to have kind of an unbiased, entity handling this so that there's really no room for anybody within the city limits to say, you cheated, you know, you did this, you did that. Um, because I do know when I first got here, several people had made that comment to me. And so I, I would prefer not to put my staff at the center of that. Um, because again, the savings does not outweigh the benefit. Um, the bent, the savings is minimal. Um, and, and I asked Holly, She showed me the last couple years, and they've always beat their estimates pretty significantly. What was it, last year? Estimate versus the actual, for the? No, for the general.

So we paid $11,594 just for the general, but they had sent us a quote for like $27,000.

So, you know, between the additional cost and what we paid during the general, total is still less than this. So I like their style. Over budget, over deliver. Anyway, you know what I'm trying to say.

Under promise, over deliver.

There you go. Thank you. Thank you.

I have a question. Can we change the rules on the extra election if needed? Go back to how it was?

That would be another charter amendment to go back.

Doesn't that make sense?

But you have to take it to the voters.

Makes fiscal sense. Saves the voters money.

Then let's look at it.

Do you want to put that on as another agenda item sometime?

Do I have a second?

You don't need a second for an agenda item.

So when is the last time you did a charter amendment commission? It was in, the election was in 24. 2024. Okay. Well, you can amend your charter every two years, but you may have a charter provision about how often you're supposed to review it. 10 years. That answers that.

Okay. Are there any other questions?

Well, if it's 10 years for review, that's different than amend.

Correct.

I would think so. All right.

Yeah, it's two different issues, but by state law, you can only amend your charter every two years. How you want to do it pursuant to your charter, when you want to look at it, when you want to spend that money, your charter says that, but you just couldn't have an election two years back to back. That would violate state law.

I'm sorry, how often?

So you, on an amendment to your charter, it's state law that you may only amend every two years.

Every two years.

You have to wait. The way it's worded, usually you have to wait two years.

So we're okay there?

Yeah, you are.

Yes, sir. Mr. Gutwa?

Yes, thank you. Do I need to set the address and everything? Okay, Thomas Kutwa, 313 Beacon Street in Keene. And regarding the runoff, it's becoming a concern out there because people, they know the cost. I know we paid twice, almost two and a half times what the cost was, $11,000. And then the runoff was $25,000 because we were on our own. So every year we are having election in Keene, and there's a chance that every single election you're going to have a runoff. I know the previous city charter did allow for a provision to have a runoff in case of a tie, which is standard, which is very rare. So if we continue with, as Councilman Bob Chapman has said, if we continue on this path of having runoffs, Of course, every year we are looking at a very steep course because I know this year might be more than 25,000. We are looking at maybe 12,000, 15,000, plus a runoff of 35,000 or 32,000. It depends how it goes. And I've talked to some of these taxpayers for several years, one-on-one. I do visit them, and the issue that they have I know the city manager might say we might have conflict of interest or people might not trust the city secretary who is trained to run election. And I know as a council I was during my time. We hired secretary to be able to conduct the election to save. So we compensated more so that the taxpayers can be able to have the convenience It's different when you go to Cleveland and other areas. Those voters who tend to go to other areas will tell you they have a very, I don't want to say that bad customer service, but they are not happy with the way they are being handled. So we have also to factor that. So the runoff, yes, it's something that you have to look at because the cost is going to go up drastically. Otherwise, what it was supposed to solve, it doesn't make sense because every year you're having election. And the numbers up here can change based on the candidates that are on the ballot and based on how you vote on these ideas that are brought before you by the city staff. Thank you.

Thank you.

You know, when we did a charter review a couple years ago, and I'm gonna make sure we keep this to what it is, but when we did a charter review, we had people come up and voice their concerns, and the gentleman that actually offered up the suggestion for a majority vote which is what causes a runoff if there's more than two candidates and not one candidate reaches 50% plus one vote. And so that was essentially the catalyst of why we actually have to have a runoff is because we're trying to get a majority vote. And the reason for that was so that way the citizens felt that And I'm a perfect example of that. There was four people running against with me, so four total. I won by 30 votes, but I only got a quarter of the votes or just over a quarter. So I'm a perfect example of why that didn't look very good in the eyes of the citizens because I only got 28% of the vote, right? So that's why that was such a... big topic when we were, when the discussion was made, do we want a plurality vote or do we want a majority vote? And so that's why that unfortunately, which I don't care either way, but the way that it's set up now, I really feel like that gives the citizens the best chance to get the person that they want in there to be up here and sitting, you know, making decisions for them, so.

Well, and I'd like to just clarify, I don't know if you caught this, but what Holly said is we are contractually obligated. So even if we take it over, we cannot say, okay, voting is only going to happen at City Hall. We are obligated to staff five different locations. That means five different machines. That means, so we, I know we think we can just go back to the way it was, but laws have changed. And so to do that, it's not just simply all the voting happens at City Hall. And then on top of that, even if we go to one, let's just say we do away with this charter, then it for sure is still cheaper to contract with Johnson County because they can do it for less than what we could do it based on the cost analysis. And there's no more shared cost. It's just on us. So I just want y'all to keep that in mind, too, as we, I'm sure, continue this conversation in the future.

I have a question for our lawyer. I was just recently in Boise, Idaho, and I saw some, I was interested in the body that they have there in the city of Boise, and they actually just changed their charter to make their council people there longer. So then that way it's, I don't know why they did it, but I'm assuming it's one to save money for vote, you know, for voting, but two, they can sit in the seat for an established amount of time and actually get some work done here. Right. And so what, what's the, other than a charter, is there anything in our law, in our, in Texas law that restricts us from changing that from two-year terms to three or four-year terms.

You can change it to a three-year term, but the methodology is by amending your charter. So there's a statutory scheme to amend your charter where you have to appoint a commission, and it costs money to do that, and then you have to have an election, and it costs money to do that. Unfortunately, it costs money almost to do anything you want to do. I'm really the harbinger of doom today, aren't I? But you can change it to three years.

Okay, and I was just asking because I really feel like two years is like just not a lot of time to be able to try to accomplish the goals that you set out to do for each of us, right? I feel like we get here in the first year is kind of like one of those, I don't know what to do, you know, like, hey, here we go, you know, until you kind of get established and then all of a sudden you hit the ground running year two and it's like, it's over, I got to redo this, so.

But let me remind you that the creation of a charter and a charter amendment is not done by city council.

Correct.

It's done by the Charter Commission. So even though you may, you as city council members may think a certain thing should change your commission and the people in your city may not agree. So just, I mean, I had one charter that was amended. We had 87 amendments. And believe it or not, they all passed. But there was nothing like changing terms or anything like that. But it's kind of a gamble when you come to charter amendments. Either they're really popular or They die on the vine.

I know the city of Burleson does. They have six council members, and they do three-year terms, two, two, and two. So there are different structures out there for sure.

But they're still having an election every year. They're still having an election every year. I think one of Troy's methodologies was to skip elections. But you're going to have an election every year, so you're not saving any money there.

You have to stagger. Yeah.

They just do the three-year term to address kind of like what you said. So you have four people that are there, you know, at least a couple years working together. So, yeah.

I'd like to make a motion to approve the contract with Johnson County Elections Office to administer the November 3rd general election and runoff election, if needed, for the city of Keene. Second.

Bob? I have a motion. Council approve the contract with Johnson County Elections Office to administer the November 3rd general election and runoff election, if needed, for the city of Keene. Motion made by?

Rob.

Troy. By Troy. And second by?

No, I made the motion.

OK, you made the motion. And that's why I thought. And then Troy was second. OK. All those in favor? Thank you. Abstained? Now we have informal reports only on receiving information to discuss revenue sources, demographics, metrics regarding the physical year 2026-2027. FYI 27, proposed budget including general fund and utility revenue.

Yes, Council. So as promised, I'd give you an update. We're getting closer. Scott Porter has been on the phone with us at 8 o'clock this morning. Again, still kind of muddling through this report. I do believe that we will be able to do the budget workshop for the revenue side next Thursday. I will send you all an email, and if we're going to be able to put it on the agenda or not. We are getting close, and did you want to speak to that a little bit about the legalese? Remember, we were reading. The big thing is, sorry. This morning was really early. It's just I want to make sure that the citizens know that everything is still above board. We're still doing what we're legally allowed to do.

We re-evaluated our budget calendar and I was not prepared to talk. So the tax code, and Judy, please correct me if I'm misunderstanding this, but it did say that the certified praise value had to be reported and given to council by August 7th or as soon as reasonably practicable was pretty much the exact wording. So there is, they understand that there may sometimes be glitches and issues, so.

So, thank you. Sorry to blindside you. So anyway, so we, Holly shared that with me this morning. So our goal is still to try to present it on Thursday. But again, I just don't want to present numbers that are not factual. It's just, it doesn't do us any good as far as, you know, wasting our time, so. But we are getting close.

So does that mean your county is telling you you might not get them on August 7th? You'll get them after?

Well, we got the certified estimate. We got an email from CAD, but it said estimate. And so there was still about 6% of properties that were still not verified.

So in other words, they're not certified for the people out there that don't understand.

Correct.

Okay, so. But my concern is, because you're right, the statute is written that way, it means that you might not get them until the 10th. I'm just warning you. Squeaky wheel gets grease.

Well, we're trying to make sure on our end we have everything lined up, ready to go, so it's just a matter of plugging numbers in. But, you know, like I shared with you earlier, we've been seeing fluctuations in all the estimates and, you know, $100,000 swing, that's a Do we approve a CIP or not?

And when do we have to have our budget filed? Actual date?

Well, budgets have to be approved by the end of September. I thought so. We are looking at the 17th.

I will let you all know officially if we stick it on the agenda. FOR THURSDAY TOMORROW.

AND DOES THE BOOK, THE ACTUAL BOOK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, DOES THAT HAVE TO BE DONE BY AN ACTUAL SPECIFIC DATE AS WELL?

THE PROPOSED BUDGET HAS TO BE FILED IN MY OFFICE 30 DAYS BEFORE THE ADOPTION DATE. SO IF WE'RE GOING BY SEPTEMBER 17TH, AUGUST 17TH IS WHEN FINANCE NEEDS TO TURN IT OVER OR FILE IT IN MY OFFICE.

Oh, we have until the end of September if worse comes to worse. So our goal is the 17th. Correct.

Yes, sir. I don't like to do things last minute. So we're doing our best to give as much time as possible.

Okay. Any other questions? Yes, sir, Mr. Goh.

Yes, good evening again, council. So my concern might be with the massive protest that's going on with property tax, which is part of the problem that you're having right now. You know, we have a street fund rehabilitation policy that allows, once a council approves the budget, it allows, regardless of the audit, because it's not illegal. According to the state law, the attorney might look at it in different ways. But I feel like we are ignoring and just kicking the stuff down the road. And I know there are so many expenses that are coming up. Everything is going up. And that money is stuck in paper, $100,000. We said we were supposed to, I voted for it, to be able to be moved. Now come this budget season, you're going to approve something regardless of how no tax revenue comes. You're not going to increase the tax rate because of the audit issues and the state. So if we keep piling it and say once the audit is done, then we'll move that 100,000 and then maybe this year again, we might have an audit going on regardless if we don't have reconciliation going on and then we'll have another maybe $100,000, now you have $200,000, and from my experience, we have always traded on a very thin ice, $200,000, $250,000. So where is that money going to come from to transfer now, maybe two years from now, to transfer to that account, even though it's in paper that we have $100,000, if it's not in that account? It doesn't make sense very well. Excuse me, Mr. Gutmann.

Are you asking about, I'm sorry, I'm losing you here. Are you asking about streets and stuff right now, money for streets?

What I'm saying as you consider the budget, I know you are going to approve this budget in a few weeks from now, maybe in a month.

But you're talking about an accounting issue and not a budget issue. This is not the forum for the accounting issue.

I'm just saying it's something you need to consider because it feels like we are not doing what the policy is saying. That's what I'm saying. Transfer the funds once the council approves.

But you're saying that we're just going to be transferring money from this fund to the streets fund?

Yes.

That's an accounting issue, not a budget issue.

It's in the budget. You approve it to transfer based on the policy. So it's an issue. You are not doing what you're saying you're supposed to do. And that's what I'm saying. The excuse was we are under audit. I'd like to address your concern.

It's actually, we write it into the budget, but it's only if there's a surplus does it go in to that account. We're looking at it right here. So we're hoping that the audits will yield that there was a surplus so that we can take that money and put it in the budget. So, and I can assure you, as far as streets, we are trying to deal with that, but using outside funds, which I'll be sharing with them, come budget discussions. This isn't really the platform to be discussing this right now, but there are roads that are going to be being done in our city that is from grant and federal and EDC type A funds. So we're actually gonna be doing quite a few road work that does not cost the taxpayer dollars. So, yeah.

We really appreciate your concern and everything, but these things will be addressed later, and hopefully you can come to those meetings. Does that work for you?

It works for me, but you need to consider that because it's a concern. You approve something, but you're not moving it, which means...

But we are working on it, Mr. Gutwa.

Yes, I understand, I understand. But I'm just saying consider it because it doesn't look very good. We are tracking it, and hopefully you can be able to do what the policy says.

Thank you. Again, if there's a surplus policy, we will put it in the street fund. I can assure you that.

And if I'm... If I'm right, I think two weeks ago when we were doing the expense, there was actually a line item for the $100,000 street fund.

Yeah, we always put it in the budget. Policy states that as long as there's a surplus, like we're not going to go into a hole putting cash into a fund if we weren't able to stay within budget.

And I do remember, in fact, you were probably still here back in December. I believe we talked about that. And the only reason it hadn't got transferred was because of the audits that we were behind on and that were continuing, which stopped us from being able to say, well, we don't know if that $100,000 is valid because of the, we don't know if we have a surplus or not. So I don't know if you remember that, but that was way back, you guys remember that? Yeah, so there was discussion about that back in December, if I'm not mistaken.

I think he's,

Aren't you the one that made the motion to do that street fund? It seems to me like you were the one that started that.

So we'll be taking consideration for it. And is there any other questions or anything? Are there any future agenda items that we need to do? And Bob, what was yours? Did you want it to be a future agenda item? I'm sorry, what? Did you want your comment, the other to be another agenda item, a future?

Yes.

Okay. Okay. Okay, any other future agenda items? Okay. The meeting is adjourned at 6.45 PM.