City Council - Regular Meeting

We appreciate everybody being here, full house. While I've got your attention, would you please make sure your phones are on silent, so we do not get interrupted during this meeting. We appreciate it. With that, I'll hand it over. We have a forum, and I'd like to ask Mr. Shandell to give the occasion for the prize.

Thank you, Father, for another opportunity to serve the citizens of Montgomery. Thank you, Father, that Free speech is still alive in Montgomery and in this state and in this country. Thank you, Lord, that you're watching over our soldiers, Father, and they do their due diligence in the areas they're assigned to. Thank you, Lord, for keeping them safe. And guard them in all their ways. And we ask all of this 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. On the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to thee, the Texas flag. All right, I received seven requests for comments.

All right, the first one is, you can barely make sure I was first, so I will go first. I'm before you tonight not to make excuses but to tell you the truth because you deserve nothing less. There have been confusion and I understand frustration among many of you regarding the street that's planned south within that part of Davis Museum. I want to be clear and on the record that in front of every single one of you and this community, the planning of that street was a staff-level decision in 2022. Assistant Administrator David Corcoran was setting that up along with the EDC. It was not directed, approved, or initiated by the mayor, or this council, or even Mr. Walker, our city administrator. There was a plan developed and advanced by staff at the time, and I want every resident of Montgomery to know that distinction. The current administration's moving forward on downtown improvements and found the plans left by the previous administration. Now, I must speak carefully with great reverence here, and it's not simply a matter of traffic or infrastructure, our community knows through both written record and oral history passed down for generations that this site holds a deep and solemn significance. We plan to honor that. The lilies matter, the children resting here matter, the story matters, and this city's response to that story matters. I hear you, we hear you. With that, I did some research, and on August 15th, 2022, the EDC meeting, I have it here, and I've got the whole entire agenda if you would like, but it's discussed that the EDC paid more archeological consulting to go look at that site prior to making the plans, Rebecca Huss said Ms. Adams sent her a note stating she felt the tree was actually in the middle of FM 149, not the tree on that property, as opposed to the property, and they were purchasing based on the family documents. Carol Lindley asked if this report would take care of UBC and the city doing their job to make sure there were no graves. Rebecca Huss said, yes, she believes so. Rebecca Huss said Virginia Adams also sent her a memorized document stating that the baby he removed from her cemetery flat at her expense in the unlikely event that any 168-year-old remains were found. Anyway, it goes on to state that the EDC had done quite a bit of due diligence in that story. Because of Mr. Walker coming into the city, picking up where others are left behind, he was running with this. There's not anything behind anybody's back, case of anything nefarious. It truly was, okay, we've got the calendar, we've got improvements to do, let's get it done. So thank you for actually doing action moving forward. But with that, the street has been scrapped. That's not going to happen. The rules will be preserved, but maybe it's something along and around it. Thank you. Secondly, number two would be Sarah Mabry, and she sent me a... by a great, okay, it's written from a mother's graveyard, by a great-great-granddaughter and namesake, Sarah Elizabeth White Davis. We once, we... were when our mother wore and buried us in her adopted land of the new state of Texas in the small village of Montgomery. We have rested for decades near the home of our parents and siblings who lived to find their feet in Montgomery, Texas, to marry and bear children of their own in this beautiful and tranquil part of the world. No bitterness we bear, for we know our life on this earth is brief, but not without cause or reason. God does not say all, but when he does, it is for a reason. We bear no malice for the living and only ask that the living think of us as what we might have been, what our souls might be today. our souls might, I'm sorry, what our souls have meant to ages past and present and to what purpose we can serve the future. May we stay a little longer to serve and to give now to the city of Montgomery what we did not to survive to do decades ago. We want those in need of prayer, consolation, and comfort to come and sit awhile, meditate, and find hope from the grief that befalls the human race. We are here to listen to your voices and wipe away tears, heal the hurt, and give solace to all. Our mother, if she could speak, would welcome you to her small and simple cottage where life of the Davis family went on. It always did, as life does. The labyrinth takes many twists and turns, so let us lie. in peace to offer respite, a place of beauty, voices through the heuristic world of hierarchies to give encouragement, lend ears, and hear the voices of the living. We ones, as we are, will not wail the woes of illness and death, but we will speak truth. There is always hope. Sarah Amey. God works through modern man. I trust and trust Mayor Sarah Benjamin to follow this way as well as counsel. Most respectfully, Sarah Amey. All right, now number two. Number three. When I'm calling your name, can you please come to the podium, just as a reminder. We won't go back and forth, it's just we want to hear your comments. We have three minutes. This is for Bob Keel at 165 Field 8. Are you ready, James? Come on, keep going.

I appreciate your time. Just a few moments. I've been advised last week, about three days ago, that the city had plans for a lot next to the Davis Cottage. That was three days ago. I've also been advised that since then, those plans have changed. but it's like I've not seen any more of it. Their plans were to make a parking lot out of that lot, or use a majority of it for parking. I have concern with that project because it would amount to a lot of paving. And there is, Some people buried in that area, that are history. They're a part of Montgomery, a very part of Montgomery. I don't want anything to happen to their graves. Three-year-old child, child that was born, stillborn. The oldest child was a boy. His name, he was named after his father, Matt Horace Davis. I'm sure most of you heard that name. And he was three years old when he died. The other child didn't live to have a name. So it's an unnamed baby girl. I've since learned that Well, as of today, a portion of our land has been set aside. If this is so, can someone confirm it to me?

Where the lilies are, we'll leave it on the stairs, because that's what we're talking about.

I'm talking about what area of the livers. I don't care. I'm for hell about the livers. I'm concerned what's buried beside them. So what are you talking about? That'd be disturbing.

Yeah, we'll not disturb that. We're actually going to improve the area on the surface and put a line up to what you're describing here.

Mr. Walker, I don't want to sound pessimistic, but can you give that to me in writing?

I can get the EDC. It's an EDC project, and they need to approve all projects. But, you know, we can show you what that project's going to look like.

Because the things in the past have been separately done and different. That's all the information I gave you. Something has been playing for us. If not, I'd like to personally do something, but we'll see what happens. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next up, Diane Lane.

I'm not going to read everything that I had written, but I am going to say this before I ever start. I appreciate so much you coming to this meeting. I don't appreciate the way you seem to blow him off with what he was saying. It's wrong. This means a lot to us, to this family that's been here longer than we have. My husband's family has been here longer since the 1860s or 70s. These babies mean a lot to us. I'm not even going to read what I have written. Our hope is that you take us serious enough, which I do think some people are doing that, We would like to save the area, and it is a known fact, it has been a known fact all of my life. We had Miss Bessie as a teacher, and she instilled in us the love of the Montgomery history. And that lady made me love our history. And I don't think I'm gonna have to, but I wasn't going down without a fight on preserving the area for these families. They are precious little souls that all we need to do is put a nice fence around that area and preserve that. And I think everybody will be happy. What I would love to see is for the Montgomery Historical Society and the city council people have a better working relationship where we communicate better and get on the same page with these types of things. We want... To keep our little town, I know it's got to grow. That's not my point at all. But the history, we want it to stay preserved. These babies deserve it. The Davis family deserves it. And I'm not going to lie, I'm sure somebody drove by and saw my husband and I and some friends out there with our dowsing rods to see if it worked. And Ms. Fox and B. Rouse happened to be on the Davis Cottage steps talking. They walked over, they saw what we saw. Buddy walked up and down and up and down through that yard that was their front yard back in the day. And all of a sudden, The rods crossed and it happened numerous times. He kept going back over and the way that worked, whether you believe it or not, and we went to the new cemetery, we used these rods for a long period of time just to make sure And it says they operate by using the scientific principles of electromagnetism, generating an electric field when bones or bone fragments are located under the pressure of dirt. And you're not going to convince me otherwise. After what we've gone through and what we've had a lot of people see us do, And I would just like to say my wish, my hope, my prayer is that we can all come together, fence the area for the babies, and be happy with what we do. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you so much.

So I just wanted to say thank you. I wanted to thank you for listening and hearing what our, I don't want to say complaints, but our wishes are, and you did listen, and that meant a lot to us, okay, as a member of the Historical Society and wanting to work with all of you to preserve the small-town feel, but also I like a lot of the changes you're making. It's not that I'm against anything being done. It's that the history part needs to be preserved. And you did listen, and I sincerely appreciate it.

And thank you, Bob, for coming today. That's what makes the difference.

Thank you for that. Kristen Beard. And Julie Jensen.

All right. I'm here today on behalf of the History Task Force. I don't know how many of you have ever heard of us, but we do a lot of research and we have seven members with different skill sets. We're doing a lot of research in this area, in Montgomery County, and actually we're doing some things for work in Walkerville. So I just wanted to say, you know, based on a lot of research and all the things that we've discovered over the years, you know, the pioneer times were just, it was so harsh. It was so difficult to settle in the wilderness. and establish your home, your food source. Everything was so difficult. But these people persevered. And they had a lack of medical care. We had a Dr. Henry Waters. He performed surgery at Addison Gandy House. I don't know if any of y'all know the story I'm talking about, the Montgomery Miracle. And John Boe, James Addison, survived. They served in the military. So there's a lot of stories that we have here in this community that have such historical significance to so many people. And we have their descendants living here. You know, I was fortunate enough, when my husband and I retired and moved out here, that we, when I started getting into the history, I discovered that we lived on Jacob Shannon's survey. which I just found out about the Texas 300, the original 300, in which Jacob Shannon was one of them. So our survey still says Jacob Shannon. And we have had a LIDAR study done of our property, and there's something there. I personally haven't gone out and looked because it's in a 10-foot gully, and I don't need to bring those up anymore. So, anyway, I just want to say thank you for preserving this very important part of our past that showed the struggle and the losses that these people endured, and they stayed, and they made it what they were. I love it here, and... Again, I'm speaking on behalf of the District Task Force. I do have parts that I would like to pass out, but then we have a wonderful website and so many resources. We did digitize Bessie Owen's, Bessie Owen, her, all her papers, and it's all available free to look at. So we have, and plus we have 40,000 digitized documents from whichever county. The William Hartigan papers, we have so much. resources for people to look at and learn about what went on in the original documents, handwritten, you can read some of them, photos, all that stuff. And I would like to be considered as a resource or a contact for anything you want to do. I would like to be helpful to my community that I love so much. Thank you.

All right, last up is Denison.

This is a completely new subject.

I came here six weeks ago, as you're shaping your gift, about the ditches in Delta. You all can see about getting them mowed, getting us helped. Donna's not able to mow. Six weeks, we haven't heard a word. What's going on?

I think I was still with him. I didn't hear the whole thing.

Oh, I was here six weeks ago and brought to the attention. The ugly ditches they dug on Anna Springs. They ruined our front yard, okay? Y'all said y'all were going to see about getting them mowed for us or getting us some help. I haven't heard a word.

My question is, do I hire someone to mow them and bring y'all the bill?

No, don't do that. I'll work with Mike and we'll take a look at it. We were working on the engineering part of it. We haven't even looked at the mulling part of this yet because we wanted to look at what the options were with the sidewalks and all the other things that we're looking at. So, that's what we're doing.

I mean, our grass is getting tall, and his health, he can't get down. Okay.

Sure.

Do it.

Sure.

So, maybe we're going to have to pay someone to do it. So, I thought maybe if y'all want the bill, I'm ready to do it.

We can take a look at it. I might call Royce and know that. We'll take a look and see what we can do.

Okay, and you'll let us know?

Yes.

Okay, I'm at 114. All right.

Okay, thanks. Thank you. Okay, next up on your agenda, presentation number five.

Presentation from Purdue Brand and Builder College and LLT on a paper collection.

Good evening. I'm Leslie Scotti with Purdue Brandenburg College of Water. The city's Fillingwood Tax Attorney. I'm here to give you an update on Fillingwood tax collections as well as fines and fees owed to the city. So as we go through the report, note that these are Fillingwood taxes only. Your residents do a fabulous job of paying for taxes. So I'm not saying your residents aren't paying. The county tax office is collecting Over 95% of the tax levy every year, we're getting less than 5% of the role in delinquents every year turned over to us for collection. And when you contract with a delinquent tax collection firm, we get paid what what's called a collection penalty. So after the taxes become delinquent on February 1 and remain delinquent on July 1, the taxpayer will receive what's called a 3307 notice that provides due process and procedure to the taxpayer to put them on notice that the taxes are still delinquent on July 1, the collection penalty will attach, it becomes part of the tax claim, and it is from collection of those taxes that We receive reimbursement for our collection activities, so that fee is passed on to the taxpayer once and only if that 3307 notices sit to the taxpayer, but then we'll investigate them later. So, first chart we have is the account breakdown chart, and this gives me a snapshot of all the delinquent taxes on the roll, all tax years, and where they are and how they are collectible. So, you'll see the largest percentage is the action pension section at 49%. So, these are accounts where we are trying to contact the taxpayer sitting... collection letters, doing title work research, if they have a lien holder, if there's a mortgage lien, or an individual that holds a lien on the property, we contact that lien holder, give them an opportunity to pay the taxes, because if we get filed a delinquent tax suit, they are also a party to the suit, and we will close their lien on the property if we get to the courthouse steps. So we're actively trying to reach out, make somebody aware, give them an opportunity to set up a payment agreement, pay the taxes. If the taxpayer has passed, we try to locate their heirs, identify them, notify them. Lots of activities going on in this section. And also notice going through the roll that there are some late delinquencies that have been added to the roll. And I'll talk about this later when I get to the historicalcollection.org. So next section is the suit litigation section at 20%. So when we're unable to get the taxpayer payment agreement, the default, we can't find any of the errors or the taxpayer fails to pay or set up the payment agreement. Sometimes it's necessary for us to file a delinquent suit. That's very effective in getting their attention and usually those end in a satisfied payment agreement. We very rarely get to the courthouse steps to sell the property but this is everything in that process from signatures filed to ready for the next tax sale. Next largest section is the deferral section at 18%. So these are taxpayers who are 65 or older or have a disability who have elected to defer the payment of their delinquent taxes and this is only available on their resident's homestead. By law, they can only have one resident's homestead at a time. So they have to first get the homestead exemption, get the over 65 or disability exemption, and then they'll file an affidavit for the deferment. Once that deferment is on the account, they file this in the county prison district, then we may no longer collect on the account. The taxpayer may collect to pay big payments. at any time during that deferment, and then the taxes are paid after the deferment expires as well. Next chart we have is the dollar rate chart. The purpose of this is just to help me to direct my staff and see where the dollars are owed. For example, 29% of the delinquent roll was in the $1,000, and this is delinquent base tax, just the base tax I'm showing you. So 29% of the largest section is in the $1,000 to the $2,500 range. Many of the accounts with the larger delinquencies are in that tax-affirmative category or in pending litigation. So note also when I refer to an account or a taxpayer, our proprietary software takes data from the county tax office and it merges together accounts with common ownership. So when I'm making my collection calls, if Bob Smith, I apologize if anybody here shares that name, because... drawing it out of the air, owns 10 different accounts. My software will put all of Mr. Smith's accounts together. So I'm not calling Mr. Smith 10 times. So I'm calling, we're being effective and efficient with our collection efforts. So this is just basically a collection tool to help us direct our staff. Third chart we have is the tax year chart. Do a great job. And this shows what percentage of delinquent tax is due for each year. So you'll see that the largest percentage, that 39% of the 2024 tax year. And then after that, the percentages fall. The 2023 tax years, I'm seeing lots of non-standard delinquency dates, which means that the appraisal district has back assessed property, whether it be committed improvements, improvements that they did not catch. when they were first put on the ground and they're back assessing them or property that value that they've added to the role. So when we get the historical data, I will go into that further. So the segments get smaller and smaller. Those older tax years are going to be predominantly your tax deferments. And now we are to the historical collection data charts. I have tax years 2020. You'll see we're almost 95% collected of what was originally turned over to us to collect. And the tax deferments are also represented in this chart. And if you'll skip to the 2023, I wanted to point out how I know that the appraisal district has added additional value. So you'll see at the very top, what was originally turned over to us was $33,831. The taxes attributable to the additional taxable value that were added between July 1, 2024, when this was originally turned over to this net $33,000 range, was $11,020 was added to the roll in between those time periods. And when additional value is added to the roll, those taxpayers are afforded more time to pay that before it becomes delinquent. So those accounts have nonstandard delinquency dates, and the tax code guides us on that. how long the taxpayer has to pay without penalties or interest or that collection penalty. So that's throwing this chart off. But I'm just looking for this one tax year, but I wanted to point that out too. So next up we have the 2024 chart. You'll see we're at almost 65% collected, which is great. What was turned over to us last July, so we're over halfway through making our way to 70%. Are there any questions about taxes before I switch to fines and fees? Of course, you can go to our website. It's on the front part of the report, pdfcm.com, if you're interested in keeping up with tax sales that we have throughout the year. On our homepage at the very bottom, you can sign up for an email notification. If that's something that interests you, you'll get an email blast every Friday morning at 6 a.m. So, moving on to fines and fees. The last chart we have, finance fee collections are also no charge to the city. There's a 30% statutory fee that's added. When those accounts are turned over to us, that fee is also passed to the violator. So you'll see up at the top the number of accounts and dollars that have been turned over. And I like to refer to the bottom chart. You'll see 31% of what's been turned over to us has been resolved in payment. And 46% has been resolved by the court. And our main goal... In reaching out to these folks and locating them, finding a good address, getting their attention is to drive them to the court to resolve the issue. So it looks like that's working. About 77% of the accounts have been resolved in either payment or dismissal by the court or time served or whatever reason it was closed by the court. So about 23% of what was turned over to us. and outstanding. You can also see addresses, number of addresses we've corrected, the letters we've mailed, phone number changes, contacts, and text contacts. Any questions? Well, thank you so much for allowing me. My pleasure. Y'all have a great evening. Thank you.

Consent agenda, item number six. Consideration of possible action on city council meetings in May 12th, 2026. Number seven, consideration of possible action on an agreement between the city of Montgomery and Tullochson Builders, L.O.P. with construction management for the municipal complex project to authorize the city administrator to execute the agreements. Councilor, would you take this meeting with me or is there a question? Mr. Olsen, we have approved the consent agenda and is set in writing spots. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, say nay. The ayes have the motion here to accept the consent agenda as presented. Regular agenda, item number eight, discussion on a large flagpole in the front row parking lot.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. I threw this agenda on there at the last minute before the deadline with an internal staff discussion. That's why there was no real information on it. But I did reach out. Some of you have heard, I think, they contacted you about the flagpole. It looks like from what we're finding, we're not responsible for it. But I just wanted an open discussion to find out if there's a desire to maybe ask for ownership or a maintenance agreement to take over the flagpole. So I did make some calls, contacted Cromberger, flagpole, big doubt that I'd use them. They came and took a look and they're estimating about five grand to get it back operational if the winch is not burned up. So they... They're not going to take an in-depth dive, but they know there's some electrical problems. They know the cable needs to be replaced. So about 5,000. If the winch has to be replaced, then we're looking at maybe over 10,000. Flags for that pole for a high-quality 30 by 60 are $3,200 apiece. They're estimating about every 12 months to replace it. So I just wanted to bring out some rough numbers. Throw the idea out there and see what, you know, I'm not asking for you to do it or not do it. It's something to be discussed.

When did the bank notify you that they don't want to take care of you?

They didn't notify me. I think they had reached out to me.

That flagpole, they had to get it improved, or they partnered with Herber when the bank went in. And the flagpole, I thought, was in the development agreement, but it wasn't in the development agreement.

It was a joint agreement between the development group and the bank at the time.

Yes.

And then when the bank switched, they kind of created a new agreement. But in there, I could never find anything that says, the city is going to take care of this. You know, it just didn't happen. It just didn't happen.

Because it was the base responsibility. That's who always had contact with them, whether it's a tavern or whatever. And they would buy three or four at a time and then put them up. And then I get the call that the motor's burned up and he apparently put new cables on that didn't really make sense. And now he's like, if he doesn't want to pay for the new motor... So he's wanting to know who's responsible for everything. He's wanting to be responsible for this black hole.

The only thing I could see about maintenance agreements or anything was an early agreement doesn't even stand anymore because it was agreed when the new bank bought it, there was a whole new agreement in with that.

And that's not an agreement.

And it only talks about. So time out.

Our agreement was with the original bank, which is the original, right? That doesn't matter who bought it after that. That's how they.

No, they renegotiated between themselves, not with us. Exactly. So that's. It's a new agreement between the new bank and the developer.

That's what I mean.

There's nothing that I could find that says the city's responsible for any of this.

So whenever Simmons first bought it from Spirit of Texas, the rumor was circulating that they didn't want to invest in the flag anymore. I can't remember who the city administrator was. I believe it was Richard. But I had an internal discussion with Richard, got permission to him to reach out to Simmons to make an offer to at least maintain the raise lower, and they weren't interested. So even though they said they weren't in the flag business like Spirit of Texas Bank was, they weren't interested in us operating or doing anything to the flagpole for them.

So why wouldn't that develop, the original development area, why would not get it forward?

You don't get to sell your property and get out of the dumpster, and that's not awesome. So, in Chris and Emma's book, way back when they first started this, there was a whole different design. The monument in the front was different, the whole thing was different. And in that writing, it said that the city would take care of the flags. But it was talking about the flags that were with the monument. They didn't even, the big pole did not exist in that time. So as I tried to follow it, I never did find anything. I saw, I found the purchase agreement. I found all the stuff that they bought that big old pole. but never do I see anything about maintenance or anything in the city.

We didn't have it. It was solely on Spirit of Texas. And when Simmons Bank bought it, they removed the plaque about the story of the Buffalo Soldier that we had to make. We found it. Oh, okay. Okay. I had been told. I was like, I didn't see it on there. Okay. So, okay, good. So with that, though, with buying the bank and the responsibility... of that transfer.

And it's really on the property of Kroger now.

Yes, but it's always in the property.

Yes. But originally Wade's group, I think was the original developer that made the first agreement. So it wasn't always Kroger, but just considered a Kroger property at some point. So, I mean, there would be some sort of, if you ever wanted to, you know, if nobody wants to take care of it and the city decides to, you know, maybe some sort of easement where that is accessible only by us.

So what we're hearing you say is Simmons does not want to take ownership, responsibility, financial responsibility, anything from that point.

Well, so I'm saying that what I originally talked to them when they first bought it, they weren't interested, but then they said they weren't interested in us operating it either. They've been handling it since then until recently.

So now it's a bigger ticket. Exactly.

So I just wanted to get the discussion going about it and just make the recommendation that if y'all are thinking about possibly taking it over, that we do it in a way where we actually take it over. Because I don't want to be responsible for something that someone else is operating, but we foot the bill or something burns up. I don't want to see us to get into that scenario. If we don't, are they going to opt out and not take it at all?

Or do they require keeping part of the policy?

It's not clear in there. The monument and stuff is very clear with what they did there. That flagpole, not very clear.

That flagpole, when this was originally discussed, that was the gateway to the city. It was one of three of the largest in the state. And I remember distinctly, yes, and that came after they even built this. Anyway, the whole point being is like, We helped them get over, this was the plan, and I don't care if it's Chase Bank, I don't care if it's Simmons Bank. They should, they fired the bank, they fired responsibility. How would we have responsibility if we don't have a property in the name of the bank?

We don't right now, that's kind of my point.

Unless the property was given to the city, I don't understand how we'd actually be, why are they interested in giving us the property?

The discussion was with y'all first to find out if it was something y'all were thinking about, which way you wanted to go. What I will say is that it is a... It is a staple. It has become a staple, you know, coming in and seeing. So I'm not opposed to the idea of us taking it. I just, if we do it, we need to do it all the way and get actual ownership of it or something where we're the only ones operating it, the only ones touching it.

I think we would actually honor it. I think we would actually honor it because I don't know, I can't tell you how many times I've been called how tattered that flag is. As a matter of fact, I think they got one on Timu because the star was upside down. I mean, don't get away with it. That tells us we don't care, right? And it's been, when they first came here, Simmons, basically said, you know, we don't care about the flag, but we do. And so, he said he worked a couple of them, but it's been a pain in the rear since day one. Matthew, you ministered to the Earth President. Thanks for your time. Well, you can change the flag from the front to this. We're all Texas flags, so now there's America. But we're not proposed to, but it defeats the purpose of what? The development agreement states.

Well, there's no action on them. We're just running for discussion. Now we can talk about it.

So you said the motor's 5,000 and then the flag is 3,200?

Each flag is for a very high-quality polyester flag.

Not with the star upside down?

Yeah, not with the star upside down. $3,200 each and they're estimating $5,000. That's if they have to bring a crane out because that is the height of a pole that can require a crane. They said they do have some guide they said they can bring in that will climb. Sometimes he climbs poles.

Yes. Yeah, it's got an electric motor inside of it. It requires a generator. Plug it up to a generator, which we have. We have four little generators. And it mainly goes up and down.

We probably have to put four guys on it to... do it the right way and respectfully and not let it touch the ground. But it's something that we can handle. I don't see that being a problem.

Frankly, I think it's money well spent because it makes a statement.

Well, that's why I wanted to bring it up. I hate to see just a pair of flagpoles. I'm not promoting the idea, but the police keeps on taking facts.

I hate to make this flagpole statement.

whenever someone gives them the authorization to actually come and tear into it. So they came and looked at it and gave us an estimate of what they think, but they have to plug up to it and check it out, and they'll know at that point. They said it's highly unlikely that it's actually the motor burnout, but if it is, then it could go to 10,000. So I'm trying to give you worst-case scenarios here.

And the motor's burned up, is it because of the operator? So therefore, maybe there should be a price split or cost share?

Could it be because of the operator? I guess it's possible, but I mean, it's up, down. But it's, I mean, it's push the button to go up and push the button to go down. It's hard. Let's see if anybody wants to know cost share.

Because what's the cost of that?

Cost share and then maintain it?

I guess more the cost share of, yeah, if they want to pay for half the motor, that'd be great. But if not, cost share in the flat, fine, we maintain it. We'll do everything because we know we'll do a good job. But it's on the part of the U.S.S.A. So if they pay for half the flat, we pay for half the job.

Yeah, I agree.

Yeah, I agree with him.

The city didn't take it over.

I don't know that we just want to give money without knowing the responsibility of who's doing what. So, yeah, it could be negotiated. Yeah.

I mean, my thoughts on it are, this is the first big ticket item that we've heard of that's happened to the flagpole since. So are we looking at really, are we looking at $3,200 a year for a new flag to go up? I mean, is that-

Yeah, honestly, if it gets to a fight, I would rather they just either give us some either demon land to us and we'll take the thing over or some kind of an easement and we'll take it over.

Yeah, I agree. That's something we can deal with the engineers on. We can deal with what we can do, but if y'all sound like y'all are okay with that concept, we can start checking into that and see what we can do. I want to know if the motor is out of time. Because that's a $10,000 key there, you see. Yeah. They're telling me worst case.

Well, I know it's somehow. I mean, I used to steal it before.

Sold on me. Taking it over. We definitely don't have a flagpole specific light item, but we do have a parks maintenance light item. They didn't come out up until we were going to create a new one for next year. But we do have a general part. All of our other flags come out of the parks maintenance because they're all typical parks. I think you might have to come kind of this in case. We always have one back. more on standby so the guys can change it.

Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. Number nine, discussion on the crossing at Montgomery, development number 2403, the project. Can I go ahead and hand these out? Yes. Okay.

Good evening, Marion Council. So tonight, for discussion only, is an update on the crossing at Montgomery development. The developer is handing out kind of an updates packet as far as where the development stands. Just to paint a picture of the overall development, so back in 2024, we completed a feasibility study that looked at 235-lb, 86-acre development just north of the railroad tracks against Bradford Meadows down on this briarway. We prepared a feasibility study, presented it to the council, presented it to P&Z, and then the board with the development agreement. The development agreement outlined all the requirements for the development that needs to be done. So with that included connection to public water on either side of the development, Old Dobbin and Old Plantersville, and then the construction of a new lift station within the development, and then off-site improvements for the horse lane and gravity along 105. The development agreement outlined all of that. And upon preparation for WJ to complete the off-site facilities, as is typical for development agreements within the city, the city engineer will complete the facilities. The developer expressed concern about the cost associated with those facilities. And so the development went on pause for a year, year and a half or so. And then more recently, the developer came back asking that we amend the development agreement to include that the developer's engineer complete the lift station and then the WJ complete the off-site facilities. Forest Main and Sanitary Sewer Extension for the development. This is not an unusual request. Riley has done the same. They constructed their own on-site lift station and WJ has completed off-site Sanitary Sewer Extensions to serve those lift stations. So in front of y'all again is the Executed Development Agreement, which was executed back in October of 2024. And again, in front of y'all with the packet as well is the Updates for Development. I'll let the developers speak to kind of overall updates. But again, for discussion items tonight is the city council's preference on any additional amendments to the development agreement for consideration. And once we get the direction from city council and staff, we'll work with city staff, the attorney, and the developer to make those certain amendments after an additional extra deposit is made to provide the time spent on those amendments.

Again, it's been about 15 months or 16 months, but we went through a workshop and came to city council four or five times. We kind of, like we said, got away from the development agreement. And then as we went through the process and went through city council and did the annexation of one of the tracks and approval of city utilities and all the other elements related to the development agreement, we got in a cost estimate. We our engineering for our construction and the city's construction and that came in a little bit higher than we expected to a $3 million, $3 million plus more than we, based on the lot contracts that we had with the builders then, those figures just wouldn't work. So we had to take a step back, kind of get our pencil out and repencil things and look at different alternatives like larger lots and, you know, see if there were similar connections and things like that and just the configuration of the track did give us enough of that three or four acre lot. So it all Kind of came back to the same plots that we had, same plot size and health that we had talked about through the development agreement process back in 2024. So the land plan is the same that we took through in those prior city council meetings and the development agreement, 235 lots, 65 by 120 and 130. So it's all pretty much the same. I know that When we got to the development agreement, the task to design the lift station and the city's off-site improvements were on the city's engineer. I think previously we talked about a developer designing the lift station as our responsibility. But since it's in kind of a moralized development agreement, that we need to look at whether that's something that we can do and simply we're just trying to propose that because that would be a time that would be a time saver that would kind of reduce our cost and reduce our cost and our time and it would be for the city it would be two separate projects at the lift station and then at Piper's you know 105 and if we can break it up into a couple smaller projects and have our engineer do that we think it'll save us you know six months or six to nine months and that's a quick be helpful because we've got lots to deliver to the builder within about a year at this time. Also, the method would be an ability where we would pay those costs as we go, and that would just give us six months to make a payment, $200,000 or $300,000 each month, versus having one lump sum due at the beginning, which would be paying interest not for a year, year and a half. So it's just trying to be creative and develop some solutions that get us over the goal line for the development that we've talked about in prior sessions.

So when development agreements expire, do they typically, do you go back and redo the development or do you make amendments? How does that typically work? Because this one is expired, right?

No.

No?

No. Okay. Okay. So that's one thing we've been talking about with city staff and legal as well, kind of the term limit on development. It's an understanding that this one has paused for about two years at this point. We're wanting to bring this back to y'all before any action is taken on amending it to say, okay, if this is what was presented previously two years ago, a lot of things have changed in those two years. Are there any other considerations that city council staff want to make for the development? As far as, you know, termination of development agreements, we started writing in our current development agreements, you know, if there's any action or non-action, rather, of developers either not reaching out via email, calls, kind of giving a timeline on, hey, we're putting on a pause to secure funding XYZ, we would have grounds to terminate the development agreement and renegotiate terms and conditions for any future proposal of said development agreement.

And we've been trying to get in for maybe like six months. It's October, November, October of last year. So we've been trying to get you all updates, you know, through that period of time. And that's an expense that's outstanding. So we had to bring that all up to date so that we could kick off again.

The only change to the development agreement is just the engineering part. Yes, sir.

And then it's been suggested that we've got a time within our contract to deliver lots, and we're going to be pressing the board on that. There may be a request at some point in the future to do a public hall agreement, like other... developers have done. So the suggestion was to kind of add that in. We continue on our timeline. We may make it, but that would keep us from trying to come back and bring this in for a job.

Something that wasn't on your development agreement that was on Briarley's development agreement, and I was hoping to get the opportunity to get that, so if we're going to amend, let's do that now, that didn't allow you, didn't ask you to redo the roads. Briarley, this road has been beat up from one end to the other. Briarley is repairing it, and Commissioner Walker is helping with improvements. As soon as that happens, then you're going to be coming in with trucks, and then we've got this pretty road now that's going to be torn up. So I would like to ask that we amend this, that you are responsible as the developer to put the roads back into the pristine... When we, you know, start to get in there.

So there are a couple ways we can do that. So Jonathan suggested we do some drum footage or something so we could take some photos so we can kind of measure, you know, when you're going to hand it over to us. But when we start, you know, working there. Well, sure. But if the county already approves it, that's what I do.

okay exactly just because we had no discussions yet of when the road project would start in relation to this project but there's also another road which we can have construction attempt to have construction traffic come off of the east side of the old plantersville i think there's some conversations that we can have to try to play with that understanding concern and how to address the concern but we just need to kind of know what timelines are so we can kind of figure out what the best strategy of that is. But we're just not knowing the details of everything. We're just kind of brainstorming. Quick aside on that.

Every development, every construction project, we take pre-construction photos of all adjacent city facilities. If there are any damages to there, we'll reach out to the developer, contractor, and say, hey, this wasn't what it was before y'all got here. Make it right. We've done that priorly on old plans. Old potholes have been coming up in this kind of push on the need for improvements on Old Plainsville and Old Dobbins. And so this wouldn't be any different. But it can be, to your point, written into the development agreement that they have explicit access to one for construction and not use the other for access. That can be written into this one.

So we certainly want to have it in the standard that the county would approve it to. And then the other option is to come off of that and then just not have that in the room. Still monitor it.

We can use that room. We can still monitor it.

If there is a virus, it's the same thing. So is that fine? Or do you want to retire? No.

I think it's for protection of all parties because, you know, we don't want, you know, our construction truck to hurt the road. And so if we have documentation that it's dead, then we know, hey, contractor, this is y'all's fault. Y'all did it correctly.

It's just been in my craw that we do this on other developments and this didn't happen on this one and I didn't know why. We're going to make every effort to appeal to future residents and so the appearance and aesthetics and all would be very important. I just don't want that. I don't want the road repair to be on the taxpayer. Exactly. When we live across town. Okay.

So this is really a chance to kind of reintroduce where we are, and I think Zachary's a tip for us to get back next time.

So the next steps as far as once we get comments from staff, legal, council, and mayor, we'll close in with the developer. We'll request an additional escrow deposit for the amendment and any associated fees for completing that project, the project being off-site utilities and the review and construction inspection of their section one. That will be coming for y'all again for council approval of the project and then separate deposit for the local escrow to fund their planning, building coordination, construction inspection, etc. That will be completed by the city engineer. having all y'all's comments compiled, we'll have that as a future agenda item in a future council meeting, working with staff, legal, to make sure that everything is copacetic with all parties, and we'll bring that back before y'all for execution, and then move forward with the development process. So don't you think that we discussed having some language in there about how you're going to proceed with it? the funding and reimbursement? Yeah, I think it should be part of it.

We haven't, we did talk about it on our, our team, our kind of group call, and the PIPA has already kind of gone through the process for development agreement, and then March of 2025 was approved, so.

It's approved, it's created. The issue is how you're going to function it.

So I think...

It's up to the city, you know what I'm saying?

That's right. I think what we had, kind of the theory we had talked about with, you know, prior teams, you know, and we went through this as a development with Monroe, which they would have people come in and have a bid consultant. They get this method, you know, we have a bid consultant with both roads, and they help us with the preparation of the document with the city's council. And it's kind of the theory was that some ways the city of Montgomery would hire a bid consultant at ours. but there would be a PID consultant coming out of that fee and so we've got a few names that we could recommend you know based on you know who's worked often for the city of Conroe or city of Tomball and there's other cities within this county so and then they would be representative for the city and that again as an expensive developer and so typically that would be you know we'll you know Once we go through the construction, we'll present all of our costs into an auditor. They'll audit that, they'll present that to the city. The city will either accept that audit, accept those as expenses, and then the pit consultant will come in with a service plan every year with that.

We can build in, Daniel correct me if I'm wrong, a certain language for review of audit and completion and acceptance of audit prior to moving on a future section of the development. That way we're confirming that the existing section can support the infrastructure for the future section.

And that's already in Chapter 372 of the Local Government Code.

So when are y'all going to have the workshop?

You know, I didn't know about a workshop, but I saw that on the agenda.

You know, we thought we'd already had one in 2024. We've had two prior workshops.

I would like that.

Before execution of any development.

Yes, ma'am. So we're clear. Would it be good to do a draft of development agreement kind of based on this conversation before that workshop?

In the package, it's Meritage Homes in Long Lake.

And so over the course of the year that we've been working, the price signs have gone up and increased. So I think when we first started talking to y'all 12, 18 months ago, we were looking at the 400s. Now the builders are anticipating building, you know, in the upper 400s and 500s. And I think if we sell a lot in a year, maybe it'll be 500 to 550 at this rate. So that's increased the value, you know, to the community and to the tax base. So I know that there was always a goal to have that mid-range and higher-range housing within the core of the city of Montgomery. Is there a building in Montgomery? Yes, ma'am. So Meritage is a national builder. They're the five out of the top 100. They're the number five builder in the country. And then I've added the presentation to whole places and then also one lake is based in houston and they're a private building and um both builders homes in several communities around the city and we're on the cypress northwest part of houston that's the closest i think and then there's something on the book that's in victorian conroe They have something, Tom. Yes, ma'am. Yeah, the American Tome, you know, those are, you know, not the same product you'll have here. They're in the 300s, you know, so I'm just looking to buy that. I think it's Pine Lake. Pine Lake.

So Pine Lake, Lane Road, West 45, north side of Conroe. They've got, it's probably one of the smaller products, probably Conroe, I mean, I'm like 45, 50 foot long. Pine Lake.

I thought that was like off of 105. Montgomery Oaks.

Is that Montgomery?

Let me look at it.

No, it's south of 100.

You know, kind of across from Starbucks and all that, that's all the restaurants there. And so those are a little bit less in value than what they're planning to build here. That's right. That's right. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Number 10 on your agenda, consideration of possible action on the acceptance of the engineer's recommendation to award to complete the construction services related to the town pre-placework construction project.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. So in front of you all is a hard copy of the WJ memo outlining the results and summary of the bids that were received for the... So again, that's kind of paint the picture. This project has already been funded for with the 2026 CO funds. We are completing our, the design was completed by half engineers who's completing the design. The demolition part, yes, the demolition that proposed the plans and then phase one of the plan that you get a new construction of your plant three NGD plant. They were previously quoting us, you'll see on the second page, page of, or I guess third page of that package, $1 million for the demolition of the existing plant. That was completed by now. We've included it in our CO summary, just to outline what we were expecting costs to come in at for the demolition, phase one, and then the future water plant number four. We received bids last Wednesday, a total of 11 bids were received, ranging from 229 all the way up to 636. Upon completion and verification of bid form and unit prices, you will see on that last page, kind of the summary of where everything stands. as far as cost for the project. And so I'm just walking through all of that for you. The apparent low bid at the time of the bid opening was ERC. We believe that they have low bid, or they quoted us with a low bid of $229,000. Upon verification of their unit prices and bid documentation, that total base bid came up to $24 million and $25,000 base for substantial changes. This is an error on their unit pricing. So it was irregular and we couldn't come off of that because the unit price is for bid form. Our bid packages govern what is cost. So they had a calculation in terms of their final dollar, final bottom dollar. Essentially, as long as the unit prices are fine and the bottom dollar is good, or in error, we can update that bottom dollar. If the unit prices are off, we have to update the final bid package based off of the annual cost. So that's why you see that huge discrepancy on their first bid. The next bid came from RMDI companies with a total base bid of $283,000. And at the time of the bid opening, they did not complete the proposed calendar days for their project, as well as completion of their 1295 form, which essentially outlines conflict of interest, excuse me. They have since provided their calendar days, of course, which is outlined in that memo at Westview. And the 1295 form can be requested and executed prior to any execution of contracts with the city and the contractor. So I just want to make that caveat. And then the next little bit came from Rebel Contractors in the amount of $386,000 and 45 calendar days. complete bid package. There were some discrepancies in their total bottom dollar, but the unit prices were all the same. So you'll see that reflected in the red highlight on that bid side with 386,000 dollars.

So we've contracted references for both those two low bids.

We have no issues with either. It should be noted that our NDI is based out of Willis and rental contract is based out of Rockwall with offices in the Houston area.

So the discrepancy in the amounts?

We'd like to see that. In a perfect world, we receive a lot of bids with a good range between low and high. We did anticipate that the bids were coming lower than what was projected for the demolition, and that's why we broke it out from phase one.

Can you change orders they can get up to? Anything over, believe you, 20% of the original contract?

25% of the original contract would have to be revid. So in the event that they do come and hire, we would have to revid the project. But there are contingencies in that one of the biggest ones that we were noticing would be the dewatering and sludge removal of the plant. So we had that built into their contract. I don't know. have public works that pays on supplying some of those people, and we have outlying costs that would not be exceeded because we got that from both my hands. Everything else is all based off of quantities that are out on site, and so their contracts and their unit prices are being held against that.

Two reasons that we broke this out separate from the whole project. One was time, two was cost, because there's a lot more people that can break stuff than build stuff. So, you know, we're putting, beginning the demo contractors, we have a whole lot more players than a plain contractor that is usually subbing this out and adding a market to it. So that was, so they are low, which is good. We've checked references, because again, these are our normal contractors who bid on water, sewer, drainage, paving projects, and the reference just came back in. So ultimately, what Zach is saying is that ERC is out because we have been based off their universe, because they're written about that as government. RNDI, though they did provide days after 1295, it's an irregularity. Their price still holds. So they provided those days after the 1295 is required before you execute a contract. So it doesn't mean regular bid, but you're allowed to accept an irregular bid. And the reason we put it on Rebill is that's the first one that came back that took the 1295, the days, and everything else, but it's $100,000 more. So, and there's no qualifications or anything that says Breville's gonna do substantially better than RMDI, based on what I'm seeing.

What if RMDI takes 90 days? Is there a recourse on that? Do they pay us? Because they didn't state any days, so then we have to have a...

So it'll still be in their contract. So their contract will still have the days that they provided. It's just it was blank on what they submitted, but what they told us after was the 40 days, and that is the substantial completion days that are in the contract. So the contractor doesn't carry liquidated damages. But it does have just standard a damage clause. So by delays of the project, delays of the project causing development delays or whatever it is, that would be something the city could claim damages against.

Yes.

No, so we typically just do a blanket damages clause, which are to be calculated by the owner. And so we have to provide backup. So it says, you know, if we estimated 40 days for them to complete it, and here's the cost of testing and inspection for having those 40 days, and it takes 90 days to your point, we have to say, okay, here's the additional cost the city incurred due to your delay. And that is something that's, the damages and incentives, we try to get a little bit away from that because unless you have incentives to go with the damages, it's harder to fight that way.

We also were under construction for how much longer from the adjacent bridge?

I mean, that was... That one did have damages in it.

And we got paid.

So I just have a quick question, Chris, on your original.

Yes, sir. I guess you can call it.

How did we come off 76%?

So those, I think, one... I mean, I'm thrilled to death. That's not a chance, man. That was pointed in the wrong direction. This is way off. So what we can surmise is that you have provided us the cost estimate breakout of all experiences. They were looking at, they provided a full 10-page packet of kind of backup for their cost. One thing I think that's driving it, it doesn't address the full 70-something percent, is having it broken out with contractors. Because JTR, for example, that's on the bid form, they are a plant contractor. Providence Water Group is as well. And those are your higher prices that you see. So they built the demo into the plant, is what you're saying? Well, yes. So the cost estimate, so the totality of the plant project, and they have a lot of contingencies in that estimate. So hopefully, that's the same thing we see on the wastewater plant as well, and we have funds available. I mean, it's gone. Yeah. There's a lot of questions. There's a lot of questions in reference checking just to make sure that, one, we're not going to end up with a problem and save 76% and end up spending another 50%. So it was concerning, but so far reference checking out in their local. And one more, Chris's point.

The cost estimate that has provided in their cost estimate, they up prices on bonding, maintenance, insurance, and additional profit intake on supply item for the project. And so taking that into account, that does add some of the profit that we're seeing in this development.

So are there any contingencies for these contractors to adjust their fees on something they find that they didn't expect?

That would be outlined in the change order, and again, if the change order amounts to 25% of what was awarded, so in the example we went with RNDI, if their change order ultimately came above $40,000, we would have to remit the project. Yes, ma'am. R&D is from Willis. Do you know how long you've been in business? I do not know that one. I'll follow up with that.

I tried to get you at the location.

It is like you say, Chris. It's a lot easier to break things than it is to go by yourself.

Yeah.

Hopefully it goes off.

Yeah. All right.

The action here is to select a contractor and then authorize us along with city staff to execute and review contracts with that contractor.

Is it something you guys have recommendations or you've worked with before or anything like that?

So we haven't worked with either of these. Again, we've reviewed references. The references are all a little bit similar. So for demolition of wastewater treatment plants, water plants, and we have no issues with what they recommended. Just brought a recommendation to go and reach out to those clients as well for confirmation as to the quality of what they're doing.

So I'd like to make a motion to accept the engineer's recommendation and award the demolition project of the wastewater treatment plant.

Second.

Motion by Mr. Olson, second by Ms. Langley that we accept the engineer's recommendation award to demolish the project, the wastewater treatment project. and awarded to R&DI. This motion is debatable and will part of the discussion. All those in favor of accepting the engineer's recommendation to award R&DI the demolition project for the wastewater treatment plant, say aye. Aye. Those opposed say nay. The ayes have it. The rest of the years we will award R&DI for the wastewater treatment plant. Consideration of possible action on the acceptance of water plant and our free booster competition.

Good evening again. So this project is water plant and free booster competition. As a reminder, this is being funded with ARPA funds that the city has and Again, kind of the silver word for this project is the additional addition of a fourth pollution pump on water plant number three, a 900 GPM pollution pump. This takes the city's paper capacity from 550,000 gallons per day to 730,000 gallons per day. And so in addition with water plant number four that's currently in design and we're expecting to build later this summer, the city is in low capacity for all the active developments and feasibility or development agreement process that we have currently slated for the city.

So say that one more time, real slow.

So with this project, as well as Water Plan Number 4, the city has capacity for service of all existing developments and future developments that are currently in feasibility.

Thank you.

Again, this just makes the project up into the warranty period. Inefficiencies noted with the booster pump during that one-year warranty would be identified and the contractor that was selected would have to come out and make those repairs. So any deficiencies would be noted by Public Works and or Hayes. We'll call the contractor to come out and fix it, and they would not do that. In this agenda packet, you'll see that one of these items was not checked. This was the hydro mulch, establishing vegetation for the plant. This has since been completed. This was done on Tuesday of last week, but due to the time the agenda happened to be posted, we couldn't include that in the packet. But as of today, this has been completed.

That has been completed as of last Tuesday. Okay. I make a motion to accept item number 11 as presented.

Motion for Mr. Olsen to accept item number 11 as presented. Seconded by Mr. Fleischer. Is the motion straightforward? All those in favor of subject item number 11 as presented, say aye.

Aye.

The item of the motion here is Bill 11, as presented. Number 12, consideration of possible action regarding authorizing the city engineer to amend the previously completed feasibility study report from Montgomery Retail to Sarbanet Park LLC, the project.

Good evening again. So I'd like to direct y'all's attention to page 174 of y'all's packet. This outlines kind of the proposed project area. And so you'll see on that exhibit, Previously outlined area of the original 32 acres that was considered the H-E-B development. If you remember as a part of the development, they were responsible for the batch rating extension for the entire 32 acre site. Half of it being for H-E-B, the other half being for the S-R-1-5. The S-R-1-5 was responsible for that. Fargo, and then the other adjacent 16 acres or so is to be determined as commercial development. They recently are, or as of today, considering purchasing the adjacent KOA property. This is an additional 50 acres of land that is currently partially within city limits, partially within Danny Lake's mud, so there's a lot of coordination and ongoing conversations that are going on with that development, and as far as how it will receive service, this action tonight is authorizing us to complete a feasibility to kind of outline all of those requirements. Because of the proximity to Sand Lake MUD, you know, on that survey and project of vicinity area, you'll see adjacent Wake Forest treatment plant legislation that are all kind of within realms of service areas for that legislation and development. And so looking at all of those, any potential need for interconnect with Sand Lake MUDs could be entered into are considered with this development. So outlining all of that and any feasibility study that will be completed by WGA.

As we understand it, it would be

Bind into one development. What they're going through now, as the last conversation that we've had with them, is determining how drains would work. And so because there's already existing drains on that KOA property, they're seeing how they could possibly redo the drains on the HED and SR 105 original 32 acres. But again, that kind of is going to be outlined as far as the requirements of that and the feasibility of that. But as of today, they're considering it as one development. And do we know where the city... So if you're looking at it, it may be hard to tell, there is a kind of black border that outlines just adjacent to the Kenrock property. That is where the city limits are. Yeah, it's a very small sliver that's within.

Yeah, very small sliver that's within.

within the city. So there would be annexation, de-annexation from Conroe as well as annexation to the city. Correct. As we understand today, yes, sir. Annexation within the city or de-annexation from Conroe and then annexation to the city. Correct. Outlining that process that would be required for the developer. Yes, sir.

I don't understand how we can give them a feasibility study on the new property, and we don't know what they're going to do with it.

So it's proposed as commercial. Of the 50 acres, as of today, they're proposing development of approximately 27 acres of that, all part of the 1.05 as a part of the feasibility study request. actual site layout of what they're proposing, but from conversations that we've had, it's all large blocks of development. So, larger storefronts, you know, academies, loads, etc. That would be on that block.

So, their proposal... is to do commercial development along 105?

Correct. But they're purchasing, looking at purchasing the entire property with potential plans of developing the rest of the 50 acres at a later time, which we'll outline as well in the event that they want to do that.

And that background is possibly multifamily?

It's already in the back. The conversations that I've heard have been that But the feasibility of the study include the annexation of that whole red area? The whole red area, yes, which is an element of just the one on top portion. We'll outline requirements on if they plan on coming back in the future for any future development. That's not outlined or accounted for within this study. That would have to happen to another team members.

So then all of the trailers that are back there, our RV spots, whatever, are they going to allow them to continue to live there until they figure out since they're going to do the retail on the 105, was that still going to be in play?

That has not been conveyed. I would imagine that it would get rid of everything. But again, we can confirm that with the office.

Because I believe somebody that lives there contacted me and said that they were told that this development was that they still have a year or two left on their contract. I can't speak to the agreement, but that's part of the . We'll hop on that as well, to all of them.

Okay, so we're just approving just to continue the visibility study? Yes.

There's no approval or commitment to any usage of capacity within y'all city water or wastewater. This is just outlining the steps that would be required for them to continue. I make a motion to approve the consideration of possible action.

As you already mentioned, previously completed visibility step is sufficient.

All those in favor of accepting and authorizing the city engineer. To amend the previously completed feasibility study report for Montgomery Retail SR 105 LLC, say aye. Aye. Those opposed say nay. The ayes have it, the motion carries. And we will authorize the City Engineer to amend the previously completed feasibility study for Montgomery Retail SR 105. 13, consideration of possible action on the preliminary plot for BCS Capital Development, development number 2415.

evening again. So in front of y'all tonight is the preliminary plat for the BCS development that's going on between C.B. Stewart, Buffalo Springs, and 105. 38 acre development that is consisting of commercial and multifamily. In front of y'all tonight is the preliminary plat. Preliminary plat was reviewed and approved by P&T at their May commissions meeting. And so now in front of y'all is this concurrence with that approval and making a recommendation for y'all's selves. This development would be subject to impact fees at the time of final planning. That summary that's outlined in the memo outlines what those impact fees would be. As it stands today, commercial with six pads and two-inch meters, one large commercial pad with a three-inch meter, and then a feature multifamily with a six-inch meter for the total $461,870 for water impact fees. and $358,117 for wastewater impact. At the time, or at this time, the development is not aware of the multifamily project that's going on right now. They don't have a current buyer or developer of that land. So as you'll see on the preliminary plat, that northern reserve is unrestricted. They would have to come back to get that replatted as a multifamily tract. So you would see that at a future time for a separate preliminary plat and a separate property plat. Yes. Yes, ma'am. That was a comment on our preliminary review. Then it's supported by y'all's ordinance that any unrestricted reserve has to come back for replanting once it's been defined as to what that reserve will function as.

No. It's still zoned multi-family.

But there's not any multi-family there, so then...

As of what we've been discussing, there are still plans for multifamily. It's just there's not a buyer or developer to do that multifamily portion. The previous buyer or developer backed out of the deal, so they're looking for a new one.

Any chance we can change it to a hospital?

Is that restricted?

And again, as a reminder, y'all will have an opportunity to review the proof of that. Thank you.

It's preliminary and I'll make a motion to approve the possible action on the preliminary plat for BCS.

I motion by Mr. Glazier that we approve the preliminary plat for BCS Capital Development and second by Ms. Fox. This motion is debatable and amenable. As far as majority vote, it's open for discussion.

I have one question. I know they were here about a month ago, and there was trouble with the development agreement.

Has that since been... Yes, it was resolved, and they're not asking for a payment plan. They're not asking for a payment plan. That's all I have.

All those in favor of accepting the preliminary plaque for BCS Capital Development number 2415, say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it, the motion carries, and we will accept the preliminary plaque for BCS Capital Development number 2415. Number 14, consideration of possible action on the preliminary plaque for Briarley, formerly known as Redbird Meadows, Pond A2 Development number 2006.

Good evening again. So on this one, I'd like to bring y'all's attention to page 191 of y'all's package. This will outline the overall plan of development. This reserve for pond A2 is the section of ponds. There are three ponds just east of the drop-in from The northern portion of the development, excuse me, this preliminary plat is just for the recordation of that so they can continue on with their development. There are no impact fees associated with it because there's no impact to see infrastructure related to water or wastewater. So it's just approval of the preliminary plat. And again, you have an opportunity to approve the final plat once it's ready for approval.

Number 15 on your agenda.

Consideration of possible action on the preliminary platform, Riley.

So on this one, I would like to direct your attention to page 201. Again, outlines the same land plan. Section 7 is located on the hard point of Old Dobbin Plain of Go and Old Plain of Go Road. This twin rate flat would be subject to impact fees in the amount of $207,130. Again, one of the caveats that I'd like to make with this one is, as approved by you at the committee's local council meeting on the tree assessment requirement for all future plaques of development, this one was approved, and so now we're seeing one red plaque planning and zoning, excuse me, took action on this at their May planning and zoning meeting, contended upon y'all's approval of the tree variance, not tree variance, tree assessment, which was approved at your May 12th council meeting. So now that all that has been done, we are ready to approve or take action on approving the plan right back for Section 7.

To make a motion, we accept agenda item number 15 as presented.

Mr. Johnson, we accept number 15 as presented. Second. Seconded by Mr. Glazier. All those in favor of accepting item number 15 as presented, say aye. Aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have 15 here. We'll move to item number 15 as presented. Number 16, consideration of possible action on the preliminary plot to buy the formerly known Redbird Meadows section 8, development of 2016.

The meeting again, more or less the same. If you can turn to page 211 of y'all's packet, you'll see another land plan. This is for Section 8. Section 8 is the sections just east of those on A2 reserves, a portion in red and yellow, kind of in the middle of that land plan. This, again, plat will be separate to impact fees, totaling $263,592 for... water and wastewater. And one thing to note on both section seven and section eight and all future sections is that Red River Meadows and Riley and St. Colfer are getting an impact fee credit for the water line. The water line is now complete and we are doing an audit of making sure that credit has been used up. So any future sections, section eight, section nine, or any future would be subject to impact fees. We'll get that dollar amount for you, pick that up once we have the final pledge ready for y'all to approve. I know we did some variances on block sizes.

Did we drop one?

I'm sorry?

No, not below.

So it's 60s. 60s is the minimum. There's a reminder on how block sizes are measured. It's from the building line, in fact. And so on those... But the building line is from, you know, lengthwise.

If we take the building line, we're talking about the building line, right?

Mm-hmm.

That's the measurement you're talking about on the street?

Yes, sir. We gave a seven foot measurement, seven and a half foot?

On the sidewalks, yes.

So essentially all adjacent lots, you can only have one. We did.

Totally that 15 feet, seven and a half inch lot.

all of those, so we have a running total of how many blocks have that seven and a half foot setback, side yard setback, and they're not above their threshold as far as the entire building.

Zach, I have a question. If you go down, so if you're behind for our league, you take that dog right? Yes, ma'am. It's behind the detention line. It's low. with all those houses coming in, is that gonna ram off those people that are beyond that little spot?

Is that good? for the development of Burley. And so all of their calculations are proving that there's no adverse impact to the downstream lots that are outside of the development. And again, if anything does change on that, you would have to review and approve anything. And so they're currently going through changes for their amenity parks. They are currently proposed as dry bottom. They're now proposing them to be amenity. And so they're going through TCQ analysis on dam safety. All this will be re-reviewed by us and approved.

So all of this development will be caught into that water basin that's there?

Yes, ma'am. And it shows based on their calculation that it does have capacity with no adverse impacts to downstream development.

Is that a 500-year flood, 1,000-year flood? Like what is each?

500 and 100-year is what we base our calculations on. And it's all standard TCQ Montgomery County requirements for that.

Do we have any more contingencies in Briarley that are going to require us to give them impact fee credits?

No, it's just the old plan to go one-on-one. And that one was constructed back in 24. Warranty ended earlier this year. So we're ready to reconcile those costs and make sure that we're capturing all impact we can move forward.

Second by Mr. Glazier. This motion is to be held un-ruled, passed by Goethe, seconded by Mr. Johnson.

All those in favor of accepting item 16 as presented, say aye. Aye. Mr. President, may the ayes have it that the motion carries, we will accept item 16 as presented. Closing agenda, council inquiry. Shall we talk about July 4th? What are the plans? Just we need to get out ahead of it.

So you want to know the activities and everything that's going on?

Well, so we're typically used to having a parade. Now the chamber is no longer providing the parade services, and we just found out. So instead, we're throwing a big birthday party bash in downtown. Just let me get in everybody's mind.

We're going to bring in a band. We're going to have some individual events, choir ceremony, contests, a lot of fun things. It'll be from 9 to 12. That way everybody does family. stuff on 4th of July, that way they can come out, enjoy that in the morning, and then go play at the lake or watch fireworks or whatever we're going to do. We're trying to make kind of a neat little community event. And then, you know, going forward, we'll re-look at the parade or, you know, the golf cart parade is kind of what everybody wanted to do, so we'll look at that again.

Yes, yes.

The jeep's ass, though, they were interested.

They're nice, but they're lost. Lee Creek Baseball and Softball are going to stay, both of them, just FYI. Starts on Thursday.

Thank you. The ladies is in Austin, and the guys start favoring the college station.

Next up, I'm at 18. I would consider for placement on future agendas. I have a question for Ruby. How are we coming along on that website?

I hate finding information.

Talk a little bit. All right, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.

I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.

Ms. Langley, seconded by Mr. Olson, all those in favor of adjournment. I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.

Thank you. Yeah, ma'am.

Oh, you're coming. I can believe that. It's almost a year.