City Council - Regular Meeting

target painting tracking systems that treats everyone like criminal out of our American community. Thank you. Uh, I do, uh, I do have one quick question guys. Uh, I noticed that Willie Nelson over here and commissioner Barry, uh, you guys had a little private powwow sidebar in the back there. As I understand, that is a sunshine violation. Everything at these meetings must be on the record.

That's mostly what I can't say that fast anymore, let alone remember it. But, uh, Anyway, we would just like you to all have some wisdom, wisdom from the Lord to slow some things down and think about it before the lawsuits keep flying because we know they're coming.

Thank you, Margie.

And also, I did talk to Governor Greg Abbott's office this morning, and he's wondering why you all aren't following his notices that he's put out about stopping data centers for a pause.

Thank you. And then after Ms. Thomas will be, is it Marcy Goodfletch? Goodfletch, you'll be next. Yes, ma'am.

Hi, Lynn Thomas Temple. Following up on Margie, I had no idea she was gonna talk about the flock cameras, which is what I came here to talk about. From what I understand, if I think I have it right, we've had the flock cameras for a while. What I would like to know is, How long have we had them? How much are we paying for them? If I remember correctly, there was a city council meeting a while ago, and I thought it was passed that it was a $31,000 a month payment, but I can't be sure if I got that right or not. So I'd like to know if you guys can be transparent, maybe do a Temple Telegram article, let us know how long we've been under surveillance, where these cameras are, how much we're paying for them, why we have them, And then maybe understand that a lot of the people in Temple don't want these. There's a tremendous amount of abuses, and I would like to know maybe from the police department, what kind of assurances can you give us that you guys aren't sitting there doing things you shouldn't be doing? Because that's been going on a lot that we've noticed over the past several months. These stories have been coming up. So what I would like to say is please, Temple, be transparent with the flock. Let us know what we're paying for. how many we have, how long we've had them, and what all the details on those are, because I think as the city, if we're gonna be watched going up and down 31st Street, we deserve to know. Thank you.

Thank you. I know that there's a spot on the website that discusses flock cameras, and I don't know if Ms. Thomas, all of those concerns were addressed there. but I know that there is information, just citytemple.gov backslash flock or flock cameras. I don't remember the exact website, but there is some information out there, and I'm sure we can easily add some of your questions to it. Yeah, this is there.

TempleTX.gov slash flock safety. Where did I hear that from? Oh, right there. Flock safety?

Flock safety. Okay, very good. Thank you. You're up.

Thank you. Marcy Goodfleish, Temple, Texas. Thank you so much for offering us a few minutes to share some thoughts with you and for all your work you do. I worked a long time in the city of Austin and other state agencies, and I know the work you're putting in for no money and sometimes. I have a couple of things that I would like to see Temple begin to research and analyze. I've pulled research I teach at a university and I pulled some research from the University Library The bee population can be very much affected according to what I have been reading heat affects them considerably and also air pollution such as things that are run by will affect their sense of detecting scents, such as where they need to pollinate. So I think that is something that, and I can send you the research on that. I'm concerned about ATSES, aquifer thermal energy storage. I don't know if the data centers are going to be using that, but the research indicates that's a possibility. apparently they have gotten a well to directly enter and draw water from the aquifer and return it we need to know what the thermal impact of that would be if that's the case and i would appreciate research on that as well the thermal impact if the temperature and the natural underground water source is affected dramatically artificially, that can be a real problem. I really think, after thinking about this for a long time, we are trying to retrofit technology that's been existing that we currently use for cooling things, power, energy, to an industry that is ahead of the game of what the current technology is. And I believe they're trying to adapt technology that isn't yet ready to support the huge demands of data centers. And they're used to, believe it or not, educate machines. There's machine learning. The data centers feed information into machines to create the AI. I personally think AI is not particularly useful at this time. I've failed too many students because they submit and that's an automatic F for me. If it's an early paper, they can get another chance if they admit to it and ask for it. So anyway, thank you for listening and thank you so much for the work you all do on the staff as well as not on the staff. I appreciate it.

Thank you, ma'am. Next is a couple of budget items. I'm gonna read in items three and four together. Item three is a first reading in a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance approving the tax roll and authorizing calculation of the amount of tax that can be determined for all real and personal property in the city for fiscal year 2027, which is tax year 2026. And item four is the first reading in a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance setting a tax rate for fiscal year 2027, which is tax year 2026, and making the appropriation for the regular operation of the city. Ms. Bernard.

Yes, thank you, Mayor and Council.

As you just read, this proposed ordinance will approve the ad valorem property tax roll certified by the Appraisal District of Bell County in the amount of $12,815,349,754. And on the screen here, I show the grand totals and show what city a temple of the $9.1 billion, the freeze taxable of $1.3 billion for a total adjusted value of $10.5 billion. And this shows just the total increase in the tax roll is 9.19%, 3.8% increase for what goes to the M&O and the INS fund interest in sinking. And then for the tax increment district, the amount, the grand total is 2.2, okay. No? Okay, sorry. 2.2 billion, and that is a 44.2% increase compared to what, or growth over the previous year. Looking at our proposed tax rates, we have last year, or the current FY2026, our tax rate is 69.99 cents. The file budget included a tax rate of 69.99 cents. The proposed rate, the rate that was set on earlier this week, is 75 cents. The no new revenue tax rate is 75.41 cents. The notice and hearing rate is that the same no new revenue tax rate and the voter approval tax rate that was calculated through what's a certified role was received and adjusted and corrected. The voter approval tax rate is 88.15 cents. That includes a little over 10 cents of unused increment from previous years. Any questions on those rates? If you look at the estimated tax revenue at the proposed tax rate of 75 cents for fiscal year 2027 as compared to fiscal year 2026, the proposed rate includes an adjustment to the M&O tax rate up to 40.08 cents, and that is a 2.54 cent increase. For the interest in sinking fund to pay debt service, the proposed rate is 34.92 cents, an increase of 2.47 cents. Again, for the total tax rate increase of 5.01 cents. The estimated tax levy comparing to what was in the file budget, the maintenance and operation taxes or tax will increase by a little over $2 million from what was in the file budget. And then the interest in sinking tax levy will increase $116,681. The estimated tax levy for the tax increment district is the $16.9 million, and that is an increase of $5.981 million. Just the calendar of where you've been and what we're looking at today, and then the final adoption will take place on August 27th. Tonight you just read the first reading of approving the tax roll and levying taxes, and then item number four, first reading setting the tax rate. I'd be happy to answer any questions related to the rate that was presented.

RISHI, could you take one quick minute and explain the no new revenue tax rate? Yes.

The no new revenue tax rate is what rate would it take this year if you tax the same properties this year that you did last year. It excludes any new value. So what rate would it take? It would take a rate of 75.41 cents to generate the same amount of revenue is if you tax the same properties again this year that you did last year. So the new revenue, that you do receive from new value, new improvements, is not included. DAVID BURRAGE.

Right. OK. I think that's important. We've talked about your final tax bill being a function of the rate and the appraised value. And the overall appraised values in Temple, on average, the average home, we always talk about the average home, dropped from I think it was roughly $220,000 down to $190,000. Doesn't mean that every home dropped that percentage, but I just think it's important that we take a minute to explain that. The reason why the, to collect the exact same amount would be the .7541. So we in effect are leaving the tax dollars owed on the average home very, very close to the same. In fact, a very small decrease, but we're leaving it very, very close to the same, moving the tax rate to the 75 cents per hundred.

Here's a slide on exactly that.

There you go.

The average taxable value, again, that's the average, decreased 13.63%. And the tax bill on that average home would actually, with the rate of 75 cents that's below the no new revenue rate, would actually decrease $114.90 a year. Yep.

That's very good, thank you for that further explanation. It's a challenge for staff to put together a budget when the expenses are going up and the revenue stays the same. We struggle doing that at our own homes, and imagine doing that across, across the city that has so many needs. And so as we always do, I just want to, again, commend staff on a difficult tax year. I mean, sorry, a difficult budget year and guiding and helping the council understand Uh, and, you know, given us all the information that we need to make these decisions that ultimately, uh, move the city in a positive direction. So we know it's not easy and, uh, but we, we appreciate, uh, the work that you guys do very much, very much council. Are there any, uh, questions, um, or statements or anything to, uh, to Ms. Myers or Ms. Bernard before I open the public hearing? Then I will open the public hearing. We're going to hold one public hearing tonight for both items three and four. We ask that you step to the podium, state your name for the record, and please stay on topic. You're talking about the tax rate tonight and the budget. Is there anybody that would like to speak on that tonight? Really? Got to stay on topic, Margie. You gotta stay on topic. Alrighty. No data centers, no nothing, just.

Stay on topic, I'll do my best.

I didn't write very much, so you're lucky you're there.

You're very blessed that I didn't get much written. So I'll try and swing it. Why did property values go down? I would like to know. Due to what reason? Because I know people in the new development have already been over there where it's by that area where you've got all the machinery going for specific reasons that you gave tax abatements to. And they're billion dollar corporations. Why do you give tax abatements to billion dollar corporations and then now you have to give a tax increase to the people in the city who are struggling to make ends meet, as you said. A lot of them, I've already seen several homes there with for sale signs. Talked to a couple people who said by the end of the year they'll be gone even if they have to take a loss in their homes. that they've already purchased, of course. I really want to know why would you give tax abatements to billion-dollar corporations that are actually going to destroy the health of the people? They've already proven that. There is facts out there now that it's going to create 800 to 900 more patients in small cities, 2,000 or 3,000. 9,000 of them will develop asthma. Their children will develop health problems and breathing problems. So in the end, you're not going to generate any income from these people for how long? I mean, you said tax evadements. You going to get lots of tax money this year from them? You said you got Sammons, you've got a senior center. You want a bond for that.

There's no tax revenue until they're up and operational. So no, there will be very limited tax revenue this year.

For this year, maybe for 10 years, for all you know. Because in three to five years, they're saying they might be obsolete. So you might have destroyed a lot of property, a lot of lives, because there was not enough.

Are you still on topic?

Yes, to me it's on topic because your taxes are going to go higher. because you're not gonna have the revenue you need to take care of your city, to repay all your debts. Don't go into debt so much.

Thank you. Anybody else? Nobody? Okay, very good. I will, council, I will close the combined public hearing on items three and four. And if there are no further comments, council, I'll entertain a motion on item three.

I'll make a motion to approve item three.

There we go.

We have a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Walker. We have a second by Council Member Grant. Council, please cast your vote. Do we need to state the tax rate in the motion? Yes. Okay. Yes. Okay. Sorry, I'm over here talking, I haven't voted. All right, item three passes five votes to zero. Moving on to item four. Council, I retain a motion on item four.

Make a motion to approve a tax rate of 75 cents.

Could you state that rate for the, in two components, the M&O and INS?

Pull those back up. Right up there.

Right there.

Okay, for the M&O to be 2.54?

No, the M&O would, what's presented on the 75 cents? 40.08 cents. Yes.

And on the debt, INS, 34.92 cents, totaling 75 cents. Does that work?

second okay we have a motion by councilmember Emmons we have a second by councilmember Pilkington council please cast your vote item four passes five votes to zero Moving on to item five is consent agenda. All items that are listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the city council. It may be enacted in one motion. If discussion is desired by any council member, that particular item can be pulled for separate consideration. Council during workshop, I don't believe that we are pulling anything, correct? Unless, we are not pulling anything unless someone's decision is changed. We good leaving it like it is? All right, very good. Then council, I'll retain a motion on the consent agenda for items 5A, this is ironic, through item 5AI.

I move to approve the consent agenda items 5A through 5AI.

Second it.

We have a motion by Councilmember Pilkington. We have a second by Mayor Pro Tem Walker. Council, please cast your vote. Consent agenda passes five votes to zero. Moving on to the next item. On the regular agenda, this first reading in a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance authorizing a rezoning request from Urban Estate to plan development neighborhood services to allow a drive-through coffee shop on plus or minus 4.629 acres in Lakewood Ranch, phase eight. A portion of lot one, block one, city of Temple, Bell County, Texas, addressed as 10751. West Adams, um, the applicant has withdrawn, um, their, uh, their request for this zoning change on item six. So no action is required at this time by the council. Moving on to item seven is the first reading in a public hearing to consider adopting an ordinance. of the City, sorry, consider adopting an ordinance of the City of Temple, Texas, approving a negotiated settlement between Atmos City Steering Committee and Atmos Energy Court, Mid-Tex Division, regarding the company's 2026 rate review mechanism filing. declaring existing rates to be unreasonable, adopting tariffs that reflect rate adjustments consistent with the negotiated settlement, finding the rates to be set by the attached settlement tariffs to be just and reasonable, and in the public interest, approving an attachment establishing a benchmark for pensions and retiree medical benefits, requiring the company to reimburse ACSC's reasonable rate-making expenses, determined that this ordinance was passed in accordance with the requirements of the Texas Open Meetings Act, adopting a savings clause, declaring an effective date, and requiring delivery of this ordinance to the company in ACSC's legal council. Mr. Chateau.

Thank you. Today we're talking about this proposed ordinance, as you stated, studying a new tax rate for at most energy. And this is that first reading for this. Um, so that was clearly written by lawyers at most city steering committee is the city of temples lawyers, uh, in this matter, essentially. Um, they are the primary public interest advocate before, um, groups that deal with gas utilities, uh, public utilities commissions, the courts and legislator. They've been doing this for about 30 years or so. They represent 190 municipalities, including the city of temple. And like I said, they've been in existence for the 80s. They were formally structured in the 90s though. And the steering committee is ultimately gonna be funded by Atmos on the back end by per capita assessments. And the reason why we talk about them is because, as I said, they negotiate on the city's behalf whenever Atmos requests a rate increase. And in this case, ACSC has negotiated the rate review mechanism system, which was created in 2007 due to a settlement that occurred between ACSC and Atmos. The settlement essentially, the goal is to have comprehensive rate review and city participation involved in that. It allows for the annual evaluation of expenses, revenues, and capital investments. And this differs from the GRIP system, which is the Gas Reliability Infrastructure Program, and that's a statutory process that Atmos uses to kind of seek rate increases. That statutory process does not allow city participation, and it's essentially an administrative review of any rate change that Atmos seeks. And to note, City of Temple residents are able to benefit from this RRM process, but non-city residents are not. So back April 1st, 2026, Atmos sought a rate increase. They were seeking $291.1 million revenue increase on a system-wide basis. And they basically claimed that their cost of service entitled it to that additional revenue. And this is all based on a test year ending at the end of last year, December 31st, 2025. So after Atmos sought that rate increase, ACSC got involved and they negotiated with Atmos and they entered into a settlement of $260.5 million, that being $30.6 million less than what Atmos was seeking originally. The ultimate result of this is that the average residential bill is going to increase $13.37 and the average commercial bill will increase $44.82 on a per month basis. In order to adopt this ordinance, the city of Temple has jurisdiction over gas rates within its boundaries. It's subject to two readings, this being the first one, and then it must be passed by October 1st, 2026 to match the effective date of that settlement. And so we would recommend that council approve the settlement and rate increase. I don't know if anybody wants to read this again. The mayor did a great job, first to go around, thankfully. But in conclusion, Atmos is seeking this rate increase. Under the GRIP process, it would be more than what the ACSC settlement is. As I noted, there's a $30.5 million savings between what Atmos was seeking system-wide. And so the city would, or we would recommend that council approve this ordinance.

That's so complicated. I don't know that anybody would even have any questions about that.

Ultimately, this saves us money over the statutory process. Okay.

think it might be important to note that that disapproving this item doesn't mean that no rate increases occur it means that higher rate increases occur to the 290 versus the correct yes okay very good counseling questions all right this item is subject to a public hearing anyone wishing to speak on this matter may do so yes you step to the podium and state your name for the record

nobody okay with that I will close the public hearing and counsel I'll entertain a motion on number seven I do better not in I'll second it to not increase the rate any more than we have to very good we have a

A motion by Council Member Pilkington. We have a second by Mayor Pro Tem Walker. Council, please cast your vote. Item seven passes five votes to zero. It's currently 5.43. This is the shortest meeting we've had in a while. Thank everyone for attending. And this meeting is adjourned, but we are going to do a final adoption of the tax rate one week from today special called meeting 10 a.m. 9 10 a.m. today okay okay so we'll see y'all next week in the morning thank you all very much this meeting is adjourned