City Council - workshop

Good afternoon, everyone. The time is 5.01. I'm going to call to order this work session of the Pflugerville City Council on Tuesday, September 8, 2026. Our first item on the agenda is public comment. I don't believe we have any public comment for the work sessions. We will move forward to our regular agenda. This is a presentation and discussion regarding Unified Development Code amendments. Director Bailey.

Excuse me, Ms. Craycraft, can you check and make sure your microphone is on?

And I've got my hearing aids turned up to 11, so just if you could speak up a little bit. Sure. Thank you. And closer to the microphone, that'd be helpful.

Can you explain what a zero lot line is?

I did have a couple other comments as I was going through this, because if there's one thing I'm a little bit more nerdy about than water, it's probably land use. And so in looking through this, There were a couple of things that stood out to me. One, specifically thinking about redevelopment and infill. So all these neighborhoods, legacy neighborhoods that are SFR today, not in this new code, as far as I saw, not allowing things like a duplex to go in. I know we are pretty good about ADUs, but especially for redevelopment and infill, I think that adding that extra step in order to convert it

Sure. I just want to make sure I understood what you were saying and what you're recommending there. Are you saying that we should amend existing districts to allow for these uses rather than add new districts?

I think where it makes sense, we should be opening it up some. Yeah. I don't know exactly what the answer is, but basically, so think about our existing neighborhoods, our old town with the overlay, right? We've had cases come through before where somebody wanted to do a perfectly reasonable duplex and they weren't able to, for example.

It sounds like you landed on this scenario. And can you tell me, I'm curious how large the impact would be. I'm imagining that most existing SFRs that way because it's already under construction or complete? Is there a lot of infill opportunity that's already zoned SFR?

I mean, I live in a duplex in Falcon Point.

Right. I'm just trying to understand, Jonathan making the recommendation that we allow people to build these housing types without necessarily going through a rezoning effort if there's opportunities, if there's existing property within these districts. i just want to understand how practical that is and it sounds like it was considered previously and i'm curious why you ended up going this way rather than you know the the alternative approach sure um i can

And obviously, yes, going through a rezoning process would be onerous, but I think we've denied some of those rezonings in the past as well. So there may be a good reason for going through that process. And I appreciate the perspective from the commissioner.

Yeah, definitely. One other. Oh, go ahead.

Oh, I just, I mean, similar. I was just wondering where exactly in the city that these new zonings could apply. Have you contemplated that?

Thank you for that. I'm not sure if I heard as well, are these properties for rent or are they for purchase?

Yeah, that's a pro tem. Thank you for for voicing that. That's a concern of mine as well. I see a lot of the missing middle conversation centering around homes for rent and the built to rent product and not necessarily about the smaller units for ownership. And I'm wondering, is there something we can do in the development code that provides us with more of an opportunity to nudge it in in favor of one versus the other? Obviously, we've got the ability to develop in a condo regime without subdividing the parcels. I feel like subdividing the parcels may make it more likely to be ownership rathe

I want to clarify, a lot of people may make the assumption that my question would lead towards I want it to be a rental property. That's not necessarily the case. I'm asking, I think I'm more asking because now that we've changed the way our water structure will go and I'm learning more things, Some of the condo units are set up with, I guess, what they would call this one-line thing or whatever. And so it would actually make their water bill higher. So I'm asking more from a perspective of learning one way. So I'm not leaning one way or the other. Of course, I will always tell you all that I

Jonathan, I think you still had another question.

Yeah, I had just two others. So one, I was curious about speaking to the feasibility of actually building less expensive homes. I noticed that our smallest lot sizes are only proportionally allowed to be like 25% of a subdivision or a neighborhood. And so I'm curious because that would imply that you're incentivizing larger neighborhoods with a section over here with small lots. instead of saying, hey, I've got this land that's not giant, and I can do smaller setbacks and smaller lot widths, and don't have to just put it off to the side. You could actually have a neighborhood designed around t

I mean, I wonder if even for SFR, if duplexes should be by right for new neighborhoods, right? If we're allowing smaller homes on smaller lots, why not allow a duplex in that same area? Yeah.

I think it's really important to figure out who you're asking the question to. Because if you ask a homeowner who already has a home how they feel about variety in housing, you're definitely going to get a different answer from those who are living in multifamily homes, right? So I think who's responding is going to be really important. I wrote down that you wanted to walk away from this conversation making sure this conversation was code and public ready and you wanted to know what we wanted to hear from the public. For me, I want to make sure that your responses also were reflective of the d

My last thing on this one, I'm curious to hear your all's take on why we're keeping the manufactured home zone, which is really just written for mobile home parks of 20, 30 years ago, versus a modern manufactured home really just looks like a home. It's not what people have in mind from the 70s and 80s. So I'm curious about us not allowing that in some other zones or not at least updating that one. Because again, it's sort of that's setting a particular housing type off to the side. And I just don't like that fundamentally, because like we've been saying, multiple housing types in the same nei

Then is the distinction, I know there is a statute I think just went into effect that requires us to have a zoning district that allows for manufactured homes.

So I'm a visual learner. Just wondering, do we have a map of like where the city and where these different zones could apply? And then also I'm wondering about the process. Is this just like, okay, we're proactively changing whatever is... I forget all the acronyms, but the duplex one, are we actively changing that or does the landowner have to come and say, okay, you have this new zoning now and I want that and they have to go through this application process. So just those two things about sure.

I know we've got our color-coded zoning map available online. I think the zoning map is going to tell us where the 2F is and that's what's changing. It would be really our comprehensive plan and our future land use map that would be telling us roughly where do we want more density, which would be a concept of where we would have these implemented, but it would be up to the landowner to petition for the zoning change.

I'm just, I just want, what is the scope of these changes? Like how many acres does this actually impact is what I'm trying to understand. And I think, you know, depending on who you ask right in the community, that could make a difference on how they feel. You know, like, I don't know, is this only going to change 10% of our land? Or is it going to change 50% of the available land? I don't know. And so it's hard. I'm just trying to understand, like, what kind of impact this is. And then as far as density on those areas of land, what would this do? Like how many more people or how many more ho

Yeah. I think that would be good. You know, it's hard to, I mean, this is theoretical, right? But seeing it on the map of like, what would the impact be is more concrete.

So the new coding of NMU, theoretically, could that just only go where it's currently single-family zoned, or could that go in the corridor, CL4 and CL5?

If we approve this, then the second step is what you're saying, that we would go and say, okay, this could apply to these current areas, and then if someone wanted to change, they could come and then request it. Yes.

well hold on i want to be be clear on that if we if we prove this then do we need to make a change to our future land use map in order to allow people to to apply for that in the comprehensive plan or we make these changes and people can start applying for rezoning as long as their parcel meets the definition within the future land use map

So does that, how much of a barrier does that create when you have to apply for the zoning change if you are then in a designated eligible area?

So similarly, in that same vein for something like the NMU, have you all built in an incentive structure to your point, Director Bailey, around if, hey, if that's one that we really want to see neighborhoods that have neighborhood scale commercial in them, how do we make sure that the code not only makes that easy, but also gives them density credits or something that can also make that easier to pencil and to work for these types of developers? That would be something I'd be interested to hear if you all considered it or if it's something we should talk further about.

Would that be in particular areas that we would want to see that level versus anywhere?

I mean, I guess I was mentioning specifically the mixed-use neighborhoods, which theoretically does have neighborhood scale commercial or retail in it, which we don't see a whole lot of today, right? for a variety of reasons, I'm sure, but it would be awful nice to have neighborhoods that have that type.

Well, that begs the question about how many other cities do this type of development, how successful is it, and how much of a demand is there for it?

I guess is this truly a path towards more affordable homeownership?

Right. The developers, the home builders, they're looking to maximize their return on their investment. The question is, does this density benefit create not only them reaching their return targets, but also producing homes that are more affordable?

So that was one of the questions that had sent in advance along those lines of, and you had referenced the committee that was going over that, and I'm not sure who was on that committee, but has there been developer review of these concepts and the different stakeholder feedback about whether what we're trying to propose would actually incentivize them to do, for the outcomes that we're looking for?

And we do have development representation on the advisory commission, right?

So I guess my recommendation from a survey perspective is that we take these and we ask the development community. It's not a citizen-necessary survey. Let's ask the development community. Looking at this zoning district, what would you build? If we gave you these options, would it change what you built? Because I want to... I want to validate the concept before we start going through and saying, hey, what do you think of these things if they're entirely impractical?

I want to pick up on what the mayor just said about that. Now that Mayor Gonzalez is gone, everybody up here is from somewhere else. So we have these ideas. I lived in a fourplex and I loved it, but is that appropriate uh here you know i think jonathan mentioned he lived in a duplex in the past and and he enjoyed that um so i am curious as the mayor said about what the developer side demand is for this because if there isn't any it won't be built and we're just spinning our wheels um and i don't want to i don't want to waste your time mr sparks if if we're developing something that nobody's go

There's the developers that are here that are building, and I hate to say it, a lot of developers get comfortable in their own space, right? They have their own market. So when I say we need to survey and figure out if this is practical, it's not just the people who are already building here, it's the nationwide, it's the other individuals who might be looking to get into the market.

But yeah, I would like to understand that.

The development that's happening in North Dallas and what's happening around here are not necessarily the same. But it's certainly what we see in North Dallas is much more likely to be something that will play in the market here than something, you know, say in the northeast or in the far northwest. So, you know, if the developers are saying, we want to build this, but your code doesn't allow that, obviously we want to be accommodating to that. And also, you know, to the extent that there are current residents who say, I would like that. build a duplex on the lot next door to me or you know a

There's a lot of stigmatism associated when we say fourplexes and duplexes and all that. So I just want to make sure I put that in the atmosphere as well that I'm concerned about some of that that comes up when we talk about that. I'm just going to leave that right there.

What I can tell you is that I guess I live in a paired villa. Right? Because we don't use the word duplex sometimes.

It's about the wording. It's all about the wording and how you feel and your life experiences and where you come from. And I just want to be careful about that as we go out and do our surveys. That word play really does matter.

I had lots of friends who also had town homes and garages under and small, right? So, well, mine was kind of large, you know, with like 150 or 200, but there's others with, you know, 15 or 20 or maybe just six or eight on a redeveloped lot that was a blight and they turned it into beautiful, you know, affordable homes for people to get their foot into the market. So that's just why I'm kind of wondering where these are going to go, because it could be various reasons. It could be a large, you know, organization with HOA and all that stuff. Or it could, well, probably if they were attached, the

Could be some of the, like, five or ten acre parcels, right? Yeah. You could do something cool with it. Right.

there there are a few infill parcels where i think it uh it could certainly make sense and we saw a 10 or 15 acre parcel here not that long ago but i think that you know these are going to go where we allow them to go this doesn't allow them to go anywhere yeah they're going to go where they uh where someone asks us and and we grant them permission to go uh unless as jonathan was saying you know do we add it to existing areas that's where he gets into your point talking about the blighted areas i tear down and rebuild and someone puts up a six flex where there was a rundown hole right i think

Or just small. Yeah, I don't necessarily see it as a blighted thing.

I'm not saying that was Los Angeles. I'm not saying that that's here in Los Angeles.

Right, but that's the example you gave, right?

Or on a busy street. Like, in Los Angeles, I go there, but, like, their home, and I mean, you know, three lanes each way, you know, you don't want to turn into your home off of that street, so they, you know, some of those, when they got older, they turned them into townhomes that you know, or more appropriate on a busy street. So those types of things, you know, there's little small lots.

Well, I think, you know, part of my part of what I want to bring up on that, too, is Sure, we can change this stuff periodically, but if you're thinking about five, ten years from now, there will be more of those properties, not blighted. But there will be homes in older neighborhoods that there probably will start to be people wanting to do redevelopment in.

Well, I think we've had several of those rezoning requests for road loop. We've had rezoning requests for... What is that street? Nimbus, I believe. Oh, yeah. So, you know, those are areas, but do I want to allow this by right, or do I still want those to have to go through a rezoning process?

You're just reducing the number, the accessibility of... doing that, right? An individual with a builder and an architect isn't probably going to have the money to go through a full on land use map update and a zoning update.

I don't know that we're talking about land use map updates, but we're talking about rezoning. How much does a rezoning cost?

Yeah, and that's where I think it's the total cost of development is where things get, it ends up quick, right? I mean, I think even today, the last time I did the math on a single family home and a new development in Pflugerville, it's over $60,000 that is like all in to set up your development, to do the build per house, somewhere along there. And so I'm just mindful that, yeah, the fee may be $1,000, but it's 20 grand with their consultants and lawyers to get through and an extra six months because you got to do public hearing, EPNZ, and then it's got to come to us, and maybe we say no. So,

I was just throwing out a number. You're fine.

All right. We stopped you after, I think, slide two. What else do you have to tell us that we haven't asked you already? We have a habit of getting ahead of ourselves.

Is this where I start poking at parking?

No, I have people in the last year tell me, hey, why don't you have car dealerships around here? I'm like, because I don't make money on parking lots. No, anything we can do to reduce the amount of pavement and increase the usable area is going to be beneficial to the community.

Yeah, and I think that's where I appreciate that you all add in added in the maximum. But quite frankly, I'm on the complete opposite end and say we just get rid of them all together. Even if we don't, let me tell you a different thing that I was thinking about that I think maybe mentioned in your report or in the code to I think to get an exception to reduce your parking minimum still required like a traffic study. I feel like, OK, if you're if someone voluntarily wants to build less parking we should let them do that and not make them go spend money on studies that will prove that they don't

So, again, I'm visual on this. just wondering how these changes compare like if we had an example okay you i don't know you're an apartment complex or you're a restaurant center whatever how does this look under current versus new and then i guess um I do like the market to determine things, but also want to make sure we don't have not enough parking. So I don't know where that balance is. But just wondering, like, how much parking would be reduced under these new rules? And then also, what kind of cost impact is that to, you know, to the property owner under the, you know, like, is it saving

Well, let me pick up on that and also what the mayor said about you don't make any money off of parking spaces. When we let the market determine how many parking spaces they build, the answer is generally, well, my neighbor has parking, so I'm just going to piggyback off of him. We've seen that in downtown Pflugerville, where there is a lack of parking. And there's been disputes about the business a using the parking that actually belongs to business B so I am concerned about Completely eliminating those requirements Having some flexibility depending on business type strikes me as reasonable b

And that may be okay. Maybe we're in the lowest quartile of our competitive cities. Even if we don't get rid of them completely, if we're at the lowest minimums of our neighbors.

Find a way to make it make sense. One other thing I want to mention there, you mentioned the public use spaces. And I just want to make sure we don't leave any loopholes in here. I've seen too many 10 by 10 stained concrete pads to say, hey, that doesn't look like a legitimate public use space that was dedicated for the purpose. So I want to make sure, you know, when we've got these regulations in place, we have some efficacy around them, that they will be implemented in the way intended and not abused. I mean, that also goes for the condo regime land use where we've got single family homes on

other thing with public spaces to your point about size and location orientation um going along with that is i just want to make sure that if something is public and they're getting credit for it that it's actually available and accessible to the public and not in the middle of somewhere where like no one knows and it's basically a private park but they got credit for providing public space

That's another area just to point out where I would love to see some way that we're incentivizing people not to use turf. And it looks like you all reduced turf requirements, or maybe you got rid of them, something like that. But I do think if there's an innovative way of enticing more people to not put in grass. That would be fantastic. Okay. When you said turf, I was like, wait.

Yeah. Now we, I mean, it's a reality situation. It's, I mean, it's not going to change. All right.

I think that's another one where we need to think about what you're asking the public because they're just gonna say they don't want one. And I do think there's probably some more optimization in what you all wrote. I think in my opinion, there's a big difference between a five megawatt data center and a 20 or 50, whatever the actual tier was. size scale right yeah well no people won't but yeah it'll matter when one gets built i know and the other thing was for like practical purposes i don't think we have the contiguous land for a hyperscaler anyway um i mean because you're looking at hundred

Sure, yeah. In the reality of the situation, it's the same thing we had the conversation about seven, eight years ago. What's that place that David always makes fun of that it has its own pig, but it hasn't grown outside of the apartment complex? Oh, Pecan District? Yeah, Pecan District. What we do at Pecan District. I do not make fun of Pecan District.

I'm hoping that Pecan District will come to life someday.

Shots fired again One of the specific things we talked about then and we asked for was that They're gonna build a parking garage How are they gonna go ahead and convert that to apartments because the remediation is the reality situation was that? at some point in the future, we're saying, okay, you can have less and less cars for being bought. Same thing I'd like to know about when you're talking about data centers, what are we requiring for them to do after that 20 year mark? Because essentially what the math says is it's much easier for them to just go ahead and ditch it and pay whatever fee

I think to that point, one of the ideas that I've been looking at was whether there's a mechanism that we can get like an annual report or something out of these, right? So how do we get a continuous feedback of how much power, water, et cetera, they're using? Because to your point, over the long term, that could pretty significantly shift and we would never know. I don't know if there's a way to do that type of thing, but that would be... Well, apparently the governor's office is having the same problem. That's why you have to do it proactively.

Yeah, I think... I'm not sure if I've voiced this to this group. My concern around data centers and energy facilities Related there too is not so much that they bring enough power to supply themselves But that they don't consume the entire allotment of power for a larger area we have we see a I Don't want a data center to come in and turn the area around it into a desert Because there's no development potential around it because they can't get any more power to the entire substation so so yeah, we we need to ensure that that If they have an impact on the power grid, they're mitigating the enti

And specifically because of the fact that we know now that they are not built, our grid is not built to go ahead and maintain support. So the reality is, what are you doing with your power grid? with your energy, where's it coming from, how's it going to be sustainable, how's it going to be a reality situation to help, you said mitigate, or ultimately outright go ahead and doesn't affect anything else that's going on in the community. Because, I mean, it's not sustainable, their model right now. And so what does that look like?

Well, so I've wondered, and I don't know that I've seen the answer, although I think people have thrown this out, is when you're looking at this type of use, this certain amount of land that could maybe be used for residential, how does it compare with how much water and energy and other things and traffic and all of that? uh between the different uses because a lot i've been told well this is consuming less energy less water than if we had a single family you know a neighborhood there i don't know if that's true or not i mean i don't know but i'm curious to that and like what is When we talk

Yeah, I don't think, that's a good question, because I mean, I think the reality situation is that they know, you know, you've seen gas power, you've seen nuclear, all these other aspects, but they know that it's not sustainable to go ahead and electric. Their concern is this, is that flat out, is that what happens when they need a backup, and can they go ahead and plug into our grid? And the reality situation is, again, it's not sustainable what they're doing right now. So, i agree with you though like okay listen however you're gonna part with the reality is how are you going to make sure yo

Yeah, I think I was I heard from some folks on the Committee as well that were pretty uncomfortable with that And I am I don't love the idea that we're gonna go in and charge fees to existing homeowners and require new tree permits and mitigation I have a hard time thinking of someone who has a house and is clearing all the trees off and not doing something else. I mean, I'm sure it happens, but people value trees. And I just, I'm not super comfortable with us expanding our own enforcement abilities to

homeowners I think the issue I've seen and I believe in some of our kids excuse me in our beauties we've had this and some of our I think the AL you are that we've implemented in the past they require a certain number of trees per lot they require that those be retained I don't think we have any enforcement mechanism so this sounds like it's adding an enforcement mechanism I'm not so worried about people just chopping down their trees. I'm worried about trees dying. And I've seen regularly where a tree has died and someone put in one that's not as big around as my thumb and it tips over after

So the standard builder installed tree, which is three to five caliber inches, this isn't applicable to that.

Yeah, my concern would be related to when we've got these trees in place, the multiple trees will often, one will out-compete the other. And we'll end up with, oh, you're required to have three trees on your lot, but then, well, one of them overshadows and the others don't make it because you've got one large tree. But you're saying this doesn't apply to those builder-installed trees, those tiny little things? The starter trees. Not the starter trees. It would take several years for them to reach that.

What problem are we trying to solve here with putting this restriction on residentials who've already moved in? I mean, my HOA already requires two trees on a lot. This happened to me. I was not happy about it.

19-year-old tree died, carpenter ants, root problem because we put a nice tree ring that stopped the roots from growing. It was a large tree. And so, you know, and I've seen some stories in our neighboring city about, you know, the city going after people for removing trees that were going to damage their home, you know, or damage their foundation. So I'm... i'm not sure what we're trying to solve here and then um and i also wonder about the additional cost or you know going from a eight inch to a six inch for developments or um i guess i guess i'm just not sure are we like really losing that

that died on us early on and we got in trouble with our HOA with the starter tree and we're like, wait a minute, We're not the ones who put the starter tree in. Why are we getting responsible for that as well? And the person who built the home, which I will not name, refused to... To warranty the tree? Yeah.

I did have one of my trees replaced under warranty at one point in time. It is unbelievable.

Home Depot, they will do it for a year even if it... No, my home builder... Oh, but I got... Trees live and trees die.

During the snow populace, a lot of trees died. You had a dead tree in your front yard, of course you're going to knock it down. And you're not going to replace it with a tree that's the same size. One of my neighbors had a tree that was substantially taller than their two-story house. They didn't replace it with a new tree that was substantially taller than their two-story house. They're not going to, and it's completely unreasonable to expect that. And you can say, okay, you need to have X number of trees. Most, if not all, of the HOAs in the city have some kind of tree requirement. The vast

So to Council Member Ryan's point, I am curious, what problem are we solving with this? You mentioned it only applies to 18-caliber-inch trees, which are substantial trees. I don't know if they're taller than a two-story house, but they're pretty dang tall. What problem are we solving with this?

So what I heard was if we've got someone coming in to flip a house and they want a better picture of the front, so they chop down an 18, 20-inch tree, they've got to replace it.

is that what i heard it's very expensive to remove yeah a large tree yeah yeah yeah three five eight grand depending on the size of the fruit what is it what did you mean by minute if if it's dead or diseased we have ways to mitigate that what does that mean i mean does the homeowner has a dead tree and they still have to go through some city application process no they we have just buy right um allowances yeah not an extra

You don't have to get a tree removal permit if your tree is dead.

Do we have to have somebody come out to the house and certify that the tree is dead? Yeah, how is it police?

Well, because you could have a healthy, I mean, this happened at another property that I own. you have a healthy tree what is going on with you killing trees it wasn't me no this was a different one where a tree was planted without good discussion and it was too close to the house and then now we have six eight thousand dollars of foundation because of this tree And so, like, someone else has mentioned that they have, you know, like, and then, especially if we're going to have smaller lot sizes, how many trees can you fit where it's not going to rip up the, the roots aren't going to, you know,

Yeah, exactly. The tree roots of... I know all sorts of things. When you own a home long enough.

Boy, you have had some serious ass restoration. So I'm just asking this because we also talked about how, I thought of it as turf, but you know, we're talking about zero scaping, promoting some of those aspects. How does that play into that? Because what if I buy a home and I'm like, screw this, I want to go ahead and just get rid of everything. Yeah.

I want to get rid of all the trees and just have cactus in the front yard. Yeah.

So, yeah, what I'm looking for is, yeah, is there a practical reason for us to move forward with that? Because I'm having a hard time finding a practical implementation for that. It seems like a very, very edge potential case.

And then just have an ordinance for those eight trees. I'm sorry. Go ahead. I know you've got a couple more slides.

It's recreational areas that serves the area, but not the larger area. I like that that's a reduction. I'm glad for the reduction.

because the neighborhoods so i mean because the goal is to build on the system right and we need to do it in a smart way but if you get 100 of your parkland just go to your private thing that only you can use then you're not adding to the system and then they're likely also you know to go and put more stress on other systems that are nearby caesar's folks always coming to my park all the time all right

So, I mean, what I said earlier goes back to this. I think if we don't have alternative uses to show this property owner could do A, B, or C, here's the impact of these things because A lot of times it's like, well, I just don't want anything on that land, right? And, you know, people have that about whatever is going to go next to the land, especially if it's been undeveloped for a long time. So I'm real concerned to go out to the public without context.

Well, and to your point, right, like neighborhoods, people don't know what a cottage court is, right? I only barely do. Now, if you show somebody a picture... and say, you know, rank this picture. You know, there's probably ways to do it without just getting people angry about apartment buildings and data centers.

I think you have to do it from a perspective, and I'm assuming y'all are the experts on drafting the survey questions. But my assumption would be, like, on parking... You know, the question you'd ask is that, you know, should we require parking minimums? It's, you know, how would you feel if you have to walk X distance in order to find a parking spot? How would you feel if you couldn't go to this business because you couldn't find a parking spot, right? How would you feel if there were so many parking spots that kids are playing hockey and you can't find a spot because they're all used by kids

Yeah, nimbyism is a real thing. We all know that, right? But if you're able to put things in a context where they understand, as you put it, the downstream ramifications of it, That's when it becomes more curious because even when we talked about parking we were talking about Possible bonds and we talked about downtown the biggest thing that folks I started hearing after we said now they're like well I can't find parking downtown like well, you know, you didn't have this discussion when you had it over there as well I I get that And I think that, I mean, Erica, I saw how you couched the questi

I think on the data centers, yeah, you need to be specific on resource utilization and noise, environmental nuisances. Because that's the biggest thing I'm hearing about data centers is are they generating heat? Are they generating noise? Are they consuming resources that the community needs for other purposes? You know, asking someone, hey, is it okay to build one of this size? Well, if it's silent and it doesn't consume any water.

Yeah. And we got those inherited trees around it. And the giant trees that we cut down and moved over here. Then it's not a big deal. If they're running on their backup generators 23 hours a day, then no, absolutely I don't want that here. I don't want them running on their generators. 30 minutes a day. They can test them and that's it. The only, I've got two points to make quick, and there was one thing I've noticed in the UDC that I didn't see modified here, but it's really more, I guess this is more around residential uses. I saw in commercial uses, we've got, I think it's CL4, allows for o

Do you feel that the feedback we have provided you today would make changes to this in what was released to the public?

True, but we didn't vote on anything here tonight. So you may have heard some feedback from one or two individuals that five or six don't agree with, so we don't necessarily need that being reflected in a draft going out to the public.

So if I'm understanding your approach, it's take the existing draft but formulate questions based on our feedback here today and go ahead and release that to the public?

But you said on the 17th we'll have a meeting before then? No, our next meeting will be the 22nd.

Can you all wait until the 22nd? Can we get another look at this? Do we need another look at this? Do we go forward with what's in there with questions around our feedback?

You're going to ask this person if you need another look at this? It might be useful to see what they do with the feedback they got from us today, especially if, as you say, Mr. Mayor, there's something that one or two people put forward that the other five or six of us don't necessarily agree with. We might want to see that.

And many of those may have been the same things that I said.

Um, but we have that discussion now like is there what are the things that there's general consensus about? What are the things that only one or two people you want to list the five?

I don't know if I actually heard anything that we like totally disagree on. I thought we were just having a discussion. I Thought that's what this was Um for me, um, I guess the only thing that gives me pause is the tree enforcement I love that word that we want to encourage it, I don't know about the enforcement piece of it. Because I think most of us know that trees actually add value, and with the way this heat is, why would you want to cut any trees down? So I think it's more of a conversation, education, awareness, and less oversight and enforcement around the trees. I don't see any reaso

I'm fine with that. I don't think any of us had anything that was too contentious or that we absolutely disliked.

Nothing that changes the direction of the UDC, only that it changes the direction of the questions and questions. feedback that we received.

I mean, it obviously would be nice to see your next draft when it's ready, of course, right? So we can see what you all changed.

Or we'll all see something on the 17th, along with the public.

I guess I would also encourage that you're also listening for the questions that those you are surveying ask, and those questions may lead you somewhere else, just to be open to that.

And when the development community and builders see this, they're going to have a stack of feedback for us to consider.

You say a stack. The other thing that I think we want to think about is what people say and what people do are not necessarily the same. So you may get verbal feedback, I would like X or Y. And then when you look at behavior in the market, it actually turns out people don't want to buy X or Y. They want to buy E and F. That's what they actually do, but they feel like they should want X or Y. So I think it's important when you bring the feedback back to us that it's not just what they say on the survey, but how does that stack up against actual behavior? Behavior in the marketplace.

So we're Steve Jobs and we're gonna tell people what they what they really want.

We're not I think that goes back to my my comment, you know, I asked the question would you purchase a house in this community? Not how do you feel about this design standard? So what I'm hearing I'm Roughly counting. It sounds like we should go ahead and get this out public. You've got the community you've got the feedback for the questions that should be asked. Let's start garnering some feedback and then we'll see where it goes from there. We'll start making decisions.

So is the developer... Feedback going to be during that open house period of September 17th through October 4th. Developers here, as well as developers who do that type of project that we want to be considered. Yeah, it's virtual. Well, I mean, like reaching out specifically, inviting, not just say, hey, fill this out if you want to.

Proactive, invited feedback. We have a list. I would hope so. I hope you've got a list. Go wide. And I'd love to see feedback from outside the region as well. As David mentioned, North Dallas market may be different than the Austin market, but there's a lot of similarities. So let's get feedback from folks who might be interested in entering the market, not just those who are already there.

I mean, that's how we got some of the folks down here years ago. I think we're going to make another trip.

all right uh that takes us to uh the next items on our agenda which are executive session items it's uh we're gonna consider these in the next half hour item 3b executive session pursuant to section uh excuse me chapter 551.072 of the texas government code deliberations regarding the purchase exchange lease transfer and or sale of real property related to the limestone commercial the pfluger farm lane north project Item 3C, Executive Session, Deliberation of Personnel Matters Regarding the Appointment, Employment, Evaluation, Reassignment, and Duties of the City Manager Pursuant to Section 551

Thank you for being here tonight. Next on my list is Charlie Torres.

Incredible timing as well. Next on an item on consent, Les Wall. Les, if you'd come give us your statement.

Thank you, Les. And another item on the consent agenda, DJ Lozada for consent item 5F.

Thank you. Thank you, David. That concludes the citizen comment cards that I have received. Is there anyone else from the public wishing to make comment during this time? All right, we will move forward to item four on our agenda, presentations. I have two presentations to make. The first item I have tonight is a Mayor's Proclamation declaring September 2026 as Preparedness Month in the City of Fleurville. Texas faces many types of disasters each year, reminding us that emergencies can happen at any time. National Preparedness Month encourages everyone to strengthen their readiness to prevent,

Oh, the backup phone. I like that. That was Cesar's phone? I should have just given him my phone.

Council members, that brings us to the consent agenda. Are there any items wishing to be pulled from the consent agenda?

Yes, Mr. Mayor. I have three items. And because today is Star Trek Day, I'm going to give you the letters in the names of alien races from Star Trek. So that's E. L. Aryan. F as in Ferengi and H as in the Horta.

Can you give me those in... E, F, and H. Oh, that's what you're trying to say. D. D. Alright, I've got D, E, F, and H. Stop.

What would be a D Star Trek, David? Daya.

Any other items, counsel? He's not a Star Trek fan. No, I didn't get that. Oh, and we are pulling 5C. There will be no action on that this evening. So Trista, can you read the consent agenda for me?

So moved. Yes. Second. I have a motion and a second.

Mine's broken. Is it broken for everyone?

Yeah, refreshing didn't work. We'll handle this by voice vote. Mr. Ruiz? Yes. Mr. Mateo? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Holliday? Yes. Mr. Kaufman?

Mr. Rogers? Yes. Ms. Ryan? Yes. Mayor votes yes. Consent agenda passes unanimously. Good, because I'm out of practice on that. That brings us to next item on our agenda is item 6A. Item 6A is to discuss and consider action to approve an ordinance on first and final reading with the caption reading, an ordinance of the city of Pflugerville, Texas, adopting the annual budget for fiscal year 2027, providing appropriations for each city department and fund, adopting the city's master fee schedule containing the cumulative clause and containing a savings and severability clause. Director Waldron.

All right. Thank you, Tracy. All right. Council, this is to discuss and consider action. Do we have any questions, discussion related to the budget? I know we've been through it several times. All right. Melody, what questions do you have?

So overall, my goal is to get the overall no new revenue tax rate of 0.5407. And I think we should also evaluate whether we can do better than that. But the bigger issue is the recurring cost base. Pflugerville is currently growing around 1% to 2% per year. So I want to understand whether personnel, contracts, facilities, and service costs are growing at a sustainable rate relative to the population. workload, and comparable communities. I'm looking at both immediate opportunities to lower the fiscal 27 tax and utility rates and structural changes that can reduce pressure in future years. One

OKAY. I GUESS I, WELL, THERE'S A LOT, AND I'M NOT SURE I SAW THAT WRITTEN IN THE BUDGET. OKAY. SO THEN THE OTHER, MY OTHER CONCERNS IS WE HAVE REDUCED OUR PERSONNEL BY 10 POSITIONS OVERALL. But personnel is still going up a lot. And there was a number of different things. And there is a market rate adjustment. And I don't recall receiving any report or anything about that. And we haven't discussed it as a council. So it's a large amount. I'm not saying that I disagree with it. But we haven't had a discussion about it. have the amount like what is the amount that this impacts our budget so thes

I think part of... Oh, no. No, go ahead.

I understand that there is, we're not sure.

And I guess the way I look to the rationale is that the reason why, you know, you said what the specific policy is, I think that, I mean, this is where I give staff a lot of credit because we said, listen, we need, they need some relief. Our citizens need relief right now regarding the economic conditions, everything that's happening around us. What can we do to do that? They went and they took the ball running and because there's SMEs in their own area and they said, listen, we can convert this specific amount $8 million and directly pay it toward that, which we allow for relief in this speci

Some of these things just need further, I feel like there needs to be further discussion and, you know, a policy direction or a strategy of why things are the way they are. Why are you doing that? So it's just that we didn't have a robust conversation last meeting and I had asked for a work session item. I missed the deadline apparently. um so that we could have more of a discussion you know in a work session um so that's why this is my last time to bring these up so i just i want to have more conversations about these types of things that maybe we haven't looked at in a while you know let's I

And then I think my final large thing is, and I brought it up before. I hope so. Okay. the Justice Center courtroom renovation.

There's a $2.2 million CIP, not all of it's in 2027, but it's 2.2 million. And out of that, 58% of it is contingency. So over 1.1 million and whatever it is, is contingency. And it's for 2,500 square feet to include a kitchen and some renovation of this space. So I just feel that's a vastly, overextended on the pricing on that. And that's an opportunity.

Wait, wait, wait. Okay, okay. You said you feel that.

Well, I reviewed some of the details. Well, obviously, half of it is contingency. You know, $80,000 on electronic lines. You know, things like that.

You don't think they did any of the pricing to get some estimate on it?

That was not the response. It said when the scope was more defined, then we could look at the cost.

What do you mean that was not the response? Well, in my written request.

So anyway, I think that is an opportunity that perhaps instead of spending over $2 million on 2,500 square feet, we can reallocate that towards the animal shelter.

I think I like the solution that we found, which I think we found both, you know, how to move both forward. I think one of the things that we've talked about here, and none of y'all get to see this, we get to see this rarely, is just how often this space is used. This is the space that they use for everything going on from there as well. So finally, the ability to convert this space and utilize this space as proper matter in a building. I mean, and that's another thing, too, as well. This building has been held together by shoestrings and bubble gum, I think is the vernacular utilized on this,

Well, I received the Excel spreadsheet, which is $1.1 million in contingency, and normal contingency is 15% to 20%. So I'm not saying that it doesn't need to be renovated. I'm just saying that 2,500 square feet at $2.2 million is a lot. But they're in the market.

$2.2 million for $2,500 per feet is a lot.

I don't know what it costs as compared to you're using it as a police station.

Well, I think if we don't know what it's going to cost, we shouldn't have it.

Wait, wait, wait. No, I said I don't. I'm guessing since they gave that number, they didn't just go... They didn't go like that.

The contingency number that's hot, that's bad,

One of the challenges that we've had, I don't know if you remember the pool bathroom.

Which we had an opportunity to pursue that, and I think it was $650,000, and that seemed like way too much to spend, and so we pushed it off for a year. What a good example. And I think we ended up spending $1.2 million.

Yeah. But. I don't know what the square footage is of that.

Anyway, it's just in the market. Things cost more than we think they do. 2 million for 2,500 per feet. 58% contingency. That's what got me. I'm just telling you.

If there is that much contingency in there, then that tells me that we will have funds available for the uh extended renovations at the animal shelter let's uh let's expect we should we should allocate that now and what is i mean if all we if all we want to do is take the you you said 15 is normal we're at 58 you're saying it's 1.2 million in contingency somewhere around there somewhere around 1.2 million in contingency at 58 roughly 60 so if we move 850 000 of that to the animal shelter You're cool with the budget?

I'm cool with that part of it. Well, I said what I wanted for the budget was .5407.

You're looking for the... What's the impact to the median homeowner at that rate?

I believe I calculated that out to about $24 a year. Does that sound about right?

Yeah. I think you were asking about the no new revenue.

No, no, no. Sorry. No, the difference between the no new revenue and voter-approved rate, I believe, is a difference of $24 to the homeowner. Now, I will also say one of the things that I undertook, because I asked the question, but then I also like to check my work, right? So I pulled every parcel in the city. I looked at everyone who had a homestead exemption last year and everyone who has a homestead exemption this year. I looked at their assessed value for each year, and I looked at the rates to see what is the impact, not just to the median home, but to... most people in the city, and I f

I was about to say, but that's not, okay, yeah, I was about to say, you know, you can't make that argument because that's the way tax rates work.

Frequently we'll hear, oh, no, my value went up, but the rate went down. Well, why did my value went up? My value went down, but the rate went up. Well, that's bad, too. What I believe matters to our homeowners is dollars. not rates, not values, but dollars that they pay in taxes. And if 70% of our homeowners are paying less at this rate, I think that's a very compelling story.

so the other thing though is that you can't look at one year in a vacuum it's over time and so i did look at my own personal residence and you know just like when did when when values started really skyrocketing and so from 2020 until 2026 with this estimated my property taxes went up 1345 dollars a year just for the city So I'm just saying at one year, like, that's great. I mean, I'm in that 30%, you know, so, and I'm happy that 70% are going to get a reduction, but their, their increase from 2020 and over the last five years, it's been significant. And so, so yes, but we can, I think we can

No, no, indeed. I mean, I saw your post online and I wanted to do the math as well. So you posted from 2008 to 2026. And what was your annualized increase in your taxes?

From 2028 to 2028? No, from 2008 to 2026, yeah. Well, I don't have it in front of me.

Okay. Well, when I did the math, it was 2.8% per annum with a CPI of 2.5. So it certainly has increased over the term that any of us have lived here. Which is the expectation. But has it?

But most of the increase has happened in the last five years, five, six years.

I mean, I would argue that our quality of life has also dramatically increased in the last 14 years that I've been here or whatever, right?

I think you're putting that lightly. And I think that's the reality. And we had this conversation many moons ago when it was at 8%. We had the conversation about, okay, do we need 8%? What's happened with the reality? And specifically, what we do is figure out, okay, what do we need? What do we want? And we go lower than 8% and trying to go from there, but our growth was going substantial with that. Now you're, I mean, again, telling y'all this, something that y'all are well aware of is that, you know, you have 3.5 and you see what's happening with the city. Like, let's be clear. If any citize

But these are real decisions that are really impacting cities, not just across Central Texas, but across the state.

So one of the things that we have said over and over, and I appreciate that PCDC is in the house representing, is that economic development is supposed to relieve tax residents. And we've grown and whatever. So the other thing is looking at it at a per capita basis, which I did. So 10 years ago, on a per capita basis, our property taxes was $366 per person. And now it's around 780. And so that's the other thing, is economic development and bringing up, we've brought in a lot of things. We have brought in a lot of things over these last 10 years. But yet, on a per capita basis, we are paying mo

Tracy, real quick, could you remind me, how much do we expect to collect in total from property tax? I believe it's about $30 million.

In general fund. And our public safety, our police department, that budget alone is over $25 million, right? I think that's always an important thing to remember. It's in the budget.

I pulled that from the budget. I was going to say, let's be clear what the mayor said about that. So pull in 30, 25 law enforcement. And let's be clear, no matter what city you live in, Law enforcement services are going to be the biggest part of your budget, no matter what. And you've got to understand that that is not Pflugerville, that is not Austin, Dallas, that's how it is in America. And that's what drives a lot of the cops. So if you want to continue, because we talk about, as Councilman Rogers talks about, having one of the safest cities in America and working for those things. How are

Let me bounce off of some of those ideas, because I want to first of all aggressively agree, if you'd like to say, WITH YOU THAT OUR PRIORITY SHOULD BE POLICE, ROADS, WATER, AND PARKS. THOSE ARE THE FOUR, TO MY MIND, ESSENTIAL THINGS THAT THE CITY DOES. I WOULD, HOWEVER, TAKE SOME EXCEPTION TO YOUR statement that none of this was predictable. In 2020 and 2021, under both Republican and Democratic administrations, the federal government printed an unprecedented amount of money. The idea that you could do that and not have large inflation after that is just ridiculous. Everybody knows if you pri

Why are we spending almost double that? On the Monarch. No, why are we spending almost double on it?

Because the council approved spending almost double on it without going to the citizens. The idea that we couldn't foresee that there would be substantial expenses and that the number of FTEs that are required for those new buildings, which are greatly in excess of our current needs, that we couldn't foresee that that would cause an economic problem, and that it would cause shortfalls for the budget going forward. is just not credible. It was completely foreseeable. I foresaw it. I warned this council about it. And of course, Councilman Coffman wasn't here then. But the rest of you all decided

Tracy, I had a couple questions. I know Melody went through all hers. Real quick, there are a couple that caught my attention. I just wanted to see if we could get some quick clarification on it. The bond contract, the contract for bond services, was that included in this year's budget or was that in last year's budget?

Okay. And then there was a mention of market rate adjustment. Is that specifically the police department market rate adjustment, or is there a separate market rate for adjustment for general employees?

during the year and then there's the market adjustment that's built into the budget for the sworn officers okay and then the uh the the cola is three percent correct all right so how much is the how much is in the budget for market rate adjustments i believe we added the language i believe it averages like 2.8 not for police but for general uh employees

Everything else is COLA. Okay, that's not what I had heard in the question, so I wanted to clarify that because I had that same conversation down at CapCog related to the CapCog budget here a little bit ago. We have zero market adjustment, zero merit adjustment. It's strictly COLA. cost of living adjustment in our budget for personnel other than the sworn officers. Thank you for that clarification.

To bounce off of your question, Mr. Mayor, are the sworn officers getting two different adjustments or just the one adjustment, the market rate adjustment, not that plus the COLA, it's only the market rate adjustment?

Okay. So the sworn officers will be getting a larger percentage raise than the general civilian population in the city. Okay. Thank you for clarifying that.

All right. Council, do we have any other questions related to this item? All right, this is to discuss and consider action to approve an ordinance on first and final reading. As I mentioned, this is, I was glad to do that math that showed 70% of our homesteaded homeowners will pay less. I'm also super excited that this includes the master fee schedule, which adopts a reduction in our water and wastewater rates, also providing dramatic relief to our residents. Council, do I have a motion to approve the ordinance?

I'd like to move two amendments. Mr. Mayor, I would like to move a one-third reduction on the roadway impact fee. And I would like to move that we move that $800,000 that was discussed earlier from the overage for this renovation to the work on pause. That's the Pflugerville area animal shelter.

I believe that impact fee motion would be out of order. Mike?

No, it's on, okay. I'm sorry, I thought that was a part of the master fee schedule. No. All right. Well, then, just a motion to move the $800,000 from the overage.

I'm sorry, is that a motion for approval with that amendment?

Okay. Does that get you on board? Well, let's see what happens to the amendment.

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. We've danced this way before. He asked you a specific question, and he asked you that question for a reason. Yes or no?

I would love... for this council to show unity on this, if that's what it takes to get you on board, then I would be interested in that amendment.

Do you hear that? You have a second. If it gets you on board.

What about a motion for the no new revenue rate at 0.5407 with the amendment of moving the $800,000 out of the Justice Center courtroom to animal shelter.

Further discussion? Go ahead and restate that motion.

Do I need to do it in any sort of requirement?

No, no. We just need to make sure that folks know what they're voting on.

I motion that we adopt the overall no new revenue tax rate of 0.5%.

So I am going to pause you there because that's not the agenda item we're on currently. That 6B would be the tax rate. This is specifically the budget. So I would advise if that's your intention that you identify the, what is it, $1.1, $1.2 million necessary in order to reach that rate.

It wasn't a million between .5407 and .5407.

Well, that was Councilman Rogers' motion in our last budget meeting. Right. You were asking about $3,000, $1,000,000. The answer was $1,000,000. Somebody's got to find $1,000,000.

There's the debt and the M&O. So you could do no new revenue on one and not on both.

Okay. I wanted to reduce it by $336,000, which was my calculation to get us from 0.5436 to 0.5407. So the 5436 is the total of the two rates.

So I'm not suggesting that we go to the no new M&O rate. I'm suggesting that we go to, because it was listed somewhere that the overall no new revenue rate was 0.5407.

I already have a motion and a second. We're in further discussion. But we were... But I do believe that motion was out of order since it was related to the rate.

Yeah, that's why I was... All right, you tell me. I don't know what... I do have a... I have a question on this item still about something else, though.

So the previous motion, Mike, do I need to take action to dispense with the previous motion since it was out of order?

That was on the rate, and the rate is six feet. What we're talking about now is the budget, so do I have a motion on the budget?

Motion to approve ordinance number 80899 to adopt the city's budget for fiscal year 2027 on first and final reading.

I have a motion and a second. Do I have any further discussion?

I have a question. Does this include the policies, the financial policies that we're approving? Okay, because there were changes that we have not discussed, but the ordinance said that it was discussed and that there was due deliberation, but there were changes. Changes in the policies and that I didn't find, I didn't recall and I didn't see it in our presentation that any of the changes.

Well, I saw new information added that wasn't redlined, um, and just wanted, uh, not from proposed to final financial management policy. I thought, and I just wanted an overview of the main changes in those because they had had effective dates in 2026 and we hadn't discussed them or we hadn't approved them separately, which is what the ordinance said, that they had been approved separately.

All right. Council, you have a question in front of you.

Was this my motion? No, this was Rudy's motion to approve. Motion passes 5-2. Okay. We've got a second item on that slide once we get back to it.

I know I can't. Motion, Mayor, you're in charge of motion. Motion to ratify a vote to adopt a budget that would require raising more revenue from property taxes than the previous fiscal year. I love that. Second.

All right, I have a motion and a second, and I believe this is the motion that requires 60%. That's tax rate, okay. No, this is still a majority vote. Motion passes 5-2. We will move on to Item 6B. Tracy, this is still you. This is to conduct a public hearing on the proposed property tax rate of 54.5436. Let's go with that.

It's a beautiful slide, Tracy. Tracy just wanted to see us do the math on the desk.

I'm tempted to make the comment that David made about... I'll leave it. If you making a comment about how huddles tax rate is about half or or how he talked about hey these cities aren't they're not growing Actually, this is a public hearing I'm gonna invite anyone from the public wishing to speak on this item Come forward you'll have three minutes

Thank you. Is there anyone else from the public wishing to speak?

I've got a motion to close the public hearing. Do I have a second? Second. I have a second. This is a motion to close the public hearing. Let's see if this actually works.

And would you entertain a motion at this time?

No, now I will open item 6C. This is where the rubber meets the road here. This is to discuss and consider action to approve an ordinance on first and final reading. With the caption reading, an ordinance levying an ad valorem property tax for the use and support of the municipal government for the city of Pflugerville, Texas for fiscal year 2027, apportioning each levy for specific purposes and providing when taxes shall become due and when same shall become delinquent if not paid. Tracy.

And this is our motion that statutorily requires 60%. Council, any questions, concerns, or motions?

So just to clarify the math, when I use 0.5407, which is the overall no new revenue, not the maintenance operations no new revenue, it generates $67,157,186. And compared to the projected revenue levy in the budget, that is a reduction of $360,192. So that would be the debt rate of .2826 plus an M&O rate of .2581, and those together is the .5407. So that is what my proposal would be.

Could you clarify for me? You did the math on that. What's the math on the median home value or the average home value?

Yeah. Well, what's the impact of that difference on our homeowners?

It would be a reduction of $11. Okay. So is this where if I wanted to make a motion, I could do it in this language and substitute the rate?

You'd have to get the percentage right, but yeah. Unless someone else beats you to it.

make a motion I would like to make a motion to approve ordinance number 0898 and that the property tax rate be increased by the adoption of a tax rate of .5436 which is effectively a 3.46% increase in the tax rate alright I have a motion second I have a second

All right, let's do a discussion real quick. Do we have any further discussion?

Yeah, so there's a certain advertisement going around that's saying that cities want to go ahead and raise your taxes, and that's ridiculous and absurd. Is that advertisement out there because this specific language that we're being forced to say, even though 75% of people, it's actually going down, is that why that advertisement's even out there? Again, I don't think any citizens, any city council I've ever met in my life saying, yes, we want to go ahead and just raise your taxes. I think in fact what they say is... Have you ever been to Austin?

Again, again... The tax revenue is going up from $66.8 million to $67.5 million.

So that's an increase in the tax... And what I'm saying is that you're talking about, and we've talked about a lot of things tonight, and to your point... You're worried about how things are going to be paid for. I'm telling you right now, the biggest concern is going to be how the legislature is going to go ahead and affect the way that you're going to be able to operate moving forward.

Which is why we have to tighten our belts.

or have people understand how cities are run. Because remember, 80% of the revenue for the state of Texas comes from cities. Cities are the engine. We talk about the Texas miracle. It's because of cities, not because of the legislature. Let's be clear. It's cities that are there. Cities that partner with businesses. People who actually invest in their communities. These are the things that attract people from there. They don't come here and say, man, that's a great legislature. They come here because they have great cities, great schools, great parks, great roads.

Well, they live in other places because they have terrible legislatures.

All right. All the votes are in. That passes 5-2. I believe that exceeds 60%. All right. Thank you, council, for that. I know. Tracy, especially, I want to thank you for your fortitude in getting us through that budget. I want to thank this council for establishing goals and policies and expectations on the way we serve our citizens. And I want to thank you for making the hard decisions that we have to to make this happen. And I want to thank the citizens and reinforce that I think 70% our homeowners will be paying less to the city this year than they did last and i think that that does speak

I mean, that was a dilapidated old gas station. That was horrible.

Thank you, Emily. I do have an individual public wishing to speak on this item. DJ Lizada, if you'd come forward, you'll have three minutes on this item.

Thank you. Council, any questions on this item?

Well, I sent questions in advance, which Ms. Lozada covered basically all of them. My other question THAT WASN'T COVERED IS WHEN A NORMAL BUSINESS IS GOING TO BUILD A RESTAURANT OF THIS SIZE, ROADWAY, WATER, AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES ARE ALSO ADDED TO THAT BUSINESS AND THE COST OF BUILDING THAT. SO THAT'S ANOTHER CONSIDERATION OF, YOU KNOW.

I get it. But at the same time, we all have sat here many times over many hours talking about how we don't get restaurants and small businesses because of these impediments. And I do want to give staff credit for architecting a solution that's going to make a business, a small business, locally owned business, be able to expand and fully grow, hire new people, and solve for that problem. They're being given an opportunity to succeed in Excel. I hope that we can extend that same courtesy to OTHER COMPANIES AND THROUGH ADDITIONAL SUPPORTS FOR SMALL BUSINESSES. AND SO I THINK IT'S A GREAT OPPORTU

President Kennedy asked, why do we do the hard thing? Why does Rice play Texas? We do it because we learn from the process. This is the kind of backroom, closed process that I objected to months ago when we did it the last time. Just like the last time, I like The selection.

The last time was when we selected our city manager without doing a search of any kind. And I asked them, why did Bryce play Texas? And it's the same answer. We learn from the process. We bring our best efforts to the process. And we ultimately get not just a better process, but a better result. West Pecan's a great coffee shop. I've eaten there, eaten and had coffee there many times. In fact, I think I've had coffee up there with most of the people on this dais. It's not the only coffee shop in town that's locally owned. I'd like to know if all of the other coffee shops in town were given an

First of all, you're not supposed to talk about executive session in the open. That's a violation of our internal rules. Secondly, The idea that we're only going to have a single bidder was never presented. The idea that we were going to have somebody run the coffee house inside the city council was presented. But the idea that nobody else got an opportunity to be part of it was not part of the discussion.

So, Emily, can I ask some questions since everyone else is having their moments? If I recall correctly, even before we thought of what businesses were going to fill into these positions, The previous city manager and staff reached out to several local businesses and other folks that they thought they may have been interested in operating in that space. Is that correct?

And we also made reference and let people know in the community that, hey, if you have interest in this space, please sign up. Because I know personally, I sent three or four businesses because you guys talked about it and they're like, oh, yeah, I'm interested. Let me go ahead and talk about this as well. So when I hear this wasn't like some open process or people didn't have opportunities, That's just not true. Now, I think you're talking about a procurement process standard by the state of Texas. That's true. But this was definitely a process where people got opportunities to ask, hey, list

Because again, let's be clear, this is not going to be the only thing that we got there. We still have opportunities in other places for this, for that as well. This is just one of many right there as well. At some point, we'll be able to announce the restaurant that we're looking at and other things like that as well. I want to make sure for citizens, you're hearing a lot of back and forth over here with it as well. The process was known. It was made known to us. I know that citizens and business owners were cognizant of it because they reached out to me, and I know they reached out to staff

So we did have a public RFP process like we've done with other... No.

And those are where we would potentially need a 380 agreement if we were trying to support a local small business to expand within downtown East.

Those would be private locations that we would be partnering with. As compared to what we own.

And I was about to say, we have an economic development director who specifically denoted in his plan talking about these businesses and what the biggest issue is because I sleep next to somebody every night, who's lived here for 40, what?

Long enough, long enough, long enough. Who talks about what the storefront looks for our businesses, for these restaurants. And for us to be able to, how do we work to help fix that? Because we do have a variety of, I mean, I've said it before and I'll say it again. There are major Fortune 50 companies They're along our 130 corridor who miss being near Pflugerville because they were able to go to so many different restaurants and different restaurant options here. And people just don't see it because they don't see the store. They don't like the storefront. They don't see what the restaurant,

so i have a follow-up question um you know and i'm i'm happy to hear that there's excitement um but if there is excitement about coming in and joining downtown east uh it just seems like a you know free rent and all of the equipment uh you know can we find someone who will pay market rent i i mean that's just what comes to mind what what is what is market rent

I don't have that with me. No. We've got a CPI calculator I know in the lease.

So one other question. Was there a reason that we didn't have PCDC involved in paying for these, you know, the free rent or the cost of the equipment so that it didn't come out of general fund?

Probably because it's retail. I don't think that's an allowable project expense for PCDC.

That's our restaurant space we're leasing to an operator. That's right. It's not like they get to carry it away at the end of the lease. That's our equipment.

I guess because the only thing that comes up for me around that is, you know, sometimes once you're in, you're in, no one else can come in. What does that look like in four years for the procedure of, because now it's open, it's established, you know, people have memberships at the Monarch, what the opportunities will look like in four years for someone else to be able to come in?

And I like the way you put it, dominoes, because I will tell, y'all, what is today? 9, 8, 2026. I'm telling you that this is going to blow up. I'm telling you. Like, I mean, this is going to make a big economic impact here in Fulgham. I'm telling you that because it's something that we have decided what we want to see here. And we've set the standards. So now we require all the developers moving forward what that looks like. And us investing our city, investing our community, betting on ourselves, I'm telling you this thing's going to blow up.

So just a clarification because to I saw in the lease agreement that there's an extension option, and they have the option to extend the lease for up to two additional terms of five years each. So that's an additional 10 years after that. Unilateral? Well, it says that they have to give notice six months prior of its notice of intent to exercise each extension option. so and so to me that says if they say we want to extend then the city is agreeing i mean i think right like i don't think our goal should ever be to turn over a business in a yeah and they're she asked about the other possibiliti

So they would be faced with the opportunity to renew and they would not be subsidized.

But we wouldn't be necessarily revisiting it if they exercised their option to extend.

Yeah, I just wanted to clarify. We're not going to revisit this unless they... Well, let's also be clear.

You're the city council. You can revisit anything six flights from Sunday. So you can revisit it.

I think there is the general termination clauses in there. But this does appear that if... the company wants to extend, they're the ones that extend, and then it's extended.

Correct. And again, but we also have, as Mike has mentioned, and any other, David, myself, anyone who's been an attorney for cities, though, we do have the ability to go ahead and terminate and work on things, and it's been exercised numerous times by different cities. So if you're not seeing what's going down, and you're not liking what's happening with West Pecan,

I mean, I'm more concerned there's going to be too many people in the lobby. Oh, I mean, this is... How many people... Good problem to have.

How many times have we talked to people specifically saying, hey, listen, they want to have more of a space where they can just go and work and lounge. They've taken over West Pecan. If you've gone to...

Yeah, Tee-Keezy. That's another place where people have just taken over the spots over here with this wall of things. This is going to blow up. I'm telling you that.

Well, Rudy, you mentioned this too, and I'm sure other council members as well, right? The businesses that are inquiring about the rest of our space over there are 100% the things that our residents have been asking for, right? Yeah. On all the sticky notes and stuff for downtown East, those are the companies that are actually reaching out.

Or when a crazy executive director puts out a Facebook post asking what businesses and restaurants people want. Yeah, those are the ones that are not there.

What, specifically what other businesses were offered this deal?

So no other restaurant or coffee business in Pflugerville approached you about this?

But if we had had an open bidding process, there could be other businesses that want to expand it to an additional location that could have been interested and applied.

That is true. I was about to say, I know that there are numerous businesses numerous minority-owned businesses, numerous women-owned businesses who have been reached out and talked to about our space. Like, I mean, that's just, this is me saying that. This is not something hyperbole or theoretical. I know that's been happening.

Move to approve the ordinance authorizing a lease with two rooms LLC for the City Hall Cafe. Second.

I have a motion and a second. I can't believe you said it that quickly.

Motion passes 5-2. And I will say I am indeed excited that we are committing to our small local businesses, allowing them to expand, helping those small businesses. I know that's an important part of what we've talked about. on this council and our commitment to those homegrown businesses that are showing potential and have shown previous success. I'm glad that they will continue to be able to do so. uh that brings us i'm going to take us back to our consent agenda before we move on to our executive session item so i'm going to bring us to item 5d that is a professional services agreement betw

Well, I was curious about the comments that were brought up during on this from the public about a previous deal and cost participation and So I didn't know if there was any history that anyone could add on that. But the other question that I had was just in general about construction materials testing and whether is this an item that is gonna be on all of our roads or is this specific roads or, and then if it's all roads or specific roads, is there a way to, have a larger scope to cover multiple roads. I'm not sure. When I looked back and did my research on the last time we had construction m

David, what happened to Grand Avenue Parkway?

I was going to say, it wasn't Grand Avenue Parkway our lesson. Yeah. Do you remember that? Were you here for that? I drove up and down that all the time.

Okay, well, I remember about that, but I'm just unclear as to whether this is going to be on every road or if it's only specific roads.

So I would expect this to be included on every road. I believe, if I'm not mistaken, this is... This amount, the amount of this contract, is included in the budget for this particular item, and we're still within budget on this project. Is that accurate?

Okay. So this was anticipated as being part of this project? Correct. Right. Melody, does that answer your question?

well i had that question about the bidding process because the summary was silent on whether this was bid and this is a different when i looked it up it seemed to be a different firm than the last time we approved someone for construction materials testing so just wondering about the bidding process

So to help understand this process, this is a professional services agreement. Professional services agreement don't necessarily go through bidding. They go through qualifications. We identify firms that are qualified to provide these services, and then we contract specifically with those firms. under a professional service agreement, not a construction contract.

All right. And to be fair, just like you said, we go down the list for each and every one of them because they all are, you know, pre-qualified. We figure out who's available. Yeah.

Who's got, who can meet the schedule and who is hopefully reasonably priced.

No smoke-filled back rooms, right? No cigars.

So, but then in that example of there's six, all six have been determined to be qualified and therefore made the list?

And that's the prior action that we approved, correct? Yes, correct. Melody, does that answer your question?

Well, my original question was, if we're going to be doing this on all of the roads, is there an opportunity for including more than one, or is it because of this, now that I know about this qualifications list, can we just get a better deal if we have more than one contract, more than one road at a time that they handle?

Okay, so that's why it's coming separately and not under the, okay.

Well, it's professional services, not construction. Correct. That's another reason why it's separate. Because that's why attorneys and everything else, professional services. And this process is designed to get us the best possible deal. The best value. The best value. I was about to say, wait a minute, is he trying to make a pun? Okay. Best value.

And my written question had been, have we found issues in the past that this service is trying to solve? And so what I'm hearing now is our problem with... all right because that was before my time and so i'll try to oh you drove oh you drove on it though oh yeah i don't i don't drive down that road you don't care about our roads unbelievable i don't even know if i want to talk to you anymore

Motion to approve 5D as presented. I have a motion and a couple of seconds. You are it.

I do love Kenny Ford. It's one of my favorite roads.

It is shocking how much time it saves. Motion passes unanimously. That brings us to item 5E, which is a professional services supplement agreement number 5 between the city and Burns and McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. in the amount of $91,851.89. the construction phase services associated with tr 2010 city intersection improvements fm 685 at copper mine overpass david i believe you pulled this are you looking for do you have a question or are you looking for a record presentation about copper mine overpass beyond what was in the packet i would like that too because i had questions uh well

The exact lanes that are being added because the map was in black and white and it was unclear to maps. Yeah, I'm visual. It was unclear to me about the new, what was going to be the new traffic pattern. So that's what I asked for.

Wasn't that last meeting what I was going to say?

Didn't we already do that? No, that was the other end. That was Kelly Lane. Do we have a map of this that we can put on the screen?

Hendrickson uses it every day, people from Hendrickson. So I wanted to. All right.

Not on the slides. We don't have a slide. Not on the slide. Could you give us a quick description of what this supplemental agreement number five covers? Can somebody go to Google Earth?

Google Earth will tell you what it is, not what it's going to be.

What would you like to add? This is professional services supplement agreement number five. Tell us what we're getting for $91,851.89.

This being... PSSA number 5, I believe this intersection improvement project included some other intersections. Have we previously approved the lane layout, the traffic design for this project?

So this is a contract to update standards to TxDOT requirements and get us through construction phase. Correct.

Hold on, I've got a motion from David and a second from Jonathan. Further discussion.

I'd like an explanation of what is changing in this intersection with the lanes and the direction.

Can we request that it maybe gets put in the weekly?

Yeah, I think that's a request for a weekly because I do believe we've approved that prior. This is a bit more focused item right now. Can we get that map in the weekly in the future? All right. Colored. burnt orange all right motion passes unanimously that brings us to item 5f ironically 5f is in fit authorizing project fit including not including but not limited to the monarch recreation center funding in an amount not to exceed $4,642,592 for the maintenance and operation costs pursuant to authorized projects under Texas local government code section 505.152. David, I believe you pulled thi

Yeah, I think we've discussed this, and I think Ms. Lozado gave a strong case for opposition on this one. And I don't think we needed anything other than a record vote. Ms. Lozado wants to talk about it some more.

I had questions that I sent in advance about this because there was no documentation in the packet.

This is the deal we previously have put together for the business case of cost recovery. So I don't think, I assume, my assumption was it's the exact same thing that we've been talking about, right?

And we got a presentation at PCDC on it too.

So I want to make sure, Trace, correct me if I'm wrong, tell me if I'm wrong here, because I feel like this is deja vu all over again. So, Yogi Berra. That's exactly what's happening here. As Trace, she explained explicitly to us is that, hey, listen, it's not all going to be an escrow for this specific amount. This is what the specific year was, and here's the first one, the two-point, whatever it is right there as well. Then after that, they're going to keep looking and revisit and looking at that. This is just ultimately, in case anything happens, this is what they have up to that limit, bu

There's no documentation saying, so I don't know any of that because the agenda item, there was no agenda item besides the summary. It just says 4.6 million. It doesn't say 2.1 and other years.

This is the exact, like, I got the, I mean, we've done it before. Like, literally, this is the conversation we had before. Am I wrong?

I was expecting us to come back and decide this after the Monarch opened and we saw what our financial needs were. They need the money now. There's been no discussion about needing the money. That wasn't part of the discussion. I guess maybe everyone's having other discussions.

Alright folks. So my understanding of this is that we approved a resolution that went to the PCDC board, which they approved and is coming back to us for ratification. So this is a resolution that we have previously passed. Am I mistaken? No. Please correct me. I'm always happy when I'm wrong.

We just talked about it at a retreat We approved 2.1

This is something, this is for the five years, and there's no, I mean, I don't know. I would like to see how over the five years.

You can say call the question anytime you want. I said you can say call the question.

There hasn't been a motion yet. Yeah, there is.

I don't have a motion on the table yet, do I? Yeah. Do I have a motion?

I'd like to hear from... I have a motion and a second. Okay. From PCDC? Jerry, you want to come tell us what you presented to the board and what they approved? What your expectations are and what the boards are? But I know we talked about it.

I know it was a great presentation. I thought this was our idea. Like, literally. Yeah, that's what I was just like, wasn't it our idea? Yeah. Did you improve our idea, Jerry?

Hold on. Let's give the presenter the opportunity since we requested him be up here. Jerry, I appreciate you being here. I know it's hot. Tell us what you did. This was like last Wednesday? Yes.

I'm just wondering what financial analysis that we have done about the impact that this is going to have on PCDC and our ability to execute on other projects like Project Nexus or other initiatives if we are committing these funds.

That's a council question. That is a question of council.

So I will share my perspective, and I've been around longer than I want to admit sometimes. When I was actually talking to folks today in preparation for PCDC's 25th anniversary about how when I first joined the PCDC board, the annual sales tax collections, the annual budget at PCDC was $2 million.

Oh, my God. So much money. So much money.

So much money. And now the sales tax collections are somewhere between $10 and $12 million a year.

The PCDC numbers are, for some reason, a little bit different than the city numbers due to the way some of that is aggregated. uh and one of the things i've heard from from people in the past is hey why aren't we using some of that sales tax to offset the the property tax burden uh and what we've done the last few years when i look at this and i say oh my god we've we've increased in in just 16 years uh five or six fold the amount of money that we're bringing in at pcdc the ability to leverage some of that money to help cover these expenses seems seems incredibly responsible we still have a wa

I didn't hear an answer to Councilwoman Ryan's question. Those were some nice words, but... The question was, have we done an analysis to see how this will affect the ability of PCDC to proceed with Project Nexus and other similar projects going forward?

I mean, I don't know that we do that with any of their, I mean, each one of their projects has a financial analysis to it. Absolutely.

And I'm going to bother, I'm going to bother, borrow one of Jonathan's terms, is that make it an issue i mean in all sincerity i mean this is this is the problem it's not it you know you're saying have we done the analysis for it okay so let me go and do the corollary of that show me where that's going to inhibit that because anything that we've seen so far is we're talking about that utilization of a new facility to go ahead and jump growth and economic progress based on what we're seeing in the marketplace for such a facility in the state of Texas, least of which here in Central Texas. This

No, you're trying to prove a negative. The question was, has there been a study? The answer is no, there hasn't been a study. So when would there ever be a study?

Yeah, yeah. Show me what the analysis... No, he said the study. Please, show me where that would happen.

So if the question is financial analysis, every project at PCDC has a financial analysis component, correct? Each one.

Are you sure you're not bankrupting PCDC at some point in those five years?

I know. Counsel, there is a question before you.

Just for clarity, the monarch, it will only be available for people set up for memberships. Is that correct?

I mean, I guess we haven't officially voted on it, but we did just spend...

I'm just saying there was a comment made about, well, this is for the good of the community and the taxpayers. But this is an enterprise fund that's limited. I just want to be clear, that's an enterprise fund limited to people who pay a membership. So it's not going to necessarily be open to any taxpayer. Just the ones who sign up for membership.

So let's be clear. No, that's not true. We're going to have daily memberships too, right? Let's be clear.

I think we're going to have daily memberships. Isn't that part of the plan?

And I'm sure there are programs. Because let's be clear that, again, this council made the decision that it wants a 100% recruitment, which changed what was the trajectory in the first place regarding when it was initially voted on. What we've said is that we want fees to be at a specific level to be able to have that 100% recruitment. Additionally speaking, there will be daily passes, and just by nature of the facilities there, you're going to have people renting out space. I'm thinking about parties and everything else. It's going to be like, yes. Literally, for the seniors... Again, I just

And then when you does you'll see where the momentum is going to counsel There's a question to be clear because we haven't said said it and If we say it's open for all taxpayers, but then we go and set membership fees now and limits then it's not I'm gonna change directions. Yeah, I'm not just I'm just I'm gonna be clear on what we're doing and how we portray it Oh

Motion passes 5-2. That takes us to item 5-H. This is a resolution amending the Youth Advisory Council to open eligibility to Pflugerville ISD students outside of city limits. David, are you looking for a question or a regular vote?

I'm curious why... Do you hate kids, David? Well, I'm curious...

It's not very neighborly for you to say.

We have... taxpayer supported services. We're now opening it up to people outside of the city limits. I want to know why.

You have a sunk cost if you do it, and so this would just increase membership. Correct.

I mean, there probably are some variable costs.

And I can't believe I'm saying this. To defend David, I mean, I get the idea that, hey, wait a minute, you know, this is the city of Pflugerville, this is the other, but you know what? City of Austin, some other cities that we have around here, they, you got folks who may not live in there for their for some of these committees and some of these other groups that they have going on where they want to invite participation. I think it makes sense when you're talking about the ISD. And it is kind of weird that you go to school, somebody say, hey, listen, I got on the, what's the acronym again? YA

This is pretty awesome. I'm excited. And then they're like, hey, I want to join it. And then that trust is going to say, sorry, you're having a wrong idea. Because if you didn't know, you lived in the ETJ. You're in Hidden Lakes.

You mentioned that there were some years when you didn't make five. Were those years other than the COVID years? Yes. Previous or after? After COVID.

I would like to make a motion to approve.

I have a motion from Kimberly, and I'll let you choose that second. There we go.

Wait, no, let's see. Let's see if we should take a picture. No!

Okay, there we go. You nailed this. All right. That concludes the items pulled from the consent agenda. We will return to two items in executive session. That's item six. Excuse me. Item 7D, Executive Session for Deliberation of Personnel Matters Related to the Appointment, Employment, Evaluation, Reassignment, and Duties of the City Manager pursuant to Section 551.074 of the Texas Government Code. And Item 7E, an Executive Session Item Consultation with City Attorney. pursuant to section 551.071 of the Texas government code regarding interlocal agreement between the city and Travis County eme