8.1. Consideration and possible action regarding possible appointments, re-appointments and/or removals to City Boards, Commissions, Task Forces, Economic Development Corporations, Local Government Corporations and Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Boards, and Area Government appointments.

[8.1. Consideration and possible action regarding possible appointments, re-appointments and/or removals to City Boards, Commissions, Task Forces, Economic Development Corporations, Local Government Corporations and Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Boards, and Area Government appointments. ]

>> THAT CONCLUDES OUR PUBLIC COMMENT. WE HAVE CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE APPOINTMENTS, REAPPOINTMENTS OR REMOVALS TO CITY BOARDS. TASK FORCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS AND TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARDS AND

AREA GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS. >> WE DO HAVE ONE FOR THIS WEEK.

WE HAVE DONE SOME INTERVIEWS WHERE WE ARE CONTINUING TO INTERVIEW. WE STILL HAVE OPENINGS. WE HAVE OPENINGS ON THE BOARD NUMBER THREE, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION, PARKS ADVISORY BOARD, PLANNING AND ZONING AND THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. WE STILL HAVE OPENINGS SO PLEASE GO ONLINE AND SUBMIT. WE ARE STILL DOING INTERVIEWS. WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT FOR BOARD NUMBER ONE WHICH IS THE CO-OP. APOLOGIZE IF I GET THIS WRONG PER. WE DID INTERVIEW HIM AND FELT HE WAS VERY WELL QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. THAT IS THE ONLY RECOMMENDATION.

>> IS THAT A MOTION? >> YES THAT IS A MOTION.

>> SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK.

>> WHICH NUMBER WAS THAT? >> NUMBER ONE. THE CO-OP.

>> FURTHER REMINDER TO ONCE YOU APPROVE OF RECOMMENDING IT TO CITY SECRETARY, THE RECOMMENDATION JUST BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A LOT OF APPLICATIONS. SO JUST TO VERIFY.

>> MAYOR SNYDER. COUNCILMAN BERT THOMPSON. COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. GORDON. COUNSEL FOR

CLARK. COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> PASSES 7-0. ARE YOU ON ANY

BOARDS? WHICH ONES? >> YOU NEED TO WAIT UNTIL YOU

HAVE YOUR COUNSEL. >> AND COTTONWOOD.

>> IS THAT PART OF THE OR IS THAT ANOTHER OPENING THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN? IF THERE IS A MEETING AND YOU'RE NOT HERE, WE

[00:45:07]

CAN'T DO IT. THERE ARE THREE PEOPLE ON THE BOARD.

>> I BELIEVE THERE'S FIVE PEOPLE. SO IT IS BARE MINIMUM.

[8.2. Consideration and possible action regarding recommendations or updates from City Council sub-committees (i.e. Legislative, HISD). ]

>> CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RECOMMENDATIONS OR UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEES.

>> WE DISCUSSED TWO POSSIBLE BILLS THAT MIGHT AFFECT CITIES BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE NOT MOVING FORWARD.

>> THE CITY I GUESS HAD SENT AN EMAIL TO ALL OF US RECOMMENDING SUPPORT. BUT NEITHER HAVE RECEIVED A HEARING. SO MAYBE IN THE FUTURE WE CAN SUPPORT. BUT TIME IS RUNNING OUT.

>> NOT ON THE COMMITTEE BUT I DID SUBMIT THE EMAIL WE GOT

TODAY. FOR LEGAL. >> SENATE BILL 1844. THERE IS SOME INFORMATION THAT SEEMS TO BE CONTRARY TO WHAT THE SPONSORS

REPORT SAYS. >> THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT COUNSEL OF HER CLARK IS TALKING ABOUT.

>> HE IS TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT WAS EMAILED. IS THERE

SOMETHING WE NEED TO KNOW? >> IT DEPENDS ON THE READING OF IT. BUT IT ALLOWED VOLUNTARY PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS.

>> I HAVEN'T. >> WHAT WAS IT?

>> 1844 IN THE SENATE. AND ONE IN THE HOUSE.

[9.1. Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) Updates and Presentations (Matt Rector) ]

>> ANYTHING ELSE? MOVING ON. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT UPDATES AND PRESENTATIONS. IT'S BEEN A COUPLE MONTHS.

>> I AM JUST GOING TO TRY TO GO THROUGH THIS AS QUICK AS I CAN.

THIS IS TYPICALLY AROUND THIS TIME IS WHEN WE GO THROUGH EVERY

PROJECT. >> QUESTIONS AFTER EACH ITEM OR

AT THE END? >> AS WE GO WILL PROBABLY BE EASIER. SO WE ARE WORKING ON THE SIDEWALK THING. WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT INTERNALLY IS WE ARE GOING TO BASICALLY FIELD ENGINEER IT RATHER THAN HIRING A CONSULTING FIRM. AND THEN BASICALLY THE ENGINEERING TEAM WILL ALLOW THE TEAM TO MAKE SURE THAT GETS BUILT THE WAY WE WANT IT BUILT. AND THEN WORK THROUGH THAT PROCESS. HOPEFULLY WE GET MORE SIDEWALK FOR THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY. 1660. OBVIOUSLY THIS ONE.

>> THAT LAST ONE, IS THAT THE ONE WHERE THE PEOPLE DON'T WANT

THE RIGHTS OF ENTRY? >> NO SIR. THAT IS A SEPARATE

PROJECT. >> THIS IS JUST AN ANNUAL ONE.

>> 1660. SO WE DO STILL HAVE ONE UTILITY CONFLICT WE ARE TRYING TO GET RESOLVED. WITH A TELECOM COMPANY. WE ARE WORKING WITH THEM TRYING TO GET THEM OUT OF OUR WAY BUT WE ARE STILL TRYING TO GET THIS WRAPPED UP THIS MONTH. THAT IS WHERE WE'RE AT.

THIS ONE IS. >> YOU GOT A UTILITY CONFLICT.

THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND DO THE PAVEMENT. AND DO THE UTILITY

LATER. >> THEY CAN. BUT THEY HAVE ASKED IF WE CAN DO EVERYTHING ONCE THE UTILITY IS OUT OF THE WAY. SO THEY STILL HAVE TO ONCE THAT LAST LINE IS OFF THE POOL THEY STILL HAVE TO PUT A STORM CULVERT IN. SO THEY HAVE ASKED IF THEY CAN DO EVERYTHING AT ONCE.

>> IS THIS UNDERGROUND UTILITY?

[00:50:02]

>> THIS IS ON A POLE AT 1660. SO IT IMPACTS HOW THEY CAN.

>> THANK YOU. >> THIS STARTED 2023.

>> YEAH. I BELIEVE WE STARTED CONSTRUCTION AT THE END OF '23.

>> IF IT STARTED IN '23, WAS THERE ANYTHING IN THE CONTRACT THAT HEY, GO AHEAD AND START MOVING THE UTILITY IN JANUARY OF '24 INSTEAD OF WAITING UNTIL THE END. SOME OF THESE JUST GO ON AND ON AND THERE IS ALWAYS A LITTLE EXCUSE. I GUESS IT'S A RHETORICAL QUESTION. IF WE DON'T HAVE THAT IN THERE, WHEN WE DO CONTRACTS GOING FORWARD CAN WE HAVE SOME KIND OF DEADLINE? AFTER THIS YOU OWE US MONEY. BECAUSE WE DON'T CARE ABOUT THE UTILITY ISSUE. YOU HAD 18 MONTHS.

>> IT'S A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED. THE CONTRACTOR IS NOT THE ONE THAT MOVES THE UTILITY. WE HAVE A CONSULTANT THAT WORKS FOR OUR CONSULTANT WHO DOES UTILITY COORDINATION AND THEY FACILITATE THE CONVERSATION WITH THE UTILITY COMPANY TO GET THEM MOVED OUT OF OUR WAY. THE CAVEAT ON THAT ONE IS WHEN THEY RELOCATED, WHEN EVERYBODY ELSE MOVED THERE LINES WE CREATED NEW CONFLICTS. SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH THAT AND THEN THAT IS THE HANGUP RIGHT NOW IS THIS LAST CONFLICT WE ARE TRYING TO GET THIS UTILITY COMPANY. ENCORE ALREADY MOVED ALL THEIR LINES, JUST LIKE WE DID ON 1660 NORTH. YOU GET THEM ALL MOVED AND THEN YOU CAN GO. SO WE MOVED EVERYBODY EXCEPT FOR THE LAST ONE. BUT THE POLLS WERE WHEN THEY PLACE THEM THEY WERE SHIFTED. THIS IS THE UTILITY COMPANY. THEY WERE SHIFTED BY ABOUT 10 FEET FROM WHERE HE HAD DESIGNED THEM. SO IT CREATED NEW CONFLICTS FOR US. SO THAT'S THE PROBLEM WE ARE FACING IS NOW WE ARE TELLING THESE UTILITY COMPANIES MOVE YOUR STUFF AGAIN SO WE CAN FINISH OUR WORK BECAUSE YOU PUT IT RIGHT WHERE WE WERE PUTTING SOMETHING ELSE. SO. IN THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS WE ALWAYS SAY YOU HAVE THIS MANY DAYS OF WORK AND IF YOU MISS THE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION DATE WE CAN CHARGE YOU X NUMBER OF DOLLARS PER DAY FOR EVERY DAY YOU ARE BEYOND THAT. BUT IT IS NOT THEIR FAULT LIKE A UTILITY COMPANY BEING IN THE WAY THAT WE CAN'T. WE COULD TRY TO PUSH IT

ON THE CONTRACTOR. >> THEN HIRED THE CONSULTANT.

HERE'S WHAT I'M SEEING. IN MY EXPERIENCE WHEN YOU DO DEVELOPMENT, YOU MEET WITH THE UTILITY PROVIDERS AND YOU HAVE TO MEET ON DAY ONE. AND EVERYBODY SIGNS OFF ON IT. WHAT I FIND FREQUENTLY HAPPENS, IT SEEMS LIKE WE ARE GOING OUT AND DOING WORK AND THEN THEY ARE THE ONES TELLING US WHAT TO DO. I DON'T SEE A COOPERATION WHERE DID WE MEET WITH THEM A YEAR AGO AND THEY ALL SIGNED OFF ON THIS? BECAUSE WE ARE SPENDING TENS OF THOUSANDS ON CONSULTANTS. A CONSULTANT OF A CONSULTANT WHO DIDN'T DO THEIR JOB WHO'S GOT THE WHOLE PROJECT ON HOLD.

THERE'S GOT TO BE A FASTER WAY TO DO BUSINESS. BECAUSE THIS IS ONE OF THREE PROJECTS THAT UNLIKE, HOW IS IT STILL IN CONSTRUCTION? THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE IN SEPTEMBER. IT'S A UTILITY CONFLICT. THIS ISN'T YOU, BUT IT'S LIKE THE PEOPLE WE ARE HIRING. I WANT TO VOTE NO ON WHATEVER CONTRACT IT IS. WE HAVE ISSUES WITH A GUY THAT SUBMITTED UNDER AN OLD LAW, GOT A SIX MONTH DELAY THERE. THERE'S GOT TO BE A CONSULTANT TO UNDERSTAND IT'S YOUR JOB. BUT YOU'RE NOT DOING A GOOD JOB, YOU ARE FIRED AND YOU OWE US MONEY. INSTEAD WE COULD CHANGE FOR WORK THAT WASN'T DONE CORRECTLY BECAUSE IT COST OTHER ISSUES. IF I'M GOING TO TAKE THE BLAME, I WILL START BEING THE GUY THAT STARTS PUSHING. WHO IS THE CONSULTANT? LET'S FIRE THE CONSULTANT. FIGURE IT OUT TO WHERE WE CAN HAVE A JOB DONE. SOMETHING THAT STARTS IN '23. SO IT'S FRUSTRATION FOR ME BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN BUDGETED SINCE 2019

[00:55:01]

WELL BEFORE YOU WERE HERE. FULLY FUNDED AND BUDGETED. AND HERE WE ARE. WE ARE STILL ALMOST READY TO GET IT DONE. WHENEVER IT COMES UP, WHOEVER IT IS, PLEASE DON'T ENGAGE THAT CONSULTANT.

BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THEY DID A GOOD JOB.

>> THIS IS AGAIN ONE OF THE GROUP OF 1660 PROJECTS THAT STARTED IN 2019. THIS IS THE ONE THAT WE GOT ALMOST THROUGH, WE DID GET THROUGH DESIGN AND WERE NEGOTIATING WITH AND THEN TXDOT SAID YOU CAN'T DO WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING TO DO. SO THIS WAS ALL EARLY LAST YEAR. WE WORKED WITH TXDOT AND PUSHED BACK AND SAID HEY, YOU ARE ADDING THIS AT THE MIDNIGHT HOUR TO US. YOU SHOULD PAY FOR THIS. YOU SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DESIGN, YOU SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ADDED COST. BECAUSE WE SUGGESTED THIS TO YOU BACK WHEN THE CITY FIRST STARTED THIS PROJECT AND YOU SAID NO. SO TXDOT AGREED TO THAT. WE MODIFIED THE AFA, THEY HIRED THE CONSULTANT AND STARTED WORKING THROUGH THE DESIGN, THE DESIGN WAS PUT ON HOLD AND THEY STARTED UP AGAIN. CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS ON THEIR SIDE. WE ARE NOW AT ABOUT 90% DESIGN.

THEY HAVE WORKED OUT OTHER CONTRACTS, NOW THEY HAVE COME BACK AND TOLD OUR CONSULTANT THAT THEY HAVE TO CHANGE ALL OF THEIR PLANS TO INCLUDE THE CONSULTANT INFORMATION AND MODIFY THIS OTHER STUFF. OUR CONSULTANT SENT ME A CHANGE ORDER, I SENT THAT TO TXDOT AND SAID YOU ARE GOING TO PAY FOR ALL THIS. THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. OUR CONSULTANT IS WORKING TO TRY TO FIGURE ALL THIS OUT BUT HAS BASICALLY PUT EVERYBODY ON NOTICE THAT ALL OF OUR AGREEMENTS WERE THAT TXDOT WOULD PAY FOR IT. SO NOW TXDOT IS ASKING FOR AN ITEMIZED LIST OF THE EXTRA COSTS. THE PROJECT IS STILL MOVING. IT IS JUST MOVING AT A SNAILS PACE. I HAD HOPED THAT WE WOULD BE MUCH FURTHER

ALONG ON THIS. BUT. >> BECAUSE THEY ARE PAYING FOR EVERYTHING, IF THAT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE BALL IS IN THEIR COURT FOR EVERYTHING. AND ALL THE WHILE WE HAVE A NEW SUBDIVISION BASICALLY THAT IS GOING IN, WE HAVE TWO NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE TRYING TO OPEN EMPTY OUT WHERE THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO OPPORTUNITY TO TURN RIGHT ONTO 1660 SOUTH. AND SO HELP ME UNDERSTAND. WHAT LEVERAGE DO WE HAVE AS A CITY IN ORDER TO MOVE THIS PROJECT ALONG? BECAUSE IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THERE IS AN ACCIDENT OR BOTTLENECK. OR IF THAT LIGHT AT 79 DOESN'T WORK ALL THE PEOPLE ARE BACKED UP GOING ALL THE WAY POTENTIALLY BACK TO THAT LIGHT. SO WHAT LEVERAGE DO WE HAVE?

>> CLARIFY A COUPLE THINGS YOU SAID. THE REASON WHY TXDOT HAS ADDED THE SIGNAL IS BECAUSE OF THE BACKUPS AND ACCIDENTS THAT HAPPENED IN THIS INTERSECTION. SO THAT'S WHY THEY SAID HEY, THIS IS NOT SAFE, WE NEED TO ADD A SIGNAL. WE TOLD YOU THAT A LONG TIME AGO. ANYWAY, I ESCALATED IT AS HIGH UP AS I CAN WHICH IS NOT ONLY THE AREA ENGINEER BUT I ALSO WENT TO AUSTIN DISTRICT. THE DISTRICT ENGINEER. THAT'S AS HIGH UP AS I EVER DEAL WITH. AT YOUR LEVEL, I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE THE CITY ATTORNEY CAN HELP FIGURE OUT WHAT KIND OF LEVERAGE YOU GUYS HAVE A LIVER ABOVE ME. MOST OF THE TIME, ANYBODY ABOVE THE DISTRICT ENGINEER IS NOT GOING TO TALK TO THE CITY ENGINEER. SO I AM PUSHING ALL OF THE BUTTONS AND PULLING ALL THE LEVERS I HAVE ACCESS TO BUT I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE YOU KNOW OTHER AVENUES THAT THE CITY HAS TO TRY TO GO ABOVE THOSE PEOPLE.

>> THAT IS PRETTY MUCH THE ISSUE. FOLKS CAN'T MANEUVER IN THIS INTERSECTION. AND SO IF I AM UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU ARE SAYING WITH YOU PUSHING AS FAR AS YOU CAN AND NOW I AM AT THE MERCY OF TXDOT. WHAT IS OUR NEXT PATH? SOMEONE ELSE IS PAYING FOR IT. IT'S NEEDED. I HAVE TO IMAGINE THAT IT'S NOT TOUGH

[01:00:05]

LUCK. WHAT CAN WE DO? >> I WOULD HAVE TO RESEARCH THAT. THE INITIAL THOUGHT IS THAT IN THE LEGISLATURE THERE IS A METHOD THAT YOU WOULD CONTACT. I DON'T KNOW THAT OFF THE TOP

OF MY HEAD. >> CAN I FINISH WHAT I'M SAYING? THERE IS A TRANSPORTATION METHOD THAT WE

CAN POTENTIALLY TAP INTO. >> DO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT? THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WOULD BE THE AVENUE THAT WOULD HELP THE CITY IN RESOLVING THIS.

>> THE COUNTY. THE 3349 BRIDGE. THE COMMISSION REALLY PLAYED A HEAVY HAND IN HELPING MOVE THAT AND GET FUNDING. BUT THAT'S A HUGE PROJECT. THIS IS ALSO A BIG PROJECT FOR SAFETY REASONS.

MAYBE NOT ON THE SAME SCALE BUT.

>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE ONE OF OUR RECOURSE. THAT IS WHO TXDOT

REPORTS TWO. >> WHEN I GET BACK TO FOLLOW-UP ON THIS, WHEN I REACH OUT TO DOTTIE AND CECI YOU TO START THE CONVERSATION AND GET YOUR FEEDBACK AFTER YOU RESEARCH

THAT? >> I'LL HAVE SOMETHING FOR YOU

QUICKLY. >> I WILL KEEP YOU TACKED ON THE EMAIL SO YOU ARE IN THE KNOW AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN FIND SOME SORT OF RESOURCE TO THIS ISSUE. AGAIN, WE ARE BACKED UP WITH THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE THE NEIGHBORHOODS ON THE EAST SORT. THE GAS STATION ON THE WEST SIDE THAT IS TRYING TO TURN LEFT AS WELL. AND THEN EVERYBODY ELSE FROM THE GLENWOOD AREA THAT WAY. SO I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD REALLY GIVE A LOT OF ATTENTION TO IF WE CAN. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR EFFORT AND I'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH YOU ON THAT.

>> WITH THIS BEING AT 95% COMPLETE, DO WE HAVE AN IDEA OF COST SO WE CAN GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED WITH OUR PROCEDURAL THINGS TO FIND SOMEBODY THAT IS GOING TO CONSTRUCT IT? HOW CAN

WE ROLL THE BALL ON OUR SIDE? >> OUR CONSULTANT HAS ALREADY PUT TOGETHER A COST BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW FROM OUR PROJECT.

WE KNOW HOW TO COMBINE THE TEXTILE PROJECT WITH OUR PROJECT AND WE RUN ALL THOSE NUMBERS SO WE KNOW WHAT THE NEW COST WILL BE. WE HAVE TO HAVE THE ENTIRE PACKAGE BEFORE WE CAN PUT IT OUT FOR BID. BECAUSE IT IS A TEXTILE ROAD SO IF ARE GOING TO PUT IT OUT FOR A BIT, THEN WE HAVE TO HAVE TXDOT APPROVAL. THEY HAVE TO REVIEW IT, SIGN OFF ON IT AND SAY YES IT'S GOOD. AND THEN ONCE WE GO THROUGH THEIR PROCESS AND OUR PROCESS, BECAUSE OUR PROCESS IS THEIR PROCESS. WE WILL SELECT A CONTRACTOR, THEN WE HAVE TO HAVE THEIR PERMISSION TO ACTUALLY NOTIFY TO PROCEED.

WE HAVE TO HAVE THEIR PERMISSION. SO ON OUR SIDE I AM DOING EVERYTHING I CAN. WE ARE WAITING ON TXDOT AND CONSULTANTS. AND I AM TRYING EVERY WAY I KNOW HOW TO SPEED TXDOT UP BUT IT'S A BIG MACHINE. AND I'M ONE PERSON.

>> THANK YOU. >> I BELIEVE SHE SITS ON THE

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. >> SHE IS ON TRANSPORTATION.

>> SO SHE WOULD BE ONE AND COUNSEL FOR THOMPSON. I WOULD REACH OUT TO HER AND SHE WILL KNOW WHO TO TALK TO LOCALLY.

AUSTIN OR FURTHER UP. >> WASN'T AT CONGRESSMAN CARTER THAT GOD IS-- GOT US MONEY FOR THIS AS WELL?

>> I DON'T THINK THAT HAS AN EXPIRATION DATE. WAS IT 2 MILLION OR SOMETHING? I THINK THERE IS AN EXPIRATION DATE ON THAT. BUT CONGRESSMAN CARTER WAS INVOLVED.

>> I WASN'T AWARE THERE WAS ANY OTHER. I THOUGHT ALL OF THE FUNDING WAS FROM THE 20 18TH BOND.

[01:05:04]

>> WAS THAT FOR 132 MAY BE? >> FOR THIS ONE. TO DO WITH THE

RAILROAD. >> OKAY.

>> SO TXDOT IS THE ISSUE. NOT THE RAILROAD?

>> YEAH. WELL. WE JUST NOTIFIED THE RAILROADS.

>> WE STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE WORKING ON IN THIS WAS FINALIZING THE GRANT WITH YOU PRR. AND WE COULDN'T FINALIZE THAT BECAUSE TXDOT WOULDN'T SIGN OFF ON THE PLANS. SO THAT KIND OF PUT THAT WHOLE THING ON HOLD AND THAT'S WHEN WE WENT BACK TO TXDOT AND SAID YOU ARE ADDING THIS AT THE LAST MINUTE. WE WANT YOU TO PAY FOR IT, HE PROMISED US THAT WE WOULD HAVE IT ALL BY AUGUST. AND HERE WE ARE IN MAY AND WE DON'T. THAT WAS AUGUST OF LAST YEAR. ANY

OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? >> THANKS.

>> 137 1660. THIS IS ONE THAT TXDOT IS REALLY NOT IN OUR WAY.

WE ARE JUST TRYING TO JUMP THROUGH ALL THE HOOPS.

REGARDLESS OF THAT, YOU CAN SEE THE SCHEDULE IS SLIDING TO THE RIGHT. WHICH I DON'T NECESSARILY LIKE BUT I DON'T HAVE THE POWER TO CHANGE IT ALL.

>> DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY?

>> WE ARE WORKING ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AGREEMENT. WE ARE WORKING ON UTILITY COORDINATION AND ALL OF THAT NOW WELL WE WRAP UP DESIGN. DESIGN IS ABOUT 90% DONE. SO WE CAN TRY TO AVOID SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT WE'VE BEEN SEEING. AND TXDOT HAS BEEN WORKING WITH US, THEY JUST FINISHED THE REVIEW ON 90% PLAN SO WE ARE PUSHING OUR CONSULTANT SO WE CAN GET THIS OUT FOR BID. THE CAVEAT ON THIS ONE IS BECAUSE THIS ONE CONTINUES TO SLIDE TO THE RIGHT, I HAVE BEEN PUSHING ONE OF OUR OTHER CONSULTANTS ON A DIFFERENT PROJECT TO TRY TO PUSH THEIR PROJECT TO THE LEFT. SO THAT WE CAN STAGGER THEM AND IT DOESN'T BLOCK EVERYBODY IN THIS AREA FROM BEING ABLE TO. ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? OKAY. THIS IS THE ONE WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER. LAKESIDE ESTATE SIDEWALKS. PHASE TWO IS COMPLETE. PHASE THREE IS THE ONE WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET RIGHTS OF ENTRY. I BELIEVE THERE IS AN EXECUTIVE SESSION ON THIS ONE LATER TONIGHT. TO TALK ABOUT WHAT TO DO ON THIS ONE. WE HAVE CHANGED ALL THE TIMELINES TO BE DETERMINED.

>> SO THE ISSUE AS I UNDERSTAND IT. WE ARE TRYING TO GET RIGHTS OF ENTRY TO GET ON PEOPLE'S PROPERTY IN ORDER TO WHEN WE HAD A SIDEWALK IT MIGHT NEED THEIR DRIVEWAY TO BE REBUILT, IT MAY BE A NUMBER OF THINGS. WE ARE NOT SUCCESSFUL GETTING THE RIGHTS-OF-WAY WE NEED TO FINISH THE PROJECT. IS THAT DECENT?

>> BASICALLY. THERE'S ABOUT 161, 162 PARCELS THAT ARE BEING TOUCHED BY THE PROJECT. OF THOSE, ABOUT 80 OF THEM WE NEED RIGHTS OF ENTRY TO BE ABLE TO GO ONTO PEOPLE'S PROPERTY FOR FIXING DRIVEWAYS, JUST CONSTRUCTION, SPILLOVER, THOSE KIND OF THINGS. OF THOSE WE HAVE HAD THREE HARD NOSE. WE HAVE GOTTEN LIKE 30 OKAYS AND THE OTHER 40 SOMETHING JUST WON'T RESPOND TO US. WE STARTED ASKING FOR THIS BACK IN AUGUST. WE REACHED OUT AGAIN IN FEBRUARY. WE HAVE KNOCKED ON DOORS. WE HAVE REACHED OUT TO THE HOA. WE HAVE CHANGED THE RIGHT OF ENTRY FORM BECAUSE THE FIRST DRAFT WE WERE TOLD SOUNDED TOO LEGALISTIC AND LIKE WE WEREN'T GOING TO FIX ANYTHING. SO WE REVISED IT.

WE GAVE POSTAGE-PAID ENVELOPES IN EVERYTHING SO THEY COULD JUST SIGN IT AND SEND IT RIGHT BACK TO US. WE JUST CAN'T GET PEOPLE TO GIVE US PERMISSION TO GO ON THEIR PROPERTY.

>> WE HAVE 3 MILLION BUDGETED FROM THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT.

>> WE HAVE ABOUT 3 MILLION. AND WE HAVE SPENT ABOUT 62.

[01:10:09]

>> WE JUST NEED TO DECIDE. I GUESS IT WOULD BE A LEGAL QUESTION. EMINENT DOMAIN THE RIGHT TO COME THROUGH THEIR AND PUT THE SIDEWALKS AND OR WE SAY IF YOU DON'T WANT THE SIDEWALKS, WE WILL GO SPEND IT SOMEWHERE ELSE IN OUR COMMUNITY.

IS THAT SAFE TO SAY? >> PRETTY MUCH.

>> WITH $3 MILLION FOR THE SIDEWALKS, IS IT FROM COMMUNITY OR ARE THESE BOND DOLLARS? MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY ARE

BOND DOLLARS. >> IT'S FROM THE SERIES 22. NOT

FROM COMMUNITY. >> SO WHAT BOND IS IT?

>> THE 22 GEO. >> WHAT CAN WE SPEND THAT ON?

>> I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE EXACT WORDING.

>> THAT WOULD BE TIED TO THE 20 18TH ROAD BOND REALLY.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THIS IS ROAD MONEY WE CAN USE. WE CAN STOP HAVING 3 MILLION SITTING HERE WAITING FOR

PEOPLE TO SAY YES. >> CORRECT.

>> IS IT SAFE TO SAY THAT STAFF HAS TOUCHED VIA NOTIFICATION KNOCKING ON THE DOOR ABOUT SIX TIMES?

>> I KNOW THAT INITIALLY WE SENT OUT ALL THE LETTERS IN AUGUST.

WE SENT OUT MORE LETTERS. WE SENT OUT DOORKNOCKING IN FEBRUARY. THAT IS SIX RIGHT THERE. WE REACHED OUT TO THE HOA. THEY REACHED SAID THEY WOULD PUT IT ON THEIR WEBSITE AND SEND IT TO ALL OF THEIR MEMBERS. AND WE DIDN'T DO THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT COUNTS AS A TOUCH POINT.

>> I'M WILLING TO TAKE IT TO THE STREETS AND GET THE MAYOR TO

COME WITH ME. >> IF YOU DON'T SIGN TO LETTUCE ON YOUR PROPERTY WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON. YOU WON'T GET SIDEWALKS. MAYBE THEY DON'T WANT SIDEWALKS. BUT I DON'T KNOW. I HAVEN'T SEEN COMMUNICATION. AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE TO TELL THE PEOPLE LOOK, WE HAVE $3 MILLION TIED UP AND JUST SITTING HERE WAITING. IF YOU DON'T WANT THEM, JUST PUT NO ON THE PIECE OF PAPER, SEND IT IN AND WE WILL MOVE ON ABOUT OUR WAY. I DON'T MIND MAKING A DECISION TO WHERE WE HAVE DONE EVERYTHING WE COULD, WE GOT AN INTERSECTION AND WE GOT OTHER ROAD WORK WE CAN DO. THE PEOPLE IN 1660 HAVE BEEN WANTING SIDEWALKS FOR 30 YEARS. I'D LIKE TO GET IT OFF YOUR PLATE SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO GET UP HERE EVERY TIME AND SAY NO PROGRESS.

>> I WOULD LIKE THAT TOO. I WOULD RATHER COME UP AND TELL YOU I AM DONE WITH EVERYTHING AND I'M GOING ON VACATION.

>> I'M DONE WITH EVERYTHING. I'M GOING ON VACATION. THE NEXT ONE IS 132 OVERPASS AT 79. WE WERE PROGRESSING ON THIS ONE AND THEN KIND OF PAUSED ON IT. WE ARE GOING THROUGH THE ICE. WE SHOULD HAVE THAT ANALYSIS BACK FROM GARVER IN THE NEXT WEEK OR TWO. ORIGINALLY IT WAS GOING TO BE EIGHT WEEKS. THEY HAVE NARROWED IT DOWN. LET ME JUST EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT.

INTERSECTION CONTROL EVALUATION. BASICALLY YOU START WITH THIS BIG LIST OF ALL THE DIFFERENT POSSIBLE CONTROLS THAT YOU CAN PUT AT THIS INTERSECTION AND YOU START PUTTING IN THE DATA YOU HAVE COLLECTED ABOUT THE INTERSECTION AND IT STARTS NARROWING DOWN THE POSSIBILITIES OF WHAT IS RECOMMENDED AND WHAT IS NOT. IT DOESN'T MAKE THE DECISION FOR YOU. IT JUST SAYS THIS IS A BAD IDEA. THIS IS AN OKAY IDEA. THIS IS A GOOD IDEA.

THINGS LIKE SAFETY, COST OF CONSTRUCTION, TRAFFIC VOLUME, VEHICLE CAPACITY RATIOS, LEVELS OF SURFACE, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. IT COMES UP WITH A TOTAL COST OF THOSE DIFFERENT INTERSECTION OPTIONS AND SAYS YOU GO, THESE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE RECOMMENDED. THIS IS HOW MUCH IT'S GOING TO COST IF YOU CHOOSE OPTION. AND THEN THAT IS KIND OF THE ICE EVALUATION. IT

[01:15:02]

GOES BACK TO TXDOT, THEY SAY IT'S GOOD OR CHANGE THIS, WHATEVER. THEN WE BRING IT BACK TO YOU GUYS. SO YOU CAN MAKE THE DETERMINATION. OF THESE FIVE OR WHATEVER IT ENDS UP BEING, WE LIKE THIS ONE, THEN WE GO TALK ABOUT IT AND SEE IF WE CAN GET THEM ON BOARD. AND ONCE WE GET THEM ON BOARD IT WILL BE BACK TO I GUESS SQUARE ONE OF ACTUALLY DOING THE FULL DESIGN ALL OVER AGAIN AND MOVING FROM THERE. THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THIS ONE AT THAT. WE ARE ON SCHEDULE. WE ARE GOING TO WRAP THIS ONE UP THIS MONTH. IF I WAS GIVING THIS PRESENTATION IN THREE WEEKS,

WE'D BE DONE. >> NO APPLAUSE ON THAT ONE? COME

ON. >> I NEEDED TO HER.

>> BEFORE IT OPENS UP. >> IS PROBABLY BLOCKED OFF RIGHT NOW. LIVE OAK. WE ARE PUSHING, PUSHING, PUSHING. SLIDING THIS ONE TO THE RIGHT A LITTLE BIT. IT IS GOING TO BE BIDDING TOWARD THE END OF THE YEAR. CONSTRUCTION STARTING NEXT YEAR AND WRAPPING UP CONSTRUCTION IN EARLY '27.

>> GO BACK. AT MOST, THEY ARE CHANGING THE PLAN.

>> WE ARE NOW BASICALLY GOT ENCORE ALMOST ONBOARD. NOW IT IS COMMUNICATION WITH ALL THE TELECOM COMPANIES THAT WE GOT TO GET THEM ALL TO AGREE TO BASICALLY FORCING THEM ALL TO GO INTO A SHARED TRENCH. AND BASICALLY TELLING THEM YOU ARE GOING TO BE IN CONDUIT ONE, THEY ALL HAVE THEIR OWN REQUIREMENTS.

LIKE I DON'T WANT A THREE INCH, I WANT A FOUR INCH. THAT KIND OF STUFF. WORKING OUT THOSE DETAILS. AND THEN THE FINAL THING WITH ENCORE WILL BE ONCE THEY GET THEIR FINAL DESIGN, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE SOME TRANSFORMER PADS AND THAT KIND OF STUFF. WE WILL HAVE TO GO GET SOME EASEMENTS FROM SOME OF THE LAND OWNERS ON THE STRETCH OF ROAD TO BE ABLE TO PUT THAT ON THEIR PROPERTY. SO THAT IS WHY WE ARE SLIDING THIS TO THE

RIGHT. >> THE TRENCH IS NO LONGER IN

THE STREET. >> WE MOVED IT OUT OF THE STREET. IT WAS GOING TO BE A HUGE CROSSED INCREASE.

>> WAS THIS DELAY BECAUSE WE ARE BURYING UTILITIES?

>> YES. BECAUSE WE ARE DOING SPECTRUM AND FIBER LINK AND ALL THOSE PEOPLE. ED SCHMIDT. THE SIDEWALK IS SLIDING A LITTLE BIT TO THE RIGHT BUT IT IS ON THE CONSENT. WE ARE SPLITTING THE SIDEWALK AND INTERSECTION. THAT PART. IT'S NOT THE ENTIRE REDLINE. THIS WAS ORIGINALLY SUPPOSED TO BE A REDLINE AND THEN IT WAS LIKE THIS JUST FOCUS ON THE SIDEWALK ON THE SOUTH AND THE INTERSECTION ON THE NORTH. IF I BREAK THEM UP I CAN DO ONE FASTER THAN THE OTHER. SO THAT'S WHY YOU ARE SEEING IT BROKE APART LIKE THIS. SIDEWALK SHOULD BE GOING OUT FOR BID WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH OR SO. AND THEN THE INTERSECTION IS NOT TOO

FAR AFTER THAT. >> HENRY FARMS AND CONSTRUCTION WRAPPING UP THIS MONTH. THEY'VE GOT THE INTERSECTION OPEN NOW.

WE HAVE BEEN PUSHING THEM DAILY TO TRY TO SPEED UP. WE HAVE NOTIFIED THEM THAT THEY ARE IN LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SITUATION.

TRYING TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO SPEED THEM UP AND PUSH THEM ALONG. WE'VE GOT MULTIPLE CONSTRUCTION OUT THERE. THE CITY MANAGER HAS GONE OUT THERE ON A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS. I'VE GONE OUT THERE ON A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS. JUST SAYING HEY, WHY IS THIS NOT DONE? ESSENTIALLY BABYSITTING THE CONTRACTOR.

>> WHAT ARE THEY SAYING IS THE ISSUE? THIS IS FOR THE MOST PART ABOVEGROUND WORK. PROJECTS LIKE THIS GET DONE IN A MONTH. THEY STARTED LIKE NOVEMBER. THE FIRST WAS FEBRUARY. THEN IT GOT MOVED TO APRIL 18TH AND APRIL 24TH. THEY GOT TIRED OF CHANGING THE

[01:20:08]

DATE. >> WE BID THIS ONE OUT AT THE END OF THE YEAR. AND WE AWARDED IT IN NOVEMBER AND THEY ASKED US FOR HOLIDAY TIME TO DELAY STARTING CONSTRUCTION. SO WE SAID START AFTER THE NEW YEAR. THAT'S WHEN THE ORIGINAL SIGNS WENT UP. AND WE SAID YOU CAN'T PUT SIGNS UP THERE WITHOUT GIVING US YOUR TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS. WE CHANGED THAT, THEY PUT THE SIGNS OUT THERE, AND THEN THERE WERE ISSUES WITH , THEY WEREN'T SURE HOW TO MOVE IT. SO THE CONTRACT CALLED FOR THEM TO COME OUT WITH A CRANE. BUT WE CAN'T GET A CRANE SO THEY ENDED UP TRYING TO MOVE IT WITH FORKLIFTS. SO THAT DELAYED THEM.

ONCE THEY GOT GOING, WE THOUGHT THINGS ARE MOVING WELL. WE JUST FOUND OUT THAT THE REASONING FOR WHY IT WAS DELAYED IS RIGHT THERE ON THE EASTERN LEG THERE IS SOME WATER VALVES, SOME ELECTRICAL LINES GOING IN AS WELL AS THE CONCRETE AND PEDESTRIAN RAMPS. AND SO THEIR STORY IS THAT THE ELECTRICAL BOXES, THE WATER VALVES AND A.D.A. RAMPS WERE ALL IN THE SAME SPOT. AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH THAT. TALK TO THE DESIGN ENGINEER AND FIGURE IT OUT. FIGURE THIS THING OUT.

CHANGE IT. LET'S GO. SO I PUSHED A LOT OF THAT VERY QUICKLY THROUGH THERE. I DIDN'T WAIT FOR THEM TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. I CONTACTED THE ENGINEER AND SAID THIS IS WHAT THEY ARE TELLING ME. HE GOT THEM AN ANSWER. JUST A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. I THINK THAT'S WHEN THEY STARTED REALLY MOVING FORWARD AGAIN. CONCRETE WAS POURED. REALLY IT'S JUST THAT CONTRACTORS. WE'VE GOT PHOTOS. THEY ARE WORKING MONDAY THROUGH

FRIDAY 8:00 TO 5:00. >> THEY ARE NOW. I DON'T LIVE BY THIS. BUT THESE GUYS CUT A HOLE IN THE GROUND AND NO ONE HAS BEEN THERE. I HAVE NO SYMPATHY FOR A CONTRACTOR.

>> THAT'S WHY I NOTIFIED. >> WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE CONTRACTOR? SO THAT I CAN ASK YOU WHY WE ARE PROPOSING TO USE THE SAME PEOPLE. THEY PROBABLY GOT SOME OTHER PLACE THAT IS 5000 A DAY. THEY TAKE CARE THE BIGGER ISSUE AND FIVE GRAND A

DAY. >> I HAVE SO MANY DIFFERENT CONSULTANTS AND CONTRACTORS THAT I DEAL WITH.

>> THIS ONE HAS BEEN BID OUT. WE HAVE A CONSTRUCTION MEETING NEXT WEEK. SO YOU SHOULD SEE THEM MOBILIZING AND START GETTING THIS ONE IN CONSTRUCTION. EXCHANGE AT LIMBER. TEMPORARY IS ALREADY UP YOU CAN SEE STUFF IN THE GROUND FOR THE PERMANENT SOLUTION. YOU WILL SEE THEM CUTTING THE TURN LANE AND IS DOING ALL OF THAT AND OF STUFF. THEY'VE BEEN TOLD THEY HAVE TO BE DONE BEFORE SCHOOL STARTS. SO FROM THE END OF MAY TO BEGINNING OF AUGUST THEY WILL GET THAT TURN LANE CUT IN THEIR AND

FINISH UP THAT >> HOW MUCH MONEY GETS SPENT FOR

A TEMPORARY SIGNAL? >> I HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE CHANGE ORDERS. I KNOW IT WAS A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS THAT WE SPENT ON TEMPORARY CABLES AND MOST OF THE SIGNALS WE ARE GOING TO REUSE. WE CAN'T USE ALL OF THEM BECAUSE I THINK THE NEW SIGNAL HAD HAS FOUR INSTEAD OF THREE BULBS. BUT IT'S IN THE RANGE OF A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND THAT WE SPENT

TO GET THIS UP. >> I DON'T KNOW THAT WE ARE GOING TO THROW A SIGNAL UP FOR $200,000 AND THEN THROW MOST OF IT AWAY AND REDO THE WHOLE THING. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THE PLAN OUGHT TO BE THEY GET IT GOING, WE FIGURED OUT. THAT'S $200,000 AND BEGIN GIVING YOU SOME OF IT. IT'S CRAZY HOW

QUICKLY WE SPEND MONEY. >> WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR DOING

THE TEMPORARY? >> IT WAS BECAUSE WE WANTED TO HURRY UP AND GET SOMETHING UP. AND WE WERE TRYING TO GET IT UP WHILE SCHOOL WAS STILL IN SESSION WITHOUT IMPACTING THE

[01:25:02]

TRAFFIC TOO MUCH. SO THAT'S WHY WE SPED IT UP AND DID A TEMPORARY SIGNAL NOW AND THEN THIS SUMMER WE WILL DO THE PERMANENT SOLUTION. EXCHANGE BOULEVARD. WE JUST REVIEWED 60% SO THEY ARE WORKING TOWARD 90% DESIGN. SAME THING. I HAVE TOLD THIS CONSULTANT THAT HE NEEDS TO BE BIDDING THIS THIS MONTH SO THAT WE CAN START CONSTRUCTION AS SOON AS SCHOOL LETS OUT. AND THAT IT HAS TO BE DONE BY THE TIME SCHOOL STARTS. THIS ISN'T A HEAVILY TRAVELED ROAD BUT STILL A PRETTY HEAVILY TRAVELED INTERSECTION SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE IT IS NOT BLOCKED OFF DURING A SCHOOL RUSH HOUR AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. SO TRYING TO GET HIM TO START BASICALLY MEMORIAL DAY AND FINISH BEFORE SCHOOL STARTS IN AUGUST.

>> THAT ROAD. >> NOT THE ROAD. THE

INTERSECTION. >> THE ROUNDABOUT.

>> YES. JUST THE ROUNDABOUT. ORIGINALLY IT WAS GOING TO BE GOING TO HOLLAND. NOW WE ARE JUST FOCUSING ON THE

INTERSECTION. >> THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE TELLING

ME. >> THEY ALREADY GOT THE RIGHT

AWAY. >> WE'VE GOT RIGHT-OF-WAY ON THREE OF THE FOUR CORNERS. I'M WORKING WITH THE POST OFFICE PEOPLE TO GET THE LAST SECTION.

>> THAT'LL BE COOL IF YOU GET THAT DONE.

>> I AM TRYING TO PUSH THE CONSULTANTS TO SHIFT TO THE LEFT SO THAT IS WHY YOU SEE WE ARE CERTAIN TO SHIFT DATES. TRYING TO GET THEM SO THAT THEY CAN BE THROUGH DESIGN AND DONE WITH CONSTRUCTION BEFORE THE 137 CONSTRUCTION STARTS. BECAUSE THAT ONE CONTINUES TO SLIDE TO THE RIGHT. I CAN SLIDE THIS ONE FURTHER TO THE LEFT AND WE CAN GET THIS BUILT SO WHEN 137 BECOMES A CONSTRUCTION ZONE THEN IF PEOPLE NEED IT THEY WILL HAVE A PAVED ROAD AT THE BACK OF THE SCHOOLS TO GET OUT OF THAT AREA.

I KNOW IT WON'T FIX EVERYTHING BECAUSE THERE WILL BE A LOT OF OUTSIDE TRAFFIC BUT IT WILL REDUCE CONGESTION. 199 RECONSTRUCTION. 90% PLANS ARE DONE. WE ARE WORKING THROUGH RIGHT AWAY WE JUST GOT I THINK THE LAST PARCEL WE GOT RIGHT OF ENTRY SO WE CAN FINISH THE SURVEY AND UTILITIES AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. SO I THINK WE ARE GENERALLY GOOD. THERE IS NO TIMELINE ON BIDDING OR CONSTRUCTION. THIS IS ONE OF THE PROJECT YOU GUYS SAID IT IT DESIGNED, GET IT READY TO GO AND PUT ON THE SHELF. ONCE WE ARE READY TO PULL THE TRIGGER ON IT, WE WILL PULL THE TRIGGER ON IT. 3349. THIS IS THE OVERPASS. THEY ARE DESIGNING THIS ONE. AND WE ARE APPROACHING THEM TO. I HEARD FROM THEM TODAY. THEY ARE THINKING THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HIT THE CONSTRUCTION START OF QUARTER ONE IN '26 SO EVERYTHING WILL SHIFT TO THE RIGHT ONE QUARTER MAY BE.

THAT'S WHERE WE ARE ON THAT ONE. 132, THIS ONE IS GOING ON SCHEDULE ON TIME. BUT THIS ONE IS PRETTY EASY BECAUSE ALMOST ALL OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS ALREADY THERE. IT'S REALLY JUST A GREENFIELD SITE. THEY ARE WORKING ON MOSTLY DOING THE STORM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS SO THAT WE CAN GET IT ALL BUTTONED UP BEFORE WE KICK IT OVER TO CONSTRUCTION. LIMBER LOOP. THIS ONE IS IN DESIGN. ON SCHEDULE, MOVING RIGHT ALONG. THIS IS BETWEEN INNOVATION AND ED SCHMIDT. THEN YOU HAVE THE LOOP FROM ED SCHMIDT. IT SAYS TO 1660 BUT IT'S NOT ALL THE WAY TO 1660 BECAUSE WE ARE DOING PART OF THAT RIGHT NOW. SO BASICALLY THIS PROJECT GOES FROM ED SCHMIDT TO WHERE THE CURRENT 1660 PROJECT STOPS. SO RIGHT UP TO WHERE THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.

>> ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO RELOCATE ALONG THAT STRETCH? DO

YOU KNOW? >> IT'S POSSIBLE. WE DON'T HAVE DESIGN SO I CAN'T TELL YOU ALL THE UTILITY CONFLICTS.

[01:30:02]

>> WE COMMUNICATED BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ARE PUTTING FIBER RIGHT WHERE THE ROAD IS GOING TO BE AND IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE WORKED TOGETHER AND YOU GUYS ARE RUNNING FIBER DOWN. 80 FEET OF THE CENTER LINE SO WE DON'T TO D TO PUT THE LINE UNDERGROUND. AND TO MOVE THE LINE. SAME WITH THE SIDEWALKS. FIVE OR SIX YEARS AGO. EVERYTHING SEEMS LIKE WHEN I WAS BEING PUT IN IT WAS BEING PUT IN A WAY THERE IS NO ROOM FOR WIDENING.

>> SO YOU'RE RIGHT. WHEN SIDEWALKS AND EVERY THING WERE DONE. BUT IT WAS DONE BASED ON FIVE OR SIX YEARS AGO. IN 2018 YOU HAD A MOBILITY PLAN THAT SHOWED THIS BEING A MAJOR ROADWAY. SO I THINK SOME OF THE SIDEWALKS PREDATED THAT WHICH IS WHY THEY ARE SO CLOSE TO THE WAR-- ROAD. ANYTHING NOW THEY HAVE TO MOVE IT OUT BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO NEED THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. BUT THAT'S THE BIGGEST ISSUE. EVERYONE WAS TIED

TO WHAT WAS THERE. >> A LOT OF THIS ISN'T YOU. THE PART THAT ISN'T YOU GO TO YOUR CONSULTANTS THAT WE APPROVED THE HIRE. SO WE SHOULD JUST SAY WE ARE NOT GOING TO USE THEM ANYMORE. I THINK THE NUMBER ONE THING EVERYBODY IS HAMMERING IS WE GOT THE WHOLE CITY AND DESIGN AND A SMALL PORTION OF CONSTRUCTION. AT LEAST WE WILL HAVE A DIFFERENT COMPLAINT.

>> TYPICALLY THAT IS KIND OF THE HIGHLIGHTS. IF YOU HAVE ANY

SPECIFIC QUESTIONS. >> I SPENT SOME TIME OUT HERE BUT ANY BUDDY WORKING DO THEY WORK? I HAVE HEARD SOME PEOPLE WALK AROUND. ARE THEY ON SCHEDULE? IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE

DONE MY MEMORIAL DAY. >> IS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE BY MEMORIAL DAY. WE HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CONTRACTOR SO TYPICAL CONTRACTOR STUFF. HE HIRED US TO COME IN AND DO CONCRETE WORK. I JUST HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION TEAM. HE IS FIRING MOST OF HIS SUBS AND HIRING NEW ONES BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT SHOWING UP OR SHOWING UP AND WORKING FOR AN HOUR AND SAYING THEY WERE TOO HOT AND LEAVING.

HE IS TELLING US ONCE HE GETS THE NEW SUBS HE WILL MEET THE DEADLINES HE HAS. I BASICALLY TOLD HIM LOOK, NOTHING IS HAPPENING. YOU ARE LITERALLY RIGHT OUTSIDE MY OFFICE. AND EVERY TIME HE SENDS ME A PICTURE, I LITERALLY GO DOWNSTAIRS AND WALK THROUGH THE SITE AND LOOK AT WHAT HE JUST SENT ME. WHY DIDN'T YOU JUST COME UPSTAIRS AND TALK TO ME? HE KNOWS I'M WATCHING. HE KNOWS THAT I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE HIM ANY BREAKS. SO HE UNDERSTANDS HE IS UNDER THE GUN TO GET THIS FINISHED. EVERY CONTRACT WE DO HAVE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES.

>> WE USE THE INDUSTRY STANDARD? OR ABOVE THE INDUSTRY STANDARD?

>> WHEN YOU DO LIQUIDATED DAMAGES, MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHEN YOU DO LIQUIDATED DAMAGES IT'S THAT TYPICALLY IT IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT IS GOING TO COST YOU TO CONTINUE THE PROJECT SO YOU CAN'T JUST SAY THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PROJECT, I'M GOING TO CHARGE YOU $10,000 A DAY BECAUSE I WANT TO. IT'S HOW MUCH IS IT GOING TO COST ME FIRST OUT-- FOR STAFF TIME, PROJECT MANAGEMENT, ALTHOUGH THINGS. IF IT'S GOING TO COST ME AN EXTRA $1000 A DAY, THAT IS ALL I AM LEGALLY ALLOWED TO CHARGE YOU. IS THERE SOMETHING I'M MISSING?

>> USUALLY LIQUIDATED DAMAGES ARE SPECIFIED IN THE CONTRACT.

IF NOT IT WOULD BE WHATEVER DAMAGES YOU CLAIM AS A RESULT OF

THEIR BREACH OF CONTRACT. >> SO YOU CAN'T PUT HIGHER

AMOUNTS. >> WHATEVER OUR ACTUAL DAMAGES.

[01:35:03]

>> IF IT IS SOMETHING LIKE WATER LINES WERE NOW YOU HAVE TO BUY WATER AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF AND COSTING MORE MONEY AND IMPACTING PEOPLE. THEN I THINK YOU CAN GO ABOVE AND BEYOND. BUT IF IT IS JUST LIKE A SIDEWALK OR MEMORIAL, NOT THAT I AM MINIMIZING EITHER ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS. BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO DRAMATICALLY HURT THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR CITIZENS. IF THOSE THINGS ARE NOT FINISHED ON TIME. MY UNDERSTANDING, YOU CAN REALLY ONLY CHARGE THEM WHAT YOU ACTUAL DAMAGES ARE WHICH IS THE ACTUAL COST YOU INCURRED TO CONTINUE THAT PROJECT LONGER THAN YOU

THOUGHT. >> THERE'S GOT TO BE AWAY. THAT SAYS THIS IS BEHIND SCHEDULE BECAUSE OF SUCH AND SUCH COMPANY. I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE JUST LIKE BIG DEAL.

PEOPLE JUST WANT TO SEE SOMETHING DONE. PEOPLE JUST WANT TO SEE HOT ASPHALT HIT THE GROUND. WHAT THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE IS CONES EVERYWHERE AND NO ONE WORKING. WHAT IS GOING ON? OR THIS GUY WANTED TO TAKE DECEMBER OFF AND IT'S LIKE NOBODY ELSE GET TO TAKE THE TIME OFF AND NOW WE ARE GOING TO MISS MEMORIAL DAY. IT'S NOT YOU. BUT SOMETHING MAYBE WE CAN DO TO

GIVE YOU MORE TEETH. >> THANKS MATT.

[10.1. Public Hearing relating to the readoption of Ordinance No. O-2025-015 electing to readopt Article 20.04 of the City of Hutto Code of Ordinances regarding Reinvestment Zones and Tax Abatement Agreements, as amended, herein, authorizing the participating of Tax Abatement Agreements and establishing guidelines and criteria governing tax abatement projects to encourage economic development in the City of Hutto. (Legal) ]

>> THANK YOU. >> NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 10.1.

PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER 2025/015. ADOPTING TO THE CITY OF HUTTO REGARDING REINVESTMENT ZONE AND TAX AGREEMENTS AS AMENDED HEREIN. AUTHORIZING THE PARTICIPATING OF TAX ABATEMENT AGREEMENTS AND ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA GOVERNING TAX ABATEMENT PROJECTS TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF HUTTO. WE JUST HAVE TO OPEN UP THE HEARING. WE OPEN UP THE HEARING AT 8:37. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK REGARDING THIS?

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR.

COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. MAYOR GORDON. COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON.

COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. MAYOR SNYDER.

[11. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ]

>> MOTION PASSES 7-0. NEXT WE HAVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 11

ONE, 11.2, 11.3, 11.4 AND 11.5. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO

APPROVE THE REST. >> DO WE HAVE A SECOND? PORTERFIELD. ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. COUNCIL MEMBER CLARK. MAYOR SNYDER. MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON.

[11.1 Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2025-112 authorizing the City Manager to execute amendment No. 2 to the Individual Project Order (IPO) with WSB LLC for design services in the amount of $128,775 for the Ed Schmidt Improvements project. (T-10-2023) (Matt Rector) ]

COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. IS A MEMBER KOLAR.

>> PASSES 7-0. 11.1. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO TO THE INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER IPO WITH WSB LLC FOR DESIGN SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF 128,000 FOR THE ED SCHMIDT IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. MATT, MY QUESTION ON THIS. I AM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE ARE PAYING FOR. ALMOST SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD ALL THE WAY UP TO THE AVENUE. THERE'S A LITTLE GAP ON EACH SIDE. AND SO WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, THERE'S

[01:40:04]

HALF A MILLION DOLLARS AND DESIGN COSTS. WHAT EXACTLY ARE THEY DESIGNING? THEY ARE NOT DESIGNING ALL THE NEW SIDEWALKS.

>> THERE IS NO SIDEWALK ON THE EAST SIDE LEADING UP TO. I BELIEVE THAT WE ARE GOING FROM 79 UP TO THE CHURCH. THE WHOLE POINT OF PUTTING THE SIDEWALK IN THERE WAS THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT LEAVING THE HIGH SCHOOL AND WALKING UP TO DAIRY QUEEN AND CHICK-FIL-A IN THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. THERE IS NOWHERE FOR THEM TO WALK EXCEPT THE DEEP DITCH OR THE SHOULDER OF ED

SCHMIDT. >> ZOOM IN ON THE AERIAL. THERE ARE SIDEWALKS. PROBABLY TWO THIRDS OF THAT AREA HAS SIDEWALKS. DAIRY QUEEN, CHICK-FIL-A, FROM WHAT I CAN TELL IT IS TO THE AVENUE AND FROM THE POND AND SOUTH IT SEEMS LIKE THERE IS AN AREA THERE. ON THE WEST SIDE THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT SIDEWALKS. UNLIKE, THERE ARE SIDEWALKS, THE HOTEL PUT THEM IN, THE DAY CARE PUT THEM IN, THERE ARE LITERALLY SIDEWALKS ALMOST UP UNTIL A SECTION BY WALGREENS.

>> JUST FROM 79 UP THE WALGREENS AND WE TIE INTO THEIR SIDEWALKS.

>> HOW DO THESE GUYS NEED MORE MONEY TO DESIGN A SIDEWALK? I DON'T WANT A GUY TO REDESIGN A SIDEWALK THAT IS ALREADY IN AND

PAY SOMEBODY TO TEAR IT UP. >> I CAN TELL YOU THAT A LOT OF YOUR SIDEWALK COSTS ARE GOING TO BE THE DRAINAGE ISSUES. IF YOU DRIVE ED SCHMIDT AND LOOK AT THE DITCHES, THEY ARE CONCRETE CHANNELS. AND SO WE ARE HAVING TO PUT IN SOME COVERTS AND REDO DRAINAGE TO BE ABLE TO GET THE SIDEWALKS IN THERE AND BE ABLE TO HANDLE RUNOFF. IN FACT, ANGIE FROM WSB IS HERE. CAN YOU PULL

UP A GOOGLE MAP? >> WHEN WE HAD THIS ITEM BEFORE US, I DON'T REMEMBER THERE BEING SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES.

WE PICKED ONE SIDE. MAYBE WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND INVESTIGATE THE MINUTES OF THAT MEETING. I BELIEVE IT WAS GOING TO BE THE EAST SIDE. WE DIDN'T WANT TO ENCOURAGE TO CROSS TO THE OTHER SIDE. AND ALL THE RESTAURANTS ARE ACROSS.

>> THERE IS A SIDEWALK THAT PICKS UP AT CHICK-FIL-A. IT GOES ACROSS TO DAIRY QUEEN. THAT IS A GOOFY INTERSECTION BUT DOESN'T

EXACTLY MATCH UP. >> THERE IS A GAP ON THE WEST

SIDE AS WELL. >> WE ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE EAST. ARE YOU DESIGNING ALL THAT SIDEWALK OR JUST FROM THE

CHICK-FIL-A. >> WE ARE NOT TAKING OUT ANY

EXISTING SIDEWALK. >> I SAID FOR THE LITTLE BIT OF SIDEWALK, I COULDN'T BELIEVE THAT.

>> IS GOING TO BE TO THE CHURCH, ON THE LEFT SIDE IT WOULD BE UP

TO HENRY FARMS. >> THE SIDEWALK ON THE EAST SIDE, IS IT GOING TO GO BEHIND THOSE BUSINESSES INSTEAD OF A

LONG ED SCHMIDT? >> WE ARE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF

[01:45:06]

THE DRAINAGE. >> SOMETIMES YOU BUY A BUILDING AND YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE USE, SOMEBODY SAYS THAT HIS OLD CODE, YOU HAVE TO BRING IT UP TO CODE. TEARING DOWN PART OF THE BANK.

ARE THEY NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR BRINGING THE PROPERTY UP TO TODAY'S CODES AND PUTTING IN THE SIDEWALK? OR ARE THEY BASICALLY GOING TO REDO EVERYTHING. THE CITY SAYS DON'T FORGET, YOU HAVE TO PUT A SIDEWALK. WOULDN'T THEY HAVE TO BE ON THE HOOK FOR ALL OF THAT?

>> I WASN'T AWARE THAT THEY WERE DOING A PROJECT. BUT I WOULD THINK IF THEY ARE MAKING IMPROVEMENTS THEN YES THEY WOULD NEED TO BRING THEIR SITE TO THE CURRENT CODE WHICH WOULD REQUIRE

SIDEWALKS. >> IF YOU DESIGN IT, THEY GET TO BUILD IT. THEY ARE TEARING DOWN THE, I THINK THEY ALREADY MOVED INTO THAT BUILDING AND TEARING DOWN THE DRIVE-THROUGH LANES TO EXTEND THE BUILDING. THE WHOLE TIME, I'M THINKING THIS IS GREAT BECAUSE WE GOT MORE HOSPITAL SERVICES FOR THE

PEOPLE. >> IF IT WAS JUST BUILDING STUFF, BUT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES I CAN TOUCH BASE WITH THEM IN FEE WHAT ALL IS HAPPENING THERE. AT LEAST .

>> WE ARE TIGHT ON CASH. WE COULD USE THAT MONEY. SO WE ARE JUST DOING THE GAPS, NOT ANYTHING ELSE. IS THAT AN A.D.A.

ISSUE WITH SIDEWALKS? I REMEMBER GOING THROUGH TRAINING AND SUPPOSEDLY THE TRUNCATED DOMES YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO KNOW THAT.

YOU WOULDN'T KNOW WHERE TO HIT IT. BECAUSE IT IS OFF A COUPLE

FEET. IS THAT A NORMAL ISSUE? >> WE WILL TAKE IT I LOOK AT IT.

OBVIOUSLY SHE KNOWS THAT I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE WE ARE IN

A.D.A. COMPLIANCE. >> IF WE HAVE TO REDO ANY OF THE

SIDEWALK. >> THANKS. GLAD YOU ARE HERE.

>> I DIDN'T WANT TO OVERSTEP. THANK YOU.

>> CAN WE BRING THIS ONE BACK? >> THIS IS JUST FOR THE DIVINE SERVICES-- DESIGN SERVICES. THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER.

>> I MENTIONED IT DURING MY PRESENTATION, THIS IS THE ONE WE ARE BREAKING THE PROJECT INTO TWO. THEY ARE ON THE HOOK FOR THE DESIGNING THE INTERSECTION ON THE NORTH AT SCHMIDT AND LIMMER AND THE SIDEWALK. TO TRY TO MOVE ONE FASTER THAN THE OTHER, WE ARE SEPARATING THEM OUT. SO THEY ARE GOING TO BE DOUBLE DUTY. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE DIFFERENT PACKAGES FOR DIFFERENT CONTRACTORS TO MANAGE, DIFFERENT ALL THAT KIND OF

STUFF. >> AND THEY ARE GOING TO BE AHEAD OF SCHEDULE AND UNDER BUDGET.

>> I LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE NUMBER ARE 2025 112 AS

PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER THORNTON. COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. MAYOR SNYDER. COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON.

COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD.

[11.2 Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2025-113 authorizing the City Manager to execute an Individual Project Order (IPO) with Clark Condon Associates, Inc. in the amount of $23,150.00 for the Pickleball Courts project. (CIP P18-2024) (Matt Rector) ]

>> MOTION PASSES 7-0. ITEM 11.2 CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION ARE 2025 113 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER IPO WITH CLARK CONDON ASSOCIATES IN THE AMOUNT OF $23,150 FOR THE PICKLEBALL COURT PROJECT. I'M GOING TO TRY TO SUMMARIZE THIS. IT SOUNDS LIKE

[01:50:01]

WE WERE GOING TO DO THIS AT CREEKSIDE PARK. THAT DIDN'T WORK AND WE TRIED TO MOVE IT. THAT DIDN'T WORK EITHER.

>> OKAY. THIS 21,000 IS BECAUSE.

>> IS BECAUSE WE HELD OFF ON DOING SURVEY AND GEOTECH UNTIL HE HAD A LOCATION THAT WE THOUGHT WAS VIABLE. SO NOW WE ARE ADDING THE SURVEY SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY SURVEY EVERYTHING OUT AND GET IT DONE AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.

>> SO HOW MUCH HAVE WE SPENT BY TRYING TO DO ONE VERSUS THE

OTHER? >> THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING FOR THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. PLANNING OUT WHERE IT WOULD FIT, WHAT THE AMENITIES NEED TO BE, HOW CLOSE IT IS TO RESIDENCES, HOW ARE THEY GOING TO RESPONSE. THAT'S ALL WE HAVE DONE SO FAR.

SO WE HAVEN'T SPENT ANYTHING YET.

>> WHY IS THERE A CHANGE ORDER?

>> NOW THAT WE HAVE A LOCATION, NOW WE ARE ADDING SURVEY AND

GEOTECH. >> SO THE CONCERN I HAVE IS, WE PICK A PLACE FOR A PICKLEBALL COURT. THIS ISN'T ON YOU, HOWEVER WE PICK THE PLACE TO PUT THE PICKLEBALL COURT I WOULD THINK BEFORE WE START PICKING CONSULTANTS AND DOING A DOLLAR WE HAVE ALREADY FIGURED OUT AT LEAST WITH GOOGLE EARTH ARE WE LOOSE ENOUGH TO RESIDENCES? IT'S GOING AT CREEKSIDE PARK, WE START SPENDING MONEY, THEN WE GO THAT IS TO CLOSE. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US GET MORE TO WHERE ALL THOSE ARE VETTED BEFORE THEY GO TO CITY COUNCIL. BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF TIMES WE ARE VOTING ON THINGS AND THEN THEY GET ADJUSTED LATER ON. THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK OUT. THEN WE MOVED TO THE SOUTH. SOMETIMES I DON'T REALLY THINK IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. WHICH IS WHY I FREQUENTLY VOTE NO. I'D RATHER VOTE NO AND KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN WHICH MAY BE NOTHING. I WANT TO EXACTLY LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE. OR A REALLY GOOD REASON WHY NOT. THIS ONE I FEEL LIKE THE WHY NOT IS SOMEONE SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE CITY.

LUCKILY IT WAS CAUGHT BEFORE WE APPROVED IT OR REALLY GOT INTO WORK BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW WE GET TO A POINT.

>> CLARIFICATION QUESTION. MAYBE MY UNDERSTANDING IS NOT CORRECT ON THIS. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THIS $23,000 WOULD'VE HAD TO BE SPENT ANYWAY. EITHER BEING SPENT HERE OR IN CREEKSIDE. IT'S NOT THAT THIS IS ADDITIONAL $23,000 BECAUSE OF THE MOVE. IT IS JUST

NOW IT'S TIME TO DO THE WORK. >> WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND IT REGARDLESS. IT'S JUST THAT WE HELD OFF. YOU DO SURVEY AND GEOTECH BECAUSE YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU ARE BUILDING

>> LET'S SAY WE DIDN'T LEAVE THE LOCATION .

>> YOU WOULD'VE STILL SPENT THIS MONEY.

>> WE ARE NOT ADDING MORE MONEY BECAUSE WE CHANGED THE LOCATION.

>> NO. WE ARE ADDING MORE MONEY BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS

ORIGINALLY. >> ARE THE SOCCER FIELDS GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY THIS? IS LAND GOING TO BE TAKEN AWAY?

>> NO. JEFF HAS WORKED WITH THE CONSULTANT TO THE SPOT THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE SOCCER FIELDS. OUTSIDE OF THE CELL TOWER THAT THEY WORKED ON. IT'S NOT GOING TO IMPACT THE PARKING. THEY HAVE FOUND A LOCATION OVER THERE THAT IS RIGHT NEXT TO THE SOCCER FIELDS BUT NOT IMPACTING ANY OF THE STUFF ALREADY THERE.

>> IS THAT CITY LAND OR RIVERWALK?

>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS CITY LAND BUT DON'T HOLD ME TO THAT. I HAVEN'T DONE A DEEP DIVE TO MAKE SURE.

>> THE SOCCER FIELDS WERE GIVEN TO THE CITY A COUPLE YEARS BACK.

>> AND ALSO, YOU PROBABLY DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS, BUT WAS THE PARKS ADVISORY BOARD PART OF THIS CONVERSATION AS TO THE LOCATION OF THE PICKLEBALL COURTS?

>> I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.

>> IT IS CITY. >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

[01:55:02]

BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S HIS ISSUE ISN'T THAT WE ARE MOVING

IT, IT'S THAT . >> I DON'T KNOW IF THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER KNOWS THE PROCESS.

>> I BELIEVE THAT THE WAY THIS ONE WORKED OUT, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. BUT THE CREEKSIDE LOCATION WAS PART OF THE PLAN. THEN WHEN THIS CONSULTANT WHICH WAS NOT THE CONSULTANT. THEY TOOK OVER AND WAS ASSIGNED THE PROJECT. THEY WERE LIKE THIS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA, AND HERE'S WHY. THEN JEFF SAID, WHAT IF WE MOVE IT OVER HERE? AND THEY SAID, YOU HAVE SIMILAR BUT DIFFERENT ISSUES. AND SO THAT IS NOT A GOOD ANSWER EITHER. SO I DON'T KNOW IF HE TOOK EACH OF THOSE LOCATIONS TO THE PARKS ADVISORY BOARD. BUT THAT'S HOW THIS PLAYED OUT. HE WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO SHIFT IT AROUND. BECAUSE HE KNEW THAT THE PRIORITY WAS TO GET PICKLEBALL AND JUST TRYING TO

FIND THE RIGHT SPOT. >> THE PARKS BOARD IS AWARE OF IT. HE SAID THEY DID APPROVE THE LOCATION.

>> THANK YOU. >> I LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE R-2025-113 AS PRESENTED.

>> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR.

COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. MAYOR SNYDER. COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON.

COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON.

>> PASSES 7-0. >> THANKS, MATT. CONSIDERATION

[12.1 Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2025-119 repealing Resolution R-18-02-15-10E approving the City of Hutto Policy for Donation, Grants, Sponsorships and Fundraising, dated February 15, 2018, repealing Resolution R-2023-252 approving the City of Hutto Sponsorship Policy dated October 12, 2023, and adopting the City of Hutto Donations, Grants and Sponsorships Policy dated May 1, 2025. (Kate Moriarty) ]

AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION R 2020 5119 REPEALING RESOLUTION R 18 02 15 10 E. APPROVING THE CITY POLICY FOR DONATION GRANTS, SPONSORSHIPS AND FUNDRAISING. REPEALING 2023 E- 252 APPROVING THE CITY SPONSORSHIP POLICY DATED OCTOBER 12TH 2023 AND ADOPTING THE CITY OF HUTTO DONATIONS, GRANTS AND SCHOLARSHIPS POLICY DATED MAY 1ST, 2025.

>> KATE MORIARTY, I AM REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPMENT APARTMENT ON THIS ITEM. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS TO REPEAL THE 2018 AND 2023 COEXISTING SPONSORSHIPS AND ADOPTING THIS CURRENT RUN THAT IS JUST EXPANDING AND A BIT CLEANED UP FROM THE OTHER TWO EXISTING SPONSORSHIP POLICIES. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS

THAT YOU ALL MAY HAVE. >> ANY QUESTIONS OR ACTION?

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO REPEAL RESOLUTION R 1802 15 10 E. AND ADOPT THE DONATIONS, GRANTS AND SPONSORSHIPS POLICY DATED MAY

1ST, 2025. >> SECOND.

>> ALSO REPEALING RESOLUTION 2023-252.

>> I WILL ADD THAT TO THE MOTION.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> MAYOR SNYDER. MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON. COUNCILMEMBER CLARK.

COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR.

COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD.

[12.2 Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2025-120 approving the municipal services agreement between the City of Hutto and Limmer Holdings, LLC for the proposed annexation of 111.851 acres of land located west of Texas 130 and south of Limmer Loop. (Legal) ]

>> MOTION PASSES 7-0. ITEM 12.2. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION R-2025-120 APPROVING THE MUNICIPAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF 111.851 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED WEST OF TEXAS 130 AND SOUTH OF LIMMER LOOP.

>> AT THE APRIL 17TH COUNCIL MEETING, YOU APPROVED THE LIMMER SQUARE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. IT ACTS AS THE PETITION FOR ANNEXATION AND ALSO HAS CONNECT AS THE SERVICES PLAN. SO WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE IS DONE THE MUNICIPAL SERVICES PLAN WITH THE

[02:00:03]

ADDITIONAL MUNICIPAL SERVICES THAT WEREN'T LISTED IN THE ANNEXATION AGREEMENT. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE WASTEWATER SERVICES PROVIDED THERE. THIS IS REQUIRED TO BE ATTACHED TO YOUR ANNEXATION ORDINANCE SHOULD YOU CHOOSE TO ANNEX THIS PROPERTY. WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

>> I LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE R-2025-120.

>> SECOND. >> SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON. COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON.

COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD.

COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. MAYOR SNYDER. COUNCILMEMBER CLARK.

[12.3 Consideration and possible action on Resolution R-2025-114 regarding amendments to the Type A and Type B Bylaws of the Hutto Economic Development Corporations. (Councilmember Brian Thompson, Mayor Pro Tem Gordon, and Councilmember Randal Clark)]

[13.1. Discussion and possible action related to the conceptual mixed-use development known as ATX Legacy Park, located north of Limmer Loop near Limmer Loop and HWY 79 intersection. (Councilmember Randal Clark) ]

>> MOTION PASSES 7-0. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 12.3 CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION R-2025-114 REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO THE TYPE A AND TYPE B BYLAWS OF THE HUTTO CORPORATIONS. WE

HAVE MISS AUDREY GUTHRIE. >> EVENING AGAIN. FOR ANYONE THAT DOESN'T REMEMBER ME, I AM ATTORNEY FOR THE HUTTO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND I JUST CAME HERE TO REAL QUICK SUMMARIZE THE PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGES AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. I WILL TRY TO BE FAST. THE PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGES REALLY INTO TWO CATEGORIES, ONE OF THEM IS GEARED TOWARD COMPLIANCE AND THE SECOND IS DISCRETIONARY. 1.4 WHICH IS LISTED, PREVIOUSLY IT LISTS A BUNCH OF PEOPLE AND SAID THEY HAVE ACCESS TO RECORDS. TEXAS LAW ACTUALLY REQUIRES THAT FOR CERTAIN RECORDS. CERTIFIED AGENDAS AND RECORDING AND THINGS LIKE EXECUTIVE SESSION. CERTAIN PEOPLE AREN'T ACTUALLY ALLOWED.

SO ALL WE DID WAS ADD A LITTLE LINE THAT SAYS TO THE EXTENT LEGALLY ALLOWED. AND IT IS JUST A RED FLAG FOR ANYBODY LOOKING AT THIS IF THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS TO THINK I SHOULD CHECK AND MAKE SURE THIS PERSON HAS LEGAL AUTHORITY. THE OTHER CHANGE THAT IS GEARED TOWARD LEGAL COMPLIANCE IS 210. ALSO REGARDING EXECUTIVE SESSION. YOU GUYS KNOW MORE ABOUT THE BACK STORY. THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHO WAS AUTOMATICALLY ENTITLED TO ATTEND THE SESSION. BUT THERE IS ACTUALLY LIMITATIONS ON WHO THE BOARD IS ALLOWED INTO EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. THERE HAS TO BE CERTAIN FINDINGS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE INTERESTS ARE INVERSE. WHETHER OR NOT THE ATTENDANCE IS NECESSARY. SO TO 10 LISTS A FEW PEOPLE, BOARD DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS AND THE ATTORNEY THAT THEY YOU CAN BUT IT PUTS AN OBLIGATION ON THE BOARD TO MAKE THE FINDINGS AND MAKE SURE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ATTENDING ARE LEGALLY AUTHORIZED. THEN WE HAVE DISCRETIONARY CHANGES WHICH ARE PRETTY SIMPLE. ONE OF WHICH IS JUST SAYING THE BOARD SAID THEY WOULD PREFER NOT TO HAVE EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY BE ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. SO THEY ADDED A REQUIREMENT THAT CITY EMPLOYEES WOULD NOT BE ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND PUT AN AUTOMATIC RESIGNATION IN SO THAT IF YOU ARE ON THE BOARD AND TAKE A POSITION WITH THE CITY YOU HAVE RESIGNED FROM THE BOARD.