[Call to Order 08.25.2026] [00:00:08] MEETING OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN CITY COUNCIL. WE'RE GOING TO START OFF WITH THE PLEDGE. BEN STEWART, DO YOU WANT TO LEAD US OFF? [Proclamation of National Preparedness Month] THANK YOU. WE DO HAVE ONE RECOGNITION BEFORE WE MOVE INTO THE REST OF OUR MEETING. IT IS NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS MONTH. AND SO I'M GOING TO READ THIS. AND THEN CHRISTIE IS GOING TO COME FORWARD. OH THERE YOU GO. ALL RIGHT. WHEREAS THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND HOMELAND SECURITY HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED TO COORDINATE WITH THE EMERGENCY RESPONSE AGENCIES AND THE PUBLIC TO PROTECT LIFE AND PROPERTY FROM THE EFFECTS OF MAJOR EMERGENCIES AND DISASTERS THROUGH MITIGATION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE AND RECOVERY ACTIONS. AND WHEREAS, RECENT TRAGEDIES ACROSS THE STATE AND NATION REMIND US OF THE IMPORTANCE OF DISASTER PREPAREDNESS AND HAVING A PLAN IN PLACE BEFORE CRISIS STRIKES, AND WHEREAS, EACH YEAR BRINGS THE POTENTIAL THREAT FOR NATURAL DISASTERS OR HUMAN CAUSED EMERGENCIES TO OUR COMMUNITY, AND WHEREAS THE CITY ENCOURAGES EVERY COMMUNITY MEMBER TO SIGN UP FOR THE ALERTS THROUGH WARN CENTRAL TEXAS. ACTIVE. ACTIVATE EMERGENCY NOTIFICATIONS ON THEIR MOBILE DEVICES, PREPARE A DISASTER SUPPLY KIT, AND SPEAK WITH YOUR FAMILY ON BEST. HOW BEST TO RESPOND TO EMERGENCIES. AND WHEREAS NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS MONTH IS A NATIONWIDE EFFORT HELD EACH SEPTEMBER TO RAISE AWARENESS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF PLANNING FOR ALL TYPES OF DISASTERS AND TO PROMOTE FAMILY AND COMMUNITY DISASTER AND EMERGENCY PLANNING NOW AND THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. NOW, THEREFORE, I, JOSH SCHRADER, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER 2026 AS NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS MONTH IN GEORGETOWN, TEXAS. COME ON FORTH, CHRISTI. ALL RIGHT. FOR FOLKS WISHING TO ADDRESS COUNCIL ON ANY OF OUR PUBLISHED AGENDA ITEMS, YOU CAN DO SO BY FILLING OUT A FORM AT THE BACK AND GIVING THAT TO ROBIN ON MY LEFT. AND YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WHEN THAT ITEM COMES UP. IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS COUNCIL ON ANYTHING OTHER THAN OUR PUBLISHED AGENDA ITEMS, YOU CAN DO SO BY LETTING STAFF KNOW PRIOR TO OUR NEXT MEETING, AND YOU'LL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AT THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING. WE DO HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON SOMETHING OTHER THAN OUR PUBLISHED AGENDA ITEMS. JORDAN UTTER. IS JORDAN HERE? WE WEREN'T SURE IF. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL SEE IF THEY WANT TO SPEAK NEXT TIME. THAT BRINGS US WE DON'T HAVE ANY ACTION OUT [Statutory Consent Agenda] OF EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO THAT BRINGS US TO OUR STATUTORY CONSENT AGENDA. ALTHOUGH WE DO HAVE A REQUEST TO PULL ITEM FIVE Z. AND THEN I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MR. PITTS BECAUSE I'M RECUSING ON ITEM FIVE IN. OUR COUNCIL. I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. SAVE AND ACCEPT FIVE Z. IF I COULD HEAR A MOTION. MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND, IT IS WITHOUT ITEM FIVE Z, CORRECT? MR. NOBLE? YEAH. MOTION. AWESOME. ALL RIGHT, ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. WITH MR. BUTLER ABSENT. THANK YOU. KEVIN. THAT [6.A First Reading - Contract Authority for Cooperative Agreements] BRINGS US TO OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. FIRST UP, WE HAVE ITEM SIX A, AND I BELIEVE LEE IS GOING TO LEAD US OFF ON OUR BUDGET ITEMS. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. LEE WALLACE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER WE HAVE A PROPOSED CHANGE FOR OUR CONTRACT SIGNATURE AUTHORITY ORDINANCE AND POLICY. WE HAD BROUGHT THIS ORDINANCE AND POLICY TO YOU IN OCTOBER OF 2025 TO MAKE SOME CHANGES. AND SO I HAVE TWO CHANGES PROPOSED TONIGHT. ONE HAS TO DO WITH STREAMLINING, EXCUSE ME, STREAMLINING THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR ROUTINE [00:05:04] EQUIPMENT PURCHASES IN OUR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FUND AND OUR FLEET FUND. SO IN AN EFFORT TO DO PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS FOR OUR PROCUREMENTS, WE ARE PROPOSING THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE DELEGATED THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE COMPETITIVELY BID COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT PURCHASES. AND SO BASICALLY, IF OUR IT DEPARTMENT AND OUR FLEET DEPARTMENT HAVE THE EQUIPMENT FUNDED IN THE BUDGET AND THEY PURCHASE IT OFF OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT THAT COUNCIL HAS ALREADY APPROVED, THEN THE CITY MANAGER WILL BE ABLE TO EXECUTE THE SPECIFIC CONTRACT FOR THAT SPECIFIC PIECE OF EQUIPMENT OR SOFTWARE SERVICE. AND SO THIS ITEM IS RELATED TO ONE OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. WHEN YOU ADOPT THE BUDGET, WE HAVE LISTED AN ADDITIONAL EXHIBIT IN THAT ITEM THAT LISTS OUT THAT PROPOSED FLEET AND IT EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES THAT BE ADOPTED WITH THE BUDGET THIS YEAR. ASSUMING THAT YOU WILL APPROVE THIS ITEM. ONE OTHER SMALL CHANGE. WE HAD A CORRECTION TO ONE OF THE RED LINES FROM THE OCTOBER 2025 CHANGE. AND SO THAT'S JUST CORRECTING THAT. THE CITY MANAGER MAY APPROVE A CHANGE ORDER THAT IS $50,000 OR LESS FOR A CONTRACT REQUIRED BY STATE LAW TO BE COMPETITIVELY BID. WHEN WE DID THE THRESHOLD CHANGE PREVIOUSLY, WE JUST IN ERROR RED LINE THAT IN TWO PLACES INSTEAD OF ONE PLACE. SO WE'RE FIXING THAT. I'LL READ THE OR ANY QUESTIONS AND I'LL READ THE CAPTION. OKAY. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING SECTION 4.08.010, TITLED AUTHORITY OF THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY STAFF TO CONTRACT OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN. REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU MA'AM. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION, MR. MAYOR. I. WISH TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS READ. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. AND I THINK RANDY'S TAKING OVER THE NEXT ONES. YEAH. HELLO, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I'M RANDY CORMACK, THE BUDGET MANAGER. [Items 6.B & 6.C] THIS IS GETTING PULLED UP. I JUST WANTED TO QUICKLY SAY IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK TO GET HERE WITH THE BUDGET FOR YOU AND THE TAX RATE. AND I JUST WANT TO RECOGNIZE EVERYBODY IN THE CITY THAT HELPED US GET HERE, ESPECIALLY ISAAC AND AMANDA, OUR SENIOR BUDGET ANALYSTS. OKAY, SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE HEARING ON THE BUDGET AND THE TAX RATE. BUT BEFORE THAT, THIS IS JUST A QUICK RECAP. YOU'VE SEEN A LOT OF THIS BEFORE. SO IF IT SEEMS SHORTER TO SOMEBODY, IT'S JUST BECAUSE WE'VE PRESENTED IT SEVERAL TIMES TO YOU ALL. WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER THE BUDGET AND TAX RATE REVIEW, AND THEN WE'LL CONDUCT THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE BUDGET AND THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE TAX RATE. SO THESE ARE THE KEY THEMES THAT STAFF LOOKED AT WHEN DEVELOPING THE BUDGET FOR FY 2027. WE LOOKED AT PUBLIC SAFETY RESOURCE INVESTMENT, STRATEGIC INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT, RELIABLE SERVICE DELIVERY, INVESTING IN OUR PEOPLE, CONTINUED STRONG FISCAL STEWARDSHIP AND ADDRESSING FINANCIAL TRENDS IN THE CURRENT ECONOMY. THIS IS AN OVERVIEW OF ALL OF THE FUNDS. SO FOR OUR REVENUES YOU'LL SEE PRIMARILY BOND PROCEEDS IS AT THE TOP. WE ALSO HAVE CHARGES FOR SERVICES AND TAXES COMES IN THIRD THERE. AND WHEN YOU BREAK DOWN THE EXPENSES BY KIND OF AREA OR FUND, WE HAVE THE WATER UTILITY AT 58%. AND THEN ELECTRIC AND GENERAL FUND. THE EXPENSES IS 1.6 BILLION 903 MILLION OF THAT IS PLANNED CAPITAL PROJECTS. SO THAT'S ABOUT 55% OF OUR BUDGET. THE MAJORITY OF THAT IS IN OUR WATER WITH 720 MILLION. WE HAVE 95.4 MILLION IN ELECTRIC PURCHASE POWER EXPENSES, 97.4 MILLION IN WATER AND WASTEWATER OPERATIONS, AND THEN 75.4 MILLION IS APPROPRIATED FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. THESE ARE OUR PROPOSED STAFFING INCREASES. THE GENERAL FUND. WE HAVE 14 NEW FTES PROPOSED IN JOINT SERVICES. WE HAVE SEVEN ELECTRIC. WE HAVE 11 WATER, ONE STORMWATER. WE HAVE FOUR NEW FTES, TOURISM, A PART TIME PERSON, AND TWO IN IT. SO THAT BRINGS OUR TOTAL TO 39.5 NEW PERSONNEL FOR FY 2027. SO THE [00:10:10] FY 2027 PROPERTY TAX, THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE IS 36.216 $0.08. THE VOTER APPROVED RATE IS 36.316 $0.07. AND THAT IS ALSO WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING FOR THE PROPERTY TAX RATE, 36.316 $0.07. THAT IS MADE UP OF THE OPERATIONS OR O&M SIDE, WHICH IS 11.26 $0.03, AND THE DEBT SERVICE SIDE, WHICH IS 25.053 $0.07. THE AVERAGE TAXABLE HOME VALUES DECREASED THIS YEAR BY ABOUT 2.8%, FROM 402,000 TO 390 391,000. SO WITH THAT, WE ARE ESTIMATING NO ANNUAL INCREASE TO THE AVERAGE HOMESTEAD TAX BILL. THIS IS A LOOK AT THE PROPERTY TAXES COMPARED TO OUR NEIGHBORS. THESE ARE MAXIMUM SET TAX RATES. SO THESE ARE PRELIMINARY AND THEY COULD CHANGE. BUT WE ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE ONE OF THE LOWEST IN THE REGION. AND SO WE'VE DONE SOME PUBLIC OUTREACH WITH THE BUDGET AND TAX RATE. AND WE PUBLISHED THE DIGITAL PROPOSED BUDGET BOOK ON AUGUST 7TH. WE POSTED ON THE WEBSITE. AND THERE WAS SOME SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS AS WELL. THERE WAS ALSO PRESS RELEASES, AND WE HAD SOME NEWSPAPER NOTICES. WE'RE HAVING THE PUBLIC HEARINGS TODAY ON THE BUDGET AND TAX RATE. AND THEN THE ADOPTED BUDGET WILL BE PUBLISHED ON THE WEBSITE ONCE IT'S ADOPTED AND COMPLETED. AND WE WILL HAVE NEWS RELEASES AS WELL ON THE ADOPTED BUDGET. YOU WERE PROVIDED WITH COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WE GATHERED THROUGH ASGT. SO THOSE WERE WHAT THE CITY COLLECTED. WE ALSO GAVE YOU FEEDBACK THAT THE TAX ASSESSORS HAD COLLECTED. WE WILL ALSO, IF WE GET ANY, BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, SEPTEMBER 8TH MEETING, PROVIDE THOSE AS WELL. SO THE NEXT STEPS ARE. WE HAVE THE REQUIRED PUBLIC NOTICES PUBLISHED IN THE INTERNET TV. YOU'LL SEE THEM ON OUR WEBSITE. WE'RE HAVING THE REGULAR MEETING TODAY WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET AND TAX RATE, AND THE FIRST READING OF THE BUDGET AND TAX RATE AND THE FEE AND RATE ORDINANCES. SEPTEMBER 8TH, WE WILL HAVE THE SECOND READING OF THE BUDGET AND THE TAX RATE AND THE FEE AND RATE ORDINANCES IN OCTOBER 1ST IS THE NEW FISCAL YEAR BEGINS. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS? NO, MA'AM. READY. OKAY. WE'VE PRESENTED OUR OVERVIEW OF THE FISCAL 2027 BUDGET. WE WILL NOW CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. NO ONE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. SEEING NO ONE INDICATE A DESIRE TO DO SO, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2027 BUDGET. THE CITY COUNCIL WILL VOTE TO ADOPT THE BUDGET ON FIRST READING TONIGHT, TUESDAY, AUGUST 25TH, 2026, HERE AT THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 510 WEST NINTH STREET IN GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AND ON SECOND READING AT 6 P.M. ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8TH, 2026 AT CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 510 WEST NINTH STREET, GEORGETOWN, TEXAS. IS THERE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET? MAYOR MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ITEM SIX C. THERE'S NOT A IT'S JUST WITH THE SAME PRESENTATION. SO OKAY, SO WE WILL NOW CONDUCT THE PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX RATE. EACH SPEAKER WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES. NO ONE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. SEEING NO ONE INDICATE A DESIRE TO DO SO, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPERTY TAX RATE. THE CITY COUNCIL WILL VOTE TO ADOPT THE TAX RATE ON FIRST READING TONIGHT, AUGUST 25TH, 2026 AT THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 510 WEST NINTH STREET, GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AND ON SECOND READING AT 6 P.M. ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8TH, 2026 AT THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 510 WEST NINTH STREET, GEORGETOWN, TEXAS. IS THERE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE TAX RATE MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE TAX RATE? I'LL SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT. THAT MOVES US TO ITEM SIX D. THANK YOU MAYOR. [6.D First Reading - Annual Operating Budget FY2027] STATE LAW REQUIRES THE CITY COUNCIL VOTE ON THE BUDGET AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE PURPOSE OF THIS ITEM IS TO RECORD THE COUNCIL'S VOTE ON FIRST READING. I WILL READ THE ORDINANCE CAPTION. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR THE ENSUING FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST, 2026 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2027. IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 102 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE APPROPRIATING THE VARIOUS AMOUNTS, THEREFORE, REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE [00:15:03] DATE. THANK YOU MA'AM. WE ARE NOW READY TO VOTE TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY'S BUDGET. IS THERE A MOTION? I MOVE TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2027 ANNUAL BUDGET. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND COUNCILMEMBER. FRENCH SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. STATE LAW REQUIRES US TO BE A RECORDED VOTE. WILL THE CITY SECRETARY PLEASE READ THE ROLL? DISTRICT ONE, HOW DO YOU VOTE? YES. DISTRICT TWO, HOW DO YOU VOTE YES? DISTRICT THREE IS ABSENT. DISTRICT FOUR, HOW DO YOU VOTE YES? DISTRICT FIVE, HOW DO YOU VOTE YES? DISTRICT SIX, HOW DO YOU VOTE YES? DISTRICT SEVEN HOW DO YOU VOTE? YES. APPROVED SIX ZERO. [6.E Resolution - Ratify the Property Tax Rate Increase for FY2027 Budget] ALL RIGHT. THAT MOVES ITEM SIX C. TO. SO THE PURPOSE OF ITEM SIX E IS TO RATIFY THE PROPERTY TAX REVENUE INCREASE REFLECTED IN THE BUDGET. SO THE PROPOSED TAX RATE IS HIGHER THAN THE CURRENT RATE. AND THERE IS NEW ASSESSED VALUE IN THE CITY. SO THERE WILL BE MORE REVENUE FROM TAXES. THIS VOTE IS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. COUNCIL MUST MAKE THIS VOTE SEPARATELY TO MAKE CLEAR THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WILL TAKE MORE PROPERTY TAXES FROM THE CITY RAISED LAST YEAR TO PAY FOR THE BUDGET THAT YOU APPROVED FOR THIS YEAR. THIS IS NOT A VOTE ON THE TAX RATE. YOU WILL HAVE A SEPARATE VOTE ON THE TAX RATE IN A FEW MINUTES. I WILL READ THE CAPTION. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, RATIFYING THE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE REFLECTED IN THE BUDGET, REPEALING CONFLICTING RESOLUTIONS, INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU MA'AM, IS THERE A MOTION TO RATIFY THE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE REFLECTED IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2027 BUDGET ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL TODAY? MAYOR MOVED TO RATIFY THE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE REFLECTED IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2027 BUDGET. SECOND COUNCILMEMBER GARLAND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION NEEDED? ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM PITTS AND A SECOND FROM COUNCILMEMBER GARLAND. THIS IS A REGULAR VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR? THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. THAT BRINGS US TO [6.F First Reading - Levying the Property Tax Rate] ITEM SIX F. SIX F IS TO LEVY THE TAX RATE. STATE LAW REQUIRES THIS TO BE A SEPARATE VOTE FROM ADOPTING THE BUDGET, AND A SEPARATE VOTE FROM RATIFYING THE TAX RATE. THE PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX RATE IS 36.316 $0.07 PER $100 OF ASSESSED VALUATION. THIS IS HIGHER THAN THE CURRENT TAX RATE. THE TOTAL RATE IS COMPRISED OF 11.26 $0.03 FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS, AND 25.053 $0.07 FOR INTEREST AND SINKING OR DEBT SERVICE. THE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PORTION OF THE RATE HAS DECREASED BY 0.001241 PER $100. EVALUATION AND THE INTEREST IN SINKING OR DEBT SERVICE PORTION IS INCREASING BY 0.01140 $0.08. STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT THE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PORTION OF THE TAX RATE REVENUE MAY ONLY BE INCREASED BY 3.5%, AND THE PROPOSED RATE COMPLIES WITH THIS REQUIREMENT. I DO HAVE ONE CORRECTION TO THE ORDINANCE ITSELF. THE THIRD. WHEREAS CLAUSE SHOULD STATE THAT THE TAX RATE WILL BE RAISED BY POSITIVE 4.32% AND WILL RAISE TAXES FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION ON $100 $100,000 HOME BY APPROXIMATELY $4.66. THIS CORRECTION WILL BE INCLUDED WITH THE SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE. I'LL READ THE ORDINANCE. THERE'S NO QUESTIONS. AN ORDINANCE LEVYING A TAX RATE FOR THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, FOR THE TAX YEAR 2026, REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL NOW CONSIDER THREE MOTIONS TO ADOPT THE PROPERTY TAX RATE. I WANT TO ASK A QUESTION FIRST, MAYOR. REAL QUICK, RANDY, ON THIS, THE THE INCREASE FOR A $100,000 HOME IS APPROXIMATELY $4.66. BUT ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, IT SAID THERE'D BE NO OR AVERAGE HOME VALUE WAS 380 SOMETHING, 390 SOMETHING, I BELIEVE. AND THERE'D BE NO, ON THE AVERAGE, I GUESS, NO EFFECTIVE TAX RATE. SO IS THIS JUST STATE MATH HERE? CREATING THIS LIKE WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST? WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IT. YES, IT IS STATE MATH BASICALLY. SO THE WAY THEY CALCULATE THAT INCREASE IS FIRST OF ALL, THEY'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE ONE PORTION OF THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS PORTION. AND THEY'RE TAKING THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE FROM THIS YEAR, SUBTRACTING OUT OUR SALES TAX RATE, AND THEN COMPARING IT TO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION, THE SALES TAX RATE BEING THE THE 0.125. YES. OF THE SALES TAX THAT IS FOR PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. YES. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. SO YEAH, IT'S A SPECIAL CALCULATION AND I CAN SHOW YOU THE BACKUP. YEAH. NO IT'S NOT AN EASY CALCULATION. ALL RIGHT. YOU READY FOR MOTION. OKAY. I DO HAVE THREE SEPARATE MOTIONS. FOR THE FIRST ONE, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE TAX RATE OF 11.263 [00:20:05] $0.00 FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION COMPONENT OF THE OVERALL TAX RATE. I NEED A SECOND ON THAT. SECOND. I GOT A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRENCH. ANY DISCUSSION NEEDED? ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM PITTS TO APPROVE THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION COMPONENT OF THE TAX RATE. AND A SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER FRENCH. THIS IS A REGULAR VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR? THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. KEVIN. ALL RIGHT. SECOND MOTION TO MOVE TO APPROVE THE TAX RATE OF 25.053 $0.07 FOR THE DEBT SERVICE COMPONENT OF THE OVERALL TAX RATE. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM PITTS TO APPROVE THE DEBT SERVICE COMPONENT OF THE TAX RATE. AND COUNCIL A SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER FRENCH. THIS IS A REGULAR VOTE AS WELL. ALL IN FAVOR. THANK YOU ALL. LAST ONE KEVIN. ALL RIGHT. LAST ONE. I MOVE THAT THE PROPERTY TAX RATE BE INCREASED BY THE ADOPTION OF A TAX RATE OF 36.316 $0.07, WHICH IS EFFECTIVELY A 0.28% INCREASE IN THE TAX RATE. SECOND ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM PITTS TO ADOPT THE PROPERTY TAX RATE. AND A SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER. FRENCH STATE LAW REQUIRES THIS FINAL VOTE TO BE A RECORD VOTE. WILL THE CITY SECRETARY PLEASE READ THE ROLL? DISTRICT ONE HOW DO YOU VOTE? YES. DISTRICT TWO, HOW DO YOU VOTE YES? DISTRICT THREE IS ABSENT. DISTRICT FOUR, HOW DO YOU VOTE YES? DISTRICT FIVE HOW DO YOU VOTE YES? DISTRICT SIX HOW DO YOU VOTE YES? DISTRICT SEVEN HOW DO YOU VOTE YES. APPROVE SIX ZERO. ALL RIGHTY. ALMOST DONE. GO AHEAD. OKAY. SO SIX G IS THE ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.08.01 THE [6.G First Reading - Administrative Department Updates] ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS. SO THIS ORDINANCE REESTABLISHES ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS AS REQUIRED BY CITY CHARTER FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027. THIS ORDINANCE HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE SEPTEMBER 2023. THE ORDINANCE REFLECTS NEW ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, AND THE RENAMING OF SOME OF THE DEPARTMENTS, LIKE 311 CALL CENTER TO ASGT, PURCHASING TO PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACT SERVICES, AND BUILDING INSPECTION TO INSPECTION SERVICES. I'LL READ THE ORDINANCE. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING SECTION 2.08.010 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS, REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? MAYOR MOVE APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE IS READ. SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU ALL. YEAH. [6.H First Reading - Amendment to Miscellaneous Utility Account Fees] THANK YOU GUYS. APPRECIATE ALL THE BUDGET FOLKS. NEXT UP WE HAVE ITEM SIX H. AND SHARI I BELIEVE IS HANDLING THIS. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. TODAY I'M GOING TO BE PRESENTING OUR ANNUAL REVIEW OF MISCELLANEOUS UTILITY ACCOUNT FEES THIS YEAR. THE PROPOSED CHANGE IS TO THE METER TAMPERING FEE. AND I'LL BRIEFLY WALK YOU THROUGH HOW WE REVIEWED THE FEE, WHAT'S DRIVING THE COST, AND THE PROPOSED PROPOSED COST. WE PERIODICALLY REVIEW THESE FEES TO MAKE SURE THEY STILL REFLECT WHAT ACTUALLY COST TO THE CITY TO PROVIDE THE SERVICE. THOSE INCLUDE. THAT INCLUDES CHANGES IN LABOR, EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS AND THE WORK REQUIRED TO RESPOND TO THESE INCIDENTS. THE GOAL IS TO RECOVER THESE COSTS FROM THE CUSTOMER REQUIRING THE SERVICE, RATHER THAN SPREADING THOSE COSTS ACROSS ALL UTILITY CUSTOMERS. IT ALSO HELPS US KEEP OUR FEES CLEAR AND TRANSPARENT. AS PART OF THE 2027 BUDGET PROCESS, CITY STAFF REVIEWED THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROVIDING THESE SERVICES. WE LOOKED AT STAFF TIME, EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLE USE, AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE WORK INVOLVED. THE GOAL WAS NOT TO INCREASE THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE, IT WAS SIMPLY TO DETERMINE WHAT IT CURRENTLY COSTS THE CITY AND MAKE SURE THE FEE REASONABLY REFLECTS THAT COST. BASED ON THAT REVIEW, WE ARE. WE ARE PROPOSING A ONE TIME FEE ADJUSTMENT TO THE CURRENT METER TAMPERING FEE. IT IS CURRENTLY $880. THE PROPOSED FEE IS $990. AND I'LL SHOW YOU WHAT GOES INTO MAKING UP THAT COST. WHEN WE IDENTIFY. POSSIBLE METER TAMPERING ARE A REGULAR USAGE. THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF WORK INVOLVED. STAFF FIRST REVIEWS AND DOCUMENTS THE ISSUE AND CREATES A SERVICE TICKET FOR INVESTIGATION. A METER TECHNICIAN IS DISPATCHED TO INSPECT THE SITE AND DEPENDING ON THE SITUATION, THERE MAY ALSO BE COORDINATION BETWEEN BILLING. LEGAL AND POLICE. SERVICE MAY NEED TO BE DISCONNECTED AND RECONNECTED, [00:25:04] AND THE METER OR METER CAN MAY NEED TO BE REPLACED REPLACED. WHEN WE CALCULATED THESE THOSE COSTS. LABOR WAS ABOUT $281. THE METER AND METER CAN WERE ABOUT $678 IN THE SERVICE TRUCK WAS ABOUT $24. THAT BRINGS THE TOTAL CALCULATED COST TO $983.19. THE BIGGEST DRIVER OF THE COST IS THE IS THE REPLACEMENT OF THE METERING EQUIPMENT THAT REPRESENTS ABOUT 69% OF THE TOTAL CALCULATED COST. WHEN YOU COMBINE THE EQUIPMENT WITH STAFF TIME, THE FIELD INVESTIGATION, THE SERVICE TRUCK AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE FOLLOW UP, THE ACTUAL CLOSE IS VERY CLOSE TO. THE ACTUAL COST IS VERY CLOSE TO THE PROPOSED $990 FEE. THE INTENT IS FOR THE CUSTOMER RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TAMPERING INCIDENT TO COVER THOSE COSTS, RATHER THAN SPREADING THEM ACROSS ALL UTILITY CUSTOMERS. FROM A FINANCIAL STANDPOINT, WE EXPECT THE OVERALL IMPACT TO BE MINIMAL. THESE FEES ARE ONLY CHARGED WHEN THE APPLICABLE SERVICE OR INCIDENT INCIDENT ACTUALLY OCCURS. AGAIN, THE PURPOSE IS NOT TO GENERATE ADDITIONAL REVENUE. THE PURPOSE IS COST RECOVERY AND MAKING SURE THE CITY IS RECOVERING THE ACTUAL COST ASSOCIATED WITH RESPONDING TO THESE EVENTS. ANY QUESTIONS? SO THE FEE IS STRUCTURED TO RECOUP OUR COSTS AND NOT NECESSARILY BE A. WELL, I GUESS THEY'RE BEING PENALIZED BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT. BUT IT'S NOT PUNITIVE. IT'S JUST A COST RECOVERY. BUT I NOTICED, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS THAT THAT'S CORRECT. YES. THE GOAL IS TO RECOVER OUR COSTS FOR HAVING TO GO OUT AND INVESTIGATE. IT CAN BE PUNITIVE TO THE CUSTOMER BECAUSE IT IS OUR EQUIPMENT. AND SO WE YES. SO WE DO HAVE TO RECOVER ANY COSTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH ANY DAMAGES TO THAT. BECAUSE METER TAMPERING IS A SERIOUS IT CAN BE DANGEROUS DEALING WITH ELECTRIC AND WATER. AND WITH THAT, THE CUSTOMER IS ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ANY USAGE THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AS WELL. DOUG, DID YOU HEAR THAT? IT COULD BE DANGEROUS, SO DON'T BE MESSING WITH IT. SO THE I SEE ON HERE ON SLIDE FIVE, YOU SAY COORDINATE WITH BILLING, LEGAL AND POLICE WHEN NEEDED. SO IS IT SOMETHING THAT IT WOULD IT WOULD IF SOMEBODY'S MESSING TAMPERING WITH A METER. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS, I GUESS, CRIMINAL THAT WE WOULD CONTACT THE POLICE OR WHAT? THE POLICE THERE JUST FOR SECURITY PURPOSES OR COST FOR POLICE COULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE FACT THAT DEPENDING ON THE SEVERITY OF THE TAMPERING, DEPENDING ON THE COST, IT COULD CAUSE MORE SERIOUS INCIDENTS AND WE WOULD INVOLVE POLICE AND LEGAL WITHIN THOSE MATTERS. IF WE DO NEED TO GO DOWN THOSE INVESTIGATIVE ROUTES, HOW OFTEN DOES THIS COME UP A YEAR? DO YOU KNOW THE METER TAMPERING CAN OCCUR ON A DAILY BASIS? UTILITY BILLING, BECAUSE WE ASSESS THE COST, WE DEAL WITH IT ON A DAILY BASIS. MOSTLY WE SEE THOSE INCIDENTS IN TERMS OF WHERE MAYBE A CUSTOMER HAS BEEN CUT FOR NONPAYMENT. THEIR THEIR SERVICES HAVE BEEN INTERRUPTED FOR NONPAYMENT. AND IF UNFORTUNATELY, THEY DO TAMPER WITH THOSE SERVICES TO AVOID PAYMENT OF THE SERVICES THAT WE'VE ALREADY PROVIDED. AND WE SEE TAMPERING IN THOSE IN THOSE INSTANCES. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. THIS IS A OH, NO, SORRY. THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. FIRST READING, FIRST READING. YES. SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING SECTION 13.04.24 C OF CHAPTER 13.04, ARTICLE SEVEN OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN REGARDING THE METER TAMPERING FEE, REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU MA'AM, APPRECIATE IT. WE HAVE A MOTION. MAYOR, I MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM SIX H AS PRESENTED. SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? [6.I Public Hearing and First Reading - 2026 Annual Service Plan Update and Assessment Roll for Georgetown Village PID] ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. AND THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM SIX. I. AND I BELIEVE KYLE IS GOING TO LEAD US OFF ON THIS. NOPE. THERE YOU ARE. I'M ACTUALLY NOT KYLE. I DIDN'T THINK SO. I WAS I DIDN'T WANT TO ASSUME ANYTHING. KYLE WAS SCHEDULED TO BE HERE. I'M ANDREA BARNES WITH B3 WORKS. WE SERVE AS YOUR PIT ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE GEORGETOWN VILLAGE PIT. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. TONIGHT, WE ARE HERE TO REQUEST THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HOLD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING PER THE PIT ACT, IN REGARDS TO THE GEORGETOWN VILLAGE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. NUMBER ONE, THIS PARTICULAR PIT WAS CREATED IN FEBRUARY OF 1999 BY THE CITY, AND THE FIRST LEVY WAS DONE IN APRIL OF 1999. SO THE FY 2027 [00:30:05] BUDGET IS INCLUDED IN THE ANNUAL SERVICE PLAN UPDATE THAT IS REQUIRED PER THE PIT ACT. IT ALSO INCLUDES THE REQUIRED FIVE YEAR SERVICE PLAN, WHICH IS SIMPLY A BUDGET FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE PIT. A FIVE YEAR LOOK FORWARD SO THEY CAN SEE WHAT'S ANTICIPATED IN TERMS OF THE ANNUAL INSTALLMENT THAT WILL BE DUE, AND THEN THE REQUIRED ASSESSMENT ROLL, WHICH IS SUBMITTED TO THE WILLIAMSON COUNTY APPRAISAL TAX OFFICE. EXCUSE ME FOR BILLING AND COLLECTION. AS YOU WILL PROBABLY RECALL, THE 26 BUDGET WAS BASED ON A 12 CENT PER $100 OF ASSESSED VALUE. BUT THE BUDGET BEFORE YOU TONIGHT FOR 27 IS $0.11 PER $100 OF ASSESSED VALUE. THERE WAS A RESOLUTION THAT WAS APPROVED BY THIS BODY TO CALL TONIGHT'S PUBLIC HEARING, AND WE DO RECOMMEND THAT YOU PROCEED WITH THAT PUBLIC HEARING UPON THE CONCLUSION OF THIS PRESENTATION, I DID WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THERE WAS A CORRECTION THAT WAS MADE EARLIER TODAY REGARDING THIS PARTICULAR SLIDE. SO THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL SLIDE AND THERE WAS FAILURE ON OUR PART. ALL APOLOGIES TO CARRY OVER THE FY 26 APPROVED INTO THE FY 26 PROJECTION COLUMN. AND SO THIS NEXT SLIDE SHOWS THAT PROJECTION CARRIED FORWARD. THE IMPACT ACTUALLY JUST REDUCED THE REPLACEMENT AND REPAIR RESERVE AMOUNT BY THE SAME AMOUNT OF THE COLUMN FOR PUBLIC WORKS THAT WASN'T CARRIED FORWARD INTO THE FY 26 PROJECTIONS. SO THE BUDGET STAYS AT THE SAME AMOUNT WHERE THE EXPENSES AND REVENUES BALANCE. AS I SAID EARLIER, THE RATE WAS SET AT $0.11 OR IS RECOMMENDED AT $0.11, WHICH WILL GENERATE AN ANNUAL INSTALLMENT OF $543,906.34. AND THEN THIS SHOWS YOU THE FIVE YEAR LOOK FORWARD THAT I MENTIONED. THAT GIVES THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE DISTRICT THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUDGET FOR THE ANTICIPATED COST. AND THAT DOES ASSUME THAT THE RATE WOULD STAY AT THE $0.11. AND THEN THIS IS THE REVISED TO SHOW THE IMPACT. AND THEN AS I STATED TONIGHT IS THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE WERE NOTICES, THE REQUIRED NOTICES PER STATUTE THAT WERE PROVIDED. AND IT WAS ALSO PUBLISHED IN THE SUN NEWSPAPER AS REQUIRED. AND THEN THIS IS THE FIRST OF THE TWO REQUIRED READINGS FOLLOWING THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. YOU MIGHT HAVE. ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS? YEAH. ON THE I'M LOOKING AT THE. THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET. SO IT IS THE ATTACHMENT. THE GEORGETOWN VILLAGE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. WHAT IS THIS CALLED? UPDATE FINAL ON ITS PAGE 42 OF THAT. SO IT'S BASICALLY THE INCOME STATEMENT OR THE FUND SCHEDULE. SO THERE'S A LINE ITEM FOR THE. MOWING CONTRACTS OF PARKLETS COMMON AREAS. OBVIOUSLY THAT'S MOWING SIGN MAINTENANCE, LANDSCAPING INCLUDING DESIGN TREE AND SHRUB REMOVAL SERVICE AND UTILITIES. THERE'S NOT MUCH BUDGETED IN THE WAY OF THE LANDSCAPING DESIGN OR THE REMOVAL. I'M CURIOUS, DOES ANYTHING IN THESE CONTRACTS OR ANYTHING IN THE BUDGETARY LINE ITEMS HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM, BY ANY CHANCE, AT THE VILLAGE OR MAINTENANCE OR UPKEEP OR JUST ASSESSMENT OF THAT? IF NOTHING ELSE, SIR, THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE A QUESTION I'D HAVE TO DEFER TO STAFF BECAUSE THE STAFF PROVIDES THE BUDGET TO US. WE DON'T GET INVOLVED IN THE DETAILED DISCUSSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE SPECIFIC LINE ITEMS. SO I DON'T KNOW IF IF NICK HAS ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. I APOLOGIZE TO ELABORATE ON THAT PARTICULAR QUESTION. NICK, DO YOU WANT WAYNE TO ANSWER IT INSTEAD? YES. LET'S SEE WHAT HE'S GOT. THE SPECIFICS AND THIS IS FIRST READING. LET US WORK BACK AND GET THE SPECIFICS BETWEEN. IT DOES INCLUDE SOME FOR IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE. SO IF THERE'S A SPECIFIC CONCERN, WE'RE HAPPY TO. SO I'D IMAGINE THAT SOME OF WHAT THE CONCERN WAS IS PROBABLY NOT AS MUCH OF AN ISSUE NOW, BECAUSE IT'S PROBABLY BEEN RIPPED OUT BECAUSE OF THE WIDENING OF SHELL ROAD. OBVIOUSLY, I DON'T DRIVE THROUGH THE VILLAGE EVERY EVERY DAY, BUT I KNOW IT SEEMS THAT THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM, AT LEAST WHAT I COULD SEE FROM SHELL WAS NOT WORKING PROPERLY ON A MULTIPLE TIMES. I WOULD SEE IT WATERING ON A MONDAY OR MIDDLE OF THE DAY, OR WHEN IT'S RAINING WATER STANDING IN PLACES AND IT'S. IT'S PROBABLY AN OLD IRRIGATION SYSTEM THAT WAS BUILT OUT 20 YEARS, 30 YEARS AGO. ONE OF THE THINGS I [00:35:03] WOULD LIKE TO SEE AT SOME POINT WITH THIS, WITH THE PYD, AND THEY HAVE LIMITED FUNDS, I UNDERSTAND, BUT MAYBE SOME TYPE OF PLAN FOR CONSERVATION AND FOR CHANGING THE LANDSCAPING OVER TO REDUCE THE NEED FOR THE IRRIGATION. SURE. IT'S SOMETHING WE'RE ASKING OUR NEW RESIDENTS TO DO. IT'S SOMETHING WE'RE ASKING OTHER DEVELOPMENTS TO DO. AND THERE IS A FUND GENERATING MONEY HERE. NOW, A LOT OF THIS IS JUST MAINTENANCE. THERE'S NOT MUCH IN THE WAY OF NEW FUNDING HERE. I GET IT. SO IT MAY WOULD HAVE TO TAKE ACTUALLY AN INCREASE OF THE ASSESSMENT TO DO WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. I'M NOT NECESSARILY PROPOSING AN INCREASE. I DON'T THINK IT WOULD ACTUALLY THERE'S WE HAVE ENOUGH IN THE REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT RESERVE THAT IF WE NEED TO MAKE SOME LANDSCAPING UPGRADES, ESPECIALLY ALONG SHELL ROAD AND IMPROVE THE IRRIGATION THAT WE HAVE THE FUNDS THERE TO, TO DO THAT, THE FIRST THING IS JUST MAKING SURE WE'RE DOING LIKE ANNUAL REVIEWS OR IF NOT MORE OFTEN THAN THAT, TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S WORKING PROPERLY. BUT THEN LONG TERM, HAVING A PLAN OF, OF CHANGING OUT SOME OF THE LANDSCAPING IN THE COMMON AREAS TO MAKE IT MORE DROUGHT TOLERANT AND LESS RELIANT ON IRRIGATION. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. AND WE'LL FOLLOW UP AND GET SOME MORE DETAILS FROM, FROM PARKS AND REC AND GET THAT CITY COUNCIL. THANKS, NICK. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. UNLESS WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. NO ONE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO I'LL CLOSE IT. ARE YOU READY FOR MOTION? YES. SHE READ THE CAPTION. DID YOU READ THE CAPTION? I WAS, I DID NOT, MR. MAYOR. GO AHEAD AND READ THAT I WAS. GO AHEAD. WOULD YOU LIKE FOR ME TO. YES, MA'AM. PLEASE DO. ALL RIGHT. I'M NOT SURE THOUGH, NICK, HOW TO GET TO THAT CAPTION. OH, IT'S A LONG CAPTION TO. I WILL TRY NOT TO HAVE A COUGHING FIT, BUT HERE WE GO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE FINAL 2026 O&M SERVICE PLAN UPDATE AND THE FINAL 2026 ASSESSMENT ROLL TO BE KEPT ON FILE WITH THE CITY SECRETARY ESTABLISHING CLASSIFICATIONS FOR THE APPORTIONMENT OF COSTS AND THE METHODS OF ASSESSING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE SERVICES AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PROPERTY, AND THE GEORGETOWN VILLAGE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. NUMBER ONE, CLOSING THE HEARING AND LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR THE COST OF CERTAIN SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES AND IMPROVEMENTS TO BE PROVIDED IN THE DISTRICT DURING 2027, FIXING CHARGES AND LIENS AGAINST THE PROPERTY IN THE DISTRICT AND AGAINST THE OWNERS THEREFOR THEREOF. PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU SCOTT. ALL RIGHT. NOW I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE SO ELOQUENTLY READ BY OUR CITY CITY ATTORNEY. SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, MR. HOLT, YOU'RE UP SIX J. GOOD EVENING, [6.J First Reading - Adoption of the 2026 National Electric Code] MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. GREG HOLT, ASSISTANT BUILDING OFFICIAL FOR THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN. WE WERE HERE AT WORKSHOP ON AUGUST 11TH AND PRESENTED ADOPTING THE 2026 NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE. I DO HAVE A PRESENTATION IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE IT, BUT I HAVE. NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE I WAS LAST HERE. ANY QUESTIONS? ANYONE? QUESTIONS? I THINK WE'RE GOOD. MAY I PLEASE READ THE CAPTION? YES, SIR. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 1516 CODE OF ORDINANCES PROVIDING FOR THE ADOPTION. THE NFPA 70 2026 NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE WITH LOCAL AMENDMENTS PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU SIR. ALL RIGHT. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MAYOR. I MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM SIX J AS PRESENTED. SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? [6.K First Reading - Adoption of the 2021 International Fire Code] ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. THANK YOU. NEXT UP, SIX K DANIEL, YOU AND JASON BOTH COMING UP. YOU CAN COME TO. HE'S TRYING TO CUT IN LINE. THAT'S I MEAN TRAFFIC GUY. EVENING COUNCIL MAYOR. WE'RE HERE WITH THE PROPOSED FIRE CODE CHANGES THAT WE BROUGHT TO YOU ON AUGUST 11TH. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THEM? I DO HAVE THE POWERPOINT IF NEEDED. NO, I THINK WE'RE GOOD. YOU CAN GO AND READ THE CAPTION. OKAY. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 8.04 FIRE PREVENTION CODE OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. ADDING AND AMENDING LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE 2021 FIRE CODE, PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY, REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU DANIEL. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM SIX K AS PRESENTED. SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU GUYS VERY MUCH. NOW, LUIS, UP. YOU GOTTA WALK ALL THE WAY BACK THERE. [6.L First Reading - Amending Rates of Speed on Ronald Reagan Blvd] [00:40:14] GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THIS IS A FIRST READING TO UPDATE THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. CHAPTER TEN. I JUST WANT TO UPDATE THE COUNCIL. WE WERE ASKED TO LOOK AT THE SPEED LIMIT ON RONALD REAGAN BETWEEN SOMERSET HILLS DRIVE AND ABOVE AND BEYOND WAY. THE DESIGN SPEED OF OF RONALD REAGAN WAS ACTUALLY MEANT TO BE 60 MILES AN HOUR. AND USING THAT SPEED LIMIT THAT WAS MEANT FOR THE DESIGN, WE WERE ABLE TO USE THE US LIMITS TWO, WHICH WAS DEVELOPED BY THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, LOOKING AT NOT JUST 85 PERCENTILE SPEED THAT WE TYPICALLY USE, BUT ALSO THE 50 PERCENTILE SPEED CRASH RATES SURROUNDING INFRASTRUCTURE, ROADWAY TYPE AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS. THE CRASH RATES ALONG THIS SEGMENT OF ROADWAY ARE ARE HIGHER THAN THAN WHAT'S NORMAL ON TEXAS ROADWAYS. AND SO USING THE DESIGN SPEED, WE'RE RECOMMENDING A SPEED LIMIT OF 55 MILES AN HOUR THROUGH THIS SECTION. WESTINGHOUSE ROAD CURRENTLY THE CODE OF ORDINANCES HAS WESTINGHOUSE ONLY FROM I 35 TO 1460. THIS IS JUST EXTENDING IT THROUGH THE CITY LIMITS. AS YOU HEAD EAST ALL THE WAY TO GLENN'S PASSAGE, THERE'S STILL SOME SECTIONS IN THERE THAT THAT ARE CONTROLLED AND OWNED BY WILLIAMSON COUNTY. BUT THE STUDY THAT WAS DONE WAS BY WILLIAMSON COUNTY WHEN THEY DID THE ROAD UPDATE, CONSTRUCTION ON WESTINGHOUSE ROAD. THE GRACE ACADEMY. THIS SITS BETWEEN CHICHI DRIVE AND SCHELL ROAD. TXDOT INSTALLED AND DID THE WORK FOR THE SCHOOL ZONE. THIS WOULD JUST BE ADDING IT TO OUR CODE TO BE ABLE TO BE ENFORCEABLE. THE SCHOOL ZONE FOR THE FORD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. YOU CAN SEE HERE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S COMING IN THERE ON THE CORNER. IT LANDED RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR DRIVEWAY, SO WE HAD TO JUST RELOCATE THE SCHOOL ZONE JUST FURTHER, I GUESS, KIND OF TO THE SOUTH AND WEST TO THAT NEW LOCATION AND RELOCATE THE FLASHING SIGN FOR WHERE THAT SCHOOL ZONE STARTED. SO THAT'S THE UPDATE I HAVE. CAN I ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS? OR I CAN MOVE TO READ THE READ THE CAPTION SO WE DON'T FORGET AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING SECTIONS 10.1, 2.090 AND 10.12 .130 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO RELOCATE THE SCHOOL ZONE ON WOODLAKE DRIVE TO ADD A SCHOOL ZONE ON SH 195 TO ESTABLISH A 55 MILE AN HOUR SPEED ZONE ON RONALD REAGAN BOULEVARD AND EXTEND THE SPEED ZONE ON WESTINGHOUSE ROAD, PROVIDING A PENALTY, REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, AND INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANKS, LAURA. ANY QUESTIONS? YEAH, MAYOR, THE QUESTION I HAVE JUST ONE QUESTION, LAURA. THIS IS GOING TO REQUIRE A LOT OF SIGNS TO BE CHANGED, IS IT NOT? NOT ONLY CHANGED, BUT WE'RE WE'RE ADDING ON ON RONALD REAGAN. WE'RE ADDING ABOUT FIVE, 4 TO 5 SIGNS IN EACH DIRECTION. THAT'S A GOOD STEP. THANK YOU. I THINK THE COUNTY'S PLANNING ON WIDENING RONALD REAGAN. I KNOW THE COUNTY'S PLANNING WIDENING. RONALD REAGAN IS I'M NOT SURE THE SEGMENTS THEY'RE DOING ARE THEY DOING THIS SEGMENT HERE? IS THAT PART OF THE PLAN CORRECT. YES, SIR. AND IT'LL BE TWO LANES DIVIDED. YES, SIR. FOUR LANES DIVIDED, EVEN TWO EACH WAY. YES, SIR. WELL, ONCE THAT IS DONE IS THE 55 MILE AN HOUR SPEED LIMIT STILL WHAT WE WOULD WANT IT TO BE? OR IS THAT GOING TO BE SOMETHING. SO, SO TYPICALLY, JUST LIKE REAGAN, WE TYPICALLY DO SPEED A SPEED STUDY TO LOOK AT WHAT THAT SPEED LIMIT IS, YOU KNOW, BUT AGAIN, WE WOULD WE WOULD STILL LOOK AT THE CHARACTERISTICS OF IT, RIGHT? IT WILL BE CONTROLLED, MORE CONTROLLED OF ACCESS. YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO MAKE A LOT OF LEFT TURNS THAT YOU DO TODAY. SO WE'LL RELOOK AT THAT. STUDY IT WITH THE COUNTY. THE SAME THING WE DID AT WESTINGHOUSE TO LOOK AT WHAT WHAT THE BEST POSTED SPEED LIMIT IS. BUT CURRENTLY, THE WAY WE HAVE IT, WE WOULD STILL TRY TO ENFORCE THAT 55 MILE AN HOUR SPEED LIMIT. YOUR THOUGHT IS WE'D KEEP IT THAT WAY ONCE IT WAS JUST WITHOUT THE STUDY JUST ON YOUR MIND. YOU THINK THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD DO, BUT WE'D PROBABLY HAVE A STUDY TO [00:45:02] DETERMINE. WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, WE'RE CHANGING WITH THE WIDENING, RIGHT? AND SEPARATING THE LANES. WE'D BE RELOOKING AT WHAT THAT SPEED LIMIT IS. BUT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOING TO BE SIGNALS OUT THERE TO CONTROL THOSE LEFT TURNS WHERE NOW THERE ISN'T, LIKE I SAID. SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A LOT OF THOSE LEFT TURNS. AND WITH THE SIGNALS, IT'LL MAKE IT A LOT MORE SAFER OUT HERE AS WELL. DO WE KNOW WHEN THE CONSTRUCTION WILL BEGIN? THEY RECEIVED A GRANT KIND OF THAT GRANT AS WELL. SO, YOU KNOW, THEY WERE READY TO BID IT. BUT WITH THE GRANT FUNDING, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE PROBABLY LOOKING AT SIX EIGHT MONTHS BEFORE THEY GET THE A F COMPLETED WITH THE STATE. MY LAST CONVERSATION WITH THEM WAS NEXT JUNE IS WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING AT NEXT JUNE. AND WHAT'S THE SEGMENT THEY'RE DOING FROM 195 TO 29? I MEAN, THAT'S THE FULL SEGMENT, BUT IT'S BROKEN UP INTO TWO DIFFERENT SECTIONS. SO THERE'S ONE FROM LIKE 245 TO 195 AND THEN 245 TO WILLIAMS. AND SO IT'S BROKEN UP INTO DIFFERENT SEGMENTS ALONG THERE. WELL, THE REASON I WAS ASKING IS IF IT'S ABOUT THE START, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF IT MAKES MUCH SENSE TO GO PUT SPEED LIMIT SIGNS IN. THERE'S GOING TO BE KNOCKED OUT WHENEVER THEY DO THE WIDENING AND THE SPEED WILL SLOW WHEN IT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION, YOU WON'T HAVE TO CHANGE THE SPEED LIMIT. IT'S JUST GOING TO BE GOING SLOWER. BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SIGNS THE SIGNS ARE. WE PRINT THEM OURSELVES. THEY'RE RELATIVELY INEXPENSIVE. YEAH, YEAH, WE DO THOSE IN HOUSE. OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU. THE QUESTIONS. OKAY. WE DO HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM BEFORE WE HAVE A DISCUSSION. WE HAVE MR. MITCHELL, YOU'LL COME UP AND MR. MITCHELL, IF YOU JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. ROBIN WILL KEEP YOUR TIME FOR YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I'M THOMAS MITCHELL. I CURRENTLY RESIDE AT 801 PEACEFUL PSALMS PLACE IN GEORGETOWN. AND I'D LIKE TO BRING TO THE COUNCIL'S ATTENTION A TRAFFIC SAFETY ISSUE. I'M GLAD TO HEAR ALL THE DISCUSSION WE'RE HAVING ABOUT RONALD REAGAN, BECAUSE IT CONCERNS RONALD REAGAN IN THAT AREA. THAT'S BEING CHANGED FROM 65 TO 55. THIS AREA OF RONALD REAGAN IS SITUATED AT THE NORTHERN PART OF THE CITY, AS SHOWN HERE ON THE SLIDE. JUST TO GIVE EVERYBODY WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT UP IN THIS AREA OF GEORGETOWN, THIS AREA IS A RAPIDLY GROWING PORTION OF GEORGETOWN. IT INCLUDES SECTIONS OF SUN CITY AND THE WOODSIDE COMMUNITY. THE PROBLEM IS THE ABILITY FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THIS AREA TO SAFELY TURN OFF OF RONALD REAGAN AND ABOVE AND BEYOND WAY. THE RESIDENTS OF THIS AREA ARE TOTALLY DEPENDENT ON THESE TWO INTERSECTIONS BETWEEN RONALD REAGAN AND ABOVE AND BEYOND WADE, FOR ALL INGRESS AND EGRESS OF THAT AREA. AND I'LL SHOW YOU THAT YOU CAN SEE THIS AREA HERE. ALL THESE HOMES HAVE NO OTHER WAY TO GET OUT OF THIS AREA OTHER THAN GOING THROUGH THOSE AREAS, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP ABOVE AND BEYOND WAY INTERSECTS AT TWO POINTS. THE NORTHERNMOST INTERSECTION LABEL NUMBER ONE THERE IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF WILLIAMS COUNTY, BUT THE SOUTHMOST INTERSECTION IS LABELED. NUMBER TWO IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF GEORGETOWN. THE PROBLEM IS THAT BOTH INTERSECTIONS ARE UNSAFE. IN THE PAST NINE MONTHS, THREE ACCIDENTS HAVE OCCURRED ON THESE INTERSECTIONS INVOLVING EIGHT VEHICLES AND TEN PERSONS, INCLUDING ONE FATALITY. CLEARLY, SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE. THE REDUCTION IN SPEED LIMIT FROM 65 TO 55 WILL HELP, BUT THE PRIMARY ISSUE STILL REMAINS. THE CURRENT DESIGNATED INTERSECTIONS ARE INHERENTLY DANGEROUS. THE CONCERNS ARE NOT HYPOTHETICAL. I PERSONALLY WAS INVOLVED IN ONE OF THESE ACCIDENTS AND WAS SENT TO THE HOSPITAL BACK ON DECEMBER 18TH, 2025. THE PROBLEM IS THAT SOUTHBOUND TRAFFIC THAT WANTS TO TURN LEFT INTO, ONTO, ABOVE AND BEYOND WAY SOMETIMES MUST STOP ON RONALD REAGAN BOULEVARD TO WAIT FOR THE NORTHBOUND TRAFFIC ON RONALD REAGAN TO CLEAR WHILE STOPPED WAITING FOR TRAFFIC TO CLEAR THE OTHER SOUTHBOUND TRAFFIC. TRAVELING AT 65 MILES AN HOUR AND SOMETIMES HIGHER, TRIES TO PASS THE STOP CAR BY GOING ON THE SHOULDER AND PASSING ON THE RIGHT WITHOUT SLOWING DOWN. TWO INTERSECTIONS OF RONALD REAGAN ABOVE AND BEYOND NEED. THESE NEED THE ACCELERATION LANES FOR BOTH THE NORTH AND THE SOUTHBOUND LANES. I KNOW THIS SECTION OF ROAD IS SCHEDULED FOR IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE [00:50:02] WIDENING OF RONALD REAGAN BOULEVARD, BUT THAT IS PROBABLY YEARS AWAY. SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE NOW BECAUSE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE MOVING INTO THAT AREA IS GROWING AND THE AND THE TRAFFIC IS GROWING LESS THAN ONE AND A HALF MILES SOUTH OF THAT INTERSECTION, DOWN BY NUMBER THREE, SHOWN THERE IS INTERSECTION OF SUN CITY BOULEVARD AND RONALD REAGAN. THERE THEY HAVE THE ACCELERATION LANES FOR THE NORTH AND SOUTHBOUND LANES, AND THERE'S A LOT SAFER TO TURN. I'M SORRY, SIR, YOUR TIME IS UP. I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY HAVE THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER INVESTIGATE THE SAFETY OF THESE INTERSECTIONS AND RECOMMEND CORRECTIVE ACTION. THANK YOU SIR, APPRECIATE IT. WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF THE ITEM IS READ. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM SIX M AND. ALLISON'S [6.M First Reading - 2025-2-PUD - Texas Municipal Center Planned Unit Development] PRESENTING. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THIS EVENING. I HAVE A REQUEST FOR REZONING OF THE ENTIRETY OF BLOCK 23 GLASSCOCK ADDITION FROM THE MUT ZONING DISTRICT AND 2.57 ACRES OF LOT FOUR AND LOT THREE, BLOCK 21 AND FOUR POINT OR 0.414 ACRES OF LOT FIVE SIX AND A PORTION OF LOT SEVEN, BLOCK 21 GLASSCOCK ADDITION FROM RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT WITH A BASE ZONING OF M U, D T FOR THE PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED AT 205 EAST UNIVERSITY. 1014 MYRTLE AND 1009 CHURCH. THESE ARE MADE UP OF THREE SEPARATE PARCELS LOCATED DUE NORTH OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE BETWEEN CHURCH AND MYRTLE, AND WE HAVE OUR THREE PARCELS HERE, THE FIRST THERE IN THE MIDDLE BEING, OF COURSE, THE GEORGE TONIAN OR WESLEYAN SITE, AND THE TWO PARCELS LOCATED TO THE NORTH. THE ONE ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE IS A PARKING LOT. PRESENTLY. THE ONE ON THAT NORTHWESTERN SIDE IS A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE THAT IS A LOW PRIORITY HISTORIC RESOURCE, AND WE CAN SEE THAT THIS PARTICULAR SITE IS SURROUNDED BY KIND OF A VARIETY OF USES WITH SAINT JOHN'S METHODIST TO OUR EAST, A RESTAURANT TO OUR SOUTH, A COUPLE OF OFFICES TO OUR WEST THERE, AND JUST A VARIETY OF RESIDENTIAL TO THE NORTH. LOOKING AT OUR FUTURE LAND USE MAP. THE GEORGETOWN SIDE, OF COURSE, IS ALREADY LISTED AS A SPECIAL AREA, WHILE THOSE TWO PARCELS TO THE NORTH ARE MIXED DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD SPECIAL AREA, OF COURSE, IS THEREFORE UNIQUE DESTINATIONS WITH AN EMPHASIS ON BUILDING, DESIGN, LANDSCAPE AND PUBLIC SPACES. WHILE OUR MIXED DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD IS AVAILABLE FOR A LIMITED NUMBER OF NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING SERVICE USES, SUCH AS OFFICE OR INSTITUTIONAL, WITH A FOCUS ON COMPATIBILITY AND WALKABLE STREETS. AS FAR AS OUR ZONING, THE GEORGETOWN SITE, OF COURSE, IS A MIXED USE DOWNTOWN PROPERTY. IT IS LOCATED WITHIN DOWNTOWN AREA. 1 OR 2 PARCELS TO THE NORTH ARE CURRENTLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY AND THEY ARE LOCATED WITHIN OLDTOWN. I WILL NOTE THAT WHILE WE ARE REQUESTING FOR ALL THREE PARCELS TO BE MUDT, WE ARE NOT REQUESTING THE MOVE OF THAT DOWNTOWN OVERLAY DISTRICT. AND OF COURSE, YOU HAVE GOOD AWARENESS OF THE RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY AND MIXED USE DOWNTOWN ZONING PIECES AND HAVE AWARENESS OF THAT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT IT IS A SPECIAL PURPOSE ZONING DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS FLEXIBILITY IN PLANNING AND DESIGN AND IS THERE TO ACCOMMODATE VERY UNIQUE DEVELOPMENTS, WHICH THIS CERTAINLY IS JUST THAT. THIS PROPOSAL IS TO RENOVATE THE EXISTING GEORGE TONIAN STRUCTURE AND CREATE TWO ADDITIONS ONTO THAT STRUCTURE, ALONG WITH SOME ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE ON EITHER CORNER TO OUR NORTH. THOSE SITES WILL REMAIN RELATIVELY UNCHANGED. THE PARKING LOT WILL REMAIN, WHILE THAT TRACK THREE, THAT RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE WILL BASICALLY BE USED AS FLEX SPACE. THE GOAL OF THIS PUD IS TO CREATE THE HEADQUARTERS AND CORPORATE OFFICES FOR THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL CENTER, INTERGOVERNMENTAL RISK POOL, AND THAT GEORGETOWN SITE WILL BE USED FOR BOTH OFFICE AS WELL [00:55:04] AS MEETING AND EVENT SPACE. WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT DEVIATIONS FROM THE UDC STANDARDS, THEY ARE PRIMARILY RELATED TO THE NON-CONFORMITIES THAT EXIST FOR THESE GEORGE TONIAN SITE AND STRUCTURE. WE HAVE A MAXIMUM OFFICE SPACE LIMIT OF 45000, WHICH THE GEORGE TONIAN ALREADY EXCEEDS. THEY HAVE ASKED TO BRING THAT UP TO 95,000FTâ– !S, WHILE THE GEORGE TONIAN STRUCTURE IS INTERESTING IN THAT IT IS AN OPEN V SHAPED CONCEPT, IT IS RELATIVELY SIMPLISTIC IN FORM, AND SO THEY ARE NOT PROPOSING INCREASED ARTICULATION, AS THE CODE MIGHT ASK, IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE FORM OF THAT EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURE. THE SAME CAN BE SAID FOR THE ROOF STYLE, WHICH IS EXISTING AT A 212 PITCH WITH A PARAPET OF LESS THAN TWO FOOT ABOVE THE ROOF LINE, SO THEY ARE LOOKING TO MAINTAIN WHAT IS SPECIAL ABOUT THAT EXISTING STRUCTURE. AS FAR AS PARKING, THEY ARE LOOKING FOR A MAXIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT OF 200 SPACES, AND THE ALLOWANCE OF ADA BEING PROVIDED WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY. WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT APPROVAL CRITERIA, WE DID FIND THAT IT MET ALL APPROVAL CRITERIA THAT WAS APPLICABLE WITH THIS REQUEST, AND THAT IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE ARE SEEING THE REVITALIZATION, REVITALIZATION OF AN UNDERUTILIZED STRUCTURE, WHICH DOES ACT AS A GATEWAY INTO OUR DOWNTOWN. SO THIS REALLY IS A SORT OF REJUVENATION OF THAT SITE AND WILL BE A GREAT FOCUS POINT AS WE'RE MOVING INTO DOWNTOWN. AND ALSO WITH THOSE REZONINGS OF THOSE TWO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES LOCATED TO THE NORTH OF THE GEORGE TONIAN SITE, BEING THAT SORT OF SMALL OFFICE FLEX TYPE SPACE AND A PARKING LOT THAT ALREADY EXISTS, IT WILL NOT INCREASE THE INTENSITY OF THOSE USES SIGNIFICANTLY AND ACT AS A REALLY GREAT TRANSITION ZONE BETWEEN OUR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AND OUR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. AS FAR AS PUBLIC NOTICE, 82 PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED. THIS WAS PLACED IN THE SUN NEWS ON JULY 5TH. EIGHT SIGNS WERE POSTED ON SITE AND TO DATE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO WRITTEN COMMENTS IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION. AND AFTER JULY 21ST MEETING, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST AND A VOTE OF SEVEN ZERO, AND THAT DOES COMPLETE MY PRESENTATION. I'M, OF COURSE, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE TO SPEAK TO THE PROJECT, AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO READ THE ORDINANCE CAPTION. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING PART OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO REZONE 1.322 ACRES OF BLOCK 23 GLASSCOCK ADDITION. 0.257 ACRES OF LOT FOUR. LOT THREE SOUTH PORTION BLOCK 21 GLASSCOCK ADDITION AND 0.414 ACRES OF LOTS FIVE AND SIX, AS WELL AS LOT 7SP BLOCK 21 OF GLASSCOCK ADDITION, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 205 EAST UNIVERSITY AVENUE, 1014 MYRTLE STREET AND 1009 CHURCH STREET. FROM THE MIXED USE DOWNTOWN MUDT AND RESIDENTIAL SINGLE R.S ZONING DISTRICTS TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PUD ZONING DISTRICT WITH A BASE ZONING OF MIXED USE DOWNTOWN MUDT REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU MA'AM. ANY QUESTIONS FOR ALLISON? ALL RIGHT. NICE AND EASY. I WILL ENTERTAIN OH, SORRY. WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. NO ONE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MAYOR, IS THE WAS THE APPLICANT PLANNING ON SPEAKING OR HE WAS GOING TO SPEAK IF NEEDED? OKAY. ONLY QUESTION I HAD, I WAS CURIOUS IT MENTIONS ON THE DOCUMENTS, MENTIONS REMOVAL OF THE PENTHOUSE AND SOMETHING WITH THE BASEMENT IS WHAT'S THE PLAN FOR THE BASEMENT? IS THE BASEMENT GOING TO BE. OFFICE SPACE CAN BE USED. THE BASEMENT WILL BE CONVERTED TO CONFERENCE CENTER, SO THEY WILL BE GOING A BIT SUBTERRANEAN DIGGING IN, CREATING A GREAT PLAZA SPACE INTO THAT BASEMENT SPACE AND THE PENTHOUSE. IT WILL BE DEMOLISHED. THAT HAS GOTTEN HAACK APPROVAL THROUGH A COA, ESSENTIALLY, BECAUSE IT'S NOT ADA COMPLIANT, THE ELEVATOR DOES NOT ACTUALLY REACH THE PENTHOUSE, AND IT IS SO SMALL THAT BY THE TIME YOU'VE GOTTEN THE ELEVATOR TO IT, YOU MIGHT HAVE A SMALL STORAGE ROOM LEFT. YEAH. BY THE TIME YOU GET THE ELEVATOR TO IT, THAT'LL TAKE YOU A COUPLE YEARS TO GET, HOPEFULLY, HOPEFULLY THAT'S THE FIRST THING YOU DO IS RIP THOSE ELEVATORS OUT AND PUT NEW ONES IN. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. AMANDA. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT. THANKS, ALLISON, FOR THE PRESENTATION, BUT I THINK THAT IT IS A TESTAMENT TO THE WORK OF BOTH STAFF AND TML ON THIS PROJECT THAT EVERYONE IN THIS COMMUNITY SEEMS EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT, TO HAVE A PROJECT [01:00:05] COME TO US THAT HAS NO COMMENTS, AND IT DEFINITELY IN OPPOSITION, NO COMMENTS, AND NO ONE EVEN, YOU KNOW, CONCERNED ENOUGH TO COME AND, YOU KNOW, SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS PROJECT, I THINK IS A TESTAMENT TO THE FACT THAT PEOPLE ARE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THIS REVITALIZATION OF THIS PROJECT AND IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD. PEOPLE SEEM VERY EXCITED ABOUT THAT. AND I THINK IT'S A TESTAMENT TO, TO HOW EVERYONE HAS WORKED TOGETHER AND TO SEEK PUBLIC INPUT, TO TALK TO NEIGHBORS EARLY ON AND TO MAKE THIS A REALLY GREAT PROJECT FOR OUR COMMUNITY. SO JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT. THANKS SO MUCH. GREAT. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. LET'S OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO LET'S CLOSE IT. ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MAYOR. I MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM SIX AS PRESENTED. SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. ALL RIGHT. LAST [6.N First Reading - 2025-8-SUP - 2815 N. Austin Ave] UP WE HAVE ITEM SIX IN. AND MATT. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS MATT AND I'LL BE PRESENTING BUBBLEBATH 617582520258SUP. THE ITEM UNDER CONSIDERATION IS 20258SUP. PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR SPECIFIC USE OF CAR WASH AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL. C-3 ZONING DISTRICT ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2815 NORTH AUSTIN AVENUE, GEORGETOWN, TEXAS BEARING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF 1.951 ACRES OF THE ANTONIO FLORES SURVEY. ABSTRACT NUMBER 235. THE SUBJECT IS LOCATED ALONG NORTH AUSTIN AVENUE, IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE EXISTING SH. THE AREA INCLUDES COMMERCIAL USES ALONG AUSTIN AVENUE, BUT THERE ARE ALSO RESIDENTIAL USES NEARBY, INCLUDING MAGNOLIA, GEORGETOWN, AUSTIN AVENUE APARTMENTS AND CRYSTAL TERRACE. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED GENERAL COMMERCIAL C3. THE AREA ALONG NORTH AUSTIN AVENUE HAS A COMMERCIAL CHARACTER. RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ARE LOCATED NEARBY, PARTICULARLY TO THE SOUTHEAST. THE CONCEPT PLAN PLACES THE SINGLE LANE CAR WASH TUNNEL ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY, WITH THE LANE RUNNING ALONG THE EASTERN AND NORTHERN EDGES AND THE VACUUM STATION'S PARKING SITUATION INTERNALLY. INTERNALLY TO KEEP THE CUSTOMER ACTIVITY WITHIN THE SITE'S. MOST IMPORTANTLY, A SIX FOOT MASONRY WALL IS PROPOSED ALONG THE SOUTHERN AND SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE SITE, PROVIDING CRITICAL SEPARATION AND SCREENING FOR THE NEARBY RESIDENCES. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN OUTLINES THE PRIMARY MITIGATION MEASURES FOR NEARBY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING A 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH ENHANCED TREE PLANTINGS ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY. AS PREVIOUSLY AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THE SIX FOOT MASONRY WALL, TOGETHER WITH THE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING FORMS THE CORE OF IMPROVEMENTS STAFF RELIED ON IN DETERMINING THAT THE PROPOSED USE WOULD NOT CREATE A SIGNIFICANT NEGATIVE IMPACT ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. STAFF REVIEW THE REQUEST AGAINST THE FOUR SPECIAL USE PERMIT CRITERIA IN UDC SECTION 3.07.030, AND FOUND THAT THE REQUEST COMPLIES WITH ALL FOUR CRITERIA. IN ADDITION TO THE C P CRITERIA, STAFF REVIEW THE REQUEST AGAINST A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT CRITERIA STAFF ALSO REVIEWED THE REQUEST AGAINST THE FIVE STAFF FOUND THAT COMPRISED OF TWO PARTIAL CLASS ONE AND DOES NOT COMPLY WITH TWO FOUR CRITERIA. B THE ZONING CHANGE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, STAFF FOUND PARTIAL COMPLIANCE. THE REGIONAL CENTER DESIGNATION SUPPORTS HIGH INTENSITY, AUTO ORIENTED COMMERCIAL USE ALONG MAJOR CORRIDORS, AND A LOCATION ON NORTH AUSTIN FITS THAT PATTERN, SO CAR WASH DOES NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CONFLICT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. HOWEVER, LAND USE POLICY ONE CALLS FOR GRADUAL TRANSITION BETWEEN HIGHER INTENSITY COMMERCIAL USES AND NEARBY RESIDENCES. BECAUSE THE PROPOSED CAR WASH DOES NOT FUNCTION AS ITS TRANSITIONAL LAND USE STAFF CONCLUDED THAT THE PROJECT MEETS POLICY ONLY IN PART FOR CRITERIA C, THE ZONING CHANGE PROMOTES THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITY IN A SAFE AND ORDERLY AND HEALTHFUL DEVELOPMENT. THE CITY STAFF FOUND THAT THE REQUEST DOES NOT COMPLY. THE PROPOSED MASONRY WALL LANDSCAPE BUFFER ENHANCED LAND PLANTINGS, REDUCE POTENTIAL NOISE AND VIBRATIONS, AND ALLOW STAFF TO FIND THAT THE USE WOULD NOT CREATE SIGNIFICANT NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THEIR CRITERIA. HOWEVER, THIS CRITERIA REQUIRES MORE THAN MITIGATING POTENTIAL HARM. IT ASKS WHETHER THE REQUEST PROMOTES THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITY AND SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PRIMARILY OFFSET IMPACTS CREATED BY THE CAR WASH, RATHER THAN PROVIDE A BROADER PUBLIC BENEFIT OR ENHANCE CONDITIONS FOR NEARBY RESIDENTS, STAFF FOUND THAT THE CRITERIA IS NOT MET. FOR CRITERIA D, THE DOMAIN COMPATIBLE WITH ZONING AND CONFORMING USE OF NEARBY PROPERTY AND WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD STAFF FOUND ALSO FOUND THAT REQUEST DOES NOT COMPLY. NORTH AUSTIN AVENUE IS A MINOR ARTERIAL FROM COMMERCIAL AUTO ORIENTED CHARACTER, AND THE PROPOSED WALL AND ENHANCED LANDSCAPE ALSO HELPS REDUCE NOISE AND VISUAL IMPACTS. WHILE MITIGATION MEASURES LESSENS THESE EFFECTS, THEY DO NOT CHANGE THE UNDERLYING INTENSITY OF THE USE, SO STAFF CONCLUDE THAT THE REQUEST DOES NOT MEET THE BROADER CRITERIA. STAFF STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF SCP BECAUSE THE CONCEPT PLANS INCLUDES MEANINGFUL MITIGATION MEASURES. THE SIX FOOT MASONRY WALL, 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER. ENHANCED LANDSCAPING SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCES POTENTIAL [01:05:01] NOISE, VIBRATION AND VISUAL IMPACTS ON NEARBY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. PUBLIC NOTICE WAS PROVIDED AS REQUIRES SEVEN PROPERTY OWNERS. PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE 300 FOOT BUFFER WERE NOTIFIED, NOTICE WAS PUBLISHED AND SOME NEWS AND SIGNS WERE POSTED ON PROPERTY. TODAY, STAFF HAS RECEIVED ZERO WRITTEN COMMENTS IN FAVOR AND IN ZERO AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION AT THEIR AUGUST 4TH, 2026 MEETING, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST UNANIMOUSLY SEVEN ZERO WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION. HOURS OF OPERATION 7 A.M. TO 8 P.M. DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR YOU WANT ME TO READ THE CAPTION? FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS. GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE SPECIFIC USE OF A CAR WASH WITHIN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL C-3 ZONING DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2815 NORTH AUSTIN AVENUE, BEARING A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF 1.951 ACRES OF THE ANTONIO FLORES SURVEY SURVEY. ABSTRACT NUMBER 235. REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, INCLUDING SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? GO, JAKE. THIS IS REALLY MORE OF A COMMENT, BUT FIRST I'D LIKE TO THANK STAFF. I. THIS WAS ON ONE OF OUR PREVIOUS AGENDAS IN THE ORIGINAL STAFF REPORT FROM JUNE 30TH. I THINK THIS ONE IS A LOT CLEANER. I JUST HAVE ONE KIND OF QUESTION OR COMMENT, MAYBE ON CRITERIA D OF THE STAFF REPORT WE SAID DID DOES NOT COMPLY. THE ZONING IS. THE ZONING CHANGE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE PRESENT ZONING AND CONFORMING USES OF NEARBY PROPERTY WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE EXPLANATION, I JUST, YOU KNOW, I HOPE WE'RE WE'RE THINKING ABOUT IT DOESN'T IT DIDN'T REALLY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE GAS STATION IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH, WHICH I WOULD CONSIDER A COMPLEMENTARY USE, YOU KNOW, GENERALLY SPEAKING. AND THE. THERE'S A PROPERTY OR TWO PROPERTIES, MAYBE IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST ALSO THAT ARE CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED THAT ARE ZONED C THREE. AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN. AROUND THE PROXIMITY TO THE RESIDENTIAL, YOU KNOW, APARTMENT COMPLEX TO THE SOUTH, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE, NOT JUST NECESSARILY IN A NEGATIVE LIGHT, BUT, BUT IN THE CONTEXT OF, OF ALL OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. SO THAT'S MY ONLY FEEDBACK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JAKE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO I'LL CLOSE IT AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR MOTION REALLY QUICK ON JUST PROCEDURAL. LOOK LIKE P AND Z PUT A CONDITION IN FOR THE OPERATING HOURS. STAFF RECOMMENDED THE WALL AND THE SCREENING. ADDITIONAL SCREENING OF LANDSCAPING. THIS CAPTION. THIS ORDINANCE IS INCORPORATE BOTH OF THOSE CONDITIONS. I KNOW THE THE CONDITION IS IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT THE. THE WALL BECAUSE IT'S APPROVED AS PART OF THE SITE. YEAH, BECAUSE IT'S PREAPPROVED SPECIFIED IN THE SECOND READING. YEAH. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO NOW I'LL TAKE A MOTION. MAYOR. I MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM. WHAT IS IT IN SIX IN SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL VER * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.