[0:02] Good evening, everyone. And welcome to the city council regular meeting. It is Monday, March 16th, 2026. We are located Lakeway City Hall, 1102, Longings Crossing Road, Lakeway, Texas, 78734. The time is 632 p.m., the meeting is called to order. I note that six members of council are present on the dius. Council members, semantics will be absent this evening. Therefore, we do have a quorum and I call this meeting to order. It is a historic day.

[0:32] Today, most people are talking about America 250 throughout the world.

[0:37] Two of the architects of America 250 are James Madison, our fourth president, and Thomas

[0:42] Jefferson, our third president.

[0:45] Today is James Madison's 275th birthday.

[0:49] James Madison is widely regarded as the architect of the United States Constitution.

[0:55] It's brilliance, it's simplicity, and it's checks and balances.

[0:58] in federalist 51, one of his most famous statements were,

[1:03] if men were angels, no government would be necessary.

[1:07] If angels were to govern men,

[1:09] neither external nor internal controls on government

[1:12] would be necessary.

[1:15] True words have never been written.

[1:17] And on this day in 1802,

[1:21] the third president of the United States, Thomas Jefferson,

[1:24] overturned his longstanding tradition

[1:26] to a active and longstanding military, and established the creation of a college of engineers

[1:35] to be garrisoned at West Point, New York.

[1:38] And so today is the 224th anniversary of the founding of West Point or what we graduate

[1:45] refer to as Founders Day.

[1:47] So in order to celebrate that and all of the great things our founding fathers did, would

[1:52] Would you please, to the best of your ability, rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance?

[1:59] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[2:17] Thank you.

[2:19] Calling for citizens participation for the consent agenda and the financial report no ensigned up in advance does anyone wish to address council on those items.

[2:26] I see none in close citizens participation.

[2:29] The consent agenda is called, I have every request to have a separate conversation on items 10 and 11, and so they will be removed from the consent agenda at this time.

[2:39] Do I have an emotion for the consent agenda?

[2:41] I'll make a motion, we approve the consent agenda, except I don't have an element.

[2:45] Second.

[2:46] I have a motion second to approve the consent agenda, absent items 10 and 11, any further conversation discussion?

[2:53] I see none. All those in favor please raise your answer. I that motion carries unanimously

[2:58] six. Nothing. Thank you very much, Council.

[3:04] With that, we will move directly to item 14,

[3:10] and it is our great pleasure as the City Council has just so ordained that we will see the

[3:16] administration of the oath of office to our newest City employee, Lakeway Associate Municipal

[3:22] judge, so if I might ask our presiding judge to come forward with our new municipal judge.

[3:42] State your name, do solidness, swear, or affirm, do solemnly swear or affirm that I will

[3:50] faithfully execute the duties of the office, that I will faithfully execute the duties of

[3:56] the office of Associate Judge, City of Lake White Municipal Court of Associate Judge, City

[4:03] of Lakeland Municipal Court of the State of Texas and will to the best of my

[4:10] ability and will to the best of my ability preserve protect and defend the

[4:16] Constitution and laws preserve protect and defend the Constitution and laws of

[4:22] the United States of the United States and of this state and of this state so help me

[4:27] God so help me God congratulations

[4:29] I think

[4:53] two or a couple of times I've got the interruption to get there.

[5:08] Congratulations, Judge.

[5:10] I'll

[5:14] call item 10, discussion and possible action regarding ordinance number 2026-03-16-03.

[5:20] In ordinance of the City Council, the City of Lakeway, amending ordinance number 2001-10-29-1,

[5:26] by amending the Lakeway City Council meeting of decor and policy adopted in ordinance 2016-08-15-03,

[5:33] be providing for finding savings, severability, repealer, and an effective date.

[5:40] We have a staff report, Councilmember Sherman, who asks us to be pulled to your questions.

[5:46] If we just get some more background on this from the City Attorney, I'd appreciate it.

[5:50] And then second is if it's going to be posted somewhere where it's easier to find on our website.

[6:01] In terms of, geez.

[6:02] In terms of a more background, the decorum policy has been discussed as many council meetings

[6:10] recently, and I had never actually looked at it from a legal perspective, and in doing so

[6:16] noted that there had been some changes from the legislature. I think post the adoption

[6:23] of this ordinance, yeah, in 2019, that now we needed to clarify a little bit of the language

[6:30] cleaning it up to a better comply with the language legislature has put out in the Texas Government

[6:36] code section 551.007 relating to public testimony. There's a provision in there that says you

[6:44] can adopt rules about how people do their testimony, which we've done. But you may not

[6:48] prohibit public criticism of the governmental body, including criticism of any act of mission,

[6:53] policy, procedure, program, or service. So we needed to clean up some of the language,

[6:59] because it had language in there about just sort of being rude and things like that.

[7:03] Cool. Thank you. I've taken that language out and cleaned it up to better comply with the statute.

[7:09] Appreciate it and Jared, you had stepped out, but if you can potentially look at if we can have the decor and policies somewhere accessible on the website or make it easier, I was

[7:21] not able to find it. Maybe I'm totally overlooking the link for it, but we could do that.

[7:26] Cool. Thank you.

[7:29] Is there anything else? Not for tech. Would you motion them to return it to where we want to have a separate vote?

[7:35] on it. I motion to approve agenda item number 10. Second.

[7:40] I have a motion to approve agenda 10 as presented. Is there any further comment or discussion?

[7:45] I see none. All those in favor, please raise your answer. I approve six. Nothing. Thank you very much.

[7:51] Item 11. Discussion and possible action to authorize the city manager and negotiate and execute

[7:55] work order agreement. Charly 24-0514-ECO for project management services for solicitation number

[8:03] number 26-001 Butler-Ruff Hallow Park improvements, your question, sir.

[8:10] So I appreciate this coming back now with a dollar amount, I know two months ago there

[8:14] was no dollar amount associated so I thank you and the staff and Andrew for doing that.

[8:19] Can we get some more information about what this is just to give, just for some education?

[8:29] Thank you.

[8:29] Good

[8:34] evening Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, City Council.

[8:37] Thank you for the opportunity to bring this item back, I appreciate that.

[8:42] So just to give you some background on this, this item is part of implementing the 2024

[8:49] Parks Improvement Bond project.

[8:51] There was a pretty lengthy staff report in there trying to connect the dots, perhaps a little

[8:57] better.

[8:58] This is going to ensure that the Butler Ruff Hollow Park Project is delivered successfully

[9:04] to our residents.

[9:05] Staff is requesting authorization for the city manager to negotiate and execute

[9:11] a work order agreement with PAPE Dawson Consulting Engineers for project management services for

[9:18] this park.

[9:19] As the city advances multiple park bond projects simultaneously because we are going

[9:25] have to now speed up this process a little bit. We have about five years to work

[9:32] through this bond before we can start incurring some penalties. So you're about

[9:39] a year and a half into this. So now we're going to be doing simultaneous

[9:43] larger projects. So this will involve Butler, Ruff Hollow Park, City Park, and the

[9:49] Swim Center simultaneously. And then we will get to hopefully live oak at some

[9:54] point. As the city advances these projects simultaneously the size, complexity, and overlapping

[10:01] timelines of these projects require consistent, professional oversight during construction.

[10:07] Staff evaluates opportunities to manage projects internally first. For example, park staff successfully

[10:14] managed the Activity Center PlayScape project last fall in 2025. While continuing to handle

[10:20] normal department responsibilities which help save the taxpayer dollars.

[10:25] However, the remaining bond projects are significantly larger and

[10:29] will incur at the same time making it difficult to maintain the same level of oversight while continuing to manage daily park operations without additional support.

[10:41] Simply put, we don't have the bandwidth or the expertise that is needed from an engineering standpoint.

[10:48] to now manage these larger park projects.

[10:53] This is not intended to replace staff responsibilities only to come alongside and up underneath and support that effort as a supplemental activity and provide specialized experience and expertise during the construction phase that we simply don't have.

[11:12] This will help us stay on schedule, remain within budget and meet city standards while also

[11:18] helping reduce risk and potential liability.

[11:21] Staff is recommending PAPE Dawson consulting engineers based on their qualifications and

[11:26] experience and expertise in this.

[11:29] When we went out in 2024, you may remember we went out in May of that year to do a RFQ

[11:37] for engineering firms for city projects.

[11:41] This involved not only facilities and parks, but also streets.

[11:46] Pape Dawson was one of the highest scored offers in that RFQ and they were the one that

[11:55] most aligned with park projects for what we were needing and that's why we're making

[12:02] the recommendation for them. Their responsibilities would include coordinating with contractors

[12:07] and design professionals, monitoring the project schedule and budget, attending construction

[12:13] meetings and inspections reviewing contractor pay applications to ensure

[12:18] that what we're being charged is what we're actually getting and providing

[12:22] regular updates not only to staff but more specifically to City Council and

[12:27] the public. For projects of this scale dedicated construction oversight helps

[12:32] ensure issues are addressed early which can help prevent delays and change

[12:37] orders that could ultimately cost the city more. This project at Butler

[12:43] Mr. Ruffalo is expected to take 300 calendar days.

[12:46] We are hoping that we have a qualified contractor that we can bring back to you next month for

[12:53] a recommendation for Council to award that bid.

[12:57] So 300 calendar days from when they start construction, so we'll be going through permitting.

[13:03] I'm hoping that by June 1, we have a shovel in the ground.

[13:06] So, getting paid Dawson on board now to where they can review the plans and be ready to go at the same time is really critical to the success of this project.

[13:22] Yeah, in closing, we have asked them to bid this on an hourly basis so that we can monitor costs with a not to exceed amount of $253,550.

[13:37] $150. We did look at this late last week to see if there was any way to reduce that.

[13:43] One of the things that we talked about was the landscape architect and could we reduce

[13:48] that fee and to zero, and that is a possibility. Outside of that, we are asking for a not-to-exceed

[13:56] amount. Still to remain a $253.550. In the event we need to tap into landscape services,

[14:04] but we're looking at ways to mitigate that.

[14:08] Pape Dawson is also here this evening

[14:10] if you have any questions for them as well.

[14:13] Okay, thank you.

[14:14] Councilmember Sherman, any other questions?

[14:17] Thank you, Director Bennett.

[14:19] That all seems reasonable to have third party oversight

[14:22] where I get caught up and it is,

[14:24] we're probably gonna be hiring a very competent

[14:26] general construction firm.

[14:28] So we always do, so appreciate that.

[14:33] This fee, it's approaching 10% equivalent of the actual budget for the park, which is $2.7 million.

[14:42] It just seems like a big number for within 300 days. It just seems very expensive.

[14:48] There's a lot of time here by the vice president and some very high cost people.

[14:53] I completely agree with what you're saying, like we need some more help and some third party help.

[14:56] but to also to your point, if we have multiple

[15:00] Local projects that we're going to be doing, have we considered hiring in-house? Because we also have, this is just for rough hollow, right? So I'm assuming there's been something similar for city park and for the swim center. Reproaching million dollars of these types of fees. That's a big staff that then we have fully in house. My other question is just around, if there's a, does this bring

[15:29] any guarantees. So, if they notice, hey, the contractor is not delivering on something

[15:37] or we didn't, something didn't happen and we dug up some dinosaur when I was delayed

[15:42] project. I don't know, whatever that might be but does this have anything like, hey, as

[15:46] a result of hiring us now, we have the authority and we can, you know, dig the general contractor

[15:52] fee. You know, so does this fee get made up elsewhere? I don't think it does. Like, does

[15:59] and includes some sort of a clawback function if something is going over.

[16:05] So yeah, I have completely an agreement with you on additional oversight and whether

[16:10] that's in-house.

[16:11] I don't want to be in-house if we have four more years of projects coming.

[16:15] I think that we have then better control.

[16:17] That's a big budget overall that we could hire for.

[16:21] But just this one on its own approaching 10%, I'm having a tough time with that.

[16:26] Yeah, that's pretty standard when it comes to consulting fees like this.

[16:34] Because we are going to be doing multiple projects simultaneously, it really is critical

[16:41] at this point.

[16:42] And we had talked about it, you know, before we even went to a bond, we had talked about

[16:48] having a consultant come in as a project manager.

[16:52] I mean, that was always part of the conversation.

[16:55] And so here we are in the 11th hour of we were able to manage the first one to save those dollars.

[17:01] Now we need to be moving forward.

[17:03] And that's why this was brought to you last month was because now is the time.

[17:10] Yes, would I have loved to have had the 28 million that we originally proposed?

[17:15] Yes, absolutely. It would give us a little more buffer.

[17:18] But the reality is we have 22 and prices are not going down. They're increasing.

[17:23] and so the time is really critical to keep moving these forward plus we also don't want to get

[17:29] dinged on the backside of taking too long to spend this bond money. We have to show in good faith

[17:36] that we are moving these projects forward. I can appreciate that. I still feel almost then

[17:42] it starts to feel like we're having to prove it like under duress but I appreciate your comments and

[17:47] additional information. If I could have you know if there was a way to speed up this process they

[17:53] certainly would, but things just take longer in government than we hope that they do,

[18:00] but that's the reality.

[18:03] Thank you.

[18:04] Any other questions of council?

[18:06] Just a quick question, Andrea.

[18:09] I clearly don't have as much engineering experience as or understanding of the finances of this

[18:16] as councilmember Sherman must, but this was part of our

[18:23] I remember these discussions and throughout the entire process we were we

[18:28] understood we were going to need somebody like this and this is within the

[18:33] budget that we approved what three years ago. Oh, that was in May of 2024.

[18:40] Oh, okay. So I'm not surprised in the slightest that we have this and I also have

[18:47] every faith in you that you chose the right contractor along with the rest of

[18:52] staff and I appreciate all the work that went into this and I completely understand why

[19:02] we need to use somebody like this as opposed to trying to wing it on our own. So I just want

[19:11] to congratulate you and staff on putting this together and bringing it to fruition. Thank you.

[19:21] I have a quick question before a motion so I

[19:28] hit it but it must not have went on a quick question

[19:30] director Bennett so the remaining projects each one of these will have a similar price

[19:37] take for projects is that correct is that what I understood I just want to make sure

[19:41] that I'm fully understanding it yes okay well they will be similar okay yeah it just depends

[19:46] on the scope. So City Park will be the biggest project that we do.

[19:51] So in the center may be the most complicated project that we do.

[19:55] But each one will have a similar price tag.

[19:58] I just stagger a percentage of percentage.

[20:01] And just as a percentage, sorry.

[20:03] Just as a question,

[20:05] this was part of the bond package.

[20:08] Yes. This was all part of what we voted to bring to the bond, just to clarify.

[20:13] This is not new tax dollars going out.

[20:16] This is all part of the original plan.

[20:18] We're just now voting on the incremental pieces of the plan.

[20:23] Right.

[20:23] Okay.

[20:24] Thank you.

[20:24] No.

[20:25] And I agree.

[20:26] I think there's probably maybe a little sticker shock, right?

[20:29] You think you're going in to get a, you know, the original thing was we put a $22 million bond

[20:34] out and we put $2.2 million in for contract supervision.

[20:39] That's true.

[20:40] I think maybe I don't I don't want to speak and put words in your mouth constant membership

[20:44] It may be just the dollar amount broken up because we did approve it, right?

[20:48] And so this is the funds that are already allocated, but just seeing it I think in real-time with actual

[20:55] Dollars and percentages to discuss it might be a little bit of a sticker shock, right? Everyone thinks like yes

[21:01] It's approved, but now it's like whoa sure now it's here

[21:09] We have to still authorize it for these exact reasons and questions, just like we have on Hey Parks Equipment has cost more so yes, it's captured with the original bond amount, not disputing that I never have, but it still comes back to us ultimately for a discussion.

[21:26] Okay, if there are no other questions, I'll move to a motion.

[21:30] I'll make a motion, we approve agenda, I don't know whether.

[21:33] And I'll second.

[21:35] Any further discussion?

[21:37] All those in favor of approving motion, 11 as print, please say, I, all those opposed.

[21:42] Motion carries five to one.

[21:43] Thank you, council.

[21:46] Item 15, the financial report.

[21:59] Thank you, Mayor, council, Mayor Presum.

[22:03] Happy to present our monthly financial opening.

[22:07] This is our March update. These figures are as of the end of February. Let's take a look at our revenues.

[22:16] Okay, so our tax revenues were on target, property tax, sales tax. You can see the property tax,

[22:22] a couple hundred thousand more budgeted than when we brought in. That will continue to come in through the rest of the fiscal year.

[22:29] Permits, fines, and fees. Those are trending slightly lower than what we projected.

[22:35] It's mostly due year-over-year court revenues lower than projected at this point.

[22:44] Other program revenues, franchise fees, those are on target.

[22:49] And then looking ahead are expected additional revenue collections and permits, fines and

[22:56] fees.

[22:57] You can look at the permit collection chart there to the right.

[23:00] you can see we've collected approximately 300,000, 1.35 is what we budgeted, so that 300,000

[23:07] is approximately 25%. We're 40% through the year, so we're filling that gap the rest

[23:12] of the year with projects that come in. There's a couple of projects that are on the horizon

[23:18] that we are expecting to come in, and that'll fill that gap for the remainder of the year.

[23:23] And then as far as I just wanted to mention real quick court, they have an

[23:30] initiative where they're looking at warrants currently, so that'll be an

[23:34] additional revenue stream potentially to fill to fill that gap as well, the

[23:37] remainder of the fiscal year. On the expenditure side, expenditures are they're

[23:43] tracking on budget. We do have, if you look at PD, that there's a bit of a variance

[23:52] there, approximately 300,000. Half of that is due to, we had some early year expenditures,

[23:59] so that's just a timing issue. The other half, I wanted to point that out. This month was

[24:04] personnel, a little over budget on salaries. However, I'm not showing it here if you take the city-wide

[24:11] salaries were on budget. That gap is just kind of related to PD. So what we'll do is, as we progress

[24:20] of the year we may kind of go internally and reallocated. It makes sense that PD has

[24:24] that gap because that's where the majority of the vacancies were budgeted. So we'll

[24:29] either smooth that out. I don't want to anticipate, you know, we need to come back for an

[24:33] amendment, but if we do, sure, you know, I'll bring that to you all.

[24:38] And that's, yeah,

[24:41] we have a negative 100,000, so total budget variance. I think we're in a good spot.

[24:48] That concludes my update.

[24:50] Happy to answer any questions.

[24:52] Thank you.

[24:53] Any questions for the finance director?

[24:55] Yeah.

[24:56] Can you go back one slide?

[24:57] Please.

[24:58] Sure.

[24:58] Thanks, Aaron.

[25:00] You mentioned it.

[25:01] Projected Irvier court revenues are lower.

[25:04] So that looks like a hundred pounds.

[25:06] What do you, can you just maybe want to give us more information on that?

[25:10] It's going to be just the fine collections.

[25:13] So I guess issuing citations.

[25:16] I mean, it's a question for the chief centers.

[25:19] Yeah, it might be for the chief, just looking year-over-year, you know, we have our projections

[25:23] based on historic data year-over-year, we're not at that, you know, as we progress, maybe

[25:29] we'll get there.

[25:30] I do know, like I mentioned before, the warrant, the initiative of the warrants might bring

[25:36] in and just on revenue stream to fill that gap, but yeah, chief might be able to get you

[25:40] mad.

[25:42] That's all right because you said it's mostly then due to the courts, not like permits for

[25:47] building permits.

[25:48] So here what you're seeing there is what we've projected to bring in just through our

[25:56] normal BDS operations and what I've decided to do going forward is just kind of show you

[26:00] the big picture down below.

[26:02] So I mean we do need to get to that 1.35.

[26:05] Sorry, I just meant on that, in the top table where it says permits, fines and fees.

[26:11] Is that permit the same as a BDS permit or is it different permit?

[26:13] Yeah, and it's, those numbers you can buy and I can break them out, that's kind of, you know, you don't need to, I just, I was just wanting to, I was just surprised that the court was that far, you know, trending behind, but all good.

[26:28] Yeah, I mean just year over year and you know it it it it could bounce back

[26:33] And I'll just keep all updated on that or people are speeding less. So yeah, yeah, it's a lot of people

[26:41] Well as a point you now have two judges instead of one and so that should reduce the docket and

[26:47] Get the fines fees proceeding. Yeah, thanks

[26:54] Aaron. You're welcome. Any other questions?

[26:57] Okay, thank you very much. All right. Thank you

[26:59] Item 16, Citizens Participation for items that are not on this agenda, no one signed

[27:04] up in advance does anyone present, wish to address counsel on any item not on this agenda.

[27:11] Going once, twice, okay closing Citizens Participation, 17, presentation, discussion and possible

[27:18] action to accept the fiscal year, 2025 City of Lakeway Audit, and we have a presentation

[27:22] by Singleton Clark and company are certified public accountants who have rendered the audit

[27:28] and each member of council has a copy of the audit in front of them.

[27:33] Good evening, sir.

[27:33] Welcome back.

[27:34] Good evening, sir.

[27:35] Thank you.

[27:36] It's a pleasure to join here again.

[27:37] My name is Robert Contelkin with Singleton Clark.

[27:40] The city's independent auditor.

[27:41] I'm here to present four captains, the audit.

[27:44] Everyone should have a copy in front of them, as Mayor mentioned.

[27:47] I used to flip pages.

[27:49] I have more or less the same page with you, but we don't flip pages.

[27:52] But if anyone has any questions and we need to open it up, we certainly may.

[27:55] I will try to be brief.

[27:57] I will try to keep you from falling asleep.

[27:59] I like to focus on three things and if anything else, mention where we were asked.

[28:05] Conclude that.

[28:07] But I think we're safe to stick with my three, which are the audit opinion and what it means.

[28:13] How we got to that opinion, so whether other conclusions or outcomes of the audit and finally

[28:18] the quick look at calculated reserves and general funds ending fund balance.

[28:22] So I'll start with the opinion.

[28:24] It's a letter on the front of the report.

[28:27] Very important to us because it summarizes what we did, what we're responsible for, what

[28:31] the city is responsible for, and the statement that covers all of the items under the opinion,

[28:39] which are the financials, the supporting footnotes, and the required supplementary information.

[28:45] So the statement is that that information is fairly stated in all the terrestrial aspects

[28:49] and presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

[28:53] The technical term for this type of opinion received for the year is unmodified.

[28:58] We often rely on the common term which is clean.

[29:01] The City of Lakeway received a cleaner unmodified opinion for the year under audit.

[29:06] It's important to consider other outcomes or conclusions of the audit.

[29:12] Those being potentially fine-aged related to controls are compliance, recommendations

[29:16] and or audit adjustments.

[29:18] I'm happy to inform you that there were no findings for the year under audit, there were

[29:22] no recommendations, we had no audit adjustments.

[29:27] And over the years I've kind of struggled to put this in context because most of my clients

[29:31] do have some or all of those, but then it is important to put it on some sort of spectrum

[29:36] to explain why or why it is not a problem.

[29:40] But I'd like to introduce something to you.

[29:43] I don't know if I've discussed it in the past, but the city does submit for the Certificate

[29:50] of Achievement with the Government Finance Office of Association and has received that

[29:53] over the last several years as a Certificate in the report for last year.

[30:03] It's in the introductory section on

[30:15] Roman numeral page 13. And I think that that back goes to or speaks to why we don't have any issues. The audit is not designed to create quality, it's designed to verify it. And so I would not expect for an entity that goes out and receives annually that certificate of achievement from the government finance officer's association to have any issues, shouldn't have findings, shouldn't be making recommendations, and we shouldn't have any audit adjustments.

[30:41] The last thing I normally discuss with you, I'm sure very aware of, because of the transfer

[30:47] that's made related to access fund balance between the general fund and the capital reserve

[30:51] fund, is where your reserves are related to the unassigned fund balance and the general

[30:56] fund.

[30:57] And so we take the expenditures for the year, divided by 12, and come up with an average

[31:02] monthly amount.

[31:03] And so for the year under audit, the average monthly expenditures from the general fund

[31:06] or about 1.68 million, which then translated to about 4.4 months of reserve,

[31:14] which is slightly

[31:15] higher than I think you're normally around 90 days, and so the transfer that was sent

[31:20] from the General Fund to the capital reserve fund was 450,000, so when you sit down and

[31:26] look at that, the summer you have a little bit left from the prior year.

[31:32] Before I summarize and ask for any questions, I'd just like to thank you for allowing us

[31:35] serve as your independent auditor. I'd like to thank the Finance Department for all their

[31:40] help in conducting the audit. So in summary, clean up and gotten to the way you should, without

[31:45] the help of the audit, no findings, no recommendations, no audit adjustments and a healthy ending unassigned

[31:51] fund balance in the journal fund about 4.4 months.

[31:56] So thank you, sir. Are there any questions for our auditor?

[32:00] I don't know if it's for you sir or city manager does this help us achieve like a higher

[32:09] bond rating? Does this come into play at all on that or is that completely separate?

[32:15] I mean it's part of the whole process of analyzing the city's fiscal health and so absolutely

[32:20] having consecutive clean audits and awards of achievement certainly help with that situation

[32:28] Okay. Okay. Thanks. Any other questions?

[32:32] Have are we posting this on the website for citizens to review if they so choose?

[32:38] Yes, yes, yes. Do we have that? Do we know where that is that sometimes things can be a little difficult to find?

[32:45] I should be on the finance page. So we'll make sure that's out. Okay. Yeah, when we publish the results of the meeting, there will be a

[32:53] I mean, comment that the audit has been received and there will be a link to the current audit report when we said that our email.

[33:01] Good. Thank you.

[33:02] Is there anything else?

[33:03] Questions?

[33:04] It might be worth considering an actual press release on it based on there was one item to come back to.

[33:10] We can do that during the discussion period.

[33:13] Okay.

[33:14] If there are no more questions, thank you, sir.

[33:16] Thank you.

[33:16] Appreciate it very much.

[33:18] Of course.

[33:18] Citizens participation, does anyone wish to address counsel on this item?

[33:22] I see none and will close citizens participation return to the council for discussion.

[33:29] So yes, we can certainly advertise it and make sure that it's included in everyone understands

[33:35] that.

[33:36] I would like to start the discussion by congratulating the finance director and the finance

[33:40] department city manager and staff for a second clean audit.

[33:45] It think that's incredibly good work and it's very hard to do in the real world.

[33:51] and getting it done consecutively is really quite a good, it's a good thing.

[33:57] And so we shouldn't let that pass unnoticed.

[34:00] Other discussion or items?

[34:02] I echo you and Council Member Sherman.

[34:04] Council Member Bryan?

[34:06] I too would like to say thank you to our staff for the hard work and the dedication.

[34:12] And especially for multiple years now having good reports.

[34:15] So very important and my kudos to you.

[34:19] So thank you.

[34:19] That's more Brinson.

[34:21] Same.

[34:21] I'll give it easy.

[34:22] All right.

[34:23] Mayor Pro Tem.

[34:24] Yes, I would be remiss if I didn't say thank you since everybody else did.

[34:29] But this is year over year over year we tend to do extremely well.

[34:37] You did it too.

[34:40] Anyway, so, you know, in eight years of going through this, I would have to say that I've

[34:49] I've never seen the city perform poorly and it's exceptionally clean.

[34:55] I was going to ask a question about how we compared other cities, but you kind of answered

[35:01] that when you mentioned that you're used to seeing a lot of the problems and you don't

[35:06] see them with us.

[35:08] I would say that among the top, for sure, I've got three actors that I do and I'd say you're

[35:16] When you're out, no adjustments, very few, if any, related to maybe an implementation that we had to do,

[35:21] which we had a few this year related to, guess we won a one, but we did them as re-classes, so but, but very good.

[35:27] Great, thank you very much.

[35:29] Councillor Schell.

[35:30] Oh, sorry, that's it.

[35:31] Councillor Schell, were you making further?

[35:33] Same, thank you.

[35:34] All right, great.

[35:35] Well, with that, I'd undertake a motion for the City Council to accept the audit report as presented.

[35:41] I make a motion that we accept the audit report as presented.

[35:44] Second.

[35:44] I have a motion and a second to accept the audit report as presented in any

[35:48] conversation discussion. I see none. All those in favor raise your hands

[35:51] ahead. That motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much for the

[35:55] presentation, sir. Thank you for your hard work again. We appreciate your firm

[36:00] having been with us a number of years and and Aaron and the team we're very

[36:05] grateful to have acknowledged the city's finances and our processes are very

[36:12] very well documented and survive on it.

[36:15] It's very good.

[36:15] Thank you, sir.

[36:20] Item 18, a presentation by the Travis County Community Development Block Grant.

[36:25] And we have a presentation by Travis County Health and Human Services block grant team.

[36:29] Hello, and it's good to see you.

[36:31] Welcome back.

[36:32] It's one of those things where we like to see the county coming to us to talk about what

[36:37] you all can do and how we might be able to work with you.

[36:40] So nice to see you again and look forward to hearing what you have to say, man.

[36:44] Absolutely, thank you for having us. My name is Michaela Manian. I'm the planner for the community development block grant.

[36:51] With us today is also our planning manager, Ying Booth-Potodon, and we're excited to discuss with you today about what our grant is and how we can help your residents.

[37:02] Alright, so we are the community development block grant. If you've received emails from us, it's CDBG, a little bit easier to remember.

[37:10] this year we're going to be discussing changes to our program as well as some

[37:14] things that have stayed consistent just for updates. So what is CDBG? We are a

[37:21] federal grant we have been received yearly by Travis County since 2006. We are

[37:27] yearly granted $1.7 million approximately. This money goes to supporting local

[37:33] communities and we focus on low to moderate income families. We also have a

[37:39] program for individual qualifying families, but we'll go into that a little bit further.

[37:45] So CDBG specifically is going to be that development block grant program. As I said, this is

[37:51] designed for communities. Lots of things this grant can do. I've covered a couple of our

[37:57] really fun projects here that are very important for their communities. The first is going

[38:02] to be there are crystal-bend drainage projects improvements. This is something we do to help

[38:08] with flood mitigation. Very important in this area and I know it's a priority of this council.

[38:13] You can see there too is our forest bluff infrastructure improvements. Sidewalks are something

[38:19] that's very often overlooked. Also very important for the safety of communities. It's something we see a lot

[38:25] as a need across Travis County, but especially in unincorporated areas. We'll go a little bit more into

[38:31] the different places in the county we work, but unincorporated is something that's often overlooked.

[38:36] and you do have many constituents that may participate in the city but are

[38:41] still considered unincorporated even if they're your residents at the same time.

[38:48] So three here is a really fun one. That's our South East Metro all

[38:52] inclusive playground. This was completed in 2023. We did actually win some park

[38:58] awards for it. It's as you can tell very very fun and because it is all

[39:03] inclusive. We've especially made sure that children with any kind of disability or mobility

[39:09] impairments can still use that playground to its full extent.

[39:13] Four is going to be our Austin Colony Infrastructure Improvements. Similarly, this, you know,

[39:19] it's a basic sidewalk, but when those are not available, especially around schools, folks

[39:24] where places where elderly folks live, general residents, that is a huge impact on your

[39:30] community. Next here, this is going to be something very relevant to your constituents

[39:36] especially. Home rehab is that program I mentioned a minute ago that is designed

[39:41] for individual families instead of at a community level. Home rehab is also part of the CDBG

[39:48] program grant. It allows for up to $24,999 that individual qualifying families can use on

[39:59] repairs for their homes that are necessary.

[40:02] Like we have listed there, septic systems can be a huge one, especially in unincorporated areas of Travis County.

[40:09] A personal one for me that's important is ADA compliance.

[40:12] I know that you have residents that are aging in their homes that may need improvements so

[40:17] they can still access them, wheelchair ramps, shower handles, things that are very expensive and very needed.

[40:24] weatherization is something we see, this can look replacing windows, improving on heat

[40:29] and cooling infrastructure, you know, helping with those hot Texas summers.

[40:34] We are accepting applications now, this program is fairly new, but we have, you know, seen

[40:40] a great need in the county, and it's something that, once again, is very applicable to your

[40:44] residents, even if the CDBG grant as a broader, isn't always going to be used for central

[40:51] for Lakeway areas, but Home Rehab's a big one.

[40:54] Home is actually entirely different separate grant

[40:56] from CDBG.

[40:58] This is a new program that our program is still rolling out.

[41:01] It's something that's designed

[41:03] to help our first-time homeowners

[41:05] with down payment, cost closing assistance,

[41:09] things that make it easier for folks in Travis County

[41:11] to become first-time homeowners.

[41:13] This can include in the Lakeway area.

[41:17] Here's some great examples of our Home Rehab program.

[41:20] these were completed all this year. First is, like we mentioned, that ADA compliant wheelchair ramp for a family that now needs to have ability to access their home where previously they did not need to.

[41:32] Two is weatherization example. Those are double-pained window replacements to allow for easier heating cooling of a home.

[41:39] Three there, HVAC system, hugely important in our area, especially in our hot summers that can make homes livable where they may not otherwise be.

[41:47] and roofing repairs, something very expensive,

[41:51] something that families will need help with

[41:52] and is often out of their budget otherwise.

[41:57] Eligibility is something that is a big question for us

[42:00] and there's some important things that go into it.

[42:03] First, I'd like to say every single project

[42:05] that is applied to us, every family that is applied,

[42:08] we do look at every one of those,

[42:10] even if we don't think they're going to qualify,

[42:13] our team still pays attention.

[42:14] So first we look at income level, that's low to moderate income families in Travis County.

[42:19] This is going to be based on the moderate income levels for Travis County.

[42:23] And we do have to have that qualification to be able to support a family.

[42:28] We look at national objectives.

[42:30] This is a way for us to make sure that CDBG programs across the country are aligned in helping people who need it the most.

[42:38] This means we look at that low to moderate income.

[42:40] We look at people that may especially qualify for specific needs, elderly residents that are considered part of a vulnerable population.

[42:50] We also have county priorities.

[42:52] These are set every five years.

[42:54] It's something that our team speaks to residents, collects surveys, speaks to city councils, such as yourselves, and creates two main priorities that we focus on.

[43:05] This allows us to use our funds to the greatest capability in a specific area.

[43:10] Currently, our programs are looking at affordable housing and infrastructure.

[43:15] You can see on those examples how both of those were reflected, and they are what we continue

[43:21] to see as a huge need in the community that we are able to fill.

[43:26] Again, there's some examples there.

[43:27] We already talked about some of them.

[43:29] If there are questions about if something qualifies or what specific programs can look like, we're

[43:34] happy to answer them after, but like we said, we encourage all applications.

[43:40] All right.

[43:41] This is our community needs survey.

[43:43] I mentioned a couple of seconds ago about how we establish our priorities.

[43:48] This is how we do that.

[43:49] Every year we have a survey that is extended to residents, excuse me, all, that has a list

[43:56] of questions that allows residents to tell us what matters to them in their community.

[44:01] That can look like a lot of different things.

[44:03] We see residents will vote on libraries.

[44:05] We see them vote on right-of-way improvements, sidewalks, affordable housing.

[44:10] Things like that down payment for home ownership.

[44:13] We ask as broad a group of questions as possible so that we can get a comprehensive answer.

[44:20] For our 2428 program, the response we saw there was going to be housing and infrastructure-related.

[44:26] That will remain the case for a while, but we do the survey every year.

[44:30] the more response we get, the better we can serve our community. We'll be able to have

[44:35] handouts for these, and we've already had great help from your team posting this online

[44:40] and making it available to anyone who would like to complete it.

[44:44] And finally, here's our contact information. Yeng and I are here, so if you'd like to

[44:49] come speak to us now, we're excited to answer any questions, but also phone number, email

[44:55] our mailing address, we are located on airport down in central

[45:15] We still encourage application, but that's a great starting point to see is your community something that's in a load of moderate income area. And they're on our right. That's our application form. We say, even if you can't fill out every box, do let us know.

[45:29] know it just lets us understand there's an interest in that area which can then lead to further

[45:35] conversation. Okay that's it y'all thank you for your attention. I'm happy to answer questions

[45:41] now. Okay, Ying is going to be our expert. Thank you. Question is going to be important.

[45:46] Yes I do. So on the speaking about the home rehabilitation and relative to some of our discussion

[45:58] before council meeting. A couple of questions here. You may mention about CDBG grants can

[46:07] be applied and can only be applied in areas relative if you can go back to that slide but

[46:13] it shows the criteria and it talks about the community must meet an 80% of moderate.

[46:20] All right. How is that community boundary established? And I say that because if you look

[46:28] in this area, we have areas of the South Shore of Lake Travis, where we have communities

[46:36] who could meet that, but depending upon how the boundary is established, they might not

[46:42] meet that requirement. Absolutely. So the specifics of how we look

[46:47] at zip codes, communities where those boundaries are is something that our planning manager and

[46:52] our project manager look at at a case by case basis. It is still going to have to meet that

[46:57] general requirement level for it to be applicable of the grant at a federal and at a local community

[47:03] level, but we also do try and look at specific vulnerable groups we are able to do income surveys in

[47:10] some areas. So even if at a starting level it doesn't look like a community may qualify if we're

[47:16] seeing it in an area where we do know there is a need. On paper, it might not, but we can

[47:21] look at specifically through our team to try and focus in a little bit basically.

[47:25] Can that be established by age group? Elderly, as opposed to part of being considered

[47:32] across the entire population? I believe your question is very specific to our home

[47:38] we have program. And that one, we callify based on an individual home. So any resident

[47:47] in your city that has the income lower than 80% AMI could qualify. We don't need to

[47:56] look at the block any sick court, not for the home rehab program is individual.

[48:07] But when

[48:08] improvement, we need to look at the location of the projects and we go from there.

[48:16] So can you work with directly with 501C3 type support groups and foundations and faith-based

[48:27] groups and those sort of things?

[48:28] Can you work directly with those programs in terms of identifying and providing grant

[48:39] that could support what those folks do,

[48:42] or is it project by project related, how does that?

[48:45] Right, so this program already been launched

[48:48] and we already have the program administrator.

[48:51] We have the link where the citizen resident can just go there,

[48:54] put their name, information of the address,

[48:57] and we go from there, we don't need to,

[48:59] we do not, what is it, we do not a bit some more people

[49:05] to work on the project, we already have the team

[49:07] that work on it. You just need to find a resident that qualified for it so we can help.

[49:13] So you would or you would work with those groups or you would not.

[49:20] So if you had one of these groups that had identified needs and a community of what

[49:25] you're talking about in this presentation, are you saying you would work with those groups to help support?

[49:32] We do consult with many different organizations in the county.

[49:35] They are able to tell us what those needs are often those conversations do lead to someone submitting a project proposal

[49:42] But the starting point is the application. We don't go out and look for need ourselves

[49:48] It's our residents our partners our city councils have to take the initiative to let us know what that need is and then we can look at it further

[49:56] So you could help you could work with those groups to help applications be completed and submitted

[50:02] They just have to talk to us first. Yes

[50:06] Okay, thank you.

[50:07] Is that answer your question, sir?

[50:08] Yeah, does, thank you.

[50:09] That's it.

[50:10] Thank you, Mayor.

[50:11] Councilmember Woodson.

[50:12] Yeah, just a follow-up to that,

[50:14] because I did a quick math calculation on my phone.

[50:17] This area, specifically, Lake Way,

[50:19] is 100,000 over your 80% of Travis County.

[50:24] So does that eliminate residents in the city of Lake Way?

[50:27] Just in general for it.

[50:28] I know that you said that you would potentially work

[50:31] with case-by-case basis for the housing, but what about the rest of it?

[50:38] So another thing that we, two things we like to focus on here, one is that we're going

[50:43] to have unincorporated residents that are still participating in these programs.

[50:47] Their access point to them is often through city councils.

[50:51] They are going to be paying attention to these programs and listening to information from

[50:56] you guys.

[50:56] The other really important part of that is we can do an income survey on a smaller level even if at a very broad scope

[51:03] It doesn't look like something's going to qualify when we have you know a street that as you mentioned

[51:09] There are communities here that need that kind of support. We will be on a very small level looking at how those

[51:15] Individual families qualify instead of at a broader lakeway level. Is that answer? Yes. Thank you. Thank you

[51:22] I don't know if it's a

[51:24] One of your slides at the

[51:26] beginning was very intriguing to

[51:27] me when you were showing the

[51:29] parks.

[51:30] I don't imagine city park would

[51:32] probably qualify.

[51:33] Do you have any extra giant zombie

[51:37] dinosaur heads that we could have

[51:39] possibly for our park.

[51:41] You need to because I get one and

[51:43] then you can have the second one and

[51:44] I'll let you know.

[51:45] Thank you so much.

[51:46] Absolutely.

[51:47] Okay.

[51:48] That's all the questions.

[51:49] Thank you very much.

[51:50] Thanks, y'all.

[51:50] Okay.

[51:51] Open this up for citizens' participation.

[51:53] Anyone wish to address council on this item?

[51:55] Closing citizens' participation in discussion.

[51:57] There's no council action required.

[51:59] I think we can continue to advertise this as Councilman Brittonson pointed out.

[52:04] Lakeway writ large doesn't qualify, but we have individual parts of the community.

[52:10] And certainly there are charitable organizations.

[52:13] We learned from my community service summit that would be able to identify specific areas and subordinate areas.

[52:20] So I think it's a more communications task for the city and for the community service folks to be aware of this.

[52:28] And so we'll get this information out to our community service summit.

[52:31] Okay.

[52:32] Okay. With that, we'll call item 19.

[52:35] Discussion and possible action regarding ordinance number 2026-3-16604.

[52:40] and ordinance of the city of Lakeway, Texas adopting the Lakeway 2026 comprehensive plan and providing for saving

[52:46] separability repealer and an effective date. We have a staff report from our system city manager,

[52:51] assistant city manager, Ashby, government manager.

[52:54] Thank you, Mayor Mayor Pro Tem and Council. So as mentioned, this item is an ordinance to approve the Lakeway 2026

[53:01] comprehensive plan. This item was presented to City Council in January and at that meeting, direction was given to staff to

[53:08] to reduce the plan down to 50 pages, clearly identify that the additional support materials

[53:14] were not part of the comprehensive plan document itself, take it back to the steering committee

[53:19] for a formal vote, and then bring it back to the zoning and planning commission and city

[53:23] council on March. All of those things have been done. The steering committee met February

[53:28] 10th and took a vote to move the plan forward back to Zapco and council on March. Then the

[53:37] the Comprehensive Plan was written to Zapco a couple of weeks ago. Zapco voted to recommend

[53:41] approval unanimously with two changes. The first was to clarify the stories under the

[53:47] dynamic core to be as compatible to update that graphic and then the second was to remove

[53:53] the Serene Hills project from the thoroughfare plan. I do want to point out there are a couple

[54:00] members of the steering committee here tonight so I wanted to take a moment to recognize them

[54:03] I'm going to appreciate the hard work that they put in to get us to this point.

[54:08] And with that, Olivia Sullivan is here with Line Heart Places and she'll cover the plan

[54:12] and the changes in a little bit more detail.

[54:15] And that concludes my portion of the presentation.

[54:17] I'd be happy to answer any questions you all may have.

[54:20] Any questions for the City Manager?

[54:22] Okay, I guess you're going to summarize the couple of changes we've had?

[54:25] Yes, good evening.

[54:26] Thank you for having me.

[54:28] Yes, I'm just here to go over a few of the updates in the last meetings that we've had

[54:33] As Ash we mentioned we are here January 20th and Council agreed to send the document

[54:40] back to the steering committee for them to review it and send it and decide if they

[54:44] were going to vote to send it forward.

[54:46] So during that February 10th steering committee meeting there was a 5-0 vote to send the

[54:50] document back to ZACO with the following changes made.

[54:54] A few, this is the list of changes, the major changes that we've made is that the dynamic

[54:59] course section, we've removed the number of stories to state that they will be dependent

[55:04] on compatibility, which now says as compatible in the document.

[55:09] And organize the document to ensure that it's clearly stated that the 50-page document

[55:14] is the comprehensive plan and everything, all the appendices are supporting documentation.

[55:20] So this is the amendment to page 24 of the comprehensive plan so that it reads as compatible,

[55:26] Well, previously it said 2 to 5 stories and now it's been updated to just say as compatible.

[55:31] And then this is the strike through of the Serine Hills project from the list of potential

[55:37] projects for future consideration, which is part of the thoroughfare plan.

[55:42] So this is what ZAPCO voted to move forward to you all.

[55:47] And then these are the major documents.

[55:49] So all of the updates reflect the conditions from the City Council, steering committee and

[55:55] zoning and planning commission.

[55:56] The full comprehensive plan document is now 50 pages

[56:00] with six appendices as they're supporting documents.

[56:03] You can see in this chart here,

[56:06] the original documents versus the updated documents.

[56:09] So we've made all of the changes requested

[56:11] in all of those meetings,

[56:13] and I'm here to answer any questions.

[56:15] Okay, thank you.

[56:17] Councilor important, any questions?

[56:19] No questions?

[56:20] Councilor Brannick, any questions?

[56:21] Can I have a discussion?

[56:27] I have a question, but it also qualifies a discussion for assistance in the City of Manor's

[56:32] Salisway for Discussion.

[56:34] Thank you.

[56:34] We don't have any questions.

[56:36] Citizens participation, anyone in Chambers will suggest council on the proposed comprehensive

[56:40] plan.

[56:41] Ending citizens participation coming back up here for discussion.

[56:47] And when do we kick it off?

[56:48] I mean, I can say right off the bat, I absolutely disagree with removing the serene hills

[56:54] drive from the thoroughfare plan. This council voted to approve the payment of the Serene

[57:03] Hills HOA landscaping fees because it was on the thoroughfare plan, it was a major collector,

[57:10] and the idea was it should be treated exactly the same as Highlands Boulevard,

[57:15] and that having been done, that was sort of the deal with the HOA, and I'm greatly disappointed

[57:21] that the zoning commissioner, who is also the H.O.A. president, backdoored that change to get it out of the thoroughfare plan, binding this council and future councils and requiring them if they ever have to do any widening on Serine Hills Road to go through extraordinarily expensive engineering studies to reopen that.

[57:39] And so I find that to be not kosher and I'm going to certainly suggest that that be not an accepted item.

[57:48] other discussion points. Yes, sir. So, asking that's my question. I live in a neighborhood

[57:54] that's also affected by potential thoroughfare plan. I didn't ask for it to be removed.

[58:00] But can you go over for us and also for residents and for future councils that watch this, how

[58:05] that thoroughfare plan is used, and that it's not a rubber stamp right now like, hey, this

[58:11] council in March, 2026 said, we're going to do all these things. So, can you just give

[58:15] more context to that please?

[58:17] Yeah, so I mean, all the projects shown on the thoroughfare plan are fully conceptual

[58:21] in nature.

[58:21] They haven't been designed.

[58:23] They haven't been funded.

[58:24] They haven't been, you know, there may be right away that's necessary to acquire things

[58:28] like that.

[58:28] So it's purely a conceptual project in nature that's been identified through community feedback,

[58:35] through studies, traffic studies, and things like that to identify transportation needs within

[58:39] the community.

[58:39] One of the priorities that they outlined in the Congress of Plain was that connectivity.

[58:44] So, one of the major things that you see in your neighbor, it specifically is allowing

[58:49] for more parallel connectivity to 620 to alleviate some of that traffic concern.

[58:53] So, that's why those projects were identified, Serena Hills as a major thoroughfare identified

[58:57] on our current thoroughfare plan map was identified as a need there and that's why that's on the

[59:03] list.

[59:05] Thanks for that.

[59:05] And the thoroughfare plan also doesn't limit us to that.

[59:09] If all of a sudden we see that challenger hurts or something else needs to be updated, that could potentially be updated.

[59:18] Sure. I mean, technically you can update the thoroughfare plan at any point.

[59:23] I mean, it is a kind of a fluid document, but you want those in the plan if they're identified as a need in the community to allow for multiple reasons.

[59:31] If you want to go out for a bond, you can identify it on the third floor plan or if you want to explore funding opportunities

[59:36] You can say it's pointed out here and so there's several benefits to having things like that in the third floor plan.

[59:43] Certainly, but again, it's just not a binding plan where if we came up with like, oh this intersection wasn't on the plan, but it really needs help.

[59:50] We need to discuss it and potentially fund it. That can be done still.

[59:53] Right, it's not a binding plan.

[59:55] It's both ways, both what's included and what's not included.

[59:57] Okay, thank you.

[1:00:00] Other discussion comes from important points?

[1:00:05] No, you've covered my point. Council Member Brad. Well, I would echo your thoughts, Mayor, relative to Serene Hills and removing it from the comprehensive plan as it's presented. Whereas I understand the neighbors and the neighborhoods concerns. Serene Hills does provide a service to the entire community.

[1:00:32] which we as a body of council must consider and it is a thoroughfare that connects

[1:00:39] to city to state highway 71 is a thoroughfare that provides for emergency

[1:00:46] response especially once LTFR puts their fire station out in that area it also

[1:00:54] provides for connectivity into the interior of the city and I believe that

[1:01:01] string hills needs to be back on there. Now I will qualify that to also say that I would

[1:01:09] recommend that any improvement that we make to any street should be justified by a proper

[1:01:16] engineering study. And if we would get a micro simulation model in place, we would be

[1:01:22] very easily be able to assess the improvements that would be needed, whether it's a phased

[1:01:28] approach or not. So that's my thoughts on there. Thank you. Thank you.

[1:01:35] Councilmember Robinson. My thing that I'm just I guess I don't know I'm going to I

[1:01:41] won't say hang up but the whole word compatible right on in the dynamic core.

[1:01:48] It's just what's compatible to me is different than everyone else up here and so I just don't like

[1:01:56] living in the gray space and I feel like that's a gray space to me.

[1:01:59] Well, Council Member Sherman and I were both present at the conversation.

[1:02:03] The members of the Comprehensive Plan Committee were concerned that

[1:02:07] where I had previously said three to five stories would lead to every

[1:02:12] development project being proposed for five stories or more based on that.

[1:02:17] And so they felt like by saying as compatible with the surrounding area

[1:02:22] was it took away sort of the license to start at five stories and go up. And so

[1:02:29] that was the reason for the change. And I felt like that was, I felt like the

[1:02:36] Steering Plan Committee citizens who had volunteered their time were making a

[1:02:40] reasonable argument and putting in what they thought unanimously was a

[1:02:49] a rational guardrail, would you agree with my characterization or add to that?

[1:02:56] Yes, and Kelly, your exact thought is why we agreed to put as compatible so that if something

[1:03:03] comes up, no one's pointing to the number five, it's a fluid discussion up here to work it out.

[1:03:09] I guess maybe I should have clarified more. Maybe my thing is, is that, let's just say I'm going to say

[1:03:15] roundels it's you put use and they come in and because it's let me right back up on that whole

[1:03:24] section most everything is one to two stories technically if you would look and height right and so

[1:03:31] what my biggest thing is is would somebody be able to come in reinvest in a whole section and say okay I'm

[1:03:40] I'm going to do two, then three, three, and then four,

[1:03:43] and then four, and then five.

[1:03:45] You know what I mean?

[1:03:45] Like, stagger, because then at that point,

[1:03:48] they are compatible, right?

[1:03:49] If they slowly change in its higher section,

[1:03:52] I guess that was my biggest thing,

[1:03:54] because then a five is compatible.

[1:03:57] Because you have to have compatible,

[1:03:59] define notes to the architecture of the building.

[1:04:02] So I hear you're saying and agree like that.

[1:04:04] If it was defined as compatible with the neighboring heights,

[1:04:07] et cetera, et cetera, then I think that would come

[1:04:09] in the play, but it's just as compatible. So what do you think is as compatible is different

[1:04:14] than what I think is compatible. The recommendation was to sort of take away a starting point,

[1:04:23] right? Take away a fixed number and make it back on the zoning commission and the City Council

[1:04:29] to say whether or not we wanted that. So I would, you know, one of the examples would be,

[1:04:36] I can't remember when somebody came in to the HUD subcommittee and wanted to propose

[1:04:44] three stories behind torches overlooking what would be the new city park and we immediately

[1:04:51] said no that's not compatible with that but they were like we already have five stories

[1:04:56] there and so this I think takes away that justification it gives a lot more it gives a lot

[1:05:02] more authority to get to the zoning commission into the council.

[1:05:06] Then to have to argue, it says five in the plan, and you have five over there, so why

[1:05:11] can't I have six?

[1:05:13] Right, so.

[1:05:14] No, I get it.

[1:05:15] I get it.

[1:05:16] In an example, another example would be, we may be familiar with, the BDS director car

[1:05:22] brought up is, or that Walgreens sits, it's in a pit.

[1:05:25] Five stories there is much different than five stories that the shell gas station with

[1:05:30] the really steep driveway.

[1:05:33] So this is intended to be like, well, as compatible.

[1:05:37] Councilor Mayor Pro Temini, discussion points.

[1:05:40] Okay, well, first off, I understand why people would

[1:05:45] that live right on that street might not want to see it widened.

[1:05:49] But every, huh?

[1:05:51] Serenzo's.

[1:05:52] Yeah, I guess.

[1:05:53] Sorry.

[1:05:55] But every other entrance, main entrance into the city,

[1:05:59] And this is a main entrance, people are using it that way, and people are going to continue

[1:06:04] to use that way, and it's going to only increase in traffic.

[1:06:08] So typically, I mean, every other entrance like that has either started out as four lanes,

[1:06:14] or is it four lanes now?

[1:06:16] So having just two lanes doesn't make sense.

[1:06:20] It's extremely difficult to maintain if there's something that needs to be done by the

[1:06:26] mud or anything like that where they have to close off the lane, that road is closed.

[1:06:31] I mean, there's almost nothing they can do to get in and out of there.

[1:06:35] And that's more of a hassle for the whole city.

[1:06:38] Those corridors are really for everyone, not just the neighborhood that it's sitting next

[1:06:43] to.

[1:06:45] The homes that were frontings, serenials, dry, those were never supposed to be built the

[1:06:51] way they were built.

[1:06:52] But something went goofy within our internal system many years ago that allowed them to

[1:06:58] be built the way they are with the driveways right off of Serene Hills and that was a mistake.

[1:07:06] The commercial corner is going to have a big effect on traffic there as well.

[1:07:12] And like Kent said, the fire station being there, and I don't know if anybody has ever

[1:07:18] notice, if you watch when the fire trucks leave, right at Lomans Crossing and Lomans, or

[1:07:27] make way boulevard, it's a mess. I mean, it's just one lane right there and it's very

[1:07:33] difficult. If there was an accident, it would be a huge problem. And I also am somewhat concerned

[1:07:39] about the manner, as you mentioned, in which this came about. But more importantly than

[1:07:46] anything, well not more than anything, but one of the things that really bothers me, and

[1:07:52] I've said it up here a bunch of times, when we ask people to volunteer their time and

[1:07:59] spend all that time working on a project just to have it upended by somebody with a personal

[1:08:06] stake in it, I find that frustrating.

[1:08:11] I don't like to see our committees upended simply because one person representing a group of people decided to try to throw a wrench in it.

[1:08:22] So for that reason, I can't support the removal.

[1:08:29] Yeah.

[1:08:30] Other discussion points, Councillor Morshroom?

[1:08:33] Yeah, I mean we started the comprehensive plan I think back in September of 23.

[1:08:39] So I just I want to bring it back to the plan so it's just not that we spent two years

[1:08:43] talking about serene hills drive, but this is my favorite slide out of the full plan.

[1:08:49] So if people are looking at the plan, I don't really know where to go in it.

[1:08:53] This slide I think is in the early on in the plan and also the very end.

[1:08:58] and one of our goals as the hearing committee was to update the 2020 plan, I think I had 10 goals and we had areas that we could combine it down into here.

[1:09:10] So a lot of it can get confusing but I think this page, including the vision statement, really captures what we were trying to accomplish with the plan and I to appreciate all the efforts of the citizens and the staff that were involved with it because it was a very, very long process.

[1:09:30] I agree. It's just like page six, or I can't remember, but one more thing. Also,

[1:09:36] Councilor Britinson was on the plan for a few months at the beginning, so I think

[1:09:40] you should be at it as being recognized on that recognition slide. And I don't

[1:09:44] think that would need to go back to Zapco. No. No, that's fine. I forgot. I mean, I

[1:09:49] remember OS on there, but thank you for the recognition. Welcome. Okay, we can get

[1:09:54] that. Okay with that I'd accept the motion.

[1:10:02] I'll make a motion we move forward

[1:10:04] approving the comprehensive plan with the exception of the ZEPCO recommendation

[1:10:09] regarding serine hills. I'm sorry can you do that. You said yes to approve it

[1:10:16] without the supreme. Correct. We'll approve it the way it is but we're not going to

[1:10:21] take the recommendation to remove serine from the second that. Okay so I have a

[1:10:25] Is there any further discussion?

[1:10:31] Would that be better?

[1:10:32] Would that sound better?

[1:10:33] It's more positive.

[1:10:35] I like being positive.

[1:10:36] All right.

[1:10:37] Can I withdraw your second?

[1:10:40] I'll withdraw mine.

[1:10:41] I will withdraw my second.

[1:10:42] I'll withdraw mine.

[1:10:43] I'll make a motion that we approve the comprehensive plan.

[1:10:48] And we put back in these serene hills

[1:10:52] to drive on the thoroughfare plan.

[1:10:56] Positive.

[1:10:56] That way it's not double.

[1:10:58] Yeah, no, we like that.

[1:11:00] May I second that one?

[1:11:01] You know, I will second that one.

[1:11:03] Yes.

[1:11:04] Okay, so I have a motion in a second.

[1:11:06] Any further conversation?

[1:11:08] Councilor Brittenson, you said?

[1:11:10] I would like to just to address.

[1:11:12] I know I have a lot of supporters.

[1:11:14] I live in Flint, Rock Falls.

[1:11:16] So Serine Hill's actually, when I moved there,

[1:11:21] Flint, Rock was just basically a paid call path.

[1:11:24] I mean, it wasn't even a proper two lane road at that.

[1:11:26] There was no, there was like no center divided.

[1:11:30] Basically it was a road to nowhere.

[1:11:32] Serene went in, my life got up heaved, I will tell you.

[1:11:36] Because it became another access point to 71.

[1:11:40] When it was originally created, it was never meant to be a cut through.

[1:11:45] It is what it is, you know, just like water traffic flows with the path of lease resistance.

[1:11:52] My once quiet street got destroyed, which is Flint Rock, that's my main avenue.

[1:12:00] And I'm saying this because I'm going to vote a certain way but I wanted to address

[1:12:04] my supporters in a specific way.

[1:12:06] By me voting in favor of this in which I'm about to do doesn't mean that I support necessarily

[1:12:12] the widening of the road and that would be on a, I just wanted to, like I said, come out

[1:12:19] and specifically address my supporters.

[1:12:24] Now while that is not something that's going to take place anytime soon,

[1:12:29] because of the overall engineering of the roads in that section,

[1:12:35] I just felt because that is something that I've fought long and hard for prior

[1:12:40] to me even being on council, I felt that it was respectful of me to address my

[1:12:45] supporters. So thank you.

[1:12:47] Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Any other comments discussion? I do have one. Joseph, on page 17, we make note that a digital dashboard will be developed of the plan.

[1:12:59] Can you just give a real brief description and understanding that for the public to hear how we're going to deal with the plan at this point?

[1:13:08] Yeah, absolutely. So as we move forward, we will put together a dashboard working with our consultant who's going to build the initial draft,

[1:13:15] and then staff will complete and maintain it.

[1:13:18] And that draft is going, or that dashboard

[1:13:21] is going to give citizens access to the comprehensive plan.

[1:13:24] But it's also going to illustrated in terms of the goals

[1:13:29] and essentially be able to be a road mark for those goals,

[1:13:32] road map for those goals where they can check the status.

[1:13:35] So as staff works through the goals with council and the community,

[1:13:39] the citizens will go to that dashboard and see what's been done,

[1:13:42] on what still needs to be done.

[1:13:45] They will be able to still give us comments

[1:13:47] on how we're doing and give us comments

[1:13:49] on what they think we need to work on next.

[1:13:51] So it'll be an interactive location for our citizens

[1:13:56] to give us feedback on the cop plan

[1:13:57] as it's written and as we're moving forward on it.

[1:14:00] And we're looking forward to getting that feedback

[1:14:02] because that's going to help drive in five years time

[1:14:05] or more the next iteration of the comprehensive plan.

[1:14:08] So it's supposed to be a living site

[1:14:11] where we can share that information, they can look at the plan, they can look at our progress, and they can give us feedback on that.

[1:14:18] Thank you.

[1:14:19] Okay, anything else?

[1:14:23] Yes, go ahead.

[1:14:26] Sorry, I'm just the client.

[1:14:33] On the steering committee, should Logan and Josh be represented as the zoning and planning committee members?

[1:14:43] and then friendly suggestion is that we just recognize the citizens first and then maybe go down and have elected and staff at the end.

[1:14:55] And then also Scott Olson served as the chair and I know he was here in the back.

[1:15:03] He's not on here. Yes, he is. Just to recognize as chair of the steering committee.

[1:15:14] I don't think those are all technical corrections that we would describe as a script or error. I don't think they need to be included in resolution. I support nobody objects to that. Okay, so I have a motion and a second to approve the comprehensive plan as presented and to return serene hills to the thoroughfare plan.

[1:15:36] That's the motion the second that we've concluded discussion.

[1:15:39] All those in favor, please raise your hand.

[1:15:40] Say aye.

[1:15:41] Aye.

[1:15:42] All those opposed?

[1:15:43] Motion carries unanimously.

[1:15:44] Thank you very much.

[1:15:45] The Council.

[1:15:47] Item 20.

[1:15:48] Discussion and possible action regarding resolution number 2026-03-16-01, a resolution

[1:15:53] of the City of Lakeway, Texas, establishing and appointing members of the view protection

[1:15:57] conditional overlay, VPCO, Committee of Staff Report, by me.

[1:16:01] So we had the task presented to us at the last meeting that we were going to create a citizens committee to help the city members staff and to find a way to improve the current VPCO ordinance.

[1:16:23] each member of council was asked to name a member, everyone is named a member.

[1:16:29] Councilor Fortin's member was not published as Mr. Troy Dunson.

[1:16:35] Zapco was asked to name two volunteers, only two volunteers came forward.

[1:16:39] Council was asked to name two volunteers, only two volunteers came forward.

[1:16:44] We don't know the fiscal impact because the committee, as you can see in the underlined resolution,

[1:16:50] has the authority to request additional legal assistance in

[1:16:53] Tope and drafting or doing a new one. Does anyone have a

[1:16:57] question for me on the resolution and the formation of the

[1:17:00] committee?

[1:17:01] Councillor Bragg? Mayor Proton. Questions?

[1:17:05] I don't see one for Christopher. I said that he did not publishes but it's Mr.

[1:17:09] Troy Duncett. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize that we received a

[1:17:13] circulatory email from the city secretary updating us on that.

[1:17:16] No questions. Well, they're because this is great. Yes, they will be discussion. Look at this screen.

[1:17:22] Councilmember Sherman on

[1:17:25] the city council nominees. I don't

[1:17:28] Were we supposed to send in if we were interested? I thought I was just sending in the people are nominee are nominees

[1:17:35] Well, we we're going to ask for volunteers. We said two words. We need two city council volunteers. I thought we were doing it tonight though

[1:17:42] Okay, did you want a volunteer for two months?

[1:17:44] Well, I'll never turn down a task.

[1:17:47] But I just, this is a point of clarification.

[1:17:51] I thought I was going to be decided tonight.

[1:17:55] I actually agree with Council Member Sherman.

[1:17:58] I thought we would be picking that as long as all of us.

[1:18:02] Yes.

[1:18:04] There's glass breaking somewhere.

[1:18:06] Well, that's OK.

[1:18:07] When we come to the discussion, you can move to either join.

[1:18:10] And then we can have a discussion as to who the two city

[1:18:13] Council members are. Okay.

[1:18:17] No questions? Okay. Open it up for citizens participation and

[1:18:21] when you address council on this, closing citizens participation come back for discussion.

[1:18:29] I have a couple. I can kick off this. Okay.

[1:18:35] The resolution.

[1:18:41] I like to discuss removing

[1:18:42] the fourth and fifth paragraph so that we would go from whereas state of Lakeway previously adopted

[1:18:49] to the VPCO and then it'll jump down to the City Council's desire to create a committee

[1:18:55] to analyze the issues related. I'm not comfortable having so many other specific items here that

[1:19:03] seem redundant, whereas I think it's captured by to analyze issues. That doesn't put us in

[1:19:12] one specific scenario. And I think it still gets it done. I guess I'll be a question

[1:19:18] also for Coby. Would this resolution be fine if we remove the fourth whereas paragraph

[1:19:24] and the fifth whereas paragraph?

[1:19:38] I don't know that they're necessary. They may and this

[1:19:42] may be your issue sort of direct the focus of what the committee's supposed to work on.

[1:19:46] And so if you want it to be broader, you know, what you're suggesting makes sense.

[1:19:54] But if it's the goal of the resolution is to say look at these issues and this is sort of defining those issues.

[1:20:03] Then potentially expanding that to include aware as that would be a risk of a legal challenge if it was removed.

[1:20:12] We've to diluted so much that then people who have been operating under the VPCO and

[1:20:17] being in compliance with it, bought their homes under the standing that staff has told

[1:20:21] them, oh, you're in a VPCO, et cetera, et cetera, I think then we should have both of those

[1:20:25] scenarios listed as a potential issue.

[1:20:31] That would be fine too.

[1:20:32] I mean, ultimately, I don't know if the whereas clauses of the resolution should be making

[1:20:36] legal conclusions.

[1:20:38] So we would need to be crafted in a conditional sense or a, because I don't know if the committee

[1:20:44] He's going to be answering the question of whether it's-

[1:20:47] Well, what if you then just remove the fourth one and left the fifth one, would that be enough guidance issues

[1:20:53] related to legality and forcibility, policy, and potential amendments?

[1:20:57] I think that that would work.

[1:20:59] So I'd turn that over to Council for a discussion about removing the fourth wear as paragraph.

[1:21:13] Well, do you think that the paragraph is not true?

[1:21:16] I

[1:21:22] think that this resolution can get it done and have a successful VPCO committee without

[1:21:28] that paragraph.

[1:21:30] And then I would question you could go the other way as well.

[1:21:33] People that have, I mean, we've had people speak up here as that they've retained attorneys

[1:21:38] just under the concern about removing or repealing the VPCO.

[1:21:49] Having that removed mayor and you still have the one below it, including issues ready to

[1:21:54] legality, wouldn't that cover us both ways?

[1:22:04] Or any other council member, if they wish?

[1:22:06] Well, I mean, my position is, I think, the language,

[1:22:11] the critical task is to resolve the vague language.

[1:22:18] And removing that word is problematic.

[1:22:23] Because that is the crux of the legal position,

[1:22:27] is that the current ordinance is vague.

[1:22:31] We do not know what a view is.

[1:22:33] We don't know what an obstruction is.

[1:22:35] We don't know what unreasonable is.

[1:22:41] You could put any issues related to the gallery, comma vague language, comma enforceability.

[1:22:46] As long as the vague language is included in the fifth one, then the fourth one could be eliminated.

[1:22:52] But the fourth one is there because that's the crux to the issue.

[1:22:57] I don't have a concern with just having vague language added to the fifth one or moving forth.

[1:23:04] I can go along with that.

[1:23:06] I don't support that.

[1:23:08] Council member Brian.

[1:23:09] I'm good with that.

[1:23:10] I think it's fine to wait.

[1:23:11] But I'm okay with that.

[1:23:12] I mean, I can go.

[1:23:12] I can live with it or the changer.

[1:23:14] I mean, if that makes you more comfortable, sir, then we can make that change and eliminate four and go to vague language.

[1:23:21] Language in five.

[1:23:23] Okay.

[1:23:25] Second discussion under Section 2F, the committee shall select a secretary to keep record

[1:23:32] of the attendance and minutes reach meeting.

[1:23:36] That effectively removes a person from being like participating.

[1:23:43] These meetings like they just, there's a lot of discussion in that person who's in sitting

[1:23:47] there taking notes and whatever, I friendly suggestion to be if the city secretary could

[1:23:52] to be a vat role for these meetings.

[1:23:58] City manager, can we support that with staff

[1:24:01] of either the city secretary, the executive assistant?

[1:24:04] I think part of the point of that was to help relieve

[1:24:07] the duty on the staff because we're already

[1:24:09] all there a bunch of committees and commissions,

[1:24:12] but if that's the will of the council,

[1:24:13] we can certainly do that.

[1:24:15] The other argument is that gives the committee

[1:24:18] kind of skin in the game.

[1:24:20] One of the things we've noticed is that this is going

[1:24:23] going to be a very involved process and we want to be able to encourage committee members

[1:24:31] to attend these meetings regularly, which doesn't always happen and this is also one

[1:24:36] of those lessons learned from the comprehensive plan you're all aware that we heard comments

[1:24:41] from some of the comprehensive plan steering committee members that they felt they weren't

[1:24:46] as involved in the process as they could have been so this was a suggestion by staff to get

[1:24:51] that involvement, but again we have no problem having somebody else take care of that as well.

[1:24:58] It was just an idea to try to resolve some of the issues that we saw with the comprehensive

[1:25:02] plan.

[1:25:05] I understand that.

[1:25:06] I think one, our city of secretaries, I think that person being just an independent, not

[1:25:15] part of the committee would be beneficial, not to mention a professional at it.

[1:25:22] So what if we had just outside the box an AI note taker I mean there's tons of apps

[1:25:29] out there I mean we can get them for free and then just do an AI note summary of the

[1:25:34] meeting and I mean most of the time is better than I know anybody is going to put down

[1:25:38] anyways because I know what I'm taking notes I can't read what I wrote later on and at least

[1:25:44] AI would all be printed out and all be categorized and broken down into sections and it's just

[1:25:49] Just an option.

[1:25:50] I agree those work great.

[1:25:51] I don't know if you want to lot something like that with something that's sensitive.

[1:25:55] And to further, Councilmember Sherman's point, we've already had discussions with our city

[1:25:59] attorney about probably not having AIs taking notes when we're having attorney client confidential

[1:26:07] discussions or legal discussions in general.

[1:26:11] And so, yeah, it would be my recommendation that we have a person do that.

[1:26:14] That can make the choices on what to dictate in the city.

[1:26:17] Once you are talking about drafting an ordinance and considering if there are any past issues,

[1:26:24] then I think you want minutes to be sort of 30,000 foot minutes, not detailed transcriptions

[1:26:31] of every sidebar.

[1:26:32] Right.

[1:26:32] I got you.

[1:26:33] Just outside the box, I was thinking trying to alleviate some additional work.

[1:26:37] I think sorry.

[1:26:39] You go ahead.

[1:26:40] I was late.

[1:26:40] I think the concept of having a committee member will also create some flexibility on times

[1:26:47] for the committee to meet, if we're expecting a city secretary to sit in or another staff member

[1:26:55] to sit in, we may be finding ourselves having committee meetings at this hour or the evening,

[1:27:01] just due to work schedules. And I think if we have a committee member who is doing that,

[1:27:07] and maybe it's a subcommittee, if you will, that helps develop the notes and put them together.

[1:27:16] Okay.

[1:27:18] So, like, Councilmember Sherman, I think you're the only person advocating for this.

[1:27:22] Yeah, I'm going to put out there.

[1:27:23] That's fine.

[1:27:24] Okay. Do you have another point on the resolution?

[1:27:27] No.

[1:27:28] Okay.

[1:27:29] Did you want to revisit?

[1:27:30] Councilmember Brian and I step forward.

[1:27:32] Does anybody else want to be on the committee?

[1:27:35] You never got to me.

[1:27:37] Well, I kind of figured with your job, you weren't going to pick up another point.

[1:27:41] No, I'm not asking to be on it, but I have a couple of points that

[1:27:44] But just because, I mean, taking the charter review committee into consideration, not having

[1:27:54] somebody taking notes was a mess because we didn't, I mean, we had a really bad problem

[1:28:00] with people not showing up.

[1:28:02] There was one person that didn't show up for half of the meetings.

[1:28:06] We had others that showed up for about 40 percent.

[1:28:11] Nobody, at least everyone except myself Joseph and Kaby, missed at least two meetings.

[1:28:20] So I think having the record of what we talked about is very important and who attended

[1:28:27] is very important.

[1:28:28] So I don't care how it gets done, but it has to get done.

[1:28:32] I have one more suggestion.

[1:28:34] question?

[1:28:34] No, they're outside the box, but what if it alternated between members on the committee,

[1:28:42] each person turns taking notes at each meeting, so that way, one person isn't pigeonholed

[1:28:47] and do it every time they, you know, they deal with it and it moves on to the next person.

[1:28:52] People have a vested interest in being there because, you know, they have to be the one

[1:28:56] taking the notes.

[1:28:56] It also doesn't push it on to one person, each person continues to do it.

[1:29:03] That's okay, but I think it would be tough on consistency of how the notes are taken.

[1:29:08] And they're just notes it's 30,000, I mean, you're right, it's going to be different every time, but at the end of it.

[1:29:13] And I can't read what Gretchen writes.

[1:29:15] Hopefully she could write it out.

[1:29:18] I just figured it would be another way of taking it off of staff's hands and also to Council Member Sherman's concern of putting one person in charge of it.

[1:29:29] under secretary, we could make it potentially pluralized.

[1:29:34] Secretary?

[1:29:35] Yeah.

[1:29:36] To handle it so that it can rotate or if the secretary has to mis-meeting an alternate,

[1:29:41] it can be there.

[1:29:42] Yeah.

[1:29:42] I like that idea.

[1:29:43] So in that way.

[1:29:44] And maybe let the committee also decide if they determine, hey, we'd like an independent secretary

[1:29:49] and then they can.

[1:29:50] I mean, we're not asking, I know it's off hours.

[1:29:53] I appreciate the sensitivity to that.

[1:29:55] If it's off hours, it might be during the day.

[1:29:57] Okay, I don't think most people can...

[1:30:00] I can make during the day. I talked to several people, every one of them wanted it in the evenings. Okay.

[1:30:09] So we have, we have some functions that occur outside of normal business hours. So I mean, I, I, I hear you on the staff. I would hope we're paying for that appropriately, of course. Are you on this committee?

[1:30:22] Yes, I think I'm. Oh, your name's not mentioned anywhere in here. That's because the staff members are not there. I would be.

[1:30:30] very happy if Joseph took the notes and I'm sure he wouldn't put a personal

[1:30:36] spin on anything. The going on beyond that though can I bring up a different

[1:30:44] issue? It's discussion. Okay the other thing that is there any way that we can

[1:30:51] make minimum attendance required? It's everything. If you missed three meetings

[1:30:57] you're off the committee. Oh, good, good, good. All right. So same, same rule for council.

[1:31:02] We set that bar after the last one about the non-attendance. Yeah, that was said. It's a one-year

[1:31:07] appointment. If you can't get to three meetings, you're off. And with regard to, okay, and don't take

[1:31:14] this too personally. But you and San Giv as a chair, and you still being on the committee, I think

[1:31:23] is going to be a very difficult thing. I mean, if you understand, you're welcome to type a very strong

[1:31:32] personal one. But it's not type. He's the chair. Yeah, but it's just like, will he be the chair?

[1:31:38] Will be the chair, because otherwise he wouldn't do it. And he's Councilor Sherman sat with me on

[1:31:42] Comprehensive Plan Committee. Did I act as the chair or mayor on comprehensive, on the comprehensive plan?

[1:31:50] Well, you came in towards the end, but is that what you're on the aviation committee?

[1:31:56] No.

[1:31:59] But you seem very passionate about this one, so I would just not say that.

[1:32:02] I don't think I'm any more passionate about this than I was aviation.

[1:32:05] I think this, well, it's been put out there now for the record to mind your piece, okay?

[1:32:13] So I don't have an issue with either you or Kent.

[1:32:17] I just think that we would as a group because I don't think we put in there that the Mayor shall assign the City Council representatives.

[1:32:28] But so I mean I'm just curious that anybody else want to be on this committee.

[1:32:32] I think we were all asked yes.

[1:32:35] I did ask Kelly if she wanted to take another committee assignment on.

[1:32:39] And I'm full.

[1:32:40] And she said right.

[1:32:41] She was currently busy.

[1:32:43] I know Christopher's job.

[1:32:45] He's yeah, he's not a bill and I'm not and you're not so and the other two

[1:32:49] That was the process of the limited two council members are stepping off

[1:32:53] So I mean it wasn't like it's like we have five candidates and there are three no's which means the two who said yes or the two available

[1:33:01] Okay

[1:33:01] Okay, there's exactly the same thing on Zapco because they they had their members of Zapco and they're only two available to say yes

[1:33:09] How many total meetings do you think this will be roughly and are you can't say that?

[1:33:16] When it's yeah, thanks that that ties it all down

[1:33:21] All right, they'll probably have three or four meetings before they have to report back in June at the first report date

[1:33:27] Okay, and how often will these meetings occur? I'm just thinking of the people that we have

[1:33:33] nominated and

[1:33:35] Or they're gonna decide that I think they'll have to decide that all right.

[1:33:40] I would raise my hand even though serving I have two more months

[1:33:43] But that is two more months, but

[1:33:45] But, yeah, so be it.

[1:33:47] Okay.

[1:33:49] Any further discussion?

[1:33:50] Yes.

[1:33:51] I found just a slight typo that I would like corrected.

[1:33:55] Page three, under Lakeway Residence,

[1:33:58] there's an extra colon under five.

[1:34:02] Council member O'Brien.

[1:34:05] Between council member and O'Brien.

[1:34:07] Just something minor.

[1:34:08] It is, but I wanted to clean down.

[1:34:10] An extra colon?

[1:34:12] Yes.

[1:34:14] It should, it's a colon.

[1:34:16] currently reads Council member Colin O'Brien-Colin.

[1:34:19] No, excuse me, healthy.

[1:34:21] I'll do that to somebody who made the joke.

[1:34:22] Yeah.

[1:34:25] Okay.

[1:34:25] Moving right along.

[1:34:27] Any other discussion points?

[1:34:29] I'll undertake a motion.

[1:34:31] I'll make a motion that we approve the B.P.C.O. committee

[1:34:34] and nominees as presented.

[1:34:36] I'll second.

[1:34:37] Oh, wait.

[1:34:39] And with the clerical modifications.

[1:34:44] Yes.

[1:34:44] Yes, with the clerical modifications of opening up the secretary to a plural setting.

[1:34:52] Okay.

[1:34:53] Were you going to change the, remove the form, put the vague language into number five?

[1:35:00] Does that what you wanted?

[1:35:01] I think if you, can we restate your name?

[1:35:03] Yeah, let me restate that.

[1:35:04] Okay.

[1:35:04] Is that what you were saying?

[1:35:05] Accept it with the, with the modifications.

[1:35:09] Whereas, you don't have to say all this, just with the editorial, that was the intent.

[1:35:15] But if the edit, with the edit, so I'll make a motion, we approve the VPCO committee nominees

[1:35:21] as presented with corrections to the resolution that removes the paragraph number four,

[1:35:29] and adds vague language into five and changes secretary to plural.

[1:35:36] That can.

[1:35:38] Okay.

[1:35:38] Did I capture that?

[1:35:39] You did.

[1:35:40] That's fine.

[1:35:41] Thank you.

[1:35:42] Any further comments?

[1:35:44] All those in favour?

[1:35:45] Please raise your hand.

[1:35:45] Say aye.

[1:35:46] Aye.

[1:35:46] All those opposed.

[1:35:47] Motion carries unanimously.

[1:35:48] Thank you, Councillors.

[1:35:50] Yes.

[1:35:51] The time is 8.08 p.m.

[1:35:54] We will recess for 10 minutes.

[1:36:01] Good evening, everyone.

[1:36:02] The time is 8.18.

[1:36:03] Council has returned to the dius on time.

[1:36:06] And we're very pleased by that.

[1:36:07] It's a rare occurrence.

[1:36:08] So the meeting, the forum is re-established with six members, the meeting is called back to order and we're moving on to item 21, discussion,

[1:36:17] possible action regarding ordinance number 2026-03-16-05 in order to the city of Lakeway, Texas, regarding Tuscan Village Plan Unit Development Amendment number 9,

[1:36:27] in ordinance amending the City of Lakeway, ordinance number 2008-04-21-04,

[1:36:33] Tuscan Village Plan Unit Development, PUD, approximately 17.462 acres of land,

[1:36:39] comprising Section 2 of Tuscan Village, PUD, for multi-family housing,

[1:36:42] and cottages located at Lohman's Spur, and Lohman's Crossing Road,

[1:36:46] a lot for Lakeway mud E5 tank phase 2, and providing forward findings of fax,

[1:36:50] severability repealer, effective date, and proper notice and meetings.

[1:36:53] So we have gotten to the portion of the evening, which is the air and car show.

[1:36:57] So welcome Director Carr.

[1:36:58] Thank you Mr. Mayor. Mayor Pro Tem Council. I'm going to be quick tonight. Mine are going

[1:37:04] to be so easy that y'all are going to be like looking at your clocks, that your watch is going,

[1:37:09] woohoo. So this one, Tuscan Village Section 2 PUD was approved back in 2008 and this is amendment

[1:37:18] number nine. The only request, the developer of the cottages, which is

[1:37:24] personal, I can get the pointer to work, there we go, which is personal see

[1:37:29] here, is to go from 21 attached units to 23 detached, so they'll be single

[1:37:39] family detached units. They're surrounded by mixed use and commercial, there's

[1:37:47] the GUI across the street, as far as the library goes.

[1:37:53] And this is the section here.

[1:37:56] A little pointer thing isn't it, there we go.

[1:37:59] This is the section here,

[1:38:01] and this is the approved site plan

[1:38:06] and this was provided in your packets as well,

[1:38:09] but this is what they're asking to revise to.

[1:38:14] And Bill Hayes, and this is the only ask for this amendment, so there are not any other

[1:38:20] asks except this one, and Bill Hayes with WHOV1 is here, and he can answer any questions

[1:38:29] all may have.

[1:38:31] And ZAPCA recommended approval 7-0 unanimously.

[1:38:35] Thank you, Director Carr.

[1:38:36] Any questions for Director Carr?

[1:38:39] No.

[1:38:39] Okay.

[1:38:40] Thank you.

[1:38:41] Does the applicant have a quick question for the area?

[1:38:44] These would doplexes.

[1:38:46] When you say they were all connected, they weren't like one long.

[1:38:51] Correct.

[1:38:52] Either doplexes or triplexes.

[1:38:53] I think you have two triplexes.

[1:38:55] One triplex and then the rest doplexes.

[1:38:58] Okay.

[1:38:58] So this will be just single family.

[1:39:03] And there were questions about parking and things like that.

[1:39:07] But there are garages on these homes that will hold two cars and then the driveway

[1:39:15] lengths will be long enough to have two cars in the driveway lengths also, so-for.

[1:39:19] Thank you.

[1:39:22] Anything else?

[1:39:24] Mr. Hayes, do you have anything you wish to say?

[1:39:27] I mean, it's pretty straightforward.

[1:39:28] I have a question.

[1:39:30] I have a question.

[1:39:31] Okay.

[1:39:32] So we have some questions, then.

[1:39:33] Okay.

[1:39:34] Councilmember Sherman?

[1:39:35] So what was the old height that you were planning on and does that change with the new?

[1:39:43] Yeah, great question. Thank you. So originally we had, very originally it was 32 feet and then as part of one of the revisions to the overall plan, we did get the approval to go to 40 feet if necessary.

[1:39:58] The previous version with the duplex and the triplex contemplated three story units.

[1:40:06] This version we are spreading them out and we're going to sacrifice a little bit back yard

[1:40:11] space to have a little bit bigger footprint but we're going to two story units.

[1:40:15] So it'll follow more of the 32 foot standard Lakeway height versus the 40 foot that it was

[1:40:21] previously.

[1:40:21] That's absolutely.

[1:40:23] Director Carr, is that correct?

[1:40:25] It's set to 40 feet right now?

[1:40:27] Or does this capture it at 32 maximum?

[1:40:29] This amendment nine.

[1:40:31] The amendment doesn't address it one way or another.

[1:40:33] As a practical matter, we're going to two stories

[1:40:36] from three stories.

[1:40:37] The story is fine.

[1:40:38] I just mean for a max height.

[1:40:40] If that can just be, is that fine?

[1:40:43] If that was written in, is it 32?

[1:40:45] Yeah, okay.

[1:40:45] Or it follows Lakeway standards.

[1:40:49] Any other questions for the applicant?

[1:40:51] No? No? Okay.

[1:40:55] Okay. Thank you very much, Bill. You're welcome.

[1:40:57] Open to suffer citizens' participation. Does anyone risk to address counsel on this item?

[1:41:01] I see none in close citizens' participation come back here for discussion and or motion.

[1:41:06] Any discussion points? I'll make a motion. We approve a judge item 21.

[1:41:10] I'll second. And did you go ahead? I just want to I'd like to capture that it's then moved to the 32 feet.

[1:41:21] It sounds like the applicant is fine with that, if we can just ensure that it's, I'd

[1:41:25] leave that to the BDS director to determine the best language, if it just reverts back to

[1:41:29] Lakeway standards, if you want to put 32.

[1:41:31] Yeah, I will look at the, at the height designation and make sure that it says 32 feet.

[1:41:38] I think that's already what's in there.

[1:41:39] I, I thought so too.

[1:41:41] It's the right idea.

[1:41:42] It was only going to be with the 32 feet.

[1:41:43] Yeah, but I think because of highest natural grade, I don't know if they had to do some

[1:41:46] grading out there, and that was, yeah.

[1:41:49] I thought it was well, but then when I heard 40, I was like, well, did I miss that?

[1:41:53] I don't remember seeing that.

[1:41:56] I may be mistaken, I may be mistaken in another zone because there's so many different answers.

[1:42:00] He might be thinking of...

[1:42:03] Hold on.

[1:42:04] Is that the first 32 feet from my tree?

[1:42:08] Yes, that is higher.

[1:42:12] But regardless, I mean...

[1:42:13] I will double check to make sure that it says 32 feet in the...

[1:42:18] It does actually a little further down on page 32 of 36 building high 32 feet.

[1:42:24] So I don't know where the 40 is coming in.

[1:42:25] I think he's getting it maybe are you thinking of are you thinking of the condo unit?

[1:42:31] The three-storey condo unit that was approved?

[1:42:34] There was on page 32.

[1:42:36] Okay.

[1:42:39] Yeah. So I think maybe that three-storey multi we would consider that multi-family

[1:42:48] That's between joe v and these cottages. I think that was 40 feet, but I'll have to get back to this as long

[1:42:55] Yeah, we don't need to try to figure out right now

[1:42:57] But it sounds like you're the developers. Okay with it so that the homes of yours. Yeah, personal

[1:43:02] Yeah, 32 feet

[1:43:04] So yeah, that's strong by the way. So we're good all right. Okay, so we're all set

[1:43:10] I think we're all set. Yeah, I'm fine. I'm okay until Bill said poor Danny. Okay. Yes, so we have a motion

[1:43:16] and we have a second to approve this, as presented.

[1:43:20] Any further discussion?

[1:43:22] All those in favor, please raise your hand, say aye.

[1:43:23] Aye.

[1:43:24] And there's no one opposed, thank you, Council.

[1:43:26] Moving along, item 22.

[1:43:29] Thank you, Bill.

[1:43:31] Discussion and possible action regarding

[1:43:33] the special use permit, 1200, we drive Unit 3

[1:43:35] considered a request from Christopher Sherbock

[1:43:37] of Lake Waveled Square, grooming LLC, tenant of the owner

[1:43:41] of 1,200 Lake Waveled Drive Unit 3 for approval,

[1:43:44] who especially use permit to operate a pet grooming salon

[1:43:46] at this location, Director Carr.

[1:43:48] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:43:50] So this tenant of the Lakeway Village Square grooming

[1:43:54] is requesting an SUV to operate a dog grooming facility.

[1:43:58] This is right over here by Kathy Lago.

[1:44:02] Good pancakes.

[1:44:04] An SUV is required as dog grooming facility

[1:44:07] is not specifically mentioned as a use

[1:44:10] that's a by-right and a C1 zoning district.

[1:44:13] and it is existing multi-tenant center.

[1:44:17] They're operating hours or nine to five daily.

[1:44:20] There's no overnight kenneling.

[1:44:22] So the noise should be kept to a minimum.

[1:44:25] At the March 4th Zapka meeting, there was one tenant

[1:44:28] that was a little hesitant about this use.

[1:44:34] But I believe the new tenant actually said, you know,

[1:44:38] I have no intention of having any problems.

[1:44:40] And we're going to go talk about it and I believe they went and tried it about adding

[1:44:45] some more soundproofing installations so that she wouldn't be bothered and I'll let

[1:44:51] him discuss that if you all have any questions.

[1:44:54] There were no other comments received through the portal and Zapga recommended approval.

[1:45:00] Do you all for 25 years for the duration of the SUP? And Mr. Sherbeck is here. Okay. Are there any questions for the director? If you have any questions for me. I don't know if this is for you, director or for Joseph. What was the reason why Vance dissent in? I can't remember if it was the duration, or she just why what a Gretchen Vance dissent. Do you know why?

[1:45:29] I don't know if she gave a reason.

[1:45:31] I don't think she stated specifically.

[1:45:33] No.

[1:45:33] Okay.

[1:45:37] Any other questions for the staff?

[1:45:40] Okay.

[1:45:40] We can have the applicant come forward.

[1:45:48] Yes, I did have an opportunity to speak with the owner of the massage therapy clinic next door.

[1:45:56] And we went through her space and we did some sound tests.

[1:45:59] And she was right.

[1:46:00] A lot of sound carried over very easily.

[1:46:02] So she had a right to be concerned.

[1:46:04] I explained to her the procedures we take to minimize dog noise and nobody likes a noisy dog

[1:46:10] We also looked at our hours and because we although the the the salon opens at eight

[1:46:15] Some groomers can come in early and so since they normally don't start their massage just until 10 or 11

[1:46:23] We so we can easily have the if we have any noisy dogs they can come in at eight

[1:46:28] Plus they're not open Sundays so we could also use Sunday for that purpose

[1:46:32] but most importantly is that we have issued or rather applied for a finished

[1:46:39] out permit BLDC0061-2026 to add a sound proofing wall six to 12 inches from

[1:46:48] her the wall that we share and that wall will it's a very simple wall one of

[1:46:53] any electrical work or anything else in it it's just going to have insulation

[1:46:57] mass loaded vinyl, which is a thick piece of soundproof rubber drywall and then a decorative panel on top of that.

[1:47:04] So we're expecting it to be very soundproof and that was actually the recommendation.

[1:47:09] Jen did some research and came back and said, you know, a separate wall is the best way to go.

[1:47:13] And so we got a price and decided, it's a small inconvenience for us and we want to make sure that we have happy neighbors.

[1:47:20] And so we're talking about other ways we can share customers and generate new business for each other.

[1:47:25] so it's going to be a very positive relationship and she's not here this evening because we're

[1:47:30] in agreement on how this is proceeding and I hope council agrees to. Okay thank you questions for

[1:47:35] the. I don't have a question but I'd like to just say a very nice job for reaching out to your neighbor

[1:47:41] there and being able to come up with a solution that worked out for both of you. I love seeing that

[1:47:46] so. Thank you. I'm like a no-brainer honestly. Any other questions? Okay thank you very much sir.

[1:47:52] Oh, Matt. Director Clark, we talked with the neighbor to verify, trust but verify. Like, okay.

[1:48:04] Our inspectors have been over there and said that they're adding the sound proofing and

[1:48:09] installation. So, I mean, I heard it from the chief building official.

[1:48:14] Yeah, I'm going to say she's not here, so I brought it in.

[1:48:16] Yeah, if I may add as well. The point was raised by one of the members of Co-Community

[1:48:23] that it's really an issue that she has with the landlord more so than with

[1:48:27] myself and the landlord has made this evident from the beginning that we do

[1:48:30] have to be careful with the noise so I was open and welcome to those

[1:48:34] discussions and I'm happy to get ahead of it did you guys discuss what would

[1:48:38] happen if it turns out like oh this is actually getting this is if it's not

[1:48:44] gonna work I will not move into the space okay it's really that simple I mean more

[1:48:49] so that once you're in and fully operating, what would happen then?

[1:48:53] Well, the first thing again that we do, if we do have a noisy dog, is they're first

[1:48:59] in and first out.

[1:49:00] Nobody wants that because it tends to be contagious.

[1:49:03] We also have pop-up kennels that we can put in other areas of the grooming salon that if

[1:49:09] we're worried about a dog disturbing either the neighbor or other dogs, we would isolate

[1:49:13] that pet.

[1:49:14] and so we have those procedures. If it's a known nuisance,

[1:49:19] hey, we try not to even bring on those clients.

[1:49:21] We recommend, if the dogs overreact, or overactive,

[1:49:25] we recommend that they either see their vet for those types of services,

[1:49:29] or have some kind of, I don't want to use the word,

[1:49:32] sedative, we're not putting the dog to sleep,

[1:49:34] some CPD or something to calm the dog down so they don't come in over-anxious.

[1:49:37] So it's definitely an issue for us.

[1:49:41] We always have to manage noise and it's not just for this particular neighbor, but it's upsetting to everybody including the groomers and the people working there

[1:49:49] So we take it very seriously and again are excited about this opportunity to put up this extra wall and make some new friends in the process

[1:49:58] Can I get a point of order, Coby?

[1:50:01] Do we have the right to deny or approve a

[1:50:06] A special use permit based on whether we think it's going to make too much noise or not.

[1:50:13] Is it not a civil matter?

[1:50:17] We have to be kind of careful about what we're dealing with.

[1:50:23] Director Carr is correct that there is a specific section in C1 zoning section 30.03.09.

[1:50:31] It says these things are allowed by right and it's physicians, dentists, optometrist lawyers

[1:50:37] I don't know why, we're pretty loud engineers, so kind of quiet office uses.

[1:50:42] And then there's another section called conditional uses that said, these are allowed by right

[1:50:47] within C1, except in a certain condition.

[1:50:50] So that includes medical offices and retail and service businesses, which is what I would

[1:50:54] consider this to be.

[1:50:55] But the condition is, if it's within 300 feet of a residential or school use, you have to

[1:51:01] get a special use permit, which is what we're doing.

[1:51:04] So the condition and the special use are tied to proximity to a residential zoning district.

[1:51:12] We don't have the right to just say, well, if it's not in the list of, by right, we can't do it without a special use permit.

[1:51:21] Because subsection C specifically says, these businesses are allowed within C1 districts by right unless it's within 300 feet.

[1:51:29] So the chances of it barking and the chances of it barking and also bothering neighbors

[1:51:38] inside the rest of the building, that's not residential, so do we, is that something

[1:51:44] we should be discussing?

[1:51:46] I think it's fine to discuss because you want everybody to be happy, but if you were going

[1:51:51] to like put a condition on them that he had to do the things he's already done, he has to

[1:51:55] to keep as DB's the low 60.

[1:51:57] We would have to have a good conversation about that.

[1:52:00] Because again, that's really more of a landlord tenant conversation.

[1:52:03] That's what I thought.

[1:52:04] City regulatory authority.

[1:52:07] I mean, it has to comply with the city noise ordinance generally.

[1:52:09] Right.

[1:52:11] Okay.

[1:52:11] Other questions for the applicant?

[1:52:13] Okay, sir.

[1:52:14] Thank you very much.

[1:52:14] Please.

[1:52:15] Thank you.

[1:52:15] You're back.

[1:52:16] Opening this up for citizens participation.

[1:52:17] Does anyone wish to discuss this with council?

[1:52:20] I see none in close citizens participation come back up here for a further discussion.

[1:52:23] or motion. I'll make a motion we approve agenda item 22 for the special use permit.

[1:52:30] I'll second. I have a motion and second to approve agenda item 22 any further discussion.

[1:52:35] All those in favor please say aye. Resurrected. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Congratulations.

[1:52:41] Welcome to Lakeway.

[1:52:44] That's what's going to say and we're right. Yeah and he's moving from

[1:52:47] BK. Very positive move. There you go.

[1:52:55] Discussion and possible action regarding special use permit, 1213, Ranch Road 620, South, Suite 101.

[1:53:00] Consider a request from Rodney Smith, owner of Weston Coast Salon, LLC.

[1:53:04] The tenant of the owner, 1213R620, South, Suite 101 for approval of a special use permit to operate a hair salon at this location, excuse me, that direct the car.

[1:53:14] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:53:15] So, here's another one. This one does fall under the conditional use permit that Copy

[1:53:20] was referring to. The way I read the code, I think that pet grooming is a special use permit.

[1:53:29] Not a conditional. We can have a conversation later. Okay, but there we go.

[1:53:34] So, but this is a hair salon. And since it's within 300 feet of residential,

[1:53:38] point zone property it requires a special use permit. So this is a very straightforward

[1:53:45] it's a multi-tenant center it's surrounded by commercial except to the east is residential.

[1:53:56] It's Monday 3 Saturday 8 to 7. It's in the I don't know the name of this building but it's

[1:54:06] in this building here that's depicted.

[1:54:09] And at the March 4th Zapga meeting,

[1:54:11] the commissioners recommended approval

[1:54:13] for 25 years to City Council.

[1:54:16] And this was unanimous decision.

[1:54:19] And Mr. Smith of West and Co is here representing

[1:54:23] the request if you have any questions for him.

[1:54:26] We received no comments through the portal for either of these.

[1:54:30] Okay, thank you.

[1:54:31] Are there questions for Director Carr?

[1:54:33] Let me just say Council Member Sherman, question.

[1:54:35] Thank you very much, Director Carr.

[1:54:36] Thank you.

[1:54:38] Do we need to hear from the applicant?

[1:54:40] I mean, not much you want to talk about services, hair services, things about.

[1:54:45] Oh, well, thank you.

[1:54:46] Because you need a haircut, don't you, Chris?

[1:54:49] Well, Lewis is happy.

[1:54:51] He's going to have two new places to go to get a haircut.

[1:54:53] The first place in this place.

[1:54:56] Okay, if there's no need for the applicant,

[1:55:00] I'll open his up for citizens' participation.

[1:55:01] Does anyone wish to discuss this request with council?

[1:55:04] I see none in close to participation will come back up to the Dias for discussion and or a motion I'll make a motion we approve agenda item 23.

[1:55:13] I have a motion and second to approve agenda item 23 as presented. Is there any further conversation? All those in favor please raise your answer.

[1:55:22] Aye.

[1:55:23] Okay. Thank you very much.

[1:55:26] Council thank you moving along.

[1:55:27] and risky. Item 24, discussion of possible action regarding proposed economic development

[1:55:32] in sent to policy. We have a staff report by assistant city manager, Ashley Gordon.

[1:55:38] This is a return of the policy that we have previously looked at. Council members, since this

[1:55:44] agenda was published, I received two requests. One from the Lake Travis Chamber of Commerce

[1:55:50] that they be given the chance to participate, to review the policy and edit it and return

[1:55:56] it with their thoughts. And second, from the Economic Development Committee, that the

[1:56:02] Economic Development Committee would like to be a part of the process to also review the

[1:56:06] document and make any comments. In light of that, and since it is on the agenda, we have

[1:56:14] this request for two of the organizations that we work with on economic incentive, rather than

[1:56:18] using council time tonight. I might suggest that we postpone this so that those agents

[1:56:26] We can see those committees can give us some feedback.

[1:56:29] So anybody would agree with that?

[1:56:32] I said one comment to find with that just one comment to make to the policy.

[1:56:37] If it could be captured, I guess discussion for council here, that these incentives are for

[1:56:47] projects that are not currently entitled or if they already are, then they have a significant change that would be the reason for this.

[1:56:56] So in other words, the policy is for new or redeveloped businesses in the community.

[1:57:02] What's significant impact, I think, is when you see that?

[1:57:05] Well, yeah, I can have a significant impact, but we can have projects already on the books,

[1:57:10] already approved, that are going to have significant impact, subsequent to the adoption.

[1:57:16] Would be the, I think, in the moment, I've seen, as of right now, they would have significant impact.

[1:57:20] Yes.

[1:57:21] This should not be used as like a backstop bailout whenever you want to call it.

[1:57:25] It needs to be forward-looking and or if it's an existing but it's like, hey, if we had

[1:57:31] access to these funds, we would take the project from what you're seeing here to this and

[1:57:35] there would be this many more jobs, this much more intact.

[1:57:37] So I think the comment, again, you would say subsequent to adoption, the businesses considered

[1:57:44] would be considered for their development subsequent to the adoption of the policy,

[1:57:48] not in existence prior to.

[1:57:55] The point is, if I think we might be saying the same thing, I think we're saying the same thing.

[1:58:01] I'm just trying to give you the right language.

[1:58:03] Well, we can work through the language.

[1:58:04] I mean, we're not deciding how it's going to come back.

[1:58:06] It's going to come back.

[1:58:07] I'm going to capture it like, hey, this is not to be used for everyone who's got something today.

[1:58:12] Can come back and say, oh, I need that.

[1:58:14] And if their plan is still the exact same that we've already approved without

[1:58:17] a 380 or a turs it's like we know we we're already going to be getting this and

[1:58:23] now it feels more like a bailout. I'll let you guys work. Sure. Thank you.

[1:58:27] So would that be acceptable that we postpone until we receive that? How many how long do

[1:58:32] you think that these committees would need to review? Are we talking a month? We're

[1:58:36] talking two months. I would say we've given 60 days, two months. So two months. Yeah. So the main meeting.

[1:58:43] So I would everybody's okay. I would say we make a motion to postpone.

[1:58:47] This item to my regular meeting.

[1:58:52] I'll second.

[1:58:53] Okay, I have a motion to second to postpone

[1:58:54] until the May regular meeting.

[1:58:55] Citizens participation.

[1:58:56] Does anyone in chambers wish to just counsel on this item?

[1:58:59] Seeing non-closing citizens participation.

[1:59:01] Take this for a vote to postpone

[1:59:03] until the May regular meeting.

[1:59:04] All those in favor, can we capture that?

[1:59:06] Yes.

[1:59:08] All those in favor of postponing

[1:59:10] until the May regular meeting, please say aye.

[1:59:12] Aye.

[1:59:12] That's six.

[1:59:13] Nothing, thank you very much, counsel.

[1:59:16] And

[1:59:19] moving to our final agenda item the evening discussion possible action regarding Lakeway Activity Center policies due to possible loitering on February 17th, 2026 staff report by City Manager Joseph Molyse City Manager.

[1:59:35] Thank you Mayor and Mayor Proteman council members. Most of you are all of you are aware because I've sent a memorandum to council that during our last council meeting will advance the next slide.

[1:59:47] During our last council meeting, we received a complaint of possible election hearing at the Lakeway

[1:59:52] Activity Center. Our meeting happened to be during early voting for the Texas primaries.

[2:00:00] Oh, I wanted to give a little bit of background on this. So on August 14th, 2025, the late Travis Democrats reserved the Liquid Activity Center for multiple meeting nights, including the February 17th, 2026 meeting. In early 2026, the staff relies at that meeting date overlapped with the early voting period. They then tried to work with that organization to reschedule the event, but that organization was reluctant to do so.

[2:00:28] So that event was already a rescheduled event because they did have that meeting originally

[2:00:35] scheduled for when we had the ice storm and we closed all the facilities.

[2:00:40] Also the staff, you know, was trying to work with a good customer service and didn't want

[2:00:45] to have an appearance of discrimination against a particular political party so they decided

[2:00:52] to honor that existing reservation. However, they put some strict requirements in place including

[2:00:58] that the event would be segregated, that the windows would be blacked out, that they would use

[2:01:04] a separate entrance to the facility, that the bathrooms in the front would be segregated so that

[2:01:09] the voters wouldn't be allowed to use the front bathrooms, they'd be allowed to use the bathrooms

[2:01:13] towards the back where the voting was occurring and so forth to try to segregate that. If you go to

[2:01:18] the next slide, please. However, this is what occurred that night. Please keep in mind

[2:01:25] their reservation said that they would have the facility from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., including

[2:01:31] setup. Again, the staff tends to be overly, I'm just not going to miss words, they tend

[2:01:38] to be overly nice to people that come in, especially if there wasn't a reservation ahead

[2:01:42] of time so they did allow that group to set up early.

[2:01:46] They were there before 6 p.m. looking at the video records with the City Secretary.

[2:01:51] I think we determined they were there a little bit after 5 p.m. to begin their set up and

[2:01:57] obviously the polls were still open at about 6.30 p.m. they had refreshments and had a some

[2:02:04] type of meeting beforehand and informal gathering with refreshments.

[2:02:11] Shortly before 6.30 p.m., I received a complaint about potential electioneering activity near

[2:02:19] the polling location.

[2:02:21] So I dispatched a Lakeway PD officer and a Parks staff member to go evaluate the situation.

[2:02:29] They spoke with the election judge and other election officials, and we're told that this

[2:02:34] This was kind of a gray area.

[2:02:36] They did not personally see any electioneering and the candidates and elected officials agreed

[2:02:44] to remain outside the 100-foot electioneering boundary until the polls closed.

[2:02:49] So those are the events that occurred on the 9th of February 17th during our council meeting.

[2:02:54] Next slide, please.

[2:02:56] As a result of that incident, and I'm just going to again be blunt about it, there was a staff

[2:03:03] failure in terms of enforcing the strict requirements since the last time.

[2:03:10] I have recommended enhanced policy changes for the Activity Center that I initiated following

[2:03:19] my investigation event and speaking with the City Attorney.

[2:03:23] And so those enhanced requirements are that no political groups will not be allowed to

[2:03:30] to be scheduled to meet the activity center during active voting periods.

[2:03:35] So if they've already pre-reserved the room and then it turns out we have a run-off

[2:03:41] or something that wasn't on the schedule ahead of time, they will be required to move

[2:03:45] to a different facility or reschedule or cancel that event.

[2:03:49] The activity staff will coordinate with the city secretary to clearly demarcate those election

[2:03:56] periods and try to get those into the reservation system and in the reservation

[2:04:00] and calendars, whenever a polling reservation is scheduled from the county, the staff will

[2:04:08] again review the tenants or clients and relocate political events when possible, if not

[2:04:14] they will cancel those.

[2:04:16] That type of language is placed now in the rental agreement, so we have reinforcing language

[2:04:22] that's required to be read by the applicant and initialed by the applicant, as well as

[2:04:27] definitions of election hearing which are already or we're already on the application

[2:04:32] at the time.

[2:04:33] And so what I am seeking from you as is the rest of staff is that was an initial policy

[2:04:40] decision that I made to deal with that situation and I'm now seeking council feedback on that

[2:04:47] policy.

[2:04:47] Do we continue with that?

[2:04:49] Do we strengthen it?

[2:04:50] Do we lessen it?

[2:04:53] Do we have anything else that we want to discuss about that?

[2:04:56] But like I said, I as city manager made the decision to change the policy in immediate response and am now seeking clarification from council on how we would like to move forward.

[2:05:06] That concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

[2:05:11] Questions for the city manager?

[2:05:13] Yeah, I just have one.

[2:05:16] When we're talking about during active voting periods, I know this isn't the exact terminology that you're going to be using.

[2:05:23] We make sure that we say active voting days, so that, hey, for somebody to say, well, hey, I got something at 7pm and voting ends at 7, so technically we're allowed to say that it becomes another issue.

[2:05:33] You are correct, and that was the intent of the order that even if they come back and say, well, we're going to do it at 8pm, we're going to say no, it is during election day.

[2:05:42] So you are correct, we will ensure that that policy reflects that.

[2:05:45] Okay. Thank you. Can I remember a brine?

[2:05:49] Still stewing. Councilor Britson. No questions.

[2:05:54] Just a question. No question. Councilor Sherman questions.

[2:05:59] Did you do an audit to see like this year how many groups would have been canceled or meetings

[2:06:07] or reservations I should say? No I don't believe. I think I did not do that. I don't know

[2:06:12] if the issue isn't staffed at it, we can certainly research that, but I don't believe

[2:06:18] that we did.

[2:06:19] And how is it handled like for men's breakfast?

[2:06:23] So the way we've looked at that is that's not a known political group.

[2:06:27] It is a group that has political discussions, but it's not a political group.

[2:06:32] Now one of the things we've done is, and we have to be careful about this for censorship

[2:06:37] issues and constitutional protections, but we do look at their agendas when they provide

[2:06:41] them and if we notice that it is something that starts to skirt that line of

[2:06:47] electioneering, then we work with them about rescheduling. But Canada's coming

[2:06:50] to speak, you're like probably not. Right, but you know as I so we actually had a

[2:06:55] discussion because one of the county commissioners came to give a

[2:06:58] presentation and so I had to clarify that an elected official giving a

[2:07:04] presentation is not necessarily political speech. You know the mayor can give

[2:07:09] a presentation on the transportation bond and that's not necessarily a political speech

[2:07:15] whereas if the mayor were running for office and hey vote for me, that is.

[2:07:20] So there's a distinction that we look at, but the reality is that what we are specifically

[2:07:26] looking for in this new language are known political groups.

[2:07:30] So Lake Travis Democrats, Lake Wave Republican Club, whatever that group is, if it's an actual

[2:07:35] political affiliated group, then we would enact those protections if it's a group that

[2:07:42] sometimes talks about politics and we'll have that conversation, but that's not within

[2:07:47] the scope of what we're discussing.

[2:07:50] Thank you.

[2:07:53] That's a question.

[2:07:54] Okay.

[2:07:54] Good coffee over there.

[2:07:55] So, for

[2:07:59] actual political periods, if you will, we know pretty far in advance when those

[2:08:05] are going to happen.

[2:08:06] Is that right?

[2:08:07] I mean Texas primary elections are on the same date or same same day of the month of March every time and so and we know local elections are held in May same time early period runoff elections or such and such date.

[2:08:27] I mean we know those sufficiently ahead of time such that we could be assuring that any group that wants to schedule during those periods.

[2:08:36] which you should just say no.

[2:08:39] Well, and that's the discussion.

[2:08:40] So the Lake Travis Democrats could have a meeting

[2:08:43] and talk about anything they want, right?

[2:08:46] It doesn't have to be political.

[2:08:48] It's just that meeting that night happened to be

[2:08:51] a candidate forum for people that were on the ballot.

[2:08:54] So that was clearly something that should not have happened.

[2:08:58] But if they were having a, you know, they're a club.

[2:09:01] If they were having a discussion to talk about deer hunting,

[2:09:03] just because they're a political group doesn't necessarily mean that we should ban their speech.

[2:09:09] However, given the history of things that have happened at the activity center,

[2:09:15] that is why I made that decision, but that's why we're having this conversation

[2:09:19] is to get that clarification from you.

[2:09:22] Yes, theoretically, we know when those dates are happening,

[2:09:25] and we reaffirm that because the county has to reserve the room at the activity center,

[2:09:30] So then we absolutely know it's being used as a polling place during this time period and we go back and we

[2:09:36] Recheck those but we don't always have the agendas for those meetings and so that's the

[2:09:42] The danger zone as the city attorney is is not looking favorably on me at

[2:09:48] That that's the danger of you know just because it's a political group. Are we in a position to?

[2:09:54] to force them to reschedule their meeting?

[2:10:01] Well, I guess what I was going to question is your first bullet says they will not be

[2:10:06] scheduled to meet during active voting periods.

[2:10:10] So you're not allowing known political groups to schedule during active voting periods.

[2:10:16] So my original question was we know sufficiently ahead of when these active voting periods

[2:10:23] are going to be such that we're able to anticipate how to schedule these groups and when they

[2:10:30] can't be there and when they can't be there based upon that.

[2:10:33] As opposed to waiting to look a year ahead, we know two years ahead, three, four years ahead,

[2:10:38] we have a sense of that already because we know some groups like to schedule further out.

[2:10:43] I'm going to let the city secretary clarify that.

[2:10:47] Two exceptions to that would be primaries and run-offs.

[2:10:51] Right.

[2:10:51] We don't know those till they're scheduled by the county for primaries a lot of times.

[2:10:56] And runoffs we don't know until that election occurs and then we know there has to be

[2:11:01] it runoff.

[2:11:03] Those are the two I guess my point is my point is that primaries are held on a date in

[2:11:09] March, a day in March, same day every time, right?

[2:11:20] That's a question or discussion.

[2:11:22] As a question, I don't know the answer to that.

[2:11:26] I don't usually keep up with primary elections, but I can find out.

[2:11:29] Although I'm going, I'm just trying to give staff some space here to look further out

[2:11:35] ahead for these groups that are trying to schedule further out and make sure that we're

[2:11:40] given staff enough cover.

[2:11:42] As for the general election dates, we know what, two years out.

[2:11:47] I mean, there's a uniform date, but yeah, but the Secretary of State usually has got a

[2:11:52] calendar of like when early voting begins and things like that.

[2:11:55] We can calculate all that from the statute,

[2:11:58] but it's at least laid out, at least two years

[2:12:01] in advance on the Secretary of State.

[2:12:02] That's my thought, and that's the reason for my question.

[2:12:04] But the primary is, I don't know about it, I get a look.

[2:12:07] Okay, thank you.

[2:12:08] Any other questions?

[2:12:11] Okay, just a question.

[2:12:12] Okay, opening stuff for citizen participation.

[2:12:14] Does anyone wish to dress counsel in this matter?

[2:12:17] Yeah, it's my closing citizen participation.

[2:12:19] Now we can have a discussion.

[2:12:26] I'm fine with supporting the city managers' adjustments as they are right now.

[2:12:31] I might be so inclined to go further based on sort of a history of this, but I can understand

[2:12:41] why we probably would not want to step into that danger zone.

[2:12:44] So, I think this is a fine midpoint to draw a line for telling political clubs.

[2:12:55] They need to find a different place to meet during these voting periods.

[2:13:01] Well, a discussion on that, Kelvin.

[2:13:03] I agree.

[2:13:04] Senator.

[2:13:07] In the staff, although it says the city attorney has advised a complete prohibition on

[2:13:10] political groups using the facility during election periods could raise constitutional concerns.

[2:13:14] So, how do we get this done?

[2:13:15] Copy. We need to discuss that in the back. What's going on?

[2:13:20] I don't want to do that in open session.

[2:13:22] What's going on? Let's go to the back.

[2:13:25] Okay. Well, otherwise may we're proving something that the attorney is saying no on, so.

[2:13:30] No. Let's not infer what the attorney is saying. Let us instead go back and hear what the

[2:13:37] attorney wants to say.

[2:13:41] So, pursuant to the local government code section 551.071, consultation with an attorney,

[2:13:50] the City Council will move into executive session, the time is 8.56 p.m., no action will

[2:13:58] be taken in executive session, action if any will be taken in open session.

[2:14:02] With that, we will move to executive session.

[2:14:12] The council has returned to the dius. I take note of a quorum. The meeting is returned to order. It is called back to order.

[2:14:19] No action was taken in executive section. Action if any will be taken here in open session.

[2:14:26] So we're going to go down this list of policy implementations.

[2:14:30] Political groups will not be scheduled to meet at LAC during active voting periods.

[2:14:34] I believe Council would like that rewritten to be political groups will not be allowed access to meeting rooms until 30 minutes after the polls have closed.

[2:14:49] The LAs, the staff will coordinate with the city secretary to clearly mark election periods that is as stated.

[2:14:55] What a reservation is scheduled staff will review the facility.

[2:15:00] Any calendar, reschedule, or relocate, political events when possible. That is agreed to.

[2:15:06] The reservation agreements will now include election period restrictions and require

[2:15:12] acknowledgment by all applicants. So those are the four things that we'd like to see in the policy going forward.

[2:15:21] With that, would Eddie would like to make a motion on those points.

[2:15:24] Mr. Mayor, on the third bullet item, if we're stating in the first bullet item that those groups cannot schedule until 30 minutes after polling period, does that make the third bullet moot?

[2:15:42] I would just reframe the third bullet point to reflect that condition, the first condition.

[2:15:49] Can you say it again please?

[2:15:50] I would reframe the third one to say that the third

[2:16:00] one's fine, it's the fourth one.

[2:16:06] What's the issue with the fourth one?

[2:16:08] About the 30 minutes after the polls close, that they can rent a space 30 minutes after

[2:16:14] the polls close, we'll put that into the agreement with language to the effect.

[2:16:19] That's what we did by changing one.

[2:16:22] Right, but I'm just saying it should be reflected in four on three. I don't know that there's anything in these be changed

[2:16:28] I don't think we need three at all

[2:16:31] Well, no, they are gonna try to reschedule and relocate

[2:16:34] Well, we've said don't we said in their first bullet. They're not gonna have to spot until 30 minutes after post-close

[2:16:39] But just in general if they can reschedule they will try to reschedule if it's not an option or there's pushback then one goes in

[2:16:47] Like if there's a runoff

[2:16:49] Yeah, well, it does say when possible. So yeah, I should just it could stay.

[2:16:53] And does the technicality remember a lot of these groups make these reservations a year in advance

[2:16:59] for multiple periods? So we probably have active reservations. Yeah, we're going to go back

[2:17:03] to reflect in that language. So far, why that's there. The last time we talked about it, so I would

[2:17:08] assume now that we shouldn't have that problem right now. My thought too. We should not have been

[2:17:17] booking anything during the election period. But again, we don't know about run-offs. We

[2:17:23] don't know about run-offs. We won't know until the election occurs.

[2:17:28] But on any scheduled election, we don't have a map.

[2:17:33] I mean, that's the thing. We need to go back and look and then deal with it. There's

[2:17:38] something to say. I say, we meaning. Okay. So, I mean, I hate to say, guys, we're

[2:17:43] We're talking ourselves into a circle here, but I think three is fine.

[2:17:48] And four, the reservations will now include election period restrictions and require

[2:17:52] acknowledgment by the applicants of the conditions in line one.

[2:17:57] But there are other conditions as well, so I don't think you need to change that.

[2:18:01] I would agree.

[2:18:02] I don't think the way it is clear in the latitude to do what we need to do in the end.

[2:18:06] Okay.

[2:18:06] I read it the way I said it should be done and now we're getting back and forth.

[2:18:10] So do we go with the original presentation or are we going to try to edit stuff?

[2:18:17] Come to me. We're Brian. You're the only one to edit right now. I'm not following what you're asking. What okay? So

[2:18:23] We do okay, just let's go down. We'll do this one of the times

[2:18:27] Political groups will not be scheduled to meet at the Lakeway Activities Center

[2:18:32] until 30 minutes after polls close. Do we all agree on that? Yes. Okay, great

[2:18:38] The staff will coordinate with the city secretary to clearly mark election periods on the resident

[2:18:53] We don't know every polling time now, and that's why that has open ended language.

[2:19:03] Do we all agree that we can work with that?

[2:19:06] Yes.

[2:19:07] Okay, great.

[2:19:09] Reservation agreements will now include election period restrictions and require knowledge

[2:19:12] of employment.

[2:19:13] by the applicants, straightforward.

[2:19:15] So those four things, that's it.

[2:19:18] I missed this on the first one, should we change it

[2:19:22] from schedule to permitted?

[2:19:25] Because they could be scheduled,

[2:19:26] they might be scheduled, but then they could come in early.

[2:19:29] Right, will not be permitted, okay, let's say that again.

[2:19:33] Political groups will not be permitted to access

[2:19:35] the Lakeway Activity Center until 30 minutes after polls close.

[2:19:40] That's clear.

[2:19:40] there. That's good. Okay, that's very specific. Okay. Does any further discussion?

[2:19:50] We did before we admit. Perfect. I'll make a motion that we approve a

[2:19:54] agenda item 25 as stated by the mayor and with the use of permitted instead of

[2:19:59] scheduled in line one. I'll second that. Any further discussion? All those in

[2:20:05] favor, please say aye. Raise your chair. Aye. Aye. All those opposed? Motion carries

[2:20:09] unanimously. Thank you. All business of this council having been concluded. This meeting is adjourned at 934.

Mar 16, 2026 City Council

Agenda

Transcript