Jan 22, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission

ITEM NUMBER FOUR

[4. CONSENT AGENDA:]

IS OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

WE HAVE A SINGLE ITEM ITEM FOUR A OF THE MINUTES FROM THE DECEMBER 4TH, 2024 REGULAR MEETING.

THERE'S NO DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

DOES THIS ITEM NEED TO BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION? ANYBODY? ALRIGHT.

CAN I HAVE A, UH, MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? MOVED.

COMMISSIONER WALLACE SECOND.

AND COMMISSIONER CARONE.

GIMME A SEC HERE.

ALRIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THERE'S NO DISCUSSION.

PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES.

ALRIGHT, AS SHE SEE FIVE VOTES, CAN WE PUBLISH THAT? I HAVE FIVE AYES.

NONE OPPOSED THAT MOTION PASSES.

ITEM

[A. PLCPA20250006 - Hold a public hearing, consider and make a recommendation to City Council on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to incorporate updated Water and Wastewater Master Plans.]

NUMBER FIVE IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING RELATED TO ZONE CHANGE REQUESTS AND RELAS.

WITHIN THIS AGENDA, THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE OPEN TO RECEIVE A REPORT FROM STAFF, THE APPLICANT, THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, AND ANY OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS UPON COMPLETION.

THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE CLOSED.

THE COMMISSION WILL DISCUSS AND CONSIDER THE APPLICATION AND MAY REQUEST ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF OR THE APPLICANT IF REQUIRED.

AFTER DELIBERATION, THE COMMISSION IS ASKED TO CONSIDER AND ACT UPON THE FOLLOWING REQUESTS AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL IF NECESSARY.

ITEM FIVE A-P-C-P-A 2 0 2 5 0 0 0 6.

HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDER AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCORPORATE UPDATED WATER AND WASTEWATER MASTER PLANS.

KATHY, THANK YOU CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.

GOOD EVENING.

UM, THIS IS PRESENTATION IS, UH, MUCH OF A REPEAT OF WHAT WE PRESENTED LAST TIME TO THE CIAC.

UM, BUT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT, UM, THE CIP SO MUCH, UH, FOR IMPACT FEE UPDATES, BUT WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT UPDATING THE MASTER PLANS OF, UH, WATER AND WASTEWATER FOR THE CITY.

SO WE'RE GONNA GO OVER THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS.

AGAIN, I'M GONNA GO PRETTY QUICKLY, SO FEEL FREE TO, UM, STOP ME OR ASK QUESTIONS AT THE END.

UM, WHATEVER YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH, UH, WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THE METHODOLOGY FOR PROJECT IDENTIFICATION AND THEN HAVE OPPORTUNITY FOR QUESTIONS.

TWEAKED OCCASIONALLY DEPENDING ON DEVELOPMENT, BUT FOR THE MOST PART IT'S ASSUMED THEY REMAIN THE SAME.

REAL QUICK, KATHY, I THINK BECAUSE IT'S THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE, WE WILL HAVE TO HOLD OUR QUESTIONS TILL THE OKAY.

SO, UH, GOING OVER THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS FOR UPDATES OF THE WATER AND WASTEWATER MASTER PLANS.

UM, AND, UH, THIS PRESENTATION WAS PREPARED BY OUR CONSULTANT, LAN, UM, USING THE SAME PRESENTATION MADE A COUPLE LITTLE TWEAKS TO IT, BUT FOR THE MOST PART IT'S, IT'S THEIR PRODUCT AND WHAT THEY PUT TOGETHER.

UH, SO THE BASIS FOR THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS WAS THE 2018 LAND USE PLAN MAP.

UH, IT WAS MODIFIED BASED ON RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE CITY TO OUR CONSULTANT, UH, IN 2022.

UH, SO THE END OF 2022 WAS REALLY THE BASELINE FOR, UH, ALL OF THE GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS.

IT, UH, IS ASSUMED THAT DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE IN PLACE WILL REMAIN IN PLACE FOR THE PLANNING PERIOD USED FOR THE THESE MASTER PLANS.

NEW GROWTH WILL EXPAND AWAY FROM THE CITY CENTER, UH, AS OPPOSED TO STARTING AT THE EDGES AND MOVING IN.

UH, AND DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE ALONG 35 AND FROM NEW BRAUNFELS WILL RESULT IN DEVELOPMENT AT HIGHER DENSITIES THROUGH THE NORTH.

UH, IT DID, UM, TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE ANNEXATION AGREEMENTS AND THE FACT THAT MOST OF THE ANNEXATIONS DID OCCUR EARLIER THIS SUMMER.

SO, ALTHOUGH, UH, WE USED 22 AS THE BASIS FOR THE GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS, UH, WE DID ADD IN THE TERRITORIES THAT WERE RECENTLY ANNEXED.

IT ASSUMES THAT THE CCNS WILL, UH, REMAIN THE SAME, UH, WHICH THEY DO GET

[00:05:01]

UH, LET'S SEE.

POPULATION PROJECTIONS WERE DONE, UH, AND GROWTH RATES ESTABLISHED FOR, UM, PROJECTION OF AN ULTIMATE, UH, 2050 POPULATION OF A LITTLE OVER 80,000.

THE DE DISTRIBUTION OF THAT POPULATION WAS FACTORED IN.

UH, THESE MAPS KIND OF GENERALLY DEPICT THE DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION OVER THE TIME BETWEEN 2020 AND 2050.

HOUSING PROJECTIONS, UH, WERE ALSO CONSIDERED, UM, INCREASES IN, IN HOUSING FOR EACH FIVE YEAR PERIOD BETWEEN 2020 AND 2050.

THE HOUSING DISTRIBUTION, SIMILAR TO THE OTHER, UM, EXHIBITS SHOWING THE HIGHER DENSITY OF HOUSING OVER TIME.

THE METHODOLOGY FOR PROJECT IDENTIFICATION FOR THESE MASTER PLANS WAS TO EVALUATE THE EXISTING SYSTEMS MODEL, THE FUTURE GROWTH THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, AND PROPOSE PROJECTS TO SOLVE THE EXISTING AND FUTURE ISSUES.

SO FOR THE WATER MASTER PLAN, WE DEVELOPED A WATER MODEL IN PUTTING THE PIPES, VALVES, TANKS, STRUCTURES, UH, ET CETERA.

THAT'S THAT CURRENTLY IN OUR SYSTEM, UPDATES WERE MADE TO THE MODEL, INCLUDING WHOLESALE CUSTOMER DEMANDS, UH, ACTUAL RESIDENTIAL USAGE PATTERNS FROM SHIRTS, DATA, UH, PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE SETTINGS AND REMOVAL OF WATER LINES THAT WERE ACTUALLY IN OUR GIS SYSTEM BUT ARE NO LONGER, UM, IN SERVICE.

THEN THE CONSULTANT EVALUATED THE EXISTING MODEL AGAINST TCE Q'S WATER RULES AND REGULATIONS AND WE IDENTIFIED CIPS OR PROJECTS THAT ADDRESS THOSE T THAT TCEQ CRITERIA WHERE THERE ARE SHORTFALLS CURRENTLY.

SO LOOKING AT THE TCEQ PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS, IT TALKS ABOUT HOW MUCH STORAGE AND SUPPLY MUST BE PROVIDED BASED ON POPULATION.

UH, PUMPS MUST HAVE CERTAIN HIGH SERVICE CAPACITY BASED ON POPULATION ALSO AND, AND NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS.

UH, AND THERE ARE MINIMUM PRESSURE REQUIREMENTS, UH, BASED ON FIRE FLOWS THAT HAS TO BE, UH, MAINTAINED WITHIN THE SYSTEM.

SO IT WAS IDENTIFIED LOCATIONS WHERE THERE PERHAPS WAS A LITTLE BIT OF LOW PRESSURE OR, UM, PUMPS THAT MAYBE AREN'T MEETING THE CAPACITY DEMANDS IN ORDER TO MEET THOSE TCEQ REQUIREMENTS OVER TIME.

UH, SO WE EVALUATED THE FUTURE WATER SYSTEM BY APPLYING THE GROWTH PATTERNS FROM THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS TO THAT EXISTING MODEL, REEVALUATING THE MODEL AGAINST THOSE TCEQ REQUIREMENTS AGAIN, AND IDENTIFY FURTHER PROJECTS THAT WOULD SATISFY ANY UNMET TCEQ CRITERIA FOR THE FUTURE.

SO WE'VE GOT TWO TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN, IN THE MASTER PLAN, AND THOSE ARE PROJECTS THAT WE NEED BECAUSE OF IDENTIFIED DEFICIENCIES IN THE SYSTEM TODAY, AND THEN ALSO PROJECTS THAT ARE NEEDED TO MEET THAT FUTURE GROWTH.

ALRIGHT, SO MOVING ON TO WASTEWATER, AGAIN, A MODEL WAS CREATED USING, UH, STARTING WITH OUR EXISTING GIS DATA, ALL OF OUR SYSTEM MANHOLES, PIPES, UH, FORCE MAINS, LIFT STATIONS, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.

UH, THEN THAT MODEL WAS CALIBRATED BASED ON FLOW MONITORING THAT WAS DONE AT DIFFERENT POINTS IN THE SYSTEM AND THEY WERE ABLE TO CAPTURE SOME RAIN EVENTS.

AND THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY, UH, ALLOWS THEM TO SEE HOW MUCH INFLOW AND INFILTRATION OR STORM WATER IS GETTING INTO OUR WASTEWATER SYSTEM.

SHOULDN'T, IN AN IDEAL WORLD, NONE OF IT GETS IN THERE, BUT, UH, IT ACTUALLY DOES IN THE REAL WORLD.

AND SO THEY WERE ABLE TO CONFIRM AND CORRELATE WHAT GOT IN FOR THAT.

THEY WERE ABLE TO MONITOR.

ALSO LOOKING AT RAIN GAUGES AND RAINFALL DATA DURING THE PERIOD THAT THEY WERE, UH, MONITORING AND MEASURING FLOW IN THE SYSTEM AND HOW THE MODEL, UM, REACTED TO THAT.

AND THEN THEY ADJUST THE MODEL TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS ACTUALLY DEPICTING RESULTS THAT WE ARE ACTUALLY SEEING IN THE REAL WORLD.

SO THEY LOOK FOR, UH, THE MODEL CREATING, UM, OR INDICATING THAT WE'RE HAVING SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOWS, WHICH MEANS THERE'S NOT ENOUGH CAPACITY IN THE SYSTEM FOR ALL THE FLOW THAT'S GOING THROUGH IT, WHETHER THAT'S WASTEWATER OR WASTEWATER AND STORM WATER THAT'S GETTING INTO THE SYSTEM.

UH, SO THEY'RE LOOKING FOR OVERFLOWS, WHICH IS WHERE THE SEWAGE ACTUALLY COMES OUTTA MANHOLES RARELY HAPPENS HERE.

THE MODEL DOES INDICATE THAT THERE ARE PLACES THAT

[00:10:01]

IT EXPECTS IT TO HAPPEN.

IT'S NOT REALLY HAPPENING.

UM, BUT WE NEED TO ADDRESS IT.

IF THE MODEL SAYS IT'S IT'S HAPPENING, WE LOOK VERY CAREFULLY AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING WHATEVER WE CAN TO KEEP IT FROM HAPPENING.

UM, ALSO SURCHARGE GRAVITY MAINS, WHICH MEANS THERE MAY BE WATER BACKING UP IN A MANHOLE AND FILLING THOSE PIPES, NOT NECESSARILY DISCHARGING AT THE SURFACE, BUT, BUT FILLING UP THE GRAVITY MAINS SO IT, UH, LOWERS THE AVAILABLE CAPACITY FOR MORE FLOW.

UM, THEY DID FIND THAT THERE, UH, WERE APPROXIMATELY 26,000 FEET OF SURCHARGE GRAVITY MAINS AND 21, UH, PROJECTED OVERFLOWS.

SO EVALUATING THE FUTURE SYSTEM, THIS IS WHERE THEY PUT THE POPULATION PROJECTIONS, THE GROWTH PROJECTIONS INTO THE MODEL, APPLY IT AND IDENTIFY ANY FUTURE EXPECTED SEWER OVERFLOWS OR SURCHARGE LINES AND IDENTIFY PROJECTS, UH, DEVELOP TO RELIEVE THOSE EXISTING ISSUES AND FUTURE SYSTEMS STRESSES, WHICH COULD BE FROM A CAPACITY ISSUE OR THOSE DEVELOPING FROM GROWTH.

SO AGAIN, WE'VE GOT BOTH TYPES OF PROJECTS IN THE MASTER PLANS.

WE'VE GOT PROJECTS THAT MAY BE UPSIZE, A LINE THAT'S CURRENTLY UNDER CAPACITY WHERE WE MAY BE HAVING SURCHARGES.

UM, AND THAT WOULD BE NEEDED IF EVEN IF THERE WAS NO FURTHER GROWTH, AND ALSO PROJECTS THAT ARE NEEDED TO AS TO PROVIDE CAPACITY FOR THE FUTURE GROWTH.

SO, UH, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE MASTER PLAN UPDATES THEN.

SO, UH, I'M USING THE SAME SLIDES THAT WE USED LAST TIME TO TALK ABOUT DEVELOPMENT OF THE CIP, WHICH IS REALLY FOCUSED ON PROJECTS THAT ARE NEEDED FOR GROWTH.

AND IT'S IMPORTANT IN THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT OF THE CIP TO SAY, OKAY, DO WE EXPECT THIS TO OCCUR IN THE NEAR TERM, IN THE, UH, 10 YEAR PLANNING PROCESS OR IN THE 30 YEAR PLANNING WINDOW? BECAUSE IT IMPACTS, UH, WHEN THOSE COSTS CAN BE CALCULATED INTO IMPACT FEES.

IT'S NOT SO IMPORTANT FOR THE MASTER PLAN TO IDENTIFY WHEN WE EXPECT PROJECTS TO HAPPEN, BUT I'M USING THE SAME SLIDES.

SO THEY'RE BROKEN INTO NEAR TERM 2030 AND 2050, BUT THE FACT IS IT'S ONE BIG LIST OF PROJECTS ON, ON THESE MASTER PLANS.

SO WE'VE GOT BOTH MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS AND WATERLINE IMPROVEMENTS.

THERE'S A LISTING HERE, THERE'S A LISTING IN THE, THE REPORT THAT, UM, WAS IN YOUR, YOUR PACKETS.

WE'VE GOT, AGAIN, THE 2030 WATER PROJECTS AND THE 2050 WATER PROJECTS.

AND THE OUTCOME OF THIS IS REALLY, THIS IS A GRAPHIC DEPICTION OF THE UPDATED WATER MASTER PLAN.

SO IT SHOWS ALL THE PROJECTS, UH, WITH THEIR IDENTIFYING NUMBERS.

SO THERE'S A DESCRIPTION OF THOSE PROJECTS IN THE, UM, POLICY DOCUMENT THAT GOES ALONG WITH, WITH THIS MAP, THE WASTEWATER PROJECTS.

WE'VE GOT SOME MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND SOME, UH, IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS.

AND AGAIN, THEY'RE BROKEN INTO NEAR TERM 2030 AND 2050, NOT SO IMPORTANT FOR THE MASTER PLAN.

UM, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALL INCLUDED ON THE MASTER PLAN.

AND SO HERE IS THE PROPOSED UPDATED WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN, AGAIN, WITH ALL THE PROJECTS, REGARDLESS OF WHEN THEY'RE PROJECTED TO BE NEEDED.

SO THAT, UH, CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION.

I'M HAPPY TO GO BACK TO, UH, ANY OTHER SLIDES.

UM, BUT WHAT WE DO REQUEST BE DONE IS A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTING THESE MASTER PLANS AND THEY WILL BE PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS, UH, SUPPLEMENTAL SIMILAR TO THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN THAT WE HAVE.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU KATHY.

IT IS, UH, SIX 15 AND AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENT.

ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON THIS TOPIC? NOBODY.

ONCE, TWICE, THREE TIMES.

QUESTIONS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO ASK, UH, FEEL FREE TO DO THAT.

IT IS STILL SIX 15.

PUBLIC INPUT IS CLOSED.

NOW, COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS, UM, ALMOST THE SAME PRESENTATION THAT WE SAW TWO WEEKS AGO, BUT I KNOW, UM, MS. BROWN, YOU WEREN'T HERE.

UM, SO IF ANYBODY HAS ANY

[00:15:01]

NO.

SO, UM, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL, UM, TO INCORPORATE THE UPDATED WATER AND WASTEWATER MASTER PLANS INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

SO, UH, WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? WE CAN APPROVE OR WE CAN DENY, UH, WE CAN RECOMMEND APPROVAL, WE CAN RECOMMEND DENIAL.

GOOD.

I HAVE A QUESTION.

ALRIGHT, QUICK , , UM, THERE'S A LOT OF PROJECTS ONGOING RIGHT NOW THAT WEREN'T DIRECTLY INTO THE CIP, BUT SO SOME OF THE DEFICIENCIES THAT WERE MENTIONED IN THE CIP, LIKE THE ABILITY TO REFILL THE LIVE OAK TANK AND, AND LOW PRESSURE ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF HAVE THO ARE THOSE THINGS, HAVE THEY BEEN ADDRESSED OR ARE THEY BEING, WILL THEY BE ADDRESSED IN THE NEAR TERM? SO LIKE HOW, HOW'S THE WATER PRESSURE ON THE SOUTH SIDE? IS IT, IS IT GOOD? IS IT BAD? SO IT'S BETTER THERE, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME IMPROVEMENTS MADE.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA ADD ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR, BUT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS MADE TO, UM, HELP WITH THE PRESSURE THERE.

WE'VE ALSO HAD SOME IMPROVEMENTS BECAUSE OF THE CORBIT ELEVATED STORAGE TANK AND THE GROUND STORAGE TANK THAT SUPPORTS THAT IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW.

UM, SO THOSE SHOULD WORK.

AND I THINK WE ALSO HAVE ANOTHER PROJECT FOR THE WARE SASIN TANK IMPROVEMENTS.

UH, THE GROUND, THE GROUND STORAGE TANK ISN'T FINISHED YET, BUT, AND, AND THERE'S A PUMP STATION ALONG WITH THAT? YES.

AND THEN DID, DID THIS CIP DID, DID IT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE SECOND PIPELINE FROM SHIRT SEIN? YES.

THE MASTER THAT SECOND.

OH, IT'S NOT, YEAH, RIGHT, BECAUSE IT'S AN S-S-L-G-C PRO, BUT IT DOES TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT INCOMING WATER SOURCE, INCOMING WATER.

THAT'S WHAT I MEANT.

SO IT DOES TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT, OKAY.

CORRECT.

YEAH, MAYBE SORT OF CHIME IN AGAIN, COMMISSIONER, BRO.

SO PART OF WHAT WE NEED IS THE PLAN, RIGHT? WE KNOW WHAT ARE THE BIG THINGS WE NEED TO BUILD.

PART OF ADOPTING THIS INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS THAT BECOMES THE BASIS OF OUR REGULATIONS AND OUR ABILITY TO REQUIRE DEVELOPERS TO BUILD SOME OF THIS STUFF AS WELL.

UH, WHICH ALL WORK TO THEN NOW WE HAVE A PLAN, WE KNOW WHERE WE'RE HEADED TO SORT OF SOLVE AND ADDRESS THOSE PROBLEMS. IT'S REALLY THE NEXT ITEM, THE IMPACT FEE ITEM IN THE CIP IS THEN HOW DO WE PAY FOR THAT TO, TO GET 'EM ACTUALLY BUILT IN A TIMELY MANNER.

IS THAT ANYONE ELSE? I GUESS SO.

WELL, WE CAN TAKE A MINUTE.

A LOT OF NUMBERS, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PROJECTS, SO.

ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? YEAH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF P-L-C-P-A 2 0 2 5 0 0 0 6 SECOND.

I HAVE A, UM, MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER WALLACE AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER CARBONE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF P-L-C-P-A 20 25 0 0 0 6.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES.

ALRIGHT, I SEE FIVE VOTES.

CAN WE PUBLISH THAT? WE HAVE FIVE AYES.

NONE OPPOSED THAT MOTION PASSES.

IN THERE OF OUR, UM, THE PROJECTS AND ITEMS CURRENTLY IN FRONT OF CITY COUNCIL IN THEIR CURRENT STATUS.

ALRIGHT, ITEM NUMBER SIX, REQUEST AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.

REQUEST BY COMMISSIONERS TO PLACE ITEMS ON A FUTURE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENDA.

ANYONE HAVE ANYTHING? NO ANNOUNCEMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS.

ANYTHING ANNOUNCEMENTS BY CITY STAFF? NOTHING.

WHAT HAVE Y'ALL BEEN DOING FOR THE LAST MONTH? NOT, YOU KNOW.

ALL RIGHTY.

MOVING RIGHT ALONG.

ITEM NUMBER

[A. Current Projects and City Council Status Update ]

SEVEN.

UH, INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PACKETS.

NO DISCUSSION TO OCCUR.

I, YOU KNOW, YOU'LL FIND A, A LISTING

[00:20:01]

ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, IT IS 6 21 AND THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.

WE'LL TAKE A COUPLE MINUTE BREAK HERE AND RESET FOR THE, UH, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

[1. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING]

UH, GOOD EVENING.

IT IS, UH, 6 25 AND THIS IS A JANUARY 22ND, 2025 MEETING OF THE SHIRTZ CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

UM, THE, UH,

[2. SEAT ALTERNATE TO ACT IF REQUIRED]

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONERS ARE JOINED BY OUR, UM, ADDITIONAL REPRESENTATIVE, DR.

SHORN.

MR. JONES.

APPRECIATE Y'ALL BEING HERE.

UM, MR. WALLACE IS UP HERE WITH US ONCE AGAIN, HEARING OF RESIDENCE.

ANYBODY, ANY, UH, WRITTEN OR INTERNET OR NO? OKAY.

ITEM

[A. Hold a public hearing for a presentation, discussion, and possible action to approve a recommendation regarding an update to the City of Schertz Water and Wastewater Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plans, and Impact Fees to be assessed. ]

NUMBER FOUR, IT'S PUBLIC HEARING OR A ALL THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR A PRESENTATION DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE A RECOMMENDATION REGARDING AN UPDATE TO THE CITY OF SHE'S WATER AND WASTEWATER LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS AND IMPACT FEES TO BE ASSESSED.

KATHY MEMBERS FOR CIAC IN ADDITION TO PNZ COMMISSIONERS.

UH, SO AT THE LAST CIAC MEETING, WE WENT THROUGH A LOT OF WHAT WE JUST WENT THROUGH IN THAT PNZ MEETING.

WE WENT THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND THE SELECTION OF PROJECTS THAT WOULD GO INTO THE CIP.

WE'RE GONNA KIND OF SHIFT GEARS INSTEAD OF REFERRING TO THIS AS A MASTER PLAN.

AND REMEMBER, THAT PLAN INCLUDED IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE NEEDED IN OUR SYSTEM REGARDLESS OF, EVEN IF GROWTH STOP TODAY, NOBODY ELSE HAS COMING TO SHIRTS.

WE NEED SOME IMPROVEMENTS, BUT WE CAN'T ASK NEW DEVELOPMENT TO PAY FOR THOSE IMPROVEMENTS.

SO WE'RE NOT JUST GONNA TALK ABOUT THE OVERALL MASTER PLAN, BUT WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THE CIP, WHICH HAS THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED THAT HAVE AT LEAST A PORTION NEEDED BECAUSE OF THE GROWTH THAT'S GONNA COME.

SO, UH, SO WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT DEVELOPING THE COSTS FOR THOSE PROJECTS.

UH, LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENTS, A CREDIT ANALYSIS, WE'LL, I'LL EXPLAIN WHAT THAT IS.

THE MAXIMUM IMPACT FEES THAT WERE CALCULATED, A LOCAL IMPACT FEE COMPARISON, HOW DO WE STACK UP AGAINST OTHER CITIES? UH, AND THE NEXT STEPS.

SO DEVELOPING THE CIP COSTS.

SO, UH, THE CONSULTANT LOOKED AT A, A VARIETY OF COST DATA.

THEY LOOKED AT CALCULATING THE INFLATION RATE AND WHAT PARTS OF THE PROJECT, UH, COSTS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR IMPACT FEE FUNDING OR TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE MAXIMUM FEES.

SO COST DATA A LITTLE BIT HERE.

UM, GENERALLY A A COST ESTIMATE GETS CLOSER AND CLOSER TO ACTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE COST IS GONNA BE, THE FURTHER ALONG YOU GET IN DEVELOPMENT OF A PROJECT.

SO IF IT'S JUST SPITBALLED, IT'S, IT'S IN THE FUTURE.

WE DON'T KNOW A WHOLE LOT ABOUT IT, BUT WE KNOW IT'S GONNA BE ABOUT A FIVE MILE LONG WASTEWATER LINE AND WE THINK IT'S GONNA BE ABOUT 24 INCH DIAMETER.

AND IT, IT'LL PROBABLY COST, UH, WHATEVER IT COSTS $10 MILLION, BUT WE KNOW VERY LITTLE ABOUT IT.

SO WE NEED TO ADD A REALLY LARGE CONTINGENCY TO IT BECAUSE TO ACCOUNT FOR, WELL, WE WERE, WE WERE REALLY FAR OFF.

WE DIDN'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT PROJECT.

THE BETTER YOU UNDERSTAND THE PROJECT, IT'S EXACTLY FOUR AND A HALF MILES, AND IT'S BETWEEN 20 FEET DEEP AND 25 FEET DEEP, AND IT'S DEFINITELY A 24 INCH DIAMETER LINE.

AND WE NEED THIS MANY MANHOLE.

ONCE YOU KNOW THOSE THINGS, ONCE THE PROJECT IS DESIGNED, YOU DON'T NEED AS MUCH CONTINGENCY.

YOU KNOW PRETTY WELL HOW MUCH IT'S GONNA COST.

SO THE CLOSER YOU GET.

AND SO THEY'VE GOT THESE, THIS DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATION FOR EACH STAGE OF A PROJECT DEVELOPMENT.

AND THE PROJECTS HERE FOR THE MOST PART, EXCEPT THE ONES THAT ARE ALREADY UNDERWAY, WHICH WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE COSTING BECAUSE WE BID THEM OUT, WE'RE PAYING FOR THEM RIGHT NOW.

THE ONES THAT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT THESE KIND OF NEWER IDENTIFIED PROJECTS ARE CLASS FOUR.

SO THOSE, I BELIEVE HAVE A 30% CONTINGENCY ADDED TO THEM.

THE SOURCES THAT OUR CONSULTANT USED TO COME UP WITH, THE, UH, PROJECT COSTS WERE

[00:25:01]

TXDOT REPORTS.

RS MEANS DATABASE COST ESTIMATES FROM PAST AND CURRENT CITY PROJECTS.

WE DID PROVIDE SOME DATA AND, UH, PAST AND CURRENT PROJECTS THAT THEY'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN AS A DESIGN FIRM.

SO AGAIN, THEY DID ADD A 30% CONTINGENCY FACTOR.

UM, AND THAT IS ON TOP OF INFLATION RATES, UH, APPLIED BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE CLASS FOUR ESTIMATES, IT'S VERY EARLY IN THE PLANNING STAGES.

SO FOR INFLATION RATE CALCULATION, THERE WAS A VARIETY OF SOURCES USED FOR THAT, AND THAT'S TO ACCURATELY CAPTURE CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE, NOT THE NEAR TERM PROJECTS, BECAUSE THOSE ARE, ARE MUCH MORE, UH, PINNED ON AND THEY'RE CURRENT.

SO THERE'S NOT NEARLY A AS BIG OF AN INFLATION, UH, ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE APPLIED TO THOSE.

BUT FOR 2030 PROJECTS AND 2050 PROJECTS, UH, ANNUAL EXPECTED INFLATION WAS, UH, CALCULATED.

UM, RS MEANS HISTORICAL INDEXES, MORTENSON INDEXES AND TURNER INFLATION INDEXES WERE CONSULTED FOR A MEDIAN YEARLY INFLATION RATE OVER THAT TIME OF 3.91% ELIGIBLE PROJECT COSTS.

SO THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE IS VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT IMPACT FEES OR OTHERWISE KNOWN AS CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES.

WHAT CAN BE INCLUDED AND WHICH PROJECTS CAN BE INCLUDED.

SO HERE I'M GONNA, UH, MENTION DURING THE LAST PRESENTATION WE TALKED ABOUT, UM, THE FACT THAT THE PROJECTS WERE SLOTTED INTO DIFFERENT TIME PERIODS.

WE DON'T EXPECT THAT ALL THE POPULATION GROWTH IS GONNA HAPPEN IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS.

SO WE HAVE TO SAY, OKAY, WHICH OF THESE PROJECTS DO WE REALLY NEED TO, UH, ACCOMMODATE THE GROWTH THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS? WE'RE ALSO GONNA LOOK AT THE PROJECTS THAT ARE NEEDED FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS BECAUSE WE CAN'T TELL FOR CERTAIN WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT'S GONNA COME.

SO WE MAY PROJECT, OKAY, WELL WE NEED, UH, CAPACITY DOWN HERE IN SOUTHERN SHIRTS.

SO WE'RE GONNA PUT, YOU KNOW, EXPECT A PROJECT THERE.

AND THEN THE GROWTH ACTUALLY HAPPENS IN NORTHERN SHIRTS SOMEWHERE.

SO WE WANNA LOOK AT PROJECTS IN BOTH BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE IT'LL BE, BUT WE KNOW THAT THE LIKELIHOOD OF THE GROWTH BEING A CERTAIN AMOUNT OVER 10 YEARS COULD BE EITHER ONE OF THOSE PLACES, BUT WE CAN ONLY USE 10 YEARS WORTH OF GROWTH.

HOPEFULLY THAT'LL, THAT'LL SORT OF COME INTO FOCUS A LITTLE BIT MORE.

WE ALSO LOOKED AT THE PERCENT UTILIZATION FOR PROJECTS, SO THAT WE DID ACTUALLY LOOK AT SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE, UH, SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE NEED REGARDLESS OF WHETHER GROWTH COMES, BUT THEY'RE ALSO ACTUALLY ADDING CAPACITY.

SO SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS, A PORTION OF THOSE PROJECTS IS ELIGIBLE FOR IMPACT FEE FUNDING AND TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE RATE.

SO, UH, IN, IN THE REPORT YOU MAY HAVE SEEN THERE'S HOWEVER MANY 50 OR 60 PROJECTS, UH, THERE'S A SHEET FOR EACH PROJECT.

AND YOU'LL SEE THE LITTLE SNIPPET HERE IS KIND OF A SNIP OUT OF THAT, UM, OVERALL PLAN.

AND SO EACH PROJECT IS IDENTIFIED, WHETHER IT'S NEAR TERM 2030 OR 2050.

IT'S GOT A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT, IT'S GOT A JUSTIFICATION IN THIS CASE.

THIS ONE WAS A CITY IDENTIFIED CIP.

THIS IS A LINE THAT'S A SIX INCH.

IT DOESN'T MEET OUR CURRENT MINIMUM STANDARD.

IT ALSO HAS SOME ISSUES WITH LEAKING, UH, UNDER THE CREEK WHERE IT CROSSES THE CREEK.

AND SO IT DOES NEED TO BE UPSIZED TO A 12 INCH AND THAT PROVIDES MORE CAPACITY TO SERVE SOME FUTURE GROWTH.

UH, BUT ALSO A PORTION OF IT IS, UM, NEEDED REGARDLESS OF GROWTH.

SO IT'S NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT, UH, GROWTH RELATED, BUT A PORTION OF IT IS.

SO THERE'S A PROJECT SHEET IN THE REPORT FOR EACH ONE OF THE PROJECTS IDENTIFIED AND A COST ESTIMATE THAT GOES ALONG WITH IT, I GUESS THAT'S A PRETTY IMPORTANT POINT.

POINT.

SO THIS PROJECT, TOTAL EXPECTED COST, UH, $763,000, IT'S FAIRLY SMALL.

SO THEN YOU'LL SEE THERE ARE TABLES THAT HAVE, THIS HAPPENS TO BE THE NEAR TERM WATER.

CIP PROJECT TABLE WITH THE EOPC STANDS FOR ENGINEERS OPINION OF PROBABLE COST.

AND SO THIS PROJECT THAT WE JUST LOOKED AT, THE SHEET FOR BUBBLING SPRINGS, SIX INCH WATERLINE REPLACEMENTS, $763,000, 27% OF THAT IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE EXPECTED NEW GROWTH.

AND SO FOR THE IMPACT FEE CALCULATION THAT'S INCLUDED, ONLY 27% OF THE COST CAN BE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION

[00:30:01]

OF THE MAXIMUM FEE.

SO YOU'LL NOTICE A LOT OF THE NEAR TERM PROJECTS HERE, IT'S ACTUALLY 0% OF GROWTH UTILIZATION.

UH, ANOTHER QUESTION THAT CAME UP AT THE LAST MEETING WAS, ARE WE CAPTURING THE PROJECTS THAT WERE ON THE PREVIOUS CAPITAL RECOVERY PLAN THAT ARE CURRENTLY BEING CONSTRUCTED OR, OR STILL NEED TO BE CONSTRUCTED? AND FOR EXAMPLE, THE CORBETT PUMP STATION IN 3 MILLION GALLON STORAGE TANK IS ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS.

IT WAS INCLUDED IN A PREVIOUS PLAN.

IT'S BEING AT LEAST PARTIALLY FUNDED BY IMPACT FEES THAT HAVE BEEN COLLECTED OVER THE YEARS PAST.

SO WE'RE NOT ADDING ADDITIONAL CAPACITY, THEREFORE WE'RE NOT INCLUDING THE COST OF THAT PROJECT AS IMPACT FEE ELIGIBLE.

IT'S STILL HERE BECAUSE IT, WE DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A MASHUP BETWEEN THE MASTER PLAN AND THE CIP FOR THE IMPACT FEES.

SO YOU'LL SEE WE'VE GOT SOME, SOME LINES DOWN SOUTH, AND WE'VE GOT A LINE IN, UM, FM 78 THAT ARE PARTLY ELIGIBLE FOR TO BE INCLUDED IN THE IMPACT FEE CALCULATION.

SO, UH, THEN WE GO ON TO THE 2030 WATER PROJECTS.

THESE ARE IDENTIFIED IN ORDER TO MEET THE GROWTH THAT'S PROJECTED TO HAPPEN BY 2030.

SO ALL THESE PROJECTS ARE HERE ALONG WITH THE GROWTH UTILIZATION.

IF IT'S A HUNDRED PERCENT, THAT LINE IS PURELY NECESSARY BECAUSE OF EXPECTED FUTURE GROWTH.

SO THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF THE PROJECT COST IS INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION.

AND THEN WE'VE GOT THE 2050 PROJECTS.

WE STILL HAVE A COST ESTIMATE FOR THEM.

WE'VE GOT THE DESCRIPTION FOR THEM.

THEY ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION FOR THE IMPACT FEE, BUT WHAT THEY ARE ELIGIBLE FOR IS TO BE FUNDED BY IMPACT FEES THAT ARE COLLECTED.

BECAUSE AGAIN, WE CAN'T NECESSARILY PREDICT EXACTLY WHICH PROJECTS ARE GONNA BE NEEDED BECAUSE IT HAS TO DO WITH WHERE DEVELOPMENT COMES IN AND EXACTLY WHAT THAT DEVELOPMENT IS.

SO WE'VE GOT ALL THESE PROJECTS, WE'VE DONE OUR BEST TO PROJECT WHEN WE EXPECT THEM TO BE NEEDED, BUT WE DON'T KNOW FOR SURE.

SO THESE PROJECTS CAN USE IMPACT FEE FUNDS THAT ARE COLLECTED, BUT AGAIN, THE CALCULATION COULD ONLY INCLUDE PROJECTS THAT, UH, ARE NEEDED FOR THE 2030 TIMEFRAME.

MOVING ON TO WASTEWATER, SAME DEAL.

UM, NOW SOMETHING THAT DID HAPPEN BETWEEN THE LAST MEETING AND THIS MEETING, AND IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE, THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS FOR THE RATES, IF YOU HAPPEN TO LOOK AT THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE REPORT THAT YOU GOT, YOU MIGHT NOTICE THAT THE MAXIMUM WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RATE WAS, UM, I DID NOT WRITE DOWN WHAT IT WAS.

IT WAS 6,000 SOMETHING, IT'S COME DOWN NOW IT'S ONLY $5,556 BECAUSE WE MADE AN ERROR AND WE NEGLECTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE WOMAN HOLLERING CREEK PROJECT, WHICH IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION ALMOST FINISHED.

IT WAS IN THE OLD PLAN, IT WAS IN THE OLD PLAN FOR $9.6 MILLION.

SO WE'VE ALREADY COLLECTED IMPACT FEES FOR THAT.

WE CAN'T NOW DOUBLE DIP AND ASK FUTURE FOLKS WHO ARE COMING IN TO PAY FOR THAT ALSO.

BUT THE TOTAL PROJECT COST IS 13 MILLION.

SO WE BROUGHT THE COST, THE IMPACT FEE AMOUNT THAT'S ELIGIBLE DOWN TO 3.4 MILLION.

ALSO, IT'S NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT FOR GROWTH BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY SOME GROWTH THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING, UH, NOT, NOT ALREADY SOME GROWTH DEVELOPMENT THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING SERVED.

SO WE'VE GOT SEDONA CROSS VINE, THE PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANT THAT IS TREATING THEIR WATER.

THIS LINE WILL TAKE THAT OFFLINE.

SO AGAIN, WE'RE NOT GONNA GET NEW GROWTH THAT'S ALREADY THERE, THAT'S GONNA BE SERVED BY THIS.

SO 74% OF IT IS NECESSARY FOR, FOR GROWTH.

BUT THE OTHER PART OF IT IS ALREADY, UH, UH, ALREADY THERE EITHER GOING TO THE PACKAGE PLANT OR PUMP AND HAUL OPERATIONS LIKE HALLIE'S COVE.

UH, SO THOSE ARE THE NEAR TERM WASTEWATER PROJECTS, THE 2030 IDENTIFIED WASTEWATER PROJECTS.

AND AGAIN, THE 2050 PROJECTS, THE PROJECTS ARE ELIGIBLE TO BE FUNDED BY IMPACT FEES, UH, BUT THE COST OF THEM IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE MAXIMUM FEE.

MAY HEAR FOLKS TALK ABOUT LUE SOMETIMES THEY REFER TO 'EM AS EDS EQUIVALENT DWELLING UNITS.

NOW, LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENTS, YOU

[00:35:01]

UM, WHAT IT IS IS A STANDARD MEASURE OF CONSUMPTION USE GENERATION OR DISCHARGE ATTRIBUTABLE TO A U INDIVIDUAL UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT CALCULATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED ENGINEERING OR PLANNING STANDARDS.

AND BASED ON HISTORICAL DATA AND TRENDS APPLICABLE TO THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION IN WHICH THE INDIVIDUAL UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED DURING THE PREVIOUS 10 YEARS.

SO TO MAKE THAT LONG STORY SHORT, IT'S WHAT'S EQUIVALENT TO WHAT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME USES FOR WATER OR WASTEWATER GENERALLY AS GALLONS PER DAY.

SO AN LUE IS EQUIVALENT TO ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

SO IF WE WANTED, UM, PUT SHIRTS AS GROSS IN TERMS OF LU, UH, WE HAVE TO EQUATE THAT LUE TO A RESIDENTIAL WATER METERS USAGE.

SO RESIDENTIAL HOMES ALMOST ALWAYS USE A FIVE EIGHTHS INCH WATER METER.

AND SO THAT FIVE INCH, EIGHT FIVE EIGHTS INCH WATER METER HAS A CERTAIN CAPACITY AND THAT CAPACITY IS GOING TO EQUAL ONE LUE.

SO THAT'S THE BASIS FOR ALL OF THE CALCULATIONS OF THE RATES THAT WILL BE CHARGED TO EACH DIFFERENT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.

SO FOR, UM, WATER L LUE, THAT'S EQUIVALENT TO 245 GALLONS PER DAY.

AND FOR A WASTEWATER LUE 172 GALLONS PER DAY, AND AGAIN, REMEMBER YOU, YOU USE YOUR WATER, SOME OF IT GETS CONSUMED, ADDED INTO COOKING, YOU DRINK IT, UH, YOU MAY WATER PLANTS OBVI, YOU KNOW, SOME FOLKS HAVE A SEPARATE IRRIGATION METER, BUT GENERALLY WHATEVER COMES OUT OF THE TAP, WHATEVER COMES THROUGH THE WATER METER, NOT ALL OF IT GOES INTO THE SEWER.

SO ON AVERAGE, 245 GALLONS PER DAY IS, UH, GENERALLY WHAT IS, UM, CONSIDERED FOR ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE, AND THEN 172 GALLONS PER DAY FOR SEWER BEING DISCHARGED FROM THAT SAME RESIDENT RESIDENTIAL UNIT, WHICH HAPPENS TO BE 75% OF THE WATER THAT THAT IS USED.

SO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE ALSO DICTATES THAT, UH, THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF, UH, FEE THAT CAN BE CHARGED HAS TO BE DECREASED OR HAS TO BE A CREDIT GIVEN TO THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE THAT THE NEW DEVELOPMENT WILL GENERATE AND PAY FOR THEIR WATER AND WASTEWATER.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, THEY CAN'T PAY AN IMPACT FEE AND THEN ALSO PAY RATES THAT MAY GO TO THE SAME PROJECTS.

IT'S IT'S DOUBLE DIPPING.

ALTERNATIVELY, WE COULD JUST TAKE THAT MAXIMUM RATE, CUT IT IN HALF AND SAY GOOD ENOUGH.

SEEMS KIND OF SILLY BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY HAD, UM, HAD A CONSULTANT DO THE CALCULATION AND THEY CAME UP WITH MUCH, MUCH LESS THAN 50% THAT NEEDS TO BE REDUCED FROM THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT.

SO, SO THEY DID THE STUDY, A COPY OF IT IS, IS IN THE REPORT.

THE REVENUE CREDIT FOR WATER WAS, UH, $3.365 MILLION WASTEWATER, $4.611 MILLION.

SO THOSE HAVE TO BE DECREASED FROM THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT.

SO NOW WE GET TO THE, THE BOTTOM LINE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF WANNA DO A DRUM ROLL, UM, BASED ON A TOTAL CALCULATION AND TALLYING OF THE IMPACT FEE ELIGIBLE COSTS MINUS THAT, UH, CREDIT FROM THE REVENUE GENERATED FROM THE NEW DEVELOPMENT AND DIVIDE THAT BY THE GROWTH IN LUE.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, HERE'S HOW MUCH IT'S GONNA COST US TO BUILD ALL THIS STUFF THAT'S GONNA BE NEEDED BY THE GROWTH.

AND THEN HERE'S HOW MANY UNITS OF GROWTH WE'RE GONNA HAVE, AND HOW MUCH SHOULD EACH ONE OF THOSE UNITS HAVE TO HOW MUCH IS EACH ONE OF THOSE UNITS WORTH? SO FOR WATER, THAT COMES TO $8,814 AND FOR WASTEWATER $5,556.

SO THOSE ARE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE RATES.

YOU GUYS CAN'T, COUNCIL CAN'T SAY, WELL, I THINK WE SHOULD REALLY CHARGE 10,000 FOR WATER, OR WE SHOULD MAYBE CHARGE 6,000 PER LUE FOR WASTEWATER.

IT'S NOT PERMITTED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

THESE ARE CALCULATED BASED ON THIS VERY SYSTEMATIC PROCESS AND SCIENTIFIC PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH TO CALCULATE THESE ALLOWABLE RATES.

[00:40:01]

SO ONCE THESE ARE ADOPTED, COUNCIL CAN DECIDE TO CHARGE LESS.

THEY CAN DECIDE TO CHANGE WHAT THEY'RE CHARGING, BUT THEY CAN'T UNTIL WE DO ANOTHER STUDY AND UPDATE THIS, THEY CAN'T CHARGE MORE THAN THOSE RATES.

SO IN ORDER TO APPLY THIS FAIRLY, WE LOOK AT THE CAPACITY OF THE WATER METERS.

AND SO EACH WATER METER HAS A CERTAIN MAXIMUM FLOW RATE, AND THAT EQUATES TO A CERTAIN NUMBER OF L LUE.

SO THE FIVE INCH, FIVE EIGHT INCH METER, REMEMBER I SAID THAT HOMES, RESIDENTIAL HOMES GENERALLY HAVE A FIVE EIGHT INCH METER.

IT HAS A CAPACITY OF 15 GALLONS PER MINUTE.

SO THAT IS EQUAL TO ONE LUE.

THE ONE INCH METER IS, HAS A CONTINUOUS FLOW RATING OF 30 GALLONS PER MINUTE, WHICH IS TWICE 15.

SO THAT'S TWO LU.

SO IT'S, THIS PART IS FAIRLY SIMPLE MATH.

YOU LOOK AT THE FLOW RATE OF THE METER, AND THAT'S THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT THAT THAT CAN GO THROUGH THE METER AND DIVIDE IT BY 15, WHICH IS THE, THE BASIS ONE LUE.

AND THAT TELLS YOU HOW MANY LUS ARE EQUIVALENT IN THAT METER.

SO THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE RATE THAT CAN BE CHARGED IS THAT MAXIMUM AMOUNT, 8,814 FOR WATER AND 5,556 FOR WASTEWATER.

AND SO ON DOWN THE LINE, THE NUMBER OF EE TIMES THOSE TIMES, THOSE NUMBERS, SO TWO LUE TIMES THAT 8,814, THAT'S HOW YOU GET THE 17 6, 27.

SO SOMEBODY COMES IN, THEY NEED A ONE INCH METER BECAUSE THEY'RE DOING AN ACTIVITY, UH, THAT GENERATES THAT THEY NEED UP TO 30 GALLONS PER MINUTE, WHICH IS A LOT OF WATER.

THEN THIS WOULD BE THE MAXIMUM IMPACT FEE THAT WE'RE ALLOWED TO CHARGE.

SO TO COMPARE OUR FEES WITH, UH, SOME OTHER MUNICIPALITIES, UH, WE LOOKED AT A VARIETY OF MUNICIPALITIES AND THESE ARE ARRANGED FROM MOST EXPENSIVE TO LEAST EXPENSIVE FOR THE TOTAL, THE WATER AND THE WASTEWATER.

AND THEN ALSO JUST TO HAVE AN IDEA, UM, PFLUGERVILLE FOR EXAMPLE.

WELL, YOU KNOW, WE KIND OF KNOW WHERE THAT IS UP NORTH OF AUSTIN, AROUND ROUND ROCK SOMEWHERE UP THERE.

BUT HOW BIG ARE THEY? I, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW.

I'M NOT SUPER FAMILIAR WITH PFLUGERVILLE.

MAYBE YOU GUYS ARE.

BUT IN ANY CASE, THEY'VE GOT A POPULATION WHEN THEY DID THEIR STUDY IN 2023, THEIR POPULATION WAS 65,000.

AND THIS IS WHAT THEIR MAXIMUM RATES, THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE CHARGING ACTUALLY FOR THEIR IMPACT FEES.

NBU IS HIGH ALSO SINE, UH, IN 2023 RAISED THEIR FEES QUITE A BIT.

SO WE FALL UNDER THAT.

UH, IF WE CHOSE TO ADOPT THE MAXIMUM RATES SAWS, AUSTIN, BERNIE, UH, SAN MARCUS, OUR CURRENT RATES ARE AMONG THE LOWEST.

THESE ARE OUR CURRENT RATES DOWN HERE FROM 2011.

SO THAT IS, THAT'S SORT OF WHERE WE FALL.

SO I WANTED TO SHOW THE DIFFERENCE IN WHAT A COMMON DEVELOPMENT WOULD PAY, WHAT THEY WOULD PAY TODAY UNDER THE CURRENT RATES AND WHAT THEY WOULD PAY IF WE ADOPT THE MAXIMUM RATES FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER.

THIS IS, IT'S EASY TO SEE, IT'S EASY TO UNDERSTAND FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS, IT'S MUCH LESS SENSICAL.

UH, WHEN WE LOOK AT ANY OF THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS, LARRY WAS HELPING ME WITH THIS TODAY, AND THIS WAS INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER, NOT ONLY DOES THE RATE PER LUE CHANGE, BUT THE TECHNOLOGY OF THE METERS HAS CHANGED.

AND THE WAY WE HAVE CHARGED AND DETERMINED THE ELU FOR WASTEWATER HAS CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU LOOK AT, UH, A TWO INCH DOMESTIC METER FOR A WAREHOUSE, THEY PAID, LET'S SEE, THEIR CURRENT, THEY PAID $36,000 UNDER THE NEW RATES.

IF WE CHOSE TO IMPLEMENT THE MAXIMUM RATES,

[00:45:01]

AND IF THEY STILL NEEDED A TWO INCH METER, THEY WOULD PAY $239,000.

SO IT LOOKS WILDLY DIFFERENT, BUT THESE RATES HAVE NEEDED TO BE UPDATED FOR A WHILE.

IT'S TAKEN QUITE A WHILE TO GET THROUGH THE PROCESS.

AND ALSO IT'S QUITE POSSIBLE THAT IF THEY CAME IN TODAY, BECAUSE OUR METERS TECHNOLOGY THAT'S BEING USED HAS CHANGED, THEY MIGHT ONLY NEED A ONE INCH METER.

SO I DIDN'T TRY TO GET TOO CUTE AND MAKE A TABLE THAT SHOWED ALL THOSE, ALL THOSE DIFFERENCES.

SO THIS IS KIND OF A, I KIND OF WANNA SAY TAKE THIS COMPARISON WITH A GRAIN OF SALT BECAUSE IT'S REALLY, UM, I, I THINK I SAID, OH, IT'S APPLES AND ORANGES AND LARRY SAID IT'S APPLES AND WATERMELONS.

SO IT'S REALLY VERY DIFFICULT, BUT AT LEAST IT'S ALMOST LIKE A WORST CASE COMPARISON.

IF YOU LOOKED AT, OKAY, 300 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX.

THESE NUMBERS COME RIGHT FROM THE 1518 APARTMENTS THAT ARE BEING DEVELOPED, GETTING READY TO OPEN DOWN ON 15 18 4 INCH DOMESTIC METER.

THEY PAID $376,926 UNDER THE NEW RATES MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE, THEY WOULD PAY 958,000.

UM, SO IT IS A, A, A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE.

BUT WHAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING IS THE FUNDS THAT WE SHOULD BE CHARGING FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT, WE'RE, WE'RE FAR UNDER CHARGING.

AND SO IT'S, IT'S QUITE DRASTIC.

SO NOW WE GET TO, UH, THE CONVERSATION THAT YOU ALL NEED TO HAVE ABOUT, UM, ADOPTING A RATE AND THE PHASE IN.

UM, I'M GONNA JUMP AHEAD A LITTLE BIT JUST TO, SO YOU'LL HAVE THIS CONVERSATION AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS THAT WE WILL SEND TO CITY COUNCIL AND GOT A DRAFT OF A LETTER.

THIS IS ACTUALLY, I JUST TOOK THE OLD ONE FROM THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE WORK THAT WE DID A FEW YEARS BACK.

AND I JUST SAID, OKAY, JUST TO SHOW YOU GUYS, OKAY, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS.

YOU'LL MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS, YOU MAKE YOUR, HAVE YOUR CONVERSATION AND THEN WE'LL BOIL IT DOWN.

WE PUT IT ACTUALLY IN A LETTER.

THIS IS ANOTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE RULE.

WE PUT THESE COMMENTS IN A LETTER BASED ON WHAT YOU DECIDE TODAY, AND, UH, YOUR CHAIR WILL SIGN IT AND IT WILL ON BEHALF OF THE COMMITTEE.

AND, UH, IT'LL GET SENT TO, UH, CITY COUNCIL.

AND THAT WILL INCLUDE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY ADOPT THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, AND WHATEVER RATES AND ANY PHASE IN INFORMATION.

SO THE RATE ADOPTION, UH, I HAVE A COUPLE OPTIONS HERE.

THIS IS JUST FOR CONVERSATION.

THIS IS NOT A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF WHAT WE'RE PRESENTING.

THESE MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE RATES ARE WHAT IT WOULD REALLY TAKE TO FUND THE PROJECTS THAT WE NEED FOR THE GROWTH THAT WE EXPECT TO HAPPEN.

THAT'S, THEY'VE BEEN CALCULATED, IT'S, IT, THAT PART ISN'T REALLY THAT DEBATABLE.

UM, BUT WHETHER YOU THINK, WELL, WE SHOULD CHARGE THAT HIGH AMOUNT OR THAT'S TOO EXPENSIVE, WE CAN'T EXPECT DEVELOPMENT, WE'RE GONNA SCARE OFF ALL THE DEVELOPMENT OR, UM, IT'S JUST TOO MUCH FOR FOLKS TO HANDLE.

WE, WE RECOMMEND SOMETHING LOWER.

THAT'S, THAT'S YOUR CONVERSATION.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO PUT SOME THINGS DOWN HERE SO YOU CAN BE THINKING ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT, WHAT WOULD WE RECOMMEND? SO OPTION A, ADOPT THE MAXIMUM FEES WE NEED, WE NEED THE MONEY ADOPT, WE'RE GONNA RECOMMEND ADOPTING THE MAXIMUM FEES.

VERY SIMPLE.

OPTION B MIGHT BE ADOPT FEES THAT ARE EQUAL TO A PERCENTAGE OF THE MAXIMUM.

SO MAYBE WE WANNA ADOPT FEES THAT ARE 90% OF THE MAXIMUM OR 50% OF THE MAXIMUM, OR OPTION C MIGHT BE SOMETHING ELSE.

SO AGAIN, THESE FEES REPRESENT WHAT WE BELIEVE THROUGH THESE STUDIES.

IT WOULD COST TO BUILD THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE NEED TO SERVE THE NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT'S COMING.

IF WE DON'T CHARGE THOSE MAXIMUM AMOUNTS, THAT MONEY STILL NEEDS TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE.

SO WE DID HAVE, UM, OUR FINANCIAL CONSULTANT LOOK AT APPROXIMATELY HOW MUCH WOULD WE NEED TO RAISE WATER OR WASTEWATER RATES.

SO THE RATES THAT EVERYBODY PAYS, NOT JUST

[00:50:01]

NEW GROWTH, BUT EVERYBODY WHO PAYS A WATER BILL HERE IN SHIRTS, HOW MUCH WOULD WE HAVE TO RAISE THOSE RATES IN ORDER TO COMPENSATE FOR WHAT WE'RE NOT GONNA MAKE THE NEW DEVELOPMENT PAY? AND THE ROUGH EQUIVALENCY THAT HE CAME UP WITH IS IF YOU ADOPT MAYBE A 90% RATE FOR THE IMPACT FEE, THE RATES THAT ALL THE CITIZENS WOULD PAY WOULD HAVE TO GO UP BY 1%.

SO, UH, AND THAT'S BASICALLY TO PAY THE DEBT ON BONDS THAT WOULD BE ISSUED IN ORDER TO COVER THE COSTS.

DID I GET THAT GENERALLY RIGHT.

IF YOU DON'T MIND ME, UH, I WROTE DOWN SEVERAL THINGS HERE, UM, KATHY, ON, UH, THE CHARTS WHERE YOU SHOWED THE PROJECTS, PARTICULARLY THOUGH, UH, THIS IS NTW NINE AND NTW 10 OR DASH 10 W 10 WATER OR WASTEWATER, UH, WATER.

I'M, I'M NOT FINANCE, SO , I WANNA MAKE SURE I SAY I'M GIVING YOU THE RIGHT INFORMATION.

SO, UM, THOSE ARE, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.

IF, IF THE IMPACT FEE, IF THE, THE NEW CUSTOMERS AREN'T PAYING WHEN THEY'RE COMING IN AND TAKING UP CAPACITY IN THE SYSTEM, IF THEY'RE NOT PAYING, SOMEBODY STILL HAS TO PAY.

AND GENERALLY THAT'S GONNA BE THE RATE PAYERS.

SO ANOTHER THING WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT IS THE PHASE IN OF THIS.

THESE ARE BIG JUMPS FROM THE CURRENT RATES TO WHATEVER'S PROPOSED HERE.

EVEN, EVEN IF YOU DECIDED TO, TO RECOMMEND NOTCHING IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT AND NOT GOING WITH THE MAXIMUM RATE, IT'S STILL A BIG JUMP FROM THE CURRENT RATE.

UH, SO TO SORT OF HELP SOFTEN THE BLOW, UH, YOU MAY RECOMMEND A GRACE PERIOD.

SO UPDATED FEES, WE MAY SAY THEY WOULDN'T BE EFFECTIVE UNTIL A COMPLETE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION, UH, SUBMITTED AFTER OCTOBER 1ST, WHICH IS THE BEGINNING OF THE NEW FISCAL YEAR.

I PUT THAT IN GRAY BECAUSE THAT'S, LIKE I SAID, NOT NECESSARILY A A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE'RE MAKING, BUT, UH, WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, ALLOW SOME SORT OF A GRACE PERIOD IS PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA.

AS FAR AS A PHASE IN, PERHAPS, AGAIN, THIS IS JUST AN OPTION YOU'D WANNA SAY, OKAY, YEAR ONE FIRST WE DECIDE WHEN YEAR ONE STARTS.

SO IS IT OCTOBER 1ST? IS IT JULY 1ST? WHEN IS IT? SO FOR THE FIRST YEAR OF THAT, FOLKS WOULD PAY 50% OF THE MAX, THEN THE SECOND YEAR IT WOULD GO UP TO 75% THIRD YEAR UP TO A HUNDRED PERCENT.

THERE MAY BE OTHER OPTIONS THAT, THAT YOU MIGHT THINK OF.

AND THEN AGAIN, WE'LL PUT IT ALL TOGETHER IN A LETTER.

UH, AFTER THE, THE COMMENTS ARE MADE, NEXT STEPS.

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? WE'RE HAVING THIS FOLLOW UP MEETING FROM OUR LAST CIAC MEETING TONIGHT, TOMORROW EVENING.

UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE EDC TO GET SOME INPUT FROM THEM.

YOURS IS THE FORMAL COMMENT THAT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL, BUT, UH, WE WANNA KIND OF GET A FEEL FROM THE FOLKS THAT HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE DEVELOPERS THAT ARE COMING IN AND GETTING THESE BIG IMPACT FEE, UH, BILLS.

AND, UM, SO WE'RE GONNA TALK TO THEM TOMORROW, GET A LITTLE BIT OF FEEDBACK.

UH, THE FINAL REPORT WILL GET, UH, SUBMITTED TO COUNSEL.

WE GAVE THEM THE DRAFT REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED BEF, UH, WITH YOUR PACKET THE LAST TIME CIAC MET.

YOU HAVE THAT, UH, FINAL REPORT NOW IN YOUR PACKET HERE.

THAT PACKET HAS TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL, THEN WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL.

AND THEY, BECAUSE OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, HAVING VERY STRICT REGULATIONS OF EXACTLY HOW THE PROCESS GOES, COUNCIL HAS TO HAVE, UH, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A MEETING.

THEY HAVE TO PASS AN ORDIN AN ORDER, A RESOLUTION, SETTING A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.

THEN THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS TO BE WITHIN SO MUCH, I THINK 60 DAYS OF WHEN THAT DATE IS SET.

THEN THERE'S A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THEM TO ACTUALLY CONSIDER AND ADOPT THE, THE, UM, RATES.

AND SO AT THAT FIRST PUBLIC HEARING IS WHEN THEY WOULD GET THE COMMENTS THAT YOU ALL WILL GENERATE.

AND THAT IS IT FOR THE PRESENTATION.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU KATHY.

IT IS, UH, 6:59 PM AND I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

PUBLIC INPUT IS CLOSED.

ALRIGHT, UM, TIME FOR DISCUSSION.

UM,

[00:55:01]

SO BACK ONE MORE.

UM, YEAH, RIGHT THERE AT THE BOTTOM.

SO THOSE TWO BOTH HAVE THE DOUBLE ASTERISK, WHICH MEANS THEY'RE PARTIALLY GROWTH AND YET THE GROWTH IS 0%.

I, I APPRECIATE THAT.

I CANNOT ANSWER THAT QUESTION THAT WAS PROVIDED BY OUR CONSULTANT.

AND WE SEE THAT THERE IS 0% GROSS UTILIZATION DURING THE 2020 TO 2030 PERIOD.

OKAY, WELL MAYBE THE ASTERISKS DON'T BELONG THERE.

MAYBE THAT WAS JUST A, YOU KNOW, GO AHEAD.

SO IT WASN'T, WASN'T THAT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE ONLY HAVE SO MUCH GROWTH NEEDING CAPACITY MM-HMM .

AND SO IT'S 0%, BUT THAT WAY IT'S STILL ON THE IMPACT FEE.

CIP AND THUS CREDITS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION.

THAT IS TRUE.

YES, THAT IS, THAT IS WHAT IT IS.

IT'S 0% GROWTH UTILIZATION BECAUSE IT'S NOT ANTICIPATED TO ADDRESS A GROWTH ISSUE IN THAT LOCATION AT THIS TIME.

OH, OKAY.

UM, AND THEN WHEN, WHEN WE SEE THE TOTAL COST, PROJECTED COST OF THE, UM, THE PROJECTS, THAT INCLUDES ALL THREE, THE NEAR TERM, THE 2030S AND THE 2050S.

SO IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE 2050 OKAY.

JUST THE NEAR TERM.

BUT 2030, IF A 2050 SHOULD POP INTO THE 2030, THEN IT'S, IT'S ELIGIBLE FOR FUNDING.

IT JUST HASN'T BEEN INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATIONS.

CORRECT? UM, 2011 IS THE LAST TIME WE DID THIS.

A FULL UPDATE? YES.

WELL, IT, IT JUST SEEMS TO ME, UM, SO THAT WAS 2011, IT'S NOW 2024, SO THAT WAS 13 YEARS.

BUT WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT 10 YEAR INCREMENTS, 20, 30, 20, YOU KNOW, IS YES.

I MEAN, UH, I DON'T THINK IT REALLY MATTERS IN TERMS OF TALKING 2034 INSTEAD OF 2030.

BUT, UM, I'M CURIOUS, UH, WHY THE, UH, WHY WE ARE USING, UM, IN THE CALCULATIONS IN THE LUE CALCULATIONS, WHY WE USE THE MAXIMUM METER FLOW VERSUS AN ACTUAL AVERAGE USAGE.

'CAUSE YOU FLOW, YOU FOLKS DO AVERAGING EVERY YEAR FOR OUR SEWER RATES.

SO WHY DOES, WHY, WHY DO WE, UH, I, I GUESS THE QUESTION WHERE I'M GOING IS HOW MANY HOUSEHOLDS ACTUALLY USE, UM, THAT 2200 GALLONS OR WHATEVER IS THE MO IS THE MOST OUT OF A FIVE EIGHT METER.

YOU SEE WHERE I'M, WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS? UH, YEAH, FOR THE, THE AVERAGE FIVE EIGHT METER, UH, THEY CONTINUE TO, SO WE INCLUDE THAT AS ONE LUE.

AND SO WHEN YOU GET TO THE EQUIVALENCY DOWN BELOW, RIGHT? AND SO WE DID THE AVERAGE INK FOR SEWER WATER.

UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE EQUIVALENCY FOR SEWER AND WATER FOR THE NEW METERS, RIGHT? SO THE REASON WE'RE CHARGING THE MAXIMUM OF THE ONES DOWN BELOW, 'CAUSE TYPICALLY THOSE ARE PUT ON COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS, RIGHT? AND SO THEY SIZE THEIRS BASED ON THE ACTUAL NEED, THEY THE NEED IN THE BUILDINGS.

AND SO THEY CAN USE UP TO THE MAX OF THAT METER.

AND SO THAT'S THE IMPACT THEY HAVE TO THE SYSTEM.

SO IT'S GONNA, IT'S GONNA VARY SOME, RIGHT? SO NOT EVERYBODY'S GONNA USE THE MAX.

NOT EVERYBODY'S GONNA USE THE MEN.

IT'S GONNA BE BE SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE, BUT WE SIZE THOSE METERS APPROPRIATELY.

THEY SIZE THEM PER THE BUILDING AND PER THE USE THEY EXPECT NOT BASED ON AN AVERAGE BUILDING ALL THE TIME.

RIGHT? AND SO THOSE MAXIMUMS TO, TO DEVELOP THE EQUIVALENCY IS, IS THE MAXIMUM CONTINUOUS DUTY.

AND, AND I'LL TELL YOU THAT ON RESIDENTIAL, ON COMMERCIAL DEVELOPS A LOT.

THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH ON SIZING AND IT'S, FRANKLY, IT'S

[01:00:01]

BASED ON THE FEE.

AND SO THEY COME IN AND THEY WANT A, A MUCH LARGER METER.

THEY, THEY LOOK AT WHAT THE FEE IS AND THEY WILL LIKE, THEY ACTUALLY GET DOWN AND CALCULATE HOW MUCH WATER ARE WE ACTUALLY GONNA USE AND THEY PUT IN THE METER APPROPRIATE FOR ACTUALLY WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO USE.

AND SO IT IS THE MAX, YOU'RE RIGHT.

BUT IT, THAT'S FOR THE EQUIVALENCY OF THOSE LARGER METERS.

'CAUSE THAT'S HOW MUCH WATER THEY CAN USE.

THAT'S RIGHT.

AND THAT'S THE IMPACT TO OUR SYSTEM.

AND THEY USE IT.

IF THEY, IF THEY COME IN AND THEY SAY, LOOK, I'M GONNA GO WITH A THREE INCH METER.

WE NEED TO ASSUME WE CAN PROVIDE CAPACITY, WE CAN PROVIDE FLOWS BECAUSE THEY CHOSE A THREE INCH METER.

RIGHT? WELL THAT'S, THAT'S THE REASON WHY.

I I, I UNDERSTAND THAT RYAN.

I GUESS I'M, I'M MORE FOCUSED ON THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FAMILY, SINGLE FAMILY THAT, UM, BECAUSE YOU KNOW, EVERY YEAR WHEN YOU FOLKS CALCULATE, WELL NOT YOU, BUT SOMEBODY AND SOMEBODY CALCULATES WHAT I'M GONNA PAY FOR WASTEWATER SERVICE FOR THE NEXT YEAR, THEY DON'T USE THE MAX CAPACITY OF MY METER.

THEY, THEY AVERAGE OVER THREE MONTHS WHAT I ACTUALLY USED.

RIGHT? THAT'S HOW WE CHARGE THE RATES.

SO THAT WAS MY QUESTION.

WHY, WHY DON'T WE USE THAT KIND OF DATA TO CALCULATE THE, THE, UM, IMPACT FEE? IT'S A LITTLE BIT THE SAME WAY, RIGHT? SO WE SORT OF ASSUME THIS IS WHO DO YOU WANT TO HAVE PAY FOR THIS, RIGHT? SO WHEN WE GET NEW RESIDENTS COMING IN AND THEY'VE GOT THAT FIVE 8 CENTS METER, WE DON'T NECESSARILY RUN IT TO THE MAX.

WE TAKE SORT OF A MODIFIED RATE.

BUT THE REASON WE DON'T RATCHET IT DOWN FURTHER THAN THAT IS BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T HAD THAT HISTORY.

WE HAVEN'T SEEN THEM COME IN AND WE HAVEN'T SEEN THEM SAY, LOOK, I KNOW I'M GONNA LIMIT MY USAGE.

I KNOW I'M GONNA LIMIT MY FLOWS.

AND SO AGAIN, IT'S WHO DO YOU WANT TO HAVE PAY FOR THIS? IF YOU WANT TO DROP IT DOWN, WE COULD.

BUT TO YOUR POINT, WE DON'T THINK IT'S AN UNFAIR WAY TO DO IT.

WE, WE, AGAIN, FOR, FOR THE FIVE EIGHTHS, WHICH IS A TYPICAL RESIDENCE, WE'VE ADJUSTED THAT TO THE FLOW WE TYPICALLY SEE.

WHEREAS THE OTHERS, WHICH ARE GENERALLY USED FOR COMMERCIAL, WE ASSUME THE MAX.

'CAUSE THE ANSWER IS IF YOU'VE CHOSEN THAT METER, NOT ONE SMALLER THAN THAT, I'M GONNA ASSUME I'VE GOT A CAPACITY.

OKAY? SO WHEN I LOOK AT THIS FIVE EIGHTS METER, THAT 15 GALLONS PER MINUTE, THAT'S NOT THE MAX FLOW ON THAT METER.

IT'S, IT IS, BUT THEN WE'RE KIND OF MIXING THAT UP WITH THE 245 GALLONS PER DAY.

THAT'S THE DESIGN NUMBER, THAT'S THE EXPECTATION FOR WATER USE.

AND A LOT OF TIMES IF SOMEONE DOESN'T USE 245 GALLONS PER DAY, BUT THE METER IS, HAS THAT CAPACITY 15 GALLONS PER MINUTE IF YOU TOOK 15 GALLONS PER MINUTE TIMES HOW MANY MINUTES IN A DAY? THAT'S YEAH.

UM, YEAH.

I I, OKAY, I'M JUST TRYING TO, SO WE USE THE 15 GALLONS PER MINUTE AS THE EQUIVALENCY, AS THE BASIS FOR ONE LUE BECAUSE I KNOW AS BRIAN JUST SAID, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NEW USERS AND YOU REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GONNA USE.

BUT CERTAINLY, UH, YOU CAN LOOK ACROSS THE CITY AND YOU CAN FIND OUT WHAT THE MEDIAN USE IS IN A, IN A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

RIGHT? YOU COULD, YOU COULD OKAY.

ENOUGH SAID WE'LL LEAVE IT THERE.

AND THEN OUR CURRENT RATES ARE NOT AT 100%.

IS THAT CORRECT? I BELIEVE THEY ARE AT 100% FROM, FROM THE 2011.

TRADITIONALLY FOR WATER AND SOLAR, CIP THE CITY HAS CHARGED THE MAXIMUM ON WATER AND SOLAR.

BECAUSE I, I REMEMBER SOME DISCUSSION, BUT MAYBE THAT WAS THE PHASE IN THAT I'M THINKING OF WHERE WE DIDN'T CHARGE A HUNDRED PERCENT RIGHT OFF THE BAT.

DID WE? THAT WAS THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEE.

HOW ABOUT THE, THE, THE FIGURES YOU SHOWED US FOR THE OTHER CITIES, ARE THOSE ALL 100% OF THEIR MAXIMUM? DO YOU KNOW? I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK THOSE ARE THEIR, YEAH, I THINK THOSE ARE THEIR MAXIMUMS. YEAH.

THEY, THEY PROBABLY ARE.

MOST PEOPLE TEND TO CHARGE THE MAX.

BUT THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THE WHAT YOU, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY CHARGING, WHETHER IT'S THE MAX OR NOT.

THAT'S, THAT'S THEIR CURRENT FEE.

ANYBODY ELSE? WHO'S NEXT? RICHARD? SO OUR CURRENT RATES FROM 2011, THEY ARE A HUNDRED PERCENT.

[01:05:01]

HE'S WORKING ON THAT.

SO DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS OR YOU'RE JUST PUTTING THE DATA OUT THERE AND SAYING WE'RE WE'RE SAYING CHARGE OF THE MAX.

WITH THE PHASE IN WITH, WITH THE PHASE IN.

I MEAN I, I THINK SORT OF WITH THE CITY'S KIND OF CORE VALUES, DO THE RIGHT THING AND DO THE BEST YOU CAN.

OTHER PEOPLE, THE WAY YOU WANNA BE TRUE YOUR WORK OFF, YOU HAVE A TEAM.

IT'S, IT'S PROBLEMATIC FOR DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE IN PROCESS THAT HAVE DONE THEIR PRO FORMA MM-HMM .

TO GET HIT WITH THIS BIG INCREASE ALL OF A SUDDEN.

CIP, SO THEY WEREN'T GETTING CREDITS, RIGHT? SO THINK ABOUT ROADWAYS, WHICH WERE MORE FAMILIAR WITH.

UM, AND SO WHAT WE'VE TEND TO GET, I THINK TOO, JUST FOR KIND OF POLITICAL POLITICALLY SAVVY REASONS, IS RATHER THAN HAVE THEM FIGHT THIS SO STRIDENTLY BECAUSE OF THAT IMPACT MM-HMM .

WE, WE'D RATHER GO, THAT'S FINE.

BOTH THOSE REASONS WE'LL PHASE IT IN, BUT IT GETS ME UP TO THE MAX FEE.

AND, AND THAT IS THE BENEFIT TO OUR CURRENT RATE PAYERS OVER THE LONG TERM, MOST BENEFICIAL IS I GET UP THERE AND I START COLLECTING AND I I KEEP UP WITH THE UPDATES AND I DO THAT GOING FORWARD.

SO YEAH, I THINK WE WOULD RECOMMEND A PHASE IN SIMILAR TO ROADWAY THAT WORKED PRETTY WELL.

THE, THE OTHER THING THAT WE'RE DOING, JUST SO Y'ALL KNOW, IS WE'RE PRESENTING TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION TOMORROW NIGHT.

AND OUR ASSUMPTION WILL BE, WE'RE GONNA SAY TO THEM, LOOK, IT'S, IT'S PROBLEMATIC FOR THE CURRENT RATE PAYERS TO SUBSIDIZE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? WHICH IS USED AS THE OTHER METERS AND AS AN INCREASE.

THAT'S KIND OF WHAT EDCS JOB IS TO HELP MAKE THAT STUFF HAPPEN.

AND THEY CAN EVALUATE THE BENEFIT OF A PROJECT SPECIFIC AND SAY WE'RE GONNA, AND PART OF OUR INCENTIVE WILL BE TO COVER MORE OF IT OR COVER LESS OF IT.

SO THEY CAN DO IT ON A THOUGHTFUL, SPECIFIC BASIS, UM, GOING FORWARD.

AND I THINK THAT WHAT WE WOULD SAY, AGAIN, JUST AS A REMINDER IS THIS IS ONE OF MANY COSTS THAT GOES INTO DEVELOPMENT.

SO, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT FOR RESIDENTIAL, YOU'VE GOT BUILDING PERMIT FEES, YOU'VE GOT UH, ROADWAY IMPACT FEES, YOU'VE GOT UTILITY IMPACT FEES, YOU'VE GOT PARKLAND DEDICATION FEES, YOU'VE GOT ALL OF THIS STUFF THAT GOES INTO IT.

ANY ADDITIONAL IMPACT FROM C-A-S-S-L GC.

AND IF COUNCIL FEELS LIKE OVERALL THOSE ARE TOO GREAT AND HAS A NEGATIVE IMPACT, THEN WHAT WE THINK COUNCIL SHOULD DO IS WORKING WITH THE APPROPRIATE BOARDS, DECIDE WHERE WE WANNA LOWER THOSE, RIGHT? AND NOT TO PICK ON PARKS, BUT THEY MAY SAY OUR WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM IS MORE CRITICAL.

LET'S LET'S DROP THIS BACK, LET'S DROP THAT BACK OR SOMETHING.

TO ME, AGAIN, IT'S A WAY TO MAKE A THOUGHTFUL DECISION.

IF THE OVERALL IS TOO HIGH, LET'S NOT KEEP THIS ONE DOWN BECAUSE OF THAT, LET'S DECIDE WHERE WE NEED TO, TO SORT OF SAVE WOULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION.

SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS GO WITH THE MAX, DO A PHASE IN SOMETHING LIKE THIS, UM, AND, AND GET US WHERE WE NEED TO BE.

AGAIN, SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY MM-HMM .

IT'S HOW MUCH OF THIS DO Y'ALL WANT TO PAY AS EXISTING RATE PAYERS VERSUS YOU PAID AN IMPACT FEE AT THE TIME THAT WAS APPROPRIATE, OR YOU'VE BEEN PAYING YOUR RATES FOR YEARS AND YEARS TO GET THE SYSTEM WHERE IT IS TODAY.

AND THIS, UH, REPRESENTATIVE PHASE IN THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE, THIS CONCEPT, UH, IT CAN BE DIFFERENT FOR, UM, WATER.

WELL, I GUESS WHAT I'M REALLY LOOKING AT IS RESIDENTIAL VERSUS COMMERCIAL, NOT WATER VERSUS WASTEWATER.

WE, WE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND IT BE DIFFERENT FOR RESIN COMMERCIAL.

IT, IT, WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS CITIES TEND TO DO THAT A LITTLE MORE WITH ROADWAY IMPACT FEES.

THEY DON'T DO THAT MORE WITH COMMERCIAL.

AGAIN, WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND, AND, AND YOU KNOW, I THINK, I THINK FOR VALID REASONS IS HAVE EDC AS PART OF THEIR INCENTIVES ON A PROJECT BY PROJECT BASIS OFFSET FOR COMMERCIAL, WHICH, WHICH THEY DO NOW, RIGHT? SO WOULD THEY GET A PROJECT THAT COMES IN AND THAT PROJECT IS ASKING FOR INCENTIVES.

PART OF WHAT EDC GOES THROUGH AND SAYS IS, WELL, WHAT ARE YOUR BUILDING PERMIT FEES TO THE CITY? WHAT ARE YOUR ROADWAY IMPACT FEES FOR THE CITY? WHAT ARE YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION COSTS? AND THEN THEY SAY WHAT VALUE TO BRING TO THE COMMUNITY AND THAT'S HOW THEY ASSESS IT.

WE THINK THAT THEY WILL DO THAT, YOU KNOW, FORTUNATELY OUR EDC, UM, IS FAIRLY WELL FUNDED, SO WE THINK THEY'VE GOT THE ABILITY TO DO THIS, AND IT'S NOT INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT THEY CURRENTLY DO.

NOW, LIKELY WHAT IT'S GONNA MEAN IS THEY'RE GONNA FUND AT AT A BIT HIGHER RATE AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO STEP INTO SOME, SOME OTHER AREAS.

UM, BUT I THINK ONE OF THE OTHER ADVANTAGES TO THIS SYSTEM IS BECAUSE OF HOW WE'VE LAID OUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM, THOSE DEVELOPERS THAT ARE BUILDING THE INFRASTRUCTURE WILL MORE OFTEN GET A CREDIT.

SO THERE ARE THOSE BENEFITS AS WELL.

YOU BUILD SOME OF THIS STUFF, YOU'LL GET A CREDIT FOR IT.

UNDER THE OLD SYSTEM, WE DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE IDENTIFIED ON THE

[01:10:01]

IF A DEVELOPER COMES IN AND BUILDS A SECTION OF SYSTEM ROADWAY, SO THE SADDLEBROOK DEVELOPMENT OFF LOWER SEINEN, THEY'RE MAKING SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO LOWER SEINEN, THEY GET ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDITS THAT APPLIES TOWARD, UH, OFFSETS THEIR ROADWAY IMPACT FEE HOMESTEAD THE SAME WAY HOMESTEAD PARKWAY AND WHATEVER THE OTHER ONE COMING IN.

THEY GET CREDITS FOR THOSE AND IT LESSENS THEIR FEE.

SO THIS NEW SYSTEM WE'RE GOING TO, THERE ARE MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE TO GET CREDIT AS THEY SHOULD.

THAT HELPS THIS AS WELL, WHERE IN THE PAST THEY DIDN'T, THEY BUILT THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND GENERALLY IT WASN'T ELIGIBLE AND THEY PAID THE FEE ON TOP OF IT.

QUESTION FOR YOU, SIR.

COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE FEES THAT, THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY PAYING RIGHT NOW? IS THAT THE ONE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? SO OUR CURRENT FOR, UH, UH, ONE SINGLE FAMILY IS ALMOST 3000.

NOW, COULD YOU GO TO THE ONE YEAR PHASE IN THAT YOU JUST HAD UP, SO ONE OCTOBER OF 25 IT WOULD GO TO 4,400.

SO ONE OCTOBER IT'S A 50% INCREASE.

IT'S NOT INSUBSTANTIAL, AND THEN BUMP FROM THERE AND BUMP FROM THERE.

BUT WHAT THIS DOES IS, YOU KNOW, WE PUBLISHED THIS AND EVERYBODY KNOWS YOU BEAT ME TO MY SECOND QUESTION.

SO MY SECOND QUESTION WOULD BE ALL THE DEVELOPERS WOULD KNOW THAT THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE THREE YEARS.

AND SO IF I'M A DEVELOPER, I KNOW I'M PROBABLY GONNA WANNA TRY TO BEAT SOME OF THESE FEES.

YOU, YOU WILL.

AND SO WOULD THAT RUSH DEVELOPMENT IT.

SO IN MY EXPERIENCE, AND, AND FUNNY ENOUGH, OUR, OUR ENGINEERING CONSULTANT ASKED THAT TODAY, SAID, JUST KEEP IN MIND WITH THIS, WHAT I HAVE SEEN IN MY EXPERIENCE IS YOU DON'T GET A RADICALLY DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE.

IF A PROJECT'S NOT VIABLE TODAY, THEY'RE NOT GONNA RUSH IN AND DO IT JUST BECAUSE THE IMPACT FEE'S LOWER.

WHAT YOU TEND TO GET IS, I'D SAY IT'S ABOUT A THREE SIX MONTH WINDOW THAT THEY WORK TO GET THEIR PLAT FILED AND SOME OF THEIR PERMIT FEES IN TO, TO, TO DO THAT.

AND, AND, AND I WILL SAY WE'RE FAIRLY, UM, WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, RIGHT? SO OUR BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT WILL KNOW, HEY, THAT FEE GOES UP OCTOBER 1ST.

ANYBODY IN PROCESS, THEY WILL RUSH AND WORK WITH THEM TO GET THEM THROUGH IN FAIRNESS.

UM, ON, ON THAT.

SO YEAH, WE PUT IT OUT.

EVERYBODY KNOWS.

BUT YEAH, IN MY EXPERIENCE, IF IF YOU'RE NOT, IF YOU'RE NOT READY TO BUILD THAT APARTMENT COMPLEX, YOU'RE NOT GONNA BUILD THAT APARTMENT COMPLEX.

AND THE SAME THING, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT WITH INCENTIVES.

IF A COMMERCIAL PROJECT DOESN'T MAKE ON ITS OWN, NO AMOUNT OF INCENTIVE IS GONNA CAUSE THEM TO COME IN AND BUILD THAT THING, IT REALLY BECOMES WHO'S GIVING ME MORE INCENTIVES? THIS CITY OR THIS CITY, OR HOW MUCH CAN I GET OUTTA YOU IS WHAT DRIVES IT.

ONE QUESTION I HAD, BRIAN, IS UM, WITH A HUGE JUMP THAT THIS IS, I THINK WOULD CREATE INCENTIVE TO RUSH THE DEVELOPMENT.

I MEAN, FOLKS WE'VE TALKED TO, I HAVEN'T GOTTEN THAT IMPRESSION, RIGHT? I MEAN, BECAUSE IT'S PART, PART OF IT TOO IS THE PERSON WHO PAYS FOR THIS AT THE END OF THE DAY IS THE HOME BUYER, RIGHT? IT'S NOT THE DEVELOPER.

SO THE WAY AGAIN, THIS SYSTEM WORKS IS THE, THE DEVELOPER OF THE PROJECT DOESN'T PAY FOR IT.

THE BUILDER WRITES THE CHECK TO PULL THE PERMIT, BUT IT'S THAT FUTURE HOME BUYER WHO BUYS IT.

'CAUSE IT'S BAKED INTO THE COST OF THE HOUSE.

UNLESS YOU'RE BUILDING YOUR OWN HOUSE, UNLESS YOU'RE WALKING, I'M BUILDING MY OWN HOUSE AND PULL A PERMIT, PAY THESE THINGS.

IT'S THE FUTURE HOME BUYER WHO PAYS IT.

AND GENERALLY, IF YOU'RE GOING OUT AND GETTING A LOAN, YOU'RE ROLLING THIS INTO YOUR LOAN DOCUMENT.

SO THE PROBLEM WITH THIS STUFF IS, AND AS I SAID, IT'S NOT SO MUCH THIS, IT'S ALL OF THE OTHER FEES THAT GO INTO IT, RIGHT? AND SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE PAYING, YOU KNOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU'RE PAYING $1,400 IN UTILITY IMPACT FEES.

YOU'RE PAYING ANOTHER 3000 IN ROADWAY IMPACT FEES.

AND AGAIN, WE'RE GONNA KICK THAT STUDY OFF AND IT'S PROBABLY GONNA GO UP.

YOU'RE PAYING A THOUSAND BUCKS A LOT IN PARK LAND, RIGHT? YOU'VE GOT WHATEVER LAND DEVELOPMENT COSTS YOU'VE GOT, YOU'VE GOT TREE MITIGATION THAT ROLLS IN.

IT'S THAT NUMBER THAT YOU START LOOKING AT GOING BUILDING PERMIT

[01:15:01]

FEES.

WHAT'S A TYPICAL BUILDING PERMIT FEE ON A SINGLE, THE TOTAL FEES, THE TOTAL FEES, THE TOTAL, THE BUILDING PURPOSE AROUND, UH, 1500 FOR THE BUILDING PERMIT, RIGHT? SO ALL OF THAT ADDS UP.

YOU THINK ABOUT 1500, IT'S A LOT, BUT IT ALL STACKS THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE TEND TO FIND.

SO YEAH, WE MAY GET SOME FOLKS RUSH IT A BIT, BUT I'VE NOT HAD ANY DEVELOPER SAY, AND I WAS THINKING ABOUT DOING THIS THING IN A COUPLE YEARS AND WE'RE GONNA PUSH IT FORWARD.

'CAUSE WE'VE BEEN TELLING FOLKS THAT THIS IS COMING.

SO AGAIN, IN MY OPINION, STILL, I COULD BE WRONG.

IT'S, YOU'LL GET A THREE, SIX MONTHS RUSH UP.

BUT, BUT NOT AT THE, NOT A HUGE ONE.

RIGHT? 'CAUSE THEY'VE GOT WHATEVER TAKE DOWN SCHEDULE THEY'VE GOT.

P'S NOT GONNA MATTER AS MUCH.

WELL, WHAT'S RUNNING THROUGH MY LITTLE P BRAIN RIGHT NOW, BRIAN IS, IS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.

UM, SO THE DEVELOPER DOES SOME KIND OF ECONOMIC STUDY OF WHAT IT'S GONNA COST HIM TO PUT THIS DEVELOPMENT TOGETHER.

AND THEN, SO HE'S PLANNING ON SELLING A LOT TO THE BUILDER FOR X IN ORDER TO RECOVER HIS COSTS AND MAKE A PROFIT.

UM, AND I GUESS WHAT I'M WONDERING IS NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN THAT LOT, INSTEAD OF COSTING, I DON'T KNOW, UH, $20,000 IS NOW GONNA COST.

UM, WELL, I GUESS NOW NOT, NOT QUITE.

'CAUSE IT'S NOT THE DEVELOPER'S PAYING FOR IT, BUT THE BUILDER IN, ALL RIGHT, LET, LET ME LET CHANGE CHANGE A LITTLE BIT.

IT'S THE BUILDER USE THE BUILDER ANALOGY, YOU WERE THERE.

SO THE BUILDER, INSTEAD OF HAVING TO, INSTEAD OF HAVING TO SELL A HOUSE FOR 350,000, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO SELL IT FOR THREE 70 OR 3 75 AND 360, YEAH.

360.

A BUNCH OF STUFF ON TOP OF IT.

I, I GUESS WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M GOING IS THAT THIS ISN'T GONNA, IF I'VE ALREADY GOT A PROJECT AND I'M OUT THERE MOVING DIRT AND PUTTING IN PIPES AND CABLE AND ELECTRICITY, THAT THIS IS REALLY NOT GONNA AFFECT ME AS THE DEVELOPER.

WELL, IT, IT, IT DOES HARDER TO SELL THE BUILDER TO THE DEGREE.

RIGHT? SO GO BACK.

SO THE DEVELOPER IS BANKING ON THE FACT THAT HE CAN SELL THESE LOTS TO A BUILDER.

THE BUILDER IS BANKING ON THE FACT THAT HE CAN SELL THESE LOTS TO AN END BUYER.

RIGHT? AND SO HE'S ASSUMING HOW MUCH RIGHT? ECONOMICS, HOW MUCH WILL SOMEBODY PAY FOR THIS? AND SO IN THIS CASE, RIGHT, WE'RE GOING UP ABOUT 10, $11,000 TOTAL.

SO THE QUESTION IS, WILL THE CONSUMER PAY AN EXTRA $11,000 FOR THAT HOUSE, RIGHT? THAT'S THE QUESTION.

'CAUSE AT SOME POINT, AS MUCH AS YOU LIKE IT, YOU GO IN AND YOU'RE LIKE, OH YEAH, I'LL DO THIS, DO THAT.

YOU TAP OUT, RIGHT? IT'S JUST LIKE WITH A CAR, RIGHT? AND THEY TRY TO UPSELL YOU AND, AND, AND YOU.

THAT'S ALL I CAN PAY AND I CAN'T PAY ANY MORE THAN THAT.

PART OF WHY WE LOOK AT, IF YOU WANNA GO BACK TO THE OTHER CITIES IS, IS THIS QUESTION OF WHAT'S EVERYBODY ELSE CHARGING, RIGHT? BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THERE WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT IS, WELL, ARE WE HURTING OURSELVES BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO A DIFFERENT COMMUNITY, RIGHT? AND AND THAT'S WHAT YOU WORRY ABOUT.

I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE LOOK AT THIS.

IF YOU LOOK AT SINE, IF YOU LOOK AT SAWS, IF YOU LOOK AT NBU, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S WHY WE STAY.

SO NBU IS THAT WHOLE AREA NORTH OF US, RIGHT? AND SOME OF OUR RESIDENTS ARE IN NBU.

SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE PROPERTIES WE HAVE ARE IN NBU AND ARE PAYING THAT.

THEY'RE PAYING A MUCH HIGHER FEE.

AND SO WHAT WE WOULD SAY IS THIS IS WHERE IT BECOMES A LARGER ISSUE.

AND, AND, RIGHT.

BUT, BUT IT'S A LITTLE BIT, LET ME KIND OF GO BACK.

I'LL OFFER THIS UP AND COMMISSIONER, HOW YOU'LL LOVE THIS ONE.

'CAUSE WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION EVERY TIME WE PASS DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, WHETHER IT'S A FEE OR IT'S SOME OTHER STANDARD THAT CAN ADD TO THE COST OF A PROJECT.

SO WE'VE HAD THE DEBATE OVER AND OVER WHEN WE GO, UM, WHEN WE INCREASE THE DESIGN OF STREETS, 'CAUSE OUR STREETS WEREN'T HOLDING UP, THAT'S AN EXTRA COST THAT ROLLS INTO THAT HOME PRICE.

WHEN WE SAY YOU GOTTA HAVE A 10 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK, NOT A FIVE FOOT, THAT GOES INTO THE COST OF THE LOT, RIGHT? SO THERE ARE ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT STACK ON ONE ANOTHER.

UM, BUT AGAIN, I THINK THE PROBLEM IS STUFF'S JUST GETTING MORE EXPENSIVE.

NOW, THE DEVELOPERS WOULD TELL YOU, LAND'S GETTING MORE EXPENSIVE TO BUY RAW LAND THAT'S GETTING MORE EXPENSIVE TOO.

SO IT'S NOT JUST THIS FEE, IT'S

[01:20:01]

BUT, BUT WHAT WE THINK IS THAT THE PHASE IN WE'VE PROPOSED IS, IS A FAIR FEE THAT WE THINK DOESN'T DISRUPT TOO MUCH.

'CAUSE NBU JUST WENT UP ON THEIRS.

I MEAN, THEY MADE A HUGE LEAP, I BELIEVE RIGHT OFF THE BAT THAT YOU SAW IN THE MEDIA WITHOUT MUCH PHASE IN, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR THE REASONS THEY MADE.

WE TEND TO DO IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

UM, SO YEAH, I I DON'T WANNA STAND HERE AND SAY IT WON'T HAVE AN IMPACT, BUT IF IT HAS TOO MUCH OF AN IMPACT, THEN I THINK WE ARE ALL SITTING NOW WITH COUNCIL AS A COMMUNITY TO SAY WE'VE GOT A BIGGER PROBLEM.

AND, AND HOW DO WE WANNA MAKE THAT ADJUSTMENT? SO, UM, I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY AGAIN.

UM, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE MENTIONED THE, THE, UM, HOW THE PLA DATE IS.

IT'S YOUR MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT.

UM, OKAY.

SO WHAT COUNSEL NEEDS TO DO, WHAT YOU'LL RECOMMEND THAT THEY DO IS THAT THEY ADOPT, THEY'RE GONNA KIND OF DO TWO THINGS.

THEY'RE GONNA ADOPT THE MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE RATE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'VE GOT HERE.

AND THAT WILL BECOME EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY RIGHT AWAY.

THAT IS THE MAXIMUM THAT THEY CAN CHARGE TO ANY PROPERTY THAT IS, THAT RECORDS A PLAT AFTER THAT DAY, THAT IS THE MAX.

SO, SO ANYBODY WHO GOES IN AND RECORDS THEIR PLAT THE DAY AFTER THIS ALL PASSES, THEY'RE LOCKED IN.

SO WHEN CITY OF ASSURES IN 25 YEARS GOES UP TO $50,000 FOR THEIR IMPACT FEES, THOSE FOLKS THAT OWN PROPERTIES THAT WERE PLATTED THAT DAY IN 2025, THEY'RE STILL MAXED AT THE, UH, THE 14,000.

THEY CITY CAN NEVER MAKE THEM CHARGE MORE UNLESS THEIR PLAT IS AMENDED OR, OR, OR STATE LAW CHANGES OR RE PLATTERED OR STATE LAW MAY CHANGE, RIGHT? UM, BUT WHAT COUNCIL CAN DO AT ANY TIME IS EVEN IF THEY ADOPT THIS PHASE IN, THEY CAN GO BACK AND THEY CAN CHANGE THAT AND THEY CAN SAY, WELL, THIS PHASE IN IT'S STILL TOO MUCH.

IT HAS TOTALLY STOPPED DEVELOPMENT.

WE'RE HEARING FROM EVERY CORNER OF THE CITY THAT THIS IS A PROBLEM, WE'RE GONNA RATCHET IT BACK.

THEY, THEY CAN DO THAT ANYTIME, PROBABLY WON'T HAPPEN.

BUT THEY HAVE THAT POWER.

OR IF THEY SAY, WE, UH, WE'RE NOT GONNA LISTEN TO CIAC, THEY'RE NUTS.

WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE ONLY GONNA CHARGE 10% OF THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE AND THEY CHANGE THEIR MINDS IN TWO MONTHS, THEY CAN GO AND AND CHANGE IT AGAIN.

SO THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL FIRST ADOPT WHAT THEY, YOU KNOW, WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION AND THEIR CONSIDERATION WHAT THEY, WHAT, WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE AND IS PROBABLY GONNA BE WHAT IS RECOMMENDED.

SO THE MAXIMUM RATE THAT'LL BE EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, THE, THE PHASE IN THAT, THAT CAN CHANGE.

SO, OKAY.

I I WAS THAT CLOSE TO UNDERSTANDING IT AND THEN YOU THREW THROUGH THE CURVE BALL.

THAT, LEMME LEMME TELL YOU WHERE I'M CONFUSED NOW.

WE COLLECT THESE IMPACT FEES AT BUILDING PERMIT.

AND SO YOU WERE SAYING, LET'S SAY WE DECIDE TO GO, OR COUNCIL DECIDES TO GO 100% ON OCTOBER 1ST, BUT SOMEBODY'S ALREADY FILED THEIR PLAN SO THEY PAY THE OLD FEES.

SO YOUR PER STATE LAW, YOUR MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE FEE IS SET AT PLAT FILING DATE.

OKAY? RIGHT? AND, AND THAT'S WHAT SETS AND THAT CARRIES FORWARD.

AND SO HOWEVER, THE FEE AMOUNT THAT'S CHARGED BASED ON YOUR PLA CAN GO ANYWHERE TO THE MAX OR LESS THAN THAT, RIGHT? MM-HMM .

SO WHEN WE'VE GOT, LISA CAN HELP ME ON THIS.

AGAIN, IF SHE LOOKS UP, WHEN SOMEBODY WALKS IN AND THEY WANT TO PULL A BUILDING PERMIT, IF THAT PROPERTY WAS PLATTED 25, 30 YEARS AGO, WE LOOK THROUGH THIS SCHEDULE OR CHART TO FIND THEY PLATTED WITHIN THIS DAY, THIS IS WHAT THEIR MAX ACCESSIBLE FEE IS.

BUT DIDN'T WE PUT IN PLACE A, YOU COME IN AND PLAT A SUBDIVISION, BUT YOU DON'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT.

DOESN'T THAT PLAT EXPIRE IF YOU DON'T FILE IT IF YOU DON'T COME IN WITH A FINAL PLAT? BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS SITUATION IS THAT YOU'VE GOT A SUBDIVISION AND YOU'VE GOT LIKE ONE LOT OR THREE LOTS THAT DIDN'T GET BUILT ON.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

RIGHT? MOST TIMES IT HAPPENS IN FAIRLY SHORT ORDER, THEY BUILD IT OUT.

BUT OCCASIONALLY AND MORE OFTEN FOR COMMERCIAL, YOU WILL FIND SOMEBODY PLAT PROPERTY AND IT WILL NOT DEVELOP FOR 10 YEARS,

[01:25:01]

15 YEARS.

AND FOR WHATEVER REASON, SOMEBODY WILL THEN COME IN AND PULL A BUILDING PERMIT AND THAT'S WHEN IT TRIGGERS BACK TO THE PLAT FILING DATE.

SO IT'S, IT'S MOSTLY COMMERCIAL LESS SO RES, BUT, BUT IT, IT, SO IT'S, IT'S BASED ON THE FINAL PLAT, NOT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, IT'S THE FILING DATE WHEN YOU FILE THAT PLAT WITH ACCOUNT THE FINAL PLAT.

AND YOU CAN'T FILE THAT UNTIL YOU HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE.

SO WHAT WE WILL NOT, LET ME BACK UP AND SAY THIS.

SO WE DO SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENTS TO LET YOU FILE PLATS BEFORE ACCEPTANCE OF INFRASTRUCTURE.

WE HAVE NOT, OR WE DID NOT WITH ROADWAY ALLOW PEOPLE TO DO THAT SOLELY TO END RUN THE IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE.

RIGHT? BUT AGAIN, WHAT WE WOULD SAY IS, I WOULD TREAT THEM THE SAME WAY.

IF I HAD SOMEBODY WHO WALKS IN AND GOES, I GOT THIS COMMERCIAL BUILDING I'M TRYING TO BUILD, I GOT THIS WATER LINE, I WANNA MOBILIZE PEOPLE AT THE SAME TIME, CAN YOU LET ME DO THAT? WE WOULD LET 'EM DO THAT STILL, WE'D TREAT 'EM THE SAME WAY YOU HAVE, BUT WE WOULD NOT ALLOW PEOPLE TO COME IN AND EITHER PREPAY THEIR FEES OR RECORD THEIR PLAT WITH THE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT SOLELY TO BEAT OR, OR LET ME SAY, STAFF WOULD NOT RECOMMEND WE DO THAT TO ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEAH.

I THINK WHAT YOU'RE TELLING YES.

IF IF THERE'S SOLE REASON, THE, WHAT THE RULES SAY IS WE WON'T APPROVE, YOU CAN'T RECORD YOUR FINAL PLAT TILL ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE'S END.

AND THEN YOU HAVE UM, I DON'T WANNA CALL IT A WAIVER, BUT YOU HAVE A WAY OF GIVING THEM A LITTLE LEEWAY RIGHT.

TO WHERE THEY CAN FILE IT EARLY AND, BUT YOU WOULD NOT ALLOW THEM TO FILE IT EARLY JUST TO AVOID THE IMPACT FEES.

AND ULTIMATELY IT'S COUNCIL'S DECISION.

WE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND A COUNCIL TO DO THAT.

OKAY? RIGHT.

WE WOULD TREAT PEOPLE THE SAME WAY WE HAVE.

SO IF I, LIKE QT ALWAYS DOES IT GENERALLY.

SO IF I GET A QT THAT COMES IN AND THEY SAY, HEY, I'M READY TO GO.

MY BUILDING PLANS READY.

I NEED TO BUILD THIS WATER LINE THOUGH, AND I WANNA MOBILIZE AT THE SAME TIME AND, AND IT'S GONNA TAKE ME FOUR MONTHS TO BUILD THAT, BUT THEY'RE TWO MONTHS OUT FROM THE UPDATE, WE WOULD DO THE SAME THING WE DID FOR EVERYONE.

AND, AND THE ONLY REASON I BRING IT UP IS BECAUSE AT AT, AT FINAL PLA STAGE, THEY'VE GOT THE STREETS AND THE WATER AND THE SEWER AND THE CABLE AND THE ELECTRICITY, ALL THAT'S IN.

SO THEY'RE READY TO START PULLING, BUILDING PERMITS.

UH, NOT ALL OF THAT IS IN, BUT ALL OF THE CITY INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN.

SO THE WATER, SEWER AND STREETS ARE ALL IN.

THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE THE CABLE OR THE POWER, OR THEY GOTTA HAVE THE STREET LIGHTS GOING.

WE DID, WE DID CHANGE THE CODE.

SO THE POWER HAS TO BE IN FOR THE STREET LIGHTS.

WELL, TO RECORD THE PLA YES.

THEY HAVE TO HAVE THEIR NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE.

WELL, I I I'M DOESN'T INCLUDE CABLE, BUT IT INCLUDES OKAY, SO THEY'RE NOT THE, I I'M BACK TO THE QUESTION ABOUT RUSHING TO GET THESE THINGS IN BEFORE THE NEW, BEFORE THE NEW FEES.

THAT'S GONNA BE KIND OF HARD TO DO.

IF IF IT'S, I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT THEY'RE GONNA, WHAT WE'LL, WHAT WE'RE GONNA GET IS WE'RE GONNA GET SOMEBODY WHO'S WITHIN ABOUT TWO MONTHS, THEY'RE GONNA BE CHEWING ON THEIR CONTRACTOR.

ALMOST COMPLETED, CORRECT.

AND THEY'RE GONNA BE CHEWING ON ENGINEERING INSPECTION STAFF AND PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTION STAFF TO ACCEPT THE THING AND GET IT DONE AND NOT DRAG IT OUT.

THAT'S WHAT WE, THAT'S WHAT WE REALLY GET.

I I WOULD SAY WE GET THAT A LOT NOW.

THERE'S A LOT OF CHEWING.

YOU KNOW, IF YOU SEE BRIAN TIMMONS, HE GETS CHEWED ON A LOT, UM, FOR THAT REASON.

'CAUSE EVERY TIME IS MONEY AND THE LONGER THIS THING DELAYS, RIGHT? THAT'S IT.

SO WE'LL GET MORE OF THAT, BUT IT, IT IS WHAT IT IS.

IF I COULD ADD THAT MEANS I'LL BE SENDING A LOT OF EMAILS TO KATHY AND LARRY GOING, HEY, WE REALLY NEED TO GET OUT THERE, REALLY NEED TO INSPECT THIS THING, DA DA DA DA DA.

DID WE TELL 'EM THEY NEED TO DO THIS? IF I COULD ADD TO THAT, JUST TO GIVE YOU A REFERENCE, WE JUST WENT THROUGH THIS IN SAN ANTONIO DOING SUBDIVISION AND THE, UH, THE, UH, IMPACT UPDATES.

SO JUNE WAS OUR DEADLINE TO HAVE EVERYTHING SUBMITTED.

AND IN APRIL AND MAY, YOU HAD PLATS THAT WERE ALREADY CLOSE TO FI FINALIZING WHAT BRIAN'S SAYING, PUSHED TO GET RECORDED IN TERMS OF YOU'RE NOT GONNA TAKE SOMETHING FROM THE BEGINNING TO THE END WITHIN THREE MONTHS.

YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE SAYING OCTOBER, YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE VERY, IT IS VERY UNLIKELY FOR YOU TO COME IN TODAY AND SAY, I NEED TO FILE THIS AND GET THIS GOING.

IT'S STUFF TOWARDS THE END THAT'S GONNA MAKE THAT LAST PUSH.

SO IT IT'S THE, THE PROJECTS THAT ARE, THAT ARE BASICALLY DONE CORRECT.

THEY'LL BE, THEY'LL BE PUSHED TO GET DONE.

AND FRANKLY I'M GONNA SAY WE'RE GONNA PUSH STAFF TO GET THOSE DONE TOO.

WHAT I DO NOT WANT TO HEAR COMING TO YOU GUYS COMING TO COUNCIL IS, LOOK, WE WOULD'VE HAD THIS THING, BUT STAFF MESSED AROUND AND COULDN'T GET OUT TO INSPECT THE THING FOR A WEEK.

WHEN IT WAS READY TO GO.

AND THEN THEY HAD A WHOLE BUNCH OF PUNCH LIST STUFF THAT THEY HADN'T SAID BEFORE.

AND IT TOOK ME TWO WEEKS TO DO IT, BUT THEN I COULDN'T GET 'EM OUT FOR ANOTHER WEEK.

AND AT THAT POINT I HAD MISSED IT.

THE LAST COUPLE WEEKS OF SEPTEMBER IF THEY ARE PART OF THE INSPECTIONS PROCESS.

THAT'S WHAT I CAN'T HAVE HAPPENED.

SO NOBODY'S TAKEN VACATION

[01:30:01]

AND, AND SO AGAIN, WE'RE, WHAT I'M THINKING OF IS, UM, UM, WEER OLD WHEATER, OUR WHEATER STAIN UP HERE WHERE WE HAD THAT, WE, WE, WE'VE GOT THAT OLD SUBDIVISION THAT NOTHING EVER HAPPENED WITH IT.

AND I THOUGHT THAT'S WHY THE, THE UM, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A UDC OR ANYWAY, THERE WAS AN ORDINANCE THAT THAT PLATS EXPIRED IF YOU DIDN'T DO SOMETHING WITH THEM IN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, THEY WERE VOIDED.

SO WE HAVE EXPIRATION DATES ON PRELIMINARY PLATS AND FINAL PLATS, BUT NOT IF THEY'RE RECORDED.

SO IF SOMEONE CAME IN WITH ONE OF THOSE LOTS IN THE LIVE OAK HILLS SUBDIVISION AND THEY CONSTRUCTED THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S NOT THERE NOW THAT'S REQUIRED THEIR FEES WOULD, NOW THEY'RE PRE 87.

THEY'RE PRE 87.

THAT'S A WHOLE, A WHOLE NOTHER ODD, ODD MODEL.

I UNDERSTAND ACTUALLY.

THEN THEY WOULD BE ASSESSED AT THE CURRENT RATE BECAUSE THEY'RE PRE OKAY, NEVERMIND.

I DON'T HOW MANY INDIVIDUAL, THAT BAD EXAMPLE.

YEAH, I DON'T HAVE MONEY.

BUT IF THEY HAD BEEN PLATTED IN UH, 2005, THEN THEY'D BE PAYING THE OLD RATES.

GOOD ENOUGH.

AGAIN, LIKE THE HERITAGE OAKS, THE ONE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF PARKWAY, THEY'RE RE PLATTING SO THEY RESET THE NEW DATE ON THAT REPL.

I MEAN I COULD KEEP BEATING ON THAT, BUT I, BUT I THINK I GET THE IDEA.

SO IT'S NOT A BIG IMPACT.

, WE THINK IT'S A, IT'S, IT'S AN IMPACT.

WE THINK IT'S A FAIR IMPACT.

NOT SURE HOW YOU DO IT OTHERWISE.

OTHERWISE WE STRETCH THIS THING OUT FOREVER.

AND NOBODY PAYS IT.

SO ONE, SO ONE MORE.

WE TALKED ABOUT ANYTHING LESS THAN THE MAXIMUM AND THE RATE PAYERS HAVE TO PAY PART OF IT.

THAT'S THE RATES GO UP.

SO, AND THE RATE PAYERS ARE ALREADY GONNA EAT SOME OF THIS WITH THIS PHASE IN.

RIGHT? WELL THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING.

SO IF WE DECIDE TO DO A PHASE IN, AT LEAST FOR THOSE FIRST COUPLE OF YEARS, THE RATE PAYERS GONNA ARE WILL BE SUBSIDIZING.

SO IF WE DO, IF WE RECOMMEND ANYTHING OTHER THAN 100% RIGHT NOW, IT'S GONNA AFFECT THE CURRENT RATE PAYERS.

WELL, LET'S SEE, WHAT ELSE CAN WE TALK ABOUT FOR, I'M TRYING TO PULL A PERMIT RIGHT NOW.

I THINK BEFORE YOU'LL BE RIGHT.

SO I GONNA CLARIFY.

SO IF THE NEW, SO IS YOUR HEAD HURT YET DOWN THERE, JOHN? ADOPTED BY COUNSEL.

JUST, I'M MAKING DATES UP IN MARCH.

APRIL AND THEY GO THE PHASE IN, THEN THEY'RE ON THE PHASE IN MM-HMM .

BUT THEY'RE UNDER THE NEW MAXIMUM STILL.

WELL WE DO.

AND THAT, THAT'S A FACT.

BUT I, BUT I REALLY, I REALLY HATE TO PULL A VOTE WHEN I KNOW SOMEBODY'S HERE.

UNLESS HE'S OFF ON, UNLESS HE'S, UNLESS HE'S OFF TODAY ON PURPOSE FOR SOME REASON.

SO, NO, LET'S SEE IF HE'S ON THE PHONE OR SOMETHING.

JUST MAKE SURE HE'S OKAY.

YEAH, I ASSUME.

ALRIGHT, WELL LET'S SEE.

I JUST RUN DOWN MY QUESTIONS HERE REAL QUICK.

MAKE SURE I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S, WHAT'S GOING ON WHEN IT'S GONNA GO INTO EFFECT.

SO WHEN, WHEN WE MAKE OUR, WHEN WE MAKE OUR RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL, WE CAN, WE'RE GONNA RECOMMEND AN EFFECTIVE DATE, CORRECT? OR CAN WE JUST LEAVE THAT UP TO, SO WHAT WE WOULD TEND TO SAY, WHAT YOU'RE GONNA DO IS YOU RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL, YOU BRING THAT LETTER, THAT THE, THAT LETTER UP THAT YOU YEAH, IT'S THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS.

DON'T WANT ME TO SIGN THE CIP.

IS THERE ANYTHING IN THERE ABOUT AN EFFECTIVE DATE? I I DON'T, I DON'T THINK WE TYPICALLY HAD THE, THE EFFECTIVE DATE IN EFFECTIVE RIGHT.

YOU WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE MAX FEE WITH A PHASE IN.

AND THAT, THAT WOULD BE IT.

BUT IF THE EFFECTIVE DATE IS GENERALLY RIGHT, YOU COULD SAY DELAY THE EFFECTIVE DATE.

WELL, WE WOULD SAY AT WHATEVER POINT COUNSEL HITS IT AS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

SAY, LOOK, WE DON'T WANT THE EFFECTIVE DATE FOR THE MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE TO BE TILL OCTOBER ONE.

SO I GUESS THEN THE, THE THE WELL WE, I MEAN WE COULD, WE COULD DELAY 'EM, RIGHT? IF, IF, IF WE WANNA RECOMMEND YOU DON'T DO, YOU DON'T START YEAR ONE UNTIL ONE OCTOBER.

WE CAN DO THAT.

YOU, YOU COULD, YOU COULD, YOU COULD

[01:35:01]

THAT WOULD NOT BE WHAT STAFF WOULD SAY BECAUSE WE THINK THE PHASE IN COVERS YOU FOR IT.

SO IF, IF THEN IT REALLY BECOMES, IF IF IT, IT REALLY THEN BECOMES WHENEVER COUNCIL APPROVES WHATEVER COUNCIL APPROVES THAT BE THAT BEC THAT'S ONE OF THAT EFFECT.

THAT REALLY IS IT.

SO WE CAN, WE CAN, WE CAN RECOMMEND A HUNDRED PERCENT, WE CAN RECOMMEND SOMETHING LESS THAN A HUNDRED PERCENT.

WE COULD RECOMMEND A PHASE IN.

SO I, I I, I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS IF IF SOMEBODY'S GONNA MAKE A MOTION, WE NEED, WE NEED TO KNOW, WE NEED TO RECOMMEND, UM, THE PERCENTAGE, WHETHER IT'S A HUNDRED PERCENT OR SOMETHING LESS, AND THEN WHETHER WE WANT IT ALL RIGHT NOW OR WHETHER WE WANT TO PHASE IT IN.

DOES THAT SOUND ABOUT RIGHT? AND THEN THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND THE CIP AND THE LAND.

SO YOU ADOPT THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND THE CIPS PRESENTED BY STAFF, AGAIN, I'M GONNA OFFER THIS THE, YOU ADOPT THE MAXIMUM ASSESSABLE RATE AS PRESENTED.

AS PRESENTED AND THAT WE ADOPT A PHASE AND AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

IF WE, I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYBODY OBJECT TO THAT AND SO I'M BUT SPEAKING, DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.

IF WE WANT TO DO THE MAXIMUM, RIGHT? RIGHT.

THAT'S WHAT YOU, YOU YEAH.

YEAH, BUT WE CAN RECOMMEND SOMETHING LESS.

YOU COULD, ALRIGHT, SO LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, THE IP MAXIMUM, WE JUST DO THAT.

THE LAND USE STUFF.

YOU DID THE MASTER PLAN, BUT THAT FOR THE MASTER PLAN, WHICH, WHICH IS, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE MASTER PLAN, RIGHT? IT'S A, IT'S A DIFFERENT DOCUMENT.

SO LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND THEN IF WE WANT WHATEVER, WHATEVER VALUE OF THE, WHAT DO YOU SEE ABOUT, OH, YOU DO THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS.

YEAH, THE IMPACT FEE.

CIP.

AND THEN YOU SET THE MAXIMUM FEE AND THEN WHETHER OR NOT TO DO A PHASE IN OR GENERALLY WHAT THAT PHASE IN IS.

SO YOU WILL RECOMMEND THAT THEY ADOPT THE MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE, THEY CAN CHOOSE TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO, BUT THEY HAVE TO SET THAT.

SO WHAT I'M LOOKING AT AGAIN, AND I'M SORRY TO KEEP GOING OVER THIS, I JUST LIKE TO DO IT CORRECTLY.

SO I'M SEEING THAT, THAT THE MOTION, THE RECOMMENDATION NEEDS AT LEAST AT LEAST THREE.

THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, AND THEN THE MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT FEE.

WHATEVER WE WANT.

WE SUGGEST THE MAX FEE BE WHETHER THAT'S THE MAX MAX OR 50% OF THE MAX OR WHATEVER.

AND THEN IF WE, THE FOURTH ONE WOULD BE IF WE WANT TO DO A PHASE AND, AND WHAT YOU WANT THAT TO BE CHARGED AT.

SO LEMME LEMME TRY AGAIN.

LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS.

IF I, IF I COULD, I THINK I'VE GOT IT DOWN.

GIVE IT A TRY.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE, UH, CITY CHURCH'S WATER AND WASTEWATER LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

THE MAXIMUM IMPACT FEES AS PRESENTED BY STAFF AND THE THREE YEAR PHASE IN AS PRESENTED BY STAFF TO BE EFFECTIVE ON A DATE DETERMINED BY CITY COUNCIL CHAIR THERE.

DID HE NAIL IT? OKAY.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND.

YEAH, I'M JUST MAKING WORK FOR EVERYBODY.

HE, HE HAD IT ALL FIGURED OUT DOWN THERE ALREADY.

I GLAD YOU'RE GETTING THERE, .

BUT IT'S ALSO GOOD TO TELL DEVELOPERS THEY THOUGHT ABOUT THIS A LOT, RIGHT? THERE'S A POSITIVE TO THAT THEY DIDN'T JUST, ALRIGHT.

I'M NOT, I'M NOT GONNA TRY TO REPEAT THAT.

I HAVE, I HAVE A MOTION FROM, FROM, UM, UH, MR. WALLACE AND A SECOND FROM MS. BROWN TO RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

THE COMPREHENSIVE OR THE, UH, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

THE MAXIMUM, UH, IMPACT FEE AS PRESENTED BY STAFF AND THE PHASE IN SCHEDULE AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

IS IT WITH CITY COUNCIL? WITH AND WITH CITY? THAT'S FINE.

WAS THE PHASE IN SCHEDULE AGAIN? JUST OCTOBER 1ST DATE WAS WHENEVER, WHATEVER CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO SET, IF THEY WANT.

I'LL LEAVE THAT IN.

GOT IT.

ANYBODY ELSE? RICHARD? MY APOLOGIES FOR HAVING TO WALK OUT AGAIN, BUT WHAT, WHAT

[01:40:01]

WHEN I INITIALLY SAW THIS, I WAS WONDERING WHY, HOW MUCH ARE WE GONNA LOSE BY GOING 50% IN THE FIRST YEAR? SO WE'RE GONNA DO 50% ON OCTOBER 1ST FOR A YEAR, AND THEN WE'RE GONNA GO TO 75 AND THEN WE'RE GONNA GO TO A HUNDRED.

SO, SO IT'S, IT, IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO ESTIMATE BECAUSE AGAIN, I THINK YOU HAD STEPPED OUT THE MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE FEE IS SET AT THE PLAT FILING DATE.

MM-HMM .

YEAH, I I UNDERSTAND ALL THAT.

AND, AND SO I, I'M, I'M JUST, IT IS JUST KIND OF A KIND OF OF A RHETORICAL QUESTION.

HOW MUCH ARE WE GONNA LOSE? 'CAUSE WELL, I DON'T, I DON'T WHEN WHEN IS THE YEAR THREE GONNA TAKE EFFECT? IS THAT GONNA BE 25, 27, 26, 27? WELL SEE.

UN UN UNDER THE, UNDER THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE, THAT'S THAT'S BEEN MADE MM-HMM .

THAT EFFECTIVE DATE WOULD BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

IT IT, IT, I THINK IT WAS, BRIAN WAS SAYING IT'S TYPICALLY WHEN THEY APPROVE IT, IT'S, IT'S WHATEVER DATE THEY APPROVE IT ON.

BUT THEY COULD, THEY COULD SET A DIFFERENT DATE AND THEN THE QUESTION WAS ASKED.

DURING THOSE FIRST TWO YEARS, RATE PAYERS, CURRENT RATE PAYERS WILL SUB, WILL BE SUBSIDIZING AT SOME POINT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN, CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.

BUT AGAIN, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THEY CAN TELL YOU.

I, I, I GOT ALL THAT.

BUT WHAT, WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THE, I MEAN, YOU LOOK AT WHAT PFLUGERVILLE IS, YOU LOOK AT WHAT NBU DID AND IF I READ THE, THE NEWS CORRECTLY, NBU RAISED THEIR RATES TO 25,000 FOR THE PURPOSES OF STALLING DEVELOPMENT.

I I DON'T THINK IT'S WORKING.

IT, IT, IT'S GONNA HAPPEN.

SINE IS UP ABOVE WHERE WE ARE AND THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH DEVELOPMENT IN SINE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE A PHASING SCHEDULE OR NOT, BUT, UH, NOBODY'S NOT GOING TO SINE, UM, SAS HAS TOO MUCH MONEY ANYWAY.

THEY GOT OTHER SOURCES OF MONEY.

SO DOES AUSTIN AND EVERYBODY ELSE DOWN THERE.

THEY'RE PROBABLY GONNA RAISE THEIR RATES TOO.

SO I DON'T THINK WE NEED SUCH A GENEROUS PHASING SCHEDULE.

I THINK WE JUST, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IN OCTOBER GO 75 AND THEN A HUNDRED THE NEXT YEAR.

BUT I, I THINK WE JUST NEED TO RAISE THAT UP AND START COLLECTING MONEY BECAUSE THESE THINGS ARE GONNA COST A LOT OF MONEY.

AND I, I THINK, LIKE I MENTIONED LAST TIME, JUST AS A, AS A BIG CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, UH, THE SOUTH PLANT WAS SUPPOSED TO COST $4 MILLION.

IT ENDED UP COSTING CLOSE TO 10.

THE FIRST EXPANSION'S GONNA COST CLOSE TO 40.

CONSTRUCTION HAS GONE UP.

WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA BE PAYING TONS OF MONEY.

YOU GUYS GOT A LOT ON YOUR PLATE BETWEEN NEAR TERM AND 2030.

THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF ON THERE AND I KNOW YOU HAVE ESTIMATES IN HERE AND YOU HAVE A LITTLE FLUFF IN IT, BUT, UH, IT'S STILL A LOT OF MONEY.

I, I'D PREFER JUST TO START COLLECTING AS SOON AS WE CAN THOUGH.

I, I'M, I DON'T REALLY CARE FOR A THREE YEAR PHASE AND I'D LIKE TO GO SOMETHING SOONER, BUT IF, IF THE MOTION STAYS AS IT IS, IT STAYS AS IT IS.

DO I DO, I DO.

SO ONE MORE TIME.

SO THE MOTION BEFORE THE COMMITTEE RIGHT NOW IS BASICALLY WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN THERE, OR DID SEE , THANK YOU.

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE, THAT WILL, THAT WILL BE DETERMINED BY, UM, IS IS TO BE DETERMINED BY CITY COUNCIL, CORRECT? CORRECT.

AND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY, SO, AND I VOTE AT THIS POINT.

WHAT? HUH? NO, NO, THAT'S FINE.

NO.

, I'M GONNA TIE 'EM TO THEIR CHAIRS.

WHAT I'M GONNA DO, UM, OKAY, SO AN I VOTE AT THIS POINT IS TO RECOMMEND WHAT YOU SEE ON YOUR SCREEN WITH THE, EXCEPT OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE.

SO PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE.

LET'S STAND, LET'S START DOWN HERE.

WE'RE UH, WE'RE SHORT, BUT OH YEAH, THAT VOTING, AYE.

OH, THAT'S RIGHT.

I'M SORRY.

YEAH, NEVERMIND.

YEAH, I CAN'T USE THE MACHINE.

ALRIGHT, SO

[01:45:01]

DR.

PENCE HO AYE AYE AYE, AYE.

SO THAT'S SIX AYES, ONE OPPOSED MOTION PASSES.

AND JUST TO BE CLEAR FOR THE RECORD, UM, IT'S, AS I UNDERSTAND, YOUR NO VOTE WAS 'CAUSE YOU WON A SHORTER PHASE IN TO GO UP MORE QUICKLY.

IT'S A HELP TO HAVE THE, THE NO REASON THAT WE, COUNCIL, CITY COUNCIL COULD MAKE THAT DETERMINATE.

CITY COUNCIL CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT TO.

ALL WE'RE ALL WE'RE DOING THIS EVENING IS, IS WE'RE JUST MAKING THIS RECOMMENDATION.

CITY COUNCIL IS THE FINAL, IT'S, IT'S JUST LIKE A ZONING AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

THEY'LL, THEY'LL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION, BUT AGAIN, HELPFUL FOR THEM TO KNOW IT WAS, HE WANTED A FASTER PHASE AND AS OPPOSED TO RIGHT.

NOT THAT HE WAS YES, THE RATES ARE TOO HIGH.

RATES ARE TOO HIGH.

AND THANK YOU FOR THE FACT THAT WE DON'T USE THE ELECTRONIC.

I FORGOT ALL ABOUT THAT.

SO THANK YOU .