Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 08.08.2011 CC-SMinutes of the Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Monday, August 8, 2019 The City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met in Special Session on the above date with Mayor George Garver presiding. Council Present: Council Absent: George Garver, Patty Eason, Troy Hellmann, Danny Meigs, Bili Sattler, Pat Berryman, Rachael Jonrowe, Tommy Gonzalez Staff Present: Paul Brandenburg, Bridget Chapman, Rachel Saucier, Keith Hutchinson Minutes A Call to Order - SPECiAL SESSION TO BEGIN NO EARLIER THAN 6:00 PM B Public Hearing and discussion, review, and possible action on the 2011 redistricting pian -- Mayor George Garver Garver welcomed everyone and stated that Council is going to follow a tight agenda process this evening. He added that before starting with the actual agenda, he wishes to share some information and perceptions with Council. He said that Council has been spinning wheels for weeks fussing about how best to redistrict, and thus far has spent a considerable amount of money for legal fees and the clock is still clicking. He continued that tonight he is hoping that Council will reach a decision on how best to redistrict our city, and suggested an agreement to spend whatever amount of time is necessary to achieve this goal. He added that Council will be polite and courteous in all interactions. Garver continued that the focus on what is best for our city is the recognition that this is a subjective issue with differing points of view, and there will be no room for personal conflicts. He added that City Ordinance Section 2.24.150 states "The Mayor and Council members shall treat each other with dignity, respect and civility". He continued by reminding Council that every word said, every facial expression made is being recorded for perpetuity. Garver noted that he reviewed the last meeting and wondered how individuals who might be considering Georgetown as a location for investment would react to Council's demeanor. He inquired what kind of image does Council ivant r fhe City and does Council want to be perceived as a dysfunctional body? He concluded that he hopes not. Garver noted that he does not think that the 'last meeting was a shinning example of quality governrnPni in action. He commented that if Council is really interested in helping make Georgetown a City of Excellence Council should lead the way in a most positive manner. He added that personal issues should have no place at the dais, and as elected officials for this city and the behavior should demonstrate maturity of judgment, quality, caring, transparency, and above all honesty. Garver respectfully reminded Council that the City Charter and the City Ordinances delegates to the Mayor the responsibility of chairing all meetings of the Council. He said it further states that no Council member shall speak unless recognized by the chair and no council member shall interrupt another council member. Garver indicated that before a council member who has just spoken is recognized again all other members of the council shall be given the right to speak. He added that in most cases, statements by Counci.' members shall be statements of personal perceptions not questions directed to other council members and questions directed to other council members may have a place but they must flow through the chair. Garver said, in summary, for Council to please remember that Ordinance Section 2.24.140 states that during Council meetings, Council members shat,' preserve order and decorum and shall, neither by conversation or otherwise, delay or interrupt the proceedings nor refuse to obey the orders of the Mayor or presiding officer or the rules of the Council City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 1 of 7 Pages Garver moved to the agenda for the evening and indicated that first Council will have Mr. Caputo present each of the ten possible redistricting maps in a summary form. He stated that the number of the Map will be the identification key. Each Council member will record, on a piece of paper which has been provided by staff, one of three following scores for each Map. He indicated that a numeric score of 1, 2, or 3 for every plan presented by Mr. Caputo should have a score listed by each council person. Garver indicated that the rank shall include the following: One, I like this plan and this should be listed for further consideration; two, this map might still be one for further consideration but currently does not appear to be our best option; and three, this map is not one that I believe is deserving of further consideration. Garver commented that at the conclusion of the presentation by Mr. Caputo Council will discuss the presented maps and tabulate the scores recorded by each council member. He said that it is hoped that the scoring yields two or three possibilities for a category one consideration. Garver noted that once Council has identified two or three promising possibilities the public hearing will take place. He continued that as in the past, Council will listen to the presenters but not engage any person during or after their presentation. He added that after the public hearing has taken place Council will discuss the two or three final possibilities and then offer a motion or motions until a final decision has been made by Council. He said that the final plan selected by Council will need to become an ordinance and as such there must be two readings of the action council is considering at two separate future meetings, with the public again being given the right to offer their observations. Garver introduced Mr. Caputo to present the maps. Caputo began with the plans previously reviewed by Council starting at Plan A. He said that Plan A splits the east side with District 1 south of University Drive and it takes up part of old District 3. District 7 backs out of Old Town and University and is more oriented along 130. District 6 picks up the entire university area and parts of old District 2. Sun City is split along northern and southern boundaries that are combined with the lake area and River Chase and parts of old District 3. District 2 is more central and takes up Williams Drive. District 5 is mainly the same but picks up part of old District 6. Garver asked for Council questions regarding Plan A and Council had none. Caputo introduced Plan A Revised and noted the only difference is the orientation of the Sun City split east and west. Garver asked for Council questions regarding Plan A Revised and Council had none. Caputo introduced Plan Al Revised wid indicated there were modifications as requested by the county such as removing the tail along Cowan's Creek to Sun City along the northern boundary along District 3 and into District 4 with minor changes along Williams Drive in District 2. He added that this plan is mostly the same as Pian A. Caputo asked and Council had no questions. Caputo introduced Plan B and said it uses the same split in Sun City along the northern and southern sides, the east side is the same, and District 5 is mostly the same. He said Sun City's smaller portion is combined in District 2 and collects Georgetown Villages and the Heritage Oaks area, everything along the Shell Road area, the Estralla area, and spots along the northern portion Williams Drive just south of the airport. He continued that District 3 is south of the highway except for a small piece of District 1 along Leander Road. Caputo asked and Council had no questions. Garver asked and Caputo introduced Plan B Revised. Caputo noted that this plan is similar to A Revised with the only difference between B and B Revised is the split of Sun City. Caputo asked and Council had no questions. Garver asked and Caputo introduced Plan 131 Revised. Caputo indicated that Plan B1 Revised is modified in response to the County's questions about election precincts and cuts the tail along the northern portion of the neighborhood along Cowan Creek, but otherwise this is the same as B Revised. Caputo asked and Council had no questions. Caputo introduced B2 Revised and mentioned it.was discussed previously. He said the only change between this and B1 Revised is flipping the district numbers between District 2 and District 3. He said District 2 is everything south of Williams Drive except the portion of land south of Leander Drive that is in District 1. He added that he smalier part of Sun City, Villages, Estralla, and the area north of Williams Drive just south of the airport will be District 3. City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 2 of 7 Pages Caputo asked and Council had no questions. Garver asked and Caputo introduced Plan E. Caputo reviewed the plan presented based on the Mayor's suggestions to keep the "-1" revised version of the east -west split of Sun City. He said the plan was to make one district that combines the rest of Sun City , the Shell Road area, Georgetown Villages, Heritages Oaks, the lake, and the Estrella Road area. He said everything south of Williams Drive, including District 2 and District 3, are merged into one district to balance population. Otherwise, he said the east side is the same as all the other plans. Garver asked for Council questions regarding Plan E and Council had none. Caputo introduced Plan F as the one drawn at the last meeting. He said this assumes a waterline easement connection between Sun City and the Heritage Oaks and Georgetown Villages. He said it splits Sun City into three areas. He said the northern part of Sun City becomes one district similar to the A and B plans. The southern part of Sun City will be split into half with part connected to the Villages, Heritages Oaks, and Estrella area, northern Williams Drive south of the Airport. He said District 3 takes Sun City South, the lake, Wolf Ranch, River Chase, and what remains of District 3. He said this is a viable plan in terms of numbers. Caputo asked and Council had no questions. Caputo introduced Plan G. He said there was a suggestion to combine the Villages into District 5. He said the deviation is 9.993, so moving just a few people would change the balance. He said the same Sun City boundaries were used from "-1 revised series." He indicated District 4 would be on the eastern side and District 3 would be the western connection to the lake, Heritage Oaks, the outer edges of the Villages, and portions along Williams Drive are also included. He said this is due to census geography. Caputo discussed the combined neighborhoods and said the leftover portion of District 3 would be included as well as some portions north and south of Williams Drive. He added that a piece of River Chase and some areas along Highway 29 would be included. He continued that a large apartment complex is included and areas along Williams Drive back from Lakeway Drive to 135 will be included. He commented on including comments from previous discussions in drawing the boundaries of this new clan. He concluded that this is a new map to the public and can lead the discussion. Garver asked and Caputo responded about property along DB V�Iood and the census population. Caputo noted that DB Wood and Highway 29 only have 2 residents. Meigs asked and Caputo responded about keeping River Chase in District 2. Caputo noted that the part of River Chase excluded is about 193 people and other boundaries would need to be shifted to keep the deviation balance in order. Garver asked and Jonrowe responded regarding District 6 boundaries. Jonrowe called attention to the northern part of the district north of 29, and she asked about the neighborhood across from Katy Crossing that has similar concerns. She added that there may be more similar concerns among the northern neighborhoods and asked to possibly adjust the Quail Valley area. Caputo asked and Jonrowe and Gonzalez discussed the demographics and location of possible changes. Caputo noted that due to the ethnic demographics, any changes should pay close attention to District 1 and District 7. Council discussed alternative modifications to fit neighborhoods of interest with the census demographics. Gonzalez agreed to the modifications of the boundary. Caputo recalled Meigs' request about the River Chase area. He noted that part of District 2, around 200 people, would need to move to District 3. Meigs responded that the northwest section would be a logical location to pull population from. Hellmann noted that the proposed change could be splitting part of the neighborhood. Garver asked Council to first review the District 6 modification as proposed by Jonrowe. Caputo noted that there could be DOJ questions, but if the District 7 incumbent and City Council agrees then the 1 percent change could be okay. Garver asked and Gonzalez said he is perfectly okay with the numbers. Jonrowe, Berryman, and Meigs stated their acceptance of the change. Hellmann asked about the large block of population between District 6 and 7. Caputo noted there are about 520 people and Hellmann agreed the change is acceptable. Eason said if the incumbents in both District 7 and in District 6 are in agreement, then she is alright with the change. Garver asked about Meigs' suggestion to tidy the area along River Chase. Caputo reviewed the exchange of residents and said the numbers would be okay. Meigs said it looks like the cleanest organization. Garver asked and Eason responded that the modification to leave River Chase with the historically similar -interest grouped neighborhoods is a good idea. Hellmann said he does not like breaking up neighborhoods, but in the interest of getting something accomplished, he can understand the move. Meigs approved the move. Sattler asked and City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 3 of 7 Pages Caputo responded that most of the area is District 4 and the continuity is in place. Sattler noted his approval. Berryman disagreed with splitting up different neighborhoods and would rather not apply the change but does not hear opposition from Council. Jonrowe noted her concerns about breaking up neighborhoods similar to Hellmann's comment. She added that as Eason noted, the continuity balances her concern, so she is in favor of this change. Gonzalez commented about the original intent to combine neighborhoods and noted that this plan separates one neighborhood at the expense of another, so he is not in favor fixing one area while separating another. Garver noted that the consensus is four in favor of the modifications, two opposed, and one ambivalent regarding the proposed adjustment to River Chase. Garver asked for these revisions to be included and for Caputo to review the map with the new adjustments. Sattler asked and Caputo responded about the north side of Williams Drive. Caputo noted that the big block would require additional movements of population. Caputo's staff evaluated the population based on Council's discussion. Caputo noted there is a 8.9 deviation and is a better percentage then the original plan and Council is within constitutional boundaries. Caputo noted the Sun City split utilizes the "-1 revised series", and includes Cowan's Creek as a boundary, the western portion to the north where new development is occurring, a connection to lake, the area around NEB, Heritage Oaks, the outer ring of Georgetown Villages due to census geography, across the river to the south, the country club neighborhood, a hop across Williams Drive and south of the airport form the boundary. District 2 and District 3 are combined into one district. District 5 now contains most of the Georgetown Villages, the south and east side of Shell Road, Estralla, the Wesleyan home area, south of airport, the airport, Berry Creek, and the rural area of District 5 in the 195 and IH35 area. He continued that District 6 is north along the highway, Old Town, north of University Drive, the entire University area, and the Quail Run area. Caputo indicated that District 1 is everything south of University Drive, south of the University, some area around Quail Valley, and parts of old District 3. He concluded that District 7 is everything remaining on the east side, Old Town, the downtown area along rail road tracks along the University, neighborhoods along 29 and everything along the 130 corridor. Sattler-ue.kcd abo,t the modification in District 3 and the Georgetown Village area. Caputo commented on the census geography related to Heritage Oaks and Georgetown Villages. Council discussed swapping neighborhood populations, within the census geography parameters, between Districts 2, 3, and 5 to maintain contiguity and appropriate deviation. Caputo reviewed the redrawn boundaries to include Council's suggestions. Berryman asked and Caputo responded that Riata Trails is combined with Sun City. Garver asked Caputo to show the full map as revised and known as Plan G. Garver asked and Eason stated that this is the best Council can do to help as much as possible in keeping neighborhoods together on a concentrated map. She likes this map and stated her approval. Hellmann noted his preference for the revised Plan G map. Meigs stated that he feels positive energy about this map. Sattler stated that he likes keeping the neighborhoods together such as the Georgetown Villages and those within District 2. Berryman said she likes that most neighborhoods are kept together but regrets that Riata Trails was moved. Jonrowe stated that no matter what Council does, not all neighborhoods can be kept together. She said this plan comes closest to minimizing impact on neighborhoods and likes what Council has done with this plan. Gonzalez said this plan is not perfect, but it looks pretty good. Garver asked Council if they need any additional information prior to a review of all the plans on the table. Caputo noted that he tried making a map as a constituent requested, but the district options would not work without having the specific their census data. each He the said presented. there was a 68% deviation Eason 1. in the attempted plan. Garver noted that Map G is the only one with amendments. He continued that Council should now be ready to tabulate Berryman 1, their score on each of the maps presented. 1, Garver asked and each council member responded by individually giving Map A a score of 3. Garver asked and each council member responded by individually giving Map A -Revised a score of 3. Garver asked and each member of council responded by giving Map A1 -Revised a score as follows: Gonzalez 2, Jonrowe 3, Berryman 1, Sattler 1, Meigs 3, Hellmann 1, and Eason 1. Garver asked and each member of council responded by individually giving Map B a score of 3. Garver asked and each member of council responded by giving Map B -Revised a score as follows: Gonzalez 3, City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 4 of 7 Pages Jonrowe 3, Berryman 3, Sattler 3, Meigs 2, Hellmann 3, and Eason 3. Garver asked and each member of council responded by giving Map B 1 -Revised a score as follows: Eason 2, Hellmann 1, Meigs 2, Sattler 3, Berryman 3, Jonrowe 1, and Gonzalez 3. Garver asked and each member of council responded by giving Map B 2 -Revised a score as follows: Gonzalez 3, Jonrowe 1, Berryman 3, Sattler 1, Meigs 1, Hellmann 3, and Eason 1. Garver asked and each member of council responded by giving Map E a score as follows: Eason 2, Hellmann 1, Meigs 1, Sattler 3, Berryman 3, Jonrowe 1, Gonzalez 3. Garver asked and each member of council responded by individually giving Map F a score of 3. Garver asked and each member of council responded by individually giving Map G a score of 1. Garver reviewed the maps to be deleted from consideration include Plan A, Plan A -Revised, Plan B, Plan B -Revised, Plan F. Garver indicated that Plan Al, Plan B1 -Revised, and Plan B2 can be held for further discussion considering the variety of scores from Council. Garver indicated that Plan G shows the most consensus and asked for Council's wish regarding Plan B2 or for only keeping Plan G. Garver asked and Eason responded that since Plan G is the only map with consensus, it should be the focus of discussion. Hellmann noted that B2 should be included for discussion. Eason said she is okay with keeping B2 for discussion. Meigs did not object to keeping B2 for discussion. Sattler asked for keeping A1 -Revised for discussion. Berryman stated A1 -Revised and G should be included in discussion. Jonrowe stated B2 -Revised and G for discussion. Gonzalez stated A1 -Revised and G should be included for further discussion. Garver clarified G, B2 -Revised, and A1 -Revised shall be the primary plans to guide the forthcoming public comment. He stated that one plan does have a heavy majority of preference from Council. Garver asked and Caputo noted that it is a good time for public comment. to open. Gonzalez asked and Caputo responded that confidence is high that Plan G will be appropriate for final approval. Garver welcomed the public comment and opened the public hearing. Speaker, Stephen Fought, thanked Council for serving and an opportunity to speak. He stated his residence in Sun City and in the discussions with friends and neighborhoods; the preference is to be fairly represented. He stated splitting Sun City will provide the long over -due representation. He said either A1 -Revised and G would serve this purpose. He evaluated the representation of Sun City in the meantime and stated that both Hellmann and Meigs can serve Sun City well. ;e said tihat connection to Williams Drive v,ill help with guiding development. He said only option A1 -Revised and G offer the best for Sun City and the economic growth in the city. Speaker, Joe Pondrom, stated his residency in River Ridge. He said option G is the only option that meets all the criteria previously discussed and covers what everyone wants. He said Sun City will get the coverage they desire under Plan G. He commented that the conversation surrounding Williams Drive will best be met by having multiple representatives. Speaker, Karin Truxillo, stated that A1 -Revised was preferred by the Villages and B2 -Revised was preferred by Sun City and River Ridge. She said Plan G has the best of both plans. She said G provides compact districts and separation between neighborhoods as the community indicated. She said Plan G provides good coverage for growth. She added Plan G, G for Georgetown. Speaker, Reg Bessmer, commented on the Mayor's opening comments. He applauded the community involvement. He stated support for Plan G and his residency in Sun City. He added that Plan B has been supported in previous conversations, but Plan G is the way to go. Speaker, Bill Mateja, a resident in Sun City and has completed a term of five years on the Parks board. He knows that homes are planned out west. He believes in quality of life and home property values. He said A1 -Revised gives both those qualities. He stated his experience in retail and the review of family rooftops. He said development will explode once the economy turns around and growth must be properly managed. He said any one person representing Williams Drive will be responsible for growth and development. He added that quality of life draws City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 5 of 7 Pages residents, and he prefers A1 -Revised. Speaker, Don Siler, a resident in Sun City and favors the Plan Bs, such as B2 -Revised. He stated that if Williams Drive is the most important growth area in the city then all seven members should be involved in the development. He added that Al splits the population centers. He noted the confusion about one neighborhood being more important than another such as the Villages and River Ridges and moving them into other areas. He said B2 is his preference and Council has done a great job putting Plan G together and would approve of this plan. He commented that there have been some negative comments regarding the active voters in the community, and he agreed that Sun City will vote for the best candidate. Speaker, Diane Nagy, was yielded three minutes by Helen Sarver. Nagy stated her original intent was Plan A1 -Revised, and she has been trying to keep track of all the moves. She said that Council seems to prefer Plan G unanimously and it appears good to her. She liked Plan A1 -Revised since it met all the Department of Justice criteria. She commented that if certain neighborhoods preferred separation from Sun City, she thinks it's a perceived problem but understands their concern. She stated that having an opportunity to vote earlier for a representative is a bonus. She commented on Williams Drive and the difficult overlay district rules. She added that the gateway project will help with traffic flow near 135. She said A1 -Revised shares this responsibility. She concluded that if these concerns could be included in the Plan G map, she would be happy to support it but asked for consideration of A1 -Revised as well. Speaker, Richard Copple, stated that he and his wife are business owners on Williams Drive. He said he thinks the worst of the plans have been eliminated. He is concerned that there were too many districts with a little interest but no singular representative. He commented that these final plans to consider seem pretty acceptable with a division into three sections that balance council member representation. He added that the last plan created is acceptable to him and his neighbors on Williams Drive. Speaker, Charles Graham, reminded Council to be statesmen and not politicians. He said what he has seen at this meeting is the best interest of Georgetown being represented. He stated that he can be satisfied by Plan G which has been worked through by each member to satisfy as many interests as possible. He added that his preferred plan is B1 -Revised, but he would accept Plan G due to the collaboration in its making. Speaker, Harold Clinton, and stated his residency in River Ridge. He commented that he has spent his career in computers using logic. He noted that some of the plans are not logical from any aspect. He said some of the plans presented seem to be the preservation of power, and his original preference was for plan B -Revised. However, upon seeing Plan G, he stated it is marvelous and logical. He said Plan G is he only way to go. Speaker, Tom Crawford, stated his residency in Sun City. He noted his eleven years of experience on City boards and a current member of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. He said he is leaning towards Plan G despite his original preference for Plan A1 -Revised. He added that after seeing the plans as presented this evening, Plan G will satisfy as many interest as possible. Garver thanked the citizens for commenting and sharing their preference. Garver closed the public hearing. Garver asked Council to review the three plans left on the table. Garver asked and Caputo responded about his comfort level with the legitimacy of Plan G being pre -cleared without any problems. Eason asked about clarifying the time period for voting upon adoption of Plan G. Caputo noted that Councilmember Sattler will be in District 3, and currently, no council member lives in District 4. Caputo noted that none of the plans have a council member in District 4. Sattler commented that Meigs, as the incumbent in District 3 and he, as the incumbent in District 4, will continue to serve until the election in 2013. Eason clarified that the interim will continue with the current council members representing their districts until the election which will then clean up who represents which district and Caputo concurred. Eason stated that since the election will clean up the representation and since Plan G will help a majority of neighborhoods become whole, she is in total support of Plan G. Hellmann commented that he came to the meeting with intentions for a unanimous solution, and it has become a reality. He said a unanimous vote is almost more important than the plans themselves. He added that there are more important issues than the politics, such as General Graham had mentioned. He noted his hopes for a plan council could work on together and then move onto the real business of the City. He continues to hope for a City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 6 of 7 Pages unanimous conclusion. Meigs stated his appreciation for Council's effort and willingness to compromise. He noted that Plan G is the best fit for the criteria originally set out by Council. He said Plan G is compact, contiguous, and it keeps neighborhoods together. He appreciates the discussion and the public input. He added G for Georgetown. Sattler thanked all the people who responded to him with their input through letters and meetings. He noted over 350 points of contact in Sun City regarding the various plans. He said overwhelmingly, his constituents were in favor of A1 -Revised, so they could vote in 2013. He said Plan G is quite good and he thanked the legal staff for balancing the ideas. He added the most important thing is for neighborhoods to stay together. He concluded that despite the previous calls to support A1 -Revised, he must support Plan G considering what the plan has achieved. Berryman said she came to the meeting with intentions to support A1 -Revised due to the Williams Drive overlay district. She said some folks do not understand the district and it is a concern. She likes that one council member will be responsible for the gateway and overlay. She liked putting whole neighborhoods back together and how this plan has separated some neighborhoods from Sun City to achieve better representation. Jonrowe said she feels privileged to participate in this process since it occurs only once every the ten years. She said it is a vitally important issue with long -reaching implications. She thanked all parties for sharing their input and helping council stay informed on how to reach a consensus. She stated her support for Plan G. Gonzalez thanked everyone involved in the process. He noted the several criteria including compact districts, neighborhoods with similar interests, and maintaining current boundaries as similar as they are currently drawn. He added that A1 -Revised, up to this point, had been his preferred plan. However, he added, Plan G provides some separation between neighborhoods. He concluded that his constituents were drawn to A1 -Revised, but he believes that once they have an opportunity to see Plan G, they will approve. He stated his support for Plan G. Caputo asked Council to entertain a few small adjustments to the map to clean up the lines. Garver asked and Council did not object to any of the final adjustments. Caputo noted that this plan shall be G -Revised to demonstrate the final changes to the map. Garver asked for a motion. Motion by Meigs, second by Hellmann to accept Revised Plan G. Approved 7-0, C Adjourn Garver asked for a motion to adjourn. Motion by Berryman, second by Jonrowe to adjourn. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 07:00 PM. Assistant City Council Meeting Minutest Page 7 of 7 Pages