HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 10.26.2021 CC-WMeeting Minutes of Meeting of the
Governing Body of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
Tuesday, October 26, 2021
The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 2:00 PM at City Council
Chambers located at 510 West 911, Street.
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined
under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon
request. Please contact the City Secretary's Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled
meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 808 Martin Luther King Jr. Street, Georgetown, TX
78626 for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Mayor Schroeder called the meeting to order at 2:04 p.m. The following Council Members were
in attendance: Mayor Josh Schroeder; Amanda Parr, Council Member District 1; Shawn Hood,
Council Member District 2; Mike Triggs, Council Member District 3; Steve Fought, Council
Member District 4; Kevin Pitts, Council Member District 5; and Tommy Gonzalez, Council
Member District 7. District 6 is vacant. A quorum of Council Members was present in Council
Chambers and a roll call was performed.
Gonzalez joined during Item A.
Policy Development/Review Workshop - Call to order at 2:00 PM
A. Presentation and discussion regarding historic tax programs -- Mayra Cantu, Assistant to the
City Manager and Britin Bostick, Downtown and Historic Planner
Cantu presented and reviewed the possible program goals and following feedback that is
being requested: what a successful program looks like; who would benefit from the program;
is there a need to partner the program with other programs; is there additional information
needed to give direction to staff; is there a preferred program type or goal; and are there other
options the Council would like staff to research and bring back for consideration. She then
reviewed the history of encouraging historic preservation from 2001 to now. Cantu explained
what other cities are doing and reviewed the primary program types as follows: status based
incentive where property tax exemption based on qualifying historic status; project based
incentive where property tax exemption or freeze related to restoration or rehabilitation work
meeting specific qualifications; or a combination of both. She then reviewed the tax revenue
impact, Dallas criteria and process, eligible costs, ineligible costs, and combination programs
in Waxahachie and New Braunfels.
Bostick then presented and reviewed preservation activity based on the 1,654 historic
structures that exist Citywide, residential Certificates of Appropriateness, 2021 Property Tax
exemptions based on data from Williamson Central Appraisal District (WCAD), and Old
Town average annual change in value from 2017 to 2021 based on data from Williamson
Central Appraisal District (WCAD). She then provided examples of rehabilitation with
addition on a high priority structure, porch and siding replacement on a medium priority
structure, and rehabilitation on a low priority structure. Bostick then provided program
example impacts and provided the 2022 Property Tax average in the Old Town Overlay. She
then provided program examples for a status exemption calculated using the WCAD tax
estimator for 2021 tax rates and calculated using the average assessed residential value for
Old Town. Bostick then reviewed the program selection matrix.
Councilmembers then provided their comments and question on the current and proposed
programs. David Morgan, City Manager, summarized the comments noting that the general
consensus of Council is that staff will provide Council options for scope of eligibility; what
homes will be eligible; using a project -based system; providing Council options for
commercial properties; homestead exemptions; options for incentives; requirements for
properties based on status; making this a way forward program instead of grandfathering;
staff time for administering this types of program; awareness for applicants on the program;
and use of TIRZ (Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone) funds in downtown.
B. Presentation, update and discussion on redistricting -- Skye Masson, City Attorney and
Bickerstaff, Heath, Delgado, Acosta LLP
Masson introduced the item, then Cobby Caputo with Bickerstaff, Heath, Delgado, Acosta
LLP presented the item. Caputo reviewed redistricting, applicable law, and the main three
principles to consider during redistricting. He explained the following in detail: "one person
— one vote" related to equal population, Voting Rights Act § 2 related to nondiscrimination,
Shaw v. Reno related to limiting the use of race, and an additional diagnostic tool of Voting
Rights Act § 5 related to retrogression. Caputo then explained the rule of thumb for one
person — one vote related to a total deviation of less than 10% and provided an example of
deviation calculation. He noted the available Census data and noted that there are two
population types in play, total population versus voting age population (VAP). Caputo
expanded on Voting Rights Act § 2 noting that there should be no discrimination on the basis
of race or language minority status and the City should generally, avoid "cracking" or
"packing." He explained that with the 14th Amendment as referred to in Shaw v. Reno there
are limits to race -based decision making, including redistricting, and if race the predominant
consideration in drawing a redistricting plan, is the plan a narrowly tailored means of
addressing a compelling governmental interest. Caputo explained Section 5 of the Voting
Rights Act noting: preclearance no longer required (Shelby County v. Holder (2013)); Section
5 standard is "retrogression" asking if minorities worse off under the new system, and that a
City may have no discriminatory purpose or effect; and that this is still a useful diagnostic
tool to identify potential Section 2 issues. He reviewed benchmark and noted that the
benchmark is the standard against which retrogression is measured, and the benchmark is
2020 Census data superimposed on the last legally enforceable plan (typically, current city
council districts with all annexations are included). Caputo provided the adopt criteria where
districts should have the following: identifiable boundaries; maintaining communities of
interest and neighborhoods; using whole voting precincts, if possible; basing plan on existing
districts; adopting districts of relatively equal size; drawing districts that are compact and
contiguous; keeping existing incumbents in their districts; and narrowly tailoring plan to
comply with the VRA. He then provided the steps to balancing conflicting legal obligations
in redistricting as follows: plan ahead and build a record; be aware of legal obligations and
responsibilities; adopt criteria that reflect traditional redistricting principles, including
consideration of race to the extent required to meet obligations under the Voting Rights Act;
pay attention to the criteria when drawing the plan; consider and evaluate each plan
presented, whether by district's hired consultant or by general public, in light of the adopted
criteria; analyze the final plan in terms of how well it conforms to the adopted criteria; make
sure the analysis is considered by the City Council before plan adoption; and avoid truly
bizarre districts. Caputo noted the plan development elements that include an initial
assessment; adopt plan criteria, guidelines; develop illustrative plan(s); public comment and
hearing; analyze comments; adopt final plan; and implementation. He provided the
proposed redistricting timeline as follows: October 26, 2021present initial assessment;
November 9, 2021 Illustrative Plan and first drawing workshop; November 23, 2021 Public
Hearing and second drawing workshop; December 14, 2021 Public Hearing and final
adoption; and Special meetings can be called as needed. Caputo then reviewed the 2011
benchmark with 2020 Census Data; current districts; overall deviation for current districts
using 2020 Census data; Hispanic Thematic Map; and Black Thematic Map.
Discussion among Fought, Caputo, and Morgan related to: Census data numbers; process
for challenging Census data numbers; concerns with the count associated with Sun City;
and difficulties with counting related to COVID-19.
General discussion among Council and staff related to population versus voting age
residents; past reasoning for Council drawing of Council districts; ways to redraw District 6;
desire for two "historic district" representatives; confusing areas in current districts; how to
draw the Sun City districts; and how no district will look ideal.
Mayor Schroeder recessed at 3:47 p.m. for a brief break. Mayor Schroeder resumed the meeting at 3:55
p.m.
C. Overview, discussion and direction from City Council regarding the possible creation of an
In -City Municipal Utility District (MUD) for the proposed Madison Development -- Sofia
Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director
Nelson presented the item and reviewed the Location Map; Land Use Plan; 2018 MUD Policy;
and a summary of proposed terms of development as follows: 1,583 residential units (single
family -age restricted and non -age restricted, multi -family, and attached condos); 25 acres of
commercial uses; residential development standards; residential diversity - lot and type;
transportation enhancement of $1-million-dollar contributions towards SH 195
improvements; and construction of two 24" water line extensions to provide water service to
the Madison Tract and offsite connection to an 18" wastewater line in Berry Creek. She added
that the applicant is generally consistent with the MUD Policy in the following ways: the
proposal is consistent with 1 of 10 MUD Policy Statements; the proposal is partially consistent
with 7 of 10 MUD Policy Statements; and two of the policy statements are not applicable.
Nelson asked for feedback and direction on the following: does Council support an In -City
MUD under terms as presented; and does Council have comments on the proposed Land Use
Plan. She then noted that should Council direct staff to proceed with an In -City MUD, the
next steps would include the initiation of negotiations with Blake Magee Company, LP.
General discussion among Council and staff related to the following: road types related to
connectivity to Shady Oaks Subdivision; if the applicant can work towards complying with
the Water Conservation Policy; and general support for the project.
Steven Sperry yielded his time to Dale Durham.
Durham, member of the Traffic and Safety Committee with the Shady Oaks Subdivision,
regarding an agreement among the Shady Oaks, the City, Williamson County, and the
landowner related to entitlements tied to previous plats. He then asked that the City work
with the residents and include them in communications related to the project. Durham them
listed the subjects of the entitlements.
D. Presentation and discussion on boards and commissions -- David Morgan, City Manager
Morgan presented the item and gave an overview of staff time and associate costs related to
preparing for and conduction board and commission meetings. He then asked for Council
Direction on the following: for the short term, are there any boards or commissions you would
like to combine, how council would like to see financial reporting — on a quarterly or monthly
(as -is) basis, and what time of day should the boards meet; and in the long term, should the
board or commission business be focused on strategic direction vs. routine approvals, and is
there a need for separate by-laws. Morgan then stated that over the next six months staff will
continue analysis on boards and commissions and bring back recommendations to council
and the boards and commission schedule as follows: recruitment begins on November 1, 2021;
recruitment ends early January; recommendations presented to Council at 2nd meeting in
February; and appointments made in March.
General discussion among Council and staff, including Masson and Robyn Densmore, City
Secretary, regarding a move to quarterly meetings; time commitment related to Planning and
Zoning Commission; what board are legally required; staff coming forward with proposal to
combine and provide streamlining; note redundancies if multiple boards are reviewing the
same things; try to time board meetings around office hours; having the boards being more
strategically focused instead of being routine; how to properly adjust or remove bylaws;
creating a set of operating procedures for all boards; combining boards where appropriate;
how changes will be implemented a year from now and current processes will stay the same;
possible changes to the timing of board appointments; and verifying that board members
know expected time commitment.
E. Presentation and discussion regarding the operation of pedicabs within the city limits of
Georgetown -- Cory Tchida, Acting Police Chief
Tchida presented the item and began with noting that a pedicab is a small three -wheeled
public conveyance that a driver operates by pedals. He provided background noting the
following: historically, there have not been pedicabs operated within the City; lack of
pedicabs likely had to do with the atmosphere at those times; that atmosphere has changed,
and night life is more abundant; and over the last several years, there has been increased
interest from individuals wanting to operate pedicab businesses within the City. Tchida
provided the following issues: current Ordinances do not currently cover or regulate the
operation of pedicabs; Chapter 6.20 Motorized Vehicles for Hire, defines a vehicle for hire as
a chauffeured motor vehicle used to transport passengers, and pedicabs are not motor
vehicles; chapter 6.25 Horse Drawn Carriages and other Non -Motorized Service Vehicles for
Hire indicates that a non -motorized vehicle for hire is pulled by animals; if no ordinance
prohibits pedicabs, the current thought is they could operate without regulation as long as
they obeyed other laws such as traffic law or city ordinances that govern vehicles and traffic;
locally, it appears only Austin has an ordinance regulating pedicabs, and they operate in
Round Rock without regulation and are advised to "obey traffic laws"; and of the 29 cities
50,000 to 100,000 population only Galveston and San Marcos had ordinances listed in
Municode. He then provided Council the options of taking no action, prohibiting the
operation of pedicabs within the City, and allowing and regulating the operation of pedicabs
via ordinance, and reviewed each in detail. Tchida noted that staff does recommend taking
action of some sort and asked for feedback on the following: does Council wish staff to move
forward with an option in relation to pedicabs; and if Council wishes to allow and regulate
pedicabs, are there particular areas to be addressed or specific items with the identified areas
that Council wants to ensure are covered.
General discussion among Council and staff related to the following: where the liability lies
when there is an incident with a pedicab; insurance requirements for operators; Police
response to complaints; possible limits on the number of operators; what areas of town to
allow the use of pedicabs; the use of pedicabs during special events; and reconsideration of
horse drawn carriages.
Lawrence Romero addressed the Council regarding his support of pedicabs, but concerns
related to side streets, proper operations, and safety.
Mayor Schroeder recessed Workshop at 5:18 p.m. with Executive Session to start at 5:30 p.m.
Executive Session
In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas
Codes, Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to
action in the regular session.
F. Sec. 551.071: Consultation with Attorney
Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which
the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items
- Litigation Update
Sec. 551.072: Deliberations about Real Property
- Berry Creek Interceptor Phases 1-3, Parcel 11 (Chamberlin) - Jim Kachelmeyer, Assistant
City Attorney
- Potential Sale of Surplus Property to Habitat for Humanity - Jim Kachelmeyer, Assistant
City Attorney
Sec. 551.086: Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters
- Purchased Power Update
- ISDA Agreement with Morgan Stanley
Sec. 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations
- Project Flex Power
- Project Festival
Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Robyn Densmore, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice
of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. Street, a place readily accessible to the
general public at all times, on the day of , 2021, at , and remained so
posted for at least 72 hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
Robyn Densmore, City Secretary
Approved by the Georgetown City Council on ! j 0\4466� - r Z4— r,-[
Date
R AK� (I %11A1$WJ F/, - =Md A , A
s