City Council Regular Meeting MINUTES June 11, 2024 at 6:00 PM  CALLTO ORDER:  Mayor Sara Countryman called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.  Present:  Sara Countryman Carol Langley Cheryl Fox Stan Donaldson  Mayor City Council Place #1 City Council Place #4 City Council Place #5 City Administrator Finance Director City Secretary MPDI Lieutenant Court Administrator Public Works Foreman Waste Management Enterprise Fleet Management  Also Present: Gary Palmer  Dave McCorquodale Director ofl Planning & Development  Maryann Carl James Greene Joe Belmares Kimberly Duckett Eric Standifer Tiana Smith Jeff Warner  INVOCATION: CMI Fox Gave the invocation.  PLEDGE OF ALIEGIANCETOFLAGS: Pledges to the American and Texas Flag were conducted.  VISITORICITIZENS FORUM:  Merrily Thompson addressed Council. She: said she does not live in the City of Montgomery, but she does own two properties in the historic district: 914 and 920 College Street. I am here because the drainage problems that are occurring, Carol my neighbor probably knows this as well, have become catastrophic. So Ihave a little video ofwhat happened with the recent rains, andI I am almost about tol be flooded because of  the drainage problems. So ifI can step forward P'd bel happy to show you that video.  Mayor Countryman invited her to step to the dais.  Thompson explained while showing the video that this is my driveway, this is the bridge. You can see that itis quite deep, its going over thei road and its going intoi my garage. Its noti in my house yet, but my tenants, itsl halfway upt the wheels oftheir tires on my driveway.s So wel haveal bigi issuet there. Here are: some pictures ofthe current drainage pipes that are in place that are undersized and causing thej problem. Mayor Countryman asked Thompson to return to the podium so that she could be recorded for the record. Thompson said my concern is that I have owned these properties for twenty years and when I bought the property, it was a very small ditch. The gentleman who is my tenant stood in the ditch today and it is this deep with him with no wateri ini it. With the wateri ini it, it would be overl his head andi its not only problematic for the flooding issue, but it's a danger. I would ask that the city, with their planning & zoning, fix the  problem before wel have a catastrophy.  Page 11    Mayor Countryman verified Thompson's property addresses.  Thompson verified the addresses and said that there is al home in between us and they actually have some retaining wall damage because the water is rushing through and is beginning to bow their wall as well. It  can't be ignored any longer. Mayor Countryman thanked Thompson.  Tyler Cooper addressed the council. The following is a transcript of his address submitted by Cooper.  Page 12    Mynamel Is Tyler Cooper andl Ilive at1 118A Anna Springs Lane.! lam here tovolce my conçerns around the development of unapproved plans ont the Cornerstone Community Church property andt tol Inquire about actions the city and/or church mayr need tot taketo Ever since the church purchased, cleared, sodded, and paved the nelghboring' lot, heavy rainfall has overwhelmed our dralnage ditch and French draln system, floodingmy poolv with muda and debris everys soaking raln event. Ibellevel Ith has also contrbutedtothe furtherwashing outo ofourdriveway." Wel havel lived! here for 4years andr nevere experlenced this amount off flooding andr rushing water. Allf four floodinge events lam referencingt hereln have occurred since October: 26", 2023, which tor me, Is nota coincidence int timingasit Ihave emailed Gary Palmer aboutt thel issuewho statedt thatt this Is a private property Issue, andt the clty can'tdo muchy without clear-cut codev violations. Officer Tilly visited our propertyto: surveyt thel Issues andt take pictures, butstated! last weekt thatitremalns a Civl Thisl Iswherelrespectiuly. disagree with Mr. Patmer. After reviewing! boththe PlanningandZoninge Commissions andi the CityCouncit agendas and minutes, madet the olowngdiscoveteswmen l've documentedi Inc chronologicalorder. lalso alignedt the ordinances that pertalnt to eacha articlei int thep packetthatiwill leavev withyou. Fortime  rectifythes situation.  relatest tot the development oft the church property.  matter between! private property owners.  purposes, here Is as short summarytot this point:  April4",2023, Planning andz Zoning CommissionMeeting:  The P&ZC approved the rezoningt to"Institutlonal"1 from" "Residential". During ther meeting (avallable on) YouTube), the committee discussed varlous concerni for nelghboring residents. Mr. McCorquodale assured that all ordinances ande approvals would bet followed, especiallysince the propertywas being replatted and developed next to abutting  residents.  April11h, 2023, City Counci! Meeting:  The City Councll approved ther rezoning motion after al brief discusslon, also avallable on' YouTube. Mr, Olsons asked ift ther rezoning would allow fort the churchto bulldap parking! lot withouti further rezoning. Mr. McCorquodale confirmed: sayingl Ity wouldi require them going throughwhatever governmental, processi is required to builda  parking lot.  --Internal Use---  Page 13    This brings met toi myp point of whyl Idon't believe thisi is a private civill issue. Ifthis property was replatted and developed according tot the new rezoning, Itshould be subject  tos several ordinances, Including: 1. Chapter 78, Article I, Sec, 78-60-78-64 2. Chapter 78, Articlel IV, Sec. 78-96 3. Chapter 78, Article V, Sec. 78-123 4. Chapter 78, Articlev, Sec. 78-126 5. Chapter 78,A ArticleVi, Sec. 78-161-78-162 6. Chapter 98, Article II, Sec. 98-239 approvall Is warranted, my questions are; approvalsf fort thev work completed? 2. Ifso, werethese approvals granted?  Many of which require the approvalof the clty engineer dwelycaunsiAdanaa. 1. Didt the churchg go tot the county and filei forr replatingthenfllefort the appropriate 3. Ifthose approvals wereg granted, did the cityengineer or inspector physicallyvisitt the sitel before approvinge anye alteratlons tot thep property? 4. What inspectionswere conducted, and! bywhat means? 5. Ifthe church didr note adhere tot the standards contained within, doest that not warrant enforcement of or mitigationfore anyi infractions? 6. lftherea are obvious infractions, whyist the Code Enforcement Officer not able to 7. lftheyfi fled thee appropriate paperwork, isi itincompetence from withint the city that they! blindly approved thep plans with no actual follow-ups ort recommendations, did noti followt through ont their end oft the ordinance guidelines, ors simplyr not care ast to Please understandi that wel haver noi issue with the rezoning of the church ortake umbrage oft theire existence. Itise a welcomede addition to the communitywith manys great parishioners. Ourl Issuel lies withthep halatandfmendatame to our property duet to the poor dralnage of thelry property, and thep potentalincompetence: and inaction oft the city. Ihave provided ap packet withe emails, invoices, damage pictures, timellnes, and ordinancesi in question, along with quotes directlyf from the! prevlous City Council and P&ZC meetings. lalsol havey video evidence of our concerns duringt thel last storm (May 30",2 2024), whichlcan share viat text or email. Lastly, linvite anyone tov visit our property anytime; my  act?  avoid strife with the church?  contact information is Included! Int the packet.  ---Internal Use--.  Page 14    Timeline ofF Rezoning and Approvals of Cornerstone Church Property Ihave combed through the Planning andz Zoning Commission agendas andr minutes as well ast the City Council's agendas andi minutes andi made the following discoveries.!  have documented each oft those In chronological orderk below:  The April 4th Planning andz Zoning Commission Agenda shows where Itwas brought forth and sent to City Councll, the approval ofthel Rezoning Request tor rezonet thei newly purchased plot of land from Residentialto Int the comments section of the satellite imagery draft, Itstates, "Future uses couldi Includet facility or parkinge expanslon projects" and' "Ensure anyt futured devetopment provides buffer for adjacent Int theF PlanningandZoning' Commission Recommendation Report in which ther rezoningwas approved, one oft the points statest that "Adequate development: regulations are Inj place to ensure no negative effects ons surrounding propertiesi ift ther rezonel is approved. Thec church property is currently being platted tor reflect a: 25-foot vegetative setback (Sec. 78-162) andt thes side &reary yards (Sec. 98- Mrs.. Julle Davis can be heard saying off camera ont the) YouTube upload that" "they are operating on drivewayvariance and soi ift the intention ist to buythis 1/3 of an acre ande extend this driveway aroundt the side of thel building, theny your need to keep In mindt that whatever we maket themjump1 throughr now, we'reg goingt tor make themj jump1 throughitv witht that drivewaywhent theye expandit.I believe theyl have crusheds granite now". It was agreed upon! byt the Mrs. Merriamy Walker can also bes seena and heard talking about the Ught andi noise concerns fromt the church. Mr. McCorquodale canl be seen and heard saying" "the development ofltwouldr require thes same type ofreview as any other type of development would with the city engineer. Mrs. Walker asked' "Iknow whent theys started developingi itthey asked aboutt the special use fort thet type of pavement that theya are to use andy we approvedwhat! it is theyl have now, do they! havet to come  Institutional.  residential uses per City Code".  239), adjacenttos single family properties.  committee members.  ---internal Use--  Page 15    backt to us ift theywantt toe extend that parking lotf fort thes same Mr. McCorquodate said" "yes..yes". Mrs. Walker continued" "they can't just doi itbecause we: said yes to Mr.McCorquodale sais' "yes, right, that area that is parking loty was Sec.78-162, Provislon Areads: "Vegetative setbacks of2 25 feet inv width shalll be maintained at all timeswhere commerciat,' multifamily, industrial, church, publicbuildings orschool properties abut anys single-family residential property or adjaçent acreage that mayi int thet future become single familyresidential. Sec. 78-162, Provision CI reads:* "Thev vegetation setbackmust also provide a visual barrier". Sec. 98-239, Provision. Ar reads: "Barrier. Avisual barrier shall bec constructedand permanently maintained on anylot adjoining ora abuttingP R or PDI District". Int ther minutes report of the April4 4th Regular Meeting on Page 3,1 point number 5, itr reads' "Mrs. Julie Davis saidt the churchh had avariance to their parkings surface and tol ber mindful of palanglote,pansions" I'mi not sure what that means, butl lam assuming thats since this is now! beingr rezonedt to" "Institution", a paved parking surface and/ort larger parking! lotr must! be provided to meet ther minlmum standards in Article IV- Off StreetParking. Ifthis assumptioni is correct, under Sec. 78-123- General policies regarding improvements; payment and costs of improvements.- - "Policies, terms, ando conditions tol be followedin pavingwork andt the extending of water lines, sewer! lines, and drainage must be approved! by the city council and citye engineer. Alli improvements shall bei installed Also, int ther minutes oft the April 4th Regular Meetingon! Page 4, point number 6, itr reads: "Staff reviewed the draft report. JeffWaddel! noted the requirementsi in the reportt that future. davelopmentolthe church propertyneededi to meet thes city regulations on! buffering lights and noisef from adjacent. homes.Mr. McCorquodales saidthe churchwas platting thancparmhichreutcas. a 25-footy vegetative  request"? this"  not as big asi itcoulde ever get".  byt the developer at his expense".  ---Internal Use--.  Page 16    buffer adjacent tol homes. Staff confirmed new development ant the sitewouldn need toi follow all current cityregulations'. AccordingtoArtiole: II- Plats, Sec. 78-601 through 78-65, any sort of Plat (Replat, Minor Plat, or Final Plat)wouldi needt to follow ther rules setf forthint thel Final Plat Instructions. Thls means int the least, Itwould need tol be approved byt the cltye englneerif notr more approvals byt the City AccordingtoSec. 78-641 Developmenti Plats: "A development plat must be prepared byar registered professional lands surveyor". "Development mayr not begin ont the propertyu until the development plati ist filed with and approved byt the city Ina accordance with this chapter". "Approval. Development, plats shall! bes submittedto the city andi mayl be approved and signed byt the city engineer and city administrator".  Councll.  ---Internal Use-.-  Page 17    CONSENT AGENDA:  1. Consideration and possible action on thel May 28, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutes  Mayor Countryman introduced the item.  CM Langley said she had a question about item 13 on the minutes. It said that Bryan Lucas with Hayes Utility was present. I thought that gentleman's name was Phillip Wright. Can we check into that and make sure because ifit is Bryan Lucas, Ir need to call him and apologize to him for calling  him Phillip Wright.  Mayor Countryman asked for a motion.  CM Fox made a1 motion to approve the minutes ofMay 28, 2024 with corrections ifneeded and the motion was seconded by CMI Langley with all Councilmembers voting AYE, motion carried.  CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION:  2. Consideration and possible action regarding approving execution of an Interlocal Agreement with  Montgomery Independent School District Mayor Countryman introduced the item.  Palmer said thanks Mayor. You may recall that this item has been on a workshop agenda regular council meeting, MISD is building the CTE Center on Lonestar Parkway just west of Buffalo Springs and in that development, there is a water line that we: require to be extended. It's a loop that services that area and ify you recall we offered toj pay $75,000, not to exceed $75,000 for that. The attorney drafted upt the agreement andl MISD accepted that agreement. It's in your packets and tonight the approval will bind us tot that $75,000 which willl likely come out off fund balance. Happy Mayor Countryman said just something I noticed; on the signature page it has Nici's name. Do we need to get a new page with Dr. Ruffin's signature on it maybe? Ori if we can Id don't! know mark it  to answer your questions.  out, ifit'll be acceptable ifhe marked it with Mr. Greene's name. Palmer said ifyou guys approve it tonight then we can make that change.  Mayor Countryman said OK, I just didn't know ifit's going to have to come back because oft the CM Langley made a motion to approve the Interlocal Agreement with MCISD as presented and CM Fox seconded the motion with all Councilmembers voting AYE, motion carried. 3. Consideration and possible action egardingapproving expenses for emergency relocation of an 8" force main located on the southern edge of Lone Star Parkway approximately 100 yards east of  page. OK. Thank you. Council, what is your pleasure?  SH149  Mayor Countryman introduced thei item.  Katherine Vu addressed the council. Good evening Mayor and Council. As you all may be aware, you received iny your email notification that we were doing an emergency relocation ofthe Lift Station number 8 forced main along Lonestar Parkwayj just West ofTown Creek. While Wright  Page 18    Solutions was performing the repairs tot the 4-inch forced main it was also discovered that the eight inch forced main coming from Lift Station 2, which heads East, was also exposed and in danger oft being compromised. We asked Wright Solution to put together an estimate which is included in your packet. Since then, we. have had to do a realignment to move the forced main further away from the creek bank because it is continuing to erode, and we want to make sure that it's no longer in danger regardless oft the erosion as much as we can control. So there is an updated estimate which) I passed out to you. The updated estimate comes in at $60,300. The difference between what I handed out to. you and what is in your packet is an additional 100 feet to account for relocating it closer to the pavement ofLonestar Parkway, again to try to get away CM Fox asked but that includes 100 more feet? Is that what you are saying? So that's the Vu said that's correct. It's 100 additional feet so this is the forced main coming from Lift Station 2 which carries over halfofthe flow oft the entire city that takes it upt the hill to a manhole on the east side ofLonestar Parkway and Buffalo Springs. Sot this is a very critical force. CM Donaldson asked ift this size is going to be adequate for our future developments that we're Vu: said iti is. The other thing to consider is when the Town Creek wastewater treatment plant gets rebuilt, this forced main will go offline temp, it'll stay inj place, but it will not be in use because everything that comes tol Lift Station 2 will be treated at the Town Creek Wastewater Treatment plant. This forced main is going to stay in place in case we ever need tot take that plant down for service. We can continue to pump it back to the Stuart Creek Plant sO we want to be able to have an alternate just in case the plants needs to come down for service. But yes, this will bej plenty to CM Fox made a motion to approve the expenses for thel Emergency Relocation oft the eight-inch forced main with the additional 1001 fti fort the additional cost of $6,550 and the motion was seconded by CM Donaldson with all Councilmember voting AYE, motion carried. 4. Considerationandi possible action on ANORDINANCEOPTHECITY COUNCILOFTHECITY OFI MONTGOMERY TEXAS, AMENDING ARTICLEIL "IMPACT! FEES" OF CHAPTER90 UTLIESPOETHECITYCODEOPS ORDINANCES BY] INCREASING THE IMPACTFEES FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY'S WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE SERVICE AREA WITHIN THE CORPORATE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY: AMENDING CITY ORDINANCE NO. 2018-06, DATED MARCH 27,2018: PROVIDING A TEXASOPEN MEETINGS ACT CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE: AND PROVIDING  from the creek.  difference ofthe $6,550?  going to speak of1 later on?  accommodate future, growth.  FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AFTER PUBLICATION. Mayor Countryman introduced the item.  Vu said what is in front ofs you is the impact fees that I understand have been presented to you all ai few times. You had aj public hearing on these as wellj just to remind you. These were reviewed by the Capital Impact Advisory Committee which was the P&Z acting as the CIAC as well. The public hearing as I mentioned was held. So, al briefreview on this, we are proposing about a 9% increase for all meter sizes across the board. This will alleviate the cost ofi necessary infrastructure improvements because of growth over the next five to ten years. This is in line with other municipalities around, this is not anything that's out of line with what other local  governments are doing.  Page 19    CMI Donaldson asked what was the five or ten years for?  Vu said we do a ten-year projection ofa all the capital projects that will be needed because of growth and that'st the cost that is used to help determine what the impact fees are going to be as well as the number of connections that we' 're anticipating over the next five to ten years. CM Donaldson said ok. So, this is the six-year update. You recommend we doi it more often than Vu said you can doi it as often as you like. What I would recommend is no longer than about five years. It gives you a chance to review your project list again, refresh your connection counts, and account for any changes in growth trends, ifdevelopment slows or really speeds up even more than it already is, gives you a chance to accommodate for that ifsomething major and catastrophic happens in the market or int the city project needs. We can always revisit it at any time. The law actually requires you to do it at least every five years. Mayor Countryman asked ifany oft the developers are already grandfathered in because they've already got developments going? So, this is moving forward once it's adopted, correct? Vus said impact fees are assessed at the time of platting sO whenever the final plat is recorded, that's when thei impact fees or that day are assessed and locked in for that platted section whether it be a single-family section or a development or whatever it may be. Itmay be with these new impact fees going into place there'sa a ninety-day grace period, sO any developments that come in within the next ninety days would still go under the current impact fees, and then after ninety-  that?  days, everything would be subject to these newi impact fees.  CM: Fox asked upon final plat?  Vus said yes, final plat. So, they are assessed at the time ofi final platting and due at the time of connection to the system unless otherwise outlined in a development agreement. Mayor Countryman asked ift there is a motion or other questions? motion with all Councilmembers voting AYE, motion carried.  CM: Donaldson made a motion to accept item four as stated and CMI Langley seconded the 5. Discussion of the Annexation Process and Direction on the Request of the Havenshire Subdivision (located on east side of FM2854 - % mile south of SH105) to be Annexed into the City.  Mayor Countryman introduced the item. Palmer asked if Council would like aj recap? Mayor Countryman said yes please.  Palmer said wel had ai request from one oft thel homeowners from Havenshire a couple weeks ago. I believe they came and spoke at our workshop agenda last month asking if the city would annex them. So, we decided to put it on the agenda for discussion. So, PII just defer, I don't know if anybody from Haven Sire is here that wants to speak on behalfoft the subdivision, but I would like to openi it up for discussion. Ok, is there anyone that would like to approach the podium?  Several residents of Havenshire asked ifthey could all come up.  Mayor Countryman said yes, sure.  Page 110    The resident said we've got several people from Havenshire! here. We really) just want to try to save our neighborhood. It's twenty houses, it's one street. II live at the end of the cul-de-sac and there's a development over in Conroe on the other side oft the creek that plans on connecting our cul-de- sac. They've built a little bridge and from everything we have, and I have prepared, and I don't know if you need anything. I know I've probably given you all these before, but based on their schematic plot, they are proposing our street as our secondary access and that is a five-hundred house subdivision and we don't want the traffic. So, what we want to do is keep our street closed to all pass through traffic, and ifthe way to dot that is annexation with the City ofl Montgomery then that'sr more than likely what we want to do. Wereallyj just need to seei ifthat's possible that we can make sure that they can'tstill tie into the street, even if we Annex. That's our fear. Mayor Countryman said: sol I know, Alan, wel have tol be: asked by the residents and then we, should we need to look at several factors, right? The roads, infrastructure, how would that look? What would that look like? And impact to the city, and then of course, once Council is presented with that, they can make the decision then whether they would like to annex or not? Petrov said the process is pretty straightforward, you know. It can go a couple of ways depending on whether you have all of the property owners requesting annexation or only some portion and not 100%. So, assuming properties in the City's ETJ which have been told what it is then it's possible to Annex the property. Annexation these days begins with a petition from the property owners. Ifyou have 100% of the property owners sign off ont the petition, then the process is pretty simple, a public hearing, and involves negotiation of services to the area and then council, after hearing, approves service. Ifyou don'thave 100% ofthe! property owners sign off, then an election isi required. There would have to be scheduled for an election on one ofthe uniform election times, so itr really depends on the residents filing aj petition at the beginning oft the process. And if they're interested in where they find the petition, they should contact an attorney to assist them. Resident askedlhayeaquestion about the 100% property owners. Is it 100% ofthe property owners or property owners governed by the HOA? We are in an HOA, sO as long as we have a motion passed and signed by our. HOA Council, is that 100% participation oft the property? Petrov said 100% of the property owners. And it goes by the tax roles. You get a certified copy of Resident said It think we could get 100% ifl can tell them that it will stop that development from using the road, but I don't know ifI can tell them, oh maybe. Do you want to pay city taxes for maybe, then Idon't know. So, Ikind ofl like, Ineed tol know that what we: need can actually happen. Petrov said I can tell you that ift the property is int the city, council could vote to close the road and Resident said there is no way to know. That would be following annexation, the vote to close the  the tax roles and based on that isl how you get your 100%.  That we can close that cul-de-sac.  prevent the connection. But again, that would take a vote oft the City Council.  road.  CM Fox asked isn'tt the road is a dedicated County Road? Resident said iti is a County Road right now.  CM Fox said let me ask you one other question that'sl kind ofa curiosity thing, and I know when I ask it its going to bel kind ofs strange. The house sitting north ofy'all on the acreage, is that part of  your subdivision?  Page I1 11    Resident saidy yes, andl he'son board with it.) Ifwe were to go to our homeowners and tryt toj propose annexation or get people to sign a petition, what other kinds of benefits could we offer them as Mayor Countryman said sO the city provides infrastructure, which I believe you all have. And we, that's part of entertaining this idea is, what does sewer look like? What does water look like? How good are your wells, you know. How old are the wells? Because ift the city takes you in, and then two years, we have to put in a whole new subdivision, basically. That's got to be taken into consideration. Se we would want to also look at the street that comes in is in good shape also. So, there's some things that's got to be considered, and then once those are presented. So, then we would maintain that. And then you get Emergency Services as well. So, you get Cityt taxes, nothing changes with your ISD. You just pay city taxes and then your infrastructure, meaning your water and sewer, is maintained by us, then the road is maintained by us, and then we could cut it off.  becoming part ofthe city.  Resident asked so then city water would come?  Mayor Countryman said that's part of like, do you have City, I know you don't have City water now, but do you want it? And that's] part ofa all the discussion that we would have in the interim. Petrov said that typically becomes part of the discussion as you say of the service plan, whether we would run a water line and the number, and they receive emergency services, City Police. Resident said yeah, that'd be great. Those type of things like sewer and water and of course the road would be things that It think we would need to communicate to our homeowners to be able to sign the petition. And that sort ofstudy, would you) not be able to perform that until after you have ap petition signed by the homeowners? Or can that study oft those services happen simultaneously Mayor Countryman asked: SO Alan, would you suggest that we take an inventory ofhow their water Petrov said yeah, I think SO. You got a little bit of the Chicken and Egg kind of situation going. How much time and money do you want to invest if you aren't sure that they're sure. And by the same token, how much time andi money do you want toi invest ify you aren'tsuret that the city is sure. The homeowners and the city, you know, wel have to agree to work together and seei ifv we can close Mayor Countryman said yeah. And we don't! know what we don't know. We don't know what the water and sewer and the road conditions are, but that'ss something that we could, I guess, potentially start working on Gary, or ask how that's provided today? II believe you have got individual welis? CMI Langley said Id drove down there, and I drove all the way to the end SO. II like her little street. Resident asked what about the front entrance. Like we have the brick structure and yard person to maintain that front area. Would that be part ofthe city services or would that still?  sO we can use that information tol kind of go forward and get a petition?  and sewer is provided today?  the gaps.  Resident said we. have one well and then individual septics.  Mayor Countryman said that's typically HOA that does that.  Resident asked if we did do this, and the portion between the cul-de-sac and the property line is unpaved, the wholey problem I feell likei ifll liverightt there,Iwant that intomy property. Wereplatted ita after annexing, dol I have to have the adjoining property owner permission. The developer that's trying to use our road. Do they have to sign off on my owning that piece or once it's city :  Page 1 12    Petrov said that depends on what it is that you are replatting. The owners of the property would have to sign off and your subdivision plat that I've seen appears to me: nobody. Resident said no, it'sj just Havenshire right of way. They just extended it to the property line. ButI was told by the county before we start looking into annexation, that in order for me to try to take that, that I would have to get the developers permission which is obviously not going to happen. Petrov said as long as it does not create a landlock situation on the other side, then I disagree. Resident saidIhave one more question ifyou don'tmind. We weret told that while the county could vote to close the road in a council meeting, sorry, the city could vote to close the road in a council meeting, it wouldn'tbe: a forever guarantee. Because a: future City Council could change their minds orf for whatever reason. What would be a reason that a future City Council might want to open that road back up if the property on the opposite side is Conroe or Conroe's) jurisdiction. Would there be ai reason you would think oft that the CilyofMontgomery would, would it be ini their best interest Mayor Countryman said ift they want to pau us ten million dollars to open it, Idon'tknow. CM Langley said there is no telling what the other council would want to do or the situation might Resident said like Conroe ETJ over there where they could approach government and say we'll give you ten million ify you let us use that road and all ofa sudden even though we' re part oft the Mayor Countryman said they could dangle a carrot, they could not dangle a carrot. I mean, we CM Fox said yeah that'st true, but for Conroe right now, Id don't think they got their budget. Resident asked number one, who do we: negotiate with the city as far as getting the paperwork we need to go forward. We do it with the City Attorney, you have someone else negotiate with Mayor Countryman said I would suggest go to Gary Palmer, he's our City Administrator.  So, I'm just trying to make sure with annexation.  to open our road?  be.  city and we annex, I have the same problem again. That's why we are scared.  don'tk know what we don't know.  Council?  Palmer said as the City Administrator Iami the liaison to council. Should wet turn that street over to the city, does that imply ownership?  Resident said perfect. Thank you. Also, a couple other questions. Let's say we become annexed.  Petrov said yes.  Resident asked sot the city would own the street? Petrov: said it's not aj private street. It'sa County street, right? Resident said it is a county road right now. Mayor Countryman affirmed that it is a County Road.  Page 113    Resident said some say it's a county road but I said its not a County road. But that's a whole different thing, ok. What I'm saying, my problem is that right now I don't think it's a county road. Ithink they'rel blocked: from coming int there. Ithink the developers block, Ithink they'rei interfering when they gave a permit to bridge across that creek, that's what I think. And I've got paperwork that says that. My fear is that I've dealt with a lot of City Councils. A lot of City Councils and Counties and soi forth. My feari is that today, Imean, Imay not be around anyway, buti int the future, ifv we give this to the city, nothing would prevent the City Council from coming in and saying we Mayor Countryman said I can't imagine a need, but I mean, sure, I mean they probably always. Resident said it's a matteri ifthat is right? Ok?That'si my concern. Now if we go as she was talking about, that portion oft the street, county road, whatever you want to call it, from over the cul-de-sac to the creek. OK?1 Not paved, never has been paved. County sign saying no through street, ok? All of that. Nothing, I've never seen a document that gives that road to the county. Never seen a. document, etc., etc. However, if we are annexed, ift the city takes control oft that road, that street down tot that cul-de-sac, which is right ini front ofNaomi's house. Ifwe could get that portion. That eighty feet given tol Naomi as part ofher property replat. Give it tol Naomi. Would that prevent the city, without using or some other, would it prevent them from opening that street up. Petrov said yes.) But, as you know, the city has the ability of eminent domain. ButIagree with you. Mayor Countryman asked ifCouncil had anything to add to the discussion? With that, we'll move right along. We have nothing for executive session this evening, sO how about Council Inquiry?  open that road. Am Ic correct? They can ask, the county can ask.  Resident said thank you.  No inquiry. Ok, all right, with that then Pll entertain a motion to adjourn.  ADJOURNMENT:  CM Langley made a motion to adjourn and the motion was seconded by CM Fox with all  Councilmembers voting AYE, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:41 p.m.  Submitted by:  Date Approved: 62524  James  C  MONTG  &g  1837 BB  Page I1 14