City Council Regular Meeting Minutes April 08, 2025 x % TEXAS OPENING AGENDA 1. Call Meeting to Order. The City Council Regular Meeting of the City of Montgomery was called to order by Mayor Countryman at 6:00 p.m. on April 08, 2025, at City Hall 101 Old Plantersville Rd., Montgomery, TX and live video streaming. With Council Members present a full quorum was established. Present: Mayor Sara Countryman Mayor Pro-Tem Casey Olson Council Member Place 1 Carol Langley Council Member Place 4 Cheryl Fox Council Member Place 5 Stan Donaldson 2. Invocation. Council Member Donaldson led the Invocation. 3. Pledges of Allegiance. Mayor Countryman led the Pledges of Allegiance. PUBLIC FORUM No comments were received. CONSENT AGENDA 4. Consideration and possible action on the City Council Regular & Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes ofl February 25, 2025. 5. Consideration and possible action on the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of March 11, 2025 Motion: Mayor Pro-Tem Olson made a motion to accept consent agenda items four and five. Council Member Fox seconded the motion. Motion carried with all present voting in favor. April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 12 REGULAR AGENDA 6. Consideration and Possible Action on the Lone Star Ridge Section 1 WSD&P plans. (Dev. No. 2404) City Engineer Roznovsky said starting on page 63 of your packet, you will see a copy of the construction plans for the first section ofLone Star Ridge Section One. Lone Star Ridge is the Taylor Morrison development on Lone Star Parkway where they began the clearing and grading work on the north side of Lone Star Parkway, just east of Buffalo Springs. As is required by your code, the actual construction plans for that section coming from Council for approval, we have reviewed the plans with reference to the City's ordinances and the City's design manual. We find them to be in compliance and do not have any issues with this. A couple things I do want to point out that we have talked about previously, just to wrap it all together, at your March 25th meeting you all approved an amendment to the development agreement to address the retaining walls throughout the section. Just in noting, it is the developer's responsibility, not the City's responsibility for the retaining walls. They have since adjusted their plan SO those are outside the right-of-way, outside the easement as much as possible. A couple things just to note in the plan set. This is the first oft two sections. The grading is already ongoing. This plan set does not approve their park layout. Ifyou look in the plan set, there is a park and it looks like a splash pad for reference only. That is not part of this approval. They have submitted those plans to us and we provided comments, mainly surrounding a lot of easements and utilities in that area and just making sure everyone is clear on responsibilities and other agreements needed in place. A couple other things we. had them do that is worth noting is for their water line connection at Lone Star Parkway. We had them extend that steel casing, due to the planned improvements ofl Lone Star Parkway, just going ahead and having that in steel casing, sO if that project does get funded, it is already there and there is no additional work to be needed. This connection also goes over to Buffalo Springs Drive and ties into the water line there, as well as the sewer line goes over to lift station 10, which they are funding the improvements of. Other than that, the plans are in order and we recommend approval. Council Member Donaldson asked what about the water drainage, the surface water? Which way is the water going to drain in that place? City Engineer Roznovsky said generally, all will flow north toward the canal. They are in the process of digging a large detention pond in the back ofthe property. There is going to be a series oftwo ponds. There is a pond that is existing today. It is at the end of Peel Point Drive and then that will flow down into another larger pond they are constructing, that ultimately now falls into the drainage. That is not part of this plan set, that was a separate masquerading plan set that was approved because it does not include the public infrastructure roads. Council Member Donaldson asked are they going to have two ponds? City Engineer Roznovsky said correct. A small one that is already existing and then a larger one that is essentially all the way April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 12 across the bulkhead at the very northern end of the property. They did submit a drainage impact analysis showing impacts on the channel they are retaining and they are not exceeding the pre-developed flow Motion: Mayor Pro-Tem Olson made a motion to accept the Lone Star Ridge Section 1 WSD&P plans. (Dev. No. 2404). Council Member Fox seconded the motion. Motion carried with all present voting in favor. 7. Consideration and Possible Action for the TPDES Permit Amendment for the Stewart Creek Wastewater: Treatment Plant to 0.8MGD flow. City Engineer Roznovsky said you have two wastewater plants. You have the Town Creek and Stewart Creek. Town Creek is the one that you entered into a design contract with Halff to replace that facility. We have been going through for the past almost two years at this point, the permit amendment process for that plant to get the additional. TCEQ has been very behind on all their reviews. Typically, we used to tell developers and clients this was a nine to 12 month process. We have permits now that sit at the TCEQ for 12 to 18 months. With that being said, as we know, we have growth coming. The Stewart Creek plant is also going to need to be upsized, SO this just gets that permit process started and in place, SO when you get to that point, the longest lead time item is out ofthe way. What this includes is preparing the permanent amendment application and submitting it to the TCEQ. Reimbursable expenses are all required to be published in the paper. There is the TCEQ fee which is a couple thousand dollars depending on the size of the permit, and postage because you have to send out certified letters. The big thing on this is just the time because we now have to budget for 12 to 18 months of following up with the TCEQ to try to get these permits moving. The actual permit prep itself is 60 to 90 days and then it sits at the TCEQ for 12 months. Mayor Countryman asked what happens ifiti is only at the TCEQ for 60 days? City Engineer Roznovsky said we will all be surprised. City Engineer Roznovsky said ifit comes back and we do not have to do the TCEQ coordination, I will gladly come back and figure out what we did this time that was different. Mayor Pro-Tem Olson asked what is in the expenses and fees? City Engineer Roznovsky said there are two newspaper ads that have to be run. Itisa a notice that has to be published in the paper for the amendment. Those typically run anywhere between $2,000 to $3,000 a piece, depending on location. We are lucky here because in Harris County it is $6,000 a piece. The actual TCEQ fee is based on the size of the permit and the type of the amendment. I believe it is $1,100 - $1,200 for that and then postage. It is time and expense, SO whatever it comes through is what we will bill. Council Member Fox asked SO it could be less than this $25,000? City Engineer Roznovsky said yes. The time and materials, the $10,000 allowance is just that, allowance. A lot oftimes what we will try to do is work with staff and they will pay directly to the Courier. That works just as well. Mayor Countryman asked, SO is this the not to exceed $10,000? City Engineer Roznovsky said yes. Mayor Countryman asked do we: need April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of12 to say that in the motion just because it does not state it here? City Engineer Roznovsky said you can gladly do that. Motion: Council Member Donaldson made a motion to accept the TPDES Permit Amendment for the Stewart Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant to 0.8MGD flow. Council Member Langley seconded the motion. Motion carried with all present voting in favor. 8. Consideration and possible action by City Council on an Amendment to the Development Agreement with Tri-Pointe Homes (the "Developer"), for the Legacy Grove (Dev No. 2409) for the proposed sanitary sewer bypass pumping. City Engineer Roznovsky said on page 115 in your packets you will see a copy of the amendment to this agreement. There are two main components of this. If you remember the Legacy development, part of their job is they are relocating and replacing lift station number five. Lift station number five is the one at the bottom of the creek by Napa. What is in here are those contingencies of the time to build that if they have lots available, to allow them at their cost and expense, to fund a bypass pumping to pump that while the lift station is being finished. That is what is in this section two. It lays out the developer is responsible for installing and paying the cost of a two pump system that has an auto dialer, SO if there is a failure, that comes out. They are also required to contract with the City's operator. They are the ones that are operating it at their expense. The final component of this is there is a $50,000 financial guarantee that gets put out oft the City when they start it and when they finish. In the worst case scenario that they start the operation and they fail to maintain it, they do not take care ofit, they abandon the job, the City will be able to call on those funds to finish up that bypass pumping. That is in addition to any type ofbonding, etc. on the project itself. This financial guarantee is also in line with what you looked at for the Red Bird development. Very same situation. Based on timing, this may or may not come into play, but we are trying to get ahead ofit before it gets to that point. Over to page 116, item three, the voter trailer, voter housing. They are creating a utility district on the property. One thing that came up with the Redbird development is the time that the trailer is on site and the time that it is going to be off the site. This lays that out and says it can be there, but it cannot be there for a time exceeding 12 months. It gives them enough time to move it in, establish residency, hold the vote, and move out. Mayor Pro- Tem Olson asked if that is just a one-time thing? City Engineer Roznovsky said correct. Mayor Countryman asked what kind of permitting has to happen because I believe there was a difference in permitting and directing staff? City Engineer Roznovsky said they will still have to get the normal permits for a mobile home trailer on the property. Mayor Countryman asked not a commercial office building? City Engineer Roznovsky said correct. I know this is not an executed agreement, but this has been reviewed by the developer. Council Member Langley asked SO they will come before Council with their mobile home? City Engineer Roznovsky said I do not remember the Ordinance. Council April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 12 Member Langley asked do they have enough time? City Engineer Roznovsky said yes. The nearest election they will be trying to hit would be the November election. They would need to get a trailer moved in by the middle to end ofthe summer to establish that residency for the November election. Mayor Countryman said I am assuming Code Enforcement will be the one to ensure all of the permits are properly done and properly executed. City Engineer Roznovsky said that is correct. Motion: Mayor Pro-Tem Olson made a motion to accept an Amendment to the Development Agreement with Tri-Pointe Homes (the "Developer"), for the Legacy Grove (Dev No. 2409) for the proposed sanitary sewer bypass pumping. Council Member Donaldson seconded the motion. Motion carried with all present voting in favor. 9. Consideration and Possible Action on the Draft MOU for the BCS Capital Development (Dev. No. 2418). Mayor Countryman said for the record, she knows Mr. Burgher could not be here and Mr. Todd had a brand new baby. City Engineer Roznovsky said if you pull your attention to the hard copy that is on your desk, I realized late last night, early this morning, we had uploaded the previous version that did not include the section in red that is highlighted on your sheets. Everything else is the same. Itisjust this additional language that was requested to be added by the developer. II know we have talked about this agreement a couple times between workshops and coffee meetings, and this is the culmination of our understanding of everyone's stance and direction that was given. What I will do is I will run through the terms in here. The developer has reviewed it and they are in agreement with the items and the engineer is here as well. What is not part of the MOU itself is this summary. This is really for reference only. We do expect the exhibition showing the scope of the improvements as part of the MOU. The actual cost summary is a separate document just for reference that we will talk about in a bit. We will go back through the highlights SO we are all on the same page. As a reminder, this is the BCS Capital development. This is adjacent to Home Depot from Buffalo Springs all the way from SH-105 to CB Stewart along that side, wrapping around Ransom's Steakhouse. There are a handful of items they are needing to proceed with in terms of the feasibility study. When we go down to the bottom of the first page, section one is the water line improvements. Ifyou look at exhibit A, this includes the water line that extends all the way from Lone Star Parkway to the northern boundary of Home Depot, as well as along the front of SH-105 on the property. Mayor Pro-Tem Olson said I think you explained this before, but what is the reasoning for us having to connect it all the way to Lone Star Parkway again? City Engineer Roznovsky said flows. Right now, essentially in order for water to get all the way around to Home Depot, it goes around Lone Star Parkway in front of Kroger to get over to Home Depot. When that was going in, there was already close to April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 12 pressure flow issues when it comes to fire flow, SO we are, having them connected because that makes a shortcut and increases our pressure and flow at that location to be able to meet power flow requirements. Mayor Pro-Tem Olson asked would it not be easier just to connect it to the 12 inch on the other side of the tract? City Engineer Roznovsky said you can, but it still gets bottled down. Ifit goes on 12 inch in front, it goes down to a 10, and then down to an eight, and connects to Pond Street where that 12 inch was upsized a few years ago. The shortest route from water plant three, which is your main producing water plant, is down Buffalo Springs Drive. That will help benefit this entire area. Council Member Donaldson said it will create a loop, right? City Engineer Roznovsky said correct. Council Member Donaldson said and we will already have it there for additional projects. Mayor Pro-Tem Olson said Ijust look at this other 112 acres over here and they are getting off cheap because the majority of everything the City is paying for and I am struggling with that a little bit. City Engineer Roznovsky said you do have provisions in your ordinance that allows for the recoup of pro rata share of cost. That is both for City and developers to go back and try to recuperate that cost from when that property gets developed. Mayor Pro-Tem Olson asked when you say go back and try, does that mean it is not very successful? City Engineer Roznovsky said I am not going to say go back and try, it is more ofifthat is the avenue the City wants to take. I will have to go back and look specifically. Typically, it is a developer that puts in the cost and the developer collects the pro rata share. I believe it is worded that either or can fund the project and collect. This is part of your impact fee list. Your impact fee is calculated based on this cost, SO at a roundabout way, you are collecting some of those costs. Mayor Pro-Tem Olson said that is the thing. IfBCS goes back and wants it, we are already reimbursing BCS, SO BCS has no right to it. City Engineer Roznovsky said correct. That is something you could have clarified in the final agreement. City Engineer Roznovsky said the second portion of this project is sewer improvements which are simpler. Ifyou go to the next exhibit, this is just a gravity line along SH-105 and along CB Stewart as needed. Their final land plan on where: it is going to connect and where the apartment complex is will dictate the final layout along CB Stewart. The portion along SH-105 is necessary. That section in the yellow box is the potential that when we get to that point, the City wants to complete that section and remove lift station number 12 in the process to say the operational cost is something that can be done. It can be bid as an alternate to see other prices come in and then a decision made at that time. Mayor Countryman asked are we taking that six acres into consideration when discussing. Mayor Pro-Tem Olson said they. just purchased it. Mayor Countryman asked they did? Mayor Pro- Tem Olson said BCS bought this, yes. Mayor Countryman said he was interested and it was looking good. Mayor Countryman said they have not purchased it. Mayor Pro-Tem Olson said I thought he said he did. Mayor Countryman said no. Council Member Fox said that is a potential. Mayor Countryman said it is a potential and they were talking about it. That is why I am asking. Is that to be considered in what we are talking about? City April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 12 Engineer Roznovsky said it is not considered in any value calculation, sales tax, or any of that, it is by itself and would be an addition to it. As far as utility service goes, they would be required to extend it along their frontage and connect it when they develop,, just like we would. City Engineer Roznovsky said the third portion of the project is the roadway entrance, which is Buffalo Springs, including the intersection at Buffalo Springs and CB Stewart as shown on the exhibits. Those are the three main components of the actual public infrastructure work to be done. How this agreement is written, and was based on the feedback we received, is that the entire agreement there would be a funding mechanism either through a 380 or a different mechanism to reimburse up to a $4 million amount. Some of that being for direct reimbursement of this infrastructure, some oft that being for a grant for economic development, job creation, etc. Again, this MOU is intended to be high level, SO the actual form and the structure oft that gets worked out in the details. The section in red that was added since this was put in your packets, or missed I should say, is the feasibility study and CB Stewart as well. What the developer requested is if they also fund the CB Stewart improvements that were roughly $750,000, that their reimbursement would go up the same and SO that is what this is written as. Mayor Countryman asked, to be clear, this is our structure and then we will get the finer points and numbers, and this is an up to no more than $4 million or up to no more than $4.8 million and they will get us hard cost and they will not get paid back additional monies, other than what they have spent on the project? City Engineer Roznovsky said correct. If you go to the very last page oft the hand out, one thing that is not included in here on the very first section is any of their private "public" infrastructure, SO the detention ponds, the drainage, and things like that, I think their estimate on that was $2 million. When you take that $2 million of those public infrastructures and $2.5 ofthe linear utilities and the roadway, that is where you get above that $4 million and they are asking for that $4 million back. The way that this is worded is the City is not taking ownership of those facilities. We are not interested in taking ownership of the detention ponds, SO it is not a true reimbursement with the intent of acquiring. It is part of the overall incentive for the development of a credit toward all the infrastructure it takes to get the flagship store and to get these other items. Mayor Countryman said we have seen a couple of different renderings, but with our goal for this being a mobility city via bikes, walking, and golf carts, the plans that you have seen, was that going to be able to allow such mobility? City Engineer Roznovsky said they have not gotten to that point, but it is definitely something that we can ask for. Adjacent to this, the Church ofl Montgomery project on CB Stewart, in their draft development agreement, is to put sidewalks along CB Stewart. That is something that can easily be carried over for the continuation of that. Mayor Countryman said it is something that we have definitely all agreed on with talking to KKC and the other third parties that we had helping us with planning and zoning around the City. April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 12 City Engineer Roznovsky said going back to page three of the agreement, paragraph five, City agrees to fund the reimbursement through some portion of City sales tax revenue, MEDC sales tax revenue, and additional ad valorum tax revenue. This is not saying that it is going to be all three, these are all the potential buckets. Obviously, it is going to take both MEDC's and City's consideration. Once I get through these items, I will point to the last page to at least talk from the concept level, and a term not to exceed 10 years. That was a big point that Council was making was a 10 year limit and SO that was written into this MOU. Essentially, they do a drainage report. The drainage report is approved, the tract is platted that will govern for that tract, which is normal practice for the City. The final portion is just a reminder/funderstanding that the northern portion ofthe property will need to be rezoned to R2 multi-family. They have the 13 to 14 and a half acres of multi-family development that is currently zoned B-commercial and PD. The B-commercial portion would need to be rezoned by the City. This is not rezoning the property. They have to go through the normal rezone process. This is just an understanding ofthat rezoning that needs to occur. Council Member Fox said I have actually talked to the developer. I talked to Jack about the landscaping for the whole project since there really is nothing that we are doing about that, and that is one thing I am concerned about. The fact that we have appropriate landscaping that will actually give a better quality of life to the area. City Engineer Roznovsky said that is definitely something that we can add into the development agreement. Mayor Pro-Tem Olson said it is similar to the trees and all the grass we made Home Depot put in. City Engineer Roznovsky said right. Home Depot did not request any type of variance on the landscape plan, SO they just followed the normal landscape ordinance. I think they did go above and beyond. I do not remember those numbers off the top of my head. I think again, that is one of the details that we can ask and put in that they provide that in advance, or at least a concept in advance to understand where these green spaces are going to be as they are being developed. Council Member Fox said I would like it to be a step up from Home Depot. I thought Home Depot did a great job, but for this particular project, I would like to see it stepped up quite a bit. Mayor Countryman said I think maybe you are also referencing to the east ofHome Depot, we. have a rather large big box grocery store that was supposed to put in trees that did something other than stand there like sticks. Mayor Pro-Tem Olson said part ofthe agreement with Home Depot is we made them put in irrigation. Mayor Countryman said I am just saying the landscaping should actually be landscaping. City Engineer Roznovsky said when the Kroger development ended, the landscaping and tree ordinances were different SO there are different rules. Mayor Countryman said that is right. City Engineer Roznovsky said it does not mean that you cannot ask for above and beyond as part of the development agreement and that can be a discussion. On the last page ofyour packet, you will see a copy oft the financial summary. This is not part ofthe MOU, again, it is just to get in front ofyou for a reference. Your projected sales tax is at full build up. Once it stabilizes, they estimated it around three years. When you April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of12 get down to the very bottom line of those years, that assumes an additional three years on top of essentially zero payback. We nderstand their first building is 12 to 18 months is what they stated, SO going there is going to be additional revenues and sales tax generated earlier than the three years, but worst case they said it will take three years to stabilize, SO we just backed it up. One word that we did add is that it is all based on additional ad valorem tax created if the City decides to go to ad valorem tax. Right now the build is valued for MCAD at $1.5 million based on the MCAD valuation. We are not saying that they enter into this agreement and they get a portion of that ad valorem tax back, even if they do not develop it. It is all based on the growth of ad valorem tax. Your sales tax breakdown in the next box and ad valorem breakdown shows what is debt or maintenance, then the very bottom box is the payback period. Again, we do not need to decide this today. I think that the most appropriate is we have both MEDC and Council's workshop to talk through and scenario this. You see a couple different variations of options that hit the $4 million reimbursement and the 10-year payback period. You see it varies from no ad valorem, some ad valorem, some combination thereof. So again, not to decide tonight, but just to give you the most recent numbers as we continue to develop. Mayor Countryman asked has Maryann seen these numbers and you are still on board from the last meeting? Council Member Donaldson said my understanding from Planning and Zoning is that they are going to put a retaining wall in the southeast corner of the property. Are you familiar with that? City Engineer Roznovsky said that is my understanding. Council Member Donaldson asked why is it going there? In my understanding, it is like six feet high. Is it going to block views? What is the purpose of putting it that far? City Engineer Roznovsky said he will let their engineer address what the plan is at this point. Mr. Jonathan White, L Squared Engineering, said we do not have our final plan, but just looking at it conceptually as we are going through the detention modeling and TxDot criteria, that is the lowest part, right there at the corner is the lowest part. That is typically where you want the detention pond, the lowest part ofthe land. Obviously, itist the most valuable corner, SO we are putting the detention behind and we are having to elevate that pad SO the water will go backwards to the detention pond. It is not going to be in an area where you are actually going to be driving into. You are going to be entering off ofSH-105 and off ofBuffalo Springs, further back. It is going to be elevated for four to five feet, it could be six. Do not hold me to that, but it is going to be somewhere around that. Council Member Donaldson asked what is going to be behind it, just land? Mr. White said that is going to be where one of the pads are going to go, SO whether that is a bank, a restaurant, that will be that most valuable corner, Mayor Countryman asked what is the setback? Is it 25 feet? Mr. White said the building set back is probably 35 feet on SH-105. Mayor Pro-Tem Olson asked City Engineer Roznovsky, based on your sales tax revenue, where did you get those numbers from? City Engineer Roznovsky said the $55 million in sales tax was what was provided by the developer. Excuse me, $55 million in annual sales April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 12 revenue. The sales tax itselfis the $1.1 million. Mayor Countryman said I think that is very conservative, but I appreciate being conservative. Mr. White said just to answer your question, they did just get the six acres on a contract. Mayor Countryman said they did, okay good. City Engineer Roznovsky said the next steps from this is obviously answer any questions on this, but approval tonight of the MOU, what this allows, is for staff and the developer to start working on the full development agreement that lays out all these specific terms, and then kick off a workshop between MEDC to talk about the buckets that this will come from to fund the agreement. This gives the framework that everyone agrees upon, and concept to be able to develop a full agreement. Mayor Countryman asked with that change of the six acres under, what about CB Stewart there and upgrading that road, therei is going to bei no ask for that? City Engineer Roznovsky said I think that is a valid ask. It is under contract, SO if they come back and they request that be included in the MOU, I think obviously we need our development agreement, but just re-evaluate the needs for all those. The feasibility study, everything was based off of the 32 acres. This is not anticipating the six acres now, however, if the six acres is part of this, that detention is also going to serve the six acres. A lot oft things will change. Council Member Fox said technically just approving this tonight is just kicking it off to move forward with the plan. City Engineer Roznovsky said yes, it is non-binding. The MOU is designed to detail the specific meeting requirements oft the development. It establishes the good faith foundation between the parties future collaborative efforts and are mutually beneficial. They work together in order to coordinate to achieve the goals. The duration of the MOU becomes effective the date it is signed by both parties. The MOU is non-binding and remains enforced and in effect unless explicitly terminated in writing by both parties. Motion: Council Member Donaldson made a motion to accept the MOU for the BCS Capital Development (Dev. No. 2418) with the changes made that were presented. Council Member Fox seconded the motion. Motion carried with all present voting in favor. 10. Consideration and possible action to award the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Design-Build Contracting for Police Station/Municipal Court Facility. Police Chief Solomon requested they postpone any action on this item until after the executive session. After executive session, Mayor Pro-Tem Olson asked Chiefifit is going to cost anything for this request for qualifications? Police Chief Solomon said no. City Secretary Beaven said just for some background, when another opportunity presented itself, City Attorney Villarreal had advised us to not score this or to do anything with it. So at this time, we are unable to award it, SO I was asking to take no action on this SO that way if depending on April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 12 how your outcome comes with the executive session, would determine whether or not we brought this forward again. Motion: Mayor Pro-Tem Olson made a motion to take no action to award the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Design-Build Contracting for Police Station/Municipal Court Facility. Council Member Donaldson seconded the motion. Motion carried with all present voting in favor. COUNCIL INQUIRY Mayor Countryman said she does have a question for Public Works Director Muckleroy, actually Hays, but they are not here this evening. When testing water, do they walk onto any residents property and have access to outside water sources of private residents? Public Works Director Muckleroy said there are set addresses that they have. Mayor Countryman asked are the residents made known? Public Works Muckleroy said yes. There are 10 set ones that have been in place since before I was hired on. We recently changed one of the addresses at the request of a homeowner. We have to set those in place with the State. They have to be a known address the State already knows about. Mayor Countryman said I happen to be related to one of the people that I guess is a set address that had no idea and did not have a pleasant engagement and we can take that offline. I was just curious how that took place. Public Works Director Muckleroy said it very well could fall under the existing address being the testing point. Someone moved out and someone new moved in and did not know. It is very possible. Mayor Countryman said the Hays Utility employee was less than pleasant. EXECUTIVE SESSION 11. Closed Session City Council will meet in Closed Session pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code, in accordance with the authority contained in: A. Section 551.072 Deliberations about Real Property for potential land purchase. At 6:40 p.m. Mayor Countryman convened the Montgomery City Council into closed session pursuant to provision Chapter 551 ofthe Texas Government Code, in accordance with the authority contained in Section 551.072 Deliberations about Real Property for potential land purchase. 12. Open Session City Council will reconvene in Open Session at which time action on the matter(s) discussed in Closed Session may be considered. April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of12 A. Section 551.072 Deliberations about Real Property for potential land purchase. At 7:31 p.m. Mayor Countryman reconvened the Montgomery City Council into an open session pursuant to provision of Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code to take any action necessary related to the executive session noted herein, or regular agenda items, noted above, and/or related items. Motion: Mayor Pro-Tem Olson made a motion to authorize the Interim City Administrator to pursue real estate negotiations as discussed in executive session. Council Member Fox seconded the motion. Motion carried with all present voting in favor. CLOSING AGENDA 13. Items to consider for placement on future agendas. No items to consider at this time. 14. Adjourn. Motion: Council Member Fox made a motion to adjourn the Regular Meeting oft the City of Montgomery at 7:34 p.m. Council Member Donaldson seconded the motion. Motion carried with all present voting in favor. APPROVED: hangne / Sara Countryman, Mayof e ATTEST: - Ruby Beaven, City Secretary April 08, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 12 of1 12