Citizen Comment:
Three topics came up:
- Malachi Williams:
- Redwood and Riverbend Ranch
- Speedbumps in Trace Development
Let’s take these one at a time.
- Malachi Williams: his mother and sister both spoke about their loss. They will continue to fight for justice.
It’s always particularly heartbreaking to hear from the family, and it’s worth being grateful that they have not shied away from speaking on his behalf.
2. Redwood/Rancho Vista and Riverbend Ranch:
Basically, Riverbend Ranch will be a gigantic development that is immediately uphill from Redwood. The development agreement was approved in 2021.
Now, Redwood has huge problems with septic and flooding. Today the developers want to change up the agreement, in ways that might increase the flooding.
The two speakers are Veronica Reyes Ibarra and Monica Reyes Ibarra. Veronica is the president of both the Redwood/Rancho Vista Neighborhood Association and Water Supply Corporation, and Monica is a former resident and advisor to the organizations. They are both advocating on behalf of their community. They both explained about the flooding and challenges to Redwood/Rancho Vista, and the consequences on the people who live there.
We’ll unpack all of the details in Item 17!
- Speedbumps in Trace:
Rodriguez Elementary is here:
in the middle of Trace subdivision.
The speaker wants speedbumps on Van Horn and Esplanade, due to people tearing through the main road at unsafe speeds:
I can imagine that – it feels like a nice, big wide expressway:
Ok, that is a terrible photo. In reality, it has trees and houses and people living there.
(I got that photo is from Bing maps and it is obviously very outdated, but Google maps is even worse:
But I didn’t have a chance to go photograph it in person. Oh well.)
Anyway: yes. Speed bumps are probably a good idea.
…
Item 1: HUD grant money
We get federal grant money from HUD , (the department of Housing and Urban Development). Some of these grants we get regularly, and others we’d apply for if we have another flood or natural disaster.
HUD grants require a few things:
- A citizen participation plan
- A five year consolidated plan
So we’re updating these.
The Citizen Participation Plan:
HUD requires you to have a plan on how citizens will be able to participate in the decision-making process for how the grant will be used. You have to update it every five years.
Here’s ours:
No one has any questions or concerns about this.
…
The Five Year Consolidated Plan:
This is a little more in-depth. Basically we need to pick some broad categories to prioritize.
Background
We generally get about $700K each year in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) money.
HUD puts some rules on it:
During the past 5 years, these were our priority categories:
And here’s what we accomplished over the past five years with the CDBG money:
…
So what do we want to prioritize for the next five years?
Here’s what HUD directs us to do:
Staff held surveys and open houses to get public opinion.
Survey results:
Feedback ranked along themes:
Based on all that, here’s what staff recommends that our priorities should be:
…
So what does Council think?
Amanda: What about sidewalks? Can we include sidewalk projects?
Answer: They’re generally too expensive, but the gap sidewalk program has smaller, cheaper projects that are a good fit.
Alyssa: What kind of survey response numbers did we get?
Answer: 86 online, and then in the 7 dream sessions we got another 50 responses.
Alyssa: Transit is clearly a big response. Can we include that as a priority?
Answer: It is included under Public Services.
The city also gives out grants to nonprofits, under the Human Services Advisory Board, or HSAB.
Jane: Can we merge the application process of CDBG and HSAB?
Answer: We’re going to align the applications in 2026, but we still have separate committees looking at the applications.
There’s some discussion of workforce skills and economic development. ACC offers HVAC courses at the library, for example, and Community Action picks up the tab using CDBG money.
Everyone is on board with these two plans.
…
Item 15: Summer Fun! And other fun.
We’re updating our Youth Programs Standards of Care for 2025. This means Summer Fun and Discovery Camp and any other kid-things that the city runs.
What is Summer Fun?
It’s a weeklong summer camp held for 8 sessions during the summer. The biggest point is that it is extremely affordable – $40 per week for city residents, including breakfast and lunch – and so it’s a real service to families who need affordable childcare. It’s hosted at different SMCISD campuses each year.
Before Covid, Summer Fun had 300 kids per week, across two different campuses. It dropped dramatically during Covid, and now we’re somewhat back, up to 120 kids per week. There’s usually a waitlist of about 50-60 kids each week, but we’re short on staffing.
There are a few questions about scholarships and residency and growing the program.
- scholarships are available for anyone in SMCISD, even if you’re out of the city
- City residents get priority registration, so it’s been filled with just city residents for the past few years.
- They would like to grow the program and serve more families, yes.
The city also runs a discovery camp, and a spring break camp, and other helpful camps.
(The vote for the Standards of Care is 7-0.)
…
Item 17: Rancho Vista/Redwood, and Riverbend Ranch
This one is big and tricky.
Backstory:
Riverbend Ranch is an enormous piece of land that kind of wants to be its own town. It is just north of Redwood:
It’s not built yet, though.
We approved a development agreement with them back in December 2021. (This was when I was practice-blogging, and had not yet gone public. I did write up the meeting, but did not notice the importance of this item.)
…
Keep in mind: Back in 2021, development agreements did not trigger any notifications. So no one in Redwood would have been notified about this development.
This changed after SMART/Axis blew up in 2023. Now they notify people within 400 feet about an upcoming development agreement.
That’s better, but still not much. The notification radius should be proportional to the size of the development.
…
So as far as I know, no one noticed this massive tract of land was being discussed.
Just for funsies, here’s how the original vote went, back in 2021:
Yes, this looks AWESOME: Jane, Shane, Saul, and Mark Gleason and Jude Prather
No, this seems terrible: Alyssa, Max Baker
Mm-hmm.
Redwood/Rancho Vista
Just south – and downhill! – of Riverbend Ranch is the Redwood/Rancho Vista community. They’re part of SMCISD and the greater San Marcos community, but they’re also kinda their own community. The Guadalupe-Hays county line runs right between Riverbend Ranch and Redwood.
Back in 2017, a study by UT-Austin uncovered widespread parasitic infections in the residents. This is due to septic problems and flooding. The soil is terrible for septic systems, so they break down and leak almost immediately. Anything that increases flooding risks will expose this vulnerable community to more adverse health effects.
Since then, the two speakers – Veronica Reyes Ibarra and Monica Reyes Ibarra – have mobilized the community around solving the septic, flooding, and parasite issues. The three issues are all intertwined, and all expensive to fix. (Veronica is the president of both the neighborhood association and Redwood/Rancho Vista water supply corporation.)
…
In August 2022, the development agreement came back for amendments. This time I noticed. They wanted a variance for a 30 foot cut-and-fill.
What’s cut-and-fill? I drew you some pictures!
Suppose you’re trying to develop along a hill:
Now, you can’t put a foundation on a slope – you have to level it out:
(I’m sorry. I wasted a lot of time doing this.)
So this is cut-and-fill:
Developers love this because now you can fit a lot of houses, or one big industrial building:
But now you’ve destroyed the natural drainage patterns, and this is going to make flooding much worse.
So the city code requires you to take little steps, like this:
You can’t fit as many houses though:
and you definitely can’t put a giant industrial warehouse on it anymore.
Back in 2022 at least, that was exactly what the developer wanted to do:
This went to P&Z.
There was a huge outcry from the residents of Rancho Vista/Redwood. About 30 residents wrote letters, and more showed up in person, to talk about the flooding and drainage issues and health consequences.
P&Z turned the cut-and-fill down.
Then it went to Council. Council did not vote on it, but instead formed a subcommittee in January 2023. Matthew, Saul, and Alyssa are all on it.
Then two years passed? I’m not sure why?
Which brings us to the present moment
They want a bunch of amendments, but specifically they want the cut and fill. No one mentions if this is for an industrial portion anymore. (Sure do hope it’s not another AI Data Center!)
Here’s the deal they hammered out with staff:
So this is the question that’s before Council: Can they have their cut-and-fill if they agree to do all these other nice things?
….
What does Council say?
Matthew: It is shameful that Guadalupe County isn’t helping our neighbors! I dream of annexation! I am a simple man, and I like retention ponds. They’re a visual indicator that storm water is being detained. Can we have more of those?
(I’m really not trying to mock Matthew here – these are quotes! He literally said “I am a simple man!” Council members are just endearing goofballs sometimes.)
Answer: They’re going to have retention ponds. Those were already in the development agreement.
Matthew: But can we have more?
Answer: No? They’ll be there? Look at this map, there’s a lot of them:
It’s hard to see, but I believe it’s the two red hatchmark regions, on the left and lower right parts of the pond?
….
Jane is arguing hard for the deal. She keeps hammering the angle that if there were no development agreement, there’d be no protections at all. Therefore this is better than the alternative.
I am not so sure. Big cut-and-fill is generally banned for a reason. Jane doesn’t seem to be taking that into account – she’s only arguing that the mitigation strategies are great.
Shane comes out against the deal. “It’s like the Woods all over again. 15% increased retention is barely anything.”
Staff: They’ll divert the water and release it downstream of Redwood/Rancho Vista
Shane: Doesn’t matter. 15% is barely anything.
(I’m inclined to agree.)
Saul is worried about the parasites and the flooding. It floods really badly there.
Staff explains a bit: the soil is really bad for septic systems. They basically break very quickly and release sewage into the soil. The parasite lives in the sewage in the soil.
Several council members ask: Can Redwood be annexed and brought onto city sewage?
Answer: Redwood/Rancho Vista might not want this? Every home owner would have to individually request annexation. Annexation comes with lots of taxes and fees. Just the sewer would require connection fees and stormwater fees and other things. It’s not likely that Redwood would reach consensus on this.
Staff: The advantage of this development is that it will at least bring a sewer line much closer to Redwood.
Q: What’s all this about a M.U.D.?
Answer: M.U.D. stands for Municipal Utility District. This is like a city-lite. They charge taxes and have a board. They run utilities for people that live in the M.U.D, but they don’t do all the rest of the city government stuff.
(If you are curious about the insanity of the Cedar Park M.U.D, enjoy this blog which is their version of The San Marxist. Things are pretty bonkers.)
City Manager Stephanie Reyes weighs in with the following, which is worth quoting:
“That’s the hard part with a lot of decisions Council is faced with. Because, sometimes, it will look like you’re supporting a certain development, and a lot of times, it’s not about supporting the development – it’s about supporting the regulations on the development, that you would not otherwise have if you did not vote a certain way.
So that is something to contemplate, and it’s not lost on us that that is a very heavy decision… Some of the things can be developed by right, so even if you don’t vote for it, it’s still going to happen, but you lose the negotiating power to make some of these concessions and negotiations happen.”
So basically, no one likes this development any more, but we can’t stop it. (Well, I think Jane still likes it.)
…
Here’s my read: City staff and Jane Hughson are absolutely convinced of two things:
- The benefits of the improvements outweigh the risks of cut-and-fill.
- They will definitely develop the property anyway, if the cut-and-fill is denied.
The rest of council has to decide if they agree on those two things. Everyone feels very uneasy voting yes but also uneasy about voting no.
I will say this: Council seemed genuinely concerned about the residents of Redwood.
Jane makes one last point: This is a big environmental win, because they wanted to build a package plant, and we got them to agree to a lift station instead.
What this means is that the developer wanted to install a cheap little sewage treatment station that would then release to the river. This means it would have higher levels of phosphorous and lead to more algae blooms and other bad river outcomes. Also, package plants are not staffed, so it takes longer to notice when something malfunctions and it starts dumping untreated waste into the river.
Instead, we’ve gotten them to agree to a lift station, which brings the sewage back to San Marcos, to a higher quality treatment plant. So this is good!
(This win is independent of the welfare of the people in Redwood, though.)
The final point is that the Redwood parasite is already a problem that needs dire attention. And ultimately, Redwood is not in either San Marcos or in Hays County – it’s in Guadalupe County, which we have no jurisdiction over.
What Council decides is that they’ll to bring the issue of Redwood septics and flooding back, at a future meeting. They will discuss a resolution to send to Guadalupe County, to try to somehow get them to take action on the issue.
The vote:
Yes: Jane, Matthew, Alyssa, Saul, Amanda, Lorenzo
No: Shane Scott
My take: This is a really hard one.
- I’m not convinced that the mitigation strategies will outweigh the cut-and-fill risks, but I’m also not convinced that they won’t?
- The package plant thing seems like a win
- Passing a resolution to get Guadalupe County to help Redwood seems likely to be empty, but maybe Council will be more persistent than that.
I felt like the current Council is sincere in their desire to help the residents of Redwood, but it’s not obvious how they should do that. It will require sustained attention and energy to help the residents out.
The San Marxist 