First off: it was Laurie Moyer’s last meeting, after 36 years with the city. Mostly she’s done engineering-ish things, but also some City Manager-ish things. She took all these great City Hall photos on her road trip last year. Congrats to her!
Citizen comment:
- Two people – Noah Brock and Annie Donovan – talked about the latest iteration of SMART/Axis hijinks. I’ll save their comments for that section.
- Two people called for a resolution for a ceasefire in Gaza.
- The San Marcos Civics Club, and how Council passively assumes they can’t solve city problems
- Mano Amiga’s petition to repeal Civil Service. I’ll save these details for later, too.
- Finally, the killing of Malachi Williams by the SMPD officer on April 11th. (Discussed previously here, here, and here.)
To recap, the family of Malachi Williams has been asking for:
1. Release the name and badge ID number of the officer that killed Malachi Williams
2. The officer should be placed on leave while the investigation is ongoing.
3. The family should be able to view all officer and storefront footage, with a lawyer present.
Malachi’s grandfather spoke eloquently. This has happened before. But then the City Manager Stephanie Reyes spoke, which is new.
Here’s what Stephanie Reyes says:
– Video material is available for the family to view along with their attorney. It’s at the Hays District Attorney’s office.
– The DA says that neither the family nor their attorney has reached out to view the footage.
– The DA is waiting to discuss how much of the video the family can watch.
– Because this has been so awful, Chief Standridge is putting together an SMPD Crisis Communication Policy for future incidents.
– the DA Kelly Higgins weighed in on the policy. He has concerns about any public release of video while the investigation is ongoing. He wants videos to be withheld until after a grand jury has reviewed the matter.
– the DA knows that the family needs answers. State code authorizes the DA to let the family watch the video. He’s open to conversation with the family.
(I would like a universal policy that applies to all situations. When an officer is killed by a civilian, how quickly does the family see the videos?)
Next Malachi Williams’ grandfather speaks again, which is usually not allowed. “What we have been offered has not had much substance to it. We have not had a fair offer. There’s been an offer, but it’s not fair.”
Alyssa Garza asks, “Was the family offered the entire videos? All the body camera footage?”
Chief Standridge comes up. “The DA and I are offering the family all the body cam footage. But we are not offering the store’s videos. The DA has not agreed to release that. The DA and I will let them see still photos from the store. But the DA has not agreed to store footage.”
After that, the grandfather has a lot of questions and frustration. Council was not really allowed to respond, legally. They redirect him to the DA. He’s already interacted with the DA and is entirely fed up with him.
It ends in a tense place.
…
Item 23: Another LIHTC project!
LIHTC projects are low-income apartment complexes which don’t pay local property taxes. We’ve seen two others recently here. (LIHTC stands for Low Income Housing Tax Credits.)
Where’s this one?
And here’s a close up:
They’re planning on having 304 units. How affordable will these be?
In other words, this is 46 units for low-income community members, and 258 for regular community members. (The median income in San Marcos is $47,394 a year, so 85% of these units are regular old market rate apartments.)
Okay, fine. How much is this costing us?
The estimated loss in tax revenue is $3 million over 15 years, or $200K per year. They’re softening that by giving us a one-time $400K payment.
What other services are there going to be?
[Technical note: There’s some mucking about with the number of 3-bedroom apartments. This complex only has half as many as the city San Marcos requires for LIHTC developments. However, there’s a letter from the Housing Authority about the different waitlists for 1, 2, and 3-bedroom apartments, and 3 bedroom apartments are not in demand as much as 1 and 2, so it’s fine.]
Jane Hughson has some questions:
– Did this area flood in 2015?
Answer: yep. But the buildings weren’t TOO badly damaged.
– Will the complex provide residential shuttles?
Answer: nope. It’s right on a bus line.
– Will the units have individual washer and dryer units?
Answer: yep.
– Will they have education, services, and after-school tutoring?
Answer: yep.
Alyssa: I’ve heard complaints about restrictions and racially biased access to facilities. How do you make sure that doesn’t happen?
Answer: We partner with Asset Living. They staff everything and report to us monthly. If something isn’t getting used, we ask them to advertise it.
[I am extremely curious about the complaints of racially-biased access to facilities.]
The vote: Passes 7-0.
However: Council is going to have big conversation about LIHTC projects in general, at the end of this meeting. Stay tuned.
….
Items 23-24: Kissing Tree
Kissing Tree is the senior community, way down on Hunter Road and Centerpoint.
Kissing Tree is a TIRZ. This means they pay taxes, but the taxes don’t go to the city’s General Fund. Instead they get funneled to side projects that benefit Kissing Tree – mostly building out the public roads and utilities that run through Kissing Tree. It’s not wasted money, but it doesn’t go to libraries, parks, firefighters, etc.
Costs have gone up and the assessed value of Kissing Tree has gone up, so they’re re-jiggering all the TIRZ numbers:
This is probably all fine! Before we had estimated that we were sending $32 million over to the Kissing Tree for roads and pumps and parks, and now we’re sending $46 million over.
Over 15 years, we’re keeping $5 million and giving $46 million back.
Let’s compare this to the LIHTC Project above! In that one, we’re keeping $400K and sending $3 million back.
So to be stark about it:
- The LIHTC project is giving us 13% of their estimated property taxes and using the rest to subsidize rents on low-income apartments.
- Kissing Tree is giving us 10% of their estimated property taxes taxes, and using the rest on local roads and utilities.
Guess which project makes Mark Gleason uncomfortable? The big reveal later on will not surprise you at all.
….
Item 2: SMART Terminal/Axis Logistics
The SMART/Axis people want San Marcos to annex about 7.5 acres of land for a road and right-of-way.
Quick backstory (Read more here.)
In January 2023, Council signed a development agreement with SMART/Axis people. Back then, these agreements happened in one single council meeting, and barely anyone had to be notified. So Council approved a gigantic fucking 2000 acre industrial park without public input and barely any details, and everyone got super angry about it.
2000 acres is very big:
Like, REALLY big:
The people who live out this way were absolutely livid. But the development agreement was already signed.
The next step of the process was for SMART/Axis to apply for a zoning change to Heavy Industrial and get annexed into the city.
What they could have done was meet with the neighborhoods nearby, provide details of the project, build relationships and be good neighbors. Instead, they met with the neighborhoods and generally acted like supercilious pricks who couldn’t be bothered. The surrounding community got more and more furious, and launched a major activist campaign against the project.
Eventually SMART/Axis withdrew their zoning and annexation request. That was last summer. Since then, it’s been quiet.
Here’s my best guess: SMART/Axis didn’t want to share any details because they didn’t have any yet. They literally want free reign to do whatever they want on this land. They came off as supercilious pricks because they are supercilious pricks. They assumed San Marcos is a backwater rural town that will fawn over fancy business men and give them whatever they want, in hopes of some dollar bill scraps. City Council was happy to play their role!
…
That brings us to today – should San Marcos annex some land and build a road along the side of the land?
First off: Nothing happens today. We are just picking dates for the public hearing and final vote.
However, let’s do some speculation! This is brought to you by Noah Brock and Annie Donovan, during Citizen Comment. (They spearheaded the public campaign against SMART/Axis last year.)
Here’s the case that Noah and Annie are building:
- Is this a major change or a minor change? If it’s a major change, the development agreement needs to be amended. That’s a much bigger deal. (The city is saying this is a minor change.)
- Originally, the roads lined up with the end of Quail Run. That was the edge of the whole project. But since then, the developer has bought more property, and asked Caldwell County to move some roads over.
- It seems clear that they’re expanding the project beyond the development agreement, and this new land is right next to a residential area.
- This new ROW annexation is consistent with a bigger, changing project.
The basic problem is that SMART/Axis people are super secretive and seem to want to walk all over us. Maybe they’re sweet little bunnies at heart, or maybe they want to do some toxic battery mining or who knows what. They act like shitty neighbors every time they have a chance to right the narrative.
…
Today’s vote was just to set the dates, and here they are:
- Public hearing will be on August 5th
- Final vote will be on August 20th
….
Item 25: Dunbar is getting some new pipes!
We’re spending $6 million on water and wastewater improvements here:
If you go here and scroll to Dunbar Water and Wastewater Improvements, you can keep an eye on the project.
Supposedly will be done by August 2026. So at least two years of dug up streets and annoying construction, but with a worthwhile payoff.
…
Item 27: Installing sports lighting on six soccer fields at Five Mile Dam.
This money was authorized awhile ago, this is just the contract to make it happen. It’s about $1.3 million.
The San Marxist 