[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6207874,"mediaKeyId","3751172-2237c0b5d0b1420951b06f17fe390c3f","parentId",3751172,"title","Council approves alcohol license for 2 Loops winery and floral shop","audioSeconds",467,"startMs",3274000,"endMs",3741000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3751172-2237c0b5d0b1420951b06f17fe390c3f&start=3274&end=3741","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3751172-2237c0b5d0b1420951b06f17fe390c3f/thumbnail_3274000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6207874/Montgomery/Montgomery-County/Texas/Council-approves-alcohol-license-for-2-Loops-winery-and-floral-shop","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6207874-2d00cedef5a549f08a22be3697c437f0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185258&Signature=AWc0pGzXHVTiTc4TDPAIAiupOCB-hvE2BR0B~RMFrUc3u4b3s8vAGXhYe5R5SGRWljql2CipAFxieYJVX8GZJ1COF4u8~9~pYP5QA3zB6iUDyxx4ZkeaOSrmdqgQeiSTLslPxxfy~Nb9vvSNS7BkU9Ou7d~PRuR1fPnJXWXi59BzovQmkgKLyjdnDcMYaQiCBTS7GkXqDpJEWSsr1Y8jxXKmk74IeSv5~xytQecC7sv1KNqdlEX~zw7o9sWNyLcgOBjzT2Yeg7iGProsNoeJ8RhuxpaTcouI47rjuNxxZlCVO89gzFL~loz13yxM8fVPs55ouAHGuxMTAUajwDm~dw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Montgomery, Texas","date","2025-06-10T22:07:31Z","article","The City of Montgomery City Council approved an alcohol beverage license application filed by 2 Loops, a business that will operate as a winery and floral shop with on‑premises consumption and retail sales.

Applicant John Timothy (identified in the meeting as Tim/John Timothy) told council that federal and state permits had been approved earlier in the week and that the business would blend and bottle Italian wines and operate floral workshops on the property formerly known as the heritage house. He said the business planned to offer on‑premises consumption and would also package wine for take‑home sales as allowed by the license category selected.

Council received confirmation that fire marshal inspection had been completed and that a health inspection was scheduled. A motion to accept agenda item 13 (the alcohol license application) was made by Council Member Dawson and seconded by Council Member Fox; the motion carried and the council approved the license application.

The applicant said the business planned community discounts for city employees, first responders and teachers, and that a wine‑club storage option on the property was being considered for members.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","06/10/2025 Montgomery, TX City Council Regular Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","The City of Montgomery approved an on‑premises alcohol beverage license application for 2 Loops, a winery and floral business planning on‑site consumption and retail sales; applicant said state and federal permits had been received.","taxTitle","Montgomery, Montgomery County, Texas","taxId",59888,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6207879,"Council accepts public infrastructure for MISD CTE and AgBarn project; $75,000 payment release pending",179,3051000,3230000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3751172-2237c0b5d0b1420951b06f17fe390c3f&start=3051&end=3230","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3751172-2237c0b5d0b1420951b06f17fe390c3f/thumbnail_3051000.jpg","/articles/6207879/Montgomery/Montgomery-County/Texas/Council-accepts-public-infrastructure-for-MISD-CTE-and-AgBarn-project-75000-payment-release-pending","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6207879-f61502fcb87a7c3209b0ac4a9d000721/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185258&Signature=oAKgzIHQ5XtXhp03DoQbwvofE0nQOcigyyyGclAdh~ee1j7E1xNk2Reoo3FPcL7wUmWQR7k~sAUGDSxvfqrsrSstxBnLEk4Z7hEtWL9XEzwJoSjI5FcBlQUGLG0kDl4F~IgOFUiaQMTa0G4zZ2bZrqBRspHSzfLYGUzdTCfJgDva47rDkco9HxkqCyt73WEY0pI4Xbsl3Cc5PyaVJaBWCjeZTc-JEW6UixVjHv1xWFGeMctJms5rpO-tz1COCDkKEqko5hwMG3W9Ys49q4e8NXKvc5FeY~F7ADXNgx9oN~WeJSOziXwzBeejfjYQdvsilgm784quNkeknwd-R3DJKw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The City of Montgomery City Council accepted the public infrastructure for the Montgomery Independent School District (MISD) CTE and AgBarn project after the city engineer reported the items ready for acceptance.

Staff told council that a $75,000 payment had been released in concept and that the request to release funds had been submitted; Stewart Builders was the prime contractor noted in the discussion. City staff said the $75,000 request will be routed through the Montgomery Economic Development Corporation (MEDC) as part of the agreed funding mechanism.

Council moved to accept the infrastructure (agenda item 12) and voted in favor. Staff will follow up to process the payment request and to confirm contractor closeout documentation and payment disbursement.

Council had no substantive amendments and approved the acceptance as presented.","Council accepted the engineer’s recommendation to accept the MISD CTE and AgBarn public infrastructure. City staff said a $75,000 payment request has been submitted and that MEDC will handle the payment; contractors and closeout matters remain under review.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6207883,"Council accepts Baxter & Woodman to design Water Plant No. 4; inspection costs separate",363,2673000,3036000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3751172-2237c0b5d0b1420951b06f17fe390c3f&start=2673&end=3036","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3751172-2237c0b5d0b1420951b06f17fe390c3f/thumbnail_2673000.jpg","/articles/6207883/Montgomery/Montgomery-County/Texas/Council-accepts-Baxter-Woodman-to-design-Water-Plant-No-4-inspection-costs-separate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6207883-0628f78c32fac849c714c763d2bbce89/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185258&Signature=PBm9-4HO-CmQfXd-ugdQ0jsOVWRur0ozOCes-bncY3XgkbfPn9rY~Wbmr67izF0yDEjTJ-uJBAA3398Vl1porl29B4vW24L2W8Wq3Z-ENuJKctFTl9UQX~8fPNYsRGzyr09IGpqLWVrsarsMLjT~oJhMlMJ9-tZYIZZ9wmFmpHIKuIXMQCJjFTVVqEBtwKZnz0cOZK221uIl7Hxz76shd8phNO~wckZ3rady-RKgus~KsjMfgMLTJyed87zPQcXJoHs3LTGOMsQGzax1r3aTIltw4XUzPKUxC-LXg3JYRaTmTkrSL~J6J63UbgiieWEKuAY5~RlYkIDXTXRVC9gebw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The City of Montgomery City Council approved the engineer’s recommendation to contract Baxter & Woodman for design services on Water Plant No. 4, with the understanding that construction inspection was not included in the design fee and would be budgeted separately.

Council accepted the recommendation as agenda item 11. City staff explained Baxter & Woodman’s proposal covers full design, bidding support and construction administration tasks typical for design engineers, but that the firm’s $440,000 fee does not include daily construction inspection services. Staff said the city plans to use in‑house inspectors for construction inspection and will bring a separate proposal and budget for that work when the project approaches construction.

City staff also said Baxter & Woodman will assist with identifying funding options and may provide support material for grant or water‑development‑fund applications. Staff noted impact fees could cover an additional $40,000 if needed. Council moved to accept the recommendation and voted to approve the contract award; the motion passed without amendment.

Council members asked for clarity about which services were included in the fee and whether the city would pay inspectors separately; staff confirmed those distinctions and said a separate recommendation for inspection services will be presented later.

The action authorizes finalizing the design contract with Baxter & Woodman and to proceed with design work while staff finalizes inspection staffing and funding plans.","City council accepted the city engineer’s recommendation to hire Baxter & Woodman for design services on Water Plant No. 4; the $440,000 design proposal does not include construction inspection, which the city will budget and assign separately.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6207889,"Montgomery council accepts fiscal‑year 2024 financial audit showing $1.6M surplus",250,262000,512000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3751172-2237c0b5d0b1420951b06f17fe390c3f&start=262&end=512","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3751172-2237c0b5d0b1420951b06f17fe390c3f/thumbnail_262000.jpg","/articles/6207889/Montgomery/Montgomery-County/Texas/Montgomery-council-accepts-fiscalyear-2024-financial-audit-showing-16M-surplus","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6207889-0b7ff688d7d9db94d8740ada91078273/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185258&Signature=YAyNKOzBpTre4J4uIWS9bmSrmwGgaAmNspnLQGNc-Vb-F6ddnajREg3AqXEI5IepCtvYOakcsi-e2BKH1NHafS~tswcFi8vrGjrPxYC2yPFoGX8hUV8Sq8yHgYYRX69~Iw4uhQnCQpQ1FREpGInm-g5t0UJvhfAaAeJNbjfmzODydXTExxoW4pXmSLaeKASc7PWfyFqX5oRWRfJWy~3M7x2j6BBwo5TX-CdfbW1k9FYKM5J4IleCz48zIQjBxKnXVAe-zdIkG4LWSG200ux4BNtyCPOz8zcTTU5LFGPvMmXHKzNhVTv12LtPDcG1XjG9yeqrOax73NacxR9idfa0WA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The City of Montgomery City Council accepted the independent financial audit for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2024, after an auditor presented a clean (unmodified) opinion and highlighted key fund figures.

Marianne Carle, the auditor presenting the report, told the council the firm would issue an unmodified opinion and that required disclosures were included: \"Our independent auditors report is presented over on page 1 of the next draft report. We do anticipate issuing this in this file form just like it is here today. But our opinion letter is an unmodified letter,\" she said.

Carle summarized highlights for the council. The general fund reported total revenues of $7,300,000 and total expenses of $5,700,000, producing revenues over expenses of roughly $1,600,000. The general fund began the year with a fund balance of $3,018,000 and ended with a fund balance of $4,613,000. Carle noted the fund balance provides operating‑day equivalents and said the city’s fund balance equated to about 10 months of operations, which she described as an \"excellent financial position.\" For the water and sewer fund, operating revenues were about $3,600,000, operating expenses were about $3,050,000, and operating income was about $610,000; Carle said depreciation of about $4,480,000 is noncash and that adjusted operating results were favorable.

Council members praised staff. A motion to accept the audit (agenda item 9) was made by Council Member Johnson and seconded by Council Member Trulovich; the council voted to accept the audit as presented.

City staff said a final, nondraft copy would be supplied after the auditing firm completes its internal reviews. The audit presentation concluded with council acceptance and no further conditions.","City auditors delivered a clean (unmodified) opinion for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2024; council accepted the audit, which shows an increase in the general‑fund balance to $4.613 million.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6207893,"Montgomery council and H‑E‑B negotiate language, remedies in draft development agreement",1158,592000,1750000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3751172-2237c0b5d0b1420951b06f17fe390c3f&start=592&end=1750","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3751172-2237c0b5d0b1420951b06f17fe390c3f/thumbnail_592000.jpg","/articles/6207893/Montgomery/Montgomery-County/Texas/Montgomery-council-and-HEB-negotiate-language-remedies-in-draft-development-agreement","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6207893-80281e77f05a89966f13ccec1f586116/orig.mp4?Expires=1771185258&Signature=YB3egOOSuzcakMqJ4zGWlUBA58SlVhBMEWuqDluVDk8qWKaSk~ZiNtp57xcedNHPv3m150IZ3qzOYjH~JSiREL-RqJpmHgfxtHX5lRyO-4sro-5dgFxt7v8BjYljzER9F0~NWe-0YL0MDoLZ0-QyfE-QW0VGzCPHxSOTVXMuJBMP0QGGYINe9lmRLsNxZsrJ46I8NG29f5Xp0UV7cZprVJx4EfT6149SPI6c0FS4eJuT1fECvGt9C0nEX-SrZYEbbw4VZGLiYrGV3du0GYRhYD5tPRcIz~uzL~f1Vl~7oqicS0vqCqnwUPD4StuXx3Qm~t9n6dg7XRYe9Q2XQmp4Rg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The City of Montgomery City Council met with H‑E‑B representatives on a draft development agreement that council members said requires softer language so the city retains meaningful input on the location and design of a proposed memorial and on remedies if the developer fails to meet obligations. The item was discussed June 2025 and no formal action was taken.

The discussion matters because the agreement touches public utilities, variances that could affect adjacent single‑family property, and legal language that council members said may limit the city's enforcement options. Council members pressed H‑E‑B on language that currently gives the city sole discretion to determine a monument site and on a provision (Section 3.2.d in the packet) they said appears to limit the city's remedies to utility disconnection in some enforcement scenarios.

Mayor said, \"I think we'd like to have a say,\" when asking what language would allow the city input without dictating aesthetic details. H‑E‑B real estate representative Sean Smith introduced himself and the company’s team and answered council questions: \"Mayor, City Council. So I'm Sean Smith with real estate team here in Houston,\" he said.

Council members identified several technical items they want clarified before any vote: two variances pending before planning and zoning (including a request to place a public water line in the SH‑105 right of way rather than within a 16‑foot easement, and a request to reduce a landscape setback from 25 feet to 20 feet where the site abuts a single‑family property in the extraterritorial jurisdiction); a requested adjustment of parking‑lot tree placement (the packet noted trees moved to \"150 feet from the door\" for sanitation reasons); and a question about a proposed 60‑foot easement connected to a retaining wall. Council members asked city staff and H‑E‑B to provide clearer engineering rationale for the easement and retaining‑wall placement.

Council members also raised concerns about a legal clause flagged in the packet. A city speaker noted the provision appears to limit the city's remedies to utilities: \"If code enforcement goes out there and says this is not at all what was agreed upon, the only thing that we can do is turn the water,\" the speaker said during discussion of enforcement options. Council asked staff to check how commonly similar clauses appear in other Texas development agreements and to clarify what bonds or other financial assurances will be required if H‑E‑B leaves a project incomplete.

Participants agreed to continue negotiating specific language rather than remove requirements outright. Several council members advocated for \"softening\" the clause that currently reads as giving the city sole discretion over location, suggesting alternative phrasing such as \"a location acceptable to both the city and H‑E‑B.\" H‑E‑B indicated willingness to work with the city on mutually acceptable language but said it did not want provisions that would unreasonably restrict project feasibility.

Council members and H‑E‑B representatives also discussed how public improvements would be bonded and who would bear costs if utilities end up under future pavement, with city staff noting the utility owner would be responsible for relocation or repair if a state agency or TxDOT improvement affected the line. No vote or final agreement language was adopted; council directed staff to continue negotiations and to return the item once revised language and clarifications (engineering rationale for easement/retaining wall, specifics on the dedication/monument commitments, and the draft remedy/bond language) are supplied.

The item will return for future consideration after city staff and H‑E‑B refine the draft and the planning and zoning variances are processed.","City of Montgomery council and H‑E‑B representatives discussed but did not vote on a draft development agreement, focusing on language around the city’s input on monument location and limits on legal remedies tied to utilities.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council approves alcohol license for 2 Loops winery and floral shop

Council accepts public infrastructure for MISD CTE and AgBarn project; $75,000 payment release pending

Council accepts Baxter & Woodman to design Water Plant No. 4; inspection costs separate

Montgomery council accepts fiscal‑year 2024 financial audit showing $1.6M surplus

Montgomery council and H‑E‑B negotiate language, remedies in draft development agreement