[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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],{"_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",6512141,"mediaKeyId","5118026-4dc655b2abeb78f438b9b9f2c1628169","parentId",5118026,"title","Fulshear releases preliminary FY 2026 budget; streets, police pay and utilities drive difficult trade-offs","audioSeconds",3835,"startMs",3835000,"endMs",-1,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5118026-4dc655b2abeb78f438b9b9f2c1628169&start=3835&end=0","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5118026-4dc655b2abeb78f438b9b9f2c1628169/thumbnail_3835000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6512141/Fulshear/Fort-Bend-County/Texas/Fulshear-releases-preliminary-FY-2026-budget-streets-police-pay-and-utilities-drive-difficult-trade-offs","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6512141-4a411885a0d584503c824f5537b6d8bc/orig.mp4?Expires=1775368465&Signature=QxhgmizgPe~bLeWo94m-FEloEosjoTQeZwaeV9uKESAvN05F-~jjD1RSCX9u1fd0PFD0pBnWlmMBkIJlGx6uD0A3XGaV7ARlfSU2dFD0B9LMRsfPj68RTDcw6kC2qx~syteUciD51kkscb6V0Wca8N8k~tcNdA9cD8d0EP9~4yXKG8rktjWiXItmDOWhw6sn30QkZpAV43kZmXbMC3TqLSuXSi-jd8CPxKFLIhbcvL-mqiLBEVvi2qMTiElMmRAG9uue7uwTyzpj~QFIxwpYVixFtaJ4k8d29lXb3KFOmICErD31viOoLb8aCo5HAw20h7HLod6h-vsVojzak8jubw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Fulshear","date","2025-07-01T00:00:00Z","article","City staff presented the preliminary fiscal year 2026 operating and capital budget to the Fulshear City Council on July 1, 2025, and council members directed staff to return with options for funding key priorities including pavement management, police pay competitiveness and utility operations.

Budget staff framed the city’s options as trade‑offs: keep the current low tax rate and defer or reduce capital and maintenance programs, or increase revenue (including the possibility of a voter‑approved tax measure) to fund proactive pavement management, public‑safety compensation and other services. The presentation included high‑level fund projections, requests for new positions and capital projects that staff said could not be fully funded at the current revenue assumptions.

“Mickey Mahoney, the city’s budget manager, presented the highlights and timeline for FY 2026, noting the city’s fund balances and the need to prioritize,” staff said. The presentation showed the general fund in a healthy position by common benchmarks but flagged a long‑term mismatch between the city’s current tax rate and the recurring costs of streets and services as the city grows. Staff recommended keeping a conservative approach and asked council for direction on which priorities to fund.

Pavement management (proactive street maintenance) drew repeated concern from council members and staff. Staff reported that the city is spending reactive funds for pothole and emergency repairs but lacks the recurring revenue to follow the earlier Pavement Condition Index (PCI) recommendation for proactive maintenance. Council members called pavement management a high priority to avoid higher replacement costs in future years and asked staff to model funding scenarios that include tax‑rate adjustments, use of fund balance and other revenue sources.

Police staffing and compensation also drew focused discussion. The police department provided an informal salary survey showing that Fulshear currently lags some neighboring cities on pay; council members asked staff for options to close that gap over time rather than by a single‑year, large increase. Staff said matching top local pay (for example, certain neighboring cities) would be a significant budgetary impact and requested council guidance on pacing and funding sources.

Utilities were another central topic. The draft budget includes a proposal to bring water/wastewater operations in‑house; staff estimated an additional roughly $952,880 to fund operators, equipment, vehicles and an after‑hours call center in the utility fund. Staff also said the utility projections assume a potential rate adjustment (the city is preparing a formal rate study and plans to present a rates recommendation this summer) and asked council whether to present rate options to the public in August.

Other requests and clarifications included:
- Several departmental position reclassifications and a citywide step/merit program (staff recommended a 2% cost‑of‑living adjustment and a 2.5‑step merit program with conditions); council asked for statistics on how many employees would be affected and what the dollar impact would be.
- Street‑related budgets include nearly $988,800 for maintenance items (signage, pavement/sidewalk lift repair, school zone flashers, tree trimming and electricity for streetlights); staff said the city is researching streetlight types and possible LED conversions to reduce electricity costs.
- The utility fund showed a projected beginning balance of roughly $3.1 million, revenues around $24.8 million and expenditures of $16.1 million under the draft assumptions; staff noted those revenues incorporate a placeholder assumption for a rate increase that will be finalized by a forthcoming rate study.
- Capital projects not funded in the draft include portions of the diversion lift station and other large utility projects; staff warned that delaying some projects can raise future costs as materials or bids escalate.

Council members asked staff to return with tax‑rate scenarios that would fund a prioritized set of “must‑have” items (pavement management and targeted police compensation improvements were mentioned repeatedly), and to model alternatives that blend tax changes, use of fund balance and EDC contributions. Several council members said they would support a modest tax‑rate increase if it funded durable, visible improvements such as better streets and competitive public‑safety pay.

No final budget vote was taken on July 1. Staff said they would return with more detailed analyses, rate‑impact modeling and specific funding options in coming budget workshops.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Fulshear - Special City Council Meetings - Jul 01, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","City staff presented the preliminary fiscal year 2026 operating and capital budget to the Fulshear City Council on July 1, 2025, and council members directed staff to return with options for funding pavement management, police pay and utility operations.","taxTitle","Fulshear, Fort Bend County, Texas","taxId",69473,"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},6512145,"Council postpones vote on electronic school marquee rules after public debate over size, brightness and hours",2819,594000,3413000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5118026-4dc655b2abeb78f438b9b9f2c1628169&start=594&end=3413","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5118026-4dc655b2abeb78f438b9b9f2c1628169/thumbnail_594000.jpg","/articles/6512145/Fulshear/Fort-Bend-County/Texas/Council-postpones-vote-on-electronic-school-marquee-rules-after-public-debate-over-size-brightness-and-hours","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6512145-2c8525b6733019323b9315059605fdd2/orig.mp4?Expires=1775368465&Signature=Tq0oSawEWavjZc6kC4t0I7BPfLTzPZDP6vhPKPT2j~qHH8PalFuhG5rFjWyvurSBH6UXY2pGdkqhFGSxxh9y07EtCaTIrvh7f4~C~CUszDycM5R0GfTaCF1hzVq~u9w~4D31gUn4bF3Aoo55LeLfFkgZoQu3Djo098-lLOdifhFfvYEWcW9dWZPnfWqcMjNUH1N3Mja4pZE8-AbghxrWcE1HhlZ0x1B8~l~k6ZedL2gazWdCNQKwetqVpv-p3X8OdkbMIQYFQpdt6-n1iuOzjupAlueYhZvRdglgkCSrqYQmnS8pcUwfIjlEVAI3xEPP-YxG3h6uFmmTyqt1UV5WgA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Fulshear City Council members postponed consideration of an amendment to the Coordinated Development Ordinance on July 1, 2025, after an extended debate over whether schools should be allowed electronic message-board signs and what restrictions to impose.

The draft ordinance (2025-1497) would permit electronic message-board signs at public schools and set conditions intended to limit driver distraction and incompatibility with residential neighborhoods. Staff presented draft conditions — including placement in front of a school’s primary facade, compliance with monument‑sign standards in the semi‑urban district, limits on brightness (maximum daytime luminance 5,000 NITs; 500 NITs at night), a minimum static-display duration of six seconds and prohibitions on animation, video, special effects and solid-white backgrounds.

Many residents testified against allowing LED/digital marquees, saying they are “garish” or inconsistent with Fulshear’s character. Ramona Ridge, a member of the original coordinated development ordinance (CDO) committee, told council, “Lit signs do just that. They are moneymakers for the PTOs at the schools, and the rest of us suffer the eyesores.” Several speakers argued schools already have digital communications channels and that roadside marquees would not reach all parents but could distract drivers.

Supporters, including Kimmy Willam, who identified herself as Randolph Elementary PTA president-elect, said modern marquees help celebrate students and provide real‑time safety messages. “This sign isn't about flashing lights or distractions. It's about connection, pride, and communication,” Willam told council.

Council members and staff debated technical details the ordinance did not yet finalize: maximum sign area, how the electronic portion would be measured (total sign face versus just the lit area), maximum mounting height (a 10‑foot top-of-sign cap was discussed), hours of operation, exceptions for school events or emergencies and whether the city should require the signs to be made available for official emergency messaging. Staff said an earlier legal review removed a proposed requirement that the signs be used for official emergency messaging because that raised contract issues.

Council members requested additional field verification of existing school sign dimensions before finalizing a maximum area; staff agreed to measure current signs and return with concrete size guidance. Several members also asked staff to propose specific hour limits (examples discussed included turning signs off after 10 p.m., or only allowing operation during school hours and events, with narrow exceptions) and to provide visual examples of the proposed NIT levels at day and night.

During council discussion a motion to deny the ordinance was moved but received no second. Council ultimately adopted a motion to postpone the ordinance 2025-1497 to a future meeting to allow staff to return with clarified ordinance language, size limits that reflect existing school signs, defined hours of operation, contrast/contrast‑control measures, enforcement provisions and examples of the proposed luminance settings.

No ordinance language was adopted on July 1. Staff said the revised, full ordinance and supporting materials will be posted to the city website before the item returns to council for decision.","The council discussed proposed Coordinated Development Ordinance amendments to allow electronic message-board signs at schools; staff proposed limits (brightness, static images, display time) but council postponed ordinance 2025-1497 to refine sizes, hours and other controls after public comment and internal questions.",{"_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},6512150,"Fulshear council delays action after residents press against apartments planned at Del Webb entrance",2205,162000,2367000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5118026-4dc655b2abeb78f438b9b9f2c1628169&start=162&end=2367","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5118026-4dc655b2abeb78f438b9b9f2c1628169/thumbnail_162000.jpg","/articles/6512150/Fulshear/Fort-Bend-County/Texas/Fulshear-council-delays-action-after-residents-press-against-apartments-planned-at-Del-Webb-entrance","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6512150-c74f1b01d4b15f20980eb9e123e355a1/orig.mp4?Expires=1775368465&Signature=bg8coBL9P0~PqWbGjIo52KAa-hVG8o-8Nv0SFojKblqkZtua4~JKNbN-dNFnaFKaq2npUVBMU3DRqJ1DJ3YZVlgDhJbJV2YCEFu1IIAmc~YqqoXrDqILqNB0o-VdGt2OvxNurC5X~GmwXiTIgqd6qcsyyeiYSzq2wewNkvpb~~BdIJQzqGIHiWpjq7rLaumvR0FnylIDRnrOQSZnvg7O3fgW6VHWXZgT~NtQSrcYMLr1XtheHMjaW5QqM~PcmkxSruZeyCOyQrmsjPtIT9BG4GdS28c7AC8y~4IUMF-BLUY56KV1Emajif9FXXC0zBfBeFNxZRcrjldsm93JJc~-CA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Dozens of Fulshear residents urged the City Council on July 1, 2025, to block proposed multifamily housing near the Del Webb community and to keep the land designated for commercial use.

The concern centered on tracts identified in a 2016 development agreement and a 2019 amendment that the city staff said are labeled “commercial/multifamily.” Residents near the entrance to the Del Webb subdivision said they bought homes expecting a commercial buffer and worry apartments would increase traffic, reduce privacy and lower property values.

The matter drew staff presentations and legal review because the properties were annexed after agreements were signed in 2016 and amended in 2019. City staff advised council to delay action and continue reviewing the original documents and any legal obligations tied to the agreements.

“My wife and I moved here in January 2024 because when we came here, we thought it was gonna be a quiet community,” resident David Pearson told the council. “...I'm hoping you don't put a lot of apartments… traffic's getting bad.” Several other residents – including Susan Gray, Loretta Farkas, Cecile Thompson and Lovey “Kimette” Hillary – made similar statements during the public-comment period about traffic, privacy and the expectations set when they purchased homes.

City staff summarized the chain of events: in 2016 the city, Forrester Equine and other entities associated with the landowner identified certain tracts as commercial/multifamily in a development agreement; in 2019 an amendment added another tract (about 35 acres near the 1093 entrance to Polo Ranch) under the same agreement. Staff said the landowner requested zoning into general commercial at the time of annexation; the tracts were in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) in 2016 and later annexed into the city.

Officials said the council’s options are constrained by what the agreements require at present. Special counsel and planning staff told the council they needed more time to research the original agreements and any contractual obligations before taking final action.

Council moved the item into executive session to consult with legal counsel and then returned to open session with no action taken immediately after the closed-door review. Later in the meeting the council formally postponed consideration of item b (approval of ordinance 2025-1495) to allow further legal review and to make the staff presentation publicly available online.

The postponement vote followed a motion to postpone the ordinance; the presentation and the development agreements will be posted to the city website and are available via open-records request, staff said.

The council did not adopt or deny any zoning or ordinance change on July 1; members repeatedly told residents they would continue legal and staff review before taking a final vote.","Residents pressed city council to block multifamily housing near Del Webb; staff briefed council on 2016 and 2019 development agreements that label specific tracts as commercial/multifamily. Council moved to postpone consideration while staff and legal counsel continue research; no ordinance action was taken at the meeting.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Fulshear releases preliminary FY 2026 budget; streets, police pay and utilities drive difficult trade-offs

Council postpones vote on electronic school marquee rules after public debate over size, brightness and hours

Fulshear council delays action after residents press against apartments planned at Del Webb entrance