Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Impact Fees Trust Funds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears update on trust fund review and possible move to impact fees; consultant work tops $3 million
Summary
Development services staff briefed the council on an ongoing review by the Capital Improvement Advisory Committee (SEAC) comparing the city's longstanding trust fund model with impact fees; staff said consultant work and master‑plan updates have cost about $3 million so far.
Development Services Director Michael Dice and SEAC chair Moses Masagatchi updated the City Council on the city's multi‑year review of funding alternatives for new subdivision infrastructure, explaining why the municipal trust fund model is under review and how a potential shift to state‑authorized impact fees would work.
"So my graphic would have shown there. Not that 1. We're getting there," Dice said as he described prior work. He traced the program’s history to a 1982 developer‑driven trust fund arrangement that reimburses developers for oversizing and extending water and wastewater infrastructure, and he contrasted that with an impact fee created under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 395. "Chapter 395 ... defines an impact fee as a charge or assessment imposed by a political subdivision against new development in order to generate revenue for funding or recouping the cost of capital improvements ..." Dice said.
Dice told council staff contracted with consultants (Pete Dawson engineers and others) to produce land‑use and capital plans; he said the work included 28 Capital Improvement Advisory Committee meetings, 19 council updates and district town halls. When Councilwoman Campos asked why the matter was not finalized by the previous council, staff said open questions remained — particularly about how to pay for existing projects and how a change would affect current reimbursements.
Dice said about $3,000,000 has been spent on consultant work and master‑plan updates to date; Councilman Hernandez emphasized that the SEAC was reviewing not only a straight comparison but also potential improvements to the trust fund model and possible hybrids between trust funds and impact fees.
SEAC membership and next steps: Dice said the committee has 15 members (majority development‑related as required by statute), subcommittees are meeting and the city will orient recently appointed members in March. He said subcommittee recommendations will be returned to the full SEAC, then to the Planning Commission for review and ultimately to council for consideration.
Ending: The presentation concluded without a council vote; council members asked for further briefings and for staff to bring clearer, written materials to new council members as the SEAC continues its comparative study.
