Pflugerville bond committee advances $117.07M package, pauses 685 relief routes for further review

The Pflugerville Capital Improvement Bond Committee on a night of brief votes and extended discussion advanced a proposed $117,070,000 bond package and decided to remove the 685 relief routes from consideration for the 2026 ballot while staff pursue further planning and coordination.

Committee members and city staff spent the bulk of the meeting reviewing project lists, revised cost estimates and the tax-rate implications of issuing bonds. Staff said the 2026 proposal focuses on parks, the PAWS animal shelter project, transportation improvements and downtown parking; they emphasized that the relief-route work for SH 685 remains in the city's five‑year Capital Improvement Plan but will be deferred from this bond cycle.

Staff member Angel led the presentation, noting project categories and that Finance Director Tracy Waldron joined to walk the committee through fiscal details. Angel told the group that, after refinements and identifying additional funding sources for some projects, "the total amount that we are talking about tonight is 117 million 70,000 dollars." The committee heard that the city’s FY26 budget is roughly $783 million, the full CIP totals about $1.3 billion and roughly $800 million of that is unfunded—placing the proposed bond at under 9% of total CIP and covering about 15% of the unfunded portion.

The presenters outlined a geographic cost split and singled out several projects: Kelly Lane phase three (north side, noted at approximately $12,150,000), Mel Burger Lane, the Destination Play Space and the 1849 Park expansion; staff said many projects are already partly funded and the bond would help complete them. Presenters explained some cost adjustments—two park projects rose slightly to reflect a 3% bond management/issuance fee now included in estimates.

Staff described project timelines: citywide trail improvements staged 2026–2031, 1849 Park phase three design in 2028–29 followed by construction, PAWS shelter advancing from design to construction, and Kelly Lane phase three moving into final design and land acquisition before construction around 2028–29. They emphasized that, if voters approve, bonds would be issued in tranches over several years as projects require funds rather than all at once.

On tax impacts, staff said the financial adviser applied conservative valuation growth assumptions (3% growth) and projected a roughly 6-cent increase to the debt portion of the tax rate under the current scenario, translating to an incremental charge of about $237 on the median homestead in the cited calculations and a smaller overall percentage change when accounting for all taxing jurisdictions. Staff provided household-scale examples by proposition: parks (~$62M) equates to about $121 annually for the median household; transportation and other items were broken out separately.

Committee members pressed staff on outreach and messaging. Staff reported a live survey (launched April 17) with about 50 early responses, postcards for committee distribution, and planned engagement at upcoming events (Slice of Pflugerville, Coffee and Fuel, Music in the Park). Staff described planned project one‑pagers and a program fact sheet to be posted to the city bond website; the committee will review compiled public feedback at a May 18 meeting and is scheduled to present its recommendation to City Council on May 26. If council concurs, the bond propositions would be placed on the November ballot.

On governance items, the committee approved the minutes of the March 23, 2026 meeting by voice vote and moved to designate a chair. Members Jesse Plaza and Chris Bailey had volunteered; the committee voted to designate Chris Bailey as chair and charged staff with notifying her of the selection.

Several members raised political and timing concerns, noting concurrent utility-rate discussions and a recent local issue (referred to in the meeting as the lake incident) that could affect voter sentiment. Staff recommended separating projects into multiple propositions (likely three or four) so voters could choose among categories rather than face an all‑or‑nothing package.

The committee will reconvene on May 18 to review survey and engagement results and aim to form a formal recommendation for the City Council meeting on May 26; meeting participants were reminded that even if the committee makes a recommendation, council may choose a different path.