Travis County Commssioners Court
December 10, 2002
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Item 2
2. Receive input on the petition to incorporate the community of volente as a type b general law municipality. Have we indicated that we -- the law places on the judge of the county responsibility for making sure that certain legal requirements are met. We tried to summarize those last week. Sverdruped from the -- from the tax assessor collector who is also the Travis County voter registrar a certificate of voter registrar which basically says that in the area described in the petition, she found the necessary 50 voters to be there. 63 are qualified and meet the statistical requirement. And of the 64 submitted, just one was not qualified and so the requirement of meeting at least 50 has been met. The other requirement is the geographic area. And ied in the staff has been working with -- with council for the -- counsel for the petitioners over the last few days and trying to get that under control. And the status report on it?
>> right. We can report that we are still verifying the information. We are needing a little bit more time because we did not receive the information in a format that was able to -- we were able to verify very easily. So we do need to although at more time -- to look at more time.
>> so this matter does need to be back on the court's agenda next week for action? But we can have the public hearing now? Are we making progress?
>> yes, we are.
>> we believe that we will be able to bring this to a conclusion within the next couple of days or so?
>> yes, sir, we should be able to do that, yes.
>> okay. Any other outstanding issues that we need to lay out before we take comments from residents?
>> judge, this is just a technicality. I'm informally dressed because -- I don't normally do this. I'm going to be catching an airplane to new york city for a bond rating trip, I apologize, that's been long planned. I will catch up on what I do not hear I'm going to have to catch up on what I do not hear on videotape with the remainder of the comments that go on during the public hearing. I am really aware of what's going on here because I was very proud to represent volente for several years.
>> because there were outstanding issues we did not post this for vote, the -- we will call it next Tuesday or so as well. But it was to hear from residents today. The law does not those the commissioners court to make the decision except on whether or not the legal requirements have been met to call the election. Those authorized to vote are the one who's live in the geographic area, they have submitted to the court and approved by us and -- and -- will thereafter if approved by voters become the incorporated areas. As far as I know, no one on the court lives in the targeted area, so we won't get to vote except on whether or not legal requirements have been met and whether the election ought to be called. Having said that, if elaine, if you will vacate your chair --
>> certainly will.
>> we would be happy to hear from residents. If the -- if the one or two petitioners have comments, it may be good to take those up front and then we can take the three other people who would like to give comments today.
>> move that the public hearing be opened.
>> second.
>> all in favor? Mr. Davis, opening the public hearing?
>> yes.
>> thank you, judge.
>> good morning, judge. My name is alan [inaudible], the attorney [inaudible] which is incorporated non-profit here in Texas. That is working to better its community. One thing that it's been working on for a long time is putting the issue of municipal incorporation in front of the voters. I do appreciate the help that we have gotten from Travis County thus far. Judge Biscoe's office and van smith have been very helpful, tom nuckols and tamara armstrong in the attorney's office and of course commissioner Sonleitner and daugherty have been in this for the long haul. In the past the legislature used to incorporate cities, it was their decision when the quhiewn tee met the -- community met the requirements or not. Now the issue is put before the voters. The one thing that's left to do is to satisfy the judge and commissioners court that the petition of the citizens meets all of the requirements. Volente is not a new development, subdivision that was drawn up overnight in somebody's etj. This is a 100-year-old community and over that has a sense of identity, a sense of place, residences, commercial establishments, in other ways acts and treats itself like a village. It's grown to the point where a significant number of citizens think that it needs the duties and the authority of municipal incorporation, that's why we are here before the court today. This is not something that has just recently been thrown up on the radar screen. It has been a long, cumbersome process for volente, taking just over two and a half years to get to this point. Because they were in Austin's etj they had to go to Austin for permission to incorporate. That was denied. They had to go to Austin for annexation, which was denied. Now the third step is petitioning this county to call an election for incorporation. Not only has it been long, it's very open. There has been ample opportunity for folks in the community to find out are they included within the proposed boundaries or not, whether they want to be in the proposed boundaries or not. There has been newsletters, websites, town meetings, community meetings, all of the phase his were opened and properly noticed to the public. You have a petition before you that staff is reviewing. It meets all of the requirements and that's what this meeting is about today. I don't believe the commissioners court called this meeting to debate the pros and cons of inoperation, that would be premature. We are here to talk about is the petition valid, does the petition indicate that there's at least 201 people in the proposed boundaries? Yes, it does. Does the petition indicate that the area meets the statutory requirements for being less than two square miles, yes, it does. We have already heard from the voter registrar that the adequate number of qualified voters are there. The petition also gifts you a name for the community, which will be the village of volente, also adequately describes the boundaries so that voters know if they are in or not and county officials know how to collect the election whether the voters are in or not. We hope the court does order the election in time for February. 2.5 years is a long time to work on a project, I think it's ripe to go before the voters on to let them have their say up or down. I will be available today and the rest of the week for questions from the court. Otherwise I would like to introduce mary adams the chair of the save our volente committee.
>> good morning, for more than 30 years the community of volente has been having efforts to try to incorporate volente. In the early years, if Austin denied a petition for consent to an election, then that ended the process, they had no alternative. Today state law does provide an alternative, it states that if Austin refuses consent to an election, the residents may petition for immediate annexation. Basically, it's calling their bluff. Saying if you won't give us an election, then annex us. In April of 2002 we presented a petition for annexation. You have to include at least 50% of the owners of land in the area. And at least 50% of the prejudice centered voters. Our -- 50% of the registered voters. Our petition included two third of the registered voters that live in the area. Clearly there is great support to let this come to a vote once and for. For me the protesters has been long, but it's really been a good one. It has brought out the qualities of the very pest in many, many people. In others it has also unveiled the worst. We have seen a little bit of everything. Like it or not, change has come to our beloved village of volente and if we try to deny that change is occurring, then we miss the opportunities to try and control that change. As residents of volente we need to make a choice. Speak up and have a say in the twhai growth is handled or -- in the way this growth is handled or sit back and allow haphazard develop destroy what we love about volente or sit back and be annexed by the city of Austin or personally I think Cedar Park and have our decisions be made for us. There are both supporters and proponents of incorporation. Back in volente there are far more. I am hopeful and very pleased that this issue will fine neal be determined in a way that our country believes is fair. For each resident to go to the polls and privately cast their vote. Thank you, judge, if it's all right, I will reserve the rest of my time to answer if I questions or answer any comments that may be made later in the public hearing.
>> anybody else, please come forward.
>> judge Biscoe, commissioners, thank you for giving us some of your valuable time. We watch you all on tv. You look better in person. [ laughter ]
>> thank you.
>> can you state your name.
>> my name is bob freeman. The owner of bj's caf fay. -- cafe. Years ago our main road was a gravel road. We banked as the american state bank on burn nets, a -- burnet, a 35 to 40 minute drive. We now have a paved road. A bank five minutes away. This bank five minutes away takes longer to make a left turn to get into this bank than it does to drive to it. Our traffic is 100 fold what it was 10 years ago. The experience that probably holds true in Travis County. We see the growth coming toward it. We liken it to a red tide. We like our lifestyles and our neighborhood. I have been involved in the corporation efforts in volente prior to this movement. I listened to pros and cons for years. This has given me time to think and digest the real issues of the corporation. I have been in contact with my neighbors and can get a pretty good sense of what the pulse of the community is. And I can tell you without a doubt we are ready to bring this to a vote. We will exercise our american rights to vote. Most of us live in the -- we know that we cannot stop growth. But we are asking you to give us the opportunity to control our own destiny. We want to be able to have intelligent growth. We would also like to be able to keep our tax dollars in volente for the benefit of volente. Thank you very much.
>> thank you.
>> thank you. Mr. Freeman? If freeman? Mr. Freeman? I just wants to thank you for coming forward and I'm certainly glad that you used the term intelligent growth versus smart growth. [ laughter ] thank you very much.
>> yes, sir.
>> I have some copies, is it appropriate to hand them out to you all.
>> copies of comments? Yes, ma'am.
>> we will just pass them down.
>> thank you.
>> I'm alice son thrash. I -- allison thrash, I want to thank you all for the opportunity to speak at this public hearing. Ied in that the hearing is a formality and if the court deems the materials provided by the s.o.c. Are accurate and legal, then you have no alternative but to order an election, but I do appreciate tremendously the opportunity to speak today and have others speak today. I'm a 13 year property owner and registered voter living in volente, I have served as the secretary of the board of directors for our volunteer fire department, a current appointee of Travis County commissioner precinct 3 where I'm serving my third two-year term as treasurer. I'm a first responder in our volente emergency services department. I care very deeply about the well-being of my community and all of its residents as well as my home and the adjacent property owned by my parents. My folks and I own close to 8-acres in the proposed area for incorporation. Him here today for several reasons. -- I'm here today for several reasons. I'm really actually going to just skim a little bit. The biggest reason that I'm here that I only learned of the inclusion of our property last beak when I had come to your office and met with your executive assistant to determine if our property was in or out. I had seen the tape of the -- of last Tuesday's proceedings on Wednesday, [ laughter ], and immediately called and was informed that it was unclear and it would be best for me to come down and look at the map together. I had received no communication from sov informing me of this development or informing me of any of their activities. And I have since learned that I am not alone. Our property and that of others has been included in the proposed area defined by this group without our knowledge and approval. And this concerns me. I'm concerned about the lack of information. I know that you've already heard otherwise, but I feel there's been a severe lack of information, a lack of open dialogue. And a lack of dissemi nation of critical materials to affected voters. A few of us know the proposed boundaries or the proposed budget or the proposed methods of revenue collection or really any other of the proposed practices for the administration of a city. So I believe that others and I have been denied our rightful due process in this matter. I'm not going to belabor my second point, I just passed a dear friend of mine as we exchanged our positions here at the table. The issue is breaking us. Save our volente has become known as split or volente because the proposed boundary divides our long standing community in two. Our community has been a caring community, it's been deeply concern and committed to the goodwill and security of all of our members. But this is painful. Neighbors feel injured by their neighbors and there is distrust was there previously was none. It's true the folks in our area are very stronglied and pinnate and -- strong willed and pinnated and very -- pinnated and vocal. Opinionated. When you review the signatures on the submitted petition and the fleeting five day period in which the 64 signatures were collected, you know that this does not represent the majority of the community. Lastly, I'm concerned about the accuracy and legitimacy of the documents that you have received from sov. It is my understanding that the sov's attachment identified as field notes has been submitted as a substitution for a plat or a survey of the area. I furthered in that the area defined by the field notes is not the area represented in the map provided as exhibit a by sov. Also as the area to be incorporated. If that doesn't make sense, tell me. But to me neither document satisfies state law as explained by sov's own attorney in his letter to your executive assistant dan smith dated November 4th, 2002. Where he writes all that is required under state law is that sov's petition to Travis County include a description of the area to be incorporated that is sufficient for reasonable voters to know which territory is or is not included in the proposed municipality. Neither of these documents I feel do that. They fall short of letting us know what it is that we are voting on. And that's all really all we ask. Or a big part of what we ask. It's funny because incorporation might some day be the answer to our situation, it might some day be the vision that is shared by all of us. What has happened in this process, I believe is the key individuals and the motives surrounding the current pro incorporation effort today, has railroaded their own success by a secretiveness, a lack of cooperation, an inflectionibility, surprisingly insensitive behavior towards reasonable and concerned neighbors. Thank you for the opportunity. If the court considers any portion of what I have said, then I am very grateful.
>> thank you.
>> thanks, alison.
>> well, I guess -- is there a document that simply sets forth the geographic area? That you can look at and tell whether you are inside or outside?
>> the petitioners did include a description of the area they are depicting on their maps, I believe that is what the t.n.r. Staff is reviewing at this time.
>> that's correct. We are trying to verify that the map matches the description that we have seen. We have not been able to verify that yet.
>> I will -- if this is appropriate, there are other folks here to -- to address this, but we have -- we have members in our community who have taken the field notes and pieced that together and taken the -- the document that -- that -- the map that was submitted with the large yellow area, and apparently, though, at least from -- from their research of it, it does not match and I know that there are other folks here today to speak to that.
>> but now that it's been turned over to us, I guess it's our job to try to go through them and verdict phi.
>> -- and verify, that's where it's been turned over to us.
>> I think that's terrific. I wondered if in coming here it has been determined either way.
>> they have asked for additional time.
>> okay. I appreciate it.
>> thank you.
>> all right. Thank you.
>> thank you.?i
>> judge, I would like to further discuss the map, in particular as it relates to your decision and I will get a microphone in just a minute.
>> okay.
>> the one on the very end.
>> okay. Thank you.
>> okay. Can you hear me?
>> yes.
>> judge, members of the commissioners court, my name is walt thompson. A little bit about me so youd in why I'm here doing this presentation and my -- my credentials, if you will, such as they are. I'm the president of volente neighborhood association an association of 95 people. It has by laws, it has meetings, this is a disclaimer on my part. I am not here representing the volente neighborhood association. But there are those who would say that perhaps that I have stood up here representing the association. I do not. I'm here as a residents of volente to discuss this particular issue. I am the -- I am the retired -- I am a retired army colonel, I served 30 years. I first attempted to come to the volente in 1990. If you know a little bit about history, that was during desert storm. I had my retirement in. It was approved and I was not allowed to retire because of desert storm. I continued to serve for another 10 years, retired as a colonel. And I retired in 1997, I moved to volente in 1998. I bought my house in 1990. I own a home outside the area to be incorporated. Which is right here. I also own a waterfront home in the area to be incorporated. So I have an interest in this process, although because I live outside the area, I'm registered to vote on navajo pass, I'm not a voter. Also germane to this issue, I am a sailor and ied in charts very well, I have been a boater since I was 13 years old, as I said I served 30 years in the military, a map is a basic document upon which you do anything in military terms, where you can go, I'm probably preaching to the choir, but I need to give you that in the way of background. I was a trained officer for the volente fire department, I was a maintenance officer for the fire department and as I mentioned I'm the president of the [inaudible] i've come here this morning to specifically discuss the map. I am focused on your responsibility, judge, to determine whether to call this election. I am not here to talk about the pros and cons of incorporation, I have done that for two and a half years. I'm opposed to incorporation. I don't think that's an issue for you, I think that's an issue for the court. The only thing that you as a decision maker is concerned with is the process and does it meet the requirements. This is a map, I'm going to show you several different maps. If I'm too longwinded I will cut right to the chase, get total fuzzy yellow map that we are talking about, but I think this is necessary. This is a map of the volente, a a -- very similar to the one that you see in the background, pictographic representations of something on the ground. This is probably from the 60s as you can see it has to do with the fire area in volente, a depiction very much like the one -- each one of these little squares on this particular map, I realize that you can't see it, each one of the squares on this map represents some kind of structure, precisely placed there, this is a pretty exact map, allow can't use this map to determine property values, it's merely a depiction of the fire district. It's used for a particular purpose. There's two key elements I want to point to on this map. This is the crux, the important part of what I have to say as I get to the fusszy yellow map. This is I think what's important for you. So -- so there's two -- there's two boundaries down in the water on this map. The first one is shown right here and it is the one furtherest out in the water. It's 681, those people know anything about Lake Travis, know that 681 is the normal pool of Lake Travis, when we are doing ideal boating, everything is right, the lake is at 681, it can be down to 670, 640, various other elevations, but the most common known elevation to anybody in Travis County, anybody who votes on Lake Travis is 681. The second number that's mentioned on this map is -- it's shown here as a dotted line right here, pointed to with this area, elevation, what's shown as 714 to be accurate, but most people refer to as 715. It's been adjusted up a foot and believe me I'm going to make this pertinent. Those are elevations below, at the shoreline, most commonly by anyone who does anything on lay travis to include the residents. You ask see here, the area, we are talking about all of the buildings that one considers volente, this is basically the dividing line right now. This area with no buildings, this is ail of the developers' property, still no buildings up there. This is included in the area to be incorporated. You can see it streches all the way up lion creek road. Cluster of house that's have been here for a long time. My main point is this is 715, 681, this is 681 again. This particular area right here, this represents some property owned by mr. Shiply, the developer, for example that little dot right there, says rock Austin down below the -- rock house down below the high water lake. This points to my property on reed drive. It's a good representation, you couldn't do taxing, voting, legal liabilities, it's good for the fire department to do what it does. And by the way this is not the fire department's map anymore. It's now much more detailed. It splits roads and so forth. I would like to take you to another map. My point there was there was really two elevations, 715, the floodplain of the lake and 681 the normal pool of the lake. If you go boating on Lake Travis, you care about the direction or what the boating rules on, you go to any store and you buy this map. This is the most commonly available map of Lake Travis, this is the lcra's official map of Lake Travis. I taped this particular copy from jim richardson, water surface manager at lcra, you see it's not folded. Here's the area that we are talking about, again these elevations appear on the map. You will see here's 681, this is the point that I showed you before that was -- that was 681. There's some 750 marks, I know you can't read any of this, I will leave it with you. These are the marks, then, of course, not to mislead you, but there's -- there's all sorts of lines coming down from there that are the other elevation points. But the two key ones, the brown, this is a -- this is by the way an infrared photograph. This is not an artist's depiction, this is the actual area of volente taken by an infrared satellite. So if you could really study this, you will see exactly the features that you want to look at. We are concerned about the water, we are really concerned about this boundary that starts right here and moves all the way along here and goes up here and then stops up here. You can see this area, real shallow. As it is lake goes down, you have more surface in volente, therefore the lake boundary is extremely important. It determines how much area you have. I'm particularly going to show you some things up in these particular areas right here that show up as features on the map that was provided to the county and that -- to me indicate the elevation that the -- the elevation, which the boundaries appear. As best I can determine, from 30 years of military experience in boating, since I was 13 years old to include ocean sailing, I know charts and maps.
>> I apologize, I'm going to have to get out to the garage by 10:00 to catch my ride. I will catch you on the flip side.
>> have a safe trip.
>> thank you.
>> this is another representation, u.s. Government survey map. These are produced by the federal government. This is what you use to fight a ballots. This map contains -- to fight a battle. This map contains colors and lines, it's a detailed accurate, you know, two -- to the -- to the 10-meter interval of this particular area of volente. This is a mansfield dam map, here's the dam right here, here's the area that we are talking about right here. This map indicates it will actually show you and I know you can't see it, it shows you this light area along the shoreline. Clearly depicts elevation 681. It depicts elevation 715. Here's where I want to point out some of the features, then I'm going to move fairly quickly to the yellow map which is what we are concerned about. This particular feature here and here, you can't see it on this map, it comes in, there's a blue line that appears right here, that is the 670 line. That's the map -- we know nothing about the 670 contour line, it was never mentioned, we know nothing about it until last week. But it does appear on this map. This -- the -- both forks of this river, of this inlet go up there and do not have water in them at 670. Okay? The same thing up here. If I were taking this map and going on maneuver, I would look at this map and see that -- that -- at 670, if I knew the lake was there, the water end right there. That these things would be dry. They would not have water in them. Okay. That's what the -- that's the level of detail and the kind of decisions that you can make from a -- you canned in exactly where you can go, you know where your boundaries are, legal, definable, they help you not to cause accidents. That's what maps are all about. That's why you have maps. Aviators use this, everybody uses them. This is starnes island, I need to make this point. You know that? This is a unique feature in Lake Travis, one of the -- of a couple of islands, the man made one is further up the lake. It sticks up there, a rock outcropping before the lake was built, it was -- I'm told by long-time residents called mitchell's hill. It's not a hill anymore, it's an island. Comes up from the lake. You can't see this, but there is a contour line on starnes island. One line. It's the 700 feet -- 700-foot contour line. It says that starnes island goes down below -- this map is the blue part is 681. That's what it shows. And it shows you where the lake can go at 715. Starnes island is popping out of the lake. You can tell from the brown line that its elevation is at least 700 feet, goes a little bit above that, but the map doesn't tell you any more than that. There's no line above 700, it tells you that 710 starnes island is underwater. That's what this map tells you if you know anything about maps. Okay.
>> let's skip over here.
>> you have seen the level of detail that you would expect to find on a map. I know in order for this to come to a vote, the voters have toed in the boundaries of the village of volente. They have toed in this clearly. Obviously the county complaint bring this to a vote unless theyed in what is going to constitute the village of volente. I'm not preaching to you, this is for everybody. You have toed in the boundaries. -- you have to understand the boundaries. This map right here, this fuzzy yellow map is exactly, it's a copy, but it is exactly the map dated 26 December of 2001 that was attached to the petition that initiated this process. The petition that was announced in the hill country news, a very well read newspaper by people in volente. It was -- the legal notice posted in the hill country news and within the legal requirements certain things tend to -- 10 days, 15 days later, this map as exhibit a was attached to the petition. This map has never changed from the time that petition was posted until it was submitted to Travis County. This is the map that I believe mr. Nuckols and your executive assistant will acknowledge, this is the map, less the stickers, that was received by Travis County. This is the level of granularity and the level of understanding that the residents of volente have of the village of volente, notwithstanding meetings called by sov, on notwithstanding people being excluded from meetings that you will hear about. This is the document that you, sir, have to make a decision on whether this is adequate to call a vote. I would suggest, my feeling is from knowledge of maps only, not a lawyer or anything else, my feeling is that I cannot determine the bound dears of the village of -- boundaries of the village of volente from this map. What I can best determine from this map, being a pretty good map reader. I would say if I looked at this map, this is the way I took it, first of all, there should have been something in the legend down here that tells you what this very important boundary, all of that is the boundary of volente. I would expect to find something down here that said that the marine boundary, the maritime boundary, the lakeside boundary was at elevation something. I would have expected to see elevation 715, the legal floodplain of the lake, which appears on most people's deeds to before most people own their property, which is all recorded in your plat, in your county -- in your county records, I would have expected it to say 681, the normal pool of the lake, clearly identifiable in all sorts of illustrations here and to recognize the level of the lake. I look at this thing and there's water -- there's a little bulge, I know you can't see it. You would not have that at elevation 681, these maps will show you in details, it all happens as this goes up in there and it stops, you it does not bulge out into something else. Same thing here. This little place where the water goes in. At -- I showed you or attempted to show you, I know you didn't see it. On this map that at elevation 681, or 670, I'm sorry, you would walk across that particular area. That's not what this map shows. This map shows water there. Now, I can't interpolate anything more than that. I can't determine the boundaries, not with standing the fact that ied in this. This is all volente group property up here. They bought it in '95 or whenever. I know they have it. Why was it is never published? I'm going to finish up my point. This is another interesting clue right here. You can laugh about it, but remember I talked about starnes island. It shows up on every map. I would suggest to you that this map was derived from or taken from a map at elevation 715. The high water mark of the lake because of these features that appear on here, this and this, this blunted area right here on the other maps comes way out here like a little bit of an elephant's trunk, whatever. When the lake is high, it's under water, so is starnes island, it's gone. This is not a depiction, I don't want to say that it's just a map of the village of volente because there's the shoreline on the other side, somebody copied this from something. Starnes island is gone, it's underwater. This map, I would say, is at 714. The floodplain of the lake. Now, when your staff looked at this map and tried to determine who could vote, what the legal boundaries are, they've had this since the 11th of October. This is the 10th of December, it has been two months, your staff, your professional staff, sir, this is not a criticism, please, your professional staff have bun able in two months to determine the boundaries of the village of volume 10 stay. What about the -- volente. What about the voters? Two and a half years of this fuzzy yellow map. I do not believe this is due process. I believe the voters have been deprived of their rights. Notwithstanding whether people want to incorporate or not. And what the law says -- if -- the law says there will be a description. It doesn't say a plat, what level. It says there will be a description. This is not a description. This is a cartoon of an area. This is a fuzzy representation of something that could possibly be. This should have gone away 30 days into the process. I would ask sair that in -- I would ask, sir, that in considering this, this is the voters understanding what they want. This is about the voter saying yes, I want to be a municipality, but you know what, I want toed in what my village is going to look like, I want to know whether my property is in or out of the village. This waterfront issue is a major issue. I was on a Lake Travis committee and attended lcra meetings while they were working on the draft of the private dock ordinance for Lake Travis. It was flowing right along until somebody said something about, okay, Lake Travis -- excuse me, lcra is going to start to register all of the docks on Lake Travis and -- and control the docks. Clean it all up. It's a noble effort and I support it. Troy frasier from -- came to the meeting, he brought it to a screeching halt. The draft has never been seen again since because of the issue of control of docks and property taxes. If you went out into the lake at 670, you control out to 670. You can't even find 670. It is never mentioned in any document ever until the -- until the -- the fourth of November or the 22nd of November, I'm sorry, when ms. Adams delivered to your staff something that looks -- in writing is not this map. This first page and thens with the northwest, northeast, northwest and south lines of said jones 1,531 acres, starts you, says the intersection with the 670 contour line on the max canyon arm of Lake Travis. The next entry says the 670 contour line of Lake Travis to the point of the intersection of the lcra 2058 point something acres at hamilton hallow arm. -- hamilton hollow arm. I would suggest that this map shows elevation 715, that's what the people have seen for the last two and a half years. This legal description, which I venture to say not 20 people in volente have seen. They have siege it because alison thrash picked it up from our executive agent. No one has ever seen it, knows anything about elevation 670. Not depicted on this map. I would say this be returned to -- if it's worth doing, it's worth doing right. If this is the law that we are talking about, we have rights as voters to due process. We have a group of waterfront owners that don't know about this. Voters have rights. And, sir, I would -- I spent -- it's been a long presentation. But I tried to talk specifically to a point that is within your purview and authority to make a decision. I thank you for your time, sir, and we are -- I'm not here to say we don't want to void. Weed in the process. It's been two and a half years, if you go back, it can be done right, come back to the court, squeaky clean, everybody understands the boundaries.
>> do you recommend a certain lake level?
>> sir.
>> are you recommending a certain lake level?
>> no, sir. That's not my call. I would suggest that the two definable levels, but I'm not the one determining the boundaries. Certainly I would suggest the two things that I mentioned in the first place. 681 is a known level, it's [inaudible], it's everything, it's what the lcra uses. However it's very easy to go to the --
>> ied in --
>> everything -- the county records and get 715 the floodplain.
>> if I were to sample the deeds, of property owners that live along the lake, would lake levels be reserved in the -- referenced in the deeds.
>> if it's waterfront property, I would say that 90% of the deeds in the water front on volente will show the property boundary at 715 the floodplain. That's -- these subdivisions were divided in the late '30's, most of them. And that was the projected level of the lake and that's what the -- that's what [inaudible] read, other people that subdivided up there, that's what they sold down to. However, after that, and until now, you still can, if you own your waterfront property at 715, you have the exclusive use of the rest of it down to as far as it goes. It belongs to somebody else. In most cases it belongs to the d.c. Real estate, still. Some of it belongs to volente group. They recently acquired a whole bunch of waterfront along sandy creek. Some of it belongs to lewis henna. Other people own big pieces, you will also find on some deeds that someone's property goes out into the water. You can purchase from the d.c. Reed estate property down to elevation 670. That's the only place I find reference to 670, purchasing property from the d.c. Reed estate, you can buy it from 716 to 670. You can buy it. My next door neighbor, clark campbell is doing it right now. You are not going to find 670 on any of the plats or deeds in Travis County unless that property owner purchased the property down to 670 and then clearly it's referenced like that.
>> okay. Questions? Thank you very much.
>> sir, thank you.
>> [inaudible]
Anybody else if they want to look at them, they were for purposes of illustration.
>> tom, do you want to take a look at that?
>> okay.
>> my presentation will not be so detailed or lengthy. Or -- I think more substantive. I am woody wood. If I wanted to be more formal, I could say I'm branson l. Wood, junior, colonel of the usaf, retired. I have lived at volente with my wife, we have owned our home out there for 21 years now. I had a long and happy career in the united states air force. I flew combat missions in two of the three wars that I participated in. Around by combat I mean I shot and was shot at. I did that because I believe in our form of government. I believe in the democratic process. I did not do it for wealth because certainly the wealth isn't there. I've -- as I said, I have lived out at volente now for 21 years, it's very important to me that we retain the way of life we have had out there. I believe the best way to do that is by being able to have self government. I believe very strongly in that. I fought my missions in combat during world war ii and during the vietnam war because of that. Defending our country. I -- also have problems with those who would deny me the right to vote. I feel that the -- that the [inaudible] and our form of government is very, very important. I feel that people who are fighting incorporation are attempting to deny me the right to vote. I think that should not be denied. I think if our founding fathers, in fact, had felt as they do, as those who are opposed to incorporation seem to feel, then we would not be the nation that we are today. We would still be a british colony, and we probably would have taxation without representation. I believe we have and want to have local self government. I look at this a little bit, also, from a numbers standpoint. I -- I ask myself frequently, do I want to be one voice in 350 or 400 in the neighborhood of volume volente or do I want to be one voice in three-quarters of a million in Austin or Travis County? Obviously I think most of us would prefer the former. I at least would. I would urge judge Biscoe and this court to approve our request to call an election and let us conduct this thing in a democratic, normal way as we do business in this country. Thank you.
>> thank you.
>> good morning, judge, commissioners.
>> good morning.
>> I would also like to address the map issue. I have a little bit more detailed information. Particularly pertaining to my property, which is within the -- within the bounds.
>> okay.
>> I will cut this short, I know it's taking up a lot of your time. If you look at page 1, that's a map of the proposed incorporation area, basically taken from that. I put an outline around about 10 properties that includes mine. It's waterfront property. On page 2, if you look down below, that's a [inaudible] plat taken of the same area. Including my property on there. And that shows the 715-foot contour line, which is the 100 year floodplain. And it also shows the 681-foot contour line, which is the Lake Travis floodplain level. If you look at page 3, that's the outline section from page 1, blown up to match the plat on page 2 to make an overlay, now, if you take those two pieces of paper and you hold them up to the light, you will see that the boundary on the yellow map that was provided by save volente group exactly matches the 715-foot contour line. Now, if you also examine that plat, you will see that there's a lot of land in between the 715-foot contour line and the 681-foot line. What that turned out to do on my property was when I first saw this yellow map a year ago, I thought -- I thought incorporated area of my land, which is the total of seven and a half acres, I thought 1.3 acres, which is the area above the floodplain, was what was going to be incorporated. That's what's shown on that yellow map. Just on Saturday, I found out that this legal description was submitted and it actually goes down to the 670-foot contour line. You can see that that adds acres and acres of -- of my and my neighbor's property into this incorporated area. I had no idea that this was going to be included. This is a lot of extra control that the city gets over my property. They can now instead of just controlling where I -- where my house is being built, they now control my docks and my boats and everything else. Right down to -- right down to and below the water line. This is a big change, I was totally unaware of it until a couple of days ago. Nobody else was aware of this, either. That's basically my point. There's a lot of extra land all of a sudden on there and I didn't know about it until two days ago. How could I have decided to sign this petition or not sign this petition based on inadequate information.
>> thanks.
>> thank you.
>> okay. If -- if the map that the court relies on to call an election shows a larger area, that picks up the parts they knew about initially, does that clarify or is that still an outstanding issue or what?
>> I believe that the -- that the petition that was -- there was a petition signed by [inaudible] property owners, me being one of them, to the city of Austin, demanding to be annexed or be released [inaudible], the people that signed that petition didn't know what was being -- what area was being annexed. [inaudible - no mic] four miles of shoreline along there, my property goes from 1.3 acres that was -- that was to be annexed, goes up over 3, that's now on the 681 line, I don't know where the 670 line is. That's under water, not shown on the deed of my plat. Also to answer your question, earlier about the deeds, deeds referenced, my property stands out to the center of the -- of the -- out to the center of the channel. Which is approximately here. The way my deed is state the, if they pick up a pin right down here on the corner and say you will proceed from that pin, 1,670 some feet, out in a certain direction, then you will proceed on a different line for so many feet again, come back around, come back to here. Lake levels are never specifically mentioned in the deed except for an easement given to the -- to the lower colorado river authority. To store water on my land. 6.1 acres is an easement for them to store water on that land. I still have the use of that land provided that I follow the rules, various other types.
>> sir?
>> a lot of that mug mic. E- no mic]
>> sir, you need to pick up the microphone.
>> I'm sorry.
>> okay. So -- so is thated inable? Any other -- is that understandable?
>> writes your house located with respect to the 715, above or below it.
>> the house is above it. If you theoretically you can't build below 715.
>> that was my next question.
>> up on stilts.
>> notwithstanding theory, how many houses are there actually below the 715?
>> as a matter of fact, the -- that's because of the floodplain authority where you can get the -- a permit to build. My neighbor's house, right next door, straddles the 715. If the border of the village of volente was a 715 line, her living room is -- her living room is outside of the city, and her kitchen is inside. Because her house was built 30 years ago when the floodplain elevation was lower. She built -- her house starts at 710, and actually straddles the boundary up to about 720. Other people along the shoreline, depending on how long ago they built, they might be down to 690. The floodplain was defined as 690 many many years ago. Before I learned that the boundary was 670 feet, I had prepared something saying how could the city split my neighbor's house in two. How can the city boundary run in between her kitchen and her living room? But then two days ago, I learned it was 670 feet, so I had to throw all of that out appeared just come back -- I -- I firmly believe when you take the 670 contour, I don't know how they are going to find it because the lake is silted in since the last time anybody has down any soundings actually established where 670 feet lies. That's going to add so many acres to the -- this this plot. I figure it's going to add an extra square mile to the city of volente, over two mile, you won't have a legal city then, it's over the two mile limit.
>> okay. It shouldn't be -- one more point. I don't believe that should be the -- the city should be define odd a contour line. All of the other deeds have -- all of the other deeds defining these properties, there being some degrees, minutes, second, you start here, proceed so many feet in this direction, you determine another direction, it doesn't reference elevations.
>> would it be the -- the incorporated area should be defined that way, too?
>> yes, sir, I do. I don't know how you can establish where the 720 contour is under water. Right now. I don't know how you would survey it, but eventually in order to calculate what's two square miles in here, you have to have an exact boundary here. You can't have a fuzzy line, 720 feet or 670 feet that's under water. I don't see how you can do that. You have to run this through a computer program probably, I don't know how they did it in the old days, they run it through a computer program, put the degrees, minutes, second, of all of the points on here into the computer and it would spit out the area that's contained within that.
>> okay. Thank you.
>> thanks.
>> thank you.
>> do you -- the map that you handed out, did you want us to keep those --
>> yes, yes please, go ahead and keep them.
>> okay. [inaudible - no mic]
>> my name is [inaudible], I live at 1504 f.m. 2769 in the proposed area of incorporation. I have lived in volente since the '70's and seen many changes, not always for the best. I have been interested in incorporation for a long time, I was very happy when this stronger movement started. Since this time I have kept up with neighboring Austin area communities who -- who have incorporated. And it seems that the main reasons are to help to control their development, water usage and help to control polluting industries and so on. These are the concerns that I have also. A scenic lake area is especially susceptible to residential commercial development take can be an asset to the community, but unfortunately that may not always be the case, it may be polluting, noisy, invasive in residential areas. This has happened in volente. At this time volente residents, I feel, are in desperate need of some protection above and beyond what is available for us through the city of Austin e.t.j. Regulations, which cover certain controls only. Although we are lucky only to have -- we are lucky to have an interested and efficient inspector for our area, it is difficult for city personnel to monitor outlying areas. When visiting certain agencies such as lcra, Travis County commissioners court, so on, we have repeatedly been told that incorporation is our best effort. That -- that we basically don't have a lot of control or a leg to stand on if we are unincorporated. Anyone who keeps up with news in Austin area are familiar with the destruction of endangered wildlife habitat by development, water pollution problems and at times diminished property values in residential areas. An incorporated volente would enable us to set up guidelines to avoid further problems in these areas, also we have recently seen our property in port aransas mustang island annexed by corpus, along with much higher taxes, although most of the residents in this area wanted to be annexed by port aransas and port aransas also wanted us. However we were in the e.t.j. Of corpus so we had no choice. We weren't able to vote about that. I feel that holding an election to address the issue of incorporation is the fairest, most democratic way to determine what the majority of residents in a proposed area of incorporation prefer. Thank you.
>> thank you.
>> judge Biscoe, commissioners, my name is lee bass, I'm a volente home owner, taxpayer, registered voter and avid volunteer. I've listened to a lot of things today. Basically my concern was, I have tried since -- for two and a half years to even get a budget from sov, there was one original, I guess people didn't like it, but it -- it quickly disappeared. I have never seen another budget. I wrote to mattie adams and bob tinsman to ask them what volente incorporation would do for me, just me. All I get is zoning, no budget, because they don't want to release it for scrutiny. If I had a dream and I knew it was going to work, I would have a budget and my plan out there showing you. This is what we can do. Besides the fentress county that they not only refused to do it, it made things just a little bit suspicious. Now, as you can clearly see, we don't have clear boundaries. We don't have a budget. All we know is zoning. Well, I think clearly we are not equipped to run a city. They keep saying for 25 cents or 15 cents. They ignore the fact after one year you can change your city status to -- from a b, which is a maximum of 25 cents to an a, which is much greater. That takes the city council to change your status. Granted it would take a vote of the people. If you -- if you have to have roads, tough have liability -- tough have liability insurance, you have to hire a policeman if you have going to have a law, if you have a law you are going to have a court, tickets, whatever. I just don't think that we are equipped to become a city. The people there, it's a very eclectic neighborhood, everything from million dollar homes to a tent. But everybody calls it home. And everybody has worked with everyone before. It isn't just about the money. It's just about wasting money. We receive all of these things, all we are going to get is convenience for a builder. That's it.
>> thank you. [one moment please for change in captioners]
>> from there ms. Adams took the effort over and started the sov group and mr. Shipley became more silent with his report of incorporation. Ms. Adams and a handful of the residents for incorporation continued for a future village of volente behind closed doors. There have been meetings by invitation only in private homes to discuss the details of this incorporation plan, and residents, including myself, were denied an invitation to these meetings, and sov's strategy on this incorporation has included a division of the community, the boundaries have been strategically hais placed to benefit the developer. The boundaries were chosen without public input and it doesn't include things like the church and major areas of the older residential areas of volente. There is been a severe lack of information. Residents and business owners, including myself, were denied information when requested respectfully and properly. Sov has refused to participate in public meetings that the neighborhood association has tried to get information to the residents, and they have refused to participate, making it very difficult to educate the community. They refused to release the budget as ms. Babbs mentioned. There's been unethical behavior, and I'm not even going to get into that. But these types of tactics have set the spirit for this incorporation push. Mr. Shipley, ms. Adams, bob kissman and tim Davis are all the key advocates pushing for incorporation, and they all have extensive knowledge of real estate and/or municipalities. And this group has intentionally withheld information and misrepresented the residents of volente in order to get this issue on a ballot. And I think that a lot of those points have been well spoken of this morning. I am not against a vote on incorporation. Absolutely not. But I am against the one-sided, undemocratic, developer-initiated effort that basically I see has riddled the cove, as has been pointed out today. There are many residents who don't know today whether they are inside or outside of these boundaries. And I don't think that this issue is ready for a vote in volente. I am asking the court to require this group to abide by the laws that protect us and order them to require the necessary signatures again, and I think that it would only be fair that we go back to the petition that was submitted to the city of Austin that took the biggest majority of signatures, 50 signatures in five days is not a problem for them, again, but educating, properly educating all of those residents that it takes to sign that petition to get it in I think would finally give volente due process on incorporation. There have also been two straw votes taken on incorporation since 2000 when this started, by the vna at different general meetings with residents that represented the whole approximate four miles of volente, and both of those votes were against incorporation. And in my opinion it is ludicrous to believe that this group represents the majority of volente when they have divided it for their gain.
>> thank you.
>> for those who are going to give comments today, we need four people to come forward. It helps matters if we have the five seats occupied and if one leaves and another one comes, we appreciate it. There's an issue that has surfaced that I think court has some say so about is a description of the area proposed. If there are other issues, we need to hear what they are.
>> okay. My name is tim Davis and thank you for being here, thank you volente for being here also. I wish I could talk to Karen Sonleitner for the sidewalk she gave us two years ago. Her and grech enhelped us dramatically. I am here to basically read a letter to you from a homeowner in volente and he's also a homeowner's association president. It reads, to whom it may concern, as president of village at volente homeowners association, I wanted to express my thanks to the proponents of incorporated volente village who have worked together to impose a vision for the city in the years to come. This vision is that volente village will retain its community spirit, small town atmosphere and independent roots. Historically a sense of community spirit has enhanced and encouraged through acts of caring, kindness, community trust and understanding, a strong attitude toward volunteerism and citizenship, with teamwork to confront common goals and a mutual ownership in the future of volente village. The fundamental goal of save our volente is to sustain volente village for future generations. The provision of attractive housing for all ages, income and addressing the diverse needs of the population is part of volente village's mission. The economics and the environment are essential to securing the village's identity. The fight of the efforts of the few, over 90% of the citizens of our community who have bothered to offer an opinion on these issues before us have expressed an interest in voting on the issue of incorporation. To the commissioners court, I pray that you will give these citizens an opportunity to cast their voaft. Ank you. Sam w. Love.
>> thank you.
>> my name is susan broader. I live in volente. I am a registered voter. On June first, 2000, my husband and I moved to volente from arizona. We looked at land in many lake side communities in this area before choosing to have our home built in volente. One of the deciding factors was that volente is not incorporated. Within weeks after our move we were invited to a meeting at a private home. The first order of business was for us to sign voter registration cards. The purpose of this meeting, which consisted of approximately 12 people, soon became quite clear. We were told that volente needed to incorporate to prevent future annexation by the city of Austin. This would help to preserve volente in its present form. Since that meeting, we have not received any further invitations to private or public meetings sponsored by the save our volente group because we did not sign their petition for annexation. Even though we received two phone calls from them requesting us to do so, and therefore we have been exclude from receiving vital information about the future of volente. I have never seen a proposed budget, even though I requested this oompls from sov. And I have never seen a legal description of the proposed incorporated area until December of 2002. I am concerned that the legal description exceeds the two square mile limitation for the proposed incorporated area. I am opposed to the division of a small village. The area selected for incorporation is comprised of a few private businesses, waterfront homes, single-family houses and a large tract of undeveloped land by two developers. The tax base needed to support incorporation is minimal at this time and will put an unfair burden on the residents in this proposed incorporated area, and particularly the seniors who are on a limited budget. I feel that the entire incorporation process started in the summer of thousand 2000, has not been handled in an equitable manner to the residents in the proposed annexation area. I am not against a vote, but I respectfully request that no incorporation election be held on February first, 2003, and that the entire incorporation process to date be voided. Thank you.
>> thank you.
>> thank you. Anyone else who wishes to give comments today? If we could get you right here and then we'll swing on there.
>> good morning. My name is dan fell pz and I'm a volente resident and registered voter. I bought my property actually seven and a half years ago, but we moved back in the summer of 2000. And in fact, my first meeting, community meeting that I was able to participate, was a meeting which this was a very warm topic. I got to see the passion on both sides. I've been on the fence pretty much ever since. And hopefully I'm telling you something that's new and different, in a different perspective. I'm here and I want to see the vote because not only do I believe its my right, but I also believe that it is my community's opportunity to be defensive with whatever type of development comes in, even though I hear that most of the people who believe in incorporation and believe in this voting process are somewhat, I hate to say it, but lack keys for a developer, that's not the case in my point. I'm going after this. Most of my neighbors who are in my particular area, we are for this simply because we want a government that can help control our destiny, can work through this process as the community continues to grow. We want to maintain, wpt to preserve our way of life there, and we believe that we can do that by having self government. And I believe that this voting process is the first key step to ensuring that we have the type of future that we all want for our community. I'd like to finish real quick with my view. I am a lake -- a lack front own -- lakefront owner, and my property actually does go down to I believe it's the 680 level. And most of the people within my cove, it does. And when I look at what I'm hearing is I really question what happens to the actual list of eligible voters, whether we're at 670 or whether we're at 715. Because when the water draws up or the water goes down, the reality is the horizontal plots to the water level, they really don't change that much unless, you know, if the fish are voting now. But the reality is I don't want the hairs to be split here to keep me from the right to make that vote. Thank you.
>> I have something to tell the court.
>> okay.
>> first i'd like to thank the court for allowing us as a whole to get up here and speak. My name is bob and I'm a resident of volente village 12 years. I started a business in volente nine years ago. My wife and I own a boat rental business on the lake. My house is not in the area under consideration for incorporation. We're two streets away from it. My business is within the incorporation boundaries. And after seeing how the petitions were being peddled, I e-mails ms. Adams to find out where and when I could attend an incorporation meeting to try and determine what implications it would have on my business. Her reply was to refer me to finding an attorney who might be able to tell me about it, and if I had any specific questions, she would try to answer them. There was no mention of any kind of meeting that I might be able to attend. I did e-mail her back with a list of specific questions. Her response again was to go to an attorney and that she didn't have time to meet with me or any other people who resided outside of the incorporation area. At this time there was a refusal to meet with me in order to discuss any ramifications of incorporation on my business and a refusal to allow me -- [ inaudible ]. There have been public meetings on incorporation through the volente neighborhood association, but there has not been any representatives for save our volente present at those meetings to address the many questions that the residents have on these issues. The process, just to kind of echo what has already been said, has been held behind closed doors. It has not been an open type of meeting which allows the residents to participate. And I see incorporation as something that's going to significantly affect me, my family and my business. And I can't get answers to my legitimate questions from the people who are trying to make these decisions on the -- on the behalf of the residents within this two square-mile area. I would ask the court to delay any vote on incorporation in volente and to require the sov to communicate information on incorporation publicly in volente with an opportunity for residents and business owners to ask their questions. And that's all I have.
>> thank you. We have two more seats available. Yes, ma'am.
>> I'm nancy. I'm been a resident of volente for 12 years. My husband and I moved to Texas from minnesota, and we spent five months looking for a space place to live. We liked the uniqueness, the diversity that was out in volente, and the people. It was everything we wanted for a retirement home. Four years ago my husband died. I'm very fortunate, I'm still able to live in the home we built together and planned to retire. Now I'm faced with the topic of incorporation. And I think a lot of this has been said already today. The unknown of what we face, we haven't had anything given to us, what their plan is, what is happening with us. It also divides the community, which you've heard. When you talk about two square miles and the gentleman earlier that said it doesn't make any difference how far -- where that lakefront goes at, it does because it cut off the two square miles. If you've got more acreage in front of you, then you're going to have to chop someplace. So again, looking at once again for me, I have not been able to get any of the answers from anywhere. There has been private meetings held. The public meetings that have been through the association have been the public. And it's interesting for me to sit here today and see many people on both sides of the fence. I believe we had a meeting a couple of weeks ago where we weren't even informed that they were coming down here. So there have been a lot of miscommunications. I'm concerned with people on limited or fixed income. We have many in the area that have come out there to retire and are on fixed incomes, so where is our tax base? Right now I don't feel that there is a tax base. We have very few businesses in the area. Taxes will remain an issue for me, the unknown of incorporation, no facts, no budgets. I'm not saying anything about the increase in service because that's unknown. I'm a volunteer in the community. As a first street founder in the ladies auxiliary member. I'm dismade that the people driving the incorporation are largely not involved of. I'm not saying that they are not involved. There are many that are not involved with supporting the community. Hence, my concern is the level of volunteer support from volente should incorporation become a reality. At present I have concern for people outside of the incorporation area and how it will affect our community if volente is split in half by incorporation. Most of the people I am involved with are the many volunteers who do not live in the proposed volente incorporated area. The volunteers have given many hours to provide services for the entire area. And I thank you for your time.
>> thank you.
>> good morning, my name is mary poplin. And my husband and I live on debbie drive, which is in a little subdivision. We bought the land in the late '70's, and in 1990 we built our home and are currently residing there. We have come today to show our support in opposing the incorporation of this area into the village of volente. We agree with the questioning of the location and the legality of the proposed two square miles that's to be the incorporated area, along with other issues that have already been addressed today by those that are opposed to the incorporation. I would like to address our comments to the attitude of the proponents seeking incorporation. We feel that they have not been as open with addressing their plans for incorporation as they would like for you to believe. And i'll refer to a letter dated February the 22nd of 2002 from matty adams, president of save our volente to wilt thompson, president of volente neighborhood association. And I have provided you copies. It's not real good, but hopefully you can read it. The purpose of her letter was to decline to participate in a public meeting scheduled for March the 11th, which was the purpose of the original letter to her. And in part she states, we have found it impossible to compress a larger area into two square miles, and as a result have selected the area depicted on our map, which is publicly displayed as required by law. It is our position that people residing outside that area do not need any additional information as this particular issue does not pertain to them. When I read that part of her letter I got so mad that I got on the internet and sent my first letter to the volente newsletter that is published on the volente website. And it's kind of like writing a letter to the editor. I've never done that either. And I have a copy of my e-mails or you have a copy of my e-mails. And in part I said we have read with disbelief the sov's response to the February 12th 2002 letter from walt thompson, president of vna. We were appalled to think that the sov could be so callous toward those volente community residents who are unfortunate to live outside the area of proposed incorporation. Is this the mind set that will prevail in this small city government? We happen to live in the select area of incorporation, and as yet we have not been invited to attend a meeting by -- put on by the sov. How is the criteria for those selected to attend the meeting determined? There is so much going on in sov, but not much information is being shared. It's really frightening. And it was signed jan and mary poplin. And our letter was posted on the website March the 4th, 2002. And i've given you copies of it, and I thank you for your time in hearing us.
>> thank you.
>> there are seats available for anyone else who wants to give comments. Last opportunity. Please come forward. Yes, sir?
>> your honor and members of the commissioners court. I'm bob tinslin. I won't go into a lot of my history. I'm an engineer by degree, I have a master's in government. I wrote my thesis, and this is pertinent, on administration of zoning ordinances. And I wish to emphasize that should the vote be favorable and should there be a village of volente that I would hope that one of the first actions to be taken would be to draw up a zoning ordinance and essentially zone the two square miles as single and two-family residential areas. Those commercial areas would continue. Those properties that are more than two families would continue. And the term is legal nonconforming. They would not be changed, their land use would continue. I can't help but comment, I try hard to follow the discussion with reference to the maps. I've worked on a survey crew and I spent well over 10 years with lcra, so I have some familiarity with the jurisdiction matters at lcra. The 681 level is not the normal pool level. The average or normal pool level is 667, which is considerably lower. The 681 used to be, and I think it still is, is the point of the lake when the jurisdiction and the control of the lake transfers from lcra to the army corps of engineers, and that's for certain purposes that were determined back when mansfield dam was built. The 715, the spillway level on mansfield dam was 714. And while I was an owner, the puc, which is another jurisdiction involved, decided that they would not set meters, although they have previously. They would not set meters below 715. But I don't feel that that's particularly pertinent to our use here. I've learned a lot of discussion about the splitting and dividing of the community. Sov didn't like the state statute keeping it to two square miles. I was involved in looking at various maps, different formations, but most of us agree in an open fashion that we should start with the area where most of the people wanted to incorporate as a separate municipality. That was done. It comes down to the peninsula where I live and includes those areas. And because he is a large property owner.
>> the john shipley area. And he has been, I think -- and I won't go into the details here. It's not jermaine to this hearing. He's been exemplary in trying to protect good development in the area. So far as inviting people, we're dammed if we do and dammed if we don't. There's not much point to be gained by inviting somebody who is firmly opposed to the incorporation. The invitations are issued by the property owner, the householder who is holding the meeting. Sov doesn't determine that invitation list. It's in somebody's home. They determine it. But we would prefer to talk to people who are at least open minded and not try to brain wash or unduly influence somebody who is firmly opposed. Lastly, there are no field notes per se because the state statute, as I understand it, our attorney is here, after incorporation, after a vote, after incorporation, then a new municipality is required to do that. Why would it be done before if a new municipality is required under statute to do it after incorporation? I would merely encourage the commissioners court, make the fact determinations and as has been mentioned before, allow the democratic process so that it can be voted up or down. We know very well that the majority of the people living in the two square miles are in favor of the petition to the city of Austin campaigned over two-thirds of the voters. So we would argue to go ahead and. [papers shuffling - audio interference] and then allow us to vote. Thank you.
>> thank you.
>> there have been lots of comments made today and i'd be happy to share with you e-mail correspondence. Not all of them have been portrayed very accurately. But I wanted to address the map issue. I'm not going to argue with mr. Thompson's preaching that he is a map expert, however, I will explain how we came to these boundary lines. The area that -- the area has proposed for incorporation is biefkly the original -- basically the original Lake Travis subdivisions one through seven. They were subdivided back in the early 1940's and at that time the property lines in the subdivision generally go to either the 670 line or in some cases 715. Not all property owners that are waterfront purchased from the 715 down to the 670, but we felt that consistency was the best way to go. Some property owners on to the 715, many are on the 670. Some go all the way out to the water. So in cases where it does go all the way out to the water, yes, we are clipping that property. That's very widely done when it comes to property taxization. That's not unusual. But we wanted to be consistent and let people know, so we choose the 670 for that reason. I will be the first to tell you, they don't have a map with exact contours of lake levels of land underneath the water. If you, for instance, want to put in a new marina, then you have to get a survey at that time and find out exactly what the lake levels are. But for our purposes, the main goal was for people within the boundaries to know whether or not their property was within the proposed incorporation boundary, and the best way we needed to do that was to go to the property tax rolls and to go along those lines. So that is where we got these and we've done the best job we can. Mr. Mott's comments, I have that e-mail if you would like to. I did try to address some of his concerns; however, i've got a business. I'm not going to pretend I'm an attorney and some of the questions need to be answered by an attorney, so I did refer him to an attorney on that. I also felt that my priority is, of course, to first try and educate people within the proposed boundaries, and that I did hope to have further meetings down the road, but my priority had to be first within the boundaries for people that this directly affected. We're asking for a vote on this. Clearly there is vast majority who want it. We're continue to go have neighborhood meetings, and news letters have been sent out. They will continue to. We're trying to be as open as we can. The very, very first incorporation meeting that was held down at the community hall was posted by mr. Walt thompson, and before that meeting I called him and I said, walt, you know, why don't we be at the front together and address this to the community? This was the very first one. He slightedly not. -- absolutely not. There will be no questions, there will be no interruptions. I'm going to speak. That's it. And so he did. He had not had legal help, I suppose, and he spoke his views, not always correct, misled many people. He continued to call these meetings. They became sort of a joke. I'm sorry. He continues to have a following, but the number of people attending quickly declined. So we have found that those who truly would like to know the issues prefer to do it in maul smauler groups where they feel comfortable asking questions. We had one last night, we have another one this week. I am hopeful that we will continue to have them until everyone's had an opportunity, whether you're a pro or against it. I don't have a problem with that.
>> I think I might end up being one of the three people, and I'm doing this because I want to replay a couple of things in a non-argumentative fashion, but as ms. Adams has done, to clarify a few things. First of all, I would recommend, if you're interested with the pool of what the lake is, the sources of this is the lcra website. The normal pool of the lake is 681, despite what mr. Pittman says who used to work there. The issue of boundaries is key to this whole thing. As I mentioned in the map, and I'm not going to repeat any of that. Ms. Adams' statement about 670 contour line or anything like that, I would recommend that if anyone -- if the commissioners court, not you in particular, but on the county staff go and review whichever subdivisions it is, the primary boundary for properties all over that area, which were developed whenever they were developed, is #- 15. It is the -- 715. It is the federal emergency management agency's flood boundary. It determines where you get -- when you have to have flood insurance. It is a legal, definable, on the map boundary. Additionally you cannot get -- I'm going to say this and i'll give you a caveat sto to say I haven't talked to a lawyer. I'm not sure, but i've heard it from many people. You cannot get title insurance on a piece of property below 715. When you buy property, if you buy it down at 670 you get title insurance to 715. The rest of it you're on your own because legal documents and transfer of those properties below 715 are so sketch chi, don't exist and you can't get title insurance. One more thing that I need to address. The meetings that were conducted in volente that ms. Adams refers to, let me clarify this, and again I go back to, I am the president of the volente neighborhood association, and as such I have told you I'm not representing the neighborhood association. I have been the president for the last two years, the two years prior to that I was a board member. The meetings that she refers to are meetings which i, walt thompson, not representing the volente neighborhood association, called at the fire station. They had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the neighborhood association. I became frustrated, as did many of my neighbors, with the discussion about the boundaries of volente. This is way prior to any public process taking place. This is when we were talking about -- and I'm not going to address this to the court because it's not your issue. This is when we're talking about the pros and cons of incorporation. This was a most emotional issue. Ms. Adams has taken the strategy of -- and I would admit a successful strategy. Her strategy has been to hold small group meetings in people's homes and exclude anyone who they do not believe supports incorporation. Group psychology says if you're in somebody's home and you're comfortable and somebody is talking to you about something that's not really offensive to you. And they said all we're trying to do is call a vote. Why don't you sign this petition? It's just calling for a vote. I would suggest for you Texas-ou if they had to submit that petition again, half those signatures would not be on there because they were on obtained sailing we just want to call a vote. It wasn't that they wanted to be incorporated, we want a vote. And we do. I'm not opposed to a vote. When the boundaries are established, once the information comes out and we know what we're doing, I want a vote. It's been very device sieve. The other thing I might add is, if you're going to do something and you're going to try to make it legitimate, then do it right. Do it in good faith, explore your boundaries, talk to people, explain what it's about. What's your tax base? What's it going to gain you? What are the pros and cons. Be public about this. And don't do things that are illegal. Don't send news letters out and put them in people's post boxes without post taj. That's illegal. Talk to the post master. Do not collect voter registration cards when you're not sworn to collect voter registration cards. Do not collect voter registration cards from people in a bar, tell them to sign a petition, collect the card, put it in the mailbox so the voter registrar doesn't know where it came from. And then it arrives and it likes like the individual send sent it. That's against the law. That's not how you register voters and that's not how you obtain signatures on a petition. I'm not going to mention names here. I know it took place. I know it took place many times. I know the names of some of the people that were mentioned today are some of the people who in fact collected those voter registration cards that you will never see in this county as having been authorized to do that. So this is way at the beginning. In order to have due process we need to go all the way back wherever ms. Adams wants to start, but back to the boundaries, back to the legal announcement of what you're trying to do, and carry this process through. If we lose -- if they lose three more month in a two and a half year process, it's inconsequential. The neighborhood will be satisfied, the government will be sewed saed that the voters had the information they needed to vote. That's all I care about it. I'm not trying to stop the vote, not trying to restructure the boundaries, I'm not going to go into pros and cons. It's all about scheduling a vote based on the right information. Thank you, sir.
>> thank you.
>> so are we clear on what legal standard applies for us to determine the boundary of the proposed area?
>> well, clearly it has to be less than two square miles. That's one of the matters that tnr is going to advise us on.
>> okay. Let's say that we come up with a boundary that is in fact less than two square miles, and it goes to a certain level of the lake. And the lake drops -- the area that drops is simply outside the city, right?
>> right. The boundary stays fixed where it is regardless of where the water is. That's an assumption I'm making based on my understanding of the boundary description they've given us. But the boundary would stay fixed. And that's not uncommon actually. People's property boundary, you've heard about their deeds, their deeds at 670, their ownership of the land who change with the water, it's just whether the land they own is underwater or above the water at any given time.
>> so the shoreline may change, but the two-mile limit does not?
>> right.
>> so whatever the two-mile limit is approved, that becomes the city of volente.
>> right.
>> and if later on additional land is picked up by dropping lake levels and expanding shoreline, that is simply outside the city.
>> well, they would have to change the boundaries, they would have to annex.
>> but it's outside the city.
>> right.
>> outside the two-mile limit.
>> right.
>> so what would it take to expand the two miles? Is there a certain time that the two-mile limit is in place?
>> I'm not sure I understand your question.
>> well, typically cities can annex additional territory.
>> right.
>> shouldn't you be a city for a certain time before you can do that?
>> I don't believe so. As soon as the city is formed they're going to have all the powers of a city, one which of is to annex. Now, the challenge I think that volente would face in annexing is they're surrounded by city of Austin etj. And a city can only annex what's in its etj, so my understanding of the situation, correct me if I'm wrong, allen, you know these issues better than I do, is volente is surrounded by city of Austin etj. They're not going to be able to annex unless city of Austin releases etj to the city.
>> that is correct.
>> So if we approve a certain two-mile limit and there is thrs a dropping lakeline and expanded shoreline, you think that's an etj in the city of Austin. So volente would be prohibited from annexing that in the future?
>> unless the city of Austin con cents to it.
>> well, these are interesting questions, but I think our challenge is simpler. And I will review the standards that we applied and the issues that we have to address and answer. But based on what issue was outstanding before this hearing started, and even what i've heard today, the one big issue is the area to be incorporated. And staff is working on that and hopefully within the next couple of days we'll have it. Now, when can we have something in writing that we can share with those interested in seeing it? It may be the same map that's submitted if we can verify it. If not, can we come up with another that is accurate?
>> well, i've given some thought to this issue, judge, and looked at the law. And actually, this issue came up initially when there was a dialogue between the two between whether we needed a text actual description of the boundary or not. They did submit a platting map with the application. And looking at the law, my read on it was the plat is really sort after visual aid. It's there to give people a general idea of the extent to which this affects them. Obviously you can look at that map. Some people can look at that map and notwithstanding that it is not 100% precise, they can tell whether this is going to affect them or not. You know, you can tell just by look at geographic features and property boundaries and somewhat how close you are to this area. And some people can say with, you know, as much certainty as they need, this is nowhere near where I live, this is not going to affect me. Obviously you reach a point where you get close to the yellow area on the map, you can't tell for sure because of the scale of the thing, for example. But that's where the written boundary description that the petitioners gave us comes in. And I think it's going to come down to is are the elected officials going to be able to look at that and look at voter registration records and say the address of this voter is such and such, it is within this boundary that they have given us.
>> I don't know that anybody needs to go back and look at the map. It's just a visual aid. The key piece is the written description, the textual boundary that the petitioners gave us.
>> for those who have come today, I?m sure are interesting in knowing what our determination is before next Tuesday, right? What our determination is and the reasons why. Would we have that available, say, Friday at noon?
>> I think that's up to tnr.
>> as the commissioners court, let's just direct that tnr make that determination by Friday at noon. [ laughter ] and the way we will give that to those interested is if you telephone -- fortunately I will be with commissioner son nightler on county business, but however. Dan smith, who I?m told is county judge in my absence anyway, will be in my office, and he'll be able to assist. If you give that to dan, if you'll call my office, give it to commissioner dougherty, if you contact either one of us, we'll be able to share with you the written information that we have. At least you will be able to mull over it the weekend and Monday before our Tuesday meeting. Having said that, we do appreciate you coming out today. This description of the two-square miles is accountable. It's a sticky situation and the lake and the property lines don't help much. I assume that makes this situation more unusual than the ones we've dealt with in the past, right?
>> you know, I think the last incorporation we did was a lakefront city, which was pointe venture. I know allen represented them. What was in that petition on the lakefront boundary?
>> this is allen. The property owners' association of pointe venture is the one who led the incorporation movement. They had had their bounds of the entire subdivision done previously, so it was a survey map that was submitted of the entire point venture subdivision at that time. I think based on the comments that you've heard today that the commissioners court knows, as I do, that everyone prefer a survey, but the legislature hasn't required one yet, so those are the issues like this map. Pointe venture had one, so that's what they submitted for their nrption incorporation map.
>> okay. Well, let's try to have something in writing available at the latest Friday afternoon. If you call my office or commissioner daugherty's office, we'll be able to share that information with you. And on Tuesday we'll plan to go ahead and take action. The public hearing is closed. Thanks for coming out. We appreciate it. Fall in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Show commissioner con lightner an Sonleitner absent.
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 2, 2003 10:25 AM