San Marcos City Council To Hold Executive Session Over Three Items Including Martindale ETJ Matter

San Marcos City Council To Hold Executive Session Over Three Items Including Martindale ETJ Matter

Staff Reports

Tonight, the San Marcos City Council will hold an executive session to discuss several items including an ETJ matter involving the City of Martindale.

Council is slated to begin the executive session near the end of their regular work session this afternoon and return to executive session after the end of their regular meeting.

The executive session items are the following:

ITEM 2 Work Session / Item 20 Regular Meeting

Executive Session in accordance with the following Local Government Code Sections:

A. Section § 551.074 – Personnel Matters: Discuss and review Appointee Review Process for the City Manager, City Attorney, and City Clerk

B. Section § 551.071 – Consultation with Attorney: to receive a staff briefing and deliberate regarding Martindale ETJ matters and regarding the creation of Hays County Municipal Utility District No. 8.

C. Section § 551.087 – Economic Development: to receive a staff briefing and deliberate regarding Project Big Hat and Hays County Municipal Utility District No. 8.

ITEM 21 – Regular Meeting

Consider action, by motion, regarding the following Executive Session items held during the Work Session:

A. Section § 551.074 – Personnel Matters: Discuss and review Appointee Review Process for the City Manager, City Attorney, and City Clerk

B. Section § 551.071 – Consultation with Attorney: to receive a staff briefing and deliberate regarding Martindale ETJ matters and regarding the creation of Hays County Municipal Utility District No. 8.

C. Section § 551.087 – Economic Development: to receive a staff briefing and deliberate regarding Project Big Hat and Hays County Municipal Utility District No. 8

Whether action or motion regarding Executive Session items will be taken in open court was not stated in the agenda. The San Marcos City Council Work Session begins at 3 PM this afternoon in the San Marcos City Hall Conference Room.

Council will adjourn to executive session following a staff presentation and a discussion regarding the Parking Management Program and On-Street Parking Implementation with direction to staff.

Brief Background on ETJ Matter

In March, City Council voted to annex 734.6 acres of an originally proposed property of 934.34 acres into the San Marcos City limits.

During the annexation process of the SMART Terminal site, it was brought to the City of San Marcos’s attention that the City of Martindale and San Marcos had a potential overlap in their ETJs of approximately 154 acres.

Assistant City Manager Steve Parker said while the property, where the SMART Terminal will be located, was originally 934.34 acres, Curby D. Ohnheiser’s portion of the property had been carved out to reduce the total project to 888.772 acres; of that 888.772, 734.6 acres were located within the San Marcos ETJ.

Parker said that the city has been working with the City of Martindale regarding about 154 acres that the city thinks is in a disputed area in need of being resolved.

Regarding the 734.6 acres, Parker said, “Our property rights to that area was brought into play when we annexed the San Marcos Municipal Airport in 1980.”

Parker said the annexation of the airport extended the city’s ETJ one mile, which limited the extension of Martindale’s ETJ, which took place in 1982.

In 1983, Curby Ohnheiser submitted a request to the City of Martindale to have his property annexed into the city’s ETJ.

However, Parker said despite the request, because of the extension of San Marcos’s ETJ in 1980, Martindale was not able to annex it.

“There was something that was found on the Caldwell County Appraisal district’s website to show that all of the SMART Terminal project is in the Martindale ETJ,” Parker said. “We’ve contacted the Appraisal District just to get their comments of where that map came from and let them know that we don’t think it to be a valid map at all. I’ve talked to the county commissioner who is looking into it for us, and he agrees with our proposal of what he’s seen related to that.”


 

Related posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *