Board Members Present:
Anne Cole-Steichen (ACS)
Sam Love (SL)
Sally McLaughlin (SM)
Lonnie Moore (LM)
Erika Mott (EM)
Leo Slaton (LS)
Catriona Smith (CS)
Walt Thompson (WT)

 Board Members Absent
Jerry Mills (JM)

Call to order at 7:07pm.

 LM polled board members for any new agenda topics.  None were added.

 Minutes  – EM made a motion to accept the minutes of the 10/3/00 meeting, ACS seconded, and all were in favor.  Minutes of the 11/7/00 meeting were read aloud by EM.  WT made a motion to accept those minutes, CS seconded, and the vote was unanimously in favor.

 Treasurer’s Report – ACS reported the VNA has $3,282.74 in the checking account.  Motion to accept the report was made by EM and seconded by WT, all were in favor.  LM submitted a receipt to be reimbursed $55.86 for newsletter copying and folding costs.

 Lake Travis Committee – CS reported on that the LCRA task force for the new marina ordinances will have three, three-hour meetings.  She asked for input from the community on the issue.  WT said he has a concern about what defines a “high conflict” or “high traffic” area.  He said LCRA has included Mack’s Canyon and Gun Hollow in that category, but failed to include Sandy Creek.  He feels that is incorrect, and would like CS to bring that up in one of the meetings.  CS is also being considered to be a member of the Lake Travis Advisory Panel (LTAP).  LM expressed again, his concern about notifications, and that he thinks neighborhood associations should be among those notified.

LM gave an update on the land swap issue with the parkland in Sandy Creek between Travis County and Sandy Creek Investments.  Travis County has postponed making a decision on the matter for at least two weeks.  The Reeds spoke in opposition of the swap, and it appears that County Commissioner Karen Sonleitner is in favor of it.  CS said she called LCRA about it, and was told Sandy Creek Investments submitted an application to permit a 233-slip marina, but it is now a 54-slip marina.  LCRA says 54 is the maximum number of slips they will be allowed to put in.  LM reported that he received information that Jonestown has an agreement with Sandy Creek Investments that also limits the number of slips to 54.   CS said she would check with LCRA to see where the proposed marina is to be located.

 Business/Development Committee – SL reported that he drove to the Dies Ranch development to see if someone there could clarify what was going in there.  One of the developments is called Volente Hills something, and the other development on the Milburn Ranch is going to be something else.  LM said he would set up a meeting with the proper people to get access to all development plans in the area with SL if he would like.  SL also said he found out that Lakeline Blvd. is going to be extended to FM 1431 soon through Buttercup Creek.  Travis County told him there would be no significant work on the Anderson Mill extension until Lakeline Blvd. is finished, and that will be at least two years.  EM commented that when she spoke to Gretchen at Commissioner Sonleitner’s office, she was told the Anderson Mill extension was halted due to the environmental impact study, and it would be at least 5-10 years, if it ever went in.  WT said he was told, by Gretchen also, that the county was pursuing that extension to relieve 183 traffic, but without developer support and other environmental problems, they were not actively pursuing it.  He was also told it would be at least 5-10 years if it ever went through.  LM and LS commented on the congestion on 183.

SL gave what he thinks the purpose scope of the Business and Development Committee should be, and wants the minutes to reflect that this was asked for in May.  The purpose scope is as follows: “To facilitate the exchange of information between business owners, developers and the Volente community on issues that may affect the protection and enhancement of the Greater Volente Community.”  SL wants to explain that the “Greater Volente Community” was deliberately used to exclude any dispute between an individual and a business owner.  SL said WT brought up the issue last month, and he wants to clarify that VG is not building spec houses.  On the Café Bleu issue, SL commented that he would be surprised if it were open in January.  He said there is no inside seating, it will be all on the deck.  The wood type used for those decks is the cause of the delays because it is hard to get and install.  He said he thinks they will have a parking problem now that the lake has come up.  Last month the issue of no parking signs was brought up, SL thinks it is a good idea, and we should pursue it before it becomes a problem this summer.  LM asked what the seating capacity would be.  SL said LM would have to ask Francois Denise because he is the one building it.

SL added that yes, there is a lot going on in Volente right now, and if there are issues raised by board members we should address them, and issues we think are important to the community.  He thinks general building in the area isn’t something we should get involved with.  LS said he doesn’t want nuisance calls, because that opens the door to too much.  LM said he certainly thinks new businesses are important to report to the board, even if just to decrease paranoia and increase awareness.  WT asked for clarification on whether the board thinks marinas are included in the Business and Development Committee or the Lake Travis Committee.  He said his recommendation is that we follow LCRA in the policy that anything below the 715 elevation is a Lake Travis issue, and all above that is a Business and Development issue.  LM asked SL if he agrees with that suggestion.  SL said yes that he agrees.  CS asked if we were going to be actively pursuing information, or wait until given information.  SL said we should be pro-active, and pursue information.  SL said best he knows on Volente Group (VG) is that they are busy trying to sell lots.  LM recommended SL have a conversation with John Shipley (VG) between now and the first of the year.  SL said he has numerous conversations with Mr. Shipley, and he has a handle on what he’s doing, or not doing.  CS said she is personally more interested in the long term plans he spoke about at the May meeting.  SL said he could ask, and feel free to ask yourself.

 Membership Committee – LM reported we closed the year with 101 paid members.  There are 8 paid for 2001 as a response to the newsletter.  WT asked if the newsletter went to the City of Austin (COA) offices such as Ben Luckens.  LM said yes, about 5 went to LCRA, all of the city council members got one, Commissioner Sonleitner, Gretchen in the Commissioner’s office and others.  He said he sends them to those people so they will recognize us if and when we need to contact them about something.  He said he also sent one to Ben Luckens because of his involvement with the incorporation issue.

 Roadway/Safety Committee – WT said he spoke with the county again about Lime Creek Rd. and the Pocahontas/Arrowhead problem.  He was told they haven’t done anything yet, but it is on their list of items to look into.  On the State side, the Navajo Pass and FM 2769 intersection has the worst potholes it has ever had.  He has suggested a culvert under Navajo Pass to aid in drainage.  WT said he had not done anything with the driveway issue pending further discussion about responsibilities of each committee.  He mentioned that one of the driveways on the Becks’ development and other driveways on FM 2769 have erosion problems.  LM commented that he feels sure that Mr. Beck has probably gotten every permit required for his development.  WT sees this as a safety issue, and if no one is interested in the issue he won’t pursue it.  LM said to please pursue it, and find out whom an eroding driveway falls under for enforcement.  SL asked what happens if the road ices over for instance?  CS said TNRCC might consider an eroding driveway to be non-point source pollution.  LM and WT agree that if it is an issue that affects the community we should look into it, but if it only affects an individual we should merely point them in the right direction, so they can take care of it themselves.  WT said he would like to add “common areas” to the Roadways and Safety Committee’s responsibilities.  He said the Park by VJ’s and the end of Wharf Cove are good examples.  He thinks a community effort could do wonders to clean up these areas and improve them.

 VVFD Liaison Committee – WT reported that the burn ban has been lifted since the rain, but there have been too many fires that have been left burning after dark.  He says Roger Shull, Fire Chief, will probably be addressing this in the next VVFD newsletter.  There should be no additions to a fire after 3:00 PM, and they are to be out by 5:00 PM.  Numerous fires are being left burning, some are developments, and some are individuals.  As many as 10 or 12 were left on one property after 11:00 PM recently.  He said as recourse the Fire Marshall can be called for an investigation, and the guilty party can be fined in excess of $1000.  Taxpayer’s money is spent every time the trucks go out.  LM asked if a letter of some sort going out to offenders would help.  EM asked about punishment for repeat offenders.  LM commented documentation would help the Fire Marshall.  LM also mentioned the VVFD appreciation dinner on 12/4/00.  EM reported that the Ladies Auxiliary had a good turnout for the pancake breakfast they sponsored.

 Incorporation Report – LM handed out an outline of his report on incorporation, (copy attached).  In addition to that report it was also discussed that Ben Luckens of the COA, has stated in a letter to Save Our Volente (SOV), he would forward the staff recommendation to the city council members within 30 days of receiving their petition for annexation.  The City can then annex the area, or deny the request.  If denied, SOV can then petition Travis County to hold an election for incorporation within 45 days.  WT added that as he understands it after speaking to COA, Limited Purpose Annexation (LPA) would not satisfy the petition requesting annexation.  However, a separate request for LPA could be submitted, and COA would look at that as a separate issue.  LM asked WT if PVC would be proposing LPA action to Volente residents?  WT said not right now, but it is a possibility.  He said the COA said they would like to see more than a majority of residents in favor before accepting.  LPA would include zoning, law enforcement, more control, and the benefit of the COA staff along with most of the COA rules, but no taxation.  WT also said PVC will be publishing a December newsletter, and considering another general meeting as well as looking into small group meetings such as VG did.  He said to expect a full court press in January and February to discourage residents from signing the annexation petition.

LM asked if any board members had additional questions that they would like him to ask SOV.  He said he failed to ask about a legislative pursuit, but would ask next time, and report at the next meeting. EM said she would like some clarification as well as additional questions asked.  Specifically, has SOV formed a political action committee (PAC), what is the sales tax increase potential, what is the total number of residents and registered voters in the proposed boundaries, and what is the process for annexing if incorporated?  LM said he would not necessarily ask the PAC questions, and the number of residents’ question should be researched for yourself.  CS asked if LM would ask SOV if they would be giving a proposal for budget and rules to be put into effect if incorporated.  LM said he feels like these questions should be asked to SOV directly. CS said she has asked questions, and was told she couldn’t ask questions unless in a public forum. SOV has not been in that type setting since.  CS said she thinks VNA should be involved, and inform residents. EM said she thinks people have a right to be informed, and should not be asked to make a decision without the opportunity to get answers to questions.  She also expressed concern that VNA isn’t doing enough.  LM asked what more the VNA could do?  EM suggested another panel discussion, or other public meeting.  LM said VNA would host one if both sides would agree to the format. WT said PVC would agree to any fair format, and it needs to be before the start date for signatures.  LM said he has no intentions of having a December meeting.  WT said LM should know when notification of intent to solicit signatures is posted, if it can be done before that then it would be worth it.  EM asked about annexation.  ACS said SOV has discussed it at length, and lawyers have addressed it.  The “Village of Volente” would not be able to annex without the residents' permission.

WT volunteered to bring refreshments to the next meeting on January 2, 2001.

Meeting adjourned at 9:10 PM.
 
 

VNA Homepage