Lago Vista code rewrite stalls, taxpayer cost still unknown

When we wrote this story, the city had not posted minutes for this meeting, so this story is based on the meeting video.⁵

What the subcommittee is for

A council subcommittee had been working on a unified development code (UDC) for the city before it stopped meeting.⁶ Former Council Member Paul Roberts, a member of the subcommittee, said its main purpose was to find "inconsistencies and crossover" between the chapters of the city's code.^7,8 He said it also checks that the rules "align with state statute." Roberts said Mayor Shane Saum and Council Member Amanda Chavarria also sit on the subcommittee.⁷ The full council decides whether the project goes forward.⁶

It matters now because some city boards have held off on rule changes while they wait for the new code.^8,9

Before the meeting

On Oct. 1, Interim City Manager Ron Joy told the council the city would contract with Freese and Nichols for an engineer to work for the city as "Engineer / Dev. Serv. Director." Our story on the city's new director jobs reported that plan.¹⁰

Council Member Karen Van Ness submitted the item for the Nov. 5 agenda. Its one page lists no attachments.² City Secretary Robin Smith certified that the agenda was posted at City Hall by 6 p.m. on Oct. 29, 2026.¹¹

On Nov. 4, the city's Building and Standards Commission welcomed the city's new development services director, whom the city's own transcript names as Giancarlo Pateno.¹² Our transcripts of the Nov. 5 meeting hear the name as Patino.¹³ At the Nov. 4 meeting, the council's liaison said the UDC group "hasn't met in a long, long time." The liaison said the council wanted it going again "as soon as possible." The liaison also said commission member Frank Robbins is on that committee too. Our Nov. 5 story covered a separate $250,000 request from that meeting, money to start condemning buildings.¹²

The Nov. 5 meeting

The council's regular meeting, set for 3 p.m., was in its chambers at 5803 Thunderbird.¹¹ The mayor read the item and said Van Ness had raised it, and that he had wanted to bring it up after the election. He said the subcommittee stopped meeting after "Jordan left." The mayor said the group also stopped because no one on it agreed with a draft of Article 5, one part of the new code. He said Freese and Nichols "is now in that role," and the council would need to give permission to work with the firm.⁶

The mayor asked Patino whether a UDC was a good idea for the city.⁶ Patino said Freese and Nichols had done "a diagnostic analysis" of the city's current code, a review of what needs fixing. The mayor asked for "a quick head nod" on whether the council still wanted to go forward, and a "yes" was heard.¹⁴

Council Member Paul Prince said moving forward "is very important and should happen."^9,11 But he said he would rather wait for a permanent employee than hire "an expensive contractor." He asked the council to let time-sensitive rule changes go ahead in the meantime.⁹

Chavarria said the Building and Standards Commission is "chomping at the bit" to revise some of its rules. She said hiring Freese and Nichols for the UDC now would be "a complete waste" of the firm's time. She said she hoped the city would first fill the job with a permanent staff member.⁸

Van Ness asked how soon a permanent director could start on the project.¹³ The mayor added a question about the cost.¹⁵

Patino said, "I've been here four days, five days." He said he had been a city engineer before. He said he relies on a "bench" from Freese and Nichols, with planners and others helping him. He said six people were already working on the city's requests. A permanent director, he said, would be pulled in too many directions to finish the code quickly. He said that when "we do UDCs," the work is for places like Pflugerville. He gave a ballpark of a "$250,000 fee for a whole UDC update," and asked the council not to quote him on it. He said a fee he set for an engineering design manual, which he called smaller than a whole code of ordinances, was $275,000.³

A council member asked how long a consultant would take. Patino said, "One year with a full staff on from a third party consultant doing it." A council member said the group had set out in January to finish by September. "Respectfully, that's unrealistic," Patino said. He said he would give the council a written record of what he had found in his first days.¹⁶

Van Ness said, "I'm always mindful of the expense." Van Ness asked whether the council should get Freese and Nichols to help, and said the city would otherwise "keep pushing it off."¹⁷

Patino then said the finished diagnostic was "a big chunk of that effort," so the price might be lower. He said, "We're also helping right now with the fee schedule," which he said the city adopted in May. He said that work was under "the current contract that I'm working on." A council member said the number "seemed a little high" with the diagnostic done.⁴ That member agreed with Van Ness and said the city is "losing money" without a working code, because it cannot enforce rules that conflict.¹⁸

The mayor said the project could bring "a big expense" and that he was not sure which way to go. He asked whether it was something to bring back later.¹⁹ Council Member Jess Hall asked, "What are we deciding to do?"^11,20

Chavarria said she hoped the finished diagnostic would cut the time to six to nine months. Patino said six to 12 months, and "that next phase is probably six months."²¹ Another council member suggested that staff have Freese and Nichols size up the work so far and bring back a timeline and a cost. That way, the member said, the council would have "real numbers rather than off the cuff" guesses.²²

In citizen comments, Roberts asked the council to have the development services director read the subcommittee's latest work on its discussion board. He asked that the subcommittee meet "perhaps by the end of November." He said he did not think the job was "insurmountable."⁷

After Roberts spoke, someone asked for thoughts, and a voice answered that they could do that. The mayor asked, "Is that clear?" and moved to the next item. No one made a motion. The video does not make clear what the council agreed to do.¹

What it could mean for taxpayers

No contract or written price came before the council.² The $250,000 figure was Patino's rough guess, and he said the real cost could be lower.^3,4 Members weighed paying a consultant against waiting for a permanent director.^9,16 The 2026-27 budget sets the development services director's salary line at $115,000, in the General Fund. That is the salary line only. Benefits such as retirement and health insurance are budgeted for the whole department, not by job.²³ The records we reviewed do not show what the city pays Freese and Nichols for the director's work.¹⁰

What we could not find

• A record of when the council set up the subcommittee, its full membership, and the deadline it set.¹⁶
• The Freese and Nichols diagnostic of the city's code and what the city paid for it.¹⁴
• The Freese and Nichols contract for the director's work, and what it pays.¹⁰
• What the council agreed to at the end of the item.¹
• Minutes of the Nov. 5 meeting, which the city had not posted when we wrote this story.⁵

What you can do

• Ask the city for the Freese and Nichols code diagnostic and the contract for development services work. Requests go through the city's records request page.²⁴
• To speak during citizen comments, fill out the city's citizen participation form and give it to the mayor before the meeting starts. If you join online, email the form as it directs.¹¹
• If you have records on this, you can share them with us.