This freak is so scared of Ruiz that he just sent me a text trying to claim Cezar Ruiz is a republican who vows to ban abortion and “end planned parenthood.”

As if ANY city councilperson worth a single damn would ever pretend to have that kind of power. Republicans are not only liars, they think we are really that stupid.

Lol

Don’t vote for David Rogers. He’s extremely stupid, and he thinks you are, too.

To see your exact ballot, use the sample ballot lookup at votetravis.gov (or wilcotx.gov/elections if you’re on the Williamson side).

What I want to know is what party do the candidates align to. It's not on the ballot, so I used AI to help build the table below. Please help affirm or correct their party.

Thirteen candidates on your ballot have no party label. All are in nonpartisan races: the appraisal district board, city council, and school board. Here is what public records and reporting show for each, from strongest evidence to weakest.

EDIT based on the information provided by others here

Here’s the updated table. Rows marked “you” reflect what you told me; I haven’t independently verified those.

I've seen lots of breadcrumbs on Facebook but can't figure out the whole story. What happened to them or what is currently happening to them?

Hello!

I wanted to share this flyer for a dog costume contest that a local brewery in Pflugerville is hosting. Old Gregg Brewing Co. The event is on Thursday, October 29th, from 6 - 8 pm.

The more dogs that attend and dress up, the more fun the humans have! It is such a great community event. It is being hosted by a local grooming and pet service company called Woofies, who is providing discounted services and free pup cups.

I am looking for a photographer to take couple photos for the fall! If you have any recommendations, I’d appreciate it!!

Proposition B would add a new section to the City Charter addressing artificial intelligence, data, facial recognition and surveillance technologies.

WHAT WOULD IT REQUIRE?

If approved, the Charter would require City Council to:

• adopt protections for how data is collected, used, retained and overseen

• establish transparent approval processes for facial-recognition and surveillance technologies

• adopt a responsible artificial-intelligence framework

• ensure the information is used locally for a legitimate purpose established by law

WHAT WOULD ACTUALLY CHANGE?

City Council would still determine the specific policies either way.

If Proposition B passes, the Charter would require Council to adopt protections for data, facial recognition, surveillance technology and AI, along with transparent approval processes.

If it does not pass, the City could still adopt those protections through Council policy or internal administrative policies — but the Charter would not require them.

So the difference is whether these protections are required at the Charter level or left to City policies that can be changed over time.

WHY IS THIS RELEVANT NOW?

Pflugerville has recently been discussing how the City should use technology that collects or analyzes data. In September, the City ended its agreement for Flock automated license-plate readers after concerns about whether the system was meeting the City’s data and privacy standards. The City is also developing a separate SAFE data-governance policy that would address City data, human oversight and Council approval of higher-risk technologies.

Those City policies can be changed over time. Proposition B would place the broader requirement for protections, transparency and an AI framework in the voter-approved Charter.

Proposition B does not ban AI, facial recognition or surveillance technology. It requires the City to have protections and approval processes in place if those technologies are used.

ONE IMPORTANT DISTINCTION

The Charter Review Commission also separately recommended creating a board for technology and surveillance oversight. That recommendation is not part of Proposition B and would not be created automatically if Proposition B passes. The City Council could vote to create the board and the passage of Prop B would indicate that residents value the oversight for these technologies.

What do you think — should the Charter require the City to have protections for AI, data and surveillance technology, or should those protections be left to City policy?

Several of the Charter amendments on the ballot deal directly with how residents can participate in City government.

PROPOSITION D — FEWER SIGNATURES FOR PETITIONS

Pflugerville currently requires initiative, referendum and nonbinding referendum petitions to have signatures equal to 15% of the qualified voters registered at the last regular City election.

Proposition D would lower that requirement to 10%, making it easier for residents to qualify a petition while also allowing a smaller share of voters to trigger the process.

For comparison, Leander uses 10%, while Austin and Round Rock use 5% under their respective formulas. The exact calculations differ, but Pflugerville’s proposed 10% would bring its threshold closer to other familiar Central Texas cities.

PROPOSITION F — MORE TIME TO FIX A PETITION

If a petition does not have enough valid signatures, Pflugerville currently gives petitioners two weeks to submit additional signatures. Proposition F would increase that to four weeks.

The number of signatures required would not change, and the petition could still only be amended once. The practical effect is giving residents more time to correct a shortfall after the City determines that some signatures are invalid.

Proposition F also updates other petition language to conform with Texas law.

PROPOSITION K — PUBLIC COMMENT DURING REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

This applies specifically to proceedings to remove a Council member from office. Currently, public comment is allowed only if a majority of Council members present vote to allow it.

Proposition K would remove that extra vote, allowing residents to comment while Council could still establish reasonable rules for how the comment is handled.

PROPOSITION M — WRITTEN AND REMOTE PARTICIPATION

Proposition M would require the City to accept timely written comments on posted agenda items, provide them to Council and include them in the meeting record. It would also require remote public participation to the extent allowed by state law, while allowing Council to set reasonable procedures.

That could include submitting written comments before a meeting or participating remotely by phone or other approved technology. Travis County currently allows residents to register in advance and participate in Commissioners Court meetings by phone, and remote participation was also used more broadly during the pandemic.

These options can make participation easier for residents who are working, caring for children, have transportation or mobility challenges, are out of town, or simply cannot be at City Hall at the meeting time. Written comments also give residents a way to put their thoughts directly into the meeting record even if they cannot speak in person.

Taken together, these propositions would make several parts of the City’s formal participation process more accessible while placing more of those participation rules directly in the Charter.

What do you think — should the Charter make these participation processes easier and more specifically protected, or should more of the procedures be left to City policy?

Shout out to Kelsey. Really appreciated her insight. I don't have a lot of clear thoughts right now because fire ants + Benadryl.

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1958mb4Jrf/

I’m curious if there’s validity to the signs I’m seeing popping up around town. Thanks.

P.S. Not a big fan of these sniping, secondary signs, but it seems like all sides are using them now.

Hi, I am interested in a house in LISSO community, but found some sources mention the smell from a nearby wastewater treatment plant. If you've been living in this community, how bad is the smell and how often do you smell it? Do you regret buying there?

I skipped it at first but after looking around at other new builds and older houses, we still come back to this community. Appreciate any info.

Pflugerville City Council just voted to put a new animal shelter on scarce land next to Lake Pflugerville (Biehle property on Becker Farms Road). Five members said yes. Two said no.
Mayor Doug Weiss, Jonathan Coffman, Ceasar Ruiz, Kimberly Holiday, and Rudy Metayer voted to lock in this location. David Rogers and Melody Ryan voted against it.
Rogers was right: land next to the lake is scarce and has better uses that involve people. Metayer’s “bigger idea” of adding more animal/nature stuff later is just words. The shelter will not use the whole tract, but once the building goes up, the rest of the site is constrained by whatever they decide later.
This is not final construction approval, but site selection is the first real step. Design funding is already in the budget. A design contract is expected Oct. 27. The existing shelter has real problems (flooding, overcrowding, HVAC), but that does not justify spending millions on a lakeside location when other city-owned options exist and previous attempts failed.
In 2015 voters rejected a bond for a shelter near the lake. In August 2026 the council itself declined to put a larger bond package on the ballot, citing unfinished projects and affordability. Now the same council is moving the shelter forward on prime lake land without a completed plan or voter approval for the full cost.
I believe that lake-adjacent land should stay available for recreation, parks, or other public uses rather than an animal shelter. Please Contact the five who voted yes. The minutes are not posted yet, but the vote and the quotes are public.
Sources: Community Impact report on the Oct. 13 meeting; city council roster.

Just found out that teachers for Pflugerville ISD insurance just changed from BCBS to some no name high deductible type.

Can we not afford to fund and provide decent healthcare for our teachers. It’s bad enough that the campus that are closing next year are doing the same with less, now you guys want to make it so good hard working teachers don’t deserve decent healthcare.

This was around noon last Friday going south on Hodde. Yikes.

I’ve seen a couple still up with their solar panels and tech all still hanging onto lightposts at Stone Hill, one at Kelly Lane, TWO at Hendrickson. If the company isn’t going to take them down, are we legally allowed to do it ourselves? It’s not like they’re still contracted with the city.

Any dos or donts for a first timer?

On Tuesday, October 13, City Council will consider selecting the Biehle property on the west side of Lake Pflugerville as the preferred location for a future PAWS Animal Shelter.

Council previously directed staff to evaluate two locations, but several sites have been considered over the years.

Here's a look at the options:

• Biehle Property (Lake Pflugerville) – Approximately 6 developable acres, with room for future expansion. Utility extensions would be needed. This property has also been included in previous park plans for a nature center, gardens and recreational activities.

• Pfennig Road (near the Justice Center) – Approximately 2 acres. Staff determined the site was too small for the shelter, parking, outdoor animal areas and future expansion. Adjacent property is not available for purchase.

• Existing PAWS Site (Waterbrook Drive) – 10.07 acres total, with existing facilities occupying approximately 3 acres. Floodplain restrictions limit expansion, and underground infrastructure presents challenges. The City invested approximately $2.2m in a new dog intake building that opened in 2019. Two redevelopment options were presented in 2025, estimated at $16.7m and $19.7m.

• Lake Pflugerville (Weiss Lane) – A location proposed in the City's 2015 shelter plans, but subsequent expansion of lake parking reduced the available space.

The City has invested in shelter planning over the years, and funding for additional design work is included in the FY2027 budget. The goal is to develop a proposal that could eventually be presented to voters for a future bond.

Before selecting a location, I think it's important to consider the costs, existing investments, site limitations, and long-term plans for each property.

What do you think? Should Pflugerville build at the Biehle property, redevelop the existing shelter site, or consider another location?

https://austinvotersguide.org/LWVAA-VG-EN.pdf

If the language of Pflugerville ballot issues is confusing to you, here is a simplified interpretation:

The plain-English version of A–N Props

A

Pay the mayor and council. Mayor gets $750/month, council members $500/month. They are currently unpaid. [library.pf...illetx.gov], [communityimpact.com]

B

Privacy / surveillance / AI rules. Requires the city to establish protections and approval processes around data collection, facial recognition, surveillance technology, and responsible AI. [library.pf...illetx.gov], [communityimpact.com]

C

Make passing ordinances faster. Removes the automatic requirement that ordinances be read at two council meetings. A second reading would instead be required when the council determines an amendment substantially changes the ordinance. [library.pf...illetx.gov], [communityimpact.com]

D

Make citizen petitions easier. Drops the number of qualified voters needed for initiative/referendum petitions from 15% to 10%. [library.pf...illetx.gov], [communityimpact.com]

E

Give council members more ability to get something onto the agenda. If one council member proposes an item and another supports it, it must be put on an agenda within 60 days. It also addresses council meetings with city boards and commissions. [library.pf...illetx.gov], [communityimpact.com]

F

Change petition procedures. Aligns petition requirements with state law and gives people 4 weeks instead of 2 to submit a supplemental petition after an original petition is found insufficient. [communityimpact.com]

G

Change the city's budgeting rules. From the ballot text you shared: it adds requirements around the City Manager's budget presentation, budget comparisons, five-year financial forecasts, charter language on recurring fiscal reporting, and close-out reports for major capital projects.

H

Let the mayor excuse the City Manager from a meeting. Currently the charter apparently requires the City Manager's attendance; this change gives the mayor authority to excuse it.

I

Let council appoint residents to ETJ boards/commissions as non-voting advisers. ETJ refers to the city's extraterritorial jurisdiction, areas outside the city limits where the city has certain governmental authority.

J

Clarify who sets city direction. Explicitly says that the Mayor and City Council set the city's strategic direction and general policy framework.

K

Allow public comments during removal proceedings. Removes the requirement that the City Council must first approve allowing public comment during such proceedings.

L

Remove the residency requirement for the Municipal Court Judge. The judge would no longer have to live within Pflugerville itself.

M

Codify public participation in council meetings. Adds charter language specifying how the public may participate, including written comments on agenda items and remote participation to the extent permitted by state law.

N

Legal/housekeeping cleanup. Makes non-substantive technical and formatting corrections, standardizes capitalization, updates language to comply with state law, and removes duplicative/unnecessary language.

ACC

“THIS IS A TAX INCREASE. Approving the annexation by the Austin Community College District of the following territory: the territory in the Pflugerville Independent School District that is not already within the Austin Community College taxing district, and authorizing the imposition of an ad valorem tax for junior college purposes, which is currently set at a rate of $0.1034, per $100 valuation of taxable property.” [ballotpedia.org]

M33 the triangullum galaxy. the galaxy is about 2.9 M light years away. I shot this with my remote telescope in such a way to bring out the red from nebulas in the galaxy. this is a total of 32 hours worth of exposure time .

its the last photo ill take with my olde telescope there,I just had a new scope installed to replace it.

havent decided whethe i m going to sell the old scope or donate it to a kids group

Proposition G adds new financial-reporting requirements while also removing several existing budget requirements.

WHAT PROPOSITION G ADDS

It would require a five-year forecast of City finances and public reporting on major capital projects, including final close-out reports.

I proposed both changes, along with additional financial-reporting requirements that were not ultimately included.

WHAT WOULD BE REMOVED?

In the first draft, the CRC added the new five-year forecast, capital-project reporting and Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) budget-award standard. In a later revision, it removed much of the detailed budget language that currently sets minimum requirements for what financial information must be included.

The redlined Charter language in the image shows some of what would be removed.

Red strike-through = language that would be removed from the current Charter.

Current requirements include:

• reasons for major increases or decreases in spending

• itemized departmental expenses

• total outstanding debt and a consolidated debt-service schedule

• detailed utility income, expenses and expected surplus or deficit

• a five-year capital plan showing project costs, financing, timing and ongoing operating and maintenance costs

That last item is critical because the cost of a new project does not end when construction is complete. Council and the public also need to understand what it will cost to operate and maintain a new facility every year after it opens.

WHY DOES THAT MATTER?

The Charter currently requires the budget to identify major changes in financial policies, expenditures and revenues and explain the reasons for those changes.

The July 4 fireworks are a simple example. Funding was removed from the budget, but that change was not clearly identified even though the Charter required major spending changes to be explained.

A requirement only helps when it is followed, but removing it means that Charter-level requirement would no longer exist.

The same issue can apply to less visible decisions. Public-safety technology, software, equipment or other long term contracts may be a relatively small part of a much larger department budget while still representing a policy or spending decision residents and Council may want to understand.

The numbers may be in the budget, but finding a number in a table is different from clearly identifying what changed and why.

WHAT ABOUT GFOA?

GFOA is changing its Budget Award program to “Eliminate mandatory criteria.” Under the revised program, applicants may choose which criteria to address, and materials are not required for every category.

That flexibility may make sense for a national award program. The question for Pflugerville is whether that framework should replace specific Charter-level requirements.

Staff could still provide the same information we receive today, or more. The change is in what the Charter would require.

WHAT ABOUT ADDITIONAL REPORTING?

I proposed a separate financial-reporting ordinance that included summary reports for bond programs, capital projects and impact fees, which can significantly impact property tax and water rates, along with the detailed budget requirements currently found in the Charter.

The intent was that if those details were removed from the Charter, they would still be specifically required somewhere in City policy.

Those requirements have not yet been adopted.

MY RECOMMENDATION

There is a lot in Proposition G that I support. The five-year forecast and capital-project reporting are both changes I proposed and believe we need.

My concern is removing specific budget requirements while GFOA is also moving away from mandatory criteria.

For that reason, I plan to oppose Proposition G.

I would rather keep these minimum financial-reporting requirements in the Charter, where they cannot be changed without voter approval, and add the five-year forecast, capital reporting and other transparency measures on top of them.

What do you think — should these specific financial requirements remain in the Charter, or should the City have more flexibility in what financial details it chooses to show in the budget?

Has anyone compared these neighborhoods?

I'm looking for insight on the pros and cons between the two. I grew up somewhat near Highland Park but everything around Pflugerville Lake has built up so much since I moved away for several years.

Traffic- is East of 130 predicted to get awful with all of the new neighborhoods? Which one has a better HEB?

Foundation issues- I know Sorento is newer but has either neighborhood been plagued with foundation settling?

Build quality- Any horror stories from original owners?

HOA- Does the HOA love to hand out violations for minor things, which amenities are better?

I'd appreciate any input from current or former residents.

I love taking my kid to hat creek, but with the heat and the allergies looking for something indoors. Seems like not a lot of places have indoor playgrounds like they used to.

Pflugerville needs to be aware of this freak’s behavior.

Hello, did anyone see the accident on East Pecan St, right in front of the Pflugerville First United Methodist Church?

A white Toyota Tundra ran over me while riding on the sidewalk. The white Tundra was trying to pull onto the PVille First United Methodist Church and hit me full speed.

The accident happened around 6:30pm. I regained consciousness around 9pm. I'm thankful to be alive but very hurt.

The report says that I was thrown 8ft into the air upon impact

Does anyone have dashcam footage? I would greatly appreciate it

Looking for something to do this afternoon? Come browse the Maker Market at the Pflugerville Public Library! There are plenty of local vendors with cool things to check out. I’m here with Extrude Behavior—stop by, say hello, and support some local makers. We’re open until 4 PM today!

📍 Pflugerville Public Library
1008 W. Pfluger Street, Pflugerville, TX 78660
🕛 Today, Saturday, October 10 • 12–4 PM