Brittany Kelley
KYLE — Kyle City Council will be considering repealing a resolution regarding the Kyle Vista Property at a later date, following a 4-3 vote at the July 7 meeting.
This item follows legal concerns when discussing the potential for the Hays County Eastside Campus, as council was unsure whether the suggested landsite was dedicated parkland, meaning commercial infrastructure could not be built on it. The hesitation from the city caused the Hays County Commissioners Court to terminate the memorandum of understanding for the proposed Eastside Campus, providing “the city an opportunity for the city to revisit actions taken in support of that project … For that reason, we believe it is appropriate to begin the process of rescinding the resolution, which was adopted in September 2025, and restoring the full dedication of Kyle Vista Park as parkland.”
This now-terminated resolution detailed that the city of Kyle would be moving forward with a multi-agency partnership for 29.822 acres of land in the Kyle Vista Property.
According to council member Michael Tobias, this land has been a long-term conversation. So much so that interim city manager Perwez Moheet noted that when he joined the city in 2010, he asked the Parks and Recreation director at the time what he could do to support the vision. Moheet recalled the director stating, “Find the money that I can build a recreation center on Kyle Vista Park land.”
“His dream never came through [as he passed earlier this year], but he was super protective of that property. He was very clear to everyone, including me that day, that that property was dedicated park land,” stressed Moheet.
Tobias shared a similar story, sharing how a resident told him that she had been waiting for a playground for her children that never came and she is still waiting, only now, for her grandchildren.
Several citizens spoke during public comment, having the same experiences as city leadership. One of whom was Robert Hunter, who spoke of his support during public comment, also stating that there is an online petition with 114 signatures advocating moving the proposed animal shelter and Eastside Campus to a different location.
“This historical record matters and so does the legal standing of this land. The plats development documents [and] agreements dating back to 2006 consistently identified this land as parkland. Families purchased homes and made life decisions based on those representations. The expectation was simple and clear: this land would serve the people of Kyle as a park,” said Hunter.
Additionally, resident Eddie Clark noted that he lives in Sunset Hills, built his house from the ground up, as many others have, and was told that there would be a park: “When families chose to live in this neighborhood, they [did] so with the understanding that this park exists to provide open green space, recreation and a safe place for children, families and neighbors to gather … As our city continues to grow, parks become even more valuable, not less.”
Prior to discussion, Mayor Yvonne Flores-Cale addressed concerns that this item was an effort to prevent the construction of the Kyle Animal Shelter, stating that it “is simply not the case.” She emphasized that the concern is not whether or not a shelter should be built, but that currently proposed land may not be the appropriate location.
Council member Courtney Goza built on this statement, adding that there are restrictions on certain animals and other deed restrictions that could lead to a lawsuit, if not followed.
“We understand that there is a crisis at the San Marcos [Regional] Animal Shelter. We understand that there is a need for an animal shelter,” said Tobias. “But I need for people to understand when it comes to this specific project, we are not slowing down. What we’re doing now is, again, going back to the original conversation of getting a resolution adopted for this Kyle Vista property.”
Hays County commissioner Walt Smith was also present during the meeting and spoke on the animal shelter, stating that Hays County made a commitment with Kyle for the animal shelter, not the location. So, he is in support of the item, as the interlocal agreement isn’t specific to one property, meaning the shelter can still move forward.
Flores-Cale explained that the vote that night would not repeal the ordinance. It instead asks staff to bring a resolution at the Tuesday, Aug. 18, meeting to repeal the ordinance. This will be after the full comprehensive review of the park, which is slated for the Saturday, July 30, meeting, allowing council to determine whether to begin the repeal of the ordinance after the presentation.
“I’m not understanding the reason for the rush,” said council member Marc McKinney, which was echoed by council members Lauralee Harris and Claudia Zapata.
Zapata stated that Kyle Vista is composed of three different tracts, of which the animal shelter is on the smallest. This would leave 85% open for parkland, so she doesn’t understand why the city cannot have both, though Flores-Cale stated that the deed and development agreement states that it was dedicated for park use.
After council member Melisa Medina asked whether the strict dedication would mean the denial of any and all buildings, city attorney Aimee Alcorn-Reed noted that as long as the building was for Parks and Recreation, it would be allowed.
McKinney, again, shared that he felt this was rushed, to which the mayor stated that it’s a problem that should have been looked at in September, when it was originally approved, but that council at the time didn’t do their due diligence.
She then motioned to approve the item, asking staff to bring back a resolution at the Aug. 18 meeting to repeal Resolution No. 1909. It was seconded by Tobias and passed 4-3, with Harris, McKinney and Zapata dissenting, to an applause from the audience.
