Note: This article summarizes a work‑session‑level discussion and requests for staff action; no formal ordinance was adopted.

Lago Vista councilmembers and residents on Oct. 2 pressed for clearer, itemized public improvement district (PID) disclosures in marketing and at closings for properties in the Tessera development (referred to in some meeting materials as “Tessera” / “Tesera”).

What residents reported: Several residents and one speaker who said he had reviewed closing paperwork told council that builders’ and title documents sometimes referenced the wrong municipal names (for example a leftover reference to “City of Leander”) or used a generic statement that urged buyers to contact the city without listing the actual assessment amount. One homeowner said they only learned the true annual assessment (thousands of dollars in some cases) at closing.

Council direction: Council asked staff to work with legal counsel and the city’s PID administrator to ensure that sellers and builders use a standardized city‑approved PID disclosure form that: (1) lists the exact assessment or annual payment for the lot being sold; (2) names the correct municipal contact and includes a city website link for full PID documentation; (3) clearly explains whether the item is an amortized assessment or a property tax line item; and (4) provides signs or notice to residents where appropriate. Councilmember Shane Roberts also asked staff to clarify whether the city can require builders to use the city’s official PID disclosure language (state law allows municipalities to prescribe additional notice content under Tex. Prop. Code §5.014) and to post all PID documents on the city website as required under recent state changes.

Staff and legal context: City counsel confirmed that property‑sale disclosures tied to PIDs are governed by state law and that an omitted or incorrect disclosure can create civil remedies for buyers; counsel recommended the city produce a uniform disclosure and make PID filing materials accessible online to reduce buyer confusion. Council and staff also discussed whether extra on‑site signage and earlier disclosure in the sales process (not just at closing) would be legally feasible and useful to prospective buyers.

Next steps and timeline: Council asked staff to (a) require use of the city PID notice form where permissible; (b) post PID documents and packet materials on the city website; (c) propose a brief, mandatory disclosure checklist that sellers must provide before buyer contracts are executed; and (d) coordinate with title companies and the developer to reduce inaccurate template usage. The council asked staff to return with a proposed notice form and implementation plan.

Why it matters: Buyers said inconsistent disclosures have led to surprise assessments that materially change the cost of homeownership. Council framed action as clarity and consumer protection rather than an attack on development, and requested quick administrative steps the city can take to reduce closing‑time surprises for residents.