Commissioners Court - Regular Meeting

All right, guys, it is showtime.

Thank you all for being here. This government does not work if you don't participate. Or, it doesn't work if you don't participate. I would like to call this meeting to order. There you are. This morning's invocation will be led by our very own Pastor Darius Todd. If you will please all rise.

Let us bow. Heavenly Father, we come to you today to say thank you. Thank you, Father, with hearts full of joy and appreciation for the opportunity to come and gather peaceably, that we may hear from the citizenry of this community and the various backgrounds and areas that we have come from today. I pray, Father, knowing that we seek you today, that you would give us wisdom, that we may understand how to address the challenges that are placed before us, that we may face in every community the opportunity that we would be unified and not separate. We stand in our commitment to serve these, your people, to fulfill every charge that we have been given. We seek your help, your wisdom, and your grace to do it all. It's in Jesus' name that I pray.

Amen.

Thank you, sir. That's right, there's a small modification request.

Honor guard, halt! Honor guard, right face!

Honor guard, present colors. Honor guard, present arms.

pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one and indivisible. Nope, that's the end of it.

Honor Guard, right face. Honor Guard, forward march.

Honor Guard, forward march.

Roxanne, will you please call the roll?

Commissioner Inglesby? Here. Commissioner Cohen? Here. Commissioner Hammer? Here. Commissioner Smith?

Here.

Judge Becerra?

Here. How many public comments do we have? Four. Four. All right. In person. All right. Let's go ahead and we have four people signed up for public comments. Here's where I'll give you a little bit of the lay of the land so that you can find the best and highest use of your time and we as a government don't waste your time. We're going to open the public comments of the individuals that have signed up to speak in this portion. And then there are those that have signed up to speak when we open actual agenda items. And I always like to make that clarification when we have new names signing up. But just know ahead of time that The, although I will be opening the Hayes Commons Development Agreement Agenda Item K-13 and allowing everyone that has contributed for comments to speak, I am being asked to table it by Commissioner Smith. So just as a heads up for you. Let's go ahead and call the first name.

Public comment number one, Rodrigo Amaya.

Judge Court, I wanted to say that this last election exposed a lot of unknowns for me and, you know, some of the things that I get involved with. I got to see a lot of the what we call mechanisms of injury. Got to see a lot of people that I wasn't sure about what side they were on, but it clearly opened it up and I'm going to be gone for a couple of months. I got some things I got to go do, but when I come back, it's going to be a totally different approach up here. You know, I wish the results of the election would have been different, but that's part of the game. And, you know, the reason I signed up to speak is I'm strongly a big advocate for real accountability. I mean, I see the waste day in, day out. in agenda items that come up. You know, I come from working in former departments where we live by the motto that you want this, you want that, there's a need, there's a dream, a wish list. And the thing is that when you request something, they always ask us, can you justify this? Can you justify this? This dais here, Votes on things with, you know, something simple. I've heard comments from commissioners talk about, oh, I had that same issue. Let's vote on it the same way. I guarantee you that if I sit with you and asked you about that agenda item, your understanding of the material would be so insulting that you know, it's offensive to the taxpayers, considering the amount of money that it costs nowadays to live out just every day with the fuel and everything that's happening. So I hope, you know, things change for the better. You know, this election, like I said, opened up quite a bit of things for me. You know, I'm still in shock about some of the things that were disclosed, and I'm glad they were because now we can strategize to address those issues that came out of this election. So, Judge, thank you very much for your service. It'll be a while before I see you again, but you did your part, and we're going to organize, and next round we come up, it's gonna be a totally different approach. Thank you, Judge. Thank you, sir.

Next we have... Linda Costello.

I have two, one for Lindsay. The first one I have is on behalf of Lindsay Muse, Judge Becerra, and commissioners. My name is Lindsay Muse. I am a resident of Darden Hill Road and a community member of 535 people signed, aligned with SaveDardenHill.com, a coalition of neighbors who care deeply about the future of western Hayes County. We want to thank Judge Becerra and his team hosting that recent community meeting and for listening to residents' concern regarding the Darden Hill Road project. We felt encouraged that our voices will be heard and appreciative that an updated traffic impact and roadway study informed by community input is being brought forward for consideration as part of the Hayes County Master Road Plan. We also left with a sense of urgency that community feedback must play a greater role in shaping the future transportation planning decisions. What became clear during that meeting is that the conversation is much larger than a single road project. Residents heard discussions about roadway expansion, regional transportation connections, future school traffic, utility infrastructure, and a proposed 16-inch water line intended to support thousands of future homes. Viewed together, these projects raise important questions about the long-term vision for Western Hays County and whether the development of a major transportation corridor connecting Mopac South, SH45, as a bypass around Dripping Springs is consistent with the character residents have repeatedly said they want to preserve. Like many residents, I recognize that our community is growing and that transportation improvements are needed to address mobility and safety. We support thoughtful investments in our roadways and believe improvements to Darden Hill Road are necessary. However, we respectfully request that the project be implemented as a super two roadway configuration with pedestrian and bicycle accommodations rather than a corridor approaching the scale and width of a 290 highway. Growth is a reality, but we should not be the sole factor deciding our decisions. We also must consider our natural resources Public safety and the quality of life that makes Western Hays County unique. My cousin Judy Plumer has spent her career helping protect the parks and public lands that made Central Texas such a remarkable place to live. She often shares a quote from President Lyndon B. Johnson, another proud Hill Country native that feels especially relevant today. If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them with a glimpse of the world as it was created, not just after we got through with it. As you consider the future of Darden Hill Road, we respectfully ask that the preservation, community input, and the protection of Western Hays County's Hill Country character be given the same weight as traffic projections and future development plans. Thank you for your time and service. Thank you. Okay, that was Lindsey's. Mine's shorter. Thank you. My name is Linda Costello. Good morning, Judge Becerra and commissioners. I represent the Save Darden Hill Group also. To date, we have 535 community members who are concerned with the proposed Darden Hill Road expansion. Our group is advocating for an improved Super 2 lane instead of four lanes with a turn and median. Hayes County document dated 2-8-2021 RM-150 expansion schematic shows Right-of-way or project size to be 160 to 200 feet. This is five to seven times larger than the existing road. This will dramatically affect many property owners along Darden Hill Road. We support road improvements to safely move school and residential traffic through this area, but we do not support Darden Hill Road becoming a connector to a major loop bypass around Dripping Springs. The county proposed road is in direct conflict with residential neighborhoods and two schools. Truck traffic should not be encouraged along routes that have student drivers and carpools. Before this project moves forward, we are requesting that an updated traffic impact study and a noise impact study be done. Additionally, the speed limit should be set at 35 miles per hour, just like Sawyer Ranch Road that is also a residential area with a school just miles away. Restrict heavy traffic. TRUCK TRAFFIC, STUDENT DRIVERS AND CAR PULLS SHOULDN'T BE COMPETING ON THE SAME ROADWAYS. LASTLY, ELIMINATE THE FUTURE EXTENSION TO NOT INDUCE TRAFFIC ALONG DARDEN HILL ROAD. WE ALSO HAVE THE SUPPORT OF THE DRIFTWOOD HISTORICAL CONSERVATION SOCIETY. THEY OFFICIALLY ALIGN WITH THE SUPER TWO LANE CONFIGURATION. DHCS POINTS TO THE LOCAL PRESIDENT OF FM 967. IT IS NOT A FOUR LANE DIVIDED HIGHWAY, YET IT SUCCESSFULLY SERVES THREE SCHOOLS and surrounding communities. It demonstrates that thoughtfully designed two-lane rural roads can accommodate growth without sacrificing the character of the area that passed through. Darden Hill Road deserves the same considered approach. I will submit the Driftwood Historical Conservation Society position statement to the court. Thank you for your time. Linda Costello.

Thank you, ma'am.

Do I turn these in?

That would be a great idea. That way they could be part of the record forevermore. Thank you.

Next up, Alan Camaron.

Good morning.

My name is Alan Cameron. I'm a United States Marine veteran of the Vietnam War and a Hays County resident for the last 18 years. I'm here to say sometimes we need to pause and say thank you. And this year, most of all, 250 years of freedom in this great country. We just sat and wondered and memorialized Memorial Day. Last Saturday was the great landing of Omaha Beach, Utah Beach D-Day. And in front of us, July 4th. And I think it's important that we stop and recognize that these 250 years of freedom are very expensive. It would be impossible in just three minutes to describe all the tremendous work accomplished by our Hays County Veterans Service Office. But it's enough time to praise, thank, and be grateful for the work, duty, and attention to tasks that that office has accomplished for Hays County, Texas. I'm proud of the success of the programs managed there. For example, the Hays Hope for Veterans Program, the Hays County Operation Green Light, and the Hays County Veterans Treatment Court. Our VSO Jude Prather has done all the heavy lifting with his staff. He has been stalwart and unyielding in his service to our local veterans in Hays County and importantly the families of those veterans. I've witnessed that firsthand. We indeed are fortunate to have his leadership and management skills and the people in his office. But my appearance here today is to recognize and applaud Mr. Prather as well as this court and the members of it. The fiduciary job you have as judge and commissioners is constantly being challenged by budget items, agenda items. Yet, for the 18 years I've been here, I've seen votes go the right way to support our VSO and all his efforts. I want to say thank you, and I don't want anyone to be overlooked. But I will say I'm proud to live here. I'm a life member of the Vietnam Veterans of America Chapter, San Marcos. I try to go out and help when I can, veterans organizations. I'm proud to have served this country. But I'm mostly proud that here in Central Texas, there are counties who do not vote the way you vote, who do not encourage veteran support. They're all around us. This county is a very, very conscientious county. You've never turned your back on any veteran I know. And I want to say thank you. If there's any member from Jude's office here I'd like you to come forward. I'm not sure if anyone was able to make it. They're doing what they do. But if I could, especially recognize Commissioner Inglesby. Her and I have worked on a few tasks through the years. She's been doing this since 1996. And I've approached her at times when I thought the answer was going to be no, and she said yes. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Judge and commissioners. And if you don't mind, I'd like to take this recognition plaque down to the office of VSO. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, sir. Next name?

That's it for in-person.

That's it for in-person. Five written? Yes. Okay.

Email comment number one. Arminda Gonzalez. Eastside Campus. Should never happen. Sands Community Input. Is there a county council because of this community, or is there a community because of the county council? At all levels, there should be community input. Near schools, no. Continue developing the public safety on culture near the public safety building. The east side deserves more thought on this idea. Don't have an agenda number to enter. Help me understand the county officials' rationale. Thank you. Public comment number two from Curtis Walt Halser. Say no to Hayes Commons. It will be an environmental disaster. Public comment number three, Sarah Larcoa. I AM SUBMITTING THIS PUBLIC COMMENT IN OPPOSITION OF AGENDA ITEM K13, THE HAYES COMMON DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. I URGE HAYES COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S COURT TO VOTE NO TO THE HAYES COMMON PROPOSAL. AS A SCIENTIST, I UNDERSTAND FIRSTHAND HOW FRAGILE AND INFINITE OUR NATURAL WATER SYSTEMS ARE AND HOW DIFFICULT IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE IT IS TO UNDO THE DAMAGE CAUSED BY POORLY SIGHTED DEVELOPMENT. This development would be located directly over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, one of the most critical and irreplaceable sources of drinking water for Central Texas. Building a subdivision of this scale in such a sensitive area puts our water supply at serious risk, both in terms of contamination and long-term recharge capacity. Additionally, it's approximately downslope from Austin's water quality protection lands threatens the integrity of Barton Springs and the watershed that our community depends on. Hays County residents deserve developments that grow our community responsibly, not at the expense of the water that sustains us. I respectfully ask the court to protect our land and water by voting no on Hays Commons. Thank you for your time and your service to this community. Public comment number four, Catherine Peek. Shouldn't developers be required to put on their pants before they put on their shoes? Shouldn't they have B S E A C D and T C E Q approval before they get county approval for development agreement, water availability and water quality should be on the top of everyone's list of concerns. So please vote no until the B C E A C D and T C E Q have weighed in on the appropriateness of this development. Thank you for your time and consideration. Public comment number five, Susan Cook. Dear judge and commissioners, my name is Susan Cook and I come to you today to ask that you not allow AI data centers to move into Hays County and to work with our adjoining neighbors, neighboring counties to keep them out of our part of Texas. Not only is it largely speculative industry, but in a time when we are all trying to conserve water and energy, we should not be considering new technologies that could double or triple our current use of both in the near future. It is not like we can just create new water to cool computer chips or afford to build new power plants to fuel data centers. Not to mention, they generally not only replace farm and ranch lands, which is all increasingly needed to feed ourselves, but they create eyesores upon the land and the noise. People and animals are not made for 24-7 machine noises. We are already having trouble finding enough water for our current population. For agriculture and recreation, we are ill-equipped to provide water for industries that does what exactly? Makes who rich? Benefits who again? Destroys whose lives and livelihoods? This industry paves over and heats up farmlands and both pollutes and drains aquifers. Why are we even considering such things? And whatever you do, do not adopt the same Some lame regulations that serve only as blueprint for how AI data centers can move here. Resolutions that lack real for the industries to take one look at how difficult it would be to confirm to our requirements for all industrial uses of land, water, and energy and move somewhere else are not helpful. And if any of you has already discussed future employment with or taken money from or signed NDAs to prevent us from knowing what you are doing, please stop masquerading as public servants because you are clearly not working for the people who live here now. If we want to keep these kind of destructive industries out of our community, we need to raise the bar so high no one's wanting to destroy land, use up our water and energy, or add heat, noise, or pollution can jump that high. We need to elect only people to office who will not lose sight of who they work for. We need to make it clear to developers of all stripes, business, industrial, and residential, that Hays County is not where you bring your bad ideas. Let's develop responsibility in keeping sustainable and resilient design. We are not fools, are we? Thanks.

All right, please open F1.

Adopt a proclamation recognizing June 2026 as a month-long celebration of Juneteenth in Hays County.

And if you'll read it. Second.

Proclamation recognizing June 2026 as Hays County month-long celebration of Juneteenth. Whereas the institution of slavery in America continued for nearly 246 years, until President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, declaring enslaved people in Confederate states to be free. And whereas, although the Civil War ended in April 1865, official notice of freedom did not reach enslaved people in Texas until June 19th, 1865, now recognized and celebrated as Juneteenth. And whereas Juneteenth is the oldest known celebration commemorating the end of slavery in the United States and stands as a celebration of freedom, resilience, education, culture, and community. And whereas generations of African American families and community leaders in Hays County and San Marcos have helped preserve the history and traditions of Juneteenth through parades, unity walks, worship services, cook-offs, educational programs, music, and community gatherings. And whereas Hays County recognizes the important contributions, heritage, and cultural impact of African Americans throughout our county's history and remains committed to fostering understanding, respect, and unity among all people. And whereas in 1979, Juneteenth Emancipation Day became an official Texas state holiday through the leadership of State Representative Al Edwards. And in 2021, Juneteenth became a federal holiday recognized across the nation. And whereas, Juneteenth serves as an opportunity to reflect upon our nation's ongoing pursuit of freedom, equality, and justice while celebrating the progress and achievements of generations who helped shape our communities and our country. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Hays County Commissioner's Court does hereby proclaim June 2026 as Hays County month-long celebration of Juneteenth and calls upon the people of Hays County to join together throughout the month of June in honor of this significant day and to recognize the importance of Juneteenth. Adopted this the ninth day of June 2026.

Perfect. Please call the roll.

Commissioner Hammer. Yes. Commissioner Inglesby?

Yes.

Commissioner Smith?

Yes.

Judge Becetta?

Yes. Commissioner Inglesby? Thank you, Judge.

Oh, sure, yes. I know there are folks here.

Constable, are you ready to approach the podium?

Good morning, judge and commissioners of the court. My name is Lillian Peterson. I am the president of Juneteenth Foundation, Inc., organization, nonprofit organization, and I want to thank you for having us here this morning. I want to take a quick moment to thank our sponsors for making things happen, for our community and we could not do it without them and I invite more people in the community to come forward and join us. I want to share with you our plans for June and I'll go ahead and start out with the The fish fry that we have annually, we are now on our sixth annual fish fry, and we had that on the 5th of June, and it was quite a success. If you didn't get to go, please, we'd like to have the opportunity to do it again and for you to come and join us. That was from 11 to 2.30 at the Dunbar Recreation. And then after that, we have our specialty celebration, which is Juneteenth, June 19th. And we're going to have that start the kickoff and the unity walk. Everyone will join at the crosswalk of LBJ and Martin Luther King, and that'll start at 8 o'clock. And during that gathering, we will have a special prayer by John R. Luckey, one of our Texas State graduates. At the time he was in Texas State, he was the Bobcat. We look forward to hear his special prayer to us in our journey. And then we're going to have a speaker, which is our theme this year is unity. And Dr. Dawana Goldstone will be our speaker on unity. She is a Texas State African-American history teacher, professor. And again, we look forward to hearing her tell us about the theme of unity. And our parade in Unity Walk was set off to go at 9 o'clock. We're journeying down to Dunbar Recreation Center, and we're There'll be other activities. From there, we'll part and go to our plaza, our 206CM Allen Plaza here in San Marcos, and start up our 32nd year barbecue cook-off, annual cook-off. And we're ecstatic for that to start happening. After that starts off, we'll have the return on the 20th, which is a Saturday of June, and back at the park. And we will have continued the barbecue part of it, contest. We have different entries for that up to the ages of from 14, 16-year-olds. in the barbecue contest to adult ages. And we'll have crafts, we'll have music, silent auction, DJ, dominoes, and again, our talented cooks. And we'll have other events that will be added in there for fun for the kids. we uh... that would last from uh... six o'clock uh... well actually back up to friday we're going to have that last up to ten o'clock and then on saturday it will last till six p m we'll have our our winners uh... are constant uh... Chairman David Peterson will then call up the kids like he usually does and present the they help us present the trophies and and You know I I want to say that we can't do it without our kids so we want to always keep them involved and Then we have added on our gala gala and This will be our first annual Unity Gala. Okay? And our theme is Unity. And we will hold that starting at 6.30 to 10 o'clock on Saturday, June 27th. We have a special speaker. That's Dr. Dwight Watson. And he will speak on Unity. We have different performers do special performances. We will have, of course, one of our local pastors pray for the night and our occasion for all of us to join, be introduced to the history, the culture of black Americans. And we hope that you can join us. We still are open to invite for everybody to come out. We have a special presentations of our Juneteenth flower, which is the Hibiscus, and David is showing it here, and it breaks down each color, the yellow, the green, the red, and then the black in the middle. This will be displayed and identified, identifying each color as it is. The black meaning the black skin of African-American people, red blood shed by Africans who died in the fight for liberty. And yellow is for many African countries. This was added to show unity. Green is for the growth, prosperity, and of our African American people. So please join us. We have a wonderful program planned for the community and is open to anybody to come and share. Again, I want to thank everybody for giving us this opportunity, the community here. And please join us. Be a sponsor. If I can, if I can get the team of Juneteenth Foundation to kind of step forward so we can unidentify the few that we do have here are the ones that make these things happen with the help of our sponsors. And what we get from our sponsors, we give back to the community. And I will... I appreciate this, and I'll turn it over to our chairman, if I have a few more minutes, so he can say what he would like to say real quick.

Real quick. I'm real quick. Judge, Commissioner, thank you all very much. I know that was kind of a long, lengthy history reading about Juneteenth. This is a very special month for Juneteenth. We thank you again. We want the public to come out and enjoy another good year for history that's still in the making. We have a lot of activities that are going on. Like the president said, we have to fish fry. Next is our parade unity walk, which is very important for everyone to come out and enjoy the freedom that you have. You know, Juneteenth's not the only one. We have several other events that go on throughout the year. Cinco de Mayo is one of those that cultures and history that we also have to look at also. But these members, these board members back here are not paid. Our sponsors that sponsor us to have this It all goes back into the community. We're all about scholarships. We're all about giving where we need to give, and you will see us. You'll see us out there doing a lot of things within the county, joining law enforcement all the way around, EMS, firefighters, benefits, fundraisers, this sort of thing. This is what our nonprofit organization is all about. The board members are all involved in this, so we appreciate it. Those dates are very important to you to come out and celebrate a day of freedom. You're off from work. So if you've got something going on, so be it. No matter if it's Juneteenth or any other event, Enjoy your day doing it because God does not promise us anything. It's a day of being who you are and what you recognize and what you do on the day that you're off. And that even means when you get up in the mornings, you don't know what your day's like. You know that you have a task and you have tasks in front of you. So anyway, thank you. Thank you very much. And hopefully we'll see some of you over the weekends.

And Constable, I just want to say thank you for the presentation and putting the date out for the gala because I'm the chair of the state convention and I will be in Corpus Christi, so I want to tell you ahead of time, and John, I want to say that to you because I was invited, but I will not be there, but I just have prior commitments, but thank you for what you're doing and I appreciate your work. Thank you. Commissioner, before we go to talk, I also had Alex Banbury who wanted to talk. Do we let Alex first, or do we give comments and then Alex?

I'm happy for Alex to come.

Alex, would you like to approach to add to the contribution? And then the court will reply.

Good morning, commissioners. Also going on that same day, this is the month of June, so as the proclamation read, we are celebrating Juneteenth all month. I believe this Saturday, the 13th, Buda will be celebrating their Juneteenth celebration down in Buda, Texas. Also, After the Unity Walk, they will end at the Paul Lawrence Dunbar Recreation Center, where the DHA will be celebrating the Juneteenth Black Party at Paul Lawrence Dunbar Recreation Center. Also on June 20th, we will have our historical maze, Black History Maze, or Juneteenth Maze, which will take place at the Public Library from 1030 to 1230. And then following that, we will have our Black King celebration where we recognize seven black gentlemen out of the Hays County that have done significant things within our community. And then the big one that also takes place the same night as the gala, we are bringing the Black History 101 mobile museum to the city of San Marcos. I'm just going to say look that up, and you will learn the history about that. And I will just leave it at that. in the city of San Marcos. So we invite the community to come out and be involved with everything that's going on in Hays County. There's a lot, a lot that's taking place. Hays County is growing, and that's all I have to say.

And Alex, just for the viewing public, will you state your name and title one more time?

Alex Banbury. I am the president of the Dunbar Heritage Association here in San Marcos, Texas, and all our information can be found on our website, which is dhasmtx.com. Thank you. Commissioner Inglesby?

Thank you, Judge. I just want to say thank you for everybody who came out. You know, I know that it takes a lot of work. I just want to congratulate y'all on 32 years. That's amazing. And, you know, it is a time for our community to come together to unite and to recognize the freedoms that we have. And so I just appreciate everything that y'all do. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner?

I just want to echo my colleague. I appreciate the Juneteenth Foundation and DHA. I mean, it does take a lot of work to get these things done and to to be able to really give some recognition to your heritage. And I appreciate everything that you all do. And Peterson, you never miss a chance to barbecue. So I appreciate all of your barbecuing efforts. I made sure I had this baby right before your Juneteenth celebration. So sign me up for the margarita judge again. But no, it's a great time. It's a good time to celebrate. you know, how far we've come as a nation, and we continue to move that way, and I'm blessed to live in this day and age. So thank you all.

Commissioner Smith. I know that the Petersons both mentioned how much work goes into this, and I know how much work your family puts into the Dunbar Association. It's amazing to see that type of service and to know that it's a generational service. It's not just one member of a family that has decided that this is their passion. It's truly a passion for your entire family, just as it is for the Petersons. And I'd be remiss if I didn't name one other family that I think has a true passion and one event that wasn't mentioned. And it's also on the 19th from four to six at the Pauline Espinosa Hall is the 47th annual Rose Brooks cake auction. And if you've never been to that, Let me tell you, it's an event. It's a fun day. There's raffles. They're auctioning off cakes, as you can imagine. And it all goes to scholarships. So I invite you out to that as well. And I just hope you'll have a great celebration.

Wonderful. And I would like to say one more. Oh, I see you, Mitty. You wanted to say something. We'll sneak you in. Let me just say this. always an opportunity for us to come together and just because we are highlighting someone's history or pride of fill in the blank it doesn't mean that we are trying to push down someone else I am a father of two sons and so I always see the leveling of the playing field or the shaking of the Etch-a-Sketch and my son's growing up if you give one a compliment the other one would sometimes say What about me? What about me? It's important that we as a community in this day and age, while it is too easy to be passionate keyboard warriors, we don't see each other. And it's important that we realize we are someone's loved ones, regardless of how we look, regardless of what we believe, regardless of what we follow. We are all moving through this life in a way that we feel is best for us and our families. And the more we understand people's love and appreciation for their heritage the more we come together as a community because Praising one isn't putting down another I've heard nothing negative here And I think that is good and that's how it should be and that's how it's always been and so I want to thank you and as a Additional word she was left out because of capacity in the courtroom Miss Mitty Miller if you don't mind stepping to the podium stating your name and title for the viewing public and And right after she speaks, everyone interested in coming up, take a picture. Come on up with us to the dais.

Judge, I was just going to say, do you want to do F2 as well? Because they both go kind of hand in hand. We could.

We could? Yeah. Happily. Thank you for that.

Well, hello, Grand Rising to everyone. My name is Mitty Miller, VP of DHA. But actually, Alex has done an awesome job. I just want to recognize the county. We have Buda here, and I would like for Judge Sandra Bryant to come up and talk about what they're going to do. Since this is a Hayes County proclamation, Buda is part of it.

Love it, and thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Mitty. Thank you, Judge and Commissioner. Excuse me. Just a couple of events that I want to acknowledge. It's the sixth annual Buda Juneteenth Jubilee. This is hosted by Kim Iglesias. And the save the date is Saturday, this Saturday, the 13th. from 10 to 1 at Buda City Hall. Again, that's June 13th from 10 to 1 at Buda City Hall. It's the Buda Juneteenth Jubilee. If you have any questions, you can go to social media and find more information. And also we have... but she wanted me to mention the Juneteenth flag-raising ceremony and celebration. This is actually in Kyle, and this is on the 19th from 10.30 to 1.30 as well. We have two lovely speakers that are going to be there, and I'm going to mention their names. One of them is Sherry Hamilton. She's a very involved community person. And then the other one I'll mention is my husband, Ray Bryant. He'll be the guest speaker there as well. So both of those will be guest speakers. at the Juneteenth flag raising ceremony. And just to shout out, Ray Bryan is the former city council for Kyle and Judah. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes. And Roxanne, while we're at it, it was suggested to open F2 while we were at it. So please open that and we'll vote on that as well so we can have two birds with one stone. Good job.

F2, adopt a proclamation recognizing June 27th, 2026 as the date of the inaugural Juneteenth Gala in Hays County.

Second. And please read it.

Proclamation recognizing June 2026 as Hayes County, the first gala and theme unity celebration of Juneteenth. Whereas Juneteenth commemorates June 19th, 1865, the day when news of freedom reached enslaved African Americans in Texas, marking a pivotal moment in the history of our nation and symbolizing the enduring pursuit of liberty, justice, and equality for all. And whereas Juneteenth services as an opportunity to reflect upon our shared history, celebrate the achievements and contributions of African Americans, and reaffirm our commitment to building stronger, more inclusive communities. And whereas the First Juneteenth Gala in San Marcos brings together residents, community leaders, organizations, businesses, and families to honor this historic occasion through fellowship, education, recognition, and celebration. And whereas the theme Unity of San Marcos reflects the collective strength of a community that embraces diversity, fosters understanding, and works collaboratively to create opportunities for all people. And whereas in spirit of unity encourages residents of San Marcos to bridge differences, celebrate cultural heritage, and build lasting relationships that promote mutual respect, civic engagement, and community pride. And whereas the first Juneteenth Gala stands as a meaningful milestone recognizing the importance of preserving history while inspiring future generations to uphold the values of freedom, equality, and unity. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Commissioner's Court of San Marcos, Texas, does hereby proclaim June 27, 2026, as a day of recognition for the first Juneteenth Gala and commend the theme, Unity of San Marcos, as a reflection of our community's dedication to inclusion, understanding, and shared progress. Hayes County continued unity celebration of Juneteenth. and calls upon the people of San Marcos to join together throughout the month of June in honor of this significant day and to recognize the importance of Juneteenth. Adopted this the ninth day of June, 2026.

Beautiful. Please call the roll.

Commissioner Inglesby? Yes. Commissioner Smith?

Yes.

Commissioner Hammer? Yes. Judge Becerra?

Yes. And I believe, Constable, I don't want to assume, I believe things have been said already. We're good? Okay, so now we are ready to take the picture for those involved with these proclamations. To come on up, we're going to hold proclamations and take a quick family portrait. Come on up.

I don't want to mix them up, so I'm thinking maybe we can do it half the time.

Thank you. No, not this year. No, not this year. No, not this year. No, not this year. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We have all... I got to get the word.

I got to get the word. I got to get the word. She's at home. She's going to stay here. She's going to stay here. She's going to stay here. One, two, three. One, two, three. Hold that. One, two, three. One, two, three.

Thank you.

We're gonna keep moving. Please open F3. Roxanne, start reading.

Good morning, Commissioners and Judge Becerra.

My name is David Riggs. I'm an employment and compensation specialist with the Human Resources Department here in Hays County. It is my pleasure to introduce the service award recipients for May and June of 2026. I ask the courts indulgence. We have over 60 people to recognize. We're going to start with our service awards for first year award recipients. From the county clerk's office.

And before he starts, I want to ask to keep this moving because we have a long court and I want to be respectful of everyone's time. Hold your applause until that year's segment has been completely read. Then you can do your applause. It just helps us to keep it flowing. Go ahead.

Thank you, sir. From the Kennedy Clerk's Office, Alejandra Rodriguez. All right.

Come on up. Number one.

From the District Attorney's Office, Malan Garza. Emergency Management Office, Ken Bell, Josh Conte, Macy Cohen. From Justice at Peace, we have Griselda Perez and Daniel Ayala. From Juvenile Detention Center, Christopher Alvarez, Jaron Marmojo, and Paul Tristan. From the Parks Department, we have Stephen Barcalo, Faith Lehman, and Tucker Reese. From the Sheriff's Department, we have Tate Bouquet, Michael Burnham, Patrick Cheatham, Adria Clift, David Gomez, Nicholas Luhrmann, Brent Mulnex, Christopher Rodriguez, Jessica Siena, Emilio Torres. From the Tax Assessor's Office, we have Peyton Gilroy, Christina FROM THE TRANSPORTATION OFFICE, WE HAVE LYNN WOOD. FROM THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION OFFICE, WE HAVE LYDIA STATTON CHAPMAN. FROM THE OTHERS OFFICE, WE HAVE KATIE STRUK. FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW, TWO, WE HAVE TARA HENRY. FROM THE DISTRICT CLERK'S OFFICE, WE HAVE JASMINE GOMEZ. FROM THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, WE HAVE CAITLIN LASIMA. For the Parks Department, we have James Baker. From the Sheriff's Office, we have John Gaynor, Paul Garcia, and Richard Valdez. Those are our number one, year one Service Award recipients. Congratulations.

So, just give it a little pivot, a little shoulder, yeah, so we can make this your center. I'm all about the visuals.

Can I have like three people go on the side, please?

Plug yourselves in. Oh no, you're the honorees. I'm on you.

Okay, look at me right here.

Close enough.

One, two, three. One, two, three.

Our five-year service award recipients. From the constable's office, Alexandria Navrana. From the district attorney's office, Casey Story and Krista Kirby. From District Courts, we have Madison Ureda. From Sheriff's Office, we have Courtney Glass and Anton Lindsey, Mary Sanchez. From District Clerk's Office and from Sheriff's Office, we have Erin McCoy.

Oh, I'm sorry, we have one more, sir. Joel Adami, five years.

All right, look right over here.

One, two, three. One, two, three.

All right. Thank you, guys.

Our next category are our 10-year service award recipients. How many? 10 years.

Blank.

Our first recipient from Constable Precinct 2, David Dykes. DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, DEBORAH ANDERSON. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, RUSSELL MONAIR. SHERIFF'S OFFICE, ROBERTO DELEON. CONCORPORATE OFFICE PRECINCT 1, ROLAND VASQUEZ. THAT'S IT FOR YEAR 10.

Right over here. One, two, three. One, two, three. Beautiful. Thank you, guys.

For our 15-year service award recipients, from Constable's Office Precinct 4, Justin Drake, Constable's Office Precinct 3, Frank Cheatman, From the Sheriff's Office, Lisa Mason, John Little, Scott Whetstone, and Ryan Wayman. And from the Veterans Administration Office, 15 years, Jude Prather.

We'll get right over here. One, two, three. One, two, three. Beautiful. Thank you, sir.

Our next category are 20-year service award recipients. From the Sheriff's Office, Courtney Gamble and Stephen Lucio and Eric Batch. FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW, WE HAVE CHRIS JOHNSON. Our next category is 25 Years of Service. From the Sheriff's Office, Michael Briggs. We also want to take a moment to recognize our May and June retirees. From District Courts, Sherry Rogers. From the Maintenance Department, Patricia Sanchez. From the Sheriff's Office, Brian Carpenter and Elizabeth Prado. And from Transportation, Norm Silbig. And I ask the court just give me a few moments to remove the items from the dais so we can make room there for you.

Okay I'll take one flag back.

So what we're gonna do Here we are, sir. What we're going to do is we're going to take a group, and then we're going to take individual.

That's what I was asking. All right, so you guys are in here. One, two, three. One, two, three, three. OK.

So, what was this like at first? And then we'll swap.

Looking right here. One, two, three. One, two, three. Thank you.

And then smile. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your goodness. Welcome back. Looking right here.

One, two, three. One, two, three. Wonderful.

Thank you again, sir. Thank you. Okay, congrats.

All right.

Please open F4. F4. Adopt a proclamation declaring June 2026 as LGBTQIA plus Pride Month in Hayes County.

So moved.

Please follow along.

Commissioner Smith.

Don't we want to read it first? You want to read it? Sure. We can read it first in case you have doubts.

Sure. Proclamation recognizing June 2026 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, and Asexual Pride Month. Whereas during Pride Month, we recognize and celebrate the courage, resilience, and contributions of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual LGBTQIA plus community. We reflect on the progress made toward equality, inclusion, and justice for all. And whereas, Hayes County affirms the values of freedom and fairness and remains committed to fostering a community where all residents are welcomed, respected, and protected from discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. And whereas, Pride Month is a time to honor the diversity that strengthens our community and to recognize the ongoing impact and leadership of our LGBTQ community. LGBTQIA plus neighbors in every aspect of civic life. And whereas embracing the full spectrum of identities and experiences in our county makes us stronger, more compassionate, and more united. And whereas by proclaiming June 2026 as Pride Month, Hays County recommits to building a more inclusive, equitable society where everyone is treated with dignity and respect. And whereas, as we mark Pride Month, we both celebrate the progress achieved and recognize the work that still lies ahead in safeguarding the rights, safety, and well-being of LGBTQIA plus individuals in Hays County and beyond. And whereas, we honor those who paved the way for equality as well as those who continue to work today, striving toward a future where everyone can live openly, authentically, and without fear. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Hays County Commissioner's Court does hereby proclaim June 2026 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, and Asexual LGBTQIA Plus Pride Month. Adopted this the ninth day of June 2026.

Please call the roll.

Commissioner Smith?

Yes.

Commissioner Hammer? Yes. Commissioner Inglesby? Yes. Judge Becerra?

Yes. And is there someone here to speak on this agenda item that would approach the podium? If not, only once. Okay, there you are. If you'll state your name and title, and after this comment, they will come up for a picture for anyone that wants to be a part of it.

Hi, I'm Sylvia Sandoval. I'm here to represent San Marcos, Texas Pride. Thank you all again for your support. I know it's a... With these changing times, it's very important to have everybody have our back one way or the other. So thank you, and I'm going to call up everybody who's here that's going to take a picture with me. Thank you, Judge Becerra and Ms. Ingosby.

Perfect. Anyone else? Otherwise, we're going to come on up for a picture for anyone that wants to take a picture after Commissioner's comments. Commissioner Smith?

This resolution has changed tremendously over the last few years, and I think that we've finally found something that we can all be supportive of. I truly believe in the rights of every single individual from a constitutional and a personal standpoint, and I know this resolution is important to a large number of our employees, and I'm happy to support it on their behalf today. Commissioner?

ECHOING MY COLLEAGUE, I VERY MUCH AGREE. I THINK THAT THIS COURT HAS CONSISTENTLY SUPPORTED THE FAIR AND EQUAL TREATMENT OF EVERYBODY AND EVERYONE, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO PUSH THAT FORWARD. I DO THINK IT'S VERY APPARENT THAT THE LBG COMMUNITY WENT THROUGH SOME SERIOUS TIMES OF HARDSHIPS, ESPECIALLY THE WHOLE Pride Month was established from the Stonewall from 1969 on June 28th. And it was obviously pushing back against, they were consistently being discriminated against. I mean, from 57 to 60, you had over 1,000 people that were discharged from the military because of them being potentially gay. You had over 420 people that lost their just normal job from potentially being gay, and you had over 4,000 people have applications denied. So we've come such a long way, and I continue to push that narrative through of the fair and equal treatment of everybody and everyone.

Thank you. Commissioner Inglesby?

Thank you, Judge. You know, as we recognize Pride Month, it reminds me... that we were taught early in life that we need to treat people with love and respect, compassion and kindness. And I think that still holds true today. And it's not just today and not this week or month, but it's every day. And, you know, regardless of our differences, we are better and stronger when we value each one's dignity in our community. So just appreciate the opportunity and thank you all for being here.

showing up showing up is what matters we can all have these ideas we can all have these opinions but when someone needs you and you show up i think that's the the frosting on the cake the icing on the cake and i feel that when when we as community members show up for one another, whether it be Juneteenth, whether it be Cinco de Mayo, whether it be Pride, whatever it is, when we show up for one another, when we see, again, same message, when we see each other as someone's loved ones, then we can have more peace in our day and we don't have to worry about the acidity taking place at a federal level or at a state level. We could still be neighbors here when we cross each other at HEB. So thank you all for your participation and your continued understanding and appreciation of one another. Please come on up, anyone that wants to be a part of this picture.

You want to take a picture? Okay, let me unlock it for you.

Right over here. One, two, three.

Please open F5.

F5. Presentation by Samantha Martinez of the Texas General Land Office regarding assistance programs available to homeowners impacted by the 2024 disasters, including the Homeowners Assistance Program and Homeowner Reimbursement Program.

Good morning, Judge and Commissioners. Thank you for letting me present today. We have a presentation that's going to be shared for everyone in the courtroom to view. Thank you.

What a great logo, by the way. I've always loved that logo. The bison is a gift.

It's a very beautiful logo. Yeah, it's the Texas General Land Office's logo. Like I said, I'm here representing the Texas General Land Office's Homeowner Assistance Program for the 2024 disasters. I'm briefly going to give some background information on the program, and then I'll follow up with some information on eligibility and how the homeowners of Hays County can apply. Excuse me. All right. So in 2024, the state of Texas faced some major weather events, including hurricane Barrow that edges are straight lined wind events and tornado outbreaks. As a result, the Texas general land office was issued an allocated amount of a little over $555 million by the U S department of housing and urban development and community development block grant disaster recovery funding. Goodness. That's a mouthful to help the recovery of the state of Texas. The Texas General Land Office has set aside $244 million for the Homeowner's Assistance Program to help repair and reconstruct owner-occupied single-family homes. And in addition to the HAP program, which is the Homeowner's Assistance Program, the Texas General Land Office has also allocated $43 million for the Homeowner Reimbursement Program, or RHP, to provide eligible applicants with reimbursement for out-of-pocket home repairs.

Next slide, please.

Thank you. All right. There are 27 eligible counties for the Homeowner Assistance and Homeowner Reimbursement Program. Hayes County is located in what we are calling Zone 4. And so Hayes County saw most heavy weather during the date of May 9, 2024, where the San Marcos, Dripping Springs, and surrounding areas saw strong winds and hail over 5 inches in diameter. As I mentioned earlier, the Texas General Land Office offers two programs to help Texans recover from the 2024 events. One is the Homeowner Assistance Program, HAP, in which eligible homeowners can receive repairs or reconstruction on their homes. Qualifying applicants can even receive additional assistance such as one-year home insurance, reasonable accommodation of disability needs, and temporary relocation assistance while repairs are underway. The second program is the Homeowner Reimbursement Program. On the next slide, please. Thank you. It's the Homeowner Reimbursement Program in which eligible homeowners can be reimbursed for expenses related to the 2024 storms, such as repair costs, fees, or debris removal. Reimbursement limits are between $3,000 and $75,000 for stick-built homes and between $3,000 and $50,000 for manufactured housing units or mobile homes, as they're sometimes called. So who is eligible? Homeowners who can provide proof of at least 8,000 and inspect or verify damages from the disaster are eligible for the homeowner's assistance program. And applicants who can at least provide proof of $3,000 and inspect or verify damages from the disaster are eligible for the homeowner reimbursement program. Homeowners can apply for one program, but they cannot apply for both. The program requires the applicants to provide proof of identity, proof of legal status, proof of home ownership, proof of primary residency at the time of the disaster, mortgage payment, child support, flood insurance, if those apply to the applicant, of course, and proof of property tax payments. We hope that the community come sees us, Hays County residents come see us to apply. We are located at the Bell County Satellite Office at the CTCOG office. And then we have another location at Seguin Public Library. We just added additional satellite location at the San Marcos Public Library where you can come see us from 10 to 2. We don't have that on the slide, so I'll repeat that. It's the San Marcos Library from 10 to 2. Do not feel discouraged. If you don't see us when you walk in, just ask the front desk and they'll point you in our direction. We're in the blue room towards the back of the library. Please come. We're there every Tuesday, 10 to 2. And if you cannot make it to our office hours at 10 to 2, you know, feel free to call us. Our phone number is 1-844-8933. or you can visit our website at recovery.texas.gov slash apply. You're welcome to apply online. Give us a call. We can walk you through the application. Any questions, feel free to call us, email us, or email CDR at recovery.texas.gov. We really want to help those folks that were affected by the 2024 disasters. So we really encourage the homeowners of Hays County to come apply. And if there are any questions, we would love to answer them and get you guys the help that you all need.

Beautiful. Let's start with Commissioner Smith. Any comments, questions?

No, it's been a long time coming. This money has. I just encourage our residents, if they did have losses, to reach out and try to participate. I know the process seems somewhat complicated, but I've worked with homeowners in the past, and they've been successful in some of the previous disasters. And so I would just encourage them to take the time.

Thank you. Yes.

Commissioner Hammond.

ECHOING COMMISSIONER SMITH, I DO THINK PEOPLE SHOULD TAKE THE TIME IF THEY DO NEED ASSISTANCE TO USE THIS PROGRAM. THANK YOU FOR PRESENTING IT AND TO MAKE OUR CONSTITUENTS WORK.

I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ALL THIS INFORMATION. I WROTE A LOT OF IT DOWN AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU ALL NOW HAVE A LOCATION HERE IN SAN MARCOS WHERE PEOPLE, IT'S MORE CONVENIENT FOR THEM TO COME AND APPLY. SO THANK YOU AND WE'LL SPREAD THE WORD. THANK YOU.

Thank you. I appreciate you guys giving me the time to present. And I do apologize. I have to step out. I have to go staff the office hours. So I will be there. So please come see me if anyone needs help.

Good job. Thank you. Please open F6.

F6. Presentation by the Hayes County Judge's Office regarding the potential establishment of a Hayes County Health District.

All right. Well, thank you. If you'll state your name and title for the viewing public, you are not exempt.

Good morning, Judge, Commissioners. My name is Jacob Lamone. I am with Judge Ruben Becerra's office. And I'm here this morning to give you a quick presentation on some of the work we've been doing on possibly establishing a Hayes County Health District to maximize our dollars, our health care dollars, and improve our health care. A little bit different from something like public health, which Matthews Department does, where they coordinate health care on a large community basis. This is more directed towards an individual health care provider, more doctor and health care treatment efforts. Number one, we do have currently an indigent care program, which was established by House Bill 3135. It is the local provider participation fund. The reason that was necessary is the state did not choose to engage with the federal government on a reimbursement at the state level for the 1115 waiver or the Medicaid waiver. So instead, we have a facility to be able to do it more regionally, and that's the LPPF. While that's a good first step, the next logical step would be a health care district. Currently, we spend about $2 million on indigent care. And through our partnerships with Seton and Central Texas, we're able to cover a lot of indigent care, but there's still a lot of losses. One report has those two entities losing as much as $30 million over a period of time helping us cover the indigent care program. We also have a geographical situation. Most of our healthcare is centered around Southeast Hays County. A healthcare district can also help increase the footprint of that. So this first slide is just what we have currently, what your eligibility is. This is on our website and how you can participate in our current indigent care program. So next slide, if you don't mind. This is one of the things that we are really looking at trying to tackle with a healthcare district. It's called the Medicaid coverage gap. So for those in the audience, if you guys can see the first little bit here is, oops, it's not showing on the TV, sorry. The first little bit, those are where Medicaid generally stops or slows down. So you can see there's considerable, this map is showing Medicaid coverage uninsured people. Sorry, so it's showing who does not have insurance. So you can see in the bottom 20%, bottom 21%, a lot of people have health care coverage. And then, of course, once we see, once we get above the 100% level, there's other marketplace subsidies that people can participate in. And then, of course, as you increase your income or jobs providing, you also have a lot more access to health care. The gap here is between the 20 to 100. Those are your middle, middle class folks that are working that can't afford healthcare, but they don't qualify for the truly low income programs. And that is one of the major things that we can do as a healthcare or a county health district. Next page.

Jacob, may I ask just a quick question? Yes. So that graph that you just showed, it says too poor for subsidies. Subsidies. So you can actually be too poor for subsidies because, you know, like with the indigent, I know that you... I mean, it's extremely difficult to qualify because you cannot hardly have anything. And so that just, I don't know, strikes me a little odd that you're too poor. Explain that a little better, please.

Yeah, it's not that they're too poor. At a certain income range, you know, $22,000, give or take. No, that's not exact. But you start being able to be eligible for a lot of subsidized health care or free health care or straight out Medicaid. or other programs. So I think that's what this is reflecting, is that once you're below a certain income level, health care is actually more available to you. And the two-poor thing, I mean, if you're making $0, you're still eligible. There's not a way to go below that line. It's more of when people start making above that $22,000 threshold, where their access to the subsidized and other programs starts really dropping off. And that's why you have a big jump to almost 80% of this group, not of the whole population, but 80% of that group, as much as 80% of that group, has trouble getting insurance, underinsured, or not insured at all.

Okay. I guess the wording was just...

If I worded that a little, Autumn, I apologize.

Do you have any idea, Jacob, do you have any idea how many, just in general, our population here in Hays County fall into that individual income bracket?

As a percentage of... Of that individual income bracket, it's... pretty commensurate with the population. I don't have that exact number, but it's gonna be in the teens, most likely, with our normal poverty levels. It's not a considerable amount, but it's also not insignificant. I mean, there's quite a few. And the biggest percentage of the population really is in that under-covered or under-insured gap, that Medicaid gap, above that $22,000 threshold, but below. $75,000 the biggest number that would would qualify that it's the biggest number of uninsured for sure and then the biggest number that would qualify for benefits or be benefit have their Have access to more benefits through the health care district So I just want to summarize this This map so we're saying here that this is in general.

This is not Hayes County numbers This is not exact numbers in general If you're making over $22,000 all the way up to $100,000, you're making too much money to qualify for Medicaid, but then you also don't get any type of subsidized healthcare. And this is the largest population that is uninsured or needs more of a coverage gap.

Yes, ma'am. Biggest liability.

That's percentage of the federal poverty level.

That's not income? No. Well, it's 100% of the poverty. He told me he just said it was income. Well, it's based on income.

You said $20,000 to $100,000. That's not. $22,000. The federal poverty level here is what? $35,000? $35,000, yes. It's $35,000. So $35,000 to? No, it's these percentages of $35,000. Okay, gotcha.

And the reason they're not putting a number on there because it fluctuates, this is what DISHES uses so that different parts of the state have different poverty levels. I think Commissioner's spot on. We're in the mid-30s of where our poverty line would stop.

So this $20,000 to $100,000 is actually $22,000 to $35,000, right? Is that what you're saying?

No.

Because 100% of $30,000 is... No, 20% of $35,000. Okay.

Yeah, so... $7,000. Okay. $7,000 to whatever. But at that point, it's $7,000. That dumps right into our indigent care. Right.

And we're talking about two different measuring sticks, too. We're talking about actual number, dollars, how much you make. And that's your $7,000, the reason that we use $22,000, because that's when you start dropping off of SSI, other programs. And that's where you're really uninsured. So on this level, what we're talking about is straight for Medicaid, that 20% to 80% or 20% to 100% of the poverty level is that number up to about $35,000. And I know it's a little confusing because we're actually, sometimes with some federal programs we're using dollars, and then some federal programs we're using percentage of poverty. And there's several programs that you can fall off once you start getting into that category. $20,000 to $40,000 range. Next slide. Here are some of the financial benefits of starting a health care district. We budget right now a fixed amount of money, or in this case a little over $2 million for indigent care. If we had a rate, whatever the rate could be, 2%, 3%, 4%, up to 8% or 10%, it would be commensurate with the growth. So we wouldn't have to constantly be examining and getting an arbitrary number. If you have a rate and the population and commercial rate grows, that rate should increase our tax revenue for healthcare dollars in line commensurate with that. That'll also provide us a more stable predictive environment. Most importantly, probably the biggest draw is that we will be able to maximize our Medicaid dollars. Right now, we are going through a couple of different layers. We have a region and we have a pocket, but by all accounts, doing it directly through a healthcare district would maximize the 1115 waiver that we could get money back. Right now, our money is dependent on the local or a regional situation, our reimbursements would be straight from the federal government and not that they'd be unlimited, but we don't have a local or regional area. The infrastructure is something that we are not currently allowed to spend much money on with healthcare because our reimbursement waivers don't cover things like infrastructure. With a healthcare district, we can start building infrastructure, clinics, screening programs, things like that, that right now we can't reimburse. If Seton Ascension wanted to do it, we could not participate in a reimbursement program for infrastructure. So those are a couple of things that we would have access to that we don't currently have now. Also, if we're putting everybody under a pool, we're looking at lower negotiator rates for everything from prescriptions to treatments to screenings, as opposed to doing it the way we're doing it right now, which is really the emergency room method. over $30,000 per patient per year on our indigent care. That's because we do it pretty much the most expensive possible way, which is emergency rooms. This way, through other clinics and other partners and other federally approved organizations, We have preventative care. We have treatment ahead of time before we get to catastrophic events, which, as you know, are much more expensive. A heart attack, a stroke is much more expensive than getting prescription pills to cover that. And we would be absorbing a lot of other medical fees from everywhere, from our jails to all of our other departments that have some exposure to indigent care costs. And the next slide. And then we have the clinical benefits. These are holistic medical care. People will have screenings. They will have a file. They'll have a primary care physician. That's the access that really keeps escalating health care crisis from occurring in large quantities. Once again, preventative care, hypertension, diabetes are very key elements to more dangerous and more costly medical treatments. And of course, and we'll have an integrated healthcare program that right now is a little bit limited on how we can use those reimbursement dollars. So we can have an integrated mental health healthcare program and spend money in one lump sum instead of trying to piecemeal it right now as we're doing through the regional model. And finally, how we can set those up. There's really three, the next slide. There's really three ways to set it up, but the two that the county can do get petition of the voters, court puts forward a motion and we have an election on the next universal election day that's appropriate. We can also enter in several different interlocal agreements. We can get into a joint agreement with the different layers of government. A little more challenging sometimes getting those contracts together, but it can be done that way. The third way, which the court has no direct authority to, is the legislature could put it together and through statute create a health care district Thanks, so I know That this work will be brought forward in the coming weeks and so the next few steps for the counter to the court choose to Proceed is really a three-phase Program we can authorize a feasibility study. That's really we need to get a handle on an assessment on our current liabilities with health care and where our dollars are. And it's just a complete assessment so we know where we can better set the initial rates. The stakeholder committee is also a necessary component of it. They will need that information from the feasibility study to say, here's our levy, here's our cost. And that's very helpful, but that is also required. And then civil or civil attorneys would draft the intent document. that would be the third step to proceeding with laying the groundwork for a healthcare district.

And that's the end of that. Perfect, and thank you. Commissioner Inglesby, any questions or comments?

Well, it's a lot of information to absorb and I guess we need to continue having discussions regarding this. I see that the stakeholder, so have y'all been meeting with the stakeholders or is this something that you're saying you need to create?

Two things. We have had several meetings. In fact, Matthews was part of our initial stakeholder meeting to get informal information, get it to take the pulse of that community. But this would be a little more formal stakeholder meeting. A seat in Ascension would obviously be a logical part of that or something like that. That would be a little more formalized set up by the court.

Okay. Well, Judge, I just am interested to learn more about the process and what this means for Hays County. It's a different direction, and so I guess we'll continue to discuss.

Thank you. Commissioner Hammer?

Yeah, I think that, and I know that it says financial consultant to audit the county's total current health care. I was going to say, I think we should see some numbers and do a little bit more digging on what that looks like feasibility-wise, what the taxpayer dollars would be, what the increase rate of our tax rate would be. go at that, but it's a great first look at it.

Commissioner Smith. We've talked about this several times over the last few years, and the biggest concern that I have is that at the end of the day, there's been over two dozen of these type of, not only just structured facilities, but two dozen of these fold. in the state of Texas. And the reason is that they become the hub of not only indigent health care, but all underserved health care for the region. And at the end of the day, in general, because they may not refuse service if they're providing those services. And so what happens is, I'll use an example, like Parkland has gone Parkland's had a hard time in Dallas because regionally they are the health care provider for all of the surrounding counties for anyone who doesn't have the ability. And so the Dallas, the citizens of Dallas County are paying for health care for the citizenry of an entire region. I have a real concern over, I think the system that we have can be tweaked. And I've been very interested in working with Matthew and looking at what those other options that other counties are looking at and their indigent healthcare. But whenever I speak to commissioners from counties who have public facilities and have their own healthcare districts, they consider them an albatross. Because one of the things, if you would go back to the previous slide, the slide where it talks about the two options that the county can institute. The first one, or you don't have to pull it up, but the first one, option A, a Chapter 286 hospital district, that really puts the power in the hands of the public and gives them the opportunity through a very public vote to make a decision as to whether or not they want a dedicated tax rate to something similar to this. That would be, you know, I haven't heard an outcry that this is, from any of my constituents, that this is something that they absolutely want to pay additional taxes for. The other option, option B, the Subchapter 287 Health Services District, where you look at those joint local agreements with counties and cities. That's another option, but what wasn't stated was that if and when we enter into those agreements, we're bound by those, and we have to take that out of our current tax rate. Right now, we're looking at probably an $8 million deficit going into this tax year. Just for our updated salary survey, or our salary expenses for our non-law enforcement, well, about probably $5.5 million for our non-law enforcement employees, just to get them up to what the average should be for those positions, and probably $2.5 million under our collective bargaining agreement for all of our law enforcement officers. At the end of the day, those are going to take precedent. Or if we were to look at a Chapter 287 Health Services District, we are going to have to really look at a dedicated rate within our current tax structure to pay for that. And if I had to go out on a limb, the estimate you said you know generally it's from three to ten percent it's capped at ten percent i believe all districts are i think the average in the state is over eight cents and so you're looking at just if we had to pay for that out of our even a portion of that say with our local municipalities they paid two of that eight cents we're still looking at The largest tax increase we would have ever had since I've been on the court And so the numbers are what scared me and the public outcry and need for this is what scares me the one thing that I'm told very Sistinctly is that we have good health care in Hays County now I'll tell you I represent some of the you know now Commissioner hammer represents the most remote portions of the county and But I represent the farthest, for years I represented the residents that had to travel farther than anyone else in the county to get health care. And I can tell you that we have people from Marble Falls and Blanco and Johnson City who come to Hays for their health care, and they're not turned away. Now, we who do have insurance and pay for our insurance, we pay an increased rate because of that, and the overall cost is higher. But we thankfully, because of our partnerships with Seton and others, I haven't heard the need so far for this, and that's going to be hard for me. I could be convinced, but I'd have to be convinced in a way where the general public made that decision and we got clear direction from the general public this is what they wanted and worked towards that process to have an election to establish something.

thank you thank you all for your comments i'd like to address a few of those commissioner smith um first of all as jacob perfectly stated uh looping in matthew is absolutely part of the conversation we've had he's been involved in our some of our meetings and but like jacob said that is a different kind of care we're not talking about indigent care or the indigent alone this is a road map to Expand countywide access to the average worker person Within that big ballpark range of I'm just gonna do a dollar amount allocation $20,000 a year to under $100,000 a year. This would be working to create access at an affordable rate for them. I've had the privilege of Meeting with very successful non-albatross systems within Harris County, Travis County, Bexar County, El Paso County, Dallas County, on and on, where these programs help their working people, help their communities in ways that are massively meaningful to them. And absolutely, we would, he put those three options in, we can make this a two-hour presentation and not cover everything, But he put those three options in order of what I saw as a priority, meaning the first one is to take it to the voters. Second favorite would be to create memorandums of understanding. And the third one is to wait for the ever slow to respond legislature to create one for us. And so everything would be, through that roadmap that we're proposing, everything would be brought to the voters, voter approved, voter decided, voter led. This is a mechanism designed to work for the working people, to support the working people, and the indigent lane alone is not only not completely properly served, but not the exclusive focus here. That is just one of the rays within the kaleidoscope. And that we have a good health care system here in Hays County, I'm glad you think so. And what this will do is offer opportunities to make it better, provide our aging population, our veteran population, an opportunity to support someone locally that won't have to go to Abilene or Waco or something for more specialized care. This is a years-long conversation that we've been having with statewide counties that have been excessively successful with it. And I wanted to bring the conversation up. Jacob, did I leave anything out?

No, I think Commissioner Smith has some good points. With the regional efforts, especially with Comal and Bexar County, there's people that are not necessarily contributing to the but are getting that health care. And so they're at the forefront of dealing with some of those. So I think a lot of these questions are things that can be worked out and beneficial.

It's scary to me. Currently, the state association has announced of public hospitals and rural hospitals has announced that right now, as of today, they've got 76 facilities. They're worried they won't make it until the end of the year. And that's the pattern. All of those were established under this same process.

And so if what facilities can you clarify what you mean won't make it to the end of the year.

The State Association of Public and Rural Hospitals has stated that they have at least 76 operations that are county or locally owned or public facilities maintained by the government that may not make it to the end of the year. County hospitals is what you're referring to? County hospitals and rural hospitals that are done in partnership with not only rural but county hospitals that are done in partnership with their municipalities. because of the current crisis in funding. That's right. And that has continued. That has actually ramped up over the last 10 years. There's been a large number of failures in them. And I can tell you that I'm glad that some of those counties think that they're running and doing successful, but Dallas County, several years ago, Parkland was bankrupt. And it was going to bank... Both the infrastructure needs and the actual day-to-day health care needs, they couldn't find. And it was going to bankrupt the county.

Okay. Thank you, Commissioner, for your comments. And those are very good. And what he was referring to is what I interpret as... the defunding of rural hospitals that we're all very well aware of, which would further support a need for us to do something in our space. But I understand your comment, and this is just the beginning of a long conversation to be held in the public. And thank you, Jacob, for your contribution to this presentation. Please open F7. Thank you.

F7. Update from the budget officer regarding the fiscal year 2027 budget process.

Scott Woodland, budget officer. Good morning, judge and commissioners. Once again, we're looking to bring brief budget updates to each court just to keep the commissioners and the public aware of what we're working on and kind of where we're at, where we're going, where potential gaps could be. The focus for today is going to be on our bond-funded projects, most of those being capital, with some of them are road projects and park projects that are owned and maintained by our partners, not being capital of the county, but being something that benefits the community. Now, I'd like to show one thing I want to point out. First, if you will pull up the... the Hays County 2020 Park Bond Program commitments. I'd like to just briefly go over this. This is yours to keep and review. I will be open for any questions. First thing I'd like to point out is from our commitments for these park bonds, we have committed approximately 82 million. Now of that, oh, I apologize. That 82 million is our park bond funds. We have committed above and beyond that, $116 million, leaving us with a gap to fund from other funding sources. The main thing is we have about an $18 million gap as far as what would need to be covered outside of bond funds. We have roughly 2.85 million that's going to be covered by the 2016 road bond, and that's to still be utilized. So I'll discuss that 2016 road bond a little later when we talk about the roads. But that is committed for that parks project for those trails and multimodal systems that we're creating there. However, I'd like to point to the nearly $18 million of other funding that we will need to come up with. That is something where the county will have to proactively plan. That would be a big hit to take in one year. The goal would be to spread out that over multiple years or to try to find other funding sources or grants to help cover that difference.

And the $18 million, I want to make sure the viewers are following along.

Yes, sir.

$18 million, because you mentioned a few things. Parks, road bond, say again what the $18 million.

Yes, sir. So we have approximately $82 million in the park bonds. We have another two point, we committed money from our ARPA funds that have already been spent. That is also part of the schedule presented to you. Our 2016 road bonds, we had $9.85 million set aside for the trails and roads having to do with the parks that we're constructing. And then the final part there is coming from the general funds slash reserves. That's the title given to it. Now, if we could get some grant funds or some other help from some other sources, that would be great. But right now, that's essentially a... that is a gap that would fall to essentially the general fund as of right now in order to cover. So that's really what we need to plan for and or think about different ways that we can take care of that amount.

A portion of those funds are also the ones that we designated out of existing projects for the Sentinel Peak project as well.

Yes, sir. Yes. So I know at one point some Some funds were reallocated from other park projects to go into Sentinel Peak since that was the project that was really coming along and really that we wanted to make the flagship. So that's put us into a position where we've had to pivot, and now we're figuring out a way to cover those funds. We're repaying that reallocation. Essentially.

What's our timeline? What's our runway?

So on these park projects, I'm thinking about four years. That's what I would like to plan for. I'm working with Carl and Tucker on that. And a lot of these projects required contributions from our partners. So that's another aspect that we are communicating with the partners and just making sure that everyone's on board. And that everybody can fulfill their part of the agreement.

And in that lane, I've had numerous conversations with our closest neighbor, the city of Kyle, their elected leadership, and they have conveyed consistent concern about the spending under the $5 a gallon world that we're living in right now, among other things. And so... folks must realize that a lot of our spending is going to be triggered with matching contributions which is what you just said but can easily be glazed over on accident because we all get inside our heads listening and thinking and then we miss something you just said that's requiring highlighting italicizing and repeating for emphasis and so this does not have to be fill in the blank especially when city councils that have originally under a different political climate, a financial climate, or whatever you want to call it, had made these plans. Well, things have changed, and things are different, and people are less comfortable. And we need to stay receptive and not say, in my opinion, at least I will in my role, Well, voter approved, we're doing this no matter what, come hell or high water, here comes a bulldozer. No, we need to stay sensitive and we need to stay receptive. And when our neighbors, our partners, other municipalities are now saying, let's be better fiscal stewards and let's pause this type of investment, then we are automatically going to pause as well. Am I right?

Yes, Judge, that is correct. As far as we are constantly reallocating these projects and working with our partners to proceed.

The other thing that I would add is that the way that we structured the disbursement of the parks bond funds, we patterned it after the program that is run by Texas Parks and Wildlife. And the way that those programs work, it's on a reimbursement basis. We have, but each one of the projects that were in that 2020 bond, under state law, we have a commitment that we have to address those projects because we have a contract with the voters. Similarly, I would say I agree with Judge Becerra on possibly the implementation timeline for those projects in the city of Kyle, in the city of Buda. However, those projects that we're looking at in both, and I no longer represent Kyle, but in Buda and Kyle, Similarly, they have a contract with the voters on those specifically named projects. And if I am correct, the projects, if you remember when we came back and did the reallocation, the original reallocation, I mean the very first reallocation, those were based off of the scores that were received from our voters. from our Parks and Open Space Advisory Commission. And a number of those were included in the City of Kyle bond and the City of Buda bond. I will tell you that save one project, all of the partner projects in precinct four, because as we did our last reallocation, I reached out to both the City of Dripping Springs and the City of Buda and asked them what their implementation timeline would be and when we anticipated their request for reimbursement. they're telling me that we should get those before the end of the calendar year. And so for those projects, again, with the exception of the of one project in Dripping Springs, the town center project, I believe that at least with those municipalities, those will be closed out before the end of the calendar year. The trails, those might take decades. Because those outside partners don't operate in the same way that municipalities or the county does. Thank you.

And I have one question. Scott, do we believe that we will have any kind of savings on the allocation on Sentinel Peak or do we feel that those will totally be spent?

So built into the Sentinel Peak number is some contingency which right now I believe that they're saying that they're not going to utilize all of it so there may be some savings there but we budgeted for the full amount just because something could come up and we didn't want to be left in a situation where We didn't have that available, and that contingency is actually written into the contract as well.

And we voted on a guaranteed maximum price, so it won't go above, but we do have that CMR, which is risk manager. Thank you. Construction manager. Construction manager risk, yes.

Well, I know Sentinel Peak was important to all of us, but if there's any savings that can be had, it's also appreciated.

Understandable. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you. If there's no more questions on the park fund, then we can move on to the $100 million certificates of obligation. That is our vertical COs, as we commonly refer to them as.

Just sorry to do this to you, but a lot of people don't know what COs stand for.

Certificates of obligation. Thank you, Judge. And so this is the outline of the projects. And if you turn to the back page, that is what we actually put in for court for our projects. The one project that we have working on currently would be the East Side Campus project. And you can see the estimated costs there as well as the contracts that we have in our current expenditures. The other projects that are still in the planning phases are the animal services facility, the precinct for which this was based off the land and building acquisition, but that may be a little different. So that price was based off that. Then the Hays County Government Center remodel. That is purposely left to be all-encompassing, if you will, to give the county as many options as possible on that remodel. It's just a matter of making sure that any kind of costs that we incur with the bonds are being used for capital and permanent costs so that they qualify to be spent with bonds. And that is something that we would work with bond council on any of these expenditures. And then lastly is the Precinct 5 building. The one thing that I want to make note of these is that a lot of these projects are still in the planning phase, but it's important for the county to move fairly quickly on them because we do want to spend 85% of the $100 million proceeds within three years due to the certificates obligation requirements.

Okay, I've got something to say about that. Of course I do. The Boy Scouts told me when I was giving them tours of this facility, don't call yourself, years ago, don't call yourself a cheapskate. Do this. I was like, well, okay, fine, I get it. When you're around little kids, you don't want to say things that could be, I don't know, a negative impression for them. Nevertheless, I still am a cheapskate. I am a politically correct fiscal conservative. And why I'm a fiscal conservative, and I will forever be a fiscal conservative, is because I know what it's like to be broke. I know what it's like to have a hard time paying your light bill, et cetera. And so I will always see the world through that lens. That's why I have a garage with more things than I should, because I find value in so much. So just to roll it back just a bit for the viewing public, the certificates you are referencing that we pulled because we have great credit as good longstanding fiscal operators of the county's money. It's not ours, it's the people of Hays County. We have a magnificent credit rating. It's actually increased on my watch. And we are second highest credit rating available. But just know that. For that reason, we were able to write a check, basically, pull out a different credit card, however you want to think of it, and pull out $100 million to be spent with your permission, Some might say, but no, you didn't vote for that. We didn't get your approval. We didn't take it to the voters. We put that out there for no one's opinion. And I just want to make sure you understand that. And so when someone says we have to move quickly And it wasn't voter approved. I just want to make sure that folks don't mix it up. I am for productive development. I am for efficiencies because I am for all these things. And nine times out of ten, I've supported these things. But as the economy keeps shifting and our quality of life keeps diminishing and our access to many things keeps shrinking... straight of Hormuz remains closed. I mean, you can go on for an hour of all the different things that are going on now that weren't created when this list was established. I continue to support other elected officials throughout the county that say, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. And even further, we've had a county official quoted in the paper, and I know the paper can very often get it wrong, and I won't say which one, but they said Hays County residents don't have to worry about, for example, the East Campus, the one that's pretty close to Highway 35 on Frontage Road, and you don't have to worry about it because we have $100 million for this project. And that's how it was worded in the paper, but the truth is that is grossly inaccurate. That project is among a list of, right before your eyes that you called out, that total should be used for the $100 million if we choose to build them all right away as fast as we can, or in your words, move quickly. And so it is inaccurate whether it was said inaccurately or whether it was quoted inaccurately. It remains inaccurate to say, we have $100 million for this East Campus, don't worry about it. It's not going to be tied to the City of Kyle taxpayer. I want to remind you, you are still a Hays County resident, and so, yes, you are still tied to the decisions we make when it comes to the spending of money. I understand what they were trying to say, but it's inaccurate, and I just wanted to take a moment to clarify. Commissioner Inglesby? Anything at this point you want to add?

No, Judge, thank you. Commissioner Hammond?

No, I'm good.

Commissioner Smith?

No, I would just say that we are currently, of these projects, you know, we had in our overall CIP, there were, what, and Tami, correct me if I'm wrong, were there 14 projects? Or 12 projects? Something like... Something like that. And those were projects identified by both our service providers, our directors, our as-needed projects, along with us as commissioners and other elected officials. who know the needs that are presented both within our precincts, but within those various offices. Everyone from the county clerk and the district clerk to all the constables, all of those elected officials. I will say that that CIP or that capital improvement plan, it's the first one the county's done. That really needs to be what I would call a living document. It needs to be a document that's updated every couple of years because we know those things change on a very regular basis, especially given the population that we've got. That being the case, these are the projects that were pulled out first. But if we look at those projects in their entirety, all of them, you're probably talking $350 to $400 million was the estimate. And so... I don't doubt that it'll be after I'm long after I'm out of office here that the future courts are going to have to either do a reevaluation or additional funding for those projects. But I just also want the general public to understand and know that this is just the start of a large program. And at the end of the day, Nothing is getting cheaper. And the longer that we delay these projects, the more and more money it costs. I mean, I've heard estimates that one of our municipalities here, they tranched whenever they did bonds and COs, and they over tranched. And what that means is they borrowed too much money too quickly. And we thankfully have not done that. We've given ourselves the opportunity to borrow that money, but we haven't borrowed it. And by over borrowing on the front end, their carrying cost is $20,000 to $30,000 a day. It's much, much more money than what we're talking about here if they borrowed. Nevertheless, I would just encourage that While this is what we have planned, this is not what we borrowed. We have the ability to do this. It's like having the credit card and not using it. I darn sure don't want to pay that monthly bill for interest until we have to use it. And so while I understand that we have to do 85% of this in three years, we also want to do those tranches in meaningful ways where it saves us the absolute most amount of interest.

Exactly right, Commissioner. Thank you. We agree on that front. We don't want to mislead the public on accident because I believe people are intrinsically good. I always take the high road. We don't want to mislead the public to think that we have a $100 million check. And we're going to go cash it. And too bad, Hays County residents, you're going to pay the bill whether you like it or not because we didn't ask you. And so it is very important that the public hears this loud and clear. We have not committed. And as Commissioner Smith just said, we haven't borrowed it. There is. And yes, of course, nothing is getting cheaper. Absolutely. No doubt. But it doesn't mean we need to saddle ourselves at a time with much uncertainty with all of this wish list and could be would be nice kind of stuff. We're asking our taxpayers to tighten their belt on many fronts. And so we as a government should do the same. Anything else before we take a break?

Yes, Judge. Real quick, we can just go over the road bonds. I'll make this fast. This is mainly for your information so you can see the projects and where they're at. I do want to say our 2016 road bond, I did not provide a copy of that. Those funds are mostly spent. I alluded to it with the park bond. There is a commitment for the park bond for the Cape's Pond project that we need to reserve in those road bonds so that we don't have to cover that from other sources. And then the rest from talks with HNTB is... probably going to be utilized in some right-of-way properties, having to do with a specific project within that bond. And they've kind of given caution to, we don't know what that's going to turn into, so let's kind of set aside that money until we know that.

And a number of those projects, again, the right-of-way is still being litigated. I think that's the question. We don't know how much that's going to cost. And so having that held in reserve until those things are settled is the right thing to do.

Yes, sir.

And I agree one more time, which isn't very often. I got to admit, Commissioner Smith and I usually don't agree. But there's one more space where being a good fiscal steward, I have no problem following that thought process because that is where I live. And so since you brought up HNTB, I want you to know I'm meeting with the Darden Hill community and in that same vein of reorganizing. And we haven't spent the money. We haven't borrowed it. It's never too late is all I'm saying. It's never too late. There's going to be something that Carlos brings back for us to reevaluate the Darden Hill overall roadmap with transportation. And so I just want the community to know there's always an opportunity for your feedback. There's always a window. That's why this court is important. That's why the camera system, which everyone's pointing to me, is important for you to stay tuned in, listen to people, engage, because you have a voice all the way until the end.

One final note on the 2025 road certificates of obligation. HNTB did plan for $240 million of expenditures, which I believe that that's what we could have issued, but we only issued $200 million. So there is a difference there between what has been planned and what we have funded, just to let the court and the public know that at some point we will have to figure out if we want to continue those projects. how to fund the rest of them.

Thank you. Commissioners, I was asked for a 15-minute break. Anything else?

I would just say that on those certificates of obligation, we've also been very successful. I know I've got at least two projects that are being at least partially funded through grants from TxDOT or CAMPO. I know that I believe Commissioner Inglesby has one. I believe Commissioner Hammer has one.

Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. It's okay.

And so, yeah, those partnerships where we can get state and federal and regional partnership contributions, absolutely, those are top priorities. I, again, agree. Holy smokes. We're going to take a 15-minute recess. Okay, we are back from a short recess, and here is the next sequence of events. We will open the Hayes ISD K3, and then we're going to go K1, and then we're going to go K13. In that order, please open K3. K3.

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A RESOLUTION RELATING TO A PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVING TAX EXEMPT FINANCING IN THE MAXIMUM AGGREGATE PRINCIPLE AMOUNT OF $180 MILLION BY THE NATIONAL FINANCE AUTHORITY FOR THE BENEFIT OF PUBLIC PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, A TEXAS NONPROFIT, to finance the acquisition, design, construction, and equipping of single-family housing development and related amenities located at 10745 Camino Real, Yulin, Texas, 78640, for the use and benefit of Hayes Consolidated Independent School District.

We have a motion and a second. Was there someone here to shed light on that particular project from Bond Council? If you'll approach the podium, state your name and title, give us a... A bird's eye overview of the administrative task before us and then we'll move on.

Sure. My name is Amanda Stevens. I'm with OREC. So we're acting as bond counsel on this transaction. As you know, the IRS allows certain capital projects to be tax exempt. The county has issued their own bonds and received that exemption. and that subsidy in the past. It also allows this for nonprofits as well. And so the mechanism is just slightly different for nonprofits. And so this is part of the IRS requirements for nonprofit bonds is that we have a public hearing, which we held, and no members attended the public hearing, and then bring it before the local jurisdiction to kind of GIVE THE STAMP OF APPROVAL JUST FOR FEDERAL TAX PURPOSES ONLY. THERE'S NO LIABILITY TO THE COUNTY. THE COUNTY IS NOT INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT IN ANY WAY. IT'S JUST A PROCEDURAL MECHANISM THAT THE IRS EMBEDDED IN 1980s AND IT'S STUCK AROUND WITH US FOR A WHILE NOW. WE CAN ALSO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROJECT BUT THAT'S THE TASK FOR US.

PERFECT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER, ANY QUESTIONS?

I DON'T BELIEVE SO, JUDGE.

WE'VE HAD THIS IN THE PAST.

All good on this side? Explain the project.

Sure. Jason's also here, and he can help with that. But essentially, Hayes CISD has identified that they have a teacher shortage, housing shortage. And so they have entered into an agreement with the developer to develop out property that's currently owned by the district. And that property will be developed into single family units for teachers. So that will be a huge benefit to the district.

I just wanted the general public to have an understanding of why we would do this for a nonprofit. We don't do this in general because we're talking about elevating a tax, taking something away from our tax base that would in maybe not a direct way, but in a minuscule way, every single one of our other taxpayers would have to make up for whatever services or whatever is there. But this is a very special case. I think it's very needed, and that's the reason I think it's well brought forth today.

Yeah, and there definitely will be new students in the district. There will be other ways where there's advantages. And, again, the property is currently owned by Hayes ISCSD, so it's not being taken off a roll or anything like that.

Right on. Well, thank you, Commissioners. Roxanne, please call the roll.

Commissioner Hammer? Yes. Commissioner Inglesby? Yes. Commissioner Smith?

Yes.

Judge Becerra?

Yes. Thank you. Have a wonderful day. Please open K-1. K-1.

Discussion and possible action to approve a resolution of the Hays County Commissioner's Court establishing a 180-day temporary emergency water protection review period and corresponding temporary suspension of evaluation, processing, and approval for high water use and large-scale industrial projects in unincorporated Hays County. Directing the Office of Emergency Management and County Legal Counsel to identify lawful tools under the Governor's Active Drought Disaster Proclamation calling for a joint regional environmental review, formally petitioning the governor of Texas for a special legislative session to increase county authority to protect groundwater resources and regulate the water impacts of high water use projects, and authorizing the creation of the Hays County Water Advisory Task Force.

So moved. Thank you. Second. Would you do me a favor? Those that sign up to speak, call them up. Or was it online?

There's two in person, two emailed.

Perfect. Let's go in that order.

Matthew Garrison. Liz Gajados.

Hi. I'm Liz Guy. A lot of you may know me as Judge Sumter. But I am here to speak about this particular item because I think it's time that the courts stand up together and be with the citizens of this particular county. The people here really are suffering in terms of their water usage. They're conserving as much as they can. We're losing water every day to new development. Our aquifers are being stressed. There are many reasons that a pause is necessary. I remember the time I was working, actually. Debbie Inglesby and I, Commissioner Inglesby, worked together on this court, and we took risks for our citizens. We sued developers. We were part of protests for TCEQ permits. We did all kinds of things. We strengthened the subdivision rules to preserve and protect our aquifers. I think it's now time that we all begin to stand forward again and do these things that are necessary. A pause isn't going to hurt anyone. Hill County is leading the way. They've done exactly these things. Standing with our other counties will only strengthen our ability with the state to move them forward. So I'm in favor of this. This is something that isn't going to hurt anyone, and this is certainly something that we can do and certainly stand together with our citizens of this county. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker.

Laura Long from Wimberley. Commissioners, I am writing in support of Agenda Item K1, the proposed temporary emergency water protection review. As a licensed professional counselor practicing in western Hays County, I work with individuals and families navigating financial strain uncertainty, and cumulative stressors that affect communities' well-being. Water availability is not simply an infrastructure or development issue. Concerns about water reliability, groundwater depletion, drought conditions, and rising utility costs have real impacts on household stability, economic security, and quality of life. Recent conditions underscore why this issue deserves serious attention. According to the USGS gauge at Wimberley, the Blancos River annual mean flow during the last three completed water years ranged from approximately 8 to 12 cubic feet per second, compared with the long-term average of roughly 135 cubic feet per second. In the same period, Jacobs Well has repeatedly ceased flowing. Whether one views these conditions as a result of drought increasing demand or combination of factors, they demonstrate the importance of careful planning and stewardship of our water's resources. For that reason, I support court's efforts to evaluate available tools under the Governor's Drought Disaster Proclamation, pursue expanded county authority where needed, and establish a water advisory task force to help guide long-term planning. Taking time to access weather current Policies adequately protect Hayes County water resource is a prudent and responsible response response to current conditions I would also respectfully ask the court to address how agenda item k13 the proposed Hayes Commons development agreement relates to the concerns underlying agenda item k1 if the court determines that current condition warrants as current warrant as and emergency review period for major water use projects, residents deserve a clear explanation of how significant pending developments will be evaluated within that framework. Providing that clarity will strengthen the public's confidence that growth, economic development, property rights, and long-term water stability are being considered through a consistent and transparent process. Water is foundational to the future of Hays County. I urge court to adopt Agenda item K-1 and to clearly communicate how its goal will be applied to major development decisions moving forward. Thank you for your service and consideration.

One more written in.

Allison Romano from Wimberley. Commissioners, water is a precious resource that is fast becoming sacred in our county and the tables below. Courtesy of Hayes County residents, Laura Long, clearly illustrates the continued life of human beings and almost every living being on the planet depends on water. We stand at a critical moment and must act while we still have a chance to change, or at least slow this trajectory of sacred sea. Residents of Hays County need you to act in our best interest. Please do not be pressured by industries or other special interests that put profit over life itself. Vote in favor of item K-1. We are counting on you, most sincerely.

Perfect. And for the viewing public, do you mind, I know it's a little bit lengthy, but do you mind reading it so everyone knows what we're talking about? Roxanne? Yes. Thank you. And if, never mind. Read it. I meant never mind with what I was going to say. Please read it.

Resolution of the Hays County Commissioner's Court establishing a temporary emergency water protection review period and establish the Hays County High Water Demand Development Review Board. Whereas, Hayes County is experiencing prolonged and severe drought conditions leading to historic declines in regional aquifer levels and diminished water availability. And whereas the ongoing drought threatens the public health, safety, and welfare of county residents by increasing the emergency response burden, straining infrastructure, and compromising essential fire suppression needs. And whereas Texas Health and Safety Code Chapter 366 and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, TCEQ, rules designate Hays County as an authorized agent with direct regulatory authority over onsite sewage facilities, OSSF. And whereas certain industrial high water use projects present significant risks to public health and groundwater quality due to potential soil suitability limitations, system capacity overloads, and increased stormwater runoff risks. And whereas, Large-scale industrial high water use developments require technical and environmental evaluations that extend beyond the standard administrative resources available within county government. And whereas the Commissioner's Court seeks to evaluate and model these impacts to establish lawful health-based standards without implementing countywide zoning, and whereas the direct onsite water consumption of proposed data centers and similar computing facilities constitutes only one component of the total water demands associated with such projects, and the substantial electrical loads required to operate those facilities impose additional indirect strain on available water supplies, and costs through the water-energy nexus, including water used in electric generation and related infrastructure serving those demands. Whereas Article 16, Section 59 of the Texas Constitution declares the conservation and preservation of the state's water and other natural resources to be public rights and duties, and further provides that the legislature has responsibility to pass all such laws to protect these rights. and whereas effectively protecting shared groundwater resources requires unified regional cooperation among neighboring counties and groundwater conservation districts, as well as enhanced statutory authority from the state of Texas to properly regulate the unique impacts of industrial high-water use projects. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Commissioner's Court of Hays County, Texas, Section 1, establishment of temporary emergency review period. The Hays County Commissioner's Court hereby institutes a temporary emergency water protection review period. During this review period, the Commissioner's Court shall defer consideration of discretionary applications associated with industrial high water use projects to the extent such matters are lawfully subject to the discretion of the court. Such discretionary approvals include, but are not limited to, tax abatement agreements, development agreements, variance requests, and other discretionary approvals outlined by the Hays County Development Regulations. This temporary review applies strictly to specific categories of discretionary approval within the county's existing statutory and regulatory jurisdiction, creates no new regulatory or permitting authority, and shall not be construed as countywide zoning. Section two, duration and automatic expiration. This emergency review period shall remain in effect for a limited duration of 180 days from the date of the adoption of this resolution. This pause shall automatically expire at the conclusion of the 180-day period unless explicitly extended by the Commissioner's Court following the presentation of public findings. Section 3. DEFINITION OF INDUSTRIAL HIGH WATER USE PROJECT. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS RESOLUTION, AN INDUSTRIAL HIGH WATER USE PROJECT IS DEFINED AS ANY DEVELOPMENT OR OPERATION MEETING ANY OF THE FOLLOWING MEASURABLE THRESHOLDS. ONE, THE APPLICANT REQUESTS, REPRESENTS OR SUBMITS MATERIALS REFLECTING ANTICIPATED WATER DEMAND MORE THAN 25,000 GALLONS OF WATER PER DAY OR TWO, THE PROJECT INCLUDES DATA PROCESSING, SERVER HOSTING, cloud computing, or comparative facilities designed for an electrical load of 5 megawatts or greater. Or three, the project includes industrial cooling operations requiring more than 10,000 gallons of water per day of ongoing water use for thermal management. Or four, the project includes one or more on-site sewage facilities, OSSF, subject to review under TCEQ rules due to the system size, site conditions, wastewater volume, or surface water and groundwater concerns. Section four, mandatory written findings. The Commissioner's Court bases this temporary action on the following documented emergency conditions. One, aquifer levels. Historic drops in the Trinity and Edwards aquifers threaten local well sustainability and residential water security. Two, drought declaration. Active local and state drought declarations confirm persistent water scarcity. Three, water availability. Declining surface and groundwater supplies limit reliable availability for the new massive demands. Four, OSSF limits. High volume wastewater discharges risk exceeding local soil absorption capabilities resulting in potential system failures and environmental contamination. Five, runoff risk. Large scale industrial footprints significantly increase impervious cover creating severe storm water runoff flooding and localized aquifer recharge contamination risks. Six, emergency response burden. Water scarcity severely limits the county's capacity to handle concurrent emergency events. Seven, fire suppression needs. Depleted water reserves compromise the critical infrastructure required for active firefighting operations. And eight, infrastructure impacts. Rapid, uncoordinated water hauling and heavy industrial construction traffic threaten the physical integrity of county transportation infrastructure. Section 5, State Drought Proclamation Alignment. The Commissioner's Court hereby directs the Office of Emergency Management, OEM, and the county legal staff to identify all lawful emergency management tools available under the active State-issued drought disaster proclamation. The county shall not claim or exercise any authority not clearly delegated by said proclamation. Section 6, enforcement of OSSF authority. Hays County shall strictly exercise its statutory authority as a TCEQ authorized agent under Texas Health and Safety Code Chapter 366. This oversight focuses on public health, wastewater management, soil suitability, system capacity, and groundwater protection. This authority shall not be utilized for general land use control. Section 7, creation of the Hays County High Water Demand Development Review Board. The temporary review period shall serve as the implementation period for the Hays County High Water Demand Development Review Board, or review board, and official advisory board to the Commissioner's Court and Development Services Department for the review of proposed industrial high water demand developments including data centers, large scale industrial facilities, and other projects with significant water demands. The review board shall consist of representatives appointed by the commissioner's court, including and not limited to elected officials, development services staff, water resource professionals, emergency services representatives, development stakeholders, and members of the public with relevant expertise. The review board is directed to one, Evaluate proposed industrial high water demand developments and their potential impacts on water availability, aquifers, public infrastructure, emergency services, and long-term drought resiliency. Two, review water availability studies, utility drought contingency plans, conservation measures, and other supporting documentation submitted by applicants. Three, provide written findings and recommendations to the Commissioner's Court regarding the potential impacts of proposed developments on the public health, safety and welfare of Hays County residents. Four, recommend permanent policies and development review standards related to industrial high water demand projects for consideration by the Commissioner's Court. And five, implement the Hays County high water demand development review checklist, Exhibit A, during the temporary review period, all industrial high water demand development applications shall complete the review process and submit the required documentation before consideration of any applicable county permits, approvals, or infrastructure agreements. Such recommendations may also consider other environmental and public health risks including noise, air quality, and the general welfare and orderly growth of the unincorporated areas of the county. Section eight, call for joint environmental review. The Commissioner's Court hereby issues a formal call to neighboring counties, local groundwater conservation districts, and regional water authorities to initiate a collaborative joint regional environmental review. This joint effort shall aim to study the cumulative transboundary impacts of industrial high water use projects on regional aquifers, map shared vulnerabilities, and establish unified data sharing protocols to preserve regional water security. Section nine, petition for special legislative session. The commissioner's court hereby authorizes the submission of a formal petition to the governor of Texas requesting the call of a special legislative session. This petition shall urgently request that the Texas legislature expand the statutory authority of Texas counties granting them localized powers to protect vulnerable surface water and groundwater resources and directly regulate the water availability and infrastructure impacts on industrial high water use projects within their jurisdictions. Exhibit A, Industrial High Water Use Development Review Checklist. Applicants for any development meeting the thresholds of an industrial high water use project under Section 2 must submit a completed review package containing the following engineering data and dependent impact studies and local transparency verifications to the County Development Services Department. One, resource consumption projects, water and power, daily and peak water demands, Provide certified projections for total daily water consumption in gallons per day, explicitly identifying all planned sources, public water supply, groundwater wells, surface water, and hauled water or hauled water. Cooling system specifications. Submit comprehensive mechanical engineering data for any evaporative cooling, closed loop cooling, or alternative industrial cooling systems. Power grid impact study. Disclose total projected megawatt, MW, demand, substation requirements, and a formal service availability and grid reliability assessment from the local electric utility provider. Two, environmental and wastewater management. Large capacity OSSF design. Provide detailed engineering plans for on-site sewage facilities, including comprehensive localized soil suitability analysis, hydraulic loading rates, and long-term absorption capability studies matching peak capacity. Stormwater runoff and flooding model. Submit pre and post development hydrology reports measuring the impact of expanded impervious cover on local drainage basins along with stormwater pollution prevention plan, SWPPP. Air emissions and off-grid energy. Provide compliance documentation and copies of TCEQ permit applications for all heavy equipment, auxiliary facilities, or emergency diesel backup generators. Three. community impact and infrastructure protection. Traffic impact and roads damage assessment. Submit a comprehensive traffic impact analysis, TIA, factoring heavy vehicle loads during construction and operations, paired with a proposed infrastructure protection agreement to remedy damaged county roadways. noise and light pollution controls. Provide an independent acoustic engineering report proving compliance with local quality of life standards, explicitly modeling continuous low frequency hums from industrial cooling units or generator testing. Site plan and future expansion layout. Submit visual architectural renderings, localized facility setbacks from property boundaries, and clear project framing from any future phased footprint expansions. And four, mandatory public notice and community transparency. On-site physical signage. Provide proof of installation for highly visible weather resistant structural placards placed at the street facing perimeter of the proposed site detailing the nature of the industrial high water use application. Informal media announcements. Provide affidavits, affidavit proofs of a published public notice detailing the project specs, run consecutively in regional newsprint and local digital media outlets. Adopted this the ninth day of June, 2026. We'll start with you.

What do you think of it? Wow.

Well, Judge, I certainly believe that, you know, we need to present a resolution that we can all support on the court. I mean, I agree with the comments that, well, I know are by Judge Sumter made. I mean, absolutely. You know, we want to protect those resources. We understand that there are... AREAS OF CONCERN. I KNOW THE WESTERN SIDE ESPECIALLY. IT'S ALL OVER THE COUNTY BUT WE KNOW THERE ARE BIG CONCERNS ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF OUR COUNTY WITH THE AQUIFERS AND THE DEPLETION OF THOSE PRECIOUS RESOURCES. I KNOW THAT WE SAID THIS IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS. I mean, I received this proclamation at 3.30 yesterday. I hadn't had a really good chance to review it and talk to legal about it. I don't know if legal has even seen it. What I don't want to do is... I mean, we talked about the cost to our citizens, and we know that other counties have been sued adopting resolutions that they had no authority to do, and so that concerns me. Does it concern me more than the preservation of our natural resources? I don't know. We need to consider that and see what the best... YOU KNOW, DIRECTION IS TO TAKE. ALTHOUGH I WANT TO SUPPORT A RESOLUTION, I GUESS I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING IT. AND CHASE, YOU'RE SITTING AT THAT SEAT TODAY. AGAIN, IT SAYS A PAUSE OR AN 80-DAY REVIEW PERIOD. DO WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HAVE THAT PAUSE? IS IT A MORATORIUM, I GUESS, IS REALLY WHAT I'M ASKING IN YOUR OPINION. AND THEN GO AHEAD. I GUESS THAT'S MY FIRST QUESTION.

CHASE YOUNG, ASSISTANT CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY, CIVIL DIVISION. This isn't a de facto moratorium, but there are still a couple of issues with portions of the resolution as I've heard it and as I've kind of reviewed. I have your notes. You have your notes? Okay, perfect. Good. And as Judge talked about, we did discuss it at one point. Um, and the, the biggest issues that I'm seeing here are going to be section 7.5 in conjunction with exhibit a, um, the, the, the calls to talk to the legislature, to try to get a special session, to coordinate with community. Of course, that is always the pr the prerogative of the court to exercise their bully purpose to do that. Um, but here, um, as, It's frustrating. Most of the times counties only have the authority that they are explicitly granted. And so whenever the resolution says that in order to move forward with any sort of permit that there would have to be certain studies that are required before we even consider it, that would run afoul of a lot of the same risk that something like that a moratorium would have because we don't have the statutory authority to require some of the things inside of exhibit A. And so that's, those are kind of some of my concerns with that portion there. There's, I can go on more detail if you'd like, but that's kind of the broad strokes. There's a couple of minor things.

Okay. Well, I did highlight that, Judge. And so I'm wondering, and we can certainly go down and hear from others. If we were to consider this today, I mean, are there some revisions then? And I don't know. I mean, we even tried that last time. You know, let's not take any action right now. Let's, you know, have legal take a look at it and see if we can come up with some language that better fits, you know, the concerns.

I can answer some of that. And yes, we've... In the first pass, we were visiting with civil division legal. And we came up with a much shorter, more concise framework. And I tabled it anyway. And that was, I think, in February. And giving everyone more time to digest the idea and the, I know it's bold. Judge Suttner said it exactly right. It is bold. And I'm asking the court to be bold with me. I know. And it's uncomfortable facts. I agree. But I think we gave the legal, because I don't do anything in a vacuum. I always dialogue with all the attorneys and the community people. And we've done a statewide scrape of Hill County and everybody else. What's going on? What's useful? I deliberately chose to bring it back after the election because people were trying to saddle me with this was a political stunt. Okay, elections are over. I'm not going anywhere. This is still important and I'm still going to keep pressing for it and I'm not going away. And so for that reason, I remain the county judge for seven more months and I will continue every freaking day to fight for our community. And so that's why it's back today, deliberately after the election. So the, oh, this is electioneering, this is politicking, this is campaigning, can be all thrown out the window. This is not political posturing. This is doing what's right for not only our community, but our region. And so... and I was showing Chase while he was talking that I have all of his notes here ready to talk about him because what a lot of people don't realize is how this court has to legally operate. And so this is the space, this is the time, I'm not saying it for you, I know you know this, for us to deliberate, to say, hey, I'm not comfortable with this, or hey, civil division says we should remove the word must and instead put should. Okay, no problem. So to answer your question as is this editable through my mind as the author of this document, 100%. I am bringing you a second pass strategically timed after the election, asking humbly for your support, and unless you take all the teeth out of it, which we shouldn't, I am open to all edits that will help shore up support, but yet send a meaningful message that this community, 350,000 people, Residents of Hays County are, the broader the statement, the narrower the mind, I get it, but generally speaking, are not in favor of this type of hijacking of our resources. And so my aim is to send that message loud and clear because I believe in economic development. I believe in people investing in our communities. I believe in it 100%. I'm pro-business. but not at the expense of millions of people's drinking water and not at the expense of the hum that we hear everybody going crazy over when they build it next to their homes. It's the vulnerable, the underrepresented, and it is the community that is most at risk that is going to have this plopped onto their footprint and we must speak up in my opinion. So whatever you want to edit, I am happy to listen. I'm all ears.

Yeah, well, I mean, and I would look to our civil division to help with those edits, Judge, because, you know, and I will say, you know, Commissioner Cohen and I, we're going to bring a resolution for consideration also, but we ended up speaking with certain members of our community, Virginia Parker, Bobby Levinsky, Abigail What's Abigail's last name? Anyway, Lindsay. And so they felt that maybe we needed to revise also that resolution that we were going to be proposing. And so I want to ensure that it does have teeth, that we are sending a clear message. But, you know, we also want to do it in such a way that we're protecting the county. And so, you know, that is the section that I had highlighted that I had concerns with because I really wasn't sure. I hadn't spoken to anybody about it. But if we can work through better language on that, I'm, you know, happy to consider that.

And which one specifically since you are familiar with the effort? It was the Section 7.

Section 7.

7.5. Yes.

Yeah, the five. I'm sorry. Yes.

And Jacob, I asked Jacob to be here because he was actually the one that was helping create all the keystrokes for this and helping to circulate it through all the different spaces. Section five.

Seven.

Oh, seven. Section seven. Commissioner, I think you're 7.5? Yes.

That's the checklist component of Section 7.

And what part of the checklist, I got to it, thank you. My office did such a wonderful job. They put it in a bigger font, so I have a few more pages to turn through. So thank you.

And Jacob, I think you know which one I'm talking about, correct? The 7.5.

Which really applies to all of Exhibit A, the quote-unquote checklist. And I know Sybil's given us a couple of comments on it, Chase, is it fair to say you've gone through the checklist and there are some workable components to it?

There are some portions on here that we either do already, that we have. Depending on the type or size of development, we already do certain traffic impact analysis. There are some things with OSSFs that we can require, but we already do as a part of our normal course of business. But the majority that I've, I'm going off of memory here, were going to be things that are problematic for the county to do. For instance, Judge, you mentioned the noise, the shaking, which is obviously extraordinarily annoying and detrimental. Unfortunately, the county doesn't really have a type of zoning or regulatory authority to modify how loud something can be. We have to go with what are the common nuisance kind of standards, which is 85 decibels or greater, right? Which is unfortunately a very high standard to me. That's actually quite loud. Yes.

So to leave something in there that says addressing the 85 decibels, your... saying identify it and at 85 decibels, are you saying leave it out because we may not find it agreeable for them to make the assessment? What are you suggesting?

So if we want to go through step by step and say that like this is something we could have, this is a different variation. I'd request more time to go through it because I don't want to give the court bad advice on what we can do. You bet.

I just want to get the general tone of what you're thinking of that one sentence in the roadmap.

With that, we couldn't put the onus, we couldn't shift the burden onto the data center to say we're not going to do this at that point. That would still be a study, a verification, a thing that we can't require. If we can record that they are going over 85 decibels, then of course we would have the ability to have some sort of reactionary suit through the common nuisance sections, right? Right. And since my...

Sorry, Chase, I'm going to just back and forth. I hope you don't feel interrupted because we usually let people talk forever and then we stop. You're the client, Judge. But I just want to back and forth to keep it a little tidier for the viewing public. And so asking that they do a... assessment of the list of things that are going to be humming in their footprint to make sure it doesn't go over 85. Is your opinion, your legal direction suggestion to the court is we shouldn't ask them to articulate that humming quality and quantity?

One quibble. We can ask them. We can request them to do it voluntarily. That's fine. If they want to be a good partner with the county in that way, they can always voluntarily submit that information. We can always ask for it. But we can't have it as a requirement to then go to next sort of like platting applications to OSSF or anything else. Because at that point, we run afoul of the same sort of analysis that a moratorium would be because we're doing a thing that we don't have the statutory authority to do. And then we would run afoul of the shot clock with plats, with fire code, with we have the same risk with our OSSF and with our national flood insurance program. We'd potentially open ourselves to inverse regulatory takings claims as well as federal takings claims. And there's potentially some equal protection arguments as well, though we're still looking into that right now.

And so, Jacob, the suggestion of doing that noise study is... How do you see it?

I think what Chase is saying, it's not an enforceable component. However, we can make it part of a development review process and not contingent on moving or getting an approval.

Yeah, like you say, requesting it.

Yeah, I would even say, you know, if we can, whatever, I don't know about the 85 decibels that we want to, you know, insert language like that, but that we are like... RECOMMENDING AN IMPLEMENTATION OR INSTALLATION OF SOME KIND OF NOISE BARRIER. I MEAN, I THINK THE WORDING, YOU KNOW, THE RECOMMENDATION, WE CAN ALSO PUT THE 85 DECIBEL, WHATEVER. I DON'T KNOW. I'M JUST, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THAT'S ALSO IMPORTANT, BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, CHASE. YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T MANDATE THAT THEY DO IT, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY REQUEST OR RECOMMEND THAT THEY, YEAH. REQUEST IS A BETTER WORD.

Commissioner, one could argue how would we know if they are planning or setting up to exceed the 85 decibels without some kind of informational request on their behalf or from them?

So turning this resolution into a request of the decibel reading is fine with me because at least it puts it in focus. We request of it. And then we can later publicly decide, well, we asked this of them, but they didn't do it. But at least it will be public information as to these are the things that will make us see the picture completely versus, oh, we didn't think of that. Because none of us, for the most part, none of us build data centers for a living. And so we have to work together to understand, oh, yeah, that humming sound you hear about everybody complaining about driving them crazy. Oh, yeah, that's something we should incorporate for our Hays County residents as part of the consideration process.

I agree. And I think if they want to be a good neighbor, as Chase mentioned, you know that this is something that they will do because they have past experience and know that this is an issue.

Right. So we will happily yield and make that into a request instead of demand. Okay. What else? What else are you going to do, Commissioner? Yes. What else, Chase, was of concern? I have your notes right here, or do you want to just open yours?

Let me, if you don't mind, this is the same one that we... Yeah, yeah. Okay. One second.

To help with the noise, is it possible that we can require them for a certain setback that we don't, is there any type of enforceable, like maybe we're not going to the full enforceable limits? I know we talked about Comal County and what they do currently with their setbacks, and we're redoing our subdivision regulations currently, so we're kind of getting into the nitty-gritty of all those things.

So there are some tools that we have available there, but a lot of times they're going to be triggered on the platting. And a lot of times these data centers, what they're doing is they're buying up things that are far greater than 10 acres, which means then that they're going to get an automatic exemption from our authority, which is not something that we created. It's a state-made exemption that we have no control over. And so inside of those ones that are subject to our subdivision regs, we have setback regulations that are there that would provide SOME KIND OF BUFFER TO THAT AREA. WE CAN ALWAYS REQUEST.

I MEAN, YOU EVEN TALKED TO ADAM HAINES FROM THE CUC AND HE SAYS THERE'S NOT BEEN A SINGLE DATA CENTER THAT HASN'T ABIDED BY WHAT THE COUNTY HAS REQUESTED. THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

But I was really smart.

I would just say just when we're talking about 85 decibels, that's the statutory limit that we can enforce as a county under state law. And for example, Nutty Brown Cafe was in my precinct. I say recently closed. It closed three years ago. You could hear Nutty Brown Cafe four miles away at night. They had 24-hour noise or sound monitoring at the property line and provided that data multiple times when requested to all the HOAs surrounding and in my office. And so that 85 decibels really, it doesn't do any good. It's not an enforceable limit. I have some real, the things that, I could support this resolution, but go ahead. I was going to say, is it okay if I go first?

Yes, yes, please.

Okay. Yeah, no, I mean, I'd like to hear from legal. We got this yesterday as I skimmed through it. It's a four page resolution, which is kudos to you for being very thorough.

I've had five months to work through it. I'm trying to do the right thing for our community. Sorry, I was just coughing right before you talked.

You're good. You're good. So when it comes down to it, and I think that there's a reason why, I don't know if y'all saw, but Hill County did rescind their moratorium as of yesterday. So there is obviously some type of legal repercussions that they saw coming. So we have to do things the right way. But I am also down to set precedent from a county perspective, especially when it comes to our water. So when you talk about, basically when I look through this in a nutshell, because it's four pages long, so for the viewing public that doesn't want to read all the four pages, we're basically saying that you have 180 days to not allow discretionary approval. So that's going to be variances, DAs, any type of tax abatements. So any type of thing that gives them... Yeah, exactly. It's not necessarily saying that we're not going to do what the state legislature has told us that we can and cannot enforce. It's just kind of going above and beyond for them and not giving them any incentives. I don't think that this court would support incentives anyways from a data center perspective just due to our past voting history. But then it also establishes what a high industrial usage is from a county perspective because there is not any type of legal definition from the state of Texas on what high industrial usage is from a county lens. So this is just giving Hayes County a definition for that. And then it's also asking the state for guidance and assistance to local authority on these issues, which we drastically need. We need the state legislators to step in and tell us, hey, you have authority in X, Y, and Z so we can make decisions best for our county because right now the state telling the counties how to operate is just not going to work. especially when it comes to our water and our natural resources. And then it establishes a review board. And if this does go forward, I'd love to be on that review board because this is my lane where I'd like to spend all my time if I could. But I think that just going through with a fine-tooth comb and checking out all of these developments, especially when it comes to data centers, and I think in this day and age, we need to do this. And I'm all for supporting... I HOPE EVERY SINGLE COUNTY COULD SAY, HEY, STATE, WE NEED SOME HELP, WE NEED SOME GUIDANCE, YOU NEED A SPECIAL SESSION, YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS A PRIORITY. AND I THINK THAT THEY'RE LISTENING. WE DON'T KNOW. WE'LL SEE.

BUT... COMMISSIONER HAMMER, THROUGH THESE EFFORTS, THAT'S HOW WE GET THEIR ATTENTION. Honestly, I am so grateful. I always say this. I thank the media for covering Hays County and what we do because people don't know what you're doing unless you tell them. And so that's how we get their attention is by moving. If we sit still and do nothing, sit in our hands and be a fear mongered into a corner, then we stay quiet. We stay in our lane. We stay in our place. We do nothing. And then we generate no attention.

It's been very obvious that our constituents care about this. It's probably the most obvious thing in the world. I don't even want to say the word data center ever again. With that also being said, we are redoing our subdivision regulations. Because of this data center discussion that's been going on, they are incorporating as much as they can from that perspective as well into this. I think it's a good, if we want to put them side by side and kind of work in tandem with our development regulations to make sure that whatever we do come up with, it is the best thing for our water and our natural resources. Again, I represent Western Hayes County. There's not a more dire need than this. That's right.

Before I go to Commissioner Smith, Chase, or Jacob, do you guys want to add anything as staff to the program? What Commissioner Hammer has mentioned. Anything? If there's nothing, that's okay. No.

YOU'RE CORRECT, THE DEVELOPMENT RESOLUTIONS AND REGULATIONS ARE COMING DOWN THE PIPE. BECAUSE WE ARE LIMITED ON WHAT WE HAVE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE A LOT OF SOLUTIONS IN THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT ARE COMING DOWN THE PIPE. THIS IS KIND OF A UNIQUE ANIMAL THAT WE'VE LITERALLY BEEN WORKING ON. THE BONES OF THIS RESOLUTION HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR SEVERAL MONTHS. the actual nexus of it. Because of our limitations, the development regulations probably aren't going to help us. Outside the box, thinking on some of these programmatic or requests, that's where we're going to find at least the first step.

Well, and I agree with you, but we have been looking through other counties and seeing what they've been doing to push the limit as much as they possibly can. And maybe if they get, you know, they get tried for it in court, they might lose, but it would be a loss that wouldn't truly, like, have a lot of impact. So they're kind of taking it, doing the out-of-the-box thinking, and Comal County is one from a setback perspective. How can we push that boundary to get them, you know, from that perspective? And there's also other things from a water perspective that we can require. the public water PUCs to provide to be able to approve developments. There's certain things you can do that they're kind of looking into.

Commissioner Smith? Let me first say I appreciate the effort here. I think it's a good start. Some of the things and some of the concerns that we had with the previous version aren't They're addressed here. I'm probably the only native of Hill County here, but I grew up in Hill County and still have a ranch there. And I can tell you that their commissioners learned very quickly the fear and understanding of what we discussed in our court three months ago, four months ago. Within two days, they were hit with over a $100 million lawsuit, and that's why they repealed. They did a repeal within a week. We've proven in this court, and I'll give great kudos to former Commissioner Schell, but former Commissioner Schell and myself are the ones who brought forth the resolution to sue Kendra Morgan when Kendra Morgan decided to build a pipeline across Hayes County, and we knew it was a losing battle. But we did it in conjunction with the city of Kyle. They stood with us. And I felt like I would file that resolution today if we were facing a similar situation. I view this very similar to that. The difference is that under that lawsuit, we really had a situation where we thought we could have some impact. On this one, there are certain aspects of this that I really have concern for the simple fact that we outlined the first time we had this conversation. Most importantly that under the 30-day shot clock if we deny some of these things or if we require that checklist and they submit, we have to make a decision within that 30 days. I would really like for legal to have the time to review those individual things under our development regs and that checklist to ensure that we aren't setting them up for immediate success. Because at day 31, if they've submitted those correctly and we choose to not consider them, then we automatically have to accept whatever they submitted under state law. Some of the specific concerns I have, Chase, that I have questions on, under Section 3, Item 4, and Section 4, Item 4 on the OSSF standards, what I don't think many would know or talk about is if we required this same delay on anyone who is anyone who is subject to a TCEQ OSSF or Texas Commission on Environmental Policy OSSF. We have restaurants that have OSSFs that are regulated by TCEQ. I mean, we're actually, and so we have small businesses that we are going to directly impact on those. Right now, we're going to consider a development agreement later today for a business that if we did not, because of, if we did not offer them a variance, it would be cheaper for them to go to the state and take longer. But to go to the state and just completely be outside of our review process, but because they want to be within our review process, We are getting other things out of that development, like we're getting dark sky standards, we're getting things like that that we wouldn't have the ability to do otherwise. And I don't want us to take that tool out of our toolbox. And I'm talking about the development agreement specifically for the Driftwood store.

Commissioner, that wouldn't be considered a high water demand.

The point is they made a business decision because they could not meet our OSSF standards to either do a development agreement with us or they could have just gone to the state and gotten an OSSF. And instead of 3,800 gallons a day building a septic system to 5,000 gallons a day, they would fall under the state. And under this, those two items, item 3.4 and 4.4, that would capture a number of what we would consider high users under that. So those two provisions, again, I'm okay with a lot of this. Those two things, I don't know. And one of the things I want to ask Chase is, can we make our rules pursuant to completion of a state process if it's outside of our process? Because once they submit an application to us, we have to consider it within that 30-day shot clock. And so it doesn't matter if they, because I've got, we have facilities in my precinct that have had an OSSF through the state for five years, but they've never started construction. So now if they, just because they have that or they chose to go through that process, that state process, it would put us in violation if we waited 30 days if they submit for their driveway permit or something like that. That's what my concern is. It's a logistical concern.

Okay, that's good and I appreciate it. But I just want to tell you as the creator of this document, co-creator, I never want to take full credit. I would never do anything to harm any small business. Never, ever, ever. And so it is, as Commissioner Inglesby pointed out, it is repeatedly large industrial high water users. Industrial, by definition, would not be a restaurant, not a driftwood gas station, none of those things.

Under this provision right here, it says the project includes one or more on-site sewage facilities subject to review under the TCEQ rules due to system size, site condition, wastewater volume, or surface water and groundwater concerns.

And so we can make sure we tie it tightly to the large single industrial user for that point.

I'm fine with that. But if you tie it directly to whether or not they're under TCEQ review... That wraps in an entire group. And I say that because, for example, if you're familiar with my precinct, the corner of Nutty Brown Road and 1826, they are under TCEQ review because they are a public water supplier. To put in a gas station, they had to go to the state and get a public water supply permit. A restaurant, I mean, I've got over 200, I think now, public water, what are considered public water supplies in my precinct. And the vast majority of them are either camps or a restaurant or an individual, you know, because they have to have those food service facilities, they have to be certified as a public water system by TCEQ. It would wrap all of those into it, even if they only use 150 to 200 gallons a day. And that's what my concern is.

So, Chase, you can help us make sure that we weed that concern out, right? You can help us word it so that it doesn't include restaurants and campsites. Thank you.

Those are my concerns. Very good. Very good. We can address that. The other thing that I have, under the review board, I want some clear... some clear direction from legal as to what ability we have to have the outside public make those individual decisions. Recommendations. Recommendations. And how would that work within the shot clock process? Because we would still have to make those decisions in 30 days. And so whomever is on this, it's going to be a full-time job. If not a full-time job, it's going to be, in order to get all of the materials that we're asking for, it's going to have to be designated down to, it can't be a committee of 30 people trying to make a decision on this, or 15 people or 10 or whatever, if we have to build that into that four-week process that we have for every application. Jacob was going to answer that maybe?

Well, I was just going to point out that We don't have to go with all five of these. They can be on a more permanent, large-scale recommendation and not have to get something in by the 30-day review. There's no reason that can't be taken out of the purview of the review board.

How many of these projects do we currently even have in our application window right now? How many of these projects would even exist? I don't know if Michael or Chase can give clarity to that. I believe one. None? What, you said one? One with...

I'm aware of one, but I don't know if there is another.

I mean, this wouldn't be... I agree.

Thank you. I agree with you. We have to ratchet down the individual items on that checklist, because if not, there are going to be other entities out there that we're going to capture that they're going to have to review. That's the point I'm making.

And and Chase will make sure I mean we're recording everything to make sure that we make the edits to anyone else except the intended net cast towards that audience and I will say that I I know this much Commissioner and and I know you're understanding it more and more the longer you're in office, but I Pretty quickly get a statewide view of things and in my capacity as County Judge Commissioner Smith You see it to how quickly we get a statewide view of things and I'll tell you this we have already just by talking about it in February, even though I tabled it, okay, but just by talking about it and showing the community stance on these issues and where we stand as a community, pitchfork ready, there has already been a pivot on some of those things that we're thinking about coming to Hays County, and I'm sorry, but that's on their leadership. They've bounced off to neighboring counties. And so my point is our stance, our message, and needs to continue to be loud and clear if you want to come here we're gonna have a conversation and so that's what this helps us to do and so there were when we started crafting this six proposed operations looming around the area but even still because I don't want to be Hill County I still remain very concerned about being sued and doing the right thing all balancing it together I made sure that this said because I know there are no others to make sure that this document said future. So no one can say, well, I'm going to sue you like hell. No, because this was not in that timeline. And so we are very cautious and careful to scrape statewide what's working, what isn't working, and how we move forward in a meaningful way. Because I repeat, this is and has not been a political stunt. So Jacob, you're saying we can easily modify that and keep the integrity of the spirit. Am I right?

We can make that review board more of an advisory for policies and more 30,000 feet as opposed to reacting to an individual application.

And look, the one that came to court here back last year, I'll be honest. The thing that they never met with me And the thing that upset me the most about it was, quite literally, they already had prescribed water capacity for what they wanted to do. And I've spoken to our fire marshal, and he's telling me that in that area, on that water system, that that water system is denying fire suppression flow for small businesses. So we have fire code review going on on these small businesses, and they're having to put in tank storage and those kind of things because the water system won't provide them fire flow, but they're going to provide literally tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of gallons a day to this facility, which is ludicrous to me. My question is, because I also said on my next question is, and I use that example because I also sit on the West Travis County PUA board. And we've had a moratorium on all development for about six months. And I say a moratorium, we are not issuing any water, like no water meters. And we're doing that at the prompting of the two Hays County members of that board because we feel like it's the right thing to do. I don't know how, looking at this, if they can produce a valid letter from a water provider that the water provider has a non-standard service agreement or an agreement to serve. I don't know how we regulate that because we don't have that statutory control. We can't depend on these water systems to do the right thing, even though they should. I don't know how we control that and how we work that into our review process. So I'd like to hear more from legal as they continue to review this, to look at that aspect of it, because I think that's really the, I mean, that's where the rubber meets the road when we're looking at these things is the water usage more so than anything else.

And we can absolutely address it like we did the sound. This is what we would like. That's what would be good and right and nice for this community you want to be a part of. but it's not mandatory so that they see it and everyone else looking in sees the same answer. I think the same answer applies to that water as the other, because when the governor created that emergency declaration, I simply echoed the governor's emergency declaration. As a director of emergency management, I said, public health, emergency, we have these concerns, and I encourage all water providers in the Hays County footprint to go to stage four or equivalent. For example, Kyle does not have a stage four. or equivalent, hence the phrase. And if they do that, you're exactly right. If they do that, then it's a moot point. But I am trying to give everyone political cover to do the right thing by the people they are charged with serving and representing. And so anything where we don't, I'll agree to this, Chase, it's my document, anything where we don't have statutory authority, I want to put it as a requested item but not mandatory item because I don't want this to go again tabled where we don't make a public statement to the state that we are currently okay with the status quo and we hope the ledge will do something next time they meet, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I want to send a strong message from our strong community with a strong but respectful vote today.

That's my aim. Well, and that's my concern is, again, legal got this at what time?

Well, we worked on it last week, too, though. The last version, they got it yesterday at 3, 3.30, like everyone else.

Mike, I have concerns that I don't think they're going to be able to answer today. And I fully expect this to come back with input from everyone from the court and output from legal answering our questions before the next court. That would be my anticipation. The other thing that I have questions on, you know, we're working on a state water plan right now. Our county is unique because we're split into two different regions. We're Region K and Region L. And there's a process for that. And there's a coordination effort amongst those on how we would look at overall water supply and how we might have additional authority. I like the call for joint environmental review amongst counties because, to your point, whenever we take action here, they just buy property in the next county, right? And it could be the same water table. It could be the same water regionally. I like that. I just need some clarification on how that could be done or if that should be done through Region K and Region L. I think that that's probably the right place. But is there a way for us to take recommendations from Region K and Region L and implement those into whatever structure or review structure? I think there might be, which would be an additional hook for us to look at in here. But I don't know that I'm, at least with the items, section three, item four, section four, item four, I'm not okay with that.

Okay. Pause that for one second. Let me give you a reply. I didn't want to interrupt you. But the first part of your comment and question was the regionalism. And I believe in regionalism. I believe in partnerships. I believe in coordinating with partners. And that's why I have the – I've done the research. And there is kind of like the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, CAMPO, which does regional planning and pulls down federal and state funds for particular projects that benefit the long-term gain, the goal of transportation. We have the capacity here to create the same thing for this purpose, and I could easily, and I have their numbers, talk to Travis County. Comal County and our neighboring counties, and we create that equivalency by choosing to do it.

And it's formed. And just for the general public, Campo has been looking at expanding into water itself for probably two years, three years now. And so that effort is already underway, Judge. I would tell you, it's currently underway. I think that my Another thing that is feeding into my concern, I think all of us are members, and the general public would not know this, but I think all of us are members of the TAC listserv, which is the Texas Association of Counties listserv. And it has every single county commissioner and judge in the state on it. Within the last three days on that listserv, there's been, Commissioner Inglesby, you tell me, seven different resolutions passed. Shared amongst them and all of them are different every one of them is different and tack I know tack is looking at those and Determining and telling them okay this portion of your resolution is legal this portion of it is not you can have enforcement here I think this is and just giving our own legal staff the time to do that. I think would be well worthwhile and

Yeah, and I was going to mention that I had that written down. You know, if you look at the TAC listserv, yes, there have been numerous resolutions. I think this can be a model, you know, for other counties. I know that Jacob's been writing down notes. Chase, I hate to put you in a spot, but I don't know, is there time? for Jacob maybe to refine some of this language that we've shared today, let you review it sometime during the day.

Commissioner, I love where you're going. We have all that done. We have all of Chase's notes, honestly. And Kama Davis, I see you in there. She's been working with us also on this since last week. This, I know it may be framed, and I'm not trying to make civil division look bad or put them in a bad light, in a negative light. I am not trying to do that. but they've had time to see this in a useful way. We've got some good notes from them, and we are prepared because they also, in their wonderful way, they also offered to make the updates for us. And I said, Jacob, hold on, because this is supposed to be a working conversation. And so we are prepared, and they've seen it, and I have all of their notes right here in several pages stapled. Make the edits, and I'll table it for now, and we've got plenty to do in court, and bring it back because I really, really... I don't want to take it down six more months. I want us to push something, and if you're uncomfortable with a part, well, then let's edit it. I'm happy to edit it, but I want to happily move that along. Okay, sound good? So we've got another item right after this one that's a good idea. Is there something else you want them to look at besides the legal?

I was just going to say, Chase, Michael, do you all think that today is enough time, or would you like more time to review? What are your thoughts? Chase is very, very good at his job. I want to just say that right now. But he is also someone that gets in the weeds and knows for a fact whether or not.

I appreciate that, Commissioner Hammer. Respectfully, Judge, I do think I would prefer to have some more time based on the recommendation was essentially to remove it if we're looking at winding a little bit more nuanced on where do we have a little bit more authority in some areas or not. I'd really prefer to be able to have more time than just today when I'm also in court doing that to be able to give proper legal advice. I'm not sure if just today is going to be enough time.

I also feel like this is an important move for the court. I know that Commissioner Cohen is sick today. I would much rather have her here as well because I'm sure that she would have some input or would like to have some input on the process.

Can we call a special meeting? How many days do you need?

If all of today and whatever else you've seen and provided notes for is not enough, how much do you feel will be useful for you?

I feel that we could have something ready for next court.

That's far away. Something sooner?

Oh, as far as just like the internal working notes?

Yeah. In terms of updating with Jacob's guidance, because Jacob and I went over all these notes yesterday that you provided, and I told him. No, we don't need to do that. Yes, this would be nice, but that's his opinion. It's not a legal angle. And I kept going down the list of your stuff, right? And I said, yeah, okay, I see that. That's a great point. We do need to change that. Great suggestion. And so Jacob has my thoughts on this because I don't want to just sign a plain piece of paper and have paper tigers. And so my aim is the notes that you've made and Jacob has... clear understanding of priorities in this effort, how much time do you think you would need to address it properly?

I COULD PROBABLY HAVE TO DISCUSS WITH JACOB AND SEE OUR AVAILABILITIES, BUT WE COULD PROBABLY HAVE SOME NEXT VERSION OF WORKING NOTES BY END OF WEEK. BY THE END OF THE WEEK?

I LOVE THAT HEARING IT, AND I APPRECIATE IT. WE NEED MEASURABLE, OBTAINABLE GOALS IN MY MIND, AND I APPRECIATE THAT ANSWER. I KNOW IT FELT DIFFICULT TO DO, BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE THE I'm respectfully pressing you for an answer, and I appreciate you providing the meaningful answer that we need by the end of the week. So I mean, I could, Commissioner, I could call a special meeting to address it for Friday.

Is that, does that meet the...

I think he's going to need until Friday to get the work done.

Right, but calling the meeting doesn't stop his work. Right, but again, what time do we have to review it if he finishes on Friday and say, we're going to have a meeting on Friday? Well, his notes are already available.

I could share them with you. They're not significant. They're just suggestions of edits. My aim is just to stay in the process, Commissioner, so I thank you for that. I thank you for that suggestion.

My chair keeps going down.

My other question is with our new posting rules, if we wanted to call a meeting, we would have to do it today.

Do it today for Friday.

What were you going to say, Chase? I didn't want to interrupt. So that would be something that I'd be able to get like a first set of drafts back with Mr. Limon by that point. But to get y'all's input back together again, I can't guarantee that we're going to have like the final document. Okay.

When is next court? Who's at the calendar in front of them?

The 23rd.

23rd. Okay. So here's what I'll commit to. I'll table it, bring it back to 23rd, and have everybody have all the time they want to massage this one more time. Because I don't want to put you in a negative light. I'm not trying to, I promise. But I have a community clamoring for us to act, for crying out loud. So thank you, commissioners, for your willingness on that front.

Can I just ask that we all know and we all anticipate it's coming on the 23rd, right?

I think we're all in agreement with that.

Yes. So that being the case, Can we ensure that the public gets a copy of this by it being posted in the agenda as it should be for the 23rd? And then we're not scrambling the day before, well, we just got it or you didn't get it. And then the general public can have a time to look at it as well.

Commissioner, great point. As soon as Chase says this is our final, we're good with this and we agree on it, I will make a social media post. I have every desire to make that public as you want it. No problem. The answer is yes.

I appreciate your willingness to put it on social media. Available to the public.

Let's print it in the agenda, too. Sure. You got it. Yes, all of the above. Yes, sir, if you'll state your name and title for the viewing public.

Greg Cox, first assistant from the DA's office. I'm here to support Chase on this matter. I do want to just point out that we want to do this right, and we want to do it to where it is legally defensible in court in case the lawyers for these developers come after us like they did after Hill County. I would love it if y'all could share with Chase, because every good lawyer is happy to steal from somebody else that's already plowed the ground. If y'all could share with Chase the stuff you're seeing on that TAC listserv so that we can take ideas that have already been vetted and researched by other counties and possibly offer some suggestions using that language. And I'm going to be here to support him in every way to try to get this to y'all as soon as possible.

Perfect. It will be back on the agenda for the 23rd. Can I count on you, Candace, to put it on the agenda for the 23rd?

Yes, sir.

Thank you very much. No action, additional action required from me besides providing a legal draft. for the backup will be required, right? It will be on the 23rd, no matter what, moving forward, correct?

Yes, sir, and we post on the 17th at the end of business, so if we have the actual item, we will include that in the back.

Okay, I will table this item, bring it back to 23rd, and now the next item will be, please open item. I'll tell you right now, K-13. K-13. K-13.

Discussion and possible action to authorize the execution of a development agreement for the Hayes common subdivision between Hayes County and Hayes Commons land investment LP Okay, I heard a motion and a second and Here is how this will unfold this agenda item.

I am well aware that there is much community interested in comments and it is very important to me that the community be heard, feel heard and most definitely be taken into consideration. Because there are over 60 letters written alone, not to mention public comments, But I value your opinion oh so much that I have done the difficult thing and I have asked the county clerk's office, this is on my direction, as the chair of this court, so if you're going to throw darts, throw them at me, to capture the spirit of a letter. If it is very low percentage the same, I mean very low percentage different, to read one letter and then tell us all the names of those people that signed on to it. If it is meaningfully different, then I'll ask them to read it. What I don't want is because someone may not either have the time, the skill set, the availability, or you, whatever you fill in the blank with, to draft an original document. with their name on it, with their concerns. What I don't want is for the community to feel ignored. So those individuals that can't be here because of work, because of transportation, because you decide, I want to make sure they're heard. But at the same time, I also want to be respectful of everyone's time involved. We don't need to stay here till 4 in the morning. We will capture your concern. And I'm going to give you one more, Roxanne. This is going to be a curveball for you. And I've never asked of you asked this of you before. I have already been asked to table this item, but just note, as the sponsor of the item, Commissioner Smith is asking for it to be tabled you've taken the time to be here i want you to be heard i want you to know where i stand personally is i'm ready to vote but nevertheless i will respect the commissioner's request to table it and so for that reason roxanne here is my request all of the entries that have been submitted to be read in court today, I would like for you to forward them to the next court agenda so that they don't have to do the work again. And when action is finally taken by this body, that those records will stay together forevermore.

Judge, I would make one correction to that. Please. First off, I am going to move to table this today for another 30-day period. If those comments were submitted and it's going to be another 30 days, it would not be our next court. It would be the next time the item was considered. I would want those read in or placed on for the next time it's considered. JUST BECAUSE IF THEY WERE FOR THE NEXT COURT AND THIS WASN'T ON THE AGENDA, IT WOULD MAKE NO SENSE.

OF COURSE.

AND OUT OF DUE DILIGENCE, IF I DID NOT WANT TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC ON THIS, I WOULD HAVE PULLED THE AGENDA ITEM AND IT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED TODAY. BUT I WANT TO GIVE THE PUBLIC, AGAIN, THERE'S A REASON THAT I DID THE FIRST 30 DAYS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, AND BECAUSE OF THAT, That's the reason that I knew that people were coming today, and I wanted to ensure that they had the opportunity to make those comments. Otherwise, before court, I would have pulled the agenda item, and we wouldn't have even considered it. But y'all taking the time out of your schedule, y'all taking the time to be here, and I appreciate that.

That's right. Thank you, Commissioner. And Roxanne, I appreciate the clarification, but I know you understand my intent, which is next time this appears before this court, I want all of those written comments to be transferred over so that the people that went through the work, it's not their job to run this government, it's ours. The people that did that work don't have to do it again. Okay? That's doable, no problem? Perfect, and thank you. Let's start with those that have signed up and are in person. I will ask you this respectfully. If your message has already been said, It is purely up to you though at this point, okay? I am big on your First Amendment. If your message has already been said and we call your name, you can do anything you want from I'm good, or it's been said, you can come to the podium, state your name and say ditto, whatever you wanna do, or repeat it all for three minutes. The choice is yours, but this is all being recorded. And out of respect for the process, if your message, one more time, if your message has been stated and you're comfortable with the way it was stated, then you don't have to take three minutes. And let's begin. Oh, and there is one last thing I will do administratively as the chair of this court. Because there are so many things to be done, so many names to be called, we're going to ask for a sharp, when the buzzer goes off, when it beeps at three minutes, I'm not even going to ask you to complete your sentence. I'm going to ask you hard stop. Okay, for, again, for the spirit of respect for everyone's time. Hard stop, when the buzzer stops, don't make us tell you to stop or anything else or have our powerful bailiff yank you from the podium. I'm just kidding. But my point is, when it beeps, please stop. Be respectful of the ask of today. So start with the first one.

Javier Fonseca.

Good afternoon, judge and commissioners. My name is Javier Fonseca and I'm a citizen of Buda. Life on this planet has taught me one essential truth. You cannot build a future in a place you've destroyed. As of a few days ago, despite the moderately wet spring, most of our county is still categorized as an extreme drought. This has concerned me since moving to central Texas almost 10 years ago. And this development agreement, Agenda K13, does not improve my concerns. With the current development plan, before the density variance, water supply and wastewater management is already an issue that has not been resolved. The proposed variance exacerbates this issue further during this time of extreme drought. Before any variance is considered, it is imperative that the developer shows that their wastewater treatment plan will not have any impact on our drinking water. Once the water is contaminated, we cannot clean it up. The aquifer recharge zone does little to no filtration on surface water runoff in this area. This developer has shown that it is only concerned about its bottom line from removing itself from jurisdictions to avoid enforcement of regulations to asking for variance on lot size. The developer is showing that it is not here to improve the lives of Hays County citizens. The developer is not going to move their families into this community and deal with the consequences. Developers profit today. Taxpayers pay to clean up the groundwater contaminations for decades. You cannot build a future in a place that you have destroyed. I urge this commission to reject Hays Commons development and deny the associated density variance. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Bobby Levinsky.

Bobby Levinsky, thank you. And while Bobby comes up, I will ask, just in case you're motivated, please hold your applause.

Thank you, Commissioners. Bobby Levinsky, Hayes County resident, and I'm representing Save Our Springs Alliance. We have been dealing with this Hayes Commons site for quite some time now, and another 30 days is another bite at the apple. And I think that this development's gone through an entire orchard of apples. If you look at all the different development applications that they've submitted, throughout the years and the bullying that they've done to the city of Hayes and to the city of Austin. And ultimately, I think the answer to the question that we need to ask is, how can we preserve this land? This is an irreplaceable part of the county. It is incredibly environmentally sensitive. It's on top of the return zone. And so I appreciate The concept of clustering, but how it is being employed and how it is being asked of you to approve it actually creates more environmental harm than what would otherwise exist. It cannot be ignored that this application is reliant on a Texas land application permit, which would spray treated effluent over the recharge zone. It cannot be ignored that this application is reliant upon groundwater from the lower Trinity Aquifer. It would result in 128 million gallons of water per year being pumped from a very limited aquifer that we don't know too much about, but we do know it is an ancient water source that doesn't recharge. And we cannot ignore... that the way that this applicant is presenting this to you is that they're trying to say that they're shifting their development entitlements onto one area of the site that is less environmentally sensitive. That's somewhat true, but it's not entirely true, because what they're actually doing is increasing the development intensity that would otherwise occur on this site by using lower lot sizes, but also in not taking into account the floodplains taking into account the recharge areas, not taking into account the economic realities of a plan that doesn't make any sense in what they put in that paper. It also is relying upon variances, flag lot variances. They're telling you that it doesn't require county variances, but there's flag lots all over that site. What we need you to do is just go ahead and say no to this development agreement, no to the variance request. If they want to develop their site, they have the property rights to do that. But really, ultimately, what's at stake is they're trying to use you as leverage against the City of Austin to force the City of Austin to provide water and wastewater service to the site that the City of Austin has previously rejected. They just added the East Grag Track just to the north of 45. That City of Austin has previously denied service to that site because they're concerned about the environmental sensitivity of this area. It is a difficult situation that we're in, but we need to be working together. And we really appreciate the conversations that we've been able to have with Judge Becerra and Judge Inglesby and Judge Cohen. Sorry, and Commissioner Inglesby, Commissioner Cohen, not yet. And I would really love to meet with both the other two commissioners if you'll have me and meet with you in the next couple of weeks. Thank you.

Tom Lehman.

My family and I have lived in northern Hays County, city of Hays for 47 years. Milestone Builders is planning to construct a sewer water cleaning plant to serve the hundreds of homes they are building over the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone. The sewer water produced at the plant will be pumped to a sprinkler system that sprays thousands of gallons of water a day. The water will smell constantly every day. It will be unbearable to me. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Candace Blake. Harvey Davis.

Oh, sorry. Sorry. I'll talk for a minute.

I wrote my handwritten notes last night after the Spurs game, and I don't know if they make a lot of sense anyway.

Do you believe it? It was a great game. But restart her three minutes. We talked about the Spurs.

Okay. No, no, no. I don't even need three minutes. My husband and I moved to the city of Hays in 1985 with our three little children, and it was pretty rural then and very different. And it was a given that the land that the Milestone builders now want to ruin would never be developed. It's fragile and unique and over an aquifer and therefore something to protect carefully. Occasionally in the past, people intended to develop it, but were always denied by the county or the state. And now Milestone wants you to throw those protections out and approve a development agreement that would enrich them at the expense of the water, fresh air, and plants and animals that make this land unique. Some reasons not to approve this development agreement are they don't have water wells approved by the Barton Springs Edwards Aquifer Conservation District, nor do they have pumping permits for the planned 348 houses. TCEQ has not approved a wastewater permit. It continues unresolved. Hays County requires a minimum lot size of three-quarters acre over the recharge zone, and Milestone wants a variance to this requirement so they can sell many more houses. Please do not approve this variance. Regulations are for protection. This land is fragile and beautiful and home to wildlife who depend on the land, trees, and plants. The open space should remain in its natural state according to the county development codes. Milestone wants to spray treated wastewater in the green space, taking up to 60 acres of the 200 acres they say are to be undeveloped. The treated sewage is not a natural state for the land. There are karst features in caves, and pollution can enter the water sources through the porous rock and thin soil. We are in a years-long drought now, and the homes built on this property will require pumping 128 million gallons of groundwater annually from the lower Trinity Aquifer, which does not recharge and is becoming lower and lower. We cannot even pretend this is sustainable. Milestone has been lying to us, changing their plans and disregarding opportunities to do better with this land for 15 years. And this agreement is... as bad or worse than any previous ones. I know you all know what is right. This development is not even close. I respectfully ask that the milestone DA not be approved.

Thank you.

Harvey Davis.

I guess it's good afternoon, judge and commissioners. My name is Harvey Davis. I'm only a 31-year resident of the city of Hays. I am fortunately the retired mayor of nearly six years. And our city had been involved with this project in one iteration or another for really about 20 years, our city. Officials have spent hundreds of hours meeting with them. Back in 2013, we had a development agreement with Bill Walters, not with Milestone. They weren't in the scene. And of course, at that time, the concept was this was going to be another Sunset Valley mega apartment, not apartment, but retail outlet. So, and we're, and the developer said, when you're going to be part, it's going to be part of your city and you're going to collect a fortune in sales tax and you'll be like Sunset Valley. It's a little bitty city that has tons of money. But, of course, that didn't happen because we had the 2008 financial crisis. And it's really sad that, These developments are now thrust upon county governments because of the ETJ law. And the ETJ law is so horrible that it's done so much damage to cities. Cities are now disempowered from having oversight of the projects. They have been done for a much longer time. Of course, we all know that cities had more abilities to manage these and the limited powers of county governments. I'm really sorry that that has happened. Of course, we have no real say in the project, even though we're greatly affected by it. But I hope you don't approve the development agreement. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Rose McCorkle.

Hi. Judge, I have to agree with everyone that's come before me. Thank you for what you said. I appreciate it. One thing I just want to, I didn't understand, I'm 69 years old and didn't know what a karst was until I moved to City of Hays five years ago. I didn't know, and I grew up in the country. If our aquifers be recharged to this and we put impervious land cover over it, we should all weep. If we're not allowing water to get into our aquifer, it should make anyone sad. I live in the community. Both of my sons live in the community. My grandchildren live in the community. Please, let's keep it safe for them.

Thank you.

Jeff Cuffman.

And what you can do is call the next name. That way they can at least get ready just to keep this moving along.

David Patterson will be next.

And David Patterson will follow him. Thank you, Mr. Kaufman.

Good afternoon, Judge and Commissioners. I'm Jeff Kaufman, and I speak as the chair of the Kyle Buda area Democrats. I think along with my testimony, you've gotten a written handout, which is a resolution that that KBAD, as we call ourselves for short, the board passed. And I'm not going to read that resolution to the public. That would be the most boring thing you guys have seen all day. But I do want to paraphrase it a little bit. And the first thing I'd like to say is that you'll hear echoes of what I'm going to call Judge Becerra's one big, beautiful resolution in our resolution.

One big, beautiful resolution.

So... In summary, we have two basic messages. Don't rush into the development agreement between Hayes County and Hayes Commons Land Investment, LP, otherwise known as Milestone. And number two, work with other governmental entities to come up with long-term solutions to these kinds of destructive developments about protecting our water and making sure Hayes Commons is held to strong environmental standards. Water protection matters even more now because of the drought that we're suffering. And Hayes Common should not move forward unless it includes real safeguards for the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone and the Trinity Aquifer, which we know so little about, as some others have said, and long-term water quality. We call on Hayes County to use every legal tool that it has to work with other regional governmental entities and water authorities and to reject any agreement that does not seriously protect water resources and provide for responsible growth. The resolution that you have in your hands provides a link to a great report called County Tools for Managing Growth, which this court authorized in 2023. And it was commissioned by you and shows important powers that counties do have and do retain to regulate growth, including the authorities related to water and development requirements. It's a good primer that can help guide this discussion going forward. Finally, the KBAD board opposes state laws that restrict local control. For instance, developers are allowed to sidestep stricter city protections, as Milestone has done repeatedly, by shifting projects into less regulated county ETJs. We want all local, county, and regional authorities to collaborate and work with the Texas legislature to amend state laws like HB 2127, otherwise known as the Death Star Law, and SB 2038 that have weakened local control and returned authorities to local governments. Thank you all for all you do to protect our environment and our water. Thank you, Mr. Kaufman. And I believe David has left. He had another appointment. Thank you.

Denise Amber Weber.

Followed by?

Followed by Brett Mundy.

Okay.

Thank you all for listening to the citizens today, I appreciate it judge and commissioners My name is amber. I've lived three Property lines away from the project in question for the past 13 years I've had the pleasure of serving on my own personal City Council as our former mayor Harvey discussed discussing all of this with Walter Southwest and initially with Milestone and Our city is not new to developer agreements and variance requests. We have heard them. And we've had one result in a local business moving in, not a large development, low traffic impact. The second result was where we are here today, all of us being here. The reason why they've done this is, as others have said, is because now they want to put it in your hands. They've taken it out of ours because our city As Mayor Brian Valdez says, we are small but mighty. And I enjoy that phrase when she uses it. I'm not a professional on water. I wish I was. I'm a mother of an 18-year-old son. And I have neighbors with children and that have all grown up. So I'm going to talk to you all today about something totally different than the water. Because there's a lot of professionals here that can talk to you all about water. There are no less than five neighborhoods that dump in to this intersection already, with apartment complexes going up. I only work a mile and a half away. When I come home from work, I have to sit in the center lane of 1626 for four minutes. That's longer than the amount of time that we're all going to get to talk. Four minutes, white knuckled, with cars passing by, At 60 to 70 miles an hour, I know the speed limit's 55, but nobody does it because they're coming off of 45. Everyone's in a hurry to get home. A high appreciation for everyone wanting to get home. However, it's an extremely dangerous area for us to continue to add more residents, especially young families, where it's going to continue to grow. And we have inexperienced drivers on a heavy roadway where we are already suffering from accidents. So I appreciate the fight for the water. I believe in the water. I don't have a garden anymore because we've been in a drought for 10 years. I can't even grow my own food in my backyard. So I have a high appreciation for the water. But I have an extremely high appreciation for the amount of deaths and accidents that have the potential to happen as we continue to add housing into an area that is already crammed and that our highways and our traffic signals, our non-existent traffic signals, already cannot manage. So I'd ask that that be taken into consideration as well. Thank you.

Brett Mundy, followed by Cindy Willey.

My name is Brett Mundy. I own Jumping Jack Dog Ranch, a dog boarding and daycare facility bordering Milestone's beautiful proposed future doo-doo sewage field. I'm so excited about it. After the last little sneaky meeting we had where you guys tried to give notice to push this developer through for lot variances, you actually did the right thing and you gave us all proper notice via mail. So thank you for that. And because of that, we have a new speaker today, which is Cindy Willey. I'm very excited for you to hear her talk. Cindy owns the 160 acre farm that Milestone is salivating over. They've already built an entire development plan around that and they haven't shared it with you, but I've personally seen it and it has hundreds of houses that you guys aren't aware of. Cindy's not gonna sell her ranch, but Milestone thinks they need it to hit the right number so they just keep taking her up in helicopters to brag over their past developments that they've made. And they like to show her that, but jokes on them because Cindy is impressed by nature and trees, not rooftops and housing developments. But they continue to court her because they're billionaires after all. That's what they're used to. They get money and they use it to get what they want because everyone has a price, right? Do you guys have a price? Cindy's not for sale and neither are any of us. Our movement in Hays County will continue to grow and get louder. It's for the same people or the same reasons that people in every state across this nation are getting louder. Water, data centers, developers, billionaires. And as an independent voter, I'm going to follow the candidate who protects the water and I'm going to be loud and I'm going to be obnoxious. Milestone is not honest with you. This isn't their final development plan. Their plan is expansion. So if you grant these quarter acre lots for this development, it's going to be for another development that they continue to buy land around them. The city of Austin wrote a letter to this exact effect last night asking you to table this, and I'm guessing that's why you probably did. In that letter they mentioned Milestone is considering expanding to the city of Austin ETJ. Whose land sits in that ETJ? My land sits in it. Ms. Willie's land sits in it. Isn't that kind of interesting to you guys? And what's next when we don't sell out? Are you guys going to sponsor some sort of eminent domain? Is that what billionaire money can buy? You're going to hear from a lot of people today with very compelling arguments as to why you should vote no on this agenda item, and I'm glad that you tabled it. But I'll be here in 30 days because it seems like we're going to just keep having this discussion with you guys. I'm here to discuss your job. Your job as commissioners is to listen to the constituents. That is us, not the billionaires. Your job is to read the facts. I'm afraid some of you might be misguided to who your constituents really are. You work for us. Or maybe you work for the billionaires. I don't know. And maybe some of you are going to go work for them when you leave this office. But look at the people here and across the country. We're organized and we're uniting across party lines. The billionaire's time is up everywhere, including here. We outnumber them. I suggest you choose people over profit and do your job or lose your job. The rest of us are required to actually do our job or we get fired. There's no billionaire sugar daddy who's out there paying us to not do our jobs. Do the right thing.

Cindy Willie, followed by Carson Gilchrist.

Hi, I'm Cindy Willie, and I'm fourth generation on that property. I've seen old deeds going back into the 1860s, so I've stomped all over my property. I've stomped all over the adjoining property chasing cows in my 67 years. So I've seen all the cars and all the caves. Some of them you can even see steam coming out of in the wintertime when it's really cold. So I know there's many of them there on my property and the adjacent property. And they join me on the east side and on the south side. So I'm probably one of the ones that's going to have the most impact. These guys, they are trying to get my property as well. Like Brett said, they've taken us up in helicopters, showing us all of their properties and all their developments, and then giving us reports of what our property is worth and what they'd be willing to give us for it. And I'm going, over my dead body, you're going to have to haul me out of here first. But all they're interested in is as much money as they can make and put in their pockets. I even suggested to Garrett Martin one day, he was talking to me. I said, do you have to put all these houses? How about a little airport, kind of like Lakeway? I don't think that'd make enough money. So I just ask you all to make sure that, we have responsible development in our area. So I think that kind of wraps it up. Thank you.

Carson Gilchrist, followed by Lydia Brian Valdez.

Good afternoon, Your Honor, and good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Carson Gilchrist, and I am here representing Save Our Springs Alliance. I want to talk specifically about the variance request. For the applicant to be granted this variance request, they must do four things. First, it must show why this property should be less regulated than other properties near it. The applicant argues that it differs from its neighbors because this property lies within the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. In other words, the applicant is stating that we should have more lax regulations on recharge zone land than on other land. This logic is exactly backwards. The recharge zone needs less development, fewer houses built on it, and less wastewater being discharged onto it. The applicant has already failed on the first of four findings, but we will continue. Second, the applicant needed to show that enforcement of the minimum lot size regulation would deny it the privilege or safety afforded by similarly situated property. The applicant responds with a threat, stating that if they followed the regulations, it would have to develop the entire property. And this is simply not true. The applicant would not do this because they cannot do this. This is a bluff. The applicant cannot develop about 150 acres of this site because it is a floodplain containing critical environmental features. We all know this. The applicant knows this. And it is a lie to claim it will develop the whole property. To make its money, the applicant plans on cramming homes onto small lots where the land can be developed. Third, the applicant needed to show how a variance would not be detrimental to public health, safety, and welfare, or injurious to other nearby properties. Its response fails to address damage to the land and water caused by chopping trees, pouring concrete, and spraying sewage onto the soil. Lastly, the applicant must show how the supposed hardship it will endure is not the result of its own action. Its answer doesn't even pretend to respond. If it had actually responded to the question, it would have had to admit that the hardship was entirely of its own making. The applicant knew this property was in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone before buying the land. It knew that Hays County laws and regulations could apply, including the minimum lot size regulation. The applicant gambled that it would be able to get away with ignoring the regulations anyway. To the extent that there is any hardship for Hays Commons, it is the hardship the applicant brought on itself. In conclusion, the applicant fails all four required showings for a variance from the minimum lot requirement. The applicant is lying to us and gambling on the destruction of this community's land hoping to make a quick buck. You must reject this variance. Thank you, Your Honor. Thank you, Commissioners.

Lydia Bryan-Valdez, followed by Christine Doan.

Are these your glasses?

Oh, they've been there a while.

Someone's missing their glasses. Good afternoon, and I'm glad it's not good evening. We're close. Commissioners, Judge Becerra, thank you for giving us this time to present. I'm Lydia Bryan-Valdez. I'm the mayor, again, of the small but very mighty city of Hays. We have 93 homes, wonderful people in our community. We're a small general law city in the northern part of Hays County. For years now, the city has spent its time and resources opposing this development. We are in a David and Goliath fight and have been for 10 years, on my watch, 20 years, under my dear friend and mentor, Mayor Emeritus Harvey Davis. 20 years we've been fighting a bully. Now they're carrying costs for their property, for their development, and we're expending resources that are minimal. We don't have a lot of money. And it's a big bully situation. I met recently with Walt Smith, Candace Blake and I did, and Commissioner Smith said this is the best deal we're going to get. It's the best deal we're going to get. We need to do this. It's going to pass. We don't need to do this. I firmly disagree. Our residents, we are all strongly opposed to this. This is not in the best interest of it. What we have, we have two groundwater wells that are at risk of being tainted. Our Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone is at risk of being tainted. When we have a water emergency in our city, we may have a burst pipe, we may have another, we sell water to our neighboring community, Elliott Ranch. When someone says, our well, there's something wrong with it because we have sand residue in our water. That's an emergency for us. We put all hands on deck. We call PGMS, we call engineers, we say, what's happening? And that right now is the current situation with it could be a water table, it could be a drought issue, it could be other issues. I cannot even begin to imagine what would happen if we allow this, if you allow this to happen and they destroy our water supply. There's no reason for this project to go forward. It should not. It is the definition of insanity to allow it to go forward. We are in a drought like we have never seen before. And we're still saying, let's add another 300 homes. And sure, let the bully billionaire do this. We've been here a long time. We're going to continue. If we have to come here every 30 days, if we have to sleep in your parking lot, if we have to do media, if we have to do whatever we have to do, we're going to do it. We're going to continue to oppose. Thank you for your time. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Judge.

Christine Dillon, followed by Liz Cajados.

Good afternoon, Commissioners. Good afternoon, Judge. My name is Christine Doan. I am a resident of the City of Hays. I come before you to respectfully ask that you vote no on item K-13 and reject the proposed development agreement in its current form. Commissioner Smith, when you were speaking about the Hays County Health District, I was encouraged to hear that you're prioritizing the public's opinion because I am sure that you're finding the overwhelming majority of your constituents do not support this development agreement. This agreement seeks approval of variances to establish lot size requirements. Those variances deserve independent consideration and scrutiny. Combining these issues into a single approval risks bypassing the level of review that such significant requests warrant. There are also ongoing legal proceedings related to Milestone's Texas land application permit, as you've heard, their TLAP permit. Those proceedings remain unresolved and that hearing is currently abated due to Milestone inaccurately representing an easement and spray field location. Approving this development agreement before those matters are resolved would be premature, irresponsible, and would deny both the court and the public the benefit of a complete record. I loved the analogy that was read in a public comment earlier about having to put your pants on before you put your shoes on. Milestone doesn't have their pants on. Milestone presented this item last month without proper public notice. They're familiar with the rules that apply to them and frequently choose to circumvent them. This is reflective of their intentions. Protecting the Edwards Aquifer is not only an environmental concern, it's a public health and safety responsibility. This new development agreement is being presented as a gift to us. High density development is not a gift to us. Sewage being sprayed over the recharge zone is not a gift to us. Depicting a sewage spray field and a floodplain as a preserve is misleading and not a gift to us. The narrative that there is absolutely nothing that can be done to prevent this is overwhelmingly false. The requested variances are discretionary approvals. Milestone does not have to be granted a variance to pad their pockets at the expense of the many residents who will be negatively impacted. This court has both the authority and the responsibility to carefully evaluate whether this development agreement serves the public interests.

Spoiler alert, it doesn't.

As public servants, it is your obligation to safeguard the health, safety, and welfare of your constituents. I urge you to prioritize people over profit and vote no to this development agreement. Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Liz Gajados, followed by Alana Betty.

This is somebody's glasses.

Hi, I'm Liz Gajados, and I live in the Wimberley area, and I am against this particular Hays Common development, and let me tell you why. Obviously, the people behind sitting in these audience are not for sale, but I think that developer might be. And there might be a win-win for this community. You can protect your citizens' public health and welfare and their properties by simply going and speaking with the developer, you have a willing partner with the City of Austin, start buying up their development rights. We did this 20 years ago when we did Dalston Ranch. We bought the development rights to protect the aquifer recharge area. It's a perfectly good use of your park bond money. And once you've done that, that's in perpetuity. This ground stays the way it is. It functions the way it needs to function. So I'm urging this court not just to deny this, but to move forward with a win-win situation for your community, stand with your community, and a win situation for the developer too. He walks away with a little change in his pocket, and we get exactly what we want and deserve. Thank you.

Thank you.

Alana Betty, followed by Darlene Stahl.

Good morning, Judge and Commissioner. Well, good afternoon. I'm Alana Bedi. I live about a mile from the proposed development. The DA has glaring flaws that the court can definitively say no to because it violates county code. Other public comments have addressed the development agreement. I want to go on to what's next. After the public comments, Jeff Howard or another Milestone representative will come up here and will use fear tactics to bully or at least confuse the court into agreeing to that development agreement because of an idle threat from Milestone that is a bold-faced lie. to develop the property entirely. He will show you 200 acres of open space protecting woodlands and creeks. Irrigating this land with treated wastewater will not protect either the woodlands, the creek, or the aquifer beneath. Lie number two. He'll flash a development map and advertise that it is code compliant. This is lie number three. There are at least seven flag lots on which are not permitted by county development code. So this development plan would indeed require variances. So no, the county would not be statutorily obligated to approve. Jeff Howard or the other representative from Milestone will then show another scary alternative with commercial development. Whether it's retail or apartments, what I see is that there are no wells, no OSSF, and no wastewater treatment for the red buildings. Again, this is something that's just thrown together with the purpose of being a scare tactic to scare the city of Hays, the city of Austin, and Hays County. Line number four. When you're shown the comparison map, of the cluster development partnership with the county versus the empty threat to fully develop, just remember that a quarter of this open space is being sprayed with effluent. The water quality impact slide is equally weak. It's cost prohibitive to drill 100 wells. Septic systems somehow have a bad reputation, but OSSF technology has developed dramatically over the last few decades, which has eliminated most of the risks associated with old dilapidated conventional systems. There is no research that shows that a properly functioning OSSF poses any greater risk than a TLAB. And with the county acreage requirements for OSSF, larger lots reduce density, and that is the biggest factor in how wastewater will affect the recharge zone. With their DA, there would be piping underground across the creek and floodplain, so right there they say none, carrying treated wastewater to irrigation fields. So that's lie number five. I'm not sure what they mean by multiple creek crossings with the agreement. What I see are single family lots that will have exorbitant and cost prohibitive home insurance because such a large percentage of the lot is in the floodplain. When you see their wastewater system slides, consider that all the woodland that's here is going to be chopped down for the irrigation fields. Finally, there's the financial difference that goes along with this. Reducing from 346 to 102 lots means selling for three times the price to make their project pencil financially. They can't do what they want without the high density. It's higher than what the land can sustain, and it can't be done in any county or city without permission to violate codes. If every governing entity says no to variances, Milestone won't be able to develop this land.

Don't fall for their scare tactics. I know it sounds tough, but you did the right thing. Thank you for calling the next name.

Followed by Justin Hobson.

Good afternoon. My name is Darlene Starr. I live .19 miles from the footprint of the proposal. I'm on a private Edwards aquifer well. I want to address the 200 acres pitched as open space in this DA, which has also been used to calculate the percentages. It is a ruse, as other people have brought up. More than a quarter of the land is also simultaneously shown on the plan as the distribution area for chemically TREATED EFFLUENT. WOULD YOU PAUSE WHILE I GET MY GLASSES?

I WENT NORTH OF 50 AND NOW I USE READING GLASSES.

SORRY ABOUT THAT. YOU CAN RESTART ME. THEY'RE SHOWING THIS AS OPEN SPACE BUT MORE THAN A QUARTER OF THIS IS GOING TO BE FOR THEIR SPRAY AREA FOR TREATED EFFLUENT. THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE TO BRING PIPES THROUGH THIS AREA, REMOVE OLD GROWTH TREES AND VEGETATION AND DISTURB AN AREA THAT WE KNOW TO BE FULL OF DOZENS. of caves and open cars directly into the Barton Springs segment of the Edwards Aquifer. This does not meet the county code definition of open space, which requires land to remain in its natural state. We hear a lot of talk about landowner and property owner rights in Texas, but we too often only hear it in regard to developers and other moneyed interests. Those of us who depend on the water from this area of the recharge zone also have property rights. There are more than 75 private and 17 community wells at risk from this development. We have rights to clean and abundant water. We have rights to unpolluted air free from bacterial contamination. We have rights to safety from storm runoff caused by irresponsible building in an area already known to flood. And we have rights to have our home space not degraded to maximize someone's profits. No one on this dais was elected or tasked with making decisions to maximize the profits of a corporation. The oath you have taken is to us, to protect what has to be protected for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And I know it's an oath you take seriously. Thank you for listening to all of us who have commented today or who wore blue to support aquifer recharge protection, which is a critical natural infrastructure essential to our survival. Can I see a show of hands for those of you who came to support aquifer recharge protection today? We all had the courage to show up here today. Some of us had to take the day off work when we couldn't afford it. Some of us had to find babysitters, caregivers for aging parents. Some of us had to overcome fears of public speaking or being seen, and that takes courage. We ask the same courage of you to stand up for what is right for this community, your constituents. Members of the court, you have the grounds and you have the tools to say no to this today. Thank you in advance for doing so, and thank you for your service.

Thank you.

Thank you for my glasses.

Yes. And thank you for participating.

To follow will be Joe Freeland.

Thank you, Judge and Commissioners. I just want to add some color to the fact that this is the TLAP application that was submitted showing that they have Carson easement that runs through the spray fields. And I just want to add some color to the fact that the scare tactic of proposing the development that would go in if you do not approve the TLAP. It's just not even possible. There's an easement that runs right through this development, as well as car systems and sensibly environmental features. And so just to add, in addition to it was brought up the flag lots and some other floodplain issues that was brought up previously, but I also want to add that, again, this is just proposed as a scare tactic, something that's not even feasible. So I want to make sure that we're just taking this TLAB application on its own accord and voting on that, not based on the fact that something else might be put in its place that's not possible. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Joe Freeland, followed by Lori Hobson.

Afternoon, Judge, Commissioners. I'm Joe Freeland here on behalf of Lost Lakes Resort, which is a neighboring property owner and owns the easement that runs through this land that Hayes Commons wants to build houses on top of. I'm going to give you a slightly different story than what you're going to hear from everybody else. And here is, if you consider moving forward with this development agreement, we haven't asked for y'all. And that is, if you look at what was handed to you and You see the hatched area, which is the irrigation area. What you need to understand is they'll have to come in there and clear cut everything that's in that zone, bring in 12 inches of soil from outside, and then they'll grow Bermuda grass there that they have to cut once a year. That's what their permit would require. If you look here along the City of Hays property, they have not pushed that irrigation area right up to those backyards. What we would ask is that they extend that same courtesy across to the other properties, which are green dots on your handout, so that there would be at least 150 foot of, NON-CUT, NO CUT, NO CLEAR-CUTTING, LET'S LEAVE THAT AREA UNDISTURBED, 150 FOOT, AND 150 FOOT AROUND THAT EASEMENT. THAT LEAVES HAYES COMMONS WITH SUFFICIENT, I THINK, SUFFICIENT IRRIGATION AREA THAT THEY CAN MEET THEIR PERMIT AND SERVE THE 348 HOMES. JUST ASK THAT WE KEEP THIS SORT OF SCENIC, NATURAL,

view that the neighbors would have so at least it would diminish some impact on the neighbors that are going to have to deal with this development thank you thank you sir and i want to recap just to make sure i understood it right because i'm taking notes you're asking for because this is court of record right so people here listening can understand you're asking for a 150 foot setback from the easement for that aerial spraying activity

That's correct. And any cutting. Let's just leave it as no clear cutting in that 150 foot along the easement or 150 foot along the neighboring property lines.

Okay. I want to make sure that it's properly recorded in the county clerk's office. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Lori Hobson, followed by James Dawson.

Good afternoon, Judge, Commissioners. Here's your public speaking right here. Similar to Joe's point of view, I support responsible growth, but I also believe growth should preserve the natural assets that cannot easily be replaced. These mature live oaks provide beauty, shade, wildlife habitat, privacy, stormwater management, and a natural buffer between neighbors and roads. Once they're removed, it'll take generations to regain what was lost. This is not a choice between growth and preservation. It's a question of whether we can grow wisely while protecting the features that make this community unique. I respectfully ask that every effort be made to preserve the natural habitat and trees. Thank you.

Thank you.

James Dawson, followed by Jeff Parks.

I'm James Stinson. I'm a neighbor. I'm an area resident since everybody's telling us how long we've been around. We've been in the area since 1851 and don't plan to leave. We care about the water. We care about development rights. And what I'd like to talk with you all about today really is, you know, I understand that the county commissioners really only have so much they can do when it comes to regulating things outside of your control. For instance, a TLAP application is not in your control. But there are things that can be in your control when somebody comes in and wants to defy and go beyond what the county development code allows. And that's what Milestone is asking for. Milestone is asking for an exception to the development code. And in return, there needs to be some give back to the public. And what I'm proposing, because I know that you guys can't completely stop Milestone's TLAP and Milestone's ability to go in and put some density there. What I'm proposing is 150 foot setback from any property lines, from our easement as well. I believe that a windbreak would cut way, way down on odor nuisance claims that you guys are going to have to be dealing with from the public. And I think that it's a happy middle ground. But, you know, I really want to emphasize more than anything, you know, what exactly are we doing here anyways? I mean, this is a very, very critically sensitive piece of property. And we're asking to go from 0.75 acres to 0.15 acres. That's a 500% increase in the number of houses that would fit in an acre. And maybe there's some places in Hayes County that makes sense to do. I don't think that over the environmental recharge aquifer zone is the right place to do it. I don't think near Karsh features is the right place to do it. I especially don't think it's the right place to do it when there's Karsh features in the creek that actually drains this area out. So there's just no way that this TLAP water ultimately will not make it into the aquifer. By you guys approving higher density, you're just approving more gallons of it going into there. We can disguise this. We can say, hey, part of this is not going to be developed and part of this will be really densely developed, but the final outcome is it's still a lot more gallons that we're allowing by considering this development agreement. So I would urge you guys to not consider the development agreement, but if you do, I would encourage that some sort of reasonable setbacks and tree breaks, things that prevent odor nuisance claims in the future, would be considered as part of this. Thank y'all.

Thank you. That's twice.

Jeff Parks. Lastly, Paige Olverio.

Did you say last? Will be the other written? For the in-person, yes. Okay. What I'm going to do is, because people ask, I'll take a short 10-minute break after the people here speaking, and then we're going to go into the written word. Right after you're done.

Jeff Parks.

Left.

Paige Olverio.

Paige, you may be our last public speaker. If you give them all to her, she'll pass them. We'll pass it along. There you go. Thank you.

This is good timing because my honey hurts and my stomach's probably going to talk more than I do right now. I just handed you a really terrible map, and I kind of want to borrow that pretty one.

We don't need no stinking helicopters.

No helicopter, I brought you. Aerial view. What's that? No, I'm sorry.

Well, sure.

Point. So my name is Paige Oliverio. I am a resident in the area and my property does back up to the property in question. I'm also here unofficially on behalf of all of the residents on Country Oaks Drive who back up to this property.

Somewhere over here. I think it's upside down.

In addition to being a neighbor, I have 20 years of professional experience in green stormwater infrastructure riparian stewardship, riparian restoration, water quality, environmental flows, and I design programs for the watershed department for the city of Austin. So for those who were limiting that they don't have the science background, I do. You've heard over and over again of folks talking about water quality. There is an issue that this is on the creek and Bear Creek already has problems. They have erosion problems, water quality problems. Raising all of the pristine vegetation that's on this part of the property where they're talking about putting out the sprinklers will cause more erosion downstream for our neighbors in Bear Creek who don't show up here because they're in Travis County, but they're still affected. Also, Let's talk about the aquifer again. You've heard of folks talking about their wells that are already backed up to the area in question and directly into the Edwards Aquifer. I wish that you could have a chance to go visit this property in person. I have. There are just holes in the ground everywhere. You cannot possibly cap or fill all of the features that are on this property. I've read the reports about the ones that are making it into reports as sensitive features. Some of them are 50 feet long and 20 feet wide. And there's multiple ones on this property. I've circled the ones on this map for you that are where the spray field is supposed to be. Another thing about this land is it is absolutely pristine. I've walked it with native plant, excuse me, I'm so hungry. I've walked it with native plant professionals and they have been floored at how few invasive species are on this property. If they scrape this and throw Bermuda grass down with fill dirt for this field, everything will be destroyed. In addition to that, there are water dye tests that have been done on features all over this region. Water that falls on the ground here shows up three days later in Barton Springs Pool. I'm pretty sure the City of Austin does not want us spraying on a spray field that goes to Barton Springs Pool. I'm not anti-development. I'm a card-carrying member of the Center for New Urbanism. So I promise you I'm not here to say I hate development. I just, these guys need to dial it in and stay on their footprint.

Thank you. We're going to take a 10-minute recess, and then we're going to conclude, continue with written words. I will tell you that I thank the community every time for participating and taking time and I know you've got to know this and I am bragging about myself and that's okay. I can do this. I run a pretty efficient court. I know I do. I watch city councils that go on until 3 in the morning and I'm like oh my god. And so, but even still, no matter how hard I push, and I really do ask the commissioners for a little understanding because I'm trying to keep the conversation moving, but yet not shut anyone down. There's a threading of a needle that I've got to do there. But no matter what, I'm still sitting here at 2 o'clock and we've only gone through three agenda items. So know this. If You get a ticket while being here. I'm serious. These are two-hour parkings. I've gotten two. I want you to do me a favor. First and foremost, forevermore, when you come to do county business, try, if possible, park the nose of your car to face the historic courthouse because we are an embassy in the city of San Marcos. We are a stand-alone governmental body. And so city does not patrol, this is county. This is truly deputies writing tickets and managing the facilities here, this property. And so it is so much easier and faster for us to ask a deputy to support discarding a ticket that was written for a different purpose. You were here to do the government's work, the work of the people. You were here representing official work. You just didn't camp out and walk away somewhere. And so what I'm saying is, if you get a ticket on our square, I'm going to do my best to get it canceled, because this takes a long time.

Park on our side of the square. That's what he's saying.

In addition, yeah, when possible. Okay, so now what I've asked the county clerk's office to do, in the spirit of efficiency, but yet keeping people's names alive and well in their efforts, is they're going to read the most, and it's random, okay? We didn't pick someone. I actually didn't see it at all. It's all in their hands. To pick the most robust letter in the written that has the most encapsulation of ideas to contribute to the court of record and then read everyone's name that signed in. That's how I'm going to do it today and I hope nobody minds. Roxanne, are you ready?

Yes, and just to preface before Alejandra reads a notice, sent in from Carol Pennington. We did receive a total of 73 emailed public comments for K-13. Roughly about five of those didn't submit the required information, but we'll still go ahead and read their names off on the list of comments received, just for public record.

So that would technically be around four hours, okay? Just so you understand what and why, I value oh so much, I really, really do, I value oh so much everyone that took the time to contribute to today's court agenda item. But at the same time, I will not burn four of your hours to hear strongly similar statements. Okay, Roxanne, all yours.

Okay, so Alejandra is going to now read the list of names that we've documented that have emailed public comments in.

So for putting in comments against K-13, I have Tanya Crenshaw, David Van Heusen, Dale and Cheryl Van Blockland, Karen Abuzi, Dane Smith, Mike Clifford, Russell Sanders, Leanne Michael, Carol Patrick, Frances Hargrove, Janie Tinsel, Amy Lakely, Ann Louise Tokan, Christina Rodriguez, Alicia Eats, Alfonso Carl, Allison Bakum, Merrill and Carl Betty, Kelly Schaefer, Chuck Goldsmith, Rex H. Hunt, Christine Ramirez, Donielle Kalachi, Nike Mathis, Charlotte Robinson, Luann Williams, Eric A. Johnson, Maddie Darden, Matthew Payne, Stacey Knight, Bill Knight, Kate Kasalig, Michelle Pascal, Aaron Duke, Stuart Robertson, Paris Brady, Virginia Palmer, Gerald Hashkeet, Jeff Ross, Nick Thomas, Richard Manis, Michelle Camp, Heather Eberl, Candace Volz, Martha Sanders, Deborah Cunningham, Elena Matys, Peggy H. Nelson, Lynn Bridge, Christina Gatson, Carol Pennington, Danielle Stuart Stottner. Carolyn Wood. Brandon Gatson. Layton DePenning. David L. Lawrence. Deborah Williams. David Vasquez. Sharia Johnny. Misty Wilson. Joanne Piddington. Piddington, DePenning, sorry. Hannah Ballou. Susan Cook. Angie Unger. Deborah Telles. Vivek Ghani. Donna Miller. Barbara Johnson. Clay Perswell. Beverly Bays. David Dedrick. Joelle Depenning. Against K-13 agenda item, I am asking this court to vote against the Milestone-Hayes Common Development Agreement. There is no water or watershed services that have been secured. Why would you vote on a development agreement for a subdivision without water and wastewater? They won't be able to get a pumping permit for water services until we are out of this drought. It could be five more years. So why are we even talking about this now? What is the hurry? Is it because Commissioner Smith is trying to get this approved before the Before he leaves the court, is he doing them a favor because they donated? $10,000 to his election campaign. That is a conflict of interest and he should recuse himself from this vote. The biggest problem with this development agreement is the variance they are asking for. The Commissioner's Court back in 2017 adopted the development regulations and they had the foresight to understand the importance of protecting the Edwards Aquifer. Since the county cannot create zoning regulations, they use lot size requirements for developments over the recharge zone. What has changed since then? More people and more straws into the aquifer? While Milestone may not be getting their water from the Edwards, I am. This 120-acre cluster of homes is over the very land that recharges the aquifer where I get my drinking water. If the 2017 Commissioner's Court felt it necessary to put three-fourths acre lot sizes over the recharge zone, then it should have not vary from that now. You cannot use the entire property to calculate the lot size because you cannot build houses on 200 acres. They have designated open space. What they are calling open space will have 56 acre TLAP, three wells that have a designated perimeter around where the public will not have access to, a creek, a tributary creek, and a sensitive environmental features that the public should not be hanging around. These features should not be considered in calculating the lot size and not be considered open space. Who wants to take a walk in a poo field? Open space should be left in its natural state and that is impossible if you're going to install irrigation lines for a T-Lap. They will cut all the trees down to install it and they will not be preserved forever as stated in their presentation. This is what Milestone does, they take a look, added before and after pictures of Sky Ridge and hills of Bear Creek. They strip the land of all vegetation, including heritage oak trees. They do not have a good reputation when it comes to preserving nature and protecting the environment. What makes you think they will protect this piece of property? You cannot believe them just because they put a pretty picture of oak trees in their presentation. This other plan they show where there are houses on large lots of private wells in OSSF is nothing but a threat and a scare tactic. They have used this exact threat with the city of Hays and the city of Austin. It is nothing but a threat, and they're hoping you buy. I hope you are smart enough to not take the bait.

Beautiful.

Judge Becerra, I have the pictures that Carol is referring to to hand to you.

I will now... Ask Commissioner Smith as a sponsor of this item for the variation of our policies if you have any parting comments before we move on.

No, I would just say as far as background, number one, I appreciate you all being here today. Number two, if you go back and look at our agendas over the last three months, four months, Maybe I want to say it was probably in March at least a Variance for this development appeared on our agenda, and it was not Traditionally in our court anything related to development is brought forth by the County Commissioner a variance for this not Not a development agreement, but a complete variance for this property was brought forth by the judge It's placed on our agenda three times to do the exact same variance that was requested in the development agreement. And we as a court had made a choice that in the past that we will not do variances of this scale without some type of development agreement. And so it was at that time I said I will sit down with the developer and try to work out at least something that is for the general good of the public. And that's where this development agreement came from. It was my attempt to address that other pending agenda item. If at the end of the day the public has spoken and doesn't want to move forward with this development agreement, I'm absolutely fine with that. But if it does come back, I will make sure that it comes back more than 30 days from now so that if there is any additional input that is needed or any additional suggestions that we have time to consider that. What I would encourage you, Whenever I did the initial 30-day extension period for the consideration of this, I asked in court that day, and I made it very public, forgive me, that I wanted people to come and see me, come talk to me, talk to me individually about it. If you have suggestions as to, and I will correct the mayor, I never said this would pass. I said that a development under the state guidelines will probably happen. Whether it's this development agreement or not, something will go there. I have full confidence. We don't have the tools to stop it here. In Hays County and counties throughout the state, we have five tools to limit and regulate development. Number one, their OSSF, their onsite sewage facility, And Hays County has the most stringent, actually the report that was mentioned earlier over tools that counties have. I would encourage you to look at that because when the Edwards Aquifer Alliance and that group came together and completed that study in 2023, it stated that Hays County has the most stringent development regulations in the entire Edwards Aquifer region. Because we do. We've gone about making very clear that from a development standpoint, where we lack tools, we try to create others with the authority we have. And on-site sewage facilities is a great example of that. We can't, under state law, require minimum lot sizes like a city can. But guess what? We can require the maximum gallons per acre you can put on with your septic system. That's where we get those rules where we say, well, you can't have more or less than a certain lot size. We use the tools that we have in a different way, and that's how we use those on enforcement. Other than that, if you connect to a county roadway, if you're, you know, a water availability study, floodplain study, if it's a commercial building or if it's a commercial entity, then we have fire code. And what am I missing, Michael? That's four. Did I miss one? Or was that five? That's five. Those are the five things that we have. And so we try to use those limited tools as best we can to address these things. And when it was mentioned earlier about the Death Star Bill, and if you're not familiar with that, it was the bill that was authored in the legislature to strip any and all regulatory authority from the county. There's one person on this dais who went and testified against it. Whenever the ETJ, exit the ETJ legislation passed in 2023, that took away the city's ability at enforcement, there's one person on this dais who went and multiple times testified against that bill. It was me. We need more structure and we need more ability to impact these things. But until that happens, we have to use the best tools that we have. A DA is a tool that we've been able to use in the past to get those things that we were not able to get otherwise. And at times we are able to use those to incentivize staying within our regulatory structure so that they don't go all the way to the state and they can do whatever they want. And I would just say that in this case, that is what functionally we wanted to do as a county. Otherwise, we know what that overall development looks like. And I am assured that I would be shocked if that entire property is not going to be developed now. If that is the will of the community, then they're going to get it. Because we don't have the ability to control that. And I think that's the frustration that I have more than anything. is the fact that we want businesses here and we want affordable housing here. There is no affordable housing per se in Hays County. An affordability rate, our current residents are having a hard time with affordability. And so at the end of the day, I would much rather see some ingenuitive thinking than just say we just let them follow the regs that we have that we're tied to by state law. And I do believe our previous discussion on data centers is a good example. We have pushed, I have testified over 30 times in the state house asking for increased impervious cover authority on behalf of our groundwater districts for improved authority for our groundwater districts. And every time, I'll tell you right now, Senator Betancourt's subcommittee, I get smacked around like a rag doll. At the end of the day, we need more authority. We can't do everything that we would like to do. But I have to tell you, I hope and I pray that y'all, during this legislative session, whenever these bills come up that would give authority to counties, to address some of the concerns that you have, I hope and pray that y'all take that one day like you took today to come talk to us and go talk to them. Ask them for that. It would be a benefit to everyone in this room. And with that, I'll go ahead and ask to table it and bring it back in 30 days. I will say we received a letter last night from the city of Austin asking us to table it for 30 days. And we also received correspondence that was read from at least two of the witnesses from Saber Springs. And so we're going to pull it for at least 30 days. But it will be very public when it goes on the agenda, and we'll make sure to reach out on social media and anyplace else to ensure that you all know that it's happening if and when it does.

Well, I want to test. You have something to say before I say it?

I was just going to say, I mean, to be completely honest, I think this DA is incredibly flawed. I understand, and I'm not saying you created it. I'm not saying that our staff didn't create it. It was terribly flawed, and unless they're willing to scrap it completely and come up with a complete different, I mean, totally different DA, I see benefit in calling for the vote.

Thank you. And so I'm going to challenge Commissioner Smith's idea that we have no power, that you should go to the Capitol instead. Join him as the lone resident that goes to the Capitol. Join him, please, and plead for power for this court. Let's test it. Roxanne, call the vote.

It would have been great to see you.

Roxanne, call the vote to not—to call the vote to cancel— This development agreement. I move to table.

Commissioner Inglesby?

No. There's a motion on the floor. Do you have a second? No second. Please call the roll.

Commissioner Inglesby? Yes. Commissioner Smith?

No.

Commissioner Hammer? Yes. Judge Becerra.

Yes. Your theory just failed. Try again at the Capitol. These people are watching, and they care more than you do.

I hope they go back and watch exactly... I sincerely hope you go back and watch the three courts where he put this on here with not a single, not one single caveat on that development.

Roxanne, please open all consent agenda items. I move that we open all consent agenda items. Do I have a second? We have a motion and a second. For all consent agenda items. So you have two for G. Okay, yes. Thank you for that note. I forget about that note. Pace County residents, one. Thank you. So we have those that were pulled were G21. So please don't open G21. Open the rest. And then you have two public comments.

They were for G21.

Okay, perfect. We're not opening G21. Exactly. Please call the roll for approving all of slate book 21.

We have G27 comment. G17 public comment for Rodrigo Amaya. He's not here.

Move that also. Any more G pieces? Okay.

All right. No more public comments for consent items. Calling the roll of Commissioner Smith.

Yes.

Commissioner Hammer? Yes. Commissioner Inglesby? Yes. Judge Becerra?

Yes. And now the Chief Deputy had texted me about an agenda item. Please open his items, because I do that. And the Constable also here. My aim is to go through your requests. to make sure that I keep the people moving. Judge, we also have folks here for K-12. Perfect, perfect. I will do all of them in the most quickest manner possible. Chief, I'm looking for your items. So please open K-5, 20, and 26. Hold on to those. Are those also to the Sheriff's Office? No, right. Just that block of K5, 20, and 26, and then followed immediately by K7. Thank you.

K5. Discussion and possible action. Authorize the Sheriff's Office to regrade a records supervisor, position and slot number 0479-002, grade 118, to a records coordinator, grade 116, Effective June 15th, 2026. So moved. K20, discussion and possible action to authorize the execution of a professional services agreement between Industrial Organizational Solutions, Inc., pursuant to RFP 2026-P11, promotional testing services for the Sheriff's Office, and K26, discussion and possible action to approve the selection of Johnson, Mirren, and Thompson, Inc., JMT to provide project management services for the additional renovations approved for the Hayes County Jail and authorized staff and the Criminal District Attorney Civil Division to negotiate a contract. So moved. Second.

Now we have all three, and the Chief Deputy is here from the Sheriff's Office. If you have any questions, comments, or concerns, anyone? Thank you, Mr. Coffey. No? Please call the roll.

Commissioner Hammer? Yes. Commissioner Inglesby? Yes. Commissioner Smith? Yes. Judge Becerra?

Yes. Thank you, Chief, for your patience. And now please open the constable's item, K-7.

K7, discussion and possible action authorizing the purchase of 10 expired ballistics helmets and related equipment from Hays County Emergency Services District Number 6 in the amount of $10 total for the benefit of the Hays County Constable, Precinct 4, and authorize the execution of a bill of sale related therewith. So moved.

Second. Any questions or comments? The constable is standing by for your questions.

I wanted to bring this to court and obviously... Constable Graham, I had a couple people reach out and said, why are we trying to acquire expired ballistic helmets? And I think Constable Graham had a good explanation, justification for it. So I did want him to say something about that.

Thank you. If you don't mind, and I'm sorry, name and title.

Good afternoon, Judge Commissioners. Dave Graham, Constable Precinct 4. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak today regarding the matter of officer safety and responsible stewardship of our county resources. I am requesting the Commissioner's Corps authorize the transfer of ballistic helmets that have reached the fire department's administrative expiration date to the constable's office. These helmets were acquired for firefighter training purposes and have seen limited use. While the manufacturer signs a five-year service life for certification and liability purposes, the helmets have been used primarily in a controlled training environment and have not experienced the wear, damage, or operational exposure that would typically degrade their protective capabilities. Speaking from professional experience, before I retired from the Dallas Police Department, I was a unit commander assigned to our tactical operations division where I oversaw the full-time SWAT team and the bomb squad. I completely understand ballistic equipment, all equipment, has a shelf life capacity. However, these helmets have seen limited use. They haven't been exposed to moisture, heat, UV, so forth and so on. So their typical hard life retirement would be more like five to ten years. At present, our office does not have ballistic helmets available for deputies. This creates a significant gap in personal protective equipment during high-risk incidents, warrant service, active threat situations, and or other law enforcement operations where head protection may be critical. The proposed transfer would provide our deputies with an additional layer of protection at no additional cost to the taxpayers. Rather than disposing of equipment that still retains practical value, we can maximize the county's investment by repurposing these helmets for a public safety agency that currently has no comparable equipment available. The request is not intended to replace future procurement of modern ballistic helmets when funding becomes available. Instead, it serves as a temporary and fiscally responsible measure to improve officer safety using existing county assets. As public servants, we have an obligation to use taxpayer-funded equipment wisely while ensuring that our personnel have the tools necessary to perform their duties as safely as possible. Transferring these helmets accomplishes both of those objectives. I respectfully request the court to consider approving the transfer so that these resources can continue to serve the county and help protect the men and women who serve our community. Thank you for your time and consideration.

My buddy, you were perfect in your framing of this magnificent request through the fiscal lens, through the public safety lens, and everything else. So perfectly stated. Anything else? Anyone else? Before I call the roll.

I just want to thank you, Constable, for providing that information. Appreciate it.

Thank you. Most magnificently done. Please call the roll, Roxanne.

Commissioner Inglesby? Yes. Commissioner Smith?

Yes.

Commissioner Hammer? Yes. Judge Becerra?

Yes. So, Marisol, when you give me a number, you've got to remember there are a bunch of letters. So I never want to assume. I've done it before where I read someone's lips and I have the wrong number open. So let's open K-18 and then you guys start telling me which ones you want. K-12. After K-18, open K-12. Thank you, Constable.

K-18, discussion and possible action to execute the Vertisoft quote for Mosaic Consulting to consulting services for the configuration of the countywide timekeeping system, UKG, totaling $42,600, and amend the budget accordingly. So moved. Second.

Second.

Good afternoon, Judge and Commissioners. We are requesting that we consult with the Mosaic Consulting Group to help us do the final implementation for the Sheriff's Office UKG timekeeping software. We also need to make some changes in the software for the requirements for the Big Beautiful Bill regarding the premium overtime reporting. Last year it was just an informational return. This year we do have to make sure that everything is flowing from our timesheets into our W2s. And so we have consulted with other counties. We have visited other counties. And it is not, and we talked to our IT director, and it is not something that can be handled in-house. So that is why we are requesting that this consultant be brought on to help assist with the configurations.

All right. Any questions, commissioners? We've been Jeff, we've been trying to get this systematized for so many years. We finally get to see it before you and I go. Please call the roll.

Commissioner Inglesby? Yes. Commissioner Smith?

Yes.

Commissioner Hammer? Yes. Judge Becerra?

Yes. Now we're on to K-12.

K-12. Discussion and possible action to authorize the execution of a development agreement for the Driftwood Country Store between Hayes County and FM 150 Driftwood Investments, LLC. And we do have one emailed public comment.

Okay. Motion? So moved.

Second.

Got a motion and a second. Now if you'll read that comment.