Commissioners Court - Regular Meeting

Good morning, everyone.

It is 9 a.m. on this Tuesday, August 11, 2026, and we're going to commence this regularly called session of the Kendall County Commissioner's Court. I'm going to call roll. Commissioner Regent, or I mean Commissioner McCall.

Present.

Commissioner Regent.

Present.

Commissioner Chapman's absent. Commissioner Carpenter. Here. And I'm present. We have a quorum consisting of four members of the court. Next up, I'm going to introduce my colleagues, Commissioner McCall and Commissioner Wieschens, for announcements regarding our prayer and our pledge.

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to this morning. And I would like to welcome John Breese, the senior pastor at Creed Creek. He's going to open us in prayer.

Heavenly Father, we thank you for the day. We thank you for the opportunity that it brings. We thank you for the blessings of it. Lord, we pray for wisdom and discernment for the court. Lord, we ask that you would guide them and direct them. Father, we thank you for the community that we live in and the blessings of living in it. Father, would you watch over us for your glory and for our good. We ask these things and we pray all these things in Jesus' name. Amen. Amen.

Good morning, everyone. I'd like to introduce Savannah and Lexi Womble, who attend Comfort High School, and they're going to lead us in our pledges.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right. Next up, declarations of conflict of interest. Anything from you ladies today? Chad, anything from you? Nothing from me? Next, comments from the bench. Commissioner McCall, would you kick us off?

Yes. I'm conducting a comprehensive review of all contracts and agreements related to the FLOC camera program. I've heard the concerns raised by our citizens, and I take those concerns seriously. My responsibility is to ensure that we fully understand our contractual obligations and the legal options available to us. I will continue reviewing the agreements and applicable law so that we can make informed decisions about that are in the best interest of our citizens in Kendall County. And then for those of you who have inquired about property tax relief or flooding damage, the Kendall County, I'm sorry, the Kendall Appraisal District offers a temporary exemption for property damage by disaster. To apply, you can go to their website, the Kendall Appraisal District at kendallad.org. and select the forms page. Near the bottom of the page on the right-hand side, click temporary exemption property damage by disaster. If you have any questions or need assistance, the appraisal district's contact information is available on its website. Please share this information with anyone who may have experienced property damage from the recent flooding.

Commissioner Regents?

Thank you, Judge. Good morning again, everyone. Well, quite an adventure this morning. Happy back to school, everyone. Just a reminder, when you're out there driving, please be courteous. Leave early, leave in plenty of time, and stay off your phone. Be safe.

Thank you. Chad? I'm assuming everyone's here for flock cameras. Just kidding. I think Commissioner McCall... I already laid out the concerns for Flock, and we're on it. We've heard you. We've been receiving lots of emails from you. We do listen, and we do respond to what you guys want from this court. And I just want you all to know that we don't go and ignore what you have to say to us.

Thanks. We're going to kick off with agenda item six, accounts payable claims, consideration of possible action on approval of accounts payable claims for purchased services and vendors. Morning, Corinna.

Good afternoon, Commissioners. Morning. Today we have accounts payable claims in the amount of $380,675.91. Does anyone have any questions on any of the 27 pages of accounts payable?

If not, I'll entertain a motion at this time.

Judge, I move to approve accounts payable claims for purchase of service and vendors in the amount of $380,675.91. We have a motion made by Commissioner Wieschen.

Do I have a second? Second.

Seconded by Commissioner Wieschen.

Any further discussion? Paula, please tell them both.

Commissioner Powell?

Aye.

Commissioner Wieschen?

Aye.

Commissioner Parker?

Aye. Aye. Motion carries 4-0. Yes, please. All right. Next up, we got our proclamations for this court. First, consideration of possible action regarding Proclamation P-2026-0811-1 proclaiming August 17, 2026 as Nonprofit Day in Kendall County. So, Each year we recognize a bunch of groups that support our local community. And, you know, Kim plays an important role in that. Would you mind bringing your crew up and introduce who you brought with us today? As many as you can pack up here.

There's a bunch of us. So in Kendall County, we represent the Greater Learning Chamber of Commerce, represents over 150 nonprofits. Their economic impact is over $50.3 million in the Kendall County. So when we do this, it matters. And they play a vital, important role for everything, right? For our businesses, for our mental health, for our seniors, and everything in between. So we're very grateful for their support.

And they all, during any disaster event, y'all are the first to step up and ask, what can we do to help? And so the county is very thankful for everything you do and for your leadership and support. So with that, I'll read our proposed proclamation. Whereas nonprofit organizations throughout Kendall County play a vital role in strengthening our community by providing critical programs and services that enhance the quality of life for residents while reducing demands on public resources. And whereas these organizations address diverse community needs through their work in areas such as education, health and human services, the arts, environmental stewardship, civic engagement, recreation, faith-based outreach, philanthropy, making Kendall County a stronger and more vibrant place to live in. Whereas the unwavering commitment of nonprofit professionals, board members, and the volunteers reflects a spirit of generosity, compassion, and service that positively impacts countless individuals and families each year. And whereas Kendall County Nonprofit Day 2026 offers an opportunity to honor the invaluable contributions of our local nonprofit organizations and recognize the lasting difference they make in the lives of our citizens and continued success of our community. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Kendall County Commissioner's Court declare August 17, 2026 as Kendall County Nonprofit Day and urge all residents to acknowledge the beneficial impact of nonprofit organizations on the quality of life within our community. So with that, I move to proclaim August 17, 2026 as Nonprofit Day in Kendall County, pursuant to Proclamation P-2026-0811-1. Do I have a second?

Second.

Motion by the judge, second by Commissioner Carpenter. Any further discussion? There being none, call it. You're up.

Commissioner McCall?

Aye.

Commissioner Beeson? Aye. Commissioner Carpenter?

Aye.

Judge Stolarzik?

Aye. Motion carries 4-0. Thank you. I'LL GET YOU AFTER. ANYONE SECOND?

THANK YOU FOR COMING IN.

Thanks for coming in, Pastor. Highest rated show in the county. Nice to meet you.

Can you get everybody? Thank you. Thank you. All right.

Another proclamation. This time, consideration and possible action regarding proclamation P20260811-2, proclaiming October 2026 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month in Kendall County. Do we got Glenda, Wilkie, or anyone from the DA's office? We're right here. Back there. Good morning, Glenda.

Good morning.

Can you remind everyone the importance of Domestic Violence Awareness Month and what efforts you're involved with?

Good morning, Judge and Commissioners. On behalf of Kendall County Victim Services, thank you for recognizing October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month and for your continued support of victims and survivors in our community. We appreciate the county's commitment to bringing awareness to this important issue.

Well, thank you. So the proposed proclamation reads as follows. Whereas October is National Domestic Violence Awareness Month and Prevention Month, and it's time for us to come together to reaffirm our commitment to ending domestic violence and working together to continue to refuse to tolerate abuse, support survivors, and hold perpetrators accountable. Whereas domestic violence is a serious crime that affects people of all races, ages, genders, and socioeconomic backgrounds, leaving lasting physical, emotional, and psychological scars on survivors, families, and communities. Whereas in the United States, approximately half of female victims of homicide are killed by current or former intimate partners, and an estimated one-third of the women and one-fourth of the men will experience domestic violence in their lifetime. And in Texas, thousands of families are directly impacted each year. Whereas Kendall County recognizes the need to support victims and survivors of domestic violence by raising awareness, providing resources, and collaborating with local organizations, law enforcement, courts, healthcare providers, schools, and advocates to break the cycle of abuse. And whereas local organizations, including Hill Country Family Services, Hill Country Crisis Council, Kendall County Women's Shelter, and Transformation House play an essential role in providing services, advocacy, and support for survivors and their families. Whereas National Domestic Violence Awareness and Prevention Month is an opportunity to honor and strengthen the resilience of survivors, to mourn the lives of those lost to domestic violence and to recommit ourselves as a community to prevention, education, accountability, and healing. Whereas Kendall County is dedicated to promoting safety, justice, and hope for all residents and reaffirms its commitment to a coordinated community response that ensures survivors have access to services, protections, and justice. Whereas the Kendall County Commission's Court has approved purple lighting of the Kendall County Courthouse and displaying of the Domestic Violence Awareness Month banner, as a visible reminder of the county's commitment ending domestic violence in support of survivors now therefore be it resolved that the 11th on this 11th day of august 2026 that keno county commission court duly convened hereby proclaims the month of october 2026 as domestic violence awareness and prevention month so i move um to proclaim october 2026 as the best domestic violence awareness month in keno county pursuant to proclamation p2026 0811-2. Do I have a second? Second. Motion by the judge, second by Commissioner McCall. Any further discussion? There being none, Paula, could you please call the vote?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Motion carries 4-0. It's your signature.

Yes, and Andrew. So did you use the mouse? They can't see you. Here, stand up here. Okay.

All right, our last proclamation is consideration of possible action regarding Kendall County Victim Services Department hosting the Walk the Mile event on the front courthouse lawn on October 10, 2026, in support of October's Domestic Violence Awareness Month. We've got, well, back again. All right, could you remind the public a little bit about what this event is and why this is important?

Thank you for recognizing our annual Walk the Mile event. This event brings our community together to raise awareness, support survivors, and stand together against domestic violence. We hope everyone will join us in October.

With that, I move... Move to support the Kendall County Victim Services hosting the Walk the Mile event on the front porch of House Lawn on October 10, 2026 in support of October's Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Do I have a second? Second. Pushed by the judge. Seconded by Commissioner Carpenter. Any further discussion? There being none, Paula, could you please call the vote?

Commissioner McCall? Aye. Commissioner Wheaton? Aye. Commissioner Carpenter? Aye. Judge Stolarzik?

Aye. Motion carries four to zero.

Get your copy after. Okay, thank you.

All right, next up, our burn ban resolution. Consideration action on the burn prohibiting outdoor burning for a period of 90 days in the unincorporated areas of the county due to the existence of conditions that have created a safety hazard. All right, Brady, looks like things are still looking good where we can keep the burn ban off based on.

Yes, sir. Right now, the burn index is sitting at 423 and it is it's going up quickly. I know that we had quite a bit of rain and saturation, but as those fuels are starting to grow, they are drying out very quick with 100 plus temperature days and then the high winds. So over this next week, it's going to be critical with the 20 and 30 mile an hour gusts that people maintain their gas. burning of natural vegetation. They're piles. I want to remind everybody that they need to stay with those piles. We haven't seen a trend yet along I-10, 87 North, any of that with fires here in our county, but some of our counties to the north and to the northwest are starting to experience grass fires.

What's our window we're looking at before we could be considering reimposing that at least two weeks or not?

I would say by next court, it'll be on the fence. I'll reach out to all the fire chiefs just before next court, but we may be looking at getting close to that decision-making.

So the recommendation is to encourage everyone to burn while they can?

Yes, burn while you can, but please, please, please do it responsibly.

Okay. Does anyone have any opposition taking no action and leaving the burn ban off? No. All right.

Just one thing. Would you just let everybody know a reminder to make sure that they are not burning at night, that they're watching your piles, that kind of thing?

Yes, ma'am. State the right now. The Clean Air Act, by statute, it has several rules that you can find on our website. They're listed, which is for the safety of burning. You cannot burn at night. It kind of follows the same rules as hunting. 30 minutes before sunup, 30 minutes before sundown, natural vegetation only, no trash, tires, anything like that. You have to remain with your burn at all times. That is until it is out cold, meaning no more smoke, no more embers or anything. And if you are burning a pile, I would encourage you to turn it a little bit because as these winds move in, they start to feed what you thought was out. They add that oxygen needed and it'll reignite your pile. So stir your pile, make sure it's out, stay with it. That's where most of our grass fires start in this county is from unattended burns. You can find all of that on our website, on the county website, kentocountytx.org, I'm sorry, .gov, and under the fire marshal's page.

And if things got out of hand, call for assistance immediately because it's easier to get a handle of it.

Yes, and we're putting another PSA out today. It might have gone out last night, but if you look at our Facebook page, it has a whole bunch of safety tips on there.

Thank you. Thank you, Brady.

I wouldn't burn if I was you, so...

I think it's a bad idea. Even though the burn index is still in the range that's safe, all it takes is one fire out of control and we're toasted. The grass is not.

I'm by no means encouraging everybody to burn, but I do know after several years of doing this that it is going to happen. So if you have to and you're going to, follow the rules and be safe about it.

Great. Thank you, Brady. Next up, consideration of possible action regarding Resolution R-20260811-1 to authorize the county treasurer to execute and submit all documents related to establishing and maintaining an investment account with Texas Range Republican Funds Investment Pool. Good morning, Cheryl.

Good morning, everyone. How are y'all this morning? I'm coming to you today to get a resolution approved for the county to have an investment account with Texas Range. They do require that Missioners Court is on board with opening an account with this local government investment co-op. So I also spoke with you a little bit in April, or actually it was probably May. I was going to the investment conference in June, and we were waiting to hear what the economists thought about what interest rates were going to do. And just like before June, we had no idea. We still have no idea. The economists were all over the place at that conference from interest rates are going to go up 50 basis points, interest rates are going to go down 50 basis points, or we don't know what they're going to do with the placement of the new chairman. So this particular product, I spoke with the representative from Texas Range at the conference, and this particular product allows us to invest quickly. We can do investments from a week up to a year, earning probably an entire point above what logic is probably giving us at the moment. And we can invest for a month or three months or anything like that. If we have money that we know we're going to have for maybe six months before we need to spend it, we can utilize this particular fund. And I think it's a really good product. So I'm asking that y'all approve that resolution for me.

Okay. Thank you. Well, I move to authorize the county treasurer to execute and submit all documents related to establishing and maintaining an investment account with Texas Range pursuant to Resolution R-20260811-1. Do I have a second? Second. Motion by the judge, second by Commissioner Wieschen. Any further discussion?

Just I did a little research, and it looks good. It's a AAA money market fund rating.

Yes, ma'am.

Thanks for finding that.

Okay. I mean, it seemed like a really good product. I had never really seen that product with the investment groups like that before the local pools. So I don't know if they're just now starting to advertise those products. And this company, he was very personable. It's going to be an easy product for us to get into and move money around. So I think it's going to be a really great advantage for the county. Thank you for that.

Anything else? If not, Paula. Please call the vote.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Motion carries four to zero. Cheryl, I'll get you that document after.

Yes, thank you.

Thanks. While we're signing signatures, we'll move into public comments. You know, multiple people are here for agenda item 22. I've put your requests to speak during that agenda item. I'm going to address just strictly public comments who want to speak during this general item. So first up, first up, we got Jake Watson.

Jake.

Oh, yeah, absolutely.

So this is your first time here. So if you look to your right, there's a three minute timer. Once you begin speaking, it'll count down and give you a little ding at the end. So kind of wrap up succinctly. Got it. Start by introducing who you are, where you live, and then roll your test.

Yes, sir. Thank you. Yeah, so I've got a little thing here. I'll just read from it. Good morning. My name is Jake Watson, and I'm a conservative business owner, lawyer, coach, father, and Christian here in Kendall County. Probably not the average person you'd expect to talk about flock cameras going up in our community over the last few weeks, but the issue is greater than identity politics. It's how the state of Texas is prioritizing the construction of mass surveillance and cheap car insurance over our God-given right to privacy. And how this Commission, whether y'all knew it or not, became a direct facilitator of that infrastructure. As you are aware, Kendall County receives grants from the Texas DMV Crime Prevention Authority, which is a seven person board with two people on that board directly. representing the car insurance industry. And its intentions are seemingly good. They provide money to law enforcement for the purpose of combating motor vehicle crime and driving down the cost of insurance. But as we all know, the road to hell can be paved and is paved with good intentions. Because that grant money was used on August 15th of last year by our sheriff to sign a work order with Flock to install 57 cameras, ostensibly marketed as license plate reader cameras. with section two of that contract stating the locations of the cameras are not included in this agreement due to security concerns which is a wild thing for a contract that states that it is constitutional because these cameras maintain capturing only things public information in the plain view outside of that fact my basic question is this did anyone on this commission ask what this technology is actually capable of i know you did We can't answer comment right you so I understand. Thank you for the question. I'm going to assume no Because this commission on the court date of October 14th allowed five minutes as time needed for presentation of the item Which is two minutes more than I'm getting right now So allow me to fill you in because these are not just license plate reader cameras used to stop bad guys what they are doing and what the technology will be capable of as it progresses and is capturing a mass mosaic of digital information capable of tracking the whole of your everyday movements now you might hear this and say well they're just license plate reader cameras and you have no expectation of privacy on public roads but that's fundamentally incorrect uh... the supreme court has recognized clearly that there is reasonable expectation of privacy in the whole of your physical movements even if those movements occurred in public and once there are enough of these cameras in the county they will create a detailed picture of everyone's life that no ordinary observer could realistically obtain, which is unconstitutional. So here's the worst part. We're using our own money to install this. And nobody really seemed to bother to ask why or for what. So... That's my point. If we want to do better, my official legal advice is to terminate the contract with Flock, which can be done with 30 days written notice. Sheriff Al, I think he'll still catch the car thieves. And if you like, I can help you write the termination notice for you pro bono. Appreciate your time. Thank you.

Nailed it.

Next up, Miss Martinez, Jessica.

Jessica? Is she on Zoom?

Is Jessica on Zoom? All right. Next up, Christy Wiley and Doug Mechel.

Good morning, judge and commissioners. For the record, my name is Christy Wiley. I'm a resident in Kendall County, Precinct 4, and director of the Hill Country Fire Coalition of Texas, the nonprofit established to help implement the county's community wildfire protection plan. In other words, we're doing the county's work to reduce wildfire risk to the residents of Kendall County. Last week in Austin, wildfire mitigation and federal grant professionals not only recognized the value of what the coalition has built here in Kendall County, they asked not only how they can replicate it, but if we could help them. Yet here we are again, sitting before you, explaining the value that we bring to the county that directly benefits the county. I want to clarify a key point from yesterday's budget discussion. The coalition's $2.2 million community wildfire defense grant is a reimbursement grant. Those funds are not sitting in a bank account. We must first perform work, pay eligible expenses with funds readily available, submit proof of payment, and then wait approximately six weeks for reimbursement. That's why we requested a one-time $125,000 revolving fund. It is not an annual appropriation and not money the coalition will keep. It's a working capital fund to pay expenses received federal reimbursement, replenish that fund, use the same dollars over and over again throughout the five-year grant. Eliminating the fund altogether as Commissioner Huizhen suggested or reducing it to a level that that was actually below our initial reimbursement request to the state, as Commissioner McCall suggested, creates the same problem. Without sufficient funds to pay expenses up front, we cannot access the federal dollars already awarded Kendall County. The coalition secured a $2.2 million grant grant to reduce wildfire risk here, and the federal government additionally waived approximately $740,000 in required cost share over the five years. We're not asking for this fund because we failed to secure funding. We need it because we succeeded, and reimbursement requires us to spend funds first. This revolving account is a financial mechanism that turns the grant award into actual wildfire risk reduction to Kendall County residents in a county where the United States Forest Service identifies us as a high risk wildfire county higher than 76% of the remaining counties across the United States. By temporarily providing the $125,000 to the county enables us to access more than $2.2 million in federal funding, while those dollars ultimately remain available to the county, and it is a return of more than $18 for every county dollar temporarily committed.

And Christy, it's Doug's turn.

That's it.

As each of you ran on a platform that includes public safety first, I respectfully ask, where else in Kendall County can you get this kind of return while directly improving public safety? Thank you for allowing this time today to clarify. Thank you both.

Thank you.

Okay, did I miss anyone that wanted to speak during actual public comments? Okay. All right, we're going to move on to consideration and action on the 2027 optional fees, county road and bridge fee, and child safety fee. Mr. Hudson?

Yes, these are the fees that get added on to motor vehicle registration renewals and new title application registration transactions. So basically, we've got the current fees for Kendall County or $1 child safety fee, which goes for funding school crossing guards. This particular fee, it specifies that it can be up to $1.50. So it's the only fee that could possibly be raised if there was a need. Revenue must be used for school crossing guard services. Remaining funds must be used for programs to enhance child safety, health, or nutrition, including child abuse intervention and prevention and drug and alcohol abuse prevention, among other purposes. The other fee that we have there is the main one for Road and Bridge, the $10 fee. fee, and we are already at $10. That's the maximum. And that greatly helps out Fund 11 for the Redden Bridge funding in Kendall County.

Is it your recommendation that we make no change to impose any additional fees on our citizens?

I kind of feel that way because, I mean, I kind of feel like we might want to do that particularly in light of the economy for a lot of hardworking people Commissioner McCall, did you have anything you wanted to say on that item, though?

No, we had talked about whether we could raise that fee in light of the HERO program, and we're still looking into that, but I don't think that this really applies.

Okay. So I never could get an answer out of Bexar County on how they – We're doing that program, the HERO program, which is a roadside assistance program, emergency roadside assistance program. But they are allowed an additional $10 fee. If you see that section in your backup where it talks about transportation project fee, if you all needed money for something like that, you would have to figure out how to get the legislature to allow Kendall County to do that. And then it You don't have to go to the maximum. You know, you could do whatever you thought was appropriate. And, you know, we've got good historical records. But, yeah, my employees and I would like to keep the 50 cents away and just stay at the dollar.

Yes, sir. All right. So I move to adopt the up to 2027 optional fees with no change. Do I have a second? Second. Motion by the judge. Second by Commissioner McCall. Any further discussion? There being none, Paula, could you please call the vote?

Commissioner McCall. Aye. Commissioner Wieschen. Aye. Commissioner Carpenter. Aye. Mr. Larson.

Aye. Motion carries 4-0. And I filled it out. There was no signature page, so. Right. I'll take care of it.

Yeah.

I'll send it in. Next up, we have present, discuss, and seek approval of the 2026 Certified Appraisal Rule totals and receive anticipated tax collection rate currently at 98.47%. Mr. Hudson?

Yes. So that's me certifying the election rate to you. And I've got some handouts on this. The information wasn't completely available at the time I requested the agenda item. But you did get a lot of backup on this item, which is basically a selective cherry picking of the pages. We get a very lengthy report from the appraisal district. And they don't really pick a number that they're certifying, but they give you all the reports. So the computer limitations cause it to be a little confusing. I picked the appraisal review board totals, both on the net taxable and then the freeze-adjusted taxable. So I'm certifying or asking the board to approve two different numbers and again, has any provisions in the order I'm certainly open to it. But I thought that was the cleanest thing. The chief appraiser, you know, about 25 years ago, used to give out an actual number on their certification. And there's just so many ways to cut this thing because you've got tax freeze and you've got contested values and they're not finalized yet and so forth. This is what I would recommend. I will talk about the values in greater depth, though, we're hearing this this information i'm going to talk about was included in your your backup does anybody else need a copy yes sir all right good okay um so the uh of course the first couple of pages are the chief appraiser uh nelly zapata certifying that these are the numbers were to use for our truth and taxation calculations for that process which uh includes the tax rate proposal and adoption process. But basically, the treats and taxation stuff is all to help taxpayers know if there's any increases in their taxes. And so they have a right to know if the county is proposing any of that. So the first page of your backup that has numbers on it, the ARB approved total. So those are finalized numbers for the year. And the ARB actually approves those numbers, the total role there. And like I said, the net tax, the gross value of all the property that they approved was $20,147,194,574. Excuse me, $194,574 net taxable. It's about halfway down the page on the right-hand side, net taxable of $12,801,524,761. So a lot of the big difference is agricultural land is taxed at productivity value and so forth. And so these large ranches are significantly less value on those for tax purposes because they couldn't afford a ranch if they had to... based on the market value of land in Kendall County. Then the freeze taxable, it is continuing to grow. I will mention that the freeze taxable number is $3,506,679,326. And you subtract that and the transfer adjustment, which relates to the over 65 tax freeze, you come out to the net amount approved by ARB, of $9,290,910,958. So that's the number I'm looking. Those two numbers, the last two, the 12, 801, and the 9290 numbers are the ones I'm suggesting the court approve. It's kind of like your best numbers. The additional pages show you the one that's got a four marked at the bottom right-hand corner on my handout. or the backup for the agenda item, shows different categories from single-family residents, vacant land and lots, multifamily residents, et cetera. So those just give you a detail of what those ARB-approved numbers are. So the next page after that, page 5, shows the certified totals under ARB review. So if you look at the net taxable number, it's $197,870,663 value in properties, 282 properties still under ARB review, if you will, and in different stages of the process that people contesting their values. The page right after that, page six, shows the... Excuse me, the market value, the $225 million on page 5, $225 million, $740,978, that's the market value. The actual estimated amount that the appraisal district says we have to use is $172 million. So I think it's about a 13% difference. That's probably a historical percentage when you've got people in an advanced state. maybe with tax reps and stuff fighting their values. It can go to district court in some cases. So page seven, probably my favorite page. We have total new value near the top of the page. The new taxable value of $372,904,090. So that's a new value. It's a little lower than last year, but I think there was some catch-up going on last year, maybe with some lots and things that were not... They're kind of like catch-up items because it was about $450 million last year. And it could show some slowing of construction and new business property and stuff. So you can see there was no new agricultural exemptions and kind of the lower... Half of the page there, there's zero loss for new ag. The average market value of a home is the average taxable category A and E, so that includes mobile homes on land as well as actual homes, is $602,093. So that's the average home in Kendall County County. Averages can be a little deceiving because there's a median, which we will talk about in another meeting. A median value is half above and half below, but it's informational. And then my last page there where I'm certifying what the appraisal district indicated, and I agree on the percentage collections for the last three years, basically, and what the future is. your estimate is. So it's still going very well. Very high percentage at 98% overnight percent on average. So, you know, still a great place to to live and people are paying their taxes in a timely fashion. And hopefully we get to lower them one more time.

Yeah. So let me ask you. So if I make a motion, is it sufficient if I say Pursuant to the proposed order, I move to adopt order the Commissioner's Court of McKendel County to approve the 2026 certified appraisal roll ARB approved totals of $12,801,524,761 net taxable value and $9,290,910,958 of freeze-adjusted taxable value. Will that suffice? I believe so. Jen's an expert here. All right. That's my motion. Do I have a second? I'll second. All right. Motion by the judge. Let me make note here. Motion by the judge. Second by Commissioner Carpenter. Any further discussion?

Maybe we just send questions for Mr. Hudson.

Yeah, we can open it up for questions while I fill this out here. Does anyone have any questions for James?

So on a $12.8 billion certified tax base, that's what, roughly $9.29 billion subject to the current rate after the freeze adjustments, right?

Right, yes. Right. Yeah, because a significant part of our tax base is residents over age 65 or disabled. that their taxes are frozen so they don't go up unless they did in addition to their house or something. In other words, some of the taxes are frozen and can go down in some circumstances, but they generally will not go up for the county's tax. And I believe that's also true for the school district and probably the city, but I don't want to get out of my wheelhouse here.

So are we beginning to see that number level off, or do you expect, that frozen portion of the tax base will continue to grow given our demographics?

I can't predict the future, but it has been growing. And, of course, we do get revenue on that. It just doesn't increase for inflation or anything. So I would suspect so. But, you know, I would suspect so. Okay. For multiple reasons.

I guess the other thing that stands out is that we added about $383 million in new value, but that looks like it's overwhelmingly residential. So I think that reinforces us to be very disciplined when it comes to spending because I'm not seeing a big increase in commercial.

I don't have a breakout on what the actual total new improvements or how they break down available for this meeting. But, yeah, I do believe that the business growth may be slowing down a bit. But a lot of times it can be because, say, the city has a lot of restrictive covenants that make something drag out longer than normal. Oh, yeah, good point. It's possible.

Okay, just some observations. Everything looks good. Thank you. And we're still, what, at 98%, over 98% of the collections? Yes. And some of that could still come in that just may be kind of lagging?

Yes, it's possible. We're still collecting tax through the appraisal district, of course. back into the early 1980s, so occasionally. Rare, but it does happen. Okay, thank you. Any additional questions?

No, just one other thing. So you did mention that if the tax rate goes down, we were talking about this, that those people who are frozen, their rate will go down as well.

You know, I think that's something to get a further clarification on but yes i believe it it can be refroze and i i not very because i haven't elected the regular property tax since 97 um yeah i'm not as familiar with it as the appraisal district staff okay i'll reach out but yes i believe i believe their taxes in some instances will go down if we adopt a lower rate so i can't say what um I think Cow Creek maybe isn't subject to the tax freeze. I'm not sure. But they're a very small, very small fraction of the total tax bill. So I believe that's the correct statement.

Thank you.

With that, Paula, would you please call the vote?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Motion carries four to zero. I have that document for you. I'll give it to you after, James. Next up. Present, discuss, and approve the 2026 calculated tax rates for Kendall County, no new revenue tax rate, and voter approval tax rate.

Yes. Now, because we hadn't fully technologically developed our skills, the backup for the agenda item has at least one change, and it's the – we have to have a hyperlink now on the form. And so when it shows up on our website, people can just click that hyperlink. And, of course, I have to manually sign this and certify it. So we have a revised copy with a hyperlink on there. Now that is on the website on our tax assessor collector department. Thank you.

But for the public's awareness, nothing else of your figures have changed. So if they receive the backup documents electronically.

Thank you. So, yeah, the critical, of course, you can see the complete back up there. The hyperlink is basically for the first time we're required to show where all our numbers come from. So anyone can recalculate the rate if they want to. And just something we had never done, creating our own hyperlink on a form that was scanned in as a We ultimately had to scan it as an Adobe Acrobat form. So anyway, any questions on this? It starts out calculating the revenue from 2025 based on the numbers are always changing over at the appraisal district based on settlements and so forth. And there's refunds that get created out of some of those things. And there's a lot of changes from the time we actually do the levy in October to the time now in July and August that we're looking back at those numbers and seeing how they came out. So anyway, there's a lot of deductions and so forth based on new exemptions that are approved by the appraisal district and tax refunds based on probably settlement of you know, for tested values and so forth. And just kind of see if you've got any questions about the deal there. That hyperlink will show you. You have to really dig through it. But I've tried to even attach copies of adding machine tape so somebody could see where, you know, I have to add three numbers together to come up with this number and so forth.

Do you think you could jump to page 10 and 11 and just kind of give a quick synopsis of the adopted rate and what's significant of what we're trying to do this year for the citizens?

Well, I can't talk about the proposed rate yet. Yeah, I'm getting ahead of myself. But basically, the crux of the calculations are the final page 11, the no new revenue tax rate, which is the rate that should impose the same amount of tax on properties that were taxable last year to taxable this year on average would be the same amount of tax from the county is .373566. So we have a current rate of .377. So to levy the exact amount of tax based on how this calculation is required to be made, the rate would drop to .373566. Now this is the first time in 29 years or so that we've looked at trying to hit that rate instead of either holding the rate the same or lowering it some. But the voter approval rate, which is a rate at which if we were to adopt of that rate, the public would have an automatic rollback election where they could vote to roll the taxes back and the county would be rolled back to that number. So kind of like, in my view, the maximum rate that the county would be ever wanting to propose would be the 392283, which is quite a bit above, about a penny and a half above the 377, which is our current rate. So part of that is because the county is allowed to recapture past revenue that it didn't levy, you know, because it went below the... the voter approval rate, and that drops off the map. You have a three-year look-back period, and one drops off every year, and a new one comes on. A lot of times the number might be zero, so there isn't anything you could capture. In this case, there will be if we end up adopting the rate that I'd like to propose the court. Yes, sir. We've talked about in the budget meetings. So there's my certification, very last item on there. So those two rates are the critical ones. And that's what I'm just asking you all to approve those. Approve the no new revenue rate and the voter approval rate as presented by the tax assessment.

Well, I move to approve the 2026 calculated tax rates for Kendall County. No new revenue tax rate and voter approval tax rate as proposed by James Hudson. Do I have a second? Second. Motion by the judge. Second by Commissioner McCall. Any further discussion? There being none. Paula, you're up.

Motion or call? Aye. Commissioner Leach?

Aye.

Commissioner Carpenter? Aye. Judge DeLarge?

Aye. Motion carries four to zero. Next up, take a record vote to place a proposal to adopt the rate of 0.373 cents or $100 taxable valuation on the agenda of a future meeting. Since the proposed rate of 0.373 is not higher than the no new revenue tax rate, no language about a tax increase except a slight increase in maintenance and operation taxes will be needed in the motion to adopt. Adoption of the tax rate is planned for the meeting of Commissioner's Court on August 25th, 2026 at 10 a.m. after the budget is adopted.

Need to make a correction to that. The budget adoption will not be August 25th. It will be on September the 8th.

I was going to talk about that. So at the time I requested the agenda item, I was using the best information available at the time. And so we are going to... I talked to Corinna and, of course, been talking to the budget officer and so forth. And so September 8, 2026 at 10 a.m., I believe Corinna is going to have the budget hearing and adoption item at September 8, 2026 at 9.30 a.m. I believe she wanted to get some of the basic start out. So I've got a copy of an order here. I apologize. Thank you. But that's basically what I'm waiting for. And if Jen has any revisions, give her a minute to look at that. All right. But personally, we have to have all kinds of wording. If you raise the taxes $1 over the no new revenue rate, then you have all kinds of wording about tax increases and so forth.

All right. The proposed wording, I'm just going to go ahead and make the motion. I move to order the Commissioner's Court of Kendall County to place the proposal to adopt the rate of 0.373 cents per $100 taxable value on the agenda of a future meeting, that being Tuesday, September 8th, 2026 at 10 a.m. in the Kennel County Courthouse Commissioner's Court, room number 301 on 201 East San Antonio Ave, Burney, Texas. Is that sufficient, General Counsel? Do I have a second? Second. Motion by the judge. Second by Commissioner Wieschen. Any further discussion?

Just a comment. I just think that for the first time in 29 years that we've been able to adopt the no new revenue rate is huge, particularly given the statewide conversation about lowering property taxes. And the legislature has done its part to make every effort to try to give us relief. And so they're asking local jurisdictions to do the same. And I think we're doing our part as well. So thanks for working with us on being able to do that.

I'm excited about it.

Anyone else? No, I'm just happy that, thank you for working with us over the years. I know it's been a key priority of this court to be fiscally responsible. And in doing so, it's allowed us to reduce county taxes multiple years during the past four years. And I think a lot of people are struggling and every little bit helps. And so it's just, just remember we're doing everything we can. There's a lot of needs and wants in the county and that pie only goes so far. So we do our best to manage it while still providing the most quality of service to you, the citizen, because you are the customer we serve. So with that, Paula, would you please call the vote?

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Motion carries four to zero.

Thank y'all.

Thank you, Mr. Hudson.

And I'll get you copies of these orders once we're done here. Thank y'all very much. All right, next up. Consideration of possible action regarding ratifying the grants management and compliance director job. Mr. Regent, you're up.

So I'd like to have Sheriff come up, and I know that Nicole Bishop, our district attorney, had some flight delays coming in. Nicole, were you able to zoom in? She was going to try to zoom from an airplane at 30,000 feet, probably not. She was doing her thing. No, not there. Okay. So this position is already included in the budget, and today's action is simply to ratify this job description through Commissioner's Court. The description clearly defines the county's grant management function, including grant research and writing, administration compliance, financial coordination, as well as reporting. Nicole has indicated to me, I did talk to her this morning, that there is alignment on the job description with all the departments involved and everybody satisfied with it. So I support moving forward, and I just wanted to get your input as well since you were part of this discussion and this plan.

Well, I think this, I believe this will certainly improve the processes since we are involved in so many different grants, and I appreciate the support. I'm looking forward to moving forward with this.

Okay. And with that, I move to ratify the Grants Management and Compliance Director Job Description.

Motion made by Commissioner Weijian. Do I have a second? Second.

Commissioner. If you could just amend your motion to be approve the job description. There's approve, not ratify. Just approve.

Okay, so I amend my motion to approve the grants management and compliance director job description.

Motion be by Commissioner Weijin, seconded by Commissioner McCall. Yes. I just have one observation. I'm not sure. Can we just verify that that font is ADA compliant on this job description?

Before it's advertised, we will make sure that it's a SANS font. It'll be

That's the only observation. Good point. Okay. Any further discussion? Paula?

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Motion carries four to zero. Thank you, Sheriff. Thank you. Next up, consideration of possible action on the request of the county auditor to conduct an audit on the CDA Chapter 59 Asset Forfeiture Report as required by Article 59.06 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Good morning. Good morning.

And this is just administrative. This is done year after year. We just need to ask your permission to allow for our auditor to approve the audit report that gets submitted.

Okay. I'll entertain a motion as agenda item 18.

I move that we accept the audit of the CDA Chapter 59 Asset Forfeiture Report as required by Article 59.06 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Could you amend your motion to authorize them to conduct it as well? I amend it as stated, yes. Okay. Motion made by Commissioner McCall. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Carpenter. Any further discussion? There being none, Paula, would you please call the vote?

Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Motion carries four to zero.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, consideration of possible action regarding the proposed concept design and preliminary project budget and authorizing Project ArcheTexas to proceed from task one, pre-design, to task two, schematic design for the Burrita County Annex Renovation Project. Commissioner Regent? This item's been pulled, Judge. Oh, okay. Sorry. So we'll be taking no action on agenda item 19 because it's been pulled. Next up, consideration and action. order the general election for county and precinct officers to be held November 3 2026. We have anyone from elections here. Stacey said she was going to zoom in. Stacey on zoom with my good morning.

Good morning. Good morning.

Floor is yours.

Yes. So this is the order of election for the November 3rd, 2026 general election. And it is the court's responsibility to start the process by ordering that election. And that's all we need today. So now is a go ahead so we can keep moving forward.

All right.

I'll entertain a motion as agenda item 20. Judge, I move to order the general election for county and precinct officers to be held on November 3rd, 2026. We have a motion made by Commissioner Weijan.

Do I have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Carpenter. Any further discussion? If not, Paula, could you please call the vote?

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Motion carries four to zero. All right. We're going to hit this last agenda item, take a five-minute restroom break. Agenda item 21, consideration of possible action regarding the polling locations for the November 3rd, 2026 general election. Stacey, what do you got?

Yes. Okay. So moving forward with this election, we do have some changes that we will need to make to the election day polling locations. Verdict Center is either going to be under construction or on its way. So we will need to close down the Burdick Center as an election day location for now with possibly reopening. If our offices do move over there, then we'll be reopening it as a main early voting site and our election day polling location. So my suggestion is closing that one. We do need to equally distribute polling locations between each commissioner precinct boundary lines. So I am proposing that we open back up at Morningside Ministries. We have used that location years and years ago. I think we stopped right around COVID. They did not want us over there, understandably. I have been in talks with... people at the Morningside Ministries location, and they have gotten approval for us to move over there. So I would like to open Morningside Ministries. We're going to close Burdick Center. And then to have a more equal distribution between the four of y'all, the four commissioner precincts, we need to look at closing the 1910 location. That would take us from 11 locations down to 10, which is moving us in the direction for next year when the new Senate Bill 2753 kicks in and we drop down to nine locations that y'all have already pre-approved. This is stepping us down in that direction. Okay.

All right. Well, I move to adopt the proposed polling locations for November 3rd, 2026 general election. Do I have a second? Motion by the judge. Second by Commissioner Carpenter. Any further discussion?

If not, Paula, please call the vote. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Motion carries four to zero. And with that, we're going to, it is. 10.06 AM. We're going to recess till 10.11 and resume with our public hearing on the North Creek property. Thanks, Gabe. All right. We're going to commence with our public hearing. The court will conduct a public hearing for the purposes of determining whether the Kendall County Commissioner's Court should utilize Proposition A funds to purchase the following property, 120 acres located in the intersection of North Creek Road and and Cypress Creek Road with a physical address of 8 Cypress Creek Road, Comfort, Texas, 78013, with approximately 70 acres of the property being located in a floodplain. Owner, Lydia Joy Hawkins. So before I hand it over to Commissioner Carpenter, we have a, bear with me here, we have quite a few public comments. And so y'all kind of heard how it works. You can have a timer on your right. starts when you begin, but just announce who you are, where you're from, and then roll into your speech and try to wrap up succinctly once the timer goes off. So we're going to begin with Sterling Martin.

Judge, we normally let the county or the Prop A committee introduce the item before we begin the hearing. All right. If Commissioner Carpenter would like to introduce the item.

I'm sorry, Mr. Martin. Or anyone from Prop A, if you want to come up and... Would you just mind introducing it? Sure. Okay, this is a property that was, when I first got a hold of this property, I received it from our development office. There was a proposal of 397 homes to be built on North Creek and Cypress Creek Road in Comforts. I immediately called Comfort Neighbors Group. We started meeting. We started discussing. We met with the developer. We also met with the water district trying to find out how can we get D.R. Horton, Lenar, all these groups out of Comfort and away from our water supply. And We also brought this before Prop A, and Prop A denied it not only once, but they denied it twice. The reasoning was based on water availability, the fact that this property would not come with water rights. And I don't know how much I want to go into that before we get to the actual discussion, but I believe that if we had taken care of the water concern This probably would have had unanimous support. Maybe not everyone on board, but it would have had support on Prop A. So does someone from Prop A want to come and speak?

Well, we have several Prop A folks that are in the queue. All right. Sterling, your time is now.

Good morning. I'm ready when you are.

All right.

Good morning, judges and commissioners. My name is Sterling Martin. I live at 226 Holiday Road, Comfort, Texas. I'm a small business owner in the Comfort area and a big advocate for youth sports. First, I want to disclose I'm the land surveyor working with the county and the developer subdividing this property. So I'm limiting my comments to only as a Comfort community member and my experience with local sports and the community parks. I serve as the president of the Comfort Youth Baseball Association. the vice president of the Comfort Football Association, and a board member of the county parks board. Through those roles, I've seen firsthand how badly our area needs additional space. Comfort is unincorporated. We do not have a city government or parks department providing these facilities, so we depend heavily on the county and community volunteers. The Comfort Youth Baseball Association owns and maintains our existing fields. We have one major minor baseball field, one softball field, one coach pitch field, and one t-ball field. And those facilities are located on 27 just inside the Kerr County, across the Kerr County line of a portion of Comfort. We currently have no fields in the Kendall County portion of it. And I don't know how well y'all know baseball, but you notice I missed the junior field. We don't have one. So kids that are 12 years going before they're after they're 12 years old or they go to high school, we don't have a field for them. to play at all. I have to, it's a kind of a chess game just to make sure we put a few kids together. They're always playing away. And if there is some availability at the high school, they try to accommodate us as they can. Did I mention, oh, the Comfort Youth Baseball Association, oh, I said that already. Lost my whole spot here. Take your time. You're good. Okay, there's only so much participation our existing fields can accommodate. Additional county fields would allow us to serve more children, and the organization would be willing to help prepare and maintain those fields during the season. I understand it's a long way out before we'll get county fields. This purchase is just the first step. This is a rare opportunity to preserve open space, support flood mitigation, provide room for future parks and new sports and protect the long-term characteristics and safety of comfort. For those reasons, I strongly support the county moving forward with this purchase. Thank you for your time. Thanks, Jerome.

Next up, Ms. Amy Sinclair.

Good morning, Judge and commissioners. My name is Amy Sinclair. I moved to Comfort in 2004 to the home my husband grew up in on Water Street and Highway 27, right by the Cypress Creek Bridge. At that time, they had recently recovered from the 2002 flood that swept through the house due to the simultaneous flooding of both the Guadalupe River and Cypress Creek. Though I had never experienced such a life-changing event firsthand, I wouldn't have to wait long. His family home, our home, was again inundated in the flood of 2007 and again in 2016. In 2011, between those two floods, my husband started the Comfort Floodplain Coalition. For 15 years, one of the primary goals of this endeavor has been to prevent flooding in our town, or at the very least, to prevent loss of life due to flooding. For 15 years, we have worked, watched, and waited for the powers that be to acknowledge the importance of this issue and take steps toward resolving it. There is no question that our area is vulnerable to flooding. The county has already funded engineering studies confirming that strategically placed floodwater retention structures on the Guadalupe's tributaries would slow the flow and reduce flash flooding all the way downstream. These structures would also have the significant benefit of allowing that sudden influx of rainwater to soak in and replenish our desperately depleted aquifers. It is my understanding that Prop A was passed to fund land purchases for the purpose of conservation, recreation, and water management. This North Creek property purchase fulfills all aspects of these stated goals, including aquifer recharge, which I don't believe has been satisfied by any other land purchase it has funded thus far. And this isn't anyone's pet project or just some idea that sprang up recently. It has been in the works for decades and has been supported by many respected proponents within both the government and our community. I look forward to a day when we can welcome news of approaching rainy weather as the godsend it should be to relieve the drought we've been in for so many years, instead of fearing how much rain will fall upstream and anxiously watching the river gauges to see how much they rise. The purchase of the North Creek land will bring us one step closer to realizing the dream of bringing safety and peace of mind to all of us who live along the Guadalupe and its tributaries. Thank you to everyone who has worked toward this goal over the years, and thank you to the judge and county commissioners for your time and honest consideration of our plea. We place our heartfelt hope and gratitude in your hands. Please vote yes.

Thank you, ma'am. Next up, Ms. Laura Lee Hines.

My name's Laura Lee Hines. I am a resident of Kendall County, live in Comfort, and I've only been in Comfort for about three years now, although we've had business in Comfort for a little bit longer than that. In two years watching what has happened along the Guadalupe and the creeks has just really been something that this West Texas girl has never witnessed before. I hate to see my neighbors in such situations and that hurts. So I very much hope that you will see it advantageous to purchase this land and for its intended use and to help with these problems. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am.

Jeffrey Holt.

Good morning, Kendall Court. Glad to be here. You know, comfort may not be incorporated, but it doesn't mean it's not united. And probably behind me, you got a lot of head nods. Normally, it's against something we don't want. And you've all been there and you've seen that. We don't need to relive that. But you have the rare opportunity to vote for something they actually want. So, you know, when I looked at this as far as a diversion dam and what this intends to do with Prop A money, I realized this is a great example of what responsible growth looks like. And from a Kerr perspective, a guy who actually lives on Cypress Creek, I fully support this resolution, having watched that creek come and go and the water leave. It would be great to have a diversion dam built to capture some of that water. So it goes back in the aquifers and the springs actually replenish. And when you think of the fact that this could be used for very limited development as far as home-wise, but more maximizing open space for a place my daughter can bring her horse and ride or a place maybe, you know, her kids can play soccer one day in comfort. or additional baseball, this just makes sense where you can capture the groundwater and have it go back into our local aquifer instead of evaporating and going someplace else. So what we're telling you is we're definitely from a landowner perspective on that watershed, but also a commissioner that has a great partnership with y'all. This totally makes sense. And in fact, as an example, we would like to replicate on a lot of the tributaries that flow into the Guadalupe Bay. You are starting something which just makes a lot of sense and you have the opportunity to vote yes. And I thank you all for your time and considering the issue as you weigh in on heavy decisions here. But rarely will you see this many folks from a variety of backgrounds come together to support something that makes sense. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner.

Next up, Mr. Emmanuel Flatton. Thank you.

I hope I can pull this off in three minutes. I also brought earlier, there was a question about who should talk about the Prop A Committee. And I have some brief comments from the chairman of the Prop A Committee who could not be here today, Rusty Busby. If I have time available at the end, I would love to convey those from his personal letter that he gave me permission to share.

And just so you know, if you run out of time, we have a copy of that letter. So we have that sitting on our desk. So if you're time restricted.

This is a different letter that was sent personally to me to share with y'all. Understood. But I'm glad he sent that one too. I got that one here too, if you want me to read it aloud. But I appreciate this. Floor is yours now. All right. So I would like to thank the court this morning for their time and consideration. My name is Emmanuel Flaten. I was born in a cabin on the Guadalupe River Ranch. I have lived at the confluence of the Guadalupe and Cypress Creek for 45 of my 48 years. For over 20 years, I've advocated for flood relief, monitoring, and alert systems. We have the resources and political will at this moment to truly make a difference. We did not just arrive at this critical vote. It has been a decades-long marathon. Each step has been accomplished through the hard work of this court's predecessors. This mission was resurrected after every election with every new representative unaware of what had come before. Six milestones precede your vote today. In 2002, we recognized the problem, educated stakeholders, and gathered political support. In 2011, we formed the Comfort Floodplain Coalition and engaged with state and local representatives. In 2016, all candidates wrote letters of support to our cause, so we elected a civil engineer. We secured funding and performed engineering studies, proving several ideal dam locations. Don Durden ensured water management language was included in Prop A, which he was a part of passing. So water capture projects, which already dovetail with conservation and recreation, could be funded by Prop A. The most difficult was acting quickly when one of the engineered locations became available for voluntary purchase, avoiding invoking eminent domain or any other government overreach or heavy-handed acquisition methods. Your vote at this critical moment is the seventh step in this decades-long marathon. There's more work ahead, but the cause is righteous and must be carried on. We're not trying to build a park simply for recreation or to conserve natural habitats or recharge our aquifers or promote healthy waterways. We are trying to accomplish all these Prop A goals while also saving the lives of Kendall County citizens. Parkland will be purchased with Prop A funds. It already has been. It's simply a matter of where. If you had the choice to build a park over here or a similar park over there and save 30 lives, which would you choose? Which location would your morals and your ethics mandate you choose? We find grace in selfless acts of compassion. In the most perilous moments, our first responders charge into danger to save lives. We must honor their sacrifice and their selflessness by working to reduce the severity and frequency of those terrible times, especially now, after the storm, when the danger seems so far away. If you believe this loss of life to be hypothetical or hyperbolic, Texas leads the nation in flood-related deaths by a significant margin. 1,211 deaths in 65 years in Flash Flood Alley. There's a reason it's called that. 12% in the last 13 months alone. It's time to do something about this. I don't believe an informed moral person could advocate for more fear, more trauma, and more loss of life when choosing the location for a park is all it takes to save lives. I do believe this court and everyone in this room and on Zoom to be moral people. I just pray that you are sufficiently informed about this topic to make this proper decision. And that's your time, sir. I must trust that you vote yes to purchase the Hawkins Ranch Lane.

Fair enough, sir. Take it for that.

Rusty said... Hold on, sir. That was your full three minutes, so you're not going to be able to get into the letter. I understand. All right, we got to next up.

One moment, a procedure. I have copies of over 20 letters for the court from residents of Kendall County.

If you give them to me, I'll disseminate them.

I just want you to hear that. Oh, that's the stack. I brought a copy for each of these. On the top, you'll find everybody's name except the ones that came in late last night with a small excerpt from each of their letters.

Is Rusty's letter in here?

Rusty's personal letter is not in there, but I will give it to you right in a moment. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Remove your paper. You can have my copy.

Do I need to give a copy to the clerk? No, I'll give her my copy if she needs it. Thank you, sir.

And Rusty's letter Right here.

Okay. Thank you, sir. Yes. Thank you. All right. Next up, Melissa Hill.

Yes, she has it now. It's the top portion. No. I just pulled his appropriate start here. Thank you. and not the bottom photocopy part.

My name is Melissa Hill. I live in Comfort. We are above the area that's going to be, we hope, bought and purchased for all of this. I have, I'm going to read Rusty's letter. It says, hey, Manny, I want to drop you a note about your superb effort to the country to purchase the Hawkins property. I wrote a letter to the judge and other members of the court yesterday. The court is still the one that can decide Prop A funds, not me, not the committee. three votes are going to get her done. So we're looking for those three votes. I've also got a letter here from Don Durden, who is a retired Kendall County Commissioner from Precinct 4 about this area. He was a Kendall County Commissioner from Precinct 4 from January 2017 to December of 2022. One of the things he started back then was his feasibility of flood control dams on the Cypress Creek watershed above Comfort. The final draft of that study was issued in January 23. Final report was completed in April. The recommendations of that report were provided to the Guadalupe Regional Flood Planning Group 2 and 4 incorporation into regional and state flood plans. He reviewed the report and offered comments and suggestions. In response, an addendum was issued on July in July of 2023 concluded that such retention dams can produce flood reduction benefits, have a cost benefit ratio of greater than one and a high probability of providing infiltration benefits. Flood mitigation projects also enhance aquifer recharge zone, which we desperately need in our area. Our water table is really low and we've been told that we're within a foot or two of mandatory heavy-duty water restrictions. So anything that we can do that's going to help try to do recharge is going to make a big difference in our area. After his service as a commissioner, he was appointed to fill a non-voting position on the Guadalupe Regional Flood Planning Group, representing the public. He was appointed as a voting position representing agriculture. We raise cattle. We're having a hard time getting grass, keeping grass, and buying hay all year round because we can't keep our wells running is a big deal. So keeping something that's going to do recharge into these areas is very critical for us. I'm pleased, he was pleased to report that the Cypress Creek retention, project was identified in the 2023 amended Guadalupe Regional Flood Plan as a flood mitigation project ID number 113000073, Cypress Creek Tension, doesn't automatically guarantee funding, but it gives us a head start that all this work has already been done so far. Kendall and the county's use of Prop A to purchase the property in question would allow us to use matching funds from the state to be able to provide funding for the other work that needs to be done if we can acquire the property.

If you can succinctly wrap up, that was your three minutes, ma'am. Okay. All right. So this is a trifecta.

You know, it's rare opportunity, provides recreational benefits, it mitigates floods, and it increases the possibility of groundwater retention. Thank you, ma'am. I think it's everything. Thank you. Ms. Cruz?

I think you submitted two, right? One was online and I got a copy of it. Thank you. You're good to go, sir.

Good morning. My name is Mark Cruz. I live in Comfort. I'm a public speaker and I am passionate about this cause, but I want to tell you a little story. A year ago on July 4th at 12 noon, 12 Aggie Bonfire students loaded up and said, we've got to go to Kerrville. By the time the 10 days was over, they had brought 123 kids to fight the flood. They were kicked out of Kerrville and they found their way down to Center Point because they weren't going to stop. They were going to do what they could do. They ended up clearing 23 miles of riverfront. And I tell you this because I don't want them to have to come again. We have an opportunity here to buy some land that's appropriate. We have the opportunity to use some money that's been set aside. And most importantly, we have funding in grants from the state and the federal government to make it happen and do the mitigation for the flood. $20, $30, $40 million of flood damage, we could avoid part of that, some of that. We need to do something now. I don't want to have to come back here in a year and go, why didn't you vote for the bill? Thank you very much. Thank you, sir.

Ms. Lozano?

Let's see here. Well, thank you for hearing us out, the comfort folks. My name is Lorena, for the record. I am a Kerr County resident, and I reside in comfort, joyfully reside in comfort. I love comfort. I'm a self-proclaimed, I guess, aspiring philanthropist, if you will. And so I also have a little history lesson. On August 19th, 1865, three men paid $20 for a lot in comfort to build a monument honoring the 36 men that were captured and killed during the 1862 Nueces Massacre. One year later, on August 10th, 1866, the oldest Civil War monument was dedicated to those men whose lives were lost. Yesterday, On August 10th, 2026, I, along with the members of the Comfort Heritage Foundation, came together on that lot to remember the lives that were lost. Led by Brenda Seidensticker, she led us in prayer, read aloud the names and the ages of each life that was lost, ending the remembrance with taps played by Colonel Baker, who's retired U.S. Air Force. All thanks to three men who paid $20 for a lot in comfort. And a lot means a lot. More today for those who honor and remember their history. So 163 years later, three of you possibly, I have five on my notes, but one is missing. So all four of you have the opportunity of a lifetime to make history. And to rephrase Winston Churchill, history will be kind, for we intend to write it. And God bless Comfort, Kendall County, Kerr County, and God bless the USA. Thank you. Thank you, guys.

Ms. Sherry Walden?

Good morning. Good morning, ma'am. My name is Sherry Walden. I co-chair the grassroots group Comfort Neighbors, which opposed... The now withdrawn Lenar Comfort 590 project. A central tenet of our opposition was the need to raise awareness of Comfort's vulnerability to flood. Comfort has suffered significant loss of life from flooding. 25 people died in 1978. 10 teenagers died in 1987. and 23-year-old Florida Malima as recently as 2016. In 2016, the river crested just under 28 feet with 5 inches of rain that fell over several hours. In the past 10 years, Comfort has experienced 9 rain events that exceeded 5 inches. Six of them were coupled with National Weather Service declared flood events on the river in comfort. In the last two years, the river crested at 35.64 feet and 37.08 feet, almost 10 feet higher than 2016. Given the frequency of flooding and coupled with heavy rainfall, it is a miracle that we have not suffered more. We now have a rare opportunity and history will judge how we use it. A creative solution was made identified by Kendall County for flood mitigation available for purchase at a fraction rate. of the property's value at $7.8 million. Let me say that again because I think I misspoke. A creative solution has made land identified by Kendall County for flood mitigation available for purchase. Kendall County commissioned and completed the study that identified that site. Prop A was passed to fund land purchases for conservation, recreation, water management. We've already said several times, the importance of recharge. This appears to be the only Prop A project that focuses on recharge or enables recharge of the aquifer. It was recently brought to my attention that when Prop A passed, that the strongest polling was focused around protecting the aquifer and recharging the aquifer, as well as protecting drinking water. And a caveat of this deal, which the county is not being asked to pay for, is giving access to drinking water, more access to drinking water for comfort residents. After the July 4th flood, Texas created a fund for flood control projects. Grants require community investment. Purchasing this land would provide that investment, while the completed study gives us the foundation for shovel-ready projects. Comfort led the effort to install monitors and sirens to warn residents of flash floods. Comfort and Kendall County received national recognition for that foresight. But sirens do not stop flooding. This is a legacy opportunity for Kendall County. The pieces are in place, creative deal-making, county funding, completed study, and potential grant monies to lead a meaningful flood mitigation effort. I ask you to enable us to buy this land.

Okay. Thank you, ma'am.

All right.

Mr. Etheridge. Yeah, you had 22.

Judge, commissioners, good morning. For the record, my name is Michael Etheridge. I serve on the Kendall County Parks Advisory Board and also serve on the board of the Greater Comfort Area Chamber of Commerce. I'm speaking for myself this morning, not on behalf of either board, but from both of those perspectives, I strongly support the county moving forward with the purchase of this property. When the opportunity was discussed at our last Parks Advisory Board meeting, There was considerable excitement around the table, and I think there's good reason for that. This is one of those rare opportunities where a number of county priorities come together on the same piece of ground. Flood control, riparian protection, conservation, recreation, preserving open space, and preventing sensitive land from eventually becoming another high density development. Any one of those would be a legitimate public benefit. Here we have the opportunity to accomplish several at once. And importantly, Kendall County is in a position to do it. The voters approved Proposition A specifically to give the county the financial ability to acquire and preserve important properties. There are ample Prop A funds available for this acquisition. Despite the Prop A committee opposing this particular property, I commend this court for recognizing the opportunity and being willing to move it forward. Opportunities like this have a shelf life. Land doesn't wait on government. There's already... Discussion about grant funding that may be able to help develop this property for recreational and conservation purposes. That matters. The county can secure the land now using funds already set aside for acquisition while potentially leveraging outside dollars to help turn it into something the public can actually use and enjoy. And I want to speak specifically about what that could mean for comfort. The possibility of athletic fields on this property is exciting. Comfort area families deserve recreational opportunities closer to home. Kids shouldn't have to travel towards Bernie or outside the county to find quality facilities. From my chamber perspective, those facilities could also be an economic asset. Youth sports bring families to town. They buy fuel. They eat at our restaurants. They shop. They discover comfort. Tournaments and events can generate tourism and put dollars directly into local businesses. So this can be good for conservation, good for recreation, good for comfort families, and good for the local economy. And we should remember something very simple. We don't have to decide every detail of this property's future today. There will be time to determine where fields belong, where trails belong, what should remain untouched, and how this land can best serve the public. But first, the county has to own the ground. Once land like this is developed, particularly along our waterways, we rarely get another chance to protect it. This court has the resources, the opportunities, and I believe a compelling public purpose for acting today. I commend you for bringing it forward, and I respectfully encourage you to see the signs around here. Buy the damn land. Thank you.

Next up, Ms. McCarthy. Good morning.

Hello, Wanda McCarthy, a member of Prop A since inception. And I'm here to have the opposing view. I am adamantly opposed to the use of Prop A funds for the purpose of acquiring this property, the Hawkins property. Prop A committee has been working for months, months on a specific deal that would only be possible by utilizing the remaining available Prop A funds. Rating those funds at this pivotal time for the proposed project before you would negatively change the face of this county forever. You know that. You know it because you're privy to Prop A information. No one else in this room besides Prop A people are aware of that because it's confidential. So although I am not opposed to flood mitigation, I am adamantly for that, but I strongly believe that this county court has access to funds in other sources besides the one source that's available to help us protect not only the hundreds of emotional and, rightly so, vehement votes for this Proposition A use of funds, But your vote today, the fall of this gavel today against Prop A funds usage on the deal that we have put together, will affect tens of thousands negatively for decades to come. And I can't, my hands are tied to give you the details in a public audience, but you know the details. And I ask you to stand up and do what's right for the long-term care of the entire county, not succumb to a urgent voice of a developer, the emotional voice of people that have suffered, I get that. And I want this county to support those people in comfort and along the Guadalupe. But you have choices of other aspects for money. You have the choice to work with reserves. You have the choice of managing other long-term projects that can easily accommodate this acquisition. I urge you to not take the quick popular decision in front of all of these citizens today that do not know the full effect of your actions. They do not allow the desire for a popular temporary win before the present constituents over the best entrance of this entire county for decades. Please do not undermine a substantial effort by the Prop 8 Committee to preserve critical and highly sensitive water recharge zones that support not only our Kendall County water major reserves, but also Edwards Aquifer. If an inadvertent pollution occurs on that property, not only thousands will suffer, but millions. I strongly urge you to not vote for this property, but to vote no for use of Prop A funds. Use other sources to your availability. Okay.

Thank you, ma'am. Is Ms., I don't know, did Ben Eldridge submit a form to speak?

No? That was just an email?

Yeah, okay. Next up, Maxie.

Hi, I'm Maxie Zinsmeister. I live in the Berghain area or district of Berghain. But I'm very much in favor of Prop A. When it came into being, what caught my mind was it's being put in place to keep property out of the hands of developers, to kind of slow down growth in the county. And it was also to be put in place to protect our groundwater because a lot of us out in the county, rural people, have to depend on what's underneath the ground. And so we have to look at this from a standpoint of How is this going to affect those objectives, okay? Sure, if you buy the property, okay, you're keeping it out of the hands of developers, but it's in a floodplain, so are they really going to develop that property anyway, okay? Then we talk about groundwater. We will not own the rights to that groundwater. It's being accessed by a water control district, okay? So are we protecting that groundwater? Now, yes, I've heard a lot of good information today about the potential use of basically a flood control structure, okay? I like the idea. And, in fact, when this last election cycle, you were the only ones that had a good solution for going forward with groundwater, okay, injection wells. We have four flood control structures already in Kendall County. And my thoughts are, well, wow, that water's just sitting there. Why can't we inject that water into the ground, okay, and store it? It's a good source of water, okay? You had the right idea. Same thing here. I'm hearing talk about a diversion dam, basically a flood control structure. But if you're going to buy that and turn it into a park, You guys know that I'm opposed to parks because it requires long-term funding to maintain and all that kind of junk, okay? And all the herbicides and fertilizers we're going to put on these ball fields are going to wash on down into this flood control structure if it ever comes into being, and we're going to inject that into our groundwater? I don't think that's a very good idea. So, again, I don't know how you're going to vote. You know, I've said it before. I'm not a big fan of overpaying for stuff. I think we can use this money to aid the county more, as Ms. McCarthy mentioned. You know, you can do a conservation easement for a lot less and a lot less ongoing maintenance. So... I think if you go forward with it, I'd like to see some more around what we're going to use. Are we going to build a diversion dam? Are we going to reach out to the Soil and Water Conservation District and see what we can do to get some help there to build a flood control structure, which everybody is asking for here? Can we do that and use those funds, as Ms. McCarthy mentioned? Thank you.

Next up, Bobby Schwartz.

My phone's on silent, I promise. I'm Bobby Schwab. I'm on the Prop A committee. I've been doing this for about 18 months. And this property was voted on twice, as y'all are aware, and turned down. It was done because we felt like the money could be used elsewhere. We also felt like what's needed up there. I'm not an engineer. I don't know enough about flooding. I do know that At least three of the events when people talk about flooding, a flood control lake on that creek wouldn't help because all that water was coming from the west. But I'm not going to argue that. We've done this for 18 months. And not one time has a commissioner showed up at one of our meetings. Not once. Nobody talked to us about this. If somebody would have come and talked to us after the first time we turned it down, maybe something would have changed. I'm not asking for comments. I know y'all can't comment. But nobody ever came and talked to us about our reasoning behind it. I think the funds can be used better on a couple of properties we've got left that can't be talked about that's going to tie up property that's going to help the aquifer and going to help groundwater as well as surface water. But to use these funds now and make this this urgent when the committee could have been talked to, it's not the way things should be done. We should have been talked to about it. That's my opinion. That's all. I hope we can hold those funds and get some better properties taken care of other than this. And the final thing with a minute left is this, and this is not a comment on this particular court, but there was an opportunity that would have stopped Lennar Homes from coming in here. There was an opportunity 10, 12 years ago, I could be wrong on the dates, that would have put 10-acre densities, averages like we have now, that got turned down, the court said no. That's short-sighted. If that would have been done, Lenar never would have been up there. And just for clarification, I'm a real estate broker, and I hate developers. And I have that reputation in this business. They don't come talk to me because they know I don't like them. Thank you, Mr. Schwab.

All right. Did I miss anybody that submitted a form? Okay. So we're going to continue with the public hearing. We'll open it up to comments from the court itself. We'll begin with Mr. Carpenter.

All right. So I probably should open it up with this initial comment, but we're dealing with 342 acres that a developer has secured. It was listed at $7.8 million. I don't know what his... We don't have the information on what he has the offer at. Comfort Water District tried to purchase this property to turn it into parkland. They wanted more water available to comfort residents to beef up their water supply. A simple fire, structure fire in the town of Comfort right now drains Comfort's water to the point of water rationing. And that's happened, I think, twice in the past couple years. So the entire purpose of the water district wanting this property was water to beef up, not to promote development. When the developer first sat down with us, there was a plat of 397 homes on just 100 acres of the 342. That's why I immediately called Sherry Walden and Roy Dye and got going with Comfort Neighbors. If you think I'm working with the developer, then you haven't been paying attention over the past few years on my fight against big development in the Comfort area.

We didn't want Lenar. We still don't want Lenar.

They're going to be knocking on our door trying to come to our community. But I want to try to shore up the idea of the Water Company or Comfort's Water WCID. And Mr. Marquardt, would you mind answering a couple questions for the people that are here? So the idea of the comfort water system giving a developer, a high-density developer water, that doesn't exist. They were able to negotiate with the developer, you take 70 acres out of the floodplain, you're left with around 272 acres, of which the water district is willing to drill their own well, give that developer 27 taps, which is significantly less than 1,000 homes that they could build on this 342 acres. If someone comes to the Water District and they want water from Comfort's WCID, they have to bring water with them. They cannot just run a water line and tap into the Water District. The idea of 1,000 homes from Lenard just wanting water and depleting what you have doesn't exist. It's not allowed with the Water District. Our current Water District and Comfort are made up of people that are from Comfort. They didn't just move here to... encompass if someone could literally move outside of this this county or somewhere in the county live on a piece of property and then they develop a water district that's how this happens a lot of times where because they live on the property they say well we have a township or whatever i don't know i want to get into the definition of population and all that but can you can you assure the people that y'all cannot just give a developer water without them drilling their own wells proving that they have the water available

So my board of directors put together a development agreement several years ago. In that development agreement, when a developer comes in, which I talk to them every day, and they want to look at a piece of property and put a development out there. We have no say on density, any of those things. The only thing we have is whether or not we can provide them service for water and sewer. In our development agreement, it states that the developer is responsible for following the rules of Calcrete, state of Texas, in developing a water source for their development. Now, for most developers, of course, they don't want to be in the business of water because it's a pain, but they have to follow those rules, develop a source, and their availability for whatever that property is will determine what kind of residents, how many, you know, that kind of stuff. Also in our development agreement, we also have encouragements for zero scaping, which will be in effect for this property that we're discussing today. Also rainwater catchment for every home. All of those things are in our development agreement. It's incentivized for anybody that's wanting to do a development. But it states that they have to make water development on that property. So basically, they have to have the water available there for whatever development that they choose that they want to do, or they have to secure those water rights somewhere else and bring them to the table. And then at the end of that all that infrastructure, all the water rights is basically deeded to the water district for perpetual management and care.

When you say this development agreement, is it a contractual arrangement with each developer?

Correct.

And so this was formulated by your current board, correct?

Correct.

Would you agree that boards change? Yes. And so the current philosophy of the board is you're enforcing those kind of terms, but people who replaced you may not. That's correct. So that could be a possibility that what binds us now may change in the future. That's correct. Thank you.

So would you say, I think I've heard it said before by Stanley Martin, that there's no new water tasks for WCIP.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean.

No, no. You're servicing a existing customer. You're not letting new customers into your product. Or maybe it may have been an agreement that we were looking at.

So in stage four, we don't do that. Currently – I'm sure you all know, you know, every property in Comfort basically has to be replatted. And we have people in town that have an acre lot. Replat that and split it in half. And they may have plans to build a house or they may not. But part of the deal is how much water is available for that. Now, if they have a plan to build a guest house or whatever the case may be, then we evaluate that against our current availability, which we do have some current availability. It's not extensive. But in those cases, and I'm sure, you know, I write a letter to you guys just about every time somebody subdivides something, that any future plans will have to be evaluated based on availability whenever they decide what they want to do on that property.

I have a question for you. So, Currently, can the WCID provide enough water for the proposed subdivision without this deal going through?

For the 22 or 27 homes that he's... I would say probably no. Okay.

And if you cut with using the full acreage that's being bought by the developer... You can.

With those water rights, correct?

What about if you were to cut off and give the county back the water rights to the 120 acres being proposed, would the remaining portion be enough to provide water to the developer?

Yes. Okay. However, the intent for the water district is to bolster the supply for the community. Okay. Okay.

I don't know if you would be the best. I have some technical questions. I don't know if he would be able to answer them or you, so I don't know.

I'd like to ask a question.

Okay, sure.

Thanks for coming in. I appreciate you. Yes, ma'am.

Have you done any groundwater availability study to determine what is it, roughly 420 acres, 300 for the development of the 27 homes and 120 for this deal?

Not yet. We will have to do that. As part of Cal Creek's rules, but we haven't done that yet. We don't own the water rights yet.

And then did you calculate how many acre feet these 27 homes would be using?

I don't have the number in front of me, but basically the daily consumption per tap, We use 350 gallons per tap per day, which is pretty much in line with, I mean, some are higher, some are lower, but we use 350 gallons per connection per day.

And you're going to encourage the rainwater capture, which they can do, and zero escaping.

Yes, that's correct.

So if you don't know how much is there, you do know how much they're going to use, you don't know what would be left over, but whatever the remaining amount of water left over would be, my understanding is to shore up The supplies that you already have rather than using that to fuel new development.

That's correct.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

So here's my technical question. Has anyone talked to the upper Guadalupe River Authority about putting up a dam on North Creek and will they allow it? Because this is all part of the due diligence before we make such a big investment of Proposition A funds. I think we need to thoroughly investigate because that would be the first question I ask. And then going from there, who's going to pay for the environmental study for the dam and it would require including the upstream neighbors. So these are additional expenses that someone has to incur and we'd have to find funds for. And then Did we confirm with Proposition A bond counsel that Proposition A funds can be used to buy property for flood control purposes? Because I know the Proposition A language is about conservation. And yes, I know we have flood issues in Comfort. This is about the proper pot of money to use to purchase it. This is where my concern is. And so if we've not checked with bond counsel, How can we go forward with using Proposition A funds on something that may be illegal? And so before we even came to a public hearing, this should have been a decision that was vetted so we know whether or not it is. And maybe it has been. But these are questions that Shane has that I would like answered today before we vote. Next, we applied for grants.

Got somebody who can answer your questions. Do you want to ask all the questions first, or do you want to have them answered as you go?

What's his background on it? Oh, you are? Okay, because that was North Creek, so come on up, because I have questions about... Here, I'll give some... And also... We applied for grant funding to build flood control relief on Cypress Creek. And knowing that we did that, that seems like the more critical area based on historic floods.

That's a critical area, but it's also in Kerr County. And we joined with Kerr County in the grant application. We wrote the grant. and they joined us as a joiner for that grant. But I've been told we can't actually purchase money out of our county funds in another county, but I don't know if that's true or not.

Yeah, but my question is, if that grant comes through, which, again, grant funding is going to pay for that, will that grant authorize the construction of a dam on both North and Cypress Creek?

We wouldn't use the grant for North Creek. There's two parts. If you understand the way the tributaries flow into Comfort, this property is the last potential spot for a flood control dam before it runs into Cypress. Once it runs into Cypress, there's no place to build a dam before you hit Comfort.

I know, but we've already spent a lot of funds and effort to prioritize a certain area. Now we're doing it about face. And when you make rushed decisions, you make bad decisions. So I'm just trying to be thorough. You may disagree with me on where I'm going. But I just want to voice my concerns for the public. And you can vote how you want. But which, to me, we should prioritize what we've invested in already because we've got grant funding coming. We know it's an issue. And why do an about face when we have a lot of unknowns that have not even been answered yet?

So. Let me answer your UGRA question. Tara Bushnow is my contact for UGRA, and I've spoke before the board about water diversion dams already. They also have a water engineering study by Waterway Engineering, Michael Pantil, that indicates... diversion dams Many diversion dams being useful as you're aware. We have something kind of like it already which are quarries along the Guadalupe this store during major Rainfall events about three billion gallons of water which do recharge into the aquifer This is a different model right a smaller diversion dam. This is one of I hope many to go in and whether it be on North Creek or Cypress or Verde or so many other creeks that go up, we do believe this is a useful asset. And I've already testified before UGRA on that as the TCEQ rep for Cypress Creek, which kind of represent this area. So it is a useful tool, but it'll take many, you know, to... help do this up and along the Guadalupe to be fully effective. So yes, as far as UGRA discussion, and I didn't want to answer all your questions.

Okay. Thank you. But then the, okay. Hearing that, but what about in the end on council, does this fall within the scope of what we can and can't do?

Just in the, if I may just go ahead and read the prop a language from the ballot for everyone, just to remind everyone what the voters actually approve. The issuance of not to exceed $20 million of Kendall County, Texas general obligation bonds for acquiring open space and conservation land and acquiring conservation easements on land for any authorized purposes, including to ensure its availability for recreational or open space use, or to protect wildlife habitat and the water quality of creeks, rivers, and springs, and the levying of a tax and payment thereof. We did look at this issue, Judge. I haven't spoken directly with Matt Lee about this, but I will. Before anything moves forward, if the court chooses to move forward with authorizing the purchase, we would, of course, get something in writing from bond counsel clearing it. But I will tell you that after reviewing it, this property purchased, it's proposed it would be used in multiple ways, not just for flood mitigation, but also for recreational use and open space. So there would be some wildlife habitat there in addition to potentially ball fields or walking trails. So it was my preliminary opinion that I don't see any reason why it can't be used that way and in compliance with the bond language that was authorized by the voters. But we would get something in writing from bond council before a purchase would move forward.

Yeah, because I analogize this to the whole Guadalupe River Ranch with possibly using a portion for law enforcement.

I think that's a very different situation, Judge.

I just see my concern.

I do. I do.

Is this deal officially closed with the developer, or is this still in the prospective stages? Like, who actually owns this? Because I know Joy Hawkins is on there, but is that Dale Krenwalgey? the actual owner at this point?

No, the Hawkins family continues to own this property. It had a closing date of August 1st, I believe, and there was an easement issue with LCRA that they were working out. Otherwise, they would have already closed. But they are going to close with or without us, regardless.

And we would be purchasing property from whom?

We'd be purchasing this property from the developer.

And so, in the current proposal... WCID would be getting the full water rights to the entire track. To me, if preservation of water and water quality is part of the Prop A bond, how can we give up the water rights? Because it seems to me that's preserving them. And as a lawyer, I would never advise a client to buy land giving up the water rights when there may be a need for the county for those water that water down the future maybe for future residents or other purposes so we're paying what over twenty thousand dollars an acre for land that's sixty percent in the flood plain and giving up our water rights that's a big concern for me and i've expressed that to you and so this is now surprised and once once you build something next to a water district they have the first rights to either bring you into their district which that's pretty much what this is doing and you

no longer have the right to drill your own well once you're on a water.

But I think that would be part of this negotiation. If we're paying premium dollar for that, everything's negotiable. In my opinion.

So I have a question. What would the county do with those water rights practically? If we own the water rights below the 120 acres, we're not a utility. There's nothing called injection wells and water. It's aquifer storage and recovery. We do not have the topography. the structure underground to do an ASR in this area. So I want to know practically what could the county do with those water rushes?

You could potentially drill a well on it for whatever purpose.

With the park, if we had a park there, we could drill a well. We would go through Cow Creek for the permitting. Cow Creek would set the acre feet that we would be able to take out of it.

That's correct.

And I don't believe we would be able to be a water purveyor and sell water. I don't think that Cal Creek would authorize a ground well for selling water.

That I don't know. And then another big concern is we bought the Gill property for comfort for ball fields. And we know the last two floods, it was completely underwater. And I've asked you this before. What did this property look like during the most recent floods?

I was there during the most recent, if you want to, what it looked like. So right below that property, right next to it is, uh, there is this road and bridge goes straight to Gattis Bluff. So as part of my volunteer fireman, swift water rescue hat, I was on that property during it. He had a lot of watershed. In fact, I was worried and I called Adam, who's our chief at Comfort. Like, we need to block this intersection right here by Gattis because there's so much water running underneath that right south of the property. So during that flood, it was well inundated. In fact, they eventually, I think, did put a barrier up on that crossing, which is right south of it. It is surprisingly a considerable watershed during this event.

To answer your question on that? No, thank you. And then it went from being 70-acre proposal to Prop A to 150. How did that come about? Because it was... 120. Yeah, how did it get up from 70 to 120? I'm sorry. How did the 50 acres come about?

Who negotiated this? The last time I brought this item to court, we were looking at 70 acres, and the asking price was $2.1 million. And I brought that to executive session. Can I speak on this?

I think that I will make a short statement about that. Okay. When the court discusses items in closed session, it's normally because it would protect the court's ability to negotiate should the court move forward with the property acquisition. In this case, it was Prop A. So we don't have any voting that takes place in closed session. What does happen is I may ask the court, is there a consensus among the court that you'd like to see an item on a future agenda to discuss this item in open session? That's the kind of question that would be asked and was asked. And at that time, I believe the consensus was they didn't want to move forward at that time. But I don't think we should talk about the details of what the discussion entailed.

But would you also expand that and talk about how this item got on the open agenda from the last executive session?

Yeah, but my question is about how we got an additional 50 acres being negotiated with who authorized the negotiation, where did it come from? Was it straight from the developer and he said, here's the price? I'm trying to get details of how we came up with this figure and this acreage.

The 50 acres had been brought to Prop A informally. Mr. Allred, we had lunch on Friday. That was brought to them, and it was discussed as a potential add-on to the 70, but they never actually had a price to look at or had any type of voting on that property for 120 acres. Ms. McCarthy?

What I would like to say is that Prop A as a committee has not addressed the additional 50 acres. It was not brought before the committee formally. It was discussed informally with one or two members of the committee, but the Prop A itself has not addressed this 50 acres at all. Okay.

And then do you know how this figure for 2.5, is it 2.5?

I can't speak to that other than I believe it came from the developer. And I raised my hand while ago. You were talking about what would the county do with that water.

Yes, ma'am.

It was stated previously that a concern was made when any fire at all is in the comfort area and volunteer fire department is tasked with that. their water availability has gone to nothing. So in my mind, if the county does purchase this, which I'm not opposed to purchase, I'm opposed to Prop A funds, but if the county utilizes this purchase, they should keep the water and in storage for volunteer fire department because that will affect everybody in that community.

Okay, thank you. And I'll wrap up here and hand it over to my colleagues.

Just one more question, Mr. Marquardt. Yes, ma'am. Who does from having a storage tank Anywhere on that 120 acres for fire, is that something that the WCID could do? That's pretty common in the county.

It would be the same thing we do, yes.

Okay. So overall, again, this is looking at the long-term implications. I voiced my concerns about moving forward with it, but looking at long-term. We just finished the budget that was going to tap into $7.5 million of a reserve balance. And it required us to delay hiring employees, including sheriff's deputies, cut hiring employees, and making IT upgrades on aging equipment. We also just purchased the Guadalupe River Ranch property that's going to need millions of dollars of renovations just to make it safe for the public to use. And then we also purchased the Gill property. And now we're being asked to take on an additional floodplain property for ball fields and a sports complex. We're all about small government, but when you take on such large purchases, hundreds and hundreds of acres, that requires new equipment, personnel, hiring experts, engineers, and other people to make these properties safe. And we have so many other pressing needs facing the county. Look at our roads following the floods. There's millions of dollars of flood damage, some in private subdivisions where they don't have funds to cover those roads. And then we have infrastructure needs elsewhere through the county and then water. I know Commissioner Regents says we're not conducive to ASR, but I believe we may be. That's something that water is one of the most pressing issues facing this county. And if we don't start planning today for it, 10 years from now, we're going to look back and say we missed an opportunity to invest in those things. So to me, this purchase using Prop A funds is financially irresponsible when you look at the big picture. The Prop A committee knows more properties out there and have prioritized other properties, I believe, that would benefit the whole committee more than this parcel. There's other funds out there, as that was said, there's state funds available for purchasing floodplain land. building flood structures. So for me, I think the fact that the Prop A committee rejected this twice, we've, we put this committee together to advise the court and do the due diligence. I think they've done it and I'm going to defer to them and support their decision on no. So hand it over to y'all.

I would like to just, I guess Ms. McCracken is not just a citizen, she's representing Prop A.

She can be who she wants to be today.

It depends on your question. As a Prop A member from Inception, I'd be happy to answer those from that perspective. I appreciate that.

So I'm aware of this potential conservation project. It's a conservation easement and it is a very important sensitive land that is certainly worth pursuing. This came up, I believe, kind of at the inception of the committee forming. This particular landowner was not ready to move forward. There was federal funding available at that time, as I understand it, and that property owner did not want to move forward or could not move forward or wasn't able to move forward. I don't know all the details. Since that time, that federal funding has gone away. This would be a conservation easement, in my understanding, would be millions of dollars, maybe to the tune of $20 million, which we don't have. So what I'm thinking, we would still have the $75,000 for the conservancy due diligence. That includes the closing costs. That puts money into somewhat of an earmarked trust fund so that the conservancy can make sure that whatever was agreed to in the contract remains, such that land won't be developed. So I don't think we have to choose between the two projects. I think we can still do that because even $2.5 million is not a drop in the bucket of what this property owner wants. is going to be looking for that conservation use yet. So having said that, I think we could move forward. Supposedly this federal funding would be available in November, but I've called and I've asked a couple of experts. They did not weigh in today on is this money really coming? And so we've got an opportunity now versus something that could come and we don't even know the deal. So I support the project. I know what you're talking about, but it's not a project right now.

May I respond? I hear your point about the due diligence. I hear your point about what is available right now. I don't believe you have the most up-to-date information on that. I don't believe it's my perspective to share that information publicly because, again, as I said previously, that's confidential information. But yes, there are things in place. And yes, there are conversations. And there was specific reasons why that didn't move forward as fastly as we think it should have years ago. But it's definitely in the hopper. And it would require more than $75,000 of county dollars to make that happen, in addition to other federal funding.

I just talked to who you're talking about this morning, Ms. McCarthy. I talked to the Conservancy, and I asked those specific questions. And there's some ideas of funding, and I said, well, what do you need from the county? As much as we could get. But that's not a number. That is not a bona fide deal, and that's not a number. And this is. So you're my representative on Prop A as well. So I would respectfully request that you let us know what's going on. But I got the very latest information at 830 this morning.

Thank you. Do you have anything else or hand it over to Commissioner McCall? Commissioner McCall, do you have anything to add?

No, I think most of the things that I wanted to say have been brought up. I did want to note that the deal that the PAPE committee saw is definitely what we're looking at today and that the chairman voted for it each time and that would be using PAPE funds And he has been in support of this project anytime it's been discussed. And I do think that just with what the website states regarding what properties should be used for, again, it's been brought up many times. I think this fulfills what's stated on our website.

I want just some closing remarks. Yeah, closing remarks.

And then if you're okay, we'll go straight to the agenda item to vote. And it's just a way people can... I know most people are here for this item, so we'll just vote and get it over with.

So I'm going to say some things that have already been said, but I prepared this for a very strategic reason to let you know my real thoughts on this. And before I get started, I want to thank the members of the Prop 8 Committee. You have dedicated countless hours. There's no pay, a lot of complaining and whining and, you know, criticism. And I want you to know how much we've appreciated you reviewing thousands of acres for us. and looking at these potential deals. But having said that, these recommendations are very extremely important to the court. It's ultimately this commissioner's court's responsibility to decide this. We have to decide what's best to do today and tell these public funds to be used. And I keep thinking, and you all hit this, about the flooding that's taken place in Comfort and what happens when Mill Country Creek start trying to carry all this water at one time. And I didn't really understand this until Commissioner Carpenter walked me through, but the fact of the matter is these tributaries are interconnected. The North Creek feeds into the Cypress, and the Cypress runs through Comfort, and then when you have the rain on top of the Guadalupe, then you have tremendous flooding, and so we get that. We can't stop the rain, but we have an opportunity to protect this watershed and preserve this opportunity for a future grant-funded flood mitigation project, whatever that looks like. And I think that that's what makes the 120 acres interesting, because it gives us three opportunities. First, to protect approximately 70 acres in the North Creek floodplain as a riparian border. We can keep that land undeveloped, protect the watershed and wildlife, contribute to recharge, and preserve the opportunity to pursue grant funding for the flood mitigation structure. Second, there's an opportunity called play. The other approximately 50 acres, which are not in the floodplain, could address another problem we have, more ball fields. And that's important to a lot of people in that community. There's a shortage of and kids are being turned away because of that shortage. Recreational use is clearly one of the specific approved uses for that land, so I think that that fits. And we don't have to incur debt and have years and years of funding complexes and structures. We can partner with other organizations, little league or soccer clubs that maybe would want to build that. I have a perfect example, the Youth Ag and Equestrian Center, Virginia Livestock and 4-H raised $2.1 million and then some and partnered with the county. So I know that that model works. And then third, I do trust the WCID. Number one, you're going to serve this property. And you aren't a WCID that was created like the ones recently. You're created in the 30s for the real purpose of what that legislation intended, that there were people living there who were already there, not imaginary people yet to buy land. who wanted a way to raise money to put water infrastructure in place. And I tell that story time and time again because now WCIDs are formed by big law firms in Houston and a developer gets a way to finance their project. So I believe you when you come to me and you're the local WCID and you're going to stand by your word, you're going to supply this water to the 27 acres in the county and then you're going to use it to shore up existing water or water for existing customers and not new imaginary people. So protect, play, and water, these are the three needs and one piece of property And yes, the seller is a developer, and he purchased property along with roughly another 300 acres, which he plans to develop. And if you want to do something with that property, you can buy it. We are a property rights state. I think we should be very clear about that, that he's going to develop those homes, whether Kendall County buys this land or not. And that's a business transaction. The seller has his interest, and Kendall County has our interest. So our job is to decide in this vote whether acquiring that 120 acres property for approximately $2.5 million is a good investment or not for the people of Kendall County. I think it's an excellent conservation opportunity because of the watershed and the recharge, and I'm able to go forward this time. Thank you all for weighing in today and coming all the way from Comfort.

I know where this vote's going, so I just implore you, do not give up the water rights to this land for our citizens. We heard it from Mr. Marquardt that This development can happen if they carve out the water rights for the 120 acres we bring purchase. Do not buy this without the water rights. I think it's a bad decision. So with that, we'll close.

I have a question. Isn't the WCID getting the water rights?

Yes, ma'am.

Judge, just to let the court know, even if you vote today to move forward, we still would be negotiating a contract and bring it back to the court for review and approval prior to entering into an agreement. So if there were concerns about different aspects of that agreement, we would still have opportunities to address those concerns.

So you're saying that we could still be protected, that there's something that would be adverse to the county?

We would do exactly what we did when we purchased Guadalupe River Ranch, and that's going back and forth with the property seller. in negotiating the terms of the transaction.

Okay. It's 11.30, 31 a.m. on this Tuesday, August 11th, and the public hearing is now closed. We're going to jump ahead and just move on to the vote. Thank you all for your public comments, both for and against. Appreciate it. We're going to move to agenda item 27, consideration of possible action to determine whether the Kendall County Commissioner's Court should utilize the Proposition A funds to purchase the following property. 120 acres located at the intersection of North Creek Road and Cypress Creek Road with a physical address of 8 Cypress Creek Road, Comfort, Texas 78003 with approximately 70 acres of the property located in the floodplain. Owner Lydia Joy Hawkins. Commissioner Carpenter, I'll entertain your motion.

Judge, I move that Kendall County Commissioner's Court moves forward utilizing Proposition A funds to purchase the following property. 120 acres located at the intersection of North Creek Road and Cypress Creek Road with a physical address of 8 Cypress Creek Road. Comfort, Texas 78013, with approximately 70 acres of the property being located in the floodplain.

Okay, the motion made by Commissioner Carpenter. Do I have a second? Seconded by Commissioner McCall. Any further discussion? If not, Paula, please call the vote.

Commissioner McCall. Aye. Commissioner Wiesch. Aye. Commissioner Carpenter. Aye. Judge Stiller.

Nay. Motion carries 3-1. with commissioners from precincts one, two, and four in favor and the judge opposed. All right, we're going to move on to our consent agenda. There's five items on today's consent agenda. Consideration of possible action proves the minutes for July 21st, 2020 July 27th, July 29th, and July 30th, special called meetings for budget workshops. And July 28th, 2020. Thank you all. And the July 28th regular called meeting. B, consideration of possible action to accept the list of donations received in July 2026 on behalf of Kendall County for local government code 81.032. C, consideration of possible action on the approval of amending the FY 2026 budget to regular budget adjustments. D, consideration of possible action regarding the cash summary at Frost Bank for June 20-26. And E, consideration of possible action regarding a right-of-way dedication from George A. Kampman Jr., trustee of the 1975 Abigail Camille Gunther Trust and HEPCC properties, the second Limited on Daisy Lane. Properties located or adjacent to 6 Daisy Lane Interstate 10. I'll entertain a motion as to the consent agenda items if no one has anything to remove. Judge, I move that we approve consent agenda items A through E. Thank you, Commissioner Carpenter. We have a motion made by Chad. Do I have a second?

Second.

Seconded by Commissioner Wieschen. Any further discussion? If not, Paula, please call the vote.

Commissioner Wieschen. Aye. Commissioner Carpenter. Aye. Judge Stolarzik.

Aye. Motion carries 4-0. Next, consideration of possible action regarding the renewal of an interlocal cooperation agreement between Kerr County and Kendall County for jail services for FY2026 to be set forth the terms and conditions under which Kendall County inmates may be housed in Kerr County. Do you want to speak on this, Sheriff, quick?

If you have any questions, it's just continue with your contract.

to provide services for in case we need to locate inmates in another facility. We have several of these.

So this is our annual review of these contracts and nothing's changed?

Nothing's changed.

Okay. I move to approve the renewal of the interlocal cooperation agreement between Kerr County and Kendall County for jail services. FY 2026 to be set forth the terms and conditions under which Kendall County may be housed in Kerr County. Do I have a second? Second.

I do want to correct that there were some changes made, but none of them should impact your decision today. I just want to correct the record that we did make some revisions in Kerr County.

I'm sorry, was that you that seconded? I'm sorry. Motion by the judge, seconded by Commissioner Carpenter. Any further discussion? There being none, all of you are up.

Commissioner McCombs, I'm Commissioner Wheaton. I'm Commissioner Crawford.

I'm Judge Solerzi. Aye. Motion carries 4-0. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next, consideration of possible action to approve the Hill Country Dispute Resolution Center contract for 2026-2027. This, again, is an annual renewal. Jen, you reviewed the contract and have no issues, so I move. to approve the Hill Country District Resolution Center contract for 2026-2027. Do I have a second? So it should be by the judge, seconded by Commissioner McCall. Any further discussion? There being none, Paula.

Commissioner McCall. Aye. Commissioner Leeshan. Aye. Commissioner Carver. Aye. Judge Salarza.

Aye. Motion carries four to zero. Next up, consideration of possible action regarding the resignation of Kendall County Appraisal District Representative To Kendall County, Rodney G. Edmondson, effective immediately in discussion and possible action regarding the replacement of Mr. Edmondson on the appraisal district board. So we received his resignation letter. And I don't know if we want to revisit this. We'll move to accept his resignation and then set it for a future court to give people time to find volunteers that may want to serve on that. Is that fair with y'all? Because I don't think I'm prepared to put up a name today.

and this can be anybody in the county correct um the general council what's a good way for us to submit names would that be in a future item or is that exact or i would suggest that you reach out to your constituents and ask for anyone who is interested in serving to contact you and then on a future agenda we could have any candidates that the commissioners would like to bring forward And those people could appear if the court wants to ask them questions or if they'd like to give a statement about why they'd like to serve. And you can make a selection at that time. And that would be an open? Yes.

Thank you.

Okay. So I move to accept the resignation of Kendall County Appraisal District Representative Rodney G. Edmondson effective immediately and propose that the courts acquire names for consideration at a future court to replace Mr. Edmondson. Do I have a second? No. Motion by the judge, seconded by Commissioner McCall. Any further discussion? There being none, Paula, could you please call the vote?

Commissioner McCall?

Aye.

Commissioner Wieschen? Aye. Commissioner Carpenter? Aye.

Judge DeLarsen? Aye. Motion carries four to zero. Next up, consideration of possible action. Number 28, consideration of possible action regarding the interlocal cooperation contract between DPS and Kendall County for DPS to provide testing and analysis of seized drug evidence submitted by Kendall County and Medina counties. We have the DA's office with us, so this looks like an annual renewal as well.

It is a renewal of an existing contract. Only the contract is within four-year periods, and so we are needing to go into our next four-year periods. I think you've seen this, and I want to make sure you're okay with everything. The reason why we're bringing this to you is we want to make sure that this contract gets approved in order for we believe that we have grant dollars we're waiting for to be awarded. And so we need to get this in place so that those grant dollars can cover what is being approved, hopefully, within this contract. Okay.

I move to approve the interlocal cooperation contract between DPS and Kendall County for DPS to provide testing and analysis of seed drug evidence submitted by Kendall and Medina counties. Do I have a second? Motion by the judge, seconded by Commissioner McCall. Any further discussion? If not, all of you are up.

Commissioner McCall?

Aye.

Commissioner Wieser? Aye. Commissioner McCall? Aye. Judge Savarza? Aye.

Aye. Motion carries four to zero. Next up, consideration of possible action regarding the acceptance of grant funding from the U.S. Department of Justice in the amount of $915,961 through the Office of the OJP for FY2026 Special Attorneys Program Round 3 grant to fund a position for a special assistant U.S. attorney. Can you just give us a quick summary of what we got to do here?

Indeed. So this is a three-year program. grant award that was issued by the Department of Justice. It's actually a little bit more than the original budget that was requested. We won't be able to see the formal breakdown of what they're granting us until we've accepted the award. But as of right now, they're listing it up to $915,000. Again, this is a three-year award. no match, and it really truly is going to be more of a pass-through funding where the Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney's Office had really reached out to see if we would be willing and able to help facilitate this grant so that we can get somebody for their office. They will be located in San Antonio. They will not be located here.

Okay. How is that in reality tied to the county being a federal branch and

Good question. So the county is responsible for the full salary fringe, all of that, and we will pay that salary and then seek reimbursement from the DOJ.

Does that benefit citizens in Kendall County?

So there are federal crimes such as that have to do with illegal aliens coming into the county and making sure that we support those initiatives with the federal government and that there's no trafficking, sex trafficking and human trafficking and those sorts of things. Those become a federal realm and they will assist in making sure that that doesn't affect our county and we'd be supporting them per their request for us to hire and manage this person through the grant that's being awarded to us.

And the person reports to, does the district attorney have a role in that or is that all the federal prosecutor's office?

It's federal prosecutor's office. And I'm speaking on behalf of Nicole. And of course she's sorry that she was unable to be here because of the flight delay. Um, but all we will be needing to do is just affirm their, um, timesheets and manage their trainings and those sorts of things, sort of like facilitating, um, the individuals, uh, um, awarded funds, if that makes sense. But we, the county, will not be responsible financially in any shape or form for this person that we are supporting on behalf of the federal government.

Yes, ma'am.

Yes, ma'am. In conjunction with the federal attorney's office.

And this was already approved to be submitted? Yes, sir. Okay. I'll entertain a motion at this time.

Okay.

All right, you want to go for your questions and then we'll...

Okay. So you mentioned that the rent and all that would be paid for. So is this a county employee?

So we essentially are a pass-through for the funding that pays for this federal employee using a county-awarded grant.

And then do we have a proposed salary? And if so, is this salary compatible with any current Kendall County prosecutor?

So the salary is above what a Kendall County prosecutor would normally receive or would receive because of the nature of the position and so forth. We will via this position, if we have any federal crimes and so forth, be able to move those to this individual to manage on our behalf. And we can support them in whatever way our law enforcement folks need to. But that's, you asked, Commissioner, what the benefit is to our county. And we have had issues with trafficking in the past. And so this would be a way in which they would support us. And I'm sorry, let me make sure I answered your question if you need to ask me that again. Thank you.

Go ahead. Can I help? Yes, please. In the next item, you'll be looking at the job description for this position, and then you'll look also at the exemption status and what the appropriate grade would be. This is a special position that doesn't currently exist in Kendall County, which is why that new job description is being presented to you today. It would be a special U.S. attorney position, so it is very different from anything that we currently have in our pay scale. And we would be asking that it be a higher grade, dependent, of course, on what the grant funds allow us for offering that salary. But that is the next item to come on the agenda if you accept this grant funding today. It would be a Kendall County employee officially, and that person would be on our books and would be eligible to participate in our retirement benefits and our health benefits and everything else. But they would be housed within the federal U.S. attorney's office. So they would be a Kendall County employee. and kind of a hybrid federal employee at the same time, but they would be participating in our benefits and not the federal benefits. I believe that's.

But the grant would be covering all the expenses. Exactly.

But when you ask whose employee are they, they would technically be Kendall County's employee, but managed by the U.S. attorney.

Isn't this consistent with like how the law enforcement works with other agencies to like, we work with the feds, we work with the DEA. This is no different. It's just the DA is working with the U.S. attorneys who have overlapping jurisdictions in some areas, and this allows for a more smooth transition when you have a state and federal crime to hand it over to the U.S. Attorney's Prosecution.

It does, and it increases the number of attorneys available at the U.S. Attorney's Office to pursue and prosecute cases, and in that way benefits this county directly.

Also, I was going to ask Nicole, but do you know if we have cases in Kendall County that this attorney would have prosecuted. I mean, is this something we can look at that we would have been able to use this attorney for?

I can pull that information. I don't have it readily available.

Well, to follow up on her question, I assume that that attorney's office is already trying these cases, right?

That is in their realm, yes, to try the federal level crimes, correct.

This gives them another prosecutor to help get that done.

It's a way to use federal dollars to supplement in a quicker way than going through the federal process.

It's faster for them to get an employee through us than asking for an employee through the regular federal channels.

Yes.

Forgive us.

No, that's fine. This isn't an easy one. This is a little bit more complicated.

I'm glad you're here, Jen. So we have a new position coming as a grant manager. And I looked at the 43 conditions on 19 pages of what this attorney needs to follow, well, for the grant needs to follow. So kind of in your opinion, since you deal with grants, can you kind of tell us how many man hours or maybe a percentage of their job, just looking at what the seat grant would be dedicated to this?

So the maintenance of this one, actually, it's going to fall on the judge first when he gets to read through and make sure that we're already in compliance with all of those. But they're pretty standard for what we're already required to do. And otherwise, you're looking at reporting periods. I mean, this is going on for three years. The application side of it, which in some cases is the hardest side, is done. Now it'll just be maintenance. So there are programmatic reports that will be due and they're done on a quarterly basis. The auditor's office will be responsible for the financial side of that, which is also done on a quarterly basis. It's very manageable once it's in place and everything gets on a calendar.

Any other questions?

And then last question. Again, we have a grant manager that will be handling this and I know there'll be a transition period. But it sounds like we're going to be doing the reporting and all of the, what's needed for this grant. If we don't meet the conditions, because there's 43, and I know every grant's different, what would be the consequences of not meeting that?

That is a good question that I can't necessarily answer without having gone through and looked at all of the ramifications. And a lot of time there's, there's, some wiggle room where they're very willing to work with us. At least this has especially been true with the governor's office and pass-through funds. Once they've given those out, it's a lot more work to get them back and have to recollect those. So there is typically a lot of opportunity to work to remedy any kind of issues or concerns that come up beforehand. Again, our official budget has not been confirmed because they're still reviewing and looking at all of that. they will do that and go through it with a fine-tooth comb before it's even released to us.

All right. At this time, I'll entertain a motion as to Agenda Item 29. Anyone?

I'll move to, is that Special Assignment Attorney?

Let me just read it.

Thanks. I move to approve the acceptance of grant funding from the U.S. Department of Justice in the amount of $915,961 to the Office of Justice Programs FY2026 Special Attorneys Program Round 3 grants to fund a position for a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney with the U.S. Attorney's Office.

Motion made by Commissioner Wieschen. Is there a second? I'll second. Second by Commissioner Carpenter. Any further discussion? If not, Paula, you're up.

Commissioner Leeson? Aye. Commissioner Carpenter? Aye. Chair Stilbarza?

I'm abstaining because I did the last time, so motion carries 2-1. Next up, consideration of possible action regarding a job description for a special assignment attorney, special assistant U.S. attorney position, which will be working with the U.S. Attorney's Office. So you have the job description, and it's been

This one has not gone through the normal channels simply because it is a way in which I've tried. It's been explained to me is it's not really one of our on our job lists as a position and it's not being paid by our county dollars. It's a federal now that it's approved federal funded grant position. So we're bringing it straight to you for.

review and consider. So, Judge, I move to approve the job description, special assignment attorney, special assistant U.S. attorney for Office of Justice Programs FY 2026, special attorney's program.

Motion made by Commissioner Wieschen, seconded by Commissioner Carpenter. Any further discussion? I just want to make sure, again, when it comes time to put it out, please make sure the font's ADA compliant. All right. With that, Paula, you're up.

Commissioner McCall? Nay. Commissioner Wieschen? Aye. Commissioner Carpenter? Aye. Judge Salarza?

I'm abstaining again. So motion carries two to one with Commissioner Weijan and Carpenter in favor and Commissioner McCall opposed. And finally, last thing up on our agenda, consideration and possible action to enter an agreement with the AGCM Inc. to provide, is there anything, I don't need to sign on anything for that, correct? Okay, thank you. To provide project management ownership owners agent services in amount not to exceed $49,150 for services related to remodeling project at 119 Old San Antonio Road, pursuant to the county's request for qualifications 2026-06. Commissioner Legion, I'll go ahead. Thank you, Judge.

So yesterday we worked through the budget, which is $4 million for this project and currently earmarked in our fiscal 2026 budget. We have now maximized the use of the building rather than designing around two departments. We're now working toward a plan that addresses three county needs, the JP2 elections and the district court, which, as we've heard from Judge Cahoon, is out of space in the courthouse due to not only two district courts. but a surge in the number of cases from visiting judges. So the architect is on board with this plan. He'll be tweaking the design to make room for a 12-person jury for district court. And right now that makes the owner's rep, I think, really more important at this point in time. The owner's rep is to represent the county's interests, including bringing this project to budget so that make sure that we can use the money that we have efficiently and live within our means. So I'll kick, let Sharon... Follow me.

I'm kicking it off.

Okay.

Yes. So basically this item, previously the court agreed to pursue the next person in line in the RFQ, which was AGCM. So this is the negotiated contract we're bringing back to court for your approval for their services.

And then we have Joshua. Yes, Joshua Sletcher with AGCM here, if you have any questions. Tell us a little bit about your firm and how you intend to help us and bring this project in a timeline and the budget that we've got.

Yes, ma'am. It's a pleasure to be here. Thank you, Judge Court. AGCM is a Texas firm. We've been in operation for about 30 years, headquartered in Corpus Christi. The central office here in San Antonio area has 24 folks in our operations department that work on project management for all sorts of owners. Understanding your fiscal kind of constraints or issues, really our priority is going to be drilling down into the programming and scope and analyzing the budget and bringing the architect's design within Kendall County's needs. the intent would be to get that wrangled very quickly so that the project can continue moving forward, get back on track. I know that through the negotiation and the owner's rep has elongated, and so we understand that you already feel behind the power curve, and we're going to help deliver this project in a timely manner.

And then just to clarify, this firm – went through the request for qualifications and all of the rankings and then the interviews. Yes. Was the second chosen? Yes.

Correct. Correct. So this is, it's been procured correctly. Yes.

Mary Ellen, I'd like your opinion on the committee and your instrumental in working on the engineering building that we now live in on Blanco. And so what are your thoughts on?

I think this is the right time to bring in the owner's rep, get them included in and incorporated in the next phase of the architect's design, and also in procuring the CMAR in protecting the county and representing the county in that role. Our office will work very closely with AGCM throughout the project, but they will be the expert on the contract side of it to help us through the process. Thank you. Yes. Can I entertain a motion?

Judge, I move to approve the proposal submitted by AGCM Inc. and to authorize the county judge to execute the contract for owner's agent services associated with the remodel project at 119 Old San Antonio.

Motion made by Commissioner Wieschen. Do I have a second? Seconded by Commissioner McCall. Any further discussion? There being none. Paula?

McCall? Aye. Commissioner Wieschen? Aye. Commissioner Carpenter?

Aye. Judge Delisle? Aye. Motion carries 4-0.

Thank you, Josh. I appreciate it.

All right.

That concludes our open portion of today's session. Would you all like to take just a quick break and then we'll wrap up? All right. So we're going to be in recess until 12.02. p.m., and we are resuming our open portion of today's session. Are there any motions coming out of executive? Ladies? None? Chad? None? None for me. With that, it is 12.17 p.m., and this regularly called session of the Kendall County Commissioner's Court is now adjourned.