KingWm #LibertyMatters

The tension in the Courtroom today was palpable as the SB22 budget was narrowly approved by a 3/2 vote.  While the simpler and generally smaller requests made by the Constables and County Attorney’s Office received little scrutiny, the request by the Sheriff’s Office drew criticism and ultimately divided the Court.  At issue was the overall use of the funds, the size and distribution of the pay increases, the approval authority and the audit trail.  Some things can’t be reported on, you just have to hear it for yourself.  This is one such occasion.  It’s only 16 minutes.

The first order of business was to approve the language of the amendment to the subdivision regulations.  I support most of the changes, but the court went too far by setting the minimum lot width of 170’ when 150’ would do.  The second topic covered the use of the SB22 grant funds.  There was no information available to the public at the meeting and no presentation was made.  All they said was that they wanted to use 100% of the grant funds for salary.  After getting official copies of the spreadsheets, I can see why there is so much secrecy as the proposed raises would represent a total increase in overall compensation of 30% or more on average, in one year!  The final decision will be made Thursday 5/2.

Today’s meeting was another one with great participation.  There were a number of topics with heavy discussion but the most interesting was the application requesting a 100% tax abatement for a giant battery project and the pending changes to the subdivision regulations.  While the proposed increase in subdivision platting will help ensure compliance with minimum standards, setting the minimum lot width so high at 170 feet will adversely affect real estate development by making it more difficult to develop affordable, minimum-sized lots.  Regulations become onerous and over burdensome particularly when they go beyond the minimum requirement to protect public health and welfare and try creating Utopia.

My crusade to update the subdivision regulations continued recently as I objected to the Pope subdivision on the grounds that it wasn’t platted.  With 15 lots, many long and skinny, it wasn’t clear whether the proposed residential development was viable or posed a threat to public health and welfare.  Essentially sustaining my objection, the Court called this special meeting to consider my recommendations.  It was the most productive meeting in recent memory with heavy public attendance and participation.  The Court adopted most of my recommendations in principle, leaving some details to be determined.  I write this knowing the future and I cannot express enough the importance of this hour-long conversation.

This La Grange ISD School Board meeting was a crowded one.  The discussion on books continued this week with several people signing up to make comments.  Also, there was a lengthy library update that was very informational.  The school board also discussed the sale of financial bonds, chose a new auditor and considered many other matters.

Commissioners Court was poised to grant a variance to a 15-lot subdivision, eliminating the plat requirement, when a couple timely questions drew attention to the flawed subdivision platting procedure.  Don’t miss this very important 13 minute discussion.  State law requires a plat for all subdivisions, with few exceptions, yet our County continuously grants variances for large subdivisions without public dedications, approving them with little consideration and without plats.  It’s time to close the subdivision fast lane and start considering all subdivisions more carefully.  In other news, 3 of the 5 members of the Court agreed it was better to read the airport hangar contract before approving it.

It was another very routine meeting, but there was a little discussion on elections and various grant funds.  The most interesting part was probably the questions Commissioner McBroom asked about the Round Top traffic stops in the Sheriff’s Office report.  It may seem innocuous at first glance, but I think there may be more questions regarding the nature of these private security agreements in the near future.

Again, courtesy of Jeff Parker.  Unfortunately, we did not get our recording of the last school board meeting when the book issue erupted in controversy, but we did get this most recent one.  I have not listened to the entire recording, but I listened to all the public comments in the beginning, and they are well worth your time.  As this book controversy unfolds, check back here for more recordings.

Courtesy of Jeff Parker:  LGISD “Budget Workshop” meeting 3/18/24 to discuss taking out a “Maintenance Tax Note”, which would be a loan of $2,000,000 at 4.75% for 15 years. The purpose of the note is to tackle maintenance and construction projects “now” rather than at the rate of the yearly amount budgeted for capital outlay -- approximately $285,000 per year. The money to pay principal and interest on the note would then come from the capital outlay budget item. Debt service would be about $186,000, leaving around $100,000 yearly for contingencies. $1.5 million of the note would be applied to a list of projects the administration proposed to the board. The other $0.5 million would be held in reserve. After outlining the concept of the Maintenance Tax Note, the administrators present went over the prioritized list of projects. Board wants to look into some of the projects in person, so a future Budget Workshop meeting will be held for “show and tell”.

At 67 minutes in length, it was a bit of a marathon (lol), but it could have been the most routine meeting ever.