Search Results

Below is the agenda for this special Board meeting, with my agenda analysis and meeting analysis underneath. Agenda analysis: a. What is a special meeting? "Special" meetings pop up every so often for all governmental bodies. I haven't before discussed its meaning, but the brevity of this agenda makes this a worthwhile opportunity for my series on "how to read an agenda". The Open Meetings Act mentions special meetings, see 51.002 , but doesn't define or even describe them. If you want to do a deep dive on the meaning consider researching Robert's Rules of Order , the bible of parliamentary procedure. For my purposes, a special meeting is merely an extra public meeting that is usually dealing with some particular business matter that the board could not address at its regular meeting because of a timing issue but still must be dealt with before the next regular session. These meetings usually address a matter of high importance that cannot be delayed, but that also does not qualify for an "emergency" meeting for extreme circumstances. Because a quorum of the board will be present at a special meeting, it still has to meet all the posting deadlines of the Open Meetings Act. And, because it is a public meeting, the agenda still has to have a place for public comment. See 51.007 . This agenda includes a public forum at item 2. (There were once some very dark days under former Supt. DeSpain when ICISD completely eliminated the public forum, so I watch this issue closely.) Also, note that the agenda does not have an item for an executive session. While Texas law requires that every public meeting must have a public forum, there is no requirement that the body meet in closed session. Closed sessions, while highly regulated under the Open Meetings Act, are not required. b. Health insurance, item 4. I first became interested in the insurance woes at ICISD when, during a public forum for the re-election of state Representative Drew Darby , it became evident that the previous contract for insurance apparently entered at the end of Supt. DeSpain's tenure was in fact nonexistent. Subsequent board meetings made it public that the District was essentially self insuring its staff during the school year. See Meeting Analysis # 6 . (I have a related pending PIA request related to this matter, coincidentally. Good health insurance is one of the few perks of government employment, so the teachers that registered their anger at the Darby public forum on this issue were justified, in my opinion. While I obviously have huge issues with using tax dollars to flood my home and community, I strongly favor excellent health care insurance for government employees.) This agenda item hopefully will get the District back under contract with an insurance company, based on discussions at the previous board meeting. c. Attendance waiver , item 3. TEA has a rule that can be waived, and they are going to waive it. My experience is that if a rule in some way involves money, and attendance always does, TEA requires a formal waiver. Rules that don't or indirectly involve money, well, there's a fudge factor. TEA does not enforce all of its many rules. 2. Meeting analysis: a. Health Insurance, item 4 . Supt. Moore ran through a few ways the District could save money with its employer contribution part of the new plan with Blue Cross, then the Board approved the plans. That's really good news for teachers and staff and their families; Blue Cross has excellent plans for government employees. b. Attendance waiver, item 3 . The District had a handful of low attendance days this last year and had some explaining to do to TEA. The Board approved the waiver request. c. Adjourned . There was no other business, no discussion and the Board adjourned promptly. d. Forecast . More rain is in the forecast, with moderate temps for the area in the low 90's. These slower rains are more beneficial to our water table, as the soil is less hydrophobic and that allows for more soil absorption and less runoff to Spring Creek. But, of course, if we pave and cement over the soil the impermeability of that covering will increase runoff. So the weather related word for these 2024 bond era years is "depave" which means to undo the act of paving and restore the land to its original state. Consider this article on depaving, Depave - the Community-Based Approach to Stormwater Management . Copyright 2024 G Noelke

Below is the agenda for the July 15 meeting of the Mertzon City Council, with my agenda analysis and meeting analysis underneath. Agenda analysis: a. Special event ordinance, item 5: The Council is trying to standardize street closures here. b. Contract for right of way landscaping, item 6: The Council appears to be formalizing its arrangement allowing the Ibarra's to landscape the edge of the street at their home at 3rd and Fayette next to ICISD. c. IC Booster Club Fun Run at the creek, item 7: This is a new matter that has not been discussed before, to my knowledge. The "creek" is Spring Creek, the river that runs through Mertzon that I have elsewhere in these pages noted has more water flowing through its banks than the Pedernales River. The City has done well to keep the area clean and underdeveloped, so throughout the year you can find folks camping, picnicking and fishing there. d. The rest: Items 1-4 and 8-11 are standard and are on every agenda. 2. Meeting analysis: a. Here are the meeting documents for this meeting. b. Parade ordinance, item 5 : the Council unanimously approved a new ordinance relating to street closure for certain events. See pages 2 - 11 of the meeting documents . I will be possibly by following up with some amended analysis on this ordinance. (My first read was immediately prior to this meeting when it was made available at the meeting in the meeting documents. I am researching why it is this particular ordinance did not have to be published publicly prior to its adoption.) c. Contract for right of way landscaping with landowner, item 6 : The proposed agreement with landowner Santiago Ibarra is at pages 12 - 21 of the meeting documents . Mr. Ibarra was present at the meeting and raised questions about the portion of the agreement that would make him totally liable should one of the young drivers attending school next door hit one of the landscaping rocks. The Mayor agreed that, yes, the liability would be solely Mr. Ibarra's. That caused Mr. Ibarra to withdraw his request for the agreement, so no vote was held on this matter. After some discussion, it was agreed that the Mayor would reach out to Supt. Moore to attempt to reach some solution since the area is going to be the site of extended construction in the coming years due to the 2024 school bonds. Note: the meat and potatoes of the proposed agreement is at paragraphs 7.1-7.4 relating to liability and indemnification. Once folks start putting obstructions in the right of way all sorts of problems arise that limit the City's governmental immunity if the City allows that encroachment on its property. Thus, in this case any agreement has to include that the landowner, Mr. Ibarra, has to absorb any of the liability if he puts anything on the right of way that might be hit by a driver. The agreement also provides that the landowner will protect the City (indemnify the City) if it is sued. I'm not sure why any landowner in their right mind would agree to such terms because it assumes that the landowner can be self insured as if the landowner could afford government immunity, which of course is not realistic. On a related note, years ago I came to understand that local resident Tom Carter purchased and now owns the median with the oak trees on Hwy 67 in front of his property on the south end of Hwy 67. Similar liability issues may have been addressed in his agreement. I would imagine that TXDOT waived all its liabilities when it sold the property. Connecting the dots to the 2024 bonds: These liability issues will come back to roost again in the upcoming school construction. The City during the 2019 bond build out, free of charge and without any written agreement, allowed WBK Construction to use a portion of the right of way along 4th Street between Juanita and W. Fleming to park its construction trailer and various materials. This caused construction gravel build up on the shoulder that is part of the problem my property has today. The construction company doing the 2024 construction is likewise going to need real estate to locate their equipment and materials. I have been saying this for years, to no avail: it is ok for a city to collect license/ordinance fees for use and enjoyment of the roadways for construction matters. This is not double taxation any more than it is double taxation for the the City Tax Assessor Collector to collect a fee from the City for collection of its taxes. The City of Mertzon will leave 2024 bond money on the table if it allows the construction company to have its way with our city streets. And, just like the situation above with Mr. Ibarra, the City increases its legal exposure if it allows a 3rd party to willy nilly park whatever it wants on the roadway edge. If anything, school bonds should be considered a source of revenue to the City to the extent it has to manage the increased liability for a 3rd party to park materials or close a roadway . The City should not give away our valuable property, even for a short time. Likewise, the City should not be impoverished when it has such a wealthy neighbor, ICISD, who clearly benefits from city services and public lands. d. Fun Run, item 7 : Joli McDowell appeared on behalf of the ICISD Booster Club. After some discussion, the Council unanimously approved the run. See pages 22-23 of the meeting documents . e. Approval of minutes, item 8a: The Council approved the minutes for the previous two meetings, and I have included those at pages 25 and 26 of the meeting documents . More: Here is the official Seminole Canyon State Park website . Be on your toes if you hike or bike here. We met up with 3 apparent migrants inside the park boundaries. The exchange was not dangerous, but one should always remember that the "border" is only an imaginary construct and the vastness of the country and its rugged terrain mean crossings are inevitable. Copyright 2024 G Noelke

Below is the agenda for the July 16, 2024 meeting, with my agenda analysis and meeting analysis underneath. Agenda analysis a. Meeting time: note the meeting is not on Monday but Tuesday, July 16 at the earlier time of 5:30. b. Superintendent's report, item 4b : There's a lot of meat in each of the listed topics. The Kramer Consulting would appear to be the kickoff of the 2024 bond spending on new busses. c. What's different: Again, approach all agendas critically with an eye toward trying to understand what is different this month from last month. A lot of thought gets put into the drafting of agenda because if the topic isn't listed technically it can't be discussed. Here we see that there is no principal's report. There was also no report last month. Who knows whether this is significant at this point. My goal here is to educate my readers about how to read agendas and to not accept them passively. d. Procurement of construction and procurement of design and construction, items 6 & 7: This appears to be the first formal steps in getting Gallagher Construction and Parkhill hired for the 2024 bond projects, as my best guess is that it entails choosing the method of construction contracting for the projects. This area of law, Texas Gov't Code 2269 , is complex and mind numbingly boring UNLESS you have previously been burned by it like I was, and our community was, when the Board chose the Construction Manager at Risk method for the 2019 bonds. Stay tuned. e. Adding a new signor to all accounts, item 8 : This is a LOT of authority, and signing off on the annual spend down of a $20+ million budget and $50+ million in bonds is significant. It also begs the question: What about Mr. Helms? f. What's different, take 2 : School law is largely understood to be "administrative law" because so much of it is regulated by the Texas Education Agency and its many, many rules in the Texas Administrative Code, Title 19 . I cannot over emphasize the sea change created on the federal side of administrative law by the US Supreme Court this last session in the Loper Bright case where the Court pared back the agency authority to interpret its own administrative rules to effectively zilch . If this approach is adopted in Texas (and I believe Chevron deference has been the rule here as well), this could mean that TEA's interpretation of ALL of its Title 19 rules is likewise zilch . In place of TEA's interpretation could be the interpretation of the Travis County District Courts, the 3rd Court of Appeals and the Texas Supreme Court. Here is some more analysis of the Loper Bright case . This will be an area to watch both in the Texas state courts and in the upcoming 2025 Texas legislative session. There were other recent US Supreme Court case relating to administrative law that also have the potential to revolutionize Texas law. A great deal of uncertainly now exists in Texas administrative law, including uncertainty in the area of public school funding and performance testing. Think you understand school construction law because of TEA's interpretation of its own statutes and rules? Well, you don't because their view may not be important any more . 2. Meeting analysis: a. Open forum, item 3 : A local resident presented on the specs of her residential property that is for sale and the District clearly has interest in. Open Meetings Act sunshine: the governmental body can't ask questions to the public speaker. Perhaps more on this, and the real estate purchase, later. b. Superintendent's report: 1. Communications audit results - the District hired a consultant a few months back and her work product was reviewed. I'll come back to this issue. 2. Health Insurance Update - The District has contracted with Blue Cross, apparently thanks to their consultant contract with Neil Seltz. I am in the process of getting his contract, I hope. 3. Local Ryan Kramer presented his pitch to be hired as a consultant to aid the District sell and purchase its busses. No action taken publicly on this. 4. Financial - Mr. Helms was absent, so nothing substantive was discussed regarding finances at item 4a; she referenced his materials were in the board packet. Checks and reports were approved in 10 b. I'll cover more about the financial condition of the District next month as it goes through the 24-25 budgeting process. c. 2024 bonds, items 6, 7 and part of 9 : In due time I'll be delving into the contracting method chosen by the Board at this meeting - construction manager - agent. See Texas Gov't Code, Subchapter E, Section 2269.201 - .208 . The action taken by the Board in thee items was to grant authority to Supt. Moore to negotiate the contracts for construction and design and construction. ("Design" means "architect".) Negotiations are already underway with Gallagher via the District's law firm, Eichelbaum. So, the upshot is that the contracting is taking shape for who will do the build out for the 2024 bonds. In other bond news, at item 9 the board approved a $10,000 construction management stipend to James Green, head of the District's Ag Department. In contrast to other stipends at the District, this one would appear to be outrageously high. Let me tell you, if his job is what I think it will be, he's going to be earning every penny of that and asking for it to be renegotiated at a higher amount before this build is complete. The issue of what construction code standards to use alone ought to be a hair raising experience for the District. TEA in its rules imposes different build standards on communities like ours when the municipality has no building codes, as the City of Mertzon has none. I definitively proved that the new gym was not properly code inspected during its construction, and neither then superintendent Ray DeSpain, WBK Construction or Architect Jeff Potter could attest to its safety as required by TEA rules because...the District did not have its own independent inspector. Moreover, the City of Mertzon has punted on the issue of imposing construction codes (I've tried!), so there's a real concern here that the District will do a repeat of what it did with the 2019 bonds. As an aside, I don't want to imply that I am a safety nut. I do some dangerous things like hunt, hike and bike. But, the closure of the street where the new gym now sits was justified by the District's then administrators for "safety" reasons , and it created way more safety problems than it solved. So, until the District corrects some of the safety issues it created with the 2019 bonds by properly using the 2024 bonds, I'm not inclined to look the other way. The parents of the children who will be attending school in these new buildings should not look the other way, either. And, the Mertzon City Council should especially not look the other way. This issue - that of not having construction codes - is where I believe the City's brand of libertarianism seriously fails. Children can't always look after their own safety at school, and that is where good government comes in. I hope to be visiting with Supt. Moore in the near future about these issues so the mistakes of 2019 are not visited upon the 2024 bonds. In the mean time, hats off to Mr. Green! My prediction is that he will be earning his keep. c. Closed session and action on closed session, items 12 and 14 : No matters were voted on after the closed session went into open. d. Other matters: There will be a special meeting in July coming up, and the next regular meeting will be August 5. Also, very soon I will be posting more Jacob Conner documents. I was able to get his Agreed Order with SBEC and will be posting that. Finally, all the talk of the bus sales at this meeting had me reminiscing with Board member Taylor Douglas after the meeting. As a member of Mertzon's Troop 116, I took a camping trip about 1973 with his uncle Lynn Freitag, one of my best friends, and grandfather Pinkie Freitag to Big Bend for a week of floating the river, camping and fishing. We had to leave Mertzon (from what is now the Museum) at midnight because we used Pinkie's beat up old school bus and it would over heat during the daytime. I slept like a baby during the trip out because all the seats had been pulled out of the bus, and I rolled over off the 1/4 inch plywood we were supposed to sleep on and slept prone on top of the Troop's bread supplies for the week. Morris Grice, France's Grice's husband who was the other parent on the trip, was none too happy with me, but Pinkie just laughed and laughed. It was a magical childhood fishing trip that included wandering and fishing from the Mexico side of the border. Even today I miss Pinkie and Lynn. Copyright 2024 G Noelke

Below is the agenda for the July 1, 2024 meeting, with my agenda analysis and meeting analysis underneath. Agenda Analysis a. Roads and Right of Way: I've highlighted items 5 and 9, part of my City Gym series of posts, as yet another reminder that cities, including the City of Mertzon, have legal authority over how our streets are used. The Ibarra's at item 9 will be following through with earlier Council approved improvements to the right of way next to their home and adjacent to ICISD. For what it's worth, I recall the days when the only paved street around was 3rd Street. All students, teachers, and visitors parked along 3rd street back then. All of the parking and drainage issues the Ibarra's are currently addressing here are the consequence of decades of school growth…and the City of Mertzon passively allowing that growth without concern for private property rights. It’s a good thing when any private property owner gets protection from school growth, so long as all private property owners get equal protection. b. Tax Assessor Collector, item 6: Joyce Gray's office doesn't work for free. This contract will almost certainly be approved. She is the only game in town. c. Excessive water bill, item 7: The City has a longstanding practice of trying to help citizens out when their water bills skyrocket. This item is unique in that it describes what they are willing to entertain - averaging. (Don't show up to complain about an unknown leak and expect to get your water bill comp’ed.) d. Meter replacement, item 8: The Council has been evaluating for several months how to modernize and update its water meters. Electronic meters that can instantly alert for leaks are being considered. 2. Meeting Analysis : Here are the documents for this meeting. a. 4th of July Parade, Road closure, item 5: Joli McDowell and Brandi Whitlow appeared to request approval. The Council voted unanimously to close the streets for this annual event. The route can be found on page 2 of the meeting document. Details can be found on Facebook at Irion County News. b. Tax Assessor Contract, item 6: The Council approved a contract with Joyce Gray's office for the costs of collecting taxes. The fee is $629.00. The contract is on page 3 of the meeting documents, for those of you interested in intergovernmental contracting. c. Excessive water bills for 2 residences, item 7: The Council approved 3 months averaging for each. But, there was no discussion of who the folks were and they didn't appear. I think more transparency is needed here. d. Meter replacement project, item 9: After a hearty debate, the Council approved a bid from Ferguson for around $160,000 for electronic water meters. About two thirds of of this expense will be paid for by grant funds, and the remainder will be from a CD. Councilmember Holland initially appeared to oppose taking from the CD, but Councilmember Lindley appeared to offer up the necessary assurances that replacing the water meters was a longstanding project and it was worth doing so. I will be following up with more on the details of the meters, as it was clear from the discussions that they were going to offer some real water conservation features like digital notification of leaks. e. Resident plan for landscaping, item 9: The Ibarra's didn't show up, and a few questions came up during the item where it would have been appropriate for them to answer. The Council approved. The Council did not discuss whether a waiver of liability had been signed. f. Administrative report -The baseball field bleachers being hauled off turned out to be norm contaminated ( naturally occurring radioactive material ). Who knew? Probably the pipe donors years ago. We are in the thick of the oil industry in Irion County. This certainly raises a question about all the piping used for local governmental purposes within the city. Pipes are everywhere! -Some worthwhile offers are being considered regarding property along the railroad tracks. Discussions are preliminary. Copyright 2024 G Noelke

I have submitted the following comments to the draft 2024 State Flood Plan. The time to leave comments on the draft, June 17, 2024, has passed. The deadline for the final Plan is September 1, 2024. This draft 2024 State Flood Plan leaves out one important source of flooding: state and local government. From improper design of state highways to the excessive creation of impervious structures by local school districts, private property owners statewide must be vigilant to prevent stormwater runoff originating from state and local government infrastructure and capital improvements. This problem is only going to worsen as our state population continues to expand, thereby causing increased government growth and worsening climate conditions. The bedrock constitutional principle that the government can’t take private property without first paying for it is not always recognized by government leaders. Stormwater runoff from government property onto private property has long been ruled in our courts as an unconstitutional “taking”. Yet, one can readily find  instances at all levels of government where officials have taken or are in the process of taking private property illegally by “inverse condemnation”. Even the Texas Private Real Property Preservation Act (Texas Government Code Chapter 2007) is readily dismissed by government decision makers. One of its provisions requires a “takings impact assessment” that, if used by government officials, could go a long way to reducing the impact of stormwater runoff from government owned property. In other words, laws already exist that are intended to prevent inverse condemnation. Reform is no doubt needed, but the foundation exists. The final 2024 State Flood Plan should make clear that state and local governments are obligated to consider all applicable constitutional, statutory, administrative and local laws to protect private property from stormwater originating from government property. Thus, as a broad policy objective, the final plan should openly affirm the right of private property owners to be free of governmental takings in that context. The final Plan could thereby be used as a communication tool to educate and remind government leaders that taking of private property by our state and local government is unlawful. I'll update this page once I receive a response. I’m not expecting much of a substantive response, however. If there’s anything I’ve learned in these 8+ years of advocacy, it’s that government leaders are not inclined to tackle the issue of how their own decisions are contributing to the problem. Still, our state’s hyper growth and accompanying climate change I think are reason enough for the pushback in my comments above. See also my post on Devillier v Texas about how state leaders are misrepresenting their progress on property rights and flooding. That post in part informs my view that Texas state and local government are, if not outright hostile towards private property rights, certainly not always deserving of their pro private property rights reputation. Copyright 2024 G. Noelke

Below is the agenda for this meeting, with my agenda analysis and meeting analysis underneath. A. Agenda analysis The Council of late has been prioritizing greater use of the little league fields, as seen in agenda item 5. This is a good thing. I’m not much of a baseball fan, and I still think this is a good thing. Office space for the sewer plant, item 6: This is the first time this has come up to my knowledge, though a year or two back it came up in the limited sense of the space was also being over utilized for document storage. Stay tuned. B. Meeting analysis. Here are the meeting documents for this meeting. Repairs to baseball field stands, item 5: Jaydon Taylor was present and discussed with the Council his evaluation and bid for demo/repair/replacement of the stands. After much discussion, the Council accepted his bid of $2,410 to demo the existing stands. The City is going to reach out to Jaime Tankersley on the little league side to encourage a fund raiser to replace the stands. The Council wants to encourage year round use of the field, but doesn't have the money budgeted to do it right. It's a good idea to do a fundraiser. The City shouldn't bear the entire burden. See the meeting documents for more details. Office space, item 6: The City is in talks with Producer's Marketing Cooperative and the railroad to purchase/lease the building/land immediately north of the Wool House. Other announcements, item 9b: Mayor Stewart gave an update on his meeting with the City's engineer, Supt. Moore and Parkhill's engineers on ICISD's proposals to address stormwater flooding from the campus. It is important for our community to understand that even at these earliest of pre-bid planning stages hydrology engineers can predict quantities and patterns of water flow. And, ICISD is required to by law to evaluate it's impact. We were all hoodwinked in 2019 by ICISD failing to properly address the impact of the stormwater displacement from the bond build out. It's not as if I wasn't speaking out, publicly, that the District needed to disclose its hydrology data back in 2019. I was. So, what was done at this meeting is what should have happened back in 2019. What ICISD is doing now is something that they are already required to do by law, and the incentive is that they wish to close 3rd Street permanently for the new elementary building. Other announcements, cont'd: Mayor Stewart also announced his meeting with Judge Molly Criner and Supt. Moore to form a coalition so that future community emergencies are messaged consistently among the City, County and ICISD. This effort was born from one of Mayor Stewart's recent initiatives after the fugitive situation developed. (See B.2. on this page.) I applaud each of them for these efforts. Consistent messaging during emergencies is something that builds trust in government. The consequences of failing in messaging are significant in these days of social media. Copyright 2024 G Noelke

The Horse Crippler Cactus is common in Irion County, though they are hard to spot because of their low profile of just an inch or two. Yes, their thorns can cripple a horse. Horses are aware of their danger as they will break stride or hop to avoid stepping on one. Here is more information about the plant at the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center. Here is the agenda for this meeting, with my Agenda Analysis and Meeting Analysis below. Here are the meeting documents for this meeting. A. Agenda Analysis 1. Meeting Time: Note this meeting is on June 3, 2024 at 6:30 and conflicts with the ICISD Board meeting at the same time. 2. Municipal Alleys, item 5: Municipalities under Texas law regulate the streets and alleys. If a property owner wants to run an underground pipeline across an alley, they must receive permission by the municipality. And, if a governmental body wishes to close an alley, it too must receive permission from the municipality. That's City Gym in a nutshell. ICISD never received proper approval from the City of Mertzon when it closed an alley to build the new gym with the 2019 bond funds. And, that failure is what makes the Tort Claims Act (see this page at A.4.a. ) relevant even today for the governmental employees and elected officials of both ICISD and the City of Mertzon. Government employees and elected officials cannot build off a foundational error of an improperly closed alley and a structure that floods a community and expect to enjoy the protection of governmental immunity, especially if they continue to take actions that flood the community with additional construction. It is a good sign that the City is regulating the alley in this agenda item. That is Texas law. The question is looming, however, about how the City and ICISD will interpret these same laws as ICISD moves forward with more construction with the 2024 bond funds. Political firestorms have unanticipated consequences. They create messes for the rest of us to clean up. B. Meeting Analysis (meeting documents here) 1. Crossing alley with water well line, item 5: The James' sought and received permission from the Council to cross an alley between their lots with a water well line. The significance for my purposes is as stated above - the City Council controls and regulates our city streets as well as alleys. The concept that municipalities regulate alleys is central to understanding my City Gym argument that the gym built with 2019 bond funds sits on top of an alley that was not properly closed. 2. Administrative Report, b. Other announcements: At the last page of the documents for this meeting you'll see the request to abandon a street and alley that runs through the Elkins' property. This was not a matter listed specifically on the agenda and so was not voted on. The consensus from Council Members Crutchfield and Councilman was that the Council had been advised by their attorney to not abandon streets or alleys because it would created a bad precedent. Indeed, Council Member Crutchfield attempted to re-write history by saying, "We were told by our attorney to never do it. Once we do it sets bad precedent. Never have before." Council Member Crutchfield, of course, was responsible for making the motion to abandon 4th Street for the new gym. 3. Items from the Council, b. Other announcements: In a fascinating exchange about how council members should respond to people complaining about W. Fleming being closed, Council Member Crutchfield made a jaw dropping reveal that it was ICISD Principal Jessica Parker who complained to him that the street should be re-opened. See B.4. on this page for more context. Principal Parker has been a longtime advocate for the new gym, the closure of 4th Street and the alley. (This guy!!!!!) She has never expressed publicly any concern about the flooding, though her father's business offices are in the direct path of the flood waters. (Supt. Gray even publicly exclaimed her support for the new gym during the pre-bond election public meetings in April 2019. ) So, ICISD was silent on the matter of the recent closure of W. Fleming because they wanted it open, floodwaters and debris on my property and those beneath me be damned. This position would be consistent with their view, as described to me by Supt. Moore, that 3rd street can be closed independently of W. Fleming Ave. There's a reason I can't let my advocacy stop...it would obviously be cheaper for ICISD if it could de-couple their request to close 3rd Street with the ongoing flooding of W. Fleming Ave. and its lower elevations. (Football field.) By the way, Mayor Stewart's recommendation to the Council members who hear complaints about the street being closed? Complainers should take it up with the ICISD. The problem started with them. 4. Decorum, please: During the discussion about how to respond to complainers Council Member Holland, apparently taking the opportunity to speak her mind since I was not present in the meeting, said that I should "grow up" and "get a life." Such words were unnecessary in a public meeting. Actually, I'm working on a pretty cool website these days, thank you. Best I can tell, no one else is doing what I am doing on this site. In my youth at ICISD, you bet, I was immature and needed to grow up. But, I was of course young then. As I've aged, I've learned that I especially enjoy owning my words and speaking my mind. I'm also more at ease than ever at allowing those around me to be responsible for their own discomfort with my presence. Aging has few benefits, and I'm going squeeze this one as long as I can speak and type! I've just charged up the battery to my RadRover 6 Plus fat tire ebike - with my own diy solar panels no less - and its time to celebrate the conclusion of this day with a bike ride around Mertzon! Here is a photo of this same Horse Crippler in full bloom last year. Copyright 2024 G Noelke

Read more about another Owl of Athena on the Commons building at the University of Texas at Austin campus. I walked underneath the UT and ICISD Athena owls for roughly 16 years total and never took the time until now to appreciate the symbolism. Athena was the Goddess of Wisdom, so symbolism of her on a school building is especially appropriate. Hopefully this owl, along with 2 other steles that I will cover in other posts, will be preserved for inspiration and placed on/in the new building. If you look around the ICISD campus today, you won’t find this kind of decorative architecture on any of the new buildings. (I am calling the owl a "stele" because it is a monument on the face of a building, but it you find a more accurate term please let me know.) Below is the agenda for this meeting, with my Agenda Analysis and my Meeting Analysis (pending) underneath that. A. Agenda Analysis: Date: Note the meeting is on June 3, about 2 weeks earlier in the calendar month than usual. Formal Action: I highlighted it in this agenda as part of my "how to read an agenda" series. "Formal Action" in a public meeting means that the members may actually vote on a matter, as opposed to merely discuss it. The "action" is the vote itself. I typically connect items like 8 and 10 together because the law prohibits formal action in a closed session, so the vote on anything discussed in closed must be voted on during a portion of the meeting that is open (the public is present). In reality, members will reach a consensus on a matter in closed session, without explicitly voting. I specifically stay to the end of public meetings of interest so that I can hear what specific matter is being acted upon that was discussed privately. (Thus my objection to a motion after closed session that uses the phrase "as presented" because such language acts as a second layer of darkness.) Administrative Reports: Supt. Moore's report is back on the agenda, but no principal or athletics reports. Again, such things may have no particular meaning beyond folks are on summer break, but one agenda reading tip I harp on is to read actively for how this agenda is different than the previous ones. Agendas are messages in advance to the community about the priorities of the governmental body. Don't assume they are static documents each month. Project Reimbursement, Item 5. My recollection is that at some point the District needs to initiate reimbursements for its front end expenses on the bond now that it has passed but the bonds have not issued. I will report back on this as I am not certain. (I don't know what "project" means on this item.) Personnel in closed session, item 8a. This item is an example of where reading an agenda for contrast with previous agendas can be a useful technique. It just says "personnel". In contrast, some recent agendas included terms like "terminations", "resignations", "new hires", "resignations", and "non renewals". The omission of these words from this agenda might mean all those actions are in the past. Is this significant to anyone? Well, if you are a teacher that survived the latest round of departures, it could be hugely significant. And, if you are a taxpayer like me wondering how the District is going to get back into the black on its next budget cycle, knowing whether there are ongoing staff departures before the budget season is relevant. Employee salaries make up the lions share (about 75%) of the District's Maintenance and Operations budget, so the the most effective way to manage the currently projected 24-25 deficit budget of $434,000 (see here at B6c) is to trim the staff. So, reading agendas for detail is helpful. Coincidentally, this week I submitted my latest Public Information Act request that, in part, addresses the comings and goings of staff. I'll report back on this in a future post. B. Meeting analysis (In draft) 1. Open vs. Closed: The Board spent roughly 17 minutes in open session (meaning that the public was permitted to be present) and just over 3 hours in closed (meaning the public was excluded). As mentioned below, the spend down of the 2024 bond funds started with this meeting, However, as a technical matter the Board under this agenda was limited to discussing "personnel" in the closed portion. 2. Administrative Reports, item 4: a. Budget/Finance: CFO Robert Helms did not attend this meeting. Supt. Moore referenced that his documents were in the board members' materials. There was some question about the expenditure of funds on an electrical problem, but the discussion was impossible to understand without access to Helms' documents. The opaqueness continued with the approval of the monthly checks and monthly revenue to expenditure reports in the consent agenda at item 6a. That is to say if you came to this meeting hoping to learn even the basics of what money is coming in and how its being spent you would leave dissatisfied. For all the accountability measures placed upon teachers by the Texas legislature, through the huge bureaucracy of TEA, what is sorely lacking is public accountability of school board members' approval of monthly finances. It is cloudy all the time in these parts, folks, and when one witnesses it month in and month out at every meeting it is hard to not come to the conclusion that it is by design. Bottom line: elected officials are not keen on making their funding decisions transparent, and so it goes with board members at ICISD. b. Superintendent Moore's Report : The District, she reported, is meeting with Region 15's tech department to do an inventory. There appears to be a significant transition taking place with the the technology infrastructure, but I'm unclear from her report what this means. (Technology expense is worth tracking because the costs are repetitive and schools can never be up to date.) She also reported the District is still interviewing and hiring, but is through posting jobs for the most part. (This might well be the signal at the moment that the District is managing its deficit, as mentioned in 5A above. There was no discussion at this point about the fiscal impact of the administrator/teacher/staff transitions taking place, but the budget season is near.) Finally, she reported that TEA's report card for the District is out, but they are still evaluating it internally so it was not discussed. I'm going to keep my powder dry for the moment. Keep in mind, however, my bias on state standards: a school board who does not actively question the results in a public school board meeting is going to be witness to mediocrity, year in and year out. Administrators and teachers need to hear the high expectations of school board members, and the public needs to know board members are engaged on the issue. Improvement cannot be achieved in an echo chamber, and sunlight in an open meeting is the antidote to mediocrity. 3. Resolution declaring intention to reimburse project expenditures, item 5: This was the meatiest portion of the meeting in that it represented the formal beginning of the spend down of the 2024 bonds. The resolution itself works as an advance of bond funds of sorts. The bonds, as reported by Supt. Moore, will not be sold until September 2024, and the funds will not be received until October 2024. Rather than wait until October, the District can expend available cash now from its own cash, then obtain a "reimbursement" in October once the funds come in. Because it takes up to 12 months for new buses to arrive, the District used this resolution to allow it to expend cash now on buses AND to build a new bus barn. Remember, City Gym, built with the 2019 bonds, left the District without a bus barn. (See a photo of the old barn here.) Doesn't make sense to buy brand new buses and not have a place to house them, right? The reimbursement resolution passed, so the District now has $2.5 million of the bond funds to spend. And so, here we question, right out of the starting block, the poor decisions made with the 2019 bond funds that are already haunting the 2024 bonds: what to do about the storm water runoff from the new impervious cover that will be created from the new bus barn? The Board didn't address this drainage issue in open session during this agenda item. But it is the elephant in the room...or put another way, the whale on the street. 4. Personnel and actions from closed sessions: Items 8a and 10, if personnel was all that was discussed, consumed over three hours, and nothing was voted on when the Board came back in open session. A 3 hour closed session for personnel is too long. Here is what 571.074 of the Texas Open Meetings Act says about closed sessions for personnel matters: Sec. 551.074. PERSONNEL MATTERS; CLOSED MEETING. (a) This chapter does not require a governmental body to conduct an open meeting: (1) to deliberate the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of a public officer or employee; or (2) to hear a complaint or charge against an officer or employee. (b) Subsection (a) does not apply if the officer or employee who is the subject of the deliberation or hearing requests a public hearing. A citizen willing to wait out an executive session to see if anything is voted on in open is likely never going to be able to know whether the law, and in particular 551.074, is being followed. As a lawyer who formerly counseled many state agencies during their closed sessions, however, I can safely say: without an independently minded lawyer present in the closed session the board will stray from the law. I've said that before, and the public should have no illusions about what happens behind closed doors. Board members in closed session do not self police, and executive staff in closed session are hesitant to tell their bosses that they are not following the law. 5. Other matters: I am currently reviewing the responses to my May Public Information Act request, and I might post some of that information here because some of it is budget related. I have not made that decision just yet; I just want to give my regular readers a heads up that more content is on the way. Copyright 2024 G Noelke

Below is the agenda for the May 13 regular meeting, with my agenda analysis here and my meeting analysis here. This page was last updated on May 29 2024 with an added # 8 about election runoff results and school vouchers. A. Agenda analysis Agenda availability. This is a photo of the agenda for this meeting that is posted at the front door of the Administration bldg. The Open Meetings Act always requires a physical posting of every meeting, and it is usually at the meeting location/main offices. Post election business. Items 3, 4 and 5 should be read as a group. Now that we are post election, the vote totals and winning candidates must be officially recognized. This should be where we finally learn the actual vote totals for and against each of the bond propositions, as well as the number of votes each candidate received. Once those are declared official, then the board itself must re-organize with new officers. I don’t anticipate any change up of the officer positions since two of the returning officers, Carlile and Rey, have been reelected and are the most senior members. (And, they, along with Ashley Hill, are experienced board members who were around during the entirety of the 2019 bond build out, so they have the skills to avoid the mistakes made during that bond package.) Redemption of bonds, item 9. This cryptic item is where the rubber hits the road for the early payoff of the 2019 bonds. If you are concerned about the District carrying too much bond debt, speaking up in open forum in this meeting is where you might exert influence as a taxpayer to make sure those are paid down as early as legally allowed. (I would be doing so under ordinary circumstances.) The decision to pay bonds off early is made by the Board, upon recommendation of the Supt. with the guidance of the CFO. I made this point publicly at least twice leading up to the bond vote so that voters understood that this was a matter specifically controlled by board members. The District has a good record of paying things down, so I expect the same with this vote. But, the District now is functioning with rolling bond debt for 2019 and 2024 bond elections, so the stakes are much higher. I intend to keep this issue on the front burner so as to avoid this train wreck under former Supt. DeSpain and previous board leadership. As an aside, Supt. Moore has already had to defend the bond financing on Facebook because a citizen has noted that Tom Thorp's Transport is going out of business in 2024. All manner of unexpected scenarios can alter financing projections, from major industrial businesses like Thorps closing shop to the oil and gas market collapsing or going into the negative. Then, after all the bond money is spent and the payoff begins, the District will have to manage the increased M&O expenses associated with the build out. (No one talked about, for example, the increased electric bills of the new 2019 new gym before that bond election.) So, the District is facing years and years of financial uncertainty, and CFO Robert Helms' projections are going to have to be spot on each and every time. Resignations, new hires, items 12a and 14. Absent from this agenda are the earlier references to “termination” and “nonrenewal” found in these agendas for matters never concluded because the meetings were canceled. As written on this agenda, the Board can vote to accept in open session what “resignation” (?) was discussed in closed session. If the vote is worded something to the effect that a board member “moves to accept the resignation as presented” by the superintendent, then theoretically the name is hidden from public. Theoretically. Again, a teacher/administrator’s name would clearly be public were it sought in an open records request, so failing to state it in the open meeting here only draws attention to the secretiveness. (Secretiveness in this situation begs the question, "What are they hiding?!") The same goes for the folks that are being hired. Those names would be similarly public in an open records request, and so the names of all individuals hired by the District should be stated in during the public part of the meeting. B. Meeting analysis. Officer Elections. Board incumbents all recited their oaths to uphold the Constitution, and the same officers were re-elected. (Carlile, Rey, Hill) For more on what it means for a board member to uphold the Constitution, see this post. Briefly, it includes that the District can’t take private property by stormwater runoff without first paying just compensation to that property owner. Vote totals - The Board is required by law to "canvass" election results, which essentially means here they are to approve the final totals by a vote. I have added the final numbers to this election page. The Board voted unanimously to approve those numbers. I estimate voter turnout for this election to be 26%. I am interested in vote totals and voter turnout of the bond election, especially, to help avoid the type of misinformation about election results used by former Supt. DeSpain. Quite often in response to any of my public criticisms of the 2019 bonds he would say words to the effect of, "The vast majority of our community approved those bonds", to attempt to make the point that I was in the minority and could be dismissed. (The 2019 bond package passed by a margin of 123 for and 42 against.) He would never specifically refer to the voter turnout in the election, which is of course a key part of the metric to evaluate how engaged the registered voters are in an issue or candidate. Indeed, I think as this site grows its legs with more voting data I'll be able to argue persuasively that a minority of people in the county are making the voting decisions... Paying down the 2019 bonds early: The Board approved a 10 year pay down totaling $4,035,000. Added to that will be the bond payment due in August of $1.1 million. Member Chad Koonce said, "I like it", and indeed there is good reason for the entire community to be relieved at the Board's conservative fiscal approach on this issue. Member Rey made the motion to approve, I missed who made the second, and the motion to pay early on the bonds was approved. This is a bit like paying off your credit cards each month, folks. It's different in that securities laws prevent them from paying off everything at one time, but it has the same effect of being cheaper and safer in the long run. I commend the Board for this vote. For reasons discussed in 6c below, there is no reason to assume the District can continue to spend its M&O revenue at its current pace. Restructuring: In the background, the District has eliminated a principal position and Dr. Jessica Parker will serve as K-12 Principal. John Morrow will serve as an assistant principal and athletic director. This restructuring is in response to Principal Chapman moving to greener pastures. Terminations: The dreaded “as presented” was used in the post closed session motion at item 14, so all terminations remain in the dark. More on this in the future. I am dismayed by the opaqueness of the Board when it returns to open session and makes a motion using "as presented" after a lengthy closed session. There's no reason for using double speak, and it unnecessarily raises the issue of whether board members are being loyal to the agenda in closed session, as required by the Texas Open Meetings Act. Budget, CFO Helms' Report, item 8 a: A. Mr. Helms reported that tax revenue estimates are in and they are lower than last years. He attributed most of the $179 million devaluation on each the M&O and I&S side due to the Texas Scottish Rite no longer having to pay ad valorem taxes on its mineral income. HB 456, passed by the Texas Legislature in 2023 and effective January 1, 2024 created a new exemption for mineral owned by nonprofits, and Scottish Rite is a significant mineral owner in the county. This is an example of how school finance projections can go asunder in the blink of an eye and without any meaningful involvement by ICISD. This is a "substantial hit to the tax base", according to Helms. The District will miss out on $513,000 in M&O revenue and $100,000 in I&S revenue. However, he pointed out that 70% of M&O revenue is going back to the State so that loss is not as large as it first appears. That is, the District will have roughly $150,000 less in revenue because of it. (ICISD is a property wealthy district.) Of course, another way to look at that is that the school finance formulas are wrongheaded to begin with and that ALL of the revenue from Irion County minerals should stay in Irion County and NONE of it should go to the State. If you are an ICISD parent not engaged in monitoring and trying to understand how school finance is impacting your child's education at ICISD you are asleep at the wheel. The ICISD board bears the burden for permissively creating an apathetic community who is not engaged in school finance issues. I will be doing an open records request for Helms' report after the close of the school year to better suss out these numbers. One thing the District could do to engage the community on finance matters is to publish this sort of data on its website and point out where the money is going. b. Healthcare consultant: Helm's pointed out that the District has hired Neil Seltz Consulting to help broker its insurance benefits. This is the District digging out of the hole created by blindly choosing the TRS Care alternative under former Supt. DeSpain last year. That caused the District to become self insured to the tune of $120,000 as I discussed here at Meeting Analysis # 6. It appears the District has learned from that mistake. c. Preliminary budget numbers. The budget is currently at a deficit of $262,000 and will be at a deficit of $434,000 for the upcoming 2024-25 budget cycle. "If we could get our employment numbers down we could knock a lot of that deficit out." Helms said. The District is currently at 70 full time employees and 3 part time employees. There was some excellent board initiated discussion about staffing levels during this part of the meeting. I would anticipate based on that discussion that there will be staffing cuts for the 24-25 year. Now, put this in context. Statewide, school districts are experiencing significant budget deficits. Here is a Google search prompt to research this trend. Some, not all, of the statewide deficit is intentional by Governor Greg Abbott as part of his failure to fund teacher pay raises since he did not get his sought after amendments allowing school vouchers. I think the District and community should assume that his hostility toward public schools will continue with a vengeance in the 2025 legislative session starting in only 8 months. (I am amazed at the Governor's apparent continued support in rural Texas when his supporters on this voucher movement are uncovered, but such matters are not really suited for this website. I go to these lengths to make the larger point that rural Texas does not have a friend in Gov. Abbott when it comes to public education. See the update at 8 below.) Administrative Reports, items 8 a-d: As part of my "how to read an agenda" tag, I've previously mentioned one starting point is to compare the current agenda with previous agendas, see what the "stock" (standard) language is for each, then monitor each month for when the "stock" language is changed and what unique language is added each month. For this month, it is time to recognize that the apparent new stock agenda omits the Superintendent's Report as sub part of the Administrative Report. This is something I've been monitoring for several months now, and I see it as a regrettable development in these meetings. I suspect the internal position is that Supt. Moore provides the board members an administrative report each week via email and/or before the meeting, so no report from her is necessary at a board meeting. The problem for this is that it entirely removes the office of the superintendent from all public accountability and review. In my own children's public education, that school district was so sensitive about public engagement with the superintendent that, not only did the superintendent give a report at each meeting, but the superintendent also gave an annual "State of the District" report at each campus. The reports included performance data slides via Power Point and financial info, and parents and the community were invited to attend to interact with the superintendent to ask questions and engage with the district. The problem I see in removing the superintendent's report from the monthly meeting agenda is that it allows the Board and Superintendent Moore to enter an echo chamber where the only input they are getting is feedback from one another. Eventually they will be able isolated enough to believe their own PR, without any recognition that they are a publicly funded institution with high expectations placed upon them. Add that dynamic to the apparent comfort with which this board has in operating without public attendance at their board meetings and you potentially have 1) a recipe for mediocrity in education...and, 2) graft and corruption when spending down the $55 million in 2024 bond funds entrusted to them. Otherwise, both principals, Chapman and Parker, were absent from this meeting, so their reports (really, updates) were handled by Supt. Moore. Also missing is the Athletics report, which perhaps is an intentional omission because Jacob Conner technically still holds the Athletics Director contract for another month. I hope when John Morrow officially takes the job there will be some meat to this report. I have covered CFO Helm's report above at 6. School Vouchers May 29 2024 Update. According to this Texas Tribune article, yesterday’s primary runoffs resulted in even more anti-voucher incumbents losing to Gov. Abbott backed pro-voucher candidates. The upshot is that there will likely be enough votes in the Texas House to support vouchers when the legislature meets in January 2025. Copyright 2024 G Noelke

This page also includes School Board election results here. There were 314 total votes cast, and of those 187 voters were early and 127 were on election day. Using the latest figure available from the Texas Secretary of State, in March 2024 Irion County had 1,221 registered voters, then the turnout for the May 2024 election I estimate at 26%. (The 2020 census showed Irion County with a population of 1,513. The county has 1,051.5 square miles, as compared to 1,214 square miles in Rhode Island. The number of school children registered at Irion County ISD K-12 is typically 300 to 325 students, making it a wealthy 1-A school district in Texas under the current state educational funding finance system.) The 2019 bonds ($18 million) were passed by a margin of 123 for and 42 against. Official results, canvassed by the ICISD Board on May 13, 2024 for the 2024 bonds: Prop A (Construction - $53 million) For: 192 (63%) Against: 111 Prop B (Technology - $1 million) For: 201 (67%) Against: 96 Prop C (Teacher Housing - $1 million) For: 205 (68%) Against: 96 School Board: Maegin Carlile 289 (24.9%) DJ Rainey 234 (20.1%) Chad Koonce 233 (20%) Ricky Rey 214 (18.4%) Ashton Braddock 191 (16.6%) *The top 4 are incumbents and return to the Board. Mr. Braddock was the challenger and will not serve. On May 13, 2024, the full board re-elected the previous officers, Maegin Carlile as President, Ricky Rey as VP, and Ashley Hill as Secretary. Copyright 2024 G Noelke

A. Agenda and Meeting Analysis Time limitations and completing my post on the school board meeting last week prevented me from posting a meeting analysis prior to this meeting. I am combining them below. Here are the meeting documents for this meeting, which include the approved meeting minutes for the previous meetings on April 15 and May 6 meetings. 1. Lawyer present, agenda item 5. At the last meeting during discussion of the temporary closure of W. Fleming Ave., Councilmember Holland requested at the next meeting the City invite its lawyer, Jeff Betty, to attend this meeting to answer questions. Mr. Betty has been the City's lawyer since at least 2019 when I began speaking out against the closure of 4th Street for the City Gym. 2. Public comment, agenda item 4. The Ibarra's, Santiago and Sandra (who own the property relating to agenda item 12) and I (who own the property relating to agenda item 8) were the only members of the public present. None of us spoke during public comment. ICISD did not have a representative present at this meeting or at the previous Council meeting. (Both agenda items, 8 and 12, involve properties adjacent to ICISD.) 3. Executive session, agenda item 6. Council member Holland requested the City enter executive session, and the Council met with Mr. Betty for almost an hour. 4. Fleming Ave. repairs, agenda item 8. Upon returning from executive session, Mr. Betty left the meeting and Mayor Stewart first addressed the purchase of stop signs at item 7, then entertained a motion on item 8 on the repair of W. Fleming Ave. The brief discussion leading up to the motion made it transparent that the City had received the advice of Mr. Betty to temporary close the street and place traditional street closure barricades at each end at 3rd street and 4th street. Councilman Councilman, who was not present at the last meeting (and who is an employee of the Texas Department of Transportation), made a motion to temporarily close W. Fleming Ave. between 3rd and 4th "until proper repair can be made". Councilman Elliot, who had made a similar motion at the last meeting, seconded. There was no further discussion and the Council, including Holland, Crutchfield and Lindley (who all voted against closure at the last meeting), unanimously voted in favor of the motion. Below is some of my additional analysis of this street closure, including two of my photographs back in 2020: a. Governmental immunity - there are exceptions. Of course, I was not privy to the discussions in executive session with Mr. Betty. But, I have an inkling. I've done a word search for "tort" as in the Texas Tort Claims Act (and see here for local government immunity) in my bank of 5 years worth of public comments made to ICISD and the City Council. Sure enough, I recalled correctly that back in September 2020 I warned both the District and the City Council about the potential for liability under the Texas Tort Claims Act for flooding on W. Fleming from the 2019 bond build out. At the time of my warning, the cafeteria was still under construction and the gym had not yet been built. Indeed, I went so far back then to print out on foam board two of my relevant photos as exhibits to make my point as clear as possible. Here those photos are in 2024: Photo 1 Photo 2 Here is what the cleanup looked like in December 2023. b. Why the 2024 bond build out should (hopefully) be different. Flooding streets with stormwater runoff not only implicates Takings clause violations, it also implicates exposure under the Texas Tort Claims Act. There are other laws, like the Equal Protection clause and of course civil rights laws in US Code section 1983, that protect citizens. Perhaps the ICISD Board is currently recognizing that it needs the cooperation of the City of Mertzon, who regulates the streets, to successfully expend the 2024 bond money without violating these and other laws. c. Who is still here. Today in 2024 there remain only a handful of elected officials present who were involved with those 2019 bonds that, once spent, by design dumped water into city streets. On the ICISD side, Maegin Carlile, Ricky Rey and Ashley Hill were present, though in different capacities. On the City side, Council members Crutchfield, Holland and Lindley were all present. Each of these folks, especially, need to be cognizant that doing what they did in 2019 to solve the stormwater runoff from the ICISD campus - which was nothing - may well lead to increased exposure for them in 2024 under Texas tort laws. Governmental immunity is never a sure bet when children and flooded streets are involved, especially when the risks of danger have been known and documented for years. Eight years to be exact. d. All roads lead to free speech as the best remedy. It was also back in 2020 that former Supt. Ray DeSpain called me out of order during my public comments to the ICISD board. He took offense to my saying that his legacy as superintendent would be that all future superintendents would have to drive through flood waters from the 2019 bond build out in order to reach the superintendent's office. This May 20 2024 formal vote temporarily closing W. Fleming underscores the truth of my statement back then, as W. Fleming is, or now was, a flooded route to the superintendent's office. Citizens should not be shut up or shut out, especially when they speak the truth. Thankfully, our Founders understood the significance of the right of free speech. e. The onus is back where it should be. Councilman's motion, properly worded, was that the street should be closed "until proper repair can be made". I contend elsewhere on this blog that former Mayor Taylor had both his arms broken by ICISD in a political firestorm, initiated by ICISD board member Ashley Hill, to close 4th street for the new gym. That gym is now the leading contributor to the flooding on W. Fleming Ave. Thus, the onus is back on the school to pony up some of those 2024 bonds, as promised before the election, to correct this flooding. The City Council's initial position back in 2019 was to NOT give the street over to ICISD for the new gym (the very first motion on the issue never received a second, and so failed under Roberts Rules of Order). So, now that the 2024 bonds are soon to be sold the City of Mertzon should not bear a single penny in costs for any repair of W. Fleming Ave. f. And one final thing, where's that sewer line? All involved need to remember that a City sewer line that services ICISD goes under W. Fleming Ave. and enters my property. I therefore own that sewer line for almost the entirety of a city block because the City does not have an easement for it to cross my property. In other words, there's reason for all stakeholders to continue to cooperate should the City or ICISD ever wish for the City to one day receive an easement for that line. 5. Third and Fayette shoulder barrier, item 12. The Council is going to attempt to reach an agreement with the Ibarra's to allow them to use landscaping rocks to keep that portion of the shoulder closed, with the condition that the Ibarra's accept the liability. That's a big liability given there are so many teenage drivers around... But, eventually drivers will figure it out. 6. Pro Forma Discussion. There was a bit of side bar discussion on last meeting's decision for the City to go "pro forma" with its speeding laws so that Sheriff Estes could begin enforcing the state speed limit inside the City of Mertzon. I feel confident that the matter was discussed in their closed session, but of course am not privy to that. Regardless, no action was taken in this meeting to change this decision. Citizen's should begin to see the City's PR statements on this to educate them on the new approach. Hopefully, there will be some PR statements coming from Sheriff Estes' office so that citizens know what his take is on what the new speed limit will be. I have heard both 30 and 35, so this might be a point for the City and the Sheriff to consider being consistent on. 7. Council member leaving. Council member Micah Elliott submitted his resignation and will serve his last meeting in early June. He will be missed for one who independently stood up for things he believed in. You might recall last meeting he was the one who made the motion to close W. Fleming for the safety of our citizens, and that motion failed. He was vindicated in this meeting, however, and his noncelebratory demeanor during this meeting indicates the exemplary nature of his character. He has been serving the public. 8. Pending Copyright 2024 G Noelke

The latest meeting below for Saturday May 11 at 9:00 has been canceled. Perhaps the page below will still be helpful for you as one of my posts on how to read an agenda. Also, I am working on getting the agenda for a meeting scheduled for Monday, May 13 at 6:00 pm, and I intend to post that one before meeting time. Stay tuned for that in a separate post. There’s a special board meeting on SATURDAY morning May 11 at 9:00 am. Below are two agendas. The first one is for May 10. After posting that agenda, I was notified by Superintendent Moore that a new agenda has been posted for May 11. One reason I publish agendas is to educate folks about their importance and how to read them. Drafting them is an art form and quite challenging. Once a lawyer gets involved in drafting, well, good luck trying to figure out what is going on. On the other hand, there are reasons for lawyer involvement, such as here where it appears a contract employee is getting fired. Here is the original agenda. (Do not attempt to go to this meeting; it is on an incorrect date.) I actually prefer the agenda above because at item 3 it indicates that there will be some discussion in open session regarding staff terminations. Sunlight on government employee termination is a good thing. But, there are some legal pitfalls. For example, if a board member accidentally blurts out in public session that an employee is being fired for an illegal reason (ie, she is pregnant), then a lawsuit might follow. This agenda is appropriate because it covers both an open and closed session. But, a second agenda has been put out. You can go to this meeting because it is on the correct day and time. Notice that “termination“ has been deleted and the open discussion has been removed. Now, I don’t have enough information to determine whether this is sufficient notice under the Texas Open Meetings Act. It is not my purpose here to throw darts at an agenda. But, the second agenda indicates to me there has been some Eichelbaum Wardell wordsmithing going on, because “termination“ clearly has a different meaning than “non-renewal”. There is a case out there relating to a teacher challenging whether they received adequate notice of termination by the school board, so these waters run deep indeed. What is clear is that personnel mattters can be addressed in a closed session, and in certain circumstances the subject of that closed session can ask that it be addressed in open. (551.074) Also clear is that any final action will have to be done in open, as is done here at item 5. The final issue is whether this board will even announce the name(s) of the individual(s) at item 5. Such information would obviously be public were it requested under the Public Information Act, so there is no reason to withhold it in an open meeting. (I will be requesting the names and more if it is not made public during the meeting.) I hope the District will be in the sunshine on this point. A. Meeting Analysis: meeting canceled. Copyright 2024 G Noelke