>> MICROPHONE IS NOT ON. GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. [Call Meeting To Order] [00:00:02] THANK YOU FOR COMING IN AT CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT. WE'RE GOING TO CALL OUR MEETING TO ORDER ON THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 AT 09:00 AM. DO NOT SEE COMMISSIONER ROLLING HERE, SO I'LL DO THE INVOCATION. FATHER, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING US ALL TOGETHER TODAY. WE THANK YOU FOR ALL THE BLESSINGS THAT ARE ALIVE. WE HOPE THAT WHAT WE DO HERE WILL BE PLEASING IN YOUR SIGHT, AND THAT YOU'LL LEAD US TO MAKE ALL THE RIGHT DECISIONS FOR THE CITIZENS OF CALDWELL COUNTY. FATHER, WATCH OVER US AS WE GO AND GO THROUGH THE WEEK AND PROTECT THIS AS WE GO FORWARD. WE PRAY ALL THESE THINGS IN CHRIST'S NAME AMEN. >> >> DO WE HAVE [Announcements] ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS THIS MORNING COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF? >> NO FROM ME JUDGE. >> THANK YOU. >> I JUST WANT TO SAY I ATTENDED THE LEARNING LIVESTOCK SHOW AND GLAD TO SEE ALL OF THE SUPPORT THAT WAS GIVEN TO THOSE YOUNG KIDS OUT THERE WORKING HARD AT WHAT THEY WERE DOING. IT WAS REALLY EXCITING AND I THINK THEY WERE ALL VERY PLEASED. >> COMMISSIONER ONTARIO. >> I TOO ATTENDED THE LIVESTOCK SHOW. THE KIDS REALLY HAD SOME GOOD PROJECTS THIS YEAR AND THE PRICES STAYED HIGH, SO THEY WERE ALL ABLE TO BENEFIT AND WANTED TO THANK ALL THE BUYERS GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS THAT PURCHASE THOSE PROJECTS. THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO THOSE KIDS, AND I FEEL LIKE THOSE KIDS ARE OUR FUTURE SO IT'S GREAT THAT WE CAN ALL GET OUT AND SUPPORT THEM. >> WE HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM STAFF? >> NO. >> CITIZENS COMMENTS? >> NO CITIZENS COMMENTS. [CONSENT AGENDA ] >> WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON CONSENT? IF NOT, I'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> PAUSE HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 8, DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING THE BURN BAN. [8. Discussion/Action regarding the burn ban] I THINK HECTOR MAY STILL BE OUT SICK AND I THINK HANK IS AT THE THE TESTING DEAL THAT WE'RE DOING. WE PUT THE EMERGENCY BURN BAN ON DUE TO THE HIGH WINDS THAT CAME LAST WEEK AND HE ASKED THAT WE LEAVE IT ON. HE SAID, WE HAVE A LOT OF DRY GRASS IN THE COUNTY AFTER THESE FREEZES AND THERE'S A HUGE LOAD, AND HE WOULD LIKE TO WAIT, WE'RE GOING TO GET VERY MINIMUM AMOUNT OF RAIN TODAY AND THEN NOT MUCH GOING FORWARD SO HE REQUESTED THAT WE LEAVE THE BURN BAN ON. SINCE WE DON'T HAVE JOE HERE TODAY, [LAUGHTER]. >> I'LL GOING TO MAKE A MOTION WE LEAVE THE BURN BAN ON. >> WE HAVE A MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> PAUSED HEARING THEN, MOTION CARRIES. [9. Discussion/Action to consider the Luling Foundation Board Member Nominations. Speaker: ] ITEM 9, DISCUSSION AND ACTION TO CONSIDER LEAVING FOUNDATION BOARD MEMBERS, WAYNE DO YOU WANT TO COME UP? >> GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS AND JUDGE, AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES ON RULING FOUNDATION BOARD FROM THE THREE SURROUNDING COUNTIES, [INAUDIBLE] GONZALES, AND GUADALUPE COUNTY. BILLY RAY BUCKNER'S POSITION FOR THE CALDWELL COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE HAS ENDED. HE WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK ON THE BOARD. WE ALSO HAVE ANOTHER NOMINEE, BRIAN NIELSEN AS WELL, WHO'S ONE OF OUR YOUNGER GUYS WHO'S BEEN INTERESTED IN GETTING ON AS WELL, BILLY RAY BUCKNER HAS SAID THOUGH THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK ON. BUT AS ALWAYS, WE TRUST YOU ALL'S DECISION. >> OKAY. >> DO YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? >> COMMISSIONERS, I DON'T KNOW THE OTHER DOMINANT I'M CERTAINLY HE'S VERY WELL-QUALIFIED. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT BILLY RAY BUCKNER HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB ON THAT BOARD. I THINK HE WOULD CONTINUE TO DO AN EXCELLENT JOB ON THAT BOARD SO JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BILLY RAY BUCKNER OR WHAT WAS THE OTHER GENTLEMAN'S NAME I'M SORRY? >> BRIAN NIELSEN. >> THANK YOU. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE KEEP MR. BUCKNER. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BILLY RAY BUCKNER FOR THE LOOTING FOUNDATION BOARD MEMBER NOMINATION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. [00:05:01] >> POSE HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU. >> ITEM 10 DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER [10. Discussion/Action to consider Budget Amendment #23 to transer money from (001-6000-0950) Insurance Proceeds to (001-4300-5310) Machinery & Equipment to receive revenues for Sheriff County Vehicle and allocate expenditures. Speaker:] 23 TO TRANSFER MONEY FROM 00160000950, INSURANCE PROCEEDS, TO 00143005310, MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT TO RECEIVE REVENUES FOR SHERIFF COUNTY VEHICLE AND ALLOCATED EXPENDITURES AND THIS IS AN INSURANCE SETTLEMENT ON A REGULAR VEHICLE. IT IS GOING TO BE IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,707. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT 10? >> IT'S A MOVE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> POSE HEARING THEN MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 11, DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER 24 TO TRANSFER MONEY FROM [11. Discussion/Action to consider Budget Amendment #24 to transer money from (001-6000-0950) Insurance Proceeds to (002-1101-5310) Machinery & Equipment to receive revenues for County Unit Road Vehicle and allocate expenditures. Speaker:] 00160000950 INSURANCE PROCEEDS TO 00211015310 MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT TO RECEIVE REVENUES FOR COUNTING UNIT ROAD, VEHICLE AND ALLOCATED EXPENDITURES. THIS ONE IS SAME THING. THE UNIT RHODES WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT. WE RECEIVED $3,900 IN INSURANCE PROCEEDS AND WE NEED TO MOVE THAT TO MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT IN ORDER TO TAKE CARE OF THAT MOTION TO APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT 24. >> I'LL ALSO MOVE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> POSE HEARING AND MOTION CARRIES. [12. Discussion/Action to consider Budget Amendment #25 to transer money from (019-1000-5169) Broadband to (019-1000-5171) Lost Revenue to reallocate the ARP Broadband for toughbooks in lost revenue. Speaker: ] ITEM 12, DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER BUDGET AMENDMENT 25 TO TRANSFER MONEY FROM 01910005169, BROADBAND TO 01910005171, LOSS REVENUE TO ALLOCATE THE ARP BROADBAND FOR TEXTBOOKS AND LOST REVENUE. DENNIS. >> THANK JUDGE, COMMISSIONER. I WANT TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY WITH THIS PARTICULAR ITEM TO BRING AN UPDATE TO THE COMMERCIAL COURT ABOUT THE ONGOING EVOLUTION, IF YOU WILL, OF THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN. YOU MAY RECALL WHEN WE GOT OUR INITIAL ALLOCATION OF $4.2 MILLION, DECISIONS WERE MADE ABOUT HOW TO ALLOCATE THAT MONEY. YOU MAY RECALL, WE DECIDED TO GET SOME FUNDS TO HELP VETERANS SERVICES, SOME FUNDS TO HELP SUPPORT THE CALDWELL COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES FOUNDATION, MAXIMUM WATER SPLAT CORPORATION, BROADBAND, AND SOME OTHER TECHNOLOGY TYPES OF THINGS. WHEN WE FILLED OUT THAT INITIAL ALLOCATION OF THOSE FUNDS, EVERY ACTIVITY THAT WE WANTED TO FUND HAD TO FALL WITHIN ONE OF 62 CATEGORIES THAT HAD BEEN ESTABLISHED BY THE US TREASURY DEPARTMENT. THE US TREASURY DEPARTMENT CAME OUT WITH ITS FINAL RULE ABOUT AT ALMOST BEEN A MONTH AGO NOW, AND THEY HAVE EASED SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS ON THE ALLOCATION AND THE USE OF THOSE FUNDS AND TO THE BETTERMENT I THINK FOR CALDWELL COUNTY, WE WERE ELIGIBLE UP TO $10 MILLION. EVERY ENTITY THAT WAS ALLOCATED MONEY THROUGH THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN, YOU RECEIVED UP TO $10 MILLION ON TOTAL ALLOCATION WAS 8.4 AND WE ONLY HAVE 4.2 OF IT NOW. BUT ALL ENTITIES WERE GRANTED A $10 MILLION ALLOCATION FOR LOST REVENUE, INSTEAD OF US HAVING TO ASSIGN ALL OF THOSE ACTIVITIES TO ONE OF THOSE OTHER 62 CATEGORIES, EVERYTHING NOW FALLS UNDER THE LOST REVENUE CATEGORY, WHICH EASES OUR DOCUMENTATION AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF REPORTING THOSE ALLOCATIONS. WE'RE USING THIS PARTICULAR ITEM NUMBER 12 TO REPORT AN EXPENSE ITEM OF $39,842 FOR DOCKING STATIONS, FOR THE TUFF BOOK NOTEBOOKS AT WHAT WE'RE BEING BOUGHT THROUGH THIS MONEY, AND AS THE LANGUAGE REPORTS IN HERE, IT'S NOW FALLING UNDER THE LOST REVENUE CATEGORY WITHIN THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ALLOCATION OF MONEY. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY WHY THAT NOW HAS EASED OUR ABILITY TO ASSIGN PRACTICALLY EVENTUALLY ALL OF OUR $8.4 MILLION ALL FALL ON THE WALLS WHEREVER YOU'VE CATEGORY. WE DON'T HAVE TO GO FIND A SPECIFIC ONE OF 62 CATEGORIES NOW TO ALLOCATE THAT MONEY. THIS IS OUR FIRST USE OF THEM AND THAT NEW RULE TAKES EFFECT APRIL 1. BUT THEY SAID IF YOU HAVE AN EXPENSE ITEM THAT YOU'RE WANTING TO PAY FOR THAT IS AN ELIGIBLE EXPENSE WHICH LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES ARE, [00:10:01] YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND APPLY THE LOST REVENUE CATEGORY TO THAT ACTIVITY, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BRINGING TO YOU TODAY IS THE USE OF $39,842 IN LOST REVENUE CATEGORY, TAKING IT OUT OF THE ORIGINAL BROADBAND CATEGORY TO PAY FOR THE TUFF BOOK DOCKING STATIONS. >> COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I'D LET FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE [NOISE] A BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER 25. >> I'LL MOVE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> POSE HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES. [13. Discussion/Action to consider the approval requisition REQ01472 in the amount of $176,649.68 for professional services to be rendered by Doucet & Associates, Inc. for R1911-004: Caldwell County Evacuation Shelter. Speaker: ] ITEM 13, DISCUSSION AND ACTION TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL, A REQUISITION 01472, AND THE AMOUNT OF $176,649.68 FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO BE RENDERED BY DESCENT AND ASSOCIATES FOR R1911-004 CALDWELL COUNTY EVACUATION SHELTER, DENNIS. >> THANK YOU. >> MAY I SEE [INAUDIBLE] IN YOURSELF ON THIS ONE? >> OKAY. >> THIS IS A SEEKING APPROVAL FOR REQUISITION DEALING WITH AN EXPENSE ITEM WITH DAWSON AND ASSOCIATES ARE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS THAT WE'RE UTILIZING ON OUR EVACUATION SHELTER PROJECT. WORK HAS ALREADY UNDERWAY WITH ENGINEERING SITING CONSTRUCTION. DECISIONS ARE FACTORS IN A MEETING THIS AFTERNOON OF THE EVACUATION SHELTER MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE TO CONTINUE WORKING ON DESIGNS PROJECT MANAGEMENT OF THAT FACILITY. BUT SOME OF THIS WORK HAS BEEN ONGOING AND DOLL SAID HE HAS SUBMITTED AN INVOICE FOR A PORTION OF ITS ENGINEERING FEES RELATED TO THE EVACUATION CHILDREN. I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN THAT THAT'S WHAT THIS REQUISITION IS ABOUT, IS WE'RE ENGINEERING SERVICES RENDERED ON BEHALF OF THE EVACUATION CHILDREN. >> OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS? >> DO WE HAVE ANY KIND OF LAID OUT THAT COULD BE PRESENTED OR SHOWN TO THE COURT AND TO THE PUBLIC AS TO WHAT THE EVACUATION CENTERS GOING TO LOOK LIKE? >> YES. >> THAT IS A MOVING TARGET. YES, THERE WILL BE. WE HAVE A RENDERING WHICH WE HAD TO SUBMIT TO THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE INITIALLY. WE HAVE ONE SCHEMATIC THAT COULD BE MADE PUBLIC. THE QUESTIONS ARE GOING ON RIGHT NOW, IS THE FINAL DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE ABOUT WHAT ARE OTHER THE ENTITIES AND THE AMENITIES DO WE WANT WITHIN THIS EVACUATION SHELTER BEFORE WE COME UP WITH A FINAL DESIGN AND SO FORTH. WE HAVE A CONCEPT RIGHT NOW THAT COULD BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT. >> YEAH. IT ACTUALLY WAS FOR US. WHEN WE APPROVED THE GRANT THAT WAS IN THAT PACKET, THAT CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF IT, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY AVAILABLE FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SEE IT. >> THE FACILITY ITSELF HAS A TOTAL OF ABOUT 41,000 SQUARE FEET, THAT'S THE COMMON AREA AS WELL IN ABOUT 20,000 OF ACTUAL USABLE SPACES USING FOR EVACUATION PURPOSES OR COMMUNITY EVENT PURPOSES. BUT YEAH, WE DO HAVE A SCHEMATIC THAT WE CAN SHOW AND MAKE THEM AVAILABLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. BUT THE FINAL DECISIONS OR WHAT IT TOOK TO LOOK LIKE ARE STILL BEING DECIDED. >> GENERALLY SPEAKING, JUST SOME OF THE STEP THAT'S REQUIRED AS FAR AS THE EVACUATION SHELTER PORTION OF THE SHOW, WHICH IS WHAT GLOS INTERESTED IN. WE HAVE TO HAVE A WARMING KITCHEN. >> YES. >> WE HAVE TO HAVE RESTROOM FACILITY BIG ENOUGH SO THAT THE EVACUEES CAN GO AND SHOWER AND WE HAVE TO HAVE A STORAGE AREA, WE HAVE TO HAVE OFFICE FOR ANY STAFF THAT MIGHT RESIDE THERE. >> COULD KITCHEN FACILITIES? >>YEAH. I THINK THAT'S ABOUT IT. THEN, OF COURSE, THE OPEN SPACE, AND I THINK IT'S 300 AND SOME ODD SQUARE FEET. WHAT IS IT? NO. [OVERLAPPING]. >> [INAUDIBLE] CENARIO, THE FACILITY COULD HOLD 350 EVACUATED, SO THAT'S AN SIXTH SQUARE FEET PER PERSON. IT WILL BE SO DESIGN THAT THE BUILDING CAN BE DIVIDED INTO THREE SEPARATE MEETING ROOMS, YOU COULD HAVE THREE SEPARATE FUNCTION, OR YOU COULD OPEN IT UP AND IT WOULD HOLD APPROXIMATELY 1400 PEOPLE. >> I JUST LIKE TO SAY A LITTLE MORE OF THAT OUT THERE FOR THE PUBLIC TO START TO SEE. >> SURE, ABSOLUTELY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? IF NOT, I'D LOOK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE REQUISITIONS 01417. >> AWESOME. >> HAVE A MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> OPPOSED HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES. >> THANK YOU. >> COULD YOU TELL COMMISSIONER TEREO WE'RE DONE DOING THIS. [14. Discussion - Discussion only to consider a presentation from the owners of K&L Ranch Road, Knight Lane, and Lewis Lane, requesting the Court to designate these easements as a Private Gravel Road ursuant to the Caldwell County Development Ordinance. Speaker: ] OKAY. ITEM 14; DISCUSSION TO CONSIDER A PRESENTATION FROM THE OWNER OF KENO RANCH ROAD, [00:15:06] NIGHT LANE AND LOUIS LANE, REQUESTING THE COURT TO DESIGNATE THESE EASEMENTS AS A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD, PRESENTED AT COWELL COUNTY DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. AND I THINK MR. HOGAN IS HERE TO DO THAT PRESENTATION. >> THANK YOU, JUDGE. OKAY. >> EXCUSE ME, MR. HOGAN, IS YOUR SPEAKER ON? YOU'VE GOT THE GREEN LIGHT THERE? >> HELLO, CAN YOU HERE ME NOW? >> [LAUGHTER] SORRY ABOUT THAT. >> PUT A LITTLE BODY ENGLISH ON IT HERE. ALL RIGHT. WELL, GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION TO THIS VERY IMPORTANT MATTER, WHICH REALLY IMPACTS MORE THAN JUST K AND L RANCH ROAD. I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK ALSO AS TO HOW WE EXECUTE OUR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL PROCESS IN ORDER TO ENSURE SAFE ROADWAYS IN RURAL PARTS OF CALDWELL COUNTY. MY NAME IS BARRY HOGAN. I'M HERE WITH OTHERS TO REPRESENT K AND L RANCHES. TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, MY WIFE AND I ARE THE LARGEST PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN K AND L RANCHES. I'VE WITNESSED THE EVOLUTION OF K AND L RANCHES FOR 50 YEARS. BOY, I TELL YOU WHAT IT'S CHANGED THE WHOLE COUNTY. OLIVE RURAL CALDWELL COUNTY IS CHANGING. I'M RETIRED, BUT IN MY CAREER, I WAS THE FOUNDER AND CEO OF [INAUDIBLE]. IT WAS THE LARGEST WRECK OR PERMANENT HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT FACILITY IN THE UNITED STATES FOR THE TREATMENT OF PETROLEUM REFINERY HAZARDOUS WASTE. WE ALSO PROVIDED FIELD SERVICES INSIDE PATROL AND REFINERIES. I COULD GO ON AND ON AND ON, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS, I OPERATED UNDER A NUMBER OF GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS SUCH AS THE DEVELOPMENT GUIDANCE DOCUMENT HERE. I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH HOW THEY CAN BE EXECUTED. I'VE TAKEN THE TIME TO READ AND UNDERSTAND YOUR CALDWELL COUNTY DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. I REQUESTED THE FOYER ON A RECENT SUBDIVISION PROCESS REQUEST FOR APPROVAL WITHIN K AND L RANCHES, AND I'VE REVIEWED THAT PROCESS TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THE ORDINANCE. THE ORDINANCE IS TO ENSURE THE DEVELOPMENT AND UNINCORPORATED AREAS IS EXECUTED IN A SAFE AND ORDERLY MANNER IN ACCORDANCE WITH SOUND PLANNING AND ENGINEERING PRACTICES ESPECIALLY RELATED TO ROADWAYS AND DRAINAGE. I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT THIS BOOK IS ABOUT. I MEAN, THERE'S A NUMBER OF OTHER CHECK YOUR BOX. BUT IT'S REALLY ABOUT KEEPING THE COUNTY SAFE, RELATIVE TO TRAFFIC VOLUME INCREASES ON ROADWAYS DUE TO SUBDIVISIONS. THE PROCESS FAILED IN THIS CASE. IF WE LOOK UP HERE AT THE SCREEN, I HAVE A COUPLE OF PICTURES ON THE TOP. WE HAVE 4.5 MILES OF EASEMENT INSIDE, WHAT IS THE BIGGEST SUBDIVISION IN CALDWELL COUNTY? IF YOU LOOK TO THE LEFT, THAT'S OUR MAIN ARTERY, K AND L RANCH ROAD. WE WERE GOING TO PUT GRAVEL ON THAT ROAD LAST YEAR AND WE STARTED COLLECTING MONEY TO DO IT. BUT THEN THIS SUBDIVISION CAME UP AND WE SAID, WAIT A MINUTE, LET'S SAVE OUR FUNDS IF WE NEED A LEGAL TO PROTECT US, BECAUSE THIS ISN'T RIGHT. YOU CAN SEE THAT THAT SURFACE ON THAT ROAD, WHICH IS THE MAIN ARTERY, IT MEETS NONE, ZERO OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE LOWEST ROAD CLASSIFICATION IN THIS DOCUMENT, WHICH IS PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD. IF YOU LOOK TO THE RIGHT, THERE'S TWO PICTURES THERE THAT WERE GOING TO BE DRIVEWAYS PUT. SEVEN DRIVEWAYS WERE GOING TO BE PUT ON THE MAIN ROAD, AND SEVEN DRIVEWAYS WERE GOING TO BE PUT ON NIGHTLINE, WHICH ARE THE TWO SLIDES TO THE RIGHT. THAT ROADS ONE LINE. WHERE ARE WE GOING TO PUT POTENTIALLY 23 RESIDENTS ON A ROAD THAT DOESN'T HAVE A ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, THAT MAKES ZERO STANDARDS IN THE COUNTY ORDINANCE FOR SAFETY, IT'S ONE LANE. IT DOESN'T HAVE SHOULDERS. IT DOESN'T HAVE DITCHES. IT'S COMPLETELY INAPPROPRIATE. BUT YET, THIS WAS GOING TO BE FAST-TRACK THROUGH, HAD OUR COMMISSIONER NOT NOTICED IT, LET THE COMMUNITY KNOW, AND THEN WE GOT TO GO AND CONVINCE THE DEVELOPER THAT HE SHOULDN'T BE PUTTING THIS HERE, [00:20:06] AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO FIGHT THEM TO THE END OF THE WORLD. >> MR. HOGAN, CAN I ASK YOU ONE QUICK QUESTION JUST FOR MY CLARIFICATION. THE MIDDLE PICTURE IS K AND L? >> NO, THE MIDDLE PICTURE IS NIGHTLINE. >> OKAY. THEN THE RIGHT PICTURE IS K AND L. >> THEN ACTUALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE ON THE RIGHT, JUDGE, THAT'S FROM THE CORNER TO THE PICTURE THAT'S IN THE CENTER. THOSE TWO PICTURES TOGETHER, WE'RE WHERE THERE WAS GOING TO BE SEVEN DRIVEWAYS PUT. >> OKAY. >> IT'S ONE LINE. THERE'S NO SHOULDERS. THERE'S NO DITCHES. BY THE WAY, THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC ON NIGHTLINE ON A DAILY BASIS, WITH WORKDAYS BEING THE HIGHEST TRAFFIC VOLUME, WE HAVE FEDEX TRUCKS COMING IN, OUR PRIME TRUCKS AT ABOUT 60 PERCENT OF OUR TRAFFIC. NIGHTLINE GETS ABOUT FIVE TRIPS A DAY. K AND L RANCH ROAD, GETS ABOUT 20 TRIPS A DAY. THIS SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE ORDINANCE, IF WE READ THE ORDINANCE, WOULD'VE BEEN INCREASED THE TRAFFIC ON THOSE TWO ROADS BY 207 TRIPS PER DAY. I'M JUST READING THE ORDINANCE. THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW IT BETTER THAN I DO, BUT CALDWELL COUNTY IS IN THE PATH OF UNPARALLELED EXPANSION DUE TO THE EXPANSION OF AUSTIN AND SAN ANTONIO CORRIDOR. TRAVIS COUNTY LOST A QUARTER OF ITS OPEN SPACES IN 15 YEARS BETWEEN 1997-2012, AND THAT DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS GOING ON IN AUSTIN DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME IS COMING FOR CALDWELL COUNTY. WE NEED TO PREPARE FOR IT, AND WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO EXECUTE OUR ORDINANCE IN ORDER TO PROTECT CITIZENS IN THE RURAL COUNTY. THE PROCESS IS FAILING AND WE CAN SEE IT FROM THE SLIDES BEFORE. THE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT TEAM NEEDS SUFFICIENT RESOURCES. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH RESOURCES. I THINK YOU NEED AT LEAST ONE OTHER PERSON TO MEET THE INCREASING DEMAND, AND THE PRIORITY OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL MUST BE ABOUT SAFETY. THIS IS REALLY ACTUALLY A SAFETY GUIDANCE DOCUMENT. WE NEED TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE ENGINEERING STANDARDS AND NOT TREAT IT LIKE A LEGAL DOCUMENT WHERE WE'RE DEBATING WHAT IS MEANS. THE COUNTY IN TIMES OF ESSENCE, THIS SUBDIVISION HAD WE NOT FOUND IT OUT A BIT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN APPROVED. AS I DROVE HERE, AND I CAME DOWN FOUR MILES OF ROAD, SAND HILL ROAD, THE CONSTRUCTION OUT THERE IS, AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THESE ARE SUBDIVISIONS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ALL IT IS, BUT THE SUBDIVISION IS EXPONENTIALLY HIGHER THAN ANYTIME IN THE HISTORY OF THAT ROAD. TO GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND ON CANE OUT RANCHES, WE'RE A NON-CONFORMING SUBDIVISION WHICH WAS PLANTED IN 1970. WE WERE PLANTED BEFORE SUBDIVISION RULES WERE IN PLACE. WE HAVE 28 OWNERS, AVERAGE OF 74 ACRES EACH, COMBINING 241 TRACKS IN 2,073 TRACK ACRES. NOW HAVE THIS SUBDIVISION BEEN APPROVED EVERY ONE OF THOSE TRACKS ENDED UP BEING SUBDIVISIONS. THE EASEMENT IS PRIVATELY MAINTAINED. HOW DO YOU CAN APPROVE A SUBDIVISION ON A ROAD THAT HAS NO ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE IS IRRESPONSIBLE. THE CANE RANCH EASEMENT CONNECTS IN TWO DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS TO SAND HILL COUNTY GRAVEL ROAD INTO SANDY FORK. THE SECTION ROAD THAT IS SAND HILL COUNTY GRAVEL ROAD IS UNMAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY AND IT COULDN'T MANAGE THIS TRAFFIC. FURTHERMORE, EVEN SANDY FORK IF YOU BEGAN TO PLOP SUBDIVISIONS IN OUR THE LARGEST SUBDIVISION IN THE COUNTY WOULD BE UNDER PRESSURE AND IT WOULD BE INADEQUATE. FROM 1970 TO 2000, WE HAD LESS THAN FIVE HOUSEHOLDS AND LESS THE 10 FULL-TIME RESIDUES. TODAY, APPROXIMATELY 10 OF OUR OWNERS USE K&L AS THEIR PRIMARY RESIDENCE. [00:25:02] SO APPROXIMATELY A THIRD OF US ARE OUT THERE EVERY DAY, AND OUR RESIDENTS ARE TYPICALLY RETIRED. THEY'RE NOT USING IN THIS ROAD EVERY DAY. THEY'RE NOT THE DEMOGRAPHIC THAT WOULD COME INTO A SMALL TRACK SUBDIVISION. THEY DON'T USE OR THEY DON'T TAKE KIDS TO SCHOOL. WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF KIDS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO GO TO SCHOOL HAVE TO BE TAKEN TO SCHOOL. WE HAVE RETIRED PEOPLE THAT GO TO THE TRACTOR SUPPLY ONCE A WEEK AND ATP ONCE A WEEK AND THAT'S ABOUT IT, AND THEN WE HAVE OTHER OWNERS THAT COME OUT THERE ON THE WEEK AND NIGHT. THIS SUBDIVISION WOULD'VE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES THAT ARE EASEMENT COULD NOT MANAGE NOR COULD THE ADJACENT COUNTY ROADS. THIS IS THE SUBDIVISION WHICH IS A CASE STUDY ON HOW THIS PROCESS FAILED. IF YOU'LL NOTICE, THIS IS ACTUALLY BIG SANDY BRANCH GOING THROUGH THE CENTER OF IT. IT'S A DRY CREEK BED. NOTICE THAT THESE TRACKS ARE 150 FEET ABOUT 1500 FEET. NOW, HAD THE DEVELOPER BEEN ABLE TO CONVINCE THE COUNTY ENGINEER THAT WE WERE A PRIVATE STREET, THEY COULD HAVE BEEN 125 AND YOU COULD HAVE PUT A COUPLE MORE LOTS IN THERE. THE DEVELOPER PAID TWICE WHAT IS NORMAL COMPARABLE PRICE PER ACRE FOR THIS PROPERTY WITH THE INTENTION TO SELL IT AT FOUR TIMES. THE ROAD, IF YOU SEE ABOVE IS NIGHT-LINE. SEE HOW NEAR THAT ROAD IS? THE ROAD TO THE RIGHT IS ALL SAND GOING THROUGH THERE. AGAIN, WE WERE GOING TO PUT GRAVEL ON IT, BUT NOW WE HAVE TO DECIDE. DO WE PAY OUR MONEY ON FOR ATTORNEYS? OR WE PAY OUR MONEY FOR GRAVEL? WE REALLY WANT TO SPEND OUR MONEY ON GRAVEL. NOW, WE CONVINCE THE DEVELOPER TO BACK WAY FROM THIS SUBDIVISION. IN THE BOTTOM WE HAVE A QUOTE FROM THE LETTER THAT HE SENT TO THE COMMISSIONER WHEN HE BACKED AWAY. TOO MUCH DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA ON AN UNNAMED MAINTAINED ROAD COULD CREATE DANGEROUS DRIVING CONDITIONS. WELL, EVERYBODY IN OUR COMMUNITY SEES THAT. OUR COMMISSIONER SAW IT. THE DEVELOPERS SAW IT, BUT THE PROCESS WOULDN'T HAVE STOPPED IT. HERE'S THE PROCESS. THIS IS MONDAY MORNING. THIS IS FROM THE COUNTY ENGINEER TO CASEY ROBERTS. >> COMMISSIONER, IT'S JUST THAT THE AGENDA ITEM ITSELF IS TO DISCUSSION OF THE ROADS. IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE GETTING INTO THE DISCUSSIONS AS FAR AS THE SUBDIVISION ITSELF AS OPPOSED TO THE ROADWAYS. I'M NOT TRYING TO NITPICK, BUT JUST SO THAT WE CAN JUST STAY MORE ON THE AGENDA AS OPPOSED TO GETTING INTO THE DISCUSSIONS FOR THIS PARTICULAR SUBDIVISION. >> I THINK TO HIS POINT, CASEY. EXCUSE ME. CHASE THAT HE'S TRYING TO EXPLAIN WHY THIS SUBDIVISION WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE ROAD ITSELF. >> WELL, FURTHERMORE, THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS TO TALK ABOUT A SUBDIVISION WORKSHOP. WELL, IF YOUR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL PROCESS IS WORKING PERFECTLY, YOU DON'T NEED A WORKSHOP. TO SOME EXTENT I'M GIVEN A PRELUDE AS TO THE NEED TO DO SOMETHING HERE. WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT TO DO. IT'S PRETTY CLEAR TO ME. >> YOU CAN CONTINUE. >> THIS IS WHAT WAS SENT. WE CAN ASSUME THE COUNTY ENGINEER WHO IS FOLLOWING HIS MANDATE AND THE RESPONSIBILITY GIVEN BY THE COURT COMES IN. HE LOOKS AT THE AGENDA FOR THE KICKOFF MEETING, THE PRELIMINARY MEETING, AND OUR PRE-PROCESS APPROVAL MEETING OR WHATEVER IT'S CALLED IN THIS ORDINANCE. HE LOOKED AT IT AND HE GOES ON, MY GOODNESS, THEY'RE GOING TO PUT SOMETHING ON CALDWELL RANCH ROAD. WELL, I KNOW THAT'S AN EASEMENT BECAUSE I JUST WORKED ON ANOTHER SUBDIVISION RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD. HE SAYS, "I WAS ALL SET TO TELL THIS GUY, YOU CANNOT DEVELOP OFF AN EASEMENT OR A ROAD NOT RECOGNIZED BY THE COUNTY. BUT HERE IS THE 1985 MAP, LOOKS LIKE K&L IS GOING TO BE A MESS." NOW, AGAIN, THIS IS A SAFETY DOCUMENT OF ENGINEERING STANDARDS FOR ROADS AND HOW TO KEEP RURAL DEVELOPMENT SAFE AND THIS IS THE ENTIRE PROCESS. BECAUSE THERE'S A LINE ON A MAP WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE FACT THAT IT'S A PRIVATE EASEMENT. I KNOW FOR SURE BECAUSE HE DID HE KNOWS THAT NOBODY MAINTAINS THAT EASEMENT. WE COULD GO ON AND ASSUME IT'S A NON-CONFORMING ROAD, [00:30:02] BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANY DUE DILIGENCE HERE TO GO AND SAY, WAIT A SECOND, LET'S SLOW THE PROCESS DOWN. THREE DAYS LATER AFTER THE MEETING, WE HAVE A LETTER FROM THE DEVELOPER TO THE COUNTY ENGINEER. ''THANK YOU AGAIN FOR MEETING WITH US. WE'RE HAPPY TO HEAR THAT WE ARE ABLE TO SUB-DIVIDE THE PROPERTY.'' HE GOES ON TO SAY, ''IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE IT'S A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD OR A LOCAL STREET.'' WELL, THIS IS ABOUT FRONTAGE. HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE 100-FOOT FRONTAGE INSTEAD OF 150 FOOT FRONTAGE, SO HE PUT MORE ROCKS IN THERE. THEN THIS IS THE RESPONSE. "ALL EXISTING ROADS ARE CONSIDERED MONITOR COLLECTORS UNLESS THE APPLICANT DOES THE TRAFFIC STUDY OF THE ROADWAY THAT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT ALL POSSIBLE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE ROADWAY TO PROJECT TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS." WE AGREE THAT'S IN THE DOCUMENT. IT'S IN THE DOCUMENT SEVERAL STATE AT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS, BUT IT'S ALWAYS RELATIVE TO FRONTAGE. WHAT THE DOCUMENT IS TRYING TO SAY IS THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE 150 FEET ON THESE RURAL DEVELOPMENT. IF YOU WANT LESS YOU'D HAVE TO DO A TRAFFIC STUDY AND PROVE THAT THERE'S NOT ANY TRAFFIC OUT THERE OR OTHERWISE WE'RE GOING TO CALL YOU A MINER COLLECTOR. BY THE WAY, A MINER COLLECTOR IS OVER 1,000 TRIPS PER DAY 1,000-2,500. SO IF YOU WANT TO GO IN AND PROVE THAT IT'S LESS WELL, MAYBE WE CAN CLASSIFY YOU AS A LOCAL STREET AND YOU CAN HAVE LESS FRONTAGE. SAME DAY, AN HOUR LATER, THE DEVELOPER COMES BACK TO THE COUNTY ENGINEER. HE SAYS, ''ONE LAST QUESTION. WE'VE HEARD THAT SOME OF THE RESIDENTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE OPPOSED SUBDIVISIONS IN THE PAST." WELL, REALITY IS THAT SOME OF US KNEW AND OPPOSED A SUBDIVISION ON UNMAINTAINED COUNTY ROAD, BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY SUBDIVISIONS. AGAIN, THIS IS PART OF THE LAND RUSH TO WHERE IF SOMEONE WOULD EVEN CONSIDER PUTTING A SUBDIVISION OUT THERE. SO HE SAYS, ''BECAUSE THIS IS A PRIVATE ROAD, WITHOUT A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT IN PLACE, IS THERE ANY CIRCUMSTANCE THAT NEIGHBORS COULD STOP A SUBDIVISION OF THIS PROPERTY?'' TO WHICH THE ANSWER IS NO, NOT REALLY. THEREFORE, THAT WAS IT. WITH THAT, THE DEVELOPER WENT OUT AND BOUGHT THE PROPERTY. LET'S BE FAIR AND LET'S BE SPECIFIC. HE SAID, "IF A DIVISION OF PROPERTY COMPLIES WITH THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, THE COUNTY IS OBLIGED TO APPROVE." I AGREE WITH THAT. I ALSO AGREE THAT YOU'RE NOT READING THE ARGUMENTS PROPERLY. YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THE ENGINEERING STANDARDS, NOT JUST FOR THE SUBDIVISION, BUT FOR THE ROAD THE SUBDIVISION IS GOING TO TAKE ACCESS FROM AND ALL OF THE ADJACENT ROADS THAT PEOPLE TAKE. THAT'S GOOD ENGINEERING STANDARDS. "WE WILL HIGHLY ENCOURAGE," HE SAYS, ''THE PARTIES TO GET TOGETHER AND COME UP WITH A MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR THE PRIVATE ROADWAY, BUT WE RECOGNIZE THAT MOST LANDOWNERS WILL PROBABLY REFUSE.'' GREAT. THAT'S OUR PROCESS HE'S NOW RECOMMENDING. WELL, SINCE WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO RECOMMEND TO A DEVELOPER THAT HE HAS TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO SLOW HIS CASH FLOW DOWN AND EXPECT ANY INCOME AS A RESULT? THIS IS THE 1985 MAP. YOU CAN SEE A BLOW UP ON THE RIGHT THAT SHOWS THE SUBDIVISION K&L RANCH IN SANDY FORK. IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP, YOU CAN SEE THAT BIG SPOT THERE THAT IS THOSE TWO SUBDIVISIONS. YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY WERE THE LARGEST SUBDIVISION IN THE COUNTY. HERE ALSO, I'VE GOT A BLOW-UP OF THIS INSERT ON THAT MAP. THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER ADOPTED THE NAMES. BY THE WAY, IT'S AN APPRAISAL DISTRICT MAP. AND ALL IT REALLY DOES IS SHOW YOU, WHERE ALL THE ROADS THAT ARE IN THE COUNTY. IT DOESN'T DISTINGUISH IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP BETWEEN A STATE ROAD, A COUNTY ROAD, AND A PRIVATE EASEMENT. THIS IS THE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT REALLY, [00:35:03] FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROADS. IT'S JUST A LOT OF MEETING IN THIS PARTICULAR TABLE. AND IF YOU LOOK AT IT, IF YOU HAVE NOT MORE THAN 100 TRIPS PER DAY, YOU'RE A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD. IF YOU GO DOWN HERE, YOUR LOCAL STREET, NOT MORE THAN 1,000 MINOR COLLECTORS, 1,000-2,500. THE SPEEDWAY ON A MINOR COLLECTOR IS 35 MILES AN HOUR. WE MEET ZERO OF THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD. YOU CAN'T GO 25 MILES AN HOUR DOWN A ROAD WITHOUT TEARING THE FRONT END OUT OF YOUR PICKUP TRUCK. THE NUMBER OF LINES IS NOT TWO IN ALL PLACES. IN SOME PLACES, IT IS. THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH IS 40 FEET, NOT 60 FEET. THERE ARE NO DITCHES. I CAN GO ALL THE WAY DOWN. THERE'S NOT ONE SINGLE SPECIFICATION HERE THAT MEETS COUNTY SPECIFICATION. THEN WE'RE GOING TO PROVE SUBDIVISION ON IT AND WE'RE GOING TO INCREASE THE TRAFFIC FROM 20 TRIPS A DAY TO 227 TRIPS A DAY. IT TOOK US TWO DAYS TO FIGURE THAT OUT. WE DIDN'T EVEN SLOW THE PROCESS DOWN. BY THE WAY, OUR COMMISSIONER THAT KNOWS THE ROAD WAS NOT EVEN IN THE MEETING, NOT INVITED TO THE MEETING, THAT'S A FAILED PROCESS. SO IF WE LOOK AT THE DOCUMENT AND ASSUMING THAT WE WERE A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD BECAUSE WE DON'T EVEN MEET THAT SPEC, AND SO IF WE SAID, LET'S USE THE LOWEST SPEC IN THE BOOK, THEN DOWN HERE UNDER PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD, IT SAYS UNDER F, PROPOSED SUBDIVISIONS INTEND TO TAKE ACCESS FROM AN EXISTING PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD MUST RECONSTRUCT THE ROADWAY TO MEET THE STANDARDS OF THE APPROPRIATE ROAD CLASSIFICATION PER TABLE TOO. ALL WE HAD TO DO IS GO, HEY, YOU'RE NOT MEETING THE MOST MODEST STANDARDS OF ROADWAYS IN THIS COUNTY, THE ROAD YOU'RE TAKING ACCESS FROM, AND BY THE WAY, THE ADJACENT ROADS, IT'S THE SAME. AND SO YOU NEED TO RECONSTRUCT THE ROADWAY TO MEET THE STANDARDS. THAT WOULD HAVE STOPPED THE WHOLE PROCESS RIGHT THERE. HE WOULD HAVE NEVER BOUGHT THE LAND. IN FACT, HE WOULD HAVE NOT BOUGHT THE LAND HAD OUR COMMISSIONER BEEN IN THE MEETING AND SAID, ''WAIT A MINUTE, I'M GOING TO OBJECT TO THIS,'' BUT THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. OUR COMMISSIONER HAS THIS DOCUMENTED IF YOU NEED IT JASON. THIS IS OUR EASEMENT. AND BY THE WAY, THERE'S A NUMBER OF TEXAS STATUTE ISSUES RELATIVE TO TAKING THE AXIS OF OUR EASEMENT WHEN YOU START PUTTING SUBDIVISIONS ON AN EASEMENT, THERE'S A WHOLE ANOTHER ISSUE RELATIVE TO THAT, BUT LET'S STICK TO THE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. THIS IS OUR PARAGRAPH. THIS IS OUR FINAL PARAGRAPH SHOWING ON THE 13TH OF JULY 1982, WE WERE GRANTED, PEOPLE THAT USED THE ROAD, THIS EASEMENT. IT ALSO SAYS IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH THAT THE OWNERS ENTITLED SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT BUT NOT THE OBLIGATION TO MAINTAIN THIS EASEMENT. THAT'S A ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT RIGHT THERE. IT'S WORKED FOR 50 YEARS. WE GO OUT THERE AS COMMUNITY, IF WE HAVE A BAD SPOT IN THE ROAD, WE FIX IT. WE WERE TO FIX BAD SPOTS ON THE ROAD LAST YEAR. IT ALSO SAYS THAT IF 70 PERCENT OF THE CURRENT OWNERS WANT THE ROAD TO BE DEDICATED TO PUBLIC USE, WE CAN VOTE TO DO THAT. LATER ON, CHRISTINE CHARLES IS GOING TO COME UP HERE AND SHE'S GOING TO SHOW US THAT 90 PERCENT, AND THAT'S PEOPLE WE CAN FIND, OF OUR COMMUNITY WANT TO REMAIN PUBLIC AND NOT PRIVATE. THEY DON'T WANT THIS TO BE A PUBLIC ROAD. WE WANT TO MAINTAIN IT OURSELVES, BUT IF YOU START POPPING SUBDIVISIONS IN IT, WE'RE GOING TO BE COMING BACK TO YOU AND SAYING, "THIS IS YOURS, YOU BROKE IT, YOU BOUGHT IT." ARE WE A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD? WELL, WE'RE TOLD WE'RE NOT EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T MEET THAT STANDARD. WE AGREE WE'RE REALLY AN EASEMENT, BUT REGARDLESS, THIS IS A SECTION OF MAP THAT SHOWS K&L RANCH ROAD. IT ALSO SHOWS SAND HILL PRIVATE COUNTY GRAVEL ROAD. AND IF WE LOOK AT IT AND WE SAY, ''WELL, [00:40:01] WHAT IS THIS ROAD ACCORDING TO THE TABLE ON THE LEFT?'' WE'RE A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD ACCORDING TO THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT. THESE MAP'S BEEN PUBLISHED FOR, I DON'T KNOW, WE CAN FIND IT GOING BACK TO 2003. WE HAD ONE LONG WALL AND ON COMMUNITY. YOU PROBABLY CAN FIND THEM GOING BACK ANOTHER 30 OR 40 YEARS, BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY CALL IT. THIS WAS A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD. NOTICE THAT WE HAVE EASEMENT MISSPELLED ON THE TABLE ALSO, ON THE WEB. NOTICE THAT THERE ARE SOME EASEMENTS HERE. WELL, ACCORDING TO THE WAY THAT WE CURRENTLY INTERPRET OUR GUIDANCE, YOU CAN PUT A SUBDIVISION ON ANY OF THESE. THERE ARE NO PRIVATE GRAVEL ROADS BECAUSE EVERY ROAD IS A MINOR COLLECTOR UNLESS IT'S DONE A TRAFFIC SURVEY ACCORDING TO THE WAY OUR PROCESS IS CURRENTLY. YOU KNOW HOW MANY ROADS, HOW MANY EASEMENTS, SMALL ROADS THERE ARE IN THIS COUNTY THAT ARE PRIVATE, THAT HAVE HAD A TRAFFIC SURVEY DONE? NONE. THEREFORE, THERE ARE NO PRIVATE GRAVEL ROADS NOR EASEMENT IN THE COUNTY. IF WE'RE GOING TO INTERPRET THE BOOK THAT WAY. YOU ALSO CAN TAKE A LOOK AT IT. LOOK OVER HERE. HERE'S [INAUDIBLE] SOME PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD. IT'S ON A MAP. THEREFORE, WE CAN PUT A SUBDIVISION ON IT. IT'S GOT AN EASEMENT DOWN HERE BELOW THAT IT COMES TO. HOWEVER, IF YOU GO OUT THERE, AND IF YOU'RE IN A CAR, AND NOT A FOUR-WHEEL DRIVE JEEP, AND YOU GO DOWN THAT ROAD, YOU'RE GOING TO SLOWLY BACKUP BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH SPACE TO TURN AROUND. AGAIN, WE CAN PUT A SUBDIVISION ON THAT ROAD. NO PROBLEM. NOT ONLY DOES THAT APPRAISAL DISTRICT MAP CALL US A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD, THERE'S SEVEN MAPS THAT ARE PUBLISHED THAT ARE ON YOUR WEBSITE, THEY CALL US A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD. SO BASICALLY THE PEOPLE THAT TAX US AND THE PEOPLE THAT GOVERN US, THE PEOPLE THAT TAKE CARE OF OUR SCHOOLS AND OUR FIRES, THEY ALL THINK WE'RE A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD. THEY'RE WRONG. HERE ARE THE DEFINITIONS FROM THE POWER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE; PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD, A ROADWAY THAT IS DESIGNED FOR USE BY 100 OR LESS VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY AS DETERMINED BY AN ENGINEERING SERVICE SURVEY AND APPROVED BY THE COUNTY. AGAIN, THIS IS PART OF THE WORD SOUTH. THAT'S WHY THIS HAS TO BE LOOKED AT FROM A HOLISTIC SAFETY STANDPOINT, BUT THAT LAST PART OF THAT SENTENCE, ENGINEERING SURVEY, IS REALLY IF THEY WANT TO LOWER THE CLASSIFICATION FROM SOMETHING DOWN TO A LOCAL STREET OR A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD. THAT'S WHAT THAT REALLY REFERS TO. THE REALITY IS A ROADWAY THAT IS DESIGNED FOR USE BY 100 VEHICLES OR LESS IS WHAT YOU SHOULD CALL A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD. AND THAT'S THE WAY THIS BOOK SHOULD BE INTERPRETED AND ANY OTHER WAY IS INADEQUATE. THIS IS ALSO FROM THE CALDWELL COUNTY DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. PRIVATE GRAVEL ROADWAYS MAY BE APPROVED TO PROVIDE VEHICULAR ACCESS TO FORM RANCH OR OTHER RURAL TRACKS THAT ARE GENERALLY 50 ACRES OR MORE IN SIZE AND WHERE THERE ARE NO EXISTING PUBLIC ROADS. THAT'S US. IN 1970, WE WERE TRACKS THAT WERE 50-60 ACRES. THAT'S WHAT OUR ROAD WAS DESIGNED FOR. THAT'S US. CLOSEST DESCRIPTION YOU CAN FIND IN YOUR ORDINANCE. AGAIN ACCORDING TO YOUR ORDINANCE, IF WE ARE PROBABLY GRAVEL ROAD, THEN YOU SHOULDN'T BE PUTTING SUBDIVISIONS ON OUR ROAD UNTIL THAT ROAD IS BROUGHT UP THE CURRENT COUNTY'S STANDARDS. IF YOU ALLOW SUBDIVISIONS WITHIN K&L RANCH, YOU ALSO PLACE AN UNSAFE AND UNSUSTAINABLE BURDEN ON SAND HILL ROAD. SAND HILL ROAD IS A COUNTY GRAVEL ROAD. I'VE BEEN OUT THERE FOR 50 YEARS AND THE COUNTY HAVEN'T PUT ONE BUCKET OF GRAVEL ON THAT 1.4 MILE SECTION ROAD. IT HAS BEEN MAINTAINED BY PRIMARILY K&L RANCH OWNERS. WE PUT TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS INTO THAT ROAD, AS WELL AS THE OTHER 30 HOUSEHOLDS THAT USE THAT ROAD TO ULTIMATELY ACCESS THE PAYMENT. THIS IS ABOUT 70 HOUSEHOLDS WHO ALSO RECEIVE THEIR EMS. A ROAD NOT MAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY, [00:45:03] MAINTAINED BY THE CITIZENS OUT THERE, THAT IS A COUNTY ROAD, THAT WE RECEIVE OUR EMERGENCY RESPONSE FROM. YOU'RE GOING TO GO PUT ANOTHER 200 TRIPS PER DAY ON THAT ROAD. BY THE WAY, THE [NOISE] PRESIDENT ALLOWS US TO PUT ANOTHER 200 AND ANOTHER 200 AND ANOTHER 200. [NOISE] IN THIS SITUATION, A TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENTS SHOULD BE FORMED IN ALL CASES. AGAIN, CHRISTINE SHAW IS GOING TO GET UP HERE AND SHE'S GOING TO SPEAK TO THIS. BUT ONE THING THAT'S HAPPENED AND IT'S VERY POSITIVE. WE'VE COME TOGETHER AS COMMUNITY, AND WE'VE ALSO COME TOGETHER TO RECOGNIZE WE NEED TO HELP THE COUNTY BECAUSE YOU NEED TO USE US AS A SHINING EXAMPLE OF WHAT DOESN'T WORK. I'VE BEEN OUT THERE FOR 50 YEARS AND I PROBABLY DIDN'T NOTE 10 OF MY NEIGHBORS, AND NOW I'VE TALKED OUT OF 28 NEIGHBORS [NOISE] I'VE TALKED TO 26 OF THEM. IT'S BEEN GREAT, AND WE'RE ABSOLUTELY IN AGREEMENT THAT YOU CAN'T PUT SUBDIVISIONS OUT HERE. BY THE WAY, WE ALL WANT TO DO A BETTER JOB OF MAINTAINING OUR OWN ROAD, OUR OWN EASEMENT. HERE'S ONE WAY TO SOLVE OUR PARTICULAR PROBLEM. IT DOESN'T SOLVE THE COUNTY'S PROBLEM. BUT I HAVE A NUMBER OF COMMENTS I COULD MAKE ABOUT THAT. BUT WE WOULD REQUEST THAT K&L RANCH ROAD, NOT LINE AND LOOSE LINE COMPRISED OF PRIVATE EASEMENT MOST CLOSELY APPROXIMATED AS [NOISE] GRAVEL ROAD DEFINED IN THE CALDWELL COUNTY DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AND ANY SUBDIVISION REQUIRING APPROVAL BY THE COMMISSION OF COURT THAT INTENDS TO TAKE ACCESS FROM THESE ROADWAYS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED UNTIL THESE ROADWAYS MEET CURRENT COUNTY STANDARDS BECAUSE OUTLINED IN THE ORDINANCE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, MR. HOGAN. [NOISE] >> CHRISTINE, YOU WANT TO COME UP AND SHOW THAT I'M NOT THE ONLY OLD GUY UP HERE IN THE COMMUNITY. [NOISE] >> I'M NOT AS TALL. [LAUGHTER] JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS. [NOISE] GOOD MORNING. I'M CHRISTINE SHAW AND I OWN PROPERTY AT THE END OF LOUIS LANE, AND SO I'M PART OF THE K&L RANCHES COMMUNITY. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ABOUT THE CONCERNS THAT OUR COMMUNITY HAS WITH THE CONDITION OF OUR EASEMENT. FROM THE ASPECT OF SAFETY AND RELIABLE TRANSPORTATION. WE'RE CONCERNED WITH THE SUSTAINABILITY OF OUR ROADS. SUPPORT OF THESE CONCERNS WE'VE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY. I'M HERE TO SHARE THE COLLECTIVE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE. I HAVE HERE AND I CAN GET THAT TO YOU GUYS. WE HAVE WRITTEN STATEMENTS FROM OVER 90 PERCENT OF ATLANTA OWNERS AND THE K&L RANCHES SUPPORTING THESE CONCERNS. GETTING CONSENSUS [LAUGHTER] FROM PEOPLE WHO LIVING [LAUGHTER] OUT IN THE COUNTRY, WHO LIKED THEIR PRIVACY AND INDEPENDENCE IS DEFINITELY NO SMALL FEAT, BUT WE'VE MANAGED TO GET THAT. WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT OVERWHELMING SUPPORT FROM ALL OF THE HOMEOWNERS. FOR 50 YEARS, THE ROAD EASEMENT AT K&L RANCHES HAS BEEN PRIVATELY MAINTAINED BY US. WE WORK TOGETHER, WE DONATE OUR TIME, OUR MONEY, OUR RESOURCES TO MAINTAIN THE ROADS, TURN BACK BRUSH AND ENSURE THAT WE CAN USE OUR ROADS SAFELY TO GET BACK AND FORTH FROM OUR HOMES. THIS IS IMPORTANT. THIS IS NOT A GAMES, IS NOT A JOKE, THIS IS THE ONLY WAY WE CAN GET TO OUR HOMES. THINK ABOUT THAT. OTHER PEOPLE, SOMETIMES IF THERE'S CONSTRUCTION OR TRAFFIC, THEY HAVE WAYS TO GO AROUND IT. WE DON'T. PARTIES [NOISE] WE TAKE TACKLE ON LARGER PROJECTS. AGAIN, WE USE OUR OWN MONEY, [00:50:01] OUR OWN TIME TO DO WHAT'S BEST AND WHAT'S GOOD FOR OUR SMALL COMMUNITY AND FOR THESE ROADS. WE'VE COLLECTED FUNDS TO PURCHASE GRAVEL. WE'VE INSTALLED GATES, CAMERAS, SIGNS AT BOTH ENTRANCES OF K&L RANCHES. TO NOTE THAT THIS ROAD IS PRIVATELY MAINTAINED GRAVEL ROAD. WE COMMUNICATE REGULARLY THROUGH GROUP EMAILS AND WE GET TOGETHER FOR MEETINGS TO DISCUSS THE ESSENTIAL CRITICAL ONGOING MAINTENANCE OF OUR ROADS, SO THAT AGAIN, WE CAN GET TO OUR HOMES SAFELY AND RELIABLY. THESE ROADS CUT RIGHT THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY. IT IS THE SOLE PASSAGE. WE'RE VERY CONCERNED THAT [NOISE] UNCHECKED TRAFFIC WILL POSE A THREAT TO OUR DAILY LIVES, FURTHER DESTROYING THE ROADS AND IMPEDING ACCESS TO OUR HOMES. NOW THINK ABOUT THAT. IMPEDING ACCESS TO OUR HOMES. THE COUNTY HAS ORDINANCES THAT ARE DESIGNED TO HELP THE PEOPLE OF THE COUNTY, TO HELP US. WE WOULD LIKE TO ENSURE THAT OUR COMMUNITY IS AFFORDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THOSE ORDINANCES HELP US. ON BEHALF OF THE 90 PERCENT OF THE LANDOWNERS AND K&L RANCHES, WE'RE ASKING THE COURT TO FORMALLY RECOGNIZE THAT THE EASEMENT AND K&L RANCHES IS INDEED A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD. THE DESIGNATION WILL HELP PROVIDE CONSISTENCY AND CLARITY WHEN WE'RE WORKING WITH OTHER COUNTY AGENCIES AND WITH THE PUBLIC. IT WILL KEEP THE ROAD AS IT WAS DESIGNED FOR AND AS ITS INTENTION. IT IS OUR ROAD TO GET TO OUR HOMES. WE CANNOT HAVE THE UNDUE FINANCIAL BURDEN OF MAINTAINING A PUBLIC COUNTY ROAD, WE CANNOT ASK THAT OF THIS COMMUNITY. IT IS A PRIVATE GRAVEL ROAD. WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION AND THOUGHTS ON THIS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> WOULD YOU LIKE THE WRITTEN STATEMENTS FROM [OVERLAPPING]. >> YOU'RE WELCOME TO GIVE US A COPY OF THAT FOR SURE. >> GREAT THIS IS THE COPY, YOU CAN HAVE IT. >> THANK YOU. >> YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, I THINK WE'LL HAVE MORE OF AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET INTO THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF THIS DISCUSSION ON THE NEXT ITEM WHEN WE DISCUSS IT. THIS HAS COME UP OVER AND OVER AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS THIS SITUATION AT SOME POINT. I THINK ONCE WE GET INTO THE NEXT ITEM, WE CAN GET INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE. I PERSONALLY, IN ALL FAIRNESS AND TRANSPARENCY HAVE A VERY SIMILAR SITUATION ON MY PROPERTY. I HAVE NO INTENTION OF SELLING IT, BUT I CAN ALMOST GUARANTEE MY KIDS WILL. AT SOME POINT THIS VERY SAME ISSUE IS GOING TO AFFECT ME AND THERE ARE OTHER PROPERTIES WHERE THIS EXACT SITUATION EXISTS WHERE RIGHT NOW PRIVATE CITIZENS ARE MAINTAINING THAT ROAD AND I DON'T GET THE SENSE THAT ANYBODY IS SAYING THAT YOU SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DEVELOP IN CALDWELL COUNTY, BUT ON ROADS LIKE THIS, I THINK WE HAVE TO ADDRESS HOW WE DEFINE THEM GOING FORWARD AND I'LL JUST LEAVE MY COMMENTS AT THAT TILL WE GET TO THE NEXT SECTION SO THAT I DON'T GET OFF TRACK ON THE ITEM. >> WELL, I WANT TO MAKE A SMALL COMMENT AS WELL. KNOWING CANADA RANCHES AS WELL AS I DID, AND FINDING OUT MUCH LATER THAT THERE WAS A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION, I MADE THE PHONE CALL TO THE ENGINEER AND I SAID SO THEY'RE GOING TO BRING THIS ROAD UP TO COUNTY STANDARD BECAUSE THAT WAS WHEN I READ IN OUR ORDINANCE AND HE TOLD ME NO AND THAT WHERE THE BALL STARTED. >> OKAY. DISCUSSION ITEMS, SO THERE'S GOING TO BE NO MOTIONS, [15. Discussion/Action to consider scheduling a Subdivision Ordinance Workshop. Speaker: ] BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE ON TO 15. DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER SCHEDULING THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE WORKSHOP. COMMISSIONERS, I'LL JUST GO ON RECORD AS SAYING I THINK IT'S TIME THAT WE DO THAT. I THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE TAKEN UP IN THAT WORKSHOP. [00:55:03] NOT JUST HOW WE DEFINE PRIVATE GRAVEL ROADS, BUT OTHER THINGS THAT WE TEND TO RUN INTO AGAIN AND AGAIN, AS FAR AS EASEMENTS ON FAMILY LAND GRANTS AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS, AND MAYBE SEEK A MORE CLEAR DEFINITION AND WITH THE FULL KNOWLEDGE THAT ANYTHING WE DO AND THOSE OF US WHO WERE ON THIS ORDINANCE COMMITTEE BEFORE I WAS ONE OF THEM, I KNOW LINDA WAS ONE OF THEM. YOU'RE TRYING TO TAKE A HOLISTIC VIEW OF A LOT OF THINGS, AND SO OBVIOUSLY, AS TIME GOES ON, YOU PUT THESE ORDINATES IS IN THE PLACE AND YOU BEGIN TO REALIZE THAT YOU HAVE ISSUES WITH IT, THEY NEED TO BE ADDRESSED AND I THINK WE'RE AT THAT POINT. I WOULD JUST GO ON RECORD SAYING THAT I WOULD SUPPORT A ORDINANCE WORKSHOP SIMILAR TO THE ONE THAT WE HAD BEFORE. WE HAVE A COMMITTEE APPOINTED ALREADY. IT SHOULD BE FAIRLY EASY TO GET THAT TOGETHER, SO THAT'S JUST MY COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS. ANYBODY ELSE HAS ONE? >> I AGREE. WE DO HAVE A COMMITTEE SETUP OR APPOINTED THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IT REACTIVATED AND SCHEDULED TO COME UP WITH A LIST OF AUDIT REQUIREMENTS THAT WE CAN STRENGTHEN. WHEN I FIRST CAME ON TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT, THAT WAS A PRIORITY OF MINE AND I KNOW OTHER COMMISSIONERS TO MODIFY OUR 2011 DEVELOPMENT ORDINATES IN ANY MANNER POSSIBLE TO STRENGTHEN IT, TO GET AHEAD OF THE DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES THAT WE WERE HAVING IN THE COUNTY. IF THERE ARE ANY LEGAL MODIFICATIONS THAT CAN BE MADE AND I'D LIKE TO LOOK SERIOUSLY INTO ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS AS A METHOD, NOT JUST ON PRIVATE ROADS, BUT ON PUBLIC ROADS, ALSO AS A MEANS TO GET A HANDLE ON THESE CARVE-OUTS THAT WE SEE PREVALENT IN ALL OVER THE COUNTY. I'M IN FAVOR OF THAT, AND WHEN I FIRST CAME ON THE COMMISSIONERS COURT IN 2016, WE DIDN'T EVEN REQUIRE WATER AS A PREREQUISITE TO LOTS THAT WERE BEING SUBDIVIDED. WE HAVE MADE SOME GOOD MODIFICATIONS. BUT I THINK IT'S TIME THAT WE GO FURTHER AND BONE UP ON WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T DO BECAUSE I DEFINITELY LIKE TO PUSH IT TO THE LIMIT AS TO WHAT WE CAN DO AS FAR AS AMENDMENTS TO THE ORDINANCE. >> YES, COMMISSIONER. WE CAN WORK ON THAT. >> WOULD WE LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO SCHEDULE ONE AT SOME POINT IN THE NEAR FUTURE? >> ALL RIGHT. >> BUT DOES THAT MEAN ON TOP? >> NO, HE HASN'T YET. I JUST ASKED IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE IT [OVERLAPPING]. >> I KNOW THAT WE REAPPOINTED THE BOARD AND THEN WE HAD CORONA POP UP ON US. I'M ON SEVERAL BOARDS, I ATTEND SEVERAL MEETINGS AND IT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BY ZOOM, BUT IT WAS ONE PERSON COULDN'T, ONE PERSON THIS AND THE EXCUSES HAVE TO STOP. WE HAVE TO DO THESE MEETINGS. WE HAVE TO PUT OUR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE IN A VERY UNDERSTANDING MANNER. IT CONFLICTS ITSELF ALL OVER. I HAVE TABS ALL OVER THAT BOOK. MR. HOGAN IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. WE DON'T FOLLOW IT TO THE T, WE DON'T FOLLOW IT TO THE STATE, AND WE NEED TO GO IN AND THOROUGHLY LOOK AT THIS AND MAKE SURE WE COVER IT. MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T CONFLICT OURSELVES AND GET THIS TAKEN CARE OF, AND IF ONE PERSON IN THAT COMMITTEE SAYS I CAN'T COME THAT DAY, THEN THEY JUST DON'T COME BECAUSE IT IS LONG PAST DUE FOR TWO YEARS THAT WE WERE GOING TO DO THIS SUBDIVISION MEETING, THESE GROUP WE PUT TOGETHER AND IT'S NOT HAPPENED, AND NOW WE ARE EXPANDING. THIS COUNTY IS GROWING. WE'VE GOT FAMILIES WHO THEIR KIDS CAN NO LONGER AFFORD TO GO OUT AND BUY ACREAGE SOMEWHERE ELSE, SO THE FAMILIES WANT TO PUT THEM ON THEIR LAND. WELL, OUR STATE STATUTE SAYS THAT CAN. WE'VE GOT PEOPLE WHO BUY OVER 10 ACRES. IT'S MORE THAN 10 ACRES. BUT YET WE'RE REQUIRING THEM TO GET PERMITS, WE'RE REQUIRING THEM TO GET EXEMPTION LETTERS. THEY DON'T NEED THAT ACCORDING TO THIS STATE RULE. [01:00:03] WHY ARE WE DOING THAT? WE NEED TO FIX OUR FIELD WHICH IS FAILING SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, AND I'M VERY STRONG ON IT. I WORKED IN THE SURVEYING FIELD, WORKING WITH PEOPLE, DEVELOPING LAND AND EVERYTHING FOR 19 YEARS. I SHAKE MY HEAD WHEN THEY COME AND SAY, WELL, THEY TELL ME I CAN'T DO THAT AND I'M LIKE, WHY NOT? THAT'S HOW I KNOW A LOT OF THE STATE STATUTE, WHAT IT SAYS BECAUSE I ALWAYS GO BACK AND LOOK AT THOSE THINGS. SO YES, WE NEED TO GET THIS DONE AND IT NEEDS TO START NOW. WE NEED A MEETING SETUP WITH THEM WITHIN A WEEK AND GET THEM GOING ON THIS BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO BE A LONG PROCESS BECAUSE THERE'S I DON'T KNOW 5, 6, 7 PEOPLE ON THAT COMMITTEE, AND WE'RE ALL GOING TO GET TO LOOK AT IT AND SAY, WELL, JUST DON'T LOOK RIGHT AND WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK SO IT'S GOING TO GO BACK AND FORTH. >> I THINK THAT'S A GREAT POINT, COMMISSIONER AND I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO GET IT DONE IN ONE MEETING. THIS IS GOING TO TAKE MULTIPLE MEETINGS. BUT SOONER WE START, THE SOONER WE'LL GET TO A PLACE WHERE WE HAVE STRONGER ORDINANCE. I THINK THAT'S WHAT ALL OF US DESIRE. OUR FAIRNESS IN 2020, ZOOM WAS PRETTY SKETCHY AND YOU COULDN'T GET TOGETHER, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S TIME. I THINK WE'RE ALL PREPARED TO DO THAT. I'D LOOK FOR A MOTION TO SCHEDULE THIS MEETING. LET'S PICK A DAY [OVERLAPPING] AND GET SCHEDULE. >> I'VE JUST GOT A COUPLE COMMENTS [OVERLAPPING] BEFORE WE MAKE THAT. I THINK WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE HERE. I THINK SPECIFICALLY OVER THE LAST YEAR, THERE HAS BEEN SOME INSTANCES IN PRECINCT 1 THAT WE'RE ALL AWARE THAT HAVE LEFT US SCRAMBLING FOR ANSWERS, BECAUSE THE DOCUMENT DOESN'T PROVIDE ENOUGH CLARITY ON REMEDIES AND FIXES. I DO THINK AS PART OF THIS AS WELL. IN ADDITION TO WHAT THE DOCUMENT STATES, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE AT LEAST A LOOK AT HOW THE PROCESS IS DONE WITHIN THE COUNTY ITSELF. I KNOW THAT CASEY IS OVERWHELMED, AND I THINK THAT'S BY NO FAULT OF HER OWN. I DON'T WANT TO GO ON RECORD, I'M SAYING THAT. IT'S JUST THE AMOUNT OF VOLUME THAT WE'RE SEEING AND THAT TO ME IS A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR IN SOME OF THESE CASES. I WOULD LIKE TO AT LEAST LOOK AT THAT TO TRY TO GET A GRIP ON HOW WE CAN APPROACH THE PROCESS IN ADDITION TO WHAT THE ORDINATES SPECIFICALLY STATES. IF THAT'S AGREEABLE TO [OVERLAPPING]. >> I THINK. I'M SORRY COMMISSIONER. >> EXACTLY HOW WE CAN ASSIST HER IN GETTING THIS DONE. >> WE ACTUALLY HAVE A POSITION BUDGETED. >>YES. >> SO SHE NEEDS TO FILL THAT POSITION. >> THAT WOULD GO MILES TOWARDS HELPING IS JUST FOR HER TO FILL THAT POSITION. I THINK WE ALL ENCOURAGE HER TO DO SO. >> CASEY, DO YOU HAVE THE LIST OF THE PEOPLE WE APPOINTED FOR THE SUBDIVISION? >> [BACKGROUND]. >> OKAY. >> [OVERLAPPING] WE CAN TRACK IT DOWN THOUGH COMMISSIONER. WE'LL NOTIFY. TO YOUR POINT, COMMISSIONER. WE'VE ALL SEEN IT. WE'RE CONSTANTLY BEING PLACED IN A POSITION OF HAVING TO DO VARIANCE AFTER VARIANCE AFTER VARIANCE AFTER VARIANCE. IT'S ALWAYS A SIMILAR SITUATION FOR THE VARIANCE. I'VE GOT ONE SITTING ON MY DESK RIGHT NOW. I'M NOT EVEN SURE WHY WE WOULD NEED TO DO A VARIANCE ON IT. IT'S GOT AN EASEMENT GOING IN FROM A COUNTY ROAD, ON ONE SIDE THERE'S A GRANTED EASEMENT. IT'S GOT DIRECT ACCESS OF THAT COUNTY ROAD TO THE OTHER SIDE. THIS GUYS WANT TO TAKE 50 ACRES AND DIVIDED INTO TWO PLOTS, ONE FOR HIS MOM, ONE FOR FOR HIM. YET FOR SOME REASON, WE'RE TELLING HIM HE'S GOT TO HAVE A PLAN. I THINK IN SITUATIONS LIKE THAT, THAT PUTS UNDUE BURDEN. NOW, WE HAVE TO BE ALSO BE VERY CAREFUL BECAUSE IF THAT WAS A DEVELOPER, ONE CAN DO THE VERY SAME THING, CARVE THAT UP IN THE ONE ACRE LOSS. WHAT WE DO FOR ONE, WE HAVE TO DO FOR ALL. THAT'S WHY IT'S GOING TO TAKE A WHILE TO GO THROUGH THIS. WE ALSO HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WITH THAT TO GET OURSELVES INTO A TAKING SITUATION. ANYTHING WE DO WILL BE SUBJECT TO AN ASSESSMENT BY SOMEBODY QUALIFIED TO DECIDE IF WE'RE DOING THE TAKINGS AND I WON'T GET INTO WHAT ALL THAT MEANS. BUT BASICALLY IT'S TO TAKE AWAY SOMEBODY'S RIGHT TO DEAL WITH THEIR PROPERTY AS THEY WILL. I THINK IT'S TIME. I THINK COMMISSIONER, YOU WERE PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION. IF YOU WANT DO SO THAT WOULD BE GREAT AND I THINK WE WON'T [NOISE] HAVE ANY TROUBLE GETTING A SECOND. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION REACT, THEY TAKE COMMITTEE WITH THE CHARGE TO EVALUATE OUR CURRENT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND COME BACK TO THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT UPON COMPLETION WITH A LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE CODE. [01:05:07] I DON'T WANT TO SET A MEETING DATE, I'D LIKE THOSE FOLKS TO BE CONTACTED AND THEN COORDINATE AMONGST THEMSELVES TO GET THAT MEETING SCHEDULED. >> WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH SITTING ONE AT A TIME OUT COUPLE OF WEEKS? >> YEAH. I'D LIKE TO HAVE AN INITIAL MEETING WITHIN A COUPLE OF WEEKS. >> OKAY. I WONDER IF YOU'D BE OKAY IF WE CAN CONVENE BY FEBRUARY 11TH, WHICH WOULD BE TWO WEEKS FOR [OVERLAPPING] EVERYBODY TO GET THAT ON THEIR SCHEDULE. >> OKAY. >> I'LL SECOND THAT. ON THE CONDITION OF THAT, IF SOMEONE IN THAT COMMITTEE SAYS I CAN'T DO THAT, THEN WE MIGHT LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY THAT WHOEVER NOMINATED THAT PERSON TO DO THAT, MAYBE WE NEED TO NOMINATE SOMEBODY ELSE THAT'S MORE AVAILABLE. >> AGREED. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> YES. >> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO SET A VISION ORDINATES WORKSHOP WITH THE CURRENT COMMITTEE ON FEBRUARY THE 11TH AT THE LATEST. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> I SECOND THE MOTION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> PAUSE CARRYING NONE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU TO THE PRESENTERS. YES, SIR. MR. HOGAN? >> [BACKGROUND] [INAUDIBLE] >> YES, SIR. PLEASE PLEASE COME UP. >> TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. THIS DEVELOPER IS GOING TO SELL THAT TRACK TO ANOTHER DEVELOPER AND WE'RE GOING TO BE RIGHT BACK HERE. I WANT TO UNDERLINE WHAT COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND SAID. YOU NEED TO LOOK RIGHT NOW AT THE PROCESS. THE COUNTY ENGINEER IS YOUR CONTRACTOR, HE WORKS UNDER YOUR DIRECTION. SO BY SIMPLY GIVING HIM SOME DIRECTION, VERY MODEST DIRECTION, YOU COULD AT LEAST SLOW THE PROCESS DOWN, SO THAT ANYONE THAT IS SEEKING TO PUT A SUBDIVISION ON A NONCONFORMING AND IT COULD BE A COUNTY ROAD BY THE WAY, YOU HAVE COUNTY ROADS HERE THAT ARE ONE LINE. IF YOU'RE A NON-CONFORMING SUBDIVISION THEN IT NEEDS TO BE SLOWED DOWN. IF THE ENGINEER KNEW THAT WAS HIS MANDATE, THEN HE COULD TELL THE DEVELOPER WELL BASED ON WORKING WITH A COMMISSIONER WHO'S GOING TO KNOW THAT ROAD HE COULD TELL THE DEVELOPER NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO STUDY THAT. IN REALITY IF YOU'RE GOING INTO A NON-CONFORMING ROAD, YOU SHOULD DO, WELL HOW IS IT NON-CONFORMING AND SHOULD WE DO A TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT? BUT YOU NEED TO AT LEAST BEGIN TO SLOW THE PROCESS DOWN. WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO CHANGE THE RULE BOOK, WHICH QUITE FRANKLY, I THINK THE RULE BOOK'S ADEQUATE. IT'S NOT ADEQUATE, IT NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED. BUT IT'S NOT BEING EXECUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS INTENT, BECAUSE IT'S A BIT OF A WORDS OUT OF DOCUMENT. >> I AGREE, SIR. I THINK THOUGH INTENT IS WE BOTH KNOW BECAUSE I WAS IN THE SAME BUSINESS YOU ARE FOR YEARS. IF YOU GET TWO LAWYERS HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT INTENT, THEN THE LAWYERS WILL GET RICH AND WE'LL ALL BE STUCK HERE IN THE SAME SPOT SO. >> I AGREE. >> NO OFFENSE. >> NO I [OVERLAPPING] AGREE BUT IT'S WRITTEN IN ENGINEERING STANDARD BOOK. IF THE ROADS, THE SUBDIVISION ARE GOING TAKE ACCESS FROM OUR IMPACT, DON'T MEET THOSE ENGINEERING STANDARDS, THEN THAT'S A REASON TO AT LEAST PAUSE. ALL THE ENGINEER HAS TO DO IS NOTE IT AND SAY, WELL, YOU'VE MEET ALL THE STANDARDS BUT, AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE THE POWER. YOU CAN VOTE AND SAY, WELL, WE'RE NOT GOING TO APPROVE IT UNTIL SOMEBODY GOES BACK AND DOES BECAUSE I CAN SEE IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE. WHAT HE SHOULD BE DOING IS HIGHLIGHTING SAFETY ISSUES THAT ARE OBVIOUS IN MANY CASES. I THINK IN MOST CASES. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> [OVERLAPPING] COMMISSIONER JUST ONE LAST THING ON THIS. JUST IN THE INTEREST OF KEEPING THE BALL ROLLING, YOU MAY CONSIDER ADDING AGENDA ITEM JUST FOR THE APPOINTMENT MISSING MEMBERS, SO THAT NEXT TIME WE CAN DO THAT AND NOT HAVE TO SET IT FOR ANOTHER AGENDA AND IT JUST GOES A LITTLE FASTER BUT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT JOE WOULD DO NOW. >> SURE. IF WE DISCOVER THAT EVERYBODY SHOWED UP, THEN WE'LL JUST TABLE THAT UNTIL A FUTURE TIME. BUT THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. THANK YOU. [16. EXECUTIVE SESSION - Pursuant to Texas Government Code Section 551.071 (1): Consultation with counsel regarding pending or contemplated litigation or settlement offers. Possible Action may follow in open Court. Speaker: ] >> OKAY. WITH THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 10:10 AM. WE'RE SITTING AT THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.0711. [01:10:03] CONSULTATION WITH COUNSEL REGARDING PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION OR SETTLEMENT OFFERS. POSSIBLE ACTION MAY FOLLOW IN OPEN COURT, WE'RE ON EXECUTIVE SESSION BEGINNING NOW. WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND END THE EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.0711. CONSULTATION WITH COUNSEL REGARDING PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION OR SETTLEMENT OFFERS. POSSIBLE ACTION MAY FOLLOW IN OPEN COURT. MOVING ON TO ITEM 17, DISCUSSION TO CONSIDER TAKING ACTION ON EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE HAVE ONE MORE SPECIFIC ITEM ON 18, SO COMMISSIONERS IF I COULD GET A MOTION. >> YOU DO YOU NEED TO CLOSE IT WITH [INAUDIBLE]? >> I DID. >> I DON'T BELIEVE YOU SAID THE TIME. >> [OVERLAPPING] I'M SORRY, [LAUGHTER] 10:16. >> OKAY, 16. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ITEM 17, [17. Discussion/Action to consider taking action on Executive Session. Speaker: ] DISCUSSION THAT CONSIDER TAKING POSSIBLE ACTIONS ON EXECUTIVE SESSION. IF WE CAN TABLE THAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO 18. THAT'S SPECIFICALLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ACTION ON. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE TABLE. >> SEVENTEEN. WE HAVE A MOTION ON TABLE 17. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> PAUSE HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES. I'LL MAKE TEAM DISCUSSION, [18. Discussion/Action to ratify a release agreement between Caldwell County and Daren Campbell: Speaker:] ACTION AND RATIFY RELEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CALDWELL COUNTY AND DARREN CAMPBELL. COMMISSIONERS, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO RATIFY THE RELEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CALDWELL COUNTY AND DARREN CAMPBELL? >> SO MOVE. >> IN THE AMOUNT $920, WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> PAUSE HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 19 WE HAVE MOTION TO ADJOURN. >> I'LL MAKE MOTION WE ADJOURN >> WE HAVE MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 10:20. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.