carol@stormzero.com – Carol A. Spencer

So Wrong on So Many Levels

I’ve been to many, many governing body meetings. Ten years of Council meetings as an elected official myself. Then there were the many years before and after my term of office. As a public information official, I attended county governing body meetings. I’d say I’ve easily attended over 700 governmental body meetings.

But not once, until April 22 at the Bastrop City Council meeting, have I ever seen the presiding official prohibit a member of the public from speaking. We didn’t have time limits on our speakers and some came to every meeting calling us out on our lack of action on this issue or that. Some were relentless, but we listened to them each time. We, after all, were their representatives, those they hoped could fix what they saw as problems in our town.

John Kirkland’s blatantly politically motivated actions last night were shocking. He was way out of line. His use of his position on the dais to silence a political opponent was a clear abuse of power. He should have allowed the former mayor to speak, thanked him for his comments, and moved on. But he didn’t. He rambled on about some illegality, about the former mayor not being able to speak because the vacancy hadn’t been filled. Ridiculous and wrong.

John Kirkland is blinded by his vendetta against Lyle Nelson. Kirkland, not some errant member of the public, circulated the petition to get rid of the mayor. Whether the former mayor was right or wrong in his actions isn’t the issue. He was never charged with a crime and was completely exonerated by the Council’s own investigator. Kirkland couldn’t wait to get him off the Council. Now, it seems, he is hell-bent on keeping him on.

Once the mayor resigned, Kirkland needed to move on. But he hasn’t. The former mayor, whether Kirkland likes it or not, is a citizen of the City. He has the legal right to speak at meetings, to call out actions of the City Council where he sees they need calling out.

What better person to raise issues than one who has been in the system? He has far more knowledge than most citizens. But that’s what makes him dangerous to Kirkland and his ilk. That’s why he’s a threat. He knows the game. He knows the players.

Kirkland’s actions last night were offensive to a free people living in a representative republic with a constitutional right of redress of grievances. They were a vicious attack on government of the people, by the people and for the people. If Kirkland can’t handle the heat, which he apparently cannot, he should get out of the kitchen.

Your Comments Count

Did you know you can comment on bills that are being considered in Texas House Committees? At comments.house.texas.gov, you can register your comments. Can’t make it to Austin and the Capitol for hearings? Take advantage of this. Voice your opinions!

This morning, I commented on two bills: the huge film industry give-away (HB 4568 ) and a bill to prevent Austin from injecting treated water and then later drawing it out from aquifer(s) in Bastrop County (HB 1523). FYI, there is a Senate companion bill to HB4568 that has already passed the Senate, SB22.

HB 4568 (Bill Text)

“It really doesn’t matter how much money the film industry is bringing to Texas. That, as a rationale for giving them Texas taxpayer money, is not appropriate. If I wanted to support this industry, I would do so with my money by going to movies. I rarely do. What I want is that you don’t take my hard earned tax money for a use that is NOT an appropriate government use. This bill picks winners and losers.

And, just the other day, CA Governor Gavin Newsom was bemoaning the fact that high taxes and regulation were causing the film industry to leave CA (https://www.lifezette.com/2025/04/hollywoods-film-industry-collapses-as-jobs-studios-flee-gavin-newsoms-ca-watch/ and https://www.siliconvalley.com/2025/04/21/can-tax-credits-save-californias-film-and-tv-industry-heres-what-legislators-have-proposed/ and https://deadline.com/2025/04/ca-film-credit-expansion-hollywood-workers-support-1236372913/). That’s right and we all know it. They’re leaving CA and coming to Texas, even without your massive subsidies rewarding them for doing so.

This bill regulates the industry: how much of the movie must be filmed in TX, how many Texans they must employ, and on and on. I’ve written two blog posts about how Texas seems to be turning into NJ with all the housing mandates y’all are considering. Now, you want to turn Texas into CA through incentivizing and regulating the film industry. Have y’all forgotten why people and businesses move here? FREEDOM. Every time you pass a bill like this, you take another step toward turning Texas into those states that many of us fled. I really didn’t think I’d see it in my lifetime, let alone this legislative session. I am ADAMANTLY opposed to this bill, this “incentive”, this tax dollar giveaway to the industry of your choice. They’re coming anyway… y’all just seem to have forgotten why.”

HB 1523 (Bill text)

“Forty-one years ago, five months pregnant, I returned to my home and found the notice in my door. We were notified we could not drink our water nor shower in it longer than one minute. Five months pregnant. On my little dead-end street of under 60 houses, there were 11 special ed students, five of us who had placenta previa at birth, one child with cerebral palsy, one who died from leukemia at the age of 5, one born significantly premature, one with tourette’s syndrome, and several miscarriages. All of those birthed children are around the age of 40+. All of us drank that groundwater water while pregnant.

Our wells were placed on the EPA Superfund list in September 1983. Once a water source is polluted, cleaning it up takes years and millions of dollars. My street didn’t pollute the water we drank. Others did but water travels underground. Containing pollution when it happens is extremely difficult.

This bill is critical to protect the water supply in Bastrop County: ranchers’ wells, agricultural well water, city well drinking water. Water moves underground. If Austin injects 1,000 gallons, what’s to say that 1,000 gallons will still be there when they choose to retrieve it? Will they draw Bastrop water, then, leaving Bastrop without the necessary water for its own purposes? If Austin wants to store its water underground, do so in Travis County which is home, according to its own website, to 3 aquifers: Barton Springs and Northern Segments of the Edwards Aquifer, Trinity Group Aquifers, Colorado River Alluvial Aquifer. And, perhaps Austin should concentrate of repairing old infrastructure so it doesn’t lose significant amounts of water via leaking pipes.

Hmmmm…. just musing…. Why is it that urban areas always want to “outsource” their problems to the surrounding counties?”

One Hand Washes the Other

Follow the money. ALWAYS. With an upcoming local election, it’s important to understand how a candidate and ardent supporters interact. Enter John Kirkland and Mel Cooper onto the stage.

The Players

John Kirkland is a City of Bastrop Councilman and Mayor Pro-Tem running for re-election. Mel Cooper is the chairman and treasurer for a Bastrop County political PAC: Bastrop County Conservatives. Cooper is also one of the directors of a Texas corporation: Festival de la Cultura, Inc. created 10/19/2023.

The Handwashing

Hand washing In late 2023, Festival de la Cultura, Inc. requested a $25,000 taxpayer funded donation from the City of Bastrop. On October 24, 2023, just five days after the corporation was registered with the State of Texas and one day after the corporation applied (but was not yet approved) for IRS non-profit status, John Kirkland seconded a motion to give Cooper’s corporation $25,000 in taxpayer funded money. It was unanimously approved and check number 152230 was cut to Cooper’s corporation on October 27. (For more details on this transaction, read my blog post The Emperor Has No Clothes.) According to open and public records, neither Cooper or his corporation ever provided an accounting for the use of those $25,000 taxpayer dollars.

Quid Pro Quo

In 2024, Cooper sent out emails to his PAC members and supporters containing false information in support of Kirkland-driven initiatives.

A Cooper November 21, 2024 email stated, “Tonight, at 6:30 pm, the Bastrop City Manager, Sylvia Carrillo, will be under attack by a small but vocal political faction seeking her removal, led by Mayor Lyle Nelson and City Council member Cheryl Lee. This group has made allegations, which Sylvia will address and refute with clarity and conviction.”

How did Cooper know that she would “address and refute with clarity and conviction” some alleged attack? There was nothing on the agenda to that effect. There was no listing of any public presentation. There was (and is) no resolution attached to the public agenda.
11/21/2024 Executive Session Agenda item

How did Cooper know that Carrillo would request the discussion be in public session? That decision was only announced during the meeting itself.

Carrillo had a lengthy Powerpoint presentation ready to go for the meeting. It had to have been prepared in advance. For Cooper to have known that Carrillo would “address and refute [an attack] with clarity and conviction”, Cooper had to have been told in advance what Carrillo would do. Cooper had to have been told in advance that Carrillo would request this personnel matter be discussed in public…. because this item was on the agenda as a “Executive Session”, a session closed to the public.

Summary

BCC endorsement list Cooper‘s LLC gets $25,000 of taxpayer money with Kirkland‘s second-on-the-motion and vote. A few months later, Cooper sends an email calling for Nelson’s resignation (yet he never sent such an email calling for Jimmy Crouch’s resignation). Cooper then sent the November email discussed above to his PAC members and supporters with false and inside information.

Now, Cooper and his PAC are now hawking Kirkland for Bastrop City Council. Of course they are.

In this case, it’s clear that one hand washed the other. But should the soap be $25,000 of your hard earned taxpayer money?

A Tale of Two Censures

It’s totally immoral for the government at any level to impugn your character without charging you. If you have the evidence, charge me. Or shut up. ~ Tucker Carlson March 10, 2025

Censure #1: Jimmy Crouch, City of Bastrop Council Member and Builder

You’re likely unaware that in March 2022, an Ethics Complaint was filed against a then-sitting Council member, Jimmy Crouch. Hardly anyone I’ve asked knows or remembers that this happened.

A complaint was filed accusing Crouch of representing “others before the city” and attempting “to secure a benefit for his private client”. Crouch admitted guilt and a resolution to that effect was passed by the City Council. Voting for that resolution were current members John Kirkland, Kevin Plunkett and Cheryl Lee.

The Crouch Chronology

In its meeting of April 11, 2022, the Board of Ethics found the complaints against Crouch to be substantive and “ACTIONABLE”. They determined that the facts, if true, were a violation of 1.15.009(d)(1) (representing others before the city while a city official) and 1.15.009(e)(1) (attempting to secure a benefit for [a] private client in the form of a deviation from city protocols).

On May 16, 2022, the Board of Ethics chose to enter into Dispute Resolution under Section G, a new procedure apparently added that very day after an Executive Session discussion. It is a procedure that is currently non-existent in the City of Bastrop ordinances regarding the Board of Ethics.

The May 16, 2022 agenda shows that first, “Discussion and action to amend Section E. 7 of the City of Bastrop Board of Ethics Rules of Procedure” took place, after which a motion was made and adopted 4-0 to so amend the rules. Minutes do not specify what that change was but the very next item was a “motion to avail to Subsection G. Dispute Resolution” for the Crouch ethics complaint. It was approved. Then the meeting was adjourned.

On June 28, 2022, City Council members Kirkland, Lee, Plunkett, and possibly Crouch (but the minutes aren’t clear) participated in an Executive Session to discuss this ethics complaint. After that Executive Session, those Council members, including current Council members Kirkland, Plunkett and Lee, voted their support of a “mediated settlement” (R-2022-58) of the Ethics complaints against Councilman Crouch.

On July 22, 2022, after the City Council vote, that “negotiated resolution” was also approved by the Board of Ethics by a 5-0 vote.

R-2022-58 included an admission of guilt by Councilman Jimmy Crouch.

John Kirkland never demanded Jimmy Crouch resign his Council seat. John Kirkland made no effort to recall Jimmy Crouch.

In 2024, two years later almost to the day, Kirkland and Plunkett actually voted to appoint Jimmy Crouch to the Charter Commission. That happened after he voted in favor of the Gateway Project behind Buc-ces. And just a few weeks ago, Jimmy Crouch was nominated by Kirkland to sit on the Planning & Zoning Commission. The nomination was approved by Council with both Kirkland and Plunkett voting in favor.

What does Jimmy Crouch do for a living? Well, no surprise there…. Jimmy Crouch is a developer. His bio from the City website states:

“His knowledge and experience in the commercial construction field will help tremendously in the next phase of Bastrop’s growth. He has built for major companies such as HEB, Coca-Cola, USACE, Living Spaces Furniture and The University of Utah among others. He has had the privilege to be part of the team that built the Lost Pines Art Center and the new 921 Main Street building here in Bastrop. Working on these projects has given him an opportunity to see what building processes work within the City of Bastrop Building Departments. He is also a current member of the Greater Austin Home Builders Association.“

So much for consequences for admitted unethical behavior. Apparently, ethics be damned if you’re a developer.

Censure #2: Lyle Nelson, City of Bastrop Council Member and Mayor

Compare that story to the ethics complaint John Kirkland filed against Mayor Lyle Nelson.

Kirkland, Plunkett and Crouch are the very people who voted to move forward on an Ethics Complaint against Nelson well before legal investigations were complete. John Kirkland was the driving force behind the Nelson recall petition. Kirkland, Plunkett, Crouch and their families obtained more than 75% of the signatures on that petition.

In early 2024, Kirkland wrote the Nelson complaint and testified at the Board of Ethics hearing. Were you aware that in December 2023, the City Council hired investigator had found no evidence of misuse of funds, no evidence of sharing confidential information, no conflicts of interest? City Manager Sylvia Carrillo was aware of those findings and thus the Council should have been.

Compare the investigator’s exoneration of Nelson to the Crouch ethics complaint where Crouch admitted guilt.

Kirkland’s rationale in the Nelson complaint is interesting. Every Code of Ethics concern cited by Kirkland is applicable to the Crouch complaint.

“The Bastrop Code of Ethics lays out expectations of city officials. The first 5 are reproduced here to make a point.
(a) City officials are expected to conduct themselves in a manner that fosters public trust.
(b) City officials are charged with performing their public duties in a way that projects a high level of personal integrity and upholds the integrity of the organization.
(c) City officials must avoid behavior that calls their motives into question and erodes public confidence.
(d) City officials shall place the municipality’s interests and the concerns of those the city serves above private, personal interests.
(e) Those who serve the city are expected to value honesty, trustworthiness, diligence, objectivity, fairness, due process, efficiency, and prudence as values the city professes.”

crouch vs nelson results

What happened to Jimmy Crouch? Nothing happened to him. He did lose re-election but what a difference a year makes. He is now, once again, a favored son. He now has been appointed to two boards, one of which has a major impact on development in the City.

What happened to Lyle Nelson who was exonerated in the December 2023 report and never charged with anything at any level of law enforcement? John Kirkland went after Lyle Nelson with a vengeance. John Kirkland whipped up the public into a frenzy by going door-to-door himself to collect far more than 50% of the signatures on the recall petition. John Kirkland led the charge to stop Lyle Nelson from representing the City in any manner whatsoever.

John Kirkland voted “yes” finding Jimmy Crouch actually guilty. Then did nothing: no recall, no admonition, no consequences.

character counts in our representatives

I’ve always believed that consistency is critical in elected officials. After all, don’t we believe that the law applies to all equally? Isn’t our Country founded on equal protection under the law? Didn’t we fight a war to end a monarchy that treated people differently dependent on their status?

Apparently, John Kirkland, Kevin Plunkett and their buddies could care less about consistency and equal protection under the law. The proof is in the Tale of Two Censures.

Don’t New Jersey my Texas

Senate bill 785 passed out of the Senate Local Government Committee without amendment and is headed to the Senate floor. There’s an identical bill in the Texas House: HB 1835 scheduled in the Land & Resources Committee on April 10.

Both mandate that any Texas “municipality with zoning regulations or zoning district boundaries”:

(1) shall permit the installation of a new HUD-code
manufactured home for use as a dwelling under at least one:
(A) residential zoning classification; or
(B) type of residential zoning district; and
(2) may not adopt or enforce other zoning regulations
or zoning district boundaries that directly or indirectly prohibit
the installation of new HUD-code manufactured homes in all
residential zoning classifications or types of residential zoning
districts adopted by the municipality.

This isn’t about affordable housing. It’s zone busting step one and I’m shocked that Republicans who allegedly are for less government intrusion would be supportive of this.

In NJ, suburban towns were accused of and sued over “exclusionary zoning” in the 1980’s. Denville, where I lived, was primarily made up of very small lots around lakes… summer cottages that were renovated in the 1950s as year-round homes because they were cheap. Denville was also 13.7% seniors, many on fixed incomes. None of that mattered when the State of NJ decided that the suburbs were exclusionary. Build it and we don’t care what it costs current property taxpayers.

As a result, since the late 1980’s, every NJ municipality is assigned a “fair share” housing quota every 10 years. Municipalities either have to figure out how to do it themselves with tax dollars or builders get what’s called a “builder’s remedy”: 5-6 market value townhouses for every 1 low or moderate unit they build. To hell with zoning, land topography, water resources, traffic, schools, public safety.

These Texas bills are the first step toward those quotas. They don’t mandate quotas, but do mandate that HUD-code housing cannot be prohibited in “all residential zoning classifications or types of residential zoning districts adopted by the municipality”.

That means it can be placed in any residential district in every municipality in Texas and there’s not a thing a municipality can do about it. The problem is that this bill only deals with the building, the HUD-Code house. What exactly, then, is “indirectly” prohibiting the use of these HUD-Code homes? Is the cost of land an “indirect” prohibition?

Affordable Housing Isn’t Just a Building

What happens to municipalities where land is too expensive for a person to acquire the land to put up a HUD-code home? When that happened in NJ and suburban towns didn’t build any low or moderate income housing, the courts, unhappy with the lack of affordable housing, began assigning quotas to every suburban municipality. When municipalities still didn’t build the housing (who could afford to do so), developers were allowed to sue towns for not providing housing commensurate with the quotas. Our town had a plan, but the court didn’t like our plan so the court assigned a “master zoner” to our town. I called those meetings “Thursdays with David” and was at nearly every one. I watched and listened as a court-appointed planner worked with developers who had sued our town to rezone their lands for high density housing…. all in the name of providing affordable housing.

This is how it starts. Let’s assume these bills pass. Yes, I can put a HUD-code manufactured home on a lot in City A. But I can’t afford that lot in City A. So what good does that do me? I want to live in City A. Schools are better. It’s closer to my job. I want to live there for any number of reasons. But I can’t afford to. Next come mandates and quotas.

This is the second bill this session that seems to be rushing through the legislature in the name of affordable housing. Neither one addresses water resources. Neither one addresses municipal service costs. Neither one addresses income qualification or verification for affordable housing. Neither one addresses saleable versus rental housing. (More on that in another blog post.)

Clearly, neither author has thought through the impact and costs. Even though the state Fiscal Notes say there are no costs to either one either at the state level or municipal level. There are costs and if they looked at NJ’s experience, they’d realize that. I really hope these legislators don’t New Jersey my Texas.

HUD-Code Housing

What is it? Who regulates it? Does it even exist anymore?

I looked up “HUD-code” on the web with interesting results.
Web search for HUD-code

These two pages, one specifically the home page for HUD’s Office of Manufactured Housing Programs and that program’s Frequently Asked Questions page, are gone. That would seem to mean that program is now defunct. In any case, it’s continuity is clearly in question. Yet, the Texas Senate is poised to pass legislation requiring HUD-code housing in all residential districts in all cities.

I then did a search on the HUD website itself for HUD-code. It returned this:

Again, every one of these pages having to do with HUD-code housing returns a Page not Found error and flips the user to HUD’s home page. Yet, the Texas Senate is poised to pass legislation requiring HUD-code housing be allowed in all residential districts in all cities.

Perhaps the Texas Senate would be wise to see what happens to HUD before moving forward with SB785. Same for the Texas House with HB 1835. HUD is in the process of cutting about 4,000 staff members, or approximately 50% of its staff. As I pointed out, there’s no information on its website about HUD-Code housing. There are only 4 regulations under HUD-Code on Regulations.gov and none is from the past 3 years: 1-2003; 1-2005; 1-2007; and 1-2022.

It would seem Texas is poised to legislate allowing something to happen in all residential zoning districts of all Texas municipalities that may no longer exist.

More Sloppy (Illegal?) Gov’t

I wrote extensively on March 30 about what appear to be flagrant violations of the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA) by the City of Bastrop with its called meeting on March 31.

But wait! There’s more.

Another meeting has been called. This time for Wednesday, April 2, 2025. The agenda says it’s a Special City Council Meeting. But you wouldn’t know that by scanning the list of meetings. It’s not called a Special City Council Meeting on the list of City Council meetings. It’s called “Pet Microchipping Townhall Meeting”.

What’s a city-sponsored “Townhall Meeting” anyway? There is no such meeting type in the Bastrop Charter or Rules of Procedure. Both the PDF and HTML agendas for this meeting repeatedly refer to a City Council meeting or the Council. The HTML public agenda actually says this is a “Special City Council Meeting”. All references to the Council, on both agendas, are highlighted below. Why would any member of the public accessing either of these agendas think this is not a City Council meeting?

2025-04-02Special City Council Meeting 04_02_2025 05_30 PM _ Bastrop, TX-HTML Download

2025-04-02Special City Council Meeting 04_02_2025 05_30 PM _ Bastrop, TX-PDF Download

And, did I mention that once again, the HTML version of the agenda says there will be a closed session at 5PM, a “Mayor’s State of the City Address” at 6PM and the meeting starts at 6:30. Yes, it does, and it also says, in the upper right corner, that the meeting starts at 5:30. One agenda. Two different meeting start times. The PDF version of the agenda also says the meeting starts at 5:30. So, which is it?

As a member of the public, I have to guess if the meeting starts at 5:30 or at 6:30. I have to guess if that “Mayor’s State of the City Address” will be given or repeated from the other poorly noticed meeting two days earlier, or not. I also have to guess who is giving presentations and guess at the subject matter. Presentations should be identified along with the presenter on an agenda.

The point of the Texas Open Meetings Act is so that citizens know what is going on at City Hall, what their elected officials are up to, and to allow citizens a forum to express their views on the topics advertised.

Governing bodies and city officials can’t just make it up as they go. This meeting completely fails the TOMA test. It should be properly noticed as a Council meeting with a quorum of the Council in attendance to officially listen to and collect citizen input on this subject.