Category: news

It’s baaaack… Gateway Zoning Returns

There was a long discussion on Nextdoor a while back about development in the City of Bastrop and this election. NO, some shouted. It isn’t about the Gateway development. That’s over. Some of that land is up for sale, they said, so it won’t come back.

Caution, I said. Rezoning is afoot and zoning goes with the land, not the owner. The last application was a request for a zone change. I warned the City was moving too fast with zone changes and the public really didn’t understand them. I also warned about the City Council appointing developer and ethically-challenged former City Council member Jimmy Crouch to Planning & Zoning. I warned about stacking that Commission with developer friendly, Council buddies.

Now this article, from Thursday night’s P&Z meeting, by the Independent Texans PAC.
NOTE: I’ve refrained from suggesting who you should vote for since I don’t live in the City and I continue to do so. The title on this post is that of Independent Texans PAC, not mine. Article reprinted with permission to reprint in full from Independent Texans PAC.

Powered By EmbedPress

Stand Up Texas!

Great read this morning from JoAnn Fleming of Grassroots America-We The People regarding the utter failure of Texas House Republicans to move GOP priority bills, to protect Texans and our Constitutional rights. Instead, we have Democrat bills moving quickly through the Texas House. Personally I’m hopeful most of them die in the Senate.

There are just 31 days left in this legislative session. More than 3 times that number have passed. And what does the Texas House have to show for it? Nothing except school choice and that was forced on them by the TX Senate and Gov Abbott. They’re going wring their hands and tell you they just ran out of time. HOGWASH!

The most important two words, I told my daughter, to be successful in college are “time management”. TX House leadership are masters at doing just the opposite and squandering time so important legislation fails to see the light of day. STOP electing these do-nothing House members. Next year, we have a chance to again clean House (literally) and elect conservative Republicans who will act like Republicans, govern like Republicans, and pass legislation that Republicans sent them to Austin to pass.

GRWTP-Forecast_-Political-Bull

Follow the Money

City of Bastrop Edition

Candidates are legally required to file financial disclosure forms. Why? Primarily so you know where a candidate is getting their money.

May 3 contested candidates were required to file 30-day and 8-day prior reports by April 3 and April 25 respectively. Let’s take a look at who filed or failed to file and what the reports tell us.

If you’ve not spent a lot of time looking at these reports or reading on Texas Ethics what candidates must report, they may be confusing. So, I’ll break them down with what I see that should concern City of Bastrop voters: who is getting money from developers.

First, it’s the law that candidates with opponents file reports on time (Sec. 254.037. FILING DEADLINE). While local election reports aren’t filed with Texas Ethics, Texas Ethics rules apply to all filings. Texas Ethics provides a synopsis of what local candidates must file and when. Even after an election, win or lose, candidates with money in their accounts must file reports by Jan 15 and July 15 annually.

Let’s look at issues revealed by these reports.

city council place 5

  • Cheryl Lee donations reported in her 30-day report are short $300. Whether she failed to list a donation or added wrong is impossible to tell.
  • John Kirkland accepted a $250 donation from the Home Builders Association of Greater Austin-HOMEPAC.
  • John Kirkland accepted $500 from a relative of the developer that just received $600,000 of City taxpayer money in the form of a grant1. The address listed for that person is the business address of the developer.
  • At a City Council meeting, when asked to acknowledge if any Council members had received donations from this developer, Kirkland and Plunkett sat silent even though they had.
  • Kevin Plunkett accepted four $500 contributions from this same developer under four different names: Duhrman Bassett Realty Group LLC, BCSC LLC, BRP East LP, Bastrop Retail Partners LP.
  • Texas law prohibits corporations and labor organizations from making political contributions to candidates. The prohibition also applies to other organizations, such as partnerships and limited liability companies (LLC), if they are owned by a corporation or include an incorporated member or partner.4
  • Plunkett has not filed the legally required reports since 20232 violating Texas Ethics rules.
  • John Kirkland recently accepted $3916.37 from Councilman Plunkett’s campaign account1.
  • Plunkett originally accepted those developer contributions. He then donated the funds to Kirkland, who also accepted a contribution from this developer. Contribution movement

city council place 1

  • Perry Lowe’s donations of note: Robert Trevino (City Manager’s husband $65); Joe Grady Tuck ($250); Home Builders Assoc-HOMEPAC ($250); Texas Realtor’s PAC-TREPAC ($2,000 pledged)
  • Cecilia Serna: Serna chose modified reporting, meaning she would not raise or expend over $1100.

mayoral candidates

  • Ward Northcutt identified all donors and expenses properly in both his 30-day and 8-day reports.
  • Willie DeLaRosa did not file an 8-day report. That’s a violation of Texas Ethics.
  • Ishmael Harris (30-day report) claims $1640 in itemized contributions, but the reported amounts don’t add up. The reported donor amounts add up to $1510. Included in that $1510 is a $200 contribution from “anonymous”. Anonymous donations are illegal5. Also listed are several names with no donation amounts.
  • Ishmael Harris also took money from the City Manager’s husband, Robert Trevino ($65).
  • Ishmael Harris has signs all over town, yet none of his reports show an expense for signs. Who paid for them? Each of the other mayoral candidates spent close to $1,000 for signs, just to put this in perspective.

april 30 updates

  • Perry Lowe missing donation: According to their 8-day prior Texas Ethics filing, Mel Cooper’s BCC GPAC donated $500 to Perry Lowe’s campaign. It does not show in Lowe’s 30-day prior or 8-day prior campaign finance reports.
  • Cecilia Serna 8-day report: Once a candidate exceeds the $1100 of modified reporting, that candidate is required to file reports. Cecilia Serna filed an 8-day prior report on time after having exceeded the $1100 modified reporting limit.

summary

Question Mark ManAsk yourself how a candidate will manage taxpayer money if they can’t properly manage campaign funding. Ask yourself who will get their ear and vote if they’ve taken money from developers and development-related PACs (Political Action Committees).

Candidates John Kirkland and Perry Lowe have taken significant funds from the development community. Willie DeLaRosa hasn’t filed the legally required reports. Ishmael Harris hasn’t reported all his campaign income and expenses as legally required.

The only candidates to properly fill out these reports were Ward Northcutt who is running for mayor and Cecilia Serna running for City Council, Place 1. Cheryl Lee had a minor error in one report, but shows no donations from developers.

These public documents are for your benefit. They are required so you know where a candidate is getting their money and how they are spending it. Know before you go.

1 https://www.cityofbastrop.org/upload/page/0601/Election_2025/John%20Kirkland/Kirkland_30th%20Day%20Finance_Redacted.pdf
2 https://www.cityofbastrop.org/page/cs.candidate_officeholder_documents
3 https://www.cityofbastrop.org/page/cs.election_may2025_SPECIAL
4 https://www.ethics.state.tx.us/data/resources/guides/Gpolfund.pdf
5 https://www.ethics.state.tx.us/data/resources/guides/Gpolfund.pdf

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 washingIn 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 listCooper‘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

Jimmy CrouchYou’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

Lyle NelsonCompare 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.