The Swamp – Page 2 – Carol A. Spencer

What’s the Rush?

In 2019, the City of Bastrop adopted new development code ordinances. It took a long time because the City gathered a lot of public input prior to holding any Planning & Zoning public hearings or City Council public hearings.

The City held public meetings to “share future development plans and to solicit community input”. These were held on April 10 2019, May 9 2019, June 8 2019 and June 26 2019. The draft code, technical manual, and draft pattern book were released on May 24, 2019 so the public could review them. Another public meeting was held to solicit input on the technical manual on August 22 2019. The Planning and Zoning Commission did not take action to approve the code until September 26, 2019. The Council’s first reading of the new zoning ordinance was October 22 2019. The second reading and final adoption took place on November 12 2019.

From the first public meeting to final adoption was seven months.

Why, then, is the City Manager Sylvia Carrillo trying to push through a new code in just 23 days? There’s always a reason when that happens. So, what’s the rush?

City of Bastrop P&Z Meeting Last night’s meeting agenda was far too long. The meeting started at 5PM. I don’t know what time it ended because I left at 9:30 when there were still two items to be discussed and voted on. There was a full house when it started. By the time I left, there were barely 25 people in the room.

City of Bastrop P&Z Meeting 9:30PM Even the Commissioners were exhausted. So exhausted, in fact, that one of them left the meeting. Another read a motion for setback code changes when he meant to read a motion for lot size code changes. He was so tired he didn’t even realize he was reading the wrong prewritten motion. Setbacks hadn’t even been discussed yet.

Four hour meetings are unfair to the governing body, but most especially to the public who have to work the following day, may have had to arrange child care or may be elderly. Again, what’s the rush?

For all the bloviating about drainage, street width, cost of street maintenance by Carrillo last evening, pushing this forward in such a short time frame only makes sense in the context of future development. What’s on the drawing board for which these changes are needed? What’s the rush?

Citizens need to remember that the Gateway development was defeated on May 14, 2024. That date is important because the developer can resubmit an application one year later: May 15, 2025. If Carrillo has her way, the new code will be adopted by March 11, 2025. That’s 2 months for the Gateway developers to have access to the new code to lay out a conforming development.

Previously, developers were required to comply with a grid layout of streets and roads-including the Gateway development. If these proposed changes become law, that will no longer be the case, facilitating a different design for this project and every other.

What else is on the drawing board? Are there mapping changes? Zone changes to specific areas? There’s something in Bastrop’s future for which these code changes are necessary, that’s for sure.

I spent eight years on a planning board, six years on a town council. I know this game. Nothing of this magnitude and effect on citizens gets rushed through this fast without an ulterior motive. It’s likely the Planning & Zoning Commissioners have no idea what it is, and perhaps only the Council majority that votes together knows. Maybe only the City Manager knows. But there is an ulterior motive that will reveal itself in time. Otherwise, what’s the rush?

J6 Choir: Let’s be Very Clear

Let’s be VERY clear about the J6 Choir controversy the Democrats used to delay the vote for Kash Patel as FBI director. Let’s be VERY clear.

The J6 Choir video that the Judiciary Committee Democrats are SO opposed to is one of incarcerated J6ers singing the National Anthem while President Trump cites the Pledge of Allegiance. The Democrats have now clearly shown their true colors. Shameful.

Watch the video that they object to, the patriotic video that they want to use to deny Kash Patel, a highly qualified individual, the Directorship of the FBI. Shameful.

These Democrats want to deny Kash Patel the Directorship of the FBI, but they were fine with these people serving in the Biden administration. Democrat Party Judiciary members have gone nuts and clearly shown themselves for the kooks they are.

A Fix Without a Problem

The City of Bastrop held numerous public hearings before it adopted the current zoning ordinance. The public had many opportunities to provide input. Modifications were made based on that input. The Council held public hearings on the ordinance to obtain more public input, and then it was adopted. That happened just 6 years ago in 2019.

As proven by the defeat of the Gateway project, the code worked. An over-intense project was proposed needing a zone change. When citizens came out to oppose the unfettered development on steep slopes behind Bucees, the developers modified their plan. They hoped they’d still get approval for a zone change so they could build their multi-million dollar project. That strategy did not work and the zone change request was defeated.

That, however, wasn’t the death of the project. It was just denied under current zoning. And the defeat only meant citizens wouldn’t see it again for 12 months.

But there’s more than one way to skin a cat.

Why not change the entire zoning plan for the City of Bastrop? Make it so complex that citizens cannot absorb it all. Do it quickly before citizens realize what’s happening and why.

Developers do this all the time. Can’t get what they want one way, they try another tactic. Can’t get a zone change on a particular piece of property? Change city-wide zoning instead and buried deep within is the zone change that developer wanted all along.

It’s all about money. The profits from major developments run in the tens, sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars. So, they get Council people out of the way who might or do oppose their plans and install Council people who vote “yes” for the zone changes because they’re in the developers pocket or they just aren’t “minding the store”. (Sound familiar? Get rid of Lyle Nelson and pro-Gateway Council member(s) remain.)

No matter how it happens, the developer gets its development, citizens be damned. Once the code is modified and the proposed development meets the zoning criteria, the development gets approved.

It’s odd the code is being re-written and shoved through so quickly. Odd, too, is that it’ll be adopted just in time for Gateway to be refiled, only this time, a zone change won’t be needed making that development harder to defeat.

I’ll be very surprised if this isn’t what happens. The only thing that will change is if citizens come out in droves and express their opposition to these zone changes. Waiting for future development projects is just too late.

Effecting Charter Changes

If you live in the City of Bastrop, you may remember quite a few charter amendments on your ballot last November. Two failed. All the rest passed.

November? That’s almost 3 months ago. Are the changes in effect yet?

Good question. So, let’s figure that out. State law allows charter changes to be placed on the ballot. Citizens vote. If citizens approve a change, there are other steps that must be taken before they are law.

According to Texas law: Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter 9, Sec. 9.005(b):

Sec. 9.005. ADOPTION OF CHARTER OR AMENDMENT.
(b) A charter or an amendment does not take effect until the governing body of the municipality enters an order in the records of the municipality declaring that the charter or amendment is adopted.

Has that been done? Well, it’s all a bit confusing and more of the sloppy government in the City of Bastrop that I’ve written about before.

The election was November 5, 2024.
On the November 12, 2024 City Council agenda was a draft “first reading” ordinance (2024-41) certifying the results of the election. This was deferred to a future meeting because final vote tally had not been sent to the City Council.
On the December 10, 2024 City Council agenda was a draft “first reading” ordinance (2024-41) certifying the results of the election. All questions except J were approved by the City Council as canvassed.
On the January 14, 2025 City Council agenda, more than 2 months after the election, was a draft of a resolution (rather than the previously adopted ordinance for second reading) (2025-07) certifying the results of the election.
As written, that resolution provided for the “adoption of Propositions A, B,C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, and M.
On January 13, 2025, after reviewing the agenda, I emailed several City Council members and the Mayor letting them know that this verbiage was incorrect and that Proposition L had, in fact, been defeated by the voters. Further review showed that Proposition G had also been defeated.
At the meeting of January 14, 2025, a motion was made to modify the City Secretary’s written resolution to provide for the “the adoption of Propositions A, B, C, D, E, F, H, I, J, K, , and M; and the rejection of Propositions G and L.”
With that modification, the resolution certifying the results of the November 5, 2024 was finally adopted on January 14, 2025.

So, with all those delays, the City Manager bought almost three months more to move into the City limits. The current charter requires her to live in the City limits, but the City Council somehow gave her a pass. Voters reaffirmed that provision on November 5, 2024. So, has she moved into the City limits?

There are a couple of other legal steps once the Council has certified the results. Under Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter 9, Sec. 9.007:

Sec. 9.007. CERTIFICATION OF CHARTER OR AMENDMENT.
(a) As soon as practicable after a municipality adopts a charter or charter amendment, the mayor or chief executive officer of the municipality shall certify to the secretary of state an authenticated copy of the charter or amendment under the municipality’s seal showing the approval by the voters of the municipality.

(b) The secretary of state shall file and record the certification in his office in a book kept for that purpose.

And, last, the City Secretary must record the changes either on microfilm or in a “book kept for that purpose.” As of this writing, the changes have not been recorded on the City’s website.

Sec. 9.008. REGISTRATION OF CHARTER OR AMENDMENT; EFFECT.
(a) The secretary or other officer of a municipality performing functions similar to those of a secretary shall record in the secretary’s or other officer’s office a charter or charter amendment adopted by the voters of the municipality. If a charter or amendment is not recorded on microfilm, as may be permitted under another law, it shall be recorded in a book kept for that purpose.

The Clock is Ticking

Did you know that the Texas Legislature meets for only 140 days every 2 years? Some of us think that’s good as it limits the damage they can do. Others think it’s not enough time. One would think that with only 140 days, they’d work every single day for the State of Texas and its citizens.

At least in the Texas House, they don’t.

A quick look around the website Capitol.Texas.Gov shows the work done so far by the House and Senate. The Texas Legislature (House and Senate) gaveled in on January 14, 2025.

The Texas House

The full House has met 8 of the 18 days since then. They won’t gavel in again until February 4.
The House elected a Speaker and adopted rules, without debate or amendments being allowed. (more on that in another post)
Speaker Dustin Burrows has not yet assigned committees. Thus, House committees have not met.

The Texas Senate

The full Senate has met 6 of the 18 days. They gavel in again on February 3.
Senate committees have met 9 times: Sunset Advisory Commission, Finance Committee, Education K-16 Committee, Administration Committee.
Senate Bill 1 (SB1) Appropriations, was sent to the Finance Committee on January 22.

More than 10% of this session is over and the Texas House doesn’t even have committees assigned. They were to be assigned today, but Speaker Burrows announced on Tuesday that wouldn’t happen.

The Governor gives his State of the State address on Sunday, February 2. He will announce his priorities. Once done, those priorities can be addressed immediately, yet the House won’t even have committees to do so.

So much to look forward to in the coming days. Will Democrats be appointed as chairs of the new category of “Permanent Standing Subcommittees”? What will Governor Abbott specify as his legislative priorities? Will we get our overpayment of taxes (surplus) back or will the legislature spend it? Will loyal Burrows renegade House members be rewarded with committee chairmanships? Will we finally find out how much the House spent last session to impeach Ken Paxton? Will we find out how much Democrat vice-chairs can spend on committee work? Will legislators get raises or will we never see a 2025 Housekeeping resolution? The clock is ticking….

No Dem Chairs Vote Rings Hollow

Bastrop County Republicans overwhelmingly voted for Republicans in November. We swept all contested races. Why, then, would our Republican Texas House representative vote for Democrat chairs? He claims he didn’t. But, he did.

Perhaps he didn’t read the rules before he voted on them. After all, they were sent to House members at 4AM, all 232 pages of them. Perhaps he didn’t understand what he was reading. Perhaps he didn’t realize they were written by Democrat Hugh Brady, former Obama General Counsel and Democrat Parliamentarian whose decisions killed conservative legislation during the last session. Perhaps he thought WE wouldn’t understand what we were reading. Perhaps he thought we’d be fooled by the splitting of hairs: banning Dem Chairs for committees but allowing them for extremely powerful subcommittees.

Rep Gerdes’ Facebook post says “I proudly voted to implement a new House rule that BANS the appointment of minority party chairs to lead committees in the Texas House.”

Not true.

“Oh! What a Tangled Web We Weave/When First We Practice to Deceive!” – Sir Walter Scott

Permanent Standing Subcommittees

The Rules Gerdes so “proudly” voted for created 12 new Permanent Standing Subcommittees. Permanent Standing Subcommittees is an entirely new class of committee this session, clearly created to allow members to claim they voted against Dem Chairs, all while allowing Dem Chairs and influence over legislation.

These 12 new Permanent Standing Subcommittees have assignments of “all matters related to” specific areas. The extensive matters falling under the jurisdiction of each Permanent Standing Subcommittee are listed in Rule 3. STANDING COMMITTEES. Pages and pages of them.

The 12 Permanent Standing Subcommittees are:

Juvenile Justice
Defense and Veterans’ Affairs
County and Regional Government
State-Federal Relations
Family and Fiduciary Relationships
Academic and Career-Oriented Education
Disease Prevention and Women’s and Children’s Health
Telecommunications and Broadband
Workforce
International Relations
Transportation Funding
Property Tax Appraisals

The Rules Gerdes so “proudly” voted for allow the Speaker to assign bills to these Permanent Standing Subcommittees. (In reading legislation, underlined words are new. Strikeout words are ~~removed~~. The word shall means must. The word may means optional.]

“All proposed legislation shall be referred by the speaker to an appropriate standing committee, permanent standing subcommittee, or select committee with jurisdiction, subject to correction by a majority vote of the house.”

The Rules he so “proudly” voted for require the Speaker to appoint Permanent Standing Subcommittee chairs and vice chairs. The Rules he so “proudly” voted for require the Speaker to appoint Permanent Standing Subcommittee members.

“The speaker shall appoint the chair and vice-chair of
each standing procedural committee and permanent standing
subcommittee and the remaining membership of each such [~~the~~]
committee and subcommittee.”

And, there is no provision in the rules prohibiting the Speaker from appointing Dem Chairs to these 12 Permanent Standing Subcommittees. The additional words “permanent standing subcommittee” were not added in the Rules section below as they were in many other Rules sections.

If, at the time the speaker announces the membership of standing committees, the members of the house of one political party constitute a majority of the membership of the house, the speaker shall designate a member of that party to serve as chair of each standing committee. The speaker shall not designate a member of that party to serve as vice-chair of a standing committee.

I verified with three House members that these Rules allow the Speaker to appoint Democrats as chairs of any of these “Permanent Standing Subcommittees”, that the Speaker could assign bills directly to them, and that committee and subcommittee chairs would have the same powers to hold hearings on bills, refer them out unchanged or with substitutions, offer amendments, or just ignore them.

We’ll see when Speaker Dustin Burrows announces committee and subcommittee appointments. They were due this Friday, January 31, but Burrows announced yesterday that those appointments would be delayed.

If even one Democrat is appointed as a chair of any Permanent Standing Subcommittee, Gerdes’ words “I proudly voted to implement a new House rule that BANS the appointment of minority party chairs to lead committees in the Texas House” will ring hollow and untrue.

As Predicted

It took 2 hours. See my post “The Poison Pill” in which I predicted that within a few hours, Rep Stan Gerdes would tell you that he banned Dem Chairs, but he wouldn’t tell you “the rest of the story”. And, that’s exactly what he did.

He did not tell you about Permanent Standing Committees and the other Dem-favorable provisions of these Rules. He did not tell you he voted to shut off all debate, to not allow any amendments, shutting off representation of the people. Rep Lowe stated “I am disgusted that the process of fair debate was eliminated in an effort to concede power to the minority party.” Rep Gerdes voted “yes” to eliminate debate in an effort to concede power to the minority party. (See page 116 of the 1/23/25 Journal. See also Rep Pierson’s relevant comments on why he voted “no” on page 118 of the 1/23/25 Journal.)

Gerdes did not tell you that he knew of this strategy when he voted against the GOP Caucus choice, violating the rules of the Caucus. Yet he did. And, he did not tell you what he’ll get in return for his votes. A chairmanship of one of these subcommittees? Again, we’re watching and time will tell.

Here’s the text message his consultants sent just 2 hours after adjournment.

Don’t believe Stan Gerdes sent this text. He did not. His consultants did.

Don’t be duped or played. Consultants who are given access to (and often design) elected official communications put out these texts and social media posts.