Mertzon City Council April 21 2025
- G. Noelke
- Apr 19
- 6 min read
Updated: Apr 22
The first of the construction fencing went up this week around the part of the elementary school that will be razed and replaced with 2024 bond funds. Two of the new classrooms will be designed for STEM learning, according to Supt. Moore in her report to the Board this week.
A. Agenda Analysis 1. Ordinance 20.03, item 5: This appears to be a revision to the new council pay ordinance passed at the last meeting. 2. Customer water line damage, item 6: This is a first, at least since I've been following the Council. The City is going to consider requesting payment for payment for damage done by a customer to a City water line. 3. Meet Ms. Chappell: This is the first agenda signed by the City Administrator Assistant, Brittany Chappell. Now that she is full time, you'll also see her at the Council meetings.
As a reminder, the closure of this street during construction is pursuant to an MOU between IC ISD and the City of Mertzon.
B. Meeting Review 1. Here are the meeting documents for this meeting. 2. Ordinance 20.03, item 5: This is an ordinance amendment limited solely to taking away a provision that allowed IC ISD to have a reduced "summer rate" for its water bill. The Council unanimously approved an amendment (see meeting documents) deleting the summer rates, without opposition from IC ISD. Recent significant water bill increases at IC ISD apparently brought this pay provision to the attention of City staff. 3 Water line damage, item 6: A city ordinance (11.2 at page 3 of meeting documents) allows the City to charge users who damage the city's property. In this case, a resident was turning off her water at the meter to save money in her bill from a leak in her home. The repeated opening and closing of the city's valve caused $300 in damage. Pro tip from the City: turn your water off on your side of the line and NOT at the meter. 4. A few more things: a. Call before you dig kerfuffle with Frontier: Frontier says the City cut a line, and the City says they did the "call before you dig" thing and Frontier said go ahead. An irate and unprofessional Frontier rep is trying to strong arm the City out of roughly $1,000. I raise it here because I was surprised to hear about Frontier's strong arm tactics and unprofessionalism over a penny ante to them $1,000 bill. Be a good neighbor, Frontier. The City has documented its good faith efforts. I'm a Frontier customer, and I'm embarrassed for them for the way they are handling this. (Referring it to their attorney?! Over a $1,000 fee?! ) They need to waive the darn bill and get on down the line. b. Spring Creek Pavilion Lions Clube project update: The Lions Club foundation pad for the new pavilion is going in at the river. I raised back here when it was proposed that no discussion was had about the Lions Club long term commitment to upkeep and improvements. Mr. Dolan, Club member, certainly didn't offer up any long term support in his initial pitch for the project. A discussion about the matter was raised by one of the Council members at this meeting. Perhaps one of the other Council members who happens to be in the club will be going back to the club and will get some commitments. It is clear to see from the location (near the baseball fields) that the facility is going to create long term drainage and road maintenance issues alone from the stormwater runoff and extra vehicle traffic it will bring to the area. And, without law enforcement patrol, it also has potential to increase loitering in the area. Commitments by the Lion Club need to be firmed up right away (before the cement is poured), otherwise the City is going to be burdened for decades to come. Public park structures like this one eventually become eye sores when neglected. (Don't think what it will look like in 2025 but in 2050 if it is not well tended to.) Taxpayers should not be burdened with upkeep and maintenance of charitable capital improvements like this one without a clear understanding on the front end of the charitable commitment. c. Next meeting: should be Monday, May 5.
C. Commentary
This week the Texas House voted to approve its version of the school voucher program sought after by Gov. Abbott. I have had on occasion addressed my opposition to the school voucher concept in these pages, even though my next door neighbor, Irion County ISD, has so aggressively pursued publicly funded capital improvements that are flooding my property.
So, it is with a real sense of disappointment that this week State Representative Drew Darby of San Angelo voted for SB 2, the current Texas bill that will create school vouchers. You can read about my support of his primary race here, when I praised him for being a staunch opponent of vouchers and beating back Gov. Abbott's heavily financed efforts to see him out the door. I especially admired him for speaking the truth about vouchers when he said, while visiting Mertzon on a campaign stop, that vouchers were racist and would lead to segregation in our schools. (I agree with him on these points.)
There is some indication that his change in heart on the issue was over a larger Hobson's choice involving rural school funding. Whatever the truth is on that point, it is equally important to put his decision in proper context of the political realities of the day. This week when addressing why Republicans in Congress were unable to stand up to President Trump, Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski famously said, "Retaliation is real." (Gov. Abbott even posted his phone call with President Trump just before the SB 2 vote in the House.)
If anyone knows about political retaliation, it is surely Rep. Darby.
But, fear of retaliation is no excuse. I supported Rep. Darby even without an ounce of support from him. I expected him to be as much of a purist on school vouchers as I am a purist on how wrong it is for a public school to take its neighbor's property by storm water. Both are wrong, both have protections found in our constitutions, and both are worthy of staunch and unwavering advocacy. (Indeed, I might have also added to my Milestones page that I am continuing my advocacy notwithstanding the total lack of support from any of my elected officials, including Rep. Darby. In these 9 years, I have yet to find an elected representative to champion my cause. Elected folks will not speak out against a school district, even in situations where the district is not only flooding its neighbor but also flooding its community and itself!)
Of course, Rep. Darby is also part of the institution - the Texas Legislature - for funding IC ISD. What school vouchers are certain to do is to take more from the wealth of Irion County than ever before. The District already turns over $9 - $15 million per year in recapture funds. (See page 5 of this document for the top 10 largest taxpayers in the county.) The community ought to be incensed that so much wealth is being transferred out of district, especially now that our local wealth is the process of being dedicated to private educational programs that are sure to undercut funding to IC ISD.
Don't kid yourself. This all is nothing more than a transfer of local public wealth to private hands.
One reason in Irion County that there has been no community uprising over this travesty of funding, as I have written before in this blog, is that the school board has failed to engage the community in its meetings. Why is that? Well, dissent is frowned upon in a small community of less than 1,000 folks. When folks want to challenge how public dollars are being spent it gets uncomfortable for the board members and administration. (See how far you get by challenging a $9+ million gymnasium!) The public, particularly parents, know that there will be negative consequences. Why even show up at board meetings and take that risk? It's not as if Rep. Darby himself is in the trenches at school board meetings defending taxpayer rights. He's not there, either.
Senator Murkowski was right. Retaliation is real. And, it is hyper-focused in a small community like this one.
Perhaps there is some hope on where to go from here, a place where cynicism breeds, in these words by Edwin R. Murrow: “The right of dissent, or, if you prefer, the right to be wrong, is surely fundamental to the existence of a democratic society. That’s the right that went first in every nation that stumbled down the trail toward totalitarianism.”
Murrow also said these words:
"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty."
And, finally, he said these words:
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves."
Don't be sheep.
Copyright 2025 G. Noelke
