top of page
Search

Mertzon City Council May 4 2026

  • 6 days ago
  • 4 min read

Agenda Analysis | Meeting Review | Meeting Documents | Commentary | Last Meeting


The heavy construction machinery coming down 4th St. is already crumbling the new pavement forming the entrance to the flood detention area, so Gallagher’s folks need to rethink the design of the project. IC ISD uses the street regularly for its buses, so it needs to be constructed well enough to handle daily bus traffic, plus direct stormwater into the detention area without becoming waterlogged.
The heavy construction machinery coming down 4th St. is already crumbling the new pavement forming the entrance to the flood detention area, so Gallagher’s folks need to rethink the design of the project. IC ISD uses the street regularly for its buses, so it needs to be constructed well enough to handle daily bus traffic, plus direct stormwater into the detention area without becoming waterlogged.


A. Agenda Analysis

  1. 2nd Street drainage, item 5: Kudos to the City for not letting this issue die.

  2. Resolution 5-4-26, item 6: I think, but am not certain, that this is to give the Mayor authority to explore and negotiate a potential 391 Commission with the County and others to address the potential 765 kV line going through the county. Also, see my commentary below.

  3. Speeding on Duncan, item 7: Yes, it needs to be addressed. The Council should also be mindful that the County Commissioners Court may still place a new Community Center in the Park with a larger Duncan street main entrance.





B. Meeting Review

  1. 2nd Street drainage:

    When the folks at Gallagher present at the meeting proposed this:

…after several minutes of discussion, an astute City staffer, Nate Padilla, pointed out to Mayor Stewart that the MOU between the City and IC ISD actually called for detention “walls”. Here’s the MOU; see paragraphs numbered 1-4. Indeed, there was a quid pro quo in the MOU: IC ISD will not get the portion of 3rd street in front of the High School and Elementary unless IC ISD puts in the flood control projects at this location in the photo above and at 4th and West Fleming. And, the MOU also has a deadline for construction: this month! By the end of the discussion it was agreed that each side would huddle and figure on how to renew the MOU before it expires. (Everyone in the room but Nate had forgotten about the MOU provisions.) One key issue for further review is whether sufficient money was recommended for both projects by Parkhill and Gallagher prior to bond election. I recall the figure was north of $800,000 for both projects combined. Gallagher stated at this meeting that over $800,000 was spent just on the project at W. Fleming and 4th.

  1. Resolution 5-4-26, item 6: The Council made one of its most impactful statements in recent memory by passing the resolution below that starts the process to more formally opposing extra high voltage transmission lines (765 kV), data centers and battery storage facilities in Mertzon and Irion County.

Note that this is NOT the creation of the 391 (Council of Gov't or "COG") but a statement of resolve to create one. Why this is important: This is the first formal statement, whether or not a 391 is actually created, that the City of Mertzon can make to say to the developers of these multi-billion dollar projects that our government and its citizens are not interested. Why all citizens should favor this Resolution: Development will bring excessive consumption of already limited water supplies. Folks, it is the limited water supply in Mertzon and Irion County that is keeping development out. This resolution is one tool our government leaders can use to keep development out.




C. Commentary

  1. A “Prayer” in a legal pleading is simply a request from the party that the Court grant them what it is they want. I am continuing to monitor the next leg of the 765 kV line that Oncor/LCRA and the PUC are proposing. (I’ve also intervened in that leg, CCN 59475, but I don’t know yet whether the judge will accept my intervention.) This week I came across the "Prayer" below in the 59128 case written by a pro se landowner ( a non lawyer) opposed to the line. While I am in the 59128 case trying to intervene in the 59475 case, she is in the 59475 case trying to intervene in the 59128 case. (We are aligned parties.) In my 35 years as a licensed attorney, I don't think I've ever read a better Prayer than this one:


    Here’s my message to all those landowners out there sitting on their hands and doing nothing but waiting to collect the eminent domain money from Oncor/LCRA: Don’t pray to the almighty dollar. Remember this landowner, and all those like her, that you aren't helping by doing nothing.

  2. In light of my message above here's a pleading I filed yesterday that I am pleased with. Another pro se land owner, Kevin Kennedy, is fighting like hell to keep a 765 kV line off of his property. In my pleading I ask the Public Utility Commission of Texas and the State Office of Administrative Hearings to look at the larger picture and see how fundamentally unfair this process is to Texas landowners.

  3. Also, see this letter co authored and filed yesterday by local State Representative Drew Darby expressing his concern about one segment, the eastern most segment, of the 765 kV project…but not the segment that goes through Irion County. He needs to be encouraged to say what he is saying here but also say it about Irion County, which is in his district:

    “Texans deserve a more thoughtful and deliberate approach to improving existing infrastructure, one that enhances reliability and resilience, reduces costs, and better protects private property rights.”




Copyright 2026 G. Noelke

Drop Me a Line, Let Me Know What You Think

Thanks for submitting!

© 2025 by George Noelke

bottom of page