Mertzon City Council September 15 2025
- G. Noelke
- Sep 16
- 3 min read
Updated: Sep 23
Agenda Analysis | Meeting Review | Meeting Documents | Commentary | Last Meeting
A. Agenda Analysis
Creek clean up, item 5: This is the same item from the last meeting. The Council postponed discussion so that the Lions Club, who did not make an appearance, could do some homework on some of the thorny issues of the proposal.
Other items: the rest of the agenda is the “stock” agenda seen in each meeting.
It was caliche and street debris migration allowed by IC ISD’s construction manager, WBK, in the last go round of bonds (2019) that left the City of Mertzon holding the bag doing the cleanup on Fleming Ave. in front of my property. These are the current caliche piles of the 2024 bond Construction Manager, Gallagher, that are likewise migrating by stormwater to the same location on Fleming Ave. I’m doing a PIA request for Gallagher’s SWPPP, a document required under the Clean Water Act, because I think this sort of caliche storage requires a sediment fence. Construction managers unfortunately dismiss the City of Mertzon because it doesn’t have a regulatory system in place to protect the streets. So, it is up to individual landowners to speak out. If I don’t speak out some part of this caliche will end up in my front yard.
B. Meeting Review
Here are the meeting documents.
Creek clean up, item 5: The Council, try as they did, could not gin up a sufficient number of reasons to support this Lions Club proposal. Several things likely contributed to its demise. First, there is some history of this type of proposal failing in the past. Second, leadership from the Lions Club was not present at the last meeting or this meeting to pitch the proposal. And, third, the club is not helping their cause by their slow start to build the pavilion at Spring Creek. The discussion did, however, lead to a proposed City initiated clean up effort where the City will invite the community to help keep the river area clean each March and September.
C. Commentary
"At the end of the day we are all here to protect each other's rights and not take somebody's life because we disagree with them. No matter how irritated or aggravated we get at each other, we are still here to respect each other's rights." Mayor Stewart reflecting on the recent assassination of Charlie Kirk.
I think Mayor Stewart’s words appropriately point out that we are the shared guardians of one another's protected rights under the Constitution. We have an obligation, a guardianship if you will, to act to protect other's rights.
This obligation of guardianship extends beyond speech. It extends to all the protected rights under the Constitution. If your neighbor is being flooded by the government, for example, you should be concerned because what you are witnessing is a "taking" by the government. We are all invested in the government knowing its limits and not taking our neighbors' property.
When it comes to speech, the human condition is such that our voice is one of the first things we use to protest authority. Think of your of your relationship with your parents, as an example. This is human nature. But, killing or using violence to extinguish another's voice of protest is wrong and immoral.
We are guardian's of one another's rights. We all share in this obligation. That we are in constant debate over those rights and their meaning is a valid exercise that preserves democracy. If debate ever ceases it will be like momentarily being in the eye of a hurricane. The back side will be worse.
Copyright 2025 G. Noelke
