[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6475282,"mediaKeyId","5735101-c2b0cc19b0c48523a702cfb0896530d0","parentId",5735101,"title","Commissioners hold public hearing on replat for Lot 24 in Cope 2 Addition; legal timing and notice questioned","audioSeconds",8258,"startMs",410000,"endMs",8668000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5735101-c2b0cc19b0c48523a702cfb0896530d0&start=410&end=8668","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5735101-c2b0cc19b0c48523a702cfb0896530d0/thumbnail_410000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6475282/Collin-County/Texas/Commissioners-hold-public-hearing-on-replat-for-Lot-24-in-Cope-2-Addition-legal-timing-and-notice-questioned","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6475282-ccf0eed7448341676accfbf6369080cb/orig.mp4?Expires=1770442077&Signature=GgtlKup9zeqNvpJDdSeeD6a2uDPnOC1KeOkPZcsdSmPFbKabv6V~C5m8RAvITijGfPXuVIa0M~NczkH7EiguW1mdIKUNvpMMdjS67jA9C1e4Ufk~RKqWAX62N-cZqbIsFaVm9Oh1B1gIHJdn0bdjyJPIrmoYl9zRH0NTcmF0iFKNC9biWUgiktUTCVwpw0qn3LXtPSX~VZopfV1Tgd3Q5h2VOxpznJj1vfCqonh--uL31lWB3Z7DMZbMoh4FOxqa~xn4PGZ8nYfDhvJoTd3zVQbOUPPUXZzPUxeAPbbQJySDUSR7F9YNI2hTKsD5iMMQ9LZogXyhcuKVjtF~gE9zBg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Collin","date","2025-09-08T00:00:00Z","article","Collin County Commissioners’ Court held a public hearing on a developer’s request to replat Lot 24 of the Cope 2 Addition to add an easement and construct a paved access from the end of Andrew Court to a new development to the north.

Clarence Daugherty, Collin County’s director of engineering, said the replat would add an easement along the edge of Lot 24 “for the purpose of connecting to a development that is next to it, immediately adjacent to it, immediately north of it.” He said the easement would allow the developer to provide a second access point to the long, narrow subdivision planned immediately north of the lot.

Why it matters: The replat would alter a cul‑de‑sac lot into an access street for a new manufactured‑home community, converting the lot’s cul‑de‑sac character and increasing through traffic for existing homeowners. Commissioners asked whether adjacent homeowners were informed and whether the court had discretion to deny a replat that otherwise meets subdivision rules.

Public comment and developer response

• Developer representative: A representative who said his company is First Step Homes and that the ownership entity is P 12 LLC told the court the northern tract will be a manufactured‑home community that requires a second access once it exceeds 25 lots. The developer said outreach to the neighbors in both cul‑de‑sac areas had not produced objections.

• Adjacent-homeowner concerns: Commissioners and one public commenter raised concerns that property owners who had bought a cul‑de‑sac lot might not expect the lot to be opened into a through street. Commissioners asked whether the county had sent notice letters; staff said notices were mailed to adjacent owners but that the county does not perform door-to-door notification.

Legal timing and disposition

• Shot clock and timing: County staff said the statutory “shot clock” for plats applies and that the replat was at day 35 of the county’s review schedule. Staff noted that the statute’s timing begins when the application is deemed complete and that in some past situations developers have agreed to waive timing constraints, though staff said that practice should be used cautiously.

• Administrative approval: County staff advised the court that, because the replat met subdivision requirements, it was administratively approvable. The court did not take a final vote; staff later confirmed that the 30‑day statutory timeline applies and that in this case the replat is administratively approvable.

Ending

The court tabled a final decision to allow staff to confirm statutory timing and to provide any additional required legal guidance. County staff said they would notify the court as soon as possible if attorney review or any additional action were required.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Collin - Health Care Foundation Sep 08, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Collin County Commissioners’ Court held a public hearing on a replat of Lot 24 in the Cope 2 Addition to add an easement and a paved access street to serve a new development to the north.","taxTitle","Collin County, Texas","taxId",2696,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6475291,"Collin County reviews courthouse expansion plans; parking, security and courtroom layout draw sustained debate",1418,2368000,3786000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5735101-c2b0cc19b0c48523a702cfb0896530d0&start=2368&end=3786","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5735101-c2b0cc19b0c48523a702cfb0896530d0/thumbnail_2368000.jpg","/articles/6475291/Collin-County/Texas/Collin-County-reviews-courthouse-expansion-plans-parking-security-and-courtroom-layout-draw-sustained-debate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6475291-b8fd97d5638d1b0e461d5566318c5ca4/orig.mp4?Expires=1770442077&Signature=gTITbt0h1flQMcvwZZDrTRQQbpVv3PoTWhbgPgtz4tnHltqXa1Yrcs0TGp7yzKJ4HtY2AA8Q8qV7d1HIIyCgSd~n~rFtlw0gdace6iI8KKVhhX~wDlOkcvP6~ViJ6KIVX85Re25E9ft4Se-iQH7FjrLbpBMARXTFdi-mWZLc8ISkwUL2I6uTLeNstRP3Hci24V4f0wlRWAdd1GnSpcuLB3UlIacVLAWMlC3b0Sd3dGaa-W1VRH5EeRNFeYFSWIgMf1Ryem66GV0kgTLfLVQoF-AAABZ4CAOKKn52L2lTYUkhmHoryPs16y0q0FMQwV3hpl4Ja4nt~LeCsOCvu7VZrA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Collin County Commissioners Court on Friday heard a detailed presentation of the planned courthouse expansion, including proposed courtroom layouts, an employee parking garage and revised public-entry security. The court and judges pressed the design team on parking capacity, queuing at security screening, and whether to build additional judges’ chambers instead of full courtrooms.

The discussion came after the design team presented schematic layouts for three floors of courtroom additions, a five-level employee garage connected by a sky bridge and several options for auxiliary hearing and training spaces. Sandeep Kataria of the design team said the employee garage “is targeting 514 parking spots” and that the design treats about 799 spaces at the front of the building as dedicated public parking.

Why it matters: Commissioners, judges and county staff said Collin County’s rapid growth makes room planning and security design high priorities. Judges emphasized that courtroom capacity determines how quickly cases proceed; commissioners emphasized the county’s duty to balance public access, security and long-term costs.

Most important facts

• Scope and layout: The design team showed floor plans for three floors of courtroom additions, a sky bridge to a five-level employee parking garage and alternative adjacencies for auxiliary hearing rooms, conference/training rooms and multipurpose space. The presentation also included seating proposals (a standard courtroom gallery with 78 seats: 72 fixed plus six removable chairs) and security screening arrangements for public entry.

• Parking and circulation: The design team reported existing parking at about 1,225 spaces countywide on the site and said the proposed build (garage plus modified surface lots) would raise the count to roughly 1,581 spaces. The team and county officials discussed an overflow surface lot (estimated at about 150 surface spaces or a future 500-space garage) and the difficulty of routing public users from a rear overflow lot to the secure front entry.

• Security and queuing: The plan preserves a single public secure entry with magnetometer screening; commissioners asked whether the public entry zone could be widened to support more magnetometer lanes and reduce morning bottlenecks. The design team said widening is feasible but would require revisiting canopies and facade work; it recommended further study.

• Courtroom vs. chambers debate: Judges present urged prioritizing courtrooms because “courtrooms move cases,” arguing that chambers alone do not increase case-processing capacity. Commissioners and the design team raised the possibility of shelling certain chambers or auxiliary spaces so they can be fitted later if needed.

• Options A and B: Option A pairs four courtrooms with four judge suites and four jury deliberation rooms; Option B shows four courtrooms, five judge chambers and four jury rooms (allowing one additional judge chamber that could be shelled). Commissioners expressed openness to Option B if the extra chamber is left shelled (unbuilt-out) until operational need and fiscal capacity are clear.

Court direction and next steps

• The court asked the design team to study a set of discrete alternatives and return with a short decision timeline that separates immediate decisions from those that can be shelled or postponed. The court specifically asked staff and the architect to: (a) study whether holding cells can be reduced or eliminated and what that change would do to possible courtroom layouts; (b) produce parking alternatives that add 100–200 public spaces (surface or structural) and show cost ranges; and (c) test widening the public-entry atrium/portico to allow more screening lanes and estimate aesthetic impacts and cost.

• Timing: County staff said the project had been scheduled to finalize design this month for a 2028 construction target; the court asked the team to return with revised options and a clear list of decision points within weeks so the court can prioritize which items require immediate resolution before bidding and which can be shelled.

Voices at the meeting

• Judges who spoke urged that auxiliary hearing rooms be included and that at least one of the configurable spaces be fully programmed as an auxiliary courtroom to support child-abuse/neglect (CAC) and other high‑need dockets that require larger juries or special handling.

• Commissioners raised concerns about peak juror days (the court referenced past days with about 450 jurors) and said the front-row public parking count should be sufficient for typical peaks. Several commissioners asked staff to provide additional parking-management strategies (staggering juror call-ins, off-site overflow with shuttles, and phased contractor alternates for future garage construction).

Context and background

Design team materials described three floors of new courtroom/building back-of-house adjacencies, multiple alternate layouts for auxiliary spaces (training, conference, multiuse), and a parking study showing the employee garage, front public lot, and a possible overflow area to the rear. The design team noted some slides were redacted from the public presentation because they contained security-sensitive areas.

Ending

The court did not vote on the schematic plan at Friday’s meeting. The county directed the design team to return with costed alternatives, a decision-timing matrix and a revised schematic that tests removal or relocation of holding cells and shows the parking tradeoffs. The court set an expectation that staff will provide a clear list of decisions needed now and those that can be shelled for future build-out.","Collin County Commissioners Court on Friday heard a detailed presentation of the planned courthouse expansion, including proposed courtroom layouts, an employee parking garage and revised public-entry security. The court and judges pressed the design team on parking capacity, queuing at security screening, and whether to build additional judges’ chambers instead of full courtrooms.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6475277,"Votes at a glance: Collin County Commissioners’ Court — routine consent items and hospital funding",1960,381000,2341000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5735101-c2b0cc19b0c48523a702cfb0896530d0&start=381&end=2341","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5735101-c2b0cc19b0c48523a702cfb0896530d0/thumbnail_381000.jpg","/articles/6475277/Collin-County/Texas/Votes-at-a-glance-Collin-County-Commissioners-Court-routine-consent-items-and-hospital-funding","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6475277-36c67904a574060ef8b511112a0c14a1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770442077&Signature=QHHCxOtd1beIqMNI9aXXtiuYBR-Iv3wwfa5ESej0w9iORS-5BdBJ8uM1BQiNdwp1aHsMPO1AWSnzmg5iE4RHmKw~eowKV5FthgvOEV7L9rxHckzqiK81hRsG8473DRzz25TSBm7Jbut8fpNEsU1Qf1QheTqkfnxMW5V4o-qJjo~cBlP8E5NG1oNnlrUpfUZhws9-uo~K5wJABKG80y3gcWKMjrEQ9Z0kfoOKq6PUMRVh7HsIv5P8wcCUrMREL8qMO2X0hzAbQxDeerppe5ls9pMPils0538f4dPfpp~dFLfgMGKWi1jhvqkrBQsKMtqsOC7fY8LA7dmjRauIMH0kpw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At Friday’s session the Collin County Commissioners’ Court recorded several routine approvals and one substantive funding vote during open session.

Summary of recorded actions

• County consent agenda: The court approved the county’s consent agenda (listed as routine business) by voice vote. The presiding officer announced “Motion carries 5 to 0.”

• Collin County Healthcare Foundation: The court convened the Healthcare Foundation meeting, approved its consent agenda, and adjourned; the chair announced approval by voice vote, “Motion carries 5 to 0.”

• Collin County Toll Road Authority: The court convened the Toll Road Authority meeting, approved its consent agenda, and adjourned; the chair announced approval by voice vote, “Motion carries 5 to 0.”

• Local Provider Participation Fund (LPPF): Following a public hearing and presentation by Adelanto Healthcare Ventures, the court approved a 6% mandatory rate for FY2026 and authorized an increased administrative fee permitted by the Legislature under Chapter 292E of the Texas Health and Safety Code. The motion carried by voice vote; the chair announced approval.

Why it matters: The consent‑agenda items were routine approvals. The LPPF vote continues an existing local funding mechanism that pools hospital contributions to draw federal Medicaid match and will affect how local hospitals are reimbursed for care of low-income patients.

Vote details

• County consent agenda — outcome: approved; tally: 5 yes, 0 no, 0 abstain. (Voice vote; no roll-call recorded.)

• Healthcare Foundation consent agenda — outcome: approved; tally: 5 yes, 0 no, 0 abstain. (Voice vote.)

• Toll Road Authority consent agenda — outcome: approved; tally: 5 yes, 0 no, 0 abstain. (Voice vote.)

• LPPF rate and administrative fee — outcome: approved; tally: 5 yes, 0 no, 0 abstain. (Voice vote.)

Where to find records: The public record for each action is reflected in the Commissioners Court minutes and any related agenda packet materials; staff indicated follow-up implementation steps and reporting schedules for the LPPF and the courthouse project.","During the meeting the court approved routine consent business for the county, the Collin County Healthcare Foundation and the Collin County Toll Road Authority, and approved the FY2026 Local Provider Participation Fund mandatory rate of 6%.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6475286,"Commissioners approve 6% mandatory rate for Collin County Local Provider Participation Fund for FY2026",149,2188000,2337000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5735101-c2b0cc19b0c48523a702cfb0896530d0&start=2188&end=2337","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5735101-c2b0cc19b0c48523a702cfb0896530d0/thumbnail_2188000.jpg","/articles/6475286/Collin-County/Texas/Commissioners-approve-6-mandatory-rate-for-Collin-County-Local-Provider-Participation-Fund-for-FY2026","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6475286-e9212472ea3961fd0985ac1278312e99/orig.mp4?Expires=1770442077&Signature=EVOcFdpE9m6T3DscABotr9sdEVPUZuM4raH7kRS7byLz61y7H~lEm0hZ71LkkgKkLFS02bHYL5h~0iInS1jFMGHVeh4G3huqsdLcIc8ciTQ52MEMM4F9GnNx6x-kP6XOY5VZRq~lR8X7bwNRzWAai6YCqCavZ1zKBJNESmJjxYsrIBACbL-IC7XvRhjWHFVBZpWvJucFFuWz2eQzGH5TKp6wqqCIq~1nMnsCBKAKXCZTNO63CcNh4ZLv19Cg5LdzLnaiv41KFMDyCYd8YBMEgUlNmA7D39l~AQCmHO87E~cKGxu~S6A492oPWD3epKwNcr882-Pi6zdG1dD3lt4kpA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Collin County Commissioners on Friday approved a 6% mandatory rate for the county’s Local Provider Participation Fund (LPPF) for fiscal year 2026 and authorized an increased administrative fee allowed under recent state statute.

The move follows a public hearing at which Adelanto Healthcare Ventures’ representatives explained the program and its purpose. Michael Neal of Adelanto told the court the LPPF is “a mandatory payment that private hospitals in your county pay into that unlocks federal funding to reimburse your hospitals here in Collin County to pay for the health care services for those indigent population members.”

Why it matters: The LPPF is a county-level mechanism that pools local hospital payments to draw federal Medicaid matching dollars. Counties use the federal funding to reimburse hospitals for care of low-income residents and to preserve local hospital finances.

What commissioners approved

• Mandatory rate: The court approved a 6% mandatory rate for private hospitals’ contributions for fiscal year 2026. The vote followed the public hearing and a staff presentation.

• Administrative fee and statute: Commissioners also accepted an increase in the county administrative fee permitted under the Legislature’s recent enactment of Chapter 292E of the Texas Health and Safety Code, which specifically addresses Collin County’s authority to continue the program and to collect a higher administrative fee for running the LPPF.

• Supporters present: Representatives of local hospitals attended the hearing and were listed as supportive, including Baylor Scott and White, Dallas Children’s, Texas Health Resources, HCA Healthcare and Methodist. Adelanto Healthcare’s Kimberly Lam and Michael Neal led the presentation.

Vote and procedure

• Motion to approve the 6% rate and the higher administrative fee was made, seconded and carried by voice vote; no roll-call votes were recorded. The court chair announced the motion carried.

Context and background

Chapter 292E of the Texas Health and Safety Code, enacted in the most recent legislative session and cited by the presenters, provides statutory authorization for Collin County’s program changes and the revised administrative fee structure. Adelanto officials said the program has been used in other counties and that Collin County’s continuation would “bring these dollars back into Collin County for your health care funding.”

Ending

County staff and the Adelanto team thanked the court for its approval and said they would continue to work with local providers on program administration and implementation.","After a public hearing, Collin County Commissioners voted to set the mandatory Local Provider Participation Fund rate at 6% for fiscal year 2026 and accepted an increase in the county administrative fee authorized by new state law, Chapter 292E of the Texas Health and Safety Code.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commissioners hold public hearing on replat for Lot 24 in Cope 2 Addition; legal timing and notice questioned

Collin County reviews courthouse expansion plans; parking, security and courtroom layout draw sustained debate

Votes at a glance: Collin County Commissioners’ Court — routine consent items and hospital funding

Commissioners approve 6% mandatory rate for Collin County Local Provider Participation Fund for FY2026