[{"_1":2,"_120":-5,"_121":-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",[32,75,86,98,110],{"_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",6462286,"mediaKeyId","5811733-6e98daa4817a2fe41fe166957b9cf042","parentId",5811733,"title","Johnson County Commissioners approve consent agenda, plats, budget items and several orders; rescind construction award","audioSeconds",2742,"startMs",843000,"endMs",3585000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5811733-6e98daa4817a2fe41fe166957b9cf042&start=843&end=3585","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5811733-6e98daa4817a2fe41fe166957b9cf042/thumbnail_843000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6462286/Johnson-County/Texas/Johnson-County-Commissioners-approve-consent-agenda-plats-budget-items-and-several-orders-rescind-construction-award","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6462286-e35aae15ed4dfaa63f16eea67a2f24d9/orig.mp4?Expires=1770951425&Signature=n4JDz8ZJzuYuXO0OrI3rOp6cTH0pPdqyh9sWzqFIDycuz3J2PpBHoyNvQQ6ledN0gA4zCjsAN6f6POMTOwNwbzbgIP4t-7vuL75YmyWX5uEoytsEI2-njBPT9iBVgvuVst7qmzxkVTzGo8loOVdNoRY6zjwTdb2gA1pznu2drdQq3fDIS9T1qtGgFhZMVju6ggsIglqo87Q5axbRK-Ux5UwQdRWrr5X2zlTyEovlPKH7LqRUOex4P3S60NXIuxU7AjQAO9vNmNHWBUCdBs5xuGzUIdmpwk14DIqTSVjrK0DQqZtYPsRlgxJoxJx7dzzxTPBnYBepNoagl0SS96Mb9A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Johnson","date","2025-09-22T00:00:00Z","article","Johnson County Commissioners Court met Sept. 22 and took a series of routine and substantive votes, approving the consent agenda, multiple subdivision-related orders, changes to the county’s purchasing policy, and authorizing solicitation for a transportation bond project. The court also rescinded a recent construction award after staff discovered a major error in the winning contractor’s proposal and approved two executive-session outcomes.

The court approved the consent agenda (items CA‑1 through CA‑56) as a single motion by Commissioner White, seconded by Commissioner Howell; the judge called the vote and the motion carried unanimously. The consent agenda covered routine renewals and interlocal agreements, including dispatching, radio, and jail agreements.

Under land-development items, the court approved Order 2025‑94, the plat for the Chisholm Oaks subdivision (68 lots) in Precinct 2, after Public Works staff said the developer met the county’s requirements. The court also accepted the required construction bond for Chisholm Oaks—$11,363,833 secured by SureTech Insurance Company—so the developer may proceed with roads, signage and drainage, with inspections expected through next September.

The court granted a variance to allow a replat of the Dragoo Addition that produced two lots smaller than the previously approved size; the motion carried 4–1 with Commissioner Woolley recorded as the lone dissenting vote. Staff said the acreage loss resulted from required right-of-way dedication identified after a new survey.

Other votes included:
- Approval of an estimate of $93,143 from Where Fencing to install a fabric awning and extend the sidewalk at the Burleson Sub‑Courthouse to provide shade for voters and reduce wait‑time heat exposure; the court approved using current-year construction‑fund transfers to cover the cost.
- Adoption of Order 2025‑90 setting the regular court terms and the county’s 2026 holidays; the court adjusted filing deadlines to reflect a state change to meeting‑posting rules.
- Acceptance of Buffalo Ridge Circle (Ranches at Buffalo Ridge subdivision) into the county road maintenance system.
- Amendment of the county purchasing policy to raise the competitive‑bidding threshold from $50,000 to $100,000 to match recently approved state law (Senate Bill reflected in Texas Local Government Code changes).
- Authorization for the purchasing agent to advertise an RFQ for RFQ 2025‑201 (FM 917 segment 3 Thomas Street to Eagan Railroad) as part of the transportation bond program.

On procurement, the court rescinded the award for RFP 2025‑305 (service center vehicle processing facility and exterior remodel) to Johnson Construction after purchasing staff and the county attorney found a subcontractor’s estimate in the winning proposal was several hundred thousand dollars too low to perform the work; the court voted to rescind the award and directed staff to move to the next steps, including evaluating the runner‑up.

In executive session the court approved a $3,699.48 settlement payment to resolve a potential tax refund claim by Cody Sanders; the motion specified the payment was effective immediately. The court also authorized a temporary stipend to make Captain Ben Areola’s acting‑interim‑sheriff salary $150,000 (an increase of $16,397) effective Oct. 1, to remain while he serves as acting sheriff; the action passed unanimously.

Several items were discussed in nonbinding workshops or received staff updates (transportation bond program, ambulance subsidy/ESD partnership, ARPA funding status, a Meals on Wheels building request). Those discussions are reported separately. The court adjourned at 11:30 a.m.

Votes at a glance (key items and outcomes):
- Consent agenda CA‑1–CA‑56: Approved (motion: Commissioner White; second: Commissioner Howell; outcome: unanimous).
- A‑1: Bill run for court‑appointed attorneys’ fees: Approved (motion by Commissioner House; second by Commissioner White; outcome: carried).
- A‑3: Order 2025‑94, Plat — Chisholm Oaks (Precinct 2): Approved (motion by Commissioner Howell; carried unanimously).
- A‑4: Construction bond for Chisholm Oaks, $11,363,833 (SureTech): Approved unanimously.
- A‑5: Variance for replat of Dragoo Addition (lots reduced to 0.89 and 0.77 acres): Approved (motion by Commissioner Hales; second by Commissioner Bailey); vote 4–1 (Commissioner Woolley opposed).
- A‑6: Estimate $93,143 (Where Fencing) for awning/sidewalk—Burleson Sub‑Courthouse: Approved unanimously.
- A‑7: Order setting court terms and 2026 holidays (Order 2025‑?): Approved unanimously.
- A‑8: Order 2025‑96 — accept Buffalo Ridge Circle into county road system: Approved unanimously.
- A‑9: Amend purchasing policy—competitive bidding threshold to $100,000: Approved unanimously.
- A‑10: Authorize RFQ 2025‑201 (FM 917 segment 3) advertising: Approved unanimously.
- A‑11: Rescind award for RFP 2025‑305 (Johnson Construction): Rescinded (motion by Commissioner Bailey; second Commissioner White; outcome: unanimous).
- ES‑3 (executive session): Approve $3,699.48 settlement payment to Cody Sanders effective immediately: Approved unanimously.
- ES‑4 (executive session): Stipend to make Captain Ben Areola’s acting‑sheriff salary $150,000 effective Oct. 1 while serving as acting sheriff: Approved unanimously.

The court recorded motions, seconds and outcomes on the public record for each item above. Where the court recorded a named dissenter, that vote is noted.

Ending: The court completed its agenda and adjourned at 11:30 a.m.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Johnson - Commissioner's Court","oneSentenceSummary","Johnson County Commissioners Court met Sept. 22 and approved the consent agenda, several land‑use and procurement orders, and two executive‑session actions; the court also rescinded a construction award after staff found a major error in the winning proposal.","taxTitle","Johnson County, Texas","taxId",64594,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6462270,"Court postpones decision on future use of Meals on Wheels building; schedules walkthroughs",0,4452000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5811733-6e98daa4817a2fe41fe166957b9cf042&start=4452&end=4452","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5811733-6e98daa4817a2fe41fe166957b9cf042/thumbnail_4452000.jpg","/articles/6462270/Johnson-County/Texas/Court-postpones-decision-on-future-use-of-Meals-on-Wheels-building-schedules-walkthroughs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6462270-06541691a84d53ca3cb2879bb9c27bea/orig.mp4?Expires=1770951425&Signature=BLODaXOxhhoNGttjtCNDYogykNIQdHg9N5MQneAN5bbkk5d0JUUGXx5lSFbNK-4XONZfoEZ25VVWCCXTF-oDJlUp0dqwPS2SkUg~zOxzsaDbjqIaxswEqRzwt3ECpyAT37IR~CX6fuiLQQ3E-2I9n3fcFJ1HW5xdBiHbQ8Ukhc3M5cNUri1Um5rYBdO-T-vlUGsgMU8iDhDCWJN7RwNRr50-E3xgKF7WslJH6~thUViy-SRKSa6JRx28ufI1LN-3BFsg6TgrwZbU4RYPWP-jgvSCiol8cd7N6pzw~XYEPpGkUiCtCQ78Xutxm4wt~fVGFEvd9ov4vitIJgXbtSe46A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Johnson County Commissioners Court on Sept. 22 discussed requests from Pecan Valley to use or acquire the county’s former Meals on Wheels building. The building currently houses Pecan Valley (about one‑third of the space), the Texas Department of Health and Human Services (about one‑third), and a remaining vacant third that had been leased to Meals on Wheels.

Pecan Valley asked whether it could take ownership of the entire building (the organization initially inquired about donation of the property) or, alternatively, whether the county would consider a short‑ or medium‑term lease for the front portion of the building (the portion previously used by Meals on Wheels). County staff expressed concern about disposing of a building that also contains a state tenant and emphasized the public services both Pecan Valley and the state provide.

The court discussed potential alternative uses, including relocating the Medical Examiner’s office and freeing space for elections staff; staff estimated a partial remodel for that use could cost in the range of $750,000 to $1 million based on earlier, rough estimates. Commissioners said they did not want to accept a lease or donate the building if the county intended to pursue a remodel within a short time frame because it could unfairly require a tenant to vacate after investing in improvements.

No decision was made. The judge asked facilities staff to schedule a walkthrough of both facilities with two commissioners (excluding the judge) so the court could better evaluate parking, space needs and remodeling costs before returning to the issue. Facilities staff said the south parking lot is substantial and could accommodate Medical Examiner needs if the court later decided to relocate that office.

Ending: The court postponed action and asked staff to coordinate site visits; Pecan Valley will be informed that the court is still studying options.","Johnson County discussed a request from Pecan Valley to use or acquire the former Meals on Wheels building; commissioners expressed concern about disposing of a county asset while the state occupies part of the building and asked staff to arrange site walkthroughs for commissioners.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6462274,"Commissioners clarify step‑plan lateral transfers: receiving agency can waive step‑6 cap",417,4252000,4669000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5811733-6e98daa4817a2fe41fe166957b9cf042&start=4252&end=4669","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5811733-6e98daa4817a2fe41fe166957b9cf042/thumbnail_4252000.jpg","/articles/6462274/Johnson-County/Texas/Commissioners-clarify-stepplan-lateral-transfers-receiving-agency-can-waive-step6-cap","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6462274-528dbb3c76266cf4e5118ca308e911ae/orig.mp4?Expires=1770951425&Signature=CyRWJg7jazz3swPOROa8Fg9WUYbZq3iTBXD9ULxY4bkIOQcD5xXwzD1w~eE89rRY6jipvizK1YK5yyel~M4UVMFKoo6F7xSHJfGyNkjNCVPcefrbC8eKrXngBSwONM5zywHrWyLxtpMuukE9EzJsszvv1hUFCz7mHUTf-7zgtOyF3CuhsAoyL3pwZnOEkoFZSKX3pYb6vXlysYCVnsNDLeaGD3tA34jEbYPqOghyG704r64O1bTUweiopjIb2v1qUqT1YtYohwQ9M1Smaf06SERmZVsPVIvTJBk5T0jxZvGLmhJSlPucb-T-kwPZKwrqtmctkttQLxSX0avbPGFUzQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Johnson County Commissioners on Sept. 22 clarified county policy so officers moving between participating Johnson County law‑enforcement agencies may be lateraled in above step 6 at the discretion of the hiring agency head.

The court considered a question from Captain Ben Areola about whether officers who are already paid above step 6 at one Johnson County agency (for example a constable’s office) must be reduced to step 6 if they transfer to another Johnson County agency (for example the sheriff’s office). The court said retention across county agencies was the stated policy intent when the step plan was adopted.

Several commissioners and Captain Areola argued that officers should not be financially penalized for transferring to a different county agency. Commissioner White said the policy should support retention within the county because “they're still the same employer.” The judge proposed leaving discretion with the receiving agency head to permit lateral transfers above step 6 when warranted.

The court voted—with a motion and second—to amend/clarify the step plan so that the agency head of the receiving Johnson County agency (sheriff's office, the four constables’ offices, or the fire marshal) may authorize a lateral hire above step 6 based on the officer’s experience and the receiving agency’s staffing needs. The motion passed unanimously.

Ending: The county directed staff to implement the clarification administratively so agency heads may use discretion in cross‑agency lateral transfers without reducing long‑tenured officers’ pay automatically.","Johnson County commissioners clarified that when law‑enforcement officers move between county agencies (sheriff, constables, fire marshal), the receiving agency head may, at their discretion, allow lateral pay above the usual step‑6 cap to retain experienced personnel.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6462277,"Johnson County authorizes RFQ for FM 917 safety and mobility project; Freese & Nichols program management underway",2700,710000,3410000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5811733-6e98daa4817a2fe41fe166957b9cf042&start=710&end=3410","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5811733-6e98daa4817a2fe41fe166957b9cf042/thumbnail_710000.jpg","/articles/6462277/Johnson-County/Texas/Johnson-County-authorizes-RFQ-for-FM-917-safety-and-mobility-project-Freese-Nichols-program-management-underway","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6462277-cbda5475a4b5181a331de147153ced3e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770951425&Signature=K0dwrSBVhxdiyexkOjArjC0rz2upg3HOfegDKrDTnkJT~-58SBNdsXzIZhqsNtAn1BXCksKKg92Ng6xrbWV~Vl8wLvSPAncbivzNZKiRJcXx0v9x2DIv4UeHGEYahi3vZOe-UBIjytQqzkxcpSQYmHrZFJbjma5vhaipi3xg5DHZ5iFyi60jl09SqSP03GeBsf81RVVYR3cjJLV7t2T5Xo7UZOBqBZJiH2uNlcluYLYQ9s5YQGco7TA2JQTGt5VJMzLup-aAOXyrPzIkJkc9-2gQIi6fSjtlOBKP-l1DrLfkZfTCMb03HR6Z7RY3iXA87H6pKLihkzHgMIM2lRJZDw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Johnson County Commissioners on Sept. 22 authorized the purchasing agent to advertise RFQ 2025‑201 for the FM 917 safety and mobility project (segment 3: Thomas Street to Eagan Railroad), marking the first transportation bond project the county will publicly solicit under the recently approved bond program.

Public Works Director Jennifer Vanderlyn introduced County Engineer Mr. Friedrich, who told the court that the transportation bond program is moving forward and the program management plan from Freese and Nichols should be completed soon. Friedrich said the RFQ for project 4.1 (the FM 917 section between Eagan and Joshua) will be brought forward for public advertisement once finalized.

Commissioners described the targeted FM 917 section as a persistent safety and traffic‑flow problem and said they wanted visible early progress on bond projects. One commissioner called the intersection area “a public safety nightmare” because of traffic, congestion and train crossings that complicate first‑responder access. Staff clarified that grade separations and overpass work are related but may be procured as separate projects at later phases.

The court voted to authorize advertising the RFQ after a motion by Commissioner White and a second by Commissioner Woolley; the vote carried unanimously. Purchasing staff said award and construction will follow the RFQ and a future court decision on the selected team and guaranteed maximum price (as applicable).

Ending: Staff will publish the RFQ once Freese and Nichols finish the program management plan; commissioners indicated they expect further RFQs for additional segments of FM 917 in the coming weeks.","The commissioners authorized the purchasing agent to advertise an RFQ for Segment 3 of FM 917 (Thomas Street to Eagan Railroad) as the first transportation bond project to be publicly solicited. County staff said the program management plan from Freese & Nichols will be presented soon.",{"_33":111,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":112,"_41":113,"_43":44,"_45":114,"_47":115,"_49":50,"_51":116,"_53":117,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":118,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":119,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6462282,"Johnson County court opens conversation on moving ambulance‑subsidy oversight to Emergency Services District",479,1322000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5811733-6e98daa4817a2fe41fe166957b9cf042&start=843&end=1322","/articles/6462282/Johnson-County/Texas/Johnson-County-court-opens-conversation-on-moving-ambulancesubsidy-oversight-to-Emergency-Services-District","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6462282-82df0d72dc2c329bbf0fe33ff4d494a3/orig.mp4?Expires=1770951425&Signature=FnMt2H6IFodYewJKhWZkXf2V0vuIfzrtWwRxCMaDO3NkrSm8Jvw-UbiaEwHHY0Q~YQNZUfkxjKSw9hRQOh3boQbA~8R39KujxivydGRW-94fJkGFySIRwU29J0rKrtvWiGdAt1GY1n53qvoAzjom16FOocQumyiPaVWewi7R9Tyg1Z~a-e5u2Q-yheMFpFcO01FaleOu3HRhrS1LIhJZ8R63io2pDxyPTz1rCPWQ84OrRbTrUsLgnoovZKGr051SuIQ6OQ9qTnHbU-6n4TCusee~4JYNqIQuW8eGnkFAOu~pDAisyXlVFIsUOkdLvu7pGi2ScKKzjFOS9Up~2AEOwA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Johnson County Commissioners on Sept. 22 held a workshop discussion about possibly transferring contract oversight for the county’s ambulance subsidy to Johnson County Emergency Services District No. 1 (ESD 1), citing the ESD’s operational expertise and the increasing cost pressures on ambulance service.

The court’s presentation said the ESD service area matches the county’s ambulance subsidy area (excluding the cities of Cleburne and Burleson) and that ESD staff includes paramedics and first responders who regularly manage ambulance operations. Judge (presiding) said, “to me, it's always made sense that the ESD was the right place to oversee the compliance, the contract, and the service under our ambulance subsidy contract.” The judge emphasized that the discussion was exploratory and not an immediate change.

Tommy Foster, executive director of Johnson County Emergency Services District No. 1, attended the meeting and confirmed the ESD already participates in the compliance review committee and procurement process with purchasing and that the current provider, CareFlight, meets regularly with the ESD. Foster said the district has staff with paramedic experience and firefighting first‑responder credentials that align with contract oversight needs.

Commissioners raised operational and financial concerns. Commissioner Woolley asked whether shifting oversight would amount to “dumping” additional responsibilities on the ESD; the ESD’s representative replied the district could perform contract administration, but noted it would impose an extra workload and that financial arrangements would need to be resolved. The judge said it was not the intent to shift costs onto the ESD: “It's not my intent that we dump this on you financially either.”

Several commissioners urged early planning because staff reported call volumes much higher than the basis of the current contract bid. The court heard that the original bid assumed about 20 calls per day but actual call volumes were reported in the high 30s (38–40), and county staff said longer transports because of local hospital capacity are increasing costs. Commissioners also discussed long‑term funding options, including the possibility—but not an immediate recommendation—of establishing a separate ESD funded by a voter‑approved property‑tax levy if necessary. One commissioner noted that creating an additional ESD would require voter approval and could levy up to a statutory maximum tax rate but cautioned that the tax implication might far exceed current subsidy needs.

The court reached no final decision and treated the item as a workshop. The judge and multiple commissioners described the next step as continued conversation and closer budgeting ahead of the provider contract renewal. The ESD and county staff were thanked for their participation, and the judge asked staff to continue discussions so the court could better understand financial impacts before any formal transfer of responsibilities.

Ending: Commissioners asked purchasing, ESD and county staff to continue analysis of operational responsibilities and budget impacts, with the expectation a recommendation or proposal would come back to the court before the next ambulance contract renewal.","Commissioners discussed a potential partnership to shift oversight of the county ambulance subsidy contract to Johnson County Emergency Services District No. 1, citing technical expertise at the ESD and anticipated higher costs when the current provider’s contract is renewed.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Johnson County Commissioners approve consent agenda, plats, budget items and several orders; rescind construction award

Court postpones decision on future use of Meals on Wheels building; schedules walkthroughs

Commissioners clarify step‑plan lateral transfers: receiving agency can waive step‑6 cap

Johnson County authorizes RFQ for FM 917 safety and mobility project; Freese & Nichols program management underway

Johnson County court opens conversation on moving ambulance‑subsidy oversight to Emergency Services District