Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kendall, Kerr counties approve interlocal to form Hill Country Energy subregional planning commission over opposition
Summary
Kendall County Commissioners Court approved an interlocal agreement with Kerr County to create the Hill Country Energy Subregional Planning Commission (a Chapter 391 ‘‘3-91’’ planning body) and adopted bylaws despite a 3–2 split. Commissioners also appointed two Kendall commissioners to the new commission.
Get email alerts on the Energy Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kendall County Commissioners Court voted 3–2 on Feb. 11 to approve an interlocal agreement with Kerr County that creates the Hill Country Energy Subregional Planning Commission (HCES RPC), a Chapter 391 subregional planning commission intended to coordinate local response to proposed energy storage and energy projects.
The court also approved the commission’s bylaws and appointed two Kendall County commissioners to serve on the new body. The measures passed on roll calls that left the county judge and one commissioner opposed.
Supporters, including Kendall County Commissioners who negotiated the draft with Kerr County, said the commission gives local governments a formal channel to require state and federal regulators to meet with affected counties and discuss large battery storage and other energy projects. Commissioner Chad Carpenter and other proponents said the commission will require agencies such as the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the Public Utility Commission to “sit at the table” so counties can present concerns about siting, traffic and safety.
Opponents and some commissioners argued the interlocal and bylaws were drafted and negotiated quickly, raised legal questions about bylaw incorporation by reference and about withdrawal language, and should be approved only after more review. One commissioner asked why cities such as Kerrville and Boerne were not included as participants and expressed concern that a county might be unable to withdraw easily if it later disagrees with commission actions.
The interlocal, the bylaws and a resolution approving formation all passed by the same 3–2 margin. The court then appointed two Kendall County commissioners as the county’s representatives; that appointment vote was unanimous.
County staff said Kerr County’s commissioners voted unanimously to approve matching documents the prior day. County counsel advised the court that the commission, once formed under Chapter 391 of the Local Government Code, would be authorized to adopt bylaws at its first meeting. County staff also noted the interlocal’s map and appendices are incorporated by reference and said members had corrected two drafting errors after Kerr County’s review.
Officials also flagged implementation questions the court asked be tracked: whether municipal extraterritorial jurisdictions (ETJs) are correctly shown on the petition materials, the timing and location of the commission’s first public meeting, insurance requirements and whether the commission territory later could be expanded. County elections and clerk staff said no county funds were being requested for commission operations other than meeting space; the county auditor said she would certify zero budgeted funds for fiscal year 2025 for the commission.
Why it matters: supporters said the commission gives counties formal coordination rights with state agencies that issue permits for large energy projects such as grid-scale battery installations. Opponents said the interlocal, as drafted, expands the scope beyond battery energy storage systems to “energy storage” generally and leaves open questions about governance, withdrawal and municipal involvement.
What’s next: commissioners named Kendall’s two members to the new commission and agreed the first joint meeting will be held in Kerr County on Feb. 14 at 2 p.m., per the interlocal. The commission is required to adopt formal bylaws at its first meeting and to post meeting notices under the Texas Open Meetings Act.
Provenance: The debate over the interlocal, the bylaws, the votes and the appointments appears in the public meeting transcript beginning with public comments urging the court to act and continuing through the court’s motions and roll-call votes. Evidence spans participants’ presentations, the joint committee report and the recorded motions and votes.

