Brazos County residents press for pause and public hearing on Inner East Loop, cite notification and contract concerns

Residents of eastern Brazos County used the public-comment period at the May 13 Brazos County Commissioners Court meeting to press officials to pause work on the county\'s proposed Inner East Loop, extend the public comment period, and hold a public workshop, saying they were not properly notified about the project and raising questions about consulting contracts and campaign mailers.

"This affects your citizens\' livelihoods, their homes, their family legacies. We deserve more than a flyer on a bulletin or a small post on a governmental website," said Jacqueline Teck, a resident who identified herself during the court\'s public-comment period.

Speakers repeatedly pointed to a July 2022 transportation workshop and to ballot language in the November 2022 bond election (referred to in comments as Proposition A and Proposition B) to argue that the public did not have clear notice the Inner East Loop was a likely use of bond funds. Several speakers shared attendance and election figures they said undermine the claim that the loop is a clear voter "mandate." Charlotte Stivers, a landowner and registered voter, told the court, "Who do our elected officials represent the best interest of? The 37,000 people that voted for it or the 22,000 people that are registered voters?"

Speakers also raised concerns about political mailers and a local political action committee. Beverly Greenwood said she examined three mailers and donor lists and questioned legibility and sponsorship; she named a PAC treasurer, Larry Hodges, and said he owned a local printing business. Greenwood asked why County Judge Peters did not recuse himself from matters related to the project, saying the maps shown to the public appeared to skirt some property owners\' land.

Several commenters criticized the county\'s consultant work and the scope of a contract with a private firm identified in comments as Quiddity. Kyle Greenwood, who spoke during public comment, cited contract language and said the contract includes services such as right-of-way mapping and acquisition, and even testimony at imminent-domain proceedings. He argued that "if the court so chose, they could vacate the entire draft project list and move forward with something else totally different." Adam Purdue asked the court to schedule a workshop to review a preliminary traffic study and to explain consultant payments; he asked why consultant John Polster was being paid, citing a figure of $15,000 per month that he said he had seen referenced.

Multiple speakers asked the commissioners to extend the comment period (one speaker asked to change it from 17 days to 90 days), to pause or suspend the contract with the consultant (noting speakers said the contract contains a suspension/cancellation clause), and to put the East Loop on a future court agenda so the public could have a formal discussion rather than only short public comments. Ronnie Vitulli and Russell McGee called for the issue to be placed on a commissioners\' agenda so it could be fully discussed.

A county official or court member asked that the court schedule a public workshop or hearing on the East Loop; the record does not show the court made a formal motion or vote on pausing work or extending the public comment period during the meeting.

Speakers referenced several local organizations and entities in connection with the project, including the county\'s Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), the Regional Mobility Authority (RMA), TxDOT, the city of Bryan, Quiddity (consultant), and the PAC donors named by speakers. Commenters also named specific neighborhoods and subdivisions they said were affected, including Mariemont, Copperfield, Emerald Forest, Green Branch Ridge, Little Lions, Los Lobos, and Garrison Creek.

No formal action on the Inner East Loop was recorded in the Commissioners Court minutes during the May 13 meeting. Court business that moved forward during the meeting included routine proclamations and administrative approvals; the court did not adopt any change to the consultant contract or the bond project list in open session.

Residents asked the court to provide clearer, proactive outreach for projects with potential to use bond funds, to publish maps and project information in an accessible format, and to explain how the ballot language used in 2022 relates to specific projects. Those requests — and calls for a workshop or formal agenda item — were the principal outcomes of the meeting\'s discussion on the Inner East Loop.