Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Dams topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rockwall County appoints contracting officer for Cedar Creek Sites 16 and 16A and authorizes execution of assurances
Summary
At a March 30 special meeting the court appointed Commissioner Lichty as contracting officer for repairs to Cedar Creek Sites 16 and 16A and authorized execution of 'Assurances Relating to Real Property Acquisition,' subject to a final legal opinion and Kaufman County sign-off. Both motions passed 5-0.
The Rockwall County Commissioners Court voted to appoint Commissioner Lichty as contracting officer for repairs to Cedar Creek Site 16 and Cedar Creek Site 16A and authorized the contracting officer to execute related assurances, the court said at a special meeting March 30 at the Historic Courthouse.
The judge moved to appoint Commissioner Lichty, and the motion carried on a 5-to-0 voice vote. Commissioner Lichty then sought authorization for the contracting officer to execute documents titled "Assurances Relating to Real Property Acquisition" for both Site 16 and Site 16A, contingent on receiving a final legal opinion from county counsel; that motion also passed 5 to 0.
Commissioner Lichty (Precinct 3) told the court the item involves two NRCS dams and that the legal description for Site 16A is unclear and may cross into Kaufman County. He said the county has coordinated with Kaufman County and engaged outside and in-house counsel to obtain a legally sufficient opinion. "They put a March 31 deadline and ... the prior contracting officer is no longer a member of this court and somebody has to sign all these papers and get them submitted," Commissioner Lichty said, explaining the need for the special meeting and the appointment.
County officials named counsel involved in the work, and Commissioner Lichty said execution of documents related to Site 16 would be subject to Kaufman County's sign-off. The court approved both the appointment and the conditional authorization to sign assurances so the county can meet the submission deadline and move forward with repairs and related real‑property steps.
The actions recorded in the transcript show the court taking the formal steps requested on both items; the documents and any last-minute exhibits or instruments were authorized to be executed so long as the final legal opinion is received and, for the Site 16 documents, Kaufman County also signs where required.
The court moved immediately to the next agenda item; no public commenters spoke on this topic during the public forum.
