[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-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",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_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",6655623,"mediaKeyId","5385527-dec082a145baec7babd1440f97510a0d","parentId",5385527,"title","Votes at a glance: Johnson County Commissioners Court actions, July 14, 2025","audioSeconds",1764,"startMs",1432000,"endMs",3196000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5385527-dec082a145baec7babd1440f97510a0d&start=1432&end=3196","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5385527-dec082a145baec7babd1440f97510a0d/thumbnail_1432000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6655623/Johnson-County/Texas/Votes-at-a-glance-Johnson-County-Commissioners-Court-actions-July-14-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6655623-410489ba98c142a3ad752221fe2a5723/orig.mp4?Expires=1770961289&Signature=Whh6mTXd6vT-awvzkSUR9rIrUVBDZ0o9YfSywlr8DLyCfw11Smr28EyJE3~UPUsKA6-G8B36QW4Gcvob54OFpNGbVtzoex6aMC7VwjFxYKNNlNpOSh0oPhErxm5BcXtOEEJhQrx1GoFHQO2fOkC~Ix8lIlBwl2e5vwa9rfi8Zdi-AG00FyIatQbQ0a04tMJAyQ4k4WMY6rmNGVzA5X3TSOhX9goysCu-DPwgbWyjMiHbE30nUnUw9lL6kbdDCmKCpp09cv~BKlZDJ5VDWEVgBFDkfvlYjdF~yjFurIIIlsn6WZem7iPjV1UtQgV020CDX6z4edvwWVFy~0v8qxkaaw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Johnson","date","2025-07-14T00:00:00Z","article","The Johnson County Commissioners Court took the following formal actions at the July 14 meeting. For transparency the list records the motion text where provided, who moved and seconded when stated on the record, and the outcome as announced by the court.

- Consent agenda: Motion to approve consent agenda carried unanimously (motion by Commissioner White; second by Commissioner Howell). Outcome: approved.

- A1 — Bill run for court‑appointed attorney fees: Motion to approve (record notes the county judge recused on this item). Outcome: motion carried; judge abstaining (motion and second recorded; clerk recorded action as carried).

- A2 — Authorize purchasing agent to advertise for bids and proposals: Motion carried as presented (no dissent recorded).

- A3 — Reappointment to Prairie Lands Groundwater Conservation District (Paul Tishler, 4‑year term): Motion to approve reappointment (mover: Commissioner Bailey; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously among voting members.

- A4 — Order 2025‑55: Hills of Homes plat revision, Lot 10 Block 2, Section 1 (private water well): Motion to approve (mover: Commissioner Bailey; second: Commissioner White). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A5 — Order 2025‑56: Replat of That’s High Day Estates Lots 1 & 2 to Lots 1R & 2R (served by Johnson County Special Utility District): Motion to approve (mover: Commissioner White; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A6 — Order 2025‑57: Cancelation of Godly Yard addition (vacation of plat and public right‑of‑way): Motion to approve (mover: Commissioner Bailey; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A7 — Order 2025‑62: Martin Creek replat to combine lots (private well): Motion to approve (mover: Commissioner Bailey; second: Commissioner White). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A8 — Plat: Country Meadows addition, Lots 1–4, Block 1 (served by JCSUD): Motion to approve plat as presented (mover: Commissioner White; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A9 — County participation agreement for turn lanes (Country Meadows): Motion to approve participation for turn lanes at County Road 203, materials and labor valued at $23,757.80 (mover: Commissioner Bailey; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A10 — Improved construction bond from Country Meadows Grand View LLC ($87,992 secured by Insurers Indemnity Company for road/streets/drainage/signage): Motion to approve (mover: Commissioner White; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A11 — Order 2025‑564: Release construction bond (Plantation Orchard LP) secured by Harcourt National Insurance Company for $1,850,660 for roads/drainage/signage: Motion to approve release (mover: Commissioner Bailey; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A12 — Variance to allow two proposed lots with 133 feet of road frontage each (less than the 150‑foot requirement): Motion to approve variance (mover: Commissioner Bailey; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A13 — Order 2025‑59: Reduce speed limit to 30 mph on County Road 714 (segment): Motion to approve order reducing the speed limit to 30 mph (mover: Commissioner Howell; second: Commissioner White). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A14 — Prime Source Construction roofing proposal for Correctional Facility Building C2 ($79,800), with transfer from general fund non‑departmental: Motion to approve (mover: Commissioner White; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A15 — Prime Source Construction roofing proposal for Correctional Facility Building C3 ($198,500), with transfer from general fund non‑departmental: Motion to approve (mover: Commissioner Howell; second: Commissioner White). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A16 — FY2026 pre‑purchase: water heater/boiler replacement ($55,535) and 2025 Ford Transit van and upfitting ($75,727) with transfers from general fund and equipment reserve: Motion to approve (mover: Commissioner Hales; second: Commissioner Bailey). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A17 — Summit Fire and Security extinguisher recharge proposal (service for patrol vehicle extinguishers): Motion to approve (mover: Commissioner White; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A18 — Interlocal agreement for STOP (Special Crimes Unit) operation (2025): Motion to approve agreement, authorize county judge to sign (mover: Commissioner White; second: Commissioner Bailey). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A19 — Order 2025‑61: Sole‑source exemption for Schindler Elevator Corporation for proprietary diagnostic and parts (authorization recorded; no new contract awarded at hearing): Motion to approve exemption finding (mover: Commissioner White; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously.

- A20 — Acknowledgment of audits completed April–June 2025 (auditor’s reports): Motion to acknowledge receipt and place on minutes (mover: Commissioner Bailey; second: Commissioner White). Outcome: acknowledged unanimously.

- A21 — Replace AT&T data circuits at Burleson Sub Courthouse and Gwen Justice Center as part of IT decentralization plan (cost savings and performance improvements discussed): Motion to approve replacement circuits and proceed with decentralization (mover: Commissioner White; second: Commissioner Howell). Outcome: carried unanimously.

These actions were reported on the record. Where the record lists “carried unanimously” the court noted no opposing votes and that four court members were present (Commissioner Woolley absent). Where the record noted a recusal, that recusal is recorded above.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Johnson - Commissioner's Court - Jul 14, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The court approved consent items, plats, bonds, contracts and personnel actions. This roundup lists each formal action taken, the mover/second where recorded and outcomes as stated on the record.","taxTitle","Johnson County, Texas","taxId",64594,"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},6655628,"Commissioners preview 2026 budget: COLA proposal, law‑enforcement step plan and road funding concerns",2046,7134000,9180000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5385527-dec082a145baec7babd1440f97510a0d&start=7134&end=9180","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5385527-dec082a145baec7babd1440f97510a0d/thumbnail_7134000.jpg","/articles/6655628/Johnson-County/Texas/Commissioners-preview-2026-budget-COLA-proposal-lawenforcement-step-plan-and-road-funding-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6655628-036bc50d063f74985e504e9ff9940f71/orig.mp4?Expires=1770961289&Signature=BFs-QIGffRn7VdMFAbln-ORv3xkanvR7XjtCbKNTo~NzKXXGI6PogzLkAEqZpXjqcGHydJ5WCQXw5fCNn2L9PYRMW592jHnltx6syGWyUC-LVXy0-c6WHR7oGx3EU~LwO6Zlu6m9Yaq3IeH6ndF9kdiVocYdC0ZUD54pcrMp-5RIsuOPUZvkudkHmvC7y9QOeZzkM5jP4E2V8Lf1GVCJyS0JpJf4Wjey66EThKydu1-KsCCY3paDV9Be5O6COSeHMUh9Y9cCV51lmzDfI83dz5d~sDlOHEdYoTV9R4FjbJ0IefbAMW4Jt7A5UTDf2beRy4d3FrpUfBxXkYrLi2nb6w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Johnson County commissioners on July 14 held a preliminary budget workshop in which staff outlined timetable and priorities for the FY2026 budget and discussed candidate increases for employee pay, potential law‑enforcement step plan changes and pressure on road‑and‑bridge budgets.

County staff said the administration’s working priority is to avoid a tax‑rate increase beyond the voter‑approved road bond penny while investing in existing employees and maintaining healthy fund balances. The county manager recommended a cost‑of‑living adjustment (COLA) equal to the April consumer price index — about 2.3 percent — consistent with the court’s policy used in prior budget cycles.

The sheriff and county staff discussed an update to the law‑enforcement step plan. The proposal raised patrol deputy starting pay to $70,000 from roughly $63,000, compressed early steps, and retained a higher top step for long‑tenure officers. County estimates presented to the court placed the annual cost of the proposed step adjustments at roughly $1.6 million including fringe benefits; staff said the number would vary depending on final design and whether small command‑staff adjustments are included.

Commissioners and staff also discussed the county‑wide longevity program adopted last year; staff recommended funding the second half of a multi‑year implementation so that long‑service employees receive the intended larger longevity payments. The county manager said the court’s priorities also include keeping employee health‑insurance contributions flat if possible.

Several commissioners raised concerns about road‑and‑bridge funding and rising costs for materials and heavy equipment. Precinct officials said the price of oil, replacement parts and construction equipment has increased significantly and urged the court to consider additional road funding — including reconsideration of interlocal agreements and the vehicle/equipment replacement reserve — to avoid deferred maintenance.

No budget decisions were made; staff said certified appraisal values arriving later in July will determine available revenue and that the court will hold formal budget workshops in August and adopt a proposed budget by mid‑August ahead of a September adoption date.","In a preliminary budget workshop commissioners discussed a 2.3% cost‑of‑living adjustment proposal, a law‑enforcement step‑plan expansion to raise starting deputy pay to $70,000 and ongoing concerns about road and equipment funding.",{"_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},6655633,"County tests Soma dispatch system; IT and sheriff keep Central Square as plan B",587,10276000,10863000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5385527-dec082a145baec7babd1440f97510a0d&start=10276&end=10863","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5385527-dec082a145baec7babd1440f97510a0d/thumbnail_10276000.jpg","/articles/6655633/Johnson-County/Texas/County-tests-Soma-dispatch-system-IT-and-sheriff-keep-Central-Square-as-plan-B","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6655633-e910a36331cf2ba15c69644f1048f6ce/orig.mp4?Expires=1770961289&Signature=fsznMxnCgoqIycC3YSkx~1kFx2DtqEcgnLnuQfv4cniLfXkWp7fCu31jhtDuu3K3LInARlv3aacNrULPtlr3aNy5kFnv01s9qx3Ad4ZNUxCE1wKqg~YCu4r-jceCcdVrPAYIC1DEXQPly5oEDsjsNhGIPiFHsuBlv5GZHbWy0KOGY5sc5XfJGxQqSTYRBYXBImzUxViKPDoGIhlFs~V3~MFsM3ESr5DVtOS7goXqhhUQ01qlyw7GwlIcoDVvCJJXYr3~mDZYNPFe77zW7qeiGHztW-LeoiIfcqvQ0EjXjeSti56edHAkp1pAdfM9SU1~Si0arQo7fNLDmBdoTw2Lcw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Johnson County officials said July 14 they have scheduled a stress test of the Soma emergency dispatch system and are pursuing a cloud‑based plan B with Central Square in case the Soma system cannot support the county’s multi‑agency 9‑1‑1 operations.

The county’s IT staff and the sheriff’s office described a timeline of short‑term testing and negotiations. IT staff told the court they expected a stress test to begin the day after the meeting and a Central Square representative to meet with county staff the following day to discuss a “one‑solution” cloud alternative. County staff said the Central Square cloud option is priced within a range that the county considers manageable and that it would provide redundancy if Soma cannot meet performance expectations.

Sheriff’s office leaders urged caution: they said earlier rollouts of the same Soma product experienced performance collapse as more agencies were added, and that a full “go‑live” must be delayed until the software can support all participating agencies reliably. The sheriff and IT staff said they will run an extensive stress test with agencies and local police and fire partners to evaluate scalability and reliability before any final acceptance or milestone payment.

County officials told the court they will not release final acceptance payments until the system performs reliably in live operation with all users. The court’s stated priority is to keep dispatch services operational; officials said staff will continue parallel planning with Central Square so the county can migrate quickly if Soma remains unsuitable.

No final procurement decision was made at the meeting. Commissioners asked staff to continue aggressive testing and to return with a clear recommendation and a negotiated contract from Central Square should Soma fail to meet the county’s requirements.","After a previous failed Trinity/Soma launch, Johnson County scheduled stress testing with Soma and is pursuing Central Square’s cloud offering as a backup. County leaders said they will not approve milestone payments until full, stable operation is demonstrated.",{"_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},6655635,"Goodland developers ask Johnson County to join financing plan for 5,000‑acre master‑planned town",1834,5074000,6908000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5385527-dec082a145baec7babd1440f97510a0d&start=5074&end=6908","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5385527-dec082a145baec7babd1440f97510a0d/thumbnail_5074000.jpg","/articles/6655635/Johnson-County/Texas/Goodland-developers-ask-Johnson-County-to-join-financing-plan-for-5000acre-masterplanned-town","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6655635-6808fa3df9dda779b9dca3bd2ce3f9ff/orig.mp4?Expires=1770961289&Signature=XSSRLUzkf15MsGbV9SRA5Saf7l5M-8Cwr7OXhZfMpWIObFjku-WMrp9-eEuNHRgESAp7Srx5veC2WT0FjiRD3CLhqOvUqasHRtSHAAnx3N8ZTPCSI45RQRI9INeXnxArJt4lGsFzjr2~qKJRTotseTMVp2dcn5FI2k9GyllBkme~G3h6kXj3iZKlTNEQCERX-OfrOhep~ryni483P6P6RFooA9CRyLUQQpGgcAcAPKeyOIYm9pu8V0TSWU71SgEg0BDiOXWV0YIZPwsXPGvDVP5SIc6paTmqeLvbXw3sknTiJeoddr5SczUw0LCg4y~5I6DTrA-ksYU8s~Ov9mO4Xw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Developers of Goodland, a proposed 5,000‑acre master‑planned community that stretches from the U.S. 287/360 area toward State Highway 67, returned to the Johnson County Commissioners Court on July 14 to seek county participation in financing infrastructure needed to support the project.

Providence Realty representatives and Grand Prairie officials showed commissioners conceptual plans for an urban‑style town center, parks, schools and more than 6,000 single‑family units and over 4,000 multifamily units at full build‑out. Daniel Toya of Providence and Megan Mahan, deputy city manager for Grand Prairie, said most of the Goodland acreage and the town center will be within the city limits of Grand Prairie but that major infrastructure — regional thoroughfares, sewer mains and other utility work — must be financed before development can proceed.

Toya and the city’s team described a financing approach that combines a municipal management district and a tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ). Grand Prairie officials said the city would participate in the TIRZ; Providence asked the county to participate at a 70 percent level comparable to the city’s participation. Presenters said participation by the county would accelerate infrastructure construction and the creation of new taxable value that will eventually flow to county, city and other taxing jurisdictions.

Legal counsel and the developer’s financial advisors described the structure: the developer will construct regional infrastructure and then be reimbursed from future tax increments captured and remitted under the municipal/ TIRZ structure; the plan is self‑supporting because it uses only new taxable value generated within the project area. Steve Robinson, counsel to the developers, said the freshwater supply district currently covering some existing Goodland parcels in Ellis County will remain in place until its bonds are retired; most Johnson County parcels are already planned to be inside Grand Prairie city limits and would be served by the city when annexed.

Commissioners asked detailed questions about water supply, conservation and how commercial and data‑center demand would be met. Presenters said Grand Prairie is building water infrastructure now — including a 3 million‑gallon water tower — and is coordinating with regional water providers to meet long‑term demand. District counsel and Grand Prairie representatives said water supply planning and nonpotable solutions are part of project planning but acknowledged permitting and regional water constraints will require ongoing coordination with the Prairie Lands Groundwater Conservation District and other state agencies.

No vote was taken. County leaders said they will discuss the proposal further; the court placed the matter on the court’s executive‑session agenda for more detailed economic‑development negotiation but did not take action at the meeting.","Developers and Grand Prairie officials presented the Goodland master plan, described regional infrastructure needs and asked Johnson County to participate in a tax increment reinvestment strategy to help fund roads, sewer and parks that will support projected growth.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6655638,"Prairie Lands groundwater officials report steady well registrations; court reappoints Paul Tishler",984,1621000,2605000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5385527-dec082a145baec7babd1440f97510a0d&start=1621&end=2605","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5385527-dec082a145baec7babd1440f97510a0d/thumbnail_1621000.jpg","/articles/6655638/Johnson-County/Texas/Prairie-Lands-groundwater-officials-report-steady-well-registrations-court-reappoints-Paul-Tishler","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6655638-54e850363aa35c1b5f59e04e93097f8e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770961289&Signature=bmowYqHk2NdsmMlPe64zVyGPn7GdTMUXe0lYjTvGXJzVD3-pCKh-6WPQCWRnj8vPejRD5bZQ93nDGPT1iuhxqx5Ry0aPLPmpDxIqK1yDTIZHfrxuXooxhGXofjsD6NHGlcSkS8x9CeSh1FNDESMHwxnAM0Wi0qnpoTSmFYyDQM2w~hGvUT8sCcNR6lqzYH7zsnyv5hmF-0RH5fYQPdq-RpyDedvOAHXIBzANEf5spafoBelJVxP684kM4vn1ADv9tsKpFeo9hwL8u0J5I9aKctxn27vBsybgc4DhFLfInzEYbvFYrrMJ-fU1BF78Z5Wbxas~kJfHYWEJVOVUcjv~Eg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Johnson County commissioners heard an update from the Prairie Lands Groundwater Conservation District on July 14 and approved the reappointment of Paul Tishler to the district board for a four‑year term. The district reported changes in well registration, production and conservation efforts that officials said will guide local planning.

The district’s permitting director said the district saw 173 well registrations in one recent year compared with 193 district‑wide the prior year, and that Johnson County accounted for 99 new well registrations in the most recent year described, a majority of them for domestic use. Kaylene Garcia, the district’s permitting director, said many wells registered are domestic and that public water supplies remain the largest category of groundwater production.

District staff told the court they are implementing groundwater availability certifications required by state law to inform which subdivisions have groundwater suitable for long‑term development. The district also reported that overall permitted allocations for 2024 totaled about 9.7 billion gallons, of which roughly 3.1 billion gallons are allocated to sources within Johnson County; officials emphasized many permittees do not use their full allocation.

Commissioners and district staff discussed commercial uses and data centers. Garcia said data centers would be classified as nonexempt and subject to the district’s allocation limits — typically 50,000 gallons per acre per year unless historic use applies — and that developers would need to obtain water rights if they could not meet demand from permitted allocations. Commissioner questions and district remarks noted concern about future demand if several data centers locate in the region.

The district described several conservation and planning efforts now under way: water‑loss audits for retail public utilities, work with Groundwater Management Area 8 on regional dynamics and a rainwater harvesting rebate program that offers $1 per stored gallon up to 500 gallons to early participants. The district also said it is coordinating with Texas Real Estate Commission forms so buyers know if groundwater rights are not included with property transactions.

After the presentation, the commissioners voted to reappoint Paul Tishler to the Prairie Lands Groundwater Conservation District board for a four‑year term to expire 2029; the motion carried unanimously.

The district officials said they would remain available to answer follow‑up questions about groundwater availability studies and the rebate program as subdivisions continue to develop.","Prairie Lands Groundwater Conservation District updated Johnson County Commissioners on well registrations, production trends and conservation programs; the court unanimously reappointed Paul Tishler to a four‑year term.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Johnson County Commissioners Court actions, July 14, 2025

Commissioners preview 2026 budget: COLA proposal, law‑enforcement step plan and road funding concerns

County tests Soma dispatch system; IT and sheriff keep Central Square as plan B

Goodland developers ask Johnson County to join financing plan for 5,000‑acre master‑planned town

Prairie Lands groundwater officials report steady well registrations; court reappoints Paul Tishler