[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-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",[32,74,86],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_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":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6001706,"mediaKeyId","5841243-477a8b85061afb4c264fddbc7218d34a","parentId",5841243,"title","Resident raises long-running complaint about County Road 259; commissioners outline ongoing road repairs","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",137000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5841243-477a8b85061afb4c264fddbc7218d34a&start=137&end=137","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5841243-477a8b85061afb4c264fddbc7218d34a/thumbnail_137000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6001706/Mills-County/Texas/Resident-raises-long-running-complaint-about-County-Road-259-commissioners-outline-ongoing-road-repairs","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6001706-260fffdc9f77e80b4ef1e3c98bc949b0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771145529&Signature=mayQILtPc8bjciYPqWzLh3IzTFGX8AFfXdyJgtX31V6fnfcLQDtGPHtUO5LXLCjkQf-GFGKWPSqroIGDvsNmiemF3CFhpVO5Xp6yNy9Z3g1DL-IOrrfEfztFfN8PlYNPupBv8D8CJP730ycbjulcEyNw7SW9JzFtDpkPuzbRJifaQxZ0QGjMQKg3PPZ2AnnRPoptzDGYhxMCAGPKwyvMDbi2R37REbspK5n7el87OJCy3R3ljgHJoOIrRzOe3zktiVC69fAXjL0HGmWtMiQf4meKcWPGDUIlrvNP48kqlGMJjtzw~cliwopxU5GGkBM60MqE0IwmzShxLwf0tp9EdQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Mills County Court, Texas","date","2025-08-26T00:00:00Z","article","A Mills County resident urged the commissioners court on Aug. 25 to repair long-standing washouts and remove excess gravel on County Road 259, saying the road has been reduced to one lane by cones and that drivers often force passing traffic onto the shoulder.

The unnamed resident (identified in the record as the public commenter at the podium) told the court he has repeatedly driven in the ditch to avoid oncoming vehicles that “decide they will go around the cones regardless” and said his truck had been scratched by bushes along the shoulder. “There is so much gravel on the side of that road,” he said, asking county crews to use the material to fill holes and return the road to two lanes.

County staff and commissioners responded with practical next steps. A staff member advised the resident to speak with the precinct commissioner after court. Commissioners described ongoing work across precincts: hauling material from Heather’s pit to maintain Manning Road (County Road 327); rebuilding and hauling to County Road 235 and County Road 437; addressing washouts on County Road 549 and FEMA mitigation needs; and preparing a rock crusher and milling operations for more repairs. Commissioner Pardon said a FEMA mitigation area is working on a washed-out site at County Road 549 and that the county may need to act sooner than planned.

Specific road items reported by commissioners during the meeting included:
- Manning Road (CR 327): hauling material from a local pit and grading work under way.
- County Road 235 and County Road 437: tree removal and road rebuilding efforts.
- County Road 545 and County Road 549: repairs and a FEMA mitigation site being coordinated with county staff.

Commissioner Williams also described equipment moves, cattle-guard cleanouts and coordination to begin rock work using a crusher the county is preparing to pick up and deploy. Commissioners said they are coordinating loader and equipment availability among precincts to support rock hauling and resurfacing.

The court did not adopt a new policy at the meeting but recorded the public comment and the commissioners’ operational reports; staff advised the resident to follow up with the relevant precinct commissioner. The county judge said commissioners would discuss road priorities in upcoming work and scheduled follow-up items in routine precinct reports.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","08.25.2025 Commissioners Court","oneSentenceSummary","A resident told the Mills County Commissioners Court that County Road 259 has long-standing storm damage and excess gravel, and commissioners reported multiple ongoing road repairs and FEMA mitigation work across the county.","taxTitle","Mills County, Texas","taxId",73734,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6001710,"Mills County hears Inogen Healthcare report; inmate-health resolution tabled, optional services notification approved",924,575000,1499000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5841243-477a8b85061afb4c264fddbc7218d34a&start=575&end=1499","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5841243-477a8b85061afb4c264fddbc7218d34a/thumbnail_575000.jpg","/articles/6001710/Mills-County/Texas/Mills-County-hears-Inogen-Healthcare-report-inmate-health-resolution-tabled-optional-services-notification-approved","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6001710-1f548051149e93f76b337974d4f40af2/orig.mp4?Expires=1771145529&Signature=KlMmjdRUzmWktyvErwLqEfhVkh-KutQEVppl9cnRJFP1EmQE0i0shL0tm08RVWzCsbHwupwPF-t0re8eEgbqd9Mx4ML3EsW5L7GaRh3YHyyfNna4IcILjN7vd14wSMurzrHN~YHfb3molPclQRug7XEy4GJ9M-TxOAQxYJsr307LWYxb1KPehPfUOliuYCFYfMpzOgBMWiJ61sqhshFqAvN~eZ6gUCLL4o~HfyYbv5bO8vmKWXOHjhgecpbHmXcXAEbiFsnBwE2li7113PtBIE~PO4ZTk1sTvVLAKYcQOBSz6W6p51wBHZRWBhXG7~0HQ6p12flCiWWarqnuDjVniw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","On Aug. 25 the Mills County Commissioners Court received a fiscal and claims report from Inogen Healthcare and approved an optional health-care services notification for submission to the state, while tabling an inmate-healthcare resolution that was not available at the meeting.

Mary Gales, identified at the meeting as representing Inogen Healthcare, briefed the court on claims processed from Sept. 1, 2024, through Feb. (sic) 2025 and reported total expenditures of $28,045.48 for that period. Gales said inpatient and outpatient services were the largest categories and that outpatient hospital services made up about 42.46 percent of the billed amount (reported as $11,908.81). She told the court Inogen had negotiated a previously misdirected bill with a long-time provider — reported in discussion as Hendricks — reducing an approximately $82,000 bill to $5,129.40, yielding savings the presenter characterized as “above $77,000.” Gales said Inogen had entered 16 new client files and had roughly 64 clients in the fiscal year’s caseload.

Gales said the program pays providers at Medicaid rates in accordance with the county’s prior inmate resolution and that the company works to resolve billing errors and negotiate rates with providers. She also described social-work assessments for eligible clients and said most of the caseload consisted of inmates who receive outpatient services off-site.

During the presentation commissioners asked whether the amounts shown were settlements; Gales replied that the amounts reflected Medicaid-rate payments and negotiated settlements with providers. She also noted provider reassessments after ownership changes at some hospitals and said Inogen had worked to redirect bills properly when they were sent to the jail in error.

Procedural actions followed. Commissioner Williams recommended tabling the inmate-healthcare resolution because the actual resolution document was not included in meeting materials; Commissioner Pitt seconded and the court voted to table the resolution. Earlier in the discussion the court had mistakenly taken an initial vote on an item that was only a report; that vote was rescinded and the court corrected the record before tabling. Separately, the court approved the optional health-care services notification — the state form that lists optional services the county is willing to provide beyond basic indigent-care coverage — by motion of the court with a second by Commissioner Williams. The court’s clerk was asked to collect and file the missing inmate-healthcare resolution and the interlocal agreement and related invoices for fiscal years 2024 and 2025 for follow-up.

By the numbers Gales reported: total expenditures $28,045.48; outpatient hospital services $11,908.81 (42.46%); negotiated reduction of a bill originally ~ $82,000 to $5,129.40; 16 new client files and roughly 64 clients in the fiscal-year caseload. Gales also said two clients were fully eligible under indigent criteria.

The court directed staff to obtain the missing resolution and the interlocal agreement for action at a future meeting.

Note: the meeting transcript included small inconsistencies in reported client counts (64 and 66 were both spoken); the article reports the figures as presented by the Inogen representative.","An Inogen Healthcare representative reported on county indigent inmate-care claims and cost negotiations; the court voted to table an inmate-healthcare resolution that was not present in packets and approved an optional health-care services notification to the state.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6001715,"Mills County court votes 4-1 to begin process for Red River Clean Energy reinvestment zone",1345,1511000,2856000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5841243-477a8b85061afb4c264fddbc7218d34a&start=1511&end=2856","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5841243-477a8b85061afb4c264fddbc7218d34a/thumbnail_1511000.jpg","/articles/6001715/Mills-County/Texas/Mills-County-court-votes-4-1-to-begin-process-for-Red-River-Clean-Energy-reinvestment-zone","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6001715-55c7ae72495d6e6e7b77a4e2ad0c0331/orig.mp4?Expires=1771145529&Signature=Y9kwg-zntkHWOxV3ZEedQSuQU8jBwLYEDsWr2gBi~qKmMlSJFLmZRZBcGpjXJ0Hrhpp2-IzPQ6Teu9TW1YFqRxxDT2Q4ExTcNEYxiVs4egg~~DxgC4OtebGlyeqe15-duJYg1o-I81JoM~aNKWPNIauOQFLehC4XKX3z~kNludqOYB5yv3~ksR4A7Xk15t16XJnXLkw6TJ3A4WYtyP2-H0dbDGUGhkOzIYvgr8RzuVH0KHQe7YgGDKDkgK3S2NXwKLvBv8X9Oq18cvIFcie2m-W50HnnsMv8t0FHBtkDHScy~npQJykJU~QeusDkrAcQARZuCRL6UCfkl3ng~yrjdQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","On Aug. 25 the Mills County Commissioners Court voted 4-1 to begin the process of creating a reinvestment zone at the request of Red River Clean Energy, initiating steps that could lead to future tax-abatement talks but do not grant any abatements or approvals. Commissioner Williams moved to start the process; Commissioner Hartnell seconded. The court counted four votes in favor and one opposed.

The decision starts a county-level procedural step toward a potential reinvestment zone for a proposed solar and battery project from Red River Clean Energy, but county officials emphasized the vote was only to “begin the process,” not to set tax-abatement amounts or finalize any agreements. Karen Wesson, a retired CPA and Mills County property owner who spoke during public comment, urged the court to reject tax abatements and to require road bonds or road-use agreements if projects proceed.

Wesson said she owns property near one of the proposed sites and that a battery-storage facility could be within “100 yards of my fence and 800 yards of my home.” She also cited state-level proposals she described as restricting renewable-energy tax incentives, naming Texas House Bill No. 5 (1988) and a more recent Senate bill she identified as Senate Bill 819 and saying State Sen. Charles Perry supported the measure in April 2025. “I am here today to ask you to vote against giving any tax incentives, an abatement or a payment in lieu of property taxes to any solar energy companies,” Wesson told the court.

Commissioners debated tradeoffs. Some commissioners said a high tax-abatement percentage—Wesson and others recalled hearing “50%”—would be excessive and raised concerns about lost tax revenue and the county’s ability to collect if a developer later went bankrupt. Others argued a pilot (payment in lieu of taxes) can produce significant revenue in early years compared with leaving a project fully on the tax roll if market values decline. Attorney Jeff Allen (referenced by the court) advised updating the county’s guidelines and criteria for reinvestment zones, noting statute language refers to “new and existing” projects and recommending the county adopt current guidelines whether or not it approves abatements.

Several neighboring counties were cited by speakers as precedents: Brown County and Coleman County were named as counties that had refused future abatements for renewable projects, and County Commissioner Kirk Chastain of Brown County was said to have required a bond for road repair in one local case. Court members discussed road-use agreements and bonds as tools to protect county infrastructure during construction, and Commissioner Pardon said FEMA mitigation work is in progress on some washed-out roads that will also need county attention.

The court voted to open the administrative process for creating a reinvestment zone in order to consider guidelines and criteria and to allow further, formal steps. The court did not set any tax-abatement rates, adopt a reinvestment-zone ordinance, or approve any project. Those would require separate actions and documents at future meetings.

What happens next: initiating the process means county staff and the court will prepare the required notices, draft guidelines and criteria, and schedule additional hearings or workshops before any final reinvestment-zone designation or tax-abatement agreement. The court did not establish a timeline in the meeting.

By the numbers and sources cited in court: Wesson said the developer had advertised roughly 250 jobs; speakers referenced a cited 50% abatement figure as the developer’s initial ask; the court vote to begin the process was 4–1. The county attorney advised updating existing guidelines to reflect statute language about new and existing projects.

Mills County’s next commissioners court meeting is scheduled for Sept. 8, when follow-up items related to this topic could appear.","The Mills County Commissioners Court voted 4-1 on Aug. 25 to begin the procedural steps for creating a reinvestment zone connected to a proposed Red River Clean Energy solar project. The vote starts a process that could lead to future tax-abatement negotiations but does not itself grant any tax breaks or approvals for a project.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Resident raises long-running complaint about County Road 259; commissioners outline ongoing road repairs

Mills County hears Inogen Healthcare report; inmate-health resolution tabled, optional services notification approved

Mills County court votes 4-1 to begin process for Red River Clean Energy reinvestment zone