How we got here
The bond election was ruled void after an October 2024 lawsuit filed by four Hays County property owners cited multiple violations of the Texas Open Meetings Act, or TOMA.
The lawsuit argued that the Aug. 13 commissioners court agenda included vague language and failed to properly disclose key details about the bond’s purpose, total amount and proposed property tax rate increase, according to previous Community Impact reporting.
After being called in August, Proposition A passed with more than 55% of the vote in the November 2024 election, according to previous Community Impact reporting. It would have funded the construction, design and right-of-way acquisition for more than 30 transportation projects across the county.
The summary judgment order found that the Aug. 13 agenda item violated TOMA, reversing and declaring void the court’s action to call the bond election. Because the special election was never lawfully ordered, the court ruled Hays County can no longer take any action related to the bond.
In their own words
In a video posted to Facebook following the June 24 Hays County Commissioners Court meeting, Becerra said the court would be urgently reevaluating and “triaging” the projects precinct-by-precinct, starting with those most directly tied to public health and safety.
Becerra wrote in a separate news release that he is not inclined to appeal and spend “another hundred thousand dollars only to find the court at the exact same point we are now.”
“For now, my immediate concern is to find the resources necessary to address the most dire segments of our infrastructure and bring relief to so many of our residents who had faith in our ability to fund these vital road projects and improve our community,” Becerra said in the news release.
In the Facebook post, Becerra wrote that a few of the bond projects had sparked controversy—none more than the SH 45 extension over the Edwards Aquifer and into Austin. He wrote that despite another commissioner’s statement in court that Austin and Travis County supported the project, both entities had publicly opposed it, which helped trigger lawsuits.
Becerra also said his office had suggested creating public committees to engage the community—similar to the Parks and Open Space Advisory Commission, or POSAC—but the majority of the court declined.
“My office also suggested creating public committees to engage the community and to ensure we were doing the work the Hays County residents wanted,” he wrote. “This was successful during the POSAC bond, and unfortunately the majority on the Court refused. We shut the public out—and we’re now paying the price.”
A proposal by Becerra to form such a committee appeared before the court twice—in August and again in early September—but no action was taken at either meeting.
At the Aug. 20 meeting, Precinct 4 Commissioner Walt Smith said it was the commissioners’ responsibility—not a committee’s—to educate the public. He added that the POSAC model worked because that committee had been created two years before the call for that bond election.
In the comments of the Facebook post, Becerra wrote that the District Attorney's office, who manages the agenda, assumed the wording was solid as other agencies had used the same approach.
What the commissioners are saying
Precinct 2 Commissioner Michelle Cohen wrote in a Facebook post that although she respects the decisions of the judiciary, she is saddened that the judge’s legal analysis resulted in this outcome.
“I can assure you that the safety of our citizens remains of utmost importance, and I will continue to commit myself to finding paths forward to provide the much-needed road safety improvements this county so desperately needs,” Cohen wrote.
Precinct 1 Commissioner Debbie Ingalsbe shared a similar sentiment in a Facebook post, writing that the outcome is especially disappointing for residents in eastern Hays County.
“This bond would have supported critical infrastructure improvements, many of them located in the eastern part of our county, where roads are in poor condition and long overdue for repair,” Ingalsbe wrote. “I remain committed to finding alternative ways to fund these much-needed improvements.”
Precinct 4 Commissioner Walt Smith expressed frustration in a Facebook post, writing that the bond was voided on a “technicality by a judge not even in [Hays County].”
"Today is a sad day indeed for the citizens of Hays County,” Smith wrote. “A Travis County district judge chose to ignore over 100,000 of our citizens and side with Save Our Springs... Please remember this when we have new schools without adequate roads, when it takes you 40 minutes to get your little to class, or you hear of the next wreck that costs a life near your neighborhood.”
