Commissioners Say Yes To Jail Work, No To Roads
County Jail Administrator to get new office space
GILMER, TX, Jan. 30, 2009 -- Upshur County commissioners agreed today to renovations in the jail building, designed to create a new office for the County Jail Administrator.
In other business, they approved and accepted the plat filed for the Eagle Ranch Subdivision, and reappointed David Stevenson as Upshur's representative on the board of the Northeast Texas Regional Mobility Authority.
Commisioners split, though, on whether to accept two private roads, PR-1198 and 1199, into the county maintenance inventory.
Commissioner James Crittenden argued for accepting the roads, saying in effect that residents who live on the road had fulfilled their two year obligation to maintain the roads.
But Commissioner Joe Ferguson argued against acceptance, saying the roads did not have school bus turnarounds. His argument was helped by Bubba Pendarvis, Road Administrator, who said the roads did not meet county specifications.
Crittenden said he had spoken with Gilmer ISD Superintendent Rick Albritton, and had been told buses currently picked up and dropped off children at the corners of the two roads and Golden Eagle Road. Crittenden said Albritton had confirmed that the routes would't change, even if the county accepted the roads.
Ferguson, seizing on Pendarvis' statement, said the county "might as well throw away our specifications", and worried that accepting the roads would set a precedent the county would have to live by in later actions.
In the end, Commissioner's Crittenden and Glenn Campbell voted to accept the roads, and Ferguson, along with Commissioner Lloyd Crabtree voted against it. County Judge Dean Fowler cast the tie-breaking vote against accepting the roads, saying he based his vote on Pendarvis' comments.
6 comments:
Crabtree and Fowler just do whatever Ferguson says. it is a shame we don't have better leadership in Upshur County.
the roads were trying to be excepted as 3rd class roads just the very same that was done here at the glenwood acres subdivision.nothing has changed here on these dead end roads.our children still walk to the end of there roads to catch the buses.this is what i did state in the meeting.from all of what i personally know of this matter glenwood acres with the county commissioners court did set the precedence of a 3rd class road.
by excepting them in 2004 after the statutory waiting period.one would just have to assume that several of these side streets that are dead end roads are 3rd class roads.or was these roads not 3rd class roads and then maybe that was why the county did in fact redo a whole road bottom to top that was a very short dead end road i do not believe a culdesac turn around was added there at that time either.
so i guess what i am saying here is did the county brake policy when they did in fact take over the maintenance of the roads in 2004.mr lundy spoke on dec.16th in the cccm. an stated that some things had to be done in order for the county to except the roads during the two year waiting period .one of which was to remove all speed bumps.i think i have pics recently taken that show 8 speed bumps.so why did the county then at that time agree to except the roads out here.did joy orms as our county commissioner then mislead the county.or was the vote influenced for a different agenda. why did the commissioners court agreed to except them.even with many many roads not to county specs.so i say yes policy was broke then.as well as the vote from the subdivision of all the landowners was illegally done.i have requested in writing to have copy of said documents and our paid office employee cindy gill sent back to me that there was no such documents in 2002 about the voting of the roads.so just who all was involved in these matters.
seems like a whole lot of fraud and deception going on.who will investigate it.
why cant these people be held accountable for there actions.are they in fact above the law and as such do they not have to answer to the people.as well as the courts for there misguidings.
so just when was policy broke in these matters.was in in 2002,2004,2006/2007 or 2009?thats the real question.surely this is not one of those pick and chose deals!
Well the only TWO that are still there from 2002 is..... Ferguson and Fowler!
Quote:
"Ferguson, seizing on Pendarvis' statement, said the county "might as well throw away our specifications", and worried that accepting the roads would set a precedent the county would have to live by in later actions."
Specifications my A**! They don't give a rats patooty about specifications when they don't like them. How about the specifications that say we're supposed to have a road engineer?
Mr. Ferguson, in your precinct does Tobacco Road meet county specifications? There is no bus turnaround on that road, for sure, but then nobody lives down there. You can barely turn a car around at the end of it! Who benefits from having that road on the county roll?
No, these men are not public servants. They are power brokers. They don't have the county's best interests at heart, just their own interests.
What are the specifications for a county road, and how does a person get a copy, anyway?
Apparently no one knows. Just ask Buddy Ferguson.
Post a Comment