County’s Newest City Needs Help With Its Streets

Fayette County Commissioners Court discussed a possible interlocal agreement with the City of Ellinger to maintain city streets at their meeting last Thursday.

The citizens of Ellinger voted to incorporate their community in 2020. Prior to that, the County maintained Ellinger’s streets since there was no local governing authority. But now, it’s up to the new city government to conduct street maintenance.

Ellinger Mayor Matt Mikulenka said his town is able to conduct some maintenance such as patching potholes. But he said the town does not have the ability to purchase the necessary equipment or hire contractors for major repairs. Mikulenka approached the Commissioners Court at their meeting last Thursday about a possible agreement for the Pct. 2 Road and Bridge Department to conduct street work in Ellinger.

“Commissioner (Luke) Sternadel has a unique situation in the northern part of the County where there are four cities that are incorporated, very small cities that sometimes need assistance, but they provide discounted compensation,” Mikulenka said.

Mikulenka said the City of Industry in Austin County has a similar agreement with their Commissioners Court for road assistance.

Under the proposed agreement, if Ellinger requests road repair assistance within the City, the Pct. 2 Road and Bridge Department would prepare a cost estimate for the repairs. The City Commissioners of Ellinger would review the estimate. If they agree to it, the work would proceed and the City of Ellinger would pay the County for the costs.

The County has similar agreements in place with the cities of Fayetteville, Round Top and Carmine.

“Even though we’re incorporated, we still bear (county) property taxes,” Mikulenka said.

“For the City, its a good deal, because they’re essentially getting it for cost,” said Assistant County Attorney Blake Watson. “Whereas if they had to go out and hire a contractor, they’d have to pay them an additional charge, obviously, so that the company could be profitable.”

Pct. 1 Commissioner Jason McBroom raised an issue with language in the proposed agreement that stated, “The County shall be responsible for providing the labor and equipment required for maintenance and repair of Ellinger roads …” “It says ‘County shall’; should that say ‘County may’?” McBroom asked. “Let me use an analogy – if you asked us to build a bridge, we’re probably not going to do that. We’d say you need to find someone else. Shouldn’t we have a little way to say yes or no, we will do that for you. Because right here it says we have to. If he asks, we have to.”

Watson said the language could be changed to provide the County with some discretion.

Pct. 2 Commissioner Luke Sternadel said he supports the agreement. Sternadel said he would always prioritize County roads ahead of any requests for assistance from Ellinger. However, Sternadel will retire at the end of this month. County Judge Dan Mueller will appoint Sternadel’s successor until the next election, but Mueller has not yet done so.

“The only other thing I have an issue with is, and its not an issue with Commissioner Sternadel, but he’s about to leave in two weeks,” said Pct. 3 Commissioner Harvey Berckenhoff. “Now he’s going to sign an agreement with the town and the next guy coming in is going to be responsible for that. Maybe we should defer that and let the next commissioner look this over.”

Watson said the agreement would be for two years with an extension option and a 30day termination clause.

Pct. 4 Commissioner Drew Brossmann asked if the County changes that language in the agreement from “shall” to “may,” as McBroom pro-posed, would the new commissioner have the discretion to decline any request for assistance from Ellinger.

“Once this gets pushed through,” Brossmann said, “Lets say its in September, and the mayor contacts the new commissioner and says, ‘Hey, I need you to do this road. Are you willing to help me?,’ and the commissioner says, ‘I’m sorry, I can’t do it. I’m too busy. I’ve got other stuff going on. I’m kind of swamped. I’m new to this. I really don’t feel comfortable helping you this year. You’re going to have to do it on your own.’ Does he have the right to do that?”

“Sure, yes, under the agreement, that wouldn’t be an issue,” Watson said. “We can make the change in the language. The County isn’t obligated to do any work until we agree to do that.”

Mueller suggested deferring a vote on the agreement until the first meeting in May so that the new commissioner could participate in the decision. The rest of the court agreed. They deferred the decision until their first meeting in May.