Via the AAS, Williamson County proposed budget includes raises, new hires.
Williamson County’s proposed budget for 2011-12 includes employee raises, new voting machines, nine new county positions and extra money to pay for fuel increases. Commissioners don’t yet know how they will pay for all of it.
The budget of about $129.55 million spends about $4 million more than the county expects to get in revenue, assuming the current tax rate is not increased. It would increase spending about $5.19 million over this year’s budget, a 4.1 percent increase.
Options for officials for closing that potential gap include cutting spending, increasing the tax rate, using county reserves to make up the difference or some combination of cuts and tax increases. County staffers did not propose a possible tax rate when they presented the budget Tuesday.
Of course Precinct 4 County Commissioner Ron Morrison knows exactly who must pay for this. That’s right, the least among us.
Commissioner Ron Morrison said he didn’t know specifically what could be cut. “The only thing in jeopardy might be the public assistance contracts,” he said. Those contracts include the money that the county provides to social service agencies. [Emphasis added]
Why do they always come after the neediest first?
Certainly in Williamson County, still a growing county despite the economic conditions, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that the budget is rising. More people means more sheriff, fire, and EMS personnel, etc…and that costs money. What should shock everyone is that the first place they’re looking to make up the difference is from those who are already struggling the most, and not from those who have already have more than they need.
The county should look at instituting a progressive, or graduated, tax structure. One where those who have more will pay a little more, so we can stop balancing budgets on the backs of poor, working, and middle class tax payers while letting the wealthiest off without paying their fair share.
This is not a done deal by any stretch and I would urge any and all Williamson County residents to mark August 30th on their calendar, when there will be a public hearing on the budget. Also contact County Judge Dan Gattis and your commissioner, info here.
View the budget data thus far here.
WCCC gives away $75,000 to Office Depot, Williamson County OKs incentives for Office Depot to bring 200 jobs to county.
While the budget and more pressing economic issues in Texas and the nation have kept us busy lately, we’ve neglected what’s been going on locally here in Williamson County. With two freshman state Representatives and a state Senator that’s from Bryan, Williamson County has played a much smaller role this legislative session then in the recent past. Below is a little bit of what’s been going on.
Earlier in the session during Texas House redistricting Williamson County found out that they would, as thought, get a third House district. The first attempt at a drawing that new district was ridiculous. After Williamson County Democratic Chair Brian Hamon’s testimony at the next hearing the districts in Williamson County were drawn in a more rational manner.
Of course a third district in Williamson County means there’s an open seat for 2012. And certainly many will see it as an opportunity to move up the political ladder. The first opportunist appears to be Precinct 2 County Commissioner Cynthia Long. Via Mcblogger, Fight Club (Williamson County Edition).
There’s a ridiculous little fight brewing up in WilCo that should come to head Tuesday evening. On one side, we have Georgetown Councilmember Pat Berryman and on the other we have Georgetown’s Mayor, George Garver. Normally, in a fight between two Republicans, I’d prefer to sit back and just watch the bloodsport from a distance that would guarantee no blood on my shoes. However, in this case I can’t do that because
1) I have a bunch of friends in Georgetown
2) Berryman is really acting as a stand in
It’s number 2 that really irritates me because Pat is really just a sockpuppet of teabagger WilCo Commissioner Cynthia Long, the same one who has taken money over the years from the developers who’ve been trying to get something going near 183/620. The fight began a few years ago with a simple request to have a bridge over 35 in north Georgetown (the Lakeway Bridge) rebuilt with money available to CAMPO through ARRA (the so-called Federal stimulus bill). This particular bridge is, I can tell you, a terrible piece of public infrastructure on which there has been at least 6 fatal accidents. Mayor Garver put the bridge on the agenda and Cynthia Long, who was serving as Vice Chair of CAMPO in 2009 made a few strategic moves and got that particular bridge project pulled even though it was shovel ready.
The two County Commissioners that are likely running for reelection appear to be trying to burnish their tea party credentials by taking on so-called government waste in the Hot Check Department of the County Attorney’s Office. Yes, the same County Attorney that filed suit to remove the County Judge earlier this year. And after winning reelection the Precinct 4 Commissioner has gone back to sleep.
And last, but not least, the WCGOP is re-drawing the Commissioner/JP/Constable Precincts in Williamson County, County officials to redraw precincts.
Redistricting can bring with it a long list of concerns and complications.
The county’s redistricting committee, which was formed in early 2011, said its goals for the process are: to balance populations at close to 25 percent; limit splitting of government lines; preserve existing precincts as much as possible; keep elected officials in their precinct; create geographically compact precincts; and use major roads and natural features as boundary lines.
“We’re trying not to change things more than necessary or without reason,” Semple said. “We’re not going to be able to do all these things.”
The committee includes commissioners Birkman, Precinct 1, and Valerie Covey, Precinct 3, along with Semple, other county staff and legal representatives.
“There’s a lot of complications. That’s why it takes so long to get a map,” Birkman said. “It most likely won’t be a straight taking from one precinct and giving to another … because that ignores [communities of interest].”
The county is seeking public comment on redistricting, and everyone is encouraged to participate. The current proposed map can be view at, www.wilco.org/redistricting.
Two endorsements came this week from the Williamson County Sun, excerpts below:
Keep Maldonado in Office.
Moreover, in her one and a half years as a state legislator, she has been both active and effective, passing a key education bill to expand the East Williamson County Higher Education Center in Taylor and Hutto and securing serious money for three educational projects that should pay handsome financial dividends throughout the county: $805,000 to establish a Renewable Energy Training Institute in Williamson County, $16 million for the Texas A&M Health Science Center in Round Rock and $350,000 for the Texas State University’s Round Rock campus.
She also secured $10 million for the expansion of FM 1460 (the old Georgetown-Round Rock highway), which was critically needed as Seton Medical Center Williamson, Scott & White Healthcare – Round Rock, Texas State University, and Austin Community College continued to build out along University Boulevard between Interstate 35 and FM 1460.
This was urgent and had been blocked for several years; Maldonado pushed this money through roadblocks. No area of the country is better primed to boost education, medical care and financial clout over the next decade than this one – and though technically within Round Rock, Georgetown will greatly benefit from these developments.
As a member of the House Committee on Defense and Veterans Affairs, Representative Maldonado has educated herself on the needs of Texas veterans and is working to get better regional medical care for former military and their families, especially as veterans are transitioning back into their home communities.
In short, Representative Maldonado is on a roll. She has worked hard, earning plaudits for concrete advances in education, transportation and economic development. It would (be) silly for Williamson County voters to allow the good will, connections and experience she has accumulated to go to waste.
The Sun strongly recommends her reelection so she can continue to become a more effective legislator for the county.
Maurice for Commissioner.
Mr. Maurice has the background: He graduated number one in his class from University of Texas’ honors business program, then graduated from UT’s MBA program and its School of Law. After law school he worked for Pete Winstead’s Austin law firm, which did virtually all the legal work for Michael Dell and Dell Computers, which soon became Mr. Maurice’s main focus. After four years with Winstead, Dell recruited him to its fledgling in-house law firm. While at Dell, Mr. Maurice was the legal guide for the development of the Dell Campus at Round Rock.
After nearly 10 years with Dell, Mr. Maurice retired and moved with his wife, Shawn to Hutto, to raise horses. He volunteered his legal skills to Hutto, which was fighting a large LCRA transmission line and the county landfill. He became active in the community, co-founding the Williamson County Public Policy Coalition and serving on the board of the Hutto Citizens Group and Jonah Water Utility District.
He sees Precinct 4 as having intriguing possibilities – a “nice growth corridor” from the medical and educational complex at the junction of FM 1460 and University Boulevard continuing east on Chandler Road, which he pledges to finish building. But the area’s future is threatened by visions of a landfill towering 140 feet over the prairie below. His solution: keep the height at 70 feet, spread the landfill over a wider span, so that it resembles rolling hills and master plan it so developers aren’t scared off.
This is an issue that strikes at the heart of Precinct 4, which could use a savvy attorney with deep knowledge of development and finance to help drive fresh and healthy development. Jeff Maurice appears to be just the man for the job.
Great endorsements for both candidates.
The editorial board at the Austin American-Statesman endorsed Jeff Maurice for Williamson County Commissioner, precinct 4.
Maurice, a lawyer and critic of the landfill expansion, is passionate about his cause and uses that as an example of how lax government oversight over development can affect lives as well as property values.
Unfortunately, the AAS, in the same article, endorsed Cynthia Long for precinct 2 commissioner. The editors contort themselves painfully in order to build up a case for Long, and the best they could produce was:
(W)e think the fact that Long has priorities speaks volumes. To lead is to choose, as the expression goes, and Long, 48, has amply demonstrated she isn’t afraid to choose.
In other words, the choices themselves were horrible, but at least she had the guts to make them. This sounds like a rehash of the paper’s 2004 endorsement of George W. Bush.
Some are whispering that choosing to break the law is one of Long’s “leadership” qualities. Those rumors have led to an investigation that burst into the headlines of the Williamson County Sun this past week. Do we expect the all-Republican county government to clean itself up? There’s only one way to wake our county leaders up, and that is to vote as many out of office as possible.
Jeff Maurice and Jim Stauber represent long overdue change at the county. Democrats missed by 300 votes knocking off Lisa Birkman in 2008. No doubt, there are at least that number of Hermine flood victims that voted for Birkman who wish they could have that one back.
Republican County Commissioners vote to grow county government, circumvent the elected County Attorney.
Via the AAS, Williamson County to stop using county attorney’s office for legal advice.
Williamson County commissioners will not be relying on the county attorney’s office for legal help anymore.
The commissioners created two positions Tuesday: an attorney and an administrative assistant who will handle the legal duties of the court, including negotiating and drafting contracts and interlocal agreements, attending executive sessions and handling public information requests.
The commissioners decided Tuesday that the salary and benefits would be $101,801 for the attorney and $50,309 for the executive assistant. Money to hire the attorney would come from cutting one position at the county attorney’s office, said Lisa Zirkle, the county’s director of human resources. Zirkle said the commissioners “would find” the money to hire the administrative assistant. [Emphasis added].
County Attorney Jana Duty has clashed with commissioners over the years on various issues.
Much of this stems from an argument last month, during the budget process, about a new social media policy that the commissioners believed was needed because of county employees who were exercising free speech on their own time.
Here are a few comments from the AAS article linked above:
Appears the County Attorney is now being “Griffinized”. The Wilco Commissioners Court is out of control. Former Constable Griffin was targeted for standing up to them, now it is Duty’s turn. So much for constitutional checks and balances by independent elected officials.
It is a strange way to organize a government, but having the voters decide who will provide the Commissioners with legal advice, is a far better system than a system—like they have now created—where the lawyer knows he can be fired if he gives the Commissioners any advice they don’t want to hear. The irony of this situation (and my prediction) is that, having rid themselves of an independent source of legal advice, the Commissioners are likely to get themselves in legal trouble.
It’s pretty clear now that when this crew on the WCCC runs into a roadblock they will do whatever they feel like to get the answer and results they want. (Click here to read some of how former Constable Gary Griffin was treated). It should be obvious to every resident of Williamson County that some balance and accountability must be brought to our one-party county government.
If the two current commissioners running for reelection are returned to office (Cynthia Long and Ron Morrison), and the WCCC is returned intact, then we will get the exact same results – unaccountable and shady county governance. It’s time to bring accountabiliyt to our county government. That’s why we need to elect Jeff Maurice and Jim Stauber in November.
Via the Williamson County Public Policy Coalition (WCPPC), Landfill money which benefits Hutto ISD
resulted from citizen involvement in contract [.pdf]. As the WCPPC press release points out none of this would have been possible without the direct and consistent Hutto area citizen involvement, for several years, in shaping the new landfill contract in Williamson County.
If the Williamson County commissioners court votes to convey $45,000 from a special landfill fund to the
Hutto ISD through the Hutto Education Foundation on May 11 (agenda item 14), the beneficiaries have numerous citizens to thank.
As the county’s revised landfill agreement was being debated in 2008 and early 2009, the Hutto City Council (HCC), the Hutto Citizens Group (HCG), the Williamson County Public Policy Coalition (WCPPC) and numerous citizens sought benefits for east Williamson County and especially Hutto—the areas most adversely affected by the landfill.
The initial drafts of the contract which were released to the public in February of 2009 contained no benefits for the Hutto area, but when the “final” draft was presented and passed on March 3, 2009, after a strong citizen push, the contract contained the provision for the Hutto ISD to get one percent of the landfill tipping fees—31 cents per ton.
“No one looks a gift horse in the mouth, whatever the amount,” said Kurt Johnson, Sr., staffer for the WCPPC and a member of the HCG, “and citizens are pleased that the Hutto ISD is finally receiving a belated benefit. But it’s important to note that without the continued pressure and input from citizens aimed at commissioners court, this amount, small though it may be, would never have made it into the contract.”
Actions by the Hutto City Council were included in the focused citizen and stakeholder effort to derive
mitigating benefits from the county to offset the adverse consequences of the landfill’s location four miles north of Hutto. On December 18, 2008, the Council unanimously passed a motion which insisted that the county not continue with the permit application to expand the landfill in the absence of an ironclad Master Site Plan to protect Hutto. Voting in favor of that resolution were Ken Love, Tina Slaton, Debbie Holland, Ronnie Quintanilla-Perez, David Begier, Jason Wirth and Felix Madrid.
A long list of HCG members worked on getting the funds for Hutto into the contract along with seeking other provisions to protect and benefit the greater Hutto area. That list of members includes Felix Madrid, Jason Wirth, Mahlon Arnett, Cindy Allen-Lott, Ken Kincaid, Betty Sun, Weldon Copeland, Jeff Maurice, Deann Tidwell, Kurt Johnson, Sr., Mike Fowler, Jerry Tidwell, Mark Lidell, Charles Shell, Hugh Tidwell, Robbie Arnett, Orlynn Evans, and numerous others. In July of 2008, some 150 citizens crowded into the Hutto Lutheran Church parish hall to discuss options for the landfill. County representatives were invited, but did not attend.
“If you’re looking for someone to thank for Hutto’s funding, the people on that HCG are a good place to
start,” Johnson said.
The WCPPC also points out the the county continues to drag their feet on holding the operator responsible for meeting certain provisions of the contract, and the citizens are continuing to call them out on this.
The politicians on the Commissioners Court, and the corporation that’s operating the landfill, would never have done this on if they were not pressured to do do. But, of course, that is not stopping them for trying to take credit.
Over the last several years no issue has crystallized the Williamson County Commissioners Court (WCCC) and it’s, if not corruption, at least tone deafness to the public and hypocrisy, more than the controversy surrounding the new landfill contract between the WCCC and Waste Management, Inc. (WMI) (To read about it just click on “Landfill” under categories donw the right side of this blog).
When the landfill contract was signed in March 2009 a requirement of the contract was that WMI had to meet certain criteria withing the first year. Specifically they were supposed to present a Master Site Development Plan and a Master Recycling Plan within that time. We find out from this memo [.pdf] from the Williamson County Public Policy Coalition (WCPPC) sent to Williamson County Commissioners Court that this requirement was not met:
On March 9, 2010, Williamson County Commissioners Court “accepted” a hypothetical “report” without approving or disapproving the Master Site Development Plan (MSDP) and Master Recycling Plan (MRP) from Waste Management of Texas (WMTX, or Contractor) submitted for the Williamson County Landfill. Submission of the plans at the end of the first contract year (which began on March 3, 2009) was a requirement of the Landfill Operating Agreement (LOA) approved by commissioners court on March 3, 2009.
The memo further states:
The LOA contains this requirement for the MSDP in Section 2.16 (Page 21): “Within one (1) year of the Effective Date, Contractor (Waste Management of Texas) shall development a Master Site Development Plan for the Landfill. Within (12) months of the date of County’s approval of the Master Site Development Plan, Contractor shall begin implementation of the Master Site Development Plan for the Landfill in accordance with the agreed upon timelines set forth in the Plan.”
This statement makes it clear that the Contractor is to submit its full and complete plan for review by the county, not a partial or incomplete plan. In addition, there must be “timelines set forth in the Plan.”
Wait until you read the excuse the corporations attorney gives for not having these plans done on time:
The plan as submitted contains no “timelines”. In addition, Steve Jacobs, the Contractor’s representative, admitted in commissioners court on March 9 that the plan is incomplete. Jacobs stated:1 “We have a lot of other information that may not have made it into the plan simply because it gets too complicated and too hard for me to write it.”
The MSDP cannot properly be evaluated by members of commissioners court or by citizens if it lacks completeness and the required timelines. The LOA makes no provision for submitting a partial or incomplete plan in meeting the specific provision of the LOA. If, as stated by Jacobs, the Contractor is incapable of submitting a complete plan because it “gets too complicated” and is “too hard” to write, then the Contractor obviously cannot perform on the contract. At the very least, such failure to perform is a contract default.
Really? And our WCCC took that excuse and let it pass!! For a bunch who thinks corporations can always do it better, we can only imagine the outrage if words like that would have been spoken by a government employee, instead of a corporate mouthpiece.
It’s encouraged that all residents of Williamson County read the entire WCPPC memo on this issue. The county has essentially allowed WMI to miss this deadline, without any retribution, by submitting a “report” that falls way short of the plans they were required to submit. Needless to say, as in most dealings with the WCCC, the public has been left in the dark as to what the WCCC has been doing on this issue.
However, it also is clear from the discussion at commissioners court on March 9 that representatives of commissioners court participated with the Contractor in working on the plan in a secret, non-public process prior to its release.
The WCPPC also list four key issues moving forward.
- Adequate notice and forum format
- Consideration of complete and not partial plans
- The county’s responsibility in processing plans
- The county’s responsibility in the public discussion of the plans
It should come as no surprise that the WCCC would let WMI slide on a requirement of the contract. This action will only bolster the perception many have of the court and it’s penchant for secrecy and backroom dealing when it comes to its dealings with WMI. During contract negotiations how the WCCC treated WMI was controversial and seemed hypocritical. It’s perceived that the WCCC believes in the free market, is pro-business competition, and “conservative”. When they negotiated the new contract without a competitive bidding process, which went against their beliefs, it makes people wonder. Instead the perception now is that the WCCC will bend over backwards to accommodate WMI, at the expense of the residents and tax payers in Williamson County. And this current action will only further that perception.
Two letters to the editor (LTE) have been published this week about the county’s proposed master site plan for the county landfill.
First this one from the RRL, Landfill oversight stinks.
The controversial contact between the county and WMI, to run the landfill – which was passed on March 3, 2009 – provides for the county to “hire a qualified and independent Oversight Inspector,” and the contract requires WMI to contribute $50,000 toward paying for that service.
After a seven-month delay following approval of that contract, the county finally issued the RFP to hire the inspector, and apparently four firms responded by the Nov. 4, 2009 deadline. After almost a year has passed, no oversight inspector has been chosen.
A county source told media – and it was duly reported – that the county received proposals for this oversight inspector “totaling upwards of $200,000 a year.”
That figure is more than suspect. There is no way the equivalent of one full-time job, even if performed by a qualified engineer, should cost that much.
Either the county did a terrible job in constructing the Request for Proposal, or in trying to negotiate a final contract – or both.
But, in ether case, the $200,000 figure doesn’t speak well for the county’s ability to oversee the landfill or perform effective fiscal management.
This letter was signed by both Democratic candidates for county commissioner Jeff Maurice (Precinct 4) and Jim Stauber (Precinct 2).
Also this one from Maurice in the Taylor Daily Press, Regarding your March 14 article, “Commissioners consider WM master plan”.
Over a year ago, Hutto-area residents were hopeful that the process of developing the master site plan and master recycling plan for the Wilco landfill would finally present an opportunity for the community to have long-promised meaningful dialogue with the county on ways to address the landfill’s negative impact on local economic development and quality of life. Instead, for the past year, these plans have been drafted without any public input. The notion that the county just wanted to create a starting point for discussion (and that it took a year to do so) is laughable. The starting point was apparent to everyone a year ago.
These proposed plans contain very little that is new or innovative. Worse, they still fail to address the community’s main concerns about the negative effects of the landfill height (as tall as the Jonah water tower) and its massive 575 acre footprint. Colorful graphics of a new “entrance” with a few trees and a new sign may make for good press, but they don’t come close to addressing the real issues. Even those parts of the plans that appear to offer benefits are short on detail and lack any commitment whatsoever.
There’s much more in both letters and you can read EOW’s previous reporting on the landfill master plan here.
It’s looking like nothing has changed as far as the Williamson County Commissioners Court (WCCC), Waste Management, Inc. (WMI) and the county landfill are concerned. Last year when the new landfill contract was signed between the county and WMI part of the agreement was that within a year the Master Site Plan and Master Recycling Plan be developed. These plans were presented at the Tuesday March 9th WCCC meeting, and as yet, have had no public input or scrutiny.
In advance of the meeting the Williamson County Public Policy Coalition (WCPPC) recommended that the commissioners not accept the plans submitted on Tuesday. They would like them to wait until “..there has been time for the WCPPC and interested citizens to study the plan AND subsequent public forums or workshops to be held which provide the public the opportunity to dialogue with members of commissioners court about both plans”.
That seems like a reasonable request. But we know that the WCCC doesn’t care much for involving the citizenry in the decisions in this county once they’re elected. Anyone who owns land or a home can understand that those who live closest to the landfill have a stake or vested interest in that land, and should be allowed to be part of the planning of the landfill. It would also seem that our elected officials would want to work with these people to make the plan as beneficial as possible to all involved.
From last year, via the WCPPC [PDF], the question of public meetings and input was posed to Precinct 4 Commissioner Ron Morrison:
The contract calls for a master site plan to be developed for the landfill within a year of signing the contract this past March. Will there be public meetings to receive input from the public regarding the structuring of that site plan? If not, why not?
Morrison’s answer: “ … a master site plan will be developed for the landfill. Public input will be sought on the master site plan.”
Morrison’s response ducks the question regarding whether there will be public meetings to discuss structuring the site plan. And he doesn’t even commit to a process of reasonable dialogue about the process—only that citizens will provide “input”. The absence of real discussion has been a longstanding problem with regard to landfill issues, including the process by which the present contract was devised. “Input” is not the same as having a seat at the table with real two-way dialogue and compromise.
On Tuesday the WCCC did not approve either plan but instead formally received them. This action by the commissioners court, and the related comments during the discussion, caused the WCPPC to raise numerous questions [PDF] about the plans and the planning process thus far. Several are listed here:
- When will the public forums to discuss these plans be held?
- If no specific dates are designated now, what is the specific time frame within which they will be held?
- Inasmuch as the county did not “approve” the plans on March 9, why was it necessary to formally “receive” the plans?
- Why has there been no public discussion on this issue during the past year?
- What has kept that from happening?
- Why has it taken so long to get to this point?
- Why were citizens not invited to participate in those “working jointly” discussions so that substantive issues could have been processed before Waste Management rolled out its “official” plan to comply with the contract?
- What is the position of each county commissioner regarding the plans’ contents?
The WCCC appears to be repeating the same disturbing cycle of ignoring the citizenry. Thus far the WCCC has not changed how it will proceed with the landfill and WMI, in relation to the people they represent. At this point it doesn’t appear they have an interest in working with the people who live near the landfill, or the citizens of this county, to come up with a plan that everyone can live with. We will have to wait and see if only token input is sought, or if once the public gets their chance if any of their ideas will be implemented.
Plans presented at Tuesdays meeting, all are [PDF]:
Master Recycling Plan.
Master Site Development Plan.
Here’s the statement from the Williamson County Public Policy Coalition about the landfill Master Site Plan and Master Recycling Plan which are on Tuesday’s agenda of commissioners court:
“The Williamson County Public Policy Coalition emphatically urges the Williamson County Commissioners Court NOT TO TAKE ACTION to accept or approve the Williamson County landfill Master Site Plan or Master Recycling Plan on Tuesday, March 9 until after there has been time for the WCPPC and interested citizens to study the plan AND subsequent public forums or workshops to be held which provide the public the opportunity to dialogue with members of commissioners court about both plans.”
One of the members of the WCPPC, the Hutto Citizens Group will be holding an meeting on Tuesday March 9th.
As per the direction of the officers and directors of the Hutto Citizens Group, the next meeting of the HCG will be held on Tuesday, March 9, at the Hutto Lutheran Church parish hall in Hutto, beginning at 6:30 p.m.
It’s fine to partake of self-carry-in for meeting refreshments. However, if that’s the case, it might be wise to bring a bit more than you would consume yourself.
There are no lengthy items anticipated for discussion, but you never know. The agenda for this session is open and flexible as the HCG catches up on recent news and then moves forward.
The HCG is branding itself as “Serving the greater Hutto area”. Variations of a logo to that effect will be presented at the meeting for consideration. The scope of projects for the upcoming months also will be discussed.
DIRECTIONS TO HUTTO LUTHERAN [MAP]: From US 79 in Hutto go NORTH on FM 1660 (the intersection is located between the pawn shop on the east and the Hippoplex Auto on the west) and take the THIRD RIGHT. Hutto Lutheran is one block ahead.
Please invite your friends and neighbors, especially Hutto citizens and business owners.
� Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »