Response to May 6, 2025
Commissioners' Court
“This page was originally created in May 2025 in response to information presented during Commissioners Court concerning the Inner East Loop. It is preserved here as part of the historical record of the No East Loop effort. Some language has been updated for clarity, but the underlying documents and sources remain unchanged.”
See the slides that Judge Peters presented to the court on May 6, 2025. Hear what Bill Oliver & WTAW have to say.
The original May 6, 2025 Brazos County Commissioners Meeting can be watched here on YouTube. His comments are at the very end of the meeting.
We highly recommend you set aside time to watch our entire movie that includes information about the TRIP Bond Workshop and the backstory of the Inner East Loop.
In addition, all the media reports that we could find, in the order they appeared leading up to the November 2022 Bond election, can be read/viewed on our TRIP Bond page ... "What Did You Vote For, Brazos County?"
Additional information about the Brazos County Regional Mobility Authority or the Metropolitan Planning Organization are on those pages under the "Get Educated" tab in the menu above.
1. Transportation Road Improvement Workshop July 28, 2022
Transportation Road Improvement Program Workshop Minutes and Presentation by Brazos County Consultant John Polster of Innovative Transportation Solutions. View July 28, 2022 minutes here. View the 45 Attendees HERE (download pdf). Watch that workshop HERE with John Polster starting around the 14 minute mark.
KBTX was the only media organization listed on the workshop sign-in sheets. Its report following the July 28, 2022 workshop inaccurately described the proposed bond program as funding improvements to area highways, including Highway 6, while making no mention of the Inner East Loop. The Inner East Loop was, however, included among the projects to be funded through the proposed TRIP bond. As a result, the only media report we have located from that workshop gave the public an incomplete and inaccurate picture of what Proposition A would fund. We have not located a public correction or clarification before the November election. See that complete report here on KBTX or watch below.
2. Proposition A Project List
For a complete viewing of all media prior to the TRIP Bond election, that we could find, please see our TRIP BOND PAGE.
3. TRIP Bond Mailers - Politically Paid Advertisements
This map could not be found in the July 28, 2022 TRIP Workshop minutes. The first time we have seen it, other than on the mailer we received in December 2024 from John Polster, was when Judge Peters showed it in court on May 6, 2025. Notice that this does not match the MPO's Thoroughfare study area that was set back in 2016 but rather cuts through the backside of Miramont and Copperfield.
DOWNLOAD the three mailers we received from John Polster of Innovative Transportation Solutions back in December 2024.
DOWNLOAD the Political Action Committee Filings to view donors and amounts. That PAC paid for the "mailers." The two pictures below are the ones that Judge Peters showed the court on May 6, 2025.
4. Proposition B BCRMA's Project List
Please see our information about the BCRMA on our page under the "GET EDUCATED" tab. There you will find the Moving Forward document that lists the three projects. You may also visit the BCRMA's own page and find the information.
5. November 2022 TRIP Bond Election Results
This is the page Judge Peters showed the Court on May 6th with his highlighted facts. Proposition A passed with 37,436 votes in favor and 18,332 against. That was 67.13% of the votes cast on Proposition A. Viewed against the county's 126,229 registered voters at the time, approximately 29.7% of all registered voters voted in favor of Proposition A.
KBTX's post-election reporting continued to describe Proposition A as funding Highway 6 improvements, which was inaccurate. Highway 6 was not one of the funded projects. See more about the media reporting surrounding the lead up to the Bond election on our page, TRIP Bond.
On Prop B, 23,018 voters voted FOR the RMA's three projects, which is 18% in favor of the RMA's three projects.
How do we reconcile the same project listed on both propositions? Because the Inner East Loop appeared in project materials associated with both transportation propositions, one of the questions raised by No East Loop was whether voters had been given a sufficiently clear understanding of how the project related to each proposition.
6. TRIP Bond Ballot Language
The bond language was not required to list the individual projects, so when Judge Peters said the ballot language was ‘totally in compliance,’ he was correct. Our concern was not whether the ballot language complied with the law. Our concern was whether the ballot itself gave voters enough information to understand the specific transportation projects the bond would fund. View the complete notice of election HERE. In addition, read Senate Bill 1389 that was introduced to require more specific project information in certain bond propositions. The bill did not pass during the 2025 legislative session.
Conclusion
The Inner East Loop discussion also took place within a broader context of significant growth and development planning in eastern Brazos County. The City of Bryan's long-range plans, annexation activity and infrastructure planning along the FM 1179/Steep Hollow corridor were among the issues No East Loop examined while trying to understand how transportation and future development plans intersected. In their words, it is "ripe" for development (this can be seen in the movie). You can view the future plans on Bryan's long-range planning page.
