YDHLGE Logo
YDHLGEYou Don't Hate Local Government Enough
Back to Docket Search
11. • GeneralCity of Kaufman (Kaufman County)

Consider and take appropriate action on an engagement letter with the Law Office of Stephen C. Dickman to provide legal services for the City of Kaufman in its protest to the creation of Kaufman County M.U.D. No. 16; and authorizing the Mayor or his designee to execute necessary documents.

Presented in: City Council Meeting on 2026-06-22
Meeting Agenda PDF

Official Roll-Call Vote

Restrains Gov't • 2.6/10 Impact Weight
PASSED (6 - 0)
“Consider and take appropriate action on an engagement letter with the Law Office of Stephen C. Dickman to provide legal services for the City of Kaufman in its protest to the creation of Kaufman County M.U.D. No. 16; and authorizing the Mayor or his designee to execute necessary documents.”
JJ
YES
MP
Matthew Phillips
Councilmember, Place 1
YES
JN
Jason Nelson
Councilmember, Place 2
YES
AL
Ashlea Longenecker
Councilmember, Place 3
YES
CG
Charles Gillenwater
Councilmember, Place 4
YES
LP
Lisa Parker
Councilmember, Place 5
YES

Staff Report & Agenda Item Details

The proposed boundaries of Kaufman County Municipal Utility District No. 16 encompass territory located primarily within the City of Crandall's extraterritorial jurisdiction, as well as portions of the City of Kaufman's extraterritorial jurisdiction and unincorporated Kaufman County. In response to the proposed creation of the district, the City of Crandall has engaged the Law Office of Stephen C. Dickman to provide legal representation. Because all three governmental entities share a common interest in protesting the creation of the district, the City of Crandall, the City of Kaufman, and Kaufman County wish to jointly retain the Law Office of Stephen C. Dickman to provide legal services related to such protest and any associated proceedings.

Bastiat Liberty & Property Rights Analysis

This motion is scored as RESTRAINS_GOVERNMENT (Impact Weight: 2.6/10). Under the Bastiat Liberty Watchdog Index, voting YES on measures that cap or reduce ad valorem tax burdens, expand taxpayer exemptions, retire debt early, enforce competitive bidding caps, or remove regulatory/zoning barriers to private property rights earns a positive Pro-Liberty score.