At the June 9 meeting, the Hays County Commissioners Court recognized June as a month-long celebration of Juneteenth and LGBTQIA+ Pride, considered a 180-day pause on high-water-use projects and rejected a development agreement for a 340-acre subdivision located over the Edwards Aquifer
Hays County Commissioners proclaimed June 2026 as a month-long celebration of Juneteenth in Hays County and June 27, 2026, as the date of the inaugural Juneteenth Gala in Hays County.
Lillian Peterson-Jimenez, president of the Juneteenth Foundation Inc., shared plans for the annual Unity Walk, which takes place on Juneteenth, Friday, June 19. Attendees will meet at the intersection of LBJ Drive and MLK Drive at 8 a.m. and share a prayer and hear from speakers. Following the speakers, the parade and unity walk will start at 9 a.m. and conclude at the Dunbar Community Center.
“This is a very special month for Juneteenth,” David Peterson, chairman and founder of the Juneteenth Foundation, said. “We want the public to come out and enjoy another good year for history in the making, we have a lot of activities going on.”
Alex Banbury, president of the Dunbar Heritage Association, also shared some upcoming events to celebrate Juneteenth in San Marcos and Hays County. The events include a Juneteenth Block Party that will take place directly after the Juneteenth Unity Walk at the Dunbar Community Center and a visit from the Black History 101 Mobile Museum on June 27 from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the San Marcos Public Library.
A calendar of Juneteenth events throughout the month of June in San Marcos can be found on the city of San Marcos website.
Precinct 1 Commissioner Debbie Ingalsbe shared support for the celebrations.
“It is a time for our community to come together and unite and to recognize the freedoms that we have,” Ingalsbe said.
Precinct 3 Commissioner Morgan Hammer echoed Ingalsbe’s support and appreciation and Precinct 4 Commissioner Walt Smith shared his appreciation for all the hard work that goes into planning the celebrations.
Hays County Judge Ruben Becerra emphasized that this is a time for the community to show each other support rather than be divided.
“It is always an opportunity for us to come together,” Becerra said. “And just because we are highlighting someone’s history or pride of fill in the blank doesn’t mean we are trying to push down someone else.”
Hays County Commissioners also proclaimed June 2026 as LGBTQIA+ Pride Month in Hays County.
“During Pride Month, we recognize and celebrate the courage, resilience, and contributions of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, and Asexual (LGBTQIA+) community. We reflect on the progress made toward equality, inclusion, and justice for all… by proclaiming June 2026 as Pride Month, Hays County recommits to building a more inclusive, equitable society where everyone is treated with dignity and respect,” the proclamation states.
Hammer advocated for Pride Month and fair treatment for everyone.
“I think that the court has consistently supported the fair and equal treatment of everyone,” Hammer said. “… I do think that it’s very apparent the LGB community went through some serious times of hardship, especially the whole Pride Month was established from Stonewall.”
The court also heard presentations regarding assistance programs available to homeowners impacted by the 2024 disasters and the potential establishment of a Hays County Health District.
In response to residents’ rising concerns about water usage in Hays County due to drought and high-water-use projects like data centers, the court considered a resolution that would create a 180-day pause on approvals for high-use large-scale water projects in unincorporated Hays County.
The resolution was first brought to the court by Becerra in February 2026. This is his second attempt to pass a resolution that would limit data centers’ access to water in Hays County.
“I am bringing you a second pass, strategically timed for after the election, asking humbly for the [court’s] support,” Becerra said. “Unless you take all the teeth out of the [resolution], which we shouldn’t, I am open to all edits that will shore up support, but yet send a meaningful message that this community, 350,000 residents of Hays County, are … not in favor of this type of hijacking of our resources.”
The court ultimately decided to table further discussion until the court meets again on June 23, when a revised resolution will be presented that addresses concerns over the legality of the resolution and concerns that the resolution could negatively impact small businesses.
The court also considered the approval of a development agreement for the creation of a 340.8-acre subdivision, called Hays Commons, that would include the construction of 346 single-family residential lots, one commercial lot, and one amenity center. The subdivision would be located over the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone.
The Edwards Aquifer recharge zone is a 1,250-square-mile area where the limestone is faulted and that allows for rainwater to flow into the aquifer and refill it, according to the Edwards Aquifer website.
The court received 73 emailed public comments against the development agreement due to environmental concerns.
The presentation from Hays Commons stated that if the development agreement was passed, the subdivision’s water and wastewater supply would come from a Texas Commission on Environmental Quality-approved system, but if the development agreement failed, it would require the creation of over 100 individual private wells and septic systems.
Smith said he brought the item before the court because the development agreement would give the court the greatest ability to regulate the subdivision.
“A development under the state guidelines will probably happen, whether it’s this development agreement or not, something will go there, I have full confidence,” Smith said. “We don’t have the tools to stop it here.”
Smith proposed tabling the discussion on the development agreement for 30 days, citing a letter from the City of Austin asking the court to table the discussion.
“I think this [development agreement] is incredibly flawed … and unless they are willing to scrap it and come up with a completely different, totally different [development agreement], I see benefit in calling for the vote,” Hammer said.
Becerra called for a vote to deny the development agreement.
“I am going to challenge Commissioner Smith’s idea that we have no power, that we should go to the Capitol instead … let’s test it,” said Becerra.
Becerra, Hammer and Ingalsbe voted to deny the development agreement, while Smith voted against the motion. Precinct 2 Commissioner Michelle Cohen was not present at the meeting.
The Hays County Commissioners Court meets at 9 a.m. on select Tuesdays. More information is available on the county website.
