There is always MOOOOr to the story

techno-ag said:

---

The BBC meetings are closed. The mayor could well have stated any of your hypotheticals to the board. He really has no obligation to satisfy your curiosity on the matter.

Now, stay with me for a moment. What if the mayor did not tell Dorn to put his cows in that field? What if Dorn decided to do that on his own? What if the mayor didn't even know?

---

The neighbors who had the longhorns wandering their properties knew exactly who was responsible, compliments of Brazos county SO (and their numerous responses).
Edited to add: To spell it out, it wasn't Dorn.

If as asserted above the BBC meetings are closed, how are they able to skirt the Texas Open Meetings Act? See https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/SOTWDocs/GV/htm/GV.551.htm

As a quasi-agency of COB they may be. TML publishes a hand book and on the third page #5 is a caveat for committees. https://www.tml.org/DocumentCenter/View/1332/The-Texas-Open-Meetings-Act-Made-Easy-2019--Final

Having spent over 25yrs on city advisory boards and commissions I never served on one where TOMA was not applied.

This whole incident does not pass the smell test.

I will ask this again for all of the COB,BBC,Mayor,Dorn supporters

Does anyone (on this board) believe that awarding this $1/year lease to a "known and trusted" individual, without vetting other qualified lessees is above board and without suspicion?

None of that matters. That's not illegal.












jk that's totally fishy

Well, okay then said:

---

Current Revolt now has a report:

https://open.substack.com/pub/currentrevolt/p/bryan-mayor-allegedly-demands-250k

---

that article and a certain poster on here keep reiterating that the mayor was a non-voting member of BBC when the grazing lease was signed. They seem to keep forgetting that he was a voting member when the property was purchased in 2021 for $12.8 million.

techno-ag said:

---

The BBC meetings are closed. The mayor could well have stated any of your hypotheticals to the board. He really has no obligation to satisfy your curiosity on the matter.

Now, stay with me for a moment. What if the mayor did not tell Dorn to put his cows in that field? What if Dorn decided to do that on his own? What if the mayor didn't even know?

---

Setting aside your wholesale disregard of my explanation about why a response along the lines of "How do we know he didn't" isn't a reasonable explanation, your first two sentences are categorically false. Their meetings are open and the minutes of said meetings are kept on the City of Bryan's website:

• Gutierrez was present at the BBC meeting on August 18, 2021 during which the BBC discussed and approved motions to accept assignment of the property (Armstrong Tract) and enter into a loan agreement to purchase the property (8/18/21 minutes).
• A motion to enter into a lease with Rafter D of the property (Armstrong Tract) was considered and approved during the BBC's regular meeting on April 11, 2022 (4/11/22 minutes). As you can see from the meeting minutes, Gutierrez was absent from that meeting. He could not have stated anything to the BBC about his connection to Rafter D during that meeting. Interestingly, current city council member and then-member of the BBC Marca Ewers was present at that meeting and voted in favor of the motion; she has not contradicted the BBC press releases that it was unaware of Gutierrez' business relationship with Rafter D.
• Gutierrez was present at the BBC workshop on April 12, 2022 (4/12/22 minutes). There is no mention of him bringing to the BBC's attention on that date that he had an existing business relationship with the entity that they had just the day prior agreed to enter into a lease agreement with.
• The next meeting of the BBC that Gutierrez was present for was on June 16, 2022 (6/16/22 minutes). There is no mention of him bringing to the BBC's attention on that date that he had an existing business relationship with the entity that they had agreed to enter into a lease agreement with two months prior.
• Same for Gutierrez' attendance at the meetings on July 18, 2022 (7/18/22 minutes), August 8, 2022 (8/8/22 minutes); September 12 , 2022 (9/12/22 minutes), or December 12, 2022 (12/12/22 minutes).

Although clearly at this point an exercise in futility, I will again preemptively point out any claim that maybe he said something during the executive session portion of one of those meetings would only further demonstrate that Gutierrez (and possibly the BBC) had no genuine desire or intent to be transparent and avoid the appearance of impropriety from the outset.

Furthermore, your statement that he has no obligation to satisfy my curiosity, and by extension the curiosity of others, about this matter only serves to betray your tacit acknowledgement that Gutierrez had no such genuine desire.

With regard to your hypothetical, aside from pointing out that it requires Olympic-level mental gymnastics to get to a point where that could in any way be a reasonable explanation, Dorn posted on this very forum (it's on page 6). He confirmed that La Pistola was a client of Rafter D and that they had been engaged in the embryo program since 2021, and stated, "Rafter D Genetics worked with La Pistola Cattle to move their donor cows to the property to isolate them prior to starting the embryo program." To hypothesize that Gutierrez was in the dark about the location of his cattle that were involved in a program purported to be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars is preposterous.

Even assuming that such a preposterous occurrence did in fact take place, there is no dispute from anyone that Gutierrez was aware that his cattle were located on the property after the plane landed there. Gutierrez' own attorney has admitted that Gutierrez reached out to Borrel with regard to economic damages resulting from his landing his plane on the property. Furthermore, none of the involved parties have disputed that until this story gained traction on social media Gutierrez did not take any steps to involve the BBC or Rafter D or advise the BBC of his on-going business relationship with their lessee.

Again, pick one, any one, of the possible steps Gutierrez could have taken but didn't and offer up a reasonable explanation for why, if Gutierrez had any genuine desire or intent to be transparent and avoid the appearance of impropriety, he did not take that step.

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

according to Brazos CAD, $5.3 million

---

The market value is what they paid for it. $12,900,000 Or they overpaid by $7,600,000. Which would add a whole other layer of stupid to this whole deal.

Interesting citation. According to this OPINION by then Att'y General John Cornyn in 2001 and specific to an entity called Byran College Station Economic Development Corporation you are correct. However, the BBC apparently does not operate with the specificity of membership as does/did BCSEDC

This opinion has not apparently been tested in court.

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/2001/jc0327.pdf

ETA: Back to de plane, de plane- interesting sidebar

techno-ag said:

---

ctag02 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

The BBC meetings are closed. The mayor could well have stated any of your hypotheticals to the board. He really has no obligation to satisfy your curiosity on the matter.

Now, stay with me for a moment. What if the mayor did not tell Dorn to put his cows in that field? What if Dorn decided to do that on his own? What if the mayor didn't even know?

---

Setting aside your wholesale disregard of my explanation about why a response along the lines of "How do we know he didn't" isn't a reasonable explanation, your first two sentences are categorically false. Their meetings are open and the minutes of said meetings are kept on the City of Bryan's website:

• Gutierrez was present at the BBC meeting on August 18, 2021 during which the BBC discussed and approved motions to accept assignment of the property (Armstrong Tract) and enter into a loan agreement to purchase the property (8/18/21 minutes).
• A motion to enter into a lease with Rafter D of the property (Armstrong Tract) was considered and approved during the BBC's regular meeting on April 11, 2022 (4/11/22 minutes). As you can see from the meeting minutes, Gutierrez was absent from that meeting. He could not have stated anything to the BBC about his connection to Rafter D during that meeting. Interestingly, current city council member and then-member of the BBC Marca Ewers was present at that meeting and voted in favor of the motion; she has not contradicted the BBC press releases that it was unaware of Gutierrez' business relationship with Rafter D.
• Gutierrez was present at the BBC workshop on April 12, 2022 (4/12/22 minutes). There is no mention of him bringing to the BBC's attention on that date that he had an existing business relationship with the entity that they had just the day prior agreed to enter into a lease agreement with.
• The next meeting of the BBC that Gutierrez was present for was on June 16, 2022 (6/16/22 minutes). There is no mention of him bringing to the BBC's attention on that date that he had an existing business relationship with the entity that they had agreed to enter into a lease agreement with two months prior.
• Same for Gutierrez' attendance at the meetings on July 18, 2022 (7/18/22 minutes), August 8, 2022 (8/8/22 minutes); September 12 , 2022 (9/12/22 minutes), or December 12, 2022 (12/12/22 minutes).

Although clearly at this point an exercise in futility, I will again preemptively point out any claim that maybe he said something during the executive session portion of one of those meetings would only further demonstrate that Gutierrez (and possibly the BBC) had no genuine desire or intent to be transparent and avoid the appearance of impropriety from the outset.

Furthermore, your statement that he has no obligation to satisfy my curiosity, and by extension the curiosity of others, about this matter only serves to betray your tacit acknowledgement that Gutierrez had no such genuine desire.

With regard to your hypothetical, aside from pointing out that it requires Olympic-level mental gymnastics to get to a point where that could in any way be a reasonable explanation, Dorn posted on this very forum (it's on page 6). He confirmed that La Pistola was a client of Rafter D and that they had been engaged in the embryo program since 2021, and stated, "Rafter D Genetics worked with La Pistola Cattle to move their donor cows to the property to isolate them prior to starting the embryo program." To hypothesize that Gutierrez was in the dark about the location of his cattle that were involved in a program purported to be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars is preposterous.

Even assuming that such a preposterous occurrence did in fact take place, there is no dispute from anyone that Gutierrez was aware that his cattle were located on the property after the plane landed there. Gutierrez' own attorney has admitted that Gutierrez reached out to Borrel with regard to economic damages resulting from his landing his plane on the property. Furthermore, none of the involved parties have disputed that until this story gained traction on social media Gutierrez did not take any steps to involve the BBC or Rafter D or advise the BBC of his on-going business relationship with their lessee.

Again, pick one, any one, of the possible steps Gutierrez could have taken but didn't and offer up a reasonable explanation for why, if Gutierrez had any genuine desire or intent to be transparent and avoid the appearance of impropriety, he did not take that step.

---

I'm not disputing he was aware of it. We're all aware of it now. But what if it was Dorn's idea to put the cows there? If so, that blows another hole in your conspiracy theory.

---

Who's idea is it to have them on the property now?

Who get's called when they get out?

who's hands put them back when they get out?

asking for a friend....

Mathguy64 said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

according to Brazos CAD, $5.3 million

---

The market value is what they paid for it. $12,900,000 Or they overpaid by $7,600,000. Which would add a whole other layer of stupid to this whole deal.

---

wonder who made the commission on that deal!?

Mathguy64 said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

according to Brazos CAD, $5.3 million

---

The market value is what they paid for it. $12,900,000 Or they overpaid by $7,600,000. Which would add a whole other layer of stupid to this whole deal.

---

this is BCS, government overpaying for property is kind of the thing around here.

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

Mathguy64 said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

according to Brazos CAD, $5.3 million

---

The market value is what they paid for it. $12,900,000 Or they overpaid by $7,600,000. Which would add a whole other layer of stupid to this whole deal.

---

this is BCS, government overpaying for property is kind of the thing around here.

---

As far as Bryan goes, I'd say the La Salle hotel they bought and later sold turned out well. Their development of Traditions and Midtown have gone very well, despite much opposition at the time. My bet is this 200 acres near the bio-corridor will do well too.

Just got an open records request back where all records related to the lease of the land including payments and communications with the tenant were requested. The return included the lease (previously posted here) and the meeting agenda/minutes where the lease was discussed. According the the BBC they have no record that Rafter D even paid the $1. They also have no records that they have ever communicated with Rafter D after the signing of the lease.

cavscout96 said:

---

Mathguy64 said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

according to Brazos CAD, $5.3 million

---

The market value is what they paid for it. $12,900,000 Or they overpaid by $7,600,000. Which would add a whole other layer of stupid to this whole deal.

---

wonder who made the commission on that deal!?

---

Betting on a former mayor....

Just a guess.

cslifer said:

---

Just got an open records request back where all records related to the lease of the land including payments and communications with the tenant were requested. The return included the lease (previously posted here) and the meeting agenda/minutes where the lease was discussed. According the the BBC they have no record that Rafter D even paid the $1. They also have no records that they have ever communicated with Rafter D after the signing of the lease.

---

you need to request all docs and discussions related to the purchase of the land

For the sake of clarity, what is my conspiracy theory as you see it?

I have been consistent from my first post on this subject to this post that my assertion is that Gutierrez has been without a genuine desire or intent to be transparent and avoid the appearance of impropriety in this matter from the outset based on the information provided from the parties involved.

If that assertion is nothing more than a conspiracy theory, then again (for the third time) pick one, any one, of the possible steps Gutierrez could have taken but didn't and offer up a reasonable explanation for why, if Gutierrez had any genuine desire or intent to be transparent and avoid the appearance of impropriety, he did not take that step.

And in the spirit of practicing what I preach, I'll respond to your query about what if it was Dorn's idea to keep the cattle on that property. No one has claimed otherwise. Nor has anyone claimed that Gutierrez was unaware that his cattle were on BBC property that was being leased to Rafter D as you concede. Regardless of whose idea it was, why would someone who has a genuine desire or intent to be transparent and avoid the appearance of impropriety upon the first sign that his own actions (or inaction) could appear suspect due to his position as an elected official not take immediate steps to be as transparent as possible? Why would he leave the BBC in a position to be blindsided by a social media debate about their lessee being involved in an ongoing business relationship with one of their former members who was present at the time the property was acquired and was still an ex-oficio member at the time it was leased?

What is it that makes you not the least bit curious about Gutierrez' actions (or inaction) in any of this? I can't for the life of me wrap my mind around how someone could look at the information we now have and not be the least bit curious about why an elected official who has been involved since this property first came into BBC's possession would not take even one step that could be remotely considered transparent at any point during this entire saga.

techno-ag said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

Mathguy64 said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

according to Brazos CAD, $5.3 million

---

The market value is what they paid for it. $12,900,000 Or they overpaid by $7,600,000. Which would add a whole other layer of stupid to this whole deal.

---

this is BCS, government overpaying for property is kind of the thing around here.

---

As far as Bryan goes, I'd say the La Salle hotel they bought and later sold turned out well. Their development of Traditions and Midtown have gone very well, despite much opposition at the time. My bet is this 200 acres near the bio-corridor will do well too.

---

At least $1/year....

In the interest of de plane.

One aircraft relocated to Easterwood. Now out of the clutches of well who ever. https://www.kbtx.com/2023/03/23/plane-removed-off-land-pending-faa-investigation/

'The pilot of the plane, Rene Borell, told KBTX in a phone call that the FAA is set to conduct an investigation on the plane on Friday morning. He said the plane will stay at Easterwood Airport until the investigation is complete.'

AND that's no BULL

cslifer said:

---

Just got an open records request back where all records related to the lease of the land including payments and communications with the tenant were requested. The return included the lease (previously posted here) and the meeting agenda/minutes where the lease was discussed. According the the BBC they have no record that Rafter D even paid the $1. They also have no records that they have ever communicated with Rafter D after the signing of the lease.

---

So I guess someone broke something

techno-ag said:

---

As far as Bryan goes, I'd say the La Salle hotel they bought and later sold turned out well. Their development of Traditions and Midtown have gone very well, despite much opposition at the time. My bet is this 200 acres near the bio-corridor will do well too.

---

And this is why this whole thing, to me, is a non issue.

In the end BBC will do great with that property just like they have with all of the stuff they've been involved in. I couldn't care less, as a taxpayer and resident, about Doctor Dorn and Bobby's cattle ops on a piece of property that was purchased near HSC in the HSC/RELLIS corridor not for intentions of making money on grazing leases. That's not what's appealing about that property and I would gamble that's not why it was purchased.

City of Bryan, and the BBC for that matter, have done great things for the COB since I have lived here (30 years now) despite great opposition by NIMBY's and people who pine for 1970 again. Remember that absolute joke of a financial audit on the Traditions Development that found less than a 1 dollar out of balance that cost taxpayers thousands of dollars? I am/have been on several boards in COB and regularly volunteer on boards/committees for COB and believe Bryan is very much moving in the right direction and nothing that has happened pertaining to this incident has changed my confidence in things.

So where is your $1 lease?

I honestly don't care who has one either. What I do care about is if the $1 lease was done above board.

Ethics matter.

Charpie said:

---

I honestly don't care who has one either. What I do care about is if the $1 lease was done above board.

Ethics matter.

---

When you are not legally obligated to put it out for bid it literally cannot be below board. The is no obligation to do so