For The Record

Denton County, TexasJanuary 13, 2026

Commissioners Court brief: January 13, 2026

Share to social media

Post the image. It travels further than a link.

Shareable summary card listing the sections of this brief
Download the image

287(g) and Corruption in Plain Sight

Twice, Sheriff Tracy Murphree told this Court the new immigration enforcement agreement comes "at no cost to the county." He said it, the Chair said "Right," and he said it again: "It's at no cost to the county."

The agreement he was asking them to approve says the opposite. Not in fine print. In a section titled "Costs and Expenditures."

Section X of the Memorandum of Agreement between ICE and the Denton County Sheriff's Office, sitting on page 121 of the packet in front of every member of that Court, reads: "Participating LEA personnel will carry out designated functions at the LEA's expense, including salaries and benefits, local transportation, and official issue material." LEA means law enforcement agency. It means Denton County.

Then it closes off his argument. "Whether or not the LEA receives financial reimbursement for such costs through a federal grant or other funding mechanism is not material to this MOA." The county pays. Whether anybody pays the county back is, in the document's own words, not material.

The next page is more specific. The county owes "the salaries and benefits, including any overtime, of all its personnel being trained or performing duties under this MOA and of those personnel performing the regular functions of the participating LEA personnel while they are receiving training." The county pays the deputy who goes to training and the deputy who covers his shift while he is gone. The county also supplies "the necessary security equipment, such as handcuffs, leg restraints, etc." Section XIV adds that the county bears its own people's costs for "death, injury, or incidents giving rise to liability."

Some of what he said is true. ICE pays for the training, the instructors, and the travel to get officers there and back. It is still not "no cost to the county," and the difference is in the contract he signed.

So there are two explanations, and the Sheriff gets to pick. Either he did not know what was in the agreement he presented, or he did. Counties have published these costs for nearly 20 years. Harris County ran its agreement with two deputies and seven detention officers and it cost more than $600,000 a year in salaries alone, until Sheriff Ed Gonzalez ended it in 2017 and moved the money to jail staffing, patrol cars, and clearing cases. Prince William County, Virginia, paid $25.9 million over five years. Maricopa County, Arizona, ran a $1.3 million deficit in three months, mostly overtime. There is no third option where this is free.

The State of Texas had already settled it. Senate Bill 8 took effect January 1, 2026, 12 days before this vote, creating a grant program to cover sheriffs' 287(g) costs "that are not reimbursed by the federal government," including "compensation for personnel performing duties under the agreement," equipment, training, and confinement. Applications opened January 1. The Comptroller announced the program was underway on January 15, two days after this Court was told the program is free. Denton County qualifies for up to $120,000 a year. Nobody on that dais mentioned it.

Now look at who ends up holding what. The Sheriff's Office gets federally trained deputies, expanded authority, ICE hardware, and by the Sheriff's own account, federal money once his people start handling cases. The county's general fund gets the salaries, the overtime, the deputy backfilling an empty shift, the handcuffs, and the liability if somebody gets hurt. The upside collects in one department. The bill lands on the taxpayer.

Then there is how he said the work would get done. Police chiefs, he explained, answer to city councils and city managers who may want no part of this. His solution, out loud, on the record: "if we have to, a private handshake and a private nod to get some stuff done, I'll respect that just to get the job done. I'll make sure that happens."

Those city councils are elected. Their decisions are the public's decisions. A private handshake to work around them is a choice to operate outside the people the voters put there. Commissioner Williams answered, "Fair enough."

This Court did not sit quietly and miss any of it. It agreed. "110% of my support." "We're just enforcing the law." "Right." Four people with the contract in front of them, a cost claim that contradicts it, and an offer to do business by private handshake, and the only thing anybody volunteered was applause.

The county's own paperwork made the false claim official. The agenda memo, the entire written justification, is one page. Under "FINANCIAL IMPACT" it says: "None." One page saying none, stapled to 14 pages saying the county pays. And no resident could check it. All 14 pages publish as scanned images with no readable text.

I am going to call this what it is. This is corruption. Not cash in an envelope, and I am not alleging that. The kind where a department grows its own authority and its own funding, tells the body that holds the purse that it costs nothing, offers to work around other elected officials in private, and that body agrees out loud without ever opening the contract. Public power got spent for one office's benefit and the public got handed the bill.

It did not even require a closed door. It happened at nine in the morning, on camera, in a public meeting. That is the part that should scare people.

None of this is about whether Denton County should participate. State law already required one of three models and the jail model already satisfied it. This was the expansion nobody had to make.

The fixes are not hard. Read the costs section out loud before voting. Never let "FINANCIAL IMPACT: None" stand on a contract that assigns costs to the county. Publish packets with real text in them. Claim the $120,000.

And when a lawman tells this Court he will work around elected officials by private handshake, somebody up there needs to say something other than "fair enough."

  1. Denton County Agenda Center, January 13, 2026 packet, pages 118 to 131
  2. Acting Texas Comptroller Kelly Hancock Launches Sheriff Immigration Law Enforcement Grant Program
  3. Delegation of Immigration Authority Section 287(g) Immigration and Nationality Act, ICE
  4. Sheriff Gonzalez Ends Program That Transfers Undocumented Immigrants To Government, Houston Public Media
  5. Local Enforcement of Immigration Laws Through the 287(g) Program, American Immigration Council
  6. What Are 287(g) Agreements and Why Alternatives Should Be Considered, Niskanen Center
  7. Delegation and Divergence: 287(g) State and Local Immigration Enforcement, Migration Policy Institute

The ICE Task Force Agreement

The Court put trained Denton County deputies into federal immigration enforcement, with authority to detain and make arrests alongside ICE.

Then, after the vote carried and the next item had already passed, the Chair asked the Sheriff to come back and explain what the agreement was. His first question was whether ICE partners with cities too. The answer: "I think they attempt to. I don't know."

Voted, then asked.

The state did not force this. Texas law requires sheriffs to join one of three 287(g) models, and Denton County already satisfied that with the jail model it approved last April. The Sheriff told the Court this one goes "above and beyond the minimum requirement." His words.

So the county chose to expand. A choice with that much power in it gets explained first, questioned second, voted third. This Court ran the order backwards on the biggest item on its agenda.

Commissioner Mitchell asked the Sheriff to "do it the Denton County way and not abuse our privileges, abuse authority." He gave her his word he would step away if it came to that. Her instinct was right. A personal promise is not an oversight mechanism.

COURT WATCH

I am the Democratic nominee for Denton County Judge. This brief reflects my observations and opinions regarding this Denton County Commissioners Court meeting, with a focus on how authority was exercised, how decisions were explained, and whether transparency and discretion were handled responsibly.

A county government that explains itself is a county government you can check. Say what a thing costs before the vote. Keep a record somebody can read. Where this Court got that right, I say so. Where it didn't, I say that too, and I say what I would do instead.


Bottom Line Up Front

Second meeting of the year, and the Court got the hardest thing right.

Brenda Gormley was supposed to be here for her own retirement resolution. She died five days before it. The Court read her record into the permanent record anyway, handed her husband a flag that flew over the courthouse that morning, and let the room grieve. That was done with real dignity and it belongs first.

Then the county's business. 19 separate votes passed with no discussion at all. Not one Commissioner asked one question about any purchase, any plat, the bill report, or either board appointment.

The Court said one dollar figure out loud all morning: $9,500 to replace a vaccine refrigerator. It never said $712,696 for contract labor, or $158,100 for a moving contract. And it approved a five year architectural services agreement with no dollar ceiling written into it anywhere.

The Court also approved a new federal immigration enforcement agreement. Then the Chair reopened the item after the vote to ask what it was.


The Sheriff and the Newspaper

One person signed up to speak at public comment. It was Sheriff Tracy Murphree.

He said the Denton Record-Chronicle reported that a longtime sheriff's administrator was arrested for embezzlement, with a photo of a uniformed sheriff's office employee attached. All of it wrong, he said. The employee in the photo had nothing to do with it. His own office ran the investigation that made the arrest. He has asked for a retraction.

If that is right, he is right to say so. A wrong story about your people is worth standing up for. I'd do the same.

He also said the story "had to be brought to my attention because I don't read it," and that he is "not going to read it to find out" whether one runs.

How the Court handled it is what I would change. The Chair affirmed the facts from the bench in real time, cutting in with "Yeah" and "Correct" while the Sheriff was still talking, then told him his office was "part of the solution and not the problem." Nobody from the paper was in the room. One side told its version and the Court agreed on the spot.

Consent Agenda

Two items. Appointments, and payroll. Approved in one vote with nothing pulled.

Same as January 6, the Court voted first and the Chair read out what was in it second. That is twice in two meetings.

There was not much to read either way. Item 2A is an "Order Making Appointments," and its three pages of packet name nobody being appointed, no position, no board, and no term. Item 2B is "Approval of payroll," and its three pages contain no amount. A resident who pulled the packet to see what the Court approved would find learn nothing.

Read the items, then vote. And put a number next to the payroll.


The Bid That Doesn't Add Up

The Court awarded the elections moving contract to Suddath Workplace Solutions with no discussion and no number spoken. The packet carries two numbers, and they do not match.

The Purchasing memo tells the Court that "the estimated value of this contract is $158,100.00 based on estimated usage provided by the Elections Administration."

One page later the bid tab prices that same usage. 639 round trips at $150 each is $95,850. Five emergency moves at $300 each is $1,500. Suddath's total bid is $97,350.

That is a $60,750 gap between the number the Court was handed and the number the bidder quoted, against the same quantities, one page apart. Nothing in the record explains it.

There may well be a good answer. Renewal years, a contingency, a different assumption. Nobody asked, and nobody wrote it down.

The same page undercuts the memo again. It calls Suddath "the overall lowest and best bid," but the tab's own lowest column has Duryea cheaper on emergency moves, $225 against $300. County bid rules allow awarding by line. Nobody ran that math either.

When the estimate and the bid are 62% apart, somebody should ask which one is the contract before voting.


Two Contracts, No Numbers Spoken

Two contracts moved this morning with no dollar figure spoken. The packet numbers are worth reading.

$712,696 for temporary staffing. This is the fourth and final renewal of a contract first awarded in 2022, at agency markups running 22 to 32%. The entire written recommendation from Human Resources is one sentence in an email: "Yes, we would like to renew with the current vendors." No performance record, no fill rates, no accounting of what the first four years actually cost.

And a master agreement for architectural services with BKV Group, five years long, with no dollar ceiling anywhere in it. On the Auditor's certificate, the line where the amount of available funds belongs was left blank.

The staffing number sits in the packet. The architectural agreement has no number to sit anywhere. Neither reached the room. I would have staff state the cost before the vote, and I would not sign a five year agreement with no ceiling in it.

Executive Session

The Court went behind closed doors at 10:26 and came out at 11:39.

Two items, both appointments to Emergency Services District boards. Second meeting in a row where the only business behind that door was who sits on a board.

It came out with five reappointments of sitting members, two to Emergency Services District 1 and three to Emergency Services District 2. Commissioner Mitchell moved both, the Chair seconded both, nobody discussed either, and both carried unanimously inside a minute.

The packet for those items runs three pages each, and the only names printed on them are the five members of this Court on a blank court order. Not one appointee, not a term, not a seat coming open. Residents heard the names when the motion was read, after the deciding was done.

The posted purpose included "discipline or dismissal." Whatever filled those 73 minutes, the outcome was five people keeping their seats.

I said on January 6 what a closed door is for. The narrow case where talking in public would cost the county something. Reappointing a volunteer to a fire district board is not it. I would have the appointing member make the case in the open, name the seats coming up, and post who applied.


In Memory of Brenda Gormley

The agenda posted Wednesday said "retirement." Brenda Gormley died Thursday night, five days before this meeting and seven days before the retirement she had earned.

The Court rewrote it as a resolution of remembrance and read the whole thing. 12 years a CERT volunteer before Denton County ever put her on payroll in 2018, then eight years running the program. Under her, Denton County CERT was invited to the White House twice, in 2009 and 2011, as one of the best in the country.

The Chair read tributes from a dozen people and agencies into the permanent record. The County Administrator spoke, so did the Director of Emergency Management, and so did every Commissioner. Congressman Brandon Gill entered her into the Congressional Record the day before. Her husband Robert was handed a flag that flew over the courthouse that morning, framed with her patches and her challenge coins.

Then the Chair asked everybody in the room to come up for the photo, because Brenda would have wanted everybody in the picture.

That is a county taking care of its own.


Invocation

Second consecutive meeting opening with a Christian prayer, and this one came from somewhere different.

January 6 ran 993 words, delivered from the dais by a sitting Commissioner. This one was 43 words, delivered by a Denton County CERT volunteer and chaplain, not by anyone on this Court. Not from the government's own bench, which is a difference worth noting.

It still is not the fix, and my answer does not change because the week was hard. A moment of silence. That room was full of people of every belief who drove in to mourn the same woman, and a moment of silence is the only thing the Court has that holds all of them at once.

The Chair had it in his hand. He announced the item as "a moment of silence and an invocation." The moment of silence never happened. He named it and skipped it.

He also thanked the wrong person for the invocation, crediting the county's Director of Emergency Management, who led the pledges.

Around The County

Lake Cities Chamber Monthly Luncheon

January 14 @ 11:30am to 1pm

Global Spheres Center

7801 S Interstate 35E

Corinth, TX 76210

State Benefits Assistance with Tarrant Area Food Bank

January 14

Lewisville Public Library

1197 W Main Street

Lewisville, TX 75067

Teen Night Hot Cocoa Bar

January 15 @ 6pm

The Colony Public Library

6800 Main Street

The Colony, TX 75056

Citizen Science

January 17 @ 12pm to 1pm

South Branch Library

3228 Teasley Lane

Denton, TX 76210

Eating Healthy on a Budget

January 17 @ 11am

Lewisville Public Library

1197 W Main Street

Lewisville, TX 75067

Carrollton MLK Parade

January 17 @ 10am

Carrollton City Hall

1945 E Jackson Road

Carrollton, TX 75006

32nd Annual Martin Luther King Day Celebration

January 19 @ 6pm

Marcus High School Auditorium

5707 Morriss Road

Flower Mound, TX 75028

MLK Day Celebration, march, program and flag football

January 19 @ 10am to 1pm

Martin Luther King Jr. Recreation Center

1300 Wilson Street

Denton, TX 76205

Music in the Chamber

January 23 @ 7:30pm

Frisco City Hall Council Chambers

6101 Frisco Square Boulevard

Frisco, TX 75034

Estate Planning Session

January 24 @ 10:30am

Hebron and Josey Library

4220 N Josey Lane

Carrollton, TX 75010

Frisco Maker Faire

January 24 @ 10am

Frisco Discovery Center

8004 N Dallas Parkway

Frisco, TX 75034

Gardening with Kitchen Scraps

January 31

Emily Fowler Central Library

502 Oakland Street

Denton, TX 76201

United Way Dancing with the Stars

Date not announced

Denton County, TX

The Vote Ledger

Every action the Court took on January 13, 2026.

2.A Human Resources

Approval of Order Making Appointments.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Approved as part of consent agenda

2.B Aide to Commissioners Court

Approval of payroll.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Approved as part of consent agenda

3.A Human Resources

Approval of a resolution recognizing Brenda Gormley's retirement.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by the chair, second by Commissioner Mitchell

4.A Transportation and Development

Public hearing and approval of the Bois D'Arc Acres Replat, Commissioner Precinct 4.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Public hearing opened and closed unanimously; motion to approve by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Falconer

4.B Transportation and Development

Public hearing and approval of the Savannah Phase 1 Replat, Commissioner Precinct 1.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Public hearing opened and closed unanimously; motion to approve by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Falconer

5.A Aide to Commissioners Court

Approval of Bill Report.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Mitchell, second by Commissioner Williams

6.A Purchasing

Approval of award for ITB #25-2879, Elections Moving Services, to Suddath Workplace Solutions, LLC.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Falconer, second by Commissioner Mitchell

6.B Purchasing

Approval of specifications and authority to advertise for ITB #25-2897, Fleet Vehicles.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Mitchell

6.C Purchasing

Approval of renewal for RFP #21-2660, Temporary Services.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Mitchell, second by Commissioner Williams

7.B Budget

Approval of Budget Amendment Request #2026-130 for Public Health Clinical to transfer $9,500 from Vaccines to Capital Equipment to fund the purchase of a replacement vaccine refrigerator.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Mitchell, second by Commissioner Falconer

10.A Transportation and Development

Approval of the Ponder Farms Phase 1 Final Plat, Commissioner Precinct 4.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Falconer

10.B Transportation and Development

Approval of the Webster Meadows Addition Phase 1 Final Plat, Commissioner Precinct 4.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Falconer, second by Commissioner Mitchell

10.C Transportation and Development

Approval of accepting the Legacy Ranch Phase 2 into the County maintenance system, Commissioner Precinct 4.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Mitchell, second by the chair

12.A Sheriff

Approval of the 287(g) Task Force Model Memorandum of Agreement between Denton County Sheriff's Office and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by the chair

12.B Sheriff

Approval of the purchase of a single duty weapon by DCSO Deputy Brian Nelson, following his honorable retirement.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Falconer

13.A County Judge

Approval of the board appointment(s) to Emergency Services District No. 1 (ESD No. 1).

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Taken up after executive session; motion by Commissioner Mitchell to reappoint Mark Pape and Jared Harwell for a two year term, second by the chair

13.B County Judge

Approval of the board appointment(s) to Emergency Services District No. 2 (ESD No. 2).

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Taken up after executive session; motion by Commissioner Mitchell to reappoint Donna Welsh, Jeffrey Grubb, and Jerry Kirby for a two year term, second by the chair

14.A Legal

Approval of a Software as a Service Addendum and Interlocal Agreement between Denton County and Collin County Juvenile Probation Department for TechShare Juvenile services.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Falconer, second by the chair

14.B Legal

Approval of the Master Agreement for Architectural Services for the Charlie J. Cole Building, RFSQ #25-2849, between Denton County and BKV Group.

APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY

Motion by Commissioner Falconer, second by the chair

Outcomes are recorded as stated in the meeting. Where the record shows no vote count, none is listed.

From the archive ★ Every edition, newest on top