For The Record

Commissioner Precinct 1 Ryan Williams asked this Court to hand Commissioner Precinct 2 Kevin Falconer a bucket of about half a million dollars to spend on the Civil Courts Building without coming back for a vote. Commissioner Mitchell told him no, out loud, on the record. That was the most important thing that happened all morning.

$199,843 went into county jail overtime, outside the county's own budget and personnel policy. Fourth time this year. $948,012 total. And for the first time, Commissioner Williams asked a real question about it and got a real answer from the jail administrator.

The Court awarded a license agreement to a company it never named, on three pages that say nothing. Tax Assessor-Collector Dawn Waye explained what the county was buying. Nobody said who it was buying from.

Items 13.A and 13.B came off the agenda in half a sentence that doesn't say who pulled them or why. Commissioner Falconer tabled 13.C and took three minutes to explain.

The Court spent $450,000 on 16 acres in Sanger. The packet never says what for. Commissioner Williams said it's for a future convention center, after the vote was already called.

68 of the 576 pages can't be searched, including a 52 page road report that rode the consent agenda. Item 2.A had two appointments in it and printed neither name. And there is not one County Auditor's certificate in the entire packet.

And a bond refunding that saves this county about $6.1 million passed without County Auditor Jeff May, Commissioner Falconer, or anybody else saying the number out loud.

Commissioner Mitchell read the whole thing into the record. Every number, the title company, the broker, the authorization to the Auditor and the Treasurer. Credit for that.

What the packet never says, anywhere in 576 pages, is what the land is for.

Assistant District Attorney John Feldt's memo lists the price, the escrow agent and the closing date. Under operations and maintenance it says the use will be "determined in conjunction with management of other parcels in the immediate area, which are currently owned by Denton County, Texas." Under preceding court action it says: None.

The word "convention" appears zero times in the packet. So does "expo."

The public learned what this is for because Commissioner Williams volunteered it after the vote had already been called. "This is a purchase for our convention center that we will have in the future. This land is contiguous to other lands that we currently own."

The Denton Record-Chronicle has reported that the county holds 232 contiguous acres on Milam Road near the North Texas Fair and Rodeo grounds, and that commissioners hired a consultant back in December 2021 to study an expo center there, with a first phase estimated between $34 million and $41 million.

So the project is public. The purchase wasn't tied to it anywhere a resident could find, and the connection got made after the vote started, off the cuff, by a commissioner.

There's one more thing missing. A County Auditor's certificate exists to tell this Court the money is there before it obligates the county. There isn't one behind this purchase. There isn't one anywhere in the packet. I checked all 576 pages, including running text recognition on all 68 that are photographs, and the only things in this document that certify anything are a tax exemption certificate and two surveyors swearing they walked the property line. Across every packet I've read this year, this county has produced 22 Auditor's certificates. Not one of them is signed. Not one carries a dollar amount. This week it produced none at all, on the morning it spent $450,000 in cash.

Name the project in the memo. Sign the certificate before the vote. Neither one costs anything.

Seven days ago this Court moved $110,000 out of that same line for exterior lighting, fire extinguisher inspections and building repair. Four weeks before that, $23,874 out of it for ice machines. Now $35,000 for architects.

$168,874 out of one supply account in five weeks, none of it spent on what the account is named for.

Same agenda, item 6.F spends $275,957.32 refurbishing the central utility plant and item 6.G spends $238,516.24 on HVAC remediation at the Civil Courts Building. $514,473.56 of mechanical and HVAC work approved the same morning the HVAC supply line got emptied out again.

And there's one more thing about 2.C. The caption the public reads says the money is "to allocate additional architectural funding for upcoming building projects." The page behind it, in the packet, says exactly what it's for: "BA to cover remaining amount for architectural services related to the Teasley Emergency Management Building project."

The county knew the answer. It put the vague version in the caption and the real one on page 17.

Either that line is budgeted far past what the county needs, or it's a place to park money. Both get fixed in the budget, in public. And when the packet already holds the specific reason, print the specific reason.

Read it first, then vote. That is the fix these briefs have asked for since January, and this is the third clean instance all year. February 24, April 14, and May 19, with Commissioner Mitchell in the chair every time.

Then there's item 2.A, "Order Making Appointments." Three pages. A routing form, the caption printed again, a blank court order. Same as it has been all year.

Except this week there were appointments in it. Two of them. And the only reason anybody knows that is Commissioner Mitchell catching herself 20 minutes later: "I missed the name in the names on 2A, the new hire, Ryan Rice, in Facilities. We've already voted on it. And Aaron Schilling, Promotion in Public Health."

Two county employees were hired or promoted on May 19. The public record of their names is the presiding officer correcting her own omission after the vote. That's the fourth time this year the public learned who 2.A appoints, and Commissioner Mitchell was in the chair for all four.

On May 12 that item came in empty because there were no appointments. This week there were, and the packet still showed nothing. The failure isn't that the county has nothing to report. It's that the report never gets attached either way.

Print the order. It's one page.

This drew the longest debate of the morning, and it deserved it.

Commissioner Mitchell asked the obvious question: why can't it be one card? Purchasing Director Scott Arledge said that was the Auditor's call. County Auditor Jeff May said it wasn't really a call at all. "That was a Workday issue." The county's new finance system ties travel to payroll where the old one tied it to accounts payable, and it doesn't operate without a separate travel card.

Commissioner Williams said he'd had multiple conversations with employees about it and couldn't give them a good enough answer. "I guess Workday is the excuse, which is not really a very good excuse in my mind." He said he'd vote against it. "I'll be maybe the one NAY up here because I think we need to figure out how to make it work with one P card."

Commissioner Precinct 4 Dianne Edmondson put it best. "Right now it's looks to me like it's a Workday one county zero."

Auditor May offered to look into combining them. Commissioner Williams then voted yes, and said why, and his reason is the finding. The travel policy this one aligns to was already approved. Voting no would have left the county with two policies contradicting each other. His words: "That's when we should have had this conversation in more depth. So I apologize for that."

That's the whole thing. Four people had a real argument about a county policy at the exact moment when the only options were approve it or break something. The decision that mattered was made earlier, somewhere else, and arrived here as cleanup.

Commissioner Mitchell said the same thing from the other direction. Staff does send these changes out, and members don't weigh in until after. "So it's good for us all to talk to each other."

She's right, and this Court has the tool. Post the policy change itself as an agenda item, with the reason, before the county rebuilds its procedures around it.

One more note on where this Court's attention went. That debate ran longer than anything else on the agenda. Item 5.B, the Permanent Improvement Refunding Bonds, moved in about a minute. The county's own memo says it saves approximately $6.1 million in future debt payments and won't raise the interest and sinking tax rate. Auditor May said it wouldn't raise the rate. Commissioner Falconer said it's here to save taxpayer dollars and credited staff for watching the market. Neither of them said $6.1 million.

For once, the number nobody read out loud was good news.

That's who the county picked. The highest ranked vendor. The name was never spoken and it isn't in the packet.

The item is three pages. A routing form, the caption printed again, a blank court order. No memo, no scoring, no list of who responded.

The caption carries the note "CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL AFTER CONTRACT APPROVAL, 262.030 LGC." That's lawful. Local Government Code 262.030 lets a county keep proposals confidential until a contract is awarded. It's the same note that sat on the employee wellness clinic award seven days ago, the one Commissioner Mitchell pulled in 14 words.

Here's what was different, and it counts. Tax Assessor-Collector Dawn Waye came to the podium and explained the deal in plain language before the vote. Full service motor vehicle transactions. Open on days the county is closed, including holidays, with extended hours and Saturdays. No new building and no new payroll. Monitored and audited by her office.

That's the plain language summary these briefs have asked for since January 6, delivered with nobody requiring it. Credit to Ms. Waye.

So residents got a clear account of what the county is buying and no account at all of who it's buying from.

Now look four pages later. Item 7.A, the miscellaneous equipment and software report, is attached in full and itemized, presented for recording purposes only. The county can print a line item report nobody votes on. On the item it does vote on, it prints a blank form.

262.030 protects the proposals. It doesn't require the county to leave the award empty. Name the winner in the motion, and publish the responder list, the scores and the terms the day the award passes.

Commissioner Mitchell invited this one from the dais and it came out of the county's own Extension office. I name the role and not the person. The practice is the problem.

It asked, out of Psalm 90, that "the favor of the Lord rest upon us, establish the work of our hands," and closed in Jesus' name.

That request has a pattern behind it. On May 5 the prayer thanked God "for this commissioner's court and for the authority that it holds here." On April 7 a county employee at that same microphone asked that "the proceedings always be with your favor and grace." Three different people asking a blessing on the work of the five officeholders who set their budgets.

A moment of silence takes the same minute. Everybody gets to use it.

Fourth time this year. January 29, $291,557. March 17, $235,890. April 21, $220,722. Now this. $948,012, every dollar routed around rules this county wrote for itself.

On April 21 I wrote that across three of these, not one member of this Court had asked a single question.

This time Commissioner Williams did.

He asked the budget office whether, with staffing over 75%, there's any expectation the county stops needing these. The budget office said overtime is coming down, but not as fast as the filled positions should be driving it, and that the Sheriff would have to answer the rest. Then the jail administrator walked to the podium and answered it.

He said he goes through every pay period with his captains. He said one shift is moving to a four, three, three, four schedule that cuts a lot of overtime, and they're working to get every shift there. He said compared to last fall the numbers are down quite a bit, and he expects them to drop drastically.

That's what I asked for. A member asked, staff answered, and residents heard a plan instead of a motion. Credit to Commissioner Williams, and to a jail administrator who came up without anybody making him.

Now check the answer against the paperwork.

The direction holds. Each of the four transfers is smaller than the one before it: $291,557, then $235,890, then $220,722, then $199,843. Compare the two that are built the same way and it's clearer. April 21 covered two pay periods in March at $110,361 apiece. This one covers two pay periods in April at $99,922 apiece. Down about 9.5% in a month.

"Drastically" is not what that says. Not yet.

And staffing is the number that doesn't back him up at all. The jail told this Court it was at 74% in January and 72% in March. The document behind this transfer says 75%. One point above January, after four months and $948,012.

The paperwork got better too. January 29 and March 17 both read, word for word, "Our staff are still working 12-hour days due to the staff shortage." This one keeps that sentence, updates the figure to 75% staffed, and then actually explains itself: inmate housing classifications, minimum staffing levels, vacancies, leave usage, and compliance with Texas Commission on Jail Standards requirements. That's a real justification.

It's on page 333, and page 333 is printed upside down. Second time. On January 29 the entire justification for a $291,557 transfer sat on an upside down page in a 696 page packet.

Turn the page over. Then hold the jail administrator to his own timeline. He said the very near future. Put the overtime number and the staffing percentage on the agenda in 90 days and let him show his work in public, because a policy suspended every eight weeks is still not a policy.

Together they run about 120 pages of the packet. A public improvement district puts an assessment on property inside a boundary and uses it to repay bonds the county issues. The people who buy those houses carry it.

Here is the entire public record of what happened to both: "I understand we're pulling 13 a and 13 b."

Commissioner Mitchell asked if anybody had comments. Nobody did.

Read that sentence again. It doesn't say who pulled them. It doesn't say why. It doesn't say when they come back. The presiding officer herself is reporting a decision made somewhere she wasn't, and the four other people in the room had nothing to add.

That's the fifth time this year. January 29, "We're pulling 14A," on a road item that would have raised the county's share by $4,000,000. February 24, four peace officer training agreements pulled with no reason, and a commissioner had to say out loud that he'd had a question on it. April 21, "we pulled item 15B," a settlement offer in the county's own lawsuit. May 12, the employee health clinic award, 14 words.

Compare that to 13.C on the same agenda. Commissioner Falconer took three minutes explaining why he was tabling his own item, what changed, what it costs in schedule, and when it comes back.

That's the standard, and it got set in the same room on the same morning by a member of this Court.

When an item comes off the agenda, say who pulled it, why, and when it returns. One sentence. It was already done once that day.

Inside those pictures: every county maintained road, its condition, the work done on it, and what it cost. Labor hours, equipment, materials, contractor, total, by road and by date. Houston Road, $53,029.32. Hub Clark Road chip seal, $47,601.92. I know that because I rendered the pages and ran text recognition on them myself.

A resident can't search that document for their own street. A screen reader can't read it out loud. It rode the consent agenda.

68 of the 576 pages in this packet won't respond to a search. The road report is 52 of them. The Procurement Card policy the Court amended is seven more. The one page explaining why a county contract got canceled is another. The architect's request behind the item Commissioner Falconer tabled is three more.

The county owns the software that fixes this. On March 17 it bought a scanning order that names optical character recognition as a step and says the county's own system performs it.

Point it at the documents it hands the public.