Commissioners Court brief: June 9, 2026

A Hearing That Never Got Called

On May 19 items 13.A and 13.B came off the agenda with this sentence, in full: "I understand we're pulling 13 a and 13 b."

Item 13.B was the resolution determining the costs of improvements inside the Enclave of Tabor Ranch Public Improvement District, approving a preliminary assessment plan, and calling a public hearing for June 9, 2026.

June 9 is this meeting.

There was one public hearing on this agenda. Item 4.A, a two and a half acre replat in Precinct 4. Tabor Ranch is not on this agenda anywhere. Not the interlocal agreement with the municipal utility district, not the assessment plan, not the hearing.

A public improvement district puts an assessment on property inside a boundary and uses it to repay bonds. The people who buy those houses carry it for decades. The public hearing is the one point in that process where somebody who is going to pay it can stand up and be heard.

That hearing was set for today by a document in a Denton County packet. It did not happen. Nothing in this meeting says why, when it will, or who decided.

Three weeks ago I wrote that the record did not say who pulled those items, why, or when they would return. The answer to the third one now is: not yet, and still nobody has said.

When an item comes off the agenda, say who pulled it, why, and when it comes back. One sentence.

Pulled Again

Item 10.A was the preliminary road acceptance of Cashs Mill Phase 2 in Precinct 1. Yadira Court, 1,200 feet of new road.

Here is the entire public record of what happened to it: "We're going to pull 10A for today. That will be reposted."

No reason given. No date given. Sixth time this year.

January 29, an item that would have raised the county's share of a road project by $4,000,000, pulled with "We're pulling 14A." February 24, four peace officer training agreements, with a commissioner saying out loud afterward that he 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. May 19, the two Tabor Ranch items. Now this.

And this one has a clock attached to it.

Preliminary road acceptance is the moment the county takes a developer's new road and starts a two year maintenance bond. During that window the county inspects, the developer fixes what it finds, and only at the end does the county accept the road for good. That window is the whole of the public's leverage.

Development Services Engineering Manager Stephen Moore's memo, on page 190 of this packet, says: "The 2-year maintenance bond period began on June 9, 2026 and will last until June 9, 2028."

June 9 is the day this Court did not act.

I do not know what that does to the clock, and neither does anybody reading this packet. Maybe nothing at all. Maybe the bond runs from a date on the bond itself and the memo was simply written ahead of the meeting. But the document in front of the Court dates the county's only enforcement window to a Court action that did not happen, and not one person in the room mentioned it.

There is a reason I care about this specific kind of item. On March 3 this Court approved the preliminary road acceptance of Red Bird Ridge Phase 1, on a staff memo saying the roads were built in accordance with county subdivision rules, with no discussion at all. On April 21 two residents came to that podium about it. One is a half owner of the remaining family land. The other drew the drainage plans the county approved, an architect and environmental designer of 60 years who taught hydrology for 10 of them. She told the Court the built drainage had been rerouted through private property with no easement, putting water onto neighboring land, and that the retention pond at the development entrance runs 15 to 20 feet deep with steep clay sidewalls, no steps and no ledges.

Preliminary acceptance is where that gets caught, and the maintenance bond period is the only time the county still holds the leverage to fix it.

So when one of these comes off an agenda with nine words and no reason, it is worth saying out loud.

The County Named the Winner

Item 6.D awarded CSP #25-2898, the Horn Building entry door remodel, to G2 General Contractors.

Three weeks ago item 6.K awarded a license agreement "to the highest ranked vendor." That company's name appeared nowhere in 576 pages and was never spoken aloud. I wrote then that the note the county cites, "CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL AFTER CONTRACT APPROVAL, 262.030 LGC," is a real statute that protects proposals until an award is made, and that it does not require the county to leave the award itself blank.

This week the caption carries the same kind of note, "CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL AFTER AWARD OF CONTRACT," and it names G2 General Contractors.

So that excuse is finished. The county can name the winner under that note, because it just did.

What it still did not do is say what the job costs. Item 6.D is three pages. A routing form, the caption printed again, a blank court order. No memo, no amount, no scoring, no list of who else bid. I searched the packet. There is no dollar figure attached to this award anywhere in 324 pages and none was spoken in the room.

Two items earlier, the Court approved an intercom system upgrade at $236,868.25 and network appliances at $132,381.58. Both amounts were in the caption. Both were read out loud.

Name the winner, then print the price, the responder list and the scores on the same page. Half of that just happened. Finish it.

Zero Certificates, Two Weeks Running

There is not one County Auditor's certificate in this packet.

I checked all 324 pages, the searchable text and the images. Here is everything in this document that certifies anything: a certificate of deposit report inside the quarterly investment report, a Form 1295 certificate of interested parties, an insurance company's power of attorney, four letters from the outside accountants who audited the emergency services districts, and a clause about training completion certificates inside a school district agreement.

None of them is the County Auditor telling this Court that the money is there.

On May 19 there were none in 576 pages either.

This agenda moved $236,868.25 for an intercom system, $132,381.58 for network appliances, $156,819 in a state health contract for fiscal 2027, $52,550 out of a sheriff's treasury fund for gun range maintenance, $164 for a phone line, and a construction award with no price on it at all.

Across the packets I have read this year, this county has produced 25 Auditor's certificates. Not one is signed. Not one carries a dollar amount. And for two meetings running now, it has produced none at all.

The county owns the form. It is one sentence with a blank in it.

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.

By Nick Pappas

Bottom Line Up Front

21st meeting of the year. 324 pages, 18 votes, 53 minutes of public business. Commissioner Precinct 1 Ryan Williams was not there.

Three weeks ago two items came off the May 19 agenda in nine words. One of them would have called a public hearing for today. Today came and went. There was no hearing, and nothing on this agenda says why.

Item 10.A came off this agenda the same way. "We're going to pull 10A for today. That will be reposted." It was a road acceptance, and the memo behind it says a two year maintenance clock started June 9.

The county named the contractor it awarded a construction job to, under the same confidentiality note it hid behind three weeks ago. That is real progress and it is half the fix. It still did not say what the job costs, and no price for it exists anywhere in 324 pages.

Zero County Auditor's certificates in the packet. Second meeting running.

The Court proclaimed Women Veterans Day and pointed at its own Veterans Services Office as the answer. Nobody said what that office has, does, or serves.

Sixth closed session on the same lawsuit. The closed session ran 20 minutes longer than the open meeting did.

Credit where it is due, and it is small and real: County Judge Andy Eads told the room he had read the two emergency services district financial reports and that they were clean. Those reports run 98 pages of this packet. A presiding officer saying out loud that he read the attachment is worth more than it sounds like.

Consent Agenda

Two items. The Judge asked whether anybody wanted to pull something and asked for a motion in the same sentence. Commissioner Precinct 2 Kevin Falconer moved, Commissioner Precinct 3 Bobbie Mitchell seconded, it carried unanimously, and then he read what had passed.

Voted, then read.

The reading took about 20 seconds. Item 2.A, the order making appointments. Item 2.B, $164 moved from administrative supplies to wireless services for a new phone line for the assistant director of human resources, amount and reason read out clearly, after the vote had already carried.

Item 2.A is three pages again. A routing form, the caption printed again, a blank court order. No name, no position, no term, no board.

Reading two captions before the vote would have cost about 15 seconds.

Sixth Time, Same Lawsuit

Item 15.A again. Consultation with the county's attorney about Cause No. 141-377-160-26, styled County of Denton, Texas v. Victoria Johnson et al., in the 141st Judicial District Court of Tarrant County. Item 15.B, a real property deliberation.

In at 9:53. Out at 11:06. 73 minutes. No action on either one.

That is the sixth closed session on that lawsuit since April 28. Six for six, no action every time, and it has still never been discussed in open session.

Item 15.A in the packet is three pages. A routing form, the caption printed again, a blank court order. No memo. Item 15.B is the same three pages.

The public business of this meeting took 53 minutes. The closed session took 73.

What was said in that room is privileged. What this Court owes the open record is not. It filed this suit in April against a regional board. Another public body has already voted to intervene and set aside $5,000,000 for legal costs. Six meetings since, and this Court has not told the residents paying for it what it is suing over, what it wants, or what the lawyers cost.

Six meetings. Not a word.

Invocation

21st meeting, 20th invocation. All 20 have been Christian.

This one came from a guest the Judge welcomed up from the room. Not a commissioner, not a department head, not the Sheriff, not his chaplain. Somebody with no county paycheck and nothing in front of this Court. That is the one structural difference all year, and it is worth putting on the record, because the microphone did not go to somebody on the county payroll.

It asked for wisdom and guidance for the Commissioners Court, it thanked the 4-H volunteers who give their time to kids, and it closed in Jesus' name.

20 meetings. 20 prayers. Every one of them Christian.

A resident of this county who believes something else, or nothing at all, has now sat through all 20. Their faith has not come up once.

A moment of silence takes the same minute, and it holds everybody in the room. Including whoever the Judge calls up next.

Women Veterans Day

Item 3.A proclaimed June 12 as Women Veterans Day in Denton County.

The women veterans in the room came down to the front of the courtroom. Commissioner Precinct 4 Dianne Edmondson asked each of them to say which branch she served in, one at a time, down the line. They did. Nobody rushed it.

I will state my interest. I am a retired Marine, 17 years, and a disabled veteran. I am not a neutral party on this one.

The Court handled it well, and asking each woman to name her branch was the right instinct. It turned a proclamation into people.

Now read what the proclamation actually says. It says "the Denton County Veterans Services Office assists women veterans with benefits," and that "the veteran community navigators help women veterans navigate crisis or hard times." That is the county naming its own program, in its own document, as the answer.

Nobody said how many veterans that office serves. Nobody said its caseload, its staffing, or its budget. Nobody asked.

Here is the scale it works against. Denton County has roughly 43,900 veterans, on the Census Bureau's most recent five year estimates. About 12,700 of them carry a service connected disability rating. The proclamation's own figure is that women are more than 12% of the Texas veteran population and that the share is rising every year.

And the access picture around those people is thin. There is one VA clinic in this county, on San Jacinto Boulevard in Denton. A new patient waits about 80 days for primary care there. There is no Vet Center in Denton County at all, so a veteran who needs readjustment counseling drives to Greenville Avenue in Dallas, about 31 miles. The nearest state veterans home is in Fort Worth, about 44 miles.

None of that is this Court's fault. The VA is federal and the state homes belong to the state. But the Veterans Services Office is Denton County's. It is the office this proclamation points at. This Court funds it and this Court sets its budget.

A proclamation once a year is not oversight.

Put the Veterans Services Office on an agenda with its numbers. How many veterans it saw. How many claims it filed. How much money it recovered for them. How many people work there and what it is short. Then read it into the record the way this county reads its equipment report.

For The Record