R.S. Gates on Residency

There was an article in the Waco Tribune-Herald recently where County Judge Scott Felton was quoted saying some applicants did not live in the precinct. Sure enough, I received the following inquiry from the judges’ office.

Some years ago, the court appointed a man to office  who turned out not to “live” in the precinct he was appointed to serve. At the time, I did not feel it was a concern of mine since that person was not my representative. When the court took action and made that elected official my elected official, I took issue with the residency.  A complaint was filed because the address used to establish residency didn’t even have a residence on it. It was unimproved land with a mailbox. Concerned citizens, three to be exact, filed a complaint with then District Attorney John Segrest. In his response, Mr. Segrest cited case law and determined case law indicated “intent” to reside at a location in the future was sufficient to meet the requirements of the law.  I was wrong and the appointed official was entirely within the law to claim the address to establish residency.

  In the interim, several candidates for office have had their residency challenged. None, that I am aware of, with any success .

Today I suspect the issue of my residency will come up so I wanted to take the opportunity to explain.

Over a year ago, my youngest child joined the Army. He was the last local grandchild of my in-laws living at home.  My in-laws have two younger grandchildren living in the Ft. Worth area.  There was some discussion of my in-laws moving closer to the grandchildren still living at home. At that time I decided we would move to their home in Eddy. It was closer to my work, had more acreage, a great garage among other things which would make it a prudent move for new empty nesters.

I believe much of the controversy related to residency issues is because those questioned about the issue take cover and avoid discussion. That is just not my style.  I am providing a public statement because I don’t have anything to hide.  If you believe the Texas residency law is overly broad, we agree. It is, however, the law.

Some may desire to interpret the law differently than in the past. I do tend to elicit some extraordinary circumstances but it really only highlights the hypocrisy of individuals terrified the person they dedicate so much time to vilifying  might have the opportunity to demonstrate how utterly silly they are being.

Decide for yourself.

Some you win.

I am always amazed how condescending government employees can be when confronted with a public information act request. They explain how they do this every day and attend annual training on the subject.

Take a moment to consider Attorney General Request #459770. An arrest affidavit was requested and when furnished, it had been redacted. Requestor was of the opinion that a document on which a magistrate relied to make a probable cause determination was not subject to redaction.

Please note the person who determined requestor was not entitled to the information was not some lowly clerk making just above minimum wage. Ms. Cost is a licensed attorney and Assistant General Counsel for the Texas Department of Public Safety.

It should be noted the communication related to this request were very professional and no implication otherwise is intended.

The point of this write up is simply that if an attorney can be wrong, and an average citizen prevail in an interpretation of the Texas Public Information Act, why would you take the word of a clerk in your local police department? Why would you rely on the determination by a city manager or your commissioner?

It is pretty common for the Office of the Attorney General to “gig” an agency who makes a request that has already been answered. In the letter above, that “gig” is found in the next to the last paragraph.
I have not read the original request referenced in that paragraph but it appears someone put together a scheme to dispense with dealing with all the annoying public information act requests. It appears the plan was to have an opinion on had so they could simply reject a request with no further scrutiny. The AG doesn’t do that.

  So does it sound like General Counsel Phillip Adkins (pictured left) is following the spirit of the the Texas Public Information Act?

From the Act: The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created. The provisions of this chapter shall be liberally construed to implement this policy.

You have to wonder if Phil ever read that part of the law.

Absence of outrage.

What does $111,525.00 mean to an election?

For fiscal year 20111-2012, Commissioners’ Court authorized a budget of $111,525.00 for courthouse security.


The chart above shows the monthly budget was exceeded by 100% three months into the budget. The chief deputy campaigned for the Republican nomination for Sheriff as an experienced administrator. A novice administrator would have realized if they were spending twice the monthly budget three months into a 12 month budget, it would be prudent to advise the Commissioners’ Court of the potential shortfall.

While that did not happen until the budget was seriously in the red, this is where the real story starts.

The Chief Deputy received the endorsement of a local law enforcement association and some officers of that association were the beneficiaries through working security at the courthouse. Before you consider if the tax money was used to buy an endorsement, read the rest of the story.

The budget came up short by $2,107.50 at the end of April. There has been no real explanation provided for the violation of Texas Local Government Code 111.092.

Sec. 111.092.  DEPARTMENTAL EXPENSES NOT TO EXCEED APPROPRIATIONS.
The county auditor shall oversee the warrant process to ensure that the expenses of any department do not exceed the budget appropriations for that department.

County Auditor Stan Chambers said he advised the Sheriff to advise the Court in response to this request.

No record has been found indicating any member of the Commissioners’ Court was aware of the above letter. Instead, this is what was filed with the Court.

 

The budget information above was provided prior to consideration by the court but some additional information was included in the minutes found on-line.

Even though the email above indicates the information was in the possession of the respondent when the first public information act request was filed, it is not the first time information was withheld but later included in the minutes.

One last interesting point is 19th District Court Judge Ralph Strother appeared before the Commissioners’ Court to petition for additional funding for courthouse security. Judge Strother is the senior judge and basically the boss of the County Auditor. No one asked about compliance with Sec. 111.092. Neither did anyone ask the Judge why, when the Sheriff had established the precedent of expending forfeiture funds to cover deficits in courthouse security and Commissioners’ Court approved adding $50,000.00 to the budget, why was it the responsibility of the Court to pilfer other line items when the money existed.

You can decide for yourself. One explanation would be that the Sheriff could not petition the court for additional funds because that would call into question of his hand picked successor to manage the budget. The Sheriff then used forfeiture funds to cover the deficit to prevent the issue becoming public prior to the May 31st election.

One final note, the budget request for next fiscal year is $75,000.00. The Sheriff made the case that prosecutions by District Attorney Reyna was largely responsible for the increased budget expenditures. It was noted that they were holding two grand juries instead of one. No explanation was offered why it was prudent to reduce the budget by almost 50%. It was additionally noted that no more security expenditures would be necessary because the Sheriff is not going to cover the security with existing personnel. Again, you can decide if this is a direct result of there being no election to buy an endorsement for next year. Perhaps the district attorney is going to reduce crime by 50% next year and the additional courthouse security will not be necessary.

Apparently no McLennan County elected official or candidate is very concerned about it.  Now be a good little taxpayer and forget all about it and go read a story about TomKat divorce.

Parnell McNamara Fact Check

A reoccurring mantra in the local sheriff’s race is that Parnell McNamara is not a certified Texas police officer.

Here are a couple of things that might have slipped by the naysayers.

The City of Waco hired Alberto Melis as the Chief of Police a few years ago and he was then licensed in Florida. He was Chief of Police in the Lauderhill police department. Today, Chief Melis is the Chief in Douglas Arizona. Saying Parnell McNamara is not qualified is the same as saying the City of Waco hired a man unqualified for the position.

Even closer to home, when McLennan County Criminal District Attorney needed a Chief Investigator, he hired a retired Deputy U.S.  Marshall for the post.

Decide for yourself if it is important considering it was not a concern for the City of Waco or our own Criminal District Attorney.

The latest diatribe is kind of two fold. One that McNamara is promising much he will be unable to deliver and the converse that his plans will result in increased taxes.

It used to be a logical statement that only Commissioner’s Could raise taxes. That is to say the Sheriff could not raise taxes without the approval of the Commissioners’ Court. While factually true, McLennan county taxpayers have recently found two items, courthouse security expenditures and outside care of prisoners costs, where expenditures by the Sheriff have to be covered by the Court.

Those two items are not the source of the opposition to McNamara. Cited are his stated goal of increasing drug enforcement activities and in a recent Waco Trib letter to the editor, performing DWI blood draws at the County Jail.

Both of these go back to the original premise. McNamara would have to “sell” this to Commissioners’ Court to secure funding. It goes back to “checks and balances” forged by the founding fathers. 

Pursuit of knowledge

“Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.” James Madison

The thing that cripples many people when it comes to religion or politics is the fear of appearing to have a lack of knowledge on one subject or another. I prefer to look at it as only a fool professes to be all knowing.

I recently asked my county commissioner for clarification on an issue. He denied responsibility and when I offered evidence to support my position, he said “I am wasting my time talking to you. Get out of my office.” I remembered the county judge recently had a similar reaction to the local news media.

I am not foolish enough to believe an honest dialog can take place with a politician. It appears they are of the opinion if you don’t swallow their propaganda hook line and sinker, you are an idiot.

Consider the Favorite Quote on Kelly Snells’ Facebook page.

After visiting with Commissioner Snell, I can picture him longing for the days when Heretics were boiled in oil. Like he believes he is divinely endowed with the office and any question of his actions is heresy.

This is the actual quote, unmolested by the perversion of political delusion:

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly."

--letter to Morris Raphael Cohen, professor emeritus of philosophy at the College of the City of New York, defending the controversial appointment of Bertrand Russell to a teaching position, March 19, 1940.

Snell was asked about a social media forum for the Commissioner Pct. 1 contest. His response “I said a long time ago I’m not going to be concerned by something I can’t control, and I can’t control what’s on a free Facebook page.”

Not surprising that this turned up.

Let there be no doubt, Kelly Snell REALLY likes Kelly Snell.

There were two specific items I was attempting to gain clarity on:
1. The Texas Constitution requires government to hold a public hearing before taking action to increase total tax revenue. That is a constitutional limitation on government. Notice the law does not say increase the tax rate, it covers any increase in revenue. You decide if the error is trivial.

2. On August 17th, 2011, a letter was drafted in the office of the Criminal District Attorney of McLennan County by Alex J. Bell. In the letter, he indicates the jail magistrate is in violation of the Texas Constitution for holding two offices of emolument. This appears to be a constitutional limitation on government. Commissioners voted to continue with the services of the magistrate even though the District Attorney's office said he was in violation of the Texas Constitution. Here is a link to that correspondence.
http://www.pasotx.com/Snell/DA%20Ltr%20081711.pdf

Is incompetence an emergency?

It appears McLennan County Commissioners believe incompetence constitutes an emergency.

Buried in the annual budget is a line item for “contingency”. This has long been a bone of contention by observers who characterize it as an administrative slush fund. To justify the position they point out the money is not allocated for anything. Government officials point to catastrophic events like tornados ripping the roof off the coliseum.

A couple of weeks ago, McLennan County Auditor Stan Chambers called it an emergency fund and said it is up to Commissioners’ Court to determine what constitutes and emergency.

Two weeks ago, the Sheriff’s office submitted a budget amendment to raid the emergency fund for $385,000.00. The big concern was that if you do the math, there is not enough money in the emergency fund to cover the potential liabilities for outside housing of prisoners.

That made me wonder what else Commissioners had determined was an “Emergency”. The more I looked the more shocking it became.

There is a computer purchase which was eliminated from the budget, a $5,000.00 raise for the assistant budget director, a $3,000.00 dryer that was shipped to the privately run jail. The list goes on and on.

Problem with the press

Ran across a KXXV story on the Sheriff budget fiasco.

http://www.kxxv.com/global/story.asp?s=17269809

 

From the story:
The McLennan Co. Commissioners Court approved a $285,000 budget amendment today..

Wrong, it was a $385,000 budget amendment.
(Click image to enlarge)

However, after already blowing through their $1 million budget for the fiscal year, the sheriff's office expects they will need even more money very soon.

Randy and Larry did not only blow through their budget, the bill received was actually $1.3 million spent in the first 5 months of the budget year. They got a bill for $385,000 more than they had in the budget.

Unfortunately for the county, the CEC nor the sheriff's office has any idea when the downtown jail will be ready to pass the Texas Commission on Jail Standards inspection.

So the old jail has been vacant since June 2010. I think it is reasonable to expect something more than “don’t have any idea” when they have had almost two years.

"I think [Reyna's] doing a great job," said McLennan Co. Commissioner Kelly Snell. "At the same time we have a downtown jail and I don't think that would've been much of an issue had the downtown jail been open. We could've accepted the inmates."

 

Snell took office in 2009. What has he been doing to address the downtown jail since he voted to transfer the inmates out in June 2010?

For a temporary budget relief the commissioners say they plan to work with county judges to hold certain classifications of inmates for 24 hours, as opposed to 72 hours.

It should be noted the District Attorney told Commissioners he was aggressively pursuing cases because when he was in private practice, people awaiting trial would commit new crimes while out on bond. One, he noted, managed to amass a list of 9 new crimes while awaiting trial. After the District Attorney explained that, they want to get people out of jail faster.  (Link to story with audio)

Tax Payer money and plenty of it

Reviewing the agenda for next Tuesday, I ran across an interesting budget amendment request.

At first glance, this request for $385,020.00 purports be due to an increase in the number of county prisoners housed elsewhere due to overcrowding. All taxpayers should be shocked that a one million dollar budget could be missed by more than 30%.

It gets worse

McLennan County documents are cryptic at best. It appears from the second page of the agenda item, the money was spent as of 3-13-2012. Expenses incurred were $385,020.00 over budget as of a WEEK before the Commissioners’ Court is scheduled to address the issue.

Another question

Of possibly greater concern is the fact that the above ledger does not reflect any expenditures for October or November. The county fiscal year begins October 1.

And the big question

If the total for the first half of the fiscal year is $1.38M, what are they going to do for the remainder of the year? Note the invoice dates above only reflect through 3/13/2012.

The rub

Looking at the documents above, is there any doubt who is paying for the new jail? The above figures are tax payer funds.

Is anybody in there?

In a Waco Trib article. 

The county’s newly appointed criminal associate judge said he may not take the position after the commissioners court set his salary at a lower rate than he anticipated.

I have a smiley face sticker for anyone who can explain why we have 10 candidates for county commissioner and three more not running for office and not one could come up with what seems a really simple solution.

There are 8 justice of the peace courts. Two district courts and two county court at law courts. Any of the presiding judges could do the arraignments of prisoners at the jail.

So we have 12 “magistrates” on the taxpayer tit already. It seems simple. If you think it necessary to fund this position, $200,000.00 seems reasonable for an associate judge budget. All you have to do is add up all the budgets of the 12 existing courts, determine what percentage the extra $120K would be and give the existing courts the option.  The 12 courts can fill the duties and have the currently funded $80K distributed equitably among them or have their budgets cut to offset the needed funds.

This is what RESPONSIBLE taxpayers do when the have an unexpected expense or want to buy something not in the budget. The economy is screwed because people borrowed the money to finance things they had no ability to pay for.  This is the course the court has pursued in the past.  The court suffers no such disability since there is plenty of money.

 

The county budget is on line. Pretty simple to find the information. The commissioners should probably reduce the budget of the “budget director” by 10 percent just because he did not offer this solution. The key to public office is not to be a rocket scientist (can I get a hell yea) but to hire the best possible people to work for you.

The whole associate judge deal has back room deal all over it. The opinion by the District Attorney that the former magistrate was in violation of the Texas Constitution was drafted in August 2011. Prior to the budget approval by the court and the District Judges / County Court at Law Judges didn’t appear to have any problem with ignoring the Texas Constitution.

They did WHAT?

On 12-27-2011, the Commissioners’ Court voted to hire a new associate judge. The court did not know what he was going to be paid or much about what his job responsibilities would be. How does that sound for a plan?

 

McLennan County officials made the case to State Rep. Doc Anderson that due to overcrowding, they needed a way to expedite the processing of people charged with crimes. The justification is murky at best. Some say the justices of the peace who were responsible would not do their job. No particular evidence to support this was ever offered but the JP’s did not raise a fuss because they were going to be paid the same with a significant reduction in their responsibilities.
The part you will not see mentioned is most arraignments take place via video conferencing. Think Skype.  When the jail magistrate was first appointed, video arraignment was not reliable or very evolved. Not the case today. Taxpayers currently pay for 8 magistrate courts in McLennan County.

One advantage of having an appointed judge is that the person does not answer to the voters. An additional level of disconnect is of benefit because the associate judge is appointed by the four criminal judges but the position is funded by the Commissioners’ Court. The judges can say he is a county employee and the commissioner’s  can said they have no control because they don’t appoint him. Why is that important? We offer that no magistrate could do what the appointed one did and have any hope of being re-elected. Another interesting thing about this is that while a brief reference to the matter was posted in the agenda, no documentation was available before court.  In fact, Senior Court Judge Strother emphasized that failure to take the action would have dire consequences. This story by the Legendary http://downdirtyword.blogspot.com/2011/08/criminal-judges-ponder-mclennan-jail.html shows this was a well known issue more than three months ago.

<Appendix>

Quick Study of PR Bonds - Multiple Sex Offenders Freed  - There is little chance a magistrate could be re-elected with a record like this one.

Climate of Terror, Frustration Evident In Robinson -  Much the same for this report.

Waco City Attorney Stonewalls Public Information Requests – In this story details are found about a man who is compelled to beat on his wife after being released on a PR bond.

Alleged Child Rapist Has New Lawyer - Jurors To Pass Sentence – Release of child predators on PR bond might pose a disability to election.

Lady Justice absent from McLennan County – A review of the performance of the last magistrate appointed by Judge Strother.