AI Generated

 My friend David Stua came up with an AI query and the result below is not entirely accurate, draws an inaccurate conclusion but is none the less entertaining.

Randall Scott Gates: The "Minister of Irritance"

Randall Scott Gates represents the archetypal persistent local watchdog operating at the municipal and county levels. A retired law enforcement officer who spent 23 years in the field—including a decade with the McLennan County Sheriff’s Office and two years as an investigator for the local district attorney—Gates transformed his intimate knowledge of the Texas justice system into a precision tool for civic audit¹¹. Following the elimination of his position as a justice of the peace due to county redistricting in 2006, Gates directed his focus entirely toward monitoring McLennan County government operations¹¹.

 

Gates, who refers to himself as a "minister of irritance [sic]," has filed over 300 formal Public Information Act requests since 2006¹¹. His methodological approach is heavily confrontational; he frequently attends county commissioner meetings to interrogate officials during public comment periods and records his interactions on video to document their compliance and professionalism regarding open government laws¹¹. To bolster his effectiveness, Gates routinely attends open government seminars to study the nuances of the TPIA¹¹.

 

His most high-profile confrontation centered on the administrative aftermath of the May 2015 Twin Peaks biker shootout in Waco, a mass casualty event that resulted in unprecedented legal complexities and intense media scrutiny for the county. Gates sought to obtain text messages exchanged by McLennan County District Attorney Abel Reyna’s first assistant regarding the handling of the incident¹¹. When the District Attorney’s office sought a formal opinion from the Texas Attorney General to withhold the text messages under statutory exemptions, the Attorney General ruled that the messages were not exempt and explicitly ordered their release¹¹.

Despite this directive from the state's highest legal officer, local compliance was delayed and allegedly incomplete, prompting Gates to file formal complaints¹¹. In October 2015, Assistant Attorney General Lance Kutnick notified the District Attorney that the office was in civil violation of the TPIA and granted a four-day window to cure the violation¹¹. This marked at least the third documented instance in which Gates successfully utilized the Attorney General to prove the District Attorney's office had violated the statute based on his inquiries¹¹.

 

Gates's literal interpretation of the TPIA's enforcement mechanisms extended beyond civil complaints. On one occasion, he summoned two sheriff's deputies in an attempt to arrest the McLennan County Auditor, alleging the auditor had violated the criminal penalty provisions of the TPIA by delaying the release of requested county budget information¹¹. While the deputies declined to make an arrest and the matter was eventually resolved administratively, the incident profoundly underscores the severe interpersonal and operational friction generated when highly aggressive requestors utilize the TPIA as a punitive mechanism against public administrators.

11. AG says DA's office violated Public Information Act on Twin Peaks request - FOIFT.org, https://foift.org/2015/10/26/ag-says-das-office-violated-public-information-act-on-twin-peaks-request/

The corruption runs deep

 Around July of last year it came to my attention that several search warrants were executed in Bell County on smoke shops. The thing that caught my attention was the police reporting citizens complained about the shops selling illegal drugs. The narrative sounded made up. I initially blew it off because I don't live in Bell County. There was a shop I did business with that was raided. I have a large guard dog who really hates fireworks. I stopped by and bought some CBD treats one day and was impressed with the owner and establishment. I found it hard to believe this lady was involved in some nefarious endeavor. 

The more information I obtained, the worse it looked for law enforcement. Rumors of SWAT style execution of the search warrants seemed extreme. Now, more than 9 months after filing a request, it appears far worse. 

in 2022 I filed a public information request with the City of Belton. The records clerk/public information officer was Scott Rickert. I found him to be an arrogant condescending little prick.  The city refused to release some information and I sent a complaint to the County Judge detailing the criminal conduct. The County Judge replied he could not make a probable cause determination.  The corruption at that time appeared absolute. I had other more enjoyable pursuits and dropped it. 

I was pretty confident neither Temple or Belton would follow the law and make any substantive information available. I decided to rely on two decades of experience and attempt a coupe. 

There was a few government employees who sought public service because they got their lunch money stolen or got pantsed during gym class and chose government employment to retaliate against the public and avoid humiliating situations because they would be backed by the power of the government. They are actually hired because they are suckup butt kissers who will do anything they are told as long as they get to dictate to the public with no repercussions.  When a person like that encounters someone like me, or Brent McCain, CJ Grisham etc... it is like Tannerite.  My theory is they have to do a lot of sucking up and in exchange they expect the public to suck up to them or they retaliate. When it comes to public information, retaliation is a criminal offense. 

That is the jest of it, piss them off enough that they screw up. This was accomplished by hand delivering the public information requests. The favorite tool of little tyrants is force a requestor to fill out their form. The form is not required by law but the idgit use it to assess compliance. Sort of like metal detectors at government buildings. When a person does not bend the knee, kiss the ring and act 100% subserviently, the idgit will feel compelled to SHOW the citizen how much power they have. 

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely

12/1/15 Jones offers to pay Ben Matus to drop out of the race for County Commissioner Pct. 3. Jones said he was just trying to do the right thing.  Later interviews tell a different story.

2/3/16 District Attorney requests investigation by Texas Rangers. (Link)
I don’t think it was revealed that a Grand Jury recommended the investigation.
Recently, information regarding McLennan County Commissioner Precinct 3, Will Jones and his Administrative Assistant, Susanne Nemmer was brought to my attention. It is the recommendation of a current McLennan County Grand Jury that the following information be provided to the Texas Rangers for further investigation, if needed.

3/2/16 District Attorney receives anonymous letter alleging bribery. (Link)
This document is interesting because this is the first time the Anti-bribery statement comes up. That’s important later.
Interesting that the author states they fear retribution.

6/29/2016 Ranger Pena makes recommendation for full investigation for attempted bribery, a felony. (Link)
The really important thing to note here is how many people signed off on the recommendation. Note that each signature includes a note with the Ranger Chief approving the investigation.

7/6/16 Ranger interviews Jones. (Report) (Video)
Couple of things about the interview. Jones says he did it to save money. He also said his wife, an attorney, was involved in the decision. Jones, in his own words estimates he would save $40,000.00 if Matus dropped out. Listen to the statement about the District Attorney. Sounds like he believes the DA will fix it for him.

8/3/16 Appointment of presiding judge. (Appointment)
No motion to recuse 54th District Court Judge Matt Johnson has been found. While odd, the motion by the District Attorney addresses the issue.

8/9/16 E-mail from Ranger to AG about a conversation with Jones. (E-Mail)
It is interesting because it says Jones was concerned by the recusal of the local judge.

8/10/16 This is the motion by the DA and the Order signed by the judge GRANTING recusal of the DA. (Motion/Order)
This is the important part:
Although the undersigned is not disqualified to act in this matter as a matter of law, it would be in the best interest of justice and society to appoint an attorney pro tern because the Defendant is a County Commissioner for Precinct 3 in McLennan County, Texas and votes on budgetary and human resource matters brought before the Commissioner’s Court by the District Attorney’s Office.

2/3/17 Ranger sends e-mail to AG (Link)
From the e-mail:
There have been a couple anonymous phone calls to my office from McLennan County citizens expressing their concerns with Commissioner Jones. The rumor “around town” is Jones’ attorneys are going to get him off on a Misdemeanor, and Jones still feels like he did nothing wrong. The citizens feel like “politics” won again as Jones will go unpunished or the offense will be lessened. The callers are also upset about Jones intentionally swearing into office and signing certain forms.
Thinking those certain forms are the Anti-Bribery Statement. Why be obtuse if it was no issue?

3/21/17 AG files Information (Link)
Never see a black man charged by information.  Extra preferential treatment. Normal people just have a warrant issued and the police pick them up and put them in jail. This is so convoluted it took a while to figure out what happened.

3/21/17 Magistrate arraignment and Order (Link)
Nothing really interesting here. Normally it is a $2,000.00 bond for a Class A misdemeanor.

3/22/17 Ag sends e-mail to defense attorney outlining the plea offer. (Link)
Interesting part of the e-mail:
As I mentioned in our earlier meeting, as part of the deal Mr. Jones cannot plead no contest.
Apparently his attorney asked about pleading no contest and also asked about pre-trial intervention.

4/5/17 Complaint filed with AG. This was prior to Jones entering a plea. (Link)
This is a criminal complaint filed with the Ranger who forwarded it to the AG. The date is important and the complaint is the basis for complaints later found by a magistrate to be probable cause to support a warrant. As a result of this complaint, the AG called complainant and said they had looked at every aspect of possible charges and the engaging in organized criminal activity statute only applied to street gangs.

4/7/16 Follow-up to phone conversation with AG (Link)
It is interesting that there was never a response to this email and it was not furnished in response to a public information at request. Compare to Twin Peaks warrant.

5/5/17 Jones pleads guilty to Offering a Gift to Public Servant. (Link)

6/8/17 Complaints filed in Caldwell County and warrants issued. (Warrant 1, Warrant 2)
The powers that be lost it for a couple of reasons. Decide for yourself.
1. Everyone assumed only a police officer could file a complaint.
2. Everyone assumed only a local magistrate could make a probable cause determination.
Neither assumption is true but if it was true, it would make it much easier to take care of special people and cover up illegal activity.

6/9/17 Defense attorney notifies AG of new warrant. (Link)
This is where it gets predictably interesting.
Dunnam wrote to AG:
Gates, who was fired from the local Sheriff’s office, came to him this morning and gave him a copy of a complaint against Will Jones.
Gates left the Sheriff’s Office over a decade ago and was not fired. This is a blatant lie and attempt to deceive the AG.
Dunnam wrote:
Since this is an issue that we discussed and everyone looked at, I felt you should be made aware. 
This is interesting. Now the question is, did the AG authorize Jones to commit a felony offense because they were sure they were the only people who could prosecute the offense. Did the AG allow him to commit a felony so he would enter a plea to a lesser, earlier offense? They did discuss it and were aware of the issue March 2nd 2016.
AG replied:
Also please let me know if they actually try to arrest Mr. Jones. 
Wait, WHAT! The man is a convicted criminal and she is concerned about “Mr. Jones”
It gets better. Dunnam wrote to AG:
District Judge Judge Strother in Waco is going to consider the arrest of Will Jones in relation to 15.17d of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 
What is 15.17d?
Art. 15.17. DUTIES OF ARRESTING OFFICER AND MAGISTRATE. (d) If a magistrate determines that a person brought before the magistrate after an arrest authorized by Article 14.051 of this code was arrested unlawfully, the magistrate shall release the person from custody.

Art. 14.051. ARREST BY PEACE OFFICER FROM OTHER JURISDICTION. (a) A peace officer commissioned and authorized by another state to make arrests for felonies who is in fresh pursuit of a person for the purpose of arresting that person for a felony may continue the pursuit into this state and arrest the person.
(b) In this article, “fresh pursuit” means a pursuit without unreasonable delay by a peace officer of a person the officer reasonably suspects has committed a felony.

So Strother used a statute written for out of state police officers to dismiss charges. The statute provides a means for and out of State office in fresh pursuit of a felon to make an arrest in Texas. Here, not only was there no fresh pursuit, there was no out of state police officer. It was a warrant. The AG was aware but no objection noted in response to a public information act request.

Remember this part from 8/10/16?
Although the undersigned is not disqualified to act in this matter as a matter of law, it would be in the best interest of justice and society to appoint an attorney pro tern because the Defendant is a County Commissioner for Precinct 3 in McLennan County, Texas and votes on budgetary and human resource matters brought before the Commissioner’s Court by the District Attorney’s Office.
This is what the Dunnam e-mail said:
I am told that the McLennan County Assistant DA Michael Jarrett will be there for the State. This is supposed to be at 10:00am this morning. The DA has not recused at this point, but I still felt it important to advise you. Please consider the recusal of the DA was approved by a judge. The AG was aware of the recusal. The defense was aware of the recusal. You have to wonder how all of a sudden it was no longer in the interest of justice and society.

6/14/17 Motion filed with the judge who issued arrest warrants. (Link)
The issue of probable cause was actually determined in  an opinion of the 10th Court of Appeals in 2015. If you did not know, the 10th Court is in Waco and it was a Waco case decided.(Link)
From that opinion:
We reiterate that the affidavit does not have to establish the suspect’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt or by a preponderance of the evidence. As you can see above, they abandoned this plan. You have to wonder why. Did Strother step up to “Fix” it. Did Strother/DA/AG hatch a plan to “Help a brother out”? Why indeed? They could have run it by the Grand Jury who could of no-billed the charge. They didn’t and I think it is important to know why they chose to use a statute that was not applicable to to make two felony charges against the Commissioner go away.

6/17/17 Judge dismisses charges (Link to news report) (Other News report)

6/27/17 The manner in which the charges were made to go away was very questionable. I filed a request with the court for information. The court replied there were no responsive documents. (Link)

7/13/17 Strother pitches raise to Commissioners. (Video)
Strother says he has made the request before. No records exist of him making the request in the past.
Strother says he will allow the other Judges to make their case for raises. Later revealed he was making request for all staff of all District Courts.

7/15/17 Despite the cover-up by a district judge, the information turned up anyway. (Arraignment Form) (Warning)
Strother appears to take the position these are not judicial records but are court records not subject to Rule 12. The question a reasonable person would ask is, was there any doubt in the mind of the court what information was requested. If there was no doubt, why not make the information available? Why indeed?

8/10/17 Public hearing on the tax rate. The hearing is required by law. The County Judge believes 2-3 minutes is adequate to address a $100,000,000.00 budget.
(Link)

Clean your own house.

I ran across this article from Grits for Breakfast

Require criminal conviction for asset forfeiture
Sen. Konni Burton filed legislation that would void asset forfeiture proceedings if prosecutors failed to secure an underlying conviction.

It brought a couple of things to mind. While reading about William Wayne Justice I have often thought if the Texas Prison system had taken care of their business, the Ruiz decision might have gone differently. The very reason for the decision is TDC did not.
In an article by Radio Legendary People V. 2011 BMW 535-I details a seizure that fits both the proposed law and my thoughts on the Judge.

I believe asset forfeiture laws are an important tool to fight crime. History shows most of the bad laws come from failing to take care of business. In the BMW case, the stated reason for seizure alleged the vehicle was purchased with proceeds of a felony crime. The problem becomes evident on review of the court documents. Evidence to support the seizure details the vehicle was used in the commission of a felony offense with a total lack of any evidence to support the vehicle was purchased with proceeds of crime as alleged in the filing.

Close enough for government work? Apparently so. Consider though, when two Baylor University employees recently entered pleas in a DWI case, their attorney petitioned the court to dismiss charges due to double jeopardy after the court clerk discovered a date was missing from the court documents. Apparently the clerk was on vacation when the vehicle was awarded to the State.

The legislation offered by Senator Burton strikes a reasonable compromise, perhaps even a necessary one. While there are far more egregious cases involving asset forfeiture, the reality is, the system is responsible for greater restrictions on how the job is done.

2-16-15 Commissioners’ Court

How you got screwed this week.

First on the agenda was the Court met on Monday instead of their normal meeting day of Tuesday. They generally do not offer a reason because they assume the taxpayers are too ignorant to understand any way.

There is a budget amendment moving funds from the emergency fund to pay for fuel for the new Tradinghouse park manager. Not a big amount of money but it is not in the budget. The is the money Scott “Gruber” Felton said he was saving you by redistricting.

Much the same thing to buy a computer for the new Criminal Justice Analyst position. Not in the budget so rob the money from the emergency fund.

In the past, when an employee retired and had vacation time on the books, that person could not be replaced until they were paid from the budget. The incentive is for managers to stay on top of personnel management. The manager had  a responsibility. This year, a new trend started where rather than managing the human resources, they just shaft the taxpayers. The Commissioner only has a 6 figure compensation package, you can’t expect he would actually work for that meager sum.

So the generator at the Fairgrounds had a problem. The interesting thing about this one is the court already approved the repair and had no clue where the money was going to come from. I remember a story Don McCauley told about his A/C going out one year and the family had to choose between A/C and a family vacation. He would be rolling over in his grave over crap like this.

Discuss Here

About that lawsuit.

In a column published by Radio Legendary, details emerge related the the settlement of a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Documents responsive to a public information request further support early theories settlement of the lawsuit, contrary to reports by main-stream media, was not related to risk management but rooted in keeping the skeletons in the closet.

In one excerpt:

A public information request shows that Blossman’s evaluation after 6 months on the job showed a mediocre rating of 5.6 out of a possible 10 points, nothing unusual for a new hire still learning the tricks of the trade. When the documentation was changed over Eubank’s signature, he had received a glowing 7.75 points, complete with hyperbolic and superlative descriptive comments.

The speculation gained some steam after the Trib reported allegations of campaign finance violations:

Documents in a lawsuit claim McLennan County Sheriff Parnell McNamara broke campaign finance laws and retaliated against a supporter of his political opponent by trying to block him from getting a job as a local police chief.

Further traction was attributed to the dismissal of a very similar lawsuit in Bell County just the day before the local suit was settled.

You will probably be much happier to take the word of the Waco Trib that your benevolent leadership was looking out for your best interest.

Cuss? Discuss? Debate? Go here.

Appraisal District Board of Directors

Looking for citizens who can do more than just rant on Facebook. Now is your chance to actually make a difference. The groundwork has been done and there is some evidence we are making progress.

The Board of Directors of the McLennan County Appraisal District (MCAD) is composed of 5 members. All five are elected every two years. They are elected by the taxing entities. (County, City, School Districts, Community College)

Taxpayers need a change on the Board. Here are some reasons:

1. During the current term, MCAD had lost three significant lawsuits. The estimated cost to taxpayers is $1,000,000.00. All three should have been resolved out of court but the District drug them out as long as possible. That led Chief Appraiser Andrew J. Hahn to report "extraordinary" legal expenses of $225,000.00 for the current year.

2. At a recent meeting, held 11/12/13, the board voted to extend the contract of the Chief Appraiser for three years. A provision in the contract provides that he can not be paid any less than his current compensation. There is a good possibility some of the current board members will be replaced in January and they voted to extend the contract not only beyond their term of office but also beyond the term of office of the people taking office in January.
3. The ballot for this election was sent via e-mail to more than 30 people. The e-mail was requested under the Texas Public Information Act. MCAD refused to release the e-mail. MCAD hired an attorney to ask the Attorney General if they could withhold the e-mail. A request was filed with the recipients of the e-mail and they furnished the requested e-mail while MCAD spends taxpayer money on an attorney to block access.

4. There is a statement on the sign-up sheet for the Board Meeting of MCAD. It reads "The McLennan County Appraisal District highly values the input of citizens in making important decisions that affect the District." On the agenda, public comments is item 15, AFTER they have taken care of all the business. Having attended several board meetings, I can assure you "citizen input" is not appreciated and dang sure not solicited.

What can you do?

Attend one of the meetings where they are going to vote. Tell them three strikes on the lawsuits is unacceptable. Tell them you think extending the contract for the Chief Appraiser beyond their own term is unacceptable and voting to extend it beyond the term of office of those to be elected is even worse. Tell them you think transparency is important and committing resources to block transparency is unacceptable. Remind them unchecked power is the path to corruption and they are the check and balance.

November 18th 2013

Robinson School Board Meeting 6:00

Hewitt City Council Meeting 7:00

China Spring School Board Meeting 6:00 Voted 11/28/2013
Connally School Board Meeting 6:30

Lorena City Council Meeting 6:30

November 19th

LaVega School Board Meeting 7:00

Midway School Board Meeting 7:00

How can it be?

How can it be that I have friends who have such diametrically opposed views of a situation that has received more attention than the school massacre.

I ran across a few items I had not seen before and wanted to share.
The first is purported to be the convenience store surveillance video of Trayvon Martin the night he died.

That is a far cry from the picture provided by the main stream media.

Here is another one.

In the same story, in the comments, I ran across this one.

The main thing most people point to when saying Trayvon was murdered is that Zimmerman “followed” Martin. More extreme cases say Zimmerman “stalked” Martin. Check out this:

I ran across the photos in an article here.

There is a lot of information in this video I did not know.

Another brick in the wall

A month after I filed a request for information related to the arrest of CJ Grisham, I received a response from the County Attorney.

I never claimed any disability. This is a special sort of spin inferring the information was available all along and the only reason I did not have the information was because I did not stop by to pick it up. The reality is, the Temple Police Chief, City of Temple and the City Attorney violated the Texas Public Information Act. I personally find it very troubling when the people with the authority to enforce the law ignore the law.

Here is my response:

Here is the before and after photo:

After studying the matter for a while, here is the response from the City Attorney:

If you pursue it long enough, eventually they show their cards. This is a very disturbing e-mail. They begin the communication by hiding behind a misinterpretation the the AG letter. They then reveal that they were in fact in possession of the affidavit. I filed a request with the AG for clarification.

The second part is a denial information released existed. This is a very simple matter. The information was supplied via e-mail to Mr. Watson. This leaves one to wonder if a government document, the e-mail. was destroyed by the department. Doesn’t seem like something like that would be very hard to locate yet according to the County Attorney, it does not exist.

Lastly there is the matter of the public information act signs.

Sec. 552.205.  INFORMING PUBLIC OF BASIC RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER THIS CHAPTER. (a) An officer for public information shall prominently display a sign in the form prescribed by the attorney general that contains basic information about the rights of a requestor, the responsibilities of a governmental body, and the procedures for inspecting or obtaining a copy of public information under this chapter.  The officer shall display the sign at one or more places in the administrative offices of the governmental body where it is plainly visible to:

(1)  members of the public who request public information in person under this chapter; and

(2)  employees of the governmental body whose duties include receiving or responding to requests under this chapter.

The language is pretty clear. You can check the photos and decide for yourself. It’s kind of like saying you can not file a DWI charge because the next morning the person was no longer drunk.

I saw some correspondence from the Mayor and he was no different from the police or city attorney. The evidence has been submitted for your review. Make your own conclusion.

Chronicle of public information act request to Temple P.D.

Original Request

Reply

So I went to the Department to pick up the information and this is what I was furnished.
TempleResponse.pdf
While I was there, I noticed there was no sign posted. The Texas Public Information Act requires a government agency to display a sign that displays the rights of the requestor.

Nope, no sign. Here is a close up of the sign visible on the right of the photo:

The above was representative of the interaction I had with the department. The records guy was not very helpful but there is no sense in raising a fuss there, I followed up with another e-mail.

A few days later, I received this response from the "Office Assistant":

Here is the request - OPEN RECORDS REQUEST_041113SCAN.pdf
Here is the interesting thing about an AG request. Since the requester does not get a copy of the information, all an agency has to do is "forget" to send information in their possession and the AG rules only on information sent. If they only send information they know is exempt, the response is always in their favor or as they desire it to be.
The catch is, since it is not permissible to see what they sent, it is almost impossible to prove the information sought was not submitted for the AG to rule on.
The other problem is 99.9% of people who take the time to make a request give up after the initial rejection. It's not like the government would lie or do something unethical.
Sure enough this is the response from the AG:

The AG open records people crack me up sometimes. They are not stupid. You have to check the line that goes: However, you must release the basic information, including a detailed description of the offense, pursuant to section 552.108(c) of the Government Code.
Ms. Rodriguez is standing behind the police department and has not made "a detailed description of the offense" available. The response narrative said "See offense report" and the offense report narrative was determined to be excepted information.

On 4-26-13, I called to follow-up on the e-mail above and was told Ms. Rodriguez was in a meeting and unavailable. I left a message but she did not return my call by close of business. I was not particularly shocked about that.
I also filed a complaint with the County Attorney.

They did not have a clue what to do with this. After jacking me around for 45 minutes, a guy names Guess came out to talk to me. He acted like I was the stupidest person on the face of the planet. Then I received this response:

It must be great to be so important you have assistants to send e-mail on your behalf. Minor thing? Probably but here is the response I provided to the County Attorney.

As  of close of business on 4-26-2013, I have received no response to the above. Have no fear, I was not holding my breath on this one either.
Perhaps next week, almost a month after the initial request, someone with integrity will stand up and make the public information available.

Go-along Get-along and an IPad

For your consideration.
Waco Trib Opinion - The weeks long feud between fiscal-minded McLennan County commissioners and Precinct 7 Justice of the Peace Jean Laster Boone over her quest for a county-paid iPad had to end eventually.

The Trib overlooked a couple of things I think are important from the 3-19-2013 Meeting of the Court.

Judge Boone mentioned in her comments one Judge was using an IPad to do “Magistrations”.  This is the process of arraignment and setting bond for someone  arrested and charged with a crime. Taxpayers pay for a Jail Magistrate but on the weekends, the duty falls to a rotating list of Justices' of the Peace. Commissioner Jones in an attempt to make the problem go away, negotiated the purchase price down to less than $700.00.

This is important because later in the meeting. Commissioners approved $4,800.00 budget amendment from the Justice Technology fund for Justice of the Peace Precinct 5.

Here is where it gets interesting. Judge Boon had originally requested to use funds from the Technology fund and was denied. The Court has some interesting discussion between the two items.
1. Some evidence was offered that a $700.00 IPad might be able to do the same thing as the system which cost almost $5,000.00. Commissioners discussed this but offered that might not be the case.
2. It was pointed out the video system is dated as soon as it is installed and has been problematic since inception. Problematic to the point court testimony indicated one Judge refused to use the system.
3. Pct. 5 JP might not be assigned jail duties for a while making the approval less than immediately necessary. It was suggested, since there was time, to research if the equipment was really necessary. The County Judge intervened and saved the day causing Commissioners to approve the budget amendment and spend a bunch of money because that, rather than finding solutions to problems, is what they do best.

You are welcome to your opinion about whether an IPad is necessary but don’t think for a minute this had anything to do with fiscal responsibility on the part of the Court.

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.