CONSPIRACY THEORIES ABOUND
Okay… I admit it. I just couldn’t help myself. I looked at the ridiculouse website promulgated by the “group” of people opposed to the jail bond proposal. Let me just say, “wow!” I must really have a lot of time on my hands for all the cover-ups I have been accused of on their website.
Mr. Good of the law firm of Kent, Good Anderson and Bush seems to believe that I, along with one other member of Commissioners Court, have violated the law. He thinks that there is a smoking gun that exists in the blueprints for the proposed jail. He rambles on in the many diatribes that exist on their website about all the facts that allegedly point to wrongdoing.
What is the truth? I have made it abuldantly clear over the past 10 to 11 months that I would be working with community leaders to develop consensus on the jail plan. I began meeting with several community leaders (including one - but only one - other member of Commissioners Court) since early 2008 to determine certain details of what the jail plan should include. These types of meetings are clearly within the bounds of law and common sense.
As the law requires, I never shared the information discussed or developed during those meetings with any other member of the Commissioners court (other than the one member who was included in the meetings). During those meetings, the group discussed location, budget, the appropriate number of jail beds, and various options that have been suggested by the citizenry over the past several years. We analyzed all the options, and we determine our proposed budget and location for a jail plan.
Outside of those meetings, the architect developed detailed blueprints that met the criteria the group had discussed. The architect met with members of the Sheriff’s department regarding the detailed blueprints. Those blueprints were taken to the Texas commission on Jail Standards for review. The TCJS reviewed the plans, made a few suggested changes, and granted preliminary approval of the proposed plans.
The architect later provided detailed cost breakdowns of the proposal that show what was included in the proposed facility, e.g., the details on each floor related to the types and numbers of jail beds, square footage, kitchen, laundry, etc. Those projected costs/details have been provided to every local media outlet and were included in every public presentation of the proposal. The “consensus” group did not contribute to the work on the blueprints as that was not our purpose or expertise. Nevertheless, the proposed blueprints were developed because the purpose of the meetings was to gather information and build consensus on jail location and cost so that a proposed solution to jail overcrowding could be presented to the voters for approval.
Once consensus was established, the detailed blueprints of the proposed plans did not require a great deal of work on the part of the architect because the proposed plan on the ballot is one of many that he had completed last year during the last bond proposal. It only required a little “tweaking.” I think this basic plan was referred to as “option 10” last year.
That’s it. There is the brief history of the 2008 jail bond proposal. What happens now is in the hands of Smith County voters. Solutions were sought because that is what we do. The process was legal, ethical and common sensical. We are fighting the release of detailed blueprints of the proposed jail facility because of the security risk such release would pose to detention officers, inmates and the general public. It’s not rocket science.
Be informed and vote your conscience.
