Texas woke up this morning to a Democratic governor-elect and a Democratic U.S. senator-elect, and half my feed thinks the world just ended while the other half thinks it was just saved. The results are still unofficial, but Gov. Greg Abbott has already conceded.^[1][2]

I'm not going to tell you which half is right. I have a different question, one both halves can answer: why does a state that finished each of its last two budgets with more than $36 billion left over still have towns where brown water comes out of the tap? Asking it starts a lot closer to home than Austin. Your city council meets every month at your local city hall, and that's where you can ask how your city's money is spent and whether anyone is asking the state for help.

While most of us have been busy arguing red against blue, small towns across Texas have been falling behind. The cost of providing the basics, clean water, working sewers and patched streets, climbs every year, and the budgets that pay for them keep getting tighter. A state with this much money left over shouldn't be watching that happen from the sidelines.

We're Still One Flag

This country is red, white and blue. All three colors, on one flag, at the same time. People fought and died so that we could argue with each other, vote each other out, and find a way forward together, instead of taking whatever a king decided to hand us. Yesterday's election was that system working. Some of you won, some of you lost, and every one of you still has a say in what happens next.

The part I worry about is where all that energy goes now. Most of it is going into comment sections about Austin. I'd like to see some of it go somewhere it can actually do some good: questions about the money behind the pipes under your own street.

What I See From the Back of the Room

I spend my weeks in small-town council meetings and reading city budgets. Every budget in every city I cover is tight. Some of those cities dug their own holes. Trinidad's own posted audits, going back to fiscal 2018, flag the same problems year after year, and its newest audit still isn't done.^[3] Other cities have done just about everything right and are struggling anyway, squeezed by inflation and costs they don't control.

Some of what I see comes straight out of the tap. In Trinidad, residents have posted photos of brown water from their homes, and the City's contracted water operator confirmed on a public thread that the town's old cast iron pipes have built-up scale breaking off into people's lines.^[4] In Italy, a resident reported brown water from her tap.^[5] Some cities, like Italy, treat their water so heavily to make it safe to drink that it can discolor your clothes in the wash.

Meanwhile, the State of Texas keeps finishing its budgets with money left over. Texas budgets two years at a time, and the comptroller certifies what's left at the end of each cycle. The 2022-23 budget ended with $39.24 billion.^[6] The 2024-25 budget ended with $36.18 billion.^[7] Split evenly across each budget's two years, that's roughly $18 billion to $20 billion left over every year since 2022.

Context:The last two state budgets each ended with more than $36 billion left over, more than three times any budget before them.

• Each bar is the comptroller’s certified ending balance of revenue available for general-purpose spending, after the required transfers to the Rainy Day Fund and the State Highway Fund.
• The Rainy Day Fund’s own balance is not included.
• Figures as first certified each fall. The comptroller later restated 2022-23 as $39.35 billion.

Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Certification Revenue Estimates, 2012-13 through 2026-27

View the data as a table

Item	Value
2010-11	1.14
2012-13	5.51
2014-15	8.34
2016-17	0.88
2018-19	4.72
2020-21	11.23
2022-23	39.24
2024-25	36.18

I can't make those two pictures fit together. Small towns are deciding between fixing a water line and keeping a police officer, while the state sits on tens of billions of dollars. At the same time, school boards, city councils and county commissioners across Texas keep approving tax abatements for data centers and solar farms, and the residents who live next to them keep watching their own property tax bills climb. Put that next to a surplus this size, and it makes no sense to me. Texas is too rich for any of its towns to be living with brown water. My own read of Texas finances is that they lean toward business and away from the cities and the people who live in them.

That's my opinion. It doesn't belong to either party. I'd ask a Republican legislator and a Democratic one the same question: why does a state with this kind of surplus leave its small towns to fend for themselves?

Both Sides Sell You One Issue

Both parties are good at getting us to fight over a single issue. Take the border off the table for a minute. Take marijuana off the table. Forget what's happening in Austin.

The bigger picture is complicated, and complicated doesn't fit in a campaign ad. Most people don't have time to dig through a budget, so they trust what their leaders tell them. I understand that. I just don't think it's working for us.

Questions Worth Asking This Week

So here's what I'd ask anyone who has spent the last 24 hours arguing about the election:

• Have you ever read your city's budget, or sat in on a council meeting where it was discussed?
• Do you know how old the pipes are that bring water to your house, what they're made of, and when they're due to be replaced?
• Do you know how much of your money goes to contracts nobody else got a chance to bid on, or to repairs nobody can explain?
• Has your city looked into state help for its water system, like the loans and grants the Texas Water Development Board offers, and has it applied?^[8]
• Have your council members asked your state representative and state senator for help, and what did they hear back?

Those pipes aren't a hypothetical. In Trinidad, Jerry Bannister said during a Planning and Zoning meeting that at least one asbestos pipe is still in the ground.^[9] Your city could be in the same spot, and the only way to know is to ask.

None of that is meant to scare anyone. Those are the questions that decide whether your water is safe, whether your streets get fixed, and whether your tax bill goes up next year. Every one of them gets answered a few blocks from your house, usually in a half-empty room on a weeknight.

Take It Home

You can yell about the state online all you want, and I doubt it will change a thing. A question asked at your city council meeting goes on the record. Ask where the money is going. Ask what help the state offers and whether your city has gone after it. Ask your council members whether they've called your state representative. A council of five people notices when twenty residents walk in with the same question, and a state representative notices when a council calls asking for help.

If you knew what I've learned about Texas local government this year, I think you'd already be there, sitting next to the rest of us watchdogs. The problems we've found are a lot bigger than any one city hall. Some of the answers sit in Austin, and the people with the best shot at getting them are your own council members, if you ask them to try.

Red or blue, we all drink the same water. We disagreed at the ballot box yesterday. Can we agree to show up at the next council meeting with some questions?

Trinidad faced conflict all year, much of it out in the open, and the city is still standing.

In March, after my first Trinidad council meeting, then-Police Chief Charles Gregory wrote publicly about something I'd said in that room:

What you said about having tough conversations without taking things personally really stuck. That's not always easy, especially in a small town where people are passionate and deeply invested, but it's necessary. Growth doesn't happen without a little discomfort, and respectful dialogue is how we get there together.

He wrote that on March 18.^[1] He's now named as a defendant in ongoing federal litigation against the City, and eight months later I still think he was right on this point.^[1] I believe drifting away from it led to other mistakes inside Trinidad PD, and some of those mistakes are now being worked out in court.

The police department was only one piece of it. Trinidad has had more than its share of discomfort this year.

A Hard Year, Out in the Open

Four people have run City Hall since February.^[2] In May, Jennifer Combs and Winston "Otto the Watchdog" Noles were arrested. Both cases ended within two weeks, both turned into federal lawsuits with attorneys Brandon J. Grable, CJ Grisham and Ryan Franceschina, and FOX 4's David Sentendrey brought the story to Dallas-Fort Worth.^[3][1]

The Council then removed Municipal Judge Shellena Bivens and seated Susan Carver, which led to another lawsuit and open questions about when Carver took her oath. Carver is now the judge in Brownsboro.^[4][5][6] Chief Gregory resigned, and in September the state pulled the police department's authority to appoint officers. The Henderson County Sheriff's Office covers the city now.^[7][8]

Then came the money: no adopted budget a month into the fiscal year, and an audit more than seven months past due.^[9] My November 1 article has the numbers.

Look around, though. Trinidad is still here. Residents still show up at public comment, meetings still get streamed thanks to Jennifer Combs, and the conversation keeps going in the Beware of Trinidad Texas Water Facebook group.^[10][11] A year like this one could have driven people away from City Hall. They kept coming back.

People Make Mistakes. I Do Too.

Every one of those stories has people in it, and people make mistakes. Some got in over their heads. Some got pulled into situations that turned messy fast. Some said things in a meeting or a comment thread they'd take back if they could.

I've been one of them. I work constantly to make sure my information is correct, and I've still made mistakes in some of my recent reporting. When I get something wrong, I correct it in public. I've also changed how I work, so you can check me:

• Every article now lists its sources at the bottom. You may have noticed the citations on my recent articles. They show where my information comes from.
• Every claim links to its source. The number at the end of a sentence jumps to the source at the bottom. Click the number beside that source to jump back to where you were reading.
• Anonymous tips are labeled as confidential sources.
• The full story lives on my website. Anything with allegations, or anything people may dispute, stays in the article on watchtowerci.com, and Facebook gets a summary. If I ever need to correct a fact or retract something, it's all in one place.

None of us are perfect. We all have days where we do or say something we look back on and wish we hadn't. What matters is what happens next.

What's Going Right

Watching where a city goes wrong is half of this work. The other half is noticing where it's getting things right, and Trinidad's recent agendas have more of that than the comment threads would tell you.

• Money the City wasn't collecting. On July 23 the Council voted to reauthorize the quarter-cent sales tax for street maintenance. The minutes say the City hadn't been collecting it, "an estimated $66,000 per year in uncollected revenue," and the Council directed staff to start the process with the Texas Comptroller.^[12]
• Residents at the water table. The same night, the Council appointed residents to its Water Advisory Committee, and the committee's chair delivered the water report: sampling, main flushing, 21 service calls, a new flush hydrant at Olive and Walnut, and a meeting set with a free state assistance team from to assess the system.^[12]
• A plan for the pipes. The Council authorized a request for engineering services for a water infrastructure assessment, a capital improvement plan, GIS mapping and funding opportunities. By September 15, a task order with the engineering firm Schaumburg & Polk was on the agenda.^[12][13] The approved a $300,000 infrastructure grant this summer.^[12]
• Controls on spending. On October 15 the Council put the event committee's spending under the City's purchasing controls, with the audit cited as the reason. It chose a grant administrator for a Texas Community Development Block Grant through a scored process, and it authorized the Mayor to pursue selling the police vehicles.^[10]
• The Sheriff came to the table, and so did Log Cabin. The same night, Sheriff Botie Hillhouse presented the County's proposed law enforcement agreement and took questions for about 45 minutes. The City of Log Cabin has offered to serve Trinidad too: the Mayor met with the Sheriff, Malakoff and Log Cabin in September, and the October 15 agenda put the Sheriff's Office and Log Cabin side by side.^[14][15][10] The Council took no action that night, and the City is still working out its long-term plan for policing.^[10]
• A clearer budget. The October 26 update from the City's outside CPA, Christopher Turner, shows the City's cash for the first time: $801,468 across 15 bank accounts, each labeled by purpose. It replaces ten months of projections with 12 months of actual results.^[16]
• A search with the next council in mind. The Mayor, Leah Melton and Velma Womack will narrow the applicants for city administrator and hand the finalists to the council seated after the election.^[10]
• Answers when asked. When I asked Mayor Dennis Haws about the audit on October 25, he answered the same day with the auditor's estimate and a promise: "When we get it I'll send it to you."^[17] When I raised the question on October 27, the city attorney checked and agreed.^[18]

None of that finishes the audit. All of it is real work, and the people who did it deserve to hear it.

Both Sides of the Table

A year in Trinidad has taught me this much. The disagreements that went somewhere started with someone putting the facts on the table and talking directly, and respectfully, to the person across from them. The ones that went nowhere stayed in the comment threads.

If we're right, great. If we're wrong, own it, find a resolution both sides can live with, and keep going together. Trinidad is better united than divided, and a city can survive its mistakes. It has a much harder time surviving people who stop talking to each other. Hard conversations build strong cities.

My work in every city I cover has one goal: to move it toward good faith and the best interests of the people who live there. That holds for Trinidad, and for everyone on every side of this year's arguments.

To Council Members and Candidates

Listen to your constituents, including the ones you disagree with.

I've found myself in the middle of more than one local government controversy, and to me they all trace back to the same place. A resident feels unheard at city council, so they take it to social media. Social media then puts that post in front of the people most likely to engage with it, good or bad. Negative discourse grows fast when people feel unheard. It starts there, and it can be stopped there.

The fix is the table, and when residents bring their concerns to it, it's on the people at the dais to listen. Be receptive when someone stands up at public comment to tell you you're wrong, and answer them like a neighbor. Do that consistently, and I believe you'll find your loudest critics on social media slowly turning into your biggest promoters.

In the software and business world, there's a name for this idea: the Net Promoter System. It asks people one question, how likely they are to recommend you on a scale of 0 to 10, and sorts them into detractors, passives and promoters. It's something I feel every town across Texas should put in place to strengthen communication within the community: ask residents regularly, treat every piece of feedback as worth weighing, especially the angry ones, and look for ways to turn a critic into a promoter. To me, that's the key to positive discourse in a small town.

To Trinidad's Voters

On Tuesday, November 3, Trinidad voters choose three council members from four candidates. Gun Barrel City, Tool and Enchanted Oaks have races of their own.^[19] Polls are open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.^[20]

I'm asking voters to bring the same thing to the ballot box that I'm asking of the Council. Go by the record. Ask the candidates direct questions, respectfully, and listen to the answers, even from someone you disagree with. Vote for the people you believe will sit down with the residents who didn't vote for them.

After Tuesday, bring it to the table. Take your concerns to city council, to the EDC, to Planning and Zoning, and put them on the record where they count. A post on social media reaches whoever the feed picks. A comment at the podium reaches the people who make the decisions. If you feel unheard, bring it to social media in the most respectful way possible, and allow for open, fair discourse.

Whoever wins, the work doesn't change. The budget still needs adopting, the audit still needs finishing, and the water still needs fixing. Both sides of this table have to work together to build a stronger Trinidad. If every city facing these same issues recognizes them and responds the same way, we can build a stronger Texas.

Trinidad's FY2025 audit is more than seven months past due.^[1][2][3][4] A month into its new fiscal year, the City still has no adopted budget. It has two versions of one: the October 6 file on its website, and an "Updated FY2026-2027 Budget Proposal" dated October 26 that the Council had in hand and the website still didn't carry as of my October 31 check.^[5][6][7][4] Before either version came to a vote, the October 27 agenda asked the Council for $291,723.78 in new water meters.^[8] The City's seven posted audits keep reporting the same two problems, adjustments not posted and spending over budget, and the newest audit isn't done.^[9][10] I believe that record is why the City should finish its audit before it makes a commitment this size.

I got some things wrong in my own recent budget coverage, so my corrections come first and the City's numbers follow.

I talk to anyone who reaches out, on every side, City officials and their families included, and I'm prepared to be transparent about any of those conversations. I haven't paid to boost or promote anything I've published about Trinidad.

I didn't send requests for comment to the City, Steven Stearman or Velma Womack for this article. I've laid out the City's own records as fully as I can, and I'd ask you to review them, draw your own conclusions and keep the discussion going.

I invite Steven, Velma, the City and anyone else involved in these matters to reach out to me. Send me information or corrections, set up a phone call, or give me a statement or comment, and I'll add it to this article. That invitation doesn't expire.

Correcting the Record on My Budget Coverage

Between October 21 and October 27 I published several things about Trinidad's budget and its council that don't hold up, and one line, repeated on four slides, that needs a clarification.

The Audit Deadline, Counted Correctly

My October 25 article said the FY2025 audit "was due March 29, 2026," and my October 27 timeline said the same.^[11][12] Both missed a rule.

State law gives a city 180 days after its fiscal year ends to finish its audit.^[1] Trinidad's fiscal year ended September 30, 2025, and the 180th day after that was Sunday, March 29, 2026. The state's Code Construction Act covers that case: "If the last day of any period is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period is extended to include the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."^[2] The Local Government Code applies that act to its own deadlines.^[3] So the FY2025 audit was due Monday, March 30, 2026. My last check of the City's website, on October 31, found no FY2025 audit posted.^[4]

The same rule moves the FY2024 audit. Its 180th day was Saturday, March 29, 2025, so the deadline carried to Monday, March 31. The auditors signed it April 25, 2025, which makes it 25 days late. My October 25 chart said 27.^[10][2][11]

The last three audits, counted under the same rule:^{[9][10][1][2][4]}

The Meter Timeline I Posted October 27

At 4:03 p.m. on October 27, before that night's called meeting, I posted a seven-slide timeline of the meter proposal on my Watchtower CI page.^[12] Here is where each slide stands against the record:

• Slide 1's title stands. "A Solution, or the Plan From the Start?" meant that the meters have been in the City's plans since at least late February, while the FY2025 audit and the budget still aren't done. I'm not suggesting anything improper.^[13]
• Slide 4's Aqua Services date was wrong. Aqua was already working for the City by August 2025, two months before the October 21, 2025 date on the slide.^[14][15]
• Slide 4's "radio read meter bids" line was partly right. The February 20 minutes record bids for repairs and upgrades without naming the meters, and the meters come up on February 27. The slide's February 27 quote is the clerk's wording in the minutes.^[16][13]
• I withdraw slide 5 in full. Its title and closing line asked motive questions the record doesn't answer. BuyBoard purchases are legal in Texas.^[17]
• Slide 6's audit due date was off by a day. Under the weekend rule, the audit was due Monday, March 30, 2026.^[2][3]
• The Sarah Crocker billing contract, on slides 3 through 6, needs a clarification. The amount and scope come from the City's agendas, and I don't have minutes confirming the approval.^[18][19]
• Slides 2 and 7 stand as posted.

The slides, and the record behind each correctionClick to expandClick to collapse

Slide 1 asked, "A Solution, or the Plan From the Start?" I stand by that question, and here's what I meant by it. The meters have been on the City's table since at least late February. The February 27 minutes already treat them as coming. Discussing Aqua Services' contract, the City's water operator said city employees were still reading meters, and the minutes go on: "Jeremy stated once they get the radio-controlled meter readers in our employees wouldn't have to do that anymore either."^[13] The August 18 agenda's billing contract included "Future Implementation of Automatic Meter Reading Data."^[18] The September 29 budget workshop discussed "a separate loan of approximately $240,000 for water meter replacement."^[20] I'm not suggesting anything improper in that. My point is the contradiction: the meters have been part of the City's plans since at least late February, and in that time the City still hasn't finished its FY2025 audit or adopted a budget.

Slide 1 of my October 27 meter timeline, as posted. The meters have been in the City's plans since at least late February, and the audit and the budget still aren't done.

1. Slide 4 dated Aqua Services' hiring to October 21, 2025. The minutes from that night report the switch as already done: the "transition from Ford Services to Aqua Services reduced annual costs from $166,000 to $120,000." The hiring came before that meeting.^[15] The August 19, 2025 minutes already report that "aqua services continues to work on flushing," so Aqua was working for the City by that August. I haven't pinned down the exact start date.^[14]
2. Slide 4's February 20, 2026 line said the operator reported on "radio read meter bids." That's partly right. The February 20 minutes record his operator report, and that "Jeremy discussed several bids that he has gotten for various repairs/upgrades," without saying what the bids were for.^[16] The radio-controlled meter readers come up in the minutes a week later, on February 27, in the line I quoted above.^[13] The minutes I have don't tie the February 20 bids to the meters, so I withdraw "radio read meter bids" as written. The rest holds: an operator report on bids for upgrades on February 20, and the meters on the table by February 27. The slide's February 27 row also put that line in quotation marks as Crocker's own words. It's the clerk's wording in the minutes, and I've marked it on the slide.

Slide 4 of my October 27 timeline, with my corrections marked in red. Its Aqua Services date doesn't hold up, and its February 20 row is only partly right. Its August billing row gets a clarification.

3. Slide 5 asked, "Decided before the vote?" and its closing line asked who chose the vendor, and when. Those are motive questions the record doesn't answer, and I withdraw the slide in full.

Here's what the record does show. The October 15 agenda proposed a resolution to buy the meters by competitive sealed proposals.^[21] At that meeting Steven said "the company that we looked at agreed to sell to us through another company, through BuyBoards," and the Council tabled the resolution on his motion.^[22] The October 27 agenda then asked the Council to approve the meters through the BuyBoard Purchasing Cooperative, and that meeting ended with no vote.^[8][5] No vote has approved a BuyBoard purchase.

BuyBoard is a purchasing cooperative. In its own words, "The Texas BuyBoard Purchasing Cooperative streamlines the purchasing process for schools, municipalities, and other public entities in Texas."^[17] Buying through a cooperative like it is legal in Texas.

My stance on the meters comes down to the money. I don't believe the City should commit $291,723.78 to meters before both the budget and the FY2025 audit are finished.

4. Slide 6 said the FY2025 audit "was due March 29, 2026." Under the weekend rule in state law, it was due Monday, March 30, 2026.^[2][3]

Slide 6 of my October 27 timeline. Under the weekend rule the audit was due Monday, March 30, 2026. The audit point stands. Listing these contracts together wasn't meant to suggest anything improper about any of them.

Slides 3, 4, 5 and 6 each say a water billing contract with Sarah Crocker was "reportedly approved" in August. The August 18 agenda proposed "Contracted Water Billing and RVS System Management Services with Sarah Crooker in the Amount of $1,800 per Month," including "Future Implementation of Automatic Meter Reading Data."^[18] The August 27 agenda listed "the contract with Sarah Crocker" for approval.^[19] The contract was reportedly approved, but I don't have council minutes in my possession confirming it. The amount and the scope on those slides come straight from the City's agendas.

Slide 3 of my October 27 timeline. The amount and the scope on the middle card come from the City's agendas. The contract was reportedly approved, but I don't have council minutes in my possession confirming it.

The slide's heading put three names together, and the connection among them is the City's water operations. Aqua Services runs the water system under contract, the August agendas put Sarah Crocker's billing contract before the Council, and on July 23 the Council voted 4-0, with his own abstention, to make Steven its Council Liaison to the Water Advisory Committee.^{[15][18][19][23]} That's why these three names and Aqua Services keep turning up together in the water records. I'm not stating any other connection among them, and nothing I have shows anyone stood to gain from the meter purchase.

Slides 3 and 4 also say he "campaigned on new smart meters." The record I have is his September 19 comment listing "replacing our aging water meters with new smart meters" among his plans.^[24]

The figure at the center of all seven slides holds: $291,723.78 for meters on the October 27 agenda, with none of it in the proposed budget.^[8][6]

What I Wrote About Velma Womack

On October 21 I posted in The Receipts group that Councilmember Velma Womack "did later finally start 'voting against the grain' in May."^[25] The minutes put her first recorded split this year from Marie Bannister and Leah Melton on March 17, when she voted against reducing the municipal judge's pay to $400 a month. The vote tied 2-2, and the Mayor broke the tie against the cut.^[26] Her four No votes in May were all cast at the May 28 meeting itself.^[27]

Five days later, at 3:08 p.m. on Monday, October 26, I wrote on the Watchtower CI page, "On May 28 she was the only 'no' vote, four times over, when the council removed Judge Shellena Bivens..."^[28] She was the lone No on four 3-1 votes that night, and only one of them, item 7, was the removal. The other three hired Flowers Davis, ended the Gaddis agreement and appointed Susan Carver.^[27]

Both lines were wrong, and I apologize to her for both.

No Budget and No Audit, a Month Into the Year

Trinidad's 2026-27 fiscal year began Thursday, October 1, with no adopted budget. When I checked the City's website on Saturday, October 31, the only budget posted was still the October 6 proposal, and no new meeting or hearing notice had gone up.^[4] The audit of fiscal 2025, the year that ended September 30, 2025, wasn't there either.^[4]

Why There Was No Vote on October 27

The budget and the water meter purchase were both on the agenda for Tuesday, October 27, posted under the title "City Council Called Meeting Agenda."^[8] Jennifer Combs's livestream video of the meeting shows three aldermen answering the roll: Velma Womack, Steven Stearman and Marie Bannister. The fourth seated alderman was missing: "Leah Melton is absent tonight."^[5]

Trinidad is a Type A city with five alderman seats, and one of them is vacant.^{[29][30][31][32]} Under Local Government Code §22.039, a called meeting needs two-thirds of the aldermen for a , which in Trinidad is four.^[31] I raised the point. The city attorney checked and said, "since this is a special meeting, it appears that we do need it." Mayor Dennis Haws closed it out: "We're done, folks."^[5] The Council took no vote on the budget, the meters or any other item.^[5][8] My October 28 article covers that night in full.^[33]

Earlier in the meeting, the Mayor read aloud from the agenda that a taxpayer impact statement "is attached to this notice."^[5] The agenda on the City's website and on the City Hall doors was three pages, with no attachment and no budget, and I found no impact statement anywhere on the City's website.^[8][34][35] Government Code §551.043(c)(2) requires that statement in the notice of a meeting to adopt a budget, and §551.141 makes an action taken without following the Open Meetings Act voidable.^[36] No vote happened, so there was nothing to void. If the Council calls the hearing again, will the notice carry the statement?

On October 31, the City's agendas page listed the October 27 meeting as "Canceled." The aldermen present, the Mayor and the city attorney met at 6:00 p.m., and the meeting ended on the quorum point.^[4][5]

The Audit, Update by Update

The fiscal 2025 audit was due Monday, March 30, 2026.^[1][2][3] As of Sunday, November 1, 2026, it is more than seven months past due, 216 days by my count. As of my October 31 check, it isn't on the City's website, and no posted agenda has carried it for the Council to accept.^[4] The last public updates came from Councilmember Steven Stearman, in posts in the Beware of Trinidad Texas Water group, and from Mayor Haws.^[37][38]

The March 30 deadline passed before the Council appointed Steven on June 18, and so did the deadline behind the Attorney General's August list.^[39][40] I believe the auditor's own timing is out of any councilmember's hands.

On Saturday, June 27, Steven wrote that the audit "should have been completed back in January" and that "only about 20% of the requested information has been gathered." His goal was to have everything "submitted to the auditor by July 31." Once the audit was complete, he wrote, "we'll finally have the accurate financial information we need to build next year's budget on solid ground."^[37]

Steven Stearman's June 27 audit update in the Beware group. Screenshot from the Beware of Trinidad Texas Water group.

On Tuesday, July 21, he wrote: "The audit is now down to just three remaining items, and I expect to have everything ready to meet the deadline for submission."^[37]

Steven Stearman's July 21 post: the audit was down to three remaining items. Screenshot from the Beware of Trinidad Texas Water group.

On Thursday, August 6, he wrote: "we completed the City's annual audit today. We are now waiting on the auditors' final report, which we expect to receive by the end of the month. As soon as we receive it, we'll post it online for everyone to review." In the same post he wrote that he had "not found any evidence of fraud or intentional wrongdoing."^[37]

That post also estimated the City "has been losing approximately $500,000 per year" because approved water rates were never programmed into billing. The post dates the rate ordinance to March 2025. The minutes I have record the Council adopting an ordinance numbered 2025-003 on February 27, 2026, and I can't match the two.^[37][13] Which ordinance, and which months of billing, does that estimate rest on?

Steven Stearman's August 6 post, as captured; the capture cuts off partway through his closing sentence. Screenshot from the Beware of Trinidad Texas Water group.

On Thursday, September 17, Renee Weaver asked in the same group, "Does anyone know the current status of the City of Trinidad's annual audit? Has the completed audit been returned to the City yet?" Steven answered, "Not yet." She replied, "they are not fast. That's why I disagree with only giving municipalities 180 days to be compliant, it's hard to accomplish that." He answered her: "well I'm about to start the next one as soon as possible."^[41][37]

September 17: Renee Weaver asked whether the audit was back. Steven Stearman answered, "Not yet." Screenshot from the Beware of Trinidad Texas Water group.

At the September 29 budget workshop, the minutes say the audit was "expected... within approximately two weeks."^[20] On Sunday, October 25, the Mayor wrote me about the auditor: "I exchanged emails with David Godwin last Monday and he said three weeks. That should leave us a couple of weeks away."^[38] By that count, the report would arrive around November 8.

Red flag:The audit was due March 30. It still isn’t on the City’s website, and the latest estimate, on Oct. 25, was a couple of weeks.

• All dates 2026
• The deadline is 180 days after the fiscal year ends; it fell on a Sunday, so it ran to Monday, March 30
• The Aug. 6 post said “we completed the City’s annual audit today” and that the City was waiting on the auditors’ final report

Source: Steven Stearman’s posts in the Beware of Trinidad Texas Water group (screenshots from the group); Sept. 29, 2026 minutes; Mayor Haws to me, Oct. 25, 2026; Texas Attorney General, Aug. 17, 2026; trinidadtexas.gov, Oct. 31, 2026; LGC §103.003

View the data as a table

When	What	Detail
March 30	State deadline for the audit
June 27	Councilmember Steven Stearman: “only about 20% of the requested information has been gathered”	Goal: everything “submitted to the auditor by July 31”
July 21	Steven: “down to just three remaining items”
Aug. 6	Steven: “we completed the City’s annual audit today”	“We are now waiting on the auditors’ final report, which we expect to receive by the end of the month. As soon as we receive it, we’ll post it online for everyone to review.”
Aug. 17	Attorney General lists Trinidad among cities sent late-audit letters
Sept. 17	Asked whether it was back, Steven: “Not yet”
Sept. 29	Workshop minutes: expected “within approximately two weeks”
Oct. 25	Mayor Dennis Haws: “a couple of weeks away”
Oct. 31	Still not posted on the City’s website (my latest check)

The Attorney General's August List

On Monday, August 17, the Texas Attorney General's office released a list of more than 110 cities "sent violation determination letters" under Senate Bill 1851, the late-audit law, and Trinidad is on it. The office names the cities in its releases but doesn't post the letters.^[40] Trinidad wasn't on the office's May 14 list of more than 130 cities.^[42]

Local Government Code §103.005 has been in effect since September 1, 2025. If the Attorney General determines that a city hasn't filed its audited financial statement "before the 180th day after the last day of the municipality's fiscal year," the city "may not adopt an ad valorem tax rate that exceeds the municipality's no-new-revenue tax rate." The limit applies "for the tax year that begins on or after the date of the attorney general's determination," and for later tax years until the audit is completed and filed.^[1][43] Does Trinidad's letter cap the 2026 rate, the 2027 rate, or both? Has the Council seen it?

The same law says, "A person may submit a complaint to the attorney general," and the office takes complaints through a form on its website.^[1][44]

What the City's Own Records Show

The City's own posted audits, FY2018 through FY2024, and its debt and tax filings already show several of the gaps in this year's budget.^[9][10] The audits report the same problems year after year. These are audited years through FY2024. The City's position may have improved since then, and the October 26 cash figures haven't been audited. That's why I'd want the FY2025 audit first.

Seven Audits, the Same Two Findings

Anderson, Marx & Bohl signed all seven of the City's posted audits, FY2018 through FY2024, and every finding the firm issued was a material weakness.^[9][10] Two findings keep coming back. In the FY2024 audit, finding 2024-001 reads, "The City failed to post material adjustments." Finding 2024-002 reads, "The City did not maintain proper budgeting controls over expenditures by exceeding its budget in several areas."^[10] The City's answers were "The City will post all necessary adjustments" and "The City will review existing procedures and adjust its budget accordingly."^[10]

The FY2022, FY2023 and FY2024 findings and the City's corrective plans are word for word the same. Plans dated September 30, 2020 and September 30, 2022 came and went, and the FY2020 audit marked both findings "Corrected" before they returned.^[9][10] It appears to me, based on those seven audits, that the City has been promising the same two fixes since 2020.

Over Budget, Late and Debt Budgeted at Zero

The general fund spent past its budget in six of those seven years. The three biggest overruns came back to back: $368,050 (48%) in FY2022, $411,445 (55%) in FY2023 and $350,613 (45%) in FY2024.^[9][10]

Red flag:Spending ran past budget in 6 of the 7 audited years, and each of the last three ran more than $350,000 over.

• FY2022-FY2024 overruns were 48%, 55% and 45%
• Earlier years are not shown

Source: City of Trinidad audits FY2022-FY2024, budgetary comparison schedules and notes

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2022	$368,050
FY2023	$411,445
FY2024	$350,613

Part of that gap is debt the budget left out. In FY2022, FY2023 and FY2024, the general fund budgeted $0 for debt service while paying $35,660, $63,213 and $71,203. The FY2018 through FY2021 budgets had carried it, and each audit's own schedule printed the payments coming due.^[9][10]

Red flag:The City paid its loans in each of those three years and budgeted nothing for them.

• Budgeted
• Paid

• Budgeted: the final budget's debt service lines
• Paid: principal plus interest from the same schedule (my sums)

Source: City of Trinidad audits FY2022-FY2024, budgetary comparison schedules

View the data as a table

	Budgeted	Paid
FY2022	$0	$35,660
FY2023	$0	$63,213
FY2024	$0	$71,203

The general fund also budgeted $0 in loan proceeds in those three years and took in $275,989, $288,732 and $129,027.^[9][10] Two of those loans, the $500,000 city hall loan at 5% (with $480,367 left) and the $129,027 parking lot loan at 6.75%, cost about $45,852 a year together, by my arithmetic.^[10] The FY2027 budget's Admin debt line is $58,403 in both versions.^[7][6]

The audits were late, too. Six of the seven missed the 180-day deadline. Counted with a weekend deadline carried to Monday, the same rule that puts the FY2025 deadline on Monday, March 30, 2026, the FY2018 audit was 325 days late and the FY2022 audit 205 days late, while FY2021 was on time.^{[9][10][1][2]} The auditor's opinion date is the only completion date the audits show, so that's the date I counted to.

Red flag:Six of the last seven audits missed the deadline, and the FY2025 audit, still not out, is already the second latest.

• Counted from each audit's opinion date, the only completion date the audits show
• Day counts are my arithmetic
• FY2025 was due Monday, March 30, 2026, and is counted to Nov. 1, 2026 (217 days on Nov. 2)

Source: City of Trinidad audits FY2018-FY2024, auditor's opinion pages; LGC §103.003; Gov't Code §311.014(b)

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2018	325 days
FY2019	143 days
FY2020	93 days
FY2021 (on time)	0 days
FY2022	205 days
FY2023	62 days
FY2024	25 days
FY2025 (not out yet)	216 days

Reserves, Deposits and Transfers

The water fund's restricted reserve fell from $266,791 at the end of FY2019 to $6,518 at the end of FY2024.^[9][10] The October 26 cash table shows larger reserve balances, and those balances haven't been audited yet.^[6]

The general fund's unassigned balance, the part not set aside for anything, went from $209,070 in FY2021 to $175,450, then $87,335, then -$70,253 in FY2024. At September 30, 2024, the general fund also owed the water fund $140,306.^[9][10]

Red flag:Three straight years of decline left the spendable general fund below zero in the last finished audit.

• Unassigned: the part of the fund not restricted or set aside, which the City could actually spend
• FY2025 has not been audited

Source: City of Trinidad audits FY2021-FY2024

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2021	$209,070
FY2022	$175,450
FY2023	$87,335
FY2024	-$70,253

No audited year moved anything close to what next year's budget moves out of the water fund. The largest audited transfer from water to the general fund was $145,421, in FY2020, and in FY2023 and FY2024 the money went the other way.^[9] The posted budget moves $368,618 out of the water fund, and the October 26 version moves $414,461.^[7][6]

Context:Both plans move more than twice the largest audited transfer out of the water fund.

• In FY2023 and FY2024 money went from the general fund to the water fund
• Other audited years are not shown

Source: City of Trinidad audits FY2020-FY2024; proposed budget FY2026-27; Updated FY2026-2027 Budget Proposal (Oct. 26)

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2020 audit	$145,421
FY2027 posted budget	$368,618
FY2027 Oct. 26 budget	$414,461

On Tuesday, September 15, Renee Weaver asked in the Beware group, "Does anyone know how much the City currently carries in refundable customer deposits?" She added, "I'm NOT suggesting the money is missing. I'm asking whether anyone knows where this obligation appears in the City's financial records and what the current balance is." In a comment under her post, she wrote, "I just don't see it as a line item on the financials and it should be."^[45]

Renee Weaver's September 15 question about customer deposits. Screenshot from the Beware of Trinidad Texas Water group.

Customer deposits are money the City holds and owes back when an account closes. The two figures here measure different things. The audit figure is an obligation on the books, the budget figure is one named bank account's balance two years later, and one account isn't necessarily the only place the City keeps deposit money. Nothing I have shows any deposit money is missing. In the audits, what the City owed depositors rose every year, from $65,239 in FY2018 to $92,319 in FY2024. That's the obligation Renee Weaver asked about in September. The October 26 version's Water Deposits account holds $9,927.^{[9][10][45][6]} Where does the City hold the money behind its customer deposit obligation?

Debt Balances Neither Budget Shows

The FY2024 audit lists 11 debt instruments. At September 30, 2024, the City owed $1,318,291 in principal, with $682,351 more in interest still to come, and the payments scheduled for the year ending September 30, 2027 total $158,453, by my sums.^[10]

The October 26 version lists $85,420 in FY2027 principal and the cash set aside for debt payments, and it shows no balance owed on any loan.^[6] That $85,420 is close to the audit's $88,435 in water principal, and I can't reconcile the two.^[10][6] Which loans does it cover?

The Texas Bond Review Board, as of August 31, 2025, shows $515,000 outstanding in four issues: Series 2000 revenue bonds ($195,000), 2001 revenue bonds ($65,000), 2007 certificates ($165,000) and 2007A certificates ($90,000). It schedules $72,000 in bond principal in each of FY2026 and FY2027, and the 2007A's last principal payment falls on January 1, 2027.^[46] If the 2007A is the bond he means in the meters funding discussion, that schedule fits what he described.

The Texas Water Development Board shows two active 2007 State Water Fund loans to the City: $400,000 for sewer work (L070045) and $250,000 for a pump station (L070046).^[47] Matching them to the 2007 and 2007A certificates works by amount only, and I haven't confirmed it.

The FY2027 budget carries $49,602 in police debt service.^[6] It matches no loan in the FY2024 audit. The only police loan there had $14,161 left at $2,086 a month, which would have run out around spring 2025, by my arithmetic.^[10] The City's own 2026 tax-rate filing lists six notes with $126,991.60 of debt service this year, and two of them aren't in the FY2024 audit: KS State Bank police vehicle notes ($47,682.44) and a Fleetwood police equipment lease ($9,546.97).^[48] They look to me like the likely source of the police line. What's left on those notes, and how long do they run?

Which 2026 Tax Rate?

I can't find a 2026 property tax rate item on any agenda the City has posted since June, through my October 31 check.^[35][4]

For tax year 2026, the county tax office's worksheets, dated August 19, give Trinidad a no-new-revenue rate of $0.462670 and a voter-approval rate of $0.641038 per $100 of taxable value, on a certified taxable value of $83,238,479 as of July 25.^[49] Last year the City adopted $0.478944, for a $387,208 levy.^[50]

Context:The county tax office lists $0.462670 as adopted, the state-required tax database shows no rate at all, and I can't find a rate vote on any posted agenda.

• No-new-revenue rate: about the same tax money from the same properties as last year
• Voter-approval rate: the most a city can adopt without an election
• Agenda check through Oct. 31, 2026

Source: Henderson County tax office worksheets (Aug. 19, 2026) and 2026 rate table; county property tax database (Oct. 31, 2026); Texas Comptroller

View the data as a table

Figure	What it is	Signal
$0.478944	2025 adopted rate	Context
$0.462670	2026 no-new-revenue rate	Context
$0.641038	2026 voter-approval rate	Context
$0.462670	2026 rate the county tax office lists as adopted	Red flag
No rate	2026 rate in the state-required tax database (listed as $0.000000)	Red flag
None	2026 tax rate items on any agenda the City has posted since June	Red flag

The records disagree. The county tax office's table lists $0.462670 as Trinidad's "Adopted" rate. The state-required property tax database lists Trinidad's proposed and adopted 2026 rates as $0.000000. I don't know whether that means no rate was entered.^[51][52]

Three public records, three different answers. Which 2026 rate applies to Trinidad, and was it adopted or ratified at a posted meeting?

Other Questions in the Numbers

The October 26 version's System Reserve includes a $213,251 deposit dated September 10, and Turner's own memo says its "source and restrictions should be established."^[6] The posted budget shows the same $213,251 for raw water through July.^[7] The figures match, and that's all I know. Is that deposit the raw water money, and what restricts it?

At the September 29 budget workshop, lagoon repairs were "estimated at $100,000" "to avoid EPA violations."^[20] Which budget line pays for them?

On October 21, 2025, about three weeks into last fiscal year, the Council ratified the prior budget "on an interim basis."^[15] I can't find a similar item on any 2026 agenda the City has posted through my October 31 check.^[35][4] Not finding it online doesn't mean there isn't one: an earlier appropriation, an amendment or a record the City hasn't posted could cover it. What authority has covered the City's payments since October 1?

Council Work on the Record

Steven's council work is on the record too. On July 23 he moved to reauthorize the quarter-cent street maintenance sales tax, which the minutes say the City hadn't been collecting, and he flagged the billing errors that kept customers from being charged under the City's ordinances.^[23]

In September he helped stop a proposal to cut Trinidad's water rates again, and I give him credit for it. Pat Jones, who chairs the City's Water Infrastructure Advisory Committee, wrote after the Tuesday, September 15 meeting: "If it weren't for Steven, Marie's proposal Tuesday could have put the city another $66,000 in the hole."^[53][54] That figure is his.

In his August 6 audit post he also wrote that he had "not found any evidence of fraud or intentional wrongdoing."^[37]

Two Budgets: October 6 and October 26

What Changed Between the Versions

The budget on the City's website is a "Council planning worksheet" from the City's outside CPA, Christopher A. Turner. Its summary page is dated August 21, and the PDF itself was built Tuesday, October 6.^[7] The copy handed to the Council on October 27 was an eight-page "Updated FY2026-2027 Budget Proposal" from Turner, dated Monday, October 26.^[6] That night the website still carried the October 6 file, byte for byte, last uploaded October 19, and it still did when I checked on October 31.^[35][4]

The changes are real money. Water fund spending for next year rises from $1,062,329 to $1,164,997, up $102,668. Admin salaries go from $75,611 to $90,000. The water fund, which the posted version said had moved its salaries to streets, carries $50,000 in salaries again. The surplus across all funds drops from $708,562 to $605,894.^[6][7]

Context:The version the Council had carries $102,668 more in water fund spending than the one the public could read.

• Surplus is planned income minus planned spending, before counting the grant’s study, loan principal or the meters

Source: City of Trinidad proposed budget FY2026-27 (posted Oct. 6); Updated FY2026-2027 Budget Proposal (Oct. 26)

View the data as a table

Item	Value
Posted online (Oct. 6)	$708,562
At the meeting (Oct. 26)	$605,894

Turner's update also fixes things. It shows the City's cash at September 30 for the first time: $801,468 across 15 bank accounts, each labeled by purpose. It replaces ten months of projections with 12 months of actual results, and its transfers balance, which clears the $28,666 gap between pages I reported in the posted version.^[6][11]

Page 1 of the October 26 budget version, which wasn't posted with the meeting agenda. My scan, with the source hash at the foot.

All eight pages of the October 26 budget versionClick to expandClick to collapse

Page 1: the comparative budget summary.

Page 2: financial highlights and proposed funding priorities.

Page 3: the bank accounts, each with its planning purpose and its September 30 balance.

Page 4: account-level lines, prior budget, actual and proposed.

Page 5: account-level lines, continued.

Page 6: account-level lines, continued.

Page 7: the Water and Sewer Department.

Page 8: the notes on debt principal and the water line study, ending at Turner's signature.

Some pieces are still missing. Local Government Code §102.003(b) calls for a budget to show the city's outstanding obligations and "the estimated tax rate required to cover the proposed budget," and Tax Code §26.04(e-5) calls for the rate calculation forms.^[55][56] The October 26 version shows no balance owed on any loan, no estimated tax rate and no rate forms. Its eight pages end at Turner's signature.^[6]

State law lets a council make "any changes in the budget that it considers warranted" when it adopts one, so the Council can work from a newer version.^[55] I believe residents who want to speak at a budget hearing should be able to read the version the Council will vote on. When will the October 26 version be posted?

Cash the Surplus Doesn't Count

The October 26 version shows a $605,894 surplus across all funds. That surplus is planned income minus planned spending, and two items of cash sit outside it. The version counts a $300,000 grant from the City's as income while leaving the water line study it pays for out of spending, and it leaves out $85,420 in loan principal due this year.^[6] Loan principal is cash the City pays out, even though accounting rules keep it off the expense lines. I haven't confirmed how the City books the grant and the study, or whether the study's cost appears somewhere else. If both come out of this year's cash, by my arithmetic about $220,474 of the surplus is left.^[6]

The $291,723.78 water meter purchase on the October 27 agenda, plus about $6,355.80 a year for the meter network, isn't in either budget version.^[8][6] Set beside that $220,474, a cash purchase this year would take about $77,606 more than the surplus covers, by my arithmetic. I offer that figure only to show the size of the commitments next to the surplus. It's a conditional illustration, and the City's CPA could account for the grant and the study differently; a reconciled cash-flow forecast would have to come from the City. The City keeps its funds separately, its year-end cash could differ, and financing the meters would spread their cost over later years. The budget doesn't say how the City would pay for them.^[6][8]

Context:Count the grant’s study and the loan principal, and about $220,474 of the surplus is left. A cash meter purchase this year would take about $77,606 more than that.

• Total
• Decrease

• Grant study: counted as income, but the study it pays for is left out of spending
• Loan principal: cash paid out, kept off the expense lines
• Meters: on the Oct. 27 agenda, in neither version
• Beyond the surplus: my arithmetic, a conditional illustration across separate funds; the City’s CPA could book the grant and study differently
• Financing would spread the meters’ cost over later years

Source: Updated FY2026-2027 Budget Proposal (Oct. 26, 2026), pp. 1, 7-8; Oct. 27, 2026 agenda, item D.3

View the data as a table

Step	Amount	Running total
Surplus in the budget	$605,894	$605,894
Grant study	-$300,000	$305,894
Loan principal	-$85,420	$220,474
Meters, year one	-$291,724	-$71,250
Meter network	-$6,356	-$77,606
Beyond the surplus	-$77,606	-$77,606

Water Sales: Last Year's Actual and Next Year's Plan

The budget expects $799,784 from water sales next year, against $527,659 in actual water sales for the 12 months that just ended, about 52% more.^[6] Some increase makes sense. In July the Council heard about billing errors that kept customers from being charged under the City's ordinances, and the posted version bases its projection on "last two months' RVS reports using updated rates."^[23][7] Will two months of bills hold up for a full year?

Context:The budget counts on about $272,000 more in water sales. The posted version bases it on the last two months of bills at the updated rates.

• The Council heard in July about billing errors that kept customers from being charged under the City’s ordinances
• FY2026 carried the new rates for only part of the year

Source: Updated FY2026-2027 Budget Proposal (Oct. 26, 2026), pp. 2, 7; proposed budget p. 14; July 23, 2026 minutes

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2026 actual (12 months)	$527,659
FY2027 budget	$799,784

In his August 6 post, Steven estimated that the billing, meter and trash sales tax fixes "could see an increase of approximately $536,000 in annual revenue." The budget's water sales line rises $272,125, about half that. The two figures measure different things: his includes trash sales tax, and fiscal 2026 already carried the new rates for part of the year.^[37][6] Which number should residents expect?

Payroll, Court and Police

Salaries outside the police department go from $156,615 in fiscal 2026 to $245,643 in the proposal, about 57% more.^[6] Some of that may reflect a year of turnover in City Hall. Trinidad needs consistent, experienced leadership to guide it through these financial hurdles.^[57][13] The memo asks the Council to "confirm approvals for the proposed City Administrator role," and it doesn't say what the new salary money pays for.^[6] Which positions does it fund?

Context:Non-police payroll rises about 57%, and the memo doesn’t say which positions the new money pays for.

• FY2026 was a year of turnover in City Hall
• The memo asks the Council to confirm “the proposed City Administrator role” before adoption

Source: Updated FY2026-2027 Budget Proposal (Oct. 26, 2026), pp. 2-7

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2026 actual	$156,615
FY2027 budget	$245,643

Trinidad has had no police department in operation since Friday, September 18, when the State's revocation of the department's appointing authority took effect.^[58] The budget still expects $138,889 in municipal court revenue, against $214,596 in fiscal 2026.^[6] Old citations, outstanding fines and payment plans can keep bringing in money after the officers are gone. How much of the $138,889 is that, and how much depends on new citations?

The budget also carries $200,000 in police contract labor with no approved interlocal agreement. The October 15 agenda described a potential agreement "with the Henderson County Sheriff's Office or the City of Log Cabin for the provision of law enforcement services," and Jennifer Combs's livestream video of that meeting shows the Council took no action on one.^[6][22][21] From what I know firsthand, the $200,000 is what the City expects to pay one of them for dedicated coverage, and no deal has been reached yet. Budgeting for that before a contract is signed is reasonable. The budget carries $49,602 in police debt service too.^[6] Which notes does it pay?

Context:Trinidad's police department stopped operating Sept. 18. How much of this is old citations, and how much depends on new ones?

• The state’s revocation of the department’s appointing authority took effect Sept. 18, 2026
• Old citations, outstanding fines and payment plans can still bring in money
• The budget also carries $200,000 for a police agreement the Council hasn’t approved

Source: Updated FY2026-2027 Budget Proposal (Oct. 26, 2026), p. 5; TCOLE letter, Sept. 9, 2026 (first published by FOX 4’s David Sentendrey); Oct. 15, 2026 meeting

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2026 actual	$214,596
FY2027 budget	$138,889

Water testing is budgeted at $5,964 in lab fees, "based on current year spending." The City spent $49,494 on testing lab fees in fiscal 2025 and $5,770 in fiscal 2026, a drop of almost 90%.^[7][6] The budget doesn't say whether testing is now paid under the operator's contract or from another line. Where is it paid from?

Context:Lab fees fell by almost 90% last year, and the budget doesn’t say where testing is paid from now.

• The FY2027 figure is “based on current year spending,” per the budget
• The budget doesn’t say whether testing is paid from another line

Source: City of Trinidad proposed budget FY2026-27, p. 14; Updated FY2026-2027 Budget Proposal (Oct. 26), p. 7

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2025 actual	$49,494
FY2026 actual	$5,770
FY2027 budget	$5,964

The Meters: $291,723.78 Before a Budget

About 12.5% of the Posted Budget's Spending

The October 27 agenda asked the Council to approve up to $291,723.78 for new water meters.^[8] That total is $264,973.78 to Accurate Meter & Supply, LLC through the BuyBoard Purchasing Cooperative, plus up to $26,750 for Aqua Services, the City's contract water operator, to install up to 535 meters at $50 each.^[8] A cellular network subscription billed by Badger Meter, Inc. would add an estimated $6,355.80 a year.^[8] I went through that item line by line in What's Wrong With Trinidad?.^[11]

By my arithmetic, $291,723.78 is about 12.5% of the $2,341,510 in total expense in the budget the City posted on its website, the version built October 6.^[7] Neither version of the budget includes the meters.^[7][6]

The October 27 meeting ended without a vote on the budget, the meters or anything else.^[5] As of my October 31 check of the City's website, no new meeting had been posted.^[4]

The Financing Proposal

On Friday, October 30, Steven posted a video in the Beware group, filmed at what appears to be the water plant. His post says, "I was asked to do a video about the meters and what it would cost."^[59]

Steven Stearman's meters video went up in the Beware group on October 30 at 2:01 p.m., filmed at what appears to be the water plant.

"The financing we're considering would cost approximately $58,000 annually," he says. The City has "a bond dating back to 2007," he says, with payments of "approximately $45,000 dollars annually" and a final payment "scheduled for January." He proposes redirecting that money to the meters, which leaves a "$13,000 annual difference before savings and subscription costs." He estimates $26,000 to $27,000 a year in potential savings from less meter reading and administrative work, and he says himself that "those savings still need to be verified."^[59]

He also says "the first annual payment wouldn't be due until next year's budget, so that loan payment would not be an expense in our current budget, assuming those terms are finalized."^[59] The budget he means, for the year that began October 1, hasn't been adopted yet, so that timing depends on the version the Council adopts.^[5][4]

On the subscription, about $1 per meter per month, he says, "I do not support passing that subscription cost directly on to residents," and he wants that "formally adopted in writing by the council."^[59] His $1 matches the agenda: $6,355.80 a year across 535 meters comes to about 99 cents a meter a month, by my arithmetic.^[8] He also wants a 10-year rate plan "formally adopted by Council."^[59] I give him credit for putting both on the record.

Some of his numbers sit beside different ones in the City's records. The September 29 budget workshop minutes describe "a separate loan of approximately $240,000 for water meter replacement" with "an estimated monthly payment of approximately $4,000," which is about $48,000 a year by my arithmetic.^[20] The same minutes say one of the Water & Sewer Department's bonds "will be paid off in January, freeing approximately $15,000-$20,000 annually."^[20] His figure in the video is about $45,000 a year.

The 2007 bond is on the record. The FY2024 audit lists "$400,000 Combination Tax and Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2007 A," paid in installments "through January 1, 2027," with $115,000 left on September 30, 2024.^[10] The Texas Bond Review Board showed $90,000 left on the 2007A on August 31, 2025, with its last principal payment due January 1, 2027, and a separate 2007 certificates issue with $165,000 outstanding.^[46] That schedule points to a final 2007A payment of about $45,000, which is my inference; no record I have prints it. Neither budget version has a debt schedule, so neither one shows the bond.^[7][6]

Under his post, Ruth K. asked what SPI stands for and reminded him that "many don't have access to internet or even computers to check the apps proposed." He answered, "Schaumburg & Polk, Inc," and offered, "if you have anybody you would like me to come talk to directly I just let me know and I will gladly meet with them."^[59]

What Residents Said, For and Against

In Jennifer Combs's livestream video of the October 27 meeting, two Trinidad residents spoke for the meters. One described automated meters at a coastal property: accurate readings, daily usage, leak alerts and no big jump in the bill. The other said grant programs want hard numbers on water pumped, sold and lost, and the old meters can't supply them.^[5]

Jennifer made her own case on October 21. "That is one reason I support the proposed smart-meter upgrade," she wrote. "Nobody should promise that every bill will decrease. More accurate measurement could increase some bills even without a rate increase."^[60] She set conditions: "My support comes with expectations: correct installation, verified account assignments, resident access, a clear billing-dispute process and public reporting on results." She added, "Meters alone will not make the water clean or affordable."^[60]

She cited "a citys report at the Council meeting" of about seven leaks and an estimated 500,000 to one million gallons lost the month before, and wrote that "the city has said the cost would NOT be passed along as an additional charge to residents, and existing water-sales revenue could fund the purchase."^[60] Those figures are hers. Her account and Steven's October 30 bond plan are two public descriptions of how the City might pay.

Residents split under her post. Keith S. wrote, "I live in Mexia now and we converted over to smart meters about four years ago and the only thing that has increased on my bill is garbage pickup." Lee Ann T. wrote, "Again, smart meters would save the city and its citizens in the long run."^[60]

Ruth K. wrote, "Trinidad residents deserve clean drinking water and a true bill that reflects actual usage. Period." She also asked, "don't they have to purchase all the equipment to do the correct reading and billing?? Even more costly for a near broke city...." Benjamin L. asked, "how does installing these meters improve the quality of the water?" and noted, "Also, I live outside the city limits." Gerald D., writing about Murchison, said "smart meters ruined Murchison" and "Operators lose track of meter boxes and water lines."^[60]

Renee Weaver commented under the same post:

Trinidad is operating without an approved budget. HOW ARE THEY APPROVING anything related to finances?^[60]

Weeks earlier she had asked Steven about the money directly. In a September 19 thread in the Beware group, where Steven listed "replacing our aging water meters with new smart meters" among his plans, she replied:

How much will the smart meters cost, and where would the money come from? What would residents gain from having these, most residents are laymen when it comes to water systems. Would installing them add a pass through fee to the residents water bill?^[24]

In the same comment she praised him: "Kudos for you for stepping up, for rolling up your sleeves and digging in."^[24]

Why I Think the Audit Should Come First

My own comment under Jennifer's post put me on the other side: "Smart meters are a luxury the city cannot afford. ... There are pros and cons to both sides, but at the end of the day, this is a conversation that only fiscally responsible cities get to have. Trinidad isn't that."^[60] Reading it back, I'd put it more precisely. I can't show that the City is unable to pay for meters, and financing like the plan Steven described could make the yearly cost workable. What I believe is that committing to them before the budget and the FY2025 audit are finished would be financially irresponsible. I'd ask the City to be fiscally responsible, and to be open about spending and about its real financial position.

As of my October 31 check, the FY2025 audit still wasn't on the City's website.^[4] The newest finished picture of Trinidad's finances is still the FY2024 audit, with the two findings that keep coming back.^[10][9]

If the audit shows the City is fine, good. I believe a city should know where it stands before it commits $291,723.78, about 12.5% of its posted budget's spending, to anything.^[7]

My Recommendations to the City

These are my recommendations to the Council before it votes on a budget again. Six of them carry questions Renee Weaver sent me.^[61] They start from the same plan: the audit first, then any purchase the size of the meters.

The Eight

1. Settle the tax rate first. Get the no-new-revenue and voter-approval calculations and forms from the county tax office, and put the rate on an agenda.^[49] A tax-rate meeting needs four aldermen present for a quorum.^[31] Then state on the record which 2026 rate applies and how it was set. The Attorney General's office lists Trinidad among the cities sent late-audit letters. What does the City's letter say, and has the Council seen it? (Renee's question)^[40][1]
2. Put spending authority since October 1 on the record. In an open meeting, I'd ask the Council to state what authority has covered the City's payments since October 1. Last year an interim ordinance did that job. I can't find one this year, though an earlier appropriation or an unposted record could cover it. (Renee's question)^[15][4]
3. Check opening balances against the audit, and file it. Mayor Dennis Haws told me on October 25 that the FY2025 audit was "a couple of weeks away."^[38] If it's that close, I'd ask the Council to read it and check the budget's opening balances against it before adopting, and to tell residents what the CPA used to check them in the meantime. (Renee's question) The audit was due Monday, March 30, 2026, and it should be filed with the city secretary as soon as it's done.^[1][2]
4. Post the complete package with proper notice. Post every version the Council will vote on, along with the ordinance adopting the budget, agenda item D.1.^[8] The law lets the Council "make any changes in the budget that it considers warranted" at adoption, so the unposted October 26 version is a transparency question.^[55] Put the impact statement in the meeting notice,^[36] publish newspaper notice 10 to 30 days before the hearing, and hold the hearing after the 15th day after filing.^[55] Is Turner's memo the whole proposal, or is there another budget document the public hasn't seen? If the October 26 version is filed, does the 15-day count start over? (Renee's questions) The City's finance page jumps from the FY2023-24 budget to this year's proposal, so I'd also post the adopted budgets for the last two years, with their amendments.^[35]
5. Add a debt list. One page: each loan, its lender, its balance, its rate and this year's payment, starting with the police notes. What is the $49,602 police debt service, what's left on it, and how long does it run? (Renee's question)^[6][48]
6. Budget the cash that actually goes out. Appropriate the $85,420 in principal as debt service and the $300,000 water line study as a project line.^[6] Put the meters in with a line and a named funding source, or take them out. The $291,723.78 purchase and its roughly $6,355.80 a year aren't in the budget.^[8][6]
7. Base revenue on actual collections. Budget water sales on a full year at the new rates.^[6][23] Budget court revenue on what has come in since September 18, when the department's officers were separated.^[6][58] Keep the $200,000 police contract line as the estimate it is, and show what it's based on, so residents can check it against whichever agreement the Council approves.^[6][21]
8. Show what the money buys and what's spoken for. Adopt a Council-approved staffing table: non-police salaries go from $156,615 to $245,643, and the memo asks the Council to "confirm approvals for the proposed City Administrator role." Replace $29,589 in miscellaneous lines with real ones, release the ledger behind them and last year's $24,416 in Admin miscellaneous, and list the street positions and repairs behind $105,643 in salaries and $55,555 in building repairs.^[6] Document every account labeled restricted, keep the $9,927 in customer deposits apart from operating cash, and follow Turner's own advice to keep "a separate restricted cash and cash-flow schedule," and update it monthly.^[6] Fund the lagoon repairs, "estimated at $100,000,"^[20] and water testing first; the budget sets testing at $5,964, "based on current year spending," after an FY2025 actual of $49,494.^[7][6] Finally, list what the Council reviewed before voting, and get the city attorney's sign-off. (Renee's questions)

Where These Questions Came From

Renee Weaver sent me 37 budget questions of her own in late October, after my budget articles.^[61] Eleven of them were new to me, and those eleven are in my recommendations with her name on them. The rest overlapped my own questions or already had answers. She also asked publicly in September about the audit and about customer deposits.^[41][45] Thank you, Renee.

Let's Talk About It Openly

The records are all here. I'd ask Trinidad's residents, its Council and its leaders to discuss these topics openly, at council meetings and in public, where everyone can see the numbers and weigh in. Accountability takes open, respectful dialogue, even when we disagree.

On October 10, Cameron Geddie's state licensing record showed his Italy Police Department service running through "Today." It now ends that service on Wednesday, October 28, 2026.^[1][2] He had been with the department since December 2022.

Shelby Browning, ITXN's president, told me on October 30 that he was gone.^[3] A source familiar with the department said:^[4]

"Geddie is no longer with the department and it wasn't his decision."

The state record shows the date his appointment ended. It does not say why, and I have not independently confirmed the reason he left.

What Is Still Unconfirmed

On October 6, an Italy resident sent me a written complaint relaying what a sheriff's deputy had told them: that an Italy PD supervisor was making sexual harassment remarks toward a rookie female officer. When the resident named Geddie, the deputy nodded. I published the complaint on October 11 with a warning that none of it had been corroborated.^[5]

On October 15, the department said it had received a complaint "from an outside source" on September 14, had been "actively investigating" since, and had placed "the employee who is the subject of the allegation" on administrative leave.^[6] It did not name the employee, and it said the allegation "should not be considered a finding of misconduct."

Those allegations remain unconfirmed. I have not seen a finding, a report or a charge, and nothing I have connects Geddie's departure to them. What I can confirm is the order of events: the allegations reached the public between October 8 and October 11, and his service ended October 28.

Is his departure connected to the investigation the department announced? Has that investigation finished, and what did it find?

Italy PD's Harassment Training Records

TCOLE, the state agency that licenses Texas officers, does not require harassment training for city police officers or their supervisors.^[7] It does keep a general course number for it, #3910 "Sexual Harassment Recognition," which any department can use to report its own training with no contract.^[8] Italy PD already reports in-house training to TCOLE under its own name. Since August it has reported FEMA incident command courses that way for two officers.

I pulled the state training records of all nine officers Italy PD employed as of October 30, plus Geddie's, which runs through October 28. That makes ten.^[9][2]

What I counted as a harassment course: TCOLE's #3910 "Sexual Harassment Recognition" and #2027 "Sex Crimes/Sexual Harassment," and vendor courses titled for sexual or workplace harassment. Courses on investigating sexual assault cover criminal cases, so I left them out. The #2027 title covers sex crimes as well as harassment, so it is a loose fit. One officer's only course is a #2027 from 2013, and without it the count becomes 6 of 10 with no harassment course.

These figures describe these ten officers' records, which cover careers and stretches at Italy of very different lengths, and they reflect only the training reported to the state.

Start with the Chief. Chad Nelson has no harassment course, across a record that goes back to 1995 and 11 agencies.^[10] Sgt. Timothy Collums has four, all from his year at Red Oak PD, the first one week after he started there.^[11] Geddie, whose record includes the New Supervisor's Course in 2023 and field training officer training in 2024, had none in 1,579 hours of courses.^[2]

The harassment training Italy's officers do have mostly came with them from other departments. Nine of the ten have none from their time at Italy.

A department can train in-house and never report it, so a blank record does not prove an officer was never trained. It does raise the question. Does Italy PD train its officers and supervisors on harassment? If it does, why does none of that training appear on their state records?

Tuesday night's agenda had two big items: an ordinance adopting the city's 2026-27 budget, and a $291,723.78 purchase of new water meters.^[1] The Council voted on neither.

How the Meeting Went

Before the meeting started, I handed council members a sheet asking them to check that the budget vote would be legal.^[2]

Mayor Dennis Haws called the meeting to order and took the roll. Three aldermen answered: Velma Womack, Steven Stearman and Marie Bannister. "Leah Melton is absent tonight," he said. The fifth seat on the Council is vacant.^[2]

The meeting went ahead. After the invocation and the pledges, the mayor opened citizen comments, and two Trinidad residents spoke in favor of the meters. Then he opened the public hearing on the budget.^[2]

The Quorum

At the hearing, I told the Council I believed it had no . "You have three, not four, you do not have a quorum," I said, and cited Local Government Code §22.039.^[2]

That section reads: "at a called meeting or at a meeting to consider the imposition of taxes, two-thirds of the number of aldermen established by that section constitutes a quorum."^[3] Trinidad is a Type A city with five alderman seats, so two-thirds means four aldermen, and the empty seat still counts.^[4] Tuesday's agenda was titled "City Council Called Meeting Agenda."^[1]

The city attorney looked up the section and agreed. "You only need a majority to pass anything," he told the Council, "but since this is a special meeting, it appears that we do need it." The mayor's next words were "We're done, folks."^[2]

No budget vote, no meter vote, and nothing else on the agenda was taken up.^[2][1]

The Video

I'm releasing video of Tuesday's meeting today at 2:00 PM. You definitely won't want to miss it. Watch for it on my Facebook page.

Tuesday night, the Trinidad City Council is scheduled to approve up to $291,723.78 for new water meters, in the same meeting where it holds the hearing on a budget that should have been in place on October 1.^[1] That budget has no line for the meters.^[2]

The Heat, and Why I'm Still Here

This past week got loud. My Trinidad reporting started fights all over Facebook, and plenty of them were about me. I've read them. Some were fair. Plenty were about who likes whom.

My intent hasn't moved since March. I want open conversations about how Trinidad is run, out in public, with every source cited so anyone can check my work and tell me where I'm wrong. This article is about city business: the money, the meters, the people running City Hall, and how the city treats the people who ask about it.

What They Said

Today I messaged every council candidate I could find, and a few people who've been in the middle of all this, and asked them one thing: what's wrong with Trinidad? Here's what came back, exactly as it was sent.^[3]

Jason Tatom, who is running for council:

"Water. We all agree on that. However, the way we get there is not as easy. The main problem with Trinidad is the way we've all been treating each other. As soon as you attack a person then they automatically shut off. Human psychology. Everyone wants their home to be the best. That's where they live and spend time with their families. Trinidad is our home. I have known and talked to many intelligent people here in this town over the years. There are also some good and intelligent people that made their homes here more recently. It's always good to welcome good people. I would be honored if my neighbors chose me to speak for them. But if they don't I am still everyone's neighbor. I didn't grow up here but my kids did. It means a lot to me personally. How I stand on issues here in town I posted recently. Some things, I just need to be a council member, to ask and to be able to see."

Jon Baker, who is also running:

"On the record, Trinidad has a lot of soul searching to do. The town is lost unless it pulls together and does what is right for the community and not for the personal benefit of a token few at the expense of the community as a whole"

Jennifer Combs isn't on the ballot. Trinidad police charged her in May over a Facebook post about the city's water, and a Henderson County grand jury declined to indict her.

"Trinidad doesn't need more egos, personal vendettas, Facebook arguments, or people fighting to be right. We've had 30 year of that its enough.

It needs people willing to do what's right. To move the city foward

While everyone is busy fighting over who gets the credit, the citizens are still waiting for solutions.

The water doesn't care who you like. The infrastructure doesn't care who you hate. And the citizens shouldn't have to suffer because adults can't put their differences aside.

Trinidad will never move forward if personal battles keep taking priority over public service.

The goal should never be to win against each other. The goal should be to win for the citizens."

Mayor Dennis Haws declined to comment. "I have no comment about any of this," he wrote. "When you decide to do a story about what's right with Trinidad give me a call."^[4]

Mayor, here's my answer. The best thing I can say about Trinidad is the conversations it was having this spring. I sat in those meetings, and city leaders thanked me for being there. Your police chief thanked me publicly and wrote that what I'd said "about having tough conversations without taking things personally really stuck."^[5]

The same people who thanked me went on to make the biggest series of mistakes this city has made in years. I'm glad for the grants. I'm glad for the volunteers, and Trinidad has good ones. I can't write the story you're asking for while the city keeps stepping around the hard topics, and nobody outside Trinidad will take it seriously until it takes its own finances seriously. So let's break down what you need to fix.

Steven Stearman's Council Work

I asked Councilmember Stearman for a statement around noon today. He hasn't answered.^[6]

Councilmember Velma Womack, who is also on the ballot, got the same request this afternoon. She hadn't answered by the time I published.^[6]

The Council gave Stearman real work on the water system. On July 23 he moved to put out a request for engineering services for the water infrastructure assessment, and the Council made him its liaison to the Water Advisory Committee.^[7] The August 18 agenda proposed authorizing "Council Member Steven Stearman to Negotiate the Scope of Services, Terms, Conditions, and Fees with the Engineering Firm."^[8] He posts his updates on that work, on water billing and on the engineering study, in a public Facebook group called Beware of Trinidad Texas Water. At about 6:10 p.m. today he posted a graphic there signed "STEVEN STEARMAN, TRINIDAD CITY COUNCIL." It says, "MESSAGE ME! I WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!"^[9]

Reset, and a Caveat

Everyone's feelings are on the table now. Here are the facts.

The numbers below are the ones I'm working from. They're close, and some will move. They come from the City's proposed budget, its minutes and its last two audits. They're missing the audit for the fiscal year that ended in September 2025, which will show where the city really stands. When I asked the Mayor about it today, he answered quickly: "I exchanged emails with David Godwin last Monday and he said three weeks. That should leave us a couple of weeks away. When we get it I'll send it to you."^[4] When it comes, I'll update every chart here. If you see a number I got wrong, tell me and I'll fix it.

Trinidad's Financial Crisis

On July 23, Stearman gave the Council a financial report built from the City's profit-and-loss data. According to the minutes, "The City's overall financial health was rated approximately 6.7 out of 10, indicating the ability to meet obligations." Contractor spending and water revenue each scored 4 out of 10.^[7]

This evening, the same councilmember posted that Trinidad needs a purchase order system so that "Every purchase should be documented, tracked, and properly authorized," a three-step approval process, and that "No single person should control an entire transaction."^[9] Those are good ideas. They're also the basics. If the city's finances rate a 6.7, why is a sitting councilmember campaigning on purchase orders?

Here's what I'd set beside his 6.7.

Red flag:The last audited year ended with the spendable general fund below zero and $6,518 in the water reserve. Nothing since has been audited.

• Audit figures are from the FY2024 audit, the latest one finished
• Stearman's rating came from unaudited profit-and-loss data, October 2025 to June 2026

Source: FY2024 audit (pp. 9, 17, budgetary comparison); proposed FY2026-27 budget p. 14; July 23, 2026 minutes; Oct. 27, 2026 agenda; LGC §103.003

View the data as a table

Figure	What it is	Signal
-$70,253	Unassigned general fund, the part the city could spend (FY2024 audit)	Red flag
$6,518	Water and sewer reserve fund (FY2024 audit)	Red flag
$399,000	Cash in every city fund combined (FY2024 audit)	Context
45% over	General fund spending above its FY2024 budget ($350,613)	Red flag
210 days	Past the state deadline for the FY2025 audit, still not out	Red flag
27 days	Into this fiscal year before a budget is up for adoption (Oct. 27)	Red flag
$368,618	Water fund money sent to City Hall, police and streets in the FY2027 plan	Red flag
6.7 of 10	Councilmember Stearman’s own rating of the city’s finances, July 23	Context

The Budget, and What's Missing From It

The proposed budget for this fiscal year is a 23-page "Council planning worksheet" from the City's outside CPA. You can read the whole worksheet here.^[2] State law says a city's budget has to show, among other things, the cash on hand in each fund, the city's outstanding debts and its tax rate.^[10] I couldn't find any of the three in it. Where are they?

The worksheet's figures for the year that just ended run only through July 31. Its own pages disagree by $28,666, the cost of a helper position added "per conversation with Mayor."^[2]

It shows a $708,562 surplus. Most of that surplus belongs to the water fund, and the water fund is carrying the rest of the city. It's budgeted to send $368,618 to everything else, including a $234,908 increase "for Water to assist in funding Admin."^[2] The Council's own minutes say why: transfers from the water fund "have been necessary in recent months to cover shortfalls in the general fund, as property tax receipts have declined due to the delayed audit."^[11]

Red flag:Not a surplus. $169,812 already went out to cover City Hall, and loan payments and equipment aren't counted. Last audited reserve: $6,518.

• Total
• Decrease

• Money in: bills plus $213,251 in raw water sales
• Other funds: transfers out; the Sept. 29 minutes say they covered general fund shortfalls
• Contract labor: mostly Aqua Services, the contract water operator
• Before loans: loan principal and equipment are left off this page; $153,277 transferred in is not counted

Source: City of Trinidad proposed FY2026-27 budget, water and sewer fund, FY2026 actuals through July 31 (p. 14)

View the data as a table

Step	Amount	Running total
Money in	$878,872	$878,872
Other funds	-$169,812	$709,060
Contract labor	-$183,629	$525,431
Water staff	-$113,633	$411,798
Chemicals	-$71,717	$340,081
Trash hauling	-$60,719	$279,362
Other costs	-$143,403	$135,959
Before loans	$135,959	$135,959

Here's the last audited picture of the general fund, the City's main operating account:^[12]

Red flag:The general fund fell by two thirds in two years, and the part the city could actually spend went below zero.

• Unassigned is the part not set aside for a specific purpose: what the city could actually spend
• The FY2025 audit is not out; the Mayor says it should be a couple of weeks away

Source: City of Trinidad annual audits, FY2022 and FY2024 (Exhibit A-3)

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2022	$391,941
FY2023	$313,512
FY2024	$123,646
FY2024, unassigned	-$70,253

Late Every Year

This isn't the first year Trinidad started without a budget. On October 21, 2025, the Council kept the prior year's budget running "on an interim basis," and it adopted last year's budget on November 25, 56 days into the year.^[13][14] This year's hearing is Tuesday, day 27.^[1]

Red flag:Two years running, Trinidad began its fiscal year without a new budget adopted.

• On Oct. 21, 2025 the council kept the prior year's budget running until it adopted FY2026's

Source: Trinidad council minutes, Oct. 21 and Nov. 25, 2025; Oct. 27, 2026 agenda

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2026 (adopted Nov. 25, 2025)	56 days
FY2027 (on the agenda Oct. 27, 2026)	27 days

The audits run late too. State law gives a city 180 days after its fiscal year ends to finish its audit.^[15] The FY2023 audit was signed May 29, 2024, and the FY2024 audit on April 25, 2025, both after the deadline.^[16][12] The FY2025 audit was due March 29, 2026. At the September 29 workshop it was "expected... within approximately two weeks."^[11] Back in July, the Council put off a budget workshop "pending completion of the City's audit."^[7]

Red flag:Each of the last three audits missed the state's 180-day deadline. The FY2025 audit is seven months late and still not out.

• FY2025 counted to Oct. 25, 2026
• The Mayor says the city's auditor told him last week to expect it in about three weeks

Source: FY2023 and FY2024 audit opinions; Sept. 29, 2026 minutes; Mayor Haws to Watchtower, Oct. 25, 2026; LGC §103.003

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2023 audit (signed May 29, 2024)	62 days
FY2024 audit (signed April 25, 2025)	27 days
FY2025 audit (due March 29, 2026)	210 days

That has a cost beyond the calendar. Under the same chapter, anyone can complain to the Texas attorney general about a late audit, and if the attorney general agrees, the city "may not adopt an ad valorem tax rate that exceeds the municipality's no-new-revenue tax rate" until the audit is filed.^[15] I also couldn't find a vote on a 2026 property tax rate on any agenda the City has posted since June. Has there been one?

Police the City Doesn't Have

The budget sets aside $200,000 for a police interlocal agreement that doesn't exist yet. Sheriff Botie Hillhouse presented to the Council on October 15. The Log Cabin Police Department, the other agency named in that agenda item, presented too.^[2][17][18] Its assistant chief and a sergeant, filling in for their chief, said Log Cabin would hire two more officers if it got the contract and would work out of Trinidad's building. Those officers would also cover the other cities Log Cabin already serves, so no officer would be assigned to Trinidad alone around the clock. They put their response time at 10 to 15 minutes, and the Sheriff put his at 14 to 17. A council member asked why Log Cabin's price stayed near $200,000 after its proposed hours were cut within three days. The Council took no action on either proposal.^[18] The closed department still carries $49,602 in debt service. On October 21, 2025, the Council approved "a 5 year lease plan with a 6.595% interest rate" for two new police vehicles.^[2][13] Eleven months later the state shut the department down, and on October 15 the Council authorized the Mayor to sell the vehicles.^[18]

The budget still counts on $138,889 in court revenue, figured on "3 of 5" officers. Trinidad hasn't had a police officer since September 18.^[2]

Red flag:The budget counts on $138,889 in court revenue from a police department the state shut down on Sept. 18.

• FY2026 is October 2025 through July 2026 only
• The FY2027 figure assumes 3 of 5 officers; Trinidad PD has had none since Sept. 18

Source: Proposed FY2026-27 budget, court fund and five-year history (pp. 6, 18)

View the data as a table

Item	Value
FY2021	$240,016
FY2022	$212,373
FY2023	$130,249
FY2024	$106,097
FY2025	$79,721
FY2026, 10 months	$192,901
FY2027 budget	$138,889

What Else Isn't There

On September 29 the Council called repairs to the wastewater lagoons, estimated at $100,000, urgent "to avoid EPA violations."^[11] I can't find them in the budget. Water testing lab fees drop to $5,964, from $49,494 in fiscal 2025.^[2]

In September 2025, then-City Administrator Lindsey Patterson told the Council, "we are paying $1600 a month for that truck. Not including the insurance."^[19] Is the city still paying it? A budget with no list of debts can't tell me.

Since Stearman gave his rating, here's mine: I'd give it a 2 out of 10. Trinidad can still pay its bills this month, mostly by draining its water customers to do it. Nobody can show the public what's in the bank, what the city owes, or what it will tax, and the one document that would settle it is seven months late.

Smart Meters That Aren't Smart

Here's what's on Tuesday's agenda. Up to $291,723.78 in total: $264,973.78 to Accurate Meter & Supply through the BuyBoard purchasing cooperative for meters, cellular endpoints and software, and up to $26,750 to Aqua Services to install 535 meters at $50 apiece. On top of that, Badger Meter bills about $6,355.80 a year for the network subscription the meters run on, for as long as the city uses them.^[1] Over ten years, that subscription alone comes to about $63,558.

The purchase isn't in the budget.^[2] At the September 29 workshop, the Council discussed a loan of about $240,000 for the meters, at about $4,000 a month.^[11] That payment isn't in the budget either. The meters alone come to about 73% of all the cash the City had in every fund at the last audit.^[1][12]

Red flag:Take out the grant already promised, the loan payments and the first year of meters, and the $708,562 surplus is about $25,000.

• Total
• Decrease

• Grant spoken for: a $300,000 EDC grant counted as water fund income but committed to a water line study
• Loan principal: water loan payments the budget lists only in a footnote
• Meters, year one: $291,723.78 on Tuesday's agenda plus $6,355.80 for the first year of the ORION subscription

Source: Proposed FY2026-27 budget pp. 14, 15, 22; Oct. 27 agenda item D.3; Watchtower arithmetic

View the data as a table

Step	Amount	Running total
Budget surplus	$708,562	$708,562
Grant spoken for	-$300,000	$408,562
Loan principal	-$85,420	$323,142
Meters, year one	-$298,080	$25,062
Left	$25,062	$25,062

Stearman found the real problem himself. In July he told the Council about "an estimated $500,000 in billing errors identified in the utility billing system due to rates not being charged in accordance with the City's own ordinances."^[7] In mid-October he posted that billing complaints had dropped about 83% in two months, from about 47 to about 8.^[20] That drop came from fixing bills, before a single new meter went in. So what are the meters fixing?

The fair answer is misreads. I've seen meters marked as read that were still covered in dirt, as if nobody had touched them, and residents have complained about bad reads all year. Automated meters would end that. So would reading the meters. Nothing the City has posted shows it ever priced ordinary meters or a better reading routine to compare.

How the city got to this vendor matters too. The October 15 agenda proposed buying the meters through competitive sealed proposals, the method that lets the city compare offers on "best value."^[17] At that meeting Stearman explained that the company they'd looked at had agreed to sell through BuyBoard instead. "BuyBoard is a legal way that government entities can bypass the RFPs," he said, and the City Attorney called it "an exception to the RFP process." The item was tabled.^[18] It came back for Tuesday as a BuyBoard purchase from that company.^[1] Buying through BuyBoard is legal. The vendor was picked before anyone had a chance to compete for it.

One more thing to watch. In July the Council accepted a $300,000 grant from the Trinidad "for infrastructure planning and economic development projects... including engineering, GIS mapping, infrastructure assessment, capital improvement planning and grant preparation."^[7] The budget books it as income to the water fund, for a "water line study," which is a big part of why the water fund shows a surplus at all.^[2] That money is spoken for, and it's committed to planning work.

Five Leaders in One Year

Trinidad is about to hire its fifth city administrator of 2026. Lindsey Patterson was terminated on February 27. Police Chief Charles Gregory filled in for four days. Cynthia "Sam" Dosier served as interim from February 27. Michelle Webb came on as interim in July and was confirmed by the Council on July 25.^[21][22] On October 15 the Mayor said the permanent hire will go to the Council after the new council is seated, and he named himself, Leah Melton and Velma Womack to narrow the applicants.^[18]

On February 27, Melton and Womack both voted to terminate Patterson, the first of the five. The vote was 4-0: Womack, Melvin Thompson, Melton and Marie Bannister.^[21]

Red flag:Two of the three people narrowing the field for administrator number five voted to fire number one.

Source: Trinidad council minutes, agendas and recordings, Feb. 20 to Oct. 15, 2026; City website employment page

View the data as a table

When	What	Detail
Feb 20-27	Lindsey Patterson placed on leave, then terminated	4-0 vote: Womack, Thompson, Melton, Bannister
Feb 23-27	Police Chief Charles Gregory, interim	Four days
Feb 27	Cynthia "Sam" Dosier, interim
Jul 18	Michelle Webb appointed interim	Confirmed by the Council July 25
Oct 15	The search for number five	Mayor Haws, Leah Melton and Velma Womack will narrow the applicants for the council seated after Nov. 3

Every one of those changes resets the office that's supposed to produce the budget, the minutes and the audit records. Trinidad doesn't run its own water system either. A contractor does.

The Jeremy Crocker Financials

Aqua Services, the company of contract water operator Jeremy Crocker, runs Trinidad's water system. It took over the water contract at $120,000 a year, replacing Ford Services at $166,000.^[13] On February 27 the Council added wastewater at $85,000 a year, "in addition to what services he already offers the city."^[21] That's about $205,000 a year before repairs. In May, the Council noted that contract labor for Aqua had been running "between $17,000 and $20,000 per month due to ongoing waterline repairs."^[23]

This year's budget carries $220,355 for Aqua, and Tuesday's agenda would add up to $26,750 more to install the meters.^[2][1] On February 27, Crocker told the Council that "once they get the radio-controlled meter readers in our employees wouldn't have to do that anymore either."^[21]

Those contracts were voted on in the open, and Melvin Thompson, then on the Council, disclosed a relationship with Crocker and abstained on Aqua's votes.^[21] I'm not accusing anyone of anything here. I'm asking whether one contractor should be paid to install the meters he argued for, and whether anyone on the Council has priced that work against anyone else.

On Record With Nicole

In July, Mayor Haws hired Nicole Sprabary as Trinidad's interim city clerk. Two days later, the City told residents she'd decided to leave. Her emails, the Mayor's emails and the City's own posts lay out what happened in between. Nicole agreed to tell her side on the record.^[24]

On Friday, July 17, at 4:40 p.m., Nicole emailed the Mayor and applied for "the City Secretary position." Half an hour later he wrote back, "Why don't you just meet me at city hall at 3:30?" She interviewed Saturday with the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem Marie Bannister. That night at 10:16, he wrote, "my thought is to bring you both on in an interim capacity; I believe we have the workload to justify it."^[25]

"I even suggested to the Mayor and Bannister during my interview to please google and facebook my name," Nicole told me. "They assured me, my past of wanting to hold our elected officials accountable wouldn't be an issue." She offered to "sign an NDA plus a social media policy" so the city "would be safe." "They told me that wasn't necessary," she said.^[24]

On Sunday, July 19, at 8:58 p.m., the Mayor emailed the police chief: "Today I brought on Michelle Webb and Nicole Sprabary as interim administrator and clerk respectively."^[25] On the City's Facebook page he wrote, "They both have extensive administrative and customer service experience," and, "Just for the record, I made this decision after conferring with the TML legal department and much thought. I take full responsibility for this appointment."^[26]

Monday was her first full day. At 7:04 a.m. he wrote, "I hope you both have a terrific first day." At 7:08 he introduced her to the City's bank as "our interim clerk."^[25] That day she sent City work orders to Aqua Services, including a resident's request to flush the lines on a dead-end street. "He claims city personnel have stated they will be creating work orders, I cannot find one," she wrote.^[27] At 12:52 p.m., the Mayor emailed her, "it sounds like y'all are off to a great start. Just stay at it, it'll get easier every day."^[25]

That evening, she says, he called and told her, "we have to talk. I have been getting calls and such and the 'higher ups are pressuring me for you to resign and they aren't going to let up.'" He "needed my resignation email as soon as possible," she told me. "He didn't name the 'higher ups.'" The call left her in tears. "For the record. I never resigned," she said. "I agreed [to] on the phone under pressure."^[24]

Tuesday morning, on the City's page, the Mayor wrote, "One of the women I hired had a past of rather extensive political activism," and, "Based on considerable backlash from the community, I had a conversation with Nicole Sprabary last night and she made the decision to step down from her job."^[28] She never sent a resignation. On July 25 the Council confirmed Michelle Webb. Nicole's appointment never came before it.^[22][24]

Context:The Mayor's emails show a hire on Sunday and praise on Monday afternoon. On Tuesday the City page told residents she chose to step down.

Source: Mayor Haws's emails (July 17-20); Nicole's July 20 email to Aqua Services; City Facebook posts (July 19, 21); July 25 minutes; Nicole Sprabary, on the record

View the data as a table

When	What	Detail
Fri 7/17, 4:40 PM	Nicole applies for City Secretary	Emails her resume to Mayor Haws
Sat 7/18	Interview at City Hall	Mayor Haws and Mayor Pro Tem Marie Bannister
Sun 7/19, 8:58 PM	"Today I brought on Michelle Webb and Nicole Sprabary"	Haws to the police chief; on the City page: "extensive administrative and customer service experience"
Mon 7/20, 12:52 PM	"Off to a great start. Just stay at it"	Haws to Nicole, her first full day. That day she sent Aqua Services City work orders #201 and #202
Mon 7/20, evening	The Mayor calls and asks for her resignation	"The higher ups are pressuring me for you to resign" (Nicole)
Tue 7/21, morning	"She made the decision to step down"	Haws on the City page, citing "rather extensive political activism." She never sent a resignation
Sat 7/25	Council confirms Webb	Nicole never came before the Council

The emails, July 17 to 20 (redacted)Click to expandClick to collapse

These came from the Mayor's City account and are public records. Nicole forwarded them to me. I blacked out personal email addresses, phone numbers, the bank's account details and the resident's information on the work order.^[25][27]

I asked the Mayor about the "higher ups." "I have no comment about any of this," he wrote. When I followed up that there should be no one higher than the mayor, he answered, "Ron I told you I had no comment and I stand by that."^[4]

I understand the Mayor's reluctance to comment. Still, if it didn't happen that way, why not just say so? I'm not on a witch hunt. This came straight from an on-record interview with Nicole, and I checked her timeline against her employment records, which hold up. The one thing I haven't been able to confirm is who the "higher ups" were. I asked Jennifer Combs who the Mayor might have meant. She said she wasn't sure.

I asked Nicole for her own last word on Trinidad. Here it is, as she sent it:^[24]

Honestly, the citizens of Trinidad were always my priority. 💜 I was pressured to resign, and while I have my own feelings about how everything went down, I never stopped caring about the community. I just didn't realize my “extensive political activism” was going to end up being the way I continued to put the community first. 😂🤷‍♀️

At the end of the day, it's always been about the people, not the position. Community first. Always. 💜🙏

What I Think

Trinidad needs to stop running on feelings and start running on facts. The facts say the city is in a financial crisis. Its budget is late again. The proposed budget is hard to find on the City's website, and once you find it, it doesn't appear to contain what state law requires. The audit that would show where the money stands is seven months overdue. The water customers are paying for City Hall. On Tuesday the Council is set to buy meters it never budgeted for, from a vendor it lined up before anyone could compete.

To the people who say I don't keep up with Trinidad: go back to March, before the mainstream media showed up. I was in those meetings. Just because I don't post about Trinidad every day doesn't mean I'm not watching. Follow the events back to the start, and you'll see how each one led to the next.

The meeting is Tuesday, October 27, at 6 p.m. at City Hall.^[1] If you go, here's what I'd ask:

1. Where are the fund balances, the list of debts and the tax rate that state law says the budget has to show?
2. How will the city pay for $291,723.78 in meters that aren't in the budget? Is it the $240,000 loan, and where is the payment?
3. Has the Council adopted a 2026 property tax rate?
4. When will the FY2025 audit be filed, and when will the public see it?
5. Did anyone price ordinary meters, or a better reading routine, before choosing an automated system with a yearly subscription?
6. Why does the budget count on court revenue from police officers the city no longer has?

If any number in this article is wrong, tell me, and I'll correct it in public.

According to Councilmember Raymond Mosley, Italy Mayor Clinton Sulak-Tovar is threatening to sue Italy Texas News (ITXN), Italy's local online newspaper, for defamation over five words: "I don't want to know." Mosley says the Mayor texted him on Thursday that he never said it, and that he could sue if ITXN doesn't fix it.

Mosley says the Mayor did say it, to him, after Monday's council meeting, about the sexual harassment allegations at the Italy Police Department. Mosley contacted me on Thursday for an on-record interview and to tell me what the Mayor had sent him by text.

Mosley also says that earlier on Monday, City Administrator Keith Whitfield told him there was no investigation: "no, there's not, it has been handled." On Thursday afternoon, the police department said it has been investigating the allegations since September 14, and that the employee involved is on administrative leave.

What Italy PD Said

On Thursday afternoon, the Italy PD TX Facebook page posted a statement signed by Chief Chad Nelson. It says the department "is aware of recent social media posts concerning an allegation of sexual harassment involving members of our department."

According to the statement, the department received a complaint "from an outside source with knowledge of the alleged incident" on September 14, 2026, and has "been actively investigating the matter" since then, including taking written statements.

"Based on information gathered to date, the employee who is the subject of the allegation has been placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation," the Chief wrote. He also wrote that the leave "should not be interpreted as a final determination of wrongdoing," and that "the allegation should not be considered a finding of misconduct."

The statement does not name the employee, and it does not say when the leave began.

That is the first public word from the department on the allegations, which reached the public through the Italy Talk Facebook group on October 8, ITXN on October 9, and my article on October 11.

What a Councilmember Says He Was Told on Monday

Mosley says he went to Whitfield on Monday, October 12, and asked whether he knew anything about the allegations and whether an investigation was going on. According to Mosley, Whitfield told him the situation had been handled and there was no investigation.

Mosley says he asked it plainly: "so there's no ongoing investigation?"

Whitfield's answer, according to Mosley: "no, there's not, it has been handled."

Mosley says he asked whether he could get any details about who was involved, and Whitfield told him he could not give out any information. When Mosley asked whether the council needed to meet to discuss it, Whitfield told him it was nothing the council needed to meet about.

That evening, after the council meeting, Mosley asked the Mayor.

"I asked the mayor if he knew anything about the allegations. He told me no, he didn't know anything about it. I said so no one has told you anything from city hall or the PD? He again said no," Mosley told me.

Then, according to Mosley, Mayor Clinton Sulak-Tovar added: "well I did talk to Keith this afternoon about it, but I told him I don't want to know anything, and I still don't know anything."

Mosley asked him directly whether an investigation was going on. The Mayor's answer, according to Mosley: "I think there is an investigation but I don't know anything about it."

Mosley says he told the Mayor that Whitfield had told him earlier that day that everything was handled and there was no investigation. According to Mosley, the Mayor said maybe they had handled it and wrapped it up, and repeated that he did not know anything about it and did not want to know anything about it.

Mosley first saw the police department's statement when it went up on Thursday. That post is what made him feel he had been given false information by the city.

"So why is the City Administrator and our Mayor, giving me, a councilmember, false information about this situation?" Mosley asked.

The Mayor's Texts

On Wednesday, ITXN published an article titled "I Don't Know and Don't Want to Know," reporting the Mayor's response to the allegations.

The same day, according to Mosley, the Mayor sent him a text message: "I don't talk to you to go report back to Ron. In the future, if you want to know anything, go to Keith."

On Thursday, according to Mosley, the Mayor texted him again:

Whoever is in charge of ITXN, I never said that 'I don't want to know.' I only spoke with you over it. So they need to fix it, or I could sue for defamation, and libel. Especially with an unaccredited Facebook page.

In that text, as Mosley relayed it, the Mayor denies saying he doesn't want to know. Mosley says he said it. The text does not dispute that the two of them talked about it.

The Mayor's text was addressed to "whoever is in charge of ITXN." ITXN's president is Shelby Browning, and Clayton Muirhead is its vice president, as I reported in July.

Questions

When was the employee placed on administrative leave? If it was before Monday, is that what Whitfield meant by "handled"?

The department says it has been actively investigating since September 14. Mosley says the city administrator told him on October 12 that there was no investigation. If that is what he said, why?

Mosley says Whitfield also told him the council did not need to meet about it. Why would the city administrator rule out council involvement, and had any councilmember been told an investigation was underway?

Italy's Mayor presides over the council. If Mosley's account of the Mayor's text is accurate, why should a councilmember who asks the Mayor a question be told to go to the city administrator instead?

I am sending a copy of this article directly to Mayor Sulak-Tovar and Mr. Whitfield as it publishes, and asking each of them to respond to the statements attributed to them. I will review whatever they send and report it, including any correction or clarification it calls for.

About ITXN, and an Open Invitation

The Mayor raised ITXN, so here is where I stand with it. I founded ITXN in August 2024. When Shelby Browning asked about taking it over, I stepped away and pointed her to Muirhead, and the two of them worked out her becoming president. I have no part in ITXN's editorial decisions today. I help with the technical side, and like the other journalists and watchdog advocates I work with, I sometimes share information that each of us publishes on our own.

When Councilmember Billy Long asked me to publish a statement to the people of Italy, I ran it word for word, and I have interviewed officials on the record across the cities I cover. That offer is open to every official, including Mayor Sulak-Tovar and Mr. Whitfield: an on-record interview, or a written statement published in full. It is open to everyone else too. If you want to write a letter to the editor, including one that says I got something wrong, send it to tips@watchtowerci.com, and I will publish it with my response.

We lose everything when we can't have open conversations.

The Tool Police Department fired Officer Juan Ochoa over his body camera.

In an October 14 email answering my questions, Tool Police Chief Robert Walker wrote that Ochoa was terminated effective October 7 for his "continued failure to ensure that his department-issued body-worn camera was operational and functioning as required by departmental policy." Ochoa had already received verbal warnings and written discipline for not using his camera on calls and traffic stops, the Chief wrote, and "despite these previous corrective measures, the issue continued." The Chief's full email is at the end of this article.

How Long It Took

The department's own records, which I reported on in April, show when the camera problem was first in writing.

• September 18, 2024: Lt. Jason Lee orders all patrol officers, including Ochoa, to record every enforcement encounter. The directive warns that failing to comply "may result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination."
• June 13, 2025: Sgt. Jesus Mendoza tells Ochoa, "When dealing with Tool citizens or on a call, always have your BWC on. It's for your protection." Ochoa answers, "Yes, sir." Mendoza's memo records it as the most recent of "multiple verbal warnings."
• June 20, 2025: Ochoa pursues Leo Boyd and strikes his motorcycle with a patrol vehicle while not wearing his body camera. Mendoza's written reprimand treats the camera violation as insubordination and says it "may be used in the consideration of future disciplinary action should further violations occur."
• June 25, 2025: Chief Walker's letter of reprimand lists two violations, "Failure to Wear BWC While On Duty" and the pursuit. It suspends Ochoa for one week, puts him on six months of disciplinary probation, and warns that further violations "will result in escalated disciplinary action, up to and including termination."
• April 8, 2026: Chief Walker tells me, "I'm not going to terminate an officer for the first time incident, second time. Depending on what it is."
• October 7, 2026: Ochoa is terminated, the Chief wrote, for "repeated violations of departmental policy and the failure to correct previously identified deficiencies."

The reason the Chief gave in October is the outcome the 2025 records warned of. About two years passed between the department-wide directive and the termination, and more than 15 months passed after Ochoa was disciplined over his camera.

The records the department released to me in April, in answer to my request for all of Ochoa's disciplinary actions, document multiple verbal warnings and two written disciplinary actions that cite the camera, Sgt. Mendoza's reprimand and the Chief's suspension letter, both over the June 2025 incident. They contain no camera violation after that incident, but they only cover his file through April 8, 2026, and I have not requested his records since. The Chief's October email does not say how many more violations there were, and the records I have do not show how many of Ochoa's calls and traffic stops after June 2025 lack video, or whether any case that came out of them was affected. In April, several residents told me they had been told there was no video of their encounters with him.

Answering those questions would take a new records request. With Ochoa no longer with the department, I decided it was not worth the city's time to process one at this stage. Tool residents who want those answers can still ask. The Texas Public Information Act gives every resident the same right to request Ochoa's disciplinary records after April 8, 2026, and any records showing whether and how the department audited body camera use.

The Chief wrote that the department reported the separation to the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement (TCOLE), the state agency that licenses peace officers, as state law requires. He did not say what the report says.

The Rest of His Record

The Chief's email cites no misconduct beyond the camera violations. Ochoa's three years in Tool were the longest stretch of his career; before Tool, none of his stints at the Kemp, Seven Points, Malakoff, or Trinity Valley College police departments reached two years.

He kept up his training after the pursuit. Thirteen days later he completed a de-escalation course, and since then his record shows active-shooter response training, a 16-hour course on trauma-informed sexual assault investigations, and a wellness course. The last course on his record, dated August 4, is a two-hour online class titled "Protecting Your TCOLE License."

As of October 15, his TCOLE record still shows his Tool service ending October 7 and no appointment with any other agency. His peace officer license remains active.

Primary Documents

Chief Walker's October 14 email, in full. The highlighting is mine. Select an image to enlarge it.

Ochoa's TCOLE Licensee Service Report, as of October 15, 2026.

On October 6, an Italy resident emailed me a written complaint alleging that a sergeant inside the Italy Police Department is making sexual harassment remarks toward a rookie female officer. None of these allegations have been proven.

Italy Texas News (ITXN) published its own version of this story on the morning of October 9. ITXN is the nonprofit I founded in 2024. Today, it is managed by Shelby Browning. My copy had been sitting in my inbox for three days.

I held it because I did not know how to handle it. I was not sure how allegations like these would land in this town, or whether people would believe them coming from me, and I thought about what publishing would do to the officers' reputations. The formal route was records requests first, and in Italy that route is slow.

Then the allegations reached the public anyway, through the Italy Talk Facebook group on October 8 and through ITXN on October 9. They come less than three weeks after the city upheld the firing of Officer Kevin Oginski, in a case whose original allegation was not sustained.

I have faith in this community. If these allegations are true, I believe Italy will stand behind these officers and demand accountability from its police department and its city leadership. As of publication, the department had not addressed the allegations publicly, and I do not know whether it has opened an internal investigation.

A Year at Italy PD

On October 8, 2025, Police Chief Scott McAuley was fired without a council vote. Italy has no city manager. Its city administrator is Keith Whitfield. On October 20, the council voted 5-0 to put McAuley back on the payroll on paid leave. On October 27, it took the vote itself and upheld the termination 5-0. The same night, it adopted an ordinance requiring a two-thirds council vote before the city administrator can remove an officer, and it accepted the resignation of city attorney James Parker of The Parker Law Firm. Parker's letter, read aloud that night, gave the city 30 days' notice and no reason. The whole time, the city was also paying Messer Fort for legal services, and a Messer Fort attorney signed the city's 2025 answers to my records requests as "Assistant City Attorney."

Did Whitfield fire McAuley? If whoever fired him had the authority to do it, why did the council put him back on the payroll and then take the vote itself? Did Italy have two city attorneys at once, and why did one of them resign in the middle of it?

In November, the council named Lt. Chad Nelson interim chief. In January 2026, the city's hired assessor, Michael Boese of Clear Career Professionals, told the council that Italy could not produce some of the most basic policies a police department runs on, including use of force, a code of conduct, and vehicle pursuits. An offer to one chief candidate was made without the council's authorization and taken back in March. An April 22 called meeting on the hire fell apart for lack of a . The council approved conditional offers twice without naming the candidate, 3-2 in May and 4-1 in June. TCOLE, the state agency that licenses Texas officers, lists Nelson as Italy's Chief of Police effective June 22, and the Mayor swore him in on July 13. Before joining Italy PD in January 2024, Nelson spent about four years at Milford PD and three as Garrett's police chief.

Sgt. Timothy Collums left Italy PD in November 2024, spent nearly a year at Red Oak PD, and came back on January 19, 2026.

I have had my own conflicts with this department, including two arrests on Italy PD warrants that the Ellis County District Attorney rejected.

Last year, Officer Kevin Oginski ran Italy's National Night Out. This year there is none. The department says it did not have the budget or the staffing.

Three small police departments in this part of Texas shut down this year. TCOLE's standard for keeping a department open includes whether it provides a public benefit to its community. According to news reports, TCOLE revoked the appointing authority of Frost in August and of Trinidad in September. In Seven Points, the Mayor told the council in June that the county's District Attorney and County Attorney would not accept the department's cases for six months, and the council voted to deactivate it. I am not aware of any TCOLE inspection of Italy.

On August 6, Chief Nelson fired Kevin Oginski. On September 22, the council upheld it.

The Post That Came Down

The allegations first went public through an anonymous Facebook message, from an account that has since disappeared. The writer said they had overheard officers talking about it at dinner.

On October 8, a resident posted a screenshot of the message to the Italy Talk Facebook group, with a caption that said: "Since y'all are on a drama train. I hope this isn't true."

It did not stay up long. According to the resident, the officers sent the post to Sgt. Collums, and Collums reached out. The resident told me he did not ask for it to come down, that he acknowledged posting it was a First Amendment right, and that he did not dispute what the post said. He wanted the resident to know the officers have family in the group and were embarrassed. The resident took it down.

That same week, on the department's own Facebook post about National Night Out, I publicly asked Sgt. Collums to tell the truth. The Italy PD TX page liked my comment.

The Complaint, in Full

The resident who emailed me on October 6 heard the allegations from someone else. A deputy with the Ellis County Sheriff's Office, who is not named, told the resident about them in conversation. When the resident named a sergeant, the deputy nodded. The resident then asked a Milford PD officer, who would not discuss it, said to file records requests, and said he was frustrated with how it was being handled.

The resident gave me permission to publish the complaint word for word. I removed one phrase describing the officers. Everything else, including the spelling and the profanity, is the resident's.

Read the full complaint, as writtenClick to expandClick to collapse

To whom it may concern,

I am writing this complaint to Ron Helms in order bring action against a VERY serious incident that is occurring within the Italy Police Department. As a resident of Italy, I am quite aware of the unethical decisions The Police Department had made in the past and the continuous decisions that appear to be made. A couple of days ago a Deputy Sheriff with the Ellis County Sheriff's Office (who I have casual talks with) was stationary at the Family Dollar in Italy, I decided to stop by and make small talk with the deputy. We discussed issues within the Italy Police Department and the recent controversy with the decision made in reference to the termination of ex Italy Officer, Kevin "Blue" Oginski. The Deputy who will not be named, acknowledged that The Italy Police Department have bigger issues coming to them than that of the recent controversy. I asked the Deputy what he was talking about, the Deputy refused to speak to me about the Italy PD situation that was ongoing. I was very skeptical about what the Deputy was hiding and asked the Deputy to please tell me what is going on within the PD. The Deputy told me that a Sergeant with Italy PD who is NOT Sergeant Collums is making sexual harassment remarks towards a rookie Italy female officer. The only other Sergeant with the Department that I know of is Sergeant Geddie with Italy PD. In the past I had previous encounters with Geddie that were NOT positive. I named Geddie and the Deputy just nodded his head, I was told by the deputy that he was not a great person and based on what I know about Geddie, it came to no surprise. I also had knowledge by a council member that Geddie was let go by ex-Chief of Police, Scott Mcaulley for misconduct. How that officer returned is beyond me but does not surprise me, but returning as a sergeant is even more insane, even the deputy acknowledged how idiotic the decision to bring him back and as a sergeant is very unheard of. The Deputy advised me that Multiple Police officers within Ellis County have made recent formal complaints against Geddie, he advised me that Milford PD, The Sheriff's Office, and multiple other agencies that the deputy advised had put in complaints but didn't know who the agencies were, the made complaints against Geddie were in reference to the sexual harassment incidents towards the rookie female officer. I know of two Italy female officers, [description removed to protect the officers]. I asked the Deputy which female he is making these remarks towards, the deputy then began to take off his shades and gave me a long stare and advised that his body language should give me the answer to that question. I was shocked that both female officers are being harassed by this sergeant! Coming from a deputy, I knew that was not a lie and given how unethical Italy PD is, this became more believable. The deputy told me that Geddie was in trouble for the same situation a year ago, but nothing was done. My previous knowledge of Geddie through information gained from the Italy council makes me question why this officer who is now a sergeant STILL employed with the department in the town where I RESIDE! This is absolutely concerning... I have seen in the news of officers committing sexual harassment in the workplace and placed on some kind of immediate punishment. The Deputy was very surprised that no action was brought against Geddie. The same deputy told me that Geddie made such nasty sexual comments about the rookie officer to other deputies. I questioned why the new Chief of Police, Chad Nelson hadn't done anything, the deputy answered by saying "That's Italy for ya" which tells me how much of a mess our department and city is. I became very skeptical of what I just became aware of. Some days ago, during the afternoon I seen a Milford PD officer at the road ranger gas station in Milford, parked by Wendy's. To confirm what the deputy was telling me I asked the Milford Officer about what I heard from a deputy in reference to Geddie. The Milford Officer appeared to look shocked and asked how I knew of the information and said that he cannot speak of the situation but to make an open records request with the agencies. The officer did not want to speak about the situation but said he was frustrated with how the situation is being handled and added nothing more. I request that you, Ron Helms to be the light to bring this to attention as I have seen your success in bringing certain controversy to attention. I am sick and tired of seeing how our city seems to be a laughingstock. WE NEED BETTER LEADERSHIP. I believe that the Chief as well as Geddie should be held accountable... why has the Chief let this continue??? Is he in on the sexual harassment as well?? [Note from Ron Helms: nothing I have seen suggests the Chief took part in any harassment.] The fact that certain Law Enforcement Officers are aware of such misconduct is CONCERNING. Something needs to be done. How is it that Oginski was made to be such a huge deal over something that is not even true and this sexual misconduct with Sergeant Geddie appearing not to be an issue even a year ago… not being brought to an immediate investigation or disciplinary action. The Italy PD leadership does not have their priorities straight. I have not made any requests for records as I do not know how that works but I believe that you would do a better job than I would investigating this. With all going around in the City of Italy, this would add to the fuckery that us citizens have to bear. Our town has the potential to be great and potential for growth, I believe it starts with our leadership and that is non-existent as both you and I am aware..

In a follow-up email on October 8, the resident told me the deputy had seen the Italy Talk post too, and had said Milford is encouraging Italy media outlets to request the records.

What the Record Shows

I have not seen a complaint, a report, or any document showing what happened, and no one has been charged with or found to have done any of it.

The complaint also says, through a council member, that Chief McAuley let Geddie go for misconduct. That does not match what I was told at the time. Geddie told me himself that he was let go during the 2025 budget season, that it came down to the budget, that it hit him hard for a while, and that the city later found a way to bring him back after McAuley was gone. A city official gave me the same budget reason back then.

Geddie's state record tells a third story. His TCOLE record shows unbroken service at Italy PD from December 2022 to today, with no separation recorded. Texas requires a department to report an officer's separation to TCOLE. If Italy let him go, was that ever reported? If it was not, why not?

Training is the other gap. TCOLE does not require harassment training, but it keeps a general course number for it, #3910 "Sexual Harassment Recognition," and departments do report it. Sgt. Collums has four harassment courses on his TCOLE record, all from his year at Red Oak PD, the first one week after he started there in November 2024. None appear from any of his time at Italy.

Neither Chief Nelson nor Geddie has a harassment course anywhere on his TCOLE record. Italy does report its own in-house training, including field training, active shooter response, K-9 and Taser, but no harassment course appears on any of the four Italy officers' records I checked. A department can train in-house and never report it. Does Italy train its officers and supervisors on harassment at all?

On September 12, the Italy PD TX page marked National Police Women's Day by recognizing the department's two female officers. "Thank you both for all you do!" the post said. "We're proud to have you on the Italy PD team!"

The department's Facebook page is active, and Sgt. Collums appears to be its main manager. On October 8, it posted a full explanation of why there is no National Night Out this year.

Does Italy PD have a written sexual harassment policy, and what does it require? Who investigates a complaint against a supervisor? Has the city received any complaint or correspondence from another agency, including Milford PD, about an Italy PD employee? The anonymous message claims Milford's chief sent the city administrator a lengthy email about it. If that email exists, it is a public record.

The Statement the Chief Didn't Read

I am a party to this part of the story. The investigation that cost Kevin Oginski his job began as a question about whether he told me about my own arrest warrant.

On September 22, at Kevin's appeal hearing, Chief Nelson told the council he had written a statement and decided not to read it. I requested it three days later. The city released it on October 9, in full, labeled "Publicly Available Information." I am publishing it with this article.

Nelson writes that on April 23 he learned Kevin "had allegedly disclosed an active warrant to the individual named in it." That individual is me. I turned myself in on that warrant the next day. Nelson consulted the City Attorney's Office, a complaint was served on Kevin, and the City Attorney's Office hired an outside investigator, Jesse Prado.

His own statement says:

"the investigator did not sustain the violation related to the initial allegation of releasing confidential law enforcement information"

What the investigator did sustain came later. In Nelson's words, "other information received during the course of the investigation revealed concerning conduct," and Kevin received "an amended 614 notice." The finding Kevin was fired on:

"unethical conduct intended to undermine the fairness of the City's hiring process"

At the hearing, Kevin's attorney described what the report alleged: that "Kevin was conspiring with you Mosley, and you Long," meaning Council Members Raymond Mosley and Billy Long, to get himself the chief's job. He said neither council member was ever asked about it.

Nelson describes his own role this way:

"My office defined the scope but provided no further direction, and I remained neutral throughout the process."

Nelson signed the complaint against Kevin, and Nelson made the decision to fire him. His statement ends:

"The investigation findings must also be submitted to the District Attorney for review."

He writes that the DA "may determine that Mr. Oginski is no longer eligible to testify in criminal prosecutions." Were the findings ever sent?

My Involvement

Nelson did not read that statement on September 22. Instead, he told the council: "I actually have a conversation between Sergeant Collums and Patrick O'Dell, where Patrick O'Dell flat out told us that Kevin Oginski told Ron about it, but he did it in good faith, and then he completely recanted his story."

I dispute that account. Kevin Oginski never told me about my warrant. I learned about it from someone with no connection to Italy PD or the Ellis County Sheriff's Office. The night in question, April 22, I was at Rowdy T's with a group that included Neila Owen, an Italy resident and an acquaintance of the Mayor. She was present every time I spoke with Kevin. No one from the city, and no one working for the investigator, has ever asked me about any of it, and as far as I know, no one has asked Owen either.

Who Started It

There are now three accounts of how this investigation began.

Nelson's August 6 termination letter calls it "the complaint brought forward by me." His unread statement says he learned of the allegation and consulted the City Attorney's Office, and that "We determined that the allegation required investigation." Neither one mentions the Mayor.

At the hearing, Council Member Mosley asked the question directly.

"Who started the investigation and why?" / "I did."

Asked why, Mayor Clinton Sulak-Tovar answered, "because of everything in ." Moments later he gave the fuller version:

"It was started between me and one of the attorneys to see if any information was leaked out about Ron Helms and his warrant."

The Mayor then presided over the appeal. Why do Nelson's accounts never mention the Mayor?

Kevin had asked for his appeal to be heard in public, and the Mayor acknowledged it, opening the hearing "at his request." Before the hearing began, Patrick O'Dell spoke during citizen comments and reminded the council that under the , the personnel exception for a closed meeting does not apply when the employee asks for a public hearing.

For roughly ten minutes, the Mayor and council let Kevin and his attorney present their case in open session. No one else in the audience was allowed to speak to it. Then the council went behind closed doors, from about 6:26 to 8:15 that night. The agenda posted the closed session under two exceptions: consultation with the city's attorney and the personnel exception. Kevin's attorney, Ben Casey of the Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas (CLEAT), objected on the record:

"My client asked for an open session. There is no discretion."

When the Mayor said "executive session," Casey asked whether the investigator had been in there. "You violated the law," he said.

Prado was in there. I watched him leave through the back exit at the end of the closed session, and I recorded it at 8:11 that night. Council Members Mosley and Long, who were in that session and who voted against upholding the firing, told me on the record that Prado was in the room for most of it and left afterward. Prado is the investigator who wrote the City of Uvalde's 2024 report on its police response to the Robb Elementary shooting.

The Vote

Council Member Robert Hodge moved "to deny the appeal of the termination and uphold the decision of the police chief to terminate Kevin." Council Member Luin McConnell seconded. It passed 3-2. Hodge, McConnell, and Vincent Fleming voted yes. Mosley and Long voted no.

Mosley: "So we've been told that it's all about appearances, the reason this termination was done. Because somebody, an officer, hung around with the wrong people. Jesus hung around the wrong [people] too, look at what they did to him. This is just a, I'm just gonna say it, it's a total shit show, and it should have never happened like this. If anybody has any conscience to do a good officer like you're doing to this man tonight, you're the ones that don't have any morals."

Long: "What we heard in that executive session was total bullshit."

Long, one of the two council members Kevin was accused of conspiring with, also addressed what witnesses in the report said about him: "the same witnesses said that Officer Oginski gave me a thumbs up and I walked back to the council meeting. Also said that I went over to Rowdy T's to visit with Officer Oginski."

"That's a total lie."

Two Allegations, Two Processes

One officer was accused of telling a journalist about a warrant. The city brought in an outside investigator, the allegation was not sustained, the complaint was amended, and he was fired. The Chief says the findings have to go to the District Attorney, where they could end his ability to testify.

A supervisor in the same department is now accused, secondhand, of making sexual harassment remarks toward a rookie female officer. A month ago the department thanked its two female officers in public. It has said nothing in public about these allegations.

I have sent the City of Italy a request for comment, with a link to this article, and I will publish a follow-up when it responds. I have also urged the department to address these allegations directly, in a statement on its own Facebook page, where residents already go for news from Italy PD.

I do not know whether the city has opened an investigation. What process does a sexual harassment allegation against a supervisor get at Italy PD? Who is investigating it? When Kevin was accused, he was placed on administrative leave. Has the supervisor named in this complaint been? If not, why the difference?

Former Corsicana City Councilmember William A. Jones has sued the City of Corsicana and four current and former city officials in federal court, alleging they retaliated against him for his records requests, his questions as a councilmember, and his advocacy in his brother's homicide case until he resigned from office.

The complaint, filed September 23, names the City of Corsicana, former Mayor Michael Fletcher, City Attorney Kerri Anderson Donica, City Manager James Holgersson, and former Police Chief Robert Johnson. It was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, as Case No. 3:26-cv-03232, and is assigned to U.S. District Judge Karen Gren Scholer. Jones, who represented Precinct 1 from May 2024 until July 2025, is represented by CJ Grisham and Ryan James Franceschina of GFA Law, PLLC, which announced the suit in an October 7 press release.

A complaint presents one side of a dispute. None of what follows has been tested in court, and the defendants have not yet responded.

What the Lawsuit Alleges

According to the complaint, Jones's brother, Deantae Parks, was killed in Corsicana in March 2024, and Jones became his family's liaison to law enforcement around the same time he won his council seat. The lawsuit alleges that after he began requesting records, questioning city spending, and proposing public safety measures, city officials took a series of official actions against him.

Among the allegations:

• A constituent's email. The complaint says Mayor Fletcher used an email a constituent had sent to Jones and another councilmember against him from the dais in October 2024, and later told Jones that someone had given it to him.
• A consultant contract. The lawsuit alleges the City paid its former city manager as a consultant without prior council approval, and that the council voted 4-1 to ratify the arrangement after the fact, with Jones casting the only vote against.
• Records about his brother's homicide. Jones alleges the City cited the wrong exception to withhold the police file, that the Texas Attorney General ordered it released with redactions, and that parts of it have still not been produced.
• Records he requested as a councilmember. The complaint says a request for gun violence data was delayed and came back incomplete, while a colleague received comparable records promptly.
• A request for his private phone. The lawsuit alleges a police association filed a public information request for texts about City business on Jones's private business cell phone the same day he proposed a countywide law enforcement task force, and withdrew it days after he resigned. The Attorney General later determined the material was not public information, according to the complaint.
• A directive to police. Jones alleges the police chief told officers not to cooperate with him, based on the account of an officer the complaint does not name.

Jones resigned in July 2025. The complaint says his medical provider had recommended it, and it attributes the resignation to the conduct it describes.

The Claims

The lawsuit brings four counts under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the federal civil rights statute: First Amendment retaliation, municipal liability against the City, unequal treatment under the Fourteenth Amendment, and conspiracy to deprive him of his constitutional rights. Jones is asking for compensatory and punitive damages, a declaration that his rights were violated, attorney's fees, and a jury trial.

The complaint lays out each allegation in more detail than this summary, with dates, meetings, and the exhibits Jones says support them. It is public through the federal court's PACER system under Case No. 3:26-cv-03232, and the docket can be viewed free on Justia.

Where the Case Stands

As of October 10, the court docket shows that no summons has been issued, does not show that any defendant has been served, and shows no attorney appearing for any of the defendants. Under the federal rules, a defendant generally has 21 days after being served to answer the complaint or file another response, such as a motion to dismiss, or 60 days if it agrees to waive formal service. I will be watching for the City's formal response in court and will publish another article when it is filed.

As of publication, I have not seen a public statement from the City about the lawsuit. Because the matter is now in litigation, the City and the officials named may be limited in what they can say publicly while the case plays out in federal court. I am contacting the City for comment and will publish any statement it provides.

If anyone named in this lawsuit, or their attorney, would like to comment, please contact me at tips@watchtowerci.com. I am happy to publish your response.

My Connections to This Story

I am a Corsicana resident. GFA Law, PLLC, the firm representing Jones, also represents me in matters unrelated to Corsicana, and I work with Jones in an unrelated software company. Jones tagged me in his October 7 Facebook post announcing the lawsuit.

I have been arrested twice by the Italy Police Department, and the Ellis County District Attorney rejected both cases. That experience is part of why I follow allegations involving police conduct closely.

I welcome any questions about these connections.

The City of Italy fired police officer Kevin Oginski on Thursday.

This afternoon two members of the city council said publicly that nobody told them.

Council Member Raymond Mosley wrote that he asked City Administrator Keith Whitfield about Oginski on Thursday morning around 11:45. He asked whether the investigation was over, and Whitfield said he could not tell him much about it. Mosley wrote that he told Whitfield the council needed to be informed of the findings. Whitfield, he wrote, "did not say one word about him being terminated."

Two hours later Mosley learned Oginski had been fired. He learned it from a citizen.

"This is totally messed up," Mosley wrote, "and the whole investigation needs to be investigated."

Council Member Billy Long wrote that he is pissed. "That's why it's hard to keep good officers," he said, "because they run them all off."

There is a great deal more to this than what I am putting in front of you tonight. The council meets tomorrow evening, and the city should get the first chance to explain it in its own words, in its own room, with the people who live here sitting in front of them.

I will be plain about my own stake. The city spent months looking into whether this officer talked to me. I am a party to these events and I am going to say so every time I write about them.

The Italy City Council meets Monday, August 10, at 6:00 PM, at 161 W. Main Street. Citizen Comments come near the top. I expect the city and members of the council to address this, and I will be there with a camera, going live.

Mosley asked for the same thing this afternoon. "Please show up to tomorrows council meeting at 6pm and ask questions," he wrote. "We lost a great officer and we ALL deserve answers, the whole truth and nothing less."

After tomorrow I start publishing. Near daily, for weeks. Each one takes apart a different piece of what has been going on in this town, and they run backward through the calendar, meeting by meeting, until we reach July of 2025.

Tomorrow night belongs to the city. Whatever is said in that room, on the record, with the public sitting in front of them, is what they will be held to.

Come see it for yourself, or watch it live right here tomorrow at 6:00 PM.

In July 2025 the Italy City Council voted to spend $44,800 rebuilding one water pump. A second company had quoted $15,730 for the same pump, on letterhead, with every task priced out. The council had voted five weeks earlier to go get competing bids and a priced breakdown. It got one competing bid, never got the breakdown, and awarded the contract anyway.

Every document behind that paragraph is a public record. I have assembled all of them into a packet you can download below. The last eleven pages are the city's own records, reproduced exactly as released, each one stamped with the SHA256 hash of the file it came from so you can verify every page against the original yourself.

Why I Am Publishing This One Year Later

Yesterday, July 30, 2026, Basil Zangare, who publishes as BZ Watchdog, released records he obtained from the City of Italy about the Police Department roof project.

His reporting describes this sequence. At the July 13, 2026 council meeting, City Administrator Keith Whitfield told the council that Roof Time was the lowest bidder on the roof, and put the two competing proposals at roughly $100,000 each. When councilmembers told him to go find those proposals, he came back with one, for about $47,000, and said he could not locate the other. The records the city later released show three proposals: Roof Time at $43,975.00 plus tax, Prime Source Construction at $47,450.00 plus applicable taxes, permits and fees, and TXD Commercial at $30,606.36. The agenda item authorizing the work had already been written as informal quotes "not to exceed $43,975.00," which is Roof Time's exact price, printed before the public discussion happened. Zangare has called for the Ellis County District Attorney and the Texas Rangers to look at it.

Read his work and the released documents on his page. I am not republishing his records here, and the roof findings are his, not mine.

I am publishing this because I sat in the room eleven months earlier and watched the same city, under the same city administrator, handle a different purchase the same way. That record has been public the whole time. Nobody has looked at it.

What Was Being Bought

The equipment is the circulation pump for the city's water cooling tower at the water plant. It is a Flowserve 12EHL two-stage vertical turbine pump rated 500 GPM at 45 feet, driven by a Nidec vertical hollow-shaft motor, 10 HP at 1180 RPM. Both quotes in the council packet describe that same machine, and both were for rebuilding the existing unit rather than replacing it.

One piece of context belongs up front. On the night of the vote, the cooling tower this pump serves was not yet running. A resident asked the mayor that evening whether work on the cooling tower had started, and was told it had not.

How It Moved Through the Council

The June 9 vote is the part worth pausing on. The council did not simply take the first quote that arrived. It voted, over two objections, to go get competing bids and to make the existing bidder show its pricing line by line. Thirty-five days later it gave the contract to that same bidder at that same price.

The payments confirm the contract amount without anyone having to take my word for it. Twenty-four payments of $1,866.66 come to $44,799.84.

The Two Quotes, Side by Side

Jurgensen priced five tasks. They reconcile to the stated total with nothing left over.

What the Expensive Quote Actually Was

The city's position at the meeting was that ATS had itemized its work. That is half right, and the half that is wrong is the half that matters.

ATS did submit a written scope. Its page lists the tasks: new 416SS line shaft material, machining of wear rings and bowl bushings, repair of the stuffing box, sandblast and epoxy coat inside and out with Sherplate coating, and a motor refresh covering teardown, cleaning, dip and bake in varnish, new bearings, and a function test.

Look at that page and you will not find a dollar figure anywhere on it. No price for the shaft. No price for the bowl work. No price for the coating. No price for the motor. No labor rate, no crane charge, no subtotal assembled from parts.

The price appears on a separate page, written by hand under the typed scope:

"1 YEAR WARRANTY"

"TOTAL PRICE 44,800.00"

"WE COULD LET THEM PAY THIS OUT AT 0% PERCENT INTEREST IF THIS COULD HELP."

"24 PAYMENT AT 1,870.00 = 44,800.00"

That is the entire pricing record for a $44,800 purchase of public money. A scope of work and a priced itemization are different documents, and the council had voted on June 9 to get the second kind.

What the Council Was Told on the Record

The following come from the video of the July 14, 2025 meeting, with timestamps so anyone can check them.

Asked directly what the two prices were, City Administrator Keith Whitfield told the room at 1:09:56:

"One is one from his company, ATS Construction. They will rebuild it and he will give us a two year payout plan. The total is $44,800. ... Then you have another company that will be rebuilding for $15,730."

I want that stated plainly and early, because it is the strongest fact in the city's favor. On this purchase, nobody was misled about the spread. Every councilmember heard both numbers before voting.

At 1:00:23, a councilmember:

"That's a huge difference in this one. That's why it's just tough to say, oh, let's just do it. When you're talking 15 versus 40, if it was 100 and 130, it's a little different. 15 to 45, that's a huge difference."

At roughly 1:05:00, the same member, on his own trade background:

"The pump rebuild is what I was doing every day. Not this big, right? But rebuilding pumps is not crazy work in my opinion. So when I see a $30,000 difference, it jumps out, you know?"

About twelve minutes later, the council approved the higher quote with no vote against.

A resident asked from the floor where the other bids were, since the council had told staff to go get them. The answer, at roughly 1:12:15:

"Oh, you only had two?"

"Yes, ma'am."

June 9 called for "some other bids," plural, plus an itemization from the current bidder. What arrived was one competing bid and a scope page with no prices on it.

A councilmember then asked the ATS representative what the city would save by paying in full. At 1:08:24:

"That'll make it $38,000."

The city administrator's response at 1:08:48:

"But if you're going to do that, you may as well just finance it out if you're going to do that. Really? If you're going to do that, you might as well just pay it out. 24 months. Two years."

The council approved the financed structure at $44,800. On the vendor's own numbers, stretching payments over two years cost the city $6,800 more than paying that same vendor cash, a premium of nearly eighteen percent. Nobody put the $38,000 figure back out for a competing offer, and the minutes record no discussion of whether the city could have covered it outright.

I asked the council at 1:16:24 why a two-year payment plan was not matched with a two-year warranty, given how confident the vendor was in the work. About thirty seconds later the motion to approve ATS was made. The motion carries no warranty extension. Both quotes came with the same one year. The city financed the more expensive rebuild across twenty-four months while the warranty on it ran out at twelve.

The Recommendation, and the Contractor Behind It

The staff recommendation that went to the council is one page. It is addressed to Mr. Keith Whitfield, subject line "Recommendation for Cooling Tower Circulation Pump Rebuild," and signed James Wallingsford. Its operative sentence:

"After reviewing all the quotes received for rebuilding the cooling tower circulation pump, I recommend selecting the company currently installing the cooling tower."

The stated basis is expertise: experience with cooling towers, and familiarity with how the SCADA system starts and stops the pump based on water temperature. The memo allows that the other companies are "reputable and knowledgeable in pump systems," then concludes they may lack that integration expertise.

The memo contains no dollar figures. It names neither bidder. It never states the price difference it is recommending the city absorb, never weighs that difference against the expertise it cites, and never identifies a single technical problem with the competing quote. It carries no date and no letterhead.

The adopted June 9, 2025 minutes show James Wallingsford delivering the Public Works report, and four councilmembers plus the mayor thanking him for his service to the city. By the July 14 agenda, the Public Works report had passed to Jose Estrada, and a resident raised the public works director vacancy from the floor. The recommendation in front of the council that night came from the public works director who had left.

At the July 14 meeting the ATS representative introduced himself as Larry Parker and identified his company as the contractor already installing the city's cooling tower. He told the council ATS's contract with the city ran a little over $500,000, and that the project engineer had issued a change order covering the pump rebuild.

The city's own bill registers bear that out.

So the vendor recommended by the departing public works director, and awarded the pump at nearly three times the competing quote, was the vendor already holding the city's largest active contract. That existing relationship was the reason given for the recommendation.

Parker also made an argument to the council that deserves to be repeated fairly. He said that if an outside company rebuilt the pump and it later shed metal into the heat exchanger, ATS would not warranty the damage, because ATS did not do the work. He said his firm carries performance, payment, and maintenance bonds, with the maintenance bond standing behind the warranty. Single-source responsibility on connected equipment has real value, and a bonded contractor is a different risk than an unbonded one. Whether that value came to $29,070 was the council's call. My concern is not that the council weighed it. My concern is that it weighed it without a priced breakdown from the company it chose, five weeks after voting to require one.

Where the Legal Line Actually Sits

Chapter 252 of the Texas Local Government Code requires a city to advertise and take formal sealed bids before entering a contract above a set dollar amount. Below that line, a city can gather informal quotes instead and decide for itself how much process to apply.

That line moved between these two purchases, and it matters. When the council voted on the pump in July 2025, Section 252.021 set it at $50,000. Senate Bill 1173, passed by the 89th Legislature and effective September 1, 2025, raised it to $100,000. That was the first increase since 2007, when it went from $25,000 to $50,000.

So the two purchases sat very differently against the law of their own day.

I want to correct something I might otherwise have implied. These are not two purchases that both squeaked under the same line. The pump did, with $5,200 to spare under the $50,000 ceiling that applied that night. The roof did not come close to its ceiling, because by July 2026 that ceiling was $100,000. Neither purchase triggered the sealed-bid requirement, and I am not claiming either was illegal.

What actually connects them is simpler and, to my mind, worse. In both cases the city gathered informal quotes, chose a company that was not the low quote, and left behind no document comparing the offers on price. The legal room to do that just doubled.

There is a second requirement that did apply to both. Section 252.0215 provides that a municipality "in making an expenditure of more than $3,000 but less than $50,000, shall contact at least two historically underutilized businesses on a rotating basis," using the comptroller's list, unless no such business is listed in the county. The pump at $44,800 and the roof at $43,975 both fall inside that range. Whether Italy did that on either purchase is not something I can answer from the records I hold, and it is worth asking.

Did Anyone at City Hall Notice the Line Had Moved?

I cannot answer that from these records, and I will not pretend otherwise. Nothing I have seen out of Italy references the change at all.

Here is what does sit on the table. The roof item was noticed to the public as informal quotes "not to exceed $43,975.00." That figure is Roof Time's exact price. It also lands just under the $50,000 ceiling that had stopped applying ten months earlier.

In July 2026 that number bought the city nothing. Italy had room up to $100,000 before any bidding requirement attached. Coming in under $50,000 was no longer necessary for any purpose.

Which leaves two readings, and I cannot separate them. Either the figure is coincidence, or whoever set it was still working from the old rulebook. I am not suggesting the number was picked to dodge a bidding requirement, because under the law actually in force it would not have needed to be. The council can settle this by asking one question at one meeting.

If City Hall genuinely had not caught the change, it has now. The ceiling on what Italy can spend without advertising, comparing, or tabulating anything doubled while nobody was watching, and the two purchases in this report are the entire public record of how that discretion gets used. Twice the room to spend with no paper trail is an argument for more scrutiny of the spending, not less.

Why This Matters Now

Nothing about the pump is new. The vote happened in the open, the packet was posted, the video exists, and the payments ran through the bills list every month for two years. It sat there.

What changed yesterday is that Zangare's records made it possible to see the same shape twice. One purchase handled this way is a bad night. Two, eleven months apart, in the same department, under the same administrator, is a question about how the city buys things.

There is one more piece I have not seen anyone raise. I was in the room on July 13, 2026, and the city attorney reminded the council on the record that what they were looking at were quotes, not bids. That is a correct statement of the law. It is also the whole argument. Once a purchase is called a quote instead of a bid, the requirements to advertise, to compare formally, to tabulate, and to document why the winner won all fall away. The city gets to decide how much process to apply to itself.

So the honest question is not whether Italy broke Chapter 252. It is what the city does with the discretion Chapter 252 leaves it. On these two purchases, the answer looks like: collect a couple of quotes, pick one, write nothing down. I have requested the audio of the July 13 meeting through a public information request so the attorney's exact wording is on the record rather than resting on my recollection.

The timing makes this more urgent, not less. When the pump was bought, a purchase had to stay under $50,000 to avoid formal bidding. Since September 1, 2025, that ceiling is $100,000. Every purchase Italy makes between those two numbers now falls into the same undocumented zone the pump did. If the city had a written policy for how it handles informal quotes, the change would not matter much. It does not appear to have one.

What You Can Do

None of this requires a lawyer or a lawsuit. It requires people asking specific questions in public, on the record.

• Ask the council to adopt a written purchasing policy for informal quotes. I can find no city document saying how many quotes are required, how they get compared, who writes down why the winner won, or what gets kept. A one-page policy would fix most of this. Ask for it at Citizen Comments, and ask for it to be placed on an agenda.

• Ask what the city attorney's guidance actually was. At the July 13, 2026 meeting the council was reminded these were quotes, not bids. Ask what the city understands that to permit, and whether staff has ever been advised in writing about documenting informal-quote selections.

• Ask whether the city knows the threshold changed. Senate Bill 1173 doubled the ceiling on September 1, 2025. Ask when Italy was advised of it, whether any purchasing practice was reviewed in response, and what now happens to a purchase between $50,000 and $100,000 that would have gone out for formal bids a year ago.

• Ask for the comparison documents on both purchases. For the pump, ask for any written comparison, tabulation, or evaluation of the two quotes, and for the change order Larry Parker said the engineer issued. If the answer comes back empty, that is the finding.

• Ask whether the two required HUB contacts were made. Section 252.0215 applies to both purchases. Ask which historically underutilized businesses were contacted, and on what date.

• Watch for three things at every meeting. An agenda item that already carries a specific dollar cap, and whether that number turns out to be one vendor's exact price. Any purchase between roughly $3,000 and $100,000, which is now the entire informal-quote zone. A staff recommendation that names no price and no competitor.

• Show up. The council meets the second Monday of the month at Italy City Hall, 161 W. Main Street. Citizen Comments come near the top. Three minutes is enough to ask one clear question and get it into the minutes.

In Summary

Every record named in that table is reproduced in full at the back of the packet.

Fair Reading and the Limits of This Report

You should get the weak points from me rather than find them yourself.

Both prices were stated aloud before the vote. Whitfield said $44,800 and $15,730 in open session. No councilmember was told the expensive quote was the cheap one. That is a real difference from what Zangare describes on the roof, and it is the single most important thing in the city's favor here.

The cheaper quote had technically lapsed. Jurgensen dated its estimate June 12, 2025 and marked it valid for 30 days. That window closed around July 12, two days before the vote. Whether Jurgensen would have honored the price is unknown, because the record contains no sign that anyone asked. That cuts both ways, and it raises its own question about why a quote the council ordered in June was allowed to expire before the July meeting.

The bonding argument is legitimate. Parker's point about single-source warranty responsibility on connected equipment is a real consideration, not a smokescreen, and reasonable officials can decide to pay a premium for it.

Nobody ever evaluated whether Jurgensen could do the job. No engineer, no staff memo, no outside opinion in the record assesses the cheaper quote on technical grounds. It may have been the wrong choice. My point is not that Italy picked the wrong pump company. My point is that it made a $29,070 decision without a priced breakdown from the winner, after voting to require one.

The two purchases did not face the same legal ceiling. The pump was bought under a $50,000 sealed-bid threshold and landed just beneath it. By the time of the roof the threshold was $100,000, so the roof was nowhere near its limit. Anyone drawing a straight line between the two on that basis, including me before I checked the date the law changed, has the timeline wrong.

I do not have everything. The change order Parker referenced, the underlying cooling tower contract, and any correspondence about the pump are all still outstanding. So is the audio of the July 13, 2026 meeting. I also cannot tell from these records whether the city met the Section 252.0215 requirement to contact two historically underutilized businesses on either purchase.

I have not received a response from the City of Italy on any of this. I have not put these specific questions to City Administrator Keith Whitfield or the council ahead of publication. Everything above comes from the city's own posted packets, adopted minutes, bill registers, and the open-session recording. If the city responds, I will publish the response.

Quotations from the July 14, 2025 meeting come from the open-session video and carry timestamps. Where the audio is unclear I paraphrased instead of quoting. Vote counts, movers, and seconders come from the city's adopted minutes. The city attorney's quotes-not-bids remark is my own firsthand recollection of the July 13, 2026 meeting and is presented as such pending the audio.

The City of Hawk Cove has an agenda item called Public Comments. On Tuesday night, the mayor ruled that no one could comment on it.

It is item five. It is printed on the agenda. When a speaker raised it, he was told that item five is "a procedural item," not an agenda item, and that public comment is limited to agenda items. He was ruled off agenda, at the agenda item, for discussing the agenda item.

That is a small moment in a town of a few hundred people. It is also the arrangement in miniature. Hawk Cove has a mayor and five aldermen, chosen by the residents. On paper the council governs the city. In practice, by the account of its own members, the council is told what it may discuss, when it may discuss it, and what it is permitted to see.

Hawk Cove Council Members Say They Are Kept in the Dark

Tuesday's regular session ran forty-four minutes, from 6:33 to 7:17. In that time the council took up a federal loan its own attorney described as one the lender is "done being patient" about, a utility billing increase residents were never notified of, and a countywide emergency services question that will appear on the November ballot.

Council members said plainly, on the record, that they do not know what their own city is doing.

"As a council, we don't know anything that's going on," one council member said. He wanted to know what would be discussed with the USDA the following night. "What are you guys discussing with him tomorrow that we don't know?"

Another council member went further. "We've been shut out as a council," she said. "We weren't sitting in those meetings that they were in. We weren't in those bi-weekly sessions that they had directly with them. We weren't involved in that. We didn't get any records."

She was talking about the United States Department of Agriculture, which holds the debt on the city's sewer system. USDA representatives came to Hawk Cove on June 16 and inspected the sewer plant and all seven lift stations. Asked whether he attended, the mayor said he was there "only for part of it." Asked whether the council would receive a report on what the inspectors found, he said, "We don't know. We don't have that information. That is internal to the USDA Special Assets Unit."

When a member asked for an engineer's assessment of the plant, she was told the city is working on it. When she asked whether the council could prepare questions in advance of the USDA's presentation, the answer was that questions would be collected afterward.

The Ordinances Behind the Hawk Cove Council's Rules

Why does a five-member council have so little room to move? Part of the answer may sit in a stack of ordinances.

Otto the Watchdog, a Texas journalist who has covered Hawk Cove since 2018, provided me with scanned copies of nine ordinances numbered 2023-05-31.1 through 2023-05-31.9. The copies carry blank signature lines and no adoption date, so I am not yet in a position to say they were adopted or that they are in force. I am requesting certified copies from the city, along with the minutes showing their passage. What I can report is what the documents say.

They say the city administrator holds "the sole right, responsibility, duty and final authority" to decide every item placed on every council agenda, for regular, special, and executive meetings.

They say council members may not contact "Contractors," a term the documents define to include "all past, present, or prospective entities, business vendors, business candidates and similar contacts, and particularly governmental entities," without written authorization from both the mayor and the administrator.

They say a council member who wants to look at city records may do so one member at a time, supervised, for up to one hour, after signing a confidentiality and non-disclosure agreement. The member may not photocopy or photograph anything, must surrender any recording device, and may take handwritten notes only if those notes are handed to staff to be photocopied at the end of the session.

They set a fine of up to $500 for a council member who violates these provisions, and provide that each violation counts separately.

They provide that repealing any of them requires a vote of the entire council, either unanimous or four of five with all five present, depending on the document.

City Administrator and Police Chief: One Person, Two Offices

They also describe a second office. The police chief, in these documents, is "the sole administrative authority" over the department "without the requirement, or reporting, of any of the Police Chief's actions to the Mayor or Council." The chief may protect department records "including from any public forum, the Mayor and/or Council," hires and fires without the approval of either, and "shall not be required or caused to give any information in any public forum or to any person."

In Hawk Cove, the city administrator and the police chief are the same person.

So the office that decides what the council is allowed to discuss, and the office that answers to neither the council nor the mayor, are held by one individual. That is the arrangement those nine documents describe, and it is the plainest answer available to the question of who runs this city.

As reported by Otto the Watchdog, on May 25, 2023, in the window between an election and the seating of a new administration, the outgoing council signed a slate of ten-year employment contracts, with a package approaching $2 million. The ordinance establishing the city administrator's office states that the city "presently is under contract to City's present Administrator," that the term "shall continue indefinitely," and that discharge is governed by that contract. It does not state a length.

What Texas Law Says About Council Rules

Texas Local Government Code Section 22.038 says the governing body of a Type A city "shall determine the rules of its proceedings," and that the mayor "shall call a special meeting on the application of three aldermen." Each of the nine documents rests its authority on a single recited line: that it is "a function of the Council to regulate itself," citing Local Government Code Section 22.072(b). That section is titled Powers and Duties of Municipal Officers; Bond. Subsection (b) reads in full: "The governing body may prescribe the powers and duties of a municipal officer appointed or elected to an office under this code whose duties are not specified by this code." Chapter 22 specifies a great many of an alderman's duties, including the duty to determine the rules of the council's own proceedings.

The Texas Attorney General examined these provisions in 2020, in Opinion KP-0334, answering a question from a different Type A general-law city. The opinion cuts both ways here. It reads Section 22.072(b) broadly, saying a governing body may appoint officers and prescribe their powers and duties in a way that "could include certain managerial responsibility." It also names the limit. A Type A city may regulate its affairs by ordinance only where that ordinance is, in the words of Section 51.012, "not inconsistent with state law." The Attorney General went no further, writing that his office "does not advise municipal officials about how to comply with their own ordinances."

A city may plainly give an administrator duties. Whether these particular provisions sit consistently with a chapter of state law that assigns the council itself the power to determine the rules of its own proceedings is a separate question, and it is one the Attorney General left to the city and, if it ever comes to that, a court.

That same opinion quotes another part of Chapter 22. Section 22.042 makes the mayor "the chief executive officer of the municipality," required to "actively ensure that the laws and ordinances of the municipality are properly carried out" and to "inspect the conduct of each subordinate municipal officer." Set that beside a document stating that the police chief answers to neither the mayor nor the council, and the consistency question the Attorney General left open stops being abstract. Readers can compare the two and draw their own conclusions.

Who Checks Hawk Cove's Books and Its USDA Sewer Loan

Item C on Tuesday's agenda asked the council to receive a profit and loss statement for April through June, "as presented to USDA Special Assets Unit." The wording is worth reading twice. The council received the document after the federal lender had already been given it. There was no action to take. "This is what we gave him," the mayor said.

The same member who said the council has been shut out told the room the city has no line-item budget and holds no budget meetings. "We don't have a line item budget that breaks all that down," she said. "It's a dump. So we're not able to actually physically see any of that."

The trash bill went up in June. Residents got no notice. A flat monthly billing fee was added on top of the contractor's own increase, and she told the room the contractor's increase is a small fraction of what residents are now being charged. She asked for a vote at the next meeting to remove the fee. Whether that item reaches an agenda is, under the documents described above, the administrator's decision.

At the June 16 meeting, the city attorney told the council that reviewing a records request from one of its own council members costs the city more than $3,000.

As reported by Otto the Watchdog, the city has not produced a valid state-required audit since 2014, and budget documents have been submitted to the USDA carrying a city secretary's signature without being shown to or approved by the council. I have not confirmed either of those claims against city records. I filed a public information request with the city for every annual audit since 2014, for the budget documents it sent the USDA, and for the minutes of every meeting at which a budget was adopted. I will report what comes back.

The USDA Meeting on the Hawk Cove Sewer Debt

The council meets again tonight at 6:30 at 1585 Maria Street, and the USDA will be in the room to present repayment options and re-amortization proposals on the sewer debt. The city has not said publicly how long a restructured term would run. That is one of the things the meeting is for.

The mayor addressed the rumors directly Tuesday. "There is some sort of crazy rumor going around that the USDA wants to repossess our wastewater facilities," he said. "That is so far from the truth. That's the last thing anybody wants." He said the city is working to restructure the note.

Hawk Cove does not record or stream its own meetings. Tuesday's session filled the building past capacity and residents were turned away at the door. The only public record of what happened is a livestream filmed by a private citizen. A resident asked the council to consider an ordinance requiring the city to stream its own meetings, which seems like a modest thing to want in a city deciding how it will carry a federal debt.

Tonight will be no different. Otto the Watchdog is livestreaming the meeting on his YouTube channel, and he is already at Hawk Cove City Hall. I am watching his stream as I write this. If you want to watch a city of a few hundred people take up a federal loan workout in real time, join him there. It is the only place it will be shown.

Why I Am Getting Involved

I am going to Hawk Cove for tonight's meeting. Part of why I am going is to introduce myself to the mayor, to the council, and to the people who run the city day to day, and to learn who they are from them directly rather than from a livestream video.

I have not printed the names of the council members quoted in this article. They spoke in an open meeting that anyone can watch, so their identities are not a secret. I would simply rather meet the people I am writing about before I start attaching their names to things.

I have already filed a public information request with the city for every annual audit since 2014 and for the budget documents it submitted to the USDA. Two more are going in behind it: certified copies of the nine ordinances with the minutes that adopted them, and the employment contracts signed in May 2023. Every claim in this article that rests on someone else's reporting is a claim I am asking the city to confirm or contradict from its own records. The city has ten business days to answer each one.

The events at Tuesday's council meeting and the statements several council members made on the record are what moved me. Elected officials saying out loud that they do not know what their own city is doing is not a small thing, and it is not something residents should have to learn secondhand.

I am adding Hawk Cove to the list of small Texas cities where I document matters of poor governance, and I intend to join the advocacy effort of steering a struggling city toward a better direction when it cannot seem to afford to help itself.

If you live in Hawk Cove and there is something you want me to be aware of, send it to me. I read everything.

Money From Three Directions

Hubbard has about 1,400 residents and roughly $1.73 million in its general fund. The money now moving into and around this Hill County town runs into the tens of millions, and it is arriving from three directions at once: a private data center is paying for pieces of the city government, voters have approved a $7.6 million school bond, and the city has borrowed millions more on its own.

Near the top of two of the institutions handling that money sits the same man.

The Man in the Middle

Jason Patrick is Hubbard's city manager. He is also its police chief. He is, at the same time, president of the Hubbard Independent School District's board of trustees. One person holds the senior administrative job in the city, runs its police department, and chairs its school board.

I have spoken with Patrick on the record several times this year, by phone in March and in person at City Hall in July. He is enthusiastic about what is happening. "It is a celebration in this community," he told me. "I kid you not." He called the data center "the monstrosity, the huge hyperscale, largest project in the United States," and he framed its spending as simple neighborliness. "So why wouldn't they want to pour something into the nearest community?" he said.

The Data Center's Money

The company is Nexus Data Centers, building what the City of Hubbard itself has called a "multi-billion-dollar data center facility" on State Highway 171 just outside town. Its planned power draw, roughly 600 megawatts, would be enough to run a small city on its own.

Nexus is not taking a tax break. It told Hill County it preferred "direct investment rather than reduced tax obligations." That investment, announced in February as a $50 million "Community Partnership Program," now reaches into much of the city's budget. Working from the city's own resolutions, its council minutes, and Nexus's letters, I count commitments that include:

• $5,500 for swimming-pool and concession equipment
• $1,000 a month to the recreation center's programs, and $500 a month to the food pantry
• three new police officers, with Patrick telling the council the funding would be "indefinite for salary and benefits," and roughly $246,600 for three patrol vehicles and equipment
• $247,381 for two brush trucks for the volunteer fire department, routed through Nexus's charitable arm, Nexus Hub Incorporated
• $250,000 to buy the city's Civic Center, and a new City Hall and police station built to a $2 million "cost basis"
• $2,689,500 toward a citywide water-line replacement

Two arms of the town's public safety now sit on that list: the police department, which is getting officers whose pay Nexus has agreed to cover, and the volunteer fire department, which is getting its trucks. Every donation letter carries the same sentence: the money "is not tied to any agreement, permit, approval, or obligation on the part of the City." I quote it here exactly as Nexus wrote it.

The Civic Center sale has already closed. Hill County records now list the property at 300 North Magnolia under a Nexus company, Nexus Land Holdings.

The Water Line, and a Question

The water line is the largest single item. The full project was awarded at $4,387,500. The city has paid the contractor about $1.7 million; in June, the city council voted to enter an agreement under which Nexus would pay the remaining $2,689,500 directly to the contractor. Patrick calls it a bargain. "A hell of a deal for the city," he said. "He saved us almost $4 million."

For that same water-line project, the city also borrowed about $4 million through a 2025 certificate of obligation, a kind of municipal debt that does not require a public vote. If Nexus is covering the largest share of the contract, what is the borrowed money paying for? I have asked, and I do not yet have a clear answer.

The School's Money

While the city's spending runs on data-center dollars and borrowing, the school district has been raising money the older way, by asking voters.

Last November, Hubbard ISD put a $7.6 million bond on the ballot for athletic facilities, a new agriculture building, and repairs to the elementary school. It failed on an exact tie, 178 to 178. Over the winter a group of parents who called themselves "Bonding with the Jags" handed out fliers and held town halls, and in May the same $7.6 million bond passed.

Patrick is the president of the board that put it forward. He is also, as noted, the city manager and the police chief. None of this is hidden. Put together, it means the person atop the city's payroll and its police force also leads its school board, in a year when both institutions are moving more money than the town has seen in a long time.

A Footprint Bigger Than the Town

Set all of this against the size of the place. Hubbard is two square miles. The land assembled around it is bigger than the town. According to Hill County appraisal records, Nexus companies own more than 3,100 acres in and around Hubbard, spread across dozens of parcels and appraised at over $30 million. That is close to five square miles, more than twice the footprint of the town itself.

The town those acres surround is small by every measure. Hubbard's median household income is about $47,000. Its general fund is smaller than the water-line contract, smaller than the school bond, and a fraction of the data center's community program. Residents' own costs have gone up, too: last fall the city raised its tax rate to about $0.88 per $100 of value, from about $0.81, which the city's own tax ordinance records as a 25 percent effective tax increase, measured against a revenue-neutral rate.

Patrick expects the site to bring far more than land and money. He told me the jobs pay "$27 an hour with 30 hours mandatory overtime," bringing home "$8,000 to $10,000 a month," in a place where some workers, he said, "were working $7 an hour." He also expects a crowd: "6,000 people in less than 45 days," he told me, and "15,000 people out there working by January." Those are his projections, not numbers I have confirmed, and 15,000 workers would be more than ten times the population of the town they would be working next to.

A Question About Cameras

In November 2025, a data-center town hall was held in Hubbard. According to the city secretary's written answer to a records request, "The Data Center requested no recordings," and no audio or video of that meeting exists. This year, Nexus is offering to pay for the equipment to put the city council's own meetings on permanent public video. I do not know what changed between the two.

How I Got Here

I should say plainly where this comes from. In the fall of 2025, I started asking the City of Hubbard a simple question: why did the data center's town hall not allow cameras? Soon after, I was blocked from the city's Facebook page. Around the same time, I noticed someone else filing public-records requests with Hubbard, a man named Basil Zangare who publishes as BZ Watchdog. I reached out. We work differently, and we do not agree on everything, but we share one goal, accountability in Texas local government. We began comparing notes, sat in on council meetings together in nearby Hillsboro and Whitney to get to know each other, and started building a record.

Between us, we now hold more than a thousand records and documents on Hubbard. Some of what we asked for came back the same way: no records responsive to your request, in cases where our reading of Texas law says the records should exist.

Before I Published This, I Talked to Basil

On July 16, the evening before this went out, I interviewed Basil about what he has been finding on the ground, so I could put some of it on the record.

Basil has been going business to business in Hubbard with a simple question: has the data center brought you more customers? He told me the answer was almost always no. "All of the small businesses have told me they have not seen any increase in traffic from the data center business," he said. The only exception among the storefronts was a national chain, not one of the local shops. His read: "The business boom that Jason Patrick's talking about is the big corporation chains, not the small mom-and-pop places. Those places are not getting the increase in business that they were told they were going to get with the deal of the data center coming to Hubbard."

The one group he sees actually gaining is the food trucks. "The food truck businesses may be getting all the business," he told me. That is worth setting against what the council did on June 20. The same night it adopted an ordinance restricting where food trucks can operate, it denied one vendor's application to run a food truck on leased land, five votes to none. The one kind of business that seems to be thriving is also the one the city has just moved to control more tightly.

Basil told me the owners he spoke with had concerns about going on the record and did not want to be named, in a small town where one man holds several of the top offices. I am not naming any of them. I cannot independently vouch for every conversation he had. What I can tell you is what he told me, on the record: most of Hubbard's storefronts are not seeing the boom the city is celebrating.

In fairness to Patrick's side of it, this is a snapshot of the town as it is today. The data center is still ramping up, and Patrick expects thousands more workers to arrive in the coming months; if they do, the businesses seeing little now could see more. Many of the improvements are long-term as well, the water lines, the new buildings, the school upgrades, the kind that take years to show their full effect.

When I Asked to Talk, the City Stopped Talking

I have spent more time with Jason Patrick than most reporters get, two conversations by phone and two more in person, the most recent this month at City Hall. I appreciate that he has been willing to sit with me at all, because the city as an institution has not.

In April, the day after I asked to interview Patrick, the City Secretary wrote back: "per our attorney's directive, at this time the City of Hubbard will not be participating in interviews." I filed a public-records request for that directive and the communications behind it. It is past its legal deadline, with no response.

Patrick talked to me anyway. When I saw him this month, he raised the lawyers himself. He told me he did not agree with the advice to stop talking, "do I agree with it? No," but that he had to follow what the attorneys who "represent this city that I work for" told him. When I said that he serves the constituents, not the city attorney, he answered, "Yes, sir."

The records we hold leave gaps in the timeline of what has happened in Hubbard, and when I started pressing on those gaps, the response was not answers. It was a lawyer's instruction that the city would not talk to me. From the outside, a city that goes quiet the moment the questions get harder invites the very questions it is trying to avoid.

What Comes Next

I wanted to settle this directly, with the city and with Jason. The attorney's directive has effectively taken that off the table, and left us to chip away at it through records requests instead. I have asked to sit down with Patrick on camera and put the remaining questions to him directly, on the record. Until the city's attorney allows that, I will keep working through what we have found in public, one article at a time.

For Basil, the Hubbard work is finished. "I'm done with my Hubbard investigation," he told me. "I handed it off to you to take care of it and pass the torch." He is moving on to other work, and I am carrying the Hubbard reporting forward. This is the first of several articles. Over the coming weeks I will lay out what the investigation has documented.

I want to be plain about what this is and what it is not. I am not accusing anyone in Hubbard of a crime, and I am not alleging misconduct. What Basil and I have done is gather the public record and identify questions we believe deserve answers. We have reached the point where it is time to put those records in front of the people who live in Hubbard and pay for it, and to ask for their help: answering the questions, filling the gaps we have not filled, and correcting anything we have gotten wrong.

I am not trying to make Hubbard look bad. If the city's attorney lets Patrick answer on camera, I will put every one of our questions to him directly. Until then, stay tuned. There is a lot to cover.

A Disclosure

There is one thing readers deserve to hear from me directly. Basil Zangare, who publishes as BZ Watchdog, is planning a run for Hill County Commissioner, Precinct 3. In the weeks ahead I plan to interview Basil on the record about how his journalism ties to his run for office, what led him to become a candidate, and what he wants the public to understand about how his candidacy relates to his work under BZ Watchdog. Those strike me as fair questions, and I intend to ask them plainly. Look for that conversation soon.

Opinion. This piece reflects my personal views and experiences. The factual claims in it come from public records, court filings, published reporting, or my own firsthand account.

The United States of America turns 250 years old today. My feed is full of people who are genuinely excited about it, and I understand why. A quarter of a millennium of self-government is worth celebrating. I have been trying to find that feeling all week.

One year ago today, on the afternoon of the Fourth of July, I walked out of the Wayne McCollum Detention Center in Ellis County on what started as a $3,000 recommended bond, later lowered to $500 at arraignment. All told, I spent about 30 hours in custody, from the arrest at my home to my release. The charge was criminal trespass, a Class B misdemeanor. The allegation was that I refused to leave Italy City Hall after a city council meeting. I will get to that story later.

What I keep coming back to instead are the people I have met doing this work, in small Texas towns most of the country will never hear of, whose lives got turned upside down for showing up: to a council meeting, to a protest, to a comment thread, or just to the lobby of their own city hall.

Nobody named in this article asked for pity, and I am not asking for any on their behalf. I am asking for honest reflection. These are their stories, told from the public record, and mine, told as carefully as a pending case allows.

Jennifer Combs

Jennifer Combs lives in Kerens. In early May of this year, she was arrested on a state jail felony warrant over a Facebook post about the City of Trinidad's drinking water. The charge came under Texas Penal Code §42.06, the statute covering knowingly false alarms or reports. In plain language, it treated a citizen's Facebook post about water quality as a criminal false alarm.

The post echoed concerns Trinidad residents had been raising about their water for years. Jennifer does not even live there; she spoke up on behalf of the people of a neighboring town. I documented the timeline of her arrest in detail back in May. The short version: on May 21, a Henderson County grand jury declined to indict her. The felony died in front of the first citizens who looked at it.

The fallout did not die with it. Jennifer filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Police Chief Charles Gregory, Officer Cameron Beckham, Mayor Pro Tem Marie Bannister, and the City of Trinidad itself. Since her arrest, the council has voted to terminate its municipal judge, Shellena Bivens, and appointed a replacement, Susan Carver; I was in the room for that vote. Weeks later, Chief Gregory resigned, and the council appointed Officer Beckham, the investigator who built the case against her, as interim chief.

City business carries on. Watching from the outside, you would never know a woman spent nearly a day in a jail cell over a Facebook post a grand jury would not touch, and the investigator who put her there now runs the department.

Winston Noles

Winston Noles, known to most people as Otto the Watchdog, came to Trinidad four days after Jennifer's arrest to protest what had happened to her. He was handcuffed and put in the back of a squad car, where he sat for about forty minutes before being released with a citation.

That is also the day I met him. I rushed to Trinidad when I heard what was unfolding and got there too late to see any of it. The charge was disorderly conduct, a Class C offense, the lowest level of criminal charge Texas has. Nine days later, Trinidad's municipal judge dismissed it. By then Otto had already filed a federal civil rights lawsuit of his own against Chief Gregory, three officers, and the city. That case is moving through the Eastern District of Texas now.

Here is the part that should stop you. The municipal judge who dismissed Otto's citation was Judge Bivens, the same judge the council went on to remove. Her attorneys took the removal to court, and according to their June press release on the case, Mayor Pro Tem Marie Bannister testified under oath that the council removed Judge Bivens in part because of the dismissal of Otto's case. Per that same release, her retaliation and due process claims against the city are headed to trial.

Otto did not recently stumble into this work. He has been at it for years, and it has cost him for years. He was once arrested in Royse City for holding a sign a passing motorist found offensive, a misdemeanor that prosecutors kept alive even after he moved out of state, pulling him back to Texas for hearing after hearing. In a 2020 interview with The Real News Network, he said he has no criminal convictions.

In that same interview, he talked about the case he considers the most egregious of all of them. He was camping with his own children when a stranger saw a child whose complexion did not match his and reported that his "brown baby may have been kidnapped." He was arrested on a felony. A father at a campsite with his kids, and someone else's assumption about what a family is supposed to look like. That was enough for a felony arrest.

He described the machinery better than I ever could: "Traveling back and forth to court costs a lot of money. Everything costs a lot of money. So just to be accused in a land that we're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, can actually bankrupt you. And does, in fact, bankrupt most people."

Disclosure: when Otto's federal complaint needed to be served on the defendants, I volunteered and did it at no cost to him or his attorney. I handled each service discreetly, out of respect for everyone on both sides of the case.

Kolton Krottinger

I met Kolton Krottinger at a Trinidad council meeting this June. He introduced himself with a handshake and told me he had come to advocate for finding new council candidates for Trinidad, a town where he does not live and holds no personal stake. He drove out anyway, because people he had never met were going through something he recognized.

He recognized it from Hood County. In November of last year, sheriff's deputies arrested Kolton over a satirical political meme posted on a Facebook page he operates. The charge was felony online impersonation. His attorneys say he did not even post it; one of the page's administrators did. He was arrested the day after an election he had been active in, and he was released on a $10,000 bond with a condition banning him from social media entirely. The story made national news.

The case fell apart the way these cases tend to. A justice of the peace discharged the charge within about a month. The prosecutor brought in to review it, Ellis County and District Attorney Lindy Beaty, rejected it in December for insufficient evidence. In January, Kolton filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the sheriff, a former deputy, the original district attorney who had stepped aside from the case, and Hood County itself, alleging what his attorneys called a "coordinated effort to silence a political critic." Among the allegations: officials seized the phone he uses for his journalism without a warrant.

Sit with the bond condition for a second. A man no court ever convicted of anything spent weeks legally barred from speaking on social media, over a meme his lawyers say he did not post.

Then There Is Italy

A year ago I was president of ITXN, short for the Italy Texas News and Transparency Foundation, a nonprofit I founded in August 2024 for the benefit of Italy, Texas, and the organization I led before Watchtower. Today it is run by President Shelby Browning, with Clayton Muirhead, an Italy resident, still serving as vice president. Dane Oakley is an Italy resident who came to the same June council meeting we did, but he was never part of ITXN. He simply got grouped with us in the fallout.

On June 9, 2025, I attempted to interview Italy Councilmember Luin McConnell on camera after that meeting. McConnell grabbed my camera, making contact with force, then reached for it a second time, and I had to move it out of his reach. Councilmember Robert Hodge, City Secretary Amber Cunningham, City Administrator Keith Whitfield, and then-Public Works Director James Wallingsford were among the witnesses, along with other residents. No officer was in the building; one had to be called to respond. Nobody was arrested that night. Everyone went home.

The warrants came weeks later. On the morning of July 3, Italy police served a criminal trespass warrant at my home over the allegation that I refused to leave City Hall after that meeting, a Class B misdemeanor. I spent the night in jail and bonded out the next afternoon, on the Fourth of July, paying the $500 in cash.

On July 7, Dane went to the police station to ask what had happened to me. He was arrested on sight. Here is what Dane did at City Hall that night: nothing. He spoke to no one. He watched as an observer, and when people were told to leave, he walked out right behind Councilmember Raymond Mosley while I was still in the lobby. Clayton saw what happened to Dane, learned there was a warrant out for him too, and turned himself in the following morning, covering Dane's bond on the way in. Their bonds were lowered to $500 too. All three of us were booked, and our mugshots circulated publicly.

On September 2, 2025, the office of Ellis County and District Attorney Lindy Beaty, the same prosecutor who would later reject the Hood County meme case, issued a rejection letter in Dane's case: "The above-referenced case has been rejected for prosecution at this time." The warrant was recalled, the bond was released, and Dane got his money back.

Clayton and I have received no such letter. One full year after my release, our cases have not been filed. No court date. No news. The charges simply sit there.

In April of this year, Italy police arrested me a second time, this time for disrupting a meeting or procession under Texas Penal Code §42.05, another Class B misdemeanor. The recommended bond was $8,000, the judge upheld it, and I bonded out through a bondsman. That fee never comes back, and that case still has no court date either.

I retained CJ Grisham and Ryan Franceschina of GFA Law to represent me in the matters stemming from my Italy arrests. As of this writing, both matters remain open.

Dane's rejection letter came from the office of Ellis County and District Attorney Lindy Beaty, the same office where my case and Clayton's still sit unfiled. The City of Italy's current attorney, Ann Montgomery of the Messer Fort firm, is herself a former Ellis County District Attorney.

Two Hundred Fifty Years

The document this country celebrates today was, at the moment of its signing, evidence of a crime. The men who put their names on it understood that a death warrant was the likely response to their words. They showed up anyway, and the country they started was built on the idea that it should never work that way again.

Look at how these stories actually ended. Dane's case was rejected by the district attorney. Jennifer's felony died at the grand jury. Otto's citation was dismissed by the city's own municipal judge, who was then removed from her bench. Kolton's charge was discharged by a justice of the peace and rejected by a specially appointed prosecutor. Not one conviction anywhere in this article. The only things still open are the two Italy cases that remain unfiled a year later, my second charge waiting with them, and the federal lawsuits the arrested filed back.

The process was the punishment. The mugshot, the bond money, the social media ban, the night in a cell, and the message all of it sends to the next person thinking about showing up.

I find it hard to feel 250 years of freedom on the first anniversary of bonding out of jail over a chain of events that began when a sitting councilmember grabbed my camera. It is harder still knowing a woman was jailed on a felony warrant over a Facebook post raising real concerns about another town's drinking water. The water everyone already knew was bad became the whole story, and the months of political tension that led to this mess in the first place seemed to get drowned out with it.

I want to be clear about where this comes from. I love this country, today especially. Loving it honestly means looking at what happens in its smallest towns and telling the truth about what I see.

Fifteen years after the signing, the first generation of Americans wrote a promise into their Constitution: the right of the people to speak freely, to assemble peaceably, and "to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I wonder what the men who wrote that promise would think of these stories.

While you enjoy the holiday, and I hope you truly do, I would ask you to sit for a moment with the same question I will be carrying through the weekend. Are we truly free when valid public discourse is met with warrants, criminal charges, and financial burden, instead of open conversation?

More than 244,000 times, and counting, a video has played of a small-town mayor saying he's tired of watching the towns around the lake "get taken down by these people that are nothing but fearmongers." The clip runs about eleven seconds. The comment section under it is a war. Strangers from across the country are in there arguing about data centers, the President, the left, the right, and whether the man on the screen is a king or a communist. It's a fun scroll. It also has almost nothing to do with what the mayor was actually talking about.

I've spent this year reporting on Tool, Seven Points, and Trinidad. Those are three of the towns around this lake, and all three have had public fights over holding their leadership accountable. So when a mayor on Cedar Creek Lake says he's tired of watching the towns around here get taken down by "these people," the clip is hard for me to scroll past.

On Tuesday, June 23, 2026, Gun Barrel City Mayor Brian Crull said his piece during the public comment period. He didn't walk down to the citizens' podium to do it. He spoke from the dais, from his seat as mayor, with his nameplate in front of him, while he was the one running the meeting. He told the room he'd "speak as a resident," and then he spoke for about six minutes. The line that left the building and went around the country was this one: "I am tired of watching some of these towns around here get taken down by these people that are nothing but fearmongers. They have no substance."

Here's the part the clip doesn't carry. It wasn't posted by a stranger. It was posted by Amaris Faith, the opponent Crull defeated in May and the same critic he named that night, in a Facebook group she runs, framed as a question: "What towns around here is he talking about?" When commenters said the clip lacked context, she posted the full council video so people could watch the whole thing for themselves.

What He Actually Said

The clip is short, and it traveled a long way from the room it happened in. The real moment was local, specific, and pointed, and it's worth slowing down on.

Crull didn't toss the remark off. He named a private citizen who wasn't in the room and spent several minutes on her, questioning her honesty, her motives, and her conduct in other states. He said critics like her "seem to hide all the time behind a keyboard." He went after the animal-ordinance petition. He invoked a former legal name his critic no longer uses, a woman who now goes by Amaris Faith and who has said publicly that she changed her name more than 20 years ago for religious reasons. I'm not going to republish that name, because doing so would only finish the job he started from the dais. He closed with, "sometimes you gotta meet fire with fire."

Citizens get three minutes at a Gun Barrel City meeting. The mayor took about six, from his own seat, with the official timer nowhere in sight. That's the part residents keep coming back to. Civil rights advocate CJ Grisham, who has shown up in plenty of these fights, laid out the open-meetings argument in the thread. He didn't mince words:

Mayor, you are NOT allowed to speak during "public comments." You are not the public when you are on the dais. We are. There is case law on this. Government Code Sec. 551.007, Public Testimony, is very clear and unambiguous that "A governmental body shall allow each member of the public who desires to address the body regarding an item on an agenda for an open meeting of the body to address the body regarding the item at the meeting before or during the body's consideration of the item." You'll notice that the law does not say "each geographic resident under the governing body's authority." So, the question then becomes, "what is a member of the public?" Well, "When 'member of the public' is used in conjunction with an identified or identifiable group (or groups)—as it is here with 'governmental body'—its meaning is contextually modified to mean a person who does not belong to the identified group." Austin Bulldog v. Leffingwell, 490 S.W.3d 240, 246 (Tex. App. - Austin 2016). Hence, "the phrase 'member of the public' is often used to differentiate between ordinary citizens and the government that was created by and is comprised of those citizens." Id. at 247. For example, in Stratta v. Roe, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that Mr. Stratta could not speak during public comments because he was a member of the groundwater conservation district board that he wanted to address. The Court held that because "Stratta is a BVGCD Board member...[h]e thus is not a 'member of the public' when he attends a BVGCD meeting" even though he signed up to speak in his personal capacity. Stratta v. Roe, 961 F.3d 340, 363 (5th Cir 2020). As the person officiating, obviously we can't stop you from being a clown and doing whatever you want until next election. But, you've garnered my attention. Congratulations. Additionally, you violated your own rules even speaking for more than double the time allotted for public comments. You're a hypocrite.

CJ Grisham, June 2026

Another commenter, Roger Joiner, put the fix plainly: if Crull wanted to speak as a citizen, he should have handed the gavel to the mayor pro tem and stepped down to the podium like everyone else.

There's a real counterargument, and it belongs here. One commenter pointed out that an elected official doesn't lose his free-speech rights and is "also one of the people." Fair enough. The open question isn't whether the mayor can have an opinion. It's whether he can take the public's comment time, from the chair, while he's the one running the meeting. That's a fair question, and it's the kind that gets lost the moment a local meeting turns into a national shouting match.

So I Called

I want to give credit where it's due, because this is where the story turns.

I asked the front desk for the city manager. The woman I reached did more to help me get to her mayor than almost any city I've ever called. She gave me his voicemail line and his email and told me plainly that staff doesn't manage his calendar. I left a voicemail, introduced myself as one of the "you people" he'd talked about the night before, and said that if he wasn't talking about me, I'd love for him to clarify.

He called back the same morning. We talked for 55 minutes, on the record.

That matters. This is a mayor who takes calls. In his own words: "I don't call everybody back. I'm not a keyboard person. I either meet in person or I talk over the phone." He doesn't return every voicemail. Get him on the line, though, and he talks. Plenty of officials go quiet the second they learn I'm the one calling. Hubbard did. After a stretch of open, cordial conversations with the city there, its attorney directed staff to stop sitting for interviews, and the line went dead. That's a story for another day, and it's coming. Crull did the opposite. He picked up, he talked, and before we hung up he invited me to City Hall, invited me to a regional mayors' group he helped start, and asked me to send him this article.

The Mayor in His Own Words

Some of what he told me is to his credit, and I'm not going to pretend otherwise.

Crull serves without pay. He works a full-time job at a facility in Dallas, gets up at 3:30 in the morning, and gets back to handle his city duties in the afternoon "for free, by the way, as a volunteer position." He described the city the same way by phone that he did from the dais: "We are a mayor weak, council strong. I am basically just the face and the voice of the city. I don't have a vote." He's proud of a regional coalition he started with Randy Teague from Mabank. "I have guys calling me from all over the state of Texas asking me to come speak," he told me, "how do I get this started, because they're all dealing with some of this stuff too."

He also told me he uses no social media and has no Facebook account. I'll be honest about where I land on that, because I think it cuts against him, not for him. I'd rather see a public official on social media than off it. Done right, with a clear understanding of the risks like accidental walking quorums and the city's own policies, a mayor's page is one of the best tools he has to meet residents where they already are. A mayor who stays off the platform where his whole city is already talking isn't rising above the noise. He's just missing the conversation. I appreciate the officials who show up and engage at the same level as the people they serve.

There's one project he was genuinely excited to tell me about. He's building a personal advisory board, separate from the city, that he's calling "Moving You Forward." He described it as a set of podcasts on his own site, built around people he trusts. Dr. Carla Russo, he said, will handle a wellness and fitness component. His pastor, Sean Paschal of First Baptist Church in Gun Barrel, will lead a spiritual component alongside other faith leaders in the area. There's a business component too. There's also a civics piece, someone whose only job is to explain small government to residents in plain language: what planning and zoning actually does, what a plat is, what a board of adjustment is and why the city has one. "The only thing I know to do at this point," he told me, "is to educate and get as much positive information out there any way I can to help my constituents and my citizens understand better what's good and what's bad." I don't have to agree with how he handled the dais to think a mayor who wants residents to understand planning and zoning is onto something worth watching.

Taken Out of Context

Crull told me the viral line was "taken out of context." What he meant, he said, was mayors reaching out to one another for help, plus "the 2 or 3 percent of the malcontents who have nothing to offer the city." He says he's usually much more positive than that clip makes him look.

So let me lay his words and his own tape side by side. The words in the clip are real. They're on the recording, and the clip didn't invent them. On the part that matters, though, his next-morning framing doesn't match what the tape shows. A general comment about a mayors' coalition and a few malcontents isn't what happened in that room. What happened was a sustained, personal callout of one named individual, delivered from the chair, with a former name attached to it. The phrase was real. So was the context he says it came from. The honest place to disagree is on whether the podium moment was appropriate, not on whether the callout was personal. It was.

The Names in the Thread

The clip didn't just travel to strangers. It pulled in a recognizable roster of Texas accountability voices, and they didn't stay quiet.

CJ Grisham was one of them. Jennifer Lynn Combs weighed in. Trinidad resident and community advocate Jon Baker wrote that a mayor "calling out someone personally and launching personal attacks is not leadership." Winston "Otto the Watchdog" Noles of the Watchdog News Network and the activist Kolton Krottinger got tagged into it, and Krottinger said he might just make the trip out to Gun Barrel City.

Here's the part worth sitting with. Naming that roster is the exact thing the mayor was warning about. An out-of-area network of government accountability figures, many of whom have never met in person, pointed at one small town over a single clip. If you support Crull, that looks like a coordinated pile-on by people who don't pay Gun Barrel City's sales tax and won't live with what comes next. If you don't support him, it looks like accountability doing what accountability does, showing up wherever a door cracks open.

I don't think that resolves cleanly, and I'm not going to pretend it does. There's one fact that keeps the "outside pile-on" answer from settling it, though. The grievances pulling people in are mostly local, and mostly documented. The animal-ordinance repeal petition carried 207 signatures that the city's own secretary certified as legally sufficient. In that same thread, residents were talking about brown water near the 274 dam, the budget, and the long-stalled Pier 334 project. The outsiders didn't invent any of that. They just pointed at it.

The reaction hasn't stayed with the out-of-town crowd, either. Days later, Chris Bayhi, a Gun Barrel City resident who ran for a council seat and sat on the committee that petitioned to repeal the animal ordinance, posted his own breakdown. He skipped the case law and made Grisham's point from a resident's chair. The mayor, he wrote, "wasn't standing at the podium like the rest of us." He was "holding the gavel, running the meeting, sitting at the dais." His verdict: "That's not a resident. That's the government." Bayhi's bigger worry was for everyone else in town. The mayor "wasn't just talking about us," he wrote, meaning the candidates and the people who signed the petition. "He was talking about YOU." Bayhi gave me his blessing to quote him, and he says he has more coming.

What He Confirmed on the Record

In the middle of defending himself, Crull confirmed real news. Gun Barrel City is losing both its city manager and its economic development director at the same time, with an interim coming in through Strategic Government Resources. That's a lot of turnover at the top of a city this size, and his own council authorized the SGR arrangement on the same June 23 record.

He confirmed he was reelected on May 2 by roughly two to one. He said the 2026 animal ordinance is headed "to the voters in November." That lines up with the city secretary's certification that the repeal petition carried 207 verified signatures and was legally sufficient, the same number the mayor's own staff put on the record, and a more favorable picture for his critics than the one he painted from the dais.

He defended the long-delayed Pier 334 waterfront project hard. He told me the city already has about $58,000 in permit revenue from it in a town with no property tax, blamed tariffs and supply-chain problems for the slow build, and said the developer "held off on construction for an extra six or seven months so we could keep that Big Chief Landing boat ramp open for the summer." Those are his numbers, on a project that's years behind schedule and one I'm digging into separately, against the records.

The Questions Worth Asking

A mayor who criticizes people for hiding behind a keyboard used the one thing he does control, the chair and the gavel, to deliver a personal speech at a critic who wasn't in the room to answer. There's an extra wrinkle. The same night he went after a critic's "keyboard," his council took up a proposed social-media policy for council members, presented by the departing city manager and set for possible adoption in July. A mayor who told me he has "no vote" and is "just the face of the city" took roughly six minutes of the public's comment time from his own seat, with the timer absent, to call a defeated opponent by a name she no longer uses. I'm putting those to him as questions, not accusations, and he asked for the follow-up calls.

Not everyone read the meeting the way the "watchdog" crowd did. After Amaris Faith posted the full video so people could judge for themselves, one commenter watched the whole thing and decided the mayor had done nothing more than "put a keyboard warrior in their place."

I'm one reporter with public records and a phone, and I'm not out to take any town down. What I can do is keep the conversation going, in the open and on the record. So here's where this goes next, and I'd like you in on it.

My next move in Gun Barrel City is Amaris Faith. She's the one the mayor named, and she hasn't had her turn. I'm reaching out to her for an on-record conversation, and that interview will be its own article, in her own words. I've also reached out to Winston "Otto" Noles, and he's agreed to sit down with me for a piece of his own. Both of them have spent years around exactly this kind of fight.

When I loop back to Mayor Crull to close this out, I'm not going to walk in with only my own questions. I've asked Amaris and Otto to send me the ones they most want put to him. If you have concerns you want Mayor Crull to address and you haven't had luck on your own, feel free to send them to me at tips@watchtowerci.com. I'll take the questions that come up the most, from every side, and put them to the mayor directly on our next call. I feel that is where this conversation will start to get a lot more interesting and productive.

To close this out for now, Otto had some words to share on the subject of "taking cities down":

Since the mayor likes putting things on the record, I haven't taken down a single City that didn't deserve it. In fact, I think I get too much credit, I haven't taken down a single City that didn't do it to themselves. If accurate reporting is all that is required to "take you down" then you do in fact need to be taken down.

Winston "Otto" Noles, June 27, 2026

I am seeing a lot of friction and hate on both sides of the aisle in Trinidad. As someone caught in the middle and seeing both sides, I can publicly attest that this is an incredibly stressful situation for everyone involved.

There are misconceptions about what I do and why I do it. I am not a journalist. I am not a reporter. I am a consultant. There is a section at the bottom of this article that explains more about that, for readers who want it. The context most relevant up front is this. Trinidad Police Chief Charles Gregory publicly endorsed my work on March 18, 2026.

"I truly appreciate you coming out, being part of the meeting, and taking the time to share your experience. It means more than you probably realize to see people show up, stay engaged, and care enough to speak on the future of our community. I also want to thank you for your kind words. My goal, and the goal of every officer here, is simple: we want people to feel welcome, safe, and respected when they come to Trinidad. Whether it's your first meeting or your fiftieth, you should feel like you belong in the conversation. What you said about having tough conversations without taking things personally really stuck. That's not always easy, especially in a small town where people are passionate and deeply invested, but it's necessary. Growth doesn't happen without a little discomfort, and respectful dialogue is how we get there together."

Chief Charles Gregory, Trinidad Police Department, March 18, 2026

At the time of that endorsement, Trinidad was actively facing high amounts of political tension over matters not even related to the water. That deeper story is something the public has not yet fully seen. The endorsement was made after I attended my first Trinidad city council meeting and was able to reset the mindset of the room. It seemed like the entire city supported what I was doing. I could call anyone and have a conversation, even Dan Pass and Jerry Bannister.

I have been active in the Cedar Creek Lake area since February with Seven Points and Tool. I have made a lot of connections over the last few months, nearly all of which have been incredibly stressed and/or emotional in some way due to the recent events.

I have also had recent conversations with people across the city on every side of what is happening, including elected officials, the police chief, officers, and current and former city employees and contractors. The common theme among them all is stress and uncertainty.

The Day of Winston Otto Noles's Arrest

On May 12, I drove very quickly from Corsicana to Trinidad to try to prevent the arrest of Winston Otto Noles. Let's just say I made it to Trinidad City Hall before the Police Chief did. However, by the time I showed up, Otto was already being put in the back of the squad car, and the arresting officer had no patience left for me. My goal was to prevent Trinidad from walking itself into a second lawsuit. I failed.

I have been involved in this story in every direction since. I have spoken with Otto's federal civil rights attorney, Brandon J. Grable of Grable PLLC in San Antonio, who filed Otto's federal complaint on May 14 against Chief Gregory, Sergeant Robert McCumsey, Officer Cameron Beckham, Malakoff Officer Derrick Hocutt, and the City of Trinidad. I voluntarily agreed to serve process on the defendants in that case at no cost to Otto's counsel. I did it because I believe the case has merit and because the alternative was a constable, a sheriff's deputy, or a stranger handing them the papers in an uncomfortable situation. As of this writing, all five defendants have been served. Chief Gregory was the last. I served him in person at 1:45 PM today, May 26, after we agreed over the weekend to meet once he was back in town.

I am disclosing service here because transparency is important. I wanted to help keep this from being any harder than it had to be for everyone involved.

Where the Larger Story Stands

In the last week, this story has moved very quickly.

On May 19, Jennifer Combs filed her own federal civil rights lawsuit against Chief Gregory, Officer Cameron Beckham, Councilwoman Marie Bannister, and the City of Trinidad. On May 20, David Sentendrey with Fox 4 in Dallas broke the Combs arrest story into mainstream coverage, including an interview with Mayor Dennis Haws in which the Mayor said, on the record, that the city's water situation is "a struggle, without question" and that the original water pipes were installed in the 1950s. On May 21, the Henderson County Grand Jury declined to indict Jennifer Combs on the felony false alarm or report charge. The same day, the disorderly conduct citation against Otto Noles was also dismissed.

Two arrests. Two cases. Two dismissals. Two federal civil rights lawsuits filed within five days of each other against the same police department.

CJ Grisham and Ryan Franceschina, the two partners at GFA LAW, PLLC, are representing Jennifer Combs in her federal case. They are now coordinating with Consumer Wellness Center Labs of Cedar Creek to provide free independent water testing to Trinidad residents who live within the city water system. Residents who want a test can email trinidadwater@gfalaw.us with their address and a contact number. Identities will be kept confidential unless the resident gives explicit permission. This is the kind of community work I always hoped would emerge from this situation, and I am grateful to see it happening, regardless of who organized it.

I am also encouraged to see that open discussion about Trinidad water has resumed in the Facebook group called "Beware of Trinidad Texas Water." Residents are sharing photos, asking questions, comparing experiences, and posting infrastructure observations. This is the kind of discourse that should never have been chilled in the first place.

What People Need to Stop Doing

The Henderson County Sheriff's Office posted a public statement on May 23 that I would like every reader of this article to take seriously. Henderson County dispatchers and 911 operators are being flooded with calls and verbal abuse from people upset about decisions made by the Trinidad Police Department. The Henderson County Sheriff's Office is not the Trinidad Police Department. Their 911 dispatchers do not control what the Trinidad Police Chief does. When you tie up those phone lines with calls of frustration over Trinidad's choices, you are blocking calls from people who need actual emergency help.

Please stop. This is not how we hold Trinidad accountable. This is how we hurt the people of Henderson County while we are trying to help the people of Trinidad.

I will also say this directly, regardless of which side of this you stand on. Please stop directing comments at the families of Trinidad police officers. The spouses, children, and parents of those officers did not vote on any of this. They are not on the agenda for Thursday. Aiming at them is not accountability. It is harassment, and it makes the actual case for accountability harder for the people who have been doing this work for months.

On Chief Gregory

I want to say a few things about Chief Gregory directly.

I am not excusing the decisions that have brought us to this point. Two federal civil rights lawsuits, two dismissed cases, and a no-bill from the grand jury are not normal outcomes for a police department that is functioning the way a police department is supposed to function. Those outcomes deserve scrutiny. They will get scrutiny.

What I will also say is that there is more going on in Trinidad than what has appeared on Facebook or in the news. Local political tensions in this city predate the water story and continue to run underneath it. I am not going to detail those tensions in this article. They are real, they matter, and they are part of why I have been here doing this work for as long as I have.

There has been online speculation that Chief Gregory has been hiding from this situation. He has not been. He was out of town last week for training that was scheduled before any of the recent events broke. He returned to Trinidad over the weekend. We spoke by phone. We agreed to meet today. I served him at 1:45 PM. He has not avoided me. He has not stopped talking. Make of that what you will.

Where the Decisions Actually Get Made

Direct your concerns to the voting city councilmembers. They are the ones responsible for these decisions at the end of the day.

The Mayor of Trinidad is not the decision-maker on the items everyone is in uproar about. The Mayor is, by design and by law, the face of the city. He runs the meetings, he represents the city publicly, and he votes only in the case of a tie. Mayor Haws has, in fact, been one of the more publicly measured voices on the water issue in recent weeks. The actions that have created this uproar were taken by the voting city councilmembers. That is where the questions belong, and that is where the answers will come from or fail to come from.

The next Trinidad City Council meeting is scheduled for Thursday, May 28, at 6:00 PM at Trinidad City Hall, 100 Park Street. The agenda was posted on May 21 at 4:00 PM by City Administrator Sam Dosier.

The agenda confirms what Item 4 calls the visitors and citizens inquiry slot, limited to five minutes per person, on any subject not on the agenda. That is your time. Use it.

The substantive agenda is short and personnel-heavy. After the opening, the council recesses into an executive session under the , citing both consultation with the city attorney (Tex. Gov't Code § 551.071) and personnel matters (Tex. Gov't Code § 551.074), to deliberate the future of one specific person by name: Trinidad Municipal Judge Shellena Bivens. Judge Bivens is the same judge who dismissed the disorderly conduct case against Otto Noles on May 21, the same day this very agenda was posted. The very next public action item, Item 7, is to discuss and possibly take action concerning her dismissal or termination.

Items 8 and 9 handle the city's outside legal counsel. Item 8 brings in Flowers Davis PLLC as the new outside counsel for any and all litigation matters. The signature authorization on that contract is notable on its own. The agenda routes it not through Mayor Haws but through Mayor Pro Tem Marie Bannister. Item 9 ends the existing legal services agreement with Clayton B. Gaddis PLLC and directs City Administrator Cynthia Dosier to notify the firm.

Item 10 is the cleanest signal of how the council expects this meeting to go. It appoints Susan Carver as the new municipal judge, but only if Item 7 results in the dismissal of Judge Bivens. The replacement is pre-staged, contingent on the removal vote.

The agenda also includes a notice that members of the Trinidad Economic Development Corporation may attend the same meeting in numbers sufficient to constitute a .

Get Involved

You can be in the room for all of this. You can ask questions on the record. You can ask why the judge who dismissed a city case is on the agenda this week. You can ask why the city is changing its legal counsel right now. You can ask why the contract authorization is routed through the Mayor Pro Tem rather than the Mayor. You can ask about the water. You can ask about anything that concerns you as a resident. The record matters. If you cannot attend in person, watch for the livestream on my Facebook page.

This is going to keep getting harder before it gets easier. I do not have a tidy way to end this article, because the situation does not have a tidy ending yet. What I can tell you is that I am still here, I am still having conversations, and that this story is far bigger than any one Facebook post, any one arrest, or any one news cycle.

I will see you Thursday.

About Watchtower

I do what I do to protect our small Texas cities and to help coax them towards compliance, grants, infrastructure repairs, and growth. These things cannot happen when you have public officials acting like tyrants.

Articles only come when the consulting does not work. I resort to investigative journalism when local advocacy and direct communication break down.

Watchtower was built to help cities navigate these problems without cost to the city or its residents. Everything published on watchtowerci.com is free. No paywalls. No ads. No corporate sponsorship. The work is funded entirely by readers who believe it matters.

A U.S. military veteran stood on the public sidewalk outside Carthage City Hall on the morning of September 20, 2024, holding a cardboard sign that read "God Bless Our Homeless Vets." Within minutes, according to a federal civil rights lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, a Carthage Police sergeant detained him, demanded his identification under threat of arrest, and trespassed him from all City of Carthage property.

The encounter was recorded twice. Ten days later, the Carthage city manager sent one of the recordings, the police body-camera footage, to the veteran himself, along with a written apology and a rescission of the trespass. The federal lawsuit was filed twenty months later.

The Lawsuit

Jeffrey Gray v. City of Carthage, Texas, et al. was filed May 21, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division (Case No. 6:26-cv-00238). The defendants are the City of Carthage, City Manager Stephen K. Williams, and Carthage Police Sergeant Dustin C. Mims. Williams and Mims are sued in their individual capacities.

The complaint brings four counts under 42 U.S.C. § 1983: First Amendment suppression of speech in a traditional public forum, First Amendment retaliation, Fourth Amendment unlawful seizure and compelled identification, and municipal liability against the city. Gray seeks declaratory relief, nominal and compensatory damages, punitive damages against Williams and Mims personally, attorneys' fees, and a jury trial.

The factual narrative in the complaint runs like this. Gray, a veteran and citizen journalist from Saint Augustine, Florida, came to Carthage on the morning of September 20, 2024. He entered City Hall, asked permission to use the restroom, told a staff member he would be standing outside with his sign, and was waved through without objection. He then stood to the side of the City Hall entrance with his sign. Within minutes, city staff called the police. Sergeant Mims responded, told Gray to move out to the public roadway, and after Gray respectfully declined, went back inside to ask staff whether they wanted Gray issued a criminal trespass. He returned outside, trespassed Gray from all city property, and compelled his identification under threat of arrest. The complaint says Gray asked to speak with the city attorney, the mayor, or the city manager before the trespass was issued, and that each request was denied. The complaint says City Manager Stephen K. Williams was inside the building throughout, watching through the glass.

After Gray left, according to the complaint, the sergeant went back inside and briefed the city manager in person, with the body-worn camera still rolling. The complaint quotes the city manager telling the sergeant: "Being public property, as long as he is not harassing and bothering people, I don't know that we can do anything with him, you know, and we just gotta be careful." The lawsuit says the city manager did not order the trespass rescinded at that moment, and instead described Gray as the kind of person who "films" and goes around to "stir up something" and "get you" in a lawsuit. Ten days later, the complaint says, the city manager called Gray, apologized in writing on city letterhead, rescinded the trespass without a commission vote, and committed to scheduling civil rights training for the Carthage Police Department.

Gray is represented by Brandon J. Grable of Grable PLLC in San Antonio.

The Videos

The encounter was recorded twice, and both recordings are public.

The first is Jeffrey Gray's own. He carries a personal camera and runs the HonorYourOath YouTube channel. His recording captures the outside-the-building portion of the encounter from his perspective. It was published September 23, 2024 and has more than 220,000 views.

The second is the Carthage Police body-camera footage. The sergeant was wearing a body camera throughout the encounter. On Monday September 30, 2024, the city manager uploaded that body-camera footage to his Google Drive and sent it to Gray, along with the apology email. Gray published it on October 2, 2024. It has more than 314,000 views.

I reviewed both videos in full.

What I Observed

The two recordings line up with the petition's account of the outside-the-building encounter. Where the complaint quotes the sergeant directly, those quotes appear in Gray's recording at specific timestamps.

At about 3:52, after Gray tells the sergeant he is engaged in protected speech on a traditional public forum, the sergeant responds: "They understand that. They know what you're doing, but they don't want you up here by the door."

At about 4:38, Gray asks: "Am I being detained or anything?" Sergeant: "You absolutely are, now." Gray: "Am I required by law to give you ID?" Sergeant: "You absolutely are now." Gray: "And if I don't, what will happen?" Sergeant: "You will go to jail." All three of those quotes appear, word-for-word, in the federal complaint.

At about 6:26 through 6:39, Gray asks to speak with the city attorney, the mayor, and the city manager. Each request is refused.

At about 8:04 of Gray's video, just before he leaves, he asks the sergeant: "Is your body cam recording?" Sergeant: "Absolutely." Gray: "Was it recording the whole time?" Sergeant: "Absolutely."

The body camera fills in what Gray could not see from outside.

In the inside briefing before the trespass, a female staff member tells the sergeant Gray was "making everybody nervous" and that "the girls are nervous." She says: "we don't want him by the front door doing it. You know, soliciting right here at the door." Before the sergeant walks back outside to issue the trespass, he asks the staff: "So he's not going to want to move, so y'all want him trespassed from the property?" The complaint says the sergeant did not exercise independent law-enforcement judgment but asked city employees whether they wanted the trespass. That moment is on the body camera.

At about the 8:04 mark of the body-cam segment, the sergeant walks back inside and finds the city manager. He tells him Gray "actually wanted to argue a case stating that I didn't have the right to" trespass him from the property. The city manager responds:

"Being public property, as long as he's not harassing and bothering people, I don't know that we can do anything with him, you know, and we just gotta be careful."

That is the same quote the federal complaint attributes to the city manager. It is on the body-camera footage the city manager himself sent to Gray.

The body camera keeps rolling. The city manager continues: "He didn't look like he was filming, but you got these people that go around and try to stir up something and get you in [a lawsuit]. That's exactly what he was doing." About a minute later, he says it again in slightly different words: "There are people out there that are trying to get you in a lawsuit, so they'll come in here, and then you're like, well, you want nothing. Well, then you need to leave, right?"

The trespass was not rescinded in that moment. That happened ten days later, after Gray contacted the city manager directly.

After Gray had already been trespassed and was gone, a staff member added a more specific claim: "He asked Jeremy for money when he came in." The complaint specifically denies that Gray was soliciting money. Gray's own video shows him asking only to use the restroom on his way in. The federal court will resolve the dispute.

What I did not see in either video: the city manager watching through the glass during the outside encounter. The body camera is mounted on the sergeant, not pointed at the city manager during that period. The complaint says the city manager watched through the glass. The recordings I reviewed do not independently confirm or contradict it.

Asking Carthage

I am attempting to open a line of communication with the City of Carthage about what the federal complaint alleges and what the body camera shows. I have sent a set of on-the-record questions to City Manager Stephen K. Williams and to City Attorney Collin Underwood, and I have asked them to respond. With the Memorial Day weekend underway, I do not expect a response before next week. Any response will be added to this article as soon as it arrives.

Sources Cited

• Jeffrey Gray v. City of Carthage, Texas, et al., Case No. 6:26-cv-00238, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, Original Complaint filed May 21, 2026 (24 pages).
• HonorYourOath video, "Detained, Trespassed and Threatened With Arrest", published September 23, 2024.
• HonorYourOath video, "Update Bodycam Trespass Rescinded", published October 2, 2024.

Winston Wesley Noles, the citizen journalist who records under the name "Otto the Watchdog," filed a federal civil rights lawsuit Thursday over his May 12 arrest at Trinidad City Hall. The complaint names Trinidad Police Chief Charles W. Gregory, Trinidad Sergeant Robert W. McCumsey, Trinidad Officer Cameron M. Beckham, Malakoff Officer Derrick Hocutt, and the City of Trinidad as defendants. It was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, and docketed as Case No. 6:26-cv-00221. Noles is represented by Brandon J. Grable of Grable PLLC in San Antonio.

I covered the original arrest on my own livestream on Tuesday afternoon. This article is a short summary of what the new federal complaint actually says.

What Noles Is Alleging

The lawsuit pleads four counts under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the federal civil rights statute.

Count One. Unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. Noles alleges Trinidad PD arrested him on a public sidewalk in front of City Hall without probable cause. The asserted offense, on Citation No. 36889, is disorderly conduct (language) under Texas Penal Code § 42.01(a)(1), with a court date of May 27, 2026. The complaint argues that the officers articulated the wrong legal standard on the record, omitting the statute's requirement that the language tend to incite an "immediate breach of the peace" and substituting a subjective-offense standard the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected since Cohen v. California in 1971.

Count Two. Unreasonable prolonged seizure under the Fourth Amendment. Noles alleges that after Chief Gregory arrived on scene and personally decided he would be released on a citation rather than taken to a magistrate, officers kept him handcuffed in the back of a patrol vehicle for at least another twenty minutes while paperwork was completed.

Count Three. First Amendment retaliation and content-and-viewpoint discrimination. Noles alleges the arrest, the prolonged detention, the citation, and an in-progress broadcast of music over Officer Beckham's patrol-vehicle PA system were each motivated by the content of his political signs and his commentary critical of Trinidad PD.

Count Four. Municipal liability against the City of Trinidad. The complaint pleads five independent theories, including that Chief Gregory is the city's final policymaker for arrest and detention decisions under Trinidad Code of Ordinances §§ 32.048 and 32.052, that the City Council ratified the conduct by inaction, that a custom of First Amendment retaliation exists, that the City failed to train its officers on the constitutional limits of arrest authority, and that the City was deliberately indifferent in its hiring of the named officers.

Noles asks the court for declaratory judgment that the conduct violated the First and Fourth Amendments, an injunction against using Texas Penal Code § 42.01 to arrest people for constitutionally protected criticism of government, an injunction against using police PA equipment to disrupt protests, nominal damages, compensatory damages, punitive damages against the individual officers, attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, and a jury trial. The amounts of compensatory and punitive damages are left to be proved at trial.

What the Complaint Says Happened Inside City Hall

The complaint describes a single, brief visit inside Trinidad City Hall before the protest began outside.

According to the lawsuit, Noles entered the building during ordinary business hours and spoke with a City employee in a normal speaking tone. He used profanity once. The complaint quotes it verbatim, as a self-deprecating remark about the employee's surname: "That's a fucked up name. Sorry about that." The employee allegedly responded, "I've had worse," and the conversation continued for several more minutes. According to the complaint, the two of them discussed an air-filter return vent, a Texas Penal Code § 30.06 firearm-prohibition sign posted on the outside of the building, and a potted plant. The employee allegedly told Noles the § 30.06 sign would "be gone by the end of the day." Noles departed by saying "Have a good day."

The lawsuit alleges that after Noles exited, the doors of Trinidad City Hall were locked from the inside. It also alleges that interior video-surveillance recordings, when produced, will corroborate Noles's account.

The complaint contrasts that description with what Chief Gregory told me on my own livestream later that afternoon. Gregory's stated basis for the arrest, as captured on that recording, was that Noles had "walked in, started yelling and cussing and screaming" inside the building and that the City's water clerk had been "offended" by his words. The complaint treats those two descriptions as inconsistent and asks the court to find that the version reflected on Noles's contemporaneous audio is the correct one.

What the Complaint Says Happened Outside City Hall

Noles then set up his recording equipment on the public sidewalk and steps in front of Trinidad City Hall and began a live internet broadcast. The complaint describes three handheld signs: Back the Blue, Fuck Bad Cops, and Shit Is Fucked Up And Stuff. His commentary was critical of Trinidad PD's recent enforcement actions and the City's handling of water-system concerns.

The lawsuit pleads a twenty-minute sequence between the first officer's arrival and the handcuffing. During that twenty minutes, officers from three different municipal police departments came and went. Officer Hocutt, of the Malakoff Police Department, arrived first and, the complaint alleges, entered Trinidad City Hall for about six minutes to speak with City employees. Officer Beckham arrived in a marked Trinidad PD patrol vehicle and, according to the complaint, broadcast music through the vehicle's PA system at a volume audible at Noles's recording location. The complaint alleges that broadcast was intended to interrupt the protest, interfere with the livestream, or trigger automated copyright-takedown action on Noles's internet broadcast.

According to the complaint, Sergeant McCumsey eventually told Noles the encounter "became a criminal matter," identified the offense as disorderly conduct, and articulated the elements as being in a public place, using profane language, and offending "a citizen that is not a public servant." Noles asked whether he could refrain from the language and receive a warning instead of a citation. McCumsey allegedly answered, "No. You've already committed that offense." Beckham then directed McCumsey to handcuff Noles with the words "Hook him up." Hocutt allegedly stood within arm's reach during the handcuffing and physically escorted the handcuffed Noles from the public sidewalk to the rear of a marked Trinidad patrol vehicle.

The complaint also pleads, on information and belief, that the four named officers have never received a single hour of First Amendment training, as reflected in their Texas Commission on Law Enforcement records.

Parties

Plaintiff. Winston Wesley Noles, a citizen of Hopkins County, Texas. He operates the "Otto the Watchdog" YouTube channel and a related internet broadcasting platform.

Defendants.

• Charles W. Gregory, Chief of Police, City of Trinidad. Sued in his individual capacity.
• Robert W. McCumsey, Sergeant, Trinidad Police Department. Sued in his individual capacity.
• Cameron M. Beckham, Officer, Trinidad Police Department. Sued in his individual capacity.
• Derrick Hocutt, Officer, Malakoff Police Department. Sued in his individual capacity.
• City of Trinidad, Texas, a Texas municipal corporation.

Plaintiff's counsel. Brandon J. Grable, Grable PLLC, 12451 Starcrest Drive, Suite 206, San Antonio, Texas 78216. Texas Bar No. 24086983.

Court. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division. Case No. 6:26-cv-00221. Filed May 14, 2026.

What Trinidad Says

This article is based entirely on the allegations in the complaint and on my own contemporaneous recording of the events at the scene. The City of Trinidad, Chief Gregory, Sergeant McCumsey, Officer Beckham, the Malakoff Police Department, and Officer Hocutt have not yet filed an answer. Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, they will have an opportunity to respond. None of the allegations have been tested in court, and the defendants are entitled to a presumption of innocence with respect to the conduct alleged.

I requested a statement from Chief Gregory at the scene on May 12. He gave me one on camera, and that recording is part of the public record of this case. I will continue to request comment as the case proceeds.

The complaint, the citation, and my own recording of Tuesday's events will continue to be the basis of my Trinidad coverage. The next regular Trinidad City Council meeting is on Tuesday, May 19. I plan to be there.

If you have information related to this case, the City of Trinidad, the Trinidad Police Department, or the Malakoff Police Department, you can reach me at tips@watchtowerci.com.

In the last week, Trinidad has charged a journalist with a state jail felony over a Facebook post about water, cited a protestor outside City Hall for their "language" and a sign that read "Fuck Bad Cops," and given a Texas First Amendment law firm enough material to publish two formal press releases in forty-eight hours.

Some of you have followed the events on Facebook. Some of you have read the article I published last weekend about the arrest of Jennifer Combs of Kerens. Some of you watched my livestream on Tuesday afternoon when a Navarro County activist was cited at Trinidad City Hall. Some of you watched Dan Pass's two livestreams the same day. Some of you read the press releases from CJ Grisham at GFA Law on May 12 and May 14.

What you may not have is the connected story.

I have been covering Trinidad since the middle of March. In that time, I have attended meetings, filed open records requests, watched livestreams, recorded my own, interviewed people on the record, listened to people off the record, and read every set of city council minutes I could get my hands on.

This article is that connected story. It is what brought me to Trinidad, what I have seen since, what other people have told me, and what I plan to do at the next council meeting on Tuesday, May 19. It is not a complete record. It does not name everyone. There are details I am not yet ready to publish, and there are claims I am not yet ready to confirm. The things I do publish here are things I can support with public records, with on-record interviews, with public Facebook posts, or with my own first-person observation.

If you live in Trinidad and you do not know who is on your council, when they meet, or what they have been deciding, I hope this article helps. If you live somewhere else and you are watching, I hope it helps you too. The patterns here are not unique to Trinidad.

What Originally Brought Me to Trinidad

I started covering Trinidad in mid-March 2026. The first thing I noticed, before I had attended a single meeting, was that the city had cycled through three city administrators in roughly two years.

Terri Newhouse, who had served as the city's secretary and administrator for years, departed sometime in mid-2025. The audit reports she had been responsible for had findings the auditor described as material weaknesses. Those findings repeated, in some cases verbatim, across multiple years. After her departure, an interim administrator served briefly. In August 2025, the city hired Lindsey Patterson as its new administrator. Six and a half months later, in late February 2026, the council voted four to zero to terminate Patterson. The mayor confirmed on the record that the termination was without cause.

The same week Patterson was placed on administrative leave, a sitting councilmember named Paul Kern resigned. He cited his health. Paul Kern had been appointed to the at-large council seat in November 2025 on a unanimous vote of the seated council; his resignation was accepted, also unanimously, at the February 27 meeting. This is the same Paul Kern who will appear later in this article on scene at Trinidad City Hall during the events of May 12, and whom several commenters on my own livestream that day referred to as "Santa."

At the next regular council meeting after Patterson's termination, on March 17, 2026, I signed up to speak. Specifically, I signed up to speak on the citizens comments slot and on most of the individual agenda items. There were close to twenty items on that agenda. The reason I signed up that many times was simple. The requires that the public be able to address each item the council is going to act on. Trinidad's own posted rules allow it. So I did. I spoke on the items. I cited public records. I asked questions. I did not make accusations. I asked the council, item by item, whether what they were about to do was consistent with the law that governs how they have to do it.

Some people called what I did that night a filibuster. I called it a citizen participating in the public-comment process that the city's posted rules say I can participate in. Either way, it took most of the meeting.

That meeting is when I knew I was going to keep coming back.

The Timeline as I Understand It

The story of Trinidad, as I have been able to piece it together, goes back further than the last six months. It goes back at least to the city's FY2018 audit, which was delivered roughly sixteen months late and identified the first in what would become six consecutive years of material weaknesses in the city's books. The same person was named in the corrective action plan, year after year, until she was no longer with the city.

In late summer 2025, the city brought in a new auditor, a new municipal CPA, and a new city administrator. The auditor told the council on the record that the city had, in his words, serious bookkeeping problems. The CPA was authorized to spend most of a year cleaning up records. The new administrator, in her first months, documented thousands of dollars in operational savings and identified the basic financial questions she had been hired to answer.

In the same window, the council hired a new police chief, took up a third-party audit of the police evidence room, reverted a controversial change in the city's retirement plan that had been adopted three years earlier, and signed off on a series of contracts that addressed long-deferred issues with the water plant.

By November 2025, the city had elected its fifth mayor in five years. The Planning and Zoning Commission was dissolved for stated Open Meetings Act reasons and reconstituted with new members.

I was not in Trinidad yet. I started paying attention shortly after.

What I Have Seen Since I Started

I have attended several council meetings. I have collected published agendas, signed minutes, audits, and budgets going back years. I have read the comments under the city's official Facebook posts. I have interviewed a sitting and Planning and Zoning member on the record. I have spoken with people off the record. I have filed open records requests to help trace the issues through factual public records.

The water question has shown up everywhere. It has shown up in the city's own audit notes. It has shown up under the city's official Facebook posts. It has shown up in a Trinidad Police Department post in early April. It has shown up in a city-issued Boil Water Notice fifteen days after that police department post.

I have read residents who said their water has been bad for decades. I have read residents who said the city told them years ago not to drink it. I have read a long-time resident who said she is selling her home and attributes cancer in the community to the water. On a public Facebook thread less than two weeks ago, the city's own contracted water and wastewater operator, Jeremy Crocker of Aqua Services, wrote a substantive on-record explanation of what is happening to Trinidad's water right now.

Crocker explained that the city is in the middle of an active chemical conversion intended to clean the pipes. He said the city is following that up with, in his words, "probably some of the most flushing the pipes have ever seen." He confirmed that most of Trinidad's pipes are old cast iron and that the buildup inside them is the source of the discolored water residents have been photographing. "Once this stuff breaks off the inner walls of the pipes it has to be flushed out," he wrote. "There is so much of it that it is getting in people's lines as well." He said the flushing will continue for approximately another month, and that crews had already been at it for more than two weeks. When asked publicly about a longer-term fix, he wrote that the city plans to follow the current conversion with a second step that changes the chemistry of the water to be "more scale forming" so that a protective coating reforms on the inside of the pipes and helps contain iron particles. He called the work "a lengthy process."

In other words, the city's own contractor characterizes the brown water residents are seeing right now as the expected by-product of an active cleanup of a long-neglected system. Per the same contractor speaking on the record at the April 9 council meeting, the water plant itself has been brought up to standard. The distribution lines, the pipes that carry the water from the plant to people's homes, are the part still being cleaned out.

That is the city's explanation. I want to offer a contrasting perspective.

My own observation, watching the brown-water photos as residents have posted them, is that the discoloration has tended to heighten during and right after rain. After a recent Kerens City Council meeting, in an unrelated conversation, I described that timing to Kerens Mayor Jeffrey Saunders. Mayor Saunders has spoken publicly about his own background in water systems, and from what I understand he keeps pressure monitors in his own yard that he uses to watch the Kerens water system. When I told him about the rain-and-brown-water timing I had been seeing in Trinidad, he told me that the pattern I described to him sounded like infiltration. I asked him the obvious follow-up question. If a water system is always under pressure, how does outside material infiltrate the pipes. The most he could offer in response was that it sounded like a serious problem Trinidad needs to jump on as soon as possible.

I am not a water-system engineer. I am noting what the city's contractor has said publicly, what my own observation of the pattern has been, and what a sitting mayor in a neighboring city told me when I described the pattern to him.

You may contact Kerens Mayor Saunders yourself to verify this conversation occurred.

The April 9 Council Meeting

The next thing I want to walk through is the regular council meeting on April 9, 2026. I attended in person.

The mayor opened the meeting by saying that he did not consider the agenda in front of him legitimate. He said he objected to all of the action that would be taken if the council proceeded. He said he had thought long and hard about whether to gavel the meeting in at all.

A resident then delivered a prepared statement about the water. He described brown, flaky, sediment-filled water. He cited the kind of chemistry that happens when chlorine disinfectants meet the protective scale inside old cast-iron pipes. He asked for a written remediation plan with a timeline.

After he sat down, the police chief responded. The chief told the room that posting on Facebook about people being hospitalized due to bacteria in the public water supply could be charged as a state jail felony.

The chief made other statements that evening. He accused the mayor of several things in open session. A resident in the room described being approached at a barbershop by someone seeking to be installed on the council long enough to vote the mayor out. The resident speaker named Marie Bannister, who was actively sitting as a council member at the dais, as the person who had done the recruiting. He told the room she had asked several people in town to take the seat. It is an allegation Marie Bannister has denied. The allegation itself was made in open session, on the public record, while Marie sat at the dais.

Two action items on the agenda were tabled. One was the city's effort to reduce the hours of the municipal judge. The other was an ordinance that would have defined the duties of the mayor. Both items had been on prior agendas. Both were dropped from action without a public vote on the substance.

At one point during the back-and-forth, I asked the mayor directly, from the audience where other residents were also speaking out of turn, to stop the meeting and reconvene at a properly-noticed time. The discussion in front of him had moved well beyond the bounds of the posted agenda. He declined to end the meeting. It continued.

I am not going to characterize the rest of that meeting in this article. All I will say is that the meeting was an incredibly unique demonstration of how Texas local government should not operate.

From April 9 to Today

Twelve days after the chief's April 9 statement about water Facebook posts, the City of Trinidad issued a Boil Water Notice on its own Facebook page. The Trinidad Police Department shared that notice on the same official page that had earlier warned about state jail felony charges for water-bacteria reports.

Two and a half weeks after the Boil Water Notice, Jennifer Combs of Kerens was arrested by Kerens Police Department on a Trinidad Police Department warrant. The charge was False Alarm or Report. She was booked into the Navarro County Jail at 5:36 PM on Friday, May 8. I published a full article about that arrest on the evening of Saturday, May 10.

Two days after the Combs booking, a Trinidad resident posted new brown-water photos to a community Facebook group, and the city's contracted water operator replied on the public thread confirming the cast-iron-pipes problem on the record. Another resident in the thread asked, in real time, whether the recent arrest in Kerens was related to the same topic.

On Monday evening, May 11, CJ Grisham, a Texas First Amendment attorney with GFA Law, PLLC, announced publicly that he was about to file a third lawsuit against the City of Trinidad and the Trinidad Police Department.

On Tuesday morning, May 12, Grisham was blocked from the Trinidad Police Department's public Facebook page. He gave the department until noon to unblock him. They unblocked him within hours. By mid-morning, he had announced that a formal press release for Jennifer Combs was coming the same day. That press release went up that afternoon.

On Tuesday afternoon, May 12, the same Trinidad Police Department cited a Texas local government activist named Winston Otto Noles for disorderly conduct after he stood outside Trinidad City Hall with a sign that read "Fuck Bad Cops" alongside a "Back the Blue" sign. He sat in handcuffs in the back of a patrol car for approximately an hour. The Trinidad chief was at his home when the incident began. Officers from Malakoff Police Department were the first to respond. The chief eventually arrived. The chief, on a public livestream that I was running from the scene, explained the basis the city was using for the citation. The Trinidad Police Department alleges that, before the citation, Noles went inside City Hall and caused a disturbance that offended and frightened the female city employees who work in the office. That is the basis the department has stated, on the record, for the citation.

Around the same time, Harvey Freebird, a Galveston-based police-accountability activist and cop-watcher who operates a large public Facebook page focused on First Amendment work, contacted CJ Grisham and connected him to Noles on the scene. Grisham's subsequent call, made on Noles's behalf, came together because of that introduction.

I showed up to Trinidad that afternoon after I saw Otto's livestream go up and was notified by BZ Watchdog that police were responding. I made my way to City Hall and started livestreaming as soon as I arrived. Paul Kern, the former councilmember I introduced earlier in this article, was on scene during the incident. Several commenters on my livestream that day referred to him as "Santa."

On Wednesday afternoon, May 13, CJ Grisham drove to Trinidad himself with his law partner Ryan Franceschina, his equal partner at GFA Law, PLLC. They stood in front of City Hall. They were threatened with citation for saying "fuck" aloud at City Hall, the same word that appeared on the sign Noles had been cited for the day before. Grisham posted that incident to Facebook with a photograph.

On Thursday morning, May 14, GFA Law issued a second formal press release. It named Otto Noles. It listed the federal authorities under which the firm was prepared to act, including a federal civil rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The press release described, in the firm's own words, a documented and escalating pattern of retaliation by the Trinidad Police Department against critics of the department.

That is roughly where we are.

What Tuesday Night Looks Like

The next regular meeting of the Trinidad City Council is Tuesday, May 19, 2026, at 6:00 PM, at Trinidad City Hall, 100 Park Street, Trinidad, Texas.

Trinidad allows up to five minutes of citizens comments during the standing public-comment slot at each regular meeting. You can use that slot to speak on whatever you want.

You can also sign up separately to speak on individual agenda items. That second option is one most people I have talked to in Trinidad do not realize they have. You can be the resident who shows up, signs up for items 5, 8, and 13, and asks specific questions about specific items. You can be the resident who only signs up for citizens comments and uses five minutes to tell the council what you think. Both are legitimate. Both are protected by the same Texas law I have been quoting in this article from the beginning.

I plan to sign up to speak during citizens comments on Tuesday. I also plan to sign up to speak on a few specific agenda items. I will be reading from the published agenda, and I will be asking questions about specific items the council is being asked to act on.

If you live in Trinidad, and you have a grievance with the way your city government is running things, I would like you to consider doing the same thing. You do not have to be confrontational. You do not have to make accusations. You can ask questions. You can read directly from the public record. You can simply remind the council, on the record, that the public is paying attention.

If you cannot attend in person, I plan to livestream the meeting on Facebook. I will also record it offline in widescreen with better audio, and that recording will go up on watchtowerci.com sometime after the meeting.

The Trinidad story does not end Tuesday. It does not start there either. Tuesday is the next chance for the public to participate, in the room, on the record, in real time.

How to Reach Me

I am always gathering information.

My focus right now is Trinidad, Seven Points, Kerens, and Italy. I am active in other Texas cities and I am open to any and all credible leads from any small town in Texas. I may not reply to every email, but I do see everything. My contact information is on my profile and the Watchtower website.

Confidentiality is the default. If you ask me not to publish what you tell me, I will not publish it. If you want to be quoted, I will quote you. If you want me to verify what you tell me against the public record before I print it, I will do that, and if it does not check out I will tell you and not print it.

Thank you for your time, your patience, and your attention to this complex timeline. I know it is a lot. I know not all of it makes sense yet. I am working on the parts that do not, and I will publish more as more becomes clear.

I will see you Tuesday.

Jennifer Lynn Combs of Kerens was arrested Friday, May 8, 2026, on a state jail felony charge over a Facebook post about Trinidad's water system.

A confidential source has confirmed two facts to me. I can personally attest that this person has direct knowledge of this investigation. First, the arrest was based on the social media post. Second, the charge was escalated to a state jail felony specifically because the speech concerned a public water supply.

I am publishing this as a timeline of what I know, and what I am working on, so the community has the public record in one place.

The Timeline

April 2, 2026. A resident of the Trinidad area, Emmily Emerine Stearman, posted in the Facebook group "The New Age Trinidad Texas." The post is detailed and specific. It cites EPA guidance about distribution system deterioration. It names the symptoms of failure: brown water, chunks, intermittent appearance, and worsening after flushing or repairs. It provides three regulatory paths for residents to file complaints. Those paths are the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the EPA, and the City of Trinidad. The post includes copy-paste complaint language for any of those paths.

The post drew over a hundred comments. Among them, Jennifer Lynn Combs herself wrote, "I am honestly shocked at how bad the water looks. Are Trinidad residents really expected to drink this and bathe in it?" She wrote separately on the same thread, "this is 100% not an employee of the water dept problem. This is 100% city council and infrastructure problem."

Long-time residents corroborated the pattern. Jan Dover, identifying herself as a 35-year resident, wrote that she planned to sell her home and attributed cancer in the community to the water. Allison McCormick Cox wrote, " has been involved so many times over the years." Linda Maxwell wrote, "It's the old cast iron pipes." Flor Hernandez Gaspar wrote that the city had given her a "note 3 years ago" warning about cancer and chemical concerns from drinking the water. Serena Feagin wrote that Trinidad's budgets were "fabricated" and that she was previously arrested "for things I never did" while raising the same concerns about misuse of public funds.

I commented on the same post, expressing my own concern.

April 6, 2026. Four days after the Stearman post, the Trinidad Police Department posted a "PUBLIC INFORMATION NOTICE: WATER QUALITY" on its official Facebook page. The notice cites Texas Penal Code 42.06, the False Alarm or Report statute. It tells the public that when such a report involves a public service such as a municipal water system, the offense "may be elevated to a state jail felony."

The post attaches a screenshot of a Facebook page called "Southern Belle Watch" that had stated some Trinidad citizens were being hospitalized due to bacteria in the water. Trinidad PD's post does not name a person. It cites the statute and explains the conditions under which the offense is elevated to a state jail felony.

April 21, 2026. Fifteen days after the Trinidad Police Department's §42.06 warning, the City of Trinidad issued a formal Boil Water Notice on its official Facebook page. The Trinidad Police Department then shared that Boil Water Notice on its own official Facebook page. The notice tells residents to boil water before drinking, cooking, washing dishes, or using it on cuts.

The same agency that, fifteen days earlier, had cited Texas Penal Code 42.06 and stated that a false report involving a public water supply "may be elevated to a state jail felony" was, on April 21, publicly amplifying a city-issued notice that the water in fact required boiling.

May 8, 2026, at 5:36 PM. Jennifer Lynn Combs was booked into the Navarro County Justice Center. The public inmate roster lists her by name and Name ID 614246. The charge field reads "FALSE ALARM OR REPORT." The charging agency is the Trinidad Police Department. The arresting agency is the Kerens Police Department.

May 9, 2026. A Facebook user named Carrie Gaston Evans, posting in "The New Age Trinidad Texas" group, shared a screenshot of Jennifer's Navarro County booking entry. She wrote that she "knew immediately who it was. FB did its job." A former Trinidad council member, Paul Kern, commented on her post asking who Jennifer's "known associates" are.

May 10, 2026, today. A different Trinidad resident, Charles Colman, posted new photos of brown water from his home in Trinidad. The contracted operator of Trinidad's water and wastewater systems, Jeremy Crocker, replied on the public thread. On the record, Crocker confirmed that Trinidad's pipes are old cast iron, that they have built-up scale that is breaking off into residents' lines, and that the city is performing an active chemical conversion to clean the pipes. He wrote, "Once this stuff breaks off the inner walls of the pipes it has to be flushed out. There is so much of it that it is getting in people's lines as well."

A third resident on the same Colman thread, Will Jones, asked the room directly: "wasnt someone recently arrested for talking about this exact thing on fb??"

What I Am Saying

I have been in conversation with Jennifer Combs since the night of her arrest. A line of communication is open between us, and she knows I am reporting this story out.

I have personally seen the information that was sent to Jennifer in confidence about Trinidad's water system. I am not publishing that information yet, because the person who shared it did so in confidence, and I am working with that person to determine whether they will go on the record for follow-up coverage. From my own review of what was shared with her, I can attest that the underlying concern about Trinidad's water is very serious, and that Jennifer's reaction was the reaction of a person trying to surface a real public-safety issue.

The confirmation that the charge was escalated to a state jail felony because of the public water supply nexus came from a confidential source. I can personally attest that this person has direct knowledge of this investigation. I am protecting that source absolutely.

The City of Trinidad issued the Boil Water Notice on April 21, fifteen days after the Trinidad Police Department's §42.06 notice. The Trinidad Police Department itself shared that Boil Water Notice on the same official Facebook page. The screenshot is in evidence.

What I Am Not Saying Yet

I am not telling you what is in the arrest affidavit, the complaint, or the magistrate's order. None of those documents are in my hands. I am filing public information requests for them this week.

I am not opining on whether the charge will be sustained. That is a question for the Henderson County District Attorney and, if the case goes that far, a court.

What I Am Asking

If you are a Trinidad resident with information about Trinidad's water system, the events leading up to this arrest, or the arrest itself, I want to hear from you. Confidentiality is the default.

Trinidad residents with concerns about water quality should also attend upcoming city council and meetings to stay informed.

Disclosure

Jennifer Combs has been an on-the-record source for me on transparency issues in Kerens since approximately March 2026. She is a published journalist, previously served on the Kerens Community Development Committee (KCDC), and ran for Kerens City Council in the 2026 election.

One more thing. The City of Trinidad, the Trinidad Police Department, and I have what I feel is a good working relationship from my recent coverage of their city. Chief Charles Gregory has spoken publicly in support of the work I do; refer to the "About" page on the Watchtower website. With that history in place, I am confident the City and the Department will engage with me transparently as I report this story out. I will be in active communication with both this week.

I will write another article in this series as more information becomes available. Follow this page and watchtowerci.com for updates.

Italy city council candidate Shelby Browning says the city needs stronger oversight of how taxpayer money is managed and argues that large reserves should be actively working for residents, not sitting on the books while other parts of the city feel strained.

In her written responses to the 2026 Candidate Questionnaire, Browning lays out a platform centered on transparency, accessibility, and year-round engagement. She says she has already started reviewing the city's budget, supports councilmembers communicating with residents on social media within clear guidelines, and wants regular opportunities for residents to speak and ask questions outside of the election cycle.

The questionnaire was published by Watchtower in February 2026 and offered to every candidate filing for city council in communities I cover. The nine questions are the same for every candidate. Browning submitted her answers by email in response to that invitation.

I'm New to the Community. Tell Me About Yourself.

I'd tell you I'm someone who truly cares about Italy and the people who live here. I'm not running for a title. I'm running because I believe our city deserves leadership that is accessible, transparent, and willing to listen.

I'm the kind of person who pays attention, asks questions, and follows through. I believe in being honest, even when it's not the easiest route, and making decisions based on what's best for the community as a whole.

What Inspired You to Run for Office?

What inspired me was seeing that many people feel disconnected from what's happening in our city. I've had conversations with neighbors who feel like they don't have a voice or don't always understand how decisions are being made.

At some point, I realized that if I care about that, I need to step up and be part of improving it. I want to help create a city government that people feel included in and not one they feel shut out of.

What Is the Most Important Issue Facing Italy Today?

One of the most serious concerns to me is how taxpayer money is managed, along with the lack of transparency around those decisions.

People deserve to know where their money is going, how it's being used, and why certain decisions are being made. When that's not clear, it creates confusion, frustration, and a loss of trust in local government.

My approach is focused on accountability and openness:

• Making financial information easier for residents to access and understand
• Asking questions and expecting clear answers about spending
• Supporting regular reporting and oversight to ensure funds are being used appropriately
• Encouraging a culture where transparency is the standard, not the exception

This isn't about pointing fingers. It's about making sure we're doing things the right way moving forward. When people can clearly see how decisions are made and how money is spent, it builds trust and strengthens the entire community.

Are You Satisfied With the Way City Leadership Communicates With the Community?

No.

I think there's room for improvement in how information is shared with residents. Too often, people feel like they're hearing about things after decisions have already been made or without enough context.

We can do better by being more proactive, more transparent, and more consistent in how we communicate.

Should Elected Officials Be Able to Communicate Openly With Residents on Social Media?

Yes, with clear guidelines.

I understand the legal concerns, especially around quorum laws, but I don't believe that should prevent councilmembers from sharing factual information or engaging with residents.

In today's world, social media is one of the main ways people stay informed. It should be used responsibly to:

• Share updates
• Answer questions
• Address misinformation

The goal should be better communication, not less of it.

How Will You Make Sure Taxpayers Feel Heard Beyond the Election Cycle?

By making engagement an ongoing priority, not just something that happens during campaigns.

That means:

• Hosting regular opportunities for residents to speak and ask questions
• Being available and approachable outside of meetings
• Creating simple ways for people to give input and actually see follow-through

People deserve to know their voices matter year-round, not just at the ballot box.

How Familiar Are You With the City's Budget, and How Will You Keep Italy Financially Healthy?

I've started reviewing and learning the city's budget, and I'm committed to continuing that work so I can make informed decisions.

My focus will be:

• Prioritizing essential services and infrastructure
• Being responsible and thoughtful with spending
• Making sure residents can clearly understand where their tax dollars are going

Good financial management comes down to accountability, planning, and transparency.

How Should Italy's EDC Be Operating, and What Role Should the Council Play?

The EDC can be a valuable tool for growth, but it needs to stay aligned with the needs of the community.

If there are large reserves while other areas feel strained, that's something that should be looked at carefully. Those funds come from taxpayers, and they should be actively working to benefit the city.

I believe the council should:

• Provide strong oversight
• Ensure clear goals and accountability
• Focus on projects that bring real, lasting value to residents

Economic development should strengthen the community and not just exist on paper.

Audience Members Are Upset With How You Voted. What Do You Say to Bring the Room Together?

I would start by acknowledging them.

"I hear you, and I appreciate you being here and speaking up. I know not everyone will agree with every decision, and that's okay."

Then I'd explain my position respectfully and clearly, and emphasize that even when we disagree, their concerns still matter.

At the end of the day, we all want what's best for Italy. My goal is to keep communication open and continue working together, even when we see things differently.

Closing Statement From the Candidate

Browning closed her questionnaire with an open statement to Italy voters:

I'm running because I care about this town and the people in it.

Italy is the kind of place where people know each other, support each other, and take pride in where they live. Our city government should reflect those same values; honesty, transparency, and respect.

I don't claim to have all the answers, but I do promise this: I will show up, I will listen, and I will do the work. I will ask questions, I will seek clarity, and I will always be accountable to the people I represent.

This isn't about politics for me, it's about community. And I want to help make sure everyone in Italy feels like they have a voice in the future of our city.

An Open Invitation to Every Italy Candidate

Watchtower's candidate questionnaire is open to every candidate running for city council in Italy in May 2026. The nine questions are the same for every candidate. Each candidate's written answers will be published as submitted, with only light copyediting for readability.

If you are running for office in Italy, Texas or another community I cover, email your answers to tips@watchtowerci.com. Use your city name as the subject line. Your response will be published in full, with only obvious spelling typos corrected. Your phrasing and voice will be preserved.

Voters deserve to hear from every candidate on the ballot. Read the answers. Compare the substance. Make an informed decision at the ballot box.

Italy city council candidate Quentin Dean Little wants the city's social media policy rescinded, arguing that restrictions on councilmembers posting about city business amount to "policies to keep people quiet."

Little is a lifelong Italy resident who has organized community festivals since 2020, when he and a group of citizens stepped in to run a Christmas festival after the city pulled back due to COVID. In his written responses to the 2026 Candidate Questionnaire, he lays out a transparency-first platform, calls for the city to return to running its own trash service and road work, and commits to meeting with any resident who brings him an issue.

The questionnaire was published by Watchtower in February 2026 and offered to every candidate filing for city council in communities I cover. The nine questions are the same for every candidate. Little submitted his answers by email in response to that invitation.

I'm New to the Community. Tell Me About Yourself.

My name is Quentin Dean Little, I'm a lifelong resident. I've been around and seen a lot of things happen. I love being a part of this community, I'm a big supporter of law enforcement and our public works crew. I often have spoken out against the city for certain things they have allowed. In 2020 myself and a team of citizens organized a Christmas Festival in lieu of the city backing out due to COVID. I've since thrown many festivals in Italy Texas just to give the citizens something to do.

What Inspired You to Run for Office?

I was inspired to run for office when I started noticing the city wasn't self sustaining anymore, growing up the city ran their own trash service, fixed their own roads, and kept Italy noticeable. I wanted to bring the self sustaining situation back to Italy, along with making sure the city was operating properly.

What Is the Most Important Issue Facing Italy Today?

The most important issue facing the city is TRANSPARENCY, lacking transparency means lacking accountability. If no accountability is pursued then administrations end up doing things that aren't known to citizens.

How Do You Feel About the Way City Leadership Communicates With the Community?

Communication is of the utmost importance between cities and citizens. Italy Texas has not been very communicative when it comes to anything. The only thing the city has made sure to communicate is water leaks. That's it nothing else is advertised.

Should Elected Officials Be Able to Communicate Openly With Residents on Social Media?

Social Media policies are something that needs to be navigated carefully, I understand the need to stop a walking quorum, however there are citizens that aren't able to have a face to face, or a telephone conversation, some people rely solely on social media for updates about certain things going on with their community. I would ask that a social media policy be rescinded because at the end of the day if it's not posted in a public forum owned and operated by said city, then at that point it just becomes a violation of rights, if said councilmember is providing factual updates where is the harm. Social media policies are just policies to keep people quiet!

How Will You Make Sure Taxpayers Feel Heard Beyond the Election Cycle?

ANY taxpayer will be able to come to me with any issue I will do whatever I can to make sure their concerns are heard and dealt with to the best of my ability. I will refuse no one. I will listen to the whole population of Italy one at a time if need be. They voted me in I work for them.

How Familiar Are You With the City's Budget, and How Will You Keep Italy Financially Healthy?

The cities budget needs to reflect that of a small community, not that of big one. The budget need to be able to cover the cities bills and salaries. We need to save where we can and only spend when necessary.

How Should Italy's EDC Be Operating, and What Role Should the Council Play?

The EDC is responsible for bringing business to the community, I believe the EDC should always do what can be done to fulfill their mission.

Audience Members Are Upset With How You Voted. What Do You Say to Bring the Room Together?

I'm aware that some aren't happy with my votes, please understand that I don't vote without the facts, evidence, and anything else needed to persuade me. I vote with my mind and my heart with each one of you in mind. We aren't always going to agree but I am going to make sure that your needs are heard, you get factual answers, and you don't carry the burden of this city making mistakes.

Closing Statement From the Candidate

Little closed his questionnaire with a direct message to Italy voters:

I want to say thank you for the opportunity to represent such an amazing community, I can tell you I'm going to work hard to make sure your city is transparent with you, that my votes are made with precision, accuracy, thoughtfulness, and research.

Thank you citizens for taking the time to read this. If you have any questions please reach out to me. DLittle1424@gmail.com, or 214 407 2821

An Open Invitation to Every Italy Candidate

Watchtower's candidate questionnaire is open to every candidate running for city council in Italy in May 2026. The nine questions are the same for every candidate. Each candidate's written answers will be published as submitted, with only light copyediting for readability.

If you are running for office in Italy, Texas or another community I cover, email your answers to tips@watchtowerci.com. Use your city name as the subject line. Your response will be published in full, with only obvious spelling typos corrected. Your phrasing and voice will be preserved.

Voters deserve to hear from every candidate on the ballot. Read the answers. Compare the substance. Make an informed decision at the ballot box on May 2, 2026.

I got unsuspended from Kerens TX Talk, and I wanted to say thanks.

To the admins who lifted the suspension: I appreciate it. I know I can be a lot. I ask questions publicly, I post long things, and I show up to meetings nobody invited me to. Forums like Kerens TX Talk only work when people with different views can share the same space and disagree without getting locked out. A community forum that silences one side stops being a forum. Kerens TX Talk is still the real thing, and I am glad to be back in it.

What's Coming in Kerens

A few things are in the pipeline.

Records requests. I have been filing Kerens and Navarro County records requests as part of ongoing work. I will write about that experience soon. Not the findings yet. The turnaround times, the charges, the friendliness, the resistance, the small details that tell you what kind of city you are dealing with. Kerens readers will recognize parts of it. Other parts may surprise them.

Candidate forum clips. I attended the Kerens candidate forum and recorded it. I am clipping each candidate's segment into an individual video and posting those over the next few days. Residents should be able to watch a single candidate without scrubbing through an hour of footage. The goal is to let the candidates speak for themselves.

No individual candidate calls for Kerens. I considered it. After watching the forum, I decided the forum already says what needs to be said. The candidates showed up. They answered questions. They gave residents a clear look at who they are. Anything I added on top of that would be noise. I will still cover Kerens issues as they come, but my coverage of this election is going to center on the forum and on public records, not on a round of one-on-one interviews I am not sure anyone asked for.

A Note to Readers Generally

If you follow Watchtower, you have probably noticed that I bounce around. One day it is Italy. The next day it is Tool. Then Seven Points, then Hubbard, then Kerens, then Gun Barrel City. It is not a plan. I do not get to choose where the stories take me. People send tips. Records come back. Meetings happen. Something moves, and I follow it.

I do try to follow the stories that keep readers interested, and I pay attention when comments and messages tell me what is landing and what is not. If there is a city, an issue, or an angle you want covered, send a note. I read everything. I do not respond to everything, but I read everything.

Thank you for following along. Thank you for sharing. Thank you for pushing back when I get something wrong. The coverage is better for all of it.

More on Kerens very soon.

The people of Tool just did something that rarely happens in a small Texas town. Residents told the truth out loud, under their own names, all at once, on a public Facebook thread about one police officer. The post drew 248 comments, 135 shares, and 180 reactions in a handful of days. That kind of response tells me this conversation was overdue.

Before I write another word, thank you. Every resident who came forward with a firsthand story took a risk. Every resident who shared the post helped a neighbor feel less alone. Every resident who simply read and reacted added weight to something that had been sitting quiet for years. I see it. I am grateful for it. The city is going to see it too, because I am going to bring it to them.

What I Am Seeing in Your Accounts

I have read every comment on that post more than once. There are patterns in your words that jump off the page.

The most common pattern is the phrase "the camera was not recording." Resident after resident described asking for dash camera or body camera footage in court and being told no video existed, the camera was off, or the footage was corrupted. One person losing footage is bad luck. Dozens of people losing footage is a pattern, and it spans multiple stops over multiple years.

Another pattern is geography. The same officer has been described in accounts from Kemp, Seven Points, Gun Barrel City, and Tool. Stops happened inside city limits. Stops happened outside city limits. Stops happened while people were simply trying to go home. The accounts describe behavior that followed the officer from one department to the next.

A third pattern is retaliation. A store owner described being ticketed after he asked the officer to stop pulling over his customers. Residents who asked questions, stated their rights, or began recording described sudden escalation. That is a pattern worth naming out loud.

A fourth pattern is who got singled out. Young drivers. Women traveling alone at night. A grandmother with children in the car. A store owner. A 14-year-old at a community event. Taken together, the accounts describe stops that look less like pursuit of serious crime and more like the search for a reason to pull someone over.

None of this is a verdict. All of it is something the City of Tool, the department, and I now have to take seriously together.

Where Things Stand With the City

I am in active communication with Tool city leadership. Lieutenant Jason Lee reached out to me before I reached out to him. I sat down in person with Chief Robert Walker, Lieutenant Lee, and the city secretary. I filed a formal Public Information Act request, and the city has already fulfilled six of the seven items I asked for. The one outstanding item involves a third party outside their direct control, and they are following up on it in good faith.

Councilmember Tommy Salvato has also opened a direct line of communication with me. Based on what I have reviewed of recent council meetings, the council in Tool takes governance more seriously than most small town councils I have covered. I mean that as an observation, not as flattery.

The city has not hidden. The records have not been stonewalled. A lieutenant did not vanish into a spam folder. A chief did not hand me a cost estimate to photocopy disciplinary letters. I want that noticed, because it is not the norm, and it is the kind of cooperation that actually leads to change when residents show up with the truth.

What I am bringing the city on your behalf is the picture your accounts paint together. None of them reached city hall on their own. Put together, they become something the city can no longer miss.

How You Can Help Move This Forward

If you have a firsthand experience with Officer Ochoa, here is how you can turn it into something the city can act on.

1. File a formal complaint with the Tool Police Department. This is the single most powerful thing any resident can do. A complaint on the record forces a formal response. A comment on Facebook does not. If you are unsure how to file, Chief Walker's office or the city secretary can walk you through it.

2. If you are not comfortable going directly to the department, send your account to me at tips@watchtowerci.com. I will document the pattern, keep your identity confidential, and add it to the ongoing record. I have protected community sources for years. Your name does not have to appear anywhere in a published article for your story to count. You can contact me anonymously, and I will honor that.

3. If you have video, audio, court records, or dashcam footage, save it. Back it up in two places. That material is evidence, and it has a way of disappearing if it lives on only one phone.

4. Consider speaking at a council meeting. Three minutes at a public microphone carries more weight with a city than a thousand comments online ever will. If you are nervous, I am glad to help you think through what to say.

Each of these options exists for the same reason. I want this to move out of a comment thread and into a formal process the city can respond to.

A Word on Fairness

Officer Ochoa has a family and a livelihood, and he is a human being. I will keep reporting what the public records show, because the records are what the community deserves to see. The goal here is accountability and truth, not personal destruction. The records will speak for themselves. The formal process will decide what comes next. I trust the City of Tool to handle that process the same transparent way they handled the first conversation with me.

Closing

I did not write last week's article to start a movement. I wrote it because public records answered a question a resident had asked in a public group. Your response turned it into something bigger, and I am grateful for that.

Keep coming. Keep telling the truth. File the complaint. Send the tip. Save the footage. Show up at the meeting. I will keep doing my part on the record side, and I will keep the line of communication with the city open. Tool is answering the call so far. Let's meet them there, together.

I have written two articles about the BiCARBUS situation in Italy. The first documented how the system was installed without council approval. The second covered 's claim that the city had regulatory approval since January, a fact the council was never told. If you have not read them, I would start there.

This piece is different. This is my opinion, clearly labeled as such, and I want to be more direct than I have been.

I Thought It Was Snake Oil

When BiCARBUS first appeared on the Italy City Council agenda, I was skeptical. The name sounds like a miracle product. The marketing materials promise everything short of turning your tap water into a fountain of youth. I had the same reaction a lot of people in town had: this sounds like snake oil.

I was wrong about that.

I Did the Research

After the February meeting, I started digging into BiCARBUS as a product, separate from how it was handled in Italy. I looked into the company. I looked into the chemistry. I talked to people. Here is what I found.

BiCARBUS appears to be a legitimate sodium hypochlorite solution. It has been used in at least a couple of other cities with documented success. The short version of how it works: it treats the water in a way that is safer for human consumption while reducing the need for other chemicals. It breaks down mineral buildup and corrosion inside the pipes and leaves a protective coating that prevents future scale. It is NSF/ANSI Standard 60 certified. It has been researched by the University of Houston.

If everything I have read about this product is true, every small town in Texas dealing with aging water infrastructure should be looking at it. Italy's water system has real problems. E. coli at ten times the permitted limit in 2021. Water loss that has more than doubled. Rates that have nearly doubled since 2022. A product that genuinely addresses corrosion and scale buildup is exactly what a system like Italy's needs.

I mean that. I am not being sarcastic. This appears to be a good product.

I Also Looked at the Budget

Italy's City Administrator wrote in his own September 2025 budget letter that the city's budget has been "challenged with large unforeseen infrastructure expenses this year, that will continue because of aged infrastructure." He described the upcoming fiscal year as "another tight budget year." The city's budget surplus last year was roughly $90,000.

That is not an abstract description. In April 2025, the council approved $135,721 to replace the failed pump and motor at Ground Water Well #2 after the city's own internal memo described the failure as a "critical risk" to the water supply. Two months earlier, in January, another $8,400 went to repairing Trinity Well #2. Utility Fund expenses increased 23% year-over-year. The council raised water rates to try to keep pace. Every month, the consent items in the council packets show a steady stream of water line repairs, equipment failures, and emergency maintenance that reflects a system under constant stress.

There is one more pump decision worth naming, because it shows how these choices actually get made. On June 9, 2025, the council took up a proposal to rebuild the circulation pump at the cooling tower. On a 3-2 vote, they tabled it and directed staff to obtain additional bids. When the bids came back the following month, Jurgensen Pump LLC of McGregor submitted a professional, itemized estimate on company letterhead: $15,730 total, fully scoped, with a 30-day validity. ATS Construction of Mabank submitted a handwritten note on plain paper, no letterhead, with the total scrawled across the page: "TOTAL PRICE $44,800.00." The handwritten note also offered a payment plan: "WE COULD LET THEM PAY THIS OUT AT 0% PERCENT INTEREST IF THIS COULD HELP. 24 PAYMENT AT 1,870.00 = 44,800.00." On July 14, the council voted 4-0 to accept the ATS bid. The written justification cited the company's existing familiarity with the cooling tower's SCADA system. The end result: the council specifically asked for more bids to compare pricing, received a quote from a professional pump company for $15,730, and voted to pay $44,800 to the vendor whose submission was handwritten. The same pump rebuild scope, both quoting the same Flowserve 12EHL-2 repair, for $29,070 more.

At the same March 9 meeting where the council deferred BiCARBUS for the second time, they also approved $38,615 in water infrastructure spending in a single consent vote: $16,780 for a new pump at the water house, $14,912 for a pump at the Taylor Street lift station, and $6,923 for concrete repair from a water leak on South Ward Street. That is three separate water emergencies addressed in one meeting. The month before, in February, the consent items included $8,400 to CCS Water Specialist for yet another well repair, this time on Trinity Well #2.

The police department is burning money too. In November 2025, the council approved a $6,000 contract with Clear Career Professionals for a police department organizational review. Two $3,000 payments followed: one on November 14 and another on December 14. In December and again in January, the council voted to allow Danny W. Smith, a former DPS commander, to conduct chief of police interviews, both times conditional on a contract being finalized by the City Attorney and, on the second vote, the City Administrator. The Smith engagement never actually happened. The reason, as I understand it, is that the city attorney was not comfortable with Smith's offer to provide the service for free. Rather than bring a replacement option back to the council for a vote, the City Administrator re-engaged Clear Career Professionals. On February 5, Clear Career billed the city another $3,000 for "CHIEF POLICE SELECTION ASSISTANCE-ASSESSMENT, VIRTUAL INTERVIEWS." A check was cut on February 11. That engagement never appeared on a council agenda. The council never voted on it. At the February 9 meeting, I asked the mayor directly who was doing the police chief interviews and why Clear Career's contract scope had been modified without a corresponding price change. The Clear Career chief-interview process then produced an offer of employment to a candidate, which the City Administrator extended without council authorization. On March 9, the council voted to rescind that offer, describing it as "not authorized," and created an advisory council to start the interview process over again. The unauthorized offer is now on the record as rescinded. The unauthorized $3,000 payment that produced it has never been publicly addressed.

The BiCARBUS system costs roughly $22,700 in its first year: $9,653 for equipment and $13,057 for the annual chemical supply. The 90-day demo is free. The ongoing cost is not. Against a surplus of $90,000 and a budget that the City Administrator himself describes as tight, that first-year commitment represents roughly a quarter of the city's entire budget cushion. This is a city that is spending $38,615 on emergency water repairs in a single meeting, $135,721 to replace a failed well pump, $44,800 on a cooling tower pump rebuild it could have gotten for $15,730, $6,000 on a council-approved police review, another $3,000 on an unauthorized chief-interview engagement the council never voted on, and then restarting the entire chief search after the City Administrator extended an offer nobody authorized him to make. BiCARBUS is not an unreasonable expense if the product delivers what it promises. But it is exactly the kind of expenditure that a city in Italy's financial position needs its elected council to weigh, debate, and approve with full knowledge of every dollar. Instead, the equipment was installed before the council had finished discussing it.

So What Is the Problem?

Here is where I need the community to pay attention.

One Italy resident, Tobi Owen Beesley, posted publicly that she supports the idea of BiCARBUS but raised a concern I think every water consumer in Italy should hear:

"I'm NOT fine that it was 'installed without approval from council' and Lied to us about it. As no one has said if they have been using it or not, BUT why are they flushing our pipes now? Why am I getting rust and junk in my toilet and sinks when I have house filters? Even Google says the pipes need to be flushed when applying BiCARBUS!!"

She asked the question the city has not answered. When BiCARBUS works, it breaks down the scale and mineral deposits inside the pipes. All of that material has to go somewhere. That is why flushing is required. The city is supposed to flush the lines aggressively so the loosened debris does not end up in people's homes. Residents are supposed to know this is happening so they can flush their own systems and watch for discolored water.

Instead, Italy posted a vague Facebook notice on February 13 about flushing water lines "every second Friday of the month." No mention of BiCARBUS. No mention of potential debris in the water. No advisory to residents about what they might see coming out of their taps. One resident reported her water was out for three hours, not the "few minutes" the city described.

I worry that the lack of notice may have caused damage to plumbing, fixtures, or appliances that would not have happened if the city had simply told the public what was going on. A product can work exactly as intended and still cause harm if the people on the receiving end do not know it is being used.

Tobi put it plainly: "We have 2000 people in this town and stuff being put in our water without approval. Isn't that a crime? Isn't that illegal?"

I cannot tell her whether it is a crime. What I can tell her is that Texas Health and Safety Code Section 341.0351 requires notification to TCEQ before making significant changes to a public water supply system. Violating that notification requirement is a criminal offense under Section 341.047, classified as a Class C misdemeanor, with each day of a continuing violation treated as a separate offense. Whether that statute was violated depends on facts I do not yet have, specifically who applied for the TCEQ approval and under what authority.

What I Cannot Figure Out

TCEQ says Italy was granted approval to use BiCARBUS on January 21, 2026. The city council has never approved it. Three meetings. Three deferrals or rejections. October 2025, February 2026, March 2026. The council said no every time. Nobody in city leadership ever mentioned that TCEQ had already signed off.

Who applied for TCEQ approval? The council never authorized anyone to do that. As of January 12, 2026, the City Administrator's independent spending and contracting authority had been eliminated by council ordinance. Nine days later, TCEQ issued the approval. Nineteen days after that, the system was physically installed at the water plant on the same day the council tabled the matter for the second time.

I have asked TCEQ directly: when one level of the approval mechanism is bypassed, who is the responsible party?

On April 1, after TCEQ closed the complaint, I responded within minutes. I asked for an expedited reply given the April 13 workshop. I made clear that I had only contacted TCEQ in the first place because the city refused to discuss the matter with me directly. I told them this was a complaint follow-up from a resident of more than thirty years, not a media inquiry. I asked them to focus on the substance of my concerns rather than how I should "correctly contact" them. I asked specific questions about what happens when the council approval mechanism is bypassed and who bears responsibility when that occurs.

That was eleven days ago. The workshop is tomorrow. TCEQ has not responded.

I do not know what conclusions to draw from that silence. I am not accusing TCEQ of anything. But the residents of Italy are walking into a workshop tomorrow with questions that the state regulatory agency has had nearly two weeks to address, and the only information those residents have is what I have been able to document on my own.

The Community Is Watching

I am not the only person asking these questions.

Patrick Odell wrote on social media that he wants to see which council members "speak up about all the crap Keith has pulled and who doesn't." He wants to know who will address the fact that BiCARBUS was installed while the mayor says he knew nothing about it. He said he is looking forward to what Billy Long and Raymond Mosley have to say. He is looking for courage and integrity from the people elected to represent this town.

Karen Maida, who first brought the BiCARBUS installation to my attention and is on the record as the person who discovered it, posted publicly: "I hope the city will be honest and tell the citizens that the BiCARBUS equipment was installed on February 9th before the meeting. The council has not approved of it yet."

These are residents who care about their town. They are not trying to cause problems. They want answers.

What I Want to Hear on April 13

A workshop to discuss BiCARBUS is scheduled for April 13, 2026 at 5:30 PM at Italy City Hall, before the regular council meeting at 6:00 PM. Keith Whitfield specifically directed me to attend the workshop if I wanted more information. He refused to give me anything over the phone.

I plan to attend and record that session. I had hoped to go into this workshop with TCEQ's response to my questions about the dual approval mechanism. That has not happened. So I will go with what I have, and here is what I want to hear:

Who applied for TCEQ approval, and when? Who authorized the application? Was the council informed at any point before the January 21 approval was granted? Was the city's TCEQ compliance consultant, who was billing $650 per month during this period, aware of the application? Was the system activated at any point, even briefly? What was the purpose of the line flushing that began days after installation?

I want to hear the city take accountability for the lack of public notice. If flushing was necessary because of a new treatment system, residents deserved to know. If the product is as good as the research suggests, the city had every reason to tell people about it. Instead, they said nothing.

Where I Stand

I believe BiCARBUS is probably a good product that Italy's water system probably needs. I believe the people who installed it may have genuinely thought they were doing something good for the community. I also believe that good intentions do not replace due process. You do not connect something to the water supply of two thousand people without telling them, without getting council approval, and without making sure the regulatory agency that oversees public water knows about it.

Italy has real water problems. BiCARBUS might be part of the solution. But the solution has to start with transparency, and what happened here was the opposite of that.

This Meeting Is About More Than BiCARBUS

I have focused this piece on BiCARBUS because that is my primary concern going into Monday. But BiCARBUS is item L on the April 13 agenda. There are fifteen other items on the regular session, and several of them deserve residents' attention just as much.

Item O is titled: "Discussion regarding the 4th of July fireworks within the City limits, including but not limited to the hiring of additional officers and signage regarding parking on city streets." This is the first time in years that the city has put a proactive 4th of July conversation on a posted agenda before the event. Raymond Mosley appears to have pushed for this to happen on the record, in front of the public, rather than after the fact. If you had concerns about the parking restrictions that got dropped on the community with little warning last year, or about how fireworks enforcement has or has not been handled in recent years, Monday is the conversation. This is not a rhetorical invitation. The council is going to discuss it, and what residents say will shape what happens.

In July 2024, while I was covering Italy for ITXN at itxn.net, I wrote about a young resident named Nate who suffered a traumatic brain injury at an unauthorized fireworks gathering inside city limits. The city has had ordinances restricting fireworks within the city since June of 1995. Those ordinances have not been consistently enforced. The city's response to the fallout from 2024 was not to enforce the existing fireworks rules. It was to impose parking restrictions on residential streets that surprised the community on very short notice. Police presence and actual fireworks enforcement would have addressed the underlying problem. Locking down the streets did not. If that matters to you, item O is the agenda item where the city is supposed to hear from you.

The agenda has more. Item H is the presentation of the 2024-2025 audit by Anderson, Marx and Bohl. Item J is a Police Department request for FLOCK surveillance cameras in the 2026-2027 budget. Item M is a one-year $36,000 wastewater operation and maintenance contract with Bowman Environmental Enterprises, LLC. Item N is an open discussion of the Public Works Building bidding process, construction, remodel, and current condition. And after , the council will take action on three personnel matters: evaluation of the City Administrator, duties of the Public Works Supervisor, and the hiring of the Police Chief.

Each of those items is its own story. If even one of them matters to you, Monday is the meeting.

Show Up Tomorrow

The BiCARBUS workshop starts at 5:30 PM. The regular council meeting follows at 6:00 PM. I would encourage anyone who plans to attend to arrive by 5:00 PM if you can. If you show up at 5:30 for the workshop, you are already late.

Italy City Hall is at 161 W. Main Street.

When you walk into the chamber from the lobby, there will be a citizens comments sign-in sheet on the desk. If you want to speak during citizens comments, put your name on it. You can fill in your address or leave it blank. Addresses are not required, and leaving the line blank is within your right as a resident. If you want to go last, sign toward the bottom of the sheet. People have been known to draw their own line under the last signature just so they could speak after everyone else. That is allowed.

You do not need to prepare a speech. If you want to say something short, say it. If you want to ask a question, ask it. Nobody remembers what anyone said at a council meeting a week later unless it was extraordinarily memorable, so do not worry about sounding polished. Say what is on your mind. If you want your comment to carry weight in the minutes, be clear and specific. If you want to just say thank you or just say you are worried, that is also fine.

I will be there. I plan to record the open portions of the meeting so residents who cannot attend can hear what was said.

If you care about any of these issues, stay through the entire council meeting, all the way to council member comments at the end. That is where the real conversations happen. That is when the people you elected get to speak freely on the record about city business, without being limited to a specific agenda item. It is worth hearing what they have to say, and it is worth them seeing the community in the room when they say it. Show up for them. Let them know their constituents are paying attention.

It is going to be a long meeting. Bring water. Bring your questions. Bring your patience. The best conversations tend to happen at the end.

If you have experienced water quality issues since February, document them before you come. Take photos of discolored water with timestamps. Write down the dates. Save any notices from the city. You can also reach me at tips@watchtowerci.com or contact TCEQ directly at 512-239-1000.

I hope to see you at Italy City Hall, Monday, April 13, at 5:00 PM.

Kerens city council candidate Jennifer Lynn Combs left a candidate forum today and posted a public statement on Facebook describing what she called harassment, bullying, and intimidation at the event.

Combs said she attended the forum despite online harassment she had already been experiencing and despite warnings about potential disruptions. Shortly after she arrived, she said a person made inappropriate comments toward her that "had absolutely nothing to do with city council or city business."

She chose to leave, she said, so the person causing the disruption would stop and the event could continue without further distraction. She credited the women at KESA for hosting the event and said she did not want them to have to deal with the situation.

"Running for office should never look like that," Combs wrote.

Combs' Full Statement

The following is Jennifer Lynn Combs' complete statement as posted to Facebook on April 11, 2026:

I showed up today despite the online harassment, bullying, and intimidation because I care about this community and I believe in showing up.

Unfortunately, shortly after I arrived, a person decided it was the perfect opportunity to make inappropriate comments toward me, comments that had absolutely nothing to do with city council or city business.

At that point, I made the decision to leave the event in hopes that the person causing the disruption would stop and allow the event to continue without further drama, so citizens could meet the candidates without unnecessary distractions. The amazing women at KESA didn't have to deal with all that.

Unfortunately, the drama was exactly what I expected and what I had been warned about.

Running for office should never look like that.

Some people like to pretend they're brave by having others publicly bash their opponents, then stand back and make a mockery of what a candidate for city council should stand for.

That's not leadership. That's cowardly. It's not something I will ever stoop to.

I saw what happened today. None of this was funny. Not the comments. Not the behavior. Not the way the situation was handled.

Leadership isn't about tearing others down. It's about respect, integrity, and how you carry yourself, both when people are watching and when they aren't.

The drama needs to end. It's not helping anyone, not the citizens, not our town, and certainly not anyone's mental health.

I believe in standing on my own character, who I am today, my own work, and my commitment to this community.

If you want to vote for candidates who are stirring unnecessary drama, more power to you. If you want to vote for the people who show up, get the work done, and refuse to lose themselves in dirty politics, rumors, and everything flying through this town, then do that.

Either way, I wish it was May 2nd already.

I still care, and that's why I'm still here.

But your girl is mentally tired.

An Open Invitation

Watchtower covers local government in several small Texas communities, including Kerens. I believe voters deserve to hear directly from the people who are running for office and the people currently serving.

If you are a candidate for any local office in a community I cover, or if you are a sitting public official who wants to release a public statement, I will publish it. Contact me at tips@watchtowerci.com.

Your voice matters. The public deserves to hear it in your own words.

Italy Councilmember Billy Long asked Watchtower to publish the following statement to residents of Italy.

I'm issuing this statement because people in our town deserve straight answers and real accountability.

Water reliability, road conditions, and public safety are not meeting expectations, and residents are right to be frustrated. These are basic responsibilities of local government, and too many people feel like progress has been too slow and too inconsistent for too long.

I am pushing for real fixes on water infrastructure, not temporary patches. I am pushing for a more serious, long-term approach to road repairs that actually holds up. On public safety, I am increasing focus on coordination with law enforcement to address concerns that are showing up in everyday life.

The message from me is simple. The era of excuses is over. People don't want explanations. They want results they can see.

I will continue pushing for that standard until it happens.

This article is built entirely on public records obtained from the Tool Police Department, the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement, and publicly available documents. Every factual claim below is sourced from official department disciplinary records, signed by the officers who wrote them and the chief who approved them.

Officer Juan Ochoa was not contacted for this article. This was a deliberate decision. The public records speak for themselves, and I believe the facts should lead the conversation. If Officer Ochoa would like to sit down for an interview at city hall with city staff present, or over the phone, I am open to either and willing to work with his schedule. My number is public.

UPDATE (April 9, 2026, 10:16 AM): This article has been corrected. The original version reported two separate motorcycle incidents based on disciplinary records that carried two different dates. Lieutenant Jason Lee of the Tool Police Department promptly reached out to advise that a clerical error on his part resulted in inaccurate dates in the records. Both disciplinary actions arise from a single motorcycle collision on June 20, 2025. There was no second motorcycle incident. The article has been revised to reflect this correction. I appreciate the city's diligence in reaching out quickly to set the record straight.

How This Investigation Began

On April 6, 2026, a Tool resident named Leo Boyd posted in the "All About Tool Texas" Facebook group. Boyd described an encounter with a Tool Police Department officer that ended with his motorcycle being struck by a patrol vehicle. He included helmet camera footage and described a felony evading charge that was later dismissed. Boyd claimed the city's insurer paid him a settlement.

I saw the post the following day. The details were specific enough to warrant a closer look, so I shared a summary on my own page and asked the community a simple question: has anyone else had a similar experience with this officer?

The response was immediate.

The Community Response

The response was unexpectedly overwhelming. Over a dozen independent community members came forward describing their own encounters. Several reported that when they requested dash camera or body camera footage of their interactions, they were told at court that no video was available or that the officer's camera was not recording at the time.

Other patterns emerged in the public comment thread. Multiple residents described being pulled over repeatedly. One resident reported 12 stops in 18 months with four tickets, all from the same officer. A store owner described being ticketed after asking the officer to stop pulling over his customers.

I want to be clear: these are public statements made voluntarily by community members on a public social media post. I have not independently verified each account. What I can verify are the official records, and that is what this article focuses on.

The City Reached Out

On the morning of April 8, Lieutenant Jason Lee of the Tool Police Department emailed me at 8:56 AM. He mentioned awareness of my post and invited me to the police station for a meeting. The tone was constructive and direct.

I offered to come in after his lunch break so he would have time to gather information. Mercy Patterson accompanied me for the visit.

When we arrived at the station, we observed Officer Ochoa exit city hall and leave in his personal vehicle. We did not approach him. We focused on what the city wanted to discuss, and we figured that if they wanted us to speak with him, he would have been in the room.

We met with Lieutenant Lee, Chief Robert Walker, and City Secretary Kimberly. I had filed a detailed Public Information Act request at midnight the night before, listing seven categories of records related to Officer Ochoa. My original email had gone to their spam folder and was never received. Despite that, once we confirmed the request in person, the city fulfilled six of the seven items within 30 minutes.

To put that in perspective: I have active requests with other cities that have gone unanswered for over a month. I have received cost estimates of $50 to $60 for documents that could be photocopied in seconds. I once waited 10 business days for a two-sentence resignation letter that had to be reviewed by a city attorney before release. Tool handed me a stack of disciplinary records in the time it takes to eat lunch.

The one outstanding item involved a payment from the city's insurer to Leo Boyd. The city was not aware of this payment until I brought it up during the meeting. The city made calls and confirmed that the Texas Municipal League did pay Boyd something. The city has assured me they will continue to work with me to confirm that information. I do not fault them for the delay. They learned about the TML payment from me, and they are following up.

The Officer's Background

A review of Officer Juan Ochoa's licensing record through the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement reveals a pattern of short tenures across multiple agencies:

Eight appointments at five agencies in ten years, according to TCOLE records. His current position at Tool PD is the longest tenure of his career.

During the interview, Chief Walker stated that when Ochoa was hired, the department conducted a background check through SecureShare. "Whatever was sent in the personnel file was what I reviewed, and there was no red flags there," Walker said. The department did not independently contact Ochoa's prior agencies.

I have filed PIA requests with Ochoa's prior agencies for his personnel records.

The Body Camera Directive

On September 18, 2024, Lieutenant Jason Lee sent a department-wide email directive to all patrol personnel, including Officer Ochoa, establishing mandatory body camera guidelines. The directive is clear:

Officers are required to activate their body worn cameras during all official law enforcement encounters, including traffic stops, arrests, use of force incidents, and "any other situation where a reasonable expectation of recording exists." Officers shall not deactivate the camera until the encounter has concluded. Any deactivation must be documented in a written report with a reason.

The directive warns: "Failure to comply with this directive may result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination."

Ochoa was also formally trained on body-worn cameras in September 2018 through the Kaufman County Sheriff's Office.

June 20, 2025: The Motorcycle Strike

On June 20, 2025, at approximately 5:45 PM, Officer Ochoa observed a motorcycle in the 700 block of North Tool Drive allegedly traveling at a high rate of speed. He activated his emergency lights and initiated a pursuit.

What happened next is documented in the department's own disciplinary write-up, prepared by Patrol Sergeant Jesus Mendoza on June 21, 2025. According to Mendoza's investigation, which included a review of in-car camera footage, departmental video systems, and Henderson County dispatch logs:

The motorcycle was not committing a felony at the time of the stop. There was no indication of a crime in progress that would justify an emergency response under department policy. Ochoa's use of emergency lights and initiation of a pursuit were not in accordance with departmental policy regarding emergency responses.

The pursuit extended to the 1400 block of South Tool Drive. Ochoa drove into oncoming traffic and positioned his patrol vehicle between civilian traffic and the motorcycle. The motorcyclist attempted to turn into a driveway. Ochoa followed and struck the motorcycle with the right front end of his patrol unit, resulting in a fleet vehicle accident. He then detained the rider and called for EMS.

Ochoa was not wearing his body-worn camera.

Mendoza characterized Ochoa's actions as demonstrating "a clear disregard for the safety of the public, improper use of emergency lights, and reckless pursuit conduct in a situation not warranting such a response." He cited Texas Transportation Code Section 546.005, which defines reckless disregard.

The crash was investigated by the Texas Department of Public Safety, not Tool PD, because a fleet vehicle was involved. This is standard practice to avoid self-investigation.

The rider, Leo Boyd, was arrested and charged with felony evading.

The June Discipline

On June 25, 2025, Chief Robert Walker issued a formal Letter of Reprimand to Officer Ochoa. The discipline included:

• A one-week suspension without pay
• A six-month disciplinary probation period, during which Ochoa would not be eligible for overtime, special assignments, or off-duty work

The letter includes a direct warning: "Any further violations of department policy will result in escalated disciplinary action, up to and including termination."

Ochoa signed the letter on June 25, acknowledging receipt. Chief Walker signed it the same day. A witness also signed.

Thirteen days later, on July 3, 2025, Ochoa completed a de-escalation training course.

The Body Camera Discipline

A separate disciplinary action was issued for Officer Ochoa's failure to wear his body-worn camera during the June 20 incident. Sergeant Mendoza's memorandum identifies the violation as insubordination and failure to follow a direct order, noting that Ochoa violated directives from three levels of command: Sergeant Mendoza, Chief Walker, and Lieutenant Lee.

The discipline for the body camera violation was a written reprimand. The pursuit and strike received the more severe penalty: a one-week suspension and six-month probation. Both actions stem from the same incident.

During our April 8 meeting, Chief Walker acknowledged the complexity of officer discipline. "I'm not going to terminate an officer for the first time incident, second time," he said. "Depending on what it is." He referenced the legal risk of wrongful termination lawsuits.

The Felony Charge and the Insurance Payout

Leo Boyd was charged with felony evading arrest after the June 20 incident.

During our April 8 meeting, Lieutenant Lee confirmed that the felony charge was dismissed at the department's request. "There was a letter sent over to the DA's office requesting the case not be pursued," Lee said.

The department asked the district attorney to drop the felony charge against the person their officer struck with a patrol vehicle during a pursuit that their own investigation found violated department policy.

Boyd's helmet camera was recording during the encounter. In a public post on April 6, he stated that his footage captured a beer visible in the back of Ochoa's patrol vehicle. Boyd also stated that he has Ochoa on camera "both saying it was on purpose and on accident" regarding the decision to strike the motorcycle. Two separate speeding tickets Ochoa had previously written Boyd were also dismissed. Boyd described the cited speed of 55 in a 50 zone as "a lie" and noted that Ochoa did not show up to court for the first one.

Separately, the city's insurer, the Texas Municipal League, confirmed that a payment was made to Boyd. Leo Boyd has publicly stated the amount was $5,000. The city is still working to verify the details, as they were not aware of the TML payment until our meeting. The payment appears to have been handled as an administrative insurance claim. No civil lawsuit has been identified in connection with this incident.

What Comes Next

I have filed Public Information Act requests with Officer Ochoa's prior agencies for his personnel records. Those requests are pending. If the records reveal documented conduct issues at prior agencies, the next question will be whether those issues were shared with Tool PD through the SecureShare system when Ochoa was hired.

I will continue to review records as they become available and will report on what they show.

A Note on the City of Tool

I want to close with something that does not often make it into investigative reporting: credit where it is earned.

The City of Tool invited me into their police station. They sat down with me face to face. They handed me a stack of disciplinary records within 30 minutes of confirming my request. They did not hide behind a city attorney. They did not send me a cost estimate. They did not tell me to wait 10 business days. Lieutenant Lee reached out to me before I reached out to him.

That is not normal. In my experience covering small-town governance in Texas, that level of transparency is exceptional. I have been removed from council meetings, arrested on a warrant three weeks after attempting to interview a councilmember following a meeting, and stonewalled on two-sentence resignation letters. Tool opened the door.

I also want to thank Councilmember Tommy Salvato for reaching out and establishing a direct line of communication. Having reviewed recent Tool council meetings, I am encouraged by what I see. The council appears to be thinking about governance at a level that is uncommon for cities this size. They seem capable of coordinating with each other and with city staff in a way that suggests real institutional maturity.

The records I obtained raise real questions about accountability within the police department. The pursuit that violated department policy is documented. The body camera compliance failure is documented. The community's response speaks for itself. These are serious matters.

I am hopeful that the City of Tool will work through this in a positive, transparent, and efficient manner. The leadership I met today gave me reason to believe they will. I look forward to continuing the conversation.

To Officer Ochoa: our past does not define us. What we do moving forward is what defines us. Everyone makes mistakes. We are all human. How we react to our mistakes is what defines us.

Former Seven Points police officer Justin Shaffer has filed a lawsuit against the City of Seven Points, Mayor Keith Betts, and Anthony Katsoulas in Henderson County District Court. The case, CV26-0126-173, was filed on March 10, 2026 in the 173rd Judicial District. Shaffer is represented by attorney William J. Dunleavy of Richardson, Texas.

Both Betts and Katsoulas have been personally served. Returns of service filed with the Henderson County District Clerk show Betts was served at a Seven Points address on March 30, 2026, and Katsoulas was served at a Gun Barrel City address on April 3, 2026.

What the Lawsuit Alleges

The 22-page petition lays out ten causes of action. The central claim is whistleblower retaliation under the Texas Whistleblower Act (Texas Government Code Chapter 554).

According to the petition, Shaffer was employed as a police officer by the City of Seven Points and completed his probationary period in late October 2025. The petition states that he made multiple good-faith reports of violations of law to several authorities, including the Henderson County Sheriff's Office, the Henderson County District Attorney, a DA investigator, and the Acting County Attorney.

The reports involved two areas. First, Shaffer reported that a city employee had been arrested for official oppression. Second, Shaffer reported that Mayor Betts was improperly placing police department employees on administrative leave using complaints that, according to the petition, "lacked any factual basis, including the lack of any policy or rule violation."

The petition names seven police department employees, both officers and dispatchers, who were placed on administrative leave.

Shaffer alleges he was terminated on December 15, 2025, and that the termination was carried out by Katsoulas at the direction of Betts.

Peace Officer Protections

The lawsuit also focuses on Texas Government Code Sections 614.022 and 614.023, which provide procedural protections for Texas peace officers facing complaints.

Under these statutes, disciplinary action cannot be taken against a peace officer unless a signed complaint is provided, the complaint is investigated, and there is evidence to support the allegation. The petition alleges that none of these steps were followed before Shaffer was terminated.

Shaffer alleges he filed a grievance three days after his termination and appealed to the Seven Points City Council approximately one month later. According to the petition, neither the grievance nor the appeal was ever heard.

Additional Claims

Beyond whistleblower retaliation and peace officer procedure violations, the petition raises several other claims.

Shaffer alleges his termination violated his right to free speech under the Texas Constitution, arguing that he was punished for citizen speech on matters of public concern.

The petition also alleges that Katsoulas was commissioned by the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement (TCOLE) but was holding himself out as a police officer for the City of Seven Points without proper authority.

The petition further alleges that Betts and Katsoulas created "fraudulent government documents" that falsely stated the reasons for Shaffer's termination and filed them with TCOLE.

Shaffer seeks reinstatement to his position with full benefits and seniority, declaratory relief, injunctive relief, a writ of mandamus to compel the city to hear his grievance, and attorney's fees. The petition requests a jury trial.

I Will Be Watching

This lawsuit is in its early stages. No answers or responses from the defendants have appeared in the court record as of this writing. I will continue to monitor this case through the Henderson County District Clerk and will report back to the public as developments occur.

On March 14, 2026, the City of Italy held its annual cleanup day at Upchurch Fields, the only real public park in town. The Upchurch family donated the land to the city. For more than a decade, it has been the place where Italy holds National Night Out, Easter egg hunts, IYAA baseball and softball seasons, benefit concerts, and fireworks shows. It is where parents take their kids on weekends. It is the closest thing Italy has to a town square that is not a parking lot.

The cleanup day was scheduled from 8:00 AM until noon. Dumpsters were brought in for residents to use. The flyer, which I have obtained, required a current city water bill and a matching photo ID. Only one truck load per household was allowed. The flyer stated in red text that residents were required to help unload their own vehicle. These are the same residency requirements the city used for cleanup days at Upchurch in 2016. They are reasonable rules. They exist to make sure the dumpsters serve the people who pay for them.

According to residents who were there that morning, the dumpsters were full by mid-morning. The event continued anyway.

What happened over the next several hours is the subject of six interviews I conducted with eyewitnesses, a sitting council member, and on-record community sources. I also received a written response from Mayor Clinton Sulak-Tovar, a blanket "no comment" from City Administrator Keith Whitfield, and more than two weeks of silence from former Mayor Bryant Cockran. I have been sitting on this story since mid-March because other Italy issues demanded immediate attention, including a call to about a chemical named BiCARBUS connected to the city's water supply without council approval and a city official reading a false timeline into the public record about a failing Public Works Building. Those stories have been published. This one has been waiting its turn, and the facts have not changed.

A Birthday Party, a Locked Gate, and a Disabled Grandmother

After the cleanup ended, the city locked the gate to Upchurch Fields. A text notification sent to residents said the park would be "closed after 1:00 Sat, Mar 14th and reopening Tues, Mar 17th." That closure covered Saturday afternoon, all of Sunday, and all of Monday. It was spring break weekend.

A resident who lives near the park with clear visibility of the field was at Upchurch that afternoon with his family for a birthday party. A city worker told him that someone would come back at 6:00 PM to unlock the gate so they could leave. That is not what happened. The gate stayed locked. The worker never returned.

The resident's family had an elderly woman with them on a mobility scooter. She could not get out. They had to push her through rough terrain and grass around the fence to reach their vehicle. The resident carried his grill all the way around the park and lifted it over the fence to get it into his truck. He hauled about twenty chairs out the same way.

When I met this resident at the park the following Sunday to discuss the situation, I could still see the tracks in the grass where they had pushed the scooter. I took a video, which is in my possession.

While the gate was locked, a thirteen-year-old child fell from the playground equipment, landed on her back, and had the wind knocked out of her. She was not seriously injured. But the resident raised a point that stuck with me: what if she had been? What if an ambulance needed to get through that gate?

"The thing that angered me was locking that gate with people in there and saying we'll be back and never came back," Karen Maida told me on the record. "The woman basically is disabled."

Council Member Raymond Mosley, now in his fourth term, arrived at Upchurch around 6:15 to 6:30 that evening. A friend had called him and told him the gate was locked. When Raymond got there, he saw the birthday party group, about six or seven young people, walking along the curve of the walking trail toward wherever their cars were parked. They were already packing up. Baseball families had parked at the Catholic church and carried their equipment across to the field. The trash can at the park was full. The birthday party group had tied their trash in a bag and left it next to the can because there was nowhere else to put it.

I asked Raymond on the record whether the cleanup day situation had been discussed at the council level. It had not. He was unaware that the Mayor did not know about the incidents either. The council and the Mayor were operating in silos.

What Was Left Behind

After the cleanup day ended, a resident described seeing a dozer used to smash debris down into the dumpsters. A pile of scrap was left behind on the ground, and the area had not yet been graded. He described nails and boards left in the ground as a hazard for anyone walking barefoot or playing on the field. Italy hosts visiting baseball teams at Upchurch. Those teams would arrive to find debris on the ground and no working bathrooms.

The city eventually borrowed a magnetic nail roller from the lumberyard next door and swept the area on Monday. According to Jose, the city's Public Works employee, the remaining debris was picked up Monday around 11:00 AM. The park was cleaned up and reopened that same day, one day ahead of the posted Tuesday schedule, after public pressure mounted on social media and the resident contacted a Texas Parks and Wildlife warden in Ellis County.

The resident posted about the situation on the Italy Talk Facebook page on March 15. The thread drew significant community engagement. Multiple people confirmed the mess, the locked gate, and the spring break timing. He followed up on March 16 with a post noting that he had coached IYAA and mowed Upchurch field himself, that this year's cleanup was worse than last year, and that the community response had shifted in his favor. "The park was supposed to be closed until now," he wrote. "I stretched my neck out there to get chopped off. Thank you."

"At this point, I don't trust the city to do the right thing," Karen Maida told me. "Now you can quote me on that."

Who Got In and Who Did Not

A resident who lives near the park observed the morning traffic from his home. What they saw was the gate access in the final minutes before noon.

Around 11:40 AM, about twenty minutes before the event was scheduled to end, another resident in a green pickup truck pulled up. Becky Boyd, a city employee who was allegedly standing out at the road controlling access, told him no. The green truck left.

Then, from the opposite direction, a truck allegedly bearing Bryant Cockran's AC company name pulled in. Becky Boyd did not stop it. She waved it right through.

I want to be clear about something. A lot of people in small towns use their company truck as their only vehicle. Showing up in a truck with a business name on it does not mean the load was commercial waste. I am not implying that. I am reporting what was described to me by the people who were there.

Jose, the city's Public Works employee, gave a consistent account. Speaking to Council Member Raymond Mosley, Jose said that after one person was turned away, "the ex-mayor pulled up." According to Jose, Cockran told the workers they had to take whatever was brought before noon, and that the city would get another dumpster and pick it up later. Jose said this was what staff had been told the previous year and the year before. So they let Cockran in and he dumped his things.

Both accounts agree on the central fact: a resident in a green truck was turned away, and shortly after, Cockran was let in without being stopped.

Where the accounts diverge is on what was in the load. One commenter in the Facebook thread reported that her husband saw "trailers full of job trash" including AC units being dumped, and that he waited 45 minutes while they were unloaded. Jose denied that Cockran brought AC units. Jose said one person put a single window unit in a dumpster but that workers caught it and removed it. No photographs of any load exist. I do not know what was in the load, and I am not going to guess.

What I can report is this: the 2026 cleanup day flyer lists seven categories of prohibited items. Tires, oils, freon, propane, wet paints, flat panel and plasma TVs, and hazardous materials. Air conditioning units are not named on the 2026 list. They were explicitly named on the 2016 list and on the 2012 convenience station list. The prohibited items list got shorter between 2016 and 2026. Whether that was deliberate or someone just made a shorter flyer, I do not know. But AC units contain freon, which is on the 2026 list. The historical record shows the city has prohibited AC units at disposal events for at least a decade.

I texted Cockran on March 19 at 9:42 AM. I wrote: "Did you talk to becky about unlocking the gate on the cleanup day? I was told someone got turned away right before you but then she let you in." The message was marked as read immediately. As of today, more than two weeks later, he has not replied.

The Rules on Paper vs. the Rules on the Ground

The cleanup day flyer states three requirements that matter here. First, a current city water bill and photo ID. Second, one truck load per resident. Third, residents are required to help unload their own vehicle.

These are residency requirements. They exist to make sure the dumpsters serve the people who pay for them. The city has been running cleanup days with these rules for at least a decade. Chris Enriquez said that people without a city water bill were turned away at the event.

Cockran is an Italy resident. He may well have been using his company truck to haul personal household waste, which is common in a small town. I am not claiming otherwise. But according to Jose's account through Raymond Mosley, Cockran gave instructions to city workers about what to accept. The flyer says residents must help unload their own vehicle. It does not say residents can direct city workers to handle decisions about what to accept.

The question I keep coming back to is simpler than who had what in their truck. It is about who gets told no and who does not. A resident in a green pickup was turned away. Shortly after, a former mayor was waved through. The people working the gate that morning were city employees. One of them, according to Jose's own account, took instructions from the former mayor about what to accept. That is what was reported to me by two independent sources.

Who Was in Charge?

I emailed Mayor Clinton Sulak-Tovar on March 18 with eight questions about the cleanup day. He responded within 36 minutes. He told me he was not present that day. He was at Trade Days from 8:30 AM until about 3:00 PM, then delivering bakery cakes until about 5:00 PM. When I asked about the trash left behind, the gate not being unlocked, the disabled woman trapped inside, the company truck being given preferential access, and the debris not being cleared, his response to all five of those questions was the same: he was "unaware" of the incidents.

When I asked who currently maintains Upchurch Fields, he said he would have to look into it. He said he personally picks up trash when he walks there. He was open to the idea of monthly bulk pickup as an alternative to cleanup days: "that does seem like it would be a good idea to look into."

I emailed Keith Whitfield, the City Administrator, the same evening with six questions. He was out of town. On March 25, his first day back, he responded at 9:23 AM with five words: "No comment on any item."

That response covered every question I asked. Who was in charge of cleanup day logistics. Who made the decision to lock the gate. Whether he was aware a disabled resident was trapped inside. Who decides which vehicles are allowed in and which are turned away. Whether the city has a maintenance plan for Upchurch Fields. Whether the city considered using the debris storage area behind city hall instead of the park.

No comment on any item.

If that phrasing sounds familiar, it should. On March 26, one day after his cleanup day response, I called Keith to ask about a chemical treatment system, BiCARBUS, that had been connected to Italy's water supply without council approval. His response on that call, which I recorded: "I'm not going to discuss it, Ron." I called TCEQ the next day to ask whether what I was seeing was a legitimate concern. They told me it was. They opened a complaint on their own based on what I described. On April 5, I published an article documenting three primary-source admissions that contradict a timeline Keith read to the council about the Public Works Building. Keith did not prepare that timeline himself. He asked City Secretary Amber Cunningham to put it together for him.

Three different issues. Three refusals to engage. The Mayor says he was not there. The City Administrator says no comment. The former mayor reads the text and goes silent. Nobody was in charge, nobody is responsible, and nobody wants to talk about it.

A Park That Volunteers Built

Upchurch Fields was donated to the city by the Upchurch family. In 2012, the city council dissolved the Italy Parks Commission and created the Italy Parks Board under Ordinance 12-0409-01, placing Upchurch Field under formal city governance alongside Gorman Park, George Scott Memorial Park, and Children's Memorial Park. The city accepted legal responsibility for maintaining the park.

In 2013, the Italy Economic Development Corporation invested more than $44,000 in public sales tax funds to build a concrete walking trail at Upchurch, about half a mile long and seven feet wide. Gerdau Steel donated materials. The Hyles family provided volunteer labor. Mayor James Hobbs and IYAA president Charles Hyles dedicated the trail on November 20, 2013. Former IYAA president and Planning and Zoning commissioner John Droll put it simply in a 2014 candidate questionnaire: "There were many folks who made Upchurch Field what it is. And let's not forget the Upchurch family who made it possible."

Since then, the park has been maintained largely by the people who use it. IYAA parents mowed the fields, welded bleachers, and repaired dugout benches. In 2017, the organized a community volunteer work day at Upchurch because the normal city operations were not keeping up. The volunteers were asked to bring tools for dirt work, power washing, and painting.

Karen Maida documented the same maintenance problem in September 2014, writing under her married name, Karen Mathiowetz, in her "Karen's Korner" column for the Italy Neotribune. She described an open hole at Upchurch adjacent to the walking trail and called it "a serious accident waiting to happen for a child." She asked a question that is still relevant twelve years later: "Can we expect our citizens to obey the ordinances when our city does not?"

The same woman, the same park, the same complaint, twelve years apart.

When I asked the Mayor who maintains Upchurch Fields today, he did not know. He said he picks up trash when he walks there. When I asked Keith Whitfield whether the city has a maintenance plan or assigned staff for the park, he said no comment.

I was also told by residents that the bathrooms at Upchurch have not had reliable access. The Mayor said he believes the restrooms are "functional, but not sure if they are always unlocked." A restroom that is functional but locked is not functional for the people who need to use it. Italy hosts visiting baseball teams from other cities at Upchurch. Those teams arrive to find no working bathrooms and, on the weekend of March 14, trash and debris on the ground.

The city invested public money in this park. It accepted governance responsibility by ordinance. The families who use it maintain it themselves. The city held a cleanup day there, left their trash on the ground, locked the gate with people still inside, and closed the park for the rest of spring break weekend. A disabled woman had to be pushed through rough terrain to get out. Then nobody in city leadership could explain who was in charge or what went wrong.

A Better Way

Multiple residents I spoke with raised the same alternative: monthly bulk pickup service. Quentin Little raised it in the Facebook thread. Karen Maida raised it in her interview. The Mayor said it seemed like "a good idea to look into."

Monthly bulk pickup is not a new concept. When Access Disposal held the city's trash contract in 2017, the agreement already included bulky item pickup by appointment. Residents could call Access directly to arrange collection of large items like couches and tree limbs. The annual cleanup day with dumpsters at the park was not the only option then, and it does not have to be the only option now.

What This Comes Down To

A family went to a public park for a birthday party on a Saturday afternoon during spring break. The city locked them inside. A disabled woman on a mobility scooter had to be pushed through the grass to get out. A thirteen-year-old child fell from playground equipment while the gate was locked, and if that fall had been worse, an ambulance could not have reached her. The city left significant trash on the ground and closed the park for the weekend.

Meanwhile, at the same event that morning, a resident in a green truck was turned away while a former mayor was waved through. The city worker who controlled the gate took instructions from the former mayor about what loads to accept. Nobody in city leadership knew about any of it, or if they did, nobody would say so.

The Mayor was not there. The City Administrator said no comment. The former mayor read my text and never replied.

I have asked every person I can think of to ask. The residents talked to me. The officials did not. That is the story.

On March 9, 2026, I sat in the lobby of Italy City Hall and listened as City Administrator Keith Whitfield read a prepared timeline to the city council. The timeline was about the Italy Public Works Building, a metal shop structure at 1100 FM 667 that has been failing its occupancy inspection for more than a year because of ADA compliance problems. Keith did not prepare the timeline himself. He told the council, on a recording I have in my possession, that he asked City Secretary Amber Cunningham to put it together for him.

The timeline was meant to settle a question that has been circulating in Italy for months. Who was actually responsible for the Public Works Building project, and how did a brand new municipal building end up failing its accessibility inspection before it was even finished? The question was circulating because I had been asking it. I first messaged Charles Hyles directly about the Public Works Building on February 11, 2026, using his official phone number for city business. I asked him for comment as the project manager. He did not reply. I asked again. He did not reply. For the past two months, the Public Works Building has been an ongoing topic of my reporting on Italy, and for the past two months, Charles Hyles has declined to answer any of the questions I have put to him directly.

Keith read Amber's timeline out loud. It hit the key dates. It named a few people. Then it made two claims I want to quote directly:

"What I want to make clear is that at no time has there been speculation. One is Shawn Holden had nothing to do with this whole project. He was gone."

Council Member Raymond Mosley, sitting at the dais, interjected immediately.

"Yes, he did."

Keith did not respond to Raymond's interjection. He continued:

"The other thing of it is there was speculation that Charles Hyles was the project manager. That's not true. If it is, we can't find any document that says so."

Charles Hyles has been president of the Italy Economic Development Corporation for about fifteen years. I have recordings, emails, and documents that contradict both of Keith's claims. Some of the documents I am about to cover were released to me by the City of Italy's own attorney more than a year before Keith read that timeline to the council. The city had them the whole time.

This is the story of the Italy Public Works Building, the timeline the city read at a public meeting, and the records that tell a different story.

The Project in Brief

The Italy Public Works Building was supposed to be a simple project. The city owned an old metal shop building on a property near downtown Italy, a property that has since been sold and is now home to a Family Dollar store. The proceeds from that sale were earmarked for the Public Works Department's new workspace. The original plan was to disassemble the old metal shop building, truck it over to the city's water treatment site on FM 667, and reassemble it there as the new Public Works Building. That plan did not hold.

On May 8, 2023, the Italy City Council voted to award a construction contract to M.D. Bowles Construction for about $168,600. Nine days later, on May 17, after an with the city attorney, the same council voted to rescind that contract and put the project back out for bids. In August, after proper newspaper advertising, the council voted again to award the contract to Bowles Construction, this time at about $172,000. The contract was signed in October 2023. Construction began in November 2023. The building was completed, signed off on, and paid for in May 2024. Five months later, in October 2024, a licensed accessibility inspector failed the building on its ADA compliance review.

By the time the council discussed the project again on March 9, 2026, the building had been in failed status for more than a year. The city was preparing to spend more money to remove walls and redo counter tops to try to bring the building into compliance.

Keith's timeline covered all of those dates. His timeline said Shawn Holden "had nothing to do with this whole project" and that Charles Hyles was "not" the project manager. Here is what the records actually show.

May 8, 2023: Shawn Holden Presents the Bid, and Thanks Charles on the Record

On May 8, 2023, Shawn Holden stood in front of the council as City Administrator and Public Works Director, a dual role he held until his resignation in September of that year. He presented two bids for the Public Works Building project. The Bowles Construction bid was about $168,600. The Robert Morgan Construction bid was about $231,000. Holden recommended that the council go with Bowles.

Before the council voted, Holden said this:

"With the help of Charles helping me answer questions, get bids, go back and forth, engineers, it's been a headache. Mostly for Charles."

That is a verbatim quote from the official city audio recording of the May 8, 2023 council meeting, at the 52:32 timestamp. "Charles" is Charles Hyles. The council was in public session. The quote is on the city's own audio record, released to me through a Public Information Act request.

A minute later, during the same discussion, Council Member Raymond Mosley asked Holden about the demolition of the old building. Holden explained that the original plan had been to disassemble the old building and move it to the new location, but that plan fell through because the materials could not be reused cleanly. Mosley pressed him on the details. Here is Holden's response, at the 53:37 timestamp:

"We paid Josh's group to take it down, and what they did was he took that building, the old building, and then took money off what he charged us to take all the other stuff down. That's what that was, and I don't have the amount we paid them yet. I wasn't prepared for that, but you're welcome."

"Josh's group" is a local contractor named Josh Trees. Holden could not state, in public session, the amount his own city had paid that contractor. He said he did not have the number with him.

Later in the same meeting, at the 1:00:00 mark, Holden confirmed that $50,000 of the project funding was coming from the Italy Economic Development Corporation. The rest was coming from the sale of a separate city property to Family Dollar and from Holden's own departmental budget.

That is the May 8, 2023 record: Shawn Holden publicly thanked Charles Hyles for helping him with bids and engineers on the Public Works Building project. Shawn Holden publicly confirmed that Josh Trees was paid to demolish the old building but could not state the amount. Shawn Holden publicly confirmed that $50,000 of money was going into the project.

Keith's March 9, 2026 timeline said Shawn Holden had nothing to do with the project and Charles Hyles was not the project manager.

May 17, 2023: The Attorney Steps In

Nine days after the council approved the Bowles bid, on May 17, 2023, the council held a called meeting. The agenda included one item that stood out. It was a request to enter executive session under Texas Government Code §551.071 to receive legal advice on the Bowles Construction agreement. That section covers "consultation with attorney on a matter in which the attorney's duty to the governmental body under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct conflicts with Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code."

That is a specific legal citation. It is the section cities use when their attorney has identified something the council needs to hear in private before taking further public action.

The council entered executive session at 6:14 PM. They reconvened at 6:56 PM. That is roughly forty-two minutes behind closed doors on a single contract item.

When they came back, Council Member Troy Kowalsky, who had just been sworn in to his first council term moments earlier, made a motion. On the audio recording, Kowalsky says he made the motion "after consulting with our attorney." The motion was to rescind the Bowles Construction contract and put the project back out for bids.

The rescission passed. The contract that Shawn Holden had presented nine days earlier, in a meeting where he publicly thanked Charles Hyles for helping with the bids and engineers, was voided after about forty-two minutes of legal advice in executive session.

I cannot tell you what was said in that executive session. I was not there, and executive sessions are closed under . What I can tell you is what the public record shows on either side of it. On May 8, Shawn Holden credited Charles Hyles on the audio. On May 17, the council rescinded the contract after an executive session about the attorney's duty under the disciplinary rules of professional conduct.

September 26, 2023: Charles Hyles Admits It Was His Fault

By September 2023, Shawn Holden was gone. His last day was September 1. I will get to the details of his departure in a moment. For now, what matters is that Charles Hyles was still EDC President and was still running EDC meetings.

On September 26, 2023, the Italy Economic Development Corporation held its regular meeting. Charles led the meeting. At the 1:05:48 timestamp on the official audio recording, Charles said the following:

"No, we did not advertise. That's what threw me off when I got the bids for the city building. I didn't know if I had read the description before. I didn't even think it was going to happen. It was my fault. I didn't put it in the paper. So we went out and got bids to the public works building. But I didn't put it in the paper because the EDC didn't have it in the paper. We just had bills."

Read that again slowly. The EDC president is talking about "the bids for the city building." He is saying "I got the bids." He is saying "I didn't put it in the paper." He is saying "It was my fault." He is saying "we went out and got bids." He is saying "we just had bills."

Competitive bidding requirements under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 252 require that certain municipal contracts be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation. That rule is why the original Bowles bid was rescinded on May 17. It had not been advertised. The attorney almost certainly told the council exactly that in the May 17 executive session. The project then had to be re-bid in July with proper newspaper advertising in the Waxahachie Sun. Bowles won the re-bid anyway, at about $172,000.

Charles's statement on September 26, 2023 was him explaining, on his own city's audio recording, why that happened.

He took personal responsibility. He said "it was my fault." He was the person who failed to put it in the paper. He was the person who "got the bids." He was explaining this to his own EDC board, on a city recording, twenty-five days after Shawn Holden had stopped working for the City of Italy.

A person who had "nothing to do with" a project cannot be personally responsible for failing to advertise its bids twenty-five days after the only other named participant has left the city.

Shawn Holden's Resignation Letter

Let me now tell you exactly when Shawn Holden left Italy and what the city's own files contain about his departure. The primary source is a document I am holding in my hand because I asked the city for it. Here is the entire letter, verbatim:

August 28, 2023

Mayor Cockran,

Please accept this letter as my formal resignation for the positions of City Administrator and Public Works Director for the City of Italy. My last day will be September 1, 2023. I want to thank you and the city council for the opportunity to serve the citizens of Italy.

Sincerely,

Shawn Holden

That is the entire letter. One substantive sentence. Four days of notice on a dual senior executive role. No stated reason. No mention of why a man who had been giving public works reports to the council two weeks earlier was now walking out the door.

The resignation was addressed to then-Mayor Bryant Cockran. It was not copied to the council. The letter does not exist on city letterhead in the scan I received. It is typed on plain paper with a handwritten signature.

I will let readers draw their own conclusion about how common that is for a dual City Administrator/Public Works Director departure.

August 30, 2023: The Mayor's Single-Sentence Announcement

Two days after Shawn signed the resignation letter, on August 30, 2023, the Italy City Council held a Called Meeting. The primary purpose was a public hearing on the proposed property tax rate of $0.536097 per $100 for the 2023 tax year, followed by a discussion of the 2023 to 2024 budget. Will Dan Financial Services was present and walked the council through the numbers. Council Member Luin McConnell was absent.

At the end of the meeting, during the Mayor Comments section, Mayor Bryant Cockran announced Shawn Holden's resignation. Here is what the official city minutes say, verbatim:

"Bryant Cockran announced the resignation of Shawn Holden. He thanked Shawn for his dedication to the City of Italy and wished him well."

That is the entire official written record of a dual senior executive leaving the City of Italy. One sentence. No motion of appreciation from the council. No council vote accepting the resignation. No discussion. No reason given. No succession plan mentioned. No mention of the dual-role nature of the position he had been holding. The minutes are signed by Mayor Cockran and by City Secretary Amber Cunningham, TRMC.

If you are reading this and thinking "that cannot possibly be the entire written record," you are asking the right question.

September 11, 2023: The Will Dan Consultant Confirms It

Italy's City Council met again on September 11, 2023, for its next regular meeting. Will Dan Financial Services consultant Jason Gray was presenting on the budget process. At the 14:24 timestamp on the September 11 audio recording, Gray mentioned Shawn Holden's resignation in passing:

"At the end of the last meeting that I was at, you know, hearing that Mr. Holden was submitting his resignation..."

Gray was confirming what the August 30 minutes show. The resignation was announced at the end of the August 30 Called Meeting during Mayor Comments. Gray was present at that meeting. He heard the Mayor say it. Two weeks later, he was mentioning it at the next council meeting because the budget numbers he was discussing now had to account for both a city administrator search and a public works director search.

At the same September 11 meeting, the council discussed the budget impact of replacing Shawn. The numbers were about $242,000 for the combined administrator and secretarial budget line and another $430,000 for the public works department budget. The dual role Shawn had held was going to be split into two separate hires.

October 24, 2024: Italy's Public Works Director at the Time Writes an Email

Fast forward about thirteen months. The Public Works Building had been constructed by Bowles under the rebid contract. The city signed off on the completed building in May 2024 and made the final payment. Everyone thought the project was finished.

In October 2024, the accessibility inspector from a firm called Access Granted returned to do the ADA compliance review. The inspector, a registered accessibility specialist named John Johnson with TDLR license number RAS 1544, found that the building failed its accessibility requirements. On October 23, 2024, Johnson sent the draft and final reports to Italy's Public Works Director at the time, James Wallingsford. Wallingsford had been hired in early 2024 to fill the role Shawn Holden vacated the previous September. He served as the city's Public Works Director until he resigned in July 2025. Shortly after his resignation, Wallingsford began working for Italy again as a Public Works consultant, receiving a smaller but regular contract payment from the city for his services. That consulting arrangement is still in place as of this article. For the October 2024 email below, Wallingsford was writing in his capacity as the sitting Public Works Director.

Johnson's email included this line:

"So here is the Draft Report I sent first, and the final report sent after talks with Shawn."

"After talks with Shawn." Shawn Holden had been gone from the city for more than a year by the time Johnson wrote that email. The email was forwarding reports that had been finalized based on conversations with Shawn from before his departure.

One day later, on October 24, 2024, Wallingsford forwarded Johnson's email to City Administrator Keith Whitfield with his own commentary. Here is what Wallingsford wrote to Keith, verbatim:

"Keith,

The ADA Inspector sent this to Shawn in January of 2023. He without a doubt notified Shawn of the issues in the plans, Shawn should have had this resolved before any construction began. For all we know Shawn sent this to the contractor and the contractor did not abide by what was noted. I'm not sure how we can find out if Shawn contacted the contractor with these issues. I will do some more research and see if I can determine if the contractor was notified.

Jim W"

The Public Works Director of the City of Italy at the time, writing to the current City Administrator of the City of Italy on the city's own email system, states the following as fact:

1. The ADA Inspector sent accessibility findings to Shawn Holden in January 2023.
2. Shawn Holden was "without a doubt" notified of the plan issues.
3. Shawn Holden "should have had this resolved before any construction began."
4. Wallingsford does not know if Shawn communicated the issues to the contractor.

Keith Whitfield received that email on October 24, 2024. On February 25, 2026, at 2:30 PM, Wallingsford forwarded that same email chain to City Secretary Amber Cunningham. That forward happened twelve days before the March 9, 2026 council meeting where Amber would prepare a timeline for Keith to read to the council claiming Shawn had nothing to do with the project.

Amber Cunningham had this email in her inbox when she wrote the timeline Keith read.

The Records Request I Filed in March 2025

On March 12, 2025, about a year before the March 9, 2026 council meeting, I filed a Public Information Act request with the City of Italy. The request was broad on purpose. Here is the verbatim text of what I asked for:

"Any and all internal memos, termination letters, resignation letters or any other communication regarding Shawn Holden leaving his City Administrator position in 2023."

My goal was simple. I wanted to see everything the city had in writing about the departure of its dual senior executive. Memos. Termination letters. Resignation letters. Emails. Internal communications. Anything.

On March 26, 2025, fourteen days later, I received a response from Messer Fort PLLC, the law firm the City of Italy retains for legal services. The response letter was signed by Assistant City Attorney Michael K. Kallas. The response was CC'd to Amber Cunningham, the City Secretary.

Here is what the response letter said:

"This letter is in response to your public information request received by the City of Italy ('City') on March 12, 2025, in which you requested: 'Any and all internal memos, termination letters, resignation letters or any other communication regarding Shawn Holden leaving his City Administrator position in 2023.' Enclosed are the documents responsive to your request. Because the City has fully responded to your request, it is now closed."

The city released exactly two documents to me in response to that request. The first was Shawn Holden's one-sentence resignation letter, which I quoted above. The second was the minutes of the August 30, 2023 Called Meeting, the minutes where the Mayor's announcement is the only written record of the departure.

That is what the City of Italy gave me as the complete record of a dual senior executive's resignation.

No internal memos. No emails between Shawn and the Mayor. No emails between Shawn and council members. No emails between the Mayor and council about the resignation. No severance agreement. No separation agreement. No exit interview notes. No HR file material. Nothing from the city administrator's own office describing the circumstances of his departure.

The response letter did not cite any Texas Public Information Act exceptions for withheld documents. Under Chapter 552 of the Texas Government Code, if a governmental body is going to withhold responsive records, it is required to notify the Attorney General within ten business days and cite the specific exception it is claiming. That did not happen here. The letter simply stated the request was "fully responded to" and "now closed."

I want to be precise about what that means. Either the City of Italy has no internal written communication about the departure of its dual senior executive beyond a one-sentence resignation letter and a one-sentence line in meeting minutes, or the City of Italy withheld responsive documents without citing any statutory exception. Both possibilities are newsworthy. One represents an extraordinary absence of normal city recordkeeping. The other raises questions about compliance with the Texas Public Information Act.

Amber Cunningham was CC'd on the response. From March 26, 2025 forward, she was on actual notice that a journalist was specifically investigating every communication related to Shawn Holden's 2023 departure. That notice was in place for nearly a year before she wrote the timeline Keith read to the council.

February 2026: I Asked Charles Hyles Directly

On February 10, 2026, the day after the Italy City Council's February 9 regular meeting, I sent Charles Hyles a text message at his official phone number, which he uses for city business as EDC President. I had heard from other residents that Charles had made comments about me during the previous night's meeting, including a claim that I do not pay city taxes. Charles had walked past me twice during the meeting without speaking to me directly.

Later the same morning, at 10:11 AM, I sent Charles a professional courtesy message explaining that I was reaching out for comment before publishing an article. Here is what I wrote, verbatim:

"I've got questions about permits, Charles. I heard some stuff that I think it's time for you to clarify since you're now getting involved in city council again. I was taking time to reach out because I have been gathering my facts. I have everything now, so I would like to get a comment from you before I publish as a professional courtesy. Let me know when you have time for a phone appointment today. If you want your comments included in the article, I need to hear back from you by Friday."

I then listed four questions about EDC business, including one specifically about the EDC's 2022 acquisition of the property adjacent to the Upchurch Ballpark that the EDC has not done anything with.

The next day, February 11, 2026, at 11:49 AM, I sent Charles a fifth question. I want to quote this question in full, because it matters:

"Additional question: 5) Your comments as Project Manager of the new public works building, and why the building continues to fail inspections, per Keith Whitfield."

Read that carefully. On February 11, 2026, almost one month before Keith Whitfield would tell the council on March 9 that "speculation that Charles Hyles was the project manager" was "not true," I asked Charles in writing to comment as the project manager of the building. I asked why the building continued to fail inspections, and I cited Keith Whitfield as the source for that information. That means Keith had been discussing the building's failed inspections with me as early as February 2026.

Charles did not reply.

On February 12, 2026, at 8:18 AM, I sent a final message. I will not quote the full text here because it covers multiple topics, but the relevant portion for this article is that I put in writing that Charles was ignoring my public works building question, I informed him that all future personal commentary he wanted to make about me could be directed to my attorney C.J. Grisham, and I told him I would not contact him again unless he replied. Charles did not reply.

I did not contact Charles again by text for about two months. In that time, the March 9, 2026 council meeting happened. Keith read Amber's prepared timeline. Charles threatened me in the lobby. Officer Geddie separated us. I filed a Public Information Act request for the recording of that meeting, paid the city about $42 through its third-party payment processor, received the audio, and began writing this article.

Earlier today, on April 5, 2026, at 10:59 AM, I sent Charles one final professional courtesy message before publication. Here is the full text:

"I am publishing an article about the public works building and your involvement in the project today. Now is your last chance to comment if you want something included in my article. As of right now, I've already reached out to you for comment, and you refused, so that will be indicated in my article unless you reply to me today before 3 PM. I am also seeking comment from Amber and Keith, in addition to the mayor, if you can pass the word on for me. I don't have their numbers, but I know you do. Thank you."

The message was delivered. Charles did not reply.

For the past two months, the Italy Public Works Building has been a central focus of my reporting on this city. Charles Hyles has had multiple documented opportunities, in writing, at his official city-business phone number, to respond to my questions. He has chosen not to reply to any of them. Keith Whitfield and Amber Cunningham have been similarly on notice. Wallingsford's October 24, 2024 email sat in Keith's inbox for sixteen months before Keith read the contradicting timeline to the council. The February 25, 2026 forward to Amber gave her the same information twelve days before she wrote that timeline for him.

The city's March 9, 2026 public statement through Keith was, in effect, the city's response to the questions I had been putting to Charles in writing for weeks. That is why the city rushed a prepared statement into the middle of a monthly activity report rather than putting the topic on a future agenda for open public debate. The city chose the delivery method, and the city got the facts wrong. Intentionally or unintentionally, readers can decide.

March 9, 2026: The Timeline Read to the Council

On March 9, 2026, I sat in the lobby of Italy City Hall. I was there because the council was scheduled to discuss, among other items, a water treatment system called Bicarbus that I had been raising questions about for weeks. I had not entered the council chamber because of a separate legal matter involving my 2025 arrest at that same building, which is the subject of a pending civil case.

From the lobby, through the open doorway, I listened as Keith Whitfield delivered his monthly activity report. He had not put the Public Works Building on the agenda as a discussion item. There was nothing on the published agenda that told the public the council would be discussing the project. Keith brought it up on his own, inside his routine department head report, using the prepared timeline Amber had written for him.

Here is what Keith said, at the 17:39 timestamp on the official meeting audio:

"While we're there, we know we've been having a lot of speculation going on about different things on that project at the Public Works building. And I asked Amber to put me a timeline together that we could specify some things, we could kind of get some things cleared out in the air. A lot has been said."

He then read the timeline. The dates were largely accurate: early 2023 planning, September 1 as Shawn's last day, October 25 as the contract signing date, November 2023 for permits and construction, May 21, 2024 for building completion, October 2024 for the ADA inspection failure. All of that matches the other records.

Then came the two claims.

"What I want to make clear is that at no time has there been speculation. One is Shawn Holden had nothing to do with this whole project. He was gone."

Raymond Mosley, seated at the dais, interjected:

"Yes, he did."

Keith did not acknowledge Raymond's correction. He kept going:

"Okay. The other thing of it is there was speculation that Charles Hyles was the project manager. That's not true. If it is, we can't find any document that says so. Okay? So we just want to clear all that up."

City Attorney Ann Montgomery, a senior attorney with Messer Fort who had just been assigned to Italy as its legal representative at this meeting, interrupted:

"Mayor, Council, this is only on the agenda for our monthly activity report. So if you want to have that discussion, it needs to be on the next agenda so that there can be open discussion about that item because there might be members of the public that might want to come to listen to that. And based on this agenda, they didn't know that was going to be discussed."

Montgomery was right. The Texas Open Meetings Act requires that items of substance be specifically listed on the agenda so the public can attend if they choose to. A monthly activity report is not the appropriate place to deliver a prepared statement absolving two named individuals of responsibility for a failed public project. Montgomery's point was procedural, but it was also substantive. If the city genuinely wanted to clear the air about who was and was not involved in the Public Works Building project, the honest way to do it was to put the topic on a future agenda, give the public notice, and let residents attend the discussion. The city's own newly-assigned attorney said so on the record, inside the same meeting where the statement was being read.

That did not happen. The statement was delivered. The council moved on.

After the Meeting Recessed into Executive Session

Shortly after Keith's timeline, the council recessed into executive session on the Bicarbus item and on separate personnel matters. I was still in the lobby. Several other people were there with me, including Charles Hyles.

I had been recording from the beginning of the evening. I had the recorder in my hand. Charles walked over to talk. What followed is on the audio.

I asked Charles a direct question.

"So you're saying you had nothing to do with the project?"

Charles answered:

"Once the project started, absolutely not."

I pressed:

"No, no. The project in general, you had nothing to do with the project at all, huh?"

Charles hesitated, then said this:

"The only thing... You can record me."

I said:

"I'm recording you."

Then Charles said the sentence that matters:

"The only thing that I helped Shawn with, he had a question about..."

I caught it immediately.

"Wait a minute. Calm down. Back up. You just admitted on the record that you helped Shawn with a project."

Charles tried to walk it back.

"No, he had a question."

I said it again.

"You just admitted on the record that you helped Shawn with a project."

That exchange is at the 5:28 to 5:49 timestamp on my recorder. I have it. It is verbatim. Charles Hyles, in his own voice, on a recorder I was openly holding in my hand, a recorder he had just acknowledged and told me I could use, admitted he helped Shawn with something on the project.

Minutes earlier, Keith Whitfield had read a prepared statement from his usual seat at the City Administrator's desk in the council chamber, claiming Charles Hyles was not the project manager and could not be documented as such. Three independent audio recordings from 2023 and 2026, spanning thirty-four months, document Charles Hyles's involvement in the Public Works Building project:

• May 8, 2023: Shawn Holden on the city's own recording: "With the help of Charles helping me answer questions, get bids, go back and forth, engineers, it's been a headache. Mostly for Charles."
• September 26, 2023: Charles Hyles on the city's own recording, twenty-five days after Shawn's last day: "It was my fault. I didn't put it in the paper. So we went out and got bids to the public works building."
• March 9, 2026: Charles Hyles on my recording, minutes after Keith read the timeline: "The only thing that I helped Shawn with, he had a question about..."

Three recordings. Three admissions. Thirty-four months. One of those recordings is from inside the same building where Keith had sat at his City Administrator's desk minutes earlier and read the statement denying it.

"I'm Going to Take Him Out Myself"

The conversation with Charles did not stop after he admitted helping Shawn. It escalated.

I asked Charles why the EDC owned a property at the south corner of the Upchurch Ballpark baseball fields. I knew the answer. I had pulled the ECAD records. The EDC had acquired the property in 2022 to resolve a boundary dispute after a neighbor discovered that the city's baseball field was partially sitting on his land. I was asking because I wanted to understand why, if Charles had led a walking trail construction project at the same ballpark in 2013, the boundary issue had not been caught then.

Charles did not want to answer the question. He told me to file a records request instead.

"Why don't you do an open records for it?"

I pushed back.

"So you want me to force the city attorney to process my records request and you can just tell me for free right now?"

He repeated himself:

"Yeah, I'm telling you to do an open records request."

I asked again. He deflected again. The exchange went on for several minutes. At about the 8:03 timestamp, Charles changed the subject. He brought up lawsuits. I have referenced elsewhere that I have a pending civil matter against the City of Italy related to my 2025 arrest. I have stated that publicly. Charles knew about it. What he said next, verbatim:

"Unlike you, who threatens with the lawsuit. I'm not threatening. I'm not you."

That is Charles positioning himself as someone who acts rather than threatens. I caught what he was implying. I asked him, sarcastically, if he was threatening to sue me:

"You're threatening to sue me right now?"

Charles answered, and this is the actual threat:

"No, I'm telling you right now."

I said I did not care what he was telling me, letting my only "F-bomb" of the night slip. Charles then said this, at the 8:18 timestamp:

"If he cusses at me again, I'm going to take him out myself."

I have that quote on audio. An Italy police officer who had been standing nearby walked over within seconds. His words to Charles and me, at the 8:48 timestamp:

"Just separate from him, okay?"

The officer was Cameron Geddie, one of Italy's patrol officers. He physically stepped between us. I said, out loud on the recording, "Jesus Christ. Alright, I'm out of the room. That's ridiculous." I walked away.

For the record, I want to be precise about what happened. Charles Hyles, fifteen-year president of the Italy Economic Development Corporation, told a journalist he was going to "take him out" if the journalist cursed at him again while pressing him with questions about a municipal project. An Italy police officer responded by physically separating us. I am a public figure in Italy in the sense that I am an investigative journalist who covers the city. I ask direct questions. I publish what I find. I do not threaten. I report. What happened in that lobby was a public official, in a public building, threatening a journalist who was asking basic questions about how a taxpayer-funded municipal construction project was managed.

The threat is on tape. The officer intervention is on tape. Charles's own words are on tape.

The Walking Trail, the Property Dispute, and the Pattern

A few minutes after Officer Geddie separated us, Charles came back over voluntarily to explain the EDC property acquisition. He pulled out his phone to show me an aerial image of the ballpark area. He was visibly nervous, slightly shaking, so much that he had to set the phone down on the counter to steady it. I ended up helping him find the correct location on Google Maps. He told me he was offering me information "out of kindness" as a private citizen, not as a public official, and asked me to turn the recorder off. I declined to turn it off. He proceeded anyway.

Charles then walked me through the history as he remembered it. I want to be careful with how I relay his account, because I cannot independently verify most of it from documents, and parts of it are factually questionable. Here is what Charles told me:

Charles said that in the early 1990s, a man named Mr. Dilworth donated land to the City of Italy for a new baseball field after the old field at the high school was demolished. He said Lloyd Davidson built the new field. He said an old barbed-wire fence marked the property boundary on one side. He said years later a neighbor called Charles to report that part of the baseball field was actually on his property. He said a survey confirmed it. He said the EDC purchased the property for about $16,000 to resolve the boundary issue and keep the field intact.

There is a factual problem with Charles's account right at the beginning. The Upchurch Ballpark in Italy was not donated by a Mr. Dilworth. It was donated by the Upchurch family. The park is named the Upchurch Ballpark. The walking trail at the park is called the Upchurch Walking Trail. Walter Upchurch, for whom the park is named, has a memorial scholarship bearing his name at the local high school. The Upchurch family's donation of the land is documented in the Italy Neotribune archives and in local history. Charles, who has been EDC President for fifteen years and who personally oversaw the 2013 walking trail construction at that same park, confused the donor family with someone else while trying to explain a 2022 EDC property purchase to a journalist on a recording.

I cannot independently verify the rest of what Charles told me about the boundary dispute or the neighbor's call or the survey. Those are Charles's allegations. The only piece that I can independently confirm is that the EDC does now own a property at the south corner of the ballpark, and that the purchase happened in 2022, per public ECAD property records.

There is one more thing Charles told me about that property on the recording that I want readers to sit with. Charles acknowledged, on tape, that the parcel the EDC purchased sits inside a flood plain. That is his own admission, not my characterization. A flood plain designation severely limits what can be built on a piece of land, drives up insurance and compliance costs, and in most cases makes commercial or structural development impractical or impossible. Under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 505, a Type B Economic Development Corporation is supposed to spend its money on projects that promote or develop new or expanded business enterprises and create or retain jobs. The Italy EDC has been sitting on roughly $600,000 in undeployed funds. The Italy EDC also, under Charles Hyles's presidency, spent sales tax dollars to acquire a parcel of land inside a flood plain where nothing of commercial value can realistically be built. Residents should be asking a simple question. What economic benefit does the City of Italy receive from the EDC purchasing a nearly completely unusable property inside a flood plain, and what authorized use of sales tax funds does that purchase represent?

I asked Charles when the walking trail at the ballpark was built. He told me the walking trail was laid on top of an existing asphalt road that had been there since the original field construction. I pointed out to him, on the Google Maps image still sitting between us, that the asphalt road he was describing runs along the north side of the park, not the south side. The walking trail on the south side of the park, the one his own EDC dedicated in 2013, is an entirely new path through ground where no previous road existed. That distinction matters, because if the south-side trail was built on undisturbed land, it would have required a survey and permits to confirm the city owned the ground it was being built on. Charles did not have a direct answer to that. The Italy Neotribune has a story from November 26, 2013 documenting the walking trail dedication. It names Charles Hyles as the person who built the trail, with assistance from his father Jimmy Hyles, his sons Creighton and Case Hyles, and their schoolmate Jose Luna. The article credits the Italy EDC for funding the project.

Then I asked Charles the question I had been building toward.

"Also, question. Why would you be building a walking trail if you don't pull permits, if you don't have a survey, if you don't know where the stuff is? So why would you build a walking trail? So if you would have pulled permits for the walking trail, you would have known about the property issue, would you not? Because the plats and everything would have been examined."

Charles answered:

"They didn't require permits."

I pushed back:

"Why not? That's the story."

Charles said:

"I don't know."

That exchange is at the 17:13 timestamp on my recording. The fifteen-year president of the Italy EDC, responsible for how EDC sales tax funds are spent, admitted on tape that no permits were pulled for the 2013 walking trail project. When I asked him why, his answer was "I don't know."

The boundary issue that cost the EDC $16,000 to resolve in 2022 would have been caught in 2013 if the walking trail work had been done with proper permits and a proper survey. It was not. Charles's words, not mine.

I am bringing up the walking trail because it is a pattern piece. The question in this story is not whether Charles Hyles is a bad person or whether he meant to help the city. The question is whether projects under his control as EDC president followed standard procurement and compliance practices. The 2013 walking trail did not have permits. The 2023 Public Works Building bids were not advertised in the newspaper. In both cases, Charles Hyles has, on audio, personally accepted responsibility for the procedural failures while simultaneously denying his involvement in the broader projects.

What the Records Actually Show

Let me bring this back to the central question. On March 9, 2026, Keith Whitfield read a prepared timeline to the Italy City Council claiming that Shawn Holden "had nothing to do with this whole project" and that Charles Hyles was "not" the project manager. Here is what the city's own records, released by the city itself, show:

1. Shawn Holden presented the original Public Works Building bid to the council on May 8, 2023 in his dual capacity as City Administrator and Public Works Director. He publicly thanked Charles Hyles for helping him with bids and engineers. This is on the city's own audio recording.

2. Shawn Holden publicly confirmed on May 8, 2023 that Josh Trees's crew was paid to demolish the old building. He could not, in that public meeting, state the amount paid. This is on the city's own audio recording.

3. Shawn Holden's resignation letter, dated August 28, 2023, names both his positions as "City Administrator and Public Works Director." The letter is one substantive sentence, with no stated reason for the departure, addressed only to the Mayor, with four days of notice on a dual senior role. The city released this letter to me under a Public Information Act request in March 2025.

4. Charles Hyles personally admitted responsibility for the Public Works Building bid advertising failure on September 26, 2023, twenty-five days after Shawn Holden's last day at the city. He said "it was my fault" and "I got the bids" and "we went out and got bids." This is on the city's own audio recording.

5. Italy's then Public Works Director James Wallingsford wrote to City Administrator Keith Whitfield on October 24, 2024 stating that Shawn Holden "without a doubt" received the ADA deficiency notification in January 2023 and "should have had this resolved before any construction began." Wallingsford later forwarded that same email to City Secretary Amber Cunningham twelve days before she prepared the March 9, 2026 timeline Keith read. Wallingsford has since resigned from the Public Works Director role but continues to work for Italy as a public works consultant on contract.

6. The City of Italy, through its attorney, released the resignation letter and the August 30, 2023 meeting minutes to me in March 2025 in response to a Public Information Act request. The response was CC'd to Amber Cunningham. No other documents were returned. No exceptions were cited.

7. Charles Hyles, in his own voice, on a recording he acknowledged and consented to on March 9, 2026, admitted helping Shawn with the project: "The only thing that I helped Shawn with, he had a question about..."

All seven of those records were either generated by the City of Italy, released by the City of Italy, or captured inside the City of Italy's own buildings. None of them required me to obtain anything through private channels. The city made these documents available. Amber Cunningham, the City Secretary, was on notice of all of them. Keith Whitfield, the City Administrator, was on notice of at least the Wallingsford email since October 2024.

On March 9, 2026, Keith read a timeline that contradicted every one of those records. The council was told that Shawn "had nothing to do with this whole project" and that Charles was "not" the project manager. Raymond Mosley said "yes, he did" and was ignored. The statement was delivered. The meeting moved on.

What I Already Asked the City

I am not calling anyone names in this article. I am presenting the records and letting them speak for themselves. The readers of this article can judge for themselves whether the statement read at the March 9 meeting is consistent with the documents in the city's own files.

I also want to be clear about something before anyone accuses me of publishing without giving the city a chance to respond. I have already done that. The city's response to my questions is the March 9, 2026 timeline Keith read to the council. That is the on-record answer Italy chose to give. I have quoted it in this article, in full, multiple times. I have shown what it said. I have shown what the records in the city's own files say alongside it. Readers can decide for themselves which one matches reality.

For the record, here is the full outreach trail the city was given before publication:

• February 10, 2026: I texted Charles Hyles directly at his official city-business phone number. I told him I was reaching out for comment as a professional courtesy before publishing an article. I asked him for a phone appointment.
• February 10, 2026: I sent Charles four questions about EDC matters, including the EDC's acquisition of the baseball field property.
• February 11, 2026: I sent Charles a fifth question specifically asking for his comments "as Project Manager of the new public works building, and why the building continues to fail inspections, per Keith Whitfield." This message is in writing. I can produce it.
• February 12, 2026: I sent Charles a final February message. I told him I would not contact him again unless he responded. I informed him that any personal commentary he wanted to make about me could go to my attorney, C.J. Grisham.
• March 9, 2026: Keith Whitfield read Amber Cunningham's prepared timeline to the council from his usual seat at the City Administrator's desk during his monthly activity report. The timeline claimed Shawn Holden had nothing to do with the project and Charles Hyles was not the project manager. That statement was effectively the city's response to my February questions. It was delivered on the city's terms, at the city's preferred venue, without any direct communication with me.
• March 9, 2026: Charles Hyles, in the lobby of City Hall, verbally admitted on my recorder that he had helped Shawn with the project. He then threatened me, and an Italy PD officer physically separated us.
• April 5, 2026: I texted Charles one final time, on the day of publication, notifying him that the article was being published today and that he had until 3 PM to respond if he wanted his comments included. He did not reply.

The city of Italy does not owe me a response. The city of Italy owes its residents one. The record shows the city has been given ample, documented opportunities to address the contradictions in this article. Charles chose not to reply. Keith chose to read a prepared timeline at a monthly activity report rather than putting the topic on a future agenda where open public discussion would have been allowed. Amber chose to prepare a timeline that contradicted an email sitting in her own inbox.

The questions I would like the city to address publicly, on the record, at a future council meeting, are these:

1. Did Amber Cunningham have the October 24, 2024 Wallingsford email in her possession when she prepared the timeline Keith Whitfield read on March 9, 2026? If so, why did she include the statement that Shawn Holden had "nothing to do with this whole project" when the Public Works Director at the time had written that Shawn was "without a doubt" notified of the plan issues in January 2023?

2. Did Keith Whitfield review the Wallingsford email before reading Amber's timeline to the council? He received it in October 2024. It was in his own inbox for sixteen months.

3. How does the city reconcile its March 9, 2026 statement with Charles Hyles's September 26, 2023 on-record statement that "It was my fault. I didn't put it in the paper" regarding the Public Works Building bids?

4. How does the city reconcile its March 9, 2026 statement with Shawn Holden's May 8, 2023 on-record acknowledgment that Charles was helping him with bids and engineers on the project?

5. Will the city release all other documents responsive to the March 12, 2025 Public Information Act request that were not provided in the March 26, 2025 response? If no such documents exist, is the city's position that there is zero internal written communication about the August 2023 departure of its dual senior executive?

6. Will Charles Hyles retract the threat and defamatory statements he made on March 9, 2026, on audio, inside Italy City Hall?

I will update this article if and when the city chooses to address these questions in a public meeting. Any formal written response I receive from the city, the Mayor, Keith Whitfield, Amber Cunningham, James Wallingsford, or Charles Hyles will be published in a follow-up article.

What Italy Residents Should Know

If you live in Italy and you are reading this, I want to tell you three things.

First, the Public Works Building is still failing its occupancy inspection. The city has told the council it is preparing to spend more money on wall removal and counter top modifications to bring it into compliance. Those costs will come out of your tax dollars. You have a right to ask where the money is going, who is managing the corrective work, and whether the same people who directed the original project will be directing the repair work.

Second, the March 9, 2026 council meeting is on the public record. The audio is available through a Public Information Act request. The August 30, 2023 minutes and the August 28, 2023 resignation letter are both documents the city has already released and is obligated to release again if asked. You do not need to take my word for any of this. The records are there.

Third, and I want to be clear about this, the point of this article is not to attack individuals. It is to document what the records show and to ask whether the public statement delivered at a council meeting matches those records. When a public official tells the council a specific set of facts on the record, and the city's own files contain a different set of facts, that is a question residents deserve to be asked about. I am asking it.

The Request at the Center of This Story

Everything in this article was built on documents I obtained through the Texas Public Information Act. The resignation letter came from a request. The council audio recordings came from PIA requests. The Wallingsford email came from a supplemental PIA request after I realized the city had not provided it in the original response because I had not named Jim Wallingsford as a document custodian. The meeting minutes came from PIA requests. Every single foundational document in this story is public record that any Italy resident has the right to ask for.

You do not need to be a journalist to file a Public Information Act request. You do not need to have a lawyer. Under Texas Government Code §552.221, any person can submit a request to a governmental body, and the body is required to respond within ten business days or provide a cost estimate. Under §552.267, media representatives are entitled to fee waivers for requests made in the public interest. Under §552.306, the governmental body must notify the Attorney General if it intends to withhold records under any exception.

I paid $41.92 for the 2023 council audio recordings that produced the quotes in this article. That is the entire cost of access to the truth about a project the city has spent an unknown amount of taxpayer money on and is still spending money on.

Everything the city has in its files about Shawn Holden's departure fits in a single email attachment the city's attorney sent me in March 2025. One resignation letter. One set of meeting minutes. That is it. If you want to know why this story matters, start there. The city of Italy has, in its own official response to a records request, told a journalist that this is all it has on the resignation of its dual senior executive. If that is actually true, it is newsworthy. If it is not, it is more newsworthy.

I will continue to report on this story as more records are released. The April 13, 2026 Bicarbus workshop is the next time the council will meet in a public setting. I will be there.

If you have information relevant to the Italy Public Works Building project, the 2023 bid process, Shawn Holden's departure, or the ADA compliance issues, you can reach me at tips@watchtowerci.com. All sources are protected.

On the evening of April 4, I called Jerry Bannister. No agenda, no gotcha questions. Just a conversation.

If you follow Trinidad city politics, you know the Bannister name. Jerry sits on both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Economic Development Corporation. His mother Marie is on the city council. His wife Dusty is on the event committee. Depending on who you ask, the Bannisters are either trying to take over Trinidad or just trying to participate in their community.

I wanted to hear Jerry's side. Because in the past few weeks learning more about Trinidad, I have talked to plenty of people on one side of the city's divide. I had not yet heard from the other.

What I got was a 45-minute conversation that challenged some of my assumptions.

"I Don't Do Word of Mouth"

Jerry answered the phone and got right to it. He is a veteran, a former corrections officer, and a former law enforcement officer. He opened his cafe in Trinidad in 2019. He does not have time for rumors.

"When somebody comes and tells me so-and-so said something about you, I don't take word of mouth," Jerry said. "I'll go down to Dan's house, knock on the door, and we can have a conversation. Did you say this? No? Okay, then it's just a rumor flying around town."

That directness is what prompted our call. Earlier that day, comments on a Facebook livestream had escalated into accusations, perceived threats, and the kind of public back-and-forth that drowns out real civic discourse. Jerry had posted comments that caught my attention, and I wanted to understand the context.

His explanation was straightforward. A woman he identified as Beth had made comments about his family and his cafe on Dan Pass's livestream. Jerry said he sent her a private message first, asking her to stop. When she continued publicly, he responded publicly.

"I could have not said anything and just went straight to my attorney," Jerry said. "But I didn't go that route. It was simply saying, hey, unless you want to be involved in a lawsuit, stop."

The Family Question

I asked the question directly: Are the Bannisters trying to run Trinidad?

Jerry did not dodge it. "We have heard a comment made that the Bannisters are trying to run Trinidad," he acknowledged. But he framed each family member's involvement as their own decision. His mother ran for council "against my wishes," he said. His wife is on the event committee. He himself focused on P&Z and .

"I have no desire to get into that stuff," he said, referring to the council business his mother handles.

Whether you accept that framing or not, Jerry offered something few people in Trinidad have offered: a direct, on-record response to the perception. He went further.

"If you want to do a public records request, Lindsay actually gave me the folder back when, way back, but there's a folder probably about an inch thick that the city kept directly on us," Jerry said.

I have independently confirmed that the city did maintain a file on the Bannister family. That alone should give anyone pause before dismissing Jerry's account of being targeted.

He described years under the previous administration where the Bannister family was, in his words, "the oppressed ones." He alleges that former Police Chief Brian Myers used his authority to cancel the cafe's trash service contract, forcing Jerry to hire an attorney to get his dumpster back. Other verified sources with no business or personal connections to the Bannisters have independently corroborated this claim.

The Old Guard

Jerry's account of the prior administration paints a picture consistent with what others have described: a small group that controlled city business and discouraged public participation.

"Back then, absolutely nobody came to the meetings because it didn't matter what their complaint was," Jerry said. "It fell on deaf ears. That select few did what they wanted to. They didn't care about the citizens."

He pointed to a specific example involving the P&Z residency ordinance. Around 2020 or 2022, Jerry alleges that Roy Stanfield and the mayor at the time, Leslie Parker, pushed through an ordinance changing the P&Z residency requirement from a 10-mile radius to within city limits, specifically to block Jerry from joining.

"If you look at the agendas, that ordinance was signed off on a month before they even had the meeting and voted on it," Jerry said. He added that then-city attorney Clayton Gaddis declared it "an illegal ordinance."

The broader pattern Jerry describes, where Roy Stanfield allegedly wielded outsized influence over city boards and used procedural maneuvers to maintain control, is consistent with accounts from multiple independent sources. The story of the prior administration's behavior in Trinidad has been told from many directions now. Jerry's version fits the pattern.

Where is the City Business?

Despite my offering multiple times for him to weigh in on the Judge Bivens situation and the council's current agenda, Jerry mostly stayed in his lane. He did share one observation from his law enforcement background: he alleges the municipal judge was accepting pleas directly from citizens, which he said compromises judicial neutrality.

"I was up there the other day making copies," Jerry said. "Colby had left for a doctor's appointment. So people were coming in with tickets and the judge was doing them."

But the moment that resonated most came when I asked about the upcoming Thursday agenda, which contained only three items: another about the judge, concerns about the mayor, and an ordinance restricting the mayor's powers. No infrastructure. No water. No budget.

Jerry acknowledged the disconnect. He refocused on what he cares about: reducing ordinances that nickel-and-dime residents.

"I've got to pay a $75 fee for a permit, and then when I'm done, I've got to pay another $75 to have code enforcement come look at it," he said about fencing. "They act like a HoA. This isn't Dallas, this is Trinidad."

What Comes Next

I told Jerry I would write about our conversation and put it in a positive light. I meant that. Because regardless of what is happening behind the scenes in Trinidad, this was a productive phone call. Jerry talked to me. He did not dodge. He gave me context I did not have. He agreed, at least in principle, that the community needs more conversations and fewer Facebook fights.

"Talk it out and be done with it," Jerry said.

I suggested a future recorded conversation or livestream where Jerry could share his perspective publicly. He said he would think about it.

Trinidad has real problems. The water system needs attention. The budget is tight. City business is not being discussed at meetings. The community is fractured.

The only way through is to talk. Jerry Bannister was willing to do that tonight, and I give him credit for it.

On March 28, I published a detailed account of how a chemical water treatment system called BiCARBUS was installed on Italy's public water supply without city council approval. That article, Italy's Council Said No to a Water Treatment System. It Got Installed Anyway, laid out the timeline, the evidence, and the fact that I had contacted the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality about it. If you have not read Part 1, I would encourage you to start there.

Here is what has happened since.

TCEQ Opened the Complaint on Their Own

I want to clarify something about how this complaint came about. I never submitted an online complaint to . I called the TCEQ main switchboard on March 27 to ask whether my concern was even valid. I was routed through several departments before reaching Eraj Karunanayake, the environmental investigator assigned to Ellis County.

When I described what was happening in Italy, Eraj stopped me. He was already familiar with Italy's water system because he had personally conducted a Comprehensive Compliance Investigation of the city's water infrastructure at the end of 2025. He told me the concern was valid. His exact words: "That is a valid complaint." He told me that no chemical can be connected to a public water supply without prior TCEQ approval. He said he did not believe the system could "even be built or connected" without TCEQ's knowledge. His closing statement: "Thank you for bringing this to our attention, because it shouldn't be happening."

After our phone call, Eraj followed up by email to reconfirm the details he had taken down and to accept additional documentation in my possession. I promptly forwarded documentation supporting my claims. The complaint was then formally opened by Eraj after his review of everything I provided. I simply made a phone call. TCEQ's own investigator decided this warranted investigation, verified the details, requested supporting evidence, and opened the complaint himself.

Then TCEQ Said It Was Already Approved

On April 1, I received an email from Steven Dyer, an environmental investigator with TCEQ's Region 4 office in Fort Worth. His message read:

"Upon further review, it was determined that the City of Italy was granted approval to utilize the sodium hypochlorite solution BiCARBUS by the TCEQ Water Supply Division on January 21, 2026. Therefore, the complaint does not meet the necessary criteria for conducting a complaint investigation and will be closed out."

January 21, 2026.

Let me put that date in context.

The Full Timeline

BiCARBUS did not first come before the Italy City Council in February. It first appeared on the council agenda on October 13, 2025. The agenda item read: "Discuss and consider necessary action(s) regarding water treatment with BiCARBUS LLC." The council voted 5-0 to take no action.

According to TCEQ, someone obtained approval from the TCEQ Water Supply Division on January 21, 2026. The council was never informed that this approval had been obtained. There is no mention of it in any council packet, agenda, or meeting minutes I have reviewed, and I have reviewed every council packet from October 2024 through March 2026.

On February 9, 2026, BiCARBUS came back before the council for a second time. A presentation was given. The council voted 3-2 to defer the matter. The same day, the BiCARBUS system was physically installed at the water plant.

On March 9, 2026, BiCARBUS appeared on the council agenda for a third time. Residents raised concerns. The city attorney directed the item to . After closed session, the council voted unanimously to schedule a workshop for April 13 at 5:30 PM. Again, no vote was taken on the BiCARBUS agreement.

Three council meetings. Three times the council either rejected or deferred BiCARBUS. And at no point during any of these meetings did the City Administrator mention that TCEQ had already granted approval.

Why I Am Concerned About This Response

If Italy had TCEQ approval since January 21, why did nobody say so?

When I called Keith Whitfield on March 26, he refused to discuss BiCARBUS. He told me to wait for the April workshop. If the city already had TCEQ approval, the simplest response in the world would have been: "TCEQ is already aware. We have their approval." He did not say that. He said, "I'm not going to discuss it, Ron."

When TCEQ's own investigator, Eraj Karunanayake, took my call on March 27, he sounded confused and concerned. He told me the complaint was valid. He said the city could not connect a chemical without prior TCEQ approval. He opened the complaint himself. If this approval from January 21 was on file the entire time, it appears the investigator assigned to this region was not aware of it when I called.

Then, four days later, a different investigator emailed me to say the complaint was being closed because approval had been on file since January.

I want to lay out what that sequence looks like from where I sit. The City Administrator refused to tell me anything. The TCEQ investigator who had just inspected Italy's water system did not seem to know about the approval. He opened a complaint because the situation concerned him. Then a different TCEQ representative closed it, citing an approval that nobody involved appeared to know about until after the complaint was filed.

The Question TCEQ Has Not Answered

Here is what I wrote back to TCEQ on April 1 at 10:16 AM:

The connection was still done without council approval. I have this as a documented fact based on Italy city council meeting minutes. The council specifically tabled the matter. TCEQ approval does not equal council approval.

I asked TCEQ three specific questions:

What involvement does TCEQ have when someone can prove a City connected a water treatment chemical without council approval? This seems like a seriously concerning matter that demands a response from TCEQ. What are your official comments? There are two levels of approval: TCEQ and council. What do we do when one of these mechanisms are bypassed, and who is the responsible party?

These questions went to Steven Dyer, the TCEQ media team, and Eraj Karunanayake. I also copied several media associates so they would be aware of the situation.

The Media Inquiry Reclassification

Later that afternoon, at 1:40 PM, I received a response from Ricky Richter, a TCEQ Media Relations Specialist. He confirmed my questions and asked when my deadline was. He also directed me to submit future media inquiries to TCEQ's media team.

I responded at 1:51 PM. I want to be direct about what I said, because I think it matters.

I told Ricky Richter that this is not a media inquiry. I made my concerns clear to Eraj during my original call. This is a serious matter of water system accountability. I grew up in Italy. I spent over thirty years of my life there. The people on this water system are people I know. I am not contacting TCEQ as a journalist chasing a story. I am contacting them because I have a genuine concern for the community I grew up in and continue to document and advocate for.

I asked him to focus on the issue at hand rather than instruct me about how to "correctly contact" TCEQ. I asked him to reply-all so that all parties could remain updated.

As of today, April 2, I have not received a response to my questions. Tomorrow is Good Friday, so I do not expect to hear back until Monday at the earliest.

Two Levels of Approval

I want to explain why I believe this is important, and why TCEQ's response so far is not sufficient.

There are two separate approval mechanisms for connecting a chemical to a city's public water supply. The first is TCEQ's regulatory approval, which addresses whether the chemical itself is safe and whether the installation meets state standards. The second is the city council's approval, which addresses whether the city has authorized the expenditure, the contract, and the modification to its infrastructure.

TCEQ says they granted the first. The city council never granted the second. In fact, the council actively withheld the second on three separate occasions.

If TCEQ approval was obtained on January 21, that raises its own set of questions. Who applied for it? Was it Keith Whitfield? Was it Texas Rebuild? The council had not authorized anyone to pursue TCEQ approval. The matter had been on the council agenda once, in October, and the council voted unanimously to take no action. No council member authorized the City Administrator to seek regulatory approval for BiCARBUS. And yet, someone did.

The January 12, 2026 ordinance amendment eliminated the City Administrator's independent spending and contracting authority. Nine days later, TCEQ approved the use of BiCARBUS in Italy. Nineteen days after that, the system was installed at the water plant on the same day the council tabled it for the second time.

The residents of Italy who consume this water were never told that TCEQ had already approved its use. The council members who voted to defer were never told. The community members who have been suspicious about line flushing since February were never told.

Whether or not TCEQ's regulatory box was checked, the people who actually live here and drink this water did not have a say. That is the concern I have raised with TCEQ, and it is the question they have not yet answered.

What Happens Next

A workshop to discuss BiCARBUS is scheduled for April 13, 2026 at 5:30 PM at Italy City Hall, before the regular council meeting. Keith Whitfield specifically told me, on a recorded call, to attend the workshop if I wanted more information. He refused to give me anything over the phone.

I plan to attend and record that session. I will continue to update the community as I learn more.

If you are an Italy water consumer and have questions or concerns about your water, you can contact TCEQ directly at 512-239-1000 or file a complaint online at www.tceq.texas.gov. You can also reach me at tips@watchtowerci.com.

I sent my last email to TCEQ at 1:51 PM on April 1. I am publishing what I know now so the community can stay informed while we wait for their response.

We walked into the Kerens ISD Board of Trustees meeting on the evening of March 30, 2026, not knowing what to expect. We cover local government in several small Texas communities, and we have seen just about everything, from boards that operate like private clubs to officials who treat the like a suggestion.

What we found at Kerens ISD was a genuine relief. This board gets it. And we think other TOMA-regulated bodies in Kerens could learn from them.

We are going to walk through what the board covered, what they voted on, and what we observed. We have also included our TOMA compliance analysis toward the end for those who want the full picture.

Every board member was present. Board President Teresa Jennings called the meeting to order, Tyrone Martin led the opening prayer, and the room felt welcoming from the start.

Students of the Year

Before any business was conducted, the board recognized two Kerens ISD Students of the Year: Kayla Gonzales and Isaiah Carter. Both were selected by staff and honored through the Area Chamber of Commerce.

Kayla is involved in student council, FCA, volleyball, track, and softball, and plans to attend the University of North Texas after graduation. Isaiah is ranked third in his class, active in FCA, football, basketball, and track, and plans to continue at Navarro College.

By pure coincidence, Isaiah ended up sitting right next to me during the meeting, and I had the chance to congratulate him personally. Both of these students clearly represent the best of Kerens ISD. We wish them nothing but success as they move on to the next chapter of their education.

What the District Reported

Director of Student Services Mr. Atkeisson reported enrollment is steady at about 700 students. Energy management is running roughly 22% under budget, and facilities are in good shape. The standout news: the district received zero findings on a surprise intruder detection audit. According to Atkeisson, Kerens ISD was the first district in the area to achieve a perfect score. That is worth recognizing.

Elementary principal Mrs. Mathis shared updates on upcoming activities, including a nursing home visit, Easter parties, and Parent Special Appreciation Day. She also recognized librarian Mrs. Flynn for her outstanding work with students.

Secondary principal Mrs. Lynch reported the one-act play advanced to area competition in Corsicana. The UIL high school academics team earned second place overall, with a dozen students moving on to regionals. STAAR testing kicks off the following week.

Assistant Superintendent Mr. Priddy gave updates on the Teacher Incentive Allotment application and the Instructional Materials Allotment survey coming to the next meeting for approval.

Superintendent Brumit discussed the upcoming Good Friday weekend, the TREA conference in June, and graduation on May 20.

Board Votes

The , covering prior meeting minutes and monthly expenditures, passed 7-0 on a motion by Tyrone Martin, seconded by Shelby Warren.

The 2026-27 school calendar was approved 7-0. School starts August 12, with fall break aligned to the football open week. After spring break, most weeks will land on four-day schedules due to how the calendar falls, though the district is not moving to a permanent four-day model.

Clear Backpacks on the Table

Superintendent Brumit and Mr. Atkeisson presented a plan to implement clear backpacks at both campuses next school year. The company they are looking at supplies Dallas ISD and other districts. The backpacks run roughly $14-18 each, and the district plans to cover the cost for all students in the first year.

Board members asked about privacy concerns, specifically around female students and hygiene products. The district noted the backpacks include privacy closures to address that. This was a discussion-only item on the agenda, with a formal vote expected at a future meeting. We appreciate the board taking the time to hear concerns before moving to action.

Library Book Approvals

Under Senate Bill 13, which took effect for the 2025-26 school year, Texas school boards are now required to approve all library material acquisitions. Proposed books must be publicly listed for 30 days before board approval. At this meeting, the books had been set out for public comment and no challenges were received. However, the item was listed on the agenda as a budget amendment rather than a library book purchase approval. Because it was mislabeled, the board could not vote on it.

It can be a little disheartening to see business kicked down the road because of an agenda mistake. But this actually highlights how seriously this board takes TOMA compliance. Under the Texas Open Meetings Act, governmental bodies cannot vote on matters that are not specifically listed on the posted agenda. The board recognized the error and held off rather than voting on something that was not properly noticed. We would rather see a board delay an item than vote on something they should not have.

Executive Session

The board entered at 6:30 p.m., citing Texas Government Code Chapter 551, Subchapters D and E. They came out at 6:58 p.m. Twenty-eight minutes.

After reconvening in open session, the board voted on two items:

Co-Athletic Directors Gerald Hurd and Cole Lancaster were approved 7-0 on the superintendent's recommendation.

An order of cancellation for the May 2, 2026 school board election passed 5-0, with Tyrone Bailey and Randy Bancroft abstaining. Two seats were open, and only two candidates filed. Texas Election Code requires cancellation in that scenario.

We did notice that this item was not specifically listed on the posted agenda. Technically, that could be seen as a TOMA issue. But we are not going to make a fuss over it. No one signed up to run against the two candidates. The board acted in good faith to cancel an election that nobody contested, and time was a factor in getting the cancellation processed. More importantly, canceling an uncontested election saves the district money it would have spent running an election with a predetermined outcome. That is a win for taxpayers.

Every piece of this executive session was handled correctly. Legal authority cited, times documented, and all decisions made in the open.

Minutes Posted by the Next Day

Here is where this board really stood out for us.

By the next day, the official minutes from the March 30 meeting were already posted on the Kerens ISD website. Most governmental bodies we observe can take days or weeks to post minutes. Some take months. Some never post them at all unless you file a Public Information Act request.

Kerens ISD had theirs up the next day. If you want to know how seriously a board takes transparency, watch how fast they make their records available to the public.

Going Beyond What the Law Requires

In 2019, the Texas Legislature passed HB 2840, amending the Texas Open Meetings Act to require governmental bodies to allow public comment on each posted agenda item at least once during the meeting. That was a significant step for public participation.

What the law does not require is a separate, dedicated public comment period for topics not on the agenda. A lot of boards call this an "Open Forum" or "Citizens' Comments." It gives residents a chance to raise concerns or ask questions about things that were not on the night's agenda.

Kerens ISD puts an Open Forum on every meeting agenda. Nobody made them do that. It is a voluntary commitment to civic engagement, and we think it says a lot about how this board views its relationship with the community.

One Policy Worth a Second Look

We did notice one thing in the Open Forum rules that gave us pause:

"The Board shall not allow negative comments in public sessions about individual employees or students."

We understand the intent. Nobody wants a meeting to turn into a personal attack on a teacher or a student. We get that. But the wording is broad. A parent raising concerns about how an administrator handled a situation, or a taxpayer questioning spending decisions in a particular program, could technically be silenced under this rule. The gap between "negative comment about an individual" and "legitimate criticism of how a public employee performs their duties" is a real one, and it matters.

We came to the meeting intending to raise this point, and while the board was preparing to go into executive session, the opportunity came up. It kicked off a broader conversation among the group about whether that wording could be used to shut down criticism.

After the meeting, we had a really positive conversation with the superintendent about it. We told him we felt the policy could create a problem if someone came in to raise a legitimate concern and got shut down because it was considered "negative." He listened, he thanked us for raising it, and he said he would run the language by their attorney.

That moment stuck with us. We have raised concerns like this with officials in other communities and been met with crossed arms, deflection, or worse. In Kerens, the response was a genuine thank-you and a commitment to follow up. We cannot overstate how refreshing that was.

TOMA Compliance

We check every public meeting we attend against the requirements of the Texas Open Meetings Act. At this meeting, we did not observe any significant TOMA compliance issues. The agenda was posted, the meeting was open, every vote was recorded with counts, the executive session cited proper legal authority with entry and exit times, and all post-executive actions were voted on in open session.

The one area worth watching is the Open Forum "no negative comments" language we described above. It is a board policy choice, not a TOMA violation. But if someone had shown up to speak critically and been shut down under that rule, it could have created a real compliance issue. The superintendent's willingness to have counsel review the policy is exactly the right move.

We Will Be Back

We came into this meeting with no expectations and left genuinely encouraged. Across the communities we cover, it is not often that we walk away from a public meeting feeling good about what we just saw. This was one of those nights.

The board was professional. The meeting was organized. The staff was welcoming. And when we raised a concern, we were heard. For a small district with about 700 students, Kerens ISD is setting a big standard.

If you live in Kerens or the surrounding area, go to a school board meeting. Sit in the room. Listen to what is being discussed. These are the meetings where decisions get made about your children's education, your tax dollars, and the long-term direction of the district. The agenda is posted in advance, and as we saw firsthand, the public is welcome. Your presence matters.

Enough is enough, Paul.

I was not planning on writing anything else about the March 24 meeting. The budget passed. The council did its job. The story was told. I was ready to move on.

Then Paul Sessions, a city council candidate in the May 2026 election, decided the most important thing to focus on after one of the most productive meetings in recent Seven Points history was posting a selectively edited video clip targeting LaJohnna Wells in the "Seven Points After Dark" Facebook group. His caption read: "(((AGAIN, Somebody is out of control)))."

I am tired. I am so tired of this.

This city just accomplished something it could not do for 170 days. The council sat down, went line by line through a broken budget, fixed it, and passed it unanimously. Every person in that room should have walked out proud of what happened. Instead, a man running for city council decided the takeaway was a clip of one council member leaving the room in tears, stripped of every piece of context that explains why she was upset in the first place.

Paul, you were at that meeting. You saw what happened. You heard a citizen stand at the podium and tear three women apart in front of a packed room. You heard the one-sided retelling of the January gavel incident that left out the part where the mayor put the gavel in her face first. You watched LaJohnna absorb all of that and break. And your takeaway was to post a clip that makes her look bad.

That is not coverage. That is not transparency. That is a targeted attack on a public servant who showed up to do her job during one of the hardest periods of her personal life, and you know it.

I called him out in the comments. I asked why he only posts clips designed to bash LaJohnna and never the full meetings. I asked why he did not post the part where Kevin Reynolds admitted on the record that he cursed at me unprovoked. I asked why, if he is "exposing" one council member, he does not expose all of them equally. He had no answer. He responded with "Freedom of speech and videos. If you want the whole video, video it yourself and post it."

That is not an answer. That is a deflection from a man who got caught being unfair and does not want to admit it.

Then something else happened. His post disappeared.

I have the screenshots. I have the original post. I have every comment in the thread. So when it vanished, I posted the receipts and asked him directly: Paul, what happened to this post?

His response: "You stir a pot of lies. I deleted nothing."

Paul, I have the screenshots.

Dwight Callaway Sr. called it exactly right in the comments: "He won't come out and say someone else did, he just wants to give that impression." Dwight asked Justin Shaffer, the group admin, to weigh in. And Shaffer did. He confirmed what anyone who understands Facebook already knows: "Posts don't get deleted unless Facebook Deletes them or the author does."

So either Paul Sessions deleted his own post and then lied about it, or he is accusing an admin of deleting it for him, which the admin just told everyone does not happen. Pick one, Paul.

Mary Wennerstrom posted a response that night that everyone should read. She laid out what Paul's clip left out: that LaJohnna is going through one of the most difficult periods of her life, having lost her husband and then her mother in less than six months. That she showed up to the meeting anyway because she cares about getting this city's budget passed. That the gavel incident in January started with the mayor putting the gavel in LaJohnna's face, not with her response. That for almost two years, certain council members have endured "tons of hateful and disparaging remarks both publicly and non publicly, in the most disrespectful manner from employees, their friends and family, and other public officials including the current mayor." That none of this context was even being considered. Only one side.

Mary is right. The video Paul posted did not show where I walked outside and found LaJohnna completely broken down. It did not show the people who followed her out and stood by her side. It did not show her pulling herself together and walking back into that room to finish the job. It showed none of that. Because showing that would have required Paul to be fair, and being fair is apparently not what he is interested in.

This Is Not New

This is not the first time Paul Sessions has gone out of his way to stir things up.

At the January council meeting, I was standing outside having a conversation with two Seven Points residents. We were talking about city business, who the local officials are, who was in attendance. Normal conversation. Paul Sessions walked over and joined in. He stood there like he was part of it. Then one of the residents I was speaking with mentioned a specific name. Nothing negative. Just a name that came up in the course of a conversation about local government.

Paul walked off shortly after. About thirty seconds later, a woman came over to us, frustrated, raising her voice, telling us to "keep her name out of it."

I was appalled. Someone had taken a harmless piece of a private conversation and run it straight to that person, twisting it into something it was not. The only person who had walked away from our group in that window was Paul Sessions. If you want to know who the individual was, you can ask him. I am not going to identify her because it does not matter. What matters is the pattern: Paul Sessions inserts himself into a conversation, grabs the first thing he can use to create conflict, and walks it over to someone else to light a fuse.

That is what he did in January. That is what he did after the March 24 meeting. He does not contribute. He does not build. He finds the nearest piece of information he can weaponize and uses it to cause drama. Every single time.

Withdraw

I want to be very clear about something. If this is what Paul Sessions focuses on as a council candidate, if this is how he plans to contribute to Seven Points governance, if his instinct after a historic budget vote is to post a gotcha clip targeting one woman, then he has no business sitting on that dais. None.

A council member who cannot see the full picture has no place making decisions for this city. A council member who posts biased clips, deletes them when confronted, and then denies deleting them is not someone the citizens of Seven Points can trust. A council member who cannot even apologize to LaJohnna for this clear mistake lacks what it takes to sit up there and represent this community.

Paul, if you cannot bring yourself to apologize to LaJohnna Wells for this, you should withdraw from the race. Save everyone the headache of dealing with your biased and unfair antics any further. Because if you get elected and this is how you operate, you are going to make a difficult situation in this city even worse. And Seven Points does not need that. Not after everything it just went through to get a budget passed.

The personal attacks in this city have to stop. From the podium, from social media, from council candidates who should know better. This is how we end it: by calling the nonsense out for exactly what it is, every single time, until people either stop doing it or stop pretending they did not.

The truth will set Seven Points free. But only if people stop running from it.

I called the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality on March 27 about Italy's public water system. I want to explain why, and I want to lay out the facts so you can decide for yourself whether this situation concerns you.

The February Meeting

On February 9, 2026, the Italy City Council took up an agenda item described as: "Discuss and consider necessary action(s) regarding a presentation from Bicarbus." That description raised eyebrows right away. Several residents, myself included, questioned whether the agenda was specific enough for the council to take action. I asked the city attorney to weigh in on the matter.

The council heard the presentation. A company called Texas Rebuild presented a chemical product called Bicarbus, which they say treats corrosion and scale buildup inside water pipes. Their marketing materials claim the product is NSF/ANSI Standard 60 certified, researched by the University of Houston, and "approved by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality."

After the presentation, the council voted 3-2 to defer the item to the next meeting. Council Members McConnell and Hodge voted against deferral both times. Council Member Panther initially voted to allow the presentation but then switched to vote for deferral after hearing it. The council did not approve Bicarbus.

The March Meeting

Bicarbus came back at the March 9 meeting with updated agenda language: "Discuss and consider necessary action(s) regarding Bicarbus agreement for elective treatment of the City's water supply to reduce the amount of needed chlorination."

Residents again raised concerns during citizens comments. One pointed out that no agreement had been included in the council packet for the public to review. Another asked why the agenda did not list how much the agreement would cost.

It is also worth noting that the city had a different attorney at the March meeting than it had at the February meeting. At the February 9 meeting, the city attorney was Robin Cross. By March 9, the attorney was Ann Montgomery, a senior attorney from Messer Fort. The council's legal representation changed between the two Bicarbus discussions.

The new city attorney suggested that the council go into to receive legal advice on the Bicarbus item before acting on it publicly. The council entered closed session at 6:32 PM.

When they reconvened, they voted unanimously to schedule a workshop on April 13 at 5:30 PM. No vote was taken on the Bicarbus agreement itself. For the second consecutive meeting, the council did not approve it.

What I Learned Between Meetings

Here is where this story takes a turn.

Karen Maida is a longtime Italy resident who has been involved in city government accountability since 1992, when she successfully challenged the city's failure to pay employees proper overtime. She later covered city business as a journalist for the Italy Neotribune. She has continued monitoring city operations independently for years.

When Bicarbus first appeared on the February agenda, Karen did her own research. She looked into the product, talked to a city that has been using it for two and a half years, and thought it sounded like a good idea. She tried to contact Larry Jones, the Texas Rebuild representative, but he did not return her call.

Then, on a Friday evening, she accidentally dialed his number. When she hung up and realized she still needed to speak with him, she called back. During that conversation, Larry Jones told her the equipment had already been installed at the water plant. Karen called me to report what she had learned.

I want to be clear about one thing. There has been talk in the community about who brought this information forward. It was Karen Maida. She is on the record.

Karen contacted both me and Council Member Raymond Mosley with what she had learned. Mosley then went to the water plant and saw the system for himself. He personally observed the Bicarbus system physically connected to the city's water supply in its own dedicated space. The city's Public Works Supervisor, Jose Estrada, explained that activating the system would require nothing more than opening a valve. Mosley then contacted me to confirm what he had seen firsthand. Italy does not currently have a Public Works Director. Keith Whitfield serves in that role himself, in addition to his duties as City Administrator.

I want to be clear about what this means. The council voted to defer this matter twice. They never approved it. But the equipment was apparently installed on the same day it was first presented, February 9, before the council had even voted. And a woman who actually supports the idea of this product in principle was so troubled by how it was handled that she brought it to my attention.

As Karen put it: "I don't like the fact that they did that without council approval or even talking to ."

Four days later, on February 13, the City of Italy posted the following on their official Facebook page:

"The Public Works Department will be flushing water lines every second Friday of the month. You may experience low pressure or no water for a few minutes. Thank you."

The timing of that announcement raised immediate questions in the community. One resident commented: "pretty sure if additives are put in water, the citizens must be notified." Another asked directly: "So did we make the decision to go with Bicarbus even though the council voted against it? Why else are we flushing the lines?" A third reported that her water was actually out for three hours, not "a few minutes" as the city described.

The city did not respond to any of these questions publicly.

The Agreement

I have reviewed the Professional Services Agreement between Texas Rebuild and the City of Italy. The agreement is dated February 10, 2026, one day after the council tabled the matter. It remains unsigned. The terms include roughly $9,600 in equipment costs and around $13,000 per year for the chemical supply. The agreement also states that Texas Rebuild would handle "application for permits with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)."

That raises a question. If the agreement was never signed and the council never approved it, who authorized the installation?

The city's own Purchasing Policy, adopted in November 2024, requires council approval for any capital expenditure exceeding $10,000. The Bicarbus equipment is quoted at $9,653. That is $347 below the threshold. But the annual chemical supply is quoted at $13,057, which exceeds it. The total first-year cost of roughly $22,700 is more than double the council approval threshold.

There is another layer to this. On January 12, 2026, just twenty-eight days before the Bicarbus system was installed, the council passed an amendment to the City Administrator ordinance that eliminated the City Administrator's remaining independent spending authority. As of the date of the installation, the City Administrator had no authority to approve expenditures without council approval at all.

How Did This Company Get Here?

Before the February council meeting, a representative from Texas Rebuild told me directly that he met City Administrator Keith Whitfield through ARCIT, the Association of Rural Communities in Texas. Keith serves as ARCIT's Board President. ARCIT's website lists him on its board, and the company behind the Bicarbus product is listed as an ARCIT sponsor.

There is a detail on that same ARCIT board page that I think is worth mentioning. Keith Whitfield's title on the ARCIT website reads: "City Manager, City of Italy." Italy is a Type A General Law municipality. It does not have a city manager. It has a city administrator. Those are not the same thing under Texas law. A city manager under Chapter 25 of the Local Government Code has broad independent executive authority. A city administrator has only the powers the council explicitly delegates. Keith's own ordinance calls him City Administrator. The council's own amendments refer to him as City Administrator. But on the ARCIT website, he presents himself as City Manager.

His ARCIT biography also lists prior experience as City Administrator of Rosebud for eight and a half years, City Manager of Daingerfield for two and a half years, and City Manager of Marlin for four months. He currently serves as the City Administrator for the City of Italy. He also served on the Board of Directors for the Central Texas Water Supply and the Heart of Texas Council of Government.

I am not making accusations here. But the public has a right to ask questions when a vendor arrives at a council meeting through a personal organizational connection with the city administrator, and equipment from that vendor ends up installed on city infrastructure before the council has approved it. When the official who facilitated that connection represents himself externally with a title that carries more authority than the one the city has actually given him, that adds another layer to the question. Under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 171, public officials are required to disclose relationships with entities doing business with the city. Whether this situation triggers that requirement is a question worth asking.

I Called the City

On March 26, I called Italy City Hall three times trying to reach someone who could discuss the Bicarbus installation. The Public Works Supervisor and the City Administrator were both out of the office initially. A staff member worked to track them down.

When I finally reached Keith Whitfield, I told him I understood the Bicarbus system had been connected to the water supply and that valves were in place to activate it. He did not deny it. He directed me to the upcoming workshop.

I pressed for more information. His response, on a recorded call: "I'm not going to discuss it, Ron. We'll discuss it at the workshop."

I told him I was going to contact TCEQ. He said: "You go ahead and do what you gotta do. I'm through with it."

I Called TCEQ

On March 27, I called the TCEQ main switchboard at 512-239-1000 and asked for information about validating whether my concern was a valid complaint. After being routed through a couple of departments, I was eventually directed to the environmental investigator assigned to Ellis County, which covers the City of Italy.

When I started explaining the situation, the investigator stopped me. He told me he was already familiar with Italy's water system. He had personally conducted a Comprehensive Compliance Investigation of the city's water infrastructure at the end of 2025. He sounded confused. He asked me how recent this was, like he could not believe what he was hearing about a system he had just reviewed months ago.

I walked him through everything: the February council meeting, the tabling, the installation on the same day, the council tabling it again in March, and Keith's refusal to discuss it. His tone shifted. He became noticeably concerned.

"That is a valid complaint," he said.

He told me that no chemical treatment system can be connected to a public water supply without prior TCEQ approval. "They can't be connecting any sort of chemical without prior approval from us," he said. When I described the physical installation, he said he did not believe "it can even be built or connected" without TCEQ's knowledge. He sounded genuinely taken aback.

I provided photographs of the installation, the first four pages of the February council packet, and contact information for the council member who personally observed the equipment at the water plant.

His closing statement: "Thank you for bringing this to our attention, because it shouldn't be happening."

TCEQ has accepted the complaint and is routing it to management for investigation. I followed up the same day with an email containing supporting documentation, and the investigator responded with a formal summary of the complaint for the record.

What the Records Show About Authority

I have reviewed official city council meeting packets from October 2024 through February 2026. What those records show is a council that has been systematically reducing the City Administrator's independent authority for months.

When Keith Whitfield was hired as City Administrator in 2024, the ordinance defining his role gave him broad unilateral authority. He could hire and fire city employees on his own. He had spending authority for purchases without council approval.

Then the council started pulling that back.

On October 8, 2025, the city's police chief was terminated. When I called Keith Whitfield five days later, on October 13, to ask about the decision, I asked whether it was a joint decision. His answer: "It's a decision made by policy." He did not reference a council vote or council authorization. He described it as an administrative action.

Nineteen days later, on October 27, 2025, the council passed Ordinance 2025-1027-01, amending the City Administrator's powers and duties. The amendment specified that removing any city employee classified as an "officer" under Chapter 22 of the Texas Local Government Code now requires a two-thirds vote of the city council. The City Administrator can only recommend the removal.

On January 12, 2026, the council went further. They passed an amendment requiring the City Administrator to "recommend to the Mayor and City Council the appointment, promotion, discipline, suspension or termination" of specifically the Public Works Director, the City Secretary, and the Chief of Police. The same amendment eliminated the City Administrator's independent purchasing authority. That vote passed 3-2.

There is an additional wrinkle here. Italy does not currently have a separate Public Works Director. Keith Whitfield serves in that role himself, alongside his City Administrator duties. The ordinance requiring council oversight of the Public Works Director position is, in practical terms, requiring council oversight of Keith Whitfield in his other hat.

Twenty-eight days later, a chemical treatment system was installed on the city's public water supply without council approval.

I want to be clear about what this timeline means. The council had been actively reining in the City Administrator's independent authority. They had stripped his unilateral purchasing power. They had required him to go through the council for major personnel decisions. Then, twenty-eight days after the most recent restriction, equipment was installed on city infrastructure that the council had specifically deferred acting on.

Who Was Watching the Water?

There is one more detail from the city records that I think residents should know about.

Italy's former Public Works Director, James Wallingsford, left that position at some point between late 2024 and mid-2025. The city did not hire a replacement director. Instead, Keith Whitfield assumed the Public Works Director role himself, in addition to his duties as City Administrator. Jose Estrada serves as Public Works Supervisor under him. But Wallingsford did not leave the city entirely. He returned as an independent contractor.

City records show that on July 10, 2025, Wallingsford signed a consulting agreement with the City of Italy. His contracted services are listed as bacteriological sampling, TCEQ compliance, and water and wastewater systems support. His rate is $650 per month. He is available from 3:45 PM until the end of the day only.

City financial records from the March 9 council packet confirm three consecutive monthly payments to Wallingsford during the Bicarbus installation window: $650 on January 5, $650 on January 30, and $650 on February 2. The February invoice was paid by check on February 11, two days after the Bicarbus system was installed at the water plant. His invoice number for that payment was JW-0008, meaning he had been billing the city consistently for at least eight months.

I do not know what role, if any, Wallingsford had in the decision to install Bicarbus or whether he was aware it was happening. I did not reach out to him separately because I had already contacted the City Administrator directly. Keith Whitfield's response, as noted above, was to refuse to discuss it.

But the question is worth asking. The city was paying someone to help ensure regulatory compliance with TCEQ on water matters. During that same period, a chemical treatment system was connected to the public water supply without TCEQ's knowledge or approval. Was the TCEQ compliance consultant aware? Was he consulted? If so, what did he advise? If not, why not?

There is one more detail from the March financial records worth noting. In February 2026, the city purchased six 150-pound chlorine gas cylinders, nine water chlorine bottles, and seven sewer chlorine bottles from its regular supplier. Total chlorine spending that month was roughly $2,000. If the Bicarbus system had been activated, the company's own marketing materials claim it reduces chlorine usage by 75%. The continued purchase of chlorine at what appears to be a normal rate is consistent with the claim that the valves were not opened. But it also means a chemical treatment system sits connected to the city's water supply, doing nothing, while the city continues to buy chlorine as if it were not there.

What the Law Says

I spent time researching the specific Texas laws that may apply here, and I want to share what I found.

Under Texas Health and Safety Code Section 341.035, a person may not begin construction on a public drinking water supply system unless the TCEQ executive director approves the plans first. The implementing regulation, 30 TAC Section 290.39(j), goes further: public water systems "shall not institute significant changes in existing systems or supplies without the prior approval of the executive director." Adding a new chemical injection system qualifies as a significant change.

Section 341.0351 of the Health and Safety Code requires utilities to notify the executive director prior to making any significant change or addition to the system. Violating this notification requirement is a criminal offense under Section 341.047, classified as a Class C misdemeanor. Each day of a continuing violation is considered a separate offense.

Then there is the question of municipal authority. Italy is a Type A General Law municipality. Under this form of government, the city council is the legislative authority. A city administrator, unlike a city manager, does not have independent statutory authority to authorize infrastructure modifications or enter into contracts. The administrator's authority is limited to what the council explicitly delegates. As I noted above, Italy's City Administrator lists himself as "City Manager" on the ARCIT website, but the city's own ordinances use the term "City Administrator." The distinction is not cosmetic. It is the difference between an executive who can act independently and one who serves at the direction of the council. When the council tables a matter, that is a direct exercise of their authority to withhold approval. Proceeding anyway raises serious questions about whether the action was taken without legal authority.

The city's own ordinances reinforce this point. As I described above, the council had been actively narrowing the City Administrator's independent authority for months. The purchasing policy requires council approval above $10,000. The most recent ordinance amendment eliminated independent spending authority entirely. The council had tabled Bicarbus twice. Under Dillon's Rule, which governs general law cities in Texas, a city administrator can only exercise the authority that the council has specifically granted. By the time this equipment was installed, that authority had been reduced to the point that the City Administrator could not even approve an expenditure without the council's blessing.

What Italy Residents Should Know

I want to be clear about the current situation. Based on the information I have, the Bicarbus system is physically connected to the water supply, but the valves that would activate it have reportedly not been turned on. I have no confirmed evidence that the chemical has entered the water supply.

However, a resident has reported brown water from her tap, and the city was flushing water lines around the same time the system was installed. I cannot prove a connection, but the timing is worth noting.

Italy's water system has been under significant stress. In 2020 and 2021, TCEQ took enforcement action against the city for E. coli levels that reached ten times the permitted limit. That resulted in a penalty of $13,500. Water loss has increased significantly in recent years. Water rates have nearly doubled since 2022. The city has taken on bond debt for a new elevated storage tank, replaced a failed well pump at a cost of roughly $136,000, and is participating in a regional water supply feasibility study with seventeen other entities.

I mention all of this because it provides context. Italy has real water infrastructure challenges. A product that promises to reduce chlorine usage, eliminate scale, and improve water quality might sound attractive to city officials dealing with an aging system. I understand that. But the process matters. There is a reason TCEQ requires approval before connecting anything to a public water supply. The health and safety of every person on that system depends on it.

In his own September 2024 budget letter, the City Administrator cited TCEQ as a potential partner for water infrastructure improvements. Seventeen months later, TCEQ was not even notified that a new chemical system had been connected to the water supply they regulate. That gap between stated intent and actual practice is something residents deserve an explanation for.

A workshop to discuss Bicarbus is scheduled for April 13, 2026 at 5:30 PM at Italy City Hall. I plan to attend and record that session so the public can hear the information directly.

How to File a TCEQ Complaint

If you are an Italy water consumer and you have concerns about your water, you have every right to contact TCEQ directly. Here is how I did it, and how you can too.

Phone: Call the TCEQ main switchboard at 512-239-1000. Tell them you have a concern about your public water supply and that you are in Ellis County. They will route you to the appropriate investigator. That is exactly what I did, and I was speaking with someone knowledgeable within minutes.

Online: Visit www.tceq.texas.gov and search for "file a complaint." You can submit a complaint through their online environmental complaint system. Be as specific as possible about what you have observed and when.

What to include: If you have noticed any of the following, document it and include the details:

• Abnormal water discoloration (outside of routine main breaks and boil notices)
• Unusual or new odors from tap water
• Abnormal discoloration of clothing beyond what you normally experience
• Unexplained changes in skin conditions or other health factors
• Excessive or unusual water line flushing activity by the city

Document everything. Take photos of discolored water with a timestamp. Write down the dates. Save any notices from the city about flushing or water quality. TCEQ investigators rely on documentation from residents to build their case, and the more specific you are, the more it helps.

Contact me. If it is easier for you to reach out to me first, you can send your information to tips@watchtowerci.com. I will relay it to the TCEQ investigator assigned to this case.

This is an actively developing situation. I will continue to relay updates to the community as I have more information. The April 13 workshop is the next milestone, and I intend to be there.

After 170 days of operating without an approved budget, the Seven Points City Council finally passed a balanced budget on March 24, 2026. The vote was unanimous. But the path to getting there was anything but smooth.

Before the gavel even dropped, Council Member Kevin Reynolds told me to get "straight the fuck away from us." I hadn't said a word. When I tried to introduce myself and asked his name, he said "none of your fucking business" and "don't even talk to me. I don't want to hear your shit." Completely unprovoked. Inside, things weren't much better.

A City Divided

During public comment, a local resident who identified as a property owner and taxpayer in Seven Points delivered a lengthy attack on three female council members: LaJohnna Wells, Valerie Bahm-Logsdon, and Mary Wennerstrom.

"Two ladies on the city council, LaJohnna Wells, have conducted themselves in an unprofessional manner on several occasions," the resident said. She accused Wells and Bahm-Logsdon of unprofessional conduct, claimed Wennerstrom "does not want to lose her power on the council and over the city," and said the city "is considered to be the shithole of the lake."

She described council meetings as potential "episodes of Jerry Springer" and said "people have even brought popcorn, and this is for real, they have." She claimed that "as long as she has LaJohnna and Valerie in her pocket and voting with her, she has the majority. That means total control on her agenda."

She also turned to the upcoming May 2026 election, warning citizens that "a vote for Raymond would be a vote for a figurehead mayor," claiming "Raymond only does what his wife tells him to do, in my opinion." She urged citizens to "consider the two men that are running for the city council" and argued that "the mayor is trying to make improvements but has been stopped due to no current budget."

She referenced a January incident in which Wells told the mayor she would "shove that gavel up" a particular part of his anatomy. What the resident did not say, and what I can confirm from firsthand observation, is that Mayor Keith Betts had first picked up the gavel and moved it toward Wells' face after telling her to be quiet. That is what started it.

Wells was upset because she had just listened to someone retell that moment in a way that put all the blame on her while leaving out what the mayor had done first. The fair truth is that Wells never would have made that comment if the mayor had not put the gavel in her face. Having that thrown back at her publicly, stripped of its context, in front of a room full of people, was more than she could take.

Wells left the room in tears. I left shortly after to check on her. I'm not entirely sure what happened in the meeting room while I was gone. What I do know is that Wells was not alone. People followed close behind her and stood by her side in a moment of complete loss.

She pulled herself back together. She came back into that room before public comment ended. That takes something most people don't have.

What is happening in Seven Points right now goes deeper than politics. Real people are carrying real weight, and when the public forum becomes a place where one-sided versions of painful events get thrown around in front of an audience, it does damage. I watched it break people that night.

A retired military veteran also spoke during public comment and urged all parties to handle their disagreements behind closed doors. "When they get something wrong, or they disagree with me, I will bring them out. And we will hash it out," she said, drawing on 15 years of Department of Defense leadership experience. "I'm never, ever embarrassing none of my airmen in front of people. Never. So please, I ask you, be professional."

Respect

Wells came back into the room. I came back into the room. And then I spoke.

I addressed the council because I was appalled. I was appalled by what I had just watched happen. I was appalled that a council member had cursed at me unprovoked before the meeting even started, and that a citizen could stand at that podium and tear people apart with a one-sided version of events while a room full of people sat there and let it happen.

I corrected the record about the January gavel incident. And I confronted Council Member Reynolds directly about what he had said to me outside.

"Do you want to tell the room what you said to me outside?" I asked him. He acknowledged part of it but would not repeat everything. "For the record, that's not all that you said. Say everything that you said," I told him.

"I'm not trying to sit up here and defend or attack anybody, but we need to be factual in what we're saying," I said.

"If one council member is unprofessional, Mr. Mayor, your whole council is unprofessional," I told them. "And when you sit up here and you allow other council members to be criticized, she leaves in tears. And we don't take a recess to figure out what happened."

I ended my remarks by asking everyone to come together: "Please, everyone, let's be professional tonight. Let's get our budget passed. Even if we don't agree on the budget, let's get a non-deficit budget passed. We can pass amendments. You can call special meetings. You can call emergency meetings. There's things you can do. Let's take care of business for your constituents so that our water pipes are not crumbling and we have a productive city government."

I had to step out of the room again after that to compose myself. Watching a city government fall apart like this hits harder than you'd expect. Multiple people were in tears that night. I was one of them.

The Budget Fight

Once the meeting turned to the actual budget, things nearly went off the rails again. Council Member Kevin Reynolds made a motion to accept the budget as presented. The same council member who had cursed at me before the meeting was now trying to push through a deficit budget. No one seconded it. The motion failed.

The room tipped toward chaos. It felt like the council was about to walk out again, like they had in September and October, and Seven Points would be right back where it started: 170 days without a budget and counting.

I asked to speak. I told the room to take a moment and breathe.

"If someone makes a motion and the motion fails, you're stuck on the item until you can either make a motion that passes or you take a motion to take no action," I said. "You're stuck until you figure it out."

I told them the motion failed for a reason. "So let's talk about why the motion failed and let's make a new motion that has a better chance of passing. That's how government works."

The budget as presented had a $156,000 deficit. Revenue projections from September workshops were no longer accurate. Fine revenue had collapsed. Where the city once projected tens of thousands of dollars from citations, actual collections had dropped to a fraction of that, with citations falling from hundreds per month to single digits.

A more fundamental issue emerged: road fund revenues totaling $378,000 were co-mingled with general fund expenses in the proposed budget. Council members caught this and explained that road tax revenue must be segregated and spent only on road improvements. Adopting the budget as presented would have allowed those funds to be spent on anything.

"Are you basically saying Keith has misappropriated our funds?" one council member asked, before clarifying: "He hasn't done anything yet. But what I'm saying, we can't sit here and say that this is okay when we know it's not okay."

The council went line by line. Ad valorem tax, franchise fees, mixed beverage revenue, rental income from the post office and county, equipment purchases, holiday lighting, code enforcement, police department, maintenance. Everything was examined.

When asked why the mayor wasn't leading the budget discussion, Mayor Keith Betts responded: "I present it to the council, and they fully discuss it. They vote. I don't vote."

When asked why these corrections hadn't been made sooner, the answer was familiar to anyone who has followed Seven Points governance: "We haven't been able to address it on an agenda. And the only way we can talk about it is on an agenda."

170 Days. Budget Passed.

After approximately two hours of line-by-line work, the council arrived at a balanced budget: $956,135 in general fund expenditures plus $378,000 in segregated road funds, totaling $1,334,135.

The gap was closed by adjusting revenue projections to match actual collections, properly segregating road funds, and cutting tens of thousands from salaries and smaller amounts from maintenance and police department budgets.

A motion was made. A second followed. "All in favor?" Unanimous. The room broke into applause.

A powerful moment in Seven Points history, but one that should not have taken so long.

Mercy Patterson with Watchtower wrote after the meeting: "The contradiction is difficult to ignore. A council divided in conduct, yet aligned in outcome. A meeting marked by dysfunction, yet ending in decisive action."

Patterson described a council member who had left in tears but returned to her seat, "choosing duty to her community over retreat." She wrote that the evening raised "a more enduring question: not just what decisions are made, but who is holding the line on how they are made."

She also wrote that "public trust hung in the air as accusations and one-sided narratives dominated the early proceedings. Citizens and observers alike witnessed a council struggling not just with decisions, but with each other." And that "in Seven Points, progress came, but not without leaving deeper questions behind: not about what was passed, but how."

What Happens Next

This is a six-month budget for the remainder of the current fiscal year. Next year's budget cycle will begin fresh with updated property valuations and revenue projections.

Development may be coming. The mayor mentioned 14 or more houses planned behind a church on Highway 274, with the developer seeking annexation into the city. Apartment permits have been issued but construction hasn't started. Wastewater treatment capacity could be a limiting factor.

On the community side, citizens have stepped up where government has not. Kyle Askins spent eight days clearing roads and abandoned areas with his own bulldozer and crew. Others have volunteered weekends for trash pickup, weed eating, and general cleanup, often with their own equipment and money.

Raymond Wennerstrom is running for mayor in May 2026. If he wins, Mary Wennerstrom has said she is willing to step down from the council if that is what the citizens want.

Seven Points has a budget now. Whether it can hold together long enough to use it is the question nobody in that room could answer.

This piece represents the opinion of the author based on the facts presented below.

I have been publicly planning a video interview series for Italy's upcoming city council election. The format is straightforward: each candidate sits down individually, answers the same set of nine questions, and the interviews are published as videos for the entire community to watch. Candidates don't get to hear each other's answers. The questions have been published on this website since February for full transparency. Every candidate gets the same preparation time, the same questions, and the same fair shot. The process is overseen by the Watchtower consulting team and designed to give voters an honest look at who is running for office.

I announced this weeks ago. The community knows about it.

On March 26th, the S.M. Dunlap Library in Italy posted an announcement on the Italy Talk Facebook group. They're hosting a "Meet Your Candidates" evening on Thursday, April 9th at 7 PM. Here are the rules:

• Questions must be submitted by March 31st via a Google Form
• Only the "top 5" questions will be presented to candidates
• There will be no question and answer session
• No filming or recording of the evening's activities will be permitted

So let me get this straight. I'm offering a video interview series where every answer is preserved on camera, available for the entire community to review, and every candidate gets the same fair shot. And instead of supporting that, or at the very least coexisting with it, the library is hosting an event where they pick five questions, the candidates answer them in front of a room, nobody gets to record it, and if you weren't there, tough luck.

How is that more transparent than what I'm already doing?

The "Private" Question

In a follow-up comment, Tina Sims Cline wrote that the library is "in fact, a private library" and receives "no public funding, so the issue of restrictions doesn't really apply."

I looked up the property tax records on ellistaxes.com. The property at W 300 Main St, Italy, TX 76651, is owned by "DUNLAP S M LIBRARY." It has a 2025 market value of $201,172. The total property tax bill across every taxing entity (Ellis County, Italy ISD, City of Italy, and the ) is $0.00.

Zero dollars. On a property worth over two hundred thousand dollars.

I'm not a tax attorney. But I know that private entities in Texas generally pay property taxes. A zero-dollar property tax bill on a $200K property sure looks like a property tax exemption, and property tax exemptions typically come from some form of public benefit classification. If the library is truly private with no public connection, I'd be curious to understand how that exemption works.

You can't claim you're private when it's convenient and enjoy a property tax exemption at the same time without someone asking questions. That's my job.

The Pattern

On February 17th, I wrote an article called "Leaving Italy, Not the Fight." It was about shutting down ITXN, the nonprofit I built with three other people to improve civic engagement in Italy. We closed it because the consistent message from this community was that our involvement wasn't welcome.

The city refused to let us use city hall for a candidate forum. They quoted us $200 to $250 to rent the community center, plus a $75 deposit. For an event that benefits their own election. I even offered to pay for a police officer to provide security. None of that mattered.

When I said I was leaving Italy, I meant it. I took ITXN's mission and expanded it. Today, the Watchtower team is actively working in nine small Texas cities across multiple counties. We've built relationships with city officials, police departments, and community leaders in most of those cities. We have law enforcement agencies endorsing our work. We have citizens reaching out to us asking for help.

Italy is the only city that consistently cannot figure out how to have a working relationship with us. Or, for that matter, with its own residents.

I don't think this is about the library. I think this is a reflection of how Italy has been governed for the last thirty years. A culture of control, of deciding who gets to participate and on what terms, of treating transparency as a threat rather than a tool. Every time someone tries to bring accountability to this community, the doors close a little tighter.

What Happens Now

I'm canceling the Italy candidate interview videos.

Let that sink in. The one person in this community who has consistently shown up, done the work, built the tools, and offered every resource at his disposal to help Italy's voters make informed decisions just got pushed out. Again. By his own community. Again.

Watchtower is committed to consulting with and empowering cities that actually want to work with us. Italy has made it clear, over and over and over, that it does not. So we're done asking.

We're taking our candidate interview series to Seven Points instead. On Tuesday, March 24th, Seven Points held one of the most emotional but productive council meetings I've ever attended. People in that room had personal differences. Real ones. And they sat across from each other and found a way to conduct business anyway. That's what leadership looks like. That's what a community looks like when it decides to move forward instead of circling the same drain for three decades.

I'll be publishing an article about that meeting later today. It's a story you'll want to remember, because it's proof that small Texas cities can actually get it right when the people in charge care more about progress than control.

Italy had every opportunity. We came with open hands. We offered civic engagement through ITXN. We offered professional candidate interviews. We offered to work alongside the city, not against it. We published the questions in advance. We designed a process that was more fair, more transparent, and more accessible than anything this community has ever been offered. And the response, every single time, has been some version of "no thanks, we'll handle it ourselves behind closed doors."

Fine. Handle it yourselves.

But here's what won't change: the investigative journalism. The public records requests. The hard questions. The published findings. We extended professional courtesy to Italy because we genuinely wanted to help. That courtesy is officially withdrawn. From now on, Italy gets the same treatment as any other city under investigation. No advance notice. No friendly conversations. No offers to collaborate. Just the work.

You had a team of professionals offering to strengthen your community for free. You had a journalist willing to give your candidates a fair, transparent platform. You had people who cared enough to keep showing up even after being arrested, removed from meetings, blocked on social media, and charged money to host events that benefit your own elections.

And you chose a closed-door forum at a property-tax-exempt library where nobody is allowed to bring a camera.

Good luck with that, Italy. You're going to need it.

I called Jason Patrick on March 19 to talk about Hubbard.

Not to file a records request. Not to ask about contracts or controversies. I wanted to hear, from the man who runs the city, what is actually going on in Hubbard, Texas, and whether the progress people talk about is real.

The Conversation

I opened the call by telling Patrick I wanted to bring some positive coverage to the city. I asked him a simple question: from your perspective, what can I do to help?

Before we got into that, Patrick mentioned he had spoken with BZ Watchdog the day before in a lengthy phone call. I asked how it went.

"It was a nice conversation," Patrick said. "He was very cordial."

That was encouraging. From the outside looking in, it had seemed like there was not much communication happening between the city and the people asking questions about it. Patrick had his own take on why.

"He gave mention that he had called up here several times, and I'm like, well, Basil, did you leave a message? I mean, I don't sit in my office all day. If you're going to call, leave me a message so I can call you back."

Fair enough. Sometimes the simplest explanation is just a missed phone call.

Growth and Infrastructure

I asked Patrick about the school bond election. It had recently failed on a 172-172 tie, a dead-even split, and I noticed another bond election was already being organized. Was there a genuine need, or was this just a push to get a different result?

Patrick explained that enrollment is growing. The school needs remodeling, additional classrooms, space for new students.

"People are moving here more and more," he said. "I can't think of one house that is available for rent or lease. It's just people are moving here."

I told him that from my perspective, covering small towns across the region, Hubbard did not look like a city that was struggling. I see infrastructure jobs getting done. I see things happening. Patrick appreciated the observation, and then he laid out a vision for the city that, frankly, would make any small-town mayor jealous.

"We're fixing to have our own secondary water supply. We're drilling a second well. Where requires you to have a secondary water supply, this additional well will eliminate us from having to pay a rural water supply every month."

He kept going.

"All new water lines. Next project is all new sewer lines. Upgraded water treatment facility, upgraded sewer facility. And then, ultimately, new roads. What other small town the size of Hubbard is progressing like that?"

I told him he literally just went down the list. Every small-town official I talk to would be jumping for joy with that kind of infrastructure plan.

Jobs and the Data Center

One of the more striking things Patrick shared was about the local data center and the jobs it has brought to the area.

"We've got multiple screenshots of people who were negative against this who are now working out at the data center making twenty-seven dollars an hour with thirty hours mandatory overtime, bringing home between eight and ten thousand dollars a month. These people were working seven dollars an hour."

That is a real economic shift for a community this size. Data centers across Texas have taken heat for overpromising on local employment, and some of that criticism is fair. But if workers in Hubbard are pulling down that kind of money in a town where those wages did not exist before, that is worth acknowledging.

Patrick agreed with my observation that a few bad actors in the data center space give the whole industry a bad reputation.

"Hey, I will 100% agree with you on that. 100%."

The EDC and Community Support

Patrick also talked about the Hubbard Economic Development Corporation and some of the smaller community projects it supports. He described a recent HEDC meeting where a local garden club came forward to request funding for improvements to a Vietnam War helicopter memorial that sits in the city.

"It is an attraction. We have multiple people that stop there all the time because it was an active aircraft in the Vietnam War. They asked the for some money, and the HEDC is going to help support."

It is a small thing, but it says something about a community when the economic development board is responsive to a garden club asking for help with a local memorial. I have seen EDCs in other cities sit on hundreds of thousands of dollars and refuse to fund projects far more substantial than that.

"It's all hands on deck on this one," Patrick said. "Everybody, all the boards, everybody. I mean, everybody's in total support."

Addressing the Scrutiny

I was not going to pretend the scrutiny does not exist. BZ Watchdog has been active in Hubbard, raising questions publicly about contracts, property sales, and governance. Patrick is aware of it, and he addressed it directly during our conversation.

"That's why it bothers me with all the optics that are perceived, or profiting. That does not exist. It is a celebration in this community."

He also spoke openly about his first interaction with BZ Watchdog and the Hubbard Police Department. He acknowledged that one of his officers approached BZ Watchdog on the side of the road and ran his plates during their first encounter. He said it "went south from there."

"I even apologized to Basil for that and told him, yes, because there's something that's never happened here before. We were caught off guard."

He added: "This is an open window, brother. There's nothing to hide."

I appreciated the candor. Whether you agree with his perspective or not, the fact that he is willing to sit on the phone with a journalist and address these topics directly is worth something.

The Lake One Conversation

BZ Watchdog has also raised questions about a property transaction near Hubbard's lakes and the companies involved. During our call, I told Patrick that I had seen the Lake One material and the grant-related questions, but that I was more interested in current events and the path forward.

Patrick and BZ Watchdog had apparently discussed these topics at length during their hour-long conversation the day before. Patrick characterized their exchange as cordial and said he was open to walking through the details.

This is a topic that deserves its own coverage, and I plan to revisit it. For now, what matters is that the conversation is happening. Patrick is not dodging the questions.

A Personal Story

Unprompted, Patrick shared part of his own history.

He described leaving the Hill County Sheriff's Office years ago under difficult circumstances. He said he was approached by the Republican Party to run for sheriff against an incumbent he described as "a crook." The incumbent retaliated, and Patrick ended up filing a federal lawsuit.

"I turned down a very large monetary settlement to sit across the desk from that man and have him change my discharge to an honorable one," Patrick said. "I gave up a very high-ranking position within that sheriff's office to do what was right because I wasn't a yes man."

He paused.

"It took food out of my family's mouth, trust me. It would have been easy just to say okay and yes."

I told him that an officer putting his career on the line to do the right thing is something I can recognize and respect. Whatever else is going on, that takes a certain kind of conviction.

Wrapping Up

Toward the end of our conversation, Patrick invited me to be more involved in the community.

"How about Ron Helms moves to Hubbard, Texas?" he said with a laugh.

I told him I actually live closer to Hubbard than I do to Italy, the city where I first started covering local government. If there are ways I can bring coverage to the community, sit down with people, and have transparent conversations, I am open to it.

Patrick encouraged public involvement: "Tell people to be involved. Come to a council meeting. Come to an HEDC meeting."

That is something I can get behind. Civic engagement is the foundation of everything I try to do. When people show up, ask questions, and understand how their local government operates, the whole system works better. For everyone.

What Comes Next

Before we hung up, I told Patrick exactly what I planned to do: write this article, put my impressions from our conversation into the public record, and use it as a starting point for deeper coverage of Hubbard.

He was fine with that.

"I really, really hope you enjoy your time," he said. "And when you're in our community, I hope it represents well."

Patrick has told me that more conversations are on the table whenever I want them. He has offered to sit down in person, even do a video interview. All I have to do is ask. That kind of openness from a city official is not something I take for granted, and I plan to take him up on it.

I am not here to take sides. I am here to have the conversations, document what I learn, and give the public a reliable source of information about what is happening in their community. Hubbard has a lot going on. The infrastructure investment alone is worth following closely. The questions that have been raised publicly deserve honest answers, and the people doing the asking deserve to be heard just as much as the people running the city.

This is the beginning of that coverage.

If you live in the Hubbard area, work for the city, serve on any of its boards, or simply have information you think the public should know about, my door is open. I am not looking to catch anyone. I am looking to tell the story.

This is Part 4 of an ongoing series. Read Part 1: Tool's Fire Department Is Fighting for Its Life, Part 2: Both Sides of the Fire, and Part 3: The Numbers on the Wall.

The fire station was full.

On Tuesday evening, I walked into 525 South Tool Drive expecting a fight. Instead, I watched a community pull itself back together.

Henderson County Emergency Services District No. 4 held its special meeting at 6:00 PM on March 25, 2026. Four of the five commissioners were present: Allen Anderson, Randall Ingle, Mark Holley, and Richie Alred. Commissioner Larry Elliott was absent. The room was packed with Tool residents who had come to have their say.

Before citizen comments began, Anderson read a set of conduct guidelines: no yelling, no foul language, no outbursts, no interruptions. Comments were limited to three minutes and were to focus on factual information. Given the accounts I had heard about prior meetings, those ground rules were not ceremonial.

The Community Spoke

Every person who stood up to speak supported the fire department. Every speaker received applause.

Beatrice Gonzalez was the first to the front. She told the board she called 911 last month when her son was having a heart attack. "Those people volunteered immediately. There were three vehicles. If it hadn't been for them, no telling what would have happened, because he had to be rushed to the hospital right away." In November, it was her. "I was almost having a stroke. They came in right away." She told the board the citizens of Tool deserved a say in any decision about their fire department. "I think that the citizens of Tool have the right to make that decision also, not only the board." And she made the point that would echo through every speech that followed: "If we didn't have a volunteer fire department in Tool, by the time they came here, I'd be dead."

Greg Figueroa identified himself as a City Councilman with the City of Tool. He thanked Chief Rodney McClain and Michelle McClain for their decades of service and then spoke on the department electing a new chief, Melvin Clay. "It's a fresh start and there's new leadership," Figueroa said. "I would like this board to consider giving the new leadership a chance, the training and the support to work with you guys. It's a clean slate of communication and support." He noted the 's budget had grown from roughly $200,000 to over $700,000 and that the department now had new equipment it had never had the opportunity to use under proper training. He asked the board for 90 days. "I'd like for the newly appointed chief to have the opportunity to lead. I think that the department will follow." He closed by thanking the entire department for their collective service and expressed his hope that they would rise to meet the board's expectations.

Tool Mayor Vera Bennett thanked both the volunteers and the board members for their service, then told the room something that stuck with me: "You can pull a chain along with you, but you can't push it." She urged the board to keep the fire department and work with it rather than cancel the contract. "If you're a day late on a report, but you show up and you fight that fire, by God, we appreciate that. Every single time, we appreciate that." She noted that Michelle and Rodney McClain gave 20 years of service to the city. Then she read directly from the meeting agenda, naming the items authorizing investigations by the Henderson County District Attorney, County Attorney, and County Auditor. "I don't know what's going on," she said, "but did the change of leadership change all this?" She told the board to make sure the decision was not a personal agenda. "What we do here tonight, make sure it's something that benefits every one of these citizens of Tool. Because we deserve fire service. We deserve the closest firemen that we can get serving us." She named individual volunteers, telling the room she knew they lived five minutes from her home. "Make the right decision, be transparent, and let us know what's going on."

Ted Larson lives less than five minutes from the fire station. About a year ago, the house next door burned to the ground. "You folks saved our property and saved lives," he told the VFD members. Two adults and two children lived in that house, and none of them were home. "If they were at home, the way the fire was burning, at any point we could have lost lives. Our home could have been lost as well." He told the board that the VFD was first on scene. "Maybe half an hour, 45 minutes later, Trinidad showed up. Seven Points showed up." He paused. "So if it was half an hour, 45 minutes, and lives were at stake, and my home was at stake, and you were gone, what do we do? I lose. Lives are lost." He ended with a message to the board: "It has to be the citizens of this city that count the most. Not y'all that sit in a big nice chair."

Catherine Pennell told the room she lives just down the road and has been in Tool since the beginning. "I've been here since the dirt," she said. She told the board the fire department should stay right where it is. "We just voted to raise taxes for the fire department," she reminded them. "And we appreciate all they do for us." She said she did not know what was on the agenda before she arrived, "but it upset me when I did find out that y'all might try to move it to someplace else." She wanted the right thing done.

After the signed speakers finished, a woman who had not signed the sheet spoke from the floor. Her house caught fire on February 4th, she said. "It burned down the whole top of our house." Her voice broke as she looked at the VFD members in the room. She did not have a speech prepared. She did not need one. "All I can say is you guys were there," she said. "And we thank you." It was the shortest statement of the evening and the one that hit the hardest.

The Vote

The board entered and exited under Texas Government Code Section 551.071. When they reconvened in open session, Anderson made a statement that reframed everything.

"I want to thank the fire department for everything that you've done, past, present, our future," he said. "We recognize that the things that you do are important."

He said the biggest roadblock was a 20-year-old contract that no longer met county and state requirements. The board would issue the contractually required 90-day notice to terminate the current agreement. But termination, Anderson said, was not the ending.

"That doesn't mean that we're not going to continue with you guys," he told the VFD members in the room. "We're giving y'all a 90-day window for us to renegotiate a contract that is to the standards of the county and the state moving forward."

Then Anderson turned to the VFD members in the room. "Are y'all in agreement to move forward?" The volunteers answered. It was not loud enough. "Say it louder," Anderson told them. The room heard it this time. "Yes, sir. Yes, sir." There was a weight to that exchange. These were people who had walked into the building expecting to lose their fire department. Anderson looked at them and said: "We want you to continue."

Anderson opened the floor to the board. Each commissioner who spoke did so directly to the volunteers sitting in the room.

One board member addressed the rumors head on. "We are never, ever, ever going to leave this town undone," he said. "In any shape or form, it was never going to be shut down. That was never a thought. Or moved. The rumors that went around, that was never the case." He said he had been in regular contact with Mayor Bennett and Councilman Figueroa throughout. "That was never our goal. Our goal is to have these people in the best situation, to give them the best equipment we can possibly give them for the dollars that we have coming in now." He told the room he lives in Tool. "I don't want my house burned down either." He committed to paying for the training the department needs. "We will work very hard with y'all to get that done over the next 90 days. Get you the training that's required, that we will pay for, that the ESD will pay for, so that you can all get the certifications that you want and need." He closed by acknowledging the crowd. "Regardless of the reason you came, you came because you're worried about this city. And that's what we are too."

A board member who described himself as having been on the board for only five or six weeks made what I thought was the most striking statement of the evening. "The Emergency Service District and the Fire Department are on the same team," he said. "We all want the same thing. That's the best fire and emergency service protection that we can provide for this city." He did not sugarcoat the history. "Teams are something I've been around. And this one has been dysfunctional. I'm not pointing fingers and I'm not leveling accusations and I don't want to go back. But the fire department and this board, in my estimation, are guilty of damaging the rapport between us." Then he made a personal commitment. "I believe that a certain level of respect and dignity and common decency is required for us to go forward. I can't speak for anyone on this board. I can't speak for anyone except myself. But I vow that I'm going to do everything in my power to improve the level of respect between us."

The board's treasurer spoke last before the motion. "My goal is to be able to control the funds, incoming and outgoing, in a complete, transparent way, that we're spending the money in the right ways, looking for feedback from the fire department on tools that they need in order for them to be successful." He said something that resonated: "We are not the experts in firefighting. You guys are. So we look to you to provide that information." He said the county fully supports the plan. "If you guys can come up to this level, that will put their mind at ease. And it should put everybody's mind at ease." He framed the goal in concrete terms: Henderson County currently has three certified fire departments. "We plan on being one of the top four." He noted the board was not making up its own standards. "It's not an emotional guideline. It's purely, this is what you need to do to be successful. We're going to follow the county."

The treasurer then made the formal motion to terminate the existing contract effective 90 days from the date of official written notice, with the stated intent to negotiate a new contract during that period. The motion was seconded. The vote was unanimous.

What This Means

The board did not shut down the fire department. They did not suspend operations. They did not hand Tool's fire protection to a neighboring district.

What they did was end a 20-year-old contract that both sides agree is outdated, and open a 90-day window to write a new one. The VFD continues operating during that period. The board committed to training, certification, and financial transparency. The VFD agreed to the terms.

The 90-day clock creates its own pressure. If the new contract is not completed in that window, the termination stands. But both sides left that room having made public commitments to each other and to the citizens sitting behind them.

The open questions I raised in Parts 2 and 3 have not disappeared. The data gaps, the financial questions, the incomplete records. Those things still exist. But the people responsible for answering them have now publicly committed to a path forward. Whether they follow through is something the community will be able to see for itself over the next 90 days.

What I watched on Tuesday night was something I do not often see in the small-town stories I cover: two sides that had been tearing each other apart in public found a way to sit in the same room and agree to try again. The citizens who showed up made it clear that they were not interested in blame. They were interested in keeping their fire department.

What I Think

OPINION:

I walked into that fire station expecting to document a community losing its fire department. I walked out watching a community decide to save it.

The fire department has new leadership in Chief Melvin Clay. The ESD board admitted its own role in the dysfunction. The volunteers agreed to meet the standards being asked of them. No one pointed fingers. Everyone took accountability. That is what successful governance looks like, and it is rarer than it should be in the small towns I cover.

I am shifting my focus on this story. What began as an accountability investigation into the actions of the ESD board and the VFD leadership is now something different. The people involved chose to change course. They chose to do it publicly, on the record, in front of their neighbors. I have to respect that.

What's done is done. We cannot change the past. What truly matters now is how the community, the fire department, and the ESD move forward together.

That said, this is not the end of my coverage. I will continue watching. I will continue encouraging civic engagement in Tool and across the communities I cover. I will continue reporting on the stories that come to me in a way that gives everyone a fair chance to tell their side. And I will continue having the hard conversations that have the opportunity to propel a struggling community into a new, positive direction.

If you have information relevant to this story or any other, you can reach me and my team at tips@watchtowerci.com.

This is Part 3 of an ongoing series. Read Part 1: Tool's Fire Department Is Fighting for Its Life, Part 2: Both Sides of the Fire, and Part 4: The Community Fights the Fire.

The posted performance reports at the fire station for anyone to see. I reviewed them. The data tells a complicated story, but the facts make it easy to follow.

The ESD's case against the VFD keeps coming back to one point: the numbers are on the wall.

Seven performance reports covering all of 2025 have been posted publicly at the Tool fire station since January 2026. I obtained and reviewed copies. My team and I analyzed the full data set.

These are not reports the ESD created from scratch. The underlying data comes from the department's Active911 dispatch response app and NFIRS reporting system, combined with operational data reported to the ESD by the VFD. The reports were then posted at the fire station for public inspection.

After reviewing the full data set, some of the figures are consistent and verifiable. In other areas, the data appears incomplete, leaving questions that neither the reports nor the interviews I conducted can fully answer.

What the Data Confirms

The reports document 410 total calls in 2025. ESD-aligned sources told me the number was "about 400." That checks out.

Of those 410 calls, exactly 23 were categorized as "dispatched and no response," meaning the department was called and nobody showed up. That is 5.6 percent of all calls.

The chief's command vehicle consumed 36.54 percent of the department's total fuel for the year. ESD-aligned sources placed the figure at 39 percent, overstating it by about two and a half percentage points. But the underlying point stands: one vehicle used more than a third of all department fuel, including every fire truck.

The individual participation data is consistent with the ESD's claim that the fire chief attended roughly 37 percent of calls. Multiple other members fall below the 50 percent attendance threshold that the ESD says is required by the VFD's contract. The data suggests only one member meets that threshold.

What the Data Undermines

One area where the ESD has identified concerns is response times. But the response time data has a problem.

Of the 410 calls logged in 2025, only 104 have a response time entered in the NFIRS system. That means 75 percent of all calls have no response time data at all. When three quarters of the data is missing, whatever conclusions you draw from the remaining quarter are built on incomplete information.

Why is so much of the data missing? That remains an open question. VFD-aligned sources have argued that the Active911 app is unreliable in practice. The argument is straightforward: if you are running into a burning building, you are not stopping to tap a phone screen.

That explanation is plausible for initial check-in. But it does not account for the scope of the gap, because the system allows users to go back and edit their response times after the fact. A source who uses the same county-wide reporting system confirmed that times can be adjusted when filling out post-call reports. You fill out the report after the call and correct the times based on what actually happened. Times may be off by a few minutes or as much as twenty, but the data gets entered. Seventy-five percent is not a failure to tap a button in real time. It is a failure to complete the paperwork afterward.

The data as it currently exists cannot answer the response time question. It does not mean the VFD's response times are good. It does not mean they are bad. It means the available records are incomplete. The only source that could provide a definitive answer is Henderson County dispatch records, which neither side has produced and which could be obtained through a public information request.

The Fuel Question

The fuel percentage, while slightly overstated by the ESD, raises a legitimate question. Why does the chief's command vehicle account for more than a third of all department fuel?

VFD-aligned sources offered a specific explanation. The command vehicle is one of only two gasoline-powered vehicles in the fleet. Every fire truck runs on diesel. The fuel report tracks gasoline separately. According to these sources, the chief regularly fills gas cans for department equipment: chainsaws, pumps, a floating pump, and weed eaters.

If the chief is fueling both his vehicle and multiple pieces of portable equipment from the same fuel card, the 36.54 percent figure would reflect more than personal driving. Resolving this requires transaction-level fuel records showing individual purchases, which could distinguish vehicle fill-ups from gas can fills.

The total fleet fuel for the year was 1,046 gallons at a cost of roughly $5,100. The chief's share was approximately 382 gallons, or about 32 gallons per month. In absolute terms, these are modest numbers. The percentage looks alarming. The dollar amount less so.

I was also told by a source with direct knowledge of Henderson County fire operations that the command vehicle was allegedly used for a personal trip to Florida. To be clear, I have not verified this claim through fuel card records or other documentary evidence, and the available data does not confirm or deny it. But if accurate, it would reframe the fuel question entirely. Transaction-level fuel records would resolve whether out-of-area purchases occurred.

The Contested Middle Ground

Beyond the data, this investigation uncovered a series of claims where both sides directly contradict each other. These disputes cannot be resolved without documentary evidence that neither side has produced.

The mattresses. VFD-aligned sources say the board approved $2,000 per bedroom for furniture, but used mattresses with holes appeared instead. ESD-aligned sources say the mattresses were donated from a personal collection and that the $2,000 was approved but has not yet been spent. Purchase records would resolve this.

The training program. VFD-aligned sources say the ESD purchased a Vector Solutions training system with laptops but never distributed them. ESD-aligned sources say the system was purchased and contracts were signed, but distribution was delayed because of the ongoing conflict. Usage logs would resolve whether the system was ever activated.

The financial records. The ESD says the VFD has refused to provide financial statements. VFD-aligned sources say bank statements were offered at a meeting but the board wanted to run their own report. The VFD maintains that its fundraising accounts are separate from taxpayer funds because the department is a 501(c)(3). The distinction between ESD oversight of taxpayer funds and VFD nonprofit fundraising accounts is a question that the contract between the two entities should answer.

The CDL licenses. The ESD says no VFD member holds a CDL and they offered to bring a tester to the station with no takers. VFD-aligned sources disputed this, with members claiming they do hold CDLs. They also argued that Texas law exempts emergency vehicle operators during emergency responses, making CDL certification unnecessary for most fire calls. DPS licensing records would resolve the factual question. The legal question is separate and depends on how the vehicles are classified.

The audit. The question of whether the VFD has had an external audit is a point of contention. VFD-aligned sources say they contacted Henderson County directly and were told the county audits ESDs, not fire departments. However, a source with direct knowledge of Henderson County fire department oversight said the county did audit the VFD's finances and found significant problems, including missing receipts and charges at businesses inconsistent with fire department operations. The source said the audit results were serious enough that the county declined to assign the department a county coverage contract, giving it instead to a neighboring district. County records would clarify the full scope of the audit findings.

The Data Quality Problem

One finding from the wall reports cuts against both sides. Of the 410 calls in 2025, 82 incidents, nearly 20 percent, have no incident type entered in the system at all. These calls happened, someone responded, but nobody recorded what kind of call it was.

An additional 520 hours were logged under the code "Fire, Other," which is a catch-all category that tells you almost nothing about what actually occurred.

Between the 75 percent missing response times and the 20 percent uncategorized calls, the 2025 activity reports have significant gaps. The reasons for those gaps remain unanswered. What is clear is that anyone relying on this data to make their case should acknowledge its limitations. Incomplete records leave room for interpretation, and interpretation is where disputes live.

What Would Resolve This

Nearly every disputed claim in this investigation could be answered by records that are obtainable through public information requests under the Texas Public Information Act.

Henderson County dispatch logs would show actual response times from the authoritative source, not an app that 75 percent of calls never get logged into.

ESD financial records would show exactly what was purchased, from whom, for how much, and whether competitive quotes were obtained.

The VFD's contract with the ESD would show what performance standards exist and whether either side is meeting them.

Court records from Henderson County would confirm or refute specific allegations about individuals that are currently single-source.

Texas Commission on Fire Protection records would show which members hold what certifications.

These records exist. They are public. They have not been produced by either side during the course of this investigation. I intend to request them. If you live in the Tool area or have a stake in the outcome of this dispute, I would encourage you to do the same. Any Texas resident can submit a public information request under the Texas Public Information Act. The more people requesting these records, the harder they are to ignore.

Since publishing Parts 1 and 2, additional sources have come forward with information that corroborates claims from both sides and raises new questions. Some of the records described above may already exist in forms I have not yet obtained. This investigation is ongoing.

What Comes Next

On March 25 at 6:00 PM, the ESD board will convene at the fire station. The agenda authorizes discussion and action on possible termination or suspension of the VFD contract. The vote will occur in open session after the concludes.

The outcome matters beyond Tool. Emergency services districts across rural Texas face similar tensions between oversight boards and the volunteer departments they fund. The questions here are not unique: How much control should an oversight board have over daily operations? When does accountability become retaliation? When does independence become a lack of transparency?

In Tool, both sides have evidence that supports their position. Both sides have claims that their own evidence undermines. The community deserves answers based on records, not allegations. I will continue reporting as those records become available.

Read Part 4: The Community Fights the Fire for what happened at the March 25 meeting.

This is Part 2 of an ongoing series. Read Part 1: Tool's Fire Department Is Fighting for Its Life, Part 3: The Numbers on the Wall, and Part 4: The Community Fights the Fire.

After days of interviews with people on every side of this fight, one thing is clear: this story is far more complex than it appears on the surface.

In Part 1, I outlined what is at stake in Tool: a special meeting on March 25 where the board will vote on whether to terminate or suspend its contract with the Tool Volunteer Fire Department. In this article, I present both sides of the dispute based on interviews I conducted with verified sources connected to each side, as well as independent sources with no stake in the outcome.

A note before we begin: During the course of this investigation, I learned that both the ESD and the VFD operate under policies that restrict members from speaking to the press without board approval. I did not know this when I began conducting interviews. Every person I spoke with did so willingly. I am not going to identify my sources in this article, because doing so could put their roles at risk. That creates an obvious tension. Direct quotes and named sources are the backbone of credible journalism. But I am not willing to cost someone their position on a fire department for telling me the truth. Where I reference specific claims, they come from verified sources whose identities I have confirmed and whose accounts I have cross-referenced against each other and against documentary evidence. I will let the facts speak for themselves.

The VFD's Case: Retaliation

Sources aligned with the volunteer fire department describe a conflict that traces back to one event: the ESD board president's son was involved in a serious criminal incident, and the fire chief suspended him from driving department trucks. After that, the son allegedly told multiple VFD members that his father would join the ESD board and make them pay for it.

That arrest is a matter of public record. On June 8, 2023, Bryce Anderson was arrested by the Tarrant County Sheriff on three charges: aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, unlicensed carrying of a weapon, and driving while intoxicated with a blood alcohol concentration greater than 0.15, nearly double the legal limit. He was 23 years old at the time and listed his address as Tool, Texas.

What followed, according to VFD-aligned sources, was roughly three years of escalation. The board president joined the ESD, rose to president, and began imposing new reporting requirements, purchasing equipment without consulting the department, and hiring personal associates for work at the station without competitive quotes. Sources say an officer's workspace was cleared out without notice. They allege fuel cards have been declined, their operating budget was eliminated, and insurance nearly lapsed because of delayed payments by the board.

VFD-aligned sources say they campaigned for a tax increase to fund better equipment. It passed. New equipment arrived. Now they believe the board is preparing to hand all of it to a replacement department.

At a recent ESD meeting, multiple community witnesses say a board member yelled at a female VFD member before the meeting was officially recorded. She became emotional and walked outside. Another board member left in protest. Shane Helton, a Tool community member, described the incident in a public Facebook post: "A grown man yelling at a younger lady."

I attempted to obtain video of a prior ESD meeting that multiple sources referenced as significant. I reached out to community members, attempted to join the private Paradise Bay Forum Facebook group, and was even directly contacted by a Tool city official who offered to share a link to the video. The link required group membership to view. I requested access to the group and was denied. I asked the official if someone could send the video directly. That request was seen but never answered. As of this writing, I have not been able to review the video. If anyone has a copy they are willing to share, I can be reached at tips@watchtowerci.com.

The VFD side sees this as retaliation. A son was disciplined. A father took power. The department is paying the price.

However, the timeline is more complicated than that narrative alone. A local informant with knowledge of Henderson County fire service operations told me that Tool VFD members approached a neighboring district roughly three years ago, before the current board president even joined, asking to be taken over because they were unhappy with their own ESD governance and could not maintain enough board members. According to this source, the neighboring district declined, and the request is documented in their official meeting minutes. I have not independently reviewed those minutes, but the source was highly credible and had no reason to fabricate the claim. If accurate, the VFD's frustration with ESD oversight predates the current board president.

The ESD's Case: The Data

The ESD side tells a completely different story. Sources aligned with the board describe a fire department with serious operational problems that have nothing to do with one person's son.

In January 2026, performance reports covering the full year of 2025 were posted publicly at the fire station for anyone to review. I obtained and reviewed copies of those reports. My team and I analyzed the full data set.

According to sources familiar with the ESD's position, the fire chief attended roughly 37 percent of calls last year, during a period when the chief was reportedly unemployed. The chief's personal command vehicle consumed more than a third of the department's total fuel, including every fire truck. No member of the department holds a CDL license. The ESD reportedly offered to bring a CDL tester to the station. No one applied.

Sources say every VFD member who attended the county's Firefighter 1 training program failed the test. They also describe a recent incident where the department allegedly responded to a brush fire with a truck that had no water in it, and a member reportedly did not know how to connect to a nearby fire hydrant.

The ESD has invested approximately $1.5 million in new equipment over the past few years, reportedly after consulting with fire chiefs from neighboring districts who purchased similar gear. The stated intent was to attract new volunteers. Instead, sources say, performance declined. They describe a department that has refused to provide financial records, will not log into the training system purchased for them, and will not provide the board president access to certain areas of a building the ESD owns.

The ESD side denies the retaliation narrative entirely. Their position is that the performance data speaks for itself, and they point anyone who doubts it to the reports posted on the wall.

A Source Who Criticizes Both Sides

Not everyone falls neatly into one camp. I spoke with a source who has direct knowledge of both the VFD's internal operations and the ESD's governance. This source is critical of both sides.

On the VFD side, this source described a department controlled by a small number of people, most of them related to each other, living in the same household. The department's leadership, its financial management, and its daily operations are all concentrated in one family. This source alleged that the per-call payment system was restructured in a way that benefited family members who live closest to the station, and that personal items were being charged to the department's account at a local business.

When I asked about the personal charges, a VFD-aligned source denied it.

On the ESD side, this source was equally blunt. The board has been spending money on equipment without meaningful input from the people who actually respond to calls. Some of those purchases, according to multiple sources with fire service experience, were poorly researched: wrong specifications for the terrain, wrong drive configuration for the climate, and in at least one case, a piece of equipment that was purchased because a neighboring department bought one, not because the department needed it.

The family structure of the VFD leadership is not in dispute. Both sides confirm it. The question is what it means. Some see it as a control problem. Others see it as the reality of volunteer fire service in a small town, where one person joins and the whole family follows.

Bryce Anderson's Record

The retaliation question hangs over every aspect of this dispute. The VFD side says Bryce explicitly promised his father would join the board and retaliate. The ESD side denies it.

What is not in dispute: Bryce left the department. His father subsequently joined the board and became president. The relationship between the ESD and VFD deteriorated.

But there is more to the Bryce story than either side fully disclosed.

I have independently confirmed that Bryce received deferred adjudication for the Tarrant County charges. Under Texas law, deferred adjudication is not a conviction. He completed every requirement imposed on him, including monitoring conditions. He subsequently applied to and was accepted by a neighboring Henderson County fire department, where he passed a full background check. He is currently enrolled in EMT school and, according to an independent source, shows up to work and is described as a good firefighter. If he had a felony record, he could not be enrolled in the EMT program.

Three charges, including aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, are serious. But Bryce went through the system and completed what was required of him. The VFD's continued characterization of his legal situation as unresolved does not match the record.

Separately, Bryce filed a public information request for any VFD messages mentioning his name and reportedly sent members a proposed agreement requiring a payment each time his name was mentioned. No one signed it. Sources described the proposed terms as intimidation.

I was also told by multiple sources that a VFD member allegedly sprayed a citizen with a fire hose during a dispute over a controlled brush burn. According to sources familiar with the incident, the resident had the fire under control, called to cancel the response, and told VFD members to leave his property. The confrontation escalated and a firefighter turned the hose on the resident, causing injuries. Criminal charges were reportedly filed and remain pending. That member was allegedly not suspended from the department, which sources on one side characterize as a double standard.

A Resignation Before the Vote

As I was finalizing this series on the evening of March 23, the fire chief's wife posted a public statement in the All About Tool Texas Facebook group announcing that she and her husband had resigned from the fire department.

In her post, she attributed the resignation to what she described as "malicious accusations from ESD president Allen Anderson for misappropriation of funds with no proof." She stated that Anderson had been trying to remove her husband for the last year and a half. She also said the county auditor has not completed the audit of ESD #4, and that there is no proof of the allegations against them. She thanked the citizens of Tool for 20 years of support and said she would be posting more information at a later time.

This is a significant development. The chief and the department's treasurer have now stepped down two days before the board was scheduled to vote on whether to terminate or suspend the VFD contract. Whether this changes the scope or direction of the March 25 meeting remains to be seen.

It is also the first time anyone has publicly named the specific allegation at the center of this dispute: misappropriation of funds. During my investigation, that phrase did not come up in those terms from either side. The ESD's agenda referenced "recovering funds" and triggering investigations by the county DA, county attorney, and county auditor. The VFD side framed everything as retaliation. Now, through this public post, the financial accusation is on the table.

I have not independently verified the status of the county audit. Whether it is complete, in progress, or has produced findings is something I intend to clarify through public records requests.

What Happens March 25

The special meeting begins at 6:00 PM at the Tool fire station. Citizens may speak during the public comment period, limited to three minutes per person. The board will then enter . When they return, they will vote in open session.

With the chief and treasurer now resigned, the question of what the board votes on may have shifted. The original agenda authorized discussion and possible action on termination or suspension of the VFD contract. Whether the resignations satisfy the board's concerns or whether the investigation referenced in the agenda continues independently of the VFD leadership is unclear.

If the board moves forward with suspension or termination, Tool's fire protection would shift to mutual aid coverage. Sources indicate that neighboring departments have been in discussions about covering the district.

However, a local informant told me that a neighboring ESD that already covers portions of Tool's area under county contract has formally voted not to take over Tool's fire department, citing concerns about inheriting the political situation. According to the same source, this decision is documented in their official meeting minutes. I have not independently reviewed those minutes, but the source was highly credible. The same informant said this neighboring district had been approached in the past about taking over Tool's fire coverage and declined.

The informant also indicated there is a legal mechanism for emergency coverage if the board terminates the contract: the county commissioners can appoint a neighboring department to cover the area, potentially granting them access to Tool's fire station. According to this source, the neighboring department would cover Tool if the county asked. But they will not volunteer for the political fight.

Community members have indicated they will attend and speak. The outcome of the March 25 meeting is now less predictable than it was 24 hours ago.

Both sides believe they are right. Both sides have evidence to support their position. In Part 3: The Numbers on the Wall, I examine the actual performance data posted at the fire station and what those numbers reveal. Then read Part 4: The Community Fights the Fire for what happened at the March 25 meeting.

On Wednesday evening, five commissioners will walk into the Tool fire station and vote on whether to end the community's only local fire protection.

The agenda for the March 25 special meeting of Henderson County Emergency Services District No. 4 is unusually specific. It authorizes the president to recover district funds and to trigger investigations by the Henderson County District Attorney, County Attorney, and County Auditor. The entire discussion will take place behind closed doors.

I have spent the past four days investigating this story. Since Thursday evening, I have conducted more than six hours of phone interviews and more than three hours of in-person interviews with sources on both sides of this dispute. My entire Saturday and Sunday were consumed by interviews, station visits, research, document analysis, and writing. My team assisted with analysis and reviewing the 2025 activity reports that are at the center of this dispute.

What I found is a story with no easy answers. Both sides sat down with me. Both sides made their case on the record. Both sides presented evidence. And after reviewing that evidence, gaps were identified that still need answers.

Here is what is not in dispute:

The ESD board has called a special meeting for March 25, 2026 at 6:00 PM at the Tool fire station, 525 South Tool Drive, Tool, TX 75143. The agenda includes discussion and possible action on termination or suspension of the Tool VFD contract. Citizens will have three minutes each to speak before the board enters .

Performance reports covering the full year of 2025 have been posted publicly at the fire station since January 2026. Those reports contain data on call volumes, attendance rates, fuel usage, and response times. The ESD board identified what they believe are inaccuracies in the data they have been receiving. After my team and I reviewed the same reports, I found that the data leaves questions on the table. As I will detail in Part 3, some of the numbers are consistent across sources, while others appear incomplete.

Multiple VFD members say the ESD president's son explicitly promised his father would join the board and retaliate after the chief suspended him from driving trucks. The ESD president denies the retaliation allegation and points to what he describes as documented operational failures.

If the board votes to end the relationship, Tool's fire protection could fall to mutual aid from neighboring departments 15 to 20 minutes away, unless the ESD has already arranged an alternative.

Over the next two articles, I will lay out both sides of this fight and then walk through the actual performance data. The picture that emerges is more complicated than the narrative from either side. There are legitimate concerns about department operations. There are also legitimate questions about how this situation arrived at the point of a termination vote.

This is Part 1 of an ongoing series. Read Part 2: Both Sides of the Fire, Part 3: The Numbers on the Wall, and Part 4: The Community Fights the Fire.

The Italy Economic Development Corporation held its regular meeting Monday evening at city hall to discuss the bid process for demolishing the building at 101 E. Main Street.

The main agenda item was straightforward: figure out how to get the demolition project out for bids. But the meeting revealed the isn't quite ready for that step yet.

What Was Discussed

The board and what appeared to be the city engineer talked through the process of preparing the project for competitive bidding. One of the bigger discussion points was what to do with the old bricks from the building. The board weighed whether to require their destruction or preservation as part of the bid specifications.

The engineer stressed the importance of nailing down these kinds of details now, during the planning phase, rather than leaving them open-ended. Unresolved questions in a bid package can lead to unexpected costs and complications once work begins.

What Was Decided

Not much, practically speaking. The EDC acknowledged that it still needs to finalize the project scope and specifications before the engineer can help them put together a proper bid package. Once those details are ready, the project will go out for bids, and the board will reconvene to review what comes back.

The formal plan remains to demolish the building. Nothing beyond demolition has been officially decided, though the general sentiment around town leans toward turning the lot into parking.

What's Next

The EDC will need to work through the remaining project details and prepare a complete bid package. Another meeting will follow once bids are received and ready for review.

In January, I submitted a Public Information Act request to the City of Hubbard asking for Open Meetings Act training certificates for every member of the City Council, Mayor Mary Alderman, City Secretary Diana Hall, and City Manager Jason Patrick.

Texas Government Code Section 551.005 requires all elected and appointed officials serving on a governmental body to complete Open Meetings Act training within 90 days of taking office. The law places responsibility on the governmental body itself to maintain those certificates and make them available for public inspection.

The city responded about ten days later. Five certificates were provided. Three officials had no certificates at all.

What the Certificates Showed

Of the five certificates included in the response, two belonged to Aldermen Simone Johnson and Brandon Ivy. Both had completed their training months before my request: Johnson in the spring of 2025 and Ivy the following month.

The remaining three certificates raised a question worth noting.

City Secretary Diana Hall completed her training the same day the request was received. Mayor Pro-Tem Kenneth Baldwin completed his the following day. City Manager Jason Patrick completed his on the same day the city sent its response, roughly ten days after the request was filed.

Three officials completed mandatory state training in the window between a records request asking for proof of that training and the city's response.

Three Officials With No Certificates

The response did not include certificates for Mayor Mary Alderman, Alderman Wayne Taylor, or Alderman Roger Lynch. The city did not explain the omission and did not state that no records exist for these individuals.

Under Section 551.005, the training is not optional. It is a statutory requirement for every member of a governmental body subject to the Open Meetings Act. The absence of certificates for three sitting officials raises questions about whether they have ever completed the required training.

A Filing Gap

The email chain attached to Brandon Ivy's certificate revealed something else. Ivy completed his training in the spring of 2025 and forwarded the certificate to Mayor Alderman, who acknowledged receiving it. The certificate was not forwarded to the City Secretary's office.

It was not until January 2026, days after my request was filed, that the certificate finally reached the City Secretary.

Section 551.005(c) places responsibility on the governmental body to maintain training certificates for public inspection. In this case, a certificate sat unfiled for roughly eight months.

Looking Ahead

Three officials have not provided evidence of completing a statutory training requirement. The certificates the city did provide show training completed in the days following this request. And at least one record the city is required to maintain was not on file until prompted by a public records request.

I will continue requesting records from the City of Hubbard as part of ongoing coverage.

Have information about Hubbard city government? Reach out: tips@watchtowerci.com

Here are the questions.

If you are running for city council in May 2026, these nine questions are for you. Every candidate in every city I cover will receive the same questionnaire. The questions are designed to give voters real answers about who you are, what you know, and how you plan to lead.

How to Submit

Email your written answers to the address listed at the bottom of this page. Use your city name as the subject line (for example: "Italy" or "Trinidad"). Answer each question by number.

Take as long as you need to prepare thoughtful, substantive responses. Your answers will be held privately until every candidate in your city has had the opportunity to respond. Once all responses are collected, I will publish them together so voters can compare candidates side by side.

No candidate sees another candidate's answers before submission. The process is the same for everyone.

I will be reaching out to candidates individually as well. If you are ready, do not wait for me.

The Questions

General Leadership and Vision

1. I'm new to the community and I don't know anything about you. What do you tell me?

2. What inspired you to run for office?

3. What do you feel is the most important issue facing your city today, and how do you plan to address it?

Community Engagement

4. How do you feel about the way city leadership currently communicates with the community? Are you satisfied with the level of public communication? Yes or no, and explain why.

5. Some cities in Texas have social media policies that restrict councilmembers from commenting publicly about city business. There is a valid concern about accidentally creating a walking , but other Texas cities navigate this appropriately and allow councilmembers to make factual public statements without blanket restrictions. What are your thoughts? Should elected officials be able to communicate openly with residents on social media?

6. How do you plan to make sure taxpayers feel heard and included in city government beyond the election cycle?

City Operations and Finances

7. Every city has infrastructure needs and financial pressures. How familiar are you with your city's current budget, and what is your plan for keeping the city financially healthy while addressing the projects and maintenance that residents are counting on?

8. Many cities in Texas have Economic Development Corporations funded by sales tax revenue. These organizations often accumulate significant cash reserves and property assets while the city's general fund runs tight. What are your thoughts on how your city's should be operating, and what role should the council play in making sure those tax dollars are working for the community?

Final Thoughts

9. You're at a meeting on the dais during councilmember comments. The meeting was productive, but some members of the audience are upset with how you voted on certain issues. What do you say to bring the room together?

For the Voters

Pay attention to who participates and who doesn't. Pay attention to who answers with specifics and who answers with generalities. These nine questions are not trick questions. They are the baseline of what any voter should expect a candidate to be able to answer before asking for your vote.

The responses will be published before the May election. Read them. Compare the answers. Make an informed decision at the ballot box.

I had a conversation with Brandon Torres this week. For those who haven't heard, the City of Italy identified Torres as the top candidate for police chief during the last council meeting. We talked for about half an hour.

It was a good conversation. I wanted the community to know it happened.

Part of that conversation included me doing my due diligence. I made Torres aware of the mold situation at the current police department. Given his background, I felt he needed that information before potentially stepping into the role. He deserved that honesty, and I gave it to him.

If Brandon Torres ends up being the person the council votes in, I believe his priorities are community safety and doing what is best for the city. Half an hour is a limited window, but his reputation reinforces what I heard. I'm cautiously optimistic.

That said, I have concerns. Italy could be walking into another situation where a known problem ends up costing taxpayers and pulling resources away from where they're needed most. Street patrols. School zone enforcement. Community safety. I've seen the complaints on Italy Talk about speeding in school zones. Those concerns are real, and they demand a fully resourced police department, not one hamstrung by a building problem the city has known about for years.

I want the city to get this right. Navigate the mold situation in a way that doesn't further restrict the resources dedicated to keeping this community safe. Torres or not, that problem needs a solution.

The city probably didn't expect me to have a long conversation with their top Chief candidate this week. I may not be in the Italy council chambers anymore, but that doesn't mean I'm not always watching.

A week ago, I walked into a city council meeting in Seven Points with a notebook and a few questions. Since then, I have been doing my homework. And I mean that literally.

I have filed public information requests. I have read through every publicly available city ordinance going back decades. I have reviewed city agendas, public information response documents, financial records, and legal filings. I have conducted direct, on-the-record interviews with elected officials who were willing to sit down (or pick up the phone) and answer hard questions. I have studied the legal framework that governs how a Type A General Law city in Texas is supposed to operate under the Texas Local Government Code.

And I have been watching the conversations happening on social media.

The Interviews

I want to say something about the people who have spoken to me directly.

Multiple council members have given me their time, their perspective, and their willingness to go on record about what they have experienced serving in Seven Points city government. I respect that enormously. In small-town Texas, going on the record about problems inside your own city takes courage. The social consequences are real, the political consequences are real, and these individuals know that better than anyone.

Their accounts are detailed, specific, and consistent with the documentary evidence I have independently gathered through public records. I am not going to lay out everything they told me right now. Some of what I have learned will inform future reporting when the time is right. But I will say this: the picture these interviews paint, combined with the public documents I have reviewed, is both more complex and more concerning than what most people following this story on Facebook currently understand.

To the council members who have spoken with me: thank you. Your willingness to put facts on the record matters more than you probably realize.

The Social Media Problem

Speaking of Facebook.

There are voices in the Seven Points community, and in related social media groups, who are confidently steering public discourse in a direction that the documented facts simply do not support.

I have seen claims posted online about who is responsible for the budget stalemate. I have seen characterizations of specific council members' actions that directly contradict what the city's own records show. I have seen blame placed on individuals who, according to multiple independent sources and the city's own documentation, were actually the ones trying to force accountability.

Some of these posts are written with enough conviction that they sound authoritative. They are not. They are based on incomplete information, secondhand accounts, or narratives that conveniently leave out key facts.

I understand that people have strong opinions about their city government. That is healthy and appropriate. But there is a difference between having an opinion and spreading information that is factually wrong. When inaccurate narratives take hold in a community, they make it harder for residents to evaluate their elected officials fairly. They muddy the water right when clarity matters most.

If you are one of the people posting confidently about what happened with the budget, or who is blocking what, or why certain things happened the way they did, I have a genuine question for you: have you read the city's own documents? Have you filed a single public information request? Have you spoken directly to multiple council members and compared their accounts against the paper trail?

I have. And what the documents show is different from some of the stories being told online.

For the Taxpayers

Here is what I think every Seven Points resident should understand heading into the coming months.

You have a May election approaching. The mayor's seat and council seats will be on the ballot. As of today, the city does not appear to have published a formal list of candidates. That means filing deadlines, candidate forums, and voter education are all still ahead of you.

This is not the time to tune out. This is the time to pay closer attention than you ever have.

I am not going to tell you who to vote for. That is your decision, and it should be an informed one. What I am going to tell you is that the decisions made in May will determine whether the structural problems in this city get addressed or get worse. The budget situation, the police department questions, the concerns about how city business is being conducted: none of that disappears after an election. But the people you put in charge of addressing those issues will matter a great deal.

Do your own research. Read the agendas. Attend the meetings. Ask candidates direct questions about specific issues. Ask them about the budget. Ask them about how police leadership should be appointed under the Local Government Code. Ask them about public information compliance and whether the city is meeting its legal obligations. Ask them whether council members should have the ability to place items on the agenda.

If a candidate can answer those questions with specifics, that tells you something. If they cannot, that tells you something too.

A Note to the Noise

I want to be direct about something, and I want certain people to read this carefully.

I have reviewed more documents, conducted more interviews, and analyzed more evidence than I have published. What you have seen from me so far, one opinion piece, a transparency alert, and some public comments, represents a fraction of what I know.

I am not in the business of publishing everything the moment I have it. I am in the business of being thorough, accurate, and fair. That takes time. It takes verification. It takes cross-referencing multiple independent sources against each other and against the documentary record.

But make no mistake: the research is ongoing, it is detailed, and it is building toward a factual record that will be very difficult to argue with.

If you have been posting misleading information online, whether out of genuine misunderstanding or for other reasons, consider this a courtesy notice. The facts are coming. And facts, unlike social media posts, do not care about loyalty, friendship, or political alignment. They just sit there, documented and verifiable, waiting to be read by anyone who wants to read them.

I would encourage anyone who has been contributing to public misinformation, even unintentionally, to take a step back. Review the public records that are actually available. Reconsider whether the narrative you have been promoting holds up under scrutiny. If it does, you have nothing to worry about. If it does not, now would be a good time to quietly adjust before the record speaks for itself.

What's Next

I am going to keep showing up. I am going to keep filing records requests. I am going to keep talking to people who are willing to share what they know. And I am going to keep publishing, on my timeline, as the evidence warrants.

Seven Points, your election is coming. The people making noise on social media are not the ones who are going to fix your city's problems. Informed voters will.

Pay attention to the facts. They are the only thing that will matter when the dust settles.

Five candidates have filed to run for the Goodlow City Council, according to Ruthie Washington, Goodlow's City Secretary, who confirmed the list this week.

The candidates are:

• Jeffery Baxter
• Jeffery Betts
• Sterling Cotton
• Arlene Owen
• Wayne Owen

Incumbent Tina Littleton will not be seeking reelection.

A Small Town With Big Questions

Goodlow is one of the smallest incorporated communities in Navarro County, with a population of roughly 200. Despite its size, the city faces real governance challenges. The most significant: Goodlow has not completed its annual audit obligations.

Whoever wins this seat will step into a council that still needs to address those outstanding obligations. The new council member will also inherit the responsibility of helping guide a community that has dealt with property disputes and limited municipal resources for years.

Why Showing Up Matters

Goodlow's last election cycle saw strong civic engagement, with the community turning out for candidate forums. That kind of participation makes a difference in a town this size, where every voice in the room carries real weight.

Residents who want to stay informed and involved should plan to attend upcoming council meetings. With a new council member joining and audit obligations still unresolved, these meetings are where the decisions get made. The more residents who show up, the more accountable those decisions become.

The general election is scheduled for May.

Have information about Goodlow city government? Reach out: tips@watchtowerci.com