Tag Archives: Randall County

local news

Armored car joins sheriff's force

2 Comments

Randall County, Texas, is where I live. It is a nice place, full of nice folks. It has its share of soreheads and criminals, but it’s not a place thought to be a haven for violence.

And yet …

The county sheriff’s department has just purchased — are you ready? — an armored car.

It’s one of those beastly vehicles associated, say, with battlefields. You know, places where enemy soldiers fire big-time ordnance at each other.

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/28775019/randall-county-sheriffs-office-buys-armored-vehicle

Sheriff Joel Richardson, a good guy and one of the top cops in Texas, has purchased a Lenco BearCat. The armored car is designed for ultimate protection and defense.

I’ll hand it to Richardson, though, for recognizing the public relations hurdle his department must clear.

According to NewsChannel 10: “Richardson’s biggest concern is making sure the public realizes the department is not trying to militarize law enforcement.”

“This is a vehicle not intended for aggression, this is a vehicle that is intended to make our community safer and to save lives,” said the sheriff.

Interesting, don’t you think?

The police in Ferguson, Mo., deployed some pretty heavy equipment when citizens there rioted after a young black man was shot to death by a white police officer. Critics then called Ferguson’s response a bit overheated.

Indeed, little ol’ Randall County’s crime issues seem tepid compared to what the cops in Ferguson faced.

If the armored car is intended to “make our community safer,” as Sheriff Richardson insists, then he’d be wise to keep it under wraps until all hell breaks loose. I’ve lived here slightly more than 20 years and have yet to see anything close to that happening.

 

local news, political news

Chaos will reign supreme in 2016 election, if …

Randall County is going to need a serious reworking of how it conducts its elections in 2016, based on what I witnessed all day today in this mid-term, supposedly “low-turnout” election.

The county established “voting centers,” which effectively eliminated many traditional polling places around the county.

One of those centers happened to be at the County Courthouse Annex on Georgia and the Canyon E-Way in south Amarillo. I worked all day there conducting exit polling for a public opinion research company.

I witnessed considerable chaos, some chagrin from disheartened voters and some angst among county election officials seeking to manage the mayhem.

The voting center system allows voters who live anywhere in the county to vote at whatever polling site they wish. It turned out today that nearly 2,000 of them decided to vote at the courthouse annex. It started off fast when the polls opened at 7 a.m., slacked off just a bit right after noon, then it got seriously busy and crowded from about 2 p.m. until the polls closed at 7.

I was camped just outside the west entrance and I watched voter after voter walk in, look at the crowd, then walk out proclaiming they’re “coming back later,” or “I’ll go vote somewhere else. I ain’t waiting in that line to vote.”

It was an impressive display of voter interest in an election that pundits said would produce a tepid turnout. I don’t know what the final numbers are just yet and I don’t think they’ll really rival presidential election-year vote totals. The pandemonium at the annex, though, needs to be examined.

We’ll be electing a new president in 2016. The turnout for those elections always is greater than these mid-term elections.

What’s the county to do? Elections officials told me tonight they’re going to need to reconfigure the ballot box setup, the course of the lines that will be sure to form and look for better ways to manage the crowd packed into the area in front of the tax office.

Good luck with all of it.

 

local news, political news, State news

Panhandle no longer forsaken?

It’s been said over the years — often by yours truly — that Democrats have given up on the Texas Panhandle while Republicans have taken us for granted.

The major candidates from both parties don’t come here often to campaign for office, to court voters or tell us how important we are to their electoral chances.

Well, this week two major candidates for lieutenant governor are venturing into the Panhandle to do all of that.

http://amarillo.com/news/local-news/2014-10-27/van-de-putte-stumps-Amarillo

It’s the Democrat’s visit that I find most intriguing.

State Sen. Leticia Van de Putte staged an Amarillo rally understanding full well that she’s venturing into the belly of the beast, so to speak. She is planning a last-minute statewide blitz that includes Amarillo and Lubbock, the twin “capitals” of the most Republican region of a most Republican state.

Will this visit put her over the top? Don’t bet on it. Her Republican foe, and the presumptive favorite, state Sen. Dan Patrick is coming here as well. I’m still waiting to see if another state senator, Republican Kel Seliger of Amarillo, plans to throw his arm around Patrick’s back on a star-spangled podium. Patrick’s visit is more expected, given the voting strength he is expected to enjoy here.

Van de Putte? That’s another matter.

Honestly, it’s a bit gratifying that a leading Democrat would even bother to come here.

Yes, the pendulum swings both ways.

Back in the old days, when I first arrived in Texas, I landed in Beaumont, one of the last Democratic strongholds in Texas. Republican candidates for high office were as hard to find in Jefferson County as Democrats are in, say, Randall County.

This is all part of why I long for a day when Democrats can regain something akin to equal footing with Republicans statewide. It brings all regions of the state into play and attracts candidates of both major parties to all regions to do what they call a little “retail politicking.”

That is a good thing for the political process.

 

local news, political news

Sucking it up for an early vote

Grumble, grumble.

That’s me, griping about a task I have to perform this election season.

Duty calls and I’m going to be forced to vote early in this year’s Texas mid-term election.

A polling research company has hired me as an exit pollster on Election Day. I’ll be working at a Randall County precinct, giving confidential questionnaires to voters as they leave the polling place. It’s a 12-plus-hour gig that day and I’ll be unable to go to my regular polling place to cast my ballot.

Readers of this blog know how I feel about early voting. I detest it. No, I actually hate voting early. My fear is that voting early exposes voters to being surprised when their candidate gets caught doing something naughty, or illegal — or both — before Election Day. Yes, I know that an Election Day vote doesn’t prevent someone from misbehaving between that day and the day he or she takes office, but I want to hedge my bet as much as is humanly possible.

Texas secretaries of state have proclaimed the virtues of voting early. They want to make it easier for Texans to cast their ballots, even though the state now has a voter identification law that — some have said — will make it more difficult for some Texans to exercise their rights as citizens. But that’s another story.

The blunt truth about early voting, though, is that it doesn’t boost the total number of voters. Texas still ranks among the lowest-turnout states in the Union. All it does is enable more Texans to vote early rather than wait this year until Nov. 4.

So …

I’m going to suck it up and vote early. Just to be true to my belief in hedging my bet against something bad happening to the candidates of my choice, I’m going to wait until the very last day of early voting.

See? Pay attention, tea party Republican members of Congress: This proves you can compromise without sacrificing your principles.

local news

Courthouse building: opportunity or eyesore?

I ventured recently to Canyon, Texas to interview a West Texas A&M University professor on a project for Panhandle PBS.

And as I usually do when I venture to the Randall County seat, I drove briefly around the Courthouse Square.

There it was. The old 1909 Courthouse building. All dolled up. The yard was manicured. The clock tower was keeping time. The building was nice and shiny. The windows were clean.

Then I looked closely at the windows from my car and noticed the interior was dark. Still. Not a thing going on in there — that I could see.

I keep wondering: What is going to happen to that building?

Randall County vacated that structure years ago. Commissioners Court has moved across the street into what used to be the old county jail. Virtually the rest of the government structure has moved a few blocks east to the Justice Center, which once was home to a Wal-Mart.

County Judge Ernie Houdashell told me a few years ago he was trying to swing a deal. With whom, he didn’t say. He just would tell me that some folks are interested in moving into the building.

It’s also interesting that the Randall County website features the old courthouse structure on his home page.

http://www.randallcounty.org/

Houdashell is a wheeler and dealer par excellence. I wish him well in his search for a worthy tenant. I have a few guesses on who or what might move in there. The Canyon Economic Development Corp. comes to mind. So does Canyon City Hall. I once thought the Canyon Independent School District might be interested, then CISD built that new office complex at the north end of town.

It’s just a shame to see a building with a renovated exterior paid for with historical preservation grant funds and local tax money just sitting there. Empty. Waiting for someone to turn on the lights.

It’s too pretty a structure to remain vacant.

Uncategorized

Just wondering: Why the no-bill?

1 Comment

It’s a bit dicey for me to question a grand jury’s deliberation, given that no one other than the grand jurors are supposed to know what goes on when the doors are closed.

However, I’m wondering about that Randall County no-bill decision regarding the Amarillo Animal Control Department’s euthanizing of unwanted pets.

The grand jury decided against filing criminal charges against anyone involved in what’s become something of a scandal at the animal shelter.

Animals were being put down in violation of state law. They were given the lethal drugs while failing to be weighed so officials at the shelter would know much of the drug to administer. There were reports of animals suffering greatly during the euthanasia process.

The top two animal control officers, director Mike McGee and assistant director Shannon Barlow both “retired” recently from the city — which, of course, is laughable on its face. They’d been placed on administrative leave when the animal control troubles became known. They should have been fired.

District Attorney James Farren, whose office presented evidence to the grand jury, expressed surprise at the no-bill. He’s not alone in the surprise. The grand jury said it found no animal cruelty at the shelter? I don’t get that one.

If animals weren’t suffering needlessly, then why did the grand jury ever get this case in the first place?

It’s one thing to accept — even grudgingly — a grand jury’s decision. It’s quite another to believe in it.

Uncategorized

Grand jury no bills animal control

A Randall County grand jury has returned what could be seen as an unsatisfactory decision on Amarillo Animal Control’s controversial treatment of animals in its possession.

The grand jury decided against indicting anyone for criminal wrongdoing in what has been a major embarrassment for the city.

http://www.connectamarillo.com/news/story.aspx?id=1056604#.U5kLwFJOWt8

District Attorney James Farren expressed surprise at the no-bill decision.

I guess we have to live with the grand jury decision, given the system we have of investigating these kinds of activities.

The good news for the animals under the care of the city, however, is that (a) the two people at the top of the Animal Control Department chain of command are gone and (b) changes have been implemented to stop the kind of abuse inflicted on the unwanted pets.

Former director Mike McGee and assistant director Shannon Barlow both have “retired” from the city. They should have been canned after it was revealed that animals had been euthanized improperly. They were being administered the wrong drugs and there had been reports of considerable suffering by the animals during the process.

Changes were made almost immediately, while McGee and Barlow were put on “administrative leave,” which meant they were getting paid while being ordered off the job.

The city issued a press release that stated: “Operations at Animal Control move forward under the guidance of interim director Scott McDonald, as the search for a permanent animal control director takes place. The City continues to look at areas for improvement at the animal shelter with the goal of increasing adoptions and making the shelter a sanitary, comfortable place for animals. Improvements include operational changes and improvements to facilities, animal intake and care procedures, and employee training practices. An internal management review will be undertaken immediately to determine if there have been noncriminal violations of policies or procedures and to further assist in improving shelter operations.”

The city should proceed with that “internal management review.” Meantime, look long and hard for an administrator who will take better care of these animals. After all, a “shelter” by definition is a place where unwanted animals at least can be granted temporary sanctuary for the time they have left.

Uncategorized

Retirement in name only

Let’s call Mike McGee’s departure as head of the Amarillo Animal Control operation what it is: a “retirement” in name only.

McGee didn’t “retire” the way most of us understand the term. He was shoved out, asked to leave, perhaps told to hit the road.

By my way of seeing things, he should have gotten the boot when allegations erupted over mistreatment of animals that were being euthanized at the shelter.

City Manager Jarrett Atkinson put McGee and his chief deputy, Shannon Barlow, on “administrative leave,” meaning they were getting paid while letting someone else do their job — and while a Randall County grand jury investigated whether to indict anyone for criminal wrongdoing.

Well, McGee is gone. His “retirement,” announced Thursday, is effective today. Interesting, eh?

The fact that the city implemented serious changes in the euthanasia methods for unwanted animals carries the implication that the former way was wrong, if not illegal. Who was responsible for that? The guy in charge … McGee. Let’s throw Barlow into that category as well.

And when the guy in charge is running a publicly funded operation in a way that cries out for change, that suggests he isn’t doing his job. Isn’t that correct? Thus, he and his top assistant both should have been canned.

Now he’s “retired.” McGee’s troubles might not be over. The grand jury is supposed to decide perhaps by June 11 whether to indict anyone for crimes involving the Animal Control Department. McGee and Barlow appear to be the individuals on the hot seat.

This story appears to be far from over.

Uncategorized

Grand jury has much to ponder in animal abuse case

Randall County grand jurors have met this week.

They won’t meet again for another two weeks. They have a big case on their plate. It involves allegations of abuse of animals kept at the Amarillo Animal Control Shelter and whether they were euthanized properly.

Two senior animal control officials — director Mike McGee and deputy Shannon Barlow — are on “administrative leave.” The city has enacted changes in its euthanasia policy to correct what it acknowledges went wrong at the shelter. My own view is that McGee and Barlow already are deemed culpable in this matter and should be terminated.

Someone — maybe more — might be facing criminal charges if he grand jury decides to issue indictments.

I had thought there might be a decision this week. It won’t happen for at least another two weeks, given that the grand jury meets every other Wednesday.

That’s all right. The panel needs to consider lots of evidence. The district attorney’s office is presenting witnesses, documents and is trotting at least one prosecutor who will talk to the grand jury about the case.

I’m prepared to wait for as long as it takes for the grand jury to make its decision.

Having once served on a Randall County grand jury, I understand fully the stakes. Our grand jury didn’t get a case that has drawn this much attention, but we had our share of heartbreaking cases to ponder.

This one, though, has everyone watching.

Take your time, grand jurors, and be sure you get it done correctly.

Uncategorized

This constable earns his pay

DRIPPING SPRINGS, Texas — Those who know my views on things know that I have had a long-standing loathing of constable offices.

I consider them to be non-essential functions of law enforcement in counties where their duties could be performed by municipal police officers or county sheriff’s deputies. They cost counties — and the state — money that could be spent in other areas.

However …

While visiting my wife’s brother, I heard a story this morning that proves that in at least one Texas county, constables are able to perform an actual function that justifies their existence.

Here’s how the story goes.

My brother-in-law was visiting friends at a local diner recently in Dripping Springs, a tiny town just west of Austin. A constable burst into the place and told my brother-in-law that he needed a juror to sit in on a trial being held at a justice of the peace court in the county seat of San Marcos.

Michael’s friend said he was too busy, as he had to attend a funeral later that morning. The constable turned to Michael and said, in effect, “OK, pal, you’re it. Come with me.”

My brother-in-law accompanied the constable to the courtroom, took his seat on the six-person jury and listened to a trial involving a fellow who was being evicted from the house where he lived. It was a slam-dunk case for the county, my brother-in-law said, and the jury voted to toss the guy out of his house.

I heard the story and couldn’t stop laughing. The very idea of a uniformed law enforcement officer virtually ordering someone to serve on a jury is something I’ve never witnessed, or frankly, ever even heard of happening. It does, quite obviously, in some rural counties that employ constables.

My feelings about the office haven’t changed. I still believe the Texas Legislature needs to give counties the power to get rid of the office if they see fit. Randall County, where my wife and I live, has suffered through constable woes for longer than officials care to admit. They can’t get rid of the office, because the Legislature doesn’t give counties the power to act cleanly.

Hays County, at least, puts their constables to work. More power to them here, just not where I live.