Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sheriff asks for more deputies; court discusses using SB 22 funds for equipment and partial costs
Summary
Hunt County sheriff's office requested new deputy positions; chief deputy said the original ask was seven positions and the sheriff reduced it to five. Commissioners discussed using SB 22 funds to cover equipment and vehicle costs (roughly $500,000 suggested) and considered phasing hires if full funding isn't available.
HUNT COUNTY, Texas — The Hunt County sheriff’s office told the commissioners court on July 18 it needs additional deputies to reduce long response times and to support jail operations, and the court discussed partially using Senate Bill 22 funds for equipment and vehicles tied to new positions.
Why it matters: County law enforcement staffing and jail population were described as the meeting’s most pressing public‑safety concerns. Hiring multiple deputies and equipping them would create a recurring personnel cost for the county and involve one‑time equipment outlays.
Buddy Oxford, chief deputy for Hunt County, said the sheriff initially requested seven new positions; the sheriff reduced that request to five. Oxford asked the court for guidance so the sheriff’s office could rework its proposed budget lines and identify savings if the court will consider fewer hires. “If you can give us not a commitment, but a suggestion that you’d consider, we could go back and look through our budget and cut down all the other excess money in the different line items that could help the budget,” Oxford said.
Court members and staff discussed using SB 22 funds to pay for equipment tied to new deputies — patrol vehicles, body armor and other gear — rather than using those funds for ongoing salary obligations. A county staffer suggested subtracting $500,000 from the sheriff’s requested total as a placeholder for SB 22‑funded equipment; county staff later explained that removing that amount would make the county share closer to the estimated recurring payroll cost for five deputies.
Several commissioners urged prioritizing at least five deputies if possible. Commissioners also discussed alternatives including phasing hires (for example, authorizing some positions on Oct. 1 and adding others in April) to save part‑year payroll costs while allowing the office to recruit and onboard personnel. The sheriff’s office cautioned that adopting positions does not mean they can be filled immediately: equipment delivery and vehicle ordering timelines mean new hires may not be fully operational right at the start of the fiscal year.
No binding commitment was made at the session. Commissioners provided the sheriff’s office with budget guidance — including the contingent $500,000 SB 22 figure — and asked staff to reflect those directions in the preliminary figures the court will review next week.
