Waller County hears hours of public comment on proposed Masonic cornerstone at courthouse

Dozens of residents filled the Waller County Commissioners Court on Wednesday, Aug. 20, to speak for and against placing a Masonic cornerstone at the new Waller County Courthouse.

Public comment drew roughly 20 speakers and more than an hour of remarks, with supporters describing Masonic lodges' local charitable work and historical ties and opponents saying a cornerstone could signal government endorsement of a private organization and raise questions about secrecy and influence.

Supporters from local lodges described charitable activities and historical connections. Carter Sharbro, identifying himself as a member of Pleasant Hill Lodge and other local lodges, said Masonry “promote[s] reading programs in grade school and reward honesty and integrity in high school,” and noted lodges’ scholarships and support for children. H.N. Chip Green Jr., representing the Grand Lodge of Texas, told the court that the leveling ceremony provided to the county “is not secret” and called the cornerstone ceremony “a public ceremony,” and said the stone’s inscription would read, in part, “leveled by the Grand Lodge of Texas.”

Opponents urged the court to decline the request. Jolene Reed said the organization “is like a religion with secret beliefs and activities” and argued that public institutions should not appear to honor private organizations. Philip Birkelbeck said he was not making accusations but warned of a perception problem: “if we put the cornerstone on a building that is central to our county government…we send a message that says that our county government is founded on this.” Father Xavier, a local Catholic priest, said he was not speaking for or against Masonry but stressed that the courthouse is a place for justice and for honoring God as the judge holds it.

Court members took public comment and discussed the issue but did not vote. County staff and Masonic representatives clarified ceremony details: Green said the stone is typically a replica for the public ceremony, the only inscription is the Grand Lodge wording and year, and the local lodges would not place their lodge names on the stone. Commissioners and the judge repeatedly emphasized that the item was listed as discussion only and that no action could be taken that day.

Judge Duham and several commissioners thanked speakers on both sides and said the item would return to the court agenda for a formal vote. At the close of discussion the judge said the court would place the item back on the agenda in two weeks to allow full consideration and a formal vote.

The public record shows a clear split in community views: many longtime Masons and affiliates emphasized local philanthropy and historical ties to county founders, while several residents and clergy said the cornerstone could appear to bind government institutions to a private group or to a belief system. Court staff noted there are procedural limits — the court treated the session as discussion only and deferred a decision to a later meeting.