Maverick County OKs Monotech Consulting to review county IT and telecom; one commissioner abstains

Maverick County Commissioners Court on Nov. 25 approved hiring Monotech Consulting to perform a countywide review of telephone, Internet and IT infrastructure and to represent the county in vendor negotiations.

At the meeting the consulting representative, identified in the record as Miss Cynthia / Miss Hesley, told commissioners she would perform a discovery process — reviewing bills and wiring, documenting current systems with Visio diagrams, vetting multiple vendors and negotiating contract terms — and would remain involved through implementation. She said prior municipal work produced cost savings, citing an example of about $140,000 saved over 36 months for a city that upgraded its services.

The court first considered an exemption for professional services and then a separate motion to engage Monotech as the county’s representative in purchasing Internet, telecommunications and related IT products. Commissioner Reese moved to proceed; Commissioner Rios seconded. During discussion, members pressed the consultant on costs. When asked whether the engagement would cost the county, the consultant initially stated there would be "no cost," then clarified, "I don't work for free, sir. The, the vendors actually end up depending on who you end up choosing, they pay me." Commissioner(s) raised questions about whether a payment arrangement in which the selected vendor pays the consultant could create conflicts or affect who is looking out for the county’s interests. The consultant said she brings multiple vendors, that fees are a set amount paid by any vendor the court ultimately selects, and that she provides the options and recommendations while the court makes the final decision.

The court recorded an abstention by Commissioner Morales on the hiring vote; the remainder voted in favor and the motion carried. No contract terms, fee schedule, or vendor-selection criteria were recorded on the public motion beyond the consultant's statement that vendor(s) would pay her set fee. The court directed staff to proceed with the exemption and engagement as presented.

The next procedural step recorded was to begin the discovery phase — county staff and the consultant would review existing bills and infrastructure to identify needs, options and estimated savings. The meeting agenda indicated that any contracts would require subsequent court approval and follow standard purchasing protocols and auditor/judge sign-offs before execution.