Washington County approves moving JP Precinct 2 office to courthouse annex after contested discussion

Washington County Commissioners Court voted Dec. 16 to relocate the Justice of the Peace Precinct 2 office to the Washington County Courthouse Annex at 105 West Main Street in Brenham.

The motion to move the office was made, seconded and carried after an extended exchange in which the current JP and other staff raised concerns about public access, security and cost. An earlier procedural motion also authorized sending a 30-day notice of termination for the current leased office at 44260 Sausage Lane.

The clerk or a current JP (speaker 11) described several objections to the move: “Mister Zamora has been there approximately a month and a half. He has, unfortunately, no true idea what happens in our office simply because he has not been there,” the speaker said, adding concerns about housing cash and facilitating hearings in the current office. The speaker also said many Precinct 2 residents travel from Houston and might have trouble finding services if the office is moved.

The court discussed specific facility needs. The interim JP had requested at least a restroom in the new office; the presiding official noted that the requested space did not have a restroom and that the interim office holder had requested the move. The current JP estimated about $20,000 in upgrades might be needed for the annex office and asked who would pay those costs; commissioners said they had not seen formal upgrade requests and could not confirm funds were available.

A county official asked the judge and staff to be transparent about the timeline for seeking or approving a new office. Security concerns were raised by another attendee who requested additional security cameras on that end of the annex, saying there are currently none and that visitors often come looking for offices and must pass through other public counters first.

County staff and the sheriff described the annex layout and noted the proposed space would include a lockable clerk window and separate area for court operations, though it would not have bullet-resistant glass like other JP offices. After hearing the concerns and responses from staff, the court approved relocating the office and the motion carried.

The court did not specify a funding source for any proposed upgrades in the motion; commissioners said future budget or project paperwork would address implementation details and any security or remodel costs. The relocation and the 30-day notice are the most recent procedural steps; the county will follow internal steps to execute the move and address facility improvements as required.