Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.

Haskell County commissioners approve voice-services change adding election board; routine payments also approved

Haskell County Commissioners · April 20, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board approved a change order to add the election board to a voice-services contract (about $95/month), authorized a $371 P-card payment and signed routine appropriations and transfers; votes were recorded by roll call.

Haskell County commissioners voted to approve a change order that adds the county election board to the VIP voice-services contract and will add roughly $95 per month to the county bill. The same meeting approved a $371 monthly P-card payment and signed routine transfers and appropriations.

The chair introduced the contract change, describing it as a modification to add the election board to the new voice-services contract and to include a monthly charge. A committee member said, "I meant from that, it looks like an extra $95 a month." Commissioners questioned whether any one-time installation fees would apply; one participant said they did not believe an installation fee was required. A motion to approve the change order was made and seconded; the transcript does not clearly identify who made the motion or who seconded it. The item passed on a roll-call vote with Clark McClary, Larry Watson and Billy Cloud each recorded as voting "Yes."

On the P-card payment, the chair confirmed the period total was $371. A motion to approve the P-card payment was made, seconded and approved by roll call with the same three members recorded as voting "Yes."

The board then reviewed transfer-of-appropriations paperwork, checks received and purchase orders to be paid. A motion to approve the appropriations item was moved and seconded and passed on a roll-call vote.

No statutes, ordinances or external approvals were cited during these votes. The transcript records the roll-call responses but does not identify the specific mover or seconder by name for the contract change or the other motions. The meeting continued with operational discussion about roads and fleet matters and then adjourned.