Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Controls topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners press for tighter purchase controls after invoices, travel overruns and branded shirts raised concerns
Summary
During the Nov. 25 meeting, commissioners criticized after‑the‑fact purchases, travel spending that exhausted a sheriff department line item, and invoices for embroidered shirts bearing a non‑county logo. The court voted to hold checks pending approval and seek reimbursements where appropriate.
Commissioners at the Zapata County meeting on Nov. 25 pushed for stricter procurement controls and more timely oversight after several invoices and travel expenses raised questions about approvals and allowable uses.
The court approved routine invoices for Nov. 8–21, 2024, but several commissioners said many payments were being ratified after the fact rather than pre‑approved. One commissioner noted the sheriff’s office had exhausted its travel budget early in the fiscal year, saying that the incoming sheriff could start with no funds available for training or operations unless the court intervened.
The court discussed two invoices from Oct. 9, 2024, for sheriff‑office apparel: one for $1,163.40 (30 T‑shirts/polos plus embroidery) and a second for $230.86. Commissioners flagged that the embroidery on some shirts used a “Hope and Faith” logo that is not associated with county business and recommended seeking reimbursement of $230.86. The court also directed staff to review procurement procedures and PO requirements so purchases are performed with proper prior authorization.
To restrict further after‑the‑fact spending, the court instructed the county treasurer/auditor’s office to hold checks until the court approves them and asked for reimbursement requests when purchases appear to be outside county policy. Commissioners said training on purchase‑order procedures may be arranged for department staff.
What happens next: The court asked administrative staff to review procurement procedures, to hold checks pending approval and to pursue reimbursement where appropriate. The court did not reverse previously completed purchases at the Nov. 25 meeting but voted to tighten controls going forward.
