Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners debate purchase‑order system rollout after hiring of purchasing assistant
Summary
Auditor Miss Moore briefed the court on a draft purchase‑order system and said a purchasing assistant has been hired per a district court order; several commissioners questioned whether staff were hired before formal court approval of the PO system and sought clarity on authority and next steps.
Newton County’s auditor’s office updated the Commissioners Court on March 11 about development of a purchase‑order/procurement system and the status of related hiring.
Miss Moore reported the office has drafted a county purchasing policy and procurement procedure, has consulted with county attorneys, and has hired an assistant purchasing person as directed by a district court order. “Our goal right now to go live is to be fully implemented and on stream the end of the second quarter of 2025,” Miss Moore said.
Several commissioners pushed back, asking why the assistant position was filled before the court had approved a formal purchase‑order policy. One commissioner said, “we put the wagon before the horse — you hired people before the court even accepted this,” expressing concern about process and timing. County staff responded that the hiring stemmed from a district court order directing positions to be included in the budget and that the final purchase‑order policy and procedure would be presented to commissioners for approval; the court retains final say on adopting the policy.
The update reviewed next steps: schedule a workshop with the county judge’s office, finalize departmental reporting structures with county attorney input, and return to the Commissioners Court with a line‑item request to approve creation and adoption of the PO system. No formal policy adoption occurred at this meeting.
Why it matters: Commissioners emphasized that adoption of procurement policies is a county‑level decision and wanted clearer process transparency before staff hires and implementation. Staff cited a district court directive as the basis for positions and a target implementation timeline for the PO system.
