Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jail Overcrowding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners raise jail capacity concerns during SB 496 discussion; 84 inmates reported 'paper ready'
Summary
During the special meeting, a commissioner reported 84 inmates (72 males, 12 females) as 'paper ready' for transfer to TDCJ and urged action; officials discussed transfer frequency and paperwork delays but did not obtain TDCJ confirmation.
A commissioner (identified in the transcript as S4) told Potter County Commissioners Court during the March 3 special meeting that, as of Feb. 27, there were 72 male and 12 female inmates—84 people—who were "paper ready" for transfer to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ). The speaker also said there were 33 male and 10 female parole-only holds.
"There is 72 males and 12 females. That is 84 people in our jail that are paper ready to go," the committee member said, framing the numbers as evidence of ongoing pressure on local jail capacity. The same speaker said he understood Sheriff Thomas had indicated TDCJ had been coming "every 10" days to pick up state inmates, a practice he said was not sufficient to reduce the local population.
Judge Matt Hand and other participants described the pen-pack process that moves a convicted felony to TDCJ custody: after conviction the district clerk prepares the penitentiary packet, the sheriff’s office completes forms and TDCJ confirms and schedules transfer. Judge Hand cautioned that the court’s proposed jurisdictional changes would cover agreed pretrial matters and preliminary proceedings and would not permit County Court at Law No. 2 to try felony trials, so jurisdictional change is not a direct remedy for all transfer delays.
Participants recommended follow-up: commissioners asked for a meeting or inquiry to understand how many inmates are actually transferred, what limits TDCJ imposes, and whether Potter County could arrange increased transfers (for example, additional van loads) to relieve local custody demands. No TDCJ representative was present to confirm transfer frequency in the meeting record.
