Citizen Portal

Get email alerts on the Reserve Officers topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Sheriffs, chiefs and TxDOT debate limits and standards for ‘construction cop’ assignments

Senate Committee on Criminal Justice · May 4, 2026

Summary

Sheriffs and police leaders told the Senate Criminal Justice Committee that lucrative off‑duty construction traffic jobs have spawned a parallel reserve‑officer market with inconsistent markings, unclear jurisdictional authority and safety risks; TxDOT and contractors said officer presence reduces dangerous work‑zone crashes and they are working on standard vehicle/uniform specs.

The committee’s second interim charge focused on reserve peace‑officer programs and off‑duty work in construction zones. Gregory Stevens, executive director of the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement, told senators reserves were intended to serve their appointing community and highlighted cases where reserve officers work many counties from their commissioning agency with little local oversight. “If on the side of the vehicle or on his uniform, it said Ed Couch police department, at least they would know that,” Stevens said to illustrate confusion when vehicles lack agency identification.

Sheriffs and chiefs described safety and staffing consequences. Brian Hawthorne, representing the Sheriffs Association, called the phenomenon a threat to the profession: “TxDOT is paying $85 to $150 an hour for these construction cops,” he said, and warned that powerful financial incentives are drawing deputies from full‑time posts. He urged tighter rules, clear uniforms and vehicle markings, and limits on where reserve officers may exercise traffic authority.

TxDOT officials and contractors countered that officer presence — when used selectively for high‑risk lane closures or complex traffic shifts — reduces speeds and saves lives. Duane Milligan, TxDOT’s construction director, said law enforcement assignments are a risk‑based tool, not routine on every project, and noted TxDOT is working with contractors and law‑enforcement partners to standardize markings, training and contract specifications.

The committee discussed possible solutions: require clear agency identification on vehicles and uniforms, expand MOUs or interlocal agreements to authorize adjacent‑county operations, require bonding or minimum service standards, and adjust TxDOT contract language to enforce uniform and marking requirements. No legislative votes were taken; the chair proposed a stakeholder working group to refine specifications and law changes for future sessions.

AI generated

The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.

AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.

Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.

Source