Summary of PCCCM 06-30-26

Panola County Commissioner's Court Meeting

Opening Discussions and Public Sentiment

The meeting began with informal conversations among attendees expressing frustration over logistical and procedural issues. Many attendees noted the cold temperature in the courtroom and confusion about entry points, with some doors marked as employee access only. Attendees expressed disappointment at low turnout, attributing it to the early 9:00 a.m. meeting time, which conflicts with work schedules for those holding multiple jobs. One attendee emphasized that scheduling public forums in the evening would improve participation but acknowledged the county's reluctance to do so, suspecting it is intentional to limit public engagement.Tensions were high due to a lack of transparency and communication between city and county officials. A journalist, was denied entry with her camera despite signage allowing recording from at least five feet away from the bench. This sparked concerns about violations of the Texas Open Meetings Act and First Amendment rights.

Citizen Comments: Key Issues Raised

Robert Delconte addressed the court, raising two major concerns:

1.Emergency Service District (ESD) Conflict of Interest: Delconte reported that a fire chief from a Volunteer Fire Department has an alleged  conflict of interest with purchasing of fire trucks.

2.Trash Service Contract:

Delconte criticized the sudden termination notice of the interlocal agreement between Panola County and the City of Carthage for the solid waste transfer station. He noted that negotiations appeared to have been abandoned without public notice, leaving rural haulers in limbo. Delconte expressed frustration that his outreach to county officials, including County Judge, yielded no follow-up despite providing detailed suggestions.

Terry Terrell condemned the county's handling of the trash issue, calling it "abhorrent". He warned that shutting down trash services would put people out of work, reduce tax revenue, and harm the county's economy. He stressed that the county should prioritize citizen welfare over political convenience.

Cheryl Simmons defended the integrity of trash haulers like RPM, stating that their customer base is over 1,000 but not 2,000 as rumored. She emphasized that the haulers were not responsible for out-of-state dumping and criticized the lack of transparency from city and county officials. Simmons urged the commissioners to engage with their constituents directly and avoid emotional accusations, advocating instead for fair representation and open dialogue.

Jamie Baker, representing RPM (a family-owned business founded by his grandfather over 40 years ago), clarified that RPM serves just over 1,000 customers and has lost 50 due to the crisis. He highlighted that RPM supports five families and expressed frustration over the lack of advance notice—only learning on a Tuesday that dumping in Carthage would end the following day. This forced RPM to double its rates, using Center, Texas, a more expensive and distant facility costing $2,000 per week. Baker emphasized that RPM never hauled trash from outside the county and was unfairly blamed. His main concern was the lack of notification, which prevented proper planning.

Keith Coleman, GOP representative for Precinct 12, asked clarifying questions:

•The transfer station contract was owned by the city, not the county.

•The county learned about the impending cancellation in May, while the city had notice since January.

•Despite early awareness, the city took no corrective action until negotiations collapsed.His questions helped dispel rumors and confirmed that the county had limited control over the contract, though it was still responsible for managing the fallout.

Commissioner's Report

Commissioner Alexander explained that the county and city are conducting a 30- to 45-day survey to monitor incoming trash, distinguishing between residential and commercial waste. He acknowledged that tonnage data was previously inaccurate and emphasized that fixing the issue would take time. He denied that this was a quick fix and urged patience, noting that commercial haulers—defined legally as those profiting from hauling—are included in the monitoring. He admitted that the survey began only after commercial dumping had already been restricted, potentially skewing results.

County Judge’s Report

The county judge confirmed receipt of the City of Carthage’s notice of termination, effective 90 days from the last Monday, but stressed it was an intention, not a final decision. He emphasized ongoing negotiations and the county’s commitment to a "mutually beneficial long-term solution." He criticized the city’s rigid definition of "commercial" dumping, citing cases where a church and a worker in a white truck were denied access—actions he deemed unreasonable.He highlighted that Harrison County, with three times the population, spends less than half of what Panola County and Carthage spend on waste management, suggesting inefficiencies and potential mismanagement. He defended the county’s efforts, stating that rash decisions could lead to lawsuits, costing taxpayer money. He urged citizens to avoid social media misinformation and instead engage directly with officials.

Consent Agenda and Formal Actions

The court approved the following items unanimously:

•Payment of current county bills

•Payment of county payrolls

•Appointment of Holly Gibbs to calculate and publish the 2026 no new revenue tax rate and voter approval tax rate

•Approval of the 2026 holiday schedule, including a July 3rd holiday to commemorate America’s 250th anniversary, to be exchanged with Columbus Day

•Approval of a new roof for the 316 West Sabine Annex building

•Approval of a consignment contract with Machinery Auctioneers of Texas for surplus vehicles

•Acceptance of the notice of termination of the interlocal agreement with the City of Carthage

•Approval of 2026 budget amendment #7

•Approval of a rental contract for a Dynapac roller for Precinct One

Despite the frustration, attendees remained determined to hold officials accountable. They recognized that while the county cannot force the city to maintain the contract, it must negotiate in good faith and protect rural residents. The recurring theme was that transparency, communication, and adherence to open government laws are non-negotiable. Citizens vowed to continue documenting violations, filing complaints, and demanding that elected officials serve the public interest—not political convenience.The meeting concluded with a mix of anger, resolve, and cautious hope. While no immediate solutions were implemented, the pressure from informed and persistent citizens signaled a growing demand for accountability in Panola County governance.