Reeves withdraws from JP#4 race & goes to court

03/08/10

Permalink 01:06:03 am, by bill Email , 1386 words,   English (US)
Categories: Observer Opinions, Politics, Law, Crime & Punishment, Elections, Ethics

Reeves withdraws from JP#4 race & goes to court

In a response to an email from The Collin County Observer, Doug Reeves informed me that on Friday, he withdrew for the race for Justice of the Peace, Precinct 4.

Mr. Reeves was responding to a request to comment on or rebut the issues raised in this investigative article.

####

Doug Reeves, whose surprising 2nd place finish in the Republican primary race put him in a run-off against the incumbent Mike Yarbrough, will soon have his day in court.

But Reeves will appear in Judge Raleeh's JP Court, not as a judge but to defend himself against a Class C misdemeanor charge of filing an incomplete campaign finance report.

CASE NO. 01-TR-10-01329, STATE of TEXAS vs.DOUGLAS REEVES has not been scheduled for trial as of the date of this article. Court records appear to indicate that a fine of $320 dollars is proposed.

The hapless Mr. Reed, who boasts on his website that he has been "Tea Approved" by the North Texas Tea Party, is also under investigation by the Texas Secretary of State for illegally notarizing his own signature on a campaign finance report.

Not the first time: My Brother's Helper, Inc.

This is not the first time Mr. Reeves has run afoul of state law and regulations.

Research by the Collin County Observer has turned up a disturbing record of failure to comply with the law.

On his campaign website, Reeves writes, "In 1988 I founded My Brother's Helper, Inc. For the past 22 years, I have assisted handicapped adults in their quest to obtain meaningful employment and become self-supporting. This small business, 501(c) (3) non-profit organization also provides for young people to perform community service and learn life lessons. In January, 2009 we began a program mentoring fatherless young men."

There is a website for My Brother's Helper, and it is actively soliciting donations. It asks that donations be sent to "101 West Buckingham Road, Ste. 144 Richardson, Texas 75081".

However the company at that address is not "My Brother's Helper", but "Lincoln American Security Officer/Concealed Handgun Academy".

The website for Lincoln American advises, "Call Doug to schedule a class", and that is is "designed and hosted by Doug Reeves @ Homestead."

A search at the Texas Department of Public Safety lists Doug Reeves at 101 West Buckingham Rd. as a licensed to operate a school for private investigators.

A search of incorporation records at the Texas Secretary of State shows that "My Brother's Helper" was incorporated as a non-profit on August 28, 1989, but that on August 3, 2007 Reeves was sent a "Notice of Forfeited Rights for non-filing of Periodic Report"

The State of Texas then "involuntarily dissolved" My Brother's Helper on December 5, 2007. Yet in an article about a pro-life rally in 2008, Mr. Reeves continued to represent that My Brother's Helper was an incorporated non-profit.

Further, on a web page titled "Ethics and Texas, Happy Halloween from My Brother's Helper", Reeves writes that:

"Approximately seven years ago Carol McKinney, a Texas Rehabilitation Commission Counselor, called me with some astonishing news. Paul Begales, the TRC regional Programs Director had visited the Plano field office. He met with the Vocational Rehabilitation Commission counselors. He told these VRCs that they could no longer take referrals from me and to cease doing business with my organization, My Brother's Helper Inc.

"I had been referring handicapped clients to TRC for years. They in turn would refer many of them back to me for various services that I provide. Some of the services I provide are, helping clients with a resume, and teach them job getting and job keeping skills. The main service I provide is teaching a security course and helping handicapped people get a job as a security officer."

Nevertheless, Reeves continues to state in his campaign materials that My Brother's Helper, Inc. is a non-profit corporation helping rehabilitate young men.

Withdraws from race: Reeves responds

The Observer contacted Mr. Reeves and asked him to refute or comment on any of the issues raised in this article. I received 3 seperate email responses from Mr. Reeves.

The first one was a terse, "I withdrew from the race on Friday."

His second response asked me to double check my facts, charging that I, "have drawn a wrong conclusion in some regards".

On the issue of the campaign finance reports, Reeves stated that:

"You and many others do not take into account the circumstances that I faced in this campaign. I am not a criminal or evil man. I have made stupid mistakes on paper work. Much of this campaign I have been depressed related to circumstances. My father passed away last year, a few months later an uncle who was like an older brother passed. We were close in age, fished and hung around together, and he was the big brothers that I never had. In the middle of the campaign my cousin passed away. You are probably aware of the grief process which can last one week or in some cases over one year. The first stage is shock---you expect them to walk through the door. You pick up the phone to call them; it does not seem real. Then anger sets in. I was at this stage at the very beginning of the campaign. People who knew me inquired into what was wrong with me. I wasn't myself. I was able to put a smile on my face when in public, but as soon as I left the public the smile left my face. The third stage--grief did not set in until the last 1 1/2 months into the campaign. Also my job went the way of the economy. My income dropped and I took on a part time job. I was the candidate, the campaign manager, and the campaign secretary. Almost every night I was up until one or two o'clock, and arose for my part time job at 4:45 in the morning. This eventually took its toll on my body--the grief--the lack of sleep---I developed stomach problems, my blood pressure went up. At 59 I am not the man I used to be. Yes, I made paper work mistakes, and have been beaten up pretty badly for them. I look forward to the day when everything is resolved."

On the issue of My Brother's Helper, Inc. accepting donations, Reeves wrote:

"Incidentally, My Brother's Helper, Inc. was run out of the office on Buckingham. I now operate it out of my home, and have done so for a long period of time. I operate another business out of the Buckingham address. I have asked the building owner to change the name on the door, but they have not. Some tenants have moved out of the building and the name on the door was not changed for up to two years. My Brother's Helper, Inc. does not accepted donations. When people inquire, I refer them to their church. The website needs to be updated, and I will get to it. I have not been on tha site in a long time."

He also issued a veiled threat, asking me if I had checked the statute of limitations, as someone might want to file a complaint against one of my 2006 campaign reports.

In his third response, Reeves again issued a veiled threat, but offered no specific defense or argument other than to say, "Some of your assessments earlier are definitely wrong. Some will amount to slander. I am under no legal obligation to correct before you go to print."

A few hours later, someone revised the donations page at My Brother's Helper, removing the suggested $10 donation and adding the line, "We will resume our non-profit status soon."

The Texas Election Code permits a run-off candidate to withdraw from the race, if he informs the County Chair of that party within 10 days of the primary. If Reeves does in fact officially withdraw, then Mike Yarbrough will be the nominee.

Since Yarbrough is unopposed in November, he is in effect, re-elected.

Bill

On March 8, I received the documents from the Texas Secretary of State's Office that are referenced in this article:

My Brother's Helper - Incorporation
My Brother's Helper - Incorporation Certificate
My Brother's Helper - 1st warning letter of periodic reports not filed
My Brother's Helper - 2nd warning letter of periodic reports not filed
My Brother's Helper - Notice of Involuntary Dissolution
North Shepherd Christian Center - Incorporation
North Shepherd Christian Center - Forfeiture of Incorporation

Comments, Pingbacks:

Comment from: COLLIN COUNTY ATTORNEY [Visitor] Email
Why is he still "tea approved" by those denizions of freedom? Do the attributes described above give rise to the honor they so bestowed upon him?
PermalinkPermalink 03/08/10 @ 07:17
Comment from: Davis Standard [Visitor] Email
Mike O., where are you on this one? Is this the kind of work your group endorses? Glad to see your group tucking tail and heading out of Plano.
PermalinkPermalink 03/08/10 @ 10:22
Comment from: MikeO [Visitor] Email · http://northtexasteaparty.org/
At the office at the moment, making a living and no time for a lengthy response at the moment. But I would suggest you reread the title of this article and contemplate of why and how that came about. It certainly wasn't in consultation with Bill here.

Now, how about you all getting some of those judicial people who have various conflicts that Bill is so fond of pointing out to withdraw?

Despite this all, Doug remains a friend and I will ALWAYS honor him for his extensive work for others.
PermalinkPermalink 03/08/10 @ 11:23
Comment from: MikeO [Visitor] Email · http://northtexasteaparty.org/
One other note: the North Texas Tea Party isn't going anywhere. Sorry to disappoint the local establishment and Bill.
PermalinkPermalink 03/08/10 @ 11:25
Comment from: Constitutionalist Jim [Visitor] Email
BORING!

If he withdrew, then who cares? There are plenty of politicians in office now that need to be removed for far worse grievances. Let's focus on those.
PermalinkPermalink 03/08/10 @ 11:38
Comment from: Collin County Citizen [Visitor] Email
I really don't think Doug is an evil man. I don't agree with many of his politics, and I know he messed on on this paperwork, but I think he's just a guy who wants to be involved, and we can't fault him for that.

Yarbrough gets a pass on this one, and he doesn't deserve it. But, Reeves doesn't deserve this office either.

I wish Adley had fared better.


The Observer comments:

Evil? Who said anything about evil?

I've heard Reeves has helped a lot of kids with his charities. I have no reason to doubt that, and I honor him for it.

That doesn't change the fact that the man wanted your vote to be elected as a judge. I assume that you, like I, expect our judges to understand and respect the law.

The purpose of my research into Mr. Reeves was to put forth information to allow the voters to judge for themselves if Doug Reeves did understand and follow the law.


Bill

PermalinkPermalink 03/08/10 @ 15:04
Comment from: COLLIN COUNTY ATTORNEY [Visitor] Email
But Reeves is still "tea approved." Does that remain even though he doesn't demonstrate T-ish behavior?
PermalinkPermalink 03/08/10 @ 18:07
Comment from: Collin County Citizen [Visitor] Email
We agree, Bill. My point was more directed to previous commentators who seemed to be preparing for a "hang em'" rally.

Doug doesn't need to be a judge. We're on the same page, friend.

But, I don't think Yarbrough needs to be one either.
PermalinkPermalink 03/08/10 @ 18:25
Comment from: Concerned on 121 [Visitor] Email
Personally, these revelations should have come to light before the election, but that is hindsight. Because Reeves dropped out the day after the election Yarbrough gets to be JP again for 4 more years. Really do you think he could have beaten Adley in a two person race. I believe it was time for Yarbrough to go but Reeves in his haste messed up the whole race. The fair thing to do is have the runoff with Yarbrough vs Adley. But the right thing to do won't happen. Mr. Reeves may have done some good but this time he really messed things up for more than just himself. He cheated the voters!!!
PermalinkPermalink 03/08/10 @ 22:51
Comment from: Mike O [Visitor] Email · http://datatroll.wordpress.com
If you read the explanation of 'TeaApproved', you'll see it applies to candidates for office, not non-candidates. Simple


The Observer shakes his head:

"Simple" and nonsensical.

Good Lord, man. Say it out loud. The Tea Party is supposed to be different than the political norm. You're supposed to be the voice of the disenchanted citizenry, so "tell it like it is".

say it....

"We are new at this, and we didn't do our homework on a minor candidate. We screwed up."

Otherwise you just convinced me that you're nothing but a glee club for the same old, repudiated, right-wing, big-business Republicans, spouting the same old political mumbo jumbo excuses the power brokers have spouted for years.

Bill
PermalinkPermalink 03/08/10 @ 23:35
Comment from: COLLIN COUNTY ATTORNEY [Visitor] Email
Reeves is still listed as "tea approved." And when the notary allegations came to light nothing changed. At the link - box on the right of the page shows him as a "tea approved" candidate. Period. You need a vetting process before you endorse these folks.

http://northtexasteaparty.org/
PermalinkPermalink 03/09/10 @ 06:33
Comment from: Constitutionalist Jim [Visitor] Email
For those of you challenging the North Texas Tea Party's process, I suggest you attend their meetings and get involved instead of blogging about it.
PermalinkPermalink 03/09/10 @ 07:38
Comment from: Mike O [Visitor] Email · http://datatroll.wordpress.com
We had not yet updated the web page to remove all who were no longer candidates; we've been busy.

And, Bill's hysterics here on the stuff before the election is so similar to that he posted about people like Keith Self. However, the Campaign expense report foulups fell in a different category and we addressed them, privately, to a point of resolution now.

One candidate out of all TeaApproved ones makes mistakes after well after the vetting process was done and the issue addressed. I know the Bill's wielding the establishment's big brush here, but this one won't stick and your efforts will only increase our attendence at the next meeting.

Now when will the groups who endorsed the various judges you believe are having conflicts and the like address their candidate's issues?


The Observer noticed:

...what the North Texas Tea Party's web site says about "Tea Approved", "This does not imply we are going to endorse candidates. The Tea Approval stamp is something different, more of a due-diligence process."

It would seem more like a "back room deal", as you say, best handled "privately".

I see in every one of your replies nothing but spin. Blame someone else, attack your questioner, quibble over definitions -- spin.

The Tea Party is acting like the same old political machine, using the same old smoke filled rooms. The same old spin machines.

Astro Turf.

Bill



PermalinkPermalink 03/09/10 @ 07:57
Comment from: No Incumbents 2010 [Visitor]
Why was Reeves "Tea Approved" instead of Adley? Does actually being qualified mean you can't be TeaApproved? It is very suspicious when a candidate holds himself out as being fully qualified and ready to serve, then just drops out. The voters were cheated by the North Texas Tea party and by Mr. Reeves. Why is Wayne Richard still listed as TeaApproved? Who is minding the store at North Texas Tea Party?
PermalinkPermalink 03/09/10 @ 08:55
Comment from: Concerned Citizen [Visitor] Email
This brings to light to wonder what kind of vetting process the N. Tx Tea Party did on Mr. Reeves or any of the other candidates they "tea approved". Seems like the good ole friend thing again. They did not vet the other judicial candidates but did in JP4 - perhaps because because Mr. Reeves was/still active in the tea party? So much for being an independent voice of the people.
PermalinkPermalink 03/09/10 @ 09:20
Comment from: MikeO [Visitor] Email · http://northtexasteaparty.org/
Doug Reeves has a long and consistent record of working for conservative causes and is an unquestioned believer in the Tea Party's 5 principles. Talk to any local conservative office holder and they'll tell you what a warhorse Doug has been for a long time. He's earned his strips at the grassroots, not bought them in the social circles. Not 'good old boyism'; earned credentials on top of a solid personal political philosophy.

Kelly was vetted, and while several of us thought he had potential, he didn't come across as having any of the philosophical underpinnings we would expect in a candidate. I actually look forward to seeing Kelly gaining those philosophical roots and returning to the field as a candidate.


The Observer comments:

Thank you for finally offering a responsive answer.

Your explanation points out the weakness of one-dimensional litmus tests like the Tea Party's 5 Principles.

You see, Mr. Reeves wasn't running for the office of "Mr. Conservative". He was running for judge.

His problem wasn't just one poorly completed campaign finance report.

And his actions and history show that he is either incapable of or indifferent to following the law. He is simply a poor choice to enforce laws he himself would not obey.

His "Tea Approved" status thus becomes misleading. It weakens your message, and by covering for him, you do a disservice to those voters who share your philosophy and look to the Tea Party for fair guidance.

Bill

PermalinkPermalink 03/09/10 @ 10:05
Comment from: Concerned on 121 [Visitor] Email
I am all for the Tea Party Movement and what it stands for. However, they did not even contact Adley for vetting until the week before the election. That is way to late and rushed to make a good vetted decision about a candidate. If they would have taken the time to properly vet the candidates they would have found that Mr. Adley has the conservative and family values held by conservative America and has a level of integrity that Reeves can only dream of.
Ladies and Gentlemen, the Republican party must, in the immortal words of Benjamin Franklin, "stand together or most surely hang seperately."
If there is anything we can learn from this is to properly vet the candidates. Judge Yarbrough needs to be replaced. In four years, lets stand together and see that this accomplished.
PermalinkPermalink 03/09/10 @ 15:10
Comment from: Davis Standard [Visitor] Email
Mike, I am getting very confused here. Tea Approved does not mean endorsed by the Tea Party? Is there a different term for being endorsed? How does the public know when someone is Tea Approved and endorsed by the Tea Party or just one or the other? I think I actually agree with the media on this one, you're a confusing group...
PermalinkPermalink 03/09/10 @ 15:48
Comment from: COLLIN COUNTY ATTORNEY [Visitor] Email
How can the Tea Party save the Republican party? I thought they weren't partisan??? I remember their "non-partisan" treatment of Raphael de la Garza.
PermalinkPermalink 03/09/10 @ 15:49
Comment from: Thom Baird [Member] Email
Why does the Tea Party not have the courage to call themselves what they really are, Libertarians? Wayne Richard campaigned against the franchise tax which goes a long way toward supporting our schools. I guess he wanted you school taxes to go back up 35%. Van Taylor moves from city to city trying to find somewhere from which he can be elected to just about anything just to satisfy his ego.

Kathy Ward was Tea Party approved and thankfully she got defeated by someone who has some common sense and can probably lead the court since Self is a joke.

The Tea Party cannot save the Republican Party, they cannot save themselves and the Republican Party doesn't need saving by them.
PermalinkPermalink 03/10/10 @ 10:15
Comment from: Concerned Citizen [Visitor] Email
The information coming out shows that Mr. Reeves is not fit to be a judge of anything. His issues seem to be not just current. What kind of "vetting process" did the north texas tea party do? Not just Mr. Reeves, but look at the information that has been sited about Mr. Richard. Did they really do anything or just take someone's word that they are "conservative". Frankly, unless someone has a voting history and / or involvement how can anyone say they are conservative. Does the word conservative mean anything anymore?
PermalinkPermalink 03/10/10 @ 10:19
Comment from: Concerned on 121 [Visitor] Email
Everyone keeps talking about the Tea Party here and its deserved. However, thanks to Reeves' mistakes, Precinct 4 is saddled with a Justice of the Peace that doesn't work a 40 hour week. He refuses to help the schools with truancy while allowing one of the JP3 judges come over once a week to hear a few truancy cases. All he cares about is how much money he can collect in tollway and traffic fines. His docket for civil cases is now backlogged for a least 8 months. Where is the justice in that? Ugh...I am very frustrated at the fact Mr.Reeves wasted the people's time and ruined a really good chance at getting someone in office that understands that the Justice of Peace works for the people.
PermalinkPermalink 03/10/10 @ 22:22
Comment from: Plano Resident [Visitor] Email
Mike O,

Based on the filing at http://204.65.203.5/public/439803.pdf it appears that your organization had already chosen its slate of candidates. How long after this January 14, 2010 filing did you wait to send out your questionnaires to other potential candidates? Based on this, it seems that you were simply going through the motions in inviting other candidates to participate in your vetting process. This appears to be very much like back-room dealing. And all zeroes on that filing? I find it hard to believe that you had not spent or received any money prior to that. Nice web site you have, by the way.

While I was on the web, I looked for your group’s other recent PAC filings, but I could not find them online at the Ethics Commission’s web site. Maybe I am missing them, and if so, please direct me to them. I found the lack of filings odd given that yellow hand-out the North Texas Tea Party volunteers handed me and anyone else near me when I went to vote during the earliest days of early voting. It had your organization’s name all over it, and it specifically endorsed candidates and quoted them. I find it hard to believe that if this were being done by “rogue members” your organization would not have known about this, since many of my acquaintances received copies of that same document at different polling places.

Per http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/schedule/s10gspac.pdf “A political committee must file pre-election reports if the committee accepts contributions or makes expenditures and had activity in connection with the election.” Unless I am missing something, it appears that your organization may have missed more than one filing.

If that is the case, maybe your organization should not have reprimanded Mr. Reeves for making the filing mistakes he did. Personal responsibility is one of your pillars, right?
PermalinkPermalink 03/11/10 @ 19:26
Comment from: Anonymous [Visitor] Email
More simple explanation; how about a lot of really unhappy people who cannot fix things on the national level? Taking it out on the "little guys" is their only recourse. The shouting across poll locations to others who imcumbents are and "vote the bastards out"; WHAT is wrong with you people? Focus your angst at helping people in other states; Republicans [or Democrats] who can stop the impending trainwreck. As for the topic at hand--he's probably the nicest man in the world. Unfortunately incapable of dotting i's and crossing t's. I like it went Collin County manages to keep itself out of court. Call me "simple".
PermalinkPermalink 03/11/10 @ 20:24
Comment from: Plano Resident [Visitor] Email
Mike O (or any other North Texas Tea Party Official),

I guess you were out for a while on spring break and have not had a chance to catch up on your web activities. I just noticed that you made a post a couple of days ago on the Tea Party site, so perhaps you'll have a chance to respond to me here. My original post from 3/11/2010 is attached below.

During the interim, I also noticed that those yellow Tea Party hand-outs did not have the disclosures detailed in http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/pamphlet/G08polad.htm Thoughts on that?


************************************
(From 3/11/10)

Based on the filing at http://204.65.203.5/public/439803.pdf it appears that your organization had already chosen its slate of candidates. How long after this January 14, 2010 filing did you wait to send out your questionnaires to other potential candidates? Based on this, it seems that you were simply going through the motions in inviting other candidates to participate in your vetting process. This appears to be very much like back-room dealing. And all zeroes on that filing? I find it hard to believe that you had not spent or received any money prior to that. Nice web site you have, by the way.

While I was on the web, I looked for your group’s other recent PAC filings, but I could not find them online at the Ethics Commission’s web site. Maybe I am missing them, and if so, please direct me to them. I found the lack of filings odd given that yellow hand-out the North Texas Tea Party volunteers handed me and anyone else near me when I went to vote during the earliest days of early voting. It had your organization’s name all over it, and it specifically endorsed candidates and quoted them. I find it hard to believe that if this were being done by “rogue members” your organization would not have known about this, since many of my acquaintances received copies of that same document at different polling places.

Per http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/schedule/s10gspac.pdf “A political committee must file pre-election reports if the committee accepts contributions or makes expenditures and had activity in connection with the election.” Unless I am missing something, it appears that your organization may have missed more than one filing.

If that is the case, maybe your organization should not have reprimanded Mr. Reeves for making the filing mistakes he did. Personal responsibility is one of your pillars, right?
PermalinkPermalink 03/24/10 @ 12:11
Comment from: Mike O [Visitor] Email · http://datatroll.wordpress.com/
IF a group had been responsible for the fliers: May I quote?

" the full name of one of the following: (a) the person who paid for the political advertising"

And there is this exemption:

"circulars or fliers that cost in the aggregate less than $500 to publish and distribute;"

Check the bottom of the fliers again; the NTTP as an organization paid not one nickel for them; those that chose- on their own volition and under no direction from the group proper- to produce a flier from the posted declarations. There are several different versions of these; some printed for specific regions, some marking personal choices in multi- 'TeaApproved' races, some printed on blue paper with even less info. I know this is radical, but it used to be called 'grassroots citizen campaigning' (first time I did some of this was 1962, at the age of 8, from the families hand-cranked mimeograph machine; we beat Urban Renewal with that thing).

I have been ready for this for even before the election. My video response, recorded a month ago when the whining was at it's loudest, can be found at the link above.

Call me a 'rogue' if you want; I kind of like the title and it gives me more flair than the title 'fat, old man with a printer'. :)
PermalinkPermalink 03/24/10 @ 23:27

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email and url)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))
This is a captcha-picture. It is used to prevent mass-access by robots.

Please enter the characters from the image above. (case insensitive)

The Collin County Observer

You can observe a lot by just watching.
Yogi Berra

It is my hope that this forum will serve as an acute observer of Collin County government, leading to the return of the county to those it is supposed to serve.

I will post my opinions, fair analysis, news clippings that are relevant to local issues, and your comments.

To post your comment, you may register, or you may post anonymously. Comments will be reviewed before being placed online.

Comments that I consider inappropriate will be deleted, and the commentator warned. All I ask is that discussions remain civil and courteous. The standard for comments here is "common courtesy".

Subscribers will receive an email whenever a new blog entry is posted.

Bill Baumbach

Find more discussion of CCO topics on The Collin County Observer Facebook Group.

Add to Technorati Favorites

TESTIMONIALS

"Love you to death Bill, but you're like a hemmoroid that keeps swelling and won't go away."
Rick Neudorff, past Chair Collin County GOP

"Your premise is wrong, as it often is."
John R. Roach, Collin County District Attorney



July 2010
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 << <   > >>
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Search

Files and Links

2006 Bill's Campaign for County Commissioner

County Government

Voting Rights & Education

Indigent Legal Defense

Indigent Healthcare

Texas Legislature

Texas Blogs

Commissioners Blogs

Mobility

2007 Bond Election

2008 Budget

Collin County Discussion Boards

Courts & Judiciary

Collin County Info & Stuff

Community Life, Art & Assistance

News Media

Financial Transparency

2009 Budget

Families & Children

Demographics

2010 Budget

Public Meeting Broadcasts & Videos

2010 Election

2010 Finance Reports

XML Feeds

What is RSS?

Who's Online?

  • Guest Users: 20

powered by b2evolution free blog software