Petition remove county judge dismissed

Editor’s Note: After press time, at approximately 4 p.m. Monday, Jan. 24, 271st District Judge Brock Smith signed an order dismissing the petition filed against Jack County Judge Keith Umphress. A petition was filed by a resident of Jacksboro last week in the 271st District Court of Jack County to remove sitting Jack County Judge Keith Umphress. The petition, filed Wednesday, Jan. 19, alleges two separate counts of official misconduct by a government official.

As of Monday, Judge Umphress had not been served a citation by the district court.

Count one in the petition alleges that Judge Umphress engaged in official misconduct by alleging Rod Heltzel, the resident who filed the petition, threatened then Jack County Commissioner for Precinct 2 James Brock’s life.

In the petition, Heltzel claims the allegation was not true, and “appears to be designed to obfuscate the real circumstances of Brock’s resignation.”Brock resigned from his position as commissioner April 26, 2021, claiming that a threat had been made against him.“I received a threat on April 25, 2021 that I took as a direct threat of my life according to how I vote in the matter of the Windmills,” Brock wrote in his resignation letter.

In a statement made via Facebook April 27, 2021, Jack County Sheriff Tom Spurlock stated that Brock refused to give any information regarding the person who made the threat.“He said he would rather it would just be dropped to keep things from becoming a war. I have asked him to think about it and possibly reconsider that. However, without a Complainant, you can’t file charges,” the post stated.
Spurlock said last Friday that charges were never filed regarding the individual who threatened Brock, and that he was never given the name of the individual.

Count two in the petition alleges that Judge Umphress engaged in further misconduct by failing to allow the public testimony at commissioner’s court meetings.

According to the petition, “no meeting notice for the commissioner’s court for the last several months has notified the public of an opportunity for comment on any topic,” and the petitioner cites Texas Government Code, Sec. 551.007.

According to the 2022 Texas Open Meetings Handbook, an Attorney General opinion from 2020 examined section 551.007, regarding the right of the public to address the governmental body at an open meeting.

“Subsection 551.007(b) requires a governmental body to ‘allow each member of the public who desires to address the body regarding an item on the agenda . . . to address the body regarding the item at the meeting before or during the body’s consideration of the item.’ Attorney General Opinion KP-0300 considered a governmental body’s practice of holding one public comment period at the beginning of the open meeting versus holding separate public comment periods immediately before each agenda item,” the handbook states. “The opinion concluded that the plain language of subsection 551.007(b) gave a governmental body discretion to allow the public comment at either time, provided the comment opportunity occurred prior to the governmental body’s consideration of the agenda item. The opinion also considered a governmental body’s rule capping the total amount of time a speaker has to address all agenda items and concluded that such a rule is permissible only if it is reasonable.”

According to the county’s website, a public forum agenda item appeared at the top of each commissioner’s court agenda, with the June 14, 2021 meeting agenda the last to list the item. Minutes from county meetings held after June 14, 2021 did not reflect that members of the public had addressed the court, either at the beginning of the meeting or during agenda items.

Also contained within the petition is a signed declaration from Gary Oliver, Jack County Commissioner for Precinct 1, regarding a conversation he had with Judge Umphress in August last year.

In the declaration, Oliver states that after a meeting held in late August, he went to the judge’s office where Judge Umphress claimed he knew who had threatened Brock. Judge Umphress then claimed it was Rod Heltzel who made the threat, and also claimed to have watched surveillance footage from a local convenience store where the threat was made.

Oliver alleges that during the encounter, Judge Umphress claimed Brock had given him a sealed envelope containing the name of the person who had threatened him, with instructions to open the envelope if anything happened to him. Judge Umphress told Oliver the envelope was being kept in a safe.

In the declaration, Oliver wrote that on Nov. 13, he met with Heltzel and shared Judge Umphress’ accusation. Oliver said, in an interview last Friday, he waited to speak to Heltzel about the allegation because he wanted time to think about it.

“A lot of times, I kind of soak on some things. And(...) I really didn’t believe it when I first heard it,” Oliver said. “But I just didn’t feel the urgency to just go run, find Rod, and tell him. I wanted to think about it a little bit. And I didn’t tell anybody.”

According to Judge Umphress, the matter was referred to the 271st District Attorney, James Stainton, when it first occurred, and is currently being investigated by his office.

The judge also said no formal service of a citation has been attempted and he has had no recent contact from any investigators or 271st District Judge Brock Smith regarding the petition as of Monday morning.