Long meetings, drawn-out debates: Harris County claims to be more transparent. But is it?

Zach Zavoral rushed out the front doors of the downtown Harris County Administration Building.

The 37-year-old softball coach came to Commissioners Court on a mission: save his team’s practice grounds near Tomball from being turned into baseball fields.

The meeting began at 10 a.m. After nearly two hours of commemorative resolutions honoring various organizations and employees, the court finally reached the public comment portion of the meeting. It was time for Zavoral’s moment in the spotlight.

While court members tout their increased public debate as being more transparent, Kirkland, the public policy professor at the University of Virginia, said government transparency and functionality should be viewed through separate lenses.

Many people tend to think that more transparency equals a better functioning organization, but according to Kirkland’s research, that is a false equivalency.

While people tend to enjoy transparency in government with the ability to speak to their representatives at public meetings, it has little impact on how a government body functions, he said.

In Harris County, Kirkland said, officials could improve government functionality by adhering to a well-written rulebook.

‘Guardrails’ needed

At that same meeting last February the court also attempted to create policies that would follow Kirkland’s advice.

Briones suggested a policy similar to one at the Texas Legislature, where agenda items can be discussed for up to 10 minutes. Two extensions could be granted by a majority vote, but to discuss an item for more than 30 minutes, a supermajority vote would be needed.

Though that rule exists, the court rarely has used it.

Aiyer said he keeps tracks of time — along with Hidalgo — but says enforcing the 10-minute rule often depends on what officials are discussing.

“It sounds to me like this thing is run not well,” Kirkland said. “It’s run not well because it’s not what we would call a very institutionalized organization. The rules aren’t fixed and set and clear to everybody.”

According to its rules of procedure , Harris County Commissioners Court is supposed to meet publicly at least twice a month.

Sometimes, due to scheduling conflicts, that does not happen. Missing meetings, however, only compound the number of agenda items the court must work through.

At the court’s lone meeting in March there were 683 agenda items. The meeting lasted 7 hours and 29 minutes.

Its most recent meeting on April 23 also was the only session that month. That agenda had 499 items – 184 fewer than the previous meeting. The meeting still lasted 7 hours and 50 minutes.

Cuillier said court members “need guardrails” and, most importantly, need to follow them. He questioned whether holding an hours-long meeting is in the best interest of Harris County residents.

“That’s just a disservice to the public and to the people who are relying on these decisions,” he said. “Plus, it just looks unprofessional. It’s like, wow, if these folks can’t run an efficient meeting, how are they going to run an efficient government?”

Long agendas, little background

Commissioners Court regularly has more than 400 items on its agenda, varying in magnitude from sweeping propositions about updating the Harris County jail and allocating federal funding to approving mundane budget line items, sometimes amounting to as little as $10.

Not all agenda items are discussed individually. Most are passed by a single sweeping vote on what is known as the consent agenda.

Commissioners Court members can add or remove items from the consent agenda as they see fit.

Additionally, supplemental materials that could provide context and background on individual agenda items — including contracts, internal memos or the scope of a project — often are excluded. The background materials that are included rarely say more than what is on the agenda.

To Pelissero, the government ethics expert, that lack of clarity can make it difficult for constituents to actively participate.

A review of the country’s four most populous counties — Los Angeles, Cook , Harris and Maricopa — offers a glimpse into alternative meeting structures that Harris County could employ to increase efficiency and accessibility.

In Los Angeles County , for instance, Board of Supervisors meetings are held every Tuesday morning. A review of their agendas so far in 2024 shows that they usually have anywhere from about 100 to 300 agenda items per meeting.

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors breaks out various tasks into different meetings held over multiple days.

In Los Angeles, public speakers are not required to sign up in advance and constituents are able to listen or give comments via phone or in person.

When Zavoral had to dash out to feed his expiring parking meter, he thankfully ran into county staffers outside the courtroom who offered to hold his spot in line.

When he returned, Zavoral, along with a group of concerned parents from his team, all spoke before the court.

Court members, Zavoral said, seemed attentive and genuinely interested in helping. They heard his concerns, he said, and ultimately decided to save his team’s softball fields.

He left the meeting feeling grateful, not only to the commissioners, but to his flexible work schedule.

“That was half my day,” he said. “Imagine if I had to stay there for longer.”

After the Houston Landing asked questions about Commissioners Court’s meeting structure, the members attempted to address some of the inefficiencies at their most recent meeting on April 23.

As court neared its eighth hour, Ramsey suggested changes that included limiting each commissioner to only two ceremonial resolutions per meeting and requiring public speakers be heard before a lunch break. The commissioners voted unanimously in favor after a brief discussion.

“7:55 (p.m.) may not be the best time,” Ramsey said of the attempt to address meeting length. “And I’ll just stop there.”