County Candidates Appear at Graham GOP Forum
The Young County Republican Party hosted a candidate forum Jan. 20 in Graham, bringing together the three candidates seeking the office of Young County Judge for a question-and-answer session focused on growth, transparency, and the county’s future as large industrial projects target the area. No Democrats were running for the position.
Incumbent County Judge Win Graham, former County Judge John C. Bullock, and retired U.S. Air Force Col. Don Sexton each responded to the same three questions provided in advance: their qualifications and experience; how they would ensure transparency in the Commissioners Court; and how the county should secure the best possible deal for residents as a large data center project moves forward.
The tone of the evening reflected unease among many residents about the pace and scale of development in Young County, which has drawn interest from solar farms, wind projects, and data centers because of its proximity to high-voltage transmission lines serving the Dallas–Fort Worth Metroplex.
Judge Bullock, who served five terms as county judge before retiring three years ago, emphasized his long experience with county government and argued that the current approach to major projects lacks early public involvement. He said large developments are often negotiated privately before being presented to the public, leaving citizens to react after key decisions are already made. Judge Bullock called for a pre-development process that brings projects into public discussion earlier, allowing impacts on infrastructure, water, roads, and nearby landowners to be addressed before agreements are finalized. He expressed concern that long-term risks from private developments could fall on taxpayers unless developers are required to bear those costs themselves.
Judge Graham pointed to his business background and his first term as county judge, highlighting grant funding, intergovernmental cooperation, and infrastructure planning. He described transparency as a core principle of his administration, noting that he publishes weekly public updates and regularly meets with city, hospital, and school leaders. Judge Graham argued that no major project is entirely good or bad and said each requires a cost-benefit analysis that considers countywide effects, not just the Commissioners Court. Regarding the data center, Judge Graham said such a project could shift a significant portion of the tax burden away from residents and onto the facility, potentially benefiting school districts and hospitals, while also allowing the county to negotiate concessions related to traffic, noise, emergency services, and water use.
Col. Sexton, a political newcomer who moved to Graham three years ago, framed his candidacy around leadership, budgeting experience, and what he described as a need for stronger oversight. Drawing on his military and business background, Col. Sexton said transparency requires more frequent and accessible public meetings, clearer communication, and independent audits of county finances. He was sharply critical of tax abatements, arguing that developers are already incentivized by low land prices and warning that large data centers could drive up electricity costs, strain water resources, and accelerate the loss of farmland. Col. Sexton said he opposes approving abatements without firm, enforceable guarantees that protect residents from higher taxes and utility rates.
Despite a wide range of challenges facing the County and the Cities of Graham and Olney in the coming years, the forum centered on the divide over tax abatements. Opponents of projects such as the Tapaderos Solar Farm argue that the county should not reduce taxes for incoming developments, while supporters contend that abatements give the county leverage to require setbacks, noise controls, infrastructure contributions, and support for emergency services.
The Jan. 20 meeting underscored that growth and development will be central issues in the race for county judge, with voters weighing promises of economic opportunity against concerns about transparency, long-term costs, and the preservation of Young County’s rural character.