[2. In recognition of the Nueces County Historical Commission for the 2023 Distinguished Service Award as presented by the Texas Historical Commission.]

EDDIE OPPOSED ? >> THE MOTION TABLES .

>> THE OASIS THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION FOR THE 2023 DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD IS PRESENTED BY THE TEXAS HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

. BULLET DOWN. I HOPE I DON'T WROTE IT .

>> CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> YES MA'AM .

>> WELL, I KNOW THAT SEVERAL YEARS IN A ROW WE HAVE RECEIVED THIS SPECIAL DESIGNATION. IT IS VERY SPECIAL WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE ENTIRE STATE OF TEXAS THAT WE WERE RECOGNIZED AND COMING BACK AFTER I DO WANT TO MENTION IT SO NOT GOING TO BUT IT'S HARD TO GET BACK UP AND RUNNING AGAIN. WE HAVE DONE SOME PRETTY SPECIAL THINGS IN THE AREA TRYING TO WORK IN PRESERVATION AREAS IN THE COUNTY. I HAVE A TEAM HERE WITH US TODAY AND I APPRECIATE ALL THAT THEY DO TO HELP MAKE THIS WORK AND GET DONE PRESERVING OUR HISTORY. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF ME? GO WE ALL APPRECIATE YOU AND EVERYTHING

YOU DO . >> WERE GOING TO DO A NEW DISPLAY IN THE BOTTOM FLOOR AND I THINK YOU'LL LIKE WHAT WE HAVE IS REMNANTS OF THE 1914 COURT HOUSE THAT WE HOPE TO PUT

THAT UP . >> I THINK WE HAVE A CERTIFICATE FOR YOU THAT WAS BROUGHT IN A LITTLE BIT LATE IF YOU WANT TO COME UP HERE DO A PHOTO WE'D BE HAPPY TO HAVE

YOU JOIN US . >> I JUST HAVE SOMETHING DAD.

WE APPRECIATE SO MUCH WHAT YOU DO. IT'S REALLY AMAZING . WE

[00:05:03]

COULDN'T DO WITHOUT YOU AND THE SMALL WILL ROLE WE PLAY IN IT PROVIDING MARKERS IS A SMALL ROLE TO DO ALL THE WORK AND WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR IT. PRESERVING HISTORY IS SO IMPORTANT AND SOME OF OUR HISTORY IS NOT SO GOOD AND YOU PRESERVE IT SO WE DON'T REPEAT THE BAD STUFF. I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU DO EVERYTHING YOU DO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I GO THANK YOU FOR

ALL YOU DO. >> I ALSO WANT TO SAY I APPRECIATE THAT YOU PRESERVE ALL THE BUILDINGS AND THEY HAVE A HISTORICAL PRESENCE LIKE THE HILLTOP. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I DON'T PICTURE TIME.

DID YOU HAVE THE TEAM COMING IN NOW ?

>> THEY ARE OUT THERE. AS MANY AS WE CAN GET. MY DOUGH THAT IS

GOOD . >> LET'S GET THEM IN BEFORE WE GET STARTED.

YOU CAN ALL GO ON ONE SIDE. YOU CAN GO OVER WITH THEM IF YOU WANT TO. WHENEVER YOU WANT TO DO. NOT EVERYBODY IS HERE

TODAY. >> THIS IS WHO WE COULD GET TODAY.

[1. Recognizing the London Pirates Baseball Team. ]

IN THE SUMMER TO GET THIS MANY HERE IS A PRETTY GOOD DEAL .

>> YES. WE DID THE BEST WE COULD TO GET AS MANY AS WE

COULD . >> RECOGNIZING THE LONDON PIRATES BASEBALL TEAM THERE IS A RESOLUTION .

>> WHERE IS THE BASEBALL TEAM LED BY COED COACHES AND ASSISTANT COACHES TEAM MANAGERS AND STUDENT TRAINERS WHEREAS THE BASEBALL TEAM CONSISTS OF LOCAL PLAYERS WHERE IS THE BASEBALL TEAM FINISHED THE SEASON WITH A 39-4 OVERALL RECORD WITH AN APPEARANCE IN THE SEMI FINALS.

THIS IS THE FOURTH STRAIGHT YEAR TO THE TOURNAMENT. BE IT RESOLVED AS THE COMMISSIONER 'S COURT DOES RECOGNIZE THE BASEBALL TEAM ON THE 2024 STATES IN MY FINAL APPEARANCE .

>> ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. GUYS, I KNOW A COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.

[00:10:02]

>> COACH, I USUALLY SEE YOU ON TV. WE DIDN'T, WE WEREN'T ABLE TO GET EVERYONE HERE TODAY. IT IS HARD TO GET THE LONDON GUYS HERE BECAUSE THEY ARE OUT PLAYING BASEBALL AND SCHOOL IS JUST GETTING STARTED. I REALLY WANTED TO BRING THEM IN. THIS HAS BEEN A SPECIAL TEAM WITH A SPECIAL GROUP OF SENIORS ESPECIALLY. I REMEMBER WHEN THE FRESHMAN CLASS CAME IN AND EVERYBODY WAS SO EXCITED AND THEY CONTINUED TO BUILD AN AMAZING LEGACY. I WOULD LIKE SOMEONE TO CHECK TO SEE IF THEY KNOW OF ANY OTHER TEAM THAT HAS GONE FOR YEARS IN A ROW TO THE STATE BASEBALL TOURNAMENT. MAYBE I'M SURE IN HISTORY THERE IS ONE BUT THAT IS AN AMAZING A COMPETENT. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, WITH ONE STATE CHAMPIONSHIP AND ONE FINAL RUNNER-UP AND TWO SEMIFINAL APPEARANCES. I HOPE I GOT THAT RIGHT. I FOLLOW YOU GUYS PRETTY CLOSELY. WE ARE SUPER PROUD OF WHAT YOU HAVE DONE ON THE FIELD AND OFF THE FIELD, THE TEAM CONTINUES TO BE GREAT AND THE ACADEMICS. THAT IS A BIG PART OF EVERYBODY'S DEAL. WE WANT TO RECOGNIZE ATHLETES BUT WE ALSO WANT TO RECOGNIZE HOW MUCH THEY PUT INTO THEIR ACADEMICS AS WELL. LONDON IN IS A GREAT SCHOOL DISTRICT. I KNOW IT VERY WELL. IT IS VERY ACTIVE IN THAT COMMUNITY. COACH, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. ON BEHALF OF EVERYONE, SOMEONE ELSE MAY WANT TO SPEAK TO, JUST WANT TO BRING YOU IN AND CONGRATULATE YOU, SORRY NOT EVERYONE COULD BE HERE BUT I HOPE YOU WILL TAKE BACK OUR APPRECIATION TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. HE SAID HE WAS COVERING CLASSES SO THE COACHES COULD BE HERE. IS THAT RIGHT? I HAVE TO GIVE THEM A HARD TIME. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. ANYWAY.

GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> ON BEHALF OF THE BASEBALL TEAM AND THE BASEBALL PROGRAM, THANK YOU FOR HAVING US THIS MORNING AND RECOGNIZING US. YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD WHEN YOU SAID YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT ACADEMICS AND THE TYPE OF KIT THAT WE HAVE AND BEING AT THE STATE TOURNAMENT FOUR YEARS IN A ROW IS A REFLECTION ON WHO THESE KIDS ARE AND WHAT THEY REPRESENT, THE FAMILIES, THE COMMUNITY THE KIDS THAT ARE HERE TODAY, THEY ARE EXCEPTIONAL, THEY ARE GIFTED AND TALENTED AND WE AS COACHES AND AS TEACHERS AT LONDON, WE ARE BLESSED TO BE A PART OF THEIR LIVES. FOR ALL THEY HAVE ACCOMPLISHED THE LAST FOUR YEARS AND PAST YEAR JUST AMAZED BY IT. WE ARE SO PROUD OF THEM. WORDS CANNOT EXPRESS HOW PROUD WE ARE OF THEM. YOU SAID IT, THEY HAVE BEEN TO THE STATE TOURNAMENT FOR FOUR YEARS IN A ROW. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS A MEMORY THEY WILL THE MEMORIES THEY WILL CARRY WITH THEM FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES. LAST YEAR WAS A SCHOOL RECORD FOR WINS THAT WE HAD. WE WERE ONE WIN SHY OF 40. BEAVER 39-4, WHICH IS AN EXCEPTIONAL, EXCEPTIONAL SEASON. WE ARE SO PROUD OF THEM AND BE WANTED, ON BEHALF OF CAR AND COACH SALINAS, THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING US AND WE LOVE ALL OF THESE KIDS AND ALL OF OUR PLAYERS. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENT? ANYONE OF THE PLAYERS WANT TO COME UP AND SPEAK? WE UNDERSTAND. WE UNDERSTAND. WE JUST WANT TO SAY, AGAIN, HOW VERY PROUD WE ARE OF YOU AND THE WORK THAT IT TAKES ACADEMICALLY AND PHYSICALLY AND EVERYTHING ELSE. WE WANT TO HOPE THAT YOU CONTINUE TO HAVE MANY, MANY MORE VICTORIES.

THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. WE HAVE THIS FOR YOU, WE WOULD LOVE TO TAKE A PICTURE WITH YOU AS WELL.

[00:15:17]

OKAY. MOVING ONTO HMG, PUBLIC COMMENT. THERE IS NOBODY ON THIS LIST THAT SIGNED UP. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIGN UP WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AT THIS

[2. CONSENT AGENDA: The following Agenda Items are of a routine nature, and the Commissioners Court has received supporting materials for consideration. All of these Agenda Items will be passed with one vote without being discussed separately, unless a member of the Commissioners Court or the public requests that a particular Agenda Item be discussed. If so, that Agenda Item will be pulled from the Consent Agenda and discussed as part of the regular Agenda at the appropriate time. One vote will approve the remaining items on the Consent Agenda.]

TIME? IF NOT, WE WILL MOVE ON. OUR CONSENT AGENDA, ARE THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS WHO WISH TO PULL ANY ITEM FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA?

>> NO, MA'AM. >> A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA. I THINK SOME OF THE JUDGES WANTED ME TO PULL

[1. Discuss and consider approval and execution of Amendment No. 1 to Work Authorization No. 1 under the Master Services Agreement between Nueces County and LJA Engineering, Inc., for the Amistad Veterans Memorial Park Project, and related matters.]

THERE'S. THEY ARE NOT.. CONSIDER APPROVAL AND EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO WORK AUTHORIZATION NUMBER ONE HUNDRED AND MASTER SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THREE AND AND LJA ENGINEERING INC FOR THE AMISTAD VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK

PROJECT . JJ. >> GOOD MORNING, JUDGE, COMMISSIONERS. THIS IS JUST A TIME EXTENSION. WE ARE UNDER THE CONTRACT PORTION OF IT. WE ARE JUST NOW BUILDING IT.

>> IS THE ATTACHMENT THE CURRENT ONE? I DID HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT BUT IT SEEMED LIKE THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE ATTACHMENT BEING THE OLD DESIGN OR SOMETHING, IS THAT THE NEW DESIGN THAT IS ATTACHED, THE CURRENT

QUESTIONING >> THERE ARE QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS ONE HAS BEEN, I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO TRACK DOWN WHETHER GRANT WORKS AS LOOK AT THIS. I BELIEVE THAT IS A PROJECT THEY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH. I BELIEVE IT IS MORE THAN JUST A TIME EXTENSION. THERE IS SOME CHANGE IN THE LIST OF ITEMS THEY ARE TO PERFORM.

>> WHAT WOULD IT WAS WE TOOK ALL OF THIS STUFF THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE ALREADY DONE AND IT OF THE ITEMS.

>> IS THE ATTACHMENT WE RECEIVED THE CORRECT ATTACHMENT OR IS THERE WORK TO BE DONE? WHEN WE FINALLY SENT PUT THESE INTO APPROVE, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE CORRECT, CURRENT ATTACHMENTS. I WAS TOLD IT WASN'T CURRENT. I DON'T HAVE A CLUE IF IS THE MOST CURRENT OR NOT.

>> BUT SHOULD BE THE MOST CORRECT ATTACHMENT. I DON'T

HAVE ANY HERE WITH ME. >> IN THE BINDER IS JUST THE

AMENDMENT. >> THE ATTACHMENT, THEY TOOK IT FROM THE OTHER TIME THIS WAS DONE.

>> ALL WE ARE ASKING FOR IS TIME. THE PROJECT IS ALREADY IN

DESIGN. >> YOU ARE ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME, NO CHANGES TO ANYTHING?

>> THAT AT THIS POINT. >> THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, ARE YOU

OKAY WITH THAT? >> NO, I DON'T BELIEVE IT HAS BEEN LOOKED AT BY GRANT PARKS. THERE ARE CHANGES. I DON'T MEAN CHANGES IN THE DOCUMENT, I MEAN CHANGES IN THE LIST, OF AS WE'VE DESCRIBED, THEY HAVE TAKEN OFF SOME OF THE THINGS THE GROUP IS SUPPOSED TO DO AND PUT IN ADDITIONAL THINGS.

>> CAN WE BRING THIS BACK ON THE SEVENTH? LET'S HAVE CLARIFICATION SO THAT WE ARE NOT MOVING FORWARD ON SOMETHING THAT IS NOT BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED. PROBABLY NOT A PROBLEM BUT LET'S CLARIFY AND BRING IT BACK. I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO BRING BACK THE AUGUST 7TH MEETING.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO TABLE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED ?

[2. Discuss and consider a temporary staging area agreement between Nueces County and AT&T Services, Inc. (d/b/a AT&T) to stage work crews, materials, vehicles and equipment related to performance of work necessary to avoid interruptions in telecommunications service or to restore service interrupted by emergency conditions, and any related matters. This agreement has been reviewed for legal sufficiency by County Attorney's office.]

MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO ITEM 2. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER A TEMPORARY STAGING AREA AGREEMENT BETWEEN NUECES COUNTY AND AT&T SURFACES TO STAGE WORK CREWS, MATERIALS, VEHICLES .

THEY WERE INSTRUMENTAL AND HELPFUL IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS. I BELIEVE THIS AGREEMENT HAS BEEN SEEN AND

[00:20:04]

APPROVED BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ONE NOTATION, AS PER EMERGENCY SERVICES. THE ADDRESS HAS BEEN CHANGED AND IF WE COULD APPROVE WITH CLARIFICATION, THEY ARE NO LONGER GOING TO BE AT THE AIRPORT BUT AT THE FAIRGROUNDS WHERE THEY WERE DURING THIS LAST EMERGENCY. IF WE COULD JUST CHANGE THE LOCATION, I WOULD ASK FOR APPROVAL. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND QUESTION MARK ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER

[3. Discuss and consider Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) project funding source; Discuss and consider authorizing and approving execution of an agreement with Network Cabling Services (NCS), under BuyBoard Cooperative Contract No. 739-24, for the purchase and installation of a VOIP system in the total amount of $55,531.49, and related matters.]

THREE, DISCUSSED AND CONSIDER EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER VOICE OVER INTERNET PROTOCOL PROJECT FUNDING SOURCE. THIS IS FOR THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION, ACTUALLY , DO WE NEED TO DO NUMBER FOUR FIRST? SORRY BECAUSE THAT IS UNALLOCATED. THE LAST MEETING, I ALLOCATED 60,000 FOR THIS. WE ARE FINDING OUT THAT THIS IS A LENGTHY PROCESS AND BECAUSE OF THE DETERMINED PROCESS, I NEEDED TO USE CEOS. ITEM UNALLOCATED MY ARPA MONEY FROM THIS. IF YOU ARE OKAY.

>> SAME AMOUNT? >> SAME AMOUNT, NOTHING CHANGED. WE ARE JUST CHANGING IT FROM ARPA MONEY TO COS.

[4. Discuss and consider Un-allocating $500,000 County-wide ARPA funds approved July 17, 2024, for the Emergency Operation Center (EOC), County Judge Project and $128,595.61 County Judge, individual ARPA remaining balance for a total of $628,595.61 ARPA funds to the Bob Hall Pier Project. Un-allocate $628,595.61 Bob Hall Pier Hurricane Harvey funds and Re-allocate to Emergency Operation Center (EOC), County Judge Project and all related matters. ]

>> I HAVE QUESTIONS ON THREE BUT IF YOU ARE GOING TO WAIT,

THAT'S FINE. >> YES. ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ON ALLOCATING 500,000 COUNTYWIDE AMISTAD VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK PROJECT FUNDS APPROVED LAST WEEK FOR THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER AND THE COUNTY JUDGE ARPA , 128,595 FOR A TOTAL OF 620,595 ARPA FUNDS TO THE BOB HALL PIER PROJECT. THE SECOND MOTION TO THIS IS ON ALLOCATING FROM THE BOB HALL PIER HARVEY FRONT AND WE ALLOCATING TO THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER. THIS FREES UP THE TIME CONSTRAINTS ON THE MONEY. IT IS THE SAME EXACT SWAP BUT IT WILL ALLOW US TO DO WHAT IS MUCH SAFER AND IN THE BEST INTEREST WITH THE HILLTOP COMMUNITY CENTER, IT IS A MUCH SAFER, IT IS CLOSER TO THE FAIRGROUNDS, IT IS A MUCH TO REBUILD THE. AND THEN GETTING OUR PEOPLE OUT OF CLOSER TO HARM'S WAY WHEN THEY HAVE TO STAY HERE IN THE COURTHOUSE DURING THE HURRICANE OR ANYTHING ELSE.

>> FROM YOUR STRICTLY TO THAT? DO WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE

PUBLIC WAS TO MAKE >> BECAUSE IT IS ARPA MONEY AND BECAUSE THE CONTRACT WITH THE HILLTOP IS GOING TO MAKE IT VERY SKETCHY AND GO TO PUSH PASS, IF WE SWAP THE MONEY, IT IS THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT. BOB HALL PIER IS ALREADY UNDER CONTRACT, IT IS MOVING FORWARD. IT IS THE EXACT NUMBER SWAP .

IS NO MORE, NO LESS. I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO UNALLOCATED MY ARPA MONEY AND REALLOCATE THAT SAME AMOUNT TO THE BOB HALL PIER . ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE AYE ? I ALSO MAKE A MOTION TO ON ALLOCATE THAT EXACT AMOUNT FROM THE BOB HALL PIER HARVEY INSURANCE MONEY TO THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS

PROJECT . >> SECOND IF THAT IS EMOTION.

>> THAT IS A MOTION, YES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE AYE. ANY

OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. >> JUDGE, I WANT TO SAY, I REALLY, I THINK IT IS SUCH A GREAT SERVICE TO THE COUNTY TO MOVE THIS TO THEM HILLTOP COMMUNITY CENTER. AS YOU SAID, THE REASONS YOU STATED, IT MAKES SO MUCH MORE SENSE. IT'S ON THE GROUND FLOOR, IT'S INLAND, THAT THING IS BUILT SOLIDLY. I THINK THIS IS , YOU KNOW.

>> CLOSER TO THE STAGING AREA, THE FAIRGROUNDS. EVERYTHING

WORKED OUT. >> IS HELPING UTILIZE A BUILDING THAT HASN'T BEEN UTILIZED AND WE ARE TRYING TO RENOVATE. THIS IS JUST ANOTHER GOOD WAY OF DOING THAT.

>> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ FOR ALLOWING

>>> NUMBER THREE , SINCE THE MONEY HAS BEEN UNALLOCATED, THIS IS DISCUSS AND CONSIDER EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER VOICEOVER PROTOCOL. THIS WAS THIS IS , YOU

CAN TALK ABOUT IT. >> I WANTED, THERE IS A MISSPELLING ON NUMBER THREE AND IT'S PROBABLY MY FAULT. IT

[00:25:03]

SHOULD HAVE SAID VIDEO OVER INTERNET NOT VOICE OVER INTERNET PROTOCOL. BASICALLY, WHAT WE ARE DOING IS OUR SYSTEM THAT DID WORK THERE HAS AGED OUT AND IT HAD TO HAVE PEOPLE COME IN TO FIX IT AND THEY CHARGED US A LOT OF MONEY TO DO IT AT THE TIME. WE HAVE A SYSTEM NOW THAT IS NOT WORKING BECAUSE OF THE LARGE TV WE USED TO DO THE ZOOM MEETINGS WITH PARTNERS ON DURING EMERGENCY HAS SEEN ITS LIFETIME. WHAT THIS IS GOING TO ALLOW US TO DO IS IT WILL ALLOW US TO HAVE VIDEO OVER INTERNET WHICH WILL ALLOW US TO STREAMLINE ANYTHING ON TWO DEDICATED LAPTOPS ON ALL THE TVS HAVING A BRIEFING. WHEN WE ARE NOT HAVING BRIEFINGS WE CAN HAVE OTHER THINGS ON THE TV. THE WEATHER CHANNEL OR APPS OR OTHER THINGS WE USE. WE HAVE A SMART TV THAT WAS GRANTED TO THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER TWO YEARS AGO. IT WAS NEVER INSTALLED, SO WE WILL INSTALL THAT AND HAVE A CAMERA PUT ON SO WE CAN SEE AND BRIEF WITH PARTNERS DURING THESE MEETINGS, BEING A SMARTBOARD I CAN BE DRAWING ON IT OR WHATEVER AND WE ARE DONE WE CAN DOWNLOAD, PRINT AND SEND IT OUT TO WHATEVER WE NEED TO DO. THE MICROPHONES WILL STAY THE SAME. THE SYSTEM MANAGING THE AUDIO AND AMPLIFIER FOR THE ROOM, BUT WE WILL PUT IN A CEILING MICROPHONE AND WITH A MICROPHONE WILL DO IS WHEN EVERYBODY IS AT THE TABLE AND YOU ARE IN FRONT OF THE SMART PHONE -- BOARD HAVING BRIEFINGS EVERYBODY WILL BE HEARD. IT IS LIKE HAVING A MICROPHONE ON YOURSELF SO YOU DON'T HAVE PEOPLE SAYING I CAN'T HEAR YOU, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO HEAR EVERYBODY AT THE TABLE WHEN THEY SPEAK. THE CONTROL SYSTEM IS A SWITCH TO ALLOW US TO GO BACK AND FORTH. REALLY WHAT WE ARE DOING IS WE ARE SIMPLIFYING IT, MAKING IT MUCH EASIER TO USE. ALSO ONE OF THE GOOD THINGS ABOUT THIS IS ALL THE CODES COME TO US SO OUR I.T. DEPARTMENT CAN MANAGE AND MAINTENANCE THE SYSTEM. IF I HAVE A PROBLEM I CAN CALL I.T.

IN THERE THERE. I DON'T HAVE TO CALL AND WAIT 48 HOURS FOR SOMEBODY TO RESPOND, WE WILL BE ABLE TO TAKE THE SYSTEM AND MANAGE AND MAINTAIN OURSELVES WHICH WILL SAVE A LOT OF TIME

AND MONEY. >> I THINK COMMISSIONER CHESNEY

HAD A QUESTION. >> THAT'S FINE. JUST THE QUESTION AND YOU HAVE ANSWERED THEM. WHEN , YOU MAY NOT KNOW THIS, BUT I REMEMBER WE BOUGHT THIS VOICEOVER SYSTEM. SO, EIGHT OR NINE YEARS AGO AND ARE WE REPLACING ALL OF IT OR AN

ELEMENT OF IT? >> WE NEED TO REPLACE THE TV OR THE MAIN TV BECAUSE THAT IS GONE. WHAT WE ARE DOING, THE DOES NOT WORK PROPERLY NOW. IT IS IN THIS AND IT IS HIT AND MISS. ONE TO BE WILL COME ON AND THE OTHER WILL NOT. WE HAVE BEEN TOLD IT HAS AGED OUT, THEY WILL NOT EVEN COMING TO FIX IT.

THEY DON'T HAVE PARTS FOR IT AND THEY WANT TO CHARGE ANOTHER 100,000 PLUS TO PUT IT IN THE SYSTEM SO THIS WAY WE PUT IN A SIMPLIFIED SYSTEM WHERE IT'S JUST A VIDEO OVER INTERNET SO YOU ARE STREAMLINING LIKE ZOOM OR WHATEVER BUT IT HAS A SWITCH SO WE CAN RUN IT ON UP TO 24 TVS OR UP TO HOWEVER MANY. WE HAVE SIX TVS NOW BUT IT CAN GROW LATER ON IF YOU WANT. IT IS A SIMPLIFIED SYSTEM, A SWITCH THAT ALLOWS WHATEVER YOU ARE PLAYING ON THE LAPTOP TO GO ON. THE BIG THING IS THE CEILING MICROPHONE. EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE THE AMPLIFIERS AND AUDIO, IT IS MUFFLED WHEN YOU HAVE THAT MANY PEOPLE IN THE ROOM. IF THE MICROPHONE IS IN THAT CERTAIN PLACE IT WILL PICK UP EVERYBODY'S VOICE SO EVERYBODY CAN BE HEARD CLEARLY.

>> WHAT WILL THIS DO AS FAR AS THE REST OF THE SYSTEM?

>> I WAS GOING TO ASK DARRELL TO COME UP.

>> WE HAVE THIS BIG SYSTEM AND IF YOU CAN GIVE ME WHAT IT IS AND HOW PLACING A PART AFFECTS THE WHOLE THING, DO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT DOING MORE LATER? GO THROUGH THAT I WOULD APPRECIATE IT. WE INVESTED QUITE A BIT IN THE SYSTEM.

>> IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE VOICEOVER IP PHONE SYSTEM.

THOSE WOULD WORK. >> THE SYSTEM WE BOUGHT IS NOT

[00:30:02]

ANTIQUATED AND THE END OF LIFE?

>> NOTHING LIKE THIS. THIS IS WITHIN THE EOC AND THE EQUIPMENT , THAT'S WHAT IS OUTDATED WHICH IS CONTROLLING EQUIPMENT AND IT IS WEIGHT OVER. PREVIOUS DIRECTOR IS WORKING ON IT FROM BEFORE AND IT WAS MORE THAN TWICE THE AMOUNT THIS ONE IS. THIS IS A PRACTICAL SOLUTION. WE WENT OVER REALISTIC SCENARIOS THAT WOULD TAKE ICE. AND BEFORE THIS COMPANY CAME IN AND GAVE US THIS QUOTE AND IT'S ONLY WHAT CAN HAPPEN IN THIS ROOM, SO I AM VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THIS.

AND IT IS VIDEO OVER IP. THEY HAVE USED THE NETWORK NOW,

THAT'S ALL THERE IS TO THAT. >> I CANNOT HEAR YOU.

>> IT DOES ALLOW US TO GROW THE SYSTEM AND WE'RE NOT THROWING OUT THE BABY WITH THE BATHWATER. IT HAS THE SYSTEM IN THE CLOSET WE ARE JUST ADDING THIS LITTLE PIECE TO IT. IF THE EOC GOT BIGGER WE COULD GROW WITH WHAT WE'VE GOT. THAT'S WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO, SIMPLIFY IT SO IT IS NOT SO TECHNICAL AND IT IS NOT COST A LOT TO FIX BUT IT DOES WHAT WE NEED IT TO DO. STAYING IN TOUCH WITH PARTNERS BEING ABLE TO BRIEF AND WORKING EFFICIENTLY AND .

>> THAT MAKE SENSE I WANTED TO GO TO THAT WE SPENT QUITE A BIT ON THE SYSTEM EIGHT OR NINE YEARS AGO. I WAS NOT SURE.

>> THE TECHNOLOGY, IT MOVES SO FAST

>> IT IS PART OF IT, WE GET IT.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION. AND A SECOND , TO ALLOCATE THE FUNDS FOR THE VIDEO OVER INTERNET PROTOCOL SYSTEM REQUESTED BY THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.. THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. I

[7. Discuss and consider award and execution of a Health Services Agreement with Amistad Community Health Center, Inc. for Public Health Services at Calderon Building (RFP No. 3272-24) and related matters.]

HAVE A MESSAGE TO ASK TO BRING UP ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AWARD AND EXECUTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH ARMISTEAD COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER FOR PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES AT THE CALL THEIR OWN BUILDING AND RELATED MATTERS NUMBER SEVEN AND COMMISSIONER

GONZALEZ THIS IS YOURS. >> UP A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON

THE CONTRACT MYSELF. >> GOOD MORNING. THE ITEM IS ABOUT , THE, WE HAD A CONDITIONAL SELECTION AND WE HAVE GONE THROUGH AND MADE SOME NEGOTIATIONS ON THE CONTRACT AND TODAY THE DISCUSSION IS WHAT THE POINTS ARE ON THERE.

OVERVIEW IS THE GOAL IS TO OFFER PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES AND PINNACLE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES AS LISTED THERE. THE OTHER THING TO HIGHLIGHT TO YOU, THE WAY IT IS DESIGNED AND BASED ON , SO IF SOME OF THOSE ITEMS HAVE TO DO WITH, IF WE DON'T HAVE A GREAT VOLUME THE EXPENSE WOULD GO DOWN.

>> I DID NOT SEE, THIS CONTRACT I DO NOT HAVE IT HIGHLIGHTED FOR ME OR ANYTHING ON HERE. THE CLARITY THIS CONTRACT WAS NOT STARTING UNTIL OCTOBER 1 THIS JOB WAS NOT GOING TO START IF IT GETS APPROVED HERE TODAY. AND MY OTHER ISSUE WAS WE HAVE A FIVE-YEAR AGREEMENT AND I STATED THIS, TOO , TO THE ATTORNEY A LONG TIME AGO IN THESE DISCUSSIONS AND REALLY ASKED FOR THIS NOT TO BE INCLUDED. SO FOR A TRIAL RUN ON SOMETHING I HAVE A REAL ISSUE WITH GOING AHEAD AND SIGNING A CONTRACT FOR FIVE YEARS. TO I WANTED TO WORK, YES. DON'T WANT TO BE LOCKED INTO SOMETHING THAT POSSIBLY DOESN'T, THEN I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

>> WE ARE NOT LOCKED INTO ANYTHING. IT IS A CONTRACT WHERE ANYBODY CAN GET OUT OF IT. WE ARE NOT LOCKED INTO ANYTHING. IT IS THERE. WE MAKE SURE IT'S THERE. THAT IS

[00:35:01]

SOMETHING THEY WORKED ON. IF SOMETHING HAPPENS WE CAN GET

OUT IN A YEAR. >> I JUST, I KNOW THIS COUNTY HAS A HISTORY OF BEING LOCKED INTO CONTRACTS THAT PUT US IN A

BIND. >> FEW, TOO. WE DID NOT HAVE THE OUTLET THAT WE HAVE NOW. COUNTY ATTORNEY WORKING ON IT. SO I AM JUST SAYING TO ME FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS IT'S GOING TO PROVIDE SERVICES AND IT IS SOMETHING ONE YEAR IS NOT GOING TO TELL A LOT. I THINK THREE YEARS TO FIVE YEARS IS SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD GO ANY MORE THAN THREE YEARS.

>> THAT IS MY ISSUE WITH IT. >> WE HAVE ARMISTEAD HERE TO

MAKE A COMMENT. >> TO CLARIFY, THERE'S A 90 DAY NO-COST TERMINATION FOR THE COUNTY.

>> 180 DAYS? >> 120. AND WE WERE NOT JUST GO 120 WE ARE NOT GOING TO DROP THE BALL FROM A PRACTICAL STANDPOINT. THIS FIVE YEARS. PRACTICALLY IT IS 90 DAYS FOR

THE COUNTY. >> I JUST WORRY AND I KNOW WE HAVE BEEN THINKING OF WAYS WE CAN UTILIZE THE BUILDING AND WE CAN DO THINGS AND IN SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS THROUGH NO FAULT OF YOURS, NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU ALL, YOUR CONTRACT IS WHAT YOU STATE TO DO. ADDITIONAL CHARGES AND ADDITIONAL THINGS WE FIND OUT THAT WILL COST THE COUNTY WITH OUR SEPARATION IS A LITTLE CONCERNING TO ME ON WHAT THE ACTUAL COST WILL BE. THIS , BACK AND I'M SORRY I KNOW WE HAD A LOT OF MEETINGS IN MY OFFICE ABOUT MAKING SURE TO CUT THOSE COSTS AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS A STAGGERED THING THAT WE ARE GOING TO GROW, WITH TIME, WITH NECESSITY. AND VALUE AND PROVEN NUMBERS THAT SHOW AND I THINK WITH THE COUNTY AND THE COUNTY IN THE SITUATION WE ARE IN WE HAVE TO REALLY BE CAUTIOUS. I STILL DON'T KNOW, I THINK THERE ARE ISSUES ALL OF US HAVE ABOUT NOT KNOWING WHERE WE ARE AND WHERE WE ARE GOING TO BE NEXT YEAR AND WHERE WE WILL BE SIX WEEKS FROM NOW.

THAT WAS MY CONCERN. >> JUST TO ADD PART OF THE DISCUSSIONS, MAKING THOSE REJECTIONS. A LOT OF PROJECTIONS AS FAR AS THE TYPE OF SERVICES GIVEN, BASED ON THE POPULATION THERE. BASED ON THE SERVICES THE POPULATION REQUESTS. I REALIZE THESE ARE PREDICTIONS. WE HAVE DONE DUE DILIGENCE AS FAR AS WHAT'S THE MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM.

>> THAT IS WHY I HAD A BIG ISSUE WITH THE FIVE-YEAR AGREEMENT. I THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE A TRIAL RUN, THAT'S MY SAY IN IT. SOMEBODY ELSE THEY HAVE SOMETHING ELSE. THAT WAS MY ONLY ISSUE.

>> ONE MORE PROVISION HAD NOT BEEN DISCUSSED. PREVIOUSLY, I NEED GUIDANCE FROM THE COURT SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE IT HAD NOT BEEN DISCUSSED. THE 5% INCREASE ANNUALLY.

>> THAT WAS ONE OF MY ISSUES. >> WE HAVE THE CITY HERE. I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE ALL OF YOU WALKING IN, BUT IF YOU WOULD

LIKE TO COMMENT. >> I WASN'T.

>> GREAT, THANK YOU JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS. MORNING AND THE CITY MANAGER FOR THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ITEM AN IMPORTANT DECISION SO WE WANTED TO COME TALK TO YOU TO TELL YOU WHAT WE ARE THINKING AS OF TODAY.

BEFORE I BEGIN I WANT TO LET THE COMMISSIONERS COURT AND THE COMMUNITY KNOW THAT WE THE CITY ARE PROUD, I AM PROUD AS A CITY MANAGER WE HAVE A LONG-STANDING GREAT WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH NUECES COUNTY. NOT OFTEN IN TEXAS CITIES AND COUNTIES CAN WORK WELL WITH EACH OTHER. WE HAVE A PROVEN TRACK RECORD OF THAT. WHETHER IT IS BEACH MAINTENANCE PROGRAM WE MAINTAIN 20 MILES OF GULF COAST BEACH. WHETHER IT IS PREPARING FOR THE NATURAL DISASTER AND THEN RECOVERING FROM IT, OR PROVIDING HEALTH SERVICES. WHEN IT COMES TO HEALTH SERVICES WE

[00:40:02]

HAVE BEEN WORKING TOGETHER WITH THE COUNTY OVER 30 YEARS , ALMOST 30 YEARS, THREE DECADES PROVIDING HEALTH SERVICES TO ALL OF NUECES COUNTY IN PARTNERSHIP WITH NUECES COUNTY.

UP UNTIL RECENTLY IT WAS A LEGACY BUSINESS MODEL AND THIS WOULD CONCLUDE TWO YEARS OF THE NEW MODEL WE ARE WORKING WITHIN. WE UNDERSTAND THE COUNTY HAS THE RIGHT TO GO IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION. WE ARE HERE TODAY TO TELL YOU OBSERVATIONS TO DATE. A LITTLE LESS THAN SIX MONTHS AGO WHEN THE COUNTY CONTEMPLATED GOING IN A NEW BUSINESS MODEL , WE BEGAN TO SEE WHAT IT MEANS IN TERMS OF THE NEW SERVICE DELIVERY MODEL THAT WOULD BE ONE WHERE THE CITY PROVIDES SERVICES JUST TO THE CITY RESIDENTS AND CORPUS CHRISTI AND THEN THE COUNTY WOULD PROVIDE SERVICES TO UNINCORPORATED PORTIONS OF THE COUNTY OR A SMALLER JURISDICTION. WE ARE HERE TO SAY WE DON'T THINK WE ARE READY YET. IT IS VERY COMPLEX TO SEPARATE THE MODELS IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE BOTH SIDES ARE READY TO PROVIDE SERVICE. IN A NEW WAY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING IN THE 30 YEARS. WE THINK IT WOULD BE ADVISABLE TO AT LEAST GIVE ONE MORE YEAR IN THE CURRENT WORKING MODEL TO GIVE BOTH SIDES AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO DEVELOP THE NEW BUSINESS MODEL.

I WANT TO REMIND THE COUNTY THAT IT IS A COMPLEX SERVICE DELIVERY PROGRAM WE HAVE TOGETHER WITH THE COUNTY. NOT JUST CLINICAL SERVICES, WE PROVIDE TOGETHER WITH THE COUNTY FOR ALL OF NUECES COUNTY . WOMEN, INFANT AND CHILDREN NUTRITION SERVICES AND SCREENINGS, WE PROVIDE SEXUALLY-TRANSMITTED DISEASE IDENTIFICATION , SURVEILLANCE AND TREATMENT. WE PROVIDE TUBERCULOSIS SURVEILLANCE TREATMENT AND IDENTIFICATION. WE PROVIDE WITH THE COUNTY VACCINATIONS. WE PROVIDE A LOT MORE THAN JUST MEDICAL SERVICES. WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SERVICES AND THE NEED FOR ADVANCED LABORATORIES WITH SCIENTISTS THAT CAN TEST SPECIMENS, THE NEAREST LAB FROM HERE IS OVER 100 MILES AWAY IN SAN ANTONIO. SO THAT SOMETHING WE OPERATE TODAY. CERTAIN THINGS YOU WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE IN THE COUNTY INCLUDE RESTAURANT INSPECTIONS, SEPTIC TANK INSPECTIONS, ALTHOUGH SYSTEMS EXIST TODAY IN THE CURRENT BUSINESS MODEL. SO WHAT IS A LOT OF NEW DEVELOPMENT ON BOTH SIDES AND WE'RE HERE TO SAY THE CITY IS WILLING TO CONTINUE THAT CURRENT RELATIONSHIP FOR AT LEAST A YEAR TO GIVE YOU THE COUNTY MORE TIME AND TO GIVE THE CITY MORE TIME. WE HAVE CHALLENGED IN THE FRONT AND MANAGER, THEY BEEN WORKING OVER THE PAST COUPLE MONTHS TO DECOUPLE BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER THINGS LIKE WHEN A CLIENT COMES IN, TO CHECK ARE YOU A CORPUS CHRISTI RESIDENT AND IF NOT WHAT DOES IT MEAN, WHAT'S THE CHARGE FOR SERVICE AND YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO THE SAME IF SOMEBODY CAME INTO ROB'S TOWN CLINIC WHO LIVED RIGHT OUTSIDE , SO THOSE THINGS HAVE NOT BEEN DEVELOPED YET. MORE TIME WOULD BE NEEDED TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. FINALLY WE ARE WORKING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE CONFIDENCE IN WHAT WE ARE DOING IN NUECES COUNTY. IT IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT COULD BE NEW BUSINESS MODELS AND I DON'T THINK TODAY THEY HAVE A GOOD UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT GIVEN ENOUGH TIME TO EXPLAIN TO THEM. WE DON'T WANT TO RISK LOSING CRITICAL STATE GRANTS THAT WOULD IMPACT EVERYBODY IN THIS REGION. NOT JUST NUECES COUNTY, BUT THE CITY, NEIGHBORING COUNTIES, SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THAT STRONG WORKING TO MEDICATION RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CHIEF PEOPLE AT HEALTH SERVICES AND FRANKLY WE ARE NOT THERE AS OF TODAY. AGAIN THE MESSAGE TODAY FROM ME THE CITY MANAGER AND WITH THE SUPPORT , WE ARE WILLING, WE ARE GLAD TO BE PARTNERS WITH THE COUNTY. WE HAVE A TRACK RECORD AND I AM PROUD OF IT BECAUSE YOU DON'T SEE THAT OFTEN IN TEXAS. WE ARE HERE TO SAY IF YOU WANT TO CONSIDER THAT WE WOULD BE

WILLING TO CONSIDER. >> THANK YOU, WE APPRECIATE YOU

BEING HERE TODAY. >> LET ME SAY SOMETHING. CITY MANAGER. I HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR YOU, ALWAYS EVER SINCE YOU CAME DOWN. BUT I WANT TO SAY THIS BECAUSE I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE SAID. BACK THEN WHEN YOU CAME YOU WERE PART OF

[00:45:02]

THE FIGHT. TO SPLIT. PART OF THE FIGHT WERE WITH YOU, COMMISSIONER CHESNEY AND I WERE WITH YOU UNTIL THE END BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE CITY WANTED. THE MAYOR WANTED. NOT WHAT THE COUNTY WANTED AT THE TIME, BUT WE ALL WANTED IT. IT DID NOT HAPPEN SO IT'S NOT THAT THE COUNTY WANTED IT THIS WAY, IT'S THAT THE CITY WAS READY TO SPLIT AND THE CITY AGREED TO PROVIDE SERVICES IN THE NUECES COUNTY AREA , BUT IT'S NOT FOR FREE. WE PAY FOR THE SERVICES. YOU DID NOT MENTION THAT WHEN YOU SAY THE CITY IS THROWING ALL THE SERVICES, BUT WE ARE PAYING $1.7 MILLION.

>> YES THAT IS CORRECT. >> SO WE SPLIT, THAT MONEY IS GOING MOSTLY WITH US. PROVIDING SERVICES FOR THE COUNTY OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS. SOMEBODY WALKS IN FROM CORPUS CHRISTI OR CITY LIMITS WILL NOT CHARGE THEM , WE SHOULDN'T IF IT'S A HEALTH CLINIC WE HAVE TO TAKE ANYBODY WHO WALKS IN. SO I HOPE THE CITY DOES THE SAME THING. YOU DON'T WANT TO TURN ANYBODY AWAY , BUT I WANT TO MAKE THIS CLEAR THAT WE WERE WITH YOU

WHEN YOU NEEDED US, RIGHT? >> BRIGHT AND WE ARE STILL HERE

WITH YOU. >> I APPRECIATE IT, BUT I THINK WE HAVE COME A LONG WAY. THIS SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED MAYBE A MONTH AGO. INSTEAD OF COMING TO THE MEETING WE WILL TAKE A VOTE AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IT TRYING TO CHANGE THINGS. I KNOW YOU ARE INVITED TO BE HERE, BUT I WILL TELL YOU WE WERE THERE AND WE ALL VOTED, EVERYBODY IN THE GROUP VOTED 5-0. WE ALL VOTED 5-0 TO GET A CONTRACT. WE ALL VOTED 5-0 TO GET PRIMARY CARE. NOW WE ARE COMING BACK BECAUSE SOME OF US FEEL IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO OR THEY DON'T FEEL SAFE. WE TALK ABOUT MONIES? WE WILL NEVER SPEND $1.7 MILLION. AND THEN YOU TALK ABOUT , WE ONLY WANT THREE YEARS OR ONE YEAR. WE DO $21 MILLION , FOR SIX YEARS AND THEY WANT MORE. SO WHERE IS THE JUSTIFICATION THERE? WE CAN DO SIX YEARS, 21 MILLION AND WE CAN'T DO 1.7 TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE NEEDY, TO THE POOR , THE UNDERINSURED. IT BOTHERS ME BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN WORKING HARD AT THIS SINCE WE SPLIT , TWICE WE GOT THE EXTENSION. LAST MINUTE CITY COUNCIL WE GOT IT EXTENSION TWICE. NO I DON'T THINK IT IS FAIR FOR THE COMMUNITY IN THE AREA OF NUECES COUNTY THAT DOES NOT GET SERVED, CAN'T COME INTO THE HEALTH DISTRICT , TO BE LEFT OUT AGAIN AND SHAME ON US HERE, WE DON'T CARE. WE CAN CARE ABOUT ALL THE SERVICES , BUT WE DON'T CARE ABOUT THE SERVICES DON'T CARE? THAT'S JUST WHAT'S HAPPENING, TWO DAYS A WEEK IS NOT GETTING SERVICES DONE. WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT BEFORE. SO I THINK IT'S TIME THAT PEOPLE KNOW WHERE WE ARE AT ON THIS THING. WE WORRY ABOUT MONEY, WORRIED ABOUT 1.7 MILLION WHEN WE GAVE AWAY 21 MILLION? THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT?

NOBODY FOUGHT THAT. >> BRIGHT, COMMISSIONER. TO PHRASE IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY WHEN WE WERE WORKING TOGETHER TWO YEARS AGO OR THREE YEARS AGO THERE WAS NOT A SPLIT TO PART WAYS IT WAS TO DEVELOP A NEW BUSINESS MODEL. WE KNEW THE BUSINESS MODEL THAT EXISTED THAT GROUP OVERTIME WAS OUTDATED. IT HAD NUMEROUS FLAWS TO INCLUDE , NOBODY WAS IN CHARGE BECAUSE TWO PEOPLE WERE IN CHARGE. THE OLD ADAGE WHEN MORE THAN ONE PERSON IS IN CHARGE NOBODY IS IN CHARGE. WE HAD POOR UTILIZATION OF PUBLIC HEALTH DOLLARS IN TERMS OF EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS TO PROVIDE SERVICES. WE HAD EXTREMELY LOW EMPLOYEE MORALE , THE EMPLOYEES I WOULD SPEAK TO EACH FRIDAY DID NOT WANT TO COME TO WORK.

AND I LOVE COMING TO WORK AND I TOLD THEM YOU NEED TO LOVE TO COME TO WORK SO THAT HAS CHANGED. THERE HAS BEEN TREMENDOUS IMPROVEMENT. IT WAS NOT A SPLIT, THE VOTES WERE NOT THAT, THEY WERE TO SAY WE ACKNOWLEDGE WE NEED A DIFFERENT BUSINESS MODEL. THAT'S WHAT WE CREATED AND IS THE COUNTY RIGHT

[00:50:03]

TO GO AND THE CITY I SUPPOSE. >> NOT TO INTERRUPT I KNOW YOU ARE EXPANDING, BUT ISN'T PART OF THE QUESTION WE HAVE BEFORE US TODAY AND THE REASON WHY MAY BE POSTPONING THIS A LITTLE BIT LONGER AND I THINK YOU CAN AGREE TO THIS. THE GRANTS ARE INTERTWINED, THE DIVISION OF THOSE AND THERE IS NOT A CLEAR PATH ON HOW WE DIVIDE THAT AND GO FORWARD AND THE ACCEPTANCE

OF THAT? >> THAT IS DEFINITELY ONE OF THEM. WE HAVE NOT HAD ENOUGH TIME TO MAKE SURE WITH THE

STATE THAT THEY CLEARLY KNOW. >> WE HAVE SAID THE SAME. IF YOU CONFIRM YOU HAVE CHECKED ON THOSE AND WE ARE ON THE SAME BOAT. WE ARE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR COMMUNITY AND CITIZENS HERE, NO DOUBT THAT IS NOT DISPUTABLE, BUT THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THESE GRANTS AND FUNDING INTERTWINED WITH THE CITY AND IF WE SEPARATE WHAT PORTION WE GET OR WHAT WE GO AFTER AND WHAT THEY KEEP AND WHEN THEY ARE TOGETHER, THE LAST EXTENSION WE DID WAS BECAUSE THE STATE ASKED US TO DO THAT BECAUSE OF THIS CONVOLUTED SYSTEM THAT WE ARE

ALL IN. >> YES. AS YOU MENTIONED, WE HAVE HAD FREQUENT CONVERSATIONS WITH THE STATE TO DESCRIBE WHAT IS THE PLAN ON THE COUNTY SITE, HOW TO MOVE FORWARD, FROM THE UNDERSTANDING WHEN IT COMES TO CONTRACTS THAT THE STATE PROVIDES FOR LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS TO DO THE SERVICES , THE WAY THEY ARE WRITTEN, THEY ARE ALL-ENCOMPASSING FOR THE COUNTY AND FOR SEVERAL COUNTIES. SO, AS FAR AS THE STATE IS CONCERNED, THEY WANT TO KNOW FROM OUR SIDE AND THE CITY SIDE WAS TO SEE, IF YOU HAVE TO DIVIDE THE FUNDS FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS, HOW WOULD THEY DIVIDE THE FUNDS? EITHER WAY FOR THE COUNTY SIDE BECAUSE WE WOULD KNEW A BE A NEW ENTITY WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO SHOW THEM THAT WE HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND CAPABILITY BEFORE THEY COME BACK AND

PROVIDE THAT. >> DO YOU HAVE CONFIRMATION FROM THEM THAT THEY FEEL WE ARE READY TO PROCEED FORWARD?

>> BECAUSE THEY ASKED US TO WAIT.

>> THAT'S WHY I EMPHASIZE WE HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE, THEY WERE NOT PROVIDE THAT IMMEDIATELY. THEY WOULD HAVE TO SEE HOW WE ARE WORKING THE FIRST YEAR. AFTER THAT.

>> THE CITY WOULD LOSE THE FUNDS THEN?

>> THEY WOULD LOSE THOSE, THEY WERE NOT LOSE THE FUNDS BECAUSE THEY ARE ALREADY IN EXISTENCE. THEY WOULD REQUEST TO CHANGE THE SCOPE OF WORK TO NO LONGER BE COUNTYWIDE BUT THE STATE WOULD HAVE TO DO , IS ADJUST THE FUNDING BASED ON THE POPULATION. IF THEY LEAVE THEM AS IS MEANING ANYBODY COULD STILL COME FROM WHEREVER THEY CONTINUE RECEIVING THE FUNDS.

UNTIL WE COME BACK TO SHOW THEM AFTERWARDS AS A NEW PUBLIC HEALTH UNIT WE ARE CAPABLE OF DOING THESE THINGS AND THE POPULATION WE ARE SERVING WE HAVE TO SHOW THEM THE NUMBERS.

SO THAT IS HOW THE DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN AS FAR AS MOVING FORWARD. AS FAR AS SOME OF THE CONTRACTS, SOME OF THEM ARE SEVERAL COUNTIES SO THE STATE WOULD SEE THAT IRREGULAR. YOU OFFER SIX COUNTIES SERVICE AND NOT JUST A PORTION OF THE

COUNTY. >> WE WOULD ALL LOSE, NOBODY WOULD GET IT. THAT'S MY FEAR.

>> ALWAYS A WAY WE WILL END UP LOSING ANYWAY, LOSE THE 21 MILLION, TOO. WE TOOK A CHANCE.

>> THAT'S THE ANSWER TO MY QUESTION. ANYONE ELSE?

COMMISSIONER CHESNEY . >> THANK YOU. FIRST I WANTED TO ADDRESS ONE OF COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ COMMENTS . WE COULD NOT DO THE SAME WITH AGO BECAUSE WE JUST GOT THE CONTRACT AND WE JUST GOT THE CONTRACT IN OUR PACKAGE THIS TIME AROUND TO LOOK AND START ANALYZING. WHEN I STARTED DOING MY DILIGENCE AND I MET WITH DR. GONZALEZ AND HE PRESENTED WHAT HE WOULD PRESENT AND HE PRESENTED ON THE BUDGET. HE DID NOT TELL ME HE WOULD ASK FOR A $40,000 RACE FOR HIMSELF, BUT HE DID SHOW THE CHART INDICATING ALL THE THINGS HE WOULD PROPOSE AS PART OF THE HEALTH UNIT. I ASKED ARE THESE THINGS THAT WE ARE STATUTORILY REQUIRED TO DO BECAUSE THE COUNTY OPERATES DIFFERENT FROM THE CITY, THE CITY'S CHARTER THE COUNTY A STATUTE. HE CANDIDLY AND HONESTLY TOLD ME MOST OF THE THINGS ON THE LIST WERE NOT STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS OF THE COUNTY. I HAVE BEEN VERY CLEAR WHETHER YOU LIKE MY POSITION OR NOT WE NEED TO BE MOVING MORE TOWARD AT THE LEAD

[00:55:03]

OF THE JUDGE SHE HAS PLANTED IT IN MY MIND WE NEED TO BE WORRIED ABOUT THINGS MORE SO THAT WE ARE OBLIGATE IT TO DO STATUTORILY OR ABLE TO DO THAT AND SOME OF THE THINGS WE DO AND I MET AND SHARED THAT WITH THEM. I TOLD HIM I HAD CONCERNS. MARY CANDIDLY AND HONESTLY WHEN DOING MY DILIGENCE AFTER THE CONTRACT, AS I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE BUDGET PROPOSED AND MADE SEEING WHAT THE COST WAS GOING I DID REACH OUT AND I'M NOT HIDING THAT AT ALL. I HAVE THE ALLEGATION AS COUNTY COMMISSIONER OR ON ANY PROJECT TO DO DILIGENCE AND THAT'S PART OF IT AND RESPONSIVE AND SPENT A GOOD AMOUNT OF TIME TALKING TO ME ABOUT THIS. AND, SO, I APPRECIATE THAT THEY ARE HERE TODAY MAKING THE PRESENTATION. I HAVE MANY OF THE SAME CONCERNS THE JUDGE HAS ARTICULATED SO I WON'T GO BACK OVER THOSE. AT THE END OF THE DAY NO MATTER WHAT ACCUSATIONS ARE MADE BY PEOPLE WHEN THEY DON'T LIKE OTHER POSITIONS, WE ARE ALL HERE TRYING TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO BEST SERVE OUR COMMUNITY AND CITIZENS THAT WE SERVE. I AM THE WAY THE COUNTY SHOULD GO. I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT IT IS TODAY AS WE SPEAK BASED ON UNCERTAINTY AND GRANTS, BASED ON CONTRACT, THE COST BEING WAY MORE THAN ANTICIPATED. I ORIGINALLY THOUGHT IT WOULD BE $750,000 AND WE WOULD GET BACK MONEY TO THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. THIS HAS ALREADY BALLOONED , THE CONTRACT AND LET ME TELL YOU IT'S AS GREAT OF A GROUP AS WE COULD PICK SO THIS IS NOTHING RELATED TO THEM BUT THE COST IS THE COST OVER $920,000 . PLUS THE COST TO ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM AND TO RENOVATE THE BUILDING , THOSE ARE TAXPAYER DOLLARS. THE COST TO ADMINISTER INCLUDES DR. GONZALEZ SELLER, ASSISTANT SALARY, CLERK SALARY, SO WE HAVE PUSHED THIS OVER $1.2 MILLION AND WE HAVE NOT EVEN ALLOCATED THE COST RELATED TO ALL THE OTHER STUFF WE HAVE TO DISH OUT. SOMEONE HAS TO DO SEPTIC, SOMEONE HAS TO DO OTHER THINGS I DID NOT SEE ALL OF THOSE ALLOCATED EITHER. SO AGAIN I AM NOT SURE THAT I DON'T WANT TO DO THIS, I'M JUST NOT SURE THAT I DO. SO, THE CITY MANAGER REQUEST AND I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE AND I DON'T MEAN TO ELEVATE ANYONE AT ALL BUT I DON'T SEE THE CITY MANAGER SHOW UP AT THESE MEETINGS A LOT. TO ME THAT'S NOT A NEGATIVE, THAT SHOWS THE EMPHASIS THAT THE CITY IS PUTTING ON THIS BY SAYING , HEY LOOK LET'S TRY AGAIN. LET ME SAY UP FRONT. I AGREE WITH WHAT COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ SAID. WE WERE NOT GETTING ENOUGH COUNTY SERVICES IN OUTLYING AREAS AND THAT IS AN ISSUE WE HAVE TO ADDRESS. BEFORE WE THROW THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER SHOULDN'T WE AT LEAST TRY TO SIT DOWN WITH PARTNERS OF 30 YEARS TO SEE IF WE CAN WORK IT OUT BEFORE WE RE-CREATE THE ENTIRE WHEEL AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. DR. GONZALEZ IS A CAPABLE MAN BUT HE IS NEVER ANY HEALTH UNIT OR PUT TOGETHER THIS KIND OF THING. SO TO PUT THAT ON SOMEONE WHO HAS NEVER DONE IT IS A LITTLE UNFAIR TO BEGIN WITH. I THINK THE CITY IS MAKING A GREAT GOODWILL GESTURE AND LET'S TALK HISTORICALLY A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT. WHEN THIS STARTED BACK WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL DID VOTE TO WITHDRAW FROM THE HEALTH DISTRICT. WE WERE ALL CAUGHT OFFGUARD BY THAT, WE WERE BOTHERED BY THAT AND AS WE TALKED ABOUT, WE GOT TOGETHER AND SAID HOLD ON, BEFORE YOU DO THIS LET'S LOOK AT THE NEW BUSINESS MODEL WE WERE ABLE TO WORK TOGETHER. WE ASKED THEM AT THAT POINT TO COME BACK TO THE CABLE -- TABLE. TO THEIR CREDIT THEY DID IT WAS 13-1 TO RE-CREATE THIS MODEL AND I DON'T THINK IT HAS BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL BUT IT NEEDS TWEAKING. I NEED THAT TWO OR THREE MORE TIMES WE HAD TO GET COUNTY SERVICES AND WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO DO THAT WE CAN DO THAT SITTING DOWN WITH PARTNERS AND TRYING TO BE EFFICIENT ON THIS AND WE OWE THE PEOPLE WE REPRESENT THAT OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE EVERYBODY CAN TALK. I DON'T AGREE WITH THE FIVE-YEAR DEAL, I DON'T AGREE WITH 5% INCREASE AT THE END OF THE DAY THE REAL DEAL HERE IS WE NEED TO SERVE BEST BECAUSE ONCE WE UNDO THIS IS

[01:00:06]

NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE DONE. AGAIN. WITH EASE. WHEN THE CITY MOVES DOWN THE ROAD AND HERE'S ANOTHER THING AND I'M NOT SAYING THEY ARE THEY MAY HAVE TO LAY OFF PEOPLE WHICH COULD'VE BEEN FORMER COUNTY EMPLOYEES WE SENT OVER TO THE CITY IN GOOD FAITH. I WOULD NOT WANT THAT TO HAPPEN.

AND IF WE'RE PULLING A $1.7 MILLION IN THE PARTNERSHIP THAT COULD AFFECT EMPLOYEES AND THAT'S THE LAST THING ANY OF US WANT TO DO BECAUSE WE WORK HARD TO MAKE SURE THEY TOOK EVERYONE OF OUR EMPLOYEES AND THEY KEPT THEM AND THEY HAVE DONE THAT TO MY KNOWLEDGE AND THEY LIVED UP TO THEIR PROMISES AND AGAIN THIS IS A BIG DEAL. A BIG BIG DEAL AND IT IS IMPORTANT, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING WE WILL DEAL WITH TODAY.

NO OFFENSE TO ANYBODY ELSE ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE THIS IS PUBLIC HEALTH AND IT MATTERS. I'M JUST NOT READY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PLAN BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY UNANSWERED QUESTIONS. DO I THINK WE OUGHT TO DELAY ONE YEAR AS SUGGESTED? MAYBE NOT, MAYBE SIX MONTHS IS REASONABLE. IF IT HAS TO BE A YEAR, GREAT, WE NEED TO KNOW IF WE CAN WORK THESE THINGS OUT AND GET DOWN TO BRASS ON THIS. I DON'T WANT TO VOTE ON THIS TODAY UP OR DOWN, I WOULD RATHER DELAY. JUDGE I DON'T WANT TO QUASH THE DISCUSSION BUT I WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED LATER FOR A MOTION TO TABLE BEFORE ANYONE ELSE BECAUSE IF I MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE WE CAN'T DISCUSS ANYMORE SO I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW, BUT I WANT TO HEAR FROM EVERYBODY. I WOULD LIKE TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR THAT BECAUSE PUTTING THIS BACK IS THE BEST THING FOR OUR CITIZENS. IT WILL HELP THE MOST AND I WOULD HOPE WE WOULD HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY.

>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION THREE YEARS.

>> SECOND. >> THAT'S EXACTLY . WE HAVE

ALREADY HAD DISCUSSIONS. >> COMMISSIONER MAREZ ASKED FOR THE FLOOR SO LET'S HEAR WHAT HE HAS TO SAY. FOR DISCUSSION.

>> ARE WE IN DISCUSSION FOR THE MOTION? YES? IS THAT ACTIVE? OKAY. MOTION ON THE FLOOR. JUST TO KNOW, I WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF GO BACK TO THE GENERAL DISCUSSION WE HAD ON WHAT WAS PRESENTED FIRST. BUT I GUESS IT CAN TIE INTO THIS. THE MAIN POINTS FROM ME HERE TODAY AND TRY NOT GO FIRST BECAUSE IT TAKES ME WHILE TO PROCESS EVERYTHING AND I WANT TO HEAR THE PERSPECTIVES BROUGHT UP HERE. SO THAT IS ALWAYS HOW I TRY TO APPROACH BIG ISSUES. AND I AGREE, COMMISSIONER CHESNEY, WE DON'T HAVE THE CITY MANAGER WALK INTO COMMISSIONERS COURT VERY OFTEN AND WHAT IT DOES, IT SAYS TO ME THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE. THIS WAS 13 ELECTED OFFICIALS IN FAVOR OF THIS DECISION TWO YEARS AGO, HARD TO BELIEVE IT HAS BEEN THAT LONG.

JUST ANNOUNCED IN OCTOBER IN OCTOBER 2022 TO BE OUR PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR. SO, IT HAS BEEN A PROCESS. IN THE END WE HAVE TRIED TO FOCUS ON COUNTY SERVICES , THOSE UNDERSERVED AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE POSE HERE TODAY THAT'S THE BIGGEST ISSUE, THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT AFFECTS ME AND MY CONSTITUENTS THAT ARE OUT IN ROBSTOWN, THIS FACILITY RENOVATED AND ON THE SOUTH WING OF THE BUILDING IS DEVOTED TO HELPING TO IMPROVE HEALTHCARE AND HEALTHCARE ACCESS FOR THOSE UNDERSERVED AND THOSE WITH LIMITED TO NO TRANSPORTATION AVAILABILITY TO GET INTO THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI. BOTH OF THESE FACILITIES ARE IN PRECINCT 3. KIND OF COINCIDENTAL BUT THE CITY COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT IS THERE AS WELL. I SEE IT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE REPRESENTING KIND OF THE GOOD FORTUNE OF THOSE FACILITIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES. THIS IS A BIGGER ISSUE, LIKE MENTIONED IT IS A COUNTYWIDE ISSUE THAT IS IMPORTANT. FOR ME IT'S WHAT ARE SERVICES OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS, KEEPING EMPLOYEES THAT'S A GOOD POINT WE HAVE NOT CONSIDERED WHAT KIND OF IMPACT THIS HAS. I DON'T WANT TO DOWNPLAY , START, IT IS AN IMPORTANT COMMUNITY PARTNER AND IT HAS BEEN CLOSE TO ONE YEAR NOW SINCE I WAS INVITED TO GO TAKE A TOUR. AND VISIT THE

[01:05:01]

FACILITY FOR THE ADMINISTRATION TALKING ABOUT THEIR VISION TO LOOK AT WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. AND HERE WE ARE. IN THE END WHEN YOU HAVE A PARTNER, I PUT THIS IN TERMS THAT ARE EASY FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND AND TO RELATE TO. IF A PARTNER CAME IN FROM MY PRECINCT , THE ONLY CITIES I HAVE ARE ROBSTOWN AND CORPUS CHRISTI. I PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE IF SOMEONE CAME FROM ROBSTOWN , THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT OR THE CITY MAYOR. WITH THAT KIND OF SAYING -- STANDING AND SAY WE WANT TO WORK TO FIND A RELATIONSHIP TO CONTINUE. FOR ME, THAT IS A GAME CHANGER. THAT MAKES A BIG DEAL. I WOULD SUGGEST HAD HE NOT COME IN TODAY THAT I WOULD JUST PROCEED BECAUSE I THINK OVERALL IT IS A GOOD PROJECT. I DON'T KNOW IF ONE YEAR IS WHAT WE NEED. I DO WANT TO TAKE A LITTLE MORE TIME TO LOOK AT THIS BUT I DON'T HANDCUFF JUST TO SAY WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS DECISION DONE BY TODAY. IF THERE ARE ISSUES TO DISCUSS THEN LET'S WORK IT OUT, CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT ENGAGEMENT. I DON'T WANT THIS TO TARNISH WHAT WOULD BE AN EXCELLENT PARTNERSHIP. BE THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY THAT CAN BE UTILIZED THAT THE CITY HEALTH DEPARTMENT CAN WORK TOGETHER AND REALLY FOCUS ON. ON WHIRL NEEDS, AS WELL AND PERHAPS THROUGH PARTNERSHIP WITH AMISTADES. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR TODAY. TO TAKE A PAUSE , NOT TO SAY NO TO THIS BECAUSE I BELIEVE STRONGLY IN THE CONCEPT OF THIS AND I DO BELIEVE THIS WILL SERVE MANY UNDERSERVED , BUT ALSO TO SEPARATE THE PARTNERSHIP WE HAVE HAD SO LONG AND THE FACT THAT THE CITY MANAGER IS HERE TODAY ASKING FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION, THAT GOES A LONG WAY IN MY BOOK. THAT JUST DOES.

IF THIS IS AN ITEM WE CAN TABLE AND CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION I WOULD MUCH RATHER DO THAT . I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE BUDGET BEING CHANGED ONE WAY OR ANOTHER AND ELIMINATE ANYBODY ON THE CITY SIDE OR COUNTY SIDE. SO I GUESS IT IS A PUSH BUT A PUSH IS OKAY WHEN WE HAVE AN ISSUE THAT IS SO COMPLEX LIKE THIS. AND IT IS NOT DENYING THE WORK OR EFFORTS FROM COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ AND OTHERS INTO THIS, YOU KNOW WE PUT , IN TERMS FOR ME WE WORKED ON A PROJECT FOR ARPA THAT I REALLY THOUGHT WOULD WORK WELL AND HAD TO GIVE THE BAD NEWS THAT IT DID NOT QUALIFY AFTER MONTHS AND MONTHS OF INVESTMENT ON THE STAFF SIDE AND MY SIDE BEING TOLD IT DID NOT WORK. SO THESE KINDS OF THINGS HAPPEN IN PUBLIC SERVICE. NOT SAYING TODAY IT HAS TO DIE, BUT I SUPPORT TABLING THIS TO COME BACK TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS, CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY BECAUSE I FEEL IT IS SO IMPORTANT. I NEVER INITIALLY FELT SPLITTING THE PARTNERSHIP WAS A GOOD IDEA, BUT THE FACT THAT THE CITY IS HERE TODAY TO SAY WE WANT TO TRY TO MAKE IT WORK I'M NOT GOING TO DENY THAT AND I CAN'T BECAUSE A PARTNERS ASKING TO CONTINUE THE PARTNERSHIP WE ALREADY HAVE. IF THAT FALLS APART THEN WE HAVE THE MEANS AND A VALUABLE MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY WHO CAN STEP UP FOR THE ORGANIZATION AND WE HAVE A LOT OF THOSE ROLES. THE FUNDING, THE GRANT ISSUES ARE A CONCERN AS WELL. JUST RECALLING WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED. I DON'T WANT TO PICK IT APART AND JUSTIFY, BUT PLAIN AND SIMPLE THE CITY MANAGER WALKS IN THE DOOR ASKS FOR CONTINUATION I WILL DEFER PLAIN

AND SIMPLE. THANK YOU. >> THE MOTION ON THE FLOORS TO AMEND THE CONTRACT TO A THREE-YEAR AGREEMENT INSTEAD OF FIVE YEARS. THERE IS A MOTION AND SECOND.

>> ISSUES ME JUDGE I WOULD LIKE TO SAY I WISH THE CITY MANAGER WOULD HAVE WALKED IN SIX MONTHS AGO. I DO SUPPORT COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. IF ANYBODY HAS EVER WORKED SO HARD FOR RURAL AREAS, COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ ESPECIALLY ON HEALTH. AND MYSELF BEING OUT THERE TALKING WITH CONSTITUENTS, THEY LIKE THE IDEA BEING ABLE TO GO TO THE BUILDING AND WE DID SPEND QUITE A BIT OF MONEY GETTING THE BUILDING READY , BUT I WISH COMMISSIONER CHESNEY ALSO SINCE IT IS A COUNTYWIDE AREA PROJECT HE CHIMES IN AND TELLS US HIS FEELINGS. I WISH TO FIND COMMON

[01:10:02]

SENSE TO TELL US WHY WE SHOULDN'T HAVE A RESTAURANT ON THE PIER THAT'S GOING TO GET BLOWN DOWN EVERY TIME WE HAVE A STORM AND IS NOT EVEN INSURED. I WISH YOU WOULD HAVE THAT KIND

OF COMMON SENSE. >> BE HAPPY TO, IF YOU ARE EVER

YEAR I WOULD BE HAPPY TO. >> COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ HAS

THE FLOOR. >> CITY MANAGER DO YOU WANT TO HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SAY? I SAW YOU STAND UP.

>> THANK YOU. ONE IMPORTANT REASON WHY I AM HERE NOW IS NEXT TUESDAY I WILL BE PRESENTING THE CITY PROPOSED BUDGET SO THAT SPEAKS, COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ, YOU AND I HAVE A GREAT WORKING RELATIONSHIP. IT IS A SURPRISE I AM HERE LAST MINUTE BECAUSE WE ARE WORRIED. I HAD TO PRESENT THE BUDGET NEXT TUESDAY AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE TEAM FOR SEVERAL WEEKS NOW AND IT'S MORE APPARENT THAN EVER WE ARE NOT READY SO THAT'S WHY I AM HERE. IT IS UNUSUAL TO SHOW UP LAST MINUTE AND NOBODY LIKES TO WORK IN THAT MANNER. TO RUSH TO A DECISION AND JUDGMENT THAT COULD IMPACT THE COMMUNITY IS WHY AM HERE FOR THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT. MORE APPARENT THAN EVER AS WE GET TO THE FINAL STEP NEXT TUESDAY WHEN I HAVE TO PRESENT THE BUDGET AND IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET NOW IS THE ELIMINATION SO I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER IS IN MORE THAN 21, 21 POSITIONS THAT WE WOULD BE TELLING NEXT WEEK. WE DO HAVE A REDUCTION OF FORCE POLICY SO THE GOAL WOULD BE EVERYBODY IS PLACED SOMEWHERE ELSE. I CAN TELL YOU DON'T HAVE SO MANY NURSING POSITIONS AVAILABLE. WE HAVE SOME VACANCIES AND POSITIONS WE WILL RECOMMEND PRODUCTION. COMPANY THAT MOST OF THEM WILL BE PLACED BUT WE KNOW HEALTH IS A UNIQUE NICHE IN OUR CITY WE HAVE 29 LINES OF BUSINESS WITH ONE PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT SO IT'S HARD TO PLAY SOME OF THOSE EMPLOYEES. THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TODAY. WE ARE ON THE HEELS OF A BIG RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL. TO 21 EMPLOYEES WHO, WE MADE A PLEDGE TO THEM THAT WE WOULD BRING THEM OVER AND WE WOULD MAKE SURE THEY HAVE EMPLOYMENT FOR AS LONG AS THEY WANT. AND NOW WE MIGHT BE TELLING THEM NEXT TUESDAY ALL BETS ARE OFF. SO THE TIMING , I WOULD ADMIT TO COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ AND COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ DOES NOT SEEM APPROPRIATE AS A SHIRLEY, BUT WE ARE TO THE POINT WHERE WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING TUESDAY. I AM WORRIED MORE SO FOR THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE ARE READY. I WANTED TO ADD THAT.

>> THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ ?

>> THANK YOU. ONE OF THE THINGS ALSO DISCUSSED WAS THE BUDGETARY FISCAL SIDE OF THIS. THIS IS HEART OF THE CONCERN.

OF THE IDEAS TO EVEN PUSH BACK SIX MONTHS, THAT WOULD INCREASE THE BUDGET PROPOSAL WE HAVE PRESENTED ON MONDAY. THE BUDGET PROPOSAL WAS MEANT, THE WORKING PLAN WAS HOW TO PROVIDE SERVICES AT A LOWER COST AND A MORE EFFICIENT COST. SO I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT, EVEN IF WE DON'T CHANGE FOR YOUR SIX MONTHS, THE BUDGET COST WILL GO BACK TO WHERE THE VALUE WAS AT AROUND 2 MILLION. SO SAVING THAT AMOUNT WE WERE SAYING WE WOULD NOT UTILIZE WHICH WAS 645,000 WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO USE IT AFTER ALL. JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT, THAT IS ONE OF THE TALKING POINTS ON THE BUDGETARY SIDE.

>> ALSO THE OTHER TALKING PART WAS ABOUT AFFECTING SERVICES AND THE GROWTH AND WHETHER BOTH OF US ARE READY AND NO ONE IS HARMED IN THE PROCESS, SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS ON WHETHER WE ARE READY TO AFFECT OUR COMMUNITY.

>> THE BEST VOICE FOR THAT ONE OUR SITE IS A CONTRACTOR WHO HAS BEEN IN SEVERAL MEETINGS. ARE WE READY TO SEE WHAT THEY

THINK. >> I HAVE NO DOUBT AMISTADES HAS BEEN DOING THIS WELL. WE SPEAK VERY HIGHLY AND WE KNOW IT WILL BE IMPACTED. THERE ARE MANY OTHER FACETS OF THIS WHICH WILL CREATE DEPARTMENTS AND PEOPLE AND EMPLOYEES AND THINGS THAT I'M AFRAID THE COUNTY IS NOT READY FOR. THAT IS MY FEAR.

IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH AMISTADES AND THEIR ABILITY AND EXCELLENT WORK AND REVIEWS. I THINK THAT IS UNANIMOUS ACROSS

THE COURT UP HERE TOTALLY. >> I AM REALLY REALLY KIND OF UPSET FROM WHAT I HEAR UP HERE. YOU KNOW, NOT TALKING ABOUT

[01:15:03]

PARTNERSHIPS, WE TALK ABOUT AN EXTENSION, EXTENSION PARTNERSHIP. TALK ABOUT PARTNERSHIP DO IT FOREVER, TALK ABOUT EXTENSIONS WE WILL BE HERE FOREVER. IT IS AN EXTENSION NOT A PARTNERSHIP. YOU WANT THE EXTENSION SIX MONTHS OR THREE MONTHS WHATEVER IT IS AND WE HAVE DONE THAT TWICE. NOTHING HAS COME AFTER THAT, NOTHING HAS COME TO US TO SAY WAIT A MINUTE, CONTINUING ANOTHER SIX MONTHS SIT DOWN AND TALK ABOUT IT. SO , THIS EXTENSION , YOU KNOW AND THEN I HEAR ABOUT MONIES. WORRIED ABOUT MONIES, 1.7 MILLION, IT'S WHAT WE ARE WORKING WITH. WE ARE NOT GOING OVER 1.7 MILLION. WHERE SERVICES PROVIDE TO PEOPLE IN RURAL AREAS, IT IS A NEED, NOT A WANT. TOO MUCH MONEY WHEN YOU TAKE 2 MILLION AWAY FROM 21 MILLION THAT WE GIVE AWAY AND WE PUT IT ON THE SITE. TAKE 20 MILLION FROM THE PIER AND PUT IT ON THE SITE. I DON'T SEE, I VOTED FOR SOME THINGS MOVING FORWARD AND I SAY OKAY I WILL GO ALONG WITH THAT WE DO NEED IT. WHEN IT COMES TO SERVICES, MAYBE WE ARE NOT MANDATED, BUT TRY TO TELL ME WE'RE NOT GOING TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE WE ARE NOT MANDATED, WE DON'T WANT TO SERVE THE POOR OR THE SICK? THE CARE, THE ONES WHO NEED IT? IT IS NOT A WANT, IT IS A NEED.

AND THE JOBS , I THINK WE MIGHT BE LOSING JOBS, I DON'T KNOW.

EVERYBODY IS LOSING JOBS. PAY EMPLOYERS MONEY WITH THE MONEY WE HAVE FROM THE 1.7 AND YOU'RE NOT REALLY PAYING THEM FROM CITY MANAGER. YOU ARE PAYING FROM THE 1.7. 1.7 , THAT WOULD BE OUR BUDGET. EVEN WITH THOSE THINGS TALKING ABOUT , THE CONTRACT IT WOULD OF NEVER, EVER GOING FOR THE 1.7 WE TALKED ABOUT. I DON'T CARE IF YOU BRING IT, WE TALK ABOUT THE INSPECTORS , THE PUBLIC HEALTH , SANITATION STILL FROM 1.7.

THE OTHER PROBLEM WE HAVE WITH THE 1.5 AGAIN , THAT'S WHAT WE SAY WE ARE READY TO SPLIT. YOU KNOW I HATE TO DO THIS, CITY MANAGER, BUT JUST BEING OPEN WITH YOU BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE I CAN DO THAT. WE HAVE FOUGHT SOME BATTLES TOGETHER, SOME BUDGETS TOGETHER. I WILL JUST SAY, THIS IS NOT , TO ME, WE ARE NOT TELLING THE PEOPLE WE WANT TO DO SOMETHING OR TAKE CARE OF YOU AND YOU MAY NOT FEEL LIKE THAT HERE OR DO NOT FEEL THAT, BUT WE MANDATED OR COMMISSION TO THE COMMUNITY TO HELP THOSE SO WHY IS THE CITY DOING IT? WHY ARE THEY DOING IT? WE DO NOT MANDATE HEALTH HERE EITHER, BUT WE HAVE HEALTH HERE. WE ARE NOT MANDATED TO HAVE A RESTAURANT BUT WE HAVE A RESTAURANT. WE HAD ONE BECAUSE SO TO ME A RESTAURANT VERSUS SERVICES FOR THE POOR, HOW CAN YOU COMPARE THAT?

>> I DON'T THINK ANYONE HERE IS SAYING WE DON'T WANT TO HELP THE PEOPLE OUT THERE. NO MATTER WHAT IF THIS GETS PUSHED THE CITY IS PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES.

>> THERE WERE OTHER THINGS THAT WERE SAID AND TO ME IT IS A

DONE DEAL. >> I AM JUST SAYING , AT THIS POINT I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO GO OUT FOR BIDS WITH THE CONTRACTOR. AND AFTER WE SELECTED A CONTRACT, WE GO FOR BID ON PRIMARY CARE. AND GETTING READY FOR PRIMARY CARE.

WHY ARE WE DOING ALL OF THIS? IS ANYBODY SAYING THAT? WHERE

WE DOING IT? >> SOME OF IT WAS MAYBE RUSHED.

>> YOU ARE PART OF IT, TOO ALL ALONG.

>> GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER CHESNEY AND THEN IT WILL CALL THE VOTE. THE VOTE ON THE FLOOR IS ABOUT CHANGING THE CONTRACT FROM FIVE YEARS TO THREE YEARS. I WOULD LIKE TO GET THE VOTE DOWN AND IF YOU DON'T MIND COMMISSIONER CHESNEY I WILL LET

[01:20:01]

YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. >> JUST GOING TO SEE YOU ARE GIVING US NO CHOICE, BUT TO VOTE IF YOU'RE ASKING FOR A

VOTE. >> THIS IS AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT, NOT THE CONTRACT. THE AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT.

>> I SAID I WAS AGAINST IT, THAT WAS MY BIGGEST PROBLEM, THE FIVE YEARS AND I THOUGHT WE WOULD TRY FOR ONE YEAR, THAT WAS THE REASON WE KEPT RELATIONSHIPS GOING AND WANTED TO WORK SO WELL WITH THE CITY. I WAS NOT SURE WE WOULD COME

RIGHT BACK. >> SO FOR ONE YEAR WE DON'T DO

THE EXTENSION? >> I DID NOT MIND HAVING ONE YEAR. I TOLD THE COUNTY ATTORNEY THAT WHEN I WENT OVER THE CONTRACT I WOULD NOT VOTE FOR THIS. IF YOU HAD A ONE-YEAR TRIAL WITH MAYBE OPTIONS FOR TWO ADDITIONAL YEARS, UNDERSTAND YOU PUT A LOT INTO THE BUSINESS AND COME FORTH BUT I CAN'T FOR THIS NOW WITH ALL THE INFORMATION I HAVE. TOO MUCH IS UP IN THE AIR AND NOT CLEAR.

>> CAN ASK THE ONLY THING ON THE FLOOR IS A MOTION THAT WITH A MOTION ON THE FLOOR I WOULD LIKE TO FINISH BEFORE WE VOTE IF THAT'S OKAY. A COUPLE THINGS . HE SAID WE MIGHT BE LOSING JOBS AND I DON'T WANT COUNTY EMPLOYEES TO BE SCARED BY THAT COMMENT. THERE IS ZERO PROPOSAL ON OURS FOR ANY OF THE EMPLOYEE TO LOSE THEIR JOB. COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ ALLUDED TO WE MIGHT BE LOSING JOBS, THERE IS NO PROPOSAL ON THE TABLE. NOTHING SAID EVER ACCEPT BY YOU JUST KNOW IT SCARES PEOPLE WHEN WE SAY THINGS SO THERE IS NO PROPOSAL ON THE FLOOR PLEASE CAN I FINISH? THERE IS NO PROPOSAL ON THE FLOOR FOR ANY COUNTY ATTORNEY OR EMPLOYEE TO LOSE THEIR JOB SO LET'S BE CLEAR. NUMBER TWO WHAT COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ SAID IS EXTENSION. WHAT I HEARD CITY MANAGER SAY IS HE'S ASKING FOR EXTENSION TO SEE IF WE CAN HAVE A LONG-TERM DEAL WORKED OUT.

THIS IS NOT JUST YES WE ARE NOT READY AND THE COUNTY CAN DO WHAT THEY WANT, BUT ALSO LET'S SEE IF WE CAN WORK TOGETHER WITH THE EXTENSION. WE CAN GET READY OR WE CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT BETWEEN THE TWO TO BETTER SERVICE THAT THE COUNTY. IF I MISUNDERSTOOD YOU PLEASE LET ME KNOW BUT THAT'S WHAT I HEARD.

IT'S NOT ANOTHER DELAY, IT IS DELAYED BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE ARE READY AND ALSO DELAY SO WE CAN GO SIT DOWN WITH THE CITY AND UTILIZE THAT TIME TO SEE IF WE CAN COME UP WITH A BETTER PART OF A LONG-TERM PARTNERSHIP WE HAVE HAD 30 YEARS THAT WE JUST CREATED TWO YEARS AGO AND TO THROW IT ALL AWAY RIGHT NOW WHEN WE ARE NOT READY IS TOUGH AS WELL. I WANTED TO MAKE THOSE CLARIFICATIONS. I CANNOT VOTE FOR THE AMENDMENT EITHER BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE GO ON THE CONTRACT. I NEVER AGREED TO ANYTHING , I DID NOT KNOW WE WOULD DO THREE YEARS OR FIVE YEARS EITHER SO I CANNOT VOTE FOR THE AMENDMENT BUT I DON'T WANT TO BE CASTING A VOTE AGAINST THE PROJECT YET BECAUSE I'M NOT READY. I WILL VOTE NO ON THE AMENDMENT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE OUGHT TO BE GOING THREE OR FIVE YEARS. IF WE DO IT WE SHOULD DO ONE, BUT WE OUGHT TO DELAY SO I WANT TO SAY THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE MOTION COMING UP AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR WHEN I VOTE AGAINST IT BECAUSE I THINK IT IS TOO LONG AND WE OUGHT TO DELAY SO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO

FINISH AND CLARIFY. >> I WANT TO SAY ON THE TIMING I WOULD HATE TO VOTE AGAINST ANYTHING . I FEEL MORE INCLINED , THE NUMBER WAS JUST THROWN OUT AS AN OPTION. I DON'T THINK IT WILL SWAY ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. WE WERE GIVEN THE ASK, ALBEIT LAST-SECOND, LAST-MINUTE WHICH WE HAVE TO HONOR AND HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION. I DID WANT SOME CLARIFICATION AS WE TALK ABOUT THE TERM I GUESS OF THE LENGTH OF THE CONTRACT IF WE CAN LOOK AT SECTION 2.3 AND THIS IS FOR CLARIFICATION.

EXTENT OF SERVICES. SO, SERVICES WILL BE PROVIDED AT THE CALL THEIR OWN BUILDING MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY 8:00 TO 5:00 AND ONE DAY PER WEEK UNTIL 6:00 LATE SO THIS IS A BIG CHANGE IN WHAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY. AND THEN MOBILE SERVICE IS SOMETHING WE DID NOT HAVE BEFORE THAT WE AS A COUNTY SUPPORTED AND WE HAVE THAT OPTION. IS THAT CORRECT?

[01:25:01]

>> MOBILE SERVICES WE DID HAVE, WE HAVE TWICE A MONTH THE

CONTRACT SUGGESTS GOING . >> THERE IS SO MUCH GOOD TO THIS, IT'S NOT LIKE THIS IS A BAD CONTRACT OR THAT THE TIME HAS BEEN SPENT INCORRECTLY, THE INVESTMENT PUT INTO THIS IS A LOT OF THOUGHT AND INVESTMENT, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ ABOUT WHAT COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ PASSION IS, MY THING IS THAT WE ARE ASKED TO HAVE CONTINUATION AND I DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT. BOTH ENTITIES NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT ARE THE INDICATIONS MEANING PER PUBLIC HEALTH FOR THE COMMUNITY? NOT JUST THE CITY, BUT THE COUNTY.

IF THE ASK WAS ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT I WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE AS SUPPORTIVE, BECAUSE WE ARE HERE ASKING FOR THE CONTINUATION THAT'S WHY AGREE TO TABLE OR TO EXTENSION OF DISCUSSION. HOWEVER YOU WANT TO WORD IT OR WHATEVER LENGTH OF TIME. LET'S MAKE IT SHORTER TO GET THIS RESOLVED QUICKLY. MAY BE A MATTER OF MONTHS NOT A FULL YEAR. THAT'S WHERE MY THINKING IS. NOT IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM IS THIS BAD. THE AWARDING OF THE CONTRACT I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE BAD BUT THE FACT THAT WE HAVE THE REQUEST I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE TO DO THE DUE DILIGENCE TO FIND OUT WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FOR ALL TAXPAYERS BECAUSE WE ARE ALL IMPACTED. YOU HAVE HEARD THE CONCERN ABOUT SERVICES TO OTHER PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY WHICH HAS TO BE CONTINUED AND LET'S HONOR THAT BECAUSE WE KNOW EVEN WITH DISCUSSIONS WE HAVE FOR PEOPLE THAT LIVE OUTSIDE OF ROBSTOWN WILL STILL BE IMPACTED, THOSE TRANSPORTATION ISSUES. WHETHER ROBSTOWN OR CORPUS CHRISTI WILL BE DIFFICULT, BUT MOVING OUT TO THE WESTERN PART MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER FOR SOME, BUT STILL A CHALLENGE. THANK YOU

FOR LETTING ME CLARIFY. >> I WOULD LIKE A CLARIFICATION. WE TALKED ABOUT STAFF AND MORE STAFF, YOU'RE READY TO GO WITH STAFFING AND EVERYTHING ELSE ACCORDING TO

THE CONTRACT? >> WE WILL BE READY TO GO BUT WE HAVE NOT HIRED PEOPLE BECAUSE WE ARE WAITING FOR THE CONTRACT. WE HAVE PEOPLE IN PLACE AND A LOT OF SERVICES IN HERE ARE NOT JUST FROM THE NEW HIRES IN ROBSTOWN. IT IS FROM WITHIN A NETWORK WHEN IT COMES TO MEDICATIONS AND HELP WITH TRANSPORTATION. OTHER NAVIGATION AND THINGS LIKE THAT FOR ALL THE AREAS FROM THE ISLAND , SO BECAUSE STAFFING -WISE WE CAN BE READY AND I AM MORE THAN HAPPY TO WORK WITH ANYTHING, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT. WE ARE HONESTLY, WE DO NOT MAKE ANYTHING OFF OF THIS, THIS IS JUST A SERVICE AND WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT HEALTHCARE IS LOOKED AT OUTSIDE OF THE CITY , WE ARE GETTING OUT THERE. THE CONTRACTS IS ONE WEEK AND THE GOAL IS THREE TIMES A WEEK TO BE IN A SMALL TOWN, PARTNERING WITH SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY CENTERS SO WE FIND THINGS PEOPLE BRING THEM IN, IDENTIFY AND CONNECT TO CARE. THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT FOR THE COMMUNITY. IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE US, WHAT WE WANT

THIS FOR THE COMMUNITY. >> HAVE A QUESTION TALKING ABOUT THE CONTRACT. I ASKED OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY, THERE WAS AN ISSUE THAT WAS NOT CLEAR YOU ARE OPEN FIVE DAYS A WEEK. DID THEY CHANGE THAT AND CLARIFYING? THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS A PROBLEM WITH WHAT THEY HAD OR COMMENTS MADE BY THE COMMISSIONER NOT BEING OPEN EVERY DAY AND PEOPLE CANNOT GET USED TO THE HOURS. I BELIEVE IN THE CONTRACT IT SAID SOMETHING ABOUT YOU WOULD CLOSE WHEN YOU DID MOBILE CLINICS OR WHERE YOU WOULD BE, IS IT OPEN FIVE DAYS A WEEK EVERY DAY? I WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE YOU CANNOT HAVE A BUSINESS OPEN OR SERVICE OPEN AND PEOPLE GET TIRED OF COMING AND ON THAT DAY YOU ARE CLOSED THAT WAS ONE ISSUE WE HAD.

>> VERY TRUE. SET HOURS AND DATES. WE ARE IN ROBSTOWN READY TO START PEDIATRICS TWICE A WEEK YOU CANNOT START CERTAIN NUMBER OF DAYS A WEEK. HAVING STAFF AT THE CLINIC AND HAVING THE MOBILE UNIT IN A WAY WE TRY TO DO THIS EFFICIENTLY IS BEING

[01:30:03]

ABLE TO FLEX OTHER STAFF WHICH IS WHERE I SEE THE PART-TIME

PIECES. >> THAT BROUGHT UP ANOTHER QUESTION I ASKED THE COUNTY ATTORNEY THAT INITIALLY WAS NOT CLEAR THAT I WANTED CLARIFIED, THINK IT.

>> SO AGAIN, LOOKING AT THIS AS A WRITTEN HOW DO WE GET THESE GREAT SERVICES OUT? CONNECT PEOPLE WITH CARE AND FIND PEOPLE , CANCER SCREENINGS, MOBILE CERVICAL CANCER SCREENINGS. THAT'S A BIG PROBLEM. SOME COOL THINGS ARE DONE, MANDATED OR NOT AND WE HAVE TO TO GO TO THE LEVEL YOU WANT, BUT THOSE ARE SOME PART-TIME PIECES COME WITH FIXED COST LIKE STAFF THAT ARE THERE FOR THAT AND SINCE WE HAVE A BIGGER POOL OF FOLKS PART-TIME PEOPLE GO DO SPECIAL SERVICES. THEY REACH ALL THE AREAS OF THE COUNTY SO ONE THING TO MENTION ON THE COST. I DID CONFIRM 3% INCREASE PER YEAR AND THE ONLY REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE NUMBERS GO UP AT LEAST 3%. IN FACT IF ANYTHING HAPPENS WE WILL EAT SOME COST ON THAT. SALARIES WENT UP 7% ONE YEAR. THAT WAS JUST TO COVER REGULAR INFLATION TO BE HONEST. AGAIN PRETTY MUCH A ZERO NET CONTRACT. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DOES NOT BECOME A DRAIN. FOR SERVICE AND A MISSION STANDPOINT WE ARE HERE. WE LOVE WORKING WITH THE CITY, WITH LOVE WORKING WITH DR. KAHN , WONDERFUL COMMUNICATION AND GREAT SERVICE 'S WERE HAPPY TO WORK IN WAYS FOR THE COUNTY.

>> THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH. NOW, YOUR MOTION ON THE TABLE TO CHANGE THE CONTRACT TO THREE YEARS? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO AMEND.

>> SERVICES. IT IS YOUR CONTRACT. I THINK GIVEN LIGHT OF THE INFORMATION IS GOING TO BE DISCUSSED, BUT YOUR MOTION?

>> MOTION TO GO ONE YEAR. >> SECOND.

>> HE WILL RESEND HIS MOTION FROM THREE YEARS ON THE CONTRACT TO GO ONE YEAR WITH TWO OF OPTION YEARS.

>> JUST ON THE AMENDMENT? >> JUST ON THE AMENDMENT, YES.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY

OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. >> JUDGE I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THE ITEM 6 MONTHS WITH DIRECTION FOR THE COUNTY JUDGE , COUNTY ATTORNEY AND CITY DELEGATION TO WORK TOGETHER TO EITHER GET US READY TO SPLIT OR TWO WORK OUT A LONG-TERM DEAL WITH SPECIFIC INSTRUCTION TO IMPROVE COUNTY PRESENCE EXCUSE ME TO IMPROVE THE THE HEALTH HISTORY PRESENCE AND SERVICES OUTSIDE OF THE ET J AREA OF NUECES COUNTY. THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION TO TABLE THAT DIRECTION FOR SIX MONTHS.

>> SECOND FOR DISCUSSION I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SHORTER-TERM.

>> THEY WANTED ONE YEAR. >> I KNOW, EVERYTHING IS IN PLACE. A LOT OF WORK HAS BEEN DONE AND I THINK WE WILL KNOW IN A SHORT TIME SIX MONTHS OR FOUR MONTHS. I THINK SHORTER SOWS WE UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING SOMETHING RATIFIED AND IF WE NEED EXTRA MONTHS WE CAN ADD IT ON AT THE END, BUT LET'S GIVE OURSELVES QUICKER TURNAROUND SO WE CAN HAVE THIS RESOLVED BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR, FOUR MONTHS FROM NOW SO THAT PUTS US INTO NOVEMBER SO WE CAN TAKE ACTION BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR TO BE READY BY THE START OF 2025 AT THE LATEST. WE SAY SIX MONTHS AND THEN A NEW YEAR, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING SHORTER. WE FIGURE OUT WHEN WE GET STARTED WE NEED MORE TIME, THEN BRING IT BACK FOR MORE TIME. WE CAN ALWAYS ADD EXTENSION TO THAT. FOUR MONTHS WILL SEND A MESSAGE TO EVERYONE THAT WE WANT TO GET IT RESOLVED, AMISTADES IS READY TO GO AND DON'T HAVE THEM DELAY MUCH LONGER THAN THE CITY AND COUNTY WE WILL KNOW SOON WHAT

[01:35:01]

WE CAN HAVE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT AS A MIDDLE GROUND TO

PUSH THROUGH THE ISSUE. >> I DON'T WANT TO NEGOTIATE

HERE. WITH THE CITY MANAGER. >> I AM OKAY I WILL ACCEPT THAT AS AN AMENDMENT AND THAT WOULD BE MAYBE THROUGH THE ROUTE OF AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER WOULD BE FOUR MONTHS

SO SOMETIME IN DECEMBER? >> WE HAVE ONE MEETING IN

NOVEMBER. >> AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, NOVEMBER. BROUGHT BACK IN DECEMBER. I AM ACCEPTING THAT AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO TABLE WITH EVERYTHING ELSE AS WELL. I WOULD BE HAPPY FOR THAT DISCUSSION , THEY HAVE A GREAT JOB BUT I WILL LEAVE IT AS THAT FOR NOW.

>> THE EFFECTIVE DATE IS OCTOBER 1, CORRECT?

>> WE TABLED IT A COUPLE TIMES AND UNDERSTANDABLY THIS BIG OF AN ISSUE WE WANT TO DO CORRECTLY WHEN WE MOVE FORWARD AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE ARE STILL ISSUES. WE HAVE A MOTION TO , THE AMENDED MOTION TO TABLE 4 MONTHS AND WORK ON SOLUTIONS BETWEEN ALL OF US TO MAKE SURE THESE THINGS ARE COVERED. WHETHER IT IS GRANTS DIVISION OR MAKE SURE ALL THE PEOPLE STILL HAVE SERVICES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. EF3 AND THERE ARE SERIOUS QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED AND I DID NOT GET ANSWERS TODAY. THANK YOU. MOVING BACK I WANT

[6. Discuss and consider the TIDC Mental Health Public Defender grant funding extension and Statement of Grant Award and all related matters, and approve acceptance of funding from TIDC.]

TO BRING UP ITEM NUMBER SIX BECAUSE I CAN SEE HERE AND SOME OF THE JUDGES STEPPED OUT. I WAS GOING TO BRING YOU UP FIRST, SORRY YOU CAME AT ANOTHER TIME , BUT I HOPE THIS IS NOT INCONVENIENCING TOO MUCH.

DISCUSS AND CONSIDER THE TIDC MENTAL HEALTH PUBLIC DEFENDER GRANT FUNDING EXTENSION AND STATEMENT OF GRANT AWARD AND RELATED MATTERS. SOME EXCELLENT NEWS FOR US AND I DID RECEIVE A LETTER CONFIRMING THIS INFORMATION, AS WELL. I WILL LET HER TELL YOU WHAT'S GOING ON.

>> MORNING, THANK YOU JUDGE. EDWIN COLFAX FROM TIDC IS ON ZOOM IN CASE YOU HAVE QUESTIONS I CANNOT ANSWER. THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT OUR ORIGINAL TWO-YEAR START UP GRANT , THE $3.6 MILLION GRANT WAS DUE TO EXPIRE AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER. TIDC HAS VOTED TO EXTEND THAT UNTIL WE EXHAUST ALL OF THOSE FUNDS.

SO THEY HAVE EXTENDED THROUGH SEPTEMBER OF SO THEY HAVE EXTENDED THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2025 AND WE ANTICIPATE WE WOULD SPEND DOWN SOMETIME IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. SO THEY ALSO MOVED INTO THE SECOND PHASE , WHICH ORIGINALLY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE COUNTY PAYING 20% AND TIDC PAYING 80% DURING THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS INSTEAD, THE COUNTY WILL ONLY PAY 20% OF WHATEVER'S LEFT AND TIDC ESTIMATES THAT THE COUNTY PERCENTAGE WOULD BE AROUND $85,000. THEN, GOING FORWARD, THIS IS THE PART THAT CONFUSED ME. THE TERMS OF THE GRANT WERE , YOU WERE TO GET THE BENEFIT OF THE 30 YEAR BEING ONLY A 20% CONTRIBUTION. SO SINCE THAT WOULD NOT START UNTIL SOMETIME LATER IN THE YEAR, THEY HAVE AGREED YOU WOULD GET THE FULL 12 MONTHS, NO MATTER WHEN IT STARTS. IF 20% STARTS NEXT JULY, YOU WOULD GET 20%. AND THEN THAT WOULD CARRY OVER TO THE FOLLOWING JULY AND THEN THE 40% WOULD BE TO THE NEXT JULY AND SO ON. MR. COLFAX HAS EXPLAINED TO ME WHAT THEY WOULD DO, WHENEVER WE RUN OUT OF THOSE FUNDS THAT'S WHEN THE COUNTY MATCH WOULD START. IT WOULD AVERAGE SO INSTEAD OF FIGURING OUT 20% SIX MONTHS, THEY WILL AVERAGE OUT , 30% FOR

[01:40:02]

THE FULL YEAR IF WE HAVE THAT 12 MONTH PERIOD.

>> I APOLOGIZE WE NEVER CONNECTED I'M SORRY FOR THAT.

THAT WAS MY MAIN QUESTION. WOULD WE LOSE ANY FUNDS? SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE THAT ADDRESSED BECAUSE WE WERE WORRIED ABOUT THEM STARTING TOO EARLY WITH 20% BECAUSE IT TOOK TIME TO GET OPERATIONAL SO THAT WAS MY MAIN QUESTION. THAT IS A GREAT RELIEF BECAUSE I WAS WORRIED WE WOULD LOSE THOSE FUNDS. SO THANK YOU FOR GETTING THAT CLEARED UP AND HAPPY TO MEET WITH YOU IF YOU NEED TO, IF NOT, BUT I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT

CONNECTING. >> JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WAS PREPARED FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. WHAT I HAVE HANDED OUT IS A BRIEF SUMMARY FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE NOT AWARE OF WHAT WE DID DURING THE FIRST TWO YEARS. HOW WE DID GET GOING. WE ARE NOW FULLY GOING. WE ARE IN THE COURTS EVERY DAY, AT THE JAIL EVERY DAY, TO SEE CLIENTS AND TAKING CARE OF CASES. WE HAVE BEEN APPOINTED TO OVER 1800 CASES SO FAR. WE HAVE CLOSED OVER 1100. WE HAVE 650 PENDING AND I CHECKED THAT YESTERDAY. OF COURSE IT CHANGES EVERY DAY AND A GOOD CHUNK OF THOSE ARE MENTAL HEALTH CASES WHICH AS YOU KNOW WAS ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS FOR TRYING TO DO THIS SO THE COUNTY COULD ESTABLISH MORE STREAMLINED WAYS OF HANDLING THE CASES. SO FAR I THINK THAT IS HAPPENING. WE ARE BECOMING EXPERTS IN THE MENTAL HEALTH LAW. IT IS DEEP, BUT WE ARE LEARNING AND HAVING GREAT SUCCESS. DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE GRANT PAPERWORK? I BELIEVE THERE WAS A RESOLUTION INCLUDED.

>> THE BOARD OF JUDGES YES THAT IS INCLUDED. I WOULD MAKE THE

MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU.

YOU HAVE BEEN VERY GOOD AT CONNECTING WITH MY OFFICE AND KEEPING US INFORMED AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT AND WE COMMEND ALL OF YOUR TEAM AND EVERYTHING FOR WHAT YOU ARE

COMPOSING. >> THANK YOU JUDGE AND WHAT TO THINK JUDGES NAME ] AND

>> ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS BRING

>> IT GOES EASY. MOVING BACK ITEM 383 , I RECEIVED A MESSAGE THAT I BELIEVE WE WERE INCORRECT BY $1300 ON THE TOTAL OF THAT SO THE MOTION NEEDS TO BE AMENDED TO ALLOCATE THE $56,919.78 FOR THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS.

>> SECOND. >> A MOTION AND SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION

[5. Discuss and consider approving selection of Turner, Ramirez & Associates, Inc. for architectural services for Nueces County Emergency Operations Center Renovations and related matters.]

PASSES. MOVING ON, ITEM 5 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVING SELECTION OF TURNER PREMIERS AND ASSOCIATES FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER RENOVATIONS. I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO SELECT THEM FOR THAT.

THEY ARE ON THE APPROVED LIST. THIS WILL BE ON THE HILLTOP. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[8. Approve method of procurement of IFB (Invitation For Bids) for Calderon Clinic Upgrades; authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice.]

MOVING ON, ITEM 8. METHOD OF PROCUREMENT INVITATION FOR A BIT FROM THE CALDER ON CLINIC UPGRADE AUTHORIZING PURCHASING AGENT TO PUBLISH NOTICE WITH PRECINCT 2 ARPA FUNDING I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE. THIS IS NOT FOR THAT THIS IS A DIFFERENT, UTILIZING THE BUILDING IN THE BIG CONFERENCE

ROOM. >> I THOUGHT THIS WAS.

>> THIS IS NOT , THIS IS ON THE CONFERENCE ROOM. THE BIG ROOM,

YES. >> SECOND? THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE., ANY OPPOSED,

[9. Discuss and consider selection of Hanson Professional Services, Inc. for City of Robstown Multi-Purpose Facility located at 401 W. Ligustrum Blvd, Robstown, Texas 78380; authorizing and approving Work Authorization No. 1 in the amount of $90,772.00 with Hanson Professional Services under Master Service Contract No. 20230264-4/26 (RFQ 3220-22) for Engineering Services for for Robstown Multi-Purpose Facility, and related matters.]

SAME SIGN. MOVING ON. ITEM 9, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER SELECTION OF HANSON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF ROBSTOWN MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY LOCATED AT 401 WEST LAKE A STRUM BOULEVARD AND THIS IS WITH PRECINCT 3 ARPA FUNDING FOR

[01:45:01]

ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY.

COMMISSIONER MAREZ THIS IS YOURS I BELIEVE.

>> IF WE NEED BACKGROUND OR MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> I WILL SECOND. >> MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. I'M SORRY,

[10. Discuss and consider adding a new employee policy/protocol for effective employee communication, and all related matters utilizing Everbridge/Reverse Alert.]

COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ, I WAS A LITTLE QUICK ON THAT ONE. ITEM NUMBER 11. SKIES AND CONSIDER UPCOMING COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING DATES AND WORKSHOP DATES AND RELATED MATTERS.

>> DID WE TABLE 10? >> SORRY I HAVE IT TABLED. IT IS MY ITEM AND I AM ASKING TO TABLE INDEFINITELY UNTIL I GET WITH THE ELECTED TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE BUY-IN BECAUSE IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS WE ALL DO IT THE SAME FOR ALL EMPLOYEES.

TABLING INDEFINITELY IS MY MOTION.

>> I WILL SECOND, BUT IT IS A GREAT ITEM.

>> I HAVE QUESTIONS RAISED AND CONFLICTS WITH THAT. I DON'T WANT TO MOVE FORWARD UNTIL I HAVE ALL ELECTED UNDERSTAND AND BUYING HIM AND AGREEING. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION

[11. Discuss and consider upcoming Commissioners Court meeting date(s), workshop date(s), and related matters.]

PASSES. NOW MOVING ON, ITEM NUMBER 11. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER UPCOMING COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING DATES, WORKSHOP DATES AND RELATED MATTERS. NOBODY HAS ANY ? MOVING ON. PUBLIC WORKS.

[1. Discuss and consider Current budget, expenditures to date, emergency repairs to date, additional items used to reduce budget, budget deficits, and funds needed through FYE 9/30/24.]

ITEM NUMBER ONE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CURRENT BUDGET EXPENDITURES TO DATE, EMERGENCY REPAIRS TO DATE, ADDITIONAL ITEMS USED TO REDUCE THE BUDGET, THE BUDGET DEFICIT AND FUNDING NEEDED THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 9/30/2024. UNDERSTANDING THE FUNDING REQUEST COMES DIRECTLY FROM THE GENERAL FUND.

RIGHT OFF THE TOP. >> GOOD MORNING JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS. JUDGE WE ARE HERE TODAY TO REQUEST, FOR THE ADDITIONAL FUND FOR OUR EMERGENCY REPAIRS , BEFORE THE

BUDGET HERE. >> THE TOTAL FOR THOSE?

>> 229,000 >> 229,833. WE CAN ROUND OFF TO 300,000 IN CASE THERE IS MORE EMERGENCY REPAIRS COMING UP

>> I KNOW A WHILE BACK THERE WAS TRANSFERRED TO PURCHASE THE EQUIPMENT FOR ANOTHER DEPARTMENT, IN HINDSIGHT YOU WISH YOU WOULDN'T HAVE DONE THAT? YOU TRANSFERRED SOME MONEY FOR EQUIPMENT PURCHASE BACK, I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT

OF ME. DO YOU HAVE THAT? >>

>> IN THE MICROPHONE. >> I DON'T OVER THE ITEM OFF HAND. YOU MOVED IT FROM THE BUILDING FUND TO PURCHASE THE

RUBBER? >> TRACTORS OR MOWERS.

>> THE THING WITH THAT, WE ARE SHORT BECAUSE YES.

>> I POINTED THAT OUT IN THE BUDGET HEARINGS AND THE

WORKSHOP. >> 2022 AND 2023, TWO YEARS OF NO ALLOCATION , THAT'S WHY WE WERE STRUGGLING.

>> IS THERE A REASON WHY IF IT COMES OUT OF THEIR BUDGET WE DON'T ALLOCATE THE MONEY FOR JANITORIAL?

>> WE HAVE THE JANITORIAL IN, BUT AT THE TIME OF THE BUDGET WE WERE UNDER A BID REQUEST AND PROPOSED BIDS AND WE DO NOT HAVE THE TRUE AMOUNT OF THE FUNDS COMING IN. WE PROJECTED BASED ON WHAT WE HAD DONE IN THE PAST AND WHEN THEY CAME IN

THEY WERE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER. >> I THOUGHT THEY DROPPED THEIR SERVICES BECAUSE THEY KNEW AND THEY CHARGED EVEN HIGHER?

>> ORIGINALLY BEFORE THE BID CAME OUT OUR BUDGET WAS VERY LOW AND WORKING WITH PUBLIC WORKS WE ESTIMATED WHAT WE THOUGHT THE CONTRACT WAS AND THE BIDS CAME IN SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER.'S WE WERE DEFINITELY UNDERFUNDED.

>> TO HAVE A COMPARISON OF WHAT WE PAID THE YEAR BEFORE AND WHAT WE PAID LAST YEAR? YOU CAN STATE IT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO

BRING IT. THANK YOU. >> LAST JANITORIAL , THE LAST JANITORIAL LOCATION WAS 232,000 FOR THE WHOLE YEAR. FOR A

[01:50:03]

YEARLY SERVICES. >> THIS YEAR ENDING?

>> 2021. 2022 WHEN THE NEW JANITORIAL SERVICES CAME IN, IT

GOES UP TO 716,000. YEARLY. >> AFTER THAT WHAT WAS

BUDGETED? >> ALTHOUGH WE HAVE A LITTLE SAVINGS IT IS STILL SHORT 639,000. THERE IS 125,000 THE

ALLOCATED. >> 129 .

>> AND 232. >> 300 SOMETHING ON A $600,000

BILL. >> THAT'S WHY IT WAS SHORT

YEAR AFTER YEAR. >> I SUGGEST.

>> THAT'S REALLY -- >> I TALKED WITH THEM PERSONALLY ON CUTTING SERVICES AND CUTTING BACK COST. THEY WANTED TO KEEP THE JOB , BUT I WAS NOT AWARE THAT DID NOT HAVE THAT MUCH, I GUESS THE FINAL WAS UPPER BUDGET OR YOU ALL GOT IT AND I DID NOT SEE IT. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. GO AHEAD.

>> THAT'S WHY WE ARE REALLY SHORT. YEAR AFTER YEAR ALREADY

THE TWO YEARS WE ARE REALLY . >> LAST YEAR THE DEPARTMENT END IN THE NEGATIVE? SO WE ARE NOT DEDICATING ENOUGH HOW DID YOU PURCHASE? I KNOW THIS YEAR I BROUGHT IT TO THE ATTENTION AND REQUESTED ANYTHING OVER BUDGET AND ALLOCATED IN THE DEPARTMENT YOU HAVE TO COME HERE AND ASK FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS BECAUSE IT

COMES STRAIGHT OFF. >> WE WERE REQUESTING THROUGH TERESA . AND THEN THERE WAS NEVER ACTION WITH ANYTHING. SO, WHAT WE DID EVEN IF WE WERE SHORT OF LAST YEAR WE KIND OF ALL THOSE EMERGENCIES OR PROJECTS WE KIND OF PUSHED IT TO THE NEXT YEAR, BUT WHAT HAPPENED IS PUSHING AND PUSHING

IT, IT'S GETTING MORE SHORT. >> THIS IS THE CORRECT WAY TO COME FORWARD IN THE YEAR WHEN THE BUDGET IS EMPTY. FROM NOW GOING TO TERESA WHEN THERE IS A ZERO BALANCE, SHE IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE FINDING MONEY, THAT HAS TO COME FROM THE COMMISSIONERS COURT APPROVAL, IT DOES NOT COME FROM OPEN-ENDED CHECK THAT YOU KEEP DOING. THIS IS THE WAY WE DO IT, I AM GLAD YOU ARE HERE TODAY.

>> WE ARE THINKING BEFORE. IT GETS APPROVED. IT GETS APPROVED

THROUGH COMMISSIONERS COURT. >> AFTER THE PURCHASE IS DONE.

>> WE HAVE TO ALLOCATE THE MONEY TO THE BUDGET.

>> YOU HAVE THE REST OF A WEEK LEFT OF THIS AND IN AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2 MORE MONTHS. THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT DEPARTMENT WITH SERVICES AND THINGS GO DOWN SO I WOULD HOPE WE'RE LOOKING HARD AT THOSE ASKS THAT ARE NEEDS AND NOT NOT WANTS AND REQUIREMENTS WE NEED TO KEEP FUNCTIONING SO NEXT YEAR POSSIBLY WE CAN WORK ON THE ALLOCATION TO THAT. RIGHT NOW, THIS IS NOT TO DO FIXER-UPPER'S OR THINGS, THIS IS THE END OF THE BUDGET ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL MONEY. NEEDS TO BE ABSOLUTE NEEDS. THERE WAS A CRUST ON SOMETHING THAT WAS AN EMERGENCY AND LATER WE FOUND OUT THAT IT WAS. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THESE ARE ACTUAL EMERGENCY ITEMS THAT ARE NECESSARY. IF YOU GET THE ALLOCATION COMPANY ALLOCATION TO PLAN FOR YOUR BUDGET YOU ITEMIZE THOSE AND PRIORITIZE THOSE ON YOUR LIST AS WELL AND DO NOT SPEND ALL OF IT DOWN KNOWING A WEEK BEFORE BUDGET AND YOU MIGHT BE OUT OF MONEY

AGAIN. >> THE THING IS JUDGE WITHIN THIS YEAR, IT IS WITH THE ELEVATOR.

>> THAT'S WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT GOING FORWARD. WE HAVE TO PLAN FOR THINGS. ONE OF MY CONVERSATIONS WAS WITH ALL THE ELEVATOR ISSUES , THAT WE DO HAVE, WHY WE HAVE A SENSOR SO HARD TO COME BY WHEN WE DON'T HAVE A SPARE SET IN A DEPARTMENT OR IN A FACILITY , OBLIGATED TO THE COUNTY. EVEN AT THE STORE WHEN WE PULL OUT THAT WHEN THEY REPLACE THAT KNOWING WHEN YOU NEED THESE, WE WERE DOWN FOR SO LONG HOW LONG

[01:55:03]

WAS THAT TIME WE WERE DOWN? SIX MONTHS? IF WE HAD MORE THAN ONE, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CRITICAL. WE CANNOT AFFORD THAT. WE HOPE THOSE THINGS ARE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT. MO USE ARE MADE WITH COMPANIES THAT PROVIDE THOSE PARTS FOR THOSE, BUT WE NEED TO PLAN A LITTLE BIT FOR THINGS LIKE THAT. I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHERE THE BUDGET WENT TO, BY ALL MEANS.

SO YOU ARE ASKING FOR 250,000 TODAY?

>> 229. >> PART OF THOSE FUNDS CAN BE REALLOCATED NOT COMING FROM GENERAL FUNDS.

>> YOU HAVE LIKE THE LIBRARY THAT IS FUND 14 THAT AMOUNT CAN GO OUT WITH FUNDS DEDICATED FOR THE FAIRGROUNDS. AND THEN THERE IS ABOUT 60,000 IN HERE FOR JUVENILE. WE CAN CHECK TO SEE IF MAYBE THAT CAN BE OFFSET THROUGH STATE DOLLARS BECAUSE THEY'RE GETTING READY FOR THE END OF THE YEAR , AT THE END OF AUGUST SO THAT CAN BE REALLOCATED. IF WE PULL OUT THOSE AMOUNTS THAT'S 130,000 WHICH MEANS WE NEED MAYBE

100,000 FROM GENERAL FUNDS. >> SO MOVED.

>> ARE YOU MAKING A MOTION TO DO WHAT TERESA SAID?

>> 100,000. OR THE 200? YOU HAVE THE REST OF THE YEAR. 229

IS WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR. >> HOUR WE GET IT WE WILL GET

IT. >> IF YOU WANT, YOU NEED TO BE SPECIFIC. TERESA MADE A SUGGESTION DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT AND WE WANT TO ALLOCATE THAT MONEY?

>> JUVENILE WANT TO VERIFY IF HE'S OKAY WITH PUTTING THAT

INTO THE STATE DOLLARS. >> WE ARE APPROVING UP TO THAT AMOUNT WITH THOSE COMING OUT IF THEY ARE AVAILABLE THROUGH

DIFFERENT FUNDING. >> SOME OF THESE, CAN THE CEOS

BE USED FOR ANY OF THIS? >> PROBABLY SO. I WILL CHECK

THAT FUNDING. >> I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO ALLOCATE 50,000 OF MINE. A MOTION TO ALLOCATE $50,000 OF PRECINCT 4 CEOS, TO THIS AS WELL BECAUSE SOME OF THIS IS WORK ON PROJECTS IN MY PRECINCT. I WANTED TO MAKE THAT, AS WELL. TO STAY AWAY FROM THE GENERAL FUND IF WE CAN. AS LONG AS THE CEOS QUALIFY.

>> AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION? >> I WAS TRYING TO BE SPECIFIC.

SO, CAN WE AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT OR DO YOU WANT ME TO DO IT SEPARATE? TERESA HAD A SUGGESTION I WAS GOING TO AT 50,000 FROM PRECINCT 4 CEOS TO HELP. HE HAS PUT SOME OF THAT MONEY INTO PRECINCT 4 . I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED ONE BIG

MOTION. >> 200,000, +50,000 M?

>> 229,000 MINUS BUT TERESA SAID MINOR -- MINUS WHAT I SAID LEAVING A BALANCE OF ABOUT 50. YOU WANT TO LIST THAT? SO WE

HAVE IT GOOD FOR HER? >> 50,000 FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO COVER THE DEFICIT AND PUBLIC WORKS. I APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK YOU ALL DO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I KNOW SOMETIMES WE GET CAUGHT UP IN SITUATIONS. TRY TO KEEP A CLOSE EYE ON THAT.

>> WE HAVE THAT MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[1. Approve Budget Amendment No. 10 for Fiscal Year 2023-2024.]

>> ITEMS C 1 APPROVED BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER 10 FISCAL YEAR

2324. >> ONE SMALL REQUEST FOR BUDGET REQUEST ITEM NUMBER 10 FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY . SHE HAD TO PAY OVERTIME WHEN THE EMPLOYEES LEFT AND THERE WAS A TRANSCRIPT REQUIRED , SHE AGREED TO REMOVE SOME OF THE COST FROM THE SUPPLIES THE FUNDS ARE THERE

>> SO MOVED. >> MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL

[02:00:01]

THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES. AND APPROVE THE , MAKING A MOTION TO TABLE THE

[2. Approve Quarterly Investment Reports ending December 31, 2023, March 31, 2024, and June 30, 2024.]

QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT TO AUGUST 7 MEETING. WE HAD A COMMITTEE MEETING AND WE ARE LACKING 11 OF SOMETHING SO WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING IT UP AGAIN. MOTION AND SECOND TO TABLE TO AUGUST 7 MEETING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THE MOTION PASSES. I THOUGHT THAT WAS FROM LAST WEEK. HUMAN

[1. Discuss and consider the Nueces County Stop Loss Insurance renewal and approval of the proposed rate increase and recommendations from McGriff Insurance, LLC.]

RESOURCES DISCUSS AND CONSIDER NUECES COUNTY STOPLOSS INSURANCE RENEWAL AND APPROVAL OF PROPOSED RATE INCREASE AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM MCGRIFF INSURANCE LLC. OPTION ONE STAYS AT THE SAME CURRENT RATE IS THE SUGGESTION FROM THOSE THAT WERE

ON THIS AND WORKING ON THIS. >> THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION.

>> I WILL SECOND OR. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION

[2. Discuss and consider moving ARPA funded Truck Driver I position from Inland Parks Department (Dept 01700) to Senior Community Services Department (Dept 41900).]

PASSES. ITEM 2 . DISCUSS AND CONSIDER MOVING THE ARPA FUNDED TRUCKDRIVER ONE POSITION FROM INLAND PARKS DEPARTMENT 01702 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT , 41900. AND, EDWARD DO YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN THIS? DIDN'T WE PUT IT IN NOT LONG AGO?

>> CORRECT. WE JUST PUT IT IN THE WRONG LOCATION.

>> WE VOTED AND PUT IT IN THE WRONG DEPARTMENT?

>> I GAVE YOU THE WRONG DEPARTMENT , THIS GOES TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES. DELIVERING MEALS AND ALSO THE MOBILE

MEDICAL UNIT. >> YOU NEED A TRUCK DRIVER?

>> CLASS CDL. >> STILL FUNDED WITH ARPA, BUT

ASSIGNED. >> IS THIS POSITION FILLED?

>> WE ARE TRYING TO PILLAGE. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WAS.

>> WORKING WITH DELMAR TO GET TO THE DRIVERS AT A DRIVING

SCHOOL. >> OKAY.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION.

THE STATUS ON THAT. >> I WILL HAVE THE AT THE NEXT

COMMISSIONERS COORDINATING. >> THAT DOES NOT PERTAIN TO THIS ITEM. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THIS TO CLARIFY AND CORRECT FROM THE INLAND PARKS TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT. I WAS ASKING IF WE HAD A MOTION. WE DON'T HAVE A

MOTION YET. I WOULD ASSUME? >> SO MOVED.

>> I WOULD NOT SURE WHOSE ITEM. I WAS TRYING TO GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY BEFORE I JUMPED IN. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES. I DON'T BELIEVE I HAVE SKIPPED OVER ANYTHING. SO WE SHOULD BE MOVING ON TO EXECUTIVE. EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[4. EXECUTIVE SESSION: PUBLIC NOTICE is given that the Commissioners Court may elect to go into an Executive Session anytime during the meeting to discuss matters listed anywhere on the Agenda, when authorized by the provisions of the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code. To the extent there has been a past practice of distinguishing items for public deliberation and those for executive session, the public is advised that the Court is departing from that practice, and reserves the right to discuss any listed agenda items in executive session when authorized by law to do so. In the event the Commissioners Court elects to go into Executive Session regarding an agenda item, the section or sections of the Open Meetings Act authorizing the Executive Session will be publicly announced by the presiding officer. In accordance with the authority of the Government Code, Vernon’s Texas Codes, Sections 551.071, 551.072, 551.073, 551.074, 551.0745, 551.076, 551.086, 551.087, the Commissioners Court will hold an Executive Session to consult with attorney(s) including matters related to litigation; deliberate regarding real property, prospective gift(s), personnel matters, including termination, county advisory bodies, security devices, and/or economic development negotiations and other matters that may be discussed in an Executive Session. Upon completion of the Executive Session, the Commissioners Court may in an open session take such action as appropriate on items discussed in an Executive Session.]

CORRECT ME IF I NEED TO GO BACK TO SOMETHING THAT IS NOT BEEN DONE. I ASSUME WE HAVE GOT IT.

EXECUTIVE SESSION. PUBLIC NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT MAY ELECT TO GO INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION ANYTIME DURING THE MEETING TO DISCUSS MATTERS LISTED ANYWHERE ON THE AGENDA, WHEN AUTHORIZED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, CHAPTER 551 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. TO THE EXTENT THERE HAS BEEN A PAST PRACTICE OF DISTINGUISHING ITEMS FOR PUBLIC DELIBERATION AND THOSE FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION, THE PUBLIC IS ADVISED THAT THE COURT IS DEPARTING FROM THAT PRACTICE, AND RESERVES THE RIGHT TO DISCUSS ANY LISTED AGENDA ITEMS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION WHEN AUTHORIZED BY LAW TO DO SO. IN THE EVENT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ELECTS TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING AN AGENDA ITEM, THE SECTION OR SECTIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE, VERNON S TEXAS CODES, SECTIONS 551.071, 551.072, 551.073, 551.074, 551.0745, 551.076, 551.086, 551.087, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT WILL HOLD