[1. CALL TO ORDER]
          [00:00:12]
          >>> PLEASE RISE AND PASTOR IS HERE AND WILL BE DOING THE INDICATION, PLEASE CONTINUE STANDING FOR THE PLEDGES AS 
          WELL. >> LET US PRAY, GRACIOUS AND ALMIGHTY GOD WE COME BEFORE YOU ACKNOWLEDGING YOUR SOVEREIGNTY SEEKING WISDOM AS WE GATHER IN THIS PLACE , WE THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF NUECES COUNTY. WE ASK YOU FOR THE GUIDANCE AND EVERYDAY DECISION-MAKING DURING WISDOM AND DISCERNMENT TO LEADERS, AND TO OTHER PUBLIC SERVANTS SO THERE WITH INTEGRITY AND FAIRNESS UPHOLDING JUSTICE AND TRUTH IN EVERY MATTER CONSIDERED AND MADE DECISIONS REFLECT YOUR RIGHTEOUSNESS AND BRING PEACE AND PROSPERITY TO THE COMMUNITY TO LIFT UP THE CITIZENS ASKING FOR YOUR BLESSING UPON THEIR FAMILIES AND THEIR ENDEAVORS HELPING US TO WORK TOGETHER IN UNITY STRIVING TO FULFILL THE GREAT TO LOVE ONE ANOTHER AS YOU HAVE LOVED US WE ASK FOR YOUR PROTECTION OVER THOSE WHO SERVE THE COUNTY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT, FIRST RESPONDERS AND ALL THOSE WHO WORK TO ENSURE THE SAFETY AND WELL-BEING OF THE COMMUNITY MAY THEY CARRY OUT DUTIES WITH COURAGE WITH HONOR AND STRENGTH AS WE BEGIN THIS DAY WE COMMIT TO YOU TRUSTING IN YOUR GUIDANCE AND PROVISION MAY EVERYTHING DONE HERE TODAY BRING GLORY TO YOUR NAME AND BENEFIT TO THE PEOPLE WE ARE CALLING TO SERVE IN JESUS HOLY POWERFUL AND PRECIOUS NAME, 
          AMEN. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE , ONE STATE UNDER GOD , ONE AND 
          INDIVISIBLE. >> THANK YOU, PLEASE BE SEATED . WE HAVE ALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT. 901 LEOPARD IN THE NUECES COUNTY COURTROOM. 9:05 AND I CALLED THIS MEETING TO ORDER. I WOULD LIKE TO FIRST START OFF BEFORE WE GET ANY FURTHER BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY EXTRA PEOPLE HERE, THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONFUSION AND CONFLICT ON OUR BUDGET BOOKS, THE PRINTING DID NOT COME OUT CORRECT. THERE ARE SOME MISTAKES AND CORRECTIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE. AND I HAVE TO DO THIS BEFORE WE CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST TO MY COMMISSIONERS THAT WE POSTPONE OUR BUDGET HEARING, I AM TOLD WE CAN MOVE THIS TO THE 25TH. I AM TOLD ALSO BY THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE IF WE DO SO, WE WOULD HAVE ALL THE CORRECTIONS AND THE CORRECT BUDGET BOOKS AND GIVEN TO THE COMMISSIONERS AND ALL OF US SO WE HAVE TIME TO LOOK OVER THINGS BY MONDAY. THOSE WOULD BE PRESENTED TO OFFICES WITH THE CORRECTIONS DONE. I JUST THINK THIS IS, AND I ASKED MY COMMISSIONERS FOR YOUR OPINIONS, I THINK THIS IS THE BEST IDEA THAT I HAVE GOING BECAUSE OF THE MISTAKES AND THE LINES THAT DID NOT GET PRINTED. THERE IS A LOT OF CONFUSION, SOME OF THE AMOUNTS WERE THE SAME, BUT THE PAY SCALES DID NOT GET PRINTED, WE CANNOT MOVE FORWARD AND MAKE A VOTE ON SOMETHING WE SAY THAT'S GETTING CORRECTED, WE NEED CORRECTIONS BEFORE WE MAKE A VOTE ON IT AND I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE THE BUDGET HEARING TO THE 25TH. 
          >> SECOND. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION, I'M SORRY COMMISSIONER, DID YOU HAVE 
          SOMETHING YOU WANT TO SAY? >> NO I THOUGHT WE COULD KIND OF DO THE BUDGET. THIS IS ONE OF THE WORST BUDGETS I HAVE SEEN IN A LONG TIME. YOU KNOW IT'S THE BEST, VERY CONFUSING AND VERY MISLEADING. SO EVEN LAST NIGHT I WAS COMMUNICATING BACK AND FORTH WITH THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND YOU KNOW AGAIN JUST , WE ARE AT THE POINT THAT WE HAVE TO DO THIS, BUT , IF YOU DON'T HAVE A BUDGET YOU CANNOT PASS THE BUDGET. 
          >> EITHER YES OR NO ON THE BUDGET AND I KNOW A LOT OF THINGS ARE PROBABLY MISSING AND THEY SHOULDN'T BE. YOU KNOW THE COURT RULES WE HOLD IT AND I WILL GO ALONG WITH THE COURT. 
          [00:05:03]
          >> I'M NOT SAYING IT'S GOING TO CHANGE ANY OF THE NUMBERS, I THINK SOME OF THE ENDING FINAL NUMBERS , BUT THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION FOR DEPARTMENTS AS WELL LIKE ONE DEPARTMENT HEAD, THEIR WORKDAY DOES NOT LIST THEM, THEY GOT INCLUDED IN THE REGULAR SALARY, SO THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION. PEOPLE THINK THEY DON'T HAVE A JOB BECAUSE THEIR LINE IS NOT THERE ANYMORE. WE NEEDED A LITTLE MORE TIME , THEY NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO MAKE ALL THE CORRECTIONS THAT HAVE COME IN FROM EACH OF THE DEPARTMENTS. ONCE WE HAVE THOSE PRINTED WE WILL POST FOR THE PUBLIC, AS WELL IN PLENTY OF TIME AND I THINK WE CAN MAKE IT BETTER DECISION MOVING FORWARD. REALLY CHANGE THE BUDGET COMING FORWARD WITH A VOTE I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE, BUT WE NEED FACTS BEFORE WE VOTE ON SOMETHING THAT WE SAY WILL BE CORRECTED. 
          >> IS ME JUDGE OF ELECT ASK A QUESTION. IS THIS USING THE NEW 
          SOFTWARE? >> SOFTWARE AND THE NEW STAFF AND ALSO WE HAD TO USE OLD AND NEW SOFTWARE AND THEY DID NOT 
          QUITE MESH TOGETHER. >> WHEN YOU MAKE THE CORRECTIONS YOU WILL STILL USE THE NEW SOFTWARE AND THE OLD? 
          >> THE NEW CORRECTIONS WILL BE DONE CORRECTLY, BUT IN THE FUTURE THE NEW SOFTWARE WORLD WORK. 
          >> YOUR STAFF IS PROPERLY TRAINED NOW? 
          >> THEY WILL BE YES. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. SO, THIS DOES NOT CHANGE ALL THE POSTINGS? WE HAVE WAITED REQUISITE 30 DAY NOTICE AND ALL THAT , WE HAD HEARINGS NOW WE ARE HERE TO VOTE, SO HOLDING IT TWO WEEKS LATER , IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS WERE PUSHING IT UP TO THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, BUT THERE'S NOTHING STATUTORILY LISTED. AS FAR AS I KNOW WE HAVE A WHOLE CALENDAR TO SHOW US WHAT THE TAX CALENDAR IS LIKE SO IN YOUR OPINION THERE'S NOTHING , WE ARE NOT JEOPARDIZING ANYTHING BY 
          WAITING TWO WEEKS? >> WHILE , COMMISSIONER, I WOULD PREFER TO ADVISE THE COURT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION IF YOU WANT TO WITHDRAW TO EXECUTIVE SESSION. THIS HAS BEEN A RESEARCH THAT HAS BEEN ONGOING FOR A SMALL AMOUNT OF TIME AND WE ARE ALL IN THE SAME BOAT , REACTING TO THE CONDITION OF THE BUDGET. SO I DO BELIEVE THE COURT IS WITHIN ITS AUTHORITY TO DO WHAT IT IS DOING, BUT AS FAR AS THE INTRICACIES I WOULD PREFER TO ADVISE IN EXECUTIVE. 
          >> DO WE NEED TO DO THAT NOW? WE WILL COME BACK FOR THE REST OF THE ITEMS, BUT IF THAT SOMETHING YOU CAN ONLY SHARE WITH THE COURT I WOULD RATHER DO THAT. THIS IS A PRETTY BIG DECISION TO HOLD OFF TWO WEEKS. SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING TO 
          SHARE WE NEED TO. >> I GUESS I DON'T REALLY KNOW, WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT COULD POSSIBLY BE WHAT YOU ARE WANTING TO ADVISE US ON AN EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THAT IS YOU HAVE INDICATED AT THIS POINT WHERE WITHIN OUR ABILITY LEGALLY TO DO THIS. 
          >> WE BELIEVE SO, COMMISSIONER. 
          >> OKAY. WE HAVE HAD A VERY STRICT POLICY IN REGARDS TO HAVING THE APPROPRIATE BACK UP, THE CORRECT BACK UP, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS BEFORE WE VOTE ON THEM. AND AGAIN IT MIGHT NOT CHANGE ANYBODY'S MIND OR VOTE, IT'S NOT ABOUT THAT, IT'S ABOUT MAKING SURE WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE VOTING ON. I'M STILL GETTING COMMUNICATIONS THIS MORNING FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS OR DEPARTMENT HEADS THAT'S A LOOK AT MY BUDGET IS NOT RIGHT, THINGS ARE MISSING. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN NOT PUT THIS OFF AT THIS POINT AND COUNTY ATTORNEY IS ADVISING WE CAN LEGALLY DO IT, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO BEFORE WE JUST, YOU KNOW, TABLE IT IS TO HAVE SOME DIRECTION WITH THE TABLE LIKE THE NUMBERS WILL BE IN BY THIS TIME. EVERYBODY WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW IT SO WE DON'T GET STUCK LIKE THIS AGAIN BECAUSE WE LITERALLY CAN'T . THAT MEANS EVERYBODY THE DEPARTMENT HEADS, ELECTED OFFICIALS. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME DIRECTION ADDED TO THAT MOTION WITH SOME DEADLINES THAT EVERYBODY CAN LIVE WITH AND TO KNOW THAT WE WILL NOT BE BACK IN THIS SITUATION AGAIN IN TWO WEEKS. BECAUSE LITERALLY, WE CANNOT BE, WE WOULD BE OUT OF TIME. SO CAN SOMEONE ARTICULATE WHAT THAT WOULD BE SO WE COULD POSSIBLY INCLUDE NOT IN PART OF THE MOTION? LIKE WHAT DEFINITIVELY THIS IS THE REAL FINAL, EVERYTHING WILL BE CORRECTED BY THIS TIME. 
          [00:10:02]
          >> MY STAFF IS GOING THROUGH REVIEW RIGHT NOW. I AM WORKING ON THE BOOKS SIDE TO MAKE SURE THE LINES ARE THERE. I BELIEVE I CAN HAVE THIS DONE BY FRIDAY. 
          >> FRIDAY AND WE CAN HAVE OURS BY MONDAY. WHEN DO WE HAVE TO POST PUBLIC? DO WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME? WE CAN POST CHANGES, BUT IT'S ALREADY BEEN POSTED, THE BAD ONE, WE WOULD LIKE TO POST THE ADJUSTED FOR THE PUBLIC SO THEY HAVE TRUE FACTS. IS THERE 
          TIME FOR THAT? >> I COULD BE WRONG, BUT I BELIEVE THAT, FROM THE DAY OR THAT THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS FILED I BELIEVE THERE IS FIVE DAYS COMING UP FIVE DAYS FROM THE DATE THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS FILED TO ADOPT THE BUDGET AND I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE TAX RATE WITHIN FIVE DAYS OF ADOPTING BOTH THE TAX RATE AND THE BUDGET, BUT AGAIN I WOULD DEFER TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. 
          >> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS NOT WITHIN FIVE DAYS OF TODAY. WE 
          HAD IT LAST WEEK. >> SEVEN DAYS, EXCUSE ME 
          THAT'S SEVEN DAYS. >> SO THEN WE MAY NOT BE ABLE 
          TO DO THIS. >> WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE PUBLIC 
          HEARINGS AGAIN. >> WHICH IS EASY, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THAT PART, I'M WORRIED ABOUT WHEN IT CAN BE DONE BY. DALE IS SAYING BY FRIDAY, THEN WE WOULD 
          HAVE TO SET PUBLIC HEARING . >> IT NEEDS TO BE REPRINTED AND SENT AROUND SO MONDAY MORNING WE COULD HAVE THE CORRECTED 
          VERSION. >> SO YOU NEED TO PUBLISH NOTICE IN A PUBLICATION OF BIG CIRCULATION. THEN YOU NEED TO PUBLISH THE PROPOSED BUDGET BEFORE HAND. 
          >> WE DO NOT HAVE THE BUDGET AT THE TAX HEARING. 
          >> NOT A SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF THE TIME PERIOD YOU DON'T NEED TO DO IT LIKE THIS WAS PUBLISHED SATURDAY FOR THE WEEKEND. SO THAT IS NOT A CONCERN. WHEN YOU PUBLISH THE CIRCULATION NOTICE THIS WEEK AND HAVE WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THAT OR AFTER POSTING 10 DAYS , THEN YOU HAVE ALREADY HAD THE PUBLIC HEARING, YOU CAN HAVE ANOTHER ONE EASILY ON THE SAME DAY ON THE 25TH. 
          >> SO YOU COULD HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 25TH IN THE MORNING, DO THE BUDGET IN THE AFTERNOON. 
          >> JUST LIKE TODAY. >> SO THE BUDGET WOULD HAVE TO BE POSTED WITHIN SEVEN DAYS OR FIVE DAYS, IN OTHER WORDS BECAUSE LET'S SAY YOU GET EVERYTHING FRIDAY THEN EVERYBODY NEEDS TO REVIEW IT BEFORE WE POST IT AGAIN RIGHT? SO I MEAN WE ONLY GOT THIS BUDGET WHAT, FRIDAY? 
          >> SATURDAY AFTERNOON. >> SATURDAY. 
          >> SO OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T WANT TO POST IT BY FRIDAY, YOU ARE SAYING YOU CAN GET IT DONE BY FRIDAY WHERE EVERYBODY CAN REVIEW? I'M TRYING TO GET CLEAR ON WHAT WE ARE SAYING. 
          >> AFTER SPEAKING WITH ANOTHER SUPERVISOR IF WE CAN HAVE UNTIL SUNDAY TO HAVE THE REVIEW TIME YES. 
          >> THAT'S WHY I SAID FINISH THIS WEEKEND, MONDAY WE WILL 
          HAVE THE CORRECTED VERSION. >> SUNDAY YOU ARE SAYING WHAT? 
          >> IF WE CAN HAVE UNTIL SUNDAY TO ENTER TO VERIFY AND CHECK, SMOKE SUNDAY VERIFIES AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS ON MONDAY? WRITING 
          ALL OF THIS DOWN. >> WE CAN FILE. WELL, WE CAN PRINT, PROVIDE IT TO THE DEPARTMENT HEADS FOR REVIEW AND THEN IF THERE IS FIVE DAYS WHICH AGAIN I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER, BUT IF THERE IS THE FIVE-DAY WE WOULD DO FIVE DAYS OUT FROM THE 25TH SO THAT MEANS WE WOULD OFFICIALLY FILE IT ON 
          THE 20TH. >> SO MONDAY IS SORRY 16TH? SO YOU ARE SAYING IT WILL ALL GO TO THE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS ON THE 16TH AND THEN IT'S GOING TO BE FILED ON THE 20TH. SO, FOR ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS, ELECTED OFFICIALS WE WILL GET THAT WORD OUT, YOU HAVE THAT PERIOD OF TIME TO MAKE CORRECTIONS AND CHANGES, MAKE SURE IT'S RIGHT, THEN POSTED AND FILED ON THE 20TH SO WE THEN GET IT TO REVIEW FOR FINAL REVIEW TO LOOK AT IT ON THE 25TH. 
          >> IF YOU WOULD ALLOW MY OFFICE LIKE 10 MINUTES TO ACTUALLY CALENDAR THIS OUT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE SAYING THE RIGHT DATES TO SATISFY , THEY ARE WORKING ON THAT. 
          [00:15:01]
          >> JUDGE AT THE MOMENT. >> NO NEED TO GO TO EXECUTIVE 
          SESSION? >> I DON'T THINK SO. 
          >> JUST CLARIFYING. CAN WE DO THIS? 
          >> I THINK IT IS GOOD. >> THE NOTICE FOR THE PAPER , 
          DO WE HAVE TO DO ANY OF THAT? >> YES. 
          >> THAT'S WHAT SHE WANTS TO CALENDAR OUT. 
          >> CAN I PRINT THE PLANNING CALENDAR SO YOU CAN SEE THE 
          DATES IN BETWEEN EACH STEP? >> THE PLANNING CALENDAR ALSO REFERENCES THE STATUTES. SO IT WILL HELP. 
          >> JUDGE I'M WILLING TO DRAW MY SECOND TO THE MOTION TO TABLE OR WE CAN DIFFER VOTING UNTIL LATER WHICHEVER YOU 
          PREFER. >> LET'S GET SOME ANSWERS. 
          THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE HERE FOR THAT AND LOOKS LIKE THAT'S NOT GOING FORWARD. I APOLOGIZE FOR YOUR INCONVENIENCE. LET'S MOVE FORWARD AND WE WILL COME BACK TO THIS. WHEN WE GET CLARIFICATION ON THE EXACT DATES. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> SO I AM GOING TO SKIP 
          [1.  In recognition of Dr. Donna J. Shaver's commitment to sea turtles and to the Coastal Bend community. ]
FORWARD , ITEM F1. ADOPT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION RECOGNITION OF COMMITMENT TO SEE TURTLES IN THE COASTAL BEND COMMUNITY AND COMMISSIONER CHESNEY THIS IS YOURS THAT 
          EMILY IS GOING TO READ. >> WHEREAS DR. DONNA SHAVER HAS DEDICATED 43 YEARS WORKING WITH SEA TURTLES INCLUDING HER POSITION AS CHIEF OF THE DIVISION OF SEA TURTLE SCIENCE AND RECOVERY FOR THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE AT PADRE ISLAND AND THE TEXAS COORDINATOR OF THE SEA TURTLE SALVAGE NETWORK WHEREAS DR. SHAVER LED A PLETHORA OF SEA TURTLE CONSERVATION PROJECTS IN RESEARCH IN TEXAS AND IS KNOWN FOR HER LEADERSHIP AND RECOVERY OF THE CRITICALLY ENDANGERED RIDLEY SEA TURTLE, SHE RAISE ALL FUNDING FOR THE SEA TURTLE PROGRAM SINCE 1993 FROM NO BUDGET TO NOW $1.4 MILLION BUDGET, PLUS $14.6 MILLION IN GRANTS, DONATIONS AND PROJECT FUNDS. WHEREAS DR. SHAVER HAS BEEN AWARDED NUMEROUS RECOGNITION SUCH AS 2021 TEXAS DISTINGUISHED SCIENTIST AT THE ANNUAL MEETING AT THE TEXAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCE RECEIVING LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD FROM THE INTERNATIONAL SEA TURTLE SOCIETY IN 2018, 2013 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY CHAMPION AWARD. CORPUS CHRISTI 2011 NEWSMAKER OF THE YEAR AND 2012 FINALIST FOR THE 2020 SERVICE TO AMERICA AND ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT PERSON OF THE WEEK. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY HEREBY RECOGNIZING DR. DONNA SHAVER FOR HER UNWAVERING COMMITMENT TO SEA TURTLES AND THE COASTAL BEND COMMUNITY. 
          >> 
          >> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED SAME TIME, YOU WANT TO START OVER THE COMMENTS? 
          >> YES I WOULD END CERTAINLY I WANT DR. SHAVER TO SPEAK IF SHE IS SO INCLINED AND I WILL LET HER MAKE HER WAY TO THE BACK MICROPHONE IF SHE WANTS TO. OR HAND OR A MICROPHONE AND LET HER DO IT UP HERE. I JUST WANTED TO START BY SAYING THAT DR. SHAVER HAS BEEN A LEGEND IN THIS COMMUNITY 43 YEARS PLUS. 
          THE WORK SHE HAS DONE FOR THE SEA TURTLE PROGRAM HAS BEEN INSPIRING TO ALL. UNFORTUNATELY, THAT PROGRAM SEEMS TO BE IN SOME PRETTY AROUND HERE AND THAT'S VERY SAD AND IT IS A TYPICAL BUREAUCRATIC MOVE SO SOMETIMES PEOPLE MAY COMPLAIN ABOUT LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUT IT'S EASIER TO GET TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT THAN IT IS NATIONAL OR FEDERAL TO HAVE IMPACT SO I'M SORRY FOR THAT BUT TODAY WE DON'T WANT TO SHINE A LIGHT ON THAT. I WANT TO SHINE A LIGHT ON YOU AND EVERYTHING YOU HAVE DONE AND POSITIVE CONTRIBUTIONS YOU HAVE MADE AND WE ARE SO GRATEFUL FOR THAT. IN MY PRECINCT THE THINGS YOU HAVE DONE HAVE BEEN NOTHING SHORT OF MIRACULOUS IN REGARDS TO WHAT YOU HAVE DONE. ON BEHALF OF ALL THE CITIZENS OF NUECES COUNTY AND NOT JUST NUECES COUNTY BECAUSE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE HAVE COME TO THIS COMMUNITY TO SEE THE SEA TURTLE RELEASES AND THAT IS NOT A UNDERESTIMATE. 
          OVER 43 YEARS I CAN'T IMAGINE THE NUMBER. IT MIGHT BE IN THE SEVEN DIGITS. I'VE BEEN OUT SEVERAL TIMES MYSELF, BUT IT'S AMAZING TO WATCH THE EVENT AND AMAZING TO WATCH THE PEOPLE THAT SHOW UP THAT BRING THEIR CHILDREN AND IT'S BEEN A 
          [00:20:01]
GENERATIONAL THING. THANK YOU ON BEHALF OF A GRATEFUL COMMUNITY FOR EVERYTHING YOU HAVE DONE WE ARE SO APPRECIATIVE OF IT AND WANTED TO RECOGNIZE YOU TODAY IN 
          REGARDS TO IT. >> WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH TO MY FRIENDS AND COMMISSIONERS FOR THIS. I APPRECIATE IT, MORE THAN YOU CAN EVER KNOW. ESPECIALLY NOW WHERE THINGS HAVE BEEN SO DIFFICULT FOR ME, FOR FIVE YEARS NOW TRYING TO HANG ONTO A PROGRAM. IF YOU DON'T MIND I WANT TO GET A PICTURE NEXT TO THIS AND WITH ALL OF YOU. 
          >> WE WOULD TAKE A PICTURE, WE WILL BRING YOU UP IN A MOMENT. 
          >> I HATE TO TURN MY BACK TO ANYONE, BUT THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DONE WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE COMMUNITY. THEY HAVE BEEN PART OF THIS WORK EVERY STEP OF THE WAY WITH NOW MORE THAN 100 VOLUNTEERS PER YEAR FROM OUR COMMUNITY AND WE COULD NOT HAVE DONE IT WITHOUT THIS PARTICIPATION AND THIS SUPPORT. 
          IT IS A SUCCESS STORY THAT WE CAN ALL BE PROUD OF WORKING TOGETHER AND MAKING A DIFFERENCE FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS SO THAT THIS MAGNIFICENT CC CAN BE PART OF OUR LOCAL HERITAGE, THAT WE CAN ALL BE PROUD OF. AND YOUR GRANDCHILDREN AND GREAT-GRANDCHILDREN CAN COME HERE AND SEE THE NESTING TURTLES, HATCHLING RELEASES AND TO KNOW THAT WE ALL TOGETHER HAVE SET A GOAL AND MADE A DIFFERENCE TRYING TO SECURE THIS FUTURE OF THIS SPECIES THAT WAS ALMOST EXTIRPATED FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH IN ONE HUMAN GENERATION. FROM THE YEAR MY DAD GRADUATED FROM THE NAVAL ACADEMY IN 1947 WHEN THE FAMOUS FILM WAS TAKEN SHOWING AN ESTIMATED 40,000 TURTLES NESTING IN ONE DAY, TO WHEN I STARTED AT PADRE ISLAND IN 1980. AND GRADUATED FROM CORNELL IN 1981 AND THEN MOVED TO TEXAS AS FAST AS I COULD. I WAS NOT BORN HERE BUT I AM A TEXAN THROUGH AND THROUGH NOW AND HAVE WORKED TO SUPPORT THIS COMMUNITY AND I THANK YOU FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HEART FOR YOU RECOGNIZING ME AND GIVING ME SUPPORT TO HELP ME KEEP THIS FIGHT ON. FOR MORE THAN JUST MY JOB, BUT FOR A PROGRAM THAT IS IMPORTANT TO OUR COMMUNITY AND TO THIS SPECIES, FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. SO, THANK YOU VERY 
          MUCH. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> 
          >> OKAY, THIS TIMELINE YOU GAVE US, WE ARE NOT READY TO GO BACK TO THIS YET BECAUSE JENNY IS NOT BACK, SHE IS STILL WAITING. 
          [00:25:02]
I SKIPPED ITEM OVER DUNN ANNOUNCEMENT ON DISCLOSURE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. DOES ANYONE HAVE THOSE TO ANNOUNCE RIGHT NOW? YOU CAN ALWAYS ANNOUNCE WHEN THE ITEM COMES UP ON THE AGENDA SO IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL. THERE BEING NONE NOW 
          [G. PUBLIC COMMENT: This section provides the public the opportunity to address the Commissioners Court on any issues within its jurisdiction. The Commissioners Court may not take formal action on any requests made during the Public Comment period which are not on the Agenda, but can refer such requests to County staff for review if appropriate.]
I WILL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT, WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO COMMENT. JUDGE WARNER YOU ARE UP FIRST, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS YOU KNOW THE DRILL AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. WE CANNOT SPEAK BACK. 
          >> FIGURE VERY MUCH JUDGE SCOTT AND COMMISSIONERS. I HAVE COME HERE TODAY WITH OTHER COUNTY COURT OF LAW JUDGES TO ADDRESS THE DISPARITY BETWEEN THE PAY OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF LAW JUDGES TO ADDRESS THE DISPARITY BETWEEN THE PAY OF THE DISTRICT COURT COURT REPORTERS AND THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW COURT REPORTERS. I ONLY LEARNED A FEW MONTHS AGO THAT THE DISTRICT COURT REPORTERS ARE IN A GROUP 34 OR AS THE COUNTY COURT OF LAW REPORTERS ARE IN PAY GROUP 33. APPARENTLY THEY WERE MOVED UP TO THAT PAY GROUP IN THE COUNTY COURT OF LAW REPORTERS WERE LEFT BEHIND. I THINK THE COMMISSIONERS AND JUDGE ARE AWARE THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR COUNTY , WE HAVE MOST OF THE COMPLEX AND LENGTHY CIVIL CASES BEING FILED IN THE COUNTY COURT'S AT LAW. CERTAINLY, THEY WORK JUST AS HARD IF NOT HARDER THAN THE DISTRICT COURT JUST AS HARD IF NOT HARDER THAN THE DISTRICT COURT COURT REPORTERS. THEY ARE ALSO AVAILABLE TO FILL IN, IN THE DISTRICT COURT'S WHENEVER THEY ARE SHORTHANDED AND DON'T HAVE ENOUGH COURT REPORTERS TO HANDLE THEIR BUSINESS. I BELIEVE THE NUECES COUNTY PERSONNEL POLICY MANUAL DOES SAY THAT THERE SHOULD BE A PRACTICE OF SIMILAR PAY FOR EMPLOYEES THAT DO SIMILAR WORK. 
          SO WE WOULD ASK THAT THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW REPORTERS PAY GROUP BE ADJUSTED AND THEY BE MOVED TO PAY GROUP 34. 
          >> THANK YOU, JUDGE. LIEUT. ERIC WOOD . 
          >> GOOD MORNING MY NAME IS ERIC WOOD WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, I HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED HERE 16 YEARS, IN PUBLIC SERVICE ALMOST 30 YEARS. I WANTED TO BRING UP THE LAST CONTRACT A FEW YEARS AGO, EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD INDICATED TO US THAT THEY WANTED TO ENSURE LAW ENFORCEMENT WAS PAID CORRECTLY, BUT THERE WAS A QUESTION AS TO WHAT THE CORRECT WAGE WAS. 
          SELECT THE PAY STUDY WAS BROUGHT UP THAT WE ALL AGREED A PAY STUDY WAS GOING TO BE DONE AND BASED OFF THE PAY STUDY WE WOULD ENTER THE NEXT NEGOTIATION. THAT NEGOTIATION COMES UP IN A FEW MONTHS, THE PAY STUDY IS DUE IN A COUPLE MONTHS AND MY CONCERN IS WITH THE PROPOSAL TO FREEZE THE TAX RATE, NO MATTER WHAT THE PAY STUDY IS THERE WILL BE NO MONEY AVAILABLE TO PAY US THE APPROPRIATE RATE. AND I KNOW YOU ALL ARE WAITING ON THE PAY STUDY BUT I CAN ASSURE YOU BECAUSE WE ARE ABOUT 30% SHORT AND WE HAVE BEEN 30% SHORT SINCE COVID , WE ARE NOT RECRUITING ANYBODY BECAUSE OUR PAY IS SIGNIFICANTLY, 30 TO 40% LESS THAN EVERYBODY ELSE AROUND HERE. MOST STARTING POSITIONS AND OTHER AGENCIES EXCEED WHAT I MAKE AS A LIEUTENANT THAT'S A BIG THE DISPARITY IS. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS BROUGHT TO EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE YOU GET TO THE POINT WHERE YOU MAKE THAT VOTE. THANK YOU. 
          >> OFFICER OTHER COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS 
          >> CAN YOU TURN THE MICROPHONE UP A LITTLE BIT POINT TOWARD 
          YOU AND SPEAK INTO IT? >> CAN HEAR ME NOW? MY NAME IS ASSOCIATION AND 20 YEAR VETERAN OF THE FORCE. HERE TODAY TO ASK COMMISSIONERS A SIMPLE QUESTION DO YOU SUPPORT LAW ENFORCEMENT OR DO YOU NOT? WE'VE BEEN TOLD THIS IS A PRO LAW-ENFORCEMENT COUNTY. LITTLE HAS BEEN DONE TO SHOW THIS. NOT ONLY DOES PASSING THE SMALL INCREASE IN THE EFFECTIVE TAX RATE DIRECTLY AFFECT LAW ENFORCEMENT, IT AFFECTS EVERY EMPLOYEE, EVEN MEMBERS OF YOUR STAFF MOST IMPORTANT IT AFFECTS SAFETY AND SECURITY OF EVERY CITIZEN IN NUECES COUNTY. THANK YOU VERY 
          MUCH. >> THANK YOU. RACHEL, SORRY I THOUGHT YOU LEFT, 
          [00:30:07]
COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVES. 
          THANK YOU GUYS FOR HONORING DR. DONNA SHAVER AND HER TURTLE PROGRAM. I REALLY APPRECIATE THE EFFORT OF DOING THAT. I AM ASKING YOU GUYS TO USE, I THINK COMMISSIONER CHESNEY SAID IT IS BUREAUCRACY THAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE SUPERINTENDENT ]. I'M ASKING THE FIVE OF YOU TO PLEASE PUT THE PRESSURE ON HIM TO NOT DISMANTLE THIS PROGRAM. WE ELECT YOU GUYS TO BE THE VOICE OF THE COMMUNITY, THIS IS WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS. THIS FOR HER IS UNWAVERING AND QUITE FRANKLY BEING INVOLVED IN THIS POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT , YOU KNOW WE UNDERSTAND THAT PRIVATIZATION IS TRYING TO COME KNOCK ON OUR DOOR, THE WAY IT IS IN FLORIDA AND OTHER PLACES AND YOU KNOW THIS IS ONE STEP IN THAT DIRECTION. OF THE TEXAS OPEN BEACHES ACT TO PROTECT US FROM THAT AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO FIGHT AND ADVOCATE FOR THAT JUST LIKE WE WILL CONTINUE TO FIGHT AND ADVOCATE FOR DR. DONNA SHAVER AND HER PROGRAM. I IMPLORE THE FIVE OF YOU TO PLEASE PUT PRESSURE ON TO DO THE RIGHT THING. WE HAVE REPEATEDLY SAID WE DON'T WANT FOR PEOPLE TO CALIFORNIA OUR TEXAS AND UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S THE APPROACH HE HAS TAKEN. PLEASE AGAIN IF YOU CAN PUT PRESSURE ON HIM TO DO THE RIGHT THING, TO MAKE HER JOB A LITTLE BIT EASIER AND ALLOW HER TO DO WHAT SHE HAS BEEN DOING SO FANTASTIC AND WELL THROUGH THE COURSE OF HER CAREER. THANK YOU 
          FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. >> THANK YOU AND JAN ROBERTSON, 
          YOU WANTED TO SPEAK, TOO? >> GOOD MORNING, MY NAME IS JAN ROBERTSON, ADVOCATE FOR THE SEA TURTLE PROGRAM. I SPOKE IN FRONT OF THE COURT NOVEMBER 21, 2021. 
          >> CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR ME PLEASE? 
          >> SURE, JAN ROBERTSON , THE PHYSICAL ADDRESS, 3933 3933 WAGNER LEE DR., CORPUS CHRISTI, 78418. ANYWAY I SPOKE IN NOVEMBER ANYWAY I SPOKE IN NOVEMBER 17, 2021 AND THE COMMISSIONERS COURT , AS A RESULT WHICH WE APPRECIATE IT, YOU MADE A RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT THE SEA TURTLE PROGRAM WHICH WE APPRECIATE. WE HAVE BEEN ADVOCATING FOR THE PROGRAM GOING ON FOUR YEARS AND EIGHT MONTHS. UNFORTUNATELY WE MIGHT HAVE LOST THE BATTLE, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO STOP. WHY AM HERE TODAY IS TO BRING LIGHT TO ANOTHER SITUATION JUST LIKE OUR GROUP SAID FOUR YEARS AGO AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY IN THE COUNTY THOUGHT THE SEA TURTLE PROGRAM WOULD BE DISMANTLED, BUT IT HAS BEEN. I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS WE BROUGHT UP. IN RESPONSE TO JUNE 18 OF THIS YEAR. TOWARD SIX HOURS AND 35 MINUTES HE RESPONDS TO DAN STOCKLEY SPECIFICALLY STATING THAT SEA TURTLE HATCHLING RELEASES ARE NO LONGER FINANCIALLY SUSTAINABLE. AND TOWARD THE END OF THAT FIVE MINUTES LATER, HE LAYS OUT A TIMELINE FOR A STUDY THAT THE PARK IS GOING TO GO THROUGH WITH. HE LAYS OUT A FIVE-YEAR PLAN, THEY WILL STRETCH OUT FROM 2025 AND NOT INFORM THE PUBLIC UNTIL 2029 OR 20/30. I FIND THAT ALARMING BECAUSE OF WHAT JUST HAPPENED THE PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS. THE ORIGINAL REVIEW THAT WAS RELEASED TO THE TIME ZONE JUNE 12 OF 2020, IT STATES ABOUT THE 10 YEAR SPAN. DIFFERENT SECTIONS THEY WILL DO, RIGHT NOW IS YEAR FIVE AND SURE ENOUGH THE TURTLE PROGRAM WAS DISMANTLED AND IT WILL ALWAYS BE THERE, BUT NOT IN A CAPACITY LIKE . I NEED TO POINT OUT IN A ISLAND MOON ARTICLE FROM AUGUST 23, 2024. THEY ANNOUNCED THAT THE PROGRAM IS NO LONGER FINANCIALLY SUSTAINABLE. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY FALSE. THE RECORDS WHICH YOUR CLERK JUST READ GOES OVER THE BUDGET FROM 1993, TWO 2019. AND DONNA AND HER STAFF WITH GRANTS AND 
          [00:35:06]
WRITING PROPOSALS SUPPLEMENTED HER BUDGET WITH $14 MILLION. IN ADDITION TO THE BASE FUNDING. THAT MADE THE PROGRAM FINANCIALLY SOLID SO OUR QUESTION IS, FROM 2020 WHEN NAME ] ON APRIL 26 OFFICIALLY ANNOUNCED SUPERINTENDENT OF THE SEASHORE TO JUNE 18 OF 2024, WHAT MADE THE PROGRAM UNSUSTAINABLE? WHY DID IT FALL APART IN FOUR YEARS? YOU'VE GOT TO ASK YOURSELF. LACK OF MAINTENANCE, 15 VEHICLES SITTING IN MAINTENANCE THAT HAD NOT HAD OIL CHANGES IN A YEAR THEY ARE SITTING AND RESTING , A MISUSE AND WASTE OF GOVERNMENT TAXPAYER MONEY. THERE WERE MULTIPLE OTHER THINGS THAT I DON'T HAVE TIME TO GO INTO, BUT WE WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION , MAYBE TO OUR REPRESENTATIVES AGAIN WHICH SO FAR NEITHER PARTY HAS HELPED OUT ON THAT. 
          AGAIN IT IS COLLOCATED. >> CAN I ASK TO BRING BACK F1 SO I CAN MAKE SOME COMMENTS? I WANTED TO FOCUS ON THE DOCTOR. 
          >> YES, I HAVE TO STEP OUT FOR A SECOND. I WILL BE RIGHT BACK. 
          >> I WANTED TO MAKE, ON ITEM F1 IN RELATION TO WHAT YOU TALK ABOUT AND TO REITERATE THE PERIL OF THIS PROGRAM AND THE FIGHT THAT HAS GONE ON. THE SOLUTION I AUTHORED IN 21 AND WE HAVE REACHED OUT AS A COURT, I REACHED OUT INDIVIDUALLY, LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES HAVE REACHED OUT AND I WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT, BUT THIS FALLS CLEARLY ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND I WILL BE SENDING ANOTHER LETTER FOR A KNOW HOW MANY TIMES TO THE REPRESENTATIVE IN REGARDS TO THAT BECAUSE THAT IS SOMETHING HE CAN HAVE AN EFFECT ON TO SAY THAT IS UNSUSTAINABLE IS VERY SHORTSIGHTED. 
          SURPRISED SHOWED UP AT CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE HE WOULD NEVER COME TO COMMISSIONERS COURT DESPITE BEING REQUESTED TO COME SEVERAL TIMES TO HAVE MEETINGS. AND IT HAS BEEN VERY FRUSTRATING TO SEE. I DON'T THINK POSITION IS SOMEONE WHO HAS THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COAST IN MIND. HE IS ALL ABOUT , I DON'T KNOW, BUT I WILL SAY IT'S BEEN VERY FRUSTRATING TO DEAL WITH HIM AND I DON'T THINK HE HAS DONE A GOOD JOB AND I DON'T IS APPROPRIATE FOR THAT POSITION BECAUSE THAT IS A PROGRAM THAT'S VERY SUSTAINABLE BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE COME TO THIS COMMUNITY AND INJECT THE CAPITAL. IF YOU WANT TO DO AN ANALYSIS FINANCIALLY I THINK YOU WILL LOSE THAT ONE DRAMATICALLY. SO AGAIN I WILL BE REACHING OUT BECAUSE UNFORTUNATELY LISTEN TO LOCAL OFFICIALS OR CARE ABOUT LOCAL OPINIONS. 
          NEVER HAS, NEVER WILL. HAS BEEN AN EYESORE SINCE HE HAS TAKEN OVER THAT POSITION AND AT SOME POINT WE SOMEONE IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL HEAR US AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. I AGREE COMPLETELY WITH WHAT THESE FOLKS HAVE SAID TODAY AND I WILL BE SENDING SOMETHING AGAIN TO REPRESENTATIVE CLOUD AND HEAVILY THIS TIME HE CAN GET INVOLVED AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT 
          IT. THANK YOU. >> IS THIS SOMETHING WE CAN PUT 
          A RESOLUTION ON? >> WE HAVE A RESOLUTION ON FILE AND I WILL ATTACH THAT. IT IS STILL THERE, STRONGLY WORDED. 
          THE RESOLUTION DOES NOT GO AWAY UNLESS WE TAKE IT AWAY AND IT HAS BEEN THERE SINCE 21. IT WAS FOUGHT OFF FOR YOU WHILE BECAUSE WE DID DO SOME GOOD , THREE OR FOUR YEARS, BUT SHE'S RIGHT THERE DISMANTLING IT AGAIN AND I DON'T THINK DR. 
          SHAVER HAS A JOB THERE ANYMORE, VERY DISHEARTENING AND WILL CHANGE THE COMPLEXION OF HOW THE PROGRAM RUNS , AGAIN IT IS UNFORTUNATE HE DOES NOT SEEM TO CARE. 
          [E. PUBLIC HEARING WILL BEGIN AT 9:00 A.M.]
          [5. BUDGET]
          >> OKAY, THANK YOU. I THINK WE ARE READY TO GO BACK TO OUR BUDGET DISCUSSION. IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE CLEAR TO GIVE THEM UNTIL MONDAY MORNING TO GIVE ALL DEPARTMENTS AND EVERYONE THE CORRECTED AND CLEAR VERSIONS OF THE BUDGET. AND THEN WE WILL JUST HAVE TO FILE THE CORRECTED BUDGET FOR THE PUBLIC AND THE NOTICE, SEVEN DAYS OUT WE HAVE TO DO THE LETTER FOR THE BUDGET HEARING IS THAT CORRECT ON YOUR TIMELINE? EVERYBODY TALKED, THEY'RE TALKING TO MAKE SURE WE DO IT CORRECTLY, IT WILL BE FILED AND WE CAN IN FACT BRING THIS BACK AND HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 25TH AT THE NEXT 
          [00:40:01]
MEETING, THAT WOULD BE THE CORRECT WAY TO DO IT AND THAT'S THE WAY I WOULD ASK TO TABLE THIS, WITH THOSE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE RECEIVE OUR CORRECTED VERSIONS BY MONDAY TO ALL THE DEPARTMENTS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS, COMMISSIONERS COURT SO WE CAN ALL HAVE TIME AND YOU ONLY HAVE A FEW DAYS BEFORE IT IS FILED ON THE 20TH POSSIBLY FIVE DAYS OUT. IS THAT GOING TO GIVE ENOUGH TIME? 
          >> IT HAS TO. >> WHEN YOU GET THEM PLEASE, IF YOU'RE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, LOOK AT THE BUDGETS , MAKE SURE THEY ARE CORRECT BECAUSE WHEN WE COME BACK WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH WHAT'S IN THE BOOK AS PRINTED. 
          >> I WOULD SECOND TO MOTION WITH THAT DIRECTION. IS THAT SPECIFIC ENOUGH? ANY OTHER COMMENTS? 
          >> JUST NOTICE REGARDING THE HEARING ON THE 25TH WOULD NEED TO BE IN THE PAPER WE ARE ASKING FOR FRIDAY. THAT'S THE 
          ONLY THING. >> WE DID THE LAST AND WE WILL 
          DO THE SAME. >> ADDED AS A MOTION TO TABLE? 
          >> THAT'S PART OF THE REQUIREMENT SO YOU HAVE TO PUT 
          IT IN THERE. >> WE HAVE, SOMEONE ON STAFF ALREADY DID THE PROPER POSTING SO WE HAVE A POINT OF CONTACT. 
          WE DON'T HAVE EVERYBODY POINTING AT EACH OTHER. 
          >> TO SAY OUT LOUD WE HAVE A POINT OF CONTACT. 
          >> OKAY WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SO WE WILL NOT DO THE BUDGET HEARINGS ARE NOT DOING THE BUDGET THIS AFTERNOON SO ANY OF YOU SITTING HERE FOR THAT PURPOSE YOU ARE FREE TO GO ON AND WORK ON YOUR 
          BUDGETS. >> FOR THE RECORD WE HAVE 
          TABLED ITEM E AND HOLD ON. >> THE VERY LAST PAGE. FIVE 5A, 
          ALL THE BUDGET. G, H AND I. >> THERE WE GO, SORRY. 
          >> ALL OF THEM. THERE IS A BUNCH IN THE BACK. MOVING ON. 
          [H. BOARD APPOINTMENTS:]
UNTO BOARD APPOINTMENTS AND I'M SORRY, I HAVE TO TABLE THESE AS WELL. THESE I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE ITEM 1 AND TWO . BECAUSE WE ACCIDENTALLY PUT THEM ON KNOWING WE HAD TWO MEMBERS IN AN ELECTION IN THE COMMISSIONERS COURT POLICY IT SAYS YOU CANNOT APPOINT BOARDS WITHIN 60 DAYS OF ELECTION IN CASE THOSE MEMBERS CHANGE AND THEY SHOULD HAVE A VOICE IN THE NEW MEMBERSHIP IF THAT SEAT IS 
          GOING TO CHANGE. >> SECOND BASED ON COURT 
          POLICY. >> MOTION AND SECOND TO TABLE 
          ITEM H ONE AND TWO. >> THAT'S FOR ALL? 
          >> YES WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED. I ALLOWED IT BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS ONLY FOR THE FIVE BIG BOARDS BUT WE DID NOT SPECIFY SO THE POLICY SAYS ALL BOARDS. MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE SAME SIGN? 
          >> INDEFINITELY UNTIL WE SEE WHAT HAPPENS? 
          >> UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION SO WE WILL HAVE TO PUT IT BACK ON AFTER NOVEMBER. 
          [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.]
          >> MOVING ON H 2 , THE CONSENT AGENDA. ANYTHING IN THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT ANY COMMISSION WISHES TO PULL FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION? WHERE WILL ACCEPT A MOTION TO PASS THE CONSENT 
          AGENDA. >> I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION UNLESS SOMEONE HAS ANYTHING TO PULL. 
          >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND TO PASS THE CONSENT AGENDA. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ARE YOU DONE COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO THAN OUR 
          [1.  Receive update on I-69 Alliance efforts and all related matters; take action if needed.]
REGULAR AGENDA. DO WE HAVE, YES ITEM A-1, RECEIVE UPDATE ON THE I-69 ALLIANCE EFFORTS AND RELATED MATTERS. JENNIFER IS ONLINE AND I BELIEVE SHE HAS SENT IN A REPORT. HELLO JENNIFER, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. 
          >> JUDGE, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME, COMMISSIONERS GOOD MORNING 
          [00:45:05]
AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF UPDATE ON I-69 IN TERMS OF PROJECT STATUS AND WHAT THE ALLIANCE ARE COLLECTIVELY DOING WITH OUR MEMBERS. I HAVE A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION. WHAT I AM SEEING ON THE SCREEN IS A REPORT. I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN FLIP TO THE OTHER DOCUMENT. OTHERWISE, LET ME PAUSE AS I TRY TO FIND THE PRESENTATION. MY NAME IS JENNIFER SHEPARD AND I SERVE AS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ALLIANCE FOR I-69 TEXAS. A MEMBERSHIP-BASED COALITION IN EXISTENCE SINCE THE EARLY 90S. I AM VERY THANKFUL FOR NUECES COUNTY. 
          YOUR COUNTY HAS BEEN A CONSISTENT AND VERY ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE ALLIANCE AND YOUR REGION CONSISTING THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, NUECES COUNTY AND THE PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI HAVE BEEN VERY ACTIVE IN TERMS OF LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE ALLIANCE OVER THE YEARS. FOR EXAMPLE, THE JUDGE SERVED AS CHAIRMAN OF THE ALLIANCE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, FORMER CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF PURPOSE CHRISTIE WAS A MEMBER OF OUR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND THEN JUDY HOLLY YEARS AGO ALSO SERVED AS AN EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBER. THROUGH THAT INVOLVEMENT WAS THE CHAIR OF THE TXDOT ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO DEVELOP THE FIRST IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR I-69. 
          NUECES COUNTY HAS DEEP ROOTS IN THE I-69 ALLIANCE AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR ONGOING SUPPORT. IF WE CAN FLIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. I'M GOING TO SHOW A SERIES OF THREE QUICK MAPS. THERE IS A LOT OF INFORMATION IN THESE MAPS AND I KNOW YOU HAVE A LONG MEETING AHEAD SO I WILL GIVE YOU HIGH-LEVEL REMARKS AND I CAN DO QUESTIONS WILL FOLLOW UP INDIVIDUALLY. YOU CAN SEE HERE THE MAP OF I-69 IN TEXAS, CONGRESSIONALLY A DESIGNATED ROUTE WITH AREAS IN YELLOW ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED COUNTIES AND THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE ONE OF THE KEY JUSTIFICATIONS FOR I-69 BACK IN THE 90S PERSISTING THROUGH TODAY IS TO PROVIDE CONNECTIVITY IN SERVICE TO UNDERSERVED REGIONS. A SECOND PERSISTENT JUSTIFICATION IS SAFETY AND THAT IS IN TERMS OF CONGESTION MITIGATION, AND ALSO EVALUATION CAPACITY AND THAT IS SOMETHING YOU ALL KNOW FAR TOO WELL. THIRD AND NOT THE LEAST BIT IS FOR THE MOVEMENT OF FREIGHT. I-69 IS, PROVIDES CRITICAL MULTIMODAL FREIGHT INFRASTRUCTURE CONNECTION. FOR THOSE REASONS WE WORK ON DEVELOPING THE PROJECT. THE GOOD NEWS, IT IS CONGRESSIONALLY AUTHORIZED, THE BAD NEWS, THERE IS NO DEDICATED FEDERAL FUNDING FOR THIS, SO I-69 IS BUILT AS A SERIES OF UPGRADES TO EXISTING ROADWAYS DESIGNATED BY CONGRESS IN TEXAS AND YOU CAN SEE THOSE LISTED AS YOU 77, HIGHWAY 44, 281, 59 AND THE CONNECTOR IN THE VALLEY. WE ARE MAKING GREAT PROGRESS WITH 220 MILES BUILT AND SIGNED AS I-69. 40 MORE MILES ARE COMPLETE AND AWAITING FINAL DESIGNATION AS INTERSTATE BY THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS MAP HERE IS VERY BUSY AND THE TICKET WE SHOULD BE THERE'S A LOT GOING ON ON I-69 IN TEXAS AND THIS IS WHAT WE REALLY FOCUS ON, BRINGING DOLLARS TO PROJECTS TO BUILD I-69. CURRENTLY THERE IS $3 BILLION OF PROJECTS, I-69 PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN TEXAS AND THE MOST RECENT 10 YEAR PLAN APPROVED BY THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION INCLUDES OVER 80 PROJECTS TOTALING OVER $13 BILLION AGAIN WITH A B OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS. AS YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE A LOT OF PROJECTS. MOST WOULD ADMIT BUILDING AN INTERSTATE IN SMALL INCREMENTS IS NOT THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY TO DO IT, BUT IT IS A NECESSITY DUE TO THE FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. DOWN A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO YOUR PORTION OF THE I-69 CORRIDOR, A COUPLE OF HIGH-LEVEL UPDATES, TXDOT IS CURRENTLY FOCUSED ON COMPLETING THE SECTION OF U.S. 77 FROM BROWNSVILLE THROUGH I-37. OF COURSE IN NUECES COUNTY, I-69 EAST, U.S. 77 IS COMPLETE AND THERE BUILDING SOUTHWARD TOWARD BROWNSVILLE MEANWHILE FROM BROWNSVILLE BUILDING NORTHWARD. SO THAT IS ONE AREA OF FOCUS 
          [00:50:05]
AND I SUSPECT THAT WILL BE THE FIRST LEG THAT IS COMPLETE ON I-69. THERE IS GREAT FOCUS WITHIN THE COMMISSION, TEXAS TRANSFORMATION COMMISSION TO IMPROVE LAREDO TO HOUSTON ALONG 59 AND ALSO FROM CORPUS CHRISTI TO THE NORTH TO HOUSTON OF 77 TO 59 SO THAT IS ONE AREA WITH INCREASED INVESTMENT. FINALLY ON 281 AND I MENTIONED I KNOW IT'S NOT CLOSE PROXIMITY TO YOU BUT IT IS PART OF THE CORPUS CHRISTI TXDOT DISTRICT AND THE DISTRICT HAS THE MOST MILES OF I-69 AMONGST ALL OF THE EIGHT TXDOT DISTRICT. SOME ADDITIONAL WORK NEEDS TO BE DONE ON 281. WE CAN SEE THERE TXDOT IS TAKING AN INCREMENTAL APPROACH SO THEY HAVE ELIMINATED STOPLIGHTS FROM GEORGE WEST TO MCALLEN SO THAT IMPROVES FREE FLOW TRAFFIC BUT ADDITIONAL UPGRADES WILL BE PLANNED AND CONSTRUCTED IN THE FUTURE. I WILL MENTION STATE HIGHWAY 44 WHICH WAS AN ADDITION TO THE INITIAL CONGRESSIONAL DESIGNATION OF I-69, BUT IT WILL BE CRITICAL LONG-TERM AND STRATEGICALLY FOR CORPUS CHRISTI BECAUSE IT DOES CONNECT ALL THREE LEGS OF I-69, TO CORPUS CHRISTI AND THE PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI IN THE COUNTY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. IN TERMS OF WHAT THE ALLIANCE WILL DO. WE ARE A MEMBERSHIP-BASED ORGANIZATION AND WE RELY UPON FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF OUR MEMBERS. WITH MANY MEMBERS WE CAN SPREAD THAT AMONGST EVERYONE. WE WORK ON THREE FRONTS, FEDERAL, STATE AND WOULD TXDOT DISTRICTS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL FROM A FEDERAL PERSPECTIVE WE ARE WORKING WITH THEM TO EDUCATE THEM ABOUT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF I-69. IT IS FANTASTIC IT WAS AUTHORIZED. WE ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR ANOTHER ANGLE TO GARNER FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR I-69. MAYBE IN TERMS OF LEGISLATION TO FACILITATE DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS YOUR MARK FOR GRANTS AND WE HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN RECENT YEARS HELPING TO SECURE FUNDING THROUGH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR I-69. AT THE STATE LEVEL WHICH ADMITTEDLY IS WHERE THE MAJORITY OF FUNDING IS COMING FOR I-69 BECAUSE THERE IS NO LONGER A DEDICATED FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCE, WE WORK VERY CONSISTENTLY, WITH THE LEGISLATURE TO GROW THE FUNDING FOR TRANSPORTATION, THE LEGISLATURE DOES NOT EARMARKED FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS THAT WE WORK TO GROW THE POT AND WE ARE ACTIVE WOULD TXDOT LEADERSHIP TO ENCOURAGE THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT POSSIBLE OUT OF THAT POT OF MONEY BE ALLOCATED TO I-69 AND I AM PLEASED TO REPORT OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS WE HAVE SEEN A STRONG UPTAKE IN THE NUMBER OF PROJECTS FUNDED BY TXDOT AS WELL AS THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING. LESLIE TXDOT DISTRICTS, WE WORK 12 MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR ONGOING BASIS WITH THE DISTRICTS ON SEVERAL LEVELS. ONE IS ENTERING THE TXDOT DISTRICTS ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR WHAT'S THE NEXT SEGMENT THAT THEY NEED TO GET THROUGH PLANNING IN ORDER TO POSITION CONSTRUCTION DOLLARS. TWO , WE ARE LOOKING AT BUILDING STRONG LOCAL SUPPORT. SO WE ENGAGE BOARD MEMBERS , BROADER MEMBERSHIP TO COMMUNICATE ABOUT THE TXDOT DISTRICT AND THE COMMISSION ABOUT SUPPORT FOR I-69. COMMUNITY MAY HAVE A BETTER SHOT OF DANCING A SMALL SEGMENT OF I-69 WHEN IT IS CONSIDERED PART OF A LARGER FRAMEWORK OF I-69. FINALLY, I WILL MENTION WE ALSO WORK WITH DISTRICTS ON GROUNDBREAKING'S AND RIBBON CUTTINGS. AS YOU SAW EARLIER THERE IS A LOT OF ACTIVITY ON I-69. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S VISIBLE TO THE COMMUNITY AND WE ARE MARKING SUCCESS AS WE MOVE FORWARD IN DEVELOPING THE PROJECT. SO THE GOAL HAS BEEN SINCE INCEPTION TO BUILD A SEAMLESS I-69. NO COMMUNITY WANTS JUST A FRAGMENT OF A INTERSTATE , THE PURPOSE IS TO BE CONNECTED SO THAT'S WHAT WE ARE FOCUSED ON AND WE ARE VERY VERY GRATEFUL TO I-69 NUECES COUNTY FOR YOUR LONG-STANDING COMMITMENT TO THE ORGANIZATION. WITH THAT I WILL CONCLUDE, 
          THANK YOU JUDGE. >> THANK YOU AND WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING UP WITH THIS AND BEING AVAILABLE AND ACCESSIBLE TODAY. I KNOW IT WAS JUST MENTIONED LAST COURT AND YOU MAKE YOURSELF AVAILABLE TO GIVE THE UPDATE, WE APPRECIATE THE TIMELINESS OF THIS. TO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK HER? I THINK WE ARE GOOD, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GREAT PRESENTATION WE 
          [2.  Receive presentation from McGriff Insurance Services, LLC related to Nueces County's agreement with AFLAC regarding the Short Term and Long Term Disability benefit offered to eligible employees by Nueces County.]
          APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU WELL. 
          [00:55:02]
          >> MOVING ON ITEM 2 RECEIVING A PRESENTATION FROM MCGRIFF INSURANCE SERVICES RELATED TO THE AFLAC AGREEMENT AND I BELIEVE DAVID WITH AFLAC IS HERE, SENIOR ACCOUNT MANAGER AND JODI CHAPMAN. DID YOU WISH TO SPEAK? 
          >> THANK YOU JUDGE. IN RESPONSE TO THE COURT REQUEST FOR AFLAC TO COME DO A PRESENTATION, SENIOR ACCOUNT MANAGER MR. DAVID COOPER HAS FLOWN IN FROM HARTFORD , CONNECTICUT TO BE HERE TODAY TO CLARIFY CONCERNS AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. WE HAVE THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE FROM MCGRIFF HERE AS WELL, GRACIOUSLY HAS COME IN FROM SAN ANTONIO TO BE WITH US HERE TODAY TO HELP ANSWER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. WITHOUT FURTHER DELAY I WILL TURN IT OVER TO MR. HOOPER. 
          >> THINK OF YOUR TIME THIS MORNING, APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. I AM HERE TO TRY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND HELP IN TRAINING WITH THE NUECES COUNTY TEAM . ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO IMPROVE COMMUNICATIONS, THE ANSWERS, THE TIMELINESS OF ALL THAT WE DO FOR NUECES COUNTY. SO THINK YOU FIRST. AS FAR AS A PRESENTATION IT WILL BE MYSELF NOT JODI. THANK YOU FOR THAT. IF YOU GO TO THE SLIDE DECK HERE IS OUR OFFERING WE HAVE FOR THE COUNTY, OFFERING BOTH LIFE INSURANCE TO COUNTY EMPLOYEES AND SHORT AND LONG-TERM DISABILITY AND INVOLUNTARY BENEFITS, TYPICALLY HOSPITAL INDEMNITY PLANS, CRITICAL ILLNESS, ACCIDENT POLICIES, ALL OF THOSE OFFERED BY AFLAC. THERE IS MYSELF AND JODI BUT JODI IS NOT HERE SO, NEXT. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SHORT-TERM DISABILITY SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT COME UP THAT WE RETURN TO ANSWER HAVE TO DO WITH ELIGIBILITY. WHEN TWO PEOPLE BECOME ELIGIBLE FOR BENEFITS AND HOW LONG CAN THEY STAY ON THE BENEFITS? THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION AROUND THE TERMINATION OF SOMEONE'S EMPLOYMENT AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY COULD CONTINUE ON BENEFIT WHAT WE CALL IF THEY ARE BEING PAID IF THE EMPLOYMENT TERMINATED AND IS VERY CLEAR IN THE CONTRACT AND I HAVE CITED THE PAGES IN WHICH CERTIFICATE THE LANGUAGE AND THE LEGAL DOCUMENTS WE OFFER TO THE COUNTY IT'S VERY CLEAR WHEN SOMEONE IS BEING PAID AND ON BENEFIT, THE EMPLOYMENT STATUS HAS NO BEARING ON WHETHER OR NOT WE CONTINUE TO PAY SHORT-TERM DISABILITY OR WHETHER NOT WE TRANSFER THEM AND PAY LONG-TERM DISABILITY. 
          SO IT IS A CONFUSING ELEMENT I UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THERE'S ANOTHER PART TO THAT IF THE EMPLOYMENT TERMINATION OCCURS BEFORE SOMEONE IS DISABLED, BEFORE THEY GO OUT ON CLAIM, THEN THE BENEFIT ELIGIBILITY ENDS AT THE END OF THE MONTH. 
          SO IF SOMEBODY WAS TERMINATED TODAY, BUT INJURED OR ILL IN OCTOBER THEY WERE NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO FILE THE CLAIM. IF THE CLAIM HAD OCCURRED SEPTEMBER 5, AND THEY WERE ACTIVE EMPLOYEE ON SEPTEMBER 5, THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO BE COVERED AND WE WOULD PAY THE CLAIM. AS LONG AS IT IS WHAT WE CALL MEDICALLY SUPPORTED OR MEDICALLY NECESSARY. THERE WERE OTHER QUESTIONS AROUND THE DURATION OF BENEFITS AND HOW LONG WE PAY A CLAIM. SHORT-TERM DISABILITY PROGRAM FOR NUECES COUNTY ENCOMPASSES A TOTAL OF 26 WEEKS WORTH OF PAYMENTS. 
          THAT DOES NOT MEAN WE AUTOMATICALLY PAY EVERYBODY 26 WEEKS RIGHT? YOU MIGHT HAVE AN INJURY MAYBE A BROKEN LEG OR ARM AND YOU'RE OUT TWO OR THREE WEEKS, THAT WOULD BE THE LENGTH OF TIME WE PAY THAT BENEFIT. 26 WEEKS WOULD BE THE MAXIMUM WE COULD PAY BEFORE WE TRANSFER SOMEBODY ONTO LONG-TERM DISABILITY. SOME OF THE QUESTIONS AND WE WILL CLARIFY IN LATER TRAINING THIS MORNING WITH FOLKS AT NUECES COUNTY. WE GO THROUGH DEDUCTIBLE SOURCES OF INCOME. 
          WHAT WOULD BE SOME THINGS WE WOULD SAY YOU KNOW YOU ARE ALREADY GETTING PAID OTHER SOURCES OF INCOME SO THEREFORE WE WOULD OFFSET THOSE FROM THE DISABILITY PAYMENT AND WE WILL CLARIFY MORE. THAT IS ALL LAID OUT IN THE CERTIFICATE PAGES 15 THROUGH 17. ONE SPECIFIC QUESTION HAD TO DO WITH WHETHER OR NOT PAYMENT FROM THE AFLAC HOSPITAL INDEMNITY , CRITICAL ILLNESS AND ACCIDENT POLICY, WHETHER OR NOT THOSE ARE CONSIDERED INCOME SOURCES AND THEY'RE NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE INSURANCE PAYMENTS CONSIDERED ONE-TIME THINGS NOT REGULAR INCOME. SO WE WILL GO THROUGH ALL OF THAT. 
          >> YOU ARE TALKING ON THE THING THAT WE AS A COURT THOUGHT, BUT 
          [01:00:07]
THERE WAS CONFUSION IN THE PRESENTATION SO THAT'S WHY WE WANTED YOU TO BE HERE TO DO THIS. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I AM HEARING YOU CORRECTLY BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS IF SOMEONE IS ON LONG-TERM DISABILITY BECAUSE OF MEDICAL REASONS , THE GENERAL FEELING IS THEN IF HE OR SHE HAS TO RETIRE OR IS TERMINATED OR QUITS BECAUSE OF HEALTH ISSUES, WHICH OFTEN HAPPENS WITH LONG-TERM DISABILITY, THERE'S NO EFFECT ON THEIR LONG-TERM DISABILITY, THEY KEEP GETTING PAID AS LONG AS THEY WERE DIAGNOSED PRIOR TO THEM LEAVING. WHICH IS THE LOGIC IN ALL OF THIS THAT WE KEPT DISCUSSING AND GETTING DIFFERENT ANSWERS. SO, GREAT YOU'RE HERE TO CLARIFY BECAUSE THAT IS WHY WE BUY THIS FOR THE EMPLOYEES FORGET THIS BECAUSE WE WANT THEM TO HAVE A SAFEGUARD IN CASE SOMETHING HAPPENS TO WHERE THEY HAVE TO LEAVE THE COUNTY FOR MEDICAL REASONS. YOU ARE SAYING AND I GET THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS FOR OTHER SOURCES OF INCOME AND THINGS LIKE THAT BUT IN GENERAL TERMS THEM LEAVING THE COUNTY IF THEY WERE DIAGNOSED BY OR TWO, IT DOES NOT AFFECT LONG-TERM DISABILITY OR SHORT-TERM, BUT REALLY IT'S THE LONG-TERM IF SOMEONE HAS TO LEAVE OR RETIRE THERE LOOKING 
          AT THE LONG-TERM DISABILITY. >> YOU ARE CORRECT AND MOST EMPLOYERS AROUND THE COUNTRY WILL TERMINATE SOMEONE'S EMPLOYMENT ONCE THEY ARE APPROVED ONTO LONG-TERM DISABILITY. PRESUMPTION IS THAT PERSON IS PROBABLY NOT COMING BACK TO WORK AND THEREFORE THEY NEED TO FREE UP A SPOT, A JOB SO WE TYPICALLY SEE THAT, BUT WHEN THAT PERSON IS ON CLAIM, AND THIS IS INDUSTRY-STANDARD WITH THE PERSON IS ON CLAIM EMPLOYMENT STATUS AND DOES NOT HAVE ANY BEARING ON FUTURE ABILITY. WHERE THE CONFUSION CAME IN , A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE WHERE THE CONFUSION CAME IN HAS TO DO WITH LIFE INSURANCE. 
          BECAUSE LIFE INSURANCE, THERE IS A PARTICULAR THING IN THE LIFE INSURANCE THAT WOULD HAVE PREVENTED US FROM DOING SOMETHING WE WERE ALREADY IN THE PROCESS OF DOING . IF A PARTICULAR EMPLOYEE'S EMPLOYMENT HAD BEEN TERMINATED, IF THEY HAD RETIRED THAT WOULD'VE BLOWN UP OUR ABILITY TO PAY THE ACCELERATED LIFE BENEFIT WE GET AN AMOUNT OF LIFE INSURANCE WHILE LIVING BEFORE YOU PASS AWAY AND THAT STANDARD IN THE INDUSTRY BUT HAD EMPLOYMENT TERMINATED BEFORE WE PAID THAT THEN WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PAY THAT. 
          >> AS LONG AS YOU ARE ABLE TO GET THE ACCELERATED BENEFIT PRIOR TO THE DEPARTURE, WHATEVER IT IS, THEN THEY GET THE ACCELERATED LIFE BENEFIT, THEN THE DEPARTURE, WHETHER IT'S TERMINATION, THEY LEAVE OR WHATEVER, AND THEY ALSO GET 
          LONG-TERM BENEFIT. >> CORRECT. 
          >> RECYCLING AS LONG AS HR DOES IT RIGHT, THEN THERE IS BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEES THAT ARE AVAILABLE AND NOTHING SHOULD 
          GET THEM SHORTCHANGED. >> THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD CONSULT AND HAVE CONVERSATIONS. IN FULL TRANSPARENCY TO OFFER UP ALL THESE THINGS, ONE OF THE THINGS WE DO HERE IN OUR DIVISION SPECIFICALLY IS WE LOOK TO FIND WAYS TO GET PEOPLE PAID AS OPPOSED TO HIDING BEHIND A CONTRACT TO FIND WAYS 
          TO NOT PAY THEM. >> COULD YOU TRANSLATE THAT TO THE HOMEOWNER INSURANCE INDUSTRY ? ANYWAY, GO AHEAD. 
          >> I WILL NOT SPEAK FOR MY COLLEAGUES ON THAT SIDE OF THE FENCE. DIFFERENT CARRIERS DO THAT DIFFERENTLY FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE WE LOOK AT IT AS THERE IS CONTRACTUAL LAW AND RULES AND WORDS AND THERE IS ADMINISTERED OF SYSTEMS AND WHAT THEY DO AND THERE IS PEOPLE AND WHAT THEY DO. ALL THREE OF THOSE THINGS CAN SAY SOMETHING DIFFERENT. WE ARE GOING TO TAKE THE APPROACH EVERYTHING THE TIME OF ASSUMING POSITIVE INTENT OF THE OTHER, WE WILL MAKE THE DECISION IN THE BENEFIT OF THE EMPLOYEE WHENEVER WE ARE FACED WITH THAT SITUATION. THAT'S GOOD BUSINESS, GOOD PR, THAT'S WHAT 
          WE DO AT AFLAC. >> A CLARIFICATION, BUT I THINK I AM HEARING YOU SAY. HAVE A CASE WHERE THIS EMPLOYEE BECOMES ILL LIKE WE HAVE NOW A COUPLE EMPLOYEES. BUT IF THEY ARE RECEIVING THE BENEFITS , THE LONG-TERM BENEFITS AND WE SAY MAYBE IT'S TIME TO RETIRE AND THE EMPLOYEE RETIRES , YOU'RE SAYING THEY RETIREMENT STILL CONTINUES TO RECEIVE ASSISTANCE FOR THE NEXT 20 WEEKS? 
          [01:05:05]
          >> ON THE SHORT-TERM DISABILITY, YES. EMPLOYERS RARELY , IF EVER TERMINATE EMPLOYEE WHILE ON SHORT-TERM 
          DISABILITY. >> HOW LONG IS LONG-TERM? 
          >> LONG-TERM COULD GO UNTIL SOCIAL SECURITY NORMAL RETIREMENT AGE. IT COULD BE A LONG TIME, IT COULD BE AGE 65, FIVE OR SEVEN YEARS SO DEPENDS ON THEIR DATE OF BIRTH AND AGE AT THE TIME OF DISABILITY. SO, IN THAT INSTANCE, AGAIN, WE , COMPANIES RARELY, IF EVER TERMINATE EMPLOYEE WHEN THEY ARE ON SHORT-TERM DISABILITY. YOU BROKE YOUR ARM YOU ARE COMING BACK THE ASSUMPTION IS YOU DON'T LOSE YOUR JOB OVER 
          THAT. >> TALKING WITH ONE NOT COMING BACK. ALTHOUGH THEY KEEP SAYING I MIGHT COME BACK. 
          >> YOUR UNDERSTANDING IS CORRECT WE WOULD CONTINUE TO 
          PAY THE CLAIM. >> AND THEN ONE POINT DO WE KEEP PAYING HER WHILE YOU PAY HER? WHEN DOES OURS RUN OUT? 
          >> AT THAT POINT, GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE SORRY. LET'S GO TO LONG-TERM DISABILITY. HERE IS WHERE I MENTIONED THE COULD BE PAID UP TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY NORMAL RETIREMENT AGE AND TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT HAS NO BEARING ON THAT ABILITY TO CONTINUE. FROM THE COUNTY PERSPECTIVE FOR SOMEBODY YOU TERMINATE OR IF THEY RETIRE THEN YOU'VE GOT WHATEVER IT IS YOU DO , PENSION OR THOSE KINDS OF THINGS OR IF IT'S JUST TERMINATION IF THEY LEFT EMPLOYMENT THERE IS NO CONTINUING. THERE ARE MORE SLIDES, I'M HAPPY TO WORK WITH TIMOTHY AND THE TRAINING AND EDUCATION GOING THROUGH ALL OF THIS BUT I AM AT YOUR BECK AND CALL FOR TIMING. 
          >> I THINK YOU CLARIFIED THE BIGGEST QUESTION WE HAD GONE AROUND AND AROUND ABOUT, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT AND THANK YOU FOR BEING AVAILABLE. NOT SURE THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS BUT I KNOW YOU WILL DO SOME TRAINING WITH OUR STAFF AS WELL TO MAYBE HELP ELIMINATE SOME OF THIS CONFUSION IN THE FUTURE GOING FORWARD . ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO SAY? 
          >> NO. THEY HAVE BEEN REALLY HELPFUL AND HAVING YOU ALL HELP US, HAVING THAT NATIONAL NETWORK AND I KNOW AT THIS POINT MOST ARE ALL SOME HUGE NETWORK BUT WE NEED IT. WE HAVE A SMALL STAFF CONSIDERING THE AMOUNT OF , HR STAFF CONSIDERING THE STAFF WE HAVE SO ALL THE ISSUES THAT COME UP WITH YOU ALL BEING ABLE TO HELP GUIDE US ON THESE SPECIFIC ISSUES THAT HAVE COME UP IN GENERAL OR LOOKING TO THE WHAT IF SCENARIOS, IT'S EXTREMELY HELPFUL. SO JUST WANT TO GIVE SOME COMMENTARY THAT I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK ON THIS AND THE FACT THAT YOU CAME IN ALL THE WAY FROM CONNECTICUT TO 
          MAKE THIS PRESENTATION. >> COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ? 
          >> I DID NOT REALIZE THE GENTLEMAN CAME ALL THE WAY FROM CONNECTICUT. SO THANK YOU FOR SETTING THIS UP. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING AND EXPLAINING TO US HOW THINGS SHOULD BE DONE. WE WILL FOLLOW UP WITH TIMOTHY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          >> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. >> I WANTED TO ADD WE HAVE HAD THIS BENEFIT EFFECTIVE SINCE 10/1/21 SO WE ARE GOING TO UTILIZE THAT TIME, MAKE IT VALUABLE TO THE COUNTY BY DOING TRAINING TO MY TEAM TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS ON THE SAME PAGE SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE CONFUSION GOING FORWARD. WE WANT TO CLARIFY ISSUES AND CONCERNS TO MAKE SURE WE DO IT CORRECTLY GOING FORWARD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TODAY. 
          DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? >> THIS IS ONGOING OR NEW? WE HAVE HAD THEM ONGOING FOR QUITE SOME TIME. DO WE KNOW HOW MANY 
          YEARS? >> 21. 
          >> THREE YEARS. >> THANK YOU, APPRECIATE IT. 
          [3.  Receive update regarding outside entities wishing to continue participation in Nueces County's Employee Self-Funded Group Health programs and ancillary services plan for 2024-2025; discuss, consider, and take action if necessary nad all related matters.]
          >> MOVING ON ITEM 3 . RECEIVE UPDATE REGARDING OUTSIDE ENTITIES WISHING TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATION IN NUECES COUNTY EMPLOYEE SELF-FUNDED GROUP HEALTH PROGRAMS AND SERVICES PLAN 2024-25 DISCUSS, CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION I KNOW WE HAD THE ITEM COME UP AND IT WAS EITHER MISREPRESENTED OR IT WAS NOT AWARE IN THE DISCUSSIONS THAT THE OUTSIDE ENTITIES, 
          [01:10:01]
OTHER THAN THE ONE WE LEGALLY CANNOT HAVE ON THE PLAN HAD BEEN ALREADY PAYING THE FULL PREMIUM ON ALL OF THEIR EMPLOYEES, THEY PAID THE EMPLOYER PORTION AND THE EMPLOYEE PORTION. THEY JUST GOT A PREMIUM FOR ALL OF THEIR EMPLOYEES AND HOW THEY DIVVY UP, WHETHER THEY PAY 10%, 20% OR 100%, THEY PAID THE WHOLE PORTION OF THEIR EMPLOYEES. 
          THAT BEING SAID WE VOTED WE WERE NOT GOING TO DO THIS. WE DECIDED TO SEND THEM , MY OFFICE DROPPED THE BALL, THERE WERE EMAILS MANY PEOPLE DID NOT GET THE NOTICE AND WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF CALLS ON PEOPLE . WE HAD A MEETING WITH THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. THEY ARE WILLING TO GO ABOVE AND MEET WITH US AT THE END OF THE YEAR TO MITIGATE IF THERE IS ANY OTHER POTENTIAL COST AT THE END OF THE YEAR TO LOOK AT. I PUT THIS ON YOU BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD PHONE CALLS AND BECAUSE WE FAILED TO SEND OUT A LETTER BY MAIL, ONLY SENT EMAILS AND MY INTENTION AND AFTER TALKING TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WE SUGGESTED TO LEAVE IT LIKE IT IS FOR THIS YEAR EXCEPT FOR THE ONE WE CANNOT LEGALLY ALLOW AND COME BACK AND READDRESS . IN DECEMBER OR JANUARY WE WILL ADDRESS THE INSURANCE TOTALLY ANYWAY OUR 
          POLICIES ARE EVERYTHING. >> FIRST OF ALL I DON'T SEE ANY BACKUP ON THIS SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO TODAY AND IF WE'RE TRYING TO REVERSE A VOTE WE HAVE ALREADY MADE I CERTAINLY THINK WE NEED TO BE REFRESHED WITH BACKUP BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE GOING BACKWARDS ON THIS. JUST BECAUSE WE DID NOT NOTIFY, I DON'T EVEN REMEMBER THE VOTE I THINK IT WAS TO MAKE EVERYBODY PAY THEIR PORTION? FOR THIS YEAR AND AFTER NEXT YEAR THEY WENT OFF SO I DON'T 
          KNOW. >> THEY ARE PAYING THE FULL PORTION IS WHY I BROUGHT IT UP. UNDERSTOOD THEY WEREN'T. 
          >> OKAY FIRST OF ALL, THERE'S NO BACKUP AND I DON'T MEAN TO BE RUDE, BUT I BRING THIS UP ON EVERYBODY ELSE'S ISSUES I DON'T HAVE ANY BACKUP. SO TECHNICALLY WE ARE SUPPOSED TO TABLE THINGS WITHOUT BACKUP AND I THINK WE SHOULD, AT THE SAME TIME I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU ARE ASKING BECAUSE WHAT WE VOTED ON WAS EVERYBODY PAID THEIR PORTION THIS YEAR AND AFTER THIS YEAR EVERYBODY WAS OUT. I MIGHT BE WRONG. 
          >> WE CAN TABLE IT. >> I THINK BUT I'M NOT SURE BUT I THINK THAT WAS THE MOTION AND THE VOTE EVERYBODY HAD TO PAY BOTH SIDES AND WE WOULD GO ONE MORE YEAR RISKING THE CLAIMS EXPOSURE ON THE ONE YEAR AND AFTER THAT EVERYBODY WAS OUT. I THINK. AGAIN I WOULD SUGGEST WE TABLE THIS . 
          >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE TO THE 25TH TO BRING IT UP WITH MORE INFORMATION IF WE NEED TO IN THE MINUTES IF IT CLEARLY STATES. I WAS WORKING ON BUDGET. I DID NOT PAY FULL ATTENTION TO THE AGENDA. WE LOOKED IT UP, I WAS MISUNDERSTANDING BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE EMPLOYEES WERE NOT PAYING THEIR PORTION AND THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO MAKE IT CLEAR I HAD A MISSED IDEA OF WHAT THEY WERE PAYING AND WHAT 
          THEY WERE NOT. >> THERE WAS A CLAIM ISSUED. 
          >> IT IS CLAIMS, TOO. I THINK IT WILL BE BETTER TO TABLE THIS TO GET IT CLEARED BECAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY BECAUSE MY BIG ISSUE IS NOT ONLY PORTIONS, IT WAS THE FACT THAT WE HAVE NON- COUNTY EMPLOYEES THAT WE HAVE CLAIMS EXPOSURE ON, THAT WAS CLEARLY ARTICULATED THAT WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING OVER THE PORTIONS OF THE EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE. THAT IS A HUMONGOUS EXPOSURE FOR NON-COUNTY EMPLOYEES. HUMONGOUS. 
          >> WE WILL BRING IT BACK ON THE 25TH. IF IT NEEDS TO COME BACK. 
          >> I KNOW WE WILL TABLE, BUT ARE WE IN CONTACT BECAUSE I'VE BEEN CONTACTED AND I'M SURE SOME MEMBERS OF THE BOARD HAVE, DIFFERENT ENTITIES THAT COULD BE INFECTED OR UNDERSTOOD THE VOTE TO GO ONE DIRECTION AND IT IS STATUS QUO FOR NOW. I WANT TO MAKE SURE SOME OF THE GROUPS MAY HAVE ADOPTED BUDGETS AND 
          [01:15:01]
MAY HAVE GONE OUT FOR THEIR OWN PLANS. I'M NOT SURE BUT THAT'S WHAT I HAD BRIEFLY BEEN GIVEN A FEW WEEKS AGO SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT POINT THEY ARE AT AND WOULD BE THE CONTACT. IF ANYONE HAS REACHED OUT FOR US TO FOLLOW UP USUALLY I KNOW ONE OR TWO GROUPS, BUT THAT MIGHT HELP US SO I WANT TO BRING IT UP BEFORE WE TABLE THIS. THAT'S ANOTHER PART OF THIS . 
          >> THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT WOULD BE PARTNERING WITH US. WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED OUTSIDE AGENCY IN THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE ARE PART OF THAT GROUP. WHY THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT? THEY ARE MORE LIKE A FAMILY I GUESS 
          INTERLOCKED TOGETHER. >> LIKE A SUBSIDIARY. BUT THEY ARE NOT, I TOTALLY DISAGREE. WE NEED TO BRING IT BACK AND IF I LOSE I WILL LOSE BUT I LOVE THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT BUT THEY ARE NOT, VERY ENTITY ON THEIR OWN, TAXING ENTITY WITH TAXES, THAT MORE RESERVES THAN WE DO, $90 MILLION IN RESERVES, WE HAVE 22 MILLION. THEIR WAY MORE BETTER OFF TO TOGETHER PEOPLE THAN WE ARE. IT'S RIDICULOUS TO THINK THAT'S NOT THE CASE. 90 MILLION IN RESERVE. WE HAVE 20. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE AND BRING BACK ON THE 25TH A SECOND? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THIS WILL COME BACK ON THE 
          [4.  Discuss and consider execution of the interlocal agreement between the City of Corpus Christi and Nueces County regarding Developer Initiated Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number Six (TIRZ No. 6, Barisi Village); and all related matters.]
25TH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ITEM NUMBER FOUR DISCUSS AND CONSIDER EXECUTION OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN CORPUS CHRISTI AND NUECES COUNTY REGARDING DEVELOPER INITIATED TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE. FOR THE VILLAGE AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. 
          >> DID YOU NEED TO GO TO EXECUTIVE FIRST? 
          >> YES THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS OR SOME DECISIONS THE COURT 
          MIGHT NEED TO MAKE TODAY. >> IT'S ON ONE OF MY NOTES. I NEED 5-0 TO TAKE IT TO EXECUTIVE. 
          >> THERE ARE TWO. ONE FOR BUSINESS DISCUSSION. 
          >> EXECUTIVE ARE YOU MAKING THE MOTION? 
          >> JUST BEING CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IS 
          ASKING FOR. >> MOTION AND SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR IN TAKING THIS TO EXECUTIVE? SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SORRY COMMISSIONER. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN? 
          >> ON THEM FOUR AND FIVE. >> FOUR WOULD BE REGARDING 
          BUSINESS DECISIONS. >> FIVE DOES NOT NEED TO, I WAS 
          ONLY DOING FOUR. >> WE CAN VOTE ON FIVE UNTIL 
          YOU DO FOUR. >> I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY 
          REASON. >> FIVE DOES NOT NEED TO BE 
          BROUGHT I DON'T THINK SO. >> FOUR IS DEAL POINTS THIS IS NOT A REVOTE, THE ONLY THING SHE WANTS TO GO TO EXECUTIVE 
          SESSION ON. >> TO CLARIFY, MY SECOND WAS 
          ITEM 4 ONLY. >> ONLY FOUR. 
          >> ALL IN FAVOR? THIS HAS TO BE UNANIMOUS TO TAKE IT TO 
          EXECUTIVE. THREE A-4. >> THANK YOU. MOVING ON ITEM 5 
          [5.  Discuss and consider approving the application process to nominate two (2) qualified candidates for appointment by the City of Corpus Christ for membership on the Reinvestment Zone Board of Directors for the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number Six (TIRZ No. 6); and all related matters.]
DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVING APPLICATION PROCESS TO NOMINATE QUALIFIED CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT BY THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI MENTORSHIP ON THE REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARD OF DIRECTORS TAX INCREMENT ZONE SIX. 
          >> ON THIS ONE , CONSIDERATION HERE THIS IS A UNIQUE IN THAT IT IS ONLY ONE NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT EVEN ONE AREA OUTSIDE THE NEIGHBORHOOD SO THE REQUEST HAS BEEN MADE ON THIS CASE THAT WE MAKE THIS QUALIFIED RESIDENCE ON THE BOARDS A LOT OF TIME WE PUT COMMISSIONERS OR THE JUDGE OR WHATEVER. THIS WHEN THE PROPOSAL IS TO LET RESIDENTS OF THE AREA APPLY AND THEY WOULD APPLY THROUGH US LIKE ANY OTHER BOARD , BUT THAT WOULD BE DESIGNATED TO BE RESIDENTS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AFFECTED, SO 
          [01:20:01]
THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION TO NOMINATE TWO QUALIFIED RESIDENCE OF THE VILLAGE AND VALLEY AREA TO BE THE BOARD 
          MEMBERS ON THIS TURS. >> SECOND. 
          >> MOTION AND SECOND, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. 
          >> AGAIN LORENZO THERE WOULD COME TO THE APPLICATION PROCESS 
          [6.  Discuss and consider approval of the Large-Scale Dune Protection Permit Required for a proposed multi-family duplex at 106 Mariners Drive, Port Aransas – DPP-20240501, and related matters.]
          LIKE ANY OTHER BOARD. >> DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL LARGE-SCALE DUNE PROTECTION PERMIT REQUIRED FOR MULTIPURPOSE DUPLEX 106 106 MARINERS DR. 106 MARINERS DR. 
          >> 
          >> LARGE-SCALE, BUT NO. >> SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE. 
          >> CAN YOU PULL THE MICROPHONE DOWN SO WE CAN HEAR YOU? 
          >> 106 MARINERS IS A LOT TAKING 12 TO 18 MONTHS TO DEVELOP THIS LARGE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. THEY ARE GOING TO BE PUTTING IN THREE TOWNHOMES. THE IMPACT TO THE DUNES WILL BE COMPENSATED ON SITE AGAINST THE ADJACENT DUNES WITH TWO OTHER LOTS NEXT TO THIS YOU HAVE SEEN RECENTLY IMPROVED AND THE COMPOSITION LINES UP WITH THE IMPACTS ON THOSE OTHER LOTS. THEY ARE PLACED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AS FAR LANDWARD AS THEY COULD TO REDUCE IMPACTS WORKING WITH THEM TO MAKE SURE CONSTRUCTION IN PLACE AND EVERYTHING THE AREA IS NOT APPROPRIATE BACK TO KEEP CONSTRUCTION KEEPING THE SLOPES AND HEIGHTS TO MATCH THE EXISTING DUNES. SO THAT'S A PRETTY SOLID APPLICATION FOR 
          DEVELOPMENT. >> IT SEEMS LIKE WE GET MORE AND MORE WHICH IS A GOOD THING. I WANT TO GO BACK TO MY EARLY DAYS WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE MY KNEE-JERK REACTION WAS CAN WE OR SHOULD WE AND IT'S MORE MINISTERIAL. BEACH MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE DOES A LOT OF WORK, THEY BRING IT TO US, THIS IS MORE OF A REVIEW TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS IN PLACE BUT THERE'S NOT MUCH DISCRETION INTO THE COURT LIKE IF WE FELT FOR POLLY REALLY POLICY REASONS WE SHOULDN'T THERE'S NOT MUCH TO LIMIT US FROM STOPPING THIS. IT IS PRETTY MUCH MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS. 
          >> YES, MEETING THE RECOMMENDATIONS. AND THEN THEY MAKE A DECISION THAT'S WHAT I ALWAYS PUT IN THE LETTERS AND INFORMATION. SO WITH THE CONDITIONS ARE FOR APPROVAL WHAT THEY HAVE MET OR NOT AND FOR ONCE THE DUNE IMPACTS WITH MORE LANGUAGE MAKING SURE YOU STAY OUT TO MAKE THESE SECTIONS AND IT IS THE ADMINISTERED OF CODE SO IT HAS BEEN THROUGH 
          SEVERAL REVIEWS. >> THIS IS RECOMMENDED FROM 
          BMAC AND THE GL OH. >> REMIND OURSELVES AND THE PUBLIC THAT ARE WATCHING, I KNOW THAT COASTAL DEVELOPMENT IS A HOT TOPIC ISSUE AND IT IS ASKED A LOT ESPECIALLY AROUND WHEN WE HAVE ELECTIONS AND PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW WHERE PEOPLE STAND ON CLIMATE CHANGE OR RECEDING COASTLINES OR SEA LEVEL OR THINGS LIKE THAT SO FOR ME GOING BACK TO THE EARLY DAYS THAT WAS MY FIRST REACTION AND THEN HAVING TO EXPLAIN TO ME AND UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS, THERE'S A LOT OF CHECKS AND BALANCES AND THERE'S A LOT TO THIS, BUT ALSO, WE AS A COURT ARE KIND OF REMOVED FROM THOSE ULTIMATE DECISIONS. THIS IS BASED IN LAW AND ADVISORIES, BASED ON STATUTORY GROUP THAT'S THERE WITH BMAC ALL THOSE THINGS FALL INTO PLACE SO IT'S NOT ONLY THE COUNTY. ULTIMATELY THIS COMES TO US NOW TO VOTE ON, BUT IT HAS ALREADY GONE THROUGH 
          THESE CHECKS. >> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE COME, SO IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS WE CAN TELL YOU WHAT HAS BEEN CHANGED. 
          >> BMAC DOES NOT HAVE STATUTORY AUTHORITY. THERE JUST AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THAT'S ALL THEY DO, BUT YOU HAVE THE 
          [01:25:03]
ULTIMATE AUTHORITY TO DECIDE WHETHER TO APPROVE OR NOT, ONE WITH THE INFORMATION YOU NEED. AT SOME POINT WE HAVE MISSED A GRANT GOING FORWARD TO UPDATE THE BEACH MANAGEMENT PLAN , THAT'S THE PLAN THE COUNTY HAS WHICH IS APPROVED BY THE STATE YOU GOVERN OVER SO AT SOME POINT WE NEED TO UPDATE THE PLAN AND SOME OF THE THINGS YOU'RE TOUCHING ON COULD BE ADDRESSED IN THE PLAN AND WHEN ADOPTED IT IS SET. 
          >> THAT SOMETHING WE NEED TO HAVE FOR POLICY DISCUSSION. 
          WHEN WE GET PAST THE NEXT TWO WEEKS AND START LOOKING THAT IS IMPORTANT, AS MUCH AS I LOVE TO SEE GROWTH AND OUR COMMUNITY IS EXPLODING WITH SO MANY PEOPLE FINDING OUT AND REALIZING HOW PRECIOUS OF A GEM WE HAVE ON THE COAST, WE NEED TO HAVE SOME BALANCE AND WE HIT THE SATURATION POINT AND THESE VALUES ARE INCREDIBLE, THESE DEVELOPMENTS HELP THE COMMUNITY AND EVERY ENTITY THAT HAS TO DRIVE REVENUE FROM THOSE PARTIES, BUT ALSO WHAT IS THE CRITICAL LEVEL WE SHOULD GET? THAT SHOULD BE PART OF LONG-TERM DISCUSSION MAYBE NOT FOR THIS ONE BECAUSE I DON'T APPOINTMENT OUT TO SAY THIS IS THE LINE WE DRAW TO MAKE AN EXAMPLE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, BUT GOING INTO THE FUTURE THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD PLAN FOR. 
          HAVE A DISCUSSION AND IF THERE'S EVER A SLOW TIME AT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OR A SLOWER TIME TO TALK ABOUT THIS, MAYBE INTO THE NEW YEAR. SO WE CAN START THIS DISCUSSION BECAUSE THAT WILL BE IMPORTANT FOR US TO LK ABOUT. AND I HEAR LITTLE BITS AND PIECES FROM PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY. 
          IT IS NOT A PRESSING ISSUE BUT IT DOES COME UP ONCE IN WHILE SO THAT WILL BE IMPORTANT TO TALK ABOUT IT, TO HAVE THAT AS THE POLICY AND PLANNING AND AS OUR AGENDA WHEN WE PUSH FORWARD, WHAT WE SUPPORT OR WHAT IS THE LINE WE DRAW IN THE SAND ON HOW DO WE DEAL WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS AND 
          PROPOSALS. >> I WILL NOTE , THIS APPLICATION AND THE NEXT AND ANY WE HAD IN PROCESS AFTER THE TROPICAL STORM ALBERTO AND HURRICANE BERYL WE HAVE REDONE THE LINES, RESET THE MARK AND GL OH UPDATED BEACH MANAGEMENT PLANS SO ALL APPLICATIONS ARE UPDATED TO MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS. SO IT IS AN ONGOING UPDATE TO MAKE SURE EVEN THOUGH DEVELOPMENT IS NEEDED , BUT IT'S DONE. 
          >> THE 350 THAT'S THE ISSUE. THAT IS SOMETHING WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE DISCRETION ON. 
          >> 250 FEET LANDWARD. >> THAT'S THE IMPORTANT PART TO NOTE ON THIS. THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST REGULATED DEVELOPMENT WE HAVE IN NUECES COUNTY BECAUSE OF THE BMAC, THE GLO REVIEW AND COMING BACK TO US. SO WE NEED TO DO THIS EVERYWHERE IN THE COUNTY MAYBE FROM THE COAST THERE ARE TONS OF SAFEGUARDS AND UNFORTUNATELY WE HAVE NOT SEEN EXPLOSION ON THE ISLAND OR PORT ARANSAS . BEING IN THE BUSINESS I AM AND I CAN TELL YOU STUFF HAS NOT BEEN GOING ARE MOVING AS FAST AS WE WOULD'VE THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE DOING FROM OTHER COAST. SO WE ANTICIPATE AN EXPLOSION, BUT WE HAVE 
          ANTICIPATED FIVE YEARS NOW. >> WHEN YOU GET OUT EVERY FEW YEARS LIKE I DO. IT LOOKS LIKE GROWTH TO ME. 
          >> SO FROM BEING HERE AND GOING FROM EVERY YEAR TO GETTING OUT THERE , I SEE SUBSTANTIVE GROWTH , RIGHT NOW IT'S RELATIVE IN MY OPINION AND IT MIGHT NOT BE WHAT INDUSTRY WANTS AND EXPECTS BUT I THINK IT IS AND SOMETHING TO HAVE WHEN WE DO HIT THAT POINT. IT IS A CONVERSATION WE HAD MOVING FORWARD ESPECIALLY I DON'T THINK IT'S ANYTHING TO ADDRESS, LEGISLATIVELY, BUT IF THE ISSUE COMES UP IN THE SESSION , WE WOULD AT LEAST HAVE A MARK ON SO WE CAN WEIGH IN ON AND SEND A RESOLUTION FOR OR AGAINST. SO I THINK THERE'S KINDS OF WAYS OF LIFE IT SHOULD BE TIED INTO FUTURE DISCUSSIONS AND PART OF THE OVERALL POLICY. I AGREE WE SHOULD HAVE STRICT REQUIREMENTS THROUGHOUT. THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES IN THE 
          [01:30:01]
RURAL PART OF THE COUNTY THAT I CAN THINK OF THAT WE FACE AND WITHOUT STRICT REGULATION WE ARE FACING PROBLEMS BEING PUT ON US AS COMMISSIONERS, ESPECIALLY IN THE WESTERN PART OF THE COUNTY WHERE YOU TALK ABOUT WATER AND SEPTIC AND EVERYTHING ELSE. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THAT AS PART OF A BIGGER POSITION. YOU DON'T HAVE TO JUST FOCUS ON THE 
          BEACH. >> I WILL NOT HAVE A WORKSHOP IN DECEMBER. SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THE HIGH TIDE LINE, LINE OF VEGETATION, 200, 350,000, UNDERSTANDING THOSE THINGS THAT COME INTO PLAY. THOSE THINGS HELP ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS WITH LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY. 
          >> THAT'S THE POINT I WAS MAKING. YOU CAN TAKE A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND IN THE COUNTY OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT WITHOUT REGULATION. WE ON THE COAST HAVE MORE REGULATIONS THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE COUNTY BECAUSE THAT IS THE REALITY. WE CANNOT DO IT HERE, WE HAVE TO DO IT THIS WAY, THE GLO IS INVOLVED. IT DOES NOT HAPPEN IN THE REST OF THE COUNTY SO WE HAVE MORE GUIDELINES AND MORE RESTRICTIONS THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE COUNTY. NOT SAYING THAT'S A BAD THING BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW BECAUSE LIKE I SAID YOU ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS OF CORPUS CHRISTI IN THE COUNTY, THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT AND THERE IS NO REGULATION. WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL THESE HOOPS TO GET THIS DONE IN A MANNER THE GLO WILL APPROVE AND THE BMAC WILL BE OKAY WITH IN THE THINGS ARE SUPER SCRUTINIZED MORE THAN ANYTHING IN THE COUNTY. 
          >> I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT, BUT YOU FEDERAL AND STATE MONEY AND WE GET GRANTS FOR OUTSIDE AREAS HAVE TO COMPLY WITH 
          REGULATIONS. >> IF YOU GET A GRANT BUT IF YOU OWN A PIECE OF PROPERTY IN NUECES COUNTY NOT IN CITY LIMITS YOU CAN DIG A WELL AND BUILD A HOUSE AND BUILD A BARN 
          AND NOBODY HAS TO APPROVE. >> IT JUST A WITH SUBDIVISION 
          RULES. >> RECOMMEND APPROVAL. 
          >> MOTION TO APPROVE . A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, ANY 
          [7.  Discuss and consider approval of the large-scale Dune Protection Permit (DPP-20240311), with exemption request for construction of a walkover seaward of the 350-foot building setback line, required for the proposed construction of seven habitable structures (three condominiums, one restaurant/bar and grill, one entrance building, and one amenity center) and four amenities (a lagoon, a pool, a dune walkover, and tennis/pickleball courts) at 6101 & 6073 State Highway 361, Port Aransas, Texas, 78373, and related matters.]
OPPOSED, , THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. ANOTHER 
          LARGE-SCALE DUNE PERMIT. >> I THINK WE JUST AT FIVE. 
          SORRY, SORRY. MY BET, MY BAD. MY BAD I LOOK AT THE WRONG 
          NUMBER. >> DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL LARGE-SCALE DUNE PROTECTION PERMIT WITH EXEMPTION REQUEST CONSTRUCTION WALK OVER SEA WALL 300 FOOT SETBACK LINE REQUIRED FOR PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF SEVEN HABITABLE STRUCTURES . THREE CONDOMINIUMS, ONE RESTAURANT BAR AND GRILL, ONE ENTRANCE BUILDING AND ONE AMENITIES CENTER. RELATED MATTERS 6101 STATE HWY. AND RECOMMENDED 
          APPROVAL BMAC AS WELL. >> MOTION TO APPROVE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? IT WOULD NOT BE HERE IF THEY DIDN'T. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED, HE IS SITTING THERE LIKE YOU DID NOT WANT TO SPEAK. BMAC RECOMMENDED APPROVAL, THIS IS DONE ALL THE SAME PROPER PROCESS THAT IT HAS TO GO THROUGH. MOTION AND A SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY 
          [8.  Discuss and consider a revised fee schedule for the Medical Examiner's Office which implements the cremation filing fee changes and all related matters. ]
AYE. I THINK WE ALREADY DID THAT, THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT DISCUSS AND CONSIDER REVISED FEE SCHEDULE MEDICAL EXAMINER OFFICE IMPLEMENT IN CREMATION FILING FEE CHARGE CHANGES AND ALL RELATED MATTERS . THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. 
          >> FORCED ME TO WITH MEDICAL EXAMINER OFFICE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS. TODAY WE ARE BROUGHT TO YOU A REVISED FEE SCHEDULE INCORPORATING CHANGE IN THE CREMATION PERMIT APPLICATION FEE , BUT ALSO REQUESTED CHANGES FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY REGARDING THE OPEN RECORDS REQUEST FEES AS WELL. WE ARE ASKING THE COURT TO APPROVE TODAY MOVING FORWARD. THE PURPOSE OF THE INCREASED FEE IS TO MAKE THIS A MEANINGFUL PROCESS THE MEDICAL EXAMINER'S , UNDER STATE LAW AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ARE REQUIRED TO MAKE DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER A COMMISSION CAN OCCUR, IT CANNOT BE DONE BY STAFF AND AS SUCH SINCE IT REQUIRES TIME AND ENERGY, THE FEE IS A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN WHAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED. WE ARE REQUESTING APPROVAL. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE ABOUT THE MATERIALS PRESENTED. 
          [01:35:04]
          >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION. TO APPROVE. YES. 
          >> HAVE A QUESTION. >> COMMENTARY DISCUSSION ON THE MEDICAL EXAMINER OFFICE IN GENERAL. I GET A LOT OF QUESTIONS BUT I THINK THE OVERALL PERCEPTION FROM THE COMMUNITY AND THOSE OBSERVING IS VERY POSITIVE. SO I WANTED TO SHOW THAT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE GET TO SHARE OR HEAR THAT OFTEN AND I THINK PEOPLE FROM THE OUTSIDE LOOKING IN, THEY SEE WE HAVE BECOME MORE STABILIZED AND YOU ALL ARE JUST FOCUSED ON THE WORK YOU HAVE AT HAND SO THAT TAKES ALL OF US HAVING ONE LESS ISSUE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT WE HAVE A COMPETENT STAFF AND MEDICAL EXAMINER SO I WANTED TO PASS THAT ALONG. I HAVE BEEN HEARING THAT FROM THOSE ON THE OUTSIDE SO I THINK IT'S WORTH SHARING. IN MY OPINION YOU'RE DOING GOOD WORK. I KNOW THERE'S MORE TO HELP SUPPORT YOU WITH YOUR FACILITY SO WE WILL TRY TO DO THAT, BUT OVERALL, THE POSITIVE GROUNDBREAKING AND BEING ABLE TO STABILIZE STAFF , THAT HAS BEEN SUCH A TURNAROUND IN THE PUBLIC'S MIND. WE HAVE DONE THE RIGHT THINGS AND GOT THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN PLACE AND WE ARE ABLE TO LET YOU DO THE WORK YOU HAVE ASKED TO DO ALL ALONG 
          SO THINK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THOSE COMMENTS AND THE SUPPORT OF THE COURT. YOU HAVE HELPED US AFFECT THE CHANGE THAT WAS NECESSARY. 
          >> I HAVE A QUESTION. ARE YOU FULLY STAFFED? 
          >> WE HAVE ONE MORE INVESTIGATOR VACANCY BEING FILLED NEXT WEEK AND THEN WE WILL BE COMPLETELY STAFFED, WE HAVE 16 POSITIONS TOTAL AND THE NEXT PERSON WILL BE HIRED NEXT TUESDAY. 
          >> A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE? 
          >> WHAT IS THE ACTUAL FEE? CHANGING FROM WHAT TO WHAT? 
          >> CURRENTLY IT $65 AND WE ARE ASKING TO RAISE $90. OUR OFFICE EVERY CALENDAR YEAR OR EVERY FISCAL YEAR DOES APPROXIMATELY 2000 OR SO CREMATION PERMITS. NOT EXACT, BUT WE ARE ON TRACK 
          FOR 2100 THIS CALENDAR YEAR. >> OKAY, FROM 65 TO 90. 
          >> THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE HIGHEST IN THE STATE , IF NOT THE HIGHEST. TRYING TO MAKE THIS A MEANINGFUL PROCESS INVOLVING ALL STAFF THAT'S NECESSARY FROM THE OFFICE, THE TECH CASES THROUGH THIS PROCESS THAT HAD NOT BEEN REPORTED SO IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE DO THE WORK NECESSARY. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE . 
          ANY OPPOSED, THE MOTION PASSES, THANK YOU. 
          >> CAN I ASK CLARIFICATION? EARLIER WHEN WE WERE TABLING OUR BUDGET WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO TABLE THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT BUDGET BECAUSE THERE'S IS ALL CORRECT AND READY? 
          >> THEY HAD POSTED A PUBLIC HEARING, IF YOU OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING WE HAVE TO FINISH WHAT WE START. TODAY WOULD CAUSE US 
          TO HAVE TO VOTE. >> THAT'S A BRAND-NEW QUESTION, CAN WE HAVE SOME TIME TO LOOK AT THAT? 
          >> I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GO FORWARD WITH JOHNNY'S BUDGET, THERE'S NO CONTROVERSY, WE COULD HAVE A LIMITED HEARING ON HIS AND GET IS DONE. HE DOES NOT NEED TO 
          SIT HERE THE REST OF THE DAY. >> UNLESS IT'S REQUIRED. 
          >> WAS IT POSTED TOGETHER OR INDIVIDUALLY? 
          >> POSTED TOGETHER. >> I DON'T THINK THAT'S CORRECT. YOU CAN SEPARATE. JUST BECAUSE IT'S POSTED. HOLD ON. 
          I'M ASKING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY MY UNDERSTANDING JUST BECAUSE YOU POST SOMETHING TOGETHER DOES NOT MEAN YOU CAN'T SEPARATE AND DISCUSS WITH THE SEPARATE BUDGETS, I WOULD LIKE AN ANSWER BEFORE WE LEAVE TODAY BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO TABLE HIS. THERE'S NO INCORRECTNESS, OR NOT DOING ANYTHING DIFFERENT SO I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE 
          TO GET HIS DONE DOWN THE ROAD >> THE PUBLIC NOTICE WAS 
          INCORRECT. >> THE PUBLIC NOTICE WAS GIVEN FOR 9:00 NOW WE WOULD BRING IT UP AT 11:00. IS THAT GOING TO 
          [01:40:01]
          BE A PROBLEM? >> I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD 
          HAVE TO. >> COME BACK. IF YOU CAN FIND 
          THAT OUT. >> WE ARE WORKING ON THAT. IF I CAN GET A COPY OF THE EXACT NOTICE THAT WAS POSTED IN THE 
          MEANTIME PLEASE. >> MOVING ON ON OUR BUT DID NOT BUDGET, REGULAR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NINE . IF WE CAN AND THAT'S GREAT LOOKING AT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT OUT OF THE WAY. I WAS TOLD IF WE OPENED IT AND WE DID THEM TOGETHER WE HAD TO CANCEL EVERYTHING TOGETHER AND IF WE OPENED IT, IT WOULD 
          [9.  Discuss and consider allocating $50,676 of Precinct 4 CO’s for the Port Aransas Veterans Memorial to be constructed on Nueces County Coastal Parks property in Port Aransas, Texas and all related matters. ]
CAUSE US TO GO TO THE DEADLINE SO PLEASE CLARIFY AND CHECK. 
          DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ALLOCATING 50,676 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ALLOCATING $50,676 A PRECINCT 4 FOR A QUARTER VETERANS MEMORIAL TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON NUECES COUNTY COASTAL PARKS PROPERTY AND I BELIEVE THAT'S 
          >> YES IN PORT ARANSAS AND THEY'RE WORKING ON THE LOCATION BUT IT WILL BE NUECES COUNTY COASTAL PARKS PROPERTY WITH A COMMUNITY GROUP LEADING THE EFFORT. THIS IS JUST MY WAY AND THE COURT'S WAY OF VOTING FOR IT BY SUPPORTING THIS VETERANS MEMORIAL THEY WANT TO CONSTRUCT ON NUECES COUNTY COASTAL PARKS PROPERTY LAND AND I WILL MAKE THE MOTION. 
          >> MOTION AND SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, 
          [10.  Discuss and consider approval and execution of Amendment No. 1 to Work Authorization No. 4 under the Master Services Agreement between Nueces County and International Consulting Engineers (ICE) for the ARPA-funded Belk Lane Drainage Improvements Project, and related matters.]
THE MOTION PASSES. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL AND EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO WORK AUTHORIZATION NUMBER FOUR UNDER THE MASTER SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN NUECES COUNTY AND INTERNATIONAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS FOR THE ARPA FUNDED BELK LANE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ 
          . >> MOVED TO PASS. 
          >> I WILL SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN THE MOTION PASSES. 
          [11.  Discuss and consider upcoming Commissioners Court meeting date(s), workshop date(s), and related matters.]
ITEM NUMBER 11 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER UPCOMING COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING DATES. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT TO ANYONE WHO MAY BE ABLE TO SNEAK IN WE HAVE MOVED OUR BUDGET MEETING TO THE 25TH OF THE REGULAR COMMISSIONERS COURT AGENDA . 
          ANY OTHER ONES ? ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THEY NEED TO DO? 
          [1.  Discuss and consider authorization and execution of Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement with Inmate Calling Solutions, LLC (“ICS”) for Inmate Telephone Services (RFP No. 3147-20), to extend the Agreement and make changes to the calculation of the Contract Continuation Payment, and related matters.]
LIVING ON ITEM B-1 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZATION AND EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE TO THE AGREEMENT WITH INMATE CALLING SOLUTIONS. INMATE TELEPHONE SERVICES TO EXTEND AGREEMENT AND MAKE CHANGES TO CALCULATION CONTRACT CONTINUATION PAYMENT AND RELATED MATTERS. THIS IS THE SHERIFF'S ITEM AND IT WILL MAKE A MOTION TO PASS. 
          >> FOR DISCUSSION, FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, THEY ARE PUTTING UP FOR RENEWAL. THIS WAS A CHANGE WE HAD BEFORE JUST A CHANGE IN PROVIDER OR A CHANGE IN TECHNOLOGY? DOES ANYBODY KNOW? I KNOW THIS WAS A CHANGE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS 
          JUST A DIFFERENT PROVIDER. >> INMATE TELEPHONE SERVICES. 
          1/3 OF THE 1/4. >> SO WE HAVE ALREADY GONE 
          THROUGH THIS. >> WHEN IT WAS FIRST LIMITED A FEW YEARS BACK MAYBE THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. 
          >> I KNOW IT WAS A NEW WAY OF CALLING OUT. 
          >> IT MADE US MORE MONEY. >> IT ALSO EXPIRES AT THE END 
          OF SEPTEMBER. >> THIS IS 1/3 OF THE 1/4. 
          >> MOTION AND SECOND TO APPROVE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY 
          [2.  Dicuss and consider ratification and approval of modifications to interlocal agreements with the U.S. Marshals Service for East Hidalgo Detention Center and Coastal Bend Detention Center and all related matters.]
OPPOSED COME THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM 2 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER RATIFICATION AND APPROVAL OF MODIFICATIONS TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS WITH UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE. WE BROUGHT THIS TO COURT LAST COURT TO PASS, IT IS AN AGREEMENT WITH THEM, THE PER DIEM IS THE ONLY THING THAT CHANGED. WHEN WE BROUGHT TO COURT IN THE LAST COURT THEY SENT A MESSAGE THAT THE NUMBER HAD BEEN CHANGED SO WE BROUGHT IT, IT'S JUST EDIFICATION WITH THE CORRECT AMOUNTS ON THE PER DIEM TO CHARGE AND MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS. 
          >> IT WAS BROUGHT UP AND ALL THAT IT DOES IS GO THROUGH US SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY 
          [1.  Discuss and consider approval of submission of application for $10,000, no cash match, to the Coastal Bend Community Foundation (CBCF) 2024 annual grant program, and related matters.]
OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM C GRANTS NUMBER ONE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AND INTERRUPT ME WHEN YOU GET THAT 
          INFORMATION IF WE CAN. >> YOU HAVE TO SET THE TAX RATE 
          [01:45:04]
FOR THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT, BUT EVERYBODY HERE THIS MORNING, WHETHER THEY WERE HERE FOR WHICH ONE WE DON'T KNOW AND DID NOT RECORD THEY HAVE BEEN SENT AWAY. SO I THINK WE HAVE A 
          NOTICE PROBLEM. >> I TOTALLY DISAGREE. I CAN TELL YOU THERE WAS NOBODY HERE FOR THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT EXCEPT JOHNNY. HE IS PASSING NO NEW TAX RATE AND NOBODY WAS HERE AND I WOULD REPRESENT THAT AND I MEAN. 
          >> WE DON'T KNOW THAT FOR SURE. 
          >> I DO, I KNOW WHO WAS HERE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO AGREE, THAT'S OKAY. THERE WASN'T ANYBODY HERE BUT JOHNNY. 
          >> OKAY. ARE YOU STILL MAKING THE MOTION, DO YOU WANT TO BRING IT UP TO SEE HOW IT GOES? JOHNNY ARE YOU OKAY COMING BACK ON THE 25TH? 
          >> I NEED THE MICROPHONE. >> YOU ARE SAYING THIS IS DOING US NO GOOD? 
          >> SORRY COMMISSIONERS. THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO. WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE ANY PROBLEMS, THE BUDGET IS READY TO GO IT HAS BEEN PASSED. WE HAVE GIVEN YOU THE INFORMATION AND WE HAVE PROVIDED INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU CAN DO IT TODAY WE WOULD LIKE TO GET IT DONE BUT WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE 
          ANY PROBLEMS FOR YOU. >> I DON'T THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT POSTPONING. THE JUDGE SAID ANYBODY HERE FOR THE BUDGET TODAY CAN GO AHEAD AND LEAVE BECAUSE WE ARE NOT DOING OUR BUDGET TODAY SO THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT DID NOT EVEN GET MENTIONED THIS MORNING WHEN IT CAME TO THE PROBLEMS AND ISSUES OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE. I THINK WE'RE WELL WITHIN OUR RIGHTS TO DO IT BUT THAT'S OKAY IF YOU DON'T WANT TO. 
          >> IF IT WAS POSTED WOULD THAT MAKE A DIFFERENCE? 
          >> THERE'S SOME COMMUNICATION THAT I THINK PAYTON WANTS TO 
          PRESENT. >> OKAY WE WILL WAIT. 
          >> STAFF, THEY GO. >> MOVING ON ITEM C 1 UNTIL WE GET CLARIFICATION AND WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE CONFUSION. 
          >> JUDGE, YOU CAN SEND THEM AWAY I DON'T CARE. I THINK WE DID IT WRONG, I THINK YOU GOT BAD ADVICE, I'M TIRED OF EVERYBODY GETTING BAD ADVICE AROUND HERE BECAUSE WE MAKE DECISIONS OFF BAD ADVICE. SO I'M FRUSTRATED WITH THIS PROCESS BEYOND BELIEF. I THINK WE SENT HIM AWAY FOR NO REASON. 
          IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO THEN DO IT. JUST MOVE ON. 
          >> OKAY, HE IS OUT, GRANTS, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SUBMISSION OF APPLICATION FOR $10,000 NO CASH MATCH TO THE COASTAL BEND COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ANNUAL GRANT PROGRAM. THANK YOU, SOMEBODY ELSE IN THE HOT SEAT. 
          >> I HOPE NOT, EVERYTHING IS GOOD. 
          >> IS THIS THE ONE WE DO EVERY YEAR? MOTION TO PASS. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? 
          [2.  Discuss and consider ratification of the submission of a no-match grant application to the Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service for the Feral Hog Abatement Program, and related matters.]
THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER TWO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER RATIFICATION OF SUBMISSION OF A NO MATCH GRANT APPLICATION TO THE TEXAS A&M LIFE EXTENSION SERVICE FOR THE FERAL HOG ABATEMENT PROGRAM. ALSO A REGULAR ONE. 
          >> THE SECOND . >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN? ITEM NUMBER 
          [3.  Discuss and consider acceptance of 2024 Texas Book Festival Collections Enhancement Grant from the Texas Book Festival (TBF) and Texas Library Association (TLA) with No Cash Match, and related matters.]
THREE. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ACCEPTANCE OF THE 2024 TEXAS BOOK COLLECTIVE ENHANCEMENT GRANT . THE AMOUNT IS A CASH 
          MATCH? JUST THE GRAND? >> NO CASH MATCH. 2500 IN 
          BOOKS. >> MOTION TO PASS. MOTION AND A SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION 
          [4.  Discuss and consider submission of a grant application to the Texas Department of Transportation for the Routine Airport Maintenance Program (RAMP) in the amount of $100,000 with a cash match of $11,111.11 (Dept. 0160 - County Airport), and related matters.]
PASSES, THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER FOUR. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER SUBMISSION OF GRANT APPLICATION TO THE TEXAS APARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE ROUTINE AIRPORT MAINTENANCE PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF 100,000 WITH A CASH MATCH OF $11,101.11. THIS USED TO BE 50-50, THEY NOW DO 90/10 . THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO ELIMINATE SOME OF THE BURDEN WITH THINGS BECAUSE THE GRANT CAN BE USED ON ALMOST ANYTHING. I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS, AS WELL. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A 
          [01:50:04]
          SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> I SEE THAT WE HAVE JOHN ON AND WE DON'T GET HIM ALL THE TIME. JOHN, DO YOU HAVE 
          ANYTHING TO ADD TO THIS? >> ASK HIM TO UNMUTE. 
          >> HE IS ON THE LIST. OKAY. JUST WANTED TO GIVE A CHANCE TO 
          GET ON >> I KNOW HE'S NOT ANTICIPATING US ASKING. BUT I WOULD ASK THEM TO UTILIZE THESE FUNDS IN THE FUTURE. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THIS OPPORTUNITY AND WITH THE CUTS AND THE BUDGETS COMING UP POTENTIALLY, THIS WOULD BE A GOOD WAY TO ELIMINATE SOME OF THE COSTS AND I WOULD STRONGLY SUGGEST THEY HAVE AN AIRPORT MEETING OF THE BOARD THAT WE HAVE APPOINTED HAVE HEARD FROM MANY PEOPLE IN MY OFFICE THEY HAVE NOT HEARD FROM THEM. ONLY SUGGESTIONS I HAVE GOING FORWARD. 
          >> THIS IS FOR ALL THE MAINTENANCE, THE RUNWAY, THE LINES, THE HANGERS, SYSTEMS, IT'S A LOT THAT THEY PROVIDE AND IT SHOULD BE UTILIZED MORE. 
          >> DID WE DO THE FINAL VOTE OR JUST A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          >> I WAS GOING TO CHIME IN AND AGREE WITH WHAT YOU ALL HAD SAID. I HEARD THAT FROM MY APPOINTEE, WE ALL HAVE OUR OWN. 
          DISAPPOINTMENT THAT IT HAD A GET TABLE BECAUSE OF THE POLICY. HOPEFULLY THAT DOES NOT IMPACT THE FORUM BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME FORM ISSUES A WHILE BACK. THE MORE THE BETTER, AT 50-50 BEFORE, NOW 90-10, WE WILL LOOK TO YOU MORE THAN EVER 
          IN THE NEXT YEAR. >> IT WENT 90-10. ASKING TO BUDGET 50-50 IN CASE THEY WENT BACK AND IT WILL CONTINUE 90-10, SO FOR THIS, UTILIZE IT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE WE NEVER KNOW WHEN IT'S GOING BACK. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? 
          >> HOLD ON. I AM AYE, BUT I WAS A GO BACK, WE NEED THE MONEY SO I DON'T KNOW WHY WE BUDGET 50-50. 
          >> SHE ASKED THE AUDITOR TO BUDGET 50-50. 
          >> WE PUT IN OUR CORRECTIONS WE HAVE ALREADY MADE THOSE 
          CHANGES. >> THEY TOOK IT AWAY. 
          >> AND WE TOOK OTHERS AWAY IN OUR SUGGESTION. ANY OPPOSED, I 
          [1.  Discuss and consider approval of Supplemental Agreement No. 2 between Nueces County and Govind Development, LLC for the Nueces County Courthouse Roof Replacement, and related matters.]
THINK IT WAS ALL UNANIMOUS. ITEM D 1, PUBLIC WORKS. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NUMBER TWO BETWEEN NUECES COUNTY AND DEVELOPMENT LLC FOR THE COURTHOUSE ROOF REPLACEMENT AND RELATED MATTERS. TIME EXTENSION ONLY WITH NO ADDITIONAL COST , THIS KEEPS HIM SO HE CAN MONITOR THE ROOF REPLACEMENT JOB . 
          >> I AM HERE. >> OKAY. JOHN IS HERE NOW. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY 
          OPPOSED ? >> NUMBER ONE, PUBLIC WORKS. 
          >> WHO MADE THE MOTION? GONZALEZ. 
          >> I SECONDED. >> THOSE TWO ON THE END. 
          >> WE VOTED ON D1 ? >> YES. 
          [2.  Discuss and consider the approval of Certificate of Substantial Completion for the Nueces County Veterans and Social Services Renovations Project, and related matters.]
          >> DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION FOR THE NUECES COUNTY VETERAN AND SOCIAL SERVICES RENOVATIONS PROJECT. THAT IS MAYBE SUPPOSED TO BE COMMUNITY SERVICES, BUT I DON'T CARE. SO YOU ARE SAYING THEY WILL BE THROUGH, THEY ARE THROUGH IT AND UNDER BUDGET? 
          >> THEY ARE COMPLETE, WE HAVE A COUPLE SMALL THINGS THEY ARE 
          FINISHING UP. >> ANOTHER MOVING IN. HAPPY TO HAVE THEM BACK IN THE BUILDING. MOTION TO PASS. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR 
          SAY AYE ANY OPPOSED ? >> I THINK WE DECIDED HE COULD 
          LEAVE? >> I THINK WE ARE STILL WAITING , BUT WITH THE NOTICE THAT WENT OUT WITH A PUBLIC HEARING POSTED I THINK IT'S PRETTY MUCH, WE WOULD BE PUSHING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD. WHETHER THERE WAS A WHEN HERE OR NOT 
          [01:55:01]
THERE MAY HAVE BEEN ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO WALKED OUT DID NOT UNDERSTAND. WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND WE WILL COME BACK 
          ON THE 25TH. >> I PRECEDE THE PRUDENCE AND ANYTHING TO AVOID PROBLEMS DOWN THE ROAD, WE WILL BE BACK IN 
          TWO WEEKS. >> LET'S POST THESE THINGS SEPARATELY FROM THE ONES WE DON'T HAVE THIS ISSUE. I HAVE NEVER EVEN HEARD OF NOT BEING ABLE TO SEPARATE THINGS OUT 
          JUST BECAUSE IT'S POSTED. >> IN FULL DISCLOSURE I BELIEVE THERE WAS COMMUNICATION TO PAYTON THAT DIFFERS, BUT STILL 
          . >> WE HAVE ALREADY ANNOUNCED OURS AND MANY PEOPLE WALKED OUT, THIS WAS STATED AT 9:00 WE WILL HAVE ENOUGH PROBLEMS AS IT IS, LET'S MOVE FORWARD AND RESPECT TO THE PUBLIC AND LET'S DO IT THE CORRECT WAY. 
          [1.  Discuss and consider rejecting all bids for Nueces County Courthouse and Jail Wastewater Line Replacement (IFB No. 3269-24) and authorize Purchasing Agent to publish a new notice, and related matters.]
THINK YOU. I DON'T E 1. NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE AND JILL WASTEWATER LINE REPLACEMENT AUTHORIZE PURCHASING AGENT TO PUBLISH A NEW NOTICE AND RELATED MATTERS. MICHAEL 
          ROBINSON YOU ARE UP. >> ON THIS ITEM , WE RECEIVED ONE BID . COUNTY ENGINEER REQUESTING TO REBID, THE BID CAME IN PRETTY HIGH, A VERY COMPLEX PROJECT AND HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE COURT AUTHORIZE US TO PUBLISH A NEW NOTICE WITH REVISED SCOPE WITHIN THE BUDGET . 
          >> WHAT IS THE BUDGET? >> WE WILL REVISE THE SCOPE AND GET 10 MILLION KNOCKED OFF THIS THING. 
          >> CUT A LOT OF IT OUT. >> THERE IS NOT A WAY FOR US TO GO OUT AND HAVE LIKE AN LIMITED. WE KNEW WHEN WE SET THE MONEY ASIDE IT'S ALL WE HAD. THERE'S NO WAY TO PICK SIGNIFICANT PROJECTS WITHIN THE SEPTIC SYSTEM REPLACEMENT AND DO TIME AND MATERIAL BECAUSE WE KNOW WE WILL NOT HAVE ENOUGH. 
          WE KNOW WE CANNOT DO THE JOB >> RIGHT . SHE IS SAYING IT MORE NICELY THAN MY SARCASTIC COMMENTS. THIS DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO GO OUT TO BID WHEN IT'S A $10 MILLION DIFFERENCE. 
          >> BRIGHT, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK TOO MUCH FOR THE PLAN. 
          WHAT IT MIGHT LOOK LIKE. >> BERT IS HERE. 
          >> SOMEBODY HAS GOT TO SPEAK. >> FROM MY UNDERSTANDING WE HAVE GOT INTO A DISCUSSION TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THE 
          BUDGET AMOUNT. >> WHAT ABOUT HER QUESTION? 
          >> WE USUALLY DO WE WILL PICK A SCOPE WE THINK IT'S GOING TO BE UNDER AND ANY MONIES LEFT OVER WILL DO PER LINEAR FOOT COST OF REPLACING WHAT WE CAN WITH WHATEVER IS LEFT OVER. 
          >> I WOULD LIKE TO CHIME IN. THIS IS WHAT IT IS. WHEN SOMEONE GOES TO THE BID AND MOST, IF NOT ALL THE INFORMATION IS PUBLIC, PUBLIC INFORMATION WE CAN ACCESS, WATCH A MEETING, IT PUTS US IN A BIND. IF YOU'RE A BUSINESS PERSON YOU WILL GO AS HIGH AS YOU CAN. MAYBE THAT'S THE TRUE BEST ESTIMATE. NOT SAYING PEOPLE ARE BIDDING TO SEE HOW MUCH THEY GET, BUT THEY KNOW HOW MUCH IT WILL PROBABLY COST AND THEY WORK IT DOWN TO REALITY AND STILL GET IT AT THE CAP. I CAN IMAGINE IT'S GOING TO BE 2 MILLION, IT WILL BE RIGHT AT 4 MILLION OR UNDER. MY CONCERN IS THE GENERAL COMMENT. 
          WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT FOR A LONG TIME. THERE IS NO DOWNTIME FOR US BUT MAYBE AT THE END OF THE YEAR OR THE NEW YEAR WE NEED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE JAIL? IT'S COSTING MORE AND MORE DOLLARS, THE MILLIONS WITH THIS PRODUCT ALONE PLUS EVERY OTHER PROJECT COMING WHILE I HAVE BEEN HERE COULD BE AT LEAST 10% OR MORE OF THE PROPOSALS I HAVE HEARD AND WE HAVE NOT HAD REAL DISCUSSION, BUT I HAVE HEARD UP TO 100 MILLION FOR A NEW JAIL IN THIS CURRENT FOOTPRINT. WE LOOK AT BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENT OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS AT 10% IF NOT MORE , ALREADY 10% WE HAVE HAD TO ABSORB IN THE BUDGET WITH FUNDING THAT WE HAVE , WE NEED TO SERIOUSLY HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE SHERIFF AND THE COURT TO APPLY NEXT STEPS. HOW DO WE GO TO THE COMMUNITY I THINK PEOPLE WILL SUPPORT THE IDEA BUT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE WITH OTHER ISSUES. WE KEEP POURING MONEY INTO THESE PROBLEMS THAT 
          [02:00:03]
WILL NEVER TRULY GET CORRECTED. THE ROOF YOU CAN ARGUE WILL BE FIXED AS OPPOSED TO OTHER STRUCTURE PROBLEMS, BUT IT'S THE AGING FACILITY THAT'S ANTIQUATED GOING BACK TO CONTROL WITH OFFICERS YOU CAN HAVE YOUR OFFICERS IN A SAFE ENVIRONMENT CONTROLLING MORE INMATES BASED ON NEW TECHNOLOGY ALONE. I WAS DRIVING BY THE COUNTY JAIL TWO WEEKENDS AGO AND YOU CANNOT EVEN TELL. IT IS RIGHT UP THERE WITH WALMART AND EVERY THING ELSE AND I POINTED OUT AND SAID THAT'S THE JAIL AND SHE WAS LIKE THAT'S THE JAIL? WE HAVE HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS SO I FEEL GOING FORWARD WE HAD TO DO THIS RIGHT. THIS IS COMMENTARY, I GET IT BUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT NUMBERS THIS MUCH AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO SAY WE JUST STARTED PAYING IT OURSELVES. EVEN ON THE BUDGET ALONE, WE COULD PAY IT OFF IN A MATTER OF 10, 15 OR 20 YEARS. NOT EVEN JUST FINANCING TO A BOND. WE NEED TO REMIND OURSELVES WHEN THE SMOKE CLEARS IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS WE NEED TO ENGAGE IN THIS BECAUSE WE NEED TO DO IT, BUT IS IT WORTH IT LONG-TERM I DON'T THINK IT IS AND IT WILL COST MORE WHEN WE TRY TO TALK ABOUT REDUCING THE IMPACT TO THE TAXPAYERS. 
          >> I BROUGHT THIS UP A LOT OF TIMES AND EVEN TALKED TO THE SHERIFF THREE TIMES AND TOLD HIM SURE IT IS A BOND ISSUE, GO TO THE PEOPLE AND SEE WHAT THEY SAY. MOVE FROM THERE. PUT IT OUT TO THE PEOPLE AND THEY WANT IT THEY WILL VOTE FOR IT AND IF THEY DON'T THEY WON'T VOTE FOR IT AND THEN WE CAN'T DO IT. I WILL SUPPORT YOU AND BACK YOU UP, BUT THIS IS THE SHERIFF'S ISSUE TOO. NEEDS TO COME FORWARD AND WORK ON GETTING SOMETHING DONE . HOPING WE COULD DO IT THIS YEAR BUT IT WAS TOO LATE SO I'M HOPING WE CAN PUT IT IN THE POND NEXT 
          YEAR. >> THE SHERIFF HAS BEEN VERY INVOLVED. HE HAS DONE THE PRELIMINARY WORK AND FUNDED THE STUDY HIMSELF, THE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          SO HE HAS HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS. 
          >> MAYBE DON'T WANT TO TALK TO ME BECAUSE I HAVE ASKED HIM SEVERAL TIMES AND HERE IN THE COURT TOO I BROUGHT IT UP I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES ABOUT NEEDING A NEW JAIL. AND NOBODY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT IT. SO, YOU KNOW I APPROACHED THE SHERIFF AND HE CAN TELL YOU I WENT TO HIM SEVERAL TIMES AND I SAID WE REALLY NEED TO CONSIDER A BOND, LOOK AT IT AND SEE WHAT THE PEOPLE SAY. HE CAN SAY WE ARE WORKING ON IT, GREAT. HE 
          HAS MY SUPPORT. >> REALLY THINK ON THE BID , BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT AND THE THINGS WE HAVE SET , I HAD A MEETING THE OTHER DAY HE CAME AND TALKED WITH ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT BECAUSE I HAVE HAD THREE PHONE CALLS FROM PEOPLE AND I DON'T KNOW IF I'M ALLOWED TO SAY THIS. THERE WERE STIPULATIONS THAT WERE PUT IN THAT SOME CONTRACTORS SAID THEY WOULD NOT BID ON IT BECAUSE OF THOSE THINGS AND ONLY WORKING FROM 6:00 P.M. UNTIL 6:00 A.M. IN THE MORNING, THAT'S GOING TO BE EXTRA COST DRIVING UP COST FOR CONTRACTORS WHEN YOU HAVE AFTER-HOURS PEOPLE WORKING. I KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE LOUD AND IT SOME, ¿ CONSTRUCTION, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO BE ABLE TO WORK A LITTLE BIT WITH THEM , WE HAVE VERY LITTLE MONEY , WE NEED TO KEEP IT TO UTILIZE WHAT WE HAVE AND NOT INCUR TOO MANY STRICT RESTRICTIONS ON A COMPANY THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME TO THE WORK. 
          >> BRIGHT, SO FOR SITUATIONS LIKE THIS TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE ALLOWS COMMISSIONERS COURT TO REJECT ALL BIDS AND AUTHORIZE TO MEET AND PUBLISH A NEW NOTICE AND IN THE NEW NOTICE WE WILL WORK WITH PUBLIC WORKS TO DESIGN A SMALLER THAT INCLUDES THAT ASPECT YOU BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL MATERIALS AND THAT WILL BE PART OF THE PROCESS GOING BACK OUT. WE WILL RUN IT IN A QUICK TURNAROUND. IT WANT TO BE A TWO WEEKS NOTICE PERIOD BECAUSE WE'RE RUNNING OUT OF TIME TO GET THIS DONE BUT I BELIEVE THEY FEEL CONFIDENT BUILDING CAN REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT DOWN TO SOMETHING THAT IS MANAGEABLE AND UNDER BUDGET. THAT'S ALL WE CAN DO AT THIS POINT WITH THIS PROJECT. THOSE ARE GREAT COMMENTS, I KNOW THE SHERIFF DID WORK ON THE JAILS NEED ASSESSMENT AND THEY DID TELL US WE REALLY NEED A NEW JAIL. 
          >> THERE IS A ARTICLE THIS WEEK OR FRONT PAGE SUNDAY SO THERE 
          [02:05:04]
IS DEFINITELY TALK AND HE IS WANTING TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          >> MAYBE WITH EMPTY OFFICE SPACE WE SHOULD LEASE A PLACE. 
          I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. IF WE DO IT, IT HAS TO BE A BOND ISSUE. IF IT IS A $100 MILLION DEAL. PUT IT ON THE BALLOT AND LET PEOPLE VOTE. 
          >> WE DON'T WANT TO DO ANY MORE STUDIES? 
          >> HE HAS ALREADY DONE HIS STUDY, YES. THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN CARE OF AND HE PAID FOR THAT AS WELL. 
          >> FOR THIS ITEM WE WOULD ASK THE COURT TO APPROVE . 
          >> I MADE THE MOTION AND YOU SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE THANK YOU. F1 FROM THE AUDITOR APPROVE BUDGET 
          [1.  Approve Budget Amendment No.13 for Fiscal Year 2023-2024.]
AMENDMENT 13 FISCAL YEAR 23-24. 
          >> GETTING CLOSE TO THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR SOME REQUESTS ARE LARGER. GOING THROUGH SOME REQUESTS AND THESE HAVE FUNDS AND WANT TO MOVE THE FUNDS AROUND SO THEY DON'T TAKE FROM OTHER AREAS. THESE ARE NECESSARY TO BE DONE. ALL FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND ROAD AND BRIDGE AND PARKS HAVE THE FUNDS TO DO THE TRANSFERS. GLAD TO QUESTIONS, CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 
          13 FOR YOUR ACCEPTANCE. >> MOTION TO PASS. MOTION AND SECOND ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED ? SORRY DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? 
          >> I HAVE ONE. DECREASE 40,500 . IS THAT THE SAME AMOUNT ? 
          >> WHAT AGE ARE YOU ON? >> 13. 
          >> COST CENTER 12,000 IS SEPARATE? 
          >> THE TAX OFFICE HAS THE FUNDS WITH THE INCREASE AND DECREASE EXACTLY THE SAME SO THEY'RE JUST MOVING FUNDS IN THE 
          DEPARTMENT. >> THESE ARE ALL INTERNAL 
          TRANSFERS. >> THERE JUST TRANSFERRING 
          WITHIN THEIR DEPARTMENTS. >> THERE WERE NO TRANSFERS AT 
          ALL. >> THEIR MOVING MONEY WITHIN THEIR BUDGET CATEGORIES TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE THE FUNDS AVAILABLE NOT TAKING FUNDS FROM ANY OTHER DEPARTMENT. 
          >> OKAY, FIRST TIME I HAVE SEEN THAT 
          >> COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ. >> ARE YOU SURE THIS IS 
          CORRECT? >> YES WE ARE. 
          >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE ANY 
          [2.  Discuss and receive an update on the Actual and Potential Impacts on the General Fund at 09/30/24.]
OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM 2 DISCUSS AND RECEIVE OF DAY ON ACTUAL AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE FUTURE AND LISA. SHE IS GOING TO DO THIS ONE? 
          >> GOOD MORNING COURT AND JUDGE. ATTACHED THERE WAS AN INCLUSION OF LISTS OF ADDITIONAL KNOWN AND POTENTIAL , KNOWN POTENTIAL EXPENSES THAT COULD BE HITTING 9/30/24 BALANCES. FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE ESTIMATED ACTUALS THAT I WANTED TO BE SURE TO DISCLOSE SO EVERYONE IS AWARE AND THERE IS NO SURPRISES WHENEVER WE COME BACK AND REQUEST THE FUNDING FOR THESE ITEMS. STARTING OFF AT THE TOP, THERE IS A LIST OF KNOWN ITEMS. THERE IS LONG-TERM RECEIVABLES 0103, GROUP HEALTH FUND. 
          RECEIVABLE FROM GROUP HEALTH. TO THE GENERAL FUND FROM THE GROUP HEALTH AND IT IS CURRENTLY AT 3.7 MILLION. THERE IS A DEPARTMENT OF LABOR INVESTIGATION CURRENTLY GOING ON. POTENTIAL EXPOSURE WE HAVE NOT BEEN NOTIFIED. 
          >> LET'S GO BACK , ALTHOUGH THIS POTENTIAL IS GOOD INFORMATION FOR THE FUTURE, BUT 3.7 IS NOT CLOSED OUT, FINISHED OR IMPACTING NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET LIKE YOU ARE SAYING SO 
          [02:10:02]
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE CAN HAVE THE INFORMATION AND TALK LATER. 
          SPECS ARE JUST THE ITEMS THAT WE KNOW? 
          >> THAT WILL IMPACT HIS YEARS BUDGET. THE REST IS FUTURE FOR YOU TO BE AWARE WHEN WE ARE BUDGETING WE MAYBE NEED TO START TAKING CARE OF THESE THINGS BUT THEY ARE NOT CLOSED OUT OR TOTALLY REIMBURSED. THIS IS NOT AN IMPACT TO THIS 
          YEAR'S BUDGET. >> ITEMS THAT WE KNOW THAT WILL IMPACT THIS YEAR'S BUDGET. THERE IS A REFUND FOR THE JAIL ANNEX GENERATOR. WE HAVE ALREADY PAID THIS AT 116,000 AT $116,335 THAT IT WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE ESTIMATED ACTUAL AND IT IS ALREADY GOING OUT. THERE IS UNDERPAID SALARIES WE HAVE TO PAY MADE UP BY MULTIPLE EMPLOYEES. IT IS TOTALING $49,530 IT IS TOTALING $49,530.90. THERE ARE FEMA EXPENSES THAT WE NEED TO COVER TOTALING 775,000 $775,246 
          >> I THOUGHT THOSE ARE STILL ? >> HANNAH, WINTER WEATHER AND TROPICAL STORM NICHOLAS ARE COMPLETELY CLOSED. THEY ARE FINALIZED. THOSE THREE ITEMS ARE COMPLETELY FINALIZED, YES 
          MA'AM. >> SO THAT AT THE TOP AND THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AMOUNT IS THE TOTAL IMPACT TO THIS 
          YEAR'S BUDGET? >> A TOTAL OF $941,112.20. 
          >> YOU DON'T HAVE THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR IN THAT 
          CATEGORY. >> POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO DO 
          WHAT WE KNEW WE WOULD HAVE. >> WE KNOW THERE WILL BE SOMETHING IN THAT, BUT WE DON'T KNOW THE AMOUNT. BUT IT WILL BE IN THIS FISCAL YEAR BECAUSE IT IMPACTS THE PAYROLL 
          THIS YEAR. >> THAT'S CORRECT. 
          >> THIS WAS MORE JUST FOR EVERYONE TO HAVE AWARENESS OF WHAT WOULD HAPPEN. AND WE CAN HAVE THIS WITH RANTS ANOTHER TIME, WE WANT TO BRING IT UP AND HAVE DETAIL BUT THIS IS POTENTIAL EXPOSURE WITH COVID. WITH ALL OF THIS. THIS IS WHY I COMPLAIN AND SAY WE HAVE TO GET PAPERWORK. DOCUMENTATION, WE CANNOT SEND IT IN FOR REIMBURSEMENT OR CREDIT IF THEY HAVE GIVEN US MONEY IF WE DON'T HAVE DOCUMENTATIONS. WE ARE GOING TO BE STRICT ON DOCUMENTING AND ANYONE DOING 
          PAPERWORK BEHIND THE BILL. >> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT 
          VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, DOES ANYBODY HAVE 
          [1.  Discuss and consider creating eight (8) Mental Health and three (3) Community Activities Officers (CAO).  A fourth (4th) Community Activities Officer would be a new position to work with juveniles in our Day Reporting Center.  All of these positions would be budgeted part-time (no more than 29 hours per week) and all related matters.  See attached summary list detailing these part-time positions.]
ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. MAY I BE EXCUSED? 
          >> YES, THANK YOU. ITEM G 1, HOMER , YOU ARE HERE. WAS GOING TO TABLE INDEFINITELY, BUT I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THIS WAS THE ONE ON DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CREATING MENTAL HEALTH AND COMMUNITY ACTIVITY OFFICERS. YOU ALL HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS. AS A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE. WE PAY THE FEE, IT GETS REIMBURSED FROM THE STATE. I THINK HR BROUGHT THIS TO YOU WANTING TO DO THIS DID YOU DO THIS WANTING TO BRING THIS TO THE COURT? WE WERE TOLD LEGALLY IT CAN STAY, WE DID NOT NEED TO DO THIS FOR THE EMPLOYEES.'S PHOTOS GIVING ADVICE FROM THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE AND HR. 
          >> I SECOND THE MOTION TO TABLE INDEFINITELY. SORRY I WILL 
          DROP. >> THIS WILL NOT AFFECT THE BUDGET RIGHT? SO, WHY DO WE TABLE IT AND NOT APPROVE? 
          >> WE ARE NOT SAYING DON'T DO THESE, HE HAS THE EMPLOYEES ALREADY AND USES THEM, BUT HE GETS REIMBURSED. IT IS AN INVOICE, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. IT WAS BROUGHT TO HIM HE HAD TO CHANGE AND RESET YOU ARE DOING IT THE LEGAL WAY. THEY WILL 
          STILL HAVE THOSE. >> YES, JUST TO CLARIFY. THIS IS ASKING FOR 12 POSITIONS. CURRENTLY WE HAVE 11 POSITIONS. 
          IT WOULD BE GRADING ONE NEW PART-TIME POSITION TO TARGET , WOMEN WORKING WITH POLICE TO TARGET THESE KIDS THAT WE HAD AN INCREASE , WE HAVE A GOOD COLLABORATION WITH POLICE IN 
          [02:15:02]
THIS PART-TIME POSITION IT WOULD BE ENHANCING SUPERVISION, CHECKING CURFEWS IN THE EVENING AND ALONG WITH THIS PARTICULAR POSITION PROVIDING SUPERVISION FOR PROGRAMMING THAT WE HAVE WITH THIS COHORT OF KIDS. THAT WOULD BE THE EXTRA POSITION PART-TIME POSITION TO MAKE IT 12. WE CURRENTLY HAVE 11 OF THESE POSITIONS. ALL OF THESE ARE FUNDED THROUGH STATE DOLLARS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE MEDICAL ASSISTANT HOSPITAL 
          DISTRICT. >> YOU CAN STILL FUND YOUR PART-TIME POSITION. SO WE GOT INTO THE BUSINESS THAT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE GOTTEN INTO. WE WILL BACK AWAY AND LET YOU DO 
          WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN DOING. >> OKAY OF THE MONEY AND THE 
          STATE. >> MOTION TO TABLE INDEFINITELY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER 
          2. >> ON THAT, THAT MAY REQUIRE SOME DIRECTION FROM THE COURT TO THE AUDITOR AND/OR HR AT A FUTURE POINT BECAUSE I THINK THERE WAS CONFUSION ABOUT REQUIRING A CERTAIN NUMBER OF HOURS AND THEN SOME STEPS. 
          >> IF THEY BECAME EMPLOYEES. >> THAT WAS THE BEGINNING OF THE ADVICE THAT CHANGED THE LONG-STANDING PRACTICE ANOTHER SOME STUFF THAT NEEDS TO GO BACK TO HOW IT WAS AND THE AUDITOR AND/OR HR MAY NEED DIRECTION FROM THE COURT AS TO WHETHER THOSE RESTRAINTS THAT HAD BEEN PLACED CAN BE. 
          >> BEFORE WE EVEN VOTED? >> IT SHOULD BE BACK WHERE IT WAS, WHATEVER IT WAS BEFORE. THERE IS NO DIRECTION, NO VOTE PLEASE QUIT GETTING INVOLVED IN STUFF WE DON'T NEED TO BE INVOLVED IN. WE SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD THIS ON THE AGENDA AND WE SHE HAD NEVER HAD DISCUSSION WHATEVER IT WAS BEFORE, IT IS NOW. THERE IS NO DIRECTION NEEDED. 
          >> I THINK THE VOTE BUT IT BACK SO THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE RESTRICTIONS. WHATEVER HE WAS DOING BEFORE. 
          >> ITEM NUMBER 2 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CARAHSOFT LINKEDIN . 
          >> HOLD ON. HOMER HAS SOMETHING ELSE. 
          >> EXCUSE ME AND I WAS REMINDED. THERE ARE THREE , THE FOUR POSITIONS THAT ARE COMMUNITY ACTIVITY OFFICERS, THEY DO NOT FIT, THEY ARE NOW JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS, TEMPORARY OFFICERS. THOSE POSITIONS DO NOT FIT THE DEFINITION OF TEMPORARY OFFICERS AS PER THE COUNTY. 
          THOSE DO HAVE TO IN THIS POSITION HAS TO BE TURNED INTO PART-TIME. THEY DO TAKE DIRECTION FROM ME, FROM OUR SUPERVISORS, THEY HAVE BEEN LONG-STANDING POSITIONS, BUT THEY DO NOT FIT THE DEFINITION OF WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN UNDER AND THAT HAS BEEN THE TEMPORARY OFFICERS. YEARS JUDGE EVEN WHEN 
          YOU WERE THERE. >> I GET IT BUT I DON'T 
          UNDERSTAND WHY. >> ON THOSE POSITIONS . I DO THINK WE NEED TO CORRECT THEM BECAUSE 
          >> THEY WOULD BECOME COUNTY EMPLOYEES NOT PROFESSIONAL 
          SERVICES? >> WHERE'S THE BACKUP ON THAT THAT SHOWS ME THIS IS DIFFERENT FROM OTHER FOLKS? 
          >> IN ONE OF THE PRESENTATIONS THAT WAS THE DEFINITION OF A TEMPORARY WORKER AND PART OF THAT IS, A WORKER THAT HAS TO COME BACK FOR THE COURT TO BE RENEWED EVERY 90 DAYS. THAT HAS NOT BEEN DONE, BUT IN ADDITION, THESE ARE BASICALLY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THAT YOU INVOICE THE STATE AND GET REIMBURSED FOR. IT IS A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT. 
          >> REP TO PUT THIS ON SEPARATELY. I DON'T KNOW I AGREE WITH YOU ON THOSE FOUR. THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON THIS WAY FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS. SO NOW WE WILL CHANGE IT BECAUSE SOMEBODY INTERPRETS SOMETHING A CERTAIN WAY AND I'M NOT CONVINCED. EITHER PUT IT BACK ON AS A SEPARATE ITEM. 
          >> IF IT'S JUST THOSE FOUR. >> SHOW ME SOME PROOF. LET ME 
          LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE . >> THE CONCERN COMMISSIONERS AND JUDGE IS THAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO RENEW A TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE EVERY 90 DAYS. THAT IS NOT HAPPENING. 
          >> THEY ARE NOT COUNTY EMPLOYEES. 
          >> THEY ARE TEMPORARY COUNTY EMPLOYEES. ONLY FOR A TERM APPROVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT. 
          >> THEIR CONTRACT LABOR NOT TEMPORARY COUNTY EMPLOYEES. 
          >> NOT CONTRACT. >> WE PAY HIS TEMPORARY 
          [02:20:01]
SALARIES. ALL UP TO THE MICROPHONE. 
          >> YOU CAN PUT THEM ON AS A SEPARATE ITEM AND THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN LOOKED AT SEPARATELY. THIS ISSUE WE HAVE BEFORE US HAS BEEN TABLED INDEFINITELY. IF YOU HAVE ANOTHER ISSUE THAT IS A SUBSIDY OF THIS THAT SOMEONE WAS TO PUT ON FOR THESE AND SHOW ME LEGALLY WHY WE ARE DOING WHAT WE ARE DOING OR WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE, BUT TO ME THESE OTHER ONES WERE NOT A CLOSE CALL AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ON. IF THIS IS A CLOSER CALL THEN YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO PUT IT ON AS A SEPARATE ITEM. NOT AS PART OF THIS ONE. 
          >> LET ME SEE IF I CAN CLARIFY. THERE ARE THREE TEMPORARY 
          EMPLOYEES PAID BY PAYROLL. >> I DON'T MEAN TO BE RUDE BUT WE HAVE TABLED THIS. WE CANNOT HAVE ANY MORE DISCUSSION. I DON'T MEAN TO BE RUDE. HAVE TABLED. 
          >> YOU WERE TALKING BACK THERE AND I DID NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE 
          TELLING HIM. >> THAT'S FINE, THANK YOU. 
          [2.  Discuss and consider Carahsoft LinkedIn Learning Binding Three Year Agreement with Nueces County, and related matters.]
SORRY, SORRY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          >> NOW ITEM NUMBER TWO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER LINKED IN LEARNING BINDING THREE YEAR AGREEMENT WITH NUECES COUNTY AND RELATED MATTERS. I BELIEVE 5/24/23 , HR PRESENTED THE ITEM FOR SIX MONTHS, 25 USER AGREEMENT AND IT WAS STATED IT WOULD BRING BACK IN TO PRESENT $37,000 1500 USER AGREEMENT AND I THINK YOU HAVE BEEN TALKING WITH THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE AS WELL AND SOMEHOW WE GOT INTO THE THREE-YEAR AGREEMENT AT $110,000 WITHOUT COMING TO COURT FOR APPROVAL. 
          >> MY UNDERSTANDING IS AND DALE AND THE AUDITOR CAN CHIME IN, THE RATES ESTABLISHED WERE BASED ON A THREE-YEAR COMMITMENT, HOWEVER WE WERE NEVER PRESENTED WITH A CONTRACT I DON'T BELIEVE A CONTRACT WAS SIGNED WITH CARAHOST OR LINKEDIN TO BIND US TO A CONDITION WHERE WE CANNOT GET OUT OF THE CONTRACT. I HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING THIS WITH CARAHOST AND LINKEDIN AS RECENTLY AS THIS MORNING. AND YESTERDAY EVENING. THEY ARE STILL REVIEWING THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT IN TERMS OF WHAT WE HAD WITH THEM AND THEY WILL GET BACK TO ME. THEY WENT TO WORK WITH US, THEY DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS A BURDEN TO THE COUNTY. WAS PRESENTED AS COMMISSIONERS COURT AND NOT SOMETHING WE COULD BOW OUT OF AND THAT'S WHAT I PRESENTED TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION. I WAS WORKING WITH THE COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE AND I RECOMMENDED LINKED IN, I STILL RECOMMEND IT, I THINK IT IS A GREAT ASSET WE CAN USE FOR TALENT DEVELOPMENT AND EDUCATIONAL COUNTY EMPLOYEES. 
          MANAGEMENT WOULD LIKE TO UTILIZE ITS SERVICES TO DO SO SAFETY TRAINING. THERE IS VALUE IN THE SERVICES THEY PROVIDE. 
          IN TERMS OF WHAT NUMBER THAT NEEDS TO BE, WE ARE NOT EXPERIENCING THE USAGE WE NEED TO BE AT, I HAD MY TIME TEST MY TEAM DO ANALYSIS WE ARE AT 129 USAGES OF THE 1500 LICENSES BUT IF WE MAKE TRAINING MANDATORY THAT NUMBER WILL CLIMB IS A WITH TALENT DEVELOPMENT WE COULD REQUIRE EMPLOYEES TO DO SOME TRAINING TO IMPROVE THEIR PERFORMANCE AND UNDERSTANDING 
          OF THEIR OPERATIONS. >> AS OF NOW YOU HAVE NOT HEARD BACK FROM THEM ON A NEGOTIATED DIFFERENCE? AS IT STANDS THEY SAY WE HAVE A THREE-YEAR CONTRACT? 
          >> THAT IS CORRECT AND I HAVE THE ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE FROM CARAHOST AND LINKEDIN REVIEWING. THEY ARE DISCUSSING WITH THEIR LEGAL TEAM THAT WILL GET BACK TO ME BUT I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER NOW, THEY HOPE TO HAVE ONE BY THE TIME WE MET, I MADE THEM AWARE WE HAVE A MEETING TODAY WITH NO 
          RESOLUTION REACHED. >> DO YOU HAVE AN EMAIL, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING THAT SHOWS THIS WAS GOING TO AUTOMATICALLY RENEW OR BASICALLY THEY RENEWED SOMETHING THAT DID NOT COME TO COURT FOR APPROVAL THEN WE NEED TO TURN IT OVER TO THE COUNTY 
          ATTORNEY. >> I DEFERRED TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR IN THAT BECAUSE THEY SET UP THE AGREEMENT. MY UNDERSTANDING WAS IT COULD BE INTEGRATED WITH WORKDAY SO THAT 
          WAS ANOTHER BENEFIT. >> NOT DISPUTING THE VALUE OF ANYTHING. I AM DISPUTING WE HAVE A CONTRACT WE DID NOT VOTE ON TO PROGRESS AND IF THEY DID IT WE NEED TO KNOW OR IF SOMEONE ELSE IN THE AUDITOR OFFICE OR YOUR OFFICE AGREED TO A CONTRACT , WE AGREED TO A SIX-MONTH TRIAL NOT TO A THREE-YEAR TERM OF $110,000 CONTRACT. 
          >> THE ONLY INVOLVEMENT I HAD WAS TO PRESENT BEFORE COMMISSIONERS COURT ON THE DATE NOTED FOR THE INITIAL 25 LICENSES AND FOR THE EXTENSION OF 1500 LICENSES AT A 
          [02:25:01]
PARTICULAR PRICE. I SIGNED NO CONTRACT, I DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT. WOULD NOT OVERSTEP YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DO THAT SO I SIGNED NO COMMITMENT. 
          >> IF YOU HAVE NOT HEARD BACK FROM THEM THERE'S NOT MUCH WE CAN DO ON THIS. THE AUDITOR SAYS THEY DID NOT SIGN ANYTHING. I WOULD ASK YOU TO TURN THIS OVER TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON OUR BEHALF WE HAVE A CONTRACT WE 
          DID NOT ENTER INTO. >> PROCUREMENT DID NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS? COME TO THE MIC. 
          >> NO SIR. BUT I MEAN WHO PUT IT OUT ORIGINALLY? 
          >> HR. >> HR. IT WAS MY RECOMMENDATION. IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL SET UP THAT WAS ORCHESTRATED BY THE COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE. 
          >> 
          >> YES. >> AS A POLICY END BEST PRACTICE, I WOULD AGREE THAT THIS BE BROUGHT TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY BEFORE IT IS REQUESTED TO BE SIGNED OR PUT ON THE AGENDA WITH ENOUGH TIME TO REVIEW THOSE. JUST ASKED AN ASIDE, IT IS THOUGHT THAT THE COUNTY WON'T HAVE THE POWER TO PUT IN THE AGREEMENT THAT THE COUNTY REQUIRES AND RTS THAT OT WANT BUT THE COUNTY CANNOT HAVE. THAT IS NOT TRUE. WE CAN NEGOTIATE WITH THE ENTITIES, EVEN LARGE ONES, TO TELL US WHAT WE REQUIRED. IF THEY WANT TO DO BUSINESS WITH THE COUNTY, THEY WILL DO IT IN THE CASES WHERE THEY WON'T. WE NEED TO KNOW THAT IN ADVANCE TO BE ABLE TO ADVISE THE COURT. I CANNOT STRESS ENOUGH THAT IT IS IN THE SEASON OF BUDGET AND THE SEASON OF TRYING TO GET THINGS THROUGH QUICKLY, I THINK PEOPLE OFTEN FORGET THAT THERE IS AN IMPORTANT STEP TO THAT REVIEW AND THAT IS ONE INSTANCE WHERE WE COULD HAVE PRESENTED THIS. 
          >> YOU HAVE MY FULL COOPERATION WITH YOUR OFFICE AND WORKING TOGETHER TO BRING THINGS TO YOUR ATTENTION BEFORE THE 
          JUDGE. >> I AM ASSUMING WHAT SHE SAYS WAS THAT THIS DID NOT GO TO HER OFFICE BEFORE. 
          >> RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND. I AM NOT SURE WHAT TRANSPIRED ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION WITH CARAHSOFT AND LINKEDIN . I JUST KNOW I RECOMMENDED IT. I CAME TO THE COURT TO ASK YOU TO BE BLESSED, AND IT WAS, INITIALLY. OTHER THAN GOING FORWARD, WHERE WE CAN WORK WITH LINKEDIN AND CARAHSOFT ON THE PRICING PART . 
          THE CONCERN CHANGE, INITIALLY WE WERE A THREE-YEAR PLAY. THEY MODELED THEIR PRICING ON A NUMBER OF LICENSES AND A LONGER-TERM. WE WERE ABLE TO GET A LOWER VALUE, LOWER COST 
          TO THE VALUE BASED ON THAT. >> YOU HAD BEEN IN NEGOTIATIONS 
          WITH THAT. >> NO. THAT WAS THE COUNTY 
          AUDITOR'S OFFICE. >> SOMEONE WAS COMMUNICATING WITH THEM TO GET US THESE NUMBERS OR SOMETHING. 
          >> I AM GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY TO SEE HOW WE PROCEED FORWARD AND AT WHAT PRICES AND IF THERE IS ANY NEGOTIATION THAT GOES FORWARD. IT WILL BE DONE IN OUR OFFICE. 
          >> AGREED. >> IS THERE ANY OTHER MOTION 
          THAT WE NEED ON THIS ITEM? >> I DON'T THINK SO. 
          >> I THINK WE ARE READY TO GO TO EXECUTIVE. 
          >> I'M SORRY. >> I TURNED IT OVER TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO INVESTIGATE MORE. 
          >> DO WE NEED TO TABLE IT THEN? >> WE CAN TABLE IT . I AM NOT SURE WHEN THEY WILL BRING IT BACK BECAUSE I AM NOT SURE WHO DID THE NEGOTIATION. WE NEED TO FIND OUT HOW FAR TO GO. 
          >> TABLE INDEFINITELY. >> YOU TABLE IT WHEN YOU AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ARE READY TO BRING IT BACK. 
          >> I JUST DIDN'T WANT -- >> 
          OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS ] >> YOU ARE ONE OF THE THREE-YEAR AGREEMENTS THAT HAS BEEN PAID ALREADY. IT IS THE 
          FOLLOWING TWO YEARS. >> IN THAT PAYMENT, WE MAY HAVE INADVERTENTLY DONE THE AGREEMENT, IF WE DID THE YEAR 
          ONE PAYMENT. >> YEAR WHEN PAYMENT HAS BEEN 
          PAID. >> THAT IS WHY THE COUNTY 
          [02:30:01]
NEEDED TO GO THROUGH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. 
          >> WE WILL BRING THIS BACK AFTER THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND I GET TOGETHER. WE WILL PROBABLY NOT BE ON -- 1 OCTOBER, LET'S 
          SAY. >> DOES THAT GIVE YOU TIME? 
          >> I THINK THE CONCERN IS THAT THE CONTRACT RENEWS OR THE AGREEMENT RENEWS UNTIL OCTOBER 1. AM I CORRECT ON THAT? WE 
          PAID FOR ONE YEAR. >> WE WILL PUT IT ON THE 25TH. 
          >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> WE ARE READY TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE, I ASSUME. ANYBODY 
          WANT TO STOP ME? >> WHAT? 
          >> OH, A MOTION TO TABLE. >> WE HAD SO MUCH DISCUSSION. 
          [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.]
          >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. WE WILL BRING THIS BACK. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY 
          AYE. >> AYE. 
          >> MOTION PASSES. >> GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. PUBLIC NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT COMMISSIONERS COURT MAY ELECT TO GO INTO 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 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 AND 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, TEXAS CODE 551-2071, 551-2072, 551073 , 551-2074, 55120745, 551-2076, 55120086, 55120087 , THE COMMISSIONERS COURT WILL HOLD AN EFFECTIVE SESSION TO CONSULT WITH THE ATTORNEY INCLUDING MATTERS RELATED TO LITIGATION DELIBERATELY REGARDING REAL PROPERTY, PROTECTED GIFTS, PERSONNEL MATTERS INCLUDING TERMINATION, COUNTY ADVISORY BODIES, SECURITY DEVICES AND/OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATION AND OTHER MATTERS THAT MAY BE DISCUSSED IN THE 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 THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE DID THE 5-0 VOTE SO WE CAN BRING THIS COMING INTO EXECUTIVE, DISCUSSING COMPUTER EXECUTION OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND NUECES COUNTY REGARDING A DEVELOPER INITIATED TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT, ZONE NUMBER SIX FOR REPEAT AND ALL RELATED MATTERS . 551.0071. 
          >> IF YOU ARE DOING IT PER THE BOAT THAT YOU HAD 5-0, IT WILL 
          BE 0725. >> I HAVE 551. 
          >> 551-0725. >> THAT IS GOOD. 
          >> AM I SAYING IT WRONG? >> THE TOP OF MY NOTES FROM YOU, IT SAYS 551.071 BUT 0725 IS THE CORRECT NOTICE. 
          >> LET ME MAKE SURE. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> A, CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON LEGAL MATTERS RELATED TO THE JULY 18 2024 CLAIM OF RODOLFO CESAR GARCIA AND RELATED MATTERS. TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 55120071, DISCUSS, CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION REGULAR SESSION IF NEEDED. ITEM B, CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON LEGAL MATTERS RELATED TO THE JULY 19, 2024 CLAIM OF MONICA YOU VARA AND RELATED MATTERS, 551-2071. DISCUSS, CONSIDER, AND TAKE ACTION IN REGULAR SESSION IF NEEDED. CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON LEGAL MATTERS RELATED TO CAUSE NUMBER 0222 61163-3. THE COUNTY COURT NUMBER THREE AND RELATED MATTERS , 551-2071, DISCUSS, CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION IN REGULAR SESSION AND THEN ITEM THREE A 4 IS NOTICE 0725? 
          >> YES. >> IT IS -- WEIGHT, ITEM D. I 
          [02:35:02]
ALMOST MISSED ONE. CONSULT WITH THE LEGAL COUNTY ON LEGAL MATTERS RELATING TO THE 2019 DCB 5404 JOHN SCOTT FLEMING VERSUS NUECES COUNTY IN THE 214TH DISTRICT COURT OF NUECES COUNTY AND RELATED MATTERS. DISCUSS, CONSIDER, AND TAKE ACTION IN REGULAR SESSION IF 
          >> IT IS 12:52 AND WE ARE BACK FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION, MOVING ON ON -- I BELIEVE WE HAVE A MOTION. 
          >> WE >> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. 
          >> ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. >> MOTION PASSES. ITEM B, WOULD 
          YOU DO THAT ONE TOO? >> DELIGHTED THE MOTION -- 
          DENIED THE MOTION. >> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION AS WELL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM 4 C, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER. 
          >> YES, JUDGE. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE A SETTLEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 IN CAUSE NUMBER 2022CCV-61163-3 , MANUEL MOTA VERSUS NUECES COUNTY IN THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW, NUMBER THREE OF NUECES COUNTY , TEXAS AND ALLOW THE COUNTY JUDGE TO SIGN THE RELATED AGREEMENT AND DIRECT THE CLERK IN THE AUDITORS OFFICE TO EXPEDITE PAYMENT. 
          >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? 
          >> THE MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO EXECUTIVE ITEM FROM THREE 8 
          -- ARE WE PASSING ON D? >> THERE WAS NOT A MOTION. 
          >> OKAY. >> I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE FINAL VERSION OF THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO INCLUDE USING THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE NUECES COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT SUBJECT TO A FORCE CLAUSE BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. 
          SAID CLAUSE WAS NOT PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPER UNTIL AFTER THE LAST LARGE GROUP MEETING THAT WE HAD TO RECTIFY THIS MATTER. 
          >> THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. 
          MOTION PASSES. >> THAT CONCLUDES OUR BUSINESS FOR TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO, BEFORE WE START OUR ADJOURNMENT TO MEMORY OF, I DID NOT START OUT THIS MORNING AND FAILED TO DO SO WITH A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOR 9/11. WE ALL WILL NEVER FORGET 9/11 AND WE REMEMBER EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM AND THEIR FAMILIES AND THE IMPACT THEY HAVE HAD. IF I COULD HAVE JUST A MOMENT OF SILENCE, PLEASE. 
          >> 
          [ Adjournment in Memory (upon request)]
ANYONE HAVE ANY ADJOURNMENT IN MEMORY OF? 
          >> I HAVE TWO. IF ANYONE IS NOT READY, I WILL START MINE. I HAVE DANNY ROBERT ALEXANDER , 73, OF CORPUS CHRISTI TEXAS. HE PASSED AWAY IN AUGUST 26, 2024 WITH HIS FAMILY BY HIS SIDE. 
          THE SON OF IAN ALEXANDER AND MARY FRANCES JONES. HE WAS BORN ON AUGUST 12, 1951. HE GRADUATED FROM ROY MILLER HIGH SCHOOL IN 1969 WHERE HE EXCELLED IN MANY SPORTS, FOOTBALL AND BASEBALL. ONE OF HIS FAVORITE STORIES TO TELL WAS ABOUT THE TIME HE HIT A HOME RUN OVER THE LIGHTS. HE THEN ATTENDED CISCO JUNIOR-COLLEGE IN CISCO, TEXAS WHERE HE PLAYED FOOTBALL. THE HARD-WORKING ATTITUDE HE PORTRAYED WHILE PLAYING SPORTS WAS ALSO PRESENT IN HIS BUSINESS LIFE . DANNY STARTED HIS FIRST COMPANY, ALEXANDER DRAGLINE, IN A 1974. HE CONTINUED IN THE CRANE BUSINESS WITH CT CRANE IN 1980 AND GULF COAST SERVICES IN 2006. DANNY WAS A GOD-FEARING MAN WHO LOVED HIS FAMILY. HIS TRUE PASSIONS WERE HIS HOBBIES. HE LOVED EVERYTHING FROM CRANES, TRAINS, BOATS AND AUTOMOBILES. HE WOULD SPEND HIS TIME HUNTING AND FISHING, SHARPENING HIS KNIVES AND SUPPORTING HIS GRANDKIDS 
          [02:40:02]
AND EVERY ONE OF THOSE SPORTING EVENTS. DANNY WAS A BELOVED FATHER, FATHER, HUSBAND AND A FRIEND WHO WILL BE MISSED BY MANY. HIS UNIQUE HUMOR AND HARD-WORKING PERSONALITY WERE WHAT MADE HIM WHO HE WAS. HIS FIGHTING SPIRIT WAS UNTIL THE END. DANNY HAS MADE AN IMPACT ON MANY PEOPLE'S LIVES AND HE WILL FOREVER BE MISSED. WE SEND OUR CONDOLENCES TO LINDA AND THE KIDS ON THE PASSING OF HER HUSBAND AND FATHER AND GRANDFATHER AND DEAR FRIEND OF OUR FAMILIES. 
          >> THE SECOND WHEN I HAVE TODAY IS A TRAGEDY AS WELL, LIAM DANIEL BEEN AVEDIS. ON SEPTEMBER 2, 2024, LIAM WENT HOME TO BE WITH OUR LORD AND SAVIOR. HE WAS BORN ON OCTOBER 8, 2009 IN CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS, TO HIS PARENTS, DANIEL AND MEGAN. LIAM WILL FOREVER BE REMEMBERED AND LOVED BY HIS PARENTS AND HIS TWO YOUNGER BROTHERS, LUKE, JONATHAN, AND CHARLIE. LIAM WAS CHERISHED BY HIS GRANDPARENTS AND DEEPLY LOVED BY COUNTLESS FAMILY AND FRIENDS. LIAM WAS A FRESHMAN. 
          HE WAS AN AMAZING ACTOR, MUSICIAN, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, A DEVOUT FOLLOWER OF CHRIST. HE WAS A SPEECH AND DEBATE STATE CHAMPION , AN ACCOMPLISHED PERCUSSIONIST, BEING THE ONLY EIGHTH-GRADER TO BE IN THE HIGH SCHOOL MARCHING BAND AND THE ONLY FRESHMAN TO MAKE IT TO THE SNARE LINE. HE ALSO PLAYED IN THE JAZZ BAND AND WAS A GUITARIST. HIS MIDDLE SCHOOL MARIACHI BAND LED MANY ROLES IN VARIOUS PLAYS OF THE SCHOOL. HE WAS ALSO A JUNIOR USHER AT HIS CHURCH. HIS DEDICATION, POSITIVITY AND CONTAGIOUS SMILE WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO IGNORE. HE MADE A LASTING IMPACT ON HIS HOME CHURCH, SCHOOL, AND HIS COMMUNITY. HE BECAME KNOWN FOR CARRYING HIS BIBLE TO SCHOOL EVERY DAY, ASKING CLASSMATES HOW THEIR DAY WAS AND THEN READING SCRIPTURES TO THEM. HE WAS UNAPOLOGETIC IN HIS SPACE. 
          HE LIVED THE QUOTE, I AM JUST A NOBODY TRYING TO TELL EVERYBODY ABOUT SOMEBODY WHO CAN SAVE ANYBODY. WE BELIEVE LIAM WAS ONLY MEANT TO BE IN OUR LIVES FOR 14 YEARS. WHILE THIS WILL ALWAYS BE HARD TO ACCEPT, WE KNOW THAT OUR BOY WAS SO SPECIAL THAT GOD NEEDED HIM TO COME HOME. HISTORY WAS FOR ALL OF HIS FAMILY AND FRIENDS TO KNOW THE ONE TRUE GOD WHOM HE IS NOW IN THE PRESENCE OF. LIKE OUR BOY, LIVE LIKE LIAM BECAUSE TO LIVE LIKE LIAM WAS TO LIVE LIKE CHRIST. A CELEBRATION OF LIAM'S LIFE WILL BE HELD AT NEW LIKE THAT THE CROSS THIS FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2024 FROM 5 PM UNTIL 9:00 P.M. WITH A PRAYER SERVICE TO BE HELD AT 7:00 P.M. THAT SAME EVENING AT 4176 ROB'S TOWN, TEXAS. FUNERAL SERVICE WILL TAKE PLACE AT 10:00 A.M. ON SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 14 NEW LIFE AT THE CROSS WITH AN INTIMATE FOLLOW-UP MEMORIAL PARK CEMETERY. OUR CONDOLENCES GO OUT TO THE BENAVIDEZ FAMILY AND THE WHOLE CHURCH FAMILY ON THE LOSS OF SUCH A YOUNG LIFE. 
          >>> TO HIS FAMILY. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? IF NOT, IT IS
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.