[00:00:10] >>> WILL YOU ALL RAISE FOR THE INVOCATION. >> SO WE PRAYED TOGETHER. EVERLASTING AND GRACIOUS GOD WE GATHER TODAY IN HUMILITY AND ALL OF YOUR CREATION. THANK YOU FOR OUR HOME HERE. WE PRAY TOGETHER THAT YOU WOULD GUIDE THIS COURT TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF NUECES COUNTY . TO THAT END WE PRAY FOR YOUR WISDOM, COMPASSION, AND GRACE TO REST UPON EACH COUNTY JUDGE AND LATER PRESENT. ROOT THEIR CONVERSATIONS AND DECISIONS IN JUSTICE AND A TRUE DESIRE FOR ALL OF YOUR PEOPLE TO FLOURISH. MAKE REAL TO US THE RESPONSIBILITY TO STAND FOR THE LEAST OF THESE AMONG US AND TO CARE FOR OUR VULNERABLE BROTHERS AND SISTERS. TEACHES TO LISTEN AND ACT WITH COURAGE. IT UNITE US ALL AS WE FACE CHALLENGES AS A COMMUNITY AND GRANT THAT YOUR PIECE GUIDE THE WORK DONE HERE TODAY SO THAT WE MAY ALL SOON SEE THE FRUIT AND EXPERIENCE THE BLESSING OF A PROSPEROUS, SAFE, AND CONTENT LIFE TOGETHER. IN JESUS NAME WE PRAY. AMEN. >> ÊI 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.Î HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. >> THANK YOU. YOU MAY BE SEATED. WE HAVE ALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT AND IT'S IS SEPTEMBER 25. WE ARE AT 901 LEOPARD AT THE NUECES COURTROOM. WE HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT. THE TIME IS 9:10 A.M. AND I CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER. DO WE HAVE ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST TO DISCLOSE. THERE [E. PUBLIC HEARING WILL BEGIN AT 9:00 A.M.] BEING THEN WE WILL GO STRAIGHT INTO PUBLIC HEARING. IT IS 9:11 AND WE ARE STARTING PUBLIC HEARING. WE WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED 2024-2025 COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT BUDGET AND MR. HIPP IS ONLINE. I WOULD ASSUME YOU ARE THE ONE PRESENTING THIS? >> YES. I REGRET THAT I AM NOT ABLE TO BE THERE TODAY. HOPEFULLY THIS PRESENTATION WILL BE BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC AND HELPFUL TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT DOES AND TO REFRESH MEMBERS OF THE COURT OF WHAT THE DISTRICT BUDGET IS. CONNIE, THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THAT UP THERE. I HAVE A FEW BRIEF SLIDES THAT ARE DIVIDED INTO TWO PARTS. AT THE FIRST PART DEALS WITH SOME TRANSIT I HAVE SHOWN YOU BEFORE AND THE SECOND PART DEALS WITH THE REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND THE FUND BALANCES FOR THE DISTRICT FOR THE END OF THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. CONNIE, IF YOU CAN PLEASE TURN TO THE NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS THE FIRST OF THREE TRENDLINES I WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU. THIS IS THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT TAX RATE HISTORY FROM 1996 THROUGH WHAT WE HAVE PROPOSED FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025. WITHOUT GETTING HUNG UP IN ALL OF THE RED DOTS I WANTED TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THE REDLINE SUPERIMPOSED ON THE GRAPH. THE TRENDLINE IS CALCULATED BY XL AND THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO SHOW THE COMMISSIONERS THAT FOR MOST OF ITS TIME SINCE 1996 WITH ONCE OR TWICE ALONG THE WAY THE DISTRICT HAS USED ITS EFFECTIVE TAX RATE TO OPERATE ON AND I CAN SHOW YOU LATER IN THE SLIDES WHY WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT. CONNIE, NEXT SLIDE. THIS SLIDE THIS THE SECOND OF THREE TRENDS AND WHAT WE [00:05:04] REFERRED TO AS THE COUNTY HEALTHCARE EXPENDITURES , COUNTY HEALTHCARE SERVICES. IN 2000 THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT CONTRIBUTION TO COUNTY HEALTHCARE EXPENDITURES HAS COME ACROSS THE WAY, INCREASED AS SHOWN BY THE REDLINE. THESE EXPENDITURES ENTAIL THINGS LIKE MENTAL HEALTH, HEALTHCARE IN THE JAIL, PUBLIC HEALTH, AND A VARIETY OF OTHER THINGS THAT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT PROVIDES. WE READ BE JUST REIMBURSE THE COUNTY FOR PROVIDING. THIS IS A CUTOUT, IF YOU WILL, OF ONE OF THE COUNTY HEALTHCARE EXPENDITURES. WHAT THIS DEPICTS IS THE HOSPITAL DISTRICTS INCREASING CONTRIBUTIONS TO MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES IN THE COUNTY. SO, CONNIE, THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES. THIS CHART REPRESENTS THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT GENERAL FUND. THE GENERAL FUND IS THE ONE THAT WE OPERATE ALL OF THE DISTRICT BUSINESS IN AND OUT OF AND TO THE DEGREE THAT WE NEED WE TRANSFER MONEY INTO THIS FUND BUT THIS DOES CAPTURE ALL OF THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT REVENUE. WHAT IS DISTINCTIVE ABOUT THIS CHART IS THAT 75% OF THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT REVENUES IN FY 2025 ARE CONTRIBUTED THROUGH NONTAX MEANS SO WE ONLY USE 25% BUT A REVENUE COMING IN IS THE TEXT MONEY TO OPERATE THE DISTRICT IN THE OTHER COMES FROM A REVENUE SHARING AGREEMENT WITH SPOHN. THIS SLIDE IS DISTINCTIVE. IT REPRESENTS THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT EXPENSES PROPOSED FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025. WHAT IS DISTINCTIVE ABOUT THIS IN TERMS OF EXPENSES IS 87% OF THE DISTRICTS INCIDENTS ARE INTERGOVERNMENTAL TRANSFERS. THOSE ARE SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENTS THAT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT MAKES TO THE STATE AND THAT BENEFIT ALL SYSTEMS IN CORPUS CHRISTI. THOSE SYSTEMS BEING KRISTA SPOHN , THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL AND BAY AREA MEDICAL CENTER AND DOCTORS REGIONAL. THE OTHER PARTS OF THE PIE CHART MAKE UP THE COUNTY HEALTHCARE EXPENDITURES. I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THE FACT THAT MOST OF THE DISTRICT BUDGET IN 2025, AS IT HAS IN PRIOR YEARS, GOES INTO DRAWING DOWN SUPPLEMENTAL FEDERAL PAYMENTS FROM OTHER HOSPITALS THAT OPERATE . THIS SLIDE IS REPRESENTATION OF THE MAJOR FUNDS THAT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT HAS. THE INDIGENT CARE FUND. THIS IS THE ONE SHOWN IN GREEN . THESE ARE BAR CHARTS. WHEN THE TWO ARE STACKED TOGETHER THE DISTRICT FUNDS ARE FOR THOSE TWO FUNDS. ABOUT MIDWAY THROUGH THE CHART, STARTING IN 2012, THIS IS ON THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT ENTERED INTO THE MEMBERSHIP AGREEMENT AND THE ARRANGEMENT WITH SPOHN IS WHAT WE ARE UNDER TODAY. THIS HAS BEEN GOOD FOR THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT AND WITH THE COUNTY. IT HAS PROVIDED FUNDING TO THE DISTRICT BUT TO DO THINGS THAT WE COULD NOT DO PRIOR TO 2013 AND THE INTENT OF THIS IS TO SHOW YOU HOW MUCH THE MEMBERSHIP AGREEMENT AND HAS BENEFITED EVERYONE IN TERMS OF REVENUE AND TO SHOW YOU WHERE WE PLAN ON ENDING THE DISTRICT BUDGET NEXT YEAR IN FISCAL YEAR 2025 IN FISCAL YEAR [00:10:03] 2025 THE AGGREGATE OF THESE TWO FUNDS IT WILL BE ABOUT $106 MILLION. IT IS DOWN SOMEWHAT FROM 117 IN THE PRIOR YEAR, 2024. WE DO PLAN TO END THE DISTRICT ON A POSITIVE NOTE SO COMMISSIONERS AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, THAT IS ALL THAT I HAVE AND I AM AVAILABLE TO TAKE QUESTIONS. >> ARE THERE QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, VERY MUCH, MR. HIPP FOR THE PRESENTATION . WE APPRECIATE IT. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER TWO, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT WILL CONDUCT A HEARING ON THE NUECES COUNTY BUDGET. >> THIS IS THE BUDGET HEARING FOR THE PROPOSED -- THAT REQUIRES US TO PROVIDE A HEARING FOR YOU. LET ME GET THIS ON THE SCREEN. WE DISCUSSED THIS EARLIER BUT THIS IS WHAT WE PROVIDE YOU ON SOME OF THE LINE AND BAR GRAPHS. THESE ARE OUR EXEMPTIONS IF WE GO TO THE NEXT PAGE, CURRENTLY OUR CURRENT TAX RATE IS UNDER $0.240253 PER $100. WHEN WE DID OUR CALCULATIONS TO THE TAXATION CALCULATIONS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS WE CALCULATED WHAT THEY CALL A NO NEW REVENUE TAX OR THE EFFECTIVE RATE. THAT IS $0.256637 PER $100. THAT IS A SMALL INCREASE FROM THE CURRENT YEAR BECAUSE OF THE VALUATION CHANGE. WE ARE PROPOSING $0.279379 PER $100 WHICH IS THE VOTER APPROVED RATE . THE PROPOSED HOSPITAL DISTRICT RATE IS $0.097012 PER $100 . WE GO TO THE NEXT SCREEN. WE CHOSE THE LARGEST ENTITIES IN THE COUNTY SO SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE A SMALL DIFFERENCE ON YOUR EXEMPTIONS BUT THESE ARE THE MAJORITY THAT THE PEOPLE IN NUECES COUNTY COVER. THAT IS THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, SEE CISD AND IN A DIFFERENT COMMUNITY AND SCHOOL DISTRICT THESE MIGHT BE DIFFERENT BUT THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE AT THE MOMENT. FOR NUECES COUNTY WE HAVE A 20% HOMESTEAD EXCEPTION WITH A MINIMUM OF $5000 PER VALUATION. IF YOU ARE OVER 65, THE EXCEPTION IS $62,500. FOR THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI IT IS A 10% WITH A 5000 -- $5000 MINIMUM AND THE OVER 65 IS $50,000. WITH THE CC ISD , THERE WAS A LEGISLATIVE SESSION CHANGE BUT RIGHT NOW IT IS $100,000. THE UNDERS -- OVER 65 IN DISABLED IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT BUT IT IS STILL $60,000 AND $60,000. DELMAR , $5000 HOMESTEAD, $50,000 OVER 65 IN DISABLED. THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT, 20% , MINIMUM $5000. OVER 65 IN DISABLED, $62,500. THIS SHOWS YOU THE TREND IN THE TAX RATE. WE WENT BACK TO 2007-2008. WE STAYED SIMILAR TO THAT FOR A FEW YEARS THEN STARTED GOING DOWN IN 2013 AND 2014. THERE WAS A BIG DROP LAST YEAR BECAUSE THERE WAS NO NEW TAX LAST YEAR AND BECAUSE THE VALUATION WAS A BIG CHANGE IT DID DROP SIGNIFICANTLY. WE ARE PROPOSING AN INCREASE THIS YEAR. THAT INCREASE WOULD GO UP BECAUSE OF THE VALUATION CHANGE BUT YOU CAN SEE THE TREND HISTORY WE ARE TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE TAX RATE NEXT SLIDE. FROM 2010 THROUGH 2011, AND CONTINUED GOING DOWN TO [00:15:09] 2023 THROUGH 2024. IF WE USE THE NO NEW TAX RATE FOR THE DISTRICT THERE WILL BE AN INCREASE DUE TO THE VALUATION CHANGES. THE NEXT PAGE WE GIVE YOU A COMBINED RATE OF THE COUNTY AND HOSPITAL COMBINED AND AGAIN, THE SAME HISTORY THAT YOU SAW. WE HAVE GONE DOWN OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS WITH A SIGNIFICANT DROP IN 2022 THROUGH 2024. NOW THESE ARE THE TAX REVENUE COLLECTIONS FOR ALL OF THE FUNDS. BACK IN 2014 AND 2015 WE WERE RIGHT AROUND $74 MILLION. THIS YEAR WE WILL BE AROUND $121 MILLION. EVALUATION HAS CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY SO THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE HAVE SEEN THE INCREASE IN RATES. I WILL SHOW YOU WHAT THE GENERAL FUND BALANCE ARE. IN 2016 WE HAD SIGNIFICANT EXPENSES THAT WE DID NOT SEE COMING. WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO BRING THE FUND BALANCE OF SIGNIFICANTLY. LATELY WE HAVE BEEN STAYING CLOSE TO THE 25.6- $27.5 MILLION. WHAT DOES THE TARGET LINE MEAN? IT MEANS THAT WHEN -- YOU TRIED TO SET ASIDE ENOUGH FUND BALANCE RESERVES IN CASE OF EMERGENT SITUATION AND CURRENTLY THE TARGET IS 25% OF THE BUDGET REVENUE. THE TAX CODE REQUIRES IS TO SHOW YOU WHAT THE BALANCES ARE FOR AN AVERAGE HOMESTEAD. THE AVERAGE HOMESTEAD DOES CHANGE EVERY YEAR AND THIS YEAR THE VALUATION FOR A HOMESTEAD AVERAGE IS 2200 $257. -- $202,275. THE AVERAGE TAX LET ME IS -- AND IF WE DO THAT AT THE CURRENT ASSESSED VALUE OF THE AVERAGE HOMESTEAD THAT IS $761.20. THAT IS A $156.95 SENT CHANGE. WE TRIED TO BRING THIS UP AND MINIMIZE THIS AS BEST WE CAN. NEXT PAGE. IF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ADOPTS THE CURRENT TAX RATE THIS WILL RAISE TAXES FOR THE OPERATION FUND AND THE AMOUNT OF TAXES THAT WILL BE RAISED IS 9.84% AND ON A $100,000 HOME IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $37.43. SOME OF YOU ALL MIGHT HAVE EMERGENCY SERVICE DISTRICTS WITHIN THIS AREA BUT THIS IS FOR THE MAJORITY OF THOSE IN NUECES COUNTY. RIGHT ABOUT THE SAME AT 1.2% AND THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT IS AT 4% AND THAT IS WHERE THE TAX VALUES GO TO. WE ARE TRYING TO SEE WHERE THE MONEY COMES FROM FOR THE COUNTY. WE ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT. MOST OF OUR TAXES ARE 85% OF THE TOTAL REVENUE FOR PROPERTY TAX SO IT IS HARDER FOR THE COUNTY TO DO STUFF AND THAT IS WHERE MOST OF THE FUNDS ARE. WE SEE A LOT OF INCREASES IN CHARGES FOR SERVICES AND WE HOPE THAT WILL CONTINUE AND WE WILL SEE AN IMPACT AT THAT VALUE. THIS IS WHERE THE MONEY GOES. UP FOR US, THE MAJORITY OF THE COST IS -- AND THAT IS PERSONNEL. YOUR NEXT ONE IS 7% -- OR RENT, YOUR INSURANCE, AND OTHER THINGS [00:20:11] THAT COVER THE BALANCE BUT YOU CAN SEE WERE THE MAJORITY OF THE FUNDING GOES. WE DO HAVE A FEW BUDGET CHALLENGES AND THERE ARE MORE THAT WE WILL BE DISCUSSING COMING UP TO THE BUDGET HEARING WORKSHOP. -- REQUIRES CONTINUOUS PAY FOR THREE YEARS BECAUSE OF A 2 1/2% INCREASE IN SALARY AND THIS YEAR THERE IS 173 ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT QUALIFY FOR THIS EXEMPTION AND THAT IS ABOUT A $221,000 INCREASE. WE ARE UNDER A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT AND CURRENTLY THERE ARE 304 EMPLOYEES IN THAT AND THE NET EFFECT OF THAT IS $325. LAST YEAR, OUR NEW CONSULTANT FOR OUR INSURANCE DETERMINED THAT THE HEALTH INSURANCE FUND IS IN NEED OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS. THE COMMISSIONERS COURT DID APPROVE A PREMIUM INCREASE FOR THE EMPLOYEE AND THE EMPLOYER AND THAT COST $2.27 MILLION IN HEALTH INSURANCE INCREASES. BECAUSE INTEREST WAS SO HIGH THIS YEAR WE WERE ABLE TOE A REDUCTION IN THE PLAN VALUE. THIS CONTINUES TO GO UP AND DOWN EACH YEAR SO THIS ONE YEAR WAS HELPFUL THAT WE SAW $150,000 INCREASE. >> SO, ON THIS $2.2 MILLION HEALTH INSURANCE INCREASE , THAT IS FOR ALL EMPLOYEES? LAW ENFORCEMENT AND EVERYBODY? >> YES. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS COUNTY JUST GAVE A SIGNIFICANT RAISE TO THE EMPLOYEES IN THIS COUNTY BECAUSE WE ARE EATING $2.2 MILLION THAT WOULD HAVE COME OUT OF THE EMPLOYEE POCKET HAD WE SO CHOSEN TO DO THAT. IF THAT DOES NOT COUNT I DON'T WANT TO HEAR A LOT OF GRIPING ABOUT OTHER THINGS. THAT IS MONEY WE COULD HAVE PUT TOWARDS RAISES BUT WE CHOSE AS A COURT THIS YEAR TO INCREASE OUR LIABILITY BY $2.2 MILLION, AND IT WOULD BE NICE TO KNOW WHAT THAT EQUATES TO FOR EVERYBODY. NOT TODAY BUT TO GET THAT OUT BECAUSE I STILL DON'T TRULY BELIEVE THE EMPLOYEES TRULY FULLY UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH WE ARE PAYING FOR THEM THAT WOULD OTHERWISE COME OUT OF THEIR POCKETS FOR THIS HEALTH INSURANCE AND AGAIN I WISH WE WOULD DO THAT IN RAISES BECAUSE THAT IS THE ONLY THING THAT THEY DO UNDERSTAND. BECAUSE THEY SEE THAT IN THEIR POCKET BOOKS BUT I WANT TO CONTINUE TO BRING THIS UP BECAUSE THIS IS A HUGE AMOUNT OF RAYS THAT WE GAVE EVERYBODY. LAW ENFORCEMENT, EVERYDAY EMPLOYEES. HEALTH INSURANCE GOES UP ALL OF THE TIME AND WE CONTINUE TO EAT THESE COSTS ON A REGULAR BASIS. THAT IS WHAT IS -- THAT IS WHAT IS MAKING THIS BUDGET VERY, VERY DIFFICULT. THAT IS OKAY BECAUSE WE ARE TAKING CARE OF EMPLOYEES BUT THAT IS REALLY MAKING THE BUDGET DIFFICULT. >> THE HEALTH INSURANCE COST FOR THE COUNTY IS ABOUT $15 MILLION. >> SO THE COUNTY PORTION IS $15 MILLION PER YEAR AND THE EMPLOYEE PORTION, WHAT IS THAT ROUGHLY? >> IT IS AROUND $5 MILLION. >> SO WE PAY $15 MILLION AND THEY PAY $5 MILLION. THAT $15 MILLION IS AN ACCUMULATION THAT GOES WAY BACK. IT HAS GONE ON FOR YEARS THAT WE HAVE DONE THIS. I'D THAT IS SOMETHING I DON'T THINK PEOPLE QUITE UNDERSTAND. THIS COURT HAS SPENT A TON OF MONEY ON THEM AND THAT HAS THAT GOT TO COUNT AS A RAISE AND IF IT DOES NOT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO CALL IT. OTHERWISE THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY A LARGE PORTION OF IT. THANK YOU. >> THE LAST ISSUE ON HERE, AS YOU MIGHT REMEMBER FROM THE BUDGET PROPOSAL AS WELL AS THE VALUE THEY REMOVED JOSH SO WE ARE BRINGING THIS TO THE COUNTY RIGHT NOW. WE BELIEVE IT IS OF VITAL INTEREST TO THE COUNTY FOR WHAT IS GOING ON SO IT IS SOMETHING WE PROBABLY NEED TO ADD TO THE BUDGET. RIGHT NOW WE [00:25:01] ARE SAYING 275 AND THOSE ARE KNOWN CHALLENGES BUT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE HERE THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS I WILL BE GLAD TO ANSWER THOSE. >> CAN I ASK YOU, I THINK ON THE THIRD TO THE LAST SLIDE, WHERE YOU GIVE A BREAKDOWN OF THE EXPENSES, CAN YOU GO DOWN TO THE BAR. THAT HAS BECOME A HOT TOPIC. I WANT TO CLARIFY, WHEN IT SAYS FOOD, IS THAT FOR THE JAIL? >> YES. >> OKAY. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT. WE BRING THE VALUE -- WE HAVE ALMOST NO EXPENSES FOR FOOD OTHER THAN WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR THE JAIL AND JUVENILE. >> WE SHOULD MAYBE ADD THAT TO FUTURE CHARTS TO CLARIFY. GOOD POINT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? THAT WILL CONCLUDE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> JUDGE, HOLD ON. I THINK JUDGE MCCOY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. >> THANK YOU, JUDGE SCOTT AND COMMISSIONERS. WHAT I AM HERE FOR ARE SOME PROPOSALS. EVERY TIME THE BUDGET COMES UP , AND I WORK ON IT, EVERYBODY SAYS, HOW COME THE COURT FIVE BUDGET IS SO MUCH HIGHER THAN ALL OF THE OTHER COURTS. COURT FIVE IS A SPECIAL COURT. IT HANDLES CPS, JUVENILE CASES, GUARDIANSHIP CASES AS WELL AS THE JP APPEAL SO BASICALLY THE THINGS THAT NOBODY ELSE WANTS TO HANDLE. WE ALSO HANDLE OUR MOST VULNERABLE CITIZENS INCLUDING ELDERLY AND CHILDREN. WE DEAL WITH CHILD ABUSE AND ELDERLY ABUSE. WHAT I AM HERE FOR TODAY IS WE HAVE AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE THAT WAS ESTABLISHED YEARS AGO AND I THINK ONE OF OUR COMMISSIONERS ESTABLISHED THE POSITION AND SINCE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THAT POSITION OUR CASELOAD IN COURT FIVE HAS INCREASED DRAMATICALLY. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF REASONS WHY. IT IS NOT JUST AN INCREASE LOCALLY BUT STATEWIDE AND IT HAS TO DO A LOT WITH CHANGES IN STATUTES AND BURDENS OF PROOF WITH REGARDS TO REMOVAL. PRIVATIZATION OF SERVICE PROVIDERS. THIS IS AN HOURS AND HOURS DISCUSSION THAT WE CAN HAVE ANOTHER TIME BUT IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS WITH REGARDS TO THAT I CAN ANSWER. SO, THE BUDGET IS ALSO INCREASED IF YOU LOOK, HISTORICALLY, IT HAS GONE UP EACH YEAR WITH REGARD TO ATTORNEY FEES AND EXPENDITURES AND THAT HAS A LOT TO DO WITH CASELOAD AND INCREASED CASELOAD. ONE OF THE BIGGEST REASONS FOR THAT IS THE CHANGE IN THE STATUTE THAT REQUIRES ATTORNEY APPOINTMENTS FROM THE OUTSET OF CASES ON A NUMBER OF CASES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH COURT FIVE. I SAY THAT BECAUSE THE , THAT STATUTE ALSO HAS TO DEAL WITH -- IT ALSO AFFECTS HOW QUICKLY A CASE CAN GET THROUGH THE COURT. THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT TAKES TO LITIGATE A CASE AND THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WAY WE TRY TO RUN THE COURT. IT HAS TO DO WITH CHANGES IN THE LAW. DUE TO THAT INCREASE IT REQUIRES MORE TIME FROM THE COURT AND FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE AGAIN, KIND OF AN INCREASE ALL AROUND. -- HAS BEEN THE JUDGE SINCE I WAS ELECTED AND HE HAS DONE A GREAT JOB AND PROGRESSIVELY, HER TIME HAS INCREASED FROM THE TIME SHE FIRST TOOK THE POSITION AS ASSOCIATE JUDGE AND SHE FOUND IT NECESSARY TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF HOURS THAT SHE WORKS BASED AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE CASELOAD INCREASE AND SO WHAT I AM HERE TODAY TO ASK FOR IS, AND I BELIEVE IT IS AS A PROPOSED INCREASE, IS TO PAY HER WHAT IS FAIR. WHEN I SAY WHAT IS THERE I WOULD ASK THAT SHE BE PAID [00:30:02] WITH ALL OF THE OTHER ASSOCIATE JUDGES ARE BEING PAID. NUECES COUNTY IS KIND OF BEHIND WITH REGARD TO THIS ISSUE. IF YOU LOOK AT SAN ANTONIO AND SOME OF THE SIMILARLY SIZED COUNTIES THEY MAY HAVE TWO OR THREE ASSOCIATE JUDGES ASSIGNED TO ONE DISTRICT JUDGE THAT HANDLE ALL OF THE CPS CASES. NOT ONLY DOES SHE HANDLE THE INCREASED CASELOAD BUT SHE HAS BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN ESTABLISHING THE DRUG COURT THAT HAS TAKEN OFF AND HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY. YOU CAN ASK ANYBODY INVOLVED. IT HAS REALLY GONE WELL. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THAT PROGRAM IS GRANT FUNDED. WHAT I AM ASKING FOR IS WHAT IS FAIR. I THINK HER CELL BE RIGHT NOW IS AROUND $51 PER HOUR AND SHE HAS HAD A COUPLE OF COST-OF-LIVING INCREASES BUT I BELIEVE THE MEDIAN SALARY FOR THIS POSITION RANGES FROM $140-$170,000 THROUGHOUT THE STATE. AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE HIRED IN 2012 WOULD BE EARNING ABOUT $150,000-$200,000. I AM HERE TO FIGHT FOR MY PEOPLE AND I KNOW THE JOB THAT THEY DO. MOVING FORWARD, SHE IS IN A GREAT POSITION TO CONTINUE IN THIS POSITION BECAUSE ONE, SHE LOVES IT AND HAD BEEN SEMI RETIRED FOR A LONG TIME. THIS WAS HER PASSION AND HER BABY. SO SHE WAS ABLE TO DO OTHER WORK AS FAR AS SITTING AS A VISITING JUDGE HOWEVER, SHE CANNOT DO THAT ANYMORE NOW THAT SHE IS FULL-TIME WITH THE COUNTY. I AM ASKING AGAIN TO PAY WHAT IS FAIR. IN THE FUTURE IF WE EVER HAVE TO FILL THIS POSITION AGAIN IT WILL BE DONE VERY DIFFICULT TO FILL IT WITH THAT TYPE OF JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE AT THE SALARY THAT IS PROPOSED RIGHT NOW. COURT FIVE IS ALSO ONE OF THE ONLY -- THE ONLY COURT IN THE COUNTY THAT HAS PERSONAL LIABILITY FOR THE JUDGE SO WE DO HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO OUR CASES. HISTORICALLY THIS COURT HAS BEEN EXTREMELY GENEROUS. IT IS HARD TO COME IN AND PUT A PRICE TAG ON HOW WE HANDLE OUR MOST VULNERABLE CITIZENS BUT WHEN YOU SEE CUTS IN SERVICES IN ONE AREA, MENTAL HEALTH. I AM NOT SAYING THERE HAS BEEN CUTS BUT A DROP OF SERVICES IN OTHER AREAS ENDS UP IN COURT FIVE BUT HISTORICALLY THE COURT HAS BEEN VERY GENEROUS AND PROVIDED LOTS OF RESOURCES AND HELPED US OUT A GREAT DEAL AND I AM JUST ASKING FOR THAT TO CONTINUE AND ONCE AGAIN, I AM NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING ABOVE AND BEYOND. I AM JUST ASKING FOR WHAT IS FAIR IN COMPARISON TO EVERY OTHER COUNTY AND STATE IN THE STATE. IF ANYBODY HAS QUESTIONS I AM HAPPY TO FIELD THEM. >> THAT IS GOOD. THANK YOU. I THINK KARA WANTS TO SPEAK. >> I HAVE A PROPOSAL AND AN AMENDMENT FOR MY BUDGET. I AM SORRY I DID NOT GET IT IN SOONER. I DID NOT REALIZE THIS IS WHERE WE ARE. MINE IS VERY SIMPLE. IT IS ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT JUDGE MCCOY HAS SAID. LULU IS MY FINANCE MANAGER AND IS AT A 22 RIGHT NOW. IT IS A UNIQUE POSITION IN MY OFFICE AND I ASK THAT SHE GET INCREASED TO A 24. I CAN USE THE COST INCREASE FROM SPECIAL REVENUE, RECORDS MANAGEMENT. SHE ALSO DOES RECORDS MANAGEMENT SO IT IS PRETTY SIMPLE AND I AM ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THAT IS IT. >> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? I KNOW YOU ALL SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. I CAN GO OUT OF THE HEARING AND DO THAT NOW IF [00:35:05] THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. EVERYONE THAT SIGNED UP IS ON THE BUDGET SO, IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK WE ARE IN THE BUDGET HEARING. ERIC, YOU ARE UP. >> GOOD MORNING. I AM LIEUTENANT ERIC WOOD AND I HAVE BEEN WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE FOR 16 YEARS AND IN LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR 30, SINCE I TURNED 21. NUECES COUNTY IS BEYOND UNDERPAID WHEN IT COMES TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AND IF THIS TAX RATE INCREASE DOES NOT GO THROUGH THERE WILL BE NO MONEY AVAILABLE TO GIVE US A RAISE NEXT YEAR. EVERYBODY ON THE COMMISSIONERS COURT, TWO YEARS AGO, WHEN WE AGREED TO A SHORT CONTRACT, IT WAS THE UNDERSTANDING THAT EVERYONE GAVE TO US, UNLESS I MISUNDERSTOOD, THEY WANTED TO PAY US WHAT WE DESERVED. AS PART OF THAT WE AGREED TO A SALARY SURVEY THAT IS DUE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS. IT IS NOT GOING TO DO ANY GOOD TO HAVE THE SALARY SURVEY COME IN AND SHOW HOW SHORT PAID WE ARE IF THERE IS NO MONEY IN THE BUDGET. I KNOW AND EVERYBODY I WORK WITH KNOWS HOW UNDERPAID WE ARE. THERE IS LITERALLY NOBODY FROM THIS COUNTY OR THE ADJOINING COUNTIES THAT ARE PAID AS BAD AS WE DO. HOURS STARTING PAY IS BEYOND TERRIBLE. EVERYBODY AROUND US, BECAUSE OF THE CHANGES AND THE ISD PD REQUIREMENTS IS SHORTHANDED. BECAUSE THEY HAVE PULLED FROM ALL OF THE AGENCIES AND ACADEMIES. THERE ARE NOT VERY MANY OFFICERS LEFT OR VERY MANY PEOPLE INTERESTED IN GOING INTO LAW ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE THEY HAVE GONE TO THE USE ISD'S. ALL OF THESE DEPARTMENTS PAY BETTER THAN WE DO. IN SAN PATRICIO PAYS BETTER THAN WE DO. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT ONE DOLLAR PER HOUR . I AM TALKING 20%-40% DIFFERENCE IN PAY. IT IS A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AND IT WILL KEEP GETTING WORSE BECAUSE COST-OF-LIVING KEEPS GOING UP AND THESE OTHER AGENCIES KEEP INCREASING PAY TO ATTRACT EMPLOYEES. IF SOMETHING DOES NOT CHANGE IT WILL REACH A CRITICAL POINT AND I THINK THAT WILL HAPPEN SOON. >> THANK YOU. ELLIOT'S MARTINEZ. >> JUDGE, WHEN DOES THE CONTRACT AND ? >> WE AGREE THAT YOU NEED TO BE PAID MORE AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT LAST YEAR WHEN WE WERE IN THE WORST RIGID WE HAD EVER BEEN IN WE STILL FOUND A WAY, AFTER CUTTING THE BUDGET, TO GET YOU RAISES SO WE COULD GET THE SHORT-TERM CONTRACT. EVEN IN THE WORST BUDGET I HAVE EVER SEEN, WE WERE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET YOU ALL PAID BECAUSE YOU WERE SUCH A PRIORITY. I AM HOPING THAT IS REMEMBERED AS PART OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS BECAUSE WHAT YOU SAID IS CORRECT. THE REST OF THE STORY, THE LAST CONTRACT, WE WERE ABLE TO FIND A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR YOU ALL BECAUSE WE WANTED TO GET YOU PAID AS A BODY. IT WAS DEFINITELY, I THINK THAT IS WHAT THE COURT WAS ON THAT. I THINK THERE IS A PROPOSAL, THE JUDGES PROPOSAL TODAY, IF I AM READING THIS RIGHT, TO TAKE CARE OF THE VEHICLES THAT YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL PASS BUT THIS IS A SIGN OF YOUR VALUE BY THE FACT THAT , I THINK THAT WAS THE JUDGES PROPOSAL. IT IS IN THE PROPOSAL AND IT DOES HAVE TO GET VOTED ON. AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE HAVE DONE EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE SAID THAT WE ARE GOING TO DO AND YOUR CONTRACT DOES NOT COME UP UNTIL THE NECK -- NEXT BUDGET CYCLE. I AM GLAD YOU ARE HERE . I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO THINK [00:40:03] WE DON'T PLACE HIGH VALUE ON LAW ENFORCEMENT. AS LONG AS I HAVE BEEN HERE WE HAVE INCREASED CONTRACTS AND INCREASED PAY. I AM GOING TO SAY AGAIN, WHEN WE DO THAT SALARY STUDY I HOPE THAT WE ARE COMPARING BENEFITS AS WELL BECAUSE I HAVE A HARD TIME BELIEVING THOSE COUNTIES ARE PAYING THE INSURANCE PREMIUMS THAT WE ARE. IF WE ARE PAYING $50 MILLION OUT OF A TOTAL OF 20 THAT IS A PRETTY HIGH PERCENTAGE. I HOPE THAT GOES INTO THE SALARY STUDY BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO COMPARE BENEFITS . IF WE ARE SURE THERE, WE NEED TO MAKE UP FOR IT. WHEN WE GET THAT WE WILL HAVE SOMETHING STRONG TO LOOK AT. YOU MAKE GREAT POINTS AND I JUST HOPE THAT EVERYTHING IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BECAUSE WE HAVE VOTED , NO MATTER WHAT THE MAKEUP OF THE COURT HAS BEEN, UNANIMOUSLY TO INCREASE AND SUPPORT AND I KNOW THAT WE CAN ALWAYS DO MORE FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL AND WE ARE TRYING OUR BEST. WE DO VALUE YOU AND APPRECIATE YOU. >> MR. MARTINEZ. >> HELLO AND GOOD MORNING. I AM NOT GOING TO ASK THAT QUESTION, DO YOU SUPPORT LAW ENFORCEMENT. I AM GOING TO GET TO THE POINT. WE DO HAVE A PAY STUDY COMING UP. NOT UNTIL NEXT YEAR BUT WHAT THESE GUYS ARE WANTING TO DO IS TO GET AHEAD OF THE GAME AND NOT BEHIND IT. WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE THINGS AND SEE WHAT IT DOES SAY BUT WE ARE DUE FOR A RAISE. SO, THERE IS A POSITION THAT HAS BEEN AVAILABLE FOR SEVERAL WEEKS. NOT VERY MANY PEOPLE HAVE APPLIED. THEY DON'T WANT TO. DUE TO THE PAY. THEY DO WANT TO RAISE THE PAY TO $65,000 AND I THINK THAT IS A $20,000 RAISE BUT THEY COULD NOT DO IT BECAUSE THEY ARE EQUAL TO US AND WE ARE AT THE SAME RATE. IT IS LIKE, YOU CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE THESE GUYS ARE NOT GOING TO GET THE SAME RATE SO THAT WOULD NOT BE FAIR. ANOTHER OPTION IS THEY PUT IT ON A LAW-ENFORCEMENT FORUM THROUGH THE STATE OF TEXAS. WE HAVE A POSITION OPEN. THINKING WE MIGHT GET RESPONSES BUT WE WERE MADE FUN OF BY SEVERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES. TWO COMMENTS WERE MADE. WE ARE GOING TO PRAY FOR NUECES COUNTY AND OTHER COMMENT WAS WHY NOT GO APPLY AT BUC-EE'S. ALL AROUND THE STATE OF TEXAS -- >> WHO MADE A COMMENT ABOUT BUC-EE'S? >> ANOTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY. I CAN SHOW IT TO YOU. >> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WASN'T ANYBODY IN HERE. >> IT WAS OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. OTHER HOUCK -- ANYHOW, THAT IS THE ISSUE. A LOT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ARE PAYING HIGHER AROUND THE AREA. THEY ARE PAYING 25-$26 PER HOUR. THEY ARE EVEN GIVING GAS REIMBURSEMENTS. ANOTHER ISSUE THAT KIND OF LIKE, IT RAISES A LITTLE ISSUE WITH ME, LOYALTY WORKING WITH NUECES COUNTY. YOU HAVE A LOT OF GUYS THAT ARE 18 OR 20 OR VETERANS AND THEIR PAY RATE IS $25 AN HOUR BUT A NEW OFFICER AT -- PD IS BEING PAID $40 PER HOUR. WE HAVE LOYALTY HERE. WE HAVE GUYS THAT ARE WAITING TO RETIRE AT THIS AGENCY. BUT YOU HAVE VETERANS MAKING ALMOST DOUBLE. >> THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING SO THERE IS NOT A TIME LIMIT. SO, IF THERE IS ANYTHING YOU HAVE NOT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY YOU HAVE A COUPLE MORE MINUTES. THAT IS THE REASON THAT WE CAN ASK QUESTIONS. THIS IS PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND NOT PART OF PUBLIC COMMENT. >> ANOTHER ISSUE, THE PAY IS AN ISSUE AND WE ARE SHORTHANDED. [00:45:08] THERE ARE DAYS WHERE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE COUNTY THERE ARE ONLY TWO OR THREE DEPUTIES. THE QUESTION I RAISED IS SAFETY. WE DO A LOT OF HIGHWAY INTERDICTION. WE DEAL WITH HUMAN SMUGGLING AND NARCOTICS. BUT IF ONE OF US WAS TO GET SHOT OR HURT OR INJURED, OUR BACKUP IS A LONG WAY AWAY. MAYBE CC PD. OR MAYBE THE PARAMEDICS OR FIREFIGHTERS CAN COME HELP US OUT. ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COUNTY YOU SEE A BUNCH OF OFFICERS ON THE MAP BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE YOU ONLY SEE TWO OR THREE AND NIGHT SO WE HAVE SAFETY CONCERNS. WE DO THE BEST THAT WE CAN DO BUT THAT DOES RAISE CONCERN ON MY END. A LOT OF THE OFFICERS AND DEPUTIES WORK 14-16 HOUR DAYS AT TIMES JUST TO GET THE OVERTIME. THE JAILERS HAVE DAYS WHERE THEY WORK 7-10 DAYS STRAIGHT JUST TO GET EXTRA MONEY IN THEIR POCKET. IT KIND OF DESTROYS THE WORK AND HOME LIFE BALANCE AS WELL. I UNDERSTAND YOU PAY A LOT FOR INSURANCE BUT THE WHOLE AREA AROUND US IS PAYING MORE. IT IS JUST MIND BOGGLING AT TIMES, LOOKING AT THE PAY. I HAVE BEEN WITH NUECES COUNTY FOR ABOUT EIGHT YEARS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR 15 YEARS. -- PD, IT IS NOT JUST AUSTIN PD . THEY ARE HAVING A SIGN ON DALLAS. I BELIEVE IT IS A $20,000 SIGN-ON BONUS TO SIGN ON THERE. $5000, $10,000. THE WHOLE AREA OF TEXAS IS SEEING THAT WE ARE SHORT OFFICERS SO THEY ARE OFFERING INCENTIVES TO COME AND APPLY WITH US. THEY ARE UPPING THE ANTE WITH PAY, BENEFITS, VACATION. RETIREMENT AS WELL. I BELIEVE THAT IS EVERYTHING I HAVE TO SAY. I 100% BELIEVE THAT YOU WILL DO THE RIGHT THING WHEN THE TIME COMES AND IT IS ABOUT A YEAR AWAY LIKE MR. CHESNEY STATED . >> WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. THANK YOU, VERY MUCH. ANYTHING ELSE? >> I AM -- PEREZ AND I AM THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION. AS FAR AS BENEFITS, A LOT OF COUNTIES ARE OFFERING WHERE IT IS FREE FOR THE EMPLOYEE . NUECES COUNTY DOES NOT OFFER THAT. GASOLINE REIMBURSEMENT JUST TO GET YOU TO DRIVE OUT THERE. I HAVE SAID IT BEFORE AND I KNOW THEY ARE GOING TO DO A PAY STUDY BUT I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS FOR YEARS AND YEARS. I HAVE SAID ON A LOT OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING BOARDS AND NUECES COUNTY HAS THE 17TH LARGEST BUDGET IN THE STATE AND GALVESTON IS NEXT AND THEY PAY $27 AN HOUR. LUBBOCK IS PAYING $26 PER HOUR. NUECES COUNTY IS STARTING OFF AT $16.98. MCDONALD'S DOWN THE STREET IS STARTING OFF AT $16. SO, NUECES COUNTY IS PAYING $.98 MORE THAN MCDONALD'S. AS FAR AS EQUIPMENT AND SAFETY, WE ARE ON OUR OWN. I HAD CC PD COME AND HELP ME GET OUT OF A HOUSE BECAUSE A CROWD OVERTOOK US. WE IT EMERGENCY BUTTONS AND WE HAD TO HAVE CORPUS CHRISTI COME HELP US OUT. WE HAVE A RIFLE VEST -- THAT JUST COVERS THE VITAL ORGANS BUT THE SOFT BODY COVERS YOUR RIBS, YOUR VITAL ORGANS. MINE IS EXPIRED. [00:50:11] MY KIDS DON'T KNOW THAT. THEY THINK I AM BEING TAKEN CARE OF BUT I AM NOT. WHAT IS HAPPENING, WE USED TO GET SOFT ARMOR THROUGH THE COUNTY. BUT THE GRANT STOPPED. YOU COULD EITHER PICK PLATES OR SOFT ARMOR. THE PLATES ARE HEAVIER AND DOESN'T COVER AS MUCH AREA. WE HAVE HAD OTHER GUYS TRY TO LEAVE. NUECES COUNTY IS NOT COMPETITIVE AT ALL . WHILE THIS DECISION TODAY -- I AM HOPING IT DOES NOT AFFECT CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS IN A FEW MONTHS BECAUSE, IN ALL OF THE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS, I HAVE BEEN REASSURED THAT THE COURT SUPPORTS THE LAW ENFORCEMENT. IT IS NOT A LACK OF WILL BUT FUNDING. WHAT I HOPE IS THAT WHEN WE GO TO THE TABLE IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS THE COURT DOES NOT COME AND SAY WE CAN'T GET YOU THE PAY RAISES THAT YOU NEEDS. -- NEED . WHEN THE PAY STUDY COMES OUT IT IS GOING TO BE EMBARRASSING. WE ARE EMBARRASSED ALREADY. WE GOT MADE FUN OF. WE GOT LEFT OUT BECAUSE WE ARE MAKING $19 AN HOUR AND THEY ARE MAKING $39 PER HOUR AND WE ARE TRYING TO RECRUIT THEM BUT THEY ARE TRYING TO RECRUIT US. THEY ARE SAYING, HEY BROTHER, COME UP NORTH. PORTLAND IS NOW OFFERING $64,000. -- IS OFFERING $31 PER HOUR AND WE ARE $19 PER HOUR. I AM HOPING THAT THE COURT IS LOOKING FORWARD AND WHAT I HAVE ASKED BEFORE, WHAT WE WANT, WE ARE GOING TO ASK THE COURT, WHEN THE PAY STUDY COMES OUT, YOU WILL MAKE THE DECISION TO SUPPORT US AND TO HAVE OUR BACKS AND TO SAY, HOW MUCH DOES IT COST? HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE US TO GET THERE? THEN WE CAN NEGOTIATE TIME. WE HAVE SOME UNITS THAT ARE HELD TOGETHER WITH ZIP TIES. WE HAVE ONE UNIT THAT WE DON'T TURN OFF BECAUSE IT MIGHT NOT TURN BACK ON. WE NEED BODY ARMOR. EVERY DAY WE ARE JUST TAKING THE RISK. A LOT OF US ARE ALIVE WITH JUST DUMB LUCK BUT THIS MORNING, I HAVE BEEN AT WORK SINCE 5:30 YESTERDAY BUT I CAME HERE BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT. THIS MORNING WE WERE LOOKING FOR AN INDIVIDUAL THAT WAS ARMED AND THAT IS WHY I RAN LATE. I DIDN'T GET A NAP BECAUSE I HAD TO COME STRAIGHT HERE. WE FACE A LOT OF DANGERS. WE ARE UNDERSTAFFED AND UNDERPAID AND OVERWORKED. >> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. JOSEPH RODRIGUEZ SENIOR, YOU WANTED TO SPEAK ABOUT THE BUDGET AS WELL? >> THEY TOOK A LOT OF MY POINTS COMPLETELY BUT, I HOPE THAT YOU WILL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, IF THERE WAS AN ACTIVE SHOOTER AT THE SCHOOL OR WHATEVER, OR CATASTROPHE HAPPENS, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO TELL THEM? WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE HERE BUT WE TOOK CARE OF THAT INSURANCE. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO TELL FAMILIES WHEN PEOPLE AREN'T APPLYING AND THERE IS A MASS EXODUS. IS THAT WHAT IT WILL TAKE TO GET THE PAY UP? EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. JUST GET IT DONE. IT IS ESSENTIAL. THAT IS PRETTY MUCH IT. AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU CAN'T GO EVERYBODY IS GETTING INSURANCE OR EVERYBODY IS GETTING THIS. IT IS AN ESSENTIAL JOB. ALL THESE OTHER AGENCIES HAVE WAY BETTER [00:55:06] BENEFITS AND THEN THE PAY AND THEY ARE OFFERING A $10,000 SIGN-ON BONUS AND JUST TO SAY, THEY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE INSURANCE AND WHAT IS BEING DONE FOR EVERYBODY ELSE, THAT IS IRRELEVANT. EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE SO YOU SHOULD JUST DO IT. GET IT DONE. THAT IS IT. >> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THE BUDGET. GO AHEAD. >> GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS AND COUNTY JUDGE. I STEPPED IN BECAUSE I THOUGHT ANOTHER ITEM WAS ON THE AGENDA THAT I WANT TO BE ON. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND FOR ALL OF THE GOOD THINGS THAT YOU DO FOR OUR COMMUNITY. I REMEMBER WHEN THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE ASSOCIATION TRIED TO GET IMPLEMENTED AND OFF THE GROUND. IT GOES BACK TO -- TIME. I THINK THROUGHOUT THE YEARS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MANY OF YOU -- BUDGETS BUT, WE RECOGNIZE 911 AND WE THINK OF THE FIRST RESPONDERS WE ALWAYS PRAY FOR FIRST RESPONDERS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT DOLLAR AMOUNT I WOULD PUT ON THE LIFE OF AN OFFICER IN LAW ENFORCEMENT. I WOULD JUST SUPPORT AND ENCOURAGE A SOLUTION THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COME UP WITH TO FIND THE MONEY TO MAKE THEM COMPETITIVE IN THE MARKET WITHOUT PUTTING THEM AT RISK OF FURTHER DANGER. FOR THOSE THAT HAVE NOT BEEN AROUND LAW ENFORCEMENT, THESE MEN AND WOMEN , I WAS SITTING THERE ALMOST IN TEARS. IT HURTS MY HEART TO HEAR THAT THESE OFFICERS HAVE TO BECOME HAVE TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSIONERS. WE KNOW YOU ARE STRAPPED FOR MONEY. YOU INVEST IN THE EMPLOYEES. YOU INVEST IN THE SAFETY EQUIPMENT. I AM HERE TO STRONGLY SUPPORT YOU AND TO FIND THOSE DOLLARS. -- THEY WERE ORGANIZING SANITATION WORKERS AND THEY WENT ON STRIKE. THEY WENT FROM $15 PER HOUR UP TO $30 PER HOUR. I KNOW WITH THE INTELLIGENCE THAT WE HAVE APPEAR NOW THAT IF YOU REALLY FOCUS ON IT, WITH YOUR DRIVE AND DETERMINATION, I WANTED TO SAY I AM ABSOLUTELY CONFIDENT THAT YOU CAN MAKE THESE MEN AND WOMEN WHOLE AND HELP THEM FEEL SAFE AT WORK AND TAKE CARE OF THEIR FAMILIES. BEING SHORTSTAFFED IS DANGEROUS. WE HAVE LOST OFFICERS OUT THERE IN THE DARK. OFFICER BROKE WAS -- HE LOST HIS LIFE WHEN HE WAS OUTMATCHED. ALSO, THEIR TRAINING. THERE NEEDS TO BE UPGRADED TRAINING. WHERE ARE WE WITH CONTINUED EDUCATION COURSES. THEIR SAFETY, THE MANPOWER, THE VEHICLES BUT I WILL SAY, THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON THE LAST 25 OR 30 YEARS THAT I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN POLITICS. THERE WAS ONE DEPUTY, THEY USED TO HAVE TO GIVE HIS VEHICLE A BOOST BECAUSE HE HAD TO GO OUT TO A HOMICIDE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR SERVICE. IT IS GOOD TO BE BEFORE YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ON THE ITEM DEALING WITH THE RATE . AND THE COMMENTS THAT WE [01:00:04] HAVE HEARD, I KNOW SOME OF THE LEADERSHIP STEPPED OUT FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE ASSOCIATION. THE EXPERIENCE THAT I HAVE HAD HERE IS HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE. THIS HAS PROBABLY BEEN THE MOST PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE HAD. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE MET AND HAVE SPOKEN WITH LEADERSHIP AND THE SHERIFFS OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OVER THE YEARS. OUR ROLES GET TIGHTENED UP DURING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING SO WE ARE NOT ABLE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. IT IS USUALLY ATTORNEY TO ATTORNEY THEN NEGOTIATING TEAMS. WE ARE NEVER REALLY ABLE TO VERBALIZE HOW WE FEEL ABOUT THIS UNTIL WE CAST OUR VOTES. IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A YES VOTE TO BRING IN MORE MONEY FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT. I REMEMBER WE WERE ORDERED OR REQUIRED TO BOOST COURT REPORTERS. I HAVE USED THAT BEFORE. THEY WERE SEVERELY UNDERPAID. PEOPLE WERE GOING TO SAN PATRICIO COUNTY AND WELLS COUNTY. THEY WERE WILLING TO MAKE THE DRIVE BECAUSE THEY WERE GETTING PAID $30,000 OR $40,000 MORE. WITH THIS INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN TODAY, WE ARE GOING TO BACK THE BLUE BUT, WE CANNOT LET HOW MUCH FUNDING DICTATE. WHAT WE DO TODAY'S SETS UP THAT SUCCESS FOR NEXT YEAR. AS MUCH AS WE TALK ABOUT BACKING THE BLUE AND HOW MUCH WE WANT TO SUPPORT OUR STAFF TO MAINTAIN POSITIONS AND TO BE ABLE TO RECRUIT WE HAVE GOT TO BE ABLE TO SET THAT UP IN A BUDGET NOW. WHEN WE REDUCE OUR RATES, NOBODY WANTS TO REDUCE OUR RATES BUT WHEN WE DO IT IS NICE TEMPORARY RELIEF THAT EVERYBODY CAN BENEFIT FROM BUT WE ARE REALLY HURTING OURSELVES WHEN WE LOOK AT THE LONG-TERM. I DON'T WANT US TO BE IN THE SAME POSITION WE HAVE BEFORE WHERE THE WILL IS THERE. IT IS LIKE, WE ONLY HAVE THIS MUCH AND NEGOTIATION IS PRETTY SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD. THIS IS HOW MUCH WE'VE GOT VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHEN I WAS ON THE CITY COUNCIL IN CORPUS CHRISTI WHEN THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT DISCUSSION ON HOW MUCH . THERE FUNDING SOURCES, THEY HAVE A LOT MORE FLEXIBILITY. WE ARE LIMITED BUT WE HAVE HAD PRECEDENT BEFORE. NOT ONLY FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT BUT ALL OF THESE POSITIONS. IF WE WANT TO REMAIN BEING THE BEST TRAINING GROUND THROUGHOUT THE STATE, THAT IS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO. WE HAVE GOT TO STEP UP AND DO THAT. THAT IS MY COMMITMENT TODAY. IT MAY NOT BE POPULAR OR WHAT PEOPLE WANT TO HEAR. IF YOU LOOK AT DOING YOUR RESEARCH INTO SURROUNDING COUNTIES, THEIR RATES HAVE BEEN MUCH HIGHER THAN WE HAVE IN THIS COUNTY AND THOSE ARE CONSERVATIVE COUNTIES. WE ARE VERY CONSERVATIVE WITH OUR BUDGET BUT, WE HAVE TO TAKE A STEP NOW TO SET UP SUCCESS NOT JUST BECAUSE WE ARE GOING IN IN A FEW MONTHS. WE HAD COVID-19 MONEY AND WE WERE ABLE TO OFFSET SOME OF THE COST FOR A YEAR OR TWO . IT WAS HELPFUL BUT WHEN THAT WENT AWAY, IT HURT. WE HAD A GOOD STRONG WORKFORCE BUT PEOPLE HAD TO LEAVE. WITH SCHOOL DISTRICTS BEING REQUIRED TO HAVE LAW ENFORCEMENT NOW, THERE ARE PARTNERSHIPS WITH OTHERS. THEY ARE ABLE TO PUT MORE INTO IT. IF WE CAN KEEP THAT PERSPECTIVE IN FRONT OF US AS WE MOVE FORWARD TODAY WITH OUR BUDGET I THINK THAT WILL BE HELPFUL. NOT JUST ACHIEVING A BALANCED BUDGET TODAY BUT BEYOND THAT TO SET UP SUCCESS. I THINK THIS IS THE MOST PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE HAD IN A PUBLIC FORUM WITH A GROUP REPRESENTING THE SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION AND WE CAN TALK OPENLY WITHOUT HAVING TO WAIT FOR NEGOTIATING TEAMS TO DO THAT. IT IS WHAT WE KNOW. [01:05:05] THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE HEARD. YOU TAG US ON FACEBOOK ALL THE TIME SO I SEE THE POSE THAT WE GET AND IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT WE ARE NOT PAYING WHAT'S OTHER BUSINESSES ARE . OR MAYBE JUST BARELY ABOVE . AND YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO PUT YOUR LIFE ON THE LINE IF YOU WANT WENT SOMEWHERE ELSE TO WORK LIKE BUC-EE'S OR SOMEWHERE ELSE. THAT IS GOING TO BE ESSENTIAL TO PASS THIS BUDGET. THESE ARE NOT GOING TO BE EASY DECISIONS TO MAKE BUT, IN ORDER TO KEEP THE LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT WE SEE, I CAN THINK OF TWO PEOPLE THAT I KNOW OF THAT HAVE GONE OVER TO AN AGENCY THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT WERE ACTIVE MEMBERS OF THE SHERIFFS OFFICE ASSOCIATION AND THEY ARE GETTING PAID BETTER OR COMPARABLE AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE SCHEDULE AND THE SAFETY ISSUES. WE HEAR YOU AND THIS IS WHAT WE NEEDED TO HEAR AS A COURT. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO DELAY OR DENY. WE ARE GOING TO GIVE EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN. YOU SAW IT CLEARLY. 85% OF THE BUDGET COMES OUT OF PROPERTY TAX. THERE IS ONLY SO MUCH THAT WE CAN ASK OF THE PUBLIC. THEY DO IT JUST LIKE REGULAR BUT THAT HURTS US AS WELL. WE ARE BEING CHALLENGED ON A LOT OF FRONTS WITH 87% OF THE BUDGET , WHERE IT COMES FROM SO THAT IS WHAT THE CHALLENGES. SO THANK YOU, FOR BEING HERE. >> JUDGE, A FOLLOW-UP? >> YES . >> I GOT APPROACHED, I WANT TO SAY SIX OR EIGHT MONTHS AGO ABOUT THE BODY ARMOR THEN I WAS TOLD THERE WAS ANOTHER PLAN IN PLACE. I KNOW THIS COURT WOULD BE WILLING TO LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE IT IS A ONE-TIME EXPENSE. SOMETIMES IT IS EASIER FOR US TO FIND , A ONE-TIME THING. I GOT APPROACHED AND THEN THE PERSON THAT APPROACHED ME SAID I THINK WE HAVE A PLAN THEN I DID NOT HEAR BACK . I WOULD LIKE TO ATTACK THAT ONE BEFORE WE GET INTO CONTRACT STUFF BECAUSE THAT IS A HUGE DEAL. I KNOW THE COURT WOULD BE INTERESTED IN COMING TOGETHER AND TRYING TO FIND SOME HELP ON IT. IT KIND OF REMINDED ME THAT I NEED TO FOLLOW UP WITH WHOEVER REACHED OUT TO ME. >> WE DID GET A RIFLE PLATE FROM A GRANT. IT JUST COVERS UP HERE. IT DOES NOT COVER YOUR SIDES. SOFT ARMOR IS NO PUNCTURE AND SLASH RESISTANT. THEY HAVE A LIFE OF FIVE YEARS SO SOFT BODY ARMOR WOULD BE AN EXPENSE EVERY FIVE YEARS. >> WOULD YOU MINE PUTTING SOMETHING TOGETHER FOR US TO REVIEW? I CAN'T DO IT MYSELF AND I KNOW MY GROUP WOULD BE INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT THAT. NOTHING IS EASY BUDGET WISE BUT IT IS EASIER IF IT IS A ONE-TIME THING. THAT COULD COME FROM A CO MAY BE BUT NOBODY HAS GIVEN US A FORMER -- FORMAL PROPOSAL ON THE SOFT BODY ARMOR SO WE HAVE NOT SAID NO. IF YOU COULD PUT ONE TOGETHER FOR US AND GET THAT TO US AS SOON AS YOU CAN AND LET US LOOK AROUND AND SEE IF WE CAN FIND SOME SPARE CHANGE. I KNOW IT IS NOT CHEAP BUT THAT IS SOMETHING, I DEFINITELY WANT TO INVEST IN IF WE CAN FIND THE MONEY. IF YOU COULD, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THAT IS ONE I WANTED TO POINT OUT PRETTY QUICKLY. WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT NOW. >> DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK, MR. GRANBERRY? IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THE PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE BUDGET? IT IS 10:18 AND I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. BEFORE WE GET -- IS THERE [01:10:07] ANYONE ELSE HERE , MOVING ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT, IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON PUBLIC COMMENT? DO WE NEED A FIVE MINUTE BREAK? WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A FIVE MINUTES BREAK BECAUSE THE REST , WE NEED TO BE HERE FOR. [G. BUDGET] >>> WE ARE BACK FROM OUR RECESS. THANK YOU FOR WAITING PATIENTLY. WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM G. ITEM 01 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDER APPROVING THE 2024 TAX ROLL , SETTING THE 2024 TAX RATE FOR AT NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT, AND LEVYING SAID TAX RATE AGAINST ALL PROPERTY IN NUECES COUNTY FOR 2024 . AND LET ME READ THIS. WHEREAS, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT AUTHORIZED THE TAX ASSESSOR-COLLECTOR TO COMPUTE THE NO-NEW REVENUE TAX RATE FOR 2024 FOR THE NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT, AND; WHEREAS, NOTICE OF THE PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX RATE FULLY IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROPERTY TAX CODE AND RULES OF THE STATE COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE - PROPERTY TAX DIVISION APPEARED IN THE CORPUS CHRISTI CALLER-TIMES FOR THE NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2024, AND; WHEREAS, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FINDS AND DETERMINES THAT THE PROPER PROCEDURE HAS BEEN FOLLOWED TO LAWFULLY CONSIDER THE PROPOSED TAX RATES FOR 2024, INCLUDING PROPER NOTICE OF THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2024 AS PROVIDED BY CHAPTER 551, GOVERNMENT CODE, VERNON'S TEXAS CODES, AND; WHEREAS, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FINDS AND APPROVES THE TAX RATE FOR THE NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT FOR THE CURRENT YEAR CONSISTING OF THE FOLLOWING: (1) THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION TAX RATE OF $0.089240 THAT IF APPLIED TO THE TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE, WILL IMPOSE THE AMOUNT OF TAXES NEEDED TO FUND MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION EXPENDITURES OF THE NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT FOR THE NEXT YEAR. 'THIS TAX RATE WILL RAISE MORE TAXES FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS THAN LAST YEARS' TAX RATE. "THIS TAX RATE DOES NOT EXCEED THE NO-NEW-REVENUE TAX RATE" NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED, BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT THAT THE 2024 TAX ROLL, AS SUBMITTED BY THE NUECES COUNTY TAX APPRAISAL DISTRICT TO THE NUECES COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR-COLLECTOR IS APPROVED, AND THAT THE FOLLOWING TAX RATE PER $100 VALUE IS SET AND LEVIED AGAINST ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY FOR 2024: NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT $0.089240 PER $100 BE IT FURTHER ORDERD THAT EXISTING HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS FOR 2024 SHALL INCLUDE 20% FOR HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION, BUT NOT LESS THAN $5,000; AND $62,500 FOR OVER AGE 65 OR DISABLED EXEMPTION, PLUS EXEMPTIONS MANDATED BY STATE LAW, AND; BE IT FURTHER ORDERED THAT NO DISCOUNTS ARE TO BE ALLOWED FOR EARLY PAYMENT OF TAXES. SPLIT PAYMENTS OF TAXES AS DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION 31.03 OF THE PROPERTY TAX CODE WILL NOT BE ALLOWED. THE PROPOSED ORDER ACCEPTING AND APPROVING THE 2024 TAX ROLL, SETTING THE 2024 TAX RATES FOR THE NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT, AND LEVYING SAID TAX RATE AGAINST ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY IN NUECES COUNTY; HAVING BEEN READ, PUBLIC COMMENT HAVING BEEN ALLOWED, AND COMMENTS HAVING BEEN CONSIDERED. THEN I HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT A TAX RATE OF $0.089240 AND TO ADOPT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ORDER OF THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 24. YOU HAVE TO LIST EACH PERSON OFF. COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ, HOW DO YOU VOTE ? [01:15:08] >> I VOTE YES. >> COMMISSIONER MAREZ. COMMISSIONER CHESNEY . >> AYE. >> THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY FOR THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE. ON ITEM 02, DISCUSSING CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF THE 2024-2025 NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT BUDGET. THIS BUDGET WILL RAISE MORE TOTAL PROPERTY TAXES THAN LAST YEARS BUDGET BY 773,273 OR 1.87% AND OF THAT AMOUNT $1,043,404 IS TAXABLE REVENUE TO BE RAISED FROM NEW PROPERTY ADDED TO THE TAX ROLL THIS YEAR. COMMISSIONER CHESNEY MADE THE MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ . NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT BUZZ -- BUDGET DOES PASS. >> WE STILL NEED TO VOTE. >> I THOUGHT WE DID THAT ALREADY. EVEN THOUGH YOU MADE THE EMOTION I ASSUME YOU ARE MAKING THE MOTION. >> I THINK YOU PROBABLY NEED TO GO BACK TO THE OTHER ONE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK YOU VOTED ON THE OTHER ONE. >> YES WE DID . >> YOU MADE THE MOTION BUT YOU DID NOT. >> I WILL SAY IT AGAIN FOR THE PREVIOUS MOTION, I WAS AN AYE . I DID NOT REALIZE THAT IF WE MADE THE MOTION WE NEEDED TO DO THAT. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDER APPROVING THE 2024 TAX ROLLS SETTING THE 2024 TAX RATE AND LEVYING THE SAID TAX RATE AGAINST ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY IN THE COUNTY FOR 2024 . I AM GOING TO READ THIS ORDER AND I WILL BE MAKING THE MOTION. SO, HERE WE GO. AN ORDER ACCEPTING AND APPROVING THE 2024 TAX ROLL; SETTING THE 2024 TAX RATES FOR NUECES COUNTY; AND LEVYING SAID TAX RATE AGAINST ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY IN NUECES COUNTY FOR 2024 WHEREAS, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT AUTHORIZED THE TAX ASSESSOR-COLLECTOR TO COMPUTE THE NO-NEW REVENUE TAX RATE AND VOTER-APPROVAL TAX RATE FOR 2024, FOR THE COUNTY, COUNTY FARM-TO-MARKET, AND LATERAL WHEREAS, NOTICE OF THE PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX RATE FULLY IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROPERTY TAX CODE AND RULES OF THE STATE COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE - PROPERTY TAX DIVISION APPEARED IN THE CORPUS CHRISTI CALLER-TIMES FOR THE COUNTY, COUNTY FARM-TO-MARKET, AND LATERAL ROAD AND FLOOD ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2024, AND; WHEREAS, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FINDS AND DETERMINES THAT THE PROPER PROCEDURE HAS BEEN FOLLOWED TO LAWFULLY CONSIDER THE PROPOSED TAX RATES FOR 2024, INCLUDING PROPER NOTICE OF THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2024 AS PROVIDED BY CHAPTER 551, GOVERNMENT CODE, VERNON'S TEXAS CODES, AND; WHEREAS, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FINDS AND APPROVES SEPARATELY THE TAX RATE FOR THE CURRENT YEAR CONSISTING OF THE FOLLOWING TWO COMPONENTS: (1) THE DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE OF $0.039369, THAT IF APPLIED TO THE TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE, WILL IMPOSE THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF TAXES NEEDED TO PAY DEBT SERVICE FOR THE NEXT YEAR. (2) THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION TAX RATE OF $0.226163, THAT IF APPLIED TO THE TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE, WILL IMPOSE THE AMOUNT OF TAXES NEEDED TO FUND MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION EXPENDITURES OF THE COUNTY FOR THE NEXT YEAR THIS TAX RATE WILL RAISE MORE TAXES FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION THAN LAST YEAR'S TAX RATE' 'THE TAX RATE WILL EFFECTIVELY BE RAISED BY 3.50 PERCENT AND WILL RAISE TAXES FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS ON A $100,000 HOME BY APPROXIMATELY $23.58. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED, BY [01:20:03] THE COMMISSIONERS COURT THAT THE 2024 TAX ROLL, AS SUBMITTED BY THE NUECES COUNTY TAX APPRAISAL DISTRICT TO THE NUECES COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR-COLLECTOR IS APPROVED, AND THAT THE FOLLOWING TAX RATES PER $100 VALUE ARE SET AND LEVIED AGAINST ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY FOR 2024: A. NUECES COUNTY, GENERAL FUND, M & O $ 0.223004 PER $100 B. NUECES COUNTY, FARM-TO MARKET, LATERAL ROAD AND FLOOD CONTROL 0.003159 PER $100. C. NUECES COUNTY, TOTAL M & O 0.226163 PER $100. D. NUECES COUNTY DEBT SERVICE 0.039369 PER $100. TOTAL NUECES COUNTY TAX RATE - ADD C&D $ 0.265532 PER $100. -- >> YOU READ THE NUMBER INCORRECTLY . >> WHICH ONE? >> I'M SORRY. I MUST'VE TRANSPOSE THOSE. ADD C&D $ 0.265532 PER $100 BE IT FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS FOR 2024 SHALL INCLUDE 20% FOR HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION (BUT NOT LESS THAN $5,000); AND $62,500 FOR OVER AGE 65 OR DISABLED EXEMPTION, PLUS A TAX BE IT FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS FOR 2024 SHALL INCLUDE 20% FOR HOMESTEAD THE PROPOSED ORDER ACCEPTING AND APPROVING THE 2024 TAX ROLL, SETTING THE 2024 TAX RATES FOR NUECES COUNTY, AND LEVYING SAID TAX RATE AGAINST ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY IN NUECES COUNTY; HAVING BEEN READ, PUBLIC COMMENT HAVING BEEN ALLOWED, AND COMMENTS HAVING BEEN CONSIDERED. I WOULD BE MAKING THE MOTION THAT THE TAX RATE BE INCREASED. I FEEL LIKE THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT GIVEN THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT WE SHOW AS AVAILABLE. THE ONLY WAY THAT I WOULD WITHDRAW THIS MOTION IS IF YOU ARE WILLING TO GO HIGHER. GIVEN THE SITUATION THAT WE WERE PUT IN LAST YEAR WITH THE BUDGET , IT STILL GETS US UNDERNEATH WHAT WE WERE THE YEAR BEFORE I CAME INTO OFFICE BECAUSE OF THE INDUSTRY DROP THAT WE HAD LAST YEAR. SO, I AM GOING TO BE VOTING YES ON THIS UNLESS ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO INTERRUPT THIS WITH ANOTHER MOTION. HEARING NONE, I WILL BE A YES. >> NO . >> COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. >> NO. >> COMMISSIONER CHESNEY. >> AYE. >> THE MOTION PASSES, 3-2. MOVING ON TO ITEM 4. DISCUSSED AND CONSIDER ADOPTING AN ORDER RESCINDING PRIOR-YEAR BUDGET RESOLUTIONS AND ORDERS. I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO RESCIND THE MOTIONS AND ORDERS . >> SECOND . >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOVING ON TO 1.G.5.. I ASSUME WE NEED TO VOTE ON EACH OF THESE RESOLUTIONS INDIVIDUALLY. THE FIRST ONE , I ADDED THIS ONE. [01:25:01] AN ORDER AFFECTING THE BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR EMPLOYEE POSITIONS. WE ADDED THIS IN BECAUSE VACANT POSITIONS, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE BUDGET THAT WE HAVE, SHOULD COME BACK TO FUND BALANCE INSTEAD OF BEING ABLE TO DELETE POSITIONS IN DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AND USE IT FOR SALARY INCREASES. THERE IS A PROVISION IN HERE AND I WILL READ THE WHOLE ORDER. THIS ORDER APPLIES TO AND AFFECTS ALL EMPLOYEES WHO ARE AUTHORIZED (1) BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF SUBSECTION 152.011, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, VERNON'S TEXAS CODES, OR OTHER AUTHORITY OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT TO SET COMPENSATION AND CONTROL THE ANNUAL BUDGET AND (2) ALL EMPLOYEES WHO ARE AUTHORIZED IN THE 2024/2025 COUNTY BUDGET, EXCEPT (3) IT DOES NOT APPLY TO EMPLOYEES OVER WHICH THE COMMISSIONERS COURT HAS NO AUTHORITY TO SET COMPENSATION. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, FOR EACH EMPLOYEE POSITION THAT IS VACANT AS OF OCTOBER 1, 2024, OR THAT BECOMES VACANT ON OCTOBER 1, 2024, OR THEREAFTER DURING BUDGET YEAR 2024/2025: SALARY SAVINGS IN ALL DEPARTMENTS FROM VACANT POSITIONS SERVE AS A SURPLUS THAT INCREASES THE FUND BALANCE AT THE END OF EACH FISCAL YEAR. OUTSIDE OF THE BUDGET PROCESS, NO DEPARTMENT WILL BE AUTHORIZED TO REALLOCATE SALARY FUNDS FOR OPERATIONAL SHORTAGES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND JUVENILE PRE/POST ADJUDICATION FACILITIES OPERATIONS. THIS REQUEST WILL REQUIRE COMMISSIONERS COURT APPROVAL. BUDGETED 'VACANT' POSITIONS SHALL REMAIN VACANT UNTIL A REQUEST TO FILL THE POSITION THAT IS BROUGHT TO COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR APPROVAL PASSES BY MAJORITY VOTE. THE DELETING OF A BUDGETED, VACANT POSITION TO COVER SALARY RECLASSIFICATIONS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024- 2025. NO RECLASSIFICATIONS OF BUDGETED POSITIONS INCLUDED IN THE ADOPTED BUDGET WILL BE AUTHORIZED. EXCEPTIONS OR EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL BE AUTHORIZED AS DETERMINED BY COMMISSIONERS COURT. THE SALARY AND FRINGE BENEFITS FOR EACH VACANT EMPLOYEE POSITION MAY BE TRANSFERRED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT TO A SPECIAL RESERVE DESIGNATED BY THE COUNTY AUDITOR. THE AUTHORITY AND FUNDS PROVIDED BY THIS BUDGET ARE FROZEN FOR EACH VACANT THIS WAS BECAUSE AND IN SO MANY YEARS PREVIOUSLY, THIS COMES IN AND CHANGES AND THIS IS BECAUSE OF CONSTRAINTS AND THE FUND BALANCE IS GOING TO BE SO LOW BECAUSE OF THE BUDGET WE JUST PASSED. WE NEED TO KEEP A TIGHT WATCH ON THINGS IN THE COMING YEAR SO I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO PASS THIS. >> SECOND . >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. DISCUSSION? >> DO I NEED TO COME TO COURT IN APRIL OR MAY WHEN I HIRE MY SEASONAL TEMPS? >> THESE ARE TEMPORARY POSITIONS. YOU ARE NOT COMING TO COURT. >> OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE >> OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. >> THE MOTION PASSES MOVE , MOVING ON TO THE RESOLUTION SETTING TRAVEL MILEAGE PER DIEM REIMBURSEMENT RATE. COMMISSIONERS COURT RESOLUTION SETTING THE TRAVEL MILEAGE & PER DIEM REIMBURSEMENT RATES. WHEREAS, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FROM TIME TO TIME SETS THE TRAVEL POLICY FOR EXPENSES AND OTHER TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENTS FOR OFFICIALS AND COUNTY EMPLOYEES; AND, WHEREAS, FUEL COSTS AND OTHER FACTORS HAVE INCREASED THE COST TO COUNTY OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES TO UNDERTAKE REASONABLE AND NECESSARY TRAVEL FOR THE PURPOSES OF COUNTY BUSINESS, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, THAT THE TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT RATE FOR MILEAGE IS HEREBY SET AT 49.0 CENTS PER MILE AND THE PER DIEM RATE IS HEREBY SET AT $48.00 PER DAY. THIS ORDER IS EFFECTIVE ON OCTOBER 1ST, 2024 AND APPLIES TO TRAVEL TAKEN DURING BUDGET YEAR 2024-2025. DULY ADOPTED BY VOTE OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS, ON THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024. >> SO MOVES . >> SECOND . >> ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE . >> THE MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON, INTERFUND LOANS. WHEREAS, A [01:30:08] NUMBER OF THE GRANTS AWARDED TO THE COUNTY ARE REIMBURSEMENT GRANTS, REQUIRING THE COUNTY TO EXPEND COUNTY MONIES BEFORE GETTING ACCESS TO THE GRANT FUNDS; WHEREAS, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FROM TIME TO TIME MAY NEED TO FUND GRANT PROJECTS IN THE INTERIM BEFORE BEING REIMBURSED WITH GRANT FUNDS; WHEREAS, THE FUNDING OF THESE GRANT PROJECTS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH A SHORT-TERM COUNTY INTERFUND LOAN, I.E. LOANING MONIES FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE GRANTS OPERATING FUND UNTIL GRANT FUNDING IS RECEIVED; AND WHEREAS, FOR PURPOSES OF THIS RESOLUTION A SHORT-TERM INTERFUND LOAN IS MEANT TO REFER TO CREDIT/DEBIT ACCOUNTING ENTRIES IN THE COUNTY'S BALANCE SHEET BETWEEN TWO COUNTY FUNDS; AND IS NOT MEANT TO INDICATE A TRADITIONAL LOAN, WHEREIN INTEREST MAY BE ACCRUED. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, THAT MONIES FROM THE COUNTY'S GENERAL FUND UP TO A MAXIMUM OF $2 MILLION DOLLARS MAY BE USED TO PROVIDE THE COUNTY'S GRANT OPERATING FUND WITH A SHORT-TERM INTERFUND LOAN PENDING RECEIPT OF APPLICABLE GRANT FUNDS. UPON RECEIPT OF GRANT FUNDS THE COUNTY'S GENERAL FUND WILL BE IMMEDIATELY CREDITED MONIES RECEIVED. >> WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION? >> I WILL MAKE THE MOTION. >> WE HAVE A SECOND. >> THIS IS DISCUSSION. >> SINCE I CAME HERE, I JUST WANT TO ASK, MAYBE WE SHOULD GET SOME TYPE OF FORENSIC AUDIT BECAUSE AT 9:15 LAST NIGHT WE FOUND THERE WERE SOME MISTAKES . A LADY WANTED TO DISCUSS WITH US OR WITH ME THE BUDGET SO I AM JUST ASKING IF WE CAN HAVE A FORENSIC AUDIT. >> THAT MIGHT COME UP DURING BUDGET AMENDMENTS. THESE ARE JUST RESOLUTIONS. >> THANK YOU, SIR. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE RESOLUTION REGARDING THE COUNTY FUNDS WITH GRANTS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE . >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. ANOTHER RESOLUTION . COMMISSIONERS COURT RESOLUTION AND ORDER ESTABLISHING FINANCIAL GUIDELINES FOR MINIMUM GENERAL FUND RESERVES. WHEREAS, SOUND FISCAL POLICIES ARE CRUCIAL TO ENABLING THE COUNTY TO MAINTAIN ITS LONG-TERM FINANCIAL STABILITY AND EXCELLENT BOND RATING; AND, WHEREAS, AD VALOREM TAX REVENUES ARE NORMALLY NOT COLLECTED UNTIL MID-DECEMBER EACH YEAR AND, AS SUCH, ADEQUATE FUND RESERVES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE OPERATING MONIES FOR THE FIRST THREE MONTHS OF EACH FISCAL YEAR. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED, BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS THAT IT IS THE COURT'S CONTINUED GOAL FOR BUDGET YEAR 2024-2025 TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM GENERAL FUND RESERVE OF TWENTY-FIVE PERCENT OF GENERAL FUND BUDGETED REVENUES AND TRANSFERS. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. AND A DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> THANK YOU . TWO MORE RESOLUTIONS. COMMISSIONERS COURT RESOLUTION AND ORDER ESTABLISHING FINANCIAL GUIDELINES FOR USE OF EXCESS REVENUE GENERATED FROM OPERATIONS AT THE RICHARD M. BORCHARD FAIRGROUNDS. WHEREAS, SOUND FISCAL POLICIES ARE CRUCIAL TO ENABLING THE COUNTY TO MAINTAIN ITS LONG-TERM FINANCIAL STABILITY AND TO ENABLE THE COUNTY TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR OPERATING THE RICHARD M. BORCHARD FAIRGROUNDS; AND, WHEREAS, ANNUAL OPERATING FUNDS AND PERIODIC CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDING IS NECESSARY TO ALLOW PROPER MANAGEMENT OF THE FAIRGROUNDS COMPLEX; AND, WHEREAS, REVENUES WILL BE GENERATED FROM ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS HELD AT THE FAIRGROUNDS. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED, BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS THAT FOR BUDGET YEAR 2024-2025 ALL EXCESS REVENUE EARNINGS GENERATED FROM OPERATIONS AT THE RICHARD M. BORCHARD FAIRGROUNDS SHALL BE REINVESTED BACK INTO THE FAIRGROUNDS FOR FUNDING GENERAL OPERATIONS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, AND EXPANSION. >> I UNDERSTAND. [01:35:30] >> IT HAS BEEN 1 MILLION. >> WE KEPT THE AMOUNT OF $1 MILLION. >> WE STILL HAVE GOT TO PAY FOR USING THE HALL SOMETIME SO, I DON'T KNOW. MY VOTE IS NO. >> >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND . >> TELL ME WHY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE VOTING NO FOR. >> THIS IS TO CONTINUE GIVING $1 MILLION IF I UNDERSTAND. >> THIS IS JUST A RESOLUTION THAT CONTINUES THE PRACTICE OF IF THEY HAVE ACCESS TO FUNDS. THIS IS NOT ABOUT GIVING THEM >> THEY DON'T HAVE EXCESS FUNDS. THIS IS A FORMALITY RESOLUTION, AS I READ IT. >> -- OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS ] >> THE LAST ONE. COMMISSIONERS COURT RESOLUTION AND ORDER ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL REVENUE ACCOUNT FOR DEPOSIT OF COUNTY FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE SALE OF FIXED ASSETS. WHEREAS, SOUND FISCAL POLICIES ARE CRUCIAL TO ENABLING THE COUNTY TO MAINTAIN ITS LONG-TERM FINANCIAL STABILITY AND EXCELLENT BOND RATING; AND, WHEREAS, THERE IS A NEED TO PRUDENTLY MANAGE COUNTY RESOURCES IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE BEST PUBLIC SERVICE WITH LIMITED RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE COUNTY; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED, BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS THAT FOR BUDGET YEAR 2024-2025 THE COUNTY WILL CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN A SPECIAL REVENUE ACCOUNT FOR THE DEPOSIT OF COUNTY FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE SALE OF FIXED ASSETS ORIGINALLY PURCHASED WITH GENERAL FUND MONIES. THIS IS ONE THAT WE DO EVERY YEAR END IT JUST KEEPS THE FUND. >> SO MOVED . >> SECOND . >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE . >> AYE. >> OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO ITEM 6. >> >> I WANTED TO ADD IT TO THE POLICY WHERE WE WOULD MAYBE HAVE A LITTLE BIT. AND THE WORDING IN THE BACK IS THE SAME , CELERY SAVINGS AND DEPARTMENTS VACANT. BUDGETED VACANT POSITIONS SHALL REMAIN VACANT UNTIL THE REQUEST TO FILL THE POSITION IS BROUGHT TO COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR APPROVAL. THE DELETING OF A BUDGETED VACANT POSITION TO COVER IT CELERY RECLASSIFICATIO NS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED FOR FISCAL YEAR '24-'25. NO RECLASSIFICATIONS INCLUDED IN THE ADOPTED BUDGET WILL BE AUTHORIZED. I AM THE ONE THAT PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA, SO I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS THE POLICY REGARDING THE SAME RESOLUTION. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND . ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE POINT ANY OPPOSED? >> I HAVE ONE QUESTION. SO, THIS WILL BE A '24-'25 BUDGET, STARTING OCTOBER 1ST, RIGHT? >> JUST FOR THE FIRST YEAR, THIS NEXT YEAR. >> SO, -- [01:40:10] >> THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE ANYTHING WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT. THAT IS FOR STARTING AFTER OCTOBER 1ST, THAT'S NOT TODAY. >> NOW, MOVING ON TO ITEM SEVEN. HE WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT HAD A QUESTION AND HE WAS GOOD. THIS IS DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED 2024-2025 NUECES COUNTY BUDGET, AS PRESENTED BY THE COUNTY AUDITOR AND HIS CAPACITY AS A BUDGET OFFICER FOR NUECES COUNTY, INCLUDING DECISIONS ON WHETHER TO CONTINUE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PERSONNEL CHANGES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO PAY STUBS, REDUCTION IN FORCE, AND CONSOLIDATION OR ELIMINATION OF CERTAIN RACES COUNTY DEPARTMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2024-'25 AND RELATED MATTERS. WE HAVE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO COME ON NOVEMBER 8TH, SO I ASSUME WE DON'T VOTE ON NUMBER SEVEN POINT WE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL AMENDMENTS. THE REASON I BROUGHT THIS UP AS I DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL LATE YESTERDAY THAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN ANY OF OUR STUFF FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY. NOT ALLOWING US TO USE THIS $320,000 IN THE PRETRIAL DIVERSION TRANSFER NOT BEING AN ALLOWABLE EXPENSE, SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS NOTED THAT WE NEED TO TAKE THAT OUT. SO, THAT WILL DROP OUR NUMBERS THAT WE ARE STARTING WITH. IF YOU ALL HAVE THIS PAGE THAT WAS PASSED OUT AT THE BEGINNING -- >> WHEN WE DID THOSE THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO, THEY HAD EMPLOYEES IN THE PRETRIAL DIVERSION ACCOUNT AND BECAUSE THE FUND WAS RUNNING AS A DEFICIT, THE PREVIOUS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY ASKED THE COURT TO MOVE THIS TO THE GENERAL FUND, PAYING FOR THOSE EMPLOYEES WITH THESE FUNDS. SO, THE EMPLOYEES WERE TRANSFERRED FROM THE FUND TO THE GENERAL FUND, RIGHT AROUND $330,000 WORTH OF STUFF. THAT'S WHY WE HAD THE PREVIOUS ATTORNEY SAYING $320,000 TO COVER THE COST. THOSE EMPLOYEES STILL RESIDE IN GENERAL FUND. >> SO, THE REST OF THE STORY HERE IS THAT IS GOING TO POTENTIALLY ELIMINATE THOSE POSITIONS, BECAUSE THEY ARE FUNDED WITH THE GRANT BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE PRIOR DISTRICT ATTORNEY, AND IF THAT GOES AWAY, THEN THOSE POSITIONS COULD HAVE TO GO AWAY. >> HISTORY OF ALL OF THAT, BUT -- BUT THE LAW ALSO SAYS IF THEY ARE NOT FUNDED BY THE GENERAL FUND -- THIS IS FINE, I'M JUST SAYING WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON THOSE POSITIONS, BECAUSE THAT WILL HAVE TO BE VOTED ON SEPARATELY, TOO. AND IF THE LAW IS THAT IT CAN'T BE DONE AND IT HAS BEEN DONE WRONG FOR ALL THESE 10 YEARS, THEN OKAY , WE NEED TO VERIFY THAT. SO, HAVE YOU CHECKED -- JIMMY, HAVE YOU CHECKED THAT HE IS GOING TO TELL US THAT THE LAW DOESN'T ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN? BECAUSE IF IT DOESN'T, WE HAVE TO FIX IT, AND FIXING IT MAY MEAN WE CAN'T FUND THOSE POSITIONS, BECAUSE WE CAN'T JUST MAKE UP 320,000, WE JUST BARELY PASSED A BUDGET THAT IS ALREADY CUTTING INTO OUR RESERVE BY $3 MILLION, THAT IS ANOTHER 10% THAT IS GOING TO COME INTO OUR RESERVES. HOW DOES THIS COME UP AT THE LAST MINUTE LIKE THIS? NO OFFENSE, BUT SERIOUSLY, HOW DO WE GET THIS AT THE LAST MINUTE? >> THIS CAME YESTERDAY OR THE DAY BEFORE IN AN EMAIL, BUT IT ALSO CAME FROM -- I BELIEVE WHEN THIS WAS DONE, THERE WAS A QUESTION IN THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE ABOUT THE LEGALITY OF WHETHER WE SHOULD DO IT. IT WAS BROUGHT BY THE PREVIOUS -- >> OKAY, LAST MINUTE, WE ARE HAVING OUR BUDGET HEARING. THE EMAIL CAME TO YOU LAST NIGHT. WE HAVE NOT SEEN IT, SHE HAS NOT VETTED IT, WHAT ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO? NO OFFENSE, I AM NOT JUST TAKING THIS AT FACE VALUE AND PUTTING $320,000 OUT OF OUR FUND BALANCE WHEN WE JUST BARELY PASSED A BUDGET THAT ALREADY CUTS $3.5 MILLION OUT OF THE BUDGET. SO, WE NEED TO PAUSE ON THIS DECISION UNTIL JENNY CAN GO REVIEW IT AND VERIFY WHAT HE IS SAYING IS THE LAW, THEN WE'VE GOT SOME TOUGH DECISIONS TO MAKE WITH THAT 320,000 BUCKS. JIMMY MAY HAVE JUST FOUND IT, THAT'S FINE, TOO, HE IS NEW TO THE JOB, I AM [01:45:02] NOT CRITICIZING IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, BUT IT CAN'T JUST BE DROPPED ON US AT THE LAST MINUTE AND SAY, HEY GUYS, GUESS WHAT, WE ARE SUCKING UP ANOTHER 320,000 BUCKS POINT >> I KNOW HE HAS GOT RESOURCES TO PROVIDE. THE TEAM CAN LOOK AT WHATEVER -- HOWEVER WE CAN BE OF ASSISTANCE. >> LOOK, I JUST FOUND THIS OUT. AND I FOUND OUT ALL KINDS OF THINGS. I HAVE BEEN ASKING ACCOUNTING SINCE I GOT HERE. I HAVE NOT GOTTEN THAT. AND SO, WITHOUT HAVING MY STARTING CHECKBOOK BALANCE, I CAN'T DO ANYTHING. THIS JUST FINALLY GOT TO ME. I ALSO FOUND OUT THAT I HAVE A COUPLE OF SPECIAL ACCOUNTS. CHAPTER 59 ACCOUNT AND FORFEITURE ACCOUNTS. THIS IS AN ACCOUNT THAT I JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT THAT IS THE PRETRIAL DIVERSION ACCOUNT. HAVE A KEN PAXTON ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION DATED AUGUST 5TH, 2019 THAT EXPLAINS WHAT YOU CAN AND CANNOT DO WITH IT. I WILL BE HAPPY TO TENDER A COPY OF THAT TO ANYBODY HERE. IN THE SUMMARY, IT SAYS THAT -- BECAUSE THE QUESTION IN THIS REQUEST FROM KEN PAXTON'S OFFICE WAS CAN WE USE THIS FOR OUR SALARIES? AND AS I READ IT -- >> WHO REQUESTED THAT? >> IT WAS THE COUNTY AUDITOR , SO, IT WASN'T OUR OFFICE, BUT I HAD MY LAWYERS RESEARCHED IT, AND THEY FOUND THIS, BROUGHT IT TO ME. AND YOU CAN USE IT ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT THE USE OF THE FUND IS SOLELY FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE PROGRAM. SO, WHAT APPARENTLY THE AGREEMENT WAS WAS TO WAIT UNTIL THE END OR THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE BUDGET YEAR, $320,000 OUT OF THE PRETRIAL DIVERSION FUND, WHICH IS MADE UP OF THE FEES -- ABOUT $500 PER JOB DIVERSION THAT GOES INTO THAT FUND. THAT FUND IS EVEN MORE TIGHTLY REGULATED AND IT IS A FUND UNDER MY NAME, SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE COUNTY TREASURY AND ATTACKS BEARING ACCOUNT. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, IT AIN'T, JUST LIKE MY CHAPTER 59 ACCOUNT IS NOT. AND THESE ARE THINGS THAT APPARENTLY HAVE BEEN GOING ON SINCE THERE HAS NEVER BEEN AN ACCOUNT THAT WAS DONE IN THE PROPER METHOD. AND SO -- >> JIMMY, I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING IT TO OUR ATTENTION AS THIS IS THE KIND OF STUFF WE ARE TRYING TO CLEAN UP, TOO, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS A HUGE HIT FOR US, RIGHT? SO, I'VE GOT TO DO MY DILIGENCE AS WELL AND SAY WE'VE GOT TO CHECK THIS, BECAUSE IF THAT IS THE CASE, AN AG OPINION IS NOT LAW, NO OFFENSE. JENNY AND I HAVE THIS FIGHT ALL THE TIME, AN AG OPINION IS AN OPINION. MAYBE WE NEED TO GET AN ACTION ON THIS AND FIND OUT WHAT EXACTLY WE CAN USE IT AND CAN'T USE IT FOR. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY -- >> COMMISSIONER, IT DOES PRETTY MUCH TRACKED THE STATUTE. >> I HAVE SEEN IT. >> I UNDERSTAND, I AM HAPPY TO MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO YOU, I JUST GOT IT. >> I GET IT, BUT IT IS A $320,000 DECISION ON BUDGET DAY THAT LIKE I AM NOT MAD AT YOU, I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT IT UP, BUT IT IS A POP IN THE MOUTH THAT I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE GOING TO FIND IT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO WITH THAT AND WE ARE GOING TO GET POPPED ANOTHER $320,000 ON OUR RESERVES, WE HAVE GOT TO AT LEAST CHECK THAT OUT BEFORE WE JUST SAY, OKAY, LET'S DO IT. BECAUSE MAYBE IT CAN BE USED FOR OTHER THINGS FOR A YEAR, AND BUY US SOME TIME IN THE DEPARTMENT THAT ARE ALLOWABLE, BECAUSE THERE HAVE GOT TO BE THINGS THAT ARE ALLOWABLE THAT MAYBE WE COULD SHIFT FUNDING TO THE PEOPLE AND SHIFT SOME OF THAT -- I DON'T KNOW. THIS IS JUST CATCHING ME OFF GUARD AND I AM PRETTY CREATIVE, BUT NOT WHEN I HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN THE STATUTE, THE EMAIL, THE STUFF, NOTHING, SO I DON'T THINK WE JUST MAKE A DECISION ON THAT WITHOUT LOOKING AROUND A LITTLE BIT. I GUESS WE'VE GOT TO DO IT BY THE END OF THE DAY. IT'S IN THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW. HE IS SAYING IF HE CAN'T USE IT -- THAT MEANS WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH ANOTHER $320,000 IN THE BUDGET WE JUST PASSED THAT WAS $3.5 MILLION IN THE HOLE. THE BUDGET WE JUST PASSED. >> ARE NOT 320, IT'S JUST A DROP IN THE BUCKET. >> SO, IT WOULD BE 3.8, WE ARE IN THE LOW, GREAT. BUT JENNY, I THINK IF YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK AT IT AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR FINDING THE STUFF, AND I KNOW YOU ARE [01:50:03] LIABLE FOR IT, SO I GET IT, BUT DEIGNED. >> IS THAT KP 0263? OKAY, SO WE HAVE GOT THAT AND THEY ARE LOOKING AT IT" AND THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK WITH AN OPINION. >> COULD YOU LOOK TO SEE IF THERE IS SOMETHING IN THE BUDGET THAT IS ALLOWABLE THAT WE COULD USE IT FOR THIS YEAR AT THE 11TH HOUR THAT IS LEGITIMATE, THAT DOESN'T PUT THE VA IN JAIL AND GET US IN TROUBLE , THAT MAYBE HE COULD AGREE TO FOR A YEAR, SO WE CAN GET THROUGH THIS YEAR'S BUDGET AND THEN FIX IT? I GET IT, IT'S GOT TO BE LEGIT, AND IF YOU SAY HE IS RIGHT, I ACCEPT THAT, BUT THERE HAVE GOT TO BE OTHER THINGS THAT I THINK IT IS ALLOWABLE FOR, THAT MAYBE WE COULD SWITCH SOME FUNDING AROUND AND BE CREATIVE FOR A YEAR. >> HERE ARE THE EMAILS. HERE ARE THE COUNTLESS EMAILS, THIS IS JUST SOME OF THE EMAILS THAT I HAVE PROVIDED YOU WITH HERE. BALANCES FOR ALL OF YOUR SPECIAL REVENUE ACCOUNTS. ALL OF YOUR LEDGERS. I HAVE BEEN EMAILING THEM TO BOTH YOU AND YOUR STAFF. >> THIS IS AFTER THAT MEETING WHEN YOU WENT AND GOT THEM, BUT THAT HAS BEEN RECENTLY PUT IN HIS DEFENSE, THAT IS JUST RECENTLY. THAT'S HOW HE FOUND THIS, YES. >> AWARE THAT HE HAD BEEN ASKING FOR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AT THE BUDGET WORKSHOP THAT WE HAD, I IMMEDIATELY THAT DAY BEGAN WORKING ON THOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, AND I HAVE BEEN EMAILING THEM TO BOTH HIM AND HIS STAFF, BECAUSE I AM AWARE THAT YOU ARE NOT EMAIL FRIENDLY, SO THIS IS WHY I STARTED INCLUDING YOUR STAFF AS WELL. BUT I HAVE PROVIDED YOU THE FUND BALANCES. I HAVE REQUESTED MEETINGS. >> THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. >> YES, BUT HE SAID HE HADN'T RECEIVED THEM. >> BUT IN ALL FAIRNESS, HE JUST RECEIVED THEM. IT HADN'T BEEN THAT LONG AGO. SINCE OCTOBER, HE HAS BEEN ASKING ALL YEAR, LET'S NOT BEAT AROUND THE BUSH. WE FAILED TO DO SOMETHING HERE. >> >> I HAVE A QUESTION. WHEN DID YOU STOP GETTING MONEY INTO THOSE ACCOUNTS, HOW LONG AGO? >> WHEN DID I STOP -- >> NO, KNOW, WHEN DID THEY STOP PUTTING MONEY INTO THOSE ACCOUNTS? >> THEY ARE STILL PUTTING INTO THAT ACCOUNT. THAT IS AN ACCOUNT THAT ACCUMULATES MONEY AS THEY GO INTO THE PRETRIAL DIVERSION PROGRAM, AND IT'S PLACED INTO AN ACCOUNT. NOT A PROPERLY DESIGNATED ACCOUNT IN MY OPINION, IN A PROPER WAY THAT'S SET OUT IN THE STATUTE, BUT THAT'S WHERE IT ACCUMULATES. I HAVE BEEN VERY CAREFUL NOT TO SPEND ANYTHING OUT OF ANY OF THESE ACCOUNTS BECAUSE I HAVEN'T TRUSTED THE BALANCES. SO, I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DRAW A BIG RED LINE BETWEEN WHERE I CAME IN AND WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE. AND IT'S BEEN A STRUGGLE TO GET THOSE. AND SO, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, IT'S STILL GOING IN, BUT I HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO LOOK INTO IT, I WILL HAVE TO LOOK INTO IT AND REPORT BACK. BUT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, EVERY TIME THEY DO A PTD, EITHER IN COURT AND GETS PAID TO THE CLERK, THEN IT GETS PUT INTO THAT ACCOUNT, OR THE SITE AND RELEASE PROGRAM, THOSE THINGS THAT ARE DESIGNATED AS PRETRIAL DIVERSION FEES GET PUT INTO IT. BUT LIKE I SAID, THIS JUST WAS SOMETHING THAT WE DISCOVERED LAST WEEK OR EARLIER THIS WEEK. >> THANK YOU, SIR, FOR BRINGING IT TO OUR ATTENTION. >> YES, SIR. BUT THE ONLY REASON I PUT THE STOP ON IT WAS BECAUSE IT WAS GOING TO -- ACTUALLY TRANSFERRING THE MONEY WAS GOING TO BE POTENTIALLY THE TRIGGER THAT GOT SOMEBODY IN TROUBLE, SO I THOUGHT WE CAN ONLY STOP AND LOOK AT IT AND FIGURE OUT A SOLUTION. I AM SORRY IT HAPPENED TO BE ON SUCH SHORT NOTICE. >> HE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH ME. WORKING UP TO THIS, WITH NOT GETTING HIS BALANCES, BUT THEN YESTERDAY, GETTING THIS NOTICE, ONCE HE BECAME AWARE OF IT, HE NEEDED TO COME TO COURT AND PUT A STOP TO IT TO MAKE SURE, OR ELSE THAT IS NOW ON HIS NAME WITH ALLOWING A TRANSFER THAT HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR, SO -- WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING AND I'M SURE THEY WILL BE WORKING ON IT. I GUESS HE WILL TALK TO THE ATTORNEY . TERESA, YOU HAD A COMMENT HE WANTED TO MAKE? >> I JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT [01:55:05] THERE IS A SITE RELEASE COORDINATOR POSITION THAT CAN BE UTILIZED , THOSE FUNDS FOR THE PRETRIAL DIVERSION, INAUDIBLE ] JUST ONE POSITION. >> AND PRELIMINARILY, THAT IS THE ONLY POSITION THAT WE CAN LOOK AT AND SAY THAT WOULD FIT ON ALL FOUR TABS, BUT THAT ISN'T GOING TO GET US ANYWHERE NEAR $320,000. AND SO -- I AM HAPPY TO GO DOWN AND RUN MY TRAPS WITH OTHER DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICES AND THE TDC AA, AND SEE WHAT I CAN FIND OUT, BUT THAT'S WHY I CAME UP HERE TODAY, WAS TO LET YOU KNOW. >> IF YOU CAN, WE ARE GREATLY APPRECIATIVE AND WE WILL BE HERE A WHILE, AND WE WILL BRING THAT BACK AT THE END TO SEE WHAT WE HAVE COME UP WITH TO ADJUST OUR NUMBERS . SO, WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. >> MAY I BE EXCUSED? >> YES, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> SO, MOVING INTO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, THE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AMENDMENTS FOR INCLUSION. I KNOW I HAVE PASSED OUT SOME AND WE POSTED SOME AMENDMENTS TO BE VOTED ON. THIS IS SOME OF THE STUFF MY OFFICE AND TEAM HAVE BEEN WORKING ON FOR MANY, MANY HOURS. THESE ARE VOTES THAT WE WILL TAKE. IT IS GOING TO BE KIND OF TEDIOUS. THESE ARE NOT JUST THINGS I AM ASKING YOU TO DO, WE WILL VOTE ON THEM ALL. IF YOU GO TO PAGE G81 IN YOUR POCKETS , I THINK PEYTON PASSED THESE OUT TO EVERYONE IN A FOLDER, THAT FRONTPAGE, THE TOP PORTION WHERE THE FIRST LINE IS IS ALREADY INCLUDED IN YOUR BUDGET FROM THE AUDITORS OFFICE. I WOULD ASK FOR ADDITIONAL REVENUE. I AM ASKING TO TAKE FROM FUND 13 THE LEASED VEHICLES FLEET SALES, THAT IS JUST MONEY THAT HAS BEEN SITTING THERE. THE FUND 13, BOTH THE WAGON SETTLEMENT, THE 147,000, THE GENERAL SPECIAL REVENUE, THERE IS A SPECIAL REVENUE ACCOUNTS WITH $1.8 MILLION IN IT. WE ARE ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL $1 MILLION. I AM TOLD THAT THERE IS SOME INTEREST THAT HASN'T BEEN DISPERSED BACK INTO THE APARTMENT, IT IS THE REASON I WOULD SUGGEST WE LEAVE THE 800 IN THERE. AND FUND 13, THE REST OF THE SALE OF ASSETS THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY, WHICH WOULD BRING OUR TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDS TO DO -- THE ONE 47,003 35, THAT IS INCLUDING OUR BALANCE, THE FUNDS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET WITH THE 3.5% VOTER APPROVED. I WOULD MAKE A MOTION FOR US TO TRANSFER THOSE OTHER FUNDS TO HELP OUR FUND BALANCE. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. FOR THOSE FOUR FUND 13 LEASED VEHICLES, MULTI-WAGON SETTLEMENT, GENERAL SPECIAL REVENUE -- >> 13 AND 14. ASK THOSE FOUR FUNDS, A TOTAL OF $1,378,000. >> YOU KEEP ON SAYING FUND 13, BUT IT IS 13 AND 14. >> OH, I'M SORRY, I JUST STARTED READING IT, THEN I STOPPED. YES, BUT THAT TOTAL AMOUNT, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND GRADE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? >> I'VE GOT A QUESTION. HOW DO WE KNOW THE BALANCES IN THOSE ACCOUNTS? >> TERESA HAS LOOKED UP THE BALANCES , AND THAT'S HOW WE CAME UP WITH THAT. >> WHICH ONE, ALL OF THEM? >> WHAT ARE THE BALANCES? >> THE FIRST TWO, THOSE ARE THE ACTUAL BALANCES THAT REMAIN. >> DESCRIBED THEM. >> THE LEASED VEHICLES FLEET SALES, THE 60 5K IS WHAT IS ACTUALLY AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW IN THAT ACCOUNT. THE VOLKSWAGEN SETTLEMENT, THE ONE 47, IS THE BALANCE AFTER WE HAVE PAID THE ATTORNEY FEES, SO THAT IS AN ACCURATE BALANCE. THE GENERAL SPECIAL REVENUE ACCOUNT HAD A BALANCE OF 1.8. WE ARE ONLY REQUESTING TO USE 1 MILLION OF THAT ACCOUNT. AND THEN THE SALE OF ASSETS FUND 14, THE 160 5006 70 WILL BE THE TOTAL BALANCE OF WHAT'S REMAINING. THE TOTAL IS 1.14, SO WE ARE USING THE ENTIRE AMOUNT. BECAUSE THE 1 MILLION IS ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE TOP. >> SO, ON THE SPECIAL REVENUE, WE HAVE A .8 -- 800,000 IN THE BALANCE, RIGHT? >> BUT WE ARE TOLD SOME OF THAT HAS TO BE TRANSFERRED BACK TO DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE OWED. >> FOR ALL OF IT, BECAUSE WE CERTAINLY COULD USE IT RIGHT NOW. >> YES. >> THE ABOUT THE ONES ON 14 AND 13 AT THE TOP? YOU KEEP SAYING [02:00:02] 13, BUT YOU'VE GOT THE SALE OF ASSETS, THE WAIVER. >> THE SALE OF ASSETS IS 1.165. 1 MILLION IS ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET. >> SO, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THAT 1 MILLION -- >> IT'S 1 MILLION ALREADY INCLUDED, WE ARE TAKING THE REMAINING OF THAT. THE 165,006 70 IS ALREADY INCLUDED IN THAT. >> SORRY. >> AND 1115 WAIVERS, THAT IS ALMOST DEPLETING THAT AS WELL. I THINK THERE IS ABOUT .8. >> YES, WE ARE JUST TRYING TO USE 1.5 OF IT. THEN THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT, THAT IS THE BALANCE AVAILABLE. >> I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE. GO AHEAD. AND WHY NOT THE WHOLE 1.8? >> 1115 WAIVER? THE SPECIAL REVENUE. ON THE 1.8, COMMISSIONERS, BECAUSE $800,000 ARE LEAVING BECAUSE INTEREST HAS NOT BEEN ALLOCATED TO ALL THE SPECIAL REVENUE APARTMENTS -- >> ON THE 1115 WAIVER FORM. YOU SAID WE ARE USING 1.5, WHY NOT 1.8? >> THAT'S RIGHT, THAT'S A GOOD POINT, WE WILL TAKE IT. >> I'M JUST ASKING WHAT THE LOGIC WAS THERE, BECAUSE THAT WAS A MOTION MADE, FOR BUDGET SUPPLEMENTS, AND THIS IS A BUDGET SUPPLEMENT. >> YOU CAN USE IT, BUT YOU NEED TO HAVE SOME AVAILABLE FOR OTHER THINGS? >> ANOTHER $300,000. ON OUR INCLUSION, THE $300,000 FROM THE 1115 WAIVER. >> SO, IT WOULD BE 1.8, WHICH FOR NOW -- >> DON'T CHANGE IT ON THE TOP, CHANGE IT ON THE SECOND. THESE ARE ADDITIONS, THE TOP IS ALREADY ON THE BUDGET. >> THE FUNDING FOR NOW. YEAH. I MEAN, DO I NEED TO MAKE THAT AS A MOTION? I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND YOUR PROPOSAL TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL $300,000 FROM THE 1115 WAIVER REMAINING BALANCE. >> SECOND. >> THE REMAINING FUNDS AVAILABLE. >> THAT'S FAIR. >> I WILL AMEND MY MOTION WITH THE REMAINING FUNDS AVAILABLE WOULD BE TAKEN FROM THE 1115 WAIVER FUND AND PUT INTO JUDGES PROPOSAL. >> YES. >> IT MAY BE 301, IT MAY BE 272. WHATEVER THE REMAINING FUNDS ARE. ALL REMAINING FUNDS. THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE AMENDMENT TO MY PROPOSAL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. NOW, I WILL MAKE THE MOTION OR WE HAVE A MOTION ALREADY. >> ON THE .8 OVER HERE, YOU SAID TO USE ALL THE .8 OR IS THERE GOING TO BE A BALANCE? >> ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE 1115 WAIVER? OH, THE INTEREST THAT GOES BACK. REDISTRIBUTED TO ALL THE SPECIAL REVENUE DEPARTMENTS. >> SO, YOU ARE SAYING THAT HAS TO BE DONE LATER, YOU JUST HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT IS. >> RIGHT, IT IS GOING TO BE DISTRIBUTED TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS. >> I SEE WHERE YOU'RE GOING HERE, TOO, I THINK. YOU COULD SAY WHATEVER REMAINING FUNDS AFTER THE INTEREST IS DISTRIBUTED WOULD GO TOWARDS THIS AS WELL. >> OKAY. >> SO, YOU WOULD MAKE THAT MOTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION ] FROM THIS GENERAL FUNDS, AND WHATEVER THE BALANCE IS, GOES BACK INTO THIS ACCOUNT. >> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DISTRIBUTE THE ADDITIONAL MONEY AFTER THE INTEREST IS TRANSFERRED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. ARE THERE ANY OTHER -- >> NOPE. >> DO WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO PASS THESE? OH, I MAKE A MOTION TO TRANSFER ALL OF THESE FUNDS TO HELP OUR FUND BALANCE. I ALREADY MADE THE MOTION. >> I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. [02:05:03] >> SORRY, YES, OKAY. >> I WAS JUST AMENDMENTS TO THE MOTION YOU ALREADY MADE. >> WAIT, FIRST, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR -- >> JUDGE, HE HAS A QUESTION. >> COUNTY ROAD AND BRIDGE, >> THAT'S NEXT, THAT'S NOT THIS. WE ARE DOING THE TOP PART. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING. >> I MISUNDERSTOOD THAT, TOO. SO BASICALLY, WE ARE JUST MAKING A MOTION. I THOUGHT YOUR MOTION WAS TO PASS EVERYTHING. >> NO, NO, WE ARE PASSING IN SECTIONS. THIS IS ADDITIONAL REVENUE. >> SO, YOUR MOTION IS JUST TO PASS THE PART WHERE IT SAYS UP TO TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDS AND WE AMENDED THOSE? >> YES. THIS IS JUST THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE SECTION. AND MY MOTION TO PASS, JOHN SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. NOW, THESE ARE SUGGESTED CUTS. AND I WILL GO THROUGH THESE BEFORE WE START MAKING ANY AMENDMENTS. THIS IS FUND 12, THE ROAD AND BRIDGE TAKING 1 MILLION. THEIR BUDGET WOULD STILL GIVE THEM 7 MILLION, BUT THERE BALANCE RIGHT NOW AT THE END OF THE YEAR, THEY HAVE $421,000 IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THEY HAVE 1.56 IN ENGINEERING, AND THEY HAVE $3,300,000 IN THE ROAD AND BRIDGE. SO, WE COULD ACTUALLY TAKE EVEN -- I THOUGHT 1 MILLION WAS BEING FAIR TO TRY TO HELP US OUT TO GET CUTS. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE WITHOUT FUNDS. THIS ISN'T GOING TO HINDER THEIR FUNCTION WHEN THERE BALANCE IS ALREADY IN SEPTEMBER TO THOSE ACCOUNTS. I WANTED TO BE CLEAR THAT I AM NOT STEALING FROM ANY, THAT IS JUST OUR BIGGEST ACCOUNT, AND I GOT WITH COASTAL PARKS AND WITH PUBLIC WORKS TO TRY TO ASK THEM TO HELP ME TO MAKE THESE CUTS, BECAUSE THEY ARE OUR BIGGEST DEPARTMENTS, AND ALSO, I LET THEM KNOW IN THE FUTURE WITH CONTRACTS THEY HAVE, THE MORE THAT THEY CAN WORK TOGETHER AND WE CAN DO OUR STUFF INTERNALLY , AND I'M SAYING THIS IN PUBLIC AT THE BUDGET HEARING BECAUSE I WANT TO REITERATE THAT, NEXT YEAR, BUDGETS ARE GOING TO BE TIGHT. WE DON'T WANT YOU TO JUST GO OUT AND HIRE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN'T DO WITHIN, BECAUSE YOU HAVE A CONTRACT WITH IT. IF OUR GUYS CAN TAKE CARE OF IT, WE NEED TO DO IT. BUT THAT'S THE FIRST ONE. WE TRANSFER 60,000 EVERY YEAR, THEY HAVE THE GRANT THAT IS 100,000 BUT EVERYTHING THAT AIRPORT DOES WITH THESE EXPENSES IS ALLOWABLE UNDER THAT GRANT. THEY NEED TO UTILIZE THE GRANT THIS NEXT YEAR, AND WE HAVE TO MAKE THE TRANSFER. AND ON PARK, 73,000, HALF OF THAT, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THAT IS THEIR VEHICLES. THEY WON'T BE GETTING ANY NEW VEHICLES THIS YEAR, THAT WAS A SMALLER CUT TO THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE PARKS, THEY ARE FULLY FUNDED BY THE GENERAL FUND, AND THEY DID GET HIT SOME OF OUR STUFF, SO I WAS WORKING WITH EVERYBODY, TRYING TO BE FAIR AND BALANCED. COASTAL PARKS, I MET WITH THEM, THIS WAS AN AMOUNT THEY CAME UP WITH. THEY HAVE SOME TRANSFERS AND POSITIONS IN THE BACK. I THINK IT SHOWS SOMETHING IN HERE, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THEY HAVE NET ZERO. I WORKED WITH THEM AND SAT DOWN FOR THESE CUTS TO COME FROM THE TRANSFERS, AND THIS WAS WHAT WE FELT LIKE WAS A GOOD NUMBER. UNLESS YOU WANT TO DO MORE, UDG PRETTY, SO -- IF Y'ALL CAN FIND MORE CUTS, THIS IS ONLY THE TRANSFERS, THIS IS NOT THE EXPENSES YET, SO LET'S BE CLEAR. THIS IS JUST WHAT THE GENERAL FUND TRANSFERS TO THESE DEPARTMENTS. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. MAYBE A GENIE QUESTION. YOU CAN'T USE THOSE MONIES BECAUSE THEY RUIN A BRIDGE. BY LAW, THOSE MONIES THAT WE DON'T THEM ANYWHERE ELSE? BECAUSE I THINK THOSE ARE THE FEES WE COLLECT. $2 MILLION THAT WE COLLECTED IN FEES. SO, CAN WE USE THOSE MONIES SOMEWHERE ELSE? ROAD AND BRIDGE. CAN WE CLARIFY THAT? >> YEAH, IT IS GOING TO DEPEND ON WHERE THE MONEY CAME FROM , GOING INTO ROAD AND BRIDGE, I BELIEVE. BUT SO, TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, >> WE DID CHECK, THE GENERAL FUND IS SET TO TRANSFER $2.2 MILLION FROM THE GENERAL FUND, THAT'S WHY WE ONLY TOOK $1 MILLION FROM IT, BUT THAT IS THE GENERAL FUND TRANSFER. THAT IS NOT ROAD AND BRIDGE. >> WHERE DOES IT COME FROM, JUDGE? YOU'VE GOT TO PUT IT IN GENERAL FUNDS -- >> [02:10:07] BEFORE, MANY, MANY YEARS AGO, THE SALES TAX WAS ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE ROAD AND BRIDGE, AND THE PREVIOUS LAW STATED THAT WE CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR THAT THERE. WE HAVE GOT TO ACCOUNT FOR THE GENERAL FUND THAT WE TRANSFER THE $2 MILLION FOR THAT. >> IT IS NOT BY LAW THAT YOU HAVE TO SEND IT. >> IT THAT WAY? >> WELL, IF I AM GOING TO ANSWER THAT, I WILL HAVE TO TRACK BACK THE CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED, BUT I BELIEVE THE JUDGE IS SAYING SHE HAS ALREADY DONE IT, SO I DON'T KNOW. WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU WANT US TO DO WITH THIS MONEY? >> BRIDGE OR SOMEWHERE, YOU KNOW? JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE, WE DON'T WANT TO OWE MONEY BACK , BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PAY IT BACK. >> I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY. >> IS THAT SOMETHING MY OFFICE CAN COMMUNICATE WITH PEYTON ABOUT? >> YES. TODAY. >> RIGHT NOW. >> SO, WE WOULD PASS THIS CONTINGENT UPON IT BEING ALLOWED. BUT WE DID CHECK BACK AND IT WAS 2.2 THAT TRANSFERRED FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THIS, SO IT IS GENERAL FUND MONEY, THE ONLY REASON WE DIDN'T TOUCH THIS. YES. GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU, JUDGE. SO, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE MOST OF THE DEPARTMENTS HERE THAT YOU ARE PROPOSING REPRESENTED , SO, I GUESS THIS IS THE SPEAK NOW OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE PARK. SO, SPEAK NOW OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE, BECAUSE THESE ARE THE RECOMMENDATIONS. >> I MET WITH THEM. >> I CAN WORK WITH IT. AS FAR AS COASTAL PARKS, WE CAN WORK WITH IT. WE HAVE THE BENEFIT OF MOST OF MY CAPITAL PROJECTS RIGHT NOW BEEN 100% GRANT FUNDED WITH WE HAD THE BENEFIT OF GENERATING A LOT OF REVENUE, WHICH HELPS US A LOT. SO YOU KNOW, THE JUDGE ASKED ME TO GET TO A NUMBER. I ACTUALLY GOT HIGHER THAN THAT NUMBER. I WAS TRYING TO ZERO OUT ABOUT 50 K THAT WAS IN 182 FOR THE PIER, BECAUSE IT SHOULD HAVE ANYTHING, IT IS NOT GOING TO GET USED. I GOT YOU UP TO 404, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE LANDED AT, BUT I CAN LIVE WITH THIS. AND YOU DID GIVE ME AN EQUIPMENT ALLOTMENT. I NEED TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT, SEE WHERE THAT IS AT, WHERE THAT IS GOING, AND THAT HELPS. SO, I MEAN, THE CUTS WE MADE LAST YEAR, AND I THINK I SAID IT IN MY BUDGET PRESENTATION, I WAS ALREADY $100,000 AHEAD OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR'S REVENUE WITH NO CUTS. SO, I SAY THIS JOKINGLY, BUT I AM GOING TO MAKE BRICKS WITHOUT STRAW AND WE ARE GOING TO DO A GOOD JOB OF IT, SO I AM FINE. BUT HE MENTIONED AN IMPORTANT PART. I THINK YOUR BUDGET, COMPARED TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS, YOU HAVE ACCESS TO A LOT OF FUNDING THAT DOESN'T TRADITIONALLY COME FROM GENERAL FUND, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS HOW YOU'RE KIND OF ABLE TO OFFSET -- ESPECIALLY WITH CAPITAL PROJECTS. EVEN WHEN WE HAD THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT, WE WEREN'T PART OF THAT. AND THAT WAS FINE BECAUSE I HAD MONEY I COULD USE FOR THESE PROJECTS, I HAD OTHER GRANT MONEY. >> AGAIN, HE MADE ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT APARTMENT CUTS LAST YEAR, TOO. SO, THIS IS TWO YEARS IN A ROW , I'M SURE HOPING EVERYBODY WILL REMEMBER THAT WHEN WE MOVE FORWARD AND NEED SOME HELP ON SOMETHING SOMEWHERE. >> BUT I AM GOOD. AND I'M GLAD Y'ALL WORK WITH ME, I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT, BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN MANY YEARS WHERE I JUST DO A PROPOSAL AND SOMEBODY GOES AND MAKES A SECRET SAUCE AND WE GET WHAT WE GET AND DON'T THROW A FIT. I AM REALLY ENCOURAGED BY THE INPUT THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR, AND THE BACK AND FORTH. >> AND APPRECIATE THAT. >> AND ONE IS HERE, HE CAN ASK ABOUT TAX ASSESSOR WHO IS NOT HERE RIGHT NOW, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE ALMOST EVERY YEAR, YOU WERE TRYING TO DO MORE WITH LESS. YOU ARE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO US MANY TIMES AS WELL. JUST BRING THAT UP, BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF DEPARTMENTS -- ALMOST ALL OF THEM ARE MAKING CUTS IN SOME WAY AND SOME FORM, SO, THIS IS SIGNIFICANT. I MEAN, IT IS TO GET US TO OUR POINT, AND THE JUDGE AND STUFF THAT WORKED REALLY HARD TRYING TO FIND THOSE CUTS, BUT -- >> WE HAVE GOT PAGES TO GO, AND IF ANY OF THIS GETS ADDED TO, THIS PAGE ALONE STILL HAS 3 1/2 MILLION DOLLARS . YEAH. >> SO, UNLIKE THE COASTAL PARKS, WE ARE THE INLET PARKS, SO WE PROVIDE ALL YOUR OTHER OPERATIONAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, EVACUATIONS, THAT KIND OF STUFF. THE ONLY THING THAT I SAW WITHIN THE BUDGET THAT IS LATER ON , THAT IT WAS A FIRST-TIME DEAL FOR ME IT WAS THE CUTTING OF A VAN DRIVER POSITION, THAT IS THE ONLY [02:15:02] THING. >> YOU HAD TWO AVAILABLE AND THERE WAS ONE, THAT HAS BEEN A LONG TIME OPEN, WE CUT THAT. IT IS GOING TO BE VOTED ON LATER, WE ARE NOT DOING THAT TODAY, BUT YES. >> THAT IS ONLY THING THAT WE HAVE ISSUES WITH, BUT OTHERWISE, WE ARE WILLING -- >> AND WE ARE GOING TO VOTE ON THAT, ADDING ANOTHER PERSON TO YOUR THING. YOURS WAS REALLY PRETTY MUCH A NET ZERO ONE WE ARE TRYING NOT TO AFFECT YOU TOO MUCH, BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO FUNDS TO REALLY WIGGLE WITH, SO YES. OTHER THAN THE VEHICLE. LAUGHTER ] >> LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION. IS THERE ANYWAY WE CAN USE THE MOST FUNDS FROM INTO THE INLAND PARKS OR OTHER AREAS? >> WELL, I HAVE GOT THEM ALL TIED UP IN PROJECTS RIGHT NOW. >> I'M JUST ASKING, CAN THOSE FUNDS BE USED SOMEWHERE ELSE? >> I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK ON THE STATUTE ON THAT AND WORK WITH ALEX, AND GET BACK WITH YOU ON THAT. >> THAT SAID IT COULD BE USED FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, LIKE WHEN WE USED THOSE FUNDS TO REBUILD AFTER HURRICANE HARVEY, BECAUSE WHERE SELF-INSURED. SO, IT MADE SENSE TO USE THOSE THERE. I MEAN, THOSE FUNDS ARE REALLY TIED TO HURRICANE PROTECTION, ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, YOU KNOW, FLOOD PREVENTION, STUFF LIKE THAT, BUT IT IS ALL TIED TO THE COASTAL ZONE. BUT I MEAN, I WILL LOOK AT IT. I WILL LOOK AT IT. I DON'T WANT TO TELL YOU SOMETHING WRONG. >> APPRECIATE IT. >> ONE? YOU ARE UP ON YOUR MILLION, YOUR TRANSFER, IS THAT TIED TO MONEY THAT YOU CANNOT TOUCH? >> YEAH, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. IS THAT CORRECT, JENNY? >> THEY ARE CHECKING ON IT. IT IS A GENERAL FUND TRANSFER, IT COMES FROM THE GENERAL FUND. THE SALE OF -- WE WERE TOLD BEFORE, THEY DID HAVE THAT BEFORE IN THE LEGISLATURE, THEY CHANGED IT WHERE YOU CAN TAKE THE LICENSE REGISTRATION FEE -- SALES TAX, WHATEVER, AND THAT IT CAME FROM -- IT HAD TO GO INTO THE GENERAL FUND, AND THE GENERAL FUND COULD TRANSFER, IT DID NOT SAY IT HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED. YES. >> YES, MA'AM, I THINK IT WAS JUST ONE COMMENT I HEARD ABOUT THE 1.5, DO WE HAVE 1.5? >> IN YOUR BUDGET RIGHT NOW AT THE END OF THE YEAR IN 1210. IN OH 54, OF THE YEAR. >> WE TRANSFER 100% OF THE COSTS FOR 0121 EVERY YEAR, SO, IN THE '24-'25 BUDGET, WE HAVE A TRANSFER GOING 201 210 FOR ENGINEERING TO COVER THE ACTUAL EXPENSES INCURRED IN THE 20 -- IN THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING 930 '23 POINT >> SO, YOU DON'T TRANSFER IT UNTIL THE END OF THE YEAR. HOW MUCH IS THAT AMOUNT THAT'S GOING TO TRANSFER? >> WHATEVER IS ACTUALLY SPENT -- >> I AM ASKING HOW MUCH RIGHT NOW IS SHOWING IN THERE. >> IT IS ON PAGE -- I WANT TO SAY IT IS UP AT THE VERY FRONT. I BELIEVE IT IS ON PAGE -- SIX? THE AMOUNT FOR THE '22-'23 IS $617,801 . ON TOP OF THE $2.2 MILLION THAT WE HAD IN THE PROPOSED. IT WILL NOW BE $1.2 MILLION. >> OKAY, ALL RIGHT. AND THEN, SO, >> THE 1 MILLION THAT IS BEING REMOVED, WHAT IS THAT? >> WHERE IS THE 1 MILLION? >> A TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND WHERE YOU GET 2.2, WE WOULD MAKE IT 1.2 TRANSFER INSTEAD OF 2.2 AND TO THE ROAD FUND 12. >> IS IT GOING TO BE OUR MATERIALS? >> I THINK THAT THAT IS UP TO YOU TO REALLOCATE BUDGET AS NEEDED. IT IS JUST YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REDUCE TOTAL EXPENSES OR FUND BALANCE. >> IT WAS THE ROAD AND BRIDGE, TO SEE THE BALANCE FOR 2023 -'24, WE ARE ASSUMING A FUND BALANCE IN OWEN 21. >> YOU WOULDN'T BE AFFECTED BY THE 1 MILLION NOT BEING TRANSFERRED IN. YES. AND YOU WERE OUT OF TOWN LAST WEEK. I MET WITH YOU THE WEEK BEFORE, BUT YOU'RE OUT OF TOWN, SO YES. [02:20:01] >> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THEN I WOULD MOVE TO ALLOW THE CUTS TO THOSE DEPARTMENTS , THE TRANSFERS OUT. THE 1 MILLION . 1,527,220 . LET ME SPIT THAT OUT CORRECTLY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. TO ALLOW THOSE TRANSFER -- CUTS TO THE TRANSFERS. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES. THEN THE NEXT -- THE EXPENSES. IF YOU GO TO THE EXPENSES , I.T. HAD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, 50,000. WE LOOKED AT CUTTING BACK. THE CAPITAL OUTLAY , CUTTING $241,095 , THE BALANCE WOULD STILL BE $285,000 FOR COMPUTERS OR WHATEVER. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION, THIS IS THE CONTINGENCY THAT WE HAD, I BELIEVE $5 MILLION? TERESA, YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS OVER? MY NOTES ARE NOT REAL CLEAR ON THIS ONE. THE EXPENSES CUTS. >> $3,423,000, WE WOULD ONLY BE BUDGETING $2 MILLION IN OUR CONTINGENCY FOR THE '24-'25 YEAR. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> IT CAME TO ME. 2 MILLION AND A CONTINGENCY THAT WE WOULD BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR. AND WE NEED TO HAVE CONTINGENCY, BY ALL MEANS. YES. SO, I WOULD MOVE TO PASS THAT. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED , SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES. THIS GETS US TO THE BOTTOM OF THAT PAGE, THEN WE WOULD GO TO G8, PAGE SIX . >> A JUDGE, IF I COULD JUST MAKE A COMMENT, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT ONCE AGAIN, WE HAVE JUST MADE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF CUTS THAT DO NOT AFFECT JOBS , SERVICES, ANYTHING ELSE . SO ONCE AGAIN, THIS COURT HAS DONE EVERYTHING IT CAN IN REGARDS -- WELL, NOT EVERYTHING, THAT IS TOO BROAD, BUT ONCE AGAIN, MADE SIGNIFICANT CUTS IN THIS BUDGET AND STILL SHOWING A DECREASE IN THE FUND BALANCE. SO, THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT STEP. WE HAVE, AGAIN, CUT MILLIONS, AND YOU'RE STILL GOING TO SEE A DECREASE IN THE FUND BALANCE, BUT IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS THAT WE ARE NOT JUST DOING WHAT WE ARE DOING WITHOUT MAKING CUTS AND TIGHTENING THEIR BELTS AS WELL. THANK YOU. >> NOW, I WOULD ASK YOU TO MOVE TO PAGE G8-SIX. THESE ARE INCREASES IN THE BUDGET. IF YOU LOOK AT THIS PAGE, IT SHOULD BE IN YOUR PACKETS, THAT ONE, GUESS. I KNOW IT WAS ON ITEM NUMBER ONE AND WE WILL HAVE TO VOTE ON THESE INDIVIDUALLY AS WELL. VECTOR CONTROL AS BEEN BROUGHT UP MANY TIMES. WE LOOKED AT LAST YEAR'S BUDGET, IT WAS 233, SO WE PUT THE AMOUNT IN. I KNOW YOU TALKED ABOUT IT BEING 290 OR -- X ONLY REASON WHY I DID THIS, THIS WAS A BALANCE OF LAST YEAR, BUT WITH THE CONTINUOUS PART OF THAT 100 EMPLOYEES, WE SAID EARLIER LITTLE BIT OF AN INCREASED COST, 230, SO I WOULD RECOMMEND 250. >> CAN ASK A QUESTION? >> YES, GO AHEAD. >> THE BEING THAT WE ARE 3.5 MILLION IN THE WHOLE , EVEN AFTER CUTS, GOING BACK AND ADDING A LOT OF THIS STUFF MAKES ME ALSO A LITTLE NAUSEOUS. SO, WE ADDED ROUGHLY -- LET'S SAY SOMEWHERE IN THE 300,000 RANGE AND WHATEVER THE EXTRA INTEREST RANGE, SO EVEN WITH THAT, THIS IS ABOUT 3.2 MILLION, BUT IF WE GO INTO THESE, IF WE DO ALL OF THESE, IT IS GOING TO DECREASE OUR FUND BALANCE EVEN MORE, RIGHT? SO, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE THAT AS A RUNNING TOTAL. AND TO ME, YOU KNOW, I GUESS ON VECTOR CONTROL, I'M GOING TO ASK -- AND I KNOW THIS IS [02:25:03] KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD AND I HATE TO DO IT, BUT EVERY DOLLAR WE SPEND ON THIS PAGE MAKES IT WORSE ON THE PRIOR PAGE, SO I'M GOING TO LOOK AT THINGS. IS THERE ANY MONEY LEFT THAT COULD BE USED FOR THIS ON A ONE-TIME BASIS? AND I GET THAT THAT KICKS THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD, BUT LOOKING AT THE FACT THAT WE ARE ALREADY GOING TO BE DIGGING INTO OUR RESERVES BY OVER $3 MILLION, I MEAN, I'VE GOT TO AT LEAST ASK AT THIS POINT. >> THERE IS NOT, AND YOU WILL SEE WHY SHORTLY, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE ANOTHER REQUIREMENT THAT IS A $665 -- $665,000 REQUIREMENT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT COMPUTERS THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE ASKING -- >> AND VEHICLES. >> NO, VEHICLES ARE ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET, WHAT'S PRESENTED, THAT'S NOT AN ADDITIONAL THING. >> ON THE PAGE, IT SAYS LAW ENFORCEMENT VEHICLES/WINDOWS 11. IS THAT JUST A TYPO? >> IT IS FOR THEIR VEHICLES. >> NO, COMPUTER IN THEIR VEHICLES. >> YES, COMPUTERS IN THEIR VEHICLES. >> BUT THEN THE LEASING OF THE NEW VEHICLES -- >> THAT IS ALREADY INCLUDED. >> SO THEN, WHAT IS THAT? BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, TOO. I'M SORRY, LAW-ENFORCEMENT PEOPLE, BECAUSE THAT IS A 606 $5000 UPGRADE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT VEHICLES? AND THEN ALSO, WHAT ABOUT 150 FOR LEASING VEHICLES THAT WE PUT IN THE BUDGET, WHAT WAS THAT NUMBER? >> IT'S ALREADY INCLUDED. >> ASKING FOR THE AMOUNT. >> I GOT TO LOOK AT MY -- >> >> IT'S $141,699 . >> SAY THAT AGAIN. >> NUMBER 19 ON PAGE TWO , ARE THEY ALREADY INCLUDED? >> THE LAW ENFORCEMENT VEHICLE LEASES FOR -- THERE ARE GOING TO BE EIGHT FOR THE SHERIFF AND ONE FOR EACH OF THE CONSTABLES. IT IS A TOTAL OF $141,699. >> NO ONE ELSE IS GETTING VEHICLES? >> NO ONE ELSE IS GETTING VEHICLES, JUST LAW-ENFORCEMENT. LET'S PLEASE MAKE SURE LAW-ENFORCEMENT NOSE, AGAIN, BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTAND THE TOTAL PICTURE, EVEN IN THIS BUDGET, WE ARE PUTTING IN $665,000 +140, THAT IS ABOUT $800,000 OF NEW MONEY TO SHOW OUR COMMITMENT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT. >> THERE IS MORE. THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE -- WE INCREASED THEIR BUDGET 100,000 DOLLARS FOR TRANSPORTATION OF INMATES. WE INCREASED THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT -- $37,000. >> THAT'S NOT ON HERE. >> THAT'S OKAY. >> THERE ARE OTHER INCREASES. >> THE SHERIFF IS ALSO USING HIS FUNDS. >> YEAH, THE SHERIFF IS USING SOME OF HIS. INMATE TRANSFER IS NOT FOR THEM, THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO DO AS A COUNTY. BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS I GUESS THEY ASKED FOR AND THEY DESERVE TO GET, SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY KNOW THAT. OKAY, THAT IS ON THE NEXT PAGE, SO THAT EATS UP ALL THE EXTRA MONEY IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, JUDGE? >> IF WE GET A VOTE, I WOULD LIKE TO USE THAT MONEY TO PAY FOR THAT BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A HIGH EXPENSE. >> I GET IT AND IT IS NECESSARY AND IT IS NEEDED, I AGREE, BUT -- >> >> DOES THAT TAKE UP ALL THE COUNTYWIDE ARPA? >> IT'S A LITTLE BIT SHORT FROM WHAT WE NEED. >> WHAT WERE SOME OF MY FINDINGS GOING INTO, TERESA? >> YES. BUT THE COUNTYWIDE PORTION -- WHERE IS THAT AGENDA ITEM? THE COUNTYWIDE PORTION IS ABOUT 585 THAT'S REMAINING. IN THE ARPA MONEY. THAT IS THE TOTAL. AND WE WANT TO APPLY THAT TO THE LAW-ENFORCEMENT UPGRADE. >> WHERE DOES THE REST OF IT COME FROM, THE 665? >> IT IS GOING TO ALLOCATE TOWARDS THAT PROJECT AS WELL. >> GOT IT, SO THE ANSWER TO MY VECTOR CONTROL QUESTION IS WE DON'T HAVE ANY. ALL RIGHT, AND THEN ON THE PERSONNEL ONE, IS THAT WHERE WE WOULD -- OR THIS IS JUST GENERAL FUND WE ARE DEALING WITH? >> WE CAN IF WE WANT TO. >> BECAUSE IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE GENERAL FUND. BECAUSE HERS DOESN'T AFFECT THE GENERAL FUND. >> NET ZERO, IT WILL BE A SLIGHT INCREASE, BUT IT WILL TRANSFER RECOVERY. >> MAKE THE MOTION TO DO WHAT IT IS THAT CARE PROPOSED , THAT DOESN'T AFFECT THE GENERAL FUND, THAT COMES OUT OF HER -- [02:30:01] >> THE RECORDS MANAGEMENT, AND THAT TRANSFER WILL CONTINUE EVERY YEAR. >> AND INCREASE THE PAY SCALE FROM 22 TO 24. SO, THAT IS MY MOTION THERE. THAT HAS A NET ZERO EFFECT ON THE GENERAL FUND. YEP, THAT IS MY MOTION. LET'S WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND? SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? GO AHEAD. >> ON THE VECTOR CONTROL -- >> THIS IS JUST ON CARES. HE CUT AWAY. SHE IS PAYING FOR ALL OF IT. IT IS NOT COSTING ANYTHING. YES. SO, COMMISSIONER CHESNEY MADE THE MOTION, COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANNIE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. NOW, ON VECTOR CONTROL, COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ, YOU WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING, SORRY. WE ARE ON NUMBER ONE, VECTOR CONTROL. WE ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE ONE AT A TIME. >> ON THE VECTOR CONTROL, WE COULD ALSO PAY THAT UNDER THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT FUNDS. >> WE CAN'T BECAUSE WE ALREADY PASSED THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT BUDGET. THEIR BUDGET SPECIFICALLY DID NOT FUND. WE DON'T GET THE MONEY FROM THERE, THEY'RE WANTING TO DO THERE IS -- >> HE IS TALKING ABOUT THE 1.7. >> COULD DO IT. >> THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT IS PLANNING TO TAKE THEIR THINGS BACK AND DO THEM DIRECTLY, IS THAT CORRECT? >> NO, JUDGE, HE IS SAYING WHAT WE GIVE TO THE CITY-COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT. BUT THE POINT OF THAT IS THAT ISSUE IS NOT TO BE DECIDED UNTIL NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER. RELATED TO THE CITY-COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT WOULD BE DISCUSSED TODAY, BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY TABLED ALL OF THAT UNTIL NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER, SO THAT SHOULDN'T EVEN BE ON THE -- >> SO, IF I WANT TO PAY FOR SOMETHING MYSELF IN THE ARPA, I NEED TO PUT IT IN HERE? >> YES, IF YOU WANT TO PAY FOR SOMETHING, YOU CAN. WE ARE ON VECTOR RIGHT NOW. LET'S GO THROUGH THE LIST. YOURS IS ON THE PAGES. YOUR STUFF IS ON HERE. >> IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE WITH VECTOR CONTROL, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO ADD THIS TO OUR EXPENSES IN THE BUDGET. SO -- >> OKAY. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO INCLUDE THE $250,000 FOR VECTOR CONTROL TO AFFECT OUR BUDGET? NO, THAT WILL BE FROM THE GENERAL FUND. BUT IF YOU HAVE ARPA MONEY, YOU WANT TO PAY FOR IT -- I DON'T THINK YOU DO. I DON'T THINK ANY OF US REALLY DO. NONE OF US DO, SO IT WILL BE A GENERAL FUND EXPENSE. IF I HAVE A MOTION -- IF I DON'T GET A MOTION, WE WILL MOVE ONTO THE NEXT ITEM. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANNIE OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. >> AND THEY ARE ADDING ALL OF THIS UP AS WE GO. THAT IS $250,000 MORE ON OUR EXPENSES. >> ANYTHING WE PASS ON THIS PAGE OR ANY OTHER PAGE COSTS US MONEY. >> I HAVE SOME MORE CUTS. >> SAID SOME OF THEM WERE IN THE 3%, THE INCREASE THIS YEAR. SO, WE HAD TO DO $250,000, SO IT IS NOT 233 THAT WE JUST VOTED ON, IT IS $250,000 FOR THAT BUDGET. >> CAN I ASK A QUESTION, SORRY. I'M TRYING TO DO A RUNNING TOTAL IN MY HEAD THE BEST I CAN. WHAT IS YOUR GUT THAT THE ADDITIONAL INTEREST MIGHT BE AFTER WE PAY OUT ALL THE DEPARTMENTS? BECAUSE I'M JUST TRYING TO KEEP -- >> FROM THAT $800,000? >> COULD I SAY MAYBE 100 MIGHT BE LEFT OVER? AND NOT IN BLOOD. >> I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HAS THE TOTAL. >> I WANT TO KEEP REMINDING EVERYBODY OF HOW MUCH IN THE WHOLE -- >> WE HAVE PROBABLY INCLUDED IT ALREADY, WHATEVER IT IS. YOU SAID THE BALANCE AVAILABLE. >> ON THE LAST PAGE THAT WE PASS, IT IS $3.5 MILLION THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GO INTO THE WHOLE TO GET OUR RESERVES, THEN WE ADDED ROUGHLY $300,000 BACK FROM THE 1115 WAIVER, SO THAT TOOK US ROUGHLY TO 3.28. THEN WE ARE GOING TO ADD THAT WHATEVER INTEREST IS LEFT, JUST IF THERE IS ANY, SO I AM GOING TO SAY, JUST FROM MY LITTLE CALCULATIONS, THAT IS 100. JUST TO BE ABLE TO DO IT, RIGHT? SO, WE ARE BACK NOW TO -- LET'S SEE, HOLD ON, I JUST SCREWED UP MY MATH. OH, 3.1, BUT THEN WE [02:35:04] JUST ADDED 250, SO THAT GOES BACK TO THE RED, SO, THE 3.1. SO, WE ARE NOW IN THE WHOLE $3.35 MILLION. SO, EVERY DOLLAR WE SPENT FROM HERE FORWARD MEANS WE ARE GOING FARTHER AND FARTHER INTO THE GENERAL RESERVE FUND BALANCE, TAKING THAT DOWN, WHICH IS GOING TO BE ANOTHER HURT. >> YOU ARE CORRECT. >> BUT ON INCREASES, COMMISSIONER, THE JUDGE ALSO HAS DECREASES. >> I HAVE SOME MORE TO COME LATER. >> BECAUSE THERE ARE INCREASES. >> I'M JUST DOING IT AS WE GO. >> THE MOVING ON. TO ITEM NUMBER TWO, THE PERSONNEL CHANGES. IF YOU WILL LOOK ON G8-SEVEN, THERE IS A LIST THERE OF PERSONNEL CHANGES, AND LET ME BE CLEAR, I AM ASKING FOR A BUDGET OFFICER THAT REPORTS TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT, JUST LIKE TERESA AND TARA DO. IT WILL BE IN THE OFFICE OF COUNTY JUDGE, BUT IT IS A PERSON THAT REPORTS DIRECTLY TO THE WHOLE COMMISSIONERS COURT. I AM ASKING FOR THAT POSITION. IF YOU WANT TO DO THESE INDIVIDUALLY, WE CAN, OR WE CAN TALK ABOUT ALL OF THEM AND PASS IT AS A WHOLE. THIS COUNTY ATTORNEY CHANGES HERE THAT IS 67,000, LET ME JUST ON YOUR BEHALF -- EVERYBODY ELSE COMES THROUGHOUT THE YEAR AND DOES ALL THESE CHANGES. SHE DID WHAT THE POLICY AND THE RECOMMENDATION WAS ON OUR RESOLUTION TO WAIT UNTIL THE END OF THE YEAR, SO WE CANNOT PENALIZE HER FOR DOING WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE HAS DONE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. NOT THAT I LIKE THE 67,000 , I AM JUST SAYING, FOR THIS TIME, THIS DATE RIGHT NOW, SHE IS THE ONE THAT DIDN'T COME IN AND MAKE CHANGES THROUGHOUT THE YEARS. THE REASON I WAS WILLING TO INCLUDE IT IN MY CHANGES. SO, THE VETERAN SERVICE, THE VETERANS OFFICER, JJ, WE ADDED PEOPLE TO HIS DEPARTMENT WHEN WE LOOKED AT HIS SALARY TO BEGIN WITH, AND THIS 24,000, THE INCREASE HERE THAT THE STATE VETERANS THING -- THEY ARE GOING TO SPLIT THIS. >> THE JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, SO THAT IT IS ON THE RECORD, THE BUDGET OFFICER, YOU ARE NOT REQUESTING TO CREATE A BUDGET OFFICER -- >> I AM NOT, AND I KNOW YOU ARE GETTING VERY WORRIED, BUT NOT YET. WE MAY COME BACK NEXT YEAR AND VOTE ON THAT, BUT THIS DOES NOT TAKE THE BUDGET AWAY FROM THE AUDITOR. >> SO, THE COUNTY AUDITOR IS STILL THE BUDGET OFFICER FOR NUECES COUNTY, JUST CLARIFYING ON THE RECORD. >> WHERE WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE AND CONFIDENT. IF IT DOESN'T WORK OUT, THAT WILL BE MY VOTE NEXT YEAR, YES. >> YES, MA'AM. I JUST WANTED TO -- >> DOESN'T COME OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND, THAT IS ONLY ONE YEAR. I THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE A POSITION, JUST LIKE STEVE WATERMAN WAS FOR MANY YEARS. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE A ONE TIME. >> I 100% AGREE. >> I WAS ASKING FOR THIS, TOTALLY, WE CAN USE HIS FUNDS FOR ANYTHING ELSE HE WANTS TO CONTRIBUTE TO, BUT I WOULD LIKE THIS TO BE A PERMANENT POSITION. I THINK IN ORDER TO HIRE SOMEONE, IT IS GOING TO NEED TO BE THAT. THEY ARE NOT GOING TO COME IN HERE AND TO THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT IS NECESSARY TO GET US WHERE WE NEED TO BE POINT >> THAT IS 408? IT WAS A PARTIAL FUNDING REQUEST. >> YES, ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE IN THE 408 NUMBER. THE COUNTY LAW THAT MR. JUDGE MCCOY WAS IN HERE FOR. THE CONSTABLE PRECINCT TAKING IT OUT OF YOUR ARTICLE FUNDS THAT HAVE BEEN FUNDING IT, AND THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT POSITION. ALL OF THESE ARE IN HERE. AND THEN WE WILL DO THE NEXT TWO, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TWO MORE THAT WE NEED TO DO THAT IS GOING TO INCREASE. BUT I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS THE NEW POSITION AND RECLASSIFICATIONS AT THE $408,000 POSITIONS NEEDED . >> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> DINNER WE HAVE A BUDGET OFFICER BEFORE? >> YEARS AGO. >> WE HAD SOMEONE BEFORE, AND YES. SO, WE ARE BRINGING IT BACK. WE'RE WILLING TO GET ANOTHER PERSON. >> IT IS A DIFFERENT POSITION. >> IT'S ACTUALLY THE SAME ROLE. >> IT IS NOT A DEPARTMENT HEAD. >> SO YES, DIFFERENT. OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO PASS THIS RECLASSIFICATION AND NEW POSITIONS, AND ADDING AN ADDITIONAL $408,000 TO OUR DEFICIT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, [02:40:04] SAY ANY OPPOSED . ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO THE NEXT THINGS. THAT WAS DONE BEFOREHAND, IT'S NO COST. THAT WAS DONE IS SEPARATE MOTION. >> IT IS'S GENERAL FUND, YOU ARE NOT GENERAL FUND. >> YOU ARE IN THE DUGOUT. >> ON THE NEXT ITEM, NUMBER THREE, THE 54,307 IS 17 AND 18, SO WE WON'T ACTUALLY INCLUDE IT OR ADD IT TO OUR NUMBER. IT IS FOR THE NEW POSITION FOR INLAND PARKS. OH. IN THE PARKS AND COASTAL PARKS, THE NEXT INCREASE IS FOR $54,000. WITH THE OTHER FUNDS, IT IS NOT GENERAL FUND. >> SO, THIS WILL NOT BE AN INCREASE -- >> AS I AM DOING MY LITTLE RUNNING TOTAL. >> I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS BOTH OF THESE ITEMS. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE INLAND PARKS SPLASH PAD AND WHOLE OPERATOR AND THE COASTAL PARKS CHANGE. >> IT IS DO NOT INCREASE THE TRANSFER INTO THOSE DEPARTMENTS? >> NO. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. >> AS NET ZERO, YES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. THEN WE HAVE -- MOVING ON TO ITEM FOUR. OUTSIDE AGENCIES SPECIAL REVENUE WAS REQUESTED THAT WE BRING BACK EACH COMMISSIONER AND THE JUDGE HAVE THEIR 25,000 SPECIAL REVENUE MONEY. DIDN'T WE HAVE A PLACE THAT WE COULD FUND THIS, TERESA? >> CAPITAL CREDITS. >> WELL, THAT IS A WHOLE OTHER DISCUSSION. I'M JUST -- THAT IS A WHOLE OTHER GROUP. >> FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTS. >> I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WE HAVE IN THERE, THAT IS NOT TODAY. >> OKAY, SO, IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE WITH YOUR OUTSIDE AGENCY CONTRIBUTIONS, THEN THAT IS AN ADDITIONAL 100,000. >> I'VE GOT TO TELL YOU, AS MUCH AS I WANT IT IN THERE, I'M GOING TO BE LOOKING TO CUT OTHER THINGS DONE TOO. >> CAN WE APPLY OTHER FUNDING SOURCES THAT WE HAVE IN OUR BUDGETS TO COVER OUTSIDE AGENCY COSTS? BECAUSE LAST YEAR, HOW DID WE -- >> WHATEVER YOU HAVE CAN APPLY. >> YOU CAN EACH INDIVIDUALLY DO THIS . >> I ABSOLUTELY AGREE, I MEAN, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THAT DISCRETIONARY FUND, BUT IT IS DISCRETIONARY. WE HAVE ALREADY ADDED A LOT. I AGREE, I THINK THAT THERE ARE AREAS THAT WE NEED TO SERIOUSLY LOOK AT MAKING CUTS, AND THERE ARE AREAS THAT WE HAVE ADDED THAT WE DIDN'T REALLY WANT TO. VECTOR CONTROL IS A NO-BRAINER. I MEAN, WE ARE DEALING WITH WEST NILE. IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD SAY NO TO. WE HAD TO. AND SO, I'M TRYING TO OFFSET THAT WITH US SAYING NO TO OUR SPECIAL REVENUE AND BE ABLE TO FIND IT IN OUR OWN FUNDING. AND APPLY IT THAT WAY. DIDN'T WE DO THAT LAST YEAR, ELIMINATE ALL OF IT? THIS CAN GO A LONG WAY, CONSIDERING THIS IS AN $836,000 TOTAL. AND WE CAN DEAL WITH SOME OF IT. STILL ABLE TO AND HAVE BEEN ABLE TO THIS PAST YEAR. >> ACCOUNT AS WE HAVE HAD IN THE PAST, SO I WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT, BUT I MEAN, YES, BECAUSE LOOK, I'M GOING TO LOOK TO CUT ANOTHER ON HERE THAT I THINK IS TOTALLY DISCRETIONARY, TOO. TO FIGURE THAT OUT, IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH. I'M OKAY WE CAN CUT ALL OF IT. >> IT DOESN'T COME IN AS MUCH AS IT IS GOING OUT. I LOOKED AT THAT ONE, TOO, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT. >> WE ONLY HAD $51,000 THAT CAME IN THIS YEAR. NEXT WE HAD A BALANCE, SO WE ONLY HAD $51,000 AND WE HAD A BALANCE, SO AGAIN, MAYBE WE CUT HALF OF THIS AND GO -- >> I AM FINE WITH CUTTING IT ALL AND USING -- I MEAN, I [02:45:03] THINK GIVEN THE BUDGET SITUATION WE ARE IN, FOR US TO -- >> AGENCIES, IT HAS GOT TO BE STRICTLY OUTSIDE AGENCIES, IT CAN BE ALLOCATED SOMEWHERE ELSE IF WE NEEDED? >> THEREFORE, OUTSIDE AGENCIES COMMISSIONER, BUT THEY GO TO YOUR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS AND Y'ALL TEND TO USE THEM HOWEVER YOU NEED WITHIN THAT DISCRETIONARY FUND. >> PARTICULAR SPECIAL REVENUE DEPARTMENT. >> RIGHT, BUT IT CAN BE USED FOR ANY PROJECT? >> SO, THE FUNDS GOING TO THAT DEPARTMENT, AND YOU HAVE FOUR OUTSIDE AGENCIES, BUT YOU CAN SPEND IT ON OUTSIDE AGENCIES, YOU CAN LET THE FUND BALANCE CARRYFORWARD, OR YOU CAN SPEND IT AS YOU CHOOSE BECAUSE IT IS YOUR SPECIAL REVENUE. >> BUT IT CAN BE SPENT OTHER THAN OUTSIDE AGENCIES? >> YES. BECAUSE IT JUST CONTINUES IN YOUR FUND BALANCE, IT IS JUST FUNDS THAT WILL GO THERE. >> THE OUTSIDE AGENCIES SPECIAL REVENUE ITEM. >> EXCUSE ME, CHRIS? >> SECOND. >> I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK, SHE SAID YOU CAN USE IT FOR ANYTHING. PROJECTS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> YES, SIR. >> OKAY, I JUST WANT TO GET THAT UNDERSTOOD, THANK YOU. >> SO, GOING BACK TO THAT 836 594, THAT NUMBER WAS REDUCED BECAUSE IT DIDN'T APPLY TO THE INCREASE IN THE BUDGET, IS THAT CORRECT? SO, I'M SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE WORKED THE NUMBERS BEFORE. AND THEN MINUS ANOTHER 100,000, SO WE ARE TALKING OVER $150,000 AT LEAST , KNOCKING OFF OF THAT 836, SO WE'RE CLOSE TO -- >> WELL, THE 836 -- ALL WE'RE DOING IS ADDING TO THE DEFICIT. >> WE ARE REDUCING. WE'RE JUST NOT ADDING TO THE DEFICIT. YOU CAN CALL IT WHAT YOU WANT, IN OTHER WORDS, THAT YOU SAVED $154,000 FROM THE 836. >> WE ARE STILL ON THE PLUS SIDE, BUT WE ARE WORKING OUR WAY TOWARDS THE NEGATIVE SIDE IS MY POINT. >> AND I HAVE GOT SOME MORE THINGS THAT WE CAN CUT IN A MINUTE, GUYS. >> I JUST WANT TO SAY OUTSIDE AGENCIES, BECAUSE I USE ALL MY FUNDS TO CONTINUE THAT, BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF AGENCIES THAT ARE HANGING ON TO WHAT THEY HAVE AND THEY MIGHT HAVE A LOT OF HELP TO THEM AND THEY COULD DO SOME OF THE PROGRAMS AND THEY HELP A LOT OF THE PEOPLE THAT WE CAN'T HELP, SO I GUESS THEY DO A LOT OF WORK FOR THE COUNTY. THAT WE CAN DO, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE DEPARTMENT, BUT ] I LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING THAT LITTLE PUSH AND A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY THAT WOULD GIVE THEM, AND CUTTING SOMEWHERE WHERE IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE. 100,000 TO HELP HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE, YOU KNOW? CUT IT SOMEWHERE ELSE, YOU KNOW? IT DOESN'T HELP PEOPLE, CUT IT SOMEWHERE ELSE WHERE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HELP PEOPLE. YOU KNOW, IF IT HURTS YOU, IT HURTS YOU. THE THING IS WE ARE HURTING A LOT OF PEOPLE, A LOT OF AGENCIES WILL LOOK FORWARD TO THIS MONEY. AND I THINK IT IS TIME -- WE WANT TO BE SENSITIVE. WE'VE GOT TO BE SENSITIVE, RIGHT? SO, PEOPLE NEED THAT MONEY, AGENCIES NEED THAT MONEY. I'M NOT GOING TO DO IT. >> BUT WE CAN ALWAYS GO AND FUND THOSE WITH OUR SPECIAL REVENUE, IS THAT CORRECT, TERESA? >> YOU MIGHT HAVE SPECIAL FUND REVENUE, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY, BECAUSE I HAVE USED ALL OF IT IN PROJECTS. I AM USING MY MONEY BECAUSE I THINK WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT, RIGHT? WHEN TERESA COMES TO ME AND SAYS I MONEY ON THIS SPECIAL PROJECT. I TRIED TO USE IT, I USE IT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT'S FOR, THAT'S WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO. WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO CARRY IT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN, WE'VE GOT TO USE IT. NOT YOUR MONEY, NOT OUR MONEY. TAXPAYERS MONEY, SO WE BETTER USE IT. >> I ABSOLUTELY AGREE. BUT WE HAVE SEVERAL SOURCES OF FUNDING. I MEAN, IT IS HOW YOU CALL IT AND WHERE YOU GRAB IT FROM, IT IS ALL THE SAME [02:50:03] SOURCE, IT IS JUST LABELED DIFFERENTLY. BUT WE HAVE PLENTY TO USE. SO, IF A COMMISSIONER IS GOING TO BE OUT WITHOUT FUNDING, THEN I WOULD CONSIDER NOT GOING ALL IN ON THE $100,000 CUT THEN, BUT THAT MEANS THEY GET AT LEAST SOMETHING. >> ARE YOU WILLING TO DO HALF? >> I WILL HELP SOMEBODY. I CAN DO THAT. >> WOULD Y'ALL RESEND -- >> AND GOING WITH THE CONSENSUS, I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE A CUT ON IT, BECAUSE ALL THIS DOES IS REDUCE OUR GENERAL FUND AMOUNT, SO I CAN GO EITHER WAY. I MEAN, I WOULD RATHER CUT IT, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO -- LOOK, THIS IS THE ONLY THING I ASKED TO EVEN PUT IN THE BUDGET, SO I AM TAKING OUT THE ONLY THING THAT I ASKED TO PUT IN. SO, I MEAN, BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE GOING TO BE THIS MUCH IN THE WHOLE AFTER CUTTING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OUT OF OUR BUDGET WE ARE STILL LOOKING AT THE DEFICIT, SO ALL WE ARE DOING IS YOU ARE JUST TAKING THIS MONEY AND SAYING, OKAY, THESE AGENCIES -- AND THEY ARE VERY IMPORTANT, BELIEVE ME, IT IS GOING TO AFFECT ME TOO, BECAUSE I DO THE SAME THINGS EVERYBODY ELSE DOES TO HELP THESE PEOPLE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, ALL IT IS DOING IS TAKING IT OUT OF THE TAXPAYERS POCKET ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO CUT INTO THE DEFICIT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO CANCEL THIS AND A SECOND. I THINK COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ , THEY SEEM TO THINK THAT YOU HAVE FUNDING SOMEWHERE. >> OH, NO, WE WERE JUST WONDERING. IT IS NOT IN THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW. >> INTO THE MICROPHONE, CAROL. >> IT HAS TO BE VOTED ON ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. >> IT IS NOT IN THERE RIGHT NOW. IT IS JUST AN INCREASE. YOU ARE ALREADY DOING IT, >> THIS YEAR, YOU ARE DOING IT. WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE FUNDS IF WE VOTE AGAINST THIS, THERE WILL BE NO FUNDS NEXT YEAR. >> >> SO, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DELETE THIS $100,000, THAT IS A MOTION THAT WE HAD. >> WE COULD JUST RESCIND THE MOTION THEN? AND REWORD IT? >> I MADE MY MOTION. IF I DON'T HAVE THE VOTES FOR IT, THEN I THINK WE'VE GOT TO CUT EVERY BIT OF IT. BUT IF YOU DON'T, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO HOPEFULLY BE ABLE TO SUPPORT. >> MY THINKING WAS -- I DON'T PAY TOO MUCH ATTENTION TO OTHERS BUDGETS, JUST KNOWING THAT I TRIED TO BE VERY -- I MEAN, WE ALL TRY TO USE THAT MONEY , ESPECIALLY SOME OF THE BOATS WE WILL HAVE LATER ON, WE ARE DEFINITELY PUTTING FUNDING TO USE. MY UNDERSTANDING WAS I ASSUMED EVERYBODY HAD SOME ACCESS TO ADDITIONAL SPECIAL REVENUE, SO THAT'S WHY I SUGGESTED IT, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, IT IS ALL TAXPAYER-FUNDED REVENUE. IT'S JUST WHAT LABEL DO WE PUT ON IT? SO, THAT'S WHY I SAID LET'S MAKE THE $100,000 CUT, BECAUSE WE ARE STILL ON THE PLUS SIDE WITH THESE REQUESTS , AFTER TAKING ON VECTOR CONTROL, LIKE I SAID, WHICH WE HAD TO. FUND THAT. SO, DO WE -- I MEAN, DO WE HAVE -- I NEED TO KNOW FOR MY COLLEAGUES, DO Y'ALL HAVE FUNDING OR WOULD YOU JUST PREFER NOT TO USE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDING? I GUESS THAT IS MY QUESTION BEFORE I MAKE ANY MOTION, BECAUSE THAT IS IMPORTANT TO ME. IF YOU HAVE FUNDING , THEN YOU CHOOSE NOT TO, THAT I'M GOING TO CUT IT. WHEN WE DON'T HAVE FUNDING, THEN YES, I WILL BE UNDERSTANDING AND SAY, NO, WE NEED TO GIVE THAT. BUT THIS IS HOW WE HAVE BEEN LIVING THE YEAR. >> WHEN WE CUT IT LAST YEAR, I STILL FUNDED AGENCIES THROUGH WHAT I HAD. AS DID I ASSUME EVERYBODY ELSE, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH I HAVE LEFT OR WHAT I HAVE LEFT, AND IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER BECAUSE I THINK WE OUGHT TO CUT IT BECAUSE WE ARE SAYING WE'VE GOT TO CUT ALL THESE OTHER THINGS AND WE ARE KEEPING DISCRETIONARY FUNDS THAT ARE DISCRETIONARY, NOT STATUTORY, SO AGAIN, I THINK WE OUGHT TO CUT THEM. BUT IF I GET OUTVOTED, I GET OUTVOTED, THAT IS LIFE, IT'S OKAY. >> SO, THIS NEEDS TO GO TO -- ARE YOU RESCINDING ? >> I WOULD LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION, BUT IF NOT, I'M GOING TO MOVE FORWARD JUST TO MAKE THE CUT AS IS, BUT I WOULD HATE TO LEAVE A COLLEAGUE OUT. >> ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER -- THAT IS MY CONCERN. >> DO WHAT YOU GOT TO DO. >> YOU HAVE ALREADY RESCINDED YOUR SECOND, SO -- >> HE SAID HE WOULD. HE WAS DISCUSSING IT. I WILL SECOND THE MOTION. YET. ALL THOSE IN [02:55:05] FAVOR OF CUTTING THE OUTSIDE AGENCIES SPECIAL REVENUE $100,000, SAY AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR OPERATIONS, THEY ARE IN THE NEGATIVE. THIS WHOLE PROJECT , WE ARE GETTING HOPEFULLY A GOOD PERSON , BUT THEY STILL HAVE TO HAVE SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT AND STUFF. THIS IS ADDITIONAL $25,000 NEEDED. >> I THINK IT IS PARKER POOL SPLASH PAD. >> IS IT EVERYTHING? IT IS CHEMICALS AND EVERYTHING FOR ALL OF THEM, SORRY. SO, THE SPLASH PAD'S AND EVERYTHING. I MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OH, SORRY. >> I WAS GOING TO ADD THAT THIS $25,000 IS ALSO IN THE PARKS, SO IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN GENERAL FUNDS, SO WE CAN BACK THAT AMOUNT OUT. AND TO COVER IT, WE HAVE ALREADY REDUCED THE BALANCE OF SALE OF ASSETS FUND 14, SO THE 20 5K CAN BE ACCOUNTED FOR. SO, IT WON'T AFFECT THE GENERAL FUND. >> IT IS A NET ZERO. >> BUT THIS IS FOR SPLASH PAD'S AND EVERYTHING, THIS IS EVERYBODY'S, NOT JUST OUR CARPOOL. THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. >> OKAY, ITEM NUMBER SIX. THE ROBSTOWN AREA DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. COMMISSIONER MONTEZ, YOU ASKED, YOU CAME TO TALK TO ME, THEN JOHN CAME TO TALK TO ME AS WELL. MY ONLY HESITATION WITH THIS ONE, AND WHATEVER WE DO MOVING FORWARD, I WOULD ASK THAT IT BE CONTINGENT UPON THEIR ISSUES WITH THEIR TAX. THEY STILL HAVE NOT FINISHED THEIR IRS SITUATION THAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST YEAR, I BELIEVE, AND THE SAME THING WITH THEIR TAX RETURNS. >> WHY WOULDN'T THIS BE IN CAPITAL CREDITS ALSO, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T INCREASE THE OUR EDC. NORMALLY WITH THE AGENCIES, WE HAVE BEEN DOING THIS ALL IN CAPITAL CREDIT, SO I AM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY WE WOULD BE ADDING TO AN OUTSIDE AGENCY INTO OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET, WHEN WE ARE NOW $3.8 MILLION IN THE HOLE. I FIGURED THEY AND ALL THE OTHERS THAT WE CONSIDERED IN THE PAST WOULD BE IN THE CAPITAL CREDIT, SO I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ARE HAVING -- I'M NOT SURE WHY IT IS HERE. >> CORRECTION. JUST SO EVERYONE IS AWARE, THE TRANSFER FOR THE OUR ADC AND THE CC OUR EDC, A TOTAL OF $60,000 WAS ADDED BACK TO 1285 IN THE PROPOSED, JUST SO EVERYONE IS AWARE. SO, THAT IS FUNDED BY GENERAL FUNDS. >> THAT IS 50 AND 10, A TOTAL OF 60. IT IS ALREADY IN THE BUDGET, IN THE PROPOSED, YES. >> BUT THIS IS ADDITIONAL MONEY WE HAVE NORMALLY DEALT WITH IN CAPITAL CREDIT. I MEAN, I FIGURED THIS WAS GOING TO COME UP IN CAPITAL CREDIT, SO I JUST -- >> A LOOK, AND I HAVE THE FUNDING AND I AM GOING TO FUND IT. I'M GOING TO FUND IT OUTSIDE, IN ADDITION TO MAKING THOSE CUTS. I HAD THE OUTSIDE AGENCY PAST , I WOULD HAVE USED THAT FUNDING. I'M NOT SAYING THAT I NEEDED. IF WE REALLY WANT TO MAKE CUTS, THEN I'M WILLING TO DO IT, RIGHT? I'M WILLING TO SAY THAT WE NEED TO MAKE CUTS. AS IMPORTANT AS THIS ENTITY IS, AS MUCH AS I AM ENGAGED WITH THEIR TEAM, AND HOW HELPFUL THEY HAVE BEEN IN SPURRING ECONOMIC GROWTH, I WILL SAY THAT AND I HAVE SAID IT PUBLICLY. NO DISRESPECT TO CCREDC, BUT THE RADC IS SO MUCH MORE ENGAGED IN WESTERN WITH CHASE COUNTY. CCREDC DOES NOT HAVE ANY FOOTPRINT OUT THERE, THEY DO NOT INCLUDE ME IN ANYTHING, SO MY COMMITMENT TO THE RADC IS STRONG. SO, HOW I FUND IT, DON'T WORRY, I WILL FIND IT AND I WILL BRING THAT FUNDING TO YOU FROM MY OWN SPECIAL REVENUE, BUT ON THE TIME THAT WE NEED TO MAKE CUTS AND WE ARE TELLING OTHER GROUPS OR WE ARE MAKING POSITION CUTS TO HAVE ANYTHING THAT IS CONSIDERED DISCRETIONARY, I AM OPPOSED TO EVEN SOMETHING THAT I VALUE SO MUCH, BECAUSE I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE SEND A MESSAGE TO THIS COMMUNITY THAT IT -- IF WE ARE WILLING TO HAVE TO TAKE ON ADDITIONAL REVENUE INCREASES AS TAXPAYERS, THEN WE HAVE TO AT LEAST SHOW THAT THESE PROJECTS, [03:00:01] THESE AREAS THAT WE HAVE FOCUSED ON, THAT WE ARE WILLING TO MAKE SOME SACRIFICES FOR NOW. SO, I HAVE THAT LUXURY OF HAVING SAVED SOME MONEY OVER THE YEARS AND BEEN VERY CONSERVATIVE WITH MY SPENDING THAT I HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE NOW TO SPEND, TO USE. SO, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, THAT IS MY MESSAGE TODAY RIGHT NOW WITH A LOT OF THESE, THAT'S WHY I HAVE VOTED THE WAY I HAVE, BECAUSE I FEEL SO STRONGLY WITH THAT. I DON'T MIND TAKING IT ALL, BECAUSE IT IS STILL GOING TO BE INCLUDED, AND DON'T WORRY, WE WILL STILL VOTE ON ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THIS GROUP. IF NOT NOW, I WILL ASK THAT WE CAN GET THIS ON OUR NEXT AGENDA. IF TERESA OR SOMEBODY CAN HELP ME DO THAT, THAT WE HAD ON THE ACTUAL AMOUNT THAT COMES FROM MY REVENUE, THAT IS ASIDE FROM THIS BUDGET, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO PUT ANY MORE REQUIREMENTS THAN WE ABSOLUTELY NEED TO BE >> RIGHT, AND IT IS THE SAME THING YOU HAVE BEEN SENT TO EVERYONE ELSE, IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE SHORT, YOU WANT TO GO BACK AND CONSIDER SOME OF THAT SPECIAL REVENUE WITH AN AGENCY, THEN OKAY, I'M JUST SAYING, THIS ALONG WITH ALL THOSE OTHER GREAT AGENCIES THAT WE FIND IN CAPITAL CREDIT SHOULD ALSO BE ON HERE OR NONE OF THEM SHOULD BE ON HERE, IN MY OPINION. I MEAN, I THINK PIB A AND THE NEW LONDON BUSINESS ASSOCIATION AND NORTHWEST, WESTSIDE, THEY ALL OUGHT TO BE ON HERE OR NONE OF THEM. ALL IN CAPITAL CREDITS, UNLESS YOU ARE GOING TO FUND THEM. AND YOUR COMMITMENT IS HUGE TO THIS GROUP, YOU HAVE FUNDED THEM YOURSELF LAST YEAR OUT OF YOUR OWN OUTSIDE AGENCY, $20,000, I THINK, SO WE KNOW YOU ARE GOING TO FUND THEM. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THERE SHOULD BE ALONG WITH THE CAPITAL CREDIT DISCUSSION. >> I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE IT ON CAPITAL CREDIT, DON'T GET ME WRONG. THE MESSAGE IS IF WE NEED TO MAKE CUTS HERE ON WHAT IS THE ACTUAL ADD ON'S, THAT'S WHERE I FEEL. CATEGORICALLY, UNDER VECTOR CONTROL, PARK -- PARKER POOL, IT WAS ALSO FOR THE SPLASH PAD'S, WHICH I HAVE PURSUED WANTING TO DO ONE, AND I GOT RECOMMENDATION HALFWAY INTO EXPLORING IT THAT IT WAS PROBABLY NOT THE BEST PROJECT TO TAKE ON WITH ARPA , BUT THE OTHER PRESENTS HAVE THEM, WHICH IS FINE, I SUPPORT THE GREATER GOOD AND BEING ABLE TO HAVE THE CHEMICALS THAT ARE NEEDED. OVERALL, I WOULDN'T HAVE, BECAUSE IT IS THREE OUT OF FOUR, I'M WILLING TO DO IT. >> PARKER POOL, THIS MAY BE GOING BECAUSE PARKER POOL AS A TOTAL BUDGET OF LIKE $25,000 FOR THE WHOLE PARKER POOL, SO, I MAY HAVE MISSPOKE. >> >> IT IS A COUNTY PROJECT. >> I GET IT. IT IS A NET ZERO. >> I MISSTATED SOMETHING ACCIDENTALLY. >> SO, I WOULD LOVE TO KEEP ON THE RADC, BUT IT IS GOING TO GET FUNDED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. >> IF WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT MAKING CUTS, I AGREE. IF WE CAN PUT IT UNDER CAPITAL CREDITS, LET'S DO IT THAT WAY. WE CAN TAKE IT OFF OF THIS. >> IF YOU ARE GOING TO FUND IT WITH SOME OF YOUR OWN -- >> HE WOULD RATHER DO CAPITAL CREDITS FIRST. >> I HAVE BEEN VERY GENEROUS , I HAVE BEEN VERY SUPPORTIVE OF OUR CAUSE HERE TODAY. AND SO, IT'S NOT WITHOUT A PRICE, RIGHT? BUT ON ANOTHER END, I MEAN, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO LOOK AT THERE WAS AN INCREASE THAT THE COURT VOTED ON, AND IF THIS CAN BE MADE UP IN ANOTHER AREA, WITH OTHER FUNDING, THEN ALL I AM SAYING IS THIS IS PRETTY PRACTICAL TO MOVE THAT FROM HERE, AND WE ARE STILL GOING TO CATCH IT. RADC AND MY PARTNERS THERE, DON'T WORRY, THE HOPE IS STILL GOING TO BE THERE, THE SUPPORT AND REVENUE WE HAVE HAD IN YEARS PAST IS GOING TO BE THERE TO GET THAT WORK DONE. THEY HAVE BEEN SO INCLUSIVE WITH ME, SO I DON'T WANT THEM TO FEEL THAT I AM LEAVING THEM BEHIND. BUT IF WE CAN TAKE THIS AWAY, SO THAT OUR OVERALL INCREASE OF THE BUDGET IS MUCH LESS, I THINK IF WE DO THAT, WE WILL BE BELOW 700,000, IS THAT ROUGHLY CORRECT, TERESA? THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. I DON'T MIND DOING THAT, BECAUSE WE CAN MAKE IT UP IN CAPITAL CREDITS OR WITH MY FUNDING, WE WILL DO THAT. >> IT IS KIND OF WEIRD TO BE THINKING ABOUT -- IT IS GOING TO GO UP AND DOWN. >> YEAH, BECAUSE THERE ARE MORE THINGS COMING THAT I AM GOING TO ADD. >> DON'T WORRY, I'M GOING TO MAKE UP FOR IT IN ANOTHER SECTION HERE. >> SO, WE ARE NOT GOING TO VOTE ON THIS THEN? YOU DON'T WANT A MOTION ON THIS? >> I'M LETTING YOU KNOW NOW, I'M GOING TO TAKE THIS UP AND HAVE THIS DISCUSSION WITH CAPITAL CREDIT, PUT IT THERE, AND THEN I WILL STILL FUND ANY ADDITIONAL THAT ACHIEVES LAST YEAR'S COMMITMENT. >> JUST AGAIN, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO MISLEAD, WE GAVE ALL THOSE EDC'S AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS THE SAME, WHATEVER IT WAS, AND THEN YOU FUNDED EXTRA OUT OF YOUR SPECIAL -- >> BUT THAT IS CAPITAL CREDIT, [03:05:02] WE CAN DO THAT ANYTIME OF THE YEAR, THIS DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DECIDED ON TODAY. >> I JUST WANT TO SAY FOR THE PUBLIC AND ANYONE WATCHING THAT I AM ASKING, I'M DIRECTING THAT WE PUT THIS ON THE NEXT AGENDA IN OCTOBER, SO THERE IS NO CONFUSION, THERE IS NO DELAY, THAT I WANT TO TAKE ACTION ON THIS, YES. >> PERFECT. >> WE ALREADY IS SET THE BUDGET FOR THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF THE APPROPRIATION. WHEREVER IT IS, IT IS BASICALLY THERE, YES. >> I WOULD LIKE TO CALL FOR A BREAK. >> WANT TO DO EXECUTIVE SESSION? [4. EXECUTIVE SESSION: PUBLIC NOTICE is given that the Commissioners Court may elect to go into an Executive Session anytime during the meeting to discuss matters listed anywhere on the Agenda, when authorized by the provisions of the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code. To the extent there has been a past practice of distinguishing items for public deliberation and those for executive session, the public is advised that the Court is departing from that practice, and reserves the right to discuss any listed agenda items in executive session when authorized by law to do so. In the event the Commissioners Court elects to go into Executive Session regarding an agenda item, the section or sections of the Open Meetings Act authorizing the Executive Session will be publicly announced by the presiding officer. In accordance with the authority of the Government Code, Vernon’s Texas Codes, Sections 551.071, 551.072, 551.073, 551.074, 551.0745, 551.076, 551.086, 551.087, the Commissioners Court will hold an Executive Session to consult with attorney(s) including matters related to litigation; deliberate regarding real property, prospective gift(s), personnel matters, including termination, county advisory bodies, security devices, and/or economic development negotiations and other matters that may be discussed in an Executive Session. Upon completion of the Executive Session, the Commissioners Court may in an open session take such action as appropriate on items discussed in an Executive Session.] >> WELL, WE ARE IN THE BUDGET. >> IT IS AN AGENDA ITEM. >> LET'S BREAK FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION. >> YEAH, THIS IS JUST REGULAR AGENDA, I THINK. IT IS BUDGET, BUT -- >> YEAH, AND MAYBE WE WILL HEAR BACK FROM THE OTHER ON THE D.A.S ISSUE WHILE WE ARE ON BREAK. WE WILL START BACK ON OUR DECREASES RIGHT HERE , THE NEXT PAGES GOING FORWARD. SO, LET ME FIND MY AGENDA TO WHERE WE ARE, AND WE WILL BE BACK. >> WE DON'T HAVE THE ONE. >> I KNOW, THERE IS ONLY ONE, BUT -- OH, HERE SHE COMES BACK. OKAY. WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A BREAK AND GO INTO EXECUTIVE AND JUST DEAL WITH THE ONE ISSUE, AND THEN WE MAY ALSO HEAR ABOUT THE D.A.S ISSUE WHILE WE ARE OUT, BEFORE WE COME BACK. I WOULD SAY MAYBE AN HOUR WE WILL BE OUT, 45 MINUTES. >> I AM BEING TOLD IN OFFICE OVER THERE THAT THERE IS NOT AN EXECUTIVE BUDGET. >> THIS IS FOR THE REGULAR AGENDA. >> SO, YOU CONCLUDED THE BUDGET FOR A MOMENT? EXIT IS ALL PART OF THE REGULAR AGENDA, WE JUST DID BUDGET FIRST, SO WE WOULD LIKE TO SKIP AHEAD IN OUR AGENDA. >> WE DON'T HAVE TO FINISH EVERYTHING ON THE BUDGET BEFORE A BREAK, WE WOULD BE HERE ALL DAY. >> WE ARE NOT FINISHED WITH BUDGET, WE ARE COMING BACK. IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS ONLY STAFF IN HERE, SO WE ARE NOT PUTTING ANY PUBLIC OUT. BUT WE WILL COME BACK, WE MAY HAVE ANSWERS ON A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS WE HAVE AS WELL, BEFORE WE COME BACK. BUT WHILE WE ARE OUT, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THE ONE ISSUE ON THE EXECUTIVE AGENDA ITEM. SO, ON THE EXECUTIVE -- EXECUTIVE SESSION, PUBLIC NOTICE IS GIVEN AT 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 HAS BEEN A BEST PRACTICE OF DISTINGUISHING ITEMS UP 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 A COMMISSIONERS COURT ELECTS TO GO TO EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING AN AGENDA ITEM, THE SECTION OR SECTIONS OF THE ACT AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY OF GOVERNMENT CODE, TEXAS CODE, SECTION 551.072, 551.073, 551.074, 551 .0745, 551.076, TH COMMISSIONERS COURT WILL HOLD AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONSULT WITH ATTORNEYS INCLUDING MATTERS RELATED TO LITIGATION, DELIBERATE REGARDING REAL PROPERTY, PROSPECTIVE GIFTS, 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. TODAY, WE HAVE ITEM EIGHT, CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON LEGAL MATTERS RELATING TO AGREEMENT WITH TARASOFF TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION FOR LINKEDIN LEARNING SERVICES AND RELATED MATTERS. TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071, DISCUSS, CONSIDER, AND TAKE ACTION IN THE SAME AGREEMENT AND REGULAR SESSION IF NEEDED. AND IT IS 12:30. WE ARE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE. [03:10:01] >>> THERE WERE NO MOTIONS, AFTER EXECUTIVE, FIRST, I GOT PULLED ASIDE. IF IS STILL HERE AND JENNY WE DISCUSSED SOME THINGS WITH HIM IN THE BACK ON HIS 320,000 THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. >> NOT IN EXECUTIVE. >> YOU AND I DISCUSSED THAT , THE COUNTY JUDGE I THINK I SAID THAT WE HAD A MEETING SEPARATELY WHEN THEY WERE IN HERE WAITING BUT, WE HAVE COME UP WITH, IT SHOWS THE LAST TIME THOSE POSITIONS WERE EVEN FILLED WAS BACK IN 2021. I DON'T HAVE THE PAPER IN FRONT OF ME, BUT THERE IS A $320,000 TRANSFER GOING OUT, AFTER DISCUSSION WITH MR. GRANBERRY HE IS WILLING TO MOVE THE ONE POSITION THAT IS FULL-TIME TO BE OUT OF THE PRETRIAL DIVISION. PRETRIAL DIVISION FUND. DIVERGENT SORRY. AND BUT, THE OTHER 240,000 , I THINK THAT PERSON IS ABOUT 60,000, THE BALANCE WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND THIS YEAR. IT WOULD NOT BE A TRANSFER INTO THAT. JENNY, DID YOU WANT TO COMMENT ANYTHING ON IT OR ANYTHING AFTER TALKING TO THE ATTORNEYS AND ALL OF US AND MY OFFICE BACK THERE BEFORE WE CAME INTO HERE? >> OUR RATING COMPORTS WITH MR. GRANBERRY. NOT THE FACT THAT THEY CANNOT FUND ATTORNEYS, IT'S THAT THE ATTORNEYS TIME CANNOT BE DOCUMENTED TO BE SOLELY TO PRETRIAL DIVERSION. >> AND THERE ARE NONE AT THIS MOMENT. >> NOT DOING PRETRIAL? >> NONE THAT ARE SOLELY AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, NONE OF THE ATTORNEYS WHO ARE IN THAT GROUP SOLELY TO PRETRIAL DIVERSION WORK. >> WHAT ABOUT PARTIALLY? WE ARE LOOKING FOR EVERY DOLLAR WE CAN GET. >> UNDERSTAND, BUT THE PROBLEM IS IT WAS NEVER SET UP WHERE THERE WAS MODALITY FOR PEOPLE TO KEEP TRACK OF HOW MUCH OF THEIR DAY OR THE HOUR THAT THEY SPENT ON PRETRIAL DIVERSION. >> WHAT DO YOU USE IT FOR? >> WE USE IT FOR A LOT OF MISDEMEANOR CASES. >> HOW DO YOU USE IT, I'M SORRY. >> LET ME EXPLAIN WHAT PRETRIAL DIVERSION IS. A PERSON IS ARRESTED AND CHARGED WITH A THEFT OR DWI OR SOMETHING , THEY COME IN 18, NEVER BEEN IN TROUBLE BEFORE, BARELY OVER THE LEGAL LIMIT , NO ACCIDENT, NOBODY IS HURT . WANT TO GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO CLEAN THEMSELVES UP, WE CAN PUT THEM ON A PRETRIAL DIVERSION, WHICH IS A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THAT INDIVIDUAL CUTTING THE COURT OUT. AND THEY SIGN THE AGREEMENT AND THEY SIGN A PROVISIONAL CONFESSION THAT BECOMES EXHIBIT A AND A WAIVER OF SPEEDY TRIAL AND JURY TRIAL , THAT BECOMES THE NEXT EXHIBIT. AND WE PUT THEM ON PROBATION THAT IS SUPERVISED BY PROBATION AND CAN BE SUPERVISED , HOWEVER RESTRUCTURE AGAIN IT IS AN INFORMAL AGREEMENT. WE GENERALLY REQUIRE THEM TO TAKE CLASSES THAT ARE STANDARD ON ANY KIND OF CLASS DWI DRIVING SCHOOL , WHATEVER WE THINK IS APPROPRIATE, IF IT IS AN ASSAULT CASE , ANGER MANAGEMENT, RED DOWE CAN MAKE THEM JUMP THROUGH ALL THOSE HOOPS. AT THE END OF THE PROBATIONARY PERIOD, WHICH CAN BE SIX MONTHS UP TO TWO YEARS, THEN THEY CAN COME BACK AND DISMISS THE CASE AND THE CASE CAN BE EXPUNGED. SO THE BIG VALUE TO THE CITIZEN IS THEY CAN GET IT COMPLETELY WIPED OFF THEIR RECORD. >> WHAT DO YOU USE THE FUNDS FOR NOW? I GET THERE IS NOT A SYSTEM SET UP NOW, BUT SOME OF THE LAWYERS ARE DOING PRETRIAL DIVERSIONS SO SOME OF THE SALARY SHOULD BE OFFSET BY THIS I WOULD THINK. >> IT'S NOT SET UP THAT WAY. WE CAN SET IT UP OR TRY TO COME UP WITH GOING FORWARD, IN A WAY TO SAY I KEEP MY TIME GOING FORWARD ON HOW MUCH TIME DURING THE DAY I DID PRETRIAL DIVERSION. YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE FUNDS AND WE DON'T USE IT FOR ANYTHING. I DID NOT KNOW I HAD IT. >> SO THEY ARE THERE, WHAT WILL [03:15:02] YOU USE THEM FOR? >> VERY LIMITED THINGS. I WANT TO SEEK GUIDANCE FROM OTHER DISTRICT ATTORNEYS TO FIND OUT WHAT THEY ARE USING THEIRS FOR, WHETHER IT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THEIR COMMISSIONERS, BY ANY OPINIONS THEY HAVE FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, ANY COURT CASES THAT THEY HAVE HAD IN THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT. I'M GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR THAT, BUT THIS WAS AN ACCOUNT I DID NOT EVEN KNOW I HAD. >> WE DID NOT KNOW IT WAS A PROBLEMS WE ARE IN THE SAME BOAT. WE WERE $300,000 PROBLEM IN FRONT OF US AND SOMEHOW WE HAVE GOT TO MAKE A DECISION TODAY, MY ARGUMENT WOULD BE , IF INDEED THE FUNDS ARE ALLOWABLE, ATTORNEYS TO BE REIMBURSED FOR WHAT THEY DO LEGITIMATELY AND ACTUALLY IN PRETRIAL DIVERSION, WE AS A COUNTY SHOULD BE REIMBURSED FOR THAT IN SOME WAY. I GET IT IS DAY ZERO AND WE ARE DOWN TO THE WIRE, BUT BEFORE WE AGAIN SAY OKAY GREAT , WE ARE ALL KIND OF MAKING THE SAUSAGE HERE WHY COULDN'T WE COME UP WITH A SYSTEM THAT LEGITIMATELY SAID LOOK, WHATEVER THE PRETRIAL DIVERSION FUNDS COULD BE USED FOR, THEY SHOULD BE USED FOR AND THE COUNTY OUGHT TO GET CREDIT. AND I GET IT'S LAST MINUTE BUT WE HAVE TO DO THE SAME THING. >> I GET THAT GOING FORWARD, BUT I CAN'T SIGN A PAPER SAYING MY LAWYERS HAVE SPENT THIS MUCH TIME WORKING ON PRETRIAL DIVERSION WHEN WE HAVE DONE NOTHING TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT. >> I GET IT BUT WE ARE IN THE SAME BOAT. ASKED AT THE LAST MINUTE, NOT BECAUSE OF YOU, BUT THE LAST MINUTE TO SAY WE HAVE TO SUCK THIS UP AND NOT GET REIMBURSEMENT FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR AND WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT TO . >> LAST YEAR ANYBODY WAS IN THE PRETRIAL DIVERSION BUDGET WAS THE 2021 BUDGET. YOU'VE GOT 320,000 FOR THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE , WHICH WAS THE 21-22 AND I AM ASSUMING . >> I GET IT, BUT I'M JUST SAYING. >> I AM KIND OF WHERE THE COMMISSIONER IS RIGHT NOW. MONEY WAS THERE , BUT NOT USED FOR TWO YEARS. BECAUSE YOU DID NOT KNOW YOU HAD THE ACCOUNT. >> WHEN I DID THE RESEARCH I HAVE DONE, THERE'S ONLY ONE PERSON WHO QUALIFIES PER THE DEFINITION IN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION. AND BY THE STATUTORY LANGUAGE INCLUDED. >> THAT PERSON WAS UTILIZING THOSE FUNDS? >> SHE WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE LISTED IN THAT COURT. FOR 2019-2020 AND FOR 2020 AND 2021. SHE IS THE ONLY ONE WHO WOULD HAVE LEGITIMATELY MET THE DEFINITION. >> SHE'S NOT THERE NO MORE? >> WE'VE STILL GOT HER, WE WILL PUT HER BACK IN AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE OFFERING TODAY. >> YOU NEED TWO PEOPLE TO BE UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF DIVERSION TO HELP YOU DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO? >> HE HAS THE FUNDS. >> JUST SAYING, HE HAS THE FUNDS , BUT IF YOU CAN USE PART OF THE FUNDS AND WE CAN USE PART OF THE FUNDS. >> CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE TRANSFER COMING OUT THE LAST TWO YEARS IF HE HAD NO PEOPLE IN THERE? >> THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY WAS THERE , WE HAD THE ISSUE WHERE THERE WERE FIVE EMPLOYEES IN THE DEPARTMENT, SEVERAL LAWYERS AND INVESTIGATORS. AND THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY STILL TALKING ABOUT AND THEY'RE RUNNING ON A DEFICIT. SO THEY BROUGHT TO THE COURTS AND CAN RETRANSFER THESE EMPLOYEES TO THE GENERAL FUND AND WITH THAT THEY PROMISED TO TRANSFER THE COST OF THE TO THE GENERAL FUND SO THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING IN THE PAST , IF THEY HAVE 320 OR THEY DIDN'T ON THE AMOUNT THAT THEY HAD. >> IT SHOULD COME TO US. >> IT DID, YOU ALLOW THEM TO TRANSFER. >> WITH THE AGREEMENT THAT WE WILL BE REIMBURSED. >> WITH WHATEVER THEY HAD. >> WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PEOPLE IN THERE, NOW IN THE GENERAL FUND? WHAT ARE THEY DOING? [03:20:01] >> THEY ARE STILL IN THE GENERAL FUND AS ATTORNEYS. >> BY PEOPLE YOU NEGOTIATED THE TRANSFER WITH ARE NO LONGER THERE ON THE LIST, THEY'VE NOT BEEN PAID SINCE 2021? >> THEY WERE PAID OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND. 21-22. >> WE'VE BEEN PAYING ALL THESE YEARS. HE HAS BEEN PAYING. THOSE FIVE PEOPLE WOULD'VE BEEN LET GO BACK THEN BECAUSE THEY DID NOT HAVE THE FUNDS FOR IT. THOSE FIVE PEOPLE WERE SENT TO THE GENERAL FUND AND HE PAID FOR IT OUT OF THE DIVERSION FUND, NOW YOU ARE SAYING YOU CAN'T, BUT WE STOPPED TO PAY FOR THE FIVE PEOPLE, SO THE GENERAL FUND NOW WILL BE GETTING SHORTED BECAUSE HE WILL WANT TO KEEP THOSE FIVE PEOPLE AND NOT PAY FOR THEM BECAUSE HE SAYS HE CAN'T LEGITIMATELY. SO THOSE FIVE PEOPLE WERE IN THE UNIT BEFORE DOING THE WORK BEFORE . THEY HAD FIVE PEOPLE SO IT'S HARD FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND HOW NOBODY'S DOING ENOUGH PRETRIAL DIVERSION WORK OR WE CAN'T ACCOUNT FOR SOME OF THE FUNDS. IT DOES NOT ADD UP AND I GET IT WE ARE IN THE LAST DAY AND WE HAD THIS TWO WEEKS AGO OR TWO MONTHS AGO WE COULD'VE FIGURED OUT HOW TO DO THIS AND YOU COULD'VE ASKED THE PEOPLE HOW WE DO IT , BUT WE ARE STUCK WITH THOSE PEOPLE THAT WERE BEING PAID FOR SOMEWHERE ELSE. NOT LIKE WE GOT A WINDFALL. 'S WE DID NOT GET A WINDFALL , THOSE FIVE PEOPLE GOT MOVED FROM ONE THING TO ANOTHER AND THE FUNDS THAT THE DA THOUGHT HE COULD USE TO PAY FOR THEM SO IT WAS NET ZERO. NOW IT'S A NET LOSS TO US. A NET LOSS TO THE COUNTY AND THOSE FIVE POSITIONS ARE STILL HERE. THAT'S A NET LOSS TO THE COUNTY THAT'S NOT RIGHT EITHER. YOU ARE 100% RIGHT , BUT WE ARE GETTING SCREWED ON THIS HE IS CLEANING UP THAT OFFICE AND THAT'S GREAT, BUT WE HAVE TO PAY FOR THESE BEFORE WE WILL PAY FOR THESE. >> 260,000. >> I HAVE TO FIGURE A LOT OF THESE PEOPLE ARE DOING PRETRIAL DIVERSION WORK AND I GET HE CAN ANSWER TODAY BUT WHAT DO WE DO? WE HAVE TO PASS A BUDGET TODAY. I DON'T KNOW. >> THE MAJORITY OF MY PEOPLE ARE NOT DOING PRETRIAL DIVERSION. I DID NOT SAY ZERO I SAID THE MAJORITY OF MY PEOPLE NOT DOING PRETRIAL DIVERSION. I AM SO SHORTHANDED FLOOR BY HIMSELF. HAVE A COUPLE OF TRAINING LAWYERS WORKING ON IT THAT HE'S TEACHING RUNNING FROM COUNTY COURT OF LAW NUMBER ONE TO COUNTY COURT AT LAW NUMBER TWO TO COUNTY COURT AT LAW NUMBER THREE AND FOUR. WHEN HE CAN FIND SOMEONE HE RUNS UP TO FILL IN THE COURT SAYS ARE YOU FREE COME WITH ME HELP ME GET THIS DONE. TO RUN DOWN AND SIT DOWN WITH A STACK OF FILES AND START DOING THOSE CASES. >> JIMMY IF WE EVER GET ANYWHERE MAKING THAT BETTER NOW WE HAVE TO EAT $250,000 MORE. I GET IT, WE NEED TO INCREASE THE PAY IN YOUR POSITIONS. WE NEED TO DO A LOT OF THINGS, NOW WE GOT POPPED WITH $250,000 WE WERE NOT ANTICIPATING AND GOING FURTHER NOW INTO THE HOLE AFTER WE HAVE CUT MILLIONS OUT OF THE BUDGET SO I MEAN, YOU DID NOT CREATE IT, I GET IT. >> I HEARD TALK EARLIER ABOUT GETTING INTO RESERVES AND THIS MAY BE ONE OF THOSE UNFORTUNATE TIMES WHEN YOU HAVE TO GET INTO YOUR RESERVES. >> EVERYTHING WE DO TODAY IS GETTING INTO RESERVES. >> YOU MEAN MORE INTO MY RESERVES. THIS WILL BE 4 MILLION INTO THE RESERVES. >> MINE IS A SHORT BIT OF THAT. >> OKAY I WON'T AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT. YOU ARE FINE UNTIL YOU SAID THAT. >> I WAS JOKING. >> I KNOW, I GOT YOU. >> THE POINT IS I'M STILL UNDERSTAFFED AND THEY ARE STILL UNDERPAID AND THAT'S A PROBLEM WE HAVE TO ADDRESS, BUT CUTTING FOUR OR FIVE OF MY LAWYERS OUT SAYING HIT THE STREETS BECAUSE WE ARE SHORT OF CASH, IS NOT THE ANSWER. I WILL BE HAPPY TO DIP INTO ANY FUNDS THAT I HAVE , IF I CAN FIND METHODOLOGY THAT WOULD ALLOW ME TO DO IT, BUT I CAN'T FIND THAT SO UNTIL I HAVE A LEGAL OPINION FROM SOMEONE THAT SAYS THAT I CAN FIND A REASON TO GIVE IT BACK TO THE COUNTY. >> MAYBE WE NEED TO PASS SOMETHING WITH CONTINGENCY ON IT BECAUSE YOU ARE DOING [03:25:02] PRETRIAL DIVERSION WORK, I GET TO DO YOU DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH AND WHAT THE SYSTEM IS, BUT IT IS, YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING SO MAYBE WE NEED TO PASS WITH SOME DIRECTION THAT SAYS , YOU WILL WORK WITH WHOEVER , THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO COME UP WITH A LEGAL WAY THAT'S LEGIT SO THE COUNTY CAN GIVE FUNDS BACK AND WE DON'T HAVE TO WAIT A WHOLE YEAR AND SUCK UP 250,000. I KNOW YOU DID NOT SAY THIS BUT UNLESS THEY DO ZERO PRETRIAL DIVERSION THERE OUGHT TO BE A WAY TO SAY LEGITIMATELY FIVE LAWYERS DO 15% OF THE WORK OR WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS THAT YOU CAN GET A ANSWER TO AND WE CAN MOVE ON. I DON'T KNOW. >> LISA WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING. >> WE CAN PUT THE MONEY IN CONTINGENCY APPROPRIATION AND WE WOULD HAVE THE TIME TO FIGURE OUT A LEGAL WAY TO USE THOSE FUNDS IN THE BUDGET WOULD GET REALLOCATED BE A CHANGE ORDER >> YOU CAN'T DO THAT. MY MONEY GOES INTO MY ACCOUNT. >> SIR, IN YOUR DEPARTMENT. >> ALL I WANT OUT OF THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE RIGHT NOW. >> WE CAN PASS THIS GOING FORWARD . >> THE SPECIAL DEPARTMENT 13 230 PRETRIAL DIVERSION CONTINGENCY APPROPRIATION IN THAT DEPARTMENT, NOT AS A TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL FUND, IN HIS DEPARTMENT CONTINGENCY APPROPRIATION. >> SHE SAYS IT STAYS IN THE FUND NOBODY CAN TOUCH IT UNTIL IT'S FIGURED OUT. AND YOU WOULD BE THE ONE WHO WOULD INITIATE THAT CHANGE ORDER. NOT US, YOU. >> ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS HE IS ASKING FOR WAS ALL OF HIS ACCOUNTS TO BE SET DIRECTLY TO HIM SEPARATE ACCOUNTS THAT GO SO HE HAS FULL ACCESS AND CONTROL. THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN WRITE CHECKS, THEY COME TO HIM LIKE THE SHERIFFS DO. HE HAS REQUESTED THAT IN THE NEXT BUDGET TO BE TRANSFERRED OVER. >> THAT'S REQUIRED BY LAW. >> YOU WILL HAVE CONTROL OF THEM WE JUST ASK FOR YOU TO WORK WITH US. >> YOU WILL GET COPIES , ANYBODY WANT TO COPY OF THE MONTHLY BANK STATEMENT I WILL BE HAPPY TO GET ONE SENT TO YOUR. COMPLETELY TRANSPARENT. >> IN THE NEXT YEAR WORKING WITH US ON FUNDING THESE POSITIONS WHEN YOU TRANSFER THE ONE AND MOVING FORWARD. >> LET ME SAY AGAIN BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S THE SAFEGUARD YOU NEED. WHAT SHE SAYS TODAY THAT WILL PROVIDE US A NET ZERO FOR OUR PURPOSE TODAY BECAUSE NOW IT COULD KICK US IN THE TEETH LATER BUT IT MIGHT NOT IT WILL BUY TIME AND PUT IT IN CONTINGENCY FUND IN YOUR PRETRIAL DIVERSION ACCOUNT, NO ONE CAN TOUCH IT OR SPEND IT, NO ONE CAN DO ANYTHING UNLESS YOU INITIATE AND THAT BUYS TIME TO SIT DOWN AND SEE IF THERE'S A LEGAL WAY TO COME UP WITH A SYSTEM THAT SAYS OKAY, THIS IS ACCEPTABLE TO WHOEVER YOU NEED TO CHECK OUT BECAUSE WE'RE DOING SOME PRETRIAL DIVERSION WORK AND MAYBE WE GET 50,000 ON THE BACK OR ZERO I DON'T KNOW, BUT IT BUYS US TIME TO NOT HAVE TO PASS TODAY AND BE ANOTHER 250,000 IN THE HOLE AS WE ARE PUSHING ON 4 MILLION. I GET IT, I WANT YOU TO DIGEST IT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT YOU TO FEEL LIKE. >> I DON'T FEEL THAT WAY, MY PROBLEM , LOSING FAITH. >> THAT'S ANOTHER DAY. OKAY. >> THAT'S MY PROBLEM WITH THE AUDITOR OFFICE. I DON'T HAVE ANY FAITH IN THEM. SO IT'S NOTHING PERSONAL , BUT I HAVE BEEN ASKING SINCE I GOT HERE OCTOBER 7 AND I HAVE NOT GOT ANY ANSWERS. I WAS 25,000 IN THE RED FOR THE FIRST COUPLE MONTHS I WAS HERE AND I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW YOU CAN BE THAT FAR IN THE RED. SO THAT'S WHERE I AM COMING FROM. NOTHING PERSONAL, BUT I CAN'T TRUST WHAT I CAN'T TRUST. SO THAT HAS BEEN STATED HERE ON THE RECORD. I TAKE YOU AT YOUR WORD, I HAVE NO REASON TO DISBELIEVE ANYTHING THAT COMES FROM THIS COURT. SO WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING I AM HAPPY TO DO IT. >> I WOULD LIKE TO DO IT SO YOU CAN HEAR IT, OFFICIAL VOTE SO THAT'S THE WAY IT HAS TO BE AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE WAY IT'S WORDED , LET US KNOW BECAUSE I TRULY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND I'M TRYING TO PROTECT THE FUNDS AND FIGURE OUT SOMETHING LAST-MINUTE IS A COMPROMISE THAT IS NOT TOAST US [03:30:02] SO I APPRECIATE YOU WORKING WITH US. >> WE WILL PUT THE WORK IN. >> ARE YOU MAKING THE MOTION? >> I WOULD MAKE MOTION THAT FIRST OF ALL THE FIRST LADY AND SORRY A LADY WE'RE TRANSFERRING BACK? >> SITE AND RELEASE COORDINATOR. >> TRANSFERRED BACK TO THE PRETRIAL DIVERSION AND THOSE FUNDS WILL PAY FOR THAT PERSON AND THE REST OF THOSE FUNDS KEPT IN A CONTINGENCY FUND PRETRIAL DIVERSION MANAGED BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND NONE OF THE FUNDS CAN BE SPENT WITHOUT DISTRICT ATTORNEY INITIATING THAT PO AFTER DOING THE RESEARCHING IS TO DO ALONGSIDE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WE CAN GO FROM THERE. >> SECOND. >> IS JUST IN A LETTER IN THE BUDGET DISCUSSION THERE IS NO NUMBER. >> PART OF NINE, THE WHOLE BUDGET DISCUSSION. >> G 8 , 7. MOTION AND A SECOND. SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE WHEN YOU SPEAK. >> OKAY. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OBOES TO , SAME SIGN? THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> YOU ALL HAVE A DELIGHTFUL DAY. >> MOVING ON G 8-6, SOME DECREASES IN THE BUDGET OPTIONS AND ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, EDWARD CAME UP TO TALK ABOUT DELETE THE VACANT POSITION. TWO DRIVERS THIS WOULD BE DELETING ONE DRIVER FROM THE SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES WHICH HAS BEEN OPEN OVER A YEAR AND THIS HELPS WITH HIS BUDGET CUTS SINCE HE GOT THE OTHER PERSON AND HE ONLY GOT THE VEHICLE CUT WERE ALL THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS HAD BIGGER CUTS. I WILL SECOND THE MOTION, A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? >> DECREASING NUMBER ONE. >> THE VAN DRIVER? >> JUST ONE. >> THAT HAVE OPENINGS. >> YOU NEED ONE OR BOTH? I KNOW ONE WAS FROZEN AND I DON'T KNOW WHY FOR SO LONG. >> IT WAS FROZEN AS PART OF THE BUDGET COMPROMISE. IT DOES NOT MEAN WE DON'T NEED IT. WE HAVE TAKEN PARKS EMPLOYEES TO GO FILL IN. PARKS EMPLOYEES COME IN AND DELIVER THE MEALS FOR US. >> I ALSO UNDERSTAND WITH THIS BUDGET WE RETURN TO KEEP IT FAIR AND THIS WAS PART OF YOUR OTHER POSITION SINCE YOU HAD TWO OPEN POSITIONS THAT WERE NOT FILLED , WE LEFT ONE AND CUT ONE. >> RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE WEREN'T TRYING TO FILL IT. >> IS THE ONLY ONE FROZEN? >> THE OTHER ONE FROZEN WAS THE CUSTODIAN BUT WE ARE TRYING TO CHANGE THAT AND GET A DESCRIPTION SO WE CAN FIND A PERSON. >> THIS IS JUST A VAN DRIVER? >> YES A VAN DRIVER. >> 40,000? >> ALL OF THESE ADD UP, BUT IT WAS JUST ONE MORE CUT. WE TRY TO BE FAIR ACROSS THE BOARD WITH OUR DEPARTMENTS AND THIS WAS ONE THING. TWO WERE NOT FILLED, ONE AVAILABLE, DEDUCT THE ONE WHICH ONLY MAKES YOUR DEDUCTIONS FROM YOUR ENTIRE DEPARTMENT, THE 73 PUBLIC WORKS GOT MUCH HIGHER, COASTAL PARKS GOT MUCH HIGHER. WE WERE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING THAT AFFECTED EVERYONE. THIS HAS NOT BEEN FILLED OVER A YEAR. >> HAVE BEEN SAYING WE HAVE TO FILL IT, NOW IT'S FROZEN. DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER VACANCIES TO TRANSFER ONE TO BE A VAN DRIVER? >> COMMISSIONER, NO. THAT WAS ONE OF THE POSITIONS WE FILLED AND THAT PERSON IS MOVING OVER TO HILLTOP. >> FOR CUSTODIAL? >> ONE OF THE DRIVERS. >> IT A DRIVER? >> JUST A MAINTENANCE WORKER. [03:35:01] GROUNDSKEEPER. >> I DON'T KNOW. I AM OUT OF MONEY. >> AND YOU VOTED AGAINST IT. WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE CUTS. >> WELL AS LONG, NEED TO FILL THE OTHER ONE UP AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. WE WILL BE COMING BACK TO COURT. >> INTO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE. >> WE HIRED THE POSITIONS, IT'S PART OF THE PROCESS. WAITING FOR THEM TO PASS THEIR DRUG SCREENING AND BACKGROUND CHECK. RIGHT NOW ESSENTIALLY WE TRIED TO HIRE THEM SO WE ARE WAITING FOR THAT TO COME BACK. SO YOU KNOW IT TAKES ABOUT A MONTH. >> IS THAT THE SAME JOB ] RETIRED? >> THAT'S WHERE THE GENTLEMAN IS GOING. HILLTOP . ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED , SAME SIGN . THEY MOTION PASSES. NEXT DEDUCTION WAS THE COUNTY COURT ATTORNEY FEES. WE JUST DID A SLIGHT DEDUCTION ON ATTORNEY FEES AT 10,000, EACH COURT. >> THEY THINK THEY CAN LIVE WITH THAT. IS THAT SOMETHING? >> WE CHECKED ALL THE BUDGETS. >> THE COUNTY AUDIT RECOMMENDS THE DECREASE. >> THERE WAS MORE THAN ENOUGH. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? >> I'M KEEPING THAT TOTAL. >> ADMINISTRATION ATTORNEY FEES , 75,000 CAPITAL TRIALS AND TERESA . >> AGAIN IT'S THE SAME, WE INCREASED, BUT THEY HAVE THE CUSHION SO WE BACKING OUT THE INCREASE. >> THEY ALREADY HAVE THE FUNDS. YES. >> MOTION TO PASS. >> EMOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM 10 THE DISTRICT COURT ATTORNEYS FEES A TOTAL OF 544,000 DEDUCTING 68,000 FROM EACH DISTRICT COURT >> YOU CAN HAVE THE CUSHION, THEY KNOW ABOUT THIS? >> THAT IS THE REQUEST FOR THE INCREASE. WE FEEL LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE IS GETTING CUTS SO WE ARE NOT DOING THE INCREASE. THEY ASKED FOR AN ADDITIONAL 68, BUT THAT WAS A CHRISTIAN. LISA WANTS TO SPEAK. >> OKAY WAIT. WE DO NOT PUT 68 IN AND WE'RE TAKING 68 OUT? >> THIS 60 IT WAS INCREASED WE ARE JUST BACKING OUT, THEY REQUESTED 68,000 INCREASED ON ALL ATTORNEY FEES NOW WE ARE BACKING OUT BECAUSE THEY HAVE AVAILABLE FUNDS. >> THE AUDITOR PROPOSAL WE WERE TAKING IT OUT. >> I GET IT THAT WILL KNOCK DOWN 544 , BUT THAT HAS BEEN LOOKED AT AND JUDGE KNOWS THIS IS COMING AND ALL THIS KIND OF STUFF? >> THEY KNOW THIS BUDGET IS NOT PLEASANT FOR ANYBODY. >> WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THESE ARE MANDATED FEES WE HAVE TO SPEND . >> AT THE END OF THE DAY, BUT RIGHT NOW LOOKING BACK ALL ACCOUNTS ARE FULLY FUNDED AND WE ARE NOT PUTTING THEM IN A BIND WITH WHAT THEY HAVE NOW. >> THEORETICALLY THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OFFICE WAS SUPPOSED TO SAVE MONEY. OKAY. >> SO I MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS . DO WE HAVE A MOTION? WE HAVE A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE AND ANY OPPOSED , THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM A, AFTER THIS THE LAW ENFORCEMENT VEHICLES , WINDOWS SOFTWARE UPGRADE WE TALKED ABOUT POSSIBLY, KNOW THIS IS AN AGENDA ITEM ON THE REGULAR AGENDA IN A MOMENT, BUT IF WE CANNOT USE THE ARPA FUNDS, IF WE DO NOT PAST AS THE REASON IT IS ON HERE THEN IT HAS TO COUNT AGAINST THE BUDGET BECAUSE IT IS REQUIRED THAT ALL VEHICLES [03:40:03] HAVE THE UPGRADE. A ONE-TIME THING. >> WE HAVE 558 OR SOMETHING? 585. >> FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE FROM THE COUNTYWIDE BALANCE. COMMISSIONER MAREZ WILL HELP WITH THAT. >> THE MOTION THIS IS USE ARPA COUNTYWIDE. TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE. >> 585 FROM COUNTYWIDE AND REMAINDER FROM COMMISSIONER MAREZ. >> THAT WILL DEPLETE COUNTYWIDE ARPA MONEY. DID YOU MAKE THE MOTION? SECOND SINCE IT'S YOURS? WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE ANY OPPOSED , THE MOTION PASSES. THIS NEXT ONE IS A SUGGESTION AND DISCUSSION AND ON THE P -CARD PURCHASING. IT'S REALLY HITTING OUR BUDGET, AS WELL. OUR SUGGESTION AND THE ONLY THING WE COULD COME UP WITH IS TO SUSPEND EXCEPT FOR TRAVEL AND HOTEL RESERVATIONS TO GO BACK YOU CAN STILL USE IT BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PO THAT GOES WITH THE PURCHASE SO THESE DEPARTMENTS KEEP TRACK OF WHAT THEY ARE SPENDING AND DON'T GO OVER THE BUDGET. IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT MANY OF THESE ON THE FINAL , DEPARTMENTS ARE OVERSPENDING, BUT LIKE ANYBODY ELSE WHEN YOU HAVE A CREDIT CARD SOMETIMES THAT STUFF CATCHES UP WITH YOU AT THE END AND IT'S TOO LATE. WITH THIS KIND OF BUDGET, THE COUNTY HAS TO BE STRICT AND TIGHT. IT IS A SUGGESTION, NOT SOMETHING I EVEN KNOW HOW TO ADDRESS. TERESA AND I TALKED AND THIS WAS THE ONLY THING WE COULD COME UP WITH, TO SUSPEND IT EXCLUSIVELY EXCEPT FOR TRAVEL, HOTEL AND REGISTRATION. >> CAN WE DO THAT? WE HAVE GONE TO THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE BECAUSE WE WERE BOTHERED ABOUT IT BEFORE. WE GOT WHICH BACK FROM PURCHASING BECAUSE HE IS IN CHARGE OF THE P-CARD , THE WHOLE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT IS. AND I THOUGHT, I DON'T KNOW, WHAT ARE WE, WHAT CAN WE DO? WHAT DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO SINCE THIS IS ALL UNDER PURCHASING? THE P-CARD RUN UNDER YOU? >> IN COMBINATION WITH ME AND DALE BUT I OVERSEE THE P-CARD. >> DO YOU RECONCILE THEM? >> EACH DEPARTMENT AS THEIR OWN. >> HOW FAR BEHIND ARE THEY? A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE NOT RECONCILING AND YOU SUSPENDED SOME OF THEM. >> I THINK WE ARE IN THE 2 TO 3 MONTH WINDOW. IT CLEANED UP A LOT FROM THE BEGINNING LAST TIME. IT'S KIND OF A RECURRING THING FOR US OVER TIME THAT SOMETIMES FOLKS GET BEHIND ON RECONCILING SO WHEN WE HAD DONE IN THE PAST WAS INSTITUTED A HARD-LINE STANCE ON IF THE P-CARD IS NOT RECONCILED WE FREEZE THE CAR AND THEY CANNOT USE IT AND THEN AFTER RECONCILED TO GET IT LIFTED TO USE THE CARD. >> HOW DO THEY GET BEHIND AGAIN WE ALREADY HAD DONE THAT? >> OUT OF YOU WILL GET BEHIND? >> OR WIRE THEY NOT SUSPENDED? >> WHAT AUTHORITY DO WE HAVE JENNY OR MICHAEL IN REGARDS TO THESE P-CARDS. I AM ALL FOR SUSPENDING THESE UNTIL THERE RECONCILED. >> I HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT, WE HAVE IN THE PAST, YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE A NEW POLICY, THE RULES ALREADY ALLOW ME TO DO THAT, BUT IF THERE ARE SUGGESTED POLICY CHANGES WE CAN LOOK AT THAT. >> WELL, ANYTHING, WHO'S ON THE BOARD FROM US RIGHT NOW? >> WE HAVE NOT HAD A MEETING IN TWO YEARS. >> THAT'S WHY I GOT OFF OF IT. >> I DID SOME RESEARCH ON THIS BECAUSE I HEARD SOMETHING BEING TALKED ABOUT P-CARDS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS ULTIMATELY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT HAS AUTHORITY TO SET THE POLICY. YOU WOULD REQUEST ME TO DRAFT UP SOMETHING IF YOU HAVE SUGGESTIONS I WILL DRAFT WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING AND EVOLVE VOTE IT THROUGH AND WHEN THE POLICIES ARE APPROVED BY THE COURT , THEN I ADOPT ENFORCEMENT OF SAID POLICY. SO MY JOB IS TO ENFORCE WHATEVER IT IS YOU HAVE SET UP. >> IF YOU DON'T RECONCILE BY THE END OF EACH MONTH WE [03:45:01] SUSPEND THE CARDS. PRETTY SIMPLE POLICY I WOULD THING. I HAVE TO RECONCILE MY CREDIT CARD EVERY DAY OR EVERY MONTH. >> WE HAVE A P-CARD POLICY NOW AND NO ONE IS IN COMPLIANCE. IT IS IN BUDGET OVERRUNS, EXPENSES DON'T POST TO THE LEDGER. WE ARE TWO OR THREE MONTHS BEHIND SO DEPARTMENTS THINK THEY HAVE THE BUDGET AND ALL THESE CHARGES POST WHICH HELPS WITH OVERAGES , THERE IS NO CONTROL. >> HOW DO YOU CONTROL ONE INAUDIBLE ] >> IT HAS NOT HIT YET. THEY KEEP SPENDING. >> SOMEHOW USE IT AND IT'S A RED FLAG. >> WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SOME MECHANISM. >> COULD YOU HAVE A PO FOR EVEN P-CARD PURCHASES BEFORE YOU SWIPE THE CARD, CREATE A PO TO GET YOUR BALANCE YOU KNOW HOW MUCH YOU HAVE? >> I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SYSTEMS LIMITATION, THE P-CARD TRANSACTIONS CAN TURN INTO A PURCHASE ORDER IN THE SYSTEM BUT THAT'S AFTER THE FACT. SO AS WE APPROACH, USUALLY THIS HAPPENS IN THE LAST QUARTER BUT I WOULD NEED TO KNOW WHICH DEPARTMENTS EXHAUSTED THEIR BUDGET IN WHICH AREAS AND THE CARDHOLDERS WHO SPEND IN THOSE AREAS WE WOULD HAVE TO FREEZE THEIR CARDS FROM THAT POINT UNTIL THE END OF YEAR IF THEY DON'T HAVE FUNDS. THAT COULD BE AN APPROACH. >> WE ALMOST HAVE TO IN THE NEXT BUDGET. >> A LOT OF TIMES USERS ARE FOLKS OUT IN THE FIELD. IT IS YOUR OFFICERS PAYING FOR VEHICLE REPAIR OR WHATEVER IF THE DEPARTMENT IS OUT OF MONEY THERE WILL NOT BE THE ONES WHO KNOW THE INFORMATION. THEY KNOW THE CARD IS DOWN AND HAVE TO FIX IT AND PAY FOR IT TO GET BACK IN SERVICE FOR A VEHICLE REPAIR SITUATION. I BELIEVE COASTAL PARKS HAVE REPAIR WORK THEY HAVE TO DO TIME TO TIME, PUBLIC WORKS FOR PLUMBING REPAIRS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. >> CAN YOU MAKE IT PART OF YOUR POLICY IN THE THIRD QUARTER OF EVERY YEAR TO GET WITH THE AUDITOR ON THE BALANCES AND MAYBE NOTIFY THE DEPARTMENT? >> MAYBE PUT THIS ON THE NEXT AGENDA. >> WE IS TO GET A COLORIZED VERSION OF THE BUDGET AND YOU COULD SEE IF YOU ARE IN THE GREEN, YELLOW OR RED AND IF YOU'RE IN THE RED ZONE SOMETHING IS TO GO OUT TO SAY HEY, YOU WILL NEED TO WATCH THIS. >> DO WE HAVE THAT NOW? >> IS THAT BECAUSE THE CARDS ARE OPEN ALL THE TIME? WE ONLY GIVE SO MUCH. >> CARTER SET UP WITH A SINGLE PURCHASE LIMIT AND MONTHLY LIMIT, BUT NOT A ANNUAL BUDGET LIMIT. >> DIVIDE THE ANNUAL BUDGET BY 12 AND THAT WOULD BE THE MONTHLY BUDGET AND IF THEY GO OVER THERE TO GET APPROVAL. >> CHECK IT AND SAY YOU DON'T HAVE NO MONEY. >> I GUESS WE NEED TO PUT IT ON THE NEXT AGENDA TO ADDRESS THE P-CARDS . WE NEED TO SET A POLICY IN PLACE THAT STOPS THIS ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE YEAR WE ARE LOOKING AT WITH THE BUDGET. I KEEP SAYING AND I KNOW HE KEEPS SAYING ABOUT THE MILLIONS WHERE DOWN IN RESERVES, BUT OUR BUDGET IS GOING TO BE EXTREMELY TIGHT. WE ARE ASKING ALL DEPARTMENTS TO PLEASE WATCH YOUR BUDGET. >> I HAD SPOKEN TO DALE EARLIER IN THE WEEK AND I WILL PUBLISH A MEMO OCTOBER 1 THAT THE P-CARDS HAVE TO BE RECONCILED AND WE WILL ENFORCE. IF THEY ARE NOT RECONCILED ON TIME. >> EVERY DEPARTMENT. >> LIKE YOU SAID, THE EXAMPLE , THINKING OF MY PAST EXPERIENCE, DEALING WITH P-CARDS WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS. WE WERE SAYING IF SOMEBODY NEEDS WORK TO BE DONE THAT'S WHEN THE TICKET IN. SAY THEY BLEW OUT A TIRE OR OIL CHANGE THINGS LIKE THAT THERE ARE SOME OTHER THINGS THAT CAN BE EXCLUDED . >> I DON'T BELIEVE THOSE ARE PROBLEM DEPARTMENTS OR EVEN PROBLEM ISSUES SPECIFICALLY. YOU HAVE SEVERAL OFFICERS WITH DIFFERENT VEHICLES TAKING VEHICLES TO DIFFERENT PLACES. IT'S HARD TO KNOW I CANNOT SET A BUDGET EQUALLY FOR ALL OFFICERS BECAUSE THEY WON'T [03:50:02] HAVE EQUAL REPAIRS. >> THEY ARE GOING OUT OF WHO CAN GET THE CAR TURNED AROUND THE FASTEST. >> IF YOU DON'T RECONCILE THEN YOU CAN'T USE IT. >> MY THING IS, IN THE PROCESS, THE NOTICE CAN OR SHOULD BE THERE WITHIN REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME SO THAT'S ONE WAY TO MONITOR. >> I THINK IF WE CAN GET COMPLAINTS ON RECONCILING TIMELY, YOU WILL HAVE AT LEAST UP TO THE CURRENT MONTH NUMBERS WHICH WE DON'T HAVE NO BECAUSE WE TALK THREE MONTHS BEHIND. SO IF WE GET IT CLOSER THERE WILL BE LESS RISK OPPORTUNITY. >> THAT IS GOING TO BE ON A FUTURE AGENDA AND ANYONE WATCHING ANY DEPARTMENT THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED SOMETHING TO MAKE THAT TIGHTER AND IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY, TAKE ONE OF THE CARDS, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO RECONCILE THOSE ACCOUNTS. OR DON'T TAKE ONE. SO, MOVING ON TO PAGE , ADDITIONAL STAFF. THAT'S IT ON MINE. WE PASSED EVERYTHING INDIVIDUALLY. >> RIGHT NOW BASED ON MY ROUGH CALCULATIONS, 3.129, IN THE HOLE BASED ON GETTING NOT LUCKY BUT SOME NET ZERO AND THE NET ZEROS WE HAD CAME UP WITH THE AD BACK ON THE WAIVER WHICH IS ONLY A STOPGAP THAT WILL KICK US IN THE TAIL NEXT YEAR. >> ABSOLUTELY. THOSE OF US HERE, LET'S KEEP IN MIND, INTEREST RATES ARE GOING DOWN, INTEREST ON THE ARPA FUNDS, WE ARE SPENDING THE ARPA FUNDS WE WILL NOT HAVE THESE POOLS TO DRAG MANY FROM SO WE LOVE TO CUT. MOVING ON NUMBER ONE, COMMISSIONER MAREZ REQUESTED AN ADDITIONAL SOCIAL CASEWORKER FOR VETERANS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES. THAT'S ON MY LIST FOR YOU TO BRING UP. AND COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. >> THIS KIND OF TIES IN WITH , TO HAVE ANYBODY FROM GRANT WORKS ON? OKAY JJ AND AMANDA ARE BOTH ON. >> HI I AM HERE. >> WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO, LOOKING BACK SORRY. TOO MANY SPREADSHEETS. >> DO YOU HAVE THIS PAGE? THE VETERANS ? >> ON THE REGULAR AGENDA ITEM REFERENCING THAT TO NUMBER FOUR REFERENCING THAT TO NUMBER 403 84. SINCE WE ALREADY JUMPED ON THAT EARLIER ON THE SOFTWARE ISSUE. I KIND OF WANTED TO REMIND THE COURT AND MAKE THEM AWARE OF THE BUDGET OFFICER POSITION. I PUT IT IN AS THE, AS A SECONDARY SOURCE TO HELP COVER THE POSITION IF THE COURT CHOSE NOT TO COVER THAT IN THE BUDGET, WHICH WE DID. SO THAT WILL FREE UP $164,120. SO WANTING TO FULLY ACCOUNT FOR ALL THE ALLOCATED ARPA FUNDING, I WOULD LIKE TO PLAY THAT TO THE SOCIAL WORKER POSITION WHICH IS ROUGHLY 60,000 AND THE REMAINDER PUT IT TOWARD CONTROL. >> CUT DOWN ON VECTOR CONTROL COST. >> CUT DOWN AND THE COST FOR THIS POSITION AT LEAST FOR THIS YEAR. >> IS THIS THE CASEWORKER TWO AMOUNT ? DO YOU HAVE THIS PAGE? >> SO YOU WOULD TAKE , HOW MUCH DID YOU HAVE? >> 164, 120. >> 164 OKAY. AND YOU ARE WANTING TO SUBTRACT OUT AND I'M DOING THIS FOR DISCUSSION SAKE. NO OFFENSE I DON'T THINK WE NEED ANY OF THIS. OKAY SO LET'S SEE, OKAY. >> 110, 545 REMAINING FOR [03:55:04] VECTOR. >> OKAY ASSUMING WE DO THAT. >> ONE YEAR FOR THIS PERSON. >> YES FOR THE SOCIAL OR VETERAN SOCIAL SERVICES POSITION CASEWORKER TWO . TOTAL SALARY BENEFITS 52,875 THROUGH ARPA FUNDING WE NEED AMANDA AND JJ TO CHIME IN. AND THE BALANCE APPLIED TO THE VECTOR CONTROL SO WE DON'T HAVE TO EAT AS MUCH AS THE COST. >> CAN WE PUT THAT LIKE TO HAVE TO DESIGNATE A SOCIAL SERVICES OR CAN WE PUT IT UNDER JJ AND LET THEM USE THEM HOW HE WANTS TO USE THEM BECAUSE THAT MIGHT TAKE CARE OF WHAT JOE IS WANTING TO DO BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE MONEY FOR THAT ONE. MAYBE IF YOU COMBINE, HE WILL, I DON'T KNOW. >> TWO DIFFERENT POSITIONS. >> ANOTHER DIFFERENT POSITIONS. I'M JUST SAYING CAN WE CALL THIS SLOW SHOW/VETERAN SERVICES AND MAYBE WE DON'T HAVE TO DO , JUST THROWING IT OUT THERE. >> MINE HAS A TOTALLY DIFFERENT NAME. >> YOU CAN USE THE PEOPLE HOWEVER HE WANTS TO. >> ONE REASON WE PUT IT HERE JJ NEEDS TO HAVE SOMEBODY TO BE CERTIFIED TO DO THE PROCESS HE IS DOING BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO BE A FAMILY MEMBER. A FAMILY MEMBER OF VETERAN . >> HOW MANY PEOPLE DID WE AT TO JJS DEPARTMENT? FIVE PEOPLE BEFORE TODAY AND NO OFFENSE. WE ARE QUADRUPLING VETERAN SERVICES AND PUTTING SOCIAL SERVICES THERE AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WILL DO BECAUSE THERE IS NO MORE MONEY ATTACHED TO THEM AND WE NEED MORE? USING ALL THE SOCIAL SERVICES PEOPLE FOR VETERANS. I THINK YOU WILL END OF USING THE SOCIAL SERVICE PEOPLE FOR VETERANS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THERE WILL BE THE LOAD ON SOCIAL SERVICE BECAUSE THERE'S NO MORE MONEY TO HAND OUT, IT WILL BE HELPING THEM FIND THINGS TO DO AND SO FORTH. THEY WANT TO ADD TWO MORE? >> FOR MY WANTING TO DO IT FOR ARPA FOR ONE YEAR, WE DON'T KNOW. YOU WON'T KNOW UNTIL YOU GET THERE AND OPERATE WITH STAFF , THE SIX OR SEVEN ADDITIONAL WORKERS TO DO THE WORK. WE KNOW YOU WORKED HAND-IN-HAND WITH SOCIAL SERVICES AND YOU'LL COMPLEMENT IT AND HELP EACH OTHER WITH COVERAGE OF PHONE CALLS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THE WORK HISTORY IS THERE BUT YOU WON'T KNOW UNTIL THIS YEAR SO THAT'S WHY I FELT THIS WAS A BETTER SOLUTION. WE ARE NOT ALLOCATING FUNDING, AND LOOKING FOR THE FUNDING THAT WE HOPE TO SAVE ON THE ARPA SITE TO BE ABLE TO ALLOCATE FOR THE ONE CASE WORKER POSITION. I'M NOT SURE WHAT COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ HAD ON THE OTHER. I WANT TO KEEP THEM SEPARATE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT FUNDING THAT IS UNDER WANT TO MAKE IT CLEANER ON MY MOTION ON THE ALLOCATION. >> COMMISSIONER, WHAT I'M ASKING. WE DESIGNATED WHAT IF JJ NEEDS OR DOESN'T NEED THAT PERSON FOR SOCIAL SERVICES AND HE CAN USE FOR VETERAN SERVICES. WE HAVE NOT BEEN CLEAR WITH HIM TO DO THIS. WE SAY HOWEVER HE WANTS TO. >> NOW THAT WE HAVE TAKEN ACTION WE HAVE IT'S ALL ONE IN THE SAME. >> THAT'S THE POINT, WE WILL CROSS-REFERENCE EVERYONE. IN EVERYTHING WE DO SO THEY WILL BE CROSS TRAINED BOTH SIDES. >> WHEN THE GRANT RUNS OUT THEY NEED TO DO VETERAN SERVICES BECAUSE THEY WON'T HAVE A JOB. >> WHATEVER THE TITLE IS LEGALLY THAT YOU COME UP WITH OVER THE LEGAL COUNCIL TO SUGGEST HOW TO TERM WHATEVER IT IS, MY THINKING IS THAT TITLE THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30 OF THIS YEAR IS TECHNICALLY CASEWORKER. WHATEVER THAT POSITION CAN FLOAT TO AND YOU CAN MAKE USE OF, THAT'S MY INTENT. ANOTHER WORKER TO GET SOMEBODY WITH MAYBE LOOSE ENDS THAT NEED TO BE FINISHED GOING INTO THE NEW YEAR AND THEN DISPERSE THEM INTO OTHER ROLES AND SIMILAR FUNCTION. THAT'S ALL ON THE BOARD . >> ABSOLUTELY. I THINK THE REASON WHY THERE ARE SEPARATE POSITIONS HERE, VETERAN SERVICES, ASSISTANT VETERAN SERVICE OFFICER, FOR US VETERAN SERVICE OFFICERS, ONE YEAR TO BE MILITARY AFFILIATED, THAT ELIMINATES MOST OF SOCIAL SERVICES. THE EMPLOYEE'S BEHALF. >> IT DOESN'T BECAUSE YOU WANT TO HIRE THE PEOPLE IN SOCIAL SERVICES. YOU GET TO HIRE WHO [04:00:01] YOU WANT. IF YOU HAVE A NEED. >> FOCUS ON THE FIRST ONE FIRST. >> I AM RESPONDING TO WHAT HE'S SAYING. HE'S MAKING IT SOUND LIKE . >> HE HAS FOUND A PERSON WHO IS A FAMILY MEMBER, HE DID NOT THINK HE HAD ONE BEFORE. IS A PERSON THERE. >> AND EXPANDING WHY THE DIFFERENCE. >> I'M ASKING WHY THE TWO POSITIONS? WE HAVE QUADRUPLED THIS DEPARTMENT. WHEN YOU STARTED IT WAS YOU AND ONE PERSON. NOW BEFORE TODAY HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE THERE? SEVEN. WE HAVE GONE FROM TWO, TO SEVEN. I AM HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING WHY WE NEED TO GO 10 NINE WHICH IS WHAT THIS PROPOSAL IS. I WANT YOU TO EXPLAIN TO ME BECAUSE WITH SEVEN PEOPLE YOU GET TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT WITH THEM. IF THAT'S NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE TO SERVICE WHAT YOU NEED TO SERVICE, I NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHY. THERE USED TO BE TWO, NOW THERE ARE SEVEN TO DO AND TO ME LOOK I'M SORRY, WE ALL VOTED 5-0 WE ALL VOTED 5-02 ELIMINATE SOCIAL SERVICES AND THEN CREPT IT IN AND CREPT IT IN, THAT'S FINE I GET IT, FINE. AND I VOTED FOR COMPROMISE, BUT THAT WAS THE COMPROMISE, NO MORE, THAT WAS IT. IT FAILED, I MADE THE MOTION AND SAID THIS IS GOING TO BE IT. AND EVERYBODY SAID THIS IS IT. HERE WE ARE AGAIN ADDING TWO MORE AND LIFE CHANGES, I'M A BIG BOY, MY BAD FOR BELIEVING WE HAD A DEAL AND A COMPROMISE , MY BAD I WON'T DO THAT AGAIN. AT THE END OF THE DAY I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU NEED TO GO TO NINE AND I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE SUPPORTING THIS REQUEST SO I NEEDED TO EXPLAIN AND WE ARE GIVING YOU A HUGE RAISE. 'S WE HAVE SPENT AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF MONEY AND I LOVE THE VETERANS. I SPEND MONEY ON REESE OF AMERICA, A MEMORIAL, THIS IS GREAT SO WE HAVE SHOWN A COMMITMENT TO VETERANS GIVING YOU A RAISE THAT YOU DESERVE WHY TWO MORE? >> I CAN TELL YOU AND LIKE I SAID I SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE VETERANS NEED TO HELP. I HAVE SENT YOU THIS INFORMATION BEFORE VIA EMAIL. IN COMPARISON TO THE EMPLOYEES WE HAVE COMPARED TO ADJACENT COUNTIES WITH THE SAME POPULATION, 25,000 VETERANS, FOR EXAMPLE HIDALGO COUNTY IS 24,500 VETERANS WITH 10 PEOPLE IN THE OFFICE. SIX 6 TO 1 VIA SO, FIVE ASSISTANCE, TWO ADMIN ASSISTANTS AND TWO AVERAGE SPECIALISTS, 10 STAFF JUST TO DO CLAIMS. THEY DON'T HAVE A VETERANS CEMETERY OR SOCIAL SERVICES, THAT'S JUST CLAIMS. LET'S USE SAN PATRICIO COUNTY. 5000 VETERANS AND THEIR COUNTY, WE HAVE 25,000. THE TWO VETERAN SERVICE OFFICERS AND ONE ADMIN ASSISTANT. I'M JUST TRY TO KEEP UP WITH THE DEMAND. >> KEEPING UP ALL THAT ONE TIME, WE HAVE GONE FROM 2 TO 7 IN ONE YEAR, NOW GOING FROM 2 TO 9. THAT'S NOT WHAT I WANTED. I WANTED, I SAID I WANTED THEM ALL TO GO TO HIM AND LET HIM USE THEM FOR VETERANS MERELY. I AGREE BECAUSE YOU WANTED SOCIAL SERVICES. I WANTED IT ALL FOR VETERANS. WE DIVIDED 5-0 WAY BACK WHEN, VETERANS STATUTORY, IMPORTANT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US AND WE HAVE SUPPORTED VETERANS 100% GOING FROM 2 TO 7 IN ONE YEAR AND WE ARE IN ANOTHER HORRIBLE BUDGET MAKING CUTS LEFT AND RIGHT SO I'M HAVING A HARD TIME WHEN EVERY OTHER DEPARTMENT IS CUT, CUTTING OUT OF ROADS AND BRIDGES, PARKS , ALL STATUTORY. HERE WE ARE ADDING TOY DEPARTMENT WE HAVE ADDED FIVE. I MEAN IT'S A TOUGH YEAR FOR ME TO AGREE WHEN WE HAVE ADDED FIVE, YOU GET FIVE MORE PEOPLE. EVERYBODY ELSE GETS ZERO OR CUT. TO HAVE ANY NEW EMPLOYEES, ANY NEW POSITIONS? SOME RECLASSIFICATIONS. >> QUICKLY. >> ACUTE -- EXCUSE ME. >> THIS IS ARPA, I AM SUGGESTING ARPA. I'M NOT SURE THE FUNDING SOURCE. THIS IS FOR ONE YEAR SO THERE IS NO TRUE BUDGET IMPACT ON THIS SO I'M OPEN. IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE THAT TITLE. I THINK THAT'S [04:05:01] EASIER FOR US TO REFERENCE, THAT'S WHERE THE POSITION IS COMING FROM. BUT THAT'S WHY, I FELT IT WAS THE PERFECT MARRIAGE OF IT'S NOT INCREASING THE COST TO THE GENERAL FUND AND IT GIVES YOU SOMEBODY TO FIGURE OUT, DO WE NEED IT? HIDALGO COUNTY IS 800,000 PEOPLE THAT THEY HAVE THE SAME VETERAN POPULATION WE DO AND WE ARE 1/3RD OF THE POPULATION. I AGREE WE SHOULD PUT ALL FOCUS. IF IT HELPS BUT THIS IS RECLASSIFIED I'M OKAY WITH THAT. I WANT TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT WITHOUT IMPACTING THE BUDGET , THAT'S WHAT THIS IS DOING AND IT HELPS US REDUCE THE OVERALL COST THAT WE HAD ON OUR GA SIX. I'M SORRY, NO , ON ONE OF THE FORMS. PERSONNEL. SO WE WILL COVER THE VECTOR CONTROL WITH THE REMAINING PORTIONS. THAT'S WHAT MY PROPOSAL IS TODAY. I WANT TO KEEP IT FROM THE OTHER DISCUSSION AND I DID NOT EVEN CONFER WITH HIM, I THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT THE MONEY, THE FUNDING THERE FOR ONE YEAR TO TEST IT OUT TO SEE IF IT'S WORTH IT AND NEXT YEAR HE MAY HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION CAN WE AFFORD IT? HOW DO YOU PERFECT THAT ORGANIZATION? THAT WOULD BE MY PROPOSAL AND I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO ASK FOR AMANDA AND/OR GG FROM GRANT WORKS. IS THAT SOMETHING I CAN DO? WITH THIS POSITION WITH THE 164,000 THE 164,120 ALLOCATED? >> YES, YOU CAN DO POSITIONS. I WANT TO SAY I AM GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS ONE ONLY BECAUSE IT IS YOUR ARPA FUNDS, BUT I NEED TO BE CLEAR , THIS POSITION IS FUNDED ONE YEAR. THEY HAVE NO JOB SEPTEMBER 30 NEXT YEAR. ARPA FUNDING AND WHOEVER COMES IN NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THE DON'T NEED TO COME BEFORE US AS WE COME AHEAD OF TIME WITH FUNDS. I CAN ASSURE YOU LOOKING AT THE BUDGET, DEPLETING SERVICES AND ACCOUNTS, INTEREST RATES LIKE THEY ARE , THERE WILL BE NO FUNDING NEXT YEAR FOR THIS. IF THIS IS WHAT COMMISSIONER WANTS TO USE HIS PERSONAL FUNDS ON THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I AM VOTING FOR THIS BECAUSE IT WILL NOT BE THERE AFTER SEPTEMBER 30. I DO NOT FORESEE THAT. THERE IS NO MONEY. WE ARE BEGGING, BORROWING AND STEALING AND WE ARE 4 MILLION IN THE HOLE THIS YEAR. THERE IS NO FUNDING FOR THIS IN THE FUTURE. IF YOU WANT TO COME OVER IT IS A ONE-YEAR DEAL AND IT WILL NOT HAVE A JOB AFTER. >> UNDERSTAND. >> EMOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE NUMBER ONE UNDER , I DON'T KNOW THESE ARE SEPARATE. >> >> STILL UNDER EIGHT, AMENDMENTS TO THE BUDGET. ALL OF THESE ARE AMENDMENTS. >> THE NUMBER REFERENCE BACK TO REGULAR AGENDA 3-A -4 TO PULL THE NUMBER ARPA FUNDING IS LISTED. >> WE WILL SKIP THAT. >> YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE REST OF THEM. >> WE HAVE TO. >> WE ARE PAID FOR THIS AND WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE POSITION PAID. >> FOR CLARIFICATION ON THAT ONE. 110,545 WOULD GO TO VECTOR CONTROL ARPA FUNDS LEAVING ONE 39,459 FROM GENERAL FUND. USING THE MONEY HE WOULD BUDGET FOR THE BUDGET OFFICER SO HE PAYS FOR THE CASEWORKER IN A BALANCE HE WANTS TO APPLY TO VECTOR CONTROL SO IT WILL REDUCE THE 250 WE HAVE FOR VECTOR CONTROL. >> OKAY YOU THREW ME OFF BECAUSE HE DID THE SUBTRACTION. NOW, MOVING ON ITEM NUMBER TWO COMMISSIONER GONZALES YOU HAVE SOMETHING. >> [04:10:02] TALKED TO HIM AND HE CAN TRAIN A PERSON HE HAS ON STAFF AND I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES TO TRAIN THEM AND WHATEVER, BUT IF HE CAN UTILIZE STAFF AND TRAIN THEM I GUESS WE DO WHATEVER YOU ARE DOING THAT MEANS YOU'RE MOVING SOMEBODY ELSE IN HER POSITION. AND OFFICERS FOR VETERANS. I DON'T CARE IF YOU HAVE A VETERAN, WHATEVER YOU ARE. THIS DIVISION I DO NOT REALIZE UNTIL I SAW IT SOMEBODY ELSE WOULD BE PUT IN THERE FOR ANOTHER WORKER SO I SAID LET ME SEE WHAT YOU WANT FOR JJ AND I DID NOT KNOW, THAT'S WHY I KEEP ASKING TERESA WITH THE ARPA FUNDS ON LOAN TO THE PLAN THEM OUT? THIS IS WHY WE MAY NOT PUT IT IN. MY FIRST OPTION WOULD BE COUNTY . >> THERE IS NO MONEY. >> THAT'S FINE. I DON'T KNOW GG CAN WORK WITH WHAT HE'S GOT. >> WE CAN DO IT. >> SIX PEOPLE HAVE MOVED IN GOING FROM 2 TO 8 SO YOU CAN DO WITHOUT THIS POSITION. THEN DOWN BELOW THERE IS CLARIFICATION AND THE PEOPLE WHEN YOU VOTED TO GET THREE ADDITIONAL PEOPLE YOU LISTED A CASEWORKER, CASEWORKER TWO AND SENIOR CLERK. THIS ONE PERSON ON HERE 2203 THAT TRANSFERRED AS 2704 THAT INCREASES THAT SALARY ANOTHER 15,000? THAT WAS INCORRECT, THE TRANSFER PERSON? >> THAT ISN'T WHAT WE AUTHORIZED. WE AUTHORIZED, WHAT WAS THE MOTION? >> WE AUTHORIZED THREE ADDITIONAL CASEWORKERS, TWO AND ONE SENIOR CLERK. TWO CASEWORKERS AND A SENIOR CLERK. >> THE PEOPLE HE INTERVIEWED WITH THE TRANSFER HE PLANNED ON TAKING AND ONE IS A SENIOR SUPERVISOR. >> THAT'S NOT WHAT WE AUTHORIZED HOW DID THAT HAPPEN? >> WE WERE TOLD ANYONE WE TOOK FROM SOCIAL SERVICES WOULD BRING THEIR SALARY WITH THEM. >> HOLDUP, WHO TOLD YOU THAT AND DID YOU READ THE MOTION? >> THAT WAS IN THE FIRST TWO WE GAVE HIM WHEN WE MOVED TWO WHEN WE SHOT THE DEPARTMENT DOWN. THE THIRD THING HE MADE THE MOTION, HE SPECIFIED INSTEAD OF SEEING TWO PEOPLE HE SPECIFIED CASEWORKER AND CASEWORKER AND WE SAID TAKE TWO PEOPLE WHO MOVED WITH THEIR SALARY INITIALLY AND THREE ADDITIONAL PEOPLE GOT LISTED AS THOSE POSITIONS. >> I DON'T BELIEVE WE NEED A SUPERVISOR WHERE DID REAUTHORIZE A SUPERVISOR? MAYBE I'M NOT HEARING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WHERE DID REAUTHORIZE A SUPERVISOR SOCIAL WORKER AND SENIOR ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT? >> THOSE WERE THE ORIGINAL POSITIONS. >> IS THAT MOTION? I DON'T REMEMBER SAYING SUPERVISOR SOCIAL WORKER . MAYBE I'M WRONG. >> TWO POSITIONS. THE FIRST TIME WE STARTED. >> WHERE IS THAT MOTION? IF YOU ARE RIGHT, YOU ARE RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE NEED ANOTHER SUPERVISOR. >> THERE WERE SEPARATE COURTS, WHEN WE CLOSE DOWN SOCIAL SERVICES REMOVED TWO PEOPLE DID NOT PACIFY WHICH. >> I JUST NEED TO SEE THE MOTION. WE HAVE THAT MOTION I JUST NEED TO SEE THE OTHER. SOMEONE NEEDS TO SHOW ME. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE NEED ANOTHER SUPERVISOR. IF WE DID NOT MAKE IT CLEAR I WILL HAVE TO LIVE WITH THAT NOT BEING SPECIFIC TO THEIR. IF SOMEONE CAN FIND THAT MOTION. SHIRLEY I WOULD'VE THOUGHT YOU MIGHT HAVE ASKED. [04:15:02] >> I DID ASK. I HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH THE COUNTY JUDGE AND THE DIRECTOR. I HAVE EMAILS WHERE I EXCHANGED. >> DID YOU ASKED THE COURT FOR GUIDANCE. YOU WENT TO THE COUNTY JUDGE THAT'S FAIR. WE SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THAT BACK FOR CLARIFICATION. >> I INCLUDED EVERYONE THAT I THOUGHT SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED. >> THE POSITIONS HE IS REFERRING TO WENT OVER WITH CURRENT STEPS AND PAY GROUP. >> THAT'S WHY WE ASSUME THE THREE ADDITIONAL WOULD BE THE SAME. >> FOR THE FIRST TWO? WHICH TWO POSITIONS? >> THE SOCIAL WORKER SUPERVISOR. THEY ALL CAME TOGETHER. TWO WERE ALLOCATED AND YOU CAME BACK AND FORTH ON HOW MANY MORE WE WOULD BRING BACK. TWO OR FIVE, NONE OF THAT WAS DECIDED UNTIL FIVE WERE DECIDED. >> TWO WERE OPEN AND WE DID NOT SPECIFY WHICH POSITION. WE SAID MEET WITH REBECCA TAKE THE TWO PEOPLE WHO CAN DO THIS, REBECCA SPECIFIED THOSE WERE THE TWO THAT YOU NEEDED, THOSE TRANSFERRED SO THAT TRANSFERRED WITH PAY. THEN THAT WAS OVER WITH, WE CAME TO ANOTHER COURT AND THAT'S WHEN YOU WANTED ADDITIONAL PEOPLE MOVED IN. AND HAD YOU NOT SPECIFIED ON THE POSITIONS , THOSE THREE PEOPLE YOU MET WITH AND HIRED, THAT'S FINE, BUT YOU SAID CASEWORKERS AND THE THREE PEOPLE LEFT THAT YOU CHOSE, ONE OF THOSE IS A SUPERVISOR LEVEL AND SHE WOULD BE TAKING A CUT IN PAY. AND I HOPE MY OFFICE IS PAYING ATTENTION AND LOOKING UP BUT THEY ARE NOT RUNNING IN HERE WITH THE DATE YET. >> IT'S FINE. WE CAN MOVE ON >> SUPERVISOR CASEWORKER. WE HAVE ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT STEPHANIE DAVIS CASEWORKER JENNIFER RODRIGUEZ AND SENIOR CLERK >> JENNIFER AND TONY WERE THE FIRST TWO YOU MET WITH. >> IT WAS ACTUALLY CASEWORKER AND ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT. >> TOP TWO WITH THE FIRST TWO AND THAT WAS OVER AND DONE WITH THAT'S ALL YOU WOULD GET, THREE PEOPLE AND THOSE PEOPLE WERE SUGGESTED IT WAS NOT LISTED SUPERVISOR OR CASEWORKER OR ANYTHING. GETTING TWO PEOPLE AND LATER, THE NEXT COURT WHERE BELIEVE YOU HAVE THE DATE THAT'S WHEN YOU READ IN COURT CASEWORKER, CASEWORKER TWO AND A CLERK. CORRECT? THAT'S WHERE THE PROBLEM , PEOPLE LEFT IN THAT HE TOOK. $15,000 AND $20,000 DIFFERENCE BUT EVERYONE ELSE HAS TRANSFERRED , ALL THESE PEOPLE HAVE LEFT AND HAVE KEPT, ONE INDIVIDUAL WOULD BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY. IT'S MY OPINION. I THINK WE HAVE TO DO IT. >> REGARDING DISCREPANCY OF CHANGE REQUEST TO REQUEST RECLASSIFICATION OF THE POSITION AS THERE APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE AGENDA AND THE MINUTES. THE INTENT OF JUDGE SCOTT TO ANY DISCREPANCY TO OR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA 9/25/24. AGENDA ITEM ON 8/7/24 IDENTIFIED THREE POSITIONS AS A CASE MANAGER. WHICH WE ASSUMED IS A SUPERVISOR SOCIAL WORK 27-A. SOCIAL WORKER WE ASSUME HIS SOCIAL WORKER TWO GETTING PAID [04:20:04] 22-A. AND SENIOR CLERK PAID 22-A. SO I THINK , I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO ASSUME. >> >> THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. >> BECAUSE I INSTRUCTED HIM TO COME BACK TO COMMISSIONERS COURT BECAUSE THERE WERE DISCREPANCIES AND I DID NOT WANT TO BE, TO HAVE ANY DISCREPANCY POSSIBLE. SO EVERYTHING WAS CLEAR-CUT, EVERYTHING WAS IDENTIFIED AND SPECIFIED AT A PARTICULAR PAY GROUP SO NO ONE COULD HAVE ANY CONFUSION. I RECOMMENDED HE COME TO COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR CLARIFICATION. >> THAT'S CORRECT. WHEN I INFORMED THEM THEY ASKED ME TO LEAVE IT OFF BECAUSE WE WOULD DISCUSS TODAY. WE HAVE THAT EMAIL, AS WELL. >> THIS IS ONE POSITION AND WE HAVE SPOKEN TO THIS PERSON, THEY PLAN ON MOVING OVER HERE, SO I WILL TAKE THE FAULT IN IT, WHATEVER IS NECESSARY AND SAY THIS PERSON TO NOT TRANSFER WITHOUT HER REGULAR SALARY, 2704 , JUST AS SHE WAS. I WILL MAKE THE MOTION. >> IT'S BEEN THE POLICY TRANSFER SOMEBODY WITH CELERY WE DON'T DEDUCT THEM. >> THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE AND THAT'S THE LEVEL. THEY CAN CHANGE ALL THE TITLES. IF YOU WANT TO COME BACK AND CHANGE EVERYONE BUT THIS IS THE SALARY SO I MADE THE MOTION AND NEED A SECOND. HAVE A SECOND. DID YOU FIND IT? WHERE IS IT AT? THE COURT WITH LEGAL MATTERS RELATED TO ROUTINIZATION OF COUNTY DEPARTMENT AND REDUCTION OF FORCE PERSONNEL TOOK ACTION RELATED TO SOCIAL SERVICES BY ELIMINATING ALL BUT TWO POSITIONS MOTION AND SECONDED. IT DOES NOT SAY POSITIONS WE KEEP OR THAT WE DON'T THAT'S FOR THE CLARIFICATION. >> THEREFORE SHOULD'VE COME BACK TO COURT FOR CLARIFICATION. I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THAT I WILL NO , BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR ACKNOWLEDGING. IN THE PAST PEOPLE IN THAT CHAIR SAT AND DID NOT ACKNOWLEDGE BUT IT STILL RUNNING NO BECAUSE I THINK IF YOU COME BACK TO COURT IF IT'S UNCLEAR AND I RESPECT THE FACT YOUR DEPARTMENT AND POINT OF CONTACT IS THE COUNTY JUDGE AND AGAIN I HAVE SUPPORTED YOU 110% EVERYTHING YOU HAVE DONE YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN TO COME BACK TO THIS COURT TO GET CLARIFICATION BECAUSE THE JUDGE IS ONE VOTE AND THE JUDGMENT THOUGHT THAT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO BECAUSE I BELIEVE SHE DID NOT DO ANYTHING BUT THE BEST INTENTIONS. YOU ARE A DEPARTMENT HEAD AND YOU KNOW THIS SHOULD'VE COME BACK TO THE COURT. >> I WILL TAKE IT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> ONE CASEWORKER PAY SCALE 2203 WHICH SHOULD BE 2704 AND I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU LIST THE TITLE AT BECAUSE THEY MOVED IN FROM SOCIAL SERVICES AND THEY SHOULD HAVE THE SAME PAY THEY MOVED OVER WITH. >> I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD BE DEDUCTED EITHER. >> THE OTHER CORRECTION IS 2001. EVERYBODY MOVES WITH THEIR STEPS, THAT'S THE POLICY. THAT'S A CORRECTION THE AUDITOR OFFICE SHOULD MAKE. WE ARE NOT INCREASING THE CASEWORKER SALARY, SHE IS A SUPERVISOR AND HE WILL HAVE TO NAME THEM HOWEVER HE WANTS. >> MOTION SHOULD BE TO CLARIFY THESE ARE THE POSITIONS AUTHORIZED. IT'S PROBABLY WHAT YOU GET THE VOTES FOR, THAT'S THE CLARIFICATION. WE HAVE NOT CLARIFIED THAT. >> WE ARE DELETING A CASEWORKER BECAUSE THESE ARE IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET BOOK SO WE ARE DELETING THE CASEWORKER TWO AND IT'S GOING TO BE A SUPERVISOR SOCIAL WORKER AND PAY GROUP 27 -4. >> SO THEY UNDERSTAND THEY ARE NOT JUST SOCIAL WORKERS OR SUPERVISORS, THEIR SUPERVISORS AND YES. THAT'S ANOTHER AGENDA. [04:25:06] HER PAY TRANSFERS WITH HER. >> I THINK YOU'RE CLARIFYING. YOU WANT TO CLARIFY JJ HAS THE AUTHORITY TO HIRE THE TWO POSITIONS I THINK IS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. I DON'T KNOW. >> IN THE MICROPHONE, SORRY COMMISSIONER. >> I AM CLARIFYING. MAKE THE EMOTION, JJ HAD AUTHORITY TO HIRE WHICHEVER OF THE THREE PEOPLE HE WANTED AND THOSE THREE PEOPLE HE HAS CHOSEN, THERE IS ONE MISTAKE IN THE CALCULATION OF PAY WHICH NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED. COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ DO YOU SECOND THAT MOTION? >> YES. >> WHAT IS HER NAME? >> >> IF YOU WERE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO CLARIFY JJ HAS AUTHORITY TO HIRE WHATEVER THOSE POSITIONS ARE SUPERVISOR AND CASEWORKER TWO. THAT WOULD CLARIFY. >> SUPERVISOR AND CASEWORKER AND SENIOR CLERK ARE THE THREE HE IS HIRING. NOT CASEWORKER TWO. >> THE SECOND MOTION, THE MOTION CLEARED , THE SECOND MOTION THAT JOE RED A MINUTE AGO THAT JOE MADE OR I MADE AND JOE SECONDED WAS FOR THE THREE. TWO THAT ARE NOT CLEAR ARE THE ONES , THE SUPERVISOR AND THE ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT. SO THE MOTION WOULD BE JJ HAS THE AUTHORITY TO HIRE A SUPERVISOR AND ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT AT THEIR PAY LEVEL , THAT WOULD CLARIFY. >> THAT'S NOT CORRECT IT BECAUSE THAT'S ALREADY IN THE BUDGET. AND YES, HE HAD TO PICK WHATEVER HE WANTED AND THAT WAS THE VOTE TO TAKE TWO PEOPLE. >> ALL OF THESE EMPLOYEES AGAIN I WAS NOT THE DEPARTMENT HEAD AND I'M STILL NOT UNTIL OCTOBER 1 FOR SOCIAL SERVICES. ALL OF THESE EMPLOYEES WERE TALK TO YOU BY HR AND WERE TOLD THEY WOULD TAKE THE PAY WITH THEM. >> OF COURSE IF THE POSITION GOES WITH THEM. WHENEVER CLARIFIED YOU COULD HIRE A SUPERVISOR. I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE CASEWORKERS. SOMEHOW IT BECOMES SUPERVISOR AND SENIOR ACCOUNTING CLERK AND I DON'T KNOW WHY WE'RE GETTING A SENIOR ACCOUNTING CLERK. THERE IS NO MORE MONEY TO ACCOUNT FOR. >> YOU HAVE SIX GRANTS. >> THAT'S WHAT THAT PERSON DOES. >> THAT'S WHY REBECCA CHOSE THOSE. HELPED HIM DECIDE. >> WE NEEDED SOMEONE WHO KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING. I WOULD HATE TO ROLL OVER SOMEBODY. GIVE ME A DEPARTMENT AND I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT WE ARE DOING. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE DID. ALL OF THESE EMPLOYEES WERE TALKED TO BEFORE HAND AND TOLD THEY WOULD TAKE THEIR PAY WITH THEM. THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. >> I DON'T THINK THE COURT KNEW YOU WOULD HIRE A SUPERVISOR. >> UNDERSTAND. >> I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE CASEWORKERS. >> YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOMEONE WHO APPROVES THE TRANSACTIONS. >> THAT MAKES SENSE NOW AFTER YOU HAVE DONE IT. >> I APOLOGIZE, LIKE I SAID I TRIED TO RUN IT TO THE EVIDENCE I WAS INFORMED TO DO. >> THAT'S A REASONABLE EXPLANATION. THE FIRST TIME I HAVE HEARD IT. >> JJ, YOU NEED SOMEBODY IN CASE YOU ARE NOT IN THE OFFICE. IN CASE YOU'RE NOT IN THE OFFICE YOU NEED SOMEBODY TO TAKE OVER. >> OF COURSE, YOU WANT TO LEAVE THE OFFICE TO CONTINUE GOING WHEN YOU ARE NOT THERE. WE HAVE THE VETERAN CENTER TO MAINTAIN AND OPERATE. KNOW YOU'RE TAKING OVER SOCIAL SERVICES AND WE DO BETTER IN SERVICES AS WELL. WE CANNOT HAVE THESE CASEWORKERS DOING CLAIMS, YOU HAVE TO BE MILITARY AFFILIATED, CERTIFIED AND ACCREDITED BY THE VA. A LOT MORE COMES. YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THE OFFICE IS GOING TO PERFORM WELL IF YOU TAKE IT OVER YOU CAN JUST HIRE JOE SCHMOE OFF THE SEAT -- STREET. YOU HAVE TO HAVE SUPERVISORS AND CASEWORKERS WHO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING. THAT'S WHAT WE DID. >> ARE CLARIFYING FIVE POSITIONS TRANSFERRED FROM SOCIAL [04:30:02] SERVICES TO VETERAN AFFAIRS. AND I WILL LIST THE FIVE STATED THAT'S IT. >> MOTION AND SECOND. >> HOLD ON. AGAIN THE ONE , HE WANTS TWO THAT ARE 27, NOT ONE SO IF YOU HIRE THE TWO THAT ARE 27 THAT IS INCREASE. >> ONE OF THE FIVE. HE IS WANTING TWO HE IS WANTING 227'S CORRECT? THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. TWO PEOPLE PAY GROUP 27. HE WANTS ONE PERSON THAT 17, ONE THAT IS 20 AND ONE THAT IS 13 CORRECT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> REGARDLESS OF THE TITLES THAT'S WHAT HE WANTS TWO, 27'S. >> ONE PERSON WILL TURN INTO THE BSO? >> EVENTUALLY, YES JUDGE. >> CASEWORKER TWO IS BEING DELETED THAT'S PART OF THE BUDGET AND WILL BECOME SUPERVISOR. >> THESE ARE ALL SOCIAL SERVICE PEOPLE? >> TO CLARIFY THAT'S THE PAY THEY HAVE. OKAY JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. >> THAT CORRECT. >> WOMEN, YOU CHOSEN. WHAT I'M SAYING IS I WANT TO SIGN THAT FIGURE BY DON'T THAT'S THE PAY THEY COME WITH THAT THEY WERE TOLD WOULD COME WITH THEM. >> YOU CHOSE THE PEOPLE. SO YOU WANT THEM. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> YOU DON'T WANT TO SET IT UP LIKE YOU DON'T WANT THEM. >> I GUESS YOU HAD NO IDEA WITH THE PAY SCALE WAS. >> THIS WAS DONE OUT OF THE BLUE. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE FUNCTION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >> NO ON SOCIAL SERVICE HIRING. YES FOR VETERANS. >> NOW THAT IS THE END OF THE LIST? ONE OTHER PAGE COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT THAT ONE YET BECAUSE THIS HAS TO BE BROUGHT BACK IN NOVEMBER? WE ALREADY BROUGHT THAT UP ON THE WELLNESS? THERE IS NO BUDGET FOR THIS UNTIL NOVEMBER SO THIS NEEDS TO BE TABLED TO BRING BACK IN NOVEMBER? >> TO HAVE IT IS WHY IT HAS TO BE TABLED. >> WE HAVE ALREADY TABLED THIS. >> WE TABLED ON ANOTHER PORTION, BUT WE CANNOT TRANSFER FUNDS WE HAVE NO FUNDING UNTIL THE VOTE COMES BACK IN NOVEMBER. >> >> FOR WHAT? >> SOMEBODY HAS TO CONTINUE RUNNING IT. >> THEY ARE FUNDED THROUGH NOVEMBER THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT FUNDED THROUGH NOVEMBER. >> IT GOES INTO THE NEW BUDGET YEAR. WE DON'T HAVE THE FUNDS THEN . I WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE ARE STILL FUNDS. >> YOU HAVE YOUR ARPA FUNDS AND THEY WILL BE THERE IN NOVEMBER. THAT'S THE LAST VOTE FOR WHEN THIS COMES BACK. >> I WOULD LIKE TO DO IT TODAY. YOU GUYS DON'T WANT TO, THAT'S UP TO YOUR. THAT'S WHAT HE WANTED TO TELL ME THAT BUT INVEST MY ARPA FUNDS I WANT TO DO MY ARPA FUNDS AND I WANT TO MOVE TO THE SALARIES MOVE SALARIES TODAY ALL DAY LONG. NOW YOU'RE TELLING ME I CAN'T? >> THERE IS NO WELLNESS PROGRAM NOW. THERE'S NOTHING TO MOVE THEM TO. >> WE WILL VOTE ON THE MEDICAL THING TODAY. >> THAT SOMEBODY ELSE RUNNING IT. >> A MEDICAL THING? >> RELEASE OF THE BUILDING FOR THEM TO PROVIDE SERVICES, NOT US TO PROVIDE SERVICES. >> WHAT THEY DO YOU THINK IT'S GOING TO RUN BY ITSELF IF SOMEBODY LEAVES? >> WHY DO WE GET REPORTS FROM WHAT THEY DO? IS THAT PART OF THE CONTRACT? >> WE WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE THIS IN NOVEMBER WE ALL AGREED TO TABLE UNTIL NOVEMBER. >> THE LEASE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES. THE LEASE IS AN ENTITY PERFORMING WHATEVER MEDICAL SERVICES THEY WANT TO PROVIDE. [04:35:06] >> OKAY. >> THAT'S WHERE HE SAID THERE ARE NO REPORTS FOR THEM TO DO UNTIL NOVEMBER, IF THIS COMES TO VOTE AND WE BRING IT BACK FOR THE HELP DISTRICT. >> ARE YOU MAKING EMOTION? >> MAKING THE MOTION WE CANNOT DO THIS. >> DECIDE TO HAVE THE MEDICAL. >> YOU CANNOT PUT EMPLOYEES IN THERE IF YOU DON'T HAVE MOTIVE TO HAVE THE MEDICAL. HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL IT COMES BACK IN NOVEMBER. >> THE MEDICAL IS TODAY. >> NOT THAT I AM AWARE. >> PUBLIC HEALTH IS NOVEMBER. >> IT'S ON THE AGENDA. >> THERE JUST LEASING THE BUILDING. WE ARE NOT DOING MEDICAL YES THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO CLARIFY. NEVERMIND. YOU CAN SIT BACK DOWN. >> WE TABLED THE ITEM UNTIL NOVEMBER. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULD BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION NOT ALL. >> BECAUSE I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT. DO YOU MIND? >> WE TABLED IN NOVEMBER THAT VIOLATES THE RULES. >> LET ME DO WHAT I WANT TO DO OKAY? IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME THEN YOU DON'T AGREE. >> I DON'T AGREE WE TABLE STUFF AND YOU PUT SOMETHING ON AGAIN, YOU DO THIS REPEATEDLY. >> I'M TELLING YOU. >> YOU TALK PLENTY. OUT OF BOTH SIDES. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE MINUTES ARE THERE >> YOUR ARPA MONEY. THOSE ARE YOUR ARPA MONIES AND YOU CAN DO THAT IN NOVEMBER , UNLESS YOU SPEND THEM AND YOU DON'T HAVE AND THAT SOMETHING YOU CAN DO IN NOVEMBER WITH YOUR MONEY. YES. >> THIS IS NOT AN INCREASE TO THE BUDGET BECAUSE YOU PLAN ON FUNDING THIS WITH YOUR MONEY. OKAY. >> I WAS GOING TO MAKE A POINT OF CLARITY. THAT YES THE DECISION WILL BE MADE IN NOVEMBER ON WHICH DIRECTION THE COUNTY WANTS TO GO WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC HEALTH. THE ONLY CAVEAT TO MAKE SURE THE COUNTY AND COURTS ARE AWARE IS THAT DEPENDING ON THE DECISION WHICH WAY IT GOES, FOR THE COUNTY TO DO ITS OWN THING WE START TO GIVE THEM 90 DAYS. JUST WANT TO THROW THAT OUT. >> WE HAVE YET TO VOTE ON ANYTHING RELATED TO WHAT DR. GONZALES DOES. ANYTHING, AND YET YOU WANT TO SPEND $227,000 TO FUND A POSITION WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE POSITION IS FOR A YEAR WHEN YOU ALREADY WENT TO THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT WITHOUT ASKING THE COURT , YOU DID IT I WILL BRING IT UP NOW BECAUSE YOU ARE DOING THIS. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT IT, YOU WENT AND GOT TO EXTEND THE FUNDING UNTIL NOVEMBER SO WE COULD DISCUSS THIS IN FULL AND HAVE A FULL-BLOWN DISCUSSION IN NOVEMBER AND SO NOW WE ALL AGREED AND TABLED AND YOU VOTED FOR THAT TO COME BACK IF YOU DID NOT VOTE FOR THAT ONE. WE VOTED AND WILL COME BACK TO HAVE A MAJOR DISCUSSION IN NOVEMBER . WHY WOULD WE WANT TO CREATE A POSITION THAT MAY BE HERE NEXT YEAR AND MAY NOT? LIFE ON ANYTHING WITH ANYBODY'S FUNDS IF WE DON'T KNOW THE POSITION WILL BE HERE OR NOT. WE MIGHT STAY, HE MICHAEL WORK FOR THE CITY, THEN IT'S ALLOCATED AND FUNDED. IF YOU NEED A MONTH OF TIME OR SOMETHING I CAN, MAKE IT DECEMBER BECAUSE IT'S NOT NOVEMBER THAT'S OKAY. WE WILL HAVE IT DECIDED BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND YES IT'S YOUR ARPA FUNDS BUT IT IS STILL GRADING A POSITION THAT MAY NOT EVEN BE HERE NEXT YEAR. DEPENDING ON HOW THINGS GO IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE DOING THIS. >> LET ME CLARIFY SOMETHING. I DID NOT GO TO COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR THIS ISSUE. I WAS THERE ON ANOTHER ISSUE AND I WAS ASKED, DO NOT GO ASK FOR FUNDING FOR THE CLINIC. I WAS THERE FOR ANOTHER ISSUE. ANOTHER ISSUE I WAS WORKING ON SO I DON'T KNOW WHO TOLD YOU THAT OR WHERE YOU GOT THAT BUT I WASN'T THERE ON THIS ISSUE. I WAS ASKING FOR SUPPORT FOR THE CLINIC FOR DR. GONZALES EVER TOLD YOU THAT IS A LIAR. [04:40:06] >> COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ. >> IS THAT IF THE POSITION DOES NOT COME THROUGH DOESN'T COMMISSIONER GET HIS MONEY BACK? >> YES BUT HE WANTS TO USE ARPA MONEY THAT'S THE PROBLEM AFTER NOVEMBER THAT'S WHY IT NEEDS TO WAIT THE MONEY , IT HAS TO BE ALLOCATED AND IF WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO THE SPLIT AND TAKE OVER THE HELP DISTRICT THAN HE WOULD BE ALLOCATING MONEY TO SOMETHING THAT WILL NOT BE THERE. >> IT WILL BE TOO LATE FOR HIM TO REALLOCATE? >> HE NEEDS TO WAIT UNTIL THE DECISION OR HE WILL LOSE HIS FUNDS AND HE CAN USE IT ON SOMETHING ELSE. IF WE VOTE IT DOWN HE WILL ALLOCATE MONEY TO SOMETHING THAT IS NOT THERE. SO, IT'S MY SUGGESTION TO WAIT. >> IF THIS DOES NOT GET DECIDED BY THE END OF THE YEAR, THEN HE AND THIS COUNTY, WE LOSE $227,000, ALLOCATED TO DECEMBER AND THEN WE KNOW SOMETHING BY THEN. IF YOU ALLOCATE AND WE DON'T USE IT WE LOSE 227,000. THAT'S ALL I WAS TRYING TO SAY THROUGH DECEMBER. >> I DON'T THINK YOU DO IT UNTIL DECEMBER YOU BRING IT IN NOVEMBER AND VOTE AND THEN ALLOCATE THEN AND YOU HAVE THE MONEY FOR IT. UNTIL WE HAVE A DECISION MADE OKAY. IT'S YOUR MONEY. >> OKAY WE ARE GOOD, NO MOTION. NOW WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. WHERE IS MY AGENDA? >> I TRULY APOLOGIZE FOR THIS. I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR FOR EVERYONE. WHENEVER WE DID THE OTHER FUND PERSONNEL, IT WAS ON G8 SIX INLAND PARKS A NEW POSITION 48,000 48,160 AND THEN FIVE FOR THE PARKER POOL OPERATIONS ADDITIONAL. WE SAID THAT THERE WOULD BE NO INCREASE TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND , BUT THERE'S NO MONEY IN 0170 TO PAY FOR THAT. SO WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER MONEY. WE WANT TO TRANSFER THOSE FUNDS. IT WILL EITHER BE WHAT TERESA PROPOSED USING SOME OF THE FUNDS WE HAD IN 0142 THAT WE PREVIOUSLY HAD JUST GIVEN TO THE GENERAL FUND TO USE THOSE SAME FUNDS TO MOVE IT OVER. SO, YOU ARE USING WHAT YOU JUST INCREASED THE BUDGET , TO GIVE IT BACK. IT WOULD NEED TO BE INCREASED TO COVER THOSE, THERE'S NO WAY. >> I HAVE TO ADD THAT BACK IN. >> I WANTED TO SAY THAT. >> WELL, IT IS 48160. I WAS TOLD THAT IS SCOTT CROSS WITH COASTAL PARKS. THE CLASS OF 6000 AND COULD ABSORB , BUT THERE'S NO WAY INLAND PARKS COULD. >> OKAY GOT IT. >> I WANTED FOR FULL TRANSPARENCY, THANK YOU. I APOLOGIZE. >> THAT THE LAST OF OUR AMENDMENTS. UNLESS, MOVING ON NUMBER NINE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE 2024-2025 COUNTY BUDGET INCLUDING AMENDMENTS AS SUBMITTED BY COUNTY AUDITOR IN HIS CAPACITY AND EACH COMMISSIONER THAT WE HAVE VOTED UPON EACH ITEM TODAY. LET ME GET A MOTION AND SECOND AND THEN DISCUSSION. I WILL MAKE THE MOTION AND SECOND FOR DISCUSSION. >> JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS I APOLOGIZE FROM EARLIER. I HAD NOT SEEN MY BUDGET AMENDMENT , THERE'S A COUPLE AND HERE I AM CONCERNED ABOUT. FIRST ONE IS THE ASSISTANT FOR THE SENTRY YARD OUR FOREMAN , WE NEED THAT PERSON . >> IF YOU TAKE ONE OUT CAN YOU PUT ANOTHER IN? I SENT YOU THE LIST BEFORE YOU WENT ON VACATION AND YOU CAME BACK WITH TWO PEOPLE. >> I HAD GIVEN A LIST TO FRANCISCA THERE WAS A TOTAL . [04:45:11] >> TAKE ONE OUT NOW YOU NEED TO FIND ANOTHER ONE BECAUSE YOUR PEOPLE OUT FROM 2017, 2018, 2019. THOSE NEED TO GO. WHATEVER AMOUNT YOU WANT BACK CUT ANOTHER POSITION TO COVER. THAT WILL MAKE IT EASIER ON US. >> YES I WANTED TO MAKE SURE AND I NOTICED WHAT IS ZERO OUT. >> YOU GOT A BUNCH OF EQUIPMENT, EVERYBODY GOT CUTS. >> 259,000. EQUIPMENT. SO WE WILL BUY ZERO EQUIPMENT THIS YEAR. >> IT IS EQUIPMENT. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO EVERYBODY , LAST YEAR, WE CUT OVER HALF $1 MILLION FROM THE BUDGET. AT THE LAST MINUTE WE DID NOT OR THE LAST 30 SECONDS TRYING TO KICK A FIELD GOAL. BUT, THIS CASE AND I'VE GOT TO SAY THIS. IT'S ALWAYS PUBLIC WORKS THEY GET THE BUDGET CUT. NONE OF OUR DEPARTMENTS GET RECLASSIFIED FOR PERSONNEL TO GET A PAY INCREASE MANON ARE CREATING MORE TO OUR DEPARTMENT YET WE'RE GETTING CUT. >> YOU GET RECLASSIFICATION IN JULY SO I THOUGHT WHY ARE WE DOING THIS RIGHT BEFORE? >> WE WERE SAVING MONIES FROM ANOTHER WERE CUTTING ANOTHER POSITION. BUT I SEE OTHER BUDGETS PEOPLE GETTING RECLASSIFIED , GETTING A PAY INCREASE, GETTING ANOTHER PERSONNEL TO ASSIST, YET MY BUDGET IS CUT AND I WANTED TO STATE THAT. I APOLOGIZE IF I SAY THAT AND I DID NOT WANT TO TALK ABOUT OTHER DEPARTMENT, BUT THEY'RE THE ONES GETTING RECLASSIFICATIONS FOR STAFF, YET I AM THE ONE GETTING CUT. SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. >> WHAT KIND OF EQUIPMENT ARE YOU NOT GETTING? >> THIS YEAR PURCHASING TO DO THE CRACKED CEILING WE HAVE EQUIPMENT FROM THE 1970S TO REPLACE FOR CRACKED CEILINGS AND I THINK THAT WAS $100,000 OR 120,000 AND ITS MUCH-NEEDED. WE GET CRACKS DURING THE COLD WINTER MONTHS. WE CANNOT DO SEAL COAT OR GRADING THAT'S WHEN MOWING SLOWS DOWN SO WE GET STAFF FROM ROBSTOWN AND WE HAVE THEM OUT DOING CRACKS CEILINGS. SO IN THE SPRING COMES AROUND WE START DOING THOSE ROADS AND WE DO A SURFACE TREATMENT ON THOSE. BUT YOU KNOW, PROBABLY WHAT I SAID IS NOT OKAY BUT LIKE I SAID MY BUDGET IS THE ONE THAT ALWAYS GETS HIT. >> I'M SORRY YOU FEEL THAT WAY BUT WE ARE STUCK WITH THE TERRIBLE BUDGET. >> YOU'RE SEEING OTHER PEOPLE GETTING THE RECLASSIFIED OR ADDING TO STAFF WHAT WE ARE DOING IS DECREASING STAFF. THING I'VE EXPLAINED WHAT'S HAPPENING IS WE'RE GETTING SUBDIVISIONS , WHERE GETTING NEW MAINTENANCE YET GETTING FLATLINED IN THE BUDGET AND STAFF IS DECLINING SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE TO BRING IT UP. >> WE APPRECIATE IT. THIS IS A MAJOR CUT IN THE FUND BALANCE FOR ALL DEPARTMENTS AND IS GOING TO BE A TOUGH YEAR , WE UNDERSTAND. I DON'T THINK YOU WERE HERE EARLIER WHEN , EDWARD WAS HERE AND COASTAL PARKS, I SAID THAT IN THE MEETING THAT I WILL STATE IT AGAIN. WE EXPECT TO ALL TO WORK TOGETHER AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO CUT DOWN ON OUTSIDE COST WITH CONTRACTS WITH PEOPLE TO DO WORK THAT WE CAN TAKE CARE OF OURSELVES SO PLEASE HELP EACH OTHER, ALTHOUGH THE DEPARTMENT MAY HAVE A CROSSOVER. WE HAVE TO DO WHAT'S NECESSARY TO GET THE [04:50:05] JOB DONE. >> BEFORE YOU ADOPT A BUDGET I WANT TO ASSURE YOU SEE MY REQUEST. JUDGE I SPOKE TO YOU ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS ABOUT MY REQUEST FOR INCREASING WAGES AND I SPOKE TO YOU AND VOCALIZED WHY I AM REQUESTING THAT. I WAS NOT AWARE THERE WAS A THREE YEAR WAITING PERIOD BEFORE YOU GET AN INCREASE. IN ADDITION I HAVE DONE A WAGE STUDY AND HAVE SOME HANDOUTS IF I CAN PRESENT THIS INFORMATION. I MADE A RECOMMENDATION WHEN I SUBMITTED MY BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR THE INCREASE AS WELL AS ESSENTIAL SOFTWARE THAT I NEED FOR MY DEPARTMENT. I AM REQUIRED BY POLICY TO DO CIVIL-SERVICE TESTING. WE HAVE NOT DONE CIVIL-SERVICE TESTING SINCE COVID-19 AND SINCE THAT DATE FOUR YEARS LATER COMPUTERS ARE OUTDATED AND NOT CAPABLE OF DOING THE TESTING. SO I IDENTIFIED A VENDOR WHO CAN PROVIDE THE SERVICE AND I'VE NOT SEEN THAT IN THE BUDGET PROPOSED. SO I WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT THIS INFORMATION TO THE CLERK. YOU WILL SEE THE PROPOSED INCREASE MY SALARY AND THE SOFTWARE I AM REQUESTING, I HAVE FOUND A WAY TO ACQUIRE BOTH REQUESTS BY ELIMINATING OR REDUCING SOME OF THE BUDGETARY CATEGORIES IN MY DEPARTMENT WHICH WOULD NET ZERO INCREASED COST TO THE COUNTY AS IDENTIFIED IN THE MATERIAL I HAVE HANDED TO YOU. >> YOU SAID NET ZERO? HAS NAME ] BEEN ABLE TO VERIFY THIS? >> WE JUST GOT THIS. I KNOW WE TALKED ON MANY OCCASIONS. I DO NOT SEE THIS HAPPENING THIS YEAR. IT IS UNFORTUNATE. >> I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS COMMISSIONER MAREZ THE QUESTION PRESENTED DURING THE TIME WE WERE REQUESTING TO GIVE PROPOSED BUDGETS SO I DID PROVIDE THAT TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR. >> I WOULD JUST SAY THE $31,000 DECREASE FOR TUITION REIMBURSEMENT IS FOR ALL EMPLOYEES. OPERATING EXPENSE. >> WHAT I AM SAYING IS YEAR TO DATE WE HAVE ONLY SPENT 20,000 AND FOR THE LAST THREE OR FOUR YEARS WE HAD 51,000 ALLOCATED. >> FOR EMPLOYEES WHO WANT TO DO TUITION, NOT FOR YOU TO TAKE TO SUPPLEMENT SALARIES AND IT'S NOT UTILIZED USE OF THE FUND. IT IS PUT IN FOR ALL EMPLOYEES WHO CHOOSE TO HAVE TUITION. I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE A WISE DECISION FOR US TO TAKE 31,000 OUT OF THAT. >> THIS, WE HAD THIS PRESENTED BEFORE? >> I PRESENTED DURING BUDGET REQUEST. BASICALLY IT'S SOFTWARE THAT APPLICANTS CAN DO FROM HOME . THEY CAN DO IT AT THEIR OWN CONVENIENCE. UTILIZED BY A FEW OTHER COUNTIES, HARRIS COUNTY BEING ONE OF THEM AND IT'S A GOOD PROGRAM. I HAVE TESTED IT MYSELF AND I FIND IT TO BE RESOURCEFUL AND HELPFUL. WE WOULD NOT -- WOULD HAVE TO PURCHASE ADDITIONAL COMPUTER EQUIPMENT. WHICH WOULD GET OUTDATED OVER TIME. AS THEY KEEP THEIR SYSTEMS UP-TO-DATE. >> IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO COME APPLY , NOT EVERYBODY HAS A COMPUTER AT HOME. >> THEY CAN STILL COME INTO THE OFFICE AND DO IT IN THE HR OFFICE. SO WE OFFER THE SAME SERVICE TO APPLICANTS WITHOUT A COMPUTER NOW, THE WAY THE OFFICE IS SET UP SO THAT CAN OCCUR. GREAT COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ THINK. -- THANK YOU. [04:55:11] >> WAY TO GET THERE. I DON'T THINK. AS MUCH AS I KNOW HE CAME AND TALKED ABOUT IT. >> I WOULD MENTION IN THE BUDGET , WE DISCUSSED $12,000 INCLUDED FOR TEMPORARY SERVICES. I COULD ELIMINATE THAT CATEGORY. ALSO SATISFY THE REQUEST. WE CAN GET DOWN TO ZERO DOLLARS. BECAUSE OF TUITION REIMBURSEMENT THAT DOES NOT APPLY? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> IF YOU ELIMINATE THOSE TEMPORARILY YOU HAVE EMPLOYEES THAT YOU STATED WHEN YOU DID THE BUDGET HEARING WHO WERE WORKING LOTS AND LOTS OF HOURS THAT YOU TAKE AWAY FROM EMPLOYEES THAT MIGHT NEED THE HELP , THAT'S NOT A GOOD VOTE . >> RIGHT NOW WITH WORK BEING AS PRODUCTIVE AS IT IS THE NECESSITY FOR CONTINUING TO WORK THOSE HOURS IS DECREASING SO THAT WILL NOT NEED TO CONTINUE TO OCCUR. >> DOES ANYBODY WANT TO ADDRESS THIS OR MAKE A MOTION? I CAN'T ON THIS NOT WITH THE SITUATION WE ARE IN >> WHAT DO YOU NEED AN INCREASE ON VEHICLE? >> I AM TRAVELING THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY AND GAS IS INCREASING IN COST AND REPAIR COST SO I'VE SEEN MY EXPENSE GO UP DESPITE THE TRAVELING I'M DOING. $200 A MONTH MAY SEEM LIKE A LOT AND IT'S NOT WHEN I'M TRAVELING TO OTHER AREAS OF THE COUNTY. >> YOU GET A VEHICLE ALLOWANCE ALREADY? >> WHAT TAKES YOU OUTSIDE OF YOUR OFFICE TO GO TO COUNTIES? >> WHENEVER I DO INVESTIGATION, EMPLOYEE MEETING REQUESTS, TO DO TRAININGS. VARIOUS TIMES I HAVE HAD TO GO TO DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS IN THE COUNTY TO DO MEETINGS. GO TO THE FAIRGROUNDS FOR EVENTS, GO TO JOB FAIRS , I DO THAT OFTEN. IF THERE IS AN INVESTIGATION NEEDED IN ANY DEPARTMENT THEN I GO. >> DOES THAT OCCUR OFTEN? >> YES SIR. ABSOLUTELY. >> SO WHAT IS , WHAT WOULD NORMALLY PAY IN MILEAGE? $.49? SO 2800 A MONTH? >> NOT A MONTH, I WISH. >> CAR ALLOWANCE DIVIDED , THAT WOULD BE 5714 MILES TO EQUAL 2800. MY DOING THAT RIGHT? YEAH, 5714 MILES , DIVIDED BY 12 YOU'RE PUTTING 439 MILES A MONTH ON YOUR CAR. 439 MILES A MONTH. >> NOT CONSISTENTLY I CAN'T SAY THAT. THERE ARE TIMES WHEN I DRIVE MORE AND LESS. >> DO YOU COUNT YOUR MILEAGE FROM HOME TO COME HERE? HE WAS TALKING ABOUT MILEAGE. YOU LIVE OUT IN ODOM . >> YES OR. >> OTHER DEPARTMENT HAD TWO MORE IN MILEAGE THAN I DO. SOME 5000 OR 6000 A YEAR AND I'M GETTING 2800 AND I'M GETTING $2800. >> I JUST DON'T SEE IT THIS YEAR, I'M VERY SORRY AS WE HAVE SAID OVER AND OVER AGAIN THIS BUDGET IS EXTREMELY TIGHT. WE HAVE CUT SO MUCH FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS, YOUR DEPARTMENT HAS PRETTY MUCH BEEN LEFT ALONE AND GIVEN THE TEMPORARY [05:00:03] POSITION, BUT WE DO FEEL THE NEED IS THERE FOR THE TEMPORARY POSITION AND NOT FOR THIS RIGHT NOW. YOU CAN ADDRESS AGAIN BUT YOU ARE JUST TIRED LAST YEAR, YOUR AND YOUR ONE YEAR AND COMING AND ASKING FOR THIS INCREASE, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE DOING IT. IF SOMEONE ELSE IS JUMP IN AND MAKE A MOTION BUT OTHER THAN THAT I'M READY TO MOVE , I'M VERY SORRY AND I TOLD YOU THIS UP FROM WHEN WE MET. I DID NOT THINK IT WAS A GOOD TIME. WE APPRECIATE WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND WHAT ALL EMPLOYEES ARE DOING , WITH LESS, BUT AT THIS POINT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR WE CANNOT DO WHEN TAKING THINGS AWAY FROM OTHER EMPLOYEES AND WE HAVE IN PLACE WORKING HARDER TO SEPARATE AND TAKE THAT MONEY FROM TUITION, TAKE THEM FOR ADDITIONAL TRAVEL NOBODY ELSE IS GETTING THAT. >> PLEASE KEEP IN MIND WHEN I STARTED I HAVE FIVE STAFF, I DECREASED ONE POSITION SO WHEN YOU SAY HOURS INCREASED YES IT HAS BECAUSE WE'RE WORKING WITH LESS TO DO MORE. JUST WANT TO MAKE YOU AWARE OF THAT AS WELL. >> AS EVERY DEPARTMENT HAS SAID AND WE LOVE THE SAME SCENARIO THIS NEXT YEAR. I DON'T MEAN IT TO BE CRASS OR ANYTHING, IT'S BAD BUT IT IS THE BUDGET WE HAVE, THE MONEY AND THE FUNDING WE HAVE . >> FOR ME, MY PERSPECTIVE IS NOW WE HAVE APPROVED ADDITIONAL BUDGET PERSON TO TAKE THE LEAD ON THE COMMISSIONERS COURT SITE WE WILL BUILD A FOCUS MORE ON THE BUDGET AND MAKE SURE WE ARE INCLUDING THE SAME AMOUNT FOR THE SAME WORK BECAUSE I AGREE IF YOU GO TO INVESTIGATIONS OR INTERVIEWS WITH PEOPLE AT THEIR OFFICE, TAKE A TOUR OF A LOCATION. I HAVE SEEN THAT BEFORE SO I GET THERE IS TRAVEL, I THINK , THIS IS A LATE REQUEST, BUT LET US WORK ON THAT IN THE NEW YEAR AS WE GO THROUGH STEPS OF HIRING SOMEONE TO REPRESENT THE COURT TO BE ABLE TO WORK WITH THE AUDITOR AND THEN CREATE THAT DISCUSSION THAT ALL OF OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS DESERVE TO HAVE BECAUSE SOME OF ACCESS TO VEHICLES, SOME HAVE CAR ALLOWANCES AND WEARS THE PARITY IN THAT? THAT'S A LEGITIMATE CLAIM, BUT FOR NOW IS NOT THE TIME, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE MORE MOVING INTO THE NEW FISCAL YEAR. >> I DO ADMIT I WAS PRESENTED WITH THE POSSIBILITY TO REQUEST VEHICLE BUT INSTEAD I REQUEST THE MILEAGE INCREASE, EVEN JUST FOR THE MILEAGE , ANYTHING WOULD HELP. I DO TRAVEL. HAVE BEEN TO PORT ARANSAS, ROBSTOWN, QUITE FREQUENTLY. TWO SUICIDES I HAVE BEEN AT THOSE EVENTS SO I DO TRAVEL OFTEN AND I WANT THE COURT TO REALIZE AND TO KNOW THAT I AM ON THE ROAD. >> WHY IS IT YOU SAY WE'VE HAD TWO SUICIDES , WHY WOULD YOU HAVE TO GO TO INVESTIGATE? >> AGO BECAUSE EMPLOYEES ARE AFFECTED BY THE EVENT, IT HAPPENS WHERE EMPLOYEES WORK TO MAKE SURE THE EMPLOYEES ARE EMOTIONALLY OKAY AND DO MY DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE THEY GET ADDITIONAL SERVICES THAT THEY NEED. >> I WOULD THINK THEY WOULD GO TO THE SUPERVISOR OR DIRECTOR AND TELL THEM. AND THEN HE WOULD COME AND TELL YOU IF HE NEEDED TO. I WOULD THINK THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE DIRECTOR OR SUPERVISOR. >> YES BUT I HAVE ACCESS TO SERVICES THAT I HOPE DEPARTMENT HEADS WITH. THAT'S WHAT I MEAN IN TERMS OF EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE AND MAKING SURE I DO MY DUE DILIGENCE. >> JUST TRYING TO SAVE YOU SOME MILEAGE. THAT'S TWO TRIPS OF THE MANY BUT I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> DOES THE NEXT MODE HAVE TO BE A RECORD VOTE TO PASS THE BUDGET? I WILL WAIT UNTIL HE GETS BACK. CAN WE MOVE ON? DO ANY OF YOU WANT TO CHECK TO THE [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.] [05:05:04] CONSENT AGENDA TO SEE IF YOU HAVE ITEMS YOU WISH TO PULL FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> I AM GOOD. >> ANY COMMISSIONER ? >> I'M SORRY. ON K . NEED SOME EXPLANATION ON THAT ONE. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO PULL. >> OTHERWISE I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO PASS THE CONSENT AGENDA EXCEPT FOR K. >> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION. ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE PULLED? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED ? ITEM K . [K. Ratify extension of deadline for applications for nomination to Nueces County Appraisal District Board of Directors from September 18, 2024 to September 23, 2024 at 5:00 p.m.] COMMISSIONER. >> JUST A LITTLE CONFUSED ON THIS ONE RELATED TO ONE OF THE NEXT ONES MY UNDERSTANDING WAS , WE EXTENDED FROM THE 18TH TO THE 23RD AND WE'RE RATIFYING THIS SO ONE OF THE APPLICATIONS STILL CAME IN AFTER THE DEADLINE SO EVEN AFTER EXTENDING IT IS STILL AFTER THAT. I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO PASS THIS. >> SECOND THE MOTION ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE , THE MOTION PASSES. SINCE WE'RE STILL WAITING ON THE COMMISSIONER, IT'S GOING TO BE A MINUTE. >> JUST KEEP GOING? [1. Discuss and consider 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 and all related matters.] >> BROTHER AGENDA THREE A-1 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER UPDATE REGARDING OUTSIDE ENTITIES WISHING TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATION IN THE SELF-FUNDED GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE AND SALARY SERVICE PLAN 2024-25 DISCUSS CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS NO BACKUP LAST TIME AND MY OFFICE FAILED TO DO THAT. WE APOLOGIZE. THE CLARIFICATION IS THE LETTER ON THE BACK THAT WENT TO EVERYONE, THEY PAY ALL PREMIUMS. ALL STOP LOSS CLAIMS. EVERYTHING IN ORDER TO STAY BUT NOT LIMITED TO PRESCRIPTION, YOU CAN READ THE LETTER IN THE BACK. THERE IS ONE ENTITY . THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT HAS AGREED TO ALL OF THIS AND THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THEIR OWN INSURANCE AFTERWARD. THE ONE DRAINAGE DISTRICT IS THE ONLY ENTITY THAT THIS AFFECTS OTHER THAN THE CREDIT UNION THAT WE CAN'T COVER. THEY ARE PAYING FOR ALL OF THEIR POLICIES, STOPLOSS, EMPLOYER, EMPLOYEE, EVERYTHING. WHAT THEY ARE NOT IS THE LIABILITY IF THEY HAVE MAJOR CLAIMS AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY HISTORY ON THAT. WE ARE ON 3-A-1. WE DID CONSENT WHEN WE WERE WAITING TO COME BACK, WE CANNOT VOTE ON THE BUDGET UNTIL YOU COME BACK. THIS WOULD ALLOW DRAINAGE DISTRICT TO CONTINUE ONE YEAR TO SEARCH FOR THEIR OWN INSURANCE. AS LONG AS THEY PAY FOR PREMIUMS, STOPLOSS AND EVERYTHING. >> ALL CLAIMS INCLUDED BUT NOT LIMITED TO ENTITIES AND EMPLOYEES UP TO STOP LOSS AMOUNT SO REMIND ME HOW THAT WORKS. THEY PAY THEIR PORTION OF THE STOP LOSS PREMIUMS AND AFTER, THEN? >> STOPLOSS KICKS IN AFTER 425,000, OUR LIABILITY IS UP. >> THIS LETTER THESE ENTITIES WOULD PAY THAT PART OF THE STOP LOSS? I'VE GOT IT BACKWARDS. >> FOR MAJOR COMING INTO EFFECT AFTER 475,000. AFTER 475 . THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT DID NOT GET THE LETTER. >> AFTER THE 475 THE STOPLOSS KICKS IN AND NEITHER ENTITY PAYS FOR ANYTHING. >> WE HAVE A NOT SELF INSURANCE POLICY AFTER? SO WE ARE SELF-INSURED TO A POINT SO THE EXPOSURE IS FOR 75, PER CLAIM FOR THE COUNTY ON ANYBODY. AND THIS LETTER WENT OUT , THEY SAY THEY DIDN'T GET IT. WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE US? [05:10:04] >> THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT IS PROMISING FOR EVERY INSURED IT WILL PAY UP TO $475,000. I AM . >> THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT HASN'T, THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT DID BUT THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT DOES PAY STOPLOSS PREMIUM. EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE PREMIUM, THEY PAY ALL THE PREMIUM. WE WOULD BE RISKING, FOR ONE YEAR LIKE WE HAVE OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS OR HOWEVER LONG THEY HAVE BEEN ON HOURS FOR ONE YEAR BECAUSE THEY DO NOT RECEIVE THIS ALLOWING ONE MORE YEAR TO GO FIND THEIR OWN INSURANCE. >> WE MADE UP? >> I THINK WE EMAILED AND IT DID NOT GET MAILED OUT. >> THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT GOT IT? >> MY MISTAKE AGAIN. >> THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT GOT IT BUT THEY DIDN'T? >> THEIR GREED AND THEIR 10% AND IT WILL COME BACK AT THE END OF THE YEAR, HOSPITAL DISTRICT IS FINE AND IT WILL SEARCH FOR THEIR OWN. >> THAT'S IN WRITING SOMEWHERE? >> WE HAVE A LETTER FROM THEM. YES. >> SO THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ON THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT? NOTHING WE CAN DO. >> NOTHING IN TERMS OF? >> MAKING THEM RESPONSIBLE. WE ARE ON THE HOOK IF SOMETHING HAPPENS UP TO 475. >> >> WHAT'S THE MAGIC DEADLINE WHEN THEY GET A LETTER? >> THEY HAVE BEEN THROUGH OPEN ENROLLMENT, THEY HAVE DONE PLANNING ON THE INSURANCE. THIS IS EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1 , THEY DON'T HAVE TIME TO FIND EMPLOYEES. >> LEGALLY WHAT CAN WE DO? PUT IT BACK UNTIL OCTOBER 2 COME BACK AND TELL US. >> YES, THIS IS A NEW QUESTION WE WOULD LIKE TO PUT RESEARCH IN. I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION BUT I WILL CONFIRM. >> THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT IS THE ONLY ONE AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE MEANS SO I DON'T KNOW WE EITHER VOTE TO ALLOW THE RISK FOR ONE YEAR OR WE KICK THEM OFF AND THEY DEAL WITH IT. I DID NOT THINK THAT WAS GOOD TO DO. WE HAVE ALLOWED THEM FOR YEARS , THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT COMING BACK WILL RESOLVE. EITHER WE KICK THEM OFF. >> CAN WE? I WANT TO KNOW IF WE CAN. I DON'T KNOW. >> WE HAVE NOT FOUND A STATUTORY REASON OR A CASE THAT SAYS YOU MUST GIVE SOMEONE A CERTAIN TIME PERIOD OF NOTICE. >> WE CAN SEND SOMETHING TODAY AND TELL THEM THIS IS WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO. THE LETTER HAS BEEN DONE WE JUST HAVE TO SEND IT AND SAY TO STAY ON INSURANCE YOU HAVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR PORTION OF THE TO THE STOP LOSS. >> YES, YES. >> I BELIEVE THAT'S ACCURATE. GIVE ME FIVE MINUTES TO CONFIRM. >> DONE. >> WE WILL GO BACK . >> JUDGE, COMMISSIONERS, I KNOW I TALKED EARLIER ABOUT THE ASSISTANT , DELETING IT WE NEED THE ASSISTANT FOREMAN. >> MY THOUGHTS TO YOU WERE WHICH EVER YOU WANT TO DELETE AS LONG AS IT COMES TO THE SAME TOTAL. >> THE ONLY ONE CAN DELETE OR ANOTHER I CAN RECOMMEND IS TRUCK DRIVER ONE BUT WE ARE $5000 SHORT. SALARY WISE. >> 5000 OR LESS? >> WE ARE SHORT. >> I WILL GIVE HIM 5000. I WILL SEND 5000. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. >> I WILL FIND IT. [05:15:07] >> LET ME ADDRESS THIS , THERE IS A LAW COMING INTO EFFECT IN JANUARY THAT CHANGES DEPARTMENT HEAD SALARY. SHE IS THE ONE UNDERNEATH THAT OR SOMETHING BUT WE HAVE THE LAW, IT IS NOT GOING TO EFFECT UNTIL JANUARY, I ASSUMED WE WOULD ADDRESS IT IN JANUARY. IT'S NOT IN EFFECT NOW. IT WILL AFFECT OTHER EMPLOYEES AS WELL? JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE A DEPARTMENT , GO TO THE MICROPHONE. >> IT IS THE FS LA EXEMPT SALARY STANDARD, MINIMUM SALARY STANDARD WENT INTO EFFECT IN JULY AND JANUARY ANOTHER INCREASE AND IN JANUARY I WILL NOT NEED TO INCREASE AND I AM EXEMPT >> IT DOES NOT HAPPEN UNTIL JANUARY AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION. WERE YOU AWARE OF IT AND THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE? I JUST GOT THE PHONE CALL THIS MORNING AND I HAD SAID WE WOULD EITHER ADDRESS IT AND WHEN YOU SAID IT DOES NOT GO UNTIL JANUARY I FIGURED THEY WOULD BRING IT IN JANUARY, PAYROLL WOULD. >> IT WENT INTO EFFECT IN JULY BUT THEY BROKE IT INTO TWO PIECES SO PEOPLE CAN ALREADY BE AFFECTED, SALARY EMPLOYEES BENEATH THEY MAY ALREADY BE AFFECTED. >> THAT IS SOMETHING PAYROLL NEEDS TO LOOK INTO. >> I JUST FIGURED IT OUT THIS WEEK. >> I SAW WHERE THEY WERE DOING A BUNCH WITH THE EXEMPT AND SOMEBODY KNOCKED IT DOWN. THEY WERE GOING TO RAISE EXEMPT TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT AND THE COURT KICKED IN AND SAID NO. SOMEONE NEEDS TO LOOK AT THIS. I DON'T KNOW. >> LOWERING THE SALARY REQUIREMENTS TO BE EXEMPT. PUTTING MORE PEOPLE IN OVERTIME. SLIGHT CHANGE SO WE WILL REVIEW AND SEE WHAT'S GOING ON TO MAKE SURE. >> YOU ARE OKAY UNTIL JANUARY? >> WHERE I AM NOW. I WAS OVER THE THRESHOLD FOR JULY AND NOT JANUARY. >> THAT WILL GIVE EVERYONE TIME TO LOOK AT THIS AND SEE MORE PEOPLE THAT THIS WILL AFFECT. ARE WE READY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH VOTING ON THE BUDGET? ANYMORE? SHOULD I WAIT UNTIL WE DO REGULAR AGENDA? WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THE AMENDMENTS AND CHANGES. GOING BACK ON G 9. ONE HAS CHANGED. >> WE VOTED ON THE AMENDMENT, NOW BACK TO SEVEN? VOTED EIGHT AND THEN GO BACK TO SEVEN AND OVERALL? >> DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET INCLUDING AMENDMENTS HAS SUBMITTED BY COUNTY AUDITOR AND COMMISSIONERS COURT. MY MOTION ON NUMBER NINE I MOVED TO ADOPT THE 2024-25 BUDGET AS AMENDED WITH COUNTY AUDITOR IN HIS CAPACITY AS BUDGET OFFICER FOR NUECES COUNTY INCLUDING COMMISSIONERS COURT AMENDMENTS AS AUTHORIZED. THIS BUDGET WILL RAISE MORE TOTAL PROPERTY TAXES THAN LAST YEAR BY $6,550,770 OR 6.15% AND OF THE AMOUNT 3,648,813 IS TAX REVENUE TO BE RAISED FROM NEW PROPERTY ADDED TO THE TAX RULES THIS YEAR. I AM MAKING THE MOTION OR VOTING YES. COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ HOW DO YOU VOTE? ON THE BUDGET AFTER EVERYTHING CHANGED. AND THE AMENDMENTS. YOU ARE VOTING FOR THE BUDGET AS AMENDED YOU EITHER SAY YES OR NO. >> WE SAID NO EARLIER. >> YOU SAID THE TAX RATE, THIS IS FOR THE BUDGET. >> OKAY I GOT YOU. [05:20:05] >> IT IS A RECORD VOTE. I MADE THE MOTION, COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ HOW DO YOU VOTE, NOT THE TAX RATE, THIS IS ON THE BUDGET WE JUST WENT THROUGH. AS AMENDED WITH ALL THE QUESTIONS. YOU VOTE YES? COMMISSIONER MAREZ YES , AND COMMISSIONER CHESNEY, NO. 4-1 THE BUDGET PASSES. YOU CAN HAVE IT, TERESA WILL GIVE IT TO YOU. SO NOW LOOKING BACK TO THE REGULAR [2. Discuss and consider un-allocating $552,578.00 County-wide American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds and allocate to Nueces County Law Enforcement Vehicle Computer and Windows 11 Software Update, and all related matters. 1. $182,578.00 - Public Sector Staff Positions 2. $370,00000 - ARPA Assistant County Attorney IV] AGENDA, SINCE WE ARE WAITING ON AN ANSWER ON THAT FIRST NAME, MOVING ON, ITEM 2 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER 3-A-2 REGULAR AGENDA NOW. 3-A-2 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ON ALLOCATING 552 , WE HAVE DONE THIS ALREADY IN THE OTHER VOTE AND WE PUT IT TOWARD THE LAW ENFORCEMENT. WE DON'T NEED TO VOTE ON THIS. TABLE INDEFINITELY. WE VOTED IN THE BUDGET HEARING WE TRANSFERRED THE MONEY FOR THE VEHICLES, THE MONITORS AND EQUIPMENT ALREADY. [3. Discuss and consider the purchase of mobile kennels, for $1,500, for animal evacuations seeking ARPA County-Wide, under 6.1 Natural Disaster Category or other funding for this project and all related matters. ] ON THE AMENDMENTS WE ALREADY DID. ITEM NUMBER THREE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER PURCHASE OF MOBILE KENNELS $1500 FOR ANIMAL EVACUATION, SEEKING ARBOR COUNTYWIDE UNDER 6.1 NATURAL DISASTER OTHER FUNDING AND ALL MATTERS. THERE IS NO ARE PUT COUNTYWIDE FUNDING SO DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER FUNDING SOURCE? >> LIKE YOU NEED TO SAY SOMETHING. I WILL SECOND FOR DISCUSSION. >> THIS COMES OUT OF THE SURPLUS? >> THERE IS NO COUNTYWIDE SURPLUS. >> THIS KENNEL. >> WHERE YOU GET ALL OF YOUR STUFF YES. >> I CALLED KENDALL AND SAID CAN YOU USE THIS 14 STAINLESS STEEL KENNELS , IT'S ON WHEELS , IN CASE OF EMERGENCY TO MOVE THE DOGS AND EVACUATE. SHE SAID WE CAN DO IT HOW MUCH, IT CAME DOWN TO 1500 TO REPLACE TWO OF THE AIR-CONDITIONERS. >> THE AIR-CONDITIONERS AND TIRES. MORE THAN 1500 NEEDED. FOR TIRES AND AIR-CONDITIONERS. ARE YOU DOING THE WHOLE 2500? THERE IS NO FUNDING FOR IT. SO WE WILL NOT GET IT IF WE CAN PUT THE TIRES AND AIR-CONDITIONING IN. >> IF WE WANT TO SPLIT THAT WOULD BE GREAT. >> JUST THE TIRES. >> WHATEVER THE AMOUNT IS. >> HE IS PAYING, HE WILL DO THE TIRES. THESE ARE WITH ARPA FUNDS? >> I DON'T HAVE ARPA. SPECIAL REVENUE. >> OKAY. AND I WILL REDUCE ARPA. >> YOU CAN UTILIZE THIS? IT'S NOT GOING TO FALL APART. >> THE MAIN THING IS IF THERE IS A HURRICANE OR LARGE-SCALE HOARDING CASE, SOMETHING , WE HAVE THREE BOX TRUCKS THAT ARE NOT AIR-CONDITIONED, NOT SAFE TO KEEP ANIMALS IN LONG-TERM LIKE YOU WOULD WHEN YOU HAVE A BOARDING SITUATION WHEN YOU'RE NORMALLY AT THE SCENE. IT WOULD BE UTILIZED FOR THAT AND IT IS SAFER, IT WOULD PREVENT US FROM GOING BACK AND FORTH IN THE SAME WITH HURRICANES. WE TRY TO GET ANIMALS OUT OF THE WAY. THE PAST WHEN I DROVE TO TRY TO GET MY HORSE TRAILER TO MOVE ANIMALS SO IT WOULD PREVENT ME FROM HAVING TO USE THAT. >> A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MAREZ, SECONDED BY ME. TO PURCHASE THE MOBILE CLINICS $1500 . >> SPECIAL REVENUE OR ARPA. >> SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS AND [05:25:04] COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ PLANNING TO TAKE CARE OF THE AC OR THE TIRES ON THE TRAILER TO BE REPLACED. THESE COME FROM THEIR FUNDS. MOTION AND I MADE THE SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY [4. Discuss and consider unallocating and reallocating Commissioner Pct. 3, American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds as follows, and related matters: Unallocate: $750,000 - Historic First Methodist Church ARPA Project Reallocate: 1. $50,000 ------- City of Robstown Police Department Building Repairs 2. $48,000 ------- City of Robstown Fire Department - Firefighter Gear and Emergency Siren 3. $250,000 ----- Casa Blanca Drainage Improvements Nueces County Drianage District #2 4. $85,382 ------- Nueces County Legal Secretary Position Salary and Benefits for two years 5. $164,420 ----- Budget Officer Position (Salary & Benefits) 6. $152,198 ----- Law Enforcement Software] AYE. ANY OPPOSED , THE MOTION PASSES. NUMBER FOUR DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ON ALLOCATING AND REALLOCATING COMMISSIONER THREE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ARPA FUNDS AS FOLLOWS. COMMISSIONER THIS IS WHERE , THIS IS ONE , ON ALLOCATE 750,000 AND HOW YOU MAKING EMOTION, I WILL SECOND THAT. >> TO UN-ALLOCATE? >> AND THEN REALLOCATE. EXCEPT WITH A CHANGE , LIST OR CHANGE SO WE CAN REALLOCATE AT THE SAME TIME. >> UN-ALLOCATE THE 750 AND REALLOCATE, THE EXCEPTION IS THE 164 , 420 WHICH IS ALLOCATED FOR BUDGET OFFICER POSITION. THAT WILL NOT BE SPLIT WITH VETERAN SERVICE SOCIAL WORKER POSITION. VECTOR CONTROL. >> UN-ALLOCATE 750. >> IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. >> I DID NOT KNOW YOU ALREADY HAD. >> IT HAD NOT BEEN VOTED ON >> WE DID VOTE ON IT BECAUSE IT IS AN AMENDMENT. >> THE VETERANS AND THE VECTOR, NOT ALLOCATING TO THESE FIVE OTHER THINGS BECAUSE WE OVERDID THE VETERANS AND THE VECTOR. SO, OKAY. I THINK WE ARE ALL A LITTLE BIT TIRED. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED , THE MOTION PASSES. JENNY ARE YOU READY FOR ME TO GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER ONE? OR NOT. >> LET ME . >> WE WILL GO BACK, REMIND ME TO GO BACK TO THIS. A-1 SHE WAS CHECKING ABOUT. >> I HAD CONFIRMATION THIS IS A DECISION FOR THE COURT TO MAKE WITHOUT , THERE IS NO TIMELINE WE HAVE FOUND. >> NO TIMELINE YOU HAVE FOUND, SO I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ALLOW THEM ONE YEAR TO STAY ON THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT HAS AGREED TO PAY FOR EVERYTHING WE ALLOW THEM TO STAY ON AS THEY HAVE GIVEN ONE YEAR TO MOVE FORWARD AND MAKE CHANGES. TO ALLOW DRAINAGE DISTRICT TO STAY ON THE ONE YEAR BECAUSE AND WE DID NOT GET THE NOTICE OUT AND WE BEEN DOING IT 20 YEARS , TAKING A HUGE RISK TO ALLOW ONE MORE YEAR FOR IT TO CONTINUE. >> WE CAN DO IT NOW 60 OR 90 DAYS RIGHT? >> IF THEY GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND SIGN UP, I DON'T KNOW YOU CAN TELL THEM , YOU CAN DO THE PORTION THAT'S A CONTRACT MATTER TO LOOK INTO. >> THEY GET ONE WEEK NOTICE. THIS WOULD BE FROM THE 25TH TO OCTOBER 1. >> WE DON'T EVEN, YOU WOULD HAVE TO UNDO THE MOTION WE PREVIOUSLY MADE BECAUSE WE MADE A MOTION WE HAVE SENT A LETTER SO YOU HAVE TO UNDO YOUR OTHER MOTION THE MOTION WAS TO SEND A LETTER OFF, WE SENT IT BUT IT DID NOT GET TO THEM SO WE WOULD RESEND THE SAME LETTER OR MAKE A MOTION TO COMPLETELY REDO WHAT WE DID. >> WE MADE THE MOTION BEFORE TO TAKE IT OFF AND SEND A LETTER. AND I AM RETRACTING MY MOTION. SOMEBODY ELSE. >> THE LETTER NEEDS TO GET SENT. >> DO YOU WANT TO DO THE MOTION OR NOT? NUMBER ONE OR ARE YOU OKAY? >> I AM GOOD WITH THEM. >> MOTION TO CONTINUE. >> WE HAVE TO RETRACT. >> THAT RETRACTS EVERYTHING. [05:30:03] THAT'S GOING TO RETRACT EVERYTHING. HOSPITAL, EVERYBODY, EVERYTHING. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ARE DOING THIS. >> MOTION TO TABLE INDEFINITELY. >> THE LETTER NEEDS TO BE SENT. >> WE SENT A LETTER SO TABLE UNLESS SOMEBODY FINDS A WAY TO BRING IT BACK AND REDO VOTES ON THE OCTOBER 2 MEETING. >> NOW THEY HAVE RECEIVED THE LETTER. >> THEY HAVE A LETTER NOW THAT WE SENT TO EVERYONE, THEY RECEIVED IT. THEY WERE ASKING TO BE LEFT ON IS WHAT THEY WERE ASKING US TO DO AND I WAS WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION. >> DOES NOT SEEM LIKE ANYBODY ELSE IS. >> THE LETTER HAS BEEN SENT THEY RECEIVED THE LETTER YOU HAVE MADE THE ACTION, THE ACTION IN PLACE WE NEED TO TELL WHOEVER SETTING UP NOT TO UNLESS THEY AGREE TO PAY. WE AGREED AND WE CAN SEND THEM A NOTICE, I AM NOT SENDING ANY MORE NOTICES. >> WHO SENDS THE LETTER? THE HR DEPARTMENT? >> WHAT WAS THE DATE ON THE LETTER? IN JULY A LONG TIME AGO THEY SAY THEY DID NOT GET IT, BUT THAT'S THEM SAYING THEY DIDN'T GET IT AND US SAYING WE SENT IT. >> WE NEED SOMETHING IN WRITING THAT THEY AGREE OR THEY ARE NOT ON. WHO IS SIGNING, WHO IS IN CHARGE OF SIGNING UP FOR BENEFITS AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF? HR, SOMEONE NEEDS TO SAY DON'T SIGN THEM UP. >> OR TO FOLLOW UP WITH A LETTER BECAUSE WE ALLOW THEM TO DO OPEN ENROLLMENT. EXACTLY. IS THAT WHAT YOU SUGGEST? >> TERESA CAN YOU TALK TO NAME ] AND COORDINATE? WHOEVER. >> SHE NEEDS TO GO TALK TO HIM RIGHT NOW. >> OKAY. WE TABLED IT. >> NOTHING TO VOTE ON. WE ARE [5. Discuss and consider approving an order granting an exemption to competitive bidding requirements; authorizing and approving a professional services agreement with Balcones Field Services for dune permit application review assistance for Nueces County Coastal Parks FY24/25; and all related matters.] NOT DOING ANY ACTION. >> NUMBER FIVE. WE ARE ON NUMBER FIVE. >> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> COMPETITIVE BIDDING OKAY FOR THE FIELD SERVICES SECOND AND A MOTION. >> WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE, I MIGHT NEED TO READ IT, I SECOND THE MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? [6. Discuss and consider the selection of Anchor QEA, LLC for engineering services for the Packery Channel Nature Park Habitat Creation and Public Access Project; and authorize execution of an Engineering Services Contract for $358,111.00 with Anchor QEA, LLC, and related matters.] AYE. THE MOTION PASSES, ITEM NUMBER SIX. NUMBER SIX IS A DIFFERENT MOTION, MOTION TO APPROVE THE AWARD AND EXECUTE ENGINEERING AGREEMENT WITH ANCHOR FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR 3277-24 IN THE AMOUNT, TO SAY THE AMOUNT? $358,111 ALREADY SELECTED. SO THE MOTION TO PASS. MOTION AND SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. MOTION PASSES . >> HAVE ANOTHER ONE, COME BACK HERE. [7. Discuss and consider renewal and amendment of agreement between Texas General Land Office/Veterans Land Board and Nueces County related to the operation of the Coastal Bend Veteran’s Cemetery, and related matters.] >> ITEM NUMBER SEVEN DISCUSS AND CONSIDER RENEWAL AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE, VETERAN LANDLORD AND NUECES COUNTY RELATED TO OPERATION OF COASTAL BEND VETERANS CEMETERY AND JJ HAS GONE OVER THIS AND I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS. MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN THE MOTION PASSES. [8. Discuss and consider authorizing execution of a Funding Agreement with the Port of Corpus Christi Authority aligned at addressing deficient septic systems in Nueces County Precinct 2 Colonias, and related matters.] >> THANK YOU JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS. DISCUSS AND [05:35:02] CONSIDER AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI AUTHORITY ALIGNED AT ADDRESSING ILLICIT SEPTIC SYSTEMS AND NUECES COUNTY PRECINCT 2 AND RELATED MATTERS. THIS IS THE CONTRACT AFTER THEY AWARDED THE MONEY COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS LOOKED AT THE CONTRACT AND ARE YOU MAKING A MOTION TO PASS? I WILL SECOND. ALL THOSE IN [9. Discuss and consider approving the award and execution of a Lease Agreement with Amistad Community Health Center for Calderon Building Primary Care Services Facility Lease (CSP No. 3262-23), and all related matters.] FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER NINE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVING AWARD AND EXECUTION OF A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER FOR THE AMERICARE SERVICES BUILDING LEASE, THE CONTRACT READS NUECES COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH IMPROVEMENT CENTER , THE CALL THEIR OWN BUILDING AND THEY DO THAT CORRECTION AND RESEND THIS CONTRACT. >> JENNY HAS REVIEWED THIS? >> A MOTION AND A SECOND AND A THIRD. YES, EXCUSE ME. >> I AM OPENING UP THE DOCUMENT. WHAT IS SPECIFICALLY, IT'S TAKING A MINUTE. >> >> THE LEASE AGREEMENT FOLLOWING CONTRACTS, I HAVE IT IN MY NOTES. THE CONTRACT READS FOR THE NUECES COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER . >> I AM NOT SURE IF IT'S CALLING IT THE HEALTH CENTER OR NOT. >> HEALTH AND WELLNESS CENTER. >> OKAY IF I AM NOT, OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD AND NOW IT'S OPENING UP. IT IS A LEASE FOR HEALTH AND WELLNESS SERVICES. I'M NOT SURE IT'S TRYING. >> NOT CHANGING THE NAME OF THE BUILDING. >> WHERE ARE YOU LOOKING? WHERE'S THE HEALTH AND WELLNESS WRITING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? >> I DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW. IT WAS JUST IN MY NOTES. JUST TO CLARIFY IT'S NOT CHANGING THE NAME OF THE BUILDING. IT IS THE CALL THEIR OWN BUILDING WITH A LEASE FOR HEALTH SERVICES BY THE ON THE STAT. JUST A CLARIFICATION. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. I DO NOT HAVE IT HIGHLIGHTED, SORRY. >> THIS IS THE DEAL WHERE THEY ARE LEASING? >> THEIR FACILITY AND SERVICES. MOTION AND SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED THE [10. Discuss and consider approval of Supplemental Agreement No. 1 with GrantWorks, Inc. related to grant management services relating to the County’s Disaster Recovery grants, including American Rescue Plan Act grant and all related matters. County Attorney has reviewed for legal sufficiency. ] MOTION PASSES. I DON'T NUMBER 10 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NUMBER ONE WITH GRANT WORKS RELATED TO GRANT MANAGEMENT SERVICES RELATED TO COUNTY DISASTER RECOVERY GRANT INCLUDING AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT GRANTS AND RELATED MATTERS, COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS REVIEWED AND IT CHANGES TO MILESTONE CHART UPDATE FOR BILLING ORIGINAL HAD TOO MANY THIS SYMPATHIZE THE PROCESS FOR THE BILLING AND THIS WAS GRANT WORKS REQUEST. I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER [11. Discuss and consider approval for method of procurement IFB (Invitation for Bids) for Workout Station Structure for Pct. 1 Hazel Bazemore Park Improvement Project; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice; and related matters. Expense to be paid with ARPA Funds Project No. 21342229, Hazel Bazemore Park Improvements, Inland Parks ARPA allocation.] 11 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL METHOD OF PROCUREMENT FOR WORKOUT STATION STRUCTURE PRECINCT 1 HAZEL BAZEMORE PARK IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. AUTHORIZING PURCHASE AGENT TO PUBLISH NOTICE AND RELATED MATTERS, EXPENSE PAID WITH ARPA FUNDS. PROJECT INLAND PARKS ARPA ALLOCATION MOTION TO PASS. MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. MIKE WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING. >> JUST WANT TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW WE ARE AT THE END PROBABLY THE LAST ONES THAT WE HAVE TIME FOR. FOR A FULL BID PROCESS. YOU HAVE REMAINING FUNDS YOU'RE TRYING TO EXPAND FOR THINGS THAT DON'T REQUIRE BIDDING SO $49,999 OR LESS. UNLESS THERE'S SOME NEW GUIDANCE. >> WE FOUND ANOTHER WAY TO DO THAT. IF WE SELECT THE PROJECT AND ALLOCATE THEN IT CAN STILL GO FORWARD SO DON'T EVERYBODY [05:40:01] HAVE A HEART ATTACK. >> THE JUDGE IS PLANNING TO DO IT IN NOVEMBER. >> YES BUT IT IS FINE. >> OKAY, BUT BECAUSE LIKE I GUESS MINE IS IN BETWEEN BECAUSE MY DESIGN SPECS ARE IN. IT'S ALREADY PART OF THE LONDON? >> LONDON IS ON THE STREET ALREADY YOUR GOOD. >> I THOUGHT SO. [12. Discuss and consider approval for method of procurement IFB (Invitation for Bids) for Pct. 3 Oscar Ortiz Park Additions & Renovations; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice; and related matters. Expense to be paid by Inland Parks ARPA allocation ] >> OKAY ITEM NUMBER 12. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL METHOD OF PROCUREMENT INVITATION DID PRECINCT 3 OSCAR ORTIZ PARK ADDITIONS AND RENOVATIONS. WITHIN PARK ARPA ALLOCATION MOTION TO PASS MOTION AND SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR , [13. Discuss and consider approval for method of procurement IFB (Invitation for Bids) for Pct. 3 Nueces County Sunrise Pond Nature Park Sensory Playground; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice; and related matters. Expense to be paid with ARPA Funds Project No. 21342228 Nueces County Sunrise Pond Nature Park Sensory Playgrounds. Inland Parks ARPA allocation.] ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES, THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER 13 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL METHOD OF PROCUREMENT NUECES COUNTY SUNRISE POND NATURE PARK CENTURY PLAYGROUND WITH PARKS ALLOCATIONS AS WELL. ANOTHER MOTION TO PASS. MOTION AND A [14. Discuss and consider approval and execution of Amendment No. 1 to Work Authorization No. 1 under the Master Services Agreement between Nueces County and Levy Dykema, PLLC for the ARPA-funded Pct. 3 Oscar Ortiz Park Additions and Renovations Project, and related matters. Expense to be paid by Pct. 3 Commissioner Marez, ARPA funds and Inland Parks ARPA allocation.] SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER 14 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL AND EXECUTION AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE WORK AUTHORIZATION UNDER MASTER SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN NUECES COUNTY FOR THE ARPA FUNDED PRECINCT 3 OSCAR ORTIZ PARK ADDITIONS AND RENOVATIONS WITH COMMISSIONER PRECINCT 3 INLAND PARK ALLOCATION SORRY. GOT US A LITTLE CONFUSED. MOTION TO PASS. IT'S A COMBINATION. OKAY. YOU WANT TO SECOND? COMMISSIONER SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. [15. Discuss and consider approval of method of procurement IFB (Invitation for Bids) for the City of Robstown Multi-Purpose Facility; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice, and related matters. Expense to be paid with Pct. 3 Commissioner Marez - ARPA allocation.] ITEM NUMBER 15 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL METHOD OF PROCUREMENT FOR THE CITY OF ROBSTOWN MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY AUTHORIZING PURCHASING AGENT TO PUBLISH NOTICE AND RELATED MATTERS WITH PRECINCT 3 ARPA ALLOCATION. >> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. [16. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving execution of Job Order Authorization No. NCCP-009 in the amount of $86,523.26 under Job Order Contracting (JOC) Agreement No. 20240167-4/10 (RFP 3556-23) with Grace Paving and Construction, Inc. for Pct. 1, David Berlanga Community Center, Agua Dulce, TX Building Roof Repairs; and related matters.] ANY OPPOSED MOTION PASSES . ITEM NUMBER 16 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING EXECUTION OF JOB ORDER AUTHORIZATION NUMBER 009 IN THE AMOUNT OF $86,523.26 UNDER JOB ORDER CONTRACTING AGREEMENT NUMBER FOR GRACE PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION PRECINCT 1 CENTER BUILDING ROOF REPAIRS AND RELATED MATTERS PRECINCT 1 CEO IS THE FUNDING SOURCE CAPITAL CHANGE ORDER. >> PRECINCT 2. >> IT IS IN PRECINCT 1. >> PRECINCT 2 IS FUNDING. VERY GENEROUS, YES. OKAY. I ASSUME YOU'RE MAKING THE MOTION TO PASS. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ WITH A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY [17. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving execution of Job Order Authorization No. NCCP-005 in the amount of $111,012.39 under Job Order Contracting (JOC) Agreement No. 20241067-4/10 (RFP 3256-23) with Grace Paving and Construction, Inc. for the Pct. 2 Bishop Community Center Building Roof Repairs; and related matters.] OPPOSED THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER 17 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING EXECUTION JOB ORDER AUTHORIZATION 005 IN THE AMOUNT OF 111,000 IN THE AMOUNT OF 111,012 FOR THE GRACE PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION PRECINCT PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION PRECINCT 2 PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION PRECINCT 2 BISHOP COMMUNITY CTR. BUILDING ROOF REPAIRS PRECINCT 2 CO AND THAT IS YOURS. >> I'M DOING THE ROOFS. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. >> THANK YOU ON-THE-JOB PROGRAM ITEMS WE HAD. BRINGING ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT I DID NOT COME TO SEE YOU THREE TIMES TO GET THESE DONE WHICH I WOULD'VE IN THE PAST SO THE PROGRAM IS WORKING, APPRECIATE YOU GUYS TAKING ADVANTAGE OF [18. Discuss and consider approving Nueces County nominations and adopting resolution listing nominees for the Nueces County Appraisal District Board of Directors ballot for the term beginning January 1, 2025 (pursuant to Tax Code § 6.03 & 6.0301) and related matters.] THAT . >> WE ARE ON TOP OF IT. >> ITEM NUMBER 18 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER PROVING NOMINATIONS AND ADOPTING RESOLUTION LISTING NOMINATIONS FOR THE NUECES COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS BALLOT TERM MEANING JANUARY 1, 2025. WE HAD THREE PEOPLE TURNING IN APPLICATIONS AND ONE PERSON TURNED IN A LATE APPLICATION LATE YESTERDAY. I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION THE THREE PEOPLE [05:45:06] THAT TURNED IN THE APPLICATION ON TIME THAT WE APPROVE THEIR NAMES TO BE PUSHED FORWARD THIS IS A REMINDER WE ARE TURNING IN THE NAMES THEY GO TO THE APPRAISAL BOARD THEY COME BACK TO US AND THAT'S WHEN WE VOTE WITH A LOT OF NUMBERS THE COUNTY HAS LIKE 720 VOTES WE CAN PUT TO ONE INDIVIDUAL WE CAN PUT TOWARD THREE AND DIVIDE UP OR WHATEVER NAMES WE GET WE CAN VOTE HOW WE WANT TO. >> ONE WAS NOT TIMELY. >> >>> HE CAN BE NOMINATED BY SOMEONE ELSE AND WE CAN CONSIDER THE VOTE THEN. WE'VE NEVER ACCEPTED A LATE APPLICATION. >> WE EXTENDED THE DEADLINE AND HE WAS EVEN AFTER THE SECOND EXTENDED DEADLINE. THAT IS WHY WE SHOULD GO FORWARD. >> HE IS A GOOD GUY. >> ORIGINALLY 18TH AND WE EXTENDED TO THE 23RD AND HE DID NOT TURN IT IN UNTIL LATE ON THE 24TH. >> THAT IS MY MOTION RIGHT NOW. SOMEBODY ELSE CAN CHANGE THAT. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. IN THE OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. >> ONE OPPOSED. [19. Discuss and consider approving order designating Wednesday as the day of the week that Court will meet in regular term for fiscal year 2024-2025, pursuant to Section 81.005 of the Texas Local Government Code, and related matters.] >> I UNDERSTAND. NUMBER 19 DISCUSSING CONSIDER APPROVING AN ORDER DESIGNATING WEDNESDAY IS THE DAY OF THE WEEK THE COURT WILL MEET ON A REGULAR TERM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020 FOR AND 25. >> SO MOVED PICK >> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. [20. Discuss and consider upcoming Commissioners Court meeting date(s), workshop date(s), and related matters.] >> THE MOTION ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. DISCUSSING CONSIDER UPCOMING COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING DATES AND WORKSHOP DATES AND RELATED MATTERS. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE A MEETING ON OCTOBER 2ND COMING UP. WE HAVE BACK TO [1. Discuss and consider approval of the plat of San Pedro Addition, Block 2, Lot 58A, and related matters.] BACK MEETINGS. COMING FORWARD ITEM BE ONE DISCUSSING CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF SAN PEDRO ADDITION BLOCK TO LOT 58 A AND RELATED MATTERS. >> RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. >> IS THIS ONE OF THOSE PLATS OUTSIDE THE E TJ AND WE ARE HAVING TO APPROVE IT? >> THAT IS CORRECT >> IT IS IN THE COUNTY. >> WE JUST DON'T GET A LOT OF THEM. [2. Discuss and consider approval of Change Order No. 1 for the Infrastructure Construction for Emergency Generators NC Courthouse, Main Jail and McKinzie Annex - Part 1 & 2 Project, and related matters.] >> WE'VE GOT ONE MORE. >> DISCUSSING CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NUMBER ONE FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION FOR EMERGENCY GENERATORS NOISES COUNTY COURTHOUSE MAIN JAIL MCKINSEY NX PART ONE AND PART TWO PROJECT. I BELIEVE THE FUNDING IS COMING FROM YOUR PUBLIC WORKS CONTINGENCY. >> THERE IS AN AMOUNT ALLOCATED. >> SO MOVED >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> BRENT AND COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU PICK >> WE APPRECIATE YOU WORKING [1. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving execution of Agreement Amendment No. 1 for RFP No. 3193-22 Nueces County’s Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System and Replacement of Timeclocks with Strada U.S. Professional Services, LLC (formerly Alight Solutions LLC).] WITH US TODAY. >> ITEM SEE THE AUDITOR NUMBER ONE. DISCUSSING CONSIDER AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE. TO THE NOISES COUNTY ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLAN PLANNING SYSTEM AND REPLACEMENT OF TIME CLOCKS WITH STRADA U.S. PROFESSIONALS LLC. THIS IS JUST A DBA NAME CHANGE ONLY. THE CONTRACT ENDS JANUARY 14TH 2025. I MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION [2. Approve Capital Project Amendment No. 005.] PASSES. MOVING ON TO ITEM 2 APPROVED CAPITAL PROJECT AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. >> THE TO RESUME WORKING WITH THE CORDS YOU COMMISSIONERS GOING TO THE BALANCES HERE. WE'VE GOT SOME NEW PROJECTS I WOULD SAY -- SENSOR WITH THE ROOF PREPARE. WE HAVE THE BISHOP BUILDING ROOF REPAIR. THE LINDALE PARK IMPROVEMENTS REDUCTION. MCKINSEY ANNEX HEATER REPLACEMENT AND ALSO THE PARKING PERMITS AND VETERAN SERVICES. COMING FROM SOME OF OUR ALLOCATED FUNDS FROM COMMISSIONER PRECINCT TO PRECINCT 4. WE'VE GONE THROUGH THEM -- TERESA HAS GONE WITH THE COMMISSIONERS ON EACH ONE [05:50:04] OF THESE. >> A MOTION TO PASS PICK >> WHAT ARE THE? >> A MOTION TO PASS PICK WE HAVE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER -- ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. ANY [3. Approve Budget Amendment No. 14 for Fiscal Year 2023-2024.] OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER THREE. APPROVED BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER 14 FOR FISCAL YEAR 23 AND 20 FOR PICK >> WE ARE GETTING CLOSE OF THE FISCAL YEAR END. MAJORITY OF THE FUNDS HAVE THIS WITHIN THEIR DEPARTMENT. 1240 WHICH IS OUR TECHNOLOGY AND OF COURSE OUR JAIL. GIVING MONEY TO THE CAPITAL PROJECT FOR BUYING EQUIPMENT OUR PROJECT HAS BEEN THESE FUNDS ALL HAVE THE FUNDS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT TO DO THE CHANGES. ARE NECESSARY TO DO THE CHANGES -- AMENDMENT NUMBER 14 FOR YOUR ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL. I WOULD BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE PICK [4. Authorize and approve removal of fixed assets that are no longer located in the departments.] >> A MOTION TO PASS. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER FOUR AUTHORIZE AND APPROVE REMOVAL OF FIXED ASSETS THAT ARE NO LONGER LOCATED IN THE DEPARTMENT. >> TABLED FOR THE NEXT COURT YOUR HONOR. I NEED TO GO THROUGH THE LIST WITH OUR OUT OF THIS IS OUR I.T. DEPARTMENT AND MAKE SURE THIS IS NOT MISPLACED. >> WE WILL BRING THIS TO THE OKTOBERFEST. OCTOBER 5TH. >> THERE IS NOTHING ELSE WE [ Adjournment in Memory (upon request)] NEED TO DO. THAT IS THE END. DO WE HAVE ANY ADJOURNMENTS IN MEMORY. >> GO AHEAD AND START IF YOU ARE READY. >> THIS IS MYSTERY MYSTERIES IS BROTHER. JIMMY LEE CARMICHAEL JUNIOR WAS BORN APRIL 18TH 1948 IN MOBILE ALABAMA. TO THE UNION OF -- DOLORES CARMICHAEL. JIMMY ACCEPTED JESUS CHRIST AS AN ORDERLY AGENT WAS BAPTIZED IN CORPUS CHRISTI TEXAS. JIMMY PASSED THROUGH HIS LIFE ON THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 19TH 2024 AT THE AGE OF 76. HE IS JOINED HIS GRANDPARENTS ON BOTH SIDES ON'S UNCLES COUSINS AND FRIENDS THAT MADE ITS JOURNEY BEFORE HIM AND ACCEPTING GOD'S HAND FOR ETERNAL LIFE AFTER. FOR MS. TERESA OUR HEARTS MOURN WITH THE FAMILY FOR THE LOSS OF MY BIG BROTHER. WHAT AN AMAZING MAN WHAT A REMARKABLE LIFE HE LIVED. I AM BLESSED AND PROUD JUNIOR WAS A PART OF OUR FAMILY. SELENA YOUR HUSBAND OF 53 YEARS SUGAR BEAR AND -- YOUR FATHER WITH NO LIMITS ON HIS LOVE FOR YOU. I PRAY FOR STRENGTH AND COURAGE FOR THE DAYS AHEAD. HE IS OUT OF SIGHT BUT WILL BE FOREVER IN OUR HEARTS. LET HIS MEMORIES GIVE YOU COMFORT AND KNOW HIS PAIN AND SUFFERING IS NOW A MEMORY OF THE PAST. AND HE IS REJOICING WITH OUR FAMILY MEMBERS GONE BEFORE HIM. TO THE GRANDKIDS LISA'S NEPHEWS AND SIBLINGS REJOICE IN THE LOVE AND GUIDANCE HE SHARED WITH EACH OF YOU. >> DO YOU HAVE YOUR GRANDDAD STRENGTH AND ENDURANCE. MAY YOUR HEART GET LASER OVER TIME AS YOU CONTINUE TO KEEP THE MEMORIES AND LOVE SHARED CLOSE FOR COMFORT AND PEACE. WE LOVE YOU ALL VERY MUCH. I'M FREE MY LIFE HAS BEEN FULL. I ENJOYED MUCH PAIN GOOD FRIENDS GOOD TIMES A LIVES TOUCH. LIFT UP YOUR HEARTS AND SHARE WITH ME. GOD WANTED ME NOW HE SET ME FREE. MS. TERESA OUR SINCEREST CONDOLENCES FROM YOUR FAMILY AT THE COURTHOUSE. >>> GO AHEAD IF YOU ARE READY PICK >> THIS IS SANDRA'S -- TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 17TH 2020 FOR LOPEZ -- AT THE AGE OF 92. JOHNNY'S JOURNEY WAS ONE OF REMARKABLE ACCOMPLISHMENTS. AT THE AGE OF 15 ALMOST TWO MONTHS BEFORE HIS 16TH BIRTHDAY HE ENLISTED IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY DURING THE KOREAN WAR. HE WORE HIS SCARS OF BATTLE WITH DIGNITY. EARNING BOTH OF THE PURPLE HEART AND BRONZE STAR. FOR HIS BRAVERY. JOHNNY SERVED TO OUR NATION WAS NOT ON THE FEDERAL FIELD. BUT ALSO IN THE LIVES HE IMPACTED THEREAFTER. HE RETIRED AS A WELDER IN CORPUS CHRISTI. ON JANUARY 28TH 1976. JOHNNY WAS KNOWN FOR HIS WORK ETHICS AND DEDICATION. BUT HIS HEART WAS SERVICE EXTENDED FAR BEYOND [05:55:07] HIS CAREER. JOHNNY ALSO SERVED ON THE ROBSON COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD FROM 1972 TO 1976. EVEN AFTER HE STOPPED HE STEPPED AWAY FROM HIS OFFICIAL DUTIES, JOHNNY CONTINUED HIS LIFE WORK IN A VOCATIONAL INSTRUCTOR. WHERE HE INSPIRED YOUNG MINDS TEACHING WELDING. HE LATER MOVED TO --. IN 1987 AND WORKED AT MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE IN VICTORIA. IN 2002 HE AND HIS WIFE MOVED TO CORPUS CHRISTI. IN HIS RETIREMENT YEARS HE ENJOYED A QUIET DAY ON THE GOLF COURSE OR AN AFTERNOON OF FISHING. HE LEAVES BEHIND HIS BELOVED WIFE -- 70 YEARS OF MARRIAGE. THEY'VE BEEN MARRIED FOR 70 YEARS. SANDRA SANTOS -- WHO 13 GRANDCHILDREN. 27 GREAT-GRANDCHILDREN. IN ONE GREAT GREAT GRANDSON. SERVICES HELD AT -- SUNDAY SEPTEMBER 29TH. AT 7:00 P.M. FUNERAL SERVICES WILL BE HELD MONDAY SEPTEMBER 30TH AT 11:00 A.M.. HE WILL BE LAID TO REST WITH FULL MILITARY HONORS AT 1:00 P.M. AT THE STATE VETERANS CEMETERY. OUR CONDOLENCES AND PRAYERS TO MY ASSISTANT HER FAMILY -- CONTINUED TO WATCH OVER. HOPEFULLY GOT BLESS ALL OF HER FAMILY. >> ABSOLUTELY. OUR CONDOLENCES TO MS. SANDRA AS WELL PICK >>> COMMISSIONER -- >> FIRST ONE IS KEVIN MARTINDALE PASSED AWAY SEPTEMBER 2ND 2024. AUGUST 14TH 1947 SHE LIVED A LIFE FILLED WITH A GENUINE LOVE FOR SIMPLE PLEASURES AND THE PEOPLE AROUND HER. SHE DELIGHTED IN SPENDING TIME WITH HER PETS. I WAS ALWAYS UP FOR A GAME WHETHER IT WAS 42 UNCAL OR A ROUND OF YANCEY ON HER IPAD. VARIOUS FIELDS FROM JUDGMENT ROSE IN CONSTRUCTION TO OWNING A BOUTIQUE AND TRANSITIONING INTO REAL ESTATE WHERE SHE MADE HER MARK AND FORGED CHAIRS FRIENDSHIPS. HER COLLECTIONS AND MEMORABILIA OR PERSONAL TREASURES THAT REFLECTED HER UNIQUE TASTE. COMMITTEE MEMBER OF FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH CORPUS CHRISTI KAREN ACTIVELY PARTICIPATED IN SUNDAY SCHOOL. SHE WAS VERY ENGAGED WITH THE YWCA. SHE TREASURE THE MOMENT SPENT WITH HER DAUGHTER CARA AND GRANDDAUGHTER. EMBRACING THEIR SHARED LAUGHTER AND ENJOYING LIFE'S MOMENTS TOGETHER. BRIGHT ORANGE NAIL POLISH AND DOWN-TO-EARTH NATURE SHE HAD A REMARKABLE ABILITY TO GO WITH THE FLOW AND FIND HUMOR IN LIFE'S UPS AND DOWNS. SHE IS PRECEDED BY HER PARENTS. HER BROTHER AND HER HUSBAND. SHE'S -- GRANDDAUGHTER AND HER BROTHER. SHE WILL BE REMEMBERED FOR HER STRENGTH AND SENSE OF HUMOR IMPECCABLE FASHION OF HER FAMILY FRIENDS AND PETS AND HER LOVE OF DESSERT AND THE SIMPLE JOYS IN LIFE BUT OUR CONDOLENCES TO THEM. SECOND ONE IS EUGENE HAROLD DELANEY. JEAN BELLINI WAS A DEDICATED AND SELFLESS UNITY LEADER AND PHILANTHROPIST WHO BELIEVED IN THE POWER OF EDUCATION. PASSED AWAY AT THE AGE OF 91. KNOWN FOR HIS HANDSHAKE INTEGRITY GENEROUS SPIRIT AND SENSE OF HUMOR JEAN AS HE WAS AFFECTIONATELY KNOWN WAS A SHINING LIGHT IN ALL THE LIVES OF THOSE WHO HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF KNOWING HIM. HIS TIME ON EARTH WAS MARKED BY UNWAVERING DEDICATION TO EDUCATION AND GENEROSITY TO HIS COMMUNITY. HE WAS BORN 1933 TO JOHN AND MABLE HE GRADUATED FROM OREGON COUNTY JUNIOR COLLEGE IN 1952. AND ATTENDED THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS. HE COMMENCED INVESTING HIS FULL-TIME BUSINESS IN THE CORPUS CHRISTI AREA GIVING SUMS TO VARIOUS CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS. THROUGHOUT HIS LIFE HE SERVED AS A MEMBER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF DELMAR COLLEGE FOUNDATION. THE ART CENTER COASTAL BEND COMMUNITY FOUNDATION. HE GAVE GENEROUSLY TO CHARITIES OFTEN ANONYMOUSLY. LAUNCHING DONATIONS TO DELMAR COLLEGE. CONTRIBUTORS WHO DONATED THE [06:00:02] ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CENTER BUILDING. HE'S LEFT A LASTING IMPACT ON DELMAR COLLEGE IN THE LIVES OF GENERATION OF VIKINGS. HE IS PRECEDED IN DEATH BY HIS PARENTS AND HIS BROTHER. AND HIS FIRST SPOUSE ELLA. HE HAS SURVIVED BY HIS WIFE CARMEN BELLINI HIS SIBLINGS JAMES AND MARY BETH. PALLBEARERS WILL BE MICHAEL GEORGE MARCUS AND MATT ADLER JASON ALEJANDRO. THE FAMILY WISHES TO THANKS THE MEDICAL STAFF. HE WAS QUITE THE PHILANTHROPIST IN OUR COMMUNITY WE WISH OUR CONDOLENCES TO HIS FAMILY AND FRIENDS PICK >>> ARE THERE ANY OTHERS IN THE COMMISSIONERS? OUR SINCERE CONDOLENCES GO OUT TO EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THOSE FAMILIES. IF THERE IS NO OTHER BUSINESS, THEN IT IS FOR: 17 AND THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU PICK >> * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.