THANK YOU. IF I COULD ASK EVERYONE TO PLEASE RISE FOR THE INVOCATION GIVEN TODAY BY [00:00:08] RICHARD WITH SAINT JOSEPH'S CATHOLIC CHURCH AND STAY FOR THE PLEDGES, PLEASE. SO IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER, SON, AND THE HOLY SPIRIT. AMEN. HEAVENLY FATHER, AS WE COME INTO YOUR PRESENCE, FILLED WITH JOY ON THIS GLORIOUS DAY, WE ASK YOUR GRACE AND BLESSINGS UPON ALL OF US, UPON ALL THE COMMISSIONERS HERE. AND TO GUIDE AND PROTECT AND TO ALSO TO HELP TO AND ASSIST IN MAKING THE BEST DECISIONS FOR THAT HONOR YOUR GREATER HONOR AND GLORY AND FOR THE GOOD OF THIS COUNTY. WE ASK THIS THROUGH CHRIST OUR LORD. AMEN. FATHER, SON, HOLY SPIRIT. AMEN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE. TEXAS STATE, UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. THANK YOU. YOU MAY BE SEATED. IT IS WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER THE 5TH. WE HAVE ALL COMMISSIONERS AND COUNTY JUDGE PRESENT. IT WE ARE AT 901 LEOPARD IN THE NUECES COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT ROOM, AND I AM IT IS 906. I AM CALLING THIS MEETING TO ORDER. A QUORUM IS PRESENT. DO WE HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS OF DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST? IF YOU HAVE SOME, YOU MAY DO SO WHEN THE ITEM COMES UP. IF YOU FAIL TO MAKE A COMMENT HERE. [1. In recognition of the 2025 Flour Bluff Hornets Tennis Team for their successful and historic season.] MOVING ON TO OUR RESOLUTIONS. THE FIRST ONE UP, WE'RE GOING TO BRING IN THE FLOUR BLUFF HORNETS TENNIS TEAM. I GUESS. Y'ALL CAN COME ALL THE WAY DOWN THE SIDES. COME ALL THE WAY IN. YES. AND EMILY IS GOING TO READ ITEM NUMBER ONE IN RECOGNITION OF THE 2025 FLOUR BLUFF HORNETS TENNIS TEAM FOR THEIR SUCCESSFUL AND HISTORIC SEASON THIS YEAR. HEY, WHERE IS SHE? WHERE'S EMILY? OH, I GOT IT. OKAY. THERE'S SO MANY PEOPLE. I DIDN'T SEE ANYBODY BACK. WHEREAS THE FLOUR BLUFF HORNETS TENNIS TEAM IS LED BY HEAD COACH STEVE BONDS AND ASSISTANT COACH JACKIE BONDS. DID I SAY THAT RIGHT? YES. OKAY, GOOD. AND WHEREAS THE FLOUR BLUFF HORNETS TENNIS TEAM INCLUDES KYLE BARJANSKY, NATALIE KANDLER, ALEXANDRA DALTON, SUZANNA DELGADO, VIVIANA DELGADO, MASON EVANS, LOLA. FABELA. Y'ALL ARE GOING TO HAVE TO FORGIVE ME. ZACH. GRAHAM, DEVIN. JOHNSON. OH, MAN. THIS ONE'S HARD, TOO. HOW DO YOU SAY IT? YEAH. THAT ONE DYLAN JOHNSON. THANK YOU. BRAYDEN MCNABB, BRYSON MORALES HUDSON MORALES, CAMILLE NERY, CAITLIN SHONI AND VICTORIA TORRES. AND WHEREAS THE FLOUR BLUFF HORNETS TENNIS TEAM MADE THEIR FIRST APPEARANCE IN SCHOOL HISTORY TO THE U.I.L FIVE, A STATE CHAMPIONSHIP FOR TENNIS FOR TEAM TENNIS, AND FINISHED THEIR SEASON WITH AN OVERALL RECORD OF 26 TO 1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY DOES HEREBY RECOGNIZE THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR THE 2025 FLOUR BLUFF HORNETS TEAM. CONGRATULATIONS. MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION. AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. COACH BONDS. COACH BONDS? WHICH ONE OF YOU WANT TO SPEAK FIRST? WE'RE EXCITED TO HAVE BOTH OF YOU HERE, SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH. IT'S AN HONOR TO BE HERE. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO RECOGNIZE. COURSE. MY WIFE. THERE ARE SOME CHUCKLES IN THERE THAT. YEAH, WE WORK TOGETHER AND WE'RE TOGETHER 24 OVER SEVEN, SO IT WORKS OUT. SO A COUPLE OF THANK YOUS. FIRST, I WANT TO THANK OUR ATHLETIC DIRECTOR WHO'S HERE, CLINT ELLWOOD, FOR HIS SUPPORT DURING ALL OF THIS RUN. OF COURSE, OUR SUPERINTENDENT CHRIS STEINBRUCK AND OUR PRINCIPAL AMY SEEDS AND ASSISTANT ATHLETIC ATHLETIC DIRECTOR JAMES MCCANN. TREMENDOUS SUPPORT ALL YEAR LONG FOR THIS AMAZING RUN. THE PARENTS OF OUR PLAYERS TO MAKE OUR JOB EASIER. [00:05:02] AND THIS IS TRULY A TEAM. WE HAVE TWO SETS OF TWINS. WE HAVE A SET OF BROTHERS, AND BUT WE'RE ALL TOGETHER, AND IT'S BEEN A GREAT RUN. YOU KNOW, SO WE'RE HONORED, SO HONORED TO BE HERE. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS RECOGNITION. THANK YOU. DO YOU WANT TO TAKE IT OVER? COACH, DID YOU HAVE ONE OF YOUR CAPTAINS OR WOULD THEY LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING BEFORE I TALK? BECAUSE I TALK KIND OF LONG SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THEY WANTED TO GET BACK TO SCHOOL AND GET BACK TO CLASS. WELL, NOW I WAS I WAS TRYING TO DELAY IT A LITTLE BIT, BUT I, I GAVE YOU I GAVE YOU AN OPTION. RIGHT. OKAY. NOBODY TOOK IT. IT'S AN IT'S SO GREAT TO HAVE YOU ALL HERE. AS A PARENT OF A FLOUR BLUFF SENIOR, I KNOW HOW HARD YOU WORK ON THE COURT AND IN THE CLASSROOM AND AND IT'S JUST AMAZING, YOU KNOW, HISTORIC, RIGHT? I MEAN, FIRST EVER IN SCHOOL HISTORY, THEY CAN NEVER TAKE THAT AWAY FROM YOU. THAT'S A PRETTY COOL DEAL. YOU KNOW, TENNIS IS DEFINITELY, YOU KNOW, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN ON THE MAP, BUT YOU REALLY PUT IT ON THE MAP FOR FLOUR BLUFF, FOR THE FOR THE WHOLE AREA. AND YOU BEAT SOME PRETTY BIG TIME TENNIS SCHOOLS TO GET WHERE YOU GOT. I REALLY WATCH THAT PRETTY CLOSELY. AND I WAS ASKING EARLIER AND SOMEONE SAID THEY REALLY LIKE BEATING A&M CONSOLIDATED THE BEST, RIGHT? I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT IS EXACTLY, BUT WE'RE GOING TO TAKE IT. I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST IT'S AN AMAZING ACCOMPLISHMENT WHEN ANY SCHOOL GETS TO A STATE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT AND GETS THEM TO THE STATE FINALS AND FINISHES THE NUMBER TWO OVERALL TEAM TENNIS IN THE ENTIRE STATE OF TEXAS. THAT'S BIG TIME. THAT IS AWESOME. SO CONGRATULATIONS. THAT'S AN AMAZING ACCOMPLISHMENT. YOU KNOW, SHERIFF HOOPER IS HERE TODAY TOO, AND HE'S A BIG FLOWER BLUFF GUY, AS EVERYONE MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW. AND HE COMES TO EVERYTHING RELATED TO FLOWER BLUFF AS WELL. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW HE'S HERE AND BUT BUT THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE AND TAKING THE TIME TO COME. IT WAS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, AS SOON AS I SAW IT, YOU KNOW, I SAID, PLEASE REACH OUT. LET'S GET THEM OVER HERE. BECAUSE THIS COURT REALLY LOVES TO RECOGNIZE YOUNG PEOPLE FOR THEIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS. WE'RE GOING TO DO IT A COUPLE MORE TIMES TODAY, TOO. AND AND IT JUST IT'S IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW, WE TALK A LOT ABOUT THE NEGATIVE IN THE WORLD. IT'S SO IMPORTANT TO TALK ABOUT THE POSITIVE. AND YOU REALLY REPRESENT SO MUCH POSITIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY, NOT ONLY BECAUSE YOU WERE SECOND IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, BUT BECAUSE OF OF HOW YOU CARRIED YOURSELF AND HOW YOU REPRESENTED YOURSELF AS INDIVIDUALS. BECAUSE YOU REPRESENT CORPUS CHRISTI AND NUECES COUNTY, WHEN YOU GO DO SOMETHING AND YOU DID THAT REALLY WELL, NOT JUST ON THE COURT, BUT OFF. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CONGRATULATIONS. AND WE'RE SUPER HAPPY THAT YOU'RE HERE. GOOD JOB. THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S MUCH MORE WE CAN ADD TO THAT OTHER THAN WE ARE EXTREMELY EXCITED TO RECOGNIZE YOU ALL TODAY. WE HOPE THAT YOU CONTINUE WITH THIS TRADITION. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU ARE RETURNING NEXT YEAR, BUT SHOW OF HANDS WHO WILL ALL BE PLAYING AGAIN NEXT YEAR? GOOD AWESOME GOOD GOOD GOOD LUCK. WE HOPE THAT YOU CONTINUE WITH THIS TRADITION AND WE CAN BRING YOU BACK. AND THEN WE HOPE WHEREVER YOU GO OUT, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE LEAVING, GOING TO COLLEGE, OR PURSUING YOUR CAREERS OR WHATEVER YOU CHOOSE TO DO, THAT YOU COME BACK TO OUR COMMUNITIES AND LIVE HERE AND RAISE YOUR FAMILIES HERE AND PARTICIPATE IN THE COMMUNITY HONORING OTHER KIDS IN THE FUTURE, TOO. SO WE HAVE A RESOLUTION FOR YOU IF WE CAN GET YOU ALL TO COME FORWARD. WE'D LOVE TO TAKE A PHOTO WITH YOU. SO IT'D BE OUR HONOR. YEAH, JUST COME IN HERE, UP HERE AND FILL IN THE WELL, AND THAT'D BE GREAT. YES, AND I WAS GOING TO GET THOSE PICTURES. YES. ALL RIGHT. YES. GOOD. TELL US WHAT WE NEED TO DO. ARE YOU READY? IT'S GOING TO BE COVERED IN ONE, TWO, THREE. SO, PARENTS, YOU CAN ALL COME UP TO TAKE PHOTOS. YOU CAN PROCEED. YOU DON'T HAVE TO. ONE. TWO. THREE. ONE, TWO. ONE. TWO. THREE. WAIT. YOUR PARENTS. [00:10:10] THANK YOU. CONGRATULATIONS, COACH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COACH. THANKS FOR BRINGING CONGRATULATIONS. SEE YOU NEXT YEAR. THANK. YOU. THANK YOU. YESTERDAY. WAS HER SENIOR YEAR IN THE NURSING PROGRAM. SO, HEY, KIM'S BACK THERE. OKAY. IF WE WANT TO BRING THE NEXT SCHOOL IN. OFFICER CINDY. YEAH. GOOD TO SEE YOU GUYS. ALL RIGHT. YES, SIR. ALL THE WAY IN. AND ITEM TWO ON OUR RESOLUTIONS TODAY IN RECOGNITION OF CORPUS CHRISTI MONTESSORI [2. In recognition of Corpus Christi Montessori School 7th and 8th grade volleyball undefeated season.] SCHOOL SEVENTH AND EIGHTH GRADE VOLLEYBALL UNDEFEATED SEASON. SO. AND KIM FROM COMMISSIONER OFFICE IS GOING TO READ THAT RESOLUTION. GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY. CONGRATULATIONS. MICROPHONE DOWN PLEASE KIM. YES. THANK YOU. CONGRATULATIONS EVERYBODY. RECOGNIZING THE CORPUS CHRISTI MONTESSORI SCHOOL GIRLS VOLLEYBALL UNDEFEATED. THE CORPUS CHRISTI MONTESSORI SCHOOL SEVENTH AND EIGHTH GRADE VOLLEYBALL TEAMS CONSIST OF YARETZI CASTANEDA, LAUREN BANUELOS, LEILA LOPEZ, CONNIE, CAMILLA, KIM. PULL IT DOWN A LITTLE MORE. LOOKING DOWN. WE CAN'T HEAR YOU AT ALL, SO I'M SURE THEY CAN'T ONLINE. YES. DO YOU WANT ME TO GO OVER IT AGAIN OR DO YOU WANT ME TO? YOU CAN. OKAY, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO. WHATEVER'S EASIEST. LAYLA LOPEZ, CAMILLE GONZALEZ, VICTORIA GONZALEZ. LILY ROBINSON. RILEY. GUILLEN. SOPHIA VINAS. SARAH KARSTETTER. EMILY LIDSTROM AND EVELYN REINA. WHEREAS SOME OF THE GIRLS HAVE BEEN PLAYING SINCE THEY WERE IN THE FOURTH GRADE. NOT ONLY DID THEY PLAY FOR THE SCHOOL, BUT SOME PLAY CLUB BALL, RECREATIONS, TOURNAMENTS, CLINICS AND CAMPS. OUR GIRLS DO THE PLAY FOR SEVERAL SCHOOLS, BUT SOME PLAY CLUB BALL FOR RECREATION. OUR GIRLS HAVE COME A LONG WAY TOGETHER THROUGH THE UPS AND THE DOWNS. THEY WORK TOGETHER. WHEREAS CMS IS A SMALL CHARTER SCHOOL, WE DON'T HAVE A GYM. STILL, THE GIRLS WORK HARD WITH MORNING AND AFTERNOON PRACTICES. OUR PARENTS GET TOGETHER TO RENT A GYM SO THE GIRLS CAN PRACTICE ON AN ACTUAL COURT. COACH JOEL HAS BEEN WITH THE GIRLS FOR THREE YEARS. COACH JEN HAS BEEN WITH THE VOLUNTEERING GROUP FOR THREE YEARS AS WELL. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF COURT, NUECES COUNTY, THAT THE COURT HEREBY RECOGNIZES THE CORPUS CHRISTI MONTESSORI SCHOOL SEVENTH AND EIGHTH GRADE VOLLEYBALL TEAMS FOR THE UNDEFEATED SEASON. THANK YOU. KIM. I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE. SO MOVED. WE HAVE A MOTION. AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW, COACH WHICH ONE OF YOU WANTS TO SPEAK FIRST? WELL, WE JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU GUYS. THANK EVERYONE FROM THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR HOSTING US TODAY AND ACKNOWLEDGING ALL THE GIRLS HARD WORK. LIKE WE SAID, WE ARE A SMALL PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL WITH JUST ABOUT 140 STUDENTS. WE HAVE A SMALLER MIDDLE SCHOOL CLASS, ABOUT 21 STUDENTS. LIKE WE ALSO SAID, WE DON'T HAVE A GYM. WE PRACTICE OUTSIDE, SO WE'RE ALREADY AT A BIT OF A BIT OF A DISADVANTAGE. [00:15:01] BUT THIS IS A REALLY TIGHT KNIT GROUP OF GIRLS AND THEY WORKED SUPER HARD THIS YEAR, SO WE'RE JUST REALLY PROUD OF THEM. I'M GOING TO HAND IT OVER TO COACH JEN IN A SECOND, BUT I JUST WANTED TO SAY TO OUR STUDENT ATHLETES, IT'S NOT LUCK THAT GOT YOU HERE. IT'S NOT BY CHANCE. IT WASN'T GOOD FORTUNE. YOU DIDN'T GET HERE BY GOING THROUGH THE MOTIONS. IT TOOK GREAT FOCUS, EFFORT, ENTHUSIASM, DEDICATION AND HARD WORK TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL THAT WE SET AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR. AND I'M SUPER CONFIDENT. I KNOW THAT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU, IF YOU PUT THAT SAME ENERGY INTO YOUR STUDIES, YOUR RELATIONSHIPS, AND YOUR FUTURE CAREERS, YOU WILL BE SO SUCCESSFUL. YOU WILL DO ANYTHING YOU WANT. SO ONCE AGAIN, JUST THANK YOU TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR HAVING US AND ACKNOWLEDGING OUR STUDENTS SUCH HARD WORK. WE'RE HAPPY TO DO SO. YES. HELLO, I'M COACH JEN, I'M THE VOLUNTEER COACH HERE WITH THE GIRLS FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU, JUDGE SCOTT AND COMMISSIONER PALSY AND THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS FOR RECOGNIZING OUR SEVENTH AND EIGHTH GRADE GIRLS FOR THE LAST HARD WORK. THREE YEARS, THEY PUT IN TO PRACTICE. AGAIN, WE DON'T HAVE A COURT. WE PRACTICE OUTSIDE IN THE MORNINGS, AND WE RENT A COURT OUTSIDE OF SCHOOL THAT THE PARENTS HELP PITCH IN FOR TO PRACTICE. AND THEY PUT IN 100% DEDICATION ON PRACTICE AND TO SHOW UP FOR EVERY GAME AND CAR RIDES, MOST OF THEM HERE IN TOWN SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A BUS ALSO. BUT WE ALL PULLED TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY WITH OUR SCHOOL AND FUNDRAISED. SO WE HAVE EQUIPMENT, UNIFORMS AND BEING ABLE TO PRACTICE AND THANK YOU EVERYTHING AND THANK YOU FOR THE RECOGNITION. WE APPRECIATE IT. WE ARE HONORED TO DO SO. MR.. DO YOU WANT TO GO FIRST? YES. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. WELL, CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL THE YOUNG LADIES AND THE COACHES. I HAVE AN EIGHTH GRADE GRANDDAUGHTER WHO IS A BIG VOLLEYBALL PLAYER, SO I GET TO GO TO A LOT OF VOLLEYBALL GAMES. BUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS ABSOLUTELY PHENOMENAL. BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT YOU DON'T HAVE EVERYTHING HANDED TO YOU. YOU HAVE TO GO OUT AND WORK REALLY HARD FOR IT. WORK HARD FOR A PLACE TO PRACTICE, WORK HARD FOR A PLACE TO PLAY AND AND WORK HARD TO RAISE MONEY FOR YOUR PROGRAM. THAT SHOWS THAT YOU ARE REALLY DEDICATED TO THIS. AND THAT SHOWS THAT YOU WILL HAVE A GREAT, SUCCESSFUL FUTURE AS YOU MOVE FORWARD. SO AGAIN, CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO COME UP THIS MORNING AND LETTING US RECOGNIZE YOU HERE IN THE COURT. SO CONGRATULATIONS AND BEST OF LUCK ON YOUR FUTURE. AWESOME. ONCE AGAIN, IT IS OUR HONOR TO RECOGNIZE YOU ALL HERE TODAY. AND WE'RE SO PLEASED TO BE ABLE TO DO THINGS LIKE THIS AND THE DEDICATION AND TIME AND EFFORT THAT YOU ALL PUT TOGETHER TO BE ABLE TO DO THESE. SOUNDS LIKE EVEN MORE CHALLENGING THAN AT A SCHOOL WHERE YOU HAVE THESE FACILITIES AND THINGS. AND THE PARENTS, THANK YOU TO THE PARENTS WHO GET INVOLVED AND PUT IN THE EXTRA EFFORT TO ALLOW YOU TO PARTICIPATE IN THESE THINGS. BUT WE ARE WE'RE EXCITED TO BE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE YOU TODAY AND HOPE TO CONTINUE TO DO SO THROUGHOUT YOUR YEARS THERE. SO WE HAVE A RESOLUTION FOR YOU AS WELL, AND WE WOULD LOVE TO TAKE A PHOTO WITH YOU LADIES. SO IF Y'ALL WOULD COME FORWARD, WE WOULD MAKE ROOM FOR YOU IN THE CIRCLE. YES. AND YOU. WILL TELL US IF WE NEED TO MOVE. YES. WELL, WHAT? DO YOU WANT US TO DO A SPOT ON ONE SIDE AND TAKE A LITTLE STEP OUT? RIGHT. PERFECT. PERFECT. OKAY. READY? ONE. TWO. THREE. PARENTS. WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT. WANT TO GET UP AND MOVE FROM UP HERE? Y'ALL ARE WELCOME TO GET UP AND. COME UP HERE. CLOSER. ONE. TWO. THREE. [00:20:07] THANK YOU. GOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD JOB. GOOD JOB. GOOD GENTLEMEN. THANK YOU. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD JOB. THANK YOU. GOOD WORK. GOOD JOB. WELL DONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HERE. LET THEM. OKAY. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE AND [3. In recognition of National Adoption Month - November 2025.] RECOGNITION OF NATIONAL ADOPTION MONTH AND NOVEMBER 2025. TARA, FROM OUR COMMISSIONERS COURT OFFICES IS GOING TO READ THAT ONE. WHEREAS EACH DAY, MORE THAN 6000 CHILDREN IN TEXAS FOSTER CARE SYSTEM ARE WAITING TO BE ADOPTED AND FIND A PERMANENT PLACE TO CALL HOME. AND WHEREAS NOVEMBER IS RECOGNIZED AS NATIONAL ADOPTION MONTH, A TIME TO RAISE AWARENESS ABOUT THE URGENT NEED FOR LOVING PERMANENT FAMILIES FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH IN FOSTER CARE, AND TO CELEBRATE THOSE WHO HAVE OPENED THEIR HEARTS AND HOMES THROUGH ADOPTION. AND WHEREAS FOSTER ANGELS OF SOUTH TEXAS CONTINUES ITS MISSION IN 2025 TO ENSURE THAT EVERY CHILD AND YOUTH IN FOSTER CARE FEELS THE SUPPORT, ENCOURAGEMENT AND OPPORTUNITY THEY DESERVE THROUGH PROGRAMS THAT MEET BOTH IMMEDIATE AND LIFELONG NEEDS. AND WHEREAS, FOSTER ANGELS ART GALLERY OF SOUTH TEXAS SERVES AS A POWERFUL TOOL TO RAISE AWARENESS AND CONNECT CHILDREN AND YOUTH AWAITING ADOPTION WITH LOVING AND PERMANENT FAMILIES, GIVING A FACE AND STORY TO THOSE STILL WAITING FOR THEIR FOREVER HOME. AND WHEREAS, THROUGH ITS DAILY REQUESTS PROGRAM, FOSTER ANGELS OF SOUTH TEXAS MEETS ESSENTIAL NEEDS THAT ARISE EVERY DAY FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH IN FOSTER CARE, FROM CLOTHING AND SCHOOL SUPPLIES TO SPECIAL EXPERIENCES THAT HELP RESTORE HOPE AND NORMALCY. AND WHEREAS THE LIFE SCRIPT PROGRAM PROVIDES ONGOING MENTORING, RESOURCES AND LIFE SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FOR OLDER YOUTH TRANSITIONING OUT OF FOSTER CARE, EMPOWERING THEM TO THRIVE AS INDEPENDENT, CONFIDENT ADULTS. AND WHEREAS NUECES COUNTY RECOGNIZES THAT EVERY CHILD DESERVES STABILITY, FAMILY, AND UNCONDITIONAL LOVE AND STANDS FIRMLY WITH ORGANIZATIONS THAT STRENGTHEN FAMILIES AND ADVOCATE FOR THE WELL-BEING OF CHILDREN AND YOUTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY THAT NUECES COUNTY PROUDLY STANDS IN FULL SUPPORT AND PARTICIPATION WITH FOSTER ANGELS OF SOUTH TEXAS AND THEIR MISSION TO INSPIRE HOPE, FULFILL ESSENTIAL NEEDS, PROMOTE ADOPTION, AND HELP EVERY CHILD IN FOSTER CARE REACH THEIR FULL POTENTIAL. DULY ADOPTED BY VOTE OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS ON THIS THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025. MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND MULTIPLE SECONDS. BUT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. JENNIFER'S COMING UP. GOING TO SPEAK? YES. THANK YOU. I KNOW NOW I'M SPEAKING TO THE THE PEOPLE WHO ALREADY KNOW WHAT WE DO. BUT THANK YOU FOR HAVING US HERE AGAIN. YOU GUYS KNOW WE WORK WITH OUR KIDS IN FOSTER CARE ALL YEAR LONG, BUT REALLY HONE DOWN IN NOVEMBER BECAUSE OF NATIONAL ADOPTION MONTH. THIS IS OUR FUN MONTH. THIS IS WHEN WE GET TO SEE A BUNCH OF ADOPTIONS AND A BUNCH OF WORK COME THROUGH THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON ALL YEAR. TWO YEARS AGO, WHEN FOSTER ANGELS ADOPTED THE HEART GALLERY. WE HAVE ABOUT 250 KIDS OUT OF THE 6000 RIGHT HERE IN SOUTH TEXAS THAT ARE ACTIVELY SEEKING TO BE ADOPTED. OUT OF THOSE 250, WE HAVE IDENTIFIED 180. WE'RE WORKING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY PROTECTIVE SERVICES TO IDENTIFY THOSE CHILDREN THAT ARE ACTIVELY WANTING TO BE ADOPTED. OUT OF THOSE, 83 ARE CURRENTLY LIVE WITH A PROFILE ON OUR WEBSITE. WE WORK WITH THE CHILDREN. I MEET WITH THEM ABOUT EVERY OTHER MONTH. WE BUILD A PROFILE, WE TAKE THEIR PICTURES, THE KIDDOS KNOW AND ARE ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN THE PROCESS. 22 THAT ARE PENDING ADOPTION AND 27 THAT HAVE COMPLETED THEIR ADOPTION. AND SO WE HAVE ABOUT ALMOST 50 KIDDOS OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS THAT ARE IN A PERMANENT HOME NOW THAT HAVE BEEN SEEN THROUGH THE HART GALLERY. UNFORTUNATELY, WE GET TO I MEAN, WE GET TO CELEBRATE NOVEMBER, BUT UNFORTUNATELY AS YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOOD AND BAD. [00:25:03] WE ALSO HAD 22 KIDDOS AGE OUT. SO FOSTER ANGELS DOES HAVE OTHER PROGRAMS. WE HAVE OUR LIFE SCRIPT PROGRAM WHERE WE HELP THOSE KIDDOS THAT HAVE AGED OUT, BUT THE NEED IS THERE. SO EVEN THOUGH WE CELEBRATE NOVEMBER, YOU GUYS KNOW IT'S A NEED THAT CONTINUES ALL YEAR LONG AND WE TRY TO MAKE IT AS NORMAL AS IT CAN BE FOR OUR KIDDOS THAT ARE IN CARE. BUT IN NOVEMBER, WE DO GET TO CELEBRATE, AND WE'RE GREAT TO HAVE. GRATEFUL TO HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE YOU AND KIND OF SHARE OUR UPDATES AND BE RECOGNIZED FOR THE YEAR, THE WORK WE DO ALL YEAR LONG. THAT BEING SAID, WE DO HAVE OUR ANNUAL EVENT IN NUECES COUNTY NEXT FRIDAY THE 14TH AT THE YACHT CLUB IN THE MORNING. IF ANYBODY IS INTERESTED IN ATTENDING THAT. I KNOW JUDGE SCOTT AND I THINK PEYTON RSVP'D FOR THAT. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT. BUT WE JUST WANT TO ENCOURAGE ANYBODY. I KNOW THE ROOM IS NOT AS FULL AS WHEN THE PARENTS WERE HERE, BUT ANYBODY THAT'S WATCHING ONLINE, YOU KNOW LOOK US UP IF YOU WANT TO GET INVOLVED. THERE'S ALL DIFFERENT WAYS TO GET INVOLVED, TO HELP OUR CHILDREN THAT ARE IN THE MOST NEED. AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING US. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. AND YES HAPPY TO ATTEND YOUR EVENT AND EVERYTHING. A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW MY HUSBAND WAS ADOPTED, AND ONE OF THOSE STATISTICS YOU JUST SPOUTED OFF OF THOSE LAST TWO YEARS IS A DEAR FRIEND OF MINE WHO WAS A FOSTER PARENT THAT ADOPTED THE CHILD, TOO, SO WE DO KNOW THE SITUATION AND SADLY THE SITUATION A LOT OF THESE KIDS COME FROM AND THE NEED AND THE NEED CONTINUES. SO WE ARE HAPPY TO HONOR YOU HERE TODAY AND HOPE THAT ANY LITTLE BIT OF VOICE WE HAVE REACHES OUT INTO OUR COMMUNITY THAT HELPS YOU. WE'RE WE'RE PROUD TO STAND WITH YOU EVERY YEAR, EACH AND EVERY YEAR WITH THIS AND WHAT WE CAN DO TO HELP. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE. THANK YOU. JUDGE, JUST REAL QUICK. YES, I JUST WANT TO ADD TO IT, I REALLY IF YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE HART GALLERY, TAKE A MINUTE TO LOOK. THE FACT THAT THE FOSTER ANGELS HAVE ADOPTED YOU AS SIGNIFICANT, BECAUSE I KNOW THE WORK THAT THEY DO IN THIS COMMUNITY, AND NOT ONLY IN THIS COMMUNITY, IS SIGNIFICANT. HAVING WORKED CLOSELY AS A JUDGE THAT HANDLED THOSE KIND OF THINGS PRIOR TO AND AND ADDING TO THE FACT THAT BOTH I HAVE ADOPTED MYSELF AND I WAS ALSO ADOPTED. IT'S A VERY SPECIAL MONTH AS WELL. SO APPRECIATE REALLY ALL THAT IS DONE AND WHAT YOU DO. AND, AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SIGNIFICANT 49 OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS THAT HAVE HAVE DONE THAT THROUGH THAT. THAT'S A THAT'S 49 PEOPLE THAT DIDN'T HAVE A HOME. KIDS DIDN'T HAVE A HOME. AND I THINK THAT THE FACT THAT WE WE DO THIS IS IS IMPORTANT. BUT WHAT YOU DO IS REALLY WHAT'S IMPORTANT. THIS IS JUST A MOMENT IN TIME. YOU DO IT EVERY DAY AND IT'S GREATLY APPRECIATED BY THIS COMMUNITY AND CERTAINLY BY ME AS WELL. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME? YES, MA'AM. YOU'RE WITH US? ABSOLUTELY, YES. ANYONE ELSE THAT WANTS TO COME JOIN US? WE'RE HAPPY TO HAVE YOU UP HERE. THIS. THANK YOU. THANK. YOU. OH, THERE YOU GO. JUST UP HERE. WE'RE GOING TO BRING EVERYBODY DOWN. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. HOW ARE YOU? AMAZING. YES. YES. HI. HOW ARE YOU? YOU TOO. IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN. YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE IT. YES. THANK YOU. YOU. OKAY. YEAH. YEAH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. EXACTLY. YEAH. OKAY. ON TO OUR PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION. [F. PUBLIC COMMENT: This section provides the public the opportunity to address the Commissioners Court on any issues within its jurisdiction. The Commissioners Court may not take formal action on any requests made during the Public Comment period which are not on the Agenda, but can refer such requests to County staff for review if appropriate.] WE JUST HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TODAY, SUZANNE GALLAGHER. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. YOU KNOW, THE YOU HAVE SPOKEN BEFORE. YOU KNOW THE RULES. SO PLEASE. I KNOW ALL THE RULES. YES. GOOD MORNING, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS. I'M HERE TODAY REPRESENTING CONCERNED CITIZENS OF ROBSTOWN AND CALALLEN. THIS GROUP FORMED FROM A COMMON DESIRE TO FIGHT THE PROPOSED AMMONIA PLANT. IT IS NOT OUR INTENTION TO ACCUSE, BUT TO UNDERSTAND, [00:30:01] QUESTION WHEN NECESSARY, AND PARTICIPATE IN THE SHAPING OF OUR FUTURE. THE FACT THAT OUR INTERESTS AND INQUIRIES HAVE GROWN FAR BEYOND THAT, AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE COMPLICATED INTERPLAY BETWEEN ALL ENTITIES, ELECTED AND UNELECTED, THAT WE BELIEVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR BRINGING TO OUR DOORSTEP. WE KNOW THAT BACK IN 2017, THE NUECES COUNTY JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS MADE A RESOLUTION TO REINVEST IN OR REINVENT THE NORTHWEST PART OF THE COUNTY. THE IDEA OF AN INLAND PORT WAS BORN. TALKS BETWEEN WATER DISTRICT NUMBER THREE AND AVINA BEGAN IN 2021, AND SOMETIME AROUND THEN, THE CALICO TANK FARM POPPED UP, SEEMINGLY OUT OF NOWHERE. THE BALL WAS ROLLING REGARDING THE PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND THE AREA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BOARDS. THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A TIME WHEN THEIR GOALS WERE ALIGNED WITH THE MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS, BUT WE NO LONGER BELIEVE THIS TO BE THE CASE. THOSE OF US WHO LIVE OUTSIDE THE CITY WANT OUR WAY OF LIFE PROTECTED. I THINK YOU WOULD BE HARD PRESSED TO FIND MANY PEOPLE THAT WANT TO SEE THE CALALLEN ROBSTOWN AREA TURNED INTO AN INLAND PORT, UNLESS THEY STAND TO GAIN PERSONALLY OR FINANCIALLY. OUR ANNUAL JUNIOR LIVESTOCK SHOW IS A CELEBRATION OF OUR AGRICULTURAL TRADITIONS, AND EVERYONE WHO'S ANYBODY SHOWS UP TO SUPPORT THE KIDS AND PRAISE THEIR LEARNING AND EMBODYING THE RICH AGRICULTURAL TRADITIONS OF OUR COUNTY. BUT WHAT OF THOSE WHO ARE LIVING THOSE TRADITIONS TODAY? MR. PIHOS PRODUCE STAND. AN INSTITUTION IN OUR COMMUNITY SITS ONE MILE DIRECTLY DOWNWIND OF THE PROPOSED SITE. IT'S NOTABLE THAT HE DOES NOT USE CHEMICALS ON HIS PRODUCE. ANY HEAVY INDUSTRY IN THIS LOCATION WOULD BE CATASTROPHIC TO HIS BUSINESS. HEATHER RIDGE STABLES SITS THREE MILES DIRECTLY DOWNWIND, AND THE ENTIRE AREA IS SURROUNDED BY COUNTLESS IRREPLACEABLE ACRES OF FARMLAND THAT HAVE BEEN CARED FOR BY GENERATIONS. NOT TO MENTION HUNDREDS OF SMALL HOLDINGS RESIDENTS LIKE MYSELF WHO KEEP LIVESTOCK, OFTEN THE VERY LIVESTOCK WE WILL SEE AT THE SHOW GARDENS TO PRODUCE OUR OWN FOOD, AND WHO SIMPLY ENJOY THE SPACE AND QUIET OF OUR SEMI-RURAL OR RURAL LIFESTYLE. WE MATTER TOO. WE ARE NOT PARTS A PARTS DONOR FOR THE PORT. WE DO NOT WANT UNSUSTAINABLE GROWTH AND WE DO NOT WANT TO LIVE IN INDUSTRY SHADOW. ON THE HEELS OF OUR BEING GRANTED A CONTESTED CASE HEARING, WATER DISTRICT NUMBER THREE HAS TERMINATED THEIR CONTRACT WITH AVINA. BUT WE WILL NOT STOP UNTIL THEIR PERMANENT REQUEST HAS BEEN DENIED OR PULLED AND THEY ARE DEAD IN THE WATER. WE WANT AVINA GONE AND WE DO NOT WANT ANYTHING REMOTELY RESEMBLING IT TO COME IN ITS PLACE. PLEASE BE ON OUR SIDE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THERE IS NO ONE ELSE THAT SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT CAME IN THAT WISHES TO SPEAK, IF YOU WOULD RAISE YOUR HAND. I'LL ALLOW IT. WE ONLY HAD ONE, BUT THEN WE'LL MOVE ON. BEFORE WE DO OUR CONSENT AGENDA, I DID GET A PHONE CALL ASKING IF WE COULD PULL UP THREE, BE THREE UNDER THE SHERIFF'S ITEM, THE WEXFORD CONTRACT. SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND PULL THAT UP FOR YOU RIGHT NOW. MR.. UNDER THE SHERIFF'S ITEMS. 3B3. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AWARD AND EXECUTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES. [3. Discuss and consider award and execution of a Health Services Agreement for Jail Medical Services with Wexford Health Services, Inc.; and related matters.] AGREEMENT FOR THE JAIL MEDICAL SERVICES WITH WEXFORD HEALTH SERVICES AND RELATED MATTERS. I BELIEVE THIS WAS CONTINGENT APPROVAL BEFORE AND NOW IT'S GONE THROUGH SO EVERYONE IS IN AGREEMENT AND MOVING FORWARD. YES, WE'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, WITH JOHNNY HIP IN THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT, WITH SHERIFF'S OFFICE, SHERIFF HOOPER AND HIS STAFF AND ALL PARTIES HAVE COME TO AGREEMENT. THAT'S THE AGREEMENT THAT'S ATTACHED HERE TO FOR AND SHERIFF OFFICE RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. SO MOVED. JUDGE, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? YES, PLEASE. SEE SHERIFF OR WHOEVER FROM YOUR OFFICE. I KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN. OR. JOHNNY, MAYBE YOU'VE YOU'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH THESE FOR YEARS. HEALTH CARE FOR OUR INMATES IS NOT ALWAYS THE EASIEST OF INDUSTRY. WE KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD CHALLENGES. WE KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN COMPLEXITIES, NOT LAWSUITS, NOT NECESSARILY ON US, BUT JUST FOR THE PRIOR PROVIDERS. BUT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE GO FORWARD ON THIS. SO WE'VE HAD RELATIVELY LITTLE TO NO PROBLEMS WITH THIS GROUP. GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS AND JUDGE, A COMMISSIONER ROGERS. THAT'S CORRECT. THIS IS THE GROUP THAT'S BEING AWARDED IS A WEXFORD. IT'S THE GROUP THAT CAME IN HERE AND HELPED US, SORT OF AN EMERGENCY SITUATION WHEN OUR PRIOR CONTRACTOR WENT INTO BANKRUPTCY. THEY PRESENTED AND I FORGET THE RIGHT TERMS MICHAEL USES, BUT THEY PRESENTED THE BEST BID FOR OUR SITUATION. THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT IS ON BOARD WITH THE CONTRACT AND THE CONTENTS OF IT AND WHAT THEY'VE PROPOSED. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION MORE DIRECTLY THE COUNTY IS ACTUALLY THE SHERIFF IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING HEALTH CARE TO PEOPLE WHO ARE IN HIS CUSTODY IN THE [00:35:04] JAIL. THE INMATES THAT ARE THERE ARE TYPICALLY NOT YOUR NORMAL PERSON IN TERMS OF THE THINGS THAT THEY HAVE GOING ON WITH THEM. MANY OF THEM HAVE DRUG RELATED PROBLEMS, WHICH IN CASE TAKES THEM INTO JAIL. WE MOVED SEVERAL, MANY YEARS AGO. WE DECIDED TO PROVIDE MEDICAL SERVICES IN THE JAIL. AND INSTEAD OF TAKING THEM TO THE HOSPITAL OR FOR WHATEVER THEY NEEDED. SO THERE IS HAS BEEN FOR MANY YEARS AN INFIRMARY ON THE FOURTH FLOOR OF THE JAIL. WEXFORD TAKES CARE OF STAFFING THAT 24 OVER SEVEN. THAT INCLUDES MEDICATION CALLS. THEY HAVE PHYSICIAN PSYCHIATRISTS. MENTAL HEALTH FOLKS ARE AVAILABLE AROUND THE CLOCK. AND THE CONTRACT PROVIDES FOR MEDICAL CARE, MENTAL HEALTH CARE NURSING AND ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO HELP KEEP THE INMATES IN JAIL FOR THEIR CARE. THERE ARE SOME INSTANCES WHERE THEY CANNOT PROVIDE CARE IN THE JAIL. AND THOSE ARE COVERED UNDER OUR INDIGENT CARE AGREEMENT WITH SPOHN. AND THOSE PATIENTS ARE TAKEN TO TO SPAHN FOR CARE. THEY ARE. THEY ARE FEW AND FAR BETWEEN. BUT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT IS WE'RE GOOD WITH THIS CONTRACT. AND I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT. I MEAN, SOMETIMES WE VOTE ON CONTRACTS AND THEY'RE EASY. AND IT'S A NO BRAINER FOR US. BUT I WANT TO JUST HIGHLIGHT THE THE WORK THAT WEXFORD HAS DONE. CONSIDERING WE'VE HAD, I WOULD SAY CONTROVERSY. THE THE NATURE OF THIS INDUSTRY IS PROBLEMATIC. I MEAN, YOU CAN PRETTY MUCH GOOGLE ANY COMPANY AND THEY'RE ALL GOING TO HAVE SOME SORT OF, YOU KNOW, CONCERN OR LAWSUIT THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP JUST BECAUSE IT WILL BE CHALLENGED BY AN INMATE OR THEIR FAMILY. BUT THE FACT THAT WE'VE HAD LITTLE TO NO ISSUES HERE AND THAT THEY'VE WORKED SO WELL WITH THE SHERIFF, I THINK THAT JUST NEEDS TO BE HIGHLIGHTED. SO THAT'S WHY I PULLED IT. NO, NO CONTROVERSY OR NO VOTE AGAINST IT FOR ME. BUT JUST TO HIGHLIGHT THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE AND TO THANK YOU ALL FOR FOR WORKING ON THIS COMMISSIONER THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF EYES ON THIS CONTRACT, MICHAEL, OF COURSE, AND HIS STAFF, THE SHERIFF AND HIS STAFF AND AND THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. SO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. DID WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOING BACK TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA ON PAGE THREE. [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.] WHAT'S THREE OF MINE? IS THERE ANY ITEM THAT ANY COMMISSIONER WISHES TO PULL FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION TO PASS. YOUR HONOR, I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM H AND ITEM R H R J H R H R AND S S AS IN SAM. YES. THOSE FOR ANYBODY ELSE? YES. WHAT? G AND H. G AND I, G AND I. LOTS OF THEM. OKAY, JUDGE, I'D MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. EXCEPT FOR ITEMS G, H, I, J R AND S. G H I J. SECOND. YES. WE HAVE A MOTION. AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. YES. [G. Adopt resolution recognizing Special Hearts Day, December 8th, 2025.] ITEM G COMMISSIONER. GONZALEZ, I BELIEVE YOU PULLED THAT. I HAVE A QUESTION ON G, ACTUALLY, G AND H AND ON THE ADOPTION RESOLUTION. WHY ARE WE HAVING A HEARING? BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANYONE PRESENT AND THEY JUST WANTED THE SPECIAL HEARTS DAY. WE ARE PLANNING TO ATTEND AND WE'RE GOING TO PRESENT THEM TO THEM. THE MARINE CORPS AS WELL, THEY WEREN'T GOING TO HAVE ANYONE PRESENT. THEY JUST NEEDED IT BEFORE THE DECEMBER 10TH MEETING. SO WE MOVED IT TO THIS AT THEIR REQUEST, BASICALLY. YEAH. NO, WE ABSOLUTELY RECOGNIZE THEM AND WANT TO RECOGNIZE THEM. I BELIEVE I'M SUPPOSED TO TAKE THEM TO READ THE RESOLUTION IN COURT, YOU KNOW, BUT I MEAN, I MILITARY MYSELF. SO I LEAVE YOU WITH THE RESOLUTION, YOU KNOW, IF NOBODY'S GOING TO BE HERE, BUT I, I GUESS I COULD REPRESENT THEM, I GUESS, BUT. WELL, AND, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS JUST MY QUESTION. I JUST, YOU KNOW. NO, I BELIEVE WE HAVE SOMEONE ATTENDING AND GOING TO READ THAT ON OUR BEHALF AT THEIR EVENT. YES, YES. SO DO YOU WANT TO DO THESE SEPARATELY SO YOU CAN TALK ABOUT THEM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT TO KNOW THE REASON WHY THEY WERE. YEAH, THAT WAS THE ONLY REASON. YES. AND BECAUSE WE HAVE ONE MEETING, THEY WEREN'T GOING TO HAVE ANYONE PRESENT AND WE WERE GOING TO BE ATTENDING THEIR EVENT. [00:40:01] SO THEY SAID IT WAS FINE TO DO ON CONSENT AGENDA AND WE'RE GOING TO READ IT. THEY'RE LIKE CHESNEY DOES SOMETIMES ON HIS WHEN HE GOES TO THE SCHOOL AND STUFF. YES. SO IS YOUR MOTION TO PASS. AND THEN I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. WAIT A MINUTE. I PULLED H AS WELL I DON'T OH SORRY. I THOUGHT HE PULLED G AND H SORRY. YES. I DIDN'T PULL G. IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND ADOPT THAT, THEN GO AHEAD. YES, I'LL MOVE TO ADOPT G. SECOND. THAT'S FINE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. YES. ITEM H. YES. COMMISSIONER. [H. Adopt resolution recognizing the 250th birthday of the United States Marine Corps on November 10, 2025 and honoring the Marine Corps League Detachment 430.] I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT THAT'S OKAY. YEAH, I JUST, I GO ALONG WITH WHAT COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ SAYS SOMETHING AS IMPORTANT AS THE 250TH BIRTHDAY OF THE UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS. THAT NEEDS TO BE AN ITEM THAT WE AGENDA. AND I DIDN'T REALIZE NO ONE COULD BE HERE, BUT WE SHOULD CERTAINLY MAKE THAT A BIG DEAL HERE IN THIS COURT. THAT IS A BIG DEAL. IT IS A VERY BIG DEAL. AND WITH THE 250TH ANNIVERSARY OF OUR COUNTRY AS WELL, AND THEN THE MARINE CORPS IS A YEAR BEHIND. SO THEY'LL BE 251 NEXT YEAR IN NOVEMBER. SO YES. SO I JUST MY HUSBAND IS A MARINE. SO I TOTALLY AGREE WITH ALL OF YOU. IT'S WHY WE WERE PLANNING ON ATTENDING. SO YES. ANYWAY, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT AND THEN SO I'D MAKE A MOTION. WE APPROVE THAT WITH FURTHER RECOGNITION TO BE BROUGHT FORWARD AT A LATER TIME. SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. I AM, I IS NEXT, AND I DON'T HAVE A CLUE WHO PULLED THAT ONE. [I. Ratify Board of Judge's approval to create and open a Grants Accountant position (Pay Group 29) for the County Auditor's Office (#12500) and to delete the Payroll & Grants Supervisor position (Pay Group 30).] SO IF YOU DID, WHOEVER. GONZALEZ. YES. I JUST NEED CLARIFICATION. WHAT? RATIFY BOARD OF JUDGES APPROVAL. THIS IS THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE, AND THAT'S GOING TO COME UP IN JUST A SECOND, TOO. SO WE HAVE MR. ELIAS HERE, OUR NEW AUDITOR. HE WAS NOT HERE WHEN WE APPROVED THE BUDGET. AND HE HAS A BUDGET FOR POSITIONS THAT WAS CREATED IN OUR BUDGET THAT WE PASSED IN SEPTEMBER. SO HE HAS TO CREATE THOSE POSITIONS, AND HE HAS A SET AMOUNT HE HAS TO WORK WITH, BUT HE HAS TO SEE WHAT HE NEEDS. WE DID NOT WANT TO FILL THOSE FOR HIM IN SEPTEMBER WHEN HE WAS COMING IN. THIS IS GOING TOWARDS THE AUDITOR. YES. BE FILLED BY THE AUDITOR. YES, YES. HE HE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO CREATE WHATEVER POSITIONS HE NEEDS WITH HIS BUDGET AND. YES, MRS NO COST. NO, NO ADDITIONAL COST. THIS IS BUDGETED IN HIS SECTION AND I THINK WE DID. BUT HE'S DELETING ONE POSITION, RIGHT? WELL, THAT PERSON IS LONG. WE REMOVED THEM OUT OF THERE. YES, BECAUSE HE WON'T NEED THAT. HE'S CREATING THE POSITION AND HIS OFFICE. WE PROBABLY DIDN'T NEED TO PUT THE DELETING ANYTHING BECAUSE EVERYTHING WAS DELETED. WHEN YOU COME IN, YOU CREATE YOUR POSITIONS. YES. SO THIS HAS NO NET EFFECT TO THE BUDGET? NO NET EFFECT. WE GAVE HIM AND WE GAVE THAT OFFICE A BUDGET UNTIL THE END OF THE YEAR TO MAKE THEIR CHANGES, AND ESPECIALLY HIM, BECAUSE HE WASN'T EVEN HERE. NO. IT FALLS WITHIN THE POLICY THAT WE'VE COMMITTED TO. THAT'S ALL I WAS SAYING. YES. OKAY. OKAY. SO MOVED. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. AND THEN COMMISSIONER. I BELIEVE YOU DID. AND WE ABSOLUTELY WANTED TO PULL THIS ONE. AND WELCOME AND INTRODUCE TO EVERYONE. ELIAS IS OUR BRAND NEW AUDITOR WHO STARTED WHAT, MONDAY MORNING AND. WE'RE EXCITED TO HAVE YOU. WELCOME. GLAD TO HAVE YOU. AND LET ME TELL YOU, IT'S BEEN A BUSY THREE DAYS NOW WITH COURT TODAY AND TOMORROW'S NOT. THIS FIRST WEEK IS GOING TO BE A TRIAL BY FIRE. I THINK WE'RE THROWING YOU INTO EVERYTHING. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU'VE YOU'VE ALREADY BEEN A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH AND LOOK FORWARD TO MANY OTHER TIMES. SO YES. AND LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU. OH PLEASE SIT. WE'RE NOT THAT FORMAL HERE. OKAY. BUT CONSTANCE ALREADY CLEANED ALL THE MESS UP. SHE DEALT WITH ALL THE HEADACHES. THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND WE'RE GLAD THAT SHE'S BACK WITH US. AND GLAD THAT YOU'RE HERE. AND I KNOW YOUR WORK AT THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT. I MEAN, YOU WERE WELL KNOWN. AND SO WHEN YOUR NAME POPPED UP, I WAS REALLY EXCITED TO HEAR ABOUT THAT. SO LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU. YES. WELCOME ABOARD. YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MOTION. DID WE HAVE A MOTION ALREADY? IN A SECOND MOTION. I'LL SECOND THAT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ITEM NUMBER R COMMISSIONER. [R. Authorize and approve execution of a Facilities-Use License Agreement with St. Michaels Parish, for use of the parking area of the LyondellBasell Park for a two-day Cook Off fundraiser event.] THIS IS YOURS? YES, MA'AM. YES. JUST A CORRECTION THERE. THIS IS THE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE SAINT MICHAEL'S PARISH TO UTILIZE, [00:45:01] NOT LYONDELLBASELL PARK. THAT SHOULD. IF THAT'S WHAT'S ON YOUR AGENDA, IT SHOULD BE BANNED. KATY PARK FOR A TWO DAY COOK OFF FUNDRAISER EVENT. THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID AT THE LYONDELLBASELL PARK EARLIER THIS YEAR FOR THE TULOSO MIDWAY FOOTBALL BOOSTER CLUB. AND WE USED THE SAME BOILERPLATE AGREEMENT THAT JENNY AND HER DEPARTMENT CREATED FOR US. AND I HAVE JENNY NOW, THE CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE. SO EVERYTHING SHOULD BE IN PLACE FOR THEM TO MOVE FORWARD. AND EDWARD'S BEEN WORKING WITH THEM AS WELL, SO JUST PLEASE I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE AND APPROVE EXECUTION OF A FACILITIES USE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH SAINT MICHAEL'S PARISH FOR THE USE OF THE PARKING AREA OF THE BANK PARK FOR A TWO DAY COOK OFF FUNDRAISER EVENT. SECOND. ARE YOU SECOND? DID YOU DO THAT? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. AND THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT AND EVERYTHING. I THINK EDWARD AND JUAN. ANYBODY ELSE THAT DOES THESE. THIS IS A GREAT TEMPLATE FOR US TO USE FOR THE FUTURE AND WHAT WE ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO USE. THIS IS THE PROPER WAY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE KIND OF THINGS. [S. Authorize and approve execution of Service Order Summary for a 5-year agreement with DBT Transportation Services for support and maintenance of the Airport’s Automated Weather Observing System, in the amount of $6,145.00 per year, plus fees; funded by the RAMP grant. ] ITEM S I PULLED BECAUSE YOU ASKED ME TO COMMISSIONER THIS WAS YOURS AS WELL. I BELIEVE IT WAS A CONTRACT CORRECTION FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE OR SOMETHING. YES. YOU DIDN'T PULL IT, SO I DID, BUT IT WAS. IT WAS AT YOUR SUGGESTION. I WAS SUPPOSED TO PULL IT. AND I'M GLAD YOU. THIS IS ONE SECOND HERE. OKAY. THIS IS A CONTRACT COURT FOR OUR FIVE YEAR SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH DTE TRANSPORTATION FOR THE MAINTENANCE ON OUR AWS SYSTEM AT THE AIRPORT. COUNTY AIRPORT. AND THIS WILL BE PAID FOR THROUGH OUR RAMP GRANT PROGRAM, WHICH WE RECEIVED EARLIER THIS YEAR. AND WE HAVE WE HAVE ALL THE DOCUMENTATION. WE'VE WORKED WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING'S HERE. I WANTED TO PASS OUT A COPY TO EACH ONE OF YOU, SO YOU'LL HAVE IT FOR YOUR RECORDS. AND THE AI SYSTEM WE HAVE CURRENTLY SOUNDS LIKE THAT NOISE UP THERE. NO. I'M KIDDING. IT IT'S AN OLD SYSTEM. IT'S BEEN THERE A LONG TIME. BUT WE'VE MANAGED TO KEEP IT OPERATIONAL. IT IS GOING TO NEED SOME WORK ON IT HERE VERY SOON. THERE'S ONE PART OF IT THAT IS NOT WORKING. AND WE HAVE TO KEEP THIS WORKING. WE HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE FAA THAT IF OUR SYSTEM IS NOT UP TO PAR AND BEING INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED THAT THEY WILL CLOSE OUR AIRPORT. SO THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE. YEAH. SECOND. MOTION. AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? JUDGE. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER HAS BEEN WORKING HARD AT THIS, ALONG WITH OUR INTERIM AIRPORT MANAGER. AND SO THIS WORK THAT'S BEEN LONG DELAYED AND AND IGNORED BUT THANKFULLY, WE'RE JUMPING ON IT. SO I JUST WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER FOR ALL HIS WORK GETTING US TO THIS POINT. THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. EXCUSE ME FOR THE COURT. THERE WERE SOME CHANGES, AND I JUST HAVEN'T SEEN THE DOCUMENT THAT YOU'RE PASSING OUT. AND SO IF YOU COULD MAYBE ADOPT THAT SUBJECT TO MAKING SURE THAT I THOUGHT WE CONFIRM THE CHANGES AS THE NOTES. THERE WERE SOME CAME FROM ON PAGE THREE. THERE'S SOME CHANGES. IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE THREE THE RED LINE COUNTY ATTORNEY ADDED TWO PARAGRAPHS THERE, THE TERMINATION AND THE GOVERNING LAW VENUE. WE SUBMITTED THIS BACK TO DATE WITH THOSE CHANGES. THEY AGREE TO THOSE CHANGES AND THEY'VE BEEN ADDED TO THE FINAL DOCUMENT. THEY SHOULD BE ON EVERYONE'S DOCUMENT. I THINK THEY'RE THEY'RE RED LINES HERE. DO YOU WANT US STILL TO APPROVE CONTINGENT ON YOUR FINAL LOOK AT THIS OR SOMETHING, OR WITH THE MODIFICATIONS? WITH THE MODIFICATIONS? IF THERE'S A PROBLEM, WE CAN ALWAYS. IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT BACK ON THE AGENDA, WE CAN. WELL, LET'S I THINK I MADE THE MOTION FOR THIS. SO I WILL ADD THAT TO MY MOTION WITH FINAL APPROVAL BY THE COUNTY'S ATTORNEYS. ADDITIONAL PARAGRAPHS AND LOOK OVER BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. YEAH. YOU SECONDED, I BELIEVE. COMMISSIONER. SORRY. YEAH. SO? SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. [00:50:02] AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'RE MOVING ON TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA. AND ITEM THREE, A ONE IS DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF SUBSTANTIAL [1. Discuss and consider the approval of Certificate of Substantial Completion for Pct. 2 Nueces County Petronila Estates Drainage Project as approved by Commissioner Pct. 2, Joe A. Gonzalez.] COMPLETION FOR THE PRECINCT. TWO NUECES COUNTY PETRONILA ESTATES DRAINAGE PROJECT AS APPROVED BY COMMISSIONER PRECINCT TWO, JOSÉ GONZALEZ. AND BEFORE WE ASKED. GRANTWORKS HAS SENT US AN EMAIL. THEY HAVE LOOKED AT THIS. THEY HAVE APPROVED SO WE ARE READY TO PROCEED. SO I'LL SECOND YOUR MOTION. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM THREE A TO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER REQUESTING ADDITIONAL FUNDS FROM THE TAX [2. Discuss and consider requesting additional funds from the Tax Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) #2 for the completion of Briscoe King Pavillion; and all related matters.] REINVESTMENT ZONE. NUMBER TWO, FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE BRISCOE KING PAVILION AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. AND I BELIEVE EMILY DIFFERENT. EMILY IS HERE TO DISCUSS THESE. THANK YOU. EMILY, FROM COMMISSIONER CHESNEY'S OFFICE. NOT THAT ONE. LET ME. I WOULD LIKE TO. CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY. MAYBE POINT IT DOWN A LITTLE. YEAH. SHARE MY SCREEN HERE. YOU MIGHT PULL IT DOWN A LITTLE MORE TOWARDS YOU IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT YOUR SCREEN BECAUSE YOU'RE LOOKING AWAY FROM THE MICROPHONE, CAN IT SCOOT DOWN A LITTLE BIT? IT LOOKS LIKE SOMEBODY RAISED IT UP. IS THAT BETTER? THAT'S BETTER. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. TRYING TO FIND WHERE TO SHARE MY SCREEN HERE. SCREEN. HERE WE GO. OKAY. DID THAT COME UP? ZOOM. SHARE YOUR SCREEN. I'VE GOT IT. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. COURT. THANK YOU. I'M BACK FROM TWO WEEKS AGO. TWO WEEKS AGO, WE DID JUST A QUICK UPDATE ON THE BUILDING ITSELF. YOU YOU DID RECEIVE SOME DOCUMENTS THIS MORNING TO LOOK AT. LET ME OPEN UP ONE OF THOSE REAL QUICK. ONE OF THEM. ONE OF THEM WAS JUST THE PROJECT UPDATE. THERE WE GO. AND THIS IS ONE THAT WAS JUST KIND OF A RECAP OF WHAT WE DISCUSSED LAST WEEK. THE PROJECT UPDATE WHERE WE ARE, WHERE WE WERE CONTRACTED IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR. ALL OF OUR REPORTS AND ENGINEERING WE HAVE OUR NEW FACILITY, EVENT VENUE, WHICH IS UNNAMED. WE HAVE OUR EXISTING FACILITY, THE BRISCOE KING PAVILION, WHICH IS A REFRESH OF THE EXISTING FACILITY. AND WE HAVE THE NEW SITE WORK, WHICH ORIGINALLY MAJORITY OF THAT WAS PART OF A FUTURE PHASE TWO, NOW INCORPORATED IN PHASE ONE. WE HAD OUR JULY 14TH EARLY ASSISTANCE MEETING WITH THE CITY, AND SOME OF THOSE ITEMS ARE RECAPPED HERE FROM WHAT WE DISCUSSED A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. SAME WITH THE REFRESH AND THE SITE WORK. SO NOW WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE MONEY AND THE UPDATED FUNDS THAT WE ARE REQUESTING. SO LET ME HOLD ON ONE SECOND AND JUDGE IN COURT, DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH OF THIS YOU WANT. THIS IS THIS IS NOT ANY MONEY FROM US. THIS IS JUST ME COMING TO ASK FOR YOUR PERMISSION TO GO ASK THE TERS FOR MONEY. I WANT EVERYBODY TO HAVE ALL THAT THEY HAVE. BUT I DON'T WANT HER TO SPEND ALL A LOT OF TIME IN COURT TODAY IF Y'ALL DON'T WANT IT EITHER. SO I'LL LET THE COURT DECIDE HOW YOU WANT THIS PRESENTATION TO GO. SO MOTION TO APPROVE. YEAH. THERE YOU GO. SORRY. SECOND, HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? THE AMOUNT. JUST JUST JUST ARTICULATE THE AMOUNT THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO GO BACK AND ASK FOR. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 2.1 MILLION ADDITIONAL ADDITIONAL FROM THE 5.9 FROM THE 5.9. AND THAT'S ALL BROKEN OUT IN HERE. NOW THE 5.9 AGAIN WAS PRE ANY ENGINEERING PRE ANY ANY REPORTS. AND IT WAS THREE YEARS AGO. SO I WANTED MY FORMAL ESTIMATOR TO BE HERE TODAY. AND UNFORTUNATELY HE'S OUT SICK WITH THE FLU. YOU'RE LOOKING AT 30 TO 40% INCREASE FROM 2022. WITH THAT, WE'VE ALSO HAD QUITE A BIT OF ADDITIONAL SCOPE. A LOT OF THAT BEING IN THE SITE WORK THAT WE'VE ADDED. ALSO, THE STRUCTURAL FOUNDATION IS SIGNIFICANT. WE DID NOT HAVE ANY ENGINEERING AT THE TIME. WE JUST DID KIND OF AN INITIAL ROUGH SQUARE FEET VERY DEEP. PIERS. WE ALSO LOOKED AT BUILDING UP THAT WAS A QUESTION ASKED ME AT THE PARKS BOARD LOOKING AT BUILDING UP TO DO A SLAB ON GRADE, WHICH YOU WOULD BE BUILDING UP SEVEN FEET WITH A CONCRETE WALL AROUND IT TO STABILIZE THE SOIL. THE EXISTING FACILITY ITSELF IS ALSO ON PILES. [00:55:03] I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY IS AWARE OF THAT. SO IT'S BUILT UP AROUND THE DIRT AROUND IT. AND IT IS ALSO ON PILES. SO WORKING BACK AND FORTH WITH THE GEOTECH AND THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIG NUMBERS. SO ON MY OPSC UPDATE THAT I GAVE YOU, I KIND OF BROKE DOWN SOME OF THE BIG POINTS THE FOUR SHEETS THAT YOU HAVE, WHICH ARE THE COVER PAGE OF THE FORMAL ESTIMATE. THEY'RE BROKEN UP AT THE TOP. THERE'S THE NEW FACILITY, EVENT VENUE, THE REFRESH AND THE SITE WORK, AND THEN THERE'S A COMBINED TOTAL OF ALL FOUR. AND SO YOU HAVE THOSE FOUR SHEETS THERE. YOU'LL NOTICE ON THE THE SUBGROUP, THE SECOND SECTION, IT'S GOT YOUR CONTINGENCY. IT ALSO HAS BUILT IN ESCALATION IN EACH OF THE PROJECTS. SO THAT'S FUTURE POTENTIAL COSTS. SO WHEN THIS GOES TO BID FUTURE COSTS THAT WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING JUST INCREASE INFLATION. AND I THINK THAT THE POINT HOLD ON, I THINK THE POINT TWO IS, IS THIS WILL ALL BE DISCUSSED FULLY AT THE BOARD. AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A REQUEST TO GO BACK AND ASK THEM FOR THE MONEY, AND THEN IT WILL BE PRESENTED IN FULL TO THE BOARD, OF WHICH FOUR OF US ARE ON AND WITH THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. SO, AGAIN, WE CAN MAKE THIS AS LONG OR AS SHORT AS YOU ALL WANT IT TO BE. I JUST WANT YOU TO HAVE WHAT YOU WANT. AND EACH ONE OF THESE, I WANTED TO JUST TO ASK ON THE OPINION OF PROBABLE CAUSE. HOW CLOSE TYPICALLY DO YOU EXPECT THAT TO BE? SO MUCH VARIANCE. A LEVEL THREE ASTM CLASS THREE ESTIMATE. THEY CAN BE FROM 15% TO 20% HIGH. THAT IS THE STANDARD AVERAGE FOR THIS TYPE OF ESTIMATE. AND WE WILL GET MORE UPDATE AT THE FIRST MEETING I GUESS. COMMISSIONER. AND EACH OF THESE JUST COVER SHEETS THERE THEY COME WITH FULL REPORTS. I HAVE 40 PAGES OF A BREAKDOWN OF EVERY BIT OF THIS BUILDING, WHICH WAS BASED OFF THE 60% REVIEW SET. AND REMEMBER, WE UPDATED. WE ADOPTED A WHOLE NEW BUILDING CODE IN AUGUST OF 2023. ANOTHER ITEM TO NOTE IS THAT TDLR IS IN THE PROCESS AND FINALIZING THE ADOPTION OF THE NEW 2020, I GUESS THEY'RE GOING TO CALL IT THE 2025 TEXAS ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS. THERE IS NO GRACE PERIOD. IF YOUR PERMIT IS NOT PULLED, THEN EVERYTHING HAS TO BE UPDATED TO THAT. SO THERE'S STILL SOME ITEMS OUT THERE THAT COULD COME INTO PLAY. HOPEFULLY. EVERYTHING I'VE DESIGNED WOULD BE COMPLIANT WITH THE NEW ONE. THEY'RE ADDING SOME WHOLE NEW CHAPTERS, BUT JUST BE AWARE THOSE ARE STILL OUT THERE AS WELL. LET'S GO AHEAD. SORRY, I'D JUST LIKE. TO 5 MILLION THAT WE HAD CAME FROM WHERE IT WAS 5.9. THIS IS ALL TERMS SO FAR. EVERYTHING. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK AGAIN ASKING FOR ANOTHER ADDITIONAL. THAT'S IT. PLUS MILLION WHATEVER DOESN'T COME OUT OF OUR BUDGET. OKAY. WHAT'S THE CONTINGENCY IF THEY DON'T APPROVE. RIGHT. LIKE WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM? WHAT DO WE DO? THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO. YEAH. TALK ABOUT. BUT THAT'S WHAT WE WANT THIS TO BE FULLY OUT IN THE OPEN. TRANSPARENT. WE JUST GOT THIS NUMBER. I'M GOING TO I'VE ALREADY REQUESTED A BOARD MEETING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ONE. I'M WAITING TO GET A DATE BACK FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE TOURS AND THE CITY ON ON GETTING THAT SET. AND THEN I'M GOING TO SEND ALL THESE NUMBERS OVER TO THEM SO EVERYBODY SEES IT WELL IN ADVANCE AND CAN DIGEST IT AND KNOW WHAT'S COMING. BUT MY QUESTION MY SECOND QUESTION IS THAT THE FIVE POINT THAT YOU SAID THAT WAS ENGINEERING? NO, NO, THE 5.9 MILLION FROM 2022 WE DID NOT HAVE ANY ENGINEERING. IT WAS JUST A SCHEMATIC FLOOR PLAN AND ELEVATIONS. WE PUT TOGETHER SOME ROUGH NUMBERS TO GET STARTED. AND THAT 5.9 INCLUDED THE SOFT COST, WHICH THAT INCLUDED ALL OF THE THE DESIGN FEES, ENGINEERING TESTING. SO THE THE ADDITION THAT WE'RE ASKING THIS, THE OVERALL NUMBER OF THE 7.3 THAT YOU SEE FOR ALL THREE PROJECTS, THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY OF THE SOFT COSTS THAT WAS IN THE 5.9. SO THAT'S WHY THE THE CHANGE FROM ON THAT BREAKDOWN OF THE OPAQUE, I'VE GOT IT ALL BROKEN. I'M CONFUSED. WHAT ARE WE PAYING WITH THE 5.9? WHAT ARE WE PAYING FOR THAT 5.25.9. WHAT ARE WE PAYING? THAT WAS THAT WAS AN INITIAL OVERALL BUDGET. OVERALL BUDGET. AND THAT WAS THE THE I KNOW, BUT WHAT ARE WE WHERE IS THAT MONEY GOING TO WHAT IT'LL GO TO CONSTRUCTION. IT'LL GO TO HASN'T GONE OUT. IT'S NOT GONE OUT TO ANYTHING. YOU'VE NOT PAID ANYTHING. YOU SPENT THE 5.9 AND NOW HERE WE ARE. WE NEED THIS MORE MONEY AND YES IT'S NOT. YES. NO, NONE OF THIS HAS BEEN SPENT. THIS PROJECT. WE'RE WAITING TO FINALIZE DESIGN FOR APPROVAL. AND THEN THE PROJECT WILL GO TO PUBLIC BID. SO WE DON'T HAVE A DEAL THAT SAYS SO MUCH WILL BE SPENT FOR ENGINEERING, FOR DRAFT, FOR ARCHITECT. I THINK HE WANTS TO KNOW WHAT THE COSTS ARE. THAT WAS IN THE 5.9. IN THE 5.9 WAS THE SOFT COST. SO THAT YOU HAVE PAID SOME OUT BECAUSE WE ARE WE'RE 90% THROUGH WE'VE BEEN VALUE [01:00:03] ENGINEERING. WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS. THIS IS WHAT WE PAID OUT ALREADY FROM THE 5.9. I DO NOT, BUT THE OVERALL FEE WAS ABOUT 671. I DO NOT HAVE EXACTLY WHAT YOU PAID OUT. I DIDN'T HAVE THAT NUMBER PULLED UP, BUT I CAN PULL THAT UP AND SEND THAT. AND THAT INCLUDED CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT REQUESTED BY NUECES COUNTY. ALL THE ENGINEERING, ADDITIONAL ACOUSTIC ENGINEERING ROOFING ASSESSMENTS ON THE EXISTING FACILITY. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT. I MEAN, I DON'T THINK I REMEMBER SEEING NONE OF THAT. OKAY. I THINK IT'S ABOUT IT'S LESS THAN 10% OF THE TOTAL PROJECT. CORRECT. JUST TO GIVE AN YES. IN OTHER WORDS, THE TOTAL VALUE RIGHT IS THE EIGHT. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM. I JUST I'D JUST LIKE TO SEE WHERE IS IT GOING TO. WHAT ARE WE SPENDING. OH, ABSOLUTELY. AND I CAN I CAN ADD THAT TO THE AND SEND THAT OUT TO THE COMMISSIONER. YEAH, IT WAS BACK ON THE ORIGINAL, BUT IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE WE'VE LOOKED AT THAT. SO IT'S A FAIR, VERY FAIR. ASK 2023. RIGHT. AND IF THIS COMES BACK AND WE HAVE TO RETHINK THIS, THAT'S A GOOD NUMBER TO HAVE AND HOW MUCH WE'VE SPENT. HOW MUCH ARE WE OUT? HOW DO WE MOVE FORWARD AND CORRECT IT. SO YEAH. BUT WE HOPE THAT IT ALL GETS DONE BY SOMEBODY ELSE'S FUNDS. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ALREADY ON THIS ONE. RIGHT. OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? I HAVE A QUESTION. OH, SORRY. COMMISSIONER. IS IT. DO YOU THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE ENOUGH OR. WHO KNOWS? WE'VE WE'VE SLICED AND DICED EVERYTHING WE CAN THINK OF TO GET IT EVEN TO THIS POINT. SO IT'S GOT, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOT TO BE OKAY. OKAY. I MEAN, IT'S A LOOK IT'S A TOUGH ASK TO GO BACK TO THE CHURCH BOARD. I MEAN, I GET IT. I MEAN, BUT WE HAVE AND SHE'S GOING TO PRESENT WAY MORE IN DETAIL WHEN SHE GOES TO THE BOARD. BUT WE SPENT A LOT OF HOURS TRYING TO SLICE AND DICE THIS THING. AND WE THINK THIS IS AS GOOD AS WE'RE GOING TO GET AS FAR AS NUMBERS. I MEAN, I'M JUST TRYING TO COMPARE IT TO THE HILLTOP TO HOW MUCH, YOU KNOW, $7 MILLION, $7 MILLION. I MEAN, I'M JUST SAYING WHAT WHAT'S GOING TO ALL IT'S IT'S A BRAND NEW FACILITY AND THAT'S PART OF IT. AND IT'S THE AND IT COSTS IT'S DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION ON THE ISLAND. I MEAN IT JUST IS. YOU HAVE TO DESIGN TO A DIFFERENT STANDARD. YOU HAVE TO YOU KNOW, IT'S ON THIS ONE'S ON PIERS. THIS ONE'S NOT. IT'S JUST IT'S A TOUGHER BUILD. I MEAN IT IS WHAT IT IS ON THE ISLAND. AND ARE YOU ALL PLANNING TO MEET WITH THE CITY STAFF BEFORE THE MEETING TO EXPLAIN THIS OR NOT? AS SOON AS. ASSUMING THIS GETS APPROVED, I'VE LITERALLY WAITING TO PRESS SEND ON THE EMAIL TO GET HER TO SEND ALL THE STUFF OVER TO THEM AND TO LET THEM TAKE IT AND DO WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO WITH IT. SO I'M SENDING IT TO CAITLIN. SHE'S THE CHAIRMAN, AND TO JACKIE, WHO'S TAKEN OVER TEMPORARILY. AND THEN I'LL PUT, I GUESS, I DON'T KNOW, I GUESS DAN MCGINN'S PROBABLY TAKEN OVER TOO. I NEED TO PUT HIM ON THE EMAIL. SO BUT AS SOON AS THE VOTE, I'M GOING TO POP THAT EMAIL OVER MY UNDERSTANDING DAN MCGINN TOOK HIS SPOT. RIGHT. OKAY. OKAY, GOOD. AND, COMMISSIONER, FOR YOUR INFORMATION, I DON'T THINK YOU WERE HERE, BUT THIS IS PART OF OUR NEW POLICY. COMMISSIONERS CAN'T GO OUT AND REQUEST ANYTHING FROM ANYONE WITHOUT COMING TO COURT AND ASKING FOR IT. SO YES, GOOD LUCK, GOOD PROJECT. HOPE YOU HOPE YOU GET THERE. WELL, JUST MAKE SURE YOU SHOW UP AT THAT BOARD MEETING. I'LL NEED YOU THERE. OKAY. I'LL ALL OF Y'ALL. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EMILY. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE. [3. Discuss and consider amending the Commissioners Court Policies regarding the Selection Committee related to the Purchasing Department, and clarifying the Board Appointmenet process and all related matters. ] DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AMENDING THE COMMISSIONERS COURT POLICIES REGARDING THE SELECTION COMMITTEE RELATED TO PURCHASING TO THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT. AND THEN THE SECOND PART OF THAT IS CLARIFYING THE BOARD APPOINTMENT PROCESS AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. WE HAD SOME DISCUSSION ON THAT, BUT I THINK, COMMISSIONER, YOU ASKED FOR THIS. WE VOTED THIS DOWN IN 2022 TO NOT ALLOW COMMISSIONERS OR THE JUDGE TO BE ON THE SELECTION COMMITTEE AND THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT WE ARE WANTING TO REVERSE THAT ACTION JUST TO BRING IT UP. JUST FOR REVIEW. I FIGURED NOW IS A GOOD TIME TO TO LOOK AT IT. AND YEAH, IT WAS ABOUT THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO, I THINK THAT THE COURT TOOK THE POLICY OF GETTING MEMBERS OF THE COURT OFF THE SELECTION. I THINK THAT IT'S HELPFUL. OBVIOUSLY WE CAN'T OVERLOAD A COMMITTEE. THE MOST WE COULD PUT WOULD BE TWO. I WOULD SUGGEST JUST TO MAYBE AT LEAST HAVE ONE MEMBER. THAT'S HOW WE HAD DONE IT BEFORE. PRIOR. AND THEN THE COURT AT THE TIME FELT IT WAS TIME TO CHANGE THE POLICY. SO I'M JUST BRINGING IT BEFORE YOU TO SEE IF ANYONE SUPPORTS THAT, THAT NOTION, THAT IDEA. WE'VE I'VE HAD SOME CONCERNS OVER SOME SELECTIONS. NOT ALL OF THEM. WE HAD A PERFECTLY FINE SELECTION EARLIER. THAT WAS ANOTHER REASON WHY I WANTED TO MENTION MY COMFORT WITH WITH THE RENEWAL OF [01:05:04] WEXFORD. BUT WE'VE HAD SOME, SOME, SOME ISSUES THAT ARE REALLY CONCERNING TO ME AND THE FACT THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE INSURANCE COMMITTEE ON SELECTING FOR CONSULTANT AND JUST THAT TRANSITION THAT'S BEEN BECOME SUCH A PROBLEM AND CONCERN TO ME. AND I KNOW ESPECIALLY TO THE JUDGE. AND WHILE SHE WAS OUT, I WAS DEALING NECK DEEP IN IT AS WELL. SO I JUST FEEL THAT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO CONSIDER ADDING THE MEMBER BACK ONTO THE SELECTION COMMITTEES AND ON A LIMITED BASIS. AND MAYBE NOT EVERYONE. MAYBE WE CHOOSE NOT TO, BUT AT LEAST TO ALLOW US TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT ADDED ON. AND SO THAT'S KIND OF MY MY PITCH TO YOU ALL AND SEE WHAT YOU ALL THINK. COMMISSIONER, I THINK I KIND OF AGREE AND DISAGREE, AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE INSURANCE OKAY. WE KNOW THAT SOMETHING WE STRUGGLE WITH. AND IT'S SOMETHING IT'S A SPECIALIZED AREA, YOU KNOW, AND WE HAVE THE INPUT. I GUESS IT COULD BE POSSIBLE, BUT TO HAVE ONE AT ALL TIMES. I THINK WE'RE DOING GREAT WITH WHAT WE HAVE WITH THE WAY WE'VE BEEN DOING IT. I WOULD ASK MICHAEL TO COME TO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE, WHILE HE'S WALKING UP. CAN I JUST YES, I AGREE WITH WHAT BOTH OF YOU ALL SAID BECAUSE I THINK YOU'RE SAYING THE SAME THING, WHICH IS JUST TO GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY WHEN WE WANT TO, TO PUT SOMEONE ON, BUT NOT ON EVERY SINGLE ONE. SO I THINK, I THINK YOU ALL ARE BOTH SAYING THE SAME THINGS. AND SO I, AND I THINK THERE WERE SOME PROBLEMS BEFORE. I DON'T THINK THOSE PROBLEMS EXIST ANYMORE. I THINK WE I THINK YOUR HYBRID APPROACH IS A SOLID ONE. SO I SUPPORT HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY WHEN WE NEED TO AS A COURT, FEEL LIKE IT, BUT NOT ON EVERYONE, I THINK. WELL, AND THAT THAT WAS WHY I WANTED MICHAEL. I JUST WAS BECAUSE I WANTED TO ASK HIM, BECAUSE I THINK IN OUR CONVERSATIONS WE'VE BEEN TOLD BECAUSE WE ARE SO LIMITED HERE, THEY BASICALLY BECOME ONE MEMBER COMMITTEES. IS THAT WHAT YOU TOLD ME IN THE OFFICE THE OTHER DAY? SO IT'S REALLY NOT A A SELECTION COMMITTEE. IT IS ONE PERSON DECIDING ALL THESE THINGS, WHOEVER THEY CAN GET IN THERE. SO POSSIBLY HAVING ONE OF US IN THERE, HAVING TWO PEOPLE LOOK AT IT ON ANYTHING IS TO ME IS I'M NOT OPPOSED TO I THINK YOU TELL ME THAT ANOTHER ELECTED OFFICIAL LOOKS AT EVERY ONE OF THEIRS WITH THE SELECTION COMMITTEE OR SOMETHING. IS THAT CORRECT SELECTION COMMITTEE? YES. SHOULD WE? I DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE DOWN TO ONE. THAT'S NOT HOW IT WAS IN THE PAST. SO MAYBE WE NEED TO LOOK AT HOW THE COMMITTEE IS COMPILED. BECAUSE. AND MAYBE THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE PURCHASING BOARD WHERE WE'RE NOT WANTING ONE. SO IF THERE IS ONLY ONE, THEN WE WOULD STRONGLY SUGGEST YOU GET ONE OF US IF WE VOTE THIS FORWARD. BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO BE ON EVERYONE DOES THAT. MAYBE WHAT WE'RE SAYING HERE TODAY. BUT IN ADDITION TO LOOKING AT NOT JUST HAVING ONE PERSON, IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING, WE NEED TO MAYBE PUT SOMEONE ELSE ON THERE, LIKE, YEAH, I'LL TELL YOU, MY STANCE WAS THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO AND IT STILL IS TODAY. I DO NOT LIKE BEING AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, ABDICATING MY RESPONSIBILITY TO STAFF, PERIOD. NOT THAT I DON'T TRUST THEM, NOT THAT I DON'T VALUE AND NEED THEIR INPUT. THEY'RE PART OF THIS, BUT THEY'RE PART THEY'RE NOT FULL. AND SO I THINK THAT WAS A BAD POLICY DECISION MADE BY THIS COURT THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO. I FEEL IT'S A BAD POLICY IF WE DON'T MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT TODAY. OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSOLUTELY DO HAVE DIRECT INPUT, AND WE'RE THE ONES THAT HAVE THE FINAL AUTHORITY. AND WE'RE SAYING, JUST GIVE THAT TO SOMEONE ELSE. NO WAY. I DON'T I DON'T SUPPORT THAT. SO MY THING IS, I AGREE, LIKE A HYBRID, WE DON'T WANT TO BE ON EVERY SINGLE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR EVERY SINGLE PURCHASE. I TRUST IN OUR PURCHASING DEPARTMENT TO DO THAT AND TO DO EVERYTHING. THEY'RE GOING TO DO ALL THE ALL THE LEGWORK FOR US, BUT I THINK AT LEAST 1 OR 2 MEMBERS NOT A MAJORITY. THAT'S HOW WE OPERATED BEFORE. I JUST THINK THAT THAT BY DOING IT THAT WAY, AGAIN, HELPS ENSURE THAT WE HAVE SOME INPUT, WE HAVE SOME EYES ON IT, AND WE'LL BE THERE TO HELP COMPLEMENT THAT SELECTION COMMITTEE. AND IN THE END, YOU KNOW, IF FOR ANY OF YOU THAT HAVE BEEN PART OF THE PURCHASING PROCESS OR THE THE REVIEWS YOU KNOW, IT'S A DISCUSSION. IT'S A VERY VIBRANT DISCUSSION. SO IT'S NOT LIKE ONE MEMBER, WHETHER IT BE SOMEONE FROM STAFF OR EVEN SOMEONE FROM, FROM THE COURT, HAS THEIR, THEIR, YOU KNOW, CAN CONTROL THE NARRATIVE. IT'S YOU GOT TO KIND OF GET A COLLECTIVE CONSENSUS TO IT. SO THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING, ESPECIALLY ON THE BIG THINGS, THINGS LIKE INSURANCE, THOSE COME ONLY HOPEFULLY ONCE EVERY FEW YEARS. AND SO THAT'S MY MY BIGGEST CONCERN BECAUSE WE HAVE AN IMPORTANT DECISION TO MAKE COMING UP ON THAT AND MAYBE JUST A FEW OTHERS. BUT BUT OTHER I WILL LEAVE IT AS IS AND HANG ON ONE SECOND. AND SINCE WE AGREE, I DON'T WANT TO BEAT THE DEAD HORSE TOO MUCH. BUT I WILL DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU SAID IN REGARDS TO IT BEING A BAD POLICY DECISION. [01:10:01] WE ARE NOT ABDICATING OUR RESPONSIBILITY. THIS IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY. BEING ON A COMMITTEE SUBCOMMITTEE, I DON'T THINK IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY. HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE GONE AND REVIEWED? LET ME FINISH, LET ME FINISH. LET ME FINISH. I'LL LET YOU FINISH. SO BECAUSE WE AGREE BUT I BUT I STAND BEHIND THAT POLICY DECISION BECAUSE OF WHAT WAS GOING ON AT THE TIME THAT I'M TRYING NOT TO HAVE TO GO BACK AND SAY THERE WAS A LOT OF NOT YOU, BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF POLITICAL STUFF GOING ON BEHIND THE SCENES BECAUSE WE HAD PEOPLE ON THOSE BOARDS. CERTAIN PERSON MAYBE. AND SO THAT DECISION WAS MADE OUT OF PROTECTION FOR THIS COUNTY AT THAT POINT, AND I THINK IT WAS GOOD. BUT I LIKE YOUR HYBRID APPROACH. BUT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE ARE ABDICATING OUR RESPONSIBILITY BECAUSE IT'S REALLY MICHAEL'S RESPONSIBILITY AS THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT. THAT'S THE LAW. WE DON'T HAVE TO BE ON THESE COMMITTEES. WE HAVE TO MAKE THE FINAL DECISION UP HERE. AND WE NEVER ABDICATE THAT DECISION. SO BUT WE AGREE ON THIS. SO HOWEVER YOU WANT TO MAKE YOUR MOTION ON THE HYBRID, LET'S MAKE IT. BUT IF WE COULD STAY AWAY FROM BEATING ON THE, YOU KNOW, THE PAST POLICY, IT'S NOT ABOUT POLICY. IT'S HOW MANY TIMES HAS THIS COURT GONE AND REVERSED A RECOMMENDATION BROUGHT TO US. THAT'S MY CONCERN. THAT'S WHAT THE ISSUE IS ABOUT. BUT BUT THAT'S THAT'S UP TO THE COURT BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN THE RECOMMENDATION. WE HAVE TWO COMMISSIONERS I READ THEM AND ISSUES, I THINK. MICHAEL ROBINSON, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE WE AGREE TOLD MY OFFICE. OKAY. THAT'S ENOUGH. OH, YOU TOLD MY OFFICE THAT THERE WAS ONLY ONE PERSON ON MANY OF THESE SELECTION COMMITTEES. SO HOW WOULD YOU IMPLEMENT SOMETHING LIKE THIS, BRINGING US IN OR ADDING OTHER PEOPLE? BECAUSE I THINK A SELECTION COMMITTEE IS SUPPOSED TO BE A COMMITTEE, NOT ONE PERSON. RIGHT. AND AND THE WAY WE'VE BEEN DOING IT, BECAUSE LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, I CAN ONLY HAVE ONE VOTING MEMBER FROM A DEPARTMENT. SO Y'ALL DON'T Y'ALL HAD ADVISED ME, THE COURT ADVISED ME THAT Y'ALL DIDN'T WANT A SUPERVISOR OR DEPARTMENT HEAD, AND HIS DIRECT REPORTS BEING ON THAT COMMITTEE, BECAUSE THAT MIGHT PRESENT A PROBLEM, RIGHT, WITH TOO MANY PEOPLE VOTING ON THAT. BUT THERE'S ONLY ONE VOTING MEMBER. IF IT'S A PROJECT LIKE THAT, BUT THAT VOTING MEMBER STILL IS ALLOWED TO HAVE A CONSULTATION WITH HIS STAFF ABOUT THAT DECISION. BUT THERE'S ONLY ONE VOTE THAT GETS PUT FORTH IN THAT VOTE IS JUST FOR AN EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION. AND Y'ALL USE THE WORD SELECTION COMMITTEE. AND I THINK THE COURT USED TO CALL THAT BEFORE WE'VE WORKED WITH COUNTY ATTORNEY. IT'S ACTUALLY AN EVALUATION ONLY. AND A RECOMMENDATION. AND THE DECISION OF WHO TO ACTUALLY SELECT ALWAYS RESIDES WITH THE COURT. BUT WE DON'T ALWAYS SEE ALL THE APPLICANTS EITHER, WHERE WE GET WHATEVER'S BROUGHT TO US, WHAT'S DECIDED BEFORE. SO THE WAY THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT, ACCORDING TO OUR POLICY, IS WHEN THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE COMPLETES THEIR PROCESS, THE COURT THEN HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST TO COME DOWN AND VIEW THE PROPOSALS. AND I OPEN MY OFFICE TO YOU ALL. YOU CAN COME DOWN AND LOOK AT EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE BEFORE THAT RECOMMENDATION COMES TO COURT. SO EVERYONE ALWAYS HAS THAT ABILITY AND WE HAVE TO SIGN A CONFIDENTIALITY. THAT WAS PART OF THE POLICY WE MADE. IF ANY MEMBER OF THE COURT CAN GO LOOK AND ANYBODY CAN REVIEW IT AND WE SIGN IT NOW, I DID NOT KNOW WE WERE DOWN TO ONE. SO THAT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THIS. APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT UP. SO TO ME IT'S VERY SIMPLE. WE NEED TO HAVE A COMMITTEE. IT SHOULD BE THREE. ONE OF US CAN HAVE THE OPTION ON IT AND IT JUST NEEDS A NUMBER. AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THE ONE IS NEVER ME. I'M JUST. I'M JUST A SUPERVISOR. IS AN IMPLIED AT ALL. YES. YEAH. SO. SO WE WANT TO BE CLEAR. WE WANT THREE AND ONE OF US CAN BE ONE OF THEM. BUT YES. OR I GUESS IT COULD BE OUR DESIGNEE OR JUST MAKE A MOTION. JOHN. I MEAN, YOU BROUGHT IT UP. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO? HOW DO YOU WANT TO CORRECT. YOU'VE HEARD EVERYBODY. I MEAN, COULD I COULD I ASK A QUESTION, PLEASE, SINCE I WASN'T HERE THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO? WHAT ARE Y'ALL TALKING ABOUT? SELECTION OF WHAT? COMMITTEE ON IF I COULD OFFER JUST ONE. THOUGHT I WAS HERE DURING THAT. WHEN I, WHEN I WAS A MEMBER OF THAT COMMITTEE OF A VOTING MEMBER AND MY DIRECT BOSS WAS ON THAT COMMITTEE. IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR ME TO BE UNBIASED IN MY EVALUATION. AND SO I WOULD SINCE ALL THE DEPARTMENT HEADS REPORT TO THE ENTIRE COURT, YOU HAVE THAT SIMILAR SITUATION. IT MAKES IT VERY COMFORTABLE WHEN THERE'S ONE OF US ON THE COMMITTEE, BECAUSE WE HAVE MORE SAY. AND WILL WE GET AND LOOK THE BOTTOM LINE THERE WAS THERE WAS SOME HEAVY INFLUENCE TALKING ABOUT SELECTION COMMITTEE OR EVALUATION COMMITTEES. THERE'S HEAVY INFLUENCE BEING PUT FORTH BY A MEMBER OF THIS COURT ON THESE EVALUATION COMMITTEES. WHAT ARE WE WHAT ARE WE ON BIDS THAT GO OUT FOR THE COUNTY FOR RFP? YES, YES. WHEN WE GET A RECOMMENDATION COMMISSIONER. THAT'S FROM THIS EVALUATION SELECTION COMMITTEE, WHATEVER THEY'RE CALLING IT, IF ONE OF US IS ON IT, THAT'S MORE WE HAVE MORE WEIGHT, LET'S CALL IT LIKE IT IS. WE'RE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL AND THAT WEIGHT WAS BEING POUNDED ON. YOU CAN FIGURE OUT WHO. AND SO NO. AND SO OTHER PEOPLE DID NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH US ON THOSE COMMITTEES [01:15:05] BECAUSE THEY WERE BASICALLY SAYING, LOOK, IF WE GO AGAINST OUR BOSS, WHAT'S THAT? OR ONE OF OUR BOSSES. SO IT BECAME A LITTLE UNCOMFORTABLE. SO WE JUST SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE'LL GET OFF OF THEM AND WE'LL GO DOWN THE ROAD. AND I DON'T THINK ANYTHING HAS GONE WRONG WITH THAT RFP OR PROJECT SPECIFIC FOR A PARTICULAR COMMISSIONERS PRECINCT. WHY WOULDN'T YOU HAVE RFP ARE TYPICALLY FOR SERVICES? CAN I FINISH WHAT I WAS SAYING BEFORE I GET INTERRUPTED JUST AGGRAVATES ME TO DEATH. WHY WOULDN'T WE HAVE THAT PARTICULAR COMMISSIONER ON THAT COMMITTEE? THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING ABOUT TODAY. WE WOULD LIKE TO. I THINK WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THAT. IT WOULDN'T IT WOULDN'T BE PERTINENT TO HAVE COMMISSIONER CHESNEY. AND I'M NOT PICKING ON YOU. PLEASE PICK AWAY. TO BE ON A COMMITTEE THAT WAS GOING TO DO AN RFP FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS TAKING PLACE IN MY PRECINCT. SO, OKAY. GO AHEAD. NO, I WON'T INTERRUPT BECAUSE THESE WERE MORE COUNTYWIDE RFPS THAT WEREN'T PRECINCT SPECIFIC. JUST BEING ON GIVING YOU THE HISTORY. THEY WERE MORE COUNTYWIDE. FOR SERVICES FOR THE JAIL, FOR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, THAT WEREN'T OUR PRECINCTS. BECAUSE MOST OF THESE ARE NOT RFPS FOR OUR PRECINCTS. THEY'RE RFPS FOR COUNTYWIDE SERVICES. AND SO IT WAS. AND SO WHAT ENDED UP HAPPENING WAS THE COUNTY JUDGE WAS ON 90% OF THEM, BECAUSE THAT WAS THE OLD POLICY, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT, IT WASN'T A COMMISSIONER. IT WAS THE COUNTY JUDGE. THE COUNTY JUDGE WAS ON ALL OF THEM, MAYBE TWO. THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN TWO OF US, RIGHT, I CAN'T REMEMBER. AND IT GOT TO BE A REAL PROBLEM SINCE WE'VE INSTITUTED THIS POLICY. I DON'T KNOW OF ANYTHING THAT'S GONE WRONG WITH IT, OTHER THAN I DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE DOWN TO ONE. THAT'S THAT'S NOT COOL. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE STILL GET THEM. AND IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY FROM THIS COMMITTEE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ON THAT. I JUST IT'S IT GETS TO BE THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING, HOW WOULD YOU BE TOO TOUGH? BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE. HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU HAVE TO GO SIT ON ANOTHER COMMITTEE WHEN THEN WE GOT TO COME DECIDE IT UP HERE, AND THEN YOU GOT TO GO WORK ON YOUR PRECINCT PROJECTS. IT GOT TO BE VERY CUMBERSOME, NOT ABDICATING RESPONSIBILITY, BUT BECAUSE IT'S JUST AN EVALUATION COMMITTEE AND IT'S STILL ALL FALLS TO US TO MAKE THE FINAL DECISION. SO ONE THING THAT WE I'M SORRY, I CAN I CAN LIVE WITH Y'ALL'S HYBRID IF YOU WANT TO DO IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S BROKEN. YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER, PUZZLE IS CLARIFICATION. WHEN YOU HAVE YOUR OWN PRECINCT COMMISSIONER, YOU GO, YOU SUBMIT IT OUT FOR BIDS, RIGHT? YOU PUT IT OUT FOR BIDS. THAT'S ALL ON YOU. YOU FOLLOW THE PROCESS BECAUSE IT'S YOUR IT'S YOUR PROJECT. RIGHT. AND WHEN IT COMES TO BID, I'M HERE BECAUSE YOU ALREADY SENT IT OUT FOR BIDS. MICHAEL, BRING US A LITTLE BIT OR WHATEVER. THEN YOU CAN DECIDE. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? WHAT'S OUT THERE COUNTYWIDE IS WAS A DIFFERENT STORY. COUNTY WIDE AS IT COULD BE. ANYBODY'S RIGHT. OKAY. SO. AND THAT'S WHAT. AND THAT'S WHAT TO ME WHEN YOU SAY TWO COMMISSIONERS AND THE COMMITTEE, THAT'S A LOT. YOU KNOW, AND I THINK WE'RE ASKING FOR PROBLEMS. YEAH, I THINK ONE ONE IS PLENTY. YEAH. I WASN'T ASKING FOR MORE THAN ONE. AND JUST LIKE WE ALL KIND OF HAVE OUR, OUR SPECIALTY, OUR FOCUS ON THIS COURT. AND SO LIKE, I WOULDN'T WANT TO BE ON A SELECTION COMMITTEE TO OVERSEE REVIEW BIDS ON SOMETHING FOR IT. EXACTLY RIGHT. I WOULD SAY WE COLLECTIVELY WOULD PROBABLY SAY, GIVE IT TO COMMISSIONER PUGSLEY. LET HIM JUST HAVE A SET OF EYES ON IT REPRESENTING THE COURT. ONCE AGAIN, IT'S A DISCUSSION. IT'S A CONSENSUS. IT'S NOT SOMEONE GOES IN. I MEAN, THERE'S TYPICALLY THERE'S THERE'S SEVERAL MEMBERS IN THAT COMMITTEE AND YOU COME TO THAT CONSENSUS AND THEN YOU COME AND BRING A RECOMMENDATION FORWARD. AND IT STILL HAS TO GO TO THE COURT. SO THAT'S MY ONLY THING IS WE HAVE OUR SPECIALTIES. SO I WOULD PREFER THAT WE JUST HAVE THAT THAT OPPORTUNITY TO CONTENT KIND OF GO IN AND DO THAT. BUT THAT I JUST FELT IT WAS TIME TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW THIS POLICY AGAIN. IF NOT, IT'S NOT HEARTBREAK FOR ME. I MEAN, WE'LL JUST CONTINUE DOING WHAT WE'VE DONE. I JUST FELT IT'S TIME JUST TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AGAIN. I THINK WE SAY SPECIALTY. SPECIALTY. SPECIALTY, RIGHT. I MEAN, THERE ARE ISSUES THAT COME UP AND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN SAY, OKAY, WE WANT TO PUT SO AND SO IN A COMMITTEE. RIGHT. AND JUST ALLOW MICHAEL TO COME IN. OKAY. ASK. SO WAS THERE A MOTION I'M SORRY. DO YOU WANT TO GIVE US YOUR IDEA OF HOW THIS PROCESS COULD WORK IF WE IMPLEMENTED ONE OF US BEING ABLE TO SERVE ON SOME OF THESE BIGGER SPECIALTY COUNTYWIDE PROJECTS, RIGHT? YES. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO ME IF I KNEW. I CAN PROVIDE YOU A LIST OF WHAT THOSE COUNTYWIDE SERVICES ARE, AND Y'ALL CAN ADVISE ME, LIKE WHO Y'ALL RECOMMEND OR WHICH SITUATIONS WILL CALL FOR AN ADDITIONAL PERSON BECAUSE IT WILL CHANGE THE WAY THAT WE WRITE THE ORDER DOCUMENT, BECAUSE THE ORDER DOCUMENT IDENTIFIES WHO THOSE EVALUATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS WILL BE. AND THAT WAY I CAN PRESENT THE CORRECT ITEM WHEN WE COME TO COURT TO ASK TO GO OUT FOR RFP. COULD WE MAYBE ADDITIONALLY, IF IF Y'ALL WISH, I CAN SEND WHEN THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE HAS CONCLUDED THEIR ACTIVITIES, I CAN MAKE SURE THAT PAYTON NOTIFIES THE WHOLE COURT. AND THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE CONCLUDED AND THAT WINDOW IS OPEN TO [01:20:01] REVIEW AS WELL. I WOULD BE HAPPY IF IT HELPS STREAMLINE AND MAKE THINGS HAPPEN FASTER, IS TO TO ALLOW THE JUDGE TO HAVE HER DISCRETION ON WHO SHE APPOINTS, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO BRING IT BEFORE COURT. NOW, IF WE DO HAVE TO HAVE IT OFFICIALLY LISTED SOMEWHERE, MICHAEL, THEN OKAY, THAT'S ONE THING. BUT IF IT'S JUST A MATTER OF THESE ARE THE GROUPS THAT WE REC BECAUSE I'LL TELL YOU, I'VE NEVER I MAYBE IT'S BURIED SOMEWHERE DEEP IN OUR DOCUMENTS, BUT I DON'T EVER REMEMBER SEEING SPECIFICALLY WHO'S LISTED ON OUR SELECTION COMMITTEE BY NAME OR BY TITLE. SO IF IT'S SOMETHING AS EASY AS THAT, I WOULD SAY THE JUDGE KNOWS OUR SPECIALTIES WHERE WE WHERE OUR FOCUS IS. AND THEN SHE COULD EASILY JUST SAY, OKAY, THIS PERSON IS ASSIGNED TO THAT. AND ONCE AGAIN, I MEAN, I REMEMBER EARLY ON MAYBE IT WAS PUNISHMENT. WHEN I WAS BRAND NEW COMMISSIONER, I WAS LIKE, WE WERE LIKE LOOKING FOR ASPHALT OR SOMETHING. WE DID SOME BID ON. I REMEMBER SITTING, I THINK IT WAS ASPHALT. IT WAS COMPANY BACK THEN. AND SO IT WAS, IT WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE MUNDANE. SO ALL I'M ASKING IS FOR IS THIS KIND OF BIG, BIG PROJECTS OR RFPS. BUT CAN YOU TELL ME SO HOW DO YOU JUST WHY? I MEAN, IN OTHER WORDS, LIKE WHAT'S WRONG WITH WHAT'S GOING ON THAT WE'RE THAT'S PROMPTING THIS OTHER THAN THE ONE PERSON ONLY SERVING 100% AGREE WITH THAT. BUT BUT IT IS I LIKE I SAID, I'M GOING BACK THROUGH THIS IN MY MIND. AND I REMEMBER IT'S IT IS VERY UNCOMFORTABLE FOR OTHER DEPARTMENT HEADS TO SIT THERE ON A COMMITTEE WITH THEIR BOSSES AND BE OBJECTIVE AND HONEST. IF THEY KNOW WHAT YOU WANT OR I WANT, ARE THEY GOING TO REALLY TELL THEM WHAT THEY WANT? I THINK IT PUTS THEM IN AN UNCOMFORTABLE SPOT, AND THAT WAS A PART OF THAT REASON THAT WE CHANGED IT TO BECAUSE IT BECAME SO UNCOMFORTABLE THAT. BUT I COULD ARGUE THE DIFFERENCE. THE OPPOSITE OF THAT IS WHERE EMPOWERING ONE INDIVIDUAL TO SELECT THEIR BUDDIES OR ANYBODY ELSE THEY WANT TO. THERE NEEDS TO BE THREE. NO, NO, I'M 100% OKAY WITH THAT. I'M JUST SAYING, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE NEED TO BE ON IT. I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE THREE PEOPLE. THREE? AREN'T YOU REQUIRED TO HAVE THREE? IT ISN'T YOUR POLICY STATE. THREE. I AGREE WITH YOU, JUDGE. I JUST AM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY. WE KNOW THERE'S THERE'S THERE'S NOT A NUMBER REQUIREMENT. I HAD I HAVE ASKED FOR TO HAVE MORE THAN ONE OBVIOUSLY. BUT TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUEST OF THE COURT, LIKE I SAID, LIKE WHEN I WORK WITH ONE, HE HAS OTHER PEOPLE IN HIS STAFF THAT ARE ACTUALLY DIRECTLY BOOTS ON THE GROUND THAT KNOW ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR THING. MORE THAN ONE EVEN KNOWS. AND SO HE NEEDS THAT ADVICE. BUT THEN HE'LL RENDER THE DECISION KIND OF TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THAT ADVICE. SO IT'S ALTHOUGH THERE'S ONE VOTING MEMBER, IT'S NEVER JUST ONE PERSON MAKING IT. IT'S THE SAME CONFLICT LIKE IT'S THE SAME THING. THAT WAS THE OTHER PART OF WHY WE TOOK OFF THE, SUBORDINATES TO THE DEPARTMENT HEADS BECAUSE ARE THEY GOING TO BE HONEST? SO TO ME, JUDGE, YOU'RE I THINK YOU'RE 100% RIGHT. SOMEHOW WE NEED TO HAVE THREE PEOPLE ON THIS COMMITTEE. I JUST I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO BE ON IT, BUT, I MEAN, I CAN SELECT OTHER IMPARTIAL DEPARTMENT HEADS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT DEPARTMENT TO ASSIST IN THAT IF YOU NEED. BUT THEN YOU'RE GETTING PEOPLE WHO ARE SPECIALIZED IN OTHER SUBJECTS THAT ON PAPER IT LOOKS GREAT, BUT I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE CONCEPT OF THE SUBJECT MATTER IS. AND THEN THEY'RE RATING IT BASED ON THE FLUFF THAT THEY SEE AND HOW IT'S EVALUATION THAT WE CAN OVERTURN. IT'S REALLY LIKE HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE, AS A COURT, EVER TURNED OVER A RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE I READ THEM AND THINK THEY'RE FINE LIKE YOU DO, AND WE ALL READ THEM AND THINK THEY'RE FINE? I MEAN, AND WE HAVE THE ABILITY THIS ISN'T I THINK THAT WE SHOULD WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION ON IF YOU COULD COME UP WITH A WAY THAT WOULD SATISFY THIS COURT, AND WE COULD PUT IT BACK ON OUR DECEMBER THE 10TH MEETING TO SEE HOW WE COULD PROCEED. WELL, WITH OUR THOUGHTS ON THIS TOO, BECAUSE I MEANT WHAT I SAID. WHILE WE'RE SAYING YOU DON'T WANT US ON THERE BECAUSE WE HAVE INFLUENCE, I'M ALSO SAYING ONE INDIVIDUAL ON THE OTHER SIDE AND THEIR DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN DECIDING ALL OUR CONTRACTS. AND TO ME THAT LOOKS JUST AS PARTIAL AND 100% AGREE. SO I THINK WE SHOULD MAKE A MOTION ON THAT TODAY. MEANING WE SHOULD THIS SHOULD BE A THREE PERSON COMMITTEE, BUT BRING IT BACK MAYBE IN DECEMBER AND TELL US HOW YOU PROPOSE THREE OR HOW YOU WANT TO GET THERE OR WHATEVER. BUT I 100%. I DID NOT KNOW IT WAS DOWN TO ONE. SO AND PROBABLY BECAUSE I THINK ONE OF THE ONE OF IT WAS IT USED TO BE THAT POSITION WE NO LONGER HAVE. NOW THAT I'M THINKING ABOUT IT, I THINK THAT COURT MANAGER WAS ONE OF THE POSITIONS AND THAT WENT AWAY. SO THAT SO THAT PROBABLY IS PART OF OUR BUDGET PEOPLE. THAT WAS NOT THE DESIGNEE, IT WAS THE COURT. BUT I MEAN, WE HAVE OTHER PEOPLE THAT WE CAN NOW. CORRECT? YEAH. SO SO I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MAKE THIS A THREE PERSON COMMITTEE AND LET THE JUDGE AND MICHAEL WORK ON SOMETHING BETWEEN NOW AND DECEMBER, AND COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHO THOSE THREE SHOULD BE. WOULD THAT BE APPROPRIATE? DO WE HAVE ANY COMING UP ON THE DECEMBER 10TH MEETING? SAY AGAIN? DO WE HAVE AN RFP TO AWARD BY DECEMBER 10TH? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE TAKE ACTION THAT WE DO BEFORE THEN. SO IF THERE'S NOT ANY THAT ARE PENDING, THEN I'M FINE WITH WAITING, BUT THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN. WELL, TODAY WE'RE VOTING TO REQUIRE IT TO BE THREE PEOPLE AT LEAST. [01:25:01] BUT WE'LL BRING BACK THE HOW HE WANTS TO IMPLEMENT THE CHANGE IN THE POLICY AT THE NEXT DECEMBER THE 10TH. YOU MADE A MOTION AND A SECOND. I SECOND IT SO YES. FOR DISCUSSION. DISCUSSION. I'M SORRY. SO YOU DON'T YOU DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY. MICHAEL, I'D HAVE TO. LOOK, IF Y'ALL WANT TO HOLD THIS FOR LATER. HOLD IT. JUST BECAUSE IF WE HAVE SOMETHING IMPORTANT COMING UP ON THE 10TH, THEN I'D RATHER WE HAVE TO TAKE ACTION TODAY. I AGREE. CAN WE JUST VOTE ON THE THREE PERSON MOTION NOW, SINCE IT'S ON THE FLOOR AND THEN IF WE NEED TO COME BACK AND AMEND OR BRING ANOTHER MOTION BECAUSE THERE'S SOMETHING PENDING, THEN WE'RE GOING TO FIND OUT BEFORE COURT. IN THE COURT, RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY. WELL, IF WE'RE GOING TO VOTE, WE MIGHT AS WELL BRING IT ALL BACK. BRING IT ALL BACK. I'LL JUST PULL IT UP AND BRING IT BACK. HE CAN LOOK AT THAT TO MAKE SURE WHAT WE DID OR DIDN'T DO. YEAH. SO WE DON'T HAVE TO RETRACT AND COME BACK AND DO IT AGAIN. OKAY. SO YOU'RE WITHDRAWING YOUR SECOND BECAUSE, I MEAN, I MADE A MOTION, BUT SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND IF Y'ALL ARE CALLING THE VOTE. LET'S VOTE. IT'S ON YOUR. YEAH, IT'S ON WHAT YOU WANTED. BUT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IT, I'LL PULL IT BACK. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW. I DO. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT'S THAT'S BEEN A CONCERN. I FOUND OUT WE HAVE TO HAVE THREE. I AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK THE ONLY QUESTION IS WHETHER WE CONTINUE AND HAVE EITHER ONE PERSON, IF IT'S A COUNTYWIDE PROJECT DESIGNATED FROM THE COURT OR NOT. THAT WOULD BE A SECOND ISSUE THOUGH. BUT YEAH, THAT WOULD BE A SECOND. LET'S GET OVER THE THREE. OKAY. WELL LET'S WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A VOTE ON THE THREE PEOPLE ON THE AND AND AND AND TO BRING BACK THIS AGENDA ITEM BEFORE THE END OF COURT TO ADDRESS COMMISSIONER CONCERNS ON ANY PENDING ONES. OKAY. I MEAN, I'M HAPPY TO AMEND THAT SO THAT IF THAT IS BETTER FOR YOU. COMMISSIONER. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES. WE'RE JUST GOING TO VOTE ON THREE PEOPLE ON THERE. WE'LL DECIDE THE REST LATER. AND THEY'RE GOING TO LET US KNOW IF WE HAVE ANY OUTSTANDING RFPS. RFQS OUT RIGHT NOW. THAT WOULD COME BEFORE DECEMBER THE 10TH MEETING. SO YEAH, IT LOOKS LIKE JANITORIAL SERVICES IS THE ONLY ONE THAT'S ON TODAY. IT MIGHT BE ON TODAY ALREADY. I THINK SO. SO THAT'S THE ONLY ONE I HAVE IN THE QUEUE. COMMISSIONER IS ON THE JANITORIAL SERVICE. I'M JUST KIDDING. THIS IS AN EMERGENCY ITEM. YEAH, IT'S A BIG ONE. ARE WE OKAY WITH THE THREE PERSON AND BRING IT BACK BEFORE THE END OF COURT TO LET US KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THAT IS COMING BEFORE US? WE DON'T KNOW. WE DON'T KNOW YET WHICH THREE PEOPLE OR HOW WE'RE GOING TO ARRANGE THAT. AND THAT WAY, THE WAY IT WILL WORK. COMMISSIONER IS, AS I ALWAYS DO WHEN WE HAVE AN RFP. THERE'S AN ORDER DOCUMENT THAT'S ATTACHED, AND INSIDE THAT ORDER DOCUMENT HAS WHO THOSE RECOMMENDED PEOPLE ARE. IF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE, I CAN BRING THAT TEXT UP TO THE BACKGROUND SECTION SO YOU CAN SEE WHO THE RECOMMENDED PARTIES ARE. COMMISSIONER THE. BUT THE ANSWER IS THE ONLY MOTION WAS WAS TO DO WHAT THE JUDGE WANTED WAS TO ADD TO THREE. BUT THEN FOR THE THE FOR MICHAEL AND THE JUDGE TO WORK BETWEEN NOW AND DECEMBER TO COME BACK AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHO THE THREE WILL BE. SO ALL WE'RE DECIDING IS TO MAKE THE COMMITTEE THREE. THEN IN DECEMBER, WE'LL DECIDE WHO THAT THREE WILL BE. AND UNLESS THERE'S SOMETHING PENDING, BECAUSE SOMETIMES THE THREE ARE TOTALLY DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Y'ALL. DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE WORK, WE WANT THEM TO BE. THREE FOR JANITORIAL. I'M GOING TO HAVE SCOTT CROSS. I'M GOING TO HAVE ONE AND HAVE MULTIPLE PEOPLE ON THAT ONE BECAUSE IT AFFECTS DIFFERENT AREAS. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT. YES, I'M OKAY VOTING. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE DON'T. JUST UNLESS IT'S CRITICAL. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE DON'T WAIT TILL THEN TO MAKE THE MOTION FOR. BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING HAPPEN BETWEEN NOW AND THEN SO THAT THEY CAN GO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO. IT'S JUST. IT'S JUST A DIRECTION TO BRING SOMETHING BACK IN. WHATEVER Y'ALL WANT TO DO, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THIS IS JUST TO BRING BACK TO THE COURT TODAY. THIS IS THE THREE PEOPLE ON THE SELECTION COMMITTEE. AND TO THEN INSTRUCTING HIM TO BRING BACK ANY OTHER OPEN CONTRACTS WE HAVE COMING UP IN DECEMBER, DECEMBER. YES. NO, NO, NO. BEFORE RIGHT BEFORE THE NEXT COURT. DECEMBER. NEXT COURT. RIGHT. BUT HE HE WOULD HAVE TO IF THERE'S ANYTHING PENDING, HE NEEDS TO TELL US BEFORE THE END OF COURT. RIGHT. OKAY. BUT OUR NEXT MEETING THAT IT WOULD BE AFFECTING IS DECEMBER THE 10TH. YES. IT'S THE ONLY MEETING. YES. OKAY. THE MOTION PASSES THE NEXT WE JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THE BOARD APPOINTMENT PROCESS ON THOSE THREE BIG BOARDS. I THINK WE HAVE PAPERS IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM. I READ THIS LAST TIME. THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION AND WANT TO READ IT ONE MORE TIME, BECAUSE WE EVEN HAVE CONFUSION. WE ONLY DO THESE ABOUT ONCE EVERY THREE YEARS, SO IT IS OUR POLICY. BUT FOR THE NUECES COUNTY APPOINTMENT PROCESS FOR BOARD SEATS, FOR THE RTA, FOR THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT, FOR PORT COMMISSIONER, AND FOR THE SPAWN BOARD, THOSE FOUR BOARDS. THIS IS ON NUMBER THREE. TWO IT'S AND CLARIFYING THE BOARD APPOINTMENT PROCESS. WE READ IT LAST TIME. WE'RE JUST GOING TO READ IT AGAIN. THERE'S NO ACTION. [01:30:01] IT'S JUST READING BECAUSE I WAS ASKED TO BY AN OUTSIDE ENTITY TO CLARIFY AND TO READ AGAIN. LAST TIME WE HAD SOME QUESTIONS, SO I WANTED TO BRING IT BACK UP. BUT THIS IS CORRECT. THE PAPERWORK AT THE BACK OF THE ROOM IS CORRECT. THE WAY WE STATED IT IS CORRECT. SO READING THROUGH IT ONE MORE TIME TO SIMPLIFY AND THE PAPERWORK IS IN THE BACK. IF YOU NEED THAT LORENZO, JUST FOR DISCUSSION OR SOMETHING, I'LL HAND YOU MINE. STEP ONE EACH MEMBER OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT GETS TO NOMINATE ONE APPLICANT FROM THE POOL OF APPLICATIONS ONE ONE. SO THERE WILL BE FIVE NAMES ON THE BOARD. STEP TWO EACH MEMBER WILL RECEIVE AN ALLOTMENT OF TWO VOTES TO CAST. MEMBERS MAY NOT USE ALL OF THEIR VOTES ON A SINGLE NOMINEE. YOU CAN'T CAST YOUR TWO VOTES FOR YOUR NAME. YOU HAVE TO VOTE FOR TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE, OR THEY CAN CHOOSE TO VOTE FEWER VOTES IF THEY'RE ALLOTTED, BUT THEY CAN ONLY USE A PORTION OF THEIR VOTE ALLOTMENT IF THEY CHOOSE. THAT MEANS YOU. IF THERE ARE FIVE NAMES ON THE BOARD YOU WISH TO ONLY VOTE FOR ONE PERSON. YOU CAN ONLY CAST ONE VOTE FOR THAT ONE PERSON, AND YOU DO AWAY. YOU LOSE THE RIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND VOTE IF YOU DON'T CAST IT, BUT IT CANNOT GO TO THE SAME PERSON. STEP THREE A NOMINEE MUST RECEIVE AT LEAST THREE VOTES TO BE APPOINTED. THE NOMINEE OR NOMINEES WHO REACHED THIS THRESHOLD FIRST WILL BE APPOINTED TO THE OPEN BOARD SEAT. STEP FOUR. IF ANY OF THE SEATS REMAIN UNFILLED DUE TO A TIE OR NO NOMINEE RECEIVING THE THREE MORE VOTES, THE ADDITIONAL ROUND OF VOTING AMONG THE ORIGINAL REMAINING NOMINEES WILL CONTINUE UNTIL ALL SEATS ARE FILLED, AND THIS IS IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM. THIS IS NOT A VOTE. THIS IS OUR POLICY. WE ARE BRINGING THIS UP BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME PRETTY MAJOR APPOINTMENTS COMING UP AT OUR NEXT BOARD MEETING. COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING. SORRY. AND WE WANTED TO CLARIFY, MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC IS FULLY AWARE OF OUR PROCESS AS WELL. SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. SO LET ME GO TO TWO VOTE ISSUE. I THINK OUR POLICY WAS WRITTEN MAINLY IN RESPONSE MORE TO THE APPOINTMENT BECAUSE WE HAD TWO VOTES. WE'RE ON A WEIRD CYCLE. SO FIRST OF ALL, IF I CAN ASK OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY TO COME BACK TO THE COURT AND REPORT TO US AT THE NEXT MEETING, OR WHENEVER YOUR STAFF CAN RESOLVE THE ISSUE OF HOW DO WE UNCLOG HAVING TWO APPOINTMENTS AT ONCE? BECAUSE IT WAS ONE EVERY YEAR, RIGHT? THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, I BELIEVE, DOES THEIR APPOINTMENTS EVERY YEAR, RIGHT? IT'S STAGGERED AND FOR SOME REASON FOR, FOR FOR THE PORT. WE HAVE 2 IN 1 YEAR. ONE YEAR WE HAVE AN OFF YEAR. AND THEN WE'RE UP TO APPOINTING THIS SEAT THAT'S COMING UP. SO IT'S ONE TWO VOTES OR ONE TWO APPOINTMENTS OFF. BUT THIS YEAR IT'S ONLY ONE. YES, IT'S ONLY ONE. SO THAT LANGUAGE DOESN'T REALLY WORK. I WOULD WANT IF WE CAN GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON HOW TO UNCLOG THAT IF EVER, BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME CIRCUMSTANCES THAT HAPPENED THAT THAT CAUSED THAT. BUT THE NUMBER OF BOATS YOU WILL RECEIVE AN ALLOTMENT OF UP TO TWO VOTES MAYBE, OR UP TO THE AMOUNT OF VACANCIES. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO WORD THAT TO SO, AND I GUESS WE CAN'T EVEN GUESS. WE CAN'T EVEN MAKE ANY AMENDMENTS TO. THAT WAS MY CONCERN IN THE LAST MEETING. BUT MY QUESTION IS, SO A NOMINEE GOING TO STEP THREE, A NOMINEE MUST RECEIVE AT LEAST THREE VOTES TO BE APPOINTED, THE FIRST TO REACH THIS THRESHOLD. WELL, BASED ON THE TWO VOTE MODEL, WE COULD HAVE, SAY, TWO CANDIDATES THAT EACH GET THREE VOTES. SO WHO'S THE FIRST? IS IT LIKE WHO GOT TO THE WAY IT'S WORDED? WE ALL WHO REACHES THIS THRESHOLD FIRST WILL BE APPOINTED. SO IF CANDIDATE A GETS THREE VOTES AND CANDIDATE B IS THE NEXT ONE THAT GETS VOTED ON AND THEY GET THREE VOTES, WELL, CANDIDATE A TECHNICALLY GOT THEIR FIRST VOTES FIRST. THIS THIS WAS AND I JUST HAVE TO LET EVERYBODY VOTE. EVERYBODY GETS THEIR VOTE. AND THEN IF YOU HAVE TWO PEOPLE THAT GET THREE, THOSE TWO WOULD GO TO A RUNOFF. SO YES, I MEAN I'M GOOD WITH THAT AND I UNDERSTAND IT. I JUST DON'T WANT ANYBODY OUTSIDE READING IT THE WAY IT IS WRITTEN AND HAVING DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS. LIKE I WHEN I RAN FOR CITY COUNCIL, I KNEW A GUY THAT THAT RAN A PERSON WHO RAN AND THOUGHT THAT THAT PERSON THOUGHT THAT THEY WERE ELECTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE THEY WERE THE FIRST TO FILE FOR FOR RUNNING FOR CITY COUNCIL. I MEAN, THERE'S PEOPLE THAT JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS. SO I'M JUST A LITTLE WORRIED, RIGHT? BECAUSE THESE ARE THESE ARE HIGH PROFILE POSITIONS THAT WE'RE VOTING ON. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THE LANGUAGE MATCHES WHAT OUR INTENT IS. THAT WAS WHAT MY DISCUSSION THE LAST MEETING WAS. I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THIS UP SO WE CAN REPEAT AND CLARIFY. BECAUSE ONCE WE GET TO THE DECEMBER MEETING, IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME TO TO WORK THROUGH THIS. OR IT COULD BE A STRAIGHT UP VOTE, BUT I JUST DON'T KNOW. I'M JUST WORRIED. THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF BRINGING THIS UP EVERY TIME THERE IS POSSIBLE. YES, BUT BUT WE WOULD OBVIOUSLY. AND THAT'S A GREAT POINT, COMMISSIONER. [01:35:02] AND I THINK THE JUDGE CAN CLARIFY THAT AGAIN WHEN SHE DOES IT ON THE ACTUAL DAY IS FIRST, DOES IT MEAN IF THE THREE OF YOU VOTE FIRST BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO. YOU KNOW, JOE AND I STILL GET TO VOTE JUST BECAUSE WE'RE LAST. DECIDE WHO I'M GOING TO CALL. I'M JUST PICKING AT IT. BUT I'M JUST DOING THAT TO MAKE A POINT. THAT'S THAT'S THE GOOD POINT. IT'S GOOD FOR LEGISLATIVE INTENT TO SAY THAT WE ALL GET TO VOTE. THAT'S THE DEFINITION OF FIRST, NOT JUST BECAUSE YOU THREE PICK THE ONES. YES, YES, OR GO TO THAT END JUST TO GET THE RESULT. I ALSO WANT TO LET EVERYONE KNOW THE APPLICATIONS FOR THOSE BIG APPOINTMENTS LIKE THAT THAT WE HAVE OUT. I THINK AIRPORT BOARD IS ONE AS WELL. SOME OF THOSE THE APPOINTMENTS WE HAVE OUT CLOSE ON NOVEMBER THE 12TH. SO IF YOU ARE CONSIDERING APPLYING, YOU HAVE A I'M SORRY, DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? YES, I HAVE A QUESTION. SO I'M GOING TO START WHERE I LEFT OFF LAST WEEK. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE DOING THESE FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS. THIS IS LIKE COMMON CORE MATH. I MEAN, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE CAN'T DO IT THE WAY WE USED TO. WHERE YOU MAKE A NOMINATION AND THEN WE VOTE ON THOSE NOMINATIONS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE PROCESS OF A COMMISSIONER HAVING TWO VOTES. I KNOW NONE OF THIS MAKES ANY SENSE TO ME. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE'RE DOING IT THIS WAY. WELL, WE CHANGED OUR POLICY. I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT MYSELF. YES, WE CHANGED OUR POLICY. AND IF YOU WANT TO BRING THAT UP AT ANOTHER MEETING TO GO BACK OR CHANGE OUR POLICY, YOU'RE WELCOME TO DO THAT WITH THIS MEETING. I THOUGHT WE WERE TOLD LAST TIME THAT WE WERE GOING TO BRING THIS BACK UP, WHERE WE COULD DISCUSS THE PROCESS. THAT'S WHY I PUT IT ON HERE FOR DISCUSSION. YES. I THINK THERE IS A MOTION TO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER. IT'S ON THERE WITH THE LANGUAGE, WITH BOTH OF THEM. SO IF IF THAT IS YOUR MOTION. BUT WE DID THIS BEFORE BECAUSE JUST EXACTLY AS YOU STATED, COMMISSIONER, YOU STATED CHESNEY. YOU KNOW, IF WE GET A MOTION DOWN THERE AND THEN WE GET THREE VOTES, TWO PEOPLE ARE SITTING HERE, MAYBE DIDN'T EVEN GET A NAME ON THE BOARD. THIS HELPED EVERYONE TO FEEL LIKE THEY HAD A VOICE IN THE PROCESS. THIS AND THEN YOU CAN'T HAVE JUST FIVE NAMES ON THE BOARD IF YOU OPEN IT UP FOR NOMINEES. YES. IF YOU OPEN UP THE FLOOR FOR NOMINATIONS, EVERY MEMBER OF THIS BOARD CAN MAKE A NOMINATION. AND THEN WE HAVE FIVE PEOPLE AND THEY'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THEIRS. IT'S ABOUT LIKE HAVING THE ONE VOTE FOR EVERYONE. THEN ALL OF US HAVE ONE VOTE AND WE'RE AT A STANDSTILL MOVING FORWARD. BUT YOU CAN'T, THOUGH, COMMISSIONER, BECAUSE IF YOU MAKE A MOTION AND SECONDED, THEN I'M OUT. IF YOU GET THEN THAT WAS WHAT WAS HAPPENING. IF SOMEONE COMES IN, MAKES A QUICK MOTION IN A SECOND, THERE'S NO PRESENTATION BY ANYONE. SO THE WHOLE THING WAS CHANGED AGAIN BECAUSE THERE WAS A FEELING ON THAT COURT YOU WEREN'T HERE THAT THAT THE PROCESS WAS NOT A FAIR PROCESS BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE MAKING FAST MOTIONS. NO ONE WAS GETTING ANY DISCUSSION, NOBODY WAS MAKING PRESENTATIONS. AND SO THIS WAS A PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH FOR HOURS UPON HOURS UPON HOURS OF WHICH YOU'RE NOW ON THE COURT. YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO BRING ANY POLICY DISCUSSION YOU WANT TO BRING. I THINK IT WOULD BE WRONG TO CHANGE THE POLICY RIGHT BEFORE A VOTE THAT WE'VE ARTICULATED NOW FOR A YEAR, HOW WE'RE DOING IT. BUT THAT'S THE COURT'S WILL. I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROBLEM IS. I MEAN, YOU I DON'T IF WE ALL IF WE MAKE NOMINATIONS, IF WE ALL FIVE MADE A NOMINATION AND WE VOTE, YOU DON'T GET FIVE OF THEM. IF YOU MAKE A NOMINATION AND I SECOND IT, EVERYBODY ELSE IS SHUT OUT. THAT WASN'T THE VOTE ON THAT. WHOA WHOA WHOA WHOA WHOA. YEAH. LET ME, LET ME. NOMINATIONS ARE NOT A VOTE, RIGHT? NOT A MOTION. IF YOU HAVE A SECOND. THEY ARE. NO THEY'RE NOT. NO THEY'RE NOT. WELL, THEN, IF YOU PUT EACH OF US GO BACK AND READ THE STATE CONSTITUTION ABOUT NOMINATIONS. A NOMINATION DOES NOT REQUIRE A SECOND, AND IT IS NOT A MOTION. BUT THAT WAS OUR POLICY. IT IS A NOMINATION. YOU JUST SAID, WHY DON'T WE GO BACK TO THE POLICY? WE HAD THE POLICY. WE HAD COMMISSIONER, WHICH YOU WERE PART OF, AND I WAS A PART OF WAS IF YOU NOMINATED AND SOMEONE SECONDED, THERE WAS A VOTE BECAUSE THAT'S ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS. AND WE HAD TO. THAT WAS THE WAY WE DID IT HERE. THAT WAS NOT THE WAY WE DID IT WHEN I WAS HERE BEFORE. IT'S NOT THE WAY I'VE DONE IT. IT'S HOW WE. TWO OTHER BOARDS THAT I'VE ELECTED TO. IF YOU MAKE A NOMINATION, THAT IS NOT A VOTE. YOU'RE CORRECT. UNLESS THERE'S A SECOND. AND THEN YOU HAVE TO VOTE. NO, THAT IS NOT TRUE. THERE SHOULDN'T BE A SECOND. THAT IS NOT TRUE. IS THAT A MOTION? SECOND, YOU'RE THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS. GUYS. IF YOU MAKE A MOTION AND I SECOND IT, THERE HAS TO BE A VOTE ON THAT MOTION. IF YOU OPEN THE FLOOR FOR. IF THEY. OKAY, LET'S LET HIM FINISH. IF THE JUDGE OPENS THE FLOOR FOR NOMINATIONS, WE CAN ALL MAKE A NOMINATION. THAT IS NOT A MOTION. ACCORDING TO ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. CORRECT. IS THAT WHAT WOULD LET HIM FINISH? WHAT IS YOUR POLICY? YOU'RE THINKING THAT SHOULD GO FORWARD. IF WE DID THAT. IF EACH OF US GET A NOMINATION, [01:40:02] EACH OF US GET ONE VOTE, THEN WE'RE AT A STANDSTILL WITH FIVE NOMINATIONS. EACH OF US MAKE A NOMINATION AND WE HAVE FIVE NOMINEES. THEN WE GO BACK AND AND MAKE A VOTE ON EACH NOMINEE. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THIS. BUT WHY ARE WE DOING. WHY DOES A COMMISSIONER HAVE TWO VOTES? OKAY, MIKE, LET'S LET A SCENARIO. WE EACH PUT A NOMINATION ON THE BOARD AND WE EACH VOTE FOR OUR NOMINEE. WHAT'S THE COUNT? IT'S 11111. HOW DO YOU HOW DO YOU YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO VOTES CHANGE BECAUSE THEN IT'S GOING TO BE 11111. WE'RE ALL GOING TO VOTE FOR WHO WE NOMINATE. WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET THERE. SO THIS IS THE WAY WE CAME UP WITH. YOU NEVER KNOW IF HIS NOMINATION WILL BE MY NOMINATION. BUT THEN BUT IT'S TRUE. I'VE NEVER SAT HERE OR ON ANY OTHER BOARD WHERE WE ALL WHERE EVERY MEMBER OF THE BOARD HAD A NOMINEE. I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT. THE ODDS OF THAT ARE PRETTY RARE. WELL, NOT IF YOU HAVE TEN NOMINATIONS. YOU ALL HAVE TREATED NOMINATIONS AS A MOTION, AND THAT IS NOT CORRECT. ACCORDING TO ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. IF SOMEONE MAKES IT. BUT WHAT WAS HAPPENING WAS PEOPLE WERE MAKING MOTIONS AS THEIR NOMINATION. IT WOULD BE, LET'S JUST SAY THEY WERE INCORRECT, BUT THEY CAN. WHY? IT'S A MOTION. IF THERE'S A IF SOMEONE MAKES A MOTION TO. IF THE MOTION WAS I, I MOVED TO APPOINT COMMISSIONER PUGSLEY OR I MOVED TO MAKE MIKE PUGSLEY A PORT COMMISSIONER, AND SOMEONE SECONDED THEIR MOTION. YOU HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT. THAT'S THE ROBERT'S RULES. AND IF THE CHAIR WANTED TO MAKE THE MOTION EVERY TIME SHE COULD YOU FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE? COMMISSIONER? I THINK WE ARE ABLE TO MAKE NOMINATIONS WHEN THE NOMINEE WHEN. AND THE JUDGE WOULD SAY, ARE THERE ANY FURTHER NOMINATIONS? IF THERE ARE NONE, THE JUDGE WILL SAY NOMINATIONS ARE NOW CLOSED. NOW WE WILL VOTE. THAT'S HOW THE THAT'S HOW ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. AND THAT'S WHAT THIS POLICY. NOBODY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO MAKE A MOTION FOR NOMINATION. THAT'S THE WHOLE THING. AGREED WITH THAT. AGREED WITH THAT. BUT THAT'S WHAT THIS POLICY WAS CHANGING, BECAUSE THAT IS THE HISTORY OF THIS COURT FROM BEFORE IT WAS MADE TO THEY WERE MAKING THE NOMINATION. AND CONSIDERING THAT A MOTION THAT IS INCORRECT. THAT WAS THE HISTORY OF THIS COURT. AND IN ALL FAIRNESS, GUYS, AND LET'S LET'S BE REAL. AS THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF THIS AND READING THE NEXT ITEM, I COULD CERTAINLY MAKE A NOMINATION WITHIN MY SENTENCE TO NOT EVEN FINISH. AND THAT GIVES YOU AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE TO WHERE I AM CONTROLLING, WHOSE NAME GETS PUTS ON THERE TOO. IT WAS MEANT TO PROTECT EVERYONE. IT WAS, IT WAS IT WAS A LOT OF THOUGHT PROCESS GOING INTO IT. AND I UNDERSTAND IT'S DIFFICULT. I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE WE PRACTICED ON IT. I UNDERSTAND WE DON'T USE IT. BUT ONCE EVERY THREE YEARS IT COMES UP THIS WAY. I FULLY INTEND TO WORK WITH YOU IF WE DO IT BEFORE. YOUR HONOR, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IF WE DO THAT THIS PROCEDURE WITH ONE BOARD OR COMMITTEE, WE SHOULD BE DOING IT WITH ALL OF THEM, BUT WE'RE NOT. AND THAT, TO ME, IS PATENTLY INCORRECT. WE NORMALLY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH NOMINATIONS. OPENS THE FLOOR. IF IT'S IF IT'S A COMMISSIONERS COURT, THE JUDGE OPENS THE FLOOR FOR NOMINATIONS. IF IT'S A CITY COUNCIL, THE MAYOR OPENS THE FLOOR FOR NOMINATIONS. EVERYBODY GETS A CHANCE TO MAKE A NOMINATION. IF NO, IF ONLY TWO PEOPLE MAKE NOMINATIONS, THE JUDGE OR MAYOR SAYS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS TO COME TO THE FLOOR? IF THERE'S NOT, I'M CLOSING THE NOMINATION PROCESS AND WE WILL START VOTING ON THOSE NOMINATIONS. THAT IS THE CORRECT PROCEDURE. BUT WHAT IF IN THE SCENARIO YOU JUST OUTLINED, ALL OF US PUT ONE PERSON ON THE BOARD? BECAUSE, LOOK, THERE'S GOING TO BE TEN NOMINATIONS FOR THE PORT. WE'LL TAKE THE PORT. THAT'S ALWAYS THE ONE THAT'S BIG. THERE'S GOING TO BE TEN. THERE'S GOING TO BE OUTSTANDING APPLICATIONS THAT EACH OF US PUT ONE ON. AND IF WE ONLY HAVE ONE VOTE, WHAT DO WE DO? IT'S A STALEMATE. YOU CAN'T GET THERE NOW. AND SO THIS WAS WHAT THE ONLY THING WE COULD COME UP WITH SO THAT EVERYBODY HAD A NOMINATION, NOT A MOTION, BECAUSE IT'S IN THE SPIRIT OF EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. BUT SO IF YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING TO FIX IT THE WAY WITH WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME, I MEAN, TELL ME, BUT I DON'T WE DON'T. WE SPENT WE COULDN'T COME UP WITH ANY OTHER SOLUTION. AND WE SPENT A GAZILLION HOURS ON THIS SO THAT EVERYBODY HAD A SAY. BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE EVERYBODY WITH TWO VOTES, THEN IT'S 11111. WELL, OR IT'S THE FIRST THREE PEOPLE, THE CHANCES OF THAT HAPPENING ARE EXTREMELY RARE. BUT BUT IF THAT IS BUT LIKE EVERYBODY NOMINATED SOMEONE LAST TIME. EVERYBODY UP HERE AT OUR LAST TIME WE DID THIS. SO IT'S NOT RARE. FIRST TIME WE DID IT A DIFFERENT NAME. THERE WERE FIVE NAMES NOMINATED. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US NOMINATED SOMEONE DIFFERENT. EVERY ONE OF US. BECAUSE IT'S SO THERE'S GOOD PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE, LIKE, HOW DO YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT. I MEAN, I MEAN, I'VE BEEN HERE, DONE THAT. NO, NO, I KNOW, SO I MEAN, IT WAS THE ONE TIME WE'VE [01:45:02] DONE IT. ONE TIME EVERYBODY NOMINATED SOMEONE, YOU KNOW, AND I DIDN'T LIKE THE PROCESS. WELL, OKAY. BUT BUT WE HAVE NEVER EVERYBODY SAYS I DON'T LIKE THE PROCESS, BUT COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT FIXES THE PROCESS THAT THAT WE'VE ALREADY SPENT 100 HOURS ON, NOT 100. WE'VE ALREADY SPENT A TON OF HOURS ON. AND WE'VE ANNOUNCED TO THE WORLD THIS IS HOW WE'RE DOING IT. BUT TELL ME HOW IT HOW IT WORKS TO WHERE EVERYBODY CAN NOMINATE AND WE DON'T GET STUCK ONE, ONE ONE WAY THAT WE CHANGE IT. I'M JUST TELLING YOU NO, NO, THIS IS NOT CORRECT. IT IS NOT ACCORDING TO ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. AND I AND I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO ADOPT THIS AS A POLICY FOR NOMINATING, IT SHOULDN'T BE JUST FOR ONE BOARD. IT SHOULD BE FOR ALL OF THEM, BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHICH BOARD MAKE THAT YOUR MOTION TO INCLUDE ALL BOARDS. AND WE ALREADY HAVE IT IN OUR POLICY FOR THESE FOUR BOARDS. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT YOUR MOTION. I DON'T, THAT'S FINE. MIKE. I DON'T CARE WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS, WHETHER IT WAS. WE USUALLY DON'T GET APPLICATIONS. WE HAVE A LOT OF OPEN SEATS ON OUR BOARDS THAT WE CAN'T MAKE A MOTION TO GO BACK TO WHERE WE WERE, BECAUSE THIS IS ALL MATTERS RELATED TO ALL MATTERS. YOU CAN. I'M WAITING FOR A MOTION BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, AS IT STANDS, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING. THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT DOING. THIS IS THE WAY WE HAVE DONE IT. SO UNLESS I HAVE A MOTION TO CHANGE THAT FOR DISCUSSION, I'LL MOVE THAT. WE GO BACK THE WAY WE WERE BEFORE. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? I MEAN, GET RID OF THIS GAME WE'RE PLAYING HERE ABOUT TWO PEOPLE, TWO, TWO COMMISSIONERS GETTING TWO VOTES. AND, YOU KNOW, JUST THIS WHOLE PROCESS. I THINK THE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO COME AND DO A PRESENTATION, WE HEAR THEM OUT, WE MAKE A NOMINATION, NOT A MOTION BUT A NOMINATION TO NOMINATE SOMEBODY. IT'S YOUR MOTION. DO YOU WANT. BUT THAT'S WHAT WE ALREADY ARE. THAT'S NOT A CHANGE. WHAT'S THE CHANGE? YOU HAVE TO. GOING BACK TO WHAT? HEY, YOU SELECTED FROM THE PEOPLE HAVE THE EQUAL RIGHT TO COME IN AND DO A PRESENTATION IF THEY WANT TO DO A PRESENTATION. THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO. WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THEM TO DO. EVEN WITH THIS POLICY, WE ALLOW THEM TO DO A PRESENTATION. ALL THE NOMINEES BEFORE WE EVEN SELECT THE NAMES. THAT IS PART OF THE PROCESS. AND MOST OF THEM HAVE COME AROUND TO OUR OFFICES AND MET WITH US AS WELL, OR TRYING TO MEET WITH US. BUT WE ARE WE DO ALLOW THEM TO SPEAK. AND I FEEL THE SAME WAY. COMMISSIONER FEEL THAT. NOT NOW YOU'RE TELLING ME HOW MANY VOTES I HAVE, RIGHT? AND IF I VOTE FOR ONE, I'M ANYONE. I HAVE TO VOTE FOR SOMEBODY ELSE. NO YOU DON'T. THAT PERSON IS NOMINATED ALREADY. YOU DON'T HAVE TO VOTE FOR ANYBODY. NO. SO NOT. I LOSE THAT VOTE. YOU DO? WELL, WHY SHOULD I LOSE A VOTE? YOU KNOW, BUT, YOU KNOW, IF I WANT TO NOMINATE SOMEBODY THAT HE'S ALREADY NOMINATED, YOU KNOW, IT'S OKAY. BUT YOU'RE SAYING I CAN'T, SO HE'S NOT TELLING US HOW TO VOTE. SO I MEAN, I DON'T I NEVER LIKED THE PROCESS. I STILL DON'T LIKE THE PROCESS. SO THAT'S WHY I MAKE THE MOTION. AND THERE'S A SECOND. FINE. IF NOT, THAT'S FINE TOO. IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION THAT IS LAID ON THE TABLE? OKAY. I'M SORRY I HAVE A HARD TIME HEARING JOE. I'M SORRY. MY MOTION WAS TO GO BACK TO THE WAY WE WERE COMMISSIONER. AND IN THIS. WHATEVER WE'RE DOING HERE. GO BACK TO. WE JUST. EVERYBODY GETS A CHANCE TO MAKE A NOMINATION. NOMINATION? NOT A NOMINATION AND NOT A MOTION. RIGHT. THAT'S NOT THE WAY WE. THAT'S NOT THE WAY WE DID IT BEFORE AT ALL. YOU DID ONE NOMINATION. Y'ALL MADE MOTIONS, AND WHOEVER WE MADE MOTIONS WERE WRONG. PROBABLY RIGHT. YES. THAT'S WHAT COMMISSIONER IS SAYING. WE MADE ANY MOTIONS. WE WERE WRONG. THEY WEREN'T WRONG. ACCORDING TO ROBERT. RULES OF ORDER. RIGHT. IT'S WHAT HE'S SAYING. SO WE GO BACK AND SAY I'M NOMINATED. I'M NOT MAKING A MOTION. IF I SAY I'M GOING TO MOVE, THEN WE NEED TO STOP THAT PERSON. SAY YOU CAN'T MOVE. NOMINATION IS NOT A MOTION. RIGHT. YOU CAN'T STOP A MOTION FROM BEING MADE. NOT DO NOMINATIONS, IS WHAT WE'RE SAYING. WE HE MADE A MOTION. SOMEBODY SECONDED RIGHT AWAY. NOBODY ELSE'S NAME WAS DISCUSSED. YOU VOTED? YEAH, BUT. BUT THAT'S BECAUSE YOU WERE TREATING A NOMINATION AS A MOTION. IT'S HOW THIS COUNTY DID IT BEFORE? YES. WHETHER IT'S CORRECT OR NOT, IT WAS THE WAY THEY DID IT. WE DON'T FOLLOW ROBERT'S RULES, AND I WOULD NOT EVER SUPPORT THAT. WHAT I'M SUPPORTING IS, IS WE OPEN THE FLOOR FOR NOMINATIONS, AND AND WHEN WE GET READY, WHEN EVERYBODY GETS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A NOMINATION, THEN YOU, AS THE COUNTY JUDGE WOULD SAY, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER NOMINATIONS, I'M GOING TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS. AND THEN WE EACH VOTE. OKAY. SO IF ALL FIVE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE DOING OTHER THAN WE HAVE TWO, YOU'RE I THINK YOUR HANG UP IS THE TWO VOTES BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING. EVERYBODY GETS TO NOMINATE ONE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO NOMINATE ONE. YOU CAN NOMINATE ONE LAST TIME. EVERYBODY NOMINATED ONE. EVERYBODY GOT TWO VOTES. AND IT WORKED OUT PERFECTLY. WE GOT THREE VOTES FOR TWO PEOPLE ON THE FIRST SECOND. LET'S SEE IF WE GET A SECOND OR. THIS IS REALLY. I DON'T KNOW WHAT, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT. GOING BACK TO WHAT? GOING BACK TO WHAT WE WERE DOING RIGHT OR WRONG. IF THE COUNTY JUDGE OPENS IT UP, MIKE AND SAYS, [01:50:01] OKAY, WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR, THE PORT APPOINTMENTS, AND MY MOTION IS TO NOMINATE MIKE PURCELL TO BE A PORT COMMISSIONER. AND JOHN MIGHT, AS SECOND SAID, THAT'S A MOTION THAT ACCORDING TO ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, UNLESS WE HAVE A POLICY, HAS TO BE ADHERED TO. WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, IF YOU GO READ IT, NOT NOMINATIONS ARE NOT A MOTION. I AGREE, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE COMMISSIONER I CANNOT VOTE ON A NOMINATION COMMISSIONER. BUT THIS COURT HAS CANNOT UNTIL THE FLOOR HAS BEEN CLOSED FOR ALL NOMINATIONS. THEN YOU GO BACK AND VOTE ON THE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOMINATED. I UNDERSTAND, BUT WHAT I'M TELLING YOU IS WHAT WAS HAPPENING WHEN YOU WERE GONE. MOTION. PEOPLE WERE MAKING MOTIONS, NOT NOMINATIONS. THERE WERE SECONDS. THAT'S A VALID MOTION, AND A SECOND HAS TO BE VOTED ON. YOU CAN'T DO THAT WHEN YOU. WE'VE DONE IT. IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN'T. THEY HAVE DONE IT HISTORICALLY. HERE IS WHAT HE'S SAYING. SO WHATEVER YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO DO OR SUPPOSED TO DO, AND ALL THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS AGAIN THAT WE TALK ABOUT THAT WE SHOULD BE FOLLOWING. WE DO NOT FOLLOW THEM TO THE T, AND WE CREATE A POLICY THAT WE GO BY. THIS WAS VOTED ON AND THE POLICY WAS CREATED TO TAKE CARE OF THAT PROBLEM BECAUSE WE WEREN'T DOING IT CORRECTLY. I AM FINE WITH WHATEVER WE WANT TO DO, BUT WE CAN'T JUST GO BACK AND AND AND COMMISSIONER, I WILL REMIND YOU, AND I CAN PULL IT UP IN THE VIDEO WHERE YOU NOMINATED A CANDIDATE AND YOU WAITED FOR A SECOND. NO. YOU MADE THE MOTION TO APPOINT A CANDIDATE. LET ME CLARIFY. AND YOU DIDN'T GET A SECOND. AND YOU WERE UPSET ABOUT THAT TOO. AND I CAN TELL YOU WHO THE CANDIDATE WAS. I REMEMBER DISTINCTLY WHO IT WAS SO THIS CHORD HAD BEEN. I KNOW THAT TOO, FOR A LONG TIME. THAT'S NOT HERE AND THERE. AND WE WERE DOING IT WRONG. AND I ADMIT, YES, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM SAYING WE WERE DOING IT WRONG. NO, WE'RE DOING IT WRONG. IF IT WASN'T WRONG, POLICY WAS TO CORRECT THAT PROBLEM. SO BUT FROM THE BEGINNING, I TOLD Y'ALL I DIDN'T LIKE THE PROCESS FROM THE BEGINNING. YOU KNOW, YOU CAN SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT TO SAY, BUT FROM THE BEGINNING I SAID I DIDN'T LIKE THE PROCESS. AND I WORKED VERY HARD WITH EVERYONE BECAUSE I KNEW IT WAS A DIFFICULT. PUT IT TOGETHER. BUT IT WOULD. AND I VOTED AGAINST IT. SO. BUT COMMISSIONER TO BE I VOTED BECAUSE I WAS I HAD TO VOTE FOR SOMEBODY. YOU KNOW. BUT COMMISSIONER, TO BE FAIR, WE REPEATEDLY SAID IF YOU HAVE AN ALTERNATE POLICY, BRING IT AND YOU NEVER HAVE BROUGHT IT. NO YOU DIDN'T. I WAS SAYING WE STAY THE WAY WE WERE. WHAT'S MY MY DEAL WAS STAY THE WAY WE WERE. WHAT WAS THE PROBLEM WITH THAT? I DIDN'T STAY THE WAY WE WORK. WHOEVER. WHOEVER NOT NOMINATES WRONG WORD. WHOEVER MAKES THE QUICKEST MOTION, I MAKE IT A MOTION. MAKE IT JUST A NOMINATION. I'LL TELL YOU, FOR REASONS OF OF SANITY AND TO MOVE ON WHILE WE'RE YOUNG. I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO STAY WITH YOUR YOUR POLICY THIS TIME. BUT I AM GOING TO ASK I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CLARIFY THIS WITH THE TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES AND GET A RULING ON HOW THIS PROCESS SHOULD WORK, ACCORDING TO ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. IT'S TOO IMPORTANT FOR US TO DO THIS, AND WE CANNOT. I DON'T KNOW IF SEGREGATE IS WE CAN'T DISCRIMINATE AGAINST OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND DO THEM DIFFERENTLY BECAUSE, OKAY, PICK, TELL ME, TELL ME A COMMISSION OR A BOARD WHERE WE'RE NOT APPLYING THIS POLICY. COMMISSIONER WHY DON'T YOU JUST MAKE YOU CAN MAKE AN AIRPORT BOARD. OKAY. THERE'S A PERFECT EXAMPLE. IF WE MAKE NOMINATIONS AND EVERYBODY ON HERE MAKES A THE NOMINATION FOR AIRPORT BOARD GOES TO THE SAME PERSON, GOES TO PARKS, BOARD OUR COASTAL PARKS. THAT'S THE JUDGES. JUDGES? THOSE AREN'T YOURS. YEAH, THAT'S ONLY MINE. SHE APPOINTS THOSE TO RATIFY IT. YES. THAT IS THE LAW TO GET AWAY FROM US. I KNOW THAT WAS ALWAYS THAT WAY. I WASN'T EVEN AWARE. BUT BUT. AND THE OTHERS IN THE AIRPORT BOARD AND SEVERAL OF OUR OTHER BOARDS, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE FULL BOARD BOARD SERVING. WE CAN'T GET ENOUGH PEOPLE TO APPLY. THAT'S THE REASON IT WAS ONLY DIRECTED AT THESE, BECAUSE THESE ARE THE BOARDS THAT WE GET MULTIPLE. BUT THAT ASIDE, WE ARE STILL NOT. WE'RE STILL PRACTICING A DUAL POLICY HERE WITH RESPECT TO OUR BOARDS AND COMMITTEES. AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S CORRECT. SO MAKING A MOTION TO AMEND TO INCLUDE ALL BOARDS AND I'M FINE WITH THAT. IT JUST IT'S NOT GOING TO BE PRACTICAL BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE APPLICATIONS. BUT I'M OKAY IF YOU WANT. THAT'S GOOD. I DON'T WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO SUPPORT THIS POLICY BECAUSE I DON'T AGREE WITH IT. BUT I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO STICK WITH IT, BUT I DON'T AGREE WITH IT. BUT WHAT I DO WANT IS I WANT A CLARIFICATION FROM THE TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES OR FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OR WHOEVER, ABOUT HOW THIS PROCESS SHOULD WORK ACCORDING TO ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THIS IS CORRECT AND I WANT CLARIFICATION IF WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO WE VOTED ON THIS POLICY, SO WE ASSUMED WE WERE ALLOWED TO DO THIS BACK WHEN WE DID IT. SO IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE ARE NOT ALLOWED AS A COUNTY TO CREATE POLICY WITHIN THIS, THEN THAT I'LL ASK FOR THAT CLARIFICATION FOR SURE, AND THAT'S FINE. I AGREE WITH THAT TOO. I IF WELL, OKAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? [01:55:02] I'M JUST GOING TO SHUT UP. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL WAY THERE. IS THERE A SECOND? IF NOT, I'LL SECOND THAT. OKAY. WHAT IS THE ORIGINAL WAY TO JUST DO AWAY WITH THIS POLICY? YEAH. POINT OF ORDER. CLARIFICATION FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. I MEAN, THIS IS NOT EVEN LISTED TO MAKE A POLICY. YES IT IS. IS IT AMENDING THE COMMISSIONERS COURT POLICY AND CLARIFYING THE BOARD APPOINTMENT PROCESS? IT'S ALL CLARIFYING THE BOARD APPOINTMENT DIDN'T SAY DID. THESE REALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN TWO ITEMS. THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT THIS UP. IT WAS ONLY SUPPOSED TO LAST MONTH BECAUSE I WANTED US TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION NOW. SO WE UNDERSTOOD IT AND THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTOOD IT. SO THEN WHEN WE GET TO DECEMBER. SO THIS IS MESSY, BUT THIS IS WORTH IT BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO BE STUMBLING THROUGH THIS. WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER MEETING BEFORE DECEMBER. I CALL A POINT OF ORDER BECAUSE THERE'S NO CLARIFICATION ON THIS MOTION. NO NO, NO. I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT YOU WERE DONE PROPERLY. SORRY TO EVEN TAKE ACTION ON THIS ITEM. SO WE WOULD NOT DREAM OF STEPPING OUT OF OUR LANE AND PRETENDING TO BE A PARLIAMENTARIAN. HOWEVER, OUR DISCUSSION WHILE THIS HAS BEEN ONGOING OF ROBERT'S RULES IS. I THINK WE'RE SOMEWHAT IN AGREEMENT WITH COMMISSIONER PUGSLEY THAT ROBERT'S RULES ALLOWS FOR THE THE PREVIOUS PROCESS, BUT WITHOUT FORCING A VOTE UNTIL EVERY COMMISSIONER HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THEIR NOMINATION FROM THE FLOOR, CHAPTER 66 FROM ROBERT'S RULES. SO WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WHAT WE HAD BEFORE WAS NOT BEING IMPLEMENTED, MAYBE EXACTLY AS COMMISSIONER ENVISIONS THERE IS ROOM TO GO BACK AND PROVIDE FOR THAT FAIRNESS SO THAT EVERY MEMBER OF THE COURT GETS TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A NOMINATION FROM THE FLOOR BEFORE THAT FIRST VOTE IS FORCED. AND WOULD YOU? BUT THAT WASN'T WHAT WE WERE DOING. SO YOU CAN'T SAY GO BACK TO WHAT WE WERE DOING BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WERE DOING. SO THE MOTION NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED. I'M CALLING A POINT OF ORDER BECAUSE WE ARE WAY OUT OF ORDER. THERE IS NO CLARIFICATION. WE WERE NOT DOING IT AS COMMISSIONER ARTICULATED. WE WERE DOING IT AS THE JUDGE ARTICULATED WAS WHOEVER MADE THE FIRST MOTION TO APPLY AND WHOEVER GOT A SECOND, THAT'S WHAT WE WERE DOING. SO IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SUPPORTING, COMMISSIONER, WHICH I DON'T THINK YOU ARE, THAT'S WHAT THIS COURT WAS DOING. YOU WERE NOT HERE FOR THE LAST. LET ME GO AHEAD AND AMEND MY MOTION. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. PLEASE CLARIFY WHAT WE'RE DOING. AMEND MY MOTION TO THE STATE THAT WE'LL GO BACK TO NOMINATIONS WITHOUT A NOMINATION BEING A MOTION AT THE TIME, THAT IT SHOULD BE DONE. BACK THEN, ALTHOUGH WE WEREN'T DOING IT RIGHT, THE MOTION IS TO GO BACK AND DO NOMINATIONS WITHOUT BEING A MOTION. AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS UNTIL THE NOMINATIONS ARE CLOSED AND THEN WE SUBMIT THEN. THEN WE VOTE ON THOSE ON THOSE NOMINEES. DO YOU SECOND THAT COMMISSIONER, YOU SECONDED THE MOTION. AND SO FOR DISCUSSION HOW HOW WE EACH GET ONE VOTE OR IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE I MEAN I'M ASKING YEAH. AND SO IT'S GOING TO BE 11111. THEN WHAT HAPPENS. YEAH. WELL JUST GO ANOTHER ROUND COMMISSIONER. TIE TO TIE. I GUARANTEE YOU IF IT'S A TIE AT ONE ONE. HOLD ON, HOLD ON. I'M ASKING COMMISSIONER PUTNEY. OKAY, WAIT WAIT, WAIT. THAT HAPPENED ON THE COUNCIL ONCE WHILE I WAS THERE, MIKE. BUT I'M ASKING YOU, HOW DO WE BREAK A1111 TIE? SOMEBODY GOT TO GIVE. SOMEBODY HAS TO CHANGE THEIR YOUR MIND. OKAY, THAT'S THE MOST. YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CHANGE OUR MIND IS A MOTION. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, BUT WE DO HAVE A MOTION ON THIS. MY QUESTION, JUDGE, WAS, IS THIS POSTED TO BE ABLE TO EVEN TAKE ACTION. THIS IS SAYS CLARIFYING BOARD APPLICATION PROCESS. I MEAN, I'M FINE WITH HAVING THIS DISCUSSION. THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO HAVE IT LAST MONTH. THAT'S WHY I ASKED TO HAVE IT AGAIN AT THIS MEETING SO THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT I THOUGHT IT WAS CLARIFYING. SO IF WE DIDN'T PUT IT, WE PUT IT AMENDING AND CLARIFYING, AMENDED AND AMENDING AND CLARIFYING. SO YES, AMENDING POLICIES REGARDING SELECTION COMMITTEE AND CLARIFYING. YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. TO ME I JUST CLARIFYING. BUT THE COMMA I AGREE THAT'S TRUE. THAT WAS NOT VERY CLEAR. BUT YEAH THAT'S TRUE. BUT WHATEVER WE'RE HERE WE'RE HERE. OKAY. SO SOMEONE NEEDS TO EXPLAIN HOW THIS IS GOING TO WORK. IT'S GOING TO BE 1111. HOW DO YOU BREAK THAT TIE. IF THERE'S A TIE, THERE'S A TIE, AND THEN YOU GO BACK AND YOU VOTE AGAIN. AND IF THERE'S NOT A THEN WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION AFTER DISCUSSION. THERE'S I'M GOING TO CALL THE VOTE. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL AGAINST. NAY. NO. TWO EYES, THREE AGAINST. SO MY QUESTION TO YOU THEN, IF WE'RE GOING TO STICK TO THIS ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER THING, THEN I OR WE FOLLOW. [02:00:02] WOULD YOU SAY WE ARE FOLLOWING ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS ON A DAILY BASIS HERE AT THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT? SO THE COURT HAS ADOPTED ROBERT'S RULES AS A A GOAL GUIDELINE? YES. SO I WILL SAY THAT AGAIN IF WE WANT TO. AND THAT'S AS STRICT AS YOU ALL WANT TO GET, THEN THAT SHOULD BE A MOTION THAT WE WILL FOLLOW STRICTLY TO THOSE RULES, NOT JUST WHEN IT SUITS OUR NEED FOR THE VOTE. YES. WELL, I'LL MAKE A MOTION. WE FOLLOW THE RULES. WE'VE ALREADY DONE THAT. THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA. AND WE CAN'T DO THAT TODAY. SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IF IN THE PAST THE AGENDA. YES. YOU ARE MORE THAN WELCOME. YES. SO IN THE SCENARIO WHERE EACH OF US GETS TWO VOTES AND THERE'S THERE'S FIVE NOMINEES, IS IT NOT POSSIBLE UNDER THAT POSSIBLE THAT YOU HAVE A TIE, A TIE AND THEN YOU HAVE A RUNOFF. AND THOSE TWO GO TO THE RUNOFF AND THEN YOU GET ONE VOTE IN THE RUNOFF. THAT'S THE PART OF THE POLICY. WHAT TWO GO TO THE RUNOFF. THE TWO THAT ARE TIED AT THREE. I THINK ONCE YOU SEE IT IN ACTION, YOU MIGHT FEEL BETTER. WE WE WILL WORK ON THAT. I KNOW BEFORE, AND I NEED TO BRING IT BACK UP. OUR OFFICE NEEDS TO DO IT AS WELL. WE DID IT WITH THE COMMISSIONERS BECAUSE IT WAS A NEW POLICY. AND IF YOU'LL ALLOW US TO JUST DO IT A FEW TIMES, YOU MIGHT SEE THE LOGIC BEHIND IT BECAUSE IT IS VERY CONFUSING. SO I IT IS BECAUSE, COMMISSIONER, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IF THERE'S TWO THAT ARE TIED AT THREE, THOSE TWO GO TO THE RUNOFF AND THEN WE GET ONE VOTE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN THOSE TWO. BUT WHAT IF WE ALL VOTE FOR A DIFFERENT PERSON? BRANT. BUT YOU GET YOU GET ONE VOTE. NO, YOU GET TWO VOTES, BUT YOU JUST YOUR POLICY SAYS YOU CAN'T USE TWO VOTES ON THE SAME PERSON, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT WORK. USE BOTH. THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT WORK. YOU WILL SEE HOW IT WORKS. YOU'LL CHOOSE. YOU'LL PICK IF EVERY FIVE PUT ONE ON. AND THEN WE ALL PICK. WE ALL VOTE FOR OUR ONE. THEN WE HAVE TO PICK OUR SECOND ONE. AND AND EVERYBODY'S GOING TO NOT MATHEMATICALLY POSSIBLE THAT THAT WOULD BE A TIE ON THE SECOND VOTE TO IF IT'S A TIE WE KEEP DOING A RUNOFF UNTIL THAT IT'S BETTER THAN A1111. IT'S MATHEMATICALLY POSSIBLE THAT THAT COULD HAPPEN. ON WHAT? WHAT'S THAT? THE SECOND VOTE. VOTE YOUR RUNOFF. YEAH. YOU MEAN THE RUNOFF VOTE OR THE SECOND? I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT A RUNOFF VOTE MEANS. IF WE ALL VOTE. I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE THIS DISCUSSION. WE HAVE. WE HAVE WASTED A LOT OF TIME ON THIS ITEM THAT THERE IS NO ACTION MOVING FORWARD. I THINK WE CAN PRACTICE THIS. WE CAN BRING IT BACK UP, BUT WE'RE CONFUSING EVERYBODY ELSE MORE BY OUR ACTIONS HERE TODAY. INSTEAD OF CLARIFYING YOUR HONOR WITH AGAIN, I'LL SAY, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT AND I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE ANYBODY MAD OVER THIS, BUT AT THE LAST MEETING WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS, I EXPRESSED MY CONCERNS ABOUT IT. AND I WANTED TO HAVE AN OPEN DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS IN COURT TO TRY TO RESOLVE MY CONCERNS ABOUT NOT NOT DOING THIS FOR EVERY BOARD AND COMMITTEE THAT WE VOTE ON, I THINK IS IMPROPER. AND SO I JUDGE I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THEN IN RELATION TO THIS, THAT WE DO THIS FOR EVERY BOARD AND COMMISSION INSTEAD OF JUST THE FOUR. I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION RIGHT NOW. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. I KNOW. THREE EYES. ONE. NO. AND COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ IS OUT. SO MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER GIVING THE COUNTY JUDGE THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE PAYMENTS UNTIL [4. Discuss and consider giving the County Judge the authority to approve payments until December 31, 2025, and all related matters.] DECEMBER 31ST AND 2025. AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. THIS IS WHAT WE NORMALLY DO BECAUSE OF THE ONE MEETING IN NOVEMBER AND ONE MEETING IN DECEMBER. MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER FIVE. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER UPCOMING COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING DATE, [5. Discuss and consider upcoming Commissioners Court meeting date(s), workshop date(s), and related matters.] WORKSHOP DATES AND RELATED MATTERS. WE ONLY HAVE ONE MEETING IN DECEMBER, DECEMBER THE 10TH. MY SUGGESTION AFTER THE LENGTHY CONVERSATION AND ALL BOARDS MOVING TO OUR THE PROCESS IS POTENTIALLY MAYBE WE HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING ON THE 17TH FOR BOARD APPOINTMENTS ONLY. SO THAT THAT WOULD BE THAT'S GOING TO BE A VERY LONG APPOINTMENT. WE HAVE THE IT POSITION INTERVIEWS AS WELL. THAT'S A SUGGESTION. IF ANYBODY WANTS TO. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION. IS EVERYONE. AND THAT WOULD BE ONLY BOARD APPOINTMENTS. I DON'T WANT TO LOAD THIS UP WITH OTHER COMMITTEE. OTHER THINGS. THAT'S GOING TO BE BOARD APPOINTMENTS IN THE IT. NO NO NO WE'LL DO THE IT ON THE 10TH. KEEP IT THE SAME. BUT ALL BOARD APPOINTMENTS BECAUSE WE HAVE SEVERAL BOARD APPOINTMENTS FOR THE 17TH AND WE DO THOSE ON HERE BECAUSE THIS HAS BECOME VERY DIFFICULT AS WELL. [02:05:04] IT WILL GIVE US ANOTHER THE 10TH THE WEEK BEFORE TO CLARIFY AND LET THE PUBLIC KNOW AS WELL. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE 17TH. EVERYBODY AVAILABLE FOR THAT MEETING IS AT 09:00, JUDGE, I WOULD ASSUME. YES, MA'AM. YES, MA'AM. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO ITEM B ONE. [1. Discuss and consider approving a funding source; and authorize and approve a Repair Work Order with ThyssenKrupp Elevator (TKE) for the modernization of Nueces County Jail Elevator No. 8, for a total of $545,403.85, under Omnia Partners Cooperative Contract No. R200502; and all related matters.] DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVING A FUNDING SOURCE. AND AUTHORIZE AND APPROVE A REPAIR WORK ORDER FOR THE THYSSENKRUPP IS KRUPP ELEVATOR SERVICE FOR THE MODERNIZATION OF NUECES COUNTY JAIL ELEVATOR NUMBER EIGHT, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $545,403.85 UNDER THE OMNIA PARTNERS COOPERATIVE CONTRACT. AND I APOLOGIZE, CAPTAIN WILLOUGHBY. AND I REALIZE NOW WHY YOU WERE STILL HERE. I WOULD HAVE BROUGHT THIS UP WAY EARLIER. I'M SO SORRY, GUYS. THERE THIS WAS BROUGHT UP BACK A FEW MONTHS AGO, AND IT'S BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION. AND PUBLIC WORKS DOES NOT HAVE THE FUNDING SOURCE. WE LOOKED INTO SOME FUNDING SOURCES. I BELIEVE THAT TERESA AND CONSTANCE HAVE FOUND POTENTIALLY CEOS THE 2021 CEOS MIGHT HAVE. AND LET ME BE CLEAR. SO OUR VOTE WOULD BE CONTINGENT TO USE THAT, BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE CEOS AND GRANTS AND EVERYTHING, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, STILL HAVEN'T ALL BEEN RECONCILED WITH TRUE ACCURATE BALANCES. BUT BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH IN THIS ONE WE THINK THAT COULD FUND IT. SO OUR MOTION, IF WE MOVE WHICH WE HAVE TO FIX, THE JAIL ELEVATORS, WE CAN'T CONTINUE WITH NOT DOING THIS WOULD BE TO MY MOTION WOULD BE TO VOTE TO APPROVE, TO USE THE IF AVAILABLE, THE 2021 CEOS, THE COUNTY WIDE CEOS TO REPAIR THIS. AND IF THAT MONEY AFTER CLARIFICATION WITH OUR CEOS IS NOT AVAILABLE, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO USE CONTINGENCY FUNDS. YES, I ONLY HAVE ONE QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? YES. GO AHEAD. DID YOU SECOND IT? YES HE DID. HAS THIS BEEN REVIEWED BY PUBLIC WORKS? YES. THEY'RE THE ONES THAT BROUGHT IT TO US SEVERAL TIMES. AND THE SHERIFF HAS BEEN REQUESTING THAT THIS BE REPAIRED. WE CAN'T AFFORD TO HAVE THE ELEVATORS DOWN THAT LONG IN THERE. THIS HAS REALLY GONE ON FAR TOO LONG AS IT IS. YES. YEAH. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITH COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ OUT. AND I APOLOGIZE AGAIN, CAPTAIN WILLOUGHBY, FOR KEEPING YOU ALL HERE. I SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT. YES. JUDGE, JUST ONE MORE MOTION WILL BE REQUIRED. IF YOU WANT TO DO THE SECOND HALF OF THAT AFTER THE SEMICOLON. OH, YES. TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT. CONSIDER APPROVING A FUNDING SOURCE AND APPROVE THE REPAIR WORK ORDER. AND UNDER THE OMNIA. OKAY. SECOND, HIS MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT. YES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE, AYE. I SHOULD HAVE MADE THAT PART OF MY MOTION. I'M SORRY. MOVING ON TO ITEM TWO. [2. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving a cooperative contract purchase with Sames Bastrop CDJ, Inc, under Texas Interlocal Purchasing System Contract No. 240901, for the purchase of a one (1) 2025 Ram 3500 Window Van; and related matters.] DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING APPROVING A COOPERATIVE CONTRACT PURCHASE WITH SAM'S BASTROP CDBG, INC., UNDER THE TEXAS INTERLOCAL PURCHASING SYSTEM CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE VAN, WHICH WE WERE ALL MADE AWARE THAT THEY WERE GOING TO PURCHASE THE VAN FOR TRANSPORT TO THE HOSPITAL. SO THIS IS THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT IS GOING TO REIMBURSE FOR THIS. I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. JUST A QUESTION REAL QUICK. MICHAEL OR SHERIFF, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION, I KNOW SOME VEHICLES, ESPECIALLY SPECIALTY VEHICLES, SOMETIMES HAVE A LAG TIME WITH GETTING THEM TO US. DO WE KNOW WHAT WINDOW THAT WE HAVE EXPECTED? HOW MANY DAYS TO GET THAT PROCESSED? IS IT A TYPICAL NORMAL PROCESS, OR IS IT EXTENDED BEYOND A MONTH OR SO. YOU ARE THE CAPTAIN. HAVE IT. THAT OR. I DON'T HAVE ANY. I DON'T HAVE A FIRM DATE ON THIS. I JUST WONDERED BECAUSE I KNOW WORK TRUCKS. A LOT OF TIMES IF YOU'RE PURCHASING THEM FROM DEPENDING ON THE DEALERSHIP, THEY CAN BE READY ON THE LOT. SOME COULD TAKE. YEAH. BECAUSE THERE'S USUALLY THERE'S 90 DAYS, ESPECIALLY WITH THIS SPECIALTY VEHICLE. THERE'S AFTERMARKET THAT HAS TO BE INSTALLED. SO I IMAGINE THERE'LL BE SOME TIME INVOLVED TO PUT THAT. WE JUST DON'T KNOW. BUT WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT, CAPTAIN. YEAH. OKAY. SURE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. VERY APPRECIATIVE TO BE ABLE TO GET IT. YES. AND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. MOVING TO COASTAL PARKS. YOU'RE UP. SCOTT CROSS NUMBER ONE, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A NO DUNE [1. Discuss and consider approval of No Dune Protection Permit Determination for the renovation of the second and third level bathrooms to an existing residential home at 6871 State Highway (SH) 361 Unit 3, Port Aransas, TX 78373 – DPP-20250916.] [02:10:04] PROTECTION PERMIT. DETERMINATION FOR THE RENOVATION OF THE SECOND STORY. THIRD LEVEL BATHROOMS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL HOME AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL. SO MOVED. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM NUMBER TWO. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION AND NO DOOM [2. Discuss and consider approval of Request for Exemption and No Dune Protection Permit Determination for addition of a pool at 105 Beach View, Port Aransas, Nueces County, Texas, DPP-20250909.] PROTECTION PERMIT FOR AN ADDITIONAL POOL AT 105 BEACH VIEW, PORT ARANSAS, TEXAS, FOR A POOL. AND IT'S ALLOWED UNDER OUR BEACH MANAGEMENT PLAN AND TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE IN BETWEEN THE 203 50. SO MOVED. MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. UNANIMOUSLY. COMMISSIONER GONZALES IS STILL AWAY. ITEM D GRANTS. NUMBER ONE, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER. [D. GRANTS] OH. GO AHEAD. SORRY. COULD I I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE UNDER GRANT'S ITEMS ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE AND SIX. ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE AND SIX. I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION. YEAH. THEY'RE ALL. THEY'RE ALL PRETTY MUCH THE SAME. I WAS LOOKING THROUGH MY NOTES. I HAVE NO QUESTIONS ON ANY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. COMMISSIONER. ARE YOU VOTING ON THIS ONE? IT'S TO PASS ALL THE GRANTS. ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE AND SIX TOGETHER. THE GRANT ACTIONS. GRANT? SHE JUST CAME IN. YEP. YES. SO UNANIMOUS. YES. AND MOVING ON TO. OH, YES. YOU'RE GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES. SORRY. SCOTT E PUBLIC WORKS, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING AND [1. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving execution of Job Order Authorization No. NCCP-022 in the amount of $105,606.46 under Job Order Contracting (JOC) Agreement No. 20240167-4/10 (RFP 3256-23) with Grace Paving and Construction, Inc. for the Medical Examiners Parking lot extension, and related matters.] APPROVING EXECUTION OF JOB ORDER. AUTHORIZATION NUMBER IN CCP DASH 022, IN THE AMOUNT OF $105,606 UNDER JOB ORDER. THE JOB AGREEMENT WITH GRACE PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION IN THE MEDICAL EXAMINER'S PARKING LOT EXTENSION. AND I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS. THAT'S THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING THE RTA FUNDS. WE DID GET THE LETTER OF APPROVAL STATING THAT WE COULD DO THAT FROM SPOHN HOSPITAL. SO I SECOND THAT MOTION WITH MANY THANKS TO THE COUNTY JUDGE FOR STEPPING UP AND PROVIDING THE FUNDING OUT OF HER RTA FUNDS. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. AND THIS HAS HAD MULTIPLE PEOPLE WITH ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO HELP OUR MEDICAL EXAMINERS. AND THIS IS A COUNTYWIDE PROJECT. AND WE PUT A LOT OF MONEY IN THERE. AND A LOT OF US HAVE PUT ADDITIONAL FUNDS IN THIS, SO WE'RE HAPPY TO PARTICIPATE. COMMISSIONER STILL IN MIND, BUT YEAH, NO, I GOT IT ON THAT ONE. Y'ALL CAN USE YOURS FOR SOMETHING ELSE. APPRECIATE IT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. I YES. I. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM NUMBER TWO. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CHANGE. [2. Discuss and consider approval of Change Order No. 1 to the Construction Job Proposal with Alvaro Lopez Marquez d.b.a. Z and Z General Construction for construction of the County Auditor’s Office renovations project, authorizing additional work in the amount of $5,100; and related matters.] ORDER NUMBER ONE TO THE CONSTRUCTION JOB PROPOSAL WITH ALVARO LOPEZ MAKI. Z AND Z, GENERAL CONSTRUCTION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE AND THE COMMISSIONERS COURT AND COUNTY JUDGE. BUDGET OFFICE RENOVATIONS. AS PER WHAT WE DID WITH THE BUDGET WHEN WE ALLOTTED THIS. SO MOVED. AND AND I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE AN ADDITIONAL 3800 FOR PAINTING THAT I'VE BEEN MADE AWARE OF. BUT ALL OF THIS, AS PER MICHAEL, WAS CLEARED, AND IT IS WELL UNDER THE $100,000 THRESHOLD, AND WE'VE ALREADY BROUGHT IT TO COURT. SO THIS IS ALL EVERYTHING IS FINE. SO WE DON'T HAVE TO JUDGE DECISION RELATED MATTERS. I WOULD AMEND MY MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT ADDITIONAL PAINTING AS WELL. THANK YOU. MOTION AND A SECOND. WERE YOU THE SECOND COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ? YES. YES. SO IT WAS PUZZLING. IT WAS PUZZLING. SORRY. YES. THANK YOU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSE? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ITEM NUMBER THREE DISCUSSING. [3. Discuss and consider approval of Change Order No. 5 for the Nueces County Courthouse and Jail Wastewater Line Replacement project.] CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CHANGE. ORDER NUMBER FIVE FOR THE NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE AND JAIL WASTEWATER LINE REPLACEMENT PROJECT. THE CHANGE ORDER IS $36,894.29. THIS WOULD BE FUNDED BY THE PROJECT CONTINGENCY FUND. I GUESS THAT WOULD ZERO OUT THE CONTINGENCY IN THAT PROJECT. THAT'S CORRECT JUDGE. AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO USE YOUR BUILDING SUPERINTENDENT FUNDS TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE. THAT'S CORRECT. JUDGE. YES, MA'AM. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. AND I JUST HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION, TOO, TO MAKE SURE. IS THIS GOING TO GET US TO WHERE? BECAUSE WE'RE OUT OF FUNDS. IS THIS GOING TO GET US TO A STOPPING POINT? YES. WE'RE ALREADY USING CONTINGENCY AND HAVING TO PULL. WE DON'T WANT YOU TO USE YOUR BUILDING SUPERINTENDENT FUNDS BECAUSE AT THE BEGINNING [02:15:03] HERE, WE KNOW THERE'S LOTS OF THINGS GOING TO HAPPEN. SO TRY NOT TO USE ANY MORE OF THAT ON THIS KIND OF THING. WE WE KNEW WHEN WE FUNDED THIS PROJECT IT WAS NOT GOING TO BE ENOUGH, BUT WE WANTED TO USE AS MUCH AS WE COULD TILL WE COULD GET TO THE END. BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE A STOPPING POINT. YES, MA'AM. WE'RE ALMOST TO ANOTHER PROJECT. OKAY. WE'RE GOOD. TERESA? YES, MA'AM. THEY'RE STILL GOING TO BE 1600 REMAINING IN CONTINGENCY FUNDS. AND THE BUILDING MAINTENANCE FUNDS IS 32,695 THAT THEY'RE GOING TO USE. SO THERE'S A YEAH, THERE'S 606. ARE YOU USING THE OTHER? IF THERE'S MONEY LEFT IN CONTINGENCY, IT'S NOT ZERO IT OUT. YEAH. WE CAN SHARE IT OUT. OKAY I WOULD ASSUME YOU USE IT FIRST AND THEN WE USE WHATEVER. SO. YES, MA'AM. YEAH. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. YES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THANK YOU. I ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM NUMBER FOUR. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING EXECUTION OF [4. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving execution of Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement with Waste Connections Lone Star DBA Corpus Christi Disposal for Solid Waste Collection & Disposal Service (Dumpsters) County Properties Only (IFB 3249-23), extending the termination date of this contract to November 28, 2026.] AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO THE AGREEMENT OF THE WASTE CONNECTIONS LONE STAR, DBA CORPUS CHRISTI DISPOSAL FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL DUMPSTERS. FOR COUNTY PROPERTIES. THESE ARE COUNTY PROPERTIES AND THEY ARE BUDGETED IN THE DEPARTMENTS. WHOEVER USES THESE. SO THIS FEE GOES THIS PRICE GOES BACK ON THEIR BUDGET. SO I'D MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE RECOMMENDING. YES. SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ANY OTHER DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM NUMBER FIVE. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ADOPTING AN ORDER GRANTING AN EXEMPTION TO [5. Discuss and consider adopting an order granting an exemption to competitive bidding requirements pursuant to Local Govt. Code section 262.024 (a)(2); discuss and consider authorizing County Judge to execute an emergency contract with Sparkling Cleaning & Janitorial Services for custodial and janitorial services at the various Nueces County buildings and facilities subject to review and approval of the County Attorney; and related matters.] COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS PURSUANT TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 262.024 A TWO TO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY JUDGE TO EXECUTE AN EMERGENCY CONTRACT. AND IS THAT NECESSARY? I THOUGHT MICHAEL CAME TO MY OFFICE YESTERDAY AND WE HAVE THE CONTRACT NOW OR SOMETHING. IS IT STILL? THAT'S THE ONLY ONE WE GOT. IT'S STILL WHITE. HAS TO BE AN EMERGENCY CONTRACT. YES, MA'AM. YEAH. WE'RE JUST WAITING FOR THE SIGNATURE FROM SPARKLING CONTRACT. AND YOU'LL BRING IT TO ME? YES, MA'AM. BUT THIS IS ON OUR JANITORIAL SERVICES. THE. THE CONTRACT WITH THEM WAS SUPPOSED TO END 1112, I BELIEVE, OR SOMETHING. AND WELL, THEY DECIDED THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO US ANYMORE. WHY? WE DIDN'T WANT TO SERVICE OUR BUILDINGS ANYMORE IS WHY WE HAD TO DO AN EMERGENCY CONTRACT. SO I MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE RATIFICATION. IT IS TO GRANT THE EXCEPTION TO COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS AND TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY JUDGE TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT IN WHICH WE'RE VOTING ON IT TODAY. I THINK THAT'S WHERE I MESSED UP. THAT'S CORRECT. WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO DO IT BEFORE IT CAME TO COURT, AND IT WAS GOING TO BE A RATIFICATION, BUT THIS IS JUST AUTHORIZING ME TO SIGN THE CONTRACT. SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSE? THE MOTION PASSES. NOW TO OUR BRAND NEW ORDER. WELCOME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER ONE, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER 17 FOR THE [1. Discuss and Consider Approving Budget Amendment No. 17 for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 and all related matters.] FISCAL YEAR 24 AND 25 AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. THIS IS. DO YOU WANT TO DO THIS ONE? I KNOW IT'S I UNDERSTAND YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THIS. SO, YES. MY LAST HURRAH. SO THIS ITEM IS THE LAST BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2425. AND ALSO ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ON FRIDAY WILL STOP RECEIVING INVOICES FOR 2425. SO WE ARE CLOSING THE BOOKS EARLIER THAN LAST YEAR SO WE CAN GET OUR AUDIT DONE IN PLENTY OF TIME. SO ALL THE DEPARTMENTS KNOW THAT YOU WILL STOP RECEIVING INVOICES TO CLOSE OUT, BECAUSE I KNOW THIS USUALLY WENT TO DECEMBER AND THEN IT GOT EXTENDED. ANY DEPARTMENT HEADS IF YOU ARE PAYING ATTENTION, LISTENING. WHAT IS THAT DATE AGAIN? FRIDAY, NOVEMBER THE 7TH. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER THE 7TH. THAT YOU ARE NO LONGER. IF YOU HAVE ANY OUTSTANDING INVOICES, THEY NEED TO COME IN RIGHT AWAY BECAUSE OTHERWISE THEY'LL BE CHARGED TO YOUR FISCAL YEAR 26 BUDGET. YES. AND ALL OF THIS YOU KNOW, IN ALL FAIRNESS TO AND SO OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS KNOW THIS CREATES A PROBLEM DOWN THE ROAD WITH CLOSING OUT AND DOING OUR AUDIT AND EVERYTHING. AND SINCE WE HAD SIX EXTENSIONS THIS PAST TIME ON DOING THESE, I HATE TO ANNOUNCE THAT WIDELY, BUT WE DID, AND WE CANNOT DO IT AGAIN THIS YEAR. OUR. WE HAVE TO CLOSE OUT. WE HAVE TO DO IT CORRECT AND HAS TO BE ON TIME THIS YEAR. WE CAN'T DO ANY EXTENSIONS. WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE A PRACTICE OF THAT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. SO YES, I MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. SEE? THIS WASN'T VERY BAD AT ALL, WAS IT, ELIAS? THIS WEEK. WAIT TO COME. [02:20:04] MICHAEL. YOU'RE HERE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO GIVE US AN UPDATE ON THAT PREVIOUS ITEM BEFORE WE GO INTO EXECUTIVE? YES, YES. THE COURT HAD REQUESTED TO KNOW WHICH RFPS MIGHT BE COMING UP ON DECEMBER 10TH. WE HAVE ONE FOR THE NUECES COUNTY JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTER. FOOD SERVICE MANAGEMENT. WE HAVE ONE FOR THE JCI PLANNED MAINTENANCE SERVICE AGREEMENT. WE HAVE ONE FOR THE COLONIAL FUND CONSTRUCTION APPLICATION ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, AND ONE FOR THE ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR COLONIAL FUND CONSTRUCTION. THIS IS WHAT ITEM THIS WAS. WENT BACK TO THE BOARD OF THE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASING. WE WANTED TO SEE WHAT. I'M SORRY, WHAT BIDS WE HAD OUT. WHAT WOULD MAYBE BE COMING UP? THESE ARE ONES THAT I'LL BE BRINGING TO YOU ALL IN DECEMBER. WHAT ARE THEY AGAIN? IT'S THE JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTER, FOOD SERVICE MANAGEMENT, THE JCI PLANNED MAINTENANCE SERVICE AGREEMENT. WHICH PLAN? WHAT IS THAT ONE? THAT'S. THAT'S A PUBLIC WORKS ITEM. OKAY. AND THEN WE HAVE TWO GRANT RELATED ITEMS THAT ARE COLONIA FUND CONSTRUCTION APPLICATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES. AND THEN THE ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THOSE COLONIA FUND CONSTRUCTION PROJECT AS WELL. THIS WAS YOUR REQUEST COMMISSIONER. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT ON THIS ONE? IT'S ON THE BIDS THAT WE HAVE. OUTSTANDING. THERE'S NOTHING ON THERE THAT WOULD. SO WE CAN BRING THAT BACK LATER AND WE'LL. AND JUST I THINK AS A MATTER OF HOW THIS HAS HAPPENED, WHEN WE USED TO HAVE SUGGESTIONS FROM THE COURT. I'M ALWAYS HAPPY TO RECEIVE THOSE. SO WHEN WE BRING ANY RFP UP FOR YOU IN THE FUTURE, EVEN IF I'VE EVEN IF WE'VE AGREED ON WHO THE THREE ARE AND YOU ALL DECIDE YOU WANT A DIFFERENT SETUP, JUST MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE'LL MAKE THOSE CHANGES. PERFECT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO WE ARE NOW READY TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE AND UNLESS I'VE MISSED SOMETHING. ANYBODY WANTS TO STOP ME BEFORE WE GO. I THINK WE'RE GOOD TO GO. EXECUTIVE SESSION, PUBLIC NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT MAY ELECT TO GO [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, 551.089, 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.] INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION ANYTIME DURING THE MEETING TO DISCUSS MATTERS LISTED ANYWHERE ON THE AGENDA WHEN AUTHORIZED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, CHAPTER FIVE FIVE, ONE OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. TO THE EXTENT THERE'S 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 THE 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 CODE, SECTIONS 551.071551.072551.073551.074551.0745551.076551.086551.087551.089. THE 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 BODY, 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 THE ITEMS DISCUSSED IN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. ITEM A TODAY IS CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND OUTSIDE COUNSEL ON LEGAL MATTERS RELATED TO THE ENGAGEMENT WITH ROYSTON RASOR FOR REPRESENTATION OF OFFICE OF DISTRICT ATTORNEY REGARDING SUBPOENA AND DEPOSITIONS ON WRITTEN REQUEST, AND JAVIER GARCIA ET AL. THE KIA AMERICA, INC. NUMBER 2.25232, AND THE US DISTRICT COURT, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AND RELATED MATTERS, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071 DISCUSS, CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION IN REGULAR SESSION IF NEEDED. ITEM B CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND OUTSIDE COUNSEL REGARDING LEGAL MATTERS RELATED TO THE MAY 19TH, 2025 CLAIM BY DLF TO INC, DLF TEXAS AND RELATED MATTERS. TEXAS GOVERNMENT 071 DISCUSS, CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION IN REGULAR SESSION IF NEEDED. ITEM C CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON LEGAL MATTERS RELATED TO CAUSE NUMBER (202) 561-3161. GILBERTO ORTIZ VERSUS NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS AND ABM TEXAS GENERAL SERVICES, [02:25:02] INC AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071. DISCUSS, CONSIDER, AND TAKE ACTION IN REGULAR SESSION IF NECESSARY. ITEM D CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY REGARDING POTENTIAL TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER SEVEN IN THE LONDON AREA AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. TAKE ACTION IN OPEN SESSION IF NECESSARY. GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071. ITEM E CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON MATTERS RELATED TO HSA BANK CONTRACT AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. TAKE ACTION IN OPEN SESSION IF NECESSARY. TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071 AS WELL. ITEM F DELIBERATE IN CLOSED SESSION REGARDING THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, LEASE OR VALUE OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR POTENTIAL ACQUISITION OR FUTURE SALE AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.072 AND TAKE ACTION IN OPEN SESSION IF NECESSARY. IT IS 1131 AND WE ARE RECESSING FOR EXECUTIVE. OKAY, WE ARE RECORDING AND WE ARE BACK FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION. IT IS 150 AND I WILL CALL THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER. MOVING TO THE EXECUTIVE ITEMS ON FOR A I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ENGAGEMENT WITH ROYSTON RASOR FOR REPRESENTATION OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON JAVIER GARCIA ET AL. VERSUS KIA AMERICA, INC.. WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SORRY. SECOND. I THINK COMMISSIONER CHESNEY ALREADY DID. SORRY. YEAH, I COULDN'T HEAR IT EITHER. SORRY. AND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM B I GUESS I SHOULD READ THESE AGAIN. CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND OUTSIDE COUNSEL REGARDING LEGAL MATTERS RELATED TO THE MAY 2025 CLAIM BY DLF AND COMMISSIONER. I BELIEVE YOU HAVE A MOTION FOR THIS. YES, YOUR HONOR, I HAVE A MOTION TO MAKE. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT WITH DLF TWO INCORPORATED FOR SETTLEMENT OF THE MAY 19TH, 2025 CLAIM IN THE AMOUNT OF $78,130.97, AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY JUDGE TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY SETTLEMENT DOCUMENTS AND DIRECT THE AUDITOR AND CLERK TO EXPEDITE THE RELEASE AND PAYMENT. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM C CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON LEGAL MATTERS RELATED TO GILBERTO ORTIZ VERSUS NUECES COUNTY AND ABM. AND I BELIEVE, COMMISSIONER MARTINEZ. YOU HAVE A MOTION. YES, MA'AM. MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT WITH CHAVEZ OVERGROWN AND PERALEZ, LLP, RELATING TO CAUSE NUMBER (202) 561-3161. GILBERTO ORTIZ VERSUS NUECES COUNTY AND ABM TEXAS GENERAL SERVICE INCORPORATED IN THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NUMBER ONE, NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS. SECOND, THE MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. DID YOU GET THAT ONE? SORRY. I KNOW YOU CAME IN. I THINK SHE HAS IT SO GOOD. I AM D CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY REGARDING THE POTENTIAL TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE TURNS SEVEN IN THE LONDON AREA. COMMISSIONER. CHESNEY. JUDGE. A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT, CONTINGENT ON ADDITIONS AND REDRAWING OF THE MAP TO EXCLUDE EXISTING VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION FROM TOWERS. NUMBER SEVEN THAT MEETS THE INTENT OF THE BUSINESS POINTS, AND THAT MEETS THE INTENT OF THE BUSINESS POINTS PREVIOUSLY VOTED ON BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT. WE HAVE A MOTION. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM E CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. I APOLOGIZE. WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON THERE? I'M SO SORRY. SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALSO GIVEN THE AUTHORIZATION TO THE COUNTY JUDGE TO SIGN THE FINAL CONTRACT WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL MEETINGS. OKAY. CAN I AMEND THAT? AMEND YOUR MOTION. I THINK YOU SECONDED IT. I DID. OKAY. OKAY. I'LL ACCEPT THE SECOND WITH THE AMENDMENTS NOW. ARE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. YES. ITEM E. CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON MATTERS RELATED TO HSA BANK CONTRACT. AND, COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE A MOTION ON THIS ONE. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE 2025 2026 AGREEMENT WITH HHS AS A BANK. [02:30:05] I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY AS WELL. I BELIEVE THAT IS THE END OF OUR ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION FOR TODAY. EVERYTHING. DO WE HAVE ANY ADJOURNMENTS IN MEMORY? AND I DO BELIEVE I WAS TOLD WE HAVE A COUPLE. [ Adjournment in Memory (upon request)] YES. GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER, IF YOU'RE READY. DO YOU HAVE? YES, MA'AM. I HAVE TWO THE FIRST ONE IS IN MEMORY OF JOHN STRICKLAND LUBY JUNIOR. JOHN DIED PEACEFULLY ON OCTOBER 26TH, 2025, SURROUNDED BY FAMILY AND FRIENDS. HE WAS BORN AND GREW UP. HE WAS BORN IN 1967 AND GREW UP IN CORPUS CHRISTI. GRADUATED FROM TULOSO MIDWAY HIGH SCHOOL, CLASS OF 85. WENT ON TO ATTEND THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS, WHERE HE WAS A PROUD MEMBER OF THE SIGMA SIGMA NU FRATERNITY AND THE SILVER SPURS. HE LATER FINISHED HIS ACCOUNTING DEGREE AT CORPUS CHRISTI UNIVERSITY, BUILDING A CAREER ROOTED IN HARD WORK, LOYALTY, AND DEDICATION. HE MARRIED THE LOVE OF HIS LIFE, BRIDGET, AND TOGETHER THEY BUILT A FAMILY FILLED WITH LOVE, LOVE, LAUGHTER AND COUNTLESS MEMORIES. HE WAS A PROUD DAD TO BROOKE AND JOHNNY, AND THE MOST ADORING PAPA JOHN TO HIS GRANDSON BARRETT, AND ONE ON THE WAY WHO BROUGHT HIM ENDLESS JOY. HE WAS WELCOMED INTO HEAVEN BY HIS PARENTS, JOHN AND RUBY, ALONG WITH HIS GRANDPARENTS, JAMES AND MAYBELLE LUBY. HE IS SURVIVED BY HIS SISTERS, DEBBIE LUBY AND MAYBACK MCCLOSKEY AND HIS BROTHER BARRY PETERSON, ALONG WITH MANY EXTENDED FAMILY MEMBERS AND LIFELONG FRIENDS WHO ARE LIKE FAMILY TO HIM. OUR CONDOLENCES TO JOHN AND THE FAMILY. JUDGE. SECOND ONE IS A YOUNG GENTLEMAN THAT IS UNFORTUNATELY NOT SO YOUNG ANYMORE, BUT GENTLEMAN THAT I GREW UP WITH A BROTHER OF JUDGE MICHAEL MCCAULEY. HIS NAME IS WILLIAM JAMES MCCAULEY. THE SECOND, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS BILL, PASSED AWAY ON FRIDAY, OCTOBER 31ST AFTER A COURAGEOUS BATTLE WITH CANCER. HE WAS BORN JUNE 27TH, 1963, TO CHARLES AND CLAIRE MCCAULEY. HE WAS A LIFELONG RESIDENT OF CORPUS CHRISTI, GRADUATED FROM RAY HIGH SCHOOL ALONG WITH ME IN 1981. ATTENDED THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS, AUSTIN, WHERE HE WAS A PROUD MEMBER OF THE KAPPA SIGMA FRATERNITY. HE HAD AN ABUNDANCE OF LIFELONG FRIENDS, WITH MANY FROM HIS UT DAYS, AND WHO HAVE REMAINED LOYAL AND LOVING FRIENDS TO THE END. DURING THE 1990S, BILL LIVED IN HOUSTON, WHERE HE CHERISHED HIS INVOLVEMENT WITH THE VELVET ELVIS. HE LATER MOVED BACK TO CORPUS CHRISTI AND OPENED AND OPERATED THE ICONIC DRAGON LOUNGE. 2001 BILL TRANSITIONED INTO THE OIL AND GAS BUSINESS AND BECAME A LANDMAN, WHERE HE EXCELLED FOR THE PAST 25 YEARS. HE WAS A PEOPLE PERSON AND HAD THE GIFT OF GAB AND AN ANIMATED STORYTELLING OF COUNTLESS TALES FROM YEARS PAST. HE WAS ALWAYS SEEN WITH A WARM SMILE ON HIS FACE, ALONG WITH AN OUTFIT AS FESTIVE AND VIBRANT AS HIS SENSE OF HUMOR. AN OUTDOORSMAN AT HEART, HE LOVED EVERY HUNTING TRIP, WHETHER IT WAS WITH HIS BUDDIES OR HIS CHILDREN, BUT NOTHING COMPARED TO THOSE NIGHTS SPENT AT HOME WITH HIS KIDS. CARDS OR POOL CUES IN HANDS, THE CHIMNEY A CRACKLING AND A COLD LIBATION IN HAND. WILD BILL WAS ALWAYS THE LIFE OF THE PARTY, AND HIS RADIANT SPIRIT WILL BE GREATLY MISSED. HE IS SURVIVED BY HIS MOTHER, CLAIRE MCCAULEY. BROTHERS PATRICK AND MICHAEL, AND HIS BEAUTIFUL CHILDREN WILLIAM, JAMES AND CLARA. DAVY MCCAULEY, AS WELL AS NUMEROUS COUSINS. THE OUTPOURING OF LOVE, SUPPORT AND PRAYERS HAS BEEN AMAZING. GOD HAS BLESSED US WITH FAITH IN HIM AND HIS FRIENDS, WHO HAVE GIVEN US THE STRENGTH TO MAKE IT THROUGH THESE TERRIBLE DAYS, AND WHO ARE ALSO THERE FOR BILL DURING HIS EXCRUCIATING HEALTH CHALLENGES. TO KNOW JUST HOW SPECIAL BILL IS TO HIS AS MANY FRIENDS HAS BEEN MOST HEARTWARMING. HE TOUCHED MANY LIVES AND WILL BE DEEPLY MISSED BY ALL THOSE WHO WERE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO KNOW HIM. OUR CONDOLENCES TO THE MCAULEY FAMILY ON THE LOSS OF BILL MCAULEY. YES. COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ, YOU HAD ONE AS WELL. ON VICTORIA OLVERA. ORTEGA. VICTORIA ORTEGA PASSED AWAY PEACEFULLY IN CORPUS CHRISTI ON OCTOBER 27TH, 2025, SURROUNDED BY THE LOVE OF HER FAMILY. SHE WAS BORN IN SAN JUAN DE LLANOS, MEXICO, THIS NOVEMBER. SHE WOULD HAVE TURNED 100 YEARS OLD. WOW. HER PERSONAL LIFE WAS RICH WITH LOVE AND JOY, ESPECIALLY IN HER CHERISHED ROLE AS THE MOTHER OF HER FAMILY. SHE WILL BE REMEMBERED BY HER FAMILY FOR THE SUPPORT AND LOVE SHE GAVE TO HER FAMILY MEMBERS. VICTORIA IS SURVIVED BY HER BROTHER, JOSE LUIS CORTEZ MENDOZA. CHILDREN HILARIO, ELOISA, SUSANA, ANITA, GRACIELA, LIMAS, OSCAR AND FRED. VIRGIE. ALSO, SHE WAS CHERISHED BY NUMEROUS GRANDCHILDREN, GREAT GRANDCHILDREN, GREAT GREAT GRANDCHILDREN, NIECES, NEPHEWS AND ALL WHO WERE BLESSED BY HER LOVE AND KINDNESS. [02:35:03] SHE WAS A LOVING MOTHER, GRANDMOTHER, GREAT GRANDMOTHER, AUNT AND FRIEND REMEMBERED FOR HER UNWAVERING KINDNESS, HER SELFLESS DEDICATION TO HER FAMILY AS WE AS WE SAY FAREWELL. WE CELEBRATED LIFE AND LIVED TO THE FULLEST, A LIFE RICH IN LOVE, FAITH AND GENEROSITY. VICTORIA'S INFLUENCE WILL FOREVER BE FELT, AND HER MEMORY WILL BE TREASURED IN THE HEARTS OF HER FAMILY AND ALL WHO LOVED HER. VISITATION WILL BE HELD FROM 11 A.M. TO 12 TO 2 P.M. ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6TH, 2025, AT CORPUS CHRISTI FUNERAL HOME WITH A ROSARY AT 11:30 A.M.. FUNERAL MASS WILL BE AT 1 P.M. ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6TH, 2026 AT SAINT THOMAS MORE CATHOLIC CHURCH. INTERMENT WILL BE HELD AT ROSE HILL MEMORIAL PARK CEMETERY. CONDOLENCES AND PRAYERS TO THE ORTEGA FAMILY, AND I KNOW THAT SHE WILL BE MISSED BY ALL THE KNEW HER. THAT'S IT? ABSOLUTELY. ARE THERE ANY OTHERS ON THIS SIDE? YES, YES. GO AHEAD. THIS ONE. YOU JUST HAD THE ONE, RIGHT? COMMISSIONER. SORRY. JUST THE ONE. KING C. YES. ANNOUNCE THE PASSING OF. DILLON. MATTHEW OLIVAREZ WHO PASSED AWAY ON OCTOBER 6TH, 2025, AT THE AGE OF 22. MY CONDOLENCES GO TO HIS FAMILY, THE OLIVAREZ AND RICHTER RICHTER FAMILIES ON HIS PASSING. THANK YOU. ABSOLUTELY. IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE ARE ANY OTHERS, BUT OUR SINCERE CONDOLENCES GO OUT TO THE FAMILY. THE MCAULEY FAMILY THE ORTEGA FAMILY AND THE OLIVAREZ FAMILIES. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER BUSINESS TODAY, THEN IT IS 201. AND I WOULD SAY THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. YOU. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.