[00:00:01]
          >>> OKAY, AT THIS TIME I WILL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AND 
          [1. CALL TO ORDER]
          [A. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States of America and Texas Flags.]
ASK THAT YOU PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALIENS TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE TEXAS FLAG. 
          I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG IN UNITED STATES STATES OF AMERICA, TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE AND HONOR AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. 
          >> HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO TEXAS, ONE STATE, ONE, AND INDIV INDIVISIBLE. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  SO I HOPE WE CAN DO GOOD WORK HERE EFFICIENTLY. I HAVE A HARD STOP WITH THE CORE OF ENGINEERS AT 4:00. IF THE MEETING TAKES LONGER, COMMISSIONERS, I NEED 30 MINUTES. 
          A HARD STOP AND WE WILL RECESS FOR 30 MINUTES. 
          OKAY, AT THIS TIME, LET ME NOTE FOR THE CLERK IT IS 1:30 P.M. 
          [B. County Judge will call roll, note date, time, and location of meeting, and certify a quorum is present.]
AND I DO CERTIFY THAT ALL COMMISSIONERS ARE HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER JOHN MAREZ IS ON VIRTUALLY AND EVERYBODY ELSE IS IN THE ROOM. WE ARE ON THIRD FLOOR OF THE NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE IN COMMISSIONER COURT ROOM AT 901 NORTH LEOPARD AND THE DATE IS AUGUST 30, 2021. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO ASK TYNER. BE LINDA HAS IT FORWARD. 
          IF YOU WILL BRING FORTH THE PUBLIC COMMENT ROSTER. 
          I SEE NONELINE AND I SEE NONE IN PERSON. 
          I WILL ASK THOSE ONLINE IF DO YOU NEED TO MAKE PUBLIC COM COMMENT, PLEASE DO SO BY RAISING YOUR HAND ON THE VIRTUAL SCREEN. REMOVE ON TO REGULAR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER A 1 BUT FORGIVE ME, I CANNOT DO THAT AND I NEED TO 
          [2.  Discuss SB6/HB12 related to bail bond reform, including any potential county budget impacts; Discuss and consider supporting amendments to SB6/HB12 that would reduce county financial burden.]
MOVE ON TO ITEM A-2 BECAUSE JOINED BY PATRICIA SHIPTON AND SHE IS GOING TO TALK TO US ABOUT SENATE BILL 6 AND H B 12 RELATING TO BOND REFORM AND ANY POTENTIAL COUNTY BUDGET IMPACTS AND OF COURSE AN ACTION ITEM THERE, COMMISSIONERS TO SUPPORT ANY AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD ALLOW HER TO -- AND THE LEGISLATIVE TEAM TO ISSUE CARDS IN SUPPORT OF SB 6 AND H B 12 WITH THE AMENDMENTS THAT COULD REDUCE OUR FINANCIAL BURDEN. 
          A PRETTY SERIOUS MATTER AND OUR EXPERT IS PATRICIA SHIPTON, MEMBER OF ARE LEGISLATIVE PEOPLE. 
          >> I AM HOPE THAT PROVIDE AN UPDATE. 
          ONCE WE GOT A QUORUM HAD THE LEGISLATURE THIS BILL WAS MOVING QUICKLY. THIS BILL A YOU WILL THOUGH IT HAD A LONG HEARING AND LONG DEBATE ON THE HOUSE FLOOR, ALL OF THESE VOTES, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS, HAVE GONE DOWN STRICTLY PARTY LINES AND IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT WE FIND OURSELVES IN THIS STATE, BUT I JUST HAVE TO SAY IT AS CANDIDLY AS WE CAN, THESE SPECIAL SESSIONS HAVE SEEN TO ME IN MY 40 YEARS' EXPERIENCE NOT ABOUT POLICY BUT POLITICS AND THAT'S WHERE WE ENDED UP AND WHERE THIS BILL IN ITSELF HAS FALLEN DOWN THE PARTY LINES. THE BILL IS,  AGAIN, ONE THOSE BILLS THAT HAVE BEEN ATTACHED AND HIGHLY EMOTIONAL SENTIMENT TO IT. IT HAS BEEN RENAMED THE DAMON ALLEN ACT AFTER A DPS OFFICER WHO WAS TRAGICALLY STOPPED BY A DEFENDANT WHO HAD BEEN RELEASED ON BAIL AND DESPITE BEING A REPEAT OFFENDER WITH A VIOLENT PAST. 
          HE WAS OUT ON BAIL AND THIS TRAGEDY OCCURRED. 
          AND NOT AN UNCOMMON SITUATION, BUT IT HAS PROMPTED THE LEGISLATURE TO REACT IN THIS WAY AND THIS BILL IS -- A CONSTITUTIONAL AMOUNT WHICH I WILL FURTHER EXPOUND UPON IN A MINUTE AND A BILL THAT CHANGES THE STRUCTURE OF HOW BAIL IS -- WHAT OFFENSES CAN BE ELIGIBLE FOR BAIL AND A TOOL -- A NEW TOOL FOR JUDGES AND MAGISTRATES TO USE TO CHECK CRIMINAL BACK GROUND AND THEN, AGAIN, AS THE JUDGE MENTIONED, THE INADVERTENT COST -- THE COST THAT NOBODY TALKED ABOUT A LOT IS THAT AS YOU WERE CHANGING THE BAIL SYSTEM, OF COURSE, YOU ARE GOING TO PERHAPS HAVE DEFENDANTS SITTING IN JAIL, ADDED COSTS AND HOW LONG IT TAKES TO PROCESS THOSE DEFENDANTS, ALL OF THAT. THAT,  WHILE RAISEDED BY MEMBERS OF THE FLOOR DID NOT RESONATE AS FAR AS VOTING IN SOLUTIONS TO THAT. THE MOST BRILLIANT SOLUTION I THINK THAT THE CONFERENCE OF URBAN COUNTIES GOT AND CHRIS TURNER OF TARRANT COUNTY TO OFFER WAS AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED COUNTIES TO BACK OUT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE 
          [00:05:01]
COST OWL OF THE NEW REVENUE RATE. 
          AND I THOUGHT WAS A VERY ELOQUENT SOLUTION TO THIS. 
          IT FAILED ON A PARTY LINE VOTE WITH TWO REPUBLICANS THAT VOTED WITH THE DEMOCRATS SO IT FAILED ON A 74-42 VOTE. 
          THE BILL PASSED,  SECOND READING. 
          THE HOUSE GOES BACK INTO SESSION TODAY. 
          AT 2:00, I EXPECT IT TO PASS EASILY AND BE HEADED OVER TO THE SENATE. I DO NOT THINK -- THIS IS A SENATE BILL OVER IN THE HOUSE, AS YOU KNOW. 
          I DO NOT THINK THERE IS ENOUGH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE VERSION TO NECESSITATE A CONFERENCE COMMITTEE. I HAVE NOT HEARD THAT MYSELF. 
          IF THAT IS THE CASE THIS IS ON A FAST TRACK FORWARD. 
          THE COMPANION CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT WHICH AS YOU KNOW WE ARE ALL GUARANTEED A RIGHT TO OUR LIBERTIES UNDER THE CONSTITUTION AND THE BAIL IS SET FORTH IN THE CONSTITUTION AS WELL OR THE RATE TO BAIL. THIS WILL -- THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT WILL TAKE IT TO THE VOTERS AND LIMITING THE ABILITY TO SEEK BAIL FOR CERTAIN CRIMINAL OFFENSES, VIOLENT OFFENSES, SERIOUS SEX OFFENSES, REPEATED HUMAN TRAFFICKING OFFENSES. THAT CONSTITUTIONAL AMOUNT -- AS I MENTIONED EARLIER THE VOTES ARE ALONG STRICT PARTY LINES. THAT CONSTITUTIONAL AMOUNT THAT NEEDS A TWO-THIRDS VOTE IN THE HOUSE FAILED TO GET A TWO-THIRST THIRD VOTE. I WAS HOPEFUL THAT THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND THE ENABLING LEGISLATION WAS LINKED. THESE HAVE BEEN SEVERED. 
          EVEN IF THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMOUNT DOES NOT PASS. 
          I DO NOT THINK IT WILL GET 100 VOTES THE ENABLING LEGISLATION MOVES FORWARD. THEY PROVIDED WITH YOU A BR BREAKDOWN OF ESTIMATED COST AND I CAN ONLY SURMISE THAT THE NUMBERS ARE ON POINT. THEY HAVE EXPERIENCE OF THAT. 
          Y'ALL WILL HAVE TO PUSH THE NUMBERS THERE. 
          I VISITED THE CAC FOLKS AND SO THAT IS BRENDA -- BELINDA, RATHER, AND BELINDA AND I WILL HAVE TO COORDINATE THIS. 
          I KNOW THERE WAS SOME CONCESSION FOR INDIGENT DEFENSE COST. I HAVE YET TO SEE THE EXACT LANGUAGE ON THAT. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE CUC AND OTHERS NEGOTIATED IN THE BILL DRAFTING. 
          PRIOR TO THE AMENDMENT PHASE ON THE FLOOR, I HAVEN'T SEEN THE EXACT LANGUAGE, BUT BELINDA AND I WILL FOLLOW UP AND TRY TO GET THAT EXACT LANGUAGE SO WE KNOW HOW THAT IMPACTS THE COUNTY. 
          SO, JUDGE, THAT IS KIND OF MY BAIL SYNOPSIS FOR YOU ALL TODAY. I HAVE A QUICK TWIA UPDATE. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COURT AND AUDIENCE UNDERSTANDS THE REASON WE BROUGHT THIS FORWARD WAS NOT TO HAVE THE POLITICAL DISC DISCOURSE, WAS TO UNDERSTAND THIS COULD BE IMPACTFUL TO OUR COUNTY AND MANY OTHER COUNTIES IN THE TERMS OF MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. 
          WHETHER WE STAND ON ONE SIDE OR ANOTHER, WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE BUDGETARY CONCERNS. IF IT PASSES, IT COULD BE A $3 MILLION TO $4 MILLION IMPACT FOR OUR COUNTY, AND WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT WILL MAKE A MAJOR DENT. 
          WE WOULD HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT. 
          >> AND I DIDN'T MEAN TO MAKE THIS A POLITICAL DISCUSSION. 
          I JUST MEANT TO KIND OF CHARACTERIZE FOR YOU ALL -- 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  NO, I UNDERSTAND. 
          >> OPERATING IN. I AGREE. 
          AND I THINK, JUDGE, WHEN YOU ALERTED US TO THIS BILL AND THE KIND OF NEGATIVE IMPACT AND WE IMMEDIATELY CONTACTED OUR DELEGATION AND STARTED COORDINATING WITH THE ASSOCIATIONS AND THEIR WORK BECAUSE THEY WERE REALLY DOING THE FRONT LINE WORKS ON NEGOTIATING AMENDMENTS. 
          SO IT IS -- IT IS JUST A STRANGE SESSION, JUDGE, HONESTLY AND COMMISSIONERS AND THINGS ARE MOVING QUICKLY. 
          SO I WOULD ANTICIPATE SHORT OF THE LITTLE BIT OF RELIEF THAT WE MAY HAVE GOTTEN ON INDIGENT DEFENSE AND HOW THAT IMPACTS THE COURT, I DON'T SEE A LOT OF -- A LOT TO ALLEVIATE THE CONCERNS ABOUT COST TO THE COURT. 
          POTENTIAL COST TO THE COURT. >> NO MISDEMEANORS EITHER, 
          PATRICIA? >> NO. 
          UNLESS IT LINKS -- >>JUDGE CANALES:  UNLESS IT LINKS BACK TO INDIGENT. UNDERSTOOD. 
          WE WILL OPEN IT UP TO TWIA AND ANY DISCUSSIONS OR COMMENTS 
          THAT THE COURT MAY HAVE. >>JUDGE CANALES:  EXCUSE ME ONE 
          SECOND, PATRICIA. >> ARE WE NOTICED FOR TWIA? 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  WE MIGHT -- WE ARE NOT NOTICED FOR TWIA. 
          >> YOU ARE RIGHT, I AM SORRY. >> SHE CAN DO PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          PUBLIC COMMENT? SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  I AM HAPPY TO SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND 
          [00:10:02]
YOU CAN GIVE US SOME INFO ON THAT. 
          >> WE JUST CAN'T UPDATE IT. >> AN UPDATE AND A HEARING -- 
          IT IS NOT ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. >>JUDGE CANALES:  OKAY. 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT. 
          >> CAN BY BACK TO THE BAIL THING. 
          DO YOU NEED ANYTHING? >>JUDGE CANALES:  GO BACK TO BAIL. ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS OF SENATE BILL 6 AND COMPANION, HOUSE BILL 12 FROM PATRICIA? WELL, WE ARE GO TO NOTE IT AS A POTENTIAL BUDGET CHALLENGE THAT MIGHT BECOME A REAL. A REAL SERIOUS ONE. 
          WE WAIT TO HEAR FROM YOU GUYS. WE MEET AGAIN ON SEPTEMBER 8. 
          MAYBE WE WILL GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE WE ARE. 
          >> YES. WE WILL CONTINUE TO CHECK WITH THE COUNTY ASSOCIATION. BECAUSE IF THERE IS A CA CAVITYWIDE EFFORT TO SOMEHOW CHALLENGE OR QUESTION, ESPECIALLY THE WHOLE IDEA OF BACKING OUT THOSE CRIMINAL JUSTICE COST FROM YOUR NEW REVENUE RATE. 
          THAT JUST MAKES INFINITE SENSE TO ME AND JUST NOT AN APPETITE FOR IT. IT WAS MOVING ALONG BY INSIDER KNOWLEDGE -- CHECKING. IT HAD BEEN MOVING ALONG IN NEGOTIATIONS AND WOULD HAVE BEEN OFFERED AS A FLOOR AMENDMENT AND CHECK WITH THE DIFFERENT LEGISLATURES WHO HAVE THE PURSUE OVER PROPERTY TAX AND WAY AND MEANS COMMITTEE AND PROPERTY EXPERTS AND IT GOT STALLED OUT THERE. 
          I THINK IT WAS ON A FAIRLY GOOD TRACK RECORD. 
          WE WERE SO HOPEFUL WE WOULD GET IT ON THE HOUSE FLOOR AND WORKING IT, AND THEN THE PROPERTY TAX POLICY FOLKS AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE FOLKS CAME TO LOGGERHEADS. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  THERE IS A LEGISLATIVE CONFERENCE THIS WEEK IN AUSTIN, I BELIEVE, SEPTEMBER 1-3. 
          AND I THINK I MIGHT BE THERE ON THE 3. 
          I KNOW WEDNESDAY I CAN'T. AND THURSDAY -- I MIGHT BE THERE THURSDAY. WE WILL SEE WHAT WE CAN DO BUT WE ARE IN CONTACT WITH YOU GUYS AND OUR ASSOCIATION AND THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE WITH THE COURT WHAT IS GOING ON. 
          AND IT REALLY UNDERSCORES AND, I MEAN, THE NEED TO MAKE CERTAIN EVEN IF YOU ARE NOT HAVING YOUR AGENDA IN MOTION, LOOK WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY VOICE YOUR COUNTY'S CONCERN. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL. 
          WITH COVID-19, I CANNOT SPEND ALL DAY LONG WORKING ON BAIL REFORM. AND THAT'S WHY IT IS CRITICAL YOU GUYS ARE AT THE FOREFRONT AND I WANT TO THANK YOU AND JOEL, IN PARTICULAR, FOR KEEPING ME UPDATED AND WORKING 
          WITH ADAM AND WENDY JOHNSON. >> WE ARE HAPPY TO DO SO, JU JUDGE. IF Y'ALL NEED ANYTHING, DON'T 
          HESITATE TO CALL. >>JUDGE CANALES:  OKAY. 
          APPRECIATE IT. WE WILL MOVE ON AND CALL -- IF THERE IS NOTHING ELSE PATRICIA, WE KNOW YOU NEED TO GET ON ANOTHER CALL. THANK YOU. 
          >> YES, MA'AM, THANK YOU. >> TWO PARTS, JUDGE. 
          ARE YOU DOING NO ACTION ON THE SECOND? 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  I DON'T FEEL LIKE THERE IS ANYTHING TO JUMP ON TO, OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW -- IF I HAD SOMETHING IN FRONT OF ME, YOU KNOW, BUT I DON'T -- -- I DON'T FEEL LIKE I HAVE AN AMENDMENT TO, YOU KNOW, TO REALLY WORK FROM. 
          >> THAT IS TRUE,  JUDGE. THERE WAS A LOT -- A LOT OF CHANGE GOING ON EVEN FRIDAY WHEN WE WERE POSTING THIS. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  YEAH, IT'S TRICKY. 
          I THINK THAT -- WITH THE -- THE ONLY THING I WOULD MAYBE LIKE TO HAVE THE COURT DO IS CERTAINLY -- IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO, YOU KNOW, LET -- ALLOW OUR LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION TO, YOU KNOW, TO CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE FISCAL IMPACT OF SB 6. AND PARTICULARLY THIS INDIGENT DEFENSE COMPONENT. I JUST DON'T HAVE ANYTHING WE CAN REALLY VOTE ON IN FRONT OF ME NOW. 
          >> I DON'T THINK THERE IS TODAY. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  JENNY, I WILL JUST HAVE TO HOLD BUT THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP. OKAY, AT THIS TIME I AM GOING TO MOVE FORWARD AND DISCUSS THE POTENTIAL LEGAL ISSUES -- ITEM 
          [3. EXECUTIVE SESSION: PUBLIC NOTICE is given that the Commissioners Court may elect to go into an Executive Session anytime during the meeting to discuss matters listed anywhere on the Agenda, when authorized by the provisions of the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code. To the extent there has been a past practice of distinguishing items for public deliberation and those for executive session, the public is advised that the Court is departing from that practice, and reserves the right to discuss any listed agenda items in executive session when authorized by law to do so. In the event the Commissioners Court elects to go into Executive Session regarding an agenda item, the section or sections of the Open Meetings Act authorizing the Executive Session will be publicly announced by the presiding officer. In accordance with the authority of the Government Code, Vernon’s Texas Codes, Sections 551.071, 551.072, 551.073, 551.074, 551.0745, 551.076, 551.086, 551.087, the Commissioners Court will hold an Executive Session to consult with attorney(s) including matters related to litigation; deliberate regarding real property, prospective gift(s), personnel matters, including termination, county advisory bodies, security devices, and/or economic development negotiations and other matters that may be discussed in an Executive Session. Upon completion of the Executive Session, the Commissioners Court may in an open session take such action as appropriate on items discussed in an Executive Session.]
NUMBER 3 A-1, DISCUSS POTENTIAL LEGAL ISSUES OF THE CONTRACT WITH DISCUSS AND OPTION ON WORK NOT YET PERFORMED. 
          FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY, WE BOTH HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS LEGAL ACTION IN EXECUTIVE SESSION BUT I BELIEVE THERE IS A PRESENTATION THAT WILL BE MADE AT THIS TIME TO GO OVER THIS. AND THEN THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK OUR COUNCIL ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS THAT WE 
          [00:15:03]
MIGHT HAVE. AND I AM GOING TO RECOGNIZE MIKE BAILEY FROM ABM. AND MIKE AS A PRESENTATION AND WILL GIVE IT TO CONNIE. SHE IS GOING TO SET IT UP, M MIKE. GIVE IT JUST A MOMENT. 
          BEFORE WE START, ANY PREDISCUSSION WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE, COMMISSIONERS? ARE YOU HAPPY TO HAVE MR. BAILEY CONTINUE? YES? 
          >> YES, MA'AM. >>JUDGE CANALES:  ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER. GO AHEAD, MIKE. 
          >> THANK YOU, JUDGE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. 
          THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO PRESENT ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. AS ALWAYS LET ME INTRODUCE MY TEAM WHO IS PRESENT IN THE R ROOM, LISA LUBE OUR VICE PRESIDENT OF SALES FOR THE W WEST. 
          LARRY HARSHAW, THE GENERAL MANAGER FOR THE BRANCH IN HOUSTON THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DELIVERY OF THE PROJECT. 
          MIKE BOYARDI WHO IS ALSO OUR VP OF OPERATION FOR DELIVERY. 
          I DO NEED TO RAISE THIS -- >>JUDGE CANALES:  SPEAK CLOSER 
          INTO IT. >> I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT HAND SIGNAL, SORRY. MIKE MORIARTI, OUR VP OF OPERATIONS FOR THE WEST. JOEL LOPEZ THAT YOU HAVE SEEN BEFORE. ONLINE TODAY I HAVE JOEL LOWER Y, WHO IS OUR VICE PRESIDENT FOR NORTH AMERICA FOR ATS SA SALES. ALSO NO EL BECKER WHO IS OUR GENERAL COUNSEL FOR ABM WHO IS ALSO PRESENT. 
          LAST MEETING WE DID PRESENT AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT, WHAT WAS BEING ACCOMPLISHED. I -- WE ARE VERY EXCITED OF THE WOULD THAT HAS BEEN DONE TO DATE AND MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT. THE BIGGEST THING I WANT TO POINT OUT AS WE JUMP INTO THE OTHER MEAT OF THE PRESENTATION IS THE FACT THAT THIS PROJECT IS HAVING A TREMENDOUS IMPACT ON THIS LOCAL ECONOMY CURRENTLY WE HAVE ON OUR SUBCONTRACTOR LIST THAT WE ARE UTILIZING 45 SUBCONTRACTORS AND SUPPLIERS, MOST OF WHICH ARE LOCAL. USE THE FAIRGROUNDS AS AN EXAMPLE. SEVEN CONTRACTORS DELIVERING WORK AT THE FAIRGROUNDS BETWEEN THE PERIOD OF MARCH THROUGH JULY, THEY HAVE DELIVERED OVER 27,000 MANHOURS OF WORK. 
          THIS IS LOCAL LABOR THAT WE ARE SUPPORTING IN OUR PROJECT THAT UTILIZED TO DELIVER THIS WORK. SO, AGAIN, THIS PROJECT IS PROVIDING A TREMENDOUS FINANCIAL IMPACT TO THIS COMMUNITY. ALSO IN THE LAST MEETING, I THINK THERE WAS -- AND THE PURPOSE OF BEING HERE TODAY WITH ABM IS THERE WAS A DISCUSSION REGARDING THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT FINANCING. 
          ABM BELIEVES THAT WE WILL BE PRESENTING TODAY THAT THROUGH THE MANY MEETINGS THAT WERE HELD THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, AS WELL AS IN FANT OF THIS COURT, THERE HAS BEEN A TRANSPARENT AND CLEAR PRESENTATION OF BOTH THE SCOPE OF WORK TO BE DELIVERED, AND, ALSO, HOW THIS PROJECT WOULD BE PAID FOR. YEAH, GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. 
          I AM SORRY. -- TO KIND OF LEVEL SET US TODAY, ABM DEVELOPED THIS PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 302 AND WE DISCUSSED THIS IN EACH OF OUR PRESENTATION. ALLOWS US TO PROVIDE ENERGY SAVINGS IMPROVEMENT TO YOUR FACILITY. 
          IT ALLOWS THOSE SAVINGS TO BE PAID FOR BY SAVINGS AND REQUIRES US TO HAVE A GUARANTEE OF THE SAVINGS WE ARE PROVIDING AS VERIFIED BY A THIRD -- INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY ENGINEER WHICH WAS DONE IN THIS CASE. 
          THE LEGISLATION ALSO ALLOWS US TO PROVIDE THE INCLUSION OF ANCILLARY WORK NOT FUNDED BY SAVINGS. 
          SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT IN THE LEGISLATION THAT WAS IN PLACE AT THE TIME THIS CONTRACT WAS APPROVED. 
          THE EXAMPLES OF THAT WILL BE PAVING. 
          OBVIOUSLY PAVING DOESN'T HAVE ANY ENERGY SAVINGS TO IT. 
          THE AMPHITHEATRE IS THE NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT ULTIMATELY DOES NOT HAVE SAVINGS BUT AN ADD TO IT. 
          NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. JUST TO KIND OF AGAIN LEVEL SET US AND REVIEW THIS REAL QUICK. WE STARTED DECEMBER 4 WITH A LETTER OF INTENT. FOR THE PERIOD FROM JANUARY OF 2020 UNTIL JULY 29 WHEN WE PRESENTED AT THE WORKSHOP, ABM 
          [00:20:03]
HAD ITS ENGINEERS ON-SITE DOING WALK OF FACILITIES. 
          JOEL, MYSELF, MY ENGINEERING TEAM WAS MEETING ON A CONTINUOUS BASIS WEEKLY WHEN THE COVE WAS OCCURRING. 
          MEETING IN PERSON OR VIRTUALLY WITH PUBLIC WORKS. 
          MEETING WITH SOME STAFF. WE HAVE HAD MEETINGS WITH COMMISSIONERS. THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE PROCESS THE WHOLE PROCESS WAS TO CREATE AN UNDERSTANDING AND UNDERSTAND THAT THE COPE WE WERE DELIVERING WAS THE SCOPE THAT YOU WANTED AND TO DISCUSS THE FUNDING REQUIREMENT WE WOULD BE UTILIZING TO DELIVER THIS PROJECT. 
          WE HAVE COMMENCED OBVIOUSLY AN INSTATION PERIOD. 
          AN 18-MONTH PERIOD ENDING IN APRIL OF 2022. 
          AT THAT POINT, THERE WOULD BE A SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION DOCUMENT EXECUTED AND NOON COMPLETION WE WILL COMMENCE TO THE MN HAVE V PERIOD OF THE GUARANTEED SAVINGS. 
          THAT WILL BE THE POINT WHERE YOU WOULD START SEEING THE SAVINGS FROM ALL THE FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS BEING INSTALLED AND THE QUARANTINE TAKING PLACE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. 
          REAL QUICK, WE HAD APPROVAL OF THE LETTER OF INTENT ON DECEMBER 4. WE HAD A WORKSHOP PRESENTATION ON JULY 29 OF 2020. I AM GOING TO SPEND SOME TIME DISCUSSING THAT WORKSHOP. ON AUGUST 19  -- THE WORKSHOP ON 7/29 KIND OF GOT CHARACTERIZED AS THE UNIVERSE WHICH IS ALL THE COPE PROVIDED BY PUBLIC WORKS AND SCOPE BY COMMISSIONERS AND IT WAS ALL-INCLUSIVE OF EVERYTHING THERE 8:19, THE COURT DEFINED THE CORE PROJECTS. 
          THE CORE PROJECTS WERE WHAT WERE INCLUDED IN OUR CONTRACT THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY APPROVED BY SEPTEMBER 23,  2020 CONTINGENT ON FINANCING ON OCTOBER 21, 2020. 
          ISSUANCE OF A NOTICE TO PROCEED AND THEN ON OCTOBER 29, THE FINANCING WAS FINALIZED WITH BANK OF AMERICA. 
          NEXT SLIDE. AS I SAID THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS ABM HAS BEEN VERY OPEN AND TRANSPARENT AS IT RELATES TO BEING VERY THOROUGH IN DEFINING THE COPE OF WORK FOR EACH FACILITY. AS YOU RECALL IN EACH OF THE PRESENTATION A COPE OF WORK BY FACILITY. 
          THAT COLOR-CODED. COLOR CODING HAS DESIGNATION IF IT IS PART OF THE 2019 CIP WORK THAT WAS IDENTIFIED. 
          WHETHER IT WAS FOR SECURITY AND SAFETY AND DEFERRED MAINTENANCE OR IF IT WAS FOR WORK THAT WAS ADDED BY STAFF. 
          EVERY PRESENTATION THE SCOPE OF WORK AND COLOR COATING WAS PROVIDED SO YOU UNDERSTOOD WHERE THE WORK WAS -- WHO WAS REQUIRING THE WORK AND WHY THIS WORK WAS BEING PROVIDED WITHIN THIS CONTRACT. THAT WAS PROVIDED THROUGHOUT THE FIRST PART OF THE WORKSHOP. THE LAST PART OF THE WORKSHOP WAS A DETAILED REVIEW CASH F FLOW. 
          THE CASH FLOW WE PRESENTED WERE THE ENERGY, THE OPERATIONAL SAVINGS, INCREASED REVENUE AND CAPITAL COST AVOIDANCE. 
          GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. THROUGHOUT THIS PRESENTATION AND YOU CAN GO BACK LOOK AT THAT. 
          OBVIOUSLY IT IS REGARDED ON 29TH. 
          I DID PRESENT HOW EACH OF THOSE ELEMENTS WERE AND HOW THEY WERE BEING UTILIZED. THE ENERGY SAVINGS. 
          OBVIOUSLY ENERGY SAVINGS IS THE REDUCTION OF ENERGY CONSUMED THROUGH THE INSTALLATION OF HIGHER EFFICIENCY EQUIPMENT. 
          THE ENERGY CALCULATIONS ARE REVIEW AND REVIEWED BY AND INDEPENDENT PARTY ENGINEER WITH SEMBLER AND ASSOCIATES AND PRESENTED TO THE COURT AND THIS REPORT WAS ACCEPTED BY THE COURT. PER THE TERM OF CONTRACT EXECUTED BY ABM, WE ARE GOING TO GUARANTEE THE ENERGY SERIES. 
          IT SHOWS EXACTLY HOW THE SAVING QUARANTINED WAS IMPLEMENTED AND EXECUTED BY THE COURT. WHEN WE LOOK AT YOU ARE ENERGY SAVINGS. THE ENERGY SAVINGS WAS IN EXPRESS OF $7 MILLION. WE ARE GUARANTEEING THAT THE COURT HAD 70 MILLION OVER A TERM THAT OFFSETS THE COST OF THE WHAT WE ARE SEEING AND PAYING FOR IN THE PROJECT. 
          OPERATIONAL SAVINGS. THIS IS THE PROTECTION OF REDUCTION TO M & O BUDGET WITH EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES BEING 
          [00:25:05]
DELIVERED. THIS IS -- THIS AMOUNT WAS 4.5 MILLION THE 15-YEAR TERM. 
          ITEMS THAT WILL PROVIDE FOR THAT OPERATIONAL SAVINGS. 
          THESE ARE ITEMS THAT WE ARE INSTALLING THAT YOU WILL NOT HAVE TO INCUR MAINTENANCE COST OF LED LIGHTING, UPGRADES, CHILLER REPAIRS, PAINTING, SMOKE PURGE, ROOF REPLACEMENT. 
          NEW CONTROLS TO REPLACE PNEUMATIC AND UPGRADES TO THE WATER -- WATER CONTROL SYSTEMS WITHIN THE JAIL. 
          BILE REPLACEMENT AT THE COURTHOUSE AND HOT WATER SYSTEM UPGRADES. IF YOU LOOK AT THE HOT WASHINGTON SYSTEM UP GRADES ADDED TO US BY PUBLIC WORKS AND ON GOING MAJOR ISSUES WITH THE HOT WATER SYSTEM. 
          HEAT EXCHANGERS HAD TO BE TAKEN APART, CALCIFYING AND A SIGNIFICANT MAINTENANCE ISSUE AND THEY ASKED US TO ADDRESS THIS. A PRIME EXAMPLE OF REDUCING -- OR PROVIDING OPERATIONAL SAVINGS. 
          BUILD THE NEXT SLIDE. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE. INCREASED REVENUE. 
          THE CASH FLOW FOR THE WORKSHOP HAVE A PROJECTION FOR THE INCREASE OF REVENUE AS IT RELATES TO THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          THAT WAS BASED ON THE FACT THAT WE ARE PROVIDING SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE FAIRG FAIRGROUNDS. 
          REPLACING THE ROOF SO THE READING FACILITY THAT WATER DOESN'T LEAK WHEN IT RAINS DURING THE EVENT. 
          YOU REPLACE THE CARPET IN THIS VICINITY AND PAINTED THE FACILITY THAT MAKES IT MUCH MORE RENTABLE. 
          THE NEXT PART OF IT WAS THE ADDITION OF A AMPHITHEATRE THAT CAN BE RENTED AND INCREASE THE REVENUE. 
          WE PROTECT A 10% INCREASE, A VERY MODEST INCREASE IN THE REVENUE. IT WAS STATED IN THE PRIOR COURT YOU DO SUBSIDIZE THE FAIRGROUND. 
          INCREASED REVENUES WOULD HAVE THE ATTEMPT OF REDUCING THE SUB CITY DEE THAT YOU ARE PAYING THERE. 
          THE LAST ITEM I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT CAPITAL COST AVOIDANCE AND RECOGNIZE THE MONEY THAT THE COURT -- THE COUNTY WILL HAVE TO SPENT THE CAP. 
          APPROXIMATELY IMPROVEMENTS THAT WAS IDENTIFIED IN THE 2019  CIP PAID FOR BY LAND. THE ADDITIONAL WORK THAT WAS REQUESTED BY PUBLIC WORKS AND ITEMS REPRESENTING DEFERRED MACE NANCE,  PAINTING, CARPETING, ROOFING AND AMPHITHEATRE, SMOKE SPLURGE, RECEIPTS EXAMS OF EQUIPMENTS AND IMPROVEMENTS DON'T PROVIDE ENERGY SAVINGS TO BE ABLE TO FUND THOSE SO THESE ARE ITEMS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED THAT WERE REQUIRED TO BE DONE. THAT THIS WORK IS ESSENTIALLY TO MAINTAINING THESE FACI FACILITIES. 
          I WILL GIVE YOU SOME EXAMPLES. LET'S GO TO THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          I JUST MENTIONED THAT THE ROOF AT THE FAIRGROUNDS HAD BEEN DAMAGE MULTIPLE TIMES WHICH PWINLD STORMS. IT WAS CREATING LEAKS WITHIN THE FACILITY. 
          PAIRS ISSUED ON THAT AND OVERTIME REQUIRED OPERATIONAL DOLLARS. WITHIN CI FOSHINGZ INCLUDE IN OUR ROOF AND INCLUDED BY THE SPORT. 
          AND DAVEING. THE SAVING AT THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          IT WAS ANTICIPATED. HOT HOLD POTHOLES THAT WILL BE REPAIRED OVER TIME AND THIS WE INCLUDE IN OUR SCOPE TO BE ABLE TO TOTALLY REPLACE THAT -- THAT PAVING AROUND THE APRON. THE CONCRETE PAVING AROUND THE FACILITIES. AGAIN THIS IS WORK THAT NEEDED TO DONE THAT NEEDED TO BE F FUNDED. 
          GALAHAR. IF YOU GO TO THE ROOF OF GALAHAR, A LOT OF BAND-AID APPROACH TO TRY TO REPAIR THAT ROOF AT THE TIME. OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN SEE SOME REPAIRS. SEALANT APPLIED TO IT IN LOCATIONS AND ALL THOSE THINGS. PUBLIC WORKS CAME TO US AND ASKED TO INCLUDE IN THE SCOPE AND THE RIGHT SOLUTION WAS TO REPLACE THAT ROOF. THEY WANTED US TO PROVIDE THAT SERVICE TO THEM. AGAIN, THERE IS VERY LITTLE SAVINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT THE PARKING LOT AT GALAHAV 
          [00:30:01]
ANOTHER EXAMPLE. PUBLIC WORKS HAVE ACTUALLY RESURFACED THAT PARKING LOT AND STILL AN ONGOING ISSUE THAT CAN ONLY BE ADDRESSED BY REPLACING THAT PARKING LOT. 
          SO, AGAIN, PUBLIC WORKS CAME TO YOU AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND ASKED THAT WE INCLUDE THAT IN OUR SCOPE BECAUSE THIS WAS WORK THAT WAS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN THAT FACILITY. TO BE ABLE TO FUND THAT WITHIN OUR PROGRAM, THAT WAS KIND CAPITAL COST AVOIDANCE, THE CIP IMPROVEMENTS, THE ADDITIONAL PAVING ADDED BY PUBLIC WORKS. 
          THE ROOFING THAT WAS INCLUDED. ALL THOSE THINGS WERE TRD AND PRESENTED IN THE WORK SHOP AS CAPITOL COST AVOID ANTS. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. ON OCTOBER 29 AS YOU SAW ON OUR TIMELINE, THE COURT DID FINALIZE THE FINANCING WITH BANK OF AMERICA. NUECES COUNTY PROVIDED THE PROCUREMENT FOR THAT. THEY ISSUED AN RFP TO OBTAIN THAT FINANCING. WE DID PROVIDE THE CASH FLOW THAT WAS UTILIZED IN THAT, AND, AGAIN, IT INCLUDED ALL THE ITEMS THINK THAT JUST WENT THROUGH AS PARTS OF THAT CASH FLOW. ABM DID NOT NEGOTIATE ANY OF THE TERMS OF THE FINANCING INCLUDING THE TIMING OF THE PAYMENT TO BE MADE. IF YOU GO BACK AND REVIEW OUR PRESENTATIONS, WE PRESENTED IN COURT THAT WE OPENED THE FIRST PAYMENT NOT TO OCCUR UNTIL 2022 AFTER SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION. 
          SO IN OUR PRESENTATIONS WE DID NOT ANTICIPATE ANY PAYMENTS THIS EARLY IN THE PROCESS. NO PAYMENTS UNTIL TOTALLY COMPLETED AND YOU WERE REALIZING THE GUARANTEED SAVINGS WE WERE PUTTING THE CONTRACT. 
          NEGOTIATION OF THE FINANCING BY THE NUECES COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE, COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, PROCUREMENT, THE COUNTY'S FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND COUNTY'S BOUND COUNCIL. 
          AND FINANCING RATE OF 1.84%. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          TODAY AS A FOLLOW-UP TO THE LAST PRESENTATION, WE HAVE PROVIDED A LITTLE OVER $15.5 MILLION WORTH OF FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS AND UPGRADES. THIS IS WORK THAT IS IN PROGRESS. THE EQUIPMENT THAT IS DELI DELIVERED. WE BUILD WHEN EQUIPMENT IS PROVIDED ON-SITE. THIS IS 48% OF THE TOTAL CONTRACT THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN BILLED FOR WORK THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DELIVERED. WE ARE CONTINUING TO DELIVER THIS PROJECT IN A WORKMAN-LIKE MANNER AND AS EFFICIENTLY AND AS DIRECTLY AS ANYONE CAN. NEXT SLIDE IF THE CONTRACT WAS TO BE SUSPENDED, THERE WAS REVOCATIONS. 
          AND THIS IS -- THIS SHOULD NOT BE SEEN AS ANY TYPE OF A THREAT BUT A STATEMENT OF FACT IS ALL THIS IS INTENDED FOR UNDER THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT FOR DEMOBILIZATION AND TERMINATION FEES. YOU CAN SEE WHY THAT COST HAS NOT BEEN CALCULATED AND WE ARE NOT AT THAT POINT AND HOPEFULLY NEVER ARE AT THIS POINT. WE ARE EXCITE OF CONTINUING TO DELIVER THIS CONTRACT, IT CAN BE QUITE SUBSTANTIAL. 
          THERE ARE OPERATIONAL ISSUES THAT WILL HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED. 
          AGAIN, BECAUSE WE ARE WERE N PROGRESS. 
          WE ARE WORKING ON DELIVERING ROOFS AT THE FAIRGROUNDS. 
          IT IS IN PROGRESS AND IT IS NOT COMPLETED AND MATERIALS THAT WE ALREADY PURCHASED TO BE INSTALLED ON-SITE. 
          PAVING AT THE FAIR GROUNTS THAT ARE NOT UNDER WAY BUT COMPLETE. 
          AND THE CHILLERS HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO SITE AND ARE BEING INSTALLED BY THE PIPING AND PUMPING AND THIS WORK HAT NO NOT BEEN COMPLETED. THE COURTHOUSE IS CURRENTLY OPERATING AT ONE BOILER. AS YOU KNOW PART OF OUR SCOPE, WE ARE INSTALLING THREE BR BRAND-NEW BOILERS TO PROVIDE A REDUNDANT SOLUTION TO THE HOT WATER SYSTEM. 
          THAT WORK THE BOILERS WERE MOVED IN AND THE PROCESS OF BEING CONNECTED AND THIS WORK IS NOT COMPLETED AT THIS POINT. 
          OBVIOUSLY EQUIPMENT THAT IS ORDERED. 
          ALL OF OUR SUBCONTRACTORS ARE EMPLOYED AT THIS POINT. 
          WE ISSUED CONTRACTS TO ALL OUR SUBCONTRACTORS AND MOVING FORWARD WITH THE ORDER OF THE MATERIALS AND OBVIOUSLY WITH COVID SUPPLY ISSUES, ROOFING INSTALLATION IS ONE ITEM AND AS I MENTIONED IN PREVIOUS MEETING IT HAS BEEN ORDERED. 
          [00:35:04]
ALL THIS EQUIPMENT IF NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH THE INSTALLATION OF IT WILL EITHER HAVE TO BE RETURNED WITH A SIGNIFICANT -- WITH A POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT STOCKING FEE OR SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT THAT COULDN'T BE RETURNED IT WILL BE DELIVERED TO THE SITE. WHEN WE PROCESSED THIS CONTRACT, WE DID THIS BACK IN APRIL, MAY OF 2020. 
          SO WE WERE PRICING THIS BASICALLY PRECOVID OR RIGHT AT THE START -- THE MAJOR START OF COVID-19. 
          SO WE WERE ABLE TO RETAIN VERY GOOD PRICING AT THAT POINT. 
          THE FACT IS NOW,  OBVIOUSLY YOU KNOW AS YOU ARE DEALING WITH PROJECTS IN THE CIP. PRICING HAS INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY. SO CONTRACTORS ARE -- HAVE -- AND WITH THE SUPPLY ISSUES THAT ARE PRESENT TODAY, IF YOU WERE TO HAVE TO REPROCESS THIS PROJECT IT WOULD BE SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE. ALSO THE ISSUE AROUND WARRANTY AND SAVINGS GUARANTEES. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE FACTS WERE PRESENTED. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE PRESENTED FAIRLY AND OPENLY AND TRANSPARENTLY OF HOW THIS IS STRUCTURED. 
          I ENCOURAGE TO YOU LOOK AT THE PREFERENTIAL THE WORKSHOP PROVIDED JULY 29 TO SEE THANK THAT FOR YOURSELF AND THAT IS WHAT I WANTED TO PRESENT TODAY. I WILL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY 
          QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. >>JUDGE CANALES:  NOTICING SLIDE 12 AND 13. IS THAT FOR US NOT TO ADDRESS? 
          I AM LOOKING AT MY SCREEN. >> THAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE 
          LAST MEETING. >>JUDGE CANALES:  NO WORRIES. 
          JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE. >> IT IS AVAILABLE AND I DID GO 
          THROUGH THAT IN LAST MEETING. >>JUDGE CANALES:  THE ONLY THING I WANT TO ADD THAT YOU DID NOT PROVIDE IT FOR US, BUT I HAD TERESA PROVIDE IT TO THE COURT. 
          THAT IS TO JUST TO REMIND THE COURT THAT THE SCHEDULE PAYMENT HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COURT AS WELL AS THE GUARANTEED SOFT SAVINGS AND STARTS OFF BEING $645,464. 
          JUST TO FURTHER EXPLAIN THAT, MIKE, THAT COMES FROM EITHER REALIZED -- REAL ACTUAL SAVINGS OR MADE UP THROUGH CONTRACT FROM THE DEL DA OF REAR ACTUALIZED AND GUARANTEED TO THE COURT. TO THE COUNTY. 
          STHAISHING? >> YES, MA'AM. 
          THE ENERGY NAIVTION IS WITHIN THE DETERMINES OF THE CONTRACT. 
          OVER THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OVER $7 MILLION. 
          $4.5 MILLION OF SAVINGS THAT IS PROJECTED TO BE REALIZED BY THE 
          COURT. >>JUDGE CANALES:  11,547,118. 
          THAT ASSUMES A 3% ANNUAL UTILITY SAVINGS. 
          A 3% INCREMENT INCREASE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  PAYMENTS TOTAL $27  MILLION OVER TIME AND THE COST SAVINGS $11 MILLION OVER THE TIME. 
          THE COUNTY'S NET IS 60 MILLION OVER TIME. 
          NOT THANK IS NOT SPECULATIVE. THAT IS WHAT THE CONTRACT 
          REQUIRES, THAT'S CORRECT? >> YES, MA'AM JUDGE I WANT THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE THAT AT ALL. I WILL OPEN IT UP ANY QUESTIONS OF THE POWERPOINT. MR. HERNANDEZ, DO YOU HAVE 
          QUESTIONS? >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ:  ONE QUESTION. WHEN DID YOU THE CONTRACT WHO WAS INVOLVED. THE CITY -- YOUR COMPANY AND THE COUNTY? WHEN YOU DID THE ARRANGE 
          CONTRACT? >> YES, SIR. 
          AS FAR AS DEVELOPMENT, WE WORKED DIRECTLY WITH STAFF AND PUBLIC WORKS TO DEVELOP THE SCOPES AND EVERYTHING AND THE CONTRACT WAS PRESENTED. FIRST VERSION OF THE CONTRACT ACTUALLY GOT PRESENTED IN JUNE FOR INITIAL REVIEW AND SUBSEQUENTLY WAS PRESENTED AFTER THE WORKSHOP ON JULY 29. 
          AM I ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION? >> REALLY WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS YOUR CONTRACT A COUNTY CONTRACT, AN ABM  CONTRACT? 
          >> THIS WAS WRITTEN ON OUR PAPER. 
          I WOULD SAY AN ABM CONTRACT PRESENTED TO THE COUNTY IF THAT 
          IS WHAT YOU ARE ASKING. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ:  THAT 
          IS WHAT I AM ASKING. >>JUDGE CANALES:  REVIEWS BY 
          LEGAL COUNSEL FOR THE COUNTY? >> IT WAS PROVIDED TO DOWN AND 
          PUBLIC WORKS AS A FACT TOO. >>JUDGE CANALES:  COMMISSIONER 
          GONZALEZ. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS H HERE. 
          YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE WHOLE THING AND I REALLY DON'T -- FOR ME, I MEAN WHATEVER YOU GUYS STARTED AND DONE, I THINK YOU 
          [00:40:04]
SHOULD FINISH IT. I NEED TO LOOK AT IT ON THE OTHER WAY AROUND. WHATEVER IS NOT ENERGY SAVINGS WE NEED TO PUT ASIDE. THAT IS HOW I FEEL. 
          BECAUSE WE TALK ABOUT BUDGET A WHILE AGO AND HOW MUCH MONEY WE ARE GOING TO NEED. SO MY DEAL IS, I ALWAYS LOOK AT IT AS AN ENERGY SAVINGS PERFORMANCE. 
          AND ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT ARE NOT ENERGY PERFORMING SAVINGS. MY DEAL IS -- THOSE CAN BE PUT ASIDE, YOU KNOW, AND STICK WITH ENERGY SAVINGS PRO FORMAS, AND FINISH THOSE OUT AND SEE HOW WE ARE WITH MONEY DOWN THE ROAD. 
          THAT MONEY -- WHEN WE REDUCE THOSE PROJECTS IT LOWERS THE AMERICAN BANK, YOU KNOW, MONIES WE NEED TO BORROW FROM AMERICAN BANK. I AM LOOKING AT SOME OF THE THINGS HERE AND YOU MENTIONED A WHILE AGO ABOUT -- THAT YOU ARE -- BY PUBLIC WORKS A $228,000 CHANGE ORDER. 
          I BELIEVE IT WAS $228,000, RIGHT. 
          BUT YOU KNOW -- I HAVE A SIGN HERE -- A -- THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT, I GUESS, THE CHANGE ORDER. 
          SIGNED BY JUDGE, JUNE 23. THEN TWO MONTHS LATER, I GUESS IT WAS GIVEN TO PUBLIC WORKS. AND SIGNED IT AND SAID ONLY ITEMS A, D AND F, THAT THEY WOULD AGREE WITH. 
          I GUESS -- YOU CAN PROCEED WITH ALL OF THEM. 
          A A WAZ HALL COLUMNS. D WAS CONFERENCE ROOM. 
          F WAS CARPET TILE UPGRADES. YOU WENT AHEAD AND DID EVERYTHING ELSE. I UNDERSTAND BECAUSE IT HAS THE JUDGE'S SIGNATURE, BUT I DON'T THINK PUBLIC WORKS AGREED WITH 
          EVERYTHING ON HERE. >> I CAN ADDRESS THAT, COMMISSIONER. IF YOU -- WHEN WE PRESENTED THAT. I DID PRESENT THAT CHANGE ORDER TO THE COURT, THAT'S CORRECT. THE QUESTION IS WE PROVIDED A WANES COAT POINTING THAT WASN'T IN THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT. 
          WITHIN THE FACILITY, WE HAVE PAINTING. 
          AND WE WERE TO POINT THAT ONE COLOR. 
          THE WAINSCOATING WAS BY A INTERIOR DESIGNER WHO FELT THIS WAS A NICE AMENITY AND MOBILIZE PAINTING AND HAD THE SCHEDULED SET AND WE HAD APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE WA INSCOATING AND BROUGHT BY PUBLIC WORKS IN THE SESSION I BELIEVE -- JUDGE, SORRY, YOU CRUSADE MADE THE ACCIDENT IF THAT VNLTD BEEN ACCUSED AMM. AND SUBSEQUENTLY DID APPROVE THE CHANGE ORDER IN TOTAL AND YOU SEE THE PROCESS AND IT WENT TO PUBLIC WORKS. AND THEY DID WANT THAT PULL THAT OUT. AND THAT IS THE STORY BECAUSE THE SCHEDULING OF HAVING THE PAINTERS ON-SITE, THAT IS WHAT WE PRESENTED THAT DAY. WE DID CHOOSE TO GO FORWARD WITHOUT APPROVAL. AND THAT IS ON US. 
          THAT IS WHERE WE ARE JUDGE LET'S MAKE SURE IF HE HAS MORE QUESTIONS. LET'S CONTINUE WITH YOUR 
          QUESTIONS. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  I AM 
          NOT FINISHED. >>JUDGE CANALES:  I SAID I WILL CONTINUE TO GO AHEAD WITH YOUR QUESTIONS. 
          XWONZ GONZALEZ OKAY, THANK YOU. -- 
          >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  OKAY. LOOKING AT THE LIST HERE. 
          NOTHING WITH YOU GUYS. I NEED TO MAKE SURE IF WE NEED TO CUT THIS YEAR, WE NEED TO CUT. 
          I THINK WE CAN CUT HERE THAT WILL GIVE US A BIG -- MONIES WE WON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT AS FAR AS AMERICAN BANK. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  JUST SO YOU KNOW, IT IS BANK OF AMERICA. 
          >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  BANK OF AMERICA. 
          I AM GOING TO GO BACK TO THE ENERGY SAVING PERFORMANCE. 
          THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. 
          DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING OTHER THAN ENERGY -- ENERGY SAVING PERFORMANCE CONTRACT. AND I KNOW THERE ARE SOME ITEMS IN NUECES JAIL LIKE PERCH, OZONE LAUNDRY SYSTEMS THAT WEREN'T ENERGY SAVINGS. I KNOW THERE ARE -- AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED THE -- THE LAUNDRY MACHINE UPGRADES AT THE JUVENILE CENTER FOR PARKING REPLACEMENT IS NOT ENERGY SAVINGS, I DON'T THINK. AND THE LANDSCAPING, CONCRETE REPAIR AND WALKWAYS TO THE F FAIRGROUNDS. 
          OPINIONED THE OUTDOOR STAGE READ IT LAST TIME WITH ENERGY SAVINGS. I FEEL WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS ENERGY SAVINGS, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE JUST DON'T. I WANT TO STOP AND SAY IF IT IS NOT ENERGY SAVINGS, I DON'T WANT TO DO IT. 
          [00:45:01]
I THINK RIGHT NOW AS FAR AS FUNDS ARE CONCERNED AND OUR BUDGET IS CONCERNED, WE NEED TO BE MORE PROACTIVE FOR FUNDS NOR COMING YEAR. THIS IS -- THIS IS HOW I FEEL. 
          >> YES, SIR GONZALEZ GOYNZ DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH YOU GUYS, ABM DOING IT, FINISHING IT, WHATEVER YOU STARTED. 
          I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, BUT I STILL HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT HASN'T BEEN STARTED AND NOT ENERGY SAVINGS. 
          JUDGE COMMISSION DOERS YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR HIM BEFORE HE RESPONDS TO YOU. I THINK HE SHOULD HEAR ALL OF THEM. DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHERS? 
          >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  NO -- WELL, JUST ONE. 
          . >>JUDGE CANALES:  GO AHEAD. 
          >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  IF YOU CAN, MR. BAILEY, IF -- IF YOU GO DOWN CAN YOU GIVE MEET ONES THAT ARE NOT ENERGY 
          SAVINGS, PLEASE. >> HANG ON ONE SECOND. 
          WHAT HE DID WAS IDENTIFY IN THE PRIOR PRESENTATION AND WE MAY BE ABLE TO PULL THAT UP FROM THE PRIOR MEETING. 
          AGAIN, BY BACK TO THE FACT THAT WE COLOR-CODED THE SCOPE AND EACH OF THE PRESENTATIONS STARTING ON THE JULY 129 PRESENTATION AND WORKSHOP ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE PRESENTATION THIS PAST WEEK OR THIS PAST MEETING. 
          AND IN THAT MEETING, AGAIN, AS WE WENT THROUGH THAT, WE HAD COLOR-CODED EVERYTHING GREEN THAT WAS ENERGY SAVINGS. 
          COLOR-CODED DEFERRED MAINTENANCE. 
          EVERYTHING THAT -- YEAH, RIGHT THERE. 
          THAT IS THE COURTHOUSE. >>JUDGE CANALES:  WHY DON'T YOU -- IF YOU DON'T MIND. FORGIVE ME FOR THE INTER INTERRUPTION, GO AND SEND THAT TO MY OFFICE -- 
          >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  YOU JUST ASKED FOR IT. 
          >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  I AM NOT ASKING FOR IT -- 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  SAID I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LIST. 
          .>COMMISSION >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  GIVE MEET LIST WHAT IS ENERGY SAVING AND WHAT IS NOT. 
          VERY SIMPLE. >> YES, SIR, AGAIN, YES, THAT INFORMATION IS READILY AVAILABLE BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN IN ALL OF OUR PRESENTATIONS. I KNOW OUR ATTORNEY, I THINK, HAS A COMMENT MAYBE THAT HE WANTS TO MAKE IF THAT IS POSSIBLE JUDGE FULL UNMUTE HIM. UNMUTE MR. BECKER, PLEASE. 
          CONNIE? GO AHEAD MR. BECKER. 
          >> THANKS, JUDGE, CAN YOU HEAR ME? 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  YES. >> THANKS FOR GIVING ME A SECOND. I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT POINT A LITTLE MORE CLEARLY. YOU KNOW THERE SEEMS TO BE THERE IS AN IDEA THAT WE COULD DESCOPE SOME OF THIS WORK THAT IS ENERGY SAVINGS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS YOU CAN'T UNRING A BELL, RIGHT. 
          WE ARE A YEAR INTO AN 18-MONTH CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. 
          THERE IS NO WORK THAT HAS NOT BEEN STARTED, RIGHT. 
          SO IF YOU WANTED TO REMOVE A SCOPE OF WORK, YOU ARE GOING TO BE THROWING MONEY AWAY, BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALREADY PAID US TO DESIGN AND ENGINEER THIS WORK IN SOME CASES WE ARE GOING TO HAVE SIGNIFICANT WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE, BUT IT WON'T BE FINISHED. IN SOME CASES YOU WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT MATERIALS OR COMMODITIES THAT HAVE TO BE PAID FOR DESPITE THE FACT THAT YOU MIGHT NOT GET THEM IF YOU DO NOT PAY TO FINISH THEM. SO,  NOW, WE ARE HAPPY TO TRY TO FIND WORKABLE SOLUTIONS H HERE, BUT THE IDEA THAT YOU CAN JUST HALT, YOU KNOW, A PROJECT OF 50%. 
          AND WOULDN'T INCUR JUST, YOU KNOW, DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES IS, YOU KNOW, JUST UNREALISTIC. I WANT TOO MAKE SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT IT IS NOT LIKE WE JUST JUST CONTRACTED FOR THIS WORK LAST WEEK. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR A YEAR, RIGHT. WE BOUGHT OUT THOSE SUBCONTRACT AND THIS MATERIAL IMMEDIATELY. WE STARTED ENGINEERING THE WORK IMMEDIATELY. WE -- YOU KNOW, WE ARE CLOSE TO THE FINISH LINE HERE. IN ISN'T BACK AT STARTING LINE. 
          >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND BACK TO HIM. SORRY, WHAT WAS YOUR NAME, SIR? 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  MR. BECKER. >> NOAH BECKER, COUNSEL FOR 
          ABM. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: WELCOME. I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION A MINUTE AGO. I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT STOPPING A PROJECT THAT IS ALREADY 50% OR 40% OR WHATEVER PERCENT. I AM TALKING ABOUT PROJECTS THAT HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN STARTING YET. 
          AND NO MATERIALS HAVE BEEN ORDERED. 
          THOSE ARE THE PROJECTS THAT I AM TALKING ABOUT. 
          YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVEN'T STARTED A PROJECT -- 
          >> THERE ARE NO PROJECTS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN STARTED, 
          [00:50:02]
COMMISSIONER. THAT IS WHAT I AM TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND. THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND. BEFORE YOU EVEN SIGN THIS CONTRACT, ABM DESIGNED THIS WORK AT RISK. 
          THAT IS PART OF THE BENEFIT OF THE COUNTY. 
          WE WILL COME IN AND PUT TOGETHER THESE SCOPES AT WORK COMPLETELY AT RISK AND YOU DON'T PAY FOR ANYTHING UNLESS YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT. 
          FROM THERE WHEN YOU SIGN THE CONTRACT A YEAR AGO, WE STARTED IMPLEMENTING THIS IMMEDIATELY, SO THERE IS NOT A SINGLE SCOPE OF WORK THAT HAS NOT BEEN STARTED WHERE WE HAVE NOT SIGNED CONTRACTS, WHERE WE HAVE NOT ORDERED EQUIPMENT OR MATERIAL. THERE IS NO SCOPE THAT PITS 
          THAT DESCRIPTION. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  OKAY, 
          THANK YOU, SIR. >>JUDGE CANALES:  OKAY, COMMISSIONER CHESNEY, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  NO, NOT AT THIS TIME. 
          I WILL WAIT FOR THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS -- REALLY I THINK MR. BECKER PROPERLY ADDRESSED IT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT IT WAS CLEAR. THIS IS ONE CONTRACT. 
          NOT TEN LITTLE CONTRACTS PUT TOGETHER. 
          THIS IS ONE CONTRACT. IS THAT CORRECT, MR. BECKER? AND ALL OF THE ELEMENTS ARE IN THERE. 
          SO YOU CALL IT "DESCOPING." SOMETIMES I LIKE TO LAY THE GROUNDWORK IN A MUCH MORE SIMPLISTIC WAY THAT WE HAVE ONE CONTRACT WITH ABM WITH A LOT OF DIFFERENT ELEMENTS, THAT'S 
          CORRECT? >> ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, JUDGE. 
          ONE CONTRACT WITH ONE PRICE. >>JUDGE CANALES:  THE SECOND ISSUE THAT I WROTE DOWN WAS JUST AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, WE, THE COUNTY, WROTE THE RFP. 
          ABM DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WITH THE RFP WITH REGARDS TO FINANCING OTHER THAN PROVIDE THE INFORMATION REQUESTED TO OUR 
          COUNSEL, THAT'S CORRECT? >> THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, BUT I WOULD DEFER TO MAKE IN THE ROOM. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  MIKE. >> THAT IS CORRECT, JUDGE. 
          THE RFP WRITTEN BY PROCUREMENT AND WE PROVIDED THE CASH LOADS 
          AS I SAID EARLIER. >>JUDGE CANALES:  THE NEXT P PART, YOU BROUGHT UP A CHANGE ORDER AND YOU SAID IT BECAUSE IT WAS SAID QUICKLY AND AN IMPLICATION THAT SOMEBODY FOLLOWED AN ORDER A SIGNED CHANGE ORDER. 
          THE REASON THE CHANGE ORDER. THIS NOT ME ASKING YOU, MIKE, THIS IS ME TELLING YOU. THE REASON THE CHANGE ORDER GOT SENT WITH THIS SIGNATURE IS THAT THE COURT VOTED TO APPROVE THAT CHANGE ORDER. I FOLLOW THE COURT'S RULE. 
          IF THEY APPROVE IT, I DO SIGN IT. 
          IT COMES TO ME FROM TERESA. WE GO OVER IT AND WE MAKE SURE IT IS WHAT THE COURT'S INTENTION WERE AND IT WAS SIGNED. IF PUBLIC WORKS DOESN'T WANT TO SIGN IT, THEY ARE NOT THE POLICYMAKER. 
          IT WAS BROUGHT TO WORK PROPERLY AND WE VOTED TO CREATE THE CHANGE ORDER. THE ONLY CHANGE ORDER -- A COST CHANGE ORDER A A HALF A MILLION DOLLAR NO COST CHANGE ORDER AND THE SECOND ONE WAS THIS ONE. HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THAT CHANGE ORDER WAS A COURT-APPROVED CHANGE ORDER AND DID HAVE MY SIGNATURE. 
          AND THE REAL QUESTION IS WHY DIDN'T CAN FROM PUBLIC WOSHTIONZ SIGNATURE. WE ARE NOT INTO THE OPINION POLL BUT WHAT THE COURT APPROVES. 
          FINALLY I WROTE DOWN OF THE LAUNDRY MACHINE AND ANY WOMAN THAT KNOWS OF WASHING MACHINES IS THERE IS DEFINITELY ENERGY SAVINGS. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE -- MAY NOT BE A LOT OF CLOTHES WASHERS BUT I THINK COMMISSIONER ECONOMIES KNEE FEELS OUT. I MIGHT FEEL THAT HE WILL HELP WASH CLOTHES. YOU GO TO BEST BYE, YOU SEE ENERGY EFFICIENCIES. CAN YOU SHARE US TO THAT THE LAUNDRY MACHINE WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE ENERGY SAVINGS. 
          ARE THERE ENERGY SAVINGS. >> TWO SAVINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I STATE THIS CORRECTLY. ONE IS OBVIOUSLY IN THE ENERGY. 
          THAT IS ONE SAVINGS. THE OTHER THING WITH THE OZONE CAPABILITY, IT REDUCES THE AMOUNT OF DETERGENT AND THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE UTI UTILIZED TO CLEAN CLOTHES THEMSELVES. BOTH AN ENERGY SAVINGS AND 
          OPERATIONAL SAVINGS BOTH. >>JUDGE CANALES:  AND A JAIL IS -- CERTAINLY NOT A HOTEL, BUT A HOTEL -- 
          >> 24-7. >>JUDGE CANALES:  IT IS A SERIOUS LAUNDRY. SOMEONE LOOK AT THE AMOUNT OF TOWELS WE PURCHASED. IT IS UNBELIEVABLE. 
          BUT NO DOUBT SOME ANCILLARY PROJECTS AND THOSE ANCILLARY PROJECTS ARE PART OF THE OVERALL CONTRACT, AND SO I WROTE DOWN TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT YOU PUT IN HERE MAYBE A PREVIOUSMILES-PER-HOUR. BUT A -- PREVIOUS POWER POINT. 
          [00:55:01]
AND THEY WERE VETTED BY OUR LEGAL COUNSEL. 
          ISN'T THAT CORRECT? >> THAT IS CORRECT, JUDGE. 
          ONE PROJECT THAT WE HAVE PROPOSED AT A PARK THAT THE COUNCIL DID NOT AGREE WITH AND THAT WAS REMOVED EVEN BEFORE 
          COMING TO THE COURT. >>JUDGE CANALES:  WHERE WE HAVE ANCILLARY BETWEEN THE CONTRACT AND THE SATELLITE ONE. 
          OUTDOOR LIGHTING, THERE WAS A MOTION WHETHER OUTDOOR LIGHTING WOULD BE CONSIDERED ENERGY SAVINGS. 
          WITH ALL THE LIGHTING COMPONENTS, MY RECOLLECTION 
          THAT WILL BE ENERGY SAVINGS. >> HIGH EFFICIENCY L. E.D. 
          LIGHTING AND EXISTING FIXTURES WHICH ARE NOT AND THERE IS OBVIOUSLY EFFICIENCIES IN EVERY LIGHT FIXTURES THAT WE 
          INSTALLED. >>JUDGE CANALES:  OKAY, PERFECT. THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. HAVING HEARD FROM THE COURT -- 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  I HAVE ONE MORE COMMENT, I APOLOGIZE. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  YES, OF COURSE. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  GOING FORWARD. 
          AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT COUNCIL SAID AND THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          GOING FORWARD, IF -- IF WE, AS A COURT, CONTINUE TO DISCUSS THESE ENERGY SAVING CONTRACTS. ME PERSONALLY AS ONE MEMBER OF THE COURT JUST SO YOU HEAR IT, I HAVE NO MORE INTEREST OF DOING PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT ENERGY SAVINGS IN A ENERGY SAVING CONTRACT. AS HE SAID THE BELL HAS PROBABLY BEEN RUNG ON CERTAIN THINGS AND I APPRECIATE AND RESPECT THAT, BUT I WANT TO BE CLEAR. 
          I HAVE NO DESIRE GOING FORWARD TO EVER INCLUDE PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT ENERGY SAVINGS IN A ENERGY SAVINGS CONTRACT. 
          JUST SO YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I AM SURE THERE WILL BE OTHERS THAT WILL BE PRESENTED AND JUST SO EVERYBODY ELSE KNOWS -- AGAIN I AM ONLY ONE PERSON AND I AM JUST WANTING TO STATE IT OUT LOUD AND CLEARLY THAT I DON'T MESS UP ON ANYTHING LIKE THAT AGAIN. I APPRECIATE THAT, THANK YOU. 
          >> JUDGE, I HAVE A QUESTION. >>JUDGE CANALES:  YES, SIR. 
          >> HOW MUCH PERCENTAGE OF WORK ON THE THEATRE SAYING THAT YOU HAD TO MOVE IT AND NOT IT WHERE YOU ORIGINALLY WANTED TO? 
          >> AT THIS POINT WE HAVE DONE A A LOT OF DESIGN WORK IS WHAT HAS BEEN DONE ON THAT PARTICULAR ITEM. 
          YOU ARE CORRECT, CONSTRUCTION HAS NOT COMMENCED ON THAT AT THIS POINT, BUT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING THE DESIGN PHASE. 
          ANYTHING ELSE, MIKE, THAT I AM MISS SOMETHING IN. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND. 
          YOU HAVE TO TAKE THE MIC ONLY TO HAVE YOU PROPERLY RECORDED. 
          I KNOW THERE HAS BEEN TURF THAT HAVE BEEN SPECED. 
          >> FOR THE MOST PARTS THAT IS CORRECT. 
          THE WORK IS ENGINEERING. MULTIPLE ITERATIONS FROM CONTRACT AWARDS TO WHERE WE SIT TODAY. 
          RIGHT NOW IT RESIDES IN WHERE IS THE BEST FIT FOR THAT FACILITY AT THE FAIRGROUNDS. AND WE ARE TRYING TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY JUDGE, THE FAIRGROUNDS, PUBLIC WORKS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS IN THE RIGHT LOCATION BEFORE WE PUT A SHOVEL ON THE GROUND AND START WORK. 
          AGAIN THAT COLLABORATIVE EFFORT BETWEEN US TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND BRING THE RIGHT PROJECT TO THE COUNTY WITH THE OVERALL BENEFITS AND MEET YOUR EXPECTATIONS ARE THE GOAL. 
          >> SO THE REDESIGN THEIR GOING TO DO IS OF NO EXPENSE TO THE 
          COUNTY? >> THAT'S CORRECT. 
          WE ARE WORKING RIGHT NOW WITH THE ENGINEERING TEAM TO LOOK AT MIRRORING, FLIPPING IT ACROSS THE MAIN WALKWAY. 
          WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO THE DETERMINATION IF IT IS A ZERO COST CHANGE. THE OTHER THING TO NOTE IS THAT IT IS CAPABLE OF BEING BUILT WHERE IT IS PHYSICALLY CITED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS, AND WE ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS AND OUR GOAL IS TO TRY TO INCORPORATE THE CHANGE IN THE MOVE AT NO COST TO THE COUNTY. CAN I SAY HERE RIGHT NOW. 
          IS THERE A COST CHANGE? I CAN'T CONFIRM UNTIL WE FINALIZE WHAT THAT DESIGN IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE. 
          THE FEATURES AND THE IMPACT OF MOVING IT. 
          RIGHT. AND THE ONE PIECE IS THAT THE ELEVATION, THERE IS GOING TO BE A LOT OF BACKFILLING TO FLIP IT TO THE OTHER SIDE AND WE ARE TRYING TO FINISH GETTING THE ELEVATIONS SHOT AND MAKE SURE IF THERE IS A COST OF IMPACT 
          WHAT IT WILL BE. >>JUDGE CANALES:  NOT A MILE AWAY BUT SEVERAL HUNDRED FEET AWAY. 
          >> CORRECT, WHERE IT IS -- >> THIS COURT DECIDE THEY HAD WANTED TO PUT A STOP TO A THEATRE, WE WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU HAVE DONE SO FAR IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T INCLUDE THE DESIGN BECAUSE IT WAS WORTHLESS TO US. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  LET ME JUST SAY THAT IS COMPLETELY CON TARRY TO WHAT MR. BECKER SAID JUST A MOMENT AGO. 
          >> A GOOD QUESTION JUDGE, BECAUSE WHAT HE IS SAYING IS ALL THEY HAVE DONE ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT THAT I AM VERY SKETCHY ON SUPPORTING AND DON'T REMEMBER DISCUSSING THAT BEFORE AND I KNOW IT WAS IN THE CONTRACT. 
          IT IS A VERY GOOD QUESTION AND MAYBE THE QUESTION SHOULD BE, 
          [01:00:04]
WHAT PROJECTS HAVE WE JUST DONE DESIGN WORK ON, BECAUSE IF THE COUNTY HAS TO EAT DESIGN WORK TO SAVE OR MOVE THOSE DOLLARS LET'S SAY TO ANOTHER ENERGY PROJECT INSTEAD, BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS AN APPROPRIATE ENERGY SAVING PROJECT BECAUSE IT IS AN ADDITIONAL FACILITY, THEN THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING I WOULD BE VERY INTERESTED IN SEEING NOT ONLY ON THE AMPHITHEATRE BUT EVERYTHING ELSE. 
          I AM NOT OPPOSED TO LOOKING AT OTHER ENERGY SAVING PROJECTS WITHIN THE SCOPE. BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH THE BELL HAS RUNG USING YOUR COUNSEL'S WORDING BUT MONEY SPENT ON DESIGN. YES, WE WOULD BE THROWING THAT AWAY. I GET THAT. 
          YOU ABOUT THE COST OF AN AMPHITHEATRE OVER 30 YEARS IS GOING TO BE ENORMOUS TO THIS COUNTY, MAINTENANCE, OVERSIGHT, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. TO ME IT MIGHT BE WORTH LOOKING AT UNRINGING THE BELL A LITTLE BIT ON SOME PROJECTS THAT HOME DESIGN WORK. AND NOT NECESSARILY REDUCING THE CONTRACT AMOUNT. I WANT TO HEAR MORE FROM OUR COUNSEL. MY PURPOSE ORIGINALLY AGAIN WAS TO -- HOW CAN I GET SOME GENERAL FUND RELIEF. 
          WASN'T -- THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL INTENT. 
          AND SO IF WE HAVE TO. IF I FIGURE HOW TO GET GENERAL FUND RELIEF AND PROVIDED ALTERNATIVES AND ENERGY SAVING PROJECTS TO SUBSTITUTE FOR NONENERGY SAVING PROJECTS. 
          I AM SIMPLIFYING IT. I GET IT. 
          SUPPLEMENT SOME NONENERGY SAVING PRODUCTS AND PUT ENERGY SAVING PROJECTS MAY MAKE OUR ENERGY COST SAVINGS GO UP BECAUSE WE HAD HAVE EN ENERGY-SAVING PROJECTS RATHER THAN NONENERGY-SAVING PROJECTS AND IN RETROSPECT. 
          I WAS THERE. I WISH WE WOULDN'T HAVE DONE IT THIS WAY. I WISH WE ALL MADE THEM ENERGY SAVING PROJECTS ONLY. MY BAD. 
          WE DIDN'T. IF THERE IS A WAY TO MITIGATE, MAYBE NOT COMPLETELY DO AWAY WITH, AND MAYBE NOT UNRINGING THE BELL, BUT, CHIMING THE BELL A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY, I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THOSE KIND OF THINGS AND MAYBE THE QUESTION SHOULD BE, WHAT ARE THE PROJECTS THAT WE JUST -- IN THE DESIGN PHASE THAT -- THAT AREN'T ENERGY SAVING PROJECTS. 
          IT MAY ONLY BE THE AMPHI AMPHITHEATRE. 
          WE WILL HAVE TO BREAK IT DOWN. I THINK COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ 
          BRINGS UP A REALLY GOOD POINT. >>JUDGE CANALES:  I RESPECTFULLY WOULD LIKE AN OPPORTUNITY WHAT YOU THINK IS A GOOD POINT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION SO WE CAN HEAR FROM OUR COUNSEL AND I CAN ALSO POINT OUT THAT THAT IS, IN MY OPINION, NOT POSSIBLE. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND LEGALLY WHAT MY REASONINGS ARE, AND I THINK MY ASK OF YOU THAT IS NOT A POTENTIAL. 
          AND I WILL ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THE AMPHITHEATRE THAT MAY NOT HAVE ENERGY SAVINGS BUT HAS REVENUE UPWARD MOBILITY. 
          SO WHEN -- AND AGAIN, WE CAN DISCUSS THAT -- IT IS NOT REALLY LEGAL, SO IF YOU DON'T MIND I WILL JUST POINT THAT OUT IT IS MY -- IT IS MY BELIEF THAT ONLY THE LANDSCAPING, THE PAVING, AND THE -- AND THE AMPHITHEATRE REPRESENT THE BULK OF 95 OR 99%. I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME BUT KNOWING I KNOW THE PROJECT VERY WELL, THOSE ARE THE THREE ELEMENTS THAT DO NOT REPRESENT ENERGY SAVINGS. 
          WE ALREADY DISCUSSED THE IMPORTANCE OF PAVING IN GENERAL TO ANY OF OUR COUNTY FACI FACILITIES. 
          AND LANDSCAPING IS INCREDIBLY DIMINIMUS TO THE ENTIRE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT. AND, OF COURSE, TYPICALLY GOES PART AND PARCEL WITH IT. YOU TYPICALLY DON'T WORK A BUILDING'S EXTERIOR AND NOT CONSIDER SOME LANDSCAPING; HOWEVER, IT IS MINOR COMPARED TO THE OVERALL CONTRACT AND THAT LEE LEAVES US WITH THE AM FEE THEATRE. 
          THE PURPOSE OF THE AMPHITHEATRE WHICH WAS COMPLETELY DISCLOSED EIGHT TIMES IN COURT IN THE DIFFERENT PRESENTATIONS, SPECIFICALLY WE DISCUSSED HOW THAT IS THE PIECE THAT HAS REVENUE. SO YOU DON'T JUST GET REVENUE FROM ENERGY SAVING. WHEN YOU HAVE AN ANCILLARY PROJECT THAT IS ALLOWED UNDER THE STATUTE, AN OPPORTUNITY SAY WHILE WE ARE HERE ON PREMISE, WE CAN UTILIZE THE CONTRACTOR THAT WE HAVE TO DO A PROJECT THAT COULD ALSO CREATE REVENUE. 
          JUST LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE -- AND I KNOW YOU UNDERSTAND THE ANA ANALOGY, JUST LIKE THE COAST AND COASTAL PARKS HAVE A PIER THAT GET REVENUE AND ASSETS TO THE COUNTY THAT OVER TIME CAN 
          PROVIDE A RATE OF RETURN. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  IT CAN. AND I DON'T REMEMBER HAVING AN ANALYSIS THAT SHOWED THE RATE OF RETURN ON THE AMPHITHEATRE. 
          I SPRAY MISSPOKE. I DON'T REMEMBER THAT. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  I UNDERSTAND YOU DON'T REMEMBER, BUT I AM SAYING WE DISCUSSED IT WITH REGARDS TO BRANDING. 
          THERE IS ANY TIME OF -- -- ANY TYPE OF -- I GOT NOTICE TODAY 
          [01:05:04]
THAT GLOBAL SPECTRUM HAS JUST MERGE $WITH A COMPANY THAT SPECIALIZED IN ENTERTAINMENT VENUES. 
          WHEN YOU HAVE AN ISSUE SUCH AS FAIRGROUNDS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT THAT ANY ASSET LIKE ANY HOME NEEDS TO BE UPDATED IF YOU WANT TO SELL IT. I DON'T MEAN PHYSICALLY SELL IT FOR A PRICE, BUT SELL IT TO A TENANT OR SOMEONE WHO COMES IN AND WANTS TO RENT IT. THAT IS HOW WE LOWERED THE COST OF OUR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OUT THERE. 
          BUT MAKE NO MISTAKE, ALL COUNTIES THAT ARE OUR SIZE AND MANY OF THEM MUCH, MUCH SMALLER INCLUDING OUR NEIGHBORS HAVE EXTENSIVE FAIRGROUNDS AND THE REASON IS EXTENSIVE HISTORY IN 4-H, JUNIOR LIVESTOCK SHOW AND THE LARGEST IN THE STATE. 
          BECAUSE OF THOSE HISTORY, F FAIRGROUNDS HAVE THINGS THAT MAY NOT MAKE YOU A LOT OF MONEY BUT ARE VERY VITAL TO THE COMMUNITY WE SERVE; HOWEVER, IF YOU WANT TO SCRATCH YOUR HEAD AND SAY, GOSH, OVER TIME, WE GOT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO KEEP MAINTAINING IT SO IT BECOMES THE LOCATION THAT GETS RENTED TO OFFSET THE NEEDS THAT WE HAVE AND THEN YOU HAVE TO FIND UPWARD MOBILITY. THAT IS THE PURPOSE -- EXCUSE 
          ME ONE SECOND. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  SORRY. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  BY THE WAY I AM INSTALLING THOSE WONDERFUL BUTTONS TO DO A BETTER JOB AS A COURT WHERE WE GET TO SAY HOW YOU CALL -- DARYL HAS BEEN KIND ENOUGH TO ORDER THOSE FOR US OR GET THOSE DONE SO THAT WAY WHEN YOU GUYS HAVE A QUESTION AND YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING THE LIGHT WILL COME ON AND I WILL PAUSE AND I WILL CALL ON YOU. AND WE CAN HAVE DECORUM AGAIN. 
          THAT WILL BE GOOD FOR ALL OF US. 
          SO I AM GOING TO DO MY BEST. LOOKING LEFT AND LOOKING RIGHT AND LOOKING AT MY AUDIENCE. THEY SAY THAT WOMEN HAVE EYES IN THE BACK OF THEIR HEADS BUT CONTRARY TO PUBLIC BELIEF, I DO NOT. GIVE ME -- AS THEY SAY, GIVE ME JUST A SECOND. BUT THAT UPWARD MOBILITY NEEDS TO BE STATED, AND I REALIZE THERE IS A DESIRE TO EXTRACT SOMETHING TO SAVE DOLLARS BUT, AGAIN, LET'S GO INTO OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS THAT. 
          I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT TO BE A LEGAL OR VIABLE ECONOMIC OPTION AND HAS A LOT TO DO WITH CONTRACT LAW. 
          BUT ANY RATE, I DO WANT TO YOU KNOW AND IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THAT -- THAT AM FEE THEATRE AGAIN COVID-19 HAS CHANGED OUR WORLD AND THE WAY WE RENT -- THE WAY WE RENT FACILITIES NOW, IT REALLY PROMPTS OUTDOOR -- OUTDOOR VENUES. 
          IT TURNS OUT TO BE A VERY BIG ASSET. 
          AND SO THAT WAS THE THEORY OF THE CASE IN JUDGE OF 2019. 
          AND IT WAS BORNE BY ABM GOING -- YOU ASKED COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ HOW -- HOW IT CAME ABOUT THAT THESE PROJECTS GOT SCOPED. WELL, THEY STARTED WITH THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND ABM WENT TO  PUBLIC WORKS AND WHAT I LOVE TO SAY OF COMMISSIONER CHESNEY. 
          YOU ARE VERY CONSISTENT. YOU HAD NO INTEREST IN ANY PROJECTS IN YOUR AREA AND THAT WAS FINE. 
          THAT WAS RESPECTED. BUT COMMISSIONER VAUGHN, MAREZ AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT GONZALEZ ALL HAD PRESENTATIONS GIVEN TO THEM BY ABM REGARDING PROJECTS THAT COULD DO BOTH, PROVIDE ENERGY SAVINGS AND PROVIDE AMENITIES TO THEIR CONST CONSTITUENTS. AND IF YOU ARE GOING TO BORROW $30 MILLION, IT SEEMED LOGICAL THAT THERE WOULD BE A SMALL PERCENTAGE, 5% GIVEN TO MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE COUNTY. 
          AND THAT WAS THE NATURE OF IT. AND SO I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY AND UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE BEHIND COMMISSIONERS -- IT HAPPENS TO BE IN THE FAIRGROUND BUT COMMISSIONER MAREZ'S PRECINCT. THEY, TOO, WISH TO HAVE AMEN TEASE THAT ARE -- AMENITIES THAT ARE BEAUTIFUL AND LIVABLE AND THIS LIFE THAT WE LIVE WHERE OUTDOOR IS BETTER AND REVENUES THAT ARE REVENUE PRODUCING JUST LIKE THE COAST. 
          PING WHEN WE LOOK AT THE BALANCING ACT, THAT SEEMS VERY EQUITABLE TO ME. THAT WAS THE PREMISE IT WAS HERE. TO AT LEAST HAVE THIS ONE PERSPECTIVE PRESENTED. YOU DON'T HAVE TO AGREE, BUT THAT PERSPECTIVE HAS TO AT LEAST BE PROVIDED TO YOU. 
          SO WE WILL -- I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF IT IS THE PLEASURE OF COURT TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION NOW. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  I HAVE A COMMENT OF RESPONSE. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  I WOULD LIKE TO ASK OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. LEGAL. 
          AND I WOULD LIKE TO GET THROUGH SOME OF THE OTHER GRANTS. 
          >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  I WOULD LIKE TOE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, JUDGE, IF YOU DON'T MIND. 
          HAVE A BUTTON TIME LIMIT SP SPEAKING TO. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  THAT WOULD BE NICE. 
          >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  I WANT TO MENTION WHATEVER IT WAS 
          [01:10:03]
WORTH AND I WAS SCRATCHING MY HEAD AND THINKING ABOUT IT. 
          WE HAVEN'T BALLPARKED THERE. WOULD BE A PERFECT THEATRE. 
          YOU GOT THE STADIUM. YOU HAVE THE SOUND SYSTEM. 
          YOU GOT, YOU KNOW, THE FIELD. WHAT MORE OF A THEATRE THAT YOU WANT THAT YOU CAN PUT OUT ON THE FIELD, YOU KNOW. 
          YOU WANT A STAGE. BUT THAT'S WHERE IT GOES. 
          I AM JUST SAYING. YOU GOT YOUR SEATING. 
          YOU GOT YOUR LIGHTING. YOU GOT YOUR SPEAKER AND EVERYTHING THERE. I MEAN -- I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY THOUGHT ABOUT THAT OR NOT. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  WE DID. IT HAS A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN. IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR CIP. 
          OVER $5 MILLION TO IMPROVE. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  I AM JUST ASKING, JUDGE. IF IT WAS -- 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  IT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU. 
          >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:  IT WASN'T. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  IN THE CIP. ANYWAY, COMMISSIONER CHESNEY. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  I WANTED TO SAY, JUDGE. 
          I WANT TO MAKE A SLIGHT ADDITION TO WHAT YOU SAID. 
          IT WASN'T THAT I WASN'T INTERESTED IN THE PROJECTS FOR OUR PRECINCT. I WASN'T INTERESTED IN ANY THAT WERE PRESENTED TO ME QUITE HONESTLY. 
          THEY WERE NOT VERY APPEALING ON A ENERGY SAVINGS PROPOSAL AND THEY WEREN'T APPEALING AND IT NEVER CAME BACK AROUND TO INCLUDE ANY AFTER THAT. I BASICALLY SAID NO TO THOSE AND DIDN'T HAVE ANY THAT CAME BACK. 
          I WANT TO MAKE -- >>JUDGE CANALES:  YOU MET WITH 
          ABM? >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  A SLIGHT CLARIFICATION. I CAN'T THINK OF NAY ARE ENERGY SAVINGS AND DIDN'T THINK IT WAS WORTH SPENDING THE MONEY ON WHAT THEY PRESENTED AND THIS WAS THE POINT ON THAT. 
          BUT, AGAIN, IF WE HAVE TO -- AND WE WILL TALK ABOUT IN LE LEGAL, BUT IF WE HAVE TO STICK WITH THE AMPHITHEATRE, IF WE HAVE TO AND NO WAY AROUND IT, THEN I THINK IT WOULD BE WORTH LOOKING AT, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF WE EVER -- I KNOW WHAT IS ON THE CIP PLAN BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE WILL DO WITH THAT BASEBALL STADIUM. IT MIGHT BE WORTH TAKING A LOOK AT, BECAUSE I -- PERSONALLY I DON'T THINK ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT BASEBALL STADIUM. SOMEONE ELSE MAY AND DELMAR MAY PLAY BUT IFS AND MAYBES AND THAT SAT THERE WITH VERY LITTLE USE AND NOT IN GOOD SHAPE AND MAYBE IF WE ARE -- I WON'T USE THE WORD. IF WE HAVE TO STAY ON THE AMPHITHEATRE WITH CONTRACTUAL LANGUAGE AS THE JUDGE SUGG SUGGESTED, MAYBE WE NEED TO LOOK AT MOVING IT OVER THERE AND PUT A COOL STAGE IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT BASEBALL FIELD AND YOU HAVE THE LIGHTS AND THE BLEACHERS. 
          AND LET'S THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX A LITTLE BIT IF WE HAVE TO HAVE IT. I DON'T THINK THAT IS A BAD 
          IDEA TO TALK ABOUT. >>JUDGE CANALES:  OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. SURE,  MIKE, GO AHEAD. 
          >> MIKE -- JUDGE SORRY, MIKE, TOO. 
          >> FIRST OFF WITH RESPECT TO THE ENGINEERING AT THE -- FOR THE AMPHITHEATRE. IT WAS AT THE REQUEST OF PUBLIC WORKS WE MOVE IT AND NOT A ABM DECISION. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF I HEARD CORRECTLY BUT A QUESTION WHETHER YOU SHOULD PAY FOR THE ENGINEERING. 
          I HAVE A CONTRACT TO A LOCAL CORPUS CHRISTI ENGINEERING F FIRM. ARE YOU ASKING ME NOT TO PAY 
          THEM, I AM HOPING NOT. >> I AM SAYING IF THAT IS ALL I HAD TO PAY -- NOT TO PAY SOMEBODY THAT YOU HAVE A 
          CONTRACT WITH. >> THAT IS ALL UNDER CONTRACT. 
          THE SECOND POINT, JUDGE, YOU COMMENTED BRIEFLY OF THE FACT OF ECONOMIES OF SCALE OF CONSTRUCTION, RIGHT. 
          THE AMOUNT OF WORK BEING DONE AT THE FAIRGROUNDS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT THE SUPERVISION AND SAFETY STAFF ON-SITE,  RIGHT, COMES INTO PLAY AND VERY SMART TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THOSE RESOURCES TO THE GREATEST BENEFIT OF THE COUNTY AND NOT DO THESE AS SINGULAR SMALL PROJECTS. SO, AGAIN, THERE ARE GREAT ECONOMIES OF SCALE. RIGHT. 
          AND THEN -- THE ONLY -- THE ONLY LAST -- THE LAST THING I WOULD SAY WOULD BE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE IS A LOT OF BENEFITS TO HAVING THAT AMPHITHEATRE. 
          WE AGREE. DON'T FORGET ABOUT JOB CREATION, RIGHT, THERE IS GOING TO BE VENUES. 
          PEOPLE NEEDING TO WORK CONCESSIONS. 
          ALL THOSE THINGS I AM ASSUMING WENT INTO A DECISION IN DISCUSSION WITH THE COURT. WE ARE HERE TO HELP YOU HOWEVER WE CAN. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE AWARE OF WHEN YOU MAKE A DECISION, THE DOMINOS THAT ARE 
          SET INTO EFFECT. >>JUDGE CANALES:  FAIR ENOUGH. 
          >> EXCUSE ME, JUDGE. I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. 
          TO PUBLIC WORKS. IN TALKING TO HIM, HE TOLD ME THAT Y'ALL WERE GOING TO PLACE AMPHITHEATRE ON TOP WHERE ALL THE UTILITIES ARE, AND TALKING TO HIM, HE SAID THAT WAS NOT THE RIGHT THING TO DO. AND YOU ALL AGREED AND YOU WERE GOING TO LOOK TO SEE WHERE ELSE COULD YOU PLACE IT. 
          AND I UNDERSTAND -- I AM NOT AN ENGINEER. 
          [01:15:03]
I AM GOING BY WHAT NAME IS AN ENGINEER TELLING US YOU WILL PUT ALL THE CONCRETE ON TOP -- ON TOP OF THE UTILITIES AND IF WE EVER HAVE A PROBLEM, WHAT DO YOU THINK WAS GOING TO HAPPEN? 
          >> I WILL LEAVE THAT UP TO THE ENGINEERS AND THAT'S WHY WE OPENED UP DISCUSSION WITH THE ENGINEERS TO SEE IF THERE WAS AN OPPORTUNITY BEFORE WE PUT A SHOVEL IN THE GROUND. 
          I AM, AS WELL, NOT MECHANICAL OR ELECTRICAL ENGINEER BY TR TRADE, BUT I WILL SAY -- I WILL DEFER TO THE ENGINEERING TEAM WHETHER OR NOT WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE OR NOT ACCEPTABLE. 
          >> I WAS JUST WE ARE THAT YOU SAID PUBLIC WORKS ASKED YOU TO 
          MOVE IT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. 
          >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ:  THEY SIMPLY ALERTED WHERE YOU PUT IT. YOU ALL DECIDED. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  WE CONCURRED AS A TEAM THAT THE MOVEMENT TO THE 100 FEET TO THE TO THE EAST IS A REALLY SMART MOVE HAVE AN AESTHETIC POINT OF VIEW. THERE WERE ISSUES THAT WERE BROUGHT UP INITIALLY THAT WE WANTED TO BE CLOSE TO THE BALLROOM SO THAT WE HAD CONSCIOUS HAVE RECEPTIONS, GRADUATIONS COULD HAVE RECEPTIONS. 
          THERE WAS A CONCEPT THAT WAS FIRST PRESENTED THAT UPON RETROSPECT THERE WAS A BETTER CHOICE BY MOVING IT. 
          YOU GAINED TWO OR THREE THINGS. WASN'T THAT IT WOULD BE ON TOP OF UTILITIES BUT YOU WOULD BE ACCESSING UTILITIES AND WATER LINES THAT WOULD -- IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR EVERYBODY. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT -- THAT'S WHY THERE IS SORT OF A PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TEAM. A PUBLIC WORKS TEAM AND CONTRACTORS. WHEN THEY ALL SIT TOGETHER, THEY ALL SAY, HEY NO HARM, NO FOUL, MOVE IT OVER 50 FEET. 
          NOT CHANGES THAT COME TO COURT BUT CHANGES THAT ARE MADE IN THE FIELD IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PROJECT. 
          I DON'T THINK ANYBODY SAYS EVERYTHING BUT WE ALL AGREE. 
          WE WILL JUST MOVE ON. WHAT I AM GOING TO DO -- I AM GOING TO TRY TO TACKLE THE COURT. 
          THERE IS A LOT OF DEPARTMENT HEADS THAT ARE HERE AND I WILL ASK THAT YOU -- WE MOVE TOWARD TO THE MARIA BETIA HERE TO DO REGULAR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3. RECEIVE OVERVIEW AND DISCUSS PERMISSIBLE USES OF ARPA. AND MARIA, YOU HAVE GOT SOME -- YOU HAVE GOT A DOCUMENT THAT NEEDS TO BE TURNED IN TOMORROW. 
          I ASKED TO MAKE THE COURT AW AWARE. 
          THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE. BUT ALSO, MARIA, THERE IS A DISCUSS TO CONSIDER PRIORITIZATION AND ALLOCATION OF RECLASSIFICATIONS. I WILL TAKE THAT PIECE OF IT. 
          BUT IF WOULD START US A OFF WITH THE DRAFT THAT YOU PREPARED WE WOULD APPRECIATE IT. 
          >> SURE. IN WOULD BE -- 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  3-A-3. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  SAY 
          THAT AGAIN? >>JUDGE CANALES:  DID WE GET 
          BACKUP? >> THERE WASN'T BACK-UP FOR THAT ITEM. ACTUALLY 2-A -- 2-A-3 OR 2-B-1 
          [1.  Discuss and consider the submission of an Initial Recovery Plan to the United States Department of Treasury in relation to the American Rescue Plan Act Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund.]
          IS SOMEWHAT RELATED. >>JUDGE CANALES:  SO THEY ARE NOT NERVOUS ABOUT IT. THIS IS JUST A REPORTING THAT IS DONE. NOT ANYTHING OTHER THAN WE HAVE A JOB TO DO FOR TREASURY. ALL 254 COUNTIES THAT GOT MONEY HAVE TO DO THIS AND THIS DOES NOT MEAN. 
          THIS IS VERY GENERAL. VERY, VERY GENERAL BASED UPON OUR OWN COURT'S DISCUSSIONS. IT DOESN'T COMMIT THE COURT TO ANYTHING EXCEPT TO TELL TREASURY WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING, WHAT WE HAVE BEEN UP TO AND HOW WE ARE COMING UP WITH A 
          PLAN, MARIA? >> THE BACKUP THAT SHOULD BE IN YOUR PACKETS THAT I ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA ITEMS. ITEM 2-B-1. A RECOVERY PLAN PERFORMANCE REPORT DUE TO THE TREASURY BY TOMORROW. 
          WE WANTED TO BRING IT BEFORE THE COURT EVEN THOUGH I CONSIDER IT A PERFORMANCE REPORT WANTED TO BRING IT BEFORE THE COURT BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE PUBLISHED ON OUR COUNTY'S WEB SITE. THE REPORT IS DUE TOMORROW. 
          THIS IS OUR INITIAL PLAN SINCE WE ARE STILL WORKING THROUGH AND HAGGERTY IS WORKING ON THE PHASES OF ENGAGEMENT FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT, UNTIL WE GET INTO THAT STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK OF THE MONEY WE ARE GOING TO BE SPENDING FOR ARPA DOLLARS, THIS IS OUR INITIAL REPORT. 
          IT IS DUE ANNUALLY AND AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND LEFT IT ON GENERAL TERMS BASED ON THE DISCUSSION THAT HAGGERTY HAD WITH THE JUDGE AND EACH COMMISSIONER AND WANTING TO TOUCH EACH ONE OF THE ELIGIBLE USES AND WANT TO SPEND -- 
          >> SO MOVED BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO TURN IT IN BY TOMORROW. 
          >> OKAY, GREAT. THAT WORKS FOR ME. 
          [01:20:04]
WHAT IS BEFORE YOU IS THE LATEST DRAFT. 
          I DID EXPAND UPON THE USES A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT, AGAIN, IT IS JUST KIND OF AN OVERVIEW OF WHERE THE DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN SO FAR REGARDING THE USE OF THESE DOLLARS. 
          WE WILL UPDATE IT AND SUBMIT IT TO THE TREASURY. 
          ONCE AGAIN THE COURT DECIDES ON A FINAL STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK 
          PLAN. >>JUDGE CANALES:  I THINK THE TREASURY WANTS TO KNOW THAT YOU ARE ACKNOWLEDGING, WORKING ON IT, GOT SOME IDEAS. THIS IS REALLY WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT. I AM ON A LIST SERVE WITH ALL THE JUDGES AND I HAVE GOTTEN LIKE 100 TODAY. 
          THE ONLY -- HOW ARE YOU DOING IT? HOW ARE YOU DOING IT? HOW ARE YOU DOING IT? THE ONLY THING I WILL ASK YOU ONE JUDGE SAID HE WOULDN'T LIST LOST REVENUES ONLY TO SAY THEY ARE CALCULATING LOST REVENUES AND YOU MADE MENTION OF THAT IN HERE, THAT'S CORRECT? 
          >> THE LANGUAGE BEING USED FOR REVENUE REPLACEMENT IS -- SO I USE THE LANGUAGE RECOVERING LOSS REVENUE IS A PARTICULAR INTEREST OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT AS THE PANDEMIC 
          CONTINUES. >>JUDGE CANALES:  PERFECT. 
          >> THIS CAN ASSIST THE COUNTY IN TEMPORARILY OFFSETTING GENERAL COSTS SO THE FOCUS CAN REMAIN ON THE COVID-19 RES RESPONSE. IF THAT IS ACCEPTABLE, THAT WILL REMAIN IN THERE. IT WON'T TAKE -- I ALREADY ALERTED INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TALKED TO DIRT ABOUT POSTING THIS ON THE WEB SITE. SO IF THERE ARE ANY FINAL COMMENTS TO BE MADE, PLEASE SHARE THEM WITH ME. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO GET IT POSTED -- IT HAS TO BE POSTED BEFORE THE END OF THE DAY TOMORROW. JUDGE JUCHBLINGZ TESTED -- ALSO JUST SAYING THEY WERE HAVING TROUBLE WITH THE PORTALS. 
          TRY IT EARLY IN THE MORNING AND MAKE SURE YOU ARE NOT TROUBLE WITH THE PORTAL. I THINK SOME OF THE JUDGES SAID WHATEVER GLITCH, IT GOT FIXED. AND THE OTHER THING IS, THAT YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY REVIEW THIS WITH HAGGERTY. 
          AND -- >> YES. 
          REPORTING IS NOT PART OF HAGGERTY'S SCOPE RIGHT NOW ONLY BECAUSE THEY WERE HIRED TO KIND OF HELP US DEVELOP THE USES OF THE PLAN. OBVIOUSLY ONCE THAT PLAN IS DEVELOPED, WE ARE TALKING OF AN RFP FOR PROJECTS PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TO MANAGE ALL THESE PROJECTS COMING FROM THE ARPA DOLLARS AND PASS IT ON TO THE REPORTING ENERGY. 
          >> HARRY I CAN'T, I HAVE A QUESTION. 
          SOME OF THE FUNDS, WILL THEY BE ABLE TO BE UTILIZED FOR PARKS? 
          >> SOME -- WELL,  THAT CAN BE UNDER THE "LOST REVENUE" CATEGORIES. GENERAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES. 
          GENERALLY THAT IS NOT ALLOWED, BUT, AGAIN, WHEN WE ARE LOOKING AT THE LOST REVENUE RECOVERY THAT CAN BE USED FOR -- A 
          LITTLE MORE BROAD. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ:  YOU ARE SAYING COULD BE USED FOR PARKS? 
          >> IT COULD, YES, POTENTIALLY. >>JUDGE CANALES:  LET ME -- LET ME BACK UP JUST FOR A SECOND. IT CAN BE USED FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICES. THAT -- THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN, LIKE, LET'S SAY PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT OR IT'S SO -- YOUR QUESTION IS VERY BROAD, AND SHE IS ANSWERING IT VERY CORRECTLY. 
          >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ:  LIKE PARKING LOTS AND WALKING TR 
          TRAILS. >> AGAIN, GENERALLY, YOU KNOW, UNDER THE LOST REVENUE KIND OF CATEGORY, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IF IT IS RELATED TO A GOVERNMENT SERVICE, YES. 
          THERE IS AND I CAN SPEAK WITH YOU OFFLINE AND I DID DISCOVER THAT TEXAS PARK AND WILDFIRE HAVE OUTDOOR RECREATION FUNDS AND BECAME AVAILABLE AND JUST OPENED UP THAT. 
          >> IT IS GOING TO BE -- I WOULD LOVE FOR IT TO COVER THOSE AREAS. BUT I DON'T SEE HOW IT DEPENDS ON THE DEFINITION OF GOVERNMENT SERVICE, AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE ASKED TREASURY. MARIA IS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO THEN A BECAUSE TREASURY HAVEN'T GIVEN US THE GUIDANCE 
          AND SEE IF IT WOULD COVER THAT. >> SAYS LANE EVENTS LIKE THE 
          LATEST RAIN EVENTS WE HAD. >> THAT WAS IN REFERENCE TO THE WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE CATEGORY. 
          >> OKAY. OVER IN HILLTOP ON THE WALKING TRAIL, ON THAT CREEK THAT IS THERE, OKAY, IT FLOODED AND EXPOSED A BIG SEWER LINE, OKAY. WOULD THAT BE COVERED? 
          >> THAT WOULD BE UNDER THE WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE CATEGORY. THERE ARE FOUR MAIN CATEGORIES. 
          IF YOU REMEMBER HAGGERTY HAD SHARED KIND OF THE ONE SLIDE AND I CAN SEND IT TO YOU AGAIN WHERE IT IS -- YOU KNOW, IT IS COVID, PUBLIC HEALTH, ADDRESSING NEGATIVE ECONOMIC IMPACTS. THE LOST REVENUE AND THE WATER AND SEWER COMPONENT AS WELL. AND THEN PREMIUM. 
          JUDGE THAT SEWER LINE COULD BE A CORPUS CHRISTI LINE. 
          WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE PAYING FOR CORPUS CHRISTI LINES. 
          >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ:  WE ARE NOT AND IN DISCUSSION 
          UNDECIDED TO IT BELONGS TO. >>JUDGE CANALES:  IT BELONGS TO 
          US. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ:  MADE OUT OF CLAY, WE ARE ASKING FOR BIGGER PROBLEMS. 
          [01:25:01]
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  IF IT BELONGS US TO, THAT WOULD DEFINITELY QUALIFY. A WATER -- A WATER 
          INFRASTRUCTURE QUALIFIES. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: 
          THANK YOU. >> YOU ARE WELCOME. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MARIA WILL GET THIS IN THE PORTAL. 
          AGAIN, YOU ARE ALWAYS WELCOME TO E-MAIL HER. 
          I HATE TO SAY IT BUT THEY CAN'T E-MAIL YOU TONIGHT BECAUSE WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO IT UNTIL PROBABLY LUNCH. 
          AGAIN, IT IS GENERAL. IT'S -- WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING THIS QUARTERLY. IS THAT RIGHT? 
          >> ACTUALLY REQUIRED ANNUALLY BUT YOU CAN UPDATE AS OFTEN AS 
          YOU PLEASE. >>JUDGE CANALES:  WE WILL UPDATE IT AS OFTEN AS WE UPDATE IT OURSELVES. 
          OKAY, IS THERE A MOTION TO RECEIVE -- A MOTION FROM GONZALEZ. IS THERE A SECOND TO SUBMIT THIS? YES, YOU HEARD IT. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL NOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. 
          [3.  Receive overview and discuss permissible uses of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds under the final interim rules; discuss and consider project prioritization and allocation of ARPA funds, including new positions and/or reclassifications, and related matters.]
THE NEXT PIECE OF THIS IS CONSIDER PROJECT PRIORITIZATION AND ALLOCATION OF ARPA FUNDS. YOU RECALL LAST COURT WE ACTUALLY DID SOME OF THIS WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S POSITION AND WE ALSO HAD THE LIFEGUARD SERVICES AND RISK ASSESSMENT. 
          THREE PRIORITIZATION THAT THE COURT MADE ACCOMMODATIONS FOR WHAT I WANTED TO DO TODAY HIGHLIGHT THAT THERE ARE OTHER POSITIONS THAT MIGHT RELIEF BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS IF THEY WERE TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE PRIORITIZATION. 
          AND THAT WOULD BE THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DISASTER RECOVERY SPECIALIST. THE PLANNER FOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT. TERESA, FORGIVE ME. 
          I MAY HAVE LEFT MY NOTES ON THE DESK AND THE CONSTABLE FOR PRECINCT FOUR. AND IT COULD -- IT COULD BE A VARIETY OF THINGS. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A CONSTABLE BUT COULD BE A CONTRACT FOR SECURITY BUT UP TO YOU -- NOT UP TO YOU BUT UP TO US TO CONSIDER HOW THAT WORKS. 
          AGAIN I AM PUTTING IT IN AS A PRIORITIZATION AND FIGURE IT 
          OUT LATER. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  MAKE WE PUT IN A CONCEPT AND LET US TALK TO CONSTABLE SHERWOOD AND 
          GET HIS INPUT. >>JUDGE CANALES:  I THINK SECURITY IS WHAT I AM LOOKING FOR. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: ANYTHING -- REALLY, JUDGE, IF YOU KIND OF WONDER IF THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN DO WITH THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT POSITIONS OR ANY OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE PUT IN AS KIND OF A CONTRACT BASIS. 
          IF WE PUT A POSITION AND IT GOES AWAY BECAUSE THE ARPPA 
          FUNDS GO AWAY. >>JUDGE CANALES:  THAT IS WHAT I JUST SAID. I SAID DO IT WITH RECOVERY 
          SPECIALIST, PLANNER. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  GREAT 
          IDEA. >>JUDGE CANALES:  IF IT IS YOURS, IT IS GREAT. I LOVE IT. 
          I WILL TAKE IT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  IT IS 
          YOURS. >>JUDGE CANALES:  THOSE WERE THREE. I FEEL LIKE THERE WAS A FOURTH ONE, TERESA, BUT THE THREE THAT COME TO MIND AS PRIORITIZATION AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED TO BE PART OF THE BUDGET. AND IF THERE IS MORE, THEY CAN PUT THEM MORE, BUT THESE ARE THE ONES THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  I WILL TALK TO CONSTABLE SHERWOOD 
          ABOUT THAT. >>JUDGE CANALES:  IN CONCEPT, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU MAYBE MAKE A MOTION TO 
          PRIORITIZE TODAY. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  I WILL MOVE AS A CONCEPT TO PUT THE CONCEPTS IN AND DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT THEY NEED TO BE POSITIONS OR CONTRACT LABOR FOR LACK OF A BETTER WAY OF MAKING THE MOTION IF THAT IS CLEAR. 
          >> HIRE TWO CONTRACTS. >>JUDGE CANALES:  HOWEVER IT TURNS OUT. YOU ARE LETTING DALE KNOW, HEY, YOU DON'T HAVE TO CONSIDER THOSE BECAUSE THEY WE ARE GOING TO PRIORITIZE THOSE BECAUSE SECURITY WILL BE AN ISSUE IN THE 3600 ACRES AND WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE -- HOW TO MAKE THAT WORK. SO IS THAT -- 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  THAT IS A MOTION. 
          IF IT WAS CLEAR. I WILL TRY AGAIN IF IT WASN'T. 
          THAT OKAY FOR THE CLERK? A LITTLE LONG BUT -- I WILL JUST MOVE THAT WE -- FOR THE -- FOR THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT POSITIONS AND THE CONSTABLE POSITION ON THE CLAYBURG LAND, THAT THOSE FUNDS BE USED IN SOME FORM, WHETHER IT BE EMPLOYEES OR CONTRACT LABOR OUT OF THE ARPA FUNDS. 
          THAT WASN'T BAD. THAT IS MY MOTION. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  PRETTY GOOD ACTUALLY. 
          THAT IS REALLY GOOD. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  BETTER THAN THE FIRST TRY. IS. 
          >> SECOND JUDGE WE CAN COME BACK AND MAKE IT MORE FORMER. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  LET THE RECORD REFLECT IT WAS THE 
          [01:30:01]
          JUDGE'S IDEA. >>JUDGE CANALES:  I THINK WE HAVE TO BE VERY MINDFUL OF WHICH ONE AND YOU SAID IT PERFECTLY MAYBE NOT POSITIONS YOU NEED ALL THE TIME AND MAYBE WE NEED A DIFFERENT MIND SET IN TWO YEARS. 
          MAYBE THIS FISCAL YEAR IT IS A RELIEF ON -- A RELIEF ON THE BUDGET. AND IT STILL ACCOMPLISHES WHAT YOU NEED TO. I AM GOING TO SECOND IT. 
          SINCE IT WAS YOUR IDEA. AND AND THEN -- 
          >> I SECONDED IT. >>JUDGE CANALES:  ALL RIGHT. 
          MOTION AND A SECOND AND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. 
          WE HAVE ANOTHER MEETING ON THE 8TH. 
          YOU THINK -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  THAT THAT BIG JOHN MAREZ'S FACE OFF THE SCREEN. 
          THAT SCARED ME, SORRY, JUDGE. >>JUDGE CANALES:  DALE THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS. IF YOU SAY I THINK THIS ONE IS KEY. IF YOU DON'T MIND. 
          >> I ALREADY HAVE IT SEPARATED WHAT WILL BE IN THERE. 
          YOU SAY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S POSITION. 
          TWO ATTORNEYS AND ONE LEGAL ASSISTANT POSITION. 
          PROPOSED PUTTING THE PIO THERE AND ALSO EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT POSITION. I WOULD INCLUDE A CONSTABLE DEPUTY OR SECURITY FUNCTION. WE PUT IN TEMPORARY SERVICE FOR OUR VETERAN SERVICE AGENTS. SO THAT IS THE ONE -- 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  I JUST REMEMBERED THE FOURTH ONE. 
          YOU JUST JOGGED -- I SHOULD HAVE REMEMBERED IT WHEN I SAW ANJELICA. YOU WILL HEAR ABOUT THIS A MINUTE AND WE WILL HEAR ABOUT IT AND THEN HOLD WHEN WE GET TO GRANTS, BUT WE WERE NOTIFIED THAT WE LOST A VERY IMPORTANT GRANT FOR VICTIM ASSISTANCE COORDINATION, BUT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE CARE OF THAT IN THIS -- I THINK WE WILL GET THIS GRANT BACK IN A YEAR. AND IF WE COULD TAKE CARE OF THAT IN THE ARPA FUNDS THAN WE DON'T LOSE A BEAT ON HELPING THE CONTINUUM -- THE CONTINUUM OF SERVICE THAT ARE PROVIDED. 
          IN FACT IT EXPIRES TOMORROW AUGUST 31. 
          >> YOU HAVE THOSE POSITIONS ON D-1 AND 2. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  WE CAN GET TO THERE WHEN WE GET TO D-1 AND 2. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  I AM CONFUSED WHERE I GOT AN E-MAIL FROM MARK SAYING NOT TO WORRY ABOUT THESE. 
          I MAY BE THINKING OF THE WRONG ONE. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  HE DID SAY THAT. 
          AND I WROTE BACK AND I SAID WE HAVE A SOLUTION TO HELP. 
          HE IS WORRIEDED OF MONEY FROM THE E-MAIL, I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          BUT I WANT HIM TO WORRY MORE ABOUT VICTIMS. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  LET'S DEE THAT ONE. 
          AND ANJELCA. >> WE WILL WAIT TO THOSE UNTIL 
          WE GET TO THE D-2. >>JUDGE CANALES:  THAT IS ONE IS THERE. THE RISK ASSESSMENT. 
          THAT ONE WE DID LAST COURT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. 
          WE WILL ADD THOSE TO THE PRIORITIZATION, DALE. 
          AND -- AND THEN LET'S MOVE TO GRANTS. 
          WE ALREADY DID THAT ONE. WE ALREADY DID THAT AND PURCHASING. MICHAEL C-1. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  CAN I HAVE -- I HAVE QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE THINK THAT TO ASK JENNY BEFORE WE GET TOO FAR INTO IT. AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND ALONG BEFORE I SEE ALL OF THAT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT PEOPLE THINK I DID ANYTHING BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN ANYTHING. 
          I NEED TO ASK JENNY ONE -- CAN YOU NOT DO THIS. 
          AND, TWO, WHAT EXACTLY DOES THIS, IN YOUR OPINION, DO FOR THE COUNTY AND IS IT TRULY N NEEDED IN YOUR OPINION, BECAUSE THIS IS A LEGAL THING. AND I STILL DON'T HAVE THAT QUESTION ANSWERED. I DON'T WANT TO GET THE DOCUMENTS BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHO IS GETTING SELECTED AND I 
          DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT THAT. >>JUDGE CANALES:  ONE AT TO DO THAT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION? I CAN SKIP C-1 AND MICHAEL, IF 
          [1.  Discuss and consider funding Dept. 2001 Other Victim Assistance Grants (OVAG) Victim Assistance – 2 temporary positions of 29 hours a week, for the month of September 2021.]
          [2.  Discuss and consider funding for Dept. 2001 Other Victim Assistance Grants (OVAG) Victim Assistance – 2 temporary positions of 29 hours a week, for FY 21/22 or until the grant can be renewed.]
YOU JUST HOLD, PLEASE. GO TO D-1. 
          D-1 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER FUNDING DEPARTMENT 2001  THE OVAG, THE VICTIM ASSISTANCE. TWO TEMPORARY POSITIONS 29 HOURS A WEEK FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2021. 
          I WILL HAVE JULIE TELL US ABOUT THE DOLLARS AND CENTS. 
          DO YOU WANT TO HAVE THE DOLLAR AND CENTS THERE. 
          MY BAD THERE. SO THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE JUST DISCUSSED IS WE LOST THAT GRANT. 
          MARIA, DO YOU WANT TO SET THE STAGE FOR THE GRANT AND LET JULIE -- TELL EVERYBODY WHAT HAPPENED. 
          >> SO THE OTHER VICTIM ASSISTANCE GRANT -- WE CALL IT 
          [01:35:05]
OVAG -- IS THROUGH THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. 
          A TWO-YEAR GRANT FOR $42,000 A YEAR. 
          THE FIRST PART COVERED TWO CRIME VICTIM RESTTATION ANALYSTS AND SUPPLIES. SECOND YEAR WAS THE SAME THING. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN A REASON YET WHY WE WERE NOT FUND THIS YEAR. WE MET ALL OF THE PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS. WE MED ALL THE EXPENDITURE BENCHMARKS. FOR ONE REASON OR THE OTHER WE WERE NOT APPROVED FOR FUNDING THIS YEAR. 
          THIS GRANT DOES COME AVAILABLE EVERY YEAR. 
          AND WE WILL REAPPLY FOR NEXT YEAR. 
          SO, YEAH, UNFORTUNATELY, THEY WEREN'T FUNDED AND TWO P 
          PART-TIME CRIME VICTIM -- >>JUDGE CANALES:  WE MET OUR 
          METRICS? >> MET PERFORMANCE, EXPENDITURE. AGAIN, I WAS HOPING TO GET AN ANSWER FROM THE OAG'S OFFICE ON THE CONDITION WHERE WE WERE NOT FUNDED. BUT IT IS VERY UNFORTUNATE BUT A LOT OF VICTIM  ASSISTANCE FUNDS HAVE BEEN CUT. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  DOES THAT QUALIFY, DALE? 
          >> COVERING -- LOOKING WITH HAGGERTY ON THIS AND DEFINITELY A GOVERNMENT SERVICE TO PROVIDE THE SERVICES THAT WE NEED. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  ANYBODY REMIND US OF THE DOLLAR AND CENTS AND A NJELICA. WITH YOU A WANT TO MAKE 
          COMMENTS. >> THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, IT 
          WOULD COST US $3900. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  WE ARE 
          TALKING OF THE WHOLE YEAR. >>JUDGE CANALES:  IT ENDS TOMORROW AND WE NEED TO COVER THE ONE MONTH. 
          . >> FISCAL YEAR ENDS IN AUGUST. 
          SO -- ENDS IN SEPTEMBER SO ONE MONTH INTO SEPTEMBER. 
          >> FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR -- THE FOLLOWING YEAR FOR THE TWO POSITIONS TO FUND IT AT 29 HOURS WEEK,  I HAVE ABOUT $4 $45,500. FOR THE TWO POSITIONS. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR -- THAT IS WHAT ANJELICA SAYS IF SHE WANTS TO TALK. 
          I DON'T MEAN TO PUT HER ON THE SPOT IF SHE DOESN'T WANT TO. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  THAT IS FOR TWO. 
          THE $45,.0 >> TWO PART-TIME POSITIONS. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  PULL THE MIC UP A BIT. 
          >> I THINK HE IS JUMPING ON Y YOUTUBE TO WATCH WHAT IS GOING ON. OUR PRIORITY TO TRY TO GET OUR BUDGET SETTLED AND WORKING WITH DALE ON ISSUES THAT WILL COME UP AND WE ARE REALLY TRYING TO SAFEGUARD POSITIONING IN THE OFFICE. OUR OFFICE AS JUDGE SAID SERVING THE VICTIMS IS A PRIMARY DISCUSSION OF THE DA'S OFFICE AND ONE WE TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY AND DONE A GREAT JOB WITH THE GRANTS AND WORKED WITH MARIA ON THOSE GRANTS. 
          OUR UNDERSTANDING IS WE LOST IT BY LESS THAN ONE POINT FOR WHATEVER REASON. BUT I KNOW IT IS NOT FROM A LACK OF DILIGENCE ON OF MARIA AND SHARA AND THE OFFICE. 
          I AM THINKING THAT FUNDS WERE SLIM AND THEY HEIGHTENED THE POINT GAP. WHAT MARK WANTS TO MAKE SURE AND WHAT HE IS TELLING ME, WE JUST DON'T WANT ANYTHING IN OUR BUDGET TO CHANGE. WE DON'T WANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE POSITIONS LATER ON. WE DON'T WANT OUR NUMBERS TO CHANGE RIGHT NOW. WE ARE DESPERATELY TRYING TO KEEP THEM WHERE THEY ARE TO ENSURE WE SAFEGUARD EVERYTHING IN 13-23 IN THOSE POSITIONS WE ARE ASKING TO MOVE IN 3520 AND IF WE ADD $45,000 ON TO THE BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR, THEN WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE US IN TERMS OF OUR ASK AND HOW DOES THAT AFFECT OUR ASK. FOR EXAMPLE, THE GRANT POSITIONS DON'T SHOW UP ON OUR BUDGET AND THEY COME OUT OF A DIFFERENT AREA AND WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THEM, BUT ARE THESE POSITIONS GOING TO BE LIKE THOSE WHERE THEY DON'T APPEAR ON OUR BUDGET AND THEY ARE NOT AFFECTING OUR BUDGET AND THEY JUST ARE -- OUR POSITIONS IN OUR OFFICE LIKE THE OTHER GRANT POSITIONS WHERE THEY KIND OF, LIKE, FLY OFF THE RADAR AND GOING CONTINUE TO THIS BUDGET. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  A GOOD QUESTION. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  I SAID TO MARK, THE AMERICAN RELIEF PLAN ACT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR BUDGET. 
          NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN -- YOU CAN CHARACTERIZE IT IN MY OPINION AS MENTAL HEALTH. I MEAN, COULD YOU PUT IT INTO MULTIPLE BUCKETS UNDER GOVERNMENT SERVICES AND OR DECREASE IN -- I MEAN, THERE ARE SO MANY DIFFERENT AREAS AND THE WHOLE IDEA WAS, I DON'T THINK -- I REMEMBER THE DAY THAT SHARA CAME IN HERE WITH A WHOLE BUNCH OF DAS REALLY 
          [01:40:04]
BEGGING IN COURT TO MAKE CERTAIN WE MADE AN INVESTMENT FOR VICTIMS AND I REMEMBER THE DAY THAT THE WOMAN CAME IN TELLING US THAT WE BASICALLY WERE NOT DOING ENOUGH TO HELP 
          VICTIMS ASSISTANCE. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  I THINK SHE IS JUST ASKING FOR THE BUDGET. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  I THINK IT IS VERY IMPORTANT -- AND I ACTUALLY -- IT'S OKAY TO DISAGREE, BUT I HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT NOBODY HEARS THIS. IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME -- EVEN IF IT WERE TO AFFECT YOUR SALARIES, INCREASES OR SOME OF THAT, I MEAN, YOU GOT TO COME IN HERE BEGGING FOR VICTIMS RIGHTS AND ASKING THIS COURT TO DO EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER. 
          IT SHOULD NOT BE A BUDGETARY THING. 
          WE ARE THE ONES THAT WORRY ABOUT THE BUDGET. 
          AND I REALLY FEEL LIKE THAT NEEDS TO BE -- I WANT THE VICTIMS TO HEAR THIS LOUD AND CLEAR. 
          WE WILL DO EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING TO MAKE SURE THESE 
          POSITIONS STAY INTACT. >> BUT WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET, IT IS THE ATTORNEYS OF THE DA'S OFFICE THAT FIGHT FOR THE VICTIMS ON A DAILY BASIS, 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. WE CAN'T PART AND PARCEL AND SAY ONLY VICTIM ASSISTANCE COORDINATORS AND VICTIM RESTTATION ANALYSTS ARE CHAMPIONING THE VICTIMS. IT IS THE ATTORNEY. SO WHEN WE HAVE TO LOOK AT DOLLARS AND LOOK AT PRIORITIZING BECAUSE NO ONE WILL GET THEIR ECONOMIST LIST, MY ATTORNEY'S CAN STEP IN AND RESTITUTION AND NOT VICTIM ASSISTANCE COORDINATORS, RESTITUTION AND ONES THAT MAKE OUR VICTIMS WHOLE. 
          I EXPECT THE ATTORNEYS TO DO THAT ON A DAILY BASIS. 
          BY EXPECT THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT IT HAS RESTITUTION. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  YOU TOLD US YOU ARE BACKLOGGED, OVERWHELMED 
          AND UNDERSTAFFED. >> NO NOT BACKLOG ON OUR INTAKE ANYMORE. OUR INTAKE IS CAUGHT UP TO D DATE. BUT BACKLOGGED ON CASES AND TRIALS AND MAKING SURE WE HAVE ATTORNEYS WHO ARE COMPETENT AND EXPERIENCE TODAY KEEP THEM TO TRIAL, OUR MURDERS AND AGGRAVATED ASSAULT WHERE THE ATTORNEYS BECOME THE PRIORITY BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE WILL TAKE IT SO AS TO NOT BE IN THE BUDGET. IF I CAN HAVE JUST A SECOND. 
          I CAN CALL MARK AGAIN AND MAKE SURE HE IS STILL ON THE SAME 
          PAGE. >>JUDGE CANALES:  I TALKED TO HIM A LITTLE WHILE AGO, BUT I ALSO E-MAILED HIM BACK IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE I THINK AMERICAN  RELIEF PLAN WILL NOT AFFECT YOUR BUDGET. IF YOU WERE NOT APPROVED -- IF IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR BUDGET, WOULD YOU BE HAPPY ABOUT THAT? CORRECT. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: DOESN'T AFFECT HER BUDGET. 
          THAT IS ALL SHE ASKS. >> THESE FUNDS AND AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN IS CONSIDERED A GRANT FUND AND PART OF THE GRANT FUND AND NOT PART OF THE GENERAL FUND OF THE DISTRICT 
          ATTORNEY. >> THAT IS WHAT I ASKED AT THE BEGINNING. AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE FUND OR BUDGET, IT WILL BE SIMILAR TO WHAT THE GRANTS ARE, THEN THAT WAS MARK'S INITIAL DEAL, WE ARE GOOD TO GO. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  I MOTIONED IT. 
          HOW ABOUT A SECOND. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  SURE. 
          .>JUDGE C >>JUDGE CANALES:  MOTION AND A SECOND AND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. 
          THANK YOU. AYE. 
          TO PRIORITIZE THOSE TWO GENERAL POSITIONS AS ARTICULATED AS VICTIM ASSISTANCE TEMPORARY POSITIONS 29 HOURS A WEEK. 
          >> ONE -- >> TWO ITEMS. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  SORRY, I AM READING ONE. 
          READDING TWO BUT READING ONE. OKAY. 
          >> THEN WITH THE D. A. 'S OFFICE THANKS JUDGE CANALES FINDING AN ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCE AND FOR COMMISSIONERS APPROVING IT AND FINDING A WAY TO ACHIEVE THIS WITHOUT THE BUDGET AFFECTING THE BUDGET. WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  DALE -- LET ME JUST ASK YOU SOMETHING. 
          WHAT I MEANT. >> FOR MONTH AND THE FOLLOWING 
          FISCAL YEAR. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  THAT 
          WAS MY SECOND TOO. >>JUDGE CANALES:  UNLESS DALE THOUGHT IT WAS -- IT SAYS MINIMAL AMOUNT FOR -- 
          >> WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR AND IF GRANTS DIVISION IS ABLE TO ACQUIRE A NEW GRANT, WE CAN TRANSFER IT THERE. 
          >> IT IS FOR BOTH. THAT IS THE COURT. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  THAT IS MY SECOND. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  ONE MONTH PLUS ONE YEAR, KARA. 
          WE DID,  I AM SORRY. WE DID COMBINE. 
          IS THAT RIGHT? >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  THEY ARE GOING TO GO BACK -- WE WILL TRY TO GET THE OVAG GRANT. 
          >> WE CAN GET THAT GRANT. >>JUDGE CANALES:  I WANT TO YOU KNOW. CERTAIN THINGS THAT GET MY 
          [01:45:01]
BLOOD MOVING AND ONE OF THEM IS FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS TO HAVE $12 BILLION AND TO SAY THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T JIVE WITH ME. I CALLED SENATOR INAHOSA AND I TOLD HIM ABOUT THIS AND HE SAID PLEASE SENDS HIM ALL OF THE INFORMATION, MARIA. BUT I AM LOOKING FOR THE OFFICIAL LETTER AND SEND IT TO HIS CHIEF OF STAFF SO THEY CAN GO FIGURE OUT HOW IT COMES TO PASS THAT THANK THEY THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, AFTER DENYING US THE VETERANS GRANT AND THE VICTIMS ASSISTANCE GRANT, YOU KNOW, AFTER NOT GIVING US OR CRF IN TOTAL THAT THEY DESERVE THAT THEY THINK -- AND JUST FOR FUN, THEY PUT IN -- I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY MILLIONS OF FUNDS FOR UNEN IF FUNDED MANDATES. SOMEBODY NEEDS TO PUSH BACK AND SAY ENOUGH. SENATOR INAHOSA MAY BE ABLE TO FIGHT WITH US FOR THIS GRANT AND MAY BE REVERSED IF WE WRITE A STRONG LETTER. ANJELICA AND DOCUMENT GOOD WORK 
          AND HAVE THE SENATOR. >> IF YOU NEED INSIGHT, WE WERE HERE AND MET WITH THE SHERIFF ON SENATE BILL 6. 
          I KNOW BELINDA HAD REACHED OUT TO OUR OFFICE. 
          I KNOW MISS DORSEY DID AND HAD A LOT OF IMPACT AND I DON'T 
          KNOW -- >>JUDGE CANALES:  ANGELICA, SOMETIMES YOU SEE THE TEA LEAVES. 
          >> MY WEAR WHAT THEY DID WITH SEGIS AND TIE THE MONTHLY TO 
          GRANT FUNDING. >>JUDGE CANALES:  WE ARE STILL 
          FIGHTING AND IT IS TOUGH. >> WE ARE AVAILABLE. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  JUDGE ALL RIGHT, MARIA, IF YOU HELP WITH CLOSING THE GAPS HERE. THAT IS ONE AND TWO. 
          [3.  Discuss and consider paying, without reducing the sick leave, vacation, compensatory, or any other paid leave balance in connection with quarantine leave, to any member of the Nueces County Collective Bargaining Unit Quarantine Leave when ordered by a supervisor or a health authority to quarantine or isolate due to a possible or known exposure to a communicable disease while on duty-effective dating back to June 15, 2021.]
AND LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO ITEM 3, JULIE. 
          THIS ONE IS IMPORTANT AND HAS TO DO WITH A PIECE OF LEGISLATION AND POLICY REGARDING SICK LEAVE. 
          WILL YOU GO AHEAD AND EXPLAIN? >> THIS ONE COMES FROM HOUSE BILL 2073. AND ASKING THAT WE IMPLEMENT QUARANTINE LEAVE FOR PEACE OFFICERS AND OUR JAILERS. 
          BY THAT IT MEANS THAT -- IF ANY OF US HAVE ASKED THE JAILERS TO BE OUT DUE TO COVID REASONS, WE DO NOT WANT THEM TO BE USING THEIR SICK LEAVE OR VACATION LEAVE. 
          SO IT IS ASKING THAT THE COUNTY PAY THEM FOR THOSE DAYS THAT THEY MISSED. THERE SHOULD BE NO ADDITIONAL FISCAL IMPACT FOR THIS, BECAUSE THE POSITIONS HAVE ALREADY BEEN BUDGETED. SO WE WILL NOT BE DOCKING THEIR SICK LEAVE OR VACATION TIME WHILE THEY ARE OUT TENDING TO THEIR OWN NEEDS OF QUARANTINE AND ISOLATION. 
          >> HOWEVER THERE COULD BE A FISCAL IMPACT. 
          THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AND CONSIDERED PRODUCTIVE TIME AND COMING AND WORKS OVERTITHE TIME AND OVERTIME EXPENSE. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  AN OVERTIME EXPENSE. 
          >> DALE, IT SAYS IN THE HOUSE BILL IT WON'T COUNT AS WORK HOURS. IT WILL COST AS NONWORK HOURS. 
          >> BUT AGREEMENT SAID IT IS CONSIDERED PRODUCTIVE TIME, WHETHER THEY ARE ON LEAVE OR NOT. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  IN OTHER WORDS, NOT THE BILL BUT THE AGREEMENT THAT CAUSES IT. THAT IS SOMETHING FOR YOU ACTUAL TALK ABOUT. EITHER WAY IT IS -- IT IS A LAW AND WHAT WE NEED, FOLKS, SR.  A POLICY THAT REFLECTS IT SO THAT THE PAYROLL CAN TAKE CARE OF IT AND JULIE'S OFFICE CAN TAKE CARE OF IT. SO WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, PLEASE, REGARDING THIS? 
          >> THIS GOES BACK EFFECTIVE JUNE 15, JUDGE. 
          WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO START COUNTING THOSE HOURS AND GET HOURS REIMBURSED FOR ANYBODY THAT TAKEN SICK LEAVE OR 
          VACATION TIME ALREADY. >>JUDGE CANALES:  FOR THE CLERK I THINK IT WILL REFLECT THE RECORD THIS COMPORTS WITH HOUSE BILL 273 SO ANYBODY LOOKING AT IT KNOW WE TOOK ACTION AND MADE THIS POLICY. AGAIN MOST BILLS ARE EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1. THIS BUN WASN'T. 
          AND THAT IS WHY WE GO BACKWARDS IN TIME JUNE 15. 
          I HOPE THAT -- I DON'T THINK THE SHERIFF CAN JOIN US, BUT WE WILL MAKE CERTAIN IF AFTER TODAY IF WE VOTE IF THE AFFIRMATIVE CALL THE SHERIFF ASSOCIATION AND THE SHERIFF AND LET HIM KNOW THAT WE PASSED THIS. 
          >> THIS WILL ALSO INCLUDE DEPUTY CONSTABLES. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  2073. >> 2073. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  DID WE VOTE? 
          A MOTION AND SECOND. >>JUDGE CANALES:  IT WAS SECONDED BY GONZALEZ? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. 
          >> THANK YOU. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  CAN I ASK A QUESTION ON ONE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER. 
          I WAS GETTING INPUT BACK ON THE ASSISTANT -- DALE, ON THE PRECINCT 4 CONSTABLE. IF WE DON'T DO THE PRIVATE 
          [01:50:05]
SECURITY THAT HE INDICATED WE NEED A DEPUTY AND I AM TRYING TO FIND OUT WHY AND NEED A CAR WHICH MAKES SENSE. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  GOOD POINT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  IS 
          THAT A VIABLE EXPENSE? >> WE LEASE OUR VEHICLE AND WORK WITH MICHAEL TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A COMPLETE CAR AVAILABLE SO NOT A LARGE EXPENSE FOR THAT. 
          WE NEED TO MAKE SURE IF ITS A LEASED VEHICLE IT WOULD ALMOST 
          REQUIRE TO BE A CONSTABLE. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  HE IS SAYING IT NEEDS TO BE A CONSTABLE AND HE SAID YOU WILL NEED A CAR ALSO. AN EXPENSE -- WE CAN DO IT THROUGH THE LEASING PLAN BUT THROUGH THE ARPA FUNDS? 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  THE ONLY THING I WILL SAY, COMMISSIONERS THAT ARPA CAN CARRY TWO YEARS, AND MAYBE WE NEED TO GO IN EYES WIDE OPEN. I THINK IT WILL BE NEEDED FOREVER. AND I THINK IT WILL -- 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  I TOLD HIM THAT. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  I WILL BE AN ADVOCATE FOR THE FUTURE. 
          >> I SAID IT WAS A GRANT-FUNDED POSITION. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  AGAIN, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL SO PEOPLE DON'T THINK WE ARE LOOSEY-GOOSEY ABOUT IT. 
          SO MUCH DATA SHOWING THE INCREASES AND JUSTIFICATION. 
          I THINK IT IS WORTH IT IF HE PUT THAT TOGETHER FOR US. 
          HOW MUCH MORE POPULATION AND TRAFFIC. 
          SCOTT CROSS. THAT WAY IT GETS IN THE RECORD, HEY, THIS IS WHY WE MADE THE DECISION. 
          WHAT DO YOU THINK? >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  I WILL ADD THAT TO THE ASK. AND HE SPRAY DONE THAT -- I HAVE NOT DONE THAT FOR A WHILE. ASK IT TO BE MORE SPECIFIC. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  OKAY. >> I DON'T REQUIRE  CONSTABLE 4 ASKING POSITION. TWO AND FIVE. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: PRECINCT 4. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  WE SAY 4 BECAUSE OF THE PRECINCT. 
          IT IS A LITTLE CONFUSING. >> JUDGE, CLARIFICATION ON THE -- 
          >> WHAT IS 4? >> SHERWOOD IS 4. 
          >>JUDGE CANALES:  HE IS SAYING 4. 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  HE DID REQUEST ONE. 
          >> PRECINCT 2. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  YOU 
          AND I TALKED FOR THE CLAYBURG. >>JUDGE CANALES:  LET'S GO BACK AND DOUBLE CHECK IT. WE WILL GET THAT STRAIGHTENED OUT. BUT, WAIT, JENNY HAD A QUE 
          QUESTION. >> I AM LOOKING FOR CLARIFICATION ON NUMBER 3. THE LAW THAT PASD REQUIRES THAT THE GOVERNING BODY SHALL DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A PROGRAM,  A POLICY. THAT SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE WRITTEN? I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE WRITTEN 
          DOWN. >>JUDGE CANALES:  IT DOES. 
          CAN WE IMPOSE ON YOU TO -- I CAN MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT YOU TO WRITE THE POLICY EVEN THOUGH THE COURT HAS ALREADY 
          ARTICULATED WILL TO GO -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: SUBJECT TO A WRITTEN RATIFICATION SHOULD BE OUR MOTION. SUBJECT TO WRITTEN -- WE NEED 
          TO SEE. >>JUDGE CANALES:  THE POLICY WILL REFLECT WHAT THE LAW REQUIRES, I MEAN, RIGHT? 
          >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:  PASSED THE CONCEPT SO SHE CAN GO BACK. 
          BUT I THINK WE NEED A WRITTEN POLICY JUDGE THE ONLY THING I HAVE -- JUDGE CANALES THE ONLY THING FROM THE HR PERSPECTIVE. 
          I AM WORRIED ABOUT THE AGREEMENT. 
          THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT. 
          COMMUNICATION BETWEEN SHERIFF ASSOCIATION AN LETTING YOU KNOW WHAT WE HAVE TAKEN IN COURT ACTION AND MAKE SURE THE POLICY 
          REFLECTS THE LAW. >> OKAY. 
          WE WILL KEEP JULIE GARRET IN THAT LOOP AND I WILL CC THE 
          COURT. >>JUDGE CANALES:  I IMAGINE THE TIME IS WHAT -- THE CLARIFICATION THAT DALE IS TALKING ABOUT THE NUANCE AS OPPOSED TO ANY OTHER COUNTY WHO MAY NOT HAVE THE SAME AGRE AGREEMENT. 
          OKAY, THAT IS A GOOD CLARIFICATION. 
          SO NOW I AM GOING TO GO BACK AND MOVE US INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. I AM GIVING PUBLIC NOTICE WE ARE COLLECTING TO GO INTO SESSION AS AUTHORIZED BY THE OPEN MEETINGS OF CHAPTER 551 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE AND SECTIONS 55.072, 73, 74, 745, 076, 086, 087. 
          REAL PROPERTY, PROSPECTIVE GIFTS, PERSONAL MATTERS, INCLUDING TERMINATION, COUNTY ADVISORY BODIES, SECURITY DEVICES AND WE WILL COME BACK INTO OPEN SESSION AND TAKE ANY APPROPRIATION ACTION 3:29  P.M. IS THE TIME. 
          I WILL ASK ALL OF YOU NOT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO PLEASE CLOSE THE COURT ROOM AT THIS TIME AND TAKE OUR MICS OFF.IS I 
          [01:55:04]
TELEPHONE? UNDER THE RULES? 
          >> RIGHT NOW, YES, I BELIEVE SO. 
          [1.  Discuss and award RFQ No. 3172-21 Legal Counsel to assist with redistricting process in Nueces County.]
          >> OKAY THEN I'M GOING TO GO ON. 
          WE WILL DO IS MOVE TO MICHAEL ON ITEM C1, DISCUSS AND AWARD RFQ -- TO ASSIST WITH REDISTRICTING ACROSS NUECES COUNTY. MICHAEL? I'M ALSO DECLARING IT 5:38 PM THAT WE ARE BACK IN FULL COURT AND RECORD. AND AGAIN, I WILL REPEAT THAT I HAVE ASKED MICHAEL TO ADDRESS ITEM C1 ON THE AGENDA. 
          >> OKAY, ITEM C1 IS DISCUSSED IN AWARD RFQ 3172 Ã21 WHICH IS LEGAL COUNSEL TO ASSIST WITH REDISTRICTING PLAN, THE PROPOSAL OPENING WAS CONDUCTED ON AUGUST 20 2 PM, RECEIVED FOUR PROPOSALS. AND THE SELECTION COMMITTEE CONSISTING OF JUDGE CANALES, TANYA LYTLE, -- COMMISSIONER MAREZ AND MYSELF, MET AND REVIEWED THE CANDIDATES AND I HAVE THE SCORING SHEETS WHICH I AM GOING TO SEND OUT NOW. 
          AND ARE YOU OKAY IF I SEND THIS TO YOU IN THE FORM OF AN EMAIL 
          OR TEXT? >> I CANNOT SEE IT BUT IF YOU WANT TO READ IT, YOU CAN READ IT. 
          >> OKAY. I TYPICALLY DO NOT READ THESE SCORES OUT LOUD. I DO NOT KNOW HOW THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WOULD WANT ME TO DO THIS. 
          >> IS THERE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT? DOESN'T IT BECOME PUBLIC INFORMATION AT THIS POINT? 
          OR I DON'T KNOW. >> I AM OKAY WITH IT. 
          >> IT IS BEING CONSIDERED, I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO 
          OPEN RECORD. >> TYPICALLY, IT IS ARRIVED AT FROM AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST ONLY. 
          IT IS NOT PUBLISHED IN THE MINUTES. 
          AFTER THE AWARD. >> AFTER THE AWARD. 
          CAN YOU TAKE A PICTURE OF IT AND SEND IT TO HIS PHONE? 
          >> YEAH, I CAN DO THAT. >> IT'S COMING TO YOU RIGHT 
          NOW. >> OKAY. 
          >> CAN YOU GO THROUGH THE RATIONALE FOR THE SCORING? WHY SOMEONE LIKE AKIN GUMP WAS SO LOW? JUST CURIOUS IT'S A PRETTY WORLDWIDE WELL-KNOWN FIRM, DO 
          THEY NOT HAVE EXPERIENCE? >> WHEN THE COMMITTEE REVIEWED EACH OF THE APPLICANTS, IN THE AREA OF EXPERIENCE, THE ITEMS THAT AKIN GUMP PRESENTED TO US IN THE COMMITTEE, WERE VARIED. 
          THEY HAD SOME EXAMPLES CITED FROM OUT-OF-STATE. 
          BUT NOTHING OF ANY SUBSTANTIAL SIZE, COMPARABLE TO NUECES COUNTY. PRESENTED IN THEIR PROPOSAL TO US. AND SO, FOR THAT REASON, THEY WERE SCORED LOWER IN THAT CATEGORY. 
          WHEREAS, IN THE EXAMPLE THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US FROM ORLANDO RIOS AND ASSOCIATES, THEY HAD QUITE A FEW EXAMPLES OF DOING THIS EXACT TYPE OF WORK FOR COUNTIES AS LARGE AS DALLAS COUNTY. AMONG MANY OTHERS. 
          AND SO THAT IS WHY THEY RECEIVED A HIGHER SCORE IN THAT CATEGORY. AND THEN, WITH REGARD TO -- THEY, THEIR EXPERIENCE WAS PRIMARILY IN SCHOOL BOARD I'M SORRY, SCHOOL REDISTRICTING AND NO EXAMPLES WERE PROVIDED FOR COUNTY REDISTRICTING. AND THEN WITH OLSON AND OLSON, 
          [02:00:01]
THE OWNER PROVIDED TWO EXAMPLES FROM VERY SMALL COUNTIES. 
          AND SO, IN COMPARISON OF ALL OF THE FOUR FOLKS THAT HAD PROVIDED PROPOSALS TO US, WE ALL FELT UNANIMOUSLY THAT ORLANDO RIOS AND ASSOCIATES HAD THE BEST QUALIFICATIONS FOR WHAT WE NEED THEM TO DO HERE IN NUECES COUNTY. 
          >> I JUST LOST HIM. 
          >> WE WILL GIVE HIM A MINUTE TO RECONNECT. 
          YEAH, I WOULD POINT OUT THAT EITHER IT VARIED FROM LITERALLY NO EXPERIENCE PRESENTED IN THE RFQ FOR COUNTIES OR ONLY ONE SMALL COUNTY PRESENTED OR IN THE CASE OF AKIN GUMP AS YOU SAID, YES, THEY ARE A WORLDWIDE FORM. 
          BUT THEY PROVIDED NO EXAMPLES EITHER TEXAS COUNTY REDISTRICTING, OR QUITE FRANKLY, ANY EXAMPLES FROM 2010 WHICH IS THE LATEST REDISTRICTING THAT WOULD BE EVEN REMOTELY APPLICABLE. IT WAS INTERESTING THAT THESE WERE THE ONLY FOUR WE RECEIVED. AND -- I DON'T HAVE IN FRONT OF ME BUT THEY HAD OVER 50 COUNTIES THAT WERE REPRESENTED. 
          OH YEAH. HELLO? YES. COMMISSIONER -- 
          >> WONDERFUL. >> HOLD ON, SIR, I'M GOING TO PUT YOU ON SPEAKERPHONE. GO AHEAD. 
          >> OKAY. YES, SIR. 
          MICHAEL WILL GIVE YOU A NEW SUMMARY. 
          WE ARE I IN ITEM THREE C1 WHICH IS DISCUSSED AND AWARD RFQ 3172-21 TO ASSIST WITH THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS. 
          AND MICHAEL, WOULD YOU PROVIDE A QUICK SUMMARY? AND ALSO TEXT TO HIS PHONE. WE ARE GOING TO TEXT TO YOUR PHONE, A PICTURE OF THE COMMITTEE REVIEW AND SCORING. 
          BUT MICHAEL HAS REVEALED A FEW THINGS ALREADY AND I WILL ASK HIM TO REPEAT FOR YOUR BENEFIT RIGHT NOW. 
          GIVE HIM JUST A SECOND BECAUSE HE IS SENDING YOU SOMETHING. 
          [INAUDIBLE] >> THAT'S IMPORTANT. 
          LET MICHAEL GIVE YOU THE BACKGROUND.O AHEAD, MICHAEL. 
          >> OKAY COMMISSIONER, WE REVIEWED FOUR PROPOSALS THAT WERE SUBMITTED. AND THOSE CAME FROM WALSH -- AND FELT AND. 
          >> IS THAT THE ONE WITH -- >> YES. 
          [02:05:01]
          >> OKAY. >> AND WE SCORED THE ROLANDO RIOS AND ASSOCIATES WITH THE HIGHEST SCORE. 
          WE FELT THEIR EXPERIENCE AND COUNTY REDISTRICTING FAR EXCEEDED THE OTHER APPLICANTS. [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> I WILL STOP TALKING. >> COMMISSIONER CHESNEY IS BACK ON. JUST HANG ON ONE SECOND. 
          COMMISSIONER CHESNEY, YOU ARE IN MIDSENTENCE WHEN YOU GOT CUT 
          OFF. >> I DON'T EVEN KNOW, I WAS GOING TO ASK THE OTHER QUESTION WAS ON THE OTHER FIRM, WHY WERE THEY RANKED LOWER? JUST CURIOUS, IT LOOKED LIKE THEY MIGHT'VE HAD SOME HIGHER LEVELS OF EXPERIENCE BUT WHAT 
          WAS THE KNOCK ON THEM? >> A KNOCK ON THEM WAS THE EXPERIENCE THEY PROVIDED WERE ONLY A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES AND THEY WERE BOTH FROM OUT-OF-STATE. 
          AND INCOMPARABLE COUNTIES, THEY WERE NOT LARGE COUNTIES AND THEY HAD NO EXAMPLES FOR -- THAT WERE DONE SO, THEY FELL 
          SHORT IN THAT REGARD. >> OKAY, THAT'S FINE. 
          YEAH, WE SAID THAT WHILE YOU'RE OFF THAT, ONE OF THEM ONLY HAD EXCLUSIVE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT PROVIDED NO EXAMPLES OF COUNTY AND THE OTHER ONE ONLY HAD ONE OR TWO EXAMPLES WHERE AS ROLANDO L. RIOS & ASSOCIATES, PLLC HAD OVER 200 FEDERAL RIGHTS VOTING CASES. SO THAT IS WHAT DISTINGUISHED IT AND THEN THEY HAD OVER 50 REPRESENTATIONS OF COUNTIES AND CITIES AND THEY'VE DONE EVERYTHING BUT THE COUNTIES INCLUDING ALL OF THE URBAN COUNTIES. 
          >> AND AS LARGE AS -- >> AND I JUST NEED TO ASK, HAVE THEY DONE THEM FOR COUNTIES IN A PARTISAN OR BIPARTISAN WAY AS FAR AS HOW THEY REPRESENTED PURELY COURTS DOMINATED BY DEMOCRATS? HAVE THEY DONE ANY WITH REPUBLICANS? I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THERE'S ANY BUILT IN BIASES THAT THEY HAVE HERE THAT I NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT. BECAUSE UNFORTUNATELY, WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT, SOME DAYS THERE IS PARTISANSHIP AND I JUST NEED TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS. 
          >> YEAH, I AM CERTAIN THAT THERE HAD BEEN -- I AM NOT SEEING THEIR ENTIRE REPERTOIRE OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS. 
          BUT THEY HAVE BEEN DOING THIS WORK 30 YEARS SO IT IS MY OPINION THAT THEY REPRESENT COURTS THAT HAVE DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS ON THEM. AND THEY HAVE THE WIDEST BREADTH WHEN IT COMES TO REDISTRICTING. 
          AND THEY REPRESENTED PEOPLE IN THIS MANNER FOR THE LAST 30 
          YEARS. >> I'M SORRY IF I DID NOT ASK RIGHT. I MEANT, I'M SURE A LOT OF COURTS HAVE SOME. MY QUESTION IS THAT DO YOU KNOW IF THEY REPRESENTED ANY COURTS, AND IF YOU DON'T THAT'S FINE. 
          IF THEY REPRESENTED ANY COURTS THAT WERE THE MAJORITY REPUBLICAN? OR WHETHER ALL MAJORITY DEMOCRATS THAT THEY REPRESENTED. 
          >> NO -- >> IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER 
          THAT IS OKAY TOO. >> I DON'T KNOW, WE DON'T ASK THOSE QUESTIONS AND WE DID NOT RECEIVE THAT INFORMATION ON THE RFQ. I CAN TELL YOU THAT AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP AND CRIMCARD CONSULTING SERVICES,, LLC LISTED THE STATE OF LOS ANGELES AND I KNOW THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES AND CALIFORNIA TO BE QUITE A STRONGHOLD FOR DEMOCRATS. SO IT SEEMS THAT PEOPLE ARE IN THIS BUSINESS TO GO REPRESENT THE BUSINESS OF REDISTRICTING. 
          >> OKAY SO MICHAEL, DO YOU KNOW BY ANY CHANCE? 
          JUST MAKING SURE. >> NO, THAT INFORMATION WAS NOT PROVIDED AS PART OF THE PROPOSAL PACKAGE. 
          >> OKAY. MEANING THEY PROVIDED YOU WHO 
          THEY DID, WITHOUT -- >> LIST OF COUNTIES, YES. 
          IT WAS PROVIDED TO US. >> DO YOU HAVE THAT LIST? 
          >> WE DO ACTUALLY. >> I'M SORRY I DO NOT HAVE IN FRONT OF ME BECAUSE I DID NOT GET THAT IN MY PACKET. 
          IF I MISSED IT, MY BAD. >> WE DON'T NORMALLY PROVIDE THE COMMISSIONERS COURT WITH THESE PROPOSAL PACKETS. 
          >> RIGHT. >> I DID NOT DO MY HOMEWORK IT 
          WAS ALL THE SAME. >> OKAY, WE CAN CERTAINLY PROVIDE THAT LIST TO YOU. AT SOME POINT IN TIME, BUT IT IS EXTENSIVE AND AGAIN, I MEAN -- IT -- 
          >> ALL I'M TRYING TO LOOK AT, AND I DON'T HAVE IT TO LOOK AT BECAUSE IT WAS NOT PROVIDED, IS WHETHER THEY ARE A FAIR AND BALANCED REPRESENTATION OR IF THEY PRIMARILY REPRESENT ONLY 
          [02:10:02]
DEMOCRAT LEANING COUNTIES THEN, I DON'T KNOW THAT REPUBLICANS GET A FAIR SHAKE AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY DON'T, I JUST 
          DON'T KNOW SO I MAY JUST -- >> WE RAN IN RFQ ON EXPERIENCE, NOT POLITICS. THE EXPERIENCE IS COMPLETELY LOPSIDED HERE. THEY REPRESENTED IN THEIR PACKET, AN EXTREMELY COMPREHENSIVE REPRESENTATION AND QUITE FRANKLY, THE ANALYSIS AS WELL WAS FAR SUPERIOR. 
          >> I DON'T DOUBT THAT. I JUST HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTIONS. LIKE I SAID IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE HAD TO ASK PARTISAN QUESTIONS AND I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG. I CAN'T REMEMBER IT'S EVEN NOT A COMFORTABLE LEVEL OF QUESTIONING TO BE HONEST. 
          I MIGHT JUST SIT THIS ONE OUT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION NEEDED FOR ME TO KNOW THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTION. AND I DON'T WANT TO PROLONG THE PROCESS. I KNOW YOU ALL DID GOOD WORK 
          AND I APPRECIATE IT. >> UNDERSTOOD. 
          IN THAT CASE -- >> THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMITTEE IS TO RECOMMEND AWARD FOR ROLANDO L. RIOS & 
          ASSOCIATES, PLLC. >> OKAY. 
          AND ACED UPON THAT RECOMMENDATION, IS THERE SUCH A 
          MOTION? >> SO MOVED. 
          >> OKAY THERE IS A MOTION AND I WILL NEED A SECOND. 
          >> WHO WAS THAT FOR? >> ROLANDO L. RIOS & 
          ASSOCIATES, PLLC. >> COMMISSIONER. 
          I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING 
          AYE. THOSE OPPOSED? >> FOR NOT HAVING ALL THE INFORMATION I NEED TO MAKE THE DECISION. 
          LET THAT BE REFLECTED ON THE RECORD. 
          >> IF THE CLERK CAN PLEASE MAKE THE REFLECTION AND PLEASE NOTE THE OPTIONOF COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ . 
          OKAY, YOU WILL CONTACT THAT FIRM AND THEN ALSO, NOW THAT WE HAVE MADE THE AWARD, IS IT NOW APPROPRIATE TO PROVIDE COMMISSIONER CHESNEY THE INFORMATION HE ASKS? WHICH WOULD BE, YOU KNOW WHAT, THEY COULD PROVIDE TO HIM, RIGHT? HE COULD JUST ASK SINCE IT HAS BEEN AWARDED. THAT WAY YOU DO NOT HAVE TO -- 
          >> I WOULD LIKE TO SIT DOWN AND MEET WITH THEM KNOW THAT WE AWARDED SO I CAN GET IT FROM THEM. 
          >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT. >> JUST TELL THEM TO REACH OUT TO ME OR MY OFFICE OR SOMETHING AND I WILL GET SOMETHING SET UP 
          WITH THEM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. >> I THINK THAT'S GOOD BECAUSE MICHAEL FEELS LIKE HE'S KEPT HIS PROCESS INTACT. 
          AND YOU STILL GET EVERYTHING YOU NEED AND WE WILL MAKE THAT 
          [1.  Discuss potential legal issues related to the contract with ABM Bundled Energy Solutions Project Agreement; Discuss and consider options available to the Court regarding work not yet performed.]
CONTACT. OKAY SO NOW, LET'S MOVE ONTO THE LAST ITEM WHICH CAME OUT ITEM 2A1, THIS REPRESENTS THE LAST ITEM TO DEAL WITH ON THE AGENDA. 
          >> I HAD TO GO -- >> OKAY THANK YOU. 
          >> ALL RIGHT. >> YES, SIR.>> IS 2A1 THE 
          ABM? >> IT IS. 
          >> WE DON'T HAVE A FULL COURT AND I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A MOTION BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A COURT AVAILABLE. 
          CAN WE PUT IT BACK ON, THE ONLY ISSUE I STILL WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE COMEDY SOLUTIONS THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND AUDITOR AND BLAKELY AND EVERYBODY CAME UP WITH FOR THE BUDGET SITUATION, I THINK HAS A LOT OF MERIT THAT WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RELIEF THERE, I WOULD JUST ASK OUT OF COURTESY, THAT ABM CONSIDER THE FACT THAT WE ARE STILL, THERE IS STILL A DESIRE TO DISCUSS AT LENGTH, AND LET EVERYONE HAVE THEIR SAY, THE ISSUE AND I WILL PUT THIS BACK ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT POSSIBLE MEETING TO DISCUSS IT. 
          IF OUT OF COURTESY, THEY CAN UNDERSTAND THAT IS THE ONLY ITEM THAT I WOULD STILL LIKE TO HAVE DISCUSSION ON IN REGARDS TO THAT. I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT 
          COURTESY. >> OKAY. 
          I'M GOING TO EXTEND THAT TO YOU TODAY. 
          AND THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MOTION NEEDED. 
          AND I THINK EVERYBODY IS SITTING HERE IN THE AUDIENCE, SOMETHING YOU CANNOT SEE BUT JUST SO YOU KNOW, I COUNT FIVE MEMBERS OF ABM. AND SO THEY HAVE HEARD YOU AND I THINK THEY UNDERSTAND BY JUST THEIR BODY LANGUAGE. 
          AND WE WILL BE BACK IN TOUCH. HAVING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, I 
          [ Adjournment in Memory (upon request)]
          WOULD ASK FOR ADJOURNMENT. >> JUDGE, HAD SOMETHING I APOLOGIZE I DID NOT BRING THEM I WILL DO THAT ALSO ON WEDNESDAY IF THAT IS OKAY. AND IF MIKE OR JOE OR SOMEBODY COULD CALL FROM ABM I LIKE TO SET UP A TIME TO VISIT WITH 
          [02:15:11]
THEM BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN IT IS BACK ON THE AGENDA. 
          >> THERE ALSO NODDING AND BODY LANGUAGE, THEY'VE HEARD YOU. 
          THEREFORE, THAT MEANS TO ME THEY WILL. 
          >> AND IF -- IF HE WOULD JUST MAKE SURE IT IS PUT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE EIGHTH, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT. 
          >> HE IS NOT HERE BUT THEY CAN WORK WITH YOUR LANGUAGE AT A LATER TIME TOMORROW OR THE NEXT PART OF THE WEEK. 
          AND COMMISSIONER MAREZ, DO YOU HAVE ANY ADJOURNMENT IN MEMORY? 
          >> NO. >> I JUST, I DON'T HAVE IT COMPLETE IN FRONT OF ME. BUT I WILL ALSO BRING IT BACK FOR WEDNESDAY. IT BEARS NOTING THAT THIS WEEKEND WE LOST A PUBLIC SERVANT, RICHARD MARTINEZ, WHO WAS THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR FOR THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, WHO PASSED AWAY SUDDENLY. HE WAS ONLY 56 YEARS OLD. 
          IT SEEMS VERY YOUNG TO ME BECAUSE THAT IS MY AGE. 
          AND I AM IN MY 56TH YEAR. I'M ONLY 55 BUT I LIKE TO GO UP AND WE WERE MOURNING THAT LOSS BECAUSE HE WAS SOMEBODY WE WORK SO CLOSELY WITH. AND IN ALL OF OUR ENDEAVORS WITH PUBLIC WORKS. AND HE HAILED FROM PLEASANTON, TEXAS AND I WANTED TO EXPRESS THAT DURING THESE CHALLENGING TIMES, AND THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE AS POLITICAL BODIES, EXTEND CONDOLENCES TO ONE ANOTHER. 
          THAT IS A HUGE LOSS FOR THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND WHILE WE DIDN'T KNOW HIM ONLY FROM A PROFESSIONAL SENSE, IT SEEMS THAT IT WOULD BE VERY APPROPRIATE TO JUST HAVE A MOMENT OF SILENCE AFTER THE CITY AND FOR THEIR DEPARTMENT HEAD THAT WAS SO BELOVED TO THEM. 
          HE JUST HAD ONE OF THOSE PERSONALITIES THAT EVERYONE ENJOYED WORKING WITH. WE ARE THINKING ABOUT THE MARTINEZ FAMILY FROM CORPUS CHRISTI AND PLEASANTON. 
          ALSO THINKING ABOUT THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AS OUR SISTER FAMILY. SO JUST, 10 SECONDS OF SILENCE AND WILL BRING BACK HIS FULL OBITUARY NEXT WEEK. 
          I'M SORRY, NEXT WEEK. [SILENCE] MAY HE REST IN PEACE. THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. 
          THE TIME FOR THE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.