[1. CALL TO ORDER]
          [00:00:07]
          >> OKAY. GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. 
          I WOULD LOVE -- YEAH, IT DOESN'T REALLY SAY MUCH ON THE AGENDA BUT WE DID MARK THE PLEDGE, RIGHT? WE DIDN'T? LET'S DO IT. 
          WE'RE DOING A BUDGET WORKSHOP MEETING. 
          WE'LL GET RIGHT INTO IT WITH JILL HAVING PROVIDED OUR BUDGET WORKSHOP NOTEBOOKS. I BET WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO START AT THE BEGINNING AND MOVE THROUGH AS MUCH AS WE CAN. 
          I DID WANT TO ASK WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS WERE ABOUT HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO ORGANIZE IT JUST SO WE CAN TELL EVERYBODY. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, DO YOU WANT TO WORK THROUGH LUNCH? DO YOU WANT TO TAKE A LUNCH BREAK? WHAT IS EVERYBODY'S THINKING HERE? DO YOU WANT TO JUST SEE HOW IT GOES? 
          >> I WOULD LIKE TO KNOCK IT OUT. >> GET HEAVY INTO THIS, BY THE TIME LUNCH IS AROUND, PEOPLE ARE TIRED AND WE TAKE A LUNCH BREAK AND NOT COME BACK BUT WE MIGHT HAVE TO GO AFTER LUNCH BUT WE'LL 
          SEE HOW IT GOES. >> OKAY, I THINK THAT'S FAIR, 
          PUTS EVERYBODY ON NOTICE. >> I WOULD THINK WE COULD GET THIS KNOCKED OUT BY LUNCH BUT THEN YOU MAY ASK FOR CHANGES AND CALCULATION EVALUATIONS AND WE MIGHT HAVE IT FOR THE NEXT DAY. 
          >> OKAY, DALE, THAT SOUNDS GREAT. 
          I WILL HAND THIS OVER TO OUR AUDITOR AND JUST -- 
          >> PLEDGE? >> YEAH, WE DIDN'T POST IT BUT WE'RE GOING TO DO IT. EVERYBODY PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. 
          HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, WIN STATE UNDER GOD ONE ANDO STATE UNDEN STATE UNDER GO AE STATE UNDER GOD ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. 
          >> GREAT, AND JUST BEFORE WE START, A LITTLE GRATITUDE BEFORE WE START MAKING YOU DO EVEN MORE. 
          WE KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ASKING A LOT OF YOU AND YOUR STAFF OVER THE NEXT MONTH AND, AGAIN, THE GRATITUDE IS ON THE PART OF EVERYBODY AND I WILL ASK EVERYBODY FOR PATIENCE. 
          THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF TIMES WHERE WE THINK IT CAN BE DONE QUICKER. DETAIL WILL DO HIS BEST BUT THANKS IN ADVANCE FOR ALL WE'RE ABOUT TO GO THROUGH. 
          >> I TRY TO PLAN THEIR DUTIES WHERE WE KNOW THIS IS THE MOST 
          [3. BUDGET WORKSHOP:  The Court will discuss matters related to the  2022-2023 Budget.]
          IMPORTANT THING TO GET DONE. >> CORRECT. 
          THE NOTEBOOK IS GREAT. LET'S GET RIGHT INTO IT. 
          >> THANK YOU, WE PROVIDED YOU YOUR NOTEBOOK ON FRIDAY BUT I WAS INFECTED WITH COVID-19 SO I WAS OUT A WEEK AND I KNOW IT WAS A LONG WEEKEND TO READ BUT WE'LL TRY TO GO THROUGH IT AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN AND MAKE SURE WHERE OUR CONCERNS ARE, WHERE WE KNOW WE HAVE SOME ISSUES AND WHERE WE HOPEFULLY ARE SHINING. 
          AS YOU SEE WE ALSO HAVE THE BOOK ONLINE IF YOU HAVE IT AVAILABLE ON YOUR WEBSITE SO IT HAS BOOKMARKS AND EVERYTHING. 
          CONNIE HAS IT AVAILABLE TO HER ON THE SCREEN NOW. 
          I WILL TRY TO KEEP HER ADDRESSED AT THE TIME WE'RE GOING THROUGH. 
          WE HAVE TWO BIG THINGS WE WANT YOU TO READ. 
          TAB A AND TAB B. TAB A JUST TELLS YOU THE UNDERSTANDING OF HOW OUR BUDGET PROCESSING WORKS AND HOW WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND WHAT OUR CHALLENGES ARE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR AND WHERE THE MONEY COMES FROM AND WHERE THE MONEY GOES AND THIS WAS ALL FROM LAST YEAR'S NUMBERS, WHERE OUR CURRENT DEBT IS AND WHERE OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FORMS ARE. 
          OUR PROPOSED BUDGET HAS MANY ITEMS ON HERE AND LISA DID A VERY GOOD JOB OF GIVING YOU A TABLE OF CONTENTS ON B 2 AND B 3, SHOWING YOU WHERE WE'RE AT AND EACH INDIVIDUAL ITEMS. WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF OUR WHAT STATEMENTS ARE, WHAT OUR PROCESSES AND GOALS ARE. WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE OUR 
          [00:05:01]
ECONOMY IS ON B 6 AND B 7 AND OUR TEXAS ECONOMY IS KIND OF GROWING. OUR UNEMPLOYMENT RATE HAS GONE DOWN AS WE GET TO THE PROCESS OF DOING OUR EVALUATION TALKING ABOUT TAX RATES. WE'LL EXPLAIN WHAT THAT DOES TO OUR TAX RATES VERY SOON BUT AS YOU SEE, OUR TEXAS ECONOMY IS DOING WELL. UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS NOT AS GOOD AS THE NATIONAL RATE BUT IT IS IMPROVING. 
          THEN WE GET TO B 10 AND B 11. WE'LL GO THROUGH THESE WHEN WE GET TO OUR CHALLENGES NUMBERS WHEN WE GET TO ANOTHER LATER TAB BUT AS YOU SEE, WE HAVE OUR NORMAL CONTINUANCE PAY WHICH MEANS THESE EMPLOYEES THAT QUALIFIED FOR THE 2.5%. 
          THIS YEAR IS OUR LARGEST YEAR BECAUSE THIS IS WHEN IT STARTED MANY YEARS AGO, THIS WAS THE FIRST YEAR OF THAT START. 
          YOU CAN SEE THERE'S ROUGHLY 279 EMPLOYEES AND AN ESTIMATED FISCAL COST OF $233,000. THIS ALSO INCLUDES 13 ELECTED OFFICIALS, EIGHT DEPARTMENT HEADS AND 258 REGULAR EMPLOYEES. 
          AS WE KNOW, OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT HAS A COLLECT I HAVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY. EVERY YEAR WE HAVE AN INCREASE, THIS YEAR IS A 4% INCREASE IN VALUE. 
          THERE'S A ROUGHLY 300 EMPLOYEES AND THE TOTAL COST OF $414,380. 
          DURING THE NORMAL PROCESS, YOU GO THROUGH ADDING A FEW STAFF AS WELL AS CHANGING SOME TITLES AND BALANCES AND THAT'S WHAT THREE DOES, GOES THROUGH MID YEAR BALANCES AND WE TRY TO GIVE YOU EACH ONE BY WHEN THE COMMISSIONER COURT APPROVES THEM. THERE'S ONE QUESTION I WANT TO GO OVER IF I CAN FIND IT. ON B 12, LAST YEAR YOU AUTHORIZED CONSTABLE MCMANN TWO MENTAL HEALTH DEPUTY CONSTABLES. 
          THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT WILL NOT REIMBURSE US FOR THIS PARTICULAR COST. IF YOU WANT TO ALLOW THESE CONSTABLES TO EVE, WE NEED TO WORK WITH HID. 
          OTHERWISE THE COST OF THE COUNTY WILL BE $106,384. 
          I HATE TO INTERRUPT BUT CAN WE MARK THAT ONE TO COME BACK? THERE'S ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT MAYBE WE CAN BRING FWART. 
          MARK THAT ONE AS AN ASTERISK. >> LAST YEAR WE LEARNED THE HOSPITAL WOULD NO LONGER REIMBURSE US. 
          >> I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT EITHER BUT I THOUGHT MHID WAS 
          PAYING FOR PART OF THAT. >> WE HAD AN AGREEMENT WITH THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT BUT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT PAID FOR THE FIRST YEAR AND THEY GOT RENEWED AND THE HOSPITAL TOOK THE FUNDS AWAY AND NOW THEY'RE COMING BACK TO SEE IF WE CAN GET THIS THROUGH MHID. MHID SAID THEY WOULD DO IT. 
          >> JUST PUT A BIG STAR ON IT. >> WHAT PAGE ARE YOU ON, DALE? 
          >> B 12. >> PUT A BIG STAR ON THAT ONE. 
          I THINK THAT ONE NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED. 
          IT'S GOT EVEN JUST ONE MORE LAYER THAN THAT BUT LET'S JUST HOLD ON THAT ONE. I FEEL LIKE THERE'S STILL A 
          SOLUTION THERE. >> I DO AGREE IT NEEDS A POSITION BUT RIGHT NOW THESE TWO POSITIONS ARE NOT IN THE REQUEST OR RECOMMENDED BALANCES FOR US SO WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE WITH THIS, WE CAN BUT WE WONDER HOW THE 
          FUNDING WOULD BE. >> BRENT, BECAUSE WE ALREADY STARTED DOWN THE RABBIT TRAIL BEFORE WE COME BACK TO IT, THERE'S AN INCONSISTENCY IN THE DOCUMENTS YEAR OVER LAST SO THE TWO THAT MHID PAID FOR IS VALID. WHAT RUNS IN QUESTION IS WHAT HOSPITAL DISTRICT PAID FOR BY AGREEMENT WITH US. 
          THAT WAS TWO YEARS BACK. THEN WE WENT AHEAD IN LAST YEAR'S BUDGET AND ASSUMED THAT IT WAS THE SAME, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO PUT ANY BLAME ANYWHERE BUT THERE'S AN INCONSISTENCY IN 
          [00:10:03]
PARAGRAPHS THAT MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO GET REIMBURSED UNLESS WE TOOK ACTION. 
          SO THAT IS WHERE, IN THE AUDIT, HE CAUGHT IT. 
          >> SO BECAUSE -- BUT WE DIDN'T ADD FOUR, WE PULLED THOSE TWO. 
          >> WE DO HAVE FOUR NOW BUT THEY'RE NOT REALLY THERE. 
          >> WE TRANSFERRED TWO FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND MHID ASKED 
          FOR TWO MORE. >> BECAUSE THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE WERE PAID FOR BY THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT ORIGINALLY. 
          >> BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S FOUR. 
          >> YEAH, THERE WERE. THEY'RE NOT THERE PHYSICALLY. 
          >> WE HAVEN'T HIRED ANYBODY. THAT'S WHAT I'M SIGHING. 
          THE CHALLENGE WOULD BE TO JUST NOT HIRE -- 
          >> CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT WE TOLD THE CONSTABLE. WE TRANSFER THE TWO EMPLOYEES FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO THE S 
          CONSTABLE. >> THEY'RE ON HOLD. 
          >> THEY'RE ON HOLD BUT THERE ARE TWO OTHERS WE APPROVED. 
          >> LOOK, IT'S A MISTAKE THAT DID NOT GET CAUGHT IN TIME BUT DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT'S NOT A VALID REQUEST OF THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. SOMEBODY GOT FUNNY WITH IT, OKAY? BECAUSE THE REASON YOU NEED FOR, WE ACTUALLY NEED SIX. THE FUNNY BUSINESS HAPPENED WHEN I HAVE TWO INCONSISTENT PARAGRAPHS IN THE CONTRACT. 
          >> BUT THE FOUR WERE APPROVED BECAUSE IT WAS REPRESENTED THAT 
          THEY WERE ALL FUNDED. >> THEY SHOP. 
          I'M SAYING TO YOU I THINK WE HAVE A CLIMB. 
          I THINK WE HAVE THE -- [INDISCERNIBLE] 
          >> WE JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW. >> BUT THOSE ARE FROZEN RIGHT KNEW. THEY'REW. 
          THEY'RE NW. 
          THEY'REOW. THEY'RE RIALEALLY NOT ON A 
          CHALLENGE. >> WHEN THE SHERIFF WAS HERE, WE WENT RUNNING AROUND AND IT WAS A MIXED UP THING. 
          I REMEMBER THAT. THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. 
          WHEN THEY TRANSED FERED THEM OVER. 
          WE PICKED THEM UP. >> WE ASSUMED THE HOSPITALS WOULD CONTINUE TO REIMBURSE THOSE FOR THOSE TWO INDIVIDUALS BUT THE JUDGE IS SAYING A FEW WORDS GOT CHANGED IN THE CONTRACT WHERE THE REIMBURSEMENT CONTRACT WAS TAKEN OUT. 
          >> WE CAN TAKE THAT ONE ON SEPARATELY AND JUST KNOW THAT I DON'T SEE THAT AS A CHALLENGE BECAUSE I THINK THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT'S INTENTIONS CONTROL AND I'M GOING TO HAVE TO REMIND THEM OF THEIR INTENTIONS. WHEN THERE'S A MISTAKE THAT'S INCONSISTENT, THEN YOU LOOK TO INTENTION. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, WE HAD AN AGREEMENT AND THAT AGREEMENT WAS SET IN STONE AND NEXT YEAR'S AGREEMENT HAS AN INCONSISTENCY. 
          IF THEY WANT TO ARGUE THEIR INTENTION, THEY NEED TO LET US KNOW THAT. WE JUST HAVEN'T DEALT WITH IT BECAUSE WE HAD TO GET THE -- WE HAD A LOT ON OUR PLATE BUT EVEN IF YOU LOOK AT THE UP TOO AMOUNT THAT THEY HAVE GIVEN US FOR CITY COUNTY HEALTH. WE HAVEN'T EVEN SPENT THAT, SO THERE'S A GREAT ARGUMENT TO BE MADE BUT THERE'S NO CHANGE IN DOLLARS FOR THEM. THEY JUST NEED TO HONOR THE ORIGINAL TWO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT IS. 
          MHIDS ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. TOTALLY DIFFERENT. 
          COMING FROM THE SAME FUND, BUT THAT'S IMMATERIAL. 
          HOW MUCH DOES MHID PAY? THEY HAVE A JAIL DEFERMENT PROGRAM. LONG STORY BUT THAT ONE IS A 
          TRICKY ONE. >> AND WE HAVE TO DO A CONTRACT 
          SUMMARY. >> THAT'S RIGHT. 
          ENOUGH SAID. WE'RE JUST GOING TO STAR IT AND KNOW THAT MAYBE IT'S NOT A CHALLENGE FOR US. 
          >> AS I SAID, WE HAVE A LARGER NUMBER OF CONTINUE USE PAY AS WELL AS OUR SHERIFF'S OFFICE AGREEMENT. 
          IF YOU GO TO NUMBER 4, WHICH IS WHERE WE CAN COVER ALL THAT COAST, IS THAT OUR RETIREMENT PLAN DECREASE IFS THE COURT SO CREWSES A DECREASE OF 818,073 THAT PAYS FOR WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT WITH THE RECLASSIFICATIONS. 
          THERE'S A CATCH. THERE'S A CATCH IN THE RETIREMENT THAT WE TALKED WITH OUR RETIREMENT AND WE CAN GO WITH THE PLAN AS-IS AND THE REDUCTION BUT THEY HAVE INFORMED US THAT NEXT YEAR WE'LL SEE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE. 
          SO IT'S THE COURT'S DECISION WHETHER WE WANT TO TAKE THE ENTIRE DECREASE THIS YEAR AND PROBABLY HAVE A $600,000 OR 
          [00:15:07]
$800,000 NEXT YEAR BECAUSE OF THE LOW INTEREST RATES THEY'RE FINDING RIGHT NOW. WE CAN TAKE THE LOW COSTS NOW BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY CHALLENGES THIS YEAR. 
          I WOULD KEEP THE RETIREMENT PLAN AS WHAT THEY'RE PROJECTING BUT THIS IS A COURT DECISION AND THIS WILL COVER MOST OF OUR CBA AND MOST OF OUR RECLASSIFICATION. 
          WE HAD THE LOSS OF THE REIMBURSEMENT FROM THAT HOSPITAL THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE FIGHTING FOR SO I WOULDN'T GO OVER THAT TOO MUCH. AS Y'ALL REMEMBER, ON ITEM 6 ON B 18 WE HAD A RENEGOTIATION WITH THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI ON OUR METRO COME. THEY GOD SOME NEW SOT SOME NEW INCREASED AND GAVE US AID AWED THIS WAS PAID FOR THROUGH ARPA FUNDS. WE GO FROM 1.4 TO 1.9 WHICH IS RIGHT ABOUT $400 THEW BECAUSE WE HAVE OTHER000 BECAUSE WE HAVE OTHER ADJUSTMENTS SO THE INCREASE FOR MET RE COM ISR COM 
          $400,000. >> DALE CAN YOU TELL ME -- I HAVE ALIAS HEARD EVERYBODY SAY CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI IS 85% OR 
          90% OF THE COUNTY OF NUECES. >> I KNOW THERESA AND THE STAFF AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT WENT THROUGH AND NEGOTIATED WITH ME METRO COM. 
          >> YES, THE RATE WENT DOWN FOR THE COUNTY FROM 24 TO 23 AND IT WENT DOWN FOR THE CITY AS WELL SO THIS IS THE OVERALL INCREASE FOR THIS YEAR. IT'S REALLY A DECREASE IN METRO COM BUT AN INCREASE IN OUR BUDGET BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GET UP TO THE 1.9 BUDGETED DOLLARS THAT WE NEED. 
          >> RIGHT, SO WHEN YOU NEGOTIATED WITH THAT, HOW DO WE GET TO THIS 
          PERCENTAGE NUMBER? >> BY THE CENSUS, THE NEW CENSUS NUMBERS. OUR ORIGINAL AGREEMENT IN 2019 BASICALLY CALCULATED, CONTEMPLATED THAT WE WOULD HAVE NEW CALCULATIONS BASED ON 2020 NUMBERS SO THE MAYOR THEN MCCOMB AND I AGREED THAT WE WOULD PREPARE THE BUDGET BASED UPON REAL PERCENTAGES SO THAT'S HOW WE GOT -- 
          >> AND THAT'S A REAL PERCENTAGE? >> THAT'S THE CENSUS. 
          WE GOT PUT DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT A POINT SO THOSE ARE THE REAL NUMBERS. WHAT WOULD HELP THE COMMISSIONER 
          IS THE REAL METRO COM BUDGET. >> NO, WHAT WOULD HELP WOULD BE SEEING HOW THE POPULATION CENSUS SHOWS WE PAY 23%. 
          >> SURE. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE NUMBER OF CALLS, TOO. HOW MANY CALLS THE CENSUS OF OUR CALLS AND, THE CENSUS OF OUR CALLS AND OUR POPULATION. 
          >> I STILL THINK THE 911, THE WAY MAJORITY HAS TO COME FROM 
          WITHIN THE CITY. >> THEY DO AND IT'S ALL PRORATA. 
          >> IT'S RATA. 
          >> IT'S A HUGE PERCENTAGE. >> SO THE IDEA IS IN ORDER TO HANDLE ONE CALL, YOU STILL NEED THE SAME INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          >> IF WE'RE MAKING 23% OF THE CALLS AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE MAKING THEN OKAY. THAT'S A FAIR RESPONSE. 
          >> WE ACTUALLY SHOWED A SAVINGS THIS YEAR OF ABOUT $60,000. 
          MAYBE THE WHOLE BUDGET COULD JUST BE ATTACHED FOR TOMORROW. 
          JUST GIVE IT TO HIM -- >> IF YOU'RE TELLING ME WE'RE MAKING 23% OF THE CALLS, IF THAT'S WHAT IT IS, I'M OKAY WITH THAT. I'M JUST WONDERING WHERE THE PERCENTAGES CAME FROM AND THAT'S FAIR. 
          THAT SOUNDS FAIR. OKAY. 
          >> THE NEXT ITEM ON THE LIST IS OUR FUNDING FOR THE DEBT SERVICE FOR THE BANK OF AMERICA WHICH WE DID THERE OUR CONTRACT. 
          A SMALL INCREASE OF $27,000 THIS YEAR TO COVER THE DEBT SERVICE SO THAT'S A VERY SMALL INCREASE FOR THAT. 
          ITEM NUMBER 8 ON B 19, I KNOW WE'RE CONSIDERING THE POSSIBILITY OF FUNDING THIS INCREASE FOR OUR JANUARY TOR SERVICES THROUGH JANITORIAL SERVICES THROUGH ARPA FUNDS BUT RIGHT NOW WE'RE PUTTING IT AS A POSSIBLE CHALLENGE OF RIGHT AROUND $100,000 ESTIMATED COST IN EXCESS OF THE FUNDS SO WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE WORKING WITH HAGGERTY AND WITH THE COURT AS WELL BUT RIGHT NOW THIS IS A BUDGET CHALLENGE THAT WE'RE 
          [00:20:03]
SHOWING AS A GENERAL FUND OF $100,000 INCREASE FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES BUT THIS CAN BE SOMETHING THAT WE WILL TAKE OUT AND IF IT DOES GO TO ARPA FUNDS IT CAN BE TAKEN OUT. 
          THIS WILL HAVE TO BE ADDED TO OUR GENERAL FUND. 
          ANOTHER PROPOSED ITEM ON 19, WE HAVE AS I MENTIONED TO COMMISSIONER CHESNEY WHEN WE CAME IN, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A LARGE NUMBER OF VACANCIES IN OUR HAVE'S OFFICE AND MANY OTHER OFFICES. NAY PUT THE POSITION ON THE JOB MARKET, THEY GET LITTLE OR NO RESPONSE. 
          WHAT I'M PROPOSING IS A SALARY INCREASE FOR A COST OF LIVING FOR 3% TO TRY TO GET US MORE COMPETITIVE. 
          THIS WILL MEAN OUR LOWEST PAID SALARY FOR HOURLY RATE WOULD BE $15.05 PER HOUR. A LITTLE OVER $33,000, THAT GIVES US A LITTLE BIT ABOVE TARGET AND MCDONALD'S AND ALL THOSE OTHERS THAT CAN PAY $14 OR $15. 
          IT'S STILL IN THE 100% COMPETITIVE. 
          WE HAVE A DEDUCTION FOR RETIREMENT SO THE OTHERS DONE SO TO REALLY COMPETITIVE WE NEED TO BE $16 OR $17 AN HOUR BUT WE CAN'T AFFORD THAT SO I'M PROPOSING 3%. 
          A FEW NEW POSITIONS, NOT VERY MUCH, THERE'S ONLY LIKE FOUR OR FIVE AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT LATER AS WELL AS SOME RECLASSIFICATIONS. THESE RECLASSIFICATIONS WILL LIKELY GO AWAY IF YOU APPROVE THE COST OF LIVING INCREASE OF 3%. THERE ARE SOME OF THE PROPOSED RECLASSIFICATIONS THAT WE PROBABLY WANT TO MAINTAIN. 
          AS Y'ALL WERE TALKING ABOUT WHEN YOU CAME INTO THE CADETS OF THE JAIL, WE PROBABLY WANT TO LEAVE THAT IN AS A PROPOSED 12%  LEAV AS-IS FOR THE IN COMING YEAR BECAUSE WE HAVE NINE VACANCIES 
          IN OUR JAIL. >> DALE, I THINK THAT TO ME I WOULD RECOMMEND 6% ACROSS THE BOARD FOR EVERYBODY. 
          BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE HEARD, PEOPLE COME AND TALK TO US, MOST WANTED A 2%, 3%, 4% INCREASE. I THINK 6% ACROSS THE BOARD WOULD TAKE CARE OF EVERYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF. 
          I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO DO RAISES. 
          I THINK EVERYBODY IS TAKEN CARE OF ACROSS THE BOARD ON THAT. 
          TO ME I'M LOOKING AT REAL SERIOUSLY AT GOING WITH 6% ACROSS THE BOARD AND I THINK IT'S DOABLE ACCORDING TO OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR. I HAVE CHECKED AND I JUST NEED TO KNOW -- WE NEED TO KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO NOT GO BEYOND AND CUT WHERE WE NEED TO KIT AND NOT ADD WHERE WE DON'T NEED TOO ADD BUT I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE ADD BUT I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF MONEY ON THE TABLE. DEALING WITH WHAT? 3 MILLION POINTS LIVE. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT AND I THINK THAT WOULD SATISFY EVERYBODY. 
          >> WHAT IS THE TOTEL OF YOUR 6% COLA? I THINK YOU HAVE RUN THAT NUMBER. 
          >> 3% IS 1.5 MILLION. SO 6% IS DOUBLE THAT. 
          SO 2.6. >> SO YOU THINK 2.6 AND WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THERE YET BUT DO WE HAVE THE DOLLARS COMING IN 
          FOR THAT? >> NO. 
          >> THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. OKAY. 
          WE'LL JUST KEEP GOING. >> WE'LL GO TO THE TAX RATES AND SHOW YOU WHERE OUR TAX RATES ARE, GO TO THE VOTER APPROVED RATE, WHAT WE ASSUME TO BRING IN BECAUSE WE HAVE CHALLENGES COMING IN. WE KNOW FOOD COSTS ARE GOING UP SO THE COSTS TO MAINTAIN THE INMATES AT THE JAIL, THAT'S GOING UP. METRO COM IS GOING UP BY $400,000. OUR WIND STORM INSURANCE WENT UP BY $200,000 OR $300,000 SO THAT'S $1 MILLION. 
          >> AND PLUS THE KNOWN CHALLENGES ARE $1 MILLION. 
          >> SO THAT'S 2 AND TAXES BRING IN $3 MILLION AND WE NEED 5. 
          >> THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. WE'LL JUST KEEP ON TRUCKING HERE. WE ALL WOULD LOVE TO DO IT. 
          [00:25:03]
          >> I DON'T UNDERSTAND. THIS IS WHAT I ALWAYS MENTION CRUNCHING AND STRUGGLING AND IF WE KNOW AHEAD OF TIME HOW WE PROGRESS AND ALL THAT, SHOULDN'T WE STOP AT ONE POINT SAYING WE'RE NOT GOING TO SPEND HERE, THERE, WHATEVER, AND GET READY FOR THE BUDGET? WE ALWAYS PUSH OURSELVES AGAINST THE WALL. AT THE END WE PENALIZE THE EMPLOYEES BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GET THEM WHAT THEY NEED TO KEEP THEM. WE'RE LOSING A LOT OF EMPLOYEES AT THE DA'S OFFICE, JAIL, AND DALE YOU LOSE A LOT OF 
          EMPLOYEES, TOO. >> IF YOU DO THE COST OF LIVING 
          INCREASE WE CAN'T DO THE JAIL. >> SOMETHING IS GOING TO COME UP 
          ANYWAY, THE BARGAINING. >> THAT'S ANOTHER YEAR. 
          >> BUT WE NEED TO BE READY FOR THAT, DALE. 
          WE CAN'T BE READY WHEN IT COMES, WE HAVE TO BE READY WHEN IT COMES. THAT'S JUST MY OPINION, SO. 
          I STILL NEED TO THINK ABOUT THIS AND LOOK AT IT. 
          >> WHAT MAKES IT DIFFICULT IS THE CAP. 
          IT'S NOT THAT IT CAN'T BE DONE BUT THE LEGISLATURE GIVES YOU A CERTAIN AMOUNT AND YOU CAN ONLY USE THAT AMOUNT. 
          IT'S NOT POSSIBLE NOT BECAUSE WE CAN'T MAKE IT POSSIBLE. 
          IT'S NOT POSSIBLE BECAUSE IT'S TRULY STATUTORILY NOT POSSIBLE 
          AT ALL. >> WE HAVE A WAY OF USING OUR UNUSED INCREMENTS. IF WE USE THAT, WE CAN PAY FOR EVERYTHING THAT BY WILL GIVE US 7%. 
          >> ABOVE THE EFFECTIVE. THAT WOULD BE DOUBLE. 
          >> BUT STILL BELOW CURRENT RATE. >> THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN BANKING A LITTLE BIT HERE AND THERE. 
          THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING TO YOU. >> WHATEVER RATE WE USE THIS 
          YEAR IS GOING TO BE LESS. >> OF COURSE BECAUSE YOUR APPRAISALS ARE TOO HIGH. I JUST GAVE AN INTERVIEW ON THAT THIS MORNING. LET'S JUST KEEP GOING AND WE'LL 
          COME BACK. >> DALE WAS SAYING BEFORE YOU CAME IN, TOO, THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD THE GROWTH THAT I WOULD HAVE ANTICIPATED ON NEW GROWTH. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          >> WE'LL CATCH IT NEXT YEAR. >> I GUESS. 
          >> WE WILL. IT WAS ALL TIMING. 
          >> THEY DO IT JANUARY -- >> IT WILL BE BETTER NEXT YEAR, 
          COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. >> THAT'S WHAT I SAID. 
          >> LIKE YOU SAID, WHEN THEY -- >> IT'S JUST ALL THE TIMING. 
          >> A BIG TIMING ISSUE AND A LOT OF THESE CONTRACTORS KNEE THAT THE HOUSE VALUES ARE VALUED ON JANUARY 1ST SO THEY MIGHT START RIGHT AT DECEMBER SO THEY'RE DONE AFTER JANUARY. 
          A LOT OF BUILDERS KNOW THIS. >> THAT'S CRAZY. 
          >> AGAIN, TODAY IS AN OVERVIEW. LET'S LET DALE FINISH AND COME BACK AND TACKLE ALL THE THINGS THAT HE'S MENTIONING. 
          >> AS ALL OUR COMMISSIONERS ARE STATING, OUR EMPLOYEES ARE BELOW AND TO BE COMPETITIVE BECAUSE IF TARGET AND MCDONALD'S AND MACY'S CAN PAY $14 OR $15 AN HOUR. IF WE PAY THIS AND THEN TAKE OFF 7% FOR RETIREMENT AS PART OF OUR AGREEMENT, WE NEED TO BE AT $16 OR $17 AN HOUR TO BE COMPETITIVE, BUT WE CAN'T GET THAT. AS WE KNOW, WE TRY THAT. 
          WE TRY TO BE COMPETITIVE. WE WANT TO TRY TO MAKE SURE WE DO THE CADETS AT A HIGHER RATE AND UNFORTUNATELY, AS WE SAID, THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT IS UNDER AN AGREEMENT AND THEY WENT UP 4%, HOPEFULLY THAT INCREASE FOR NEXT YEAR WILL KEEP MORE PEOPLE IN OUR JAIL AS CORRECTION OFFICERS BUT IT'S A DIFFICULT JOB AND NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT AND IF YOU'RE ONLY GETTING PAID $17 OR $18 AN HOUR BEING A CORRECTION OFFICER BUT $15 AT TARGET, YOU WILL PROBABLY GO TO 
          TARGET AND MAYBE $15. >> I DON'T WANT TO INSERT THIS AT THIS EXACT MOMENT BUT AS THEY SAY, NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED. WE DID SOMETHING VERY GOOD FOR THE CADETS TWO WEEKS AGO BUT NOW WHEN I STUDY ALL THE PAY SALARIES THERE ARE AT LEAST FOUR PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN THERE FOR DECADES THAT ARE MAKING $1 MORE AND HAVE COLLEGE DEGREES. 
          [00:30:04]
I THINK THIS IS ROUND ONE BUT I THINK I HAVE IDDED A COUPLE OF PROBLEM AREAS THAT HAVEED A COU PROBLEM AREAS THAT HAVE ZERO SEPARATION. THOSE FOUR PEOPLE, WE MAY HAVE YOU LOOK AT THEM. THESE ARE LAW ENFORCEMENT, BY THE WAY, BUT CIVILIAN. THEY WORK IN THE JAIL BUT 
          THEY'RE CIVILIANS. >> ANOTHER ISSUE, AS YOU KNOW, WE APPROVED THE VETERAN'S CEMETERY AND THE LAND BOARD AND THE JAIL WANTS TO GIVE OUR VETERAN CEMETERY EMPLOYEES RAISES BUT THEY'RE BROUGHT IN SIMILAR AS OTHER EMPLOYEES SO I CAN'T GIVE EVERYONE A RAISE WITHOUT SEPARATING THEM OUT. 
          >> THAT ONE I FEEL LIKE MAYBE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND I CAN WORK ON. I THINK WE CAN DO IT EARNED A VETERAN'S LAND BOARD SUP FLEMENT OR UNDER A VETERAN'S LAND BOARD SUP FLEMENT OR SOMETHING. 
          THEY'RE SO DIFFERENT. >> WE HAVE THE MONEY IN THERE SO NO NEED TO DO AJUSTMENTSES FOR THAT, WE JUST NEED TO MAKE THEIR 
          SALARIES CORRECT. >> THE ONES I WAS WORRIED ABOUT WAS, AGAIN, PEOPLE WORKING IN THE JAIL THAT ARE CRITICAL AND VITAL AND BEEN THERE FOR 15 YEARS AND NOW THE CADETS ARE $20, THEY'RE GETTING, LET'S CALL IT $21 OR $22. 
          SO WE HAVE TO REALLY WORK ON THAT. 
          >> THEY DIDN'T GET RAISES AT ALL? 
          >> I DOUBLE CHECKED IT AND THERE ARE FOUR INDIVIDUALS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO AGAIN, NOT RIGHT THIS SECOND -- 
          >> EVERYBODY ELSE GOT RAISES. >> IF THEY'RE A REGULAR EMPLOYEE, THEY GET A CONTINGENCY 2.5% OR PROMOTED AND AN INCREASE. EVERY THREE YEARS THEY GET AN 
          INCREASE. >> NO BASE SALARY AND IT'S ABOUT EACH DEPARTMENT HEAD RUNS HER OR HIS OWN SHOW. 
          SO THERE ARE TRICKY ONES INSIDE WHERE WHEREVER WE HAVE MADE MAJOR ADJUSTMENTS, WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK UP AND MAKE SURE THERE'S SEPARATION. THIS WIN JUST HAPPENS TO HAVE FOUR SO THAT'S NOT GOING TO HURT US TOO BAD BUT WHEN YOU BRING UP HERE AND MAYBE NO MOVEMENT HERE, THEN ALL YOU HAVE DONE IS TAKEN THIS AND GONE ON TOP SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT AS WE LOOK AT OUR PROPOSED RECLASSES WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAYBE DOUBLE CHECK THAT THE CADETS, WHEREVER WE REALLY CHANGED THEIR LIVES, LIKE IN THE CADETS, THERE'S PEOPLE RIGHT ABOVE THEM AND THAT MAKES NO SENSE AT ALL. NOT TOO MANY BUT ENOUGH THAT WE 
          CAN ADDRESS IT. >> A FEW OTHER ITEMS THAT WE'RE CHANGING OR REVISING. NUMBER 7, THE NCDC, WE'RE REMOVING THE TRANSFER SO THERE'S NO LONGER A TRANSFER OF $250,000, ONLY RELYING ON WHAT THE PORT BRINGS IN AND ANY FUNDRAISINGS THEY MAY HAVE. IF THEY BRING IN FUNDRAIDIISING THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO [INAUDIBLE] WE HAVE SOME OTHER IMPROVEMENTS OF ADDITIONAL CHARGES AND THERE MIGHT BE SOMETHING COME UP VERY SOON IN COURT OF HOW WE WANT TO FUND THIS THROUGH SOME TRANSFERS BUT RIGHT NOW THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE AT THE MOMENT, BUT THERE COULD BE SOME DISCUSSION ONCE THEY COME THROUGH COURSE ACTION TO MAKE SURE HOW WE WANT TO DO 
          THIS? >> ON WHICH, DALE? 
          >> PARKER POOL. >> ON B 23 WE KNOW, AS THE JUDGE JUST SAID, THIS IS WHERE IT GETS CHALLENGING YEAR, THERE'S SENATE BILL 2 WITH A 3.5% MAXIMUM RATE ABOVE. 
          WE CAN USE AND THE LAW ALLOWS US TO USE INDREAMTS TO TRY TO BRING THE BALANCES UP. THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION COMING UP SOON, WE HAVE BEEN INFORMED THIS MAY GO EVEN FURTHER DOWN. 
          IT'S GETTING HARDER AND HARDER FOR THE COUNTY TO FUNCTION HOWEVER WE NEED TO DO THE FUNCTIONING. 
          >> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION BY IS IT JUST $18,000, 250 FOR PARKER POOL? IS THAT IT? 
          >> WE NEED SOMETHING TO MAKE SURE THE SALARIES ARE PAID SO WE 
          NEED TO -- >> WHY MAKE IT A CHALLENGE? 
          [00:35:02]
          JUST GET RID OF IT. >> WE'RE TRYING TO -- ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S COMING IN THE BUDGET, IT'S A REAL SMALL AMOUNT TO PUT IN THERE TO HAVE THIS SO IT DOESN'T HAPPEN ANYMORE BECAUSE, YEAH. I COVERED IT UNTIL THE CITY'S 
          PAYMENT COMES. >> THE CITY HAS NOT FUNDED THIS 
          THE WAY THEY AGREED TO. >> AND THEY ARE AND IT'S GOING TO COME BACK ON THE AGENDA AND BACK ON THEIR AGENDA.  I DON'T THINK HOW LONG IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE BECAUSE IT'S A FREE SWIM PROGRAM AND THEY MAY OR MAY NOT CONTINUE IT SO IF THEY DON'T CONTINUE IT, WE WON'T DO FREE SWIM AND WE'LL HAVE THAT REVENUE TO COME IN, BUT WE STILL NEED TO PUT A LITTLE BIT IN THE BUDGET TO COVER IT. THAT POOL IS ALMOST SELF-SUSTAINING ON ITS OWN BUT WE STILL NEED TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CASH RESERVES, CONTINGENCY OR WHATEVER. 
          >> I'M CURIOUS, THOUGH. I'M JUST PUTTING CHECK MARKS. 
          DOES ANYONE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH PARKER POOL? 
          I DON'T THINK SO, RIGHT? >> I THINK WE PROPOSED PUTTING 
          $25,000 OR SOMETHING. >> THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING. 25. 
          WE'LL HAVE TO COME THROUGH COURT. 
          WE CAN PUT 25 TO COVER THAT. >> AND THE CITY MAY COME 
          THROUGH? >> THE CITY WILL COME THROUGH THIS YEAR BUT GOING FORWARD, WE'LL GO BACK TO NOT HAVING FREE SWIM. IT WAS ONE OF THESE DEAL WHERE IS WE DID THIS WE'RE GOING TO PAY FOR EVERY POOL TO DO IT. 
          THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT THIS YEAR. 
          >> OKAY, SO AM I GOING TO MARK OFF -- IS PARKER POOL REALLY A CHALLENGE OR NOT REALLY? DO YOU WANT IT IN THE BUDGET? 
          >> THE CITY WAS RUNNING IT THEIR VERY FIRST YEAR, THEY DID PAY US THE VERY FIRST YEAR AND THEN SAID FROM HERE ON, IT MAY BE 20%. EDWARD IS WORKING ON IT. 
          >> THEY'RE LOADED. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THEM? 
          >> WE JUST WANT TO HAVE A CONTINGENCY THERE. 
          >> WE'RE PUTTING IT ON OUR AGENDA AND IT'S ON THEIR AGENDA. 
          >> BUT IS IT A REAL CHALLENGE? >> TO ME I REQUESTED IT THIS YEAR. I THINK IT WAS THE FIRST TIME IN 
          THREE OR FIVE YEARS. >> I'M MARKING IT AS 25 K. 
          >> IS THAT A TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND OR IS THIS DEPARTMENT MOVING INTO GENERAL FUND? 
          >> NO, A TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND. 
          >> I'M PUTTING IT AT 25. I'M PUTTING ITEM NUMBER 7 AS ZERO AND I'M KEEPING SCORE, BRENT, AND I HAVE YOU AS PLUS 25. JUST SO YOU KNOW, I RELISH IN IT. I LOVE IT. 
          >> I KNOW. >> IT'S THE FIRST TIME IN FIVE 
          YEARS. >> I'M ENJOYING THE MOMENT. 
          >> BUT I CAN FIND THOSE CUTS. >> KEEP DOING IT, WE NEED THEM. 
          CAN I ASK YOU GUYS TO GO BACK, BECAUSE I THOUGHT NUMBER FOUR WE ALREADY TOOK CARE OF THAT IN ARPA. 
          CAN WE GO BACK TO THREE AND FOUR, PLEASE? 
          I THINK THE RECORD WILL REFLECT. >> I CONCUR. 
          >> WE JUST WANT [INAUDIBLE] >> PEOPLE ARE GOING TO LOOK AT 
          IT. >> IT STEPS SEPTEMBER 30, 2022. 
          WE PAY NEED COURT ACTION TO CONTINUE IT. 
          >> WE CAN TAKE THAT UP. >> I THOUGHT WE CONTINUED IT 
          THROUGH ALL OF NEXT YEAR. >> NEXT YEAR. 
          >> WHAT WE DID, BRENT, WE SAID TAKE ITEM NUMBER TWO, THAT'S FOR 
          THIS COMING YEAR. >> THREE AND FOUR IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. I'M CERTAIN WE CLEARLY MADE A MOTION DURING THE ARPA TO COVER THESE COSTS FOR THE UPCOMING 
          YEAR >> IF WE DIDN'T, CAN WE JUST 
          CLEAN IT UP? >> THEY WENT BACK TO THE MINUTES. YOU CHECKED, RIGHT? 
          YOU CHECKED THE MINUTES. >> JUNE 28TH? 
          >> IT'S ON THE SCREEN. >> JUNE 8TH. 
          >> THAT'S KARA'S MINUTES ON THE SUMMARY. 
          >> WE'RE DOING -- >> I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE 
          COURT'S INTENT. >> REMEMBER THAT BIG CONTINGENCY 
          [00:40:01]
          WE JUST PUT ASIDE? >> WE STILL GOT 8 OR 9 MILLION. 
          >> RIGHT, SO LET'S JUST CLEAN THAT UP. 
          NUMBER THREE AND NUMBER FOUR. NUMBER TWO, WE TOOK CARE OF THAT LAST WEEK. ON FRIDAY WE VOTED TO KEEP ALL THOSE POSITIONS SO THAT THIRD RISK ASSESSMENT OFFICER WAS FUNDED LAST YEAR. IT WILL BE FUNDED THIS YEAR BY 
          ARPA, DALE. >> WAS NUMBER TWO IN THAT BIG 
          NUMBER THAT YOU GAVE US, DALE? >> YES, IT WAS. 
          >> SO TWO IS OFF. THREE IS OFF. 
          WELL, IT WILL BE. WE NEED TO DO SEVEN AS A MOTION 
          NOT TODAY, OBVIOUSLY, BUT. >> YEAH, WE'LL CLEAN IT UP. 
          >> CAN YOU PUT SEVEN ON TWO? >> IT'S JUST A BUDGET, YOU JUST 
          DON'T FUND IT. >> I'M SORRY, NOT SEVEN, PARKER POOL, EIGHT. SORRY, SORRY. 
          >> ON PARKER POOL, WE CAN GET IT APPROVED THROUGH THE BUDGET DOESN'T THERE NEED TO BE A SPECIAL ITEM ON THE COURT 
          ACCEPTED AS A BUDGET REQUEST? >> I'M TRYING TO CHECK THINGS 
          OFF. >> ME, TOO. 
          >> LET'S ALSO CHECK OFF -- LET'S TALK ABOUT -- NUMBER SEVEN, TOO? 
          >> YES, TWO, THREE, FOUR, SEVEN, AND EIGHT. 
          I THINK WE CAN WORK ON FIVE, TOO. 
          >> WHAT DID WE CHECK OFF ON SEVEN? 
          >> SEVEN IS JUST WE'RE NOT GOING TO -- WE'RE TAKING AWAY THE 
          TRANSFER. >> THE COURT DOESN'T LIKE THE $50,000 TO NCDC SO WE'RE TAKING IT OFF. 
          AS THEY SAY, THERE WILL BE A $10 FINE FOR TALKING ABOUT IT. 
          IT'S GOING TO BE GENE. THAT'S WHAT MY MOM HAS. 
          IF YOU COMPLAIN, IT COSTS YOU $10. 
          >> LET'S GO BACK, LET'S TALK ABOUT NUMBER FIVE. 
          I THINK THIS ONE IS OKAY. LET'S SEE. 
          >> ALL WE'RE DOING IS TRANSFERRING ONE POSITION FROM A SPECIAL FUND OVER TO THE COASTAL PARKS. 
          >> WHY? >> BECAUSE SCOTT IS ASKING FOR 
          IT. >> BUT IT'S NET NEUTRAL, RIGHT? 
          >> FUND 18 WILL INCREASE AND FUND 13 WILL GO DOWN. 
          NET ZERO TO THE COUNTY. >> WHY WOULDN'T WE WANT TO KEEP 
          THIS ONE AND GO MESA? >> SCOTT CROSS HAS A BIG PUSH ON 
          THIS. >> SO GO MESA IS THE DOLLARS WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE USING FOR RESILIENCY. 
          IC USE IT FOR STAFF AND THAT'S WHAT HE DID. 
          WHEN HE CAME AND WE TOLD HIM LAST YEAR, LISTEN, WE NEED THE DOLLARS, AND IF YOU REALLY NEED THEM, YOU NEED THEM BUT RIGHT NOW, LET'S SEE. WE'RE STILL PLAYING AROUND WITH IT A LITTLE BIT. IT'S NICE TO USE GO MESA FOR THINGS -- YOUR STAFF IS SO THIN OUT THERE. 
          YOU HAVE TO BE READY THE FUND YOUR STAFF. 
          YOU CAN TALK TO HIM. >> IT CAN BE CONTINUED AS GO MESA FUNDS. THAT'S A $70,000 INCREASE. 
          >> GO MESA WENT DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY THIS PAST YEAR. 
          >> BUT HOW MUCH IS GO MESA? MILLIONS. 
          THERE'S A LOT IN GO MESA THAT WE'RE NOT USING IT FOR AND IF WE EVER INCREASE STAFF OUT THERE, I WOULD RATHER NOT HAVE TO DO IT 
          TWICE. >> I THINK WE'RE REAL THIN OUT 
          THERE. >> RIGHT, BUT THIS WOULD BE ADDING -- IF YOU TAKE THIS AND PUT IT ON THE GENERAL FUND AND 
          PUT THIS OUT THERE. >> THIS WAS ALWAYS IN THE 
          GENERAL FUND, RIGHT? >> WHEN IT WAS FIRST CREATED, IT WAS A GO MESA EMPLOYEE AND THEN WE INCREASED IT TO A MANAGER LEVEL AND THEN WE SPLIT BETWEEN FUND 18 AND FUND 12 AND IT WAS MOVED BACK TO GO MESA FUND AND NOW SCOTT WANTS TO MOVE BACK TO HIS FUND BECAUSE THIS PERSON MAINLY DOES A LOT OF THE DUNE PROTECTION PERMITS AND ALL THAT STUFF ASSOCIATED WITH WHAT HE DOES. AND HE BROUGHT GO MESA UP. 
          >> WE CAN CHANGE THAT DUNE PROTECTION FEE. 
          THAT PERSON IS REALLY DOING ALL THESE DUNE PROTECTION. 
          IT'S MEGAN. >> RIGHT AND IN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT WE HAVE DONE WITH ELSE ON ARPA EMPLOYEES, WE HAVE EXTENDED A YEAR SO IN THE SAME SPIRIT, TO ME WE SHOULD CONTINUE, YOU KNOW? WHY WOULD WE WANT TO BRING ANYBODY ON? 
          AND MAYBE JUMP OFF THE CLIFF. >> JUMP OFF THE CLIFF NEXT YEAR. 
          AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE TO JUMP. >> I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S A BAD THING UNTIL WE SEE THOSE GO MESA FUNDS. 
          THAT'S BIG DOLLARS. >> WHY DON'T WE GET AN 
          [00:45:03]
          ACCOUNTING OF IT. >> RIGHT, IT'S BIG DOLLARS WE 
          HAVE IN THAT FUND. >> IT'S $7 MILLION OR MORE. 
          >> I'M NOT SURE I WOULD EVER ADVOCATE TO TAKE THIS PERSON OFF 
          OF GO MESA. >> OKAY. 
          >> WE'LL HAVE THE NUMBER EXACTLY HERE IN A FEW SECONDS BUT IT'S 
          VERY HIGH. >> EITHER WAY IT CAN BE AGREED 
          IT'S NOT A CHALLENGE. >> TO ME IT'S NOT A CHALLENGE, 
          JUST LEAVE IT ALONE. >> IT'S NOT A CHALLENGE. 
          OKAY. THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO TAKE ABOUT IS ITEM NUMBER -- THAT'S IT. 
          ONE BUT I GUESS WE'LL GO THROUGH ONE MORE IN DETAIL, RIGHT? 
          >> WE'LL GO THROUGH ONE BECAUSE WE DO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL HOPES TO ADDING NEW EMPLOYEES BUT WE'LL GET TO THAT WHEN WE GET TO THE RECOMMENDED INCREASES OR CLASSIFICATIONS AND TAKE OUT WHAT YOU BELIEVE IS NECESSARY. B 24 IS WHERE WE TALK ABOUT OUR FUND BALANCE. OUR FUND BALANCE IS WHEN WE START TALKING TO YOU ABOUT TAB D AND E, OUR ESTIMATES. 
          OUR ESTIMATES ARE SHEING A SLIGHT REDUCTION OF FUNDS, HOWEVER, WE'RE GOING TO DO WHAT THE COURT IS RECOMMENDING, DOING 35% SELL OF THE ASSET TO THE GENERAL FUND. 
          I'M GOING TO BRING SOMETHING TO COURT NEXT COMMISSIONER'S -- NOT THIS COURT BUT THE FOLLOWING COMMISSIONER COURT TO SEE IF THE CURITY IS WILLING TO SUSPEND TWO PREMIUM PAYS FOR HEALTH INSURANCE BECAUSE WE'RE ABOUT TO TRANSFER $1.75 MILLION INCOURT PREMIUM PAYS FOR HEALTH INSURANCE BECAUSE WE'RE ABOUT TO TRANSFER $1.75 MILLION IN HEALTH INSURANCE FUNDS AND WE'LL BE WELL ABOVE WHERE WE NEED TO BE SO SUSPEND TWO PREMIUM PAYMENTS, THAT WOULD SAFE A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND THE HOUSING OF OUR INMATES AS WELL AS OUR MED COM FUNDS TO THE ARPA FUNDS SO IF ALL THAT PASSES AND EVERYTHING IS DONE, I BELIEVE MY ESTIMATES WILL BE CLOSER TO BREAK EVEN. 
          I DON'T BELIEVE WE'LL EVER GET IT TO A POSITIVE NUMBER BUT BREAK EVEN IS BETTER THAN A MILLION NET LOSS AND RIGHT NOW THAT'S WHAT NUMBERS ARE SHOWING. AS WE SAID AND COURT KNOWS, OUR EMPLOYEE TURNOVER IS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN 
          BEFORE. >> B 38. 
          >> BEFORE WE LEAVE YOUR B TAB. I WANT TO ASK ON, I WANT TO ASK ON ITEM B 24, THE LIFE GUARD SERVICES WE SPENT $300,000 LAST YEAR AND DIDN'T SPEND A DIME OF IT. 
          I'M FINE WITH LEAVING IT FOR A CON TINGS PSI BUT I WANT THE COURT TO BE AWARE THAT WE HAVE $300,000 THERE WE THOUGHT WE NEEDED BUT THEY'RE JUST HOLDING THERE. 
          >> IT DIDN'T KICK IN IN TIME? >> NO, WE JUST HAVEN'T NEEDED 
          IT. >> WE HAVE NOT BEEN -- 
          >> WE'RE COME APPLYING WITH THE LAW? 
          >> WE'RE COMPLIANT. AGAIN, IT'S THERE I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW WE CAN MOVE ON. I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT. 
          SO WHERE DO YOU WANT TO GO? B 38? 
          >> I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT. ON THE LIFE GUARD. 
          IF IT'S $300,000 SET ASIDE, DO WE STILL NEED THAT $300,000 OR 
          CAN WE COME DOWN? >> THAT'S THE QUESTION WE HAD WHEN WE FIRST GOT THE INFORMATION FROM THE STATE SAYING THE REQUIREMENT OF LIFE GUARD STATIONS. 
          I KNOW SCOTT CROSS AND A FEW PEOPLE FROM THE PARKS WENT THROUGH AND TRIED TOO WORK WITH THE CITY OF PORT ARANSAS, THE CITY OF COCORPUS CHRISTI AND WE NARROWED IT DOWN TO $400,000. 
          AS THE JUDGE SAID, WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR CONTACTS AT PORT A AND CORPUS CHRISTI AND RIGHT NOW THERE'S NOT A NECESSARY NEED BUT THIS IS THE FIRST YEAR AND WE'RE ABOUT IN THE SUMMER PORTION OF IT. THERE MAY BE A CALL FOR IT COMING UP VERY SOON. THIS IS ALL ARPA FUNDS. 
          [00:50:01]
THIS DOES NOT AFFECT OUR BUDGET IN ANY WAY. 
          I WOULD SAY LEAVE IT THERE WIN MORE YEAR. 
          IF IT'S NOT NEEDED WE CAN REALLOCATE IT AT ANY POINT IN 
          TIME. >> IT'S MAINLY FOR AWARENESS. 
          NOW WHERE YOU LIKE US TO GO. >> BEFORE WE GO TO VACANCIES, OUR JAIL IS SIGNIFICANTLY OVERCROWDED. 
          THE FOOD COSTS FOR FEEDING THE INMATES IN OUR JAIL IS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER BECAUSE OF THE COSTS OF BUYING ANYTHING RIGHT NOW. IT'S A BUDGET CHALLENGE BUT WE'RE REQUIRED TO ADD SOME FOR NOT ONLY OUR JAIL BUT FOR OUR JUVENILE FACILITIES WHERE THEY ALSO PREPARE FOOD FOR THIS. 
          WE HAVE OVERCROWDING FOR BOTH AND THAT'S CAUSING A LOT OF OVERTIME SO WORE PROPOSING A SMALL INCREASE OF A BALANCE OF OVERTIME. AS WE MNGSED, IF WE GO TO B 27. 
          B 27 IS OUR RETIREMENT PLAN. THE HISTORY OF OUR RETIREMENT PLAN IS 12% GOING UP TO 13 TO 14, NOW AT 12.24% I BELIEVE IT IS AND THAT'S WHAT THE RETIREMENT SYSTEM IS GOING TO RECOMMEND. THAT'S WHAT WE'LL BE BRINGING VERY SOON AND I KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE A LARGE INCREASE NEXT YEAR, BUT WITH ALL THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE THIS YEAR, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE KEEPING THE RATE AT WHERE WE KEEP IT, A REDICTION AROUND $800,000 FOR OUR GENERAL FUND WHICH IS WHERE WE NEED HELP SO EVEN THOUGH WHERE WE MOST LIKELY SEE A LARGE INCREASE NEXT YEAR, WE'RE KICKING THIS CAN DOWN THE ROAD BUT UNFORTUNATELY WITH ALL THE OTHER STUFF WE HAVE GOING ON AND POTENTIALLY TRYING TO DO WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. 
          OUR RECOMMENDED RECLASSIFICATIONS, WE'LL GET TO THAT WHEN WE GET TO POSITIONS. THIS IS OUR CURRENT FUNDED ARPA POSITIONS. RIGHT NOW ONES AT THE TOP ARE CURRENTLY FUNDED AND THAT'S $528,425 WHICH WE'LL ADD NEXT YEAR. WE HAVE THE WIN PROPOSED TEMPORARY FOR VETERAN SERVICES AND THE ONE BUDGET POSITION, THE DEPUTYN PROPOSED TEMPORARY FOR VETERAN SERVICES AND THE ONE BUDGET POSITION, THE DEN PROPOSED TEMPORARY FOR VETERAN SERVICES AND THE ONE BUDGET POSITI PROPOSED TEMPORAR FOR VETERAN SERVICES AND THE ONE BUDGET POSITIO PROPOSED TEMPORAY FOR VETERAN SERVICES AND THE ONE BUDGET POSITIN PROPOSED TEMPORARY FOR VETERAN SERVICES AND THE ONE BUDGET POSITION, THE DEE PROPOSED TEMPORARY FOR VETERAN SERVICES AND THE ONE BUDGET POSITION, THE DEPUTY ME'S OFFICE COMING UP. 
          WE KNOW THERE'S ONE THE FOLLOWING YEAR AND I BELIEVE YOU WANT TO DO IS SAME FUNDING SO WE WOULD HAVE TO ADD THOSE TOGETHER SO IF WE ADD ALL THAT TOGETHER, THAT WOULD BE AROUND $700,000. 
          >> DO YOU MIND IF WE JUST GO THROUGH THEM AND ACKNOWLEDGE THEM? WE MADE THIS DECISION ON FRIDAY BY I THINK SOMETIMES THE AWARENESS IS VERY GOOD. 
          >> AT THE VERY TOP, ATTORNEY LEVEL THREE, ATTORNEY LEVEL TWO, YOUR CONSTABLES, ALL THESE POSITIONS ARE PERMANENT 
          POSITIONS. >> SO THAT'S FOR THE CA'S OFFICE. ATTORNEY THREE AND ATTORNEY TWO 
          IS FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. >> RIGHT. 
          WE HAVE DEPUTY CONSTABLE FOR PRECINCT ONE HELPING FOR THE BAILIFFS AND WE HAVE COVERING THE CLAYBURN COUNTY. 
          >> GOT IT. >> DISASTER RECOVERY SPECIALIST AS WELL AS EMERGENCY PLANNER. THE LEGAL SECRETARY IS FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND A LOT OF THESE WERE ADDED SO LAST YEAR WE DIDN'T SPEND 528 BUT NEXT YEAR WE WILL BE SPENDING 528 AND THIS ALSO ALREADY INCLUDES BENEFITS SO THE 528 WILL BE ONE MORE YEAR 
          OF ARPA. >> AND THEN LET'S GO TO THE -- I SEE ALL OF THOSE AS STAYING PUT. WHAT'S THE NEXT ONE? 
          >> THE TEMPORARY FOR THE VETERANS ADD MAN WAS NEEDED AT THAT TIME. I BELIEVE THAT ONE REMAINS WHEN WE WORK THROUGH MEDICAL EXAMINER OFFICE, THEY'RE ALREADY ON STAFF AND BUDGETED FOR. WE HAVE ONE AT THE END OF THE YEAR FOR $102,000. IF WE GO THROUGH THE CONTRACT, THERE'S ONE MORE ADDITIONAL ONE. ALL THAT TOGETHER IS AROUND 
          $700,000. >> GOT IT. 
          >> POW WE CONTINUE. >> AND THEN GO DOWN TO THE 
          RECOMMENDED NEW POSITIONS. >> THESE ARE ITEMS WE CAN LEAVE 
          [00:55:03]
OUT, WE CAN FUND. THE PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE SAYS A GRANT WAS AWARDED THE JUDGES AND SOMEONE ELSE CAME OFF AND SAID THEY NEED ADDITIONAL STAFF. THEY NEED TWO MORE ATTORNEYS AND ONE MORE ADMIN SECRETARY FOR THEIR STAFF SO THAT'S FOR THE PUBLIC DEFENDER IT'S 267 FOR THE ATTORNEYS AND 39,000 FOR THE ADMIN67 FOR THE ATTORNEYS AND 39,000 FOR THE ADT67 FOR THE ATTORNEYS AND 39,000 FOR THE ADW67 FOR THE ATTORNEYS AND 39,000 FOR THE ADO67 FOR THE ATTORNEYS AND 39,000 FOR THE AD67 FOR THE ATTORNEYS AND 39,000 FOR THE ADMIN SECRETARY AND THEN WE NEED A MANAGER TO HELP RUN THE FUNCTION BECAUSE MY STAFF AND COMMISSIONER STAFF IS OVERLOADED AND WE NEED SOMEBODY TO DO THIS. AS WE WENT THROUGH ALL THE POSITIONS FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND THE CONSTABLES CAME IN, THEY TOLD HOW FAR THEY ARE BEHIND IN DOING SOME STUFF IN THEIR PRECINCTS AS WELL AS COVERING THE COUNTY SO EACH HAD REQUESTED SOME ADDITIONAL STAFF. I BELIEVE IT WAS NECESSARY TO PUT IN THE REQUEST FOR THIS. MY REQUEST IS TO GO IN AND ADD THESE INDIVIDUALS. THIS CAN BE ALL SET UP. 
          IF WE DO EVERYTHING FOR ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR ARPA FUNDS, IT WOULD BE $1.1 MILLION. WE CAN DO AWAY WITH ANY OF THE ONES AT THE BOTTOM OR THEY CAN BE ADDED. 
          >> ON THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE ON THE CONSTABLES, IS THAT THEIR 
          REQUEST? >> YES. 
          >> BUT ON FOUR, WE ALREADY GAVE THEM ONE. 
          >> WE GAVE THEM ONE FOR THE CLAYBURN PROPERTY, CORRECT. 
          >> GOT IT. >> AND THE SHERIFF PUT IN A REQUEST FOR FOUR. WE'RE ONLY PUTTING IN FOR ONE. 
          >> SO YOU'RE PROPOSING TO ADD ANOTHER 524 IN ARPA POSITIONS? 
          >> THAT'S THE REQUEST BUT ALL OF D WHEN WE HAVE ALL THE NEEDS, ESPECIALLY IN BISHOP AREA OR PORT ARANSAS AREA, WE FELT IT WAS NEEDED BUT THESE DEFINITELY CAN BE ELIMINATED. 
          THESE ARE NOT SET IN STONE. THESE CAN BE TAKEN OUT IF YOU SO 
          CHOOSE. >> I THINK MAKING THE CLIFF EVEN WORSE. THAT MAYBES IT TIGHT. 
          >> BUT THE ONE THAT I WANTED TO ADDRESS IS, AND I'LL HAVE TO BRING IT BACK IS THESE FOUR INDIVIDUALS AT THE SHERIFF'S 
          OFFICE. >> AND WHY DID THE MENTAL HEALTH 
          DEFENDER -- >> THAT'S A REQUEST TO CONSIDER ADDITIONAL LAWYERS FOR THE PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE. 
          SHE JUST WANTS US TO CONSIDER IT. 
          >> OH, MAN. >> EVERYTHING COMES AROUND LATER 
          ON. >> YEAH, I'M NOT. 
          SORRY, THAT'S TOUGH TO SWALLOW. >> THIS IS JUST FOR ONE YEAR OF ARPA FUNDS. YES, THIS IS A LARGE NUMBER. 
          THE ONES ABOVE THIS, IT'S SET AND WE KNOW WE HAVE ONE MORE COMING IN. THEY CAN DEFINITELY BE REMOVED. 
          I JUST FELT THAT WE NEED TO PUT SOMETHING IN THERE SO WE CAN SEE HOW WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THEM, THESE ARE DESPERATELY 
          NEEDED. >> I THINK WE'RE REALLY IN THE DANGER ZONE PUTTING THEM IN POSITIONS FOR ARPA. 
          THE STUFF WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO I THINK WITH ARPA HAS BEEN TO REFUND -- NOT REFUND BUT TO CONTINUE FUNDING -- REFUND SOUNDS WRONG. WE HAVE NOT ADDED A BUNCH OF NEW 
          ONES SO -- >> THE ONLY ONE I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE IT WOULD END WHEN ARPA ENDED IS THE ARPA 
          MANAGER. >> SURE. 
          >> YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BITE OFF MORE THAN YOU CAN CHEW THERE. 
          WE DON'T HAVE THAT PERSON. >> THAT WOULD BE -- 
          >> SOMEONE IN COURT ADMINISTRATION. 
          >> IN ADDITION TO HAGGERTY? >> IT WOULD HELP REDUCE HAGGERTY. IT WOULD NOT GET RID OF HAGGERTY. NO, IT WOULDN'T BECAUSE THERE HAS TO BE SOME UNDERSTANDING LATER ABOUT HOW ALL THESE DECISIONS ARE MADE BECAUSE NO WIN ON THIS COURT HAS REALLY 
          [01:00:03]
BEEN ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE COMPLEXITIES OF IT EXCEPT FOR IDAY AND THIS IS HER RECOMMENDATION AND IT'S WHAT OTHER JURISDICTIONS ARE DOING. WE CHECKED IT OUT AT THE NATIONALS AND THIS IS WHAT JURISDICTIONS ARE DOING. 
          EVERY ONE OF YOUR ELIGIBLE PROJECTS IS GOING TO HAVE A TON OF PAPERWORK JUST TO GET TO YOUR AUDITORS. 
          >> RIGHT, BUT HAGGERTY IS DOING THAT. 
          SO RIGHT NOW, THE CONTEMPLATION IS TO HAVE HAGGERTY THROUGH Q 1, 
          OKAY? >> THROUGH WHAT? 
          >> THE FIRST QUARTER OF NEXT YEAR. 
          YOU NEED TO EASE OFF OF IT AT SOME POINT. 
          >> IT'S EXPENSIVE. >> THE GOVERNMENT SAID SPEND 10% WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN $7 MILLION. 
          >> IN ADMINISTRATION? >> YES, WHY DO I THINK THEY DID 
          THAT? >> THAT'S RIDICULOUS. 
          >> NO, IT'S NOT. WE THINK WE CAN SPEND 1.5%. 
          HAGGERTY IS RECOMMENDING -- >> THIS IS A WORKSHOP, WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION SO IF SOMEONE CAN SHOW ME WHERE THIS WILL HELP US SPEND LESS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS, I'M AIL ABOUT THAT. IF SOMEONE CAN SHOW MANY THAT ON PAPER, AN EVALUATION AND ANALYSIS, TO ME THESE FUNDS NEED TO GO TO PROMPTS AND PEOPLE, NOT ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS AND I THINK WE ALL WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. YOU HAVE HEARD ME WEIGH IN ON HAGGERTY, I THINK THEY HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB SO IF THERE'S AN ANALYSIS THAT WE CAN PROVIDE WHERE YOU SAY THIS ARPA MANAGER WILL SAFE US TIME AND ENERGY AND WE CAN LOOK AT MORE PROJECTS I'M 
          ALL FOR THAT. >> I THINK IT'S WORTHY OF 
          BRINGING BACK. >> THAT'S FINE. 
          >> WHERE DO YOU GUYS WANT TO GO? THAT REPRESENTS THE TAB B THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE COVERED TODAY. 
          BEFORE WE LEAVE IT, LET'S GO BACK AND ASK IF THERE ARE ANY 
          QUESTIONS AT ALL. >> THE LAST ONE ON B 38, THIS 
          SHOWS YOU OUR VACANCIES. >> LET'S DO THAT. 
          >> WHAT IS THAT ONE? >> VACANCIES FOR EACH OF THE DEPARTMENTS. WE HAD 107 THIS TIME LAST YEAR, NOW WE HAVE 174 AND THIS SHOWS THE DEPARTMENTS WITH THE VACANCIES AND THE QUANTITY OF EACH. 
          THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS TWO, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY HAS 12, THE DISTRICT CLERK HAS 12. THE SHERIFF'S GOT 15. 
          JUVENILE HAS 12. YOU SEE ALMOST 69 PEOPLE MORE THIS YEAR THAN LAST YEAR. THAT'S THE WHY WE'RE SAYING WE NEED AN INCREASE TO BRING OUR LEVEL UP. 
          I'M STILL PROPOSING 3% WILL GIVE YOU THE COST FOR 6% OF THE COLA IF YOU CHOOSE BUT WHEN WE START GETTING INTO THE LEVEL OF THE TAX RATES, WHEN WE GET TO THAT LEVEL TO SHOW YOU WHERE WE'RE AT, UNLESS WE USE THE VOTER APPROVED RATE WITH THE UNUSED INCREMENTS, THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE CAN FUND IT. 
          I WILL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON 10 B. 
          >> LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION ON B 38. 
          ON THE MAIN VACANCY, OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ATTORNEYS ON THE CRIMINAL AND CIVIL SIDE JAIL. IT'S A BIG ONE, RIGHT? HOW DOES THIS COMPARE WITH PREVIOUS CYCLES? WHAT'S OUR TREND? IS THIS AN ANOMALY WE HAVE RIGHT 
          NOW? >> LAST YEAR 107 TO 174. 
          >> BUT BEYOND THAT. IS THIS AN EBB AND FLOW THAT WE 
          SEE? >> ONCE COVID STARTED, THE VACANCIES CAME IN. TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO, THE JAIL HAD MAYBE 35 TO 40 VACANCIES AND THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE LIVING ON 35 TO 40. NOW THROUGH COVID, WE'RER IN FROM 70 ANYWHERE FROM 70 TO 84. 
          PEOPLE KNOW THEY CAN GO AND WORK SOMEWHERE ELSE. 
          >> I DON'T KNOW HOW EASY IT IS TO DO THIS BUT IF EVERY YEAR WE BUDGET FOR, SAY, $1 MILLION. I KNOW WE PROBABLY NEVER SHOULD 
          [01:05:04]
ACTUALIZE THAT MILLION BECAUSE THAT'S FACTORED INTO SAVINGS. 
          THAT'S LIKE SAYING YOU WILL HAVE A 0% UNEMPLOYMENT BIT. 
          IS THAT POSSIBLE? YES, DOES IT HURT THE BIGGER SYSTEM? YES. 
          THAT'S HOW I SEE THIS. IF WE WERE TO ACTUALIZE ONE HUNDRED 100% UNEMPLOYMENT, ZERO VACANCIES BUTUNEMPLOYMENT, ZEROT WHAT IF WE KNOW EVERY YEAR WE SPEND $1 MILLION ON DEPARTMENTS, THAT'S JUST A NUMBER AS AN EXAMPLE, BUT THE JAIL, WE CAN 
          NEVER HAVE ZERO VACANCIES. >> THEY WILL BE BRINGING A QUESTION FOR BARGAINING VERY SOON AND THE LAST THREE YEARS FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE WE HAVE INCREASED THE SALARY. 
          >> I'M JUST WONDERING LIKE RODEN BRIDGE, THERE'S ALWAYS SOMEONE BIGGER AND BETTER THAT OFFERS MORE. 
          WE'RE GOING TO BE THE BEST TRAPING GROUND FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS, TXDOT, CORPUS CHRISTI. WHY DON'T WE STILL RECOGNIZE THAT MILLION DOLLARS OR SO FOR SALARIES IS WHERE THE BUBBLE'S AT? TAKE OFF 10% OR 15%, WHATEVER YOU RECOMMEND BUT THEN GIVE TO THE DEPARTMENT HEADS TO WORK WITH US TO SAY LOOK, WE KNOW YOU NEED TO FILL PUBLIC WORKS, 26 POSITIONS. WHAT IF WE GIVE YOU ENOUGH LATITUDE TO SAY YOU CAN FILL 15 OF THOSE AT A MUCH BETTER RATE AND AVERAGE THAT OUT TO THE EMPLOYEES STICKING WITH US AND WE APPRECIATE THEM AND GETS A BIGGER BUMP THAN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PAY FOR IT WITH AN INCREASE. 
          I'M IN FAVOR OF THE COST OF LIVING. 
          THAT'S NOWHERE NEAR WHAT WE HAVE IN CAPITAL PRICE INDEX. 
          IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN SAY THIS IS THE MONEY, YOU BE CREATIVE. I THINK WE HAVE SEEN THAT WITH THE DA, ESPECIALLY TOWARDS THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, IS THAT A BAD PRACTICE TO HAVE?  WE'RE NEVER GOING TO FILL 84 POSITIONS AT THE JAIL. WE NEVER ARE. 
          ALWAYS GOING TO BE UNDERSTAFFED. RODEN BRIDGE, WE KNOW THAT'S WHERE OUR WORK IS, WHERE OUR NEED IS. 
          WHY CAN'T WE JUST SAY HERE'S THE MINN MONEY, KNOWING WE'LL N GET TO THOSE SPOTS. EVEN TAX OFFICE, SEVEN PEOPLE, THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT CONSIDERING ALL THE WORK THAT THEY DO EACH YEAR. MAYBE I'M JUST TALKING OUT LOUD. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THIS GIVES US A SOLUTION BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US FOCUS ON THAT. WE KNOW WHERE OUR NUMBER'S AT, WHERE OUR VACANCY IS AT. LET'S TRY TO DECREASE THE NUMBER THOUGHING THAT WE'RE NEVER GOING TO HAVE BEST PRACTICE WOULD BE, SAY, 60 POSITIONS FOR RODEN BRIDGE. 
          IF WE CAN FUND 50 OF THEM A LOT BETTER, MAYBE THAT'S THE THE NUMBER THAT WE FOCUS INSTEAD OF 81. 
          I THINK THERE'S A NUMBER THAT WE CAN FOCUS ON THAT THE PEOPLE ARE COMMITTED TO US OR THAT WE GO OUT AND RECRUIT PEOPLE TO HELP WITH THAT BECAUSE AS MUCH AS WE TRY TO MATCH EVERYONE AND STILL KEEP THAT EMPLOYEE AMOUNT, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET TO THAT POINT. IN MY YEARS BEING HERE, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET HERE, NOT WITH THE WAY WE OPERATE OUR BUDGETS. WE HAVE A DOLLAR AMOUNT, WE CAN STILL HONOR THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT. IT GIVES THE DEPARTMENT HEAD LATITUDE TO SAY LET'S FUND THESE POSITIONS AT A HIGHER RAY KNOWING THAT THE SHERIFFS SAY I'M NEVER GOING TO GET 84 EMPLOYEES BY IF WE CAN FUND HALF OF THOSE AT A MUCH BETTER RATE, 
          [01:10:03]
WE'RE STILL KEEPING THAT SALARY RATE THE SAME THAT WE BUDGETED, THEY'RE GETTING A MUCH BETTER RATE THAN POSSIBLE AND I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO SAY COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BUT THOSE ARE THE BIG ONE THAT IS STAND OUT TO ME. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S HOW WE CAN DO IT BUT I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO SEE THESE DEPARTMENT HEADS BE GIVEN A LITTLE BIT MORE OF AN ABILITY TO BE CREATIVE AND HOW THEY CAN GO OUT TO RECRUDE 
          THEM. >> WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING T. WAY OUR CURRENT PERSONAL POLICY IS WRITTEN IS WHEN YOU HAVE A POSITION GOING OUT AND YOU HIRE SOMEONE WHO HAS NEVER WORKED WITH THE COUNTY BEFORE, THEY COME IN AT A LEVEL ONE, REGARDLESS OF YOUR HISTORY, EVERYTHING, THEY START AT THE LOWEST POSSIBLE WE HAVE AND MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THE COURT WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER, TO EVALUATE HOW WE PAY PEOPLE COMING IN BUT RIGHT NOW IF SOMEONE COMES IN FROM THE FIELD. 
          THEY COULD HAVE 30 YEARS EXPERIENCE BUT WE START THEM OUT LIKE THEY HAVE NO EXPERIENCE. YES, A LOT OF THEM ARE UNDER PAID BUT OUR PROBLEM IS THE 3.5% THRESHOLD OF THE TAX RATES, SO RIGHT NOW EVERY YEAR AT OUR CURRENT LEVEL, WE CAN ONLY BRING IN 3.5 MILLION A YEAR. SO WHATEVER CHALLENGE WE HAVE, IF THAT'S LESS THAN 3.5 MILLION, THAT'S FINE. 
          IF ANYTHING EXCEEDS THAT MONEY, WE LOSE RESOURCES. 
          >> EVEN FOR THIS YEAR, I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT KNOWING THE EXACT NUMBER BUT FOR OUR BUDGET, WE'RE NOT USING THAT FULL $100 MILLION, RIGHT? WE ALREADY SAID THERE ARE 
          SEVERAL POSITIONS. >> USUALLY WE HAVE BEEN AT 89% 
          OF OUR BUDGET. >> EVEN IF WE BUMP IT UP TO -- WHEN OUR COURT IS RUNNING, WE RUN 99%. 
          >> LAST YEAR WE RUN A 98% BUDGET. 
          WE HAVE A VERY TIGHT WINDOW THERE. 
          BEFORE COVID, IT WAS 100% OR HIGHER. 
          LAST YEAR WAS 89, RIGHT AT 90%. IF EVERYTHING IS RUNNING LIKE IT SHOULD BE, OUR REVENUES SHOULD BE ABOUT 102% AND OUR EXPENSES 
          ABOUT 93%. >> AND THE PROBLEM I SEE FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, I AGREE WITH THE CONCEPT BUT THE PROBLEM COMES IN CIVIL SERVICE, RIGHT? AND THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF EQUITY SO THAT'S WHERE IT GETS TRICKY. IT HAPPENS TO US EVERY TIME. 
          WE KNOW WE NEED TO MAKE THESE ADJUSTMENTS BUT YOU MAKE THE ADJUSTMENT IN A SENIOR CLERK POSITION AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO EQUITY. THE WAY WE CURRENTLY HAVE IT, IT DOESN'T WORK FOR US, I AGREE, BUT IT DOESN'T ALLOW THE DEPARTMENT HEAD TO REORGANIZE. THE ONLY REASON IT WORKS IN THE LAWYER'S OFFICE IS BECAUSE THERE ARE NOT LAWYERS IN EVERY OTHER EXPECT BUT TAKE EVERY DEPARTMENT AND THEY'RE CLASS FIED IN A CERTAIN WAY AND IF YOU CHANGE THEM AS A DEPARTMENT HEAD AND WE ALLOW THAT AND SOMEONE ELSE SAYS I'M A SENIOR CLERK IN ANOTHER OFFICE, THAT INEQUITY IS ACTIONABLE. 
          >> THAT'S WHY WE SAY WHEN WE DID THE VETERAN'S CEMETERY AND THEY WANTED TO GIVE THEM IN, HR BROUGHT THEM AS PARK WORKERS WHICH WE HAVE 90 PARK WORKERS AND WE CAN'T RAISE THEM WITHOUT 
          RAISING EVERYBODY ELSE. >> RIGHT. 
          IT'S TRICKIER BUT GOING BACK TO THE BUDGET, WE ALWAYS SAY IT'S A $100 MILLION BUDGET. IT'S $100 MILLION ON AD VE LORM. 
          YOU COULD MAKE EVERYBODY'S LIFE. YOU COULD MAKE EVERYBODY'S LIFE BETTER IF YOU HAD BETWEEN $6 MILLION TO $10 MILLION PERIOD. 
          THAT'S WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO GET EVERYBODY WHERE THEY SHOULD BE. 
          IT'S A PACKAGE. IT'S RETIREMENT, RIGHT? IT'S BENEFITS. IT'S DAYS OFF. 
          IT'S A HEALTH AND WELLNESS PACKAGE, SO I THINK THAT WHAT WE 
          [01:15:01]
NEED TO BE DOING IS SAYING TO OURSELVES WHAT IS COMING DOWN THE FUTURE THAT COULD REALLY GENERATE TRANSFORMATIONAL CHANGE? AND THE ANSWER IS YOUR AB ABATEMENTS. WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE NEXT THREE YEARS BECAUSE YOU'RE HAVING SOME  SERIOUS ABATEMENTS ROLL OFF. WHEN THAT YEAR COMES, WE WILL EARMARK THAT FOR SALARIES ACROSS THE BOARD. 
          JUST SO YOU KNOW, THAT'S 2023, IT'S NOT EVEN THAT FAR. 
          >> RIGHT, CONSIDERED AS NEW PROPERTY EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT 
          REAL PROPERTY. >> AND THAT WILL COME OFF YOUR TAX ROLLS AND YOU CAN TAKE THAT AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO EARMARK THIS FOR SALARIES AND THAT'S A DECISION WE'LL GET IN OUR NEXT FISCAL YEAR. THAT'S REALLY WHERE YOU CAN MAKE MAJOR, MAJOR CHANGE, BUT YOU CAN CERTAINLY KEEP LOOKING FOR DEPARTMENTS THAT HAVE AUTONOMY AND THERE COULD BE OTHERS THAT WE HAVEN'T ID'D. I'M WONDERING WHAT OTHER DEPARTMENTS ARE OUT THERE THAT COULD BE -- 
          >> PUBLIC WORKS, SEPARATED BECAUSE THEY HAVE ROAD AND CREWS AND WE CAN PICK THEM AND WITHOUT IT AFFECTING THE COUNTY. 
          >> WELL, THAT'S GOOD. >> YOU WILL HAVE THAT REGARDLESS 
          OF WHAT YOU DO. >> IF YOU LET DEPARTMENT HEADS CHOOSE SALARIES. -- 
          >> YOU'LL HAVE 10>> YOU'LL HAVE >> RIGHT. 
          YOU EITHER HAVE MERIT OAK RAH PSI, YOU WILL HAVE A LAWSUIT 
          EVERY OTHER DAY, IT'S A PROBLEM. >> THE REASON WE DO NOW WITH THE WORK ANALYSIS AND CREATE THE JOB POSITION THAT WE HAD WHERE THE DEPARTMENT HEAD WOULD DECIDE OR ELECTED OFFICIAL WOULD DECIDE WHO GETS WHAT SALARY AND SOME WOULD GET INCREASES AND SOME WOULD NEVER GET INCREASES, WE TRY TO DO IT WHERE EVERYONE GETS 
          AN INCREASE EVERY THREE YEARS. >> RIGHT BUT IF WE DO WHAT ONIS SAYING, I THINK HIS POINT IS LOOK, YOU HAVE 81 POSITIONS BUT YOU DON'T. YOU HAVE 60 POSITIONS. 
          WHY DON'T WE TAKE THOSE 60 AND DO SOMETHING GREAT WITH THEM SO 
          WE HAVE 60 STRONG POSITIONS. >> IF THEY HAD 81, THEY COULD DO A WHOLE LOT MORE WORK THAN WITH 60 BUT IF YOU ONLY HIRE 60 -- 
          >> THEORETICALLY. >> I THINK THAT CERTAINLY COULD RING TRUE IN THE JAIL WITHOUT A DOUBT. 
          THIS IS MY EIGHTH BUDGET. WE HAVE NEVER BEEN FULLY STAFFED AT THE JAIL. NEVER HAVE BEEN. 
          >> NEVER WILL BE. >> IT'S A GREAT CONCEPT WELL THOUGHT OUT. DOES IT CAUSE A LITTLE DISCERNMENT? MAYBE SO BUT IF YOU GO BACK AND SAY OKAY, SOME OF THAT COLLECTIVE BARGAINING -- 
          >> THEY'RE UNDER A DIFFERENT AGREEMENT. 
          >> BUT STILL, IT'S SOMETHING TO LOOK AT. 
          IF YOU CAN GO BACK AND SAY WE'LL AGREE TO 20 LESS POSITIONS BY PUT ALL THAT MONEY INTO THE EMPLOYEES BUT STILL WON'T BE 
          FULLY FUNDED. >> YOU CAN DO THAT AS LONG AS ITS EQUITABLE AND UNDER THE EMPLOYMENT LAW, IT'S FINE. 
          >> IT AFFECTS ELSE SO I GET THAT AND THAT'S A LOT TO TAKE ON. 
          WE COULD SPEND EVERY MEETING ON THAT SUBJECT ALONE WITH STUDIES AND ALL THAT BUT WE HAVE TO BUDGET WHAT IS REAL. 
          >> REMEMBER ALSO THAT CUSHION, THAT ALSO AFFECTS THE BUDGET. 
          THAT COUNTS ON OUR BUDGET AND MAKES A HUGE DIFFERENCE. 
          >> WE GOT TO ACCOUNT FOR A PERCENTAGE WE'RE NEVER GOING TO TOUCH.  IF YOU ASK DALE TO SHOW YOU ON ONE SIDE WHAT OVERTIME LOOKS LIKE IN THOSE DOLLARS VERSUS YOUR VACANCY, IT'S A WASH. YOU LOST PEOPLE BECAUSE YOU'RE WORKING THEM TOO HARD AND THEN YOU'RE PAYING ALL THAT OVER. 
          ON ROAD AND BRIDGE, YOU HAVE AN COUNTY ATTORNEY WHO IS GOING TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE PUT THE CHECKS AND BALANCES IN. 
          [01:20:02]
ON THE LAW ENFORCEMENT SIDE, I HAVE ID'D FOUR POSITIONS AND IT'S EASY TO SEE IT ON THE PAY SCALE WHERE THEY HAVE NEVER MOVED. HOW COULD THAT BE IF THERE'S EQUITY? SOMEBODY DIDN'T TAKE CARE OF SOMEBODY. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE DO THAT AND THE CHECKS AND BALANCES ARE AUDITOR'S OFFICE AND HR. 
          I THINK WE SHOULD TRY IT BUT IT HAS TO BE SOMEWHERE LIKE ROAD AND BRIDGE. YOU LED THE DEPARTMENTS SAY HERE'S HOW I WANT TO ORGANIZE IT AND YOU APPROVE IT THROUGH HERE. 
          >> AND TALKING ABOUT ROAD AND BRIDGE, THEY HAVE HAD AN HEAVY EQUIPMENT OPERATOR POSITION OPEN FOR 2-AND-A-HALF YEARS, NOBODY 
          APPLYING. >> AND WE HAVE TO GET SMARTER ABOUT WINNING THE DAY AND I THINK WE OUGHT TO HAVE WORK FORCE DEVELOPMENT IN THIS COURTHOUSE. 
          I SIT ON THAT BOARD. THEY HAVE AMAZING TOOLS THAT WE'RE NOT UTILIZING EVERY SINGLE DAY AND THEY PAY PEOPLE ON TOP OF WHAT WE PAY PEOPLE. THEY HAVE GRANTS FOR IT. 
          WORK FORCE SOLUTION GRANTS BUT YOU HAVE TO BE IN THE KNOW SO I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT THIS TERM GIVEN THE WAY UNEMPLOYMENT IS HERE VERSUS THE STATE OF TEXAS THAT WE HAVE TO TRY SOMETHING NEW AND THEY'RE RIGHT NEXT DOOR BUT THEY'RE ABOUT THE MOVE. ANY WAY, WE NEED TO SEE IF THEY CAN PLANT THEMSELVES HERE. THAT'S WHERE I THINK WE CAN DO 
          SOME GOOD WORK >> I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE ANY 
          SPACE. >> THEY GO INTO HR. 
          YOU JUST CREATE A PLACE INSIDE. >> LIKE A LITTLE WORK SPACE? 
          >> YEAH, A LITTLE WORK SPACE INSIDE HR. 
          >> JUST A COMMENT. YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE CUSHION AS FAR AS REGULAR SALARIES. 
          WE DON'T ACTUALLY MAINTAIN THAT ANYMORE BECAUSE WE OPERATED COSTS. AT ONE POINT THEY WERE NOT SAVIE IT GOES BACK TO YOUR FUND BALANCE. 
          WE WOULD HAVE TO, I THINK, START MAKING SURE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN 
          ANYMORE. >> WE'RE VERY HESITANT ABOUT ALLOWING THEM, WHEN THEY BRING IN A REQUEST, THEY GO WHAT ELSE HAVE YOU LOOKED AT BEFORE YOU CAN TOUCH IT? THAT'S THE LAST THING WE LET THEM USE. 
          >> REMIND US OF THAT, TOO, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE HAVE HAD THAT REMINDER IN A WHILE. THAT'S A GOOD POINT. 
          SORRY, I'M CHOKING. I SEE SALARY SAVINGS. 
          THAT DOESN'T GET BROUGHT UP. WE NEED TO BE REMINDED OF THAT, 
          TOO, SO THAT'S A GOOD REMINDER. >> THE NEXT ITEM WE WANT TO GO TO C 1 AND C 2, THAT'S YOUR BUDGET CALENDAR. 
          TOWARDS THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGES OF THIS, AUGUST 8TH AND 9TH WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS. AUGUST 10TH, WE WILL BE SUBMITTED OUR NO NEW REVENUE TAX WHICH WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT VERY SOON AND THEN WE PROPOSED THE AUGUST 15TH AND 16TH MEETING UNLESS NEEDED. AS WE GO NOW, I DON'T THINK WE'LL NEED THEM BUT WE CAN HAVE THEM IF WE NEED THEM. 
          ON THE 17TH, WE HAVE A MEETING TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED RATE, WHATEVER THE RATE WOULD BE, WHETHER THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE OR WHATEVER RATE WE BELIEVE IS NECESSARY. 
          THIS IS JUST PROPOSING A RATE THAT WE WILL USE AND PRO POSE A RATE THAT'S IN EXCESS OF THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX. 
          THE PUBLICPOSE A RATE THAT'S IN EXCESS OF THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS ON C 2. 
          WHEN IS THAT HEARING? >> SEPTEMBER 1ST. 
          >> YES. >> SO ON THE 10TH IS COMMISSION VOTER APPROVE -- THE ONLY WAY WE WOULD KNOW -- WAIT, I'M SORRY. 
          >> ON AUGUST 10TH, WE'LL TELL YOU HERE'S WHAT THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX IS, HERE'S LAST YEAR'S RATES AND HERE'S WHAT THE FUND BALANCE IS THAT WE HAVE. THAT'S ALL IT IS, JUST A 
          SUBMISSION OF THE RATES. >> AND THE 17TH WE VOTE? 
          >> YOU PROPOSE A RATE ON THE 17TH. 
          >> WE HAVE TO PROPOSE A CEILING, RIGHT? 
          >> CORRECT. >> JUST MAKING SURE. 
          >> AND THEN IF YOUR CEILING IS ABOVE ON SEPTEMBER 1ST, THERE BE A PUBLIC HEARING. THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE REQUIRED AND NOTICE FILED. ON AUGUST 17TH, SINCE THIS IS GOING TO BE A VOTE, IT WILL BE A REGISTERED VOTE FOR EACH OF THE COMMISSIONERS AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE FOUR ARE PRESENT FOR A 
          [01:25:01]
QUORUM. FOUR ARE REQUIRED FOR THIS RATE. 
          THE PUBLIC HEARING, YOU ONLY NEED THREE TO BE -- ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS WHAT OUR BUDGET IS, WHAT WE PLAN TO DO AND WHAT OUR RATES ARE. ON SEPTEMBER 2ND, I WILL BE FILING THE PROPOSED BUDGET WITH THE COUNTY CLERK AND WITH EACH OF THE COURT MEMBERS TO SAY HERE'S WHAT WE PROPOSE. 
          ANYTHING CAN CHANGE FROM THAT POINT IN TIME. 
          WHEN WE MAKE NOTICE OF OUR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 7TH IS WHEN WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER'S COURT MEETING, WE ADOPT THE BUDGET AS THE COURT SO CHOOSES. ON OCTOBER 28TH, I APPROVE THE BUDGET WITH THE COUNTY CLERK. ANY QUESTION ON THE CALENDARS? 
          >> I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION ON THE CALENDARS OTHER THAN WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS TOMORROW ABOUT I GUESS IF WE WANT ANYMORE WORKSHOPS OR WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ON MORE INFORMATION, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE GO INTO THE BOOK, YOU'VE DONE SOME NICE CALCULATIONS. 
          ARE YOU GOING TO TRY TO GET INTO THAT NEXT JUMPING ALL THE WAY TO 
          J? >> I WILL GO THROUGH THE GENERAL IF I UNDERSTAND, REVENUE, APPROPRIATIONS AND SHOW YOU WHAT THE ESTIMATES ARE. WHEN WE KNOW THAT WE'LL BE TRANSFERRING SOME OF THE COSTS OUT FOR TRANSPORTS OF THE INMATES AS WELL AS THE METRO COM AS WELL AS MOVING THE 35% OVER TO THE GENERAL FUND SO SOME OF THE NUMBERS WILL CHANGE IN MY ESTIMATE ACTUALS BUT I WANTED TO SHOW YOU WHAT WE START WITH AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE EXPECTING A LITTLE BIT OF A LOSS AND IF WE CAN USE THESE NUMBERS AS WELL AS WHAT I MENTIONED TO YOU ABOUT SUSPENDING SOME OF THE MEDICAL INSURANCE, THAT WILL SAVE SOME MONEY AND OUR LOSS WON'T BE AS SIGNIFICANT. 
          IF WE'RE READY TO GO INTO THE GENERAL FUND, IF WE GO TO D 1. 
          THE ONE YOU NEED IS THE COLUMN RIGHT IN THE MID THAT WILL SAYS ESTIMATED ACTUALS. TO TO THE RIGHT YOU SEE OVER AND UNDER BUDGET. THOSE ARE THE TWO ITEMS THAT ARE REALLY IMPORTANT TO WHERE WE'RE LOOKING INTO. 
          THE FIRST LEVEL IS YOU SEE OUR PROPERTY TAX. 
          OUR TOTAL PROPERTY TAXES THAT'S $2 MILLION LESS THAN WHAT WE BUDGETED. THAT'S WHERE WE'RE HURTING BECAUSE THE ECONOMY, BECAUSE OF COVID, BECAUSE OF THE INFLATION RATE. WE'RE ABOUT 1.7 MILLION SHORT AD VALOREM. WE SEE OTHER TAXES INCLUDE YOUR BINGO TAX, OCCUPATION AND VAT. WE'RE $4,752 OVER BUT OUR BINGO TAX IS LESS. BEFORE, THEY WOULD COLLECT EVERYTHING AND SUBMIT THE MONEY TO US. 
          NOW WE'RE REQUIRED TO COLLECT THE TAX FROM EVERY ENTITY, IT GOES THROUGH THE COUNTY CLERK THROUGH COLLECTIONS SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE COLLECT FROM EVERY BING GO ESTABLISHMENT IN THE COUNTY AND IT'S DOWN ABOUT $30,000 IF YOU LOOKCOUNTY AND I $30,000 IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THE HISTORY OF TIME. 
          THE CONCERNING NUMBERS ARE THE FEES FOR OFFICE. 
          THIS IS BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD A LOT OF THE COURSE ACTION. 
          OUR DISTRICT AND COUNTY COURTS HAVE NOT BEEN HEARING CASES AS MUCH AS THEY HAD IN THE PAST SO FEES OF OFFICE, COURT FEES, ALL THESE OTHER FEES IN OFFICE HAVE GONE DOWN AND WE'RE ABOUT $47,000 LOST FROM THE COUNTY CLERK. 
          48,000 FROM THE DISTRICT CLERK NOW. 
          THE ONE GOOD THING NOW IS THE COUNTY CLERK RECORD DIVISION HAS SEEN A LARGE INTAKE WHERE PEOPLE COME AND FILE THEIR STUFF TO GET THEIR RECORDS FILED, THEIR MARRIAGE LICENSES, MOST OF THEM ARE AT A DEFICIT. EXCEPT FOR TWO OF THEM, YOU WILL SEE 1.3 IS ABOUT $16,000 OVER. 2.2 IS ABOUT $52,000 OVER BUT THE MAJORITY OF THEM ARE SHORT. ON PAGE TWO, WE SEE WHERE OUR SHERIFF'S OFFICE, BECAUSE WE SAW TOWARDS THE END OF THE YEAR WHERE WE STARTED TO GET MORE FILINGS, YOU SEE MOST OF OUR SHERIFF AND CONSTABLES ARE ABOVE SO THAT MEANS OUR TOTAL FEES OF 
          [01:30:01]
OFFICE IS OVER WHERE IT WAS WHICH IS VERY, VERY PROMISING. 
          HOWEVER, AGAIN, LOOK AT THE FINES OF FORFEITURES. 
          THE COURTS ARE NOT ISSUING FINES AND A LOT OF IT IS THE JPS, EITHER THE FOHNS ARE NOT THERE OR THE COURSE IS NOT TAKING 
          ACTION. >> TWO THINGS BEFORE WE GET TOO FAR IN. YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, THAT'S WHY AND I'M JUST OFFERING A POTENTIAL POSSIBILITY. 
          WHEN WE TALK ABOUT LOST REVENUE FROM COVID, THAT'S WHAT ARPA IS SUPPOSED TO COME UP WITH. YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE MADE WHOLE HERE IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO AND I THINK WE SHOULD BECAUSE YOU HAVE A DIRECT NEXUS BETWEEN THE LOSS OF FEES AND FINES AND THAT'S WHAT I TELL EVERYONE, MAKE SURE WE DON'T OVERSPEND AND WE HAVEN'T. HAGGERTY HAS MADE SURE WE KEPT A GOOD BALANCE RATIO SO I BELIEVE WE SHOULD AT LEAST CONSIDER, MAKE A NOTE, THAT WHEREVER YOU SEE LOSS OF FEES AND FINES THAT ARE ATTRIBUTES TO A LACK OF COURT ENGAGEMENT, WE SHOULD BE 
          ABLE TO COLLECT THOSE IN ARPA. >> IT'S A ONE TIME THING -- 
          >> IT'S A ONE TIME THING AND IT GETS US CLEAN. 
          >> I AGREE. ANYTHING LIKE THAT THAT'S LOSSES, LIKE THE HOUSING INMATE, TRANSPORTATION, THAT'S A ONE TIME THING SO WE DON'T HAVE TO JUMP OFF THE CLIFF FOR THAT. 
          I AGREE ON THOSE. I JUST HAVE HEART ACHE ON THE 
          NEW POSITIONS. >> I'MACHE ON THE NEW 
          POSITIONS. >> I'M GOING TO ASK FOR THE TOTAL OF WHAT YOU BELIEVE TO BE, BASED ON THESE CALCULATIONS, THE LOSS OF FEES AND FINES AND ASK THAT THAT TOTAL BE SO THAT WE'RE MADE HOLD. ONLINEBARGER, I'M GOING TO MAKE THE CALL BUT ON THE 176 DEFICIT THAT'S LINEBARGER, I'M GOING TOE THE CALL BUT ON THE 176 DEFICIT THAT'S HURTING US, I WOULD LIKE TO SEA THE BREAKDOWN FROM LINEBARGER IS ON THAT. 
          THERE'S A DATE WHERE YOU GET YOUR PINK SLIP AND THEN THERE'S A TYPICAL ESTIMATION ON FROM THE TIME YOU GET THE SLIP, WHAT DO WE SEE AN AN AVERAGE RECOVERRY SO WE NEED TOAN AVERAGE RECOVER WE NEED TO CALCULATE THAT IN. RIGHT KNEW, THERE'S A MORTGAGE PROGRAMS BY THE STATE THAT SAYS I WILL PAY YOUR DELINQUENT TAXES. IF IT'S COVID RELATED, THE STATE WILL PAY THEIR BACK TAXES SO AT SOME POINT, I WANT TO LOOK TO SEE WHETHER WE CAN RECOVER THOSE AND LINEBARGER KNOWS THIS AND THEY'RE WORKING ON THAT. THEY SEND THOSE DOCUMENTS OUT TO THE PEOPLE, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR RATIO IS ON HITS SO I GUESS WE NEED TO HAVE A LITTLE REPORT BECAUSE THAT 1.7 IS 
          PROBABLY OUR BIGGEST HIT. >> ONE THING WE NEED TO LOOK INTO IS I KNOW IN THE MIDDLE OF THE YEAR WE ADDED SOME MORE CE SERFS AND TIFS AND THAT WOULD BE 
          WHY. >> THAT'S AN INTERESTING CONCEPT. THAT COULD DEFINITELY BE IT. 
          ALL RIGHT, TAX INCREMENT. THAT'S THOSE FUNDS. 
          ALL RIGHT, SORRY ABOUT THAT, I JUST WANT TO MARK ABOUT THOSE FEES AND FINES BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE ACROSS THE BOARD WE CAN 
          HELP OURSELF A LITTLE BIT. >> WE WILL SEE LICENSE AND PERMITS WHERE IT'S LESS BUT THAT'S UNDERSTANDABLE. 
          IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER BY HALF A MILLION DOLLARS. 
          WE EXPECT THAT TO CONTINUE TO BE AT LEAST THAT HIGH OR HIGHER SO THAT'S A VERY PROMISING NUMBER. WE GO TO THE NEXT PAGE ON D 3, OUR SALARY REIMBURSEMENTS, THOSE ARE IN BALANCE WHERE THEY SHOULD BE. WHEN WE START GOING TO OUR BOTTOM NUMBERS AS WELL AS OUR STATE ALCOHOL AND STATE JURY, 
          [01:35:01]
STAY JURY IS DOWN BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD REIMBURSEMENT SO EVEN THOUGH THAT'S A LARGE NUMBER DEFICIT, I DON'T BELIEVE WE NEED TO REDUCE ANY OF THAT. OUR HAZARDOUS WASTE IS DOWN SLIGHTLY, IF YOU SEE THE HISTORY OF THAT EVENT, WE MAY RECONSIDER THAT. OUR TAX COLLECTION FEE IS WHAT WE DO FROM OTHER ENTITIES A LITTLE BIT LESS BUT THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT WORKS. THE OTHER GOVERNMENTAL REF KNEW IS BASICALLY OUR GRANTS. WE HAD A LARGE NUMBER OF GRANTS FOR OUR FISCAL YEAR SO THAT SEEMS LIKE A LARGE REDUCTION F. 
          WE DON'T HAVE THE GRANTS OR MAN SO THESE KIND OF WASH OUT. 
          HOUSING OF INNATES FOR OUR CONTRACTS IS A LITTLE BIT LOWER SO IT'S A LITTLE LESS THAN YOU SEE HISTORY BUT WE BELIEVE IT WILL START GOING BACK UP. CHARGES FOR SERVICES BECAUSE OF LOST REVENUE. WE'RE DOWN BY 153. 
          ON PAGE D 4, THE BIG ONE IN HISTORY IS INTEREST RATE AND WE NOW KNOW OUR INTEREST RATE IS GOING TO BE GOING UP. 
          WE HAVE SEEN NUMBERS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO START GETTING 1.5% TO 2% FROM OUR POOL FUNDS AS WELL AS SOME OF OUR CDS GETTING 2% TO 3% SO WE'LL START SEEING SOME RETURN OF OUR INTERESTS. 
          IT WAS DOWN BUT THAT'S BECAUSE OF COVID. 
          FOR REFUNDS, WE HAVE OUR WORKER COMPENSATION NUMBER. 
          I BELIEVE WE'RE NOW WITH TACK AGAIN BUT THEY'RE LESS THAN WHAT THEY NEED TO BE. I BELIEVE THAT'S AN ERROR SO I'M GOING TO REVISE THAT AND LOOK LOOK INTO THAT. 
          THAT SHOULD BE A LOT HIGHER THAN THAT SO THAT'S PROBABLY AN ERROR. BASED ON THESE PEOPLE WHO HAVE COURT CASES. FOR OTHER INCOME, WE HAVE YOUR PRINTED MATERIALS, YOUR COP PEE FEES AND MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE. 
          THE HISTORY IS CORRECT SO EVEN THEE IT'S DOWN SOME WE FEEL IT'S OKAY. OUR TOTAL LOSS IS 2.7 MILLION FROM THE 104 MILLION WE HAD FOR BUDGET SO ESTIMATING COLLECTING 101 MILLION. OUR TRANSFERS ARE RIGHT WHERE THEY NEED TO BE, ALMOST NO IMPACT. 
          THE ONLY IMPACT IS THE 13TH COURT OF APPEAL BECAUSE OF THE LOST REVENUE IN THE DISTRICT CLERK LEVEL, I CAN'T TRANSFER SOME OF THE FUNDS FOR THAT. YOU WILL SEE A SLIGHT REDUCTION THERE SO WE'RE EXPECTING TO BRING TOTAL REVENUE IN OF 104 MILLION [INAUDIBLE] THAT'S OUR REVENUE ESTIMATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-23. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          IF WE CAN GO TO E 1. E 1, AGAIN, IS YOUR ESTIMATED ACTUALS AGAIN YOUR MIDDLE COLUMN AND TWO COLUMNS OVER. 
          YOU SEE THE OVER AND UNDER ON ESTIMATES. 
          THESE ARE SUMMARY OF EACH OF THE DEPARTMENTS SO WE GO DOWN TO THE BOTTOM. WE'RE ESTIMATED 19,000,352 -- [INAUDIBLE] ON A352 -- [INAUDIBLE] ON A BUDGETED 24 MILLION. BOTH FOR OUR OPERATION OF FUNDS AS WELL AS OUR TAX DISPUTES. THAT'S WHERE THOSE BALANCES ARE, THAT'S WHY WE ALWAYS HAVE SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS THERE. 
          ON E 2 YOU WILL SEE THE BUILDING AND FACILITIES. 
          WE'RE ESTIMATING 8,000,816 -- [INAUDIBLE] UNDER BUDGET. 
          RIGHT NOW SLIGHTLY UNDER BUDGET BUT I BELIEVE THIS WILL BE OVER BUDGET WHEN WE DO THE REEVALUATION. 
          ON E 3 AND E 4 IS OUR ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE, OUR 
          [01:40:06]
COURTS, $22,898,000, UNDER BUDGET. 
          OUR SHALL HAVE'S I HAVE AS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ARE THE MOST EXPENSIVE. $37,556,042. 
          EVEN THOUGH SOME ARE OVER BUDGET FOR THE ENTIRE BUDGET WE'RE $1,075,000 UNDER BUDGET. FOR THE JAIL, THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND SEVERAL OF THE CONSTABLES, THEY'RE OVER BUDGET. 
          OUR SOCIAL SERVICES ON E 5. >> WHEN WE DO THE BREAKDOWN, WHAT DO YOU SEE? OVER BIT BECAUSE -- 
          >> MOST OF YOUR CONSTABLES AND SHERIFFS ARE BECAUSE OF OVER 
          TIME. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO 
          SAY. >> THE JAIL IT'S OVER TIME AND MEALS. MEALS IS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER. 
          >> MEALS AND OVER TIME. OKAY. 
          THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW WHY IT'S THERE. 
          >> ON E 5 OUR SOCIAL SERVICES. 2.$9,000,000 ON ESTIMATE. 
          OUR $397,000 UNDER BUDGET. OUR HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ESTIMATING $972,461. 172 UNDER BUDGET. 
          OUR AGRICULTURAL SERVICES IS 1,009,474 UNDER BUDGET OF 104. 
          IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS, WE BUDGETED WITHOUT TRANSFERS, ESTIMATING $94,221,000 OR UNDER BUDGET BY $10,585,622. THAT'S ABOUT 89 TO 90% OF OUR TOTAL EXPENSES. IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT PAGE AND SHOW OUR TRANSFERS, THIS IS WHERE WE'RE HIT QUITE A BIT BUT OUR TRANSFERS ARE UNDER BUDGET BY $218,000 WHICH IS GOOD SO ESTIMATING 10,000,869 AND UNDER BUDGET BY [INAUDIBLE] 867. 
          WITHOUT DOING ANY OF THE CHANGES I MENTIONED BEFORE, WE'RE GOING TO SUSPEND THE MEDICAL SNIRNS, RECOVER OUR LOSS FOR TRANSPORTING PRISONERS, OUR METRO COM AND OTHER CHANGES. 
          RIGHT NOW WE'RE $1,100,000 LOSS OF REVENUE SO OUR FUND BALANCE IS $24,760,109 BUT IF WE GET ALL THOSE BACK, WE'LL PROBABLY BE PRETTY CLOSE TO BEING EVEN. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE 
          WE MOVE ON? >> ANYBODY? I'M JUST CURIOUS. I WAS GOING TO SAY, DO YOU HAVE 
          ANY CUTS YOU WANT TO MAKE, SIR? >> UNDER BUDGET IS PRETTY GOOD. 
          >> OF COURSE REMEMBER THAT'S AT THIS POINT. 
          BUT WE'RE ALMOST THERE. I'M JUST BEING EXTRA CAREFUL. 
          OKAY, I GUESS WE CAN CONTINUE IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS. 
          GO AHEAD, DALE. >> I SAID THIS EARLIER AND I WANTED TO TELL YOU, I WAS LOOKING AT THIS OVER THE WEEKEND AND REALLY I WANT TO SAY THIS PUBLICLY. 
          REALLY WELL PRESENTED. >> I AGREE. 
          >> WE LEARNED FROM -- WE STUDIED SOME SMALL MODIFICATIONS. 
          IT'S A CONTINUATION OF THAT. IT TRIES TO GIVE YOU AS MUCH DETAILED INFORMATION AS YOU WANT. 
          RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING THROUGH INDIVIDUAL CASES WHERE WE SUMMARIZE EVERYTHING BUT WE CAN GO THROUGH Q AND ON AND WE'LL BE GLAD TO GO THROUGH ANY OF THOSE YOU MIGHT WANT BUT WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND MY STAFF AND I WORKED DILIGENTLY TO MAKE THIS AS EASY AS WE CAN. WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH F. 
          THIS IS JUST A SUMMARY OF WHAT THE DEPARTMENT REQUESTS WERE, WHAT THE OPERATING INCREASES WERE, IF THEY HAD ANY REQUESTS BUT WE DON'T TAKE THAT OUT BECAUSE WE ALWAYS WORK WITH THERESA TO UNDERSTAND THE BEST TO PROPUATE. 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. UATE. IF YOU GO TO F 5. AUATE. 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. PUATE. IF YOU GO TO F 5. PUATE. 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. RUATE. IF YOU GO TO F 5. OUATE. 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. PUATE. IF YOU GO TO F 5. TIUATE. 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. AUATE. IF YOU GO TO F 5. EUATE. 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. ATE. IF YOU GO TO F 5. TE. 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. E. IF YOU GO TO F 5. . 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. . IF YOU GO TO F 5. . 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. . IF YOU GO TO F 5. . 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. R. IF YOU GO TO F 5. I. 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. AT. IF YOU GO TO F 5. E. 
          IF YOU GO TO F 5. WE TUT THAT DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY 
          [01:45:03]
BUTUT THAT DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY BUT THICUT THAT DOWN SIGNIFICAN BUT THIS IS WHAT WAS REQUESTED. THIS IS WHERE WE STARTED FROM AND WE MADE SIGNIFICANT CUTS SO WE'LL GET TO THOSE BALANCES, THOSE WILL BE THE CASE. YOU WILL SEE ON F 6 YOU WILL SEE EACH OF THE DEPARTMENTS FOR THE OTHER OPERATING FUNDS, YOUR ROAD FUND, STADIUMS, PARKS AS WELL AS YOUR AIRPORT FUNDS. 
          THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT IN THE MOMENT, THE LAW LIBRARY IS RIGHT NOW IN A HURTING POSITION. WE MIGHT NEED ADDITIONAL FUNDS THIS YEAR BUT ONCE IT GETS GOING AGAIN, THAT SHOULDN'T BE AN ANSWER. I WILL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY 
          QUESTIONS ON F. >> ONE QUESTION, DALE. 
          >> SURE. >> UNDER STADIUM FAIRGROUNDS FUND, THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT PRETTY MUCH STAYS THE SAME EVERY YEAR, RIGHT? IT DOESN'T FLUCTUATE TOO MUCH. 
          >> NORMALLY IT DOESN'T CHANGE A LOT. 
          THE OPERATING FUNDS FOR WORKING WITH THERESA AND JASON ON THE STAFF OVER THERE, IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT THEIR ESTIMATED FUNDS ARE THAT THIS THEY NEED TO TRANSFER BETWEEN THOSE TWO. 
          THE STADIUM ALMOST NEVER CHANGES. 
          THE ONE FOR THE FAIRGROUNDS, IT WENT UP SLIGHTLY BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DO A COUPLE OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS SO THERE'S ONLY A FEW MINOR CHANGES WINCE IN A WHILE. 
          WE HAVE THE SELL OF ASSETS AND THEY CAN BE USED FOR A LOT MORE CHANGES IN FAIR GROUNDS OR IF THE COURT SO CHOOSES, WE CAN TRANSFER THIS OVER AND USE THAT FOR WHATEVER THE COURT DESIRES BY NORMALLY THERE'S NOT A LOT OF CHANGES IN THE STATE AND 
          FAIRGROUNDS. >> I WANT TO FOCUS MAINLY ON THE STADIUM BECAUSE WE JUST APPROVED IN OUR LAST MEETING I THINK OR TWO MEETINGS AGO A CONTRACT FOR A BIG EVENT THERE AT THE STADIUM AT THE BASEBALL FIELD AND I THINK THAT MAY BE A SIGN OF THINGS TO COME. I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF INTEREST IN USING THAT FACILITY. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT USING SOME OF MY FUNDING IN THE FUTURE, MAYBE MY ARPA FUNDING TO HELP DO SOME ADJUSTMENTS, SOME IMPROOICHLTS TO THAT. I'M JUSTPROVEMENTS TO THAT. 
          I'M JUST TRYING TO GET WHERE MAY BASELINE IS. 
          WE SHOULD BE' ISIEIEING $310,00 THAT THE SALARY OR THE UPKEEP? 
          >> I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE A LOT OF SALARIES AT 141. 
          IT'S THE UPKEEP, THE INSURANCE, AND MAINTAINING THE LIGHTS AND STUFF AT THE STADIUM FAIRGROUNDS AND YOU CAN SEE THERE'S 1.7 MILLION IN THE SELL OF ASSETS. 
          THOSE FUNDS CAN BE USED TO MAKE THE STADIUM BETTER IF YOU WANT SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE ARPA FUNDS. 
          >> THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW. I WOULD LIKE TO. 
          I SPOKE WITH THE JUNEL ABOUT IT BECAUSE WE GET REQUESTS EVERY YEAR. I THINK THE LAST SCHOOL TO USE THE BASEBALL STADIUM -- [INAUDIBLE] IT DOESN'T MEAN WE SPEND $310,000 A YEAR, THAT'S JUST IS PUTT. 
          >> WE CAN GET OUR CREWS BACK TO WORKING AND IMPROVING OUR FACILITY. WE CAN USE IT ONE WEEKEND FOR A BASEBALL PLAY OFF GAME OR SERIES THE NEXT. 
          WE'RE JUST POISED FOR SUCH A GREAT LOCATION AND I THINK THAT'S WHY PREVIOUS COMMISSIONER'S COURTS DECIDED TO PUT SO MUCH OF THE TAXPAYER'S MIN INTO THIS INVESTMENT. 
          WE NEED TO MAKE SURE IT'S A VIABLE OPTION BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE WILL LOOK AT IT AND SAY WELL SOME OF THE SEATS NEED IMPROVEMENT OR THE PAINTING OR THE FIELD ITSELF HAS GONE INTO DISREPAIR BECAUSE OUR GUYS WERE OUT RESPONDING TO COVID AND NOT ABLE TO SPEND TIME LIKE THEY NORMALLY WOULD MAINTAINING THAT FIELD, SO I JUST WANT TO GET AN IDEA OF WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THAT MONEY SO I KNOW WHAT CAN WE PUT IN OR WHAT DO I NEED TO PUT IN? BUT THAT 1.1, IF THAT'S AVAILABLE, DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME OF THAT PUT INTO. IF THAT CAN BE APPLIED TO FAIRGROUNDS, THAT WOULD BE GREAT, TOO, BUT THAT HELPS ME 
          OUT. >> THAT SEEMS TO BE LIKE THAT BIG PICTURE DISCUSSION. WHAT IS THAT FIELD'S FUTURE? EVERYBODY NOW HAS A BASEBALL FIELD. 
          WE HOPED ROBSTOWN OR TM BUT NOW THEY ALL VIDEO FIELDS SO I THINK THERE'S A BIG PICTURE DISCUSSION ON THAT THAT WE NEED TO HAVE ON WHAT CAN WE DO AT THAT FIELD? IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN 
          [01:50:04]
REPURPOSE? I KNOW THAT'S TOUCHY. 
          >> NOT IF IT'S TOP GOLF OR A SOCCER STADIUM. 
          >> THERE'S GOT TO BE A WAY TO LOOK AT THAT FIELD AND WHERE IT NEEDS TO GO BEFORE WE SPEND ANYMORE MONEY PUTTING ANYTHING INTO IT BECAUSE IF WE COULD COME UP WITH A REPURPOSE ON THAT THAT WOULD MAKE IT -- RIGHT NOW THAT DOESN'T HELP ROBSTOWN OR THE NORTHWEST PART OF OUR AREA BECAUSE IT'S NOT BEING USED SO IF WE COULD FIGURE OUT A WAY, A GOOD SUGGESTION, TOP GOLF, IF SOMEONE LIKE THAT WOULD COME IN AND REPURPOSE THAT FACILITY, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A BETTER POTENTIAL REV NIGH GENERATOR FOR THE COUNTY AND FOR THAT AREA THAN THAT BASEBALL FIELD AND JUST CONTINUING TO THROW MONEY AFTER THAT ONE, BUT THAT'S JUST -- I THINK THAT'S A VERY VALUABLE PIECE OF PROPERTY TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT COULD REALLY BE AN ECONOMIC DRIVER. 
          >> JUST REMEMBER, IT'S LIKE 4 MINUTES TO CAL ALLEN RIGHT 
          THERE. >> COULD YOU DO AN RFP ON THAT? I KNOW WE HAVE BONDS TIDE TIED TO IT. 
          >> NO,IT. >> >> NO, NO, WE'RE GOOD. 
          WY TRANSFER GENERAL FUNDS MONEY TO OPERATE THOSE EVERY YEARMENT 
          >> THIS IS GOING TO SOUND SMALL BECAUSE THAT'S A BIG, GOOD CONVERSATION BUT I WAS THERE LAST NIGHT AND SO I GOT PICTURES ON MY PHONE BUT I THINK GOING BACK TO THE DISCUSSION OF ROAD AND BRIDGE AND INLAND PARK, SOME OF THE AREAS WHERE WE HAVE UNIQUE PEOPLE STATIONED THERE, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE, NOW THAT WE'RE OUT OF COVID AT LEAST FOR RIGHT THIS MOMENT, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE US REALLOCATE PEOPLE SO WE COULD HAVE CONSISTENCY SO THAT SOMEONE IN INLAND PARKS IS STATIONED ON THAT FAIRGROUNDS, SO YOU CREATE A PRIDE OF WOW, I AM MAINTENANCE FOR THIS BEAUTIFUL AREA AND IT'S DONE EVERY DAY. 
          ALL WE DO IS SHIFT PEOPLE ALL DAY LONG AND THEREFORE NOTHING GETS 100% ATTENTION EVERY DAY. I CAN SHOW YOU ON MY PHOTOS, I BROUGHT THEM TO SHOW JOHN WHY THAT DOESN'T WORK AND SO I JUST THINK AS WE ADDRESS TAKING SALARIES UP THAT WE CAN ALSO ADDRESS THE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART BECAUSE IF WE HAD ONE OR TWO PEOPLE STATIONED AT OUR MAJOR FACILITIES EVERY DAY, YOU WOULD SEE MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS EVERY DAY AND A PA PRIDE OF HEY, THIS IS WHERE I WORK AND TAKE CARE OF. ON INLAND I JUST THINK WE WOULD HAVE BETTER SUCCESS AND, AGAIN, I'M OUT THERE ALL THE TIME SO I SEE WHEN THERE'S POSITIVE AND WHEN WE HAVEN'T BEEN OUT THERE. 
          >> I KNOW WE GOT REQUESTS FOR ARPA FUNDS AND AS WE GO TO TAB G, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE SALARY RECOMMENDATION REQUESTS FOR THESE AREAS AND EDWARD DID PUT IN A REQUEST ASKING FOR TEN NEW PLEAS. WE CAN'T ADD THAT THIS YEAR BUT 170 IS INLAND PARK. RIGHT NOW WE TRANSFER 107 MILLION SO IF YOU INCREASE THAT BY 300 TO $400,000, WE SKR TO INCREATE THATHAVE TO INCREATE THAT BY THE SAME AMOUNT. 1.8 NEXT YEAR. 
          SO I AGREE WITH THE JUDGE, WE PROBABLY NEED STAFF TO MAINTAIN EACH OF THESE INDIVIDUALLY BUT CAN WE AFFORD IT THIS YEAR? 
          I DON'T THINK SO. >> I HEAR YOU BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE THESE INVESTMENTS. YOU HAVE TO HAVE MAINTENANCE BUT THEY WOULD LOVE IT MORE AND APPRECIATE IT MORE IF THEY COULD HOME BASE SOMEWHERE AND YOU COULD EVEN HAVE A SCHEDULE MONDAY, WEDNESDAY, FRIDAY AND I KNOW THEY WORK THEIR SCHEDULE, BUT I PROMISE YOU THAT IT WOULD WORK BETTER IF YOU HAD A GROUNDS KEEPING CREW THAT WORKED CERTAIN FACILITIES ONLY. 
          >> AND A LOT OF WHAT EDWARD IS PUTTING IN FOR 6 MILLION 
          [01:55:05]
INCLUDES SOCCER FIELDS AND BASEBALL FIELDS AND THEY NEED TO 
          BE MAINTAINED. >> YEAH, YOU WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THAT BECAUSE WE CAN'T SUPPORT WHAT WE'VE GOT NOW AT A HIGH LEVEL, SO I LIKE THE IDEA AND BEING ABLE TO DEDICATE IT. 
          I LIKE THAT. >> BASICALLY WE GO TO G 1 AND THESE ARE ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OUR NEW POSITION THAT IS WERE REQUESTED BY THE DEPARTMENTS. 
          THE SUMMARY OF THE TOTAL AT THE VERY BOTTOM, THE GENERAL FUND HAS A 21 EMPLOYEE REQUEST OF 1.5 MILLION. 
          THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND, THE GO MESA WHICH WE'RE NOT GOING TO INCLUDE SO SAKE THAT OFF. IT'S STILL ABOUT A $2.2 MILLION OR $2.1 MILLION AND THESE ARE ASKS, NOT RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          THIS IS WHERE I GOT THESE REQUESTS WHERE I RECOMMENDED SOME OF THESE BALANCES AND ONCE WE GET THERE, I CAN REMOVE SEVERAL REQUESTS FROM THE BOTTOM AND ONLY MAINTAIN THE TOP NUMBER FOR ARPA. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE NEW STAFF? NEW REQUESTS? ON H 1 THROUGH H 6 I BELIEVE IT IS OR H 7, THESE ARE ALL THE DEPARTMENTS THAT PUT IN A NEW CLASSIFICATION REQUEST. 
          IF THE COURT SO CHOOSES TO DO A COST OF LIVING INCREASE, MOST OF THESE RECLASSIFICATIONS WILL BE REDUCED. 
          THE ONLY ONE I WOULD RECOMMEND TO MAINTAIN WOULD BE ONE FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE THE JAIL. THEY PUT IN A REQUEST OF 24%. 
          THAT'S A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN WE EXPECT SO I'M RECOMMENDING A 10% INCREASE. THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY ONE THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND MAINTAINING WITH ONE EXCEPTION AND THAT WOULD BE THE ONE FOR THE LIBRARY. 
          THE LIBRARY, COMPUTER SPECIALIST, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT FELL THROUGH LAST YEAR. THEY WANT TO GET THEM THE SAME 4RE68LEVEL OF OUR OTHER SPECIAL SO IF WE DO A COLA, I WOULD SAY THE SPECIALIST ON H 5 AND THE CADETS. 
          THE REST OF THE ITEMS I WOULD NOT REQUEST ANY INCREASES AND WE CAN DO THAT WHEN WE GET THE REQUEST. 
          DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON RECLASSIFICATIONS? I IS OUR CAPITAL OUT LIE REQUEST FOR EACH DEPARTMENT AND WE DIVIDED THIS BY WHAT WE THINK CAN BE DONE AND WHAT WE KNOW NEEDS TO BE DONE DURING MAY JUROR OPERATIONS. 
          YOU'LL SEE THAT AT THE VERY TOP OF THE ROAD AND BRIDGE. 
          ROAD AND BRIDGE SUBMITTED AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO WHAT THEY HAD IN THE PAST. THAT INCLUDES A JOHN DEERE BACKHOE, A BRUSH TRUCK, A SPRINKLER TRUCK THAT THEY PLIF THEY NEED. NOW -- PAR DEN ME. 
          PARKS, TOTAL REQUEST WAS AROUND PARKS, TOTAL REO ME. 
          PARKS, TOTAL REN ME. PARKS, TOTAL REQUEST WAS AROUND $23 MILLION. WE KNOW 6 MULL IS FUNDED THROUGH ARPA ILLION IS FUNDED THROUGH ARPA FUNDS. 
          I'M NOT SURE WHICH QUALIFY BUT THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF THAT THEY HAVE THAT WE CAN'T LOOK AT SOME OTHER FORMS. SIMILAR CHANGE FOR COASTAL PARKS. 
          COASTAL PARKS ALLOWING THEM TO BUDGET. 
          5 MILLION OF IT IS THROUGH ARPA OR THROUGH HOPEFULLY WE CAN USE THE MONEY FROM THE TIF THAT WE'RE DOING, SOME OTHER STUFF WE'RE REQUIRING. THE REST IS ALL GENERAL FUND. 
          ON PAGE TWO YOU WILL SEE BALANCE FOR A HILL TOP FACILITY. 
          THEY'RE REPLACING SOME WING STUFF, 1.3 MILLION. 
          I KNOW COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ IS WORKING WITH EDWARD TO GET SOME STUFFS THROUGH ARPA SO WE EXPECT THE $145,000 IS QUALIFYING FOR 
          [02:00:10]
GENERAL FUND. SAME THING FOR YOUR COMMUNITY CENTER. THE NEW BUILDING THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR CAN'T BE THROUGH REGULAR OPERATIONS. 
          IT HAS TO BE THROUGH SOME OTHER FORMS. THE REST IS JUST GENERAL FORM AND WE'RE WORKING WITH THERESA AND IDAY ON HOW MUCH FUNDING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FOR TOTAL COSTS FROM WHAT WE HAD IN THE PAST. 
          WE'RE ADDING AROUND 125 FOR A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF CARS THROUGH OUR LEASE AGREEMENT THIS YEAR AND WE HAVE TO PUT IN OH LIGHTS, SIRENS, RADIOS AND LAPTOPS. 
          THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAD TO PUT IN THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE LAST YEAR SO THAT'S THE CAPITAL OUT LIE FOR 22-23. 
          I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. 
          >> YEAH, DALE. JUST OVERALL IN CAPITAL OUTLAY REQUESTS, AT LEAST FOR THE EQUIPMENT, NOT NECESSARILY ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT, BY WE TALK ABOUT THE BACKHOE. 
          PRICED AT $170,000. I'M REALLY CONCERNED WITH THAT AND THE PRICING FOR VEHICLES BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE FLUCTUATED A LOT, ESPECIALLY OVER THE LAST YEAR WITH SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES AND WE STILL HAVEN'T CAUGHT UP AS AN ECONOMY. 
          I KNOW EVERYTHING WITH BUDGET IS AN ESTIMATE, BUT SAY WE DO GO WITH SOME OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHAT DO YOU HAVE BUILT IN? OR DO YOU FEEL PRETTY CONFIDENT THAT THESE NUMBERS WILL STAY AT THAT LEVEL? OR IS IT A HIGHER ESTIMATE? THE PEAK BASED ON TRANSIT THAT YOU HAVE SEEN? AND YOU'RE GIVING US THE HIGHEST 
          POINT I THINK? >> MOST OF THINK? 
          >> MY THINK? >> MO THINK? 
          >> MU THINK? >> MOST OF THESE CAME THROUGH SAYING THIS IS WHAT THEY BELIEVE THEIR QUOTES CAN QUALIFY FOR. 
          WE'RE RELYING ON THE DEPARTMENT TO SEE WHAT IS NECESSARY TO FUND A DUMP TRUCK AND SOME OTHER STUFF. 
          THIS CAN BE THE HIGHEST LEVEL THEY SEE AND WE CAN GET IT FOR CHEAPER OR TRY TO GET IT FOR A LEASE PURCHASE SO IT'S NOT AS BAD AS A CAPITAL OUT LAY BUT MOST OF THE STUFF WE SEE HERE IS A QUOTE THE DEPARTMENT HASOF TH QUOTE THE DEPARTMENT HAS 
          PROVIDED FOR US. >> LIKE THE DUALLY TRUCK, IS 
          THAT PART OF THE OUTLAY >> THESE LARGER TRUCKS ARE NOT SOMETHING THEY CURRENTLY LEASE OUT BUT WE CAN. 
          >> THESE LARGER TRUCKS ARE NOT SOMETHING THEY CURRENTLY LEASE 
          OUT BUT WE CAN WORK WITH THEM. >> NO PROBLEM, I JUST WANTED CLARIFICATION. I FIGURED ENTERPRISE DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF DUALLY OR DUMP TRICKS. 
          >> SOME CAN GO DONE AS LEASE PURCHASES. 
          THAT'S WHY I PUT THEM HERE AS MAJOR. 
          THE COURT IS TELLING US WE DON'T WANT TO BUY ANY VEHICLES BECAUSE WE'RE DOING MOSTLY THROUGH LEASES BECAUSE IT'S CHEAPER. 
          SOME OF THESE LARGER TRUCKS WE CAN POSSIBLY GET THROUGH A LEASE BUT WE NEED TO WORK WITH ENTERPRISE TO MAKE SURE WE CAN 
          QUALIFY >> OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          AND THIS IS JUST -- JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT. 
          WE VISITED WITH GM WHO HAS A PLANT NEW FLEET FOR LEASE I GUESS TO COMPETE WITH ENTERPRISE THAT ARE JUST SIMPLY FOR EMERGENCY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT VEHICLES. 
          YOU KNOW WHERE ENTERPRISE MAY BE LIKE GOOD FOR SOME THINGS BUT NOT FOR OTHERS, I BROUGHT YOU ALL THAT INFO. 
          I JUST NEED TO GET IT TO YOUR DESK. 
          I DO LOVE THE LEASE BECAUSE OF THE MAINTENANCE PIECES OF IT, BUT I NOTICE WHEREVER THERE ARE GAPS, I DON'T THINK THEY'RE DOING DUMP TRUCKS BUT AS FAR AS OTHER VEHICLES THAT WE MAY NEED INCLUDING HIGH WATER VEHICLES, I'M GOING TOO DUMP  DUMP WHAT I ON ON -- 
          >> YEAH, THEY WANT TO HAVE AN AFTER MARKET SALES PRICE FOR IT. 
          >> EXACTLY. I'M WITH YOU THERE. 
          AND THEN I WANT TO MARK ALL THAT PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT. 
          I'M GOING TO TALK TO YOU GUYS OFFLINE. 
          I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY THAT COULD HELP EDWARD ON HIS BUDGET IF WE HAD ANOTHER RESOURCE FOR ALL THE PLAY GROUND EQUIPMENT, THAT WOULD FREE UP MONEY FOR OTHER 
          [02:05:03]
          ITEMS. >> WE WANTED TO WORK WITH THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT.  WE GOT SOME THAT WERE ADA RESPONSIBLE BUT THERE WERE STILL MORE AT THE HILL TOP AREA SO, YES. 
          OH. I AGREE. 
          IT'S HILLTOP AND I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER THE OTHER ONE THAT GOT SPECCED. I WENT AND DUG UP PLAN OVERS THE WEEKEND. WE HAVE DOLLARS, MAYBE THAT CAN 
          HELP EDWARD. >> RUMOR IS THERE'S RAIN IN 
          CORPUS CHRISTI SOMEWHERE. >> LET'S RECESS TO GO SEE IT. 
          >> HOW SAD IS THAT? >> IT'S VERY SAD. 
          I JUST SENT YOU A DROUGHT E-MAIL. 
          OKAY. THANKS, DALE. 
          GO AHEAD. >> THAT'S OUR CAPITAL OUTLAY REQUESTS FOR THE BALANCES. NOW WE'LL GO INTO OUR BUDGET CHALLENGE THAT IS WE KIND OF KNOW AND SEE HUE WE CAN HANDLE THAT STUFF. THE ONES THAT WOULD HAVE ANS A RISK BY IT ARE REQUI BY IT ARE INCREASES. 
          >> OKAY, I THINK THESE ARE THE ONES THE COURT NEEDS TO DIGEST AND IF ANYONE FEELS DIFFERENTLY SPEAK UP. 
          THE FIRST IS CONTINUANCE PAY ELECTED FOR 32 EMPLOYEES AT 22,981. THAT'S NOT AN ASK. 
          >> THERE ARE 13 EMPLOYEE WHO IS ARE ELECTED OFFICIALS AT 22,981 SO MY POINT IS THE FIRST THREE ARE NOT, AS I SAID, THOSE ARE NOT DEBATABLE BUT DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY CONCERN ABOUT THOSE? THAT'S JUST PART OF OUR -- THE ELECTEDS, THEY CAN YIELD, RIGHT? 
          THEY CAN YIELD. >> YEAH. 
          OH >> THERESA>> THERESA I MAY BE OT 
          NOW. >> I BELIEVE YOU ARE. 
          >> TAKE ME OFF OF IT. NOT THAT I HAVE ANY DIFFERENT NEEDS OF A MOTHER OF FIVE CHILDREN BUT IT'S A DIFFERENT 
          STORY FOR ELECTEDS. >> YEAH, I YIELDED LAST YEAR, TOO. I SHOULDN'T BE ON BEGI AGAIN TH 
          YEAR. >> BUT DO WE GROW WITH THE FIRST THREE? THE NEXT ONE, THAT'STHE NEXT ON 
          NONDEBATABLE. >> THE EIGHT EMPLOYEES AT 18,000. 258 AT 281,000. 
          THIS IS THE LARGEST AMOUNT WE HAVE EACH YEAR. 
          >> OKAY. AND THEN THE NEXT ONE IS LAW ENFORCEMENT ADJUSTMENT, NO PROBLEM THERE. 
          >> [INAUDIBLE] >> RIGHT AN THEN THE DECREASE NO ONE IS GOING TO ARGUE HERE ABOUT SAVING MONEY. 
          I'M GOING TO CHECK THAT WIN. BUT ON THE PRIOR YEAR PERSONNEL CHANGES AFTER BUDGET WAS ADOPTED, I WANT EVERYBODY TO KNOW THAT NUMBER IS 444,595 THAT REPRESENTS EVERYBODY THAT DURING THE BUDGET YEAR WE MADE ADJUSTMENTS TO. 
          IT HAS AN ASTERISK BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE OUR CHOICE. 
          IF THERE IS AN ISSUE, I HOPE YOU WOULD SPEAK UP TODAYMENT 
          >> IS THAT NUMBER GOING TO CHANGE? DIDN'T WE JUST DO SOMETHING ELSE FOR THE DA LAST COURT? 
          >> GET US THE RIGHT NUMBER. >> I STAYED REALLY LATE AND GOT THAT UPDATED. SO THAT'S A GOOD NUMBER? 
          >> IT'S A GOOD NUMBER. IT INCLUDES ALL THE CHANGES. 
          >> GOOD FOR YOU. THAT'S AWESOME. 
          THAT'S A REALLY GOOD NUMBER. I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          I LOVE IT WHEN WE DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK. 
          THAT'S GREAT. OKAY. 
          AND THEN THE NEXT ONE IS THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT AND, AGAIN, I'M TAKING THAT ONE WITH IDAY TO DISCUSS BECAUSE I THINK THAT JENNY AND I AND JOHNNY AND THEIR FOLKS NEED TO GO SET AND TALK ABOUT THAT ONE. IN THE LIGHT MOST UNFAVORABLE, THEY PULLED A FAST ONE. IN THE LIGHT MOST FAVORABLE, 
          [02:10:02]
IT'S JUST A MISS. SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN IS A 
          COMPROMISE. >> AGAIN, WE HAVE THE TWO FUNDED. THIS IS JUST -- 
          >> WE GOT THE OTHER TWO. WE ALWAYS HAD THE TWO FUNDED. 
          >> I KNOW, I KNOW, JUST SO I'M CLEAR, THE TWO THAT ARE -- I THINK THEY ONLY HIRED ONE, RIGHT? 
          >> RIGHT. >> AND THERE'S ANOTHER POSITION THAT HE'S TRYING TO FILL. THOSE ARE FUNDED. 
          >> NO. >> NONE OF THE FOUR? 
          >> NOT THIS FISCAL YEAR, NO. >> WE NEED AN AGREEMENT WITH 
          MHID. >> WE GOT THAT DONE AND BROUGHT 
          TO COURT, GUYS. >> I THOUGHTWY DID, TOO. 
          >> VERY FIRST YEAR WHEN WE BROUGHT IN TWO FOR THE DEF'S OFFICE, THEY WERE OFFICE, THEY WERE 100% FUNDED. 
          THE SECOND YEAR THE COUNTY IS PAYING 100% OF THE COSTS FOR TWO 
          OF THEM. >> NOBODY EXPECTED THAT BUT WHEN WE SENT THE BILL TO GET REIMBURSED THEY SAID WE DON'T 
          OWE YOU. >> THE CONSTABLE TOLD ME MHID AGREED IF THEY WERE 100% MENTAL HEALTH OFFICES THEY WOULD PAY 
          FOR IT. >> WE DON'T HAVE A CONTRACT WITH 
          THEM. >> WE DO. 
          >> WE JUST GAVE MHID $4 MILLION [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> I'M GOING TO DISAGREE FOR A SECOND HERE. 
          WE'RE TIGHT HERE ON THIS. WE'RE GOOD. 
          IN 2019 THERE WERE TWO OFFICER THAT IS WERE IN THE JAIL -- 
          >> NO, NO, I GET YOU. >> HANG ON. 
          >> I THINK WE CAN GET THE TWO FIXED. 
          >> THE ONES WE JUST DID THIS YEAR, THOSE COME OUT OF THEIR OWN MHID BUDGET AND THE CONTRACT HAS ALREADY COME TO COURT. 
          WE HAD IT IN THERE. UNLESS WE TABLED IT, IT CAME TO 
          COURT. >> I'M CONFIRMING RIGHT NOW THAT IT HAS BEEN VOTED ON BECAUSE I KNOW WE WORKED ON IT. 
          >> WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF WE GET THE TWO WORKED OUT, WE HAVE TO PUT SOMETHING BACK ONTO DEFUND -- I HATE THAT WORD, TOO, SORRY. THAT'S SUCH A NEGATIVE WORD. 
          OTHERWISE THOSE POSITIONS ARE -- >> ALL WE HAVE TO DO. 
          LOOK. LOOK. 
          ALL WE HAVE TO DO, LET ME MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND THIS. 
          TO DO THE PROGRAM WE NEED SIX AND WE WERE THE ONES WHO SAID FOUR. THE TWO THAT ARE REFLECTED HERE NEED TO BE PAID FOR BY THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. 
          >> THAT'S FOUR I THINK ISN'T IT? >> 218 IS FOR TWO? 
          >> TWO WITH BENEFITS. >> THE EMPLOYEES PLUS A CAR. 
          >> IT'S THE WHOLE BUDGET. THAT NEEDS TO COME FROM THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN IN THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT AND I'M GOING TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF IT. 
          I'M HOPING IT WAS A MISTAKE >> BUT WE CAN'T GO BACK -- WE HAVE TO REALLY -- WE MADE A BIG DEAL WITH THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. 
          I DON'T WANT JOHNNY TO COME IN HERE SAND AWE'RE RAISING TAXES 
          BECAUSE OF ALL THE ASKS. >> NO, THIS GOES BACK TO HIS 2019 BUDGET. HE HAS SO MUCH MORE MONEY THIS YEAR THANKS TO US THAN HE'S EVER HAD -- 
          >> I'M JUST SAYING THAT SHOULDN'T BE A BUDGET CHALLENGE. 
          >> I AGREE BUT DALE IS SO THOROUGH. 
          I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE A CHALLENGE BECAUSE PUT RIGHT THERE, HD NEEDS TO PAY. AND IF PEOPLE ASK WHY, REFER THEM TO THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE TO REMIND THEM THAT BEHAVIORAL HEALTH INDIGENT HEALTHCARE IS A MANDATE OF THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. THIS IS A NO-BRAINER. 
          THIS IS AN ARGUMENT BETWEEN LAWYERS ON CONTRACT. 
          >> SO THIS SHOULDN'T BE A BUDGET CHALLENGE. 
          WE GET FIXED OR WE UNAPPROVE THE TWO POSITIONS THAT ARE A 
          PROBLEM. >> WE'RE GOING TO FIX IT. 
          YOU CAN'T RUN MENTAL HEALTH WITHOUT MENTAL HEALTH OFFICERS IN THE STREET BUT I'M WITH YOU. IT SHOULDN'T BE A CHALLENGE. 
          >> JUST TO BE CLEAR, COMMISSIONERS, I BELIEVE THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT GIVES THE MONEY TO MHID ALREADY TO FUND THOSE TWO OFFICERS SO THEY ARE -- [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> 
          DIFFERENT. >> IT'S FINE, JUDGE, I WILL GIVE 
          YOU A CHANCE TO GO BACK. >> YOU'RE RIGHT AND YOU'RE RIGHT 
          BUT THE NUMBER IS FOUR. >> I'M JUST TELLING YOU CCPD 
          [02:15:08]
ONLY HAS ONE MENTAL HEALTH OFFICER FOR THE ENTIRE CITY OF 
          CORPUS CHRISTI. >> THAT MIGHT EXPLAIN QUITE A 
          BIT. >> WELL, NO, WHY ARE WE TAKING 
          ON FOUR? >> BECAUSE WE HAVE A PROGRAM AND WE NEED TO REMIND EVERYBODY IT CAME TO COURT. 
          THIS PROGRAM ASSISTS CCPD, TOO. THIS IS A -- OKAY. 
          WE'LL GET BACK TO IT. IT'S NOT A CONTINGENT LIABILITY. 
          WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT. 
          OKAY. METRO COM THERESA IS GOING TO WORK WITH US ON GETTING JUST THE BACKUP BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO HAVE IT BUT IS THIS A CASE OF IT IS WHAT IT 
          IS DALE? >> I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF $423,629 INCREASE. 
          WE PAID AN INCREASE FROM ARPA. I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND IF WE SPLIT THIS 50/50, WE CAN KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD NEXT YEAR. 
          >> I GET IT AND I HEAR YOU BUT WE'RE STEPPING OFF THE CLIFF AGAIN. MY HESITANCY IS I'M OKAY WITH THE SOON SEPTEMBER OF, AND I'M ONE VOTE ONLY. 
          BUT I'M WITH THE CONCEPT OF ANOTHER YEAR OF FUNDING ALREADY FUNDED POSITIONS. I AM OKAY WITH FUNDING ANY LOSSES AS THE JUDGE DESCRIBED. I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR ANYTHING THAT'S A NEW ADD TO THE CLIFF SO I'M REALLY WORRIED ABOUT NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET GOING TO BE TEN TIMES WORSE IF WE KEEP DOING THAT. I APPRECIATE WHY YOU'RE DOING IT 
          BUT I'M REALLY NERVOUS ABOUT IT. >> AND I THINK ON METRO COM, I THINK MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE A WHOLE 'NOTHER DISCUSSION. 
          >> YEAH, THAT'S GOING TO GO ON FOREVER. 
          IT'S NEVER GOING TO GO AWAY. THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITIES THERE, I THINK, IN THE FUTURE THERE. 
          JUST TO REMIND EVERYBODY, WE DON'T RECEIVE ANY 911 FEES, PRESENT AND COMMISSIONERS AND WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT. 
          THAT'S SOMETHING I HAVE TALKED TO TODD ABOUT, I HAVE TALKED TO CHUY ABOUT IT BUT IT'S A LONG STORY AS TO WHY WE OPTED OUT OF IT A WHILE BACK AND THE COINED IS CHANGING AND THEUNTY IS CHANGING AND THE DEMOGRAPHICS ARE CHANGING SO I'M SUGGESTING THAT WE GO BACK TO THE LEGISLATE SHIRR AND GET BROUGHT BACK INTO WHAT'S CALLED A DISTRICT AND WHEN WE COME INTO A DISTRICT, WE WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR 911 FEES. THERE'S ALSO SOMETHING CALLED THE IP FEES THAT WE COULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR. 
          THAT'S LIKE WHEN YOU HAVE A PHONE NUMBER, LIKE ALL OUR I PADS HAVE PHONE NUMBERS PADS HAVE PHOI PADS HAVE PP PADS HAVE P IPPADS HAVE IPADS HAVE PHONE NUMBERS ATTACHED TO IT. WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO COLLECT THOSE FOR THE FIRST TIME THIS CYCLE SO METRO COM IS ITS OWN ANIMAL THERE. WE NODE TO WORK COMPARTS OUR FUTURE ON METRO COM. THAT'S JUST GOING TO KEEP INCREASING. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE DOLLARS THERE FOR THAT. OKAY. 
          THE 27 THOUSAND SELF-EXPLANATORY, JANITORIAL SERVICES. THE COLA IS 1.5 FOR 3%. 
          >> FOR METRO COM ARE WE SPLITTING IT? 
          NEXT YEAR EVEN IF IT GOES UP -- >> IT MIGHT GO UP NEXT YEAR BUT 
          IT WON'T BE A $400,000 INCREASE. >> USE YOUR MIC, THERESA. 
          >> CAN Y'ALL PULL THAT BUDGET IS WEEK LOOK AT IT? 
          >> CONNIE IS THE MICROPHONE POLICE. 
          >> NEXT YEAR YOU WILL PROBABLY HAVE A SMALL INCREASE OF METRO COM BUT IT WON'T BE HALF A MILLION DOLLARS. 
          HOPEFULLY. >> YEAH, I DO THINK IF WE CAN -- OBVIOUSLY TODAY IS JUST DAY ONE OF BUDGET WORKSHOP. 
          LET'S BRING BACK METRO COM. THE REST ARE SELF-EXPLANATORY WHICH IS HOW YOU GET THE NUMBER AND I AGREE IT CAN BE SOME FLUCTUATIONS. THIS IS A GOOD PLACE TO PAUSE IF ANYBODY WANTS TO PAUSE HERE, THIS IS A THROUGH J IS WHAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GO THROUGH SO FAR ON OUR BUDGET BOOKS. 
          [02:20:01]
OKAY. DALE, NO QUESTIONS. 
          DO I WANT TO -- >> I WOULD LIKE TO ADVANCE THROUGH SOME OF THIS STUFF AS WE GO TO O. 
          >> YOU GOT IT. >> SOME OF THE NEXT STUFF WITH RECOMMENDED BUDGET CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDED RECLASSIFICATION, RECOMMENDED ANY POSITIONS IT'S GOOD TO KNOW WHAT OUR VALUES ARE. IF WE GO TO O2 YOU WILL SEE OUR 
          VALUES FOR OUR GENERAL FUND. >> CAN I GO BACK? 
          I HAVE SOME ON M. >> LET'S GO TO M, THEN. 
          >> I KNOW THIS IS SOMETHING YOU SUPPORT AND I'M NOT TRYING TO FIGHT WITH YOU ON THIS BUT ON M, THE NEW POSITION BETWEEN COUNTY 
          LIBRARY -- >> OH, I HAVE A SOLUTION I 
          THINK. >> MY THOUGHT HERE IS JUST THAT UTMSI I TALKED TO THEM AND THEY CAN PROVIDE THIS CURRICULUM AND 
          SO -- >> WELL, IT'S NOT THAT THE CURRICULUM WOULD CHANGE, IT'S THE PHYSICALITY OF GOING OUT 
          THERE. >> YEAH, I JUST DON'T FEEL LIKE WE NEED A FULL TIME PERSON TO DO THAT. 
          >> YEAH, I THINK THAT -- >> ESPECIALLY FROM -- 
          >> I THINK IF WE CAN FIND SOMEBODY. 
          I THINK WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IS THROUGH UTMSI OR PORT A LIBRARIES I VISITED WITH THE MAYOR. 
          THERE ARE SO MANY GREAT FOLKS RIGHT THERE, COULDN'T WE CREATE 
          AN MOU WITH THEM? >> I THINK SO. 
          I THINK IT WOULD BE PROBABLY COST FREE. 
          I TALKED TO UTMSI AND THEY WERE VERYING WITH TO JUST HELP. 
          >> I'M 100% WITH YOU. THE ONLY THING I NEED YOU TO KNOW IS REMIND ME, DALE, THIS PERSON, IT WAS 50% THIS WAY AND 50% -- I THINK SHE'S STILL ASKING, JUST SO YOU KNOW. 
          IS THAT RIGHT? >> 75% AT THE LIBRARY -- 
          >> YEAH, HER LIBRARIAN REQUEST IS ONLY A PIECE OF IT OUT THERE WHICH I'M WILLING TO TAKE  SAYIN OTHER WORDS, ORIGINALLY THIS WAS FOR THAT SO THIS HAS BEEN ALTERED IN SOME CAPACITY 
          >> WE KALTERED IT. >> I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE 25% 
          PIECE OUT. >> I AGREE AND THAT'S NOT A 
          PROBLEM. >> I NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE JUSTIFICATION IS FOR THAT POSITION. 
          >> I WILL WORK AND SEE IF WE CAN GET THE JUSTIFICATION. 
          >> SHE CAME IN AND TOLD US BUT I THINK IT'S NOT A BAD IDEA TO REMIND US BECAUSE I THINK WE ALL FIXATED ON THE COASTAL PIECE OF IT BUT SHE TOLD US WHAT THAT SCENARIO WAS SO WE MAY GO BACK TO OUR COUNTY LIBRARY PIECE OF IT. 
          >> IF THERE'S ANOTHER JUSTIFICATION, I GOT TO SAY, I'M LOOKING AT THIS AND IT'S ONE OF THE VERY FEW THAT DALE RECOMMENDED SO OF ALL THE ONES THAT WERE REQUESTED, FINE, IF WE'RE TAKING OUT, THE 25%, THAT'S OUT. 
          >> I PUT IT IN THERE BECAUSE WE KNEW WE HAD SOME KIND OF A RESPONSE TO THE OBSERVATION DECK AND WE HAD SOMETHING THERE SO WE HAD SOME KIND OF A LIBRARY SO I THOUGHT WE HAD TO HAVE SOMEONE THERE AND THAT'S THE BEST WAY OF DOING IT. 
          >> THAT'S UP TO IDAY COMING BACK UP AND SAYING -- 
          >> IT WAS THE OPPOSITE -- I CAN'T SEE YOU WITH -- YOU KNOW. 
          >> BUT THEN YOU CAN'T HEAR ON THE MIC. 
          >> ALL I WAS GOING TO SAY IS YOU'RE RIGHT BUT IT WAS THE OPPOSITE. WE WERE TRYING TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT WE COULD JUSTIFY THE NEW POSITION BY MAKING SURE THEY HAD 
          DUALITY. >> THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. 
          >> I'M FINE WITH THAT. IT'S STILL GOING TO BE PHENOMENAL WITH TALL RESOURCES WE HAD. 
          REMEMBER WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE UNTIL -- I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER HER NAME FROM UTMSI BUT SHE DID -- SALARY, MAYBE? SHE DID THE CURE RATION AND NOW 
          THEY'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT IT. >> SO ARE THE PORT A SCHOOLS. 
          >> RIGHT, ALL WE NEED IS -- 
          >> WHAT YOU WANT IS CURRICULUM. >> RIGHT. 
          >> LET'S MOVE FORWARD. >> WHAT ELSE BETWEEN M, N, AND O? LET'S GO BACK TO O, THEN, DALE. 
          >> OUR VALUATIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND AND THE GENERAL FUND IS ALWAYS THE MOST IMPORTANT AREA I HAVE. 
          [02:25:04]
BASICALLY IT SHOWS OUR INCREASES BY YOUR TOTAL RESIDENCY AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL. YOU WILL SEE TOTAL RESIDENCY INCREASED BY 9%. COMMERCIAL BY 9 PITY 65. 
          IF65. .65. 
          IF YOU GO OVER, IT'S 14.2 OF THE VALUE. 
          LAST YEAR WE WERE 6 TO 7%. THIS IS THE LARGEST WE HAVE HAD IN A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF TIME. THIS WILL HAVE A LARGE IMPACT ON OUR NO NEW REVENUE TAX. IF YOU GO THROUGH THE BALANCE WE GIVE YOU THE VALUES FROM THE APPRAISING DISTRICT AND IF YOU SO WANT TO CHOOSE, WE GIVE YOU HOW TO CALCULATE IT AFTER THE TAXES, RIGHT? LET'S GO TO P. 
          TAB P. >> P 1. 
          >> BUT THE HIGHLIGHT IS THAT'S A -- YOU UNDERSTAND WE JUST GLOSSED OVER IT. SOMEBODY NEEDS TO SAY OMG. 
          THAT NUMBER IS HUGE, RIGHT? 20%, GUYS. 
          19.81%. THIS SHOWS YOU OUR LAST YEAR ADOPTED RATE, OUR VOTER APROOFED RATE AND WHAT OUR VOTERPROVED RATE AND WHAT OUR VOTER APPROVED RATE WOULD BE IF WE USED UNUSED INCREMENTS. GOING LEFT TO RIGHT, THE LAST YEAR'S ADOPTED TAX RATE OF 0.3145 WITH THE GENERAL FUND BEING [INAUDIBLE] OUR NEW NEW REF KNEW TAX IS 0.271918. 
          THAT IS ALMOST A 4¢ DECREASE IN VALUE. 
          >> THAT DEBT SERVICE FUND S THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE DEBT FALLING 
          OFF? >> THE WAY THE TAX RATE IS COMPUTED, THEY MAKE YOU COMPUTE THE 100% VALUE OF WHAT YOUR TAX RATE IS AND THEY DON'T SEPARATE THE DEBT SERVICE SO THAT'S THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX TWO BRING THEM EXACTLY THE SAME AMOUNT OF REVENUE EVEN THOUGH YOUR DEBT REQUIREMENT MAY HAVE TO 
          INCREASE. >> I DON'T UNDERSTAND. 
          IF DEBT SERVICE FUND LAST YEAR WAS 0.004. 
          WOULDN'T YOU HAVE TO -- YOU'RE WAY SMARTER THAN ME ON THIS BUT YOU CAN'T CHANGE YOUR DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE, YOU CAN'T CHANGE THAT BECAUSE YOU OBLIGATED YOURS SO WOULDN'T YOU PUT THAT IN MY SIMPLE MIND IN THE GENERAL FUND RATE? 
          >> THE WAY THE CALCULATION IS AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NO NEW REVENUE TAX, WHEN YOU FIRST DO THE CALCULATIONS, YOU PUT IN WHAT YOUR TOTAL TAX RATE IS, HERE'S YOUR RATE AND CALCULATE WHAT YOUR NO NEW REVENUE TAX WOULD BE AND YOU BRING IN YOUR REF KNEW IN YOUR DEBT SERVICE AND YOUR GENERAL FUND. 
          >> RIGHT I'M ASKING LAST YEAR OUR ADOPTED RATE WAS 0.00475. 
          I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW IT COULD GO DOWN. 
          >> ON THE VALUE WE NEEDED AROUND $14 MILLION IN TAXES TO PAY OUR DEBT SERVICE. TO BRING IN THE SAME THIS YEAR AT THE CURRENT VALUE YOU ONLY NEED 0.37. 
          OUR LEVEL REQUIREMENTS ARE 15 TO 16 MILLION NOT THE 13 WE NEEDED LAST YEAR SO THAT'S WHERE IT GETS TRICKY 
          >> TO BRING IN THE SAME AMOUNT ON DEBT SERVICE JUST LIKE ON 
          YOUR GF. >> WE GET TO THE DEBT SERVICE RATE OUTSIDE OF THE VOTER APPROVED. 
          >> WAIT, SAY THAT AGAIN? >> WHEN YOU DO YOUR ADOPTED RATE. YOU GO TO YOUR VOTER APPROVED RATE AND YOU NEED MORE FOR DEBT SERVICE, YOUR DEBT SERVICE IS OUTSIDE OF YOUR RATES. IT CAN BE AS HIGH AS YOU NEED TO 
          AFFECT YOUR VOTER APPROVED. >> BUT WHEN YOU'RE CALCULATING 
          THE -- [INAUDIBLE] >> IT REQUIRES YOU TO PUT THEM 
          TOGETHER. >> SO IF YOU LOWERED THE DEBT SERVICE FUND IN SOME CAPACITY, THAT WOULD COUNT TOWARDS IF YOU 
          [02:30:01]
HAD TO LOWER THE DEBT SERVICE -- OR IF YOU COULD LOWER THE DEBT SERVICE RATE AND YOU INCREASE THE GENERAL FUND RATE YOU STILL ADD THEM TOGETHER TO GET THE NO NOW TAX RATE. 
          THEY BOTH COUNT IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO. 
          >> ONCE YOU CALCULATE THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX AND YOU GO TO WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO ADOPT, YOUR M AN CAN BE DETERMINED. IT CAN ALWAYS EXCEED 3.5 BECAUSE 
          IT'S BASED ON YOUR REQUIREMENTS. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          >> LET'S STAY ON THIS ONE. I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO MAYBE TAKE A BREAK BUT THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST -- WELL, J 1, P 1, ARE PRETTY DARN IMPORTANT. SO GOING OVER THE NO NEW REV NIGH, WHICH IS THE OLD EFFECTIVE TERMINOLOGY, THAT GOES ALL THE WAY TO 27¢. IF YOU HAVE ALREADY CALCULATED FOR US WHAT THE MAX IS, IT STILL GOES DOWN FROM 31¢ TO 28¢ AND THE LAST ONE IS THE UNUSED INCREMENT AND I THINK IT'S WORTH TALKING ABOUT IT AGAIN BECAUSE PEOPLE DO GET CONFUSED WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? DO YOU WANT TO JUST THROW OUT 
          WHAT OUR UNUSED INCREMENT IS. >> OUR MAIN TAX RATE IS 3.5%. 
          IF WE ADOPT ANYTHING LESS THAN THE VOTER APPROVED. 
          IF WE ADOPT ADD 0.23% ACCORDING TO THESE ROLLS WE HAVE 0.1 UNUSED AND YOU CAN PUT THOSE TOGETHER CALLED UNUSED INCREMENT TO THE MAXIMUM RATE. THEY USE THE MAXIMUM 3.5 TO DETERMINE YOUR UNUSED RATE. THE ONLY CAVEAT IS ONCE YOU USE ANY 1¢ OR ALL OF IT, ONCE YOU USE ANY OF IT, YOU LOSE ALL OF 
          IT. >> FOR THAT YEAR. 
          >> FOR THAT YEAR. EACH YEAR IS CALCULATED SEPARATELY OF ITSELF AND IF YOU USE ANY PORTION OF THE UNUSED INCREMENT FOR YEAR ONE YOU CANNOT USE THAT, THE REST OF IT, IN FUTURE YEARS. IF EYE USE ANY PART OF IT NO YEAR TWO, YOU CAN'T EVER GO BACK AND GET THE PORTION YOU DIDN'T COLLECT AND AFTER THREE YEARS YOU LOSE IT. 
          SO IF YOU DON'T GO BACK AND USE YEAR ONE ON THE FOURTH YEAR YOU'VE LOST IT. SO IF YOU DON'T USE IT BY THE THIRD YEAR YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO GET TO USE IT. 
          >> SO WHAT'S Y'ALL'S RECOMMENDATION ON THIS? 
          >> WE HAVE A FEW SCENARIOS TO TALK ABOUT. 
          LET'S FIRST DO WHAT THE RATES ARE AND THEN GIVE YOU A FEW SCENARIOS AND HOW WE CALCULATE THE NUMBERS. 
          OUR NO NEW REV NIGH TAX IS 0.271918. 
          THAT'S AROUND A 3 OR 4¢ DECREASE IN TAXES. 
          IF WE USE 0.35 WE'RE AT 0.285535. 
          AGAIN, THAT'S 1.5¢ OR 2¢ DECREASE 
          >> WHY IS THAT VOTER APPROVED RATE? 
          >> THAT'S WHAT THE TAX CODE NOW SAYS. 
          IT USED TO BE THE ROLL BACK RATE. 
          THAT'S THE HIGHEST RACE WE CAN GO WITHOUT REQUIRING AN 
          ELECTION. >> WE CALL THAT POLITICS. 
          >> WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT NAME, TOO. 
          >> I AGREE. VOTERS ARE NOT NECESSARILY APPROVING THIS BUT NOW THE ROLL BACK RATE IS THE MAXIMUM WE CAN 
          USE WITHOUT HAVING AN ELECTION. >> SO THAT'S THE OLD ROLL BACK 
          RATE? >> YES. 
          >> AS LISA WAS SAYING IF WE USE THE UNUSED INCREMENTS WE CAN GET UP TO 0.291965 AND UNUSED IS 0.006 SO A LITTLE OVER HALF A CENT. THE LEVELS ARE STILL BELOW -- 
          >> IF YOU USE THAT YOU CAN'T USE ANYMORE OF IT? 
          THIS IS A ONE TIME USE? >> EACH YEAR. 
          >> YOU HAVE UP TO THREE YEARS TO USE IT BUT ONCE YOU USE ANY PART 
          OF IT YOU CAN'T AGAIN. >> SO BENTENCOURT DESIGNED THIS AND THIS WAS THE ONE GIFT HE GAVE TO COUNTIES. 
          HE SAID IF YOU SAVE THE YEAR THAT YOU NEED IT AS LONG AS YOU USE IT WITHIN THREE YEARS WE'LL LET YOU HAVE A SAVINGS ACCOUNT AND YOU CAN TACK ONTO YOUR 3.5 BECAUSE THERE MIGHT BE -- THEY CONTEMPLATED THERE COULD BE A YEAR -- HE DID THIS BEFORE COVID SO HE DIDN'T KNOW BUT IT WAS A GREAT IDEA. 
          THE OTHER THING THAT HAPPENED, AS YOU GUYS KNOW, IS THAT WE 
          [02:35:03]
HAVE BEEN UNDER MAJOR DECLARATIONS AND, OF COURSE, THE COUNTIES, AND I JUST SENT THIS TEXT, THE REASON I HAVE BEEN WATCHING DROUGHT SO CAREFULLY IS BECAUSE THE GOVERNOR HAS PUT UP DECLARATIONS ON MANY COUNTS FOR DROUGHTENED THAT GOES UP TO 8%. 
          >> THEY SAID NO COVID AND NO TO DROUTHS. 
          >> BUT IFGHTS. >> BUT IF WE SAY IT'S OKAY. 
          THEY HAVE THEIR OWN RULES BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS IS THE GIFT THAT KEEPS ON GIVING FOR THREE YEARS 
          >> DID WE USE ANY OF IT LAST YEAR? 
          >> NO, WE HAVE BEEN BANKING FOR TWO YOU'RES IN A ROW. 
          >> SO THIS WOULD GO ABOVE THE 3.5%? BUT WITH A BANK. -- 
          >> IT WOULD BE 2¢ LOWER THAN LAST YEAR'S RATE. 
          >> I GET IT. >> IT WOULD NOT REQUIRE A VOTER 
          ELECTION. >> THE VOTER APPROVED ROLE BACK RATE ON THE PROPOSAL IS A 3.5% INCREASE. 
          THE SECOND ONE IS THE ROLL BACK RATE PLUS THE UNUSED INCREMENT WHICH GETS US TO GO OVER THE 3.5. 
          >> OKAY, I GOT IT. THAT'S JUST CONFUSING AS ITS EVER BEEN. I LIKE THAT THEY CHANGED IT TO NO NEW TAX RATE BUT THEN WENT BACK AND I THINK THE ROLL BACK RATE EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND AND CHANGE THAT HAD ONE AND IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE AND THESE INCREMENTS ARE EXTREMELY HARD TO 
          FIGURE OUT. >> WE AGREE. 
          >> THE TAKE AWAY HERE, DALE S THAT IF WE GO THE MAXIMUM THAT THE STATE LETS US GO PLUS USE ALL OUR BANKED SAVINGS ACCOUNT WE'RE STILL 2¢ LOWER THAN LAST YEAR AND THAT'S REALLY WHY P 1 IS THE STORY. ANYONE LISTENING IN TV LAND, 
          THAT'S THE SATISFACTORY. >> IT REPRESENTS AN INCREASE IN OVERALL TAX BUT A DECREASE IN THE TAX RATE. 
          >> BY A HUGE AMOUNT. >> YOUR TAXES GO UP BUT YOUR 
          RATE GOES DOWN. >> ALMOST BY 10%. 
          >> SO THE FACTS ARE THE FACTS, IT'S AN [INAUDIBLE] I'M NOT 
          OPINING I'M JUST SAYING. >> THE THEORY IS THAT IF YOU'RE ONE OF THE AVERAGE PEOPLE WHOSE APPRAISAL WENT UP, THAT STATEMENT IS TRUE. WE HAVE TO MAKE THAT ASSUMPTION 
          THAT YOUR -- [INAUDIBLE] >> SIX PEOPLE'S APPRAISALS HAVE 
          NOT GONE UP >> THE CITY ANNOUNCED THEY'RE GOING TO KEEP THEIRS THE SAME SO THEIR TAX RATE ISN'T GOING DOWN. 
          >> BUT THEY DO THAT EVERY YEAR AND THE LEVY GOES UP. 
          THAT'S POLITICIAN SPEAK. I LOVE MY FRIENDS AT THE CITY 
          BUT IT'S STILL SKYROCKETING. >> AT THE COUNTY, WE LOWERED THE TAX RATE WHICH IS THE ONLY THICK WE CAN CONTROL. 
          AT THE CITY, THEY'RE KEEPING THE TAX RATE THE SAME. 
          >> I FA FOUGHT OVER THERE ON TH. ANY QUESTIONS FOR DALE? THIS IS JUST AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE NUMBERS TODAY. 
          >> IF THEY USE NO NEW REVENUE TAX -- [INAUDIBLE] 0.10688 SO, AGAIN, EVEN WITH THEM AT 8%, IF THEY DID THAT, THEIR RATE IS ALSO GOING DOWN. WE'RE GOING TO SKIP AHEAD. 
          WE SHOW YOU THE CALCULATION OF THE GENERAL FUND. 
          GO TO P 6 PLEASE. WE CAN CALCULATE ANY SCENARIO YOU WANT US TO DO BY WE TRY TO DO THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX, THE VOTER APPROVED RATE AND THE UNUSED RATE TO DETERMINE THE 
          [02:40:02]
GENERAL FUND AS WELL AS THE DEBT SERVICE AND OTHER ONES BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT IS THE GENERAL FUND. 
          AT THE RATE THAT WE PUT IN, THAT WOULD BRING IN $777,240 WHICH MEANS THAT'S THE AMOUNT WE RECEIVE ON NEW PROPERTY GROWTH IN THE COUNTY. ON PAGE P 7, THIS IS WHERE WE DO THE VOTER APPROVED RATE AT 3.5% AND THAT'S THE GENERAL FUND RATE AT 0.20045. $3,763,346 WILL BE THE INCREASE AND ON P 8 WE WANTED TO GIVE YOU THE PRIOR RATE BUT THAT EXCEEDS EVERYTHING SO WE CAN'T DO NO NEW RATE. 
          P 8 B, THIS IS OUR UNUSED INCREMENTS STILL A REDUCTION OF THE OVERALL TAX BUT INCREASING IN LEVY, OF COURSE THE RATE IS 50.24659. THE WE CHOOSE THAT THAT WOULD GIVE0.24659. THE WE CHOOSE THAT THAT WOULD GIVE US [INAUDIBLE]. THOSE ARE THE SCENARIOS WE HAVE. 
          I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONSMENT 
          >> ANY QUESTIONS? I'M CURIOUS TO WHAT EVERYBODY THINKS. THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A WORKSHOP. THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN GET TO THE NEXT DAY IS IF YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE HEADED. 
          COMMISSIONER CHESNEY. ARE YOU AN ADVOCATE OF THE EFFECTIVE RATE THIS YEAR?  WHICH WOULD BE THE 27¢. 
          >> YES, MA'AM, BUT -- >> THAT'S FINE. 
          IT'S JUST A WORKSHOP. IT'S NOT MEANT THE PUNISH 
          PEOPLE. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> THERE ARE OTHERS TO DO THAT. [LAUGHTER] COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ, WHAT DO YOU THINK? 
          ARE YOU STILL STUDYING IT? >> IT'S A LOT. 
          >> THE 3.5. >> OKAY, THAT'S A FAIR ASASEMENT. COMMISSIONER MAREZ, HOWSSESSMEN COMMISSIONER MAREZ, HOW ARE YOU FEELING? NOBODY SOB -- EVEN-- EVEN COMMI CHESNEY COULD CHANGE. 
          I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY YOU COME, DUDE. 
          JUST GO HOME AND RELAX. >> I CAN HELP CUT THINGS WHERE 
          WE CAN CUT THINGS. >> OH, YEAH, THAT'S HELPFUL. 
          >> YEAH CUTS ARE GOOD. CUT, CUT, CUT. 
          >> I THINK I'M AT THE 3.5 AT WELL. 
          >> OKAY, AND COMMISSIONER JAG, HOW DO YOU FEEL? 
          >> I'M AT 3.5 BUT I'M STILL LOOKING AT THE INCREMENT AND I HAVE COME QUESTIONS I NEED TO ASK DALE. 
          >> OKAY, THIS IS EARLY. >> JUDGE, YOU? 
          >> OH, I DON'T HAVE TO SAY IT'S JUST WORKSHOP. 
          >> BUT YOU ASK EVERYBODY ELSE. >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY ELSE HAS A THOUGHT. I'M STILL THINKING STILL. 
          >> I KNOW YOU'RE MORE THAN JUST THINKING YOU JUST DON'T WANT TO 
          GIVE IT OUT YET. >> YOU MADE US AIL SAY 
          EVERYTHING. >> THAT'S CALLED FREE WILL, MY 
          FRIEND. >> LET THE RECORD REFLECT. 
          >> LET THE RECORD REFLECT. >> YOU SAW IT WAY BEFORE THE 
          REST OF US. >> YOU'RE RIGHT. 
          >> WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHT? >> MY THOUGHTS ARE THAT THE CONTINGENCY LIABILITIES MUST BE ADDRESSED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ONE WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT, THE MENTAL HEALTH. 
          IF YOU ADDRESS EVERYBODY'S NEEDS, THAT'S 1.131 THAT'S A MUST. IF YOU ADD THE COLA, NOW YOU'RE AT 3.244 SO THIS BOILS DOWN TO DO YOU WANT TO GIVE A COLA OR NOT? IF YOU DO, YOU ARE NOT AT THE EFFECTIVE. PERIOD. 
          YOU'RE JUST NOT. AND THAT IS -- 
          >> THE SUMMERED HAS ALREADY INDIMAJORITY HAS ALREADY 
          INDICATED THE EFFECTIVE -- >> I AGREE I'M JUST SAYING FOR 
          YOU. >> I GET IT. 
          >> I THINK THAT WE -- >> YOU'RE GOING TO JUMP OVER AND JOIN ME THIS YEAR, JUDGE? JUST CURIOUS. 
          COME ON. >> I THINK THAT THERE IS -- 
          >> I'M JUST HAVING FUN, JUDGE. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO ANSWER, YOU 
          DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER >>. 
          I'M NOT SURE. I'M A STUDENT OF THESE NUMBERS 
          [02:45:03]
AND EVERY YEAR SOMEBODY SAYS THEY WANT TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE SO UNTIL I SEE THERE'S A REAL CONSENSUS FOR UNDERSTANDING WHAT OUR CON TINGS PSIS ARE,CONTINGENCIES ARE, I'MG TO RULE ANYTHING OUT. SO FAR SO GOOD 
          >> THAT'S WHY I TRY TO STAY ON THE SIDE FOR NOT WANTING TO BE THE ONE TO DO SOMETHING BIG AND THEN VOTE NO BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR. THIS IS MY FIRST BUDGET INCREASE IN LIKE SIX YEARS ON PARKER POOL FOR $25,000 BUT I DON'T THINK THAT AFFECTS THE BUDGET. COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ SAYING 
          HE'S WILLING TO GO TO 3.5. >> UNFORTUNATELY IT ONLY MEETS US AT THE 3% AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE HE UNDERSTANDS 
          >> AND THIS IS SO EARLY. AND HE NEEDS TO SIT DOWN WITH 
          THE AUDITOR. >> IT'S IN HERE. 
          MAYBE THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT NEEDS TO COME OUT OF WORKSHOP. 
          HE'S NOT CONVINCED. CAN YOU PLEASE RUN THE 6% COLA 
          AND I THINK YOU HAVE DONE THAT. >> THEY SENT IT, JUDGE. 
          >> I'M GETTING THERE. THAT DEFICIT WOULD BE HOW MANY 
          MILLIONS? >> THAT'S JUST IF WE TAKE 
          EVERYTHING -- >> NO, TAKE IT AT THE 3.R5. 
          >> THAT'S IF WE TAKE EVERYTHING >> THAT'S IF WE TAKE EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED AND ADD THE COLA. 
          THE COURT CAN STILL GO BACK AND -- [INAUDIBLE] 
          >> ELIMINATE -- >> THE NEW CLASSES, ALL YOU'RE SAVING IS LITERALLY $550,000. SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS -- 
          >> I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT. >> ELIMINATE WHAT? WHAT'S YOU'RE THOUGHT. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A THOUGHT IN ORDER TO FIND THOSE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. 
          WHAT IS IT? >> I'M STILL THINKING. 
          >> OKAY, HE'S THINKING. EVERYONE IS STILL THINKING. 
          I'M GOING TO URGE YOU TO RAMP UP THE THINKING AND DO WE WANT TO 
          BE HERE TOMORROW? >> WHAT WAS THE NUMBER FOR THE 
          6% NUMBER? >> GO AHEAD, LISA. 
          >> TWO THINGS, SCOTT ACROSS IS ON IF YOU YOU WANT TO DISCUSS GO MESA AND THE TRANSFER OF THAT POSITION. 
          AND THE AMOUNT WAS -- I JUST LOST IT. 
          >> IT WAS THE 3% TWICE. >> WHERE DID IT GO? 
          >> YOU SENT IT. >> THE 6% IS 3.05 MILLION. 
          4% IS 2.03. THESE INCLUDE BENEFITS 
          >> THAT'S CORRECT. 3.05 MILLION FOR 6%. 
          5% WOULD BE 2.54 AND 4% WOULD BE 2.03 AND THOSE ALL DO INCLUDE 
          BENEFITS. >> GREAT JOB. 
          >> THE GOVERNOR DID INCLUDE US, FYI ON DROUGHT. 
          >> WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE EXPRESSION FROM JOHNNY ON THE SPOT TO LISA ON THE SPOT. THAT'S THE A LITTLE MORE -- YOU KNOW? GOOD JOB. 
          >> DALE, YOU HAVE HEARD FROM US AND I KNOW THAT YOU CAN PLUG THIS IN. DOES THIS HELP GIVE YOU ENOUGH TIME TO PREPARE? I GUESS MY QUESTION IS I FEEL GOOD. WE CAN ALWAYS -- I LIKE NUMBERS SO I CAN ALWAYS KIND OF CHERRY PICK WHAT CONCERNS I HAVE BUT DO WE NEED ANOTHER HALF A DAY? I'M IN FOR ANOTHER HALF DAY SESSION. IF WE CAN END THIS BY NOON, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT DAY THAT WE HAVE GOTTEN A LOT ACCOMPLISHED. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MORE YOU STILL NEED TO TECHNICALLY PRESENT TO US BUT I HAVE A GOOD PICTURE OF WHERE WE'RE ADD. I THINK THERE'S SOME CONSENSUS HERE AND THIS MAY BE THE POINT -- 
          >> MAYBE MORE THAN EVER. >> TAKE IT AND RUN, RIGHT, JUDGE? THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID THE OTHER DAY PRETTY MUCH. IF WE NEED TO COME BACK AGAIN TOMORROW, I'M ALL FOR HALF DAY BUT I WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO GIVE Y'ALL ENOUGH TIME TO WORK FOR THIS AND LET US DIVE IN ATE LULL MORE TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS. 
          >> WE CAN USE THIS TIME TO GO OVER THE BALANCE WE HAVE AND PUT IN THE ITEMS WE NEED TO PUT IN AND TAKE OUT THOSE THAT WE CAN TAKE OUT. SUSPEND TOMORROW AND REOPEN MONDAY OF NEXT WEEK. CAN WE DO THAT. 
          >> WE CAN DO NEXT WEEK. I WILL HAVE TO ZOOM IN NEXT 
          WEEK. >> YEAH. 
          >> IT'S JUST WORKSHOP, THOUGH. >> WE CHANGED -- WELL. 
          [02:50:03]
TOMORROW IS OUR DAY. WE CANCELED NEXT WEEK. 
          >> WE CAN BE READY TOMORROW. >> BY WH WHU WHT WHAT DO WE NEE? 
          >> I'M GOING TO REVISE THE CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE. 
          I'M GOING TO KEEP A FEW ITEMS IN THERE FOR THE PERSON AT THE LIBRARY THAT'S A COMPUTER PERSON SO THE AMOUNT FOR THE RECLASSIFICATION WILL GO DOWN. I'M GOING TO REMOVE THE ONE FOR THE NEW POSITIONS WE TALKED ABOUT, TALK TO IDA AND MAKE SURE WE CAN -- GIVE YOU A FEW ITEMS FOR YOUR COLAS AND UPDATE YOUR LIST BY REMOVING A FEW ITEMS FROM THE CHALLENGES THAT WE NEED TO TAKE OUT AND IF YOU GIVE ME THE REST OF THE DAY WE CAN HAVE 
          IT FOR YOU TOMORROW MORNING. >> BY EVEN IF YOU BRING THAT. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, YOU BRING THAT BACK, EVERYBODY STILL NEEDS TIME TO DIGEST WHAT YOU SAID HERE'S MY THOUGHT IS WE'RE GOING TO GET ALL THOSE THINGS, RUSH DALE TO GET THEM DONE, WE HAVE ALL GONE THROUGH THE BOOK. I WOULD RATHER GET THEM ALL, PUT THIS AS AN AGENDA ITEM ON THE 17TH AND GO FROM THERE. 
          I THINK EVERYBODY -- LET'S BE STRAIGHT. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE JUDGE IS GOING TO SAY BUT YOU HAVE THREE MEMBERS OF THE COURT WHO SAID THEY'RE WILLING TO DO THE 3.5. 
          THAT OUGHT TO BE A PRETTY CLEAR DIRECTION. 
          IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE JUNEL AND I SAY. JUDGE AND I SAY. I'M NOT SAYING THAT RUDELY BECAUSE THAT INCLUDES ME, TOO. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE NEED TO COME BACK TOMORROW IF WE'RE JUST GOING TO RUSH IT AND LOOK AT THE STUFF. I'M GOING TO GO BACK AND I WANT 
          TOO -- EVEN THOUGH -- >> LET ME JUST SHARE AT LEAST FOR THE DECISION-MAKING TREE OF WHAT YOUR CEILING IS THAT MIGHT BE TRUE. BUT THERE ARE DEFINITELY THINGS TO TALK ABOUT. LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. 
          IF THE COURT IN THE MAJORITY SAYS THAT THE CEILING IS 3.5%, YOUR GENERAL FUND TAX REVENUE BUDGET GOES TO 3.763 AND WE KNOW FROM THIS SHEET OF PAPER ON J 1 THAT THE NUMBER YOU NEED IS 3.244 LEAVING AN ADDITIONAL HALF A MILLION DOLLARS EXTRA TO DO GOOD THINGS WITH. SO IF THE COURT DECIDES TO DO THE HIGHER LEVEL, WHICH IS THE 3.5 PLUS OUR SAVINGS ACCOUNT, IF YOU WANT TO USE YOUR SAVINGS ACCOUNT AND BY THE WAY, IT'S 
          THIS YEAR OR FORGET IT. >> WE STILL HAVE ONE MORE YEAR. 
          >> OKAY, GREAT. IF YOU USE IT THIS YEAR, YOU GO TO $5.935 MILLION, MILLION 6 MILLION GIVING YOU $3 MILLION MORE TO TAKE CARE OF SALARIES, OKAY? SO JUST FYI, IF YOU WANT TO CAKE CARE OF PEOPLE AND YOU'RE COMMITTED TO 3.5, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? DO YOUR INCREMENT. IF YOU'RE AT 3.5, YOU BETTER GO HOME AND START FIGURING OUT WHY YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO DO IS INCREMENT AND DO EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE BEEN SAYING YOU WANT TO DO AND YOU SHOULD NOT DO IT WITH THE COLA. 
          YOU SHOULD CHANGE PEOPLE'S LIVES WITH A BASE SALARY. THAT'S HOW YOU DO IT. BUT IF YOU'RE AT 3.5, USING YOUR SALARY, USING YOUR INCREMENT NEXT YEAR HAS DONE NOTHING TO HELP YOU WITH ALL THESE VACANCIES THIS YEAR. 
          >> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, JUST LET'S DALE DO ALL THAT AND YOU CAN RUN THAT CALCULATION WITH THE INCREMENT BECAUSE MAYBE THE OTHER THREE WILL GO THERE, TOO, AND GET THAT TO US AS SOON AS YOU CAN, PUT IT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE 17TH AND NOT HAVE ANYMORE WORKSHOPS UNLESS SOMEONE FEELS THE NEED. 
          THIS IS MORE MOMENTUM -- >> MAY I ASK A QUICK QUESTION? IT'S EASY WHEN YOUR TAX RATE IS GOING WOO, WAY DOWN. 
          HAVING SAID THAT, IT DIDN'T HAVE TO BE FORMAL, CAN YOU GUYS JUST 
          BE HERE IN THE MORNING -- >> YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE A QUORUM. 
          >> I THOUGHT THE ANSWER WAS NO. >> I WAS CORRECTED. 
          >> NO, NO, THE ANSWER IS THAT YOU CAN TALK BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE 
          ANY DECISIONS. >> I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE CASE 
          BUT I WAS TOLD NO, JUDGE. >> I THOUGHT JENNY SAID YES 
          >>. IF YOU'RE DOING COUNTY'S 
          BUSINESS YOU NEED QUORUM. >> DOES IT HAVE TO BE A PHYSICAL 
          QUORUM? >> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT WORKSHOP 
          BEING A CARVE OUT FOR THAT. >> IF YOU READ THAT OPEN 
          [02:55:05]
MEETINGS ACT, IT SAYS DIFFERENTLY THAN WHAT -- ANYWAY. 
          >> THE REASON I'M SAYING IS I WAS GOING TO SAY IF THREE PEOPLE WANT TO COME TOMORROW, GREAT. IF YOU DON'T, IT'S NOT A MEETING BUT I CAN STILL ASK QUESTIONS. ALL I'M SAYING DALE AND LISA, YOU ALL HAVE CARVED OUT THE TIME, MAKE YOURSELVES AVAILABLE -- 
          >> MAYBE THAT'S WHERE WE FIND MORE VALUE AND YOU CAN GET A LITTLE MORE INPUT. NO MATTER WHAT, AND I KNOW WHAT I SAY CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR EVERYONE ELSE TO HEAR BUT THERE ARE SOME TINY QUESTIONS THAT WE CAN ALL CONTINUE AND GO ON AND DO THE REST OF OUR WORK FOR THE DAY WITHOUT TAKING UP TOO MUCH TIME. MY OFFICE ON MY END, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD NEED TOMORROW FOR. I WOULDN'T NEED IT MUCH ELSE. 
          IF A MAJORITY IS GOING TO BE HERE, I WILL AS WELL. 
          >> I LIKE YOUR IDEA OF ONE ON ONE TIME. 
          >> WE CAN SPEND TIME ONE ON ONE BUT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE -- ONE YEAR WE TRIED TO DO SOME STUFF AND THE ATTORNEY DATA WE CAN'T DO SOMETHING BECAUSE IT VIOLATES OPEN MEETINGS ACT. 
          WE'LL GO THROUGH AND MAYBE THE CHANGES WE HAD WITH THE DISCUSSION WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT. 
          WEEK SEE WHAT THE BEST IMPACT WOULD BE. 
          THE 17TH IS A RECORD VOTE FOR YOUR RATE AND THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE SETTING THE CEILING AND WE CANNOT GO HIGHER THAN THAT. 
          >> RIGHT. >> I THINK WE SHOULD PUT THIS ON 
          THE AGENDA FOR THE 17TH >> WE DON'T HAVE A CEILING YET? 
          >> THAT'S ON THE 17TH. THAT'S THE REAL MEAT. 
          >> YOU HAVE YOUR 3.5 PLUS YOUR SAVINGS ACCOUNT. 
          >> I WOULD PREFER THAT WE DON'T MEET TOMORROW AND LET THEM DO 
          THEIR THING. >> WE HAVE RUSHED THEM BEFORE 
          AND IT'S NOT BEEN GRAIN. >> THERE ARE SOME CONTINGENCIES AND CHALLENGES, WE GAVE YOU AS MUCH DETAIL AS WE CAN ON WHY SOME OF THE STUFF WE BELIEVE HAS TO INCREASE FOR MEAL COSTS FOR INSURANCE COSTS, WE PUT THOSE NUMBERS IN AND WE'LL BE GLAD TO 
          GO THROUGH ANY OF IT WITH YOU. >> RIGHT, AND AGAIN, ONCE WE SET IT, WE CAN GO BACK AND FIGURE OUT. 
          LIKE IF YOU USE YOUR SAVINGS ACCOUNT AND YOU WILL WANT TO TALK ABOUT SALARIES, RIGHT? OKAY. 
          SO I GUESS IF THE CONSENSUS IS EVERYBODY IS ON THEIR OWN TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU'RE NOT MEETING IN GROUPS -- 
          >> MY STAFF AND I WILL GO THROUGH THE CHANGES WE HAVE, MAIC THE MODIFICATIONS AND FORWARD OUT ANY CHANGES TO EACH 
          OF YOU. >> THERE WOULD BE NO PROBLEM WITH TWO PEOPLE HERE JUST HAVING A DISCUSSION. 
          IT JUST WOULDN'T BE -- >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. I WILL BE HERE IN THE MORNING BECAUSE LIKE ANYTHING, IDENTIFY GOT TEN QUESTIONS BUT THEY'RE ALL LINE ITEM TYPE THINGS, BUT I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS PLEASE GO STUDY WHETHER OR NOT YOU THINK YOU CAN LET US 
          KNOW WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE. >> I'LL LET YOU KNOW WHAT MY 
          QUESTIONS ARE. >> IF THERE'S A REQUEST THAT YOU GENERATE A REPORT, CIRCULATE THAT TO EVERYBODY. 
          THAT'S THE THE FAIR THING TO DO. OKAY. 
          >> ARE WE CANCELING TOMORROW? >> YES. 
          >> ON THE 19TH WE SEND OUT THE ELECTED OFFICIAL SALARY NOTICES. 
          IF NOT GOING TO DO WHATEVER PERCENTAGE ON THAT COLA, WE NEED 
          TO KNOW. >> GOOD POINT. 
          >> THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN ON THE 17TH. 
          >> RIGHT. >> SO YOU SET YOUR CEILING BUT 
          WE'RE GETTING A FEEL FOR IT. >> WE COULD DISCUSS IT IF WE PUT 
          IT ON. >> THE 17TH YOU CAN SET THE WORK AND IF THERE'S COLA INFORMATION THAT YOU WANT TO VOTE ON, 
          EVERYTHING CAN -- >> RIGHT, AND I'M CURIOUS BECAUSE YOU HAVE HEARD YOU GOT THE SNEAK PEEK, KNOWING WHAT YOU 
          [03:00:07]
          KNOW ABOUT SALARIES. >> SNEAK PEEK OF WHAT? 
          >> THE 3.5%, THE INTEREST, BUT KNOWING WHAT YOU KNOW ABOUT HOW OFF SALARIES ARE, WE DID SOMETHING GOOD WITH ALL THE ONES THAT WERE SUPPORTED BY ARPA, ON FRIDAY WE DID THAT WHAT WAS IT? WE GOT THAT UNDER CONTROL, BUT THERE'S ALWAYS THESE OTHER FOLKS THAT ARE SO OFF BASE AND THEY'RE MAINLY THE ONE THAT IS YOU HERE ABOUT. IF YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT SUPPORTING THE 3.5 OR THE INCREMENT, REALLY, THE 3.5 WON'T HELP US, FORGET WHAT I SAID, OKAY? INCREMENT. ONLY THIS YEAR BECAUSE IT'S THE ONLY WAY TO ADJUST SALARIES. OTHER THAN THAT, YOU COULD WAIT BUT THE LONGER YOU WAIT, THE MORE PEOPLE WILL LEAF, SO MY THING ABOUT THE 3.5% IS THAT IT DOES DO SOME GOOD. 
          DON'T GET ME WRONG, BUT REALLY ALL IT DOES IS GIVE YOU A 3% BUMP WITHOUT REALLY ADDRESSING THE RIGHT SALARIES. 
          >> BUT HE'S ADVOCATING 6 AND THAT WOULD HAVE TO INCLUDE THE 
          INCREMENT. >> THAT WAS THE ONLY THING I COULD SAY. I JUST DON'T KNOW IF 6 -- AGAIN, IT MIGHT BE 10 FOR HER AND 3 PRE HER. 
          >> HE'S SAYING 6 ACROSS THE BOARD. 
          >> I WOULD HAVE TO ASK WOULD 6 BE THE RIGHT AMOUNT? IF IT'S NOT, AM I MAKING A DIFFERENCE? 
          >> BUT JUDGE, SHE'S NOT THE RIGHT PERSON TO ASK BECAUSE SHE'S GOT RECOMMENDED RECLASSES IN THERE. 
          THIS IS IN ADDITION TO >> THE RECLASSIFICATION I'M RECOMMENDING THAT IF YOU SO CHOOSE TO DO A COLA WE CAN REMOVE MOST OF THE RECLASSIFICATIONS. 
          >> BUT IF YOU DON'T DO THAT -- >> YOU WOULD TAKE THOSE OUT. 
          >> ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT -- >> HE'S GOT SOME OF THE COLA IN HERE. SOME OF THE COURT REPORTING SCHOOL IS ALREADY IN THERE SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE OUT THE RECLASSIFICATIONS BASED ON WHAT HE'S PROPOSING. 
          >> IF YOU GO TO THE 6% YOU MAY WANT TO REDUCE IT SOME BUT 
          THAT'S COURT'S DECISION. >> ALL I'M SAYING IS IT'S NOT ALWAYS IN PARROT WITH WHAT'S NEEDED BY CERTAIN OFFICES. 
          >> AND SOME OF THE RECLASSIFICATIONS ARE IN SEARCH OF BRINGING THINGS BACK INTO PARITY BETWEEN SIMILAR JOB DESCRIPTIONS. LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE EXAMPLE THAT I GAVE. IF YOU TAKE EVERYBODY AND EVENLY DISTRIBUTE THE 6%, IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT THEY'RE NOT BEING COMPENSATED ADEQUATELY SO LIKE THOSE FOUR PEOPLE IN THE JAIL WHO HAVE NOT GOTTEN THEIR RAISE IN DECADES 
          >> I DON'T KNOW HOW PEOPLE GOT WHERE THEY ARE OTHER THAN DEPARTMENTS NOT PAYING ON TOP OF IT. 
          >> THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED. >> IF THE EMPLOYEE IS HIRED AS A CLERK AND THEY NEVER DECIDE TO TAKE A PRIGS, THEY GET A 1.5% RAISE AND THAT'S IT BUT THAT'S THEIR CHOICE FOR STAYING IN THAT 
          POSITION. >> WE NEED TO LOOK AT IT AND SAY 
          HOW DO WE FIX IT? >> THAT'S JUST ONE DEPARTMENT. 
          I'M SUGGESTING THAT IT EXISTS COUNTY WIDE. 
          >> I JUST INTERVIEWED SOMEONE WHO WORKS IN THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE WHO HAS A MASTER'S DEGREE GETTING PAID 19. 
          >> AND THAT'S LOWER THAN OUR CADETS. 
          >> BUT WE DO THIS ALL THE TIME WHERE SEE AN AREA OF DISCREPANCY. LAST YEAR IT WAS A DA'S I HAVE AS, RIGHT? WE HAVE BEEN DOING THIS, MAYBE NOT ALL AT ONCE BUT WE HAVE BEEN DOING IT. 
          >> BY LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENS. WE HAVE BEEN DOING IT. 
          WE HAVE BEEN ANSWERING YES EVERY TIME THEY COME IN AND THEN GUESS 
          [03:05:01]
WHAT IT'S GOTTEN US. NOTHING. 
          BECAUSE KNEW THEY'RE SCREAMING THAT ALL THESE VACANCIES ARE DUE TO BAY, WHICH I DISPUTE BUT HAVING SAID THAT, WE HAVE BEEN TAKING IT PIECEMEAL AND NOT FOLLOWING THE COMPENSATION STUDY. IF YOU'RE ASKING ME HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT, I LOVE THE IDEA. IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO TO 3.5, COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ, YOU WOULD WANT TO GO TO THE INCREMENT BECAUSE YOU WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO ADJUST SALARIES CRICKETLY WITHOUT IT. IF YOU DO IT ACROSS THE BOARD LIKE THIS, YOU'RE NOT MAKING A CHANGE 
          >> SO THEN ARE YOU ADVOCATING -- >> I'M TONOT ADVOCATING ANYTHIN 
          >> I'M ASKING YOU FOR A POSITION. 
          YOU ASKED US FOR A POSITION. >> THEN YOU CAN BE MORE CLEVER AND JUST SAY I'M THINKING. WE ALL KNOW YOU HAVE NEVER VOTED FOR EVERYTHING BY THE EFFECTIVE. IT THE EFFECTIVE. 
          U THE EFFECTIVE. THE EFFECTIVE. IT DOESN'T HELP PEOPLE I KNOW YOU WANT TO HELP PEOPLE BUT YOU DON'T VOTE FOR IT. 
          WE HAVE TO DO IT THIS YEAR IF YOU'RE GOING TO HELP PEOPLE. 
          >> I HELP PEOPLE ALL THE TIME BUT THANK YOU FOR ACKNOWLEDGING THAT. WE HAD A GOOD DAY, LET'S JUST 
          MOVE ON. >> ONLY BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE 
          TO THINK ABOUT ANYTHING. >> NO, JUDGE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT BEEN SUPER MEAN YET AND I'M TRYING TO GET OUT OF HERE. 
          >> THAT'S SO RICH. LET'S ALL TAKE A BATHROOM BREAK. 
          NO, A LUNCH BREAK. >> DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? 
          >> I THINK WE CAN REACHED AN ISSUE THAT MY STAFF AND I CAN MAKE THE CHANGES WE HAVE. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ITEMS, IF YOU CAN TO GO THROUGH THE DETAILED ITEMS I CAN MEET WITH YOU INDIVIDUALLY TO LOOK AT WHERE WE'RE INCREASING AND TRYING TO DECREASE TO MAKE BALANCES AND PUT IN SCENARIOS AND I BELIEVE WE'RE AT A GOOD STOPPING POINT 
          >> GUYS, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT? WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE YOU'RE 
          LUNCH BREAK? >> DO YOU WANT TO TAKE YOUR 
          LUNCH BREAK? >> DO YOU NEED TO DO ANYTHING 
          MORE THIS AFTERNOON, DALE? >> WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THE CHANGES MY STAFFENED AKNOW WE NEED TO CHANGE AND WE CAN MEET WITH EACH OF THE COMMISSIONERS INDI INDIVIDUALLY IF YOU CHOOSE. WE'RE AVAILABLE TODAY OR 
          TOMORROW ANY TIME. >> OKAY, LET'S JUST ADJOURN. 
          OKAY. WE'LL SEE YOU GUYS BACK HERE ON WEDNESDAY FOR REGULAR CA COURT. 
          WE'RE ALSO AVAILABLE THIS AFTERNOON.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.