[1. In recognition of Robstown Early College High School's El Mariachi Sol Rojo "Distinguished Performance" at the Texas UIL State Mariachi Festival 2023.]

INTEREST? BEING NONE, WE WILL MOVE FORWARD TO RESOLUTIONS, PROCLAMATIONS.

ITEM NUMBER ONE. WE WANT TO MOVE TO THE SECOND WEEK IN APRIL BECAUSE THE SCHOOL IS PERFORMING SOMEWHERE

[2. In recognition of Cesar Chavez Week (March 25 - March 31, 2023).]

ELSE, THEY COULD NOT BE HERE TODAY.

ITEM NUMBER TWO, IN RECOGNITION OFCESAR CHAVEZ WEEK MARCH 25 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2023 . MY CHIEF OF STAFF IS GOING TO

BE THE RESOLUTION. >> COMMISSIONER, WHEREAS, CC)SA CHC!VEZ, AFTER ATTENDING MORE THAN 30 ELEMENTARY AND MIDDLE SCHOOLS AND ACHIEVING AN EIGHTH GRADE EDUCATION, LEFT SCHOOL TO WORK FULL TIME AS A FARM WORKER TO HELP SUPPORT HIS FAMILY;HEREAS, AT THE AGE OF 17, CC)SAR CHC!VEZ ENTERED THE UNITED STATES NAVY AND SERVED THE UNITED STATES WITH DISTINCTION FOR 2 YEARS; WHEREAS IN 1948, CC)SAR CHC!VEZ RETURNED FROM MILITARY SERVICE AND, AS EARLY AS 1949, CC)SAR CHC!VEZ WAS COMMITTED TO ORGANIZING FARM WORKERS TO CAMPAIGN FOR SAFE AND FAIR WORKING CONDITIONS, REASONABLE WAGES, LIVABLE HOUSING, AND OUTLAWING CHILD LABOR; WHEREAS, IN 1962, CC)SAR CHC!VE ESTABLISH THE NATIONAL FARM WORKERS ASSOCIATION, WHICH EVENTUALLY BECAME THE UNITED FARM WORKERS OF AMERICA; WHEREAS, UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF CC)SAR CHC!VEZ, THE UNITED FARM WORKERS OF AMERICA ORGANIZED THOUSANDS OF MIGRANT FARM WORKERS TO FIGHT FOR FAIR WAGES, HEALTH CARE COVERAGE, PENSION BENEFIT , LIVABLE HOUSING, AND RESPECT; WHEREAS, DURING HIS LIFETIME, CC)SAR CHC!VEZ WAS A RECIPIENT THE MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. PEACE PRIZE AND POSTHUMOUSLY AWARDED THE PRESIDENTIAL MEDAL OF FREEDOM; WHEREAS, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS INCLUDING THE COASTAL BEND LABOR COUNCIL, THE CORPUS CHRISTI AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, THE WESTSIDE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS HAVE JOINED TOGETHER TO CELEBRATE HIS LEGACY; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES AND CELEBRATES THE LIFE OF CC)SAR CHC!VEZ WITH TEXANS AND DESIGNATES MARCH 25 THROUGH 31, 2023 AS CC)SAR CHC!VEZ WEEK.

>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WISHES? YES, IF YOU LIKE TO SPEAK.

>> GOOD MORNING. JUDGE, AND COMMISSIONERS.

[00:05:20]

WE ARE REALLY EXCITED THIS YEAR, BECAUSE WE HOOKED UP WITH THE TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY ANTONIO E GARCIA ARTS AND EDUCATION CENTER, TO PROVIDE AND THE WEST SIDE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, TO PROVIDE A CELEBRATION OF CESAR CHAVEZ LIFE AND OF COURSE, A CELEBRATION OF OUR COMMUNITY.

ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS WE ARE DOING IS BRINGING SISTER NORMAN PIMENTEL, HUMANITARIAN, DOWN THE VALLEY AND ANOTHER ONE DAY SHE'S GOING TO WIN THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE.

SHE GOT A GLOBAL RECOGNITION FOR HER WORK IN FEEDING AND THE HUNGRY AND CLOTHING THOSE WHO ARE SUFFERING.

WE WERE EXCITED ABOUT THIS YEAR.-- IS THE DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER. ANYTHING TO SAY?

>> I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR GIVING US THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE TODAY. AND I WELCOME EVERYBODY TO THE CENTER ON MARCH 25, TO CELEBRATE THE FESTIVAL.

AFTER THE SPEAKER SERIES. >> COME TO OUR BREAKFAST.

9 O'CLOCK AT THE ANTONIO GARCIA ARTS AND EDUCATED CENTER.

WENT TO THAT, WE WORKED WITH RTA TO GET A SHUTTLE BUS TO TAKE US TO THE POINT WHERE WE WILL START OUR MARCH.

IT'S REALLY SHORT SO DON'T WORRY.

WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE FLAGS, AND AFTER THAT WE WILL HAVE A RALLY AND WE WILL HAVE FOOD TRUCKS AND WILL HAVE A KITTY CORNER. WILL GIVE OUT BOOKS TO THE CHILDREN. IT'S GOING TO BE FUN SO, NOW! THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

>> WHAT TIME? >> WHICH ONE?

>> BREAKFAST. >> BREAKFAST START AT 9 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING. YES, YES.

ALL RIGHT! HOPE TO SEE ALL OF YOU THERE.

COMMISSIONER? JOHN?

>> I WOULD WORK WITH -- WE ALWAYS WORK WITH YOU, RIGHT?

>> A RESOLUTION FOR YOU AS WELL.

>> DID YOU GET IT? >> YES.

DO YOU WANT? >> DO HAVE A PICTURE?

>> YES, ABSOLUTELY. >> IS THAT ONE -- I THINK SHE HAS THEIRS ALREADY. I THINK THAT IS THE OTHER ONE.

WALKING AWAY WITH OUR STUFF. [LAUGHTER]

>> THE FIRST RESOLUTION. >> TABLED TO THE SECOND WEEK --

>> THE SECOND? AND THE VOTE?

WHAT ARE WE DOING? >> I WAS GOING TO DO ALL THOSE NEXT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO READ IT, WILL TABLE IT.

[00:10:01]

I JUST WENT OUT OF ORDER. BECAUSE I HAVE THREE OTHERS.

>> WHAT DO YOU WANT TO TABLE? >> WE HAVE TWO OTHER ONES THAT WE WILL TABLE. I WAS GOING TO DO AFTER THIS ONE. I SKIPPED OVER THE FIRST ONE.

>> OKAY. >> MOVING ONTO NUMBER THREE,

[3. In recognition of March 2023 as National Social Work month.]

RECOGNITION OF MARCH 2023 AS NATIONAL SOCIAL WORK MONTH.

WOULD YOU READ THAT ONE, PLEASE?

>> COMMISSIONERS COURT RESOLUTION IN RECOGNITION OF MARCH 2023 AS NATIONAL SOCIAL WORK MONTH.

DAY OF MARCH, 2023. >> THANK YOU, REBECCA.

>> SO MOVE. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?

MOTION PASSES. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU FOR READING THAT BECAUSE IT WAS VERY LONG.

ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO SAY WHEN I WENT BACK, AND I READ THE RESOLUTION, ALL OF THESE LEADERS ARE HERE WITH ME TODAY, I THINK, ONLY INTERVIEWED THEM, THEY ALL SAID, HAD A STRONG DESIRE TO HELP.

THAT IS THE ONE THING THAT WE HEAR FROM OUR SOCIAL WORKERS AND OUR CASEWORKERS THAT WORK FOR SOCIAL SERVICES.

WHEN I READ THROUGH THIS, SOME WORDS STUCK OUT TO ME.

EMPOWER, OVERCOME, IMPROVE, ENHANCE, RESPECT AND HELP.

THAT'S WHAT THEY DO EVERY DAY IN THE JOB.

I DON'T STAND HERE ALONE. THERE THE WHOLE REASON.

I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE, RECENTLY LOST TO SOCIAL WORK SUPERVISORS AND SO, THE NEW SOCIAL WORK SUPERVISOR FOR THEIR ROBSTOWN OFFICE AND WE ALSO HAVE.

A SAFETY OF OUR COMMUNITY. HANK YOU FOR YOUR CONTINUED

SUPPORT. >> WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF OUR COMMUNITY. [INAUDIBLE] BSOLUTELY!

>> THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO. >> THANK YOU.

CAN WE GET A PICTURE? >> TO HAVE THE RESOLUTION?

YOU HAVE IT ALREADY, OKAY. >> OKAY, I THINK WE MOVED TOO

[00:16:22]

QUICKLY AND ITEM NUMBER TWO. I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND TO

APPROVE THE RESOLUTION. >> SO MOVED.

>> COMPARED. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES.

COMMISSIONER GONZALES IS NOT N HERE.

TABLED ITEMS, WE HAVE THREE, THAT HAVE ON THE LIST THAT THEY REQUESTED TO BE MOVED. E1, EL MARIACHI SOL ROJO MOVED

[2. Discuss and consider approval of a Supplemental Agreement No. 2 between Nueces County and Richter Architects for the Hilltop Community Center Facility Project.]

TO THE SECOND MEETING IN APRIL. C2, MOVED TO THE NEXT MEETING. THE SECOND MEETING IN MARCH.

[1. Discuss and consider the reclassification and re-organization of the Special Advisor for Governmental Affairs, Communications and Legal Affairs position, including job duties assigned, and related matters.]

AND F1, MOVED TO THE SECOND MEETING IN MARCH.

>> I'M SORRY SAID F1, SECOND MEETING IN MARCH?> IS THE

NEXT UPCOMING MEETING, YES. >> WAS THE OTHER ONE?

I'M SORRY? >> C2.

>> C2, C? TWO, SORRY.

>> UNDER PUBLIC WORKS. >> THERE WE GO, SORRY.

>> 3C2? >> AND HUMAN RESOURCES, F1.

THAT IS ALL I HAVE, OTHER OTHERS?

>> I WILL YOU DO YOURS BECAUSE MINOR DIFFERENT DATE.

>> THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT DAYS 72 VOTES.NE IS ABLE AND THE OTHER TWO, LESTER THE FIRST TWO, THE SECOND MEETING.

>> OKAY I MAKE MOTION TO TABLE NUMBER ONE, EL MARIACHI SOL ROJO TO THE SECOND MEETING IN MARCH.

>> I'VE GOT THAT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> AND THEN, YOU'RE THE ONE? >> E2 AND F1 MOVED TO THE NEXT

MEETING OF THINGS MARCH 22. >> AND I'M SORRY,?

>> I MAKE THE MOTION TO MOVE ITEM C2 AND ITEM F1 TO THE NEXT

MEETING. >> 3C2?

>> YES ON THE HILLTOP.> AND THE OTHER ONE I'M SORRY? I'M HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING, OTHER ONE IS WHICH ONE?

>> IN HUMAN RESOURCES AND PUBLIC WORKS.

BOTH OF THOSE. C2 IN THE PUBLIC WORKS AND F1 IS HUMAN RESOURCES, IT IS NOT ON THE REGULAR AGENDA.

>> GOTCHA, OKAY. >> THOSE ARE MARCH 22, MOVING TO THAT MEETING. I HAVE A MOTION, DO I HAVE A SECOND? DID I REALLY GET A SECOND?

>> SORRY COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ, ALL IN FAVOR?

ANY OPPOSED? >> JUDGE, I DO HAVE ONE.

>> YES? IT WOULD BE 3C1 UNDER PUBLIC WORKS. I LIKE TO TABLE INTO THE SECOND

MEETING IN APRIL. >> MOTION TO TABLE THE SECOND MEETING IN APRIL. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.> JUDGE, WOULD BE OKAY FOR HAD SOME FLEXIBILITY WITH THE COURT, TO BRING IT BACK IF I CAN ON THE FIRST MEETING? I JUST WANT TO GIVE MYSELF AS MUCH ROOM AS I NEED. BUT THAT'S OKAY, CAN I AMEND MOTION TO SAY THE SECOND MEETING UNLESS IT'S OKAY TO GO

WITHIN THE FIRST MEETING. >> IS T OKAY?

[00:20:02]

>> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM. >> OKAY THANK YOU, APPRECIATE

THAT. >> ALL IN FAVOR? ARE THERE ANY OTHER TABLED ITEMS?

>> DO WE TABLE F? >> YES.

WE TOOK CARE OF IT. [LAUGHTER]

[F. PUBLIC COMMENT: This section provides the public the opportunity to address the Commissioners Court on any issues within its jurisdiction. The Commissioners Court may not take formal action on any requests made during the Public Comment period which are not on the Agenda, but can refer such requests to County staff for review if appropriate.]

>> MOVING ON IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER ONES RIGHT NOW, WE GO ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT. DO WE HAVE THE LIST? AND FIRST UP WE HAVE BEATRICE FROM ROBSTOWN.

>> GOOD MORNING, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS BEATRICE -- CITY MINISTRY FOR THE CITY OF ROBSTOWN. I'M HAPPY TO BE WITH YOU ALL TODAY. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE TO REQUEST AGENDA ITEM 3A4 THE SAVE ROBSTOWN IS HAPPY TO PARTNER WITH NUECES COUNTY TO PARTNER ON THIS PROJECT. AS YOU MAY KNOW, THE COMMUNITY OF NUECES COUNTY AND ROBSTOWN USES THE POOL IN THE SUMMER MONTHS. IT HAS BEEN IN DIRE NEED OF REPAIR. WITH THE HELP OF THE TEXAS PARKS AND WHILE THAT DEPARTMENT AND HOPEFULLY, NUECES COUNTY, WE WERE BE ABLE TO INSTALL THE UPGRADES THAT WE NEED FOR THE POOL, SO THE COMMUNITY CAN UTILIZE A SAFE AND FUN RECREATION ACTIVITY FOR THE SUMMER.

SO, I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST SUPPORT FOR ITEM 3A4.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE SUZANNE GUGGENHEIM.

>> GOOD MORNING, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS.

I WANTED TODAY, TO SPEAK REGARDING ITEMS 4A AND 5A. 4A TO APPOINT OUTSIDE COUNSEL, TO DISCUSS NOT ONLY FOR OBLIGATION OF THE COUNTY RELATING TO THE REMOVAL OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY. I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN A POSITION OF THAT PROPOSITION. I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY REASON TO PREVENT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, TO DO THE JOB THAT SHE IS ELECTED TO DO WHICH IS TO ADVISE THE COURT, IN A MATTER THAT IS OF HER RESULT. AND SPEND TAXPAYER MONEY IN APPOINTING AN OUTSIDE COUNSEL. SO, AND LINK TO THIS IS OF COURSE, MATTER REALLY OF THE SUBJECT WHICH IS FIVE A, IS TO CONSIDER HIRING OUTSIDE COUNSEL, TO REPRESENT THE DISTRICT IN LITIGATION TO REMOVE HIM, I REALLY WOULD FIND VERY OUTRAGEOUS, THAT THE COURT WOULD SPEND TAXPAYER MONEY, TO DEFEND AGAINST LITIGATION THAT IS BROUGHT BY THE PEOPLE, AND TO REMOVE HIM -- IT'S WHAT HE'S DOING SO I HOPE THAT THE COURT IS NOT GOING TO MAKE SUCH A DECISION.HANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE, WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON PUBLIC SPEAKING?

[1. Nueces County Emergency Service District No. 2]

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM G, BOARD APPOINTMENTS. NUMBER ONE, NUECES COUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 2.

>> JUDGE IF I COULD MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT?

>> YES SIR. >> SO, IT IS BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, AND I ASKED FOR THIS COUNTY ADVISORY AND UNDER THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IS WORKING ON THAT.

THEY TOLD ME THEY WILL HAVE THIS BY THE NEXT MEETING, IN REGARDS TO THE QUESTIONS ON THE ESD, HAVE BEEN RAISED THAT THERE MAY OR MAY NOT BE AUTHORITY FOR THE BOARD TO DO ANY KIND OF ACTION IN REGARDS TO A MERGER WITH THE CITY THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED. BY THE CITY TO THE BOARD.

AND SO, I'VE ASKED THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO LOOK INTO THE LEGALITIES OF THAT. SHE ASSURED ME THAT I TALKED TO HER SEVERAL TIMES AND SHE ASSURED ME THAT WILL BE BROUGHT BACK TO US NEXT MEETING WITH ADVICE.

I WILL BE ASKING ON THAT ADVISORY, AS I WILL ANOTHER ONE TODAY, THAT THE PRIVILEGE BE WAIVED SO THAT THE DISCUSSION

[00:25:04]

CAN BE HAD IN PUBLIC BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS REALLY ANYTHING SECRETIVE THAT NEEDS TO BE PUT OUT THERE AND THE PUBLIC NEED TO BE AWARE OF WHAT THEIR RAMIFICATIONS ARE.

THIS HAS BECOME A VERY POLITICIZED SITUATION, ONE SIDE WANTS TO KEEP THE BOARD INTACT AND ONE SIDE WANTS TO CHANGE ENTIRE BOARD FOR SPECIFIC AGENDA.

I'M NOT COMFORTABLE MAKING THOSE DECISIONS.

I DON'T THINK IS RIGHT FOR THIS COURT TO MAKE A DECISION ON THAT, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT CHANGE BOARD WILL HAVE AN IMPACT THAT THEY THINK IT WILL.

IT IS BEEN RELAYED TO ME I DON'T HAVE A CONFIRM BUT IS RELATED TO ME THAT THE BOARD DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS RIGHT, I HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANYTHING ON THAT PARAGRAPH SPECIFICALLY TO DO THAT. UNDERSTAND SHE'S ALSO MEETING WITH THE CITY ON FRIDAY. -- THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS DONE RESEARCH ON THIS AS WELL. AND SO, I THINK IT IS PRUDENT TO WAIT A PART OF THIS AND DO PART OF THIS TODAY.

I AM SAYING ALL OF THIS BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE IT MORE CLEAR THAT I'VE DONE THIS ON PURPOSE. BUT THERE ARE LEGAL QUESTIONS THAT HAVE YET TO BE ANSWERED ON THIS.

AND IF THE BOARD CANNOT DO IT EVERYONE THINKS THE BOARD CAN DO, THERE IS REALLY IS HARD TO JUSTIFY SOME CHANGE, FOR PEOPLE WHO REPRESENTED WELL AND QUITE FRANKLY, FOR MANY YEARS AND MANY APPLICANTS IS THE FIRST TIME EVEN HAVE ADDITIONAL APPLICANTS FOR THE ESD BOARD, WHICH I'M GLAD WE DO AND AGREED APPLICANTS. THEY NEED TO BE SERIOUS TO CONSIDER BUT I LIKE TO GET THE LEGAL OPINION.

THAT IS PART OF IT. I DO BELIEVE THERE IS AN UNINTENTIONAL CONFLICT BECAUSE CURRENTLY, ONE BOARD MEMBER WORKS IS BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, ONE BOARD MEMBER WORKS FOR ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER. I THINK IT IS A LITTLE PROBLEMATIC WHEN DEALING WITH TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.AND AGAIN, THESE ARE TWO OUTSTANDING INDIVIDUALS SO FAR THAT I BELIEVE COULD EASILY RISE ABOVE THAT AND HAVE THAT. ONCE THE CONFLICT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, THINK HIS WORK DEALING WITH.

IN THE PAST THE CONFLICT WAS OVERCOME BY THE FACT THAT WE LITERALLY HAD NO OTHER APPLICANTS.

SO, THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO DO AND I'M SORRY I'M TRYING TO CATCH UP AND GET TO THE POINT IN MY BOOK WHERE IT IS BECAUSE I'VE GOTTEN -- GIVE ME ONE SECOND.

TRYING TO FIND, WHAT IS THE NUMBER ON IT? I'M SORRY. I AM GOING TO MAKE A PARTIAL MOTION TO TABLE, THEN MOTION TO REAPPOINT ONE OF, OR TO REPLACE ONE BOARD MEMBER. AND I'M GOING TO COME IF IT'S OKAY WITH THE COURT, WITH THE CONFLICT NOT BECAUSE OF THE POLITICS INVOLVED WITH THE OTHER PART OF IT.

MY FIRST MOTION WOULD BE TO APPOINT -- TO REPLACE MS. BOLTON WHO IS BEEN AUSTIN WHICH IS A PERSON WORKS ONE OF THE OTHER ER BOARD MEMBERS. AND I RELAYED THIS FOR RECORD SHE DOESN'T AGREE WITH ME. I'VE HAD DIALOGUE WITH HER WITH HER AND EXPLAINED I'M SORRY THAT WE DO NOT AGREE BECAUSE I THINK SHE HAS DONE AN OUTSTANDING JOB.

BUT SHE DOESN'T BELIEVE THERE'S A CONFLICT BUT I DO.

I THINK IT IS JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT ONE BOARD NUMBER THAT WORKS FOR ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER SHOULD BE SERVING ON A TAXING ENTITY. THAT IS JUST MY PERSONAL BELIEF.HE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS VERIFIED THAT WITH SOMETIMES, IT IS A, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS, THEN MAYBE IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SOME CHANGES.

I WOULD LIKE TO REPLACE MS. ESD WITH MS. BOLTON.

>> REPLACE MS. KAYLYNN PAXSON WITH MISS BOLTON?

>> YES. I WANT AARON TO UNDERSTAND AND

HEAR. >> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, ANYONE? >> JUST ONE?

>> JUST ONE AT THIS POINT, YES SIR.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

>> THANK YOU. ON THE SECOND ONE, I WOULD LIKE TO TABLE THESE OTHER TWO APPOINTMENTS UNTIL WE GET THE ADVISORY FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, TO SEE WHAT, IF ANYTHING THE BOARD CAN DO. BECAUSE WHAT I'VE HEARD, IS, IF THERE'S GOING TO BE CHANGES TO THIS ESD MIGHT BE BY PETITION.

AND THAT IS, -- AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS RIGHT, BUT THAT IS WHAT I'VE HEARD. THAT THE BOARD REALLY CAN'T EVEN GO INTO OR MAKE THIS DECISION WITH THE CITY.

BUT AGAIN, IT MAY NOT BE RIGHT BECAUSE THE CITY HAS DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH ON THIS. SO WILL BE WITH THEM OR FRIDAY AND GET OUT THERE BUT I KNOW THAT UNDERSTAND ONE WAY THERE MAY BE SOME SORT OF POSITION BECAUSE THEY WERE PUT IN PLACE BY AN ELECTION. AND POSSIBLY WOULD HAVE TO BE

[00:30:01]

TAKEN OUT ELECTION, IT WILL BE UP TO THE PEOPLE TO DECIDE WHICH QUITE ANZA, IN MY OPINION THIS WAY IT OUGHT TO BE.

IT SHOULD NOT BE A BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF FIVE. THAT IS A BIG HUGE DEAL TO TAKE AWAY SOMETHING. BUT IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN WE NEED TO OUTLINE FOR EVERYBODY, WHAT, HOW IT GOES AND WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN SO THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS EXACTLY THE LEGALITIES OF THIS AS WELL. MY MOTION TO TABLE THE REST OF THE BOARD APPOINTMENTS UNTIL NEXT MEETING, AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS ASSURED ME WOULD HAVE THE ADVISORY AT THAT

POINT. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES. SO.

[2. CONSENT AGENDA: The following Agenda Items are of a routine nature, and the Commissioners Court has received supporting materials for consideration. All of these Agenda Items will be passed with one vote without being discussed separately, unless a member of the Commissioners Court or the public requests that a particular Agenda Item be discussed. If so, that Agenda Item will be pulled from the Consent Agenda and discussed as part of the regular Agenda at the appropriate time. One vote will approve the remaining items on the Consent Agenda.]

WHERE AM I AT? MOVING ON TO CONSENT AGENDA.

ARE THERE ANY ITEMS ANYONE WISHES TO PULL FROM THE CONSENT

AGENDA?OR DISCUSSION? >> I HAVE ITEM P.

>> P AS IN PAUL AND Z AS IN ZEBRA.

>> Z AS IN ZEBRA. ANY OTHER ONES, ANYONE?

>> D WAS MINE. >> AND C.

>> C? >> YES.

COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ, ANY FOR YOU?

ARE WE GOOD? >> NO MA'AM.

>> DO I HAVE A MOTION TO PASS THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS -- EXCLUDING, I GUESS I SHOULD NOT DO THE MOTION SOMEONE ELSE

SHOULD DO IT. >> JUDGE, MUCH WILL BE TO PASS ALL CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS EXCEPT C,P&Z .

>> SEE, P&Z. >> MOTION.

>> SECOND PAIR.> MOTION AND SECOND.

[C. Authorize payment of bills - Special Motions List and Special Motion List - American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), all dated March 8, 2023.]

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, GOING TO C. AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF BILLS, SPECIAL MOTIONLESS, SPECIAL MOTION LIST, MARKET RESCUE PLAN ACT.

C. I THINK THAT WAS YOURS, COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ.

YES. >> I PULLED C BECAUSE I WANT, I CAN ASK EVERYTHING EXCEPT 17, 18 AND 27.

>> 17, 18 AND 27? >> I'M WILLING TO PASS EVERYTHING SUB 17, 18 AND 27. I WANT THOSE FOR DISCUSSION.

>> MOTION TO PASS REMAINDER OF ITEM C OTHER THAN 17, 18 AND 27. IS THAT THE MOTION?

>> YES. >> SECOND PAIR.> MOTION AND SECOND TO PASS EVERYTHING BUT ITEM 17, 18 AND 27.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT, ALL IN FAVOR?

>> THE REASON I PULL THOSE, I WANT TO BRING IT UP.

FOR CLARIFICATION, THAT I THINK MOST OF THE CONTRACTS WE DO, SAY THAT THE INVOICES SHOULD BE SENT ON A MONTHLY BASIS.

THE COUNTY AUDITORS OFFICE. FOR SOME REASON, WE CONTINUE TO HAVE INVOICES THAT ARE BACK THROUGH FOUR MONTHS.

AND IT CREATES A PROBLEM AND RIGHT NOW THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE A COUPLE AGENCIES WITH THIS ANYMORE BUT THESE INVOICES KEEP COMING UP.ND I DON'T KNOW FROM WAY BACK OCTOBER, NOVEMBER. ONE WAS SEPTEMBER.

SO, IS THERE ANY WAY WE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK WHAT EVERYTHING SUBMITTED AND PAY THESE THINGS OFF? YOU KNOW, AND BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE WE OWE AND WHEN ASSESS FOR US TO PAY IT, I MEAN, I LIKE TO HAVE A BALANCE.

SAY YOU KNOW, STILL HAVE A BALANCE OF SO MUCH.

THAT WE OWE THEM. AND IF YOU DON'T SUBMIT WITHIN THE NEXT 15 OR 20 DAYS, WE SHOULD JUST, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO BUT ASKING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.

FOR US TO SAY WE HAVE TO PAY ON TIME, THEN I THINK WE SHOULD ALSO THE CONTRACT IS YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT ON TIME.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A PENALTY FOR THAT, YOU KNOW OR WHAT DO WE DO. BUT I THINK THIS IS JUST, THE PROBLEM IS THAT WHEN WE DON'T USE AN AGENCY ANYMORE, THE NEXT THREE, FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS. I DON'T KNOW MAYBE YOU HAVE

SUGGESTIONS ON THIS? >> IS A PROCESS MORE FIRMLY TO THE INVOICES FOR THE PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR OVERSEEING

[00:35:01]

THIS. IT MIGHT BE A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT THAT WE SEE THESE INVOICES.

BUT ONCE WE FINALIZE THEIR PROCESS, IT SENT TO MY OFFICE THAT'S WHAT WE PUT ON THE AGENDA.

THAT'S WHY SOME OF THESE ARE LATER DATES.

WE HAVE ASKED THE DEPARTMENT IN QUESTION OF WHY SOME ARE TAKING SO LONG. SOME COULD BE THAT THE WORK HOURS ARE NOT WHAT THEY BELIEVE OR THE CONSTRUCTION IS NOT IN THE PROCESS WHERE THEY ARE. OR WHATEVER THE PROCESS MIGHT BE. ONCE IT IS ON THE LIST IT MEANS THE DEPARTMENT HAS SUBMITTED IT TO MY OFFICE.

MY OFFICE WILL REVIEW THE CONTRACT AND PUT ON THE AGENDA FOR APPROVAL BECAUSE WE'VE GOT APPROVAL FROM THE DEPARTMENT IN

QUESTION. >> OKAY THANK YOU.

AND THAT BRINGS ME TO THE NEXT THING.

SUBMITTING THESE THINGS, I WENT BACK AND REVIEWED SOME OF THESE INVOICES. I DON'T HOW WE APPROVE THIS BECAUSE THERE'S NO DETAIL THE INVOICES.

JUST THAT WE DID THEM AT THIS TIME AND THAT'S IT.

IT DOESN'T SAY WHERE, IF I AM PAYING SOMEBODY AND I OWE THAT MONEY I WANT TO KNOW WHAT I AM PAYING FOR AND WHAT THEY ARE CHARGING ME FOR. I WILL NOT JUST PAY SOME OF THAT CUSTOMER HAS AND SAYS YOU ON 100,000 BECAUSE I MET WITH SO-AND-SO AND DID THIS. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU DID WITH SO AND SO. I WANT TO KNOW HOW MANY HOURS.

IF WE TALK TO SUMMARY FOR 10 HOURS EIGHT HOURS.

THAT BOTHERS ME WHEN I SEE SOMEBODY THAT SAYS, I SUBMITTED EIGHT HOURS TALKING TO SOMEBODY.

I HAVE NEVER TALKED OVER AN HOUR.

I CANNOT TELL YOU, I'VE GOT A PROBLEM.

RIGHT? AND I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS.

THIS IS WHY I AM BRINGING IT UP NOW.E NEED TO CORRECT THIS IN THE FUTURE. WE NEED TO STREAMLINE THIS, I THINK THE DEPARTMENTS. USUALLY THE EMERGENCY SERVICES IN GRANTS WE NEED TO FIND OUT HOW CAN WE, LIKE TO SEE MORE DETAILED WHEN SOMEONE SUBMIT AN INVOICE TO YOU I WOULD LIKE MORE DETAILED INVOICES PER WEEK AND TELL THEM WE WILL PAY THEM BUT I WANT TO SEE HOW AND WHY WE ARE PAYING THEM.

THIS IS MY RECOMMENDATION. SOMEHOW WE GET TOGETHER WITH DEPARTMENTS OMITTING THIS AND STREAMLINE THIS THING.

IN THE FUTURE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE BETTER INVOICES FROM OUR CONTRACTORS THAN WE HAVE NOW. THIS IS REALLY RIDICULOUS, WE PAY ALL OF THIS MORNING, AND THEN THERE IS NOT EVEN A PARAGRAPH IN THERE OF WHAT THEY ARE DOING.

>> POSSIBLY, IN OUR CONTRACT MAYBE WILL WE SIGNED CONTRACT WITH THEM THAT HAVE MORE DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THEIR INVOICES HAVE TO BE IN TIMELY, WE DON'T HAVE AN INVOICE COMING UP, THAT IS SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR OLD OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT IS NOT TURNED IN WITHIN WITHIN A CERTAIN TIME WE ARE NOT UNDER OBLIGATION TO PAY IT.

IT WOULD HELP GET THEM ON THE BALL.

>> ESPECIALLY WHEN IT HAS SUBCONTRACTORS.

BECAUSE THEY SUBMIT -- VETERAN OF THE PROBLEM IS.

ASKING THEM, NOT SUBMITTING THERE IS BECAUSE WHEN THERE SUBCONTRACTORS THEY SHOULD BE SUBMITTING SAME TIME THAT OUR CONTRACTORS SUBMIT. THIS IS REALLY SOMETHING WE

NEED TO LOOK AT. >> I AGREE.

>> WE WILL DO IT FOR THAT PURPOSE AND I THINK WE NEED TO MEET WITH THE DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE SUBMITTING THE INVOICES AND SAY YOU KNOW, WE NEED MORE DETAILS, MORE STREAMLINED.

>> BUT WE ALSO NEED TO WORK BETTER ON CONTRACT.

>> YES DEFINITELY. >> I AGREE.

>> I JUST YOU KNOW, I MOVE THAT -- YOU KNOW, NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT. MOVING PAST 17, 18 AND 27.

>> MOTION. >> MOTION TO PASS WITH RECOMMENDATION WE GET ON GETTING THE MORE TIMELY AND MORE INFORMATION INCLUDED. MOTION AND SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

[P. Accept FY 21/22 Nueces County Animal Services Report.]

SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES.

THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO ITEM P.

I THINK YOU PULL THAT ONE? >> YES, JUDGE.

I JUST WANT TO GO ON RECORD TO SAY, I APPRECIATE THE UPDATE THAT WE RECEIVED FOR THE ACTIVITIES FISCAL YEAR 21 AND 22 WHICH IS OCTOBER 1. TO SEPTEMBER 30.

22 AND SO, THIS GIVES US A GOOD IDEA, A LOT OF WORK IS BEING DONE. ON BEHALF OF ANIMAL SERVICES, WHICH DEALS WITH ANIMAL CONTROL, RESPONSE TO BITES AND ANIMALS THAT ARE OUT ON THE LOOSE, SOME OF OUR RURAL PARTS AND SOME COMMUNITIES HERE IN THE COUNTY.

[00:40:06]

I DID HAVE A GENERAL QUESTION, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN HELP PROVIDE THIS OR MAYBE WE CAN GET THIS AT THE NEXT GO AROUND.

THIS IS VERY HELPFUL. LIKE I SAID, BUT I KNOW THIS IS PRESENTED BY THE CHAIR OF THE ANIMAL SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD.

THE WEIGHT IS WRITTEN, IS A REPORT FROM ANIMAL SERVICES.

I'M NOT SURE IF WE CAN GET ONE DIRECTLY FROM THEM, OR IF IT IS SIMILAR. BUT DEFINITELY, AND OF THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF QUESTIONS REGARDING THE NEW FACILITY THAT WE HAVE, AND ALSO, JUST YOU KNOW, WE WENT THROUGH A NAME CHANGE I THINK PHILOSOPHICAL CHANGE HOW WE RESPOND TO ANIMAL CONTROL. IT IS NO LONGER ANIMAL CONTROL IS SERVICES. THAT IS A BIG PART OF HOW THIS IS DONE THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY. AND SO, I WELCOME THE CHANGE ANYTHING? DOING A GREAT JOB WITH THAT FOSTERING AND ADOPTING. THERE WILL BE SOME MOVEMENT HERE PROBABLY THE NEXT FEW WEEKS OR MONTHS, TO TRANSITION MAYBE EVEN MORE THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE AS FAR AS MAYBE HAVE ACTUAL STAFF MEMBER THAT CAN USE SOME OF THE WORK TO BE A VOLUNTEER RIGHT NOW. BUT IF WE CAN GET THIS PUT TOGETHER, MAYBE BY ONE OR THE ENTIRE TEAM PRESENTED TO US.

>> THE REASON THAT THE CHAIR PRESENTS THIS, IS STATUTORILY, THE ADVISORY IS, IS HER POSITION ASSOCIATES SUPPOSED TO DO ANNUALLY TO REPORT THAT. I HAVE ONE AND SHE'S REQUIRED

BY STATUTE TO TURN THAT IN. >> I KNOW, AND I APPRECIATE THAT WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST. IT IS LISTED AS A SERVICES REPORT. THE BOARD DOES NOT REPORT ANIMAL SERVICES, THE REPORT MAYBE WHAT THEY'VE DONE, MAYBE WHAT THEY DO ON BEHALF OR IN ADDITION.

>> WE GET REPORT FROM THAT. BUT SHE HAS TO DO A REPORT TOO.

>> I TOTALLY GET THAT. I DO APPRECIATE THIS UPDATE BECAUSE I THINK IT GIVES THE COURT AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE ALL THAT'S BEEN DONE BECAUSE THOSE VOLUNTEERS HAVE DONE A LOT BUT I THINK THAT IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN ADDITION ALSO JUST TO HEAR FROM SOME OF THE TEAM THAT CAN PRESENT IT BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE PRESENTED SOMETHING SIMILAR LIKE THIS IF ONE OF US WANTS TO REVIEW AND BRING THEM UP AND HAVE THEM PRESENT GREAT.

F NOT, WE CAN TAKE IT AND RECEIVE IT AND READ IT ON HER

OWN. >> SHOULD HAVE A FAIRY

DEPARTMENT. >> I AGREE.

>> FOR MORE DEPARTMENTS. THIS A GOOD START.

I APPRECIATE IT AND IS HELPFUL BUT MAY WE CAN LOOK AT DOING THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IMMEDIATE.

MAYBE IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. >> QUARTERLY OR EVERY SIX MONTHS. VERY WELL, I THINK SO.

I'M SORRY, WERE YOU DONE? >> ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE A

MOTION? >> GO AHEAD I'LL WAIT.

>> I'M DONE. >> I WAS GOING TO ADD, I THINK WE WILL HAVE THIS AS A BIGGER PART OF THE DISCUSSION BECAUSE I KNOW WILL, THANK YOU TO THE NEXT MEETING WE WILL GET THAT.

AND WE WILL, TO ME, THIS DEPARTMENT IS ABSENT PUBLICLY AND I WILL CONTINUE TO SAY, NEEDS A LOT OF LOOK AT OVERHAUL. IN ALL DIFFERENT ASPECTS AND I THINK PART OF THAT IS WHERE TO BLAME AND MAYBE PROVIDING THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF RESOURCES BECAUSE FOR EXAMPLE, HAVE ASKED I'VE SENT AN EMAIL TO THE AUDITOR TO PUT IT IN BUDGET CONSIDERATION WE NEED TO LOOK POTENTIALLY AT ADDING A POSITION OUT THERE, AND MAYBE ONE THAT REPORTS THE COURT WILL HAVE THE DISCUSSION LATER. IT TAKES CARE OF THE ANIMALS GO SOMEPLACE AND IT REALLY, WHAT I DON'T EVER WANT TO BE IS A NO KILL SHELTER. AND SO, THE ONLY WAY THAT WE CAN DO THAT IS TO HAVE SOMEONE, I THINK ON STAFF, THAT REALLY TAKES CARE OF FINDING PLACING ANIMALS BECAUSE WE ARE VERY FORTUNATE THAT WE WERE VERY ACTIVE COMMUNITY OUT THERE.

BOARD MEMBERS AND NON- WARD MEMBERS THAT HELP GET BOARD MEMBERS BUT IN MY OPINION CANNOT ALWAYS COUNT ON BOARD MEMBERS DOING THAT. AN ADVISORY BOARD, THE ONLY SUPPOSED TO ADVISE. IT IS GREAT THAT THEY GO THE EXTRA MILE IN GREAT THAT OTHERS HAVE TO GO THE EXTRA MILE BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE THAT WE CAN HANDLE IT WHEN THESE BOARD MEMBERS CYCLE OFF AND THEY'RE NOT AS ACTIVE.

THEY WANT TO ADVISE ON HOW TO SAVE ANIMALS.

MAYBE NOT PHYSICALLY GO DO IT, WHICH IS UNDERSTANDABLE.

I THINK, WILL HAVE A GREAT I HOPE, ROBUST DISCUSSION ON HOW WE CAN MAKE THIS DEPARTMENT BETTER IN GENERAL.

NEXT MEETING. I THINK YOU'RE 100 PERCENT RIGHT. SHE HAS TO STATUTORILY DO THIS BUT I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT, -- SHOULD BE PUTTING SOME THE FORWARD AND SAY, HERE IS WHAT THE DEPARTMENT DOES.

AND THAT NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING WE PUT ON FOR POLICY DISCUSSION AND SOMETHING THAT SAYS ONCE EVERY SIX MONTHS.

WE ARE GETTING A WRITTEN DEPARTMENT FOR DEPARTMENT HEADS. EVEN THE ONES THAT WE DON'T

[00:45:05]

APPOINT, COASTAL PARKS AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.

WE NEED TO GET, IT'S A GREAT IDEA, I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN MAKE IT AS A MOTION STATE WE JUST PUT ON AS A POLICY NEXT TIME. BECAUSE EVERY SIX MONTHS WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE SOMETHING, HERE'S WHAT PUBLIC WORKS DID.

AND PUT IN THE AGENDA AND THE WHOLE WORLD CAN SEE IT.

AND IF SOMEONE IS TO CALL THEM WE CAN.

BUT IF NOT, A LOT OF THE STUFF I LIKE TO READ AND DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT. BUT WE DON'T NEED 30 MORE PRESENTATIONS, I'M NOT SAYING THAT BUT IT'S A GREAT IDEA.

DO YOU WANT TO PUT THAT ONTO THE NEXT AGENDA?

>> I WOULD, I MEAN, THE LESS COMPLICATED ROUTE.

I THINK WE CAN WORK WITH THE JUGGERNAUT TO COORDINATE.

IF WE NEED AN OFFICIAL VOTE TO MAKE IT OFFICIAL THEN LET'S DO

IT BUT -- >> OKAY, GOOD IDEA.

>> I AGREE. >> MOTION TO ACCEPT THE ITEM.

>> MOTION AND SECOND.LL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSING? THANK YOU.

[Z. Ratify the hiring of Branscomb, PLLC, to handle legal services to advise the Commissioners Court on matters relating to removal proceedings involving the current Nueces County District Attorney.]

WE WANT TO ITEM Z. I THINK YOU HAD THAT ONE TOO.

>> YES, JUDGE. I HAVE A GENERAL QUESTION ABOUT THIS. IS THIS PART, IS IS TIED INTO, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS, IS IS TIED TO OUR

EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEM? >> YES.

>> WAS A SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND SHOULD WE HOLD OFF ON THIS UNTIL WE GET BETTER DIRECTION LATER ON?

>> ARE TWO SEPARATE ISSUES. TWO SEPARATE ATTORNEY ISSUES IN QUESTION. THE ONE ON CONSENT IS THE RETENTION OF AN ATTORNEY, TO ADVISE THE COURT AN EXECUTIVE OR IN OPEN, REGARDING ALLEGATIONS OF THE COURT, TO PAY FOR A SEPARATE ATTORNEY. AND WE DID FEEL LIKE THAT WAS APPROPRIATE, SINCE MY POSITION IS THE ONE TASKED WITH PROSECUTING THE CASE ON THE PART OF THE STATE AND IT DID NOT FEEL HE WILL PASS THE SMELL TEST, FOR ME TO TELL THE COURT, OR ADVISE THE COURT REGARDING THAT EXPENDITURE.

>> I'M GLAD YOU DID THAT. IT WAS ONE QUESTION, I HAVEN'T HAD TOO MANY PEOPLE ASK THE FEW THAT HAVE ASKED ABOUT IT, HOW CAN YOU HAVE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ADVISE, BUT ALSO TAKE AS ROLE? I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THAT.

>> THANK YOU. >> MY QUESTION IS ANSWERED.

I THINK IT NEEDS BETTER THAT THIS WAS, YOU REQUESTED THIS.

>> YES. >> NOBODY REQUESTED THIS OUTSIDE OF COUNSEL BEING HIRED FOR BUT YOU DID THIS USING THE SMELL TEST, USE THE WORDS. THINK THAT THE BETTER PART OF VALOR AS WELL. IT COULD CERTAINLY BE LOOKED UPON SINCE YOU NOW, BY LAW, HAVE TO BE THE PROSECUTOR IN THE CASE. THAT IS NOT YOUR CHOICE EITHER.

I REALLY DISAPPOINTED IN THE RULING YOU KNOW, MADE BY THE FIRST JUDGES SAID YOU WOULD HAVE TO WEIGH IN BECAUSE THAT IS NOT THE STATUTE EITHER. THAT WAS REALLY, PURSUANT ABOUT POLITICAL POSITION, I'M SORRY THAT I DON'T LIKE TO BE CRITICAL, I READ THAT IS NOT HOW SUPPOSED TO BE YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A HEARING FIRST.

IT'S JUST BE A SHOW COST HEARING.

THEN THE JUDGE DECIDES WHETHER OR NOT TO ISSUE A CITATION.

I DO NOT READ IT WHERE YOU SHOULD HAVE HAD TO OPT IN.

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE POSITION TO PUT THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS IN.

NOT FAIR. THINK THE JUDGE, SORRY, BUT DON'T THINK MADE THE RIGHT RULING AND I'M GOING TO SAY THAT BECAUSE -- THAT DEFIES LOGIC THAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WOULD HAVE TO OPT IN, BECAUSE THAT CAN GO EITHER WAY. THAT IS RIDICULOUS.

THAT BEING SAID ON THAT, ALSO, JUDGE, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE, I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN DO IT HERE. BUT IF IT IS PRUDENT ENOUGH, I THINK THE COURT NEEDS TO REALLY CONSIDER WAITING PRIVILEGE OF HAVING THIS DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC ALSO.

THIS IS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL WE ARE DEALING WITH.

I THINK WE ALWAYS, ARE TOLD THAT WE HAVE TO DO OR DON'T HAVE TO, PROVIDE DEFENSES PRAYER WITH A PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO HEAR THAT, AND THE ONLY WAY WE CAN DO IS TO WAIVE PRIVILEGE. AND SO, I CAN MAKE THE MOTION NOW I CAN MAKE IT LATER IF IT IS NOT GERMANE IN THIS SENSE IS RATIFICATION. I'LL ASK JENNY IF IT'S APPROPRIATE NOT TO MAKE THE MOST OF WHAT I WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW I WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.

>> AS IT CAN'T BE JENNY. >> IS JUST WHETHER OR NOT THE

MOTION IS PRUDENT. >> MOVING ON THE AGENDA,

>> I THINK THE MOTION REFERS TO F4A, IS A CONSENT ITEM

[00:50:03]

RATIFYING THE HIRING OF THE TRAM ASSUME THE MOTION WILL

HAVE TO COME LATER ON. >> I WILL LIVE WITH THAT, JUDGE. WHEN THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT IS WHAT I WILL ASK THE COURT TO DO.

SO THAT EVERYBODY -- >> JEFF CAN GIVE US AN OFFICIAL

OPINION. >> IS A VERY SENSITIVE ISSUE AND I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE IT IN PUBLIC, SO PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHY WE DO OR DON'T DO. IF THE LAW SAYS TO ME IS PRETTY CLEAR-CUT. IF THE LOST A SOMETHING WE HAVE TO PROVIDE WERE NOT THEN THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS.

I'M NOT HER THE BRIEFING AND I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LAW IS I WILL MAKE IT LATER.

>> IT'S ALREADY BEEN HIRED. >> FOR THAT NARROW --

>> TODAY? >> YES.

>> I LIKE TO HEAR FROM THEM TO TELL US THAT IT IS RIGHT TO

MOVE FORWARD ON THIS ITEM. >> IS NOT THE TIME TO DO IN THIS ONE WE WILL DO IT ON THE NEXT ONE.

>> THIS IS JUST FOR THAT. WHEN WE BRING THE ITEM UP, BEFORE WE GO INTO CLOSED SESSION, THAT'S WHEN SHOULD

PROBABLY BE BROUGHT UP. >> THEY ARE ALREADY BEING PAID?

>> THERE ALREADY GOING TO BE HERE FOR THE SESSION.

>> THERE ALREADY BEEN PAID.> YES.

>> IS RATIFICATION. >> WE HAD TO HIRE THEM TO GET

THEM THERE. >> LET'S BE CLEAR, THE ETERNALLY DOESN'T HAVE TO RATIFY.

SHE HAS ALL THE ABILITY. YOU KNOW THIS BUT I WANT TO SAY PUBLICLY. THE COUNTY ATTORNEY CAN HIRE AN ATTORNEY ANYTIME SHE WANTS TO WITHOUT COMING TO US.

THAT IS THE OBLIGATION SHE HAS, SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO COME TO US SHE'S KIND ENOUGH TO BRING IS RATIFICATION.

SOMETIMES SHE DOES GET A GOOD ANSWER ON IT BUT SHE HAS THE ABILITY. JUST LIKE LAURA DID AND EVERY OTHER COUNTY ATTORNEY, IF THEY FEEL THE NEED TO HIRE OUTSIDE COUNSEL, THAT IS WITHIN THEIR PURVIEW.

MY UNDERSTAND IS ALWAYS BEEN THAT.

>> OFTEN CORRECT THEN LET ME KNOW.

>> IS THERE CERTAIN TIME LIMIT FOR THIS ONE?

IS CONTRACT AND FOR HOW >> THIS ONE SHOULD BE VERY NARROW TIME PERIOD IN FACT, I BELIEVE, WITHOUT, I MEAN, I'M NOT SPOKEN WITH HIM. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT PARTICULAR REPRESENTATION, WILL MOST LIKELY BE INCLUDED TODAY.

>> AND SHE WASN'T INCLUDED IN THAT COMMENT VERY CLEAR FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. THAT WAS MYSELF THAT TALK TO THEM AND THEY WILL BE HERE TODAY FOR THIS ONE ITEM.

AND IT IS NO LONGER -- UNLESS WE MOVE IN A DIFFERENT

DIRECTION. >> OKAY.

SO MOVED. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO PASS ITEM Z. SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

[1. Discuss and consider authorizing the County Judge, on behalf of Commissioners Court, to sign a letter in support of the Nueces County Hospital District's Appeal Summary to FEMA Region VI - Public Assistance Branch (Application #674808) for the social determinants of health (SDOH) analysis amounts that were expended by the Hospital District during the COVID-19 pandemic.]

MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, I KNOW YOU'RE BUSY. MOVING ONTO REGULAR AGENDA.

3A1 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY JUDGE, ON BEHALF OF COMMISSIONERS COURT, TO SIGN A LETTER IN SUPPORT OF THE NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT'S APPEAL SUMMARY TO FEMA REGION VI - PUBLIC ASSISTANCE BRANCH.

WE HAD THIS ON THE AGENDA LAST TIME THEY PROVIDE US WITH INVOICES THAT CAME UP WITH 500-4000 AND THINK WITH THE TOTAL. OR SOMETHING.

>> YOUR CLOSE. >> RIGHT AROUND THERE.

>> I THINK THE QUESTIONS ON THIS WAS JUST, WHETHER OR NOT IT IS ACCURATE. NONE OF US WERE INVOLVED.

I WILL SECOND THIS FOR DISCUSSION.

BUT I MAY NOT VOTE FOR IT. JEFF, IS THIS AN ACCURATE REFLECTION OF, WHAT WENT ON? BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, I TRIED TO TABLE IT BECAUSE THIS COURT, NOBODY ON THE COURT WAS CONSULTED. IT WAS JUST A FORMER COUNTY JUDGE TO PUT US IN THE BIND. AND MAKE REPRESENTATIONS.

IS IT ACCURATE? >> AS FAR AS WE KNOW, IT IS ACCURATE. I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE NOT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS NECESSARY TO THE PENNY.

>> AND THIS IS JUST AN AID TO HELP THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT APPEAL, BUT DOES NOT BIND US TO ANYTHING IF THEY LOSE THE APPEAL? RIGHT?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> OKAY, GOOD ENOUGH! AS LONG AS YOU ALL LOOKED AT IT.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES, THANK YOU.

[2. Discuss and consider approving resolution in support of Corpus Christi Regional Transportation Authority (CCRTA) exploration of grant opportunities (5339 (B) Grant) to finance Robstown Park and Ride/Transit Station Project to be constructed on County-owned property adjacent to the Richard M. Borchard Regional Fairgrounds Parking Lot.]

>> THANK YOU JOHNNY, GOOD LUCK. REALLY GOOD LUCK.

ITEM NUMBER TWO, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVING RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (CCRTA) EXPLORATION OF GRANT OPPORTUNITIES TO FINANCE ROBSTOWN PARK AND RIDE/TRANSIT STATION PROJECT TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE RICHARD M. BORCHARD REGIONAL FAIRGROUNDS PARKING LOT. AND --

[00:55:02]

>> JERRY? >> DID YOU WANT TO ADDRESS

THIS, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. >> THANK YOU.

GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. MANAGING DIRECTOR OF CAPITOL PROGRAMS AND CUSTOMER SERVICES. OUR ACTING CEO, WANT TO ME TO EXPRESS HIS SINCERE APOLOGIES FOR NOT BEING HERE TODAY.

HE AND OUR BOARD CHAIR IN WASHINGTON D.C. PROMOTING THIS ITEM, WITH THE FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION.

WANTED TO SHARE THAT WITH THE GROUP.

I CAN PROVIDE A BRIEF BACKGROUND ON THIS ITEM IF WE HAVE THAT KIND OF TIME. AND, YES SIR?

>> JUST FOR SAFE TIME, CAN WE APPROVE THIS -- THE REAPER THIS

LAST YEAR? >> IS CORRECT, ABLE 27.

>> ARE YOU DOING NOW, DO YOU JUST WANT US TO APPROVE THAT

YOU'RE GOING TO GO FOR A GRANT? >> ESTHER.UICK SERIES IN THE LAND, HE CAN BUILD SOMETHING, BUT ALSO YOU WANT US TO APPROVE GOING AFTER THE GRANT. SO YOU CAN BUILD IT, RIGHT?

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND MODIFICATIONS IF YOU

HAVE MODIFICATIONS. >> YES.

>> WE NOT APPROVING ANYTHING NEW.

OTHER THAN, YOU CAN GO AFTER THE GRANT.

>> YES SIR. >> AND I THINK HE SAID THEY REQUIRED A NEW RESOLUTION TO GO WITH THE APPLICATION.

BECAUSE WE ALREADY DID THIS LAST YEAR.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH

IT. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT EITHER. WE HAVE A MOTION.

I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION AS WELL.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM? ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES, THANK YOU FOR

[3. Discuss and consider approving a Gordian ezIQC BuyBoard Contract No. 660-21 purchase with LMC Corporation for Padre Balli Office Building Renovations.]

BEING HERE, WE APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU.

>> MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVING A CONTRACT NUMBER 660 Ã21 PURCHASED WITH LMC.

>> MR. CROSS, EUROPE. >> GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY.

THIS IS A CO-OP THROUGH GORDIAN, IT IN A CONTRACT.

THE COURT APPROVED A DOLLAR AMOUNT FROM THE INSURANCE PROCEEDS. LAST YEAR SOMETIME, AND ACTUALLY COMMISSIONER CHESNEY REQUESTED LET'S GO AND GET THIS ADDRESSED. AND SO, WE HAD BEEN WORKING THROUGH GORDIAN.E GOT SEVERAL QUOTES BUT THE ROSE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE HAD BUDGETED.

WE TRIED TO NEGOTIATE WITH THESE FOLKS WE FINALLY GOT THIS GROUP, WE ARE ALL HAPPY WITH WHAT THEY PROVIDED US.

WE VETTED IT THOROUGHLY. JENNY, SHE STILL NOT IN HERE.

ALEX AND HER OFFICE JUST DOES AMAZING WORK ALL OF THIS, YOU MIGHT ASK IN YOUR MIND, WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS SCOTT, WHEN TRYING TO SET UP A JOB PROGRAM, BECAUSE I'VE GOT TO GET THIS WORK DONE. UNFORTUNATELY ALL GOING TO THE SUMMER SEASON JUST A LITTLE BIT WITH THE BEGINNING OF IT, WHAT WAS THAT THE JOB PROGRAM. AND TAKE TIME TO VET THE JOB PROGRAM WORK WITH MICHAEL AND HIS FOLKS AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS. YOU EVER PROVE THAT I HAVE TO GET ESTABLISHED. AND I NEED TO USE IT TO GET THE

OFFICE FIXED. >> FUNDING SOURCE?

>> ENTRANCE PROCEEDS. >> MAKING SURE WAS ON THE

RECORD. >> YES.

WE ARE NOT USING, ALTHOUGH ALLOTTED TO US.

BUT WE HAVE GOOD CONTINGENCY THERE.

SHOULD WE FIND ANY UNKNOWN CONDITIONS, AND WE THINK WE ARE MORE THAN COVERED. AND IF WE ARE, WE DON'T USE IT,

WE WILL GIVE IT BACK. >> MOTIONED TO PASS.

>> MOTION TO PASS. AND SECOND, COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ.LL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

>> JUDGE, MAY BE SHOWN AS VOTING FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO?

I STEPPED OUT FOR A SECOND. >> YOU STEPPED OUT?

[4. Discuss and consider approval of interlocal agreement with the City of Robstown regarding improvements to Diaz Park, Portella Park and Kiwana Park.]

>> IF THAT IS ALL RIGHT WITH THE COURT.

THANK YOU. >> MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF LMC WOULD YOU LIKE

TO TALK ABOUT THIS? >> DOES THE ITEM THAT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER DURING PUBLIC COMMENT.

THIS IS TO ENTER INTO THE AGREEMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO HELP PROVIDE SOME ASSISTANCE FOR PARKS IN ROBSTOWN AND IS FOLLOWING A SIMILAR MODEL COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ WITH HIS PARTNERSHIP WITH CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND ALSO HAS DONE OTHERS, THIS IS FOLLOWING THE MODEL.

THIS IS THE FIRST PART AND I WILL ASK TO BE PUT ON THE NEXT AGENDA THE ACTUAL DOLLAR AMOUNT SHOULD BE UNDER HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS. IF APPROVED TODAY, THIS WILL BE TAKEN OUT OF MY FUNDS. WE WORK ON THE FUNDING SOURCE.

[01:00:02]

>> IS CONTRACT DOES NOT LIST HUNDRED THOUSAND IN THERE.

IT WAS A MATCHING FUND. >> THEY WERE PUTTING THEIR OWN, YES, THANK YOU. IT IS NOT JUST SOMETHING WE ARE GETTING. THERE PUTTING UP AND THEY WILL DO A LOT OF OTHER IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE NECESSARY CAN'T FUND WITH OUR FUNDING. PROJECTS THAT THEY NEED TO DO.

BUT WE CAN HELP COVER THE OTHER HALF OF IT.

SO, THIS GIVES THAT. IT IS IN THERE.

>> THE AMOUNT IS ALREADY IN THERE SO YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO

-- >> WE DON'T HAVE TO BRING IT BACK. MOTION TO ACCEPT.

>> I CAN. >> MOTION SECOND, DISCUSSION?

COMMISSIONER CHESNEY. >> TELL ME, I JUST FIGURE OUT THE PROCESS ON THIS. I'M TRYING TO, BECAUSE, HOW ARE WE ABLE TO SPEND ON PROPERTY WE DON'T OWN? OR DO WE? THEY SHUT THAT ONE OF MY PROJECT WITH REASON IS THAT WE CANNOT USE CO ON PROPERTY WE DON'T OWN. EXCEPT HAS THAT CHANGED?

>> IT HASN'T CHANGED. WE HAVE A CONSULTANT WITH -- WE DID BEFORE, BEFORE COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ DID.

WE, THERE IS A WAY TO UTILIZE THE COS THROUGH THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, TO ASSIST OTHER AGENCIES.

THERE IS A WAY. AND I'LL PROVIDE YOU WITH A

DETAIL. >> THAT WOULD HAVE REALLY HELPED MY PROJECT THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO THAT I WAS JUST TOLD I COULD NOT DO IT. I DO OWN THE LAND AND I

COULDN'T DO IT ANY OTHER WAY. >> THERE ARE RESTRICTIONS WITH COS, THAT'S CORRECT BUT THERE ARE WAYS TO DO IT.

AND THEN I CHECK AND THEN ASSUME EVERYTHING TO LEGAL AS WELL TO LOOK INTO I'M GOING TO SHARE THAT WITH EVERYBODY.

>> I WANT TO SHARE IT IT NOW. >> IS CORRECT WHAT SHE JUST ARTICULATED TO YOU. THERE IS A WORKAROUND ON THAT.

DO INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS. I DECLARED TO SHARE THE

INFORMATION WITH YOU GUYS. >> CAN YOU DO NOW?

BASICALLY. >> I DON'T HAVE THE WHOLE THING. AT THE MOTHER DETAILS A LITTLE BIT MORE BUT I DON'T HAVE IT MEMORIZED, COMMISSIONER.

>> BEFORE THE END OF THE MEETING? BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, I WAS TOLD I COULDN'T DO IT BEFORE AND IT'S WHY MY PROJECT DIED. BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO DO THE PROJECT DIDN'T WANT TO DEED ME THE PROPERTY, WHICH I GET.

BUT IF I WOULD HAVE KNOWN THIS FOR YEARS AGO, IT WOULD BE NICE PLACE OVER IN LONDON. QUESTION WAS SPEAKING, YOU'RE CORRECT. THERE IS A WAY AROUND IT.

THERE IS A WORKAROUND. >> COMMISSIONER, YOUR PROJECT SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS OLD, ISN'T IT?

>> I'VE BEEN HERE LONG. >> PROBABLY FIVE OR SIX, YOU

ARE RIGHT. >> AND THE -- IS WHERE WE ARE COMING BACK AS I BELIEVE THAT FUNDING IS THE INTENT ON THE

AGENDA. >> I MODEL THAT BECAUSE YOU DO WHEN A BISHOP BECAUSE WE ON THAT.

AND WE HAVE A DEAL WITH THE BISHOP.

BASEBALL. BUT I WAS TRYING TO DO --

[INAUDIBLE] >> BUT I THOUGHT THAT WAS -- IT

WAS COS? >> TIME WAS NOT IN BISHOP.

>> BUT IT WAS WESTHAVEN?> YES.

>> I GOT BAD ADVICE. FAIR ENOUGH! SO WE JUST PROVIDE ME THAT. IF YOU'RE TELLING US ALL LEGAL AND GOOD TO GO I THINK IT'S GREAT.

I JUST DIDN'T THINK WE CAN DO THIS.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> OKAY.

>> I'LL BE GLAD TO GET THAT TO YOU.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT. >> MOTION AND SECOND, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES, THANK YOU.

[5. Discuss and consider amending the Guidelines for Community Use of County Courthouse Common Areas, and related matters.]

>> ITEM NUMBER FIVE. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AMENDING THE GUIDELINES FOR COMMUNITY USE OF COUNTY COURTHOUSE COMMON AREAS, AND RELATED MATTERS. I THINK IN YOUR PACKET --

>> CAN I GO BACK? I'M SORRY.

NUMBER FOUR. WE WERE TALKING ONLY DIAZ PARK,

RIGHT? >> YES, ONLY DIAZ.

WE MAY COME LATE FOR OTHER PARTS BUT THIS IS, IT ALLOWS I BELIEVE, THE -- LOCAL FOR THE OTHERS.

THIS IS A MATCHING FUND. >> AND THE CONTRACT ONLY STATES DIAZ. WE JUST APPROVED.

>> WOULD OPEN THE INTERLOCAL THE OTHER TWO.

IF WE HAVE THE FUNDING, WE CAN PURSUE THAT.

[INAUDIBLE] >> OF THE CONTRACT MENTIONED?

IT WAS ONLY WRITTEN FOR DIAZ. >> IS ONLY FOR DIAZ.

>> WHAT HE WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND GET THIS APPROVED WHERE HE COULD DO THE SAME THING FOR OTHERS.

WHATEVER YOU DO, -- >> KIND OF ON THE FRONT END,

[01:05:02]

BUT IT IS ONLY FOR DIAZ. FOR NOW.

>> WILL COME BACK AND I MAY NOT HAVE THE FUNDING.

I MAY NOT WANT TO. BUT AT LEAST -- AM I CORRECT? WE'VE GOT THAT PART TAKEN CARE OF?

>> YES. >> AND THEN, ARE WE DONE ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE? DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AMENDING GUIDELINES FOR COMMUNITY USE OF COUNTY COURTHOUSE COMMON AREAS AND RELATED MATTERS. IN YOUR BOOKS, THERE IS AN OUTLINE WITH THE STUFF SCRATCHED OUT IN RED AND NEW WORDING PUT IN THEIR PEER BASICALLY SAYS, QUOTE AS INTERIORS AND GROUNDS MAY BE USED, IF APPROVED BY THE COUNTY JUDGE OR COMMISSIONERS COURT APPROVAL.

WILL BE MADE ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS, AT THE DISCRETION OF THE COUNTY JUDGE OR COMMISSIONERS COURT.

BASICALLY, THE CHANGE IN THEIR WHERE WE ARE ALLOWED TO DO THINGS BECAUSE THERE WERE SPECIFIC --

>> LET'S TALK FOR A SECOND ABOUT THIS.

>> MAKE A MOTION AND TECHNICALLY.

>> MOTION TO PASS. SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER

GONZALEZ. >> SOMETIMES POLICIES ARE IN PLACE TO PROTECT. SOMETIMES YOU CHANGE POLICIES AND IT OPENS THE DOOR TO POLITICIZING SENT REQUESTS THAT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE COUNTY JUDGE OR COURT TO VOTE ON, IF WE DON'T HAVE STRICT REASONS.

I JUST, YOU KNOW, WANT TO BE CLEAR BECAUSE, IF SOMEONE CALLS AND SAYS WANT TO USE IT FOR THIS PURPOSE AND IS AT THE DISCRETION OF, AND GUESS WHAT? THAT BECOMES POLITICIZED POTENTIAL AND IS NOT SOMETHING I WANT TO GET INTO.

AND I DON'T WANT THE LEFT, RIGHT OR MIDDLE TO MAKE REQUESTS TO THE FACILITIES. WE CAN GET INTO THAT BATTLE BECAUSE IF THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO.

HOW DO WE AVOID THAT? I JUST -- I JUST WANT TO THROW

THAT OUT THERE. >> THERE ARE SOME GUIDELINES.

THERE ARE SOME GUIDELINES FOR THE JUDGE TO FOLLOW PATIENT GO TO CS BECAUSE OWEN IS ASKING. I THINK THEIR GARDENS FIRST TO FOLLOW. YOU CAN -- YOU KNOW, IF IT'S INFORMATIONAL, EDUCATIONAL, -- YOU KNOW, I THINK -- I DIDN'T

BRING IT WITH ME. >> RIGHT, IT SAYS MATTERS OF PRIVATE INTEREST ARE NOT ALLOWED.

DEFINING THAT THE OPERATION COURTHOUSE IS NOT SUBJECT.

, -- >> IT MIGHT BE DENIED FOR THE COUNTY JUDGE, FOR THE INCONVENIENCE OF THE PUBLIC A REASONABLE BASIS. JUSTIFIES -- [INAUDIBLE] MAY BE APPEALED BY COMMISSIONERS COURT TO REQUEST IN WRITING, THE COUNTY JUDGE FOR PLACEMENT ON THE AGENDA.

>> LIKE IT SAYS, ONLY GOOGLE PURPOSES WHICH CONSTITUTE -- YOU ARE CROSSING A PUBLIC INTEREST MAY BE GRANTED -- [INAUDIBLE] WERE TAKEN THAT PART OUT?

IS WHAT WE SAY NOW? >> THAT'S WHAT THE REDLINE

SAYS. >> IN THE PAST, WE'VE ALREADY ALLOWED SEVERAL THINGS TO BE POSTED OUTSIDE THE GROUNDS.

>> THE LESS DISCRETION WE HAVE, LESS POLITICAL IT BECOMES.

WHATEVER WE WANTED TO FIND THE US AS, NOT A DECISION, THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE AS A BODY, SO THAT IT NEVER LOOKS LIKE WE ARE TRYING TO KEEP SOMEBODY IN OR OUT.

RIGHT? THAT IS JUST -- SO, I GUESS.

>> WE DON'T AGREE WE CANNOT BRING IT BACK.

>> I'M SAYING THAT I DON'T WANT TO.

I WANT TO GET INTO A DEBATE OVER WHETHER OR NOT WE LET PRO-LIFE OR PRO-CHOICE OR PRO-GUN OR NO GUN.

>> MOO AT ALINA SAYS NO POLITICAL ACTIVITIES.

JUST ADD SOMETHING THAT COVERS US, SOMETHING WERE NEITHER SIDE IS EVER DECIDING WHICH POLITICAL PARTY CAN HAVE SOMETHING. ADD A LINE IN THERE.

>> WHERE IT IS BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC BUT NOT A POLITICAL ACTIVITY, OR POLITICAL PARTY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

>> IS OR SOMETHING SPECIFICALLY, COULD WE -- GO BACK AND LOOK AT THIS A LITTLE BIT? IS THERE SOMETHING SPECIFIC WE TRYING TO GET DONE BY THIS? HAS IT BEEN REQUESTED WE NEED TO GET DONE OR SOMETHING?

MAYBE WE CAN JUST -- >> ON THE AGENDA.

>> OKAY. >> OKAY SO, COULD WE -- AND SO, NUMBER SIX DOESN'T COMPLY WITH OUR CURRENT POLICIES? THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT CHANGING?

>> YES. >> SO THAT, RIGHT.

THAT MEANS WE ARE APPROVING ONE LENDING ENTITY OVER ANOTHER

WHICH COULD ALSO BE POLITICAL. >> YOU --

>> OR SOMEONE ELSE WANT TO BUY EVERYBODY LUNCH I THINK WE ARE FINE WITH THAT. YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT --

>> A GOOD QUESTION BECAUSE OUR WEEKLY THERE WILL BE A LOT OF

[01:10:02]

PEOPLE THAT WILL COME BY PEOPLE AND TO CONFIRM THEM.

I THINK WE ARE OPENING A DOOR THERE THAT WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL ON BECAUSE I DO BUSINESS, I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH PROSPERITY BANK WHATSOEVER. I'M FRIENDS WITH PROSPERITY BANK. BUT IF WE ARE OPENING FOR PROSPERITY BANK, MEANS EVERY BANK IN TOWN WILL WANT --

>> HAS TO BE AN EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM OR INFORMATIONAL.

>> THERE IS TONS OF -- >> PROPER APPLICATIONS OR -- IT IS JUST EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION WORKSHOP.

THAT'S ALL IT IS. WE'RE GOING TO COME IN AND DO APPLICATIONS, -- YOU KNOW RECRUIT AND A LIST OF.

I THINK IT JUST BASICALLY, WHAT DO YOU HAVE, HOW CAN YOU

BENEFIT OUR EMPLOYEES? >> RIGHT, I'M JUST SAYING, I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD LOVE TO, ALLOWED PEOPLE TO LOOK TO COME DO IT. AND NOTHING IS BAD, I JUST THINK IF WE OPEN THIS UP, THEN THIS COULD BE --

>> BACK TO LUNCH AND LEARN WE USED TO HAVE.

>> WOULD BE BETTER TO HAVE LUNCH AND LEARN?

>> YOU ALWAYS HAVE THAT? >> NOT FROM THE OUTSIDE AGENCY.

>> THEY USED TO BRING PEOPLE FROM THE OUTSIDE.

>> THAT WE WOULD SPONSOR THEM. THE COUNTY WOULD DO THEM AND WE

WOULD BRING IN RESOURCES. >> I COULD SPONSOR.

>> THAT'S WHAT I'M WONDERING. DO WE NEED TO PUT BACK IN THE LUNCH AND LEARN AND COME BACK WITH THE SUBJECT MATTER THAT THE COUNTY SPONSORS? AND THEN HAVE THESE KIND OF

LUNCH AND LEARN, I DON'T KNOW. >> WILL USE TO DO THIS, WASN'T IN UNDER THE APPRECIATION DAY FOR EMPLOYEES?

>> ON REMEMBER. >> THAT IS HOW IT STARTED.

>> WE USED TO HAVE WELLNESS LUNCHES.

IT WAS USED WITH DIABETES MONEY, I BELIEVE FOR THE

COMMISSIONERS. >> OKAY.>> THEN IT WENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH COUNTY GOVERNMENT WEEK.

WE WOULD DO POPCORN AND PICKLE SALES AND DESIGNATE CHARITIES

TO RECEIVE THOSE. >> YOU CAN'T SELL ANYTHING, WE

CAN DO IT. >> BECAUSE WE WERE GIVEN IT TO

CHARITY. >> I THINK SO.

>> AND THE LUNCH AND LEARN, WITH VENDORS COME IN.

BUT THERE WERE VENDORS WE WERE ALREADY WORKING WITH, OR DID

WE, WE DIDN'T HAVE VENDORS? >> USUALLY IT WAS WELLNESS SPEAKERS. AND AFTER THAT EXTENSION WILL COME IN AND DO TALKS AND WE HAD A LOT OF DIABETES RELATED WELLNESS PLAN. PROGRAMS.

>> THANK YOU. >> I AM FINE WITH GENERAL STUFF LIKE THAT. BECAUSE I GET YOU KNOW, THERE IS NOTHING THAT YOU ARE GETTING ANYONE TO SIGN UP BUT LET'S FACE IT, ACCESSES INFLUENCE HERE.

AND IN MY OPINION, IT COULD DEFINITELY BE AWARE, I DON'T HAVE A BANKER BEEN THINKING OF SWITCHING BANKS AND THEN, A TYPICAL ANYONE. BUT JUST ANY TYPE OF SERVICE, RIGHT? AND IT DEFINITELY IS EDUCATIONAL, THAT IS THE TRUE INTENT.

BUT YOU KNOW, GET THE ACCESS THAT NAME ID IN FRONT OF SOMEONE, THAT GIVES YOU A LITTLE BIT YOU KNOW, BETTER RESPONSE RATE PROBABLY FROM SOMEONE THAT IS LOOKING FOR THOSE TYPE OF SERVICES. I WORRY THAT THIS COULD OPEN UP, SET UP A BAD PRECEDENT. I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK TO OUR OLD WAYS. WHICH WAS THE LUNCH AND LEARN, THINGS LIKE THAT. VERY BASIC WITH ORGANIZATIONS DEALING WITH, THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY FOR PROFIT AND MAYBE JUST HEALTH RELATED FIELD.

I'M GOOD WITH THAT. MAYBE SOMETHING OFF-SITE.

I MEAN, AT THE ROBSTOWN LIBRARY, WE HAD THE.

[INAUDIBLE] TAX SERVICES PROVIDED.

THAT WAS DONE FREE OF CHARGE. OU KNOW FOR NONPROFIT.

I THINK THAT IS OKAY. WILL WE GET SOMEBODY WHO IS IN A FOR-PROFIT ENTITY THAT IS WHERE HAVE CONCERNS.

>> THAT MAY BE THE DISTINCTION. PROFIT VERSUS NONPROFIT.HAT IS WHERE IT GETS REALLY. BECAUSE I PROMISE YOU.

THIS GETS OUT I'LL HAVE 10 MORTGAGE COMPANIES AND LENDERS CALLING ME. I MEAN, THEY WILL ALL WANT IN.

WITH THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES, THEY WANT TO BE IN FRONT OF

THIS. >> I DON'T THEN WE HAVE TIME TO SCHEDULE. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WILL DO ALL OF THESE. AND HOW WE PICK.

[01:15:02]

THAT IS MY ONLY -- I MEAN, COULD WE? IS IT LIKE URGENT? CAN WE TABLE THIS?

>> WE CAN TABLE THIS AND THE NEXT ONE.

>> IF YOU TABLE 1 YOU HAVE TO TABLE BOTH OF THEM.

>> RIGHT. >> WE CAN LOOK AT IT.

>> LOOK AT IT FURTHER. >> AND MAYBE, YEAH.

I'M NOT -- AGAIN, I AM A PROSPERITY BANK MAN I LIKE THEM I DO BUSINESS WITH THEM. BUT ON WHAT THE OTHER 10

CALLING ME. >> AND ON THAT, ONLY TWO ITEMS. THIS IS NOT TIME SENSITIVE, IT IS JUST A REQUEST.

WE ARE TRYING TO GET AHEAD AND MAKE A DECISION.

THAT WILL DETERMINE IF WE ARE ALLOWING THIS ACCESS.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO TALK YOU KNOW, WITH FEWER LEGAL OR ANYONE ELSE MORE ABOUT IT. FIRST.

UNLESS SOMEONE FEELS REALLY THAT WE NEED TO PUSH IT FORWARD. MY GUT REACTION, I'VE ALREADY SHARED THAT. IT DOESN'T MEAN IT CANNOT BE DONE. MAYBE THE CITY OR OTHER COUNTIES DO IT AND THEY DO IT MAY BE A CLEANER FASHION.

RIGHT? MAYBE THERE IS A CLEANER WAY TO DO IT. AND I DO AGREE, I THINK, A LOT OF POSSIBILITIES TO STAFF, TO HEAR RESOURCES.

BUT JUST AS CONCERNS. IF WE COULD TABLE THAT, THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED AND YOU KNOW, US ALL GET OUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY LEGAL, AND HR OR WHOEVER ELSE NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED. AND THEN, MAYBE WE CAN COME AT A BETTER CONCLUSION IN THE NEXT MEETING OR TWO.

>> DO YOU THINK THAT WE SHOULD TABLE UNTIL APRIL SO THAT WE HAVE PLENTY OF TIME UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING?

>> YEAH. >> THE FIRST OR SECOND?

>> SECOND MEETING APRIL.LET'S DO THE SECOND MEETING IN APRIL.

TABLE ITEMS FIVE AND SIX. WE HAVE A MOTION, I WILL SECOND THAT. ALL IN FAVOR?

>> AND IF WE CAN BRING IT BACK EARLIER, I WOULD SAY BRING IT BACK. WE CAN GET ANSWERED AND IT IS

CLEAR-CUT. >> I WOULD ASSUME IT IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE THE SECOND MEETING IN APRIL.

I WOULD LIKE TO SKIP FORWARD, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE OUR ATTORNEY HERE. IF WE COULD, IF YOU ARE OKAY WITH THAT AND MOVE ON TO NUMBER FOUR, EXECUTIVE SESSION, FOR A, CONSULT WITH OUTSIDE -- HAVE TO READ EVERYTHING FIRST.

>> HOLD ON JUDGE. THERE'S AN OPEN SESSION ITEM I WANT TO BEFORE YOU GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

I WANT TO DISCUSS WHETHER THEY SHOULD GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT WILL BE NUMBER 5A, THE OPEN SESSION ITEM.

>> THUS FAR WE CAN GO TO 5A. -- PETITION TO REMOVE HIM FROM

>> I'M ALL FOR TRANSPARENCY BUT I WOULD LIKE LEGAL COUNSEL, TO

GIVE US THE OPINION. >> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION SO WE CAN GET DISCUSSION. YES SIR?

>> MY NAME IS -- I WOULD ADVISE THE COURT ORDER IS A DECISION AND HAVE OPEN DISCUSSION ON THE OPEN RECORD, AS YOU WANT, KNOWING WHAT YOU MAY NOT WANT TO DISCLOSE.

THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT WILL HAVE DISCRETION ON. AND THEIR COMPLETE DISCRETION, WHERE WE WILL TALK ABOUT THE THINGS THAT YOU MAY CONSIDER, ASIDE FROM THE SPECIFIC STATUTE ON WHETHER OR NOT THE STATUTE

ALONE SAYS, PAY OR DON'T PAY. >> TELL ME, OKAY, TELL ME WHY

[01:20:03]

THAT -- >> IS YOUR PRIVILEGE.

IF I WERE IN YOUR POSITION, TO ALL MY CLIENTS, IS YOUR PRIVILEGE. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO KNOW THE SCOPE OF EVERYTHING I AM PROVIDING, BEFORE YOU SAY THAT'S FINE, LET'S GO OUT AND TELL EVERYBODY.

BECAUSE IF YOU ASK A QUESTION, I ANSWER AND YOU SAY, DARN! I WISH WE HEARD THAT EXECUTIVE SESSION, IT IS TOO LATE.

>> AND OUR EXECUTIVE SESSIONS ARE TYPICALLY, RECORDED.

THEY CAN BE CERTIFIED OR RECORDED.

I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THEY BE RECORDED.

IF THERE WAS A LEGAL REASONING IN THE FUTURE FOR IT TO BE UNVEILED, AND OTHERS ARE PROTECTIONS THAT LEFT AT LEAST WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS ADVISED AND ALL EXECUTIVE SESSION, I FEEL TOTALLY CONFIDENT THAT WE CAN BRING WHATEVER FORWARD BUT I AGREE WITH YOUR ADVISEMENT.

WE'VE GOT TO KNOW BEFORE WE WANT TO SAY --

>> I THINK THIS IS THE REASON WHY IT IS LAID OUT THE LATEST WE CAN EXECUTIVE SESSION, YOU CAN TALK AND COMFORT WITHOUT WORRYING WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE GOING TOO FAR IN SOMETHING, THEN WE CAN COME OUT, WE CAN DISCLOSE EVERYTHING IF THAT'S

WHAT YOU FEEL. >> AND I HEAR YOU.

AND I'M SITTING HERE PONDERING THAT AND I'M STRUGGLING WITH IT BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.> I FULLY INTEND. I FULLY EXPECT THAT WE WILL HAVE A DISCUSSION AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION IN OPEN SESSION. BUT WE DO KNOW THE SCOPE OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE BEFORE YOU JUST WAIVE IT.

>> WE OPEN IT IN COURT ANYWAY. CHRIST WOULD HONOR THE LENGTH OF DISCUSSION IN OPEN SESSION, BECAUSE NOBODY WAS TO ASK THE SAME QUESTIONS OVER AND OVER AGAIN WE'VE ASKED IN THE BACKGROUND THEN WE WOULD, SO -- I'M STRUGGLING WITH THIS ONE.

BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW, HAVING NO CONVERSATION WITH YOU AND NOT KNOWING WHAT IS IT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THIS DISCRETIONARY STUFF. I'M STRUGGLING BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS IS GOING TO BE A VERY DICEY DECISION POTENTIALLY, BECAUSE HE JUST ELUDED THE FACT THAT THERE ARE MAY BE, SOME GRAY AREAS. AND I WOULD WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW WHAT THE GRAY AREAS ARE BECAUSE IF IT IS NOT CUT AND DRY, THEN THAT BECOMES A DECISION WE HAVE TO MAKE AS A BODY. IF IT IS MORE CUT AND DRY, THEN WE WILL HAVE A CHOICE. AND THEN, I DON'T KNOW.

THIS IS -- CAN I JUST?

>> AREAS MIGHT BE GRAY BUT SOMETIMES I NEED TO STAY GRAY.

BECAUSE IF WE SAY SOMETHING YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO SAY WILL COME BACK TO US LATER ON. SO WE JUST, I AGREE, I THINK WE SHOULD KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE VOTING ON AND WHAT WE WILL DO.

WHAT OPTIONS WE HAVE. AND YOU KNOW, LET'S GO BACK AND SAY, WE VOTED FOR THIS BECAUSE OF THIS.

OUR VOTE WAS BECAUSE BASED ON THIS FACT, BASED ON THIS

INFORMATION. >> NOT JUST BASED ON --

>> AND WHAT WE VOTED FOR IT. WE DON'T LIKE TO ASK THE SAME QUESTIONS BUT YOU KNOW, WE SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE OF THIS.

YOU KNOW. I JUST -- I JUST DON'T THINK YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD COME BACK AND SAY WE SHOULD NOT HAVE SAID THAT. OR MAYBE JUST WEREN'T SURE.

YOU KNOW. >> I'M WILLING TO ASK THE SAME QUESTIONS TO GET THE SAME RESPONSE OUT HERE.

TIME, WE HAVE ALL THE TIME WE NEED ON OUR SIDE, TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND COME BACK OUT HERE AGAIN.

AND ALSO, I GET TRANSPARENCY, BUT AT SOME POINT, AS ELECTED OFFICIALS, I HOPE YOU HAVE THE TRUST IN US PUT US UP HERE, THAT WE EXERCISE GOOD DISCRETION.

AND I THINK ONE OF THE IS TO PROTECT OUR INTEREST AS A COUNTY. AND THE INTEREST WE REPRESENT WHICH OF THE TAXPAYERS. BUT THAT WE ARE NOT UP TO SHENANIGANS, WERE NOT UP TO ANYTHING TO TRY AND HARDEN INFORMATION FROM THE PUBLIC. I FEEL INFORMATION WE SHOULD RECEIVE, SHOULD BE UNFILTERED, THE ATTORNEY HAS BEEN HIRED, FEELS COMFORTABLE PROVIDING IT TO US AND WE WILL COME BACK OUT AND WHAT WE CAN SAY, WE WILL SAY.

IF THERE'S SOMETHING THERE BE ANYTHING THAT WOULD HURT THE COUNTY IN GENERAL, OUR INTEREST, WE WOULD BE ADVISED NOT TO SHARE THAT PUBLICLY. BUT EVERYTHING ELSE, I WOULD

ASSUME OR HOPE THAT YOU CAN. >> YEAH.

>> I AGREE. >> AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT THEORY, OTHER THAN WHAT THE NATURE OF THIS ONE IS PURE LIKE IN THERE YOU KNOW, I WOULD MAKE THE SAME ARGUMENT.

ON MANY OCCASIONS. BUT THIS ONE IS, LIKE, SO DIFFERENT. I'VE NEVER DONE THIS.

I'VE NEVER HAD ONE LIKE THIS. WE'VE NEVER HAD TO TALK ABOUT YOU KNOW, WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TODAY AND IT'S UNCOMFORTABLE. AND YOU ARE RIGHT.

[01:25:03]

I GUESS I WILL -- I GUESS I WILL --

>> PULL EMOTION BACK? >> WELL, I DON'T -- LET'S JUST -- I STILL THINK, LET'S JUST, I'LL STAY WITH THE MOTION.

MAYBE YOU CAN VOTE ME DOWN BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO HAVE THIS. I'M NERVOUS AS HECK ABOUT GOING

BEHIND THE SCENES ON THIS. >> MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

MOTION FAILS. >> WAS IT 4-1?

>> I SECOND. NOW WE WILL GO AHEAD AND GO

[4. EXECUTIVE SESSION: PUBLIC NOTICE is given that the Commissioners Court may elect to go into an Executive Session anytime during the meeting to discuss matters listed anywhere on the Agenda, when authorized by the provisions of the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code. To the extent there has been a past practice of distinguishing items for public deliberation and those for executive session, the public is advised that the Court is departing from that practice, and reserves the right to discuss any listed agenda items in executive session when authorized by law to do so. In the event the Commissioners Court elects to go into Executive Session regarding an agenda item, the section or sections of the Open Meetings Act authorizing the Executive Session will be publicly announced by the presiding officer. In accordance with the authority of the Government Code, Vernon’s Texas Codes, Sections 551.071, 551.072, 551.073, 551.074, 551.0745, 551.076, 551.086, 551.087, the Commissioners Court will hold an Executive Session to consult with attorney(s) including matters related to litigation; deliberate regarding real property, prospective gift(s), personnel matters, including termination, county advisory bodies, security devices, and/or economic development negotiations and other matters that may be discussed in an Executive Session. Upon completion of the Executive Session, the Commissioners Court may in an open session take such action as appropriate on items discussed in an Executive Session.]

INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. SINCE OUR ATTORNEY IS HERE TO

GET THIS DONE. >> JUDGE, IF I MAY? I NEED TO RECUSE MYSELF DURING EXECUTIVE SESSION BUT I WILL BE OUTSIDE. IF YOU JUST LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU COME BACK INTO REGULAR PEER.

>> CONNIE, BEFORE WE GO, ARE WE ABLE TO RECORD IN THERE OR DO WE NEED TO STAY HERE AND CLEAR THE COURTROOM?

[INAUDIBLE] >> OKAY WE ARE GOOD.

>> IS THAT THE ONLY EXECUTIVE SESSION WE HAVE TODAY?

>> YES. >> SPECIAL!

>> EXECUTIVE SESSION PUBLIC NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT MAY ELECT TO GO INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION ANYTIME DURING THE MEETING TO DISCUSS MATTERS LISTED ANYWHERE ON THE AGENDA, WHEN AUTHORIZED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, CHAPTER 551 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. TO THE EXTENT THERE HAS BEEN A PAST PRACTICE OF DISTINGUISHING ITEMS FOR PUBLIC DELIBERATION AND THOSE FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION, THE PUBLIC IS ADVISED THAT THE COURT IS DEPARTING FROM THAT PRACTICE, AND RESERVES THE RIGHT TO DISCUSS ANY LISTED AGENDA ITEMS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION WHEN AUTHORIZED BY LAW TO DO SO. IN THE EVENT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ELECTS TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING AN AGENDA ITEM, THE SECTION OR SECTIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE, VERNONB SECTIONS 551.071, 551.072, 551.073, 551.074, 551.0745, 551.076, 551.086, 551.087, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT WILL HOLD AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONSULT WITH ATTORNEY(S) INCLUDING MATTERS RELATED TO LITIGATION; DELIBERATE REGARDING REAL PROPERTY, PROSPECTIVE GIFT(S), PERSONNEL MATTERS, INCLUDING TERMINATION, COUNTY ADVISORY BODIES, SECURITY DEVICES, AND/OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS AND OTHER MATTERS THAT MAY BE DISCUSSED IN AN EXECUTIVE SESSION. UPON COMPLETION OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT MAY IN AN OPEN SESSION TAKE SUCH ACTION AS APPROPRIATE ON ITEMS DISCUSSED IN AN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

WE WILL BE ON ITEM A, CONSULT WITH OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL ATTORNEY FEE OBLIGATIONS OF THE COUNTY RELATING TO THE REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING THE CURRENT NUECES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY; AND RELATED MATTERS (TEX. GOV'T CODE B' 551.071). IT IS 10:32 AM

[5. OPEN SESSION: Following Executive Session, the Commissioners Court will reconvene the Regular Meeting prior to taking any action(s) on matters considered in Executive Session.]

>> IT IS LIVED 40 8:00 A.M., WE ARE GOING BACK INTO OPEN SESSION. WE WANT TO DISCUSS? 5A, DISCUSSING CONSIDERING HIRING OUTSIDE COUNSEL, TO REPRESENT DISTRICT ATTORNEY, MARK GONZALEZ IN LITIGATION INVOLVING PETITION TO REMOVE HIM FROM OFFICE.

>> EXCUSE ME, JUDGE? >> YES.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT KNOWN THAT I WANT TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM THE MATTER. I HAVE INTERESTS IN THE DA

OFFICE. >> SPEAK IN THE MICROPHONE.

>> YES, I WANT TO LET IT BE KNOWN THAT I, I WANT TO RECUSE

MYSELF IN THE MATTER. >> BECAUSE OF THE RELATIONSHIP?

>> YES MA'AM, THERE IS A RELATIONSHIP WITH ME IN THE DAS

OFFICE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU, JUDGE IF I MAY. I THINK THE IDEA WAS PROVIDED A

BRIEF SUMMARY. >> YES IF YOU COULD DO THAT.

>> FIRST OF ALL, BEFORE THE COUNTY CAN EXPEND FUNDS, THERE HAS TO BE AUTHORITY TO DO SO. THE BY THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION, OR SPECIFIC STATUTE. IN ORDER TO RELEASE HER FUNDS FOR ANY REASON. IN THIS CASE, THE SPECIFIC INSTANCE, I WAS ASKED TO LOOK AT, SECTION 157.9, OF THE LOCAL

[01:30:07]

GOVERNMENT CODE. THAT SPECIFIC SECTION, PROVIDES THAT A COUNTY OFFICIAL OR EMPLOYEE SUED BY AN ENTITY OTHER THAN THE COUNTY, WITH WHICH THE OFFICIAL OR EMPLOYEE SERVES OR ACTION FROM THE PUBLIC DUTIES REPRESENT ABOUT A DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE DISTRICT, WHICH THE COUNTY IS LOCATED WHERE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY OR BOTH.

I'M GOING TO REFER TO THAT BASICALLY, AS THE FEE STATUTE.

SO WE UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A REMOVAL ACTION. A REMOVAL ACTION IS A SPECIFIC TYPE OF A LEGAL PROCEEDING. IT IS NOT A SUIT FOR CIVIL DAMAGES. THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT, HAS CALLED REMOVAL ACTIONS CAUSE A CRIMINAL IN NATURE.

I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHAT THAT MEANS.

BECAUSE IT IS NOT A DEFINED TERM.

BUT WHAT WE DO KNOW, IS THAT COURTS IN THE STATE AND THE TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL, HAVE RECOGNIZED THAT SECTION 157, DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR THE COUNTY TO PROVIDE COVERAGE FOR A COUNTY EMPLOYEE OR OFFICIAL, RELATING TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS. I WILL TALK A LITTLE ABOUT THAT LATER. BUT 157, DOES NOT PROVIDE THAT COVERAGE. IT ONLY APPLIES TO CIVIL LAWSUITS. THE QUESTION THERE IS WHETHER OR NOT A REMOVAL ACTION UNDER SECTION 87, IS A CIVIL LAWSUIT.

IT FOLLOWS CIVIL PROCEDURES, LIKE OTHER CIVIL CASES.

BUT AGAIN, THE SUPREME COURT WAS A CRIMINAL.

THERE IS NO DEFINITIVE ANSWER ON THAT.

EITHER IN THE OPINIONS OR CASE LAW.

THE SECOND ISSUE, WHICH IS MORE DEFINITIVE, IS WHETHER OR NOT THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY IS CONSIDERED A COUNTY OFFICIAL, OR EMPLOYEE, WITH REGARD TO REMOVAL ACTION.

IN THAT PARTICULAR, FOR THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE.

THE TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE HAS BEEN CONSISTENT FOR THE LAST 23 YEARS OR SO, EXCUSE ME, 13 YEARS OR SO.

AND THAT IS, A DISTRICT ATTORNEY IN A REMOVAL ACTION, IS NOT CONSIDERED TO BE A COUNTY EMPLOYEE.HE IS CONSIDERED TO BE A DISTRICT OFFICIAL.

AND THEREFORE, THE AG HAS CONSISTENTLY -- THAT UNDER 157, AND 157 PREDECESSOR STATUTE, THAT IS NOT, I'M SORRY I COUNTY IS NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE LEGAL ASSISTANCE, TO A DISTRICT ATTORNEY IN A REMOVAL ACTION. WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST, AND I THINK WE DISCUSSED THIS AND IT WILL BE MY NEXT STEP.

IS TO PURSUE SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS ON THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, BOTH ON THE NATURE OF A REMOVAL PROCEEDING, AS TO WHETHER OR NOT IT IS A CIVIL SUIT, OR A QUASI CRIMINAL MATTER FOR WHICH 151 SEVEN DOESN'T APPLY AT ALL.

AND AGAIN, REAFFIRM THAT A DISTRICT ATTORNEY, IS NOT A COUNTY OFFICIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF REMOVAL STATUTES.

MY OPINION IS THAT THE DISTRICT EXCUSE TO COVER THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, WILL CONTINUE TO BE OF THAT OPINION.

THE LAST OPINION I LOOKED AT WAS NOT THAT LONG AGO.

SO, I DOUBT THAT WILL HAVE CHANGED.

BUT IT'S STILL A GOOD IDEA TO THINK GET CLARIFICATION ON REMOVAL SUIT BECAUSE OF, THEY'RE OUT THERE AND

HAPPENING. >> EXCUSE ME.

WE STAYED IN THERE ALSO, THESE OPINIONS HAD BEEN FROM AS FAR BACK AS 1990, I BELIEVE THERE ARE SEVERAL OPINIONS ON THE

SAME? >> S, 1990, TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION 1276, 1990, NOTING THAT THE PREDECESSOR OF 157, DID NOT APPLY TO DISTRICT OFFICIALS.

PLAIN AND SIMPLE. >> ALTHOUGH EPSTEIN CONSISTENT

UP UNTIL THE LAST ONE, THINK -- >> IT WAS 2007, 2010.

IT'S BEEN READILY CONSISTENT AND IN RECENT OPINION, IT

[01:35:01]

WASN'T PART OF THE HOLDING, BUT WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY SAID, AND LISTED THAT. I DO NOT ANTICIPATE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CHANGING THE OPINION SINCE THERE ARE NO COURT OPINIONS, SPECIFICALLY DECIDING THE ISSUE.

AS I POINTED OUT THOUGH, A DISTRICT ATTORNEY, WHERE DIFFERENT HATS. SO, SPECIFICALLY, I AM FOCUSING ON THE ATTORNEYS GENERAL OPINION WITH REGARD TO THE PROVISION OF PROVIDING COUNSEL APPLYING FOR AN ATTORNEY TO DISTRICT ATTORNEY, UNDER THE FEE REQUIREMENT STATUTE.

SO, WHETHER OR NOT HE IS ACTING AS A STATE EMPLOYEE IN ANOTHER CASE, OR DECISION-MAKER FOR A COUNTY IN ANOTHER MATTER, IS GOING TO DEPEND ON WHICH WAY HIS HAT IS BEING WORN.

>> WE NEED SOME CLARIFICATION ON, WE TALKED ABOUT THE BOND ISSUE. ALSO, CLARIFICATION ON THE BOND. WHETHER WE DO OR WE DON'T.

YOU KNOW, WHERE DO WE STAND? >> LET ME JUST A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY IF I MAY, COMMISSIONER.

157 IS AN ENTITLEMENT. IF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY FALLS WITHIN 157, THE COUNTY PAYS, IT IS AN ENTITLEMENT.

AS I SAID AT THE BEGINNING, THE COUNTY HAS TO HAVE AUTHORITY, TO EXPEND FUNDS. THE COUNTY HAS A COMMON-LAW AUTHORITY TO EXPEND FUNDS, WHEN IT FINDS BASICALLY, THAT IS WITHIN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COUNTY TO DO SO.

AND NOT FOR A PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL.

IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS, THERE IS A BOND THAT HAS TO BE FILED WHEN THE PROCEEDING START.

I HAVE NOT LOOKED INTO THE NATURE OF THE BOND, HOWEVER, AS WE DISCUSSED, THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING APPROPRIATE FOR THE COUNTY TO CONSIDER GOING FORWARD.

AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS APPROPRIATE REASON TO EXERCISE ANY DISCRETION OR HOW MUCH DISCRETION.

I HAVE BEEN TASKED TO GO AHEAD AND REVIEW THE BOND ISSUE, AND DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF THE BOND.

AND WHAT HAPPENS. WITH THAT BOND UNDER VARIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES AND REPORT BACK TO THE COUNTY ON THAT.

THE OTHER THING THAT I JUST, WANTED TO MENTION, AGAIN, IS GETTING BACK TO THE COMMON LAW. THE MATTER OF THE COUNTY, MAKING THOSE DECISIONS. AND THAT IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE DECISION THAT THE COUNTY MAKES LATER.

MOST LIKELY. BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT CAUS-- QUASI-CRIMINAL -- THIS WOULD NOT APPLY SO THERE'S NO ENTITLEMENT FOR THEM TO PROVIDE COUNSEL FOR THE CRIMINAL MATTER.HE ATTORNEY GENERAL ALSO SAID, YOU CANNOT PROVIDE COUNSEL IF THE PERSON IS GUILTY.

WHICH MEANS YOU HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THE PROCEEDING IS OVER, TO DECIDE BASICALLY, A REIMBURSEMENT SORT OF THING.

IF THAT'S WHAT THE COUNTY DECIDES IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COUNTY. AND NOT NECESSARILY IN THE PARTICULAR INTEREST OF THE INDIVIDUAL INVOLVED.O, WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO CONSIDER THAT HOW MUCH THE BOND WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE THING TO KNOW, BECAUSE THE BOND IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT, IT IS PAID OVER TO THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY AT THE END OF A SUCCESSFUL PROCEEDING.

YOU WANT TO KNOW THAT. >> SOUNDS FAIR.

I APPRECIATE THAT. >> COMMISSIONER CHESNEY, WHERE

YOU WANTED TO SPEAK? >> NO.

I THINK YOU PRESENTED. DO WE NEED TO FORMALIZE THAT IN A MOTION? OR JUST FURTHER CLARITY? ISSUE AND PROBABLY HAVE TWO GET WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE TO ISSUE THE REQUEST FOR OPINION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. BUT I DON'T THINK IT WILL RAISE AN ACCOMPLICE BECAUSE WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT ANYTHING SPECIFIC. WE WILL TALK ABOUT IN GENERAL TERMS THAT WE WILL NOT HAVE TO UMBRELLA COUNTIES ATTORNEYS OFFICE. I'LL BE DRAFTING IT.

>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, WE APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA. I THINK WE ARE AT ITEM 7,

SORRY. >> SO ON A, WE DON'T NEED TO

[01:40:06]

TAKE ANY VOTE? >> NO NOT UNTIL HE COMES BACK.

[7. Discuss and consider approving payment of outstanding invoices from Hagerty Consulting, Inc., for services related to RFP 3141-20 Disaster Recovery Management, and related matters.]

WE ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE, TO GET MORE CLARIFICATION AND MORE INFORMATION. ON 3A7 IS WHERE WE ARE.

AND, DOES EVERYONE, GIVE A SECOND, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER PAYMENT OF OUTSTANDING INVOICES FROM HAGERTY CONSULTING, INC., FOR SERVICES RELATED TO RFP 3141-20 DISASTER RECOVERY MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED MATTERS.

>> DID YOU ALREADY DO THAT? IS THAT YOURS?

>> THIS IS COMELY POLOS OF THE SPECIAL MOTION BECAUSE HE

WANTED THEM SEPARATED. >> I PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA.

WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION, SOME OF THESE INVOICES.

I'M GOING TO BRING UP WHAT IT DID EARLIER.

THIS IS THEIR WAY BACK AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THE INITIAL APPROVAL THE INVOICES CAME -- [INAUDIBLE] SOMEBODY I GUESS.

I DON'T KNOW WHO ELSE. >> DO YOU WANT TO ANSWER THESE?

>> YOU LEAD THE APPROVAL FOR THE INVOICES, JUDGE.SUALLY CAME FROM, FOR UNDERSTAND, CAME OUT OF THE --

>> I PROVED THEM AND SUNDAYS BUT IT'S AFTER SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE SIGN THEM. I'M NOT THE APPROVAL.

I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT WAS SPENT OR NOT.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> THANK YOU.

>> SO, I STARTED TO INITIAL OFF ON THESE INVOICES.

LAST MONTH. WITH THAT BEING SAID I BELIEVE THE INVOICES WE HAVE NOW, I AM PHYSICALLY INVOLVED WITH

LOOKING AT THE INVOICES. >> AS IN ANOTHER WE DID NOT RENEW THIS CONTRACT. IS THIS FINAL INVOICES? OR WE STILL HAVE SOME OUTSTANDING?

>> ABOUT TOO MUCH OF INVOICES STILL.

>> ALL RIGHT. CAN WE CONTACT THEM AND TELL THEM WE NEED THOSE EXPEDITED AS WELL? I MEAN, I KNOW INVOICING JUST LIKE COMMISSIONER GOOD ALSO.

SIX MUSTANG ORDER TWO OR THREE MONTHS BEHIND, WHAT WE DID OR WHETHER IT WAS COMPLETED OR, WE NEED A LOT BETTER ETTER TIMELY ISSUE ON INVOICING. AND MAYBE IT IS LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, INCLUDING IN OUR CONTRACTS IN THE FUTURE.

RID HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DAYS TO PRESENT US WITH AN INVOICE FOR WORK, BUT -- OR WE DON'T PAY.

THERE ARE SOME OF HIS I THINK THIS IS COME UP AT A YEAR IS JUST REALLY RIDICULOUS. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT HAGGERTY

WERE LIKE THAT. >> JUST I MEAN, I PARTICULARLY -- I PUT IN THE AGENDA BECAUSE IT REALLY BOTHERS ME AGAIN, YOU'RE NOT THE ONLY ONES BECAUSE I TALKED TO A LOT OF DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS.

I DON'T SEE ANY MUSLIM TO SHOWING WHAT THEY'RE DOING OR WHAT. BUT YET, WE ARE SIGNING OFF ON THEM. SENDING THEM TO TERESA PAYMENT OR THE JUDGE FOR SIGNATURE WITHOUT, I THINK IT WAS ABOUT 10 OR 12 THAT WERE SENT BACK. YOU KNOW SO, WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE. WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE THAT WE SENT BACK?> LET HER KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

>> WE ARE STILL WAITING ON THOSE.

WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED THOSE BACK.

>> THOSE ALSO CAME FROM YOUR OFFICE FIRST, RIGHT?

>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE ARE REFERRING TO, COMMISSIONER.

TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. THEY SENT SOMETHING BACK AND THEY HAVEN'T TALKED TO ME ABOUT IT.

>> 10 TALKING IS -- RELATED>> HAGGERTY HAS -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR CUP OF TEA IS BECAUSE, ARE WE JUST SIGNING OFF ON A BECAUSE THEY'RE SAYING SOMETHING?

>> NO, COMMISSIONER. >> I MEAN, I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT, RIGHT? THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO REVIEW THESE THINGS REAL GOOD OR REVIEW IT WITH SOMEBODY.

AND JUST, YOU KNOW, I JUST, IT IS A LOT OF MONEY.

NOW WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND PAY THESE PEOPLE.

[01:45:01]

AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF WE DO THE WORK OR NOT.

>> FOR THE EGGS DISASTER MANAGEMENT PORTION, I CAN ASSURE YOU THEY DID DO THE WORK.

>> HOW CAN YOU ASSURE THAT? >> AHEAD AND ITEMIZED STATEMENT THAT THEY PROVIDE FOR US I DON'T HAVE IT BUT I RECEIVED

FROM TERESA. >> MAYBE THIS SHOULD BE

INCLUDED IN HERE AS WELL. >> THERE SOME IN HERE BUT THEN IS JUST A STATEMENT IN THE BOTTOM.S THAT WHAT YOU'RE

TALKING ABOUT? >> THIS IS THE TIME WE HAD A CONVERSATION AND THEY HAD THOSE HOURS.

>> IS VERY IMPORTANT. THOSE ARE VERY IMPORTANT.

IT'S WHAT WE ARE PAYING THEM. F THEY DON'T ATTACH TO LET ME SUBMIT TO COURT, I'M ALSO GOING TO KNOW WHAT'S IN HERE.

I DIDN'T BRING THIS ITEM UP SO COULD NOT ATTACH ANYTHING THAT YOU NEEDED. BUT IF YOU NEED STUFF I CAN RESEARCH AND BRING IT TO YOU. I NEED TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, WE ARE

ASKING -- I DON'T KNOW. >> DID YOU REVIEW THIS,

HAGGERTY? >> DISASTER MANAGEMENT IT IS ME AND TERESA. ANNA IS INCLUDED.

THE SIGNATURE AUTHORITIES, BUT IT IS ME AND TERESA.> TERESA, SINCE YOU'RE HERE, YOU WANT TO COME UP? I WASN'T GOING TO CALL YOU BUT SINCE YOU'RE HERE.

>> YES SIR? >> HOW COME I'VE CALLED YOU SEVERAL TIMES TOO. HOW DO WE VERIFY THESE THINGS ARE CORRECT? I NOTICED MY STATEMENTS WHERE IT SHOWS WHAT ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW SOMEONE TELLS ME THERE TALKING TO SOMEBODY FOR SIX, SEVEN OR EIGHT HOURS, THAT IS A LONG TIME FOR ME. I NEVER TALK TO ONE PERSON FOR SIX OR SEVEN HOURS. I AM JUST SAYING, HOW DO WE KNOW EVERYTHING THAT IS IN HERE, ACTUALLY WAS DONE.

AND EVERYTHING DID HAPPEN. TO ME, YOU COULDN'T CHARGE ME $20,000. I LIKE TO SAY WHAT HAPPENED IS $20,000. NOT THAT I CALL SOMEBODY ARE MET WITH SOMEBODY. BUT WHAT DID YOU MEET AT?

>> A LITTLE MORE DETAIL, YES. >> YOU KNOW, THE GUY -- I DON'T KNOW. AGAIN, I'M JUST GOING BACK AGAIN BECAUSE IT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF YEARS NOW AND WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THIS HARDER.

WE ARE AT THE END OF THE GAME HERE.

I JUST WANT TO PAY WHAT WE OWE NOT PAY WHAT WE DO NOT OWE.

BECAUSE IF WE DON'T ALL MONEY I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD PAY THEM.

YOU KNOW, UNLESS THEY CAN SHOW THAT THEY DID WHAT THEY DID.

OR SAY WHAT THEY DID. >> COMMISSIONER, ON THE ACTUAL INVOICES, WHAT THEY SUBMIT, WAS THE DETAILED INVOICE SUMMARY, RIGHT? IT IS JUST THE TOTAL HOURS THAT THEY WORK. THEN FOR EACH WEEK, HAVE A DESCRIPTION OF THE BOTTOM THAT CERTIFIES THE WORK THAT THEY DID. LIKE FRANCIS, I'M LOOKING AT THE ONE FOR THE COVID, THE, THE DISASTER RECOVERY.

WHERE THEY TALK ABOUT ATTENDING INTERNAL COORDINATOR PLANNING MEETING. AND THERE YOU LIKE ONE HOUR AND 25 MINUTES OR 30 MINUTES. THEN THOSE HOURS ADD UP.

ON THE WEEK OF DECEMBER 16, THEY TALKED ABOUT THAT THEY UPDATED THE NUECES COUNTY VACCINE RFP SPREADSHEET WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, CHECK TIMESHEETS AGAINST THE SPREADSHEET DATA. AND --

>> IS ATTACHED TO THE ADDENDA. >> ON THE BOTTOM.

>> EACH ONE OF THESE IT SAYS WHAT THEY DID.

>> I KNOW BUT IF YOU CHECK SOMETHING AGAINST SOMETHING OF THE NEEDS FOR COPY OF SOMETHING, RIGHT? QUESTIONABLE FOR THE BACKUP, THEY JUST GIVE US A DESCRIPTION OF THE SERVICES THAT THEY PROVIDED.

>> THEY JUST TELL US, THIS IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

NOT THAT I DO NOT TRUST THEM, BUT WE'VE BEEN PAYING A LOT OF MONEY. I'M JUST GETTING A LITTLE FRUSTRATED. ALL OF THIS MORNING GOING OUT AND UNEARTHING ALL THE SERVICES ARE COMING IN.

MY OPINION. AGAIN, WHAT DO WE OWE THEM?

[01:50:04]

BRING IT FORWARD TO US. WHAT IS THE BALANCE?

>> RIGHT NOW, THEY STILL HAVE TWO MONTHS TO BUILD.

JANUARY AND FEBRUARY. >> I DON'T EVEN SEE.

>> WILL GET THOSE INVOICES ARE THOSE TWO MONTHS, THAT WILL BE THE END OF THE BILLINGS FOR HAGGERTY, FOR WINTER STORM AND

COVID-19. >> WE KEEP SAYING THE WINTER STORM. IT IS ANOTHER THING YOU WANT TO BRING UP. I THOUGHT THAT WAS ALREADY GONE AND DONE WITH. WHY ARE THEY STILL BILLING US? IT WAS WHAT FIVE YEARS AGO?

>> WORKING ON FINALIZING THE DOCUMENTS.

>> YOU ARE RIGHT, COMMISSIONER. IT HAPPENED A WHILE BACK AND WE'RE STILL DOING THINGS WITH HAGGERTY FOR FUNDING FOR THE WINTER STORM. IT WASN'T QUITE COMPLETE YET.

WE ARE CLOSE TO TRYING TO CLOSE OUT AND ALSO COVID-19.

WE'RE STILL GOING TO GO FORWARD WITH HAGGERTY TO RETRIEVE

FUNDING FOR THINGS WE PAID OUT. >> LET -- I THINK THAT YOU ALL CAN DO EXACTLY WHAT HAGGERTY IS DOING.

I THINK YOU AND ANNA, CAN DO EVERYTHING THAT THEY ARE DOING, REQUESTING INFORMATION, REQUESTING INFORMATION.

CALL AND MAKE A PHONE CALL, MAKE A HONE CALL.

THAT'S WHAT IT ALL HERE. >> IT IS THAT POINT, WE COULD POSSIBLY DO THAT. BUT WE DO NOT HAVE THE STAFF TO

DO IT. >> THAT WOULD BE A NEED, TO

MAKE A PHONE CALL. >> IF OU TAKE HAGERTY PHRASES, IN ORDER TO START THE RECOVERY PROCESS, THEY HAD A FULL STAFF THAT WE DO NOT HAVE. THEY BROUGHT IN THE FIVE ADDITIONAL PEOPLE, AND THEY HAVE FIVE PEOPLE WORKING.

>> I DON'T SEE 14 PEOPLE. I SEE WORK FOR TWO PEOPLE MAYBE

THREE PEOPLE. >> UNDERSTAND.

LOOKS LIKE IT IS NOT A LOT OF WORK UNTIL YOU GO THROUGH A MAJOR HURRICANE OR MAJOR DISASTER AND WE HAVE TO TRY TO

GET ALL OF THE STUFF TOGETHER. >> WE ARE ALREADY PAST THAT MAN, THAT IS WHAT REALLY WORRIES ME.

WE PASSED ALREADY AND HERE WE ARE STILL PAYING COMMENTS TO THE KIND OF MONEY WE'VE BEEN PAYING FROM THE BEGINNING.

YOU KNOW >> THAT IS A GOOD POINT

COMMISSIONER, I SEE YOUR POINT. >> I JUST UNDERSTAND .

THIS IS RIDICULOUS. I'M FRUSTRATED.

>> I STILL SAY THIS IS AN ISSUE WITH OUR CONTRACTS.

AND WE SHOULD HAVE MORE DETAIL AND INFORMATION REQUESTED AND CONTRACTS AND ITEMS. I LIVED THROUGH HURRICANE HARVEY OVER HERE AND THERE PEOPLE OVER THERE THAT ARE STILL GETTING BACK IN THEIR HOMES, IT DOES TAKE A LONG TIME TO GET APPROVAL FOR A MONIES FOR THAT, IT TOOK US A LONG TIME TO GET OUR ROOF FIXED AND SOME OTHER THINGS THAT WE DID.

A LONG TIME BUT WE ARE GETTING TO THE END OF IT.

FIVE YEARS, ARE WE PAYING FOR SOMETHING WE ARE NOT GOING TO

GET OR IS EVEN RECOVERABLE? >> WITH HAGERTY, WE WOULD HAVE A CONTRACTOR WE ARE ABLE TO DO THAT WITH OUR STAFF HERE.

>> AT THIS POINT. >> BUT BEFORE THAT WE CANNOT.

>> SINCE IT'S BEEN SO LONG, AND WE'RE TALKING WITH THESE ISSUES THAT HAPPENED SO LONG AGO, IS THERE WAITING TO CONTACT HAGERTY AND SAY, WE WOULD LIKE TO FINALIZE OUR BILLS.

IS THERE A WAY TO CONTACT THEM? YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT STUFF A LONG TIME AGO. THEY ARE NOT CURRENTLY FIGHTING THERE NOT MAKING PHONE CALLS. OUR CONTRACT -- MAY BE A FINAL

BILL. >> FOR OCTOBER OR NOVEMBER --

>> WOULD MAYBE BE SOMETHING WE WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU ASK.

>> I CAN DO THAT. >> MAYBE PUT CLOSURE TO THIS.

I WANT TO PAY WITH THIS FOR ANOTHER THREE MONTHS.

THAT IS SOME OF THE THINGS I SAW.

I WOULDN'T EVEN PAY THEM. YOU KNOW, I'M SORRY.

I DON'T KNOW, CAN YOU COME UP? I'M SORRY YOU CAN'T TALK.

THE INVOICES WE RETURNED TO HAGERTY, HAVE YOU GOTTEN ANY

RESPONSE BACK? >> I HAVE NOT GOTTEN RESPONSES.

>> WE SHOULDN'T PAY THEM, RIGHT?

THAT'S MY OPINION. >> WHATEVER REQUESTED --

>> IF THEY DON'T RESPOND TO -- >> BASICALLY, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT DOES THE BUSINESS FOR THE COUNTY, THIS IS BUSINESS SO YOU HAVE ALL THE RIGHT IN THE WORLD TO SCRUTINIZE THE BILLS, TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THEM AND TAKE APPROPRIATE

ACTION. >> IN ORDER FOR ME TO VERIFY THAT THEY WERE PERFORMING THE WORK THAT THEY WERE SEEING ON

[01:55:04]

THEIR SUMMARY, I REQUESTED -- THEY PROVIDE AN AGENDA AS WELL.

THEY WILL DISCUSS. >> JUDGE, I LIKE TO MAYBE SET THIS UP FOR APRIL, IF THEY DON'T RESPOND, MAYBE WE TAKE

ACTION. >> YOU WANT TO MOVE THIS FOR

THE APRIL. >> FIRST MEETING IN APRIL.

>> FIRST MEETING APRIL. >> MOTION OR TABLE?

>> TABLE. >> WERE NOT PAID INVOICES? INFORMATION FROM THE STORM. THAT REIMBURSEMENT OF -- FOR THE ADMIN WE DID RECEIVE BACK, 60,000.

WE RECEIVED A LESSON FOR BACK-AND-FORTH, BACK-AND-FORTH WITH FEMA AND REQUESTING, PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION.

IT DOES TAKE A WHILE. BUT THAT IS WHY IT IS UNDER

5105. >> OKAY AND YOU PUT UP A GOOD POINT. I THINK ONE TIME, HE SUBMITTED A REPORT TO THE COURT, GIVE US THE REPORT THAT WAS DENIED.

IT WAS PAID IN COVID PANDEMIC. >> YES.

>> I LIKE TO HAVE AN UPDATED REPORT ON EVERYTHING BEING PAID, WAS OUTSTANDING. OUTSTANDING OVER $1 MILLION.

>> YES SIR. I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU HEAR ME. THE HAGGERTY TEAM DID SUBMIT REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENTS. AND OF THOSE, 1.399 MILLION.

SO FAR, ELIGIBLE IS 1.84. THEY PAID FOUR COMPLETED.

THERE SAW STANDING ONES ARE NOT EVEN PUSHED BACK TO THE TESTING PHASE. THERE STILL JUST REQUESTING MORE DOCUMENTATION ON SEVERAL SWING ONCE THEY MOVE FROM THAT

FIGURE TO ANOTHER. >> YOU ALL CAN DO THAT RIGHT?

>> YES SIR. WE HAVE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION.

>> IF YOU HAD SOMEONE TO HELP, WE DON'T HAVE TO PAY HAGERTY.

WE COULD HIRE FIVE PEOPLE WHAT WE ARE PAYING FOR THEM.

>> LIST OF THEIR COUNTRY TO HAVE THE JUDGE SIGN THE LAST

REQUISITION. >> COMMISSIONER, DO YOU WANT TO MOVE THIS TO THE FIRST MEETING IN APRIL?

>> WITH CONDITIONS THAT IF THEY DO NOT RESPOND CALMLY JUST

DON'T PAY THEM. >> I HAVE A MOTION TO BRING THIS BACK FOR THE FIRST MEETING IN APRIL.

>> SECOND. >> SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

[8. Discuss and consider any and all American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) allocations and other related matters. ]

SAME, THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.

MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ANY AND ALL AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT (ARPA) ALLOCATIONS AND OTHER RELATED MATTERS. YES, WE WILL LET LULU REST OF VOICE.

>> I THINK IS OBVIOUS SHE CAN'T --

>> OKAY, LUCKILY SHE PROVIDED ME WITH LITTLE PROGRESS REPORT FOR ARPA. SHE SAYS WANT TO PROVIDE A QUICK UPDATE ON OUR PROGRESS. IN THE PAST MONTH, I'VE HELD TWO FORMS FOR THE PUBLIC. ONE FOR BENEFICIARIES, WHICH IS RECEIVING 49,000 AND LESS. ONE FOR SAID RECIPIENTS.HERE WERE 20 ORGANIZATIONS IN ATTENDANCE FOR THE MEETINGS.

SINCE THE FORMS, WITHHELD 15 MEETINGS WITH INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATIONS TO HELP THEM DECIDE WHICH CATEGORY BENEFICIARY SUB RECIPIENT BEST FITS THEIR NEEDS, AND HELP THEM THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS.

THERE ARE FIVE ORGANIZATIONS THAT THROUGH THIS PROCESS, MOLLIFIED IN OUR AGENDA TO APPROVE FOR PAYMENT.

THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE ALSO DISCOVERED ORGANIZATIONS WILL NEED ADDITIONAL TIME TO GATHER ALL REQUIRED MATERIALS.

AND SECURE A UNIQUE IDENTIFYING NUMBER.

AS SUCH, REQUESTED THAT I BE EXTENDED THROUGH MARCH 31 2023, SEE ATTACHMENT 3A 10 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

ONE NOTE, THAT WAS INCORRECTLY ADDED AS 2028 ON THE ATTACHMENT. PLEASE LET THE MINUTES REFLECT THE CORRECT DATE OF MARCH 31, 2023.

THAT IS THE QUICK UPDATE. WHAT QUESTIONS DO YOU HAVE?

>> MY QUESTION RIGHT NOW WOULD BE, HOW MANY ACTORS DID NOT QUALIFY FOR WHAT WAS ALLOCATED? I UNDERSTAND THERE WERE THREE

OR FOUR OF THEM? >> ARE THERE THREE OR FOUR THAT CURRENTLY DON'T QUALIFY? IF YOU LOOK AT THE SUMMARY, I

[02:00:04]

THINK IT IS OUR PROPOSAL ALLOCATION STATUS OF PROJECTS.

YOU'LL SEE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF EACH, THE FAR RIGHT COLUMN, THAT THERE IS A STATUS UPDATE OF WHERE WE ARE IN THE PROCESS.

WITH THOSE INDIVIDUAL ENTITIES. IF YOU LOOK FOR INSTANCE, UNDER THE THIRD CATEGORY, VETERANS BAND OF CORPUS CHRISTI, PANTING A SAM.GOV ID PIER 1 DIDN'T QUALIFY BECAUSE THEIR 501(C)6, AND IT DOESN'T QUALIFY UNDER ARPA.

TO BACK OUT OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS ALTOGETHER.

THEN A YOU HAVE OPTED FOR THE 9000, VERSUS THE ORIGINAL

AMOUNT. >> WERE THE ONES THAT DON'T

QUALIFY AT ALL? >> I THINK THEY WERE TWO OR

THREE. >> SO FAR, THE BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, THEY WERE THE 501(C)6, NAACP IS 501(C)4, BUT THEY HAVE A 501(C)(3) BUT WE ARE LOOKING TO SEE IF THEY CAN APPLY UNDER THE AS OPPOSED TO THE --

>> AND THEN ANOTHER AS WELL? TWO.

>> I DO NOT SEE THEM. >> THERE WAS ONE THAT THERE'S A SCHEDULED MEETING PENDING, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT DOESN'T QUALIFY. OR THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION. THEY'RE MISSING A FILING.

THEY MAY HAVE LOST THEIR NOT-FOR-PROFIT STATUS.

>> THIS IS -- THAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW.

AND MAKING SCHEDULE WITH THEM I BELIEVE ON FRIDAY.

>> BUT YOU HAVE ANOTHER SEPARATE SHEET HERE, THAT EXPLICITLY OUTLINES THE -- ALLOCATIONS, IT IS NOT TRANSFERRED THAT THIS WAS GETTING AT WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?

>> LOOKING AT THAT. THE BOB HALL PEER ARPA, THIS WALKS YOU THROUGH THE ELIGIBLE CATEGORIES.

BASICALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT CATEGORIES ONE, TWO AND FOUR, IT DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR THOSE. IT WOULD QUALIFY UNDER REVENUE LOSS, THAT BEING SAID, YOU HAVE A 10 MILLION ON WHAT YOU CAN SPEND IN THE CATEGORY. IT WOULD ALSO HAVE TO BE COMPLETE BY 2026. SO THAT COULD ALSO PROHIBIT IT.

>> SAID THAT AGAIN? >> WEARS A REVENUE LOSS? GO AHEAD, START YOUR QUESTIONS OR JUDGE, I THINK I INTERRUPTED

YOUR QUESTION, GO AHEAD. >> I WAS WANTING TO KNOW HOW THE REVENUE LOSS I THOUGHT WAS BECAUSE OF THE HURRICANE, NOT BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC. I THOUGHT THAT WAS CLEAR.

>> RIGHT MUSCLE CONFUSING. THE WAY YOU CALCULATE REVENUE LOSS, AS WITH REVENUE THE COUNTY LOST DURING THE COVID PANDEMIC. WHAT THE FUNDS CAN BE USED FOR.

>> LOST MONEY DURING THE PANDEMIC.

>> RIGHT. >> GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER

CHESNEY, I'M SORRY. >> SO, IS IT YOUR OPINION THAT THE MONEY ALLOCATED, THAT THE PRIOR JUDGE AND MYSELF ALLOCATED FOR THIS QUALIFIES OR NOT?

>> DOES QUALIFY. IF IT IS COMPLETE BY 2026.

>> IF THE PEERS COMPLETE BY 2026?

>> RIGHT. THAT'S HOW IT CAN GET --

>> SOMEHOW QUALIFIES AGAIN? >> UNDER REVENUE LOSS IT CAN QUALIFY UNDER THAT IS A VERY BROAD CATEGORY.

IT CAN COVER MOST GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES THAT A COUNTY WOULD PROVIDE. UNDER THAT CATEGORY, YOU'RE LIMITED TO 10 MILLION BUT YOU CAN USE PART OF THE 10 MILLION TO FUND THE AMOUNTS THAT YOU ORIGINALLY ALLOCATED.

>> HOW MUCH WE REALLY HAVE IN THAT CATEGORY IF YOU'RE LIMITED

TO 10 MILLION? >> DALE, DO YOU KNOW?

>> 20 MILLION. >> WE HAVEN'T SPENT ANYTHING FROM THAT BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES HOW MUCH WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND DO. EVERY LOSS CATEGORY IS A CATEGORY TO TRY COVER MOST AREAS THAT DON'T COVER EVERYTHING. WE ARE NOT SPENT ANYTHING YET.

THERE'S BEEN A FEW MILLION DOLLARS ALLOCATED TO CERTAIN AREAS THAT ARE THERE AND WE ARE STILL RESEARCHING SOME TRANSACTIONS THAT WE HAVE EXPENDED THAT MAY NEED TO BE MOVED BACK HERE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T COVER THE ENTIRE COUNTY

IS CONSIDERED REVENUE LOSS. >> AND SO, DO WE HAVE TO ALLOCATE THIS A SPECIFIC WAY? TO ALLOCATE IT UNDER THE REVENUE LOSS? BECAUSE IN THE FIRST PAPER, I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THE COMMISSION FOR THIS ON THE AGENDA. INDICATED WE DIDN'T THINK THAT MONEY WAS. I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT THE FIRST PAPER SAID. SO SOMETHING IS CHANGED SINCE

THE FIRST PAPER? >> SO, THE SNOW THAT WE HAD TO

[02:05:08]

WORK TOGETHER. THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT HURDLES YOU'RE TRYING TO GET OVER, THE FIRST IS, DOES IT QUALIFY? YES, THE FIRST, DOES THE EXPENSE QUALIFY? THE ANSWER IS YES. YOU COULD USE REVENUE LOST TO FUND IT.HE SECOND FAILURE TRYING TO GET OVER.

REVENUE LOSS.> I'M SORRY. >> I'M SORRY.

SIX. THE SECOND HURDLE YOU'RE TRYING TO GET OVER, WILL BE COMPLETED IN TIME? THAT IS THE AREA I THINK, IN WHICH THEY WERE NOT SURE IT

WOULD GET COMPLETED IN TIME. >> AND -- WHAT WAS THE REASONING I'VE CALLED A WHITE PAPER WAS JUST WHATEVER YOU PROVIDED, WAS THE REASON YOU THOUGHT IT WAS UNQUALIFIED? DID I READ THAT WRONG? I DON'T HAVE IT.

>> IS IT A PAPER THAT YOU -- YES.

AND I THINK THAT WAS THE MISUSE OF THE WORD QUALIFY.

SO, DOES QUALIFY. WILL BE COMPLETED IN TIME?

>> IS LIKE TO BE PROVIDED SAYS, UNDER U.S. TREASURY ROLE, THE PEER DOES NOT NEED THE STANDARDS AND IT GOES ALL AWAY FROM A THROUGH -- LIST SEVERAL THINGS THIS IS PROVIDED TO US

AND AS WE ARE CONFUSED ABOUT. >> MY GOSH, IS NOT GOING TO

WORK. >> I THINK HER STRENGTH STAYS UNDER PUBLIC HEALTH, THERE WERE FUNDS THAT YOU CAN USE COMMAS TO SEPARATE CATEGORY FOR PARKS. AND IT DOES NOT QUALIFY AS A PARK. THAT'S WHY YOU HAD TO USE

REVENUE LOSS. >> IN THE REVENUE LOSS ON THIS,

WOULD BE FROM COVID? >> REVENUE LESS, YOU DO HAVE TO PROVE REVENUE LOSS FOR THE EXPENDITURE.

THE WAY, THE REVENUE LOSS IS KIND OF A CATCH ALL CATEGORY, THE AMOUNT ALLOCATED TO THE COUNTY IS BASED ON THE COUNTY VERY RELUCTANTLY COVID PANDEMIC.

>> WE DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER? >> NOT WHAT CAUSED THE LOSS?

>> EXACTLY. >> THE WAY, WE HAD TO DO MULTIPLE CALCULATIONS ON WHAT OUR LOSS WAS A COULD BE -- WHATEVER MIGHT BE LOST THE COUNTY.

THE MULTIPLE CALCULATIONS, THE TREASURY CAME OUT AND SAID TO PREVENT -- A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF RESOURCES.

GIVE US A ONE-TIME $10 MILLION LIMIT.

WE BROUGHT BACK TO COURT AND THAT IS WHAT WE AGREED TO BECAUSE WE WERE AROUND 70 MILLION IF WE DO OUR OWN CALCULATIONS. BUT OUR LOSS IS $10 MILLION AND

THUS THE MOST WE'VE SPENT. >> YOUR UNEQUIVOCALLY SAYING -- CHRIS EVEN THOUGH THE REVENUE LOSS WAS NOT ATTRIBUTED TO THE PANDEMIC. THAT'S NOT WHAT WE HAVE REALLY

LESS BUT IT'S OKAY. >> CORRECT.

THE REASON FOR THE EXPENDITURES DOESN'T HAVE TO BE REVENUE LOSS. IT COULD BE SPENT ON ANY GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES. THERE ARE A FEW EXCEPTIONS, PAYING DEBT.NOTHER'S ONE WILL APPEAR.

>> THE CATEGORY WITH REPORT REVENUE LOSS AREA.

>> RIGHT. >> WE REALLY HAVE $10 MILLION.

>> SO THEN WE ARE GOING OVER. IF YOU'RE SAYING REMAINING.

>> REALLY SPENT EIGHT OR 9000 SO WE MADE SEVERAL APPROPRIATIONS POSSIBLE, STILL TRYING TO EVALUATE.

WE STILL HAVE ALMOST $10 MILLION AVAILABLE TO SPEND.

WE HAVEN'T SPENT ANYTHING OTHER THAN A SMALL PORTION.

MAYBE EIGHT OR $9000. MAYBE THERE'S LIKE $9 MILLION

LEFT. >> WE KNOW THE CHAMBER DON'T QUALIFY FOR WHATEVER REASON. TODAY QUALIFY FOR REVENUE LOSS?

>> I DON'T -- ANY, THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE GIVEN THE MONEY OUT OF THEIR GENERAL FUND, I SUPPOSE THEY WOULD BUT NO.

THEY DON'T QUALIFY FOR THE NOT-FOR-PROFIT SUPPORT.

>> SAID IS A QUALIFY UNDER THE ARR FUNDS? THE ALLOCATIONS THAT WERE MADE? DOES IT QUALIFY? YOU SAY THAT IT DOES. IF IT'S BUILT BY Y 2026.

IF BUILT BY 2026. IF IT IS NOT COMPLETED BY 2026 WILL COME OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND.

>> BETTER BE COMPLETED BY 2026 FOR GODS SAKE.

I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S GOING -- >> YOU KNOW, WHAT BOTHERS HERE, WE HAVE $2 MILLION ALLOCATED.

WE HAVE THE ANSWERS, WE MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT OR IF AND THIS.

WE NEED TO KNOW ANSWERED BECAUSE, IF IT'S NOT GOING TO QUALIFY, NOT BUILT BY 2026, WHEN YOU DO SOMETHING WITH THE MONEY BECAUSE ARPA ALSO ENDS IN 2026.

>> ARE NO CONCERNS WITH THE QUALIFYING.

I'VE CHARGED WITH BE COMPLETED BY 2026.

DALE, ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT?

>> YES. >> SO, YOU KNOW AND AGAIN, WE

ARE LOOKING AT THE -- >> WE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEING

[02:10:09]

THE PEER BUT THIS IS ALLOCATED FOR THE RESTAURANT PORTION TOO.

>> THIS SAYS MUST BE SPENT. >> NO.

IT HAS TO BE COMPLETE, OPERATIONAL, RIGHT.

>> THAT IS WHAT YOU PROVIDED TO US AS PEER.

>> I CAN GET YOU ADDITIONAL DETAIL.

HAS TO BE OPERATIONAL BY 2026. >> HAS TO BE COMPLETED, THE PROJECT. BUT AGAIN, AND I'M LOOKING AT 2 MILLION AND THE DEVELOPER WHEN HE CAME TO US THE LAST TIME.

AGAIN, ANOTHER ALMOST MILLION DOLLARS.

LOOKING AT $3 MILLION THAT WE NEED FOR THE PEER.

IF YOU WON'T BE BUILT, WE CANNOT BE ASSURED IT WILL BE REBUILT. TO RECONSIDER THAT SECOND PART BECAUSE I-- THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE MONIES.

ELYSSES, WE HAVE THE MONEY TO BUILD THE PEER, NOT TO WORRY ABOUT IT. BUT, I'M SURE THERE ARE OTHER AREAS HE CAN SPEND THE MONEY. AND WHATEVER BUT -- YOU KNOW, I'M JUST BRINGING IT UP. I JUST THINK THAT WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING. WE CANNOT BE WAITING UNTIL 25 AND TRY TO GET A PROJECT FINISHED IN ONE YEAR.

IT WILL BE A BIG PROJECT . IT WON'T HAPPEN.

SO, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE, I DON'T KNOW.

THAT YOU CAN ASSURE IT WILL BE BUILT.

>> I THINK WE HAVE TO GET, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE ENGINEERS COMING IN TO GIVE US 30 PERCENT DESIGN.

I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE ON THAT.

I KNOW THAT I THINK THEY'RE STILL CONTEMPLATING SOME DECISIONS. I'M NOT SURE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS RIGHT OR NOT EITHER.

DO YOU WANT TO TABLE IT? >> WE CAN --

>> FIRST, WE NEED TO HAVE A VOTE ON THE EXTENSION FOR THE 31ST, TO EXTEND THE BENEFICIARIES FINISHED WITH THE

APPLICATIONS. >> WEIGHT, WHICH ONE?

THAT IS NOT THIS ONE? >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10.

>> I THINK WE ARE ON NUMBER EIGHT.> ASKED FOR THAT TO BEGINNING. IT WAS IN THE REPORT THAT SHE

SAID. >> CAN INTERJECT ONE MORE THING? SO YOU GET TO 2025 AND REALIZES NOT GOING TO BE DONE IN TIME. THE FUNDS ALSO HAVE TO BE OBLIGATED BY 2024. IT WOULD BE TOO LATE TO GO BACK

AND SAY. >> HE DIDN'T SAY THAT.

>> THAT'S WHY I AM ADDING THAT. IT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW.

>> I AM READING IT NOW BUT I JUST GOT THIS QUICKLY.

>> RIGHT. >> ALL FUNDS OBLIGATED BY --

>> DECEMBER 20 -- >> OBLIGATED MEANING WHAT?>

OBLIGATED TO EACH. >> BASICALLY, EACH QUARTER WE DO A PROGRESS REPORT WHERE WE SUBMIT TO THE TREASURY WHAT WE DECIDE TO SPEND THE FUNDS ON. BY DECEMBER 31, 2024, YOU COULD GO BACK AND SAY WE ARE NOT GOING TO USES $2 MILLION ON THE PIER BECAUSE BROTHER WILL BE DONE WE CAN USE IT ON SOMETHING ELSE BECAUSE IT WOULD'VE ALREADY BEEN OBLIGATED.

>> SO THE DECISIONS BY DECEMBER 31 OF 2024.

THUS THE OBLIGATION OF THE FUNDS RIGHT?

>> YES. >> THAT'S A GOOD NUMBER TO HAVE BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE PUT ON THE AGENDA, THEY NEED TO FINISH UP WHATEVER THEY ARE FINISHING UP AND WE NEED TO GET AN ENGINEER BACK IN HERE, AND CONSULTING ENGINEER AND TELL US, WHAT IS A HARD AND FAST DATE OF FINISH ON THIS PIER? I GET THAT HARD AND FAST ISN'T RIGHT BUT THEY SAY THE END OF 26, THAT IS A LITTLE DICEY. IF THEY SAY FOR SURE THE MIDDLE OF 25 AND IS A DIFFERENT STORY. IF THEY SAY 24, WE WILL KNOW FOR SURE AND 24 IF IT IS NOT DONE RIGHT? WE NEED TO GET IDEAS. THIS IS DIFFERENT, THIS IS ENCOURAGING NEWS BECAUSE VERSUS IT WASN'T ELIGIBLE NOW --

>> I CANNOT SPEAK FOR LULU BUT PICTURES TRYING TO MAKE IT FIT UNDER DIFFERENT CATEGORY. SHE WASN'T USING LOST REVENUE.

>> IT'S OKAY. IT IS WHAT IT IS. JUST TELL THE WORLD WHO MIGHT NOT BE ELIGIBLE AND NOW IT IS.

>> AT LEAST IT IS BETTER NEWS. [LAUGHTER]

>> NOT DONE BY 24. >> THERE IS NO ACTION ITEM ON THIS. WE WILL MOVE ON.

>> ACTUALLY, CAN WE TABLE THIS TO COINCIDE --

[02:15:04]

>> OR NO ACTION ON IT WILL JUST BRING ANOTHER REPORT BACK.

>> THIS IS DISCUSS AND CONSIDER.

WE WOULD NEED TO TABLE IT TO INCLUDE IT WITH THE ITEM RELATED TO WHEN THEY BRING US BOB HALL PEER UPDATE.

THEY CAN STILL DISCUSS IT AS PART OF THAT AS WELL.

I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE IT TO WHATEVER THAT WILL

HAPPEN. >> ANY IDEA WHEN YOU WANT TO

SET THAT? >> I THINK WILL BE -- I WOULD

SAY AT THE LATEST. >> THE LATEST END OF APRIL.

I JUST DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY WILL BRING ME A 30 PERCENT

PEER. >> I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO WORK CLOSELY WITH LULU AND MICHAEL FOR A PROCUREMENT ITEMS THAT YOU HAVE DEALING WITH BOB HALL PEER.

IT IS NOT PROCURED CORRECTLY, YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO USE THE

ARPA FUNDS. >> FOR THINK WE ARE TO GO THROUGH WHATEVER THE NORMAL PROCUREMENT IS ANYTHING WILL DO

THAT WITH THE PIER FOR SURE. >> WELL AWARE OF THAT.

>> THAT'S NOT A QUESTION. >> YOUR MOTION IS TO BRING THIS

BACK. >> THE SECOND MEETING?

>> I THINK IS JUST TO GIVE US, IF THAT IS OKAY WITH YOU.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE AND BRING THIS BACK TO THE END OF THE APRIL MEETING. 2 APRIL MEETING.

AND ALSO HAVE THE BOB -- PIER DEVELOPER TO COME IN AND GIVE US A REPORT AT THE SAME TIME. E HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

[9. Discuss and consider approval of the American Rescue Plan Act Subrecipient Policy/Checklist and Internal ARPA Forms.]

I ASSUME YOU DO THAT COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ.

ALL IN FAVOR?NY OPPOSED? MOVING ON TO NINE, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT SUBRECIPIENT POLICY/CHECKLIST AND INTERNAL ARPA FORMS. -- YOU HAVE A COPY OF THIS IN YOUR PACKET.

I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS? ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

[10. Discuss and consider extending the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Beneficiary Nonprofit Application submittal deadline due to SAM.gov Federal Registry delays. ]

MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 10. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER EXTENDING THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT (ARPA) BENEFICIARY NONPROFIT APPLICATION SUBMITTAL DEADLINE DUE TO SAM.GOV FEDERAL REGISTRY DELAYS. THUS FOR THE SMALLER ONES, AND I THINK YOUR DATE WAS MARCH 31, TWO EXTENDED THROUGH MARCH 31.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> SO MOVED.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

>> JUDGE, I APOLOGIZE. I MEANT TO DO CLEANUP ON NUMBER EIGHT CAN WE GO BACK REAL QUICK?

>> YOU TABLED IT. >> I KNOW.

>> YOU CAN'T DO WITH IT IF YOU TABLE IT.

I THOUGHT IT WAS TO DISCUSS LATER.

>> ACTUALLY IT IS TABLED. >> CANNOT CONSIDER IT.

>> I DO NOT THINK SO AT THIS TIME.

>> HE CANNOT DO ANYTHING PLEASE TABLED IT.

>> THAT'S OKAY. OKAY THAT IS FINE.

[11. Discuss and consider ratifying the hiring of outside counsel Brian Gaudet with Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, regarding completion of the energy savings Performance Projects, related to the County's Capital Improvement Program, and related matters.]

>> OKAY. >> I ACCEPT THE RULING.

>> MOVING ON TO ITEM 11. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER RATIFYING THE HIRING OF OUTSIDE COUNSEL, BRIAN GAUDET WITH KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP, REGARDING COMPLETION OF THE ENERGY SAVINGS PERFORMANCE PROJECTS, USED TO THE COUNTY'S

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. >> SO MOVED.

>> SECOND PEER. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION?> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING?

>> IT'S IN THERE. >> THERE HELPING US TO GET THROUGH THE COMPLETION OF THAT JOB.

B. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

AS IN THE AGENDA PACKET. >> I'M LOOKING THROUGH THE

ATTACHMENTS. >> SORRY.

>> TO TRY TO DO IT ALL -- SO I DON'T HAVE PAPERS.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?

[12. Discuss and consider next Commissioners Court meeting date, and related matters.]

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES.

THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO ITEM 12.

DISCUSS AND CONSIDER NEXT COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING DATE, AND RELATED MATTERS. MARCH 22.

FOR ANNOUNCEMENT OR TO MARK ON YOUR CALENDARS, WE HAVE THE STATE OF THE COUNTY IS SCHEDULED FOR MAY 18, FOR YOU TO PUT DOWN. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY CONFLICT WITH MARCH 22 OR WANT TO DO ANYTHING WITH OUR DATES FOR THE

NEXT MEETING? >> MC)TIS?

>> MAY 18 IS THE STATE OF THE COUNTY.

>> OKAY. >> NEXT MEETING IS MARCH 22.

[1. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving execution of Agreement Amendment No. 3 with Aramark Correctional Services, LLC for RFP 3138-20 Food Management Program for Nueces County Jails for Sheriff’s Office, and related matters.]

[02:20:04]

WE NEED A MOTION, DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT?

>> NO. >> OKAY.

WAITING ON TO ITEM B, THE SHARES DEPARTMENT, B1 IS DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 3 WITH ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, LLC FOR RFP 3138-20 FOOD MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR NUECES COUNTY JAILS FOR SHERIFFB RELATED MATTERS. DO YOU ALL WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS? OR MICHAEL? ARE YOU GOING TO UPDATE ON THIS?

THANK YOU. >> WILL SPEAK ON THE SUREST BEHALF. WE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH ARAMARK. THEY ASKED FOR A MULTITUDE OF CONTRACT CHANGES. WHAT WE SETTLED ON, WAS THE RATE INCREASE ON REAL COST DUE TO THE CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS ON THE COST OF FOOD. AND SO, THE SHERIFF IS WILLING TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS ONE ITEM, AND THAT IS WHAT THIS AMENDMENT IS TO DO.HEN I WILL TAKE CARE OF IT.

WE WILL MEET WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE AND SHERIFF

RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> SO MOVED.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ANYDISCUSSION ? ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU.

[2. Discuss and consider approval of additional American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) allocated to Out-of-County Incarcerations (Sheriff's Office-Jail).]

YOU PROBABLY NEED TO STAY THERE.

DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ADDITIONAL AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT (ARPA) ALLOCATED TO OUT-OF-COUNTY INCARCERATIONS TO OUT OF COUNTY -- SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND JAIL.

3B2 AND WOULD HAVE THIS REPORT? THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH REPAIRS DONE IN THERE THAT THE SHERIFF CANNOT BRING THOSE PEOPLE BACK TO COUNTY JUST YET BECAUSE OF THE WORK GOING ON IN THERE.

>> YES, 493,000, BUT STILL NOT ENOUGH.

A REQUEST ADDITIONAL 600,000 THROUGH ARPA.

>> ADDITIONAL 600? ALL RIGHT.

>> THROUGH ARPA. >> THIS ACCOUNT OF ONE TIME, RIGHT? NOT REOCCURRING?

>> 2023. >> JUST TO CLARIFY.

>> 2023. AND THEN, WE NEED --

[INAUDIBLE] >> THANK YOU.

>> I BELIEVE THE SHERIFF JUST WANTED TO HAVE AN EXTRA 600 FOUR -- CLASS BECAUSE OF THE REPAIRS.

NUMBERS ARE GETTING DOWN AND HE WOULD NORMALLY BE POSSIBLY BRINGING SOME OF THOSE BACK. BUT BECAUSE OF THE WORK GOING ON IN THE JAIL, WE ARE NOT ABLE TO AT THIS TIME.

>> AND IF THEY DON'T SPEND THE MONEY GOES BACK TO ARPA.

>> GOES BACK OF IT IS -- A] IS NOT SPENT.

>> DID WE HAVE A MOTION? >> SURE.

SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

[3. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving the execution of a contract with Axon Enterprises, Inc. (Sourcewell Cooperative Contract No. 010720) for the purchase of in-car cameras, body cameras, tasers and interview room technology for Nueces County Sheriff‘s Office, and related matters. ]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MOVING ON TO 3B3.

DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH AXON ENTERPRISES, INC.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND PEER.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION?

>> HAS BEEN VETTED BY THE ATTORNEY?

>> YES. >> GOOD ENOUGH, THANK YOU.

>> MOTION AND SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.

THANK YOU, MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO PUBLIC WORKS.

[3. Discuss and consider selection of plat options for subdividing the Old Show Barn property required for the development of the Nueces County Animal Care Facility.]

WE HAVE TABLED THE FIRST TWO NUMBER ONE AND TWO, GOING TO NUMBER THREE. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER SELECTION OF PLOT OPTIONS FOR SUBDIVIDING THE OLD SHOW BARN PROPERTY REQUIRED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NUECES COUNTY ANIMAL CARE FACILITY. THERE ARE FIVE OPTIONS I BELIEVE.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. THERE ARE FIVE OPTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED. -- I THINK THE OPTION THAT HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED AS OPTION NUMBER THREE.

DIVIDING THE PROPERTY INTO THREE SEPARATE PROPERTIES.

THIS IS A SELECTION AND THEN ONCE COMMISSIONERS COURT SELECTED THEN WE WILL HIRE -- TO WRITE THE DOCUMENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF PLOTTING. ALSO BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY

OF ROBSTOWN FOR APPROVAL. >> AND I DID LOOK AT THIS AS WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS, EITHER THE COMMISSIONERS, THERE WAS SOME SUGGESTION ABOUT FUTURE USE AND, IN CASE YOU WANTED TO

[02:25:02]

SETTLE THAT OR ANYTHING. I LIKE THE OPTION NUMBER THREE AS WELL PERSONALLY. WHEN I LOOKED AT IT AND ASKED THE QUESTIONS, MAKE THE MOTION TO GO WITH OPTION NUMBER THREE.

>> SECOND PEER. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? GO AHEAD.

>> THE PLANNING ISSUE IS SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY WERE ANTICIPATING WHAT THEY GOT ON IT.

I THINK THE STAFF ARE WORKING ON IT BECAUSE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE DIDN'T EXPECT THE CITY OF ROBSTOWN TO BRING UP.

BUT IT'S DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY NOW.

I GUESS BEFORE WE JUST ALWAYS WORKED ON A UNOFFICIAL AGREEMENT. I AGREE, JUDGE.

THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSIONS IN THE PAST ABOUT DIVIDED UP AND MAYBE SELL ONE PART OF IT SO, I TOTALLY AGREE THAT THIS IS PROBABLY THE BEST LAYOUT FOR THAT.

IT BUILDS ANIMAL CARE FACILITY AND SO, OF COURSE THE -- IN THE BACK WHAT WE HAD BUILT BEHIND THERE.

>> PERFECT. WE HAVE MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

[1. Discuss and consider authorizing execution of an agreement with Rene Bates Auctioneers under TASB BuyBoard State Contract No. 620-20 for online auctioneering services.]

>> THANK YOU, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS.

APPRECIATE IT. >> MOVING ON TO ITEM D1, PURCHASING. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH RENE BATES AUCTIONEERS UNDER TASB BUYBOARD STATE CONTRACT NO. 620-20 FOR ONLINE AUCTIONEERING SERVICES. WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL US ABOUT

THIS, MICHAEL? >> THIS IS DEFAULTED ON THE COUNTY OPTIONS FOR YEARS AND YEARS.

WE HAD MET WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS IN THE PREVIOUS CONTRACT IT WAS DONE SOMETIME AGO.

WE ARE GETTING REALLY CLOSE TO GETTING READY TO DO ANOTHER AUCTION. THEY FELT WE NEEDED TO UPDATE THE CONTRACT. WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THERE WERE TWO OPTIONS HOW TO PAY FOR THIS.

I AM RECOMMENDING THE CHEAPER OPTION WHICH IS 7.5 COMMISSION FEE BASED ON THE ITEMS AUCTIONED.

>> SO MOVED. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED?

>> I WOULD ADD AT THE END OF THIS THAT I WILL COME BACK WHEN WE ARE READY TO DO AN AUCTION. FIRST WILL PROBABLY HAVE A COMMUNICATION THAT GOES OUT TO THE FOLKS IN THE COUNTY IF THEY HAVE ANY WISH TO HAVE ANY OF THE ITEMS THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO AUCTION, THEY CAN GIVE IN TO OUR OFFICE AND WILL BE HAPPY TO TRANSFER THE MATERIAL TO THEM SO THEY CAN USE IT.

ONCE IT'S COMPLETED I WILL COME BACK TO THE COURT WITH A LIST OF THE ITEMS THAT WILL GO TO THE AUCTION AND WILL AUTHORIZE WHEN WE GET THAT POINT. TO PERFORM THE AUCTION.

[1. Approve Budget Change Order No. 09 for Fiscal Year 2022-2023.]

>> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.