[D. ANNOUNCEMENT ON DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Any Conflicts of Interest or Appearance of a Conflict of Interest with items on this agenda shall be declared at this time. Members with conflicts will refrain from voting and are asked to refrain from discussion on such items. Conflicts discovered later in the meeting shall be disclosed at that time.]

WE HAVE ALL COMMISSIONERS AND COUNTY JUDGE PRESENT.

ITEM D ON THE AGENDA, ANNOUNCEMENT OF ANY DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. BEING NONE, WE WILL MOVE ON TO

[1. In recognition of the Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi Islanders Men’s Basketball Program for their successful 2022-2023 season and their exceptional performance at the NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament.]

RESOLUTIONS, PROCLAMATIONS AND ORDERS ON E.

NUMBER ONE, HAVE RECOGNITION TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY, CORPUS CHRISTI ISLANDERS MEN'S BASKETBALL TEAM.

THEY WILL BRING THEM IN. AND WILL READ THE PROCLAMATION.

[APPLAUSE]

GREAT JOB. >> EASY.

WE GOT THAT RIGHT. GO AHEAD.

COMMISSIONERS COURT RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE TEXAS A&M ISLANDERS MEN'S BASKETBALL PROGRAM, FOR THE SUCCESSFUL 2022/2023 SEASON. WHEREAS THE TEXAS A&M CORPUS CHRISTI ISLANDERS MEN'S BASKETBALL TEAM, FINISHED IT

[00:05:01]

SUCCESSFUL 2022/23 COLLEGE BASKETBALL SEASON IT WAS 18 EARNED AN AUTOMATIC BID TO THE NCAA TOURNAMENT FOR THE SECOND YEAR IN A ROW. LAST WEEK TEXAS A&M CORPUS CHRISTI WHEN THE FIRST EVER NCAA TOURNAMENT GAME WITH A VICTORY OVER SOUTHEAST MISSOURI STATE, AND THE FIRST FOUR UNDER THE HEAD COACH STEVE LUTZ. WHERE IS TEXAS A&M CORPUS CHRISTI MEN'S BASKETBALL TEAM HAS WON THREE CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIPS IN THE LAST TWO SEASONS.

INCLUDE ON THAT IS A 20 2223 SLC REGULAR-SEASON CROWN ALONG WITH THE BACK TO BACK SLC TOURNAMENT TITLES.

THE ISLANDERS ENDED THE YEAR HAVING WON 13 OF FINAL 15 GAMES. THEY BECAME THE FIRST SCHOOL TO WIN THE SLC TOURNAMENT IN BACK-TO-BACK YEARS SINCE 1992 394. THE TEXAS A&M CORPUS CHRISTI ISLANDERS GARNER ALL THREE ALL-CONFERENCE SELECTIONS FOR THE FIRST TIME IN PROGRAM HISTORY.IT INCLUDED ISAAC -- AND TERRY -- ON THE FIRST TEAMS AND -- THE SECOND TEAM.

THE ISLANDERS ONLY GIVE UP A SCORING ONE OF 10 OR MORE CONSECUTIVE POINTS TWO TIMES THE ENTIRE SEASON.

THE FEWEST OF ANY TEAM IN THE COUNTRY.

TEXAS A&M CORPUS CHRISTI RANKED TOP FROM THE NATION IN FREE THROW PRESENTED WITH A .792 MARK.

THE TEAM IS GOING IN THE TOP 25 IN STEALS.

TEXAS A&M CORPUS CHRISTI ISLANDERS MEN'S BASKETBALL PLAYERS INCLUDE.

THEREFORE BE RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, THE COURT HEREBY RECOGNIZES THE TEXAS A&M CORPUS CHRISTI ISLANDERS MEN'S BASKETBALL PROGRAM, FOR THEIR ATHLETIC ACCOMMODATIONS AND ACHIEVEMENTS, AND HISTORIC SUCCESS FOR TEXAS A&M CORPUS CHRISTI.

DULY ADOPTED BY THE VOTE OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS ON THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2023.

FURTHER, ALL THE RESINS OF NUECES COUNTY CONGRATULATE THE ISLANDERS ON THEIR PHENOMENAL SUCCESS.

>> MOTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

DISCUSSION? >> YES PLEASE.

JUDGE, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE WENT THROUGH AND REDISTRICTING THE LAST TIME, COMMISSIONER MAREZ TRIED TO SNAG A NAME CORPUS CHRISTI AT MY PRECINCT. [LAUGHTER] I RESPECT THAT! I RESPECT THAT BECAUSE HE WANTED TO REPRESENT YOU SO BADLY.

THING IS VERY TELLING OF HOW MUCH RESPECT EVERYBODY HAS FOR A&M CORPUS CHRISTI. BUT I WAS ABLE TO KEEP MY REPRESENTATION OF THE ISLAND UNIVERSITY.

AND THAT IS ALWAYS SOMETHING I'M VERY PROUD TO DO.

IT WAS SO MUCH FUN TO WATCH THIS TEAM AND I WANT PRESIDENT MILLER TO COME UP AND THE DIRECTOR AND ACTING COACH.

ANOTHER BEEN SOME CHANGES AND I PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA REALLY FAST, HOPING THAT THE COACH WOULD BE HERE AND I KNOW THAT TRANSPIRED PRETTY QUICKLY. BUT WE ARE SO APPRECIATIVE OF WHAT YOU DID FOR THE COASTAL -- POINT MEMBER ALL THE PEOPLE WHO MAY BE RECOGNIZING YOU, THERE'S NO GREATER RECOGNITION BECAUSE WE REPRESENT THE ENTIRE COUNTY. OKAY? LUCY THIS IS THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI.

WE ARE THE ENTIRE COUNTY! OKAY? ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT PLACES ARE SO PROUD OF YOU.

SINCERELY, SO APPRECIATIVE WHAT YOU DID AND FOR THE COMMUNITY.

IT WAS FUN TO WATCH WHEN THE SEASON AND GREAT TO WATCH YOU WITH THAT FIRST FOUR VICTORY THAT WAS FUN, BASKETBALL IS BIG MY HOUSE AND WE WATCH A LOT OF MARCH MADNESS.

WE ARE STILL WATCHING MARCH MADNESS.

WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO IT BUT YOU ALL DAY WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE A COUPLE YEARS AGO NEVER SAID HAVE COULD BEEN DONE.

LET'S JUST CALL IT LIKE IT IS. COACH AND HIS STAFF CAME IN AND TOOK OVER THE PROGRAM THAT HAD STRUGGLED TO SAY THE LEAST.

PRESIDENT MILLER WAS WISE ENOUGH TO HIRE THE DIRECTOR,

[00:10:02]

JOHN PALOMBO, WHO WAS WISE ENOUGH TO HIRE AHEAD COACH STEVE LUTZ SEPARATING GREAT COACHES.

THEN YOU GUYS ALL BUT IN AND CAME FOR MANY OF YOUR TRANSFERRED AND SOME OF YOUR HERE IN ANOTHER RELATIONSHIP GOES WAY BACK. THAT WAS A BIG DEAL.

WE REALLY JUST ARE SO GRATEFUL FOR YOU HELPING TO CONTINUE TO PUT THE COAST ON THE MAP IN SUCH A POSITIVE WAY.

YOU REPRESENTED IS NOT ONLY BECAUSE YOU WANT BASKETBALL GAMES BUT WITH CLASS AND STYLE AND GRACE.

AND THAT MEANS A LOT, THAT REALLY MATTERS.

PEOPLE WATCH. NOT JUST HOW YOU PLAN THE COURT BUT THEY WATCH HOW YOU ARE WITH THE KIDS.

HOW YOU ARE AFTER GAMES. THAT'S COOL, IT'S FUN.

WE WENT TO A BUNCH OF THOSE GAMES AND YOU GUYS WERE HIGH-FIVING AFTERWARDS AND TAKING PICTURES AND IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH PRESIDENT MILLER WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM A PLAYER OR TWO.

>> HE'S A HORNED FROG AND I AM IN ISLANDER.

[LAUGHTER] [APPLAUSE] THAT IS YOU GUYS. YOU PUT US ON THE MAP.

I HOPE THAT WE CONTINUE. I KNOW LOOKING AT THE LINEUP, A LOT OF YOU WERE SENIORS AND GRADUATE LEVEL.

IT'S A BEAUTIFUL CAMPUS AND EVERYWHERE AFTER THAT FIRST WIN DOCTOR MILLER, IT WAS LIKE, EVERYWHERE! THEY HAD THEIR OWN ISLAND, PEOPLE WERE JUST BLOWING UP TWITTER. TALKING ABOUT YOUR TEAM AND TALKING ABOUT YOUR PLAY. YOU ALL A GREAT SPORTSMEN, LENA BASKETBALL IS A PHYSICAL SPORT. A COUPLE OF GAMES GUYS WERE LITTLE MORE AGGRESSIVE, BUT YOU DID WITH CLASS.

JUST PROUD TO BE AN ISLAND APPEARED AND PRACTICING ON THE NATIONAL STAGE WHERE WAS PAYING ATTENTION WHEN YOU'RE TAKING ON ONE OF THE BEST TEAMS IN THE NATION.

YOU HELD STRONG AS LONG AS YOU COULD I KNOW THERE WERE A FEW RUNS WE HELD THEM THE GAME WOULD HAVE BEEN A LOT DIFFERENT. OVERALL, WE ARE SO PROUD AS A COMMUNITY. YOU REPRESENT A GREAT CAMPUS, WE BROUGHT INTO GREAT COMPETITION BUT YOU MADE IT.

HELP THOSE I CAN STAY HERE WILL CONTINUE TO.

THOSE GRADUATING AND MOVING ON, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME HERE IN CORPUS CHRISTI. AND THE UNIVERSITY.

GOOD LUCK! THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE] >> I JUST WANT TO SAY FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR HAVING US HERE TODAY.

COMMISSIONER CHESNEY SAT ON THE COMMITTEE HAD, A SEARCH COMMITTEE IF YEARS BACK WHEN HE FIRST BECAME PRESIDENT.

AND WHERE BOLDLY AND MAYBE CRAZILY LAMED WOULD COME AMID A MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH. IN THAT TIME PERIOD, WE DID KNOW WHO WOULD COME MAKE IT HAPPEN.

BUT THESE ARE THE GUYS THAT CAME AND MADE IT HAPPEN.

THEIR INCREDIBLE ATHLETES, BUT INCREDIBLE STUDENTS.

MORE PORTLY, INCREDIBLE PEOPLE. AND IT IS THAT, THAT THEY BRING FORWARD AND EVERYTHING THEY DO. I CANNOT BE MORE PROUD OF THEM.

I KNEW WE WOULD MAKE IT SOMEDAY BUT I AM SUPER GLAD THAT WE MADE IT WITH THIS GROUP. THEIR CREDIBLE YOUNG MOTHER SET THE PACE OUR FUTURE. THEY PUT US FORWARD, I PROMISE THAT YOU SAID YOU HOPE WE CONTINUE THE SUCCESS.

WE WILL CONTINUE THE SUCCESS. I KNOW WE WILL, BECAUSE IT SET THE FOUNDATION FOR EVERYONE ELSE TO BUILD ON.

I ALSO WANT TO THANK YOU ALL, THE BEST OF THE SEASON, I MISSED A FEW GAMES AND I WAS WORKING HARD LIMITS IF I GET THIS RIGHT MULTIPURPOSE COMMUNITY CENTER.

THAT WOULD HOPEFULLY BE HOUSING OUR CAMPUS AND WHERE THE TEAMS WILL PLAY IN THE FUTURE AS WELL AS MANY OTHER COMMUNITY EVENTS WE HELD. COMMISSIONERS COURT HELPED IN THAT EFFORT, SUPPORTED THAT. WE ARE STILL MOVING THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION BUT I THINK IT IS ANOTHER PIECE TO THIS PUZZLE THAT WILL BE REALLY IMPORTANT FOR OUR PROGRAM.

I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

THANK YOU TO IZZY, WHO BECAME THE COOLEST MASCOT IN NCAA HISTORY. IT WAS WONDERFUL! [APPLAUSE] BUT AS YOU SAID, THROUGHOUT SOCIAL MEDIA, PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY ASKING IS THIS A REAL PLACE? BECAUSE EQUITABLY WE HAVE THIS KIND OF LOCATION. NO ONE ELSE HAS BEEN ABLE TO BRING US THAT KIND OF NATIONAL ATTENTION.

BEFORE THESE GENTLEMEN. WE OWE THEM SO MUCH FOR WHAT THEY'VE DONE, BUT WE ALSO OWE YOU FOR THAT CONTINUOUS SUPPOR , THROUGH ALL THE YEARS TO GET WHERE WE ARE.

WE ARE INCREDIBLY GRATEFUL, WE ARE INCREDIBLY PROUD AND WE ARE

[00:15:01]

SO HAPPY TO REPRESENT THE COAST AND POSITIVE INTERNATIONAL ATTENTION-GETTING WAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[APPLAUSE] >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.

DO YOU WANT TO VOTE? >> WHILE HE'S WALKING UP WANT TO MENTION THAT HIS TEAM PLAYED THE NUMBER ONE OVERALL SEED IN THE COUNTRY. PRETTY MUCH DEAD EVEN IN THE SECOND HALF. THAT IS AN AMAZING ACCOMPLISHMENT AS WELL SO CONGRATULATIONS ON THAT GAME.

THAT WAS SO MUCH FUN. [INAUDIBLE] IN BIRMINGHAM.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU JUDGE SCOTT, COMMISSIONER CHESNEY, COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ, COMMISSIONER MAREZ, COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ.

FOR YOUR SERVICE FIRST AND FOREMOST TO THE COMMUNITY.

YOUR THOUGHTFULNESS, TO RECOGNIZE THESE YOUNG MEN THAT HAVE MADE HISTORY. IN SUCH A QUICK MANNER, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO BE HERE. IF YOU DON'T MIND I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THE TEAM FOR LITTLE BIT.HEN MAYBE INTRODUCE THEM INDIVIDUALLY. SO YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THEY ARE. AND THEN MAYBE HAVE CLOSING REMARKS. IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU HAVE A CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM. YOUNG MEN, LET ME TAKE THAT BACK. I THINK YOU HAVE A HALL OF FAME LEVEL TEAM IN FRONT OF YOU. [APPLAUSE] OUTSIDE THE 2017 FIRST CONFERENCE TEAM THIS IS THE ONLY TEAM IN SCHOOL HISTORY THAT HAS WON THE SOUTHERN CONFERENCE REGULAR-SEASON. OUT RIGHT.

THIS MADE THE TOURNAMENT IN NCAA AND FIRST TIME IN HISTORY.

I KNOW IT'S A LITTLE TOO SOON, BUT I'M GOING TO TELL DOCTOR MILLER NOW, I AM NOMINATING THESE YOUNG MEN IN DUE TIME TO BE IN THE ISLANDER ATHLETIC HALL OF FAME.

TELL THE YOUNG MAN. WE'VE ALREADY MENTIONED IT.

THAT HAVE ALL CONFERENCE AWARDS.

DEFENSIVE PLAYER OF THE YEAR AWARDS, PLAYER OF THE WEEK AWARDS, TOURNAMENT AWARDS, WHETHER BE THE CONFERENCE OR PRESEASON TOURNAMENTS PROVEN EXTREMELY TALENTED TEAM.NE THROUGH 16. BEYOND THAT, WE HAVE DEDICATED TEAM. EVERYBODY THAT COULD COME BACK LAST YEAR AS FAR AS ELIGIBILITY CAME BACK.

AS OF TODAY THE STEAM STARTED ESSENTIALLY IN THE SUMMER OF 2021. EVERYBODY COMING OF THE PANDEMIC. COMING THROUGH HARD WORK IN THE SUMMER, EXTRA TIME IN THE GYM, ON THE UNIVERSITY AND FIELDHOUSE ON THEIR OWN, A DEDICATED GROUP THAT LOVES EACH OTHER. WE HAVE A RESILIENT GROUP.

I DO KNOW PEOPLE REALIZE IT BUT WE HAD FOUR SEASON ENDING INJURIES. FOUR OF THEM.

THAT TELLS YOU IT COULD HAVE BEEN IF EVERYBODY WAS HEALTHY.

OTHER GUYS HAVE OFF-SEASON SURGERY BUT WERE RESILIENT AND STUCK TOGETHER. HIGH CHARACTER HAS BEEN MENTIONED. THUS THE DIRECTIVE GIVEN BY PREVIOUS HEAD COACH. WITH HIGH CHARACTER MEANT TO BE RECRUITED. THERE AREN'T MEN ON THIS TEAM THAT IS OF HIGH CHARACTER. A FREE CLINIC ON SHORELINE DRIVE AT THE PAVILION. WELCOMING ELEMENTARY STUDENTS FROM CSSD TO THEIR MORNING CLASSES.

AND DURING EDUCATION GAME WHERE THEY STAND OUTSIDE AND SHOOK EVERYBODY'S HAND, SIGNED AUTOGRAPHS FOR THOSE FROM CCISD AND SUNNY COMMUNITIES. IT'S GREAT TO BE INVOLVED WITH HIGH CHARACTER TEAM. LASTLY, YOU SCHOLARS HERE.

ONE YOUNG MAN, GRADUATED IN DECEMBER IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SEASON. WE HAVE SEVEN OTHER PLAYERS THAT WILL GRADUATE MAY 20 IN THE AMERICAN BANKS THAT WOULD BE A PROUD DAY FOR ALL OF US. WE HAVE OTHERS THAT WILL GRADUATE IN THE SUMMER WITH A GRADUATE DEGREE AND BACHELORS DEGREE. HAVE HALL OF FAME CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM. IF YOU DON'T MIND I'LL GO DOWN THE LIST AND NAME THEM OFF. WE HAVE.

[00:21:29]

RECOGNITION, THROUGH HARD WORK AND AT THE MOMENT, IN TIME AND IN EACH OF THE MOST THEY WERE THERE AND THEY WERE RESILIENT AMID HISTORIC SEASON. WHAT I WILL DO BEFORE I LEAVE, RBC, YOUR SUPPORT HAS MEANT THE WORLD TO US.

AND WE WERE GLAD TO REPRESENT THIS UNIVERSITY, THIS COUNTY, COMMUNITY AND THE COASTAL MEN IN A POSITIVE LIGHT TO HELP PEOPLE REALIZE THAT THIS IS A GREAT PLACE TO BE.

BUT I ASKED FOR YOUR HELP AS A LEAVE, THE BEST THING YOU CAN GIVE IS YOUR TIME AND RESOURCES.ND WHAT IS A REGRESSIVE TIME, IF YOU COULD HELP US TO IMPROVE THE PROGRAM AS FAR AS ATTENDANCE, AT GAMES, ATTENDANCE AT GAMES.

THERE WAS GREAT TO HAVE THE CITY EMPLOYEE GAME COMMISSIONER CHESNEY AND OTHERS IN THE FRONT ROW.S WE GO FURTHER, IF YOU SEE ANYBODY OUT THERE IN THE COMMUNITY, THAT YOU THINK WOULD BE INTERESTED IN COMING TO A BASKETBALL GAME, TALK TO HIM ABOUT IT. PUT A DEPOSIT DOWN FOR SEASON TICKETS.THIS COMMUNITY, HAS BEEN SUPPORTIVE AND THESE GUYS THAT COME BACK WOULD LOVE TO HAVE YOU IN THE STANDS.

AND AS FAR AS RESEARCHERS ARE CONCERNED WE SURE YOU GET THIS QUESTION A LOT, HOW CAN WE HELP, RIGHT? WE PROBABLY GET THE QUESTION A LOT OF HIGH INFLUENCE AND ELECTED OFFICIALS. HOW WE CAN HELP WITH THE COMMUNITY. I'D SAY IF YOU COULD, IF SOMEONE ASKS, I THINK IT'S A GREAT THING TO GET TO THE ISLANDER ATHLETIC FUND. OR JUST THE EXCELLENCE AND IN GENERAL. IN THE UNIVERSITY.

JUST THINK IN THE GENERAL TERM, SOME MONEY THAT WE GIVE TO A SCHOLARSHIP, WEATHERBY STUDENT ATHLETE OR JUST A GENERAL SCHOLARSHIP TO SOMEONE THAT CAN LIVE ON CAMPUS, COULD CHANGE THE COMMUNITY FOR THE BETTER. WHETHER IT BE AN ARCHITECT THAT HELPS BUILD MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS AROUND THE COUNTY, OR MAYBE A NURSE THAT HELPS ADVANCED AGE PEOPLE LIVE A LONG AND HEALTHY LIFE OR MAYBE IT'S A TEACHER, THAT THEN GOES A TEACHER HELPS OUR YOUNG STUDENTS BECOME PRODUCTIVE, EDUCATED, GREAT MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY AND SOCIETY.

I KNOW YOU'VE HELPED US A LOT HAVE BEEN VERY SUPPORTIVE AND WE NEED MORE HELP TO TAKE THIS TO THE NEXT LEVEL.

UNTIL NEXT LINE, SHOCK IS UP! [APPLAUSE] WE HAVE A MOTION A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? BEING NONE, THE MOTION PASSES.

ANT TO GIVE YOU GUYS APPEAR AND TAKE A PICTURE WANT TO SAY SOMETHING QUICKLY. I DID GET TO PLAY IN THE ISLANDERS ATHLETIC TOURNAMENT, GOLF TOURNAMENT YOU HAVE.

ONE OF THE MOST FUN TOURNAMENTS, GOLF TUMORS HAVE EVER BEEN TO. I THINK I SAW SOME OF YOU GUYS OUT THERE WITH YOUR BASKETBALL GAME THAT I WAS THERE.

I DID HORRIBLE BUT YOU GUYS DID GREAT.

THANK YOU. IT WAS A LOT OF FUN.

IF WE CAN GET YOU ALL THE COME UP HERE, WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A PHOTO. I THINK THERE IS SOMETHING ALSO. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WILL SEE

YOU IF YOU STAND BACK HERE. >> OKAY, MOVING ON TO E2.

[2. In recognition of "Equal Pay Day" - March 14, 2023.]

[00:28:04]

IN RECOGNITION OF "EQUAL PAY DAY" IN RECOGNITION OF EQUAL PAY DAY MARCH 14, 2023. THE EQUAL PAY ACT JUNE 10, 1963, TITLED SEVEN OF THE SEVERANCE ACT PASSED IN 1964, WOMEN AND PEOPLE OF COLOR CONTINUE TO SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN EQUITABLE PAY, DIFFERENTIALS AND WHEREAS ACCORDING TO STATISTICS RELEASED IN 2022 BY THE US CENSUS BUREAU, YEAR-ROUND FULL-TIME WORKING WOMAN IN 2021, EARNED ONLY A 3.7 PERCENT OF THE EARNINGS OF YEAR-ROUND FULL-TIME WORKING MEN. INDICATING VERY SLOW PROGRESS IN CLOSING THE WAGE GAP. WHEREAS, OVER A WORKING LIFETIME, THE WAGES STARTED BECAUSE THE AVERAGE AMERICAN WOMAN AND HER FAMILY, $700,000 UP TO $2 MILLION IN LOST WAGES.

IMPACTED SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS AND PENSIONS.

WHEREAS, TEXAS IS ONE OF TWO STATES THAT HAVE THE LARGEST POPULATIONS OF BLACK WOMEN, WORKING FULL-TIME YEAR-ROUND, ACCORDING TO THE U.S. CENSUS BUREAU.

YET, ONLY PAID $0.55 FOR EVERY DOLLAR PAID TO WHITE NON-HISPANIC MEN. WHEREAS, THE LIVING IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC IN 2021, LEFT ONE OUT OF FOUR WOMEN IN TEXAS AND HOUSEHOLDS THAT DID NOT HAVE THEIR REGULAR SOURCE OF INCOME FROM BEFORE THE PANDEMIC. ACCORDING TO A STUDY BY THE TEXAS WOMEN'S FOUNDATION. WHEREAS, FRAPPE, EQUITY POLICIES CAN BE LIMITED SIMPLY AND WITHOUT UNDUE COST OR HARDSHIP IN BOTH THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS.

WHEREAS, THERE PAY STRENGTHENS THE SECURITY OF FAMILIES TODAY, AND EASES FUTURE RETIREMENT COST, WHILE ENHANCING THE AMERICAN ECONOMY. WHEREAS, TUESDAY, MARCH 14, 2023, SYMBOLIZES THE TIME THIS YEAR IN WHICH THE WAGES PAID TO AMERICAN WOMEN CATCH UP TO THE WAGES PAID TO MEN FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY DOES HEREBY PROCLAIM TUESDAY, MARCH 14, 2023, EQUAL PAY DAY.

IN NUECES COUNTY AND URGES CITIZENS OF NUECES COUNTY TO

[00:30:07]

RECOGNIZE THE FULL VALUE OF WOMEN'S SKILLS, SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE LABOR FORCE, AND FURTHER ENCOURAGE BUSINESSES TO CONDUCT AN INTERNAL PAY EVALUATION TO ENSURE THAT WOMEN ARE BEING PAID FAIRLY.

DULY ADOPTED BY VOTE OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS ON THIS 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2023.

>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. ENKE.

ANYONE HERE THAT WISHES? YES.

>> GOOD MORNING. CHRIS GOOD MORNING, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS CATHERINE, PRESIDENT OF WOMEN LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS, CORPUS CHRISTI AREA.

THE LEAGUE ALONG WITH THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN, AND THE YWCA CORPUS CHRISTI AND DELTA SIGMA THETA, WE ARE PLEASED THAT YOU HAVE ISSUED THIS PROCLAMATION FOR WOMEN'S EQUALITY OR EQUAL PAY BECAUSE IT IS VERY MUCH MAKES A DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF HOW WE SEE THE WORLD.

I'M ENCOURAGING YOU AT THE COURTHOUSE THAT YOU ARE MAKING SURE THAT YOU ARE BEING EQUAL AND FAIR WHERE WOMEN ARE PAID AND THEIR ROLES IN THIS COMMUNITY.

IN THIS OFFICE. IS VERY IMPORTANT WHEN THEIR 700,000 OVER A LIFETIME CAREER HOW MUCH WOMEN LOSE.

AND EVEN MORE FOR WOMEN OF COLOR.

AND INDIGENOUS PEOPLE. IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, THIS IS NOT JUST, THIS IS JUST A DAY. IT IS REALLY A CALL TO ACTION.

SO THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT AND WE WORK TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.

THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU.

AND, LET'S MAKE SURE THAT IN THIS COUNTY, THAT WE ARE STRIVING TO HAVE EQUAL PAY FOR WOMEN.

THANK YOU. >> ABSOLUTELY AND I AGREE.

[APPLAUSE] WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE A PHOTO? WE HAVE A RESOLUTION FOR YOU AS WELL.

DO YOU ALL WANT TO COME DOWN? >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> MOVING ON TO ITEM 3,

[3. In recognition of "Gideon Day" and Public Defense Week, March 18 - 20, 2023.]

RECOGNITION OF GIDEON DAY AND PUBLIC DEFENSE WEEK MARCH

18-20, 2023. >> IMAGINATION OF GIDEON DAY IN PUBLIC DEFENSE WEEK WHEREAS NUECES COUNTY VALUES EVERY ONE OF ITS CITIZENS, RICH AND POOR. WHEREAS MANY OF OUR CITIZENS CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER WHEN THEY HAVE TO GO TO COURT.

WHEREAS, APPOINTED COUNSEL, PUBLIC DEFENDERS AND THEIR STAFF WORK ZEALOUSLY TO FIGHT INJUSTICE AND ABUSES OF POWER, WHILE GUIDING WHILE GUARDING THE HUMAN AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF EVERYDAY CITIZENS. WHEREAS, MEETING THE NEEDS OF CLIENTS FACING LOSS OF THEIR LIBERTY, IS A CRITICAL PART OF

[00:35:04]

MAINTAINING A FAIR JUSTICE SYSTEM.

AND WHEREAS, THIS ISSUE IS ADDRESSED IN THE CASE OF PARENT EARL GIDEON, A 51-YEAR-OLD MAN WITH ONE EIGTH GRADE EDUCATION.

HIS CONVICTION WITHOUT A LAWYER, WAS RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT ON MARCH 18 1963. WHEREAS THE GIDEON DECISION, THE SUPREME COURT UNANIMOUSLY RULED THAT POOR PEOPLE HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO AN ATTORNEY WHEN FACED WITH BEING SENT TO PRISON. AND WHEREAS AS A RESULT OF THE GIDEON DECISION, ALL STATES NOW PROVIDE COURT APPOINTED COUNSEL TO PEOPLE FACING CRIMINAL ACCUSATIONS, AND INCARCERATION WHO CANNOT AFFORD A LAWYER. IN THE 16TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE SUPREME COURT GIDEON DECISION, AN OPPORTUNITY TO REDEDICATE OURSELVES TO CORE VALUE OF EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW.OW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, RECOGNIZES THE IMPORTANT WORK OF PUBLIC DEFENDERS, COURT-APPOINTED COUNSEL AND STAFF, FURTHER RECOGNIZES MARCH 18 AS PUBLIC DEFENSE WEEK.

WE ENCOURAGE ALL CITIZENS TO RECOGNIZE LEGACY AND POINTS OF THE GIDEON DECISION AND JOIN IN CELEBRATING INDIGENT DEFENSE.

DULY ADOPTED BY ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS ON THIS 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2023.

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

MOTION PASSES. WE SPEAK ABOUT THIS?

>> YES, I COULD. I HAVE MY STAFF WITH ME AND A COUPLE MEMBERS OF OUR OVERSIGHT BOARD.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS AND JUDGE SCOTT.

WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TODAY, TO HIGHLIGHT THE WORK OF ATTORNEYS AND STAFF THAT REPRESENT OUR INDIGENT NEIGHBORS WHEN THEY ARE FACED WITH LOSING THEIR FREEDOMS. THE PRINCIPLE OF THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL IS ESTABLISHED BY THE GIDEON CASE, IS FOUNDATIONAL AND CRIMINAL LAW.

BUT THERE IS A STORY BEHIND THAT PRINCIPLE.

A RESOLUTION NOTED THAT MR. GIDEON, CLARENCE EARL GIDEON, WAS A 51 YEAR OLD MAN WITH ONE EIGTH GRADE EDUCATION.

THERE IS A LITTLE MORE TO THAT STORY.

MR. GIDEON, ALTHOUGH HE WAS ONLY 50 AT THE TIME OF HIS ARREST, LOOKED LIKE A 75 OLD MAN BECAUSE OF THE HARD LIFE HE HAD LIVED. HE WAS ARRESTED AND CHARGED WITH ORGANIZING A POOL HALL. ACCUSED OF STEALING SOME WINE, AND MONEY FROM THE VENDING MACHINES.

HE ALWAYS DECLARED THAT HE WAS INNOCENT BUT HE COULD NOT AFFORD TO BAIL HIMSELF OUT OF JAIL OR PAY FOR A LAWYER.

IT STAYED IN JAIL FOR TWO MONTHS WAITING FOR HIS TRIAL.

AFTER THE TWO MONTHS, HIS TRIAL WAS CALLED AND ONCE AGAIN CALLED THE JUDGE TO APPOINT A LAWYER TO HIM TO HELP HIM PROVE HIS INNOCENCE. THE JUDGE DENIED THAT BECAUSE AT THE TIME, FEDERAL LAW DID NOT REQUIRE THE JUDGE TO APPOINT COUNSEL. HE HAD A TRIAL, HE WAS NOT SURPRISINGLY, FOUND GUILTY BECAUSE HE DID NOT KNOW HOW TO DEFEND HIMSELF. AND THE JUDGE SENTENCED TO THE MAXIMUM OF FIVE YEARS. HE BEGAN SERVING THAT TERM, BUT DIDN'T STOP FIGHTING. HE REQUESTED THAT THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES HEAR HIS CASE.

AND LUCKY FOR HIM, THE SUPREME COURT AGREED AND APPOINTED AN ATTORNEY TO HELP THEM ON THE APPEAL.

AGAIN HE IS LUCKY BECAUSE THE SUPREME COURT APPOINTED A LAWYER WHO BECAME A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE.

HE GOT ONE OF THE BEST AND BRIGHTEST TO FIGHT FOR HIM.

THE SUPREME COURT DID OVERTURN THAT CONVICTION, FINALLY HE SHOULD HAVE HAD THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL, TO HELP HIM FIGHT BACK AGAINST THE POWER OF THE STATE.

HE DIDN'T GET OUT OF JAIL YET BECAUSE HE STILL HAD TO GO TO TRIAL. HE HAD A NEW TRIAL WITH A LAWYER AND HE WAS EVENTUALLY ACQUITTED.

HE WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY OF THE CRIME HE ALWAYS SAID HE WAS INNOCENT OF. THAT WAS A STORY OF NUGENT DEFENSE, NOT THE END. TODAY HE'S DOING THAT WORK ACROSS THE NATION. WE DEFEND PEOPLE AGAINST THE MIGHTY POWER THE STATE THAT SEEKS TO TAKE FREEDOM AWAY FROM OUR NEIGHBORS BUT THE WORK ALSO INCLUDES THE STORIES OF THE PEOPLE, LIKE CLARENCE GIDEON. AMPLIFYING THEIR HUMANITY AND THEIR VOICES AND ENSURING THAT THEY ARE NOT PUNISHED JUST FOR BEING POOR. WILLS OF THE BOARD OF JUDGES ON A RESOLUTION SIMILAR TO THE ONE YOU ALL SIGNED.

WE ARE VERY APPRECIATIVE THAT YOU ARE RECOGNIZING THE WORK WE DO. AND AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR ALL OF MY STAFF AND OVERSIGHT BOARD FOR BEING HERE TODAY.

>> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH.

[APPLAUSE] >> WE HAVE A DAY, DO YOU WANT

[00:40:03]

TO GIVE HER THIS? AND YOU'RE OKAY -- ITEM NUMBER

[4. In recognition of Vietnam Veterans Day - March 29, 2023.]

FOUR, IN RECOGNITION OF VIETNAM VETERAN'S DAY, MARCH 29, 2023.

COMMISSIONERS COURT PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING VIETNAM VETERAN'S DAY MARCH 29, 2023.

WHEREAS IN HONOR VETERANS AND NUECES COUNTY AND VIETNAM VETERANS OF AMERICA CHAPTER 91 , ALL VIETNAM-ERA VETERANS OF TEXAS, AND WHEREAS WE REMEMBER THOSE WHO DEFENDED THIS GREAT LAND OF OURS. THOSE WHO LIVED THROUGH THE HORROR OF THE WAR, THOSE WHO CAME HOME SICK OR INJURED AND THOSE WHO TOOK THEIR LAST BREATH AND ATUL.

WHEREAS, VIETNAM AND VIETNAM ERA VETERANS OF TEXAS ACTUALLY GIVE UP THE CASE AND SECURITY OF CIVILIAN LIFE, LEAVING FARM AND FACTORY, HOME AND CLASSROOM, TO DEFEND THE UNITED STATES FREEDOMS THAT WE ENJOY EVERY DAY.

WHEREAS, ON HIS VIETNAM VETERAN'S DAY IN TEXAS, WE REMEMBER AND HONOR ALL VETERANS.

WE ESPECIALLY RECOGNIZE THOSE GIVING LIM AND ANDREA SACRIFICE FOR FREEDOM. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, THAT WEDNESDAY, MARCH 29, 2023, IS HEREBY DECLARED VIETNAM VETERAN'S DAY AND ALL OF NUECES COUNTY. THE COURT HEREBY RECOGNIZES THOSE THAT DEFENDED THIS GREAT LAND OF OURS.

AND PROTECTED OUR FREEDOM. IN FURTHER URGES ALL CITIZENS OF NUECES COUNTY TO JOIN THE COURT IN HONORING THE VIETNAM AND VIETNAM-ERA VETERANS OF TEXAS.

DULY ADOPTED BY VOTE OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY TEXAS, ON THIS 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2023.

>> THANK YOU. DO I -- I WILL MAKE THE MOTION FOR THIS AND SINCE MY HUSBAND IS A VIETNAM VETERAN.

WE HAVE MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? JJ, DO YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS? OR DO YOU HAVE ANYONE HERE?E

HAVE THIS PROCLAMATION FOR YOU. >> DO WE HAVE ANY VIETNAM

VETERANS? >> THE MORNING JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS. I WANT TO TAKE THIS TIME TO THANK YOU FOR TAKING TIME AND RECOGNIZING OUR VIETNAM VETERANS. AS YOU MAY KNOW, MOST VIETNAM VETERANS WERE NOT WELCOME HOME. BECAUSE OF THIS, IT IS MY OPINION THAT VIETNAM VETERAN'S DAY SHOULD BE EVERY SINGLE DAY.

WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. AND WELCOME HOME.

[APPLAUSE] >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS AND IF YOU WISH TO TABLE? I HAVE ONE ITEM I WANT TO TABLE. THERE IS ONE MORE? I DIDN'T HAVE THAT ONE, SORRY. OKAY I THOUGHT WE WERE THROUGH.

[5. In recognition of the month of April as "Safe Digging Month".]

NUMBER FIVE, IN RECOGNITION OF THE MONTH OF APRIL AS SAFE

DIGGING MONTH. >> MR. COURT RESOLUTION IN RECOGNITION OF APRIL AS SAFE DIGGING MONTH.

WHEREAS EACH YEAR NUECES COUNTY UNDERGROUND UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE IS JEOPARDIZED BY UNINTENTIONAL DAMAGE BY FAILURE TO CALL 811 THE NATIONAL CALL BEFORE YOU DIG NUMBER, TO HAVE UNDERGROUND LINES LOCATED PRIOR TO DIGGING.

WHEREAS, UNDESIRED CONSEQUENCES SUCH AS SERVICE INTERRUPTION DAMAGE THE ENVIRONMENT AND PERSONAL INJURY OF THE POTENTIAL RESULTS. WHERE'S THE GULF COAST DAMAGE PREVENTION COUNCIL, ALONG WITH CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND NUECES COUNTY LOCAL EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEE, ARE DEDICATED TO SPREADING THE MESSAGE OF SAFE DIGGING AND PREVENTION OF DAMAGE TO UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND NUECES COUNTY. THESE ENTITIES PROMOTE THE NATIONAL 811 NOTIFICATION SYSTEM, IN AN EFFORT TO REDUCE THOSE DAMAGES. WHEREAS, MAKING A SIMPLE CALL TO 811 IN ADVANCE OF ANY DIGGING PROJECT, WITHIN THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF TIME, RESPECTING THE MARKED LINES BY MAINTAINING VISUAL DEFINITION THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THE EXCAVATION, AND FINALLY, DIGGING WITH CARE AROUND THE MARKS WILL SAVE TIME AND MONEY. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, THAT THE NUECES COUNTY COUNTY PROCLAIMS ON BEHALF OF THE CLIENT DAMAGE PREVENTION COMMITTEE ON THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND NUECES COUNTY LOCAL EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEE, AND THE GULF COAST DAMAGE PREVENTION COUNCIL, THE MONTH OF APRIL 2023, AS SAFE DIGGING MONTH AND NUECES COUNTY.

AND ENCOURAGES CONTRACTORS AND HOMEOWNERS THROUGHOUT NUECES COUNTY, TO ALWAYS CALL A WOMAN BEFORE DIGGING.

[00:45:02]

SAFE EXCAVATION IS NO ACCIDENT. DULY ADOPTED BY THE VOTE OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS ON THE 22ND DAY

OF MARCH 2023. >> DO I HAVE A MOTION AND A

SECOND? >> MOTION.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.ANYONE HERE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS?

>> GOOD MORNING. CHRIS GOOD MORNING, HOW ARE

YOU? >> I'M WELL THANK YOU.

INTERIM FIRE CHIEF AS WELL AS INTERIM CHAIRPERSON OF THE LOCAL EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR NUECES COUNTY.

WE ARE THE PRIMARY MISSION OF THE PUBLIC EDUCATION PUBLIC INFORMATION. WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE RECOGNITION AND PROCLAMATION TO ALLOW US TO FULFILL THE MISSION BY MAKING THIS PROCLAMATION AND MAKING THE COMMITTEE AWARE OF SAFE DIGGING. POLICE AND FIRE ALSO REFER TO ALSO RECOGNIZE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ACTUALLY OUR FIRST RESPONDERS. THERE ARE THE FOLKS AT SEA FOLKS UNFORTUNATELY, NEIGHBOR, FAMILY MEMBER, WHO MAY HAVE MADE A MISTAKE, FAILED TO CALL 811 AND FIND THEMSELVES IN A PRECARIOUS POSITION. WILSON OF THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO MITIGATE AN EMERGENCY IS TO PREVENT THEM.

PROCLAMATION SUCH AS THIS HELP SPREAD THE MESSAGE.

ALLOW US TO EDUCATE THE COMMUNITY IN ORDER FOR THEM TO KEEP THEMSELVES SAFE, KEEP EACH OTHER SAFE AND AGAIN, ENSURE THE COMMUNITY IS PREPARED. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. NOW, I'M SORRY? WE ALREADY VOTED, YES. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS AND IF YOU

[20. Discuss and consider adopting an Order prohibiting outdoor burning in the unincorporated areas of Nueces County, pursuant to Section 352.081 of the Texas Local Government Code; and related matters.]

WISH TO TABLE TODAY? I WANT TO TABLE 3A20

INDEFINITELY. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.

ARE THERE ANY OTHERS THAT YOU WISH TO BRING UP? NO? OKAY, MOVING FORWARD.

CAN I GET -- IS A SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED?

>> THE JOB DESCRIPTION, ARE GOING TO DISCUSS IT OR MOVE IT TO A LATER DATE? O OR P OR ONE OF THEM.

>> DO YOU WANT TO TABLE THE JOB DESCRIPTION?

WHAT NUMBER IS IT? >> 3F2.

>> I LIKE TO TABLE THAT TO THE NEXT MEETING.

>> 3F2. >> WE HAVE A MOTION.

3F UNDER HUMAN RESOURCES. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER

RECLASSIFICATION, YES. >> SORRY.

>> I'M SORRY? [INAUDIBLE]

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.

>> I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN HAVE DISCUSSION ON AN ITEM WE ARE

TABLING? >> I CAN HOLD MY SECOND IF YOU

WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS. >> ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION.

THIS IS TO DECIDE IN LANGUAGE WE POSTED OR, WE HAVE ALREADY POSTED THIS POSITION, RIGHT? SO IT IS TO STRUCTURE IT MAY BE

TO GO BACK AND POST AGAIN? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> THIS IS FOR OUR GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS AND OTHER POSITIONS.

>> OUR NEXT MEETING IS APRIL. THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION IS MAY 30. MAY 30?

>> AROUND, YES.

>> WE HAVE LOBBYISTS ABLE TO DO SOME OF THAT WORKFORCE.

>> DO YOU WANT TO GO THROUGH SOME TODAY?

[00:50:03]

>> PROBABLY HAVE TO GO TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> YOU WANT TO SET A TABLE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION?

>> MOVE IT TO EXECUTIVE? >> CAN WE DO THAT?

>> HE WANTS TO GO TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

THERE IS NO SECOND. OKAY.

>> WE WILL JUST MOVE IT FOR FUN? OKAY. BEFORE WE START THE NEXT PART AND PUBLIC COMMENT WE HAVE OUR JUDGES HERE AND A COUPLE OF THEM, I TOLD THEM IF THEY CAN WE WOULD JUMP TO THEM SO THEY COULD GET BACK UPSTAIRS AND GO BACK TO WORK.

WE ARE GOING TO PULL UP 3A9, THE PUBLIC DEFENDERS ON THE

[9. Discuss and consider ARPA allocations for the Public Defender's Office space on the 6th Floor of the Nueces County Courthouse, and related matters.]

REGULAR AGENDA. NINE, 3A9.

DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ARPA ALLOCATIONS FOR PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE SPACE ON THE SIXTH FLOOR OF THE NUECES COUNTY COUNTY COURTHOUSE AND RELATED MATTERS.

>> WE HEARD TO SUPPORT THE PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE.

THERE'S A PRESENTATION AND SHE'S WORKED THROUGH SOME THINGS. WE'VE DONE RESOLUTION ON THE BOARD OF JUDGES THAT WE BELIEVE THIS IS THE RIGHT SPOT.

AND THE RIGHT PLACE TO PUT THE OFFICE WHICH IS HERE FOR

SUPPORT. >> THANK YOU.

THE RESOLUTION YOU ALL DID ON BEHALF OF THIS, AND SIGNED BY ALMOST ALL THE JUDGE'S, YES. WE APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH.

ARE YOU GOING TO BE THAT? >> I WAS GOING TO BUT THAT'S THE ORIGINAL AND I DON'T HAVE A COPY.

BUT I DID KNOW THAT THEY WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS.

I THANK YOU AGAIN, I WAS JUST HERE BUT I'M BACK.

TODAY, YOUR PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE IS ASKING YOU TO APPROVE THE RENOVATION OF A PORTION OF THE SIXTH FLOOR LIBRARY, TO OPERATE AS OUR OFFICE. YOU SHOULD HAVE THE PROPOSED FLOOR PLANS AS PART OF YOUR PACKET TODAY.

IT IS FITTING TO HAVE THIS ON THE AGENDA TODAY, THAT WE RECOGNIZE GIDEON DAY AND PUBLIC DEFENSE WEEK.

BECAUSE THE OFFICE SPACE FOR A PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE, IS A CRITICAL TOOL AND FULFILLING OUR MISSION AND DUTY, TO DEFEND THEIR INDIGENT NEIGHBORS. THE TEXAS INDIGENT DEFENSE COMMISSION HAS COMMITTED TO INVESTING $7.2 MILLION OVER THE NEXT SIX YEARS TO HELP OUR COUNTY BUILD A SYSTEM THAT SERVES AS A CHECK ON THE POWER OF THE STATE, TO TAKE AWAY THE FREEDOM OF POOR PEOPLE AND THOSE WITH MENTAL ILLNESS THAT ARE ACCUSED OF CRIMES. WITH THAT SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT, FROM THE STATE, THE COUNTY COMMITTED TO SUPPORTING THE OFFICE BY FINDING OFFICE SPACE, OVER THE LAST SIX MONTHS OR SO, WE'VE EVALUATED NUMEROUS OPTIONS BOTH INSIDE THE COURTHOUSE, AND OUT. AND WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS THE MOST PRACTICAL. IT PROVIDES THE ADEQUATE AMOUNT OF SPACE FOR US TO CONDUCT THE WORK WE NEED TO DO, WHICH INCLUDES MEETING WITH OUR CLIENTS AND MEMBERS OF THE TEAM AND MEMBERS OF THE MENTAL HEALTH COMMUNITY.

SOME OF WHOM ARE HERE TODAY THAT I'VE ALREADY BEEN WORKING WITH TO ESTABLISH THAT COLLABORATION.

IT IS ALSO A SECURE LOCATION IN THE TOWER OF THE COURTHOUSE, SOMETHING THE BOARD OF JUDGES THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR THIS OFFICE. AND THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES THE PROPOSAL TO USE ARPA FUNDS. IT HAS NO EFFECT ON THE COUNTIES BUDGET. I THINK BACK TO EARLIER THIS MORNING, WHEN WE WERE RECOGNIZING THE ISLANDERS.

THE TEAM PLAYERS BROUGHT THE TALENT AND THE HARD WORK THAT RESULTED IN SO MANY VICTORIES. BUT IT WAS UNIVERSITY THAT PROVIDED THEM THE TOOLS THEY NEEDED.

THE SHOES, UNIFORMS, THE BALLS, PRACTICE SPACE AND THEN, ULTIMATELY, THE TRAVEL AND SUPPORT WHEN THEY WERE IN THE CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIP AND IN THE TOURNAMENT.

WE ARE ASKING YOU, TO APPROVE THIS PLAN BECAUSE THE OFFICE SPACE IS A CRITICAL TOOL, AND OUR EFFORT TO WORK WITH THE EXISTING SYSTEMS IN OUR COUNTY, THAT SUPPORT MENTAL HEALTH, AND TO CONDUCT THE ADEQUATE REPRESENTATION THAT OUR POOR NEIGHBORS DESERVE JUST AS MUCH THAT THOSE CAN AFFORD TO HIGHER THEIR OWN COUNSEL. ALSO REMINDED BY THE BISHOPS

[00:55:03]

WORDS. THE TIDE RISES ALL THE BUTCHER LIFTED. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. WE TRIED TO EQUALIZE JUSTICE.

FOR OUR POOR NEIGHBORS AND THOSE AFFECTED BY MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES. WITH YOUR SUPPORT, WE CAN GET THIS OFFICE STARTED AND THEN WE CAN GET STARTED AND ACTUALLY

REPRESENTING CLIENTS. >> WHAT WAS THE COST ESTIMATE?

>> ABOUT $400,000 TO RENOVATE. WHICH CAME DOWN.

SOME ARE OPTIONS WE WILL OVER $1 MILLION.

>> THAT IS ALL FROM THE ARPA FUNDS?

>> YES. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM.

>> AND WE HAVE TALKED TO THE LIBRARY AND THERE, THEY ARE OKAY WITH THIS AS WELL. I THINK IT'S A GOOD SOLUTION A GOOD PLACE TO HAVE EVERYBODY THERE.

>> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT.

>> SECOND. >> ANY DISCUSSION?

>> I THINK IT IS TO BE POINTED OUT THAT THIS WAS NOT A COST THAT WAS ANTICIPATED BY THE COUNTY.

WE ARE FORTUNATE TO EVEN HAVE THE FUNDS AVAILABLE TO DO THIS BECAUSE IT WAS PROVIDED TO US, IT WAS GOING TO BE THE COMMON NO COST TO THE COUNTY FOR TWO YEARS.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR BECAUSE IT'S A GREAT ANALOGY AND I APPRECIATE IT. I THINK THE OTHER STORY IS YOUR COMING TO US AND ASKED FOR SOMETHING THAT WASN'T REQUESTED, WASN'T PART OF THE ORIGINAL ASKED.

IT IS AN ADDITIONAL $400,000 OF ARPA FUNDS BE REQUESTED, TAXPAYER DOLLARS. I THINK THERE ARE OTHER ALTERNATIVES THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE.

I THINK WE COULD'VE USED THE SPACE THAT IS THERE.

I THINK WE DIDN'T HAVE TO SPEND 400,000.

I'M ALL FOR THE PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE.

I SUPPORT THE GRANT. I'M SURE I'LL BE THE ONLY NO VOTE TODAY AND IT'S OKAY I CAN LIVE WITH THAT BUT I DON'T THINK IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. I THINKYOU ARE IN NOW THAT COULD BE RETROFITTED. I DO THINK EVERYBODY HAS TO BE IN THE SAME SPACE. I THINK THERE'S OTHER SPACE IN THE COUNTY WE COULD PUT SOME IN ONE AREA AND SEVEN ANOTHER.

THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A BETTER UTILIZATION OF FUNDS.

I THINK IT IS GREAT THAT THERE INVESTING THE $7 MILLION BUT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY, THE COUNTY HAS TO PAY FOR EVERY SINGLE TYLER THE SPENT. I THINK IT'S GREAT YOU MADE THE PRESENTATION BUT THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO KNOW, THE REST OF THE STORY I GUESS I USED TO SAY IS THAT THIS COUNTY IS MADE OF LARGE COMMITMENT AS WELL. IF THIS CONTINUES, WE HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. WE ARE HOPING, AND THE HOPE IS, BECAUSE WHAT WAS THE CELL FOR ME NOT ONLY THE FACTORS GOING TO HELP SO MANY PEOPLE BUT IT'S NOT LIKE WE WERE IN HELPING PEOPLE BEFORE. WERE PAYING HUNDREDS MAYBE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN ATTORNEYS FEES.

WE WERE ALREADY HELPING PEOPLE. THIS IS JUST A DIFFERENT WAY TO HELP PEOPLE. AND THE BIG PITCH WAS HOPEFULLY, WE CAN REALLY FOCUS ON HELPING THE INDIGENT AND DO IT AWAY WHERE IT WILL REDUCE THE ATTORNEYS FEES.

BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE TWO YEARS, IF WE ARE STILL PAYING IN THE ATTORNEYS FEES AND, WE HAVE TO PICK UP, IT'S NOT MY HOPE IS THAT AT THE END OF THE TWO YEARS IT WILL HAPPEN.

AGAIN, I SUPPORT THE CONCEPT IN THE GRANT, I DON'T SUPPORT THE EXPENDITURES OF ARPA FUNDS BECAUSE I THINK WE CAN USE IT BETTER PLACES. DRAINAGE, THERE'S ALL KIND OF DRAINAGE FOR OUR POOR PEOPLE THAT WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF.

AND I THINK WE COULD HAVE SPENT A LOT LESS OR REALLY NOTHING AND JUST USE THE SPACE WE CURRENTLY HAVE.

I THINK WE COULD HAVE FOUND SPACE IN THE COUNTY.

AND WE, THIS IS IN THE BEST WAY TO DO IT.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO JUST SIT HERE AND VOTE NO, AND NOT EXPLAIN MY VOTE. BECAUSE I THINK, JUST THINK, I JUST DON'T THINK WE SHOULD SPEND THE MONEY THIS WAY AND IT WASN'T SOMETHING THE COUNTY WAS OBLIGATED ITSELF TO WE STARTED BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS. AND WE MOVE ON AND HOPE IT GOES WELL. IT WILL BE THE LAST TIME I WILL BE THE ONLY NO VOTE ON SOMETHING AND THAT IS OKAY TOO.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> I LIKE TO SAY ONE THING.

>> YES. >> I SUPPORT IT BUT I THINK FROM THE BEGINNING WE SAID WE WOULD SUPPORT IT.

THE MONIES WERE THERE FROM THE FUNDING.

UNFORTUNATELY, OR FORTUNATELY, THE MONIES THAT WERE THERE LEFT OVER FROM OTHER AGENCIES THAT DIDN'T QUALIFY.

THAT'S THE REASON WHY THOSE MONIES ARE STILL THERE.

IT COULD HAVE GONE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

THE ONLY THING IS, -- I'M WORRIED ABOUT THREE YEARS FROM NOW. HOW MUCH IS THE COUNTY GOING TO HAVE TO INVEST? YOU KNOW, WHILE I SUPPORTED NOW BECAUSE THE MONIES ARE THERE, YOU KNOW, IT ISN'T OVER.E NEED TO LOOK DOWN THE ROAD THREE YEARS FROM NOW.

AND HOPE YOU GOT YOUR SUPPORT AND YOUR HELP BECAUSE IT WILL

[01:00:04]

COME. SOMEBODY WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR IT.R GET RID OF IT, ONE OF THE TWO.

>> ABSOLUTELY. AND WE DID EXHAUST MANY MANY EFFORTS ON TRYING TO FIND A PLACE THAT WOULD FIT.

THIS WAS AN ISSUE THAT CAME UP, THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT WENT INTO THIS AND AFTER TIME SPENT WORKING ON A PLACE I AGREE THAT WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

IF THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSION. >> JUDGE, I ALSO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. I'M LOOKING AHEAD THREE YEARS FROM NOW ALSO. SEEING HOW WE WILL DO THIS.

FOR SOME TIME ALL BEEN DOING IS PULLING MONEY OUT AND SPENDING MONEY THAT WE ARE NOT SURE WE WILL HAVE.

I'M HOPING WHEN THE TIME COMES, HOPE YOU ALL ARE UNDERSTANDING AND SEE HOW IT GOES. I HOPE IT IS A SUCCESS.

AND I'M WILLING TO HELP. >> JUST REAL QUICK.

WITHOUT GOING INTO THE COMMISSIONER SAID, WHICH I COMPLETELY DISAGREE WITH. COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ AND COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ, THE JUDGE'S AGREE WITH YOU.

YOU ALSO WATCH AS PER THE GOAL IS THAT WE WILL BE REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF FEES WE ARE PAYING ATTORNEYS, PRIVATE ATTORNEYS.

THAT'S WHERE THE BALANCE WILL BE.

AND SO, I APPRECIATE THE ONES THAT ARE SUPPORTING THIS AS I BELIEVE IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

>> JUDGE, WENT TO A RECORD THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE AN APOLOGIST UNSUPPORTED IS NOW OR AT THIS POINT.T IS WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, IS THE COST OF JUSTICE.

WHY SUPPORT A PROCLAMATION ABOUT THE GIDEON LAW AND THE GIDEON RULING IF WE'RE NOT WILLING TO SUPPORT IT? I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A COST AND WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE CAREFUL. I THINK WE ARE ALL VERY CONSERVATIVE. WANT TO JUST WASTE MONEY BUT THERE IS A COST. AND TO SAY THAT ONE DAY WE WILL COME BACK YES WE SHOULD ALWAYS REVIEW EVERY PROJECT AND PROGRAM. BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD NOT GO AWAY.T WHAT POINT DO WE SAY, OKAY, JUSTICE FOR ALL. THERE IS A PRICE TO IT AND WE ARE NOT WILLING TO PAY FOR IT. THIS IS JUST ABOUT WHAT IS RIGHT AND WRONG. NO MATTER HOW YOU SPIN IT, IF YOU ARE OPPOSED TO IT THEN YOU ARE OPPOSED TO THE COST OF JUSTICE. I THINK THAT IS VERY UNUSUAL IN THE SOCIETY WE LIVE IN THAT WE WOULD SAY THAT IN THIS DAY AND AGE, WITH SO MANY PEOPLE BEING TRIED ON BOTH SIDES OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHIES AND FEEL THAT THEY ARE RIGHT.

AND CORRECT ON LAWS FROM THE LEFT OR RIGHT PERSPECTIVE.

PEOPLE DESERVE TO HAVE THEIR DAY IN COURT AND TO BE REPRESENTED. AND SO, THAT'S WHY WE BELIEVED IN THIS CONCEPT PREVIOUSLY. AND SO, I GOT THAT THERE ARE WAYS THAT WE CAN PUT OUR MONEY TO USE, THERE WILL BE A COST TO IT DOWN THE LINE. WE DID THAT WHEN WE SUPPORTED LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PAY RAISES FOR THEM.

WE DID IT FOR A LOT OF PHYSICIANS.

WE KNOW THAT DOWN THE LINE, WE WILL HAVE TO PAY.

THANKFULLY FOR NOW, WE CAN USE SOME OF THE COST TO PROVIDE FOR THAT AND THEN, WE WILL HAVE TO BE VERY STRATEGIC AND HOW WE PLAN FOR THE FUTURE. I FEEL THAT THIS IS THE WAY TO DO IT. THAT WE CANNOT BACK DOWN FROM THIS AND PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE ARE THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY AND THEY ARE DONE WITH -- A COST SAVING MEASURES WILL.

THINK WE TEND TO FORGET THAT THIS CAN SAVE US MONEY WHEN JUSTICE IS ADMINISTERED PROPERLY.

AND RIGHT RESOURCES ARE FUNNELED EITHER TO MITIGATION OF THE ISSUES FACING THAT CLIENT, OR THE FACT THAT SOMEONE HAS BEEN REPRESENTED, DOESN'T HAVE TO STAY IN JAIL LONGER WITH THE COST THAT GOES WITH THAT.

A LOT OF THIS ADDS UP ON MY END.

I WANT YOU TO KNOW. IN OUR PENSION ABOUT THIS, THAT

THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. >> JUDGE, THAT IS REASONABLE.

WHAT COMMISSIONER GONZALES SAID IS TRUE.

I WILL RETHINK THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE JUDGE THINKS IF YOU DISAGREE WITH ME BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO

SAY SOMETHING -- >> SURE.

I WELCOME THAT DEBATE. >> NO PROBLEM.

AND AGAIN, NOT TRYING TO PUT ANYBODY DOWN AND I APPRECIATE YOUR OPINION AS WELL. SO YOU MADE THE COMMENT THAT THE YOU THINK THERE IS A BETTER ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.

WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME LOOKING AT DIFFERENT PLACES.

THIS IS THE BEST SPACE. WE WALKED IT WITH THE COUNTY JUDGE AND GOTTEN NUMEROUS MEETINGS WITH THE PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE. THIS THE BEST USE OF THE SPACE THAT IS UNDERUTILIZED NOW. GO TO THE LAW LIBRARY AND IS VERY UNDERUTILIZED. IT'S A BRIGHT SPACE, AND THE

[01:05:01]

TOWER. (THE REPRESENTATION FOR PEOPLE ACCUSED OF CRIMES, FOR A LOWER COST.

IF YOU WANT PROPER ALLOCATION OF FUNDING THIS IS IT!

>> THAT IS FAIR, I APPRECIATE CLARIFYING THAT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO WALK AWAY MISSTATING SOMETHING.

LET ME MAKE CLEAR OF THAT. I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THE LOCATION. MY PROBLEM IS THE EXPENDITURES OF THE FUNDS THAT WE WERE NOT ANTICIPATING.

I WALKED IT YESTERDAY TOO AND YOU ARE RIGHT, IT'S UNDERUTILIZED. I HAVE A QUESTION, WHAT ARE WE

GOING TO DO WITH -- ROOM? >> WILL READJUST THAT.

IT WILL BE MOVED TO THE OTHER END WHERE THE COMPUTERS ARE.

EVERYTHING WILL STAY, EVERYTHING WILL BE TAKEN CARE

OF. >> OKAY BECAUSE THAT IS A BIG

DEAL. >> YES.

>> I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT. I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THE LOCATION ALL. I APPRECIATE YOU ALLOWING ME TO CLEAR THAT. I'M HAVING A HARD TIME WITH THE FUNDING. AT THE SAME TIME, WHAT COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ SAYS, REASONABLE MINDS MAY DIFFER.

I'M GOING TO ABSTAIN BECAUSE OF GOT A LITTLE CONFLICT WITH THE MONEY BUT I DON'T, AND THAT'S NOT EXACTLY.

MAYBE IT'S AN EASY WAY OUT BUT I'M STRUGGLING WITH WANTING TO SPEND THIS MORNING. I THINK WE STILL COULD HAVE DONE A DIFFERENT WAY BUT NOT THE ISABEL LOCATION, IS JUST, THIS IS A LOT OF MONEY. IT IS A LOT OF MONEY AND I GET THAT IT IS ARPA FUNDS NOT TO THE GENERAL FUND BUT IT'S TAKEN AWAY FROM SOMETHING AS WE DIDN'T ANTICIPATE.

AND THAT IS A DISCOMFORT WITH IT.

>> I AGREE WITH YOU, MICHELLE, I REALLY DO.

THE COUNTY IS FACING A LOT OF CHALLENGES REGARDING MONEY BUT JUST LIKE YOU HAVE SEEN A LOT OF TIMES, WITH THINGS OR NEGLECTED, LIKE A ROAD LET'S SAY.

IN A DIFFERENT CONNOTATION. WHEN THERE ARE POTHOLES, THINGS NEED TO BE FIXED, RIGHT? YOU HAVE TO ALLOCATE MONEY AT THE TIME, TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS DONE RIGHT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE TIMES. THIS IS ONE OF THE TIMES TO MAKE THE SYSTEM BETTER. BEFORE WE GET TO A POINT WHERE IT'S BROKEN. BECAUSE I'M JUST GOING TO CHANGE MY VOTE. [LAUGHTER]

[APPLAUSE] >> YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO BE OPEN-MINDED AND LISTEN TO THINGS. I'M GOING TO DO THAT TODAY.

LET'S GO AHEAD. >> OKAY.

WE HAVE A MOTION -- >> IS IT JUST OUT OF THE REMAINING FUNDS THAT WE DRIVE ACROSS YES, OUT OF THE REMAINING FUNDS AND THEY ARE NOT TO SPEND MORE THAN THAT.

WE ARE HOPING IT WILL BE UNDER. BUT NO MORE THAN THE 400.

>> I THINK IS A CONTINGENCY IN THERE.

THE REAL NUMBER WAS ABOUT 320 SOMETHING AND ABOUT 50 OR

$60,000 CONTINGENCY. >> ESP REQUEST THAT CREDIT TO DIVISION 72, IF I READ THAT CORRECTLY.

>> LET'S GO. >> 400,000.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.

THERE BEING NONE, THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE. GO BACK TO WORK!

[APPLAUSE] [LAUGHTER] >> NUMBER 10?

IS THERE A DUPLICATE? >> THAT'S A GOOD ARGUMENT.

>> IT WAS NINE AND 10. >> TEND TO DUPLICATE?

>> ATTENDS A DUPLICATE. WE NEED TO TAKE THAT OFF.

WE DIDN'T CATCH THAT. I WILL PULL IT.

QUESTIONS TABLE 10? >> TABLE 10.

>> MOTION TO TABLE 10, JUDGE INDEFINITELY.

>> MOTION TO TABLE 10 ON -- >> INDEFINITELY.

>> INDEFINITELY. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. BEING NONE, MOTION PASSES.

NOW WE WILL GO BACK. LET ME FIND THIS TO MARKET OFF ON MY CALENDAR. ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, ANY ITEMS ANYONE WISHES TO PULL? I'D LIKE TO PULL ONE.

PUBLIC COMMENT, I'M SORRY. I WAS GOING TO PULL SOME THINGS BEFORE PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT THAT'S OKAY.

BECAUSE I WANT TO TAKE IT OFF OF THE CONSENT.

IN CASE ANYBODY WANTS TO SPEAK, I WANT TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. SINCE WE'VE HAD A LOT OF EMAILS AND THINGS ON ITEM O ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, WENT TO PULL THE AD THAT YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND DISCUSS ON IT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER ONES THAT YOU WANT TO PULL ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? IS ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC SPEAKING? YOU CAN EITHER SPEAK FIRST OR --

>> CAN YOU HELP CLARIFY? ARE P AND Q KIND OF TIED

INQUIRY ANOTHER SEPARATE. >> THEY WERE UNANIMOUS VOTES.

[01:10:02]

>> YOU CAN PULL, IT'S YOUR CALL.

>> IT'S YOUR CALL. >> I MEAN, WAS BEING ADDRESSED

ON O, P AND Q, SO I'M ASKING. >> I JUST PUT MINE BACK IN.

>> FEELING WHEN THAT WASN'T UNANIMOUS WAS O. THAT'S WHY WE ARE PULLING IT. WE ARE PULLING A DISCUSSION AND VOTE. DO YOU WANT TO PULL THOSE OTHER

TWO? >> JUST TO SEE WHAT MAY HAPPEN WITH THEM. WE DON'T KNOW HOW WE MAY, HOW WE MAY FEEL ABOUT RATIFYING THAT ITEM.

THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY OR ADMINISTRATION. IF YOU FEEL IT DOES APPLY OR -- I GUESS MODIFICATION IS KIND OF JUST, IT DOESN'T REALLY HOLD US TO COMMIT TO ANYTHING BECAUSE AN ACTION IS ALREADY BEEN TAKEN. WHERE JUST BRING IT FORWARD FOR

FURTHER DISCUSSION. >> REACTION, THOSE WITH UNANIMOUS VOTES. EVERYONE CAN VOTE TO RATIFY THOSE. WHEN THERE WAS A 3-2 IN THE PAST I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD EQUALLY CHANGE AND VOTE TO JUST RATIFY THOSE. I BELIEVE THAT IS WHY THEY ARE

BEING PULLED. >> OTIS ASK FOR P AND Q. FOR

DISCUSSION BASED ON -- >> YOU ARE MAKING A MOTION FOR

P AND Q TO BE PULLED? >> YES.

>> THAT IS MY ALLOCATION -- I MEAN.

>> I GOT IT. >> YOU ARE GOING TO PULL THAT ONE? WHICH ONE ARE YOU PULLING?

>> P AND Q IN ADDITION TO O. >> LIKE I SAID, I MAY NOT NEED THEM BUT JUST FOR NOW LET'S PULL THEM.

AND THEN, O IS DONE WITH AND QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

THEN WE CAN SEE IF THESE ARE EVEN WORTH HAVING FURTHER

DISCUSSION. >> OKAY.

[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.]

DO WE HAVE THE PUBLIC COMMENT LIST? [INAUDIBLE] CONSENT AGENDA.

IS ANYONE HERE SPEAKING THAT IS NOT ON THE ITEMS ON THE ARPA FUNDS ON THE PIER? SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

EDWARD? YES.

YOU ARE NOT SIGNED UP? I'M LOOKING THROUGH THE LIST. SORRY, THERE IS A LONG LIST TODAY. LET'S JUST GO THROUGH THE LIST.

EDWARD. DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK FIRST?>> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONER AND JUDGES.> GOOD MORNING.

>> CAN'T PULL UP ALL INFORMATION THAT YOU ALL HAD BUT I'VE GOT A REALLY NICE, REALLY NEAT DEAL.

WE GOT THE SPLASH PAD RIBBON-CUTTING CEREMONY THAT WILL BE HELD THIS THURSDAY, APRIL 6 AT FOUR.

THE COMMISSIONER CAME UP WITH AN IDEA SO WE HAVE AN EASTER EGG HUNT AT THE SAME TIME. WE ARE INVITING THE COURT AND ALL OF THE PARTICIPANTS UP HERE TO COME OUT AND HAVE A GOOD TIME WITH US OUT THERE. AND ENJOY THE SPLASH PAD.

WHETHER COMMISSIONER GIBSON GETS SWIMMING TRUNKS OR NOT, I DON'T KNOW. THANK YOU.

>> MR. GONZALES, YOUR SIGNED UP.

DO YOU WANT TO GO NEXT? I COULDN'T FIND YOUR NAME ON THE LIST, SORRY, I WOULD HAVE LET YOU GO.> GOOD MORNING.

I SEE MY CLOCK TICKING HERE MY NAME IS MARK GONZALES, A TWO-TIME ELECTED DISTRICT ATTORNEY.

I AM HERE TO ASK THAT YOU APPROVE MY LEGAL FEES.

LAST NIGHT COULD NOT SLEEP AND I WAS WATCHING A MOVIE WHICH WAS CALLED BRAVEHEART. THE THEME OF THIS, A GUY FIGHTING FOR HIS COUNTRY AND YET, THE -- SOME OF THE COUNTRYMEN, THEY CONTINUE TO DISAPPOINT HIM.

IN A MARCH 8, AT A HEARING, A THREE HOUR HEARING REGARDING REMOVAL OF MY OFFICE. AND I WAS DISAPPOINTED THAT I DIDN'T GET ONE TEXT OR ONE CALLED BY MY AGENDA ITEM THAT WAS PLACED HERE FOR MY APPROVAL OF LEGAL FEES.

IT IS ALMOST POETIC AND, EVEN STRICTLY FUNDED WE HEAR ON GIDEON DAY. WHEN WE ADVOCATE AND ASK THE PEOPLE GET A RIGHT TO AN ATTORNEY.

THAT IS ALL I'M ASKING FOR. I WAS ALSO DISAPPOINTED THAT IT

[01:15:05]

WAS LEFT OFF THE AGENDA TODAY. THAT'S WHY I'M HERE.

ALL I ASK IS THAT, WE DO THE RIGHT THING.

JUSTICE DOES HAVE A COST. ALL I ASK IS THAT I GET REPRESENTATION. I WAS ALSO DISAPPOINTED WHEN I SAW A LAWYER SITTING UP HERE THAT YOU PROBABLY PAID AN OUTSIDE COUNSEL A CONSULTANT THEY TOOK THE TIME AND WANTED TO PAY THEM TO DECIDE WHETHER YOU COULD OR HAD TO PAY THE MONEY. HE HEARD IN GIDEON THAT THERE WERE SOME JUDGES WHO FELT THEY DIDN'T NEED TO AND MAYBE IT WASN'T THE LAW AT THE TIME. BUT MAYBE IT WAS LATER ON.

EVEN THOUGH YOU MAY NOT HAVE TO OR MAY BE DISCRETIONARY TO HAVE A FEW REASONS WHY YOU SHOULD. NUMBER ONE, YOU ALREADY HAVE.

I'VE BEEN SUED TWICE MY PUBLIC CAPACITY.

EVERY TIME THE COUNTY HAS AGREED TO REPRESENT ME.

ONE FOR A BAIL BOND LITIGATION. AND AGAIN, FOR IN 1994 ACTION AGAINST, WHICH IS CAUSE A CRIMINAL.

ANNOTATED THINGS BECAUSE WHAT YOU RECEIVED NUMBER ONE, IF I WAS A STATE EMPLOYEE, THIS COURT AND MANY OTHERS HAVE PAID FOR LEGAL FEES FOR JUDGES THAT WE JUST SAW COME UP HERE.

NUMBER TWO, IF IT IS BECAUSE I CRIMINAL, THIS COURT ALWAYS PAYS FOR JAILERS. ANYTIME A SUIT IS BROUGHT IS BECAUSE I CRIMINAL. I ASK YOU, THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER MOVIE HERE WHICH WAS THE LEGEND OF BILLIE JEAN.

AND THAT IS WHAT FAIR IS FAIR. COMMISSIONER, WHAT IS FAIR IS FAIR. SHOULD I GET MY LEGAL FEES PAID FOR? COMMISSIONER, SHOULDN'T I? WHAT'S FAIR IS FAIR, JUDGE, JUDGE REALLY IS ANYTIME ANYTHING WASTED BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WHETHER IT IS PARTY MIGHT ASK INTERNS OR EMPLOYEES, WORK FOR ME TO TRY AND GET SOMETHING OUT, IT'S ON YOUR DIME.

I'M ASKING FOR THE SAME THING. THIS IS NOT A MOVIE, ISRAEL APPEARED EVERY DECISION YOU MAKE IMPACT ME AND MY FAMILY.

AND I HAVE THESE POINTS HERE AND I SAW BISHOP SAYING DO THE RIGHT THING. HOW POETIC IS THAT? I'M ASKING YOU TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

BISHOP I SAID PRAY FOR ME. HE SAID NO WAY.

NO WEAPON FORMED AGAINST YOU SHALL PROSPER.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

NORMAN MARTIN. >> GOOD MORNING LADIES AND GENTLEMEN PITTMAN NAME IS NORMAN MARTIN.

I'M IN A PLAY WITH DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. IS IT DIFFERENT TO SUPPORT LAW ENFORCEMENT IN PUBLIC AS IT IS IN PRIVATE? THAT IS MY ONLY QUESTION. I'M LOOKING AT SOME PAY SCALES HERE. I WASN'T GOING TO SAY ANYTHING.

LAST YEAR SOMETHING HAPPENED AND I LET IT SLIDE.

THIS YEAR WON'T LET IT SLIDE FOR LAST YEAR COVID FUNDS WERE ADMINISTERED TO A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS IN -- A LOT OF LAW OFFICES IN THIS COUNTY EXCEPT FOR OTHERS.

WE ARE LAW ENFORCEMENT AND HAVE 34 YEARS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT.

I'LL THE MASTERS OF PEACE OFFICER CERTIFICATIONS.

WE ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT VICTIMS, WITNESSES, SUSPECTS, SERVE SUBPOENAS AND FIND PEOPLE.

BUT WHEN ASKED THE AUDITORS OFFICE WHY WE WERE NOT ENTITLED TO THE MONEY, WE WERE TOLD BECAUSE WE WERE NOT PART OF THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. NOW I SEE THAT THE JOBS ARE POSTING ON OUR WEBSITE. A TEMPORARY, PART-TIME INVESTIGATOR FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE STARTS OFF AT 2773 AN HOUR. THE FIRE MARSHAL STARTS AT $27.73 AN HOUR. AN INVESTIGATOR WITH THE DAS OFFICE STARTS OFF AT A LITTLE OVER $23 AN HOUR.

HOW IS THAT FAIR? WE HANDLE MORE, DO MORE AND ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING WITH LESS. WE ARE TOLD TO SUPPORT US.

BUT WE DO NOT SEEM TO GET THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT AS EVERYBODY ELSE. HOW IS THAT FAIR TO THE INVESTIGATORS? EVERY ONE OF THE INVESTIGATORS IN OUR OFFICE HAS OVER 15 YEARS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT EXPERIENCE.

SOME OF IT WAS IN INVESTIGATIONS.

MYSELF, HAD 24 YEARS WITH THE CITY.

I WAS FOUR YEARS IN A GANG UNIT, ON A SAFE STREET TASK FORCE. YET, APPARENTLY NOT AS VALUED AS EVERYBODY ELSE. THEN WHEN ASKED THESE QUESTIONS I NEVER GET ANSWERS. WE TRIED TO GET VEHICLES AND NEVER GOT THOSE. IF IT IS ABOUT FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY, WOULDN'T IT BE EASIER TO RETAIN PEOPLE AT A BETTER PAY THAN HAVING TO CONSTANTLY HIRE SOMEONE ELSE? DO THE BACK AN INVESTIGATION ON THEM AND RETRAIN THEM, REHIRE THEM AND FIND OUT SOMEONE ELSE IS GETTING PAID MORE THAN I AM HERE. SO THEY GO TO THAT JOB.

HOW IS THAT REASONABLE? HOW IS IT FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE? HOW IS THAT FAIR TO THE PEOPLE IN THE DAS OFFICE? MY ONLY QUESTION IS, IS IT POLITICAL OR JUST AN OVERSIGHT? BECAUSE INVESTIGATORS OBVIOUSLY, ARE MAKING MORE THAN WE ARE.

BUT WE HAVE MORE RESPONSIBILITY THAN THESE OTHERS AT THIS POINT

[01:20:04]

IN TIME. SO, I WANT TO KNOW, IS IT A PUBLIC THEY SUPPORT IS IN PUBLIC AND IN PAPER YOU DON'T? BECAUSE WHAT I'M SEEING A PAPER, WE ARE NOT SUPPORTED AS EVERYBODY ELSE IS. AND PEOPLE WHO KNOW ME KNOW THAT I USUALLY KEEP MY MOUTH SHUT ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS BUT WHEN I FIND SOMETHING I DON'T BELIEVE IS RIGHT I WILL STAND UP FOR IT REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS TO ME.

OR ANYBODY ELSE FOR THAT MATTER BECAUSE WHAT'S FAIR IS FAIR AND RIGHT NOW, WE ARE NOT BEING TREATED FAIRLY AND I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF THE AUDITORS OFFICE TELLING US BECAUSE WE ARE NOT PART OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING, WE ARE OKAY.

THAT DOESN'T SIT RIGHT WITH US. WE ARE LAW ENFORCEMENT WE TAKE THE SAME RISKS AS EVERYBODY ELSE.

YET, WE ARE TREATED COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY.

I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS THAT GOING TO CHANGE?ND I'M PRETTY SURE MY ANSWER IS, WHAT I'M GETTING RIGHT NOW, SILENCE.

YOU ALL HAVE A GOOD DAY. >> NEXT UP IS ART MOORMAN.

>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS ART NORMAN, I'M A LONGTIME RESIDENT OF NUECES COUNTY.

THANK YOU, JUDGE SCOTT, COMMISSIONERS, CLARK AND STAFF YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION THIS MORNING.

I'M HERE TODAY AS A CONCERNED CITIZEN.

ELECTORAL WORK AND MEMBER OF THE ELECTION INTEGRITY PROJECT IN NUECES COUNTY. ALTHOUGH MY WORDS THERE ARE THOSE OF MY OWN AND I DON'T SPEAK FOR ANYONE ELSE.

I'VE ALWAYS CONSIDERED THE RIGHT TO VOTE THE SAFER DUTY WERE ONLY RECENTLY BECAME AWARE OF ALL THE HARD WORK IT TAKES TO HOLD ELECTIONS HERE IN MY SINCERE THANKS TO THE CLERK AND THE OFFICE WHILE THEY DO. NO MOVING TO PAPER BALLOTS IS GOING TO BE EVEN MORE WORK FOR THEIR OFFICE AS WELL AS ALL ELECTION WORKERS. I JUST WANT TO HELP WITH THIS PROCESS TO MAKE SURE WE GET IT RIGHT.

TODAY, AGENDA 3 A17, LOOK LIKE YOU ARE CONSIDERING TO PUT A MAN DOLLARS OF CONTRACT MOVERS TO PAPER BALLOTS.T IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WERE TWO DIFFERENT PAPER BALLOT SOLUTIONS AVAILABLE FROM THE VENDOR THAT BOTH COMPLY WITH THE TEXAS ELECTION CODE CHAPTER 129 003.

WHEN THAT PRODUCES A HAND MARKED BUBBLE TYPE BALLOT PADILLA PRODUCES A BALLOT SUMMARY WITH A QR CODE ON IT.

I APOLOGIZE, THEN BRING MY CONCERNS TO YOUR ATTENTION SOONER BUT I WAS HOPING FOR AN OPPORTUNITY FOR POLL WORKERS, CANDIDATES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS TO SEE THE MACHINES, ASK QUESTIONS AND PROVIDE A VALUABLE INPUT IN THIS DECISION. IN CASE IT DOESN'T HAPPEN, I HOPE YOU CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING BEFORE APPROVING THE $2.8 MILLION EXPENDITURE. FIRST, IT IS NOT TRANSPARENT.

ACCORDING TO THE SOLUTION YOU'RE CONSIDERING TODAY IT IS -- MACHINE THAT PRODUCES A BALLOT SUMMARY FORMAT WITH A QR OR QUICK RESPONSE CODE. ON THE BALLOT.

IT IS MACHINE LANGUAGE CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 4200 CHARACTERS, IT IS READABLE ONLY BY PROPRIETARY VENDOR SOFTWARE. YOU CAN'T READ IT, I CAN'T READ IT AND MOST IMPORTANT, THE VOTERS CANNOT READ THAT QR CODE. HAVING A QR CODE ON THE BALLOT WELL IT IS THE PRINCIPLE OF TRANSPARENCY AND I BELIEVE WE WILL LEAD TO VOTER SUSPICION AND MISTRUST.

A SECOND AND PROBABLY MOST CONSEQUENTIAL IS THE PROPOSED STATE LEGISLATION. HOUSE BILL 5234 FIVE LESS THAN TWO WEEKS AGO, ESPECIALLY PURPOSE QR CODES ON THE BALLOTS. SPECIFICALLY, SECTION 52.061.

HOUSE BILL 5234 YOU CONSUME FULL OUT OF LEGAL COMPLIANCE.

MY STANDING DISSOLUTION ARE CONSIDERING 30 PERCENT MORE THAN THE ALTERNATIVE. I HOPE THE COMMISSIONERS COURT IS FRUGAL AND POSSIBLE WITH TAXPAYERS MONEY.

I'M CONCERNED ABOUT PURCHASING EXPENSIVE EQUIPMENT THAT MIGHT SOON BECOME OBSOLETE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY AND CONSIDERATION IN THIS MATTER.

>> THANK YOU. >>.

I HAVE SOME REMARKS PREPARED BUT YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU COME DOWN HERE AND CHANGES ARE MADE, YOU HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR REMARKS. I'M STUTTERING AND TURNING PAPER, AND USING BATTLING IS BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO FIGURE WHERE I'M GOING NOW. HOWEVER, I AM TICKLED THAT WE HAVE REMOVED ITEM O FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THIS WHERE IT BELONGS. FIRST OF ALL WE HAVE HEARINGS.

[01:25:05]

WE HAD PUBLIC COMMENTS AND DEVELOP.

WE HAVE THIS SPECIFICALLY, THE RESTAURANT FACILITY PIECE OF IT WAS PART OF IT. I HAVE A COUPLE OF CONCERNS.

I THINK YOU SAID THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW, AND THEY DO.

THEY DO HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW. NE OF THE THINGS I'M CURIOUS ABOUT IS, YOU ALL GIVEN UP MONEY FROM THIS THAT WAS PREVIOUS ALLOCATED, VOTED ON, PLANNED FOR.

THE PUBLIC KNEW WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.

I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO RETURN THE MONEY SO WHERE WILL IT GO? I THINK THAT'S PART OF, WE NEED TO KNOW THAT AND THAT SHOULD ALSO BE VOTED ON. I DON'T THINK HE SHOULD BE ABLE TO JUST SAY OKAY, I'M NOT GOING TO DO THE SECOND FLOOR THE RESTAURANT SO I WILL PUT HOWEVER MUCH MONEY IT IS OVER HERE IN ANOTHER PROJECT THAT I LIKE.

DISCUSSION, DILIGENCE, PLANNING NEEDS TO GO IN THOSE DECISIONS.

HOPE WE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.

THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS, AND I'M GLAD THAT YOU REMOVED A COUPLE OF OTHERS. THERE IS ONE OTHER ONE WE NEED TO CONSIDER LATER IN DIALOGUE. THIS IS MODIFY RELOCATION.

I AM JUST AN OLD GRANDMA THAT CAME BACK TO CORPUS CHRISTI TO BE WITH HER GRANDKIDS. I'M NOT A LEARNED PERSON HOWEVER, IT SEEMS TO ME, THAT THIS IS TOTALLY DONE INCORRECTLY. THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS VOTE.

IF YOU CHANGE SOMETHING DRASTICALLY AND I THINK RELOCATION ALL OF THIS MORNING, IS A DRASTIC CHANGE.

YOU CAN GO TO SESSION AND SAY THAT WE ARE GOING TO RELOCATE THE SPEAR WE WILL RELOCATE THIS OR THIS.

MOTION TO RECONSIDER I THINK, IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO.

AND WE KNOW WHERE WE ARE GOING WITH THIS.

JUST THE FACT THAT YOU HAD I GUESS IT WAS AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS CAME TO BE BUT I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT IT BECAUSE IT'S ALSO RELOCATION IN GENERAL HAVE A DOG IN A FIGHT ON THAT. BUT RIGHT IS RIGHT HAS BEEN SAID TODAY SO I THINK THAT IS ALSO INCORRECT.

WHERE IS THAT GOING BACK INTO? WHERE IS THAT 600,000 GOING BACK INTO? MY REMARKS ARE, SUPPORT THE BOB HALL PEER DECISION MADE A LONG TIME AGO.

WITH THE SECOND FLOOR RESTAURANT. ENCOURAGE YOU TO GO BACK TO THAT, WHICH IS WHAT THE PUBLIC THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN. I ALSO QUESTION WHY WE ARE WILLY-NILLY REALLOCATING MONEY WITHOUT GOOD DISCUSSION, WHEN HEARINGS HAVE BEEN HAD ON SOME OF THESE OTHER THINGS.

THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING TO THE PUBLIC, WHO -- I'M RETIRED I CAN COME YOUR FOLKS WERE WORKING CANNOT COME DOWN HERE TO ENGAGE IN THIS DIALOGUE.

WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO.

WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING? SHOW ME THE BEEF, AS THE OLD LADY ON THE WENDY'S COMMERCIAL SAID.HANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE] >> MARKET SHANNON? I CANNOT READ THE NAME, SORRY IF I MESSED THAT UP.

OKAY SORRY. [INAUDIBLE]

>> THAT IS MY PENMANSHIP, IT'S TERRIBLE.

>> SORRY! >> I AM MARK -- I HAVE AN ELEVATOR SPEECH BUT AGENDA ITEM EIGHT, REGULAR JUGGERNAUT OF ADJUSTING FOR THE ALLOCATION OF ARBOR FUNDS FOR THE IMAGE OF THE PROJECT. SOME ELEVATOR SPEECHES IF YOU CONSIDER EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM, YOUR FAMILY, YOUR HUSBAND, WIFE, SIGNIFICANT OTHER, KIDS, BROTHER AND SISTERS, MOM AND DAD, UNCLES, AUNTS, COUSINS. DO YOU HAVE ANYONE THAT BUNCH OF FOLKS, WHO SUFFERS FROM DEPRESSION AND BIPOLAR, ALCOHOLISM, SUFFERS FROM DRUG ABUSE? DRUG ADDICTION? ATTEMPTED SUICIDE OR COMMITTED SUICIDE. I'VE BEEN IN PLACE A LONG TIME MADE WELL OVER A THOUSAND ARRESTED EVERYTHING FROM CAPITOL MURDER TO DWI AND SEVERAL HUNDRED DRUG RELATED SEARCH WARRANTS.'M THE FIRST ONE TO STAND UP TO TELL YOU THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A PARADIGM SHIFT IN POLICING AND THE WAY WE HANDLE THESE CASES. WE HANDLE THE MENTALLY ILL.

WE HAVE A PROJECT WE ARE WORKING ON ALONG WITH WE ENGAGE WITH FOLKS AND MAKE CALLS ANOTHER SUFFERING FROM AN ISSUE. 1960 STRATEGY IS LET THE PERSON FALL TO THE BOTTOM OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE WORLD AND HANDLE THEM THERE. WE DON'T NEED TO BE DOING THAT.

WE CANNOT SUSTAIN THAT. IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR JAIL POPULATION, I THINK THAT PROBABLY 20 PERCENT OF PEOPLE

[01:30:02]

IN THE COUNTY JAIL HAVE SEVERE MENTAL ISSUES.

THEY NEED TO BE TREATED AND THEIR ISSUES THAT THEY COMMITTED A CRIME. THE FACT IS WE ENCOUNTER PEOPLE ALL THE TIME THROUGH 9-1-1 CALLS.

AND WE MAKE CALLS ON THEM AND A LOT OF TIMES WE CAN'T DO MUCH WITH THEM IN THE PREVIOUS WAY WE DID THINGS UNLESS THEY COMMITTED A CRIME. THE RESTORATION CENTER, RESTORING THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1500 -- WILL ALLOW US TO DO IT DIFFERENTLY. WE ENCOUNTER FOLKS, ILL GIVE THEM BETTER CHANCE OF BEING RESTORED TO COMPETENCY TO LIVE A NORMAL LIFE OF QUALITY OF LIFE.

INSTEAD OF LETTING THEM FALL AWAY INTO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE WORLD. I THINK IN THE LONG TERM, IS NOT A BLACKHOLE USING THE MONEY FOR THIS, YOU'LL SAY IN THE JAIL PUBLISHING IS VERY EASY TO CALCULATE HOW MUCH YOU SAVE EVERY DAY ON A BED WHEN A PERSON COULD OF WENT UP IN JAIL FOR CRIMINAL TRESPASSING. THE SOBRIETY CENTER IS THE ANNEXED TO THIS BUT WE HAVE ONE GUY THAT WE'VE ARRESTED IN CORPUS EVERY 10 YEARS CLOSE TO 400 TIMES? WHAT IS SEVERE WASTE OF MONEY. EVERY TOWN WE ARREST SOMEBODY INCLUDING THE HOMELESS POPULATION, FOR THESE TYPES OF CRIMES SOME OF THEM ARE ENDING UP AT THE COUNTY BECAUSE THERE CRIMINAL TRESPASSING CHARGES AND IS NOT A CLASSY CHARGE.

THEY END UP IN THE COUNTY. OR PROBATION OR PAROLE VIOLATIONS ETC. WE COULD'VE TREATED AND MAY BE IN A DIFFERENT STANDARD. ALLOW US TO OFFER THEM SERVICES BEFORE THEY GO OUT THE DOOR. WE JOINED AT THE HIP WITH MHID, SUP DISCLAIMER, I SIT ON THE BOARD AND THERE WILL RUN.

WE WORK WITH THEM EVERY SINGLE DAY.

REINTEGRATED WITH THEM. WE ARE MAKING CRISIS INTERVENTION RESPONSE TEAM. WE HAVE WITH PRECINCT 2, WERE CLOSELY TRYING TO BE PREVENTATIVE AND MAKE CALLS ON FOLKS TO REDIRECT THEM AND THEIR SOCIAL AGENCIES AND CAN HELP THEM. THESE MONIES SHOULD BE WELL USED BUT YOU'LL SEE RETURN INVESTMENT ON THE ROAD.

THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]

>> SEAN BARNES. >> HI, THANK YOU, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS SEAN BARNES.

I AM THE CRISIS COURTED FOR THE CORPUS CHRISTI POLICE DEPARTMENT. JUST TO ECHO LITERALLY WITH THE CHIEF JUST SAID, WE REALLY NEED OPTIONS.

ADDITIONAL OPTIONS THAT WE DON'T HAVE IN ADDRESSING MORE SPECIFICALLY, VICTIMLESS CRIMES THAT ARE REALLY PREDICATED ON ILLNESS RELATED BEHAVIORS. WE CAN DEEP PRESSURE AS A JOB INITIALLY IS THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT.

NOT EVERYONE HAS TO THE HOSPITAL.

BUT WITHIN THAT, THE FAILURE TO ACKNOWLEDGE IMITATIONS, IS A BIG PROBLEM. IF YOU DON'T ACKNOWLEDGE IMITATIONS YOU CAN EVEN ADDRESS YOU DON'T SEE THEM AS LIMITATIONS, YOU'RE NOT JUST IN THEM.ND THAT'S HOW WE END UP STAGNANT OR WORSE. WE HAVE A MYRIAD OF LIMITATIONS IN OUR COMMUNITY. SPECIFICALLY AROUND CRISIS RESPONSE SYSTEM. THEY ARE BEST ADDRESSED SIMULTANEOUSLY. I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE.

ESSENTIALLY, THE BEST WAY TO ATTACK A DRAGON IS TO ATTACK IT FROM EVERY ANGLE. BUT THIS SYSTEM THAT THE MENTAL SYSTEM FOR THE CRISIS RESPONSE IS A HELL OF A BEAST.

UNFORTUNATELY, YOU CAN ALWAYS ADDRESS EVERYTHING AT ONCE.

BUT, WE REALLY DO NEED ALL HANDS ON DECK BEFORE THEY SHIFT -- THE SHIP FURTHER SINKS. PERSONALLY, I WORKED OVER THREE YEARS IN INTENSE COLLABORATION WITH MHID AND OTHER COLLABORATIVE PARTNERS. ASTONISHINGLY, THE COLLABORATIVE HAS NOT SUFFERED. QUITE LITERALLY, THE COMMENTS MAINTAIN RECIPROCITY. CONTINUED NOURISHMENT, NURTURANT. AND A MISSION IN LINE FOCUS.

THAT IS THE KEY. FOCUSING ON THOSE WHO PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO MISSION, NOT TO AN ORGANIZATION, TO AN INDIVIDUAL, OR SOMETHING ELSE. JUST LITERALLY, TO THE MISSION.

THOSE WHO PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THAT.

AND HOLD THAT TRUE. IT'S HOW WE WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE PROGRESS. I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE THAT. AND MHID HAS THAT.

I ALSO TELL YOU THAT IF IT CHANGES, I WILL BE THE FIRST TO LET YOU KNOW. AND KEEP YOU ACCOUNTABLE.

I EXPECT THE SAME IN RETURN. IF IT CHANGES ON OUR PART, MY PART, ANYBODY. WE HAVE TO HOLD EACH OTHER ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE SAME CONCEPT IN POLICING.

AN OFFICER STARTED TO DO THE WRONG THING AND SO IS HANDCUFFED, STOP THEM. YOU KNOW? I AGREE WITH THE CHIEF 'S ENTIRE STATEMENTS.

I HAVE ABSOLUTE CONVICTION IN THIS PARTICULAR PROGRAM.

IT IS VERY EVIDENT ANY COST-SAVING MEASURES THAT WE PRODUCE, THIS WILL BE A MASSIVE FORCE MULTIPLIER IN OUR EFFORTS AND ABILITY TO DIVERT HIS ILLNESS RELATED BEHAVIORS AWAY FROM THE COUNTY JAIL AND GET THEM INTO THE APPROPRIATE CARE.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE] >> SAMUEL -- SAMUEL FRYER?

[01:35:13]

GOOD MORNING, JUDGE SCOTT, COMMISSIONERS.

SAMUEL ANDREA FRYER AND I SPEAKING ON AGENDA ITEM 17.

YOU KNOW THE PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION SAYS WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES. IN ORDER TO FORM A MORE PERFECT UNION, ESTABLISH JUSTICE ENSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY, PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE AND PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE OF -- SECURE BLESSING LIBERTIES OF OURSELVES AND POSTERITY DO ORDAIN AND ESTABLISH THIS CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, OF AMERICA. I FIRST SWORE AN OATH TO SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AGAINST ALL ENEMIES FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC OVER 35 YEARS AGO.

I DID SO THROUGHOUT THE 30 YEARS OF MY SERVICE AS A COMMISSION ARMY OFFICER IN THE VARIOUS PROMOTIONS.

RETIRING AS A COLONEL IN 2018. I AM CURRENTLY REGROWING MY BEARD BECAUSE I HAD THE DISTINCT HONOR OF RE-DONNING THE UNIFORM AFTER FIVE YEARS. AND GIVEN THE VERY SAME OATH OF OFFICE TO MY DAUGHTER, DURING HER COMMISSIONING CEREMONY AS A SECOND LIEUTENANT IN THE ARMY. JUST A LITTLE OVER A WEEK AGO.

I PROUDLY WEAR THE T-SHIRT BECAUSE OVER MY ENTIRE BECAUSE I STAND IN SOLIDARITY WITH ELECTION INTEGRITY PROJECT.

AND WITH THE COUNTY CITIZENS DEFENDING FREEDOM.

WITH REGARDS TO ENSURING THAT WE UPHOLD OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC.S PRESIDENT ABRAHAM LINCOLN ONCE SAID, THAT GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE, SHALL NOT PERISH FROM THE EARTH.

GIVEN THAT, I'M SURE WILL AGREE THAT ENSURING INTEGRITY AND TRUSTWORTHINESS, OF OUR ELECTIONS, IS OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE. WHY?ECAUSE IT EXPRESSES THE GOVERNING WILL OF WE THE PEOPLE.

TACTICALLY, WITHIN NUECES COUNTY, THE COUNTY LEVELS, OPERATIONALLY, WITHIN OUR STATE AND OTHER STATES.

AN OPERATION STRATEGICALLY THROUGHOUT OUR NATION.

I FAVOR PAPER BALLOTS AND OTHER LEGISLATIONS AND DEALS GOING THROUGH TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY OF OUR ELECTIONS.

HOWEVER, GIVEN THE RISK OF MANIPULATIVE MACHINE TABULATION, AND THE COUNTY CLERK TO REQUEST FOR FUNDING OF THE HARD INTO CIVIC EQUIPMENT, IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT WE IMPLEMENT A MORE ROBUST, RISK LIMITING AUDIT OF MACHINE TABULATION, IN ORDER THAT WE ENSURE CONFIDENCE IN OUR ELECTION PROCESS. EARLIER, HER CONVERSATION ABOUT COST. WE NEED TO IMPLEMENT THIS LESS, IMPLEMENT THIS IMMEDIATELY FOR THE NEXT ELECTION AND NOT LATER. IN 2016 BECAUSE THE COST WILL BE GREAT. IT WILL STRIP AWAY THE GOVERNANCE OF WE THE PEOPLE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THIS WILL MOVE A LOT FASTER, THEN WE NEED TO HOLD YOUR APPLAUSE PLEASE. IT'S SUPPOSED REPUBLIC,, WE CANNOT SPEAK AFTERWARDS OR ANYTHING.

IN THE FUTURE, PLEASE HOLD APPLAUSE.

SEAN FLANAGAN, YOU ARE UP NEXT. >> HELLO JUDGE AND CORONER SEAN FLANAGAN 4218 HERNDON. ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, A BUNCH OF US GOT TOGETHER. WE WERE KIND OF UPSET ABOUT WHAT WE THOUGHT MIGHT BE SOME PROBLEMS IN THE ELECTIONS.

SO WE DECIDED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

NOW, WITH 50 OR 60 FOLKS IN OUR ORGANIZATION FOR COLLECTIONS.

LOOK PART OF WHAT WAS GOING ON IN NUECES COUNTY AND THANKS THE GOOD JOB OF OUR COUNTY CLERK, WE DID NOT FIND ANY FRAUD THAT HAS GONE ON. A LOT OF PLACES IN TEXAS GOT PROBLEMS, NUECES COUNTY IS NOT ONE WE FOUND PROBLEMS. THAT'S BECAUSE OUR COUNTY CLERK FOLLOWS A LETTER OF THE LAW AND DOES HER JOB ACCORDINGLY. IT IS VERY GOOD, WE'VE BEEN VERY HAPPY TO WORK WITH HER. I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF BUT ON AGENDA ITEM 17 OF YOUR REGULAR AGENDA, ONE OF THE THINGS I FOUND IN DOING A RESEARCH SOME CALLING DATA.

A LOT OF FOLKS HAVE TRUST IN THE ELECTIONS ANYMORE.

A TEXAS UT TRIBUNE POLL DONE IN APRIL 2021, 80 PERCENT OF TEXANS WANT PAPER BALLOTS IN THE PROCESS.

THIS IS WHY FAVOR GOING FORWARD WITH AGENDA ITEM 17 ON YOUR

[01:40:02]

AGENDA. BECAUSE THOSE MACHINES WILL PRODUCE PAPER BALLOTS AND THAT IS A HUGE STEP FORWARD WHEN PEOPLE VOTE NOWADAYS, THE PRESS SEND AND IT GOES INTO THE ETHERNET. YOU'VE DONE A GOOD JOB MAKING SURE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ANY PROBLEMS. BUT WE THINK HAVING THE PAPER BALLOTS WILL DO A LOT TO ENSURE THE PUBLIC TRUST IN THE ELECTION PROCESS.

THERE IS A DEAL, THERE'S ONE PROBLEM ANYTIME YOU GET MACHINES INVOLVED IN THE VOTING PROCESS.

THERE IS A PROBABILITY THE OUTSIDE ACTORS MIGHT DO SOMETHING. BUT THE WAY YOU DO THAT, YOU VERIFY THAT THE MACHINES ARE BEING USED CORRECTLY.

AND YOU CAN DO THAT, THERE ARE THREE THINGS THAT HAVE COME ON UP THAT IF YOU ADOPT A MACHINE, IMMEDIATELY, A TEXAS STATUTE KICKS IN THAT REQUIRES THAT WE DO A MANUAL COMPARISON BETWEEN A MANUAL TYPE RELATIONS VOTES AND MACHINE COUNTS OF THE SAME BALLOTS AND THREE PRECINCTS AFTER EACH ELECTION TO VERIFY THE RESULTS ARE CORRECT. THAT'S REALLY GOOD.

SECOND THING, GOING FORWARD IN 2026 IT WILL BE ANOTHER REQUIREMENT, RISK LIMITING AUDIT BE DONE ON ALL OF THE ELECTIONS GO FORWARD AND IT WILL BE REALLY GOOD.

THERE IS ALSO ONE THIRD THING. A PILOT PROGRAM IS GOING TO AFFECT RIGHT NOW THEY ARE GETTING THE PROTOCOLS FOR THE RISK LIMITING AUDIT AND FIVE COUNTIES ACROSS THE STATE.

IT'S POSSIBLE IF THEY WANTED TO, NUECES COUNTY COULD JOIN ONE OF THESE PILOT PROGRAMS. I THINK WILL BE WONDERFUL BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S UP TO Y'ALL WHETHER OR NOT WE DO IT OR NOT BUT I DO REALLY THINK AND MOVE FORWARD TO PAPER BALLOTS, WHICH IS WHAT YOU GOT AGENDA 17 IS HUGELY IMPORTANT AND INCREASE CONFIDENCE IN THE VOTING, NOW THAT WE HAD A PROBLEM BUT I THINK IT'S REALLY GOOD THING TO DO, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. GAIL ANDERSON.

>> GOOD MORNING JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS GAIL ANDERSON. I AM A LIFELONG RESIDENT OF NUECES COUNTY. I'M ALSO A MEMBER OF ELECTION INTEGRITY PROJECT. I WOULD ALSO WORK IN ELECTIONS.

AS ELECTION WORKER. YOU CAN COUNT ME AS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE, THAT MR. FLANAGAN REFERRED TO AS, DOESN'T HAVE CONFIDENCE IN OUR CURRENT VOTING SYSTEM.

WE AS A PUBLIC I THOUGHT WE WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET AND REVIEW THE ELECTION MACHINE VENDORS.

TO GAIN GREATER CONFIDENCE BEFORE A DECISION WAS MADE.

I AM DISTRUSTFUL OF THE VOTING MACHINES SO ADDING PAPER BALLOTS IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

AS THEY WERE REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I BELIEVE -- RAZOR IS A GOOD APPROACH. JUST KEEP IT SIMPLE.

WE HAVE ON ONE HAND, SPENT $2.8 MILLION FOR NEW MACHINES.

OR $0.10 FOR A BALLPOINT PEN. 2.8 MILLION FOR NEW MACHINES, $0.10 FOR A BALLPOINT PEN. ALL RIGHT, I KNOW THIS NOT APPLES TO APPLES. BUT YOU GET MY POINT.

SINCE I'M NOT AN EXPERT IN THIS AREA, I WILL QUOTE FROM SENATOR BOB HALL, THIS IS A BIG ISSUE OF THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE OF THE VOTING MACHINES AND HE HAS STUDIED ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINE EXTENSIVELY. HE SAYS THE MACHINES ARE EXPENSIVE, UNRELIABLE AND DIFFICULT TO USE.

WHERE'S HAND MARK PEOPLE BALLOTS, MINIMIZE ELECTRONIC DEPENDENCY, SIMPLIFY THE PROCESS INCREASE -- ALLOW MADE IN AMERICA HARDWARE, SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE SOFTWARE, SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER EQUIPMENT COSTS, IT'S MORE USER-FRIENDLY, AND ELIMINATE THE WI-FI, BLUETOOTH SECURITY THREATS.

SHOULD THE COUNTY CHOOSE TO GO WITH THE MORE EXPENSIVE, MORE COMPLICATED LESS TRANSPARENT VOTING MACHINES, THEN WE MUST HAVE A ROBUST AUDIT SYSTEM TO GAIN THE ORDERS CONFIDENCE.

AS DISCUSSED BY MR. FLANAGAN. I APPRECIATE ALL YOU DO.

GO ISLANDERS! >> JAMES PETTIS.

>> HELLO EVERYBODY. HELLO EVERYBODY.

[01:45:02]

-- HOW ARE YOU DOING? JOHN, EVERYBODY.

JAMES PETTIS. CORPUS CHRISTI NATIVE.

IDNA. THE DIRT I STAND ON IS WHERE THE PETTIS FAMILY IS FROM. ISLANDER AT HEART, BUT ALSO UNDER THE MATTRESS FIRM, FOR THE STORES OUT IN BROWNSVILLE TEXAS, SOUTH PADRE. COASTAL BLEND, SEX IN THE VALLEY, -- A TOTAL OF 13. ALL AROUND SOUTH TEXAS, THE COASTAL BEND, AND THE GULF OF MEXICO.

VERY PROUD OF MY CORPUS CHRISTI.

THE MOMENT I HEARD THAT THE SECOND FLOOR WAS BEING THREATENED, MY HORSES ARE MY TRUCK JUST STOPPED.

REVERTED AND CAME BACK TO MY CORPUS CHRISTI TEXAS.

ALSO A HORNED FROG THE HOUSE WAS CRAZY BECAUSE UNDERNEATH OUR CHEST WE ARE ALL ISLANDERS. LOOK AT CORPUS CHRISTI.

IF YOU SAW IT ON MARCH MADNESS, THE WORLD WAS BLOWN AWAY BY CORPUS CHRISTI. THEY LIVE LIKE THAT! THE PANDEMIC TURNED ON A LIGHT TO THIS BEAUTIFUL LIGHT CORD CORPUS CHRISTI, HELP YOUR LIVER WITH ALL MY HEART.

I WORK EVERY DAY, I GET UP BY THE GRACE OF GOD.

I AM ALSO AN ARMY VETERAN, SO I WORK AS HARD AS I CAN.

MY ARMY BROTHERS, I LOVE EVERYONE OF YOU.

BECAUSE FREEDOM IS WHAT WE DO HERE CORPUS CHRISTI.

WE LISTEN TO EACH OTHER. AS THE CITY NAMED AFTER OUR LORD AND SAVIOR. IT IS THE BODY OF CHRIST CITY.

WHEN I HEARD THE SWITCH AND DATE OF THAT BEAUTIFUL SECOND-STORY, THAT'S WHAT IT IS, HE SURE IS A BEAUTIFUL PICTURE OF HIS SECOND-STORY AND NOW IT'S MAGICALLY GONE AWAY.

YOU GOT THE MONEY FOR IT. WE HAD THE FULL VOTES FOR IT.

COMMISSIONERS COURT VOTED FOR IT.

THE BOARD, THE PARK BOARD VOTED FOR IT.ND ALL CITIZENS WANT THE SECOND FLOOR. IT IS UP, IF YOU ARE REAL ISLANDER, SO YOU FIGHT FOR THE ISLANDERS TODAY.IGHT FOR THE SECOND FLOOR. WE DESERVE IT! I'M 54, I WORKED MY ENTIRE LIFE.

PUT EVERYTHING INTO THE CITY. EVERYTHING, YOU KNOW THAT.

I'VE BEEN AT YOUR RANCH. EVERYTHING FOR CORPUS CHRISTI.

YOU KNOW HOW YOU CAN SEE THE ENTIRE RANCH FROM THE BEAUTIFUL BLINDS ON YOUR RANCH? WE CAN SEE THE ENTIRE GOLF FROM THE SECOND-FLOOR OF THAT. LET IT HAPPEN MY BROTHER.

I LOVE YOU. I PRAY FOR YOU THIS MORNING.

I PAID FOR ALL OF YOU THIS MORNING.

THAT GOD GIVES YOU, REMOVES THE FISH SCALES FROM YOUR EYES, AND ALLOW CORPUS CHRISTI TO BE CORPUS CHRISTI.

WE ARE ALL ISLANDERS. SHOCK IS UP GUYS IF YOU'RE IN ISLANDER! DON'T DISAPPOINT THE CITY.

DO NOT DISAPPOINT THE CITY. I WILL TELL YOU WHAT, I'LL MAKE A PROMISE. GET THE SECOND-FLOOR CANAL THREE THE BEST PARTY EVER HAD ON TOP OF THAT I'LL PAY FOR IT.

YOU TOO! WE'LL GET THE WHOLE RANCH OUT THERE. GET OUT OF THE RANCH FOR LITTLE WHILE COME ENJOY THE WATER IN THE SAND ON MY TREAT.

ALL OF YOU. GET TO KNOW YOUR CITY, CORPUS CHRISTI. YOU CAN'T MISS THE WATER, ARE YOU KIDDING ME? WE DESERVE TO SEE IT AND BE WORLD-CLASS. NOT THE LITTLE BITTY TOWN THAT GETS PASSED OVER ALL THE TIME. I KNOW YOU ARE TIRED OF THAT I AM. I'VE SEEN IN MY ENTIRE LIFE.

LET THE FISHSCALES FALL GUYS. IN JESUS NAME I PRAY .

LET'S GET THE SECOND-STORY DONE.

WE ALL DESERVE IT. YOU ALL ARE THE ONLY ONES WORKING HARD IN THIS TOWN, I'VE GOT NEWS FOR YOU.

EVERYBODY WORKS HARD IN THIS TOWN.E DESERVE.

WHEN COVID CAME WE SAW HOW PRECIOUS LIFE WAS.

THIS CITY IS A JEWEL OF A CITY. WAKE UP, LOOK AT IT.

IF NOT JUST THE KING RANCH. >> LIBBY TO MAN.

>> I LOVE YOU TO MY BROTHER, WITH ALL MY HEART.

WITH ALL MY HEART. WHEN YOU ALL ARE GONE, YOUR LEGACY STILL STANDS. AND I'LL MAKE SURE TO REMIND EVERYBODY OF THE LEGACIES. OF THE PARTY THAT WE WIN, OR THAT WE DON'T. IT'S IN YOUR POWER.

YOU HAVE THE MONEY AND WE KNOW IT.

LOVE YOU BROTHER. >> THANK YOU.

BILLY GRANT. >> I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK.

>> YOU ARE GOING TO SPEAK? OKAY.

GUY -- >> GOOD MORNING.

MY NAME IS GUY -- I LIVE ON THE ISLAND.'VE BEEN HERE ABOUT NINE YEARS NOW. I'VE HAD A CHANCE TO GET INVOLVED WITH HELPING WITH THE ELECTIONS WHICH I AM PROUD TO DO. I THINK CARE FOR ALL THE HARD WORK SHE'S DONE TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.

MAKING A SMOOTH FOR US. FAITH IN THE PROCESS.

THE BACKGROUND IS ELECTRONICS AND MANUFACTURER ELECTRONICS.

WHICH INCLUDES PROGRAMMING, CHIPS, EVOLUTION OF THINGS THEY DON'T MAKE ANY MORE AND NEW THINGS COMING IN.

I HAVE A DEEP CONCERN FOR THE ELECTRONIC INVISIBLE

[01:50:07]

INSTANTANEOUS PROCESS. INFORMATION ANYWHERE, HOW IT'S ACCESSED, HOW IT IS NOT ACCESSED, HOW IT'S TRANSFERRED.

I HAVE BEEN VERY HAPPY WHEN I HEARD THAT WE ARE GOING TOWARDS PAPER. PAPER IS, EVERYONE I TALK TO, FAVORS PAPER. I'M GLAD THEY'RE TAKING I'LL CALL IT A HALFSTEP. WE GO FORWARD WITH HAVING SOME PAPER. THE VOTERS CAN LOOK AT AND THEY CAN SEE IT GOING THROUGH THE SCANNER.

BUT THE END RESULT, HOPE IS ONE DAY, WE'LL GET TO PAPER BALLOTS TO HAVE ACCOUNTABILITY. WE CAN AUDIT THEM, KEEP THEM, REVIEW THEM IF WE HAVE TO. IT'S NOT ELECTRONIC TRANSFER SOMEWHERE, WHERE IT GOES WE DON'T KNOW.

I HAVE FAITH IN PAPER. I'M GLAD WE ARE TAKING THE STEPS, THANK YOU AGAIN. I'M PROUD TO HELP, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. WHO'S CALLING?

>> WE WEXLER BACK FROM RECESS.IVEN THE GRAVITY OF THE SITUATION

[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.]

JUST OCCURRED IN HERE, WE ARE GOING TO, WE HAVE OUR ATTORNEY IN TOWN AS WELL. WE WILL JUMP AHEAD TO EXECUTIVE SESSION. AND HOPEFULLY, WE WILL HEAR SOMETHING FROM THE HOSPITAL ABOUT THE GENTLEMAN.

IN THE MEANTIME. IT WILL PROBABLY BE AN HOUR BEFORE WE COME BACK. WE'LL GET BACK TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND EVERYTHING ELSE. THAT WE WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF.

VERY SORRY TO DO THIS TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE.

BUT OUR PRAYERS ARE WITH THE GENTLEMAN THAT JUST LEFT.

I THINK IT WILL DO US ALL GOOD TO TAKE A TIMEOUT.

WE WILL CALL IT. WE ARE GOING TO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 11:20 AM. ITEMS ARE, SORRY HAVE TO READ THIS OFF. 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. A.ONSULT WITH COUNTY ATTORNEY REGARDING LEGAL PROCEEDINGS RELATED TO EMERGENCY SERVICE DISTRICT (ESD) #2 AND ALL RELATED MATTERS (TEXAS GOV'T CODE B' 551.071). B.RECEIVE UPDATE OF THE INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS OF THE NUECES COUNTY ANIMAL SERVICES BOARD AND DEPARTMENT; AND RELATED MATTERS (TEX. GOVT. CODE 551.0745).

C.ONSULT WITH COUNTY ATTORNEY AND/OR OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR LEGAL ADVICE AND COUNSEL REGARDING THE RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES, DUTIES, AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE NUECES COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT RELATED TO THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING NEGOTIATIONS UNDER CHAPTER 174, TEXAS LOCAL GOVB CODE AND RELATED LEGAL MATTERS (TEXAS GOVB AND THEN, THREE HAVE TO. SPECIAL ADVISOR FOR GOVERNMENT

[01:55:03]

AFFAIRS, COMMUNICATIONS AND LEGAL AFFAIRS POSITION INCLUDING JOB DUTIES AND RELATED MATTERS.

SO, IT IS 11:23 AM

[B. Discuss and consider allocating resources to allow County Manager to continue independent analysis of the Nueces County Animal Services Board and Department.]

[C. Discuss and consider appropriate action pursuant to Section 174.102, Texas Local Government Code reconfirming that the Nueces County Sheriff’s Officers Association (NCSOA) has been and shall continue to be the recognized exclusive bargaining agent for the sworn, certified, and full-time law enforcement personnel in the Sheriff’s Office as well as the Constables' Offices for Nueces County, Texas, and related matters.]

DON'T APPROPRIATE ACTION FOR THAT.

FOUR YEARS SINCE THE LAST BARGAINING CYCLE AND I THINK IT IS AURLS A GOOD W-- ALWAYS A GOD IDEA TO TAKE CARE OF THE HOUSEKEEPING MATTERS HERE AND IN PARTICULAR.

WE HAVE ALREADY BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE NCOSA REPRESENTATIVES, THE CHIEF NEGOTIATION MR. RON DELORD AND THE UNION PRESIDENT.

AND SO I JUST ASK AS A MATTER OF HOUSE KEEPING TO RECONFIRM UNDER THIS PROVISION THAT THEY CONTINUE TO BE THE MAJORITY BARGAINING AGENT. THEY SEPTEMBER A L-- SENT A LETTER TO THAT EFFECT AND INCLUDED IN THE PACKET AND I WOULD LIKE FOR THAT LETTER TO BE MADE OF RECORD THAT THEY ARE THE BARGAINING. UNDER THE STATUTE, WE ARE REQUIRED FOR WORK WITH AN EXCLUSIVE BARGAINING AGENT FOR THE LAW ENFORCEMENT GROUP AND SO THEY UNDERSTOOD RIGHT AWAY WHAT I WAS ASKING FOR AND THIS LETTER MAKES IT CLEAR THAT IS WHO WE ARE GOING TO BE TALKING TO AND NEGOTIATING.

THE SHERIFF PERSONNEL, THE DEPUTIES AND THE JAILERS AND

[02:00:02]

ALSO INCLUDES THE CONSTABLES. OKAY THERE IS ALREADY ON RECORD AN ORDER FROM A COURT PROCEEDING THAT WE HAD BACK IN 2008 THAT I WANTED TO REFRESH EVERYONE'S MEMORY ON THAT IN RULED THAT THE CONSTABLES WERE COVERED UNDER THIS BAR IF BEGANING PROCESS.

WE HAD SEVERAL BARGAINING CYCLES ALREADY WITH THEM.

AND I WANTED TO MAKE THAT ORDER AGAIN OF RECORD BEFORE THIS COURT THAT AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE GOING TO BE DEALING WITH.

NO REAL CONTROVERSY AROUND THAT AND RESETTING THE RECORD AND REMINDING EVERYBODY. WE HAVE A LOT OF NEW FOLKS INVOLVED THAT THIS IS WHO WE ARE GOING TO BE DEALING WITH,.

I WAS ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT SOME OTHER -- MY UNDERSTANDING SOME OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL EMPLOYED BY THE COUNTY THAT THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT SEEM TO BE PERCOLATING AROUND ABOUT WHETHER THEY ARE PART OF THIS BARGAINING GROUP AND I THINK THAT APPROPRIATE WAY TO DEAL WITH IT IS THOSE EMPLOYEES WILL BE REVVED TO THE BARGAINING AGENT FIRST SOME OF THE BARGAINING AGENT CAN DETERMINE IF THEY ARE PART OF THE GROUP. NO POINT OF THE COUNTY ADDRESSING THIS WITHOUT THE BARGAINING AGENT ADDRESSING THIS FIRST. CONSISTENT TO MY PRIOR ADVICE.

THIS ITEM SIMPLY IS MAKING IT CLEAR THAT THIS IS HOW IT IS GOING TO WORK. FINALLY WE CAN TELL YOU THAT WE ALREADY HAVE THE FIRST MEETING FOR GROUND RULES SET UP FOR APRIL 13, I BELIEVE IT IS. WE ARE GOOD TO GO AND WE WILL SET A SCHEDULE WITH THEM. AND WHEN THE TIME COMES, WE WILL GET BACK BEFORE YOU WHEN WE HAVE FISCAL PROPOSALS.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THIS IS RECONFORMING ON THIS ITEM HERE AND NO ACTION NECESSARY. WE ARE REDATING THE FACTS.

>> THE STATUTE CALLS FOR THE COMMISSIONERS COURT TO AFFIRM

IT, YES, MA'AM. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I NEED A MOTION.

SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: YES, JUDGE. JUST REAL QUICK.

YOU MENTIONED OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL.

CAN WE MENTION THOSE PERSONS BY NAME IF WE DISCUSSED IT IN COMMISSIONERS COURT OR SUFFICIENT THE WAY YOU WORDED I IT?

>> THOSE COMMUNICATIONS HAVE NOT COME TO ME DIRECTLY, BUT I THINK IT MIGHT BE OTHER -- OTHER EMPLOYEES WHO ARE NOT WITH THE SHERIFF AND WHO ARE NOT WITH THE CONSTABLES.

AND NOT WITH THE JAIL. BUT WHO MAY ABOUT CERTIFIED.

I AM NOT SURE WHAT OFFICES THEY ARE UNDER OR WHICH DEPARTMENTS THEY MAY BE UNDER. I AM HEARING THERE COULD BE QUESTIONS THROWN AROUND ABOUT WHETHER THEY SHOULD SOMEBODY PART OF THIS NEGOTIATION AND, LIKE I SAID, THE RIGHT ANSWER IS, WHOEVER THAT IS, WHOEVER IS NOT -- NOT A CONSTABLE OR A DEPUTY OR NOT A JAILER WHO THINKS THEY SHOULD BE COVERED, THEY REALLY NEED TO TALK TO THE BARGAINING AGENT FIRST.

SO -- AND THAT IS WHY I AM PUTTING THAT OUT THERE PUBLICLY, BECAUSE WE REALLY CAN'T DO -- "WE" MEANING THE COUNTY CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITHOUT THEIR INPUT. OKAY.

SO HERE WE ARE JUST REAFFIRMING THAT THE NCSOA IS THE EXCLUSIVE BARGAINING AGENT WHOEVER IS COVERED UNDER THE LAW.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ANY MORE DISCUSSION? JOHN? ANYBODY ELSE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING

HERE TODAY. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE WILL KEEP YOU INFORMED. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THANK YOU.

NOW WE WILL RETURN BACK AND VERY QUICKLY I WOULD LIKE TO

RECOGNIZE DEPUTY CHIEF -- >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: DO F-2.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ONE MORE, F-2. SORRY.

I THOUGHT WE TABLED IT UNTIL THE OTHER INFORMATION AND WE GOT IT.

F-2 WE ARE MOVING FORWARD ON DISCUSSING AND RECONSIDER THE RECLASSIFICATION OF THE SPECIAL ADVISOR FOR GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, COMMUNICATION AND LEGAL AFFAIRS POSITION INCLUDING JOB DUTIES AND RELATED MATTERS. I GOT SOMEONE TO PRINT A COPY OF THE POSTING THAT WE HAD. THE ORIGINAL POSTING THAT WAS DONE. WITH MINOR CHANGES MATCH.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THE ONE WE PASSED AND WITH HE NEED TO

[02:05:03]

AMEND IT. DO IT NOW AND THEN COME BACK TO

IT. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: WE CAN

COME BACK TO IT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: DON'T ABOUT MAKE ME FORGET ABOUT IT. WE ARE ABOUT HOPPING AROUND.

THANK YOU DEPUTY CHIEF FOR YOUR SERVICES AND QUICK ACTION AND THOUGHT. WITH WE HAVE HEARD THAT THE GENTLEMAN IS OKAY. AND DOING ALL RIGHT RIGHT NOW.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR -- AND, YES, MISS WHITE HURST TOO.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE ACTION IN JUMPING IN TOO.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: JUDGE, WITHOUT A DOUBT THE WORD LIFESAVER GOES TO BOTH OF YOU. I WILL TELL YOU THAT THAT --

THAT WAS SCARY. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THAT'S -- VERY THANKFUL THAT YOU WERE BOTH HERE.

MOVING ON, WE WILL GO BACK TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT WHERE WE LEFT IN THE VERY BEGINNING. WE ARE -- AND MANY OF THESE PEOPLE MAY HAVE LEFT. I AM SORRY IF THEY HAVE.

I I HOPE MAYBE THEY WILL LOG IN AND DO IT REMOTELY.

I SINCERELY APOLOGIZE FOR THE CHANGE IN THIS, BUT NONE OF COWS HAVE ANTICIPATED ANY OF THIS. BILLY GRANT IS BILLY GRANT HERE? UP KNOW WE ALREADY DID GUY -- MAYBE HE ALREADY TALKED.

I CANNOT READ THIS. HE DIDN'T WANT TO SPEAK.

THAT'S WHY HE DIDN'T HAVE HIM -- DAVENPORT -- MR. DAVENPORT.

A DAVENPORT HERE. I CAN READ THE LAST NAME, BUT CAN'T READ THE FIRST. HILDA? CHUCK WEAVER -- WAVE? ALEX BIMINA.

THANK YOU. SORRY, SOMEBODY IS HERE.

SO SORRY. >> HELLO, MY NAME IS AL ALEX BIYENA. I COME TO TALK ABOUT OUR COUNTRY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE HAVE BEEN LIVING IN THERE FOR OVER 20 YEARS. IT IS LOCATED OFF OF 1889 624.

I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN BIGGER ISSUE THAN OURS BUT WE LOVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD SO MUCH, THAT WE HAVE COME HERE TO TALK ABOUT IT AND HOPEFULLY CONVINCE YOU ALL TO DO WHAT WE ARE ASKING.

WE ARE ASKING THAT ON THE STREET THAT CROSSES PERPENDICULAR TO BARBER LANE. I SHOWED YOU SOME BIRD'S-EYE PICTURES OF IT. WE HAVE THE LAKES NORTHWEST TO THE RIGHT OF US. THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE LEFT OF US. BACK THEN WHEN WE GRANDFATHERED THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ABOUT 50 YEARS AGO, WE WERE ABLE TO HUNT AND DO ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF THERE. BUT NOW WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND US AND WE ARE WILLING TO GIVE OUR HUNTING UP.

BUT WHAT WE ARE NOT WILLING TO GIVE UP THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC, ESPECIALLY THE HEAVY-DUTY CONCRETE TRUCKS, MATERIAL TRUCKS THAT USE OUR STREET, BARBER LANE TO COME AND DELIVER MATERIAL THAT COMES INTO THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS.

WON'T CUT THROUGH THEIR OWN NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS ARE PAVED STREETS. PAVERS.

AND WE HAVE HAD POTHOLES AFTER POTHOLES.

FINALLY WE GOT OUR STREET FIXED THANKS TO MR. HERNANDEZ AND WE GOT OUR DITCHES DONE. AND WE -- WE LIKE TO KEEP THEM THAT WAY BECAUSE OVER 25 YEARS TO GET OUR STREETS FIXED.

IF WE DON'T STOP THE HEAVY-DUTY TRUCKS THAT GO THROUGH THERE, OUR STREETS WILL END UP MESSED UP AGAIN.

AND THE MONEY YOU POURED INTO IT, WILL HAVE TO BE DONE AGAIN.

SO THE ONLY WAY WE CAN STOP THOSE HEAVY-DUTY TRUCKS FROM GOING THROUGH THERE IS FOR THEM TO MR. ANOTHER ACCESS ROAD.

THEIR OWN ROAD. TO GO TO THOSE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS WITH THE MATERIALS.

THE ONLY WAY TO BE SUCCESSFUL IS TO STOP ALL TRAFFIC.

PEOPLE COMING DOWN RIGHT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

A ONE-LEAN NEIGHBORHOOD AND DITCHES ON THE BOTH SIDES AND COUNTY ROAD 52 WHICH IS VERY LARGE AND GOES TO THE FREEWAY.

[02:10:03]

THEY COME ZOOMING RIGHT TOWN THROUGH THERE.

THEY WON'T CUT DOWN THROUGH THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD AND WEAVE IN AND OUT. THEY CONVENIENTLY COME TO OURS.

WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP OURS PEACEFUL.

WE HAVE GRANDFATHERED IT. AND WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY. I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH IF YOU CAN REALLY CONSIDER THAT. I KNOW IF YOU LIVE THERE, YOU WOULD FEEL THE SAME WAY. WE HAVE NOTHING BUT SENIOR CITIZENS THAT LIVE THERE. 24 LOTS AND THEY ARE THREE-ACRE LOTS. SO MUCH WITH THAT SAID, I KNOW MY PARTNER HAS SOMETHING ELSE TO DAY ABOUT IT.

AND DECALOTUS. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. TOMMY DONE LEVY.

>> YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU ALL FOR HAVING US TODAY. I WANT TO REITERATE WHAT ALEX IS SAYING TOO. THERE IS A LOT OF TRAFFIC.

WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR COUNTY HOLD 52.

YOU KNOW AS I DO, I CALL IT OLD 624 BUT NORTHWEST BOULEVARD HAS A LOT OF TRACTOR-TRAILER AND WHY YOU PUT 52 IN.

BUT IT HAS CREATED A -- A MONSTER, BECAUSE YOU HAVE PEOPLE FROM THE NEW SCHOOL THAT THEY BUILT.

YOU HAVE PEOPLE FROM ORANGE DROVE ARE.

PEOPLE FROM ROBS TOWN. YOU HAVE PEOPLE FROM DIFFERENT PARTS OF CAL-ALLEN AND THAT AREA USING 52 TO KEEP FROM GOING DOWN NORTHWEST BOULEVARD. AND THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME TYPE OF EITHER A LIGHT THERE OR SOME TYPE OF A TURN LANE.

BECAUSE SOMEBODY IS GOING TO GET SEVERELY INJURED.

THEY ALREADY HAD WILL HE WRECKS HERE.

LUCKILY NOBODY HAS BEEN MAIMED OR INJURED SEVERELY.

SOMEBODY NEEDS TO BE DONE AT THAT INTERSECTION ON BOTH SEEDS.

YOU HAVE A YIELD SIGN THAT PEOPLE DON'T -- THEY KEEP GOING.

YOU CAN'T SEE TRAFFIC EITHER DIRECTION HARDLY.

TAKES ME FROM EVERYWHERE -- IF I HIT THE END OF THE STREET AT 7:30, TAKES ME TV TO SIX MINUTES TO GO ACROSS TO GO TO COUNTY ROAD 52. PLEASE LOOK AT THAT THE INTERSECTION FOR US. BACK TO WHAT ALEX WAS SAYING, YES, A LOT OF HEAVY TRAFFIC ON OUR ROAD.

SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE. THE BUILDER.

I HAVE BEEN BATTLING FOR 26, 27 YEARS.

I HAVE BEEN THROUGH DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND WHENEVER THEY PUT THE NEW SUBDIVISION IN, THEY ARE USING OUR ROAD.

USED TO HAVE AN ACCESS ROAD WHEN THEY WENT TO FIRST LAKES, THEY HAD AN ACCESS ROAD. NOW THEY ARE USING POUR ROAD LIKE ALEX IS SAYING, USING TO DO WHATEVER THEY NEED TO DO AND NOBODY IS STOPPING THEM. WE NEED HELP THERE TO KEEP THEM FROM TEARING UP OUR ROAD. ONE OTHER THING THE FLOODING IN THE AREA. YOU HAVE DONE APPEAR GREAT JOB.

PART IS THE STATE. PART IS THE COUNTY.

WHEN YOU RAISE PROPERTY ON BOTH SIDE.

THE ONE SIDE THREE FEET ABOVE MY PROPERTY LEVEL AND APPEAR FOOT AND A HALF IN THE BACK AND THE NATURAL FLOW OF WATER COMES FROM MY AREA DOWN, YOU ARE PUSHING MORE WATER ON US.

I KNOW THAT IS THE CITY, BUT WE NEED A MEDIATOR TO STOP THIS FROM HAPPENING. WE HAVEN'T HAD A 10-INCH RAIN SINCE A LONG TIME. AND IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN AND RUIN A LOT OF PEOPLE'S HOMES. I HAD TO PIE FLOOD INSURANCE.

I NEVER HAD IT BEFORE BUT I WILL HAVE IT NOW.

WE WILL END UP GETTING FLOODED. WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT.

I WILL APPRECIATE ANY. YOU TO COME OUT AND LOOK AT ANYTHING YOU NEED TO LOOK AT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

APPRECIATE IT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THANK YOU.

LIZ WHITEHURST. >> CAN TOM GO FIRST?

>>JUDGE SCOTT: YES, SURE. TOM.

>> THANK YOU Y'ALL. YOU KNOW THIS ROOM WAS FULL OF YELLOW SHIRTS LIKE THIS EARLIER. AND WE ARE THE TWO LEFT ALL TO SPEAK FOR THE SECOND STORY OF THE RESTAURANT SPACE ON THE NEW BOB HALL PIER. ALL AGAINST THE CONCEPT OF THINKING SO SMALL AS TO NOT DO THAT.

MOST OF YOU ALL KNOW ME -- AT LEAST MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT KNOW ME AS MY PREVIOUS TIME WITH THE CALLER TIMESS A DETACHED OBSERVER. THAT IS OVER WITH.

I AM FULLY ATTACHED. I WAS BORN HERE IN CORPUS CHRISTI. AND AS WERE BOTH MY PARENTS WHO ARE BOTH STILL ALIVE AND LIVING IN CORPUS CHRISTI.

ALL FOUR OF MY GRANDPARENTS ARE FULL-TIME RESIDENTS OF SEASIDE

[02:15:01]

MEMORIAL PARK WHERE THEY ELUDE ALL TAXATION IN PERPETUITY.

LIZ AND I DON'T. WE HAVE NEW ENGLANDY NINE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. AND ONLY ONE GETS HOMESTEAD EXEM EXEMPTION.

THERE HAS TO BE SOME CONFUSION IF YOU HAVE THE MONEY TO DO THIS. YOU CAN FIND THE MONEY IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE IT IS. YOU ARE LOOKING AT ONE SOURCE RIGHT HERE OBVIOUSLY. GUESS WHAT TOM, IF THAT IS WHERE YOU WANT TO GO, FINE. ABOUT NOT BLANKING, I TELL YOU TO DO IT. MAYBE YOU HAVE MORE INGENUITY THAN THAT. BUT STILL, LIKE I SAID ARE.

WHEN I BROUGHT UP MY GRANDPARENTS, I HAVE A REASON FOR THAT. ALL FOUR WERE HERE IN CORPUS CHRISTI WHEN THE SEAWALL WAS BUILT.

BOTH OF MY GRANDFATHERS WERE BUSY WITH BUSINESS ENDEAVORS.

ONE GOT WIPED OUT BY THE SEAWALL AND HE HAD A RESTAURANT ON THE PIER THAT GOT TAKEN AWAY WITH THE SEAWALL.

HE OPENED UP ANOTHER RESTAURANT AND DID JUST FINE.

I BRING THEM UP BECAUSE I CAN'T IMAGINE THE SEAWALL WITHOUT THET-HEADS. THEY DID ALL THAT BACK THEN. TH T-HEADS. THEY DID ALL THAT BACK THEN.

BETWEEN 1930 AND 1971. 1950, 50,000 PEOPLE.

NOW PUSHING 400,000 IN CORPUS CHRISTI.

I FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE WE CAN'T PUT A SECOND STORY ON BOB HALL PIER. I GO TO ROBSTOWN AND I SEE THE FAIRGROUND. THEY ARE VERY IMPRESSIVE.

YOU GO TO THE FAIRGROUND AND YOU TELL ME WE CAN'T DO THE SECOND STORY ON BOB HALL PIER? I FIND THAT HARD -- HARD TO BELIEVE. SO I AM GOING TO URGE YOU TO, YOU KNOW, DO THE RIGHT THING. DO WHAT EVERYONE WAS EXPECTING OF YOU. AND NOT JUST ALL THOSE PEOPLE THAT YOU ARE NOT GOING TO HEAR FROM NOW THAT YOU WERE GOING TO HEAR FROM ONE BY ONE. THANK YOU.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THANK YOU. LI

LIZ. >> I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU REMEMBER GREEN ACRES AND AND EVA GABOR.

I AM NOT A NATIVE OF CORPUS CHRISTI.

HE DRUG ME NAILS, CLAWS DOWN, DOWN I-37.

I CAME HERE AND I THOUGHT I WAS IN A WHOLE DIFFERENT WORLD.

UP WITH OF THE THINGS THAT I LOVED AND I TOLD MY FRIEND ABOUT WAS BOB HALL PIER. I DIDN'T KNOW MILE MARKERS.

I DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO GET THERE. I SAID THERE IS BOB HALL PIER.

A QUARTER MILE THIS WAY AND YOU WILL FIND MY VOKES WAS.

AN ICON. A TRUE ICON OF CORPUS CHRISTI.

I HAD A WHOLE DIFFERENT THING TO SAY AND I NOTICED VIETNAM VETERANS RECOGNITION DAY, 350 YEARS AFTER -- ALMOST 50 YEARS AT THE END OF THE WAR AND WE WERE AT A MEETING YESTERDAY WHERE THERE WERE THREE VIETNAM VETS AND TALKING OF THIS BUILDING OF THE SEAWALL AND HOW WE USED TO BUILD BIG THINGS AND DO BIG THINGS AND THREE VETERANS THERE THAT SAID THEY WILL NEVER SEE THIS. THIS COMMISSION WILL NEVER SEE THIS. I WILL NEVER SEE MY GRANDKIDS.

NEVER GO TO THE SECOND STORY AND FISH OFF OF THE PIER OR FROM A QUINCENERA. WE ARE THINKING SMALL IN A TIME WE SHOULD THINK BIG. ABOUT WE CAN DO BETTER THINGS.

Y'ALL KNOW WE HAVE THE MONEY. IT HAS OPINION VETTED.

ENGINEERED. VETTED AGAIN.

WE HAVE MONEY FROM COVID. WE KNOW YOU HAVE THE MONEY AND BREAKS MY HEART THAT THESE MEN, THESE ELDERLY MEN THAT WERE -- MY DAD WAS A SCREEN VET. MY BROTHER WAS A VIETNAM WAR VET THAT WE ARE LOW BALLING. SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY ENJOYS LITTLE KIDS, OLD KIDS, POOR KIDS, KIDS WITH MONEY, TRUST FUND BABIES. THIS IS SOMETHING UNIVERSAL THAT WE CAN ALL ENJOY. AND I JUST CAN'T SEE WHY WE WOULD STEP BACKYARDS AND NOT GIVE THE COMMUNITY SOMETHING -- A SECOND STORY. WE BUILT THE HOOVER DAM.

WE DID GREAT THINGS AND THIS COMMUNITY AND THIS COMMISSION SEEMS TO WANT THE RIDE THE BICYCLE BACKWARDS AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND. PERSONALLY I WOULD LIKE AN

[02:20:02]

EXPLANATION. I DON'T GET IT.

DOES ANYBODY HERE GET IT? WE HAVE THE MONEY.

MONEY IS EAR MARKED. I AM ASKING YOU, WHY RESPECT WING TO THIS? MY MOM ALWAYS SAID, YOU KNOW RIGHT FROM WRONG. NOBODY NEEDS TO SEND YOU TO SUNDAY SCHOOL OR CATECHISM. UP KNOW WHAT IS RIGHT AND YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS IT WRONG. AND THIS DOESN'T SEEM RIGHT TO ME AND I WOULD LIKE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION PLA NATION.

THIS -- EXPLANATION. LET'S NOT DO LESS, LET'S DO MORE. THANK YOU.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WHO I DIDN'T CALL THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON PUBLIC COMMENT?

[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.]

THANK YOU. ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, I WANT TO HAVE A MOTION TO PASS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF O, P AND Q.

A MOTION TO ACCEPT TO PASS THE CONSENT AGENDA.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: MOTION. >> SECOND.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: ALSO K. >>JUDGE SCOTT: K NOW.

I THOUGHT WE ASKED EARL EARLIER O, P, Q AND K.

IS THE MOTION AND SECOND STILL STANDING FOR O, P, Q AND K.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

[K. Authorize contract with Downtown Management District (DMD) for FY 2022-2023.]

THE MOTION PASSES. FIRST UP IS K.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THANK YOU, JUDGE.

I AM SAYING THAT BECAUSE I SEE -- CAN WE --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: WE HAVE SOMEONE ON THE LINE AND TAKE UP O FIRST,

IF WE CAN, BECAUSE SOMEONE -- >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THEY ARE

SITTING THERE TOO. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I AM TRYING TO GUEST GET THEM TO HIT THIS.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: WE HAD THE DMD HERE ALL DAY.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: I THAT YOU YOU WANTED ME JUMP.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: SHE HAS BEEN WAITING THROUGH OUR MEDICAL EMERGENCY. ABOUT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: I THOUGHT YOU WERE HAVING ME JUMP TO O.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I'M SURE SHE WILL BE BRIEF.

A PRESENTATION LAST YEAR AND TO LISTEN TO ALL THE GREAT NIJS

BEING DONE. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE HAVE WE HAVE A PERSON THAT WANTS TO COMMENT AS WELL.

TAKING UP K, CONTRACT FOR THE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022 AND 2023. I WILL CALL ON YOU, FRANK, AS

SOON AS SHE FINISHES SPEAKING. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, JUDGE, COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME HERE TODAY AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT OF THE DOWNTOWN MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. WE ARE GRATEFUL TO THE FUNDING WE RECEIVED FROM THE COUNTY, LAST YEAR WE WERE SURPRISED AND GRATEFUL WHEN THE COMMISSIONERS COURT DECIDED TO ALLOCATE ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO OUR ORGANIZATION.

PA MUNICIPAL MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND 501-C-3.

AND OUR ORGANIZATION IS TO REVITALIZE DOWNTOWN CORPUS CHRISTI. WHAT OUR FULL-SCALE REVITALIZATION SERVICES PRODUCED FOR THE COMMUNITY.

ADDITIONALLY, WE ARE ABLE TO SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESSES AND ENTREPRENEURS, PEOPLE BORN IN CORPUS CHRISTI.

PEOPLE TO HELP WITH THIS JOINT EFFORT.

AND NATIVE OF THIS COMMUNITY, A SPECIAL ROLE AND I AM GRATEFUL TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY. THIS WAY AND DO THAT WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE COMMUNITY LEADERS PUSHING THE COMMUNITY FORWARD FOR SUCH A LONG TIME. I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I WANTED TO SHOW MY GRATITUDE, THANK YOU.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: JUDGE, SO I NOTE THAT WE -- GENERAL ADMINISTRATION, WE WENT BACK TO THE 10,000 PREVIOUS YEAR.

I WOULD LIKE TO ALLOCATE MONEY. I KNOW LAST YEAR ALL OF OUR POSITIONS ALLOCATED MONEY TO THE DMD, AND MOST RECENTLY POINT TO THE WORK DONE DURING ST. PATRICK'S DAY AND WORKING WITH THE DMV AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS. I DROVE BY.

I DIDN'T STOP. PRESIDENT STREETS WERE FULL IN DOWNTOWN CORPUS CHRISTI. HOW MANY WERE ESTIMATED THERE,

DUE KNOW? >> WE HAVE A SYSTEM TO TRACK THE DATA. WE WILL KNOW WITHIN A WEEK.

BUT 20,000 PEOPLE WERE OUR STEM OF HOW MANY PEOPLE DOWN THERE.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: IT WAS PACKED.

I WAS PICKING MY DAUGHTER FROM AUSTIN.

AND I SAID LOOK AT ABOUT CORPUS CHRISTI.

LOOK AT NUECES COUNTY. FULL OF PEOPLE ENJOYING THE FESTIVITIES AND ONE OF MANY EVENTS THAT HUFF PUT ON AND HAVE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. JUDGE, I MOTION TO APPROVE THE $10,000 AND ALLOCATE LIKE I DID LAST YEAR AN ADDITIONAL $10,000 TO THE DMD AND ENCOURAGE THE REST OF THE COURT.

[02:25:05]

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I THINK FRANK WANTS TO TALK ABOUT IT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: IF HE IS MAKING A MOTION --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ON ANOTHER ITEM. HE HAS HIS HAND UP --

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: HE NEEDS A SECOND FOR OF THE MOTION.

I WILL SECOND HIS MOTION AND HAVE DISCUSSION WHENEVER YOU

ARE. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE HAVE A MOTION TO UP THE CORRECTION THE SAME AS WE DID LAST YEAR.

YOU CHALLENGED EVERYONE TO GIVE AN ADDITIONAL $10,000 OUT OF THEIR FUND TO MAKE THIS THE $50,000 THAT WE DID LAST YEAR AS WELL -- $60,000. SORRY.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: JUDGE, WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY WAS -- I DON'T WANT TO DO THIS EVERY YEAR SO I ASKED DALE TO CONSIDER PUTTING THIS IN AS A LINE ITEM BUDGET FOR THE UPCOMING BUDGET.

AND ASKING TO SET THAT AS AN AMOUNT.

MY LACK OF DOING IT TODAY IS -- I AM NOT GOING TO DO IT TODAY BECAUSE I KIND OF RUNNING OUT OF MY DISCRETIONARY FUNDS, BUT I DID ASK DALE TO PUT INTO BUDGET CONSIDERATION TO INCREASE THEM AS A LINE ITEM CONSISTENTLY SO DOESN'T RELY TO US ALL THE TIME.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: SOUNDS TO ME.

WHAT IS YOUR BUDGET -- CALENDAR IS SIMILAR TO OURS? CAN WE TAKE THIS ACTION LATER THE THIS CAL YEAR.

>> ENDS SEPTEMBER 30. >>JUDGE SCOTT: PERFECT.

IT MATCHES. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I WILL RETRACT MY MOTION TO BRING IT BACK INCH A FUTURE MEETINGS A

ONE LINE ITEM ABOUT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: ARE WE GOING TO TABLE THIS, THE 10,000 REGULAR CONTRACT.

>> MOTION TO AUGHT REESE $10 T,000 AND MAYBE SAY DIRECT STAFF IF HEARD FROM EVERYBODY THAT IS SOMETHING OF INTEREST OR THE MAJORITY THAT IS SOMETHING OF INTEREST, THEY WILL KNOW TO PUT THIS IN OUR BUDGET FOR WHY EX-NEAR. I AM NOT TRYING TO JUMP INTO NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET AND I AM TRYING TO BE CAREFUL BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO TALK OUT OF TWO SIDES OF THE MOUTH BECAUSE I SAY I HATE DOING THAT. I AM NOT SAYING FOR THIS BUDGET BUT TO ABOUT I THINK IT FOR NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET FOR CONSIDERATION.

BECAUSE WE ALREADY FUNDED THEM THIS YEAR.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: BASICALLY TO APPROVE THE $10,000 CONTRACT.

WE WILL TAKE THE OTHER UP LATER. THAT WILL COME UP IN DISCUSSIONS LATER IN BUDGET. IF YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT IT, THEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE BUDGET.

APPEAR MOTION TO APPROVE A $10,000 BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR THIS

AND A SECOND. >> SECOND ABOUT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE CONTRACT AS MUCH $10,000 IN THERE IS WHAT WE ARE SIGNING TODAY, YES.

BUT WE APPRECIATE -- >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: AIDEE --

>> FOR CLAY IF I OCCASION PURPOSES, AN ADDITIONAL $10,000 FOR THE CURRENT BUDGET YEAR OR NEXT YEAR.

BECAUSE THE NEXT CYCLE ISN'T UNTIL 2023-'24.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: OCTOBER 1 THAT MATCHES THEIR CALENDAR.

>> FOR THE 2023-2024 -- IT IS $10,000.

THE YEAR WE ARE IN -- FY BECAUSE NOT 9/30 OF '23 YET.

WE I PROVED THE BUDGET OF $0,000.

THAT WAS ALREADY BUDGETED. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I THOUGHT

WE WERE AHEAD OF THE GAME. >> AND COMMISSIONER CHESNEY WOULD LIKE FOR US IN AHEAD OF THE TEAM TO PUT THAT AS ONE OF THE CHALLENGE ITEMS AND WE CAN DEFINITELY DO THAT.

NO PROBLEM TO PUT THAT ON THERE TO GET READDRESSED.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: TO IT BE DISCUSSED LATER.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THE CONTRACT TODAY WRITTEN IS FOR THE

$10,000. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: FOR 2021

ANSWER 22. >> 2022-'23 ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WHAT WAS THE 50 FOR.

>> THAT WAS LAST YEAR, CORRECT. THIS YEAR LOCATED $10,000 FOR

2022-'23. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WHY ARE WE DOING '22-'23 SIX MONTHS IN THIS YEAR.

>> CURRENTLY IN THE 22-'23 FISCAL YEAR.

THE CONTRACT IS $20,000 FOR THE 2022-'23 FISCAL YEAR.

THEY ARE SAYING LAST YEAR FOR 9/30/22.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WHEN DID WE GIVE YOU THE MONEY?

>> THIS TIME LAST YEAR. >> THAT WAS $50,000 COMMITTEES TWHES THEY GOT $50,000 FROM US THIS TIME LAST YEAR WHICH WAS MARCH OF '22. THEY GOT THEIR MONEY IN MARCH OF '22. IF WE DO THE BUDGET THE WAY THAT I PROPOSED, WE CAN GET THEM THEIR MONEY INCH '23.

TWEK STILL GIVE THEM IT THE MONEY IN '23.

[02:30:03]

FISCAL FOR US, BUT CALENDAR FOR THEM.

>> THEY ARE THE SEAM FISCAL YEAR AS US.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: BUT THEIR CONTRACT IS NOT UPON OUR FISCAL YEAR. WE GAVE THEM IN THE MONEY MARCH OF '22 IS WHEN THEY NEEDED IT. WHEN WE GIVE THEM THE MONEY IN OCTOBER OF '23, THEY WILL GET -- WHATEVER THE NUMBER WE COME UP

WITH THIS YEAR. >> MAY I MAKE A COMMENT, PLEASE? COMMISSIONER? SO FAR LAST YEAR, FISCAL YEAR '21-'22. THEIR ORIGINAL BUDGET IS STILL THE SAME, $10,000. EACH OF COMMISSIONER GAVE THEM $10,000 SO THEY GOT AN ADDITIONAL $6600,000 LAST YEAR.

AND THE CURRENT '22-'23 ON THE AGENDA FOR APPROVAL AND GOES

BACK TO THE ALLOCATED BUDGET. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I

UNDERSTAND THAT. >> WHAT I'M HEARING THAT TODAY'S CONTRACT STAY AT THE ORIGINAL BUDGETED $10,000 AND WORK THROUGHOUT BUDGET NEXT YEAR '23-'24 TO ADD ADDITIONAL FUNDS STRAIGHT OUT OF GENERAL FUNDS NOT THE COMMISSIONERS' KWCH.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THE FISCAL YEAR.

>> THROUGH OCTOBER THROUGH TEASE OF THIS YEAR, $10,000.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: CALENDAR YEAR OF '22, GOT $50,000 FROM US. THE CALENDAR YEAR OF '23, IF WE

INCREASE IT, THEY WILL GET -- >> NO, SIR.

OUR IF HE IS CAL YEAR RUNS OCTOBER THROUGH SEPTEMBER.

IF. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: TERESA, LISTEN TO ME. CALENDAR YEAR.

IN 2022, THEY GOT $60,000. IF WE INCREASE THEIR BUDGET IN '23-'24, THEY WILL GET IT IN THE CALENDAR YEAR 2023.

THAT'S ALL WE SIDE. >> THAT IS NOT CORRECT,

COMMISSIONER. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: IT IS

CORRECT. >> OCTOBER 2022 IS THE CURRENT

BUDGET WE ARE IN. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: HOW MUCH DID THEY GET IN '22. NOT FISCAL YEAR, IN THE YEAR OF 2022, HOW MUCH DID THEY GET. $60,000.

$60,000 IN MARCH OF '22. >> FOR ONE YEAR.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: MARCH OF 2022.

IF WE GIVE THEM THE MONEY IN OCTOBER OF 23, AN INCREASE, THEN THEY WILL GET MONEY IN THE CALENDAR YEAR OF 2023.

NOT THE FISCAL YEAR, BUT THE CALENDAR YEAR.

THAT IS ALL I AM AGENCY IS AND THAT IS CORRECT.

WE WILL GIVE THEM THE MONEY IN OCTOBER BECAUSE WE KNOW THEY NEED IT. AND THEY WOULD GET IT IN OCTOBER OF '3 IF THE COURT INCREASE IT IS.

AND THEY WILL GET IT AND COME BACK AND DEAL WITH 24.

AND THEY WILL GET MORE MONEY IF WE PUT IT ON THE LINE ITEM GOING

FORWARD. >> RIGHT INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR, IT WOULD STAY IN THE BUDGET NASHVILLE MAREZ FOR THIS OR ANY CONTRACT, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE FISCAL YEAR OPERATING ON THE SAME CALENDAR.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: INSTEAD OF THE MIDDLE OF THE YEAR.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: EVENLY YEAR THAT WE GAVE IT $20,000.

>> OUR CALENDAR RUNS IF OCTOBER THROUGH SEPTEMBER.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: OUR FISCAL YEAR, I AGREE.

I WOULD THEN LIKE TO ADD $10,000 FOR THIS YEAR BECAUSE THEY ARE MISSING OUT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THEY ACCOUNT FOR OR HOW MUCH MONEY THEY WERE EXPECTING FROM US, BUT

I WOULD LIKE TO -- >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: THEY GOT $60,000. A YEAR --

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I'M ASKING TO PUT MY $10,000.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I DON'T EITHER, BUT THIS IS A WORTHWHILE

CAUSE. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:

EVERYTHING IS. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: EVERYTHING

IS A DECISION AND NOT A LUXURY. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I VOTE

THAT YOU GIVE YOUR MONEY. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR COMMISSIONER MAREZ TO GIVE AN ADDITIONAL $10,000 OF

HIS FUNDS. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: MOVED.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: SECOND.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND AND A SECOND.

[O. Ratify elimination of the second tier of the restaurant facility at Bob Hall Pier.]

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPEN POSED? THE MOTION PASSES. A LITTLE MORE CONFUSING THAN WE EXPECT IT TO BE. ITEM O, RATIFY THE ELIMINATION OF THE RESTAURANT FACILITY OF BOB HALL PIER.

I THINK, DO WE HAVE JOHN MICHAEL ON TO TALK ABOUT

>> JUDGE, I'M HERE, IF YOU CAN HEAR ME.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THANK YOU. WE DISCUSSED THIS AND DID THIS

[02:35:01]

LAST TIME AND I KNOW THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AND I THINK POEM'S THOUGHTS AND PROCESSES IS THAT WE ARE TAKING A AWAY FROM SOMETHING AND THIS ENTIRE COURT WANTS GREAT PIER, A GREAT FACILITY AND WE PUT FORTH $27 MILLION INTO THIS AND WE ARE ALL EXCITED ABOUT THIS PIER.

I THINK IT HAS GOTTEN A LITTLE DISTORTED AS TO WHY WE ARE CHANGING OUR IDEAS ON THIS SECOND FLOOR . AND I THINK YOU CAN CLARIFY THAT BECAUSE WE HIRED YOU TO DO AN INDEPENDENT STUDY ON THE STRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING. DO WE NEED A MOTION.

WE ARE HAVING ALL THIS DISCUSSION.

I WILL MAKE A MOTION. >> SECOND ABOUT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: IF YOU CLARIFY SOME ON THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE SECOND FOR THAT ON THE RESTAURANT PORTION OF THE BOB

HALL PIER. >> SORRY TO INTERRUPT.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. YOU ARE MAKING A MOTION TO

RATIFY THE ELIMINATION OF -- >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE ARE GOING --

>> THAT IS WHAT I AM TRYING FOR THE MINUTES.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: THAT IS MY SECOND.

>> JUST MAKING THE MOTION. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THE WAY IT IS WRITTEN. SO THAT'S WHAT WE ARE DOING.

OKAY, JOHN MICHAEL, IF YOU COULD TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR INVESTIGATION OF IT OR YOUR THOUGHTS INCH.

YES. >> SURE, JUDGE, COMMISSIONERS, GOOD AFTERNOON. YOU KNOW, I WILL GIVE YOU THE SAME PROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT HI GAVE THE PARKS BOARD BACK IN JANUARY AND, JUDGE, I THINK YOU WERE THERE WHEN I MADE THOSE STATEMENTS AND I WILL BE PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH THAT HERE THIS AFTERNOON. BUT I KNOW THAT YOU WERE THERE, JUDGE, AT THAT MEETING. AND MAY WAS SITTING NEXT TO ME AND I CONSIDER MAY A FRIEND BUT I HAD TO GIVE MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION. AND YOU KNOW, THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT IS OUT THERE RIGHT NOW, OUR FIRM DESIGNED.

IT IS -- IT IS. ABOUT 12 YEARS OLD.

SITTING OVER THE GULF OF MEXICO. ONE OF THE MOST CORROSIVE ENVIRONMENT IN THE PLANET AND WASN'T DESIGNED TO HAVE A SECOND STORY BUILT OVER IT. IF YOU CAN ASSUME THAT YOU CAN YOU STRUCTURALLY DO SOME THINGS TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO PUT AN EXISTING SECOND FLOOR OR PUT A NEW SECOND FLOOR ON TOP OF IT. THE PROBLEM IS THIS, THAT, AGAIN, YOU HAVE A STRUCTURE THEIR IS 12 YEARS OLD THAT HAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF DETERIORATION ALREADY -- THAT WAS ALL DOCUMENTED IN AN ENGINEERING REPORT DONE OUT OF AUSTIN THIS PAST YEAR. IT SAYS, HEY, YOU NEED TO DO SOME MAINTENANCE TO THIS STRUCTURE TO MAKE IT LAST ANOTHER 15 TO 20 YEARS. IT WOULD NOT BE PRUDENT TO TAKE TODAY'S DOLLARS AND BUILD A NEW STRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE BUILT TO LAST 40 TO 50 YEARS PARTLY ON TOP OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT AMERICA HAS A LIFESPAN 2OF 20 YEARS.

NO ONE WOULD DO THAT. FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR A SECOND FLOOR AND SOME OF THE FUND WOULD NOT REALIZE THAT IT WILL BE PARTLY OVER AN EXISTING STRUCTURE AND PARTLY OVER A NEW STRUCTURE. WHEN I STARTED DIGGING THEY SAID OH, NO, ON TOP OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.

I SAID THE STRUCTURE IS NOT DESIGNED FOR A SECOND FLOOR, AND SECOND, YOU WOULDN'T PUT A NEW FACILITY ON TOP OF AN OLD FACILITY WITH A VERY LIMITED LIF LIFESPAN. SO IN MY OPINION, IT MAKES WHOLE LOT SENSE TO USE PUBLIC DOLLARS ALLOCATED FOR RESTAURANT SPACE AND EXPAND THAT FIRST FLOOR SPACE.

IT WILL BE SAFER. IT IS 15 TO 17 FEET OFF THE PEACH OR THE WATER. MOST OF IT IS OVER WATER MISOF THE TIME. NOT 30 TO 35 FEET UP IN THE AIR.

IT ELIMINATES A LOT OF ADA ISSUES THAT YOU CAN OVERCOME, BUT IT EATS UP A LOT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE.

YOU NEED TO HAVE AN ELEVATOR. EMERGENCY STAIRWELLS TO EVACUATE PEOPLE OFF THE SECOND FLOOR AND ALL THAT EATS UP SPACE AND EATS UP MONEY. AND THEN FINALLY, OVERALL MAINTENANCE OF A STRUCTURE SITTING THAT HIGH IN THE AIR.

SCOTT CROSS AND THE GUYS THAT RUN THAT FACILITY, IT TAKES SPECIAL EQUIPMENT JUST TO GET UP THIS AND PARENT IT 35 TO 35 FEET IN THE AIR. UP TO THE ROOF, YOU ARE PUSHING 50 FEET. IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE A LOT OF GOOD SENSE TO DO THAT. AGAIN, THE STRUCTURE WASN'T

[02:40:02]

DESIGNED FOR A SECOND FOR THAT. IT IS AGING.

IT NEEDS MAINTENANCE TO MAKE IT LAST ANOTHER 20 YEARS.

MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE NOT TO DO THAT.

EXPAND WHY YOU ARE FIRST FOR THAT.

GET MORE RESTAURANT SPACE. MAYBE BETTER SPACE THAT IS MORE FUNCTIONAL FOR THE CONCESSIONAIRE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION VERY QUICKLY.

WHEN WE WERE AT THAT MEETING AND THE ENGINEERS GTATION AND STUFF FINDING OF RUST ON THE PILING PLATES, CAPS, WHATEVER THOSE TH THINGS, CALLED, THE COST OF THAT WOULD BE ASTRONOMICAL CLOSE TO $1 MILLION BEFORE YOU EVEN STARTED ON THIS -- AND TOP ME, I THINK WE ALL WALKED OUT OF THAT MEETING WITH A BASIC UNDERSTANDING THAT IT JUST WASN'T LOGICAL TO BUILD A SECOND STORY CONTINUE TO THIS BUILDING AND THAT'S WHAT I CAME AWAY WITH.

WHETHER VOTED TO CONTINUE WITH IT OR NOT, I THINK IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE EDITION LIKE THAT FOR LIMITING THE FUND OR TYING UP THE FUND THAT CAN POSSIBLY BE DONE TO DO OTHER THINGS AND MOVING THE PLANS FORWARD.

THESE ARE ALL GREAT THINGS FOR OUR COMMUNITY, WE HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND WE ARE STILL GOING TO HAVE A GREAT PIER.

IT WILL BE A GREAT ADDITION TO OUR COMMUNITY.

EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WE ARE DOING THERE AND OPENING IT BACK UP IS -- WE ARE ALL VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS STRUCTURE.

WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD, BUT TO CONTINUE TO GO BACK AND FORTH ON THESE DEALS WHEN WE HEAR A STUDY FROM TWO DIFFERENT ENGINEERS THAT SAYS IT IS NOT LIKELY. IT IS NOT GOOD.

IT WILL COST A LOT MORE AND CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD MAKES NO SENSE TO ME AND NOT MAKING THE RIGHT DECISION AND MOVE FORWARD AND GET THIS OPEN. WE ARE KEEPING CONVERSATIONS GOING AND PEOPLE RILED UP THAT WE ARE NOT HEARING THE WHOLE PICTURE ABOUT AND THAT IS A DISSERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY AS WELL. SO I APPRECIATE YOU COMING ON.

I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. IS THIS FRANK WANTING TO SPEAK TO THIS? HIS HAND IS STILL UP.

I AM NOT SURE -- I FEEL LIKE. >> YES, YOUR HONOR.

ON ANOTHER ISSUE ON THE ISSUE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: CAN YOU PUT YOUR HAND DOWN FOR A MINUTE.

>> I APOLOGIZE. I AM NOT VERY GOOD TECH-WISE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THAT'S OKAY. I FEEL THE SAME WAY SOMETIMES MYSELF. YES, THANK YOU.

AND THOSE WERE MY THOUGHTS AND WHY I VOTED AGAINST THIS LAST TIME AND WHY I WILL CONTINUE TO VOTE AGAINST THIS SECOND STORY.

I BELIEVE IT WAS A GREAT PLAN. IT WAS A GREAT IDEA.

IT IS GOING TO STILL BE GREAT, AND I THINK THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE TO DO MOVING FORWARD AND ABOUT LOOKING FORWARD.

I AM VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO GET STARTED. WE NEED TO HAVE THE PLAN AND MOVE FORWARD. THAT IS WHY MY MOTION WILL CONTINUE TO BE TO ELIMINATE THE SECOND STORY ADDITION.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I SECOND THE MOTION, JUDGE.

I WANT TO SAY AT THIS POINT, REALLY OF BOTHERSOME.

PEOPLE HAVE BEEN HERE, HIKE THEY SAID, MOST OF THEIR LIVES AND SEEN THE CHANGES. YOU KNOW, THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A SECOND TIER AT THE PIER YOU KNOW, AND WHEN YOU PUT $27 MILLION AND PEOPLE SAY YOU ARE TAKING AWAY THE PIER.

ING TO DOING THIS TO THE PIER. HOW TO YOU WANT TO SPEND $27 MILLION, TAXPAYER MONEY, REGARDLESS WHATEVER YOU OWN.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS GOING TO BE A PIER.

STATE-OF-THE-ART PIER. USED TO BRING US $#00,000 IN REVENUES. NOT THE RESTAURANT, THE PIER.

NOT LIKE WE ARE GETTING RID OF THE PIER, WE WILL EXPAND THE 350ER AND IT WILL BE A STATE STATE-OF-THE-ART PIER.

THE RESTAURANT STILL BE THERE. MAYBE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER.

MAYBE THE SAME RESTAURANT OR DIFFERENT RESTAURANT.

IT IS IN THE FUTURE TO SEE WHAT WILL HAPPEN.

BUT THE PEOPLE THINK THAT WE ARE NOT -- $27 MILLION IS NOT ENOUGH TO PUT IN ONE PROJECT AND NOT EVEN ABOUT INSURED.

WE TOOK A GAMBLE. THE PIER WENT DOWN.

COST US $# MILLION THE LAST TIME WE CHECINSURY SURE THE PIER.

[02:45:05]

WAS A RESTAURANT BUT NOT THE PIER.

$27 MILLION TO GIVE THE PEOPLE WHAT THEY USED TO HAVE SO THEY CAN ENJOY IT AND THEIR GRANDCHILDREN CAN WHEN I JO IT AND THEY CAN SPEND TIME OUT THERE.

NOT LIKE WE ARE TAKING SOMETHING FROM EVERYBODY.

WE ARE GIVING SOMETHING BACK BETTER THAN WHAT IT WAS.

HOPEFULLY A LITTLE BIGGER THAN WHAT IT WAS.

I THINK WE WILL MOVE FORWARD ON THIS GIVE IT A CHANCE.

NOT LIKE SOMETHING WILL DIATOM OR A HORRIBLE PIER AND NEVER HAD ONE BEFORE. NOT LIKE TAKING AWAY SOMETHING THAT WE USED TO HAVE. THE.

COMMISSIONERS COURT MADE EVERY EFFORT POSSIBLE AND THE MONEY FROM ARPA DOES NOT SAY HOW US TO SPEND MONEY ON THE PIER, ON NEW CONSTRUCTION. IT CAN BE SPENT ON THE PIER BECAUSE WE ARE REBUILDING THE PIER.

AND WE CAN'T USE IT ON NEW CONSTRUCTION.

THE WHEREIN WHY THE $2 MILLION COULD NOT BE USED ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SECOND TIER. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE ENGINEER GAVE US SOME OF THAT INFORMATION TOO AND ANOTHER MILLION DOLLARS SHORT SO NOW $3 MILLION SHORT.

THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR AND FEEL BAD THAT PEOPLE THINK THAT IS THE WORLD IS COMING TO AN END AND IT'S NOT. YOU ARE GOING TO SEE SOMETHING THAT IS STATE OF THE ART. SOMETHING TO BE ABLE TO ENJOY.

YOUR FAMILY WILL ENJOY AND YOUR GRANDKID WILL ENJOY.

STILL GOING TO EAT AT THE RESTAURANT.

SOMETHING WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD AND START LOOKING WHAT TO HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE. AND THIS IS WHY -- I SECOND THE MOTION. SO.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ANY OTHER COMMENTS?

ESPECIALLY. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: JUDGE, I AGREE WITH THE POINT YOU MADE OF NOT DOING A SECOND TIER.

I RECALL IT SHALL HOW MANY TIMES HAVE THIS BEEN DESTROYED BY MOTHER NATURE. OKAY.

AND HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE REBUILT IT.

AND IT COST US A LOT OF MONEY. LAST TIME I REMEMBER -- THEY GOT DESTROYED. I DON'T REMEMBER THE NAME OF THE HURRICANE, BUT WE PUT THOSE 800-POUND CONCRETE PILES THAT THEY TOLD US THEY WOULD BE HARD TO MOVE IN CASE OF A HURRICANE WELL, THEY WERE MOVED AND WHY THEY ARE NO LONGER THERE.

I WISH PEOPLE WOULD REMEMBER THAT -- MOTHER NATURE.

YOU CAN'T FUEL AROUND WITH MOTHER NATURE.

MOTHER NATURE HAS OTHER PLANS FOR US -- OR FOR THIS COMMUNITY.

WE NEED TO TAKE THE ACTION THAT IS GOING TO COST THE LEAST AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR THE TAXPAYERS.

AND STILL GIVE THEM A NICE PIER THAT THEY WILL GO VISIT AND ENJOY THEMSELVES. THANK YOU.

IF. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: JUDGE,

IF I CAN. >>JUDGE SCOTT: PLEASE.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I APPRECIATE ABOUT JOHN MICHAEL'S OPINION. I THINK IF WE WOULD HAVE HAD THAT -- IF THEN WOULD HAVE SEEN THAT, IT WOULD HAVE MADE A LOT OF THINGS DIFFERENT. BUT IT DIDN'T.

AND WE ARE HERE WHERE WE ARE. I MADE MY POSITION VERY CLEAR ON THIS. I AM -- I AM VOTING FOR IT BECAUSE I KIND OF FEEL LIKE I HAVE TO BECAUSE OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN MY PRECINCT. I DON'T LOVE DOING THAT -- MAYBE THE ONLY TIME I EVER DONE IT IN MY CAREER BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OF THE COMMUNITY, BUT I CONTINUE TO VOTE FOR IT, BECAUSE THOSE I REPRESENT SEEM TO WANT IT.

THAT'S OKAY. THAT IS A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION.

I CAN LIVE WITH THAT. HERE IS WHAT I'M NOT GOING TO DO. I AM NOT GOING TO LISTEN TO THE E-MAILS THAT I GET OR READ THE E-MAILS THAT I GET AND CALLS THAT I GET CRITICIZING AND BEING NASTY AND WE DON'T DO -- THIS COURT. THAT IS NOT FAIR.

EVERYBODY WANTS TO MAKE IT ABOUT THE SECOND STORY.

OKAY, MAKE IT ABOUT THE SECOND STORY.

BUT TO CRITICIZE THIS COURT FOR ALLOCATING $27 MILLION FOR A PIER THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO ALLOCATE A TIME FOR.

THIS COURT COULD HAVE SAID WE ARE NOT GOING TO REBUILD THE PIER. TOO BIG OF A RISK OR GAMBLE.

NOT ONE OF THOSE MEMBERS OF THIS COURT PAUSED FOR A MINUTE WHEN WE KEPT COMING BACK AND SAID FIRST $18 MILLION.

NOW $# 2 MILLION. AND THEN LDZ 27 MILLION.

[02:50:02]

EVERY SINGLE ONE, AND I READ THESE E-MAILS AND IT IS LIKE -- YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING ME. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ANYBODY ANYWHERE GET $27 MILLION FOR A PIER IN A CITY OR A COUNTY THE SIZE OF NUECES COUNTY AND STILL HAVE PEOPLE UPSET AND CRITICIZING MEMBERS THIS OF THIS COURT.

YOU CAN CRITICIZE ME, THAT'S OKAY.

I GET CRITICIZED EVEN WHEN I VOTED FOR IT.

THAT'S OKAY. I AM A BIG BOY.

BUT THREE PEOPLE ON THIS COURT, THEY DON'T REPRESENT THE ISLAND, FOLKS. THEY WOULD LOVE TO SEE $27 MILLION IN THEIR PRECINCT FOR DIFFERENT PROJECTS.

I GUARANTEE YOU, THERE WILL BE A TON OF PROJECTS AND EVERY ONE OF THESE THREE COMMISSIONERS HAVE STOOD UP EXCEPT ON ONE ISSUE AND THE MAIN ISSUE OF FUNDING AND SAID WE ARE GOING TO REBUILD THAT PIER. WE WILL MAKE IT AWESOME.

WE WILL HAVE AN AWESOME RESTAURANT SPACE.

WE ARE GOING TO HAVE -- WE WILL FULLY FUND IT SPEND $27 MILLION.

AND YET -- SO MY FRUSTRATION TODAY IS NOT WITH THE VOTE OF WHAT THIS COURT IS FIXING TO MAKE, BUT THE FACT THAT NOBODY SEEMS TO BE CELEBRATING THESE PEOPLE.

I AM NOT STAYING ME. OKAY.

I AM SAYING EVERYBODY OUGHT TO BE APPLAUDING THE FOUR PEOPLE, THE THREE COMMISSIONERS WHO DON'T REPRESENT THE ISLAND TO SAY HOLY COW, GAVE $27 MILLION. $27 MILLION.

THEY GAVE $18 MILLION OUT OF A $50 MILLION C.O.

$18 MILLION OF IT WINTER TO THE PIER.

LET'S REMEMBER, I SAID THIS HUNDRED TIMES.

FEMA SHOULD HAVE PAID FOR THIS. AND FEMA SCREWED US -- I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES -- THEY MAY HAVE BEEN GREAT ON A LOT OF THINGS, BUT THEY STREW SCREWED US ON THIS.

THEY SHOULD HAVE COME UP WITH THE MONEY.

WE HAD TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO FIND IT.

WE GOT LUCKY WITH A SETTLEMENT TO HAVE EXTRA MONEY OR HAVE THE BONDING ABILITY TO DO IT OR WE WOULDN'T BE REBUILDING THIS PIER. I WILL BE ON THE LOSING SIDE OF THE VOTE BUT I WILL CELEBRATE THE HECK OF IT BECAUSE WE ARE GETTING A $27 MILLION AWESOME PIER AND I WANT TO THANK EVERY MEMBER OF THE COURT FOR THAT AND I -- I NEVER HAVE BEEN SO SHOCKED AND DISMAYED AT SOME OF THE PEOPLE AND HOW THEY TREATED MECHANICS OF THIS COURT, AND YET THEY STILL CONTINUE TO VOTE FOR THE $27 MILLION. THAT IS ALL I WANT TO SAY TODAY, JUDGE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK THE IF COMMISSIONERS AND COURT SUPPORT SUPPORTING THE PIER EVEN WITH THE THINGS AND ARROWS THROWN TO YOU. 37 THE MISINFORMATION OUT THIS HAS BEEN STAG IRING AND FRUSTRATING TOO.

NOT THE PEOPLE'S FAULT, THAT IS THE PEOPLE IS GIVING THE INFORMATION. I APOLOGIZE, COMMISSIONER MAREZ.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: ON THIS ITEM.

THE REASON I ASKED TO PULL ALL THEY ITEMS AND THEY WERE ALL RELATED AND IF THIS ONE PASS OR FAILS, IT WOULD SEE IF WE ADDRESS ITEMS P& Q. ITEM O.

SOMEONE WALK ME THROUGH THIS. I WAS GOING TO SAY AIDEE OR JENNY OR EVEN LULU. THIS IS DEALING WITH ARPA FUNDING, CORRECT? SOMEONE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ELIMINATION OF THE SECOND STORY.

ALL ARPA FUNDING. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: MY

APOLOGIES, JUDGE. >> THE ALLOCATION -- SORRY, MY VOICE IS STILL HOARSE. FOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS, JUDGE. THE MONIES WERE ABOUT ALLOCATED FROM ARPA, ONE FROM COUNTY JUDGE AND THE SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER CHESNEY. THAT WAS BACK AND FORTH.

AND, OF COURSE, PART -- PART OF THE FUNDS COULD NOT BE USED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, WHICH COMMISSIONER CHESNEY CLARIFIED.

SO IT WAS TAKEN OFF THE TABLE. THEN COMMISSIONER -- I MEAN COMMISSIONER CHESNEY DECIDED TO PUT IT TOWARDS THE RECONSTRUCTION OF IT SO THAT'S HOW IT IS COMING BACK BECAUSE IT NEEDS TO BE STATED ON THE RECORD FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

TREASURY. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: IS JOHN

MICHAEL ON ZOOM SOMEWHERE? >> YES, I AM STILL HERE.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: ALL RIGHT. JOHN, GOOD AFTERNOON.

THANKS FOR STAYING ON. >> YOU BET.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: HELP ME WITH THIS.

WE STILL HAVE A STRUCTURE OUT THERE, RIGHT.

IS THAT WHERE THE -- WHERE THE MICHAEL MAY'S RESTAURANT IS

LOCATED, THAT'S CORRECT? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

IT IS STILL THERE. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I DON'T GET OUT TO THE ISLAND AS MUCH AS ITCH USED TO BECAUSE THERE IS

NOR A PIER. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THE ONE

[02:55:02]

IN PORT A. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: TOO FAR.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I GO TO ROBSTOWN.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I KNOW. THAT WAS PART OF THE PLAN TO KEEP THAT STRUCTURE THAT DIDN'T ARE DIDN'T GET TORN DOWN, THAT SURVIVED THE HURRICANE AND BUILT THE REST AROUND IT.

ALWAYS IN THE PLANS? >> COMMISSIONER MAREZ, THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED. THE INITIAL DISCUSSION OF A SECOND FLOOR HAPPENED, IT -- SOMEONE ASSUMED THAT YOU COULD JUST TAKE PART OF A NEW STRUCTURE, PUT IT ON A NEW STRUCTURE, AND PART OF THE ADDITION OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT WAS NEVER DESIGNED TO DO THAT.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THAT WAS ALWAYS PART OF THE PLAN WAS TO KEEP THE EXISTING AND ADD IT IN. BECAUSE I TELL YOU WHEN I LOOKED AT THE PLANS AND I KNOW IT IS NOT YOU OR A HUGE FIRM.

WE DID THE RIGHT THING TO HIRE YOU TO GIVE OVERSIGHT BECAUSE YOU ARE LOCAL. I APPRECIATE YOUR ASSESSMENT AND OPINIONS AND THE WORK THAT YOUR TROUPE DOES.

BUT THAT MAYBE SUCH A BIG ISSUE AND TALKING GET LOST AND $27 MILLION TO $30 MILLION, MY EYES KIND OF ROLLED UP ON IT.

IN THE PLANNING THAT AT THIS SAW FROM THE -- FROM THE MAIN FIRM, WHO IS IT, JACOBS? IT LOOKED LIKE ONE CONTINUOUS PLAN. IT DIDN'T LOOK LIKE THERE WAS SOMEBODY ELSE THAT KIND OF PUZZLE PIECED TOGETHER THAT ONE LITTLE PART THAT REMAINED. I GUESS THAT IS WHERE I AM CONFUSED AND MAYBE SOME OF THE PUBLIC IS AS WELL ON THAT.

THAT KIND OF THROWS ME OFF BUT INITIALLY I BOUGHT IN AND SUPPORTED THE DESIGN OF THE SECOND FLOOR AND SOUNDED LIKE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY. YOU DON'T GET OPPORTUNITIES MUCH. YOU TALK OF ARPA FUNDING AND THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AT THE SIDED TO HELP WITH A VAST ARRAY OF IMPROVING COMMUNITIES AND I HAVE DONE THAT WITH PERSONNEL INCREASING THEIR SALARIES.

WE DO THAT WITH INFRASTRUCTURE AND DOING THAT HERE AND THIS PROJECT AS WELL. ALMOST THE TERMINOLOGY ONCE IN A LIFETIME, AND WOULDN'T YOU AGREE A ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY WITH ARPA FUNDING THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN TOO OFTEN.

IS THAT -- IN YOUR PROFESSIONAL ASSESSMENT WOULD YOU SAY THAT IS

RIGHT OR WRONG? >> WELL, I MEAN, COMMISSIONER,

YOU TALK -- >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: JUST RIGHT OR WRONG, JOHN. COME ON.

>> I DON'T THINK IT IS A WISE EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I DIDN'T ASK YOU THAT.

ARPA. >> I CAN'T SPEAK WHAT THE FUNDS

-- >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: LISTEN TO

WHAT I AM SAYING. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I THINK WE ALL

AGREE ON THAT. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: WE WOULD

ALL AGREE. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: WE ALL AGREE. THIS IS A ONCE IN A LIFETIME AND FUNDING THAT DOESN'T COME OFTEN AND THIS IS FUNDING THAT WE ARE NOT ASKING OUR LOCAL TAXPAYERS TO COME.

IT IS COMING FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND YOU CAN ALWAYS ARGUE OUR TAX MONEY THAT GETS FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND COME DOWN. I CAN GET THAT ARGUMENT, BUT MONEY ALLOCATED TO US SO I DO FEEL THAT THIS PROJECT FALLS INTO THAT ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY HAVE FUNDING THAT WE ARE NOT PUTTING ON 9 TAXPAYERS. IT IS NOT NECESSARILY LONG TERM.

YOU CAN ARGUE MAINTENANCE WHAT HAVE YOU AND TO CONTINUALLY PUT UP $30 TO $40 MILLION EVERY TEN, 20, 30 YEARS.

GOD FORBID ANOTHER HURRICANE. IF THAT IS THE CASE, WE SHOULDN'T BE BUILDING PIERS AT ALL AND SPLIT UP THE $27 MILLION. I DO PLAN ON STICKING WITH WHAT MY ORIGINAL COMMITMENT WAS THAT WE COLLECTIVELY YOU A IS A VISION FOR -- FOR A SECOND FLOOR AS OPPORTUNITY NOT FOR ONE INDIVIDUAL I NEVER SAW THAT FOR ONE COMPANY ONE INDIVIDUAL.

THIS IS AN ACCIDENT THAT I HOPE -- LOW PRESSURE SPUR A LOT OF INTEREST THE NEXT TIME WE OPEN UP THE OPPORTUNITY TO USE THAT VENUE AND OPEN IT UP FOR BID FOR RESTAURANT CONCESSION.

WHATEVER STREAMS PEOPLE MAY HAVE.

I ALWAYS SAW THE SECOND FLOOR AS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR INCREASED REVENUE. WE DO GET A LOT OF MONEY THAT COMES IN FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO OBSERVE OR GO FISH ON THAT PIER AND A LOT OF MONEY AND WHAT IS DMRAUN FROM THE.MONEY WE GET FROM THE CURRENT TENANT. I SEE THIS AS A CHANCE TO REALLY MAKE THIS HAPPEN. I THINK IT HAS ALREADY BEEN

[03:00:04]

STATED THAT NOT INFORM SUPPORT FOR IT.

I FEEL WE NEED TO ADDRESS THIS IS A ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY TO FUND IT OF AND MAYBE WE SHOULD GO ALL IN.

I AM DEFINITELY GOING TO CONCEDE AT THE WILL OF THE COURT, BUT I WILL VOTE -- CONTINUE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE SECOND FOR THAT.

SO, THANK YOU. INCH.

>> IF WE WERE TO BUILD THE SECOND TIER, WOULD THIS QUALIFY

UNDER THE ARPA MONEY? >> NOT FOR A NEW STRUCTURE.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: OKAY. AND IF WE GO AHEAD AND BUILD IT, WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. IS THE GOVERNMENT GOING TO ASK

FOR THEIR MONEY BACK? >> I WAS GOING TO STRESS THAT THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT IN ITS ENTERALLY WITH THE $27 MILLION, $28 MILLION HERPZ HERPZ THE TAXPAYERS WOULD BE ON THE

LOOK FOR THAT MONEY. >>.

.<,NEW LINE>>> EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE BEFORE THE PUBLIC.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: I'M NOT AGAINST A SECOND TIER.

YOU CAN BUILD IT BUT CAN'T BUILD IT LEGALLY.

>> NOT FOR A NEW STRUCTURE. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: YOU HAD ME AND BROUGHT ME BACK IN. I WAS READY TO LET THIS DIE.

THIS -- THIS -- ISN'T THIS ENTIRE STRUCTURE NEW? ISN'T THIS ENTER STRUCTURE NEW? I AM ABOUT KIND OF BLACK AND

WHITE -- >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: SECOND

TIER WOULD BE NEW. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THE WHOLE

STRUCTURE IS NEW. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: YOU HAD A RESTAURANT. YOU CAN'T UNDER STAND THAT.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: WHAT I AM SAYING, LET'S GET A DEFINITION WHAT IS NEW. WHAT IS A REBUILD.

THAT IS MY POINT. THAT IS MY POINT.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I WILL CALL THE QUESTION ON THIS.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: COMMISSIONER, I AM MAKING A

POINT. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: TRYING TO PICK ON PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ANSWERING RIGHT.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I AM NOT PICKING ON PEOPLE.

I AM TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT IS NEW --

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS CON EVEN

IFFED. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I NEED

THAT QUESTION ANSWERED. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I'M NOT SURE SHE CAN AND THAT IS WHAT I WANT TO COMMENT ABOUT.

>> THERE ARE CERTAIN RULES TO IT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: SHE, THE ATTORNEY, THE CPA TERM, ALL PEOPLE HAVE GONE OVER THIS AND LOOKED AT IT, PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS WHAT CAN AND CANNOT BE USED.

THE DEADLINE IS THE SAME AND SOME OF THE ITEMS -- ONE OF THE REASONS I WENT AHEAD WITH MY DECISION BECAUSE THE COUNTY COUNTY CAN NOT AFFORD FOR THEM TO COME BACK AND SAYS IT NOT APPROVABLE AND WE CAN NOT AFFORD THAT.

WITH THE STRUCTURE WITH THE OTHER PROBLEMS, WITH THE HALF A MILLION DOLLARS THAT DIDN'T GET FUNDED ON THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT THAT HAGERTY TOLD US THAT IS THE ONES THAT WOULD BE OKAY AS WELL, WITH THE OTHER MONEY WE ARE OUT WITH THE COVID THAT IS STILL QUESTIONABLE, WE CAN NOT AFFORD TO HAVE QUESTIONABLE OF CHOICES

IN THE FUTURE. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I AM TRYING GET CLARIFICATION, JUDGE OR ON WHAT IS REALLY NEW.

NOT THE SAME DESIGN AND SCOPE THAN WE HAD BEFORE.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: IT IS THE SAME, JOHN.

THAT IS THE POINT. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THE DESIGN IS NOT THE SAME. THE SAME CONCEPT.

IT IS A PIER. MAYBE I AM GETTING TOO TECHNICAL INTO IT. BUT IF YOU LAID DOWN WHAT THE DESIGN WORK OF JACOBS IS COMPARED TO WHAT WE HAVE, IT IS NOT THE SAME. ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: CAN WE EXTEND THE RESTAURANT, JOHN.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THE SEAM BASICS.

THE RESTAURANT AND THE PIER. WHAT THEY WERE SAYING AT THE LAST MEETING THE COUNTY PERSON TO, CPA AND LULU, WITHOUT HER VOICE, THEY SAID THE STRUCTURE IS REBUILT.

TWO SEPARATE ISSUES THE ARPA MONEY -- THEY ARE SAYING YOU CAN REBUILD WHAT WAS KNOCKED DOWN -- WHAT WE HAD TO KNOCK DOWN WHICH WAS THERE WHICH IS THE PIER AND THE RESTAURANT.

THEY DON'T SAY YOU HAVE TO REBUILD IT LIKE THE EXACT SAME

SOLITARY WAY. >> ABSOLUTELY RIGHT,

COMMISSIONER CHESNEY. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THE DESIGN IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME AS THE LAST ONE.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: YOU CAN EXPAND THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE RESTAURANT AND IT WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM BECAUSE THAT IS NOT A NEW STRUCTURE. I WOULDN'T PUT ARPA MONEY FOR

THAT. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: IN THAT LOCATION. IT IS NOT IT SHALL NOT A T PIER.

A D-SHAPED PIER. A LOT OF CHANGES WE HAD TO THAT

PIER COMPARED TO THE DESIGN. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: PART OF IT IS THERE. THEY TORN DOWN PART -- THEY TURNED DOWN THE PARTS REMAINING. THAT STAYS.

THEN THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD THE BASICALLY THE AMOUNT OF SPACE

[03:05:04]

TORN DOWN, THEY WILL BUILD IT. I MEAN, IT MIGHT BE 90 DEGREES DIFFERENT OR WHATEVER. THE SAME BASIC STRUCTURE THEY ARE REBUILDING ANOTHER 5,000 SQUARE FEET ON TOP OF IT.

5,000 BELOW. 5,000 ABOVE.

WE HAD 5,000 BEFORE AND HAVE 5,000 AGAIN AND THE SAME AMOUNT OF PIER. LITTLE WIDER AND LONG ARE.

THE SAME STRUCTURE. WHAT THEY ARE SAYING AND NOT WHAT I AM SAYING IS THEY ARE CONSIDERING THAT A NEW STRUCTURE. AND WE WERE TOLD LAST YEAR THAT IT WASN'T THAT IS IT DID QUALIFY FROM THE PRIOR COUNTY JUDGE.

AND NOW WE ARING TOLD DIFFERENTLY.

>> THE ONE THING I MIGHT ADD TO IT IS THE RENDERING THAT SHOWED THE TWO-STORY BUILDING. WHEN YOU DO THE DEEP RIDE INTO THAT RENDERING, IT WASN'T POSSIBLE BECAUSE GEE METLY THAT WOULD NOT HAVE WORKED -- GEE GEO MET TRILY WOULDN'T WORK.

THAT IS NOT PRUDENT TO DO THAT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RENDERING PHYSICALLY, GEOMETRICALLY, IT DID NOT MATCH THE BUDGET.

WHEN YOU ALLOCATED AN ADDITIONAL $2 MILLION TO EXPAND THE RESTAURANT SPACE, NOW YOU CAN'T USE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.

YOU WILL ADD WELL OVER A MILLION TO THAT BUDGET JUST TO GET THE SECOND FOR THAT. I DON'T WANT TO BORE YOU WITH A LOT OF DETAILS BUT THE RENDERING NEVER MATCHED THE BUDGET AND NEVER MATCHED THE GEOMETRY. IT WAS A PRETTY PICTURE.

IF. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: IT IS A MESS. ABOUT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: YOU CALLED THE QUESTION.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: NO.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: NO. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THE AYES HAS IT.

[P. Ratify reallocation of American Rescue Plan (ARPA) funds previously allocated to the second tier construction back to the precincts.]

THE MOTION PASSES. P.

RATIFY THE ALLOCATION OF THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN FUNDS PREV PREVIOUSLY ALLOCATED TO THE SECOND PIER DISCUSSION BACK TO THE PRECINCTS.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: SO MOVED. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE HAVE A MOTION.

>> SECOND INCH INCH. >>JUDGE SCOTT: MOTION AND A SECOND. ABOUT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ITEM Q, RATIFICATION OF $1 MILLION FROM PRECINCT # TO THE RECONSTRUCTION OF BOB HALL PIER

AND ITS PREVIOUS STRUCTURE. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: MISS WHITE4URS ANSWERS THAT QUESTION THE MONEY IS GOING BACK IN THE PEER. I WANTED TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THAT WILL STAY IN THE. PIER FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF BOB HALL PIER AND ANY APPROVED STRUCTURES, ARPA APPROVED STRUC STRUCTURES.

>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

THE MOTION PASSES. THEN WE ARE ON OUR REGULAR AGENDA. I DID MISS SOMETHING.

>> GO BACK TO THE -- THE. EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[1. Receive a presentation from Louie Ray of the Nueces County Emergency Management Plan based on the Emergency Support Functions (ESF). ]

IS SOMEBODY WAITING -- I WILL DO IT UNTIL THE END.

37 THE REGULAR AGENDA ITEM A, RECEIVE A PRESENTATION FROM LOUIE RAY FROM THE NUECES EMERGENC EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN ON THE EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: NECESSARY TODAY SINCE WE ARE SO FAR BEHIND. I AM JUST ASKING.

IT LOOKS LIKE A LONG PRESENTATION.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: CAN YOU CUT IT IN HALF.

>>LOUIS RAY: FIVE MINUTES. ABOUT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: OKAY. >>LOUIS RAY: GOOD AFTERNOON, COURT, JUDGE, COMMISSIONERS. LAST YEAR WHEN I GOT HIRED HERE, WE TALKED OF UPDATING THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN.

WE DID THAT. WE WERE USING THE OLD ANNEX FORMAT THAT EVERYBODY WAS USING THROUGHOUT TEXAS BUT THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ALONG WITH FEMA UPDATED TO USING THE EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTIONS.

THE ESFS. THE FIRST SLIDE WILL LOOK AT THE STATE'S READINESS OF THE EOC. IF AN ENT THAT COMES THROUGH -- AN INCIDENT HAPPENING OR AN INCIDENT WE NEED TO REACT TO, THESE ARE THE STEPS WE GO THROUGH WITH THE EOC.

THAT IS JUDGED BY WHATEVER THAT INCIDENT IS AN ACCIDENT ON THE

[03:10:07]

HIGHWAY TO A HURRICANE. NEXT SLIDE.

THE EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION. SOMETHING WE WANT TO SHARE WITH THE PUBLIC AND PUT THIS ON OUR FACEBOOK AND PUT IT ON THE ABOUT WEB SITE FOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.

IT STILL LOOKS AT A THREE-INCH BOOK OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT STUFF. THIS GIVES THEM A VERY QUICK REFERENCE GUIDE. ABOUT AND DID THIS IN CONJUNCTION IN TETUM AND THE 9/11 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TEAM.

AND I THINK IT IS A GOOD REFERENCE FOR EVERYONE TO LOOK AT. NEXT SLIDE.

ALL RIGHT, SO HERE IS THE BREAKDOWN OF THE SUPPORT FUNCTIONS THAT WE HAVE FOR THE NUECES COUNTY EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTIONS AND OUR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN.

IT GOES FROM ONE TO 15. NEXT SLIDE.

ALL RIGHT, HERE IS ONE OF THE QUICK SHEETS THAT YOU WILL BE

ABLE TO SEE ON THE WEB SITE. >>JUDGE SCOTT: GET MORE OF IT ON THE SCREEN. SORRY.

>>LOUIS RAY: THAT IS ALL RIGHT. THE ICON DEPICT WHAT IT IS.

YOU SEE THE NUMBER AND THE NAME OF THAT ESF.

BELOW THAT IN THE OTHER BORDERED AREA YOU WILL SEE THE PURPOSE.

YOU WILL SEE A SUMMARY, WHICH IS THE MEAT PART OF IT AND TELLING YOU OF THE BREAKDOWN OF THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, RECOVERY AND MITIGATION.

AT THE BOTTOM YOU WILL SEE THE SUPPORT AGENCIES THAT WILL BE ACTIVATED IN CASE OR IF IT HAPPENS TO GET SO LARGE THEY NEED TO BE ACTIVATED AND BROUGHT INTO THE E HEOC OR BROUGHT IN FOR ADVISEMENT. THEN I WOULD LIKE TO GO TO -- IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.

LET'S GO TO SLIDE NUMBER 20. MUCH A LINEAR GRAPH OF THE -- OF THE INCIDENT COMMAND STRUCTURE AND GO WITH 31, THE LAST SLIDE.

THIS IS HOW WE LOOK FOR NUECES COUNTY ON THE INCIDENT COMMAND STRUCTURE. YOU WILL SEE THAT THE JUDGE WHO SERVES AS INTERIM DIRECTOR IS ABOVE ALL THAT.

SHE IS THE LEAD CONDUCTOR OVER EVERYTHING WE DO.

SHE GUEST US THE STRATEGIC GUIDANCE AND INTHAT, THE UC AND THE IC. I SERVE AS A EOC MANAGER DURING AN INCIDENT OR DISASTER. ALONG WITH THAT, SOMEONE WITH THAT SPECIFIC EF STHASHGZ WE KOOFD.

PART OF THE UC IC. YOU WILL SEE THE COMMAND STAFF.

THE OFFICER, THE SAFETY, THE PIO AND LIAISON OFFICERS.

BELOW THAT TIER YOU WILL HAVE WHAT IS CALLED THE GENERAL STAFF, OPERATIONS EXCEPTION, PLANNING, LOW GUESS FIX AND YOUR FINANCE SECTION THESE PEOPLE WILL MAKE TOUGH DECISIONS OR ADVICE TO THE JUDGE WHETHER WE CAN DO CERTAIN THINGS AND KEEP TRACK OF ALL ITEMS TO GET A SPEEDY RECOVERY.

THAT'S IT. ANY QUESTIONS.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, LOUIS.

[A. Discuss and consider the County Attorney's Advisory on legal proceedings for Emergency Service District (ESD) #2 and all related matters. ]

SORRY THIS WAS A LITTLE CRAZY. BACK TO THE EXECUTIVE SESSION ON ITEM A, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S ADVICE ADVISORY FOR LEGAL PROCEEDINGS OF EMERGENCY DISTRICT AND ALL

RELATE MATTERS. >> JUDGE, THANK YOU.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE AND LET -- REMIND THE COURT AND THE PUBLIC THIS WAS A CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND THIS WILL BE DISSEMINATED TO ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO SOME DIFFERENT POINTS, JENNY I WANT TO DO AND EVERYBODY WILL READ IT BECAUSE IT IS VERY LENGTHY. I APPRECIATE YOUR DILIGENCE ON THIS. BUT THE WAY I SEE THIS, TWO OR THREE WAYS TO DO THIS, RIGHT. THE EXCLUSION OF AN ESD TERRITORY WITHIN ANOTHER TAXING AUTHORITY.

GIVE IT A QUICK LITTLE BACK GROUND.

THE REASON THIS WAS ASKED FOR BECAUSE AN ATTEMPT POTENTIALLY BETWEEN THE ESD BOARD AND THE CITY AND THE QUESTION RAISED IF THE ESD BOARD HAS A RIGHT TO ENTER IN I AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY AND WHAT I ASK FOR IS NOT TO RENDER AN OPINION WHY I THINK

[03:15:01]

IT SHOULD OR SHOULDN'T BE DONE, BUT RATHER TO LET THE WORLD KNOW KNOW HOW IT HAS TO HAPPEN SO GOOD INFORMATION AND EXPLANATION OUT THERE WHETHER OR NOT THOSE THINGS CAN EVEN -- CAN EVEN GO ON. THREE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES THAT HAVE BEEN COVERED IN THIS. AND IF -- IF YOU WERE LISTENING, BRING CHIEF HOMANICK A COPY. HE IS IN THE COURTROOM.

AN EXCLUSIVE OF ESD TERRITORY WITHIN OTHER TAXING AUTHORITIES.

REMOVAL OF A ESD BY A MUNICIPALITY AND A DISSOLUTION OF A ESD. SO WOULD IT BE EASIER, JENNY, IF YOU GAVE, LIKE, A REAL QUICK SYNOPSIS OF THESE THREE THINGS SO THE PUBLIC CAN SEE IT. WE WILL DISSEMINATE IT AND SUGGEST IT. I DON'T WANT TO MISSTATE YOUR ADVISORY. IF YOU WANT ME TO, I CAN TRY.

>> THE ADVISORY GOES THROUGH THE TEXAS HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE CHAPTER 775. IT IS OUR BEST ATTEMPT TO PUT THAT CHAPTER IN A NARRATIVE FORM TO COURT WHERE LINE ALL THE CHOICE -- CHOICES ALONG THIS PATHWAY.

YOU HAVE THE COMPLETE DISSOLUTION.

WHICH IS ONE PATHWAY. YOU HAVE THE EXCLUSION OF AREAS COVERED BY DUPLICATE SERVICE. THAT SEEMS TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY, AND ULTIMATELY IF THE CITY WERE TO COME IN AND TAKE OVER CERTAIN PARTS OF THIS WHEN IT COMES TO DIFFERENT RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PART IT COULD BE THE MOST STREAM.

LINED APPROACH. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU --

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I AM TRYING TO GO THROUGH THIS QUICK BECAUSE WE ARE SO FAR BEHIND AND I WANT TO GET BACK TO THIS.

BUT BASICALLY, IT INDICATES THAT, TO ME, THAT THE ESD BOARD AND THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI CANNOT COME TO AN AGREEMENT TO DISSOLVE. THAT IS NOT UP WITH OF THE WAYS IT CAN BE DONE. IF.

>> CORRECT. IT IS NOT THAT SIMPLE.

IF IT IS GOING TO DISSOLVE, THE BOARD NEEDS THE NOTICED AMERICA, VOTES, AND PETITIONS IF THERE IS AREA TO BE EXCLUDED, THEN THE BOARD COULD START THAT PROCESS WITHOUT A PETITION OR IT COULD BE STARTED IN THE ALTERNATIVE WITH THE PETITION.

BUT THEY CAN'T JUST MAKE THAT DECISION AMONGST THEMSELVES.

IN. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: RIGHT.

I DON'T THINK IT IS IMPORTANT AND I DON'T WANT TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON THIS SINCE THIS IS SO BEHIND.

AND THE WAY I READ IT AND AGAIN, JUST TO LEAVE IT ALONE.

BUT THE WAY I READ THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY AED GOOD TO THING OR A BAD THING, THAT THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI COULD REMOVE ALL OF THE ESD AND BE THE SOLE PROVIDER OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AS PROVIDED UNILATERALLY BY THE CITY.

THE MOST STREAMLINE VERSION, IF THAT IS WHAT THE CITY CHOOSES TO DO BECAUSE THIS FALLS BACK TO THE CITY IS STREAMLINE.

THE REST OF IT REQUIRES PETITIONS AND HEARINGS AND, YOU KNOW, ALL THIS OTHER KIND OF STUFF.

AND -- OR REQUIRES DOING NOTHING, RIGHT.

AN ALTERNATIVE. DOING NOTHING AND LEAVE IT ALONE DOING NOTHING MOVING FORWARD. I AM PROVIDING THE COMMUNITY INFORMATION AND LETTING PEOPLE READ IT AND LOOK AT IT, BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE BOARD HAS SOME -- THEY DON'T HAVE ANY ABILITY TO DISSOLVE BY THEMSELVES, THEY DON'T.

THE ABILITY TO EXCLUDE TERRITORY AND A CONVOLUTED PROCESS HERE.

AND THEN THE CITY HAS A UNILATERAL AUTHORITY TO -- ACCORDING TO THIS, ABOUT EXCLUDE OR -- SORRY, SORRY --

>> THE REMOVAL OF TERRITORY. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: EXCLUDE REMOVAL OF TERRITORY. AND THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE A RIGHT TO DISSOLVE IT, BUT THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO SAY THEY ARE THE SEOUL SURVIVOR OF THE EMERGENCY SERVICES AND HAVE THE RIGHT TO UNILATERALLY DO IT IF THEY SO CHOOSE.

I WILL LET EVERYBODY READ IT BECAUSE IT TOOK ME A WHILE TO GET THROUGH IT AND A LOT OF BACK-UP TO IT.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: COMMISSIONER, IF IT FALLS ON THE

CITY, WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WELL, WE ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING. THAT IS WHY I STOPPED -- TRANSPARENCY ONE SIDE WANTING TO FILL THE BOARD THAT WAY AND THE OTHER SIDE WANTING TO FILL IT THE OTHER WAY.

NOT THIS COURT TO MAKE A UNILATERAL DECISION.

I AM NOT SURE IF YOU DO IT, THAT THAT BOARD IS ABLE TO DO WHAT THE OTHER SIDE WAS GOING TO DO. THE POINT, LET'S STOP WITH ALL THE MISINFORMATION AND HALF INFORMATION AND HERE YOU GO,

[03:20:02]

EVERYBODY CAN READ IT AND DECIDE WHERE TO GO FROM THIS.

I AM DONE. I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANYTHING

FOR US TO DO, COMMISSIONER. >>JUDGE SCOTT: NO ACTION ON THAT. SO NO MOTIONS OR ACTIONS.

[2. Receive update on COVID-19 recovery expenses from Grants Department and Emergency Management.]

MOVING ON TO REGULAR AGENDA. ITEM.

THAT 2. UPDATE ON COVID-19 EXPENSE FROM THE GRANTS DEPARTMENT AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ANA, IS SHE NOT HERE? OH, OKAY.

SO YOU ARE DOING THIS ONE, LOUIS?

>>LOUIS RAY: I WILL DO MY BEST, JUDGE.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I THINK WE NEED TO TABLE IT.

I HAVE QUESTIONS THAT I NEED TO ASK.

I WANT -- >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE HAVE A MOTION

TO TABLE -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: BEFORE WE TABLE -- I JUST GOT THIS HANDED TO ME.

BASICALLY WHAT I THINK THIS IS SAYING IS DESPITE THE REPRESENTATIONS FROM THE PRIOR COUNTY JUDGE, WE ARE WAY BEHIND COLLECTING COVID REIMBURSEMENTS AND HAVEN'T COLLECTED BY THE MONEY REPRESENTED BY THE COUNTY JUDGE.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: ALL THAT IS TRUE, ALL THE ABOVE, BUT

I WANT TO WAIT TO ASK QUESTIONS. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I SECOND YOUR MOTION TO TABLE IF OFF MOTION.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND A SECOND TO TABLE --

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: UNTIL WHEN, THE NEXT MEETING?

>>JUDGE SCOTT: UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, APRIL 12.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO TABLE TO THE APRIL 12.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. SEE THIS ON THE 12TH.

[3. Discuss and consider approving payment of outstanding invoices from Hagerty Consulting, Inc., for services related to RFP 3141-20 Disaster Recovery Management for the Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) and related matters.]

ITEM NUMBER 3, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL AIN'T OF INVOICES FROM HAGERTY CONSULTING FOR SERVICES RFP 3141-20 DISASTER RECOVERY MANAGEMENT FOR THE EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. THE SAME ONE ANA.

>> THEY ARE BOTH TOGETHER, JUDGE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: TABLE THIS TOO? >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I THINK

I WILL TABLE IT. >> APRIL 12.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: TABLE THEM BOTH UNTIL THE 12TH.

IF. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I HAVE

QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE TOO. >>JUDGE SCOTT: MOTION TO TABLE UNTIL APRIL 12. A SECOND.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: SECOND.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES.

TABLED TO. APRIL 12, RIGHT.

[4. Discuss and consider support of H.B. 2993, relating to the eligibility of certain property located in a reinvestment zone for certain ad valorem tax incentives.]

ITEM NUMBER 4, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER SUPPORT OF H.B. 2993 RELATED TO THE ELIGIBILITY OF CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATIONS IN A REINVESTMENT ZONE FOR CERTAIN AD VALOREM TAX INCENTIVES.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: SO MOVED. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ:

SECOND. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

[5. Discuss and consider support of H.B. 3262, relating to county or municipal regulation of mass gatherings.]

THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU.

ITEM NUMBER 5, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER SUPPORT OF H.B. 3262, RELATING TO COUNTY OR MUNICIPAL REGULATION OF MAT GATHERS.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: THAT IS THE ONE I ASKED JENNY TO GIVE US SOME FEEDBACK. JENNY, DO YOU REMEMBER?

>> I AM NOT SURE WHAT KIND OF ISSUES YOU HAVE WITH IT THAT IT KIND OF -- I DO NOTICE THAT IT INCLUDES SOME DEFINITIONS WITHIN -- WITHIN A MUNICIPALITY WHICH SEEMS KIND OF CONTRADICTIVE TO

THE ABOUT BEGINNING OF IT. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: COUNTY JUDGE -- SEVERAL TIMES AND SCRATCHED OUT.

ARE THEY TALKING OF US BEING RESPONSIBLE ONLY FOR THE COUNTY AREA? BECAUSE WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MUNICIPALITY AS FAR AS THE CITY.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: I THINK THAT IS THE WAY IT WAS SCRATCHED OUT.

THE CITY WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CITY AND THE COUNTY WILL BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COUNTY. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I WILL

I BELIEVE THAT ONE. >>JUDGE SCOTT: YOU WANT TO GET

CLARIFICATION. >> YES.

I NEED TO KNOW WHAT IT IS THAT YOU ARE QUESTION SO I CAN LOOK

INTO THOSE FOR YOU. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I WANT TO CLARIFY TO MAKE SURE WHERE WE STAND AS A COUNTY, WHAT WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR. OKAY ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: THE SHERIFF IS VERY -- HE HAS

SOMETHING TO DO WITH THIS TOO. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: HUNTER'S BILL. HE JUST WANTED US TO WEIGH IN ON SUPPORT OF IT. I THINK HE TALKED TO EVERYBODY.

AND CAN WE -- I DON'T -- I DIDN'T KNOW ANYBODY HAD ISSUE WITH IT. I DIDN'T PUT IT ON -- MAYBE I

DID PUT IT ON -- >>JUDGE SCOTT: I THINK YOU PUT

IT ON. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: CHAIRMAN

[03:25:02]

WANTED US TO SUPPORT IT. SO I GUESS, YOU KNOW --

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: UP TO YOU.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: RUNNING OUT OF TIME WITH THE LEGISLATURE. DOES SOMEONE -- IF SOMEONE WANTS TO ASK ME WHAT THE QUESTIONS ARE, I CAN ASK THEM REAL QUICK AND GET AN ANSWER TO THEM AND COME BACK TO THEM LATER IN THE MEETING. WE WILL BE HERE FOR A WHEEL.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: I READ THROUGH IT AND WHERE IT LOOKED LIKE IT WOULD BE CANCELLED OUT AND THE COUNTY JUDGE.

INSTEAD OF THE COUNTY JUDGE BEING THE SEOUL PERSON FOR THE WHOLE COUNTY, BUT THE PERMITTING AUTHORITY.

WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY, WILL LOOK LIKE THE MAYOR AND THE CITY WILL HAVE TO DO THE PERMIT AND ANYTHING IN THE OUTSIDE JURISDICTION WILL BE THE COUNTY JUDGE THAT MAKES SENSE.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: OR MUNICIPAL POLICE CHIEF IS

APPLICABLE. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: ADDING FOR THE AUTHORITY OF THE CITY TO DO MASS GATHERING WITHIN THEIR JURISDICTION BECAUSE IT SAYS THAT THE COUNTY HAS TO DO

EVERYTHING. >>JUDGE SCOTT: OR THE COMMISSIONERS COURT. ALL OF THAT.

THE CITY WOULD DO THEIRS. AND WE WOULD DO OURS.

MUCH. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: HOW DOES

THE RESOLUTIONS WORK, JUDGE? >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE REALLY DON'T

HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I WAS GOING TO ASK THAT THE LOCAL DELEGATION ASKS FOR LETTERS OF SUPPORT OR RESOLUTIONS IN SUPPORT.

SO DOES IT HAVE TO BE UNANIMOUS? BECAUSE YOUR -- MY BIGGEST QUESTION WAS, HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT IT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: I DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THEN I'M READY TO SUPPORT IT.

AND IF CHAIRMAN HUNTER IS READY FOR IT.

THERE MAY BE SOME QUESTIONS AND THE MAJORITY OF US FEEL IT IS GOOD I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD AND NOT WAIT.

THE SECTION WILL BE DONE BEFORE YOU KNOW IT.

WE ARE ALREADY HALFWAY DOWN THROUGH THE SESSION AND EVERY MEETING IS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY. WHEN THE CHAIRMAN ASKS YOU TO SUPPORT SOMETHING, I THINK WE SHOULD.

AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T PHILOSOPHICALLY CHALLENGE HOW WE FEEL BUT I WOULD SUPPORT IT. THAT IS WHY I WAS ASKING, HOW DO THEY FEEL IF SOMETHING WAS NOT AN UNANIMOUS 5-0 VOTE.

COMMISSIONER CHESNEY, DO YOU KNOW?

>>JUDGE SCOTT: LONGS YOU SIGN A RESOLUTION.

IT IS PREFERABLE TO BE UNANIMOUS IN LEGISLATION -- IN LOCAL

LEGISLATION BY ALL MEANS, YES. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: ALL WE WOULD DO IS JUST -- IF WHICH WERE TO JUST APPROVE IT AND IF WE NEED TO GET RESOLUTION OR SEND SOMETHING TO SAY THAT WE SUPPORT IT. WE DON'T HAVE TO DO A RESOLUTION

-- >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: CAN WE GET THE JUDGE TO SEND A LETTER. COULD WE DO THAT JUST TO KIND OF

GET AROUND -- >>JUDGE SCOTT: SPEED IT UP BECAUSE IT IS SUCH CREATE CAL TIME IN THE SESSION.

IF YOU ARE GOING TO DO ANYTHING, YOU DO IT NOW OR YOU ARE GOING TO MISS THE WINDOW. ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: LEAVE THAT UP TO THE JUDGE?

>> WITH JOEL AND PATRICIA. >>JUDGE SCOTT: BRING THE LETTER BACK AND PUT IT ON THE NEXT AGENDA MAYBE JUST FOR SOMETHING.

DO WE DO IT THAT WAY. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I AM GOOD

FOR YOU SENDING A LETTER. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE WILL JUST DO IT THAT WAY. MOVING ON --

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WE NEED TO VOTE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: YEAH, WE NEED TO VOTE ON THE SUPPORT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: HE WANTS --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: WE STILL HAVE TO GET A VOTE.

HE WANTS THE VOTE ON IT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: HE WANTS

THE COUNTY'S SUPPORT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: LETTER FROM ALL

OF US. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: NOT FROM ALL OF US. BUT A LETTER FROM YOU ON BEHALF

OF US. >>JUDGE SCOTT: TO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR SUPPORT OF H.B. 3262 OR DO YOU HAVE MORE QUESTIONS.

A MOTION AND A SECOND. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THAT WILL BE MY MOTION. ABOUT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I WILL PULL A CHESNEY HERE, I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN REALLY VOTE FOR IT OR NOT. FOR ONCE I CAN PLAY HIS ROLE.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THAT'S OKAY, MAN.

I CAN LIVE LIKE THAT. I LIKE TO BE IMITATED.

THE BIGGEST PART OF FLATTERY. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: YOU

GUYS CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: OKAY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED?

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: NAY. >>JUDGE SCOTT: 4-1.

BRENT MOTIONED. BY SECONDED IT.

[6. Discuss and consider approval of license agreements for the use of the Lyondell/Haven Drive Fields with 1) WarCats Pony League and 2) Southern Attitude League.]

YES, SORRY. MOVING ON THEN TO ITEM NUMBER 6, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF LICENSE AGREEMENTS FOR THE USE OF LION DEL HAVEN DRIVE FIELDS WITH WARCATS PONY LEAGUE AND

SOUTHERN ATTITUDE LEAGUE. >> WE ARE TAKING PARK PROPERTY AND PUTTING IT BACK INTO OPERATION.

WE HAD SOME FIELDS DONATED TO US BY THE TM, AND WE FINALLY GOT THEM TO THE POINT TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO SELECT BALL LEAGUES.

THE SOUTHERN ATTITUDE ONE. THE WAR CATS PONY LEAGUE USING

[03:30:05]

THE SAME AREA, BUT WE WILL LICENSE IT BACK TO THEM AS WELL.

SO THE TERM IS FOR THREE YEARS TO ONE YEAR TERMS. AND WE ARE GOOD TO GO. WE RECOMMEND, COMMISSIONER.

ABOUT. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: WE APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU HAVE DONE TO GET THIS UP AND GOING.

I THINK WE CAN GET THOSE TELEPHONE POLES THAT WE ARE

LOOKING FOR. >> YES, SIR, WE GOT THEM OUT

THERE. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: OKAY.

I GUESS WE ARE READY TO GO. THANK YOU.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: CAN I HAVE A MOTION.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I HAVE TWO COPIES.

THIS RETHE SAME COMPANY? >> THE TWO SHOULD BE THE SAME.

KING GAVE OUT THE SEAM VERSION EARLIER TODAY.

THEY ADDED THE LANGUAGE THAT JENNY WAS TAKE LOOK FOR IN THE OF WHERE AS AND THE SECTIONS OF THE LAW WHERE WE CAN LICENSE -- LICENSE AGREEMENT. ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: SECOND, JUDGE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: YOU MADE THE MOTION.

AND COMMISSIONER MAREZ SECONDED IT.

NOW DISCUSSION. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: ONE QUESTION, JUDGE, FOR CLARIFICATION.

HE HAD WARD, SO A LOT OF TIMES WE GET 'APPROACHED IN ROBSTOWN.

HOW DOES THAT WORK FOR US? >> WE CAN USE THE SAME INSTRUMENT. WE CAN ACTUALLY GO THROUGH AND MAKE THE DECISION AS TO -- THESE ARE THE EXISTING GROUPS.

THE REASON WE USE THE LICENSES WE HAVE GROUPS USING THOSE FIELDS HISTORICALLY FOR YEARS. AND WE HAVE NEW GROUPS THAT WANT TO COME IN. AND WITH WHY YOU ARE -- AS YOU SAY, WE ARE BUILDING SOME NEW SOFTBALL FIELDS -- NOT SOFTBALLS, BUT SOCCER FIELDS, A COUPLE OF PITCHES OUT THERE IN THE BACK. AND WE HAVE INTEREST IN PEOPLE WANTING TO USE THOSE SO WE CAN USE THE THIS AGREEMENT.

THE ONLY THING WE WILL HAVE TO MODIFY BECAUSE THOSE PARKS ARE SO HEAVILY USED WE HAVE 1,000 TO 2,000 PEOPLE USING THEM ON A SUMMER'S NIGHT THAT WE WILL HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND AS PART OF THIS AGREEMENT THAT THE FIELD WILL BE OPEN TO WHATEVER MOM AND POP WANTS TOP USE THE FIELDS.

THE ONLY DIFFERENCE. WHEN THEY ARE GOING TO THESE FIELDS, THEY ARE GOING TO THOSE FIELDS EXCLUSIVELY TO PLAY SOME SPOTS. WHEN THEY GO TO ROBSTOWN, THEY ARE GOING TO GO PICNIC, RUN ON THE JOGGING TRAILS.

AND THESE OTHER PARKS COMMISSIONERS.

AS WE DEVELOPED A PARK FOR COMMISSIONER THESE AREAS WILL BE THAT TYPE OF PARK -- THE PARENTS ARE THERE TO WATCH THEIR KIDS PLAY. ONCE THEY PLAY, THEY ARE GONE.

A PICNIC AREA AND WILL HAVE -- JUST LIKE WE DEVELOPED THE PARKS JUST LIKE WHAT WE HAVE IN ROBSTOWN.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: CAN WE -- OR JENNY MAYBE YOU CAN GUIDE US ON THIS. WILL THIS BE A POLICY? I WOULDN'T WANT TO MAKE IT -- WE KNOW ROBSTOWN AND CAL- ALLEN AREA. WE ARE KNOWN FOR BASEBALL, OUR PASSION. BUT A LOT OF TIME INLAND PARKS WAS APPROACHED. WE WOULD LIKE TO SECURE THIS FACILITY. I GUESS THAT IS KIND OF WHAT THIS IS, BUT DO WE ENTER INTO LICENSE APRIL AGREEMENTS EVERY TIME OR BETTER TO HAVE A POLICY? DOES THAT GIVE US A BROADER -- MORE GUIDELINES TO FOLLOW SO IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT IS ARBITRARY. BECAUSE I KNOW I CAN MAKE SOME PEOPLE MAD AND I AM SURE EDWARD -- IF WE GO I WANT TO PICK THIS GROUP OVER THIS GROUP OR THIS IS THE FIRST GROUP THAT ASKED US AND SORRY YOU WERE LATE TO THE FAME, SO -- PARDON THE PUN AND YOU DON'T GET IN AGREEMENT. WHAT IS BEST.

DO WE CONTINUE TO FOLLOW THIS PRACTICE OR GET A POLICY.

>> PARKS HAS THIS CARVED OUT WHERE THEY CAN USES THIS STATUTE. IT IS GREAT FOR THEM FOR OTHER SITUA SITUATIONS.

I DO BELIEVE YOU WILL WANT TO CONSIDER A POLICY THAT IS FAIR TO ALL AND TAKES ALL THOSE THINGS OUT OF THE EQUATION.

WE HAVE BEEN -- YOU KNOW, WHILE DOING THE OTHER BUSINESS OF THE COURT TRYING TO COME UP WITH AND HELP STRUCTURE, IF POSSIBLE, SOME TYPE OF POLICY THAT IS FAIR AND DOES ACCOMPLISH ALL THE GOALS OF, YOU KNOW, FAIR GOVERNMENT, NO FAVORITISM, NO BEHIND T SKEENS THE SCENES THIN WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE.

YES, WE ENCOURAGE THAT AND WE ARE READY TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WHEN WE ARE NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF PADRE PARK OR

OTHER ISSUES. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I GET YOU.

IT IS A WONDERFUL TOOL. RESPONDS TO IMMEDIATE NEEDS AND

[03:35:03]

I WOULD LIKE GUIDANCE SO IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE WE ARE PICKING ONE OVER THE OTHER. I WOULD LIKE TO PURSUE SOMETHING LIKE THIS IF IT WOULD BE A POLICY SO EVERYBODY KNOWS, EDWARDS IS VERY FAIR. WE GET APPROACHED BY THE LITTLE LEAGUE OUT THERE. WE HAVE GOT THE PONY LEAGUE.

IT IS OPEN. ON A FIRST-COME, FIRST-SERVE BASIS. ALL THE PARKS ARE AVAILABLE.

BUT KIND OF WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO APPROACH IT.

AND I AM GLAD THE COMMISSIONER TOOK THIS ON BECAUSE KIND OF HELPS GIVE GUIDANCE HOW TO HANDLE FUTURE REQUESTS AS WELL.

I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THAT. I WANTED TO THROW THAT QUESTION IN WHILE WE HAD IT IN FRONT OF US.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: I HAD GOOD GUIDANCE, COMMISSIONER, BY EDWARD AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. I APPRECIATE FOR THEIR EFFORTS.

APPRECIATE YOUR HARD WORK. >> ONE LAST COMMENT TO COMMISSIONER'S DEAL, WE NEVER HAVE ENOUGH FIELDS UNTIL IT IS OFF SEASON. THEN WE HAVE AS MANY FIELDS AS WE CAN.

SO. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND A SECOND ALREADY FOR THIS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE.

[7. Discuss and consider an MOU Coastal Bend Food Bank for the distribution of food boxes.]

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES.

THANK YOU, EDWARD. ITEM NUMBER 7, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER MOU COASTAL BEND FOOD BANK FOR DISTRIBUTION OF FOOD

BOXES. >>.

THEY WORKED ON THIS FROM MY OFFICE.

THEY WERE VERY GOOD ABOUT IT AND THEY WERE ABLE TO GET SOME BOX THAT WERE DELIVERED THROUGHOUT THE RURAL AREAS.

WE DELIVER 50,000 TO 60,000 MEALS A YEAR AND THESE BOXES WILL BE USED TO HELP THESE PEOPLE.

THE VALUE OF THE BOXES PUT ON IT BY THE FOOD BANK IS $21.39.

SO THIS WILL HELP FOOD INSECURITY IN THE RURAL COMMITTEES. WE WON'T GET TO EVERYBODY AND WILL GET TO A SMALL PORTION OF PEOPLE.

IF. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I THINK THAT IS GREAT. I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO SUPPORT

A MOU ON THAT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: SECOND

IF. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

THANK YOU. I ASSUME THEY WILL GET WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON THE MOU FOR US TO SIGN.

[8. Discuss and consider execution of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Subrecipient Agreement with Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities (MHID); and related matters.]

YES, THANK YOU. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: THANK

YOU, EDWARD. >>JUDGE SCOTT: ITEM NUMBER 8, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER EXECUTION OF THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT SUB-RECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH THE MENTAL HEALTH AND INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES, MHID AND RELATED MATTERS.

SORRY YOU HAD TO WAIT SO LONG AND WE WOULD HAVE MISSED YOUR LUNCH MEETING ANYWAY AND KEEP IT ON THE RECORD TO GO DOWN THE LINE. JEFF.

I AM JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THE CONTRACT IS IN THE BACK HERE FOR ALL OF US. I DO VERY MUCH A QUESTION FOR THEM. ONE QUESTION ON IT.

I KNOW IT HAS BEEN THROUGH THE ATTORNEY AND EVERYTHING IS PRETTY GOOD ON IT. MY QUESTION IS, I KNOW YOU ARE ASKING FOR A MILLION UP FRONT FUNDS, I WANTED A LITTLE BIT OF EXPLANATION WHAT THAT WAS AND WHAT IT WAS FOR.

IF YOU DON'T MIND, PLEASE AND SEE THE PAYMENT PLAN.

>> THANK YOU FOR HEARING US TODAY, JUDGE, COMMISSIONERS.

MIKE DAVIS, THE CEO. THIS IS THE DIRECTOR --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE.

YOU ARE KIND OF TALL. YOU MAY HAVE TO SLIDE DOWN.

>> ABOUT. >> WE WILL TRY THIS.

MILLION DOLLARS UP FRONT SP BASED ON THE FACT THAT I AM SURE EVERYBODY KNOWS WHEN YOU ARE BUYING A CAR NOWADAYS SOMETIMES TWO MONTH TO SIX MONTHS TO A WAIT.

SAME THING FOR MATERIALS. WE ARE TRYING NOT TO GET BEHIND SCHEDULE SO THE ACTUAL MONEY IS THERE.

AND ALSO IF YOU LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF THE ORGANIZATION FOR THE PAST FOUR YEARS, WE HAVE -- WITH OUR LOCAL COLLABORATIVE, WE GENERALLY GET $4 MILLION A YEAR FROM THE COUNTY.

AND WE GENERALLY RETURN BACK $2 MILLION TO $3 MILLION.

WE ARE VERY GOOD STEWARDS. INCH WHAT WE ARE REQUIRED FOR DO EVERY YEAR AND YOU WILL BE GETTING A COPY OF IT.

BUT THE MAIN REASON TO MAKE SURE WE STAY AHEAD OF THE GAME AND LOOKING AT THAT DEADLINE. WE ARE LOOKING AT -- WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS ENDEAVOR -- WELL, IN AUGUST, BUT LOOKED AT THE PROGRAM, WE WERE TOLD TO TAKE 18 MONTHS.

AND WE ARE HOPING IT WILL BE 18 MONTHS.

AND FROM FUND SAY DECEMBER 2026. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HIT ALL THE RED FLAGS. MAKE SURE WE ARE WAY AHEAD OF THE GAME AND HAVE A FACILITY FOR THE CITIZENS OF NUECES COUNTY.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: TIM, I DIDN'T HEAR WHAT YOU SAID.

YOU WANTED TO BUY SOMETHING -- >> WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY -- FUNDS UP FRONT. IN OTHER WORDS, AS WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH SUPPLY CHAIN, ETC., WE DON'T GET TOO FAR BEHIND.

THE MONEY IS NOT GOING NOWHERE. ABOUT AND WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT

[03:40:04]

THERE IS A QUARTERLY -- HOWEVER WE HAVE THE PAYMENT STRUCTURE, WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT EVERY PENNY IS ACCOUNTED FOR.

I DON'T THINK THAT WILL BE AN ISSUE WHATSOEVER.

LIKE I SAID, THE MONEY IS NOT GOING SOMEWHERE.

>> I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE GO THROUGH THIS NOT WITH YOU, MIKE, BUT I APPRECIATE IT, JENNY.

BASICALLY. SO WE -- WE HAVE THIS ARE CONTRACT SET UP -- OR JEFF, SORRY, THAT -- HOW DOES IT GET DRAWN. FORGET -- NOT FORGET, I KNOW WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR UP FRONT, BUT HOW DOES IT GET DRAWN

DOWN. >>JUDGE SCOTT: MONTHLY.

A TABLE IN THE BACK WITH THE STUFF.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: RIGHT. BUT DOES CONSTRUCTION HAVE TO START? I AM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT AND --

HOW DO WE NAP. >>JUDGE SCOTT: ABOUT PERCENT OF COMPLETION ON THE NEXT DRAWS. I KNOW THERE IS AN AMOUNT THERE MONTHLY, BUT SINCE YOU GET $1 MILLION UP FRONT, DO WE GO TO A

PERCENTAGE OF COMPLETION? >> NOT REALLY BASED ON PERCENTAGE OF COMPLETION. MILLION UP FRONT AS MIKE STATED THE REASONS FOR THAT AND MONTHLY AFTER THAT.

WHAT IT IS REPORTING. THEY REPORT TO US WHAT THEY ARE USING THE MONEY FOR. THAT HELPS US IN OUR REPORTING TO TREASURY. BUT IT IS NOT REALLY BASED ON A

PERCENTAGE AMOUNT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: OKAY, SO -- I AM CONFUSED, WHICH IS NOT UNUSUAL.

BUT THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD THIS DIVERSION CENTER, RIGHT.

AND THE MONTHLY IS GOING -- LIKE -- LIKE THE JUDGE SAID.

GET A MILLION UP FRONT. SHOULDN'T NEED MONTHLY I DO NOTTINGHAM ACRES TRUST ANYBODY -- WELL, THAT IS NOT TRUE.

I DON'T NOT TRUST YOU. I TRUST YOU, BUT $4 MILLION OF WHICH IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG INADVERTENTLY OR ADVERTENTLY AND I KNOW THEY WOULDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG ON PURPOSE.

WE ARE ON THE HOOK FOR IT. >> WE WOULD BE TOO.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I DON'T WANT ON THE COOK WITH YOU.

>> WE LIKE PARTNERS. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: HOW DO WE MAKE -- HOW ARE WE SAFEGUARDING THIS IS GOING TOWARD CONSTRUCTION AND NOT JUST WRITING A CHECK FOR $1 MILLION AND WHATEVER MONTH EVERY MONTH AND I AM ASKING THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. HOW ARE WE SAFEGUARDING IT

CONTRACTUALLY. >> THEY WILL REPORT EXACTLY WHAT

THEY ARE SPENDING EACH PENNY ON. >> SHOULDN'T BE A DRAW FOR A WHILE BECAUSE A MILLION UP FRONT.

SO I WOULDN'T THINK THERE WOULD BE ANY NEED FOR ANY MONTHLY FOR

QUITE A WHILE. >> THERE MAY OR MAY NOT BE, IT DEPENDS ON THE COST OF THE MATERIALS AND EVERYTHING.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: ARE YOU BUILDING THIS YOURSELF?

THE CONTRACTOR. >> RFQ -- WE WILL GO AHEAD AND GET THE ARCHITECT. ONCE WE GET THE ARCHITECT, THEY WILL GET A CONTRACTOR. AND A PROCEDURAL PROCESS.

WE WILL NOT BUILD IT. GO UP TO RFQ.

BASED ON COUNTY STANDARDS TWO WEEKS.

PROBABLY WITHIN TWO TO THREE MONTHS FOR THAT PROCESS -- BEFORE THAT PROCESS PLAYS OUT. BY THE TIME WE GET THE RFQ AND THE A TICKETS ON BOARD -- WE ALREADY HAVE DESIGN DRAWN.

WE PAID FOR THAT OUT OF OUR OWN FUNDS A LITTLE A OVER A YEAR AGO WHEN THE PROJECT STARTED. THE ACTUAL CONCEPT IS WRITTEN OUT AND LOOK AT MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES.

LIKE I SAID, MY BIGGEST FEAR, I GUESS, NOT HAVING THE FUNDS AVAILABLE AND IF YOU WERE WAITING 30, 60 DAYS.

I AM NOT SAYING YOU ALL ARE SLOW.

>> WE ARE. >> BUT IF IT TAKES A LITTLE WHILE IT DRAW THE FUNDS DOWN, THEN I AM AFRAID WE WILL LOSE CONTRACTS AND WIND UP LOSING THE POSSIBILITY OF GETTING THIS BUILDING UP AND RUNNING THE WAY WE WANT IT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: HERE IS MY PROBLEM WITH THIS, RIGHT.

WHEN YOU SAY SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUE, OKAY, BUT YOU ARE NOT THE CONTRACTOR. AND UNTIL YOU GET THE CONTRACTOR, HE CAN'T GO PREBUY SUPPLIES BECAUSE YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO THE CONTRACTOR IS. YOU WILL NOT PREBUY SUPPLIES BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT SPEND THE MONEY OTHER THAN REIMBURSING YOURSELF FOR THE ARCHITECTURAL FEES WHICH IS VETTED AND THAT IS OKAY. THAT IS MY QUESTION, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE MILLION UP FRONT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WILL SPEND $1 MILLION ON RIGHT NOW. AND WE KNOW THE FUNDS ARE THERE BECAUSE THEY ARE THERE. IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU GO THROUGH WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND I WOULD SAY WHATEVER YOUR ARCHITECT OR FEES ARE, WE OUGHT TO SEND THAT CHECK, BUT PAST THAT, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE DO ANYTHING UP FRONT BECAUSE YOU ARE GOING TO GO OUT FOR RFQ, THEN YOU ARE GOING TO GET A CONTRACTOR. THEN THE CONTRACTOR IS GOING TO HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES ARE.

YOU DON'T. HE WILL BE ABLE TO FIND IT OR NOT AND THEN WE WILL HAVE TO START FUNDING IT.

I AM HAPPY TO GIVE THEM THAT MONEY IN BUT I AM NOT HEARING

[03:45:04]

TOA A REASON TO GIVE $1 MILLION UP FRONT.

>> I KNOW THAT IS NOT YOUR -- >> LIKE I SAID BASICALLY -- WE WERE TRYING TO GET AHEAD OF THE ACTUAL TEAM.

WE -- BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, ONCE WE GET THE ARCHITECT ON BOARD THAT IS PROBABLY THE GOOD TIME BECAUSE THEY WILL DO IT THE SAME PRICE GOING TO THE RFQ AND GET THE CONTRACTOR.

AS SOON AS WE GET THE CONTRACTOR A REASONABLE TIME FOR THE $1 MILLION. LIKE I SAID, I DON'T WANT TO GET FAR BEYOND AND BE ON THE HOOK FOR X AMOUNT OF MONEY BECAUSE THE FUNDS WEREN'T THERE. BY BIGGEST CONCERN.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THAT IS UNDERSTANDABLE BUT I AM NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE MILLION UP FRONT.

JUST ME. I HAVEN'T HEARD A REASON TO DO THAT. IF YOU TELL ME WHAT YOU PAID FOR YOUR ARCHITECT AND DESIGN SO FAR, THAT WILL BE AN UP-FRONT COST THAT I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH.

THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN INCURRED. TO WE KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER IS?

>> COMMISSIONER CHESNEY, A BIG PART OF IT, A LEVEL OF CONCURRENCY. WE ARE LOOKING FOR A TIGHT TIMELINE A HOPING IT TO GET DONE IN 16 MONTHS.

-- 18 MONTHS. SO YOU HAVE THE ARCHITECTURAL FIRM RUN THE SUBCONTRACTORS. WE HAVEN'T PROCURED THAT YET.

THE PROCESS TAKES PLACE LATER TODAY.

ENGINEERING COSTS, PERMITTING FEES, ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT

OCCUR CURRENTLY. >> DON'T OCCUR CONCURRENTLY.

ONCE YOU HAVE A CONTRACTOR AND THEN YOU NEED THE MONEY AS SOON AS YOU GET A BID THAT SAYS DEMO IS $300,000.

SEND US A BILL AND WE WILL GIVE YOU $300,000.

>> AVOID THE ISSUE WHOEVER THE ARCHITECT THAT WE PROCURE -- EXCUSE KNEE -- AND THEIR SUBCONTRACTORS IN A POSITION THAT THEY CAN'T START AND READY TO ROCK AND READY TO GO AND THEY WILL HAVE TO FLOAT THE FUNDS OR WE WILL HAVE TO FLOAT THE FUNDS WEDNESDAYING THAT INVOICE PROCESS AND A TIME DELAY ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. A PROCESS THAT ALLOWS US TO GO

FORWARD ABOUT. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: LET ME EXPLAIN SOMETHING. NORMALLY A CONTRACTOR -- THE WAY I UNDERSTAND THE WORK. WHEN YOU SELECT A CONTRACTOR, THE CONTRACTOR IS GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT HE NEEDS FOR MOBILIZATION. HE IS GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT YOU NEED TO SET UP SHOP. SUBCONTRACTORS AND HOW MUCH HE IS GOING TO NEED. HE IS GOING TO TELL YOU ALL THAT BEFORE YOU EVEN GET STARTED BUT IF YOU SPEND SOME MONEY ON DESIGN, YOU KNOW, OR HAVE AN ENGINEER ALREADY I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE AN ENGINEER OR NOT, BUT IF YOU DON'T, HOW WOULD YOU YOU HAVE THE DESIGN IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE ENGINEERING.

>> LIKE MR. DAVIS SAID WE FADE FOR AN ARCHITECT BASED ON OUR RENDERS FOR A GENERAL DESIGN CONCEPT.

WE DO NOT HAVE ENGINEERING SERVICES SUBSEQUENT TO THAT DESIGN. SO THAT IS GOING TO GO QUICK.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: YOU SHOULD HAVE AN ENGINEER TO WORK

WITH YOUR DESIGNER, ARCHITECT. >> THAT WAS PART OF THE PRELIMINARY REVIEW WITH THE ARCHITECT THAT WE PROCURED IN ORDER TO GIVE US THE FEASIBILITY OF THIS PROJECT WELL BEFORE WE GOT TO THIS POINT. A GENERAL STRUCTURAL OVERVIEW, A DETERMINATION THAT THE CONCEPT WAS SOUND, AND BUT, AGAIN, I AM NOT -- I AM A THERAPIST BY TRAINING.

I HAVE NO CONCEPT OF CONSTRUCTION.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: WHAT ARE YOU OWE FOR THE DESIGN?

>> THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN PAID. >> FOR THE DRAWINGS.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: HOW MUCH.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: $32,000. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: SHOULD BE MORE THAN THAT. I NEVER SEEN AN ARCHITECT THAT CHEAP. BUT ANYWAY, I UNDERSTAND WHERE COMMISSIONER CHESNEY IS COMING FROM.

UP DON'T MIND A DRAW DOWN TO HELP YOU BUT A $1 MILLION I DON'T THINK IS FEASIBILITY BECAUSE I DON'T THINK YOU ARE READY TO ROCK AND ROLL LIKE YOU SAY YOU ARE.

ONCE YOU GO OUT FOR BIDS AND GO OUT FOR A SELECTION, THEN YOU ARE READY TO ROCK ANDAND ROLL H A START TIME AND HOPEFULLY A

FINISHED TIME. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR LULU. DO THEY HAVE TO REDO THAT.

CAN THIS BE USED ON THE PROCESS. >> WE DISCUSSED WITH THEM THEY CAN NOT PROCURE BEFORE THEY GET THE FUNDS.

SO THEY CAN NOT REIMBURSE THEMSELVES.

PRIOR TO MYSELF BEING IN THE POSITION, THE INITIAL I GUESS AGREEMENT WAS THEY WERE GOING TO GET THE $4 MILLION UP FRONT.

AND SO WE CAME INTO AN AGR AGREEMENT.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: WHO IS THAT?

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WHOSE AGREEMENT WAS THAT?

[03:50:01]

WHO MADE IT AGREEMENT. DID THIS COURT AFTER VOTE ON

THAT? >> NO.

IT DIDN'T COME TO COURT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WHO MADE THAT AGREEMENT. I WANT TO KNOW WHO MADE THAT

AGREEMENT. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: PREVIOUS JUDGE AND HAGERTY. LET'S PUT IT OUT THERE WHERE IT

IS SUPPOSED TO BE. >> IT IS ON THE BASIS OF -- YOU KNOW, PACED ON THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ON WHAT THEY ALLOW AND WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THIS. WE CAME INTO AN AGREEMENT.

THEY NEEDED FUNDING FOR X- Y AND Z, SO A MILLION.

WE WERE BACK AND FORTH, HOWEVER, WE CAN DO EITHER REIMBURSABLE AND I GUESS, AGAIN, THIS IS THE COURT'S WILL.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: HOW LONG DOES DOES IT TAKE IF WE HAVE TO DO CHECKS FOR THEM -- THIS IS PROBABLY FOR YOU.

IF YOU ARE THEY ARE CONCERNED OF THE TIME FRAME OF RECEIVING A CHECK IF THEY SEND US SINCE THIS MONEY IS ALREADY SITTING THERE.

I KNOW I AM PUTTING YOU ON THE SPOT SINCE DALE IS NOT IN HERE.

>> JUDGE, NOT IN NI ANY WAY ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM TO BE CRITICAL, BUT OTHER SERVICES WITH THE COUNTY.

NOVEMBER, DECEMBER WE WEREN'T INVOICED FOR UNTIL LATE JANUARY.

SO WITH 30, 06, 90-DAY TURN AROUND.

THAT WILL BE PART OF THE CONCERN.

WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PAY THOSE BILLS.

>> THAT IS ONE OF OUR CONCERNS. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WHY YOU DID THAT -- YOU PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE LED WITH THAT.

>> I MEAN, WE ARE FOLLOWING GO AHEAD AND WORK WITH Y'ALL AND -- I MEAN, SERIOUSLY. AT THE END OF THE DAY WE WANT TO GET THIS ACROSS -- WE HAVE BEEN STRUGGLING WITH THIS FOR YEARS AND AT THE END OF THE DAY REALLY COMES DOWN TO SOMETHING EXTREMELY BEN FISH SHALL TO NUECES COUNTY.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: INVOICES FOR JANUARY, FEBRUARY OR MARCH. HAVE THEY BEEN SUBMITTED?

>> THEY WERE. >> JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH.

>> OCTOBER, NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER WE RECEIVED IN JANUARY.

A 90-DAY DELAY. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: FOR

WHAT? >> ABOUT OUR AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY FOR CONSTABLES. OUR CRISIS --

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: AGREEMENT FOR WHAT.

>> I SAID THAT SIMPLY AS AN EXAMPLE OF WHERE THAT CONCERN AND THAT REQUEST FOR THE $1 MILLION UP FRONT CAME FROM.

>> IT IS NOT RELATED, NO. NOT RELATED.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN.

>> NO, IT WAS OUR MONEY. THEY OWED US MONEY.

NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. >> WE COULDN'T PAY YOU WITHOUT A

INVOICE ABOUT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE DIDN'T SEND AN

INVOICE. >> THE OPPOSITE WAY.

WE DIDN'T GET THE MONEY FROM HIM QUICK ENOUGH IS WHAT HE IS

SAYING. >>JUDGE SCOTT: SO YOU ARE CONCERNED THAT IT WILL BE THE SAME WAY IN DOCUMENTATION ONCE IT COMES TO NUECES COUNTY WITH THE -- WITH THE WAIT TIME AND

GETTING YOU A CHECK PRINTED. >> CORRECT.

BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN OUR EXPERIENCE THAT CAN TAKE SOME TIME WITH VETTING AND MAKING SURE THAT THOSE SETTLE UPS.

THIS IS A RAPID PROCESS WITH A MONTHLY SETTLE UP --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: HOW ABOUT 500,000.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: TO GET YOU GOING.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: ONCE YOU REACH THAT.

NO DRAWS UNTIL YOU REACH THAT, RIGHT.

IT CAN'T BE $500,000 PLUS ANOTHER $100,000.

BECAUSE IF THE BIG CHUNK COMES WITH THE PERSON WITH X AMOUNT.

THE CONTRACTOR -- THEY DON'T EXPECT YOU TO PAY THEM RIGHT

AFTER THEY GET THE CONTRACT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE ARE CONTRACTORS AND WE KNOW -- WE KNOW IN DOING A JOB, THAT YOU ARE OUT THAT EXPENSE AT THE BEGINNING.

AND THAT IS KIND -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: KIND OF

THE WAY IT IS. >> DON'T Y'ALL -- THERE IS SOME REPORTING THAT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO DO WITH REGARDS TO.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THAT IS STILL WITH YOUR MONTHLY REPORT THAT IS REQUIREMENT FOR THEM TO TURN IN, YES.

SO THAT HAS TO STAY THE SAME. >> BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD. WE ARE VERY APPRECIATIVE AND AT THE END OF THE DAY IT IS VERY BENEFICIAL FOR THE PEOPLE IN NUECES COUNTY. AT THE END OF THE DAY, HONESTLY, IF THE $1 MILLION IS PUT OUT THERE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, $500,000 WILL GET ME TO CANCUN.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: 500,000? >> WE APPRECIATE IT.

ANYTHING ELSE --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: 500,000, RIGHT? >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THIS WILL BE A GREAT PROJECT. WE ARE ALL PROUD OF IT.

WE GOT TO MAKE SURE WE DO IT RIGHT AND I KNOW IN THE PAST, IT WAS DONE FAST AND FURIOUS AND PROMISES WERE MADE.

I AM SORRY THOSE PROMISES WERE MADE.

NOT BY THE COURT BUT ON PEOPLE WHO WERE NOT ON THE COURT.

WE ARE TRYING TO CLEAN UP MESS AFTER MESS AFTER MESS ON ARPA.

AND JUST -- AS FRUSTRATING FOR US AND WE ARE NOT -- NOBODY IS TAKING ANYTHING OUT ON YOU OR ANYTHING.

THIS THING HAS BEEN A DISASTER TO CLEAN UP.

WE HAVE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT WERE SOLD BY SOMEBODY ELSE IT COULD GO A CERTAIN WAY AND IT CAN'T AND IT WAS WRONG.

[03:55:03]

WE ARE LEFT HOLDING THE BAG OF TRYING TO CLEAN IT UP.

WE ARE GOING TO CLEAN IT UP BECAUSE WE WANT IT DONE.

WE VOTED FOR A PROJECT AND THOUGHT THIS IT WAS GREAT PROJECT. I STILL THINK IT IS A GREAT PROJECT AND RIBBON CUTTING AND GROUNDBREAKING INVITE US BECAUSE WE WANT TO COME AND BE THERE. NONE OF US WANT THIS TO COME BACK AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAY YOU OWE US -- YOU ARE ON THE HOOK FOR THIS TOO. NONE OF US WANT TO BE ON THE HOOK. WE WANT TO DO IT RIGHT AND GET

THE GREAT -- >> COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: HOPE

THEY -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: IF WE HAD DONE THIS THE RIGHT WAY BEFORE, WE WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE WITH THIS. AND WE DIDN'T AND NOW WE HAVE TO

CLEAN UP. >> WE COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND.

WE ARE EXTREMELY APPRECIATIVE YOU ARE WORKING WITH US.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: YOU ARE AWESOME.

WE APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO. >>JUDGE SCOTT: CHANGE YOUR PROFESSION TO CHANGE THE CONTRACT TO HALF A MILLION UP FRONT. YOU DID THE FIRST AND SECOND.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: FOR DISCU

DISCUSSION. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I WILL WITHDRAW THE MOTION AND AMEND THE CONTRACT TO BE HALF A MILLION UP-FRONT AND THEN DRAWS TO START ONCE THAT HALF MILLION

IS SPENT. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: SECOND.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH HE HAS

QUESTION FOR JEFF. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: JEFFOR JEANNIE. ARE WE COMPLETE WITH A CON

CONTRACT,. >> NOT EVERYTHING WAS DECIDED

FROM OUR SIDE. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THEY WERE WAITING

FOR THE VOTE TODAY. >> IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FINALIZED TODAY. IF IT IS FINALIZED --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: WE WILL CHANGE THOSE NUMBERS AND THEY WILL GET

A NEW CONTRACT TO BE SIGNED. >> TANYA FORWARDED ME ONE WITH WHY YOU ARE SIGNATURE. ANYWAY, WE CAN GET IT SIGNED AND MAKE THE CHANGES. NOT A PROBLEM.

[11. Discuss and consider the reallocation of Beneficiary amounts designated under County Judge and Commissioners Precinct 1, 2, 3, & 4, to the Nonprofit Fiscal Recovery Assistance Program.]

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THANK YOU. MOVING CONTINUE TO ITEM 11, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER THE REALLOCATION OF BENEFICIARY AMOUNTS DESIGNATED UNDER COUNTY JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS PRECINCT, 1, 2, 3, 4 TO THE NONPROFIT FISCAL RECOVERY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. THE BENEFICIARY AMOUNTS WITH THE $1 MILLION SET ASIDE. DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH TOTAL WE HAVE IN THERE YET. HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE BEEN APPROVED. WE TOOK IT OUT OF OUR ACCOUNTS AND MONEY WAS DESIGNATED AND NOT U

USED. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: ARE WE ON 11, JUDGE? SCOTT SKOLT YES, ON 11.

>> AS BENEFICIARIES ARE CONCERNED, WE ONLY RECEIVED FOUR. WE ARE STILL --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ONLY FOUR, WOW. THAT IS INCLUDING THE ONES THAT YOU TOOK OUT OF EACH ONE OF OURS THAT WE HAD DESIGNATED.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: IT WAS REDUCED. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WHAT

HAVE WE ONLY RECEIVED. >>JUDGE SCOTT: FOUR OF THE $49,000 BENEFICIARIES. THE 501-C-3 ALLOCATIONS.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I THINK WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT MEANING. I KNOW THERE IS A LOT OF CHARITIES OUT THERE. I DON'T THINK THEY GET IT.

I DON'T THINK THEY KNOW -- I HAD SOMEONE CONTACT ME.

AND I SAID, YEAH IT SHALL I THINK I PUT YOU IN TOUCH WITH

HER. >> WE HAVE BEEN IN

COMMUNICATION. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: NOW THEY HAVE A DEADLINE OF MARCH # 1.

ONCE THAT DEAD IS HERE. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I AM SAYING I THINK WE NEED TO LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT IT IS OUT THERE AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE DONE THAT OTHER THAN THE MEETINGS THAT PEOPLE DON'T WATCH IT ANYMORE BECAUSE NOT A NOVELA

ANYMORE. >> OS ON THE WEB SITE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: HOW MANY PEOPLE GO TO THE WEB SITE.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: 10, 15. I THINK WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING.

SEND SOMETHING OUT -- GIVE TYLER -- GET TYLER TO DO A RELEASE OR

SOMETHING. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A PRESS RELEASE.

>> DEADLINES FOR CHARITIES TO APPLY.

HOLY COW. WITH ALL THE CHARITIES IN NEED.

>> WE RECEIVED SOME, BUT THEY HAVEN'T COMPLETED THEIR 990S OR SUBMITTED THEIR FINANCIAL STAPLES.

I MEAN. >>JUDGE SCOTT: STILL PLENTY IN THAT FUND TO STILL PUT A NOTICE OUT TO THE HAVE MORE PEOPLE AP APPLY.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I WILL JUST ASK -- I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN DO IT IN A MOTION THAT TYLER PUT SOMETHING OUT THAT REMINDS PEOPLE THROUGH THE MEDIA THAT THE DEADLINE IS COMING UP --

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: THE DEADLINES FOR ITS ONES ALREADY BEEN NOTIFIED, COMMISSIONER. THE ONES THAT TRIED TO APPLY.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THE # 1ST. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: LET'S PUSH IT BEFORE THE # 1ST. ONE LITTLE PUSH TO GET IT OUT THIS WEEK TO SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME INTEREST.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: NEXT WE CAN EXTEND IT.

AB ABOUT.

>> PROPOSAL CASES, LEAVE THE 49,000S WITHIN THE DESIGNATED

[04:00:06]

PRECINCTS. IF.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: UNTIL WE SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

ABOUT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THIS VOTE IS TO TAKE IT OUT OF PRECINCT 4 AND PUT IT IN THE DESIGNATED $1 MILLION THAT WE HAVE. THIS IS WHAT THE VOTE IS TODAY.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: TO TAKE IT OUT TO OF --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: EACH OF OUR -- WE HAVE A CHART ON THE BACK WHERE

YOU HAVE. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I DIDN'T HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS ON MINE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THE REST OF US MAYBE DID.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING ON ONE.

>> COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ AND GONZALEZ DID.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: I DID TOO. >> BENEFICIARIES UNDER THEIR ALL

OCCASION. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I TOLD TERESA TO PUT ME DOWN FOR THE VETERANS STUFF SO I SHOULD HAVE SOME IN THERE AND I DIDN'T MAKE IT AS PART OF THE MOTION BUT VET GR GROUPS.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THAT'S WHAT SHE IS DOING MOVING THEM OUT OF OUR INDEPENDENT ALLOCATIONS AND PUT IT IN THAT ONE FUND FOR NONPROFITS, THE ONE MILLION. UNTIL WE EXPEND ALL OF THAT, THERE IS NO REASON TO COME OUT OF OUR ALLOCATIONS.

YOU CAN USE IT ON SOMETHING ELSE.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THAT. I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.

HE SECONDED IT. HERNANDEZ IS IT.

SORRY, THAT WAS QUICK. I SHOULD HAVE SPOKE UP A LITTLE

[12. Discuss and consider approving Budget Planning Schedule for Fiscal Year 2023-2024.]

LOUDER. THE MOTION PASSES.

THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER 12, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVING THE BUDGET PLANNING SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023-2024. TERESA, YOU HAVE THAT ONE?

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I HAD SOMETHING ON THAT ONE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: DID YOU SEND THAT TO EVERYBODY ALREADY.

>> NO, MA'AM. JUST A PART OF WHY YOU ARE AGENDA. I DIDN'T SEND IT TO YOUR

OFFICE. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THE SAME TEMPLATE THAT WE FOLLOW EVERY YEAR.

CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DAYS THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE OUR DEPARTMENTAL PRESENTATIONS AND THEN THE 250U8 SET SOMETHING OF THE TAX REAL.

ALL THAT -- >> THAT'S CORRECT, COMMISSIONERS. THE KEY DATES.

BUDGET PACKETS ON APRIL 14. A FRIDAY.

THEY ARE DUE BACK MAY 12 TO -- BACK TO THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE.

WE ONLY HAVE TWO BUDGET SCHEDULE WORKSHOPS JULY 10 AND 13, MONDAY AND THURSDAY BOTH AT 9 A.M. AND THEN WE HAVE UP THE -- THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE AND THE TAX OFFICE WILL SUBMIT THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE, SCHEDULES, FUND BALANCE TO THE COURT ON AUGUST 9. AUGUST 14 AND THE 17TH ARE TWO BUDGET WORK SHOPS FOR TAX RATE AND THE PROPOSED BUDGET STARTING AT 9 A.M. THEN ON WEDNESDAY, THE COURT HAS TO TAKE A RECORD VOTE ON THE TAX RATE AND SCHEDULE THE HEARING.

AUGUST 25, NOTICES FOR THE ELECTED OFFICIALS' SALARIES HAVE TO GO OUT TO THE DEPARTMENTS. ON AUGUST 30, THE TAX OFFICE AND AUDITORS WILL PUBLISH IN THE NEWSPAPER THE NOTICE OF THE AT THAT, YEAR '24 PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX RATE.

SEPTEMBER 3, WE WILL PUBLISH IN THE CALLER THE ELECTED OFFICIALS' SALARIES AND PUBLISH A NOTICE ON THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THE PUBLIC HEARING IS SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 6 FOR THE TAX INCREASE, IF SO. AND THEN ON SEPTEMBER 8, THE COUNTY AUDITOR WILL FILE THE PROPOSED BUDGET WITH THE COUNTY CLERK. SEPTEMBER 13, A PUBLIC HEARING TO ADOPT A TAX RATE IN ADOPTION TO THE BUDGET.

SEPTEMBER 13 IS ALSO THE DEADLINE FOR THE TAX OFFICE TO RECEIVE THE RATE THAT WE ARE GOING TO USE FOR NEXT YEAR ABOUT SO THAT NOTICES CAN GO OUT SEPTEMBER 29.

OCTOBER 27, THE BUDGET IS FILED WITH THE COURT AND THE COUNTY CLERK. MATCH ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

>> YES, SIR. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ARE TRYING TO HAVE -- WHY DO WE HAVE TO -- DO WE HAVE TO HAVE TWO BUDGET WORKSHOPS?

>> WE NORMALLY HAVE MORE THAN THAT BUT ADVISED WHEN WORKING ON THE COMMISSIONERS COURT SCHEDULE THAT YOU ONLY WANTED TWO.

DOWN TO ONLY TWO WORKSHOPS FOR DEPARTMENT BRIEFS.

IF YOU DON'T WANT ONE -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY:

APOLOGIZE, THE AUGUST 14 AND 17. >> BECAUSE THAT IS FOR THE TAX RATE, AND THAT IS TO ACTUALLY GET INTO THE MEAT OF THE BUDGET.

SO WE HAVE TO PLAN BUDGET WORK AUTHORIZATIONS FOR THAT.

[04:05:02]

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: SO MY QUESTION IS THAT IS MY QUESTION WE HAVE THE BUDGET WORKSHOPS. WE PASS OUR BUDGET AT THE MEETING. IS THERE A LAW WE DO THESE BUDGET WORKSHOPS. THEY HAVE DONE IT IN THE PAST.

IS IT A LAW? >> THE AUDITOR HAS TO --

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: DIDN'T BE PART OF THE MEETING.

>> OH, I WOULD STRONGLY ADVISE AGAINST THAT.

THINK OF HOW LONG THE BUDGET MEETINGS ARE THE DAY THAT WE GO TO ADOPT IT RIGHT NOW AND HOW CRAZY IT IS.

AND THEN AIR -- POTENTIAL ERRORS BECAUSE YOU ARE GIVING US THE INFORMATION ON THE FLY AND WE ARE MAD --

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: CAME FROM ONE PERSON ONLY.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I WONDER WHY WE NEED TO HAVE TWO OF THEM.

IF YOU THINK WE ONLY INTO NED ONE, THAT IS FINE.

>> I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER IF WE CAN GET MORE DIRECTION FROM COMMISSIONERS COURT BEFORE WE ADOPT THE BUDGET TO WHERE WE GO. I AM NOT TRYING TO COMPARE COURTS WHEN WE HAD JUDGE NEAL AND JUDGE WATERMAN AND ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET WAS A SMOOTH THING AND WE KNEW WHAT WAS IN THE BOOK. WHAT HAPPENED WAS IN THE BOOK WAS -- WAS THE WILL OF THE COURT AT THAT TIME.

THAT IS MY PERSONAL. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT, BUT I USED TO DO THAT VERILY.

WE USED TO MEET -- IN OTHER WO

WORDS,. >> MY CRYSTAL BOWL IS A LITTLE DIRTY AND I DON'T KNOW THE WILL OF THE COURT IF YOU DON'T TELL

ME WHAT IT IS. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I WOULD JUST ARGUE WE DON'T NEED TWO BUDGET WORKSHOPS IS WHAT I AM SAYING AND LIMIT THE ONES IN JULY TO 9 TO 1 P.M. SO EVERYBODY KNEW WHAT WE WERE GOING TO DO AND THEY WILL BE TIGHT AND GET IN AND OUT OF HERE AND GO. I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST MAKE THEM 9 A.M. TO 1 P.M. ON JULY 10 AND 13 AND I SUGGEST ONLY HAVE ONLY ONE BUDGET WORKSHOP. ONLY THING WITH THAT, COMMISSIONERS, WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY DEPARTMENTS WOULD WANT TO COME -- EVERY DEPARTMENT MAY WANT TO DO -- THAT WILL BE

CRAMMING IT 9 TO 1 FOR ONE DAY. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WE CAN ALWAYS EXTEND IT AND ADD BUDGET WORKSHOPS TOO.

WE HAVE DONE THAT IN THE PAST. WE CAN ALWAYS ADD.

ABOUT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: CAN WE CANCEL THE ONE IF WE DECENT NEED IT. WHY DON'T WE JUST LEAVE IT AND CANCEL IT IF IT IS NOT NECESSARY, THE NEXT ONE.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WHICH ONE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THE SECOND ONE. YOU DIDN'T WANT TWO.

>> THE 10TH AND THE 13TH. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I THINK

TWO IS UNNECESSARY. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: HAVE

ONE IN RESERVE JUST IN CASE. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: IF YOU CANCEL MEETINGS THAT RESPECT THERE.

I DON'T THINK WE WILL NEED IT. I THINK WE WILL NEED ONE DAY OF BUDGET WORKSHOP. I THINK THIS BUDGET WILL GO SMOOTH. IT IS A DIFFERENT DAY AND DAY OF BUDGET WORKSHOP. IF HE WE SPEND -- WE DON'T TAKE TEN HOURS TO DO -- UNLESS WE WILL TRAGEDIES LIKE WE HAD

TODAY. >> HONESTLY, WE WILL HAVE A BETTER IDEA WHENEVER WE GET THE DEPARTMENT REQUESTS IN.

AND THEY ACTUALLY COME US TO AND THEY SAY, HEY, WE WANT TO MEET -- WE WANT TO COME BEFORE COMMISSIONERS COURT OR WE DON'T.

THAT IS REALLY -- TERESA CAN CONFIRM WHAT I AM SAYING.

AIDEE CAN TOO. THE DEPARTMENTS GIVE US A LEAD WHO WANTS TO COME AND SPEAK BEFORE YOU.

WE DON'T SAY THEY HAVE TO. IT'S THEM ASKING TO COME TO SPEAK WITH YOU AND THEY ARE SCHEDULED AT THE REQUEST OF THE ELECTED OFFICIALS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS.

IF THEY DON'T WANT TO COME PRESENT ANYTHING TO YOU BECAUSE IT IS CLEARLY PRESENTED IN THEIR REQUEST AND THEY DON'T FEEL THE NEED, THAT WILL REDUCE THE NUMBER OF MEETINGS.

IT IS COMPLETELY POSSIBLE THAT IT COULD BE ONE OR TWO DEPARTMENTS. IT IS COMPLETELY POSSIBLE THAT IT COULD BE 15. YOU DON'T KNOW UNTIL YOU GET THE REQUESTS. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS COMPLETELY OUT OF BOTH TERESA AND MY CONTROL.

THE DEPARTMENTS COULD COME TO YOU DIRECTLY IF YOU WANTED THEM TO. AND WORK WITH YOU OUTSIDE OF COURT, EACH ONE WILDFIRE YOU INDIVIDUALLY.

I MEAN IT WILL BE MORE WORK FOR THE DEPARTMENT HEADS BECAUSE NOW THEY HAVE TO SCHEDULE FIVE INDIVIDUAL APPOINTMENTS BECAUSE THERE IS LIMITATIONS ON OPEN MEETINGS, RIGHT.

BUT, I MEAN, AGAIN, AT THE DISCRETION OF THE DEPARTMENTS.

[04:10:07]

AS FAR AS THE -- THAT IS FOR THE JULY MEET WILLING.

FOR THE AUGUST MEETINGS, AGAIN, THAT IS WHERE WE GIVE YOU THE -- THE GIST OF IT. THE -- HERE -- HERE IS WHAT EVERYONE WANTED COLLECTIVELY. EVERYBODY WHO DIDN'T ALREADY MEET WITH YOU TO DISCUSS IN THE WORKSHOPS IN JULY.

HERE IS WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE WANTS AND WE NEED GUIDANCE FROM YOU IN ORDER TO KNOW THE WILL OF THE COURT.

AND WE WOULD LOVE TO PREPARE A PROPOSED BUDGET THAT IS ACTUALLY THE WILL OF THE COURT. INSTEAD OF GUESSING AND THEN GETTING CHANGES ON THE FLY ON THE DAY THAT WE ADOPT IT.

DO YOU GET WHAT I AM SAYING? I MEAN, I WOULD LOVE FOR -- AGAIN, I HATE TO COMPARE JUDGES, BECAUSE EVERYBODY IS INDEPENDENT, BUT PERSONALLY, IN MY NONBUDGET OFFICER OPINION, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A PROPOSED BUDGET THAT IS -- HERE IS THE PROPOSED AND YOU GO, I -- I TAKE A VOTE ON IT.

AND YOU ADOPT IT RIGHT THEN AND THERE BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT IS IN THE PROPOSED. AND IT IS WHAT THE WE WILL OF THE COURT IS GOING IN. INSTEAD OF US GETTING THAT FEEDBACK ON THE DAVE WE ADOPT AND THE DAY WE ADOPT TAKING EIGHT HOURS TO ADOPT A BUDGET AND TAX RATE.

ABOUT. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I THINK THAT IS A TRADE-OFF BECAUSE WE ARE CUTTING BACK SOME OF THE DAYS TO MEET THAT WE HAD BE THIS.

IT MAY BE WORK FOR YOU TO HAVE TO DO.

BASED ON THIS MIXED GROUP THAT WE HAVE UP HERE, WE WILL HAVE DIFFERENT REASONING FOR SOME WANTING TO INCREASE SALARIES.

SOME WANTING TO CUT BACK ON SALARIES.

IT WILL BE ON THE FLY LIKE IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN.

I DON'T REMEMBER IT BEING MAYBE AS BLISS AS YOU SAY WITH JUDGE NEAL. THERE WAS A TIME WHEN COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ AND I WERE VOTING WITH JUDGE NEAL AND THE TWO REPUBLICANS WERE VOTING OPPOSED TO HIS BUDGET.

CRAZY TIMES WHEN WE GET UP HERE. I GET WHAT YOU ARE AGENCY IS, AND WE WOULD WANT TO BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU THAT, BUT I THINK THE BEST SCENARIO WHAT COMMISSIONER CHESNEY, TO CUT BACK AND SCHEDULE WHAT WE CAN, AND IF WE DON'T NEED THAT DAY ON THE 17TH, I DON'T NEED IT. I WILL PUT MONEY ON THE FACT THAT WE WILL BE AT THE END TRYING TO INCREASE IF WE HAVE TO EVER SO SLIGHTLY EVERY TAX RATE OR TRY TO BACK OFF ANY TAX RATE THAT WE CAN TO THE SMALLEST AMOUNT.

I THINK Y'ALL WILL BE WORKING FEVERISHLY LIKE YOU ALWAYS DO.

THAT IS MY ABOUT OPINION. I BOO PUT MONEY IN THAT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: KEEPING IN MIND THIS WILL BE MY FIRST BUDGET.

SO I'M SURE IT IS GOING TO BE -- I KNOW HOME GOING TO NEED ALL

THE HELP I CAN GET. >> I GUESS IT IS UP TO THE COURT. DO YOU WANT TO HAVE A QUICK AND EASY ADOPTION OF A BUDGET ON THE DAY IN SEPTEMBER WHERE IT GOES SMOOTHLY. IF YOU WANT THAT, MORE LIKELY YOU WILL NEED MORE MEETINGS UP FRONT.

IF YOU WANT FEWER MEETINGS UP FRONT, COME IN AND KNOW YOU WILL HAVE TO READ THAT ENTIRE PROPOSED BUDGET DOVER TO COVER BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT KNOW WHAT'S IN IT.

THEREFORE, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE YOUR REQUESTS ON THE LIFE IN AND UNDERSTAND MUCH THAT WE ARE HUMAN, EVEN THOUGH WE ARE AUDITORS. AND WE WILL MAKE MISTAKES.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: YOU ARE HUMAN AUDITORS.

>> WE ARE HUMAN AUDITORS. WE ARE NOT MAGICIANS.

[LAUGHTER] >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I'M

WITH YOU ROAR LISA. >> THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT.

I AM DEFINITELY OPEN TO WHATEVER THE COURT -- IS THE WILL OF THE COURT. AND I AM SURE TERESA IS.

WE LOVE LATE NIGHTS. RIGHT, TERESA?

[LAUGHTER] >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: NO

COMMENT. >> LOOK AT HER SMILING.

IN. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A LATE NIGHT INLESS WE MAKE A DECISION ON THIS, GUYS.

ARE WE GOING TO CHANGE THE MEETINGS OR KEEP THEM ON 9 CALENDAR. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO, BRENT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I WILL PICK ONE BUDGET WORKSHOP ON THE 14 AND 17 AND HAVE THE DAY SET ASIDE.

I BELIEVE THAT IS PLENTY OF TIME.

MY MOTION IS TO ELIMINATE ONE OF THOSE TWO DAYS.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: I HAVE A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: IF NOT DOESN'T MATTER.

PROBABLY NOT GOING TO GET A SECOND.

[04:15:03]

TO ELIMINATE ON AUGUST 14 OR 17. WHATEVER DAY THE COURT WANTED

TO. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I HAVE A MOTION.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: THE

MOTION IS TO ELIMINATE ONE DAY. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: AUGUST 14 OR 17 DEPENDING ON WHICH THE COURT WANTED AND WE WOULD HAVE JUST -- YNG WE WILL NEED BOTH DAYS.

AT THAT WHOLE DAY IS A LOT OF TIME.

>> NORMALLY JUST IN THE MORNING. YOU GIVE US OUR RUNNING ORDERS AND WE GO BACK TO OUR OFFICE AND WORK FEVERISHLY TO GENERATE THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

AND THEN WE COME BACK ON THE SECOND MEETING ABOUT YOUR REQUEST. AND THEN YOU COME BACK WITH MORE REQUESTS. AND THEN WE DO THE SAME THING

AGAIN. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: ASSUMING WE DON'T GIVE YOU ANYTHING BEFOREHAND.

THAT IS THE PROBLEM. HE THINKS -- I THINK EVERYBODY WILL GIVE YOU STUFF IN ADVANCE TOO.

JUST ALL THE ON THE FLY -- WELL, WHATEVER EVERYBODY WANTS TO DO.

>> YOU NORMALLY WON'T HAVE YOUR BUDGET PACKET OR BOOK UNTIL BUDGET WORKSHOP DAY. YOU -- WE DON'T -- WE WOULDN'T

HAVE IT READY. >>JUDGE SCOTT: YOU WOULDN'T HAVE IT READY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO ELIMINATE ONE OF THE TEAS FOR THE BUDGET WORKSHOP WHICHEVER DAY YOU WANT.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? THE MOTION FAILS.

WE WILL KEEP IT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I STILL LOVE YOU. [LAUGHTER]

>>JUDGE SCOTT: DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE SCHEDULE AS

IS PRESENTED. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: SEE, I

DIDN'T YELL AT ANYBODY. >>JUDGE SCOTT: YOU DIDN'T.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE ADOPTION AS IS.

DO I HAVE A SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. >> I CANNOT HEAR.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: SORRY I WAS TALKING --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ALL NOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THERE BEING NONE.

THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[13. Receive and discuss the market rent analysis for the concession/restaurant at Bob Hall Pier; and related matters.]

>> THANK YOU. >>JUDGE SCOTT: MOVING ON TO ITEM 13. AND AITEE PASSED OUT PAPERWORK.

RECEIVE AND DISCUSS THE MARKET RENT ANALYSIS FOR THE CONCESSION. RESTAURANT AT BOB HALL PIER AND

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: TABLE IT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I TOLD AIDEE THAT IT IS A TEXT AND IT CAN BE TABLED -- IT WILL TAKE A WHILE AND A LOT OF QUESTIONS

ON IT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I AM VERY SORRY, MR. WALTERS. WE WILL MOVE THIS -- WHEN DO YOU

WANT TO MOVE IT. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: TAKE

VOTE. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I THOUGHT YOU SAID IT WOULD TAKE A WHILE. TABLE IT.

LET'S DO IT. LET'S GET IT OVER WITH.

BRENT, IS YOUR ITEM. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: HAS THE K57 PARKS BOARD GOT THIS? IT IS SUPPOSED TO GO TO THE PARKS BOARD FIRST. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TEAMS TO SAY THIS ONE. THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO GO TO THE PARKS BOARD. WHEN IS THEIR MEETING.

I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT IT TOO.

OF WHAT, YOU DO OF WHAT YOU WANT.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: THEY JUST HAD A MEETING?

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: OF WHAT. GO AHEAD.

>> NEXT WEEK. >>JUDGE SCOTT: NEXT WEEK IS THEIR MEETING. YOU WANT TO MOVE THIS.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THE GUY HAS BEEN THERE ALL DAY -- FOR THE RECORD, I WANT IT TO GO TO THE PARKS BOARD FIRST TO THEY

DON'T GET MAD AT ME AGAIN. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: NOT GOING TO VOTE ON ANYTHING -- ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO SEE IT --

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I WILL WAIT FOR THEM TO SEE IT.

WE WILL COME UP WITH QUESTIONS AND HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF TIME AND THEY WILL COME BACK AND -- WE WILL SPEND A WHOLE LOT MORE

TIME. >>JUDGE SCOTT: OKAY.

. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE UNTIL THE APRIL 12 MEETING.

>> SECOND ABOUT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: PLEASE MAKE SURE IT GETS ON THE PARKS BOARD AGENDA.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

[14. Discuss and consider an Interlocal Agreement with Nueces County Water Control and Improvement District #3 for the removal and demolition of the Old Show Barn horse pens.]

MOVING -- THE MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 14, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE NUECES COUNTY WATER CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 3 FOR THE REMOVAL AND DEMOLITION OF THE OLD SHOW BARN HORSE PENS.

THAT IS YOURS, EDWARD. >> MET WITH THE WATER DISTRICT.

THEY WANT TO REUSE THE MATERIALS USED IN THE OLD PENS.

AND WE THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA.

IT TWO SAVE US MONEY, YOU KNOW. WE WON'T HAVE TO TEAR THEM DOWN AS PART OF THE NEW ANIMAL CARE FAC

FACILITY. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I ACTUALLY WENT OUT THERE AND LOOKED AT THIS AS WELL.

AND I WILL MAKING A MOTION TO PASS.

[04:20:02]

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: SECOND.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND SECOND.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EDWARD.

[15. Discuss and consider amending our policy to allow County Judge or Commissioners to serve on any Economic Development Council (EDC), and to allow County Judge or any Commissioner to serve as an alternate when designee is unable to attend, as well as any related matters.]

>>> ITEM NUMBER 15, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AMENDING OUR POLICY TO ALLOW COUNTY JUDGE OR COMMISSIONERS TO SERVE ON ANY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL AND TO ALLOW COUNTY JUDGE OR ANY DOMINION TO SERVE AS AN ALTERNATE WHEN A TESS IG KNEE IS

UNA ABLE TO RAY TEND. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: SO

MOVED. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: S

SECOND. >>JUDGE SCOTT: MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.

[16. Discuss and consider funding source for the 2023 Innovative Readiness Training (IRT) Nueces Medical Mission. ]

THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER 16, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER FUNDING SOURCE FOR THE 2023.

IRT, INNOVATIVE READINESS TRAINING NUECES MEDICAL MISSION.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: $15,000.

SKT SCOTT $15,000 IS WHAT YOU NEED.

TERESA IS MERE TELLING FUSS WE HAVE FUND.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: VETERINARIANS CHEST CHEST I AM

HAPPY TO PUT SOMETHING THERE. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I WILL CONTRIBUTE AS WELL. CAN YOU ASK -- DO WE NEED TERESA TO TELL US HOW WE ARE GOING TO DO THIS.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I ASKED HER TO CHECK.

DIDN'T WE HAVE MONEY LAST TIME? >> I WAS SPEAKING TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ABOUT THIS. AND I DID E-MAIL YOU LATE YESTERDAY REGARDING IT. IT APPEARS THAT ON MARCH I WANT TO SAY MARCH 11 -- NO:MAY 11, FROM THE SALE OF 430 NO NORTH ALISTER STREET. ON MAY 5, THEYAL CATEGORIED THE SAME MONEY AGAIN -- THEY ALLOCATED THE SAME MONEY AGAIN $15,000 OF IT FOR THE MEDICAL SUPPLIES.

AND WE ARE -- SINCE THE SAME MONEY --

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: $0,000 THEN.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: REPEAT THAT AGAIN ABOUT THE PO PORT ARANSUS PART. MAY 11, COMMISSIONERS COURT APPROVED THE ALLOCATION OF THE PROCEEDS OF THE ALISTER STREET PROPERTY IN PORT ARANSAS THAT 65% -- 35% OF THE FUNDS WE79 TO THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE FUND BALANCE AND 65% OF THE FUNDS WILL BE ALLOCATED TO THE COASTAL PARKS IN PORT ARANSAS BASED ON

DECISIONS MADE BY. >>BEN: AND PRESIDENT COURT.

MAY 25, THE COURT APPROVED THE ALLOCATION OF $15,000 FOR THE -- ALSO FROM THE SALE OF THE SAME PORT ARANSAS BUILDING FOR THE IRT MEDICAL SUPPLIES. I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT $15,000 SHOULD COME FROM THE 35% THAT WENT TO THE GENERAL FUND OR THE

$15,000 COMES FROM THE 65%. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: IT IS NOT A ABOUT COASTAL PARKS PROJECT.

>> OR IF THE # $15,000. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: SPECIFICALLY FOR A COASTAL PARK PROJECT IN PORT ARANSAS.

ABOUT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE MORE FOR THAT PARTICULAR 15,000.

>> WITH THAT SAID, WE DID FIND PREVIOUSLY LAST YEAR A PORTION OF THE PREVIOUS 15,000 HAS BEEN SPENT, BUT NOT ALL OF IT.

LAST YEAR -- WELL, I SAY LAST YEAR AND MAY AND JUNE, THERE WAS ALMOST 12,000 ALLOCATED BUT HAS NOT BEEN SPENT AT THIS TIME.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: INSTEAD OF GETTING THE $15,000, WE HAVE

THE $3,000. >> YOU HAVE THE $3,000 IN 2022,

THAT IS CORRECT. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: 15,000 AND SPENT 3,000 AND HAVE 12,000. THIS YEAR ALL WE NEED IS 3,000.

INSTEAD OF THE $15,000. >> YOU NEED 11,500.

YOU SPENT 3,000. ALMOST 3600.

SO YOU NEED 11,400. YOU HAVE 11,400 AND YOU NEED

3600 STILL. >> YOU COULD -- SINCE ALL THAT MONEY HAS ALREADY BEEN MOVED TO THE GENERAL FUND PER THE WISHES ON MAY 11, IF YOU WANT THOSE FUNDS TO COME FROM THE GENERAL

FUND -- >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: FROM

THE 35%. >> FROM THE 35%, IT COULD, BUT

[04:25:03]

THAT WOULD NEED TO BE THE WILL OF THE COUR.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: THAT IS WHAT I MOVE TO DO.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: YOU MADE A MOTION.

I WILL SECOND THAT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.

IT'S -- THE MOTION IS FOR IT TO COME FROM THE 35% IN THE GENERAL

FUND. >> FOR THE MEDICAL AND VETERINARIAN. ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: FOR BOTH. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ:

[17. Discuss and consider allocating $1,100,000.00 from the 2022 PPFCO (Public Property Financing Contractual Obligation) funds to purchase election capital equipment for the County Clerk's Office; Authorize Sole Source purchase with Hart Intercivic for election equipment; and related matters.]

BO BOTH.

>> ITEM NUMBER 17, ALLOCATING $1.1 MILLION FROM THE 2022 PUBLIC PROPERTY FINANCE CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION FUNDS TO PURCHASE ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT FOR ARE THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE. AUTHORIZE SEOUL SOURCE PURPOSE FOR HART INTERCIVIC FOR ELECTION EQUIPMENT AND RELATED MATTERS.

ONE AT TO TAKE THIS, KARA. >> YOU KNOW IT IS TIME WE NEED TO GET NEW ELECTION EQUIPMENT. A LAW WAS PASSED IN 2021 THAT REQUIRES US TO HAVE OUR ELECTION EQUIPMENT TO HAVE A PAPER AWED ET BACK-UP. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE GOING TOWARDS. IT WILL BE WITH OUR VENDOR ABOUT HART. ACTUALLY TWO OPTIONS, THAT'S IT.

THEY ARE CERTIFIED FEDERALLY AND FOR THE STATE.

JUST NOT A WHOLE LOT OF OPTIONS OUT THERE.

BUT WE HAVE BEEN WITH OUR VENDOR FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

AND WE LIKE OUR VENDOR. THEY ARE GOING TO RETROFIT THE EQUIPMENT. AND TWO WEEKS AGO, THREE WEEKS AGO YOU GAME -- SORRY THIS IS BOB HEISNER, THE VEND FROM HART.

Y'ALL MET WITH HIM THREE WEEKS AGO, I BELIEVE, WE HAD A DEMO FOR ALL OF Y'ALL. YOU GO THE TO TRY OUT BOTH PIECE OF COURSE EQUIPMENT. FROM THE FEEDBACK FROM ALL OF Y'ALL AND Y'ALL WANTED. AUTHORITY DO IT.

THAT WILL BE THE MOST SEAMLESS FOR THE VOTERS.

A BIG CHANGE FOR THE VOTERS. GOING TO THE VERIDY DUO AS OPPOSED OF HAND MARKING THE MOTH, EACH VOTER BUT YOU STILL HAVE TO PUT IT IN THE SCANNER. THAT DOESN'T CHANGE.

THE ONLY DIFFERENCE THE SEAM EQUIPMENT WITH A PIECE OF PAP THEIR WILL GO INTO THAT EQUIPMENT THEY MARK THE BALLOT LAKE A PIECE OF EQUIPMENT AND THOSE ARE THE SELECTIONS AND THEY ADD FETCHES ANOTHER STEP FOR VOTERS AND THEY PUT THE BALLOT INTO THE SCANNER. DALE, THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE HELPED US FIND MONEY IN THE ACCOUNT AND USE THE REST OF IT THROUGH MY SPECIAL FUND AND THAT'S IT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THE TOTAL AMOUNT W

WAS. >> THAT COMES FROM US?

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE WHOLE PURCHASE IF 3.7?

>>KARA SANDS: 2.8. >>JUDGE SCOTT: YOU ARE ONLY

ASKING FOR THE 1.1. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I WAS JUST THINKING OF ABOUT THAT. YOU DO A LOT EXTRA THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRED BY LAW TO CHECK MACHINES AND STUFF LIKE THAT. CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT ALL THE STUFF THAT YOU DO THAT -- THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO. I KNOW ALL THE STUFF THAT IS BY LAW, BUT I KNOW YOU AND YOUR STAFF GO THE EXTRA MILE DOING A LOT MORE ELECTION CHECKING. CAN YOU SHARE A LITTLE BIT.

>>KARA SANDS: WITH THE RECEIPTS, WE -- AFTER -- YOU KNOW, DURING THE ELECTION, WHAT WE DO IS MAKE SURE THOSE RECEIPTS THAT COME FROM THE EQUIPMENT WE HAVE NOW. WE WILL VERIFY THAT WITH WHAT WAS TABULATED. RIGHT.

THIS -- IT SEEMS LIKE WE ARE ALWAYS DOING, YOU KNOW, CHECKS AND BALANCES. CHECKS AND BALANCES, VERIFY, VERIFY, VERIFY. I KNOW MY STAFF GETS SICK OF ME SAYING THAT. BUT ALWAYS TO VERIFY THE NUMBERS SO WE DO THAT. WHEN WE GET THIS NEW EQUIPMENT.

AS SOON AS THIS IS APPROVED, THEY WILL PICK UP OUR EQUIPMENT AND THEN WE WILL GET IT BACK IN JULY PROBABLY.

AND THEN WILL HAVE DIFFERENT PROCESSES THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THEM AND GET THE EQUIPMENT BACK FIRST AND GET FAMILIAR WITH THIS EQUIPMENT TO SEE WHAT WE WILL COME UP WITH ALONG -- ON TOP OF WHAT IS ALREADY THAT WE HAVE TO DO BY THE STATE AND AS FAR AS WITH THE PUBLIC, ONCE WE GET IT BACK WE ARE GOING TO DO -- WHAT WE DID LAST TIME WHEN WE PURCHASED NEW EQUIPMENT, WE GO TO EVERY SENIOR CENTER AND OPEN HOUSES HERE AND AT THE CALDERON BUILDING.

[04:30:01]

SO WE ARE ABSOLUTELY GOING -- THE PUBLIC TO COME IN AND GET TO KNOW THIS EQUIPMENT BEFORE THE CONSTITUTIONAL ELECTION IN

NOVEMBER. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THE GROUP THAT WAS HERE BEFORE, IS THAT JUST OVERSIGHT OR THE STANDARD WAY WHEN YOU CHANGE IT BECAUSE THEY TIME TO BE UPSET THEY DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO PRACTICE ON THOSE LIKE WE DID WHEN YOU HAD THEM IN

HERE IN THE COURT ROOM. >>KARA SANDS: Y'ALL MAKE THE DECISION, RIGHT. THAT IS WHY YOU ARE THE COMMISSIONERS AND YOU MAKE THE ULTIMATE DECISION.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THEY SEEMED TO THINK THAT THEY WERE TOLD --

THEY SEEMED UPSET -- >>KARA SANDS: I DIDN'T

UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT PART WAS. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: BUT I THINK IN ALL FAIRNESS, I THINK I DID TELL KARA THAT PROBABLY WE COULD DO AN OPEN HOUSE WHERE EVERYONE WANTS TO COME AND TEST

THE MACHINES, THEY CAN DO THAT. >>KARA SANDS: THAT WILL BE WHEN

WE GET THE EQUIPMENT BACK. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THAT IS AFTER THE PURCHASE. NOT BEFORE THE PURCHASE ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I WANTED TO ASK WITH THE POINTS THAT THE JUDGE AND COMMISSIONER ASKED. I TRIED TO WRITE DOWN THE MAIN POINTS OF PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE PROVIDING AND IT IS FUNNY ON -- TO -- WHEN YOU LOOK AT TALKING ABOUT BUZZWORDS, AND WE HAD A MIX OF PEOPLE. I THINK IN PHILOSOPHY POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY. EVERYONE CHEERED.

AND SERVE WANTING TRANSPARENCY. EVERYBODY WANTS EASE OF USE, REDUCING EQUIPMENT COST. THIS IS GETTING MORE TECHNICAL.

THE PRICES ARE GOING UP OTHER THAN PAPER OR PEN AND COULD BE ARGUMENT FOR THAT, BUT AMAZES ME TO SEE TO THE CROWD PEOPLE CHEERING ON -- SOME WILL SAY A -- WOULD JUST NEVER CLAP FOR WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND UNIVERSAL TERMS BEING SAID.

ALWAYS A LITTLE WORRIED BECAUSE IT SEEMS THAT SOME WERE OPPOSED TO THIS. BUT THEN THE VERY CONCEPTS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS WHAT WE ARE PRESENTING TO US.

IT IS -- IT IS ENSURING THAT THERE IS A BACK-UP.

A PAPER BACKUP THAT IT IS PROVIDING HOPEFULLY SOME USE -- IT IS GOING TO TAKE SOME PROCESS TO LEARN, BUT ALL THOSE MAIN PARTS THAT WERE QUESTION ED ALL AT EAST SEEMS -- WHAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO US AND THE PRESENTATION WE HAD A FEW WEEKS AGO. I AM EXCITED ABOUT THIS AND THE FACT THAT THE COST IS NOT AS MUCH AS MAYBE WE HAD EXPECTED IS

WELCOMING TO. >>KARA SANDS: ALL DUE RESPECT WITH SOME OF THE COMMENTS AND THIS ONE OF THE COMMENTS WAS, WELL, THERE WAS A BILL OUT THERE THAT MAYBE OBSOLETE.

YOU HAVE THIS QR CODE TO BE OBSOLETE.

JUST SO YOU KNOW THAT ALSO TAKES AWAY -- IF THAT BILL PASSES, FOLKS, WE GET VOTE CENTERS GOING AWAY AND WE GO BACK TO HAND COUNTING. HAND COUNTING, OKAY.

THAT BILL -- IT IS A BIG OMNIBUS BILL OF REMOVING VOTE CENTERS, GOING BACK TO PRECINCT-BASED VOTING AND ALSO TAKING DOWN EARLY VOTING PERIOD. THERE IS A LOT THAT.

THE QR CODE ON THERE -- THE QR CODE IS THE LEAST OF OUR PROBLEM. WE WILL BE UPSET OF NUECES COUNTY IF THEY TAKE AWAY OUR VOTING CENTERS.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THE STATE JUST FUNDED THIS.

PUT A LOT OF MONEY TO PROVIDE THIS EQUIPMENT.

>>KARA SANDS: A LOT OF BILLS OUT THERE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: VERY UNLIKELY. FETCH ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: ONE FINAL QUESTION.

YOUR ABILITY TO SPEAK WITH ALL LOCAL PARTIES.

>>KARA SANDS: WE ARE TRYING TO TAKE THE TIME FOR HART TO FIX THE EQUIPMENT AND GET IT BACK. ANYONE UPSET THAT THEY DIDN'T GET A VOTE OR DECIDE WHICH EQUIPMENT, PLEASE UNDERSTAND, THERE WERE TWO CHOICES. Y'ALL KNOW THIS.

WE HAD TWO CHOICES. AND THE CHOICES WERE MAKING IT SEAMLESS FOR THE VOTERS. ONE EXTRA STEP OR GOING BACK IN EVERY SINGLE VOTER WILL HAVE TO FILL IN THEIR BALLOT.

AND THAT WILL MAKE LINES LONGER. CAN Y'ALL IMAGINE.

WHEN YOU DO THAT, YOU CAN TAKING AWAY THE RIGHT TO VOTE FOR FOLKS WITH DISTOS AN EXTENT. IF THEY CAN'T HOLD A PEN.

IF THEY CAN'T READ THE BALLOT. WHAT ABOUT THE EARPHONES.

WHAT ABOUT THEM WITH THE SPECIAL EQUIPMENT WE HAVE.

SO, I MEAN, SO MANY NUANCES THAT PEOPLE DON'T THINK ABOUT THAT YOU HAVE TO THINK OF ALL THE VOTERS.

ALL THE VOTERS IN NUECES COUNTY MAKING IT AS SEAMLESS AS POSSIBLE FOR THIS NEW PROCESS, THAT IS IMPORTANT AND FOR OUR DISABILITY COMMUNITY, THAT IS IMPORTANT.

AND PEOPLE WAITING ON LINE PRINTING OFF THE BALLOT AND

[04:35:01]

GETTING SOMETHING TO FILL IN. WHAT IF YOU DON'T FILL IT IN DARK ENOUGH, GUESS WHAT, THAT VOTE WON'T COUNT ABOUT THAT IS AN UNDERVOTE. THESE ARE ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT. IT IS HERE BUT -- I THINK THAT'S IT. AGAIN, WE ARE CONTINUING WITH TRANSPARENT -- PROTECTING THE INTEGRITY AND TRANS PAREN SEE AND EVERYBODY WILL HAVE ALL -- TRANSPARENCY AND EVERYBODY HAS ALL THE CHANCES IN THE WORLD IN AUGUST WHEN WE GET THIS

EQUIPMENT BACK. >>JUDGE SCOTT: MOVE APPROVAL.

>>KARA SANDS: THANK YOU. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: MOTION TO

APPROVE, JUDGE. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: SECOND.

ABOUT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

THE MOTION PASSES. AND MOVING ON TO --

>> YOUR HONOR, EXCUSE ME, BUT THIS CALLS FOR TWO ITEMS HERE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ALLOCATE THE FUNDING AND THEN PURCHASE THE EQUIPMENT. SEOUL SOURCE.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: SOMEBODY NEED TO AMEND THEIR MOTION.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: MOTION TO AMEND AND SEPARATE THE VOTES OF ALLOCATING AND AUTHORIZING. IS THAT GOOD ENOUGH.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I MADE MY SECOND.

I AMENDED MY SECOND. >>JUDGE SCOTT: SEPARATING THE VOTE TO AUTHORIZING AND SEOUL SOURCE.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

[18. Discuss and consider all advisory boards under the Nueces County Commissioners Court and any action needed and related matters.]

THE MOTION PASSES, THANK YOU. ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I WOULD LIKE TO TABLE INDEFINITELY ITEM

NUMBER 18. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION TO TABLE

INDEFINITELY. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I AM NOT GOING TO BRING IT BACK FOR AT THAT WHILE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: DO I HAVE A SECOND.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: A SECOND. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER MAREZ. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

[19. Discuss and consider recommendation for appointment of two (2) additional Tax Incremental Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) #2 board members.]

OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES.

ITEM NUMBER 19, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION FOR APPOINTMENT OF TWO ADDITIONAL TAX INCREMENTAL REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER 2 BOARD MEMBERS. I BELIEVE THIS IS THE ONE THAT YOU AND I ARE ON, BRENT. AND TWO OPEN SLOTS.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: JUDGE, THE ADDITIONAL MEMBERSHIP THAT WE GOT WHEN WE EXPANDED -- OR AGREED TO THE TIRZ.

THE QUESTION FOR THE. COMMISSIONERS COURT, DO ADDITIONAL MEMBERS OF THE COURT WANT TO BE THE DESIGNEES AND THEN WE WILL HAVE TO POST IT AS A PUBLIC MEETING WHICH IS NO BIG DEAL. THE WHOLE CITY COUNCIL SITS ON IT. IF ANYONE WANTS TO SIT ON IT, THAT IS FINE. YOU WANT, WE CAN OPEN IT UP AND AN APPLICATION PROCESS FOR ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD WANT TO SERVE AND REPRESENT US HERE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: WHAT THE IS WILL --

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: TO ADD A THIRD OR TWO MORE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: TWO MORE. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: WE HAVE

TWO MORE. >> ADDING TWO MORE.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I THOUGHT IT WAS ONE ADDITIONAL.

HE WAS GOING TO SAY THE COUNTY JUDGE PRO-TEM SHOULD ALWAYS BE THE THIRD SLOT, AND WE WILL ARM WRESTLE ON THE FOURTH.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: DOES THE COURT WANT OR OPEN IT UP TO THE

PEOPLE. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I WOULD LIKE TO SEE. IF THE ENTIRE COUNCIL AND ALL WE CAN HAVE IS FOUR, I WOULD SUGGEST FILL ALL FOUR.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THIS MEANS YOU GOT TO GO.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: HE IS GOING TO WIN THE ARM WRESTLING

ON THAT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: HAVE TO APPOINT WHO THE OTHER ONES ARE. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: ON 17. >>JUDGE SCOTT: COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ WOULD LIKE IT NOTED THAT HE WOULD VOTE AYE ON ITEM NUMBER 17. HE WAS OUT OF THE ROOM.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: MY MOTION IS TO FILL ALL POSITIONS WITH COMMISSIONERS COURT MEMBERS WITH THE ALTERNATE BEING THE FIFTH ME MEMBER.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THE FIFTH MEMBER WHO ISN'T THERE.

THE ALTERNATE. CAN WE DO THAT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THEY ALL D DESIGNATE. YOU, ROBERT AND JO GENTLEMEN.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: TO DESIGNATE.

>> A FILL- IN CASE YOU ONE OF YOU IS

ABSENT. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THAT IS THE CONCERN MAKING SURE WE ARE ALL THERE AND KEY VOTES -- WE WOULD HAVE THREE THERE AND THE ONE DEDICATED ALWAYS GOES AND

[04:40:01]

CAN'T MAKE IT FOR THAT DAY FOR THAT REASON.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: DO YOU WANT TO BE ON IT, TIRZ.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I HAVE TO HAVE TWO PEOPLE THAT WILL DO IT. AND THEN WE CAN ASK IF WE CAN SAY IF ONE OF THEM CAN'T COME, ACCOUNT OTHER ONE GO, BUT I

DOUBT IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW. >> WOULD NEED TO HOOK AT

THE BYLAWS. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THAT THE

ALTERNATE CAN VOTE IN PLACE O T >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: TUESDAYS AT 9:30. I DON'T CARE, I JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE WILL SHOW UP. DO YOU WANT TO BE ON THERE? IT IS AT CITY HALL. SO A YES? JOHN -- JOE WANTS ON. PROP-TEM.

WHICH ONE YOU GUYS WILL DO IT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WRESTLE.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I JUST HAD HIM CONVINCED.

I DON'T MIND SERVING. I WANTED TO GIVE IT TO COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ. IF HE WANTS ME TO, I WILL SERVE IN THE FOURTH SPOT. I WOULD LIKE TO ADD IF WE CAN HAVE AN ALTERNATE THAT WE DESIGNATE COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ

IF THE BYLAWS ALLOWS. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: FOR THE ELAND TIRZ. I MOVE TO NOMINATE MR. MAREZ AND COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ FOR THE TWO ADDITIONAL MEMBERS FOR THE TIRZ AND ASK THAT IF THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THERE TO BE AN ALTERNATE DESIGNATED, THAT THAT BE DONE AS WELL.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: I WILL SECOND THE MOTION.

THIRD AND FOURTH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. ABOUT THE MOTION.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: LET THE TIRZ THOUGH THAT THERE COMMISSIONER MAREZ AND GONZALEZ. AND COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ WILL

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

BE THE ALTERNATE. CHECK ON THE ALTERNATE PART OF

IT, PLEASE. >>JUDGE SCOTT: ITEM 21, DISCUSS THE NEXT COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING STATES NOBODY HAVE ANY CONFLICTS WITH ANY OF THEM? WE ARE FINE WITH THEM? WE DON'T NEED A MOTION WITH TO HE WAS.

[1. Discuss and consider extension of the January 2, 2023 through April 3, 2023 exception period in section 2.1(b)(4) of the Nueces County Game Room Regulations, and related matters.]

MOVING CONTINUE TO ITEM B. THE SHERIFF.

B-1, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER EXTENSION OF THE JANUARY 2, 2023 TO ANTICIPATE 3, 2023 EXCEPTION PERIOD IN SECTION 2.1B 4 OF THE NUECES COUNTY GAME ROOM REGULATIONS AND RELATED MATTERS.

CHIEF COOK, ARE YOU GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS? FRANK, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK FIRST THEN? SORRY. YOU FINALLY HAD YOUR HAND UP AND

I DIDN'T SEE YOU. >> NOT A PROBLEM, COMMISSIONER.

I CAN IF FIRST FIRST OR DEFER TO CHIEF DEPUTY COOK.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: YOU WERE THERE FIRST.

GO AHEAD. >> MY NAME IS FRANK LAZARDI AND OUR LAW FIRM IS ASSISTING A DOZEN APPLICANTS ON TO THE GAME ROOM ORDINANCE YOU PASSED JANUARY 6 OR JANUARY 3.

THIS HAS BEEN A LEARNING PROCESS FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED.

IT STILL IS. CHIEF DEPUTY COOK, THEY HAVE BEEN GREAT WITH THE APPLICANTS. WE HAD QUESTIONS EACH WEEK WHAT TO DO WE DO HERE. WHAT DO WE DO HERE.

AND WE WILL IF LOOK AT THE ANSWER AND HELPING WITH THE PROCESS. EVEN WITH THEIR HELP, WE ARE BEING DELAYED ON SOME THINGS WE CANNOT CONTROL.

FOR EXAMPLE, SOME OF THE SMALLER CITIES, THEIR FIRE DEPARTMENT WON'T DO THE FIRE MARSHAL INSPECTION.

SO WE NOW HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET -- RETAIN SOMEBODY OUT OF CORPUS CHRISTI TO GO TO THESE LITTLE CITIES TO DO INSPECTIONS, BECAUSE THE LITTLE CITIES SAID WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO IT AND ACCEPTED PEOPLE OUT TO DO IT. AND ALSO HAPPENED TO THE CORPUS CHRISTI POLICE DEPARTMENT. I HAVE SOME CITY THAT SAYS, LOOK, WE AREN'T DOING CERTIFICATES OF OBJECTING PAN TEE S-- OCCUPANCY. YOU HAVE TO HAVE IT FOR THE ORDINANCE. ANOTHER EXAMPLE, YOUR ON HONOR, THE COURT. IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, A LOCAL ONE, WE ASKED FOR THE FIRE MARSHAL REPORT AND THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. WE ASKED FOR THIS SECOND WEEK OF JANUARY. I WAS AT THAT LOCATION YESTERDAY WITH FOUR MEMBERS OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, TWO MEMBERS OF BUILDING SERVICES, AND CONSULTANT CONTRACTOR AND THE LANDLORD TO SAY, WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO GET THIS.

AND WE WILL TALK ABOUT IT AND LET IT KNOW I CAN'T GET IT IF

[04:45:02]

THEY DON'T TELL ME. SO WE ARE WORKING ON OTHER PEOPLE'S SCHEDULE. AND IT IS NOT SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, BECAUSE, THEY ANSWERED QUESTIONS AND HAD GLITCHES WITH THE APPLICATION PROCESS.

WE WORKED THROUGH THEM. WE ARE ASKING FOR A 60-DAY EXTENSION FOR THOSE WHOSE FIELD WITH APPLICATIONS PENDING TO GET INFORMATION FROM FIRE DEPARTMENT AND CITIES.

TAX EXEMPT FROM THE COUNTIES. WE DIDN'T GET THAT BEFORE.

THE COUNTY HAS GOT QUICK TO DO THAT.

BUT THAT IS PART OF THIS GROWING PAIN WE ARE FACING.

THE SHERIFF DEPARTMENT HAS TODO I HAVE WANT TO STAY TWO OR THREE INSPECTIONS. THEY CAN NOT DO THESE INSPECTIONS UNLESS ONE OR TWO ISSUES ARE RESOLVED.

THEY ARE BACKLOGGED BECAUSE WE ARE BACKLOGGED AND OTHER FIRE DEPARTMENTS THAT DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH THIS NEW ORDINANCE AND WHAT THIS MEANS. THAT IS PART OF A GROWING PAIN OF ANY NEW APPLICATION PROCESS AND ANY NEW ORDINANCE.

HOPEFUL THAT THE 09 DAYS WILL WORK.

IT IS NOT GOING TO WORK. OUT OF THE 12 I DON'T THINK THAT ANY OF THE 12 WAS READY FOR INSPECTIONS.

WE ARE STILL TRYING TO GET THE OTHER THINGS TOGETHER.

AND I WOULD SAY HALF TIED UP FROM FIRE MARSHALS TO GET FROM THE CITY TO GO TO THESE OTHER CITIES.

WE ARE ASKING FOR 60 DAYS FOR THOSE THAT APPLY.

WE ARE NOT ASKING TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE.

IF THEY APPLY WITHIN THE FIRST 30 DAYS, THEY ARE ON EXTENSION UNTIL APRIL 3. WE ARE ASKING TO THOSE BE ALLOWED # 0 MORE DAYS WHILE WE TRY TO HELP EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND

THE PROCESS. >>JUDGE SCOTT: MAYBE CHIEF COOK

CAN HELP US OUT WITH THIS. >> JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS, A PIECE OF PAPER GAME ROOM PERMITS TO THE TOP OF IT, AND HAS A LIST OF THOSE GAMEGAME ROOMING THAT APPLIED FOR PERMITS.

AND IF YOU GO TO THE FAR RIGHT, YOU WILL SEE IT SAYS "TEMP" ON A COUPLE OF THEM. OTHERS SAY RIGHT ONLY.

THOSE WHO SAY "TEMP" STANDS FOR TEMPORARY PERMIT.

AND A DATE. THE DATE WE RECEIVED THEIR INITIAL SUBMISSION OF THEIR APPLICATION.

SO, FOR EXAMPLE, AT THE VERY TOP ONE, LET'S TAKE IT FOR EXAMPLE, THEY SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION ON FEBRUARY 3, 2023.

SO WE ARE TALKING 90 DAYS FROM FEBRUARY 3, 2023 TO GET THROUGH THE PROCESS. WHAT I DID ON THE TEMPORARY PERMITS, AFTER TALKING TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND MAKING SURE IT WOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE, WE WENT AHEAD TO HAVE THE TEMPORARY PERMITS FOR 104 DAYS. 90 DAYS PLUS AN ADDITIONAL TWO WEEKS. WE ARE BEING VERY LENIENT.

WE ARE NOT TRYING TO KEEP THESE PEOPLE FROM BEING IN BUSINESS, BUT WE CERTAINLY NEED FOR THEM TO HAVE -- TO MEET -- TO MEET THE STANDARD TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE.

AND NOT LOOKING FOR IT AS A DROP HAD BEEN-DEAD DATE.

WE ARE NOT GOING TO SHUT DOWN BUSINESSES APRIL 2023.

AND ABOUT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SAY AS LONG AS WE APPLY THE ORDINANCE IN A FAIR AND EQUITABLE MANNER, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE ANY ISSUES. WE ARE NOT HOOKING TO SHUT EVERYBODY DOWN. I DON'T THINK WE NEED THE COMMISSIONERS COURT TO STEP IN AND OFFER AN EXTENSION.

AS IT IS, ALMOST EVERYBODY HERE IS NOT -- IS NOT LOOKING TO BE IN A SITUATION WHERE WE -- WHERE THEY ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE UNTIL THE END OF APRIL AND THE FIRST PART OF MAY.

WE ARE NOT LOOKING TO ENFORCE SHUTTING ANYBODY DOWN UNTIL ABOUT JUNE. WE ARE TRYING TO BE AS FAIR AS POSSIBLE AND WE REALIZE THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME ISSUES.

AND, FOR EXAMPLE, WE MENTION THE FEAR INSPECTION.

THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CHIEF HAS AGREED TO DO FIRE INSPECTION IT IS NOT WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF CORPUS CHRISTI.

SO HE HAS TAKEN CARE OF THAT. I SPOKE TO HIM.

HE SAID WE TAKE CARE OF IT, AND HE IS.

I DON'T SEE ANY NEED TO EXTEND THE TIME PERIOD.

WE ARE BEING LENIENT. WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO ALLOW THESE COMPANIES, THEIR BUSINESSES TO GET THEIR APPLICATIONS IN.

YOU WILL SEE A COUPLE OF -- I DO WANT TO GIVE YOU A HEADS UP AND A LITTLE BIT IF YOU HOOK THROUGH THE BOTTOM, I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED TWO BUSINESSES IN THING A GA DULCE AREA.

AND THOSE ARE TWO BUSINESSES THAT WERE NOT IF IN BUSINESS

[04:50:02]

PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 2023. THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE SAID EVERYBODY THAT WAS IN BUSINESS BY A SPECIFIC DATE IN MAY OF 2022 WOULD NOT -- WOULD CONTINUE TO OPERATE WHEN THEY WENT THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS. AND ALL OF THESE OTHER BUSINESSES ARE EXCEPT FOR THESE TWO BECAUSE WE FOUND OUT AFTER JANUARY OF 2023, THE BUSINESS CHANGED HANDS, THEY TOLD.

ORDER IS CLEAR. WHEN THE BUSINESS CHANGES HANDS, IT IS NOW A NEW BUSINESS. AND THEY HAVE BEEN TOLD TO CLOSE THEIR DOORS AND THEY CANNOT OPERATE UNTIL THEY HAVE ISSUED A PERMIT. THE ONLY TWO OF THE ENTIRE LIST THAT ARE NOT PRESENTLY OPERATING OR NOT PERMITTED TO OPERATE.

IN ADDITION TO THAT WE WILLABLE PROBABLY TALKING TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IF WE FIND THEY WERE OPENING AND FOUND THAT THEY WERE OPERATING AND WE VISITED AND TOLD THEM TO SHUT THEIR DOORS. AED 10,000 FINE FOR EVERY DAY THEY VIOLATE THEIR ORDINANCE. IF THEY ARE OPEN TOMORROW, THEY WILL BE LOOK WILLING AT AED 10,000 FINE.

CIVIL. NOT CRIMINAL.

AND ARRESTING THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE OPERATING THE BUSINESS.

I SPOKE TO AT LEAST ONE OF THE OWNERS AND HE IS CLEAR.

HE HAS BEEN NOTIFIED. THE OTHER ONE, WE NOTIFIED THE EMPLOYEES. SO IT IS GETTING READY TO GET INTERESTING, BUT I DON'T SEE A NEED TO INCREASE THE A DATE.

WE HAVE GIVEN A LOT OF ROOM AND I DON'T ANTICIPATE -- IF THE ISSUE IS ON OUR SIDE AND THERE IS A REASON, A VALID REASON WHY THEY CAN'T COMPLY BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET THE DOCUMENT THAT THEY NEED, WE WILL BE GLAD TO WORK WITH THEM YOU WILL FIND THEY WILL CONDITION TALLY WORK AND INCREASE AND IN AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER AND ASKING FOR MORE TIME.

THERE HAS GOT TO BE A POINT TO ENFORCE THIS ORDINANCE AND JUNE, AROUND THEM. BY JUNE WE WILL HAVE COMPLETED THE INSPECTIONS AND NOT PROVIDED A COMPLETE -- A COMPLETE APPLICATION PROCESS AND PROVIDED ALL THE DOCUMENTS NEEDED FOR THE APPLICATION AND COMPLETE APPLICATION MEANS A DENIAL.

>> THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO BRING UP THIS ITEM THAT THE REST OF THE COURT AS WELL HAS BEEN CONTACTED BY A FEW OF THESE BUSINESS OWNERS THAT HAVE BEEN PLAGUED BEYOND THE COUNTY'S CONTROL REALLY. NOT EVEN IN OUR PURVIEW A LOT OF THE MUNICIPALITIES THAT COME UP WITH SOME STRUGGLES, ONE.

I APPRECIATE YOUR WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH THEM.

GREAT TO HEAR YOU HAVE BEEN DOING THAT.

AND MY SECOND QUESTION -- THAT IS A STATEMENT.

MY QUESTION, JENNY, WOULD BE, IS THAT KIND OF DISCRETION ALLOWED OR DO WE HAVE TO TAKE ARE WE REQUIRED 2.4B 4 TO EXTEND THE GAME ROOM REGULATIONS AND CHIEF COOK.

SHOULD WE DESIGNATE THOSE WHO ARE IN THE PROCESS ONLY HAVE THE EXTENSION AND EVERYBODY ELSE AFTER APRIL 3 IS NOT ALLOWED THAT BECAUSE THEY ARE COMING IN AFTER THE FACT AND I AGREE.

ANOTHER 30 DAYS AND ANOTHER 06 DAYS.

I WANT TO PREVENT THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

AND DO WE HAVE TO TAKE A VOTE ON THAT OR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE EXERCISE SOME DISCRETION ON THAT.

>> I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO YOU TAKE A VOTE.

IT CERTAINLY COULDN'T HURT FOR MARK AND PUT IN THE RECORD THOSE ENTITIES THAT HAVE ALREADY DONE THE FILING, BUT, YOU KNOW, CAN YOU TAKE A VOTE AND WOULD THAT BE HELPFUL LATER? SURE. DO YOU NEED TO? I DON'T THINK SO. THE SHERIFF IS APPLYING EVERYTHING EQUALLY ACROSS THE BOARD.

AND THE ONLY PEOPLE -- IT IS GOING -- IT IS GOING TO ENTER INTO THE BENEFIT OF THOSE APPLYING SO THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY REASON TO COMPLAIN. ABOUT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: FRANK WANTS TO SPEAK TOO.

SO WHEN YOU GET THROUGH. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: CHIEF, I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING.

YOU ARE GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND. YOU ARE GIVING THESE PEOPLE ALMOST FIVE MONTHS INSTEAD OF THREE MONTHS OR WHATEVER.

THE CALLS THAT I HAVE GOTTEN, SOME OF THEM SAY, WE ARE HAVING TROUBLE GETTING THE C.O. THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY --

[04:55:03]

WHAT DO YOU CALL IT? >> CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I SAID THAT IS NOT OURS.

IT IS THE CITY'S. IF YOU ARE IN THE CITY, YOU GOT TO WORK WITH THE CITY OF IT. THE REASON THEY ARE NOT GIVING IT TO YOU, THERE HAS GOT TO BE A REASON FOR IT.

BUT I THINK -- I MEAN -- I SEE HERE THAT I THINK THE EXTENSION -- WHEN SOMEBODY SAYS I NEED AN EXTENSION, THEY GOT AN EXTENSION. THEY GOT 90 DAYS PLUS TWO MORE MONTHS. ABOUT.

>> HONESTLY, I AM NOT LOOKING TO GO TO ANY OF THESE BUSINESSES THAT YOU SEE THE LIST ON EXCEPT THE TWO THAT I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED TELLING THEM -- I CAN TELL YOU, THAT WE WILL NOT BE GOING TO ANY OF THESE BUSINESSES ON APRIL 2023 AND TELL THEM TO SHUT THEIR DOORS, WE WILL NOT. I WILL NOT ANTICIPATE THAT HAPPENING TO ANY OF THESE BUSINESSES UNTIL MAKE JUNE.

IF THEY ARE LOOKING FOR 06-DAY EXTENSION, I AM ALREADY GIVING IT TO THEM BECAUSE I AM TELLING YOU NOT UNTIL JUNE THAT WE WOULD BE TAKING THAT ENFORCEMENT TAG. I WILL CERTAINLY NOTIFIED THE COURT IF IT LOOKS LIKE WE WILLING DOING THAT WITH SOME OF

THE BUSINESSES. >> COULD YOU ALSO IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A VOTE ON THOSE BUSINESSES THAT HAVE ALREADY APPLIED.

PUT THAT INTO THE RECORD THAT THAT WON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES FOR 60 DAYS. THEN YOU ARE NOT CHANGING THE

POLICY. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: MORE THAN 60 DAYS. THEY ARE GOING TO EX-FIRE APRIL.

THEY STILL HAVE 60 DAYS AFTER THAT.

>> EXPIRE IN APRIL AND I AM TELLING YOU WE ARE NOT LOOKING TO TAKE ANY ENFORCEMENT ACTION UNTIL JUNE.

AND WE ARE COMMUNICATING VERY WELL WITH THEM.

WE ARE TELLING THEM WHEN THEY ARE LACKING DOCUMENTS.

ONLY TWO ON THIS LIST ARE ADVERSELY IMPACTED BECAUSE THEY MISS -- THEY MISS REPRESENTED THEMSELVES AND THEY WILL NOT BE IN BUSINESS AND THAT IS ANOTHER PLACE WE MADE THE EXCEPTION.

AND INITIALLY THE ORDINANCE SAID YOU HAVE TO BE IN BBUSINESS -- WHEN YOU INITIALLY PASSED THE ORDINANCE AND WHEN YOU EXTENDED THE TIME PERIOD, WHEN IN YOU OPINION BUSINESS IN MAY 2022, YOU COULD ONCE YOU APPLY AND CONTINUE TO OPERATE YOUR GAME ROOM. WELL, SINCE WE EXTENDED IT UNTIL JANUARY, I THEN AFTER TALKING TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, TOLD THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAD BEEN IN BUSINESS PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 2023, ONCE YOU PAY YOUR GABOUT 2K3W5E78Z.

YOUR GAME ROOM FEE, AND START YOUR PROCESS, YOU WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS.

WE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT AND WE THOUGHT LET'S BE FAIR.

LET'S BE FAIR. MORE THAN FAIR WITH THESE INDIVIDUALS. I FEEL LIKE YOU DON'T NEED TO DO THE EXTENSION. WE ARE BEING AS FAIR AS POSSIBLE AND I AM NOT LOOKING TO ADVERSELY IMPACT THOSE BUSINESSES. BUT I WILL TELL YOU COME JUNE, IT WILL BE A DIFFERENT STORY IF IT IS NOT A PROCESS.

IF FOR SOME REASON, ONE OF THESE GAME ROOM INSPECTIONS ISN'T PROPERLY COMPLETED. AND IT IS A RESULT OF MY OFFICE -- THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE PROBLEM, THEN WE WILL ADDRESS THAT AND RECOGNIZE THE -- THAT YOUR INSPECTION DIDN'T GET DEPLETED BECAUSE OF OUR NEGLIGENCE OR EFFICIENCY AND WE WILL CERTAINLY

TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: YOU HAVE BEEN MORE THAN FAIR CIRCUIT COURT CIRCUIT COURT FRANK, DO

YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION? >> NO, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE COUNTY HAS BEEN GREAT WITH THIS.

CHIEF DEPUTY COOK AND MISS GETTOFF HAS WORKED WITH US.

A LEARNING PROCESS AND THE CHIEF SAID DON'T WORRY, I AM NOT GOING TO SHUT YOU DOWN. AS A LAWYER, I CAN'T TELL A CLIENT, TRUST ME, THEY WON'T SHUT YOU DOWN.

LET'S OPERATE ILLEGAL FOR TO MONTHS, WE ARE FINE.

AND IF SOMETHING CHANGES WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE COUNTY, NOW WAIT A MINUTE, YOU SAID WE WERE FINE FOR 60 DAYS.

SO I UNDERSTAND HE DOESN'T NEED IT.

I AM NOT TRYING TO DIMINISH HIS WORD, BUT LEGALLY, I DO NEED IT.

I CAN'T JUST GO OFF OF HIS WORD AND PROTECT MY CLIENTS.

I HAVE A TODAY OF THEM. >> FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ONE -- YOU HAVE GOT SOME -- LIKE, ONE -- ONE OF THEM 'PLYED AS EARLY JANUARY 26. SO YOU HAVE 104 DAYS AFTER JANUARY 26. SO BECAUSE -- THEY HAVE -- THEY HAVE A TEMPORARY PERMIT THAT SAYS THEY CAN OPERATE FOR 104 DAYS FROM THAT TIME PERIOD. SO THEY ALREADY -- THEY HAVE ALREADY PASSED APRIL OF 20 -- THE APRIL -- THE APRIL DATE JUST

[05:00:05]

WITH THAT PERMIT, TEMPORARY PERMIT.

IT HAS A SIGNATURE AND A DATE AND SAYS 104 DAYS FROM THE DAYS

THAT THEY STARTED THE PROCESS. >> IF I MAY SAY, THAT PARTICULAR ONE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, THAT IS THE ONE WHERE I WAS ON-SITE YESTERDAY. FOUR FIRE DEPARTMENT PEOPLE, A CHIEF, MARSHAL, INSPECTOR, TWO BUILDING CODE PEOPLE, THE LANDLORD, AND STILL WE CAN'T BE TOLD WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO GET THE FIRE INSPECTION OR THE OCCUPANCY.

DO WE HAVE TO SPRINKLE IT? DO WE HAVE TO BUY MORE FIRE WALLS. WE ARE IN A STAND STILL UNTIL THEY TELL US. THAT IS WHAT I AM SAYING.

NOT THE COUNTY BUT THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS DEALING WITH US FOR THE FIRST TIME. AND THIS IS WHERE OUR PROBLEM IS COMING. OUR PROBLEM IS ABSOLUTELY NOT COMING FROM THE COUNTY. I TALKED TO CHEF DEPUTY COOK ON SEVERAL LOCATIONS. HE HAS BEEN EXTREMELY HELPFUL, FAIR, COURTEOUS. I MEAN, WONDERFUL.

BUT I AM DEALING WITH OTHER PEOPLE THAT AREN'T PART OF THIS

PROCESS. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: WHAT I WOULD HIKE TO, JUDGE, I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION THAT MATCHES EXACTLY WHAT CHIEF COOK IS AGENCY IS.

HE IS A MAN OF HIS BOARD AND I TRUST WHAT HE IS SAYING.

I WANT TO PUT IT ON RECORD THAT WE RECORD THAT.

>> IF YOU WANT TO EXTEND IT AND EXTEND IT 60 DAYS, THEN I WOULD

SAY MOVE IT TO JUNE 23RD. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I DON'T WANT TO EX-HE TEND IT. I OPPONENT TO WANT TO EXTEND IT.

>> I AM SAYING -- IF THAT IS WHAT THE COURT WISHES.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THAT WILL BE MY MOTION.

I WANTED THE CHIEF TOE HELP ME ON THE DATES THERE.

JUNE 23? >> THAT GIVES THEM THE 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE THAT THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT.

IF YOU IT CHOOSE. >> CAN I MAKE THAT FOR CURRENT.

THERE ARE SOME THAT HAVE THE PERMIT OR TEMPORARY PERMIT.

>> THAT LIST IS EVERYTHING THAT APPLIED THUS FAR.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: PROBABLY A LIST OF THOSE IN PROCESS.

>> THAT IS THE LIST OF EVERYBODY THAT STARTED THE APPLICATION PROCESS AND PAID THEIR $1,000. ER OTHER GAME ROOM THAT IS NOT ON THAT LIST HAS NOT APPLIED TO A PERMIT ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THEY ARE SUBJECT TO SHUTDOWN.

>> WE COULD SHUT THEM DOWN BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT IN

COMPLIANCE. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: SOMEONE NEEDS TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE FOLKS ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE.

I MEAN -- >> THERE WAS OVER 100 SUPPOSEDLY GAME ROOMS IN CORPUS CHRISTI. I WASN'T LOOKING TO SHUT PEOPLE DOWN THROUGH JUNE -- MY THOUGHT PROCESS IS, OKAY, IF YOU ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE AT THAT POINT, WHETHER YOU HAVE APPLIED OR HAVEN'T APPLIED, WE ARE GOING TO BE -- WE WILL TAKE ACTION AND CLASS A MISS DOWNPOUR TO OPERATE WHEN NOT IN COMPLIANCE.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THE CLEANER THING WILL BE, DON'T SHUT THESE PEOPLE DOWN. DON'T DO AN EXTENSION.

IF YOU DO AN EXTENSION. HOW DO YOU DO AN EXTENSION FOR

SOME AND NOT OTHERS. >> IF SOMEBODY WERE TO COME TO THE OFFICE TODAY AND APPLY, THEY BOO HAVE TO START THE 90 DAY

PROCESS FOR US. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: GET AN

EXTENSION TOO. >> I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD.

BECAUSE ACTUALLY -- YOU KNOW, THE OFFERED NANCE SAID IF YOU ARE GOING TO APPLY, APPLY BY THE END OF JANUARY.

WHEN PEOPLE DMAEM AFTER JANUARY AND APPLIED.

AND GAVE THEM A TEMPORARY PERMIT IF IN BUSINESS BEFORE JANUARY 1 AND WORKED OUR WAY THROUGH THE PROCESS HERPZ HERNANDEZ SHERIFF, YOU ARE SAYING IF PEOPLE ARE OPERATING RIGHT NOW A 60-DAY

EXTENSION. >> EVERYBODY ON THAT LIST.

THAT IS WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: 9 PEOPLE NOT IN COMPLIANCE ARE THEY GETTING THE SIGNAL THEY ARE

GETTING 90 DAYS MORE. >> THEY COULDN'T BECAUSE DIDN'T

APPLY FOR A PERMIT. >> COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: APPLY

FOR EVERYBODY ON THIS LIST MUCH. >> WE COULD IF WE CHOSE TO EVERYBODY FROM APRIL 23 THAT HAS NOT APPLIED, WE COULD SHUT THOSE BUSINESSES DOWN THAT WERE STILL OPERATING WHO HAD NOT COME IN AND STARTED THE APPLICATION PROC

PROCESS. >> IF I MAY, I AM NOT ASKING FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NOT APPLIED. I AM JUST ASKING FOR THOSE ARE ON THAT LIST, DID MAKE THE APPLICATION AND ARE ALREADY IN

[05:05:04]

THE PROCESS. >>JUDGE SCOTT: UNDERSTAND.

NEXT TIME RAISE YOUR HAND, THE COMMISSIONER WAS STILL TALKING.

GO AHEAD. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: I'M

DONE, JUDGE. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I DON'T KNOW IF YOU -- IF YOU UNDERSTAND, CHIEF COOK.

HE IS NOT ONLY GIVING YOU 90 DAYS BUT 60 DAYS AFTER THE 90 DAYS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER KIND OF EXTENSION YOU WOULD WANT, BECAUSE YOU -- NOT ONLY THREE MONTHS, YOU HAVE FIVE MONTHS. THOSE ON THE LIST.

THEY ARE -- THEY ARE GIVING THEM FIVE MONTHS INSTEAD OF 90 DAYS.

SO I THINK THAT -- YOU -- GOT TO TAKE WHAT YOU GOT.

HE THINKS IT IS A GOOD DEAL. >> I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE WHEN YOU AMENDED IT AND YOU GUYS PASSED IT, 60 DAYS. I REQUESTED 90 DAYS TO COMPLETE THE PROCESS. AND THEN WHEN WE ISSUED THE TEMPORARY PERMITS, GAVE THEM 104 DAYS.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. >> WE HAVE OPINION AS FLEXIBLE AS POSSIBLE. I HEAR THE COUNSELOR, IF IT IS NOT IN WRITE, IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. IF CHIEF COOK.

I HAVE A DESIRE TO SHUT SOME GAME ROOMS DOWN TODAY, OTHER THAN THIS MEETING AND WHAT I STATED, HE DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO FALL BACK ON. HE CAN ASSURE THE COUNSELOR AND ASSURE THESE GAME ROOMS IN PROCESS WE ARE BEING AS FAIR AND I AM NOT LOOKING TO SHUT THEM DOWN ON APRIL 23.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THE FIRST ONES THAT YOU WILL LOOK FOR ARE THE ONES THAT HAVEN'T EVEN APPLIED.

IF THEY HAVEN'T PUT AN APPLICATION IN BY NOW, THAT IS A BIG PROBLEM. NOT YOU, BECAUSE YOU HAVE PLENTY ON YOUR PLEAT. WE NEED TO SEND SOMETHING FROM THE COUNTY TO GAME ROOM OWNERS THIS IS YOUR LAST REMINDER.

YOU NEED TO APPLY FOR THIS ORDINANCE.

IF YOU DON'T, THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE WILL COME GET YOU.

>> WE HAVE. I CAN TELL YOU IN THE SMALLER TOWNS LIKE AGUA DULCE AND BISHOP AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS, I CAN DO AN AUDIT AND DETERMINE WHICH GAME ROOMS ARE ACTUALLY OPERATIONAL. INSIDE OF THE STATE LIMITS OF CORPUS CHRISTI. 1 UNION WILL OR MORE GAME ROOMS THAT HAVE BEEN OPERATING. I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY HAS AS COMPLETED LIST. SO IF WE DON'T HAVE A COMPLETED LIST, THEN WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEND THEMES INS 37 BECK PUT OUT A PUBLIC NOTICE AND PUT IT ON OUR WEB SITE.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: GET OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT GUYS TO COME

AND GET A LIST. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: WHAT IS HANG, CHIEF. THOSE ILLEGAL GAMBLING OR CAMING

ROOMS, THEY ARE MAKING REVENUE. >> YES, SIR ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: WHILE THE COUNTY IS LOSING REVENUES BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE.

>> YES, SIR. WE ARE WORKING AS FAST AS WE CAN. I HAVE TWO -- TWO THAT ARE IN THE PROS SES NOW THAT WE MAY BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY START THE ON-SITE PHYSICAL TO SEND DEPUTIES TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE DONE EVERYTHING INSIDE THE BUILDING THEY ARE POSED TO DO.

THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IS GETTING ALL THE DOCUMENTS THEY NEED.

SOME MAY BE AS A RESULT -- AS THE COUNSELOR SAID, THEY JUST CAN'T SEEM TO GET THE PEOPLE OUT THERE.

BUT MOST OF THE TIME, THESE PEOPLE DON'T HAVE A GREAT DESIRE FOR DON'T SEEM TO HAVE ANY SENSE OF URGENCY TO GET THE DOCUMENTS TO US. FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF THE THINGS.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE A DIAGRAM OF OUR BUSINESS.

IT HAS TO BE DONE BY AN ARCHITECT.

I LOST COUNT OF THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO DID A HAND DRAWING AND SENT IT IN AND SAID THAT WILL CUT IT IT.

A LITTLE FRUSTRATING. >>JUDGE SCOTT: MR. LAZARIO.

YOU HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT. >> YES, YOUR HONOR.

WE HAVE SOMEBODY ONLINE THAT IS IT DOING THESE ARCHITECTURAL EVENTS, BUT THEY GOT TO RUN AROUND THE COUNTY WHEN THEY CAN SCHEDULE IT. WITH REGARD TO DEPUTY COOK.

I'M NOT IMPUNING HIS WORD IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER.

HOWEVER, AS AN ATTORNEY, I DON'T KNOW IF SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN AND HE WON'T BE HERE NEXT WEEK AND THEN I AM HOPING THAT THE PERSON WHO TAKES HIS ROLE WILL HONOR HIS PROMISE.

>> I HAD A -- I AM SORRY, SIR. I IS IT NOT MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF.

>> NO PROBLEM, CHIEF DEPUTY. I DON'T KNOW IF HE IS GOING TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANOTHER DIVISION AND SOMEONE ELSE COMES IN.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE PERSON ABOVE HIM WILL SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE JUST -- WE ARE JUST GOING TO CHANGE OUR POLICY HERE.

THAT IS MY CONCERN. IT IS NOT TO DIMINISH HIS WORD, BUT I CAN'T LEGALLY RELY ON THAT.

I CAN'T TELL THESE OWNERS THAT ARE APPLYING AND TRYING THAT -- DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE DATE. BECAUSE THEY ARE TRYING TO APPLY. THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THIS MEETING IS RECORDED AS WELL.

AND IT CAN BE BROUGHT UP IN ANYBODY A'S DEFENSE ON THAT.

[05:10:01]

SO IT IS AN ARGUABLE DEFENSE WE ARE IN ALL AGREEMENT OF THESE PEOPLE WHO STARTED THE APPLICATION PROCESS.

>>THE SHERIFF AND I HAVE SPOKEN EXTENSIVELY.

HE AND I ARE ON THE SAME FIEJ WORK WITH THESE WERE GAME ROOMS. IF I QUIT EXISTING TOMORROW, THE SHERIFF IS STILL A SHERIFF.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: HOW ABOUT A MOTION WE WILL NOT SHUT ANYTHING DOWN IF THEY ARE WORK WAS WITH YOU.

I DON'T WANT TO EXTEND DEADLINES.

>> BUT THEN YOU GET BE INDEFINITE GUIDELINE IF YOU SAY AS LONG AS THEY ARE WORKING WITH WITH YOU, LET YOU TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE AND COME A POINT WHERE THEY CAN SAY I AM WORKING WITH YOU AND STILL HAVE A PROVIDED DOCUMENT AND FOUR, FIVE OR SIX

MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: I WANTED TO HONOR WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND PUT IT INTO MOTION THAT IT IS NOT -- NOT DIMINISHING IT AND NOT COLLAR FEELING IT AND PUT IN MOTION TO AGREE OR DISAGREE AND WE ARE DONE.

IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING. I THINK IT GETS THAT DEFINITIVE DATE THAT YOU DESERVE, RIGHT. WE WILL CONTINUE TO BE -- AND FRANK -- I KNOW THAT YOU ALL ARE BATTLING ISSUES WITH THE CITIES, DIFFERENT CITIES AND GET IT ALL DONE.

HOPE HOPEFULLY -- AND HARD TO ASK FOR A CONTINUATION BECAUSE ALWAYS GOING TO BE AN ISSUE.

IF WE CAN COMMIT TODAY TO THAT -- TO THAT JUNE --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: JUNE 23. >> YOU ARE LOOKING FOR 06 DAYS, JUNE 23 IS THE MOTION -- I DON'T THINK YOU NEED IT BUT IF THE

COMMISSIONERS COURT. >> MATCHES WITH WHAT YOU ARE

SAYING. >> I GO WITH YOUR DIRECTION.

>>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THANK YOU, CHIEF.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION TO ALL THE APPLICANTS THAT APPLIED THE DEADLINE TO JUNE 23 FOR THEIR APPLICATION PROCESS.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? I WILL SECOND IT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? YOU ARE AN AYE? OKAY.

JUST TO GET IT ON PAPER. THE -- THE AYES HAVE IT.

I DO UNDERSTAND -- I THINK WE HAVE GIVEN WAY TOO MANY DEADLINE EXTENSIONS ON THIS. AND I DO I CAN ASSURE YOU JUNE 23, I WILL NOT BE VOTING AYE AGAIN FOR ANOTHER ONE OF THESE.

FOR SAFEKEEPING AND UNDERSTAND LEGALITY WHEN HE GOES TO HIS CUSTOMERS -- IT IS AN ISSUE WHEN YOU TELL -- IT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: DID YOU MAKE A MOTION SUBJECT TO THE

ONES THAT ALREADY APPLIED. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THE ONES WHO HAVE SO FAR APPLIED. FROM TODAY -- THIS LIST HE GAVE

US. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: THAT IS THE LIST THAT IS EFFECTIVE TODAY.

EVERYBODY WHO APPLIED TO DAY. >>JUDGE SCOTT: TO DATE.

AND THAT WAS MY MOTION AND TO EXTEND TO THESE PEOPLE.

>>THE ONLY EXCEPTION WOULD BE THE TWO THAT YOU HAVE HIGHLIGHTED. THEY ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THEY WENT INTO OPERATION AFTER JANUARY 1, SO THEY ARE NOT ENTITLED TO THE EXEMPTION TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE WHILE IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS.

ABOUT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE SAID THE ONE

THAT WERE ON -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THAT IS

NOT THE MOTION -- >> I SHUT THOSE TWO DOWN TODAY.

JUST SO YOU KNOW. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I WILL RETRACT MY MOTION AND HAVE IT SAY -- YOU HAD THE MOTION -- TO SAY WITH

THE EXCEPTION OF THESE TWO. >>COMMISSIONER MAREZ: WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THESE LISTED ON THE LIST.

>> I WILL SAY WITH THE EXCEPTION OF LUCK LONGHORN AND AFUA DULCE

AND MAGIC TOUCH. >>JUDGE SCOTT: I SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. 3-2.

THE AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHIEF COOK.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: WE NEED TO HAVE A VOTE TO EXTEND THE MEETING.

IT IS 5:00. IT IS A LONG DAY.

DO I HAVE A VOTE TO EXTEND? >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: SO

MOVED. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION TO

EXTEND. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: UNTIL WHAT TIME? ABOUT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: HOPEFULLY ANOTHER HOUR.

SURELY WE WILL BE THROUGH. WE DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT.

A MOTION UNTIL 6:00. I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. MOTION PASSES.

[05:15:04]

JUST -- PUBLIC WORKS, C. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING THE INTERLOCAL PURCHASE SYSTEMS TIPS CONTRACT

-- AT THE. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: JUDGE, WERE YOU GOING -- HATED TO SKIP AROUND -- CAN YOU SIT DOWN FOR A SECOND. I NOTICED THAT THE DOCTOR IS HERE. I AM SO SORRY.

[1. Discuss and consider approving a GSA Contract No. 36F79721D0118 purchase with Apex Integrated Distribution for autopsy equipment for the Nueces County Medical Examiner Office.]

I SAW YOU EARLIER -- I NEVER WOULD HAVE KEPT YOU SITTING THERE -- TO PURCHASING D-1. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVING A GSA CONTRACT 3 REQUEST PURCHASE APEX DISTRIBUTION FOR AUTOPSY EQUIPMENT. MICHAEL, DO YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN

OR DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY? >> I WILL LET FOREST EXPLAIN.

I ALREADY REVIEWED IT AND IT MEETS WITH MY APPROVAL AND WE REVIEWED IT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS WELL.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THE COST FOR THIS IS.

>> $105,748. >>JUDGE SCOTT: PART OF THE PURCHASING OF THE EQUIPMENT THAT YOU ALREADY HAD IN?

>> YES, JULY, THIS IS BACK FROM FUNDING JANUARY 4 FROM COMMISSIONERS COURT A LITTLE LESS THAN WHAT WE ASKED FOR FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEMS AGS AA. I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE

GONTZ GONZALEZ SECOND. >>JUDGE SCOTT: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. DO YOU WANT TO SPROE DUALS -- I AM NOT SURE THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE MET.

>> FOR THE RECORD, DR. CANNON WITH OUR MEDICAL EXAMINER'S

OFFICE. >> MY NAME IS CANNON, THE NEW DEPUTY CHIEF MEDICAL EXAMINER AND FROM BEXAR COUNTY AND I AM HAPPY TO MEET EVERYBODY AND I MET JUDGE BEFORE AND I MET COMMISSIONER CHESNEY AND GONZALEZ AND I SAID HI AND MAREZ AND INTRODUCED MYSELF AND COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THANK YOU FOR COMING TO CORPUS

CHRISTI. >> IT'S OKAY, JUDGE.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: WELCOME ON BOARD.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: JUAN, YOU CAN COME BACK UP.

>> WHO WAS THE SECOND. I CANNOT KEEP UP WITH YOU.

[1. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving The Interlocal Purchasing System (TIPS) Contract #200-802 purchase from Doggett Freightliner of South Texas, LLC via Cooper Equipment Company for a one (1) New 3500-gallon Etnyre water sprinkler with all standard equipment mounted on a 2023 Freightliner 108 SD, Cummins 250 HP with an Allison 6 speed auto transmission.]

SORRY. >>JUDGE SCOTT: ITEM C, PUBLIC WORKS. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING THE CONTRACT. JUDGE, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE TIPS CONTRACT FOR ONE OF OUR WATER TRUCKS WE HAVE BEEN NEEDING AND THE CONTRACT HAS GONE THROUGH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, PURCHASING AND THROUGHOUT COURT MANAGER AND WE

ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: SO

MOVED. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: SECOND. ABOUT.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND APPEAR SECOND, GONZALEZ AND HERNANDEZ. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

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

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. NEXT NUMBER 2, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NUMBER 2 BETWEEN NUECES COUNTY AND RICHTER ARCHITECTS FOR HILLTOP

COMMUNITY CENTER. >> JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS, WE REVIEWED THE DOCUMENT FOR SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NUMBER 2 BETWEEN RICHTER AND NUECES COUNTY AND PUBLIC WORKS IS

RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: WHAT ARE WE PAYING. WHAT PERCENTAGE ARE WE PAYING?

>> FROM 14%. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: 1% ONLY. WHAT HAPPENED HERE? I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE DOWN TO 12 OR 11 OR 10.

ALREADY CHARGED US 14% FOR THE WHOLE PHASE ONE, YOU KNOW.

IF. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I THOUGHT THIS WENT DOWN MORE THAN THAT.

I WAS LOOKING FOR MORE THAN 1%. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: SORRY TO BRING THIS UP. BUT I SAW COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ. IT IS OUR FAULT TOO, BUT HE COULD HAVE SAID SOMETHING. HE IS COMPLAINING THIS TIME AROUND, BUT HE SHOULD HAVE COMPLAINED THE FIRST TIME AROUND WHEN HE WAS MAKING MORE MONEY. BUT WE DIDN'T CATCH IT, BUT -- I BLAME OURSELVES FOR IT TOO, RIGHT.

BUT MAN, I DON'T KNOW IF -- FROM 14 TO 13.

AN WE ARE ONLY TALKING ABOUT $9 MILLION.

I THINK HIS NUMBERS. HE IS PAYING EVERYBODY ELSE IS REAL HIGH. 25%.

I DON'T KNOW IF HE WILL PAY 25% FOR SOME OF THE CONTRACTORS.

WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT 30%? HOW MUCH ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?

[05:20:01]

>> WHAT WAS THE LAST AMOUNT THAT HE CAME BACK FOR? I THOUGHT THE NUMBER WAS A BIGGER REDUCTION.

>> I GUESS FOR THE DDS, THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

RICHTER IS ON ZOOM ALSO. I DON'T KNOW IF -- IF YOU WANT RICHTER TO GO OVER IT, COMMISSIONERS.

HE IS ON THE ZOOM. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL -- I WANT Y'ALL TO TELL ME WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT BASED -- THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT BASED ON THE ASK.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: 600 -- >> WENT DOWN TO 12 MILLION.

AND 1 MILLION, WHATEVER THE CONSTRUCTION.

HE IS AT THE CREASING HIS FEE WITH THE CONTRACT.

IT WAS 14% AND NOW INCREASING IS TO 13%.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: ON HIS -- THE REDUCTION IS ONLY BECAUSE IT HAS GONE FROM THE 14 TO THE 9.

>> GOING TO 9. >> SMALL 1%.

>> THE AGREEMENT STATES 14. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: THE FIRST ONE WAS 14% ON $14 MILLION.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: CAME

DOWN TO $12 MILLION. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: BUT KEPT THE 14%.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: GOT PAID FOR 14%. MADE 660,000.

>> BASED ON THE $14 MILLION. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: HAD 14 AGAIN. SAID NO AND TALKING ABOUT $9 MILLION. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT $12 MILLION. TALKING ABOUT $9 MILLION AND HE STILL WANTS 14% AND DEEM DOWN TO ONE POINT THAT IS 13%.

I THINK IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN 10% BECAUSE I -- THE OTHER -- THE OTHER ARCHITECT AND PAYING THEM 10%, YOU KNOW, FOR BIG PROJECTS, YOU KNOW. I DON'T KNOW -- I MEAN I GUESS IT IS YOUR MONEY, COMMISSIONER. I THINK IT IS YOUR MONEY, I DON'T KNOW. BUT, I MEAN, I THOUGHT WE HAD WORKED OUT SOMETHING BETTER WITH THEM.

I AM SORRY TO SAY, MR. RICHTER, I COULDN'T SEE PAYING THAT MUCH MONEY. BUT THAT IS JUST ME.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I SAW A LARGE REDUCTION, BUT I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT ALL WE DID WAS REDUCE THE PROJECT.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. BECAUSE IT WAS REDUCED FOR THE

CONSTRUCTION. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I MEAN,

I AM SURE IT WILL PASS. >> SIR?

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: DO YOU THINK IT IS GOOD.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: INDUSTRY STANDARD.

YOU ARE IN A TOUGH SPOT, WHAT WOULD BE THE NORMAL INDUSTRY

STANDARD. >> NORMAL INDUSTRY STANDARD WILL BE BETWEEN 12% TO 14%. I MENTIONED THIS IN THE LAST MEETING. I THINK -- IN LOOKING AT IT, INITIALLY, THIS PROJECT WAS, YOU KNOW, HAD MULTIPLE -- THERE ARE MULTIPLE DISCIPLINES IN THIS PROJECT.

AND NORMALLY -- NORMAL PRACTICE BETWEEN 12 AND 14%.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: YOU SAY DISCIPLINES, A DEALER FOR --

>> YES, SIR, THERE WAS ALSO A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR LEED

CERTIFICATION. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: DO WE

HAVE TO USE LEED. >> I WAS TRYING TO FIND OUT IF I AM MUTED OR NOT. I AM LISTENING.

I DIDN'T KNOW IF I WAS CONNECTED.

SO, I I CAN ANSWER WHATEVER QUESTIONS.

I WILL JUST SAY THAT THE -- YOU KNOW, WHEN WE PROPOSED THIS AT THE BE GEPG OF THE PROJECT, WE FELT AND STILL FEEL IT IS ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE FEE THAT THE -- THAT THE PROJECT IS A RENOVATION PROJECT. IT INVOLVES SOME FLEX.

TEASE THAT ARE UNIQUE COMPLEXITIES THAT ARE UNIQUE THAT ARE NOT INVOLVED IN A PARTICULAR PROJECT AND WE ARE DOING ACTUALLY SEVERAL PROJECTS IN THIS FEE RANGE OR HIGHER FOR PUBLIC ENTITIES FOR SIMILAR -- SIMILAR KIND OF PROJECTS.

AND I KNOW -- I MEAN, I KNOW THERE ARE PEOPLE TO DO WORK FOR LESS FEE, BUT INCH PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, YOU -- YOU KNOW, THE FEES ARE BASED UPON THE LEVEL OF EFFORT AND THE COMPLEXITY OF THE PROJECT AND BASED ON ANY STANDARD PERCENTAGE WHEN OF.

WHEN THESE CONCERNS ARE RAISED BY THE COUNTY, WE ALWAYS TAKE THESE CONCERNS SERIOUSLY AND WE ALWAYS STRIVE TO SAVE OUR CLIENT MONEY AND BRING THE PROJECT COST DOWN EVEN IF IT INVOLVES MORE EFFORT FOR OURSELVES. AND NOT ONLY DID WE REDUCE THE FEE BY 1% WHICH IS CLOSE TO $100,000 ACTUALLY BUT WE ALSO HAVE WAIVED ANY -- ANY REQUEST FOR FEES THAT WE ALREADY SPENT

[05:25:02]

ON DESIGNING BID ALTERNATES FOR THE ADDITIONAL WORK THAT WAS ABOVE THE $9 MILLION. I KNOW THAT THE COUNTY HAS BUDGET OF $9 MILLION, BUT ON MANY OCCASIONS IN THE EARLY STAGES OF THIS PROJECT, IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THE -- THAT THE IDEAL BUDGET FOR THIS PROJECT THAT WE DID EVERYTHING THAT WE ENVISION -- COLLECTIVELY ENVISIONED WILL BE HIGHER AND THE -- THE COURT AT VARIOUS TIMES -- SHOULDN'T SAY THE COURT. I DON'T WANT TO QUOTE ANYBODY, BUT THE ABILITY TO -- TO RAISE ADDITIONAL MONEY TOP TRY TO -- TO INCREASE THE BUDGET, AND, OF COURSE, I UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE. WE ARE RETOOLING OUR EFFORTS TO WORK ENTERALLY WITHIN THE $9 MILLION.

AND WE ARE WAIVING THE FEES THAT WE SPENT ON THE EFFORTS ABOVE THE $9 MILLION AND REDUCING PERCENTAGE BOTH.

AND I REALLY THINK THAT WE HAVE BEEN VERY FAIR WITH THE COUNTY.

I THINK THE COUNTY IS ACTUALLY GETTING A GOOD VALUE AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO SIT DOWN AND SHOW. SHOW COSTS AND COMPARABLES IF THERE IS AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO DO THAT.

BUT RIGHT NOW WE WILL -- >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR MR. RICHTER. ONE IS, DO WE NEED TO GO -- DO

WE NEED TO USE LEED. >> I COULDN'T HEAR YOU.

COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: LEED.

>> OH, LEED? NO, GIVEN THE BUDGET, WE HAVE SAID WE WILL NOT PURSUE LEED BECAUSE THAT -- WE NEED TO DELIVER. I BELIEVE WE NEED TO DELIVER AS MUCH AS WE CAN FOR THE COUNTY WITHIN THIS BUDGET.

AND I THINK THAT IT IS NOT IN THE COUNTY'S BEST INTEREST RIGHT NOW. ANOTHER THEY THINK I DIDN'T MENTION THAT WE ARE PREPARED IN OUR OWN COSTS TO DO REDESIGN TO TRY TO ADJUST SOME OF THE DESIGN ELEMENTS SO WE CAN HOPEFULLY AFFORD TO RENOVATE ANOTHER ONE OF THE WINGS IN THE BASE BID AND THIS IS A CHANGE TO THE DESIGN THAT WE WILL BE MAKING AT OUR COST. JUST TO TRY TO GET THE COUNTY MORE VALUE WITHIN THE $9 MILLION.

AND THAT WILL BE A PRETTY ■GOOD HIT.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, THIS IS -- THIS IS MY PROBLEM, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, MY ENGINEER ARE NOT AGREEING TO REDUCE FEES BECAUSE THEY DID THE WORK THAT THEY WERE ASKED TO DO SO I AM HAVING TO ASSUME SOME OF THIS COSTS FOR THE ENGINEERS OUT OF A

REDUCED FEE. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: MR. RICHTER, AGAIN, THE FIRST PHASE WHEN DOING 14%.

YOU KNOW. AND THEY WERE GETTING -- ABOUT #00 200,000,000 EXTRA. AND WILL BALANCE THIS THING OFF.

I DON'T KNOW -- I DON'T KNOW COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ IF HE REALLY NEEDS THIS PROJECT TO START.

AND I KNOW HE REALLY WANTS PHASE ONE OF THIS PROJECT.

AND I THINK -- I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU -- YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING OF AN ADDITIONAL -- I THINK YOU NEED TO WORRY ABOUT DOING PHASE ONE AND FOR COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ TO START

USING PHASE ONE. >> YEAH, AND -- I MEAN WE FOCUSING ENTIRELY ON PHASE ONE, BUT WE ARE ACTUALLY TRYING TO -- WE ARE ACTUALLY MAKING DESIGN ADJUST 789S TO TRY TO GET -- FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU ARE GOING TO PLACE THE BRICK AND THE BRICK IS KIND OF AGED AND WE WILL PUT IN A NEW MATERIAL TO REPLACE THE BRICK AND TRYING TO GET THE MOST WE CAN OUT OF THE $9 MILLION, WE MAY REDETAIL TO SAVE THE BRICK, CLEAN IT, AND PUT THE NEW STRUCTURES IN A SIMILAR BRICK AND BE ABLE TO SAVE SOME MONEY SO THESE ARE JUST THINGS THAT ARE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE

COUNTY. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: I THINK THOSE THINGS SHOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN WORKED OUT BY NOW.

THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COUNTY AND COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ'S PROJECT. I THINK THIS SHOULD ALREADY BE WORKED OUT. WE ARE TOO LATE TO CHANGE THINGS. I THOUGHT PHASE ONE WAS READY TO

GO. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: SORRY, COMMISSIONER. I MAY INTERJECT HERE.

WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS AND I BROUGHT IT UP, AND THEN THE FORMER COUNTY JUDGE KIND OF TOOK THE LEAD ON THIS.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: TOOK IT OVER.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: WE ALL AGREED WHATEVER SHE WAS DIRECTING WILL RICHTER TO DO AND WE INSTRUCTED TO GO AHEAD AND

[05:30:01]

CONTINUE WITH THE PROCESS, OKAY. SO I THINK IT IS KIND OF LATE FOR US TO COME BACK. HE IS ALREADY TRIED TO HELP US AS MUCH AS HE CAN. AND I DON'T THINK IT IS HIS FAULT. MAYBE MORE OUR FAULT FOR AGREEING WITH THE FORMER COUNTY JUDGE, LETTING HER TAKE THE LEAD ON SOMETHING THAT SHE KNEW NOTHING ABOUT OPINIONED THERE IS

-- THERE IS. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: COMMISSIONER, I DON'T KNOW IF I AGREE WITH YOU BUT HE NEEDS TO TAKE THE FALL. AND COMMISSION REMEMBER, NOT A COUNTY JUDGE. AND THE DOG PARK GIVEN TO

SNOWFALLABM. >> AND HE IS SAYING THAT RIBTER

SHOULD -- AND HE WAS SAYING -- >> LET THE FORMER JUDGE TAKE

CONTROL OF THE COURT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: UP UNTIL -- LET ME INTERJECT A SECOND. AIDEE AND I TOOK A PHONE CALL TO WORK ON THIS AND WE DID AT THAT YOU CAN TO MR. RICHTER AND EXPLAINED IN GREAT DETAIL THAT THERE WAS NO MORE FUNDING.

I THINK HE HAD BEEN LED ALL ALONG THIS WAS STILL -- EVEN AFTER IT WENT FROM ADDS 14 MILLION JOB TO A $12 MILLION JOB. AND HE CONTINUED TO BE LED.

UNFORTUNATELY NOT BY THE COMMISSIONER, BECAUSE IT IS IN HIS DISTRICT. HE WAS LED BY SOMEONE ELSE.

AND WE PUT IT STOP TO IT JUST RECENTLY.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: NOT ON US.

HOLD ON A MINUTE. THIS IS WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

THIS COURT NEVER AUTHORIZED A $14 MILLION DESIGN.

AND IF SOMEONE CAN SHOW ME A VOTE THAT WE VOTED ON A $14 MILLION DESIGN, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT.

I HAVE SAID ALL ALONG. I WAS IN ON THIS PROJECT FROM THE MINUTE YOU AND I MET. WE CAN COME UP TO $10 MILLION, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF PROJECT. I SAID THAT TO DAVID RICHTER.

HOW DID THIS -- SOMEONE STARTED DESIGNING ON $14 MILLION.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: THE FORMER COUNTY JUDGE.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THAT'S A COURT VOTE.

>> SINCE WE ARE ALL BEING VERY CANDID HERE, THE -- THERE WERE A NUMBER OCCASIONS IN OPEN COURT WHEN THE PREVIOUS COUNTY JUDGE SAID WE DO NOT HAVE THE CONSTRUCTION MONEY FOR THIS PROJECT, BUT WE DO HAVE THE DESIGN MONEY.

AND -- AND OUR YOU CONTRACT WAS WRITTEN ON THAT BASIS.

WE HAVE A AND SEE CONTRACT WITH THE COUNTY THAT -- A SIGNED CONTRACT WITH THE COUNTY THAT -- THE LAST TIME WE RENEGOTIATED

THE CONTRACT -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: ON $14

MILLION. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THAT WAS

VOTED ON THIS I ABOUT COURT. >> YES, SIR, ABSOLUTELY.

I HAVE ALL THE DOCUMENTATION. I WOULD NOT ATTEMPT -- BECAUSE -- BECAUSE THE -- THE PREVIOUS COUNTY JUDGE FELT WITH SOME CONFIDENCE THAT THE MONEY WAS AVAILABLE, COULD BE RAISED AND IT WAS WORTH IT TO THE COUNTY TO GO AHEAD AND PROCEED WITH THE DESIGN AND WE WOULD ALWAYS BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAD TO BACK UP, WHICH IS -- WHICH WE ARE DOING AS WE SPEAK, IF WE HAD TO BACK UP, WE COULD ALWAYS BACK UP.

BUT SHE FELT LIKE THEY SHOULD GO AHEAD AND FUND THE FULL DESIGN.

THAT IS THE WAY MY CONTRACT WAS WRITTEN.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I NEED TO SEE THAT THEN.

I NEED TO SEE THE COURT ACTION ON THAT.

BECAUSE IF WE -- THAT IS IS A DIFFERENT DEAL.

IF WE SCREWED UP, THEN I NEED TO SEE THAT.

I NEED TO SEE IT WHERE I VOTED FOR A $14 MILLION.

I NEED TO SEE IT AS A COURT ACTION.

AND IF -- AND IF -- I WANT TO SEE THE CONTRACT, BECAUSE I DON'T -- I MEAN, I AM NOT SAYING IT COULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED BECAUSE WE ALL GOT THE WOOL PULLED OVER OUR EYES.

IF I GOT THE WOOL PULLED OVER MY EYES, THAT IS ON ME.

I WANT TO SEE THE COURT ACTION AUTHORIZED A $14 MILLION DESIGN AND THE CONTRACT THEIR BACKS IT UP.

I NEVER SUPPORTED A $14 MILLION DESIGN AND I MIGHT HAVE MESSED UP. IF I DID IT, FILL APOLOGIZE TO DAVID. I WILL LIKE TO WAIT.

DO WE HAVE THAT. HAVE THE MEN FROM THE COURT, SOMETHING THAT SAID WE APPROVED THE 14DZ MILLION DESIGN.

>>KARA SANDS: YEAH, WE NEED THE DATE THAT THE VOTE HAPPENED ON.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.

HE HAS HIS CONTRACTS BUT I NEED THE MINUTES TO AUTHORIZE.

I. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I DON'T

KNOW WHAT DATE IT WAS. >> APRIL 20.

THE CONTRACT IS DATED APRIL 20. >> COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THAT IS THE CONTRACT. I WANT THE COURT MINUTES.

[05:35:03]

>>JUDGE SCOTT: USUALLY SIGN IT THE SAME DAY.

CONTRACTS YOU SIGN IT THE SAME DAY.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: NOT UNLESS IT IS READY.

BUT IS APRIL 20 -- APRIL 20 OF LAST YEAR.

>> 2021. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: 2021.

SO TWO YEARS AGO. >> 2021.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT BECAUSE MAKES A DIFFERENCE IF WE AGREED TO THAT. I UNDERSTAND, TOO, THAT WE CAN MOVE -- IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT DAVID WAS SAYING, I DON'T THINK HE SHOULD EAT ANY FEES. SO WE CAN CHANGE THE CONTRACT GOING FORWARD, RIGHT. IT IS THE GOING BACK.

I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO EAT ENGINEER FEES IF WE HAVE AUTHORIZE ALL THAT. WHAT WE DEFINITELY.

I AM STILL GOING TO STAY WE NEED TO RENEGOTIATE FOR THE GOING FORWARD PORTION AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY DO THAT.

CORRECT, SOMEBODY SOMEBODY IN WHAT WE WERE TOLD LAST TIME.

JENNY, AM I -- DID I MISS THAT? >> I HAVE AGREED -- MY FIRM HAVE AGREED TO ALL THE ADJUSTMENTS. REDUCE THE FEE BY 5%.

TO NOT CHARGE ON THE PAST WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE FOR THE BID ALTERNATES. AND TO GO FORWARD WITH THE 13% INSTEAD OF -- INSTEAD OF THE 14% WHICH FOR A RENOVATION PROJECT OF THIS NATURE, IT IS -- IT IS ABSOLUTELY DEFENSIBLE AND FAIR AND HONESTLY, IF WE WERE TO NEGOTIATED -- IF WE WERE NEGOTIATING AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE PROJECT RIGHT NOW, WE WOULD NOT -- WE WOULD NOT BE WILLING OR ABLE TO DO A PROJECT OF THIS NATURE FOR LESS THAN 13%.

THIS. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: DAVID, I DON'T THINK IT IS FAIR THAT YOU HAVE TO EAT THOSE ENGINEER COSTS IF THIS COURT APPROVED SOMETHING.

THAT IS NOT A FAIR. I WANT TO SEE THAT.

>> I GOT ALL -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: IF SOMEBODY HAS THE MINUTES FROM THE MEETING THAT WE APPROVED A 14%. THERE WAS OF A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT. THAT IS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT BEFORE I GO FORWARD BECAUSE I STILL WANT -- I STILL WANT TO NEGOTIATE ON THE PERCENT STAGE GOING FORWARD, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE SAME FEELING -- I DON'T THINK HE SHOULD EAT FEES IF THE COURT PAY PROVED IT. CAN SOMEONE GET A HOLD OF THAT

QUICKLY. >> IT IS ON THE 20TH.

ABOUT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: A

WEDNESDAY? >> APRIL 20.

THAT IS THE DATE IT WAS -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: MIGHT

CHANGE MY ENTIRE -- >> THE DATE THE MINUTES SAY IT

WAS EXECUTED. >>JUDGE SCOTT: VOTED ON BY THE

COMMISSIONERS COURT. >> I JUST LOOKED IT UP ON THE AGENDA TAMPA SAYS IT WAS ON THE 20TH.

IT HAS -- IT HAS SOMETHING ATTACHED.

I -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WHAT IS ATTACHED DOESN'T ALWAYS GET APPROVED.

>> SUPPLEMENTAL NUMBER ONE, A SECOND ACTION BY THE COURT THAT SELL REAFFIRMED ALL OF THESE CONDITIONS WERE REAFFIRMED.

THE COURT HAS VOTED ON IT AT LEAST TWICE.

WE HAVE BEEN ACTING -- HONESTLY MY INTEREST -- WE -- WE LOVE THIS PROJECT. WE LOVE THE COUNTY.

ALL WE WANT TO DO IS MOVE FORWARDND HAVE A SUCCESSFUL PROJECT. AND THAT'S IT.

AND WE ARE WILLING TO TAKE SOME HITS TO DO IT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I APPRECIATE THAT.

I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD IF THIS BOARD MESSED UP AND DID WHAT WE DID. SO I JUST NEED --

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: TAKE CARE OF COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I GET IT, BUT WE NEED TO BE FAIR WITH RICHTER TOO. THAT IS WHAT I NEED IS THE BACK-UP. TWO YEARS AGO.

I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT I REMEMBER THAT TWO YEARS AGO.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: ALL I REMEMBER WE INSTRUCTED HIM TO PRO PROCEED.

FORMER JUDGE CANALES INSTRUCTED HIM AND WE AGREED.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: UNANIMOUS VOTE. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: HAVE YOU

SEEN THAT. >>JUDGE SCOTT: THAT'S WHAT I AM ASK ASKING.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I DON'T KNOW.

I JUST DON'T REMEMBER. SO I GUESS -- DO YOU WANT --

WANT TO PAUSE FOR A MINUTE. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT AND COME BACK TO IT WHILE THEY ARE -- I DON'T WANT TO TABLE IT. WE HAVE A FEW MORE ITEMS TO

[2. Discuss and consider conditional selection for RFQ 3153-21 Request of Qualifications and Approach for a Public Private Partnership in the Redevelopment of Historic 1914 Courthouse.]

DISCUSS. MOVING STON PURCHASING.

ITEM NUMBER 2. DISCUSS AND CONDITIONAL SELECTION OF RFQ 3153-21 REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION AND APPROACH FOR A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP IN REDEVELOPMENT OF THE HISTORIC

1914 COURTHOUSE. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: TO REJECT ALL BIDS. A MOTION TO REJECT BIDS -- IS IT

A BID. >> PROPOSAL.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: MOTION TO REJECT A PROPOSAL.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THAT IS YOUR RECOMMENDATION AS WELL TO REJECT

IT. >> THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION. I AM NOT A MEMBER OF THE

[05:40:01]

COMMITTEE, BUT YES. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. >> THE MOTION AND WHO MADE THE

SECOND -- I CAN'T HEAR DOWN -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I MADE

THE MOTION. >>JUDGE SCOTT: BRENT MADE THE MOTION. AND COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ --

>>JUDGE SCOTT: EVERYONE VOTED AYE.

THANK YOU. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: SHE CAN

[3. Discuss and consider conditional selection for RFQ No. 3233-23 Architectural Services for Infrastructure Projects (ARPA).]

HEAR THROUGH THE PLEXY. >>JUDGE SCOTT: SPENT THE WEEK WITH GRANDKID. ITEM NUMBER 3, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CONDITIONAL SELECTION RFQ 3233-23

ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES. >> ABOUT WE RECEIVED ONE FROM INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERS AND RECOMMENDING CONDITIONAL

SELECTION. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: MOTION

TO APPROVE. >>JUDGE SCOTT: SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

[4. Discuss and consider conditional selection for RFQ No. 3232-23 Engineering Services for Infrastructure Projects (ARPA).]

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THAT WAS ME, KARA.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: ITEM NUMBER 4, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CONDITIONAL SELECTION RFQ 3232-23 ENGINEERING SERVICES.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WE GOT TO DO THEM ALL.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: HE MADE THE MOTION.

>> NOT ALL SEVEN, Y'ALL. WE RECEIVED SEVEN PROPOSALS BUT ONLY RECOMMENDING FOUR LJA ENGINEERING, GOVIND, INTERNATIONAL CONSULTING, AND AG 3 GROUP LCC.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: DIDN'T THINK WE WOULD DO ALL OF THEM,

FOR PETE'S SAKE. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE FOUR. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

THINK OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES THANK YOU.

DO WE NEED YOU BACK IN YOUR SEAT, KARA FOR TO YOU GO

[1. Approve Budget Change Order No. 10 for Fiscal Year 2022-2023.]

FORWARD? >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: KEEP

TRUCKING. >>JUDGE SCOTT: FOR THE AUDITOR B 1, APPROVE BUDGET CHANGE ORRDER NUMBER 10 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022- 2022-2023.

>> I LOOKED AT IT AND IT LOOKS FINE TO ME UNLESS LISA WANTS TOP SAY SOMETHING ABOUT IT. I WOULD MOVE APPROVAL.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION TO APPROVE.

AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. E-2, APPROVAL CAPITAL PROJECT

[2. Approve Capital Project Change Order No. 119.]

CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 119. ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: LISA. >>JUDGE SCOTT: YEAH.

>> YES, I AM RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING THE APPROVAL OF CAPITAL BUDGET 119. THIS IS THE SAME CAPITAL PROJECT CHANGE ORDER THAT WAS -- WELL, KIND OF RELATED TO THE HILLTOP AGENDA ITEM THE EXACT SAME CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET CHANGE ORDER THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY SIT INNED ON THE 8TH.

AND WAS TABLED PENDING THE OTHER AGENDA ITEM REGARDING HILLTOP ALLOCATION OF FUNDING. OH, MR. IS MYSTERY IS A.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: SO MOVED.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: SECOND.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU.

WE WILL GO BACK TO -- I GUESS YOU HAVE ALL THE DOCUMENTS WE NEED FOR C-2. ARE YOU ALL READY FOR C-2, GO

BACK TO DISCUSS THE RICHTER -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I AM

LOOKING FOR MINUTES. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE ARE COMING BACK TO IT. F-1 AND 2.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: IF YOU WANT TO DO F-1.

THE VIDEO? WHAT YOU TEND TOP DO IT SHALL IT WILL JUST SAY MOVE APPROVAL AND MOVE APPROVAL AND IS ATTACHED.

SO I THINK THAT IT IS ATTACHED TO SOMETHING YOU MOVED APPROVAL

TOO. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I DON'T KNOW. I NEED TO SEE.

>> WE WILL FIND IT. THE MINUTES IS JUST GOING TO

HAVE MOVE APPROVAL. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: MIGHT

NOT. >>KARA SANDS: I AM LOOKING TO

SEE BECAUSE THERE ARE SEVERAL. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: WE NEED

THE BACK-UP ALSO. >>KARA SANDS: WHATEVER WAS

ATTACHED AND SIGNED. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: DO WE HAVE TO DO THIS TODAY. IS THIS CRUCIAL.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: GO AHEAD AND APPROVE IT.

I MEAN, WHAT -- >> COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: I

WILL JUST VOTE NO. >> COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: JUST

THINK IT IS HIGH. >>KARA SANDS: YOU WERE --

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: I CAN'T -- IT DOESN'T -- IF MY VOTE -- I

[05:45:02]

CAN'T VOTE FOR SOMETHING TODAY WITHOUT THE BACK-UP THAT I NEED.

IF THERE IS ENOUGH TO PASS IT KNOW MY VOTE IS BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION. I GET IT.

I AM NOT TRYING TO HOLD EVERYTHING UP IF IT IS GOING TO HOLD SOMETHING UP. WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO SKOPT SCOTT WE HAVE A MOTION, ITEM C, PUBLIC WORKS NUMBER 2.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO PASS. TO APPROVE THIS.

DO I HAVE A SECOND. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ:

SECOND. >>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND A

SECOND. >>KARA SANDS: WE DON'T HAVE IT.

NEVER RETURNED. THE RESOLUTION THAT YOU APPROVED IT SHALL WHAT DO THE MINUTES SAY?

IS THAT IT WAS APPROVED. >>JUDGE SCOTT: MINUTES SHOWED IT

WAS APPROVED. >> WE NEVER RECEIVED ABOUT BACK

TO MY OFFICE. >> A RESOLUTION FOR SUPPLEMENT A NUMBER 1 THAT SPELLED OUT THE $14 MILLION, THE 14% OF THAT ESTIMATED COST AT THAT TIME, BUT IT WASN'T ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE AGENDA, THERE IS NO FILES ATTACHED. WE GOT A COPY OF THE DOCUMENT FROM PUBLIC WORKS, BUT WASN'T AN EXECUTED DOCUMENT.

ABOUT CHEST THAT ISSY DID WE VOTE ON.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: WE MADE A MOTION AND PASSED AND MOVE FORWARD, BUT THE THING IS, AGAIN, ANOTHER MESS WE HAVE TO

CLEAN UP. >>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ:

EXACTLY WHAT IT IS. >>KARA SANDS: A PROBLEM AS WELL BECAUSE MAY NOT STSH WHAT YOU VOTED ON MAY NOT BEEN WHAT WAS THERE. IF.

>>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: FIND THESE THINGS OUT AS WE GO.

>>COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ: AND FIND SOME MORE.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND MOVE FORWARD AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGH. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: NO. FERPG.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO ATHEM IN F-1.

DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CREATING AN UNFREEZING --

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: MARK ME AN AN ABSTENTION.

I CAN'T BELIEVE WE ARE IN THIS STINKING MESS.

PUT ME AS AN ABSTENTION. >>KARA SANDS: I WILL GO BACK AND

FIND OUT WHAT HAPPENED. >>JUDGE SCOTT: PUT ME DOWN AS I WASN'T HERE AT THE TIME. [LAUGHTER]

[1. Discuss and consider creating and unfreezing a Micro-Computer Specialist position in the County Jail (Dept# 3720) and approve deletion of (2) vacant cadet corrections positions.]

ON ITEM F-1, HUMAN RESOURCES, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CREATING AND UNFREEZING MICROCOMPUTER SPECIALIST POSITION IN THE COUNTY JAIL AND APPROVING THE DELETION OF TWO VACANT CADET CORRECTION POSITIONS. THIS IS FOR THE FULL-TIME I.T.

PERSON. ARE YOU GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT, MELINDA OR EVERYBODY -- I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT IT.

THE -- THE -- THE SHERIFF NEEDS A FULL-TIME POSITION DEDICATED TO WORKING ON THAT. AND THIS WAS HOW HE WAS GOING TO CREATE IT. ON THEIR -- WHAT ARE THOSE THINGS ON THE WALL. THE -- THE INTERCOMES.

THEY ARE ALWAYS BREAKING -- YEAH, THEY ARE ALWAYS BREAKING.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: JUDGE, CAN I -- I GOT TO ASK SOMETHING ON THIS. I AM REALLY BOTHERED ABOUT WHAT WE JUST DID, BECAUSE I DON'T SEE -- I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN HERE ABOUT $14 MILLION. I GOT IT FIVE MINUTES AGO AND TRYING TO LOOK AT IT. BUT AIDEE SAYS NOTHING IN HERE THAT SAID IT WAS $14 MILLION IN THIS CONTRACT.

IT JUST TALKS ABOUT THE PERCENTAGES AND MAYBE IT IS IN HERE SOMEWHERE. MAYBE DAVID CAN POINT IT OUT, BUT I JUST -- I -- I DON'T SEE WHERE IT SAYS THIS $14 MILLION DESIGN THING. I DON'T SEE HOW WE EVER VOTED ON IT. BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ACTION IS BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE KARA'S STUFF.

>>KARA SANDS: HISTORICALLY YOU WOULD VOTE ON -- THERE IS NO BACK-UP AND YOU WOULD APPROVE IT AND BACK-UP WOULD COME LATER.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: MAYBE THE CASE, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW WE DID THAT BECAUSE WE CAN'T FIND IT -- ABOUT.

>>KARA SANDS: DEPENDS ON WHICH ONE IT IS BECAUSE SO MANY

SUPPLEMENTAL -- >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: CAN YOU SHOW ME SOMEWHERE TO HAVE A $14 MILLION APPROVAL BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE IT IN THE CONTRACT I JUST GOT GIVEN.

HE SAID ON A $14 MILLION DESIGN. MY QUESTION IS HOW DID WE GET TO $14 MILLION AND HE SAID HE VOTED ON IT A COUPLE OF TIMES AND HE HAS IT ON THE CONTRACT FOR THE $14 MILLION.

I KNOW THE 14% IS IN THERE, BUT WHERE DOES THE $14 MILLION COME IN. I DON'T REMEMBER --

>> COMMISSIONER, I AM GOING TO SEE IF I CAN FIND A RESOLUTION.

IT WON'T BE EXECUTED BUT A COPY THAT WAS NOT ATTACHED TO THE

AGENDA. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT 14DZ MILLION. BUT NOTHING IN THIS CONTRACT THAT SAYING BEING OF $134 MILLION.

DOES IT. >> AM I MUTED.

CAN YOU HEAR ME. >>JUDGE SCOTT: WE CAN HEAR YOU.

[05:50:04]

>> COMMISSIONER, I THINK -- I DON'T HAVE THE DOCUMENTS IN FRONT OF ME AND I THINK IT PROBABLY IS CORRECT THAT THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT DID NOT SAY $14 MILLION.

I KNOW THAT IN OUR VERY FIRST PRESENTATION TO THE COURT AFTER WE WERE -- AFTER THE CONTRACT WAS SIGNED WE PRESENTED $14 MILLION AS THE TOTAL STEMMED COST.

RECOGNIZING THAT THE COUNTY DID NOT HAVE THAT KIND OF CONSTRUCTION FUNDS AVAILABLE. THAT WAS CLEAR FROM THE GET-GO.

BUT THE PREVIOUS JUDGE BASICALLY SAID WE SHOULD PROCEED WITH THE DESIGN AND TRY TO RAISE THE MONEY.

SO WE PRESENTED THAT INITIAL 14 TO THE COURT IN OUR EARLY SCHEMATIC PRESENTATIONS. ABOUT.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: DID WE VOTE ON THAT, DAVID.

>> I DON'T -- THAT -- I AM NOT GOING TO GO BY RECOLLECTION.

YOU WILL HAVE TO LOOK BACK AT THE RECORD IF YOU VOTED TO APPROVE THE PRESENTATION I MADE, BUT I DO KNOW THERE WAS A VOTE TO APPROVE SUPPLEMENTAL NUMBER 1 WHICH WAS WRITTEN BY THE COUNTY.

IT WAS WRITTEN BY LAN AT THE TIME BUT THE COUNTY DRAFTED SUPPLEMENTAL NUMBER ONE IN ORDER TO ESSENTIAL CODIFY THOSE NUMBERS AND THAT IS WHERE -- SUPPLEMENTAL NUMBER ONE DOES STATE THE $14 MILLION THAT STATES THE SCHEMATIC DESIGN FEE AND THE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FEE AND THE COURT, HE BELIEVE, APPROVED FORMALLY SUPPLEMENTAL NUMBER ONE, WHICH DID INCLUDE THE $14 MILLION. AND THEN WE PROCEEDED TO CONTINUE ON THAT BASIS WITH THE TINT TO TRY TO DESIGN FOR AS LITTLE AS WE COULD AND STILL ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT. THAT IS WHERE THE $12 MILLION CAME. WE DID COST SAVINGS AND VALUE ENGINEERING AND WE GOT THE PROJECT -- THE TOTAL PROJECT DOWN TO $12 MILLION WHEN THE 14 ESSENTIALLY WENT AWAY AND WE STARTED DE NOMINATING. AND NOW THE 12 IS GONE AND DOWN TO 9. WE ARE NOW RETOOLING OUR FEES TO 9. ONLY NOT GOING COMPLETELY RETROACTIVE BECAUSE A LOT OF THIS MONEY HAS ALREADY BEEN SPENT, BUT FOR THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE, WE HAVE PROPOSED THAT WE CALCULATE OUR FEE ON THE $9 MILLION.

EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE DONE A FAIR AMOUNT OF THE WORK PRIOR TO WHEN WE WERE GIVEN THE DEFINITIVE, YOU KNOW, DIRECTIONS TO ONLY DESIGN TO 9 MILLION, EVEN THOUGH WE DID A GOOD BIT OF WORK.

WE SAID WE WOULD GO AND DENOMINATE OUR FEES BASED ON THE 9 MILLION AND GO FROM 13 TO 14. AND ALL OF THIS IS BASICALLY -- EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE A SIGNED CONTRACT FOR 14% AND PRESENTED THE 14 AND THEN 12 AND NOW 9. YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE TEAMS. SO IT IS JUST -- I'M JUST TRYING TO GET CLARITY TO WE CAN GO FORWARD HONESTLY. BUT I DO KNOW THE 14 WAS NAME IN SUPPLEMENTAL 1. AND THE COURT DID ACT ON

SUPPLEMENTAL NUMBER 1. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: OKAY, I AM DONE NOW. THANK YOU.

THAT IS CLEAR AS MUD. GO AHEAD.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: MOVING CONTINUE TO HUMAN RESOURCES.

WE HAD THE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CREATING -- UNFREEZING THE MICROCOMPUTER SPECIALIST POSITION IN THE COUNTY JAIL.

THIS IS ON THE INTERCOMS. THEY HAD SOMEONE IN THERE DOING THIS PART-TIME AND IT IS REALLY A FULL-TIME.

THEY ARE ALWAYS HAVING TO FIX THESE BECAUSE THE INMATES ARE TEARING THEM TOWN. SO THE SHERIFF IS CREATING A POSITION OUT OF TWO OF HIS. WE JUST HAVE TO APPROVE THIS, IF

WE CAN GET A MOTION. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: ONE OR

TWO? >>JUDGE SCOTT: ONE PERSON BUT DELETING TWO OF HIS VACANT CADET POSITIONS.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: A NO COST.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: NO COST, YES. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: SECOND.

>> ACTUALLY A SAVINGS. >> A SAVINGS OF $0,000.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THAT IS AWESOME.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION. TO WE HAVE A SECOND.

>>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: YES, I DID.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: A MOTION AND A SECOND.

[2. 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.]

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

F-#, DISCUSS -- WE ALREADY MOVED THAT TO THE FIRST MEETING IN

APRIL. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: NO? NO, WE DID NOT CHANGED THAT. F-#, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER THE RECLASSIFICATION AND REOR REORGANIZIZATION OF THE SPECIAL ADVISOR FOR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, COMMUNICATIONS AND

LEGAL AFFAIRS POSITION. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: THAT ONE WE SAID WE WOULD MOVE FORWARD ADVERTISE WITH MINOR

CHANGES ON THE JOB DESCRIPTION. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: MAKE A

MOTION. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: HANG IN A MOTION THAT WE MOVE FORWARD ON THE POSITION AND ADVERTISE WITH

[05:55:03]

SOME -- WITH THE MINOR CHANGES WE CAME UP WITH AND ALSO ONE OF THE CHANGES WAS TO LAW PREFERRED BUT NOT REQUIRED.

>>JUDGE SCOTT: LAW DEGREE. >>COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ: WOULD

BE REARED. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: AND IT SHALL THERE WAS A COUPLE OF THINGS JENNY HAD --

>> THE PART THAT I TOOK ISSUE WITH IS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT

ORIGINAL DRAFT. >>COMMISSIONER CHESNEY: THE ONE WE PASSED. ONE YOU CALLED ME AND HAD THE ORIGINAL -- THIS IS THE ONE WE PASSED.