[G. 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.]

ALL THIS IS SAYING. >> OKAY. MOVING ON. I THINK WE HAVE ADDRESSED THAT. WE WILL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT. I HAVE SUZANNE GALLAGHER SIGNED UP FIRST. YES MA'AM.

>> GOOD MORNING JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS. I'M NOT GOING TO ATTACK YOU. I'M JUST GOING TO

>> FROM MY HEART. I AM SORT OF HERE REPRESENTING A LOT OF MY NEIGHBORS IN CAL AND ROB'S TELL THAT HAVE RECENTLY LEARNED ABOUT THE PROPOSED AMMONIA PLANT THAT WE FEEL IS IN OUR RITUAL BACKYARD. I KNOW IT ISN'T ON THE AGENDA AND I CAN'T FIND ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO SAY I KNOW ALL ABOUT THIS AND LET ME TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT. THIS HAS BEEN MY FULL-TIME JOB FOR THREE WEEKS NOW. WHAT I WANT TO SAY IS WE FEEL LIKE , OKAY, IF YOU GO TO THAT PROPERTY AND YOU LOOK TO THE LEFT INTO MILES THERE IS A NURSING HOME AND TWO PRESCHOOLS. ACROSS THE STREET IS AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. AND IF YOU GO TO ROB'S TOWN DOWN AVENUE J NOT EVEN THREE MILES AWAY IS ANOTHER NURSING HOME. AND THAT 2.6 MILES THERE ARE FOUR SCHOOLS . AT THREE MILES THERE ARE TWO HIGH SCHOOLS.

THERE'S AN OPEN WATER CANAL THAT BRINGS DRINKING WATER TO ROB'S TELL ME GOES RIGHT BY THE PROPERTY. TO SOME DRINKING WATER. THEY MAKES IT I UNDERSTAND. WITHIN FIVE MILES YOU HAVE TO WATER FILTRATION PLANTS. AND ROB'S TOWN AND ONE ACROSS 77. THERE WAS RECENTLY AN EXPLOSION IN SHEPARD, TEXAS. IT WASN'T AMMONIA, IT WAS CHEMICALS. NONETHELESS, IT WAS A TON OF 2000 AND THEY HAVE A SHELTER IN PLACE FOR FIVE-MILE RADIUS. THAT WAS A TOWN OF 2000. WHERE I LIVE THREE MILES DOWNWIND FROM THE PROPOSED SITE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT 25,000 CITIZENS, POSSIBLY. SO, I WOULD BEG, PLEAD FOR EVERYONE OF YOU, EVERYONE HERE, TO DRIVE TO THAT LOCATION AND GET OUT AND FEEL WHAT IT FEELS LIKE OUT HERE.

THAT'S WHY I MOVED OUT HERE. I RAISE CHICKENS, I RAISE MY SONS IN MY HOUSE. MOVE.HERE TO BE IN IT

>> REPORTER: ATMOSPHERE. I NEVER SAW, NEITHER DID MY NEIGHBORS WHO LIVED THERE 30 YEARS, WE NEVER WOULD HAVE ENVISIONED OR SOMETHING THIS COMING SO CLOSE TO US. IT'S NOT THE PLACE FOR IT. WE ARE THE CITIZENS IT MAY BENEFIT SOMEONE, I'M SURE IT DOES, BUT IT DOESN'T BENEFIT ANY OF US.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK THAT YOU DRIVE OUT THERE AND GET OUT OF YOUR CAR AND TAKE A LOOK AND SEE WHAT IT FEELS LIKE. AND WHEN YOU LOOK THAT WAY YOU WILL SEE THE TREES AND THERE'S A CEMETERY WHERE A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE LOVED ONES VERY THAT WOULD BE NOT EVEN A QUARTER MILE FROM THIS PLANT WITH TWO FLARES. IF YOU LOOK THIS WAY YOU WILL SEE THE TREES IN SHELTERS OF ROB'S TOWN. IF YOU LOOK THIS WAY YOU WILL SEE THE NOT SHELTERS, STRUCTURES, SORRY. IF YOU LOOK THIS WAY YOU WILL SEE TREES AND NEIGHBORHOODS OF CAL ALLEN.

ANYWAY, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME AND A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE I FEEL LIKE THE LOCATION IS UNSAFE I FEEL LIKE IT'S IRRESPONSIBLE. I EVEN FEEL LIKE IT'S UNETHICAL TO BUILD

[00:40:02]

SOMETHING LIKE THAT WITH A SUBSTANCE SO VOLATILE AND LETHAL. IN THE BACKYARD OF SO MANY CITIZENS. THANK YOU FOR

YOUR ATTENTION. >> THANK YOU MA'AM.

>> RACHEL COLE BOLERO. >> GOOD MORNING. 522 HANCOCK.

I'M HERE , ONE, I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY ON YOUR DAIS THAT WE HAVE A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO TALK TO YOU GUYS AND

>> TO YOU AND LET YOU KNOW EVERY CONCERN THAT WE HAVE ON ANY LEVEL . IF YOU GUYS DON'T ALLOW THAT WE WILL MAKE CHANGES COME NOVEMBER. OR IN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS. I'M HERE, WHEN, BECAUSE OF BEEN HAPPENING. I MAY SITUATE, BY THE WAY. TAXPAYER. I'M HERE SPEAKING ON THAT BEHALF. LET'S MAKE OUT OF THAT. I'M PRETTY MUCH OVER THE DELAYED TACTICS THAT HAVE BEEN HAPPENING WITH WAS BUILT IN THREE YEARS. THERE WAS NO INTERNET BACK THEN. JUST HARD-WORKING HONEST PEOPLE, HONEST POLITICIANS THAT WEREN'T CORRUPT. IT'S GOT IN THREE YEARS. IN JULY IT WILL BE THREE YEARS SINCE OUR PEER HAS BEEN OUT. AND NOTHING, NO MOVEMENT FROM THIS COURT. NONE. IT'S TIME TO GET MOVING. GET THIS PEER BUILT. NOW, DELAY TACTICS, IN MY EYES, MEANS MAYBE SOME TITLE COMPANIES OR SOME REALTORS ARE TRYING TO PRIVATIZE OUR BEACH ACCESS, PRIVATIZE OUR PEER, SO WE FORGET AND YOU GUYS CAN MAKE YOUR MONEY SELLING WHATEVER YOU NEED TO SELL, SO WE DON'T HAVE ACCESS. IT'S FUNNY. I KNOW, IT'S FUNNY, RIGHT? THIS IS A TRUE CONCERN FOR THIS COMMUNITY. WE WANT TO BUILD AND IT NEEDS TO MOVE FORWARD. THE DELAY TACTICS ARE EXHAUSTING . WE ARE JUST GOING TO START REPLACING PEOPLE. THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. AS FAR AS THIS AMMONIA PLANT, THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI YESTERDAY THROUGH YOU GUYS UNDER THE BUS. THIS IS A COUNTY ISSUE. SO MR. HERNANDEZ, WE ARE LOOKING TO YOU FOR SOME GUIDANCE HERE. WE DO NOT WANT THIS PLANT IN THE AREA THAT IT IS BEING PROPOSED. I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE WITH OUR LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES. IT APPEARS THAT THE INTENTION IS TO TURN THE COASTAL BEND INTO AN INDUSTRIAL DUMPING GROUND. WE ARE TRYING TO BE OVER INDUSTRIALIZED BY THE PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI, THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI AND NOW THE COUNTY. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE CANNOT CONCEPTUALLY GRASP THAT WE ARE A COMMUNITY HERE. WE WANT TO LIVE A COMMUNITY LIFE. WE DO NOT WANT TO BE A PETROCHEMICAL TOWN, EVEN THOUGH ELECTEDS HAVE TURNED US INTO THAT. AND THE FACT THAT WE HAD TO FIND OUT ABOUT THIS AMMONIA PLANT OFF SOME SIGNS IN A VACANT PROPERTY AND THIS COURT DID NOT COME TO THE COMMUNITY AND SAY THIS IS ABOUT TO COME INTO YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS EMBARRASSING.

IT'S EMBARRASSING. I'M ASKING THE COURT TO DO A BETTER JOB OF BEING TRANSPARENT AND GETTING THE COMMUNITY INVOLVED ON ISSUES LIKE THIS THAT ARE GOING TO DETRIMENTALLY IMPACT OUR COMMUNITIES FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. IT'S EXHAUSTING TO COME

HERE ALL THE TIME. >> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIGN UP FOR

PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WISHES TO >>?

>> JUDGE, FOR CLARIFICATION I WOULD LIKE IN OUR NEXT COURT MEETING TO HAVE A PRESENTATION ON THIS PROJECT. WHATEVER INFORMATION THE COUNTY HAS BEEN GIVEN, TO ITS OFFICIALS, IF ANY OF US HAVE BEEN APPROACHED. I WOULD LIKE A DISCUSSION ON IT I THINK THESE POINTS HAVE BEEN BALLOT. I'M NOT DISCUSSING, I'M DIRECTING THE STAFF TO HELP GET THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA. IF THERE ARE ANY DOCUMENTS . IF WE HAVE HAD MEETINGS OR ANY OTHER ONE OF US INDIVIDUALLY WE SHOULD HAVE THAT BROUGHT FORWARD. THERE HAS BEEN A REQUEST FROM THIS COMPANY AND IT SHOULD THREE -- BE BROUGHT FORWARD. I TOTALLY AGREE. IT'S VERY CONCERNING. IF THERE'S ANYTHING FOR US TO TAKE ACTION ON THAT WOULD PLACE IT ON THE NEXT AGENDA.

THANK YOU. >> I THINK WE NEED TO ASK JENNY. IF WE HAVE A VOTE ON IT WE WILL PUT IT ON THERE.

>> EXCUSE ME, JUDGE. I THINK COUNTY ENGINEER HAS A MEETING SET UP WITH THAT SAME COMPANY WITHIN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS.

THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE COMING HERE.

>> SO, THERE IS NO DECISION TO MAKE ASIDE FROM PUTTING IT ON A FUTURE AGENDA. THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW.

>> I GUESS, JUST FOR THE RECORD, NOBODY HAS COME TO THE

[00:45:03]

COMMISSIONERS COURT AND ASKED US ANYTHING ABOUT ANYTHING, THAT I'M AWARE OF. JENNY, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, AND JOHN TWO, IF NOBODY IS COMING TO ASK TO ASK, I'M HAPPY TO DO A

PRESENTATION, BUT -- >> LOOK, WE ONLY HAVE US FIVE.

OBVIOUSLY, SOMETHING ELSE CAME UP. I'M NOT TRYING TO GET INTO AN ISSUE THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA. I'M ONLY ASKING THAT IF THERE HAS BEEN ANY REQUESTS FROM THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT OR FROM THE COUNTY THAT NEEDS TO BE PUT TOGETHER IN AN AGENDA ITEM. I DON'T KNOW WHO LEADS THAT I DO. I'M ASKING OUR STAFF, OUR FELLOW ELECTEDS AND OUR STAFF TO COME TOGETHER AND FIGURE OUT HAS THIS AGENDA ITEM, HAS THIS

ISSUE BEEN REQUESTED? >> OR WHAT AUTHORITY DO WE HAVE? WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY . THERE IS NO VOTE TO BE TAKEN.

>> THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. I DON'T WANT US TO GET INTO A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS, I'M JUST ASKING FOR FURTHER DIRECTION OR SO AT OUR NEXT MEETING WE CAN HAVE AN ITEM TO DISCUSS. IF THERE IS NO ACTION PLEASE LET US KNOW, SO WE CAN INFORM THE PUBLIC. IF THERE HAS BEEN A MEETING, WHICH APPARENTLY THERE IS WITH PUBLIC WORKS, WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT IT. I DON'T GO

>> THE ONLY REASON I HAVE MET WITH THOSE FOLKS , AND THE ONLY REASON I MET WITH THEM, MYSELF AND I DON'T KNOW IF COMMISSIONER JACK HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH THEM, BUT I HAVE BEEN THE ONLY ONE HERE. WHEN THEY COME IN.

[1. Nueces County Beach Management Advisory Committee]

>>, THAT'S FUNNY. >> NO. THAT'S NOT FUNNY AT

ALL. >> WE WILL PUT THAT ON AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING. IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN BRING UP ABOUT IT. LET'S JUST STOP THERE. MOVING ONTO H BOARD APARTMENTS . ITEM NUMBER ONE, NUECES COUNTY BEACH MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE I THINK THERE WERE SIX APPLICANTS . WE

HAVE THREE POSITIONS OPEN. >> I'M TRYING TO GET TO THAT

ONE. >> JUDGE, I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE STEPHEN ARMSTRONG AND CHERI SPERLING FOR THAT BOARD.

>> THERE ARE TWO THAT ENDED DECEMBER 24TH AND ONE THAT IN

THE DECEMBER 25. >> I'M TRYING TO GET THERE, SORRY. I WOULD NOMINATE CHERI SPERLING FOR THE POSITION

ENDING DECEMBER 2025. >> THAT'S RIGHT. THERE IS THREE THAT CAME OFF. WE DON'T HAVE TO FILL EVERY SPOT, RIGHT? IT'S AN UP TO. AT THIS POINT TRAN05

>> YOU HAD THE MOTION FIRST. >> IT'S OKAY, YOU CAN DO IT .

THAT MAKES SENSE, BECAUSE THAT PUTS CHERI SPERLING IN 420 25.

AND THEN PUT STEPHEN ARMSTRONG IN FOR ONE OF THE 24 SLOTS AND

THEN WE CAN REDO THOSE LATER. >>

>> THAT'S NOT THAT BOARD. >> THAT'S A DIFFERENT BOARD.

>>, OKAY. >> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION FOR CHERI SPERLING TO TAKE THE POSITION THAT ENDING DECEMBER 2025 AND STEPHEN ARMSTRONG THAT'S ENDING SHORT-TERM BEFORE DECEMBER 2024. THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND BE REVOLTED ON. ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. PLACE ] ANY POST SAME SIDE. THE MOTION PASSES. THERE WAS ONE OTHER POSITION AND YOU ARE NOT READY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.

[2. Discuss and consider the appointment of the Civil Service Commission Chairperson from the following Civil Service Commission Appointees: 1. Jason Floyd 2. Aldaberto Carrillo 3. Scott Corliss]

>> I'M SORRY. >> WE CAN BRING IT BACK IF WE

NEED TO. >> YEAH, RIGHT.

>> OKAY. MOVING ONTO ITEM NUMBER TWO, DISCUSSING AND CONSIDERING THE APPOINTMENT OF A CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION CHAIRPERSON FROM THE FOLLOWING CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

APPOINTEES. >> I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE

ALL. BRIO. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A NOMINATION AND A SECOND TO NOMINATE ALBERT TOOK REAL. ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I.

[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.]

ANY POST SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES. MOVING ONTO ITEM NUMBER TWO, THE CONSENT AGENDA. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS THAT YOU WISH TO HAVE PULLED FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>> I WANT TO PULL D. >> I'M SORRY?

>> D578. AND 27. >> AND 27.

>> JUDGE, I JUST NEED, I DON'T NEED TO PULL R, I JUST WANT TO MENTION WHAT WAS CIRCULATED TO THE COURT WAS A PICTURE OF THE EXACT AREA FOR THE DEEDED LAND THAT WILL BE DEEDED TO THE COUNTY. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WILL BE

[00:50:07]

SUPPOSEDLY REVIEWED. THERE WILL BE DOCUMENTS REVIEWED BY THE END OF THE WEEK. I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT . BUT I DON'T NEED

TO PULL IT, IF THAT'S OKAY. >> ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE DISCUSSED FURTHER? THEN I WILL ACCEPT A MOTION TO PASS THE CONSENT AGENDA, EXCLUDING ITEM B B578 AND 27.

>> DID YOU SAY B? >> KNOW. D AS IN DOG.

>> CORRECTION. >> WHAT WAS THE OTHER ONE?

>> 578 AND 27. >> SO SECOND YOUR MOTION, IF

THAT WAS A MOTION. >> YES.

>> OKAY. TO PASS THE REST . >> TO PASS THE REST WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM D, NUMBER FIVE, SEVEN, EIGHT, AND 27. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I.

[D. Authorize payment of bills - Special Motions list dated February 21, 2024.]

TAKING PLACE ] ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN. AND THEN MOVING ONTO ITEM D , COMMISSIONER GONZALES, YES?

>> NUMBER FIVE. I JUST NEED AN UPDATE ON THAT. ARE WE UP-TO-DATE ON THE PAYMENTS FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH DISTRICT ? WHAT PAYMENTS ARE THESE, FROM WHEN

TO WHEN? >> COMMISSIONER, THOSE ARE THE PAYMENTS FOR JANUARY AND FEBRUARY FOR THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, FOR THE HEALTH DISTRICT .

>> JANUARY AND FEBRUARY? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> ARE WE UP TO PAR ON THIS? >> YES SIR, WE ARE.

>> THERE ARE NO OTHER PAYMENTS BEHIND US?

>> WE ARE NOT BEHIND. >> NO.

>> OKAY. >> LIKE $147,000 A MONTH?

>> YES. SO MOVED I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE NOT ARREARS

ON THIS . >> KNOW. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR TO PAST ITEM NUMBER D5 . VOTING TAKING PLACE ] ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. THE MOTION

PASSES. ITEM D7 . >> SEVEN AND EIGHT ARE COMING TOGETHER. I DON'T KNOW , HAVE WE GENERATED A REPORT ON THIS?

I KNOW WE HAVE PAID COLLIER . >> WE HAVE A FINAL REPORT , YES. WE HAVE -- BUT IT'S ON BEST PRACTICES MOVING FORWARD .

DO WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS? IF WE WANT TO POLICE?

>> YES. THAT CAN'T BE DISCUSSED IN OPEN COURT AT THIS

POINT IN TIME. >> THAT'S FINE. I WILL TAKE

IT TO EXECUTIVE. >> THANK YOU.

>> SEVEN AND EIGHT. >> LET ME WRITE IT IN MY NOTES. AND THEN YOUR OTHERS -- OTHER WAS 27?

>> 27. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT. THIS IS A CLOSEOUT ON THE A.D.A. OF NUECES COUNTY ? I THOUGHT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE CLOSED OUT IN NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER. THERE WAS AN EXTENSION, BUT THE AMOUNT OF $375,000, IS THIS A CLOSEOUT?

>> YES. DO YOU WANT TO COME UP AND

>> ABOUT THIS ONE? THIS WAS A PAYMENT THAT WE FAILED TO GET

THEM. THEY WAITED A LONG TIME. >> THAT IS CORRECT. IT WAS

JUST A DELAY PAYMENT. >> A DELAYED PAYMENT THAT GOT PUSHED ASIDE AND IT WAS FROM BACK IN NOVEMBER, I BELIEVE .

>> IT SAYS PARTIAL RETAINERS. >> THERE STILL WORKING ON

SUMMER. >> YES, MINOR ITEMS.

>> THEY ARE SUPPOSED BE OUT THERE BY?

>> ON THAT ONE THEY'RE JUST DOING THEIR ITEMS. JUST A REMINDER. WE ARE RECOMMENDING PARTIAL

PAYMENT. >> WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT AS FAR AS LITTLE BIT OF LEAD TIME, COMMISSIONER, FEBRUARY, MARCH.

HOPEFULLY, END OF MARCH. >> CLOSEOUT COMPLETELY?

>> YES MA'AM. >> ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE FINISHING OUT. SO MOVED , 22ND.

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

ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR TO PASS D 27.

[00:55:02]

ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. MOVING ONTO THE

[1. Discuss and consider approval for method of procurement IFB (Invitation for Bids) for Oil Belt Park Improvements; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice; and related matters.]

REGULAR AGENDA. ITEM THREE A1, DISCUSS AND APPROVAL FROM METHOD IMPROVEMENT -- THAT IS ARPA FUNDS IN THE COUNTY JUDGES FUNDS. WE ARE READY TO GO OUT FOR BIDS. ANYTHING YOU

NEED TO ADD TO THAT? >> NO, JUDGE. IT'S A NEAT PROJECT. IT'S JUST AS GOOD AS COMMISSIONER PROJECT YESTERDAY. IS GOING TO RENOVATE THE WHOLE AREA.

>> I MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS. >> I HAVE A SECOND.

>> HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR

>> JUDGE, I CAN'T REMEMBER, WAS THIS THE PROJECT THAT YOU

FUNDED? >> YES. OIL BELT PARK.

>> I THINK THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT PROJECT FOR THE NORTHWEST PART OF OUR PRECINCT. I THINK IT'S GOT A VERY LARGE NUMBER ATTACHED TO IT AND I'M HOPING ALL THE FOLKS OUT THERE REALIZE THAT CAME FROM YOUR ARPA FUNDS. THIS IS GOING TO BE

A GREAT PROJECT FOR THE COUNTY. >> LOTS AND LOTS OF KIDS USE

[2. Discuss and consider authorizing County Judge to execute agreement, if necessary, with legislative consultants, Joel Romo and Patricia Shipton, for temporary services, for $2,500 per month through September 30, 2024, for any business that relates to Nueces County business and related matters. ]

THESE PARKS. WE ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS.

>> LONG OVERDUE. >> LONG OVERDUE, THAT'S

CORRECT. >> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE

THAT. >> ITEM NUMBER TWO, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY JUDGE TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT IF NECESSARY WITH OUR LEGISLATIVE CONSULTANTS . JOE ROMO AND PATRICIA SHIPTON , 48 TEMPORARY SERVICES THROUGH SEPTEMBER, THE END OF THIS YEAR. I HAVE HAD SOME , I'M ASKING FOR THIS BECAUSE I HAVE HAD SOME MEETINGS WITH LEADERS THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY AND THEY ARE ALREADY WORKING ON SOME LEGISLATION . I AM SUGGESTING THAT WE NEED TO HAVE THEM ON THOSE PREPARING FOR SESSION AND GETTING READY FOR BILLS THAT IMPACT THE COUNTY. I KNOW THERE ARE TWO THINGS WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING ABOUT I WOULD ASK YOU TO AUTHORIZE THIS . THERE IS $120,000 LEFT IN THE LEGISLATIVE BUDGET. THERE IS PLENTY OF FUNDS THERE FOR US TO DO THE NEXT SEVEN MONTHS.

THEY BOTH HAVE SAID THEY ARE WILLING TO TAKE THIS ON AND MEET WITH US AND HELP CRAFT AND WORK TOWARDS LEGISLATION. WE CAN DO THE PARTIAL PAYMENT, LIKE WE DID AT THE END OF LAST YEAR, OR THE FUNDS ARE EVEN THERE FOR US TO HAVE THEM ON, LIKE WE NORMALLY DO AT THE $5000 A MONTH, WHICH WOULD BE

$70,000 OUT OF THE $120,000. >> $5000 A MONTH . WE DON'T

WANT TO PAY THEM AHEAD OF TIME. >> I WOULD SUGGEST , YOU KNOW, THE $5000 A MONTH, BECAUSE IN MY EXPERIENCE AND BEING THERE AS WELL, LEGISLATION AND CRAFTING LEGISLATION AND WORKING TOWARDS LEGISLATION IS ALREADY HAPPENING . WE NEED TO BE ON TOP OF THE BALL HERE. I WOULD SUGGEST THE $5000. THAT

WOULD BE MY MOTION TO ALLOW. >> I'M CONFUSED. I'M SORRY.

YOU ARE SAYING THIS ONE SAYS $2500 A MONTH THROUGH SEPTEMBER ANOTHER $5000 KICKS IN?

>> THIS SAYS $2500. WE HAVE THE FUNDS FOR BOTH. WE HAVE SAID

THEY ARE WILLING TO DO THIS. >> SO ARE YOU ASKING FOR $2500.

MONTH. PERSON FOR THE FIRST TIME AND THEY GO TO --. PERSON FOR THE FIRST TIME AND THEY GO TO $5000 AFTER THAT?

>> THE AGENDA SAYS 25- -- $2500 A MONTH. THAT'S BEFORE I LOOKED TO SEE THAT WE HAVE THE BUDGETED FUNDS AND THERE. I WOULD ASK FOR $5000. MONTH. WELL, I GUESS WILL BE $5000, BECAUSE IT'S $2500 A PERSON. THAT WOULD BE THE MONEY WE HAVE IN THE FUNDS TO PAY FOR THIS ALREADY. YES. $2500.

PERSON. YOU ARE CORRECT. SORRY. >> RIGHT.

>>. -- FOR PERSON A MONTH. THROUGH THE END OF THE YEAR.

THIS IS ONLY TO GET US WORKING ON THIS, BECAUSE IT IS ALREADY MOVING THROUGH AND PEOPLE ARE WORKING ON THESE.

>> $2500 A MONTH FOR ROMO AND $2400 A MONTH FOR SIFTED WHICH IS WELL WITHIN THE BUDGET THAT WE HAVE, CORRECT?

>> YES. >> THAT WOULD BE $35,000

BETWEEN THE TWO. >> EACH.

>> UNTIL THE END OF SEPTEMBER? >> RIGHT. THE $5000 WOULD BE THE TOTAL OF $70,000. IF YOU DOING $2500 A MONTH A PERSON

THAT'S $17,500 . PERSON. >> AND THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE

ASKING FOR ARE RIGHT, JUDGE? >> YES.

[01:00:07]

>> THAT IS THE MOTION. >> I SECOND THE MOTION.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR --

[3. Discuss and consider approval of a wetland mitigation project on the Nueces County owned land referred to as the Kleberg Beach Property, located in Kleberg County, and all related matters. Project funded by GOMESA Grant funds.]

OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER THREE, DISCUSSING AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECTS . I SEE MR. SCOTT CROSS, YOU'RE HERE, THANK YOU.

>> GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. SO, FIRST OFF, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF YOU ALL HAVE ANY BURNING QUESTIONS WITH WHAT THE AGENDA ITEM LANGUAGE READS. I VENTED THIS EXTENSIVELY TO GET THIS MEDICATION DONE. I HAVE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH THE ARMY CORPS AND THE REGULATORY AGENCIES . WHAT IS BEFORE YOU RIGHT NOW IS A PATH FORWARD THAT THEY HAVE ALL AGREED WOULD WORK. ALSO, WORKING WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IT WORKS AS WELL. DO YOU ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THIS? OR DO YOU JUST WANT ME TO GIVE YOU AN OVERALL

50,000 LEVEL APPROACH? >> THIS MITIGATION PROJECT IS

RELATED TO? >> TRUE VALUE PARK .

>> YES. JUST TO BE CLEAR. >> WE WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THIS IS A MITIGATION PROJECT THAT WAS ORIGINALLY COME YOU THOUGHT WAS ORIGINALLY GOING TO WORK YOU FELT LIKE IT'S GOING

TO WORK BETTER AT CLAYBURGH. >> IT'S GOING TO BE BOTH. LET

ME DO THIS FOR YOU. >>

>> THIS IS THE NATURE PARK MAP. MOVING THE MEDICATION FOR AUDREY BIO HAS ALREADY BEEN AGREED UPON. THAT IS NO LONGER AN ISSUE. THAT'S ALREADY A DONE DEAL. IT DOESN'T EXIST AT POTTERY BAYOU. IT'S JUST A MATTER WHERE WE ARE GOING TO DO IT OUT. PACK RE-IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR MAPS, I HOPE THEY PRINTED

THEM IN COLOR FOR YOU, TRAN05 >> THEY DIDN'T. BUT THERE THEY

ARE IN COLOR RIGHT THERE. >> -- THE HASH MARKS IN RED IS WHAT IS GOING TO BE CREATED. THAT HAS TURNED INTO WETLAND.

BY DOING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO CONNECT THE TWO EXISTING. THEY GET CREDIT FOR CREATION AND ENHANCEMENT, AS YOU ARE CREATING THEM TO EXISTING WETLANDS. YOU CAN SEE A YELLOW BOUNDARY OF PACK RE-CHANNEL NATURE PARK , WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF ROOM TO WORK WITH OVER THERE WITH EXISTING WETLANDS AND CREATING NEW ONES. TO GET THE RATIOS WE NEED WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GO TO THE CLAYBURGH PROPERTY. SO, THE BEAUTY OF THIS IS THAT THROUGHOUT ALL OF OUR EIGHT YEARS OF DATA COLLECTION AND RESEARCH ON THESE MIGRATORY BIRDS THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE NOTED IS NEEDED FOR CREATING MORE WETLANDS FOR THE MIGRATORY BIRDS THAT WHAT WE HAVE OVER THERE. IT FITS WITH OUR MANAGEMENT OF THE PARK AS A NATURE PARK. IF YOU LOOK AT THE NEXT MAP THERE IS , TERESA SEE IF YOU CAN PULL THIS ONE UP RIGHT HERE, RIGHT THERE.

>> DID YOU ATTACH IT? >> IT'S ATTACHED OR SHOULD BE. ALL OF THESE MAPS WERE ATTACHED. BUT THERE IS A SECTION OF UPLAND AREA IN BETWEEN TWO WETLANDS -- FIGURE 2. LET ME LET HER GET THAT UP. I DON'T WANT TO GET AHEAD OF MYSELF. ANYHOW, I'M GOING HE -- KEEP TALKING. I HATE DEAD AIR. WHAT IT DID WAS THAT THE MAP THAT SHE IS WORKING WITH ON GETTING PULLED UP HERE, ESPECIALLY TO SHOW THE CLAYBURGH PROPERTY THAT WILL REGRET THEIR. DO YOU SEE THAT LITTLE RED AREA IN BETWEEN US TWO WETLANDS OVER THERE? THAT WOULD BE CREATED . BY CREATING THAT AND CONNECTING THAT TO THE EXISTING WETLANDS, I CAN YOU'RE GETTING CREDIT FOR CREATION AND ENHANCEMENT. THIS GIVES US THE RATIOS IN THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE TO ACCOMMODATE WHAT IS NEEDED TO DO THE MEDICATION WORK THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE AT POTTERY BAYOU. PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT MORE. I ALWAYS LIKE TO THROW IT A LITTLE BIT EXTRA, BECAUSE WHEN IT GOES OR INTERAGENCY REVIEW IT USUALLY IT'S LIKE POP CORN IT'S REALLY EASY TO CHECK OFF ALL THE BOXES. THE REASON I'M COMING TO ALL OF YOU WITH THIS IS THE CHANNEL PARK HAS ALREADY BEEN VOTED ON AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS. SINCE THAT DEDICATED PARKLAND THAT FALLS UNDER THEIR PURVIEW. THE CLAYBURGH PROPERTY IS NOT DEDICATED PARK LANE. THE ULTIMATE DECISION WITH WHAT WE DO ON THE CLAYBURGH PROPERTY FALLS TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT. WHAT I REALLY NEED FROM Y'ALL'S APPROVAL HERE TODAY IS THAT WE CAN DO THE MITIGATION ON CLAYBURGH AS DEPICTED AND THEN WITH THAT APPROVAL I WILL GO BACK TO THE COURT AND I WILL START GETTING THE MITIGATION PLAN AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAPERWORK DONE . WHEN THAT GETS READY TO BE FILED WE WILL BRING IT BACK TO COURT AND WE CAN FILE IT

WITH THE COUNTY CLERK. >> IN YOUR OPINION YOU BELIEVE

[01:05:02]

THIS WILL TAKE EVERYTHING? >> IT WILL TAKE CARE OF

EVERYTHING. >> FINE. I MAKE A MOTION TO

PASS. >> AND IS NO FINANCIAL BURDEN

TO THE FUN -- TO THE COUNTY. >> I READ THAT.

>> I DON'T WANT TO BLOW THROUGH THINGS, BUT I DON'T WANT TO DELAY EITHER. THIS IS A BIG DEAL. THIS IS CORRECTING A WRONG THAT WAS PERPETUATED NOT BY THIS COURT, BY FORMER MEMBER OF THIS COURT, NOW WE ARE DOING IT AND I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THE JUDGE AND YOU HAVE DONE ON THIS. AND THE PERMIT HOLDER, WHO HAS BEEN EXTREMELY GENEROUS IN WORKING WITH US ON THIS ONE AND REALLY DIDN'T HAVE TO, BECAUSE HE HAD A PERMIT.

GOOD JOB, SCOTT , COASTAL PARK SPORT, JUDGE SCOTT, MR. LANG.

WE APPRECIATE ALL OF THIS, BECAUSE THIS RID OURSELVES OF THE PROBLEM THAT WE SHOULD HAVE HAD IN THIS COURT NEVER HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH. I APPRECIATE YOU DOING IT I WANT TO SAY THAT PUBLICLY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> IF WE HAD FOLLOWED THE CORRECT SEQUENCE OF PROCEDURES THAT WE USUALLY HAVE THE GOES ALONG WITH THIS KIND OF STUFF THIS IS EXACTLY THE WAY IT SHOULD HAVE PLAYED OUT.

>> EXACTLY. PRECISELY. AND THIS IS A GOOD USE OF THAT CLAYBURGH PROPERTY THAT WE HAVE. THIS IS EXCITING STUFF.

THIS IS ENHANCING WETLANDS. MAINTAINS THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH ARE VERY CLEAR WE CAN'T GO VERTICAL , BUT WE CAN DO ALL KINDS OF COOL ENHANCEMENTS OF THEIR. WHEN WE HAVE THE FUNDING AND THE NEED TO DO LIKE THIS WE CAN DO. THIS IS A WIN-WIN AND HOW IT COULD HAVE BEEN AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN.

CHANNEL NATURE PARK WITH WHAT WE DO THERE FROM MAKING IT A PREMIER BIRDING DESTINATION FOR TROPICAL MIGRATORY BIRDS..

BIRDING IS BIG HERE. YOU ALL KNOW THAT. OUT OF CLAYBURGH , ON THE CLAYBURGH PROPERTY EVEN IF I WAS TO MAKE IT ENHANCEMENTS OUT THERE I'M GOING TO AVOID THE WETLANDS.

I'M GOING TO KEEP THE NATURAL FEATURES SO THEY BECOME ECO-TOURISM FEATURES WITH THE FOOTPRINT. IF AND WHEN I GET THE MONEY TO CREATE PUBLIC ACCESS POINTS , SO PEOPLE CAN GET OUT THERE AND ENJOY IT HAS TO BE CONTROLLED. BEFORE WE GOT THAT PROPERTY THERE WAS NOTHING CONTROLLED OUT THERE. THERE WAS A LOT OF CRAZY STUFF THAT WENT ON COME ON THAT CLAYBURGH PROPERTY. THAT'S ALL BEHIND US NOW.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO PASS THIS. APPROVE THIS. ALL OF THOSE, IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL OF

THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I. >> ANY OPPOSED THE SAME SIDE.

MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANKS FOR YOUR WORK. ITEM

[4. Approve ratification of a Sourcewell Cooperative Contract No. 032119-CAT Lease-Purchase Agreement with Holt Texas, Inc. for one (1) new 2023 Caterpillar 930M Small Wheel Loader for Coastal Parks in the total amount of $287,625.21, and related matters. This item is to ratify the Agreement with the corrected agenda item language. Funded by Coastal Parks (0180) department budgeted funds.]

NUMBER FOUR, APPROVED RATIFICATION OF THE SOURCE WELL COOPERATIVE CONTRACT ON THE CAT LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH HOLT. IS THAT YOURS FOR COASTAL PARKS?

DON'T GO AWAY. >> SORRY ABOUT THAT. THIS IS JUST , THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT NEEDED TO BE

CLEANED UP GO >> THAT'S WHY WE PULLED IT LAST TIME. I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR

[5. Recieve update on deadlines for American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds from GrantWorks and all related matters. Take action if necessary. ]

PASSES. THANK YOU. WE WILL LET YOU GET OUT OF HERE. ITEM NUMBER FIVE, RECEIVE AN UPDATE ON DEADLINES FOR THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT , ARPA FUNDS FROM GRANT WORKS AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. I BELIEVE AMANDA AND KEN MAC ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ON ZOOM. OH, HELLO, SORRY. I'VE GOT MY NOTES YOU WERE GOING TO BE ON ZOOM.

>> I'M HERE. WE MADE THE TRIP DOWN.

>> VERY GOOD. GLAD YOU COULD MAKE IT . GOOD TO SEE YOU.

>> GLENN -- GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS AMANDA HOLDEN. I'M WITH GRANT WORKS I WILL SERVE AS YOUR AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT PROJECT MANAGER. MY COLLEAGUES PARTNERING WITH ME ON NUECES COUNTY INCLUDE JESSICA JOHNSTONE, WHO IS ON ZOOM IN WITH ME TODAY IS JESSICA HIS THUMB. AS A REGION -- RECENT GRADUATE OF TEXAS A&M CORPUS CHRISTI I'M EXCITED TO WORK WITH NUECES COUNTY. I COME HERE TODAY TO ADDRESS A CRUCIAL ASPECT OF THE FUNDS, WHICH IS THE APPLICATION DEADLINE. THE OBLIGATION DEADLINE IS DECEMBER 31ST, 2024. FOR FUNDS TO BE CONSIDERED OBLIGATED THERE MUST BE A CONTRACT OR A PURCHASE ORDER AGO THIS IS HOW THE TREASURY DEFINES AN OBLIGATION. COMMISSIONERS COURT APPROVAL , A RESOLUTION OR AN ALLOCATED BUDGET ALONE IS

NOT CONSIDERED AN OBLIGATION. >> WE JUST RECENTLY LEARNED THAT AND IT WAS SHOCKING. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT AND POINT TO GET OUT EXPLICITLY.

>> YEAH. FUNDS THAT ARE NOT FORMALLY OBLIGATED BY DECEMBER 31ST, 2024 ARE AT RISK FOR BEING REBUKED BY THE TREASURY.

AFTER ALL THE FUNDS ARE OBLIGATED BY DECEMBER 31ST, 2024 ALL ARPA FUNDS THEN MUST BE FULLY EXPENDED BY DECEMBER

[01:10:03]

31ST, 2026. SO, IN THE BACKUP THAT YOU GUYS HAVE IN YOUR PACKET THERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF A PROJECT LIFE CYCLE THAT WE HAVE INCLUDED. IT SHOWS TIMELINES OF JUST A GENERAL PROJECT UNTIL -- AND HOW LONG THAT WOULD TAKE.

>> COULD YOU ADDRESS SOMETHING WHILE YOU ARE HERE ABOUT THAT WITH THESE DEADLINES AND STUFF? IF PROJECTS COME IN UNDER BUDGET THAT MONEY IS JUST THAT LOST? YOU CAN'T MOVE IT TO USE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE OR ANYTHING?

>> AFTER 2024, THAT IS CORRECT .

>> THAT WAS ANOTHER QUESTION THAT WE RECEIVED AND I WANTED

CLARIFICATION. >> ONE THING WE WILL DO TO ASSIST IN THAT THAT WILL WORK WITH ANNA AND HER TEAM, WHO HAVE BEEN FANTASTIC TO WORK WITH SO FAR AND WE ARE REALLY EXCITED TO WORK WITH THEM AND ALL OF YOU GUYS . ONE THING THAT WE HAVE , ONE THING THAT GRANT WORKS WILL DO TO ASSIST IN THIS IS TO CONSTANTLY MONITOR THE CONTRACTS, SO THAT . THAT'S NOT THE GOAL FOR THAT TO HAPPEN. WE WILL TAKE ANY PAT THAT THEY HAVE TO TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T HAPPEN. WE WILL HELP ANNA AND HER TEAM TO MAKE SURE THAT DOES NOT TAKE PLACE.

>> YES. >> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING ABOUT THE TIMELINE? THANK YOU FOR PULLING THAT UP .

YES. THIS IS A TIMELINE OF JUST A GENERAL PROJECT THAT COULD TAKE PLACE. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS MANY STEPS AND MANY DIFFERENT AMOUNTS OF TIME THAT IT COULD TAKE. . IN ORDER TO OBLIGATE FUNDS IT MUST BE UNDER CONTRACT. THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE -- IF YOU COULD GO TO THE SECOND SLIDE -- THE FIRST SLIDE, I'M SORRY. YEAH. UNDER PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION THAT IS WHERE A CONTRACT WOULD TAKE PLACE. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE STILL HAVE A PRETTY GOOD AMOUNT OF TIME AND ACTIVITIES NEED TO TAKE PLACE IN ORDER TO OBLIGATE FUNDS. IT'S IMPORTANT THAT ALL PROJECT IDEAS AND DECISIONS START HAPPENING, SO WE CAN

START MOVING FORWARD. >> BASED ON THE SAMPLE TIMELINE THAT YOU GAVE US EVERYTHING SHOULD BE READY TO GO , AS FAR AS APPROVED BY JUNE? END OF JUNE OF THIS YEAR? I MEAN, OUT THE DOOR AND APPROVED BY THIS COURT .

TECHNICALLY, WE HAVE UNTIL DECEMBER, BUT BASED ON WHAT YOU ARE SHARING HERE, I KNOW THESE ARE GENERAL TIME FRAMES AND SOME PROJECTS MAY BE TRUNCATED, BUT OVERALL, THAT'S PROBABLY A GOOD DAY TO SHOOT FOR. THE END OF JUNE.

>> YES. I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT . WE ARE SAYING ABOUT JUNE OR JULY IS A REALLY GOOD TIME. I KNOW THAT BUDGETS START TAKING PLACE AS WELL AND THE COUNTY STARTS TALKING ABOUT BUDGETING.

THAT'S USUALLY A GOOD TIME .

>> IT'S NOT EARLY DECEMBER. >> IT'S NOT EARLY DECEMBER AT

ALL. >> UNLESS IT'S A SIMPLE PROJECT, BUT WITH ARPA WE HAVE LEARNED THAT WORD DOESN'T

EXIST. >> TRAN01

>> BUT YOU DON'T GET THE CONTRACTS STARTED , IT HAS TO BE SIGNED BY DECEMBER 1ST. JUST LIKE MY TODAY, STILL BECAUSE IT WENT OUT IS THAT THE CONTRACT IS SIGNED, SO I'M STILL IN THE SECOND SLOT THERE IS SOMETHING. YES.

>> RIGHT. >> ONE, DO YOU THIS? THAT'S WHY KEEP TELL YOU I GOT TO GET THAT LONDON DEAL GOING. I'VE GOT TO GET IT UNDER CONTRACT AND GET GOING. THAT'S WHY PUSHING ON THE PEERS IN THE DRAINAGE. I GOT BIG PROJECTS WITH BIG MONEY ASSOCIATED WITH THEM. REALLY TALKING TO JUAN, BECAUSE WE GOT ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, I KNOW YOU ARE TRAN05

>> WE ARE ALL TRYING TO GIVE HIM SOME RELIEF AND GET HIM

FOCUSED. YES. >> WE ARE HERE TO HELP IN THE SYSTEM AND THEY HAVE BEEN FANTASTIC TO WORK WITH. WE ARE REALLY EXCITED TO WORK WITH NUECES COUNTY AND THE STAFF HAS BEEN AMAZING TO WORK WITH. . WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING THERE AND BEING LIKE TO WORK WITH US AND OUR KREJCI -- CRAZY SCHEDULES AND OTHER WORK THAT YOU HAVE DONE. IT'S NICE TO MEET YOU IN

PERSON. >> YOU GUYS TOO.

>> WE ALWAYS SEE PEOPLE ON ZOOM.

>> I LOVE CORPUS CHRISTI. WE ARE REALLY EXCITED TO BE HERE

TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS. >> JUST DON'T BILL US FOR TRAVEL TIME. WE GET A LITTLE PERSNICKETY ABOUT THAT.

>> NO. NO. >> IT'S ALL GOOD. THANK YOU

[6. Discuss and consider Un-allocating $350,000 from the Nueces County Civil Process Software (County Attorney), $175,000 - County Judge and $175,000 - Commissioner Pct. 3 and Reallocate to Remaining Unallocated balance for each court member, and related matters.]

[01:15:05]

JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS. >> THE NEXT ITEM UP FOR DISCUSSION IS ITEM NUMBER SIX, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ON ALLOCATING $350,000 FROM THE NUECES COUNTY CIVIL PROCESS SOFTWARE . I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER MODEST AND I BOTH HAVE $175,000 ALLOCATED TO THAT . WE NEED TO UN-ALLOCATE THAT AND PUT IT BACK INTO OUR PERSONAL BUDGETS, BECAUSE WE DID CHECK AND THIS WAS NOT FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. THIS WAS VOTED ON AND VOTED DOWN AND BROUGHT BACK. THIS IS NOT BEING UTILIZED. I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO UN-ALLOCATE THE COUNTY JUDGES AND COMMISSIONER RECEIVE REFUNDS AND REALLOCATE THESE BACK INTO OUR PERSONAL FUNDS.

>> SO MOVED . >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR -- ANY OPPOSED SAME SIDE. THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. WE NEED TO GET MOVING ON WHERE WE ARE GOING TO MOVE THAT MONEY TO QUICKLY, BECAUSE JUNE NOW IS OUR GO TO DATE. MOVING ON TO

ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. >> ANY RELATED MATTERS TO SEE WHERE WE ARE GOING TO MOVE INTO?

>> ARE YOU READY TO ALLOCATE YOURS?

>> NO. >> BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS IN ADDITION TO THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE?

>> NO. THE REMAINING UNALLOCATED. I THINK IT WAS ON THERE, I THINK IN CASE HE HAD SOMETHING THAT HE WANTED TO

[7. Discuss and consider allowing Commissioner Brent Chesney, Precinct 4 to make requests to outside entities for additional funding for the third-party concessionaire rebuild on Bob Hall Pier in compliance with the Nueces County Commissioners Court policy, and then to bring back any positive responses for court consideration. ]

ALLOCATE. >>

>> OKAY. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ALLOWING -- SEVEN AND EIGHT REALLY GO TOGETHER AND THAT'S WHY I WANTED THESE HERE LIKE THIS . DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ALLOWING COMMISSIONER BRENT CHESNEY PRECINCT 4 TO MAKE REQUEST TO OUTSIDE ENTITIES FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE THIRD-PARTY CONCESSIONAIRE . I WANTED THEM TOGETHER FOR THE BOB HALL PIER TO UNDERSTAND IT IS COMMISSIONER CHESNEY'S INTENT TO ALLOCATE HIS $1 MILLION BACK INTO THE CONCESSIONAIRE PORTION. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS VOTE, WHILE WE ALWAYS ALLOW COMMISSIONERS TO COME AND YOUR OWN MONIES, YOUR OWN POCKETS TO DO WITH WHAT YOU WANT TO DO WITH THEM WITH, WE ALLOW YOU TO DO THAT, BUT MY REQUEST HERE WAS CONTINGENT UPON FINDING THE OUTSIDE OF FUNDS ONE OF THE THINGS THE COUNTY COULD NOT DO, AND IN OUR BUDGET HERE OR ANYTHING ELSE, WAS TO FUND THIS. IT WAS MY INTENT ALSO THAT THE PUBLIC TAXPAYER DOLLARS NOT BE USED ON THIS, BUT IF WE FIND OUTSIDE ENTITIES WHO ARE WILLING TO PARTICIPATE I THINK THAT WAS THE AVENUE THAT WE GO TO TO SEEK THOSE FUNDS. I WOULD ALLOW COMMISSIONER CHESNEY TO MOVE THIS MONEY ON A CONTINGENT THAT WE FIND THE ADDITIONAL FUNDS THAT ARE NOT TAXPAYER DOLLARS FROM OUTSIDE AGENCIES AND THAT WOULD ALSO , AT THAT POINT, ALLOW THE JACOBS ENGINEERING TO GO FORWARD TO THE ONE-STORY, ONE BUILDING BUILDING COUNTY CONCESSIONAIRE, REFURBISH THAT THING. THAT WOULD BE MY CONTINGENCY PLAN.

THAT'S WHY I'M SORRY , I KNOW IT DRY COMMISSIONER, BUT I HAD SOME STIPULATIONS I WANTED TO PUT ON THERE. IF THAT'S OKAY WITH YOU THAT'S THE WAY I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD ON THAT

ITEM. >> YES MA'AM. I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WILL REFLECT THAT. IF THAT'S OKAY I WILL DO THAT WE WILL HAVE DISCUSSION AND MOVE FROM THERE. THE FIRST MOTION WOUIN ORDER. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ALLOWING MYSELF TO MAKE REQUEST TO OUTSIDE ENTITIES FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THIRD-PARTY CONCESSIONAIRE REBUILD ON BOB HALL PIER IN COMPLIANCE WITH NUECES COUNTY COMMISSIONER COURTS POLICY. I BRING BACK ANY POSITIVE RESPONSE FOR COURT CONSIDERATION. THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION.

>> I THINK I WOULD CHANGE THAT FROM YOU TO THE COMMISSIONERS

COURT . >> ME OR ANY -- SURE. WELL, THAT'S TRUE. IF ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO CALL ME OR ANYBODY ON THE COURT . I'M HAPPY TO, IF ANYBODY WANTS TO HELP, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. AMENDED TO ANYONE ON THE COURT THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT REQUEST ON BEHALF OF THIS

PROJECT. >> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION,

AS THAT WAS MY REQUEST. >> I HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THAT.. GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER.

>> WHAT IS WRITTEN HERE IS NOT VERY CLEAR IT KEEPS SAYING CONCESSIONAIRE. THAT WORD IS STILL MISLEADING. IT SAYS THE

[01:20:08]

WAY TO BRING BACK ANY POSITIVE RESPONSES, BUT THE BOTTOM OF THAT WHEN SAYS THE WAY IT WAS PREVIOUSLY DONE. ON NUMBER EIGHT , IF WE APPROVE THIS ONE HERE ON NUMBER EIGHT, IT SAYS BUILDING A THIRD-PARTY CONCESSIONAIRE AT BOB HALL PIER THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY HER DESK PREVIOUSLY THERE PRIOR TO HURRICANE HANNAH. THAT WAS A RESTAURANT AND BAR.

>> IT'S JUST THE BUILDING THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

>> I'M JUST SAYING, THIS IS NOT REALLY CLEAR HERE WHAT WE ARE DOING. IF YOU SAY CONCESSIONAIRE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT A CONCESSION STAND OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A RESTAURANT AND BAR? WE HAVE TO MAKE THIS ONE , IF WE WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT WE NEED TO BE TRANSPARENT I WANT TO KNOW WHAT IT IS. I DON'T WANT TO ASK SOMEBODY FOR MONEY AND THEY SAY WHAT HE GOING TO BUILD? CONCESSIONAIRE. WHAT IS THAT? A RESTAURANT AND BAR X THE WAY IT WAS BACK THEN IT WAS A RESTAURANT AND BAR. WE ARE SEEING WE ARE GOING TO BUILD IT

BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS. >> THAT IS CORRECT.

. >> THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE TO BRING IT BACK. I DON'T KNOW YET.

>> YOU CANNOT ASK UNTIL WE GET PERMISSION.

>> IT SAYS HERE WE SHOULD KNOW AHEAD OF TIME THAT WE GO ASK.

ACCORDING TO THE POLICY. SHOW ME THE POLICY.

>> IT SAYS WE HAVE TO KNOW. >> THE POLICY SAYS --

>> DESCRIBE THE ENTITY WE WILL ASK.

>> I WILL ASK EVERYBODY POSSIBLE BUT IT DOES NOT SAY

THAT. >> NOT TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

>> INTO VIGIL MEMBERS WHO SEEK FUNDING ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY SHALL DISCLOSE IN WRITING TO THE FUNDING ENTITY WHETHER OR NOT THEY REQUEST PURSUANT TO ORDER OF THE COURT. IT DOES NOT SAY YOU HAVE TO DISCLOSE WHO.

>> IT SAYS DO WE NEED TO IDENTIFY THE ENTITY WE ASK MONEY BEFORE WE ASKED TO APPROVE BY THE COURT SO ANYWAY, I'M JUST SAYING THIS IS NOT CLEAR TO ME. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A CONCESSION STAND, MAYBE A RESTAURANT, BUT NOT A RESTAURANT AND BAR. WE SHOULD NOT BE IN THE BAR BUSINESS. WE SHOULD NOT EVEN BE IN THE RESTAURANT BUSINESS. THE BEER WAS A CONCESSION STAND WHEN THE PURE WAS THERE, THIS CONCESSION RESTAURANT AND BAR WAS BUILT AND GOT IN TROUBLE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SO WE HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT. NOW GOING BACK TO THE SAME THING THAT WE GOT IN TROUBLE FOR.

NOW ASKING FOR DONATION , PRIVATE DONATIONS , SO.

>> GET IN TROUBLE FOR THAT BECAUSE WE USE GRANT FUNDING ON A PROJECT THAT IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE USED.

>> I KNOW WHY WE GOT IN TROUBLE. I WAS HERE. WE BUILT IT WITH GRANT MONEY AND WE HAD TO PAY $800,000 BACK OR BUILD SOMETHING ELSE. ANYWAY, I'M JUST SAYING THIS IS NOT VERY CLEAR TO ME AND IT NEEDS CLARIFICATION OF WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AND IF WE TALK ABOUT A RESTAURANT AND BAR THEN WE NEED TO SAY THAT. WE NEED TO SAY THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO BE BUILT. CONCESSION IS A MISLEADING WORD AND I KNOW HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT THIS AND YOU KNOW HOW I FEEL. YOU AND I TALK ABOUT THIS MANY TIMES. THIS IS MY OPINION.

>> I'M WAITING TO SEE WHAT JENNY SAYS .

>> I ALSO HAVE AN OPINION. >> LET'S GET JENNY TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION FIRST IF SHE WILL ON WHETHER WE HAVE TO LIST WHO HE IS GOING TO ASK FUNDING FROM SPECIFICALLY?

>> THE COURT POLICY THAT WAS UPDATED, IT DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT THE COURT MEMBER IDENTIFY WHAT SOURCES IT IS. THIS WORKED IN CONJUNCTION WITH HOSPITAL DISTRICT AMENDMENT TO THEIR POLICIES WHERE YOU KNOW THEY WERE REQUIRING IDENTIFICATION OF THINGS, THIS THAT WENT INTO THIS COURT ONLY SAYS INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSIONER COURT WHO SEEK FUNDING ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY SHALL DISCLOSE IN WRITING TO

[01:25:02]

THE FUNDING ENTITY WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE REQUESTING PURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF THE WHOLE COURT. IT DOES NOT SPEAK TO IDENTIFYING THE FUNDING SOURCES BACK TO THE COURT.

UNLESS THERE IS ANOTHER PART .

>> NO. >> COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ

WANTED TO SPEAK. >> I THINK WE ARE OPENING THE DOOR TO PROBLEMS. WHEN PEOPLE START DONATING DOES THAT MEAN THOSE FOLKS WILL GET SPECIAL TREATMENT FROM MEMBERS OF THIS COURT FOR THEIR DONATION? YOU HEAR ABOUT IT IN THE NEWS EVERYDAY WHERE SOME JUDGES HAVE GOTTEN FAVORS FROM DONATIONS THEY RECEIVED. SO I THINK WE ARE TREADING ON VERY THIN ICE. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DO THAT. AS FAR AS USING THE ARPA MONEY, THE ARPA MONEY SAYS YOU CAN CONSTRUCT NEW ADDITION. IF YOU BUILD EXACTLY WHAT THE CONCESSION WAS, YOU CAN USE THE ARPA MONEY, BUT THE WAY I HAVE UNDERSTOOD AND WHAT I'M TOLD IS ARPA MONEY IS TO RECONSTRUCT AND NOT MAKE IT LARGER OR WHATEVER.

>> THAT'S WHAT THE PLAN IS, TO RECONSTRUCT NOT TO BUILD ANY

ADDITIONAL. >> YES, BUT WHEN THEY REBUILD THIS, THEY REBUILD ILLEGALLY. ARE WE GOING BACK TO BUILD A CONCESSION STAND THE WAY THAT IT WAS WHEN THE FIRST BUILT IT? TALKING ABOUT THE WAY IT WAS IN THE 60S OR 70S? THAT'S THE WAY IT SHOULD BE DONE BECAUSE THAT'S THE ORIGINAL PROJECT AND THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING.

>> FIRST OF ALL THE BUILDING WAS NOT BUILT ILLEGALLY, SECOND OF ALL THIS PART OF THE BUILDING IS NOT THE BUILDING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE BUILDING BUILT WITH THE GRANT MONEY IS STILL STANDING. YOU MAY NOT HAVE SEEN THAT. SECOND OF ALL THE ARPA PEOPLE THAT WERE HIRED BY THE COURT .

>> AMANDA IS HERE. >> IF YOU READ IN THE BACKUP , THE BACKUP SAYS THIS PROJECT IS ELIGIBLE. WE CAN USE THE FUNDS FOR IT AND THIS COURT HAS REPEATEDLY VOTED TO ALLOW EVERY COMMISSIONER TO DO WITH HIS OR HER, WITH THE ARPA FUNDS DESIGNATED, WE HAVE ALWAYS ALLOWED EACH COMMISSIONER IN THEIR PRECINCT TO WORK ON PROJECTS IN THEIR PRECINCT. THIS IS A REBUILD, NOT A NEW BUILD, THIS IS A REBUILD AND WE HAVE ALLOWED COMMISSIONERS TO USE ARPA FUNDS AS THEY SEE FIT AND THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. I'M NOT ASKING FOR A GENERAL FUND MONEY OR FOR CO , I'M NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING ELSE. I AM ASKING TO BE ABLE TO USE THE ARPA FUNDS THAT I HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED FOR MY PRECINCT TO USE FOR MY PRECINCT AND THAT'S WHAT IT IS. IT IS ELIGIBLE, I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR MONTHS, THERE WILL BE NO DELAY TO APPEAR OR TO APPEAR TO THE BUDGET BECAUSE WE HAVE A LARGE CONTINGENCY IN THE BUDGET BECAUSE WE HAVE DONE OUTSTANDING WORK LATELY WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE INVOLVED IN TRYING TO BUILD FOR THE RIGHT PRICE AND COME UP WITH SOME NEW CONSTRUCTION METHODS THAT WILL SAVE US MONEY SO THE PROJECT MANAGER HAS ALSO PUT INTO THE BACKUP IN THE AGENDA , THE SHOWS THERE WILL BE NO DELAY WITH NO CHANGE TO THE BUDGET AND WE WILL HAVE PLENTY OF MONEY TO BUILD THE PEER AND PLENTY OF MONEY TO DO THIS. I CAME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT I FELT IN THE PAST THE COURT HAS SUPPORTED WHICH IS ALLOWING AND ACCEPTING DONATIONS TO THIS COUNTY AND WE ACCEPT DONATIONS FROM PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY ALL THE TIME. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY, I DON'T KNOW SPECIAL FAVORS OR WHAT YOU CAN DO AS A SPECIAL FAVOR FOR SOMEONE WHO DONATES TO THE COUNTY FOR A PROJECT. WE HAVE ACCEPTED DONATIONS FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS IF THEY WANT TO DONATE TO THE COUNTY AND IF THEY DON'T THEY DON'T HAVE TO. IF THEY WANT TO, THEY CAN. THIS WAS SOMETHING I WAS ABLE TO THANKFULLY WORK WITH THE JUDGE ON THIS. I APPRECIATE HER WILLINGNESS TO LISTEN AND REALLY WORK ON THIS BECAUSE SHE SAID AT HER LAST MEETING SHE WAS NEVER OPPOSED TO THE RESTAURANT, SO WE CAME UP WITH A WAY THAT MET WHAT SHE COULD DO WITH AND HOPEFULLY THE REST OF THE COURT COULD BECAUSE I'M USING MY PRECINCT ALLOCATIONS GOING AND ASKING FOR FUNDS FROM OUTSIDE ENTITIES. I CANNOT IMAGINE WHY SOMEONE WOULDN'T ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN OTHER THAN YOU DON'T LIKE THE PROJECT AND THAT'S OKAY. YOU CAN ADMIT YOU DON'T LIKE THE PROJECT,

[01:30:11]

BUT THIS IS ABOUT AS GOOD AS I CAN COME UP WITH TO GET SOMETHING DONE IN MY PRECINCT THAT I THINK IS SUPER IMPORTANT. IMPORTANT TO THIS COUNTY, TO THE PRECINCT. I GET CALLS FROM OLIVER, PEOPLE IN PRECINCT 1, TWO, THREE AND TONES FROM FOUR SAYING PLEASE BUILD THIS, GET IT DONE WE LOVE HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A VENUE AND WE ARE BASICALLY A LANDLORD. WE MAY USE IT TODAY FOR A RESTAURANT WE MAY USE IT NEXT WEEK FOR SOMETHING ELSE BECAUSE THE RESTAURANT DOES NOT WORK. WE ARE A LANDLORD AND WILL BE A FAIR MARKET WITH THE DEAL GOING OUT TO BIDS, THAT WILL GO OUT FOR RFP AND EVERYBODY WILL HAVE A OPEN SHOT AND IT WILL BE A FAIR MARKET DEAL, CANNOT BE A GIVE ME. THE COURT WILL SEE THAT WE WILL BRING IT TO THE COURT TO SAY THIS IS THE PARAMETERS WE ARE WORKING UNDER. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MORE OPEN AND TRANSPARENT TO BE. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT I GET IT, BUT I THINK IT'S FAIR AND I HAVE VOTED FOR PROJECTS IN YOUR PRECINCT AND PRECINCT THAT I DON'T THINK ARE 100% GREAT, BUT YOU USE YOUR ARPA FUNDS AND I VOTED FOR THEM BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. IF WE WANT TO CHANGE HOW WE DO THINGS ON THAT THEN OKAY.

>> I HAVE ALSO LOST MY ARPA FUNDS BECAUSE THEY ARE USED SOMEWHERE ELSE. I DO NOT GET THE OPPORTUNITY.

>> YOU LOST YOUR FUNDS FOR ELIGIBLE PROJECTS. IT WAS NOT YOUR FAULT THAT THEY WERE INELIGIBLE.

>> I COULD'VE MOVED THEM ELSEWHERE.

>> AS FAR AS THE RESTAURANT IT WAS ILLEGAL, 700 SOME THOUSAND DOLLARS GIVEN TO THE COUNTY FOR INSPECTION OF THE

PIER. >> IT WAS NOT BUILT ILLEGALLY.

IT WAS ALREADY BUILT. YOU KEEP SAYING BUILT ILLEGALLY.

SUCK OKAY, OKAY ONE AT A TIME.

>> COMMISSIONER. THERE WAS A SMALL BUILDING THERE , BUT IT WAS NOT A RESTAURANT. IT WAS A CONCESSION STAND.

>> LET ME TAKE A BREAK. TROY ADLER FROM THE PARKS BOARD WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. HE HAS HAD HIS HAND UP .

>> THANK YOU AND I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION TODAY. THE PARKS BOARD SUPPORTS AND CONTINUE TO LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING THIS CONCESSIONARY AREA. IT HAS BEEN ONE OF THE INCOME PRODUCING ASSETS OF THE COUNTY AND HAS PAID FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE OPERATIONS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE YEAR FOR THIS COUNTY. FOR THE PARKS BOARD AND ALL OPERATIONS, BEACH CLEANING AND EVERYTHING. AT THIS POINT WE ARE LOOKING FOR SOME ASSISTANCE IN TRYING TO HELP THE COMMUNITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET BACK TO A PLACE WE HAVE ALL ENJOYED AND THE TOURISM HAS BEEN AMAZING. ON BEHALF OF OF THE PARKS BOARD WE ARE UNANIMOUS IN SUPPORT FOR A THIRD-PARTY CONCESSION. THANK

YOU. >> TO BE CLEAR. THIS IS NOT A DONE DEAL, THIS IS GOING OUT TO ASK FOR THE FUNDS. IF WE DON'T COME UP WITH THE FUNDS, THIS WILL HAVE TO BE CHANGED QUITE POSSIBLY BY JUNE BECAUSE OF THE DEADLINE WE WERE GIVEN IN THE COURT. SO THIS IS A VERY SHORT TIMELINE TO GO OUT AND TRY TO RAISE MONEY FOR THIS. IT NEEDS TO BE MOVING FORWARD IF

THERE IS ANY CHANCE. >> WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS 1 MILLION TIMES. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST THE RESTAURANT EITHER. THE BAR IS THE ONE THAT CREATES PROBLEMS. WE ARE NOT IN THE ALCOHOL BUSINESS AND IT SHOULD NOT BE PART OF THE COUNTY BUSINESS OR THE PARKS BUSINESS, SHOULD NOT BE PART OF ANYBODY'S BUSINESS AND A RESTAURANT IS A RESTAURANT, A BAR IS A BAR AND THINGS HAPPEN WHEN YOU HAVE A BAR. THAT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN WHEN YOU HAVE A RESTAURANT. I WANT TO SAY THAT WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE, IF IT IS SOMETHING WE KNOW WE CAN LIVE WITH THEN FINE, BUT I DON'T SUPPORT THE BAR.

>> I WAS SURPRISED TO FIND OUT THAT THE OTHER PIER HAS A LIQUOR LICENSE, THEY SELL ALCOHOL.

>> 30 OR 40 YEARS. >> IT HAS BEEN A STANDARD AND I

WAS SURPRISED. >> THAT HAVE BEEN DOING IT 30 OR 40 YEARS. THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THIS IS NOTHING NEW.

>> I'M GLAD THE JUDGE BROUGHT THAT UP. MAYBE TERESA CAN HELP US. WE HAVE ONE INSTANCE WHERE WE ARE DOING

[01:35:01]

THAT AS A COUNTY. IS THAT COUNTY OR THROUGH A VENDOR?

>> THAT WOULD BE SCOTT. >> VERY QUICKLY YES OR NO.

>> WE HAVE A THIRD-PARTY CONCESSIONARY CONTRACT.

>> THAT'S ALL I WANT TO KNOW. I GUESS THAT'S MY CONCERN. AS LONG AS THEY ARE THIRD PARTIES. REALLY LIKE THE FAIRGROUNDS IS LIKE A THIRD-PARTY VENDOR AS WELL. THEY SELL ALCOHOL. I THINK IT IS A LEGITIMATE CONCERN. THE COUNTY IS SELLING AND IF NOT IF IT IS THIRD-PARTY THEY ARE NOT OKAY WITH THAT. THAT IS A VALID CONCERN. AS LONG AS IT IS SET UP THE SAME WAY THAT I'M GOOD WITH THAT. THAT IS WHAT I

WANTED TO MAKE SURE. >> THAT IS A GOOD POINT. YES WE

DO WITH THE LIABILITY. >> I WANT TO CLARIFY. IF IT'S LIKE THAT THEN IT SOMETHING I AGREE TO IF IT IS A THIRD-PARTY TO HAVE THEM BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING THAT GOES ON THAT HAS TO DO WITH LIQUOR. I WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO THAT.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT. IT IS THE EXACT SAME SITUATION WE HAVE WITH A THIRD-PARTY CONCESSION AND THEY SELL ALCOHOL IN ROB'S TOWN AT THE THIRD-PARTY CONCESSIONARY AND THEY HAVE AS LONG AS THAT WAS BUILT. I DID NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT THAT SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP. THIS IS GOING ON. UNDER THIS ARGUMENT WE CANNOT SELL THERE EITHER.

>> THIS IS ONLY IF THE FUNDING IS RAISED. SO WE ARE

WAY BACK. >> I HAVE TO GO FIND MONEY.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO MOVE FORWARD TO ALLOW US TO SEEK ADDITIONAL FUNDS. IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? IF THE FUNDS ARE FOUND, TO ALLOW COMMISSIONER CHESNEY TO MOVE 1 MILLION ARPA FUNDING BACK INTO THE PROJECT.

>> A SEPARATE MOTION. I WAS TRYING TO KEEP IT ON THE ITEM.

THE FIRST IS TO ALLOW MYSELF AND ANY MEMBER OF THE COURT TO

GO SEEK FUNDING. >> I SECOND THE MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN? THE MOTION

[8. Discuss and consider reallocating Precinct 4 ARPA funds in the amount of $1 million previously allocated to Bob Hall Pier to go towards rebuilding a third-party concessionaire building at Bob Hall Pier that was previously there prior to Hurricane Hanna.]

PASSES, THANK YOU. NOW NUMBER EIGHT.

>> THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE REBUILDING THE THIRD-PARTY CONCESSIONARY BUILDING AT BOB HALL PIER MOVING PRECINCT 4 ARPA FUNDS TO THE THIRD-PARTY CONCESSIONARY CONTINGENT ON ADDITIONAL FUNDS BEING FOUND TO COMPLETE THE REBUILD AND ONCE FUNDING IS FOUND, TO FULLY MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DESIGN ON THE THIRD-PARTY CONCESSION AND COMPLETE THAT DESIGN GOING FORWARD.

>> BASICALLY ALL CONTINGENT. YES.

>> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION THAT ALLOWS YOU TO MOVE YOUR MONEY, YOUR DESIGNATED FUNDS CONTINGENT UPON FINDING THE REST OF THE FUNDS AND ALLOWING JACOBS ENGINEERING TO GO FORWARD WITH FINISHING OF THE DESIGN. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?

>> DESIGN FOR WHAT? >> FOR THE STANDING BUILDING.

>> IF YOU'RE GOING TO SAY SOMETHING, SAY THIRD-PARTY

RESTAURANT AND BAR. >> THE JUDGE WHO CAME UP WITH THIRD-PARTY CONCESSION, THE TERM FROM A LONG TIME AGO AND I

TRY TO LIVE WITHIN THE TERM. >> IT IS A HAMBURGER.

>> WHAT , AND WHAT GRANT WORKS HAS SAID IS WE DON'T WANT TO BE SPECIFIC AS TO THE USE BECAUSE IF WE WANT TO USE IT FOR SOMETHING ELSE SOME OTHER DAY WE DON'T WANT TO PIGEONHOLE OURSELVES AND BE TOO SPECIFIC. THIS IS HOW GRANT WORKS HAS TOLD ME TO DO THIS. I HAVE WORKED WITH THE JUDGE ON LANGUAGE. I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS THREE OR FOUR MONTHS TO PUT THIS TOGETHER IN A WAY THAT IS LEGAL, THAT IS RIGHT AND JUSTIFIED. SO THAT'S THE WORDING I WOULD ASK WE STICK WITH BASED ON WHAT I HAVE BEEN ADVISED.

>> COMMISSIONER MAREZ . >> I WANTED TO COMMENT. IT IS A MULTIPURPOSE BUILDING THAT THE COUNTY CAN USE AT THEIR DISCRETION. AT THE TIME THE BUILDING IS BUILT, LIKE COMMISSIONER CHESNEY SAYS, IT WILL BE FAIR AND EQUITABLE PROCESS TO THEN DETERMINE WHAT THE BUILDING WILL BE USED FOR.

I WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT.

>> THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO SAY. THERE IS NO CONNECTION OR CONDITION TO USE THE PREVIOUS CONCESSION THAT WE HAD. LET'S CLARIFY THAT CORRECT? COMMISSIONER?

>> THIS IS A COASTAL BOARD ISSUE.

>> WE ARE OPENING UP. >> LET ME QUICKLY CLEAN THIS

[01:40:03]

UP. THE CONCESSIONARY CONTRACT IS SOLELY BETWEEN THE CONCESSIONARY AND THE BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS. IT NEVER COMES BEFORE THE COURT, THAT IS UNDER THEIR AUTHORITY LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 321. SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS WE WILL GO OUT WITH RFP REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. WE GET PROPOSALS, WE WILL GET ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE RECOMMENDING WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN RESTAURANT AND BAR OR JUST A HOT DOG STAND. IT MIGHT BE A COMBINATION, BUT WE WILL SCORE AND EVALUATE, LOOK AT THE FINANCIAL STABILITY OF THESE PEOPLE TO PERFORM AND THEN THE BOARD MAKES A DECISION ON WHO THEY WANT TO SELECT. WE SELECT, WE WORK ON GETTING THE AGREEMENT READY TO GO WITH BONDING AND INSURANCE AND THEN WE NEGOTIATE THE PROFIT SHARE. THAT IS BASED ON GROSS PROFITS.

>> THEY COME TO US IT WHEN THEY ARE IN TROUBLE FOR APPROVAL.

>> THAT WAS ANOTHER ISSUE I DID NOT WANT TO GET TO. I AGREE I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT. ONE STEP AT A TIME. AS PRESENTED WITH FINAL AUTHORITY I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD PRACTICE FOR THEM TO BRING TO COURT SO THEY CAN HEAR US OR CHAIRMAN OR WHOEVER CAN COME SHARE AND WE HAVE SOME CONCERNS WE LOVE WHAT YOU ARE DOING OR WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO. JUST TO STICK WITH THE ISSUE. IT IS STILL, THERE IS STILL A PROCESS AND WE ARE NOT TIED TO THE PREVIOUS CONCESSION.

>> IN LIGHT OF THE PROBLEMS FROM THE PAST YEAR I WOULD HOPE AND HAVE EXPRESSED MY THOUGHTS TO CHAIR ADLER THAT YOU DON'T GO OUT TO THIS INTO THE BUILDING IT IS A COUNTY BUILDING AND WE DON'T NEED CONCESSION INVOLVED IN CONSTRUCTION WITH WHAT WE BUILD , THIS IS A COUNTY FACILITY AND BUILDING AND UNTIL YOU ARE THROUGH WITH COMPLETION .

>> SAME THING FROM PORT A WITH CALDWELL CONCESSION SPACE AND THEN WE WILL GET THE RFP FOR WHAT THEY WANT TO USE IT FOR

AND WE WILL EVALUATE. >> THAT IS A BIG KEY. UNTIL I SEE THE WHITES OF THE EYES OF THE BUILDING I WILL NOT DO

ANYTHING. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO PROVE WITH STIPULATION MOVING FORWARD WITH FINDING THE FUNDS AND GOING AHEAD WITH ENGINEERING. WE VOTED ON THE FIRST ONE , BUT THE SECOND IS CONTINGENT ON THE FIRST. WE HAVE TO ADD THAT TO THE LANGUAGE. A MOTION AND SECOND ALREADY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. THEN MOVING

[9. Discuss and Consider funding for Co Rd 44 Bridge Replacement Project with (ARPA Pct 3) funds. ]

ON NUMBER NINE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER FUNDING FOR COUNTY ROAD 44 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT. WITH ARPA PRECINCT

PRECINCT 3 FUNDING. >> THIS IS MY ITEM. FOR SOME BACKGROUND. WE AS A COUNTY AND MY OFFICE HAVE BEEN APPROACHED BY THE CITY AND THE COUNTY TRAINEES DISTRICT TO ASSIST ON A PROJECT WE HAVE HAD WITH PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, COUNTY ENGINEERING HAS BEEN THERE WITH ME ON TWO OCCASIONS ON-SITE AND THEN WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL OTHER DISCUSSIONS LEADING UP TO THIS POINT. THIS IS TO GET US TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE ESTIMATE.

IT IS A HEFTY PRICE TAG OF $400,000, BUT THIS IS A BRIDGE COUNTY ROAD 44 WASHED AWAY BY FLOODING WE HAD A YEAR AGO. IS THAT RIGHT? SO THIS IS A COUNTY ROAD WHICH SERVES A COUNTY PURPOSE. SO I AM BRINGING THIS BEFORE THE COURT SO WE CAN UTILIZE ARPA FUNDING BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF PROJECT BEING ASKED. SO IT WILL TAKE TIME TO WORK THROUGH, BUT WE ARE WORKING ON IT. SO WE WANTED TO BRING IT FOR YOU

ALL. >> HAS IT BEEN CLEARED WITH GRANT WORKS AND APPROVE? IT IS A PROJECT? OKAY.

>> THE ATTACHMENT KIND OF SHOWS THE NUMBERS THAT I HAVE

AVAILABLE FOR FUNDING. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO PASS.

>> WILL THIS NEED TO COME BEFORE ANY OTHER ITEMS?

>> THIS IS REALLOCATION , JUST ALLOCATING THE MONEY FROM THE FUND TO THE PROJECT AND WE HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH WHAT WE WILL DO AS WE APPROACH THE CONSTRUCTION.

[01:45:02]

>> SO I THINK MY ASK WOULD BE TO APPROVE, BUT ON CONDITION THAT AGREEMENT IS DRAWN UP BETWEEN NUECES COUNTY, THE DRAINAGE HISTORY NUMBER TWO AND CITY TO COMPLETE BECAUSE WOULD BE MOU TO BE FINALIZED?

>> THERE ARE SOME ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO WORK OUT MECHANICALLY ARTISTICALLY ASKED HER WHO WILL BE CONTRACTING WITH WHOM AND WHO OWNS WHAT.

>> OKAY. CONTINGENT ON THAT. THEY STILL HAVE TO CLEAR. THIS IS JUST TO GET THE MONEY APPROVAL OKAYED SO THEY CAN START MOVING AND ALLOW LEGAL TO FINALIZE AND APPROVE EVERYTHING. THAT IS THE ASKED TODAY TO PROVE RECOMMENDATION OF ARPA USE TO REPLACE THE BRIDGE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH NUECES COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT 2 CITY OF ROBSTOWN.

CONTINGENT ON THE AGREEMENT BEING DRAWN UP BETWEEN LEGAL

DEPARTMENT, COUNTY ATTORNEY . >> I SECOND THE MOTION. ANY

OTHER DISCUSSION? >> WE HAVE DONE THIS ALREADY WITH COUNTY ROAD 36 WHEN WE REBUILT THE BRIDGE WITH THE

CITY, THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT. >> WE DO THESE PROJECTS?

>> YES AND IT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY GRANT WORKS. WE NEED THE MOU AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY SO CONTINGENT UPON THAT I AGREE

MOVING FORWARD. >> THIS IS HALF-AND-HALF RIGHT? HALF OF ITS OWN BY NUECES DRAINAGE DISTRICT 2 AND HALF

OWNED BY CITY OF ROBSTOWN >> THAT IS CORRECT. THE ROAD BELONGS TO THE CITY OF ROBSTOWN AND THE DRAINAGE IS FROM THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT AND THE CITY. HALF-AND-HALF.

>> BOTH ENTITIES DON'T HAVE THE FUNDING ACCESS THAT WE DO AND OBVIOUSLY WANT TO USE ALL ALLOCATIONS, THAT'S ONE REASON WHY I AM COMMITTED TO DOING THIS. IF YOU ASK THEM, THE SOONER THE BETTER IT WOULD BE COMPLETE WHICH WOULD BE BETTER IF WE GO THROUGH FUNDING SOURCES, BUT I WOULD RATHER USE ARPA FUNDING WHICH HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU ANTICIPATE IT WOULD TAKE THAT THIS PROCESS WOULD ADD ON TO IT. SOME OF THE DESIGNS HAVE BEEN DRAWN UP, BUT FOR DESIGN APPROVAL AND

COMPLETION AND ALL THAT. >> PROBABLY A COUPLE MONTHS .

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO PROVE. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE

>> I WANT TO GO BACK TO NUMBER EIGHT. IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, BUT FOR THE RECORD I WANT TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE RECORD BECAUSE CONTINGENT IT WILL GO TO THE RFP OR WHATEVER IT IS AND THE THIRD-PARTY PERSON IS NOT DESIGNATED ALREADY.

ON NUMBER EIGHT. ON , WE FINISHED THAT ONE. MOVING ON

[10. Discuss and consider approval for method of procurement IFB (Invitation for Bids) Amistad Veterans Memorial Park Improvements; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice; and related matters.]

ITEM NUMBER 10 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL METHOD OF PROCUREMENT I HAVE BEFORE MATTER IN -- BETTER IN MEMORIAL PARK IMPROVEMENT. SORRY, GO AHEAD EDWARD.

>> THANK YOU. THIS IS ANOTHER WONDERFUL PROJECT ALONG THE LINES OF THE PARK COMING UP IN NORTHWEST, THIS PARK .

>> THIS IS FROM ARPA FUNDS DESIGNATED TO YOU FOR THE

PARKS. >> MY ARPA FUNDS.

>> THIS IS A PROJECT AND SO WE'VE GOT

>> WE HAVE A MOTION. >> I WILL SECOND. ANY OTHER

DISCUSSION? >> 10, ITEM NUMBER 10.

ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN? >> HAPPY TO LET YOU USE YOUR

ARPA FUNDS. >> EXCUSE ME JUDGE. WHAT ARE

THE CHANGES ON NUMBER EIGHT? >> NUMBER EIGHT THE COMMISSIONER WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THE CONCESSIONAIRE WOULD GO OUT FOR THE RFP AND SCOTT WITH THE CROSS -- PARKS BOARD STATED THAT IN COMMENTS. I THINK HE HAS RUN OUT THE DOOR, BUT THEY HAVE TO DO THAT AS PART OF THEIR REQUIREMENT.

>> THEY ARE SPECIAL, THEY DON'T HAVE TO BUT THEY CAN.

>> THAT'S THE WAY THEY DID BEFORE. AND THEY DO DO IT. WE WERE TOLD BY TWO DIFFERENT, TROY ADLER AND SCOTT CROSS, IN MY CONVERSATIONS THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE DOING, THERE IS NO CONTRACT. IT WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, EVERYBODY WILL HAVE

[01:50:02]

AN OPPORTUNITY TO REBID . >> IF THAT'S THE CASE MAKE IT

[11. Discuss and consider approval for method of procurement IFB (Invitation for Bids) Sunrise Pond Nature Keach Library Project; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice; and related matters.]

EVEN FIVE. >> MOVING ON , ITEM NUMBER 11 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL FOR INVITATION FOR BID SUNRISE POND NATURE AND GO AHEAD. YOU ARE STILL THERE.

>> THIS IS ANOTHER GOOD PARK PROJECT. ADJACENT TO THE LIBRARY SO IT ENHANCES THE LIBRARY. THEIR TEACHING CLASSES, YOU CAN SEE WHAT THEY HAVE DONE , THEY HAVE BEEN GIVEN THIS WONDERFUL PROGRAM THIS ENHANCES IT AND THIS IS LOCATED IN ROBSTOWN. IT IS ARPA FUNDING. THIS HAS BEEN SHEPHERDED THROUGH, HE HAS BEEN CRACKING THE WHIP SO TO

SPEAK. >> THROUGH YOUR ALLOCATION? I THINK I PUT A LITTLE BIT IN THERE AS WELL. YES. COUNTYWIDE

[12. Discuss and consider the Fire Marshal vehicle, and any related matters.]

OKAY. MOTION TO PASS. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES. LIVING ON ITEM 12 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER FIRE MARSHAL VEHICLE AND ANY RELATED MATTERS. I THINK WE HAVE HELD ONTO THIS FIRE MARSHAL VEHICLE AND SOME OF THE EQUIPMENT. WE HAVE A LEASE ON THE VEHICLE FOR 60 MONTHS. TRYING TO SEE MY NOTES, THE EQUIPMENT IN IT WE CAN EITHER KEEP AND ASSIGN IT TO A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT WHERE WE CAN TURN IN THE LEASE, BUT WE

HAVE HAD IT HELLO? >> SINCE 20.

>> SINCE 2020. WE ARE ALREADY INTO 24. WE WANT TO TURN IT IN? MICHAEL ROBINSON IS BACK THERE AND I TALKED TO HIM EARLIER. I DID NOT REALIZE THIS HAS NORMALLY BEEN A CHORE OR DECIDED THROUGH THE PURCHASING OFFICE.

>> TYPICALLY ANYTIME A DEPARTMENT HAS A VEHICLE THEY NO LONGER HAVE A USE FOR THEY WILL RETURN TO PURCHASING AND WE WILL THEN SEEK OUT ALTERNATE PLACE FOR THE TO CONTINUE TO GET USE. IF YOU HAVE MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS THAT WANT THE SAME ITEM I LIKE TO PUT THOSE DEPARTMENT HEADS TOGETHER AND WORK IT OUT AMONGST THEMSELVES AS TO WHO THEY FEEL IS MOST WORTHY TO RECEIVE THE ITEM. AND THEN THEY WILL COME BACK TO ME WITH WHAT THEY HAVE DECIDED. AND THEN WE TRANSFER THE VEHICLE OVER. IT NEVER REQUIRES COURT ACTION.

>> I WISH I WOULD'VE KNOWN THAT A LONG TIME AGO. I WAS

JUST AWARE OF THIS TODAY. >> I BELIEVE FOR MEMORY SERVING ME CORRECTLY, THERE WAS A LOT GOING ON WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL OFFICE SO I THINK FROM MY STANDPOINT I WANT TO LET THE COURT WEIGH IN ON PREFERENCES THEY HAVE. I WOULD

CONSIDER THAT. >> I KNOW WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF REQUESTS AND I WOULD SUGGEST YOU TALK WITH JJ AS WELL BECAUSE HE DOES TRAVELING FOR THE COUNTY AND HE WAS UP FOR THE NEXT VEHICLE AND HE POSSIBLY COULD USE ONE. I THINK THAT IS YOUR DEPARTMENT AND WE NEED TO LET YOU HANDLE

IT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> WHICH DEPARTMENT HAS REQUESTED?

>> I HAVE HEARD SOME OF THE CONSTABLE OFFICES HAVE EXPRESSED INTEREST BECAUSE IT IS A SQUAD CAR BASICALLY. IT IS IN GREAT CONDITION. INCLUDING THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

SO I WOULD SAY ANY INTERESTED PARTIES PLEASE SEND ME COMMUNICATION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

>> SHOULD WE JUST SELL THE THING AND MOVE ON?

>> THAT IS HIS FIGHT. >> IT IS MY FIGHT.

>> WE DESIGNATE MICHAEL TO MAKE THE DECISION?

>> HE IS ALREADY DESIGNATED. WE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS. WE SHOULD HAVE GIVEN IT A LONG TIME AGO.

>> THE STATUTE SAYS WHAT? A VEHICLE THAT BECOMES AVAILABLE PURCHASING DISSEMINATES AS NEEDED?

>> I AM THE ASSET MANAGER FOR THE COUNTY SO I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL THE ASSETS SO ANYTIME LIKE SOMEONE HAS A DESK THEY DON'T NEED A TURN IT INTO ME AND I FIND A NEW HOME. I DON'T COME TO COURT TO GET PERMISSION AND WE PUBLISHED MEMOS IN THE PAST ADVISING THE DEPARTMENT HEADS IF THERE IS OUTGOING

[01:55:06]

PERSON DUE TO ELECTION CHANGE THEY CANNOT TRANSFER ASSETS TO ANOTHER DEPARTMENT DIRECTLY THEY HAD TO TURN IN UNNEEDED ASSETS AND THEN WE WILL FIND A SUITABLE REPLACEMENT.

>> WHAT DO WE DO WITH ALL THE GUNS THE FIRE MARSHAL HAD?

>> THE SHERIFF IS HOLDING THEM. THE ONLY LAWFUL PERSON.

>> OKAY IF THAT'S THE LAW I DON'T NEED TO GET INTO ANY

FIGHTS. >> THE LAW DOES PROVIDE FOR IF WE HAVE A TIE WITH TWO PEOPLE THAT BID THE SAME NUMBER THE WAY IT IS SETTLED IS THROUGH THE DRAWING OF LOTS AND THAT IS SPECIFIED. IF I HAVE THREE OR FOUR FOLKS WHO WANT THIS EQUALLY AND NONE ARE WILLING TO GIVE THEN WE RESORT

TO DRAWING LOTS. >> PLEASE GIVE A HEADS UP.

I'M SURE THIS ONE NICE VEHICLE WILL DRAW A LOT OF ATTENTION AND WE MAY HAVE SOME HURT FEELINGS OR SOME THAT FEEL THEY DESERVE IT MORE THAN OTHERS. KEEP US UPDATED IF THIS BECOMES A PROBLEM SO WE KNOW. WE MIGHT START GETTING CALLS.

CONSIDERATION DEPARTMENTS THAT NEED A VEHICLE , THAT VEHICLES

ARE WAY OVER MILEAGE LIMIT? >> THAT'S USUALLY THE FIRST CONSIDERATION. WE WILL SEE THE CONDITION OF EACH PERSON SEEKING TO HAVE THE VEHICLE, WE WILL EVALUATE THEIR FLEET AND DETERMINE WHO IS IN THE POSITION OF MOST NEED OR WHO WAS NEXT ON THE LIST WHEN WE CUT OFF VEHICLE PURCHASES.

>> THAT'S A WRINKLE WE DON'T NORMALLY HAVE TO DO WITH.

THERE WERE VEHICLES WE WERE EXPECTING TO COME IN AND WE CANNOT RECEIVE THEM DUE TO THE BACKLOG AFTER THE PANDEMIC IN TERMS OF MANUFACTURING. SO HAVE TO WEIGH OUT THOSE

FACTORS. >> I HAVE HAD SOME CALLS ABOUT VEHICLES FROM THE CONSTABLE OFFICE AND THE VEHICLES ARE WAY OVER THE LIMIT AND THAT COULD POSE A DANGER AS WELL TO THE DRIVER. WHOEVER IT MIGHT BE. IF YOU CAN TAKE THAT INTO

CONSIDERATION. >> THE COURT MADE A DECISION LAST YEAR TO NOT DO ANOTHER FLEET BASED ON BUDGETARY CONSTRAINTS SO THOSE VEHICLES CONTINUE TO GET OLDER.

>> WE'VE GOT ONE VEHICLE THAT WOULD HELP A DEPARTMENT.

>> WHOEVER GETS THIS WILL BE HELPED, I CERTAINLY AGREE.

[15. Discuss and consider upcoming Commissioners Court meeting date(s), workshop date(s), and related matters.]

>> WE HAVE NO MOTION AND NO ACTION. IT IS NOT OURS TO DISCUSS. ITEM NUMBER 15 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER UPCOMING COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING DATES. DOES ANYONE HAVE COMPLEX OR PROBLEMS TO ADDRESS ON THE COURT DATES? OTHER THAN I WAS MADE AWARE YESTERDAY ALL DATES ARE LIKE THE DAY AFTER ELECTION DAYS OR SOMETHING. THAT IS KIND OF HARD FOR CANDIDATES. NOBODY LOOKED INTO THAT OR DID IT INTENTIONALLY.

[1. Discuss and consider approval of the Memorandum of Understanding between Nueces County Sheriff's Office and Texas Commission on Law Enforcement (TCOLE), State of Texas State Agency for providing School Marshal Recertification Training.]

WE FAIL TO GO BY THAT ONE. MOVING ON, ITEM B 1 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN NUECES COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND TEXAS COMMISSION ON LAW ENFORCEMENT STATE OF TEXAS AGENCY PROVIDING SCHOOL MARSHAL RECERTIFICATION TRAINING. THIS IS FUNDED BY THE SHERIFF'S COMMUNITY PROJECT FUNDS. DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

THIS IS THE SECOND MOU. THE FIRST WAS APPROVED IN OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR. BASICALLY IT CODIFIES THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN US AND TEXAS COMMISSION ON LAW ENFORCEMENT EDUCATION THAT MAKES THE NUECES COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE TURNING DIVISION ONE OF FOUR UNITS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS THAT IS AUTHORIZED TO TEACH THE SCHOOL MARSHAL PROGRAMS. THE ONE APPROVED IN OCTOBER CREATED OUR ABILITY TO TEACH THE 80 HOUR ORIGINAL SCHOOL MARSHAL TRAINING CLASS. WE HAVE 22 SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN NUECES COUNTY AND ALL OF THEM ARE TASKED WITH CREATING A SCHOOL SAFETY AND SECURITY MODEL THAT FITS THEM. SOME OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS OPT TO HAVE THEIR OWN POLICE DEPARTMENT AND SOME OF THEM OPT TO USE SCHOOL MARSHALS OR OTHER PROCESSES TO KEEP STUDENTS SAFE. SO WHAT WE ARE DOING WITH THIS AT NO COST TO

[02:00:03]

THE DISTRICT BECAUSE IT IS ALL FUNDED, IT IS A FUNDED MANDATE.

WE ARE OFFERING THEM THE ABILITY TO SEND PEOPLE TO US AND GET THEM TRAINED TO BE A SCHOOL MARSHAL FOR THEIR PARTICULAR ISD. THAT OCCURRED IN OCTOBER. NOW THE SCHOOL MARSHAL PROGRAM REQUIRES RECERTIFICATION EVERY THREE YEARS. SO THE MOU WILL AUTHORIZE US WITH TCOLE TO ALSO TEACH THAT 16 HOUR RECERTIFICATION CLASS WHICH WILL PROBABLY BE THE FIRST CLASS THAT WE PUT TOGETHER BECAUSE THERE ARE ALREADY NUMEROUS SCHOOL MARSHALS AT THE DIFFERENT ISD'S THAT ARE COMING UP TO BE RECERTIFIED.

THEY RECEIVED ORIGINAL TRAINING ELSEWHERE, OFTEN OUT OF STATE. SO WE ALREADY HAVE A ROSTER LINED UP FOR THE FIRST RECERTIFICATION CLASS OR SESSION IN MANY OF THE SCHOOL MARSHALS COMING TO US FROM OUT-OF-STATE. IT IS IN VERY HIGH DEMAND. NOT SO MUCH OUT-OF-STATE BECAUSE IT IS A TEXAS THING. THROUGHOUT TEXAS THEY ARE COMING HERE. IT IS ALL REIMBURSED. THE 80 HOURS COURSE IS REIMBURSED $20,000 PER SESSION. THIS RECERTIFICATION, THE 18 HOUR COURSE YOU ARE LOOKING AT TODAY WILL BE REIMBURSED $6000 PER SESSION. WITH NO COST TO THE COUNTY.

>> IS THIS ADMINISTERED BY YOUR TRAINING DIVISION?

>> YES. CAPTAIN MILTON IS A COORDINATOR AND WILL USE OFFICERS , OUR TRAINED INSTRUCTORS AND WE CAN BRING IN ADJUNCT INSTRUCTORS FROM OTHER AGENCIES IF THE NEED IS

THERE. >> ONLY FOUR IN THE STATE, IN

THE WHOLE STATE. >> NUECES COUNTY IS ONE OF THEM. WE SAW THE NEED AND INITIALLY THE NEED APPEAR TO BE CORPUS CHRISTI SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE BIG ONE AND THEN THEY BACKED AWAY. WE HAD ALREADY PUT THE WHEELS IN MOTION TO GET CERTIFIED AND CREATE THIS MOU SO WE ARE HANGING ON TO IT BECAUSE IT WILL BENEFIT MANY OF THE OTHER SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN NUECES COUNTY. WHO CHOOSE TO HAVE THE SCHOOL MARSHAL ELEMENT IN THE SCHOOL SAFETY AND SECURITY

PLAN. >> THEY ARE COMING FROM OUTSIDE

THE REGION? >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> GOOD TO HEAR. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO

PASS. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND MULTIPLE SECONDS.

>> WE CAN USE THAT TRUCK IN THE TRAINING PROCESS.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU

[1. Discuss and consider approval of Contract Amendment by Coastal Bend Council of Governments (CBCOG) -Area Agency on Aging (AAA) regarding the meals program and Rate Negotiation Workbook]

[2. Discuss and consider approval of new contract agreement for FY24-FY27 between Nueces County and Coastal Bend Council of Governments (CBCOG) --Area Agency of Aging (AAA)]

SHARE. MOVING ON ITEM C 1 CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CONTRACT AMENDED BY COASTAL BEND COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT AREA AGENCY REGARDING THE MEALS PROGRAM AND RATE NEGOTIATION WORKBOOK. ONE

AND TWO WERE SEPARATED. >> THEY CAN BE PUT TOGETHER.

ESSENTIALLY THE FIRST IS THE ACTUAL BOOK. WE DO THAT EVERY YEAR. THE SECOND IS EXTENDING THE CONTRACT FROM 24 TO 27 SO WE WILL NOT SEE THAT UNTIL 28 OR 27 GOING INTO 28.

>> THE WORKBOOK IS FIRST. MOTION TO PASS APPROVAL OF THE

WORK BOOK. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. WHEN IS THE LAST TIME YOU DID

THE WORKBOOK? >> WE DID LAST YEAR.

>> IT IS DONE EVERY YEAR? BECAUSE THE NUMBERS CHANGE?

>> WHAT WE DO, BASED ON CPI AND EVALUATION HOW MUCH

EVERYTHING COSTS. >> MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE ANY OPPOSED THE SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. NOW, MY QUESTION WOULD BE IF YOU HAVE TO DO THE WORKBOOK EVERY YEAR, HOW CAN WE DO THIS FOR MULTIPLE YEARS?

>> ESSENTIALLY IT IS NOT TIE INTO A NUMBER, IT TIES YOU TO WHO IS PROVIDING YOU. WHAT WE ARE DOING WITH REQUIREMENTS AND STIPULATIONS. YOU WILL SEE AMENDMENTS GOING THROUGH TIME REGARDING THE WORKBOOK AS WE GO THROUGH.

>> WHY DID YOU ASK THROUGH 2027?

>> THAT IS NOT AS THAT IS COMING FROM THE,

>> MOTION TO PASS. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN THE MOTION PASSES, THANK YOU

[1. Receive an update of the road improvements of Rabbit Run Drive and Coyote Trail.]

VERY MUCH. PUBLIC WORKS RECEIVE UPDATE ON THE ROAD IMPROVEMENT

[02:05:01]

OF RABBIT RUN DRIVE AND COYOTE TRAIL. THIS IS JUST AN UPDATE.

>> I ASKED THEM TO PUT IT ON BECAUSE THEY DID A GREAT JOB ON RABBIT RUN AND I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THE GREAT WORKS PUBLIC WORKS DID ON THIS. I KNOW THEY ADDED COYOTE TRAIL, BUT OFTENTIMES EMPLOYEES DO NOT GET, WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE MORE, BUT THEY DID A PHENOMENAL JOB AND I WANT TO TELL YOU THAT IN PUBLIC IN FRONT OF THE WORLD. I AM SUPER HAPPY, I HAVE DRIVEN OUT AND LOOKED AT IT AND I HAVE SEEN THE PICTURES YOU SENT. I WANT YOU TO TALK ABOUT IT BUT I WANTED TO JUMP IN AND SAY THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK AND

THE GREAT WORK. >> WE PUT IN A FEW PHOTOS.

THERE IS A FEW PHOTOS THAT WE PRESENTED . THE PROJECT TOOK THREE OR FOUR WEEKS. I HAVE THE LEAD FOREMAN AND THE FOREMAN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT AND YOU ARE CORRECT THEY DID A GREAT JOB, THEM AND THEIR STAFF GETTING THE PROJECT COMPLETED AND AGAIN 3 TO 4 WEEKS TO GET HALF A MILE ROAD RECONSTRUCTED , THIS IS GIVING THE FINISHED PRODUCT OF THE LOAD AND PRETTY MUCH A BRAND-NEW BASE AND IT WAS COMPLETED IN 3 TO 4 WEEKS. I BROUGHT RICHARD, THE LEAD FOREMAN AND WORKING ON THE PROJECT THEY DO A GREAT JOB SO

THANK YOU. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ON THIS, A GENERAL QUESTION. MAYBE IT IS FOR A FUTURE ITEM ON THE AGENDA, BUT YOU DID THIS BASICALLY IN-HOUSE?

>> YES OR. >> SO, AN ESTIMATE, YOU'RE AN ENGINEER, WHAT WOULD IT HAVE COST IF WE PUT IT OUT ON THE STREET? HOW MUCH DID WE SAVE?

>> LOOKING ABOUT 300,000 TO 500,000 SAVINGS.

>> OKAY. WITHIN REASON. WE KNOW WE HAVE TO BUILD STAFF, PAY SCALE NEEDS TO INCREASE AND WE HAVE GOTTEN A LOT OF GREAT NEW EQUIPMENT. WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO DO IT ALL THE TIME, BUT I REMEMBER BACK TO THE CONVERSATION I HAD WITH YOUR PREDECESSOR WHEN IT FIRST CAME ON THE COURT, I CAME IN A COUPLE OF YEARS BEFORE YOU CAME TO NUECES COUNTY AND I REMEMBER HEARING LED US BID OUT THE PROJECT AND THEN SEEING THE WAY IT WAS BID AT THE TIME CHEAPER TO GO THE PRIVATE ROUTE AND HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE BID OUT, THAT'S HOW IT WOULD BE PRESENTED. NOW WE ARE AT THE POINT WHERE YOU CAN DO THIS WORK. ONE, IT IS SAVING MONEY, TWO IT SHOWS QUALITY OF WORK AND THE WORKERS YOU HAVE AND THEN THAT SAVINGS COULD BE TURNED AROUND AND PUT INTO OTHER PROJECTS OR SAY HEY, WE ARE SAVING MONEY SO LET'S USE THAT MONEY TO JUSTIFY A PAY RAISE FOR THE STAFF TO KEEP THEM HERE. I THINK IT SERVES ALL THREE PURPOSES AND PROBABLY MORE, BUT I FIGURE WE HAD A SAVINGS. TO SAY THAT MUCH THAT IS A EYE OPENER AND THAT IS

GREAT NEWS. >> SOMETHING I WANT TO MENTION.

SCHOOL BUSES ON THIS ROAD , IT WAS IN THAT CONDITION.

>> WE HAVE SOME PROBLEMS TO FIX OVER THERE BEFORE WE GET ISSUES WITH WHO OWNS THE ROAD AND YOU ALL DID A GREAT JOB SO

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> I WANT TO ADD, YOU GUYS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN , YOU GET OUT FROM BEHIND YOUR DESK AND GO WORK WITH YOUR CREW. I HAVE SEEN YOU THERE AND THAT'S WHAT I APPRECIATE ABOUT YOU AND YOUR CREW. YOU DON'T JUST DICTATE FROM THE BACK OF YOUR DESK. YOU GO AND WORK WITH THEM. THANK YOU GUYS FOR ALL YOU DO.

>> THANK YOU, SORRY I HAD TO STEP OUT, THANK YOU. I HEARD EXCELLENT COMMENTS SO THANK YOU.

>> I DID NOT GET TO GO TO THE NEXT ITEM.

[2. Discuss and consider the approval of Certificate of Substantial Completion for the Hazel Bazemore Park New Restroom Building Project]

>> MOVING ON ITEM NUMBER 2 DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CERTIFICATE OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION FOR HAZEL BAZEMORE.

I WAS OUT THERE YESTERDAY IT LOOKS AWESOME.

>> WE RECOMMEND CERTIFICATE FOR THE PROJECT.

>> YES. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL YOU DONE, ALL OF YOUR HELP, YOU GUIDED ME. I'M NOT AN ENGINEER. I DEPEND ON YOU FOR GUIDANCE AND YOU HAVE DONE A

[02:10:01]

GREAT JOB, THANK YOU AGAIN. >> MOTION TO APPROVE, WE HAVE A MOTION, COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER MAREZ. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED SAME

[3. Discuss and consider approval of a deductive Change Order No. 2 for the Nueces County Courthouse 6th Floor Public Defenders Office Renovation Project.]

SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES. LIVING ON ITEM NUMBER THREE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF DEDUCTIVE CHANGE ORDER NUMBER TWO WHICH MEANS YOU CAME UNDER BUDGET . VERY GOOD.

FOR THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OFFICE, SIX FLOOR RENOVATION.

>> RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. >> WE WILL CERTAINLY NOT TURN IT DOWN. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND COME ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAME SIGN? THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER

[4. Discuss and consider the approval of Certificate of Substantial Completion for the 6th Floor Renovations – Public Defenders Office Project.]

FOUR DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CERTIFICATE OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION FOR THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OFFICE SIX

FLOOR RENOVATIONS. >> RECOMMENDING APPROVAL ALSO ON THE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION.

>> YES. WHAT IS THE DATE, THE FINAL COMPLETION?

>> IT SHOULD BE FULLY COMPLETED.

>> WE WILL JUST WAIT ON THE DOORS.

>> THEY SHOULD HAVE THOSE IN? OKAY. I RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND, ANY OTHER

[5. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving method of procurement IFB (Invitation for Bids) for Nueces County Courthouse and Jail Wastewater Line Replacement Project; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice; and related matters.]

DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR AYE ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN, THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER FIVE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING THE METHOD OF PROCUREMENT FOR THE NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE AND JAIL WASTEWATER LINE REPLACEMENT PROJECT. THOSE ARE FUNDED WITH ARPA FUNDS. WE SET ASIDE THIS MONEY FOR A WHILE SO I WOULD RECOMMEND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASING AGENT TO GO OUT FOR BIDS ON THIS. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN. THAT MONEY IS ARPA, 4,632,165

[6. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving method of procurement IFB (Invitation for Bids) for Nueces County Main Jail Roof Improvement Project; authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice; and related matters.]

IS THE AMOUNT ALLOCATED. ITEM NUMBER SIX I WILL LET COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ SPEAK FIRST, I SPOKE TO HIM AND ASKED HIM TO POSSIBLY TABLE FOR A COUPLE MONTHS UNTIL WE

GET THE BIDS BACK. >> I DON'T KNOW A COUPLE OF MONTHS. SO HOW LONG WILL THE BID GO OUT?

>> FOR THIS PROJECT YOU ARE LOOKING.

>> FOR THE OTHER TWO. I WANT TO TABLE UNTIL THE COURTHOUSE

ROOF COMES IN. >> WE ARE REQUESTING 30 DAYS.

IS THE DEADLINE? LET'S GET CLEAR INFORMATION. I WANT TO

MAKE SURE. >> NOT OUT YET. WE NEED THE PLANS AND SPECS. I HAVE PERMISSION TO BID SO I HAVE MY

FRAMEWORK READY. >> AND YOU ANTICIPATE?

>> AS SOON AS I GET THE PLANS.

>> TABLE TO THE DATE WE BRING BACK TO COURT TO CONSIDER THE

OTHER? >> THE OTHER DOES NOT HAVE TO BE RECONSIDER. I RECEIVED THE PLANS AND SPECS, WE WILL PUT TOGETHER THE ADVERTISEMENT AND GIVE THREE OR FOUR DAYS NOTICE.

VOTE . >> WHEN YOU GET THE BIDS BACK.

IT'S GOING TO BE A MONTH AND A HALF DEPENDING ON WHEN THE

COURT FALLS. >> WE WILL PUSH TO THE FIRST WEEK OF APRIL AND IF WE NEED TO PUSH AGAIN WE WILL.

>> TO ME I WANT TO SEE WHAT THE BIDS WOULD BE FROM BOTH.

>> WHEN I COME BACK TO GIVE YOU GUYS THE BID RESULTS THAT

WOULD BE A GOOD TIME. >> I WOULD ASK TO TABLE UNTIL THIS COMES BACK WITH A BID PROPOSAL.

[7. Discuss and consider approval of a request by the Department of Public Works to allocate $141,233.56 of Right of Way funds to cover shortage of mowing equipment purchased with ARPA funds.]

>> THAT SHOULD BE SAFE. >> FIRST MEETING IN APRIL?

SHOULD BE SAFE. >> I SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND TO TABLE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN? MOTION PASSES, MOVING ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL REQUEST BY DIBONA PUBLIC WORKS TO ALLOCATE $141,233 DIBONA PUBLIC WORKS TO ALLOCATE $141,233.56 OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FUNDS TO COVER THE SHORTAGE OF MOWING EQUIPMENT IN THE ARPA FUND, THE PRICE WENT UP WHEN YOU WENT TO PURCHASE?

>> DURING THE TIMEFRAME OF THE LAST TWO YEARS IT HAS GONE UP AND SOME OF THE EQUIPMENT WE BOUGHT WITH ARPA MONEY WE ARE REQUESTING TO USE THE RIGHT AWAY MONEY .

>> THERE IS $905,000 IN THE CURRENT AVAILABLE FUNDING.

>> WE HAVE TO SET THAT ASIDE. POSSIBLE ACQUISITIONS AND STUFF

[02:15:03]

LIKE THAT. SO TAKING IT WILL NOT HURT US?

>> I DID GIVE AN EMAIL. >> THE BALANCE WE WOULD LEAVE AND NOT ONE TOUCH AND LET THE AMOUNT GROW IS $449,107.

>> AVAILABLE BALANCE 905, YOU ARE ASKING?

>> WE OWE ONE OTHER PENDING PAYMENT AND THEN THESE FUNDS WOULD MAKE IT $449,107. TERESA LOOKED IT UP BECAUSE I WANTED

TO MAKE SURE WE WERE ALL AWARE. >> THAT'S FOR WHAT WE KNOW

WHAT WE THINK IS COMING? >> WE DON'T EVER KNOW. THEY

CANNOT JUST GIVE IT TO US. >> I DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL FROM TXDOT FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND I ASKED IF IT WOULD BE REQUEST FROM HERE UNTIL THE END OF THE YEAR WHICH IS FISCAL YOUR OF AUGUST AND HE SAID THEY WILL NOT BE REQUESTING ANY

ADDITIONAL RIGHT AWAY MONEY. >> WE PUT SOME IN EACH YEAR FROM THE BUDGET? THAT'S WHAT I NEED TO KNOW. YOU HAVE CHECK WITH HIM AND HE DOES NOT THINK ANYTHING IS COMING?

>> THERE IS A PENDING PROJECT ONGOING. U.S. 77. 77 SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 28 TO COUNTY ROAD 16. THEY SHOULD HAVE CONSTRUCTION AND UTILITIES ONGOING SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE AN ESTIMATE THAT THEY WOULD REQUEST PAYMENT ON OF 250,000 THAT THEY WOULD REQUEST PAYMENT ON OF 250,006 59.

>> THAT'S WHAT SHE IS ACCOUNTING FOR.

>> FACTORING THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL AND WE DON'T KNOW THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS. 449 THAT REMAINS WE NEED TO KEEP IT.

>> WE SHOULD BE OKAY. >> SO, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO

APPROVE? >> SO MOVED.

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

[1. Discuss and consider conditional selection for Job Order Contracting Services for General Construction and Multi-Trades (RFP No. 3256-23).]

PASSES. THANK YOU. >> MOVING ON, E PURCHASING.

ITEM NUMBER ONE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CONDITIONAL SELECTION OF JOB ORDER CONTRACTING SERVICES GENERAL CONSTRUCTION AND TO UNDERSTAND THIS IS STEP TWO OF THE PROCESS TO CREATE A POOL OF CONTRACTORS FOR PUBLIC WORKS FOR THE PARKS AND COASTAL PARKS SO I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN? THE MOTION PASSES.

>> WHEN IS THIS? >> WE HAVE SELECTED THE CONTRACTORS AND I WILL COME BACK TO THE COURT WITH CONTRACTS WHEN THE CONTRACTS HAVE BEEN APPROVED THE FOLKS HAVE OFFERED TO COME IN AND HAVE SOME MEETINGS TO SHOW THEM HOW TO UTILIZE THE PROCESS ON FUTURE PROJECTS AND WHAT I MAY DO IS GET SOME TIME WITH THE COURT IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THEM GIVE THE COURT A BRIEFING OF HOW THE PROCESS WORKS.

SEVERAL PROJECTS EACH OF YOU MAY HAVE THAT YOU WANT TO UTILIZE THE PROGRAM TO HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW IT WORKS.

AGREEMENT ON THE OTHER PROJECTS.

>> THE ONES THAT ARE SUBCONTRACTING? THAT HAS ALREADY HAPPENED THEY HAD THE MEETING.

>> WE HAD TWO MEETINGS TO INFORM POTENTIAL BIDDERS ABOUT HOW THIS WORKS. WE SELECTED THESE FOLKS TO BE CONDITIONALLY SELECTED AND WE WILL CONTRACT WITH THEM AND THEN WE WILL HAVE TRAINING FOR THE COUNTY STAFF. SO WE KNOW HOW TO USE THE PROGRAM BECAUSE THERE IS A SOFTWARE PROGRAM THAT HAS THE MEANS CATALOG FOR ALL THE INDIVIDUAL TASKS THAT SOMEONE MIGHT DO ON A REPAIR PROJECT. IF IT WAS TO REPAINT THIS ROOM BY SQUARE FEET IT SAYS HOW MANY HOURS THE JOB SHOULD TAKE AND THEN THEY HAVE A FACTOR THAT EACH OF THE CONTRACTORS HAVE BID AND THEY WILL USE THE FACTOR TO COME UP WITH A COST FOR THAT PROJECT. AND THEN YOU OR PUBLIC WORKS OR COASTAL PARKS CAN COME BACK TO THE COURT AND RECOMMEND THAT PROJECT FOR APPROVAL. IT WORKS SIMILAR TO A CO-OP ON A VERY LOCAL LEVEL WITH JUST US. WE ARE MEMBERS OF THIS SMALL PROGRAM. SO WE CAN UTILIZE ANY OF THE CONTRACTORS AND THEY CAN SUBCONTRACT WITH WHOEVER THEY LIKE. IT GIVES YOU MORE FLEXIBILITY ON WHO YOU CHOOSE TO USE. GIVES LOCAL CONTRACTORS MORE ABILITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THOSE PROGRAMS THE ON 50,000 THAT THEY GET CAUGHT UP IN BEFORE. WILL HAVE 15 CONTRACTORS. THEY WILL HAVE A WIDE ARRAY OF FOLKS TO

[02:20:02]

CHOOSE FROM. >> THANK YOU.

>> I KNOW WE HAD A MOTION AND SECOND, DID WE VOTE? OKAY SORRY. ITEM NUMBER THREE DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CONDITIONAL SELECTION OF DLF TEXAS HILLTOP COMMUNITY CENTER RENOVATIONS AND RELATED MATTERS.

[2. Discuss and consider conditional selection for Public Health Services (RFP No. 3261-23).]

>> NUMBER TWO. >> EXCUSE ME. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CONDITIONAL SELECTION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES.

>> THIS IS ONE IF I CAN ASK THE COURT TO DISCUSS THE RFP AND RESPONSE TO THIS IN EXECUTIVE BEFORE YOU TAKE A VOTE , I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.

>> YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ON TWO.

>> WE WILL ADD IT.

[3. Discuss and consider conditional selection of DLF Texas for Hilltop Community Center Renovation (CSP No. 3252-23); and related matters.]

THREE. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CONDITIONAL SELECTION FROM DLF, TEXAS FOR HILLTOP COMMUNITY CENTER RENOVATIONS AND RELATED

MATTERS. >> SO THE LOW BIDDER WAS DLF TEXAS FOR THE BASE BID. AND BOTH THE COUNTY ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS RECOMMEND WE CONDITIONALLY SELECT DLF TEXAS AND ENTER INTO THE PROCESS OF VALUE ENGINEERING TO SEE IF WE

CAN CUT SOME COSTS. >> THAT'S A LOT OF COST, THAT

IS CONCERNING. >> SPEAK TO THAT ONE. 1

MILLION, FIVE, THAT IS 2.4. >> I THINK IT IS A TOTAL OF ABOUT 1 MILLION TO REDUCE THE COST.

>> 1.402 65. LIKE 1,000,000 1/2.

>> WE RECOMMEND WE CAN CONDITIONALLY AWARD AND THEN

DO A VALUE ENGINEERING. >> THEY CAN CUT THAT MUCH OFF?

ALTERNATIVE? 975, 789? >> YOU CANNOT DO THAT ONE?

>> NO. >> WHEN ARE WE GOING TO HAVE

DISCUSSION FOR THIS? >> RIGHT AFTER YOU APPROVE THE CONDITION AND THEN WE CAN OF THE ARCHITECT COORDINATE WITH

THE CONTRACTOR. >> WHAT IS THE ALTERNATE PROJECTS? WHAT ARE YOU TAKING OFF RIGHT AWAY? BECAUSE

ADDITIONAL 975 . >> YOU WILL NOT TRY TO DO ANYTHING WITH ALTERNATE? I'M CONFUSED.

>> THE ENGINEERING KIND OF LIKE WITH THE MEDICAL EXAMINER.

>> WE ARE TRYING TO VALUE ENGINEERED TO GET THE

ALTERNATE? >> NO JUST GET WITHIN THE BASE

BID. >> THE BASE BID 10, EIGHT AND YOU HAVE NINE, FOUR 10, EIGHT AND YOU HAVE NINE, 43 HAVE TO

CUT 1,400,000. >> ALL WE CAN DO IS TRY. ALL

WE CAN DO IS TRY. >> IF NOT YOU GO BACK OUT FOR

BIDS? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> I KNOW WHAT DAVID RICHTER WOULD SAY, BUT JUST DON'T GET OUT AND IF YOU WANT TO GIVE IT A TRY WE WILL GIVE IT A TRY, 9.4 MILLION I WOULD THINK WE COULD BUILD

>> THIS BUILDING YOU SAID YOURSELF . WHEN WE INSPECTED THE BUILDING YOU SAID IT WAS IN GOOD SHAPE . HOW MUCH WILL IT

COST TO DEMOLISH? >> JUST THROWING IT OUT THERE.

>> I WANT YOU TO HAVE SOMETHING, 9.4 MILLION, IF YOU KNOCK IT DOWN YOU COULD BUILD THE TAJ MAHAL IN PLACE OF IT.

IF THAT'S NOT THE DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GO THEN OKAY, I'M JUST THROWING IDEAS OUT. WE ARE COMMITTED TO THE FUNDS, I'M NOT BACKING OUT, BUT LOOKING OUTSIDE THE BOX BECAUSE IT IS A

OLD BUILDING. >> IT IS OLD, BUT GOOD STRUCTURE. IT HAS SERVED US WELL, A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE AREA WANT IT TO STAY UP. A LOT OF HISTORY IN IT. REALLY TO BE TRUTHFUL I HAVE LOST A LOT OF ARPA FUNDS.

>> I'M NOT TAKING ANY FUNDS. I'M THROWING OUT ANOTHER IDEA.

>> I COULD HAVE HAD MORE MONEY TO THROW INTO.

>> YOU CANNOT MIX ARPA, BUT ANYWAY. JUST GOING OUT THE IDEA. IF YOU WANT TO STAY THAT'S FINE.

>> LET'S SEE WHAT WE CAN WORK OUT.

>> THINK ABOUT THAT IN CASE YOU CAN, I THINK YOU CAN GET A

[02:25:01]

HECKUVA BUILDING FOR 9 MILLION BUCKS YOU CAN BUILD A LOT.

>> THAT WAS MY SUGGESTION THIS MORNING. I WAS LIKE THIS IS A LOT OF MONEY TO DROP OFF A BIT , BUT GO GET AFTER IT IF YOU CAN. IF NOT WE NEED TO RECONSIDER AND POSSIBLY DO

SOMETHING ELSE. >> TWO OTHER COMMISSIONERS BEFORE ME OR ONE OF THEM INVESTED $2 MILLION AND I DON'T SEE ANY DIFFERENCE. LET'S GIVE IT A TRY. SEE WHAT WE CAN DO. I THINK WE CAN. THANK YOU.

>> THIS MOTION IS TO ALLOW YOU TO GO BACK IF YOU DON'T GET UNDER WHAT WE HAVE TO HAVE, THE 9 MILLION, THEN WE HAVE TO BRING IT BACK AND THEN I THINK THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD DISCUSS OTHER OPPORTUNITIES OR WHETHER WE CONTINUE WITH THAT BUILDING PLAN AND SCRAP AND START FORWARD. I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.

>> BRING IT BACK AND TELL US WHAT YOU GOT? OKAY. JUST AN IDEA, IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IT THAT'S GREAT, BUT YOU COULD BUILD A PHENOMENAL NEW THING.

>> BASED ON IMPROVEMENTS TO THE DESIGN THAT RICHTER CREATED.

THAT HAD BEEN BEFORE THE BOARD SEVERAL TIMES. OKAY.

>> DID YOU SECOND? >> I WILL VOTE FOR IT.

>> MOTION AND SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE THE MOTION PASSES. GOOD LUCK AND WE WILL PROBABLY SEE YOU AGAIN.

BECAUSE I WILL BE SHOCKED IF YOU GET THAT MUCH OFF.

>> STILL A GOOD BUILDING, IT HAS GONE THROUGH A LOT OF

[4. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving method of procurement RFP (request for proposals) for Multisystemic Therapy Family Preservation Program Services; authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice; and adopt an order delegating evaluation authority to a selection committee. Non-residential services are funded from the Juvenile Department’s general budget (3890), and grants provided by the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission.]

HURRICANES AND IT IS STILL HERE.

>> ITEM NUMBER FOUR DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING METHOD OF PROCUREMENT . FOR A MULTI-SYSTEM THERAPY FAMILY PRESERVATION PROGRAM SERVICING AND AUTHORIZED PURCHASING AGENT FROM THE JUVENILE AUTHORIZING YOU TO ADOPT ORDER DELEGATING EVALUATION AUTHORITY TO A SELECTION COMMITTEE. A LOT OF STUFF IN THERE. DO YOU WANT TO

EXPLAIN? >> THIS IS A MULTI-SYSTEMIC THERAPY FAMILY PRESERVATION PROGRAM THAT THE JUVENILE DEPARTMENT HAD IN PLACE FOR MANY YEARS. IT IS DUE TO BE BID ON . THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.

>> COMES OUT OF THE BUDGET AND FUNDS. PERFECT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE ANY

[1. Approve Budget Change Order No. 02 for Fiscal Year 2023-2024.]

OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON , TO THE AUDITOR ITEM F 1. APPROVED BUDGET CHANGE ORDER NUMBER TWO FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023-24. LISA, YOU ARE IN THE SEAT TODAY.

>> YES I AM. THANK YOU JUDGE. I SUBMIT BUDGET CHANGE ORDER NUMBER TWO COMMISSIONERS COURT REVIEW AND APPROVAL. REQUESTING TO REALLOCATE BUDGET FUNDING FROM BUILDING SUPERINTENDENT TO CAPITAL OUTLAY TO FUND A PIECE OF EQUIPMENT THEY ARE

WANTING TO PURCHASE. >> IS THIS ON TOP OF THE MANY WE GIVE THEM TO HELP WITH THAT EQUIPMENT? IT IS A DIFFERENT

PIECE OF EQUIPMENT? >> DIFFERENT PIECE OF EQUIPMENT. IT IS A MOWER BAD BOY. I DID NOT NAME IT.

OF THE CALDERON BUILDING. >> YOU NEED THE MOWER SO I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS, YES.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE ANY

[2. Approve Project Budget Amendment #001]

OPPOSED SAME SIGN. THE MOTION PASSES, ITEM NUMBER TWO APPROVED PROJECT BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER 001.

>> I RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT BUDGET CHANGE ORDER AMENDMENTS ON 001 WE HAVE RESTARTED THE NUMBERING SEQUENCE WITH WORK DAY AND THE PROJECTS , WHAT WERE FORMERLY CALLED PROJECT CAPITAL PROJECT CHANGE ORDERS ARE NOW PROJECT BUDGET AMENDMENTS IN WORKDAY. WHENEVER WE CONVERTED OVER WE MOVED EVERYTHING THAT STILL HAD AVAILABLE FUNDING IN THE CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS FROM ONE SOLUTION OVER TO WORKDAY. I HAVE WORKED CLOSELY WITH TERESA AND WE HAVE BOTH GONE THROUGH AND REVIEWED ALL PROJECTS, ANY PROJECTS THAT DID NOT HAVE

[02:30:02]

AVAILABLE FUNDING IN ONE SOLUTION AT THE TIME WE PULLED IT OVER DECEMBER 31ST, THERE WAS NOT A BALANCE TO MOVE OVER. IF ADDITIONAL FUNDING IS NEEDED AT SOME POINT AND TIME TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT BECAUSE YOU DETERMINE SOMETHING HAD NOT FINISHED THAT YOU THOUGHT DID, WE CAN ADD THE PROJECT BACK

AND MOVE FORWARD. >> THIS IS A BETTER RECORD OF KEEPING CEOS AND DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES WITH THE PROJECT WHERE WE KNOW HOW MUCH WE HAVE ALLOCATED AND IF NOT WE CAN PUT UP QUICKLY TO UTILIZE?

>> YES. FOR YOUR REFERENCE I HAVE ATTACHED WITH THE CHANGE ORDER WOULD HAVE BEEN HAD I PREPARED IT IN THE OLD SYSTEM.

THAT IS FOR YOUR RECORDS SO YOU CAN SEE THIS IS HOW WE DID IT BEFORE. AND THEN I ATTACHED WHAT I AM ANTICIPATING THE TENTATIVE REPORT WILL LOOK LIKE IN WORKDAY AS THAT IS BUILT OUT. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROJECTS NOW, IF YOU GO TO PAGE 3 OF WORKDAY. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROJECTS ARE NOW GROUPED TOGETHER. ALL OF THE FUNDING SOURCES FOR A GIVEN PROJECT ARE DISPLAYED SO INSTEAD OF IT BEING BY THE FUNDING SOURCE, AND A SEPARATE PROJECT IN EACH FUNDING SOURCE, THERE IS A SEPARATE FUNDING SOURCE IN EACH PROJECT.

SO YOU WILL BE ABLE TO LOOK AT ANY PROJECT AT ANY GIVEN TIME WITHOUT HAVING TO USE A CALCULATOR TO KNOW HOW MUCH BUDGET YOU HAVE ALLOCATED TO THAT PROJECT. YOU WILL BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY VIA FUNDING SOURCES WHERE THE FUNDS COULD COME FROM. IF THERE IS ANY LEFT. ON THE LAST PAGE OF THE SAME REPORT IS ALL ON ALLOCATED FUNDS. EVENTUALLY THIS REPORT WILL INCLUDE UNALLOCATED RTA FUNDS AND UNALLOCATED DIABETES FUNDING. ANY UNALLOCATED , I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE HURRICANE HARVEY SETTLEMENTS. IF YOU HAD FUNDING LEFT OVER FROM THAT WHICH WAS AWARDED WHEN WE ALLOCATED THAT, THAT WOULD BE HERE. ALL PROJECT FUNDING WILL BE SHOWN WITHIN THE PROJECT SO YOU WILL KNOW THE TRUE COST OF A PROJECT AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT. AGAIN AS NEW FUNDING IS AWARDED WE WILL DO CHANGE ORDER LIKE THIS, THE FOLLOWING PORT IN ORDER TO ALLOCATE THE FUNDING OUT. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS

REGARDING THE NEW FORMAT? >> HOW LONG WILL IT BE BEFORE

WE DO THAT? >> THE NEW FORMAT IS THERE.

RIGHT NOW I AM GENERATING IT MYSELF INSTEAD OF PRESSING A BUTTON AND THE COMPUTER GENERATING IT.

>> HOW LONG WILL IT BE BEFORE WE CAN DO THAT? AND PULL IT OUT AND SEE WHERE WE ARE AT WITH THE PROJECT. SO SOMETIMES EVERY TIME WE DO SOMETHING IT DOES NOT WORK. YOU KNOW SO WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO YOU GUYS AND ASK.

>> HOW LONG IT WOULD BE UNTIL THAT REPORT IS WRITTEN KIND OF MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

WE ARE WORKING TO GET THOSE REPORTS CREATED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. WE ARE ALSO WITH ANY SOFTWARE CONVERSION ISSUES. WE ARE EXPECTING SOME OF THOSE ISSUES. WE ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS THOSE AS QUICKLY AND TIGHTLY AS POSSIBLE. SOME ISSUES TAKE HIGHER PRIORITY THAN OTHERS. WE DO HAVE THE AVAILABLE BALANCE. I HAVE A LIST OF BUDGET PER PROJECT, I AM MAINTAINING THE LIST. WILL HAVE A SIMILAR CHANGE ORDER THAT GOING FORWARD WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR ARE BUT. ALL OF THE ARPA ITEMS WHERE THE FUNDING WAS REALLOCATED TODAY, THERE WILL BE A SIMILAR CHANGE ORDER TO THIS PROJECT CHANGE ORDER TO WHERE YOU WILL BE ABLE TO SEE WHAT YOUR BALANCES ARE IN ARPA AT ANY MOMENT IN TIME. YOUR BUDGET BALANCE ONLY CHANGES WHENEVER COMMISSIONER COURT TAKES ACTION. OR YOU SPEND FUNDING. WE HAVE THE PROJECT TO ACTUAL REPORT, I BELIEVE FILLED OUT. WE NEED TO DO MORE TESTING, BUT I BELIEVE THAT IS UP AND RUNNING BOARD WILL BE IN THE NEXT WEEK OR WEEK AND A HALF. COMMISSIONER.

>> WE ARE WORKING ON REPORTS THAT WILL SHOW THE INDIVIDUAL

[02:35:02]

AMOUNTS IN THE PRODUCTS PER COURT MEMBERS AS WELL.

>> ON THE LAST PAGE YOU WILL SEE UNALLOCATED. AGAIN ALL THE PRODUCTS HAVE ALL THE BUDGETS WITH FUNDING SOURCES.

>> DO YOU ANTICIPATE THIS BEING AVAILABLE?

>> HERE WE HAVE A HARD TIME TRANSFERRING $50,000 FROM ONE PLACE TO ANOTHER AND WE CANNOT EVEN DO THAT SO JUST SAYING

HOW LONG WILL THAT TAKE? >> THE COST CENTER FOR THE MOBILE PROJECT HAS BEEN CREATED. I DON'T KNOW IF HARRY EMAILED YOU IT WAS CREATED, BUT IT HAS BEEN CREATED. AGAIN THAT IS AN INTERNAL BUDGET CHANGE ORDER THAT WILL BE DONE RIGHT AWAY.

>> I DON'T SEE HOW THAT CAN HAPPEN.

>> WE WILL TRUST YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION TO PASS, CAN I GET A SECOND? A MOTION AND SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE .

[3. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving the Framework Services Agreement Amendment No. 1 to Adopt & Incorporate the Statement of Work No. 2 with Alight Solution for AMS Pool for Nueces County Auditor's Office.]

ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. NOW ITEM 3. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING APPROVING FOR FRAMEWORK SERVICES AGREEMENT

AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE. >> THAT'S THE ONE I DON'T

LIKE. >> THIS IS THE ONE WE'RE

HAVING TO DO ADDITIONAL. >> I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER HOW MR. BROWN SAID IT. HE IS CALLING IT A FRAMEWORK SERVICE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO INCORPORATE A STATEMENT OF WORK NUMBER TWO. THE ORIGINAL STATEMENT OF WORK, DIFFERENT PORTIONS OF THAT STATEMENT HAD DIFFERENT ENDING TIMES. THE ORIGINAL IMPLEMENTATION ENDING TIME FOR THE MAIN WORK FOR THE CONVERSION WAS SCHEDULED TO END ON FEBRUARY 16TH. WE HAVE RECEIVED A AT NO COST TO THE COUNTY TWO WEEK EXTENSION TO WORK ON SOME OF THE ONGOING ISSUES. THIS WOULD PROVIDE HOURS FOR US TO BE WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL REPORTS BUILT OUT.

WE ARE ALSO, THE TEAM WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH WOULD NOT GO FORWARD TO THE NEXT PHASE. IF WE WERE TO CHANGE THIRD-PARTY IMPLEMENTING, NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO DO IT. WE ARE LOOKING AT ANOTHER THIRD-PARTY IMPLEMENTOR FOR FULL DISCLOSURE. THAT COULD POTENTIALLY REPLACE THIS CONTRACT . WE ARE WORKING WITH THEM CLOSELY. WE ARE TRYING TO FIND WHERE WE CAN GET ANY SAVINGS AVAILABLE TO HELP SINCE WE HAVE TO START WITH THE NEW TEAM EITHER WAY.

>> DOES THIS HAVE A COST? >> THIS COST, WE ALREADY HAVE SAVINGS IN OUR EXISTING CONTRACT THAT COULD PAY FOR THIS EXTENSION. IT IS 50,000 FOR THIS, WHERE DID IT GO?

>> IT IS IN PHYSICAL IMPACT. >> IT IS ON PAGE 3. IT IS 250 ANNUAL HOURS AT $205 PER HOUR AND WE GET A DISCOUNT TO GET

ALL 250 HOURS AT 50,000. >> SHOULDN'T THAT ALREADY BE ? WE ARE PAYING THEM A LOT OF MONEY. SHOULDN'T THAT ALREADY BE INCORPORATED IN THE WHOLE THING? SEEMS LIKE EVERY TIME WE HIT A SNAG HAVE TO PAY TO TAKE CARE OF THE SNAG.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. IN THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT IT STATED ANYTHING OUTSIDE THE STATEMENT OF WORK , THE INITIAL STATEMENT OF WORK WOULD BE A CHANGE ORDER. THERE WILL BE ANOTHER CHANGE ORDER FOR INTEGRATION WITH THE STATE OF TEXAS THAT WILL BE ON THE NEXT COMMISSIONERS COURT. I THINK

IT WAS 10,250. >> HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE IN SAVINGS? WE HAVE SAVINGS IN THE EXISTING?

>> THERE ARE EXISTING FUNDING AVAILABLE, APPROXIMATELY 100,000. THAT WE HAVE NOT USED. THAT IS ALREADY SET UP IN A PO. WE ARE JUST , FOR FULL DISCLOSURE, WE'RE LETTING THE COMMISSIONERS COURT KNOW THAT THERE WAS SAVINGS FROM THE PROJECT. WE DO NOT HAVE AS MANY CONSULTANTS ON-SITE DUE TO THE HOLIDAYS SO THERE WERE SAVINGS AVAILABLE.

>> AFTER THOSE WE DON'T HAVE VERY MUCH LEFT.

>> THAT'S CORRECT, I UNDERSTAND. LIKE I SAID WE ARE

[02:40:01]

LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY CHANGING THIRD-PARTY IMPLEMENTERS AT THIS TIME BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A NEW TEAM WE ARE STARTING WITH

EITHER WAY. >> ARE YOU OKAY GOING FORWARD?

>> MOTION TO PASS. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN THE MOTION PASSES. COMMISSIONER CHESNEY DID WE HAVE ONE THING , ONE OF YOUR APPOINTMENTS TO THE BOARD DID

YOU HAVE CHANGES? >> YES I WOULD LIKE TO PUT

FORTH JOHN BRANDT. >> AT THE VERY BEGINNING , EVERYONE. I DON'T AGE 2 OR H1. JOHN BRANDT. SO YES, I DON'T KNOW THESE APPLICANTS, BUT THAT CAME FROM A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CURRENT CHAIR WHO HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR SO I WOULD LIKE TO PUT FORTH THE NAME.

>> WE WILL SECOND THAT MOTION. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? THAT IS FOR THE OTHER POSITION THAT IS A TEMPORARY POSITION EXPIRING DECEMBER 2024. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE ANY OPPOSED SAME

SIGN? THE MOTION PASSES. >> I WOULD LIKE TO VOTE IF THE COURT WILL ALLOW TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF ALL CONSENT AGENDA

ITEMS, I WAS OUT. >> YES, BY ALL MEANS.

>> WORK YOU'RE TAKING BACK TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> EXCLUDING THE TWO YES. SEVEN AND EIGHT, YES.

[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.]

>> NOW, I HAVE TO BRING UP ITEM 4 D FROM EXECUTIVE BEFORE WE GO INTO EXECUTIVE. I NEED A UNANIMOUS VOTE.

>> YOU SAID D? >> CONSOLE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY REGARDING VILLAGE AND TAKE ACTION. NEGOTIATING IN PUBLIC WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE COUNTY POSITIONING. SO I NEED A MOTION AND SECOND IN A UNANIMOUS VOTE 5-0.

>> SO MOVED. >> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION.

TAKING IT TO EXECUTIVE WE HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION ON 4 D.

>> WHAT IS IT? >> NOT KNOWING WHAT WE ARE DOING I'M HAPPY TO DO IT TO ACCOMMODATE REQUEST, BUT HAVE

NO IDEA WHY. >> THIS IS FROM JENNY. DOING IT AT THE REQUEST OF ATTORNEY.

>> EXECUTIVE SESSION D. >> MOTION AND SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY SO WE CAN TAKE IT INTO EXECUTIVE. THAT MEANS I AM READY TO GO TO READ ALL THE EXECUTIVE. WE ARE GOING TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

PUBLIC NOTICE GIVEN COMMISSIONERS COURT MAY ELECT TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION ANYTIME DURING THE MEETING TO DISCUSS MATTERS LISTED ANYWHERE ON THE AGENDA WHEN AUTHORIZED BY 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 COMMISSIONERS COURT HE LIKES TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING 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 AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071, 551.072, 551.073, 551.074, 551.0745, 551.076, 551.086, 551.087 , THE AUTHORIZING OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED TO CONSULT WITH ATTORNEYS INCLUDING MATTERS RELATED TO LITIGATION, DELIVERY REGARDING WORLD PROPERTY, PERSPECTIVE GIFTS, PERSONAL MATTERS INCLUDING TERMINATION. COUNTER ADVISORY BODIES, SECURITY DEVICES AND/OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS AND OTHER MATTERS THAT MAY BE DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. UPON COMPLETION OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION THE COMMISSIONERS COURT MAY IN OPEN SESSION TAKE SUCH ACTION AS APPROPRIATE ON ITEMS DISCUSSED IN AN EXECUTIVE SESSION. ITEM A TODAY IS CONSULT WITH COUNTY ATTORNEY AND OUTSIDE COUNCIL ON LEGAL