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

[00:15:05]

YOU CAN STILL CONTACT WITH CHIEF OF STAFF AS WELL, BUT HE WILL BE PRESIDING OVER THE MEETING WHILE I'M GONE. NEXT UP IS PUBLIC COMMENT. THIS IS ONLY PEOPLE THAT SIGNED UP. WE ONLY HAVE TWO TO YOU. DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON PUBLIC COMMENT OR A SPECIFIC ITEM? JUST A REMINDER FOR EVERYONE, IT'S THE FIRST OF THE YEAR, IF YOU SPEAK ON PUBLIC COMMENT OR ANYTHING, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. WE CANNOT ANSWER YOU, WE CANNOT SPEAK BACK, WE ARE NOT BEING RUDE, WE ARE NOT AVOIDING YOU. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, THERE IS A TIME LIMIT, AND WE WILL CUT YOU OFF AT THE END OF 10 MINUTES. FIRST UP IS

MR. JOHN WEBER. >> GOOD MORNING, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS . I WILL READ FROM THE TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL'S WEBSITE. MEMBERS OF GOVERNMENTAL BODIES SUBJECT TO THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE IN EDUCATION TRAINING SESSIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 551.005 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. THE TRAINING REQUIREMENT APPLIES TO ALL ELECTED OR APPOINTED OFFICIALS TO PARTICIPATE IN MEETINGS SUBJECT TO THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT. THE LAW REQUIRES THAT MEMBERS SUBJECT TO THE OPEN MEETINGS COMPLETE TRAINING WITHIN 90 DAYS OF TAKING THE OATH OF OFFICE OR OTHERWISE ASSUMING RESPONSIBILITIES OF OFFICE. I AM HOPEFUL YOU ALL WILL TAKE THE REQUIRED TRAINING. I WILL PLAY A SHORT CLIP FROM IT . THE PERSON SPEAKING IS DIVISION CHIEF

JENNY HOLZER. >> FOOTBALL GAME SITS TOGETHER AND STARTS TO DISCUSS PUBLIC BUSINESS, THAT IS A MEETING, AND IT IS A VIOLATION OF THE ACT, BECAUSE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ACT HAVEN'T BEEN FOLLOWED. NOW, I DON'T WANT TO SUGGEST HERE THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE FRIENDLY CONVERSATIONS, BUT I DO WANT TO EMPHASIZE THE SERIOUSNESS OF MEETING A■ND QUORUMS OUTSIDE OF A PROPERLY CALLED MEETING. THERE IS A 1990 TEXAS SUPREME COURT CASE WHERE THE COURT FOUND THAT TWO MEMBERS OF A THREE-MEMBER WATER COMMISSION VIOLATED THE ACT WHEN THEY DISCUSSED PUBLIC BUSINESS IN THE RESTROOM DURING A BREAK FROM THEIR REGULARLY CALLED MEETING. YOU NEED TO REMEMBER THIS AND RECOGNIZE THE DISCUSSIONS OF PUBLIC BUSINESS NEED TO BE KEPT TO THE MEETINGS WHEN YOU ARE IN A QUORUM. YOU CAN TALK TO EACH OTHER IN THE ELEVATOR, YOU CAN SPEAK TO EACH OTHER WHEN YOU RUN INTO EACH OTHER AT THE GROCERY. I DON'T MEAN TO SUGGEST YOU CAN'T. BUT YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND YOUR DISCUSSIONS OF PUBLIC BUSINESS NEED TO BE LIMITED TO THE MEETINGS. IF YOU DON'T TAKE ANYTHING ELSE AWAY FROM THIS PRESENTATION TODAY, I WANT YOU TO TAKE THE MESSAGE THAT YOU CANNOT DISCUSS PUBLIC BUSINESS IN A QUORUM OUTSIDE OF A PROPERLY CALLED MEETING. DOING SO COULD RESULT IN SEVERE CRIMINAL OR CIVIL LIABILITY TO YOU AND YOUR GOVERNMENTAL BODY.

>> SO WE KNOW THREE COMMISSIONERS CANNOT MEET WITH EACH OTHER IN A QUORUM OR WALKING QUORUM AND DISCUSSED PUBLIC BUSINESS OUTSIDE AN OPEN MEETING. THIS EVEN INCLUDES RESTROOMS. WE KNOW TWO COMMISSIONERS AND A COMMISSIONER ELECT MATT ON MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25, AT 11:30 A.M. AT WATER STREET. WE ALL KNOW THAT THE COMMISSIONER ELECT IS NOW A COMMISSIONER, SO ANOTHER MEETING OF THESE THREE PEOPLE DISCUSSING PUBLIC BUSINESS OUTSIDE OF A PUBLIC MEETING CANNOT HAPPEN WITHOUT VIOLATING THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. I AND OTHERS WILL BE KEEPING A VERY CLOSE EYE ON THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT. HAVE A NICE DAY.

>> THANK YOU. RACHEL CAVALLARO. >> GOOD MORNING , AND THANK YOU FOR REMOVING THE LINE ITEM TO DISCUSS THE PUBLIC COMMENT -- PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST AND RELATED MATTERS. ITEMS LIKE THIS ARISE WHEN WE TRANSFER PROBLEMS FROM ONE MUNICIPALITY TO ANOTHER. I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT WE ARE AWARE THAT MANY OF YOU OLD FRIENDSHIPS OUTSIDE OF THIS COURT, AND FOLLOWING THE QUORUM OF HOW BUSINESS NEEDS TO BE HANDLED WILL BE HEAVILY SCRUTINIZED BY THE COMMUNITY THAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT. ANY TYPE OF RACISM WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED HERE . THANK YOU FOR LEAVING, AGAIN, MR. PUSLEY. SOME THINGS DO NOT CHANGE. THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS AND ALLOWS US TO ENTER OUR GRIEVANCES, NO MATTER WHETHER YOU AGREE OR IF YOU'VE HEARD OF BEFORE, AND AS CITIZENS, WE ARE BECOMING STRONGER AND MORE VOCAL TO HOLD ELECTEDS ACCOUNTABLE AND BE WITH INTEGRITY AND HONESTY, AND

[00:20:05]

WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT IN A FEW DECADES. THE IRONY OF ELECTING SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS OWNERS IS THAT YOU ALL SEEM TO FORGET HOW TO DO MATH WHEN YOU GET INTO OFFICE. I HOPE THAT THE $2 MILLION THAT WAS MISPLACED FROM THE LAST MEETING HAS BEEN FOUND, AND WE CAN DO A REFRESHER -- MAYBE NOT JUST ON THAT ONE COURSE, BUT ON HOW TO DO MATH. LUCKILY, THERE'S A JOB, A BUDGET SPECIALIST ON THE AGENDA. IN THE CONFUSION, CONSIDERING THAT THE MAJORITY OF YOU AND HELD SOME TYPE OF OFFICE FOR AT LEAST THREE DECADES , AND THE WASTING OF TIME OF NOT UNDERSTANDING PROCEDURES AND PROTOCOLS IS ASTOUNDING. SO MAYBE THAT IS ANOTHER COURSE THAT CAN BE TAKEN BY THIS COURT TO BE A REFRESHER IN THAT YOU GUYS REMEMBER HOW TO FOLLOW YOUR OWN POLICIES AND PROCEDURE. WE WILL BE SCRUTINIZING EVERY AGENDA, AND YOU ALL WILL START BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO THE TAXPAYERS. SO I IMPLORE YOU TO START DOING THE RIGHT THING. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE RYAN RAWLINGS ON ZOOM . HE HAS HIS

HAND RAISED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. >> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS.

>> YES, YOU ARE UP, RYAN. SORRY. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OF

THREE MINUTES. >> THANK YOU. SO AS ALL COMMISSIONERS KNOW, WITH THE EXCLUSION OF COMMISSIONER PUSLEY, I EMAILED YOU ALL A ROUGH PRESENTATION FOR THE DEPUTY OF NUECES COUNTY AND FORWARDED IT TO FIVE OTHER COUNTIES. IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, WE BASICALLY GENERATE THE SAME REVENUE AND PROPERTY TAX RATE AS NUECES COUNTY . AND PART OF THE PRESENTATION AND SLIDE ONE THAT YOU ALREADY HEAVED WAS THE RULE LAW ENFORCEMENT GRANT PROGRAM THAT BASICALLY STIPULATES ANY COUNTY IN TEXAS UNDER THE POPULATION OF 300,000 OR LESS, IF THEY APPLY FOR THE GRANT, THE DEPUTIES , MAINLY CONSTABLES AND SHERIFFS, WILL RECEIVE A MINIMUM SALARY OF 85,000 STARTING OFF BASE PAY, AND THE JAILERS WOULD RECEIVE 40. OUT OF THE 18 COUNTIES THAT DO NOT QUALIFY , SIX COUNTIES ARE BASICALLY SIMILAR TO NUECES COUNTY, AND NUECES COUNTY INCLUDED AS FAR AS POPULATION, POVERTY TAX, SALES TAX, TOTAL GENERAL FUND. AND UNFORTUNATELY, WITH THAT BEING SAID, THE JAILERS ARE THE SECOND LOWEST PAID AND IN THOSE SIX COUNTIES. IN THE DEPUTY PEACE OFFICERS ARE THE SECOND LOWEST PAID IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. ALSO, WITH THAT SLIDE, THERE IS A COLA ADJUSTMENT BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, STATING THAT THE KINGSVILLE , CORPUS CHRISTI AREA IS HIGHER THAN MOST OF TEXAS AND MOST OF THE U.S. WITH A 17.4% INCREASE IN COST OF LIVING. I DON'T REALLY HAVE MUCH TO SAY OTHER THAN THAT, AND I KNOW MY PRESENTATION MIGHT BE A ROUGH SKETCH. I DID THIS IN ABOUT 48 HOURS COMPARED TO THE COMPARATIVE STUDY THAT YOU GUYS HAVE HAD AVAILABLE FOR A YEAR. AND THE COMPARATIVE STUDY THAT YOU ALL DID IS , QUITE HONESTLY, PATHETIC. I THINK YOU GUYS COULD HAVE HONESTLY GOTTEN A LITTLE BIT MORE QUOTES FROM OTHER COMPARATIVE COMPANIES THAT CAN DO THE STUDY BETTER.

MY LAST COMMENT IS TO COMMISSIONER CHESNEY. I WISH YOU WOULD PUT MORE COMMITMENT INTO DEPUTY SALARIES, LIKE YOU DID WITH THE PEER. I THINK AS DEPUTIES, THEY WORK THEIR BUTTS OFF, AND THEY DESERVE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONSIDERATION FROM YOU

ALL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. RAWLINGS. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON PUBLIC COMMENT HE DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIGN UP? THAT BEING SAID, THAT IS THE END OF PUBLIC COMMENT. WE WILL MOVE IN . BEFORE WE START, OUR BOARD APPOINTMENTS. I HAVE SOME ITEMS THAT NEED TO

[5. Discuss and consider adopting the Commissioners Court Policy as proposed and all related matters.]

BE TABLED THAT I WAS ASKED TO TABLE. ITEM THREE A5 -- I'M SORRY , COMMISSIONER. YES? AND THE COURT POLICY . COMMISSIONER -- COMMISSIONER PUSLEY HAS JUST GOTTEN ACCESS TO IT AND WOULD LIKE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO GO THROUGH IT AND MAKE SOME

[00:25:01]

MORE DETAILED CHANGES. >> JUDGE, BEFORE YOU TABLE, I HAD -- I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM TABLING THAT ONE, BUT BECAUSE IT WAS REGARDING COMMISSIONERS COURT POLICY, I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION NOT RELATED TO ANOTHER POLICY. SO BEFORE YOU TABLE, CAN I JUST WRING THAT UP?

>> SHIRT. >> SO I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT A POLICY THAT PROHIBITS A PERSON OR A PERSON'S SPOUSE FROM SERVING OR APPLYING FOR ANY COUNTY BOARD OR BOARD THE COUNTY APPOINTS MEMBERS TO THAT IS EMPLOYED BY THAT ENTITY THAT THE BOARD SERVES. SAID POLICY SHOULD BE BROUGHT BACK FOR CONSIDERATION AND IMMEDIATE EFFECT AT THE FEBRUARY -- EXCUSE ME, AT THE FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY. THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. I THINK THAT WILL PROVIDE US WITH SOME TRANSPARENCY AND DO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN ASKED OF

US. >> DOES THAT AFFECT THE CURRENT

MEMBERS? >> WELL, THAT WILL BE THE DISCUSSION IN FEBRUARY. IF IT DOES, WE WOULD NEED TO TABLE ANY OF THOSE, BUT THAT IS A SEPARATE MOTION.

>> YOU WANT THIS TO APPEAR INSIDE THE COURT POLICIES THAT ARE ALSO BEING OTHERWISE EDITED AT THIS TIME?

>> I AM JUST ASKING -- SHE IS ASKING TO TABLE THE ITEM . I'M OKAY WITH TABLING THE ITEM TO GIVE COMMISSIONER PUSLEY WHATEVER TIME HE NEEDS. THIS ALSO PROVIDES PEOPLE TIME. THIS IS JUST A DIRECTIVE FOR YOU TO BRING SOMETHING BACK FOR THE

COURT TO CONSIDER IN FEBRUARY. >> BUT IT IS DESIGNED TO BE INSERTED INTO THE COURT POLICIES?

>> WELL, YEAH. IT IS A MOTION -- I CAN'T JUST DIRECT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO DO IT. THE WHOLE COURT HAS TO. I'M SORRY,

WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION? >> BUT IT IS DESIGNED TO BE HOUSED WITHIN THE OVERALL COURT POLICIES?

>> YES. >> OKAY.

>> OKAY. I WILL SECOND THAT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED. >> I'M GOING TO ABSTAIN ON THAT. I DON'T UNDERSTAND. WE BRING IT BACK AND WE REVIEW IT

? >> YEAH, I JUST AM TRYING TO BE TRANSPARENT AND BRING IT BEFORE THE WHOLE COURT AND LET THE PUBLIC KNOW WHAT THE INTENT THAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO IS , WE ARE TRYING TO AVOID AS MANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AS WE

CAN. >> OKAY. SO I AM -- WITH THAT DIRECTION, I AM MAKING THE MOTION TO TABLE 3 A5 TO BRING BACK TO THE FEBRUARY COURT MEETING. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION

[7. Receive an update regarding the Nueces County Judge's ER Residency Committee, and all related matters. ]

PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 3A 7 . I WAS ASKED TO TABLE -- WE ARE TABLING 3 A 5. WE JUST VOTED ON THAT ONE, AND KNOW WE ARE

TABLING 387. >> DID YOU MAKE A DATE FOR THAT

TABLE? >> FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY.

ON THE FIRST ONE. ON THE SECOND ONE, I DON'T HAVE A MOTION.

YOU CAN BRING IT BACK IF YOU WANT TO.

>> ALL RIGHT. I SECOND YOUR MOTION.

[1. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving Amendment No. 5 to the Agreement with Aramark Correctional Services, LLC for the Jail Food Management Program for Nueces County Jails (RFP No. 3138-20).]

[2. Approve method of procurement IFB (invitation for bids) for Nueces County Jail Laundry Supplies; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to publish a notice.]

>> ALTHOUGH SOME FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED . MOTION PASSES. AND THEN THE NEXT TWO, I WAS DIRECTED BY MICHAEL ROBINSON YESTERDAY. 3B 1, AND THESE ARE BOTH UNDER THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE ELLIPSE THIS 3B 2 . I WILL TABLE TO THE NEXT MEETING, MICHAEL. THE 22ND. INDEFINITELY. I AM MAKING THE MOTION TO TABLE. AND THEY WILL BRING THEM BACK WHEN THEY ARE

READY. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW

[1. Christus Spohn Board of Trustees]

WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR BOARD APPOINTMENTS. G 1, THE CHRISTUS

SPOHN BOARD OF TRUSTEES. >> JUDGE, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THAT ONE BASED ON POLICY REQUEST THAT

HAS BEEN PUT FORTH. >> I THINK IT DEPENDS ON WHO GETS NOMINATED. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHY SHE WOULD TABLE

IT. >> BECAUSE WE LIKE TO OPEN IT UP, BECAUSE IF THAT POLICY IS PUT INTO EFFECT, IT WOULD ALSO

-- >> THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO REMOVE

[00:30:02]

-- IT DEPENDS ON WHO WE APPOINT.

>> CORRECT. IT WOULD ALSO POTENTIALLY IMPACT AN EXISTING APPOINTED MEMBER , DEPENDING ON WHAT THE COURT DOES. AND SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE IT, OPEN IT BACK UP SO THAT ANYBODY AND EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO APPLY CAN APPLY, AND WE CAN SEE WHAT THE RESULT OF THE POLICY IS WHEN IT COMES BACK TO THE COURT.

>> IT'S NOT LIKE WE DIDN'T GIVE NOBODY A CHANCE TO APPLY.

IT WAS OPEN. SO I'M JUST -- >> BUT MY VOTE MIGHT BE DIFFERENT DEPENDING ON THE POLICY, BECAUSE THE INCUMBENT

-- >> TO SAY IT.

>> YEAH, HE POTENTIALLY COULD OR COULDN'T HAVE A CONFLICT DEPENDING ON WHAT THE POLICY IS OF THE COURT. HE HOLDS OVER.

THERE'S NO HARM. >> HE IS STILL ON UNTIL WE COME BACK, IT WOULD STAY THE SAME. BUT THE TWO PEOPLE THAT DID APPLY WOULD AUTOMATICALLY BE ON IT. THEY DON'T HAVE TO

REAPPLY. >> ABSOLUTELY NOT. IF THE POLICY COMES INTO EFFECT, IT MIGHT AFFECT ONE OF THE CURRENT MEMBERS, WHICH MEANS WE NEED TO OPEN IT BACK UP TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO APPLY FOR WHAT COULD BE ANOTHER OPENING.

>> IS A GOOD JOB. HE'S BEEN HERE THREE OR FOUR YEARS.

WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? IS THAT AN ISSUE? IT HASN'T CAUSED AN ISSUE, IT HASN'T CAUSED AN ISSUE. HE'S DONE A GOOD JOB.

HE'S VERY VALUABLE TO THOSE WORDS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT

WE ARE TRYING TO DO. >> WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO IS

AVOID CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. >> TRYING TO CLEAR UP A

SITUATION WHERE -- >> IT'S NOT ONE BOARD.

>> THERE'S QUESTIONS ON A COUPLE OF THESE. SO I -- I TALKED TO SOME OF THE APPLICANTS AS WELL, AND I KNOW OF ANOTHER ONE COMING UP, THEY SUBMITTED A LETTER TO CLARIFY THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS NOT -- WELL WE GET A LOT OF DETAIL, AND WE TALK TO THESE PEOPLE EXTENSIVELY -- AND YOU MAY ASSUME AFTER THOSE CONVERSATIONS THAT THERE IS NO CONFLICT, BUT THE PUBLIC SEES IT, AND ONLY SEES THE HEADLINE, AND THEY DON'T GET ALL THE DETAIL AND THE BACKUP AND WHY OUR ATTORNEYS ARE TELLING US, MAYBE THIS IS OKAY, MAYBE THIS IS NOT. SO I SEE THAT WE SHOULD CLARIFY AND WE SHOULD MAKE IT CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC, CLEAR TO OUR APPLICANTS AS WELL, WE WANT PEOPLE TO SIGN UP, WE WANT THEM TO SERVE ON THESE BOARDS, AND WE ARE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THE PEOPLE WHO SIGNED UP AND ARE SERVING. BUT IF THERE IS A HINT OF CONFLICT, WE -- WHEN YOU PUT THEM ON BOARDS AND THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED OR THEY HAVE TUBES GAME

OR WE GET -- >> WE DO WITH THAT ALL THE TIME. CONFLICTS ON BOARDS, CONFLICTS ON THIS. AT WHAT POINT -- HOW DO WE CLEAR THIS WHOLE THING?

>> I THINK THAT'S WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DO.

>> I THINK THAT IF THERE IS AN ISSUE THAT IS HAPPENED THAT WE NEED TO KNOW, PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW WHY WERE DOING IT.

>> NO, THAT'S A GOOD POINT. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M PUTTING ON THE POLICY IN FEBRUARY, TWO OTHER VERY OPEN AND TRANSPARENT DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE TABLE TO BRING BACK, SO THAT JENNY CAN GIVE US A POLICY TO TALK ABOUT AND HAVE A CLEAR AND OPEN DISCUSSION ABOUT. WE'VE ALREADY TABLED THAT ITEM, SO WE CAN'T REALLY HAVE THIS DISCUSSION ANYMORE, AND THEN IT RELATES -- THERE ARE BOARDS THAT ABSOLUTELY, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEONE WORKS FOR AN ENTITY AND IS ON THE BOARD, I THINK THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO LOOK AT THAT AS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND I THINK THIS COURT NEEDS TO DEFINE WHAT IT IS SO THAT WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE JUDGMENT CALLS ALL THE TIME THAT IT IS CLEARLY ARTICULATED. THAT IS THE PORT OF THE POLICY. THE PUBLIC WILL GET TO COME TALK ABOUT IT. EVERYBODY WILL GET TO DO IT. BUT YES, THE BOARD IS ONE THAT HAS POTENTIAL CONFLICTS DEPENDING UPON WHAT THIS COURT DOES. THAT'S WHY I AM ASKING TO TABLE THIS UNTIL WE CAN BRING IT BACK AND HAVE A DISCUSSION AND LET THE COURT DECIDE ON WHAT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS ON THESE BOARDS. AND THAT IS ONE, IS LOOKING TO THESE BOARDS, THAT I SEE IS A POTENTIAL CONFLICT. IF WE ARE GOING TO PASS A POLICY IN FEBRUARY, WE SHOULD BE AT PEOPLE NOW -- OR SHOULD BE MAKING A DECISION ON PEOPLE NOW DO WE DECIDE WHAT A CONFLICT IS. THAT IS ALL I AM SAYING.

>> I KIND OF AGREE WITH YOU, COMMISSIONER, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO GO ONE STEP FURTHER AND LOOK AT EVERYTHING.

>> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, IT'S COUNTYWIDE.

>> WERE DOING PEOPLE BUSINESS WITH THE BOARD, WE NEED ALSO LOOK AT THAT. WE TALK ABOUT CONFLICTS, WE GOT TO TALK ABOUT

[00:35:07]

EVERYTHING. >> THAT IS WHAT HE IS ASKING

FOR. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING TO

DO. >> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST

APPOINTMENTS. >> YOU CAN PUT WHATEVER YOU WANT ON THE AGENDA. WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHATEVER YOU WANT TO TALK

ABOUT. >> THERE'S A MOTION OUT THERE.

WE SHOULD BE HAVING ALL OF THIS DISCUSSION. HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE. WE HAVE A SECOND, TO ADD THE POLICY TO THE NEXT FEBRUARY

MEETING? >> IT'S JUST A MOTION TO TABLE THE CHRISTUS SPOHN APPOINTMENT FOR THE FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY AFTER WE DECIDE WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DECIDE ON THE

POLICY. >> ON A TABLE MOTION, THERE'S NOT TYPICALLY SUPPOSED TO BE DISCUSSION. BUT I WILL NEED ASK OUR LEGAL COUNSEL OR COUNTY ATTORNEY . SO DOES THIS MOTION, AS YOU UNDERSTAND IT, DOES THAT APPLY TO EVERYTHING? BECAUSE WE HAVE A FULL LIST OF APPOINTMENTS TODAY. WOULD YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO BE TO WORK ON ALL OF THEM? BECAUSE THERE MAY BE CONFLICTS THAT WE KNOW OF OR DON'T KNOW OF. AND SO IF WE ARE GOING TO APPLY TO ONE, GOING TO APPLY TO ALL?

>> I LOOK TO ALL OF THEM, I ONLY SAW ONE THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE AFFECTED BY THIS THING. IF YOU SEE OTHERS, BRING IT UP. I DON'T SEE OTHERS THAT HAVE THOSE CONFLICT. I SEE IT ON THAT ONE, THAT'S WHY MAKING THE MOTION TO TABLE IT. IF YOU SEE IT ON THE OTHERS, BRING IT UP ONE BY ONE . I DON'T SEE IT ON THE OTHER APPOINTMENTS OR THE BOARDS, I ONLY SEE IT ON THIS ONE. THAT'S WHY MAKING A MOTION TO TABLE THIS ONE.

>> IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERN ON THE OTHER WORDS, THEN --

>> YOU WANT TO TABLE THE WHOLE THING TO THE NEXT MEETING?

>> THAT'S MY QUESTION. THERE'S A LOT. AND THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE BEEN WAITING IN THIS COURT TO COME IN, BECAUSE WE HAD A HOLDOVER BECAUSE THERE WAS APPOINTMENTS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE FALL, AND THEY DIDN'T. SO I AM A LITTLE -- I AM PERSONALLY CONCERNED. I DON'T WANT US TO DELAY ANOTHER MONTH. BUT I DO AGREE -- WHAT IS YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THIS MOTION AND HOW DOES IT APPLY TO EVERYTHING? AND ALSO , THAT IS YOUR PART. IN LOOKING AT THE APPLICATIONS, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY -- I GUESS, DO WE HAVE A PART IN THERE THAT SAYS -- YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER THAT.

SO MAYBE SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC THAT NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED AS WELL THAT MAY BE YOUR TEAM CAN COME UP WITH. I MEAN, IF IT'S ONLY ONE -- I DON'T WANT TO DELAY, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WAITING TO GET APPOINTED OR REAPPOINTED. I DON'T ALSO WANT TO MAKE IT SEEM LIKE WE ARE SINGLING OUT ONE PARTICULAR GROUP. SO THAT IS MY COUNTER.

THAT IS KIND OF MY BATTLE GOING THROUGH IT ON THIS DISCUSSION.

A LONG LEGAL QUESTION, BUT WE CAN HELP YOU WITH THAT.

>> IF YOU ARE CONCERNED, THEN I WOULD DELAY THE BOARD. NOW, THE APPLICATIONS, AS FAR AS I RECALL, DO NOT GIVE ENOUGH DETAIL FOR US TO DETERMINE WHETHER THERE IS A CONFLICT.

THERE IS A CONCLUSORY STATEMENT IN THERE ABOUT, DO YOU HAVE A CONFLICT. IF YOU WANT US TO GO DOWN AND CHECK THESE THINGS FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, WE ARE GOING TO NEED MORE DETAIL FROM

THE APPLICANTS. >> THAT'S THE ONLY ONE -- I MEAN, THERE SEVERAL THAT HAVE BEEN WAITING THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO QUORUMS, LIKE THE AIRPORT WORD. THOSE ARE ONES THAT I HAVE CONCERNS WITH, SO I'M OKAY WITH JUST, I GUESS, THE ORIGINAL MOTION WITH THE COMMISSIONER , THEN WE PROCEED.

>> THIS ALSO, KEEP IN MIND, GUYS, IS AN APPOINTMENT THAT ISN'T JUST AN OFFER TO THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. WE DON'T REALLY APPOINT. THE VOTE ON THIS. IT IS NOT OUR

APPOINTMENT. >> IT IS A RECOMMENDATION.

THAT'S THE ONLY ONE I SEE. IF YOU SEE OTHERS, PLEASE BRING THEM UP INDIVIDUALLY. I'M JUST MAKING THE MOTION TO TABLE THIS

ONE. >> AND HE WOULD STAY, THE PERSON THAT IS THERE, DO WE DO THIS. GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION, ALSO. SO IF WE DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS A CONFLICT WITH THE APPLICANT'S THAT ARE APPLYING TODAY, WHY SHOULD WE -- WHY SHOULD WE NOT GOING TO MAKE THOSE APPOINTMENTS , AND THEN WE CAN CLEAR UP THE CONFLICT IF THERE IS AN EXISTING ONE AND REDRAFT THE POLICY?

>> WELL, BECAUSE AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE -- OKAY. SO AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE THAT WORK BETTER ON THE BOARD. I

[00:40:03]

THINK THAT IS A CONFLICT. BUT THIS COURT HAS NOT DEEMED IT AS SUCH. WE HAVE NO POLICY THAT SAYS IT IS. I BELIEVE THEY BOTH WORK FOR CHRISTUS SPOHN. I'M NOT SURE ABOUT ONE. I THINK THEY ARE BOTH VERY QUALIFIED, GREAT PEOPLE, BUT THEY BOTH WORK FOR CHRISTUS SPOHN AND ARE ON THE CHRISTUS SPOHN BOARD.

THAT TO ME IS A CONFLICT. BUT THAT IS ME, THAT IS NOT THIS COURT'S DECISION. SO I THINK -- BECAUSE THE PERSON IS VERY GOOD, WOULD BE VERY HARD FOR ME TO VOTE AGAINST HIM BECAUSE HE VOTED FOR HIM BEFORE AND HE'S DONE A GOOD JOB. BUT I STILL THINK WE HAVE TO LOOK AT A POLICY --

>> WOULD YOU REQUEST TO LEGAL ALSO IN CRUDE INCLUDE IF THAT PERSON HAD FAMILY MEMBERS THAT WORK FOR THE ENTITY?

>> WHAT MY MOTION WAS WAS, YES. IF YOU WORK FOR, OR YOUR SPOUSE -- I WAS TRYING TO GIVE SOME DIRECTION. IF YOU OR YOUR SPOUSE WORKS FOR A BOARD THAT WE APPOINT TO WORKS FOR, LIKE NOT DOES BUSINESS WITH SOMEWHERE DOWN THE LINE OR SOMETHING, BUT IS EMPLOYED BY, THAT, TO ME, IS A CONFLICT.

THAT MAY NOT BE WHAT THIS COURT DETERMINES IN FEBRUARY AT THE DEFINITION OF A CONFLICT. I DON'T KNOW YET UNTIL WE HAVE THAT POLICY DISCUSSION, SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS FAIR TO VOTE TODAY ON SOMEONE THAT THIS COURT MAY THINK IS IN CONFLICT.

THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. TABLE IT SO IT COINCIDES WITH THE POLICY WE VOTE ON THAT DAY. BUT GO AHEAD. THIS IS TAKING WAY LONGER. I THOUGHT IT WAS A SIMPLE TABLE, IF IT'S NOT AND YOU WANT TO VOTE ON IT, THAT IS FINE, TOO.

>> I AM THE NEW GUY. WHATEVER YOU ALL WANT TO DO, I AM FINE

WITH. >> SO I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO TABLE THE SPOHN BOARD. IF THERE IS NO SECOND, WE WILL MOVE ON.

>> I WILL SECOND, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T GO AWAY WITH IT. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION AND WE WILL VOTE ON IT IN FEBRUARY FOR THIS ONE. WE ARE NOT LEAVING YOU ALL WITHOUT SOMEBODY. WE WILL COME BACK IN FEBRUARY AND MAKE THE

APPOINTMENT. >> HE WILL BE OUT IN FEBRUARY.

>> IF WE DECIDE IT IS APPROPRIATE. IF NOT, WE CAN REAPPOINT HIM IN FEBRUARY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND RIGHT NOW. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE . ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES. THREE AYE'S, TWO NOSE. ITEM NUMBER TWO.

[2. Nueces County Historical Commission]

HOPEFULLY THEY'RE GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER. NUECES

COUNTY HISTORICAL COMMISSION. >> YOUR HONOR, I WOULD MOVE TO

APPROVE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES . THERE WAS ONE ADDITIONAL APPLICATION WHICH THIS BOARD PULLED , WAS THERE AN OPENING? I DON'T SEE IT IN

MY NOTES. >> IT'S ANOTHER ONE, I

BELIEVE. >> WE DID HAVE AN APPLICATION OTHER THAN THE LIST THAT WAS PROVIDED , TRACY JACKSON. ARE WE ADDING THAT? YES. I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO APPOINT HIM, AS WELL. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY

[3. Nueces County Airport Advisory Board]

AYE. ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER THREE, THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. WE HAD TWO LETTERS OF INTENT FROM MEMBERS THAT ARE ON THERE. ONE LATE LETTER APPLICATION FROM

PETER CAN DIG . >> JUDGE, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE REAPPOINT THE INCUMBENTS.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO REAPPOINT THE INCUMBENTS TERRY MILLS AND JULIE HUNSICKER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES. WE HAD SOME OTHER OPENINGS THERE. WE HAVE AN AT-LARGE OPENING, AND WE HAVE, COMMISSIONER, IT LOOKS LIKE PRECINCT 4 HAS NO APPOINTMENT. AND WE DID HAVE -- WELL, IT WAS A LATE APPLICATION

, SO -- TWO OPENINGS. >> I WOULD JUST MAKE A MOTION

[00:45:02]

THAT WE REOPEN THE APPLICATIONS FOR PRECINCT 2 AND PRECINCT 4 POSITIONS AND ALLOW THE LATE LETTER TO BE INCLUDED IN THE NEW OPENING SO THAT EVERYBODY HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO APPLY.

>> SECOND THAT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED.

MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> 2 AND 4.

[4. Nueces County Animal Services Advisory Committee]

>> THE NUECES COUNTY COUNTY -- NUMBER 4 -- ANIMAL SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE. WE ARE TWO LETTERS OF INTENT FROM THIS WEEKLY AND STEVENS . I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THEIR

REAPPOINTMENT. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY I. ANY OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES. THERE ARE TWO MORE OPEN SLOTS ON THAT TO REOPEN IF ANYBODY WISHES TO APPLY.

>> SECOND. >> WE SHOULD PROBABLY JUST DO THAT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO REOPEN THE POSITION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES.

[5. Nueces County Beach Management Advisory Committee]

ITEM NUMBER FIVE, THE NUECES COUNTY BEACH MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE. WE HAD ALL 10, INCLUDING THE CHAIRMAN. SO THERE'S 11 STANDING AND ONE YOU APPLICANT.

>> ACTUALLY, JUDGE, THERE ARE SIX POSITIONS, WHICH EXPIRE, AND WHEN YOU APPLICANT. OR TWO NEW APPLICANTS, I'M SORRY. AND SO I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE REAPPOINT THE FIVE EXISTING THAT HAS TO BE REAPPOINTED, AND TO ALSO APPOINT JJ HART TO BE

ON THAT AS WELL. >> BECAUSE HER SPACE ON THERE.

THE CHAIR IS NOT INCLUDED AS ONE. I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES

[6. Nueces County Child Welfare Board]

UNANIMOUSLY. THE NUECES COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARD.

>> JUDGE, MOTION TO REAPPOINT THE THREE INCUMBENTS, O'REILLY,

YOUNG, AND HASSLE. >> AND THERE WAS ONE ADDITIONAL APPLICATION. WE WANT TO DO THAT, TOO? THERE IS ROOM ON THE BOARD. THE THREE INCUMBENTS, THE LETTERS OF INTENT, AND THE MOTION. I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION TO REAPPOINT THE THREE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. TRACY JACKSON ALSO APPLIED FOR THAT, AND I THINK COMMISSIONER PUSLEY WAS FINE WITH THAT.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE MR. JACKSON BEING ADDED.

>> YES. SECOND THAT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPOINTING MR. JACKSON TO THIS BOARD AS WELL.

>> AYE . >> ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION

[7. Nueces County Coastal Parks Board]

PASSES UNANIMOUS. THE NUECES COUNTY COASTAL PARKS BOARD . WE HAD THREE APPLICANTS, I BELIEVE, AND THIS IS A COUNTY JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION. BECAUSE OF THE BOARD HAVING THE COASTAL PARKS COVERING THE WHOLE BEACH AREA AND ALL THE PEERS AND EVERYTHING, IT IS MY RECOMMENDATION TO APPOINT RANDALL MOORE TO GIVE US TWO MEMBERS ON THEIR . THE REST OF

ALL OUR OTHER MEMBERS. >> IS YOUR SLATE, JUDGE.

HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DO IT. THIS ONE IS NO DIFFERENT.

>> WELL, LET'S APPOINT AND REAPPOINT THE OTHERS. YES.

>> AT THE SAME TIME? >> AT THE SAME TIME IS FINE.

>> MOTION TO REAPPOINT AND TO APPOINT RANDALL MOORE AS PER THE JUDGES SLATE. I GUESS IT'S YOUR MOTION, I APOLOGIZE.

>> THAT'S OKAY. I ALREADY SAID HE WAS MY RECOMMENDATION. YES, SHE IS ON THERE. AND SHE SENT HER LETTER AND, YES.

>> THAT'S A GOOD POINT. I DIDN'T SAY THAT NAME, SO I

APOLOGIZE, BUT IT IS ON THERE. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU VERY

MUCH FOR BEING HERE, MR. MOORE. >> BOB PAULSON WAS ON THAT

[00:50:04]

LIST, TOO, THAT I DIDN'T SAY OUT LOUD. I'M SORRY. I

APOLOGIZE. >> MINE IS OUT OF ORDER. I AM LOOKING AT THE WRONG LIST. SO I AM JUST GOING BY WHAT YOU ALL SAY, BUT EVERYONE HAS TO BE REAPPOINTED EXCEPT FOR CODY BATES. WE HAD AN OPENING, AND MR. MOORE WAS OUR SUGGESTION.

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

WE THINK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND THANK YOU FOR SERVING ON THIS WORK FOR US. NUMBER EIGHT, THE NUECES COUNTY EMERGENCY

SERVICES DISTRICT 1. >> YES, YOUR HONOR. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO REAPPOINT KEITH WHELCHEL ,

BERNARD LAWLER AND -- >> ALL THE CURRENT MEMBERS.

>> YES. >> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED.

MOTION PASSES. AND THERE'S NO OPENINGS ON THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, WE DID HAVE AN APPLICATION FROM AN INDIVIDUAL THAT MESSED UP ON HIS APPLICATION AND APPLY FOR THIS ONE AND HE MEANT TO APPLY FOR ESD 4, BUT WE CONTACTED THEM.

THEY ARE AWARE OF THE MISTAKE ON THERE. SO THERE WERE NO

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

OTHER OPENINGS ON THIS ONE. NUMBER 9, THE NUECES COUNTY EMERGENCY COUNTY SERVICES DISTRICT 2.

>> I'M SORRY, JUDGE. I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO REAPPOINT GARY GRAHAM AND DAVID JACKSON , AND TO APPOINT MICHAEL MORGAN TO THE ESD 2 BOARD. AND THERE IS A VACANCY.

>> YES. WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY

[10. Nueces County Emergency Service District No. 3]

AYE . ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. AND NUECES COUNTY ESD NUMBER 3. WE HAD TWO LETTERS OF INTENT, AND I AM PASSING THESE ONTO EACH OF YOU . IF THIS IS YOUR ESD, I ASSUME THIS SHOULD BE YOUR SUGGESTION AND YOUR APPOINTMENT, SO I THINK 3 IS YOURS, COMMISSIONER PUSLEY. OH, COMMISSIONER GONZALES. PART OF IT. YES. SO YOU SHARE THAT. WE HAD TWO LETTERS OF INTENT FROM GARY YOU WILFORD AND BARRY CORCORAN AND ONE APPLICATION. BUT THERE'S ONLY THE TWO POSITIONS LEFT, SO IF YOU ALL WANT TO CONTINUE WITH WHO IS ON THEIR.

>> IT'S UP TO THE COMMISSION IF HE WANTS TO MAKE ANY CHANGES

AGAIN. >> YOU WANT TO COOK SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY

[11. Nueces County Emergency Service District No. 4]

OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES. THEN WE HAVE NUECES COUNTY ESD NUMBER 4. ALL THREE SENT LETTERS OF INTENT.

>> YOUR HONOR, I LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO REAPPOINT PAUL AND OTIS GROUPING, AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO INCLUDE APPOINTING ALTON: TO THAT EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT

NUMBER FOUR. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ?

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE . >> I'M GOING TO ABSTAIN ON

THAT ONE, JUDGE. >> OKAY. ONE ABSTAIN. ITEM

[12. Nueces County Emergency Service District No. 6]

NUMBER 12, NUECES COUNTY ESD NUMBER 6 . WHO HAS NUMBER 6? IS

THAT YOU, COMMISSIONER? >> DRISCOLL.

>> DRISCOLL. >> I HAVE TWO LETTERS OF

INTENT. >> I WILL SECOND THAT.

>> AND THEN THERE IS ONE APPLICANT? OR THERE'S ONE OTHER OPENING? WE DIDN'T GET A LETTER --

>> IT SAYS THREE POSITIONS WITH TERMS THAT EXPIRE.

>> MOBLEY SENT IN A BOARD APPLICATION IS THAT OF A LETTER OF INTENT. IT LOOKS LIKE SHE IS ALREADY SERVING. SO ALL THREE ARE SERVING ON THEIR. YOU WANT TO CHANGE YOUR MOTION TO

APPOINT ALL THREE? >> I SECOND THAT.

[00:55:03]

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES. NOW

[13. Nueces County Hospital District Board of Managers]

MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 13, THE NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT BOARD OF MANAGERS . AND -- THIS ONE WE DO DIFFERENTLY AS PER OUR POLICY. I'M NOT SURE WHERE PEYTON IS.

>> JUDGE, WELL PEYTON GETS HERE, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO COMMENT THAT I THINK MOST OF US RECEIVED A LETTER FROM OUTGOING CHAIRMAN , SO I JUST WANT TO THANK HIM FOR HIS YEARS OF SERVICE AND I KNOW HE REAPPLIED AND CHOSE NOT TO. SO THIS GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY FOR TWO NEW NAMES TO BE APPOINTED TO THIS VERY IMPORTANT BOARD. HOW IMPORTANT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT IS IN CONNECTION TO THE COMMUNITY , IS NEEDED IN GOOD

REPRESENTATION. SO THANK YOU. >> I JUST WANT TO ECHO THAT AS WELL . PUBLIC SERVICE IS DEFINITELY A SACRIFICE, AND I WANT TO THANK THE CHAIRMAN FOR HIS DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. TO ME, THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT APPOINTMENT WE MAKE IN THIS COUNTY. IT'S A LITTLE UNDER THE RADAR FOR PEOPLE, BUT THE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT THAT WORD CONTROLS IS SO VITAL TO THIS COMMUNITY THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE JUST DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT IT. TO ME, THIS IS THE ABSOLUTE MOST IMPORTANT BOARD APPOINTMENT WE MAKE, AND I APPRECIATE THE SERVICE FROM THE CHAIRMAN.

>> LIKEWISE. >> 100% UNANIMOUS YEAR. WE DO APPRECIATE HIS SERVICE AND HIS HEALTH TO US AND THIS BOARD AND

THE MANY TIMES HE HAS COME IN. >> THERE'S A CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR HIM, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY HE'S

NOT REAPPLYING. >> YES, BUT WE DO ECHO THESE COMMENTS. ON THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT MANAGERS, WE HAVE ONLY DONE THIS ONE OTHER TIME , I THINK, A BOARD COMMISSIONER APPOINTMENT AS PER POLICY. WE HAD APPLICATIONS FROM BETTY BILLINGS, JOHN LESIONS, GEORGIA, KAREN IRVIN, AND EACH COMMISSIONER WILL BE ABLE TO SELECT ONE NAME AND ASK FOR IT TO BE PUT ON THE BOARD, AND THEN IT WILL GO BACK AROUND, BECAUSE THERE'S TWO POSITIONS ON THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT BOARD.

EACH COMMISSIONER WILL HAVE TWO VOTES. YOU CANNOT PLACE YOU TWO VOTES FOR THE SAME PERSON. IT HAS TO BE TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

IN THE FIRST PERSON TO GET THREE OR THE FIRST TWO GET THREE VOTES IS OUR APPOINTMENT. SO I WILL START WITH YOU,

COMMISSIONER PUSLEY. >> KAREN URBAN.

>> COMMISSIONER MAREZ. >> I HAVE TO PUT IT IN?

>> YOU DON'T HAVE TO PUT IT IN. ARE YOU SKIPPING?

>> YEAH. >> COMMISSIONER CHESNEY.

>> GEORGIA. >> COMMISSIONER GONZALES. THIS FIRST ONE IS JUST FOR NAMES ON THE BOARD, SHE IS ALREADY ON THEIR. AND I WILL SKIP, TOO. SO THAT IN FACT MEANS THAT THOSE TWO ARE OUR APPOINTMENTS, BECAUSE THERE ARE NO OTHER NAMES TO VOTE ON. SO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. DO WE STILL VOTE? MAKE THE MOTION TO APPOINT KAREN URBAN AND GEORGIA TO THE HOSPITAL BOARD. HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE . ANY OPPOSED. COMMISSIONER PUSLEY.

WE WERE DOING THE BOARD BEHIND US.

>> GOING BACK TO WHAT -- CONFLICT OF INTEREST? SHE IS ON

THE SPOHN BOARD . >> SHE RESIGNED.

>> FROM THE FOUNDATION BOARD. HER LETTER ON HERE -- AND I GOT A MESSAGE FROM SOMEONE SAYING THAT THEY HADN'T RESIGNED YET -- HER LETTER SAID IF SHE WERE UP WAITED, SHE WOULD

IMMEDIATELY RESIGN. >> THAT'S THE THING, WHEN WE APPOINT SOMEBODY, IT'S GOT TO BE --

>> BUT SHE DOESN'T WORK FOR SPOHN. SHE DOESN'T WORK FOR

SPOHN . >> IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER SHE WORKS OR NOT. IT'S THE SAME THING.

[01:00:03]

>> SHE IS ACKNOWLEDGING -- >> YOU CAN'T SERVE ON TWO BOARDS. THEY WERE BOTH BOARDS JUST LIKE THAT.

>> YES, COMMISSIONER, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED, BECAUSE I SAID IT WAS A CONFLICT. I CALLED AND ASKED FOR THE LETTER OF RESIGNATION SHE WANTED ME TO CONSIDER, AND SHE IS A GOOD FRIEND. I DON'T THINK IT IS AN ACTUAL CONFLICT, BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T GET PAID OR MAKE DECISIONS OR VOTE ON CONTRACTS FOR SPOHN. IT IS THE FOUNDATION BOARD THAT RAISES MONEY TO GIVE TO THEM. IT IS THE TOTAL OPPOSITE OF THAT. BUT I STILL THOUGHT THIS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED, BECAUSE TO ME, THE OUTSIDE PUBLIC, WE ARE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION AND WE DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND IT. THAT'S WHY I ASKED, IF YOU WANT MY SUPPORT, IF YOU EXTEND A LETTER OF IMMEDIATE RESIGNATION, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SUPPORT YOU.

SHE HAS DONE AN AMAZING JOB FOR US. I THINK SHE WILL DO SO AS WELL. BUT THAT IS WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HAVING THAT DISCUSSION FOR THE FUTURE, BECAUSE WE EVEN HAVE THIS

CONFLICT BETWEEN US. >> I THINK YOUR POINT IS WELL MADE. SHE RECOGNIZE THE FACT THAT IT COULD BE LOOKED UPON AS A CONFLICT, AND SO SHE HAS SAID, SHE IS APPOINTED, SHE IS GOING TO RESIGN, WHICH IS A STANDUP PERSON. SO THERE WILL BE NO CONFLICT. AND YOU KNOW WHAT ? I'M FINE SAYING CONTINGENT UPON WHAT SHE SAID IN HER LETTER. I'M FINE WITH THAT. SHE'S NOT QUITE WAS I BEFORE WE APPOINTED HER. WHY

WOULD SHE DO THAT ? >> SHE SENT A LETTER STATING SHE WOULD IMMEDIATELY UPON HER APPOINTMENT. NOT 90 DAYS, NOT 60 DAYS FROM NOW, IMMEDIATELY ON HER APPOINTMENT.

>> SHE STILL PART OF THE BOARD. >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THE LETTER WAS IN THE BACKUP OF THE PACKET, COMMISSIONER.

>> SHE WAS HAPPY TO SEND A LETTER, AND SHE SAID SHE HAS LOVED HER TERM WITH SPOHN . BUT SHE UNDERSTOOD THAT THE PUBLIC MIGHT NOT UNDERSTAND THAT, AND SHE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE ACROSS THE BOARD CLEAR , AND THAT THERE IS NO CONFLICT.

ARE YOU CHANGING YOUR VOTE? >> PERSONALLY, I LIKE SHE'S FROM PRECINCT 3. I LIKE SEEING SOME DIVERSITY. I THINK THAT THAT IS IMPORTANT, TO HAVE A DIVERSITY FROM ALL PARTS OF THE COUNTY. SO I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT SOMEHOW CHANGE. I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN DO IT IN THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION, BUT PERHAPS CREATE PLACES LIKE WE HAVE ON SOME OF THESE OTHER BOARDS WERE THEY GET REPRESENTATION IS A SHOULD FOR BEACH RELATED ISSUES, BUT IT'S NOT JUST A MATTER RUSHING THROUGH TO GET THREE VOTES. AND IT IS NECESSARY TO HAVE ONE FOR EACH PRECINCT, BUT AT LEAST A LITTLE MORE GENERAL AREA -- YOU KNOW, AND THEN MAYBE THE CENTER PART OF THE COUNTY. SO JUST A SUGGESTION LOOKING FORWARD, BECAUSE I DO LIKE IT. I SEE THAT SHE IS FROM PRECINCT 3, SO I THINK THAT THAT WILL HELP FOR US, BUT I THINK THAT'S STILL A BIGGER ISSUE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT

APPOINTMENTS. >> GEORGE'S HERE, AND WE DO THANK YOU FOR STEPPING UP AND TAKING THIS POSITION. WE HAVE ALREADY VOTED ON THOSE TWO, COMMISSIONER, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE YOUR VOTE ON THE ONE.

>> YES, I DO. WE HAVE TO DO IT SEPARATE, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T

VOTE AGAINST VOTES LIKE THAT. >> YOU WANT US TO SEPARATE IT FOR YOU, COMMISSIONER? OR YOU JUST WANT TO BE A NO FOR BOTH?

>> I WANT TO VOTE FOR BILLINGS. >> SHE DIDN'T GET NOMINATED.

SO THERE'S ONLY TWO THAT WE CAN VOTE ON.

>> SO YOU ARE JUST GOING TO BE A NO?

>> HE SAID JUST FOR KAREN. >> WE GOT TO SEPARATE THEM.

LET'S BACK UP. WE WILL RESEND THE MOTION. I WILL MAKE THE APPOINTMENT OF GEORGIA TO THE HOSPITAL BOARD.

>> WE WOULD HAVE TO BACK UP -- WE ALREADY MADE A MOTION AND

SECOND AND VOTED ON IT. >> I JUST THAT I RESCINDED MY MOTION. THERE WAS ENOUGH DISCUSSION.

>> WHO MADE THE MOTION AND SECOND?

>> YEAH. TO APPOINT BOTH OF THEM. YES. I MADE THE MOTION,

[01:05:05]

YOU SECONDED. I JUST SAID I RESCINDED MY MOTION. THANK YOU.

NOW, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF WITHDRAWING THE MOTION, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION TO WITHDRAW PASSES. NOW, I MAKE THE MOTION TO APPOINT GEORGIA NIBBLE IT TO THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT BOARD. WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. THE MOTION IS UNANIMOUS. THANK YOU. I WAS RESENDING AND COMING BACK TO YOU. SO YES, UNANIMOUS. THANK YOU. NOW, WE NEED A MOTION FOR KAREN. TO MAKE THE MOTION FOR KAREN URBAN. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A 2ND FOR KAREN URBAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED. ONE NAY . THE MOTION PASSES. IS THAT CLEAR, EVERYBODY?

>> I'M SORRY, THIS IS A LITTLE WEIRD. SO WE DID THE THING WHERE WE PRACTICE MICKEY MOUSE AND ALL THAT STUFF. SO HOW DID

WE -- WHY DID WE -- >> BECAUSE NO OTHER NAMES ARE

PUT ON THE BOARD TO VOTE ON. >> OKAY. SO WE JUST GO TO THE

NORMAL WAY WE DO THINGS. >> WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE FOR ANYBODY ELSE ON THE BOARD. THAT'S WHY EVERY COMMISSIONER GOT THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUT ONE NAME ON

THE BOARD. YES. >> OKAY.

>> YES. FOUR BOARDS, YES. OKAY. THAT IS NOT DIFFICULT ENOUGH.

[14. Nueces County Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities Board]

THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, BOTH OF OUR APPOINTMENTS OVER THERE.

WE APPRECIATE YOU VERY MUCH. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 14 , THE NUECES COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH AND INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

BOARD. >> WE ONLY HAD -- PUTTING ONE PERSON ON THREE COUNTY BOARDS IS A LITTLE -- IS GETTING A LITTLE OUT THERE, BUT WE ONLY HAVE ONE APPLICATION FOR THIS ONE. WE WANT TO MAYBE GO BACK AND -- EITHER REOPEN, OR MAYBE NOT PUT HIM ON THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION? THREE BOARDS FOR ONE PERSON , MAY BE A LITTLE MUCH.

>> OKAY. SO -- YEAH. AND I WANT TO EXPLAIN -- I WANT TO EXPLAIN TO THE COURT , WHEN MR. JACKSON CAME BY AND ASKED ME TO SUPPORT HIM, HE HAD LETTERS FOR EVERY BOARD , ALL OF THEM. AND I SAID, I CAN'T DO THAT. BUT WHAT HE DID IS HE SUBMITTED HIS APPLICATION AND USED THE ONE THAT I DID SIGN FOR THE PARKS BOARD AND FOR ALL THE OTHER BOARDS. AND I BROUGHT THAT TO THE ATTENTION OF TERESA , BECAUSE TARA WAS OUT SICK. HE ERRONEOUSLY TOOK MY LETTER THAT I SIGNED AND USED IT FOR APPLYING FOR EVERY BOARD. SO IF WE ALREADY HAVE HIM ON 2, I

THINK WE ARE GOOD. >> SO WE CAN EITHER TAKE HIM

OFF OF ONE -- >> WE CAN TAKE HIM OFF OF ONE,

OR PUT HIM ON THIS ONE. >> THERE PLENTY ON THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION IF YOU WANT TO PULL OFF THAT ONE.

BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER APPLICANTS FOR THIS

BOARD. >> I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE

THING TO DO. >> JUDGE, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO RESCIND -- I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO NOT APPOINT MR. JACKSON TO THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION AND TO APPOINT HIM INSTEAD TO THE MENTAL HEALTH AND INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

BOARD. >> I SECOND THAT.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND .

>> I APPRECIATE HIS ENTHUSIASM. THAT'S GREAT. SOMETIMES WE CAN'T GET PEOPLE TO APPLY TO ANYTHING.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES

UNANIMOUSLY. >> THANK YOU.

[15. Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone No. 6 (Barisi Village)]

>> ITEM NUMBER 15, THE TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER 6, THESE APPOINTMENTS HAVE TO LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD . IT'S A REQUIREMENT FOR THIS. AND WE HAD ONE APPOINTMENT APPLICANT, JOHN HARDY. I MAKE THE MOTION

[01:10:02]

TO APPOINT. >> SECOND.

>> LET ME RETRACT THAT MOTION TO APPOINT BUT TO ALSO OPEN IT BACK UP FOR THE OTHER POSITION THAT WE NEED. SO WE CAN DO IT IN ONE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY

AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED. >> JUDGE, JUST FOR THE PUBLIC'S CLARIFICATION ON THIS, THIS BOARD, THIS DISTRICT, IS SIMILAR TO WHAT COMMISSIONER PARSLEY AND COMMISSIONER GONZALES HAD EARLIER IT IS KIND OF A SPLIT .

THIS INITIATED BETWEEN PRECINCT 3 AND PRECINCT 4, AND JOHN HARDY HAS BEEN VERY INSTRUMENTAL IN ORGANIZING THAT COMMUNITY AND REALLY SWAYING THE INITIAL REACTION TO THIS DEVELOPMENT BEING PUT IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD FROM ONE OF DISDAIN TO WONDERFUL SUPPORT, OR ALMOST UNANIMOUS SUPPORT. I DON'T THINK IT'S QUITE 100%, THAT HE HAS BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN THAT, AND VERY OPEN AND INVITING AND COMMUNICATING WITH THE COMMISSIONER CHESNEY AND I . WE'VE BEEN INVITED TO A COUPLE OF PUBLIC EVENTS IT IS HELPED HOST, OR THIS HUGE TURNOUT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. A LOT OF FAMILIES, KIDS EVEN BROUGHT TO THESE MEETINGS. SO WE SOMETIMES DON'T GET TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THOSE. WE JUST PICK A NAME BECAUSE IT IS THERE AND IT'S THE ONLY ONE, BUT I FELT LIKE JOHN HARDY IS SOMEONE WHO NEEDS TO BE IDENTIFIED. AND THERE'S OTHERS, AND SURE WE WILL SEE THEIR NAMES COME THROUGH, AND

HAS THIS ONE BEEN WAITING? >> YES, SINCE WE GOT TO COURT.

>> IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME COMING FOR HIM.

>> AGREE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> YOUR HONOR, IF I COULD, WITH RESPECT TO OUR ESD'S , AND I THINK WE HAVE KIND OF THE SAME SITUATION WERE THERE SOME BOUNDARY LINE CONFUSION HERE. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THAT WE TRY TO CLARIFY THAT. I AM FINE WITH JUST HAVING TWO ESD'S, BUT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE ARE DOING THIS IN THE CORRECT FASHION. AND I EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT THERE MAY BE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT REDRAWING BOUNDARIES.

>> THERE IS. THEY ARE WORKING ON THAT, AND IT'S NOT HAVING ONLY TWO ESD'S. AT THE COUNTY, HE'S TALKING ABOUT HIS COVERAGE, HIS AREA. THAT IS GOING TO BE COMING UP, AND YOU MIGHT WANT TO SCHEDULE A MEETING WITH THE CHIEF. HE IS THE ONE WHO HAS BEEN WORKING ON THE MAPS AND EVERYTHING IN THE

CHANGES. >> OKAY, VERY GOOD. I AM FINE WITH WHATEVER WE COME UP WITH. THANK YOU.

>> A NO MAN'S LAND. >> I WAS HERE LAST TIME, AND SOMEHOW I ENDED UP WITH THE MOST. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT

[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.]

HAPPENED. >> WE DID IT WHILE YOU WERE

GONE. I'M JUST KIDDING. >> THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN

YOU LEAVE. >> MOVING ON TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA. IS THERE ANY ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT ANY COMMISSIONER WISHES TO PULL FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>> MOTION TO IMPROVE . >> YOU WANT TO PULL SOMETHING?

>> CONSENT AGENDA -- >> WHICH ONE DID YOU SAY?

>> HOW DO YOU KNOW WHICH ONE IT IS?

>> A SPECIAL MOTION? >> SECOND.

>> IS ABOUT ONE OF THE SPECIAL MOTION CHECK REGISTERS?

>> SO YOU WANT TO PULL CAPITAL C 3 ?

>> THERE ARE SEVERAL ON THERE. >> I WISH YOU WOULD JUST DO ONE AND NUMBER THEM ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

>> GIVE ANY IDEA WHICH ONE IT IS?

>> YES, I BELIEVE HE'S REFERRING TO THE SPECIAL

MOTIONS REGULAR, WHICH IS -- >> JANUARY 8TH.

>> OKAY. >> I BELIEVE IT IS C.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO PASS THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA

EXCEPT ITEM C. >> I WILL SECOND THAT.

>> I WILL SECOND HIS MOTION. >> MY MOTION WOULD BE TO PASS

ALL THE C. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED . THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. AND MOVING ON TO

[C. Authorize payment of bills - Special Motions Regular List dated January 8, 2025.]

ITEM C, COMMISSIONER , WHAT ARE YOUR QUESTIONS?

>> MY QUESTIONS ON THIS, NUMBER 3, THE CORPUS CHRISTI HEALTH

[01:15:03]

DISTRICT. I DON'T THINK ANYTHING IS CHANGED, BUT WE ARE STILL PAYING THE FULL AMOUNT FOR SERVICES THAT ARE LIMITED.

SO, YOU KNOW -- >> MARK OUR CONTRACT WITH THEM SO STATES THOSE DAYS RIGHT THERE.

>> IT WAS AN EXTENSION FOR 2 MONTHS, WE ARE MONTH-TO-MONTH RIGHT NOW. SO THIS PAYMENT IS FOR JANUARY.

>> I UNDERSTAND. BUT WE ARE STILL PAYING THEM THE FULL

VALUE WE ARE PAYING BEFORE. >> YES, SIR.

>> THERE SHOULD BE SOME ADJUSTMENTS HERE FOR WHAT WE ARE PAYING FOR AND HOW MUCH WE ARE PAYING FOR WHAT. WE WANT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THROWING MONEY AWAY AND GIVING MONEY AWAY.

I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO VOTE FOR THIS ONE. WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT SOONER OR LATER, WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH IT.

UNDER 1.7 MILLION FOR WHAT THEY ARE DOING. WE NEED TO COME BACK AND LOOK AT IT AND GO BACK TO THE TABLE. IF YOU ARE ALL HAPPY WITH DOING IT, I GUESS THAT IS FINE.

>> I THINK THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HEALTH DISTRICT --

>> I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER, IT'S FOR THE MONTH OF

DECEMBER, NOT JANUARY. >> EVEN IF WE WERE TO STOP, THEY HAVE THREE MONTHS BEFORE -- SO WE ARE ON A MONTH-TO-MONTH UNTIL THE CITY -- THEY DO WANT TO COME BACK IN FEBRUARY TO READDRESS THAT AND MAKE A CONFIRMATION, BUT RIGHT NOW, WE ARE OPERATING UNDER THOSE NEGOTIATED TERMS THAT WE HAD THAT THEY ARE THERE TWO DAYS A WEEK, AND TWO TIMES A MONTH OR -- I'M SORRY, OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT THE NEGOTIATED TERMS. THEY DO EVENTUALLY OWE IT. YES. BUT THEY WANT TO COME BACK IN FEBRUARY , AS SOON AS WE CAN IN FEBRUARY.

>> I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A MOTION ON SOMETHING I'M NOT

GOING TO VOTE ON. >> OKAY, I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO PAY THE HEALTH DISTRICT BILL OR TO APPROVE THE MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ONE OPPOSED AND FOUR AYE'S.

>> AND ON SEVEN, MY QUESTION AGAIN AS I SAID BEFORE, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE AT WITH THIS. IT SAID $5280. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE STILL OWE THEM FOR SERVICES VERSUS THE SAVINGS WE ARE GETTING FROM CONTROL? SO HOW MUCH LONGER ARE WE GOING TO BE WITH CONTROL? ANYBODY?

>> WELL, IT IS PUBLIC WORKS, BUT THE VERIFICATION WE HAVE WITH JOHNSON CONTROLS, THEY ARE IN YEAR 13. IT'S A CONTRACT THAT WE ARE UNDER. THIS IS THE FINAL YEAR, 13 , OF THE CONTRACT. THIS CONTRACT HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE 2010.

>> LET ME ASK LISA, I GUESS. ARE WE MAKING ANY MONEY WITH JOHNSON CONTROL? ARE THERE ANY SAVINGS HERE?

>> GOOD QUESTION. >> THAT IS A WONDERFUL QUESTION THAT I WAS NOT PREPARED TO ANSWER, BECAUSE IT WASN'T ON THE AGENDA. I CAN RESEARCH THAT AND LET YOU KNOW. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE AN EVALUATION THAT IS DONE BY A THIRD PARTY AGENCY EVERY YEAR THAT DETERMINES IF WE HAVE MET THE SAVINGS METRICS. I DON'T KNOW THE STATUS OF THE MOST RECENT ONE

OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. >> I THINK PUBLIC WORKS -- I ASKED ABOUT THIS NOT TOO LONG AGO. PUBLIC WORKS TOLD ME IT IS MINIMAL OR SOMETHING, BUT I HAVEN'T GOTTEN THE REPORTS.

>> IF WE SAVE MONEY, YOU ALL GET THE MONEY. SO HOW MUCH ARE WE GETTING FROM THEM ON A YEARLY BASIS?

>> WE DON'T GET ANY MONEY FROM JOHNSON CONTROLS. THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE AN ENERGY SAVINGS. THERE IS A METRIC THAT WAS CREATED WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY A GROUP, AND THERE'S A THIRD PARTY THAT COMES IN ONCE A YEAR AND DOES AN EVALUATION TO DETERMINE IF WE DID IN FACT SAVE THOSE MONIES. I DON'T KNOW THE STATUS OF THE MOST RECENT REVIEW THAT HAS BEEN DONE. I KNOW THAT WE AT LEAST, ON ONE

[01:20:01]

OCCASION THAT I CAN RECALL OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD -- AND I'M NOT SAYING IT IS NECESSARILY THIS CONTRACT, BUT THERE WAS A CONTRACT THAT WE HAD WITH ENERGY SAVINGS. I CAN'T TELL YOU WHICH ONE AGAIN OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD THAT DIDN'T MEET THE METRICS, AND WE DID GET A PAYMENT FOR THAT. BUT I ONLY REMEMBERED THAT IT HAPPENED BECAUSE IT STUCK OUT , BECAUSE IT WAS THE ONE TIME I HAD SEEN IT IN MY 16 YEARS.

>> WE SHOULD INSTRUCT PUBLIC WORKS TO BRING THAT TO THE NEXT

MEETING. >> I WAS HERE WHEN WE DID ADJUSTMENTS CONTROL, AND I THINK YOU WERE, TOO. ANYWAY.

THE ORIGINAL DEAL , IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECT, THEY CAME IN AND MADE THE CLAIM THAT THEY CAME IN AND DID CERTAIN THINGS THAT WOULD SAVE US MONEY ON COSTS OF WATER , HEATING, ELECTRICITY, AND EVERYTHING WE DO HERE MECHANICALLY. TO DO THAT PROGRAM , THERE HAD TO BE FUNDING. SO THE STATE HAD MONEY AVAILABLE FOR SOME SPECIAL PROGRAM, AND THE DEAL WAS THAT THE SAVINGS ON A MONTH-TO-MONTH BASIS , THAT DEAL WAS SUPPOSED

TO PAY FOR THE LOAN. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> AND FOR ANY MONTH THAT IT DID NOT, JOHNSON CONTROLS HAD TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE. I SEE EDWARD SHAKING HIS HEAD, SO HE REMEMBERS AS WELL. NOW, I DO REMEMBER SPECIFICALLY THAT IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT DEAL, AFTER A COUPLE OF YEARS, CAME TO US, AND THEY WERE IN TROUBLE ON THE DEAL. IN THE COURT VOTED TO STEP UP AND HELP BAIL THEM OUT FOR -- I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE NUMBER WAS AT ALL. IT HAS BEEN TOO LONG AGO. BUT SINCE THEN, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY HAVE BEEN MEETING THEIR OBLIGATION OF COVERING THAT THROUGH SAVINGS OR NOT.

SOMEBODY IS PAYING THAT LOAN BACK.

>> WE ARE -- WE ARE MAKING THE LOAN PAYMENTS PER OUR DEBT SCHEDULE , BUT THEY ARE NOT FUNDED BY DEBT. IT IS NON-DEBT -- OR, IT IS NONTAX FUNDED. SO IT'S NOT COMING FROM THE INS PROPERTY TAX RATES. IT IS COMING FROM THE ENERGY SAVINGS.

THERE IS A TRANSFER THAT IS MADE FROM THE GENERAL FUND --

>> WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE -- THIS THIRD PARTIES WAS TO COME

IN EVERY YEAR AND REVIEW -- >> IN EVERY ONE OF OUR ENERGY SAVINGS CONTRACT -- THERE'S A SEPARATE PARTY THAT REVIEWS.

>> A MORNING CHARGE, GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. WITH REGARDS TO THAT, WE ARE WAITING TO HEAR FROM THEM. WERE SUPPOSED TO HEAR FROM THEM IN FEBRUARY TO PROVIDE US AN UPDATE, AND ALSO WITH A THIRD PARTY, WHICH DOES THE THIRD-PARTY REVIEW. THEY DO THE MAINTENANCE AND VERIFICATION FOR THE REPORT. SO WE ARE SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY TO MEET

WITH JCI. >> OKAY. WE HAVE BEEN RECEIVING

BENEFITS. >> YES, MA'AM. WE ARE MONITORING THIS ON OUR BEHALF.

>> YES. IN THE SEVEN YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE, THERE'S TWO YEARS WHERE WAS ANYTHING FROM 30 TO 40 ON THE SAVINGS REQUIREMENTS.

>> SO MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE AN UPDATE ANNUALLY OR SOMETHING ABOUT THESE ENERGY SAVINGS PROGRAMS . WHAT YOU GET YOUR REPORT, YOU SHOULD PROBABLY PRESENTED TO THE BOARD.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND WE DO AN AUDIT OF THE PROGRAM, SINCE IT IS ESSENTIAL, TO SEE WHERE WE ARE.

>> WE CAN INVITE JCI. >> THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO

PROVIDE THAT. >> YES, SIR. AT THAT POINT.

>> WILL THEY PAY 30,000, OR WHATEVER IT IS, THAT MONEY GOES

-- >> I THINK THE FIRST ONE WAS THIRTYSOMETHING THOUSAND. I KNOW WE CAME TO COMMISSIONERS COURT AND REQUESTED -- WE HAD SOME EQUIPMENT THAT NEEDED TO BE UPGRADED, AND I THINK WE USED THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT TO REPLACE VALVES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I CAN'T REMEMBER RIGHT NOW, BUT I KNOW WE USED SOME OF IT. THESE ADDITIONAL MONIES, I THINK THE MONEY IS STILL THERE. BUT I CAN GET THAT

FOR YOU. >> AND I KNOW THAT YOU WILL BEEN MONITORING. IT'S JUST, I PREFER, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE CAN, TO GET ANY CONTRACTOR BEFORE US, EVEN IF IT IS RENEWAL, I

[01:25:02]

PREFER IN PERSON, BUT EVEN IF THEY ARE FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE OR CAN'T MAKE IT IN, AT LEAST GET THE MONEY ZOOM. THAT DOESN'T COST ANYTHING BUT THERE TIME TO BE HERE, JUST SO WE CAN HAVE MORE INFORMATION. I KNOW YOU ARE OUR POINT OF CONTACT, AND THIS IS NOT ABOUT YOU, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE AS MANY AS GROUPS AS WE CAN WITHOUT BOGGING THIS DOWN SO THAT WHEN WE DO SEE THEM, WE CAN ASK THESE QUESTIONS DIRECTLY, AND YOU CAN HELP GUIDE US ON THAT, BECAUSE THIS IS IMPORTANT, AND I THINK AS WE MOVE FORWARD INTO THE BUDGET PROCESS, WE LOOK AT CONTRACTS, THIS WILL MAY NOT COST US ANYTHING, BUT THERE COULD BE OTHERS THAT DO OR WE COULD DO WITHOUT, AND WE NEED A SIGNIFICANT NOTICE TO CUT THOSE TIES, RIGHT? 60 DAYS, 90 DAYS, A FULL YEAR, WHATEVER THAT IT IS. I'M WORRIED ABOUT THAT PART OF IT ISWE ARE GOING INTO ANOTHER TIGHT BUDGET CYCLE. SO IF WE -- YEAH, IF WE CAN GET THEM IN, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. IT GIVES US ALL A CHANCE TO ASK MORE QUESTIONS. ON THE JOHNSON CONTROL, I WAS FAMILIAR WITH IT, BECAUSE I THINK INITIALLY, IT WAS A REALLY GOOD PROGRAM, AND IT STILL MAY BE. I KNOW THEY TOOK SOME ACTIONS WITH IT.

AND WHEN I SERVED ON THE SCHOOL BOARD THERE, WE FOLLOW THE BLUEPRINT. SO WHEN I CAME OVER HERE, I WAS ALREADY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROGRAM. BUT I MEAN, IT MADE SENSE OF ALL THE COST SAVINGS , YOU KNOW, ELECTRICITY, AS MUCH AS WE CAN, STREAMLINING ALL THE -- PROBABLY EDWARD THE TOOK ME DOWNSTAIRS TO LOOK AT THE GUTS, THE INTERNAL PARTS OF THIS BUILDING AND WHAT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED HERE. ALL THE THINGS THAT HAVE CHANGED. I KNOW JOHNSON CONTROL HAS DONE GOOD WORK FOR US, BUT WE NEED TO SEE THAT. AND IF YOU WANT TO BE THE POINT PERSON FOR THEM, GREAT. BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, I THINK IT'S TIME TO RENEW JUST GET THEM CONNECTED WITH THE NEW COURT THAT SOME OF US MIGHT HAVE NEVER MET OR HAVEN'T

SEEN. SO THANK YOU. >> I AGREE WITH THAT, COMMISSIONER. AND ALSO, I WOULD ADD TO THAT, IN THE BEGINNING, WE USED TO GET A MONTHLY REPORT FROM JOHNSON CONTROL OVER HOW MUCH ENERGY WAS BEING SAVED, AND I KNOW WE ALL HAVE 20 TO READ, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE STARTING TO COME UP TO THE COMMISSIONERS AGAIN SO WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THEM. AND , YOUR HONOR, AS I WAS READING THROUGH THE LIST OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE JOB, BECAUSE I CALLED THEM ABOUT THIS, I SAW WHERE THE CONTRACTOR WAS GOING TO MOVE THE SOLAR PANELS , AND THOSE SOLAR PANELS --

>> WE DID CHECK ON THAT. >> WERE NOT GOING TO DO THAT

NOW. >> AND THEY HAVEN'T WORKED EITHER. WE KNEW THERE WAS A CONTRACT THAT MONEY WAS

BORROWED ON. >> THE ONES ON THE JAILER NO WORK. THEY SUPPLY SOME ENERGY. I THINK IT IS TIME WE

RE-EVALUATE THAT WHOLE THING. >> AGREE.

>> ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO PASS THAT NOW WITH THE INFORMATION YOU HAVE RECEIVED? OR DO YOU WANT

SOMEBODY ELSE TO DO IT? >> I WILL LET SOMEBODY ELSE DO

IT. >> I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO PASS. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A PASS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ONE OPPOSED, FOUR AYE'S. MOVING ON TO OUR

[1. Discuss, consider and receive update on legislative agenda and all related matters. ]

REGULAR AGENDA, WE HAVE JULE ROMO AND PATRICIA SHIPTON I BELIEVE ON FOR OUR ITEM NUMBER ONE, DISCUSS, CONSIDER, AND RECEIVE AN UPDATE ON THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. YOU OF ALL RECEIVED OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. I ASKED JOEL AND PATRICIA TO BE BRIEF, BECAUSE OF THE TIME CONSTRAINTS ON TODAY'S MEETING. SO THEY ARE GOING TO RUN THROUGH IT PRETTY QUICKLY, BUT YOU ALL HAVE THEIR NUMBERS AND CONTACTS. THEY HAVE BEEN MEETING WITH EVERYONE, ELECTED OFFICIALS, ALL OF THE PUBLIC OFFICIALS CALLED UPON TO ASK FOR YOUR INPUT. I WILL TURN IT OVER TO YOU, JOEL, OR PATRICIA, WHICHEVER ONE.

>> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. I'M GOING TO PUNT IT OVER TO PATRICIA REAL QUICK THAT SHE'S GOING TO GIVE A QUICK OVERVIEW

OF THE SESSION. >> I'M SORRY I'M LATE, I WAS TALKING TO A MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATURE WHO WANTED TO GOSSIP ABOUT THE SPEAKER'S RACE, WHICH ALL ANYBODY IN AUSTIN IS TALKING ABOUT THESE DAYS. JUST AS A QUICK REMINDER, I'M GOING TO GO OVER THE MAKEUP OF THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE AND WHAT WE ARE FACING THIS NEXT SESSION. THE SENATE

[01:30:03]

REMAINS LARGELY THE SAME WITH A NEW REPUBLICAN MEMBER FROM NUECES COUNTY, AND SO IN THE SENATE, WE HAVE THE VERY STRONG LEADERSHIP OF OUR LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR. 20 REPUBLICANS, 11 DEMOCRATS, AND SOME OF THE PRIORITY ISSUES THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR'S OUTLINE, OF COURSE, OUR SCHOOL VOUCHERS, REDUCING PROPERTY TAX, AND BORDER SECURITY ISSUES. I'M SURE THERE WILL BE OTHERS. WE HAVE HAD A GOOD -- WE HAVE REACHED OUT TO OUR SENATE DELEGATION. AND HAVE ASKED THEM -- AND HAVE BRIEFED THEM ON NUECES COUNTY PRIORITIES AND WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH THOSE. IN THE HOUSE, IT IS LITTLE MORE TOPSY-TURVY. THERE ARE TWO CURRENT REPUBLICAN SPEAKER CANDIDATE . SPEAKER FEELING OPTED TO STEP DOWN AND IS NOT SPEAKING RE-ELECTION. AND THERE ARE TWO, I THINK, AS OF LAST WEEK, THERE ARE STILL TWO POTENTIAL DEMOCRATIC SPEAKER CANDIDATES. WE HAVE A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY IN THE HOUSE WITH EIGHT REPUBLICANS , AND I WILL TELL YOU, JOE WILL VERIFY THAT BOTH OF THOSE CAUCUSES ARE DIVIDED. IT'S ONLY MATH EQUATION. SOMEBODY HAS TO GET TO 76. SO WE WILL SEE. HONESTLY, WE THOUGHT THAT THERE WOULD BE MORE OF A CLARITY ON THIS BY NOW, BUT THIS MAY GO DOWN TO THE WIRE.

SWEARING-IN DAY IS NEXT TUESDAY AT NOON, AND SO WE WILL KEEP YOU POSTED. WE WILL SEND YOU ALL A TEXT OR HOW YOU WANT US TO BEST COMMUNICATE THIS INFORMATION. AND ALSO, HAVING VERY GOOD MEETINGS WITH CHAIRMAN TODD HUNTER AND OUR NEW MEMBER. SHE'S GOING TO BE A GREAT ADDITION TO THE LEGISLATURE. JOEL, YOU WANT TO KICK IT OFF GOING BACK TO OUR

AGENDA? >> SURE. AS A JUDGE MENTIONED, WE'VE BEEN PROVIDING YOUR OFFICES THE COPIES AS WE HAVE BEEN UPDATING THEM. WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IS A CULMINATION OF MEMBERS OF THE COURT . WE'VE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH HIM ON PROPERTY EVALUATION LEDGES NATION, AND THE JUDGE, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH , THEY BEEN GREAT ABOUT HELPING US COURTNEY MEETINGS WITH COUNTIES ON THIS ISSUE. WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE SENATORS OFFICE SINCE LAST SUMMER, YOU KNOW, WORKING ON THIS, MAKING SURE IT IS FINE-TUNED. SO YOU KNOW, THE AGENDA HAS BEEN DISCUSSED WITH DIFFERENT MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY, FOLKS OF APPROACHED US, WE PREPARED NOTES ON THEIR AGENDA AND HOURS, SO , YOU KNOW, THE PRIORITIES ARE THERE AT THE TOP FOR YOU TO LOOK AT. I KNOW THERE'S SOME SPECIAL ITEMS THAT EACH OF YOU HAVE ASKED OR PUT IN THAT AGENDA THAT WE HAVE INCLUDED. WE ENVISION THIS LEGISLATIVE AGENDA IS A LIVING DOCUMENT, AS ISSUES COME UP AND WE HAVE MORE CLARITY IN THE HOUSE, THERE MAY BE SOME ISSUES WE COME BACK TO YOU TO ADVOCATE OR SUPPORT . YOU KNOW, THE RULES HAVE BEEN FOLLOWED. OF COURSE, THE NUMEROUS ISSUES ON PROPERTY TAXES, IT'S GOING TO BE A HOT TOPIC THE SESSION .

BORDER SECURITY IS A POTENTIAL MENTION. VOUCHERS. A LOT OF MENTAL HEALTH AND JAIL ISSUES WILL BE ADDRESSED. WE ARE ALSO LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO IDENTIFY FUNDING PROGRAMS THAT MAY HELP THE COUNTY. WE WORK WITH SCOTT CROSS ON SOME LANGUAGE FOR THE COASTLINE. SO I WILL STOP THERE . IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS -- BUT BEFORE YOU, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA READY FOR APPROVAL. THEY ARE READY TO MOVE ON THESE BILLS, AND WE WILL KEEP COMPOSED OF SOME OF THESE ISSUES MOVED TO A WEEKLY BASIS.

>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER MADE US HAS A QUESTION.

>> JOE, PATRICIA, THANK YOU FOR BEING A PART OF OUR TEAM THE SESSION. YOU ARE VITAL IN HELPING PROTECT NUECES COUNTY INTERESTS AND ADVOCATE FOR THAT WITH YOUR YEARS OF EXPERIENCE THROUGHOUT THE LEGISLATURE. IT REALLY HELPS US, AND I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE SOME OTHER PARTNERSHIPS WITH ENTITIES -- GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, WITHIN OUR AREA. WHAT ARE THOSE GROUPS, AND HOW CAN THEY BENEFIT US , AND WHAT ARE WE DOING TO ENSURE THAT THOSE PARTNERSHIPS ARE NOT COUNTERINTUITIVE , THAT WE ARE WORKING ON THE SAME SIDE OF EVERY ISSUE, OR THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT WE WORK THOSE THINGS OUT SO WE DON'T TURN A BACKYARD SQUABBLE INTO AN ISSUE

[01:35:04]

THERE IN AUSTIN? >> COMMISSIONER MAREZ, WE CURRENTLY REPRESENT THE CITY A POOR RAMS IS. WE AGREED TO TAKE THEM ON THIS SESSION. IT IS A NEW CONTRACT FOR US. A RUN STARTING THIS MONTH THROUGH THE END OF SESSION. AND THEY ARE MOSTLY IN A DEFENSIVE POSTURE. A LOT OF THEIR ISSUES ALIGNED WITH THE COUNTIES. WE FELT COMFORTABLE THAT THERE WERE NO CONFLICT. BUT MADE IT CLEAR THAT WHEN WE TOOK THAT CONTRACT, IT WOULD BE THAT NUECES COUNTY -- IF THE CONFLICT SHOULD ARISE, WE WOULD DEFER TO NUECES COUNTY ON THAT

, AND THEY AGREED TO THAT. >> THANK YOU, PATRICIA. JUST LETTING THEM KNOW, YOU CONTACTED ME BEFORE YOU TOOK

THE CONTRACT AS WELL. >> YES, WE DID. WE ALSO REPRESENT THEM. AS IS OUR SECOND SESSION WITH THEM? YES.

AND WE ARE PART OF A LARGER TEAM FOR THE NUECES COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT. THERE IS ANOTHER LOBBY ENTITY THAT ALSO REPRESENTS THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. AND SO WE FEEL LIKE THAT IS A LITTLE EASIER TO MANAGE WITH REGARD TO CONFLICT, BECAUSE WE CAN STEP BACK, MAKE SURE THAT OUR REPRESENTATION OF NUECES COUNTY HAS SUPREMACY AGAIN, AND LET OTHERS MANAGE WHATEVER THEY WANT TO COME UP THERE. BUT AGAIN, WE DON'T WANT TO ANTICIPATE ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST. AND LASTLY, IN NUECES COUNTY, KEVIN HUNTER ASKED US TO TAKE ON -- AND WE ARE REALLY HAPPY TO DO SO -- A PROJECT OF THE RITZ THEATER RENOVATION. THEY ARE SEEKING A STATE APPROPRIATION IF POSSIBLE. WE KNOW THAT'S A HARD, UPHILL BATTLE, WE ARE WILLING TO CARRY THAT LOAD FOR THEM THE SESSION AND SEE WHAT

WE CAN DO TO CARRY THEM. >> THAT'S GOOD. I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP. MY CONCERN IS THAT WE IN NUECES COUNTY HAVE BEEN NOTORIOUSLY BAD -- AND THIS IS ON ALL OF US, NOT TO PLACE BLAME, BUT WE, COLLECTIVELY -- I DON'T SEE US TAKING ADVANTAGE OF STATE FUNDING AS MUCH AS OTHER ENTITIES OR OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE DO. WHEN I LOOK AT DRAINAGE ISSUES, WE KNOW WE HAVE A LOT. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DRAINAGE, WE ARE IN A SEVERE DROUGHT RIGHT NOW -- EXTREME DROUGHT RIGHT NOW, ACTUALLY. LOOKING AT DRAINAGE ISSUES, THOSE ARE GOING TO BE A BIG PROBLEM. ONE DAY, GOD WILLING, WE WILL HAVE RAIN. WERE GOING TO GET THOSE PHONE CALLS AND THOSE COMPLAINTS ABOUT WHAT IS BEING DONE WITH THE DITCHES THAT WE HAVE OR ANY OTHER WORK THAT WE DONE THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY THAT CAN BE ADDED ON AS WRITERS OR CORPORATIONS, HOWEVER IT IS WORDED OR HOWEVER IT IS ALLOCATED. WHAT CAN WE DO, OR HAVE WE MISSED THE BOAT ON THAT , ON BEING ABLE TO ENSURE THAT WE GET OUR CHUNK? I KNOW WE GET FUNDING FROM TIME TO TIME, BUT EVERY TIME I TURN AROUND, HIDALGO DRAINAGE DISTRICT, NUMBER ONE, IS GETTING TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS EACH SESSION. EACH SESSION. IF I WENT BACK AND LOOKED IT UP, I'M SURE IT'S CLOSE TO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS AT LEAST SINCE THE TIME THAT I'VE BEEN A COMMISSIONER. AND SO WHAT CAN YOU DO TO HELP US ENSURE THAT WE ARE GETTING FUNDING LIKE THAT? IT'S GREAT TO HEAR ABOUT RITZ, BUT RITZ IS NOT A PUBLIC ENTITY. I KNOW THE CHAIRMAN HUNTER , I KNOW THAT HE SHOULD BE WEIGHING IN ON THAT AND OTHER ISSUES THAT ARE IMPORTANT. I'VE GOT MY COFFEE, AND YOU HEAR HIS NAME THROWN OUT THERE IN THE SPEAKER'S RACE, AND IF IT HASN'T BEEN, I'M DOING IT, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I HEAR FROM MY RESOURCES. SO IT'S IMPORTANT. IT'S NICE TO HEAR THAT. BUT I DON'T WANT FOR A PRIVATE ENTITY. SO WHAT CAN YOU DO FOR US? WHAT PLAN CAN WE SET UP IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS? I MEAN, WE HAVE A FORMAL MEMBER OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE HERE LEADING THE COUNTY, AND THOSE WHO WORK HERE , BACK WHEN SHE WAS YOUNG -- WORKED THERE -- THAT'S RIGHT.

SO WE GOT SOME GOOD EXPERIENCE, I THINK, ONE OF THE BEST TEAMS WE'VE HAD IN A WHILE. WHAT WE DO TO ENSURE WE GET SOME OF THAT FUNDING? OR DOES IT TAKE YEARS TO PLAN FOR A SESSION IN THE FUTURE? WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT?

>> I THINK YOU ARE RIGHT, COMMISSIONER, THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES, AND WE PROBABLY MAYBE SHOULD HAVE BEEN A LITTLE BIT MORE DILIGENT ABOUT THE PLANNING FOR THOSE, BUT I WILL SAY THIS -- THESE ARE NOT CLOSED CASES. GENERALLY, STATE FUNDING IS GOING TO BE IN LARGE CHUNKS, AS YOU KNOW, TO STATE AGENCIES, AND THOSE STATE AGENCIES ARE GIVING WIDE DISCRETION. I THEN WHINNIED TO MY NOSE A LITTLE BIT DEEPER, A LITTLE BIT HARDER. WE DID A REALLY GOOD JOB -- OR WE HAD A

[01:40:03]

JOB IN THE PAST WITH THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE. LET'S DO THE SAME THING WITH THE WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO WATER. THE NEW COMMISSIONER OVER THERE IS THE NEW EXECUTIVE COMMISSIONER, AND WOULD LOVE TO WORK WITH HER.

SHE IS AN OLD ALLY OF MINE, AND WORKED WITH ME AND GOVERNOR PERRY'S OFFICE. I WOULD LOVE TO CONTACT HER. LET'S GET HER TOGETHER WITH YOU AND LET'S TALK ABOUT THOSE OPPORTUNITIES.

I WOULD LOVE TO DO THAT. LET'S START THERE. SO I THINK FUNDING MEASURES GO FORWARD, AND WE WILL GO AND MAKE SURE THEY ARE COUNTY ELIGIBLE AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS AND MAKE SURE YOU ARE AWARE OF THEM SO WE CAN GET SOME INPUT ON HOW THOSE FUNDING STRUCTURES ARE AND WHAT THE APPLICATION PROCESS IS. A LOT OF THIS IS IN THE DETAIL OR THE ADMINISTRATION WHEN THESE FUNDS

GO TO THESE AGENCIES. >> COMMISSIONER, SOMETHING I'M HEARING A LOT ON THESE ISSUES, WE WILL SEND YOU A COPY OF THE REPORT. ON THE AGENDA, THERE ARE A LOT OF LISTINGS FOR DRAINAGE. COMMISSIONERS OF THE COURT IN THE PAST HAVE ASKED US TO FIND OUT WAYS WE CAN FIND SOME MORE FUNDING FOR DRAINAGE ISSUES. SO WE WILL TURN THOSE INTO SUPPORT INSTEAD OF MONITOR ON THE AGENDA. OR WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU AND SAY, HEY, THE OMNIBUS BILL IS GOING TO BE FUNDING THESE PROJECTS AND WE NEED A RESOLUTION FROM THE COURT.

>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE GREAT. I THINK THE TWO BIGGEST ISSUES ARE THE DRAINAGE AND THE FUNDING, AND I KNOW FOR SURE AND PRECINCT 2 , COMMISSIONER GONZALES FEELS THAT WAY AS WELL. WE'VE GOT SOME BUILT-IN PARTNERS, AND WE HAVE A NEW TEAM -- A RELATIVELY NEW TEAM THERE AT THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT NUMBER 2. ALSO, THE WATER SYSTEM IN ROB'S TOWN. ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT, WHAT IT NEEDS TO SUSTAIN , OR THESE NEW DEVELOPMENTS, THESE NEW -- YOU KNOW, WE HAVE DEVELOPERS COMING IN AND ALL PARTS OF THE COUNTY OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS WANTING TO DEVELOP, SO THAT'S IMPORTANT.

I WILL LOOK FORWARD TO TALKING TO YOU MORE ABOUT THOSE

OFF-LINE. >> COMMISSIONER, YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THOSE DEVELOPERS. WE ENDED UP LAST SESSION WITH KIND OF A LAST-MINUTE REQUEST FROM SEVERAL COUNTIES UP AND DOWN, BUT NOT JUST ON THE BOARD, BUT ALL ACROSS TEXAS, ASKING THEM TO JOIN US. THERE WERE A COUPLE OF BILLS THAT REALLY WOULD HAVE ERODED THE COUNTIES ABILITY TO REGULATE GOVERNMENT, AND THEY WERE BEING PUSHED. WE ANTICIPATE THOSE COMING BACK THIS NEXT TIME. WE HAD SOME GREAT INPUT FROM THE COUNTIES DEPARTMENTS, AND SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO LOOPING YOU IN ON THOSE AS WELL, BECAUSE THAT WAS A BIG DEFENSIVE POSTURE THAT WE HAD TO TAKE KIND OF LAST-MINUTE LAST TIME. WE ARE GOING TO BE BETTER PREPARED THIS TIME. THEY DID NOT PASS, BY THE WAY. WE ARE LOOKING AT THOSE COMING BACK AT US.

>> THANK YOU, PATRICIA. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND I KNOW WE WILL BE HEARING MORE FROM YOU AS THE SESSION BEGINS, AND IT WILL START GETTING PULLED OUT AND BROUGHT INTO COMMITTEES, WE ARE HERE TO HELP WHATEVER WE NEED TO. COMMISSIONER PUSLEY HAS A

QUESTION, I THINK. >> YES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

APPRECIATE THE INFORMATION. I JUST BEEN HERE A WEEK AND I LOOKED THROUGH SOME OF THE REPORTS THAT YOU PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT . ON A GO FORWARD BASIS, IF WE COULD, I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE, MAYBE A LITTLE MORE DETAIL WITH THE REPORTS WHEN YOU MEET WITH SPECIFIC LEGISLATORS , WHAT THE CONVERSATION WAS ABOUT. AND ALSO, POSSIBLY PUT TOGETHER A LIST OF THE BILLS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED SO FAR THAT YOU THINK WOULD EITHER POSITIVELY OR MOST IMPORTANTLY, NEGATIVELY, IMPACT THE COUNTY.

SO THAT WE CAN BE AWARE AND WATCH FOR THOSE . AND IF WE NEED TO, MEMBERS OF THIS COURT CAN CONTACT OUR RESPECTIVE LEGISLATORS AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE WATCHING OUT FOR US ON THOSE PARTICULAR KINDS OF THINGS.

>> ABSOLUTELY, COMMISSIONER. CURRENTLY, I JUST PULLED THIS UP. WE ARE CURRENTLY TRACKING ABOUT 93 BILLS SPECIFIC TO NUECES COUNTY ISSUES. WE HAVE A WHOLE SEPARATE TRACK ON PROPERTY TAX ISSUES, BECAUSE THOSE ARE VOLUMINOUS BILLS, AND WE WILL PROBABLY ASK KEVIN TO HELP US KIND OF SORT THROUGH THOSE. WE WILL GET YOU BOTH OF THOSE TRACKS, AND ANY OF THEM

[01:45:03]

YOU WANT TO FLAG AND HAVE US GET YOU MORE DETAIL OR GO AND VISIT THAT LEGISLATORS OFFICE WHERE WE HAVE A CONVERSATION OF THE LIKELIHOOD OF THAT BILL GETTING VERY FAR, WE ARE HAPPY

TO DO THAT ANYTIME. >> THINK YOU BOTH AGAIN. WE APPRECIATE YOU JOINING US THIS MORNING, AND WE WILL BE TALKING

[2. Discuss and review the scope of services and qualifications of firms that responded to the initial request for a forensic audit of the health insurance fund and the county auditors' office, and all related matters. ]

[3. Discuss and consider authorizing Nueces County Medical Insurance Consultant, McGriff Insurance Services, LLC to act as the County's liaison to facilitate an administrative accounting of the Boon Chapman (Medical TPA) and Script Care (PBM) financials for a 5-year period beginning October 1st, 2019 through Fiscal Year End September 30, 2024, and all related matters.]

TO YOU SOON. >> THANK YOU ALL.

>> MOVING ON, ITEM NUMBER TWO. AND THREE. I MAY JUMP AROUND A LITTLE BIT . I'M GOING TO TRY TO GET YOU GUYS OUT OF HERE BEFORE WE BREAK, BECAUSE YOU BEEN SITTING HERE. BUT WE HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I HAVE TO BE INVOLVED IN BEFORE I MIGHT POSSIBLY NOT BE HERE THIS AFTERNOON FOR SOME OF THIS. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO GO LONGER THAN I ANTICIPATED. ITEM NUMBER TWO AND THREE IS THE DIRECTION THAT THE COURT INSTRUCTED TERESA TO GO . THEY ARE KIND OF JOINT, SO I PULLED THEM BOTH UP AT THE SAME TIME. BUT TERESA WENT OUT AND TALKED TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. WE CONTACTED SEVERAL PEOPLE TO SEE ABOUT FORENSIC AUDITS AND COMPANIES AND GROUPS THAT WOULD DO THAT , SO TERESA, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO YOU. SHE HAS

SOMETHING FOR US. >> YES, MA'AM. THE SCOPE OF SERVICES WENT OUT TO SIX FIRMS . IT WAS TENTATIVE FOR SERVICES FOR ANY OF THE FIRMS THAT MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN DOING A FORENSIC AUDIT, JUST TO KIND OF PROVIDER QUALIFICATIONS. AND WE RECEIVED TWO RESPONSES . AND I THINK IT WAS THE HOLIDAYS. THE HOLIDAYS PROBABLY DELAYED A LOT OF MORE FEEDBACK FROM OTHER FIRMS. BUT WE DID GET OUR TWO RESPONSES, AND ONE IS FOR CRI ADVISERS, WHICH IS A LOCAL FORM FIRM HERE, AND WE HAVE CHRISTINE SPARKS ONLINE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IN RESOLUTION ECONOMICS, WHICH ANDREW IS ALSO AVAILABLE ONLINE TO DISCUSS THEIR QUALIFICATIONS. THEY DID PROVIDE BACKUP, WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA. I PROVIDED A SUMMARY, THEY PUT ON THE DAIS FOR EVERYONE JUST A SORT OF A LITTLE RECAP. AND AT THE BOTTOM, I DO KIND OF TALK ABOUT FUNDING. AND SO BOTH OF THESE FIRMS, THEY WERE VERY -- THEY ARE QUALIFIED, THEY HAVE EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE , PUBLIC ENTITY EXPERIENCE. THEY HAVE

PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS . >> FROM YOUR DISCUSSION -- I WANT TO POINT OUT SOMETHING. WE INSTRUCTED HER , FIRST, WE WANT THE HEALTHCARE AUDIT, AND QUITE POSSIBLY TO MOVE ON TO A MORE EXTENSIVE AUDIT, BUT WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT FUNDING AND THE COST TO DO THAT. SO I THINK IN THE CONVERSATIONS THAT TERESA AND I HAVE, AND THE COMMUNICATIONS SHE HAS HAD BACK, IT WAS KIND OF GENERALLY THOUGHT THAT IF WE GET ONE STARTED, WE MIGHT -- BECAUSE NOBODY REALLY WANTS TO GIVE US A PRICE , OR IT IS HARD TO DEFINE WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR IN THERE. IF THERE'S PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, WE CAN DO A PRICE ON SOME THINGS. WE HAVE TO ALSO MAKE SURE WE CAN PAY FOR WHATEVER WE ARE GOING TO GET. SO OUR THOUGHTS WERE, MOVING FORWARD WITH A PROFESSIONAL AGREEMENT , UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT, IF WE CHOOSE TO DO THAT, WHERE WE DON'T PUT

OURSELVES IN A BIND . >> JUDGE, IF I MAY, JUST PROCEDURALLY FOR THE COURT, YOU ALL ARE IN A POSITION -- BECAUSE THIS IS A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE, TO GO AHEAD AND SELECT TO YOU WISH TO BASED ON QUALIFICATIONS. AND THEN AFTER YOU HAVE MADE THAT SELECTION, YOU CAN GO TO NEGOTIATIONS OF WHAT PRICING YOU WANT FOR WHAT SPECIFIC SERVICES AND NEGOTIATE WITH THAT CONTRACT WOULD BE AND THEY COME BACK WITH WHAT THE

CONTRACT TERMS WOULD BE. >> WE DON'T HAVE TO DECIDE ON THIS TODAY. WE CAN DECIDE SOMEONE AND YOU CAN WORK OUT

THE DETAILS. PERFECT. >> AND IF WE DECIDE WE DON'T WANT THEM FOR WHATEVER REASON, CAN WE GO BACK?

>> YES. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS COMING -- THE FUNDING SOURCES COUNTY FUNDS, SO YOU ARE WELL WITHIN YOUR RIGHTS TO SELECT WHOEVER YOU WISH. YOU CAN JUST SELECT ONE VENDOR, AND IF WE ARE WITH THEM ON THE NEGOTIATIONS, THERE IS NO RFQ

PROCESS REQUIRED. >> AND WE ONLY HAD TWO TURN IN

-- >> IF YOU CAN'T REACH A RESULT WITHOUT ONE, YOU CAN START OVER AGAIN?

>> YES, YES. >> IF YOU CAN'T WORK IT OUT, YOU COME BACK TO THE NEXT PERSON.

>> THEY ARE BOTH ONLINE, I THOUGHT THEY COULD GIVE YOU A

[01:50:02]

QUICK RECAP OF THEIR QUALIFICATIONS.

>> WHAT IS YOUR RECOMMENDATION? THAT'S WHAT WE ASKED YOU TO DO. I DON'T NEED TO HEAR A DEBATE BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM.

>> AND SINCE WE CAN NEGOTIATE ALL THAT LATER, I THINK WE DON'T REALLY NEED TO HEAR. WE JUST NEED TO SEE WHAT YOU THINK IS BEST. AND WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND CHANGE IT IF THIS DOESN'T WORK OUT A NEGOTIATION.

>> WELL, CRI IS LOCAL. THEY DID SEND OUT A PROPOSAL. THEY BOTH SENT OUT A PROPOSAL, BUT I THINK CRI IS MORE ONLINE WITH THE GOVERNMENT FORENSIC ACCOUNTING. THAT CAN PROBABLY

BE MY CHOICE. >> OKAY.

>> JUDGE, I MAKE A MOTION TO CONDITIONALLY SELECT CRI ADVISERS BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PERSON WE ASKED FOR A RECOMMENDATION FROM , AND CONDITIONALLY UPON , AS COMMISSIONER GONZALES STATED, BEING ABLE TO WORK OUT A FEE ARRANGEMENT WITH THEM THAT WE ARE ABLE TO. THANKS.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. WE NEED TO DO NUMBER THREE? OR DO WE WAIT AND COME BACK WITH THAT ONE? I THINK WE

WAIT. >> NUMBER THREE WAS JUST

ANOTHER OPTION AVAILABLE. >> TABLE 3 AND TWO.

>> MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE NUMBER THREE.

>> UNTIL FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY? SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES

[4. Discuss and consider the Budget Officer job description and post job for applications, and all related matters. ]

UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM NUMBER FOUR. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER -- THANK YOU FOR THE PEOPLE BEING ON. I'M SORRY, I JUST THINK WE ARE

NOT AT THAT POINT YET. >> THINK YOU FOR YOUR

WILLINGNESS. >> DISCUSS AND CONSIDER THE BUDGET OFFICER JOB DESCRIPTION, POST JOB APPLICATIONS. WE WOULD LIKE TO GO OUT FOR POSTING. WE SENT EVERYONE COPIES OF IT. I THINK TERESA HAD A SMALL LIST THAT SHE FELT LIKE SHOULD -- COULD BE INCLUDED IN THERE. I THINK THE JOB LISTING. THERE IS A QUESTION FROM ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS ABOUT THE CENTRAL EMPLOYEE, AND I DO AGREE TAKING IT OUT OF THERE COULD JUST POSSIBLY BE A PART OF THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS TEAM, BUT IT IS NOT AN ESSENTIAL EMPLOYEE. DID YOU PASS OUT YOUR

CHANGES? >> I DIDN'T HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO ANY . I SAW THAT TERESA HAD BEEN THERE AND WOULD AGREE WITH TAKING UP THE CONSIDERED POSITIONAL EMPLOYEE,

AND THEN THE REST OF IT. >> WE NEED TO GET IT POSTED AND SEE IF WE GET SOME APPLICATIONS. I WILL MAKE A MOTION. SO WE CAN DISCUSS. NO , THIS IS OPEN. YOU HAVE A

QUESTION? >> NO.

>> 2ND FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES. >> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE SALARY . SEEMS A LITTLE HIGH . EVEN THE AUDITOR IS NOT A CPA.

BUT I THINK WHAT I WANT TO DO, JUDGE, IS SOMEBODY CAN WORK THEIR WAY UP, YOU KNOW? I EVEN MENTIONED IT TO HER , IS THAT TERESA WOULD BE A GOOD FINANCIAL OFFICER FOR THE COUNTY. I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH HER, SHE DOES A GOOD JOB, SHE KNOWS ALL THE SYSTEMS. WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY, YOU KNOW, WE GO TO HER. SHE'S THE ONE TRAINED TO DO THAT TO BEGIN WITH. I JUST THINK THAT -- MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO MOVE

HER UP. >> SHE CAN APPLY, COMMISSIONER, BUT LET ME BE CLEAR -- THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS TO POST FOR THE JOB. WE ALREADY VOTED FOR THE SALARY IN THE POSITION AND THAT STUFF IS ALREADY BEEN DONE.

>> YEAH, WE DID. YOU VOTED FOR IT.

>> WE VOTED BECAUSE WE WANTED IT TO BE A SIMILAR PAY SCALE AS

THE AUDITORS. >> I REMEMBER THE AUDITOR , BUT

-- >> THE ITEM TODAY IS ONLY ABOUT

POSTING FOR THE JOB TO APPLY. >> I'VE ALSO GOT SOME OTHER CHANGES HERE. CAN WE TALK ABOUT SOME CHANGES OR SOME

RECOMMENDATIONS? >> NO, COMMISSIONER.

>> WHEN I TALKED TO TERESA, I JUST THOUGHT THAT MAYBE THE RESPONSIBILITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS, I THINK

[01:55:02]

THERE'S SOME ITEMS HERE THAT I THINK WOULD BE PART OF THAT.

YOU KNOW, TO REALLY GO TO PRINT. YOU KNOW, I JUST THINK THAT THE RESPONSIBILITIES AND RECOMMENDATION NEED TO BE A

LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC. >> WE TOOK THE APPLICATION FROM STEVE WATERMAN'S APPLICATION WHEN HE WAS HERE WITH THE SAME RESPONSIBILITIES. WE SENT IT AROUND TO EVERYONE TO MAKE ADDITIONAL CHANGES OR INCLUSIONS .

>> I WAS GONE MOST OF THE HOLIDAYS. ALL RIGHT. I DON'T

HAVE A PROBLEM WITH POSTING IT. >> YEAH, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE POSTED FOR A MONTH. WE ARE NOT BRINGING THIS BACK UP FOR INTERVIEWS OR ANYTHING UNTIL FEBRUARY.

>> I WILL JUST MAKE THE MOTION TO INCLUDE TRACES RECOMMENDATION TO THE JOB POSTING TO TAKING UP ESSENTIAL

EMPLOYEE -- >> WAIT, WAIT. I ALREADY MADE THE MOTION SO WE CAN DISCUSS, SO WE ARE TO HAVE A MOTION.

>> I WOULD LIKE A MOTION TO AMEND, IS WHAT I SHOULD'VE SAID. MY APOLOGIES. TO AMEND TO INCLUDE TRACES RECOMMENDATION TO TAKE OUT THE WORDS ESSENTIAL EMPLOYEE. I SECONDED THAT MOTION, YOU ARE CORRECT. I USE THE WRONG WORD.

>> AND I SECOND YOUR MOTION. >> SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT.

WE TOOK AWAY -- THE MOTION IS TO TAKE AWAY THE ESSENTIAL FUNCTION, RIGHT? THAT IS MAINLY DURING EMERGENCIES. AND SO THAT RESPONSIBILITY RIGHT NOW, SAY WE HAD ANOTHER WINTER STORM RIGHT NOW, WE WOULD BE THE ONE COLLECTING ALL THE FIGURES TO HELP US RECOUP SOME OF THAT WITH THE AUDITOR. I AM JUST THINKING LOGISTICALLY, SOMEONE SHOULD BE PHYSICALLY THERE. SO EMERGENCY HAPPENS , AND ARE AUDITORS --

>> AND EVERYBODY HAS A BACKUP, AND NOW OUR BUDGET OFFICER CHOOSES TO GO, SHE WOULD BE WELCOME TO GO AND DO THAT AS WELL. IT IS JUST TAKING OUT THE MANDATORY REQUIREMENT, BECAUSE COMMISSIONER PUSLEY FELT THAT -- SORRY, CHESNEY, FELT LIKE THAT WAS MAKING IT A RETALIATORY ACTION IF THEY WERE ABLE TO ATTEND. SO MOST LIKELY, THIS PERSON WILL SERVE AS OUR PERSON DIRECTLY IN THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS IF AND -- NOT JUST IF, BUT LET'S SAY WHEN WE HAVE AN EMERGENCY.

>> AND THEY ARE ON THE EMERGENCY TEAM.

>> RIGHT. JUST A LITTLE CONFUSING. BECAUSE IF YOU'RE PAYING THAT MUCH, THEN YOU EXPECT THEM TO BE THERE WHEN THE EMERGENCIES HAPPEN, GOD FORBID. ALSO, I DON'T KNOW -- DID THIS RECOMMENDATION THAT WE HAVE ON THESE ITEMS, THE SEVEN ITEMS, DID THOSE GET INCLUDED ON LINE, OR DO WE NEED TO READ

THOSE OUT VERBALLY? >> THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

>> WE SHOULD READ THEM OUT . >> IS A RECOMMENDATIONS.

>> YES. HIS MOTION WAS TO INCLUDE THE AMOUNTS.

>> YES, BECAUSE IF SOMEONE DOESN'T HAVE THAT COPY, THEY

DON'T KNOW. >> YOU ARE 100% RIGHT . I WILL BE HAPPY TO READ THOSE AND I APPRECIATE THOSE CLARIFICATIONS. THOSE ARE INTERFACED WITH ALL ELECTED AND APPOINTED DEPARTMENT HEADS ON A REGULAR BASIS AS ISSUES COME UP, WORK DIRECTLY WITH THE COUNTY JUDGE ON FINANCIAL DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS OF THE COUNTY, PARTICIPATE IN VARIOUS MEETINGS ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY JUDGE OR DEPARTMENTS OR OTHER ENTITIES UPON REQUEST OR MONITOR STATUS OF VARIOUS PRODUCTS, OR DISSIPATE IN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS SUCH AS PROPERTY LEASE AGREEMENTS, MANAGEMENT CONTRACTS, COMPLETE DEPARTMENT BUDGETS FOR WORKING WITH THE -- AND A NUMBER OF EVALUATION COMMITTEE FOR ALL RF CUES AND RF FEES ON BEHALF OF

THE COURT. >> I GOT ONE MORE THING. I DON'T KNOW, I SAW SOMETHING ABOUT -- DO WE NEED THE P CARD? I DON'T KNOW HOW HE'S GOING TO DO --

>> THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO. >> THAT'S WHAT GOES OVER THE BUDGET SO MUCH. YOU ASKED FOR IT.

>> THERE'S NO WAY HE'S GOING TO BE COMING HERE FIRST --

>> NO, THEY ARE GOING TO MONITOR TO MAKE SURE THAT IS RIGHT. THAT WAS THE THING YOU WANTED IN HERE, WAS A P CARD.

>> OUR DEPARTMENTS DON'T GO OVER THERE BUDGET.

>> THEY WATCH THEIR BUDGETS, BUT THEY DON'T WATCH THEIR PURCHASES INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET. IT IS TO HELP MONITOR

[02:00:04]

DEPARTMENTS TO KEEP FROM GOING OVER THE BUDGET, AND IT IS A BUDGET OFFER AND THE MAIN FOCUS IS GOING TO BE TO MONITOR ALL

-- >> THE PURCHASING BOARD, WHICH I SURE YOU'RE STILL A MEMBER OF, YOU ALL CAN DO SOME, WE CALL IT, YOU CAN MAKE CHANGES FOR THE PURCHASING BOARD IF YOUR SUCCESS WITH THE PURCHASING BOARD. WE ALL HAVE PROBLEMS WITH HOW THE P CARD STUFF IS GOING ON, SO WE ARE JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO CLEAN THAT UP. THAT WAS THE

ONE YOU WANTED IN. >> TERESA.

>> YOU ALL NEED TO DETERMINE THE EXACT TITLE FOR THIS POSITION. BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND WE CANNOT USE BUDGET OFFICER.

>> LIAISON ON THERE. >> I WAS ONE OF MY SUGGESTIONS TO CALL IT BUDGET OFFICER LIAISON.

>> WE CAN CALL IT WHATEVER WE WANT. WERE NOT DESIGNATING IT

AS A BUDGET. >> I DID PUT AN OPTION ON THERE, COMMISSIONERS COURT BUDGET ADMINISTRATOR.

>> BUDGET OFFICER LIAISON. >> BUDGET OFFICER LIAISON?

>> YEAH. >> COMMISSIONERS COURT. KENNETH A COMMISSIONERS COURT SO PEOPLE KNOW?

>> YEAH. >> SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE AMENDMENT TO ADD THE -- THE ITEMS -- YES, MA'AM.

>> WE AT THE TITLE AS PART OF YOUR MOTION. NUECES COUNTY COUNTY BUDGET OFFICER LIAISON . COMMISSIONERS COURT, SORRY.

IT'S KIND OF LONG. >> YOU COULD JUST A COMMISSIONERS COURT. HE DOES A NUECES COUNTY. THAT'S A

MOUTHFUL. >> THEY ARE GOING TO KNOW WHO

WE ARE TALKING TO, YES. YES. >> I AGREE THAT WHAT I WAS HERE BEFORE, IT WAS ALWAYS A SOURCE OF CONSTERNATION . BUT I THINK AT SOME POINT, AND MAYBE PURCHASING WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT TO HANDLE THIS, THE COUNTY SHOULD DEVELOP A LIST OF APPROVALS FOR THOSE LOCATIONS WHERE IF THEY WANT TO GO GET THEIR AUTOMOBILE SERVICED OR THEY WANT TO GO BY WHATEVER, THAT THEY HAVE BASICALLY AN APPROVED LIST OF VENDORS THAT HAS SUBMITTED PRICES TO THIS PUBLIC ENTITY THROUGH PURCHASING OR WHATEVER SO WE KNOW WE ARE NOT GETTING

GOUGED. >> BUT THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME

TO THE PURCHASING BOARD. >> HOWEVER. BUT I JUST THINK THAT AT SOME POINT, THE CITY IS JUDICIOUS ABOUT THIS. IF SOMEBODY IN ONE OF THE DEPARTMENTS WANTS TO GET THEIR VEHICLE WORKED ON OR THEIR COMPUTER WORKED ON OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE , THOSE HAVE GONE THROUGH , BASICALLY SCRUTINIZING TO MAKE SURE WE ARE GETTING THE BEST PRICES

JUST A SUGGESTION. >> DULY NOTED. WE ARE GOOD. SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO AMEND THE BUDGET OFFICER -- THE COMMISSIONERS COURT BUDGET OFFICER LIAISON POSITION . SO WITH THE AMENDMENTS, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT. AND HE OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES.

NOW, I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE MOTION. TO APPROVE THE JOB NOW. YES, OKAY. YES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE . AND HE OPPOSED.

MOTION PASSES, AND THE JOB CAN BE POSTED , AND HR IS WATCHING

WITH THOSE CHANGES. >> JUDGE, WE WOULD THEN NEED TO COME UP WITH A TIMEFRAME ON HOW WE ARE GOING TO DO THIS. WE ARE GOING TO BRING IT BACK FOR INTERVIEWS. BUT WE PARED DOWN,

[02:05:02]

WE EACH PUT IN OUR TOP -- OUR PAST TWO OR THREE, WHATEVER WE WANT TO DO. I'M NOT TRYING TO --

>> WE DID THAT THE LAST TIME. WE GOT ALL THE APPLICANT AND WE TURNED IN OUR REPORT TO THEM, WHAT WE THOUGHT, AND WE HAD THE

TOP TWO. >> EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT THE

JUDGE IS GOING TO BE GONE. >> IT WAS GOING TO BE POSTED THROUGH THE MONTH OF JANUARY OR TO THE END OF JANUARY OF AT LEAST THIS MONTH, AND THEN WE WILL BRING IT BACK UP, AND ALL THE APPLICANTS WILL BE PASSED OUT TO EACH OF OUR OFFICES, AND THEN PROBABLY FOR THE FIRST MEETING, WE WOULD PROBABLY LIKE

TO ADDRESS THIS. >> I WOULD THINK WE COULD DO

INTERVIEWS. >> I WILL BE HERE. I WILL BE BACK. I COULD DO IT ON THE WEEKEND WHEN I COME BACK.

>> I KNOW YOU ARE. I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE AS MUCH SAY AS EVERYONE ELSE DOES.

>> I ASSURE YOU, I WILL BE WORKING.

>> WE WANT TO POST IT FOR HOW LONG, WOULD BE THE QUESTION. WE NEED TO PUT THAT FOR DIRECTION FOR THE STAFF, AND WE WOULD HOPE TO DO INTERVIEWS, SO THAT EVERYBODY LOOKING TO APPLY FOR THIS JOB KNOWS THAT WE WOULD DO INTERVIEWS IN THE FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY FOR THAT POSITION AFTER BEING PARED DOWN AND

CAPACITY FROM THIS COURT. >> IT'S USUALLY OPEN FOR HOW

MUCH? >> TWO, THREE WEEKS.

>> WE CAN POST IT UNTIL THE 24TH.

>> SO THIS -- THIS WILL BE OPEN UNTIL THE 24TH OF JANUARY?

>> IF WE DON'T GET APPLICATIONS, WE WILL HAVE TO REOPEN IT. WE CAN POST IT FOR THE TWO WEEKS. IF IT GETS OUT ON THE 10TH, THE WEEK OF THE 13TH OF THE WEEK OF THE 20TH, CLOSE IT ON THE 24TH, AND THEN ONCE THEY SEND THEM OUT TO US FOR REVIEW, AND THEN POSSIBLY --

>> WE NEED TO MAKE THAT PART OF THE MOTION?

>> I'M TRYING TO GET THAT DOWN. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE

BLAST THAT OUT. >> IS GOING TO POST ON JANUARY THE 10TH, AND CLOSE ON THE 24TH.

>> THEY ARE GIVING INSTRUCTIONS. I DON'T THINK

IT'S PART OF THE MOTION. >> WHY WOULD WE POSTED TODAY?

>> IF SHE CAN GET IT READY. >> I WANT TO GIVE AS MUCH TIME AS WE CAN TO GET GOOD QUALITY APPLICANTS.

>> CLOSING DATE ON THE 24TH. ASAP.

>> THE SECOND MEETING OF FEBRUARY.

>> WE CAN POSTPONE IT IF WE CAN GET IT DONE. BUT THEN WE WOULD STILL -- UNLESS WE DON'T GET APPLICATIONS, THEN WE WOULD STILL TRY TO DO INTERVIEWS ON THE EIGHTH. OR, I'M SORRY, THE FIFTH. THE FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY.

[6. Discuss and consider approval of an Interlocal Agreement between Nueces County and Nueces County Hospital District relating to the provision of certain County employee benefits, including but not limited to health insurance, to Hospital District employees and other related matters; initial term October 1, 2024 - September 30, 2025. ]

>> DEMO DOESN'T NEED A MOTION OR ANYTHING. WE CAN MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER'S SIX. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN NUECES COUNTY AND NUECES COUNTY RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN COUNTY EMPLOYEE BENEFIT BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE HEALTH INSURANCE. A HOSPITAL DISTRICT EMPLOYEE. I MET WITH JENNY, AND THEY SAT BACK AND FORTH WITH THE ATTORNEYS. THE LANGUAGE WE DID , WE TALKED TO JOHNNY HICKMAN. HE WAS OKAY WITH ADDING THE ONE SENTENCE IN THERE. I MADE THE PHONE CALL AS WELL IF WE WOULD APPROVE THIS LANGUAGE FOR THEIR CLAIMS AND FAMILY TO THE STOPLOSS AMOUNT WOULD BE PAID BY THE HOSPITAL BUDGET. WE DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY'VE EVER GONE OVER, THEIR CONTRACTS AS THEY ARE PAYING THE 10% OVER AND MOVING TOWARDS NEXT YEAR . IF THEY DO GO OVER, AND NEEDS TO WORK THE OTHER WAY. IF WE HAVE TO PAY, YOU ALL SHOULD COVER YOUR EMPLOYEES COMPLETELY, AND THIS TAKES CARE

OF THAT SITUATION. >> JUDGE, DO YOU FEEL LIKE THIS AGREEMENT COVERS THE INTENT OF THE COURT, WHICH SEEMS TO BE -- I'M JUST ASKING BECAUSE YOU SEEM TO BE INTIMATELY INVOLVED WITH IT AND I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK ON THIS, AT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT NOW IS BASICALLY -- THEY ARE PAYING FOR THEIR

COVERAGE AND THE COUNTY IS NOT? >> JENNY WORKED WITH THEM ON

THE LANGUAGE. >> GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME.

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

[8. Receive 2024 programmatic update from Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service - Family & Community Health Unit.]

AYE. AND HE OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. I AM SO SORRY, NORMA, BUT THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE . AND THEY TRIED FOR

[02:10:01]

MONTHS. THAT'S THE REASON WE PUT THEM ON HERE. I'VE BEEN TOLD THEY WERE GOING TO BE BRIEF. SO THANK YOU FOR BEING

HERE. >> THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO BE HERE TODAY. SO I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE MY COWORKERS. WE HAD LIVED BRADSHAW, BUT SHE HAD A PROGRAM TO GO OVER. SHE IS THE HEALTH AGENT THAT WORKS PRIMARILY WITH TEXAS INITIATIVE. I HAVE RACHEL GOLDEN HERE WHO IS THE HEALTH EXTENSION AGENT WITH PRAIRIE VIEW A&M EXTENSION, AND EVETTE HUSSEY, WHO IS THE EXTENSION AGENT WITH THE EXTENSION NUTRITION EDUCATION PROGRAM. EVETTE ALSO HAS FOUR NUTRITION EDUCATORS AT WORK WITH BOTH YOUTH AND ADULT , AND WE HAVE ONE VACANCY WITH A BETTER LIVING FOR TEXANS PROGRAM.

THERE'S QUITE A FEW OF US TO WORK ON YOUR FAMILY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH, AND WE ARE FORTUNATE TO HAVE QUITE A FEW OF THESE OTHER PROGRAMS THAT WORK TOGETHER IN THE COUNTY. SO WHETHER WE ARE LEGISLATIVELY FUNDED, OUR MAIN GOAL IS THAT WE SERVE AND PROVIDE THE CITIZENS OF NUECES COUNTY WITH RELEVANT HEALTH AND WELLNESS PROGRAMS THAT FOCUS ON NUTRITION , CHRONIC DISEASE MANAGEMENT, PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, MENTAL HEALTH, PARENTING AMONG A LOT MORE. SO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US. WE APPRECIATE WE HAVE THE SPACE HERE IN THE COUNTY TO MANAGE THE DAY-TO-DAY PROGRAMS. WE HAVE SOME BOOKLETS THAT WE ARE GOING TO LEAVE WITH YOU ALL THE CONTAINER ANNUALS SUMMARIES FOR OUR PROGRAMS. THE FIRST PAGE AND THAT BOOKLET HAS AN OVERVIEW OF THE ENTIRE COUNTY, SO ALL COUNTY AGENTS, DEMOGRAPHICS, PROGRAMMATIC NUMBERS, ALONG WITH A SHORT SUMMARY OF WHAT THOSE AGENTS THAT SERVED IN NUECES COUNTY FOR 2024 HAD A LITTLE BIT GOING ON. SO IF YOU HIGHLIGHT THAT -- FOR INCLUDING TODAY, WE HAD AN ADDITIONAL TWO SCHOOLS TO OUR LEARN, EAT, GO PROGRAM. THAT'S ARE IN SCHOOL GARDENING PROGRAM. WE SAW OVER 400 THIRD-GRADERS AND HOW TO PLANT, FEED, MAINTAIN, AND HARVEST OVER 230 POUNDS OF VEGETABLES THIS PAST YEAR. OUR CHRONIC DISEASE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM REMAINS IMPACTFUL FOR PARTICIPANTS BY HELPING THEM MANAGE AND FACE THE CHALLENGES WITH TYPE TWO DIABETES, HYPERTENSION, AND OBESITY. THE WALK ACROSS TEXAS PROGRAM CONTINUES TO BE ONE OF OUR BEST PARTICIPATED PHYSICAL ACTIVITY PROGRAMS. WE HAD JUST OVER 330 PARTICIPANTS THIS PAST YEAR LEARN THE BENEFIT OF MAKING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY A HABIT. AND SO OUR WALK ACROSS TEXAS PROGRAM HAD AN ECONOMIC IMPACT OF OVER $2.1 MILLION JUST THIS PAST YEAR WITH THE CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE SAVINGS OF JUST UNDER 1 MILLION, AND TYPE TWO DIABETES SAVINGS OF APPROXIMATELY $1.2 MILLION, ALL IN 2024. SO THROUGH OUR VOLUNTEER PROGRAM, HEALTHY CELL TEXAS YOUTH AMBASSADORS CONTINUE TO DELIVER EDUCATION TO BOTH YOUTH AND ADULTS. 2024, THEY DELIVERED OVER 220 HOURS OF COMMUNITY EDUCATION TO MORE THAN 1300 YOUTH WITH A LARGE MAJORITY OF THAT BEING THROUGH AN ANTI-VAPING CAMPAIGN. SO WE HAD ONE HEALTH AMBASSADOR THAT TOOK THE LEAD ON THAT. SHE SAW THAT THAT WAS IMPORTANT, SHE SAW THAT THAT WAS AN ISSUE, AND I BELIEVE SHE IS A JUNIOR IN HIGH SCHOOL. PRAIRIE VIEW A&M EXTENSION DEVELOPED THE EXTENSION PROGRAM, WHICH IS AIMED AT SUPPORTING CHILDREN AND FAMILIES WITH SPECIAL NEEDS. SO THESE ARE JUST A FEW MORE HIGHLIGHTS FROM 2024. WE HOPE THAT WHEN YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME, YOU CAN READ OVER OUR SUMMARIES, LEARN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT OUR PROGRAMS, AND IF YOU HAVE MORE QUESTIONS OR NEED MORE INFORMATION, WE ARE ALWAYS AVAILABLE.

>> THANK YOU, NORMA. YOU ARE ALWAYS COMING IN HERE COMMUNICATING WITH US I SEE YOU OUT THERE AS WELL.

>> THANK YOU. WE ARE HERE ANYTIME YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU NEED. I'M GOING TO LEAVE THESE IN YOUR OFFICE TO GET TO. THANK

[9. Discuss and approve the revised Jury Donation Letter, pursuant to Texas Government Code 61.003.]

YOU. >> MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER NINE, JENNY, DID WE RESOLVE THAT ISSUE, OR DID WE NEED TO

TABLE? >> I BELIEVE THAT THE CLERK IS WAITING ON TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE .

>> SO WE NEED TO TABLE AND BRING IT BACK?

>> AS LONG AS -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT ME TO CALL AND SEE

-- >> WELL, IF SHE CAN'T -- IF THE STATUTE SAYS SHE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DONATE ANY OR ALL, IN OUR PROGRAM ONLY ALLOWS US TO DONATE THE FULL AMOUNT, I WOULD ASSUME WE NEED TO TABLE UNTIL WE CLEAR UP THE ISSUE. I WILL

MAKE THE MOTION TO TABLE. >> THE PROBLEM IS, OUR SYSTEM WON'T ALLOW A PERSON TO DONATE ONLY A PORTION. IT ONLY ALLOWS THEM TO TAKE ALL OF IT. IF THEY WANT TO DONATE A PORTION, WE

[02:15:02]

HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SEPARATE. YES.

>> SO THEY NEED TO BRING THIS BACK WHEN OUR TECHNOLOGY CAN ACCEPT WHAT THE INDIVIDUAL WANTS TO DONATE.

>> YES. >> YOU WANT TO BRING IT BACK AT

THE NEXT MEETING? >> IT IS A SIMPLE THING TO FIX IT. WE CAN BRING IT BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING. I WOULD ASSUME AS SOON AS THEY GET THE ISSUE, THEY CAN BRING IT BACK ON.

>> MAKING A MOTION TO TABLE TO THE NEXT MEETING IN JANUARY.

[10. Discuss and consider allocating economic development contracts for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 from funds available in the amount of $198,067 in the Capital Credits Administration Department #13790, and all related matters.]

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AND HE OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ALLOCATING DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FROM FUNDS AVAILABLE OF 198,000. WE HAD ALREADY BUDGETED IN OUR BUDGET 125 THOUSAND OF THIS , SO -- IN YOUR PACKETS, THERE IS A LIST OF WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR. WE CAN APPROVE ALL OF THOSE AND STILL HAVE A FUND BALANCE OF 88,000 IF YOU ALL WISH TO APPROVE EVERYTHING TODAY.

>> WAIT, I THOUGHT WE DIDN'T -- SO -- OKAY. THERE'S A FUND BALANCE, BUT THEN THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH THAT COMES IN PER YEAR.

WHICH -- WHICH -- >> IT COMES IN AT THE END OF

THE YEAR, LIKE IN SEPTEMBER. >> IT'S ONLY ABOUT 60 --

>> IT'S BEEN AVERAGING -- I DID ATTACH A SPREADSHEET THAT SHOW KIND OF A TREND OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, HOW MUCH WE HAVE RECEIVED. OUR COMMISSIONER THIS PAST YEAR, I THINK WE ONLY

RECEIVED 56,000. >> SO WE ARE GOING TO CUT THIS

FUND IF WE DO THIS? >> YOU WON'T IF YOU -- 125 IS WHAT YOU ARE BUDGETING. SO THAT REDUCES THE AMOUNT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE FROM THE CAPITAL CREDIT. THAT IS THE FUND

BALANCE. >> YOU JUST GIVEN THIS BACKUP TO SHOW WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR? I THINK THAT WAS ACTUALLY OUR INTENT ON SOME OF THIS. THE MONEY THAT WE'VE ALREADY GIVEN TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CAN BE PULLED OUT OF THIS. BECAUSE THAT'S A LINE ITEM. YOU SAID 125?

>> 125, 50 K . IT IS OUR ABC. THERE IS 10K, AND THEN THE UNITED CHAMBER FOR THE SOUTH TEXAS LITERARY TASK FORCE , 40 AND 25. SO THEY ARE ALREADY BUDGETED IN 25 RIGHT NOW FOR

THE GENERAL FUND. >> -125 WOULD BE 110, RIGHT? AND WE HAVE -- I'M SORRY, HOW MUCH IS THE TOTAL?

>> 125 IS IN THE GENERAL FUND. OH, 198 . 198 , 069.

>> SO IF WE DID WHAT YOU SUGGEST OR WHAT IS BEEN PROPOSED , WE'D END UP WITH ABOUT $78,000 LEFT, AND WE ONLY GET ABOUT 60,000 A YEAR. SO AT SOME POINT, WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO AS MUCH. SO WE NEED TO KEEP THAT IN MIND. AS WE GIVE MONEY, PEOPLE KEEP EXPECTING THE SAME AMOUNTS OF MONEY, SO WE NEED TO BE JUST COGNIZANT OF THAT. WE GIVE THE 110, AND WE DO SAY WE ARE GOING TO DO WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR AND MOVE ON, WHICH IS -- I DON'T KNOW, LIKE ANTONIO GARCIA, I THOUGHT THAT WAS KIND OF A SPECIAL ONE-TIME DEAL. IF WE DO THAT, MY POINT IS, NEXT YEAR, WERE GOING TO NOT BE ABLE TO GIVE AS MUCH BECAUSE WE DON'T GET AS MUCH IN. WE ONLY GET 60,000 WERE TRYING TO GIVE AWAY 110, THIS COULD BE A DIMINISHING RETURN IT SOME POINT. THAT'S JUST HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DO IT. I'M JUST POINTING THAT OUT.

>> SO ON THE CC RDC , ARE WE GETTING A BARGAIN TO GET A SEAT ON THERE? I KNOW THERE'S A TYPICAL CONTRIBUTION LEVEL. I MEAN, WE UPDATE, BUT WE ARE NOT --

>> WE PUT 50 IN . WHAT THEY ARE SAYING IS, THEREFORE, WE WOULD PULL THIS OUT. I THINK WHAT WOULD HAPPEN WAS, I DON'T THINK WE INTENDED TO GET THIS MUCH OUT OF CAPITAL CREDIT/YEAR, BUT IT JUST HAPPENED. AND SO NOW, WE'VE GOT IT BACK IN THE BUDGET AS WE INTENDED FOR IT TO BE. SO THE 50 -- THE 50, THE 20, THE 40, AND THE 25 NOW WOULD COME OUT OF THIS MASTER LIST, AND THAT WOULD LEAVE 110,000. IF WE JUST SAID WERE GOING TO DO THE REST OF IT THAT HASN'T BEEN FUNDED.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> FOR ME, MOST OF THESE -- I WOULD SAY ALL OF THEM YOU COULD ARGUE ARE IMPORTANT. YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I DO AGREE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE CHIPPING AWAY PRETTY QUICKLY AT THE AMOUNTS THAT WE HAVE. WE'VE ALL DONE THIS ON THE PREVIOUS YEARS AND THEY DO THIS PRETTY MUCH EVERY

[02:20:01]

YEAR. IF THERE'S A PARTICULAR GROUP ON HERE THAT NEEDS MORE MONEY, THEN WE DO IT. AND MAYBE WE JUST SAY, BLANKET STATEMENT.

AND BARRING THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, DOES EVERYBODY GET A BLANKET AMOUNT? WHAT IF WE WANT TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE, THEN WE DO. THAT WOULDN'T TOUCH, LIKE, NORTHWEST BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, ALL THOSE THINGS. BUT IF WE WANTED TO TRY TO SAVE SOME MONEY NOW, NOW THAT I SAY THAT THERE ISN'T, THAT WOULD BE MAYBE ONE WAY TO DO IT. EVERYBODY ONLY GETS 10,000, AND NOW AS WE GET MORE, WE EACH DO THAT. WE HAVE NOT ALREADY

FUNDED IN OUR BUDGET. >> WE'VE ALREADY FUNDED IN THE BUDGET -- WE FUNDED LAST YEAR OUT OF THIS BUDGET. BUT WE'VE ALREADY FUNDED IN THE OTHER BUDGET , THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, SOUTHWEST MILITARY TASK FORCE, AND THAT'S A $125,000. SO THAT WOULD COME OUT, RIGHT? AND I WAS EVEN THINKING -- AND I HATE TO REDUCE, BUT I WAS THINKING EVEN MAYBE WE GO TO 7500 FOR THE REST THAT ARE ON HERE AND NOT FUNDED. SO WE DON'T JUST GOT OURSELVES GOING FORWARD.

BECAUSE HE GAVE MORE LAST YEAR BECAUSE HE HAD IT. WE DON'T HAVE IT NOW. MEANING, WE ARE GETTING WAY MORE THAN WE ARE GETTING IN. THAT IS NOT FINANCIALLY PRUDENT. BECAUSE EVENTUALLY, WE ARE GOING TO GOT THAT FUND IF THAT'S WHAT WE

DO. >> IS THAT YOUR MOTION?'S

>> IT'S JUST DISCUSSION. >> WE ARE TALKING. LIKE FOR ME, I ALWAYS GIVE MORE THAN WHAT WE GIVE. SO THAT'S JUST BECAUSE THAT'S A PRIORITY. TO ME, WE ALL HAVE THAT OPTION. BECAUSE I AGREE, THAT IS KIND OF SCARY THAT WE ARE CHIPPING AWAY, AND IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THE FUNDING TO HELP COVER THAT IN THE NEXT YEAR. THAT IS JUST MY WORRY. IF WE COLLECTIVELY SAY NO, THIS IS GOOD, AND YOU STILL WANT TO GO ON TOP OF THAT, I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR THIS, BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAVE TO GET THROUGH THIS FAIRLY QUICKLY. I JUST WANTED TO THROW

THAT OUT THERE. >> THE DOWNTOWN MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, NORTHWEST, ANTONIO GARCIA -- WESTSIDE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION WOULD ALL GET $7500 COMING UP WITH THE FUND. THAT WAY, IT EQUALIZES EVERYTHING THAT IS IN HERE, AND IF SOMEONE WANTS TO PUT ANOTHER ONE IN THAT WE HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT, BUT I THINK WE COVERED EVERYTHING, THEN I WOULD EQUALIZE -- EVERYBODY IS GETTING THE SAME. AND THAT STILL MEANS THEY ARE GETTING MORE THAN EVERYBODY ELSE. BUT THESE FOLKS -- IT IS WHAT IT IS.

>> I FIGURED MIGHT OUT DIFFERENTLY, WHERE IF WE CUT BACK ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, 45, AND INCREASE THE ART CENTER TO 10 AND THE UNITED CHAMBER TO 25 , THAT KIND OF REALLY GIVES

US THE AMOUNT THAT WE NEED. >> WE ALREADY FUNDED THOSE.

THEY ARE ALREADY IN THE BUDGET. >> THEY ARE OUT. THIS IS KIND OF CONFUSING. WE HAVE ALREADY FUNDED THEM. WE HAVE ALREADY FUNDED THEM. THE CHAMBER OUT, WE HAVE ALREADY FUNDED THEM.

THAT I MISS ONE? I THINK THOSE FOUR. WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO CONSIDER, BECAUSE THEY HAVE ALREADY BEEN FUNDED.

>> RIGHT. THIS JUST SHOWS HOW WE FUNDED IT LAST. RIGHT. WE FUNDED IT JUST LIKE THIS FROM CAPITAL CREDITS LAST YEAR . FOR THIS YEAR, THEY ARE BACK IN GENERAL FUND.

>> WE DON'T HAVE TO FUND THE AMOUNT OF CAPITAL CREDITS ANYMORE. WE JUST DID IT LAST YEAR. SO NOW IT WOULD BE -- IF SOMEONE HAS A DIFFERENT NUMBER, YOU CAN SHIP DOWN, THE DOWNTOWN MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, PADRE ALLEN, PORT A, A SIDE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, AND ANTONIO GARCIA WOULD ALL GET $7500. THEY ALL GET THE SAME. WHICH IS ABOUT WHAT WE BRING IN EACH YEAR.

>> I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION. >> ANYBODY CAN ADD, OR IF THERE'S ANOTHER THAT WE NEED A COUPLE OF FUNDS FOR.

>> THE COMMISSIONER ASKED FOR BACKGROUND.

[02:25:05]

>> THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. I'M SORRY, I TRIED TO GET THROUGH THE WHOLE AGENDA AND ASK QUESTIONS OF EVERY DEPARTMENT BEFORE THE MEETING SO I WOULD HAVE TO SLOW THINGS UP, BUT I DID NOT GET TO TALK TO ANYONE ABOUT THIS. SO I'M A LITTLE BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL HERE. SO IS THIS A SPECIAL FUND THAT WE SET UP, THAT THE COUNTY SENT UP IN LIEU OF OUR -- EACH COMMISSIONER GOT SO MUCH MONEY TO HAND OUT TO NONPROFITS EVERY YEAR. IS THIS THE SAME MONEY OR IS THIS MONEY WE TOOK OUT A

PLEDGES SOMEWHERE? >> COMMISSIONER, THIS MONEY COMES FROM WHEN THEY HAVE THE DIVORCE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURT AND HAD A FEE FOR THE FAMILY PROTECTION FEE. THOSE FUNDS WERE GENERATED TO THE ACCOUNT AND WE PLAY CHILDREN ADVOCACY PROGRAMS FROM IT. IN ANOTHER PART OF THIS

FUND -- >> CAN YOU MOVE A LITTLE CLOSER TO YOUR MIC, TERESA QUESTION MARK THEY ARE GOING TO GIVE ME A SPEAKER HERE. MY HEARING HAS NOT IMPROVED AND THEY LEFT

HERE. >> THESE FUNDS COME FROM THE FAMILY PROTECTION FEE. AND ALSO, THE STATE COMPTROLLER FOR THE CAPITAL CREDITS, THEY WERE IN THIS ACCOUNT . THE FAMILY PROTECTION FEE FUNDS ARE NO LONGER THERE. THE ONLY MONEY IN THIS ACCOUNT ARE THE COMPTROLLER FUNDS.

>> WE START USING THAT FUND TO HEAD OUT TO THESE

ORGANIZATIONS? >> LAST YEAR WAS THE FIRST

YEAR. >> BUT THE STATE GIVES US

PERMISSION TO DO THAT?'S >> YES, SIR.

>> SOMETHING ON THE HORIZON THAT I DIDN'T DO BEFORE.

ANOTHER SPECIFIC QUESTION WITH RESPECT TO THE CORPUS CHRISTI REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPERATION , DID WE BUDGET TO GIVE IN FOR $50,000? SO IS THIS TO TAKE CARE OF THE 50 OR WAS THIS ADDITIONAL MONEY WE GAVE THEM?

>> LAST YEAR, WE GAVE THIS TO FUND THE 50+10, BECAUSE I WAS OF THE DEBATE. BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF FUNDING LAST YEAR. WE PULLED OUT LAST YEAR, BUT NOW WE GOT IT BACK BEFORE WE PUT IT BACK IN THE BUDGET.

>> SO DO WE STILL NEED TO GIVE THEM THE 60? IS THIS MONEY THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DISTRIBUTED?

>> NO, SIR. THIS IS LAST YEAR. >> NOT GIVING ANYBODY OUT OF THAT FUND ANYTHING RIGHT NOW. THE MOTION IS TO GIVE ALL THE OTHER ENTITIES THAT HAVE VARIOUS AMOUNTS 7500 EACH ,

WHICH WILL MAKE OUR TOTAL -- >> I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOUR HONOR. MY QUESTION IS, THESE FUNDS ALL BEEN DISTRIBUTED?

>> FROM LAST YEAR, YES. >> THIS IS FROM THIS YEAR?

>> THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE HAD LAST YEAR. THIS IS

LAST YEAR'S FUNDING. >> IS YOUR MOTION WHAT WE ARE

GOING TO DO THIS YEAR? >> YES, SIR. WE NEED A NEW LIST FOR EVERYTHING THAT WERE GOING TO HAVE FOR THESE ENTITIES FOR

THIS YEAR. >> I WILL GENERATE THAT LIST WITH THE OUTSIDE AGENCY CONTRACTS.

>> WHY ARE WE APPROVING THIS?'S

>> WE ARE APPROVING THE ALLOCATION TO FUND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTS FROM THE CAPITAL CREDITS ACCOUNT.

>> JUST THAT ONE? >> THIS WAS A HOLDOVER ITEM ALSO, BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE NORMALLY DONE THIS LAST YEAR, BECAUSE IT WAS MONEY SPENDING, IT WAS A HOLDOVER ITEM.

>> RATHER THAN ME DELAYING THIS ANYMORE, I HAVE SEVERAL MORE QUESTIONS. YOU GUYS TAKE THE LEAD, I WILL FOLLOW. BUT I WILL HAVE SOME MORE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, TERESA. I WOULD LIKE A COMPLETE EXPLANATION ON HOW THIS WAS GENERATED, HOW IT WORKS, HOW IT'S BEING FUNDED, AND HOW WERE GOING TO HANDLE IT ON A GOING FORWARD BASIS. THIS FUND THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, IT'S REPLENISHED EACH YEAR TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT. AND SO WE ARE TRYING TO REDUCE IT SO THAT WE DON'T RUN OUT OF MONEY BEFORE

THE END OF THE YEAR, I GUESS. >> WE GOT LUCKY LAST YEAR BECAUSE WE HAD AN EXCESS BALANCE AND IT, SO WE JUST READ A POINT WHERE WE WANTED TO FUND THESE GROUPS. THEY ALL NEED THE FUNDING, THE ONLY THE HELP. WE ALL THINK IT'S VALID, SO WE KIND OF GOT LUCKY LAST YEAR WITH THIS, BUT SO THAT WE DON'T DEPLETE THE FUND AND GIVE AWAY MORE THAN WE ARE GIVING IN, THAT'S THE NATURE OF WHAT I AM -- LOOKING FOR AT

THIS POINT. >> I'M SORRY I DID NOT GET A POINT TO VISIT WITH TERESA AND BUGGED HER ENOUGH . THANK YOU

VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. >> SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, THE FUND BALANCE WILL BE 145,000 567 AFTER WE REDUCE IT.

[02:30:02]

>> THERE MAY BE SOME OTHER THINGS WE WANT TO DO WITH THE REST OF THAT GOING FORWARD. THERE MAY BE SOME OTHER ORGANIZATIONS TO BE ADDED, BUT FOR TODAY'S PURPOSES, MY

MOTION IS JUST THAT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? YES, THE 7500, TOO. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION FOR THEM. THAT'S WHY WE ARE TAKING IT

OUT. >> IT WAS 60,000 LAST YEAR FROM CAPITAL CREDIT. THE ORIGINAL BUDGET IS 50,000.

>> MY POINT IS, WE SHOULD HAVE HAD A DOCUMENT IN HERE THAT

SHOWS -- >> WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WE WERE

GOING TO DO. >> IT WAS FOR DISCUSSION.

>> WE WERE WAITING TO SEE WHAT EVERYBODY WANTED TO DO.

>> SO THIS GETS US SOMEWHERE, AND IT LETS YOU AS INDIVIDUALS, ANY OF YOUR PERSONAL PRIORITIES, THEN YOU CAN --

>> CORRECT. >> CAN YOU COME BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING? IS THERE A LIST OF EVERYTHING? ALTHOUGH THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED, CAN WE LOWER THOSE OR NOT?

>> WELL, THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE GIVING CONTRACTS FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND PLACING THOSE AGREEMENTS ON THE AGENDA

TO MOVE FORWARD. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE JUST HOW

-- >> MY PROBLEM IS, WE HAVE THESE PEOPLE WAITING, AND THESE ARE ALL ORGANIZATIONS THAT NEITHER

MONEY. ALL WE ARE DOING IS -- >> IF THERE'S A BALANCE, WHY DON'T WE JUST CHECK THE BALANCE?

>> YOU CAN. THAT'S WHAT -- IF THE COURT WANTS TO GOT THE FUND AND SAY , YOU GOT TO TELL ALL THESE AGENCIES THEY ARE DEFINITELY GETTING CUT NEXT YEAR.

>> NEXT YEAR WOULD BE A NEW -- >> 60,000, I THINK, IS BEEN THE GENERAL BALANCE. IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO FUND ALL OF THESE

NEXT YEAR. >> WE CAN TAKE A VOTE ON THE MOTION IF WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD AND THEN WE CAN ALWAYS BREAK. WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO BREAK FOR EXECUTIVE, C MIGHT HAVE TO WAIT A LITTLE BIT LONGER. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO FUND ALL OF THE OTHERS THAT ARE NOT BUDGETED FOR OUR GENERAL BUDGET AT A RATE OF 7500.

>> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, JUDGE, THE DMD, CC BLACK CHAMBER, THE NORTHWEST ASSOCIATION, THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, THE TEXAS A AND M ANTONIO E GARCIA ARTS AND EDUCATION CENTER, AND THE WESTSIDE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SEE AYE. ANY OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES.

[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.]

BECAUSE OF TIME CONSTRAINTS, I AM GOING TO HAVE TO LEAVE, SO I'M GOING TO BREAK FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT I NEED TO BE HERE FOR. I MAY NEED TO BE OUT OF HERE. SO IF IT IS ALL RIGHT WITH EVERYONE, UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS COMING UP THAT YOU ARE WANTING TO TAKE FOR AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT QUESTION OR ANYTHING, WE HAVE TWO ITEMS ON OUR EXECUTIVE AGENDA. SO LET ME GET BACK. EXECUTIVE SESSION . PUBLIC NOTICES 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 PUSHING 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, THESE SECTIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER. SECTION 551.071, 551.072, 551.073, 551.074 , 551.076, 551.08 X, 551.087 , THE COMMISSIONERS COURT WILL HOLD IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO VOTE WITH THE ATTORNEYS INCLUDING MATTERS RELATED TO LITIGATION, DELIBERATE REGARDING REAL PROPERTY, PROSPECTIVE GIFT, PERSONNEL MATTERS, INCLUDING TERMINATION,

[02:35:09]

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 , THE COMMISSIONERS COURT, MAY IN AN OPEN SECTION, TAKE SUCH ACTION AS APPROPRIATE AND ITEMS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. ITEM A TODAY IS CONSULT WITH COUNTY ATTORNEY ON CC POLYMERS TAX ABATEMENT AGREEMENT AND TAKE ACTION IN OPEN SESSION, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071.

ITEM B IS CONSULT WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY REGARDING LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO STATUTORY COMPLIANT COMPENSATION MECHANISMS FOR BROKERS PROVIDING EMPLOYEE BENEFITS AND CONSULTING SERVICES , TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071 .

DISCUSS CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION IN REGULAR SESSION IF NEEDED.

>> THE TIME IS LOCAL AND 46 P.M. AND WE ARE COMING OUT OF

[11. Discuss and consider execution of a lease agreement with Driscoll Children's Hospital permitting use of the Hilltop Community Center for Driscoll's Women, Infants, and Children's (WIC) Food Nutrition Program.]

THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WITH NO ACTION TAKEN. STARTING WHERE WE LEFT OFF, BEFORE EXECUTIVE SESSION, THAT IS ON REGULAR AGENDA NUMBER 11, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER EXECUTION OF LEASE AGREEMENT WITH DRISCOLL CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL, PERMITTING USE OF THE HILLTOP COMMUNITY CENTER FOR DRISCOLL'S WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN'S FOOD NUTRITION PROGRAM. I HAVE A MOTION, AND WE HAVE A SECOND? I THINK EDWARD IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF ANYBODY HAS ANY.

>> WE SHOULD APPROVE THIS. IT'S A GREAT PROGRAM.

>> TO HAVE A MOTION? SECOND FROM CHESNEY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

>> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED. NO? THANK

[12. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving execution of Amendment No. 1 to Engineering Services Contract for Colonias Septic System Electrical Improvements with Ardurra Group, Inc., and related matters.]

YOU. AUNT ITEM NUMBER 12, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT FOR THE SEPTIC SYSTEM ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENT WITH OUR JURA GROUP INC. AND RELATED

MATTERS. >> SO SECONDED.

>> MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR , SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED. ITEM PASSES. ITEM 13 . DISCUSS AND

[13. Discuss and consider acceptance of the initial offer for purchase of property ID#594214, Owner ID#654166 S/L of County Road 14D, N of County Road 14C and W of County Road 63 Bishop, Nueces County, Texas, in the amount of $59,970.00 for the purpose of completing the detention pond Petronila Estates ARPA Project; and authorizing County Judge to sign the Initial Offer Letter along with any other conveyance documents for said property and other related matters.]

CONSIDER ACCEPTANCE FOR THE INITIAL OFFER FOR PURCHASE OF PROPERTY I.D. NUMBER 592 414 , OWNER I.D. NUMBER 654166 SL OF COUNTY ROAD 14 D , NORTH OF COUNTY ROAD 14 C AND WEST OF COUNTY ROAD 63 BISHOP , NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS, FOR THE AMOUNT OF 59,900 $20 FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPLETING THE DETECTION POND PETRONELLA ESTATES ARPA PROJECT, AND AUTHORING COUNTY JUDGE TO SIGN THE INITIAL OFFER LETTER ALONG WITH ANY OTHER CONVEYANCE DOCUMENTS FOR SAID PROPERTY AND OTHER RELATED

MATTERS. >> THAT IS MY PROJECT, RIGHT?

>> YES SIR. >> MOTION TO APPROVE. IT IS TO ALLOW GRANT WORKS TO PROCEED AND THEY CAN'T NEGOTIATE, BUT THEY CAN START THE PROCESS OF TALKING TO THE OWNER AND BUYING THE PROPERTY. THEY WILL COME BACK TO COURT FOR APPROVAL.

>> OKAY. WHAT HE WANTING TO APPROVE TODAY?

>> WHAT IT SAYS HERE. IT SAYS ACCEPTANCE OF THE INITIAL

OFFER. >> IF I MIGHT INTERJECT, WE'VE GONE THROUGH A PORTION OF THE PROCESS. SO WE HAVE SENT OUT -- THE COMMISSIONER SENT OUT -- THIS IS THE MARKET PRICE. WE SENT IT TO THE OWNER, THE OWNER HAS ACCEPTED THIS PRICE. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO PUT IT UNDER CONTRACT.

>> I JUST ASK THE YOU DON'T PUT IT UNDER MY TITLE COMPANY SO I CAN VOTE ON THIS, IF THAT'S OKAY.

>> COPY THAT. >> NO MOTION YET. MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER GONZALES. SECOND, COMMISSIONER CHESNEY. ANY OTHER

DISCUSSION? >> COMMISSIONER, CAN I INTERJECT? SINCE THE JUDGES OUT, WHO WOULD BE THE SIGNATOR?

[02:40:02]

>> WE NEED TO INCLUDE THAT AS COUNTY JUDGE AS DESIGNEE, OR DOES THAT ASSUME SINCE I AM IN THAT ROLE?

>> YOU ARE SERVING IN THAT ROLE.

>> OKAY. >> WILL GO DOWN TO THE NEXT

COMMISSIONER. >> WHO IS, THOUGH?

>> WHO IS NEXT? >> WAS AT DISCUSSED WITH YOU

HAVING THE PRO TEM DISCUSSION? >> I WILL BE SERVING IN THE

THIRD ROLE. >> BUT THE COURT WOULD HAVE TO

DO THAT. >> SOUNDS GOOD. OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. NO OTHER DISCUSSION.

>> I HAVE A QUICK ONE, I'M SORRY. SO ARE WE AGREEING TO GO

AHEAD AND PAY FOR THE WATER? >> JUST PUT IT UNDER CONTRACT.

>> AND APPROVE THE AMOUNT, YES. AND HE HAS THE FUNDS THROUGH

HIS ARPA FUNDS. >> WE CAN MOVE FORWARD.

>> THAT IS A CLARIFICATION FOR THE MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR,

[14. Authorize the Interlocal agreement with San Patricio County for the Intoxilyzer Program and Technical Supervisor services in the amount of $63,000 for a one year period covering January 1, 2025, through December 31, 2025.]

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NUMBER 14. AUTHORIZING INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH SAN PATRICIO COUNTY FOR THE INTOXILYZER PROGRAM AND TECHNICAL SUPERVISOR SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $63,000 FOR A ONE-YEAR PERIOD COVERING JANUARY 1, 2025, THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2025. SECOND BY CHESNEY. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE.

[15. Discuss and consider approval of recommendation for reappointment of Commissioner Joe A. Gonzalez and Commissioner John Marez to Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone No. 2 (Island); discuss and consider approval of recommendation for reappointment of County Judge Connie Scott to Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone No. 4 (North Beach); and discuss and consider approval of appointment of Pct. 1 Commissioner, Mike Pusley to Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone No. 4, and related matters.]

OPPOSED. ALL RIGHT. ITEM PASSES 4-0. ITEM NUMBER 15, DISCUSS AND CAN ENTER APPROVAL OF RECOMMENDATION FOR REAPPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONER JOE A GONZALES AND COMMISSIONER JOHN MAREZ TO TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER 2, ALSO REFERRED TO THE ISLAND, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RECOMMENDATION FOR REAPPOINTMENT OF CONNIE JUDGE CONNIE SCOTT TO THE TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER 4, NORTH BEACH, AND DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF APPOINTMENT OF PRECINCT 1 COMMISSIONER MIKE PUSLEY TO TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER FOUR AND RELATED

MATTERS. >> HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS FOR ALL OF THIS, THE TEARS THAT WE REPRESENT.

>> I'M CONFUSED. IF IT'S THE ISLAND ONE --

>> WE HAVE FOUR MEMBERS. THAT'S WHY AT THE END OF THE ITEM, COMMISSIONER PUGSLEY IS NOW DESIGNATED WERE SUPPOSED TO BE DESIGNATED TO SERVE IN THE ROLE. YOU ARE ALREADY THERE.

THE CURRENT ISLAND ONE IS MAREZ, LIKE YOU SAID, MAREZ, GONZALES, CHESNEY, SCOTT. IF YOU ARE REAPPOINTING EVERYONE,

SHOULD BE REAPPOINTED. >> IT'S A TERM.

>> THOSE ARE TWO TERMS. >> MINE WAS DIFFERENT THAN

EVERYBODY ELSE'S. >> YEARS AND JUDGE SCOTT'S ARE

NOT EXPIRED RIGHT NOW. >> THAT'S ALL I NEEDED FOR

CLARIFICATION. >> WHAT WE DID WE HAVE AN OPTION FOR ALL FIVE MEMBERS TO SERVE?

>> I THINK THEY JUST INCREASED IT TO FOUR.

>> CORRECT. >> OF COMMISSIONER GONZALES WANTS TO GO ON, THAT IS FINE. THAT IS UP TO YOU ALL.

>> I BELIEVE THAT IT'S COMMISSIONER GONZALES IF HE WANTS TO REMAIN IN THAT POSITION OR NOT. I AM GOOD

EITHER WAY. >> YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THAT.

>> I HAVE SERVED ON ALL OF THEM.

>> IF YOU WANT TO DO IT, THEN JUMP IN THERE. IF YOU DON'T --

>> I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO, IN THE FUTURE, FOR A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM, SINCE IT IS IN MY PRECINCT, ASKED THAT I BE PUT DOWN ON THE DOWNTOWN GROUP AS WELL.

>> MAY BE OUR NEXT MEETING, HOUSEKEEPING . TYPICALLY, WHEN A MEMBER COMES OFF, THE REPLACEMENT IS PUT IN. I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE CONTROVERSIAL OR DIFFICULT.

>> JUDGE SCOTT SAID SHE WOULD BE HAPPY TO SURRENDER HER

POSITION. >> WE ALL WOULD.

>> SO FIRST OF ALL, COMMISSIONER GONZALES, DO YOU

[02:45:01]

WANT TO STAY ON NUMBER TWO ? >> NO, HE'S MORE FAMILIAR WITH

IT. >> SO THE MOTION THEN IS, WE CAN TAKE THESE ONE AT A TIME. IS THERE A MOTION THEN FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONER MIKE PUSLEY AND THE REAPPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONER TO THE REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER

TWO? >> SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY I. LET'S GO ON TO CONSIDER APPROVAL FOR RECOMMENDATION OF THE REAPPOINTMENT OF COUNTY JUDGE CONNIE SCOTT . THE TEARS NUMBER 4 WHICH IS, NORTH BEACH. IS

THERE A MOTION FOR THAT? >> SO MOVED.

>> COMMISSIONER CHESLEY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. AYE. OPPOSED.

MOTION PASSES. AND FINALLY, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL

OF MIKE PUSLEY TO NUMBER 4. >> IS AS A REPLACEMENT OF COMMISSIONER HERNANDEZ. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT SO WE ARE NOT DOUBLE APPOINTING. I MEAN, IF THAT'S WHAT THIS IS. THE MOTION WOULD BE TO APPOINT COMMISSIONER PUSLEY IN PLACE OF

THE COMMISSIONER. >> ALL RIGHT, SO THAT'S THE MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE. OPPOSED. ITEM PASSES 4-0. ITEM 16 . OF

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

COURSE, IT IS PART OF OUR STANDARD DISCUSSIONS DURING COURT. THERE IS A LIST IN THE ATTACHMENT FOR THE NEXT SIX MEETINGS . A SECOND MEETING OF JANUARY, A REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING IS SET FOR JANUARY 22ND, AND THEN WE HAVE TWO MEETINGS IN FEBRUARY, TWO IN MARCH, AND ONE IN APRIL. THOSE OF THE NEXT SIX MEETINGS. ANYTHING WE NEED TO CHANGE, ANY DISCUSSIONS ON THAT? IF NOT, WE COULD JUST MOVE FORWARD AND THERE'S NO ACTION THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN. NO DISCUSSIONS.

OKAY. WE MOVE ON TO ITEM B UNDERSHERIFF. THOSE ITEMS WERE

[1. Adopt a resolution authorizing the submission of a grant application to the Office of the Governor, Public Safety Office, Criminal Justice Division for the Monitoring Offenders Against Women Project under the Violence Against Women Justice and Training Program, FY2026.]

TABLED EARLIER. NOW ITEM C UNDER GRANTS. MOTION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICE, CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION FOR THE MONITORING OFFENDERS AGAINST WOMEN PROJECT UNDER THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN JUSTICE AND TRAINING PROGRAM, FY DECREMENT 26.

THERE'S A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER PUSLEY. A SECOND.

WE HAVE A SECOND? >> WHO IS THIS GRANT GOING TO?

>> AND IT'S GOT A CASH MATCH, RIGHT?

>> SO 50%. >> THE GRANT IS GOING FOR THE MONITORING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN'S GRANT. THERE IS A CASH MATCH. THE CASH MATCH WAS INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED AND ADOPTED BUDGET FOR THE '24-'25 FISCAL YEAR IN THE EXACT AMOUNT

OF THE CASH MATCH. >> OKAY.

>> IT'S A BUDGETED CASH MATCH FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE

GRANT. >> I THOUGHT WE WERE TRYING TO GET -- A GREAT GRANT AS EVERY GRANT IS, I THOUGHT WE WERE TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM CASH GRANT BATCHES. IT'S A GREAT GRANT. WE NEED TO DO IT. I GET IT.

>> THIS IS ONE OF THOSE GRANTS WHERE WE HAVE TO DO IT EITHER WAY, AND SO WE MIGHT AS WELL GET THE GRANT TO HELP OFFSET SOME OF THE COST IF WE HAVE TO PAY THEM EITHER WAY. I COULD BE

WRONG , BUT -- >> YOU COULD BE RIGHT. BECAUSE IT IS THE JUDGES WHO ORDER THESE THINGS. THEY ARE GOING TO

ORDER THEM ANYWAY. >> SO WE HAD A MOTION AND SECOND. CHESNEY WAS SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, THEN? OKAY.

>> ALL COURTS, ANY COURTS WHERE THERE IS THE MONITORING , THE

ANKLE MONITORING -- YES. >> ALL RIGHT. MOTION SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE . OPPOSED. THAT PASSES 3-0.

COMMISSIONER, DID YOU WANT TO VOTE ON THIS ITEM?'S

>> I JUST VOTED IN FAVOR. >> OKAY, THE ITEM HAS PASSED.

OF COURSE, WE DIDN'T MENTION IT OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION,

[1. Discuss and consider authorizing and approving the award and execution of an ARPA-funded Contractor Agreement with Barcom Construction, Inc. for construction of the Nueces County Courthouse and Jail Wastewater Line Replacement project (IFB No. 3304-24), in the not-to-exceed amount of $3,129,739.00 for Base Bid, Additive No. 1, Additive No. 3 (Sanitary DWV only), Additive No. 4 and Additive No. 5; and related matters.]

BUT JUDGE SCOTT IS ABSENT FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING.

ITEM D, PUBLIC WORKS. WE HAVE ONE HERE FOR THE NEXT FOUR ITEMS. DISCUSS CONSIDER AND AUTHORIZE AND APPROVE THE AWARD AND EXECUTION OF ARPA FUNDED CONTRACT AGREEMENT WITH ARCHON CONSTRUCTION INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE AND JILL WASTE WATER LINE REPLACEMENT

[02:50:02]

PROJECT, IFB NUMBER 3304-24 IN THE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $3,129,739 FOR BASE BID, ADDED NUMBER ONE, ADDITIVE NUMBER THREE, SANITARY DWB ONLY, ADDITIVE NUMBER FOUR, AND

EDITED NUMBER FIVE. >> COMMISSIONERS, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.

>> IT'S THE FUNDING SOURCES THAT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY

ALLOCATED? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> SECOND BY CHESNEY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR,

AYE. >> WE WILL HOLD UP ON

DISCUSSION. >> THIS IS ANOTHER ONE I DIDN'T GET TO ASK ABOUT. IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THIS CAME TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ALREADY AND WAS APPROVED AND THE ADDITIVES WERE APPROVED AS WELL.

>> THAT IS CORRECT, COMMISSIONER. WE ARE JUST BRINGING IT BACK WITH ADDITIVE NUMBER ONE . WE ARE REMOVING THAT FROM THE PROJECT AND DOING NUMBER THREE WITH THE WASTEWATER LINE. AND THEN ADDITIVE NUMBER FIVE. SO THERE WILL BE NO WATERLINE IMPROVEMENTS AS PART OF THIS.

>> SAW THE ADDITIVES, ONE THROUGH FIVE, WE ARE NOT GOING TO APPROVE ALL OF THOSE? YOU ARE NOT RECOMMENDING APPROVAL

OF ALL OF THEM? >> NO, SIR. WE ARE RECOMMENDING ADDITIVE NUMBER ONE , AND ADDITIVE NUMBER THREE.

>> SO ONE, THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE ARE THE ONLY ONES YOU

RECOMMENDING? >> YES.

>> AND WE ALL RECEIVED HOW MANY BIDS ON THIS PROJECT?

>> I'M GOING TO SAY WE RECEIVED THREE, COMMISSIONER.

>> OKAY. AND THIS WAS SELECTED FROM THOSE THREE BEDS?

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> I'M GOOD, THANK YOU.

>> IS A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE TABLE. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, I WILL CALL FOR THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN

[2. Approve the award and execution of food services contract with B&B Restaurant Group, LLC dba Shoreline Sandwich Company for Courthouse Food Service (RFP No. 3291-24).]

FAVOR, AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED. NONE. THIS PASSES 4-0. ITEM NUMBER TWO, APPROVED THE AWARD AND EXECUTION OF FOOD SERVICE CONTRACT WITH B AND B RESTAURANT GROUP LLC DBA SHORELINE SANDWICH COMPANY FOR COURTHOUSE FOOD SERVICE , RFP NUMBER 3291-24 , AND THAT IS UNDER PUBLIC WORKS, BUT WE ALSO HAVE OUR PURCHASING AGENT, MICHAEL ROBINSON HERE, IF WE

HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >> MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> MOTION BY PUSLEY. SECOND. SECOND BY CHESNEY.

>> I HAVE ONE QUESTION. WHAT IS THE PAYOUT? HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE GETTING BACK? IS IT A PERCENTAGE?

>> NO, WE JUST COLLECT RENT ONLY. 600 A MONTH. IT INCREASES WHEN WE HAVE RENEWALS , IF WE GO TO THE CPI INDEX FOR

RESTAURANT SERVICE IS. >> THE ONLY PAID YOU IS $600 A

MONTH RENT. >> THAT IS WHAT IT IS. IT'S IN

THE CONTRACT. >> CAN WE JUST BE A LITTLE MORE CLARITY HERE? HOW DOES IT WORK? THEY JUST PAY THE RENT?

>> THEY HAVE A LEASE. >> AND THEY DON'T GET THE

MONEY BACK? >> IT'S IN THE CONTRACT, BUT ON THE PREVIOUS COURT, WHEN WE BROUGHT IT IN FOR ADDITIONAL SELECTION, THAT'S WHEN WE DISCUSSED THE AMOUNT, AND THE COURT APPROVED THAT SELECTION. BUT WE WILL DO THAT NEXT TIME AND WE WILL MAKE SURE WE INCLUDE THAT.

>> IT'S IN THE CONTRACT. IF YOU SCROLL DOWN TO THE BOTTOM.

>> I JUST NOTICED IT'S NOT IN THE TEXT IN THE AGENDA.

>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR YOU ALL SEE DONNA TO

GO HUNTING FOR IT. >> GOOD, GOOD.

>> GOOD QUESTION. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE HAVE A MOTION

[3. Discuss and consider execution of Change Order No. 1 with ARGIO Roofing and Construction, LLC for Courthouse Roof Improvement Project.]

AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE. OPPOSED. AT PASSES, 4-0. TO ITEM NUMBER 3, TO DISCUSS THE EXECUTION OF CHANGE ORDER NUMBER ONE, ROOFING AND CONSTRUCTION LLC FOR COURTHOUSE

WITH PROJECT. >> PUBLIC WORKS IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE CHANGE ORDER FOR ITEMS ONE AND TWO. THE MONIES THAT ARE ALLOCATED ARE FROM THE CONTINGENCY. THERE IS A CONTINGENCY IN THERE FOR 150,000. THE TOTAL AMOUNT IS

152 77. FOR THE CHANGE ORDER. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION ON THIS ONE, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>> COMMISSIONER. >> ONE, CAN YOU ASK WAYNE ON

[02:55:06]

THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF THE EXISTING SOLAR PANEL, WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN THERE? ARE THEY TAKING THE OLD ONE AND THROWING IT AWAY AND BRINGING IN THE NEW ONE? OR ARE WE JUST REINSTALLING THE OLD ONE, OR WHAT IS HAPPENING?

>> NO, SIR. THE SOLAR PANELS ON THIS SIDE, THEY ARE IN SERVICE.

WHAT WE ARE DOING, IS WE ARE REMOVING THEM.

>> ALL OF THEM? >> YES. WERE GOING TO PUT ON THE NEW TITLES AND THE ANCHOR THEM BACK. NEW CODE

REQUIREMENTS. >> WELL, OUR DOCUMENTATIONS SAID WE WERE MOVING FOR REPLACEMENT OF THE EXISTING SOLAR PANEL, AND I THOUGHT, THAT'S A LITTLE HIGH FOR ONE

PANEL. >> IS FOR ALL THE PANELS.

THEY'RE GOING TO REMOVE THEM. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MOTION TO

APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE. OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES, 4-0.

[4. Discuss and consider for approval of the plat of Vaquero Ventures Addition for a new convenience store along FM 665.]

ITEM NUMBER FOUR, DISCUSS IT CAN FOR APPROVAL OF A PLAT FOR THE CUERO VENTURES ADDITION FOR A NEW CONVENIENCE STORE ALONG FM 665. I WILL BE ABSTAINING FROM THIS ITEM.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GONZALES, SECOND BY PUSLEY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE. OPPOSED, NO.

ABSTAIN, ONE. >> IT'S A NEW STORE. AND IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE SIDE OF THE FREEWAY. IT'S GOING TO BE THE EAST SIDE OF THE FREEWAY. THAT'S GREAT.

[1. Approve Project Budget Amendment No. 008.]

>> NOW ON TO AUDITOR. THANK YOU, WE APPRECIATE IT. AUDITOR, SECTION E. APPROVED PROJECT BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER 8008.

>> AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. I RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT CAPITAL PROJECT CHANGE NUMBER EIGHT FOR YOUR APPROVAL.

>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON ITEM E1? I'LL GIVE YOU ALL A COUPLE OF SECONDS TO LOOK AT THAT ONE.

>> SO JUST A QUICK OVERVIEW ON THIS, LISA.

>> YES, SIR. WE ARE REALLOCATING FUNDS FOR CROSS-REFERENCE ITEM NUMBER EIGHT TO THE HILLTOP COMMUNITY CENTER, AND CROSS-REFERENCE ITEM NUMBER E IS GETTING FUNDS REALLOCATED FOR THE NUECES COUNTY CONSTABLES OFFICE BODY

ARMOR, AS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. >> AND THEN REMIND ME -- I'M TRYING TO FIND THE BACKUP ON THIS. IT'S ALSO GOT AN

ALLOCATED COUNTY JUDGE. >> THE HILLTOP IS GETTING APPROVED WITH AN ALLOCATED COUNTY JUDGE, AND ALLOCATED COUNTY COMMISSIONER IN DISTRICT 4, TO THE HILLTOP COMMUNITY CENTER. THAT IS IN THE 2021. AND THEN THE HILLTOP IS GIVING FUNDING FROM THE 2016 CEOS FROM THE ARCHITECT AND ENGINEERING.

>> RIGHT, GOT YOU. SO I'VE GOT --

>> ALL RIGHT. MOTION -- THIS ITEM --

>> WE JUST NEED TO VOTE. >> A SECOND, AND ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE. OPPOSED. THAT PASSES, 4-0.

[2. Approve Budget Amendment No. 02 for Fiscal Year 2024-2025.]

ITEM NUMBER TWO. >> I AM SUBMITTING THE BUDGET CHANGE ORDER FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION TO INCREASE FOR THE TAX APPRAISAL DISTRICT EXPENSES. I HAVE THIS TIME ATTACHED THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATE WE RECEIVED ON JULY 28TH AS ADDITIONAL SUPPORTING BACKUP THAT SHOWS THAT WE FULLY BUDGETED. I ALSO ATTACHED THE PROPOSED BUDGET THAT SHOWS THAT WE FULLY BUDGETED THE AMOUNT THAT WE WERE ANTICIPATING BEING ASSESSED. AND THAT ASSESSMENT AGAIN WAS RECEIVED JULY 28TH.

WE DIDN'T RECEIVE THE REVISED ALLOCATION THAT WAS MACED FROM THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT UNTIL DECEMBER 6TH OF 2024 . THAT HAD INCREASED AN EXTRA 80,000, WHICH IS THE REASON FOR THE INCREASE. I CANNOT TELL YOU WHY IT INCREASED. THE ALLOCATION

WAS REDISTRIBUTED . >> I THOUGHT WE HAD ASKED FROM

[03:00:04]

SOMEONE TO BE HERE TO EXPLAIN THIS TO US. THAT'S WHY WE TABLED IT. THEY WERE GOING TO COME EXPLAIN WHY THE INCREASED THEIR BUDGET AND WE DIDN'T GET NOTICE OF IT. THEY SAID THEY GAVE US NOTICE. AND THE ONLY REASON I KNOW THEY SAID IT IS BECAUSE OUR -- WHAT YOU CALL IT, A STORY ON CHANNEL 3, AND THAT'S WHAT WAS SAID ON THE AIR. I THOUGHT THAT'S WHY HE WAS GOING TO COME AND THAT'S WHY WE TABLED IT.

>> ON THE NOTICE THAT WE RECEIVED ON THE 28TH, THERE'S A NOTATION AT THE BOTTOM IT SAYS THERE COULD BE CHANGES, THE FINAL AMOUNT WILL BE SENT OUT AT A LATER DATE. IT'S

GENERALLY OCTOBER. >> OKAY, SO AGAIN. I'M NOT PAYING SOMETHING UNTIL SOMEBODY EXPLAINS TO ME WHY WE EITHER GOT NOTICE AND DIDN'T BUDGET IT, OR DIDN'T GET NOTICE. AND IF WE DIDN'T GET NOTICE AND WE DIDN'T BUDGET IT, AND IT'S ON THEM. SO UNLESS THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT CAN PROVE THAT THEY GAVE US NOTICE THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE ANOTHER $80,000 AFTER WE DID OUR BUDGET, THEN LET THEM PAY IT. BY LAW, WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO DO THIS, I BELIEVE, THEY DON'T GIVE US PROPER NOTICE. YOU CAN COME BACK AFTER WE SET OUR BUDGET AND SAID, OOPS, IS ANOTHER 80 GRANT. THAT IS NOT WHAT THEY'VE DONE. AND THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHY WE TABLED THIS, BECAUSE -- THERE'S NO REASON FOR THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT NOT TO BE HERE, NOT TO REACH OUT, BECAUSE THE CHIEF APPRAISER WAS INTERVIEWED ON THE SAME STORY THAT I WAS, AND THERE'S BEEN NO EXPLANATION. I THINK WE REJECT THIS. MOTION TO REJECT THIS UNTIL THEY PROVE TO US THAT THEY GAVE US NOTICE PRIOR TO OUR BUDGET BEING FINALIZED, BECAUSE STATUTORILY, WE CAN'T MAKE BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS UNLESS IT'S AN EMERGENCY, IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD AND WHAT WE TOLD EVERYBODY IN THIS COUNTY.

BUT AGAIN, IF THEY'VE GOT PROOF THAT THEY SENT US NOTICE THAT THIS WAS COMING IN THIS AMOUNT, I TABLED IT THE FIRST TIME TO GIVE THEM THAT RIGHT. SO MY MOTION WOULD BE TO REJECT THIS AND SEND IT BACK TO THEM AND TELL THEM WE ARE NOT PAYING IT UNLESS THEY CAN PROVE OTHERWISE.

>> I HAVE ONE COMMENT, COMMISSIONER. WE RECEIVED THE PROPOSED BUDGET, WHICH WAS THE AMOUNT THAT WE BUDGETED. WE RECEIVED THE JUNE OR JULY, SO THAT'S THE AMOUNT THAT WAS BUDGETED. SO THEIR FINAL BUDGET USUALLY COMES AFTER THE FOLLOWING YEAR, LIKE LISA SAID, IN NOVEMBER. AND IT CAN BE UP

OR DOWN. >> WE CAN'T DO THAT.

>> THAT'S HOW IT'S ALWAYS BEEN DONE. WE GET A PROPOSED, AND WE GET THE FINAL IN OCTOBER OR NOVEMBER, THEIR FINAL BUDGET. AND I THINK WE HAVE NOT ALLOCATED AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OR PERCENTAGE TO MAYBE KIND OF PUT A CUSHION THERE. WE HAVE NEVER DONE THAT. AND SO IT'S LIKE, THAT IS THE NUMBER. BUT WE GET IT TWICE. WE GET THE PROPOSED AND THEN WE GET THERE FINAL IN NOVEMBER, AND THAT'S AFTER.

>> WE HAVE THE CHIEF OF STAFF HERE. SO DOES THAT GO TO THE JUDGE? PAYTON, BECAUSE, YES, THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, THEIR CHIEF EXECUTIVE IS USUALLY THE POINT OF CONTACT WAS NOTIFIED.

SO DID THE JUDGE'S OFFICE RECEIVED THIS, OR ANYONE ELSE

IN ADMINISTRATION? >> THEY MAILED IT TO US IN DECEMBER. THAT'S WHEN WE GOT NOTIFICATION OF THE FINAL

NUMBER. >> AND THEN WE TABLED IT, BECAUSE THE ISSUE WAS, WE CAN'T KEEP DOING THIS AFTER BUDGET. AND THEY SAID, WE GAVE THEM NOTICE. THAT'S WHAT HE SAID. I CAN BRING UP THE STORY, IF I NEED TO. WE CAN'T FUNCTION LIKE THIS. MAYBE THAT IS HOW WE'VE DONE IT, BUT THE LAW SAYS WE, AS A COUNTY, HAVE TO SET OUR BUDGET AND WE CANNOT MAKE BUDGET CHANGES UNLESS IT'S AN EMERGENCY. THIS IS NOT AN EMERGENCY. THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT NEEDS TO BE COGNIZANT OF THE ENTITIES BUDGETS THAT THEY SERVE AND THEY NEED TO GET THEIR NUMBERS TO US ON TIME, OR WE ARE NOT GOING TO PAY THEIR BILLS, IN MY OPINION. THERE'S NO LAW THAT SAYS THEY GET A PASS ON NOT GETTING US THERE BUDGET, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT, JUST BECAUSE WE DONE THINGS THIS WAY FOREVER, THAT IS NOT THE RIGHT WAY, IN MY OPINION. IT'S NOT THE LEGAL WAY IN MY OPINION. IF I'M WRONG, I'M SURE JENNY WILL CORRECT ME. BUT NOBODY IS CORRECTED YET.

>> I THINK THAT'S ONE OF MY CONCERNS, IS HOW MUCH, OR HOW LONG SHOULD WE HOLD BACK ON THE SEMANTICS OF A VALID CONCERN? IT HAS BEEN OPERATED THAT WAY FOR AS LONG AS I KNOW, AND I CAN CONFIRM OTHER COUNTIES DO THE SAME WAY, AL QAEDA FOLLOW THE SAME TIMEFRAME. THEY SENT US A CALENDAR JUST LIKE WE SEND A CALENDAR OUT TO THE PUBLIC ON WHAT OUR BUDGET CALENDAR LOOKS LIKE. BUT IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN HOLD BACK ON, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND HERE THE CONCERNS OF WHAT LEGALLY IS SOMETHING YOU RECOMMEND . HOW DO WE APPROACH THIS?

[03:05:04]

>> THAT IS A NEW QUESTION. CAN YOU GIVE ME 10 MINUTES?

>> WE CAN MOVE ON TO SOME OF THE OTHER ITEMS. BUT I DO HEAR WHAT COMMISSIONER CHESNEY IS SAYING, BECAUSE IF IT WASN'T EXPLAINED CLEARLY , HE WANTS SOMEONE HERE TO ANSWER THAT.

LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET AN ANSWER. IF THIS IS SOMETHING WE CAN'T DELAY AGAIN, THEN I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE PROCEED AND GET CLARIFICATION, BECAUSE IT IS EITHER, WE HAVE TO TAKE OUR MEDICINE OR WE DON'T AND WE ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW.

ONE OPTION OR THE OTHER. I'M CONFIRMING WITH OUR COUNTY

ATTORNEY. >> WE ARE NOT IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW. THE LAW IS, THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO GET THEIR BUDGETS TO US. HOW WE HAVE BEEN OPERATING AS COURTESY, AS PRACTICE -- I DON'T KNOW. BUT WE, BY LAW, HAVE TO SET OUR BUDGETS AND HAVE TO DO THAT. THAT IS THE LAW. I THINK WE ARE VIOLATING THE LAW IF WE KEEP APPROVING THIS STUFF.

>> I'M SURE WE ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES WHO ARE GOING THROUGH THIS. I'M SURE ALL THE ENTITIES HAVE THE SAME ISSUE THAT THEY ARE GIVEN ONE AMOUNT, AND THEN THERE IS AN EXTRA AMOUNT, OR NOT AN EXTRA, ONCE EVERYTHING IS FINALIZED, THEN YOU KNOW THE TRUE AMOUNT. WE DEAL WITH THAT OURSELVES. WE COME OUT WITH A PROPOSED BUDGET, AND WE TURN AROUND, AND WE HAVE WITH THE ACTUAL BUDGET IS, BECAUSE THERE'S GOING TO BE DISCUSSION AND MAYBE CHANGES BY THE DIRECTORS THERE. AND THEN WE FINALLY KNOW WHAT THE FINAL NUMBER IS. I HEAR YOU, I AGREE, BUT THERE MAY NOT BE MUCH THAT CAN BE CHANGED ON THAT. I WILL LET OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY LOOK AT THAT IN THE NEXT 10 MINUTES OR SO. WE HAVE A FEW OTHER ITEMS TO GO

THROUGH. >> I HAVE A COMMENT. WE HAVE PAID THE FIRST QUARTER, WHICH THE FIRST QUARTER WAS THE DECEMBER QUARTERLY REPORT. WE HAVEN'T ACTUALLY MOVE THE FUNDS TO CORPORATE. SO EACH QUARTER, THERE'S FOUR QUARTERS OF QUARTERLY AMOUNTS THAT'S GOING TO MATCH WHAT -- THAT WE

BUDGET, UNTIL THIS. >> BUT THIS IS FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR. WHAT IS EACH QUARTER, AN INCREASE. THE NEXT QUARTER THAT'S GOING TO BE DO IS DUE MARCH THE 31ST, AND THEN JUNE AND THEN SEPTEMBER. AND SO WHAT I AM SAYING IS, THEY CAN -- IT CAN ACCRUE INTEREST IF WE DON'T PAY IT BY THESE TIMES.

>> HOW CAN THEY ACCRUE INTEREST ON SOMETHING THAT THEY SENT TO US AFTER WE SET OUR BUDGET? IT HAS TO BE LAW THAT SAYS A ACCRUE INTEREST, RIGHT ? AND THAT'S WHAT JENNY IS GOING TO GO LOOK AT. IT JENNY COMES BACK WITH SOME LAW, THAT'S FINE.

BUT THEY CAN'T JUST ACCRUE INTEREST BECAUSE THEY ARE CONTESTING THE BILL. AND THIS IS WHAT THEY DO. I AM SO SICK AND TIRED OF THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT. THEY NEVER ASKED THE ENTITIES WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT IT, IT IS RUN LIKE IT IS SOMEBODY ELSE'S MONEY, AND IT IS TAXPAYER MONEY. AND I'M TIRED OF JUST PASSING THINGS BECAUSE -- NO OFFENSE, I DON'T MEAN OFFENSE BECAUSE I'M NOT SAYING THIS TO YOU, I'M SAYING THIS TO THE DISTRICT BECAUSE THAT'S HOW THEY'VE ALWAYS DONE THINGS. THEY SERVE ENTITIES THAT ARE TAXPAYER ENTITIES. WE PAY FOR WHAT THEY DO THROUGHOUT TAXPAYER. WE HAVE A DUTY TO OUR TAXPAYER. THEY HAVE A DUTY TO WORRY ABOUT OUR BUDGETS, BECAUSE WE PAY FOR THEM. SO THEY CAN'T GET THEIR ACT TOGETHER AND CHANGE THEIR BUDGET CYCLES TO COINCIDE WITH THE ENTITIES WHO ARE PROVIDING THEM FUNDING, THAT IS THEIR PROBLEM , NOT OUR PROBLEM. AT SOME POINT, WE GOT TO PUT OUR FOOT DOWN AND SAY, GUYS, YOU GOT TO GIVE US THE RIGHT AMOUNT DURING OUR BUDGET, NOT AFTERWARDS, AND WE GOT TO GO FIND THE MONEY. THAT IS NOT RIGHT. OR WE HAVE TO SAY -- WE NEED TO SAY THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT BUDGET IS DBS AND WERE JUST GOING TO $90,000 TO IT EACH YEAR. AT SOME POINT, WE GOT TO PUT HER FOOT DOWN AND SAY, YOU GOT TO COME TO THE TABLE AND JUSTIFY THESE EXPENSES, JUST LIKE WE HAVE TO JUSTIFY THEM. AND YOU GOT TO FOLLOW THE LAW, WHICH IS, YOU GOT TO GET US THE BUDGET AMOUNT AND BUDGET REQUEST BEFORE OUR BUDGET IS FINAL. AND WE HAD AN EXTRA TWO WEEKS ON OUR BUDGET THIS YEAR THAT COULD'VE EASILY GOTTEN THIS TO US, BUT THEY

DIDN'T. >> COMMISSIONER, WHEN THEY SENT OUT THE DOCUMENT THAT SHOWS ALL THE QUARTERLY REPORTS, IT STATES THAT THE TAX CODE STATES THAT THE TAXING ENTITIES THAT ARE DELINQUENT IN THEIR QUARTERLY PAYMENTS WILL BE ASSESSED THE 5% PENALTY ON THE QUARTERLY AMOUNT DUE, +10% ANNUAL INTEREST, AND THE TAXING ENTITY IS DELINQUENT IF PAYMENT IS NOT RECEIVED BY THE DUE DATE, WHICH IS -- I'M JUST

SAYING. >> I KNOW, TRACY. BUT THE THING IS, THIS IS ADDITIONAL MONEY. THIS MONEY WAS NEVER APPROVED BY THIS COURT BECAUSE THEY DON'T GIVE US THE MONEY. WE ARE PAYING WHAT WE OWE. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE OWE THIS. WE HAVE ANY BACKGROUND ON, HEY, IS YOUR EXTRA 80. THEY TELL US WHAT IT IS FOR? THEY JUST SEND US A BILL WITH VERY LITTLE

[03:10:03]

BACKUP, WITH VERY LITTLE EXPLANATION, AND EXPECT US TO PAY IT. OKAY? I MEAN, LET'S FIGHT OVER THAT, TOO. LET THEM

CHARGE ME INTEREST ON THAT. >> AND ALSO, BECAUSE THEIR FINAL REPORT IS DATED IN AUGUST. SO THAT GAVE US TIME, LIKE YOU STATED, TO INCREASE OUR BUDGETED AMOUNT, BUT WE DID

NOT GIVE THIS UNTIL DECEMBER. >> THEIR FINAL REPORT WAS DUE IN AUGUST. THEY DIDN'T GIVE US TO US UNTIL DECEMBER. THAT'S ON THEM. AND WE ARE PAYING WHAT WE KNOW WE OWE. WHY ARE WE

PAYING THIS? >> WE HEAR YOU, COMMISSIONER. I THINK WE PROBABLY GOT ENCLOSED OR 10 MINUTES ALREADY, BUT I SHE IS STILL WORKING ON THAT, REMINDER -- WE JUST VOTED IN THE LAST MEETING OR TWO TO VOTE ON A NUECES COUNTY APPOINTEE WHO GOT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT ABOUT FROM US TO BE ON THAT BOARD . RIGHT? SO WE CAN ASK HER TO COME, OR AS A DIRECTOR, SHE CAN DIRECT, YOU KNOW, HER EMPLOYEE TO COME AND SPEAK TO US. I KNOW YOU ALREADY MADE THAT STATEMENT, BUT WE ALSO HAVE APPOINTEES THAT WE HAVE MADE VOTES FOR THAT SERVE ON THAT BOARD ON OUR BEHALF. SO EITHER SHE CAN COME AND HELP ANSWER, SHE CAN COME HELP SIT DOWN AND SUPPORT WHAT MR. CANALIS HAS TO SAY, I HEAR YOU, YOUR YOUR CONCERN IS. I'LL SEE IF I CAN GET A RESPONSE. IF NOT, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND TABLE IT. BUT I WOULD ALSO ENCOURAGE THAT WE GET OUR REPRESENTATIVES WHO WE VOTED FOR ON THAT BOARD TO COME ALSO AND SIT AT THE NEXT MEETING TO EXPLAIN US WHY. BECAUSE THE ISSUE IS NOT GOING TO GO AWAY. IT WOULD HAVE THE SAME QUESTION NEXT YEAR. THIS IMMACULATE THREE ELECTED BOARD MEMBERS. I THINK WE NEED TO FIND AS MANY AS WILL, AND EXPRESS OUR CONCERNS, BECAUSE YOU GUYS CAN'T KEEP GIVING US YOUR BUDGET NUMBERS AFTER WE CONFIRM OUR BUDGET, IS THAT WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE TO GO

FIND THE MONEY. >> I AGREE. WE KNOW SHE'S WORKING ON IT RIGHT NOW, WE WILL SEE IF WE CAN GET YOU AN

ANSWER. >> IS A GREAT IDEA,

[3. Discuss and consider acceptance and approval of the fourth fiscal quarter investment report, prepared in accordance with Governmental Code 2256.]

COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU. >> THAT ONE IS ON HOLD RIGHT NOW. WE WILL COME NOW UNTO ITEM THREE , DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL OF THE INVESTMENT REPORT PREPARED IN

ACCORDANCE WITH CODE 2256. >> YES, COMMISSIONER. I RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THE INVESTMENT REPORT TO COMMISSIONERS COURT. TOTAL CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AND INVESTMENTS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2024, THEY CURRENTLY HAVE A VALUE OF 100 69 MILLION -- AS COMPARED TO THE LAST REPORT ON JUNE 30TH. THE BALANCES HAVE DECREASED BY 24 MILLION $24,400,619 AND -- WHICH, BY THAT TOTAL AT JUNE 30TH, IT WAS 194 104 365. THE QUARTERLY EARNINGS WERE 2 MILLION -- $2,054,829 . THAT IS -- OR, THAT IS A DECREASE OF $219,155 FROM THE PREVIOUSLY REPORTED AMOUNT OF 2,273,980 OR. AS YOU CAN SEE ON PAGE FOUR IS OUR INVESTMENT LADDER THAT SHOWS ALL OF OUR INVESTMENTS. WE CURRENTLY HAVE THE MAJORITY OF OUR HOLDINGS IN SHORT-TERM, WHICH IS UNDER ONE YEAR. THE LATTER IS DISTRIBUTED WITH THE MAJORITY OF THE FUNDING BEING HELD IN CASH EQUIVALENTS, WHICH IS OUR TEXAS CLASS PULL . AND 111,770,198 DOLLARS IS CURRENTLY BEING HELD IN TEXAS CLASS WITH THE REMAINING 2 MILLION -- 2,000,440 -- EXCUSE ME, THOUSAND. $383 BEING INVESTED AND SPLIT BETWEEN BROKER CDS, U.S. AGENCIES, AND MUNICIPAL BONDS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE TEXAS CLASS RATE IS RATE OF RETURN, WHICH IS OUR -- WHICH IS CURRENTLY AT 5.063% , WHICH IS WHY WE ARE CURRENTLY HOLDING THE MAJORITY OF OUR CASH IN THE TEXAS PULL . IF YOU TURN TO PAGE EIGHT, YOU CAN SEE THE TOTAL CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS BALANCES BY BANK ACCOUNT . ON PAGE -- THAT WAS

[03:15:07]

ON PAGE EIGHT. ON PAGE NINE, WE HAVE THE INTEREST EARNINGS FOR THE CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, SO THE INTEREST EARNINGS ON THOSE BANK ACCOUNTS AND TEXAS CLASS FOR BOTH THE CURRENT QUARTER AND YEAR TO DATE. AND THEN SCHEDULE C IS YOUR COMPREHENSIVE EARNINGS ON THE BEST. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> ANY QUESTIONS? DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL OF THE FOURTH QUARTER FISCAL QUARTERLY INVESTMENT

>> SO MOVED. >> MOTION BY PUSLEY. SECOND.

YES SIR. >> I THINK THAT YOU EXPLAINED TO ME PRETTY GOOD THE QUESTIONS I HAD, BUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THE TEXAS CLASS INVESTMENT POOL, WE SAID THAT THE UPGRADED FUND INTEREST EARNING -- THE CAPITAL PROJECTS INTEREST EARNINGS . ALL THOSE DEPARTMENTS THAT HAVE FUNDS , THE INTEREST, IT GOES TO ONE POOL? OR IS IT TO THE DEPARTMENT AND THE INTEREST IS PULLED OUT OF THERE?

>>'S OVER THE TEXAS CLASS INTEREST POLL, EACH SEPARATE FUND HAS A SEPARATE TEXAS CLASS ACCOUNT , AND THE INTEREST EARNED REMAINS WITH THAT FUND THAT EARNED THE INTEREST. SO THE INVESTMENT FUNDS INTEREST THAT THEY HAVE IN THE POOL REMAINS WITH THE INVESTMENT FUND, AND THEN IT'S REDISTRIBUTED OUT TO THE HOLDINGS WITHIN THAT FUND. DEBT SERVICE, SELF-INSURANCE FUND, ALL OF THOSE FUNDS THAT HAVE HOLDINGS IN TEXAS CLASS, THEY GET TO KEEP THE INTEREST EARNED

ON THEIR ACCOUNTS. >> OKAY.

>> THAT'S THE REASON WHY WHEN WE SUBMIT OUR MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORTS, WE WILL SEE INTEREST REVENUE EARNED IN EVERY FUND.

BECAUSE THOSE FUNDS EARNED INTEREST FROM TEXAS CLASS. THEY -- BASED ON THE MONEY THAT THEY HAD IN TEXAS CLASS FOR THAT MONTH. THEY EARN INTEREST FROM FROST BANK BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF CASH THAT THEY HAD WITH FROST BANK FOR THOSE MONTHS -- FOR THAT MONTH, AND THEN THEY EARN INTEREST ON THE INVESTMENT FUND HOLDINGS BASED ON HOW MUCH MONEY THEY HAD IN THE INVESTMENT FUND. FOR THAT QUARTER, FOR THAT PERIOD.

>> OKAY. AND THOSE OF THE OPERATING FUNDS. SO THE CAPITAL

PROJECT -- >> THEY ALSO EARN INTEREST,

YES, SIR. >> SOME DO AND SOME DON'T. I GUESS. BUT THE OTHERS AGO FROM THE TEXAS NOTE SERIES, THE CO SERIES, AND THE PPF CO, THAT GOES BACK INTO THOSE NOTES?

BACK INTO THE CO'S? >> YES, SIR. IN FACT, WERE GETTING READY TO SUBMIT THE CAPITAL PROJECT CHANGE ORDER FOR COMMISSIONERS COURT APPEAL AND REVIEW , SO WE CAN INCREASE THE BUDGET AVAILABLE TO SPEND ON THE UNALLOCATED FUNDS BY THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST EARNED THAT YEAR.

>> SO OUR CDS ARE STILL OPEN ? THEY SHOULD BE GETTING MONEY.

>> I'M SORRY , THE -- >> I'M SORRY, THE CO FUNDS.

>> YES, WE UPDATE THE INTEREST ANNUALLY. HAS BEEN A LONG-STANDING PRACTICE. AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, WE UPDATE BASED ON THE INTEREST EARNED FOR THE CAPITAL

PROJECTS. >> WE HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT.

THAT AMOUNT SHOULD ALMOST GROW IF WE HAVEN'T USED IT FOR A

YEAR, RIGHT? >> WHATEVER INTEREST REVENUE HAS BEEN EARNED FOR THE FISCAL YEAR AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR -- I DID IT LAST YEAR, WE DID THAT THE YEAR BEFORE AND THE YEAR BEFORE THAT. AT THE END OF THE YEAR, WE SUBMIT -- THEY USED TO BE A CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET CHANGE ORDER.

NOW IT'S A CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE BUDGET AVAILABLE TO SPEND IN THOSE CEOS IN 1901 , THE GENERAL FUND CAPITAL PROJECT, FOR THE REVENUES THAT WERE EARNED FOR THE INTEREST IN THOSE CEOS. IT IS DONE ANNUALLY

EVERY YEAR. >> MAYBE I JUST HAVEN'T NOTICED. THEY DIDN'T GROW THE SAME AMOUNT. WHENEVER I GOT

[03:20:05]

THEM THREE YEARS AGO, THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE. NOW, IT SHOWS

THE AMOUNT. >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING NOW. IT'S NOT -- IT DOESN'T GET ALLOCATED OUT TO EVERY PROJECT THAT HAS MONEY. THE INTEREST EARNED GOES TO THE UNALLOCATED -- THE UNALLOCATED BUCKET OF MONEY , AND THEN COMMISSIONERS COURT ALLOCATES THAT OUT THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.

FOR INSTANCE, FOR THE BULLETPROOF VEST, WHENEVER THE INTEREST IS -- THE INTEREST WILL BE RECORDED IN 1901 FOR THE EARNED INTEREST REVENUE. IT'S GOING TO GO INTO THAT UNALLOCATED BUCKET, AND THEN WE PULL FROM THE UNALLOCATED BUCKET AND REALLOCATE THAT MONEY OUT TO OTHER PROJECTS. IT DOESN'T GO TO YOUR SPECIFIC -- YOUR SPECIFIC PROJECT THAT YOU HAVE. IT ALL GOES TO THE UNALLOCATED.

>> IT GOES TO THE GENERAL FUND. >> NO, IT GOES TO THE OTHER UNALLOCATED BUCKET OF EACH CAPITAL PROJECT. AND AGAIN, THAT IS ALL SHOWN ON THE CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET AMENDMENT. WE CAN INCREASE THAT THERE, AND THAT'S HOW WE WERE ABLE TO FUND THE BULLETPROOF VESTS FOR THE CONSTABLES, FOR THE LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT WE JUST APPROVED, WAS USING THAT INTEREST EARNED ON THE FUNDS HELD IN 1901.

>> SO YOU'RE TODAY, WE HAVE 2,061,101. ON THE TEXAS CLASS

INVESTMENT FORM. >> THAT IS CORRECT. FOR ALL

CAPITAL PROJECT. >> SO THE 2 MILLION, IS IT ON THE TOP? WHO EARNED THOSE 2 MILLION?

>> EXACTLY. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS EARNED 100 17,131 . THAT IS YOUR 1901-0. CAPITAL PROJECTS.

THAT IS GOING -- WHENEVER WE APPROVE -- WHENEVER COMMISSIONERS COURT APPROVES THAT CAPITAL PROJECT CHANGE ORDER, IT'S GOING TO THE UNALLOCATED POLL . TODAY, ON THE CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET CHANGE ORDER, WE PULLED FROM THAT UNALLOCATED TO COVER THE BULLETPROOF VESTS. THE COMMISSIONERS COURT GETS TO CHOOSE HOW YOU USE THAT INTEREST EARNINGS. BUT WE PUT IT IN AN AND ALLOCATED, BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN ALLOCATED TO ANYONE YET. COMMISSIONERS COURT COULD CHOOSE TO ALLOCATE THAT EACH MEMBER OF COURT, BUT THAT WOULD, AGAIN, REQUIRE COURT ACTION. WE PUT IT IN UNALLOCATED FOR COMMISSIONERS COURT TO COME BACK IN LATER DETERMINE HOW TO SPEND THOSE FUNDS.

>> AND WHAT IS THE TOTAL RIGHT NOW IN THE UNALLOCATED PORTION?

>> THAT WOULD BE ON YOUR CAPITAL PROJECT CHANGE ORDER FOR THE BACKUP. IT TELLS YOU THE BUDGETS AVAILABLE FOR EACH ON THE CAPITAL PROJECT CHANGE ORDER REPORT. IT HAS ALL OF THE

PROJECT BUDGETS . >> SO WHAT IS THE TOTAL UNALLOCATED INTEREST THAT IS SITTING IN THAT FUND? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE NEED TO, AT SOME POINT, FIGURE IT OUT.

>> WE ARE SUBMITTING THE CAPITAL PROJECT CHANGE ORDER HOPEFULLY NEXT COURT TO REALLOCATE THAT INTEREST. THE UNALLOCATED FOR ALL CAPITAL PROJECTS IS CURRENTLY AT

$9,932,041 AND $.91. >> BUT A LOT OF THAT IS GOING TO BE DEPENDING ON THE COURT ACTION ALLOCATED TO CERTAIN CAPITAL PROJECT, IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> AND THAT IS BUDGET AMOUNT,

TOO. >> IS NO EXPENSES IN

UNALLOCATED. >> SO THAT IS TO SHOWING THE

BUDGET, NO MORE. RIGHT? >> THERE'S NO EXPENSES IN THE UNALLOCATED POOL. THERE WOULD BE ANY EXPENSES TO APPLY IT TO.

>> WE WOULD REDUCE IT TO CREATE NEW PROJECT. THAT IS NOT SHOWN ON HERE.

[03:26:16]

>> AND SO THIS IS $9 MILLION. SHE'S GOING TO ADD ANOTHER 2 MILLION, SHE ACTUALLY MOVED BACK INTO THE CAPITAL PROJECTS.

SHE HASN'T MOVED YET. IT IS UNALLOCATED.

>> WHEN USING THE CAPITAL PROJECTS, CAN YOU ALLOCATED FOR THINGS OTHER THAN CAPITAL PROJECT?

>> NO. THE CO'S, YOU CAN'T. THE GENERAL FUNDS, YOU COULD, BECAUSE THAT'S FUNDED BY THE GENERAL FUND.

>> -- AND WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THIS, IS A GOOD DISCUSSION POINT. YOU COULD DO A FUNDING SOURCE. LIKE IF YOU HAD SOME INTEREST IN A BIG CAPITAL PROJECT -- FOR EXAMPLE, WE ARE LOW ON OUR FUND BALANCE RIGHT NOW, OUR RESERVES HAVE BEEN DEPLETED A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE OF, UNFORTUNATELY, THE LADY EARLIER WHO SAID THE MONEY WAS MISPLACED WAS UNCRACKED, I CAN'T RESPOND TO HER, BUT THE 2 MILLION WE HAD TO MOVE OVER.

>> THAT WAS ESTIMATED. >> IT WASN'T MISPLACED, IT WAS JUST -- SOME OF IT WAS UNANTICIPATED, MAY BE. HOLD ON, NOT TRY TO GO DOWN THAT RABBIT HOLE. MY POINT IS, COULD YOU TAKE SOME OF THAT INTEREST , ALLOCATED TOWARDS CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT HAVE OTHER THINGS , PARTY SETTLEMENT MONEY, AND USE THAT SETTLEMENT MONEY FOR RESERVES? IF THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO. BECAUSE WE ARE DOWN ON OUR RESERVES, RIGHT? WE ARE NOT AT OUR 25% GOAL. SO COULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO, IS SAY WE ARE GOING TO PUT, AGAIN, $2 MILLION OF INTEREST TOWARDS CAPITAL PROJECT, AND THEN TAKE 2 MILLION OF --

>> THE HURRICANE HARVEY SETTLEMENT FUNDS. IT WAS A

GREAT EXAMPLE, SIR. >> WITH THAT IN THE FUND

BALANCE IF WE WANT TO DO? >> IF COMMISSIONERS TOOK SAID

ACTION, YES, YOU COULD DO THAT. >> IS YOU DOING THAT BETWEEN NOW AND THE 22ND, THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX A LITTLE BIT AND BE CREATIVE. I THINK EVERYBODY IN THE COURT WANTS TO SEE OUR RESERVES BUILT BACK UP . WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO NEED THEM AGAIN ON THE NEXT CYCLE OF THINGS DON'T GET BETTER. WE CAN BUILD UP CAPITAL RESERVES. SO I WOULD LIKE TO AT LEAST SEE THAT AS SOME OPTIONS WHEN YOU'RE REALLOCATING THOSE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT INTEREST. OTHERS HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS, BUT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE DONE EFFECTIVELY .

NOT A LOT, WE GOT TWO OR THREE BIG PROJECTS. WE GOT SOME HARVEY SETTLEMENT FUNDS, TOO. ALL I'M SAYING IS, JUST BE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT THAT. I'D LIKE TO FIND A WAY TO BUILD UP OUR RESERVES IF WE CAN, LEGALLY.

>> AND I DON'T -- >> WHAT SHE SAID TO US IS NEXT MEETING SHE'S GOING TO SUBMIT AN ORDER WITH REALLOCATION OF

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT INTEREST. >> ALL I'M DOING IS I'M SHOWING YOU WE EARNED THIS INTEREST, AND OUTLOOK, IT IS

AVAILABLE FOR YOU TO SPEND. >> IS NOT THE MANY PROJECTS WE CAN DO. BUT IF WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO REALLOCATE $9 MILLION, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS, IT INTEREST, WE AS A COURT WILL HAVE TO DO THAT. AND THAT'S OKAY. WE CAN MOVE SOME

[03:30:01]

OF THAT MONEY IN WAYS THAT WILL HELP THE COUNTY , IN MY OPINION, BUILD UP RESERVES AND WITH THE CAPITAL PROJECTS. BUT WE HAVE TO WORK ON OUR RESERVES. THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL THE THINGS WE ARE GOING TO BE COMING DOWN THE PIKE WITH, LIKE HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS AND, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON WHAT WE DO WITH THE TAX RATE AND BLOCK, BLOCK, WE COULD HAVE TO DIP IN AGAIN. IF THERE'S A WAY TO GET 25%, MAYBE 27% WITH SOME OF THIS LEGITIMATELY FLIPPING FUNDING SOURCES AROUND, WE CAN PROBABLY DIG RIGHT INTO IT AGAIN NEXT BUDGET AND NOT GO BELOW THE 25%. LET'S GO TO 27 OR 28, MAYBE. IF I'M NOT ON THE RIGHT TRACK ON THAT, PLEASE

TELL ME. >> I THINK THAT'S GOOD, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO WAIT UNTIL THE BOOKS ARE ACTUALLY CLOSED TO SEE WHAT THAT NUMBER IS GOING TO BE SO THAT WE CAN BUILD FROM

THERE. >> SINCE THE JUDGE IS GOING TO BE HERE IN THE FIRST MEETING OF FEBRUARY, WITH THE BOOKS BE

CLOSED BY THEN? >> THE BOOKS ARE CLOSED AND THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT IS ISSUED ON MARCH 31ST.

>> WE SHOULD KNOW AT LEAST WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE THAT WE HAVE TO BUILD ON. I'M JUST THINKING, BECAUSE THEY DON'T -- FROM

LAST FISCAL YEAR. '24. >> IT'S NOT A GUESSING GAME.

THE INTEREST IS THERE. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M DOING AT

THE NEXT QUARTER. >> JUST SO Y'ALL KNOW, IT'S

THERE. RIGHT, RIGHT. >> WE CAN COME BACK TOGETHER AND KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER IS. THE INTEREST IS THERE. WE'LL SEE IT NOW. MAKE A DECISION BASED ON THAT. I WOULD LIKE THE COURT TO CONSIDER SOME OF THOSE KIND OF THINGS. I KNOW BOB HALL AND I KNOW HILL TOP HAVE AVAILABLE FUNDS THAT WE COULD DO SOME FLIPPING AND PUT THAT IN RESERVES AND BILLBACK OUR

RESERVES. ANYWAY, OKAY. >> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION, WE HAVE A SECOND, WE HAVE PLENTY OF DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. OPPOSED. ITEM PASSES, 4-0. THAT WAS ITEM NUMBER

[4. Approve asset forfeiture reports for FY 2024 for Nueces County Constable Precinct 1, Constable Precinct 2, Constable Precinct 3, Constable Precinct 4, Constable Precinct 5, Sheriff's Office and the District Attorney's Office.]

THREE. AUTUMN ITEM NUMBER FOUR. APPROVED ASSET FORFEITURE REPORTS FOR FY 2024 FOR NUECES COUNTY CONSTABLE PRECINCT 1, POSSIBLE PRECINCT 2, PRECINCT 3, PRECINCT 4, PRECINCT 5, AND

THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. >> THESE ARE THE ANNUAL REPORTS OF THE STATE FORFEITURE REPORTS MADE BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, AND ALL OF THE CONSTABLES. IT STATES ALL OF THE FUNDS THAT THEY HAVE CEASED THROUGHOUT THE YEAR AND AWARDS THAT THEY HAVE RECEIVED, AS WELL AS THE EXPENSES THAT HAVE BEEN INCURRED. THESE REPORTS ARE SUBMITTED TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AS REQUIRED BY STATUTE. WE RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THEM FOR YOUR APPROVAL.

>> THANK YOU. MOTION TO APPROVE THE ASSET FORFEITURE REPORT? WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? THAT'S HOW I HEARD IT. ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE. OPPOSED. ITEM PASSES WORK-ZERO. DO WE HAVE AN ANSWER YET, MR. DORSEY? ARE WE STILL WORKING ON IT?

>> I WOULD RECOMMEND TABLING THIS. IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE MORE COMPLEX BECAUSE WE ALSO HAVE TO DIG UP SOME FACT

ISSUES FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR. >> YOU HEARD THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE ITEM NUMBER TWO?

>> I'D LIKE TO TABLE TO MAKE SURE SOMEONE FROM STAFF AND THE BOARD ESPECIALLY BE HERE TO DISCUSS THIS WITH US AT THE

JANUARY 22ND MEETING. PLEASE. >> WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND,

GONZALES. >> I THINK TERESA SAID SHE

WOULD DO IT. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE. OPPOSED, NO. SO WE HAVE A TABLE TO COME BACK AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO HAVE THE APPROPRIATE

[03:35:05]

MEMBERS HERE TO RESPOND TO THESE CONCERNS OF THE COURT. WE ARE MOVING ALONG LOOKS LIKE TO OUR LAST ITEM .

[1. Discuss and consider selection of the County Librarian.]