[1.A) Recognition of Rockwall Special Olympics Athletes who represented Rockwall County at the USA Games in Minneapolis, Minnesota June 20-26 with 3,000 athletes competing from across the USA - Commissioner Gallana Rachel Shupp - swimming, earned three Silver Medals Cole Randolph - swimming, earned one Bronze and had two 6th Place finishes Zach Miller - 7 on 7 Unified Soccer, 4th Place Scott Wendt - Goalie 7 on 7 Unified Soccer, 4th Place ]

GLORIANA.

AND SCOTT WENT. WE ALSO HAVE ONE MORE ATHLETE THAT WASN'T ABLE TO MAKE IT TODAY, BUT I DO WANT TO AT LEAST SAY HIS NAME IN CASE THEY'RE LISTENING. AND THAT IS ZACH MILLER. ALL RIGHT.

I WANT TO READ THE RECOGNITIONS AND I'M GOING TO START WITH SCOTT.

SO WHEREAS THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF ROCKWALL COUNTY IS PROUD TO RECOGNIZE THE OUTSTANDING ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE ROCKWALL SPECIAL OLYMPICS ATHLETES WHO REPRESENTED ROCKWALL COUNTY AT THE 2026 SPECIAL OLYMPICS USA GAMES HELD IN MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA, JUNE 20TH TO THE 26TH 2026, WHERE APPROXIMATELY 3000 ATHLETES FROM ACROSS THE UNITED STATES COMPETED IN A CELEBRATION OF ATHLETIC EXCELLENCE, INCLUSION, COURAGE, AND SPORTSMANSHIP. WHEREAS, SCOTT WENT PROUDLY REPRESENTED ROCKWALL COUNTY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS IS THE GOALKEEPER FOR THE SEVEN ON SEVEN UNIFIED SOCCER TEAM AT THE 2026 SPECIAL OLYMPICS USA GAMES, WHERE HIS TEAM EARNED AN OUTSTANDING FOURTH PLACE FINISH.

REFLECTING DEDICATION, COURAGE, EXCEPTIONAL TEAMWORK WHILE BRINGING HONOR TO ROCKWALL COUNTY.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE UNDERSIGNED ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE IN SUPPORT.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE 2026 SPECIAL OLYMPICS USA GAMES.

AND NOW I WANT TO READ ABOUT COLE S ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS WELL.

COLE RANDOLPH PROUDLY REPRESENTED ROCKWALL COUNTY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS AND SWIMMING AT THE 2026 SPECIAL OLYMPICS USA GAMES, WHERE HE EARNED A BRONZE MEDAL, ACHIEVED TWO SIXTH PLACE FINISHES.

EXEMPLIFYING HIS PERSEVERANCE, DEDICATION AND COMPETITIVE EXCELLENCE.

GREAT JOB. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN FOR RACHEL REPRESENTED ROCKWALL COUNTY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS IN SWIMMING AS WELL AT THE 2026 SPECIAL OLYMPICS USA GAMES, WHERE SHE DEMONSTRATED EXCEPTIONAL DETERMINATION IN ATHLETIC EXCELLENCE BY EARNING THREE SILVER MEDALS, BRINGING HONOR AND DISTINCTION TO HERSELF, THE ROCKWALL SPECIAL OLYMPICS PROGRAM AND THE CITIZENS OF ROCKWALL COUNTY.

GREAT JOB. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR REPRESENTING ROCKWALL COUNTY.

YOU'VE DONE US PROUD. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY, NOW WE HAVE

[1.B) Recognition of Terry Fisher American Legion Post 117 - 2026 Boys State and Girls State participants – Commissioner Macalik]

RECOGNITION OF TERRY FISCHER, AMERICAN LEGION POST 117 2026 BOYS STATE AND GIRLS STATE PARTICIPANTS.

COMMISSIONER. MOLATE. THANK YOU JUDGE. IF YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE TO COME ON UP TO THE FRONT AS I READ A RECAP OF WHO YOU ARE AND WHAT YOU'VE DONE.

THE ROCKWALL. I'M VERY HONORED TODAY, BY THE WAY, TO REPRESENT AND RECOGNIZE THE ROCKWALL,

[00:05:01]

TERRY FISHER, AMERICAN LEGION POST 117 BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN THE SPONSOR FOR THE LOCAL STUDENTS FOR OVER, I THINK OVER A DECADE TO ATTEND THE TEXAS BOYS STATE AND THE BLUEBONNET GIRLS STATE PROGRAMS. BOTH OF THESE PROGRAMS ARE PREMIER WEEK LONG IMMERSIVE CITIZENSHIP PROGRAMS. THEY'RE DESIGNED TO TEACH BY DOING CIVIC EDUCATION AND BY BRINGING TOGETHER STUDENTS FROM ACROSS THE STATE TO FOCUS ON PRACTICAL SELF-GOVERNMENT, FREEDOMS, FREE MARKETS, AND PERSONAL GROWTH. THE BOYS STATE IS HELD ANNUALLY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN, AND THIS YEAR IT HAD MORE THAN A THOUSAND PARTICIPANTS.

THE BLUEBONNET GIRLS STATE IS HELD AT TEXAS LUTHERAN UNIVERSITY IN SEGUIN, WITH OVER 600 PARTICIPANTS THIS YEAR.

THE ROLES AND THE EXPERIENCES THAT EACH OF THESE INDIVIDUALS HAD AS THEY WERE THE DELEGATES, AND THEN THEY PROUDLY WANTED TO BECOME THEY CAME HOME AS CITIZENS.

SO OVER THE LAST DECADE, TERRY FISHER HAS SENT, AS I MENTIONED, OVER 225 ROCKWELL STUDENTS.

AND THIS IS IMPORTANT INVESTING OVER 100,000 IN THEIR FUTURES.

THIS IS NO EASY RECREATIONAL SUMMER CAMP. IT'S A DEMANDING, WEEK LONG SEMINAR, AND I THINK WE'LL HEAR THIS FROM SOME OF THEM IN A MOMENT.

LEARNING HOW GOVERNMENT WORKS AND BY RUNNING LOCAL AND STATE GOVERNMENT FROM THE GROUND UP.

THAT'D BE KIND OF INTERESTING. ANYWAY, A NONPARTISAN STRUCTURE.

THE STUDENTS LEARN HOW TO CAMPAIGN FOR THEIR OFFICES, DEBATE AND WRITE AND PASS BILLS.

THIS YEAR, THERE WAS A STUDENT AT EACH CAMP IN THE FINAL RUNOFF FOR GOVERNOR.

SO WE'LL HEAR ABOUT THAT IN A MOMENT. SO ANYWAY, I AM PROUD THAT WE ARE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THIS GROUP AND THE PLATFORM AND WHAT THEY ARE DOING FROM A STANDPOINT OF BECOMING A CITIZEN AND UNDERSTANDING GOVERNMENT.

SO I'M GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO MARK AT THIS TIME, WHO WILL PROBABLY INTRODUCE EACH ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUALS.

I JUST LIKE TO ADD A FEW. A FEW POINTS IS IT'S A VERY COMPETITIVE PROGRAM IN THE HIGH SCHOOLS.

AND FOR HOMESCHOOL AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS THAT PARTICIPATE, THEY THESE KIDS GO THROUGH AN EXTENSIVE INTERVIEW PROCESS.

AND THEN THEY GO DOWN THERE AND ALL HAVE TO RUN AT SOME POINT FOR SOMETHING.

AND THEY ALL SERVE IN VARIOUS POLITICAL POSITIONS AS THEY CREATE A STATE AND COUNTY AND MUNICIPALITIES.

AND IN THAT ROLE, THEY, THEY LEARN A LOT, OBVIOUSLY ABOUT GOVERNMENT.

AND THESE ARE THE FUTURE OF THE NATION. WE'RE VERY PROUD OF THEM.

I WANT TO ESPECIALLY POINT OUT, I'M GOING TO ASK REAGAN'S GOING TO COME UP AND INTRODUCE HERSELF FIRST.

BUT BUT REAGAN WAS ONE OF THE TWO GIRLS AT GIRLS STATE COMPETED FOR GOVERNOR IN THE FINAL RUN OFF.

UNFORTUNATELY, SHE DIDN'T WIN. SHE SHOULD HAVE. BUT THAT'S POLITICS SOMETIMES.

BUT SHE CAME AWAY WITH A TREMENDOUS EXPERIENCE, AND WE'RE VERY PROUD OF THE WAY ALL THESE KIDS HAVE REPRESENTED ROCKWELL COUNTY.

SO COME ON UP AND INTRODUCE YOURSELF. HI, I'M REGAN AND I GO TO ROCKWELL HIGH SCHOOL AND I WAS THE FEDERAL NOMINEE FOR GOVERNOR. HI, MY NAME IS ALIA HURTADO. I GO TO ROCKWALL-HEATH HIGH SCHOOL, AND I RAN FOR CHIEF OF POLICE AND SHERIFF.

HI, MY NAME IS SARA FATHI. I GO TO ROCKWALL HIGH SCHOOL AND I RAN FOR COMPTROLLER OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.

HELLO, MY NAME IS HANNAH PARK AND I RAN FOR THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS.

HI, I'M LOLA COOK. I RAN FOR VICE PARTY OR NATIONAL PARTY VICE CHAIR, AND I'M FROM ROCKWALL HIGH SCHOOL.

HI, MY NAME IS DARBY JOSEPH. I RAN FOR COUNTY COMMISSIONER AND AGRICULTURE COMMISSIONER.

HI, MY NAME IS CASSIDY MCCROSSAN. I GO TO HEATH HIGH SCHOOL AND I RAN FOR HEALTH OFFICER.

HI, MY NAME IS ADELAIDE. I GO TO ROCKWALL HEATH AND I WAS THE FIRE CHIEF FOR MY.

HI, MY NAME IS COLE HUMPHREY. I GOT A HEATH HIGH SCHOOL AND I RAN FOR CITY REPRESENTATIVE.

HI, MY NAME IS BROOKS HILTON. I GO TO ROCKWALL HEATH HIGH SCHOOL AND I WAS A DELEGATE FOR THE FEDERALIST STATE PARTY CONVENTION.

HELLO, MY NAME IS ENRIQUE RIVERA. I GO TO ROCKWALL-HEATH HIGH SCHOOL, AND I RAN AND SERVED AS THE LOBBYIST FOR MY COUNTY.

ALL RIGHT. SO AGAIN, WE THANK THEM FOR THEIR EFFORTS AND FOR REPRESENTING ROCKWALL COUNTY SO WELL DOWN IN AT THE STATE LEVEL.

[00:10:04]

AND WE WISH THEM ALL GREAT SUCCESS IN THE FUTURE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, TERRY FISHER, AMERICAN LEGION.

THAT'S A WORTHWHILE ENDEAVOR. ALL RIGHT. THAT BRINGS US TO EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER.

[1.C) Employee of the Quarter/Second Quarter 2026: Destiny Devitt - Sheriff's Office]

SECOND QUARTER 2026 SHERIFF GARRETT.

GOOD MORNING, JUDGE. COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY THIS MORNING TO.

RECOGNIZE AND PRESENT THIS AWARD TO ONE OF OUR VALUABLE EMPLOYEES DESTINEE DEVITT.

SHE STARTED OUT WITH US IN THE JAIL SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND BECAME OUR EVIDENCE TECHNICIAN JUST A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO NOW. AND RECENTLY DUE TO OUR REMODEL ONE OF OUR EVIDENCE ROOM WAS MOVING AND BEING REVAMPED, UPGRADED, AND DESTINY DREW, I GUESS THE SHORT STRAW OF BEING INVOLVED IN THAT AND DEALING WITH A LOT OF THE EVIDENCE THAT WE DEAL WITH OVER THE YEARS, SOME OF THIS EVIDENCE VERY VALUABLE. WE HAVE TO KEEP SOME OF IT SOMETIMES UP TO 99 YEARS OR MAYBE EVEN LONGER THAN THAT DEPENDING ON WHAT, WHAT THE CASE IS. DESTINY WAS HAS DONE A GREAT JOB IN KEEPING EVERYTHING ORGANIZED EVEN IN THE SPACE THAT SHE HAD TO WORK WITH, WITH THE REMODEL IT EXPANDED A LITTLE BIT.

AND SO WE WE GOT HER SOME HELP IN THERE TO, TO TRY TO MOVE ALL OF THAT EVIDENCE INTO THE NEW AREA.

AND SHE DID AN OUTSTANDING JOB. AND EVEN THE COMPANY THAT HELPED US WITH THAT FORTRESS PLUS SOLUTIONS COMMENTED ON HOW WELL THINGS WERE.

IT IS A TASK EVERY DAY FOR HER TO KEEP UP WITH THIS EVIDENCE, MAKE SURE IT'S LOGGED AND, AND COMMUNICATED TO THE COURTS OF WHAT WE HAVE.

CRAIG CAN TESTIFY TO THE DESTRUCTION NOTICES WHEN THOSE HAVE TO BE DONE.

SO WE DON'T GET OVERCROWDED IN THE EVIDENCE ROOM AND MAKING SURE THAT THIS EVIDENCE IS HANDLED EFFICIENTLY SO THAT IT CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN COURT.

SO DESTINY SHOWS UP EVERY MORNING WITH NEW THINGS TO DO, MAYBE NOT EVEN FINISHING THE ITEMS THAT SHE HAD FROM THE DAY BEFORE, THE WEEK BEFORE.

SO THOSE KIND OF THINGS SHE KEEPS UP WITH ON A REGULAR BASIS AND DOES A VERY GOOD JOB OF IT.

ONE EXAMPLE IS ON FIREARMS, THE NOT BEEN TESTING ON FIREARMS. SO WE CAN CATALOG IF THERE'S A WEAPON THAT HAS BEEN USED IN A CRIME.

SHE MAKES SURE THAT THOSE ARE TESTED AND TAKES THOSE THROUGH THE ATF PROCESS.

AND SO IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF THE PROCESS THAT MOST PEOPLE DON'T SEE ON A REGULAR BASIS.

ALL THE DEPUTIES BACK HERE, THEY KNOW WHAT WHAT A VALUABLE ASSET SHE IS TO THE AGENCY.

AND SO WE'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE HER TODAY. AND THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO DO THAT AS EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER.

DO YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? DESTINY. I WAS WARNED.

I WAS WARNED. NO, I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY THAT ASSISTED WITH THAT.

ALL THE CITY DEPUTIES, THE SERGEANT, EVERYBODY THAT HELPED ME.

ALL THE GUYS. THANK YOU FOR TAKING CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM WHENEVER I ASK YOU TO FIX THINGS.

IT'S IT'S A TEDIOUS PROCESS. AND IF IT WASN'T, IF I DIDN'T HAVE THE HELP FROM MY CURRENT SQUAD THAT I WORK WITH ON THE MOVE, IT WOULDN'T HAVE GONE AS SMOOTH AS IT DID. SO THEY THEY EARNED THIS JUST AS MUCH AS I DID.

THANK YOU. AND DESTINY, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS.

WHEN WE TOOK YOUR OFFICE AWAY AND YOU STILL HAD TO WORK IN EVIDENCE THROUGH THROUGH A DEMOLITION, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR BEING GRACIOUS AND PATIENT WITH US AS WE'RE TRYING TO GET THAT BUILDING DONE THE BEST WE CAN.

AND YOU ARE A BIG PART IN ALLOWING US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONSTRUCTION AND YOUR WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH US.

SO I JUST WANT TO PERSONALLY THANK YOU FOR FOR DOING THAT.

SO THANK YOU. OKAY, THAT BRINGS US

[2) PUBLIC FORUM:]

TO AGENDA ITEM TWO. PUBLIC FORUM. IT'S THE PUBLIC'S OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE COURT REGARDING ANY COUNTY MATTERS.

ONE PERSON HAS SIGNED UP. CARRIE. IMAN, IF YOU'LL COME FORWARD NOW, PLEASE.

AND WHILE CARRIE IS COMING UP, JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T SIGNED UP WILL NOT PREVENT YOU FROM SPEAKING.

[00:15:02]

SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO DO SO, JUST ONCE. CARRIE'S DONE.

MAKE YOUR WAY FORWARD. WELCOME, CARRIE. HI. THANK YOU.

MY NAME IS CARRIE IMAN. I LIVE AT 552 EASTER DRIVE.

IT IS ON THE AGENDA TODAY ON THREE POINT G. THERE IS LAND LOT 15 THERE ON EASTWARD DRIVE THAT IS DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY. I JUST WANTED TO VOICE MY CONCERNS ABOUT ANY ACTIVITY THAT HAPPENS THERE.

IT IS A FLOOD ZONE. THE PROPERTY, MY HOME AND THE, THE GREEN SPACE.

THERE IS A FLOOD ZONE. AND IT SAYS HERE THEY'RE GOING TO CLEAR A PORTION OF THE LAND.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ANY, ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS TO THAT LAND DOES NOT AFFECT THE WAY THE WATER FLOWS WHEN IT RAINS THE WATER COMES DOWN THE HILL AND THEN IT GOES DOWN THE GUTTER AROUND MY HOUSE, DOWN TO THE CREEK, DOWN TO HACKBERRY CREEK.

OKAY. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS AWARE THAT ANY CONSTRUCTION DOESN'T ALTER THAT FLOW OF WATER THERE.

THE STREET WEST VIEW THAT CONNECTS TO EASTWARD, WHICH CONNECTS TO WHERE THIS NEW PARK IS GOING TO GO CURRENTLY DOES NOT BELONG TO THE COUNTY. I'M NOT SURE WHY THE COUNTY DID NOT TAKE OWNERSHIP OF IT.

BUT I GUESS IT BELONGS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I DON'T KNOW IF WE KNEW IT BELONGS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IT DOES NEED SOME WORK. SO AGAIN, MY CONCERN IS ONCE THIS PARK IS OPEN TO THE COMMUNITY OF PEOPLE DRIVING DOWN THIS ROAD IF THE COUNTY COULD TAKE HOLD OF THAT ROAD AND REPAIR THAT ROAD FOR PEOPLE TO COME DOWN IT SAFELY.

MY OTHER CONCERN IS THIS LAND HAS BEEN THERE FOR 22 YEARS.

THERE IS A GRASSY AREA THAT TOUCHES MY PROPERTY AND MY NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY, AND WE HAVE MUTUALLY MOWED THAT AREA.

SINCE THE COUNTY WAS NOT AWARE OF THE PROPERTY FOR A LONG TIME.

WE'VE MUTUALLY MOWED THAT GRASSY AREA THERE, SO ONCE THE COUNTY TAKES HOLD OF IT, WE'RE ASSUMING Y'ALL ARE GOING TO COME AND NOW MOW THAT AREA THERE. SO JUST AS A CONCERNED CITIZEN OF THE CONSTRUCTION HAPPENING NEXT TO OUR HOUSE ALSO THIS PROPERTY TOUCHES 4 OR 5 NEIGHBORS HOUSES. WE DO NOT HAVE FENCE LINES.

WE DON'T WANT FENCE LINES, BUT THAT PROPERTY TOUCHES OUR PROPERTY LINE.

SO AGAIN, MY CONCERN IS IF PEOPLE COME TO THIS PARK, HOW ARE THEY GOING TO KNOW WHAT'S PUBLIC PROPERTY VERSUS WHAT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY? SO I'M EAGER TO HEAR THE DISCUSSION LATER TODAY ABOUT THE REQUEST AND PROPOSAL FOR THIS PARK.

HEY, CARRIE, REAL QUICK, IS 552 AT THE END OF THE CUL DE SAC? YES, SIR. 14. GOT IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? EXCUSE ME. THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COURT.

YES, PLEASE COME UP. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

YES, SIR. MY NAME IS LAUREN DOMINGUEZ SANCHEZ.

I'M AT 517 WESTWOOD DRIVE IN THE SAME COMMUNITY AS CARRIE.

I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF SECOND HER CONCERNS.

AND WE HAVE A REALLY BAD DRAINAGE PROBLEM IN THAT WHOLE ADDITION.

I'M ON THE CUL DE SAC ON THE OTHER SIDE, LIKE THE STREET RIGHT OVER.

AND AGAIN, THE SAME CONCERNS FOR DRAINAGE IS IT'S A HUGE CONCERN FOR THAT AREA.

WE GET DRAINAGE FROM SOUTH CREEK COMING ALL THE WAY DOWN AS WELL AS WESTWARD COMING DOWN.

AND THEN IT ALL, OH, EXCUSE ME, FLOWS INTO THAT FLOOD ZONE THAT CARRIES AT THE END OF HER CUL DE SAC AS WELL.

SO THE DRAINAGE IS A HUGE CONCERN, JUST AGAIN, TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT IF SOMETHING IS BUILT IN THAT AREA, THAT IT DOESN'T BACK UP EVEN FURTHER ONTO WESTWARD OR SOUTH CREEK OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

AND SHE ALSO MENTIONED THE ROADS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVING OWNERSHIP OF THOSE ROADS.

THERE ARE GOING TO BE NOW FOUR STREETS THAT WOULD BE USED TO ACCESS THIS PARK OR AREA BEING EAST OR EASTWARD, SORRY. WESTVIEW EASTWARD. EAST CREEK AND WESTWARD AS WELL.

SO THOSE FOUR AREAS WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE COUNTY TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THOSE.

SO IF THERE ARE, IF THERE IS MORE TRAFFIC ON THAT, THEN THAT'S TAKEN CARE OF AS WELL.

SO JUST WANT TO SECOND HER CONCERNS AS WELL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COURT. ALL RIGHT.

SEEING NO ONE, WE WILL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM THREE A DISCUSS AND ACT ON UPDATES AND PROGRESS RELATED TO THE COURTHOUSE COURTROOM ADDITIONS,

[3.A) Discuss/Act on updates and progress related to the Courthouse Courtroom additions 3rd floor project, and all related issues; (Commissioner Gallana)]

THIRD FLOOR PROJECT, AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER GALLINA.

I SEE THAT SAL IS MAKING HIS WAY UP. I'LL TURN IT OVER TO HIM.

SO UPDATE IS STILL WAITING ON THE AUDIT. SO NO UPDATE.

OTHER THAN WHAT WE SAID LAST TIME. I HAVE BEEN GETTING MORE RESPONSE FROM THEM BEING A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A PEST.

SO I'M OPTIMISTIC WE'LL HAVE AT LEAST A TIMELINE SET FOR Y'ALL BY THE NEXT COURT.

[00:20:01]

ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR SAL AND HIS WAITING ON AN AUDIT? HEARING NONE, WE WILL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM THREE B, DISCUSS AND ACT ON THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY EXPANSION PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND ALL RELATED

[3.B) Discuss/Act on the District Attorney Expansion Project construction, and all related issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

ISSUES. COMMISSIONER STACY. WELL, THIS WILL BE A STANDING ITEM ON COURT.

UNTIL THE BUDGET EITHER FUNDS THIS OR DOESN'T.

BUT EITHER WAY, HERE'S SAL TO GIVE US AN UPDATE OF WHAT HIM AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON.

YEAH. GOOD MORNING. SO WE HAVEN'T SPOKEN ON THIS ONE JUST YET SINCE WE APPROVED OUR CONTRACT SOME TIME AGO.

SO WHERE WE'RE AT NOW IS A 50% CD SET THAT WAS ISSUED ROUGHLY A WEEK AND A HALF AGO.

WE HAVE DONE A PAGE TURN. WE HAVE ALSO DONE A FINISH REVIEW MEETING.

AND WE'VE DONE A REDUCTION IN SCOPE. SO THAT REDUCTION IN SCOPE ALSO COMES WITH A REDUCTION IN PARKING FEES.

SO THAT REDUCTION, IT'S NOT QUITE A 5050 REDUCTION, BUT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE REMOVING OUR DD PHASE FROM OUR SCOPE OF SERVICES, WHICH IS ROUGHLY $70,000. AND WE'RE SPLITTING OUR CD PHASE INTO TWO HALVES WHICH WAS OUR 50% CD, AND THEN IT'LL BE 100% CD. SO I THINK OUR CD PHASE IS CLOSER TO ABOUT 8000.

AND SO WE'VE JUST REMOVED 70,000 FROM IT. BUT THAT COMES ALONG WITH THE REDUCTION OF ACTUAL PROJECT SCOPE AS WELL.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT. BIG PICTURE WITH PARK HILLS PART OF IT.

WE DO HAVE A SCHEDULE UPDATE FOR YOU ALL. SO WE ANTICIPATE TO HAVE 100% BIDDING DOCUMENTS READY BY AUGUST 3RD, WHICH WILL BE READY FOR COURT BY AUGUST 11TH.

THAT WILL PUT BIDDING OPEN BY AUGUST 14TH AND WILL MAKE BIDS DUE BY AUGUST 28TH, WHICH WILL BE ON FOR COURT APPROVAL BY SEPTEMBER 8TH.

THAT'S WHAT WE HOPE. SO IF ALL GOES WELL WITH BIDDING, WE WILL HAVE A AN AWARDED OR A WINNING BIDDER FOR COURT APPROVAL BY SEPTEMBER 8TH.

SO HOW DOES THAT FALL INTO OUR TIMELINE AS FAR AS THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET? SO MY GOAL RIGHT NOW IS TO HAVE THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE BUDGET BY AUGUST 10TH.

WE, WE CAN, WE HAVE SOME ESTIMATES ONCE WE GET THE BIDDING DOCUMENTS CLOSED UP SO WE CAN EARMARK SOME MONEY IF WE WANTED TO.

AND JUST KNOW, I MEAN, I THINK IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE CLOSE TO $1 MILLION.

I MEAN, IF WE WERE JUST GOING TO THROW A NUMBER OUT THERE. SO AND THEN ONCE WE GET THE SEALED BIDS, WE CAN KIND OF GO FROM THERE. BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE PLAYING WITH.

WE'VE GOT TO GET SOME LEGAL REVIEW. WE GOT TO GET SOME AUDITOR REVIEW THIS.

YOU KNOW, I WAS TRYING TO RUSH THE PROCESS AND IT'S JUST AN ARDUOUS PROCESS TO GET THE BID RIGHT.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON DOING. SO IN THEORY, WHEN THE BID IS READY WE COULD HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING TO THAT COULD POTENTIALLY SPEED THE PROCESS UP. BUT THERE'S NO GUARANTEE OF THAT UNTIL WE'VE HAD THE FULL LEGAL REVIEW.

SO I WILL BE BRINGING THAT BACK TO THE JUDGE.

ONCE IT'S READY TO SEE IF IT MAKES SENSE FOR HIM TO CALL A SPECIAL MEETING TO PUT THE BID ON THE STREET.

BUT I DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW IF THAT WOULD MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SEE IF IT'S EVEN POSSIBLE.

BECAUSE REALLY IT'S ABOUT CATCHING, YOU KNOW, A REGULAR COURT DATE AND THEY'RE PRETTY RIGID.

SO ANYWAYS, I'M WORKING ON IT, BUT THAT, BUT THAT'S THE UPDATE.

THE GOOD NEWS IS BARRY'S MET WITH PARK HILL. WE HAVE A FULL FINISHED SCHEDULE.

WE HAVE A A FULL FURNITURE SCHEDULE THAT'S GETTING PUT TOGETHER FOR A TURNKEY PROJECT.

SO WE ARE DOING A LOT OF WORK. IT'S JUST NOT QUITE LANDING HOW WE WANT IT TO LAND.

AND SO WE'VE DONE A FULL PAGE TURN, LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING THAT'S FUN.

DOOR SCHEDULES YOU KNOW WHAT THE MECHANICAL IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE, WHAT SOME OF THE ISSUES ARE AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES.

AND THEN DONE THE PLAN DESIGN AND GONE THROUGH THE SCHEDULE OF HOW THIS IS GOING TO GO AND WHAT WALLS WE'RE GOING TO GET TAKEN OUT AND WHERE THE LIGHTS ARE GOING TO GO AND ALL THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. SO WE'VE DONE ALL OF THAT. SO WE REALLY HAVE MOVED IT REALLY FAR ALONG, BUT IT'S JUST KIND OF AT THAT.

IT'S JUST OUR COURT SCHEDULE IS NOT LINING UP WITH OUR WORK RIGHT NOW.

AND THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF BEEN THE DEVIATION POINT QUESTIONS.

YOU WANT A QUESTION THAT'S PROBABLY TOO TOO SOON AND YOU MAY BE UNFAIR.

SURE. SO $1 MILLION YOU THINK WILL BE KIND OF IN THE RANGE.

THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT. SAL HAS MORE THOUGHTS ON THAT.

IT'S ESSENTIALLY IT'S A IT'S A FINISH OUT. IT'S NOT A FULL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. SO OUR THOUGHT IS YOU'RE GOING TO LIKELY BE IN THE 200 TO PROBABLY $235 A SQUARE FOOT RANGE.

BUT THAT ALSO INCLUDES WE'RE ADDING IN FURNITURE AS, AS AN ALLOWANCE IN THERE AS WELL.

SO WE'RE ADDING A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WHAT WE NORMALLY WOULD SHOW JUST FOR FINISH OUT, BUT THAT PULLS IT AROUND THAT 800 TO $850,000 MARK.

OKAY. AND THAT'S JUST BEING CONSERVATIVE. IF TYPICALLY CONTRACTORS ADD ON ANOTHER 5% EITHER CONTINGENCY AND OR FEE TO THAT AS WELL.

AND THEN WE ALWAYS LIKE TO ADD ON ANOTHER 5% OF DESIGN CONTINGENCY FOR STUFF THAT JUST HAPPENS THAT WE'RE NOT AWARE OF YET.

SO THAT WOULD PROBABLY PUSH A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO A MILLION. I BELIEVE IT WILL BE UNDER BIDS THAT I'VE SEEN FOR ON THE COMPETITIVE SEALED SIDE HAVE BEEN COMING IN FAIRLY LOWER

[00:25:09]

THAN OUR ESTIMATES HAVE RECENTLY. SO I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF OPTIMISM THAT THIS ONE COULD COME IN A LITTLE BIT LOWER.

GOOD. AND ARE YOU THINKING THIS IS GENERAL FUND MONEY OR WHAT'S THE THOUGHT ON THAT? IT STARTS AUGUST 10TH, SIR. THANK YOU. THAT'S WHY I SAID IT WAS PROBABLY AN UNFAIR QUESTION.

FAIR ENOUGH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR SAL? ALL RIGHT.

THANKS, SAL. THAT'LL TAKE US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE.

[3.C) Discuss/Act on updates and progress related to the Sheriff's remodel, and all related issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

C DISCUSS AND ACT ON UPDATES AND PROGRESS RELATED TO THE SHERIFF'S REMODEL AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER. STACY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SAL GIVE AN UPDATE ON THIS.

HE'S JUST GOING TO BE HERE FOR A MINUTE OR SO.

YEAH. THANK YOU, MEREDITH, FOR, FOR, FOR ALLOWING US TO JUST HAVE THIS BE THIS CONSISTENT.

I BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I WANT THE COURT TO KNOW WE ARE FINE TUNING ALL THE BUDGETS WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

I'VE BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY WITH THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE, AUDITING ALL OF OUR ALLOWANCES, ALL OF OUR BILLS TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE GET INTO THE BUDGET PROCESS, THAT WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, BECAUSE FINISHING IT IS SUPER HIGH PRIORITY SINCE WE'RE THIS FAR ALONG.

I HAVE SEEN NOTHING THAT GIVES ME PAUSE OR I'M GOING TO DROP THIS BOMB ON AUGUST 10TH WHEN IT GETS TO THE BUDGET.

I THINK WE'RE GOOD. I'VE BEEN DOING A LOT OF MATH.

I'LL BE DOING SOME MORE THIS WEEK AND LISA'S BEEN CHECKING MY WORK.

SO SAL, LISA AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING HARD ON ALL OF THE ALLOWANCES, EVERYTHING IN THE CONTRACT, OUTSIDE OF THE CONTRACT, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH CI ON EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING ON WITH THE REMODEL AND ANY ISSUES I DON'T SEE FORESEE ANYTHING.

BUT IF WE DO, IT'LL KIND OF BE ON THE NEXT COURT.

AND I'M TRYING TO GET THAT ALL WRAPPED UP SO THAT IF WE DO DECIDE, HEY, WE WANT TO RUN WITH THE DA'S OFFICE, IT DOESN'T BECOME THIS LAST MINUTE. OH, AND BY THE WAY, WE NEED $100,000 TO FINISH THE SHERIFF'S REMODEL.

SO I'M TRYING TO GET ALL OF THAT TOGETHER BEFORE THE FIRST DRAFT, SO WE CAN BE TALKING ABOUT THAT KIND OF OPENLY AND SUCCINCTLY TO, TO GET TO GET THAT PROJECT DONE. SO I JUST WANT THE COURT TO KNOW ABOUT THAT. BUT I'LL HAVE SAL GIVE US AN UPDATE. YEAH.

SO FIRST OFF, WE ARE STILL ON SCHEDULE, STILL AIMING FOR A MIDDLE OF SEPTEMBER TURNOVER TO THE OWNER FOR SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION.

AND THAT'S JUST ABOUT RIGHT IN LINE WITH WHERE WE'RE AT WITH FURNITURE AS WELL, WHICH IS GOING TO BE A MIDDLE OF SEPTEMBER DELIVERY FOR FURNITURE. SO IT'S LOOKING LIKE FURNITURE AND BUILDING COMPLETION SHOULD BE RIGHT IN LINE WITH EACH OTHER, WHICH IS GOOD NEWS.

SINCE WE LAST MET AT COURT, THERE HAS BEEN SOME HANDRAILING GUARD RAILING THAT'S GONE UP THROUGHOUT THE BUILDING.

HVAC HAS BEEN LARGELY TURNED ON IN AREA A, WHICH IS KIND OF THE SOUTH OLD JAIL PORTION.

AREA A IS ACTUALLY LARGELY COMPLETE AND IS BEING PARTIALLY USED NOW, ESPECIALLY WITH EVIDENCE BEING RELOCATED NOW.

SO THAT IS ACTUALLY OPERATIONAL. THE EXERCISE ROOM HAS BEEN KIND OF FITTED OUT WITH ALL OF THE FINISHES THAT IT NEEDS FOR SPEAKERS AND MIRRORS AND, AND RESILIENT FLOORING AND WALL COVERING. STOREFRONT HAS BEEN INSTALLED.

SO WE HAVE A NICE NEW FRONT TO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.

SO IF YOU REMEMBER, THERE'S KIND OF A ALAMO LOOKING FRONT AND THEN RIGHT PAST IT, THERE'S ANOTHER KIND OF SOFFIT.

SO AT THAT SOFFIT WE HAVE A NEW STOREFRONT, WHICH WILL BE A NEW ENTRANCE FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND KIND OF THEIR PUBLIC ENTRYWAY THAT HAS BEEN INSTALLED. NOW IT'S COVERED UP BY WOOD, BUT IT IS INSTALLED ON THE INSIDE HALF, SAW CUTS AND POOR BACKS.

SO IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS WE NEED TO SAW CUT INTO THE EXISTING SLAB TO PLACE FLOOR BOXES PER CODE, AND THOSE HAVE LARGELY BEEN CUT AND POURED BACK AND COMPLETED NOW AS WELL.

SO THAT'S KIND OF THE LAST PART OF THE NORTH SIDE THAT REALLY WILL PREVENT US FROM REALLY MOVING ON FINISHES.

SO I THINK OTHER THAN THAT THE BREAK ROOM AND THE DISPATCH AREA ARE STILL PROBABLY THE LEAST ALONG, BUT THOSE WERE THE LAST TWO TO GET DEMOLISHED. SO NOT A WHOLE LOT OF WORK WHEN IT COMES TO NEW WALLS IN THERE, BUT THOSE ARE PROBABLY THE LEAST FURTHEST ALONG OUT OF EVERYTHING. BUT THEY ARE CATCHING UP QUICKLY. ALL RIGHT.

QUESTIONS FOR SAL. THANK YOU. SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM THREE.

[3.D) Discuss/Act on approving Prime Contract Change Order No. 034 and 034 to the agreement with SCI Construction for the Rockwall County Sheriff Office Renovation project, and all related issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

D DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING PRIME CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 034 AND 034.

LET'S CALL THAT 035 TO THE AGREEMENT WITH CI CONSTRUCTION FOR ROCKWALL COUNTY SHERIFF OFFICE RENOVATION PROJECT AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER STACY YES, I SAL'S HERE FOR QUESTIONS.

THIS IS SAUL CUTTING THAT WE KNEW WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO DO.

AND I DRAINED THE ALLOWANCE AND JUST PUT EVERYTHING IN THE CONTINGENCY.

THAT WAS A DECISION THAT I THOUGHT WAS A GOOD DIRECTION FOR THE COURT TO GO.

JUST, AGAIN, HOW THE CONTRACT WAS WRITTEN. WE HAVE TO VOTE ON EVERYTHING IN THE CONTINGENCY ANYWAY.

SO I HAVE ALL THESE ALLOWANCES, BUT THIS IS THIS WAS ALL KNOWN ACTIVITY.

AND AND WE'RE JUST WORKING ON FINISHING OUT ALL THESE SAUL CUTS, ALL THESE POOR BACKS AND GETTING THE OLD JAIL COMPLETELY ONLINE.

ANY QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

ALL RIGHT, JUDGE, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE.

PCO NUMBER 34 AND 35 TO THE CONTRACT WITH SSI.

CONSTRUCTION FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE REMODEL PROJECT.

[00:30:03]

GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACEY. I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTE NOW, PLEASE. YES.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THANK YOU SAL. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE E DISCUSS AND ACT ON A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE ROCKWALL COUNTY

[3.E) Discuss/Act on a Memorandum of Understanding with the Rockwall County Extension Master Gardeners for the creation and maintenance of the Learning Gardens at the Rockwall County Courthouse, and all related issues; (Judge New)]

EXTENSION MASTER GARDENERS FOR THE CREATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE LEARNING GARDENS AT ROCKWALL COUNTY COURTHOUSE AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

TODD WILLIAMS IS OUT OF TOWN. SO, COURT, WHAT THIS IS, IS THE MASTER GARDENERS TAKING CONTROL OF THE FLOWERBEDS THAT THEY'RE ALREADY IN CONTROL OF. THIS IS ESTABLISHING OUR UNDERSTANDING.

THEY ARE ASKING THEY HAVE $7,000 TO SPEND AND THEY'RE ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL $8,650 TO SPEND THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ALLOCATE FROM OUR CONTINGENCY FUND TO, TO ALLOW THEM TO GO AHEAD WITH THE WITH THE GARDENS.

QUESTIONS. YES, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THIS, BY THE WAY.

JUST ONE THING. AND I TRIED TO REACH TODD BUT WAS UNABLE TO.

SO I PROBABLY WAITED TOO LONG. HE IS ON A DELAYED.

WELL NO, HE'S AT TRAINING NOW, BUT HAS BEEN ON A DELAYED HONEYMOON IN NEW ZEALAND OR AUSTRALIA, I CAN'T REMEMBER. YEAH, GOOD. I'M ON A PERPETUAL HONEYMOON.

GOOD. JUST IN CASE ANYBODY'S LISTENING. SO BUT IN HERE IN THIS OPERATIONAL AGREEMENT, THIS MOU, IT SAYS A YEARLY BUDGET WILL BE SET BY BOTH ORGANIZATIONS AND FUND.

ANY IDEA THIS. I WOULDN'T IMAGINE THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF MONEY, RIGHT? IT'S GOING TO BE PRETTY. YEAH. I WOULDN'T IMAGINE THE MASTER GARDENERS WILL BRING IT TO US.

YEAH. AND WE WILL GET TO APPROVE IT. SO I WOULDN'T I WOULD IMAGINE IT BEING ABOUT THE SAME ABOUT $15,000.

WELL THEY WILL THEY STILL CONTINUE TO MAYBE RAISE THEIR PORTION LIKE THEY HAVE WHAT THEY ALREADY HAVE.

YES. OKAY. YES. I'M HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION, IF YOU PLEASE.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE ROCKWALL COUNTY EXTENSION MASTER GARDENERS FOR THE CREATION AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THE LEARNING GARDENS AT ROCKWALL COUNTY COURTHOUSE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MOLATE.

SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GILLEN. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ARE WE GOING TO MAKE A SEPARATE MOTION ABOUT THE APPROPRIATION? IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO MAKE A SEPARATE MOTION ABOUT THE APPROPRIATION.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THAT. SO IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW JUST ON THE MOU IT PASSES 5 TO 0 AND THEN I'LL ENTERTAIN A SECONDARY MOTION. YOU HAD THE FACTS AND FIGURES.

DO YOU MIND MAKING THE MOTION? EXCUSE ME. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TAKE $8,650 FROM OUR CONTINGENCY TO USE FOR THE ROCKWALL COUNTY EXTENSION MASTER GARDENERS FOR THE CREATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE LEARNING GARDENS AT ROCKWALL COUNTY COURTHOUSE. I SECOND THAT, SO WE HAVE MY MOTION.

WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH, IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW, PLEASE.

AND THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE F CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN ORDER AND RESOLUTION OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF ROCKWALL COUNTY,

[3.F) Consider and take action on an Order and Resolution of the Commissioners Court of Rockwall County, Texas, accepting the dedication to Rockwall County of the recreational area (Lot 15, Block A) shown on the Final Plat of Westview Addition, Phase Two, an addition to Rockwall County, Texas, situated in the Jeremiah R. Marrs Survey, Abstract No. 152, recorded in the Plat Records of Rockwall County, Texas and approved on June 28, 2004; direct recording of the Order and Resolution in the Official Public Records of Rockwall County and notice to the Rockwall Central Appraisal District, and all related issues; (Commissioner Liechty)]

TEXAS. ACCEPTING THE DEDICATION TO ROCKWALL COUNTY, THE RECREATIONAL AREA, LOT 15, BLOCK A, SHOWN ON THE FINAL PLAT OF THE WESTVIEW ADDITION PHASE TWO.

IN ADDITION TO ROCKWALL COUNTY, TEXAS, SITUATED IN THE JEREMIAH R MARS SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 152, RECORDED IN THE PLAT RECORDS OF ROCKWALL COUNTY, TEXAS, AND APPROVED ON JUNE 28TH, 2004.

DIRECT RECORDING OF THE ORDER AND RESOLUTION IN THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF ROCKWALL COUNTY.

A NOTICE TO THE ROCKWALL CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

AND YOU KNOW, WHEN A REAL ESTATE ATTORNEY HAS WRITTEN AN AGENDA ITEM.

SO TAKE IT AWAY. COMMISSIONER LICHTY. THANK YOU JUDGE.

OKAY, SO ITEMS THREE F AND THREE G ARE RELATED.

I WILL TRY AND KEEP MY COMMENTS ON EACH OF THEM RELATED TO THAT SPECIFIC MATTER.

BUT I'M SURE THERE WILL BE BLEED OVER. AND I'D LIKE TO THANK THE FOLKS FROM THE WESTVIEW SUBDIVISION THAT CAME OUT.

I'VE GOT A JOB FOR BOTH OF YOU OR ONE OF YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE AS SOON AS THIS IS OVER.

SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO FORMALLY ACCEPT EIGHT AND A HALF ACRES, 8.51 ACRES OF LAND TO THE

[00:35:02]

COUNTY THAT WAS DEDICATED WHEN THIS PROPERTY WAS ADDED IN 2004.

WHY IT WASN'T ACCEPTED AT THAT TIME, I DON'T KNOW.

AS THE THE FOLKS WHO SPOKE HAVE INDICATED, IT APPEARS THAT THIS WAS DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY IN 2004 AND NOTHING WAS DONE FOR THE LAST 22 YEARS BY THE COUNTY. AND THANK YOU FOR MOWING THE LAWN.

IT LOOKED VERY NICE OUT THERE, BY THE WAY. SO ANYWAY, THE PLAT WAS FILED, BUT THERE WAS NO FORMAL ACCEPTANCE.

AND THE RESOLUTION THAT'S ATTACHED AT THIS ITEM THREE F IS PRETTY MUCH SELF-EXPLANATORY.

IT'LL CREATE AN OBLIGATION ON US AND I WANT THE COURT TO, TO FOCUS ON THIS BECAUSE AS, AS THE PEOPLE IN THAT SUBDIVISION HAVE NOTED WE'VE DONE NOTHING. THAT'S NOT GOOD. THIS PROPERTY WAS DEDICATED FOR A RECREATIONAL AREA.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT OPEN SPACES, AND NONE OF THIS CRITICISM IS DIRECTED TOWARD ANYONE ON THIS COURT, BY THE WAY. IF IT IS CRITICISM, IT'S REALLY NOT.

IT'S JUST WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT OPEN SPACES, BUT WE'VE NEVER REALLY DONE ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

AND THIS IS A CHANCE FOR US TO DO SOMETHING IN A VERY SMALL WAY AND KIND OF GET OUR FEET WET.

SO THE RESOLUTION CREATES ALLOWS US TO LEGALLY ACCEPT THE PROPERTY.

I WOULD THINK THIS IS RELATIVELY CONTROVERSIAL NON-CONTROVERSIAL BECAUSE WHAT ELSE ARE WE GOING TO DO? RIGHT? AND THEN WHEN WE GET TO THE NEXT ITEM, WE'LL TALK ABOUT WHAT WE WOULD DO WITH IT AFTER THAT.

AND I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH SECTION 1.10 OF OUR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, WHICH WE'VE DISCUSSED WITH OTHER DEVELOPERS ON OTHER PROJECTS.

THAT THERE THEY HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO I'LL READ IT HERE.

TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE, ALL PLATS AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS SHOULD BE DESIGNED IN A WAY TO PROMOTE THE STATED OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN AND ALLOW FOR ITS FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION. THAT'S WHAT WAS DONE HERE.

WE JUST NEED TO TAKE THE LEGAL ACTION TO TO ACCEPT IT.

THAT'S WHAT THIS IS DOING. SO THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY CRITICISM, BUT THOSE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS DON'T GOVERN SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE 22 YEARS AGO, MOST LIKELY. BUT THAT DOESN'T MATTER. I STILL THINK IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE DIRECTION OF THE COURT.

THE SECOND THING IS WHO'S BEEN PAYING TAXES ON THIS PROPERTY FOR 22 YEARS.

WELL, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. I THINK IF IT'S COUNTY PROPERTY, I DON'T KNOW.

DO WE PAY TAXES? WE DON'T. BUT IT'S NOT OUR PROPERTY YET.

OR IS IT? THE CAD SHOWS THAT IT IS. OKAY. THAT WAS MY.

YOU ANSWERED THE QUESTION I WAS GETTING. SHOWS THAT IT IS.

YEAH. OKAY. WELL, THIS IS THIS IS DEFINITELY SEPARATE THAN THE NEXT ITEM.

SO YES, I DO AGREE WITH YOU. THIS IS A LOT LESS CONTROVERSIAL THAN WHAT TO DO WITH THE LAND.

IT WAS DONATED TO US. THE CAD SHOWS IT'S US. SO YEAH, THAT MAKES MORE SENSE.

THANK YOU. YEAH. AND I WANTED TO SAY THAT IT ALSO SUPPORTS THE STRATEGIC PLAN FOR OPEN SPACES.

YES IT DOES. IT'S ONE WE DIDN'T IT'S A IT'S A BLESSING.

YEAH. NO THIS IS A I LOOK I GET AS COMMISSIONER STACY'S POINT AND HE'S 100% CORRECT.

THIS WAS DEDICATED BEFORE SECTION 1.10 WAS ADDED TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS.

BUT IT IS. HAD THAT BEEN IN THERE AT THE TIME, THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN CONSISTENT WITH IT.

AND IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE TALK ABOUT. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH OUR OPEN SPACE PLAN.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S OTHER QUESTIONS OR NOT.

YEAH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND I AGREE THESE TWO ARE KIND OF LINKED, BUT THE THREE F IS MORE.

I DON'T KNOW, NEUTRAL IN ITS. IT'S NOT GOING TO COST US ANYTHING.

THAT'S RIGHT. IT WON'T COST US ANYTHING. BUT IF WE.

IF WE'RE NOT WILLING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH 3G.

AND I'M NOT SAYING ANYONE ISN'T. BUT IF WE'RE NOT WILLING TO DO SOMETHING WITH IT, WHAT'S THE POINT? WHAT'S THE POINT? YEAH. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

YEAH. ABOUT IT AS I LOOK AT THE MAP. ONE CONCERN I HAVE AND LET ME JUST SAY I'M FOR OPEN SPACE.

I MEAN, CLEARLY, AND I THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT SIZE AND AND I'VE SAID LET'S JUST GO.

WE DON'T WE DON'T HAVE TO START GRAND. LET'S JUST START.

BUT AS I LOOK AT THIS, PARKING IS SOMETHING THAT JUMPS OUT TO ME THAT IF THIS TRULY IS GOING TO BE AN OPEN SPACE FOR THE COUNTY AND NOT JUST FOR THE WESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD, WE, WE NEED A PLACE FOR THEM TO PARK UNLESS WE'RE GOING TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO PARK ON THE DRIVE OR IN THE CUL DE SAC, WHICH I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO ENCOURAGE THAT.

SO WE GOT TO FIGURE OUT PARKING OR THIS IS GOING TO BE JUST A PARK FOR PEOPLE WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE JUST TO PARK FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WHICH I'M OKAY WITH THAT. IF IT'S JUST A PARK FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE PARKING,

[00:40:06]

BUT THEN WE'RE GOING TO NEED SOME, IN MY OPINION, SOME COOPERATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON ONGOING MAINTENANCE.

IF WE COME IN AND PUT IN A TRAIL, WILL YOU MAINTAIN IT? AND THAT'S GOING TO TAKE FURTHER CONVERSATION.

SO I JUDGE, I 100% AGREE WITH YOU. AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT IN CONNECTION WITH THE NEXT ITEM. BUT PART OF MY PART OF THAT, I THINK IS GOING TO BE TO SHIFT THIS TO THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE.

AND AT LEAST THAT WOULD BE THE WAY I WOULD DO IT.

YOU ALL MAY DISAGREE, BUT AND TELL THEM COME UP WITH A PLAN, AND I WOULD ASSUME THAT HAS TO INCLUDE SOME PARKING, ALTHOUGH I WOULD EXPECT THAT THIS WILL BE A RECREATIONAL AREA THAT'S LIMITED 90% OR 95% TO THE USE OF PEOPLE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THAT'S OKAY.

THERE'S, I DON'T KNOW, I THINK 50 SOME LOTS OUT THERE.

IT'S NOT A HUGE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IT'S A BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD.

HOMES OUT THERE ARE BEAUTIFUL, GOT A LOT OF OPEN SPACES.

ONE OF THE LADIES THAT SPOKE DURING THE OPEN COMMENT PERIOD SAID, THEY DON'T HAVE FENCES AND THEY DON'T WANT THEM.

AND THAT'S ONE THING YOU NOTICE WHEN YOU DRIVE THROUGH THERE. YOU GOT A HUGE VIEW OF OPEN SPACES, BACKYARD TO BACKYARD, WITH NO REAL DEFINING AREA.

AND I THINK THAT THE FOLKS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ENJOY THAT AND THEY WANT IT.

I WOULD EXPECT THAT WHATEVER WE DO HERE WOULD BE LARGELY DONE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE FOLKS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

THAT WOULD BE MY GUESS. JUST BECAUSE IF YOU TO GET TO THIS, YOU GOT TO TRY TO.

IF YOU DON'T LIVE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU GOT TO MAKE IT A DESTINATION BECAUSE IT'S NOT RIGHT OFF A MAIN ROAD.

IT'S BURIED AT THE VERY BACK CORNER, THE VERY NORTHWEST CORNER OF THIS SUBDIVISION.

AND SO I WOULD THINK WE WOULD BE DOING A FAVOR FOR THE FOLKS THERE AND HELPING THEM OUT WITH A PLACE THAT THEY COULD USE PRIMARILY.

BUT I AGREE, WE SHOULD HAVE SOME PARKING. DO YOU KNOW, IS THERE AN HOA? THAT'S WHAT THERE IS NOT AN HOA. THERE IS NOT.

THERE'S NOT AN HOA. AND YOU SAID 50 LOTS ISH.

I THINK SO. YEAH. I COUNTED THEM THE OTHER DAY AND I DON'T REMEMBER.

MY MATH IS NOT AS GOOD BUT IT'S ABOUT 50 LOTS.

THERE'S THE ONES THAT ARE SHOWN HERE. THERE'S SOME OTHERS ON ANOTHER STREET THAT AREN'T REALLY SHOWN.

AND THEN THERE'S A COUPLE BACK IN A CORNER HERE.

BUT THIS IS IT'S LIKE YOU DRIVE DOWN 550. YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW THIS NEIGHBORHOOD'S THERE UNLESS YOU TURN AND GO FOR IT.

AND AS FAR AS THE THE STREETS GO, IF YOU ALL REMEMBER, WE HAD SOMETHING BEFORE OUR COURT A FEW WEEKS AGO ON BENT TRAIL ESTATES, WITH THEIR PRIVATE STREETS BEING CONVERTED TO PUBLIC.

THIS IS ANOTHER STREET OR ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THERE ARE PROBLEMS DEVELOPING WITH STREETS.

I HAVE NO ONE THAT HAS MENTIONED TO ME THAT THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS, BUT I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SIT DOWN AND TALK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ABOUT WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE TO FIX THOSE. I KNOW FROM MY PRIOR DISCUSSIONS THEY WON'T BE AS SIMPLE AS EVERYONE WOULD LIKE BECAUSE I'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS, BUT THESE ARE PRIVATE STREETS, AND THE STREETS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE PRETTY GOOD.

BUT IF LIKE THIS EASTWARD STREET AT THE VERY SOUTH END OF IT, THERE'S SOME REAL PROBLEMS DEVELOPING ON THAT ROAD AND SOMEONE NEEDS TO DEAL WITH THEM. THEY SEEM TO HAVE A LOT OF THAT WITH PRIVATE ROADS. WE DO.

THAT'S WHY ONE OF THE REASONS I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF PRIVATE ROADS.

I AM NOT A FAN AT ALL. YEAH. I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY REMAIN PRIVATE WITHOUT WITHOUT AN HOA TO SUPPORT THEM.

WELL, AND WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD AND I HAVEN'T DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH, BUT I'VE BEEN TOLD IS WHEN THIS WAS PLATTED, LIKE THE OTHER ONE, THIS WAS CONSISTENT WITH OUR OUR COUNTY REGS.

BUT THE DEVELOPER FOR WHATEVER REASON DIDN'T TURN IT OVER TO THE COUNTY.

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY ON, ON ONE OF YOUR COMMENTS, I ACTUALLY AM IN FAVOR OF THREE F AND NOT IN FAVOR OF THREE G.

SO YOU SAID YOU DON'T SEE HOW THAT COULD HAPPEN. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION NOW OR IF YOU WANT US TO MOVE TO THREE G. I THINK WE SHOULD.

MOST OF OUR DISCUSSION I THINK IS GOING TO REVOLVE AROUND THREE G.

SO I WAS JUST HE JUST SAID IF YOU KNOW THESE ARE LINKED AND I DON'T SEE THEM LINKED, IF LAND WAS GIVEN TO US WE SHOULD ACCEPT IT.

YEAH. BUT, BUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THAT LAND I THINK IS A SEPARATE DISCUSSION.

IT'S DEBATABLE. YES, YES. AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. SO IF SOMEBODY IS WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION ON THREE F WE CAN MOVE ON TO THREE G.

CAN I ASK A QUESTION ON THREE F? THOUGH I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION BECAUSE WE DID TALK ABOUT YOU KNOW, I LOOK THAT THEY DON'T HAVE FENCING. AND IF THIS IS GOING TO BE AN AREA THAT IS MAY PRIMARILY BE ONLY FOR THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN THAT SUBDIVISION, BUT IF, IF THE OPEN SPACE IS GOING TO TAG IT AS A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE COULD GO FOR WHATEVER THE PURPOSE OF IT COMES OUT TO BE, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO IF SOMEONE BRINGS A DOG AND THE DOG BITES SOMEONE AND IT'S ON THE COUNTY PROPERTY?

[00:45:06]

IF THERE'S NO FENCES OR NO WAY FOR THE THE DOGS TO BE CONTAINED, THAT'S I MEAN, I'VE HAD THAT HAPPEN IN MY OWN SUBDIVISION.

AND SO THAT IT DOESN'T GO WELL FOR THE HOA. NOW YOU DON'T HAVE AN HOA, BUT AT THIS POINT WE WOULD OWN THE PROPERTY.

WE WOULD OWN THE PROPERTY. YEAH. I WOULD THINK YOU WOULD DO THE SAME THING THEY'D HAVE IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN ON THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH OF THE COURTHOUSE OR SOUTH OF THE COURTHOUSE, OR IF IT WOULD HAPPEN ON THE GROUNDS HERE.

WE WOULD CALL OUR INSURANCE COMPANY AND SAY, DEFEND US.

I MEAN, AND THAT'S NOT A GREAT ANSWER. AND I'M NOT, BUT IT'S NOT IT'S NOT MY PLACE TO GIVE A LEGAL INTERPRETATION.

I THINK YOUR ANSWER IS SPOT ON, THOUGH. THAT IS THE ANSWER.

THAT IS THE ANSWER. IT IS THE ANSWER. ALL RIGHT.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

WE ARE STILL ON THREE F. I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE THE THAT ROCKWALL COUNTY ACCEPT THE DEDICATION OF THE RECREATIONAL AREA CALLED LOT 15 BLOCK A SHOWN ON THE FINAL PLAT OF THE WESTVIEW ADDITION PHASE TWO AND ADDITION TO ROCKWALL COUNTY, TEXAS, SITUATED IN THE JEREMIAH R MARRS SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 152 AND RECORDED IN THE PLAT RECORDS OF ROCKWALL COUNTY, TEXAS. GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY. I'LL SECOND HIS MOTION.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0.

THAT WILL TAKE US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE G DISCUSS AND ACT ON PROPOSAL TO SPEND UP TO $20,000 TO CLEAR A PORTION OF THE LAND DEDICATED TO ROCKWALL COUNTY FOR

[3.G) Discuss/Act on proposal to spend up to $20,000 to clear a portion of the land dedicated to Rockwall County for a Recreational Area in the Westview Addition, Phase Two, in the unincorporated portion of Rockwall County, to request that the Rockwall County Open Space Alliance review possible uses for the land and make a proposal to the Commissioners Court, and all related issues; (Commissioner Liechty)]

A RECREATIONAL AREA IN THE WESTVIEW ADDITION PHASE TWO IN THE UNINCORPORATED PORTION OF ROCKWALL COUNTY.

TO REQUEST THAT THE ROCKWALL COUNTY OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE REVIEW POSSIBLE USES FOR THE LAND AND MAKE A PROPOSAL TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER LICHTY. THANK YOU JUDGE. THIS IS PROPERTY WE HAVE NOW OWNED FOR AT LEAST A MINUTE.

AND WE'VE DONE NOTHING WITH IT. OKAY. OKAY. SO OBVIOUSLY THIS IS WHAT WE JUST GOT DONE TALKING ABOUT THE CURRENT CONDITION OF THIS PROPERTY IS UNUSABLE.

I DON'T THINK ANYONE WOULD DISAGREE WITH ME ON THAT.

I WENT TO THE CORNER WITH. I GOT A RECOMMENDATION FROM TRAVIS SAYLES.

YOU ALL KNOW TRAVIS WITH THE ROCKWALL COUNTY.

AND I WENT TO THE I'M SORRY, CITY OF ROCKWALL.

RIGHT. WENT TO THE WENT THERE AND TRIED TO WALK INTO IT WITH ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF OUR OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE.

THAT MEMBER OF THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE WOULDN'T JOIN ME, WOULDN'T EVEN GO INTO IT WITH ME.

I WENT AS FAR IN AS I COULD WHICH WAS NOT THAT FAR, BUT YOU CAN KIND OF GET A C FOR IT.

IT'S BASICALLY IT'S JUST LAND THAT'S NEVER BEEN CLEARED.

IT'S OVER OVERRUN WITH BRUSH AND TREES AND MOSTLY SCRAP TREES.

THERE'S PROBABLY SOME GOOD ONES IN THERE, BUT MOSTLY SCRAP TREES.

IT'S JUST COMPLETELY UNUSABLE. THERE MAY BE WILDLIFE THAT GOES THROUGH THERE.

IF YOU WALK A LITTLE WAYS IN, YOU SEE DEBRIS FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE GONE IN AND LEFT TRASH.

NOT A LOT, BUT SOME. AND SO IT'S JUST IT'S JUST UNUSED.

IT'S NEVER BEEN USED. YOU COULDN'T EVEN WALK TO THE END OF IT.

SO WHAT I DID WAS I GOT WITH ED TRAVIS AND HAD ASKED HIM TO PLEASE GIVE ME SOMEONE WHO COULD CLEAR AN AREA SO WE COULD SEE WHAT WE'VE GOT. SO AS WE GET INTO THIS DISCUSSION, I WOULD ASK EVERYBODY TO REMEMBER TWO THINGS.

ONE, I AM NOT ASKING FOR A PERMANENT SOLUTION HERE.

I'M ASKING FOR ACTION THAT WILL ALLOW US TO UNDERSTAND WHAT A PERMANENT SOLUTION MIGHT BE.

AND THE SECOND THING I'M GOING TO BE ASKING FOR IS THAT WE REFER THIS TO THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE FOR ITS ITS REVIEW AND PROPOSALS FROM THEM.

THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE THERE FOR. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, MEREDITH HAS BEEN KIND ENOUGH TO SET THIS UP IN A POWERPOINT FORM WITH FOR ME, AND I'M JUST GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH A FEW OF THESE SLIDES HERE TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA.

THERE'S THE THERE'S THE PLAT. YOU SAW THAT ON THE LAST ONE AT THE END, THE EIGHT.

IT DOESN'T SAY THE ACREAGE, BUT WE GOT 8.51 ACRES FROM ARENA IN OUR GIS DEPARTMENT.

SO SHE CAME UP WITH THAT CALCULATION. THERE IT IS.

THAT'S THE AREA. THE THIS, THIS NEXT SLIDE SHOWS THAT MOST OF THIS IS IN FLOODPLAIN.

OKAY. SOMEONE MENTIONED THAT EARLIER. AND THAT'S THAT'S CORRECT.

MOST OF THIS IS IN FLOODPLAIN. WHEN I WAS OVER THERE THERE WAS NO, NO STANDING WATER THAT I COULD SEE WHEN I WALKED THROUGH IT.

BUT I'M TOLD BY NEIGHBORS WHO I'VE SPOKEN WITH THAT WHEN YOU GET A BIG RAIN, YOU GET A LOT OF WATER AND IT FLOWS THROUGH THERE.

AND IT'S AN ISSUE. AND I UNDERSTAND THEIR CONCERN WITH WHATEVER YOU DO, DON'T MAKE IT WORSE.

AND THAT'S SHOULD ALWAYS BE THE CHARGE FOR ANY GOVERNMENT.

[00:50:04]

DO NO HARM IS THE FIRST THING. RIGHT. OKAY, LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

OKAY. THIS IS AN OUTLINE THAT I HAD DONE OF THE WORK THAT I'M ASKING TO BE DONE TODAY.

THIS, WHAT, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS DO A CLEARING AROUND THE AREA SO THAT WE COULD WALK IT AND UNDERSTAND WHAT WE HAVE. AND THEN THERE'S A LINE YOU'LL SEE CLEARED INTO THE CENTER OF THE MOST OF THE WIDEST PART OF THE AREA.

THAT RED LINE, WHICH AGAIN WOULD ALLOW US TO WALK IN AND SEE AND SEE WHAT WE'VE GOT AND WHAT TO DO.

NEXT SLIDE. AGAIN, THIS JUST SEES THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW.

YOU CAN SEE HOW DENSE THE VEGETATION IS IN THERE.

I MEAN RIGHT NOW WE'VE JUST ACCEPTED PROPERTY AND WE CAN'T, WE COULDN'T WALK IT WITHOUT A GREAT DEAL OF DIFFICULTY.

OKAY. THIS IS THE PIECE OF EQUIPMENT THAT WOULD BE USED TO CLEAR THIS.

AND THERE'S A LITTLE VIDEO SHOWING WHAT THEY DO.

YOU'LL SEE THERE'S A STACK OF DEBRIS BEHIND HIM WHERE HE'S CLEARED THE CLEARED THE WAY.

THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE. WHAT THEY SAID THEY WILL DO IS THEY WILL CHIP IT DOWN AND MAKE A WALKABLE PATH OUT OF IT SO THAT WE CAN THEN WALK IT AND HAVE THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE WALK IT. AND WHEN I WAS TALKING, WHEN I MADE A COMMENT EARLIER TO THE FOLKS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I WOULD LOVE IT IF SOMEONE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD OR BOTH OF YOU OR MORE PEOPLE WOULD COME AND WORK WITH THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE ON TRYING TO DEVELOP A PROPOSAL FOR WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO TO THIS AREA.

OKAY. BECAUSE WE DO WANT YOUR INPUT, WE WANT COMMUNITY INPUT.

I DON'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO RUIN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S THE LAST THING WE WANT TO DO. BUT WE HAVE THIS GROUP CALLED THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE, WHICH WAS FORMED IN 2016, I THINK IT WAS. AND THEY'RE TO LOOK AT OPEN SPACES IN IN ROCKWALL COUNTY.

AND SO THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING WE ALWAYS NEED VOLUNTEERS.

WE NEED PEOPLE TO COME HELP. SO I WOULD URGE BOTH OF YOU OR ONE OF YOU OR SOME MEMBER FROM YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO VOLUNTEER AND SAY, I WILL WORK WITH YOU ON TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO HERE.

OKAY, LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. OKAY, SO NOW THIS IS AN INTERESTING SLIDE.

THE NEXT FEW PAGES YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ARE PAGES TAKEN DIRECTLY OUT OF OUR OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN.

AS, AS EVERYONE ON THE COURT KNOWS, IN 2015, THE COURT ADOPTED AN OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN, WHICH ADDRESSES THREE OBJECTIVES FOR OUR COUNTY.

ONE IS WATER, WATERWAYS OF FLOODPLAINS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

THE SECOND IS TO FIND OPEN SPACE AREAS. THEY DON'T CALL THEM PARKS, BUT THEY CALL THEM OPEN SPACE AREAS FOR DEVELOPMENT.

AND THE THIRD IS TRAILS. SO THOSE ARE THE THREE OBJECTIVES.

AND THIS PROPERTY HERE IS IN THE UPPER BIG BRUSHY CREEK AREA.

THAT'S WHAT THAT'S SHOWN. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN IT IT DISCUSSES THAT.

SO LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. OKAY. THESE ARE AS YOU SEE OPEN SPACE OPPORTUNITIES.

OKAY. THESE WERE IDENTIFIED WHEN THE MASTER PLAN WAS DONE.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT OPEN SPACE OPPORTUNITY. G IT SAYS ZOLLNER BROOKS AREA AND IT'S CIRCLED.

THAT'S RIGHT WHERE THIS PROPERTY IS. SO WHEN THE MASTER PLAN WAS DONE BACK IN 2015, THIS AREA WAS HIGHLIGHTED AS A POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE OPPORTUNITY. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THE EIGHT AND A HALF ACRES WERE CONSIDERED AT THAT TIME.

THERE'S NOTHING IN THE PLAN THAT SAYS THEY WERE.

BUT THEY HAD BEEN DEDICATED BY THIS POINT. OKAY, SO IT COULD HAVE BEEN ANYWAY.

BUT THIS IS IDENTIFIED AS AN OPEN SPACE OPPORTUNITY.

AND YOU SEE DOWN THERE BELOW THEY'VE GOT HIGHLIGHT.

ONE OF THE THINGS IS A FUTURE PUBLIC PARK WHICH I THINK IS A GREAT USE OF THIS.

OKAY, LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS THE NEXT PAGE FROM OUR OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN.

AND IT TALKS ABOUT THE ZOLLNER BROOKS AREA. FOR THOSE OF YOU, MOST OF YOU I'M SURE KNOW ZOLLNER FAMILY AND THE BROOKS FAMILY ARE TWO LONG STANDING FAMILIES IN OUR COUNTY. THE ZOLLNER PROPERTY ABUTS THIS IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH.

ONE OF THE THINGS IT SAYS IN YELLOW, THEY'RE A COMMUNITY SIZED PARK FOR THIS LOCATION WOULD BE WELL POSITIONED TO SERVE THE EASTERN PART OF THE ROCKWALL ETJ. THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE ROCKWALL ETJ, I THINK.

SO I THINK THAT'S THE LAST SLIDE, ISN'T IT? NO, THERE'S A COUPLE MORE.

OKAY. SO HERE I'M GOING TO SHOW IT. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE VERY TOP OF THAT CIRCLED AREA OR ABOUT IN THE MIDDLE THERE, YOU'LL SEE TWO STREETS AND A LITTLE GREEN AREA.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT IN THE HEART OF THIS OPPORTUNITY ZONE.

[00:55:05]

OKAY. SO ARE THERE ANY MORE SLIDES OR IS THAT IT? THAT'S IT. OH, AND HERE'S THE BILL. LEAVE THAT ONE UP.

GO BACK ONE SO WE CAN KEEP THIS DURING THE DISCUSSION.

SO WHAT I'M SAYING, Y'ALL, IS THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE IDENTIFIED AS A PRIORITY IN THIS COURT. AND PEOPLE IN ROCKWALL COUNTY HAVE TALKED A LOT ABOUT.

I SERVED PROBABLY EIGHT YEARS ON THE ROCKWALL COUNTY OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE.

EVERYONE ON THERE CARES ABOUT OPEN SPACES, AND THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THINGS TO DO TO MAKE IT TO START TAKING ACTION.

TO, TO THIS POINT, OUR COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE ANY OPEN PARK AREAS.

THERE ARE COUNTIES THAT DO WILLIAMSON COUNTY IS ONE THAT'S A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THAT.

THEY HAVE FIVE LARGE PUBLIC COUNTY PARKS, NOT CITY COUNTY PARKS.

THOSE THINGS COST MONEY. AND I LOOK, AS I UNDERSTAND THAT AS WELL AS EVERYBODY.

BUT IF WE HAVE THIS PROPERTY, WE SHOULD MAXIMIZE ITS USE AND WE SHOULD DO SOMETHING WITH IT.

I'VE GOT A BID UP THERE. LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE NOW FOR $16,500.

THAT WOULD DO THE ORIGINAL MULCHING AND ALLOW US TO VIEW THE PROPERTY VIA FOOT, ATV OR GOLF CART.

THE PATH WILL BE 10 TO 20FT INSIDE THE PERIMETER OF THE TREE LINE.

AND SO THIS IS AGAIN, NOT TO SAY HERE'S OUR SOLUTION, BUT THIS IS TO OPEN IT UP ENOUGH SO THAT WE CAN LOOK AT IT AND MOVE FORWARD AND DECIDE WHAT OUR SOLUTION IS TO DO WITH THIS.

AND WITH THAT, I THINK I'VE SAID ENOUGH FOR NOW.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL HAVE.

SURE. I'LL START AND THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK YOU DID ON THIS.

I KNOW IT WAS EXTENSIVE. I APPRECIATE IT. AND I'M ALL FOR TAKING, YOU KNOW, THE LAND AND FIGURING OUT WHAT THE FUNCTION OF IT MAY BE LATER. MY CONCERN IS, DO WE KNOW IF THE COMMUNITY WANTS ANYTHING DONE TO THIS? BECAUSE WHAT WE SAID EARLIER WAS LIKELY 90% PLUS OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO UTILIZE THIS SPACE ARE GOING TO BE FROM THE COMMUNITY.

AND SO DO WE KNOW THAT THEY EVEN WANT THIS TO CHANGE FROM WHAT IT IS TODAY? BECAUSE WHETHER IT CHANGES TO A PARK OR WHETHER IT REMAINS OPEN LAND, IT'S STILL OPEN SPACE.

THAT'S TRUE. SO I'M CONCERNED BECAUSE WHAT I HEARD FROM JUST A COUPLE OF PEOPLE THAT SPOKE WAS THEIR CONCERN SEEMS TO BE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE THERE THERE'S A LOT OF PROPERTIES TOUCHING THIS AREA AND IT'S GOING TO DRASTICALLY CHANGE THE WAY THEIR PROPERTIES LOOK AND FEEL, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING MAYBE OUT THEIR BACKYARD. AND I, I DON'T WANT TO DO SOMETHING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOESN'T WANT TO DO JUST BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING TO PLANT PARKS SOMEWHERE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE UTILIZED AND BE FAVORABLE FOR.

THE COMMUNITY. THAT'S MY THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN. I HAVE A LOT MORE CONCERNS ABOUT HOW IT GETS MANAGED, AND I'M SURE OTHER PEOPLE WILL ASK THAT, LIKE, HOW DOES THIS GET MANAGED IN THE FUTURE IF WE DO SOMETHING? BUT MY MAIN ONE IS, DOES THE COMMUNITY WANT IT TO CHANGE? FAIR QUESTION.

I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. I KNOW I'VE SPOKEN TO HALF A DOZEN PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THIS, OTHER THAN THE CONCERN OVER DRAINAGE, WHICH HAS BEEN EXPRESSED HERE.

AND WHAT ARE YOU IN THE GENERAL WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO CONCEPT.

I HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY REAL NEGATIVE COMMENTS.

IT'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO HOLD A NEIGHBORHOOD HOA MEETING AS I TOLD THEM.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO COME MEET WITH ANYBODY. NO ONE'S CALLED AND SAID, HEY, CAN YOU COME OUT AND MEET WITH US? I UNDERSTAND THAT I'M PRETTY BORING. BUT AGAIN, I DON'T THINK WHAT WE'RE DOING OR WHAT THIS IS PROPOSING TO DO WOULD AFFECT THAT.

I MEAN, AGAIN, LOOKING AT THIS PROPERTY, IT IS SO OVERGROWN AND SO DENSELY VEGETATION THAT YOU CAN'T WALK THROUGH IT. SO I'M NOT GOING THROUGH AND CHOPPING EVERYTHING.

I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. I LITERALLY WANT TO CREATE A TRAIL AROUND IT SO WE CAN SEE WHAT WE HAVE AND THEN MAKE A DECISION.

AND I TOTALLY HONEST 100% WHEN I SAID, WE WOULD LOVE TO GET YOU ALL TO WORK WITH US ON THIS, BECAUSE IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, IF WHATEVER WE DO, THIS WILL PROBABLY BE USED BY THEM RIGHT NOW, I WOULD GUESS THERE'S NO USE OF IT AT ALL BECAUSE THERE'S NO WAY TO GET INTO IT.

YOU KNOW, I HEAR WELL, WE SEE WILDLIFE RUNNING IN AND OUT.

THAT'S GREAT, I LOVE THAT. AND I DON'T WANT TO DESTROY THAT.

AND I DON'T THINK THIS IS SOMEWHERE WHERE WE'RE GOING TO COME IN AND, YOU KNOW, PUT BOUNCE HOUSES AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

I MEAN, RIGHT, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, PEOPLE GO FOR WALKS.

[01:00:02]

THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO TRAILS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO THEY WALK DOWN STREETS KIND OF LIKE ONTARIO LANE.

BUT YOU COULD GO IN THERE, YOU COULD WALK IT, YOU COULD DO A REAL NICE CIRCULAR WALK, WHETHER YOU WANT TO PUT IN BARBECUE THINGS OR ENOUGH, I DON'T KNOW. AGAIN, BOBBY. EXCUSE ME.

COMMISSIONER GALLEN. I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT TO DO, AND THAT'S WHY I WANT TO SEND IT TO THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE AND SAY, COME UP WITH A PLAN. BUT I DON'T THINK THEY CAN EVEN DO THAT.

IF THEY CAN'T WALK AROUND THE PROPERTY, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE APPROPRIATE TO TASK THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE WITH SURVEYING THE HOMEOWNERS? BECAUSE I SHARE YOUR CONCERN BECAUSE I, WE HAD WHEN I WAS ON THE CITY COUNCIL IN HEATH, WE HAD A NEIGHBORHOOD WE'RE COMING IN DOING TRAILS.

THEY STOOD UP AND SAID, ABSOLUTELY NOT. WE WANT NOTHING TO DO WITH CONNECTING TO THE TRAIL SYSTEM.

MATTER OF FACT, WE OPPOSE IT. SO I THERE, THERE IS A CONTINGENT THAT THINKS TRAILS INVITES OTHERS TO COME IN, WHICH HAS NEGATIVE CONNOTATIONS TO IT. BUT WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO ASK THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE TO SURVEY THE CITIZENS THERE AND ASK, NUMBER ONE? ABSOLUTELY.

AND IF THEY DO WANT IT, WHAT DO YOU WANT? ABSOLUTELY I WOULD.

AND AGAIN, I WOULD INVITE IF WE PROCEED WITH THIS, I WOULD INVITE PEOPLE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO COME MEET WITH THE OPEN SPACE AND JOIN IT.

WE NEED BOARD MEMBERS. OKAY. BECAUSE IT'S ABSOLUTELY IMPORTANT BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS WE SAY COUNTY PARK AND EVERYBODY THINKS, OH, NO, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THIS, WHEN THIS IS IF WE DO SOMETHING, WHEN THIS IS FINISHED TWO MONTHS LATER, NO ONE BUT ANYONE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS GOING TO KNOW BECAUSE YOU JUST GOT TO SEE HOW THIS IS LAID OUT.

I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE AT 550, YOU SEE. OH, LOOK, THERE'S A PARK OVER THERE.

YOU GOT TO DRIVE TO GET HERE. AND IT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO SERVE THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO ABSOLUTELY JUDGE. IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD TASK THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE WITH, TALKING TO THEM ABOUT.

AND, AND THE MONEY YOU'RE ASKING TO SPEND HERE IS JUST GETTING IT TO THE POINT WHERE OPEN SPACE CAN COME TO AN ACCURATE ASSESSMENT OF WHAT WE HAVE. THAT IS CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT. ALL RIGHT.

SO IF IT'S THAT THICK I DON'T KNOW WHAT A PATH WOULD DO.

I MEAN I'M JUST THAT'S COMPLETE IGNORANCE. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE PLACES IN WEST TEXAS WHERE I GREW UP, IF YOU CAN'T WALK, YOU CAN'T WALK. YOU CAN CREATE A PATH, BUT YOU CAN'T GET OFF THE PATH.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THIS BAD OR NOT. BUT I GUESS I FEEL LIKE WE'RE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE AND SPENDING THE 16,500. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO YOUR IDEA OF CLEARING A PATH AND LOOKING AT IT.

WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IS WHAT WOULD THE OPEN SPACE LIKE TO DO WITH IT? I MEAN, WE'RE JUST GOING TO SPEND $16,000.

THEY COULD WALK UP AND GO, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH IT. LIKE, IT DOESN'T EVEN MAKE ANY SENSE FOR THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE TO TO WEIGH IN. I JUST FEEL LIKE WE NEED THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE TO SAY, HERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE MIGHT DO WITH THIS LAND.

YOU KNOW, GO TALK TO THE HOMEOWNERS, THAT SORT OF THING.

LIKE I, I FEEL LIKE THAT IS THAT FEELS TO ME LIKE A MORE, I GUESS A, B AND C LIKE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER IS WHAT IS IT? DOES DOES THE OPEN SPACE WANT TO DO IT? AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WE TOOK THE LAND BECAUSE IT WAS IT WAS GIVEN TO US.

I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THE DEVELOPER SAID.

AND, AND THAT'S WHAT THE CAD SHOWS. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT TAKING THE LANE EVEN REQUIRES US TO EVEN EXPLORE OR DO ANYTHING.

AND THEIR PRIVATE ROADS, I REALLY WORRY ABOUT CREATING TRAFFIC ON PRIVATE ROADS.

I JUST, I DON'T, I JUST WISH, I DON'T KNOW, I, THERE'S JUST A LOT OF THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW BEFORE I WANT TO SPEND 16,500.

BUT AS BOBBY SAID, COMMISSIONER GALANIS SAID, I DO APPRECIATE YOUR WORK AND I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR HEART FOR OPEN SPACES.

IT IS GOING TO BE A BATTLE YOU'RE GOING TO FIGHT FOR FOR NOW, UNTIL THE END OF TIME.

I MEAN, CREATING SOME SORT OF COUNTY PARKS DEPARTMENT OR WHATEVER WE'RE GOING TO DO TO MAINTAIN IT. I HAVE SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS. I JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING, AND I DON'T WANT TO SPEND MONEY ON SOMETHING THAT I DON'T FEEL LIKE HAS EVEN BEEN VISION BOARDED BY THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE.

THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERNS. SO I JUST THAT'S WHERE I'M AT IS 16,500.

YES. IN THE SCHEME OF A $55 MILLION BUDGET ISN'T A LOT OF MONEY, BUT I JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'RE HEADED.

AND I WOULD HATE TO JUST SPEND THE MONEY AND THEN HAVE THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE COME BACK AND SAY, WE WERE NEVER GOING TO DO ANYTHING ANYWAY, AND NO ONE WANTS US TO DO ANYTHING.

I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, I JUST THAT'S WHERE MY WORRY IS, WHAT I UNDERSTOOD, WHAT I UNDERSTOOD, COMMISSIONER STACEY, THAT YOU SAID IS YOU DID HAVE AN OPEN SPACE PERSON WITH YOU.

AND BECAUSE IT'S SO DENSE, THE PERSON SAID, I'M NOT WALKING IN THERE.

SO I DON'T KNOW THAT WHAT WE'RE WANTING THEM TO PROVIDE US WITH, THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT UNLESS IT CAN BE CLEARED I GUESS, I GUESS LET ME LET ME REPHRASE. I WOULD WANT THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE TO LOOK AT IT ON A MAP AND SAY,

[01:05:04]

BASED UPON THE POSITION, BASED UPON WHAT WE CAN FORESEE, HERE'S A FEW THINGS WE WE COULD LIKE TO DO WITH THE THE LAND OR BECAUSE OF WHERE THIS LAND IS POSITIONED, THERE'S NOTHING WE WOULD EVER WANT TO DO WITH THE LAND.

I GUESS I JUST FEEL LIKE, I MEAN, I, AGAIN, I SEE THE POINT.

I MEAN, IF I'M OUTVOTED AND WE SPEND $16,500 AND CLEAR SOME LAND IN THE OPEN SPACE.

I MEAN, IT'S NOT GOING TO GIVE ME ANY HEARTBURN, BUT I JUST, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE OUT OF ORDER SOMEHOW WITH, WITH THE PROCESS, IN MY OPINION, I DON'T KNOW.

I COULD BE WRONG. I AGREE, I AGREE. I, I WANT TO KNOW IF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN FAVOR OF IT, I WOULD WANT TO KNOW AND MAYBE OUR ENGINEER COULD HELP US WITH HOW THE, YOU KNOW, THE WATER FLOW.

I WANT TO KNOW IF WE COULD IF WE DO ANYTHING, WHAT'S IT GOING TO DO TO THE RUNOFF? THERE'S JUST A LOT OF. I FEEL LIKE WE JUST HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS. I'M NOT AGAINST IT AND I'M DEFINITELY PRO OPEN SPACE AND I'M WITH YOU COMMISSIONER, BUT I JUST HAVE QUESTIONS I WANT TO KNOW. I DON'T WANT TO, LIKE YOU SAID BEFORE, I JUST DON'T WANT TO DO MORE HARM THAN GOOD. OKAY.

AND SO I JUST WANT TO KNOW A FEW THINGS. SURE.

FAIR ENOUGH. I LOOK, MOST OF THE TIME WE AGREE.

WE DON'T. ON THIS I BECAUSE FRANKLY, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU COULD LOOK AT IT AND MAKE A DECISION IN THE CONDITION IT'S IN.

YOU CAN LOOK AT AN AERIAL PHOTO AND YOU COULD SAY, WELL, GEE, WE'D LIKE TO DO THIS AND THIS, BUT YOU HAVEN'T WALKED IT. YOU DON'T FEEL THE TOPOGRAPHY OF IT.

YOU DON'T HAVE A SENSE FOR IT. TO ME, THE MONEY WE'RE SPENDING HERE, ALTHOUGH IT'S THIS IS PROBABLY NOT A GOOD COMPARISON.

ALL WE'RE DOING IS MOWING THE LAWN. WE JUST TOOK PROPERTY.

ALL WE'RE DOING IS MOWING THE LAWN. THIS IS THE MOST BASIC CARE AND MAINTENANCE FOR SOMETHING.

SO WE CAN JUST FIGURE OUT WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH IT.

ALL RIGHT, EVERYONE, AT 1025, WE ARE GOING TO RECONVENE.

WE ARE STILL ON ITEM THREE G. EXCUSE ME. DISCUSS AND ACT ON PROPOSAL TO SPEND UP TO $20,000 TO CLEAR A PORTION OF THE LAND DEDICATED TO ROCKWALL COUNTY FOR RECREATIONAL AREA IN THE WESTVIEW ADDITION PHASE TWO IN THE UNINCORPORATED PORTION OF ROCKWALL COUNTY.

TO REQUEST THE ROCKWALL COUNTY OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE REVIEW POSSIBLE USES FOR THE LAND AND MAKE A PROPOSAL TO COMMISSIONERS COURT.

WE ARE STILL UNDER DISCUSSION. SO, COMMISSIONER LICHTY, YOU WERE YOU WERE SPEAKING WHEN WE LOST POWER.

GREAT. THANKS, JUDGE. WE HAVE IN THE ROOM WITH US, ROGER HALL, WHO IS THE GENTLEMAN WHO HAD ACTUALLY BE DOING THE WORK ON THIS PROJECT. AND I THINK IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IF HE EXPLAINED TO US WHAT HE ENVISIONS DOING AND WHAT HE THINKS ITS IMPACT WOULD BE ON THIS PROPERTY SO THAT WE CAN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION. SO ROGER, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE, MR. HALL, TELL US THE NAME OF YOUR COMPANY FIRST.

GOOD MORNING. I'M ROGER HALL. MY COMPANY IS HALL RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES.

WE PRIMARILY DO FEED CONNING AND MULCHING FOR ATMOS ENERGY GOLF COURSES POWER LINES, UTILITIES.

SO WE PERFORM THESE THIN OUTS AND RIGHT OF WAY CLEARINGS.

SO MOST TIMES SO THAT PROPERTY CAN BE VIEWED.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. TAKE IT AWAY.

SO IF WE CAN GO TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE RED LINE AROUND THE PROPERTY, PLEASE, MA'AM.

RIGHT THERE. SO WHAT WE WAS PROPOSING THERE TO VINCE WAS NOT NOT TO COME IN AND CUT THAT RED LINE BECAUSE EVERYONE WOULD SEE IT, AND I WOULD AGREE. BECAUSE THE TRACTOR THAT WE'RE USING IS 5500 0 POUND EXCAVATOR.

SO IT'S GOING TO TAKE ABOUT 10 TO 15FT TO GET AROUND THERE.

SO WE WAS GOING TO SELECTIVELY GO AROUND TREES AS WE WENT IN THERE.

BUT WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING WAS TO STEP INTO THAT PROPERTY ABOUT 20FT, 30FT, AND THEN CUT THAT RED LINE THAT YOU SEE ALL THE WAY AROUND THE PROPERTY. THEN AS WE GO ALONG THROUGH THERE FOR DRAINAGE, WHICH I KNEW WAS GOING TO COME UP, THOSE THE DARKER SHADED LINES THAT YOU CAN SEE CLOSER TO THE GROUND, THE REST OF THIS TREE TOPS, WE'RE GOING TO CLEAN OUT THOSE TRIBUTARIES AND BLUE LINE STREAMS. AS WE GO DOWN THROUGH THERE, DO SOME MINIMUM CLEARING TO TO ALLOW THAT WATER TO FLOW DOWN THROUGH THERE.

ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT'S THAT'S EXISTS THERE RIGHT NOW IS THAT YOU HAVE BUILD UP IN THEM STREAMS FROM TRASH AND OTHER FLOWING DEBRIS THAT HAVE COME DOWN THROUGH THERE.

SO IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE WATER TO FLOW DOWN THROUGH THERE ON ITS OWN.

AND THEN WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO THE WEST END OF THAT PROPERTY, THERE IS SOME A BLUE LINE STREAM THAT RUNS BACK OUT TOWARD THE HIGHWAY SO THAT WATER CAN BE RELEASED. SO THE PROBLEM WITH MOST OF THESE PROPERTIES IS YOU CAN'T FIX A PROBLEM UNLESS YOU CAN GET TO IT.

SO TO JUST LEAVE IT ALONE IS WELL AND FINE, BUT THEN YOU CREATE A WHOLE NOTHER PROBLEM.

[01:10:01]

I KNOW THEY HAVE A HORRIBLE PROBLEM OUT THERE WITH THE STREETS BECAUSE OF THE DRAINAGE, AND THAT'S BECAUSE WATER CAN'T LEAVE THE PROPERTY AND IT'S GOING WHEREVER IT CAN GO ON THE ROADS AND HIGHWAYS OR WHEREVER. AND SO THIS, IN MY OPINION, WILL HELP ALLEVIATE SOME OF THAT WATER PROBLEM. ALSO, WHEN YOU PROPOSE OR BUILD THE PARK THAT YOU WANT TO BUILD ONCE WE CUT THAT LINE, THEN I WOULD SUGGEST ALLOWING THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE NEIGHBORS COME IN AND PICK THE PATH THAT THEY WANT, BECAUSE THAT WOULD REQUIRE A SMALLER MACHINE TO COME BACK IN AFTER THAT IS DONE.

AND THEN LET THEM DECIDE WHICH WAY THEY WANT THESE TRAILS TO GO IN, THESE CAMPS TO GO.

AND THEN MOST TIMES WHEN WE DO THIS. FOR INSTANCE, WHEN WE DONE ONE FOR TRINITY FOREST GOLF COURSE, WE WENT IN ALONG THE STREAMS AND WE CLEARED JUST A LITTLE BIT SO THAT THEY COULD GET IN THERE AND DECIDE WHICH WAY THEY WANTED TO GO VERSUS YOU GOING IN THERE AND TELLING THEM, HEY, YOU'RE GOING TO GO HERE AND YOU'RE GOING TO DO THIS BECAUSE THEN THAT THAT GETS YOU INTO A, A PHASE OR A POINT WHERE NO ONE WANTS TO DO IT BECAUSE THEY'RE GETTING WHAT YOU'RE GIVING THEM INSTEAD OF WHAT THEY WANT.

BUT IN ORDER TO DO THIS, THE FIRST THING IS TO BE ABLE TO GET IN THERE AND GET TO WHERE YOU CAN SEE THAT PROPERTY.

SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT, IN YOUR OPINION, THE WORK WE'RE PROPOSING HERE, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING, WHAT YOU SAID AT THE END IS JUST SO WE CAN GET IN AND SEE WHAT WE GOT.

YES. WITH IMPROVED DRAINAGE IN THERE. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES, SIR. SO? SO WE WILL BE REQUIRED TO DO THAT AS WE GO AROUND THAT PROPERTY.

SO I CAN'T GO IN AND JUST SIMPLY MULCH IT AND LEAVE IT SO THAT SOMEONE CAN COME SEE IT, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO CREATE MORE OF A PROBLEM THAN WE'RE GOING TO CURE.

SO AS WE GO THROUGH THERE, THOSE BLUE, WHEN WE RUN UP ON THOSE BLUE LINE STREAMS OR ANYTHING THAT'S BLOCKING THE STREAM AND WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THAT UP. THAT'S WHAT WE DO NORMALLY.

YES. SO WE WON'T GO 200FT OR 300FT DOWN THROUGH THE FOREST.

WE'RE JUST GOING TO OPEN IT UP AS FAR AS WE CAN REACH AT THAT POINT, HOPEFULLY LETTING THAT WATER GET TO THE CENTER OR RUN ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE PROPERTY.

WHEN I WENT TO PUT THAT LINE AROUND THAT PROPERTY, THERE ARE SOME SPOTS WHERE I SAW TREES WAS DOWN WHERE WATER IS FLOWING, AND IT'S JUST GOT NORMAL STUFF, JUST TRASH AND LIMBS AND LEAVES AND EVERYTHING UP AGAINST LOGS.

AND SO IN ORDER TO RELIEVE THAT, THAT NEEDS TO BE CLEARED OUT.

WELL, YOU DON'T WANT TO HIRE A COMPANY LIKE US WITH LARGE EQUIPMENT TO GO THROUGH THERE AND CLEAR THEM CHANNELS OUT BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE A ROAD THROUGH THERE.

SO. BUT IF WE GET IN THERE AND CLEAR IT OUT SOME.

WE'RE SMALLER EQUIPMENT CAN GET IN THERE AND GO FURTHER ON IN THERE.

IF YOU DECIDE TO DO SOMETHING WITH IT. AND IF YOU DON'T, THEN AT LEAST YOU GOT THE THE PERIMETER CLEARED AROUND WHERE YOU OPEN THESE STREAMS BACK UP TO ALLOW SOME OF THAT WATER TO GET OUT OF THERE.

BUT AGAIN, AS YOU SAID, THE PERIMETER IS NOT RIGHT ON THE EDGE.

IT'S 15 TO 20FT IN 15 TO 20FT IN. THAT GIVES ME A LONG ENOUGH REACH TO REACH BACK TO THE PROPERTY LINE TO CLEAR OUT ANY CHANNEL UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE BACK TO MY CENTER, WHICH IS 15FT, AND THEN ANOTHER 15FT BEYOND THAT OUT THE OTHER DIRECTION.

SO TO GIVE THAT SO THAT GIVE YOU 30 SOME ODD FEET OF CLEAR CHANNEL WHERE WE'VE CROSSED OVER A DITCH OR WENT THROUGH A BLUE LINE CREEK OR SOMETHING TO CLEAR THAT CREEK OUT SO THAT THAT WATER CAN FLOW. YEAH. BECAUSE MOST, MOST OF YOUR NOT ALL THE TIME, BUT MOST OF IT ON ANY PROPERTY WHEN YOU START TO BUILD UP, WATER IS GENERALLY WHERE THE NEIGHBOR'S BEEN MAINTAINING THEIR PROPERTY.

AND THEN AS SOON AS YOU GET INTO THE FOREST HERE, LIMBS AND STUFF ARE LAID INTO THE CREEK.

AND SO IT JUST MAKES NATURAL DAMS. AND SO IF YOU CAN CLEAN THAT UP SO THAT THAT CAN FLOW SOME.

NOW WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S DEEP UP INTO THERE. AND AGAIN, WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO GO UP IN THERE 2 OR 300FT AND MAKE A TRAIL TO SEE WHAT'S UP IN THERE. THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE WALKED. BUT WE NEED AT LEAST NEED TO CLEAN UP COMING INTO THERE.

SO ALLOW THAT WATER TO, YOU KNOW, RIGHT. MOVE.

THANK YOU. I'M SURE OTHERS MAY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.

YOU SHOULD HAVE LED WITH THAT. BUT I, I STILL SORRY, I'M TOTALLY I'M TOTALLY KIDDING.

COMMISSIONER. I, I DIDN'T NECESSARILY CHANGE MY OPINION OF WHAT WE'RE DOING, BUT I DO APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND GIVING MORE CLARITY TO WHAT THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT IS. IT DOES MAKE MORE SENSE. I HAVE A QUESTION.

NOT NECESSARY. YOU DID A GREAT PRESENTATION. THANK YOU.

BUT THIS IS ACTUALLY FOR OUR ENGINEER. I DON'T KNOW, IS THERE ANY ENGINEERING TOPOGRAPHY OR ANY TYPE OF ASSISTANCE THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT COULD DO LOOKING AT THIS, YOU KNOW, FROM A HIGH LEVEL? YES, WE CAN. WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THE TOPOGRAPHY MAPS THROUGH THERE AND SEE WHAT WHAT IT GENERALLY LOOKS LIKE AND,

[01:15:02]

AND GIVE YOU SOME FEEDBACK ON THAT AS WELL PRIOR TO OR IN ADDITION OR IN TANDEM, WE, WE COULD DO IT NOW.

I WAS STARTING TO LOOK AT IT ON MY PHONE, TRYING TO, TRYING TO SEE WHAT I COULD, BUT IT'S NOT LOADING.

SO. OH, OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. HALL? NO. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. HALL. I KIND OF HAD THE SAME THOUGHT OF.

YOU KNOW, SINCE THE FOCUS NOW SEEMS TO HAVE SHIFTED MORE TO DRAINAGE THAN ANYTHING ELSE I'D LIKE TO ENGINEER TO BE INVOLVED AND TO TO MAKE SURE, NUMBER ONE, WHAT WE ALL SAY WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH DEVELOPMENT, BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR, BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE, CERTAINLY IN LAND THAT WE OWN NOW THAT WE'RE BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR, ALLOWING LAND OR WATER TO GET FROM ONE SIDE OF OUR PROPERTY LINE TO THE OTHER AND NOT CAUSE ANY DAMAGE TO PEOPLE.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO GET THE ENGINEER INVOLVED, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS OUR ENGINEER WORKING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE. BECAUSE I'M OKAY SPENDING THE MONEY BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND IT.

BUT I DO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER STACY, JUST GOING CUTTING TRAILS AND THEN HAVING THE OPEN SPACE AND NOW THE ENGINEER GET INVOLVED MAY BE A LITTLE OUT OF SEQUENCE. I DO BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CUT TRAILS IN ORDER TO GET AN ASSESSMENT OF THIS PROPERTY, BUT I WOULD I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE GETTING THE ENGINEER AND OPEN SPACE ON BOARD WITH IT, AND THEN HAVE THEM TELL US WHERE THEY'RE CUTTING AND HAVE ERICA SUGGEST TO US, HERE'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO TO TAKE CARE OF DRAINAGE HERE.

I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE GOING, I THINK.

BUT, YOU KNOW, Y'ALL MY APOLOGIES FOR NOT BRINGING MR. HALL UP FIRST. HE OBVIOUSLY DID A BETTER JOB THAN I DID.

BUT ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS GET US TO A POINT WHERE WE CAN MAKE SOME EDUCATED DECISIONS ABOUT THIS.

I MEAN, AGAIN, TO ME, THIS IS MOWING YOUR LAWN AND NOT EVEN THAT.

WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE GOT IN THERE.

AND AS HE SAID, WHAT HE DOES WILL ACTUALLY IMPROVE DRAINAGE THROUGH THERE.

WE CAN GET AN ENGINEER INVOLVED. WE CAN DO ALL THOSE THINGS, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE HARD.

YOU'VE WALKED AS COMMISSIONER. STACY SAID HE'S WALKED AREAS WHERE YOU WALK UP AND YOU THINK, WELL, I CAN'T GO THERE AND I HAVE TWO. AND I WALKED IN THERE AS FAR AS I COULD.

IT'S EXTREMELY DENSE. THERE'S A LOT OF BRUSH.

THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT KEEP YOU FROM EVEN SEEING WHAT YOU'VE GOT.

AND AGAIN SO IF SOMEBODY WANTS, IF, IF I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION HERE AND IF IT IS NOT PASSED, I'M NOT ANGRY AT ANYBODY. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULDN'T PROCEED AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE IF WE GET THE ENGINEER INVOLVED, I WOULD THINK SHE WOULD TALK TO MR. HALL BEFORE HE GOES OUT THERE.

YOU CAN SAY, WELL, LET'S GET OPEN SPACE INVOLVED AND LET'S TAKE A COMMUNITY VOTE AND ALL THIS.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH COMMUNITY INPUT. I BEG THESE FOLKS, COME HELP US.

WE WANT TO DO WHAT'S GOOD FOR YOU. I REALLY MEAN THAT.

BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I THINK? I REALLY THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE SIMPLE, BUT IT MAY BE NOTHING SIMPLE.

AND MAYBE. OR MAYBE I'M JUST SO PASSIONATE ABOUT OPEN SPACES THAT I OVERLOOK THINGS.

BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING ANY DAMAGE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I DON'T THINK.

IN FACT, I THINK FROM WHAT MR. HALL SAID, WE'D BE IMPROVING THE WATER FLOW THROUGH THERE.

I THINK THE $16,000 IS IS SOMETHING WE CAN AFFORD.

I'VE WE'VE GOT TEN 000 IN OPEN SPACES. AND I TALKED TO THE AUDITOR AND SHE SAID, DON'T WORRY, WE CAN FIND THE OTHER $65,100. SO ANYWAY, UNLESS ANYBODY HAS MORE DISCUSSION, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION.

AND IF YOU GUYS WANT TO DO SOMETHING ELSE, JUST VOTE NO.

OKAY. I LOVE YOU. OKAY. SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE A SPENDING UP TO $20,000 TO CLEAR A PORTION OF THE LAND DEDICATED TO ROCKWALL COUNTY FOR A RECREATIONAL AREA IN THE WEST VIEW EDITION.

PHASE TWO IN THE UNINCORPORATED PORTION OF ROCKWALL COUNTY.

TO REQUEST THAT THE. I'LL MODIFY WHAT THIS SAYS HERE NOW TO REQUEST THAT THE ENGINEER COORDINATE WITH THE.

THE COMPANY DOING THE WORK AND TO REQUEST THAT THE ROCKWALL COUNTY OPEN SPACE ALLIANCE REVIEW POSSIBLE USES FOR THE LAND AND MAKE A SUBSEQUENT PROPOSAL TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT.

HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY. I WILL SECOND IT.

[01:20:02]

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MOLATE. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW, PLEASE. SOMEBODY'S MISSING.

SOMEBODY'S STILL MISSING. THERE WE GO. IT PASSES 3 TO 2.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU.

[3.H) Discuss/Act on approving a Professional Service Agreement with Othon, Inc. for the FM 740 project from FM 1140 to near the Kaufman County line at a total cost of $3,012,223.00 using road bond monies, an all related issues; (Commissioner Liechty)]

THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE H. DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH OTHON INC FOR THE FM 740 PROJECT FROM FM 1140 TO NEAR THE KAUFMAN COUNTY LINE AT A TOTAL COST OF $3,012,223 USING ROAD BOND MONIES AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER LICHTY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I WILL JUST GIVE A LITTLE OPENING STATEMENT HERE AND THEN I WILL LET BRENDA CALLAWAY FROM ITS MAKE A COMMENTS.

YOU'VE GOT A CONTRACT BEFORE YOU TO WIDEN FM 74 740 SOUTH IN HEATH.

THIS GOES FROM THE INTERSECTION WITH HUBBARD DRIVE SOUTH TO KAUFMAN COUNTY BORDER.

THE WORK FOR WIDENING IT FROM 80 THROUGH KAUFMAN COUNTY UP TO THE ROCKWALL COUNTY BORDER HAS.

IS ALREADY UNDERWAY, AND I THINK THERE ARE ABOUT FIVE YEARS AHEAD OF US.

THE THIS IS PART OF OUR TRIP 21 BOND FUNDS. THIS WAS IDENTIFIED WHEN WE DID OUR LIST OF PROJECTS WE'D BE WORKING ON.

WE ENCOUNTERED WHEN WE FIRST DID THIS, WE ENCOUNTERED A LOT OF QUESTIONS FROM HEATH RESIDENTS.

WE HAVE MET WITH MULTIPLE PEOPLE IN HEATH. HEATH HAS HAD AT LEAST TWO PUBLIC MEETINGS ON THIS WHERE THEY'VE DISCUSSED IT.

AND I THINK ALL THOSE ISSUES HAVE BEEN RESOLVED.

AND IN FACT, THAT IS EVIDENCED BY THE FACT THAT THE CITY OF HEATH HAS SIGNED OFF TO APPROVE THIS CONTRACT.

THEY ARE NOT OBLIGATED ON THE CONTRACT, BUT JUST TO BECAUSE THOSE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN OUT THERE WITH THE CITY, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY OF HEATH WAS ON BOARD WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING.

AND THEY'VE SIGNED OFF ON APPROVING THE CONTRACT.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE MAKING A MOTION ON.

ONE OTHER THING I'M GOING TO MENTION IN HERE BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO BRENDA IS THE CONTRACT WITH OATH ON ENGINEERING IS INCLUDED HERE.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION 4.3 IT SAYS THE COUNTY SHALL DESIGNATE A REPRESENTATIVE AUTHORIZED TO ACT ON THE COUNTY'S BEHALF WITH RESPECT TO THE PROJECT. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE ALWAYS DONE THIS ON PROJECTS, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD.

AND I WOULD ASK THAT IF THIS IS APPROVED AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT IT WILL BE, BUT IF IT IS THAT I WOULD BE NAMED AS THAT COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE TO WORK WITH THE CONTRACTOR. AND BRENDA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION AT THIS POINT? YES, SIR. GOOD MORNING, JUDGE. COMMISSIONERS.

COMMISSIONER LICHTY IS RIGHT IN KAUFMAN COUNTY.

WE'VE GOT ONE FINAL STEP BEFORE THE SECTION FROM FM 740 SOUTH, ALL THE WAY UP TO THE COUNTY LINE IS APPROVED, AND WE'VE GOT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THAT. ONCE WE HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCHEMATIC WORK WILL BE APPROVED.

IT WILL BE READY TO GO INTO RIGHT AWAY AND DETAILED DESIGN.

SO ON THIS ONE, WE'RE TAKING IT FROM THE ROCKWALL KAUFMAN COUNTY LINE.

I'M TRYING TO NAVIGATE THE TWO S-CURVES AS YOU COME NORTH FROM THE COUNTY LINE.

EXCUSE ME. THERE'S BEEN SEVERAL CRASHES THERE, AND WE GAVE A CRASH REPORT TO THE CITY OF HEATH WHILE WE WERE DISCUSSING THIS EARLIER.

THIS WILL BE FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCHEMATIC DESIGN ON THIS, AND TO TRY TO FIND A CLEAR PATH AROUND AND THROUGH THOSE TWO S-CURVES.

SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING THE APPROVAL OF THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ON THIS ONE WITH ETHAN AND JEFF.

LOVE WITH ETHAN IS HERE TODAY. REPRESENTING. QUESTIONS.

I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION.

OTHER QUESTIONS? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH OATH ON INCORPORATED FOR THE FM 740 PROJECT FROM FM 1140 TO NEAR THE KAUFMAN COUNTY LINE, AT A TOTAL COST OF $3,012,223, AND NAMED LOREN LICHTY THE CONTACT TO COORDINATE ON THE PROJECT. GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACY.

I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? I WOULD LIKE TO SAY I KNOW YOU HAD A LOT OF MEETINGS REGARDING THIS.

I HAD A LOT OF MEETINGS REGARDING THIS. I'M SURE OTHERS HAD A LOT OF MEETINGS, BUT.

[01:25:03]

BUT HERE WE ARE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK. IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW, PLEASE.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. ALL RIGHT. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE.

[3.I) Discuss/Act on approving a Professional Service Agreement with Pape-Dawson Consulting Engineers, LLC for the FM 1141 project from SH66 (Williams Street) to FM 552 at a total cost of $ 3,494,150.00 using road bond monies, and all related issues; (Commissioner Gallana)]

I DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH PAPE DAWSON.

CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LLC FOR THE FM 1141 PROJECT FROM STATE HIGHWAY 66 TO FM 552, AT A TOTAL COST OF $3,494,150 USING ROAD BOND MONIES AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER. GALENA. I'LL KICK THIS OVER TO YOU.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. GALENA. WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IS A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN ROCKWALL COUNTY AND PATE DAWSON FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCHEMATIC DESIGN ON FM 1140 FROM STATE HIGHWAY 66 NORTH TO FM 552.

THERE ARE SEVERAL SCHOOLS IN THERE. THERE'S THREE MAJOR INTERSECTION CROSSINGS THROUGH THERE, QUITE A FEW UTILITIES THAT NEED TO BE IDENTIFIED THAT WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO MISS.

AND THEN A FLOODPLAIN CROSSING THAT WE NEED TO WORK ON.

SO THAT'S ALL INCLUDED IN THIS CONTRACT. AND WE'RE RECOMMENDING IT FOR APPROVAL.

QUESTIONS FOR BRENDA? NOPE. THESE ARE COMING AS A SURPRISE TO NO ONE, SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION IF SOMEBODY SO INCLINED.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO MAKE THE MOTION JUDGE. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH THE DAWSON CONSULTING ENGINEERS LLC FOR THE FM 1141 PROJECT FROM STATE HIGHWAY 66, ALSO KNOWN AS WILLIAM STREET, TO FM.

552, AT A TOTAL COST OF $3,494,150 USING ROAD BOND, ROAD BOND MONIES.

I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MCQUINN, SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GALLINA.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW, PLEASE.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE J DISCUSS AND ACT ON MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING REGARDING THE OUTER LOOP AND THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF ROCKWALL COUNTY AND

[3.J) Discuss/Act on Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Outer Loop in the Southern Portion of Rockwall County and proposed final version to submit to the Regional Transportation Council, and all related matters; (Commissioner Liechty)]

PROPOSED FINAL VERSION TO SUBMIT TO THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION, COUNCIL AND ALL RELATED MATTERS.

COMMISSIONER LICHTY. THANK YOU JUDGE. THE MEMORANDUM OF OUTER LOOP REGARDING THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE OUTER LOOP THROUGH ROCKWALL COUNTY.

EVERYBODY'S FAMILIAR WITH THIS. WE'VE BEEN OVER A NUMBER OF TIMES.

I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THIS UNLESS SOMEBODY WANTS ME TO.

IN WHICH CASE, I'LL BE HAPPY TO. WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS MEMO OF UNDERSTANDING SINCE LAST OCTOBER AT OUR LAST, OUR COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING IN APRIL 28TH.

WE GOT OUR LAST ROUND OF COMMENTS. THAT WAS, I BELIEVE, THE THIRD ROUND OF COMMENTS WE'VE GOTTEN FROM COMMISSIONERS COURT ON THIS.

THOSE MODIFICATIONS WERE SENT TO THE RTC. ON JULY 8TH, I HAD A CONFERENCE CALL NEGOTIATING SESSION WITH THE RTC.

THEY ACCEPTED ALL OF OUR CHANGES WITH A COUPLE OF TWEAKS.

YOU SHOULD HAVE HAVE IN YOUR PACKAGE MARKED TO SHOW CHANGES.

COPY THAT SHOWS THE CHANGES FROM WHAT WE SENT TO THEM, TO WHAT THEY SENT BACK, OR WHAT THEY WERE WILLING TO SUBMIT FOR THEIR THEIR ORGANIZATION'S APPROVAL. AND THERE'S ON PAGE ONE, THEY REMOVED IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH THE PROVISION THAT SAYS OF THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS, I APPRECIATE THE THE, THE RESPONSE FROM MY DISTINGUISHED COMMISSIONER ON MY RIGHT IN THE THIRD RECITAL PARAGRAPH, THEY ADDED, THIS IS WHERE WE HAD PUT IN THE LANGUAGE TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WE HAD COMPLETED OUR PORTION OF THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT. I THINK, COMMISSIONER STACY, THAT WAS YOUR REQUEST.

AND THEY SAID THEY WANTED TO ADD WITH RESPECT TO THE OUTER LOOP THROUGH THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE COUNTY.

OBVIOUSLY, THIS WOULD COMPLETE IT FOR THE SOUTHERN PORTION.

AND THEN IN PARAGRAPH TWO, ON PAGE TWO, THERE WAS AN EXTRA WITHOUT LIMITATION THAT WAS REMOVED.

AND THAT'S IT. OTHER THAN THAT, WE HAD A VERY GOOD DISCUSSION THAT DAY.

AND THEY ACCEPTED WHAT WE HAVE PROPOSED NOW TO SAY THEY ACCEPTED IT.

THAT MEANS NOT THAT IT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE RTC, BUT THAT THEY WILL SUBMIT IT IN THIS, THEY BEING MICHAEL MORRIS, WILL SUBMIT IT TO THE RTC IN THIS FORMAT AND REQUEST THAT IT BE APPROVED.

OKAY. THIS AGREEMENT JUST AGAIN, FOR THE RECORD, IF WE DO THIS, THIS IS GOING TO REQUIRE THE COUNTY TO TO DO AN ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY FOR THIS SOUTHERN PORTION. I'VE SPOKEN WITH MATT CRAIG OF HALF MATT'S HERE.

[01:30:02]

AND HE ESTIMATES THE COST OF THAT WOULD BE SEVEN AND A HALF TO $8 MILLION.

AND THIS, THIS IS, THIS IS A BURDEN. IF WE APPROVE THIS, WE'RE SAYING WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH IT.

WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED WITH IT. OKAY. A SECOND THIS, BUT THIS GIVES US INPUT.

IT GIVES US INPUT ON A LOCATION OF THE OF WHERE IT'S GOING TO GO.

IT DOESN'T GIVE US THE RIGHT TO DECIDE THAT LOCATION AGAIN, BEING CLEAR, BUT THERE IS LANGUAGE IN HERE WHICH WAS INSERTED BY COMMISSIONER STACY, THAT SAYS THAT THEY WILL GIVE PREFERENTIAL CONSIDERATION TO ANY PREFERRED ROUTE THROUGH THE SOUTHERN PORTION, SO THEY WILL GIVE PREFERENTIAL CONSIDERATION TO WHERE WE THINK IT SHOULD GO.

IT DOESN'T GUARANTEE WE WIN, BUT IT DOES PROVIDE FOR SIGNIFICANT INPUT ON MITIGATION OF WHAT GOES ON HERE.

SECTION FOUR. THERE ARE A LIST OF DESIGN OBJECTIVES THAT ARE SPECIFIED IN HERE.

AND WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS BEFORE. ITEMS A THROUGH I, WHICH I THINK WILL HAVE A ENABLE US TO HAVE A HUGE A BIG IMPACT ON EXACTLY WHERE THE OUTER LOOP GOES THROUGH THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE COUNTY.

IT REQUIRES THE RTC TO DO SOME THINGS. ALSO, IT REQUIRES THE RTC TO, FIRST OF ALL SUPPORT OUR LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS TO HAVE A A ZONE AROUND THE ZONING AUTHORITY AND LAND USE AUTHORITY AROUND THE OUTER LOOP, WHICH IF WE COULD GET THAT WOULD HAVE A HUGE IMPACT ON THIS. AND THEY'VE AGREED TO SUPPORT THOSE EFFORTS.

IT PROVIDES THAT RIGHT OF WAY WILL BE ACQUIRED BY TXDOT.

THAT'S NOT OUR OBLIGATION. IT SAYS THAT CONSTRUCTION OF THE OUTER LOOP WILL STRIVE TO BE DONE IN A MANNER THAT ACHIEVES THESE MITIGATION EFFORTS THAT WE'VE OUTLINED. AND IT.

DEFIES THAT. THEY WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT OTHER ROAD PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY AND THAT THEY WOULD EXPEDITE MOVING THOSE FORWARD. AND PARTICULARLY STATE HIGHWAY 205.

AND AT THE END OF OUR CONVERSATION THAT DAY, I ASKED MR. MORRIS, I SAID, YOU REALLY THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A LET DATE AT THE END OF 2028 FOR 205 SOUTH DOESN'T WORK. IT'S WE GOT TO CHANGE IT. AND ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO, YOU SAW THAT THE TXDOT ANNOUNCED THAT THEY WERE MOVING THAT DATE UP FROM NOVEMBER 1ST OF 2028 TO JUNE 1ST OF 2027.

SO ALMOST A YEAR AND A HALF SOONER. AND I THINK THAT THAT IS A DIRECT RESPONSE TO THE FACT THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH THEM AND TRYING TO FIND SOLUTIONS.

THIS ALSO SETS FORTH DESIGN OBJECTIVES WHICH WE MENTIONED.

I UNDERSTAND THE AS WELL AS ANYONE HERE. I THINK THAT THE OUTER LOOP IS CONTROVERSIAL.

SOME PEOPLE HAVE EXPRESSED GREAT OPPOSITION TO IT.

SOME PEOPLE HAVE SAID THEY WANT IT AND WE CAN'T BUILD IT FAST ENOUGH.

OKAY. IT IS A HOT BUTTON ISSUE, BUT WE HAVE ALL HEARD MR. MICHAEL MORRIS, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE RTC, STAND RIGHT THERE AND TELL US THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS, BUT IF WE DON'T, THEY WILL BUILD IT ANYWAY. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS SHOWN ON THE THE NET MOBILITY PLAN 2050 AS GOING RIGHT THROUGH OUR COUNTY. I HAVE TOLD MANY PEOPLE, IF YOU CAN MOVE IT TO HUNT COUNTY, PLEASE DO IT. DO IT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT WOULD SAVE ME A LOT OF BRAIN DAMAGE.

WE'VE TRIED ALTERNATING ROUTES SUGGESTING ROUTES OVER THERE.

THEY'VE BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL. THEY THEY AREN'T, IN THE OPINION OF THE RTC WORTHY.

SO BASICALLY NOW WE JUST NEED TO DECIDE IF WE WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS.

THIS MOU, IN MY OPINION, ASSURES US THE RIGHT TO BE INVOLVED AND ENSURES US THE RIGHT TO HAVE INPUT ON THIS.

IT'S CONSISTENT WITH OUR STRATEGIC PLAN. COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH GOAL THREE, OBJECTIVE SIX AND GOAL FOUR.

OBJECTIVE FIVE. WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE REVIEWS AND NEGOTIATIONS.

EVERYONE HAS HAD THEIR INPUT. AND I THINK BASED ON ALL THAT, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE MOVE FORWARD AND APPROVE THIS.

OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. LET'S GO AHEAD. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY I HAVE A I HAVE A FEW COMMENTS.

[01:35:02]

I WITH THE FACTS I KNOW AND UNDERSTAND TODAY, I THINK THAT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE MOU IS, IS A GOOD IDEA. SO THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER LICHTY FOR WORKING ON THAT.

IT MEMORIALIZES A MAJOR COMMITMENT FROM THE RTC TO ASSIST WITH 205, INCLUDING THE SWAP, WHICH I BELIEVE IS A PROJECT THAT IS GOING TO BE THE LIFEBLOOD OF ROCKWALL COUNTY.

IT HAS TO BE DONE. AND IT GIVES US THE BEST CHANCE TO NAVIGATE THE LOOP WITH LOCAL INPUT.

AND THEN AND JUST ON A COMPLETE PERSONAL NOTE THE LAST TIME THAT I SPOKE WITH MR. MORRIS, I TOLD HIM IF HE DOESN'T CHANGE THE LANGUAGE BEFORE HIS NEGOTIATION WITH YOU, THAT I WOULD PROBABLY BE IN FAVOR OF DOING IT AND GETTING FORWARD WITH TRYING TO BUILD ROADS. SO I'M DEFINITELY A MAN OF MY WORD, AND I JUST WANT TO KNOW THAT, LIKE I SAID, FROM THE FACTS I KNOW TODAY FROM FROM EVERYTHING WE'VE BEEN TOLD, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK I'M IN FAVOR OF.

I THINK WRITING THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVING FORWARD, THAT'S GOING TO BE THAT'S GOING TO BE HARD.

BUT I THINK GETTING THIS AGREEMENT WITH THE RTC AND THEIR COMMITMENTS IN THIS AGREEMENT ARE IMPORTANT.

AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT SPECIFICALLY FOR THE RECORD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER STACEY, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER LICHTY.

I'M GOING TO PREFACE WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY. IT'S GOING TO SURPRISE NO ONE THAT THAT I'M NOT GOING TO GET ON BOARD WITH WITH THIS, BUT STOPPING RIGHT THERE, I WANT TO SAY IT. IT IS GOOD AND IT IS PROPER.

THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE THAT WE'VE ALL DONE IN COORDINATING WITH THE RTC.

IT IS IT IS PROPER. AND MY. ISSUE WITH IT IS IS A FUNDING ISSUE.

GOING BACK TO TRIP 21. IT'S AN ISSUE WE CAN'T SOLVE, BUT WE'VE WORKED REALLY HARD AND I APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS.

I THINK OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE RTC IS BETTER TODAY AND IT'S ONLY GETTING BETTER.

I WOULD ASK, AND I SAID MY OPPOSITION TO IT JUST SO I COULD BE HONEST ABOUT MY NEXT REQUEST.

I WOULD ASK YOU GUYS TO MAKE A SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO THIS AS I READ THROUGH IT ABOUT THE FIFTH, WHEREAS PARAGRAPH, WHEREAS I'M SORRY. THIRD, WHEREAS THE RTC HAS REQUESTED THE COUNTY ENTER INTO A CONTRACT FOR AN ENGINEERING STUDY, THE PROPOSED OUTER LOOP THROUGH THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE COUNTY TO THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY.

WHEREAS THE COUNTY IS WILLING TO COLLABORATE AND COOPERATE WITH THE RTC IN PREPARATION OF A STUDY.

AN ENGINEERING STUDY WITH RESPECT TO THE ROUTE OF THE OUTER LOOP IS WHAT IT'S SAYING.

THE COUNTY'S OBLIGATION TO THE RTC IS ON THE VERY NEXT PARAGRAPH, THE LAST PARAGRAPH ON THE PAGE, WHEREAS THE RTC IS WILLING TO COLLABORATE AND COOPERATE WITH THE COUNTY IN AN EFFORT TO ACHIEVE CERTAIN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE COUNTY.

IT DOESN'T HAVE THE WORD ROOT. I WOULD LIKE IN THAT LAST PARAGRAPH WHERE WE'RE SAYING WHAT THE RTC IS WILLING TO COLLABORATE AND COORDINATE AND COOPERATE AND DO. IT CLEARLY CALLS OUT THE COUNTY IS WILLING TO COOPERATE WITH RTC IN REGARDS TO ROOTS.

IT REMOVES THE WORD ROOT WHEN IT'S STATING WHAT THE RTC IS WILLING TO COOPERATE AND COLLABORATE WITH THE COUNTY.

SO I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO ADD. FIND A WAY TO ADD COLLABORATE ON THE ROOTS.

I FELT LIKE IT WAS PROBABLY AN INFERRED SINCE WE CAME FIRST, BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR.

COMMISSIONER HAVE THEY ALREADY SIGNED THIS? HAS THEY? RTC HAS NOT BEEN SIGNED. I WOULD POINT OUT THAT IN SECTION FOUR A IT SAYS THE RTC WILL GIVE PREFERENTIAL CONSIDERATION TO ANY PREFERRED ROUTE THROUGH THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE COUNTY, WHICH MAY BE PROPOSED BY THE COUNTY.

I UNDERSTAND. SO THERE WOULD BE NO HARM IN JUST ADDING IT HERE IN THIS LAST PARAGRAPH.

I'M NOT GOING TO RESPOND TO THAT. WELL, IT'S FRAMING THE WHEREAS IS FRAMING AND THIS GETS INTO THE DETAILS, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. AND I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S WORK, BUT FRAMING IT.

I MEAN, WHY WOULDN'T WE WANT TO FRAME THAT? WE HAVE A SAY ON THE ROUTE.

WHAT DO YOU WANT IT TO SAY? WELL, I JUST ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT SAYS.

WHEREAS THE COUNTY IS WILLING TO COOPERATE WITH RESPECT TO THE ROUTE.

LET'S JUST HAVE THAT SAME LANGUAGE WHERE THE RTC IS WILLING TO COOPERATE WITH THE COUNTY WITH RESPECT TO THE ROUTE.

JUST PUT IT SOMEWHERE IN THERE. OKAY. WHAT IF WE SAY THIS? WHEREAS THE RTC IS WILLING TO COLLABORATE AND COOPERATE WITH THE COUNTY IN AN EFFORT TO ACHIEVE CERTAIN GOALS AND

[01:40:07]

OBJECTIVES OF THE COUNTY RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE OUTER LOOP INSERT AND ITS ROUTE THROUGH THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE COUNTY.

I THINK THAT'S A BETTER. THAT'S BETTER. I, I WOULD NOT EXPECT THERE'S ANY CONCERN WITH THAT.

I WOULD LIKE YOU TO VOTE. YES. AND I'VE TOLD YOU THIS BEFORE, AND I'VE SAID IT IN OPEN COURT BEFORE.

AND THE REASON I SAY THAT IS I UNDERSTAND YOUR OBJECTIONS AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR PHILOSOPHICAL OBJECTIONS TO TRIP.

21. AND I'M NOT GOING TO ARGUE THOSE WITH YOU, BUT THE REASON I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU VOTE YES, JUDGE, IS BECAUSE BY DOING SO, I THINK WE WOULD SEND A SIGNAL TO THE RTC THAT, IN FACT, WE'RE ALL ON BOARD ON THIS. WE'RE ALL WILLING TO SAY WE WELCOME AN IMPROVED RELATIONSHIP.

WE WANT TO WORK TOGETHER AND WE WANT TO TO, TO ACCOMPLISH COLLABORATIVE GOALS THAT WILL BENEFIT OUR COUNTY, FIRST OF ALL, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT. YOU KNOW, MAKE ROCKWALL COUNTY GREAT AGAIN. THAT'S NUMBER ONE. AND SECOND IT'S THE FIRST I'VE HEARD THAT, BUT THANK YOU. YEAH. WELL, BUT SO, SO JUDGE, I, I, I, YOU'RE A FRIEND.

I, YOU KNOW, I RESPECT YOU, BUT I WOULD ASK YOU, I WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SUGGEST THAT CHANGE.

I WOULD ASK YOU TO, TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER VOTING IN FAVOR OF IT.

THANK YOU. AND I APPRECIATE THAT. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK AND YOUR IDEAS.

IT. IT FEELS DISHONEST FOR ME TO DO THAT, KNOWING IN THE FUTURE THERE'S GOING TO BE A BUDGET CONVERSATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE, AND I'M GOING TO LAND RIGHT BACK ON. THE VOTERS DIDN'T DIDN'T APPROVE IT.

SO IT AGAIN, IT JUST FEELS DISHONEST FOR ME TO DO THAT.

BUT I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE AT. AND I WILL SAY, YOU'RE NOT WRONG.

YOU'RE NOT WRONG. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION UNLESS SOMEBODY ELSE HAS COMMENTS.

I WAS GOING TO, BUT YOU WROTE IT DOWN. OH GO AHEAD, YOU DO IT AND I'LL SECOND IT ONE SECOND.

YOU WROTE YOU WROTE THE CHANGES. OKAY, LET'S WE'VE GOT A FEW THINGS AHEAD OF US YET, SO LET'S KEEP MOVING.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE MEMBER MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING REGARDING THE OUTER LOOP IN THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF ROCKWALL COUNTY AND THE PROPOSED FINAL VERSION TO SUBMIT TO THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL WITH THE INSERT ON THE FIFTH RECITAL PARAGRAPH THAT WE INSERT AND ITS ROUTE THROUGH THE SOUTHERN PORTION.

HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY. I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? BEAR WITH ME IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES. NOW IT PASSES 4 TO 1.

THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR YOUR WORK. THIS BRINGS US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE K DISCUSS AND ACT ON TRANSFER OF REMAINING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF APPROXIMATELY

[3.K) Discuss/Act on transfer of remaining funds (in the amount of appoximately $424,051.30) allocated to the City of Heath for the improvement of Terry Lane, for the purpose of planning and construction of a sidewalk along Terry Lane leading to Terry Park, and all related issues; (Commissioner Liechty)]

$424,051.30 ALLOCATED TO THE CITY OF HEATH FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF TERRY LANE.

FOR THE PURPOSE OF PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A SIDEWALK ALONG TERRY LANE LEADING TO TERRY PARK AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER LICHTY IN OUR HEATH FRIENDS ARE THINKING.

FINALLY. FINALLY. WE'RE HERE. THANK YOU JUDGE.

YES, WE HAVE A LOT OF FRIENDS IN HEATH. IN 2022, THE COURT, BEFORE ANY OF US WERE ON IT, THE COURT ALLOCATED $2 MILLION TO THE CITY OF HEATH FOR THE REPAIR OF TERRY LANE.

WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PAYMENT OF $1,555,440 DOLLARS FOR STREET REPAIRS BY BOARDWALK PAVING. THOSE HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.

WE ALSO APPROVED ABOUT A $20,000 PAYMENT. I THINK IT WAS $20,000 PLUS OR MINUS FOR A STUDY TO DETERMINE THE BEST WAY TO IMPROVE TERRY LANE. AND WE PAID THAT.

THERE ARE FUNDS REMAINING OF THIS $2 MILLION THAT CAN BE USED BY THE CITY OF HEATH TO CREATE A WALKWAY.

SIDEWALK, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, ALONG CHERRY LANE.

THIS MONEY IS ALSO A PART OF THE $2 MILLION THE AMOUNT I BELIEVE IS 424,000.

ZERO. 51 AND $0.30. THE CITY WILL NEED TO CONTRIBUTE THE ADDITIONAL MONEY TO TO CONSTRUCT THAT.

[01:45:05]

WE'VE OBTAINED THE NON-BINDING AGREEMENT, BUT THE AGREEMENT OF VIRTUALLY ALL, BUT I THINK THREE HOMEOWNERS, MAYBE JUST TWO, THAT THEY WOULD DONATE THEIR RIGHT OF WAY FOR THE BUILDING OF THIS TRAIL.

SO WE'VE DONE OUR WORK ON THAT FRONT. MY, A LOT OF THE FOLKS ON CHERRY LANE HAVE BEEN VERY KIND TO BE WILLING TO GO TO DONATE THEIR RIGHT OF WAY.

AND THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE YOU. I'VE GOT BRIAN HERE FROM THE CITY OF HEATH WHO WOULD LIKE TO I THINK UPDATE US IN CHELSEA.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. YEAH. WELL PLAYED. WELCOME, SIR.

GENTLEMEN. SO.

BRIAN, WHEN YOU SAY IT'S DEEMED TO BE IMPORTANT.

I'VE ALWAYS VIEWED THIS AS ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT TRAIL SEGMENTS IN THE CITY OF HEATH BECAUSE IT CONNECTS SO MANY AREAS OF THE CITY TO THE TO TERRY PARK, WHICH IS A BEAUTIFUL PARK RIGHT THERE ON LAKE RAY HUBBARD.

YOUR THOUGHTS? NO, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. SO IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COUNCIL TO TO.

SPEND ABOUT $50,000 TO TO BRING IT ALL TOGETHER.

TO. MAKE THIS TRAIL. SPECIFICALLY.

ANY QUESTIONS. SO IT WOULDN'T BECAUSE YOU'RE STARTING IT OR MEADOW CREEK OR MEADOW LAKE.

I'M SORRY. BUT FROM THERE BACK TO SMURL, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ON THAT ON THAT PORTION.

IT'S GOING TO YOU'RE GOING TO GO MORE TOWARD YOU, SAID HUBBARD.

THEY'RE GOING TO DO FROM OVER TO THE.

FIELD. BUT THAT THAT I LIKE IT. COMMISSIONER STACY, YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? NO. I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION.

ALL RIGHT. PLEASE DO. I WOULD GLADLY MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TRANSFER THE REMAINING FUNDS.

APPROXIMATELY $424,051.30. ALLOCATED TO THE CITY OF HEATH FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF TERRY LANE.

FOR THE PURPOSE OF PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A SIDEWALK ALONG TERRY LANE LEADING TO TERRY PARK.

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACEY. I WOULD SECOND THAT MOTION.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTE, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL YOUR WORK. GOOD THINGS HAPPENING IN HEATH, TEXAS.

[3.L) Discuss/Act on approving a Request for Proposal to provide road improvements to a designated portion of Kuban Road in Rockwall County and authorize the Auditor to advertise by public notice, and all related issues; (Judge New - County Engineer)]

ALL RIGHT. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE.

L DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS TO A DESIGNATED PORTION OF CUBAN ROAD IN ROCKWALL COUNTY AND AUTHORIZE THE AUDITOR TO ADVERTISE BY PUBLIC NOTICE IN ALL RELATED ISSUES. MISS ERICA.

WELL, I'M REALLY JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS. IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY PARTICULAR ISSUES OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON TWO SECTIONS TOTALING 920FT OF REPLACEMENT ON CUBAN ROAD? YEAH. THERE'S THIS BEING DONE BY CONTRACTORS.

YES, SIR. THIS IS THOSE TWO SECTIONS WHERE THERE'S BIG CRACKS ARE.

RIGHT. YEAH. YES, SIR. THIS IS THIS IS CONCRETE ROAD THROUGH THERE, NOT ASPHALT.

SO WE FIGURE IT'LL THIS WILL GET DONE FASTER.

JUST HIRE A CONTRACTOR. AND ERICA, CAN YOU JUST REALLY QUICKLY TELL US WHY WE'RE DOING THIS?

[01:50:02]

THIS PARTICULAR PORTION OF CUBAN I IF I'M CUBAN.

CUBAN? YEP. IT IT REALLY NEEDS TO BE REPAIRED.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOT SOME SUBGRADE ISSUES PERPETUATING THEMSELVES.

SO IT NEEDS TO BE REPAIRED AND REPLACED. AND THIS IS A COUNTY ROAD.

YES, SIR. OKAY. I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS SET.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS TO A DESIGNATED PORTIONS OF CUBAN ROAD AND ROCKWALL COUNTY, AND AUTHORIZE THE AUDITOR TO ADVERTISE BY PUBLIC NOTICE.

SECOND. HAVE MY MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GALLINA.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE M DISCUSS AND ACT ON CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF SPEED HUMPS AND ASSOCIATED

[3.M) Discuss/Act on calling a public hearing regarding the installation of speed humps and associated signage in the Alexander Ranch Estates subdivision in accordance with Texas Transportation Code Chapter 251, and all related issues; (Commissioner Stacy - County Engineer)]

SIGNAGE TO THE ALEXANDER RANCH ESTATES SUBDIVISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS TRANSPORTATION CODE CHAPTER 251 AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER STACY, I'M GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO ERICA, BUT THIS WOULD BE SPEED HUMPS AND ALEXANDER RANCH.

I DO BELIEVE THAT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SUBMITTED THE SCHEMATIC AND THEN THE COST ASSESSMENT.

BUT AGAIN, WE'RE NOT VOTING ON THAT. WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE MOVING FORWARD TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I JUST ASKED ERICA TO GET US SOME CONCEPT OF THAT GOING INTO IT SO THAT THE COURT CAN BE KIND OF ASSURED OF, OF WHAT THE OF WHAT THE COST CONSTRAINTS ARE FOR THAT.

SO THIS WOULD BE FOR THE NEXT COURT AND I DID NOT WRITE THAT DATE DOWN, BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING AND, AND NOTICE IT. SO WHEN WOULD WE LIKE TO DO THAT PUBLIC HEARING? I THINK THE PUBLIC HEARING WOULD NEED TO BE THAT FIRST COURT IN SEPTEMBER.

SEPTEMBER 8TH. OKAY. SEPTEMBER. YEAH. BECAUSE IT'S JUST GOING TO TAKE TIME TO GET EVERYTHING OUT IN PUBLIC AND PUBLICIZED.

WE NEED TO GET THE ADVERTISEMENT IN THE PAPER AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, AND THEN IT NEEDS TO HAVE AT LEAST 30 DAYS BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING HAPPENS.

YOU KNOW WHAT? LET'S LET'S MAKE IT THE SECOND COURT JUST SO WE HAVE ALL THE PROPER TIME.

AND AND THE MAIN REASON IS BECAUSE CURRENTLY THE.

THE AUDITOR IS ON VACATION AND AND I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT I MEAN.

WE'RE TRYING TO WRITE A DRAFT OF THE BUDGET, AND I'M JUST AFRAID THERE COULD BE A LITTLE BIT OF A LAG.

AND I WOULD HATE TO JUST PUT UNDUE PRESSURE THAT WE'RE CREATING FROM EMOTION.

SO THAT'D BE SEPTEMBER 22ND, SEPTEMBER 22ND, WE'LL HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

AND THEN I THINK EVEN THEN WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE ON IT. IT'S THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND THEN THE NEXT COURT IS WHEN WE WOULD BE VOTING ON ACTION.

SO THAT ALSO GIVES US THE ABILITY TO PUT THE $20,000 INTO THE ROAD AND BRIDGE BUDGET, OR AT LEAST CREATE A LINE ITEM FOR THE SPEED HUMPS IF THE COURT SO APPROVES. I DO APPRECIATE YOUR WORK COMMISSIONER WORK ON TRYING TO SOLVE THESE ISSUES.

AND SOME OF OUR RURAL COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE ALREADY ADOPTED COUNTY ROADS BECAUSE THESE ARE ALREADY COUNTY ROADS.

THESE ARE NOT PRIVATE ROADS. SO WITH THAT JUDGE, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE FORWARD.

AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 22ND, 2026 FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF SPEED HUMPS AND ASSOCIATED SIGNAGE IN ALEXANDER RANCH ESTATE SUBDIVISION AND DO ALL THE NECESSARY PUBLICATION.

GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACY. I'LL SECOND IT SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE.

YEP. PASSES 5 TO 0. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THREE IN.

[3.N) Discuss/Act on updates of the Rockwall County Master Thoroughfare Plan, and all related issues; (Commissioner Liechty – County Engineer)]

AND THEN SHERRY, JUST SO YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO JUMP TO TRANSFERS AND PAYROLL AFTER THREE N.

ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO AGENDA ITEM THREE.

N DISCUSS AND ACT ON UPDATES AT THE ROCKWALL COUNTY MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER LICHTY. I DON'T HAVE MUCH TO ADD HERE.

ERICA, DO YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? YES, SIR.

WELL, I WAS JUST GOING TO GIVE A FREEZE AND NICHOLS UPDATE AFTER YOU SPEAK.

I'M NOT SPEAKING. WELL, I DID SPEAK WITH FRIESEN NICHOLS YESTERDAY, AND THEY THEY JUST SAID THAT THE NC T COG IS STILL WORKING ON THE MODELING WITH THE REVISED NETWORK AND DEMOGRAPHICS.

AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANY TIMELINE YET OF WHEN THAT'LL BE ADDRESSED.

AND THEN THE ONLY OTHER ITEM IS WE SENT THEM COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT CHAPTERS AND THEY THINK THAT THEY'VE ADDRESSED MOST OF IT,

[01:55:05]

BUT THEY STILL HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. SO I'M GOING TO MEET WITH THEM TOMORROW AFTERNOON TO TRY TO GET THAT ALL SQUARED AWAY.

AND THEN ONCE THOSE DRAFT CHAPTERS ARE, ARE BACK TO US WITH REVISIONS, THEN WE'LL LOOK AT THEM AND SEND THAT HOPEFULLY TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE AND SET UP A MEETING WITH THE STEERING COMMITTEE. OKAY.

OKAY. THAT WAS MY QUESTION. I THOUGHT WE WE HAD TALKED ABOUT MAYBE PROVIDING THE DRAFT TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE AHEAD OF TIME, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'VE MADE A CHANGE TO THAT.

WELL, I DON'T THINK WE'VE CHANGED IT. THAT'S NOT HOW I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT.

AS YOU SAID, WE WERE GOING TO PROVIDE A DRAFT TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE AHEAD OF TIME, AND I THINK WE STILL WILL.

THE ORIGINAL DRAFT WE GOT FROM FREESE AND NICHOLS, AS YOU REMEMBER IN, WAS SO FAR FROM HAD SO MANY MISTAKES.

WE DIDN'T EVEN WANT TO BOTHER THE STEERING COMMITTEE WITH IT BECAUSE WE MADE A TON OF CHANGES OURSELVES, YOU AND I AND ERICA. AND SO WE WANTED TO GET IT CLEANED UP AND GET A BETTER FIRST DRAFT BEFORE WE CALL A STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING.

OKAY. BUT YES, WE SHOULD SEND A GOOD PLAN. I MEAN, IT'S STILL A GOOD PLAN. YOU ARE CORRECT ABOUT THE REVISIONS THAT WE ASKED ABOUT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ERICA. NO. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AS PROMISED, WE ARE GOING TO JUMP TO OUR BACK OF HOUSE ISSUES.

WE'RE GOING TO DO CONSENT AGENDA, PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS, DISPOSITIONS, BUDGET TRANSFERS, AND THEN APPROVAL OF ACCOUNTS, BILLS, CLAIMS AND PAYROLL SO WE CAN GET THOSE DONE BEFORE LUNCH.

SO I'M GOING TO MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR CONSENT AGENDA.

[4) CONSENT AGENDA:]

JUDGE I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED FOR A THROUGH FOUR I.

WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACY SECOND.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GALLINA IF YOU WILL REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW, PLEASE.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM FIVE PROPERTY ACQUISITION DISPOSITIONS.

[5) PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS/DISPOSITIONS:]

MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS AND DISPOSITIONS FIVE A, B AND C GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GALIANO.

SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STACY. IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW, PLEASE.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THAT BRINGS US TO AGENDA ITEM SIX.

[6) BUDGET TRANSFER(S):]

BUDGET TRANSFERS. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE.

BUDGET TRANSFERS SIX A, B, C AND D MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GALIANO.

I'LL SECOND IT. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH, IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES.

PASSES 5 TO 0. THAT BRINGS US TO AGENDA ITEM SEVEN.

[7) APPROVAL OF ACCOUNTS, BILLS, CLAIMS, AND PAYROLL(S):]

APPROVAL OF ACCOUNTS, BILLS, CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS.

YES, JUDGE. THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE IS SUBMITTING PAID CLAIMS IN THE AMOUNT OF $124,881.41, AND ASKED FOR THE COURT'S APPROVAL.

SO MOVED. GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MCQUEWICK. SECOND.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GALLINA. IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE.

PASSES 5 TO 0. WE ARE ALSO SUBMITTING THE UNPAID CLAIMS. IT'S A LARGE NUMBER JUST TO REMEMBER THAT THIS ONE INCLUDES THE DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS ALONG WITH THE UNPAID CLAIMS. SO THE TOTAL AMOUNT IS $3,359,728.48, AND WE ASK FOR THE COURT'S APPROVAL. SO MOVED. GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GALARNEAU.

SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STACY. IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. LASTLY, WE ASK FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE PAYROLL FOR THE PAY PERIOD ENDING JULY 4TH, 2026 IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,221,539.79. AND WE ASK FOR THE COURT'S APPROVAL. SO MOVED. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GALARNEAU.

SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH. IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW WE WILL GO BACK TO AGENDA ITEM THREE.

[3.O) Discuss/Act on LoneSTAR application process for Rockwall County, and all related issues; (Commissioner Gallana)]

OH, DISCUSS AND ACT ON LONE STAR APPLICATION PROCESS FOR ROCKWALL COUNTY AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER GALLINA. YEAH, I JUST PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA JUST TO MAKE SURE WE HAD AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE'RE AT IN THIS PROCESS.

NOT KNOWING THAT WE WEREN'T GOING TO HAVE THE AUDITOR HERE WHEN I PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA.

SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE PROCEEDING AS THE APPLICATION DEADLINE IS LESS THAN 30 DAYS AWAY NOW.

IS IT 31ST? SO DO WE NEED TO PASS THE MOU OR ARE WE JUST GOING TO MOVE THIS ON TO THE NEXT COURT TO KIND OF MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION? SO YEAH, SO BOBBY AND I AND MEREDITH HAVE BEEN LOOKING INTO THIS.

[02:00:03]

I THINK WHAT WE'RE GOING TO END UP HAVING TO DO IS BASICALLY REQUEST $1 MILLION LOAN FOR THE NEW COURTHOUSE FOR THE LIGHTING.

AND WE'RE, WE'RE JUST WORKING, AS DILIGENTLY AS WE KNOW HOW TO, TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.

IT'S, IT'S A PROCESS THAT MEREDITH IS MONITORING AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PASS SOME SORT OF MOU.

SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN KIND OF GET UP TO SPEED AND HAVE THAT READY TO GO.

HOPEFULLY NEXT COURT. YEP. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NO, I APPRECIATE THAT.

MY FIRST QUESTION WHEN I SAW THIS IS LIKE, I THOUGHT WE ALREADY THOUGHT WE ALREADY STARTED DOING THIS.

WE JUST I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE WE'RE STAYING AHEAD OF THE DEADLINE.

GOT IT, GOT IT. THANK YOU. YEAH, THAT IS IMPORTANT.

AND I'LL. I DON'T THINK IT'LL BE A SURPRISE TO ANY ANYBODY.

THE ONLY WAY THAT NEW COURTHOUSE LIGHTING GETS DONE THIS BUDGET IS IS THROUGH THROUGH THIS AVENUE.

SO, AS YOU SAY, IS. YES. YES IT IS. OH I'M SORRY, I'M SORRY. NOT OFTEN. YOU GET ME LAUGHING, BUT IS, IS THIS GOING TO SHOW WHEN WE GET THIS FINAL PRESENTATION, KIND OF THE CALCULATION BETWEEN ENERGY SAVINGS AND WHAT WE'RE SPENDING ON THIS? I KNOW THAT WAS KIND OF THE, THE BACKGROUND OF THIS IS WE WERE GETTING AN UNBELIEVABLE INTEREST RATE, 1% OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND, BUT WE WOULD THINK WE'D SAVE ENOUGH ENERGY TO PAY IT ALL BACK.

IS, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE SOME SORT OF ANALYSIS? THAT'S THE THAT'S THE GOAL OF THE PROGRAM.

AND I HOPE WE WILL HAVE SOME SORT OF ANALYSIS.

I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO BE PERFECT BECAUSE SOME OF THAT HAPPENS AFTER WE DO THE APPLICATION PASS THE MOU GET THE ENGINEERING STUDY INVOLVED. SOME OF THAT ALL HAPPENS THROUGHOUT THAT PROCESS.

AND AND JUST BECAUSE WE'RE PUTTING IN THE APPLICATION, IF ALL OF IT LOOKS, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S GOING TO LOOK GREAT.

THE COST OF THIS MONEY IS SO CHEAP, BUT IF IT LOOKS BAD, WE DON'T HAVE TO ACCEPT IT, BUT WE'LL GET MORE DETAILS AS WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.

I WISH WE HAD A MORE UP FRONT WHERE WE WOULD KNOW KIND OF WHAT OUR EXPENDITURE MIGHT BE IN THE BUDGET, BUT IT'S REALLY TOUGH TO KNOW THAT UNTIL YOU GET THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS AND THEN GET THE ENGINEERING PART ON THE OTHER END OF THE ENGINEERING PART OF THIS.

YEAH, NO, I GET IT. AND I'M NOT SAYING IT HAS TO MATCH PERFECTLY.

I DON'T EXPECT IT WILL. BUT IT THE SAVINGS WERE SO SIGNIFICANT THAT WHEN WE'RE BORROWING MONEY, IT WOULD BE NICE TO BE ABLE TO ASSURE OUR OUR RESIDENTS THAT WERE GOING TO PAY IT BACK WITH COST SAVINGS, DOING THE RIGHT THING, OR AT LEAST GET CLOSE.

YEAH. ALL RIGHT. SO NO, NO ACTION REQUIRED ON THAT.

SO WE WILL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM THREE. P DISCUSS AND ACT ON RESERVE PARKING FOR COMMISSIONERS COURT PERSONNEL DURING WORKING HOURS WITH APPROPRIATE SIGNAGE,

[3.P) Discuss/Act on reserved parking for Commissioner's Court personnel during working hours with appropriate signage installation, and all related issues; (Commissioner Gallana)]

INSTALLATION AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER DELANEY.

YEAH, I TOLD YOU ALL THIS WAS COMING AT SOME POINT. SO I'VE BEEN SAYING THAT FOR EVER SINCE I'VE BEEN JUDGED.

I'M JUST GOING TO TAKE THE LEAP. I'M GOING TO TAKE THE LEAP AND SAY, WE NEED TO DO THIS.

IT'S JUST DIFFICULT WITH HOW BUSY WE ARE. IF WE LEAVE, YOU KNOW, FROM TUESDAY TO FRIDAY TO GO ANYWHERE AND TRY TO COME BACK AND PARK, IT IS LITERALLY NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO FIND A PARKING PLACE AROUND HERE.

WHICH IS GREAT. I'M GLAD IT'S BUSY, BUT, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO GET TO THE OFFICE.

I'VE GOT THINGS TO DO, AND I WANT TO BE ABLE TO PARK AND GET TO WORK.

DO YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION OF WHICH SPOTS? I WAS THINKING THIS BACK AREA BACK BACK HERE WHERE YOU KNOW, WHERE YOU AND THE AND THE JUDGE AND LAUREN PARK MOST OF THE TIME ALREADY, WHICH IS BACK HERE.

SO I THINK WE COULD I THINK THE THE HANDICAP I THINK YEAH, THE DISCUSSION WOULD BE HOW MANY SPOTS DO WE WANT TO HANDICAP.

YEAH. SO IT'S WRAP AROUND HOW MANY SPOTS DO WE WANT TO RESERVE.

AND THAT'S THE DISCUSSION. I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER TO THAT.

AND THEN WHAT TIMES OF THE DAY DO WE WANT TO DO IT SO THAT WE'RE NOT IMPEDING ON THESE RESTAURANTS AND BUSINESSES DOWN HERE WHEN WE'RE NOT HERE.

WELL, WE ARE IF WE TAKE OUR OWN SPOTS, WE ARE GOING TO IMPEDE ON THEM BECAUSE AS ANYBODY WHO'S BEEN HERE FOR A MONTH KNOWS WHERE THE PEOPLE ARE WALKING ONCE THEY PARK HERE. OH THAT'S TRUE.

THEY GO TO WORK. THEY DO. BUT I MEAN, MORE THEIR CUSTOMERS, IF THEY'RE WORKING, THEY CAN PARK OVER HERE AND THEY CAN WALK OVER.

SO. AGREED. SO I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION.

SO THERE'S FIVE OF US. THERE'S MEREDITH, THERE'S JIM BARTOW, THERE'S REPRESENTATIVE PIERSON.

HER, HER STAFF. SO WE'VE EFFECTIVELY TAKEN ALL THE SPOTS.

AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S WRONG. I MEAN, THAT'S THAT'S IF WE'RE USING THE SPOTS, WE'RE USING THE SPOTS WE'RE TAKING THESE SPOTS.

WE'RE NOT THE ONES IN THE FRONT. YEAH, I WOULD I WOULD TRY TO AVOID THOSE.

BUT IF WE CAN UTILIZE THE SPOTS HERE AND ON THIS SIDE.

[02:05:04]

THIS SIDE IS NOT. NOT US. THAT'S THE CITY OF ROCKWALL.

OH, THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S STREET PARKING. SO WE, WE JUST HAVE WE HAVE THREE SIDES.

YEAH. OKAY. I MEAN IT IS FRUSTRATING. I MEAN, BACK BEFORE ALL OF THIS, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY EITHER OWNED OR HAD SOME SORT OF AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF ROCKWALL ON THAT LOT RIGHT THERE.

AND IT AND IT IS HARD. I MEAN, THERE'S TIMES WHERE I'M PARKING AT BIN 303 AND WALKING BACK FOR A MEETING.

AND YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT DOES MAKE IT DIFFICULT.

I DO THINK IT'S NECESSARY. I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR WE GO, BUT I MEAN, IT'S ALSO HARD WHEN WE'RE HAVING MEETINGS, PEOPLE EVEN BEING ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES I GET TEXTS.

I'M SORRY I'M LATE. I CAN'T FIND A SPOT TO PARK, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE A MEETING AND TO DO BUSINESS IN THIS BUILDING.

SO I DEFINITELY THINK IT'S NECESSARY. I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT WE DO IF WE JUST TRY TO GRAB ALL OF THEM AND, YOU KNOW, 8 TO 5 MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY. I DON'T KNOW IF WE DO THAT.

I DON'T KNOW HOW WE ENFORCE IT. I DON'T KNOW IF THE SHERIFF'S GOING TO HELP US TOW PEOPLE AWAY.

I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE DO. BUT I DO THINK WE NEED TO FIGURE THAT OUT BECAUSE IT IS A REALLY BAD PROBLEM.

AND AND ON FRIDAYS, I TRY NOT TO LEAVE BECAUSE I CAN'T COME BACK.

YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T THERE'S NO WAY TO COME BACK.

SO BUT THAT ALSO MEANS WE'RE DISPLACING THOSE PEOPLE AS WELL, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY PEOPLE ARE PARKING ALL OVER DOWNTOWN ROCKWALL.

BUT I MEAN, WE CAN'T WE CAN'T EVEN HAVE MEETINGS HERE.

I MEAN, SOMETIMES PEOPLE ARE LIKE, I WANT TO MEET YOU AT 3:00 ON FRIDAY. I'M LIKE, WELL, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE HERE. WE WON'T BE ABLE TO PARK. SO IT IS DISRUPTIVE.

SO I'M WONDERING IF WE DON'T TAKE THESE TWO SIDES.

YEAH. AND LEAVE THE FRONT FOR JUST NORMAL PARKING AS IT IS, AND THEN JUST RESERVE BOTH SIDES HERE.

YOU MEAN LIKE THAT, THAT THE EAST AND THE, I GUESS THE NORTH.

WELL HE'S TALKING NORTH, SOUTH, NORTH, SOUTH, NORTH, SOUTH. AND LEAVE. LEAVE THE FRONT. YEAH, LEAVE THE FRONT. OKAY. I MEAN, THAT WOULD GIVE US ENOUGH.

NOW THAT'S GOING TO LEAD US VERY QUICKLY TO WHAT COMMISSIONER STACEY ALLUDED TO.

ALL RIGHT. RESERVED FOR COUNTY BUSINESS. NOW THEY'RE FULL AND IT'S NOT COUNTY BUSINESS.

NOW WHAT? NOW WHAT DO WE DO NOW? WHAT DO WE DO? DO WE LEAVE LITTLE NOTES? I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT'S WHAT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE.

I DO THINK THAT WHAT IS TRUE IS THAT A LOT OF THAT PARKING IS WORKERS.

WE THE SAME CARS ARE PARKED IN THE SAME SPOTS EVERY SINGLE DAY.

ALL DAY LONG. YEP. YES. SO AND YOU'RE RIGHT, IT IS.

IT'S NOT PEOPLE COMING TO EAT OR SHOP. IT'S IT'S ONCE THEY PARK, IT'S IT'S GONE ALL DAY.

YEP. BUT I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF NORTH AND SOUTH OF THE BUILDING.

PUT SOME SIGNAGE UP AND THEN WE JUST FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO FROM THERE.

I MEAN, IF WE START, I'M OKAY WITH THAT. AND I, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, WE'VE BEEN THREATENING TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION.

SO THANK YOU FOR ACTUALLY PUTTING AN AGENDA ITEM WHERE WE CAN HAVE THE CONVERSATION.

YEAH, WE NEED TO DO THAT. THIS IS AN OPERATING COUNTY, COUNTY BUILDING AND WE NEED TO TREAT IT AS SUCH.

YEAH. WE STILL NEED TO GATHER SOME COSTS ON WHAT ALL THAT ENTAILS.

I THINK BEFORE WE. DO ANYTHING REALLY, I DON'T I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COST IS YET FROM BARRY ON PUTTING UP SIGNS AND WELL, AND THEN I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF DIRECTION. Y'ALL CAN PUT A QUOTE TOGETHER, CORRECT? YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. SO I THINK LET'S LET'S PROCEED. COME BACK WITH SOME NUMBERS.

OKAY. THEN WE'LL MAKE A DECISION. SOUNDS GOOD.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SIR. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE.

[3.Q) Discuss/Act on the recommendation of the fleet committee for the FY27 Budget, and all related issues; (Commissioner Gallana)]

Q DISCUSS AND ACT ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE FLEET COMMITTEE FOR THE FY 2011 BUDGET AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER. SO I JUST WANTED TO GET THIS ON THE RECORD FOR EVERYBODY TO SEE.

THIS IS WHAT I LISTED OFF IN THE SHEET THAT YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE IN YOUR BACKUP OR GOT EMAILED YESTERDAY.

IT'S JUST THE ONES THAT WE HAVE NEEDS FOR THIS.

THESE ARE ONES THAT WE CAN JUSTIFY THE NEED FOR.

IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN WE'RE GOING TO BUY THEM.

AND WE TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT JUDGE. SO WE THESE ARE JUST THE ONES THAT MEET.

THESE ARE THE ONES THAT WE BELIEVE WE NEED TO REPLACE.

SO YOU'VE GOT SIX VEHICLES FOR THE SHERIFF. WE'LL BE ABLE TO GET WORKING WITH CAPTAIN BROWN.

WE'LL BE ABLE TO GET ALL SIX OF THOSE FOR 500 000, WHICH IS GREAT.

THEN WE HAVE THE ONE FOR TRAY CHANEY ONE FOR ERICA BRIDGES AND THE ONE FOR THE FIRE MARSHAL TREY CHENEY'S. WE HAD HIM COME AND HAVE THAT DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THAT.

[02:10:02]

THAT PROBABLY NEEDS TO GO PRETTY QUICKLY. WE'RE SINKING MONEY INTO IT.

ERICA. THIS IS JUST A HOLDOVER FROM LAST YEAR WHERE WE WEREN'T ABLE TO DO IT LAST YEAR.

AND THE FIRE MARSHAL, OF COURSE, WE HEARD HIS PRESENTATION ABOUT WHAT HE NEEDS.

THE NEXT THREE ARE LESS OF A PRIORITY. THESE ARE LISTED IN ORDER OF PRIORITY.

THE NEXT THREE ARE LESS OF A PRIORITY, BUT I CAN WE COULD SEE THE NEED FOR THEM.

AND THAT WAS A SMALL TRANSIT CARGO VAN FOR IT.

GETTING RID OF SOMETHING THAT'S SUPER HIGH MILEAGE THERE. AND THEN THE INVESTIGATORS AT THE DA'S OFFICE, THEIR VEHICLES ARE OLD AND SUPER HIGH MILEAGE.

THERE'S PROBABLY A NEED TO REPLACE THREE OF THEM, BUT I THINK THEY COULD GET AWAY WITH 1 OR 2 AND MAKE IT A POOL VEHICLE AND ONLY TAKE IT OUT WHEN THEY NEED IT AND NOT HAVE IT ASSIGNED TO A SPECIFIC PERSON.

I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY AN OKAY WAY TO TO START TO TRY TO FIX THEIR FLEET A LITTLE BIT.

SO AGAIN, JUDGE, THESE ARE JUST LISTED IN ORDER OF PRIORITY.

AND THE BUDGET WILL DETERMINE WHAT WE CAN AFFORD TO DO HERE.

BUT THESE ARE JUST THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF WHAT WE SEE AS NEEDS.

GOT IT. THANK YOU. SO WE HAVE SIX SHERIFF THAT WE'RE GOING TO CAPTURE WITH SB 22.

CORRECT. AND THEN WE HAVE A CONSTABLE TWO GETS A VEHICLE.

OUR ENGINEER GETS A VEHICLE. FIRE MARSHAL GETS A VEHICLE UNDER THE WHAT I'LL CALL THE MUST HAVES.

YEAH. AND THEN IF WE CAN GET IT, A NEW TRANSIT VAN JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT WE HAVE LEFT.

GOT IT. YEAH. GOT IT. AND THE INVESTIGATORS, A POOL VEHICLE.

MY, MY ONLY COMMENT WOULD BE, IS IT WITHIN THE REALM OF POSSIBILITY TO POTENTIALLY GET THE SHERIFF ANOTHER VEHICLE AND ROLL A PATROL CAR OFF TO A CONSTABLE? YEAH. I'M NOT TRYING TO PICK ON THE CONSTABLE'S, AND I'M SURE THEY'RE LISTENING AND I'M PICKING A FIGHT, BUT THAT'S NOT MY INTENTION. THEIR CARS TYPICALLY GET OLDER BEFORE THE MILEAGE WHILE OUR PATROL VEHICLES GET A LOT OF MILEAGE.

SO MAYBE IF WE COULD CYCLE A PATROL VEHICLE OUT, MAYBE A ONE YEAR PATROL VEHICLE TO TO TRAY CHANEY, GET HIM THE VEHICLE HE NEEDS. SO THE NEED IS THERE.

I THOUGHT HE DID A GOOD JOB DISCUSSING IT. I MEAN, IN HOW WE GOT HERE THROUGH MULTIPLE ITERATIONS ON HIS VEHICLE, WHICH MAKES NO SENSE. THAT WAS NOT ANYONE UP HERE.

YOU KNOW, I WAS TALKING TO SOME PEOPLE LAST WEEK IN AT THE CONFERENCE, WE MIGHT BE THE ONLY COUNTY WITH EVERY SINGLE COMMISSIONER AND JUDGE IN THEIR FIRST TERM IN THE ENTIRE STATE OF TEXAS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. I CAN'T FIND ANOTHER ONE.

I'VE ASKED IF THERE IS ANOTHER ONE AND NO ONE CAN THINK OF ANY.

SO THIS, THIS WASN'T US THAT MADE THIS WEIRD VEHICLE AND ALL THESE ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS. SO I AGREE WITH YOU TO GET RID OF THE CAR. I JUST DON'T KNOW IF IT MIGHT MAKE MORE SENSE FISCALLY TO, TO GET THE SHERIFF A PATROL VEHICLE AND JUST ROLL ONE OFF.

BUT I DO APPRECIATE THE LIST AND I DO APPRECIATE THE TIMING.

OKAY. YEAH. AND THAT MIGHT MAKE SENSE TO DO THAT.

IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT'S ROLLING OUT WHAT WE HAVE SCHEDULED TO ROLL OUT OF THE SHERIFF'S VEHICLES.

I DON'T THINK ANY OF THOSE WOULD MAKE SENSE, BUT MAYBE THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL, LIKE YOU SAID SOMEWHAT LOW MILEAGE THAT THAT WE COULD ROLL OUT. THE CONSTABLES WILL OF COURSE KEEP, HOPEFULLY KEEP THEIR VEHICLES MUCH LONGER THAN THAN THE SHERIFF'S SIDE WILL AT LEAST THAT'S, THAT'S THE GOAL. THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO, THEY DON'T MILE THEIRS UP OR PUT IT THROUGH THE RIGORS THAT THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT DOES.

SO THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO KEEP IT MUCH LONGER. WELL, I THINK IF NOTHING ELSE, THIS YEAR WE'VE SUCCESSFULLY LET DEPARTMENT HEADS AND ELECTEDS KNOW THAT ALL THEIR VEHICLE REQUESTS NEED TO BE FUNNELED THROUGH THE FLEET COMMITTEE.

YEAH. WHICH IS A BIG, BIG STEP FORWARD. YEAH.

YEAH. MOVING THE RIGHT WAY. YEP. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER GALLARDO. ALL RIGHT. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE.

[3.R) Discuss CloudGavel proposal, and all related issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

MAN. WE ARE CHEWING THROUGH THIS DISCUSS CLOUD GAVEL PROPOSAL AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER. STACY. THIS IS A DISCUSSION ONLY.

I LOVE WHEN THEY'RE PREFACED WITH DON'T FREAK OUT.

SO I JUST WANT THE COURT TO BE AWARE THAT WHAT THIS PROPOSAL IS, IS FOR EVERYBODY IN THE COUNTY THAT INCLUDES EVERY CITY, EVERY MUNICIPAL COURT EVERY JP, EVERYBODY.

IT'S $43,200 YEAR 128, EIGHT YEAR TWO. SOME OF OUR CITIES ARE ALREADY USING THIS SERVICE.

THEIR CONTRACTS WILL JUST ROLL UP UNDER OURS.

SO THERE WOULD BE NO, NO UPTICK AND NOTHING LIKE THAT.

WE HAVE NOT WRITTEN LAS FOR THE CITY. SO I'M JUST OPENING THIS PANDORA'S BOX.

I THINK THE CLOUD GAVEL IS AN AMAZING TOOL. I THINK THAT OUR JUDGES LIKE IT.

ALL THE FEEDBACK I'VE GOTTEN FROM ALL THE JUDGES, INCLUDING MUNICIPAL JUDGES, JP S DISTRICT JUDGES, COUNTY COURT OF LAW JUDGES, EVERYONE LIKES CLOUD GAVEL IS GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO INVEST IN SOMETHING THAT IS COUNTY WIDE.

SO I THINK OF OF SOMETHING LIKE FUND 51 FOR WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITH REIMBURSEMENTS AND HOW WE'RE SOMEHOW THIS COUNTY THAT EVERYTHING IS JUST TIED AND INTERLACED TOGETHER FROM THIS AGREEMENT, THAT THAT AGREEMENT TO FIRE AGREEMENTS TO THIS.

[02:15:02]

IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE THAT I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT AT THIS TIME.

I JUST WANT THE COURT TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE THIS IN AN ISOLATION INSTEAD OF THE BUDGET PROCESS, TO KNOW THAT I TRIED LAST YEAR TO GET IT TO THE COURT.

IT WAS DENIED, WHICH IS FINE. IT WAS A BUDGET CASUALTY AS WE GOT INTO THAT.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS SUPER IMPORTANT.

IT IS FULLY INTEGRATED INTO TYLER BECAUSE LIKE ALL THINGS CLOUD GAVEL WORKS.

TYLER BOUGHT IT. IT IS NOW A TYLER PRODUCT. SO I DID WANT TO UPDATE THE COURT ON THAT.

BUT I, I I STILL THINK IT'S A GREAT PRODUCT. THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE COULD REALLY UTILIZE IT.

AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE DA'S OFFICE CAN, CAN UTILIZE IT AND WE CAN STANDARDIZE OUR WARRANTS AND HOW WE DO WARRANTS.

SEARCH WARRANTS ARE THINGS THAT DO A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE AGENCIES AND THE PROSECUTORS.

THIS CREATES A FORMAT WHERE THEY CAN DO A LOT OF TALKING BACK AND FORTH AND ISSUE WARRANTS.

IT'S REALLY AMAZING TOOL ANYWAYS. AND OUR SHERIFFS CAN USE IT FOR A LOT OF OTHER THINGS OTHER THAN WARRANTS A LOT OF INTERNAL DOCUMENTATION THAT WE HAVE TO DO FROM THE JAILINGS AND SOME OF THAT. SO ANYWAYS, I'M NOT TRYING TO GET IN THE RAILS.

I'M NOT TRYING TO HAVE US SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON IT.

I JUST WANTED TO POINT THIS OUT TO YOU GUYS THAT THIS IS A MULTI-AGENCY SOLUTION.

IT'S NOT JUST A ROCKWALL COUNTY SOLUTION. AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A VERY EASY TRANSITION.

SO IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO YOUR CITIES ABOUT IT AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING, I HAVE TALKED TO MY CITIES ABOUT IT AND THEY LOVE CLOUD GAVEL AND BOTH OF MY CITIES ARE UTILIZING IT. SO IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD HELP THEM.

MY THOUGHT PROCESS IS NOT TO CREATE AN ILA AND HAVE THEM PAY FOR IT, BUT JUST FOR US TO INCLUDE THIS INTO OUR HODGEPODGE OF.

WE HELP YOU, YOU HELP US. AND SOMETIMES WE GET MAD AT EACH OTHER FROM THE COUNTIES AND CITIES COOPERATION, BUT I. AND I'M NOT SAYING IT SHOULD BE FUN. 51 I'M JUST SAYING IT WORKS ALONG THE LINES OF SOME OF THOSE REIMBURSEMENTS THAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST WITH FIRE AGREEMENTS AND OTHERWISE. IT ISN'T A HUGE FISCAL NOTE AT 43000 YEAR.

1288 BUT IT IS A EXTREMELY USEFUL TOOL AND IT CONTINUES MY DESIRE TO CREATE A PAPERLESS COURT SYSTEM.

AND THIS CREATES A PAPERLESS WARRANT SYSTEM OTHER THAN PHONES.

SO FOR SOME REASON THE LEGISLATURE DOES NOT ALLOW FACE TIME FOR PHONE SEARCHES.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING I WOULD PUT UPON US TO GO ASK THE LEGISLATURE FOR WHAT CAN HAPPEN IS AN OFFICER CAN SEND THE JUDGE THROUGH CLOUD GAVEL A REQUEST FOR A WARRANT, AND THEN THEY CAN FACE FACETIME. BASICALLY, IT'S NOT FACETIME, BUT THEY CAN ACTUALLY HAVE A COMMUNICATION, THEY CAN DO TESTIMONY, WHATEVER. I'M TRYING REALLY HARD NOT TO PLAY JUDGE, BUT THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO FACE TO FACE WITH THE OFFICER THROUGH THE APP, EXCEPT A PHONE SEARCH. FOR SOME REASON, THE LEGISLATURE SPECIFICALLY SAYS IT HAS TO BE DONE IN PERSON.

IT CAN'T BE DONE THROUGH ANY OTHER DEVICE, BUT WE COULD ASK FOR THAT CHANGE THROUGH JURISPRUDENCE.

ANYWAYS, HOW ARE WARRANTS DONE NOW? YEAH, THAT'S MY QUESTION.

IF WE HAVE A DEPUTY OUT AND HEY, I WANT A SEARCH WARRANT, I HAVE PROBABLE CAUSE.

THEY GO TO A JUDGE'S HOUSE OR FIND A JUDGE IN PERSON.

OKAY. YEAH, A JUDGE, NOT NECESSARILY A DISTRICT JUDGE, BUT A QUALIFIED JUDGE.

THEY FIND THEM. THEY HAVE THEM SIGN THE WARRANT.

THEN THEY GO. THEY GIVE THE JUDGE A COPY OF THE WARRANT.

THEY GO SERVE THE WARRANT. THAT'S THAT'S HOW IT'S DONE NOW.

OKAY. SO THIS WOULD SPEED THAT UP, MAKE IT POTENTIALLY IMMEDIATE.

YES. I MEAN, IT WOULD BE ELECTRONIC SIGNED BY THE JUDGE, SENT RIGHT BACK TO THE OFFICE.

WOULD WE DO THE SAME THING WE DO WITH OUR GPS? OF. THERE'S ONE ON CALL AT ALL TIMES. IT IS VERY LIKELY WE COULD DO THAT.

THAT BECOMES A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED WITH OUTSIDE AGENCIES.

AND NOW, JUST FOR THE RECORD, I AM 100% OUTSIDE MY LANE, BUT THERE COULD BE A PROCESS FOR ROYSE CITY THAT HOW THEY WANT TO DO THEIR WARRANTS, THAT COULD BE WITH THE MUNICIPAL JUDGE. FATE COULD WANT TO DO A MUNICIPAL JUDGE, AND THEY MIGHT NOT UTILIZE THE COUNTY'S RESOURCES.

BUT FROM THE COUNTY'S PERSPECTIVE, WE COULD SAY, IF YOU CAN'T FIND YOUR JUDGE, HERE IS THE LINE.

SO WHAT WE'VE DONE WITH THE JP IS JUST SO EVERYONE IS CLEAR, THEY USED TO HAVE THIS SCHEDULE WHERE THEY LISTED EVERYONE'S PHONE NUMBER AT ALL OF THE DISPATCH CENTERS. WELL, THEN THEY WOULD CALL ONE JP AND THEY WOULDN'T ANSWER, AND THEY WOULD JUST GO DOWN THE LIST AND START CALLING THEM ALL. WE HAVE NOW CREATED AN ON CALL SERVICE WHERE IT'S ONE PHONE NUMBER AND THE GPS PROGRAM IT.

SO NOW THE DISPATCH CENTER CALLS THE JP ONLINE AND IT FORWARDS TO THEIR CELL PHONE.

SO IT IS POSSIBLE THAT WE COULD CREATE A DISPATCH PRODUCT WITH THE COUNTY THAT SAYS WE WE CAN DO THIS.

THAT IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THE COMMISSIONERS COURT WOULD NOT DO, BUT WE COULD COME ALONGSIDE IF THAT'S WHAT THE JUDGES WOULD LIKE TO DO AND CREATE SOME

[02:20:01]

SORT OF WARRANT HOTLINE AT DISPATCH CENTERS. BECAUSE CLOUD GAVEL WOULD 100% GIVE US THE OPTION TO DO THAT IN A MUCH MORE EFFICIENT MANNER.

I HAVE NOT HAD THAT DISCUSSION WITH A SINGLE JUDGE.

SO IF WE'RE STEPPING ON A ON, ON SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, HEY, THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS WHY WE CAN'T DO THIS, THAT'S TOTALLY FINE. BUT IT WOULD POTENTIALLY DO THAT FROM A COUNTY'S RESOURCE PERSPECTIVE.

BUT IT MIGHT NOT DO THAT FOR WHAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER EVERY WARRANT IN THE COUNTY, BECAUSE THE CITIES MIGHT HAVE THEIR OWN OPERATIONS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF HOW THEY WANT TO DO IT. AND WE DEFINITELY DO NOT WANT TO TELL THEM HOW TO HOW TO DO THEIR POLICING AND THEIR WARRANTS.

AND I HAVE NO IDEA IF THAT WOULD. BUT TO THAT IT WOULD, BECAUSE THEN IT WOULD SHOW UP ON THE JUDGE'S PHONE AND THEY COULD JUST PROCESS THE WARRANTS AS THEY COME IN. SO YOU SAID THAT FATE AND ROYSE CITY ARE BOTH.

AND CITY OF ROCKWALL USES CLOUD GAVEL. OKAY. THEY'RE JUST NOT MY CITY.

SO I JUST THINK BOTH OF MY CITIES FOR SURE USE CLOUD GAVEL.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WHEN YOU SAID YOU WANTED THE COMMISSIONERS TO GO TALK TO THEIR CITY SPECIFICALLY, WHAT DO YOU WANT TO KNOW IF THEY'RE OPEN, IF THEY'RE OPEN TO THIS, IF THEY WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF A COUNTY WIDE SOLUTION? OR DO THEY JUST, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THEY JUST WANT TO DO THEIR OWN THING ANYWAY? WOULD THEY GET ANY BENEFIT FROM US DOING COUNTY WIDE SOLUTION? THAT WAY WHEN WE GET TO THE BUDGET PROCESS AND WE START TALKING ABOUT THIS, ARE WE ACTUALLY HELPING THEM AT ALL? GOT IT. ONE QUESTION YOU SAID THAT THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING YOU JUST THROW INTO OUR POT OF THINGS WE BUY. IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD BUILD INTO OUR INFRASTRUCTURE CONSORTIUM THAT WE'RE HOPING TO EXPAND? WE NEED TO SOME SORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY COOPERATION.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO TITLE. IT NEEDS TO BE THERE, BECAUSE I THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT OF INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE THAT COMES AND GOES WITH WHAT THIS WHOLE PUBLIC SAFETY INTERWORKINGS ARE.

THE ONE THING INTERESTING ABOUT ROCKWALL COUNTY IS THAT WE'RE 12MI².

WE WORK SO WELL TOGETHER THAT WE HAVE INTERMINGLED A LOT OF THESE THINGS THAT OTHER COUNTIES CAN'T DO, WHICH IS A GREAT THING. MY, THE POINT BEING, YES, I DO THINK THE THE, THE CONSORTIUM SHOULD HAVE SOMETHING THAT WE DISCUSS IT THAT WE TALK ABOUT HOW IT WORKS, WHAT'S GOING WELL AND JUST HOW TO DO THAT.

SO YEAH, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT ALONG. I HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT IT, BUT I THINK I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU. ONE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ITEMS WE HAVE LISTED IS POLICE, SHERIFF, ETC. SO I WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE MAY WANT TO INCORPORATE INTO THAT.

YES. THEN DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE CITY IS PAID FOR THIS? I HAVEN'T DONE ALL OF THAT RESEARCH. I GOT THIS TOGETHER, AND THEN I LEFT TOWN AND ANY.

AND I JUST WANTED TO BRING IT AS AS A DISCUSSION.

AND THAT'S FINE. I'M JUST SAYING THAT WE MIGHT BUY PACKAGING AND AND BUNDLING IT.

THEY MIGHT ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO SAVE SOME MONEY.

AND IF WE DID IT AS PART OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE CONSORTIUM LIKE EMERGENCY SERVICES THEY, I WOULD THINK WOULD PAY THEIR, THEIR SHARE. TOTALLY COULD. AND NOT THAT I DON'T, AND IT'S NOT A TON OF MONEY, BUT IT'S JUST THE PRINCIPLE OF THE THING.

IF WE'RE ALL USING IT, WHY NOT? AND IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THIS IDEA THAT WE PUT IN, I THINK THAT WE PUT INTO OUR STRATEGIC PLAN OF HAVING A INFRASTRUCTURE CONSORTIUM, AND THEN WE COULD JUST PAY HALF AND THEN KIND OF DIVVY IT OUT, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE USING IT A LOT FROM OUR JUDGES, OUR D A, AND OUR SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. THERE'S A LOT OF COORDINATION WITH THE JAIL FOR ATTESTATIONS, THAT THEY CAN USE THIS AND SEND IT STRAIGHT TO THE OFFICER ON THE STREET.

THERE'S A LOT OF COOL THINGS THAT WE CAN DO WITH CLOUD GAVEL THAT ISN'T JUST WARRANTS.

IT IS A WARRANT SYSTEM, BUT IT DOES MORE THAN JUST WARRANTS.

YEAH. SO I'VE LONG THOUGHT THE EMERGENCY SERVICES CORPORATION NOT, NOT.

AND I KNOW THOSE IN THE CONSORTIUM KIND OF GET SMUSHED TOGETHER, BUT I'VE LONG THOUGHT THAT FUNDING MECHANISM THAT WE HAVE AND THE STRUCTURE THERE COULD BE USED FOR THINGS OUTSIDE OF AMBULANCE SERVICE.

NOW REALIZING, OF COURSE, IF THE CITY SAY, YES, WE WANT TO DO THIS, YOU KNOW, OUR FUNDING STRUCTURE IS COUNTY PAYS HALF THE CITY'S DIVVY UP THE REMAINING HALF BASED ON ESSENTIALLY THEIR USAGE, THEIR NUMBER OF CITIZENS OR NUMBER OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, DEPENDING ON WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. SO THIS AMOUNT WOULD GO UP SIGNIFICANTLY BECAUSE THE EMERGENCY SERVICES WOULD THEN BE TAKING ON CITY OF ROCKWALL, CITY OF FATE, ROY CITIES, ALL OF THEIR CLOUD.

GAVLE. NO, THIS INCLUDES ALL OF THEM USING IT.

OH IT DOES. YES. OKAY. THIS IS INCLUSIVE OF EVERY AGENCY USING IT.

SO THE PRICE WILL NOT GO UP. RIGHT? AND THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THEY'RE PROBABLY GOING TO SAVE MONEY IF WE LUMP THEM ALL TOGETHER.

SO WHY WOULDN'T THEY. ESPECIALLY IF WE PAY HALF OF IT AND THEY DIVVY UP THE REMAINING HALF.

YEAH. BECAUSE MY GUESS IS I, I SHOULDN'T GUESS WHAT PEOPLE PAY FOR.

I HAVE NO IDEA. BUT THEY COULD LIKELY SAVE MONEY.

AND TO BE FAIR TO ALL THE CITIES THAT MAY WANT TO GO BACK AND LISTEN TO THIS DISCUSSION, CLOUD WILL REFUSE TO TELL ME WHAT THE CITIES PAID BECAUSE I DID ASK,

[02:25:05]

AND THEY SAID THAT I DON'T I DON'T HAVE I DON'T HAVE ANY PRIVY TO THAT INFORMATION.

SO I WAS LIKE, THAT'S TOTALLY FINE. I'M NOT GOING TO PUSH THAT BUTTON. SO I DID TRY TO HAVE THAT FOR COURT, WHICH MEANS ONE OF US IS PAYING TOO MUCH.

THAT'S WHAT THAT MEANS. SO FORTUNATELY WE'RE HAVING AN ESC MEETING THIS WEDNESDAY, SO I'LL JUST BRING IT UP AS A JUST AN ASIDE ITEM AND JUST KIND OF PLANT THE SEEDS AND SEE IF THERE'S, THERE'S, IS THAT SEPARATE FROM THE ROAD CONSORTIUM? IT IS, IT IS. YEAH. YEAH. IT IS JUST, JUST THE ESC.

OKAY. ANYTHING FURTHER, COMMISSIONER STACEY? ALL RIGHT.

WE WILL MOVE ON. LET'S SEE. YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO GET ANOTHER ONE IN HERE.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM THREE S DISCUSS AND ACT ON COUNTY BONDS AND TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY RISK POOL PRESENTATION AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

[3.S) Discuss/Act on County Bonds and Texas Association of County Risk Pool Presentation, and all related issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

COMMISSIONER STACEY. YES. SO THIS STEMMED FROM US DOING A, A BOND FOR OUR FIRE MARSHAL AND COMMISSIONER LICHTY ASKING QUESTIONS.

WHAT IS THIS? WHAT IS THAT? I'M NOT I'M NOT TRYING TO POINT THE FINGER AT YOU, BUT IT SENT ME DOWN.

WHY NOT? YEAH. OKAY. IT'S ALL. IT'S ALL COMMISSIONER LICHTY FAULT.

SENDING ME DOWN A RABBIT TRAIL. OF WHAT? OUR BONDS.

WHAT ARE A RISK? WHAT IS OUR MANAGEMENT? SO I CALLED CRAIG AND SAID, HEY, MAN, WE'VE GOT TO WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE THIS OUT.

AND HE GAVE IT TO JORDAN, WHO IS HERE FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

SO WE HAVE. SO HERE'S WHAT WE DID BETWEEN JORDAN, CAMMY, AND MYSELF.

WE TRIED TO FIGURE OUT ALL THE LEGAL PARAMETERS AROUND BONDS, ALL THE RISK POOL PARAMETERS AROUND BONDS, AND THEN WENT TO THE BONDING COMPANY AND MADE SURE THAT EVERYTHING WAS ACTUALLY DONE AS IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE.

SO THIS IS A LOT OF WORK. IT IS NOT FOR A LOT OF MONEY SAVINGS.

THIS IS A RISK MANAGEMENT EXERCISE. SO NOTHING I'M GOING TO SAY NONE OF THESE CONCLUSIONS ARE GOING TO GO, WOW, WE JUST SAVED THE COUNTY A LOT OF MONEY.

WHAT WE'RE DOING IS MAKING SURE THE COUNTY IS PROTECTED FROM A RISK MANAGEMENT STANDPOINT.

SO WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THAT. JORDAN WILL BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, ANY STATUTE QUESTIONS.

SHE WROTE THE LEGAL MEMO THAT I PUT INTO THE PACKET.

I BELIEVE THAT MY POWERPOINT WILL TRANSITION FROM A LOT OF THE STATUTORY STUFF TO WHAT MY RECOMMENDATIONS ARE AND WHAT I FOUND.

SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO HAVE MEREDITH JUMP THROUGH THIS. SO I WANTED TO START WITH SOME WEBSTER DEFINITIONS OF WHAT IS A BOND.

IT IS AN INSURANCE AGREEMENT FOR A THIRD PARTY THAT WOULD BASICALLY SAY, I WILL COVER THE FINANCIAL LOSS.

THAT'S WHAT A BOND IS. IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE.

THIS IS WHAT AN INSURANCE COMPANY, AN INSURANCE IS A CONTRACT FOR INDEMNIFICATION AGAINST A LOSS THAT IS CONTRACTUALLY BOUND.

SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT THOSE IN THERE BECAUSE WHILE A BOND IS INSURANCE, A BOND IS AN INSURANCE.

SO IT'S JUST GOING TO MAKE MY OCD BRAIN GO BACK AND FORTH AS WE DISCUSSED.

SO GO TO THE NEXT ONE. SO WHAT I'VE DONE IS I'VE TAKEN A LOT OF THE LANGUAGE AND PUT IT INTO WHAT IT IS.

WHAT WE'RE BONDED FOR IS FUNDS ILLEGALLY PAID TO US, OR IF WE REFUSE TO CONSENT TO PAYMENT FOR BONDS THAT ARE LAWFULLY FOR A LAWFUL PURPOSE. I JUST THOUGHT THAT WAS INTERESTING. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY BONDED FOR. THAT IS $3,000.

JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT'S STATE LAW. IT'S A $3,000 BOND TO PROTECT THE COUNTY FROM US DOING THESE THINGS.

TWO, 3000 UP TO 3000. SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE A COUNTY JUDGE CAN HAVE A LARGER BOND IF THEY ARE A PROBATE JUST KIND OF SUMMARIZING. AND THE BOND IS PAYABLE TO THE COUNTY TREASURER FOR $3,000.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, THE COUNTY CLERK THE BOND MUST BE PAYABLE TO THE COUNTY.

IT MUST BE EQUAL TO 20% OF THE MAXIMUM FEES COLLECTED IN A YEAR PRIOR TO TAKING OFFICE.

BUT THE BOND CAN BE NO LARGER THAN 500,000 AND NO LESS THAN 5000.

THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT IS ALLOWED TO SELF-INSURE AGAINST LOSSES THAT THAT BOND WOULD COVER.

THAT IS A THING WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO. SO I'M GOING TO GO KIND OF QUICK BECAUSE THE SUMMARY IS MUCH SIMPLER THAN ALL ALL OF THIS.

BUT JORDAN DID SO MUCH WORK. I JUST WANTED IT TO BE ON SCENE FOR, FOR THE PUBLIC.

THE CLERK MUST ALSO HAVE A BLANKET SECURITY FOR ALL THE EMPLOYEES, AT LEAST EQUAL TO THAT OF THE CLERK, BUT CAN BE MORE. AND WE CAN ALSO SELF-INSURE AGAINST ALL THOSE LOSSES.

AND THE BONDS FOR THE EMPLOYEES MUST BE PAYABLE TO THE COUNTY CLERK.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE, THESE ARE GOING TO BE OUR COUNTY JUDGES.

THE REASON I SAY COUNTY JUDGES IS BECAUSE IF OUR COUNTY JUDGE IS ACTING AS A PROBATE, THEY FALL UNDER THIS.

[02:30:02]

SO THIS IS OUR COUNTY COURT AT LAW JUDGES. ANYONE THAT PRESIDES OVER GUARDIANSHIP AND PROBATE MUST HAVE AT LEAST 500 000.

THAT'S JUST STATE LAW. THE BOND MUST BE PAYABLE TO THE COUNTY JUDGE AND ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY CLERK.

AND IN LIEU OF THE BOND THE COUNTY MAY SELF-INSURE AGAINST THOSE LOSSES.

SO IF YOU GO TO. THE NEXT ONE IS THE COUNTY ENGINEER.

THE TRANSPORTATION CODE REQUIRES A BOND TO BE SET AND APPROVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT.

THE ROAD ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL MUST ALSO BE GIVEN A BOND OR AN AMOUNT SET AND APPROVED BY COMMISSIONER.

SO CURRENTLY WE DON'T HAVE THIS VERY CLEAN BECAUSE WE HAVE A BOND ON WAYNE AND WE HAVE A BOND ON ERICA, SO WE SHOULD GET RID OF THE BOND ON WAYNE BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A COUNTY ENGINEER, BUT WE'LL WE'LL GET THERE.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE, THE COUNTY MAY OBTAIN.

THIS IS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 81.20.025. THE COUNTY MAY OBTAIN RISK POOL COVERAGE TO SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT OF BONDS.

ROCKWALL COUNTY HAS CHAPTER 119 RISK POOL COVERAGE AND THE COVERAGE MUST SATISFY ALL BOND REQUIREMENTS.

THAT IS NOT A SENTENCE TO BE TAKEN LIGHTLY. SO WHILE WE HAVE RISK POOL COVERAGE, I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE RISK POOL COVERAGE THAT SATISFIES ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF A BOND.

SO WE WILL LAND THAT PLANE SHORTLY. BUT WE DO HAVE RISK POOL COVERAGE THAT QUALIFIES FOR A BOND ACCORDING TO THE STATE LAW.

SO SINCE THE COUNTY ENGINEER AND ROAD ADMINISTRATOR ARE COUNTY EMPLOYEES, THE RISK POOL WOULD COVER ANY OF THEIR NEGLECT OR MALFEASANCE.

THAT IS JUST A TRUE FACT. IT COVERS THE COUNTY FOR THAT.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE THAT'S JUST PLANTING SEEDS TO OUR SUMMARY.

WE JUST HAVE A LOT OF BONDS IN THIS COUNTY. THE DISTRICT CLERK, AGAIN, NOT GOING TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME, 20% OF FEES COLLECTED PRIOR TO TAKING OFFICE IN A RANGE OF 5 TO 100,000.

NOW, WHAT'S INTERESTING IS THAT FOR SOME REASON, THEY HAVE CAVEATS IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

IF YOU ARE USING RISK POOL, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THIS, THAT OR THE OTHER INCLUDED IN THERE.

WE HAVE ALL OF THAT. AND THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE ALSO SPEAKS OF CREATING A SINKING FUND WHERE WE COULD LITERALLY PUT $100,000 INTO AN ACCOUNT AND JUST HAVE IT SIT THERE IN CASE WE EVER NEED TO PAY FOR IT AGAIN.

I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY'RE SPECIFIC ON ONES AND NOT SPECIFIC ON THE OTHERS.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE, IT GOES TO THEIR EMPLOYEES.

AGAIN, THE CLERK MUST ALSO SECURE BONDS FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES ON THE J S THE BOND HAS TO BE PAYABLE TO THE COUNTY JUDGE AND CANNOT BE MORE THAN $5,000 JUST. AND THE CONDITIONS ARE TO FAITHFULLY AND IMPARTIALLY DISCHARGE DUTIES REQUIRED BY LAW AND PROMPTLY PAID TO THE ENTITLED PARTIES.

ALL MONEY THAT COMES INTO THE JUSTICE HANDS DURING TERM OF OFFICE.

IT'S A $5,000 BOND. THAT KIND OF MAKES SENSE ON THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY.

IT'S APPROVED BY THE DISTRICT JUDGES, NOT BY US.

RDA IS AN ELECTED CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY.

SO THE REASON THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT IS IF YOU GO LOOK AT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, IT BASICALLY JUST REFERS THINGS BACK.

IF YOU HAVE THIS, IT REFERS BACK TO THIS. IF YOU HAVE. THIS REFERS BACK TO THAT.

JORDAN'S LAWYER BRAIN WOULD NOT. LET ME SUMMARIZE THAT SENTENCE IN THE OTHER WAY.

SO IT SAYS NO. IT HAS TO SAY IT THAT WAY. IT HAS TO BE PAYABLE TO THE GOVERNOR AND IT MUST BE FIVE GRAND.

THAT'S JUST WE CAN HAVE RISK POOL COVERAGE, BUT THE DISTRICT JUDGES GET TO APPROVE THE BOND.

SO NO ONE HAS EVER FIGURED OUT HOW YOU JUSTIFY THOSE TWO COMPETING INTERESTS.

THE ELECTIONS ADMINISTRATOR. WE SET A BOND NOT TO EXCEED $20,000.

MUST BE PAYABLE TO THE COUNTY JUDGE. CONDITIONED TO FAITHFULLY EXECUTE OFFICE.

COMMISSIONERS MAY REQUIRE ANY AND ALL OTHER DEPUTIES AND UNPAID VOLUNTEERS TO HAVE A BOND OF THE ADMINISTRATOR, BUT IT CANNOT BE MORE THAN THE ADMINISTRATOR.

SO THE COUNTY AUDITOR, A MINIMUM OF $5,000 WITH NO SET MAXIMUM, JUST AN ODD PLACE BECAUSE MOST OF THEM HAVE SET MAXIMUMS. IT HAS TO BE APPROVED AND PAYABLE TO THE DISTRICT JUDGES BECAUSE, AS YOU RECALL, THE AUDITOR WORKS FOR THE DISTRICT JUDGES CONDITION TO FAITHFULLY PERFORM DUTIES. IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE. A BOND NO GREATER THAN HALF OF 1% OF THE LARGEST AMOUNT BUDGETED FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS FOR ANY FISCAL YEAR DURING THE TERM OF OFFICE, NOT LESS THAN 5000, AND NOT TO EXCEED 500,000.

THE TREASURER'S BOND COULD, IN THEORY, CHANGE YEAR TO YEAR IF THE TREASURER SO DEEMED THAT NECESSARY.

THE TREASURER'S EMPLOYEES. THERE ARE TWO OPTIONS.

WE CAN SELF-INSURE AGAINST LOSSES, BUT THE BOND MUST BE EQUAL TO THAT OF THE TREASURER.

SET FOR THE BLANKET. FOR THE TREASURER'S EMPLOYEES.

THE TAX ASSESSOR. COLLECTOR MUST HAVE TWO BONDS.

SO IF YOU GO THROUGH OUR BOND LIST, YOU WILL SEE THAT.

IN FACT, KIM SUITE HAS TWO BONDS, ONE PAYABLE TO THE COUNTY, ONE PAYABLE TO THE STATE.

MUST BE BETWEEN 2500 AND 100,000. IT MUST BE EQUAL TO 10% OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF COUNTY TAXES.

THAT GETS HER TO THE 100,000. SO SHE HAS $100,000 BOND PAYABLE TO THE COUNTY, $100,000 BOND PAYABLE TO THE STATE.

[02:35:01]

AND THE STATUTE SAYS WE HAVE TO PAY FOR IT OUT OF GENERAL FUND.

THAT'S JUST THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO DO ON THE CONSTABLE'S.

A BOND SET BETWEEN 500 AND 1500 TO FAITHFULLY EXECUTE OFFICERS.

DEPUTY CONSTABLE'S A CONSTABLE MAY REQUIRE A BOND OF THE DEPUTIES.

THAT'S ALL. THE GUIDANCE OF THE STATE LAW ON THE SHERIFF.

ESTABLISHED BY COURT PAYABLE TO THE GOVERNOR.

5000 TO 30,000. THERE'S FOUR CONDITIONS. I'M NOT GOING TO READ THEM TO YOU AGAIN.

A LOT OF THIS IS FOR YOU ALL TO HAVE THIS REFERENCED.

IF IF FOR BONDS IN THE FUTURE. IT WAS KIND OF OUR GOAL IS TO HAVE THIS COURT TO BE THE MOST EDUCATED COURT ON BONDS IN THE ENTIRE STATE OF TEXAS.

SO YOU CAN READ WHAT THOSE CONDITIONS ARE. AND AGAIN, RESERVE DEPUTIES, SHERIFF'S, THE LAW SAYS IT CAN BE A BLANKET.

IT MUST BE FOR $2,000 AND PAYABLE TO THE SHERIFF.

AND THE LAW DOES SAY THAT WE CAN SELF-INSURE AGAINST THOSE LOSSES.

JUVENILE SERVICES. THERE IS NO STATUTORY REQUIREMENT FOR THEM TO CARRY BONDS.

ALL OF OUR JUVENILE OFFICERS DO IN FACT CARRY BONDS.

IF YOU GO. DID I PUT IT ON THERE? OKAY. I HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT LATER.

THE COUNTY LIBRARIAN HAS A BOND SET BY COMMISSIONERS COURT.

THAT'S OUR ONLY GUIDANCE. WE CAN SET A BOND. HERE IS THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SPELLED OUT.

NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER LAW REQUIRING A COUNTY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE TO EXECUTE A BOND AS A CONDITION OF OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, AND COUNTY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE IS NOT REQUIRED TO EXECUTE A BOND AND MAY PERFORM THE DUTIES IF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT BY ORDER, AUTHORIZES THE COUNTY TO SELF-INSURE THE COUNTY JUDGE APPROVES AND THE COUNTY JUDGE HAS TO APPROVE IT BECAUSE SOME OF THEM ARE PAID TO HIM. AND THEN AN ORDER ADOPTED BY COMMISSIONERS COURT.

SO BY ORDER WE CAN GET RID OF SOME OF THESE BONDS IS THE POINT.

BUT THE ORDER WOULD BE FROM US, AND SOME OF THOSE ORDERS WOULD BE FROM THE COUNTY JUDGE.

I HAVE NOT WALKED THAT DOG TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THESE ORDERS WOULD LOOK LIKE AND AND HOW WE WOULD HAVE TO WRITE THEM.

NOR HAVE I FULLY WALKED WHAT IS TRUE SELF-INSURANCE MEAN.

AND WE'LL GET THERE IN A SECOND. SO ONCE WE COULD REMOVE BY ORDER ARE LISTED HERE.

THE REASON THAT I LISTED THESE IS BECAUSE OUR E AND O INSURANCE CALLS OUT THE COUNTY CLERK AND THE COUNTY EMPLOYEES, THE DISTRICT CLERK AND THE DISTRICT EMPLOYEES, AND WE CAN SAY, HEY, THERE IS NO STATUTORY REQUIREMENT FOR JUVENILE PROBATION DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY ARE COVERED BY OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT COVERAGE. SO THERE'S SOME INSURANCE COVERAGE THAT COVERS A LOT OF THAT STUFF. AND WHY DO WE HAVE A $500 BOND ON THE COUNTY LIBRARIAN AND COUNTY ENGINEER? LIKE, WHAT PURPOSES ARE THOSE WHEN WE COULD SAY WE ARE GOING TO USE OUR RISK POOL COVERAGE FOR ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS TO THOSE EMPLOYEES? SO IF YOU GO TO THE THE REASON IS. THAT THERE ARE OUR EMPLOYEES, COUNTY AND DISTRICT CLERKS ARE SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT IN OUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS POLICY.

I DON'T KNOW WHY, BUT THEY ARE THEY'RE THE ONLY TWO ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT ARE CALLED OUT FOR E AND O.

BUT IF THE POOL DECIDES THAT THEY ACTED OUTSIDE OF THEIR CAPACITY.

THERE'S A HUGE COVERAGE LOOPHOLE AND THE POLL GETS TO DECIDE.

SO IF IF OUR COUNTY CLERK OR DISTRICT CLERK, IF WE DIDN'T HAVE A BOND ON THEM, AND THEN IT WAS DECIDED BY THE RISK POOL WHEN THEY WERE LOOKING THROUGH WHATEVER CLAIM THAT IS, I DO NOT WANT TO PICK ON LEAH OR JENNIFER ON WHAT COULD BE A CLAIM AGAINST THEM IF THEY DECIDED, OH, THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THEIR SCOPE OF OFFICE, THEN WE WOULD BE 100% FINANCIALLY LIABLE UP TO THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT OF A BOND.

SO IT DOES KIND OF PUT US IN, IN A LITTLE BIT TREPIDATIOUS WATERS.

OTHER ACTIONS. WE COULD OFFICIALLY ASK THE JUVENILE BOARD TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR BONDS, AS WE 100% HAVE RISK POOL COVERAGE FOR THEM. AGAIN, THAT DOESN'T SAVE US A LOT OF MONEY, BUT I THINK IT'S COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY BY MY RISK ASSESSMENT THAT WE HAVE BONDS ON OUR JUVENILE DEPARTMENT. I JUST DO.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THIS COURT DOES. IT DOESN'T MEAN IF WE HAVE MEETINGS THAT THAT COULD BE SOMETHING WE DO.

BUT OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT POLICY 100% COVERS OUR JUVENILE OFFICERS AND THERE IS NO STATUTORY REQUIREMENT FOR THAT.

SO HERE'S MY SUMMARY. I SAY ALL THAT SO THAT Y'ALL COULD BE UP TO DATE.

IF SOMEONE IS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, I BELIEVE WE SHOULD KEEP ALL THEIR BONDS IN PLACE BECAUSE OF THE CAVEAT OF THE RISK POOL.

IF ONE IS AN EMPLOYEE AND NOT STATUTORILY REQUIRED TO HAVE AN OATH OR A BOND, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A BOND ON THEM BECAUSE WE HAVE EXTENSIVE RISK POOL COVERAGE.

SUBROGATION CAN OPEN US UP TO RISK, ESPECIALLY FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND OATH CARRYING PEOPLE.

CREATING A SINKING FUND WOULD COST A LOT OF MONEY.

WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT. WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT $500,000 FOR JUDGES, CREATING THAT FUND MAKES ZERO SENSE.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE I WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF RELOOK AT BONDING REQUIREMENTS EVERY SINGLE BUDGET TO JUST HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. WHAT ARE WE DOING WITH BONDS? AND KIND OF GIVING THAT TO THE AUDITOR TO DO SOME RESEARCH, DO THE BONDS AS THE STATUTORY CHANGED. WHAT DO WE NEED TO BE DOING AND GOING TO ELECTED OFFICIALS.

[02:40:04]

YOU KNOW, AGAIN SOME OF THESE BONDS ARE DONE TO PASS BUDGETS.

BUT IMPORTANTLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE BLUE, I THINK THE COMMISSIONERS COURT SHOULD RAISE EVERY SINGLE BOND TO THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED BY LAW.

IF IT HAS A MAXIMUM, WE SHOULD BE DOING THE MAXIMUM.

WE SHOULD SET IT AT THE MAXIMUM. THE REASON BEING IS THE RISK POOL COULD NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION WHAT BONDING AMOUNT SHOULD WE HAVE? SO I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE ALL OF THE BONDING AMOUNT.

IF IT IF THERE'S A LIMIT, WE SHOULD GO TO THAT LIMIT.

WE CANNOT EXCEED THE LIMITS. SO THIS THESE NEXT TWO SLIDES ARE SPECIFICALLY FOR LAUREN LICHTY.

THIS IS THE ACTUAL POLICY LANGUAGE OF A WRONGFUL ACT DEFINITION IN OUR POLICY.

THAT COVERS US A LOT. BUT LOOK AT THE LAST LINE ACTED IN AN OFFICIAL CAPACITY.

THAT IS THE ONLY GRAY AREA THAT THE RISK POOL WILL HAVE FOR OUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS.

AND THEN IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE THEY HAVE ONE ONLY THOSE FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES THAT COME WITHIN THE SCOPE OF PERFORMANCE OF A MEMBER FOR OR ON BEHALF OF A NINE MEMBER MEMBER IS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL NAMED MEMBER IS ROCKWALL COUNTY.

SO THEY GET TO DETERMINE THAT BY THEIR CONTRACT.

SO ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF THAT WOULD FALL INTO A LOOPHOLE WHICH WOULD OPEN US UP FOR LIABILITY.

SUMMARY. OUR RISK POOL COVERAGE. THAT'S THE NEXT SLIDE.

I'M SORRY, THE RISK POOL COVERAGE IS ACTUALLY EXTREMELY GOOD.

THE NERD IN ME READ IT TWICE FROM COVER TO COVER, JUST BECAUSE I WAS JUST FASCINATED BY SOME OF THE THINGS.

CAMMY AND I HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS WITH THE RISK POOL PEOPLE THAT I'M SURE SHE HAD TO DRINK COFFEE AS WE WENT BACK AND FORTH THROUGH A BUNCH OF SCENARIOS.

I HAVE DONE NOTHING. I MEAN, ALL I'VE DONE AS A RESEARCH, I HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING THAT YOU DON'T SEE ON A SLIDE.

I HAVE NOT LOOKED AT WHAT COURT ORDERS LOOK LIKE. I HAVE NOT MOVED ON WHETHER WE SHOULD REALLY DO THIS STUFF ON THE EMPLOYEES OR NOT DO DO THE THINGS ON THE EMPLOYEES.

THIS IS MY LAST SLIDE. BUT I WANTED TO WALK YOU ALL THROUGH WHY WE HAVE THE BONDS.

EVERY BOND WE HAVE IS STATUTORILY REQUIRED. I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT CAMI AND I HAVE GONE TO THE BONDING COMPANY AND MADE SURE THAT ALL THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS OF THOSE BONDS ARE BEING MET BY OUR BONDS. SO WE HAVE DONE THAT.

I'VE PRODUCED A HUGE LEGAL MEMO THAT JORDAN WROTE THAT IS IN YOUR BACKUP.

AND I ALSO HAVE A SUMMARY FROM THE BONDING COMPANY OF WHAT ALL THE BONDS ARE.

SO I SAY ALL THAT TO SAY, I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT GETTING RID OF BONDS OF EMPLOYEES.

WE SHOULD LOOK AT IT. WHAT WOULD THAT ACTUALLY TAKE? WHAT WOULD MAKE OUR OUR DISTRICT ATTORNEY HAPPY? YOU KNOW, CRAIG MIGHT WANT US TO CREATE A SINKING FUND, BUT THAT MIGHT BE A COUPLE THOUSAND DOLLARS ON SOME OF THESE EMPLOYEES.

JUST TO BE HONEST, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO DO WOULD BE TO CREATE A SINKING FUND.

JUST SAYS WE ARE NOW SELF-INSURING THESE, THIS BONDING REQUIREMENT, AND WE'VE SET THIS BONDING REQUIREMENT AT $250 OR $500 OR WHATEVER WE SET IT AT.

AND THEN WE PUT THAT MONEY INTO AN ACCOUNT AND DO IT ON.

I'M TALKING ABOUT LIKE THE COUNTY ENGINEER AND THE COUNTY LIBRARIAN.

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE BIG ONES ON THE JUDGES.

AND THEN WE REALLY DIVE INTO THE STATUTES AND MAX EVERYBODY OUT THAT WE CAN, BECAUSE I THINK THAT GIVES US THE BEST RISK.

AGAIN, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY IN THESE. I THINK IT'S LIKE WE PAY $12,000 A YEAR IN BONDS, SO WE'RE NOT ROCKING THE BOAT. SOME OF THESE BONDS ARE $40 A YEAR THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GETTING RID OF.

I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT HAVING A CONSISTENT RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY.

COMMISSIONER. I BELIEVE YOU. JORDAN AND CAMI ARE A REALLY GOOD TEAM.

I WOULD AGREE, WE DID GREAT WORK, I THANK YOU.

I THINK BOTH OF THEM TREMENDOUSLY. YEP. AND SO I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO CONTINUE, IF YOU'RE WILLING TO, TO COME BACK WITH, WITH THE ACTUAL PROPER PROCEDURES AND RECOMMENDATIONS, BECAUSE, I MEAN, YOU'RE CORRECT. ANYBODY THAT READS THROUGH THIS UNDERSTANDS THIS IS A HISTORY LESSON AND HOW STATUTES WERE WRITTEN IN THE STATE OF TEXAS GOING BACK TO THE 1800S. THE FACT THAT THE TREASURER IS TIED TO MAINTENANCE IS JUST IT TELLS ME THAT THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE ANYMORE. SO IF YOU'RE WILLING AND IF YOU CAN TALK JORDAN AND CAMI INTO IT, I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO CONTINUE AND BRING IT BACK TO US.

I MOST DEFINITELY WILL. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE ONE QUESTION, BUT FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU.

I CAN'T IMAGINE THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT TOOK JUST SORTING THROUGH ALL THAT.

SO JORDAN, I APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT SELF-INSURANCE, ARE THEY AND I KNOW AT ONE POINT IN YOUR PRESENTATION, YOU SAID, I'M NOT REALLY SURE ABOUT SELF-INSURANCE.

[02:45:02]

YEAH. SO AGAIN, MAYBE AN UNFAIR QUESTION, BUT SELF-INSURANCE IN A LEGAL CONTEXT CAN TAKE UP SEVERAL DIFFERENT TYPES OF THINGS.

IT CAN BE AS SIMPLE AS WE'RE JUST GOING TO PAY THE LOSS IF WE GET IT.

YES. OR HAVING A FORM, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A FORMAL PROGRAM.

DO YOU KNOW WHERE THIS FALLS ON THAT? SO SO I'M NOT TRYING TO THROW CRAIG UNDER THE BUS.

HIM AND I HAVE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS.

I DO BELIEVE A SINKING FUND IS WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IN THE LAW.

SOMETIMES THE LAW REFERENCES A CHAPTER 119 RISK POOL.

AND I KIND OF GLOSSED OVER A LOT OF THAT, WHICH IS WHY I DIDN'T WANT TO GET US IN THE WEEDS.

THAT 119 RISK POOL IS SELF-INSURANCE, AND IT'S A CONTRACT AND IT'S A PROGRAM.

SO THAT CAN COVER SOME OF IT. SOME OF IT ISN'T.

SO WE WOULD HAVE TO SAY, YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO DO A SINKING FUND BECAUSE THERE'S AN OATH.

SO, FOR INSTANCE, ERICA TAKES AN OATH TO FAITHFULLY BE THE COUNTY ENGINEER FOR $500.

I DON'T EVEN REALLY KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS, BUT I DO KNOW THAT I CAN PUT $500 IN A SINKING FUND AND CALL IT A BOND FOR THE COUNTY ENGINEER, INSTEAD OF PAYING PREMIUMS INTO IMPROPRIETY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S $40 A YEAR.

THAT STUFF JUST STARTS TO ADD UP ON SOMETHING SO SMALL.

THE SAME WITH MARCIN AS THE LIBRARIAN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT HOW YOU WOULD UNFAITHFULLY BE A LIBRARIAN, BUT IF THERE IS AN EVER UNFAITHFUL CLAIM, THERE'S A $500 BOND.

AND. AND THE LAW SAYS THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT SHALL SET A BOND FOR THE COUNTY LIBRARIAN IF YOU HAVE A COUNTY LIBRARY.

SO I'M TRYING TO FIND THAT LITTLE SWEET SPOT OF CREATING SINKING FUNDS TO JUST GET RID OF PAYING BONDS THAT ARE, I FEEL, ARE UNNECESSARY, AND THEN ALSO INCREASING BOND PAYMENTS ON SOME OF THESE OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS JUST TO THE LIMITS BECAUSE OF THE OFFICIAL CAPACITY DEFINITION IN THE RISK POOL. SO I SO I THINK IT'S A COMBINATION OF BOTH.

SOME OF IT WOULD BE WE'RE JUST GOING TO SET MONEY ASIDE, BUT WE'RE GOING TO FORMALLY SET MONEY ASIDE.

AND SOME OF IT IS WE'RE GOING TO CALL THE. CHAPTER 19119 RISK POOL ARE SETTING THE MONEY ASIDE.

IF THAT KIND OF. THAT'S OUR SELF-INSURANCE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. WELL COMMISSIONERS, IT IS 1205. I'M GOING TO RECESS US FOR LUNCH BREAK AND LOOK TO RECONVENE AT 130.

SO AT 1205, WE ARE IN RECESS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU EVERYONE.

IT IS 130. WE'RE GOING TO RECONVENE INTO OUR REGULAR COMMISSIONERS COURT JULY 28TH, 2026.

WE ARE ON AGENDA ITEM THREE. T DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING EDITS TO THE POLICY ON OVERTIME COMPENSATION C DOT SIX TO ELIMINATE THE ACCRUAL OF

[3.T) Discuss/Act on approving edits to the Policy on Overtime Compensation (C.6) to eliminate the accrual of comp hours, and all related issues; (Commissioner Gallana)]

COMP HOURS AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER GALLINA, WELCOME BACK EVERYBODY.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT OBVIOUSLY I'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE IN COURT.

I'M NOT I UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE DEPARTMENT'S USE OF COMP TIME AND HOW THEY HAVE USED THAT IN THEIR BUSINESS MODEL. AND WE'VE, AND I'VE HEARD FROM SEVERAL LOT, SEVERAL, I'VE HEARD FROM A COUPLE THAT ARE A LITTLE BIT AFRAID OF THE COMPLETE ELIMINATION OF COMP TIME. AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT. AND THAT'S WHAT THIS AGENDA ITEM IS FOR IS TO DISCUSS THIS.

BUT AGAIN, I'LL JUST STATE MY OPINION AND YOU CAN, I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH AND READ ALL THE UPDATES HERE, BUT IN YOUR BACKUP, YOU CAN, YOU CAN READ THOSE AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THEM.

BUT MY GENERAL THOUGHT IS THAT I JUST FROM THE BACKGROUND I COME FROM, I WOULD RATHER PAY FOR WHAT WE USE AS WE USE IT.

AND I DON'T LIKE THE ACCRUAL OF COMP TIME, EXTRA VACATION TIME AS A SOMETHING HANGING OVER THE COUNTY'S HEAD THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY LATER AND WE CAN'T BUDGET FOR.

IT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT, IN MY OPINION, TO BUDGET PROPERLY WHEN WE REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.

AS FAR AS THESE KIND OF FINANCES GO WITHIN THE DEPARTMENTS, I GET THE REASON WHY IT'S KIND OF BEEN INGRAINED INTO OUR CULTURE.

BUT FROM A BUDGETING STANDPOINT, I JUST THINK WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON.

AND IF THERE'S A LOT OF COMP TIME BEING USED SOMEWHERE, THEN WHY IS IT BEING USED SOMEWHERE AND WHY AREN'T WE JUST PAYING THEM FOR THE OVERTIME THEY'RE WORKING SO THAT WE KNOW THIS OVERTIME EXISTS? THAT'S JUST MY $0.02. AND THEN I'LL I'LL LEAVE IT TO COMMISSIONER STACY, WHO'S ALSO BEEN PART OF THIS.

AND IF CAMI WANTS TO CHIME IN AT ALL, SHE CAN.

THE I SAT THROUGH A PACK TRAINING LAST WEEK ON COMP TIME, AND I WANTED TO WALK UP ON STAGE AND START EXPLAINING IT BECAUSE IT JUST WASN'T BEING EXPLAINED WELL.

AND IT WAS REALLY OBVIOUS THAT VERY FEW COUNTY JUDGES AND COMMISSIONERS UNDERSTOOD.

SEVERAL OF THEM SAID IT DOESN'T COST ANY MONEY.

NO, IT DOES. WHEN THEY LEAVE, YOU HAVE TO PAY IT OUT.

NOT ONLY THAT IS IT. IT INCREASES IN VALUE. THE, THE OBLIGATION, IT IS A LIABILITY TO THE COUNTY TO DO THIS.

SO I I THINK IT'S A, IT'S PROBABLY A REALLY GOOD IDEA TO JUST END THE POLICY.

[02:50:03]

I, I THINK THAT I WOULD WANT TO HAVE A FURTHER DISCUSSION OF WHEN MAYBE WE DO IT OCTOBER 1ST, SO WE DON'T SHOCK THE BUDGET AND WE CAN START WORKING ON PUTTING THESE HOURS INTO THE BUDGET.

THAT MIGHT MAKE MORE SENSE. BECAUSE THESE, THESE DEPARTMENTS DO NOT HAVE OVERTIME IN THE BUDGET, BUT WE ALSO HAVE SPENT 520 MAYBE LET'S JUST CALL IT $500,000 WE HAVE LEFT IN OUR CONTINGENCY FOR THE OVERALL GENERAL BUDGET. SO THERE IS A REALLY GOOD CHANCE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO SPEND $500,000 IN OVERTIME IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS.

SO, I MEAN, BUT I THINK THAT'S MORE I DO KNOW THAT LAUREN AND I AND THE AND THE POLICY COMMITTEE DISCUSSED THIS AT LENGTH.

AND WE WERE, WE WERE STEPPING IT IN, IN A DIRECTION AND YOUR ARGUMENT IN COURT KIND OF, YOU KNOW, PERSUADED ME AFTER I SLEPT ON IT A FEW DAYS, I WENT BACK TO YOU AND SAID, I THINK YOU WERE RIGHT.

AND THAT IT NOW IS MORE THE TIME. SO I DO KIND OF AGREE THAT MOVING IN THIS DIRECTION IS A GOOD IDEA.

IT REDUCES OVERALL LIABILITY TO THE COUNTY. IT MAKES IT MORE PREDICTABLE.

I WOULD POINT OUT, PER THE TREASURER'S EMAIL TO ALL OF US, THAT THERE IS AN ON CALL POLICY THAT WE WOULD ALSO HAVE TO ADJUST BECAUSE THE ON CALL POLICY DOES CREATE COMP TIME AS WELL. SO THERE ARE, THERE WOULD BE TWO POLICIES.

CAMI DID WRITE AN UPDATE TO THE OVERTIME COMPENSATION POLICY.

I DON'T KNOW THAT HR NECESSARILY ENDORSES. I THINK THEY'RE KIND OF AGNOSTIC.

THEY WILL DO WHAT THE POLICYMAKERS TELL THEM TO DO.

BUT SHE DID HELP US KIND OF WRITE, HEY, THIS IS WHAT IT WOULD NEED TO LOOK LIKE IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION WE WANTED TO GO.

BUT I, YOU KNOW, ONE, ONE OF THE BIG THINGS I DID WHEN I GOT HERE IS MAKE SURE WE PAID HOLIDAY TIME.

YOU KNOW, THAT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST CHANGES WE MADE BECAUSE WE WERE HAVING JAILERS BANK HOLIDAY TIME AND THEN LOSE IT, AND THEN THEY WEREN'T GETTING PAID. SO I DO THINK THAT JUST PAYING PEOPLE FOR THE TIME THAT THEY WORK IS JUST A PHILOSOPHY I HAVE.

AND IF, IF THEY CAN FLEX PEOPLE, THE GREAT, BUT COMP TIME ISN'T FLEXING PEOPLE.

COMP TIME IS PAYING OVERTIME YEARS DOWN THE ROAD OR IN LIEU OF DIFFERENT THINGS.

SO IT'S STILL, IT STILL IS SOMETHING THAT'S COSTING US MONEY AND IT'S A SEPARATE ACCRUAL.

SO BUT YEAH, THAT'S KIND OF MY INITIAL THOUGHTS.

SO I ASKED BOBBY BOEDEKER IF HE WOULD COME UP AND SPEAK BECAUSE THERE IS A THERE, I DON'T WANT TO SAY CARVE OUTS BECAUSE THAT'S ALWAYS SCARY, BUT THERE IS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE JUVENILE SERVICES GROUP THAT IS ALREADY IN THEIR, IN THEIR POLICY, THEY CALL IT POLICY ON, OVER ON, ON OVERTIME COMPENSATION.

AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN, I GUESS, VOTED ON PRIOR TO ME BEING ON THAT BOARD.

BOBBY, WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU MIND COMING UP? GOOD AFTERNOON. IS HIS MIC WORKING? JENNIFER.

THAT'S OKAY. WASN'T WORKING EARLIER. DOESN'T HAVE TO WORK. TEST.

TEST. YEAH. THERE WE GO. THANK YOU. SO SOMETHING THAT COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH JUST COMMENTED ON.

YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE THE JUVENILE BOARD HAS POLICY AND PROCEDURES THAT THAT GOVERN THE JUVENILE PROBATION DEPARTMENT.

AND THERE IS A POLICY ON OVERTIME COMPENSATION ABOUT THE MAXIMUM COMPENSATORY TIME ACCRUAL.

AND UNLIKE SOME OF THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S 40 HOURS FOR OUR DEPARTMENT, IT'S 100 HOURS. AND THIS WAS PUT INTO POLICY BACK IN 2015.

THE REASON I FELT WHEN I HEARD THAT THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT DOING AWAY WITH, WITH COMP TIME I JUST WANTED THE COURT TO UNDERSTAND KIND OF THE, THE, MAYBE THE DIFFERENCES THAT OUR DEPARTMENT HAS FROM SOME OF THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND WHY COMPENSATORY TIME WORKS REALLY WELL IN MORE THAN ONE RESPECT AND ONE RESPECT. IT DOES WORK ON A, ON A BUDGET.

FOR BUDGETARY REASONS. BECAUSE AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, AND I THINK I ALLUDED TO SOME OF THIS THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE TALKING ABOUT MY BUDGET AND THE PROBLEMS WITH PLACEMENT CASES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THERE ARE SOME THINGS IN OUR BUSINESS THAT, THAT THAT ARE JUST UNPREDICTABLE. AND PROBATION OFFICERS THEIR DUTIES INCLUDE, YOU KNOW, HANDLING ANY OF THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH WE HAVE PROBATION OFFICERS THAT ARE ON CALL.

WE HAVE AN ON CALL ROTATION. AND THEY COULD GET A CALL, THEY COULD FINISH THEIR 40 HOUR WEEK ON A FRIDAY,

[02:55:03]

FOR EXAMPLE, AND NOT HAVE WORKED ANY OVERTIME, BUT THEY'RE ON CALL AND THEY COULD GET A CALL FRIDAY NIGHT OR EARLY SATURDAY MORNING THAT THEY HAVE TO HANDLE FROM THE POLICE. AND THEN THE TIME THAT THEY WORKED TAKING THAT CALL AND IF THAT JUVENILE NEEDED TO GO TO A DETENTION CENTER AND MAKING THOSE ARRANGEMENTS AND THE PHONE CALLS AND SOME OF THE PAPERWORK THAT THEY HAVE TO GET DONE FOR A MONDAY HEARING SOME OF THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO SPEND, YOU KNOW, SOME HOURS DOING THAT. AND THAT CAN HAPPEN PRETTY OFTEN OR IT CAN HAPPEN NOT VERY OFTEN AT ALL.

IT'S JUST UNPREDICTABLE. WE THERE'S NO WAY THAT I CAN GAUGE THAT.

BUT COMP TIME ALLOWS US, YOU KNOW, THIS WAY OF, OF THAT NOT IMPACTING MY BUDGET AND HAVING TO PAY PEOPLE TIME AND A HALF.

I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST PAYING PEOPLE FOR THE HOURS THEY WORKED.

IT'S JUST DIFFICULT FROM A BUDGET STANDPOINT.

I KNOW WHEN I WAS HERE LAST TIME AND I WAS TALKING ABOUT MY BUDGET AND GOING INTO 2027, HOW MAYBE I SHOULD BUDGET MORE THAN I THINK THAT WE NEED. AND I THINK JUDGE NEW COMMENTED, NO, I'D RATHER YOU HIT IT, YOU KNOW, ON THE HEAD OR TRY TO. ANYWAY, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN PREDICT HOW MUCH I WOULD NEED TO BUDGET TO PAY SOMEONE FOR OVERTIME.

IT'S NOT JUST ON CALL. THERE'S OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES.

AND I DON'T WANT TO TAKE UP TOO MUCH OF THE COURT'S TIME.

BUT ONE SCENARIO THAT I COULD JUST THINK OF THAT, THAT YOU COULD PROBABLY UNDERSTAND WOULD BE IF WE HAVE KIDS IN RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT CENTERS. I'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT HERE BEFORE. SOMETIMES THEY GET KICKED OUT OF THOSE RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT CENTERS. SOME OF THOSE ARE AS FAR AWAY AS LUBBOCK. LIKE WE HAVE A YOUTH THAT IS IN A FACILITY IN LUBBOCK RUN BY THE LUBBOCK JUVENILE PROBATION DEPARTMENT.

IF THAT YOUTH WERE TO GET KICKED OUT, THEY DON'T GIVE US MUCH NOTICE, ESPECIALLY IF THAT YOUTH IS IS ASSAULTIVE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THEY SAY YOU NEED TO COME GET THIS PERSON. SO THAT COULD HAPPEN ON A FRIDAY, FOR EXAMPLE.

AND THEN I HAVE TO FIND NOT JUST ONE STAFF, BUT TWO STAFF THAT WILL GO AND PICK THAT CHILD UP, AND THEY MIGHT HAVE TO SPEND THE NIGHT IN LUBBOCK BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT DRIVE THERE.

AND BACK IN ONE DAY WITH THE CHILD, THAT WOULD BE A SAFETY ISSUE.

BUT I HAVE SOMETIMES PEOPLE THAT ARE VOLUNTEERING TO DO THAT BECAUSE COMP TIME ALSO PRESENTS AN ADDED BENEFIT, RIGHT? I MEAN, INHERENTLY, IF WE'RE USING IT THE WAY IF MANAGERS ARE USING IT THE WAY THAT I THINK IT'S DESIGNED TO USE, WHICH IS IT DOES AFFORD THEM TIME AND A HALF THAT THEY CAN USE AS, YOU KNOW, SOME TYPE OF LEAVE.

I'VE GOT STAFF THAT WILL VOLUNTEER TO DO THAT BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ANY LEAVE LEFT, OR MAYBE THEY WANT TO GO ON A VACATION LATER ON IN THE YEAR.

AND THIS HELPS THEM BUILD THAT UP. BUT WE'RE REALLY GOOD.

EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE A 100 HOUR CAP BEFORE WE HAVE TO START PAYING TIME AND A HALF.

JOE, THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR THAT MANAGES THE PROBATION OFFICERS WE'VE AGREED AND WE'VE DONE IT THIS WAY FOR A LONG TIME.

WE KIND OF SET IT INTERNALLY AT 40 HOURS, RIGHT? JUST LIKE THE REST OF THE COUNTY. WHEN SOMEONE GETS TO THAT 40 HOUR MARK FOR WHATEVER REASON, THEN WE'RE TELLING THEM, HEY, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED TO START USING THAT.

AND I THINK THAT IF YOU WERE TO LOOK AT ANY OF THE RECORDS FROM THE TREASURER'S OFFICE, YOU COULD SEE THAT WE'VE MANAGED THAT REALLY WELL SINCE I'VE BEEN DIRECTOR, I DON'T THINK WE'VE EVER HAD TO PAY ANYONE TIME AND A HALF.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE ACCRUAL OF COMP TIME THAT'S ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW FOR ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES.

I MEAN, MYSELF, I'M EXEMPT. AND THEN I HAVE A PART TIME PERSON THAT'S EXEMPT FROM THAT AS WELL.

BUT IT'S NOT HIGH NUMBERS. IT'S NOT ANYTHING THAT WOULD, I THINK THAT SOMEONE SAID THAT IT MIGHT BE LIKE A $6,000 BUDGET HIT.

YOU KNOW, IF EVERYBODY LEFT TODAY AND WE HAD TO PAY THEM ALL OUT.

SO I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF EXPRESS THAT I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE COURT IS COMING FROM ON THIS, I HOPE I DO. BUT I THINK THAT THE WAY THAT THIS COULD IMPACT, YOU KNOW, BUDGET WISE AND THEN ALSO ON THE STAFF FROM A, FROM A MORALE STANDPOINT AND NOT BEING ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, NOW I'M GOING TO, INSTEAD OF PEOPLE VOLUNTEERING, YOU KNOW, WE MIGHT HAVE TO SAY WE HAVE TO IDENTIFY PEOPLE THAT ARE THAT WE'RE GOING TO SAY, YOU HAVE TO DO THIS, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THEY WANT TO OR NOT.

AND SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT YOU GOT TO DO. BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I KIND OF GOT THAT OUT AND THEN ANSWERED ANY QUESTIONS THAT ANYBODY MIGHT HAVE, YOU KNOW, THAT MIGHT HELP BETTER UNDERSTAND OUR SITUATION.

I HAVE A QUESTION. YES, SIR. YOU MENTIONED AN OVERTIME COMPENSATION PLAN APPROVED BY YOUR BOARD, CORRECT. SO Y'ALL AREN'T ON THE SAME POLICY AS THE REST OF THE COUNTY.

WELL, THIS WE HAVE SIMILAR POLICIES LIKE SOME OF THE POLICIES THAT YOU GUYS JUST MODIFIED RECENTLY THAT I GOT COPIES OF, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT CAME TO VACATION TIME AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU PUT IN THERE ABOUT HAVING TO USE COMP TIME BEFORE YOU USE VACATION TIME.

[03:00:07]

WE HAVE A POLICY JUST LIKE THAT. I MEAN, IT, IT MIRRORS A LOT OF OUR POLICIES DO MIRROR THOSE OF THE COUNTY.

BUT THIS IS A SPECIFIC POLICY THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT THE COUNTY HAS A POLICY ON OVERTIME COMPENSATION LIKE THIS.

SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THIS MAY BE OKAY.

ARE YOU SUBJECT TO POLICY C OR DO YOU HAVE YOUR OWN POLICY ON COMP TIME? YES. SO C6 IS YEAH. IF YOU WANT I HAVE OTHER COPIES OF OUR POLICY RIGHT HERE IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO, BECAUSE MY POINT IS, IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING C SIX AND OURS IS ALSO C6.

BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO. I'M JUST REALLY CURIOUS OF WHAT IS I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR C6 TO MATCH C6 BECAUSE OF YOUR DEPARTMENT AND WHERE YOU ARE.

WELL, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I ACTUALLY WANTED TO TO GET SOME REASSURANCE BY THE COURT BECAUSE IF THIS WAS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING TO IMPACT THE JUVENILE DEPARTMENT, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT I WAS ABLE TO SPEAK TO THAT.

SO MAYBE I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE IF BASED ON WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, THAT MAYBE THIS WE HAVE A CARVE OUT ALREADY, THAT SOUNDS LIKE A LEGAL QUESTION THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE QUALIFIED TO ANSWER.

ARE YOU STATUTORILY REQUIRED TO HAVE YOUR OWN POLICY OR HAVE JUST AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST, THE JUVENILE BOARD DEVELOPED AND APPROVED THEIR OWN POLICY? I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. OKAY.

YEAH, I'D LIKE TO BE EDUCATED ON THAT TOO. FRANKLY, I DON'T KNOW WHY YOUR POLICIES WOULD BE DIFFERENT THAN THE REST OF THE COUNTY.

I THINK IT'S THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS 100 HOURS.

BUT WHY ME? I MEAN, I DON'T WE PAY YOUR SALARY WHENEVER THE HUNDRED HOURS WAS PUT INTO THAT POLICY.

SO I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I'VE NEVER VIEWED THE FULL JUVENILE POLICY GUIDE.

I WAS TOLD BY THE PREVIOUS DIRECTOR THAT THEY COULD FOLLOW THE COUNTY POLICIES, BUT THE BOARD MADE THE DECISION TO SEPARATE THEM AND SO THAT THEY COULD HAVE SOME DISCRETION OVER THERE.

AND THEY MAY WELL BE STATUTORILY REQUIRED TO DO THAT.

BUT I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. OR NOT REQUIRED MAY JUST BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT EITHER. YEAH. WHICH WE WOULD NEED TO GET THE ANSWER TO THAT. BECAUSE IF THE ANSWER IS YES, THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DO THAT. BACK TO COMMISSIONER STACEY'S POINT, THEN THEY CAN JUST SAY WE'RE EXEMPT.

OUR BOARD GETS TO DECIDE WHAT WE DO WITH OUR COMP PLAN.

SO AARON, CAN YOU. YES, PLEASE? WHY WOULD WE WANT THAT? WELL, I'M NOT SAYING WE DO.

WHY WOULDN'T WE WANT THEM TO BE ON THE SAME POLICIES AS EVERYONE ELSE? WELL, THEY'RE NOT NOW. WELL, MAYBE THEY SHOULD BE.

THAT'S VALID. AND I GUESS THE FIRST STEP IS TO SEE IF.

BECAUSE WHAT I'M REQUIRED TO BE OR NOT. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. I'M JUST I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, BUT I'LL JUST PUT THAT OUT THERE.

WE DON'T THE COUNTY DOES NOT COUNT THE JUVENILE EMPLOYEES IN OUR HEADCOUNT EITHER.

AND I DON'T KNOW THE REASONING FOR THAT. THERE'S GOT TO BE A REASON WHY THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF STATUTORILY THAT THEY ARE SEPARATE FROM THE REST OF THE.

I'M THINKING AS WELL THAT THERE'S SOME SORT OF STATE LAW, OR AT LEAST SOME STATE GUIDANCE THAT SAYS THEIR BOARD SHALL BE THE GOVERNING BODY FOR THEM AND NOT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT. I MEAN, THERE ARE THINGS IN THE. I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT THINGS IN THE FAMILY CODE THAT SAY THAT THE JUVENILE BOARD WILL ESTABLISH POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE JUVENILE PROBATION DEPARTMENTS.

SO MAYBE THAT IS, IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS SOMETHING THAT'S IN THE FAMILY CODE THAT RELATES TO THE JUVENILE BOARD ESTABLISHING POLICIES.

YEAH. WELL, BUT BACK TO COMMISSIONER LICHTES. QUESTION. WHY WOULDN'T THEY BE THE SAME? AND THEN ONCE WE, I THINK, AM COMFORTABLE ESTABLISHING WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY AND A REQUIREMENT TO ESTABLISH THE POLICIES, THEN WE CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION WHY AREN'T THEY THE SAME? AND WHAT I'M SEEING IS THAT THEY HAVE THEIR OWN INDEPENDENT AUTHORITY IN THE BOARD.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SEEING HERE, IS THAT IT LOOKS LIKE WHILE WE'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE A COUNTY JUVENILE DIVISION THAT THEY'RE LEGALLY CLASSIFIED AS SPECIALIZED LOCAL ENTITIES AND THEY OPERATE INDEPENDENTLY FROM THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER COURT REGARDING DAILY OPERATIONS, INTERNAL MANAGEMENT, EMPLOYEE DECISIONS, AND DEPARTMENTAL POLICY.

SO WHILE YOU BRING US AN INTRIGUING CONUNDRUM HERE AND AN OPPORTUNITY TO EDUCATE OURSELVES YOUR FEAR

[03:05:09]

SEEMS TO BE UNFOUNDED. YOU APPEAR TO BE IN CONTROL OF YOUR OWN DESTINY.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THE TREASURER'S OFFICE WAS EXACTLY SURE EITHER. SO THAT'S.

I'M GLAD THAT MAYBE WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CLARITY ON THAT.

WELL, AND AARON WILL GET US SOME SOME DEFINITIVE CLARITY ON IT, BUT IT SEEMS AS THOUGH YOUR POLICY IS SAFE.

YEAH. WELL, I'M SORRY IF I'VE IF I'VE WASTED YOU GUYS.

NO, IT'S A GOOD IT'S A GOOD IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. AND WE DIDN'T KNOW. I MEAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOUR 2015 POLICY WOULD WOULD SUPERSEDE ANYTHING THAT WE DID FOR YOU.

OKAY. VERY GOOD. WELL THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. SO CONVERSATION CONTINUES WITH THE CARVE OUT OF OF JUVENILE.

YEAH. WELL THAT'S THAT'S ANOTHER VALID QUESTION. HOW MANY OTHER CARVE OUTS ARE OUT THERE THAT I DON'T THINK WE'D HAVE ANY OTHER ONES THAT I COULD I YEAH, MAYBE ADULT PROBATION BUT AND AGAIN, WE ARE STUNNED BY OUR LACK OF POWER AS A LEGISLATIVE BOARD OF THE COUNTY.

THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH WE CAN DO. YEAH. AND THAT'S OKAY.

THAT'S OKAY. THAT IS OKAY. SO SO LIKE I SAID, I THINK EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS.

I MEAN, I, I HOPE EVERYONE AT LEAST UNDERSTANDS WHAT COMMISSIONER GALLEN HAS BROUGHT FORWARD, RIGHT? AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION UNLESS WE STILL WANTED TO TALK. JUST ASK ME A QUESTION. IN YOUR EXPERIENCES, AND I'M GOING TO SPEAK SPECIFICALLY ON COUNTY GOVERNMENT.

HAVE YOU, HAVE YOU HAD ANY INQUIRIES TO HOW OTHER COUNTIES MAY BE HANDLING SOMETHING LIKE THIS? FROM AN EMPLOYEE STANDPOINT, IT'S ALWAYS A TOPIC ON THE TAC LIST.

SERVE EVERYBODY DOES IT DIFFERENTLY. I WOULD SAY MOST OF THE RESPONDENTS TO THOSE CONVERSATIONS HAVE HIGHER COMP BUCKET LIMITS OR THEY DON'T HAVE IT AT ALL.

I'M THE OR I'M SORRY, ROCKWALL COUNTY IS THE ONLY COUNTY I KNOW OF WHO HAS 40 HOUR COMP BUCKETS THAT I KNOW OF.

IT'S EITHER 240 FOR NON-LAW ENFORCEMENT OR 480 FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT.

AND THAT SOUNDS LIKE A HUGE LIABILITY TO ME. BUT IT'S ALL EVERYBODY DOES IT DIFFERENTLY.

SO AND IT, AND IT IS A LAW FOR GOVERNMENT. SO I MEAN, THIS IS ONLY SOMETHING WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO.

I MEAN FROM THAT STANDPOINT. SO THIS ISN'T LIKE CORPORATIONS CAN'T DO THIS OTHER WITH THE FAIR LABOR ACT.

THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT THEY CAN'T DO. SO WE WOULD JUST BE PUTTING OURSELVES BACK TO THE FAIR LABOR ACT AND, AND DOING WHAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAYS. THIS IS HOW YOU LAWFULLY PAY PEOPLE.

IT'S KIND OF COMP TIME IS KIND OF A A CARVE OUT EXCEPTION FOR GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES.

AND I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR THE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, BUT SPECIFICALLY TO COUNTIES. I KNOW THAT'S A WORKAROUND. SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR TREASURER PETE. BOBBY HAD MENTIONED THAT IF EVERYBODY GOT PAID OUT OF THE COUNTY, IT WAS $6,000.

THAT CAN'T BE ACCURATE, CAN IT? OR DID HE MEAN 6000 HOURS? I THINK THAT WAS JUST FOR HIM. OH, JUST FOR HIS ACCRUALS.

OR SOMEWHERE AROUND SIX GRAND. THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE FOR.

DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THE TOTAL LIABILITY IS COUNTY WIDE? IT WAS A $170,000 AS OF LAST PAYROLL. SO IT'S GOING TO FLUCTUATE FOR FOR ALL THE OTHER REGULAR COUNTY EMPLOYEES.

GOT IT. GOT IT. THANK YOU. COULD YOU GO AHEAD? I THINK THE WAY THAT, YOU KNOW, SOME DEPARTMENTS HAVE MENTIONED, WELL, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO BUDGET FOR FOR OVERTIME FOR THAT.

WELL, I THINK YOU COULD GO BACK AND LOOK AT WHAT YOU'VE PUT IN FOR COMP TIME AND YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND EXACTLY HOW THE BUDGET YOUR OVERTIME. I THINK THE DATA IS THERE FOR YOU.

IF YOU'RE USING AND I THINK WHAT NOT HAVING THIS COMP TIME DOES ALSO.

RIGHT NOW IT'S EASY. IT'S LIKE THE EASY BUTTON TO GO HIT THE COMP TIME.

IF WE DON'T HAVE IT. I THINK IT'S NOT THE EASY BUTTON ANYMORE TO GO PAY OVERTIME.

I THINK IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE SOME SOME DIFFERENT KIND OF MANAGEMENT WITHIN THE DEPARTMENTS.

AT LEAST IT'S EYE OPENING TO ME. DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE, JUDGE? YES, IF IF IF THE COURT HAS A FEW MINUTES, I DO HAVE SOME SUMMARY STUFF THAT I'D LIKE TO SHARE BEFORE YOU ALL VOTE, IF THAT'S OKAY. YES, PLEASE. SO BASED ON WHAT COMMISSIONER STACY HAD MENTIONED, THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT, I PULLED THE THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION GUIDANCE AND REALLY THE CARVE OUT FOR COMP TIME FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS SPECIFICALLY SAYS EMPLOYEES OF STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES MAY RECEIVE COMPENSATORY TIME OFF AT A RATE NOT LESS THAN 1.5 HOURS FOR EACH OVERTIME HOUR WORKED INSTEAD OF CASH OVER TIME. AND THAT'S KIND OF THE WHERE WE'RE AT.

AND THE REASON THAT THAT WAS EVER SET UP WAS FOR SMALLER COUNTIES AND SMALLER ENTITIES WHO WOULD STRUGGLE TO PAY TIME AND A HALF OVERTIME.

[03:10:08]

IT'S BASICALLY SAYING INSTEAD OF PAYING THAT CASH, THEN YOU CAN BANK THIS IN A COMP BUCKET AND PAY IT OUT AS TIME OFF.

AND SO THAT'S FOR THE COUNTIES AND ENTITIES AND DISTRICTS THAT DON'T THAT ARE CASH STRAPPED WAY BACK.

AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY Y'ALL'S PREDECESSORS SET THIS UP DECADES AGO.

AND THAT IS NO LONGER THE CASE. WE CAN PAY TIME AND A HALF, MAYBE WE PAY TOO MUCH.

BUT THE, THE, THE COUNTY DOES HAVE FUNDS TO PAY THAT TIME AND A HALF.

SO THE WHOLE IMPETUS OF HAVING COMP TIME INITIALLY WHEN IT WAS ENACTED BY THIS COURT DECADES AGO, IS NO LONGER CURRENT. SO THAT'S WHY I'M TOTAL SUPPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS ADJUSTING THIS POLICY TODAY.

ADDITIONALLY SOMEBODY MENTIONED THAT IF YOU EARN YOUR COMP AT A LOW RATE, SAY $10 AN HOUR AND IT STAYS THERE AND YOU NEVER USE THAT PAID TIME OFF AND THEN YOU GET CASHED OUT 10 OR 20 YEARS AGO. THE LIABILITY TO THE COUNTY HAS GROWN THROUGHOUT THAT.

THROUGHOUT THAT TIME PERIOD. THAT'S ANOTHER THING TO CONSIDER.

AN ADDITIONAL REASON THAT I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS CHANGE IS IT'S GOING TO BE MUCH MORE SIMPLE TO MANAGE THE NUMBER OF PAID TIME OFF BUCKETS THAT MY DEPARTMENT HAS TO MANAGE, AND THE DEPARTMENT HEADS HAVE TO MANAGE FEWER IS PROBABLY BETTER.

ADDITIONALLY, I TOTALLY SUPPORT THE DRAFT POLICY THAT COMMISSIONER GALLINA ISSUED THAT LISTS THE WORD GRANDFATHERING.

THE COMP BALANCES. SO WE'RE NOT FORCING ANYBODY TO CASH THOSE OUT INITIALLY.

THEY CAN STILL USE THAT TIME OFF THAT THEY'VE EARNED.

ADDITIONALLY, BASED ON THE EMAIL I SENT YESTERDAY, MY RECOMMENDATION IS NOT TO MAKE THIS POLICY CHANGE.

IF THE COURT VOTES IN THE MIDDLE OF A PAY PERIOD TO MAKE IT AT THE BEGINNING OF A PAY PERIOD, AND I HEARD DISCUSSION ABOUT POSSIBLY PUNTING THE EFFECTIVE DATE TO THE BEGINNING OF THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR, POSSIBLY OCTOBER 1ST. THAT'S THE COURT'S DECISION.

HOWEVER, I WOULD RECOMMEND IF YOU DO THAT FOR BUDGETING REASON AND FOR JUST ADMINISTRATIVE AND SHOCK AND ALL TO THE EMPLOYEE BASE THAT IF Y'ALL PUSH THAT TO THE NEW FISCAL YEAR, THAT YOU WOULD MAKE IT EFFECTIVE, THE FIRST FULL PAY PERIOD OF THE NEW FISCAL YEAR, WHICH I BELIEVE IS OCTOBER 11TH.

THAT'D BE MY RECOMMENDATION FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. IF Y'ALL WANT TO PUNT IT, IF YOU WANT TO DO IT IMMEDIATELY.

AGAIN, MY RECOMMENDATION BASED ON MY EMAIL WOULD BE AUGUST 2ND.

A FEW OTHER THINGS. I TOTALLY THINK THAT IT WAS GREAT THAT MR. BOEDECKER CAME TO GIVE SOME TRANSPARENCY.

THE JUVENILE BOARD AND THE JUVENILE DEPARTMENT IS KIND OF A UNIQUE BEAST.

I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT IT WAS VERY TRANSPARENT.

AND I DO SUPPORT LEAVING THEIR CARVE OUT AT THE 100 HOURS.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO ITERATE, REITERATE THAT NO ONE'S GOING TO LOSE DOLLARS OR HOURS EARNED IF YOU'VE EARNED, IF YOU'VE WORKED SUCH THAT YOU WOULD BE COMPENSATED TIME AND A HALF, EITHER YOU'RE GOING TO GET TIME AND A HALF CASH, OR YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT TIME AND A HALF COMP EARNED THAT YOU CAN TAKE AS TIME OFF IN THE FUTURE.

SO TOTALLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS, HOPEFULLY I WAS ABLE TO ADD SOME CLARITY ON SOME OF THE QUESTIONS.

BUT AGAIN, IT'S TOTALLY UP TO THE COURT AND MY DEPARTMENT'S IN SUPPORT OF THESE CHANGES.

SO I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. AND I'VE GOT ERICA HERE.

IF Y'ALL GOT SOME IN IN THE WEEDS DETAIL QUESTIONS, SHE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE AS WELL.

QUESTIONS FOR THE TREASURER. NO, THANK YOU, MR. PETE. ALL RIGHT. WELL, HERE WE ARE. OKAY. SO WHAT DID WHAT DID LAUREN SAY? I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION AND IF I LOSE, I LOSE.

SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADJUST OVERTIME COMPENSATION POLICY, SEE POINT SIX AND POLICY C 11 ON CALL POLICY TO GRANDFATHER. ALL ACCRUED COMPENSATION TIME, BUT STOP THE ACCRUALS FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FIRST PAY PERIOD OF THE NEW FISCAL YEAR, WHICH SHOULD BE OCTOBER 11TH.

HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACEY. SECOND.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GALLINA. ARE THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? HEARING NONE. IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE.

THIS PASSES 4 TO 1. ALL RIGHT. THAT TAKES US.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THAT. BOTH OF YOU AND CAMI AND TREASURER PEAKE.

AND JUST TO NOTE FOR THE COURT, WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE THOSE ON A CONSENT AGENDA JUST SO EVERYONE CAN REVIEW THEM FOR ACCURACY BEFORE THE NEXT BUDGET.

[3.U) Discuss/Act to direct the County Treasurer, as the County Payroll Officer, to make all necessary payroll adjustments to implement changes to the Vacation and Overtime Compensation policies approved by the Commissioners Court on June 23, 2026, and to ensure that no payroll changes are implemented before the policy's effective date, and all related issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

GOT IT. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE. YOU DISCUSS AN ACT TO DIRECT THE COUNTY TREASURER AS THE COUNTY PAYROLL OFFICER, TO MAKE ALL NECESSARY PAYROLL ADJUSTMENTS, TO IMPLEMENT CHANGES TO THE VACATION AND OVERTIME COMPENSATION POLICIES APPROVED BY THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT ON JUNE 23RD, 2026, AND TO ENSURE THAT NO PAYROLL CHANGES ARE IMPLEMENTED BEFORE THE POLICY'S EFFECTIVE DATE AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

[03:15:01]

COMMISSIONER STACEY. YES. SO ON, ON THIS AGENDA ITEM, WE DID I DO NOT THINK INTENTIONALLY CHANGED THE POLICY IN THE MIDDLE OF A PAYROLL.

SOME DECISIONS WERE MADE TO RETROACTIVELY ENACT THE POLICY, IN MY OPINION, AND I DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO REVOTE ON THE POLICY.

I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT ANYTHING THAT HAPPENED BEFORE THE JUNE 23RD DATE OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT SHOULD BE TREATED UNDER THE OLD POLICIES AND ANYTHING ON AFTER JUNE 23RD AND ON CAN BE TREATED WITH THE NEW POLICIES.

AND I JUST ASK THAT ANY OF THOSE CHANGES BE REFLECTED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE BY THE TREASURER'S DEPARTMENT.

DOES THE TREASURER HAVE ANY COMMENTS? HE'S WALKING FAST.

THANK YOU JUDGE. I'LL BE MUCH QUICKER THIS TIME. COMMISSIONER STACEY, I TOTALLY AGREE. THE THING THAT WAS SOMEWHAT VAGUE ON JUNE 23RD WHEN Y'ALL VOTED, THIS IS Y'ALL VOTED IN EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.

SO I NEED TO KNOW IF IT'S ALL HOURS WORKED ON JUNE 23RD IN THE NEW POLICY AND ANYTHING PRIOR THE OLD POLICY OR JUNE 23RD AT 1042 OR WHENEVER Y'ALL VOTED THAT IN. SO THAT WAS A CONUNDRUM THAT JUNE 23RD WAS THE SECOND DAY OF A TEN DAY PAY PERIOD, NOT COUNTING THE WEEKENDS. SO WHAT WE DID, WE SAID, OKAY, THIS IS NEBULOUS.

WHAT DOES EFFECTIVE MEAN? AND WE JUST MADE THE CALL TO INCLUDE THAT MONDAY, WHICH WAS THE DAY BEFORE. SO INSTEAD OF NINE DAYS AT THE NEW POLICY AND ONE DAY AT THE OLD, WE SAID TEN DAYS OF THE NEW POLICY. SO WE DEFINITELY CAN FIX THAT.

WE CAN DO SOME, YOU KNOW, JOURNAL ENTRY MAGIC AND MAKE THAT ALL TRUE UP FOR EVERYBODY.

SO NOBODY LOST VACATION IS BASED ON THAT. BUT I JUST NEED CLARITY THAT IF IT'S NOT EXCUSE ME, NINE DAYS IN THE NEW POLICY, ONE DAY ENTIRELY AT THE OLD.

WE CAN DO THAT. SO IF WE VOTED ON IT ON JUNE 23RD.

YEP. SAYS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, SOMETIME THAT DAY.

DO WE JUST SAY THE NEXT DAY IT BECOMES EFFECTIVE? I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S WHAT MAKES THE MOST SENSE.

I DO THINK THIS IS KIND OF ON US WHEN WE WROTE THAT WHEN WE DID THE POLICY.

SO IT IS ON US TO, TO CORRECT AND GIVE THE TREASURER THE NECESSARY DIRECTION.

I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT ANYONE ELSE'S THOUGHTS ARE ON IT, BUT I THINK YEAH, I AGREE.

24TH AND ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT? CAN YOU MAKE THAT HAPPEN? THAT'S PERFECT. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR. SO THAT'LL BE THE THE 22ND AND 23RD OF THAT PAY PERIOD.

NOT COUNTING THE WEEKENDS, TWO DAYS UNDER THE OLD POLICY, EIGHT UNDER THE NEW.

AND WE'LL MAKE THAT HAPPEN. WE'LL TRUE THAT UP AND WE'LL ENSURE THAT'S CLEAR.

AND IT MAY TAKE A PAY PERIOD CYCLE OR TWO TO WASH THAT THROUGH.

BUT WE'LL MAKE IT HAPPEN. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU NEED FROM US ON THAT? THE ONLY OTHER THING SINCE YOU OPENED THE DOOR, COMMISSIONER STACY, ANY TIME THE COURT DECIDES TO LOOK AT ADJUSTING ANY PAY POLICIES.

PAY PERIODS, VACATION, HOLIDAY, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.

FOR EASE OF CONFUSION TO THE WORKFORCE AND TO MY DEPARTMENT TO HAVE CLEAR GUIDANCE.

IF IT'S THE FIRST DAY OF THAT TWO WEEK PAY PERIOD, FOR SOMETHING TO BE EFFECTIVE WOULD GO A LONG WAY IN MAKING THIS CLEAN SO THAT WE'RE NOT HERE AGAIN AND AGAIN. THAT'S HARD. AND I WILL TRY AND GET AHEAD OF THAT.

I WAS ACTUALLY ON MY ONE WEEK VACATION ON THE JUNE 23RD, SO I WASN'T HERE DURING THAT COURT MEETING.

SO MY APOLOGIES ON THAT. I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE RAISED THE FLAG, BUT MOVING FORWARD, STARTING CLEAN IS A GREAT THING.

AND IT'S NOT ALWAYS THE BEGINNING OF THE FISCAL YEAR AS FAR AS PAY PRACTICES.

IT'S REALLY THE BEGINNING OF THAT PAY PERIOD. SO YOU GOT TO KIND OF THINK TWO DIFFERENT WAYS. SO SHORING THIS UP THOUGH, JUST, JUST FOR MY CLARIFICATION, CLARIFICATION, SHORING IT UP, YOU'LL PUT SOME TYPE OF A NOTE IN OR COMMUNICATE WITH THE, WITH THE EMPLOYEES. ANY, ANY EMPLOYEES THAT ARE AFFECTED BY THIS CHANGE OR THE VAGUENESS OF THE.

I'LL CALL IT AN ERROR. PREVIOUSLY, WE WILL MAKE SURE WE GET A GOOD LIST OF THAT, AND MY DEPARTMENT WILL REACH OUT AND MAKE SURE THEY ARE UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE'RE DOING.

AND THAT WAY THEY SAY, WHY DID YOU CHANGE IT TWICE? I'M SEEING MY ACCRUED BALANCES CHANGE AGAIN. WHAT'S GOING ON? WE WILL GET AHEAD OF THAT AS BEST WE CAN.

OKAY. SO I THINK THIS TO BE CLEAN WOULD REQUIRE AN ACTION OF SAYING THE DATE.

MAYBE. SO IF SOMEBODY WANTS. YEAH, I'LL GO AHEAD.

JUDGE, I WOULD LIKE AS A CLARITY VOTE TO MAKE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE IMPLEMENTED CHANGES TO THE VACATION AND OVERTIME COMPENSATION POLICY THAT WAS VOTED ON ON JUNE 23RD, 2026 TO BEGIN ON THE WORK DAY OF JUNE 24TH OF 2026.

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACEY. I'LL SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GALLINA.

IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0.

ALL RIGHT, COURT, I AM GOING TO SKIP 3V3W AND THREE X UNTIL AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION, WHICH IS GOING TO MOVE US TO THREE Y.

WE'RE GOING TO DO 3Y3Z AND 3AA. SO AGENDA ITEM THREE Y DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING A NOTIFICATION OF TERMINATION

[3.Y) Discuss/Act on approving a Notification of Termination for convenience to Mobile Communications America, Inc. (MCA) to cancel intrusion monitoring service for the County Courthouse building, County Annex building, County Library building, Adult Probation building, Historic Courthouse building, Juvenile Services department, Emergency Management department, County Agent department and the Human Resource/Maintenance & Operations departments located in the County Services building as of September 1st, 2026, and all related issues; (Commissioner Liechty)]

[03:20:04]

FOR CONVENIENCE TO MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS AMERICA INC.

MCA TO CANCEL INTRUSION MONITORING SERVICE FOR THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE BUILDING.

COUNTY ANNEX BUILDING. COUNTY LIBRARY BUILDING.

ADULT PROBATION BUILDING. HISTORIC COURTHOUSE BUILDING.

JUVENILE SERVICES DEPARTMENT, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, COUNTY AGENT DEPARTMENT AND THE HUMAN RESOURCES SLASH MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION DEPARTMENTS LOCATED IN THE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING AS OF SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2026 AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER LICHTY. THANK YOU JUDGE. WHY? OKAY.

WHY? THIS IS GOES BACK TO SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON AND TALKING ABOUT FOR SINCE I THINK LAST FALL OR MAYBE EARLY THIS SPRING. AND THAT WAS TERMINATING OUR CONTRACT WITH MCA FOR MONITORING THE BUILDINGS AND SWITCHING TO GREEN SECURITY.

THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS HERE THAT ARE RELATED.

ACTUALLY, YEAH, TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS. NO, ACTUALLY THREE DIFFERENT ITEMS THAT ARE RELATED.

THIS BECAME MUCH MORE OF A LEGAL CHALLENGE THAN IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN.

NO DISRESPECT TO ANYONE. IT JUST GOT VERY COMPLICATED.

WHAT WE ARE APPROVING. BUT WE'VE WORKED WE'VE IRONED ALL THAT OUT.

AND WHAT WE ARE APPROVING NOW IS SIMPLY TERMINATING OUR SERVICE WITH MC A.

EFFECTIVE AS OF SEPTEMBER 1ST, AND AUTHORIZING THE AUDITOR TO SEND OUT A LETTER TO DO THAT IN THE NEXT TWO ITEMS. WE WILL DEAL WITH THIS AGAIN FOR SOME OTHER PROPERTIES AND THEN WE'LL DEAL WITH HIRING GREEN ELECTRIC AFTER THAT.

BUT ALL WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS AUTHORIZING HER TO SEND A TERMINATION NOTICE.

SO I WOULD SAY THIS, AS I'VE SAID ON OTHER THINGS, IF YOU DON'T PLAN TO HIRE GREEN SECURITY, DON'T VOTE FOR THIS, OKAY? BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE A PROBLEM.

WE WILL HAVE A CONUNDRUM. WE'LL HAVE PROBLEMS. AND THIS ONE. I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU, SIR.

YEAH. SO ALL RIGHT, WITH THAT INSTRUCTION BEING SAID, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION IF SOMEBODY IS SO INCLINED.

OKAY, HERE WE GO. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SENDING A NOTIFICATION OF TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE TO MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, INC. TO CANCEL INTRUSION MONITORING SERVICE FOR THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE BUILDING THE COUNTY ANNEX BUILDING THE COUNTY LIBRARY BUILDING.

THE ADULT PROBATION BUILDING. HISTORIC COURTHOUSE BUILDING, JUVENILE SERVICES DEPARTMENT, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, COUNTY AGENT DEPARTMENT, AND THE HUMAN RESOURCES MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT LOCATED IN THE COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING. AS OF SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2006, 2626, 2020.

GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY. I'LL. SECOND.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STACEY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0.

[3.Z) Discuss/Act on approving a Notification of Termination for fire and security alarm monitoring service, canceling monitoring service for County Courthouse building, Historic Courthouse, Juvenile Services, Adult Probation and two separate agreements at the County Library building as of September 1st, 2026; (Commissioner Liechty)]

THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE Z. DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING A NOTIFICATION OF TERMINATION FOR FIRE AND SECURITY ALARM MONITORING.

SERVICE CANCELING MONITORING SERVICE FOR THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE BUILDING, HISTORIC COURTHOUSE, JUVENILE SERVICES, ADULT PROBATION, AND TWO SEPARATE AGREEMENTS AT THE COUNTY LIBRARY BUILDING AS OF SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2026. COMMISSIONER LICHTY OKAY. THANK YOU JUDGE.

IN THREE Y, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT CANCELING INTRUSION MONITORING SERVICE.

WHAT I WOULD REFER TO AS A BURGLAR ALARM IN THREE Z.

WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS TERMINATING THE FIRE AND SECURITY ALARM SYSTEMS FOR THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE, BUILDING, THE HISTORIC COURTHOUSE, JUVENILE SERVICES, ADULT PROBATION, AND TWO SEPARATE AGREEMENTS AT THE PUBLIC LIBRARY.

WHAT WE FOUND OUT IS THAT THERE ARE DIFFERING TYPES OF PLANS THAT WE HAVE ON SOME OF THESE, AND THERE ARE DIFFERING SYSTEMS, SOME OF WHICH GREENE CAN TAKE OVER AND SOME OF WHICH GREENE CANNOT TAKE OVER.

AND I THINK WE FINALLY SORTED IT ALL OUT. CRAIG, YOU'RE LOOKING LIKE, DO YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? NO, IT'S GOING THE WAY I EXPECT IT TO GO. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE YES.

YEAH. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WITH REGARD TO THE FIRE MONITORING AT THE ANNEX.

THAT IS NOT ONE THAT WE'RE ISSUING A NOTICE OF TERMINATION ON DUE TO THE TERMS OF THAT CONTRACT AND THE LACK OF A TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE.

BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S NOT LISTED HERE. YEAH.

THE ANNEX HAD A SPECIAL SYSTEM AND I THINK A FIVE YEAR CONTRACT OR SOMETHING THAT WE SIGNED AT THE TIME, AND WE DIDN'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO TERMINATE IT. SO WE'RE KEEPING THE ANNEX UNDER THE OLD SYSTEM.

[03:25:06]

AND THE IRONY OF THE FACT THAT ALL OF THIS WORK THAT DESTRY HAS PUT IN, AND IT IS SIGNIFICANT IS ALL FOR SAVING 30, $25 A MONTH, BUT ON 17 CONTRACTS. BUT WHAT IT DOES IS GIVE US LOCAL REPRESENTATION.

IT DOES THAT. YES. THAT WE CAN AND WE ARE SAVING MONEY.

AND THAT'S A GOOD THING. THAT'S ALWAYS A GOOD THING.

LOOKS LIKE BOTH OF US HAD A PROJECT LIKE THAT TODAY, LAUREN, THAT WE TURNED INTO.

IT'S ACTUALLY MORE THAN $17 OR $20, $25 BECAUSE THEY'RE ON MR ALSO HAD SOME OTHER ANOTHER EXPENSE LOADED INTO IT, WHICH WAS LIKE ANOTHER 17 BUCKS A BUILDING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

BUT ANYWAY, THIS IS ALL TO SAVE MONEY. DESIREE WORKED VERY HARD.

TELL HIM HE GETS A PROCLAMATION FROM THE COMMISSIONERS COURT IF HE WANTS ONE.

AND UNLESS ANYBODY HAS QUESTIONS, I'LL MAKE A MOTION.

PLEASE MAKE A MOTION. OKAY. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE A NOTIFICATION OF TERMINATION FOR FIRE AND SECURITY ALARM MONITORING.

SERVICE CANCELING, MONITORING SERVICE FOR THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE, BUILDING, THE HISTORIC COURTHOUSE, THE JUVENILE SERVICES, ADULT PROBATION, AND TWO SEPARATE AGREEMENTS AT THE COUNTY LIBRARY, EFFECTIVE AS OF SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2026 GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY.

I'LL SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH, IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW, PLEASE.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THAT BRINGS US TO AGENDA ITEM THREE.

[3.AA) Discuss/Act on approving the County Auditor to ready agreements with Green Electronic Solutions (GES) for the service start date of September 1, 2026; (Commissioner Liechty)]

DOUBLE A DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO READY AGREEMENTS WITH GREEN ELECTRIC SOLUTIONS.

GES FOR THE SERVICE START DATE OF SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2026.

COMMISSIONER LICHTY. OKAY. THANKS, JUDGE. I GOTTA SAY.

I DON'T KNOW. WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THAT THIS IS A MOTION TO PREPARE CONTRACTS WITH GREEN ELECTRONIC SERVICE FOR STARTING SERVICE SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2026. IN ONE OF THE NEXT COURTS, YOU WILL PROBABLY GET A MOTION TO ACTUALLY SIGN THOSE CONTRACTS.

BUT THIS IS A MOTION TO PREPARE THE CONTRACTS.

I JUST WANT TO SAY CONGRATULATIONS TO THE COURT ON OUR NEW SYSTEM.

IT ONLY TOOK US TWO COURTS TO GET TO A A. SO I MEAN, WE GET A NEW NUMBERING SYSTEM AND MOVING FAST.

YES. AND IT DIDN'T TAKE US ANY TIME BUT TO START THE ALPHABET OVER AGAIN.

SO GOOD ON US. SO UNLESS ANYONE HAS COMMENTS I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE COUNTER ORDERING.

I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO READY AND PREPARE AGREEMENTS WITH GREEN ELECTRONIC SOLUTIONS FOR THE SERVICE.

START DATE OF SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2026. HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY.

SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GILANI. IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE.

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. SO THAT BRINGS US TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[8) EXECUTIVE SESSION:]

THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF ROCKWALL COUNTY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT ANY TIME DURING THE COURSE OF THE MEETING TO DISCUSS ANY OF THE MATTERS LISTED ON THE AGENDA OR IN THIS ITEM IN THE ORDER DEEMED APPROPRIATE, AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 551 OPEN MEETING SUBCHAPTER D TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, OR TO SEEK THE ADVICE OF ITS ATTORNEY ON THOSE ITEMS. WE WILL BE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION ON PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION AND ATTORNEY CLIENT INFORMATION.

NUMBER ONE, DISCUSSION OF D.R. HORTON LITIGATION AND MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICTS.

NUMBER TWO, TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING CONTRACT.

NUMBER THREE, ROCKWALL COUNTY MUD. NUMBER TEN, SETTLEMENT DISCUSSION.

AND UNDER ADVICE OF COUNSEL RECREATIONAL AREA DISCUSSION.

AND AT 211 WE ARE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[9) RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION:]

ALL RIGHT, EVERYONE, AT 302 WE'RE GOING TO RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION PURSUANT TO THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, CHAPTER 551, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.001.

THE COMMISSIONERS COURT WILL RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO TAKE ANY ACTION NECESSARY ON MATTERS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

AND I CAN TELL YOU NO ACTION TAKEN, AND WE WE'LL RESUME WITH AGENDA ITEM THREE

[3.V) Consider and act on approving Resolution and Order approving Master Agreement and Task Orders 01–02 with HNTB Corporation for Bond Program management consultant services, and County Addendum, granting professional-services exemption under Tex. Loc. Gov't Code § 262.024(a)(4), and authorizing execution, and all related matters; (Commissioner Stacy)]

V CONSIDER AND ACT ON APPROVING RESOLUTION AND ORDER, APPROVING MASTER AGREEMENT AND TASK ORDER 01-02 WITH HNTB CORPORATION FOR BOND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, CONSULTANT SERVICES AND COUNTY ADDENDUM GRANTING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EXEMPTION UNDER TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 262.024 PARENTHETICALS A AND FOR AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION AND ALL RELATED MATTERS.

COMMISSIONER. STACY. YES. SO WHAT I WANTED TO DO IS I WANTED TO OPEN WITH

[03:30:02]

A A POWERPOINT THAT I HAD MADE ABOUT HOW WE GOT HERE AND WHY WE ARE HERE.

AND SO IF YOU WOULD, IF MEREDITH WOULD COME UP, I'VE GOT I WANTED TO WALK THROUGH BEFORE WE GET INTO THE DISCUSSION ON THIS, WHY I BELIEVE CHANGING OUR BOND PROGRAM MANAGER IS ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE FOR THE COUNTY OF ROCKWALL COUNTY.

AND WHAT I HAVE ON THIS. SO IF YOU GO TO THE FIRST ONE, I'M MAKING THREE POINTS TODAY.

THE FIRST ONE IS PROJECT COMPLETENESS. WHAT IS ACTUALLY CURRENTLY ON THE GROUND AND FUNDED TO BE CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTED.

AND I HAVE NEVER MET A SINGLE PERSON THAT I'VE RAN INTO IN ROCKWALL COUNTY THAT HAS SATISFIED WITH OUR ROADS EVER. AND WE'VE HAD THE SAME ROAD CONSULTANT FOR 22 YEARS IN CHARGE OF OUR ROADS.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE WE ARE HAVING AN ACTUAL ISSUE THAT IS 100% TRUE.

AND THAT IS OUR CHILDREN ARE MOVING AWAY AND THEY ARE NOT COMING BACK.

IF YOU HAVE RAISED YOUR CHILDREN IN ROCKWALL COUNTY, THEY ARE FRUSTRATED WITH TRAFFIC.

THEY'RE FRUSTRATED WITH THE ROADS, AND I THINK THAT'S A BIG PROBLEM.

WE HAVE INHERITED A BEAUTIFUL COUNTY. AND IF IF, IF THE ATTRACTIVENESS ERODES, THEN SO DOES OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. AND WHY WOULD WE CONTINUE GOING DOWN A PATH THAT HAS FRUSTRATED OUR CITIZENS? SO NOW WE LOOK AT COMPLETENESS. SO WHAT I HAVE IS AN EMAIL.

SO NONE OF THIS, NOTHING THAT YOU'RE GETTING IS ANY INFORMATION THAT I HAVE PUT TOGETHER.

SO HERE IS WHERE THE SOURCE MATERIAL IS FROM 2004 AND 2008.

HERE ARE ALL THE PROJECTS FROM THOSE THAT ARE NOT FUNDED, ARE NOT MOVING FOR CONSTRUCTION, AND ARE JUST STAGNANT. AND WE'RE TALKING FROM OH FOUR AND OH EIGHT BONDS THAT THERE IS JUST NO MOVEMENT ON THEM WHATSOEVER.

YEAH. SO NOW IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE, THIS IS WHAT THAT COMPILES TO. I'VE HEARD IT WRITTEN IN THE LOCAL PAPER THAT THERE'S BILLIONS OF DOLLARS COMING INTO ROCKWALL COUNTY, THAT THIS INCLUDES ALL THE HIGHWAY OVER CHANGES, BUT IT DOES NOT INCLUDE INTERSTATE 30 AS THE CAT 12 PROGRAM THAT IT IS.

SO IT JUST THE ACTUAL LANES OF INTERSTATE 30 ARE NOT INCLUDED.

THIS IS DIRECTLY FROM ITEMS AND STUFF PUT TOGETHER BY.

IT'S. SO NONE OF THESE MONIES AND NONE OF THIS STUFF WAS FROM ME.

IT'S DIRECTLY FROM THEIR PROGRAMS AND WHAT THEY'VE PRINTED AND WHAT IS CURRENTLY ON THE ROCKWALL COUNTY WEBSITE.

SO OF THE 223 MILLION THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES, 116 MILLION IS ON I-30 AND 107 IS ON ALL THE OTHER ROADS. THE MOST ALARMING THING IS IT'S 15.2 LANE MILES.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE ADDED TO ROCKWALL COUNTY SINCE 2004.

NO WONDER WE HAVE THIS HUGE POPULATION GROWTH.

BUT WHERE ARE THE ACTUAL LANE MILES AND WHERE CAN PEOPLE DRIVE? SO NOW TO BE FAIR, GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

WE ARE GETTING A HUGE INVESTMENT RIGHT NOW IN 205.

BUT THAT PROJECT WAS STARTED IN ITS INITIAL MEETING ACCORDING TO CONSORTIUM REPORTS ON APRIL 14TH OF 2015.

SO THAT IS A 15 YEAR PROJECT OR RIGHT THERE AT BY THE TIME THE PROJECT IS COMPLETE.

SO EVEN THOUGH IT MIGHT HAVE MOVED UP, IT IS A PROJECT THAT HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS SINCE APRIL 14 TO 2015.

THAT WAS THE FIRST ORGANIZED MEETING ON OUR CONSORTIUM REPORT FOR STATE HIGHWAY 205.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. ALL RIGHT. SO THIS IS THE PROJECT FOR TRIP 21 JUST FOR REFERENCE, SO IF ANYONE WANTS TO FACT CHECK ME THEY CAN.

WE CURRENTLY HAVE TWO PROJECTS COMPLETED, SEVEN SET FOR CONSTRUCTION, ONE WHICH IS THE FLOP THAT WE HAVE IN THE SWAP, WHICH WE'RE HAVING ISSUES WITH, TEN THAT ARE NOT FUNDED AND SIX THAT ARE NOT STARTED.

THAT'S THE CURRENT STATUS OF TRIP 21. SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE THE BIG QUESTION IS HOW ARE WE EVER GOING TO FUND TEN PROJECTS THAT AREN'T IN THE UTP? WHILE I DO ADMIT THAT ALL THE PROJECTS WE HAVE ARE IMPORTANT, MOST OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE COMPLETED AND STARTED ARE SMALL PROJECTS LIKE SOUTH BEND PAIN ROAD THAT WE JUST GAVE THE CITY OF FATE MONEY, EDWARDS ROAD VILLAGE DRIVE ALL IMPORTANT. I'M NOT SAYING THEY'RE NOT IMPORTANT, BUT THEY'RE THE SMALLER PROJECTS, NOT THE ONES THAT PEOPLE ARE CLAMORING FOR US TO GO ON.

[03:35:01]

SO THAT'S THE FIRST ISSUE IS GETTING THINGS COMPLETE.

THE SECOND ISSUE IS PROFESSIONALISM. I DON'T THINK THIS ISSUE SHOULD BE GLOSSED OVER, ALTHOUGH IT IS THE CURRENT CONSULTANT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE WILLING TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY JUDGE OR PRECINCT FOUR AND IN FACT, ACTIVELY CAMPAIGNED IN OUR LAST PRIMARIES. IF YOUR POSITION ON THE OUTER LOOP CHANGES, HE WILL PROBABLY GO AGAINST YOU IN YOUR PRIMARY.

SO GO TO THE NEXT ONE. THIS IS ONE INSTANCE THAT I'M ABOUT TO WALK THROUGH OF JUST BLATANT WRITTEN LIES THAT HAVE CAUSED ME TO JUST NOT WANT TO WORK WITH TS ANYMORE. SO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE AS AN EMAIL.

I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU SOME CONTEXT BECAUSE A COUPLE OF Y'ALL WEREN'T ON COURT AT THE TIME WHEN IN OUR FIRST MONTH IN OFFICE, WE APPROVED A SET OF PROJECTS. IT WAS ABOUT $11 MILLION.

ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS WAS 1141 THAT WENT AWAY AND NEVER CAME BACK UNTIL TODAY.

SO GOOD JOB US BRINGING IT BACK AND GETTING IT FUNDED.

ANOTHER WAS FM 35, SO FM 35, WE APPROVED TO SPEND MONEY ON IT AND THEN TXDOT TOOK THE PROJECT.

SO THEN THE MONEY WASN'T BEING SPENT ON IT ANYMORE.

AT THAT TIME, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF FAYETTE CAME AND SAID, HEY, CAN WE DO A MISS MAY EXTENSION? AND I SAID, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. SO HERE'S MY EMAIL TO JOHN POLSTER ON MARCH 8TH OF 2024 AT 849.

WHEN IS IT GOING TO ACTUALLY BE OFFICIAL THAT TXDOT IS TAKING FM 35 SO THAT WE COULD LOOK AT GETTING THE MONEY FOR MISS MAY? THE CITY OF FATE IS GOING TO BE WORKING ON BUYING PROPERTY SOON, AND I'M WORKING TO TRY TO GET THE DESIGN COSTS SO THAT WE CAN LOOK AT SENDING THEM MONEY.

IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, COMMISSIONER, TXDOT HAS AGREED TO TAKE FM 35.

IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE WILL NEED AN ICA. OF COURSE WE WILL.

AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT AND INTER COOPERATION AGREEMENT. BUT IF YOU RECALL, AS I LAID OUT ON OUR CALL, YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND AUDITOR SAY WE HAVE TO TO DO $10 MILLION BEFORE WE CAN WORK ON THE ICA FOR MONEY THAT IS JUST SITTING IN OUR BANK ACCOUNT. SO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

I SAID OKAY, SO WE WOULD NEED TO ISSUE $10 MILLION BEFORE WE WOULD HAVE ANY MONEY FOR THE ILAILA AND FATE.

WHEN ARE WE GOING TO GET STARTED ON THIS? AND THEN HE FOLLOWS UP AND SAYS, IT WILL BE APRIL BECAUSE WE'RE WORKING ON STUFF.

HERE ARE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 5TH MEETING WHERE WE APPROVE THE ICA BECAUSE WE HAD THE MONEY.

SO WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD OUR CONSULTANT LIE ABOUT WHETHER WE HAD ACCESS TO MONEY FOR ME TO WORK WITH OUR LOCAL PARTNERS? AS YOU KNOW, NO MONEY ON TRIP 21 WAS ISSUED UNTIL JANUARY OF 2026.

THE $10 MILLION WAS 100% ABOUT BUILDING THE SOUTH PART OF THE LOOP.

IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ICA, WITH FATE.

IT'S PUSHING AN AGENDA AND NOT BEING A CONSULTANT AND BLATANTLY LYING TO ME IN WRITING AND DOUBLING DOWN WHEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. SO SOMEHOW WE DO EXCUSE ALL OF THE LACK OF PROFESSIONALISM, WHICH IS FINE. I JUST THINK WE SHOULD DEMAND MORE SINCE WE ARE PAYING THIS CONSULTANT OUT OF TAX DOLLARS.

NOW LET'S GO TO THE NEXT ONE, WHICH IS, I THINK, A MORE IMPORTANT AND LESS EMOTIONAL ARGUMENT.

SO I BELIEVE WE ARE AT MINIMUM 15 YEARS BEHIND ON OUR ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE.

WE'VE HAD THE SAME CONSULTANT FOR 22 YEARS. WE MUST BUILD ROADS.

AND THAT CANNOT BE DONE USING ONE TOOL IN THE TOOLBOX.

IF WE CONTINUE TO DO THE SAME THING, WE WILL CONTINUE TO GET THE EXACT SAME RESULTS.

SO ON AN EMAIL THAT THE CONSOLE, CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE? SO ON THE EMAIL THAT THE CONSULTANT SENT TO EVERYBODY ON COURT EXCEPT FOR FRANK AND MYSELF.

THERE WAS COMPARISONS FROM A WHITE PAPER THAT H T BE SENT TO COMMISSIONER AVILAS THAT WAS REFERENCED IN SEVERAL WHITE PAPERS WRITTEN IN SOME WAY, SHAPE OR FORM BY BY JOHN POLSTER OR IT'S.

SO IF YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. SO I HAVE INCLUDED THE WHITE PAPERS THAT WERE GIVEN TO COMMISSIONER.

AVILAS. AND I'VE INCLUDED THE WHITE PAPERS THAT JOHN POLSTER OR SOMEONE FROM ITS WROTE.

IT GOES INTO A COUPLE OF DETAILS ON HAYS COUNTY AND WILLIAMSON COUNTY.

SO IN HAYS COUNTY, IT REFERENCED A 2016 BOND.

BUT I WANT THE COURT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WAS DONE AS AN ADVANCED FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH TXDOT.

SO THAT 2016 BOND, EVERY SINGLE TXDOT ROAD IN HAYS COUNTY GOT A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FUNDED BY TXDOT IN THAT 2016 BOND.

ALL OF THEM. IT SAYS EVERY SINGLE TXDOT FACILITY GOT SOME SORT OF CONSTRUCTION IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY.

THEY HAD 250 PROJECTS SINCE 20. SINCE 2000, WITH A THOUSAND LANE MILES TO OUR 15.2, A

[03:40:06]

THOUSAND LANE MILES TO OUR 15.2. BUT ONLY 50 OF THOSE PROJECTS WERE ON SYSTEM ROADS.

SO WHILE I DO AGREE. OH, AND THEN ON DENTON COUNTY, THERE WAS SOME LOOK AT IT.

BUT THERE IS A HUGE I-35E MANAGED LANE PROJECT THAT MAKES UP MOST OF THE OH FOUR AND OH EIGHT REGIONAL INVESTMENT THAT IS MENTIONED IN THE LETTER.

ALSO, THERE IS NOTHING FROM HOOD, KAUFMAN, LUBBOCK OR BRAZOS COUNTY.

IT'S WAS CURRENTLY RECENTLY RELEASED FROM BRAZOS COUNTY.

NONE OF THAT INFORMATION WAS GIVEN TO ANY MEMBER OF COURT AS FAR AS WHAT HAS BEEN DONE IN THOSE COUNTIES. ALSO, YOU GOT TO REMEMBER IN DENTON COUNTY, THEY DO GET A TON OF TOLL MONEY THAT CAN BE REALLOCATED TO THEM.

NOW, HERE'S THE TRUTH, WHICH IS 100% TRUE. THE DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR INVESTMENT IN ROCKWALL COUNTY HAS BEEN GREAT.

IT'S ALMOST $5 FOR EVERY DOLLAR. THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT.

THAT IS A FANTASTIC TURNAROUND. BUT THOSE ARE NOT THE ONLY RESULTS.

IT'S NOT GETTING US ACTUAL CONCRETE ON THE GROUND.

WE'RE ONLY TAKING ONE APPROACH. GO TO THE RTC, WAIT FOR MONEY, WAIT FOR THINGS.

WE NEED A CONSULTANT WITH CAPABILITIES TO WORK AT THE FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, THE COMMISSIONERS AND THE LEGISLATORS DOWN IN AUSTIN, THE RTC AND LOCAL TXDOT.

WE HAVE TO SHIFT OUR FOCUS AS A COUNTY TO ACTUALLY BUILDING ROADS, NOT HOLDING ON TO SOME EMOTIONAL ATTACHMENT TO 22 YEARS OF NOT BUILDING ROADS.

SO IN CONCLUSION WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE $1.7 MILLION FROM THE SAVINGS IN CRENSHAW ROAD THAT WE COULD APPLY TO A CONTRACT TO GET US MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION TO GET A CONTRACT AND A PROGRAM THAT IS FOCUSED ON COMPLETENESS, PROFESSIONALISM, AND A MULTIFACETED APPROACH TO GETTING CONSTRUCTION DOLLARS.

IT'S TIME RIGHT NOW. SO RIGHT AFTER THE BUDGET, WE CAN HAVE ALL THESE TRANSITION MEETINGS AND WE CAN START FIGURING OUT HOW TO BUILD ROADS. SO THE TIMING IS IMPORTANT. AND YOU CAN JUST GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH IS BLANK.

AND I WOULD JUST SAY THAT MY PROBLEM IS IF WE'RE SITTING AROUND CONTINUALLY DOING THE SAME THINGS, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE GETTING THE SAME RESULTS, WHICH IS IN ANOTHER 22 YEARS, WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER 15.2 MILES OUTSIDE OF 205, WHICH IS AN AMAZING PROJECT. I GET THAT 205 IS A GREAT PROJECT.

WE'RE NOT GETTING RESULTS. WE'RE GETTING SMOKE AND MIRRORS.

WE'RE GETTING CONSORTIUM REPORTS THAT HAVE SAYING THIS IS WHAT THE CONSTRUCTION COST IS WHEN IT COMES AROUND WITH NO FUNDING, SHOWING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS COMING INTO THE COUNTY THAT ISN'T COMING INTO THE COUNTY.

AND I WANT TO WORK WITH CONSULTANTS THAT UNDERSTAND THE NECESSITY TO ACTUALLY BUILD THE ROADS THAT HAVE A FULL PLETHORA OF TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX AND CAN START GETTING THIS COUNTY MOVING FORWARD. SO THAT'S THE REASON THAT I JUST WANTED TO GO ON THE RECORD AND SAY, THAT'S THE REASON. IN MY OPINION, WE ARE HERE.

IT'S BECAUSE WE ARE. I, I AM LOOKING FOR A FIRM THAT CAN COMPLETE PROJECTS THAT IS MORE PROFESSIONAL AND HAS A MULTIFACETED APPROACH TO GETTING ROADS BUILT.

AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE HNTB CONTRACT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO SPEND A MOMENT OF SAYING, THIS IS WHY WE'RE HERE.

THIS IS WHY OUR CITIZENS ARE FRUSTRATED BECAUSE OUR ROADS ARE NOT GOOD.

I TALKED TO SOMEONE YESTERDAY THAT WORKED FOR TXDOT FOR 15 YEARS, AND THEY SAID THEY USED TO LAUGH AT HOW TERRIBLE THE ROADS IN ROCKWALL COUNTY ARE BECAUSE THEY'RE TERRIBLE AND NO ONE WANTS TO INVEST IN THEM. WE'RE NOT GETTING THAT SORT OF INVESTMENT.

YESTERDAY, WHEN I TALKED TO THE DIRECTOR OF TXDOT, THE FIRST THING HE SAID IS, HAVE YOU LOOKED AT WHAT WILLIAMSON COUNTY AND HAYS COUNTY ARE DOING BECAUSE THEY HAVE ACTUALLY FIGURED OUT HOW TO GET INVESTMENTS ON FM ROADS? WELL, THERE'S ONE CONSULTANT WORKING WITH BOTH OF THOSE COUNTIES. WHEN THE DIRECTOR OF TXDOT SAID THEY'RE THE MODEL FOR HOW TO WORK WITH US.

I TAKE THAT PRETTY SERIOUSLY, AND I DIDN'T ASK HIM ANY QUESTIONS.

HE JUST CAME UP AFTER MY TESTIMONY YESTERDAY AND SAID, DO YOU KNOW WHAT HAYES AND WILLIAMSON COUNTY IS DOING? YOU NEED TO DO WHAT THEY'RE DOING BECAUSE THEY'RE ACTUALLY GETTING TEX DOT DOLLARS ON THEIR FM ROADS AND STATE HIGHWAYS.

SO THAT THAT IS WHAT I WANT TO SAY. THAT IS MY FRUSTRATION WITH WHERE WE ARE AND WHAT WE'RE DOING.

AND, AND I, AT THIS POINT, I WOULD JUST YIELD MY TIME FOR QUESTIONS, COMMENTS AND CRITICISM.

ANY OF THE ABOVE FOR COMMISSIONER. STACY. CAN YOU GO FIRST? OH, I DON'T CARE. I DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS. I HAVE RESPONSES, BUT I DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS.

I DON'T HAVE COMMENTS. AND I CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE CRITICISM BECAUSE I FULLY DO UNDERSTAND YOU'RE DOING THIS OUT OF WHAT YOU VIEW THE BEST THING FOR THE COUNTY TO BE. BUT I DO HAVE RESPONSES, BUT GO AHEAD.

WELL, AND I DO TOO. I DON'T WANT TO CALL. I DON'T WANT MINE TO BE CRITICISMS. I, I WANT THEM TO BE MORE CONSTRUCTIVE AND, AND SEE US COLLABORATE TOGETHER AS A, AS A, AS A COMMISSIONERS COURT.

I DO WANT TO. I WAS A LITTLE, YOU KNOW, SHOCKED WITH THE HISTORY YOU JUST GAVE AS FAR AS THE NUMBER OF ROADS THAT HAS BEEN DONE.

[03:45:02]

SO I APOLOGIZE THAT I'M NOT UP TO SPEED ON THAT BECAUSE I JUST SAW THAT I WANT TO NOT THAT I DON'T TRUST YOU.

I JUST WANT TO FACT CHECK IT TO ROCKWALL. TEXAS.COM HAS THE WHOLE LIST.

OKAY. THANK YOU. BUT I, I THINK THAT ONE OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE IS THAT WE HAVEN'T BUILT ROADS ALSO BECAUSE WE, THERE WAS A BOND THAT WAS, THAT WAS APPROVED IN NOVEMBER OF 21 AND WE DID NOT ISSUE ONE PENNY OF IT.

AND WE DID HAVE SOME MONIES LEFT OVER FROM THE PREVIOUS BONDS.

THANK GOODNESS THAT WAS SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS.

YOU LISTED OUT THAT WE USED PREVIOUS BOND MONEY, WHICH AGAIN, I, I APPLAUD THIS, THIS, THIS COURT BECAUSE WE CAME IN AT ALL OF US AT DIFFERENT TIMES. SO THREE OF US AND THE TWO OF YOU.

BUT WE CAME IN AND WE ROLLED UP OUR SLEEVES AND WE SAID, WHAT CAN WE DO TO TO AFFECT THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ROCKWALL COUNTY? AND OBVIOUSLY TRANSPORTATION IS ONE OF THEM, WITHOUT A DOUBT.

SO I SUPPORT WHOLEHEARTEDLY. WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHAT WE WHAT WE NEED TO BE DOING TO, TO IMPROVE THAT.

BUT WE ALSO CAN ONLY DO WHAT THE MONEY WE HAD AT THE TIME, YOU KNOW, AT THE TIME.

SO I, I FEEL LIKE THAT WE DID NOT WE DID NOT ISSUE ANY MONEY UNTIL THIS JANUARY.

OKAY. AND FOR WHATEVER REASONS, WE DON'T NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE REASONS WHY, BUT WE DIDN'T.

SO IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE MONEY AND WE DIDN'T PUT THE PRESSURE ON SOMEONE TO BE OUT THERE WORKING ON THOSE, THOSE PROJECTS, YOU KNOW, GET FINDING US THE OTHER MONEY, THAT'S KIND OF SHAME ON US TOO.

BUT WE WERE IN HERE, I BELIEVE, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT ALL DO WE NEED TO DO? OKAY. SO, SO AND I, AND I AGREE WITH YOU. AND AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO LEGISLATE THE PAST, BUT MY QUESTION IS HOW MANY SHOVEL READY PROJECTS ARE IN ROCKWALL COUNTY RIGHT NOW? OH, I DON'T I WOULD PROBABLY SAY THERE'S AT LEAST TWO DOZEN.

PROBABLY NOT. I THINK THERE'S 440 THAT ARE SHOVEL READY.

YEAH. SHOVEL READY. SO. WELL I'M TALKING ABOUT.

NO NO NO HOLD ON. BUT THOSE WERE READY BEFORE WE EVER GOT HERE.

YEAH. I MEAN JUST THINK ABOUT I MEAN 276552548 TO WINDMILL FARMS. 205. THESE PROJECTS OUTDATE ALL OF US, RIGHT? ONLY ONE OF THEM IS MOVING FORWARD. RIGHT? I HEAR YOU, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I DO KNOW THAT A LOT OF THE I MEAN, THIS WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT JUST RECENTLY HAPPENED WITH THE RTC AND NETCONG IS THAT A LOT OF THE LARGER CITIES IN, IN THE NORTH TEXAS AREA, THEY RECEIVED MORE MONEY.

THEY RECEIVED THE MONIES FOR A LOT OF THEIR SHOVEL READY PROJECTS.

AND, AND WE DIDN'T. NOW WE CAN DISCUSS WHY WE DIDN'T BECAUSE WE HAD THE MONEY.

BUT I AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT. I, I LIKE THE PROCESS OF WHAT OF US, OF US SELECTING SOMEONE THAT'S THE MOST QUALIFIED.

AND I AM TOTALLY OPEN TO LOOKING AT THE INFORMATION.

I THINK WHERE I WHAT WHAT'S BEEN GIVEN TO ME PRIOR TO TODAY'S MEETING FOR OUR EXHIBIT, YOU KNOW, IN OUR PACKET. AND THEN WHAT WAS JUST GIVEN TO ME LESS THAN 30 MINUTES AGO.

IT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO MAKE A DECISION AND TAKE A VOTE FOR OUR CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTY, AS WELL AS LOOKING AT WHAT THE BUDGET IS, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE MONIES WE HAVE ALSO TO TO WORK WITH ANOTHER COMPANY BECAUSE, AS YOU SAID, WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED REALLY FINANCIALS.

WE GOT SOME NUMBERS IN OUR INITIAL PACKET, BUT I HAVEN'T LIKE ADDED THEM ALL UP TO SEE OTHER THAN I DO BELIEVE THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT MAYBE THE MODEL THAT WILLIAMSON COUNTY AND HAYS COUNTY ARE USING WHERE THEY ARE PUTTING MORE MONEY INTO THEIR THEIR MANAGEMENT AND CONSULTANT GROUP.

OKAY, MORE THAN WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING. AND PERHAPS THAT'S WHY THAT HAPPENED.

THERE'S ALWAYS A THERE'S ALWAYS AN ACTION TO THAT.

AGREED. SO, OKAY. I GUESS I REALLY WHERE I'M AT IS THAT I'D LIKE FOR US AS A COURT TO DECIDE WHAT'S THE RIGHT PROCESS. I FEEL LIKE WE, IT WAS FRAGMENTED ON HOW WE HOW WE REVIEWED THE THE TWO CONSULTANTS.

YOU YOU ASKED US TO. YOU ASKED ME TO REVIEW AND TO INTERVIEW WITH, BUT I DIDN'T.

WHAT. WE NEVER CAME BACK AS A COURT AND WE NEVER COLLECTIVELY HAD ANY TYPE OF A WORK SESSION OR A DISCUSSION ON THIS.

SO I THINK THAT IS MAKES IT TO WHERE NOT THAT I CAN'T READ ALL THE INFORMATION, BUT FOR US TO TALK AMONGST EACH OTHER ALSO AND SAY, YOU'RE RIGHT, JOHN, IF THESE ARE THE FACTS, AND IF YOU'VE JUST SHOWN US WHAT THE NUMBER OF ROADS WE'VE HAD DONE IN THE, YOU KNOW, IN THE LAST TIME PERIOD THAT YOU THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT.

THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT FACT. AND AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ACCURATE, NOT THAT I'M, YOU KNOW, NO, AND THAT'S TOTALLY FAIR. I AGREE.

I MEAN, THAT'S JUST I MEAN, NOW IT'S PUBLIC RECORD.

YOU CAN SEE IT. YOU CAN FACT CHECK ME. AND AND LIKE I SAID, I GOT ALL THE STUFF DIRECTLY FROM ITS REPORTS.

SO I DIDN'T TRY TO REINVENT THE WHEEL. I DIDN'T, I JUST WAS LIKE, THIS ARE THE EMAILS THAT ARE COMING? SO JUST SO YOU KNOW, MOST OF THAT INFORMATION CAME BECAUSE WE UPDATED THE OH FOUR AND THE OH EIGHT BOND ON THE WEBSITE, RIGHT? AND JIM BARTO AND I WERE WORKING WITH ITS TO MAKE SURE THAT INFORMATION WAS CORRECT AS FAR AS WHAT WAS DONE,

[03:50:05]

WHERE WAS THE MONEY SPENT AND ALL THAT STUFF.

SO MOST OF THIS CAME DIRECTLY FROM THAT EMAIL, WHICH WAS TO JIM BARTO COPYING ME AS WE WERE TRYING TO WORK ON THE WEBSITE.

IT WAS JUST SHOCKING. WHEN YOU START ADDING UP THE LANE.

MILES ADDED TO ROCKWALL COUNTY, IT'S 15.2 MILES IN 22 YEARS OF WORKING WITH THE CURRENT CONSULTANT.

YEAH, OKAY. I'LL I'LL I'LL LET. BE HAPPY TO. THANKS FOR YOUR WORK.

YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY INTERESTING. I WATCHED WHEN YOU PASSED THAT OUT BECAUSE I'VE NEVER CONSIDERED MYSELF A GLASS HALF FULL GUY, BUT I THINK I AM IT COMPARED TO YOU. AND WE'LL GO THROUGH THAT HERE IN A MINUTE.

SO I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING TO THIS THE COURT.

I, I GOT BUT I GOT TO TELL YOU, I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT THIS IS ON OUR AGENDA TODAY.

AND THE REASON IS THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH VERY IMPORTANT ISSUES.

AND EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT. AND WITHOUT A PROPER PROCEDURE AND WITHOUT PROPER ANALYSIS, RHODES IS PROBABLY THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE IN THE COUNTY.

YOU'RE RIGHT. EVERYBODY COMPLAINS ABOUT IT. I SAID A FEW WEEKS AGO IN COURT, 90% OF OUR PEOPLE ARE UNHAPPY WITH OUR RHODES.

LET'S BUILD ROADS. WE ALL AGREE WITH THAT. OKAY.

BUT AN ENDING AS 20 YEAR RELATIONSHIP, WHICH I THINK IS SUCCESSFUL.

YOU DON'T I THINK IS ALSO A HUGE ISSUE. IN FACT, WHEN I INTERVIEWED TNB AND THEY WERE VERY PROUD OF THEIR LONG TERM RELATIONSHIPS. I ASKED ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN, WELL, WE'RE PROUD OF OUR LONG TERM RELATIONSHIP AND EXPLAINED WHAT WE'VE DONE WITH IT'S FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS. AND I SAID, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? HE SAID, I'D KEEP. IT'S. THAT WAS THE RESPONSE.

OKAY, THAT'S NOT TO SETTLE THIS, BUT IT'S JUST A POINT.

THIS IS A BIG DEAL. DROPPING A 20 YEAR RELATIONSHIP, THEY'D SAY DROPPING A 20 YEAR RELATIONSHIP WITH HAYS COUNTY OR WILLIAMSON COUNTY IS A HUGE DEAL FOR THEM, I GET IT. IT IS. SO LET'S LOOK AT IT AND LET'S BE CAREFUL.

BUT THIS IS ON THE AGENDA. SO WE GOT TO ADDRESS IT.

AND I WANT TO I WANT TO SAY REAL CLEARLY, NOTHING I'M ABOUT TO SAY IS DEEMED TO DENIGRATE H N, T, B OR THEIR PEOPLE. LOOK, THERE ARE GREAT GREAT ENGINEERING COMPANY.

WE USE THEM IN THIS COUNTY. OKAY, I'M NOT SAYING THAT, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK WE'RE THERE.

YOU KNOW, ONE THING, BEFORE I REALLY JUMP INTO WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY, AND I'M SORRY I DIDN'T HAVE MY DUE.

I ALWAYS DO MORE OF A PROFESSIONAL JOB THAN I DO.

SORRY, I DON'T HAVE THE SLIDES. WE'LL GET TO THEM IN A MINUTE.

BUT THIS COUNTY DID NOTHING ON ROADS, IN MY OPINION, FROM 2003 TO 2000 OR 2023 TO 2025. I DON'T KNOW WHY, BUT IT DIDN'T. SO THAT'S THAT.

MAYBE THAT'S ALL JOHN POLLSTER'S FAULT, I DON'T KNOW.

BUT THIS COURT DIDN'T DO ANYTHING THAT I SAW.

AND I WAS SITTING IN EVERY COURT MEETING FOR TWO YEARS AFTER THE 2021 TRIP.

BONDS WERE AUTHORIZED. I JUST WANT ONE CLARIFICATION.

WE DID ISSUE $11.5 MILLION OF ENGINEERING CONTRACTS IN 2023.

GREAT. THANK YOU. SO I'M JUST SAYING IT'S NOT NOTHING.

IT JUST WASN'T ENOUGH. ABSOLUTELY. I WOULD NOT ARGUE THERE WAS NOT A PRIORITY ON ROADS.

WOULD YOU AGREE WITH ME? I WOULD SAY THAT HAS TO BE WHAT THE FACTS REFLECT.

YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. PROFESSIONALISM. DUDE, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU.

WHAT. SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE THE JOHN POLSTER, THE HEAD OF ITS ARE DISGUSTING.

AND I'VE TOLD THEM THAT AND I'VE ASKED THEM. I'VE TOLD THEM HE SHOULD APOLOGIZE.

HE SHOULDN'T GET IN CONTACT WITH OUR WITH ANY CAMPAIGN IN THE COUNTY, PERIOD.

I DON'T CARE WHO IT IS. AND IN FACT, IF WE WANTED TO ADOPT RULES OF PROFESSIONALISM FOR OUR CONTRACTORS, I'LL VOLUNTEER FOR THE COMMITTEE TO DRAFT THEM BECAUSE IT'S INEXCUSABLE.

IT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE. BUT THERE'S I'LL GIVE YOU FIVE REASONS.

YOU KNOW HOW I LIKE TO COUNT REASONS. OKAY. I'LL GIVE YOU FIVE REASONS WHY I CAN'T SUPPORT WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING.

OKAY? OKAY. FIRST THIS IS THE PROCESS IS WRONG.

IT'S THE WRONG WAY TO GET TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE.

FIRST OF ALL, THERE WAS NO RFQ WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS A FEW YEARS AGO OR A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, WE SENT OUT AN RFQ, WE SENT OUT PROPOSALS. NOBODY.

NOBODY APPLIED. I BET IF WE WOULD HAVE WORKED HARDER, WE PROBABLY GOT SOMEBODY TO APPLY.

BUT WE DIDN'T. OKAY, BUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT AN RFQ, WHAT DO YOU DO? YOU HAVE A WAY TO EVALUATE PEOPLE. THERE'S USUALLY A GRID THAT SAYS, OKAY NUMBER OF OFFICES GETS FIVE POINTS, YOU KNOW, NUMBER OF COUNTIES IT REPRESENTS GETS THREE POINTS. AND YOU HAVE ALL THIS AND YOU TRY TO COME UP WITH SOME. THERE'S NOTHING LIKE THAT.

WE DIDN'T HAVE A WORKSHOP TO DISCUSS THIS AFTER OUR MEETING IN AT THE END OF MARCH, WHERE YOU PROPOSED A DIFFERENT COMPANY.

[03:55:07]

OKAY, I TOLD YOU, I SAID, WHY DON'T WE DO A WORKSHOP ON THIS? ZERO. NO. NO WORKSHOP, NO NOTHING. OKAY. SO THIS TO ME IS JUST REMINISCENT OF WHAT WE FACED IN MARCH.

ONLY THEN IT WAS DQM. IT'S NOW. TODAY IT'S HNTB.

I DON'T KNOW WHY. I MEAN, YOU MUST HAVE THOUGHT THEY WERE BETTER THAN THEN, BUT I DON'T KNOW.

OKAY, I OBJECTED AT THAT TIME. IT'S BETTER THIS TIME BECAUSE AT LEAST I GOT TO INTERVIEW THESE GUYS BEFORE THE MEETING.

SO WE'VE IMPROVED A LITTLE BIT, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK THERE'S A RIGHT WAY TO DO IT.

THERE'S A TWO STEP PROCESS ON THIS. IT'S OUTLINED IN STATUTE THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 2254.004.

AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS FOLLOWED IN THIS CASE.

THE STATEMENT SET FORTH IN THE RESOLUTION RESOLUTION THAT WE HAVE FOLLOWED THOSE PROCEDURES I DON'T THINK ARE ACCURATE.

I THINK THEY'RE INCORRECT. THE FIRST STEP IS THAT WE DECIDE AND SELECT, AND THIS IS RIGHT OUT OF THE STATUTE, SELECT THE MOST HIGHLY QUALIFIED PROVIDER OF APPLICABLE SERVICES BASED ON DEMONSTRATED COMPETENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS.

WHO DID THIS? I DIDN'T. MY OPINION WASN'T ASKED WHO DID IT, I DON'T KNOW.

WAS IT OUR COUNTY ENGINEER? I'VE LOOKED AT HER JOB DESCRIPTION.

IT'S NOT TO REPLACE THE ENGINEER. WE COULD GIVE HER THAT AUTHORITY.

WE DIDN'T. OKAY, SO WHO DID THIS? I KNOW I DIDN'T HAVE ANY INPUT ON THAT QUESTION.

THE SECOND STEP IS THEN, AFTER WE'VE IDENTIFIED THE MOST QUALIFIED CONTRACTOR IS TO ATTEMPT TO NEGOTIATE WITH WITH THAT PROVIDER A CONTRACT AT A FAIR AND REASONABLE PRICE.

WHO DID THIS? IT SAYS OUR LEGAL REVIEW WAS BY DANIEL REY.

OKAY. DANIEL'S A GOOD LAWYER, I LIKE HIM. HE DOES A GOOD JOB.

I HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES WITH THAT CONTRACT. I DIDN'T GET ANY ANSWERS WHEN WE DID AN MOU THAT WE JUST APPROVED TODAY, WE BROUGHT IT TO THE COURT THREE TIMES. EVERYBODY GOT THEIR INPUT.

EVERYBODY GOT TO TALK ABOUT IT. NOT HERE. WE'RE PRESENTED WITH A CONTRACT AND SAID, HERE YOU GO.

I KNOW I GOT HANDED BY THE AUDITOR EITHER FRIDAY OR MONDAY A LIST OF COMMENTS WHICH IF YOU WANT THEM, I'LL GIVE THEM TO YOU. THAT SAID, HEY, I GOT SOME ISSUES WITH THIS CONTRACT.

I SAW ONE OF THEM WAS ADDRESSED, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY ONE.

AND THAT WAS A SMALL ONE. SO THE AUDITOR HAS COMMENTS, WHICH I'VE GOT RIGHT HERE IF YOU WANT TO SEE THEM.

THE AUDITOR HAS COMMENTS, I HAVE COMMENTS, BUT WHO NEGOTIATED THE CONTRACT? IT CERTAINLY WAS WITH NO INPUT FROM ME. AND THAT'S OKAY.

I'M NOT THE SMARTEST GUY IN THE WORLD, OKAY. BUT GENERALLY WE TRY TO GET THE COURT'S INPUT ON THIS.

SO WE DIDN'T DO THAT. WE HAVEN'T FOLLOWED THE PROCEDURE.

AND THE BOTTOM LINE IS, ACCORDING TO THE GOVERNMENT CODE.

2254.005, FAILURE TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE CAN RENDER THE CONTRACT VOID.

I'M NOT SAYING IT WILL, BUT IT COULD. OKAY. THAT'S RIGHT IN THE STATUTE.

BOTTOM LINE, THE PROCESS TO GET US HERE IS WRONG.

SO THE SECOND REASON AND GUYS, PLEASE ACCEPT MY HUMBLE APOLOGIES FOR WHAT I'M ABOUT TO SAY.

I'M NOT CONVINCED HNB IS, QUOTE, THE MOST HIGHLY QUALIFIED PROVIDER OF SERVICES BASED UPON DEMONSTRATED EVIDENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS, WHICH IS WHAT THE STATUTE REQUIRES. OKAY. THAT'S STEP NUMBER ONE.

I'M SURE YOU'RE A GREAT COMPANY. NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.

WE USE YOU. WE WOULDN'T USE ANYBODY BUT A GREAT COMPANY.

BUT WE ARE BEING ASKED HERE TO SEVER A SUCCESSFUL 20 YEAR RELATIONSHIP.

AND WE BETTER BE SURE WE'RE UPGRADING IF WE GET IT.

NOW, HERE'S WHERE I GET TO. IF WE DID AN RFQ, WE WOULD HAVE A SCALE WE.

WE WOULD. WHOEVER REVIEWED IT WOULD SAY, WELL, THIS WAS WORTH THIS MANY AND THIS MANY, AND YOU'RE GOING TO THAT'S NOT SCIENTIFIC, BUT IT HELPS YOU LOOK AT IT. OKAY, WE DIDN'T DO THAT.

SO IT'S INTERESTING WHEN I SAY SOME OF US LOOK AT THE GLASS HALF FULL, SOME OF IT LOOK AT HALF EMPTY.

SO I'VE GOT SOME SLIDES IN. MEREDITH IF YOU COULD PUT MY SLIDES UP THERE.

INTERESTING SLIDES. I DID SLIDES. THANK YOU. AND THE OTHER AMAZING THING, THEY'RE BASICALLY THE SAME SLIDES YOU HAVE, RIGHT? SO THAT'S WHY I SAY HOW DO YOU LOOK AT THINGS? OKAY. SO OH, AND BY THE WAY HERE, IF ANYBODY WANTS COPIES, I MADE COPIES.

OKAY. BUT AGAIN, YOU WILL FIND THESE VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT COMMISSIONER STACY PASSED OUT A MINUTE AGO.

OKAY. OKAY. SO LET'S LET'S LOOK AT THESE SLIDES.

SO I TRIED TO GET, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHY THESE WEREN'T SENT TO YOU AND THE JUDGE.

I HAVE NO IDEA THAT I'LL LEAVE THAT UP TO MR. POLSTER TO ANSWER. HE SHOULD HAVE. OKAY. BECAUSE ANYTHING THAT'S OPEN TO ONE MEMBER OF THE COURT SHOULD BE OPEN TO THE OTHER MEMBER OF THE COURT.

[04:00:05]

AND THE IDEA OF SAYING WE CAN'T SHOW THIS TO A COURT MEMBER IS ANATHEMA TO ALL OF US.

OKAY. SO ROAD FUNDING BOOM. HERE IT IS. HAYS COUNTY, I THINK THIS IS THE SAME THING.

YOU LOOKED AT THE SAME THING YOU BROUGHT UP. OKAY.

SO AND THIS WAS PREPARED BY THE GUYS AT HNTB.

THEY. THIS WAS NOT PREPARED. THIS WAS FROM A WHITE PAPER THAT H B GAVE TO COMMISSIONER I'VE ELLIS.

YES, BUT WHO PREPARED IT? NO, NO, I'M JUST SAYING YOU SAID THIS WAS PREPARED BY.

THIS WAS PREPARED BY. IT'S BASED UPON. NO, A WHITE PAPER.

NO. THIS WAS ON AN EMAIL SENT BY HNTB. NO, THE.

I CAN SHOW YOU THE EMAIL I SENT. I GAVE IT TO YOU.

OKAY. THE EMAIL IS FROM THE TEX DOT THE. I GAVE YOU THE WHITE PAPER THAT THIS IS BASED ON AT&T B DID NOT BUILD THIS.

THEY SENT IT UNDER THEIR EMAIL. NO LOOK AT THE EMAIL.

IT SAYS EMAIL. LET'S GET THE EMAIL. HERE IT IS.

I'M LOOKING AT AN EMAIL. FROM A GENTLEMAN NAMED SUMMER B LAUGHTON TO ELVIS. STEPHEN ELVIS AT TEX DOT DATED FEBRUARY 23RD OF THIS YEAR.

90229. THAT DOCUMENT IS THE DOCUMENT I GAVE YOU, WHICH IS A WHITE PAPER.

HERE IT SAYS, GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU FOR MEETING WITH US.

AT THE CONCLUSION OF THIS MEETING, YOU ASKED US TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ON THE VALUE OF THE VARIOUS PROGRAMS AND AMOUNTS OF ADDITIONAL FUNDING WE WERE ABLE TO LEVERAGE.

ATTACHED IS THAT SUMMARY INFORMATION? THAT'S THIS THAT WAS WHAT IT WAS ATTACHED.

NO, THAT IS FROM JOHN PAUL. WE HAVE A DISAGREEMENT BECAUSE IT HAS THE SAME INFORMATION.

OKAY. IT HAS THE SAME EXACT INFORMATION. OKAY.

IT'S JUST THAT H AND TB DID NOT PROVIDE THAT.

THAT'S NOT WHAT I WAS TOLD. OKAY. WELL, THIS IS WHAT THEY PROVIDED, WHICH IS WHY I HANDED IT TO YOU. ALL RIGHT. GREAT. SO LET'S LOOK AT THESE NUMBERS AGAIN.

IS THE GLASS HALF FULL OR HALF EMPTY? 131,000,000.4 IN 2016 BOND SALES.

THEY LEVERAGED IT WITH $77 MILLION. OKAY. NUMBER TWO PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM BOND AMOUNT 243 MILLION.

THEY LEVERAGED IT WITH 95 MILLION IN TEXDOT PROCESS STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDS.

2025 CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, WHICH I ASSUME WERE NOT APPROVED BY THE VOTERS.

OR WERE THEY? DO YOU GUYS KNOW? IT'S VERY COMPLICATED.

THE THE BOND WAS DEEMED LIKE A JUDGE UNDID THE BOND.

AND SO THEY DID A CO OKAY. SO THEY LEVERAGED 7.1 MILLION IN TEXDOT PROCESS, STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDING.

AND THEN AT THE BOTTOM INVESTMENT GRAND TOTAL 614.4.

LEVERAGED FUNDS. GRAND TOTAL 179.1. WHICH I THINK IS WHAT YOU SHOWED.

YES. OKAY. LET'S GO TO THE NEXT ONE. WILLIAMSON COUNTY 213 BOND SALE 275 MILLION 219. BOND SALE 412 MILLION. 2023 BOND SALE 825 MILLION.

BY THE WAY, LET'S NOT LOSE TRACK OF THE FACT THAT WILLIAMSON COUNTY, SINCE 2013 ISSUED $1.5 BILLION IN ROAD BONDS SINCE 2000, ITS 2 BILLION, ACCORDING TO THEIR WHITE PAPER.

OKAY, WELL, THIS SAYS 2013. WAS THIS 2019? WAS THIS 2023? WAS THIS. NO I AGREE. I WAS JUST GOING $1.5 BILLION.

YEAH. I WAS JUST GOING ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE WHITE PAPER WHERE IT SAID 2 BILLION. OKAY.

WELL, AGAIN, BUT 1,000,000,005 SINCE 2013. OKAY.

SINCE 2013, WE'VE AUTHORIZED 115 MILLION, 150 MILLION.

WE'VE ISSUED 50. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU GET A LOT BETTER RESULTS IF YOU'RE USING A $1.5 BILLION IN BOND FUNDS.

YES. OKAY. SO LET'S KEEP GOING. OKAY. SO WHAT THEY SHOW THERE IS ON WILLIAMSON COUNTY, THEY HAVE THE 1.5 MILLION INVESTMENT, 190.6 MILLION LEVERAGED.

OKAY, LET'S GO TO THE NEXT ONE, ROCKWALL COUNTY.

I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS YOU SAW, BUT IT LOOKS CLOSE.

OKAY. 2014 PARTNERSHIP BOND PROGRAM, 17.25 MILLION LEVERAGED IN THE AMOUNT OF $91.9 MILLION. OKAY. YEAH. 2008 PARTNERSHIP BOND PROGRAM, 100 MILLION.

TO DATE, WE'VE SPENT 39 MILLION IN BOND EXPENDITURES.

WE'VE LEVERAGED $321.892 MILLION. AND I HAVE A WHO PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT?

[04:05:01]

IT WAS JOHN POLSTER, AND IT LOOKS THE EXACT SAME AS THE OTHER TWO.

BUT YOU CAN CONTINUE. OKAY. OKAY. LOOK, IF I'M WRONG, I'M WRONG.

I'VE NEVER BEEN AFRAID TO ADMIT I'M WRONG. IF ANYBODY OUT THERE IS LISTENING TO THIS, WHEN LAUREN LICHTY IS WRONG, IF YOU SHOW ME, I WILL ADMIT IT. AND IF I'M WRONG, I'M WRONG.

BUT THE NUMBERS WERE THE SAME. YOU PRESENTED THEM. THEY'RE THE SAME NUMBERS TO ME. I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH CRITICIZING ME.

ARE YOU LAUGHING AT ME? YES, I AM SMILING. YOU'RE SMILING.

BE CAREFUL. I WON'T SMILE AT YOU, BOBBY. OKAY, SO 2023, WE'RE JUST GETTING STARTED.

WE DID 150 MILLION. SO. INVESTMENT GRAND TOTAL 59.6 MILLION.

LEVERAGED GRAND TOTAL FOR 25.8. AVERAGE RETURN 7.1.

LET'S GO TO THE NEXT PAGE. OKAY, SO THIS IS THE PART WHERE I THINK HOW DO YOU LOOK AT THINGS? OKAY. BECAUSE I'VE HEARD MULTIPLE TIMES WHILE SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COURT, ALL WE'RE DOING IS BUILDING I-30.

I WISH WE WERE BUILDING OTHER THINGS. I WANTED TO START FM 750 IN HEATH SOUTH FIVE YEARS AGO, BUT IT WAS FRUSTRATED BY THE HEATH CITY COUNCIL OR SOMEONE.

IT STOPPED ANYWAY. WE DIDN'T DO IT. SO. BUT WHAT HAVE WE DONE HERE? THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY MONEY FOR THE LANES OF I-30.

OKAY, CORRECT. THIS EXACT SAME NUMBERS INCLUDES MONEY TO PREPARE FOR THE LANES ON I-30.

FOR EXAMPLE, I-30 551 I-30 RAMP REVERSALS. THOSE WERE THINGS THAT HELPED SET THE TABLE FOR THE I-30 IN PAIRS. AND BY THE WAY, JUST SO I'M COMPLETELY HONEST AND TRANSPARENT, WHEN THEY STARTED DOING ALL THOSE OVERPASSES, IT WAS A PRIOR COURT THAT DID IT. AND I WENT AND COMPLAINED TO THE PERSON WHO WAS THEN THE JUDGE.

AND I SAID, IN 2008, YOU SAID YOU WERE GOING TO BUILD 549 IN HEATH, TEXAS, WITH PART OF THIS MONEY, AND YOU HAVEN'T DONE IT, AND ALL YOU'VE DONE IS FOCUSED ON OVERPASSES ON I-30.

AND HIS RESPONSE WAS, THAT'S WHERE WE THINK THAT MONEY NEEDS TO GO.

THAT WAS NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. AND IT'S THEY DON'T THEY DON'T HAVE SOME POWER TO DIRECT THE COURT.

THAT WAS A COURT DECISION. AND THAT COURT MADE THESE DECISIONS.

SO THERE WE DID. SO WE SHOW IN 2004 THE BOTTOM NUMBER IS 39 MILLION.

THAT'S. I DON'T THINK THAT'S RIGHT. NO, IT IS.

321. THE ONLY THING DIFFERENT BETWEEN YOUR SPREADSHEET AND MINE IS THAT I DIDN'T ACCOUNT FOR 205 BECAUSE I WAS ACCOUNTING FOR PROJECTS THAT WERE ACTUALLY DONE.

205 IS CURRENTLY IN THE DRAFT OF THE UTP. IT WILL PROBABLY BE FUNDED, BUT THAT DRAFT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED, AND IT WILL BE APPROVED IN THE NEXT 45 TO 60 DAYS.

SO I'M SAYING THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT 205 DOESN'T GET FUNDED.

IT'S VERY, VERY LOW AT THIS POINT. YEAH, I GOT THAT'S THE ONLY DIFFERENCE.

THAT SAID FROM FORWARDED BY TO FROM TEXDOT THAT SAYS THEY'RE MOVING UP THE DATE TO JUNE 1ST OF 2027, BUT THE UTP STILL HAS TO BE APPROVED. OKAY. SO OKAY, AGAIN, DEPENDS HOW YOU LOOK AT THE WORLD HALF FULL OR HALF EMPTY AND I APPRECIATE YOUR CORRECTING ME. SO LET'S GO TO THE NEXT ONE. OKAY.

2008. NO, THERE WAS I GAVE YOU ANOTHER. OKAY.

WELL, 2008, IT'S ON THE THE THINGS I PASSED OUT THERE.

OKAY. 2008 COUNTY ROAD PROGRAM. IT'S IT SAYS 2004 AT THE TOP.

I DON'T KNOW WHY BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW TO RUN A COPIER.

BUT IN THERE, IT SAYS THERE, IT LISTS EVERYTHING WE DID AND YOU SEE THEM, WE DID AGAIN ANOTHER, THIS IS THE IH359 INTERCHANGE. I'VE TOLD YOU HOW I FEEL ABOUT THAT STATE HIGHWAY 66.

WE'VE INVESTED 5.4. WE'VE LEVERAGED 22,000,740 NORTH.

WE'VE INVESTED ZERO. AND WE LEVERAGED 18.4577 40 SOUTH WE INVESTED 6453.

THAT'S IN HEATH FROM 1142 1140. AND THAT WAS APPARENTLY WE DIDN'T GET ANY MONEY FROM THEM.

THAT WAS JUST OUR BOND MONEY. 3559 I 30 TO 66 WE PUT IN 1.96, WE GOT 11.2505492 76 TO 205, WHICH BY THE WAY IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW.

WE PUT IN 1.1 MILLION. THEY'RE PUTTING IN 31 MILLION.

AND IT GOES ON AND ON AND ON. I LOOK AT THIS AND I THINK ACTUALLY THEY'VE HAD A LOT OF GREAT SUCCESS BECAUSE THEY SHOW ON 2008, IT SAYS 2004 AGAIN AT THE TOP. BUT THAT'S WRONG BECAUSE I COPIED IT WRONG.

IT SAYS 39 MILLION INVESTED FROM 2008 AND 321 MILLION LEVERAGED.

I SAY THAT'S A GREAT SUCCESS. NOW, YOU MIGHT SAY IT WAS ALL ON I 30 AND I AS I TOLD YOU, I DISAGREED WITH THEM BUILDING ALL THOSE INTERCHANGES BECAUSE I THOUGHT THEY SHOULD HAVE BUILT A ROAD IN HEATH, BUT THEY DIDN'T. THAT WAS NOT IT'S THAT WAS THEM.

[04:10:01]

SO NOW AND THIS AND THIS MONEY THAT'S SHOWN HERE DOESN'T INCLUDE MONEY TO PAVE I-30 LANES.

OKAY. OKAY. SO I LOOK AT THIS REAL SIMPLY AND I SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT THE BOTTOM LINE IS? I'M NOT SURE HNTB IS THE BEST PEOPLE FOR US. AGAIN, NO DISRESPECT, GUYS, BUT WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO IS DEMONSTRATE A CLEARLY THAT THEY'RE THE MOST HIGHLY QUALIFIED PROVIDER. I LOOK AT WHAT IT'S HAS DONE FOR US WITH DOLLARS.

AND AGAIN, LOOK AT THE AMOUNT OF BOND DOLLARS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

GUYS, THEY'RE NOT EVEN WE'RE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO HAYS COUNTY OR WILLIAMSON COUNTY.

YEAH, I AGREE. AND SO IF WE WANT TO GET MORE MORE ROADS, LET'S ISSUE MORE BONDS.

LET'S RAISE LET'S DO THAT. ANYBODY WANT TO ISSUE ANOTHER BOND PROGRAM.

IF IF WE GET GOING, I DO. OKAY. SO THIRD REASON.

CAN WE STOP ON REASON TWO BECAUSE THEY'RE WRITTEN. NO YOU CAN'T.

OKAY. OKAY. I SAID I HAD THREE FIVE REASONS. REASON NUMBER THREE.

I'M NOT CONVINCED THIS IS A REASONABLE PRICE.

OKAY. TASK ORDERS ZERO ONE AND ZERO TWO SPECIFY A PRICE.

THE ANNUAL FEE IS THREE TIMES WHAT WE'RE PAYING.

IT'S WITHIN WITHIN ROUNDING ERRORS. OKAY, IT'S 59,000 A MONTH INSTEAD OF 2000 A MONTH.

OKAY, SO THREE TIMES WHAT WE'RE PAYING THEM, PLUS A FIRST YEAR TRANSITION FEE OF $381,000, WHICH MEANS THE FIRST YEAR WE'RE GOING TO PAY THEM $1,096,076.

APPRECIATE IT GUYS, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT'S A FAIR AND REASONABLE PRICE, BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE GETTING RIGHT NOW FOR OUR SERVICES IS WE'RE PAYING 240 000 A YEAR. OKAY. WHICH I THINK IS FAIR. I'M SURE IF WE ISSUED MORE BONDS THAT WOULD GO UP.

I'M SURE IT WOULD, BUT WE'RE NOT ISSUING MORE BONDS.

OKAY. WAS IT? AND THEN I ASK WHO NEGOTIATED THIS PRICE? AGAIN, WE WENT THROUGH THIS. WE JUST GOT DONE GOING THROUGH THIS.

WE DO THIS ALL THE TIME. WE GO BACK, WE NEGOTIATE.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS WAS.

MAYBE YOU WENT BY, WENT WENT BACK AND FORTH FIVE TIMES.

I DON'T KNOW, BUT NOBODY'S TOLD US. MAYBE YOU JUST TOOK WHAT THEY SAID AND SAID, OKAY, THAT'S WHAT IT'LL BE.

BUT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT AT A FAIR AND REASONABLE PRICE.

I'VE SEEN NO EVIDENCE OF NEGOTIATION. THE FOURTH POINT, I'M NOT SURE WE'VE NEGOTIATED THE CONTRACT WE SHOULD ACCEPT NOW.

TODAY WE WERE HANDED AN ADDENDUM WHICH TRIES TO CLEAR UP SOME ISSUES.

I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT, BUT. HAVE ALL THE PARTIES HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE COMMENTS? I DIDN'T I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS DID. YOU MAY HAVE COMMISSIONER STACY, THE AUDITOR, I SAID GAVE ME COMMENTS BEFORE SHE LEFT.

WHAT WAS THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS? HOW MANY DRAFTS WENT BACK AND FORTH? DID THEY MAKE ALL OUR COMMENTS? HAVE THEY AGREED TO ALL OUR COMMENTS? WE'RE BEING ASKED TO ACCEPT A CONTRACT TODAY.

BOTTOM LINE, I DON'T THINK THAT WE'VE NEGOTIATED AN ACCEPTABLE CONTRACT.

AND JUST TO GIVE YOU ONE TINY EXAMPLE, I COULDN'T HELP BUT BRING THIS UP.

OKAY. THEY HAVE SAID ON THE CONTRACT. OH, WHERE IS IT PAGE.

IT'S UNDER TASK FOUR. THEY WILL MEET FOUR TIMES PER YEAR WITH REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES INDIVIDUALLY.

FOUR TIMES PER YEAR. CITY OF ROCKWELL. CITY OF FAYETTE.

CITY OF ROYSE CITY AND CITY OF ROWLETT. THERE'S NO MCLENDON CHISHOLM.

Y'ALL. THERE'S TWO OTHER BIG CITIES, AND THEY HAPPEN TO BE IN PRECINCT THREE.

WHOEVER NEGOTIATED THIS CONTRACT DIDN'T BOTHER TO INCLUDE THAT.

AND I KNOW IT'S PROBABLY AN OVERSIGHT, BUT MY POINT IS LET'S NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT THAT WORKS IF WE'RE GOING TO NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT.

OKAY. FIVE. THE FINAL REASON. MY FINAL REASON.

NUMBER FIVE. THEN YOU CAN COMMENT. I CAN'T SUPPORT THEIR THEIR SELECTION BECAUSE OF A LACK OF COLLABORATION WITH OUR INFRASTRUCTURE CONSORTIUM.

WE JUST GOT DONE DOING A STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL NUMBER ONE, PROMOTE TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY IN GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS.

GOAL NUMBER TWO, STRENGTHEN LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL COLLABORATION.

TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NOBODY SAID TO THE COMMISSION, TO THE CONSORTIUM, HEY, CAN YOU GUYS EACH PUT IN ONE REP IN FROM A CITY AND LET'S TALK ABOUT WHO WE'RE GOING TO HIRE FOR ROAD CONSORTIUM FOR ROAD CONSULTANT.

I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THAT. IN FACT, WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS NOW FOR AT LEAST A COUPLE MONTHS.

OKAY. AND WE HAD A JUNE MEETING OF THE ROAD CONSORTIUM.

WE HAD A JULY MEETING OF THE ROAD CONSORTIUM.

THIS WAS NEVER MENTIONED. THIS WAS NEVER BROUGHT UP FOR SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBER, SOME OF YOU MAY NOT HAVE BEEN THERE, BUT ABOUT A YEAR OR SO AGO, WE WENT AROUND THE ROOM AND I THINK, JUDGE, YOU HAD ACTUALLY ASKED,

[04:15:03]

ARE YOU HAPPY WITH. IT'S NOT UNANIMOUS, BUT VIRTUALLY UNANIMOUS.

YEAH, WE'RE HAPPY WITH IT. YES. SO WE WANT TO COLLABORATE.

WE WANT TO WORK WITH OUR PARTNERS. WE WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT.

AND WHAT ARE WE JUST GOING TO LET THEM KNOW ON AUGUST AT THE MEETING.

HEY, WE GOT A NEW CONSULTANT. I GUESS THAT'S THE PLAN AGAIN.

THAT'S TO ME, I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO DO THINGS.

YOU KNOW, I'VE ALWAYS SAID THAT I WILL DO WHAT I THINK IS BEST FOR THE COUNTY.

AND AFTER OUR LAST MEETING IN MARCH, I TOLD COMMISSIONER STACEY THAT I WILL GIVE ANYBODY A FAIR SHAKE, AND I AND I MEAN IT, AND I WILL DO WHAT I THINK IS BEST FOR THE COUNTY, EVEN IF IT DOESN'T HELP ME POLITICALLY.

BUT WE'VE GOT A 20 YEAR RELATIONSHIP THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.

AND WE GOT ROADS THAT ARE REALLY IMPORTANT AND WE NEED TO DO IT PROPERLY.

WE PROPERLY, WE NEED TO DO IT CORRECTLY AND IN A GOOD PROCESS.

AND WHERE WE'RE BEING ASKED TO CHANGE TO A CONSULTANT, WHERE I DON'T SEE THE RESULTS FROM THE LEVERAGING REPORT, THEY'VE DONE IT, WHETHER IT WAS CONDENSED FROM A WHITE PAPER OR WHETHER IT WAS PUT TOGETHER BY THEM.

YOU'RE NOT CONTESTING THE NUMBERS. OKAY. I DON'T SEE THE RESULTS THAT THEY'VE PROVIDED.

HAYS COUNTY IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY COMPARED TO THE RESULTS WE'VE GOT IN ROCKWALL COUNTY.

AND SO FOR ALL THOSE REASONS, I CAN'T JUSTIFY ENTERING INTO A CONTRACT TO TRIPLE THE PRICE.

OKAY. SO LET'S START WITH WILLIAMSON COUNTY ON THE REASON THAT GIVING YOU THE WHITE PAPER IS REALLY IMPORTANT IS THE 250 PROJECTS.

ONLY 50 OF THEM WERE ON SYSTEM, SO THEY WEREN'T DESIGNING THEIR BONDS FOR LEVERAGING, THEY WERE DESIGNING THEIR BONDS TO BUILD ROADS.

SO THAT LEVERAGING DISCREPANCY IS A HUGE PORTION OF WHY YOU ONLY SEE THESE TEX DOT ROADS BEING AVERAGED TO THE $1.75 MILLION. SO THEY HAD 50 ON SYSTEM PROJECTS AND 200 NON ON SYSTEM.

LOOK AT HOW MANY ON SYSTEM PROJECTS WE HAVE. IT DOESN'T EVEN GET CLOSE TO 50.

I AGREE. DOESN'T EVEN GET CLOSE TO 50. AND YET WE'VE HAD A LOT MORE LEVERAGE FUNDS.

THE OTHER THING IS THIS $243 MILLION WITH HAYS COUNTY WAS AN ACTUAL PARTNERSHIP IN WRITING THEIR TXDOT CONSTRUCTION ON ALMOST EVERY SINGLE TXDOT FACILITY ON ALL THE TEXAS FACILITIES GOT ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION.

IF ALL WE'RE GOING TO DO AND I SAID IT IN MY PRESENTATION, THE LEVERAGING HAS BEEN GREAT.

THERE IS NO DENYING THAT FOR EVERY DOLLAR WE'VE PUT IN, WE'VE GOTTEN MORE BACK THAN THESE OTHER THESE OTHER COUNTIES.

THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT. AND THAT IS THE ONE THING THAT HAS BEEN DONE WELL.

THE PROBLEM IS WAITING FOR LEVERAGING GETS YOU 15 MILES IN 22 YEARS.

WE NEED ROADS THAT PEOPLE CAN DRIVE ON, WHICH IS GOING TO WHICH IS GOING TO HAVE TO CREATE A MORE FACETED APPROACH.

IT'S GOING TO CREATE GOING DIRECTLY TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, GOING TO THE COMMISSION, ACTUALLY TRYING TO GET.

ALL WE'RE DOING NOW IS GOING TO THE RTC AND SAYING, WHAT CAN YOU GIVE US? AND THEN WE'RE TAKING IT. SO OF COURSE, THAT LEVERAGE IS GOING TO BE SUPER HIGH.

AND SO I WOULD JUST SAY THAT YOU'RE YOU'RE NOT COMPARING TRUE APPLES TO APPLES, BECAUSE THE FOCUS OF THESE COUNTIES HAS BEEN TRYING TO GET ROADS IN THE GROUND AND NOT LEVERAGING BECAUSE THEY WOULD JUST DO IT A LOT SLOWER.

THAT 2016 BOND, ALL THAT MONEY IS SPENT AND ALL THOSE PROJECTS ARE DONE.

AND IF HAYES IF WE SPENT THE 614 MILLION THAT HAYES COUNTY HAS DONE ON BONDS, AND IF WE SPENT THE 1.5 BILLION THAT WILLIAMSON COUNTY HAS DONE ON BONDS, WE'D HAVE MORE ROADS BUILT, TOO.

I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU. AND TO TO SAY WE SHOULD GO TO FEDERAL GUYS IF WE'RE BEING SUCCESSFUL WHERE WE ARE, HEY, IF WE WANT TO OPEN IT UP AND START ISSUING MORE ROAD BONDS AND GET MORE DONE AND START BUILDING ROADS.

I'M GAME. LET'S TALK MAN. BUT I JUST I DON'T SEE IT.

COMMISSIONER GILANI. YOU'VE BEEN VERY PATIENT. THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. COMMISSIONER.

I AGREE WITH SOME, NOT WITH OTHERS. I THE. I 30 EXCHANGES AND WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, ABOUT WHERE THIS COURT WENT WITH THAT MONEY. I DID THAT.

DID THIS, DO YOU KNOW THAT THE COURT DID THAT WITHOUT THE DIRECTION OF A CONSULTANT? I MEAN, I CAN'T IMAGINE. I DON'T I KNOW THAT WE JUST DON'T GO OUT AND MAKE DECISIONS TO PUT MONEY ON ROADS WITHOUT OUR CONSULTANT SAYING WHAT'S POSSIBLE OR WHAT SHOULD BE DONE. WELL, I'M SURE THEY DID IT WITH INPUT FROM THE CONSULTANT BECAUSE EVERYTHING WE DO IS WITH INPUT FROM OUR CONSULTANT.

NO. BUT YOUR COMMENT WAS THAT THAT COURT JUST DECIDED TO DO THAT RATHER THAN IT BEING BECAUSE IT'S SAID TO DO THAT? NO, I DIDN'T SAY THAT. I SAID THE COURT DECIDED TO DO IT.

IT'S DIDN'T CONTROL THEM. AND THE REASON I SAID IT IS BECAUSE IN THE 2008 BONDS, THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BUILD A ROAD ON 549 HEATH, TEXAS, AND THEY DIDN'T. AND THAT'S WHY I WENT TO THE JUDGE AT THE TIME AND SAID, WHY AREN'T YOU BUILDING THE ROAD?

[04:20:01]

WHY ARE YOU DOING ALL THESE INTERCHANGES? AND HIS RESPONSE WAS, WELL, WE THINK THIS IS THE BEST WAY TO DO IT. AND I BET THAT WE THINK CAME FROM SOMEBODY'S DIRECTION. THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING AT BECAUSE VERY WELL, BECAUSE I INPUT, I WOULD EXPECT IT DID BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN THAT HAPPEN TO LIKE 1141 THAT SUDDENLY DISAPPEARED. RIGHT. YOU KNOW, WHEN I WAS RUNNING FOR THIS POSITION, BECAUSE SOMEBODY'S DIRECTION WAS, WE SHOULDN'T FUND THAT PROJECT. WE'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS THAT THE COURT DOESN'T REALLY MOVE, DOESN'T GO TO A BOND PROGRAM, DOESN'T ISSUE NEW BONDS WITHOUT DIRECTION FROM ITS CONSULTANT.

SO WE CAN GO BACK IN HISTORY AND WE CAN SAY, WELL, IF WE WANTED TO ISSUE THESE VERY LARGE BONDS, WE WOULD HAVE BUILT MORE ROADS TO I DON'T THINK WE WOULD HAVE, BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE NEEDED PARTNERSHIP FROM TEXDOT.

TO SPEND ANY OF THOSE LARGE BONDS THAT WE PASSED AND WE DIDN'T HAVE IT.

WE DIDN'T HAVE IT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING THROUGH ONE AVENUE OF GETTING FUNDING RIGHT NOW THROUGH THE RTC.

HOW CAN YOU SAY WE DIDN'T HAVE PARTNERSHIP WHEN WE JUST SHOWED HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, 15.2 LANE MILES? WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IF WE'D HAVE ISSUED MORE BONDS TO TRY TO BUILD MORE ROADS, TO BUILD MORE ROADS THAN WE DID BACK THEN, WE DON'T ISSUE BONDS WITHOUT WORKING WITH ITS AND COMING UP WITH A DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT WE THINK WE CAN SPEND WHEN WE ISSUE THEM WITHIN THREE YEARS. IT'S VERY TECHNICAL. WE DON'T ISSUE THOSE BONDS.

WE DON'T ISSUE. WE DON'T JUST SAY, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO DO 500 MILLION AND WE'RE GOING TO BUILD THOSE ROADS BECAUSE THAT'S NOT THE WAY IT WORKS. WE NEED OUR CONSULTANT TO GO GET THE PROJECTS FIRST BEFORE WE GO GET TO THE BONDS.

WE SHOULDN'T BE ISSUING BONDS FOR THINGS THAT WE CAN'T GET IN.

THE UTP IS WHERE I'M HEADED. AND WE AND, AND OUR PROCESS THAT WE'RE DOING HERE TODAY IS BROKEN.

IN MY OPINION. IT STARTED TO PICK UP SOME STEAM HERE LATELY, BUT IT'S BROKEN BECAUSE WE'LL 2021 WE ISSUED BONDS AND THEN NOTHING HAPPENS.

NOTHING. THIS COURT COULD HAVE ISSUED BOND MONEY, BUT FOR WHAT PROJECTS THAT IT'S HAVE READY TO GO FOR US.

WHERE WOULD THAT MONEY HAVE BEEN SPENT? I HAVE NO IDEA BECAUSE WE STRUGGLED TO ISSUE $51 MILLION OUT OF THAT BOND MONEY JUST THIS YEAR FOR PROJECTS.

AND I AND WE'RE AND WE WERE WORRIED THAT WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SPEND 85% OF IT WITHIN THREE YEARS.

THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T ISSUE MORE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PROJECTS READY TO GO.

THAT'S MY CONCERN WITH WHERE WE ARE WITH. IT'S RIGHT NOW THE THE OTHER THING THAT I THINK YOU NEED TO REMEMBER IS THAT MOST OF THE ROAD PROJECTS IN ROCKWALL COUNTY ARE TXDOT ROADS, I KNOW. AND SO WE'VE WE COULD BUILD.

MAYBE WE DID. THEY DID ONE PASS THROUGH PROGRAM.

THAT PASS THROUGH PROGRAM IS NO LONGER OUT THERE.

RIGHT. BUT THEY DID A PASS THROUGH PROGRAM WHERE WE WENT OUT AND WE BUILT A TXDOT ROAD AND THEY'RE PAYING US BACK.

OKAY. SO THEY TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THAT. THAT PROGRAM IS NOT THERE ANYMORE.

IT WAS A IT WAS AN INTERCHANGE. YEP. IT WAS AN INTERCHANGE.

DON'T THINK SO. YEAH. WAS IT OKAY? SHE SAYS IT WAS WHATEVER IT WAS, IT WAS AN INTERCHANGE.

BUT WE SPENT THE MONEY. MY POINT IS. AND IF THAT COULD BE OUT THERE, IF WE COULD DO THAT, I'D SAY LET'S DO IT AGAIN. MY, MY POINT THAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE IS THAT WE AREN'T GETTING ENOUGH PROJECTS FUNDED CURRENTLY TO ISSUE ANY MORE BOND DOLLARS THAN WE'VE ALREADY ISSUED OR HAVE ISSUED IN THE PAST.

IF WE COULD GET MORE PROJECTS FUNDED, THIS COMMUNITY WOULD VOTE FOR MORE BOND DOLLARS FOR ROADS.

IT ALWAYS HAS, AND IT WILL. IF WE CAN PROVE TO THEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO BUILD ROADS.

BUT THE CONFIDENCE HAS BEEN ERODED AWAY BY THREE BONDS THAT HAVE PASSED THAT TOOK FOREVER TO FINISH.

NOT ALL THE PROJECTS LISTED IN THEM. AND IN FEBRUARY OF 2022, HAD THIS COURT DONE IT AND ISSUED $50 MILLION. THEN IN FEBRUARY OF 2023 OR 4, WE WOULD HAVE BEEN READY TO ISSUE HOPEFULLY ANOTHER $2,050 MILLION. AND IN 2026, WE WOULD HAVE BEEN READY TO ISSUE ANOTHER $50 MILLION.

I RESPECTFULLY, COMPLETELY WAS THERE WAS THERE SAT ON ITS HANDS.

WAS THERE A RECOMMENDATION FROM WHAT I WOULD EXPECT FROM THE CONSULTANT? AND I SAT IN THE COURT FOR JUST ABOUT AS LONG AS YOU DID BEFORE I WAS ON THE COURT.

WAS THERE EVER A RECOMMENDATION FROM ITS THAT SAID, HEY, GUYS, YOU NEED TO ISSUE SOME BOND MONEY BECAUSE THESE PROJECTS CAN BE READY TO GO BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I WOULD EXPECT FROM A CONSULTANT WOULD BE TO BE PUSHING, PUSHING THE COURT ALONG.

THE COURT'S GOT A MILLION OTHER THINGS TO DO. AND THIS IS THE ONE JOB THAT IT'S HAS TO DO.

WAS THERE A RECOMMENDATION DURING THAT TIME THAT YOU REMEMBER WHERE IT'S CAME IN AND SAID, HEY, YOU GUYS SHOULD ISSUE SOME BOND DOLLARS BECAUSE WE CAN DO THIS, THIS AND THIS.

NO. AND TO A SLIGHT CORRECTION, WE STILL HADN'T SPENT 2008 BONDS.

I KNOW BACK THEN OH FOUR IS GOING TO EDWARDS ROAD FULLY AWARE.

THAT'S RIGHT. THEY HADN'T SPENT ZERO FOUR HADN'T SPENT ZERO EIGHT. BUT BUT THE I MEAN, BECAUSE THE THREE OF US CAME ON AT THE SAME TIME.

SO THERE WASN'T THE THERE WASN'T THE VOTES TO MOVE FORWARD ALSO.

OKAY. THERE WAS NOT THE VOTES BECAUSE THERE WAS A THERE WAS AN OPINION THAT WE NEEDED TO RELOOK AT HOW THE HOW THE TRIP.

[04:25:04]

20. AND I REMEMBER ALL OF THAT. BUT SO THAT I MEAN, BUT YOU.

SO HE JUST DIDN'T COME AND PRESENT ANYTHING TO THE.

OH, I'M NOT SAYING THAT HE DIDN'T PRESENT. I KNOW I'M NOT SURE.

HE DIDN'T PUBLICLY. I CAN'T REMEMBER THAT. BUT I KNOW THAT THERE WASN'T THE VOTES TO MOVE FORWARD.

I DON'T REMEMBER ANY SITTING IN THIS COURT. I DON'T REMEMBER HIM PRESENTING ANYTHING AND SAYING, YOU HAVE GOT ROADS YOU CAN BUILD IF YOU'D ISSUE SOME BOND MONEY. I DON'T REMEMBER THAT HAPPENING. AND I HAVE A PRETTY DARN GOOD MEMORY, AND I DON'T REMEMBER THAT HAPPENING AT ALL. DURING THE TIME I SAT IN THIS COURT BEFORE I GOT ON HERE. AND I'M NOT SAYING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS WRONG, COMMISSIONER. I JUST HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION OF HOW THIS PROGRAM HAS GONE, IN MY OPINION. AND I LOOK, LOOK, I GET IT'S A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE.

THIS TV DEAL IS MORE EXPENSIVE. AND THERE'S PROBABLY SOME WORK TO DO YET TO LOOK AT A CONTRACT AND TO GET COMFORTABLE WITH IT AND WHATEVER THE COURT'S GOING TO DECIDE TODAY.

BUT WE HAVE HAD A 20 YEAR PARTNERSHIP, AND THAT IS IMPORTANT.

BUT IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT THAT YOU DON'T LET LOYALTY.

CLOUD YOUR DECISIONS BECAUSE LOYALTY JUST FOR LOYALTY'S SAKE ISN'T GREAT.

IT'S JUST NOT IT'S THE SAME WAY WHEN I WAS IN THE CORPORATE WORLD, JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE LOYAL TO SOMEBODY DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE PERFORMING WELL.

JUST BECAUSE THERE'S A LOYALTY CATCH DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY'RE DOING THE JOB WELL. I, I AM DISSATISFIED WITH HOW THIS PROGRAM HAS PROCEEDED.

15.2 LANE MILES OUTSIDE OF I-30 IN 20 SOMETHING YEARS IS NOT WHAT THIS COMMUNITY WANTS.

HOW IS THAT GOING TO SUDDENLY CHANGE WHERE WE'RE GOING TO SUDDENLY FLIP THE SCRIPT AND BUILD ALL THESE ROADS THAT THIS COMMUNITY HAS NEEDED FOR DECADES. HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF MATCHING FUNDS IS WHAT THIS COMMUNITY WANTS.

NO, I GET IT. THEY DO. BUT THEY ALSO WANT HONESTY AND TRANSPARENCY.

AND HONESTY IS TELLING THEM, LOOK, WE CAN WAIT FOREVER AND GET ALL THESE MATCHING FUNDS.

WE CAN WAIT FOR 20 YEARS TO BUILD ANOTHER 15 MILES.

OKAY. THAT'S IF WE'RE GOING TO WAIT FOR IT TO BE 5 TO 1 OR 7 TO 1 OR WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS, THEN YOU'RE GOING TO WAIT FOR THE ROAD. ARE YOU OKAY WAITING FOR THE ROAD FOR ANOTHER DECADE, OR DO YOU WANT US TO PURSUE ANOTHER AVENUE? WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO WITH YOUR MONEY? DO YOU WANT TO PASS ANOTHER BOND AND BUILD ROADS TODAY, OR DO YOU WANT TO WAIT FOR A 5 TO 1 OR 7 TO 1 MATCH? THOSE ARE THE TWO NUMBERS I'VE HEARD THROWN AROUND.

WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO? THAT'S A VALID QUESTION TO ASK, BUT FROM WHAT I GATHER FROM THE COMMUNITY IS THEY'RE DONE WAITING.

THEY'RE DONE WAITING. THEY DON'T WANT TO JUST SPEND THEIR MONEY AND THROW IT OUT THE WINDOW, BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO WAIT ANOTHER DECADE FOR THAT KIND OF MATCH TO HAPPEN.

THEY ARE DONE WAITING, I AGREE. THIS IS WHAT I SAID A MONTH OR TWO AGO.

90% OF OUR PEOPLE ARE UNHAPPY WITH THE ROADS.

UNFORTUNATELY, OTHER THAN ISSUING A LOT MORE BONDS, WHICH I FRANKLY MAY BE IN FAVOR OF, I DON'T KNOW HOW HNTB SOLVES THAT PROBLEM.

AND YOU MAY BE RIGHT. IT MAY BE THAT WE NEED TO GO TO THE COMMUNITY AND SAY, HEY, IF WE'RE GOING TO BUILD THESE ROADS, WE'VE GOT TO ISSUE MORE BONDS. WE NEED TO SPEND WHAT WE HAVE FIRST, BUT WE MAY HAVE TO DO THAT.

AND THEN THAT IS FOR THE COMMUNITY TO DECIDE.

BUT RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE NOT GETTING TO MAKE THAT DECISION BECAUSE WE ARE A ONE TRICK PONY.

THEY'RE NOT GETTING TO MAKE A DECISION ON OTHER AVENUES.

WE'RE GOING TO THE RTC FOR EVERYTHING. THAT'S ALL WE DO.

AND THEN WHEN OUR CONSULTANT SAYS, HEY, GO ISSUE A BOND BECAUSE THE RTC SAYS THEY'LL BUILD THESE FOUR PROJECTS IN THE NEXT DECADE, WE ISSUE A BOND. THERE'S NO CREATIVITY IN OUR PROGRAM RIGHT NOW.

THERE'S MORE AVENUES TO GET MONEY FROM THAN THE ROTC.

THERE JUST IS. OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE DOING IT.

WHY CAN'T WE DO THAT? WHERE'S HNTB GOTTEN IT FROM? THE DOT. THE FEDERAL DOT OF THAT MONEY THAT THEY SHOWED LEVERAGE WAS FROM THE DOT.

NO, THE WHITE PAPER YOU SAW WAS ALL TXDOT PARTNERSHIPS.

OKAY. LOOK, AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO I DON'T I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH TO COMMENT ON WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE DONE.

AND I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO INSULT YOU. SO THANKS.

I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS, BOBBY. YEAH. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER. GLENN. I HAVE A QUESTION. COMMISSIONER LICHTY, YOU SAID, JOHN POSTERS ACTIONS WERE INEXCUSABLE AND NOT ACCEPTABLE.

WHAT WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? INEXCUSABLE AND NOT ACCEPTABLE MEANS HE SHOULD NEVER DO IT AGAIN.

HE SHOULD COME AND APOLOGIZE TO YOU FOR THE LETTER HE WROTE.

AND I'VE ASKED HIM TO DO THAT. HE WON'T DO IT.

I DON'T KNOW WHY HE'S STUBBORN. MAYBE HE'S BULLHEADED, BUT IT IS INEXCUSABLE.

THAT LETTER HE SENT IN FEBRUARY WAS, IN MY OPINION, JUST ABSOLUTELY THE WRONG THING TO DO.

AND I'VE TOLD THEM THAT ON AT LEAST TWO OCCASIONS, AND I'VE ASKED HIM TO COME AND APOLOGIZE TO YOU AND HE WON'T DO IT.

I DON'T KNOW WHY I'M WILLING TO SAY IF I'VE DONE SOMETHING WRONG, I'M WILLING TO APOLOGIZE TO SOMEBODY.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS TO YOU.

YOU ARE, BUT INEXCUSABLE AND UNACCEPTABLE, WHICH I AGREE WITH BOTH OF THOSE ASSESSMENTS DOESN'T MEAN.

[04:30:09]

YOU COME APOLOGIZE, OKAY? NO. OH WELL THEN NO.

NO RAMIFICATIONS. NO NO NOTHING. YOU ACTIVELY TRIED TO GET SOMEBODY UNELECTED THAT HAS A DIFFERENT OPINION, WHETHER THAT'S OPINIONS, RIGHT OR WRONG.

WE HAVE A CONSULTANT WHO ACTIVELY MEDDLED IN AN ELECTION TO, I'M SORRY, TO TWO ELECTIONS.

INEXCUSABLE AND NOT ACCEPTABLE. I AGREE WITH THOSE ASSESSMENTS.

WHEN SOMEBODY DOES SOMETHING INEXCUSABLE AND NOT ACCEPTABLE, I DON'T THINK YOU LET THEM JUST KEEP DOING IT.

I MEAN, I TRULY DON'T. I THINK HE CROSSED CROSSED THE LINE, AND HE DID SO BECAUSE HE WAS ADVOCATING FOR MICHAEL MORRIS, NOT FOR ROCKWALL COUNTY. AND I THINK THAT'S BEEN OBVIOUS, HIS CONNECTION TO THE RTC COMMISSIONER.

RIGHT. IF WE WANT TO SIT AND WAIT, I MEAN, YOU SAY ALL THE TIME, AS WE ALL DO, WE JUST WANT TO BUILD ROADS.

I JUST WANT TO BUILD ROADS. WELL, IF WE KEEP DOING THE SAME THING, WHAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY SAYING IS WE WANT TO GO AT EXACTLY THE SPEED WE'RE GOING.

WE WANT TO DO EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING. IF IT BUILDS A ROAD, GREAT.

IF IT DOESN'T, AT THE END OF THE DECADE, WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO LOOK BACK AND SHOW YOU A 5 TO $1 SAVINGS.

NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING. I'M NOT SAYING LET'S JUST KEEP DOING THE SAME THING AND HAVING THE SAME RESULTS, BECAUSE FROM 2022 TO 2025, THIS COURT DIDN'T ISSUE ANY BONDS.

IT DIDN'T TAKE ANY ACTIONS. LOOK AT THE LIST OF WHAT WE'VE DONE.

OKAY. IN IN MY PRECINCT, I KNOW WE'VE GOT EDWARDS ROAD.

WE'RE PUTTING $10 MILLION INTO IT. WE'VE GOT POETRY ROAD, WHICH BOTH OF THOSE ARE MAJOR COUNTY ROADS.

WE'RE PUTTING OVER, I THINK, $2 MILLION INTO POETRY ROAD.

OKAY. SO WE ARE DOING SOMETHING AND DO WE NEED TO CHANGE STRATEGIES? GREAT. LET'S CHANGE STRATEGIES. I, I'M ALL FOR BUILDING ROADS.

AND AS FAR AS WHAT HE SAID, I'VE TOLD YOU WHAT I THINK ABOUT THAT IF AND AGAIN, IF WE WANT TO DEVELOP, REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE DO TODAY, REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE DO TODAY, IF WE WANT TO DEVELOP A CODE OF ETHICS AND A CODE OF PROFESSIONALISM FOR OUR COUNTY, I'LL BE SITTING ON THE COMMITTEE. I'LL BE RAISING MY HAND TO VOLUNTEER.

AND. AND LET ME TELL YOU, I DON'T THINK WHAT HE DID WAS PROFESSIONAL.

SO SO, COMMISSIONER LICHTY, I DO LIVE IN FATE, BUT I DID NOT RECORD THE PHONE CALL.

YOU SHOULD HAVE HEARD THE PHONE CALL BETWEEN JOHN POLSTER AND MYSELF ABOUT GETTING YOUR ROAD PROJECTS FUNDED.

IF YOU WOULD HAVE HEARD THAT PHONE CALL, I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD HAVE THE OPINION YOU HAVE TODAY ABOUT YOU CHANGING THOSE DIRECTIONS.

THE AMOUNT OF EFFORT IN FIGHTING IT TOOK TO GET SOUTH BEND, PAYNE EDWARDS ROAD AND POETRY ROAD INTO THE FIRST ISSUANCE OF THIS BOND WAS A LIFT THAT FELT LIKE A BURDEN. I WOULD GO HOME TO MY WIFE AND SAY, WHY AM I FIGHTING A CONSULTANT WHEN WE HAVE THE MONEY, NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE THE MONEY, I HAVE A COMMISSIONER THAT SITS RIGHT NEXT TO ME THAT WANTS EXACTLY WHAT I WANT, AND IT JUST IS A FIGHT AND A FIGHT AND A FIGHT.

AND FINALLY I SAID, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK, WE'RE GOING TO GET OUR VOTES.

YOU EITHER PUT THIS IN THE FIRST OR WE'RE GOING TO OUTVOTE YOUR OPINION.

AND HE PUT IT IN THE FIRST ISSUANCE. WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS WE ARE BEING DIRECTED.

WE'RE BEING 100% DIRECTED. IF I WASN'T BULLHEADED AND IF I DIDN'T THINK HE WAS A LIAR, SINCE HE PROVED TO ME IN 2024, HE WAS A LIAR. AND I DON'T TRUST ANYTHING THAT COMES OUT OF HIS MOUTH.

THEN WE WOULD HAVE NEVER BUILT THOSE ROADS BECAUSE HE HAD A PLETHORA OF REASONS WHY WE COULDN'T.

I NEVER GOT ANY PUSHBACK ON EDWARDS OR POETRY ROAD ZERO.

I KNOW, THANKS FOR TAKING CARE OF ME. ALL RIGHT. SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT HERE, BUT I WOULD JUST I WOULD JUST SAY THAT CHANGE IS DIFFICULT.

IT'S HARD. IT'S NOT IT'S IT'S NOT FUN AT ALL.

HAVING BEEN SOMEONE WHO WENT THROUGH LOTS OF, LOTS OF CHANGES IN THE IN THE CORPORATE WORLD.

CHANGE ISN'T AT ANY LEVEL. IT'S EVEN HARDER IN BUREAUCRACY LIKE GOVERNMENT.

IT'S HARD. IT'S DIFFICULT. BUT ARE WE SATISFIED WITH WHERE WE ARE TODAY? AND THAT'S THAT'S REALLY THE QUESTION. AND NOT NOT TO MEAN WE.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD RIGHT NOW, OR THAT WE CAN'T HAVE ANOTHER SOLUTION OF HOW WE MIGHT HANDLE THIS.

I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING PROPOSED, BUT I, I BELIEVE THAT WE WE'RE, WE'RE JUST STUCK AND I'VE SAID THAT EVER SINCE I GOT ON COURT. WE'RE STUCK IN A, LIKE AN ANTIQUATED WAY OF APPROACHING THIS ROAD SYSTEM.

AND I WANT TO DO SOMETHING ADVANCED THAT GETS ROADS FOR THESE CITIZENS LIKE I PROMISED.

[04:35:09]

THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO DO. I AGREE. I AGREE WITH YOU TOO.

I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING FROM HNTB THAT'S GOING TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM IN FACT, MY INTERVIEW WITH HIM, THEY DIDN'T I DIDN'T HEAR ANY GREAT IDEAS THAT I'VE NEVER HEARD BEFORE.

SO I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE EITHER.

BOBBY AND I'LL AGREE WITH YOU. WE NEED TO BUILD ROADS.

AND I, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE AS MUCH AS WE ARGUE UP HERE AND FIGHT ON THESE ISSUES.

I DO KNOW THAT EVERYBODY ON THIS COURT WANTS TO ADVANCE THIS AND WANTS TO IMPROVE THE ROADS, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. SO WE'LL FIND A SOLUTION.

I'M CONFIDENT OF THAT. COMMISSIONER STACY, WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO I WOULD LIKE TO RELOOK AT AN RFQ, BUT NOT THE WAY WE'VE BEEN DOING IT.

OKAY. I DO I DID HAVE A COUPLE OF COPIES OF SOME OTHER OTHER COUNTIES THAT HAVE PUT OUT FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.

BUT I'M WONDERING IF WE NEED TO SIT BACK AND REALLY LOOK AT ALSO WHAT, WHAT WE WANT TO GET ACCOMPLISHED IN THE NEXT.

I'M GOING TO SAY LET'S KEEP IT A SHORT TIME PERIOD IN THE NEXT 3 TO 5 YEARS OF, OF, OF OUR OF OUR BONDS SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A CLEAR DIRECTION ON THE SCOPE OF SERVICES WE'RE LOOKING FOR, FOR SOMEONE. AND WE MAY FIND OUT.

COMMISSIONER LICHTY THAT WE WERE GETTING, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN PAYING X AMOUNT WITH THE CURRENT ONE, BUT WE MAY SEE THAT IF IF THE RESULTS CAN SHOW THAT THEY CAN PROVIDE AND GET MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR US, THEN THAT MAY BE A WAY THAT WE, WE, WE LOOK AT THAT ALSO.

I MEAN, I THINK WE JUST NEED TO HAVE A MORE PROBABLY A BETTER DESCRIBED RFQ THAN WHAT WE'VE HAD.

OKAY. I WOULD LOVE IT IF WE HAD SOME CONSULTANT, IF WE SENT, IF WE SENT AS A COMMISSIONERS COURT, A STATEMENT THAT WE ARE UNHAPPY WITH OUR ROADS SITUATION AND HOW WILL YOU IMPROVE IT AND LOOK AT WHAT YOU GOT AND TELL US HOW YOU'LL IMPROVE IT, AND WHAT'S YOUR PROGRAM AND HOW ARE YOU GOING TO WALK US THROUGH IT? I'D LOVE TO LOOK AT SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S A THAT'S A GOOD SUGGESTION TO. YEAH, AGAIN, I, I THINK ONE THING THAT IS VERY POSITIVE ABOUT THIS DAY IS THAT I DON'T HAVE AS GOOD A MEMORY AS YOU DO, BOBBY. BUT IS I BELIEVE THIS IS THE MOST OPEN CONVERSATION WE'VE EVER HAD ABOUT ROADS.

AND THAT IS A GOOD THING BECAUSE IT'S, ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT STYLED A WORKSHOP, THAT'S WHAT IT'S TURNED INTO.

WELL WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS THROW MY HANDS UP ALMOST LIKE COMMISSIONER LICHTY DID ONCE AND I DID EARLIER. AND I'M JUST GOING TO MAKE A MOTION.

WE ENTER INTO A CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH HNTB FOR THE BOND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT SERVICES.

WE DON'T APPROVE WHAT WE'RE DOING. WE START THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS.

OKAY. GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACY SECOND.

GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GALLINA. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTE NOW, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 3 TO 2.

ALL RIGHT. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM. BEAR WITH ME.

BEAR WITH ME. SOMEBODY GAVE ME A STACK OF PAPERWORK THAT I'VE GOT MY AGENDA BURIED HERE.

THERE WE GO. SO I DID A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION.

MY HEART IS SO HAPPY RIGHT NOW. LAUREN LICHTY IT WAS GOOD.

THAT WAS MY REQUEST. I MEAN, I'M JUST WE DON'T NEED IT.

SO JUST NEGATE IT. WE'RE ON AGENDA ITEM THREE.

W DO WE NEED TO JUST I CAN'T I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT WE WE DO IT.

I'M HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION, BUT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE THE SAME THE SAME RESULTS, BUT I WILL FOR THE FOR THE BENEFIT OF TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY.

LET ME READ IT. OKAY. TO RECORD FIRST AGENDA ITEM THREE W DISCUSS AND ACT ON AUTHORIZING REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND OR REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION FOR TRANSPORTATION

[3.W) Discuss/Act on authorizing Request for Proposals and/or Request for Qualifications for transportation-related consulting services or related professional services for County-wide policy and strategy development, and all related issues; (Commissioner Macalik)]

COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH, THANK YOU. JUDGE, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE AUTHORIZE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND OR REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS FOR TRANSPORTATION RELATED CONSULTING SERVICES AND RELATED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR COUNTYWIDE POLICY AND STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT.

GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH. WELL WHY NOT? I'LL SECOND IT WHOLEHEARTEDLY. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW, IT FAILS.

[04:40:03]

2 TO 3. THAT TAKES US. OH, ACTUALLY, IT DOESN'T TAKE US ANYWHERE.

[3.X) Discussion and possible action to approve a resolution authorizing settlement and dismissal, on walk-away terms only, of the lawsuit styled Rockwall County, Texas and Rockwall County Judge Frank New, Solely in His Official Capacity v. Rockwall County MUD No. 10, and Its Purported Directors, Penny Foreman, Joshua Pace, Fernando Bocanegra, Aletha Reil, and Scott Reno, Cause No. 1-24-0256, pending in the 382nd Judicial District Court of Rockwall County, Texas, subject to and conditioned upon a final Compromise Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release to be negotiated by the County's litigation counsel, Andy Taylor; and authorizing the County Judge to execute the final settlement agreement and related documents; (Commissioner Gallana)]

WE ARE GOING TO TABLE THREE X FOR HOPEFULLY JUST A MEETING AND COME BACK TO THAT.

SO LET'S MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE COVERED EVERYTHING BECAUSE WE DID A LITTLE BOUNCING AROUND.

[10) COMMISSIONERS COURT REPORTS:]

ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT TAKES US TO COMMISSIONER COURT REPORTS.

COMMISSIONER GALLINA, I'VE GOT NOTHING TO REPORT.

THANK YOU SIR. COMMISSIONER, I HAVE SOMETHING KIND OF ENCOURAGING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU GUYS.

BUT THE CONFERENCE OF URBAN COUNTIES HAS PUT TOGETHER A A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE BUSH SCHOOL AT TEXAS A&M.

AND THERE IS GOING TO BE A STUDY THAT'S GOING TO BE FOCUSED ON THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT TEXAS COUNTIES DO TO PROVIDE STATE SERVICES AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.

AND WILL ATTEMPT TO ESTABLISH WHAT THE COST OF THOSE SERVICES ARE.

THIS, THE FOCUS ON THIS WILL BE TO CALCULATE THE COST OF THE SERVICES IN TERMS OF PROPERTY TAXES ASSESSED BY COUNTIES FOR BOTH M AND O AND INS LEVIES.

THESE AND HOPEFULLY IT WILL HELP FORMAT THIS A, A LOBBYING EFFORT FOR THE, THE UPCOMING 90TH SESSION TO WORK WITH OUR LEGISLATORS ON THAT. SO I WANTED TO LET YOU GUYS KNOW THAT THAT IS EXCITING.

IT'S YEAH, IT'S, IT'S, I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT IT.