[3.A) The proposed budget for Rockwall County for FY2027 will be available August 10, 2026, on the Rockwall County’s website homepage at http://rockwallcountytexas.com/ TAXPAYER IMPACT STATEMENTHouse Bill 1522, passed by the Texas Legislature in 2025, amends section 551.043 of the Texas Government Code to require that the notice of a meeting required to be posted under section 551.043(a) of the Texas Open Meetings Act, at which a governmental body will discuss or adopt a budget for the governmental body, must include a taxpayer impact statement showing, for the median-valued homestead property, a comparison of the property tax bill in dollars pertaining to the property for the current fiscal year to an estimate of the property tax bill in dollars for the same property for the upcoming fiscal year. Rockwall County has proposed a budget for the County’s 2026-2027 fiscal year. Rockwall County intends to adopt its budget on or before September 30, 2026. ]

ONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM THREE. I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR LEGAL COUNSEL. DO I NEED TO READ THIS IN OR IS POSTING IT THIS? WHAT I'M SPEAKING ABOUT IS THE TAXPAYER IMPACT STATEMENT. IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE READ ALOUD. YOU CAN REFERENCE IT EXISTENCE IN THE AGENDA. GOT IT. OKAY, SO AGENDA ITEM THREE, WE HAVE PUBLISHED THE TAXPAYER IMPACT STATEMENT.

[4.A) Discuss/Act an Order on enacting a Burn Ban for a period not to exceed 90 days for Rockwall County, and all related issues (Judge New - Fire Marshal)]

I'LL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR ACTION ITEMS FOR A DISCUSS AND ACT ON AN ORDER. ENACTING A BURN BAN FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 90 DAYS FOR ROCKWALL COUNTY AND ALL RELATED ISSUES, IS OUR FIRE MARSHAL HERE. THERE HE IS. COME ON UP, MR. GUTIERREZ. SO WHILE HE COMES UP, LET THE COURT KNOW WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT OUR POLICY. SO HAVING A FIRE MARSHAL IS NEW FOR US. AND PREVIOUSLY THE SHERIFF AND I WOULD GET TOGETHER AND ABSENCE OF A FIRE MARSHAL AND DETERMINE WHAT WE WANTED TO DO. SO I'M GOING TO LOOK AT OUR POLICY AND SEE IF, GOING FORWARD, I CAN'T PUT THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE A BURN BAN SQUARELY ON THE FIRE MARSHAL.

BUT GOOD MORNING, JUDGE. GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. SO HAVING SPOKEN TO THE COMMISSIONER, I'M SORRY TO TO YOU AS WELL AS TO THE SHERIFF IN REGARDS TO WHAT HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN DONE, I WENT AHEAD AND TOOK THE LIBERTY OF OF KEEPING UP WITH THE KBHDY, WHICH AGAIN IS THE PRIMARY DETERMINATION OF HOW WE, YOU KNOW, MAKE THAT, YOU KNOW, MAKE THE REQUEST. RIGHT. AND SO THAT BEING SAID, WE I THINK COMMISSIONER LICHTY REACHED OUT TO ME THE OTHER DAY, AND AT THAT TIME WE WERE AT 691, I THINK AT THE TIME THAT I SENT YOU THE EMAIL, WE WERE HOVERING ABOUT 670 OR SO. AS OF TODAY, WE'RE AT 726, ALTHOUGH WE DO HAVE SOME RELIEF IN SIGHT. HOPEFULLY, I DON'T THINK THAT IT WILL BE ENOUGH TO WARRANT TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE ANY CHANGES AT THIS TIME. SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE OBVIOUSLY TO CONTINUE WITH THE BURN BAN. AS YOU CAN TELL, ALSO THE STATE OF TEXAS THROUGH TEXAS A AND M DOES PROVIDE A MAP THAT SHOWS THE DROUGHT THROUGHOUT THE STATE. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE'RE ONE OF THE FEW COUNTIES IN THE AREA THAT HAVE YET TO ISSUE THE BURN BAN. SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND AND JUMP ON BOARD WITH EVERYONE ELSE AT THIS TIME. GOT IT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE FIRE MARSHAL? IF NOT, I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ENACT A BURN BAN FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 90 DAYS FOR ROCKWALL COUNTY. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. AND MY MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY, IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0.

[4.B) Discuss/Act on approving the Election Judges for the General and Special Elections for the upcoming fiscal year, and all related issues; (Judge New - Elections Administrator)]

[00:15:05]

THANK YOU SIR, THANK YOU. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR B DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING THE ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE GENERAL AND SPECIAL ELECTIONS FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. MR. LYNCH. WELCOME, SIR. HEY. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. I THINK YOU HAVE THE BACKUP DOCUMENT THAT I'M HOLDING RIGHT HERE. AND THIS IS MERELY AN ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION OF THE ELECTION CODE, WHERE THE TWO CHAIRS FROM EACH OF THE PARTIES SUBMIT TO ME THE PERSONNEL THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AT SPECIFIC VENUES ON ELECTION DAY.

WE TAKE CARE OF EARLY VOTING, SO WE'VE GOT THAT COVERED. FOR THE MOST PART. WE STILL GOT SOME WORK TO DO, BUT THIS WILL GET FILED IN JEN'S OFFICE. AND THEN IT'S JUST, AGAIN, AN ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION OF THE ELECTION CODE. ANY QUESTIONS? ADMINISTRATOR LYNCH IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE GENERAL AND SPECIAL ELECTION, FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO US.

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTE NOW, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. AND ON A SIDE, THE ONLY OTHER ENTITY THAT CAME ON BOARD FOR NOVEMBER, BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME STUFF OUT THERE WITH HEATH AND MCLENNAN, AS YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST GOING TO BE FATE AND THE OTHER STUFF THAT NORMALLY WOULD

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

APPEAR ON THERE. GOT IT. THANK YOU SIR. HAVE A GOOD DAY. THANK YOU. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR C DISCUSS AND ACT ON UPDATES AND PROGRESS RELATED TO THE COURTHOUSE COURTROOM ADDITIONS, THIRD FLOOR PROJECT AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER GALLINA AND SAL IS ON THE WAY UP, AND IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME SCENARIO THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR WHAT FEELS LIKE MONTHS AND MONTHS. YEAH, NOTHING. YEAH. I HAVEN'T HEARD FROM HIM SINCE THE LAST TIME WE HAD AN INTERACTION WITH THE EXTERNAL AUDITOR. BUT AGAIN, I'LL KEEP REACHING OUT AND BEING A PEST. SO YEAH. WELL, AND I'M, I'M, I'M GOING TO SAY YOU CAN'T MAKE.

AND EXCLUDING OUR AUDITOR, YOU CAN'T MAKE AUDITORS GO FASTER. THE AUDIT PROCESS IS THE AUDIT PROCESS. AND PUSHING ACTUALLY SLOWS IT DOWN. YEAH. UNDERSTOOD. SO ANY QUESTIONS FOR SAL. ALL

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

RIGHT. HEARING NONE. WE'LL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR. D DISCUSS AND ACT ON UPDATES AND PROGRESS RELATED TO THE SHERIFF'S REMODEL AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. SO STACY YEAH, I'M GOING TO DO A QUICK SLIDESHOW OF JUST KIND OF RESETTING THE COURT WHERE WE ARE. I THINK IT'S KIND OF IMPORTANT. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF ITEMS AND I'LL HAVE SAL ANSWERING ANY QUESTIONS WE HAVE AS WE WORK THROUGH THEM. I DIDN'T PUT TOGETHER A FANCY SLIDESHOW OF ANY SORT, BUT ONE THAT JUST KIND OF WALKS THROUGH WHAT'S GOING ON. SO LET'S SEE IF THE CLICKER WORKS. ALL RIGHT. SO TODAY WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT OFFICIAL CHANGE ORDER NUMBER TWO. IT IS ON THE AGENDA. WE'RE JUST GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT REAL QUICK. WE ARE MOVING $90,000 INTO THE CI CONTRACT FROM THE OWNER SIDE. I'M GOING TO KIND OF GO INTO THE OWNER'S SIDE IN A LOT MORE DETAIL IN A SECOND. IT LEAVES ABOUT 26,000 APPROXIMATELY STILL IN CONTINGENCY IN THAT PROJECT, AND IT FUNDS ALL THE KNOWN PCO'S TO FINISH CONSTRUCTION. AND IT DOESN'T ADD ANY ADDITIONAL FUNDS. IT JUST TAKES FUNDS FROM ONE SIDE, FROM THE OWNER'S SIDE INTO THE ACTUAL CONTRACT. THESE ARE SOME OF THE ALLOWANCES THAT WE HAVE SET ASIDE. THESE HAVE BEEN SET ASIDE FROM THE BEGINNING. AGAIN, THIS IS JUST IT'S STARTING TO GET INTO FOCUS. SO IT'S A LOT EASIER TO TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING. WE HAVE AN INTERNAL SIGN ALLOWANCE, IF Y'ALL HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THESE CELLS CAN DEFINITELY WALK THROUGH THIS. THE LOCKSMITH ALLOWANCE FINISHES PUTTING LOCKS ON ALL THE DOORS THE WAY WE WANT THEM TO BE. AND THEN THE APPLIANCE ALLOWANCE IS FOR APPLIANCES ALL THROUGHOUT THE BUILDING. WHENEVER WE OPEN IT BACK UP, HERE ARE SOME ITEMS THAT ARE APPROVED, BUT WE HAVEN'T FULLY PAID. SO WE HAVE PAID FOR THE DISPATCH CONSOLES. WE HAVE APPROVED THE DISPATCH CONSOLES, BUT WE HAVEN'T PAID FOR THEM, SO WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED THEM. WE HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL MONITORS THAT THE COURTS APPROVED THAT HAVEN'T BEEN PAID FOR. WE HAVE SOME FILE CABINETS AND WE REDID THE WINDOWS, BUT WE HAVEN'T MADE ALL THOSE FULL PAYMENTS. HERE ARE SOME NOT APPROVED ITEMS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY BRINGING TO THE COURT VERY SOON. WE HAVE SOME BAD STORAGE, BAD STORAGE LOCKERS. WE DO HAVE SIEMENS OUT THERE TRYING TO FIX OUR FIRE ALARM THAT WE HAVE NOT SEEN THE BILL FOR YET, AND THEN THAT WILL STILL LEAVE $47,656 IN THE OWNER'S CONTINGENCY, EVEN AFTER ALL OF THIS STUFF IS FIGURED OUT. SO THESE THESE TWO ITEMS WOULD COME OUT OF THE OWNER'S CONTINGENCY IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THEM. YES. OKAY. SO WE DEFINITELY HAVE MONEY TO FINISH THE PROJECT. AND WE HAVE ABOUT $400,000 SITTING ON THE OWNER'S SIDE. IF YOU WANTED A REAL QUICK LITTLE RECAP. SO WHAT ARE OUR CONCERNS IS BASICALLY SCOPING. THAT'S THE BIGGEST CONCERN NOW THAT WE'RE DOING THE FINISHING TOUCHES, DID THE CONTRACTORS AND DID WE DO A GOOD ENOUGH JOB WITH THE EXPECTATION OF WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO COME IN AND DO? OR DID THEY SAY, WAIT, THAT'S NOT IN

[00:20:02]

OUR CONTRACT, BUT WE EXPECTED IT TO BE. SO THAT'S SOMETHING IS THAT I PUT IN THERE. THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS, FURNITURE AND FIXTURES. WE'RE HOPING WE CAUGHT ALL THE FURNITURE AND FIXTURES, BUT WE HAVEN'T ORDERED IT AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN INSTALLED, SO POTENTIALLY THERE COULD BE MORE. YES, I APPRECIATE YOU HIGHLIGHTING THESE, BUT IS THERE IN THE SCOPING ISSUES? IS THERE SOMETHING THAT MAKES YOU THINK THERE IS A CONCERN. NO NO NO NO. I'M JUST SAYING WHY DO WE HOLD A CONTINGENCY? MY POINT IS, IS THAT EVERYTHING WE KNOW ABOUT WE'RE FUNDING AND WE'RE MOVING FORWARD. SO WHY WOULD WE HOLD CONTINGENCIES. BECAUSE THEY STILL HAVE TO COME OUT AND DO THE WORK. AND WE DON'T KNOW IF. YEAH. SO THERE'S NOTHING OUT THERE THAT SAYS, OH MY GOODNESS, WE'RE FREAKING OUT ABOUT IT OR ANYTHING. I WILL GET TO ONE HERE IN A SECOND. AND THEN IF YOU REMEMBER IN THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE BUDGET, IT AND MAINTENANCE REQUESTS ARE NOT CURRENTLY IN THE PROJECT OR IN THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE BUDGET. SO THERE'S A FEW IT AND MAINTENANCE THINGS THAT WE WILL GET INTO WHEN WE GET INTO THE BUDGET DISCUSSION. I HAVE NOT INCLUDED THOSE IN THE PROJECT AT THIS TIME. THAT THAT WOULD BE. IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 101 OF THE BUDGET AND 133 OF THE BUDGET, YOU'LL SEE ABOUT 150 SOMETHING THOUSAND DOLLARS. THAT'S REALLY BAD MATH. IT'S CLOSER TO 140 THAT, THAT, THAT WE'RE NOT GIVEN TO THEM AND ASKED TO BE PUT INTO THE PROJECT. WE WE COULD POTENTIALLY DO THAT. WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT IN ANY WAY. WE THOSE ARE STILL OUTSIDE OF THE PROJECT. AND THEN GOING INTO ON MONDAY, WHICH WAS YESTERDAY, WE ARE TRYING TO WORK THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF SCOPING ON THE FIRE ALARM. SO WE ARE WE ARE HAVING SOME VERY MINOR ISSUES THERE TRYING TO GET THAT WORKED OUT. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT IS, IS, IS THE LAST LITTLE BIT OF DETAIL. SO I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU ALL KIND OF A RECAP OF WHERE WE ARE. WE'RE INTO THE BUDGET. THIS IS SOMETHING I SAID IN THE BEGINNING THAT I WANTED TO KIND OF DOUBLE CHECK WHERE WE WERE, WHERE EVERYTHING WAS BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BUDGET.

SO I THINK WE'RE GOOD. WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY MORE MONEY. WE'RE KIND OF MOVING, MOVING A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY AROUND TO GET TWO PCOS DONE AND THEN CHANGE ORDER NUMBER TWO. SO WITH THAT, I'LL HAVE SAL GIVE MORE OF HIS CURRENT UPDATE AND WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON. WELL, I'LL PAUSE AND ASK IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THE ITEMS THAT HE PRESENTED FIRST.

YEAH, I HAD ONE QUESTION. MAYBE I JUST MISSED IT WHEN YOU SAID IT. BUT THE VERY LAST ITEM, THE IT AND MAINTENANCE REQUEST. YEAH, THERE'S AN ASPHALT, CONCRETE AND ELECTRICAL PROJECT THAT WAS NOT FUNDED IN THE BUDGET. THAT IS NOT IN THE REMODEL AT THIS TIME. WHAT IS THAT AND IS IT NECESSARY? WELL, THEY WOULDN'T BE ASKING FOR IT IF IT WASN'T NECESSARY. SO NOT ALWAYS TRUE. SO WHAT THAT IS. I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE EXCEPTION TO THAT. BUT THERE IS THERE'S SOME THERE'S A KIND OF LIKE A DRIVEWAY THAT THAT NEEDS A LITTLE BIT OF WORK. AND THEN WE WERE GOING TO TRY TO RUN ELECTRICITY INTO A FENCED OFF AREA. AND IT IS CURRENTLY GRAVEL AND SOMETIMES IT FLOODS AND IT'S HARD TO MOVE THINGS AROUND THAT AREA. AND THEY'VE BEEN ASKING AT LEAST EVERY BUDGET I'VE BEEN A PART OF TO PUT SOME ASPHALT IN THERE. AND THEY ASKED AGAIN. I JUST DIDN'T WANT ANYONE TO THINK THAT THAT WAS. IF YOU LOOK AT THE BUDGET, IT SAYS IN THE BUDGET, IT SAYS, INCLUDED IN THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE REMODEL. I WAS JUST LETTING YOU KNOW WE HAVEN'T FUNDED THAT STUFF. SO THAT WOULD THERE BE ENOUGH UNDER ALL THE OTHER THINGS YOU'VE DONE ENOUGH CONTINGENCY. IT IS PAY FOR THAT. IT IS VERY POSSIBLE.

BUT LET'S GET INTO THE BUDGET AND WE'LL CIRCLE BACK TO THAT. YEAH. GOOD. ANY MORE QUESTIONS? PERFECT. WELL, PROGRESS IS BEING MADE. I THINK THE BIGGEST ITEMS WE'RE LOOKING TOWARD NOW IS MIDDLE OF NEXT MONTH IS OUR PROPOSED SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION. THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF GIVE AND TAKE WITH THE SCHEDULE STILL ON THE CONTRACTOR SIDE. SO THAT MAY PULL IN A LITTLE BIT AND MAY PUSH OUT A LITTLE BIT. BUT WE'RE LOOKING TOWARDS SEPTEMBER TO FOR SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION. THAT ALSO WILL INCLUDE FURNITURE ORDER AND DELIVERY AND THE DISPATCH CONSOLES DELIVERY AS WELL. THE EXERCISE EQUIPMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN INSTALLED AND I'VE BEEN TOLD IS BEING USED, AND THAT ROOM IS BEING UTILIZED AT THIS POINT. SO I THINK IT WAS A GOOD NEED THAT THAT WE ACCOMPLISHED WITH THAT PART. SO THAT WAS TAKING USE OF THE OLD KITCHEN AND IS NOW A WORKOUT ROOM FOR THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. BUT AS ROOMS GET FINISHED, THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN SLOWLY KIND OF RE PULLING THEIR STAFF BACK IN INTO THOSE SPACES AS THEY CAN. ONCE WE DO FURNITURE, THERE WILL BE NEED TO BE A BIG SHIFT TO GET THAT NEW FURNITURE IN. BUT THAT'S PROBABLY THE BIGGEST HURDLE WE'RE WORKING THROUGH NOW.

PHASING WISE IS HOW WE GET THAT FURNITURE FINISHED. SO I THOUGHT I HEARD COMMISSIONER STACEY SAY FURNITURE HASN'T BEEN ORDERED YET. IT HAS BEEN ORDERED, HASN'T BEEN PAID FOR, IT HASN'T BEEN DELIVERED YET. GOT IT. AND SO WE'RE THINKING THAT'S GOING TO BE DELIVERED ANY DAY IF WE'RE LOOKING AT A COMPLETION DATE SUBSTANTIALLY OF TWO WEEKS, I BELIEVE IT IS.

THE 17TH THROUGH 19TH OF SEPTEMBER IS THE INSTALL DATE SPECIFICALLY, IT'S THE SECOND HALF OF THAT WEEK. THE FIRST HALF OF THAT WEEK IS THE DISPATCH CONSOLES. SO ALL THE FURNITURE SHOULD BE INSTALLED THAT THIRD WEEK OF SEPTEMBER. WHEN DO YOU HAVE THE GUYS THAT ARE CURRENTLY AT THE DA EXPANSION AREA SCHEDULED TO GO BACK? SO IT WILL NEED TO BE AFTER THAT FURNITURE INSTALL. OKAY. EVEN THEN WE PROBABLY NEED STILL ANOTHER WEEK OR SO TO ENSURE ALL OF THE. THE POWER AND DATA CONNECTIONS ARE CONNECTED. BUT SO IN END OF

[00:25:05]

SEPTEMBER, SEPTEMBER, YEAH, BEGINNING OF OCTOBER, SOMEWHERE AROUND THAT AREA. YEAH. SOON.

ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR SAL? ALL RIGHT. WE ARE GETTING CLOSE. WE ARE MOVING. ALL RIGHT.

[4.E) Discuss/Act on approving Prime Contract Change Orders No. 036 & 038 to the agreement with SCI Construction for the Rockwall County Sheriff Office Renovation project, and all related issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR. E DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING PRIME CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS ZERO THREE, SIX AND 038 TO THE AGREEMENT WITH CI CONSTRUCTION FOR THE ROCKWALL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE RENOVATION PROJECT AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER STACY, I FEEL LIKE THESE ARE THINGS WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON. IT FEELS LIKE FOR FOUR MONTHS NOW, FINALLY KIND OF GETTING IT ALL TOGETHER INTO A PCO. I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY PARTICULAR QUESTIONS. SAL WILL DEFINITELY BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT THESE ARE WHAT WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET THE CONTRACTOR TO DO IS STOP GIVING US, YOU KNOW, ONE PCO FOR EVERY CHANGE. SO ALL OF A SUDDEN WE WOULD BE AT 50, 60, 70. SO THESE ARE A FEW EVENTS THAT WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER. SO WE STARTED GATHERING THIS UP KIND OF THROUGH THE DEMO PROCESS OF WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO FINISH THE PROJECT. AND SAL AND THE AND I HAVE DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB OF WORKING WITH THE CONTRACTORS AND WORKING WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND FIGURING OUT ALL OF OUR KNOWN THINGS. AND SO THIS THESE ARE THE LAST TWO THAT WE'RE AWARE OF IN THE CONTRACT THAT WILL GET US TO THE FINISH LINE. SO WE'RE HOPING IT STAYS THAT WAY.

YOU JUST JINXED IT. I KNOW I DID AND I, AND I KNEW IT WHEN I WAS TALKING AND I SAID I SHOULD HAVE JUST SHUT UP. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR SAL? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. WELL, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE. PRIME CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS NUMBER 36 AND 38 TO THE AGREEMENT WITH CI CONSTRUCTION FOR THE ROCKWALL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE REMODEL. GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACY. I'LL SECOND THAT SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0.

[4.F) Discuss/Act on approving Official Change Order No. 002, for the Prime Contract Change Orders 030 through 038 previously approved by Commissioners Court, to the agreement with SCI Construction for the Rockwall County Sheriff Office Renovation project, and all relates issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR F DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING OFFICIAL CHANGE.

ORDER NUMBER TWO FOR THE PRIME CONTRACT. CHANGE ORDERS 030 THROUGH 038 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH CI CONSTRUCTION FOR THE ROCKWALL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE RENOVATION PROJECT AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER STACY. IN SUMMARY, THIS MOVES $90,000 FROM THE OWNER SIDE INTO THE PROJECT TO PAY FOR WHAT WE JUST APPROVED. YEP. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE. OFFICIAL CHANGE ORDER NUMBER TWO FOR THE PRIME CONTRACT.

CHANGE ORDERS 30 THROUGH 38 FOR THE CI AGREEMENT MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACY SECOND.

SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MACLIN. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR G DISCUSS AND ACT ON

[4.G) Discuss/Act on authorizing the Rockwall County Sheriff's office to submit an application for the Department of Justice FY2026 Bridging Immigration-Related Deficits Experienced Nationwide (BIDEN) program, and all related issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

AUTHORIZING THE ROCKWALL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FY 2026 BRIDGING IMMIGRATION RELATED DEFICITS EXPERIENCED NATIONWIDE, KNOWN AS THE BIDEN PROGRAM AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER STACY, I'LL HAVE THE SHERIFF COME UP AND TALK ABOUT THE BIDEN PROGRAM. WELL, I WON'T TALK ABOUT THE WHOLE PROGRAM.

WHAT WHAT WE'RE ASKING TODAY IS AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR THIS GRANT OR THE THREE. GRANT TIME PERIODS. AND WE'RE WE'RE IN THE SECOND ONE RIGHT NOW, BUT IT HAD TO BE SUBMITTED BY TOMORROW.

SO THEY'RE VERY SHORT GRANT APPLICATION PERIODS. WE'RE ENTERING THE THIRD ROUND ACTUALLY STARTED ON THE 24TH. SO THIS IS ASKING FOR AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR THE GRANT. THIS COULD INCLUDE HIRING REIMBURSEMENT TECHNOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT, TEMPORARY DETENTION FACILITIES AND OTHER AUTHORIZED LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES THAT'S INVOLVED IN THIS GRANT. AND LIKE I SAID, THIS IS FOR ASKING FOR AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR IT.

ONCE WE PUT THE INFORMATION IN AND WE WILL COME BACK AND ASK FOR APPROVAL OF THE GRANT AND NO MATCH REQUIRED. ALL RIGHT. I WAS GOING TO ASK, YEAH. IS THIS IS THIS AN ITEM THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE AWARDED SOMETIME THIS YEAR? AND IT LOOKS LIKE THAT? YES, MA'AM. I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFIC TIME PERIOD OF THE AWARD. IT WAS ORIGINALLY A 13 MILLION, $13.5 BILLION GRANT, AND SO FAR ONLY APPROXIMATELY 3.5 BILLION HAS BEEN ADMINISTERED. SO THERE'S THERE'S QUITE A QUITE A FEW THINGS THAT WE COULD APPLY FOR IN THERE. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION. WE AUTHORIZE THE ROCKWALL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FY 2026 BRIDGING IMMIGRATION RELATED DEFICITS. EXPERIENCED NATIONWIDE PROGRAM. I'LL SECOND GOT MY MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND

[00:30:07]

BY COMMISSIONER STACY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES?

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

THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THANK YOU SHERIFF. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR H. DISCUSS AND ACT ON UPDATES OF THE ROCKWALL COUNTY MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN AND ALL RELATED ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER LICHTY AND MISS ERICA BRIDGES. I WILLIT OVER TO ERICA. GOOD MORNING.

HOPEFULLY, I HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF AN UPDATE FOR YOU THIS TIME. SO THEY ARE CONTINUING TO WORK ON THE MODEL DATA ANALYSIS. THIS TIME THEY ACTUALLY HAVE THE DATA BACK FROM NCT COG. SO THAT'S A GOOD THING. I DID HAVE A PRELIMINARY MEETING WITH FREESE AND NICHOLS TO LOOK AT THE THE DATA THE OTHER DAY, BUT IT'S STILL A LITTLE WAYS OUT FROM THEM GIVING US, YOU KNOW, ALL THE RESULTS. SO THEY DID GIVE US CHAPTERS ONE THROUGH THREE, REVISED FOR OUR COMMENTS, OR MOSTLY PER OUR COMMENTS. I STILL NEED TO LOOK AT ALL THAT. AND HOPEFULLY, HOPEFULLY THEY'VE ADDRESSED OUR, OUR CONCERNS. CHAPTERS FOUR AND FIVE, THEY SAID ARE LAGGING BEHIND A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE THEY VERY MUCH DEPEND ON THE MODELING DATA. SO WE'LL BE WAITING FOR THAT. THEY DID GIVE US THE INITIAL MAP FOR FOR THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN TO LOOK AT AS WELL AS THE CROSS SECTION. SO THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE STILL WAITING TO SEE IF WE HAD ANY COMMENTS ON THAT. I DID SEND A COMMENT BACK TO THEM BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE PROBABLY NEED TO SEE HOW THE MODELING DATA FROM COG COMES BACK BEFORE, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY GIVE THEM ANY SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS ON THAT, THAT PARTICULAR MAP. SO CAN, CAN WHEN THE MODELING COMES BACK, CAN YOU MEET WITH ALL OF US INDIVIDUALLY SO THAT WE CAN KIND OF GO THROUGH WHAT, WHAT THAT MAP LOOKS LIKE AND WHAT'S BEEN DRAWN AND WHAT THE MODELS SHOW. THAT WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT. THANK YOU. THE ONE THING I HAVE NOTICED ABOUT THE DRAFT MAP IS THAT IT LOOKS LIKE THEY TRIED TO JUST JUST MATCH WHAT THE CITIES HAVE FOR THEIR MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLANS, THE CITIES THAT HAVE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLANS. SO THEY TRY TO INCORPORATE THAT. AND THERE WAS A COUPLE OTHER MINOR CHANGES I NOTICED, BUT I AGAIN, NONE OF THAT IS BASED ON THE MODELING JUST YET. ERICA, DO YOU THINK THAT THIS WE ARE ON SCHEDULE KIND OF WITH THE TIMELINE WE ORIGINALLY TALKED ABOUT, OR IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE KIND OF BEEN ON A HOLDING PATTERN FOR AT LEAST. CORRECT? CORRECT. AND ACTUALLY I HAVE I HAVE AN EMAIL HERE FROM BRIAN, BRIAN CROOKS AND, AND HE DID MENTION THAT HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO ADJUST THE TIMELINE. HE'S JUST NOT SURE WHAT THAT ADJUSTMENT IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE JUST YET. SO I DON'T WANT TO COMMIT TO, TO ANYTHING. ARE YOU HAVING ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM REGARDING THE APPORTIONMENT PORTION OF OF THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN? NOT JUST YET. OKAY. I MEAN, WE, WE, WE DID HAVE AN INITIAL MEETING AND LEGAL. IT WAS IT WAS KIND OF LEFT IN LEGALS COURT. I THINK WE'VE KIND OF PUSHED PAUSE AND WE'RE FOCUSING ON THE MODELING AND THE NEED OF THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN RIGHT NOW. AND THEN WE'LL CIRCLE BACK AROUND. YEAH. I JUST DON'T WANT US TO GET TO THE END OF THIS PROCESS AND HAVE LEFT OUT THE APPORTIONMENT, BECAUSE THAT WAS A VITALLY IMPORTANT PART. I TOTALLY AGREE. YEAH, JUDGE, IT'S COMPLETELY ON OUR MINDS.

AS YOU KNOW, THERE ARE OTHER THINGS WE'RE TRYING TO DEAL WITH RIGHT NOW THAT WE'VE BEEN ADVISED BEST. WE PROBABLY JUST WAIT A LITTLE WHILE. BUT ONCE THOSE THINGS ARE DEALT WITH, THEN I THINK WE'LL BE ABLE TO MOVE RAPIDLY. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS? SOME OF THE WORK HAS BEEN DONE. GOT IT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, YOU'VE SATISFIED. I JUST DIDN'T WANT IT TO GET SWEPT UNDER THE RUG. SO ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS ERICA? ERICA? WHEN? AFTER COURT, IF YOU'RE NOT RUNNING TO SOMETHING ELSE. IF YOU AND I AND DANA COULD GET TOGETHER. WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT SETTING UP AS THE MEETING WITH THE SUPPORT GROUP. WHAT'S IT CALLED? NOT SUPPORT GROUP, PROJECT, STEERING COMMITTEE, SUPPORT GROUP. 12 STEPS HERE. OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD. ALL RIGHT.

[4.I) Discuss/Act on approving an Agreement Between County and Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., for Engineering Services to be provided to Rockwall County with respect to the road improvement project for Edwards Road from FM 550 to the Sonoma Verde Phase 4 Development and from the Sonoma Verde Phase 3 Development to FM 548 at a total cost of $1,385,000 using road bond monies, an all related issues; (Commissioner Liechty)]

THANK YOU. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR. I DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTY AND KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED TO ROCKWALL COUNTY WITH RESPECT TO THE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR EDWARDS ROADS FROM FM 550 TO THE SONOMA VERDE PHASE FOUR DEVELOPMENT, AND FROM SONOMA VERDE PHASE THREE DEVELOPMENT TO FM 548 AT A TOTAL COST OF 1,385,000. USING ROAD BOND MONIES AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER LICHTY THANK YOU, JUDGE. THIS IS PART OF THE ROAD PROJECTS

[00:35:04]

THAT WE IDENTIFIED LAST FALL, AND WE ISSUED BONDS FOR THIS YEAR. THIS IS EDWARDS ROAD PROJECT AND A COUPLE OF THINGS HERE. I WANT TO POINT OUT. FIRST OF ALL, JUST FULL TRANSPARENCY TO EVERYONE. WE'RE STILL WAITING TO GET A INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH MCLENDON CHISHOLM, WHICH WE DISCUSSED, AND I'VE BEEN ASKING FOR THAT, BUT WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED IT YET, SO HOPEFULLY IT'LL BE ARRIVING SOON. BUT I THINK WE CAN MOVE AHEAD WITH THIS ANYWAY, BECAUSE I'VE NEVER HEARD ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO WORK ON THIS IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR PRIOR DISCUSSIONS. AND JUST SO YOU ALL KNOW, OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH MCLENDON CHISHOLM HAVE BEEN THAT WHEN WE FINISHED THIS ROAD AND THE WORK ON IT, MCLENDON CHISHOLM WOULD TAKE OVER THE MAINTENANCE OF IT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BUILD A NEW CONCRETE ROAD. SECONDLY, I WANT TO POINT OUT, I WANT TO GIVE KUDOS HERE TO OUR COUNTY ENGINEER, ERICA BRIDGES AND TO BRENDA CALLAWAY AT ITS. THIS TOOK A LITTLE LONGER THAN WE THOUGHT, BUT WE HAD AN ORIGINAL PROPOSAL FROM ANOTHER CONTRACTOR THAT WOULD HAVE COST US OVER $1 MILLION MORE, BUT BOTH ERICA AND BRENDA AT ITS IDENTIFIED THE ISSUE AND FELT THAT THE PRICE WAS TOO HIGH. AND WE WENT BACK AND WE WERE ABLE TO GET KIMLEY-HORN TO DO IT AND REDUCED THE COST FOR ALMOST $1 MILLION OR OVER $1 MILLION. I'M SORRY. SO KUDOS TO YOU GUYS FOR THAT WORK. BRENDA OR ERICA. SO OTHER THAN THAT, THIS IS THIS FORM OF AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED. THE COMMENTS HAVE BEEN PUT IN. WE'VE GOT A THERE WILL BE SOME CHANGES MADE TO THE FLOW OF FUNDS FROM THE BONDS, WHICH WE'VE DISCUSSED WITH OUR AUDITOR. AND I SAW A MEMO YESTERDAY. IT LOOKED LIKE IT EXPLAINED EVERYTHING. AND WOULD YOU LIKE TO RUN THROUGH THAT WITH EVERYONE? I THINK THAT IS GOOD TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR WHERE YOU'RE DRAWING THESE MONIES FROM WITHIN YOUR TRIP. 21 FUNDING. THE $500,000 OF IT COMES FROM EDWARDS ROAD ITSELF, WHICH WHICH YOU ISSUED 500,000 WILL COME FROM THE LONG BRANCH SUBDIVISION. AND THEN AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, THAT'S BECAUSE THE WORK THAT WAS GOING TO BE SPENT FOR THAT IN LONG BRANCH WAS DONE PREVIOUSLY. IT WAS ROAD MAINTENANCE WORK IN LONG BRANCH, RIGHT, WITH ROAD BRIDGE FUNDS, AND THEN 385,000 OF THE OF THE ONE OF THE OF THE AMOUNT OF MONEY COMES FROM THE FM 550 STATE HIGHWAY 205 PROJECT. WELL, IT'S NOT A PROJECT. IT WAS, IT WAS AN ISSUANCE THAT YOU ASSIGNED TO THAT THAT AREA. SO IT'S FROM THREE DIFFERENT PLACES. AND I'LL MOVE THE MONEY ACCORDINGLY ON THE SPREADSHEET THAT KEEPS TRACK OF THE MONEY. OKAY. THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION. YOU'LL KEEP TRACK OF THAT GOING FORWARD FOR US, RIGHT? AND JUST, YOU KNOW, THESE MEMOS THAT COME, THEY'RE VERY IMPORTANT FROM YOUR ROAD CONSULTANT THAT IS SHOWING YOU WHERE YOU'RE DRAWING THE MONEY FROM AND WHERE IT'S GOING FROM AND TO.

AND THAT THAT'S HOW I TRACK IT TO. AND I THINK THIS WAS THAT THAT FLOW OF FUNDS MEMO WAS SENT TO EVERYBODY YESTERDAY. SO YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED THAT. SO WITH THAT, THERE'S THIS IS A FIRST STEP OF A BIG PROJECT. BUT AGAIN, I WOULD JUST EMPHASIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING THIS DONE BECAUSE NEXT JUNE, WHEN THEY BEGIN CONSTRUCTION WORK ON 205 SOUTH, THIS WILL PROVIDE A VERY GOOD ALTERNATE AVENUE FOR PEOPLE THAT WANT TO TRAVEL. THE PARALLEL TO IT, I HAVE JUST A BASIC QUESTION, COMMISSIONER. IS THIS FOR ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL, OR IS THIS FOR ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION? NO. ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL. THIS IS NOT CONSTRUCTION. THE TOTAL BUDGET ON THIS THING WAS ABOUT $10.2 MILLION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT MIGHT BE 10.8 THAT YOU'RE CORRECT. BUT IT'S IT'S OVER $10 MILLION, JUST OVER 10 MILLION. I WOULD GUESS YOU'RE RIGHT, BECAUSE YOU HAVE BETTER RECOLLECTION OF THESE THINGS THAN I DO. BUT YEAH, SO 10.8 MILLION AND WE HAD FIGURED OUT WHERE THAT MONEY WAS COMING FROM PRIOR TO ISSUING THE BONDS. AND THAT WAS LAID OUT IN THE, THE SPREADSHEET THAT WE GOT FROM IT. SO YEAH, THIS IS JUST ENGINEERING. AND THEN, BUT IT'S ALSO TAKES US THROUGH THE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT PROCESS AND EVERYTHING. THEY'LL DO THE BIDDING WITH US, DO THE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT. AND I THINK THEY EVEN PROVIDE, THEY DON'T FUND RIGHT AWAY, BUT THEY PROVIDE RIGHT AWAY SERVICES. THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT TO DO ON

[00:40:01]

THIS BECAUSE IT'S A IT'S TWO DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF EDWARDS ROAD. AS YOU KNOW, THE MIDDLE SECTION IS OWNED BY MACLENNAN CHISHOLM, AND THERE WILL BE RIGHT OF WAY ISSUES ON BOTH SIDES AND ESPECIALLY UP THE NORTH NORTHWEST PART. GET CONFUSED OUT THERE WHERE THE ROAD. THE NORTHERN PART WHERE THE ROAD TAKES A SHARP 90 DEGREE TURN. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME ISSUES THERE TRYING TO SOFTEN THAT CURVE TO MAKE IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT ROAD ENGINEERING SPECIFICATIONS. BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST PART OF BUILDING ROADS, RIGHT? SO BUILDING ROADS. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THIS IS ALSO A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THE CONSORTIUM BECAUSE YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT WE MET LAST FALL AND THERE WERE CERTAIN PROJECTS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED BECAUSE THIS WAS NOT IN, YOU KNOW, PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 21ST WAS NOT ON THE ON THE THE BIG PICTURE. SO THIS IS A GREAT WAY OF HOW WE WORK TOGETHER WITH OUR, OUR, OUR MUNICIPALITIES AND THE COURT AND THE CONSORTIUM. AND WE'RE GETTING A MAJOR PROJECT DONE.

WELL. AND I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT I'VE GOTTEN FROM EVERYONE ON THE COURT ON THIS, BECAUSE IN THE ORIGINAL BUDGET, I THINK THERE WAS ONLY $500,000 OR $1 MILLION, ONE OR THE OTHER FOR EDWARDS ROAD. AND IT WAS JUST GOING TO BE KIND OF PUTTING DOWN MORE HOT MIX ASPHALT. AND THIS WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT TO THIS ROAD. SO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON IT. YEAH. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO MAKE THAT MOTION IF I CAN FIND MY READING GLASSES. HERE WE GO. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR ENGINEERING ENGINEERING SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED TO ROCKWALL COUNTY WITH RESPECT TO THE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR EDWARDS ROAD FROM FM 550 TO SONOMA, VERDI PHASE FOUR DEVELOPMENT AND FROM THE SONOMA VERDI PHASE THREE DEVELOPMENT TO FM 548 AT A TOTAL COST OF 100 OR $1,385,000, USING ROAD BOND MONIES. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY. I'LL SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STACY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM

[4.J) Discuss/Act upon proceeding to negotiate with the North Central Texas Council of Governments and other related parties with respect to a grant for Electric Vehicle Charging Stations and related infrastructure to be located at the County Library and/or the County Courthouse, and to designate one or more members of the Commissioners Court to act as Rockwall County representatives in those negotiations, and all related matters; (Commissioner Liechty)]

FOUR J DISCUSS AND ACT ON. UPON PROCEEDING TO NEGOTIATE WITH NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AND OTHER RELATED PARTIES WITH RESPECT TO A GRANT FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS AND RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE TO BE LOCATED AT THE COUNTY LIBRARY AND OR THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE, AND TO DESIGNATE ONE OR MORE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT TO ACT AS ROCKWALL COUNTY REPRESENTATIVES IN THOSE NEGOTIATIONS AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. COMMISSIONER LICHTY, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, JUDGE, THIS IS AN ACTION ITEM, BUT IT'S NOT MUCH ACTION. OKAY. AT THE LAST MEETING, I TOLD YOU I'D JUST RECEIVED NOTICE THAT THE GRANT FOR THESE ELECTRIC CHARGING STATIONS HAD BEEN WAS GOING TO BE AWARDED TO US. IT TURNS OUT IT'S THE THERE WERE TWO DIFFERENT SECTIONS LAID OUT. ONE WAS AT THE COURTHOUSE, ONE WAS AT THE LIBRARY, AND IT'S FOR FOUR CHARGING STATIONS AT THE LIBRARY, THE HIGH VELOCITY CHARGING STATION. SO THE COST OF THIS IS ABOUT $385,000 IN THAT RANGE. AND WE DON'T HAVE FINAL DOCUMENTS YET. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THEY HAVE REQUESTED IS THAT WE START NEGOTIATING ON THIS. AND SINCE THIS HAD DIED ABOUT A YEAR AGO WHEN WE MADE OUR GRANT, NEVER GOT IT, WE DIED. I WANTED TO BRING IT BEFORE THE THE COURT, OTHER THAN JUST IN MY COMMENT AT THE END OF THE LAST MEETING, AND GET YOUR AUTHORITY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH NEGOTIATIONS. AND AS PART OF THIS, NETCONG HAS ASKED THAT WE APPOINT A REPRESENTATIVE IN THOSE NEGOTIATIONS INPUT. IT WILL BE SITTING ON A COMMITTEE THEY HAVE FOR EVALUATING GRANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THEY'VE ASKED FOR SOME SOME REPRESENTATIVE FROM HERE. DO YOU VOLUNTEER AS TRIBUTE? SURE, SURE. I'D BE HAPPY TO, UNLESS DANA WANTS TO. I WAS THINKING YOU WOULD BE THE RIGHT ONE FOR THIS. I'LL BE YOUR. I'LL BE YOUR SECOND CHAIR FOR YOU. OKAY? I'M HAPPY TO HELP YOU IN THAT. I'LL BE YOUR WING MAN. WOMAN. WHATEVER. RIGHT. OKAY. SO ANYWAY, IT'S WE'RE NOT REALLY APPROVING ANY AGREEMENTS YET, BUT WE'VE RECEIVED DRAFTS OF AGREEMENTS. CRAIG STODDARD AND OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT HAS STARTED LOOKING AT THOSE THAT HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HIM YESTERDAY. SOUNDS LIKE WE MAY NEED SOME WORK TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE ON THOSE, BUT CRAIG'S ALREADY BEGUN WORKING ON THESE. SO I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT. SO INITIALLY WHEN WE APPLIED FOR THIS A YEAR AGO, IT. WE WERE APPLYING FOR A GRANT AND I REMEMBER OUR COSTS BEING ZERO TO US. IS THAT STILL THE CASE? YOU MENTIONED $385,000. THAT'S NOT OUR MONEY. THAT IS OUR GRANT MONEY. IT'S STILL STILL COST IS STILL ZERO ZERO. WE JUST GOT IT. AND THE WAY THIS WORKS IS THERE'S TWO VENDORS.

[00:45:06]

AND AGAIN, IT'S ALL KIND OF IN A STATE OF FLUX. SO IF SOMETHING CHANGES AND THIS ISN'T WHAT IT ENDS UP BEING, I'LL BRING IT BACK TO YOU GUYS. BUT THE WAY THIS WORKS, THEY HAVE TWO VENDORS. ONE ACTUALLY DOES THE CONSTRUCTION, AND THEN THEY HAVE ANOTHER VENDOR WHO COMES IN AND HOOKS UP THE ELECTRICITY AS THE WAY I WOULD PUT IT. I'M SURE THAT'S THE WRONG WAY TO PUT IT, BUT THAT SECOND VENDOR WILL BE ABLE TO CHARGE FOR ELECTRICITY AND TO PEOPLE WHO PLUG THEIR CARS IN. SO THAT'S THE WAY IT'LL WORK. IT'S NOT JUST FREE PLUG IN. YOU GOT TO, I GUESS, PUT IN YOUR CREDIT CARD OR WHATEVER THEY DO IN THOSE ELECTRIC CARS. AND SO THOSE TWO VENDORS SHOULD COVER 100% OF THE COST. GOT IT. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'M HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE WE PROCEED WITH NEGOTIATING WITH NETCOM IN REGARDS TO THE GRANT FOR THE ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS AND ANY RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WILL BE LOCATED AT THE COUNTY LIBRARY, AND TO DESIGNATE LAUREN LICHTY AS A MEMBER OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT TO ACT AS THE ROCKWALL COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE IN THOSE NEGOTIATIONS AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MACKLER. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GALENA. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER

[4.K) Discuss/Act on approving a Memorandum of Understanding for submission with the LoanSTAR funding application, and all related issues; (Commissioner Gallana)]

LICHTY. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM 4K DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR SUBMISSION WITH THE LONE STAR FUNDING APPLICATION AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER GALENA. SO THIS IS JUST PART OF THE PROCESS AGAIN TOWARDS PROCEEDING WITH OUR LONE STAR LOAN PACKAGE FOR THE COURTHOUSE LIGHTING SYSTEM. AND POTENTIALLY, AS WE'LL TALK ABOUT LATER IN THE BUDGET, MAYBE SOMETHING ELSE. SO SO THIS IS ONE OF THOSE COMMISSIONER GALENA GOT A LITTLE TEASER THAT THAT EVERY TIME I SIT ON THE AGENDA, I SAY, I THOUGHT WE APPROVED THAT. IT'S SUCH A IT'S A, IT'S KIND OF A LENGTHY PROCESS, ESPECIALLY BEING OUR FIRST TIME TRYING TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS. IT'S, IT'S, WE'LL GET BETTER AT IT. IT'S JUST KIND OF IT'S A LOT OF STUFF TO DO.

ERICA, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO ADD? NO. OKAY, GOOD. I JUST WANTED TO BE HERE FOR QUESTIONS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS? I YOU TALK ABOUT ADDING THINGS. I MEAN, THE THE APPLICATION DOES HAVE VERY, YOU KNOW, VERY SPECIFIC THINGS FROM THE ENGINEERING STUDIES. DO WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT AT LEAST ADDING A FEW THINGS TO IT NOW SO THAT WE CAN PUT THAT INTO THE MOU SO THAT WE CAN FINISH OUR PAPERWORK? I SURE, IF I DON'T, I DON'T MEAN TO DO, BUT BUT WHEN I READ ERICA PUT IT OUT YESTERDAY AND I READ IT AND YOU KNOW, FROM WHAT THEY'RE STUDYING, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE APPLYING FOR IS THE FLUORESCENT LIGHTS. AND WE ALSO NEED TO APPLY FOR THE FACT THAT OUR LIGHTS ARE BROKEN AND THEY DON'T TURN ON AND OFF. CORRECT.

AND THEN I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT YOUR WHAT OTHER THING YOU WERE TEASING BECAUSE I HAD NO IDEA.

WELL, IF YOU JUST THINK ABOUT WHAT ALL THIS CAN APPLY TOWARDS, I MEAN, IT GOES TOWARDS ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE FOR ANY OF THESE ELECTRICAL ISSUES. AND WE JUST HAD A MAJOR ONE HAPPEN HERE ONLY ON THE OUTSIDE OR INSIDE, NOT THE INSIDE TOO. OKAY. SO I, I WOULD LIKE TO INVESTIGATE WHETHER A 400 ZERO ZERO $0 CHILLER MAY APPLY. NOW WE KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING. AND, AND DON'T FORGET OUR VETERANS MEMORIAL NEEDS SOME LIGHTING. MEMORIAL NEEDS LIGHTING AS WELL FOR ABOUT 75,000. OUTSIDE LIGHTING WAS INCLUDED IN THE NEW COURTHOUSE, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WOULD SCOPE TO THAT. I DON'T KNOW IT WILL EITHER, AND I'D LIKE TO. AND I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TIME, BUT I JUST WAS THINKING ABOUT IT LAST NIGHT WHILE I COULDN'T SLEEP ABOUT OUR CHILLER HERE IN THIS BUILDING. THAT WOULD BE AN ENERGY SAVINGS.

YEAH. CORRECT. YES. AND WAS THE CHILLER. IN IN THE STUDY. I DON'T RECALL IF THE CHILLER WAS WE HAD WE HAD LOOKED AT THE OPTIONS FOR BARRY. WE HAD LOOKED AT THE OPTIONS FOR UPGRADING Y'ALL'S AC HERE. AND THERE WAS THE PARTICULAR ONE YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT WAS NOT IN THE PE. SO THAT'S WHY WE COULDN'T INCLUDE IT IN. HERE WAS THE OVERALL SYSTEM. I WOULD ASSUME THE OVERALL SYSTEM HAD TO HAVE BEEN LOOKED AT DURING THAT STUDY. THERE WAS A A RETROFIT FOR. LIKE SETTING AN AUTOMATIC SYSTEM, I GUESS, FOR HEATING AND COOLING. BUT I, I DON'T THINK THAT THERE WAS AN UPGRADE FOR THE CHILLER OR SOMETHING YOU WANT TO ADD BECAUSE YOU SNUCK OVER HERE, I SAW YOU. THIS BUILDING ALWAYS COMES UP IN STUDIES BECAUSE THE REMODEL IS SO OLD NOW AND THAT THIS, THIS SYSTEM WAS PRIMARILY BUILT IN 98. SO IT WENT WENT INTO USE. AND IN 2000 ISH. SO IT IT IS GOING TO BE INEFFICIENT BY TODAY'S

[00:50:01]

STANDARDS. ABSOLUTELY. WE JUST MAY HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AS A SYSTEM AS A WHOLE. IT IS ON AN ENERGY MANAGEMENT BUILDING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM RIGHT NOW. INSTALLED IN 2001. SO THEY ALWAYS IF YOU'LL GO BACK, MAYBE NOT TO WHEN THEY SENT THEIR ENGINEERS OUT. BUT IF YOU'LL GO BACK TO OUR FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT, IT WAS HIGH ON THE LIST OF, OF MECHANICAL NEEDING AN UPGRADE. SO ARE YOU LOOKING FOR SOME DIRECTION OF ADDING THAT? YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO YOU KNOW, WE CAN DISCUSS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF THE COURT HAS ANY INTEREST IN POTENTIALLY ADDING THAT TO WHAT WE'RE ALREADY TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. YEAH, SO I WOULD BUT IT IS HERE'S A TRICK QUESTION. IS ADDING THAT GOING TO DETRACT OR REDUCE OUR CHANCES OF RECEIVING I TO MY UNDERSTANDING, WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE ASKING FOR THREE LOANS KIND OF THING. WE WOULD BE ASKING FOR ONE FOR THE UPGRADE, FOR THE FLUORESCENT, ONE FOR THE NEW COURTHOUSE LIGHTING SYSTEM TO WORK, AND THEN ONE FOR THE CHILLER. YEAH. I DON'T YEAH. BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL BE EVALUATED SEPARATELY AS FAR AS WHAT THE SAVINGS ARE TO DETERMINE WHAT OUR COST IS. GOT IT. I WOULD, I WOULD BE WILLING TO, TO GO FORWARD WITH THAT. OKAY. ARE Y'ALL WANTING TO TRY TO UPGRADE IT? I MEAN, UPDATE THE APPLICATION FOR THE DEADLINE NEXT WEEK. YES. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING. YES. WHICH MAY MEAN WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SYSTEM RATHER THAN THE CHILLER.

SO WE WE WILL BE LIMITED THOUGH IN, YOU KNOW WHATEVER'S IN THAT PEA. SO I APOLOGIZE. NOW IF WE CAN'T GET ALL THESE ITEMS IN THERE. NO, NO, I'M SORRY TO SPRING IT ON YOU LAST MINUTE, BUT. WE'LL I THINK THE COURT IF THE COURT DECIDES TO DO IT, THEN WE'LL JUST DIRECT THAT IT'S THAT THE COURT APPROVES IF IT'S POSSIBLE. AND THEN WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PEA AND SEE WHAT WE'RE ABLE TO APPLY FOR. AND OF COURSE WORK WITH THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE TO SEE WHERE THAT GOES. BUT WELL, LIKE THE A COST, THE NEXT REPORT, THE MORE DETAILED REPORT THAT THE ENGINEERING FIRM WILL NEED TO DO FOR THIS THEY HAD QUOTED US 42,500. AND I PUT THAT IN HERE BECAUSE I THINK THAT WAS LOOKING AT ALL THE UPGRADE OPTIONS TO WHITMORE, TO OLD COURT, THIS COURTHOUSE, NEW COURTHOUSE, I THINK THAT WAS FOR EVERYTHING. SO I THINK THAT COST WOULD PROBABLY GO DOWN. I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO GET A QUOTE JUST YET, BUT I THINK THAT'LL PROBABLY GO DOWN AS WELL. OKAY. GREAT, GREAT. ARE YOU WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION? I GOT A QUESTION FOR ERICA. SO DID YOU SAY THERE'S 42,000 THAT WE'LL HAVE TO DO AN ENGINEERING STUDY TO APPLY FOR THE LOAN? I LUMPED IT INTO THE COST OF THE LOAN, BUT THEY REQUIRE THAT WE HAVE THIS. YOU A REPORT DONE THAT'S A MORE IN DEPTH REVIEW OF OF. NO IT DOESN'T SURPRISE ME SO. BUT WILL THEY FUND US LOAN PROCEEDS TO PAY FOR THAT. GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD. AND FOR METERING AND MONITORING. ALL THAT CAN BE LUMPED IN BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE TO PROVIDE WE'LL HAVE TO BE BE SURE THAT WE'RE PROVING THAT IT IS AN EFFICIENCY WITH WITH WHAT WE'RE UPGRADING. GOT IT. SO SO TODAY WE JUST NEED TO APPROVE THE MOU. ALL RIGHT. SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO MAKE ONE I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR SUBMISSION FOR THE LONE STAR FUNDING APPLICATION MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GALLARDO. I'LL SECOND IT. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCCULLOCH. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0.

[4.L) Discuss/Act on approving the usage of the Rockwall County Annex in lieu of Liberty Hall for the Bikes for Tykes event scheduled for September 20, 2026, and all related issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR. L DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING THE USAGE OF ROCKWALL COUNTY ANNEX IN LIEU OF LIBERTY HALL FOR THE BIKES FOR TIKES EVENT SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 20TH, 2026 AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER STACY. YEAH, FOR SECURITY PURPOSES, WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS EVENT, THE IDEA WOULD BE IF WE MOVED TO THE ANNEX, THE SECURITY NEEDS GO WAY DOWN RATHER THAN OPEN UP LIBERTY HALL FOR THE EVENT. THERE IS A MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM. THERE ARE RESTROOMS. WE CAN OPEN UP THE ANNEX LOCKS A LOT BETTER, AND WE WOULD JUST HAVE TO COORDINATE OPENING AND CLOSING OF THE ANNEX BUILDING. I THINK THIS KIND OF GOES WITH WHAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO AS A COURT, TO GET MORE THINGS, TO REDUCE OVERTIME AND REDUCE COSTS AND REDUCE THE NEEDS OF THESE EVENTS. THEY CAN DO EVERYTHING THEY WANT IN THE AT THE FACILITY. THEY CAN DO ALL THE STUFF ON THE COURTS OF THE STEPS OF THE COURTHOUSE LIKE THEY'VE DONE IN THE PAST. BUT IF THEY NEED TO GO TO THE RESTROOM OR GO INSIDE, WE WOULD JUST SAY, GO TO THE ANNEX BUILDING. SO THAT'S THE IDEA.

THIS CAME FORWARD WHEN WE WERE TRYING TO FIX THE SECURITY NEEDS FOR THE EVENT. THIS JUST REDUCES OUR OUR NEED FOR THAT. I'VE ATTENDED IT A COUPLE OF TIMES, AND I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER THE, THE AMOUNT OF ATTENDANCE AT THIS EVENT. AND IT SEEMED LIKE ONE TIME IT WAS A LARGELY ATTENDED AND HUGE. YEAH. AND THEY WERE PUTTING BIKES TOGETHER. AND SO I'M

[00:55:03]

QUESTIONING, IS THE ANNEX GOING TO ACCOMMODATE THAT? THAT'S WHY IT'S ON THE AGENDA. AND IT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT WE JUST UNILATERALLY MOVED. SO THE THE NOTES I MADE ON AGENDA ITEM FOUR L. I HAVE ONE QUESTION. DOES MAD DOG AGREE? I HAVE NO EARTHLY IDEA BECAUSE THIS CAME FROM THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT TRYING TO CREATE SECURITY FOR THE EVENT AND ISSUES WITH GETTING SECURITY TO THE EVENT. I THINK FROM A FROM THE RESTROOM PERSPECTIVE, IT'S FINE REMEMBERING WHAT THEY USE LIBERTY HALL FOR. FOR SOME OF THE THINGS I, I, I THINK THE ANNEX HAS PLENTY OF SPACE. IF IT'S SUPER CRAZY HOT OUTSIDE, PEOPLE ALSO USE IT AS A COOLING.

I REMEMBER THAT IN THE PAST, WHICH WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT AS WELL. I MEAN, YOU'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SPACE OF THE THE MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM. THERE'S. WE CAN THERE'S A POTENTIAL TO PUT CHAIRS, OTHER PLACES FOR PEOPLE TO SIT. IF WE, IF WE, IF THEY NEED IT. SO I THINK IT, I THINK FROM WHAT I RECALL ABOUT THE USE OF, OF THE LIBERTY HALL SPACE FOR WHAT THEY NEEDED, I THINK IT'S ENOUGH ROOM IN THE ANNEX AND AND BOTH FACILITIES ARE OPEN THAT DAY. YEAH. SO THE COURT IS AWARE WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE RUNNING INTO IS, IS, IS A TIME CRUNCH. NOW, WHAT WE COULD DO TO YOUR POINT IS WE COULD SAY WE WOULD LIKE TO MOVE IT. WE'RE HAVING A BUNCH OF COURT MEETINGS BETWEEN NOW AND SEPTEMBER 20TH. SO SO WE COULD REACH BACK OUT AND PUT IT BACK ON AN AGENDA IF WE NEED TO MOVE IT. COMMISSIONER, DO YOU REMEMBER HOW MUCH SPACE THEY USED IN THE IN LIBERTY? YOU'VE ATTENDED MORE OF THESE THAN I THINK. I'VE RIDDEN IN ALMOST ALL OF THESE, AND I'VE NEVER GONE INSIDE LIBERTY HALL, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY DO IN THERE. I JUST HUNG OUT OUTSIDE. HERE COMES THE SHERIFF WITH SOME ANSWERS. MOST OF THE SPACE INSIDE LIBERTY HALL HAS BEEN USED HAS BEEN FOR TABLES IN THERE FOR THEIR SILENT AUCTION ITEMS. AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE GO IN THERE TO COOL OFF AND THEN THE RESTROOMS. SO OTHER THAN THAT, THERE'S NOT A BIG MEETING OR PRESENTATION INSIDE. MOST OF THAT'S GOING ON OUTSIDE. SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE REASON WE THOUGHT IT WOULD WORK. YEAH.

AND VERY LIKELY WILL. I WOULD LIKE TO GET MAD DOGS KIND OF A. THE EVENT SPONSORS APPROVAL BEFORE WE CHANGE IT. YOU JUST LIKE SAYING I REALLY DO, I DO IT'S REALLY WHAT IT IS. I'VE TOLD HIM THAT JUST LIKE SAYING MAD DOG WILL NOT PASS UP THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY MAD DOG.

THAT IS CORRECT. DO. OKAY, SO SINCE SINCE WE THINK IT'S VIABLE, I THINK THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION WOULD BE TO CIRCLE BACK WITH MAD DOG AND THEN PUT IT ON AN AGENDA IF IT NEEDS TO MOVE, BECAUSE IT CAN EASILY MOVE BOTH. BOTH, BOTH PLACES HAVE BEEN PRETTY MUCH BLOCKED OFF FOR THE EVENT. GOT IT. ALL RIGHT, I'LL GET THAT DONE. YOU'RE GOING TO HANDLE THAT, COMMISSIONER STACY, I DIDN'T WANT TO DO WORK. IF THE COURT WAS GOING TO BE COMPLETELY

[4.M) Discuss/Act on approving the purchase of ballistic shields and breaching tools for the constables and deputy constables, and all relates issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

NEGATIVE ON IT. SO. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR M DISCUSS AN ACT ON APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF BALLISTIC SHIELDS AND BREACHING TOOLS FOR THE CONSTABLES AND DEPUTY CONSTABLES AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER STACY, I'M GOING TO HAVE I'M GOING TO TURN THE FLOOR OVER TO CHAD FOG TO TALK US THROUGH THIS ITEM.

ABSOLUTELY. GOOD MORNING, JUDGE COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU FOR HAVING US TODAY. AND WE'RE HERE TO KIND OF DISCUSS THE BALLISTIC SHIELDS AND THE AND THE BREACHING TOOLS. SO AS YOU KNOW, TODAY'S WORLD, THINGS ARE GETTING MORE DANGEROUS. BEING IN LAW ENFORCEMENT HAS BECOME A LOT MORE DANGEROUS. AND THE JOB THAT WE DO ALSO HAS GOTTEN WORSE. AND SOME OF THE EVENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED THESE DAYS, YOU HAVE THE UVALDI ACT, RIGHT? THAT CAME OUT. AND FROM THE UVALDI ACT, I KIND OF HIGHLIGHTED IN THE VERY BACK I SENT THAT TO, YOU SHOULD BE LIKE A THIRD OR FOURTH PAGE FROM THE BACK. AND WHAT THEY DID IS THEY ADDED THE BALLISTIC SHIELDS AND THE BREACHING TOOLS TO THE MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES. RIGHT.

AND WHAT THIS DOES IS IT ADDS THAT ADDITIONAL LINE IN THERE AS SOME OF THE BASIC STANDARDS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES. AND GOING THROUGH THAT, YOU CAN SEE ON THERE IS WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO NUMBER, WE'LL SAY, WHEN IT GETS DOWN TO AT LEAST AT LEAST ONE, THE REQUIREMENT OF AT LEAST ONE PER OFFICER ON DUTY. IT SAYS AN EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT UNDER THE PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING A REQUIREMENT OF AT LEAST ONE BULLETPROOF RESISTANT VEST PER OFFICER ON DUTY AND ACCESS TO AT LEAST ONE BREACHING TOOL AND ONE BALLISTIC SHIELD. SO THEY HAVE ADDED THIS TO THE LAW, RIGHT. AND WHAT WE'RE ASKING IS TO IS

[01:00:09]

TO PURCHASE THESE SHIELDS AND BREACHING TOOLS BECAUSE, FOR EXAMPLE, LAST WEEK WHEN CONSTABLE CHANEY WAS HERE, I WAS DOING ONE OF HIS EVICTIONS IN PRECINCT TWO. WELL, NO ONE WOULD ANSWER. I ACTUALLY HAD TO KICK THE DOOR DOWN. I HAD TO BREACH INSIDE THAT THAT HOUSE WITHOUT ANY ANY ADDITIONAL OUTSIDE OF THIS, THIS BULLETPROOF VEST OR BULLET RESISTANT VEST, I HAVE NO ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS WHATSOEVER. AND THIS HAS BECOME AN OFFICER SAFETY ISSUE MAJORLY. WE'VE ALSO VALIDATED ALSO WITH DALLAS COUNTY, THEIR DALLAS COUNTY CONSTABLES, EVERY SINGLE CONSTABLE AND DEPUTY CONSTABLE IN THEIR VEHICLES HAVE A BREACHING TOOL AND A SHIELD. KAUFMAN COUNTY SPOKE TO JASON JOHNSON. HE HAS ALL OF HIS VEHICLES, ALL HAVE SHIELDS AND BREACHING TOOLS. SO THIS HAS BECOME A MAJOR ISSUE. THIS IS BECOMING A BIGGER ISSUE ALSO WITH SB 1333 WITH THE SQUATTERS. SO YOU'RE NOW TRYING TO ENTER IN HOMES. YOU'RE BREACHING THESE DOORS. I'VE BUSTED DOWN DOORS WHERE I'VE HAD PIT BULLS RUNNING AT ME. AND YOU HAVE NO OTHER RECOURSE BECAUSE YOU JUST YOU JUST KNOCKED DOWN AN ENTIRE DOOR, BLEW IT OFF THE HINGES FROM KICKING IT IN. AND NOW I'VE GOT THIS BIG PIT BULL THAT'S COMING AT ME. SO THIS HAS BECOME AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TOOL THAT WE NEED FOR OUR SAFETY. AND, YOU KNOW, AT $5,500 A SHIELD, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY OUR LIVES ARE WORTH MORE THAN $5,500, RIGHT, FOR THESE SHIELDS. I MEAN, AND THESE ARE THE NECESSARY TOOLS THAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO DO OUR JOBS AND BE. AND, AND I'D LIKE TO GO HOME TO MY FAMILY TO.

I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS. YES, SIR. WHEN WAS THE UVALDE ACT PASSED? IT WAS PASSED THIS PAST SESSION. SO IT BECAME LAW. ON WHAT DATE? I WANT TO SAY IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR. AND IT GOES INTO EFFECT SEPTEMBER 1ST. RIGHT. SO I SPOKE TO CHRIS KOGAN ALSO. AND YOU KNOW, WHO IS OUR T T COLE ADMINISTRATOR REP. AND, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE TRYING TO GET EVERYTHING TOGETHER AND THEY'VE RUN INTO SOME OF THESE THINGS WHERE, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE WORDING AND THINGS LIKE THAT. AND BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, COUNTIES ARE, ARE NOW SAYING, YES, ABSOLUTELY. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR OFFICERS ARE SAFE AT EVERY STEP OF THE WAY, EVERY TIME THEY BREACH A HOUSE. AND AGAIN, WHETHER YOU'RE DOING AN EVICTION OR YOU'RE BREACHING A HOUSE FOR SB 1333 FOR FOR SOMEONE WHO'S DECIDED TO STAY IN YOUR HOME, THAT IS NOT WELCOME THERE. YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOW GETTING YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT'S BEHIND THE DOOR.

SOMEBODY'S BACK THERE. I MEAN, THEY HAVE OFFICERS THAT ARE SHOT BECAUSE NOW THEY HAVE A BULLET THAT COMES THROUGH THE DOOR BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE BEHIND THE DOOR. THAT'S WHY WE DON'T ALLOW CIVILIANS ANYMORE. UP TO THE DOOR TO, TO, TO DRILL OUT A LOCK OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

BECAUSE LOCKSMITHS, CIVILIANS HAVE BEEN SHOT MULTIPLE TIMES. SO IT IS NOT EVEN ALLOWED ANYMORE. SO WE DON'T ALLOW ANY CIVILIANS WHATSOEVER. SO WHEN WE HAVE TO BREACH THAT DOOR AND IF THERE'S SOMEBODY BACK THERE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S US PUTTING OUR LIVES ON THE LINE, BUT WE DO IT BECAUSE WE WANT TO DO IT RIGHT. AND WE WANT TO PROTECT WE WANT TO PROTECT THE COMMUNITY, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE SAFE. I GET THAT THEN MY MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO MY QUESTION IS, WHY WASN'T THIS INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET REQUEST FROM THE CONSTABLE'S? WHENEVER WE WERE TRYING TO DO THE BUDGET? AND I THINK THE THOUGHT BEHIND THAT WAS THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE PAID OUT OF FUND 51, WHICH IS THE PUBLIC SAFETY SALES TAX FUND THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. SO HOW DOES MONEY GET EXPENDED OUT OF FUND 51? OBVIOUSLY, COMING BEFORE COMMISSIONERS COURT AND ASKING FOR IT THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS. WELL, I MEAN, YOU GET THE MONEY EVERY YEAR FROM THE STATE. I GET THAT, BUT I'M SAYING IT'S THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS. LIKE OKAY, WE DON'T SPEND MONEY IN FUND 51 THAT'S NOT BUDGETED TO BE SPENT OUT OF FUND 51. SO I'M JUST SAYING OR CONTINGENCIES, RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT IT'S FOR OFFICER SAFETY, WHICH IS A COMPLETELY LEGITIMATE ARGUMENT. MY QUESTION IS, IS WHY DID THIS COME UP AFTER WE'RE ALREADY KNEE DEEP INTO THE BUDGET PROCESS AND WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO SPEND MONEY, WHAT TO DO WITH WHAT TO DO WITH THIS. WE'VE HAD TONS OF PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT REQUESTS FROM ALL FOUR CONSTABLES, BUT WE'VE HAD NONE. THIS HAS NEVER COME BEFORE THE COURT. IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF ACTION OF THE BUDGET, EVEN IF IT WAS GOING TO BE FUND 51, IT STILL HAS TO COME BEFORE US TO DECIDE THAT THAT'S THAT'S AN EXPENDITURE. SO MY QUESTION IS IF IF THIS LAW WAS PASSED IN SEPTEMBER ABOUT THE UVALDE ACT AND YOU'RE TRYING TO GET IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE UVALDE ACT,

[01:05:05]

THEN WHY IS IT JUST NOW COMING TO THE COURT WHEN WE'VE BEEN THROUGH SO MANY DEPARTMENTAL BUDGET HEARINGS WHERE PEOPLE ARE SAYING, THIS IS WHAT I NEED? THESE ARE THE LAW CHANGES FROM LAST YEAR. THIS IS WHAT'S GOING ON. I WISH I COULD ANSWER THAT, AND I REALLY CAN'T. I CAN'T ANSWER THAT. WE'VE GOTTEN SOME EMAILS FROM CHRIS KOGAN, YOU KNOW, SAYING, HEY, MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE COMPLIANT WITH THE PIO, FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE ON THE PIO FOR BOTH ONE, TWO AND FOUR AS THE PIO OFFICER THERE. AND THEN CONSTABLE STEVE, HE IS HIS OWN PIO FOR HIS AGENCY. SO WE IT IT'S MAYBE KIND OF TRYING TO FILL BACK IN FROM, FROM BEHIND A LITTLE BIT AND TRYING TO CATCH UP. AND YOU KNOW, I KNOW A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE ON OUR PLATES TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO COME UP TO SPEED AND BUT I, I DON'T HAVE THAT ANSWER FOR YOU AS FAR AS WHY WASN'T IN THE BUDGET, BECAUSE MAYBE WE THOUGHT IT WAS, WE COULD BE, IT COULD BE PAID OUT OF THIS YEAR'S BUDGET UNDER FUND 51. LISA, DO WE HAVE BASED UPON THE WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY TALKING ABOUT FUNDING THIS YEAR, DO WE HAVE ADEQUATE MONEY IN FUND 51 TO PAY FOR THIS? IT WOULD BE 32,000, APPROXIMATELY $32,000 FOR EVERYTHING. YEAH. I THINK THE NUMBER YOU SAID HERE WAS 31592. SO. RIGHT, RIGHT. AT 32,000. DO WE HAVE THAT MUCH EXTRA MONEY IN FUND 51? YOU DO HAVE A CONTINGENCY LINE IN FUND 51. AT THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I COULDN'T GIVE YOU A DISTINCT ANSWER WHETHER YOU COULD ABSORB 32,000 RIGHT NOW, BUT I'LL LOOK INTO IT FOR YOU FOR SURE. OKAY. COULD YOU THEN I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. YES, SIR.

CHAD. IT SAYS HERE THAT IT HAS TO HAVE ACCESS TO AT LEAST ONE BREACHING TOOL AND ONE BALLISTIC SHIELD. IS THERE? AND I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR, IF I REMEMBER READING THIS CORRECTLY, IS YOU'RE ASKING FOR ONE FOR EACH CONSTABLE AND EACH DEPUTY CONSTABLE IN EACH VEHICLE, IN EACH VEHICLE, IN EACH VEHICLE. WE HAVE WE HAVE FIVE VEHICLES, SO WE NEED ONE FOR EACH VEHICLE IN. I'M NOT TRYING TO GET INTO YOUR BUSINESS, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE TO GO, FOR EXAMPLE, TO DO AN EVICTION OR ANOTHER INSTANCE WHERE YOU EXPECT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A BREACHING SITUATION, RIGHT. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD HAVE A SHARED ACCESS TO, OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE ONE IN EVERY VEHICLE? IT HAS TO BE ONE IN EVERY VEHICLE. AND LET ME EXPLAIN WHY. WE ALL WORK DIFFERENT TIMES ON DIFFERENT EVICTIONS, RIGHT? AND WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO SAY, HEY, CAN I BORROW THAT SHIELD? YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO DO AN EVICTION OR, HEY, CAN I BORROW THE SHIELD? I HAVE TO DO AN EVICTION. AND IF NOBODY'S HERE, AND THEN, FOR EXAMPLE, LET'S SAY I'M THERE, RIGHT? AND THEN ALL THE CONSTABLES ARE GONE, AND THEN I'M THERE AND I GO. AND THEN I GET SOMEONE WHO COMES UP AS A SQUATTER, RIGHT. FOR FOR SENATE BILL 1333. WELL, WHAT I HAVE TO DO, PER THE LAW, IT SAYS THAT AFTER I VALIDATE, I THEN TURN AROUND AND SAY, OKAY, I HAVE TO IMMEDIATELY REMOVE THEM FROM THE HOME. IT'S SHALL. SO I SHALL REMOVE THEM IMMEDIATELY FROM THE HOME. SO AT THAT POINT IN TIME, I COULD SHOW YOU MULTIPLE VIDEOS ON, ON SQUATTERS WHERE, WHERE THEY'VE HAD TO GO IN WITH SHIELDS AND BREACHING TOOLS. RIGHT. FOR FORT WORTH AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WHERE WE WOULD HAVE TO END UP DOING THE SAME THING. WE'RE SEEING MORE AND MORE SQUATTERS. WE'RE SEEING MORE AND MORE OF THIS TYPE OF ACTION HAPPENING. MORE AND MORE. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE NECESSARY TOOLS TO DO THE JOB, WHEN WE NEED TO DO IT AND NOT HAVE TO. WELL, CAN YOU COME BACK IN 15 MINUTES? AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT KIND OF TIME WHEN IT SAYS SHALL, THEN WE IMMEDIATELY, IMMEDIATELY GO OUT AND REMOVE THOSE INDIVIDUALS FROM THE HOME? I CAN'T TELL YOU BEHIND THE CLOSED DOORS ON, YOU KNOW WHAT, WHAT KIND OF ISSUES WE MAY ARISE. I MEAN, I'LL GIVE YOU ONE OTHER ADDITIONAL SCENARIO WHERE WE HAD ANOTHER EVICTION, WHERE BASICALLY THE GENTLEMAN HAD CALLED CONSTABLE CHENEY AND SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW, START GOING OFF AND DOING ALL THIS THREATENING. SO I WAS ABOUT A HALF A MILE AWAY AND I SAID, WELL, LET ME GO AHEAD AND GO THERE AND CHECK AND SEE HOW HE'S DOING AND SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. SO I WENT OVER THERE AND WE STARTED HAVING DISCUSSIONS, AND LITERALLY HE STARTED, YOU KNOW, USING EXPLETIVES UP AND DOWN, CALLING ME, CALLING US LIARS AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF, AND THEN TURNED AROUND AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? I SAID, LOOK, I'LL BE HERE TOMORROW. AND HE GOES, WELL, GOOD. BECAUSE WHEN YOU GET HERE, I'LL BE LOCKED AND LOADED. AND I APPRECIATE YOU. I KNOW, I DON'T DOUBT FOR A MINUTE THE SITUATIONS YOU'RE WALKING INTO AND WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS THOSE. CAN I ASK YOU

[01:10:03]

A QUESTION? DOES EVERY SHERIFF'S VEHICLE HAVE ONE OF THESE IN IT? NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. I DON'T THINK THEY DO. OKAY. BUT THEY DON'T. THEY DON'T. AGAIN, WE HAVE DISTINCT DUTIES THOUGH, TO WHERE WE'RE DOING MOST MOST OF THE EVICTIONS ALSO. THAT'S HENCE WHY ALL THE CONSTABLES AND DEPUTY CONSTABLES IN DALLAS COUNTY AND KAUFMAN COUNTY HAVE THE SHIELDS AND THE BREACHING TOOLS IN THEIR VEHICLES. OKAY. SO, I MEAN, I'VE GOT EXAMPLES WHERE, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, WHERE THEIR ACCESS TO THEM IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THEM ALSO. RIGHT? YEAH. WELL, I MEAN, THAT'S, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS WORKS. SURE. ABSOLUTELY. JOHN. AND HE SAID THEY GOT THEM IN THEIR SUPERVISOR CARS AND CAN I BORROW ONE? HE SAID, NO, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH. SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO. OH I'M SORRY JOHN. I'M NOT ASKING ABOUT BORROWING THEM. I'M JUST TRYING TO SEE HOW THEY STAFF, HOW THEY EQUIP THEIR CARS, AND TO TRY AND SEE HOW WE CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO EQUIP A CAR DIFFERENT ON HOW THEY, BECAUSE OF THE DUTIES THEY. BUT YOU'RE CITING THE UVALDE BILL FOR THE REASON WE HAVE TO BUY THEM. SURE. LAUREN'S ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT COMPLIANCE WITH THE UVALDE BILL. EVERY REASON YOU'VE USED THAT YOU NEEDED THEM ARE NOT THE SAME AS UVALDE BILL. SO I I'M NOT SAYING THAT YOUR END IS NOT CORRECT. I DON'T THINK YOUR MEANS ARE CORRECT. OKAY. THE UVALDE BILL HAS VERY TECHNICAL GUIDANCE FROM TCOLE 10 TO 15 MINUTES OF ACCESS TO A SHIELD. SO THEREFORE, IF AS LONG AS YOU CAN GET A SHIELD WITHIN 15 MINUTES, YOU'RE IN COMPLIANCE. IT ALSO IN SEVEN SEVEN, 2.014 REQUIRES MUTUAL AID AGREEMENTS TO BE MADE BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS TO TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE HAS SHIELDS, IT HAS MANDATORY MEETINGS WITH THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. I KNOW Y'ALL NEED TO ATTEND THEM BECAUSE I DO. I, I'VE BEEN IN THEM. OKAY. BECAUSE THAT CREATES THIS STUFF BECAUSE UVALDE IS ABOUT UVALDE.

EXACTLY. YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT EVICTIONS AND THE SQUATTER BILL. THAT'S NOT VIVALDI, BUT IT'S ALSO PART. NOW, WHEN UVALDE CAME OUT, IT'S NOW PART OF THE 1701.163. IT'S PART OF THE MINIMUM LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY. SO NOW IT'S PART OF THE LAW FOR ACT FOR 10 TO 15 MINUTE ACCESS TO BREACHING TOOLS, FORCED BY MUTUAL AID AGREEMENTS AND SHARED RESOURCES. THAT'S NOT WHAT IT SAYS HERE IN 1701.163. CAN I GO BACK? YOU MIND? NO, YOU GO BACK. SO RIGHT NOW, THE CONSTABLE'S. EACH OF THE CONSTABLES DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THESE SHIELDS. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. SO WE NEED TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM. WE HAVE TO GET YOU ACCESS TO THESE SHIELDS. IN MY OPINION, JUST TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW. SO THE QUESTION I'M JUST TRYING TO NARROW DOWN AND FIGURE OUT HERE, CHAD AND JOHN, IS HOW DO WE HOW CAN WE DO THAT? AND WHAT'S THE MOST EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE WAY TO DO IT? AND WE GOT TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW. BUT WE'VE GOT TO GET YOU, IN MY OPINION, GOT TO GET YOU ACCESS TO THESE. AND IT MAY BE ONE IN EVERY CAR, OR IT MAY BE, YOU KNOW, ONE IN EVERY OFFICE. I DON'T KNOW, BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT. AND PART OF THAT WOULD GO TO, AND PART OF MY ANSWER MIGHT BE AFFECTED BY WHAT FUNDS WE HAVE AVAILABLE IN FUND 51. ALSO, COMMISSIONER GALLARDO, YOU'VE BEEN VERY PATIENT SO PATIENTLY, AND I'VE BEEN GONE, AND I FEEL LIKE I WANT TO SAY A LOT OF THINGS. BUT LET ME JUST START WITH, LISTEN, I RESPECT ALL OF OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS, NO MATTER WHAT THEIR ROLES ARE AND THEIR JOB. BUT IF IF WE HAD THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT UP HERE ASKING FOR THIS RIGHT NOW, WE WOULD HAVE VOTED ON IT BY NOW.

AND IT WOULDN'T BE A QUESTION. BUT FOR SOME REASON, WHEN THE CONSTABLE'S COME TO ASK FOR SOMETHING THAT IS FOR THEIR SAFETY, WE QUESTION IT AND QUESTION IT AND DRAG IT AROUND ON THE DIRT AND QUESTION IT SOME MORE. AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. THEY ARE THEIR OWN LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY GUYS. THEY DON'T LET ME FINISH. THEY ARE EXACTLY THE SAME AS ANOTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY. AND HERE IS WHAT I'M SAYING. I JUST FOUND 400 GRAND IN THE BUDGET BY SAYING, WE'RE GOING TO CONVERT THE CHILLER OVER TO THE LONE STAR PROGRAM, WHICH IT FITS FOR. THIS IS 32 GRAND FOR OFFICER SAFETY GUYS, 32 GRAND. SO I AGREE WITH THE 32 GRAND.

THE 400 WAS NOT IN THE BUDGET. IT'S IN THE SHEET I HAVE RIGHT HERE ON THE UPDATE RIGHT THERE.

OH YOU SNUCK IT BACK IN THERE. IT IS IN THERE. I'M READING IT RIGHT NOW, NOT SNEAKING, BUT IT IS PART OF THIS SHEET THAT WAS UPDATED ON 820. IT WILL NOW COME OUT AND I THINK WE CAN AFFORD 32 GRAND FOR OFFICER SAFETY GUYS, NO MATTER HOW IT CAME TO US, NO MATTER IF IT WAS MESS, IT WAS PRESENTED INCORRECTLY, WHICH I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER STACY. IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT IN THEIR BUDGET, SO WE HAD TIME TO DISCUSS IT MORE. BUT LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING, GUYS, NONE OF US HERE ARE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS AND NONE OF US KNOW WHAT THEIR DAY TO DAY ROLES ARE. BUT I CAN PROMISE YOU THAT WHEN THEY GO TO A DOOR, THEY'RE NOT

[01:15:06]

GOING TO SAY, HEY, MISTER, BEHIND THE DOOR, CAN YOU WAIT 15 MINUTES FOR ME TO GET A SHIELD? CAN YOU WAIT 15 MINUTES FOR ME TO GET IN THE DOOR BEFORE YOU SHOOT ME? DO YOU WANT TO BE THE PERSON THAT HAS TO DEAL WITH THE MEDIA WHEN ONE OF OUR OFFICERS IS HURT OR HAVE TO TALK TO THEIR FAMILY WHEN ONE OF OUR OFFICERS GETS HURT BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T PROVIDE THEM WITH A DANG SHIELD LIKE LET LET. I'M STILL NOT DONE. LET'S. LET'S BE REASONABLE. WE HAVE APPROVED SO MANY THINGS FOR SO MANY OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISIONS HERE. WE ARE SIMPLY ASKING FOR, AND WE'RE GETTING LOST IN THE TECHNICAL DETAILS OF THE ACCESS OF THE 10 TO 15 MINUTE DEAL. YOU KNOW, WHAT THAT WAS PUT IN FOR? THAT ACCESS WAS PUT IN FOR VERY RURAL SMALL COUNTIES SO THAT ARE SPREAD OUT GEOGRAPHY GEOGRAPHICALLY. SO THEY COULDN'T SAY, WELL, WE HAVE ONE IN THE TOWN AN HOUR AWAY. THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH. THAT'S WHY THEY HAD TO PUT THE 10 TO 15 MINUTE RULE IN THERE. IT WASN'T FOR COUNTIES LIKE ROCKWALL COUNTY WHO CAN AFFORD TO SUPPORT LAW ENFORCEMENT. I'M DONE COMMISSIONER. DO YOU WANT TO CHIME IN BEFORE WE THANK YOU? NO, I THINK HE SAID A LOT. AND JOHN HAS SAID A LOT. AND THERE'S, I THINK SOME A HAPPY MEDIUM, HOPEFULLY BETWEEN BOTH OF THEM. BUT I AM SUPPORTIVE OF BECAUSE PEOPLE KNOW MY FATHER WAS A CONSTABLE, BUT THEY NEVER HAD SOMETHING LIKE THIS. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER GUYS, FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, I NEVER SAID WE SHOULDN'T GET YOU THESE, OKAY? AND IF PEOPLE JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS AND TRY TO SAY THAT I SAID THAT I DIDN'T. I WAS ASKING QUESTIONS, WHICH I THINK WE HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO ASK ON THIS COURT. AND ONE OF THOSE QUESTIONS WAS TO ASK HOW THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE HAS STASHED STAFF. I DON'T KNOW, BUT IT.

THANK YOU. BOBBY. IT'S NOT THE SAME JOB. YOU'RE RIGHT. ALL I DID WAS ASK QUESTIONS. I HAVE SHOWN OVER MY YEAR AND A HALF ON THIS COURT AND IN MY 12 YEARS IN HEATH, THAT I SUPPORT LAW ENFORCEMENT. AND I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO IMPLY THAT I DON'T BY THE SIMPLE FACT THAT I'M ASKING QUESTIONS. ABSOLUTELY, ABSOLUTELY. YES, SIR. YEP. AND I'LL EXTEND THAT TO THE ENTIRE COURT. I MEAN, WE ALL SUPPORT LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUT HAVE DUTIES, BUDGETARY DUTIES. AND I THINK COMMISSIONER STACY'S QUESTION WAS VALID. YEAH. NO, ABSOLUTELY.

WE'VE ALL SAID THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A BUDGET DECISION BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN ACT, BUT WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT OFFICER SAFETY. SO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OFFICER SAFETY.

WELL, LET'S TAKE THE ACTS AND JUST THROW THEM AWAY BECAUSE YOU CAN SPEAK TO OFFICER SAFETY.

AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, WE WANT OUR OFFICERS TO BE SAFE. AND IF I MIGHT ADD, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I DID THAT I DID BRING UP THE UVALDE ACT IS BECAUSE THAT PIECE IN THERE ADDED IT TO THE MINIMUM STANDARDS OF THE 1701.163. THAT WAS AND MAYBE I DIDN'T MAYBE I DIDN'T SAY IT. ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. BUT THE REASON I WAS REFERENCING THAT IS, IS BECAUSE IN THE BACK END THERE, IT ADDED THAT LINE IN THE MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES. SO THAT'S WHY THAT'S ONE OF THE OTHER REASONS THAT I REFERENCED IT IS SO YOU COULD SEE WHERE IT WAS PUT IN THERE FOR THAT AND FOR US TO, TO, TO SHOW THAT IT'S IN LAW HERE.

THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL. AND SO LET'S, LET'S HAVE A BUDGET QUESTION BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GET. I CAN TELL YOU, I HONESTLY DON'T THINK WE HAVE IT IN FUND 51, BECAUSE I DID A REALLY GOOD JOB OF JUST DRAINING FUND 51 WITH THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE BUDGET. SO WHERE DO WE HAVE 32000? I KNOW YOU SAVED US 400 AND THERE'S MORE COMING IN THE BUDGET CONVERSATION, BUT I IF THE COURT AGREES TO THE THINGS THAT I'M GOING TO BRING UP. BUT AND THAT'S FOR A LATER DISCUSSION TODAY, BUT I. BUT I DO BELIEVE WE CAN FUND IT OUT OF THE BUDGET NEXT YEAR. WELL, I BELIEVE WE CAN FUND IT OUT OF FUND 51 BECAUSE THERE'S THINGS IN FUND 51 I'M STILL TRYING TO TAKE OUT OF THERE. THERE IS SPECIFICALLY ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE OUT OF FUND 51 THAT I DON'T THINK WE NEED THIS YEAR. I DON'T KNOW IF NOW IS THE TIME TO DISCUSS THAT. WOULD THAT BE THE STUDY? YEAH. LET'S. YEAH. SO ANYWAYS, DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT LATER. YEAH. LET'S DO THAT LATER. BECAUSE OUR AGENDA ITEM IS I DO HAVE AN IDEA OF SOMETHING I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE. AND COMMISSIONER LICHTY, I, I'M NOT TRYING TO IMPLY YOU DON'T SUPPORT LAW ENFORCEMENT. WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THAT WE'RE GETTING LOST IN THE DETAILS OF THINGS, WHEN TO ME, THIS ISSUE IS ABOUT OFFICER SAFETY, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN AFFORD TO DO TO MAKE SURE OUR PEOPLE ARE SAFE. I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE NOT, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 10 TO 15 MINUTE RULES AND WHAT STATUTE IT'S IN AND WHAT I JUST AM TRYING TO REDIRECT US A LITTLE BIT INTO WHAT THE MOST

[01:20:02]

IMPORTANT PART OF THIS CONVERSATION. I NEVER MENTIONED A 10 OR 15 MINUTE RULE. I DID WE DID THE COURT DID. LISA, HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE IN OUR CONTINGENCY THIS YEAR REMAINING? YEAH. SO THAT'S GOING TO BE I'LL HAVE TO GET SOMEBODY TO TO WE'VE GOT WELL OVER $32,000. OH.

IN OUR GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY THIS YEAR. AND COULDN'T WE FUND THIS OUT OF THIS YEAR'S BUDGET INSTEAD OF NEXT YEAR'S. AS LONG AS YOU WOULD RECEIVE IT BY SEPTEMBER 30TH, WILL YOU RECEIVE IT BY SEPTEMBER 30TH, OR CAN WE MOVE IT INTO FUND 79? I EITHER WAY, I MEAN, IT WORKS, BUT HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO GET IT ORDERED? IT COULD BE IT COULD BE WEEKS BECAUSE SOME OF THIS STUFF HAS TO COME FROM COLORADO, YOU KNOW, SO I CAN'T, I, I WISH I CAN ANSWER THAT FOR YOU AT THIS PRESENT MOMENT, BUT I CAN'T, BUT I CAN FIND OUT THAT INFORMATION. ABSOLUTELY.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT DOING IT THROUGH FUND 79. THAT'D BE THE SAFEST WAY TO DO IT. AND I JUST AND I JUST WANT TO SUMMARIZE WHERE I WAS COMING FROM, BECAUSE I DID DO A LOT OF TALKING. NUMBER ONE IS WE HAVE FOUR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THAT CAME FORWARD AND SAID THEY'RE OUT OF COMPLIANCE. THAT BREAKS MY BRAIN. WE'RE NOT OUT OF COMPLIANCE. WE ARE IN COMPLIANCE. WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS FOCUS ON THE SQUATTER BILL AND YOUR JOB, NOT THE UVALDE ACT. WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE UVALDE ACT, OFFICER. SAFETY IS IMPORTANT. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET TO. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER GALLINA. WE NEED TO LOOK AT DOING THIS. IT'S ON THE I PUT IT ON THE AGENDA. I TOLD CHAD, I DON'T NECESSARILY I HAVE THE EMAIL. I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH YOUR LOGIC, BUT WE NEED TO LOOK AT GETTING THIS EQUIPMENT. THAT IS WHAT I SAID. SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS THAT WHEN WE HAVE TO CLEAR THE RECORD THAT WE ARE NOT OUT OF COMPLIANCE, WE'RE DOING THIS FOR OFFICER SAFETY. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET TO. I MIGHT NOT HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB AND I MIGHT HAVE WORE YOU OUT. YOU.

IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE YOU'VE HAD TO SIT THROUGH ANYTHING WITH ME, BUT I DO AGREE THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT IT. I THINK WE LOOK AT DOING IT THROUGH FUND 791 WAY OR ANOTHER. I DON'T KNOW IF WE SOLVE THIS TODAY, BUT WE CAN SOLVE IT SOON. CONSTABLE FRASER, THANK YOU.

I'M HERE BECAUSE I SUPPORT CHAD AND WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DO. I WASN'T INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS, SO I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT COMING FORWARD DURING AND MAKING A REQUEST DURING THE PROCESS, THE BUDGET. BUT I WANT TO TELL YOU, I DID TALK TO CONSTABLE OROZCO, PRECINCT FIVE IN DALLAS AND MATT WOODALL, I THINK PRECINCT TWO IN KAUFMAN. THEY NOT ONLY HAVE THEM FOR THEIR VEHICLES, BUT THEY HAVE THEM FOR THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE COURT. NOW, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. THE SHERIFF'S HERE. HE CAN ANSWER ALL OF THAT. BUT I DO KNOW THAT, YES, IT'S ABOUT HOUSE BILL 33. IT WAS ABOUT UVALDE. BUT IF I COULD AFFORD IT, I WOULD PUT A SHIELD IN EVERY POLICE VEHICLE IN THE COUNTY OR IN THE STATE. I'VE WORKED IN THE SCHOOLS, I'VE DONE SEARCH WARRANTS. I'VE BEEN ON A SWAT TEAM WITHOUT SHIELDS. I'VE HAD FRIENDS SHOT IN THE HEAD, IN THE CHEST WITHOUT A SHIELD. WOULD THAT HAVE HELPED? YES. NOW, THOSE WERE PRE-PLANNED SEARCH WARRANTS. IT IS ABOUT UVALDE. THAT'S WHAT BROUGHT ALL THIS ABOUT. WE'RE FACING MORE AND MORE AND MORE LONG RIFLES. THE SHERIFF CAN TELL YOU THAT EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER CAN TELL YOU THAT. SO WE WOULD APPRECIATE IF WE CAN FIND THE MONEY TO PROVIDE EVERYONE WITH A SHIELD THAT WE CAN POSSIBLY PROVIDE, BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT RESPONDING TO ACTIVE SHOOTERS. YES. THAT'S WHY IT CAME ABOUT, AND I AGREE WITH THAT. HOWEVER, CONSTABLES AND EVEN THE CIVIL DEPUTY AT THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, I'LL SPEAK ABOUT HIS PROCESS AND HIS JOB. HE DOES THE SAME THING WE DO, AND APPROXIMATELY 1 OR 2 OUT OF EVERY TEN EVICTIONS, WE HAVE TO MOVE PEOPLE OUT. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? Y'ALL ALREADY KNOW THIS. WE DO IT BY OURSELVES MOST OF THE TIME BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE. AND QUITE FRANKLY, THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT WOULD PROBABLY BE WILLING. AND I'VE ASKED THE CIVIL DEPUTY THERE AND HE'S VERY HELPFUL. SO IT'S A TEAM EFFORT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO THESE DOORS MORE OFTEN THAN SEARCH WARRANTS THAN THAT. ARE SEARCH WARRANTS BEING EXECUTED IN THE COUNTY. THE DIFFERENCE IS SEARCH WARRANTS. WHEN YOU WHEN YOU GO TO A DOOR EXECUTING A SEARCH WARRANT, YOU DO HOMEWORK ON THE INDIVIDUALS AND THE LOCATION. WE DON'T DO THAT WHEN WE GO TO THE DOOR FOR AN EVICTION OR FOR A SQUATTER. AND SO IT IS DANGEROUS. I DON'T HAVE TO EDUCATE YOU ON THAT. I'M SURE YOU'VE HEARD THIS SO WE COULD BE SHOT JUST LIKE ANYBODY ELSE. AND CHAD'S ALREADY EXPLAINED WHAT COULD HAPPEN AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED, BUT WE'RE DOING IT ON AVERAGE, TWO OUT OF TEN, TWO OUT OF TEN. WE GO IN AND CLEAR THAT HOUSE

[01:25:05]

BY OURSELF. OKAY, YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS? THAT MEANS WE GO INTO THE DOOR, WE FORCE ENTRY OR HAVE IT UNLOCKED. WE ENTER THAT HOUSE AND WE CLEAR IT JUST LIKE YOU'RE EXECUTING A SEARCH WARRANT. THERE COULD BE ANYBODY IN THAT HOUSE. AND BUT, YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW WHAT COULD HAPPEN. SO I PROBABLY SOUND EMOTIONAL ABOUT THIS, BUT WE JUST WANT THE TOOLS TO DO OUR JOB. AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT COMING TO YOU AND ALLOWING CHAD TO DO THIS. HE CARES PASSIONATELY ABOUT THIS. AND I AGREE WITH HIM. WE'RE JUST AND IT'S NOT JUST THE THE CONSTABLES EXECUTING THEIR DUTIES. IT'S NOT PRACTICAL TO GO BACK. AND QUITE FRANKLY, IT'S NOT PRACTICAL TO HAVE 15 MINUTE TIME PERIOD. OKAY. IF YOU'VE EVER GONE TO A SHOOTING WHERE A SHIELD WOULD BENEFIT YOU, THE OFFICERS OUT ON THE STREET APPROACHING ON HIGH RISK FELONY STOPS SHIELD WOULD BE GREAT FOR THAT. SO I KNOW EVERYBODY ON THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT CARES ABOUT THE POLICE, AND YOU'RE OUR FRIENDS, AND I KNOW YOU WANT TO DO WHAT YOU CAN TO GIVE US THE TOOLS THAT WE NEED, WHETHER IT'S THE CONSTABLES OR THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. WE LOVE THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, TOO. I MEAN, IT'S A TOUGH JOB, BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO DO IT. WE JUST WANT TO BE AS SAFE AS WE CAN. AND NOT ONLY THAT, I WEAR A VEST, NOT NECESSARILY FOR ME, BUT TO KEEP US IN THE FIGHT SO THAT WE CAN SAVE LIVES. OKAY.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I JUST SAID? A VEST WILL KEEP US ALIVE SO THAT WE CAN STAY IN A FIGHT TO PROTECT OTHER PEOPLE. WE UNDERSTAND WE CAN DIE DOING THIS JOB. THE SHERIFF AND EVERY DEPUTY AND EVERY POLICE OFFICER KNOWS THAT. BUT A SHIELD COULD PROLONG THAT BATTLE AND SAVE LIVES. SO WE WOULD APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT FINANCIALLY, BECAUSE I KNOW ALL OF YOU SUPPORT US EMOTIONALLY AND PERSONALLY. SO I JUST WANT TO THANK CHAD FOR ALL THE HARD WORK THAT HE'S DONE ON THIS. AND AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE. WE SHOULD HAVE COME TO YOU DURING THE BUDGET AND MADE A REQUEST, AND I'LL TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT. ALL RIGHT. QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF BALLISTIC SHIELDS AND BREACHING TOOLS FOR THE CONSTABLES AND DEPUTY CONSULS, FOR A COST OF $31,592.57. HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY. SECOND.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GALARNEAU. LET'S TALK ABOUT WHERE THAT MONEY IS COMING FROM.

ARE WE GOING TO TAKE IT FROM FUND 79? ARE WE GOING TO TAKE IT FROM CONTINGENCY 79 DOESN'T HAVE MONEY. WE'D HAVE TO PUT MONEY IN FUND 79. OH, IF IF THE CONSTABLES WILL JUST WORK WITH SHERRY, WE'LL GET YOU THE THE PO FOR YOU TO ORDER IT AND THEN FIND OUT WHEN IT WILL BE DELIVERED. AND WE'LL TAKE IT FROM GENERAL FUND. WE'LL FIND THE MONEY SOMEWHERE IN THE GENERAL FUND OF THIS YEAR. AND IF IT DOES NOT GET RECEIVED, WE'LL MOVE IT INTO 79 SO WE CAN PAY FOR IT. GOT IT. BUT IT'LL BE FY 26 FUNDS. OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LICHTY, A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GALLINA. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO

[4.N) Discuss/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)]

0. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM FOUR N DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVING RESOLUTION AND ORDER, APPROVING MASTER AGREEMENT AND TASK ORDER 01302 WITH H N TB CORPORATION FOR BOND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, CONSULTANT SERVICES AND COUNTY ADDENDUM GRANTING PROFESSIONAL SERVICE EXEMPTION UNDER TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. 262.024 PARENTHETICALS A AND FOR AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION AND ALL RELATED MATTERS. COMMISSIONER STACY YEAH, WE WE GOT A MEMO LAST WEEK ON WHERE THE NEGOTIATION WAS. THEN LAST THURSDAY EVENING, COMMISSIONER LICHTY, THANK YOU FOR DOING SO, ADDED SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, AND I BELIEVE I'LL HAVE DANIEL SPEAK TO IT BRIEFLY, BUT I. I DO BELIEVE THAT MOST OF THOSE COMMENTS WERE ABSORBED INTO THE NEW CONTRACT. AND IF YOU COULD JUST SPEAK REAL BRIEFLY TO THAT. YES. LAST SUNDAY NIGHT, I GOT THE FINAL CONTRACT AMENDMENTS BACK FROM HNTB. I SENT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT A SUMMARY OF WHAT THOSE WERE AND THEN THE REVISED TWO DOCUMENTS LAST NIGHT. I THINK ALL OF THE CHANGES WERE MADE EXCEPT FOR ONE THAT COMMISSIONER LIGETI SENT ME AN EMAIL ABOUT THIS

[01:30:05]

MORNING, A SIMPLE CHANGE ABOUT PUTTING IN CHANGE OF ADDRESS INFORMATION. CHAD FROM HNTB IS HERE, AND I TALKED WITH HIM IN THE HALLWAY A FEW MINUTES AGO, AND I THINK WE BOTH AGREE THAT'S A REAL SIMPLE CHANGE. AND SO IF YOU APPROVE THESE DOCUMENTS, YOU CAN INCLUDE THAT IN THE MOTION TO APPROVE THEM, SUBJECT TO THAT CHANGE AND STILL VOTE ON IT TODAY.

OTHERWISE, I KNOW LAST WEEK I SENT A VERY LONG MEMO GOING OVER ALL THE CHANGES SINCE THE INITIAL VERSION OF THIS CONTRACT. AND TWO CHANGE ORDERS. AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT TODAY OR THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS IN GENERAL. AND THEN CHAD IS HERE AS WELL.

IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE IN-DEPTH QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW ANY OF THEIR TASKS WILL, WILL OPERATE AND MOVE FORWARD, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I JUST HAVE TWO COMMENTS IF I CAN. YEAH, YEAH.

GO AHEAD. NOW IS THE TIME. OKAY. I JUST THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR EVERYTHING EVERYONE'S DONE ON THIS FROM CHAD AS WELL AS DANIEL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I JUST WANT TO GO ON THE RECORD THAT AFTER LOOKING AT THE CONTRACT, YOU KNOW, WE HAD WE HAD A COPY OF IT TWO WEEKS AGO.

AND THEN THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE. AND THEN THE ONE I SAW THIS MORNING AS WELL, I JUST WANT THAT, THAT WE, WE, WE'RE GOING TO BE PROBABLY ADDING SOMEWHERE, SOMEWHERE AROUND THREE TIMES, MAYBE POSSIBLY FOUR TIMES OF THE CURRENT, THE CURRENT CONTRACT THAT WE'VE HAD, WE HAVE A LOT OF GOOD. I WOULD, I WOULD CALL IT. RETURN ON OUR INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITIES HERE. I ALSO THINK THAT WE HAVE SOME PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES THAT I'M EXCITED TO SEE, AND THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE ON PROGRESS AND PROCESSES. BUT I DO WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT FROM MY STANDPOINT, I'M, I'M, I'M, I THINK WE'VE IDENTIFIED EVERYTHING THAT IS IN THE CONTRACT. I HAVE MET WITH BOTH OF THE CITIES THAT ARE IN PRECINCT TWO WITH THEIR CITY MANAGERS AND THE MAYORS TO JUST KIND OF GO OVER WHAT, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN THE FUTURE. AND THEY'VE ASKED A FEW QUESTIONS, AND ALL THE QUESTIONS THEY ASKED WERE ALREADY IDENTIFIED IN THE CONTRACT. SO BUT I FROM MY STANDPOINT, I STILL AM NOT PLEASED WITH THE PROCESS OF HOW WE WENT ABOUT THIS. AND WE DID NOT TAKE THIS OUT FOR AN RFQ, ALTHOUGH I INTERVIEWED WITH WITH THE HNTB AND I THINK ALL OF THE SERVICES THAT YOU WE WE WENT THROUGH IN OUR INTAKE, I WAS VERY PLEASED WITH THEM, PLEASED WITH YOUR ANSWERS, PLEASED WITH YOUR YOUR EXAMPLES OF THE OTHER COUNTIES THAT YOU GAVE TO US. BUT IN THE IN THE END, I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE INCREASING US BY, YOU KNOW, 700,000 OR MORE. I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN THAT. GONE TO AN RFQ AND GONE THROUGH THE PROCESSES. SO JUST FOR THE RECORD, THAT'S MY COMMENTS. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? I'D LIKE TO THANK DANIEL AND HTB FOR MAKING THE CHANGES I REQUESTED IN THE CONTRACT. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WELL, IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION JUDGE. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE MASTER AGREEMENT AND TASK ORDERS ONE AND TWO WITH HNTB CORPORATION FOR THE BOND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES. UNDER THE LATEST ITERATION FROM COMMISSIONER LICHTY, AND THAT WE PAY THAT MONEY OUT OF THE CRENSHAW ROAD BOND SAVINGS. AND THAT'S MY MOTION. HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACY. SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GILLEN. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU REGISTER YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 3 TO 2. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM

[4.O) Discuss/Act on approval of a Resolution regarding expiration and non-renewal of the Transportation Services Contract with Innovative Transportation Solutions, Inc., notice of withdrawal, and return of County records and data, and all related issues; (Commissioner Stacy)]

FOUR. OH, DISCUSS AND ACT ON APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION REGARDING EXPIRATION AND NON-RENEWAL OF THE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES CONTRACT WITH INNOVATIVE TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS, INC. NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL AND RETURN OF COUNTY RECORDS AND DATA AND ALL RELATED ISSUES. COMMISSIONER. STACY. YEAH, JUDGE, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS AS PRESENTED AND HAVE THE AUDITOR LEASE A CONSTANT. WILEY AS THE COUNTY POINT PERSON IN THE RESOLUTION GOING FORWARD WITH THE TRANSITION, GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STACY SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GALANTI. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES NOW, PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. THAT TAKES US COURT AND THOSE LISTENING AT HOME. WE ARE GOING TO COME BACK TO £0.04 BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF A LONGER DISCUSSION. AND AS NOT TO HOLD ALL OF THE COUNTY STAFF HOSTAGE,

[5) CONSENT AGENDA:]

WE'RE GOING TO GO TO AGENDA ITEM FIVE, CONSENT AGENDA. JUDGE, IF I MAY, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE FIVE F OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA. WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE ACTION ON THIS ITEM TODAY. I

[01:35:01]

WILL TRY TO BRING IT BACK TO A FUTURE COURT. OKAY, JUDGE, I'D LIKE TO TAKE FIVE D OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA. ALL RIGHT. DO YOU WANT TO TAKE IT OFF FOR DISCUSSION OR. I WANT TO DISCUSS IT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, LET'S JUMP INTO FIVE D THEN. WELL, CAN I CAN WE JUST DO THE CONSENT AGENDA? JUDGE, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE. 5A5B5C5E5G5H AND FIVE I. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER. I'LL SECOND THAT SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCCULLOUGH. IF YOU'LL REGISTER YOUR VOTES PLEASE. THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. OKAY. FIVE F HAS BEEN

[5.D) Commissioner Stacy - Acknowledge revisions to Rockwall County Policy C.6 on Overtime Compensation and Policy C.11 on Call-Out and On-Call Compensation;]