[15. Discussion/ Action to consider the approval of the Preliminary Plat for River Oaks Ranch South consisting of 10 lots on approximately 20.11 acres fronting on Callahan Road (CR 112).]

OAKS RANCH SOUTH EXISTING OF TEN LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY TWENTY POINT ONE ONE ACRES RUNNING ON CALLAHAN ROAD.

CASEY. OK, IF GOOD MORNING.

IF YOU WOULD SEE THE ATTACHMENTS IN WHAT I SUBMITTED, TRACY HAS SUBMITTED A RECOMMENDATION LETTER AND I AM JUST LOOKING FOR APPROVAL BECAUSE ALL FEES HAVE BEEN PAID AND EVERYTHING COLLECTED.

AND THEN THE CORRECTION IS THIS IS NOT IN MY PRECINCT.

THIS IS ACTUALLY IT'S A BORDERLINE FOR US.

SO THAT ALWAYS GETS CONFUSING WHEN IT COMES TO THAT.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT STATEMENT.

OK, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT LOOK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM FIFTEEN.

I'LL SO MOVE. WE HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

MOTION AND A SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT ALL IN FAVOR. SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSE NONE MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM SIXTEEN DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR RIVER OAKS

[16. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of the Preliminary Plat for River Oaks Ranch North consisting of 5 lots on approximately 10.16 acres fronting on Callahan Road (CR 112).]

RANCH NORTH CONSISTING OF FIVE LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY TEN POINT ONE SIX ACRES FRONTING ON

[00:10:01]

CALLAHAN ROAD. OK, THIS IS ACTUALLY THE OTHER HALF OF THE SUBDIVISION.

SO EVERYTHING APPLIES, EVERYTHING HAS BEEN COLLECTED AND TRACY HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.

OK, COMMISSIONERS? THIS TOO, AS WELL AS IN [INAUDIBLE].

OK. COMMISSIONER YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION.

SO MOVED APPROVAL.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR. SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSE NONE MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM SEVENTEEN TO CONSIDER A VARIANCE REQUEST ON LOT ONE OF TAYLORSVILLE SUBDIVISION.

[17. Discussion/Action to consider a variance request for Lot 1 in TaylorsviUe subdivision. ]

COMMISSIONER SHELTON.

SO THIS THIS IS AN EXISTING LOT ONE IN A SUBDIVISION THAT WE APPROVED A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO, AND THEY ARE SHY OF FOUR FEET OF HAVING ENOUGH TO SPLIT IT IN 150 FEET EQUAL TO GET TWO TRACKS OUT OF THAT.

I DO BELIEVE IT'S PROBABLY FAMILY THAT'S WANTING TO MOVE ON THOSE, BUT THEY DON'T.

THEY CAN'T DO A FAMILY LAND GRANT BECAUSE IT'S IN A RECORD SUBDIVISION.

SO WE'RE JUST ASKING A VARIANCE OF THE FOUR FEET SO THEY CAN SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE, ORIGINALLY. IF THEY WANT TO SPLIT IT INTO A FLAG LOT, THEY COULD THEY COULD GIVE ONE SIDE 150 FEET BECAUSE WE DO ALLOW A ONE SPLIT WITH A 50 FOOT.

SO ONE WOULD HAVE 150 FEET AND HAVE TO ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY FOUR.

SO WE'RE JUST ASKING A VARIANCE OF THAT, TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS JUST DONE ON THE RIGHT PATH. AND I SEE HERE IN THE IN THE LETTER FROM [INAUDIBLE] THAT TRACY SAYS THAT HE FEELS THAT THIS VARIANCE WOULD COMPLY WITH THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF SECTION THREE POINT ONE THREE. YES.

YES. SO I'M JUST I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT VARIANCE FOR THE LOT ONE ON TAYLORSVILLE SUBDIVISION TO BE SUBDIVIDED.

OK, WE HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.

IF NOT ALL IN FAVOR. SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED NONE MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU. I WILL SKIP ITEM EIGHTEEN FOR RIGHT NOW AND GO TO ITEM TWENTY.

[20. Discussion/Action to consider Resolution 33-2021, authorizing the County Judge to execute a development agreement with Road Runner Ranch Partnership, LLC.]

WELL ACTUALLY THAT IS ALSO.

OH IT IS. IT'S SUBDIVISION.

ITEM 20 DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION 33-2021 AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY JUDGE TO EXECUTE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH ROAD RUNNER RANCH PARTNERSHIP LLC, COMMISSIONERS.

THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE.

WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST COMMISSIONER'S COURT AND I THINK THAT THAT ALL THE DETAILS HAVE NOW BEEN IRONED OUT. AND JUST LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION 33-2021.

YES SIR. AND I WILL GO AHEAD.

JJ WENT BACK OVER THIS AND I DON'T KNOW IF HE HAS ANYTHING.

HE WANTS TO SAY THAT EVERYTHING HAS BEEN ADJUSTED.

AS WE TALKED IN THE LAST COMMISSIONER'S COURT, EVERYBODY IS IN AGREEANCE WITH WHAT WAS DONE. TRACY, I THINK ALSO AS WELL.

SO YOU GOOD JJ? EVERYBODY'S HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THIS.

IT'S GONE THROUGH A COUPLE OF MINOR REVISIONS SINCE THE LAST TIME WE CAME TO COURT.

BUT I BELIEVE IT'S IN THE FORM IT'S READY TO BE PASSED.

OK, VERY GOOD.

I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THE RESOLUTION.

RESOLUTION 33-2021 RESOLUTION OF CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT, WHEREAS ROAD RUNNER RANCH PARTNERSHIP LLC DEVELOPER HAS ACQUIRED PROPERTY WITHIN CALDWELL COUNTY, WHICH IT DESIRES TO SUBDIVIDE AND DEVELOP.

AND WHEREAS CALDWELL COUNTY DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AUTHORIZES THE COMMISSIONERS COURT TO EXECUTE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH DELINEATES THE CONDITIONS FOR PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT, WHERE IN VARIOUS CONCESSIONS TO THE COUNTY'S TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS MAY BE MADE IN EXCHANGE FOR A MUTUALLY AGREEABLE ALTERNATE STANDARD WHICH MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE AND IS IN THE INTERESTS OF ALL PARTIES.

AND WHEREAS DEVELOPER IN THE COUNTY HAVE NEGOTIATED A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MEMORIALIZING THE CONCESSIONS AND STANDARDS WHICH WILL WHICH WILL FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT, THAT COUNTY JUDGE IS AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE ROAD RUNNER RANCH PARTNERSHIP LLC ORDERED THIS TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JULY 2021.

DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD SIR? BEFORE WE VOTE. I APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL.

AND LOOKING FORWARD TO MOVING FORWARD.

YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 33-2021? I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE RESOLUTION 33-2021.

VERY GOOD. WE HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND. SECOND.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR. SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSE NONE MOTION CARRIES.

APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

HAVE A GREAT DAY. AND THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF MY FORGETFUL NATURE, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND DO EIGHTEEN SO I DON'T FORGET TO DO IT LATER.

[18. Discussion for the Election Officials Salaries for FY 2022. ]

CUZ IT'S APPARENTLY AN IMPORTANT ONE.

[INAUDIBLE] AND JUST GO AHEAD AND DO THAT NOW.

THIS IS DISCUSSION ACTION FOR ELECTION OFFICIAL SALARIES FOR FY 2022.

[00:15:07]

THIS COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS WHAT WILL BE POSTED.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SALARIES LISTED HERE? IF NOT, I'D LOOK FOR A MOTION MOTION TO APPROVE SO THAT WE CAN POST THESE SALARIES.

I SO MOVE APPROVAL. WE HAVE A MOTION.

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

AYE. OPPOSE NONE, MOTION CARRIES.

NOW WE'RE BACK UP TO THE BEGINNING.

DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER COUNTYWIDE AIR FLIGHT COVERAGE PLAN PHI MEDICAL,

[5. Discussion/Action to consider Countywide air flight coverage plan from PHI Medical.]

COMMISSIONERS. WE HAD THIS BEFORE US BEFORE.

THERE'S REALLY NOT MUCH APPETITE FROM THE CITIES TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROGRAM, WHICH WOULD LEAVE THE ENTIRE BURDEN ON COMMISSIONERS COURT.

AND AT AT THIS MOMENT, I, I WOULD TELL YOU THAT I DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN REALLY AFFORD TO DO THIS RIGHT NOW.

WE HAVE SOME OTHER PRETTY PRESSING MATTERS THAT THAT THAT COULD PUSH THIS MONEY TOWARDS.

BUT I'M I'M OPEN TO YOUR THOUGHTS.

WELL, I TOOK ADVANTAGE WHEN IT WAS PRESENTED TO US LAST YEAR DOING JUST THE PERSONAL ANNUAL DEAL, AND I HAVEN'T ACTUALLY WITH TWO OF THE OTHER ONE, TOO, AS WELL.

NOT JUST PHI.

SO YOU KNOW, THAT'S PROBABLY A BURDEN THAT SHOULD BE ON THE INDIVIDUAL ANYWAY.

YES, MA'AM. I AGREE.

AND IT'S A GREAT PROGRAM.

IT IS. I WISH WE COULD AFFORD TO DO IT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A HUGE BENEFIT TO PEOPLE IN OUR COUNTY AND THOSE SURROUNDING US BUT WE JUST CAN'T SIMPLY CANNOT AFFORD TO DO THIS TIME. AND IT'S AND REALLY APPRECIATE PHI FOR PUTTING THAT INFORMATION OUT THERE THAT IF PEOPLE READ THIS THAT'S ON OUR AGENDA, AT LEAST THEY CAN GO TO THEIR WEBSITE AND YOU CAN DO IT INDIVIDUALLY.

IT'S A GREAT SAVINGS IN YOUR LIFETIME.

ONE TRIP WOULD BE PROBABLY YOUR LIFETIME OF WHAT YOU WOULD PAY.

YES. HAVING HAD A FAMILY MEMBER HAVE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS SERVICE, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY VERY IMPORTANT, IT IS VERY EXPENSIVE.

AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO GO OUT AND SEEK THESE TYPES OF INSURANCE.

THEY'RE INEXPENSIVE, ESPECIALLY COMPARED TO THE SERVICE THAT YOU GET.

BUT THE COUNTY WILL NOT BE PARTICIPATING IN THIS PARTICULAR COVERAGE PLAN THIS YEAR.

SO I'D LOOK FOR A MOTION NOT TO NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE COUNTYWIDE AIR FLIGHT COVERAGE THIS YEAR. SO MOVE.

WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND.

I'LL SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR.

SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSE NONE, MOTION CARRIES.

DISCUSSION ITEM SIX DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION 34-2021 ADOPTING A CASH

[6. Discussion/Action to consider Resolution 34-2021, adopting a Cash Handling Policy for Caldwell County.]

HANDLING POLICY FOR CALDWELL COUNTY, JJ.

I THINK WHAT WE'VE ARRIVED AT IS, IS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT TURNED INTO ONE DAY, FIVE BUSINESS DAY EXTENSION AND ANYTHING BEYOND THAT WOULD WOULD HAVE TO BE PASSED THROUGH MY OFFICE AND APPROVED BY THE COURT.

IS THAT CORRECT? THE AFTER LAST COMMISSIONER'S COURT I WENT THROUGH AND ONLY MADE ONE CHANGE. I ADDED A PARAGRAPH UNDER THE SCHEDULING OF DEPOSITS BASED ON THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD IN COURT, TRYING TO COME UP WITH A COMPROMISE, KIND OF A CONDITIONAL EXTENSION.

I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT WAS DISCUSSED.

THAT'S WHAT I HAVE IN MY NOTES.

SO THE KIND OF PROPOSED SOLUTION TO THAT I CAME UP WITH WAS THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT GRANTING AN EXTENSION.

I HAVE FIVE CALENDAR DAYS, PROBABLY SHOULD BE FIVE BUSINESS DAYS.

BUT IF A DEPOSIT IS MADE BY A DEPARTMENT OR AN OFFICIAL WITHIN THAT EXTENDED TIME PERIOD, THEY WOULD HAVE TO ACCOMPANY THAT WITH A WRITTEN EXPLANATION OF WHY IT WAS NOT MADE WITHIN THE STATUTORY TIME PERIOD.

OK, AGAIN, LET'S JUST TRYING TO COME UP WITH A COMPROMISE BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENTS THAT WANT MORE TIME AND THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT THAT WANTS TO YOU KNOW MINIMIZE THE WINDOW THE DEPOSITS ARE ALLOWED TO BE MADE.

SO YOU WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION WITH THE EXCEPTION OF MAKING IT FIVE BUSINESS DAYS? RIGHT. IT SHOULD, AS IT. I'LL READ IT AS IT READS NOW AND I'LL READ MY RECOMMENDED CHANGES INTO IT AFTER I GO THROUGH IT.

SO THE ADDITION, THE ADDED PARAGRAPH READS, FOR PURPOSES OF THIS POLICY, THE CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT IS ELECTED TO EXTEND THE DEPOSIT DEADLINE BY FIVE CALENDAR DAYS, PROVIDED THAT THE DEPARTMENT HEAD OF SUPERVISING ELECTED OFFICIALS SHALL PROVIDE TO THE COUNTY JUDGE A WRITTEN EXPLANATION OF WHY THE DEPOSIT WAS NOT MADE BY THE FIFTH BUSINESS DAY AFTER THE DAY IN WHICH THE MONEY WAS RECEIVED.

RATHER THAN THAT BE EXTENDED BY FIVE CALENDAR DAYS, I THINK THAT IT'S MORE APPROPRIATE TO

[00:20:04]

MAKE IT FIVE BUSINESS DAYS THAT KEEPS IT WITHIN THE STATUTORY LIMIT THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT IS ALLOWED TO EXTEND IT BY.

IT GRANTS THE REQUEST.

THE DEPARTMENTS THAT WANTED THE EXTENSION, THEY GET A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME AND ALSO HAS A LAYER OF ACCOUNTABILITY BY PROVIDING THAT WRITTEN EXPLANATION IF A DEPOSIT IS MADE WITHIN THAT TIME PERIOD. COMMISSIONERS, ANY THOUGHTS? WELL, MY THOUGHT IS I'D LIKE, YES, THE FIVE BUSINESS DAYS, YES, BUT IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO THE SIX? SO WE KIND OF GET A LITTLE SPLIT ON TIME VS.

JUST FIVE STRAIGHT BUSINESS DAYS AT LEAST IT GIVES IT A SPLIT OF SIX BUSINESS DAYS.

COMMISSIONER, YOU'RE, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT IS AUTHORIZED TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR DEPOSITS UP TO 15 DAYS.

SO IF YOU THINK IT'S SIX DAYS IS MORE APPROPRIATE AS LONG AS THE TOTAL TIME FOR THE AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS IS 15 DAYS OR LESS FROM THE TIME THAT THE MONEY IS RECEIVED, THAT'S WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE COURT TO ESTABLISH THAT TIME.

COMMISSIONER, I WOULD POINT OUT.

SO JUST LET'S JUST MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS.

LET'S ASSUME I RECEIVE THE CASH ON MONDAY AND THEN YOU GO TO THE EXTENSION OF FIVE BUSINESS DAYS. THAT WOULD TAKE YOU INTO THE NEXT WEEK, AS A HOLIDAY. THEN YOU'D BE TUESDAY.

WELL, IT'S A BUSINESS DAY.

SO THAT'S [INAUDIBLE].

YEAH, I WOULDN'T IT WOULDN'T COUNT AS A BUSINESS DAY AT THAT POINT.

SO THAT WOULD COVER THAT.

THAT ISSUE.

AND AGAIN, THE LANGUAGE THAT I KIND OF CAME UP WITH WAS JUST IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTES THAT WE TOOK LAST TIME TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOME KIND OF CONDITIONAL EXTENSION, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT IS FREE TO COME UP WITH ANY OTHER OPTIONS OR INSERT ANY OTHER LANGUAGE THEY THINK IS APPROPRIATE INTO THIS POLICY.

OK, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COME ON UP. AND SO I KNOW THERE WAS A FEW ISSUES THAT WE CAME TOGETHER AND I KNOW TERESA HAS JUST ONE ISSUE IN THERE ALSO, BUT ON THE PORTION THAT WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH OR SEVERAL DEPARTMENT HEADS HAVE ISSUE WITH IS THE CALENDAR DAYS, WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT SWITCHING TO BUSINESS DAYS.

AND THEN JUST AS A WHOLE, THAT PROTECTS US AS A COUNTY.

I KNOW BARBARA'S TALKED SEVERAL TIMES ABOUT WE CAN LOSE GRANTS, WE HAVE BEEN LOSING GRANTS FOR NOT COMPLYING, BEING NON-COMPLIANT.

IF YOU PUT IN THE MINUTES THAT YOU GRANT US, YOU KNOW, SIX, SEVEN EXTRA BUSINESS DAYS TO COMPLETE OUR DEPOSIT, THAT WOULD JUST SAVE US AS THE EXTERNAL AUDITORS COMING IN AND SAYING, OH, YOU'RE NON-COMPLIANT WITH YOU PUTTING THAT IN THE MINUTES, WE'RE STAYING COMPLIANT, YOU KNOW.

NINETY NINE PERCENT OF THE TIME.

AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HAS A PROBLEM WITH DOING IT WEEKLY.

WE WOULD JUST LIKE IT MADE NOTE THAT, YOU KNOW, BY THE STATUTE THAT WE GAVE, THEY'RE DUE DEPOSITS ARE DUE THE NEXT DAY.

BUT YOU DO HAVE FIVE BUSINESS DAYS TO TURN IT IN AND YOU'RE STAYING WITHIN THE LAW.

YOU'RE STAYING WITHIN THE STATUTE.

AND I THINK WEEKLY DEPOSITS ARE GOING TO BE BENEFICIAL FOR THE ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS.

DON'T THINK VERY MANY DEPARTMENTS COULD DO IT DAILY.

I MEAN, IT'S JUST GOING TO BE STRENUOUS ON EACH DEPARTMENT TO HAVE TO COME UP AND HAVE SOMEBODY COMING IN AND DOING THAT.

SO I JUST WISH THAT Y'ALL WOULD MAKE SURE THAT YOU PUT IN THE MINUTES.

SO WE'RE NOT THINK OR SOME YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT BEING NON-COMPLIANT WITH THE DOING DEPOSITS WEEKLY.

AND THEN THE WRITTEN PART.

I COULD UNDERSTAND IF WE DID NOT MEET THE HE SAID YOU GAVE US THE SEVEN DAY, SIX DAY EXTENSION DOING WRITTEN AFTER THAT, THE EIGHTH DAY OR THE SEVENTH DAY.

IF WE WERE NONCOMPLIANT WITH GETTING OUR DEPOSIT IN AND DOING A WRITTEN STATEMENT AT THAT TIME OF WHY, YOU KNOW, THAT WE WERE NOT ABLE TO COMPLETE AND BE COMPLIANT.

JUST WRITING AND DOCUMENTING THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE ALREADY GIVING US, THE EXTENSION YOU'RE ALLOWING US TO HAVE THAT.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE TO WRITE A STATEMENT UNLESS WE PASS WHAT YOU'RE GIVING US AUTHORIZATION TO DO.

SO IF WE PASS THE DEADLINE, THE SIX DAYS ON THE SEVENTH DAY, THEN WE SHOULD HAVE TO HAVE A WRITTEN EXPLANATION OF OUR DELAY.

OK, THANK YOU.

I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING JUANITA WAS SAYING, BUT I HAVE ANOTHER ISSUE STILL THAT'S IN THE POLICY, IT'S THE ONE ON PAGE THREE UNDER EXTENSION INSTRUCTIONS.

IN MY OFFICE, WE'RE UNDER TWO SOFTWARES, WE'RE UNDER EDOC AND EAGLE RECORDER, WITH EDOC, THE LADIES ARE ABLE TO DO THEIR OWN REPORT INDIVIDUALLY SO I CAN, YOU KNOW, SEE WHAT EACH

[00:25:03]

ONE OF THEM TAKES IN.

SAY ONE OF THEM IS SHORT TWENTY DOLLARS.

I'LL KNOW WHICH ONE IT IS BECAUSE THEY TAKE THEY KEEP TRACK OF THEIR OWN MONEY WITH THEIR BANK BAGS AND THEY DO A REPORT AND THEN I CHECK IT, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT MORNING.

WITH EAGLE RECORDER.

THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO DO THAT.

IT'S STILL THEY ARE ALL UNDER ONE TILL, THEY ALL GET OUT OF ONE BOX AND THEY ALL HAVE BANK BAGS. BUT IT REALLY DOESN'T DO ANY GOOD BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, I'M JUST PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER AND RUNNING ONE REPORT.

IF MONEY SHORT ON THAT SIDE, FOR INSTANCE, IF THEY'RE FORTY DOLLARS SHORT, I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PINPOINT WHO'S WHO WAS SHORT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT DOESN'T THAT RIGHT THERE JUST IT'S JUST AGAINST ME, YOU KNOW, ALONE.

SO I JUST HAVE A I DON'T KNOW, A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

ONLY ONE CASHIER IS ALLOWED ACCESS TO A SPECIFIC CASH DRAWER DURING A SINGLE SHIFT, WHICH THERE'S ONLY ONE CASH DRAWER OVER THERE, ONE TILL.

THERE'S NO WAY RIGHT NOW FOR ME TO SEPARATE THEM.

I'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH TYLER, WITH EAGLE ABOUT TRYING TO SEPARATE, BUT I STILL HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING. I DON'T KNOW IF, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN DO IT.

I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THEY COULD.

BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW, IT'S STILL NOT DONE.

SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU PASS IT, APPROVE IT WITH THIS RIGHT NOW, I'M GOING TO BE NONCOMPLIANT FROM THIS DAY FORWARD, YOU KNOW.

SO I GUESS I'M HAVING TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING WHY YOU CAN'T KEEP SEPARATE TILL BAGS EVEN ON THAT, RECONCILE THOSE SAME THREE BAGS OF THE THREE PEOPLE AND THEN HAVE THAT RECONCILIATION. AND THEN IF YOU HAVE TO COMBINE THOSE THREE TO GET IT INTO TYLER, YOU STILL HAVE A RECORD THAT YOU RECONCILE EACH INDIVIDUAL ONE SO THAT IF IT CAME UP SHORT, YOU WOULD KNOW WHOSE TILL BAG IT WAS SHORT IT.

BECAUSE I CAN'T RUN INDIVIDUAL REPORTS ON EACH ONE IS WHAT IT IS.

I MEAN, LIKE RIGHT NOW THEY ALL OPEN UP THEIR TILL ON ONE ONE TILL.

EVERY ALL FOUR OF THEM GET INTO THAT ONE TILL THEY'RE NOT SEPARATED BY SANDRA, VERONICA, MARIAH AND BRITNEY VERSUS EDOC WERE IT'S DOLORES, DEBRA, BEVERLY, LORI AND BRENDA, YOU KNOW, AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY'LL RUN THEIR REPORT WITH THEIR MONEY AND THEY'LL PUT IT IN THEIR BAG.

SO IT SHOWS ON THEIR REPORT, IT SHOWS EVERYTHING THAT THEY TOOK IN INDIVIDUALLY VERSUS TYLER ON THE DEED SIDE.

I CAN'T SEPARATE THEM, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE, SAY I GO BACK AND I TELL THEM, OK, SANDRA, YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP TRACK OF YOUR MONEY ALL DAY LONG AND PUT IT IN YOUR BAG.

THAT'S FINE. THEY CAN EACH DO THAT, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHEN WE RUN THE REPORT TO CLOSE THE TILL, IT'S ONE REPORT AND IT'S JUST WITH EVERYBODY.

IT'S NOT SEPARATING EACH NAME.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT BEFORE YOU DID THAT REPORT, THOUGH, YOU WOULD KNOW IF SOMEBODY WAS FORTY DOLLARS SHORT, IT WOULD BE THEIR BAG.

RIGHT? THAT WAS. NO. 40 DOLLARS SHORT.

BECAUSE I WON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY THEY HAVE UNTIL I RUN THE REPORT.

BUT CAN YOU? DO THEY NOT START OUT WITH AN AMOUNT.

NO. AND THEY'RE NOT SIGNING IN INDIVIDUALLY.

AND TO THAT EDOC IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING WHERE IS THE OTHER ONE THEY HAVE. YES.

THEY HAVE THEIR OWN SIGN IN.

ON THIS ONE. IT'S A GROUP, ONE SIGN IN TO EVERYBODY.

I STILL I JUST WONDER IF THERE'S NOT A WAY TO RECONCILE.

SO IS THERE NOT A WAY TO START THEM OUT OF THE HUNDRED DOLLARS CASH IN THE BAG, GO THROUGH THE DAY, RECONCILE THAT BAG AND THEN DO YOUR REPORT TO MAKE SURE.

SO THAT WAY YOU WOULD KNOW IF IT WAS SHORT WHOSE BAG WAS SHORT.

SO IF THEY DID IT, THEY START OUT A HUNDRED DOLLARS AND THEY DID THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS OF TRANSACTIONS. THEY SHOULD HAVE FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS IN THAT BAG AT THE END OF THE DAY.

AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD TRACK WHAT TRANSACTIONS THEY DID.

AND I KNOW THAT'S DIFFICULT BY HAND, BUT THE FLIP SIDE OF IT IS STATUTORILY WE COULD LOSE GRANT MONEY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TRACKING THAT TILL.

SO THAT NEEDS TO BE A PRIORITY TO GET TYLER TO FIX THAT.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WHAT THE PROBLEM IS, GETTING HIM IN HERE TO FIX IT, BUT THAT NEEDS TO BECOME A PRIORITY.

AND THEN IT I'M SORRY.

IT OK, SAY I DO THAT FIFTY DOLLARS EACH ONE OF THEM.

WHERE DO I GET THE FIFTY DOLLARS FROM? I DON'T KNOW. I'M SURE WE CAN SORT THAT OUT.

WE PROBABLY COULD. AND THEN I REALLY DON'T.

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT.

[00:30:03]

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT LIKE YOU SAID, THEY SHOULD END UP WITH FIFTY DOLLARS, BUT I'M STILL NOT ABLE TO GET A REPORT ON JUST SANDRA'S, I UNDERSTAND THAT, SO IF YOU'RE JUST ALL WORKING OUT OF ONE TILL, THERE'S NO WAY TO KNOW IF IT WAS EMPLOYING A, B OR C IF YOU'RE SHORT. YEAH, SURE.

RIGHT? THAT'S YEAH.

BUT IF YOU'RE WORKING OUT THREE INDIVIDUAL TILLS ALL DAY, THOSE TILLS SHOULD RECONCILE IF THEY DID TRANSACTIONS.

THEY SHOULD THAT BAG SHOULD RECONCILE.

AND THEN YOU JUST MAKE YOUR REPORT WITH THE AMOUNTS THAT YOU TOOK IN, BUT YOU STILL HAVE AT LEAST A LEVEL OF RECONCILIATION THERE.

AND MAYBE I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING THE ISSUE, [INAUDIBLE] HAS TO GO IN THIS ONE REPORT AND THERE'S NO WAY TO SEPARATE THE EMPLOYEES.

BUT SHE WOULDN'T KNOW WHETHER YOU TOOK IN THIRTY DOLLARS AND WHAT TRANSACTIONS YOU TOOK AND I TOOK IN FIFTY AND HE TOOK IN TWENTY.

YES, SHE SHE'D HAVE YOU'D HAVE TO KEEP A HAND RECONCILIATION OF EACH BAG THROUGHOUT THE DAY. YOU'D HAVE TO EACH INDIVIDUAL CLERK WOULD HAVE TO MANUALLY WRITE DOWN OR NOTATE DURING THE DAY HOW MUCH BUSINESS THEY DID.

AND THEN THAT HAS TO MATCH YOUR BAG, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT ENTERED, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ENTERED IN THE SAME TILL IF YOU HAND RECONCILED IT, AT LEAST THROUGHOUT THE DAY, YOU WOULD KNOW WHAT SHOULD BE IN THAT BAG AND THEN THOSE BAGS SHOULD COMBINE TO THE TOTAL TILL IN TYLER.

AT THAT POINT, I UNDERSTAND, TOO.

I THINK WE NEED TO GET THAT RECONCILED BECAUSE THAT'S.

I AGREE. THAT TO ME IT IS PROBLEMATIC THAT WE DON'T HAVE IT SET UP THAT WAY, THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL CLERK IS NOT SET UP ON THEIR OWN TILL BECAUSE THAT JUST LEADS TO PROBLEMS ON RECONCILIATION, THAT CAN REALLY SNOWBALL OUT OF CONTROL BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE PROPER DOCUMENTATION TO KNOW WHAT WAS TAKEN IN FROM WHOM.

SO I AGREE, WE PROBABLY NEED TO DO WHATEVER WE NEED TO GET THAT FIX.

YEAH, YOU'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO, WE DO THAT.

SO I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION IS, HAVE WE MADE AN APPOINTMENT WITH TYLER TO GET THAT RESOLVED? I HAVE BEEN I EMAILED SOMEONE AND THEN WE HAVE TO RUN A TICKET THROUGH TYLER.

SO I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, WAITING TO HEAR FROM THEM TO SEE IF IT CAN BE DONE.

LIKE I SAID, THEY HAD TOLD ME, WELL, THIS STARTED BACK IN I DON'T KNOW WHEN THIS POLICY FIRST CAME OUT, WHEN WE MET WITH JAN AND BARBARA AT THE JUSTICE CENTER, WHAT WAS THAT, IN MAY, APRIL OR MAY? IT WAS IT WAS IT WAS A IT WAS A FEW MONTHS AGO.

AND I WAS TOLD BARBARA WAS GOING TO GET JAN TO GET IN TOUCH WITH THEM AND.

AND WE DID.

BUT THEY NEVER YOU KNOW, THEY NEVER GOT BACK WITH US.

AND THEN A FEW MONTHS LATER, JAN AND I HAD TALKED AND SHE ASKED ME IF I HAD HEARD.

THEY STILL HADN'T. SO I YOU KNOW, I EMAILED SOMEONE, I DID A TICKET ON IT.

AND I HAVEN'T BEEN TO WORK YET, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING.

OK, THERE WAS SOME CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN TYLER AND WE DID SEND IT TO THE COUNTY CLERK.

AND JAN DID CONTACT YOU TO REFERENCE.

DID YOU ANYWAY, THIS HAS BEEN GOING BACK AND FORTH.

BUT WE WE WORK A LOT OF TIMES WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS ON A LOT OF DIFFERENT ISSUES. BUT THE POSITIVE SIDE IS BECAUSE OF THIS CASH POLICY, THERE HAS BEEN SOME GOOD THINGS THAT HAVE COME OUT OF IT INSTEAD OF SEVEN PEOPLE OR FOUR PEOPLE WORKING OUT OF THE THE TILLS WE NOW HAVE WE'RE TRYING TO GET IT DOWN TO ONE PERSON WORKING OUT OF A TILL.

AND IF WE DO DAILY RECONCILIATIONS AND WEEKLY RECONCILIATIONS, THEN WE ELIMINATE THE POSSIBILITY OF FRAUD.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO.

SO WE APPRECIATE YOU LOOKING AT AND GETTING THIS CASH POLICY APPROVED.

AND THIS IS A PURPOSE.

WE DO HAVE TO WORK THROUGH SOME OF THESE THINGS.

WE'VE EVEN BEEN ABLE TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY TREASURER'S OFFICE AND IN SOME POSITIVE REVENUE RECONCILIATIONS WITH WITH THEIR OFFICE AS WELL.

BUT IT'S BEEN SOMETHING THAT IT'S A WORK IN PROGRESS WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS.

IT WILL TAKE SOME TIME BECAUSE WE RECOGNIZE THROUGH THIS CASH POLICY THAT THERE ARE SOME OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE COME UP.

SO THIS IS A GOOD THING, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO IMPLEMENT POLICIES AND YOU FIND THERE ARE SOME THINGS AND THAT HAVE BEEN NEEDING TO BE WORKED ON FOR POSSIBLY YEARS.

SO I'M YEAH, IT JUST TAKES, YOU KNOW, SOME TIME BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE PERSONNEL

[00:35:04]

NECESSARILY THAT CAN WORK WITH A PARTICULAR OFFICE.

THEY HAVE TO TAKE THE TIME TO CONTACT THAT TYLER THEMSELVES AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN WORK THROUGH THEM AND IF THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE LANGUAGE, THEN WE'LL TRY TO TAKE THE TIME AND MAYBE DO A CONFERENCE CALL WITH THEM TO WORK THOSE THOSE THINGS THROUGH.

SO, TERESA, YOU'VE NOW ISSUED A TICKET? YOU'VE PUT A TICKET IN?`` I DID PUT A TICKET IN AND I DO RECONCILE DAILY.

I, YOU KNOW, EVERY DAY AND I BRING MY DEPOSITS WEEKLY OR THE OTHER WEEK, BUT SOMETIMES IT'S WEEKLY BUT I DO RECONCILE, YOU KNOW, THE MONIES EVERY DAY.

THE ONLY THING IS WHICH IS MY PROBLEM IS THAT WITH TYLER, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ALL ON ONE TILL I CAN'T SEPARATE THEM.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S MY THAT'S THE BIG THING.

BUT YOU CAN SEPARATE THEM.

WE DID FIND OUT THAT YOU CAN SEPARATE THEM.

I BELIEVE IT CAN BE DONE.

AND THAT'S CORRECT.

WE'RE WORKING. I WILL BE IN NONCOMPLIANCE.

I DON'T THAT'S THAT'S MY ISSUE RIGHT NOW.

WE CAN WORK THROUGH IT.

BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT TRYING TO GET WITH TYLER TECHNOLOGY AND THERE IS A METHODOLOGY AND WE IT'S JUST A MATTER OF GETTING WITH YOU AND MAKING SURE THAT.

I THINK HER ISSUE IS NOT DOING IT.

I THINK HER ISSUE IS BEING INSTANTLY NONCOMPLIANT WITH A POLICY THAT WE PASSED.

AND FOR HOW LONG? I'LL BE AND NON-COMPLIANT AND.

AND WHAT DOES THAT DO? AND I DON'T SAY THAT.

THAT SITUATION AND OTHER THINGS.

SO, JUDGE, COMMISSIONERS, I MAY HAVE A SOLUTION TO CONSIDER.

THERE IS A PROCEDURE BY WHICH EXCEPTIONS CAN BE GRANTED BY THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT REQUEST FOR EXCEPTIONS TO THESE CASH POLICY PROCEDURES MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT IN WRITING FOR CONSIDERATION AT AN OPEN MEETING.

ONE POSSIBLE SOLUTION WOULD BE TO DELAY IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS POLICY UNTIL NEXT COMMISSIONERS COURT AND GIVE ANY DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE WOULD REQUEST AN EXCEPTION TIME TO SUBMIT IT. IT'S CONSIDERED THE POLICY AND ANY EXCEPTIONS TO IT AT THE SAME MEETING WOULD COME UP AT THE SAME TIME. OK, JUST A POTENTIAL SOLUTION.

IT IS, AND I'M OK WITH ALL THAT.

I JUST NOW THAT THE TICKET'S BEEN SUBMITTED, HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET SOME RESOLUTION OF THAT ISSUE AND WE'LL MAKE, WE COULD BRING IT BACK, MAKE AN ACCEPTANCE UNTIL WE GET THE TICKET SQUARED AWAY AND THEN WE'LL BRING IT BACK AND MAKE IT THESE SEPARATE PILLS ONCE WE CAN READ THE REPORTS. JUDGE, ONE ADDITIONAL MATTER.

IF THE COURT SAW FIT, THEY COULD APPROVE THE POLICY TODAY, BUT ADD A PROVISION TO THE RESOLUTION THAT THE RESOLUTION ADOPTED AND THE POLICY WOULD NOT TAKE EFFECT UNTIL A DATE CERTAIN. AT THAT POINT, YOU WOULD HAVE ALREADY APPROVED IT.

IT WOULD TAKE EFFECT AUTOMATICALLY AND WE COULD CONSIDER ANY EXCEPTIONS OR ANY OTHER TECHNICAL CHANGES IN THE INTERIM.

I JUST PERSONALLY SPEAKING, I PREFER TO KEEP IT CLEAN AND GET THIS STRAIGHTENED OUT AND BRING A RESOLUTION BACK, THAT'S GOING TO BE WHAT WE'RE DOING.

THAT'S MY OPINION AS WELL.

THERE'S BEEN SO MUCH DISCUSSION ON THIS.

I WOULD RATHER GET IT RECTIFIED BEFORE WE.

THAT'S JUST MY OPINION BEFORE WE PASS AND APPROVE ANYTHING.

I FULLY UNDERSTAND, TERESA, WHERE YOU COME FROM.

THAT'S I WOULDN'T WANT TO BE IN NONCOMPLIANCE THE MINUTE IT PASSES EITHER.

BUT THERE IS, I THINK, A FIX AND WE NEED TO GET THAT COMPLETED.

OK, MAYBE IF YOU CONTACT THEM AND LEAVE THEM A VOICEMAIL AGAIN AND SAY, YES, I'M ON A RESTRICTED TIME NOW, I WILL I'LL GO BACK AND I'LL CHECK IT AGAIN.

I'LL CALL AND I'LL PUT IT AS ESCALATE.

YOU KNOW, THEY IT REALLY NEEDS TO GET TAKEN CARE OF.

BUT THAT'S JUST WHERE I STAND ON THAT ONE, YOU KNOW.

AND LIKE I SAID, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE CASH HANDLING POLICY AND I'LL DO THEM, YOU KNOW, BUT I RECONCILE THEM EVERY DAY.

AND I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH DOING WEEKLY DEPOSITS.

IT'S JUST THAT ONE THING THAT'S GOING TO HAVE ME NON-COMPLIANT EVERY DAY, YOU KNOW? OK, ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, THERE'S SOMEONE MIGHT WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE ITEM SIX UNTIL WE GET THE LANGUAGE CORRECTED? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE ITEM SIX.

OK, WE HAVE A MOTION TABLE ITEM SIX.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM SEVEN. DISCUSSION, ACTION TO CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO THE LOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT

[7. Discussion/Action to consider amendment to the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Caldwell County and the City of Lockhart for Performance of Governmental functions and Services for the Farmers Market.]

BETWEEN CALDWELL COUNTY AND THE CITY OF LOCKHART FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS AND SERVICES FOR THE FARMER'S MARKET.

COMMISSIONERS, THERE'S BEEN A REQUEST BY THE FARMER'S MARKET TO EXTEND THEIR TIME TO TWO O'CLOCK. THE CITY HAS ALREADY AGREED TO DO THIS.

AND AND WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR APPROVAL BY OUR GOVERNING BODY TO APPROVE THE SAME

[00:40:01]

EXTENSION. I'M ASSUMING NO OTHER COMPLAINT AND NO COMPLAINTS WERE LODGED WHEN THE CITY DID THIS BY ANY SURROUNDING NO BUSINESS OWNERS.

SO NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.

AND I SPOKE WITH MAYOR WHITE ABOUT IT AND IN ONE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER AND THEY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM SEVEN.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

ITEM SEVEN, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

WE HAVE MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSE NONE. MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM 8, DISCUSSION AND ACTION TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION 36-2021 AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY JUDGE

[8. Discussion/Action to consider resolution 36-2021, authorizing the County Judge to execute the Service Agreement between Caldwell County and Tyler Technologies, Inc.]

TO EXECUTE THE SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CALDWELL COUNTY AND TYLOR TECHNOLOGIES.

COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR BACK UP THERE, THIS IS GOING TO BE AN ANNUAL OCCURRENCE FOR AN AGREEMENT WITH TYLOR TO HANDLE SEVERAL FUNCTIONS OF OUR SERVICES NOW.

WE ARE TRYING TO GET MORE CLOUD BASED.

WE'RE ALSO, AS WE GO ALONG, IS GOING TO BE HAVING DISCUSSIONS ABOUT BRINGING SO AND THE DA'S OFFICE AND ETAL ON ODYSSEY AND GETTING AWAY FROM EDOC BECAUSE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE WITH THE EDOC. AND SO THIS IS JUST KIND OF A STEP IN THAT DIRECTION.

FORTY EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED SEVENTY TWO DOLLARS COST AND WE DO HAVE THE FUNDS TO DO IT. IN DISCUSSION.

I'D LOOK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION, AND I'LL READ IT FIRST BEFORE WE DO.

RESOLUTION 36-2021, RESOLUTION CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT, WHEREAS CALDWELL COUNTY CAR SOFTWARE SERVICES FOR THE ORDERLY ADMINISTRATION AND OPERATION OF THE COUNTY BUSINESS THROUGHOUT VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS.

AND WHEREAS TYLOR TECHNOLOGIES INC HAS OPERATED SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE AGREEMENT TO THE COUNTY FOR THE PURPOSES OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT AND CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT.

AND WHEREAS CALDWELL COUNTY TEXAS FINDS THAT SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC INTEREST IS SERVED BY THE COUNTY AND ITS DEPARTMENTS UTILIZING SERVICES OFFERED AND PROVIDED BY TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT, THE COUNTY JUDGE IS AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE THE SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CALDWELL COUNTY AND TYLER TECHNOLOGIES.

COMMISSIONERS, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I'D LOOK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION 36-2021.

SO MOVED.

WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SHELTON.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED NONE. THAT MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM NINE DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER THE IMPOSITION OF OPTIONAL ACCOUNTING FEES THROUGH

[9. Discussion/Action to consider the imposition of Optional County Fees through the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for Calendar year 2022]

THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES.

DO THIS EVERY YEAR, COMMISSIONERS.

THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES.

IS THAT CORRECT? I THINK IT IS, THERE'S NO CHANGES, RIGHT, TO THE FEES, EZZY? [INAUDIBLE], SHE SAID THERE ARE NO CHANGES, OK, SO NO CHANGES TO THE FEES, COMMISSIONERS, I WOULD LOOK FOR MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NINE.

I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NINE.

WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM 10, CONSIDERING THE 2022 SHERIFFS AND CONSTABLES FEES.

[10. Discussion/Action Considering the 2022 Sheriffs' and Constables' Fees. ]

CHIEF, ARE THERE ANY CHANGES BEING REQUESTED ON THESE FEES? YES. GOOD MORNING, WHERE YOU GUYS PROVIDED A COPY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES? YES. YES, SIR.

SO WHAT DO WE KNOW, WHAT ARE WE CHANGE THEM FROM? WE JUST HAVE A LIST OF THINGS HERE, BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY I'M SORRY, COULD YOU SHOW US WHERE THEY WERE, WHERE WE'RE GOING FROM AND TO.

SOME OF IT IS JUST THE WORDING THAT THEY'VE CHANGED WITH THE LEGISLATOR LAST YEAR, THE FORCIBLE DETAINER, IT'S STILL FORCIBLE DETAINER, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY A EVICTION CITATION.

THE FEE IS STILL EIGHTY DOLLARS.

OK. I DID WANT TO ADD THE ADDITIONAL THIRTY FIVE DOLLARS PER HOUR PER DEPUTY BECAUSE

[00:45:05]

NORMALLY WHEN WE DO THE WRITS OF POSSESSION, IT TAKES TWO OF US TO GO OUT THERE AT LEAST.

OK, SO THAT'S JUST ADDING TO THE PER DEPUTY.

I WANTED TO CHANGE ON THE RATE A GARNISHMENT TO DROP THE PRICE DOWN TO 150 DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE'RE ONLY SERVING THE BANK AND THEY'RE GARNISHING THAT PAY THE BANK ACCOUNT AND THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, WE'RE ONLY SERVING AN INDIVIDUAL AS FAR AS LIKE THE SHERIFF OR SOMEBODY IN THAT REGARDS.

WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY SERVING THE PERSON.

ALSO THOUGHT ABOUT TRYING TO DROP THE 2.55 PERCENT, JUST TO SIMPLIFY IT A LITTLE BIT, BECAUSE WHEN YOU GET OUT THERE, YOU TRY TO ADD THIS 2.55 TO THIS LARGE AMOUNT, IT KIND OF GETS HECTIC. SO THAT WAS JUST BASICALLY TO SIMPLIFY.

OK, THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS? YES, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THE COMMISSION WILL PASS THIS DOWN SO YOU GUYS CAN LOOK AT THAT RIGHT QUICK, SO EVERYBODY GOT A CHANCE TO SEE IT.

YEAH.

WHEN YOU READ EVERY TYPE THAT YOU CAN SUBMIT THAT TO US, I WILL HAVE IT.

OK.

I JUST GOT ONE QUESTION THEN, IT SAYS, TRANSPORTATION PROJECT FEES.

WHY DOES THESE OTHER COUNTIES LIKE BRAZOS AND CAMERON AND EL PASO AND HIDALGO? WELL, WHY DON'T THEY GO BY THE SAME ONES WE GO BY? EVERYBODY SETS THEIR OWN FEES.

I'VE COMPARED LIKE BASTROP, [INAUDIBLE], HAYES COUNTY, JUST THE SURROUNDING AREAS.

AND WE'RE PRETTY MUCH IN WHERE THEY'RE AT.

EVERY COUNTY SET THEIR OWN FEES.

SO WE'RE JUST KIND OF TRYING TO STAY WHERE BASICALLY THE SURROUNDING AREAS ARE AT.

THANK YOU. OK, COMMISSIONERS, THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS I'D LOOK FOR A MOTION TO CONSIDER THE 2022 SHERIFFS AND CONSTABLES FEES WITH THOSE CHANGES SUBMITTED.

SO MOVED.

WE HAVE A MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE, OPPOSED NONE. MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ITEM ELEVEN, DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE AWARD RECOMMENDED FOR RFB

[11. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of the award recommendation for RFB 19CCP01-B-5 Harwood Rd. FEMA Box Culvert Project to 304 Construction. ]

19CCP01-B-5 HARWOOD ROAD FEMA BOX COVERT PROJECT TO 304 CONSTRUCTION.

DANIE? YES.

NOW THAT THIS IS THE FIFTH TIME IT'S GONE OUT, SO HOPEFULLY IT'S THE LAST.

WE DID RECEIVE TWO BIDS, ONE FROM 304 CONSTRUCTION, THE OTHER FROM WJC AND THERE WAS ABOUT A THIRTY EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS DIFFERENCE.

AND BOTH PROPOSALS OR BOTH BID SUBMITTALS DID HAVE ALL THE PROPER DOCUMENTATION.

SO MY AWARD RECOMMENDATION FOR THE AWARD OPPORTUNITY, PLEASE GO TO 304 CONSTRUCTION.

AFTER THAT, WE WILL, I WILL GET IN TOUCH WITH 304 AND SET UP A PRE CONTRACT MEETING AND SIT DOWN WITH A GROUP OF PEOPLE.

JUST ASK ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE MIGHT HAVE OR ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THEY MIGHT HAVE AS WELL. OK, COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE MOTION TO APPROVE THE AWARD RECOMMENDATION FOR RF B19CCP01-B-5 FOR HARWOOD ROAD FEMA BOX COVERT PROJECT TO 304 CONSTRUCTION [INAUDIBLE]

[00:50:03]

. I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE IT.

WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED NONE. THE MOTION CARRIES.

GLAD TO SEE THIS THING GETTING OFF THE GROUND.

YES. IT'S BEEN LIKE ROLLING A SQUARE BOULDER UP A STEEP HILL.

AND ITEM 12.

[12. Discussion/Action to consider payment for non-compliant Government Forms & Supplies invoice made by Elections Department REQ01069.]

I JUST WANT TO REMIND THE COMMISSIONERS AND JUDGE THAT ON THAT HARWOOD ROAD COVERT PROJECT THAT WE HAVE ASKED FOR AN EXTENSION ON THAT PROJECT, IT WAS RIGHT NOW WAS SCHEDULED IN AUGUST 25TH OF 2021.

WE'VE ASKED FOR A SIX MONTH EXTENSION TO FEBRUARY THE 25TH OF 2022 FOR THE PROJECT AND WE EXPECT THAT EXTENSION TO BE APPROVED.

OK, THANK YOU, DAVE.

OK, ITEM 12 DISCUSSION ACTION.

CONSIDER PAYMENT FOR NON-COMPLIANT GOVERNMENT FORMS AND SUPPLIES AND INVOICES MADE BY THE ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT.

DANIE? YES, SO A COUPLE OF MONTHS BACK, KIMBER, WE'VE TRAINED HER UP A LITTLE BIT.

WE'VE TRAINED HER COMPLETELY NOW ON ALL THE PURCHASING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.

BUT A PURCHASE WAS MADE A FEW MONTHS BACK THAT WAS OVER FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS, AN INVOICE FROM GOVERNMENT FORMS AND SUPPLIES AND THE AMOUNT OF 589.61 CENTS FOR MULTIPLE ITEMS WAS FOUNDED BY THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT WITH AN INVOICE APPEARED IN THE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE OFFICE WITH THIS EXPENSE DID NOT HAVE A PURCHASE ORDER THAT IS REQUIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALDWELL COUNTY PURCHASING POLICY.

A SINGLE INVOICE ITEM, FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS OR MORE REQUIRES A REQUISITION TO BE GENERATED FROM THE DEPARTMENT HEAD DESIGNEE OR PURCHASING DEPARTMENT, AND THEN A PURCHASE ORDER TO BE ISSUED BY THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO MAKING PURCHASES OR SECURING THE SERVICES IN ORDER TO FINALIZE AND CLOSE OUT THIS NONCOMPLIANCE ISSUE.

THIS MUST BE MADE AWARE TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT AND ACKNOWLEDGED OF ANY FURTHER ACTION IS REQUIRED UPON COMMISSIONERS COURT.

BUT I DID SPEAK WITH KIMBER.

SHE'S FULLY AWARE AND LIKE I SAID, THAT WAS FROM A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO AND EVER SINCE THEN SHE'S BEEN SHE'S BEEN GREAT.

ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO CONSIDER PAYMENT REQUISITION 01069 IN THE AMOUNT OF $589.61.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 12.

WE HAVE MOTION TO PROVE ITEM 12.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED NONE.

MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.

ITEM 13, DISCUSSION ACTION AND CONSIDER BUDGET AMENDMENT 76 TO MOVE MONEY FROM ZERO ZERO

[13. Discussion/Action to consider Budget Amendment #76 to move money from 001-6510-4860 (Contingency) to 010-6640-3162 (Community Collections Events) to cover overage. ]

ONE SIX FIVE ONE ZERO FOUR EIGHT SIX ZERO CONTINGENCY TO ZERO ZERO ONE SIX SIX FOUR ZERO THREE ONE SIX TWO COMMUNITY COLLECTIONS EVENTS TO COVER AN OVERAGE AND GET OVER HERE SO I CAN TELL YOU THE AMOUNT.

SO WE'RE MOVING EIGHTY TWO DOLLARS FROM CONTINGENCY TO, WOW, THIS IS TINY, ZERO ZERO ONE NINE THOUSAND FOUR NINE SEVEN ZERO AND THEN WE'RE MOVING, THEN WE'RE MAKING A TRANSFER ON THE REVENUE, WE'RE MAKING THE TRANSFER OF EIGHTY DOLLARS AND PUTTING THAT INTO COMMUNITY COLLECTIONS EVENTS ZERO ONE ZERO SIX SIX FOUR ZERO THREE ONE SIX TWO.

THE TINIEST BOX I'VE EVER SEEN.

BUT WE GOT THROUGH IT, I THINK I READ THE NUMBERS RIGHT.

SO COMMISSIONERS, I'D LOOK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER SEVENTY SIX.

WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED NONE. MOTION CARRIES.

14, 15, 16, 17, 18.

ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE ARE READY TO MOVE ON TO ITEM 19.

WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 551.087 OF THE TEXAS

[19. EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to section 551.087 to the Texas Government Code; discussion of deliberation regarding economic development negotiations associated with Project Dynamo. Possible action may follow in open court.]

GOVERNMENT CODE. DISCUSSION OF DELIBERATION REGARDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECT DINAMO.

POSSIBLE ACTION MAY FOLLOW IN OPEN COURT.

WE'RE GOING IN THE OPENING SESSION AT 9:54.

OK. ALL RIGHT, FOLKS, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 551.087 TO THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

DISCUSSION OF DELIBERATION REGARDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECT DYNAMO, POSSIBLE ACTION MAY FOLLOW IN OPEN COURT.

[00:55:02]

EXECUTIVE SESSION IS CLOSED AT 10:12 A.M.

WE WILL BE TAKING SOME ACTION.

COMMISSIONERS TO HAVE A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE FURTHER NEGOTIATIONS REGARDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES AS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION? SO MOVED. WE HAVE A MOTION, DO HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED NONE. MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT.

AND THE ONE WE'VE BEEN LOOKING FOR, ITEM 21, DO HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? SO MOVED.

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