Dec 13, 2022 Commissioners Court

[00:00:01]

ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.

THANK YOU FOR COMING TO CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT.

[Call Meeting to Order]

COMMISSIONER ROLAND, WOULD YOU LEAD US IN THE INVOCATION, PLEASE? OUR FATHER, WHICH ART IN HEAVEN? THE FATHER OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOR, JESUS CHRIST.

FATHER, ONCE AGAIN THAT YOU'RE WEAK AND UNABLE TO SERVE.

AND IT'S STANDING HERE WITH MY MIND STEAD ON YOU.

LORD, YOU ARE AWESOME.

AWESOME. GOD, LORD, I THANK YOU FOR EACH AND EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE ALLOWED US TO DO HERE IN THIS COURT.

ALSO, I JUST HAVE TO ADMIT THAT THIS IS ONE OF THE GREATEST COURTS THAT I'VE EVER SERVED ON, AND I LOVED EVERY SECOND OF IT.

GIVE ME A MINUTE. ON.

YESTERDAY I WENT TO MY SISTER IN LAW'S FUNERAL, ONE OF THE TOUGHEST EVENTS THAT I'VE EVER BEEN THROUGH.

WE WERE JUST LIKE BROTHERS AND SISTERS RATHER THAN BROTHER IN LAW AND SISTER IN LAW.

I HAD A HARD TIME TALKING YESTERDAY, TOO.

BUT, LORD, I KNOW THAT YOUR GOD ALMIGHTY AND YOU ALONE CAN DO ANYTHING WITHOUT FAIL.

ALSO, LORD, I REALIZE THAT YOU DON'T MAKE ANY MISTAKES.

NOT ANY. THESE IN OUR BLESSINGS.

I PRAY IN THE NAME OF JESUS, OUR LORD AND SAVIOR.

AMEN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS THIS MORNING?

[Announcements]

AND ACTUALLY, WE'RE MEETING THE 27TH.

WE ARE MEETING AT 27.

OKAY. YOU SAID AFTER CHRISTMAS, DOES IT EVER YOU SAID AFTER CHRISTMAS THAT YOU DID SAY, YEAH, SORRY.

I THOUGHT MY BAD.

I'M GETTING CONFUSED, TOO.

THAT AND I'LL DEFINITELY MISS THE INVOCATION.

COMMISSIONER ROLAND, THAT WAS A NICE ONE THIS MORNING.

SO I'D LIKE TO ECHO COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND, WISHING EVERYBODY A VERY MERRY CHRISTMAS AND SAFE TRAVELS.

AND AND, YOU KNOW, THINK OF ALL THE FAMILIES WHO DO LOSE LOVED ONES DURING THIS TIME.

IT MAKES IT VERY ROUGH.

COMMISSIONER THERIOT> MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL.

NO REPORTS TODAY.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO OFFER EVERYONE A MERRY CHRISTMAS ALSO AND A HAPPY BIRTHDAY.

IT'S RIGHT FOR ME.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, COMMISSIONER.

AND MERRY CHRISTMAS, EVERYONE.

[Additional Item]

GO AHEAD. YES.

GOOD MORNING, JUDGE. COMMISSIONERS.

I WANT TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF UPDATE REPORT ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT ROAD PROJECT.

THE ROAD, THE ONE ROAD THAT HAS YET TO BE COMPLETED, BUT IS ALMOST COMPLETED IS BIGGS ROAD.

AND I'VE ASKED DAVID CARR FOR DORSET ENGINEERS TO GIVE US AN UPDATE REPORT.

HE DID AN ONSITE VISIT THIS MORNING AND WE'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE CONTRACTORS THE LAST FEW DAYS AND WE'LL GIVE YOU A REPORT ON THE BIG ROAD.

THANKS. WE'RE IN JUDGE POINT COMMISSIONERS WHETHER HAS SET US BACK JUST A LITTLE BIT OUT AT BIGGS ROAD.

THE RAIN THAT WE RECEIVED IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS, MUCH NEEDED, HAS PUT QUITE A BIT OF MUD AND WATER AT THE SITES.

WE'RE KEEPING AN EYE ON WEATHER TODAY, DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH RAIN COMES IN.

THEY SHOULD BE BACK OUT LATER THIS WEEK TO PUMP THE SITE OUT AND COMPLETE BACKFILL.

CONTRACTORS SAY THAT THEY CAN CERTAINLY REOPEN THE ROADWAY ONCE THEY GET THE BACKFILL ROAD BASE AND GUARDRAIL INSTALLED.

THEY'RE COORDINATING THE PAVING BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR.

THEY'RE STILL WE'RE TRYING TO NAIL DOWN A DATE ON THAT.

BUT UNTIL THEY CAN GET THE ROAD BASE DONE, THEY'RE NOT SCHEDULING THEIR PAVING MACHINE.

I'M GOING TO STAY IN CONTACT WITH THEM CLOSELY OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS, INCLUDING THE HOLIDAYS, TO GIVE YOU ALL A FIRM DATE FOR WHEN WE PLAN ON PAVING AND COMPLETING THEIR ANTICIPATE WALK THROUGH FIRST PART OF JANUARY.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER STAFF COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. IF NOT, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO CITIZENS COMMENTS.

[Citizens' Comments]

[00:05:02]

MR. JUDGE.

GOOD MORNING. JUST A LITTLE BETTER.

OKAY. I FIGURE IT'S LOUD, AND I'VE HAD TO BORROW SOMEONE'S GLASSES, BUT I FORGOT MINE ON MY DESK.

SO THIS IS GOING TO BE ROUGH, FELLAS.

I APOLOGIZE. MY NAME IS JOHN PREGMOE.

I COME BEFORE THIS COURT WITH 30 YEARS OF PUBLIC SAFETY EXPERIENCE.

I HAVE SERVED IN MANY ROLES IN MY TIME IN PUBLIC SAFETY.

17 YEARS AS VOLUNTEER FIREMAN AND A VOLUNTEER PARAMEDIC, 28 YEARS WITH THE HAYS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

AND THEN TWO YEARS HERE.

THAT'S CALDWELL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

IN MY TIME, I'VE BEEN EXPOSED TO MANY RADIO SYSTEMS. I'VE HAD UHF, VHF, 809 HUNDRED, SOMETIMES EVEN A CAN ON ONE END, A STRING TIED TO ANOTHER CAN.

SO I'VE EXPERIENCED THE GAMUT OF RADIO SYSTEMS. I ALSO, GUYS WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND, AS COMMISSIONERS, I WORKED FOR LA GUARDIA FROM THE NINETIES INTO THE MID 2000S.

OUR CURRENT RADIO SYSTEM HAS COME A LONG WAY FROM BACK THEN.

THOSE OF YOU WHO'VE BEEN AROUND LONG ENOUGH TO KNOW WE USED TO HAVE TO HOLD OUR RADIO, OUR ANTENNAS UP AND POINT TOWARD THE TOWER AND TRY TO GET SERVICE.

WE'RE A FAR CRY FROM THAT THANKS TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT.

HOWEVER, WE NEED TO LOOK AT MOVING FORWARD.

I'VE LIVED THE LAST 15 YEARS IN HARWOOD, TEXAS.

MOVED THERE 15 YEARS AGO WHILE I CONTINUE TO WORK AT HAYS COUNTY.

THE SYSTEM WE HAVE IN HAYS COUNTY IS ELSEWHERE, AND I WAS ABLE TO, AS A COMMANDER ON A NIGHT SHIFT, SIT ON MY COUCH WITH MY HANDHELD RADIO AND SPEAK TO DEPUTIES AND CRITICAL INCIDENTS IN DRIPPING SPRINGS, TEXAS.

UNFORTUNATELY, OUR CURRENT RADIO SYSTEM DOES NOT ALLOW ME TO COMMUNICATE EVEN WITH DEPUTIES IN MY OWN COUNTY.

I WAS TOLD, STEP OUTSIDE.

YOU HAVE A METAL ROOF, STEP OUTSIDE TO USE YOUR RADIO.

WELL, THESE YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN OVER HERE DON'T GET THAT OPPORTUNITY WHEN THEY'RE ABOUT TO FIRE A SUSPECT INSIDE A HOUSE.

THEY DON'T GET A CHANCE TO GO OUTSIDE AND SAY, HANG ON, I'VE GOT TO GET BETTER RADIO SERVICE.

EL SIERRA HAS ALWAYS, ALWAYS BEEN THE LAST 15 YEARS THAT I'VE USED THEM RELIABLE.

AND THAT'S WHAT THESE RADIO SYSTEMS NEED TO BE AS RELIABLE.

WHEN CITIZENS CALL 911, THEY GET WHAT THEY GET ANSWERING THAT PHONE CALL.

RIGHT? WELL, THESE HANDHELD RADIOS THAT WE CARRY OUR 911 SYSTEM AND THEY JUST HAVE TO WORK AND THEY HAVE TO WORK THE MAJORITY OF THE TIME.

JUST YESTERDAY, I HEARD RADIO DIFFICULTIES.

DEPUTIES COULDN'T COMMUNICATE EACH OTHER ON STATE PARK ROAD, JUST OUT OF THE CITY LIMITS.

SO OUR RADIOS JUST HAVE TO WORK.

SO AS YOU GO INTO THAT SESSION, PLEASE BEAR IN MIND THAT THESE MEN AND WOMEN RELY EVERY DAY IN THEIR LIVES.

EVEN THE VOLUNTEER FIREMEN RELY ON US EVERY DAY.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING I HOPE YOU'LL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE RADIO SYSTEM LATER.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR.

ONE VERY WELL.

COMMISSIONERS COUNTY JUDGE.

AND GUESS MY NAME IS JUAN VILLAREAL AND I'M THE CITY SERGEANT FOR A CALDWELL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

I'VE BEEN EMPLOYED BY THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE FOR THE PAST SEVEN MONTHS, AND I WAS SURPRISED THAT CALDWELL COUNTY WASN'T USING LCR RADIOS DURING MY SHORT TIME ON CALL.

I'VE BEEN A PART OF BEEN A PART OF OR HEARD OF INSTANCES WHERE IN-CAR RADIOS OR HANDHELD RADIOS DID NOT TRANSMIT OR RECEIVE COMMUNICATION, LEAVING US UNABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH DISPATCH, COWORKERS OR OTHER FIRST RESPONDERS.

INSTEAD, WE MUST REPLY, RELY ON THE MEANS OF COMMUNICATING LIKE USING OUR CELL PHONES OR FORCE TO MAINTAIN RADIO SILENCE UNTIL THE CALL WAS COMPLETED.

I HAVE BEEN IN LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR 28 YEARS.

13 YEARS, THE UNITED STATES ARMY.

AND ONE THING THAT I'VE LEARNED THROUGH MY EXPERIENCES IS THAT THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF RADIO COMMUNICATION IS RELIABILITY.

UNFORTUNATELY, THE CURRENT SYSTEM THAT WE ARE USING IS NOT EFFECTIVE NOR RELIABLE.

THE MAJORITY OF MY LAW ENFORCEMENT CAREER WAS THE HAYS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, WHERE I HELD VARIOUS POSITIONS FROM UNDERCOVER FUGITIVE DEPUTY TO UNIFORM PATROL SERGEANT.

DURING THAT TIME, I USED SEVERAL VERSIONS OF LCR RADIOS, AND I HAVE NEVER HAD ANY MAJOR ISSUES THAT PREVENTED ME FROM COMMUNICATING.

IF THERE WERE ANY ISSUES, LCR RADIOS, VEHICLES WERE AT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE MAKING REPAIRS OR UPGRADES WHILE A FUGITIVE DEPUTY I TRAIN TRAVELED TO SAN ANTONIO AND AUSTIN, AUSTIN TO SERVE WARRANTS, AND I WAS ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH OUR DISPATCH.

I EVEN TRAVELED TO HOUSTON, TEXAS, TO TAKE CUSTODY OF AN ESCAPEE, AND I WAS STILL ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH OUR DISPATCH.

ON JUNE 29, 2022, DETECTIVE ANTHONY AND I CONDUCTED A FOLLOW UP INVESTIGATION FOR AN AGGRAVATED ASSAULT IN GREEN PASTURES IN HAYS COUNTY.

THE VICTIM WAS THREATENED AND PISTOL WHIPPED WITH A SEMI-AUTO PISTOL.

THE RESIDENCE IS APPROXIMATELY TWO MILES FROM THE COUNTY LINE AND IS IN A CRIME INFESTED AREA OF KYLE.

[00:10:08]

THE PISTOL RETURNED, STOLEN OUT OF AUSTIN, TEXAS.

BECAUSE OUR HANDHELD RADIOS DID NOT WORK.

HE HAD TO CALL DISPATCH ON THE CELL PHONE TO RUN THE SERIAL NUMBER.

ON OCTOBER 20, 2022 MEMBERS OF THE INVESTIGATIONS DIVISION RESPONDED TO 2500 WILLIAMSON ROAD IN LOCKHART, TEXAS, FOR A REMOVAL OF SIX CHILDREN THAT WERE LEFT UNATTENDED.

ALONG WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, REMOVING CHILDREN FROM THEIR PARENTS CAN BE EXTREMELY DANGEROUS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT.

AND CPS, WITH NO RADIO COMMUNICATION, EVEN MADE IT MORE DANGEROUS BECAUSE WE WERE UNABLE TO COMMUNICATE AN EMERGENCY IF ONE HAD ARISEN, THUS LEAVING US WITH NO ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE.

RECENTLY, A VEHICLE WAS STOLEN FROM A CONVENIENCE STORE IN LULING AND LULING PURSUED THE VEHICLE ON I-10.

CALDWELL COUNTY DEPUTIES WERE DISPATCHED TO ASSIST LULING BECAUSE THEY HAD LOST RADIO COMMUNICATION WITH THEIR DISPATCH.

THE LOCATION OF THE LULING POLICE OFFICERS WERE IDENTIFIED THROUGH THEIR ABL, SO CALDWELL COUNTY DEPUTIES RESPONDED TO THEIR LOCATION.

THE VEHICLE EVENTUALLY CRASHED AND THE SUSPECT WAS ARRESTED THE FOLLOWING DAY.

I CAME TO MY OFFICE. TO MY SURPRISE, A HOUSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT HOMICIDE DETECTIVE WAS IN OUR OFFICE BECAUSE THAT SUSPECT IN THAT VEHICLE THAT CRASHED WAS A PERSON OF INTEREST AND I BELIEVE IT WAS A DOUBLE HOMICIDE IN HOUSTON, TEXAS.

IN CLOSING, THE FIRST RESPONDERS FOR CALDWELL COUNTY NEED A PROVEN SYSTEM THAT WORKS TODAY, NOT TOMORROW.

AND THAT SYSTEM IS ALSO LCRA.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

NO MORE CITIZENS COMMENTS.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

WITH THAT, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO CONSENT.

[CONSENT AGENDA]

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT.

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

ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR. SAY AYE.

OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.

NEXT ITEM IS A SPECIAL PRESENTATION BY DAVE MARSH FROM CARTS.

[SPECIAL PRESENTATION]

WE'RE HERE TODAY TO RECOGNIZE THE VALUE OF THE GOVERNANCE OF EACH COUNTY AND OUR SERVICE AREA.

WE ASK EACH COURT TO APPOINT A COMMISSIONER TO SERVE ON OUR BOARD, AND THESE COMMISSIONERS HELP US MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE DO IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT COMMUNITY NEEDS ARE.

SO WE APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH.

WE'RE HERE TODAY.

WITH ME IS DANA PLATT.

SHE'S THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OFFICER AT CURT'S QUICK COMMERCIAL.

WE'VE BEEN ON THE LCRA RADIO SYSTEM SINCE 1994, AND IT'S BEEN SO VALUABLE TO US BECAUSE IT COVERS ALL NINE COUNTIES WE SERVE.

EVERY ONE OF OUR VEHICLES, HAS A TABLET IN IT THAT'S CONNECTED TO OUR CALL CENTER.

IT'S BEEN A VERY ROBUST AND EASY SYSTEM TO USE.

NONE OF MY BUSINESS, BUT I THOUGHT I'D JUST ADD THAT WE'RE HERE TODAY BECAUSE BARBARA SHELTON IS RETIRING FROM OUR BOARD, AND WE'RE HERE ALSO TO WELCOME THE NEW MEMBER THAT YOU'RE YOU ARE SLATED TO APPOINT LATER, MR. HORN. SO IF WE COULD PRESENT A CERTIFICATE TO MISS SHELTON FOR HER SERVICE, SHE SERVED ON OUR BOARD THROUGH SOME VERY TOUGH TIMES, COVERED ALL THAT STUFF WE WENT THROUGH, AND SHE WAS A STEADY HAND FOR US ALL THAT TIME.

DO YOU MIND READING THAT CERTIFICATE DATA, BARBARA SO THIS IS A CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION FOR BARBARA SHELTON.

SHE'S BEEN RECOGNIZED FOR FOUR YEARS OF SERVICE, PRESENTED TO COMMISSIONER BARBARA SHELTON IN RECOGNITION OF HER FOUR YEARS OF DEDICATED SERVICE TO CARDS.

AS A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, HER REPRESENTATION OF THE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS AND CALDWELL COUNTY WAS EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT, AND HER COMPASSION AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY ALWAYS EVIDENT AND FORTHCOMING IN THE DELIBERATIONS OF THE BOARD.

[00:15:18]

IT HAS BEEN A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH CARTS.

WHEN YOU GET APPOINTED ON THESE BOARDS, YOU LEARN A LOT AND YOU'RE ABLE TO ASSIST THE CITIZENS AS TO WHAT IS OUT THERE TO HELP THEM.

AND I TOOK THAT FROM CARTS AND USE THAT IN A COUPLE OF OTHER BOARDS THAT I'M ON TO HELP A LOT OF CITIZENS.

SO IT WAS VERY INFORMING.

SO I'M HOPING THE NEXT COMMISSIONER GOES AND ATTENDS AND LEARNS AND COMES OUT AND DOES THE SAME THING I DO OR I DID WITH IT BECAUSE IT IS VERY, VERY VALUABLE TO OUR COMMUNITIES.

SO I APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER, I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT DURING YOUR WHOLE SERVICE, WHEN WE WENT TO CONFERENCES, YOU ATTENDED EVERY SINGLE CLASS, EVERY SECOND OF EVERY CLASS, MADE IT AROUND TO EVERY VENDOR AND THE VENDORS BOOTH AT EVERY SINGLE CONFERENCE.

AND YOU ALWAYS TOOK YOUR JOB VERY SERIOUSLY.

AND THIS IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF IT, AND WE APPRECIATE THAT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

OKAY. WITH THAT, WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM 17 DISCUSSION ACTION REGARDING THE BURN BAN.

[17. Discussion/Action regarding the burn ban. Speaker: Judge I laden/ Hector Rangel; Backup: 3; Cost: None.]

WE HAD A FEW FIRES SINCE THE LAST COMMISSIONERS COURT.

WE HAD ONE ON SH 130 NORTHBOUND TRAVIS COUNTY PUT IT OUT AND THEN WE HAD A RESIDENTIAL FIRE OFF OF SHOOK ROAD.

SO FAR EVERYBODY'S BEEN COMPLYING WITH THE BURNING OF BRUSH OUT IN THE COUNTY.

THEY'VE BEEN CONTACTED IN MY OFFICE ASKING FOR A STATUS ON BURN BAN.

SO THEY'VE BEEN PRETTY GOOD ABOUT CALLING OUR OFFICE AND CALLING THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND REPORTING IT.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, OUR NUMBERS FOR THIS WEEK, FOR TODAY, IT'S MINIMUM IS 14, THE MAX IS 370, THE AVERAGE IS 217.

WITH A CHANGE OF FOUR.

HERE IN LOCKHART, WE HAVE HAD A LITTLE BIT OVER THREE INCHES OF RAIN.

SOME PEOPLE OUT IN THE COUNTY UP TO SIX INCHES AND SOME PEOPLE OUT TO THE NORTH OF THE COUNTY, ONLY A 10TH OF AN INCH.

SO THE RAIN FELL IN SOME PLACES REALLY WELL AND OTHER PLACES IT BARELY RAINED DUE AT THE INCOMING WEATHER.

IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE DRYNESS BECAUSE OF THE HARD NORTHERN WINDS BLOWING IS GOING TO DRY THAT GRASS UP PRETTY QUICK.

A LOT OF LEAVES ON THE GROUND FROM ALL THE FOLIAGE FALLING OFF THE TREES.

SO I AM RECOMMENDING CURRENTLY THAT WE KEEP THE BURN BAN OFF BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SUBSTANTIAL MOISTURE ON THE GROUND.

SO I'M RECOMMENDING TO COMMISSIONERS COURT THAT WE KEEP THE BURN BAN OFF FOR ANOTHER TWO WEEKS AND SEE HOW IT GOES.

OKAY, THANK YOU. I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO KEEP THE BURN BAN OFF FOR ANOTHER WEEK.

WE HAVE THE MOTION TO KEEP THE BURN BAN OFF.

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

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU, JUDGE. THANKS.

ITEM 18 DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF THE DECEMBER FIREWORKS ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2022.

[18. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of December Firework Order for the year 2022. Speaker: Judge Haden/ Backup: 3; Cost: None]

I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT THAT WE KEEP FINS OFF OF, IN ROCKETS.

ANY TYPE OF PROJECTILE THAT FLIES WITH THE STICKER HAS FINS ON IT JUST FOR THAT REASON.

SO I'M RECOMMENDING TO THE COUNCIL THAT COMMISSIONERS COURT, I MEAN THAT WE DO AWAY WITH STICKS AND FINS FOR THIS GO AROUND.

OKAY. THANKS, HECTOR. AND WE HAVE AN ORDER TO THAT EFFECT, ORDER RESTRICTING CERTAIN FIREWORKS AND UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF CALDWELL COUNTY.

WHEREAS THE TEXAS FOREST SERVICE HAS DETERMINED THAT DROUGHT CONDITIONS EXIST IN CALDWELL COUNTY.

AND. WHEREAS, ON THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF CALDWELL COUNTY HAS DISCERNMENT DETERMINED THAT THE NORMAL DANGER OF FIRE IN UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF CALDWELL COUNTY IS GREATLY ENHANCED BY THE EXTREMELY DRY CONDITIONS NOW EXISTING.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF CALDWELL COUNTY ADOPTS THIS ORDER RESTRICTING THE SALE OR USE OF RESTRICTED FIREWORKS AND UNINCORPORATED AREAS.

CALDWELL COUNTY A PERSON MAY NOT SELL, DETONATE, IGNITE OR IN ANY WAY USE FIREWORKS CLASSIFIED AS SKYROCKETS WITH STICKS UNDER 49 CFR PART 173.100R210-01-86 ADDITION OR MISSILES WITH FINS IN ANY PORTION OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF COLWELL COUNTY.

[00:20:03]

AN OFFENSE UNDER THIS ORDER IS A CLASS C MISDEMEANOR.

THIS ORDER EXPIRES ON THE DATE THE TEXAS FIRE SERVICE DETERMINES DROUGHT CONDITIONS EXIST IN THE COUNTY OR MIDNIGHT JANUARY 1ST, 2023, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER APPROVED THIS 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 BY CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, COURT COMMISSIONERS.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ORDER.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION.

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

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

OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU, JUDGE. AND I WANT TO WISH COMMISSIONERS, COURT STAFF AND GALLERY AND HAPPY AND MERRY CHRISTMAS AND BE SAFE.

THANK YOU HECTOR YOU TO ITEM 19 DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 03-2023 DECLARING LOCAL

[19. Discussion/Action to consider the approvalof Resolution 03-2023 Declaring Local State of Disaster. Speaker: Judge Haden; Backup: 5; Cost: None]

MANY OF OUR COUNTIES HAVE ADOPTED THIS DUE TO THE SITUATION AT THE BORDER AND DUE TO THE STRAIN THAT IS PUTTING ON OUR ABILITY TO PROVIDE SERVICES AND AND IN ORDER TO BECOME PART OF THE GOVERNOR'S DECLARATION OF DISASTER, WE HAVE TO DO OUR OWN FIRST.

I THINK JUST ABOUT EVERY COUNTY ALONG I-10 AND SOUTH OF I-10 HAS DONE.

THIS DECLARATION.

I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ IT.

AND THEN IF WE CAN HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AND THEN HAVE A DISCUSSION ON IT.

RESOLUTION OF CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT DECLARING LOCAL STATE OF DISASTER.

WHEREAS THE DRAMATIC AND SUSTAINED INCREASE IN ILLEGAL BORDER CROSSINGS ALONG THE TEXAS-MEXICO BORDER, THE THE BORDER CRISIS AND THE SUBSEQUENT MOVEMENT OF INDIVIDUALS INTO AND THROUGH CALDWELL COUNTY AS A RESULT OF THE BORDER CRISIS PLACES THE RESIDENTS OF CALDWELL COUNTY UNDER IMMINENT THREAT OF DISASTER TO THEIR HEALTH, LIFE RIGHTS, LIFE OR PROPERTY. WHEREAS, THE BORDER CRISIS PLACES RESIDENTS OF CALDWELL COUNTY AT GREATER RISK OF HARM TO THEIR PERSON AND PROPERTY.

AND RECENTLY COUNTY RESIDENTS HAVE SUFFERED PROPERTY DAMAGE AND REASONABLE CONCERNS FOR PERSONAL SAFETY AS A DIRECT RESULT OF ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED DIRECTLY WITH THE BORDER CRISIS.

AND. WHEREAS, ALTHOUGH THE TEXAS FEDERAL INTERDICTION PROGRAMS HAVE HISTORICALLY PROVIDED ADEQUATE SUPPORT TO LOCAL AND STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THEIR RESPECTIVE EFFORTS TO COMBAT SEASONAL AND HISTORICAL LEVELS OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, RESULTING AT LEAST IN PART FROM ILLEGAL BORDER CROSSINGS, THOSE PROGRAMS ALONE ARE NOT SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT THE EXTENDED AND INCREASED PRESSURE PLACED ON LOCAL AND STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES BY THE BORDER CRISIS.

WHEREAS, THE RESIDENTS OF CALDWELL COUNTY ARE ALSO UNDER IMMINENT THREAT OF DISASTER FROM BORDER CRISIS IN THE EVENT OF LOCAL AND STATE, LAW ENFORCEMENT ARE UNABLE TO DEDICATE ADEQUATE RESOURCES TO THOSE AGENCIES PRIMARY LAW ENFORCEMENT DUTIES BECAUSE THEIR LIMITED RESOURCES ARE STRAINED BY HAVING TO ADDRESS CRIMINAL ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE BORDER CRISIS. WHEREAS IN ADDITION TO TO THE IMMINENT THREAT OF DISASTER FACED BY CALDWELL COUNTY AND ITS RESIDENTS, CALDWELL COUNTY ALSO RECOGNIZES THE HUMANITARIAN CRISIS CAUSED BY THE BORDER CRISIS AND THE STRAIN THAT SUCH HUMANITARIAN EFFORTS EXERT UPON THE LOCAL AND STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT, LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE.

TO ACCOMMODATE TRAFFIC, INDIVIDUALS INTERDICTED WITHIN CALDWELL COUNTY AS A RESULT OF THE FAILURE OF FEDERAL AUTHORITIES TO PREVENT ILLEGAL BORDER CROSSINGS AT THE TEXAS-MEXICO BORDER, WHICH PLACED CALDWELL COUNTY UNDER AN IMMINENT THREAT OF DISASTER AS WELL.

WHEREAS, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE PRESENT COVID 19 PANDEMIC AND SUBSTANTIAL EFFORTS OF CALDWELL COUNTY AND ITS LOCAL AND REGIONAL PARTNERS TO PROTECT THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF CALDWELL COUNTY RESIDENTS THROUGH COVID 19 TESTING, MONITORING AND VACCINATION PROGRAMS, THE SUSTAINED INCREASE IN MOVEMENT OF PERSONS COMING INTO OR THROUGH CALDWELL COUNTY AS A RESULT OF THE BORDER CRISIS PLACES CALDWELL COUNTY AT A SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASED RISK OF EXPOSURE TO NEW AND NOVEL STRAINS OF COVID 19 AND OTHER CONTAGIOUS DISEASES FOR WHICH CALDWELL COUNTY RESOURCES ARE INADEQUATE TO EFFECTIVELY ADDRESS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING CALDWELL COUNTY RESIDENTS.

AND. WHEREAS, COMMISSIONERS COURT OF CALDWELL COUNTY, TEXAS HAS DETERMINED THAT EXTRAORDINARY MEASURES MUST BE TAKEN TO ENSURE THE PROTECTION OF HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF CALDWELL COUNTY RESIDENTS.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT THAT ONE LOCAL STATE OF DISASTER IS HEREBY DECLARED.

AS FOR COLWELL COUNTY, TEXAS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 418.108A OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY AND TO CONTINUE, IN EFFECT

[00:25:02]

TO THE RESOLUTION SHALL BE GIVEN PROMPT AND GENERALLY PUBLIC SHALL BE GIVEN PROMPT AND GENERALLY PUBLIC AND GENERAL PUBLICITY, AND SHALL BE FILED PROMPTLY WITH THE COURT COUNTY CLERK OF THE CALDWELL COUNTY, TEXAS.

THIS RESOLUTION ACTIVATES THE CALDWELL COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN.

THIS RESOLUTION AUTHORIZES THE USE OF ALL LAWFULLY AVAILABLE RESOURCES AND AUTHORITY GRANTED UNDER BOTH THE LAWS AND CONSTITUTION OF TEXAS AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.

ADDITIONAL DIRECTIVES MAY BE ISSUED BY FURTHER ORDER OR RESOLUTION OF THIS COURT AT ANY TIME DEEM NECESSARY, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SEEKING THE ASSISTANCE OF ADDITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT PURSUANT TO TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 362.002 AND SEEKING THE ASSISTANCE OF THE GOVERNOR OF TEXAS AND PROVIDING STATE AND MILITARY SUPPORT PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 433.005 FOR THE DUAL PURPOSE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PRESERVATION AND SOVEREIGNTY.

TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.

WE HAVE SOME KIND OF MOTION AND THE SECOND AND THEN WE CAN HAVE SOME DISCUSSION.

WELL, I'LL MOVE THAT WE APPROVE. ITEM UH, 19.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 19, RESOLUTION 032023.

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

ANY DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR OF APPRAISING APPROVING RESOLUTION.

032023 SAY AYE.

OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES ITEM 20.

DISCUSSION ACTION. AND CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF THE ENROLLMENT IN TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY CYBERSECURITY COURSE FOR 2023.

[20. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of the enrollment in Texas Association of Counties' Cybersecurity Couse for year 2023. Speaker: Judge Haden; Backup: 4; Cost: None]

EVERY EMPLOYEE OF CALDWELL COUNTY, AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, HAS TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS COURSE.

SO THIS IS JUST A MOOT.

THIS WOULD BE LOOKING FOR APPROVAL JUST TO ENROLL IN THIS PROGRAM AGAIN FOR CALDWELL COUNTY.

WE HAVE. GO AHEAD.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 20.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED? HEARING NONE MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM 21 DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER APPOINTMENT OF A CALDWELL COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

[21. Discussion/Action to consider taking action on appointment of a Caldwell County Animal Control Advisory Committee. Speaker: Commissioner Theriot; Backup: 7; Cost: None]

THANK YOU, JUDGE. OVER THE LAST YEAR, I GUESS.

AND IT SEEMS TO BE INCREASING THE.

ISSUES RELATED TO STRAY ANIMALS IN COAL COUNTY HAVE BEEN INCREASING.

THERE'S PROBABLY A LOT OF REASONS FOR THAT, BUT A LOT OF IT HAS TO DO WITH THE INCREASING RURAL POPULATION THAT WE'RE SEEING COMING INTO THE COUNTY AND SOME OF THE ISSUES RELATED TO STRAY ANIMALS REGARDING THAT.

THE AS YOU KNOW, THE CITY OF LOCKHART AND CALDWELL COUNTY SHARE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ANIMAL SHELTER. THE CITY OF LOCKHART HANDLES THE STAFFING AND OPERATIONS AND THEN THEIR TOTAL COST THAT THAT ARE INCURRED AS PART OF THAT THEY BUILD THE CALDWELL COUNTY ACCORDINGLY.

I KNOW THE JUDGE HAS HAD MANY DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM OVER THIS YEAR AND LAST YEAR REGARDING HOW THOSE COSTS ARE DIVIDED.

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT THOSE COSTS ARE RISING AND.

INCURRING AN ADDITIONAL TAX ON THE RESIDENTS OF CALDWELL COUNTY.

WE HAVE INCREASED OUR EXPENDITURES THROUGH THE HIRING OF NEW ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICERS.

WE ARE PAYING ADDITIONAL COST ASSOCIATED WITH THE OPERATIONS OF THE ANIMAL SHELTER.

AND IT FEELS LIKE TIME THAT THAT MAYBE WE TAKE A HARD LOOK AT AT WHAT, IF ANYTHING, MAYBE MAYBE THERE'S NOT MUCH WE CAN DO. BUT I KNOW OUR OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS LOOKED INTO THIS SOMEWHAT.

[00:30:01]

SOME PLACES HAVE IDENTIFIED MEANS TO REQUIRE SHIPPING.

THAT'S A POSSIBILITY.

OTHER AREAS, ESPECIALLY NOT NECESSARILY A LOT IN TEXAS, BUT BUT NORTHERN STATES HAVE GONE TO SPAY NEUTER REQUIREMENTS.

WHETHER THAT DRIVE FOR US, I DON'T KNOW.

AND THAT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED.

BUT WE FEEL LIKE MAYBE CREATING A SMALL COMMITTEE TO WORK WITH CHASE AND WHOEVER APPROPRIATE THE CITY OF LOCKHART AND THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT AT KIND OF WHAT WHAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING AND WHAT, IF ANYTHING, ARE THE OPTIONS FOR DEALING WITH THAT.

I KNOW EVERYBODY MAY WANT TO TAKE SOME TIME AND AND THINK ABOUT THIS AND THINK ABOUT FOLKS WHO MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS COMMITTEE.

I HAVE A COUPLE OF NAMES THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT IS IS OKAY WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS.

BUT I'LL LEAVE IT THERE AND OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.

OKAY. WHAT ARE THE NAMES, COMMISSIONER? I HAVE CAROL JONES.

I THINK SHE LIVES OUT IN DALE HIGH AND JAN BROWN LIVES OVER IN NEWLAND OR TOWARDS NEWLAND.

THEY'RE BOTH VERY LEVEL HEADED, CONCERNED COAL COUNTY RESIDENTS.

I HAVE TO ADMIT, I HAVE TO TALK TO JAN FIRST.

I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO REACH HER, SO I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD WANT TO MAKE THAT APPOINTMENT JUST YET.

OKAY. IF WE CAN IF THIS COMES BACK BEFORE THE COURT, I WILL DEFINITELY DO THAT.

ALSO, I KNOW ALISHA THORNTON HAS HAS ASKED TO BE A PARTICIPANT ON THIS ALSO, BUT IT'S NOT MY COMMITTEE.

AND AND SO THOSE ARE JUST SUGGESTIONS THAT I HAVE.

OBVIOUSLY, WE'D WANT REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND INVITE THE PARTICIPATION OF THE CITY OF LOCKHART IF THEY WISH TO DO THAT.

WOULD WOULD MAYBE WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO TABLE THIS FOR TODAY AND GET TOGETHER AND COME WITH THE SUGGESTED SLATE TO THE COURT AND THEN PUT IT ON THE NEXT AGENDA? YOU'D BE ALL RIGHT WITH THAT.

COMMISSIONERS, Y'ALL OKAY WITH THAT IDEA? THAT'S AGREEABLE FOR ME.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'D LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS ON THE AGENDA.

AND GIVEN THAT FORETHOUGHT OF WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

I THINK AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO KIND OF OVERSEE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON OUT THERE WILL HELP THE COUNTY MAKE A DECISION.

YOU KNOW, THAT IN THE IN THE FUTURE, WE HAVE OUR OWN.

I TOOK SOME SUPPLIES TO THE SHELTER HERE RECENTLY, SOME BLANKETS AND THINGS.

IT WASN'T A PLEASANT EXPERIENCE.

AND I'VE HEARD THAT FROM SEVERAL PEOPLE.

SO I KNOW THEY'RE BUSY WITH THE ANIMALS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT PUTS OFF A BAD PERSONA AS WELL.

AND SO I THINK AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, SOMEBODY OVERSEEING THEM, WILL GIVE THEM A LITTLE OOH, YOU KNOW, SO THANK YOU.

YEAH. APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

AND I APPRECIATE APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS AS WELL.

COMMISSIONER, THIS IS A THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE GRAPPLE WITH EVERY BUDGET CYCLE.

YOU KNOW, WE I'VE SPOKEN WITH ALICIA AND FALGOUT AND ANDREA, YOUR WIFE AND MY WIFE WAS RECENTLY THERE. AND IT IS A IT IS MAXIMUM CAPACITY RIGHT NOW.

WE ARE EUTHANIZING ANIMALS, SOMETIMES THE TUNE OF 13 OR 14 AT A TIME.

SO THERE'S A WAY WE CAN GET OUR ARMS AROUND THIS.

I THINK THIS THIS COMMITTEE MIGHT BE AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO START BECAUSE FRANKLY, I'M I'M AT A LOSS AND I NEED TO HEAR FOR SOME PEOPLE THAT KNOW A LOT MORE ABOUT THIS THAN I DO.

SO DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS SO THAT WE CAN PUT TOGETHER A COMMITTEE OF APPROPRIATE PERSONNEL AND POSSIBLY BRING THAT BACK TO COURT ON THE 27TH? ALL THAT OK AND BRING IT BACK ON THE 27TH OK WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE ITEM 21 AND BRING IT BACK ON THE 27TH

[00:35:06]

DO WE HAVE A SECOND MOTION? A SECOND? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I.

I OPPOSE HEARING NONE MOTION CARRIES.

BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHAT WAS THE THIRD NAME THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED? COMMISSIONER THORNTON.

ALISHA THORNTON. THORNTON.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

OKAY. ITEM 22, DISCUSSION, ACTION.

[22. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of the Caldwell County Historical Commission Member Nominees for Calendar Year 2023-2024. Speaker: Judge Haden; Backup: 3; Cost: None]

FOR THAT. COMMISSION, AND I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THEM.

TONY. ANDREA. MELINDA.

ANDREA. DONNA BARTLETT.

CLAIRE. BRICE. DONNELLY.

BRICE. MOLLY BROWN.

COYLE BUEHLER.

WAYNE KOSLOW.

MELANIE KOSLOW.

LIZ CHRISTY. NICK SCOTT.

LLOYD. BILL MCBRIDE.

BILL MCNEIL.

PHYLLIS METCALF.

CAROL LINDORFF.

CHRISTINE LINDORFF.

JULIE LINDORFF.

MARGARET PERRY.

DON PERRY.

MARCIA PROCTOR.

RHONDA REAGAN.

MICHAEL ROYLE, RONNIE ROYLE, KEVIN WACKER, SHIRLEY WILLIAMS AND HOMER WILLIAMS. SO THAT IS THE LIST OF PEOPLE THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO RESIDE ON THAT COMMITTEE FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR.

COMMISSIONERS AND DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE LIST? THAT'S AN IMPRESSIVE LIST, SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION.

IT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE.

I DON'T EITHER. I WAS SURPRISED WHEN I SAW HOW LONG IT WAS.

RIGHT. SO I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION.

OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE LIST OF MEMBERS FOR 2023, 2024 FOR COLWELL COUNTY HISTORICAL COMMISSION.

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

A SECOND? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I? I OPPOSED HEARING NON MOTION CARRIES.

EXCUSE ME. ITEM 23 DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL TO APPOINT RUSTY HORN TO COD'S BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

[23. Discussion/Action to consider the approval to appoint Rusty Horne to CARTS Board of Directors. Speaker: Judge Haden; Backup: 2; Cost: None]

MR. HORN WILL BE COMING ON AS COMMISSIONER PRECINCT TWO, AND WE HAVE A WE HAVE TO GET THIS APPROVED BEFORE THE END OF DECEMBER.

COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE RUSTY HORN TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS? ONCE HE TAKES OFFICE? I'LL SUPPORT HIM AS.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS EFFECTIVE JANUARY ONE.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

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

IF NOT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

I OPPOSE HEARING NON MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM 24 DISCUSSION ACTION.

[24. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of a donation request to Keep Lockhart Beautiful. Speaker: Judge Haden; Backup: 1; Cost: $3,000.00]

SINCE I'VE PUT THIS ON, CHASE HAS POINTED SOMETHING OUT TO ME, SO I'M GOING TO LET CHASE ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT.

SO ANY DONATION HAS TO, IN ORDER TO BE LEGAL, HAS TO FOLLOW CERTAIN GUIDELINES.

BECAUSE THERE'S A GENERAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITION AGAINST DONATIONS.

THOSE EXCEPTIONS HAVE TO FULFILL SOME SORT OF PUBLIC PURPOSE.

THEY ALSO THE COUNTY HAS TO RETAIN SOME CONTROL OVER THE FUNDS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT FOLLOWS THAT PUBLIC PURPOSE.

AND THERE HAS TO BE SOME SORT OF RETURN BENEFIT TO THE TO THE COUNTY IN THIS CASE.

TO THE EXTENT THAT THIS DONATION IS FOR CHRISTMAS LIGHTS, I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT IT MAKES THAT THAT PUBLIC PURPOSE ASPECT OF IT, TYPICALLY THE KIND OF STUFF YOU SEE AS A PERMISSIBLE PUBLIC PURPOSE INCLUDES THINGS LIKE LITERACY PROGRAMS FOR CHILDREN, PUBLIC WELFARE, HEALTH AND SAFETY, STUFF LIKE THE FIRE AIRCRAFT, AIR AMBULANCE SERVICES, THAT IT GIVES A BENEFIT TO THE ENTIRE COUNTY.

SO JUST SOMETHING FOR THE COURT TO CONSIDER AS IT CONSIDERS THIS DONATION.

THANK YOU. I'M NOT SURE IF THIS WOULD QUALIFY FOR THE COLLIN COUNTY SERVICE GRANT THING THAT DENNIS DOES.

COULD THEY NOT APPLY IF MAYBE THEY QUALIFY FOR THAT? YES. THEN IT'S OVER HERE SHAKING HIS HEAD.

YES. SO.

ALL RIGHT. SO DO WE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO DISAPPROVE THIS DONATION AND SUGGEST THAT THEY SEEK THE $3,000 FROM THE COLWELL COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES FOUNDATION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DO DENY IT AND AND ADVISE THEM OF APPLYING FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY

[00:40:05]

WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO APPLY TO CALDWELL COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES FOUNDATION.

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

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I.

I OPPOSE HEARING NONE.

MOTION CARRIES ITEM 25 DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENTS.

[25. Discussion/Action to consider the approvalof Budget Amendment #3 to transfer money from (001-3201-1040) Clerical and Assistants to (001-3201-1090) Office and Labor to pay salary wages. Speaker: Judge Haden/ Danie Teltow; Backup: 5; Cost: $31,224.93]

DANNY. YES.

GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS AND JUDGE.

SO WE JUST HAD A KIND OF A GLITCH IN THE PAYROLL CODING SIDE OF THINGS AND THE BUDGET.

WE ENDED UP PUTTING TWO PEOPLE'S TWO EMPLOYEES SALARIES INTO THE CLERICAL AND ASSISTANCE LINE ITEM AND THE OFFICE AND LABOR WAS AT ZERO.

AT LEAST FINGERS IS SUPPOSED TO BE GETTING PAID OUT OF THE OFFICE AND LABOR.

SO WE'RE JUST MAKING THAT THAT CHANGE, MOVING THOSE FUNDS FROM CLERICAL ASSISTANTS AND PUTTING HER SALARY IN THE CORRECT LINE ITEM.

OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 25.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION THAT WE HAVE A SECOND.

SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION THAT SECOND.

DO YOU GET THE FIRST ONE, TERESA? COMMISSIONER TERRIO MADE THE MOTION.

IT BEAT ME TO IT. YEAH, IT WAS KIND OF A TIE, BUT.

AND THEN COMMISSIONER ROLAND IS SECOND.

ALL RIGHT, ITEM 26, DISCUSSION, ACTION.

[26. Discussion/ Action to consider the approval of Budget Amendment #4 for the HAVA Grant final expenses. Speaker: Judge Haden/ Danie Teltow; Backup: 16; Cost: None]

OH, YEAH. WE HAVE TO VOTE.

ALL IN FAVOR. SAY, I WAS HEARING THAT MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. I'M GOING TO MISS YOU WHEN YOU'RE NOT HERE.

I'M 26.

DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR FOR HARVARD GRANT FINAL EXPENSES.

YES. WITH THIS ONE, THE HARBOR GRANT KIND OF WENT STAGNANT FOR ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF.

THE MONEY JUST WE HAVE A SEPARATE BANK ACCOUNT FOR THAT.

AND THE MONEY HAS JUST BEEN SITTING IN THAT BANK ACCOUNT.

THE DEADLINE TO SPEND THOSE GRANT FUNDS ENDS AT THE END OF THIS MONTH.

SO I WORKED WITH SARA FULLER LOVE, AND WE DECIDED OR SHE DECIDED THAT SHE'D FOUND A COUPLE OF THINGS TO SPEND THAT MONEY ON.

SO WE'RE JUST DOING THE BUDGET AMENDMENT TO MOVE THAT MONEY FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OVER INTO THE CORRECT LINE ITEM.

AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO BE MOVING IT FROM THE HARBOR BANK ACCOUNT OVER TO OUR OPERATING ACCOUNT.

OKAY, COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR? SOME MOVE. WE HAVE A MOTION.

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

A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR.

SAY I. I OPPOSED HEARING NINE MOTION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ADAM 27 DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF AN AWARD FOR RFP TO TWO CCP 01P IT MANAGED MANAGED SERVICES

[27. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of an award for RFP 22CCP01P IT Managed Services Provider. Speaker: Judge Haden/ Carolyn Caro; Backup: 10; Cost: None]

GOOD MORNING.

AS YOU KNOW, WE DID START THE BID PROCESS PROBABLY ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO TO HAVE SOMEONE COME IN AND TAKE OVER OUR I.T NEEDS.

WE HAVE COMPLETED THAT PROCESS AND I DO WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR TAKING THE TIME TO LOOK OVER THE PROPOSALS THAT WE RECEIVED AND FOR SCORING AND JUST ALL THE HARD WORK.

SO THANK YOU. AFTER ALL OF THAT, WE DID COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON AWARDING THIS BID TO BLUE LAYER.

AND SO I JUST WANT TO BRING THIS BEFORE YOU FOR APPROVAL TO GO AHEAD AND SEND THEM THE AWARD LETTER.

OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE RFP 2201PIT THAT'S A MOVE. WE HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND MOTION? SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR. SAY I.

I OPPOSE HEARING NONE.

MOTION CARRIES ITEM 28 DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF RFQ 2108 IN THE AMOUNT OF

[28. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of REQ02108 in the amount of $241,370.00 for Blue Layer Blanket PO FY 22-23. Speaker: Judge Haden/ Carolyn Caro; Backup: 2; Cost: $241,370.00]

DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS REQUISITION? SO I'LL WE HAVE A MOTION? DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SAY WE HAVE A MOTION.

A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR. SAY I.

I OPPOSE HEARING NONE.

MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ITEM 29 DISCUSSION, ACTION AND CONSIDER HIRING HIRING DAVIS KAUFMAN PLC FOR BILL MONITORING THAT WILL AFFECT COUNTY DURING THE

[29. Discussion/Action to consider hiring Davis Kauffman, PLLC for bill monitoring that will affect Caldwell County during the next Texas Senate session. Speaker: Judge Haden/ Denise Davis; Backup: 4; Cost: TBD]

COMMISSIONERS. WE HIRED THIS GROUP LAST YEAR INITIALLY TO HELP US GET SOME LEGISLATION THROUGH.

[00:45:09]

SO WITH THE UPCOMING LEGISLATIVE SESSION, I THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE PRUDENT TO HIRE THEM AGAIN TO TRACK BILLS FOR US AND ALERT US TO ANY ANY BILLS THAT WERE AGAIN GOING TO BE DETRIMENTAL NOT JUST TO OUR COUNTY, BUT THOSE TWO BILLS WERE GOING TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO EVERY COUNTY IN THE STATE.

AND SO JUST WANTED TO PUT IT ON HERE AND SEE WHAT THE WILL OF THE COURT WAS.

SO YOU HAVE THE COST TO BE DETERMINED.

WE DON'T HAVE AN IDEAL. YEAH, WE DO.

WE HAVE WHEN WE PUT THIS ON, WE DIDN'T HAVE IT, BUT IT'S IT'S AROUND BEFORE.

IT WAS 35,000.

THEY'VE LOWERED IT BY 5000.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $30,000 TO TRACK THESE BILLS.

AND IF WE NEED THEM TO ADVOCATE ON OUR BEHALF, HOPEFULLY WE WON'T.

HOPEFULLY THERE WON'T BE ANY BAD BILLS, BUT I'M NOT HOLDING MY BREATH.

HE ALSO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE.

IF IF WE IDENTIFY A A A BILL THAT THAT WE WOULD WANT TO OR AN ACTION THAT WE WOULD WANT TO PROPOSE. YES.

AND THAT'S PART OF THIS.

SHE SHE WOULD ACTUALLY GET US IN CONTACT WITH THE BILL AUTHOR.

WE WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO MEET WITH THE BILL AUTHOR AND THEY WOULD HELP US WALK THROUGH THE PROCESS OF OPPOSING OR SUPPORTING BILLS IF THAT'S WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN. WELL, LOOK, IT SEEMED TO HAVE PROVED TO OUR BENEFIT IN THE LAST ROUND. THEY'RE GIVING US A $5,000 DISCOUNT BECAUSE WE ARE PREVIOUS.

I SEE IT AS A GOOD THING.

OKAY. SO WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE HIRING DAVIS AND KAUFMAN? I'LL MAKE THE MOTION. OKAY.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE HIRING OF DAVIS AND KAUFMAN PLC FOR BILL MONITORING THAT WILL AFFECT CALDWELL COUNTY DURING THE NEXT TEXAS SESSION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT ALSO BECAUSE MANY TIMES THESE BILLS ARE UNFUNDED MANDATES TO THE COUNTY WHERE WE'RE REQUIRED TO SPEND CONSIDERABLE MONEY TO COMPLY WITH NEW BILLS.

SO THESE ARE THINGS WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT AND AND BE AWARE OF.

I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP.

AND I GOT ASKED RECENTLY, WELL, JUST HOW MUCH HOW MANY DOLLARS WORTH OF OUR BUDGET IS UNFUNDED MANDATES.

AND CURRENTLY IT'S SITTING AT AROUND $2.4 MILLION OF UNFUNDED MANDATES FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS THAT COUNTIES HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO PAY FOR WHILE REDUCING OUR TAX RATE.

SO IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO KEEP AN EYE ON THESE THINGS.

SO I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT OF THE COURT AND WE DO HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR. SAY I OPPOSE HEARING NONE.

MOTION CARRIES ITEM 30 DISCUSSION ACTION.

[30. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of a lease agreement with Aqua Water Supply Company for the housing of County Offices within Precinct 4. Speaker: Judge Haden; Backup: 1; Cost: None]

AND A COURTROOM FOR J P FOR TO HOLD THEIR PROCEEDINGS IN.

WE'LL HAVE SOME REMODELING TO DO.

WE DO HAVE THAT IN THE BUDGET BECAUSE WE ARE AWARE OF THIS OPPORTUNITY DURING THE BUDGET CYCLE.

I THINK WE'VE BEEN 150,000 IN THERE, BUT I DON'T THINK WE'LL NEED NEARLY ALL OF THAT.

AND WE DO HAVE THE LEASE THAT WE CAN SIGN EFFECTIVE TODAY.

THEY'VE BEEN GENEROUS ENOUGH TO GIVE US A VERY REASONABLE LEASE ON THAT PROPERTY.

AND SO IN FACT IT'S $10 PER MONTH.

SO THEY JUST WANT IT TO BE OCCUPIED AND THEY SEE THAT AS THEM DOING SOME PUBLIC GOOD, WHICH IS PART OF THEIR MISSION.

SO ANYWAY, I'M LOOKING FOR AN APPROVAL FOR ME TO GO AHEAD AND EXECUTE THIS LEASE SO THAT WE CAN START GETTING THAT OFFICE READY TO GO.

I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION.

OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 30.

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

A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR. SAY, I OPPOSE HEARING NONE.

[00:50:01]

[31. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of the Preliminary Plat for Chamberlin Ranch consisting of 9 residential lots on approximately 15.26 acres located on Chamberlin Road. Speaker: Commissioner Roland/ Kasi Miles/ Tracy Bratton; Backup: 21; Cost: None]

GOOD MORNING. AND THIS IS JUST A PRETTY QUICK SIMPLE NINE LOTS SUBDIVISION PLAT.

IF YOU'LL SEE IN YOUR ATTACHMENTS.

EVERYTHING IS INCLUDED ALONG WITH THE RECOMMENDATION LETTER FROM TRACY AND ALL.

EVERYTHING IS ALL FEES HAVE BEEN COLLECTED.

I'M JUST LOOKING FOR APPROVAL TO MOVE ON TO FINAL PLAT.

I DO HAVE TO SAY THAT LATE LAST WEEK THAT MATTHEW ALLEN FROM THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT DID SEND SOME CONCERNS CONCERNING THIS SUBDIVISION, BUT THEY WILL BE ADDRESSED BY FINAL PLAT IN CASEY. I. I FOUND SEVERAL OTHER AREAS WHERE THE WATER SERVICE IS NOT MAXWELL, IT'S POLONIA.

I THINK THIS IS NOT WHAT IS THERE WATER SERVICE? DO YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS? ISN'T THAT A WELL AREN'T THEY GOING TO DO WELLS INDIVIDUAL DOES MENTION ON THEIR PLAT THEY HAVE A WELL BUT THEY HAVE A NOTE ON THERE THAT THEY HAVE MAXWELL WATER.

IT IS NOT MAXWELL. OH OKAY.

THEY ALSO HAVE I MEAN THEY HAVE MAXWELL VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT.

IT'S DEL OK THEY HAVE IT'S IN PRECINCT ONE, IT'S IN PRECINCT FOUR AND THERE'S NO OWNER SIGNATURE BLOCK.

IT HAS HIS NAME, BUT HE NEEDS A SIGNATURE BLOCK AND A DATE.

OKAY. AND THEN, AS YOU MENTIONED, THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT, THEY REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT THE COUNTY ROAD NAMES BE USED ON PLANS, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S MORE WHAT OUR 911, THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE COULD MORE OR LESS ELABORATE ON THAT.

THEY USE THE NAMES MORE WHEN THEY'RE ON THE CALLS OR THE EMS VERSUS THE COUNTY ROAD NUMBER.

PROBABLY USE BOTH. RIGHT.

BUT THAT'S BEEN SOMETHING THAT WAS SUGGESTED MANY YEARS BACK.

OKAY. SO WE JUST NEED TO GET OUR.

DEVELOPERS TO TAKE CARE OF THAT.

I'LL DISCUSS THAT WITH TRACY.

I DID FOR IT.

MATTHEWS EMAIL TO TRACY AND TO KIMBERLY LATE LAST WEEK.

AND SO WE WILL ADDRESS EVERYTHING.

EVERYTHING YOU HAVE ARE ALL SIMPLE CHANGES.

WE CAN GET THOSE DONE.

YEAH. OKAY.

DO WE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH THOSE CHANGES LISTED BY COMMISSIONER SHELTON? I WOULD LIKE TO.

OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CHAMBERLAIN RANCH WITH THE CORRECTIONS THAT COMMISSIONER SHELTON OUTLINED.

AND WE HAVE A SECOND.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.

NOT ALL IN FAVOR. SAY I OPPOSE HEARING NONE.

MOTION CARRIES ITEM 32 DISCUSSION ACTION TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LAKE LONGHORN RANCH, CONSISTING OF 163

[32. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of the Preliminary Plat for Lake Longhorn ranch consisting of 163 residential lots on approximately 340.44 acres located on Martindale Lake Rd. (CR 109B). Speaker: Commissioner Westmoreland/ Commissioner Theriot/ Kasi Miles/ Tracy Bratton; Backup: 19; Cost: None]

A BIG ONE. GOOD MORNING.

I GUESS FOR THE RECORDING OF TRACY BRATTON, DOUCETTE AND ASSOCIATES, I FIRST WANT TO ASK IF THERE'S ANYBODY WITH THE DEVELOPER APPLICANT HERE TODAY.

OKAY. SO I THINK THEY'LL PROBABLY WANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AS WELL, THIS SUBDIVISION AND A COPY OF THE PLAT AND AS WELL AS SEVERAL EXHIBITS IS INCLUDED IN YOUR IN YOUR BACKUP.

THE SUBDIVISION IS ON THE END OF MARTINDALE LAKE ROAD, AND IT ALSO TOUCHES THE HEARTLAND RANCH SUBDIVISION.

MOST OF THE ASPECTS OF THE PRELIMINARY PLATTER ARE PRETTY UNDERSTANDABLE AND WITHIN THE CONFINES OF WHAT WE DO EVERY DAY.

WHAT IS DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS IS THEY ARE REQUESTING THAT THE ROADS BE PRIVATE AND THEY'RE WANTING TO GATE THE ROADS AND THE COMMISSIONERS COURT AND CONSIDERING PULL UP THE SECTION HERE.

I SHOULD HAVE PRINTED IT OUT, BUT I FORGOT AND SO I'D HAVE TO READ OFF MY PHONE.

PRIVATE STREET SHALL BE PERMITTED ONLY WITHIN A SUBDIVISION, SATISFYING ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA.

AND THIS IS FROM 3.9 B OF THE ORDINANCE AND NUMBER TWO OF THAT.

IT TALKS ABOUT THE SUBDIVISION IS LOCATED IN AN AREA THAT IS SURROUNDED ON AT LEAST THREE SIDES, MEANING AT LEAST 75% OF THE PERIMETER BY NATURAL BARRIERS SUCH AS CREEKS, FLOODPLAIN, STEEP SLOPES, TOPOLOGICAL SLOPES I'M SORRY, STEEP TOPOLOGICAL SLOPES, GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS OR WILDLIFE PRESERVES OR SIMILAR BARRIERS CREATED BY MAN SUCH AS GOLF COURSES OR LINEAR PARKS.

SO WHAT THAT REALLY IS SAYING IS THAT 75% OF IS SURROUNDED BY SOMETHING YOU CAN'T REALLY BUILD A ROAD ACROSS.

[00:55:03]

WHAT IS NOTEWORTHY IN THIS IS THAT MARTINDALE LAKE ROAD CURRENTLY HAS ONLY ONE WAY IN FROM SOME STATE HIGHWAY 142. WE SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED THAT HEARTLAND RANCH MAKE STREET STUB OUTS TO THE WEST FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRYING TO CONNECT MARTINDALE LAKE ROAD BACK THROUGH TO HEARTLAND RANCH.

CURRENTLY, THERE'S, AS BEST I CAN COUNT OFF OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY, ABOUT 30 RESIDENCES ON MARTINDALE LAKE ROAD, AND I THINK Y'ALL ARE FAMILIAR WITH SPOTTED HORSE AND SOME OTHER SUBDIVISIONS THAT WE HAVE.

THEY ONLY HAVE ONE WAY IN AND OUT AND WILL BEGIN TO DENY PERMITS AND FUTURE SUBDIVISION TO THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE EXCEEDING 30 RESIDENCES WITH ONLY ONE WAY IN AND OUT.

SO IF IT PROCEEDS AS A GATED COMMUNITY, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PROBLEMS ON MARTINDALE LAKE ROAD WITH CONNECTIVITY AND DELIVERY, EMERGENCY SERVICES AND ISSUING FUTURE PERMITS.

I DO THINK THERE ARE A COUPLE OF POSSIBLE REMEDIES WE CAN DISCUSS.

IT'S PROBABLY APPROPRIATE TO HEAR FROM THE FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A MOMENT, AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT THE WILL OF THE COURT IS, WHETHER TO APPROVE OR DENY OR MAKE SOME KIND OF CONDITIONS THAT THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH.

SO WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME UP HERE? HELLO, I'M RUSTY SIMMONS, REPRESENTING THE LONGHORN LAKE RANCH PROPERTY.

WE WERE STARTED OUT WITH A SECURITY GATED COMMUNITY WITH PRIVATE ROADS.

LISTENING TO THE DISCUSSION, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT IS SOMETHING YOU ALL ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF.

AND JUST WANTED TO GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM Y'ALL AS FAR AS MAKING THE DECISION ON WHICH WAY WE SHOULD PROCEED.

COMMISSIONERS I AM.

I'VE GOT SOME CONCERNS ABOUT UTILIZING PRIVATE ROADS.

YOU KNOW, I'M SURE THERE'S WAYS TO SET IT UP TO WHERE WE'RE WE CAN BE COMFORTABLE THAT THEIR LONG TERM MAINTENANCE AND STAYING IN GOOD SHAPE.

I KNOW MANY TIMES AND I'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN MANY TIMES WHERE, YOU KNOW, OVER A FEW YEARS OR A NUMBER OF YEARS, THESE WILL COME BACK, YOU KNOW, WANTING A COUNTY OR A CITY TO TAKE OVER OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE BECAUSE OF FAILURES AND HIGH COSTS.

SO. SO I ALWAYS GET CONCERNED ON PRIVATE ROAD SUBDIVISIONS.

ANOTHER ISSUE I GUESS I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT MARNELL LAKE ROAD COMING IN OFF IN 42 AND THEN TOWER ROAD COMING IN OFF OF BLACK ANKLE TO THE TO THE SOUTH.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT THAT RIGHT NOW BETWEEN HIGHWAY 80 AND LOCKHART ARE WHERE 130 CROSSES 142.

THE ONLY INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN 20 AND 142 IS ORCHARD LOOP YOU KNOW THAT PROVIDES PROVIDES A CONNECTION ACROSS THERE.

I KNOW EMERGENCY SERVICES HAS CONCERNED WITH THAT.

JUST GENERAL CIRCULATION IN THE COUNTY ARE OUR CONCERNS.

I KNOW IT'D BE DIFFICULT TO MAKE THAT CONNECTION ACROSS THERE BECAUSE OF THAT FLOODPLAIN.

YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE SOME BIG CULVERTS OR OR AN ELEVATED BRIDGE.

AND. AND I'M NOT PRETENDING TO SAY THAT THAT'S FEASIBLE TO DO THAT.

BUT I WOULD LIKE I WOULD LIKE TO THAT TO BE LOOKED AT A LITTLE CLOSER BEFORE I'M WILLING TO APPROVE SOMETHING HERE AS TO AS TO HOW THAT FUTURE CONNECTION IS, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S IT'S PRUDENT ON THE COUNTY RIGHT NOW TO ELIMINATE THAT OPTION FOREVER.

YOU KNOW, ARE YOU DISCUSSING THE CONNECTION BETWEEN TOWER ROAD AND MARTINDALE LAKE ROAD? I'D LIKE THAT AT LEAST EXPLORED.

I MEAN, I KNOW BOTH BOTH GROUPS PROBABLY I KNOW MARTINDALE AND TOWER ARE GOING TO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT, YOU KNOW, ALL THE TRAFFIC FEEDING BOTH WAYS, BUT PUTTING IT ALL ON ONE OR THE OTHER IS ALSO A BIG CONCERN.

RIGHT. TRACY, WAS THIS DID THIS RISE TO THE LEVEL OF A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, BUT JUST WITH THE NUMBER OF PLOTS?

[01:00:05]

COMMISSIONER. TAC REDWOOD PARTNERS PROJECT WHICH WAS A BRIEF INFORMATIONAL SESSION PROVIDED TO COMMISSIONERS COURT.

THEY'RE WORKING ON A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RIGHT NOW.

THEIR PLAN, ALONG WITH THE COUNTY'S THOROUGHFARE PLAN THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING AN UPDATE FOR, DOES SHOW A CONNECTION THROUGH THAT PROJECT FROM DICKERSON TO RAILROAD STREET IN MAXWELL.

THAT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE LAKE.

I BELIEVE THIS LAND PLAN DOES HAVE AN EMERGENCY INGRESS EGRESS OUT THAT BACK SIDE OF THIS TO TOWER ROAD, BUT REALLY INTENDED MORE AS AN EMERGENCY INGRESS EGRESS. IT GOES ACROSS THE SPILLWAY OF OF I GUESS THAT'S LAKE MARTINDALE OR MARTINDALE LAKE.

AND SO THAT'S THAT'S A MAJOR STRUCTURE.

SO IT'S REALLY JUST A SECONDARY INGRESS AND EGRESS IN THEIR PLAN.

AND WE'VE IN ORDER TO AVOID THAT FLOOD PLAIN, THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN IS GOING TO THE EAST OF THE LAKE, CONNECTING UP TO MAXWELL.

OKAY. SO WE DO HAVE A CONNECTION PROPOSED THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION TO THE EAST OF US.

THE ONE CONNECTION AS LAID OUT RIGHT NOW.

YES, IT DOES. IT DOES CONNECT TO HEARTLAND.

AGAIN, THE ISSUE IS WHETHER IT'S GATED OR NOT.

AND THERE PROBABLY ARE WAYS TO REWORK THE LAND PLAN, TO HAVE PART OF IT GATED AND STILL KEEP THAT CONNECTION UNGUARDED.

WE CAN WE CAN LIVE WITHOUT THE GATED SITUATION.

DO YOU MIND GETTING UP HERE A LITTLE CLOSER? SO WE HERE WE CAN WE CAN ELIMINATE THE SECURITY GATE AND AS FAR WE CAN DISCUSS AS FAR AS THE ROADS BEING COUNTY MAINTAINED OR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED, WE WILL HAVE A POLICY IN PLACE THAT WILL MANAGE THE COMMUNITY.

SO FUNDS WILL BE GATHERED OVER THE YEARS FOR FUTURE MAINTENANCE ON THOSE PAVED ROADS, AND THEY'RE BUILT TO COUNTY STANDARDS AS FAR AS TEN INCHES OF BASE, TWO INCHES OF ASPHALT AND A 20 FOOT DRIVING LANE WITH FOUR FOOT SHOULDERS ON EACH SIDE.

SO FAIRLY SUBSTANTIAL ROADS AS FAR AS WHAT THEY WILL HAVE TO MAINTAIN IN THE FUTURE.

YES, I LIKE THEIR COMMENTS ALSO.

YEAH, JUST SO EVERYBODY'S KIND OF AWARE ON IT.

THIS THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IS A LITTLE BIT UNIQUE.

IT SPLITS TWO PRECINCTS, SO THE PRECINCT LINE ACTUALLY GOES DOWN.

WHAT USED TO CONNECT BEFORE MARTIN LAKE WAS BUILT YEARS AGO.

MARTIN DALE LAKE ROAD DOWN TO TOWER ROAD BEFORE THAT WAS ABANDONED TO TO ALLOW FOR THAT CONSTRUCTION.

I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER TERRIO.

I'M NOT REAL BIG FAN OF THE GATING AND PRIVATE ROAD CONSTRUCTION PROPOSAL JUST BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THIS PROPERTY SITS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT THAT AMOUNT OF FLOODPLAIN.

THAT'S JUST WE HAVE CONNECTIVITY PROBLEMS IN THAT PART OF THE COUNTY AS IT IS, AND I DON'T WANT TO EXACERBATE THOSE AT THIS POINT.

SO THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF IS AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED.

AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, TRACY, WE TALKED AND VETTED EVERYTHING ABOUT THAT SECONDARY EMERGENCY ACCESS WITH PLUM CREEK CONSERVATION DISTRICT ABOUT THERE.

BECAUSE THAT IS THEIR SITE, SO TO SPEAK ABOUT ANY ISSUES WITH THAT.

THAT EMERGENCY INGRESS EGRESS IS ACTUALLY SOUTH OF THERE THEY'RE EASEMENT EASEMENT.

YEAH OBVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTION PLANS WE PRESENT TO THEM.

I DON'T NORMALLY PRESENT TO THEM PRIMARY PLANS.

THEY DON'T HAVE ANY REGULATORY AUTHORITY OVER IT.

AND I SENSE THE DIRECTION.

THE COURT. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE NOT TIED TO HAVING THE STREETS GATED IN JUST INFORMATIONALLY FOR THE COURT.

OUR ORDINANCE DOES CALL FOR.

IF PRIVATE STREETS ARE CREATED, THEY HAVE TO PRESENT TO US A LIFECYCLE COST MAINTENANCE PLAN AND WE GET DEEP INTO THEIR FINANCIALS OF HOW THE HIGHWAY IS FUNDED IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THAT WHICH GETS IT SET UP INITIALLY CORRECTLY.

AND THERE'S AN ENFORCEMENT ISSUE.

THERE'S NOTHING THAT STOPS THE HOA FROM LATER LOWERING THEIR ASSESSMENTS AND NOT COLLECTING AND MAINTAINING THE MONEY.

BUT AT LEAST. WE WORK WITH DEVELOPERS.

IF THERE ARE PRIVATE STREETS, AT LEAST MAKE SURE IT'S SET UP INITIALLY IN ORDER TO HAVE A SINKING FUND FOR FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION.

JUST FYI. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I AGREE WITH THE COMMISSIONER TERRIO AND WESTMORELAND.

THE GATED COMMUNITY IN THAT AREA WOULD NOT BE WISE BECAUSE YOU NEED TO HAVE SOME EXITS OUT WITH THE AMOUNT OF HOUSES THAT'S GOING TO BE OUT THERE, THE RESIDENCES, EITHER EITHER THROUGH HEARTLAND OR THROUGH LAKE LONGHORN, IT WOULD NOT IT WOULD BE A REAL SAFETY ISSUE.

YES, MA'AM. SO IT DEFINITELY NEEDS TO BE OPEN.

OKAY. I GUESS I WOULD LOOK FOR A MOTION FROM EITHER COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND, COMMISSIONER TERRIO.

TRACE YOUR CASE HERE. ARE WE DEALING WITH A 30 DAY CLOCK ON THIS ONE OR IS IT.

[01:05:03]

SO WE TABLING IS NOT AN OPTION.

WE NEED TO EITHER APPROVE OR DENY THE DEPENDS ON WHAT THE DEVELOPERS COULD DO, YOU KNOW, AND WHAT THEY COULD REALLY DO BEFORE YOU GET BACK.

I MEAN, I SEE THAT THE TABLE IS AN OPTION APPROVED AND I APPROVE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT THE ROADS NOT BE GATED.

YOU COULD ALSO ADD THE PRIVATE MAINTENANCE IN THERE.

I MEAN, CONDITIONAL APPROVALS ARE POSSIBLE TO DEVELOPER.

AND, YOU KNOW, I GUESS I GUESS I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY, YOU KNOW.

STILL WANT TO WORK WITH YOU ON ON GETTING IT GETTING IT IN A MANNER THAT WE CAN APPROVE.

I THINK I THINK THE CONSENSUS IS WE'D LIKE TO SEE PUBLIC STREETS IN HERE AND THEN SOME SOME.

SOME BETTER. BETTER.

A LITTLE BIT DEEPER THOUGHT AS TO HOW HOW THE CIRCULATION IS GOING TO OCCUR IN THAT AREA.

THAT'S JUST WHERE I AM. OKAY.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY BY COMMISSIONER TERRIO.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION IN THE SECOND? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? JUDGE, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THE DENIAL THAT COMMISSIONER TERRIO HAS PROPOSED IS THAT BASED ON THE VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE FOR PRIVATE STREETS, JUST FOR.

YEAH. YES.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE I HEARD THAT CORRECTLY, THOUGH.

JUST CLOSED OUT.

I THINK IT WAS THREE AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE IT UP.

CHASE IS THREE POINT 9BI THINK IT'LL TAKE ME A SECOND TO PULL IT UP.

THREE POINT SECTION THREE POINT 9BI THINK THREE.

ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT REGIONAL CIRCULATION.

I CAN ONLY GO AS FAST AS THE INTERNET LETS ME.

CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? BECAUSE I THINK THE DEVELOPERS WILLING TO DO THE PUBLIC STREETS.

I DON'T THINK IT'S A PROBLEM TO TO EXPEDITE THE NEXT HEARING OF IT.

COULD WE IF WE WERE OKAY WAIVING THE 30 DAY.

COULD BE TABLED AT THIS MEETING AND HEAR IT AGAIN THE NEXT COMMISSIONERS COURT AS OPPOSED TO.

OR DOES. IS THERE ANY.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM TABLING IT.

IF IF THERE'S A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OR A WAIVER OR ACKNOWLEDGMENT ON YOUR PART THAT THE 30 DAY CLOCK IS NOT TICKING.

I THINK IF THEIR ATTORNEYS ARE GOOD AT THAT, WE JUST NEED A VERY CLEAR WAIVER FROM YOU ALL THAT YOU'RE WAIVING YOUR 30 DAY.

RIGHT. TO HAVE THIS HEARD AND APPROVED, RIGHT? YES. YEAH. WHAT? THEY'RE NO LONGER SUBJECT TO THE SHOT CLOCK.

TO THE COMMUNITY.

WELL, YOU CAN'T REALLY DO THAT WITH THIS.

THEY COULD UNLESS THEY APPROVE IT.

I DON'T KNOW IF APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS IS AN OPTION, BUT I JUST I MEAN LET'S SAY WE REMOVE IT'S JUST NOTES ON THE PLAT IS REALLY ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

THE AMENDMENT IS VERY QUICK TO MAKE.

IS IT IS IT AN OPTION TO.

IT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD OPTION TO ME TO APPROVE.

SUBJECT TO THAT, I THINK THERE MAY HAVE BEEN ALSO OTHER CONCERNS.

JUST BECAUSE THIS IS ACTUALLY AN OPEN MEETING.

IF YOU AS YOU GUYS ARE TALKING, IF YOU GUYS WOULDN'T MIND TALKING TO THE MICROPHONE BECAUSE THE COMMISSIONERS CAN HEAR YOU AND JUST BE ABLE TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO HEAR YOU ALSO. YES. SO ONCE YOU SAY ON THE CODE, DO YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE DENIAL BASED ON THAT SECTION? BUT NO, I MEAN, FROM OUR ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A VIOLATION OF OUR ORDINANCE, A, 3.9 B TWO IN THAT OVER 75% OF THE PERIMETER IS SURROUNDED BY NATURAL BARRIERS AND THAT'S DOESN'T PERMIT.

[01:10:05]

IS THAT RIGHT? I'M CRAZY FOR LEAVING THAT PLACE.

I THINK WE'RE OKAY. AND THEN WE'RE NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SHOT CLOCK ISSUE.

IF WE DO IT THIS WAY, IT'S GOOD FOR THEM.

AND IT'S IF THEY AGREE TO WAIVE THE THE 30 DAYS.

WELL, IF WE DO THE MOTION THE WAY IT'S ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW, I THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR THEM AND MORE CLEAR FOR THE COURT.

YEAH. SO THEN IN THAT ASPECT, COULD THEY TURN AROUND AND SUBMIT BACK TO CASEY BY NEXT TUESDAY AND IT WILL HAVE TO GET TO TRACY.

ALL RIGHT. I, I, I, I, I THINK WE CERTAINLY CAN.

I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY SPEAKING FOR THE THREE OF US, NOT AT THIS POINT, OTHER THAN TAKING THE PRIVATE THE GATES OFF AND THE PRIVATE STREETS OFF, WHICH IT SOUNDED LIKE THEY WERE WILLING TO DO, WHICH THOSE ARE NOTES WHICH WE CAN EASILY DO RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW.

ARE THERE OTHER CHANGES THE COURT IS LOOKING FOR IN WHAT? WHAT WOULD THOSE BE? BECAUSE WE WOULD NEED VERY CLEAR DIRECTION IF WE GO AWAY FROM HERE AND NEED TO COME BACK WITH SOMETHING.

YEAH, I THINK THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I'M KIND OF PROCEDURALLY, I THINK IT MAY BE BETTER TO JUST AS JUST MY TO DENY AND THEN THAT ALLOWS FOR A MORE COMPREHENSIVE THOUGHT PROCESS ON THAT.

THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M AT.

I AGREE. I WOULD LIKE TO TO I MEAN, I REALIZE THAT TIA ISN'T AN OPTION.

MARTINDALE LIKE ROADS, A SUBSTANDARD FACILITY, TOWER ROADS, A SUBSTANDARD FACILITY.

IT'S A LOT OF LOTS.

A LOT OF LOTS. I GUESS I.

YOU KNOW, IF IF WE COULD AT LEAST HAVE A MEETING REGARDING, YOU KNOW, AN OFF LINE MEETING, I'D BE WILLING TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT IF BJ WOULD. AND JUST TALK THROUGH SOME OF THOSE ISSUES, GET US COMFORTABLE WITH WITH HOW THIS CIRCULATION IS GOING TO WORK, HOW MANY TRIPS ARE GOING TO BE COMING OUT TO 142 AND AND ON TOWER OR JUST JUST FOR BACKGROUND PURPOSES TO A LOT OF THE CONVERSATION HAPPENED BETWEEN, FROM WHAT I GATHER, BETWEEN TRACEY AND ED ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY EVEN OR COMMISSIONER TERRY EXCUSE ME AND AND I WASN'T PRIVY TO A LOT OF THAT AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS SINCE I HAVEN'T HAD THAT OPPORTUNITY AT THIS POINT.

OKAY. SO DO WE WANT TO KEEP THE MOTION AS IS? I DO. OKAY.

SO WOULD YOU MIND REPEATING YOUR MOTION REAL QUICKLY, COMMISSIONER? RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE PLANT BASED ON NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE SECTION IDENTIFIED BY BY OUR ENGINEER AND LEGAL STAFF.

OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL BASED ON OUR PORTION OF THE ORDINANCE.

I THINK IT WAS 3.9 B THREE.

IS THAT CORRECT? WHAT? WHAT'D YOU DO? 3.9? 3.9. OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND AGAIN.

WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR. SAY I.

I OPPOSED HEARING NONE.

MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU. ADAM 33 DISCUSSION ACTION.

[33. Discussion/Action to consider the approval of the Preliminary Plat for Lively Stone Addition consisting of 171 residential lots on approximately 259.98 acres located on Barth Road (CR 179) and Lively Stone Road (CR 181). Speaker: Commissioner Roland/ Kasi Miles/Tracy Bratton; Backup: 24; Cost: None]

ALL RIGHT. THIS IS A FAIRLY LARGE PRELIMINARY PLAT.

THIS DEVELOPER HAS WORKED WITH US AND MODIFIED THEIR PLAN TO ACCOMMODATE REGIONAL ROADWAY NETWORK, SPECIFICALLY ASPEN WAY THAT YOU SEE KIND OF CUTS DIAGONAL THROUGH THERE.

THAT'S PART OF A FUTURE THOROUGHFARE PLAN UPDATE FOR THE COUNTY.

THEY'VE WE'VE WORKED WITH THEM ON LIMITING ACCESS TO THAT ROADWAY THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS THAT FRONT IT ACTUALLY ARE GOING TO USE AND YOU SEE ON THE PLATS THERE, FOR INSTANCE, ON THE LOTS, ONE OF NINE 110 AND 111, THEY HAVE A SHARED ACCESS DRIVEWAY COMING OFF THE ROAD.

SO THERE WON'T BE THREE DRIVEWAY CONNECTIONS WOULD BE ONE DRIVEWAY CONNECTION THAT SHARES THOSE LOTS SIMILARLY ON THE LOTS 112 AND 113.

SAME SAME THING IS GOING ON THERE.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYBODY HERE FROM THE DEVELOPER.

I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING CONTROVERSIAL, DIDN'T ADVISE THEM TO BE HERE.

IF YOU HAVE SOMEBODY HERE, WELCOME TO TALK BUT.

PRELIMINARY PLATS BEFORE YOU FOR CONSIDERATION, I HAVE ONE COMMENT.

[01:15:01]

IT'S ALL MUMBLED AND JUMBLED.

I WAS HOPING THAT WHEN I GOT TO COURT, THE ONE THAT'S ON OUR USB IS CLEAR.

I CANNOT REVIEW A PLAT I CAN'T READ.

AND SO NO ONE'S SORRY.

I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU CAN'T READ IT.

OH, MY PRINTS COME OUT FINE.

YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME. COME AND LOOK HERE.

I THINK THEY'RE SEEING THE SAME THING I AM.

ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE READ OR NOT? I CAN'T READ WHERE YOU'RE EVEN TALKING ABOUT THE LOTS.

I CAN'T REALLY VARIAN'S DISTANCES.

I CAN'T READ THE VERBIAGE.

I CAN'T REVIEW IT.

CAN YOU ALL READ IT? NOT IN THE PACKET.

NO. NO.

I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT IS.

I WISH SOMEBODY HAD REACHED OUT TO US.

WE DON'T GET THIS UNTIL FRIDAY NIGHT.

ACTUALLY, WE POSTED IT THURSDAY.

I'M SORRY. OKAY. BUT I'M JUST SAYING.

YEAH, BUT YOU JUST CAN'T.

IT'S NOT LEGIBLE. YEAH, I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT WOULD HAVE OCCURRED, BECAUSE, I MEAN, I CAN HAND YOU MINE.

WE HAD WE HAD THAT A WHILE BACK AND THEN IT GOT FIXED.

YEAH. YEAH, THAT'S CLEAR.

WELL, IF I COULD HAVE PRINTED A CLEAR, PRINTED HALF SCALE THERE, OBVIOUSLY, WHICH IS HARD ON MY OLD EYES BUT.

WELL, YOU KNOW, I, I READ ALL THE VERBIAGE AND EVERYTHING, AND I THINK WE'VE GOT THE TIME IF YOU WANT TO TABLE IT, AND WE CAN GET A BETTER COPY INTO THE BACKUP.

GOOD. AND HAVE THAT COPY.

COMMISSIONER, WE CAN GET ANOTHER COPY LIKE 27 SUGGESTING.

I'M SORRY, JOE. YES.

OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO TABLE THAT ITEM.

OKAY. MOTION TO TABLE ITEM 33.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT. WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE BY COMMISSIONER ROLAND AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SHELTON.

ALL IN FAVOR.

SAY I OPPOSE HEARING NONE.

MOTION CARRIES ITEM 30 FOR DISCUSSION.

[34. Discussion/Action to consider a variance request to roadway construction standard for Property ID: 15038, Sagada Dos Subdivision located on Homannville Trail. Speaker: Commissioner Theriot/ Kasi Miles/ Tracy Bratton; Backup: 2; Cost: None]

OKAY I BROUGHT COPIES WITH THEIR PROPOSED PLAN IS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT MADE IT INTO THE BACKUP.

THANKS. THANK YOU, TRACY.

THANK YOU, BOB. THANK YOU, BOB.

THANK YOU, SIR. AND AYE, AYE.

AND I BELIEVE THERE'S I THINK THERE'S REPRESENTATIVES HERE FROM THE ENGINEER DEVELOPER.

THIS WAS A PLAT THAT CAME AS A FOUR LOT PLAT BEFORE.

AND THEN WHAT THIS REALLY IS, IS A RE PLAT OF LOT NUMBER FOUR INTO I THINK 315 NEW LOTS.

THEY HAVE A DRAINAGE CONUNDRUM.

OUR ROADWAY STANDARDS CALL FOR A BAR DITCH ON EACH SIDE OF THE ROAD TO PROVIDE PROPER DRAINAGE AND DRAIN THE ROADWAY.

AND MOST OF OUR ROADS ARE ASPHALT ROADS.

THE PROBLEM WITH THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, IT IS SO FLAT.

IF YOU CONSTRUCT A DITCH ON EITHER SIDE, THERE'S NOWHERE FOR THE DITCH TO OUTFALL TO.

SO IT WOULD BE THE OPTIONS AT THAT POINT BECOME GOING AND GETTING AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT FROM ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS IN ORDER TO DIG CHANNELS THROUGH THEIR PROPERTY, IN ORDER TO DRAIN THAT WATER SOMEWHERE OR TO CONSTRUCT SOME KIND OF POND, THAT POND WOULD BE BELOW GROUND OR WOULD IT TAKE THE USE OF STORM WATER PUMPS IN ORDER TO EVACUATE THAT POND, IN ORDER TO DRAIN THE WATER SIMPLY TO MAINTAIN OUR TYPICAL ROAD SECTION THAT HAS A V DITCH ON EACH SIDE? WHAT THEY'VE COME BACK WITH AND THEY DO HAVE A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT TO SUPPORT THIS IS A CONCRETE ROAD SECTION AND MOISTURE BARRIER ON EACH SIDE OF THAT CONCRETE ROAD SECTION WITH BASE UNDERNEATH THAT THAT IS BUILT BASICALLY AT GRADE AND SLOPE TO ALLOW THE WATER TO CONTINUE TO FLOW IN THE SAME DIRECTION IT DOES NOW.

THEY WILL ESTABLISH A PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION AND MAKE THESE ROADS PRIVATELY MAINTAINED.

I DID NOT CONSULTED WITH WITH UNIT ROAD AND WE AS THE COUNTY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN MAINTAINING OF HAVING TO MAINTAIN CONCRETE STREETS.

SO AND I KNOW THEY WROTE AGAIN THERE'S REPRESENTATIVE HERE.

I'LL LET THEM SPEAK. THEY WROTE A SHORT LETTER REQUESTING THE VARIANCE AND I JUST WANT THE OUTLAY THAT THEY DO HAVE A REAL DRAINAGE CHALLENGE AND THEIR THEIR OPTIONS AND HOW TO DEAL WITH IT ARE VERY, VERY LIMITED.

SO. HELLO.

MY NAME'S ALAN SHEFFIELD.

I'M ONE OF THE DEVELOPERS ON THIS PROJECT HERE.

[01:20:02]

SEVERAL ENGINEERS. LATER, WHEN SEVERAL IDEAS LATER.

I THINK WE'VE GOT A PRETTY SOLID PLAN, WHICH IS A BULLET PROOF ROAD.

AND NOTHING'S BULLET PROOF, OF COURSE, BUT A CONCRETE ROAD SEEMS TO BE COMING UP AS THE BEST SOLUTION FOR SOMETHING THAT MAY HAVE SOME WATER UP AGAINST IT LONGER THAN NORMAL BECAUSE IT'S JUST REALLY FLAT OUT THERE.

SO WE WANT TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT'S SUSTAINABLE WITH THAT TYPE OF WATER SITUATION.

IF WE DID DO SOME TRENCHES, WE KIND OF LOOKED AT THAT, TRYING TO GET IT OFF TO THE SIDE.

IT JUST CREATES A POND AND NEXT TO THE ROADS.

SO THROUGH THE THE AVENUE OF SEVERAL ENGINEERS, EXPERIENCED ENGINEERS FOR YEARS TO IN ROADS HAVE COME UP WITH JUST, HEY, LET'S DO A SOLID CONCRETE ROAD WITH A LIME BASE.

IT'S PACKED REALLY WELL AND THEN LET IT.

IF WE DO HAVE A HEAVY RAIN, IT SHOULD COME ACROSS IT LIKE IT NATURALLY DOES.

AND SO WE'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE FOR THAT TO MAKE THAT TYPE OF REALLY SOUND ROAD FOR THIS PROJECT.

COMMISSIONERS. SO IS THIS BEING PROPOSED TO US AS A PRELIMINARY PLAN OR WE JUST MAKING A DECISION ON THE ROADWAY? THERE'S JUST JUST JUST THE ROAD VARIANCE BEFORE WE CAN COME BACK WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT.

OTHERWISE, WITHOUT THE VARIANCE, I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND TO THE COURT THAT WE DENY THE PRELIMINARY PLAT BASED UPON THEIR ROAD CONSTRUCTION.

CAN I ASK A QUESTION? SURE. DONALD, CAN YOU COME UP, DONALD? DOES UNIT ROAD HAVE ANY ABILITY TO MAINTAIN A CONCRETE ROADWAY? NO. WELL, WHAT IS INVOLVED IF A CONCRETE ROADWAY CRACKS OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES AND THERE'S YOU WOULD WHAT'S REQUIRED ON THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO SAW CUT WHATEVER PORTION THAT'S BAD AND THEN REPORT YOU CUT AND YOU CAN DIAL INTO THE EXISTING CONCRETE THAT'S GOOD.

AND THEN TIE INTO THE STEEL AND THEN REPORT.

I GUESS MY CONCERN ON THIS IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN FOUR, SIX, EIGHT, TEN, 12, 14, 14 LOTS ISN'T GOING TO GENERATE A LOT OF MONEY THROUGH A THROUGH A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION TO PROVIDE ANY LONG TERM FUNDS FOR MAINTENANCE.

SO I WOULD IMAGINE AT SOME POINT WE'RE GOING TO END UP WITH A CRUMBLED UP CONCRETE ROAD.

HOW LONG DOES THE CONCRETE ROAD LAST? I KNOW IT LASTS A LONG TIME.

EVERYBODY PUT IN 40 BUCKS A MONTH FOR TEN YEARS.

YOU CAN SORT THIS OUT AND REPLACE IT.

YEAH. SO IT'S NOT LIKE THE ASPHALT ROAD.

MAYBE FIVE YEARS IS A LOT.

AND OVER THE TURN, MONTHS HOLDS ALL IN CONCRETE THREE AND A LOT LONGER.

AND I THINK THAT $40 A MONTH ON 14 PEOPLE PUTTING THAT WEIGHT IN HOA RESERVE ACCOUNT SHOULD COVER ANY KIND OF CRACKS OR THE DRAINAGE BEING PROPOSED.

I GUESS WITH NO MORE DITCHES.

YOU'RE GOING TO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE.

PROBABLY. OH, I'M SORRY.

WELL, YEAH. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS MY PRECINCT FOR THE WHOLE THIS YEARS I WAS THINKING ABOUT OVER THE RAIL TRAIL.

I GUESS I WAS RIGHT AND MOVED THIS LAST SESSION.

YEAH, YEAH. I MEAN, I'M.

I'M STILL REAL FAMILIAR WITH MY COMMENT EXPERIENCE ON THIS, BUT.

YEAH, BUT, YOU KNOW, I GUESS MY OTHER CONCERN IS, IS, YOU KNOW, EACH ONE OF THESE LOTS WILL PROBABLY HAVE ABOUT THREE OR 4000 SQUARE FEET OF EITHER IMPERVIOUS OR NOT VERY PERVIOUS COVER ON THEM.

AND THEN THIS CONCRETE ROAD, IT'S GOING TO BE SHEETING WATER ALSO TO TO HAVE IT JUST FLOW AS IT'S NATURALLY DOING. THAT'S THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN IN DRAINAGE WATER WITHOUT CATCHING IT AND HOLDING IT FOR A LITTLE WHILE.

IT'S A 45,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT WITH A 4000 SQUARE FOOT FOOTPRINT ON IT.

THAT'S LESS THAN 15%, MAYBE 12% PER LOT.

AND THE ROAD IS 20 FEET WIDE AND IT'S NOT UP OR ANYTHING.

IT SHOULD GO ACROSS IT.

SO IT'S NOT TRAPPING IT OR MAKING A SITUATION WITH IT.

IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY.

RESIDENCE IS ONLY, YOU KNOW, MAYBE 500 SQUARE FOOT HOUSES WITH SOME DRIVEWAY ON THEM.

AND YOU GOT SPACE FOR DRIVEWAYS.

YEAH. YEAH.

THAT'S NOT PERVIOUS. YEAH.

BUT I THINK YOU STILL ADD IT ALL UP FOR LIKE A 12% MAYBE PER LOT IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SIZE YOU WERE ESTIMATING IT'S A 44,000, IT'S STILL A LOT.

IT'S STILL A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE OVER WHAT'S OUT THERE RIGHT NOW.

YOU KNOW, AS A, AS A FIELD.

YEAH, BUT I, I JUST WAS HOPING 15% WOULDN'T BE A BIG ENOUGH TO BLIP A RADAR.

[01:25:09]

TRACY SO DO THESE LOTS QUALIFY THAT CAN BE UNDER 150 FEET EACH.

SO ON A ON A LOCAL STREET, THE MINIMUM FRINGE REQUIREMENT IS 125 FEET ON OUR EXISTING COUNTY ROADWAYS.

WE ASSUME ALL OF THEM TO BE MINOR COLLECTORS AND CALLS FOR 150 FOOT MINIMUM.

SO IN A LOT OF OUR MEETINGS, WE ARE SEEING COMMISSIONER PLATS OF SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE OFF OF THEY'RE NOT BUILDING THEIR OWN NEW INTERNAL LOCAL STREET, THEY'RE DEVELOPING OFF OF EXISTING COUNTY STREETS, WHICH AGAIN IN THE ORDINANCE ARE ASSUMED TO BE MINOR COLLECTORS, 150 FOOT FRONTAGE.

I HAVE AGAIN NOT SPENT A WHOLE LOT OF TIME LOOKING IN GREAT DETAIL AT THE AT THE PLAT LAYOUT ITSELF BECAUSE WE WERE TRYING TO GET THROUGH HOW THE DRAINAGE OPERATED AND, YOU KNOW, SUBJECT TO THE VARIANCE IS GOING TO DETERMINE WHETHER WHAT MOVES FORWARD HERE.

I PULLED UP OUR ORDINANCE ON THAT WHEN I READ THIS ON THE AGENDA, IT JUST STATES ALL EXISTING COUNTY ROADS AND PRIVATE STREETS ARE ASSUMED TO BE MINOR COLLECTORS UNLESS THE DEVELOPER SUBMITS TRAFFIC COUNTS IN 20 YEAR TRAFFIC FORECAST SUPPORTING A LOWER ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION.

SO I JUST AND THIS IS THIS IS NOT AN EXISTING COUNTY STREET OR PRIVATE STREET.

THIS IS A NEW PROPOSED STREET.

AND SO WHEN WE DEVELOP NEW PROPOSED STREETS, WE'RE ABLE TO LOOK AT THE NUMBER.

WHAT DOES IT CONNECT TO? HOW MANY? LOTS. EVERYTHING IS CONNECT TO WHAT AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC DO WE THINK IT'S GOING TO GENERATE? WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT THOSE EXISTING COUNTY ROADWAYS FROM MORE AND MORE AND CLOSER AND CLOSER DRIVEWAYS, WHICH TRYING TO TURN THE EXISTING COUNTY ROADS INTO MORE OF REGIONAL COLLECTORS RATHER THAN RESIDENTIAL STREETS.

SO. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? MY ONLY CONCERN IS I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE YOU KNOW, WHAT THE INTENT IS TO HERE TO TRY TO SOLVE A KIND OF A UNIQUE ISSUE AS FAR AS DRAINAGE IS CONCERNED.

I JUST I'M ALWAYS HESITANT WHEN WE START TO GET INTO SITUATIONS WHERE WE ARE POTENTIALLY SETTING OURSELVES UP FOR ISSUES FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD.

AND I THINK MY GUT FEELING TELLS ME THAT THIS ONE IS IS ONE OF THOSE THAT HAS THAT POTENTIAL.

AND I UNDERSTAND THE LIMITATIONS A LOT.

I REALLY DO. BUT IT'S AT THIS POINT, CONSIDERING SOME HISTORICAL INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE WITH OTHER TYPES OF ROADS HAVE BEEN DONE NOT WITH CONCRETE, BUT SIMILAR OTHER TYPES OF ISSUES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN THOUGHT OUT COMPLETELY AT THIS POINT.

I'M NOT I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH WITH WHAT'S PROPOSED.

THAT'S MY THOUGHT. OKAY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YEAH, I THINK V.J. IS EXACTLY RIGHT, BECAUSE I WAS OUT THERE ALL THESE YEARS AND I SAW ALL THE RAINS THAT CAME AND WHAT IT DID TO IT EVERY TIME.

IT'S SO FLAT OUT THERE.

THE WATER CAN'T GET AWAY. IT CAN'T GO ANYWHERE EXCEPT SIT THERE UNTIL IT DRIES UP.

IT'S GOING TO BE A HARD CASE TO HANDLE.

THAT'S WHY WE HAD MULTIPLE ENGINEERS PUT A PLAN TOGETHER FOR US THAT WORKS.

OKAY. COMMISSIONERS.

IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A MOTION, I'LL RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY THE VARIANCE BY COMMISSIONER TERRIO.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT. WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ROLAND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR. SAY, I OPPOSE HEARING NONE.

MOTION CARRIES ITEM 35 DISCUSSION, ACTION AND CONSIDER A VARIANCE REQUEST FROM CALL COUNTY DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE.

[35. Discussion/Action to consider a variance request from Caldwell County Development Ordinance, Section 3.3.1 to allow a Family Land Grant with only 50' of road frontage for Mr. Felipe Saucedo, Property ID; 113830 located off of Seminole Trail. Speaker: Commissioner Roland/ Kasi Miles/ Tracy Bratton; Backup: 12; Cost: None]

PROPERTY ID 113830 LOCATED OFF SEMINOLE TRAIL.

CASEY. HI.

AND I'M GOING TO ACTUALLY LINDA.

KIKO IS HERE TO REPRESENT MR. SALCEDO IN HIS FAMILY.

AND I'M ALSO GOING TO DEFER TO TRACY FOR ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

LINDA HINKLE, 1109 SOUTH MAIN STREET.

THIS IS GOING TO BE A FAMILY LAND GRANT.

AND IN TALKING TO TRACY BEFORE, HE DOESN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ACT ON THIS WITHOUT IT COMING TO COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR A VARIANCE.

WE'VE DONE A LOT OF THESE.

THEY HAVE AGREED TO A ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT TO GET RECORDED.

TRACY SUGGESTED IN A CONVERSATION WE HAD YESTERDAY THAT IN THESE TYPE OF SITUATIONS THAT THEY ALSO ARE LIMITED TO OR

[01:30:07]

HE ONLY HAS 50 FEET OF ROAD FRONTAGE.

I THINK IT WAS IN YOUR PACKAGE.

THE DAUGHTER HAS A HOUSE IN THE BACK.

HE ALSO OWNS THE THE NEXT DOOR PROPERTY.

THE ONE BESIDE THIS THAT'S TO THE LEFT OF THE PROPERTY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

AND HE LIVES THERE AND I THINK ONE OF HIS SONS LIVES THERE.

THEY HAVE REALLY NICE HOUSES, BUT ONE OF THE SONS IS WANTING TO BUILD A HOUSE.

HE'S GOT A GRANDDAUGHTER AND THEN HIS DAUGHTER ALREADY LIVES ON THE PROPERTY.

SO THEY'RE JUST REQUESTING A VARIANCE.

AND IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO THEM, THEY'RE HERE.

THEY CAME TO REPRESENT THEMSELVES.

SO JUST ASKING FOR A VARIANCE TO THE 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY SO THEY CAN USE AN EASEMENT TO GET TO THEIR PROPERTY COMMISSIONERS AND I'M SORRY, CAN'T GET A STOP.

SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

SO IS IT IS IT TRACY, IS IT THE CREATION OF FOUR LOTS THEN UP TO UP TO FOUR OR THEY'RE GONE? ARE THEY GOING TO SPLIT IT FOR RIGHT NOW OR JUST ONLY DO THREE OF THREE BUT COULD NOT EXCEED THE FOUR BECAUSE THAT'S ALL YOU CAN DO FOR FAMILY, RIGHT? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT MY QUESTION WAS.

BUT SO IT'S A AN UPPER LIMIT THAT REQUEST.

BUT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO SPLIT IT RIGHT NOW.

OKAY. THAT'S THAT'S MY FIRST QUESTION.

A COUPLE OF POINTS OF CLARIFICATION.

IN CONSIDERING THINGS LIKE THIS, I THINK THE COURT SHOULD KEEP IN MIND WHAT'S BEING ALLOWED NOW VERSUS WHAT COULD BE IN THE FUTURE AND A LITTLE BIT OF SEMANTIC CHANGE RATHER THAN THE DIVISION OF FOUR.

I'M I'M JUST AS CONCERNED ABOUT HOW MANY TOTAL HOMES GET BUILT ON IT.

I WOULD SUGGEST THE COMMISSIONERS COURT, IF THEY CONSIDER THIS, CONSIDER IN ADDITION, REQUIRING THE ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT OR RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT ONLY PERMITS ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOME PER LOT.

OTHERWISE YOU COULD COME BACK IN WITH A SITE PLAN ON THE FIVE ACRE LOT AND PUT FIVE HOMES ON IT.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S WITHIN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING, AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S WITHIN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT THE COURT WANTS TO CONSIDER IN A POINT IN FAVOR OF THIS.

IN TERMS OF THE TOTAL DENSITY THAT'S OUT THERE, WHAT'S ALLOWED UNDER OUR ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW IS THEY COULD COME IN WITH A COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN AND BUILD SEVERAL HOMES, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE HOMES OUT THERE.

SO IN APPROVING THIS AS A VARIANCE FOR A FAMILY LAND GRANT, THE COUNTY IS NOT ENDING UP WITH INCREASED DENSITY, IN FACT, VIA THE USE OF POSSIBLY WITH A RESTRICTED COVENANT AND NO MORE THAN FOUR LOTS, NO MORE THAN ONE HOME PER LOT, YOU ACTUALLY END UP WITH LESS POSSIBLE DENSITY.

WHAT THE VARIANCE WOULD ALLOW WOULD BE THE INDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIP OF EACH ONE, WHICH IS NOT POSSIBLE UNDER COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.

SO I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT TO THE COURT.

YOU'RE NOT ACTUALLY GETTING MORE THAN WHAT THEY COULD OTHERWISE DO BY RIGHT.

WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS GETTING SOME ADDITIONAL CONTROL AND AUTHORITY AND POSSIBLY LIMITING THAT IF YOU SO CHOOSE, AND YOU'D BE PERMITTING THEM THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY RIGHT OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY RATHER THAN JUST BE ON A SITE PLAN AND HOW THAT IMPACTS THOSE PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO SELL LATER AND HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION, PROPERTY TAXES, THOSE KIND OF THINGS. OKAY.

THANK YOU. DID YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THIS? I THINK KIND OF IN OUR ORDINANCE IT ALREADY STATES ABOUT FAMILY LAND GRANT.

AND IF THEY FURTHER DECIDE TO DO SOMETHING WITH IT, THEY HAVE TO COME TO COURT FOR A SUBDIVISION PLAT.

AT THAT POINT WE WOULD DENY THAT ANYWAY, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ON AN EASEMENT TO BEGIN WITH.

SO THIS IS SOMETHING I'D LIKE TO LEAVE THIS COURT WITH, IS WITH FAMILY LAND GRANTS THAT THEY ONLY HAVE THIS MINIMUM ACCESS GRANTING THEM THAT WE ALLOW THE IN OUR WHEN OUR NEW ORDINANCE.

SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE GETS WRITTEN THAT THERE'S A SECTION IN THERE FOR THE FAMILY LAND GRANT THAT THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE ABLE TO USE AN ACCESS EASEMENT WITH THE ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT JUST FOR FAMILY NEIGHBOR.

AND IF THEY COME BACK FOR IT TO BE A SOMETHING ELSE, A SUBDIVISION OR SOMETHING, THEY WOULD HAVE COME BACK AND APPROACH IT AS THE SUBDIVISION RULE ITSELF.

FOR MORE THAN THAT, WHEN WE WHEN THE STATE ALLOWS YOU ONLY THE FOUR TO CUT UP FOR A FAMILY LAND GRANT, NO MATTER IF YOU'VE GOT FOUR OR 500 ACRES, YOU CAN ONLY DO FOUR

[01:35:02]

AND SO I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER THAT IN THOSE NEW RULES SO THAT WE'RE NOT ALWAYS HAVING TO BRING THESE.

AND CASEY HAS THAT ASSURANCE THAT SHE KNOWS THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO CREATE AN EASEMENT WITH A ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT JUST FOR FAMILY LAND RENTS.

THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD APPLY TO.

THEN THE WORRY ABOUT SOMEONE COMING IN AND WANTING TO SUBDIVIDE IT INTO A SUBDIVISION, IT ELIMINATES THAT ALTOGETHER.

I AGREE WITH YOU THERE.

HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, THE PART OF THE CONCERN IS NOT NECESSARILY WHERE THEY'RE SUBDIVIDING BECAUSE THEY'RE JUST BUILDING MULTIPLE HOMES ON ON THAT LOT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, ALL YOU NEED IS AN ACRE FOR.

RIGHT. WELL, LET'S DON'T GET TOO FAR OFF TRACK HERE AND START TALKING ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE KIND OF WELL TO WHAT WE'RE WE BOUGHT THE LAND WITH THE INTENTION OF PAYING FOR IT AND GIVING IT TO HIS KIDS.

THAT WAS KIND OF THE THOUGHT PROCESS THAT HE HAD.

AND, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF HE HAD THE PLANET AND BUILD A ROAD, IT'S NOT 60 FEET.

SO THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE.

BUT WE'VE DONE THIS FOR SEVERAL.

AND THE LAST 6 TO 8 MONTHS, YOU KNOW, BUT JUST JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU ALL UNDERSTAND YOU ONLY HAVE ONE HOME ON EACH TRACK, RIGHT? YOU UNDERSTAND THAT.

SO, YOU KNOW, IF THEY WANT ANYTHING MORE, THEY'D HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE COURT TO GET APPROVAL FOR IT.

SO YOU REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO NOT HAVING EACH TRACT HAVING ITS OWN 50 FEET ON A PUBLIC OR COUNTY OWNED ROAD? IT WOULD BE AN EASEMENT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS.

Q. I DON'T THINK SO.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVED THE FAMILY LAND GRANT WITH ACCESS AS AN EASEMENT AND A ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY KNOW THAT ON EACH LOT THAT THEY CREATE, THEY CAN ONLY PUT ONE STRUCTURE, ONE LIVING STRUCTURE.

SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TERRY.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ROLAND.

I'M SO SORRY.

NO PROBLEM. FOLLOW ME.

SO ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR. SAY AYE.

OPPOSED HEARING? NONE.

MOTION CARRIES.

AND CAN I SAY ONE MORE THING? SURE, JOE.

I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT EDNA RAYFORD WAS A VERY DEAR FRIEND OF MINE.

SHE RAISED A LOT OF LOVELY CHILDREN, PUT CHILDREN FOURTH FOREMOST OF ALL THE KIDS THAT SHE TOOK IN AS FOSTER.

SHE ADOPTED SOME.

SHE WAS A REAL ASSET.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNTY.

AND WE'RE REALLY GOING TO MISS HER.

SHE'S STOPPED BY OUR OFFICE MANY, MANY, MANY, MANY TIMES AND JUST VISITED.

YES. AND YOU KNOW, I KNOW DEXTER WAS PROBABLY VERY DEVASTATED ALSO, BUT EDNA RAYFORD WAS A FINE WOMAN IN THIS COMMUNITY.

SHE LIVED A LONG LIFE AND HELPED A LOT OF PEOPLE.

SHE SHE HAD A WHOLE BUNCH OF PEOPLE THERE YESTERDAY.

YEAH, A LOT.

WELL, WE ALL KNOW SHE'S IN GOD'S HOUSE.

YEAH, NO DOUBT.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[36. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pursuant to Texas Government Code Section 551.087, deliberation regarding economic development negotiations associated with Project Ardisia. Possible action may follow in open court. Speaker: Judge Haden; Backup: 1; Cost: None & 37. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pursuant to Texas Government Code Section 551.089, deliberation regarding the deployment, or specific occasions for implementation, of critical infrastructure or security devices. Possible action may follow in open court. Speaker: Judge Haden; Backup: 1; Cost: None]

WE'LL RECESS IT, GO INTO BOTH OF THESE SESSIONS.

ONE BY ONE.

FIRST EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.087 DELIBERATION REGARDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECT ARTESIA.

POSSIBLE ACTION MAY FOLLOW IN OPEN COURT AND PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.089.

DELIBERATION REGARDING THE DEPLOYMENT OF SPECIFIC OCCASIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SECURITY DEVICES.

AND WE AS I SAID, WE WERE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 1039.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.