[A. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
[00:00:04]
>> GOOD MORNING, WE GOT QUIET. I DON'T NEED A GAVEL.
WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THE SPECIAL SESSION TO ORDER THE COMMISSIONERS COURT, TUESDAY, MAY 14TH, 2024 AT 9:00 AM.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS, WOULD YOU LEAD US IN THE INVOCATION, PLEASE?
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS THIS MORNING?
[D. ANNOUNCEMENTS]
>> NO ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM ME, JUDGE.
>> JUDGE, I'D LIKE TO REMIND EVERYBODY ON MAY 27TH, WE'RE HAVING THE MEMORIAL AT THE AMERICAN LEGION.
MEMORIAL SERVICE, I BELIEVE IT'S AT 11 O'CLOCK.
THEY'RE HAVING HOTDOGS AND LIKE EVERYBODY TO JOIN.
>> COMMISSIONER THERIOT? SORRY.
>> YES, JUDGE. I GOT AN INVITATION THAT I'D LIKE TO READ TO THE COURT.
I'D LIKE TO EXTEND AN INVITATION TO COMMISSIONERS COURT CALDWELL COUNTY TO ATTEND THE LCRA GRANT PRESENTATION TO ST.
JOHN BODY PROPER ORGANIZATION HERE IN ST. JOHN COLONY, TEXAS.
WE'RE ASKING THIS INVITATION TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT IT INCLUDES ON THE COMMISSIONERS TO ADOPT THIS CALENDAR MAY 30TH, 28TH, 18TH.
THE ST. JOHN COLONY COMMUNITY APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT WITH THE RESPECT OF CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT AND COUNTY OFFICIALS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS.
DO WE HAVE ANY STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS? NO? WE'LL MOVE TO CITIZENS COMMENTS.
>> WE'LL GO TO CONSENT. COMMISSIONERS, IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS ON CONSENT,
[F. CONSENT AGENDA]
I'D LOOK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE.>> HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND AND A SECOND.
>> OPPOSED. NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM G SPECIAL PRESENTATION TO DISCUSS THE CAPABILITIES OF THE FLOCK SAFETY CAMERAS.
[G.1 To discuss the capabilities of Flock Safety Cameras. Speaker: Judge Haden/Juan Villarreal/Flock Safety Personnel; Backup: 4; Cost: $36,250]
>> YES, SIR. MY NAME IS CRAIG.
>> OKAY. HANG ON JUST A MEANT I THINK YOUR MIC MIGHT BE OFF.
>> THERE WE GO. NOW MY VOICE REALLY CARRIES.
I HELP MANAGE THE TEAM HERE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE COUNTRY.
HE IS OUR LOCAL AUSTIN REPRESENTATIVE.
MY GOAL THIS MORNING WAS TO EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT FLOCK SAFETY, WHAT WE'RE HOPING TO DO FOR THE COUNTY AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MIGHT HAVE.
THERE'S A PARADOX WITHIN POLICING, ESPECIALLY WITHIN A COUNTY HAVING SUCH GREAT DISTANCES THAT ARE COVERED WITH A FEW AMOUNT OF PEOPLE.
IT'S HAPPENING ALL THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.
THERE'S JUST A GREAT NEED FOR MORE MANPOWER, MORE EYES, THE ABILITY TO CUT DOWN CRIME, CRIME IS GOING UP.
FLOCK ACTUALLY STARTED WITH HOAS AND NEIGHBORHOODS.
IN 2017, WE STARTED WORKING WITH THEM, FOUND IT TO BE VERY SUCCESSFUL.
THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS AND SHERIFF'S OFFICES CAME ON BOARD IN ABOUT 2019.
WE'VE ACTUALLY BEEN ABLE TO MAKE A REALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON CRIME, THINGS WE BELIEVE THAT WE'RE PART OF ABOUT 10% OF THE CRIMES THAT HAPPEN IN THE COUNTRY ARE USING FLOCK TO INVESTIGATE THE CRIME, INCLUDING MANY TEXAS AGENCIES AND OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.
THE CURRENT SITUATION IS, CRIME IS GOING UP.
THERE'S VERY LIMITED RESOURCES ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
[00:05:03]
THE OPPORTUNITY IS THAT WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO PROTECT FIRST RESPONDENT, BE ABLE TO PUT TECHNOLOGY IN PLACE THAT MULTIPLIES FORCE AND TO BE ABLE TO ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY.AGAIN, WE START WITH HOAS WITH BUSINESSES, AND CAN HAVE A NATURAL WAY TO HAVE THE COMMUNITY CONTRIBUTE BACK TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AND LAW ENFORCEMENT BACK TO THE COMMUNITY.
THE WAY THAT WE DO THAT IS WITH OUR SUITE OF PRODUCTS.
WE ESSENTIALLY USE INEXPENSIVE SENSORS IN THE WILD LIKE LICENSE PLATE READERS, GUNSHOT DETECTORS, IP CAMERAS TO DETECT CRIME AS IT HAPPENS.
THEN WE USE MACHINE LEARNING TO DECODE WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING, AND THEN WE DELIVER THAT TO THE PEOPLE WHO NEED IT. I'LL GIVE YOU EXAMPLES OF THAT.
BUT TODAY, WE'RE GOING TO MOSTLY FOCUS ON OUR LICENSE PLATE READER, WHICH IS THE FALCON.
IT'S A STATIONARY LICENSE PLATE READER.
IT USUALLY GOES UP ON A POLE OR ON EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE WITH A SOLAR PANEL, AND AS A SERVICE.
IT'S LIKE PUTTING EYES IN THE STREET ON THE INGRESS OF THE COUNTY TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY POTENTIAL DANGERS AS WELL AS HELP LAW ENFORCEMENT DO THEIR JOBS MORE EFFECTIVELY AND GET THE RIGHT PEOPLE TO AN AREA TO INVESTIGATE CRIMES AS THEY HAPPEN.
THERE'S REALLY A COUPLE OF WAYS THAT THEY WORK, AND HAVE A SLIDE FOR THIS.
I MAY HAVE MIXED UP A LITTLE BIT.
ESSENTIALLY, THERE'S PROACTIVE, THERE'S REACTIVE, AND THEN THERE'S DETERRENT.
THOSE ARE WHAT THE HOPE IS HERE.
PROACTIVE POLICING WOULD BE WHEN A VEHICLE PASSES ONE OF THESE LICENSE PLATE READERS, IT TAKES A PHOTO OF THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE.
IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY PERSONAL IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION TIED TO IT.
THERE'S NO NAME, NOTHING LIKE THAT.
IT JUST TAKES A LICENSE PLATE AND IT COMPARES IT TO A DATABASE THAT YOUR SHERIFF'S OFFICE HAS ACCESS TO CALLED NCIC AND TCIC.
WHAT HAPPENS IS IT TELLS US IF THERE'S A CAR SUSPECTED OF BEING STOLEN OR IF THERE'S AN AMBER ALERT OR A SILVER ALERT.
I'LL GIVE YOU SOME EXAMPLES LATER ON, THE PRESENTATION OF WHERE WE'VE BEEN REALLY IMPACTFUL.
BUT WHAT HAPPENS IS BECAUSE WE MAY NOT HAVE A SHERIFF DEPUTY ABLE TO BE OUT ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD OUTSIDE THE COUNTY, RUNNING A LICENSE PLATE OF A STOLEN VEHICLE MIGHT BE COMING IN TO TAKE SOME VARIOUS ACTION.
THIS DOES THAT AUTOMATICALLY, AND THEN ALERTS THEM THAT THEY MIGHT WANT TO GO TO THAT AREA AND CONTINUE THEIR INVESTIGATION, WHICH MEANS MANUALLY RERUNNING THE PLATE, MAKING SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS COPACETIC AND THEN MAKING A STOP IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE.
THE SECOND WAY THAT WE HELP SOLVE CRIME IN THIS COUNTRY IS REACTIVELY.
WHEN THERE'S A VEHICLE AND WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A LICENSE PLATE, BUT WE MIGHT HAVE A DESCRIPTION OF THE VEHICLE, WE'RE ABLE TO USE THE SYSTEM TO FIND THAT VEHICLE.
I'LL GIVE YOU OTHER EXAMPLES AS WE GO THROUGHOUT THE PRESENTATION, BUT THE IDEA IS THAT LET'S SAY I WERE TO HAVE A VEHICLE DOING ANY TYPE OF CRIME, MAYBE A DRIVE BY SHOOTING OR PACKAGE THIEF, LIKE ANY VARYING LEVEL OF CRIME.
IF I HAVE A DESCRIPTION OR IF I HAVE A FUZZY VIDEO OF THAT VEHICLE.
I CAN ACTUALLY USE A DESCRIPTION OF THAT VEHICLE TO FIND SIMILAR VEHICLES IN THE AREA AT THE TIME OF THE CRIME TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE IF THAT IS MY SUSPECT VEHICLE.
IDENTIFYING VEHICLES THAT HAVE BEEN USED IN CRIMES IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE VERY GOOD AT.
WE TALK A LOT ABOUT WHAT THE TECHNOLOGY IS.
I THINK IT'S PROBABLY MORE IMPORTANT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THE TECHNOLOGY IS NOT.
WE ARE TAKING PICTURES FROM THE REARS OF VEHICLES.
THIS ISN'T TIED TO PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION.
THIS IS NOT ANY TYPE OF TRAFFIC LIKE SPEEDING OR REGISTRATIONS.
IT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING LIKE THAT AND THEN THE DATA AUTOMATICALLY DELETES AFTER 30 DAYS.
IT'S NOT UNLIMITED CONTINUOUS MONITORING.
I CAN'T JUST GO TO THE CAMERA ANYTIME I WANT TO SEE IT.
AS AN OFFICER, DETECTIVE, DEPUTY, I WOULD ACTUALLY NEED A REASON TO BE ABLE TO SEARCH THE DATABASE LIKE A CASE NUMBER OR SOME TYPE OF REASON TO MAKE A SEARCH, OR THE SYSTEM WOULD HAVE TO ALERT ME THAT THERE'S SOMETHING ON THE NCIC THAT NEEDS FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT.
THERE'S A PROACTIVE ALERTS, INVESTIGATIVE ALERTS, AND THEN DETERRENCE.
I WAS TALKING TO A CHIEF OVER IN SUNSET VALLEY RECENTLY, AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE CRIME THAT WAS HAPPENING THERE AND THE DETERRENT PIECE IS ACTUALLY WHAT THEY'RE STARTING TO REALIZE BECAUSE IT'S A RELATIVELY SMALL PLACE LOCKED IN BY CAMERAS, AND THE CRIMINAL ELEMENT THERE HAS SAID, WE DON'T REALLY WANT TO GO THERE ANYMORE BECAUSE WE HAVE A REALLY HIGH PROPENSITY OF GETTING CAUGHT.
WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS, HOW THIS ACTUALLY WORKS.
WHEN AN OFFICER GOES TO MAKE A SEARCH, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO PUT IN A SEARCH REASON.
THERE'S AN INDEFINITE AUDIT ON
[00:10:02]
THE SHERIFF'S SIDE THAT WE CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF TO MITIGATE ANY TYPE OF ABUSE THERE.IT WILL NEVER DO FACIAL RECOGNITION, IT DOESN'T DO PARKING ENFORCEMENT OR TOLLS.
IT'S NOT CONNECTED TO ANY THIRD PARTY DATABASES.
REALLY, THIS IS MONITORING, TAKING A FEW PHOTOS THAT FLED AFTER 30 DAYS OF THE REAR OF VEHICLE WITH NO OTHER INFORMATION TIED TO IT.
THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD BRING AN OFFICER TO THAT VEHICLE WOULD BE EITHER IF THE VEHICLE WAS ASSOCIATED WITH NCIC, TCIC ALERTS OR AMBER ALERTS, SILVER ALERTS, THINGS LIKE THAT, OR IF THERE WAS A REASON FOR THE OFFICER TO PUT IN.
WE ALSO PROVIDE A TRANSPARENCY PORTAL, WHICH WE CAN PUT ON THE WEBSITE THAT TELLS EXACTLY HOW THE SYSTEM IS BEING USED, HOW IT IS BEING UTILIZED, THE POLICIES AROUND THE LPR, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, SO PEOPLE CAN SEE EXACTLY HOW THE SYSTEM IS BEING USED.
IT IS AS A SERVICE. HERE'S WHAT ONE OF THE CAMERAS LOOKS LIKE.
WE ARE REALLY PREVALENT IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.
THIS IS NOT AN EXHAUSTIVE LIST, BUT THIS IS A GOOD IDEA OF SOME OF THE MANY CUSTOMERS THAT WE HAVE IN TEXAS INCLUDING AUSTIN AND SEVERAL OTHER CITIES AROUND AUSTIN.
I'D SAY THE MAJORITY OF CITIES AND COUNTIES USE FLOCK IN SOME CAPACITY IN THIS AREA.
I'LL GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF IDEAS AND THEN ANSWERING QUESTIONS OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DONE IN TEXAS TO SOME EXAMPLES.
THIS IS A CASE STUDY FROM A SHOOTING SUSPECT THAT WAS IDENTIFIED USING THAT VEHICLE FINGERPRINT, SO IDENTIFIED USING THE VEHICLE FINGERPRINT, AND THEN ULTIMATELY FOUND USING LPRS.
WHAT WAS REALLY GREAT ABOUT THIS CASE IS BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY A SHOOTING SUSPECT.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAST LINE THERE, THE ACTION TAKEN AT THE END OF THIS ORDEAL WAS WE WERE ABLE TO GET THIS PERSON HELP.
NOW, THERE IS ANOTHER ONE OUT OF GARLAND, TEXAS, MURDER SUSPECT APPREHENDED, SAME TYPE OF THING.
WE DIDN'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE VEHICLE WAS.
WE WERE ABLE TO USE A VEHICLE FINGERPRINT TO IDENTIFY THE VEHICLE AND THEN HOLD THE PERSON ACCOUNTABLE.
MISSING PERSON ALERTS, SO SILVER ALERTS, AMBER ALERTS, THINGS LIKE THAT, THESE HAPPEN ALL THE TIME WITH THE SYSTEM, THEY'RE TIED IN.
WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR THIS VEHICLE.
YOU SEE THOSE SIGNS ON THE HIGHWAY ALL THE TIME.
THIS WILL ACTUALLY HELP YOU ACTIVELY LOOK FOR THAT.
WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF SILVER AND AMBER ALERTS WITH GOOD OUTCOMES BECAUSE WE'VE HAD THIS EQUIPMENT IN PLACE AND BEEN ABLE TO HELP IN THAT SITUATION.
IN THIS CASE, IT WAS A 83-YEAR-OLD BEDFORD RESIDENT THAT WE WERE ABLE TO HELP WITH THE LICENSE PLATE READERS.
ANOTHER MURDER OUT OF SUGAR LAND, TEXAS.
WE'VE TALKED TO MANY LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES THAT HAVE SEEN CRIME DRAMATICALLY DROP BECAUSE OF THE LICENSE PLATE READERS.
I THINK YOU GET THE IDEA, STOLEN VEHICLES, BEING ABLE TO CUT DOWN ON CRIME HAPPENING ON CAMPUS IN THE UNIVERSITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS.
THIS ONE IS PROBABLY ONE OF MY FAVORITES. I KEEP IT IN HERE.
IT'S THE ONLY ONE OF THESE CASE STUDIES I INCLUDE THAT ISN'T A TEXAS ONE.
BUT IT GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF HOW EXACTLY THE TECHNOLOGY WORKS.
THERE WAS A STRANGER-ON-STRANGER CHILD ABDUCTION AT GUNPOINT THAT HAPPENED IN GEORGIA.
THIS IS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AT THIS POINT, BUT THE SUSPECTS HAD PUT A DIFFERENT PLATE, A FICTITIOUS PLATE ON THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE THEN INTENTIONALLY STOLE A CHILD, WHICH IS VERY RARE BUT EGREGIOUS.
WE WERE ABLE TO USE THE VEHICLE FINGERPRINT TO IDENTIFY THE VEHICLE, EVEN WITHOUT THE PLATE, AND FIND A PICTURE OF THAT VEHICLE WITHIN THE LAST 30 DAYS, IT ACTUALLY HAD MISMATCHED RIMS, THE HUBCAPS.
WHAT HAPPENED WAS WE WERE ABLE TO IDENTIFY THAT, GET THE REAL PLATE, CONTINUE THE INVESTIGATION.
OBVIOUSLY, NOT US, BUT THE LAW ENFORCEMENT WAS CONTINUING THE INVESTIGATION.
THEY WERE ABLE TO FIND THE VEHICLE AND ABLE TO FIND THE CHILD AND REUNITE THE CHILD WITH A MOTHER WITHIN SIX HOURS.
VERY POWERFUL TECHNOLOGY TO BE ABLE TO PUT MORE EYES IN THE AREA TO ALLOW INVESTIGATIONS TO CONTINUE.
ESSENTIALLY, WE'RE GETTING THE PEOPLE, YOUR DEPUTIES, TO THE RIGHT PLACE AT THE RIGHT TIME, AND WE'RE ALERTING THEM TO A POTENTIAL THREAT, POTENTIAL PRESENCE OF SOMETHING THAT THEY NEED TO TAKE ACTION ON.
THEY GET THERE AND THEY'RE ABLE TO MAKE THAT HUMAN CALCULATION AND CONTINUE.
I'LL LEAVE IT THERE WITH ANY QUESTIONS.
WHAT QUESTIONS DO YOU HAVE FOR ME?
>> I THINK THAT, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, SHERIFF, BUT WE'RE GOING TO USE SOME OF THE SP22 MONEY FOR THIS,
[00:15:01]
IF WE DO THIS, CORRECT? I DO HAVE A QUESTION GOING FORWARD, YEAR AFTER YEAR, IS THERE A LICENSE FEE RENEWAL WITH THIS?>> YES, SIR. THERE'S A ONE-TIME COST FOR INSTALLATION, BUT THE ONGOING COST IS AS A SERVICE.
WE DO ALL THE CAMERA MAINTENANCE, WE DO ALL THE CELLULAR THAT GOES INTO IT, EVERYTHING IS INFRASTRUCTURE-FREE.
WE ALSO INCLUDE THE SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO PFLUGERVILLE, SUNSET VALLEY, SHARING CAMERAS WITH HAYS COUNTY, ALL THE MANY, MANY CAMERAS WITHIN THE AREA, ALL THAT IS INCLUDED AS WELL.
>> DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THAT FEE IS JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY?
>> YEAH, IT'S $3,000 PER CAMERA PER YEAR.
>> ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN DO IS NEW NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE COMING IN, NEW BUSINESSES THAT WE CAN ASK THEM TO PURCHASE THIS AS WELL TO GIVE US MORE CAMERAS AND THEN MAYBE ALSO COVER THAT COST.
>> THAT'D BE GREAT. THANK YOU.
IT SEEMS LIKE A PRETTY POWERFUL LAW ENFORCEMENT TOOL.
I'M JUST TRYING TO PROJECT FORWARD JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IF AND WHEN THAT SP22 MONEY EVER ENDS, WHICH WE'LL SEE HOW THAT GOES.
JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GOT YOU COVERED ON THE FEES.
THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION. COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU ALL HAVE ANY?
>> I DO NOT. THAT WAS MINE AS WELL
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME OUT. YOU ALL HAVE A GOOD ONE.
>> WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO KEEP EVERYBODY HERE AND GO TO DISCUSSION ACTION ITEM I-1,
[I.1 Discussion regarding Environmental Task Force. Speaker: Judge Haden/Commissioner Theriot; Backup: 0; Cost: $0.00]
DISCUSSION REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL TASKFORCE.WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
WE'RE GOING TO GO IN UNDER SECTION 551.071 AND 551.074 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE.
WE'RE GOING TO START EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 9:17.
WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND EXIT EXECUTIVE SESSION, SUBJECT SECTIONS 551.071 AND 551.074 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, AND WE'LL BE TAKING NO ACTION.
WE'LL GET BACK TO THE AGENDA AND GO TO ITEM H-1 REGARDING BURN BAN.
[H.1 Regarding the burn ban. Speaker: Judge Haden/Hector Rangel; Backup: 2; Cost: $0.00]
>> GOOD MORNING, JUDGE, COMMISSIONERS, STAFF, AND GALLERY.
WELL, IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS, WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY FIRES OR ANY WILDFIRES.
THE RAIN HAS BEEN SUBSTANTIAL.
WE'VE HAD SOME PRETTY GOOD RAINS AND WE HAVE RAIN FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS.
FOR THE NEXT 15 DAYS, IT'S STARTING TO DRY UP WITH TEMPERATURES GOING UP INTO THE 100.
OUR KBDI NUMBERS ARE MINIMUM 205, MAX 337, AVERAGE 253 WITH A CHANGE OF SEVEN.
I RECOMMEND TO THE COMMISSIONERS WE KEEP THE BURN BAN OFF ANOTHER TWO WEEKS.
>> COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO KEEP THE BURN BAN OFF.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT. SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES.
>> NICE, HECTOR. ITEM H.2, TO APPROVE A PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING
[H.2 To approve a Proclamation designating May 2024 as Community Action, Inc. of Central Texas Month. Speaker: Judge Haden/Angela Mudd; Backup: 2; Cost: $0.00]
MAY 2024 AS COMMUNITY ACTION INC. OF CENTRAL TEXAS MONTH.SOMEWHERE IN THIS STACK OF PAPER, I HAVE THE PROCLAMATION.
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING MAY 2024 AS COMMUNITY ACTION INC. OF CENTRAL TEXAS.
WHEREAS, COMMUNITY ACTION INC. OF CENTRAL TEXAS HAS MADE ESSENTIAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES ACROSS CALDWELL COUNTY BY CREATING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES AND STRENGTHENING COMMUNITIES, AND WHEREAS COMMUNITY ACTION INC. OF CENTRAL TEXAS IS A ROBUST STATE AND LOCAL FORCE CONNECTING PEOPLE TO LIFE-CHANGING SERVICES AND CREATING PATHWAYS TO PROSPERITY IN HAYS, CALDWELL, BLANCO, AND SURROUNDING COUNTIES, AND WHEREAS COMMUNITY ACTION INC. OF CENTRAL TEXAS BUILDS AND PROMOTES ECONOMIC STABILITY AS AN ESSENTIAL ASPECT OF ENABLING AND ENHANCING STRONGER COMMUNITIES AND STABLE HOMES, AND WHEREAS COMMUNITY ACTION INC. OF CENTRAL TEXAS PROMOTES COMMUNITY WIDE SOLUTIONS TO CHALLENGES THROUGHOUT OUR CITY, SUBURBS, AND RURAL AREAS, AND WHEREAS COMMUNITY ACTION INC. OF CENTRAL TEXAS DELIVERS INNOVATIVE SERVICES AND SUPPORTS THAT CREATE GREATER OPPORTUNITY FOR FAMILY AND CHILDREN TO SUCCEED, AND WHEREAS COMMUNITY ACTION INC. OF CENTRAL TEXAS INSISTS ON COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND INVOLVEMENT ENSURING THAT ALL SECTORS OF THE COMMUNITY HAVE A VOICE AND WILL BE HEARD,
[00:20:04]
AND WHEREAS COMMUNITY ACTION INC. OF CENTRAL TEXAS CELEBRATING 60 YEARS OF INNOVATION IMPACT AND PROVIDING PROVEN RESULTS FOR AMERICANS, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT THAT THE MONTH OF MAY 2024 IS RECOGNIZED AS COMMUNITY ACTION INC. OF CENTRAL TEXAS MONTH.COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PROCLAMATION?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE.
>> A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> OPPOSED. HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H.3, DISCUSSION ACTION AND CONSIDER
[H.3 To consider changing the Caldwell County employee dental insurance coverage provider. Speaker: Commissioner Westmoreland/Bob Bush; Backup: 7; Cost: $0.00]
CHANGING THE CALDWELL COUNTY EMPLOYEE DENTAL INSURANCE COVERAGE.>> COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND AND BOB.
>> THANK YOU, JUDGE. I THINK I'LL LET BOB INTRODUCE THE SPECIFICS OF THE ITEM AND THEN PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO SEE IF THE COURT IS INTERESTED IN PURSUING A DIFFERENT PATH.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID WE APPROACHED THIS WAS TO TRY TO FIND SOMETHING THAT WAS A GOOD PLAN LIKE OUR HIGH PLAN IS, BUT YET LESS EXPENSIVE.
OUR HIGH PLAN RIGHT NOW HAS $1,000 DEDUCTIBLE, WHICH IS NOT MUCH WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE COST OF ANY DENTAL WORK.
THAT'S THE APPROACH WE TOOK WHEN WE HAD PEOPLE GIVE US A PROPOSAL ON IT.
WE HAD TWO PROPOSALS, ONE FROM TAC WHICH WE DISTRIBUTE TO YOU THIS MORNING AND THE OTHER ONE FROM MASSMUTUAL.
IT'S GOT A HIGHER PLAN WITH A HIGHER DEDUCTIBLE AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE WERE LOOKING FOR.
IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE MORE EXPENSIVE, BUT IT'S DOLLARS AND CENTS WISE, IT'S VERY LITTLE MORE THAN OUR HIGH PLAN RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS THAT WE'VE HEARD IS OUR DENTAL JUST DOESN'T COVER MUCH.
THERE'S ABOUT HALF AND HALF OF OUR STAFF ARE DIVIDED BETWEEN TO TAKE DENTAL, IT'S 130 PEOPLE IN OUR ENTIRE COUNTY THAT TAKE THE DENTAL AND THEY'RE DIVIDED PRETTY EQUALLY BETWEEN THE LOW PLAN AND THE HIGH PLAN.
ONE OF THE THINGS WHY PEOPLE DIDN'T STEP UP TO THE HIGH PLAN IS IT'S A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE, ALMOST DOUBLE, AND ALL YOU GAINED WAS THE $1,000 DEDUCTIBLE FOR SURGICAL STUFF.
THE BASIC DENTAL IS STILL COVERED BY BOTH PLANS.
THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE LOOKED AT IS TO HAVE SOMETHING COMPARABLE TO OUR HIGH PLAN THAT COVERED EVERYTHING AND HAD A MUCH HIGHER LIMIT ON THE SURGICAL PART OF IT, AND TO KEEP THE COST DOWN, OF COURSE, AS WELL.
EACH ONE OF THEM HAD BID ONE PLAN.
IT'S NOT A HIGH PLAN, LOW PLAN, SO WHEN OUR EMPLOYEES HAVE TO CONSIDER DENTAL, THEY HAVE TO CONSIDER ONE PLAN, THEY DON'T HAVE TO MAKE A CHOICE BETWEEN TWO AND TRY TO DECIDE WHICH IS GOING TO BE BEST.
WE WILL TAKE THE LOW PLAN AND THEN LATER ON, HAVE DENTAL ISSUES COME UP AND HAD TO WAIT FOR OPEN ENROLLMENT TO CHANGE AGAIN.
THIS WAY, THEY'LL HAVE A GOOD COVERAGE FROM THE BEGINNING.
>> RIGHT NOW CURRENTLY DENTAL SELECT, AND THIS IS A PAYROLL DEDUCTION, SO WE DON'T CONTRIBUTE APPORTIONMENT TO IT SINCE IT'S A VOLUNTARY ENROLLMENT.
THE MONTHLY COST FOR THE EMPLOYEE ON THE LOW PLAN, SO TO SPEAK, IS $18.82, ON THE HIGH PLAN, IT'S $39.22, AND THAT THEY BOTH HAVE THE MAXIMUM PAYOUT OF $1,000 BENEFIT.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PLANS IS NOT REALLY ALL THAT GREAT, EVEN THOUGH THE COST DIFFERENCE DOUBLES BETWEEN THE LOW AND THE HIGH.
THE MASSMUTUAL PLAN, THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE COURT CONSIDER HAS A $5,000 ANNUAL MAX COVERAGE BENEFIT.
THE EMPLOYEE-ONLY FOR THAT WOULD BE $40.32 A MONTH, SO IT IS ROUGHLY $1 MORE OR $1.10 MORE THAN THE CURRENT HIGH PLAN MONTHLY COST.
HOWEVER, YOU'RE GAINING QUITE A BIT MORE COVERAGE WHEN IT COMES TO THAT AS FAR AS THE MAX BENEFIT.
THERE IS A $3,500 OPTION THAT WAS GIVEN TO US AS WELL, BUT IT'S MONTHLY COST IS $39.67, SO LESS THAN $1 MORE, YOU GAIN THOUSAND $500 ON MAX BENEFIT, SO THAT'S WHY MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THE COURT MOVE TO THE $5,000 ANNUAL MAX PLAN FROM MASSMUTUAL.
THE PLAN FROM TAC THAT WE RECEIVED, THE ESTIMATE FROM TAC,
[00:25:03]
AND I APOLOGIZE FOR HAVING TO HAND IT OUT THIS MORNING, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE THIS BACK FROM THEM UNTIL YESTERDAY MORNING.THEIRS IS I BELIEVE A $1,500 MAX THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING AND THE COST WOULD BE $29.50 FOR THAT ONE PLAN.
>> THAT'S THEIR HIGH PLAN AT THAT POINT.
WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS THE COMPLAINTS THAT OUR EMPLOYEES HAVE.
AGAIN, WE HAVE 130 EMPLOYEES THAT CURRENTLY TAKE THE DENTAL OPTION, AND ROUGHLY HALF OF THOSE ARE CURRENTLY TAKING THE LOW PLAN VERSUS HIGH PLAN, SO IT WOULD AFFECT ROUGHLY HALF OF THAT NUMBER, WHETHER THEY WOULD KEEP THE PLAN OR MOVE UP TO WHAT WE WOULD OFFER AS A SINGLE-DENTAL BENEFIT PLAN AS OPPOSED TO TWO.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE MAX, THAT 1,500 VERSUS 5,000.
IF I GO IN AND I GOT TO HAVE TWO CROWNS AND IT'S $1,800 THAT'S PAID FOR, OR DO I HAVE A DEDUCTIBLE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT UNTIL I GET TO THAT?
>> BOB, DO YOU WANT TO ANSWER THAT?
>> LET'S JUST SAY I HAVE TO GO IN AND HAVE $1,800 WORTH OF DENTAL WORK DONE?
>> IS THAT PAID FOR BY THE MAX OR DO I HAVE A DEDUCTIBLE I HAVE TO MEET BEFORE THIS MAX KICKS IN?
>> THAT'S THAT'S A MAX FOR THE PLAN. THAT'S 5,000?
>> I KNOW, BUT JUST LIKE WITH OUR MEDICAL, I HAVE TO PAY $7,000 BEFORE THEY- [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU ARE STILL GOING TO HAVE THE 80-20 AND 50-50 THAT MOST DENTAL PLANS HAVE, THAT'S A GIVEN.
>> THEN TO THE 80-20 THE THIS 5,000 KICKS IN.
>> BUT HAVING A $5,000 LIMIT ON IT, IT'S GOING TO PAY MORE OF THE 80 AND MORE OF THE 50, WHICHEVER CATEGORY FALLS INTO BEFORE YOU REACH THAT.
NOW, SPEAKING PERSONALLY, I HAD.
>> IT WAS MY OUT-OF-POCKET EXPENSE BEFORE THIS KICKS IN.
>> YEAH. SPEAKING PERSONALLY, I HAD A ROOT CANAL DONE AND IT WAS LIKE $900.
WELL, THEN IF I HAD TO HAVE THE SECOND ONE, I'D BETTER WAIT TILL AFTER OCTOBER 1 TO GET ANOTHER $1,000 OUT THERE.
THIS WAY, YOU CAN HAVE MORE DENTAL WORK DONE WHENEVER IT NEEDS TO BE DONE INSTEAD OF WAITING.
>> YOU WOULD, IF IT'S THE 80-20, YOU WOULD PAY 20% OF WHAT THE TOTAL COST OF YOUR WORK WOULD BE?
>> THIS WILL TAKE IT OUT OF THE 5,000?
>> THIS WILL TAKE IT OUT OF THE 5,000.
>> IT'S MOVING THE UPPER LIMIT, IS WHAT IT'S DOING.
THAT'S HOW IT SHAKES OUT AT THIS POINT WITH THE DATA WE HAVE AVAILABLE.
>> IF YOU'D LIKE, WE CAN GET MORE INFORMATION, TABLE IT, OR BRING IT BACK, GIVE YOU GUYS TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT.
>> I WOULDN'T MIND BECAUSE I THINK I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT SINCE WE'RE ASKING THE LOW PLAN PEOPLE TO STEP UP, HOWEVER MUCH IT IS.
WE CAN BRING THAT I UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING THEM TO DO.
>> ABSOLUTELY. WE CAN COORDINATE WITH THE REPRESENTATIVE AND HAVE HER COME IN.
DO YOU MIND, COMMISSIONER, IF WE DO THAT? BRING SOMEBODY TALK ABOUT IT.
>> NO. MY FEELING THIS MORNING, SINCE WE HAD THE TAX PROPOSAL COME IN SO LATE, WAS THAT BEING IS IT NOT REALLY A BUDGETED EXPENSE.
SINCE IT'S A DEDUCTION OFF OF THEIR PAYROLL, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY PROBLEM TABLING IT IF THAT'S THE DESIRE.
>> I JUST I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I THOROUGHLY UNDERSTAND IT BEFORE I ASK THAT MANY PEOPLE.
IT'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY, BUT SOMETIMES SOME HOUSEHOLDS, 20 BUCKS IS 20 BUCKS.
>> I CAN DO A CROSS COMPARISON OF BOTH AND HAVE IT SIDE BY SIDE SO YOU GUYS CAN HAVE A BETTER VISUAL.
>> THAT SOUNDS GOOD. LOOK FOR MOTION TO TABLE, I SUPPOSE.
>> MOTION TO TABLE H3 BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND.
UNTIL WE CAN GET SOMEBODY IN HERE TO DO A PRESENTATION OF THE COURT.
WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE?
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H4, DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE ADDITIONAL FLOAT DAY 8 HOURS PERSONAL LEAVE AS
[H.4 To approve additional float day (8 hours personal leave) as an incentive for employees who volunteer during the CAPCOG Solid Waste Tire Collection Event on Saturday, June 8, 2024. Speaker: Judge Haden/Amber Quinley; Backup: 0; Cost: $0.00]
AN INCENTIVE FOR EMPLOYEES WHO VOLUNTEER DURING THE CAPCO SOLID WASTE TIRE COLLECTION EVENT ON SATURDAY, JUNE 8.>> COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS A KIND OF A THANKLESS JOB.
YOU'RE STANDING OUT IN THE HOT SUN AND THE BOX TRAILER STACKING TIRES ALL DAY.
[00:30:01]
YOU KNOW HOW IT IS RESTING.YOU DON'T GET TO VOLUNTEER, BY THE WAY.
ANYWAY, WE'RE LOOKING TO DO SOMETHING TO COMPENSATE THEM IF THEY SHOW UP FOR VOLUNTEERING BECAUSE IT IS HARD WORK.
THE ASK IS THAT WE GIVE THEM AN EXTRA FLOAT HOLIDAY IF THEY SHOW UP ON JUNE 8TH AND WORK.
>> I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER HORNE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> AYE. OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H5, DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE,
[H.5 To approve Amendment No. 3, TWDB Contract for Commitment No. G1001276, extending the contract expiration to September 30, 2024. Speaker: Judge Haden/Amber Quinley; Backup: 1; Cost: $0.00]
THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONTRACT FOR COMMITMENT NUMBER G112-76, EXTENDING THE CONTRACT EXPIRATION DATE TO SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2024. AMBER.>> THE ORIGINAL DEADLINE WAS GOING TO BE THE END OF THIS MONTH, AND THEY JUST NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO FINALIZE ALL THE DOCUMENTS SO THEY WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND IT OUT TO SEPTEMBER. NOTHING MAJOR.
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT NUMBER 3, THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONTRACT?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT FOR APPROVAL.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H6, DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE SALES BEFORE REQUISITION 03033,
[H.6 To approve Silsbee Ford REQ03033 in the amount of $66,796.50 for new Unit Road F250 Crew Cab truck. Speaker: Judge Haden/Carolyn Caro/Donald LeClerc; Backup: 2; Cost: $66,796.50]
THIS IS A LOT OF THREES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $66,796.50 FOR NEW UNIT ROAD F250 CREW CAB TRUCK.>> YES. OUR UNIT ROAD DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN NEEDING A NEW TRUCK FOR A WHILE.
WE HAVE BEEN WAITING UNTIL WE HAD SOME MONEY IN OUR BUDGET AND UNIT ROAD DOES HAVE IT SO WE JUST WANT TO GO AHEAD AND GET THE PURCHASE ORDER APPROVED SO WE CAN SUBMIT ALL DOCUMENTS TO I THINK WE'RE GOING THROUGH TIPS, THROUGH OUR TIPS COOPERATIVE TO GET THIS ITEM ORDERED.
>> MOTION TO APPROVE? WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H7, IT'S BASICALLY THE SAME,
[H.7 To approve Silsbee Ford REQ03032 in the amount of $154,274.00 for new Unit Road Ford F550 Crew Cab truck. Speaker: Judge Haden/Carolyn Caro/Donald LeClerc; Backup: 2; Cost: $154,274.00]
BUT A LITTLE DIFFERENT AMOUNT.MOTION TO APPROVE SALE BEFORE REQUISITION 03032 IN THE AMOUNT OF 154,274 FOR NEW UNIT ROAD F550 CREW CAB TRUCK. CAROLYN.
>> YES. THIS IS BASICALLY THE MAINTENANCE TRUCK FOR OUR UNIT ROAD DEPARTMENT.
IT'S THE TRUCK THAT GOES OUT THERE ANYTIME ANY OF THE EQUIPMENT BREAKS DOWN, WHICH IS WHY THE PRICE IS A LITTLE HIGHER.
THIS DOES INCLUDE A LIFT, A CRANE, AIR COMPRESSOR, FUEL TANK, BASICALLY ANYTHING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO NEED TO GO OUT THERE AND GET OUR GUYS UP AND RUNNING AGAIN.
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE REQUISITION 03032?
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND. SECOND?
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
>> I DO WANT TO ADD THAT THIS ONE WILL ALSO BE GOING THROUGH OUR TIPS COOPERATIVE.
[H.8 To approve final draft and solicitation of RFP 24CCP01P Caldwell County Hazard Mitigation Plan Development Services. Speaker: Judge Haden/Carolyn Caro/Amber Quinley; Backup: 37; Cost: $0.00]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE FINAL DRAFT AND SOLICITATION OF RFP 24 CCP 01P, CALDWELL COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.>> YES. WE ARE NEEDING TO UPDATE OUR HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN.
IN ORDER TO DO THAT IN COORDINATION WITH THE GRANTS DEPARTMENT, WE ARE PUTTING OUT THIS RFP SO THAT WE CAN GET SOME QUALIFIED COMPANIES TO COME IN AND PUT IN THEIR PROPOSALS SO WE CAN GET THIS GOING.
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE RFP 24 CCP 01P?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
[00:35:02]
>> AYE. OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H9, DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR RFP 24 CCP 01P,
[H.9 To approve Selection Committee for RFP 24CCP01P Caldwell County Hazard Mitigation Plan Development Services. Speaker: Judge Haden/Carolyn Caro; Backup: 1; Cost: $0.00]
CALDWELL COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.>> YES. I DID SEND OUT AN EMAIL TO SEVERAL COUNTY EMPLOYEES ASKING IF THEY WOULD PARTICIPATE IN OUR SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR WHENEVER WE DO GET ALL THESE PROPOSALS IN.
I HAVE THE NAMES HERE, IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO READ THAT OUT.
>> I HAVE FOR THIS SELECTION COMMITTEE, COUNTY JUDGE HOPPY HAYDEN, PRECINCT 1 COMMISSIONER, B.J.
WESTMORELAND, GRANTS ADMINISTRATOR AMBER QUINLEY, COUNTY AUDITOR, DANIE TELTOW AND MYSELF, THE PURCHASING AGENT, CAROLYN CARO.
COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR RFP 24 CCP 01P?
>> WE HAVE MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT. SECOND?
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H10, DISCUSSION ACTION APPROVED SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR RFP CCP 02P,
[H.10 To approve Selection Committee for RFP 24CCP02P Uniform Rentals & Laundering Services. Speaker: Judge Haden/Carolyn Caro; Backup: 1; Cost: $0.00]
UNIFORM RENTALS AND LAUNDERING SERVICES.>> YES. WE DID PUT OUT A BID FOR OUR REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR UNIFORM RENTAL AND LAUNDERING SERVICES FOR OUR UNIT ROAD DEPARTMENT.
I JUST WANT TO GO AHEAD AND GET THE SELECTION COMMITTEE APPROVED FOR THAT.
FOR THIS SELECTION COMMITTEE, I HAVE CHOSEN COUNTY JUDGE HOPPY HAYDEN, PRECINCT 4 COMMISSIONER ED THERIOT.
SORRY, I PUT DOWN THE WRONG NUMBER. MY APOLOGIES.
>> UNIT ROAD SUPERVISOR, DONALD LECLERC AND FIRST ASSISTANT AUDITOR GABBY SALDANA, AND PURCHASING ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT DULCE ADRIANO.
>> COMMISSIONERS MOTION TO APPROVE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR RFP 24 CCP 02P.
>> I MOVE TO APPROVE WITH THE NOTED CORRECTION.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE CORRECTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H 11, DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE
[H.11 To approve Holt CAT REQ03051 in the amount of $97,601.23 for a new generator for the Caldwell County Jail. Speaker: Judge Haden/Carolyn Caro; Backup: 9; Cost: $97,601.23]
HOPE CAT REC 03051 IN THE AMOUNT OF $97,601.23 FOR A NEW GENERATOR FOR CALDWELL COUNTY JAIL.OUR CALDWELL COUNTY JAIL HAS BEEN IN NEED OF A NEW BACKUP GENERATOR.
WE WERE FINALLY ABLE TO GET OUR FUNDING TOGETHER, AND WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND SUBMIT AN ORDER THROUGH OUR BY BOARD CONTRACT.
BEFORE WE CAN DO THAT, WE ARE SEEKING FOR APPROVAL FOR THE REQUISITION.
>> COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF REQUISITION 03051.
>> I HAVE MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
[H.12 To approve Purchasing Department End of Year Purchasing Memo. Speaker: Judge Haden/Carolyn Caro; Backup: 1; Cost: $0.00]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT END OF YEAR PURCHASING MEMO.>> EVERY YEAR, THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT DOES PUT OUT A MEMO JUST AS WE GET CLOSER TO THE END OF THE BUDGET YEAR JUST TO REMIND THE DEPARTMENTS THAT AFTER JULY 31, WE WILL NOT BE APPROVING, I GUESS, PURCHASE REQUEST UNLESS IT IS FOR AN EMERGENCY.
I JUST WANT TO GO AHEAD AND GET THIS MEMO APPROVED SO THAT WE CAN START SENDING IT OUT TO THE DEPARTMENTS AND THEY CAN START PLANNING ACCORDINGLY.
>> COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT END OF YOUR MEMO.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER HORNE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H3, DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER 15.
[H.13 To approve Budget Amendment #15 moving monies from Fund 10 to multiple Grants Department line items. Speaker: Judge Haden/Danie Teltow; Backup: 1; Cost: $0.00]
MOVING MONIES FROM FUND 10 TO MULTIPLE GRANT DEPARTMENTS.>> YES. GOOD MORNING, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS.
WE'RE MOVING SOME DOLLAR AMOUNTS AROUND A FEW LINE ITEMS WITHIN THE GRANTS DEPARTMENT.
WHEN WE DID THE BUDGET LAST YEAR, WE WERE MORE OR LESS JUST GOING
[00:40:01]
OFF OF THE YEAR PRIOR TO SEE WHAT WE NEEDED TO BUDGET FOR THOSE DIFFERENT GRANTS.WHEN AMBER CAME IN, SHE WAS ABLE TO DO AN APPROXIMATE AND IDENTIFY WHAT WE EXACTLY NEED IN THOSE APART FROM HER POSTAGE, WHICH WE ARE INCREASING JUST DUE TO HIGH VOLUME AND ADVERTISING FOR GLO PROJECTS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
THE OTHER ONES WE'RE JUST MOVING SOME MONEY FROM COMORBIDITY TO THE SCAP GRANT, AND THEN WE'RE ADDING TO THE CAPITAL MURDER TRIAL FROM THE SCAP GRANT BECAUSE THEY WERE OVER PROJECTED, AND THEN WE ARE TAKING AWAY FROM THE COMORBIDITY AND ADDING THAT TO THE SOLID WASTE.
NO MONEY IS COMING AWAY FROM THE FUND BALANCE OR CONTINGENCY, THIS IS ALL JUST INTERNAL.
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT 15.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES.
>> THANK YOU. ITEM H14 TO APPROVE
[H.14 To approve Budget Amendment #16 for additional Odyssey Contract expense. Speaker: Judge Haden/Danie Teltow; Backup: 2; Cost: $0.00]
BUDGET AMENDMENT 16 FOR ADDITIONAL ODYSSEY CONTRACT EXPENSES.>> YES, WE'RE DOING A WRAP UP ON IMPLEMENTING ODYSSEY.
THERE ARE A FEW INVOICES THAT HAVE TRICKLED IN THAT WEREN'T IDENTIFIED IN THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT.
I'M THINKING IT SHOULD BE THE LAST ONE.
WE ARE PREPARED TO IDENTIFY THAT MOVING FORWARD GOING INTO NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, SO WE'RE JUST DOING A DRAW DOWN FROM THE ARCHITECTS POOL AND ADDING THAT TO THE ODYSSEY LINE ITEM.
>> COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BUDGET 16.
>> WAS THAT COMMISSIONER THOMAS? COMMISSIONER THERIOT.
MOVED APPROVAL. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> AYE. OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H15, DISCUSSION ACTION TO RATIFY PAYMENT FOR CLOSING COSTS OF EVACUATION SHELTER.
[H.15 To ratify payment for closing costs of evacuation shelter. Speaker: Judge Haden/Danie Teltow; Backup: 4; Cost: $302,898.30]
COMMISSIONERS, WE HAD A CLOSING, THIS IS MONEY THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED IN THE PAST.WE WENT AHEAD AND DID THE CLOSING.
THIS IS A REIMBURSEMENT GRANT, SO WE HAD TO TAKE THE MONEY OUT OF THE FUND BALANCE.
IT WOULD GET REIMBURSED FROM THE GRANT, BUT THAT'S WHAT THIS IS TO RATIFY THAT CLOSING.
THAT CLOSING GOT SCHEDULED BEFORE COURT, AND IT'S FOR THE EVACUATION CENTER LIKE IT SAYS.
ANY QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I LOOK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE RATIFICATION.
>> I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE RATIFICATION OF 302,898.30 FOR CLOSING ON THE EVACUATION SHELTER PROPERTY. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H16 DISCUSSION ACTION TO REQUEST
[H.16 Request approval of amended Caldwell County Travel Reimbursement form. Speaker: Judge Haden/Danie Teltow; Backup: 1; Cost: 0]
APPROVAL OF AMENDED CALDWELL COUNTY TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT FORM.>> YES. JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS.
MY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CLERK HAS IDENTIFIED THAT SOMETIMES SHE'S RECEIVING THESE TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST, NOT FILLED OUT ALL THE WAY OR NONE AT ALL AND PUTTING THAT WORKLOAD ON HER.
WHAT SHE DID TO HOPEFULLY IMPROVE THAT IS JUST UPDATE THE TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT FORM AND PUT A SPOT ON THERE TO ADD THE GL CODE, SO THE EXPENSE CODE OF WHAT THAT DEPARTMENT HEAD OR THAT ELECTED OFFICIAL WOULD LIKE THAT MONEY TO COME OUT OF.
>> COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT TO THE TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT FORM.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS. SECOND?
>> BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES.
[H.17 To discuss and accept financial audit reporting for FY 21-22. Speaker: Judge Haden/Danie Teltow/Debbie Frasier; Backup: 124; Cost: $0.00]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO DISCUSS AND ACCEPT FINANCIAL AUDIT FOR REPORT FY 2021, 2022, AND WE THINK WE HAVE DEBBIE FRAZIER HERE TODAY TO GIVE US THE REPORT.>> YES. SHE'S ON HER WAY UP HERE.
>> I CAME UP FASTER THAN I THOUGHT I WOULD. IT'S A GOOD THING.
WELL, I WANT TO START OUT BY SAYING AND THANKING THE AUDITORS DEPARTMENT, DANNY, GLORIA.
THIS, I KNOW FOR THEM WAS A HUGE HASSLE.
I WAS PROBABLY THERE WAY MORE THAN THEY WANTED ME TO.
WE HAVE A LOT OF COMMENTS THIS YEAR, BUT I DO SEE A LOT OF IMPROVEMENT.
THE BANK WRECKS HAD NOT BEEN DONE,
[00:45:01]
AND SO THAT REALLY PUT US PRETTY FAR BEHIND BECAUSE WE DID HAVE A NUMEROUS AMOUNT OF JOURNAL ENTRIES, IF YOU REMEMBER THE TREASURER AT THE TIME WAS ANGELA.BUT WE HAD OVER 50 JOURNAL ENTRIES, SO IT WAS A LITTLE MORE TEDIOUS THAN PRIOR AUDITS.
BUT AFTER ADJUSTMENTS, YOU RECEIVED AN UNMODIFIED AUDIT REPORT.
THAT MEANS THAT YOUR FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ARE FAIRLY STATED AND MATERIALLY CORRECT.
IF YOU TURN TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS WHICH BEGIN, WHICH I HAVE MARKED, BUT I DIDN'T MARK IT GOOD ENOUGH, 15, THIS IS YOUR STATEMENT OF NET POSITION, AND THIS SHOWS YOUR FULL ACCRUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
YOU WILL SEE ALL OF YOUR DEBT, ALL OF YOUR FIXED ASSETS, YOUR PENSION, LIABILITIES OR ASSETS IN YOUR CASE, DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES AND DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES, AS WELL AS COMPENSATED ABSENCES.
NOW, TECHNICALLY, YOU DON'T BUDGET THAT WAY.
YOU BUDGET ON THE MODIFIED ACCRUAL STATEMENTS, WHICH WE'LL GET TO IN A SECOND.
YOUR TOTAL ASSETS FOR THE YEAR WERE 75,062,393.
OF THAT, 32.9 MILLION WAS CASH AND CASH INVESTMENTS.
IF YOU LOOK HALFWAY UP THAT FIRST PAGE, YOU HAVE A NET PENSION ASSET.
I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE WE'LL GET BACK TO IT A LITTLE LATER.
BUT THIS IS YOUR TCDRS ASSET OR LIABILITY.
YOU HAD AN ASSET IN 2021 THAT BASICALLY SAYS THAT, THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT THEY USED, YOU'RE A LITTLE OVERFUNDED FOR YOUR RETIREMENT PLAN, WHICH IS ALWAYS A GOOD THING.
THE TOTAL DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES WAS 1,372,776.
THE BULK OF THAT IS PENSION RELATED AND IT IS BASICALLY PREPAID PENSION.
YOUR TOTAL LIABILITIES WERE 28,021,870.
THE BULK OF THAT IS YOUR NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES, WHICH MAKE UP ABOUT 17 MILLION.
THIS IS THE ASSUMPTIONS ON YOUR TCRS, AND THAT'S 3.4 MILLION.
YOU ENDED THE YEAR WITH A NET POSITION OF $45 MILLION, AND OF THAT 45 MILLION, 19.6 IS CONSIDERED UNRESTRICTED.
I'M GOING TO HAVE YOU GO TO PAGE 19.
YOUR BALANCE SHEET DOES NOT SHOW ANY PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, COMPENSATED ABSENCES, DEBT OR YOUR PENSION LIABILITY OR ASSET.
ON PAGE 19, YOUR TOTAL ASSETS WERE 23.3 MILLION IN THE GENERAL FUND.
OF THAT, 17.7 MILLION IS CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENCE.
YOU HAD A BUILDING CONSTRUCTION FUND OF A 906,939.
THEN YOUR COVID RELIEF PROGRAM, WHICH YOU'RE SPENDING AND YOU HAVE UNTIL THE END OF 2026, IS 6.7 MILLION.
ALL YOUR OTHER NON-MAJOR FUNDS ACCOUNTS FALL INTO WHAT WE CALL THE OTHER NON-MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS BECAUSE THEY DON'T MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF A MAJOR FUND.
OVERALL, THE COUNTY HAD TOTAL GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS OF 39.2 MILLION, AND OF THAT, CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENCE WERE ALMOST 33 MILLION.
IF YOU TURN TO PAGE 21, THESE ARE YOUR LIABILITIES.
AS YOU SEE, YOU DON'T SEE ANY COMPENSATED ABSENCES OR DEBT.
YOUR TOTAL LIABILITIES ARE 35,262,962.
THEN YOUR DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES, THESE ARE FINES AND PROPERTY TAX RECEIVABLES THAT WEREN'T COLLECTED WITHIN 60 DAYS AFTER YEAR END.
FOR SOME REASON, IT IS NOT FLOWING THROUGH.
HOWEVER, YOU HAD TOTAL DEFERRED INFLOWS OF 2.8 MILLION, AND THEN UNIT ROAD WAS 531,000.
[00:50:02]
I WILL HAVE TO REPLACE THAT PAGE AS IT IS NOT IN LINE.ANYWAY, YOUR TOTAL LIABILITIES DEFERRED INFLOWS AND FUND BALANCES ARE 23.4 MILLION IN GENERAL FUND, AND IN THE BUILDING FUND, IT IS 906,000.
COVID RELIEF, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO TURN TO A DIFFERENT PAGE JUST TO TELL YOU THAT, YOU ENDED THE YEAR WITH 53,275 IN THE ACTUAL RPA PROGRAM.
NON-MAJOR, YOUR FUND BALANCE AT THE END OF THE YEAR WAS 3.2 MILLION.
IF YOU TURN TO PAGE 53, THESE ARE YOUR GENERAL FUND REVENUES EXPENDITURES AND IT'S BUDGET TO ACTUAL.
YOUR TOTAL REVENUES AT THE YEAR END WERE 28.8 MILLION AND YOUR FINAL BUDGET WAS 26.3 MILLION.
YOU HAD A POSITIVE VARIANCE OF 2.5 MILLION AND YOUR TOTAL REVENUES WERE 20.2 MILLION ALMOST FOR 2021.
YOU DID INCREASE APPROXIMATELY THREE MILLION THERE.
YOUR TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR 2022 WERE 22,363,000.
YOU HAD BUDGETED 20,064,000, SO WE HAD A VARIANCE OF 2.3 MILLION, AND THEN THE 2021 ACTUAL EXPENDITURES WERE 19.4 MILLION.
IF YOU GO DOWN BELOW, YOU'LL SEE YOUR OTHER FINANCING SOURCES AND USES.
YOU HAD ACTUALLY TRANSFERRED OUT MOST OF THAT TRANSFER IS TO YOUR ROAD AND BRIDGE DEPARTMENT, AND THEN YOU HAD LEASE PROCEEDS OF 1,153,000.
YOU ACTUALLY HAD A NEGATIVE 3.5 MILLION AS A RESULT OF TRANSFERRING OUT YOUR TOTAL TRANSFERRING OUT FUNDS TO OTHER FUNDS.
OVERALL, YOUR NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE THAT YOU BUDGETED FOR WAS POSITIVE 5.9 MILLION AND YOU ACTUALLY ENDED UP WITH 2.9 MILLION, SO THAT WAS A NEGATIVE 3,000.
A LOT OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH WHAT WAS BUDGETED FOR RPA BECAUSE THE TRANSFERS IN BETWEEN THOSE FUNDS.
ON PAGE 54, IS YOUR UNIT ROAD FUND.
THESE TOTAL REVENUES WERE 961,445, YOU HAD ACTUALLY BUDGETED FOR 751,691.
YOU HAD A POSITIVE OF ABOUT 210,000.
YOUR TOTAL EXPENDITURES BUDGETED WERE ALMOST 5.5 MILLION.
YOU ACTUALLY SPEND 5.2 MILLION, LEAVING YOU WITH A POSITIVE VARIANCE OF 271,000.
THAT'S COMPARED TO THE PRIOR YEAR YOU SPENT FOUR MILLION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.
YOU WENT UP ABOUT 1.2 MILLION.
YOUR LEASE PROCEEDS AND THESE ARE ACTUALLY VEHICLES WERE 259,482, AND THEN YOU HAD TRANSFER IN FROM THE GENERAL FUND OF 4.2 MILLION.
THAT LEFT YOU WITH A NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE OF 271,000.
YOU ACTUALLY BUDGETED A LOSS OF 4 MILLION.
YOU HAD A POSITIVE 4.4 MILLION IN YOUR VARIANCE.
ON PAGE 55, THIS IS YOUR COVID RELIEF.
IN 2022, IF YOU REMEMBER YOU RECEIVED YOUR FUNDS AND INCREMENTS.
THIS CAME IN IN THE SECOND INCREMENT.
YOU HAD 1.9 MILLION THAT CAME IN, AND THEN YOUR TOTAL EXPENDITURES WERE 1,847,000.
YOU GOT THE TWO INTERGOVERNMENTAL GRANTS IN '20 AND '21.
WE DEFERRED THE REVENUE IN '21 BECAUSE YOU HADN'T SPENT IT, AND THEN WE'RE RECOGNIZING IT IN '22 1.9 MILLION.
I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO CHANGE TO MOVE TO 57 AND 58,
[00:55:04]
2021 IS A VERY NICE COLUMN TO LOOK AT.IF YOU'LL NOTICE, YOU HAVE A NEGATIVE 3,197,234, THAT'S THE FOURTH NUMBER UP FROM THE BOTTOM.
THAT MEANS THAT YOU HAVE A NET PENSION ASSET AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
WHEN TCDRS DID YOUR CALCULATION IN 2021 AT THE END OF DECEMBER, THEY DETERMINED THAT YOU HAD A POSITIVE BALANCE.
I DO WANT TO TELL YOU THAT MOST OF THAT WAS BECAUSE THE NET INVESTMENT INCOME WENT FROM 2.3 MILLION IN 2020 TO 5.4 MILLION IN 2021.
A LOT OF THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE MARKET TIMING.
IT PROBABLY WENT DOWN A LITTLE AT THE END OF 2022 BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE MARKET DID.
ANYWAY, THE GFOA SAYS ANYTHING OVER 70% IS WONDERFUL.
YOU GUYS ARE REALLY HIGH IN THE NET PENSION AND SHOULD BE VERY PROUD OF YOURSELVES.
I WASN'T GOING TO GO OVER ANYTHING ELSE.
THERE ARE A LIST OF COMMENTS IN THE BACK SECTION THAT HAS TO DO WITH JUST OUR FINDINGS AND A LOT OF THESE ARE SIMILAR TO LAST YEAR.
UNLESS YOU WANT ME TO GO OVER THEM, I CAN.
>> I WOULD SAY IF ANY OF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE AUDIT.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS ON THE AUDIT OPINION LETTER, WHICH IS ON PAGE 1.
ALSO, DANNY HAS MY CELL PHONE.
I THINK YOU DO TOO, JUDGE, SO I'D BE HAPPY TO DISCUSS IT WITH YOU.
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE FINANCIAL AUDIT FOR FY 21-22.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED. HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.
>> ITEM H18. DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 14-2024,
[H.18 To approve Resolution 14-2024 supporting request for unclaimed property capital credits. Speaker: Judge Haden/Richard Sitton; Backup: 3; Cost: $0.00]
SUPPORTING REQUEST FOR UNCLAIMED PROPERTY CAPITAL CREDIT.RESOLUTION 14-2024, RESOLUTION SUPPORTING A REQUEST FOR UNCLAIMED PROPERTY, CAPITAL CREDITS.
WHEREAS CHAPTER 74, TEXAS PROPERTY CODE ALLOWS THE COMPTROLLER TO RECEIVE UNCLAIMED PROPERTY, INCLUDING UNCLAIMED MONEY AND CAPITAL CREDITS.
WHEREAS SECTION 381.004, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AUTHORIZES THE COUNTY TO REQUEST MONEY RECEIVED BY THE COMPTROLLER ON CHAPTER 74 TO BE USED TO CARRY OUT A PROGRAM FOR STATE AND LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
SMALL OR DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT TO STIMULATE, ENCOURAGE AND DEVELOP BUSINESS LOCATION AND COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY IN THE COUNTY TO PROMOTE OR ADVERTISE THE COUNTY IN ITS VICINITY OR CONDUCT OF SOLICITATION PROGRAM TO ATTRACT CONVENTIONS, VISITORS AND BUSINESSES TO IMPROVE THE EXTENT TO WHICH WOMEN AND MINORITY BUSINESSES ARE AWARDED COUNTY CONTRACTS TO SUPPORT COMPREHENSIVE LITERACY PROGRAMS FOR BENEFIT OF THE COUNTY RESIDENTS OR FOR THE ENCOURAGEMENT, PROMOTIONS, IMPROVEMENT, AND APPLICATION OF THE ARTS AND TO SUPPORT A CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER.
WHEREAS THE AMOUNT OF COUNTY MAY RECEIVE FOR FISCAL YEAR MAY NOT EXCEED AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE VALUE OF THE CAPITAL CREDITS THAT COMPTROLLER RECEIVES FROM AN ELECTRIC CORPORATION, ON BEHALF OF CORPORATIONS MEMBER AND THE COUNTY'S REQUEST THE MONEY LESS AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO PAY ANTICIPATED EXPENSES OR CLAIM AND WHEREAS TO REQUEST THE CAPITAL CREDITS UNDER THIS SECTION, THE COUNTY JUDGE OR COMMISSIONERS MAY COMPLETE AND SUBMIT THE PRESCRIBED FORM ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED HERE IN AS EXHIBIT A.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT THAT THE COUNTY JUDGE IS AUTHORIZED TO REQUEST UNCLAIMED PROPERTY, CAPITAL CREDITS FOR CALDWELL COUNTY PURSUANT TO SECTION 381.004 TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 14024.
[01:00:01]
>> YOU HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE, DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS, ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED, HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H19 DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
[H.19 To approve the Preliminary Plat for Spanish Oaks, Phase 2 consisting of 12 residential lots on approximately 20.100 acres located on the corner of Old Colony Line Road and Spanish Oaks Road. Speaker: Commissioner Horne/Kasi Miles; Backup: 3; Cost: $0.00]
SPANISH OAKS PHASE 2 CONSISTING OF 12 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 20.100 ACRES LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF OAK COLONY LINE ROAD AND SPANISH OAKS ROAD?>> GOOD MORNING. AS WE ALL KNOW, PHASE 1 IS COMPLETE AND UNDERWAY.
THE ONLY COMMENT I'D LIKE TO SAY IS WHENEVER THE ITEM WAS SUBMITTED, THE CIVIL ATTORNEY HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE WORDING THAT WAS WRITTEN IN THE LETTER.
THE LETTER WAS DONE BY QUATRO CONSULTANT, WHICH IS NOT OUR REGULAR EVERYDAY OUTSIDE CONSULTING ATTORNEY.
I WILL SPEAK WITH CHRIS ABOUT CHANGING THE WORDING ON THE LETTER AND EVERYTHING.
BUT AT THIS TIME, WE'RE READY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH APPROVAL.
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL?
>> I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM H19 BY COMMISSIONER HORNE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND.
AN DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED. HEARING NONE MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H20 DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE A SHORT FORM PLAT FOR LONGORIA ACRES CONSISTING OF
[H.20 To approve a Short Form Plat for Longoria Acres consisting of four residential lots on approximately 18.61 acres located on Williamson Road. Speaker: Commissioner Theriot/Kasi Miles; Backup: 2; Cost: $0.00]
FOUR RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 18.61 ACRES LOCATED ON WILLIAMSON ROAD.>> ON LONGORIA ACRES, THE FOUR LOTS WERE ACTUALLY SPLIT FOR FAMILY MEMBERS.
ONE OF THEM ACTUALLY DID NOT WANT TO RETAIN IT FOR THE FIVE YEARS IF THEY DID THE FAMILY LAND GRANT SO THEY CHOSE TO DO THE SHORT FORM PLAT.
BUT ALL COMMENTS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED AND WE'RE READY TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE SHORT FORM PLAT FOR LONGORIA ACRES?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT FOR APPROVAL. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED. HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H21, DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE
[H.21 To approve the Final Plat for Sunset Oaks Commercial Block A, Lots 1-3 consisting of 3 lots on approximately 25.262 acres located east of SH-21 and south of FM 1966. Speaker: Commissioner Theriot/Kasi Miles; Backup: 3; Cost: $0.00]
THE FINAL PLAT FOR SUNSET OAKS COMMERCIAL BLOCK A LOTS 133 CONSISTING OF THREE LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 25.262 ACRES LOCATED EAST OF SH 21 AND SOUTH OF FM 1966.>> SUNSET OAKS IS THAT LARGE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE ETJ OF SAN MARCOS.
THEY DID OPT TO GET OUT OF THE ETJ.
THAT'S WHY YOU'RE JUST SEEING FINAL PLATS.
ALL PRELIMINARY PLATS WERE DONE BY CITY OF SAN MARCOS AND SO WE'RE GOING TO BE FINALIZING THE REST OF SUNSET OAKS ON BEHALF OF THEM.
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE FINAL PLAT FOR SUNSET OAKS.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> OPPOSED. HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H22, DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE FINAL PLAT FOR LIVELY STONE, PHASE 1,
[H.22 To approve the Final Plat for Lively Stone, Phase One consisting of 30 residential lots on approximately 36.13 acres located on Lively Stone Road and Morning Mist. Speaker: Commissioner Thomas/Kasi Miles; Backup: 3; Cost: $0.00]
CONSISTING OF 30 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 36.13 ACRES LOCATED ON LIVELY STONE ROAD IN MORNING MIST.>> THIS IS THE COMPLETION OF PHASE 1.
THERE WILL BE AN ACTUAL PHASE 2 OF LIVELY STONE, WHICH THEY'RE STARTING TO DESIGN NOW.
I'M JUST LOOKING TO FINALIZE PHASE 1.
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR LIVELY STONE, PHASE 1?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED. HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
[H.23 To approve the Preliminary Plat for FM 672 Acres consisting of 9 residential lots on approximately 19.467 acres located on FM 672, Chamberlin Road and Dale Lane. Speaker: Commissioner Thomas/Kasi Miles; Backup: 3; Cost: $0.00]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR FM 672 ACRES CONSISTING OF NINE RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 19.467 ACRES LOCATED ON FM 672, CHAMBERLIN ROAD AND DALE LANE.>> AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO ASK THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT GO AHEAD AND APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT TO MOVE FORWARD.
THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CONCERNS WITH THE SUBDIVISION NAME BEING FM 672 AND WITH THE ROAD ITSELF AND EVERYTHING I'VE TALKED TO THE DEVELOPER AND I'VE TALKED TO THEIR ENGINEER AND THEY'RE CONSIDERING A NEW NAME.
WHEN IT COMES FOR FINAL PLAT MORE THAN LIKELY IT WILL BE A DIFFERENT NAME BUT I'LL CLARIFY IT WITH MATTHEW ALLEN AND JACKIE ARCHER.
>> COMMISSIONERS, WITH THOSE NOTES BY CASEY, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR FM 672 ACRES?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS. SECOND?
[01:05:01]
ANY DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
>> OPPOSED. HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO ITEM I2 DISCUSSION ONLY
[I.2 To discuss Prairie Lea traffic study. Speaker: Commissioner Horne; Backup: 30; Cost: $0.00]
TO DISCUSS THE PRAIRIE LEA TRAFFIC STUDY. COMMISSIONER HORNE.>> JUDGE, COMMISSIONERS, I BROUGHT THIS TO ATTENTION BECAUSE I HAVE A CONCERNED CITIZEN IN PRAIRIE LEA.
STOP SIGNS WERE PUT UP EIGHT YEARS AGO, THINK THEY WERE PUT UP ILLEGALLY.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANDREW, MR. MCLEISH IS HERE.
I PERSONALLY LIKE THE STOP SIGNS.
WE DID TWO TRAFFIC STUDIES, ONE IN 21 AND ONE IN 22.
THE TRAFFIC STUDY WE COULD GO THROUGH DETAIL.
THERE WAS 50 MORE CARS THAN IT WAS ONE YEAR FROM THE OTHER.
THE FINDINGS OF THE OF THE ANALYSIS ARE THE CAPACITIES, EITHER WAY IT GOES WITH THE STOP SIGNS, THEY BOTH, IF THEY'RE ALL FOUR WAY OR ONE WAY, IT'S INSIGNIFICANT, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO OPERATE ACCEPTABLE BOTH WAYS.
I PERSONALLY LIKE THE STOP SIGNS KNOWING THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT MIGHT BE ADDING MORE IF IT COMES ALONG. ANDREW.
>> I'M NOT A TRAFFIC ENGINEER, MY NEIGHBORS AREN'T TRAFFIC ENGINEER, YOU'RE NOT A TRAFFIC ENGINEER.
THE ENGINEER BASICALLY RECOMMENDED THEY WEREN'T WARRANTED, THEY SHOULD BE REMOVED, AND SINCE THEY'RE NOT WARRANTED, IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE.
YOU COME TO MY HOUSE AND SIT THERE IN FRONT PORCH AND WE COULD WATCH CARS, NOT STOP AT ALL.
CHILDREN THAT ARE PLAYING OUT THERE, IF THEIR PARENTS ARE SAYING THE CARS ARE GOING TO STOP, THE CARS ARE NOT GOING TO STOP.
THEY'RE SO LONG NOW ALL THE LOCALS RUN THEM.
NOW WHEN YOU HAVE TOURISTS SHOW UP THEY STOP.
THE OTHER DAY I SAW A CAR STOP AND THE CAR BEHIND HIM JUST DRIVE RIGHT AROUND THEM.
IT COULD HAVE BEEN AN ACCIDENT. AN ACCIDENT WILL HAPPEN SOONER OR LATER.
THERE'S ONLY NINE CARS AN HOUR.
BUT LIKE I SAID, I'M NOT A TRAFFIC ENGINEER, MY NEIGHBORS AREN'T TRAFFIC AND THEY'RE USING THE STOP SIGNS TO SLOW CARS DOWN.
THAT'S WHAT NOT STOP SIGNS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE USED FOR.
THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE USED FOR THE RIGHT AWAY AND YOU CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHO GETS THE RIGHT AWAY.
THERE WAS AN ACCIDENT IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE, YOU COULDN'T PROVE WHO HAD THE RIGHT AWAY.
THERE'S NO LINES, THE ROADS ARE THIN.
LIKE I SAID, THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER KNOWS MORE THAN ALL OF US, AND THEY RECOMMENDED REMOVING THE STOP SIGNS.
I GUESS THAT'S ALL I GOT TO SAY.
>> WITH THAT BEING SAID WITH ANDREW, I HAVE TALKED TO SOME OF THE CITIZENS OUT THERE.
OF COURSE SOME OF THE PEOPLE DO NOT LIKE THE STOP SIGNS, BUT THEY RESPECT THE STOP SIGNS DOWN THE ROAD.
LIKE HE JUST MENTIONED, PEOPLE DO RUN THE STOP SIGNS.
I HAVE ASKED THE CONSTABLES AND THEY HAVE BEEN OUT THERE AND THEY'VE MADE A FEW TRAFFIC STOPS.
BUT THE CITIZENS HAVE SAID IT HAS HELPED A LITTLE.
I SAID, THEY DON'T LIKE THEM, BUT THEY RESPECT THEM AND KNOW WHAT IT'S ABOUT, JUDGE.
>> THIS IS A DISCUSSION ONLY, SO WE WON'T VOTE ON ANYTHING TODAY.
WE JUST WANTED TO GET IT OUT THERE.
RECOGNIZE THAT WE'RE WORKING ON IT, AND WE CAN BRING THIS BACK AT A LATER TIME, BUT WE JUST WANTED TO RECOGNIZE THE STUDY.
IT TOOK US QUITE SOME TIME TO GET IT BACK FROM THE ENGINEERS, UNFORTUNATELY, BUT WE DO FINALLY HAVE IT.
I APPRECIATE YOUR WEIGHING IN MR. MCLEISH AND ALSO YOUR COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER HORNE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION FROM THE REST OF THE COURT? IF NOT, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO ITEM J AND GO INTO
[J. EXECUTIVE SESSION]
OUR SECOND EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.0711 CONSULTATION WITH COUNCIL REGARDING PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION OR SETTLEMENT OFFERS INVOLVING MOTOROLA INVOICE 828179929014110565051411075736.WE ARE ADJOURNED TO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 10:36.
>> WE'RE GOING TO EXIT WITH CODE 551.0711, CONSULTATION WITH COUNSEL REGARDING PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION OR SETTLEMENT OFFERS INVOLVING MOTOROLA INVOICES
[01:10:05]
82179929014110565051411075736.COMMISSIONERS, I'D LOOK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE ALLOWING THE AUDITOR TO PAY THESE INVOICES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SETTLEMENT.
>> MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED. HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRY.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN?
>> BEFORE WE ADJOURN, WE DO NEED TO TAKE ONE QUICK PICTURE.
IT'S RELATED TO OUR PROCLAMATION.
LET'S DO THAT AND THEN WE'LL ADJOURN.
[BACKGROUND] NOW, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN?
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT.
WE ADJOURNED AT 10:53.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.