[00:00:03]
>> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. WELCOME TO CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT.
[A. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
WE'RE GOING TO START THIS MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2024 AT 9:00 A.M. CHET, ARE YOU GOING TO LEAD US IN THE INVOCATION THIS MORNING? IF YOU WOULD, JUST COME UP HERE TO THE PODIUM?>> LET US PRAY. OUR FATHER GOD, WE COME TO YOU TODAY AND ASK FOR YOUR BLESSINGS AND FOR YOUR GUIDANCE, PARTICULARLY THIS COURT.
LEAD, GUIDE AND DIRECT THEM, GIVE THEM KNOWLEDGE TO DO THE RIGHT THING, AND FOR THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTY THAT IS BLESSED AND HAVE RECEIVED THE THINGS YOU HAVE PROVIDED.
BE WITH THE LEADERS OF OUR STATE, AND OUR NATION, BE WITH OUR MILITARY, WHEREVER THEY MAY BE.
BE WITH THOSE LESS FORTUNATE THAN US, THOSE THAT ARE ILL, AND NEED HELP AND ASSISTANCE MEDICALLY.
YES, LORD, BE WITH ESPECIALLY WITH THE CHILDREN, AND THE GRANDCHILDREN.
GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND GOD BLESS TEXAS.
THIS IS OUR PRAYER, GOD. AMEN.
[D. ANNOUNCEMENTS]
>> COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS THIS MORNING?
>> NO ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM ME, JUDGE.
>> JUST TO SAY, I ATTENDED THE VETERANS EVENT, PUT ON AT CONNECTION CENTER AND COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND AND THE REST OF THE FOLKS THAT PUT THAT ON DID A GREAT JOB.
>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER THOMAS?
>> ALL RIGHT. NONE FOR ME. THAT WE'LL MOVE TO CITIZENS' COMMENTS.
>> TIME HAS COME AGAIN FOR CYBERSECURITY TRAINING.
I WILL BE SENDING OUT AN E-MAIL TO THOSE DEPARTMENT HEADS, ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT HAVE NOT SENT ME THEIR LIST OF EMPLOYEES TO TAKE THE TRAINING, SO BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR AN E-MAIL FROM ME.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, JUST GIVE ME A CALL.
>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER STAFF? OKAY. CITIZENS' COMMENTS?
[E. CITIZENS' COMMENTS]
>> JUDGE HADEN, CALDWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
I'M HERE TODAY REPRESENTING THE AMERICAN LEGION POST 177 OF LULING, TEXAS.
BEING A RETIRED MILITARY MAN, I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THE WHO, THE WHAT, THE WHERE AND THE WHEN.
WHAT THIS IS, THE WHAT IS ON DECEMBER THE 14TH IN THE LULING CITY CEMETERY, WE ARE GOING TO PRESENT ON SOME GRAVES, 18 AS A MATTER OF FACT, TO THE VETERANS THAT ARE BURIED IN THE LULING CITY CEMETERY.
THERE ARE OVER 400 VETERANS IN THAT CEMETERY, AND WE HOPE THAT SOMEDAY THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO PLACE A WREATH BECAUSE WE ARE SPONSORING WREATHS ACROSS AMERICA.
THE DAY IS SATURDAY, DECEMBER THE 14TH AT 11:00 A.M IN THE LULING CITY CEMETERY.
THE WHO IS, VETERANS, ACTIVE SERVICE MEMBERS AND FAMILIES, AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
EACH ONE OF YOU ARE CERTAINLY INVITED, AND WE HOPE THAT THIS WILL BE A BEGINNING FOR THE ENTIRE CALDWELL COUNTY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER.
AGAIN, MY NAME IS CHET ROBINS, AND I LIVE AT 801,
[00:05:01]
EAST FANNIN IN LULING.MY CELL TELEPHONE 512-995-9096.
MY E-MAIL IS CHET@CHETROBINS.COM.
>> GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, JUDGE.
I RESIDE IN PRAIRIE LEA, TEXAS.
I'M HERE TODAY TO EXPRESS MY CONCERNS ABOUT THE STOP SIGNS AGAIN THAT HAVE BEEN INSTALLED IN MY COMMUNITY.
ABOUT A MONTH AGO, JUDGE, I WENT AND VISIT YOUR OFFICE, AND WE HAD A MEETING AND YOU ASSURED ME THAT THE ISSUE OF STOP SIGNS WERE GOING TO BE ON THE AGENDA.
HOWEVER, I SEE THAT IT IS NOT HAPPENING TODAY.
THIS COURT HAS ALREADY VOTED ONCE TO HAVE THESE STOP SIGNS REMOVED.
BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF THIS REPORT, YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY SIGNED IT.
THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN REMOVED.
THIS REPORT CONCLUDES THAT THESE STOP SIGNS SHOULD BE REMOVED BECAUSE THEY DO NOT MEET THE NECESSARY CRITERIA.
ACCORDING TO THIS TRAFFIC REPORT HERE, THIS STOP SIGNS ARE NOT ONLY UNNECESSARY, BUT COULD ACTUALLY CREATE SAFETY ISSUES.
I WOULD SURE HOPE THAT THIS COURT IS CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY.
THIS REPORT HIGHLIGHTS THAT UNWARRANTED STOP SIGNS CAN LEAD TO INCREASED STOPS, DELAYS, AND FUEL CONSUMPTION, AND THEY CAN ALSO BREED DISRESPECT FOR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS, POTENTIALLY LEADING TO DANGEROUS BEHAVIOR ON THE ROAD.
THIS REPORT HERE ALSO STATES THAT THE MUTCD SPECIFIES THAT STOP SIGNS MUST MEET CERTAIN CRITERIAS, WHICH THESE STOP SIGNS DO NOT.
I'M WONDERING WHY THIS COURT IS WILLING TO RISK FEDERAL FUNDING OVER THESE UNWARRANTED STOP SIGNS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN REMOVED TWO YEARS AGO.
IF AN ACCIDENT WERE TO OCCUR TODAY AT ANY OF THESE INTERSECTIONS, THIS COUNTY COULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE AND LIABLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN I HAVE EVIDENCE HERE IN MY HAND THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN DOWN.
I URGE YOU TO ADDRESS THIS MATTER PROMPTLY.
IF THIS ISSUE IS NOT ACTUALLY ON THE NEXT AGENDA, I WILL HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO FILE A FORMAL COMPLAINT WITH THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND I SINCERELY HOPE FOR A RESOLUTION TO THIS ISSUE.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS,
[F. CONSENT AGENDA]
WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GO TO CONSENT.IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS ABOUT CONSENT, I WOULD LOOK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER HORNE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE.
>> OPPOSED HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
WE'RE GOING TO SKIP ITEM H1 BECAUSE IT IS TIED TO THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AT 9:30 AND GO TO ITEM H2,
[H.2 To approve the Development Agreement for Magical Woods RV Park on approximately 15.33 acres located off FM 20. Speaker: Commissioner Westmoreland/Kasi Miles; Backup: 51; Cost: $0.00 ]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR MAGICAL WOODS RV PARK ON APPROXIMATELY 15.33 ACRES LOCATED OFF FEM 20.COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND, CASEY?
>> GOOD MORNING. WE'RE BRINGING BEFORE YOU A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT WAS CREATED FOR A SMALLER RV PARK HERE IN THE COUNTY.
AT THIS TIME THERE ARE NINE UNITS THERE.
MS. MARIA IS HERE WITH US TODAY, AND I'M GOING TO REPRESENT HER.
AND WHAT HAD HAPPENED WAS SHE DIDN'T REALIZE WHAT OUR RV PARK RULES WERE.
SO THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HAS BEEN CREATED TO ADDRESS ALL OF THOSE CONCERNS TO GET HER IN COMPLIANCE, AND WE'D LIKE TO JUST MOVE FORWARD WHEN I'M LOOKING FOR APPROVAL OF THE DA.
WE'VE WORKED ON THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME, AND WE'VE GONE BACK AND FORTH WITH THE APPLICANT, AND WE'RE AT A POINT WHERE EVERYONE'S IN AGREEMENT THAT THIS IS WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE APPROVED AT THIS POINT.
>> ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER, YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION?
>> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM H2.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM H2. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[00:10:01]
>> OPPOSED HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
>> ITEM H3, DISCUSSION ACTION AND CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 032025,
[H.3 Consideration and approval of Resolution 03-2025 accepting a petition to create Prairie Lea Public Improvement District; calling for a public hearing under Section 372.009 of the Texas Local Government Code to consider the feasibility and advisability of establishing the district; authorizing and directing the publication and mailing notices of the public hearing; and providing an effective date. Speaker: Judge Haden/Ross Martin/Will Conley; Backup: 20; Cost: $0.00]
ACCEPTING A PETITION TO CREATE PRAIRIE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING UNDER SECTION 372009 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE TO CONSIDER THE FEASIBILITY AND ADVISABILITY OF ESTABLISHING THE DISTRICT, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE PUBLICATION AND MAILING NOTICES OF PUBLIC HEARING AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.I DON'T THINK ANYBODY IS HERE FROM PRAIRIE LEA.
IT'S A RESOLUTION TO CREATE A PID FOR A SUBDIVISION IN PRAIRIE LEA.
IT'S A LONG ONE, SO BEAR WITH ME, COMMISSIONERS.
RESOLUTION 032025, A RESOLUTION OF THE TEXAS COMMISSIONERS' COURT OF CALDWELL COUNTY, TEXAS, ACCEPTING A PETITION TO CREATE PRAIRIE LEA PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.
CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING UNDER SECTION 372009, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE TO CONSIDER THE FEASIBILITY AND ADVISABILITY OF ESTABLISHING THE DISTRICT, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE PUBLICATION AND MAILING OF NOTICES TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WHEREAS CHAPTER 372, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE HAS AMENDED THE ACT AUTHORIZES CALDWELL COUNTY, TEXAS, THE COUNTY TO CREATE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS WITHIN THE COUNTY, AND WHEREAS A LANDOWNER PETITION, A COPY WHICH IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT A, THE PETITION WAS FILED WITH THE COUNTY CLERK REQUESTING THE CREATION OF THE PRAIRIE LEA PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, THE DISTRICT, AND WHICH PETITION THE COMMISSIONERS' COURT OF THE COUNTY.
THE COMMISSIONERS' COURT, HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES TO BE VALIDLY SUBMITTED IN PROPER FORM AND COMPLIANT WITH THE APPLICABLE LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, THE STATE.
CONCERNING THE CREATION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WITH BOUNDARIES, AS DESCRIBED IN THE PETITION TO SUPPORT A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WITHIN CALDWELL COUNTY IS REQUIRED IN THE COMPLIANCE ACT.
WHEREAS THE PETITION INDICATED, I THE OWNERS OF TAXABLE REAL PROPERTY REPRESENTING MORE THAN 50% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE TAXABLE REAL PROPERTY LIABLE FOR ASSESSMENT UNDER THE PROPOSAL AS DETERMINED BY THE CURRENT ROLE OF THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
TWO, THE RECORD OWNERS OF REAL PROPERTY LIABLE FOR ASSESSMENT UNDER THE PROPOSAL A, CONSTITUTE MORE THAN 50% OF ALL THE RECORDED OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY THAT ARE LIABLE FOR THE ASSESSMENT UNDER THE PROPOSAL AND B, OWN TAXABLE REAL ESTATE THAT CONSTITUTES MORE THAN 50% OF THE AREA OF ALL TAXABLE REAL ESTATE THAT IS LIABLE FOR ASSESSMENT UNDER THE PROPOSAL EXECUTED THE PETITION.
WHEREAS PURSUANT TO THE ACT, PRIOR TO THE ACTION OF COMMISSIONERS' COURT, CONCERNING THE CREATION OF THE DISTRICT, THE COMMISSIONERS' COURT IS REQUIRED TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING, CONCERNING ANY SUCH CREATION AND PROVIDE NOTICE OF SUCH PUBLIC HEARING AS FOLLOWS.
ONE, PUBLISH NOTICE THEREOF IN A NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION IN THE COUNTY, WHICH NOTICE SHALL CONTAIN AT A MINIMUM, THE REQUISITE INFORMATION SPECIFIED IN THE ACT, AND MAIL WRITTEN NOTICE THEREOF, WHICH SHALL CONTAIN AT A MINIMUM, THE REQUISITE INFORMATION SPECIFIED IN THE ACT TO THE CURRENT ADDRESS OWNER AS REFLECTED ON THE TAX ROLLS OF PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE ASSESSMENT UNDER THE PROPOSED DISTRICT, AND WHEREAS THE COMMISSIONERS' COURT HAS DETERMINED THAT IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF CALDWELL COUNTY TO ACCEPT THE PETITION AND TO CALL THE PUBLIC HEARING AT A DATE, WHICH THE COMMISSIONERS' COURT WILL CONSIDER THE ADEQUACY OF THE PETITION AND HEAR PUBLIC TESTIMONY REGARDING THE FEASIBILITY AND ADVISABILITY OF CREATING THE PROPOSED DISTRICT.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS' COURT OF CALDWELL COUNTY, TEXAS, THAT ONE, THE RECITAL SET FORTH IN THE WHEREAS CLAUSE OF THIS RESOLUTION ARE TRUE AND CORRECT AND ARE INCORPORATED AS PART OF THE RESOLUTION.
TWO, COUNTY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE PETITION AND DETERMINED THAT THE SAME COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ACT, AND THE FILING OF THE PETITION IS ACCEPTED.
THE PETITION IS FILED WITH THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK AND IS AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION.
THREE, THE COMMISSIONERS' COURT CALLS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ADEQUACY OF THE PETITION AND TO HEAR PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THE FEASIBILITY AND ADVISABILITY OF CREATING THE PROPOSED DISTRICT, THE NATURE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS CONTEMPLATED, THE ESTIMATED COST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT,
[00:15:02]
THE METHOD OF ASSESSMENT, AND THE APPORTIONMENT.IF ANY OF THE COSTS OF THE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE HELD BEGINNING AT OR AFTER 9:00 A.M ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2024, IN THE REGULAR MEETING PLACE OF THE COMMISSIONERS' COURT, CALDWELL COUNTY COURTHOUSE LOCATED AT 110 SOUTH MAIN STREET, LOCKHART, TEXAS 78644.
>> ATTACHED HERE TO AS EXHIBIT B IS A FORM OF THE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING.
THE FORM AND SUBSTANCE OF WHICH IS HEREBY ADOPTED AND APPROVED.
A RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE DISTRICT AND ALL OTHER PERSONS ARE HEREBY INVITED TO APPEAR IN PERSON OR BY THEIR ATTORNEY AND SPEAK ON THE CREATION OF THE DISTRICT.
SECTION 4, THE PUBLIC HEARING MAY BE ADJOURNED FROM TIME TO TIME.
SECTION 5, COUNTY CLERK IS HEREBY AUTHORIZED AND DIRECTED TO GIVE ALL NOTICES OF PUBLIC HEARING AS REQUIRED BY LAW, INCLUDING NOTICES REQUIRED BY THE TEXAS HOP AND MEANING ACT AND BY THE ACT.
THE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING CREATION OF THE DISTRICT IS HEREBY APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED TO BE PUBLISHED AND MAILED AND SHALL BE READ SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM OF THE CONTENT OF EXHIBIT B ATTACHED HERETO, WHICH NOTICE IS INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE AS PART OF THE RESOLUTION FOR ALL PURPOSES.
SECTION 6, COUNTY CLERK WILL CAUSE THE AFORESAID NOTICE ATTACHED HERE TO AS EXHIBIT B TO BE PUBLISHED A NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION AND CAL COUNTY BEFORE THE 15TH DAY BEFORE THE SCHEDULED DATE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COUNTY CLERK IS HEREBY AUTHORIZED AND DIRECTED TO MAIL NOTICES OF THE HEARING REGARDING THE CREATION OF THE DISTRICT SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM ATTACHED HERE TO AS EXHIBIT B TO THE CURRENT ADDRESSES OF THE OWNERS.
AS REFLECTED ON THE TAX ROLLS OF PROPERTIES SUBJECT TO ASSESSMENTS UNDER THE PROPOSED DISTRICT AND TO ADDRESS SUCH NOTICES TO THE PROPERTY OWNER BEFORE THE 15TH DAY BEFORE THE SCHEDULED DATE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AS REQUIRED, AND AS APPROVED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 372.09D, THE ACT.
SECTION 7, UPON THE CLOSING OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT MAY CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION CREATING THE PROPOSED DISTRICT OR MAY DEFER THE ADOPTION OF SUCH A RESOLUTION FOR SIX MONTHS.
THE CREATION OF THE PROPOSED DISTRICT IS WITHIN THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT AND IN ADDITION, IS CONTINGENT UPON THE COMMISSIONERS COURT APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE PROPOSED DISTRICT.
SECTION 8, ALL ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS OR PARTS THEREOF, WHICH ARE IN CONFLICT OR CONSISTENT WITH ANY PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION ARE HEREBY REPEALED TO THE EXTENT OF SUCH CONFLICT, AND THE PROVISIONS OF THIS RESOLUTION SHALL REMAIN CONTROLLING AS THE MATTER IS RESOLVED HEREIN.
SECTION 9, THE RESOLUTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED AND ENFORCED.
ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE AND OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, SECTION 10.
IF ANY PROVISION OF THIS RESOLUTION OR THE APPLICANT THEREOF TO ANY PERSON OR CIRCUMSTANCE SHALL BE HELD TO BE INVALID, THE REMAINDER OF THIS RESOLUTION AND THE APPLICATION OF SUCH PROVISION TO OTHER PERSONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL NEVERTHELESS BE VALID.
THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT HEREBY DECLARES THAT THIS RESOLUTION WOULD HAVE BEEN ENACTED WITHOUT SUCH INVALID PROVISIONS. SECTION 11.
IT IS OFFICIALLY FOUND, DETERMINED, AND DECLARED THAT THE MEETING AT WHICH THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND PUBLIC NOTICE OF TIME, PLACE, AND SUBJECT MATTER OF THE PUBLIC BUSINESS TO BE CONSIDERED AT SUCH MEETING, INCLUDING THE RESOLUTION WAS GIVEN ALL AS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 551 AS AMENDED TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE.
SECTION 12, THIS RESOLUTION SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY AFTER IT IS PASSED AND APPROVED.
>> COMMISSIONERS. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE OR DENY RESOLUTION 03225?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 032025 BY COMMISSIONER HORN.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TERRIO.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[H.4 Consideration and approval of Resolution 04-2025 approving and authorizing the execution of a Professional Services Agreement between the County and the developer of the Prairie Lea Public Improvement District; and resolving other matters related thereto. Speaker: Judge Haden/Richard Sitton; Backup: 29; Cost: $55,000.00]
>> CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 0422 SORRY.
YEAH, 042025, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE DEVELOPER OF PERRI LEE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT RESOLVING OTHER MATTERS RELATED HERE TOO.
[00:20:03]
COMMISSIONER. JUST A MINUTE. GOOD LORD.OKAY. THIS IS BRIEF RESOLUTION OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT, OF CALWELL COUNTY, TEXAS, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND DEVELOPER OF THE OF PRAIRIE LEE, IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND RESOLVING OTHER MATTERS AS RELATED HERE TOO.
WHEREAS ON NOVEMBER 12, 2024, COMMISSIONERS COURT, COMMISSIONERS OF COWELL COUNTY, TEXAS, THE COUNTY, ADOPT A RESOLUTION, ACCEPTING A PETITION FOR THE CREATION OF PRAIRIE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, THE DISTRICT, AND CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE CREATION OF THE DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 372, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, AS AMENDED THE ACT, AND WHEREAS THE COUNTY DESIRES TO APPROVE THE COLWELL COUNTY, TEXAS PROFESSIONAL SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND RO DG DT LOCKHART, PROPERTY COMPANY, LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, THE DEVELOPER AND WHEREAS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT DEFINES THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH MONIES MAY BE ADVANCED BY THE DEVELOPER OF PROPERTY WITHIN THE DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF REIMBURSING CERTAIN EXPENSES IN INCURRED BY THE COUNTY RELATED TO LEVY TO THE LEVY OF ASSESSMENTS AND POTENTIAL INSURANCE ISSUANCE OF BONDS BY THE COUNTY, WHICH ARE SECURED BY ASSESSMENTS LEVIED AGAINST CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE DISTRICT.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY COMMISSIONERS COURT OF COLE COUNTY THAT SECTION 1, THAT THE FINDINGS AND PREMISES CONTAINED IN THE RECITALS ABOVE ARE HEREBY DEEMED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT AND INCORPORATED AS PART OF THIS RESOLUTION FOR ALL PURPOSES.
SECTION 2, THAT A PROFESSIONAL AGREEMENT SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM ATTACHED HERE TOO AS EXHIBIT A IS APPROVED BY THE COUNTY JUDGE, COUNTY CLERK, OR DESIGNEE IS AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE SUCH PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY, AND SECTION 3, THAT RESOLUTION SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE FROM AND AFTER THIS DATE OF PASSAGE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
>> COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 4 OR DENY.
>> MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER HORN. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WEST MORELAND.
IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
>> OPPOSED HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM 5, ACTION TO APPROVE FISCAL SURETY.
[H.5 To approve fiscal security for construction of Sunset Oaks Section VII Subdivision with a Faithful Performance Bond in the amount of $2,096,845.00. Speaker: Judge Haden/Commissioner Theriot/Donald Leclerc; Backup: 3; Cost: $0.00]
I'LL KEEP WANT TO SAY SECURITY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SUNSET, SECTION 7 SUBDIVISION WITH A FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,006,845.>> BOND HAS BEEN RECEIVED AND READY TO PROCEED.
COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 85.
SO MOVE. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TERRIO TO APPROVE. WE HAVE A SECOND.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[H.6 To approve the final plat for Lytton Hills, Phase 1 consisting of 75 residential lots on approximately 485.59 acres located on FM 1854 and FM 672. Speaker: Commissioner Thomas/Kasi Miles; Backup: 8; Cost: $0.00 ]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT FOR LITTON HILLS PHASE ONE CONSISTING OF 75 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 485.59 ACRES LOCATED ON FM 18 54 AND FM 672.>> OKAY. JUST WANT TO GO OVER A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY.
THE WHOLE ENTIRE PRELIMINARY PLAT WAS PRESENTED IN 2019 TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR LITTON HILL SUBDIVISION.
SO PHASE 2, THE ROADS ARE ACTUALLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, SO YOU'LL SEE PHASE 2 COMING SHORTLY AFTER THIS ONE.
BUT AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO PRESENT FOR PHASE 1.
IT TOOK QUITE A BIT OF TIME BECAUSE WE HAD SOME NEIGHBOR ADJOINING NEIGHBOR ISSUES WITH EASEMENT QUESTIONS.
WE FINALLY GOT ALL THAT WORKED OUT, AND I'M READY TO PRESENT THIS FOR APPROVAL.
>> OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNEY.
DISCUSSION. NOT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
>> POSED HERE AND NONE. MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 7.
[H.7 To approve the short form plat for Spotted Horse Subdivision consisting of two residential lots on approximately 7.915 acres located on Spotted Horse Trail off FM 1854. Speaker: Commissioner Thomas/Kasi Miles; Backup: 2; Cost: $0.00]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE THE SHORT FORM PLAT FOR SPOTTED HORSE SUBDIVISION CONSISTING OF TWO RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 7.915 ACRES LOCATED ON SPOTTED HORSE TRAIL OFF FM 18 54.[00:25:04]
>> OKAY. AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO PRESENT THIS SHORT FORM PLAT.
BACK IN DECEMBER OF 2023, I PRESENTED TO THE COURT A VARIANCE REQUEST TO BE ABLE TO SPLIT THIS INTO TWO LOTS BECAUSE SPOTTED HORSE IS A DEAD-END ROAD, AND YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO HAVE 30 ACCESS POINTS OFF OF A DEAD END, AND THIS ACTUALLY PUT IT OVER, BUT THE COURT APPROVED THE VARIANCE.
SO AT THIS TIME, I'M WANTING TO PRESENT THE SHORT FORM PLAT AND LOOKING FOR APPROVAL WITH THAT SO THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SPLIT.
>> MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS. SECOND.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TERRIO.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
>> OPPOSED HEARING NONE. MOTION CARRIES.
[H.8 To accept proposal from Doucet – A Kleinfelder Company for the scope of work needed for the US 183 turn lane project and to enter the contract negotiation process. Speaker: Judge Haden; Backup: 12; Cost: $241,000.00]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO ACCEPT PROPOSAL FROM DUET A KLEIN FALLER COMPANY FOR THE SCOPE OF WORK NEEDED FOR US 183 TURN LANE PROJECT, AND TO ENTER THE CONTRACT NEGOTIATION PROCESS, $241, COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS THE LEFT-HAND TURN LANE THAT WILL BE IN FRONT OF GOES BASICALLY FROM NORTH OF WHERE THE HOMETOWN MEAT MARKET IS, SOUTH PAST THE EVACUATION CENTER TO APPROXIMATELY WHERE THAT WATER TOWER IS TO THE SOUTH.WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS IN COURT.
THIS IS JUST TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL FROM DC FOR 241 AND DOLLAR FOR DOING THE DESIGN.
>> MOVE TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL.
>> WE HAVE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORN TO ACCEPT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. OPPOSED. HEARING NONE.
[H.9 To approve Resolution 01-2025 for Caldwell County Appraisal Roll with tax amounts entered by the assessor due totaling $26,345,002.06 for the 2024 Tax Roll. Speaker: Judge Haden/Vicki Schneider; Backup: 8; Cost: $0.00]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 012025 FOR CALWELL COUNTY APPRAISAL ROLL WITH TAX AMOUNTS ENTERED BY THE ASSESSOR DUE TOTALING $26,345,002.06 FOR THE 2024 TAX ROLL.COMMISSIONER, I THINK IT'S, BUT LET ME GO AHEAD AND READ THE HOPEFULLY VERY SHORT RESOLUTION.
RESOLUTION 012025, RESOLUTION APPROVING TAX ROLE FOR THE TAX YEAR 2024, WHEREAS SECTION 26.009 TEXAS PROPERTY CODE REQUIRES APPROVAL OF THE CALWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR THE CALWELL COUNTY APPRAISAL ROLE WITH TAX AMOUNTS ENTERED BY THE ASSESSOR FOR THE TAX YEAR 2024, WHEREAS SUCH ROLE WAS PRESENTED TO THE COMMISIONERS COURT OF CALDWELL COUNTY ON NOVEMBER 12, 2024, AND WHEREAS ALL THINGS AS APPEARS THAT ALL THINGS CORRECT AS UNDER APPLICABLE LAWS OF TEXAS, AND WHEREAS SAID COMMISSIONERS COURT VOTED IN OPEN SESSION TO APPROVE SAID ROLE, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY CALWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT, THAT APPRAISAL ROLE WITH AMOUNTS DUE TOTALING 26 MILLION, $345,002.06 FOR THE YEAR 2024 IS APPROVED AND IS THE TAX ROLE FOR THE CALWELL COUNTY FOR THE YEAR 2024 RESOLVED THIS 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024.
COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 012025.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WEST MORLAN TO APPROVE. WE HAVE A SECOND.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TERRIO.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO SQUEEZE ONE MORE IN HERE BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ITEM H10, DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 022025 FOR
[H.10 To approve Resolution 02-2025 for Caldwell County Appraisal Roll with tax amounts entered by the assessor due totaling $5,862.75 for the Farm to Market Road 2024 Tax Roll. Speaker: Judge Haden/Vicki Scneider; Backup: 8; Cost: $0.00]
COLWELL COUNTY APPRAISAL ROLL WITH TAX AMOUNTS ENTERED BY THE ASSESSOR DUELING 5860 $2.75 FOR THE FARM AND MARKET ROAD, 2024 TAX ROW.RESOLUTION 2025, RESOLUTION APPROVING FARM TO MARKET ROAD TAX ROLE FOR THE TAX YEAR 2024.
WHEREAS, SECTION 26 009 TEXAS PROPERTY CODE REQUIRES APPROVAL BY
[00:30:01]
THE CALWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT OF THE FARM TO MARKET ROAD APPRAISAL WITH TAX AMOUNTS ENTERED BY THE ASSESSOR.TAX YEAR 2024, WHEREAS SUCH ROLE WAS PRESENTED TO THE CALWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT ON NOVEMBER 12, 2024, AND APPEARS THAT ALL THINGS CORRECT AND UNDER APPLICABLE LAWS OF TEXAS, AND WHEREAS COMMISSIONERS COURT VOTED IN OPEN SESSION TO APPROVE, SAID, ROLE, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CALWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT, THAT THE APPRAISAL ROLE WITH AMOUNTS TOTALING DUE OF $5,862.75 FOR THE YEAR 2024 IS APPROVED AND IS THE TAX ROLE FOR FARM AND MARKET ROAD FOR 2024 RESOLVED THIS 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024.
COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE 022025.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE?
>> AYE. OPPOSED HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD NOW AND GO BACK TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[G.1 Regarding the Regulations of Thru Traffic on Designated County Roads]
WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:31 REGARDING THE REGULATIONS OF FREE TRAFFIC ON DESIGNATED COUNTY ROADS.I'LL LEAVE THIS OPEN FOR A COUPLE OF MINUTES TO SEE IF ANY SPEAKERS WANT TO COME UP.
A PUBLIC HEARING ABOUT MORE SIGNS IN PRAIRIE LEE.
I WAS HERE JANUARY 28TH, FOUR YEARS AGO, 2020, AND I EXPRESSED MY OPPOSITION FOR THESE SIGNS.
YOU EXPLAINED TO ME THAT TRUCKS COULD STILL DRIVE BY IF THEY'RE MAKING DELIVERIES.
THEY COULD COME THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THESE SIGNS ARE JUST FOR LARGE TRUCKS THAT ARE JUST DRIVING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
>> IF A TRUCK 18 WHEELER COMES THROUGH TOWN AND IS MAKING A DELIVERY SAY DOWN TO THE RIVER RESORT IS TOTALLY LEGAL.
>> WAS THERE A STUDY DONE TO PUT THESE SIGNS UP? WE'RE JUST GOING TO THROW MORE SIGNS UP IN PRAIRIE LEE, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING?[OVERLAPPING] WHAT A WASTE OF TAX DOLLARS. YOU'LL HAVE A NICE DAY.
>> ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? IF NOT, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:30 AM.
[H.1 To approve an amendment to the Order Prohibiting Thru Traffic on Designated County Roads, Section 3 - Designated Roads. Speaker: Judge Haden/Commissioner Horne/Donald Leclerc; Backup: 7; Cost: $0.00]
MOVE TO ITEM H1 DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT TO THE ORDER PROHIBITING TRAFFIC IS ON DESIGNATED COUNTY ROADS, SECTION 3, DESIGNATED ROADS. COMMISSIONER HORNE.WE HAD SOME CONCERNED CITIZENS AND IT'S GOING TO BE THROUGH, I GOT TEXT INVOLVED JUST ACROSS THE TS AND DOT THE IS.
WE HAVE SOME NO THROUGH TRUCK SIGNS ON RIVER STREET, I BELIEVE.
WHEN A TRUCK TURNS THEY'RE ALREADY COMMITTED.
THE RESIDENTS UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO STOP DELIVERY TRUCKS.
BUT SOME OF THESE SIDE STREETS ARE LITTLE THAT WE'VE HAD SOME CONCERNS ON THAT TRUCKS ARE GOING DOWN.
I MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE SIGNS.
>> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDER PROHIBITING THROUGH TRAFFIC ON DESIGNATED COUNTY ROADS. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE?
>> OPPOSED HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
[H.11 To get approval to enroll in Texas Association of Counties' Annual Cybersecurity Training Program for 2025. Speaker: Judge Haden/Ezzy Chan; Backup: 8; Cost: $1,060.00]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO GET APPROVAL TO ENROLL IN THE TECH ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY'S ANNUAL CYBER SECURITY TRAINING PROGRAM FOR 2025.YOU HEARD AS HE SAY WE'RE READY TO GET THAT GOING.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM H11?
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT IN FAVOR OF SAY AYE?
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
[H.12 Regarding the burn ban. Speaker: Judge Haden/Hector Rangel; Backup: 3; Cost: $0.00 ]
>> GOOD MORNING, JUDGE, COMMISSIONER STAFF AND GALLERY.
[00:35:03]
WE DIDN'T HAVE MUCH ACTIVITY THESE LAST TWO WEEKS.WE DID HAVE A FEW FIRES, BUT NOTHING MAJOR.
STILL, WE RECEIVE A FEW RAIN FROM RAIN, BUT NOT MUCH.
SOME OF THE COUNTY DIDN'T GET ANY AT ALL.
CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW, THE KBDI NUMBERS ARE MINIMUM 541, MAX 677, AVERAGE 620 WITH A CHANGE OF THREE.
THERE'S NO RAIN PREDICTED THIS WEEK, UNTIL SUNDAY WITH A 10%.
THERE'S A TROPICAL DEPRESSION OUT IN THE CARIBBEAN THAT'S MOVING ALONG AROUND HAITI AND JAMAICA.
MAYBE IT'LL COME THIS WAY, BUT I'M NOT SENSING ANYTHING GOOD OFF OF IT.
I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE KEEP THE BURN BAND ON ANOTHER TWO WEEKS.
>> OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO KEEP THE BURN BAND ON?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT TO KEEP THE BURN BAND ON. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE.
DISCUSSION? NO ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE?
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
[H.13 To approve Southern Health Partners contract with the Caldwell County Jail to provide inmate healthcare for FY 2024-2025. Speaker: Judge Haden/Mike Lane/James Short; Backup: 2; Cost: $800,000.00 ]
DISCUSSION ACTION APPROVED SOUTHERN HEALTH PARTNERS CONTRACT BETWEEN COLE COUNTY JAIL TO PROVIDE INMATE HEALTH CARE FOR FY2024-2025 COST $800,000.COMMISSIONER, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE HAD IN PLACE FOR SOME TIME WITH THEM.
I WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL, BUT I'D ALSO RECOMMEND NEXT FISCAL YEAR THAT WE PUT THIS BACK OUT.
GO AHEAD, MIKE. COME ON UP, SHERIFF.
>> WHEN I TOOK OFFICE FOUR YEARS AGO, I WENT OUT FOR ANOTHER BID.
I WAS PLANNING ON DOING THAT IN THE NEXT BUDGET YEAR.
I DIDN'T WANT TO DO IT PRIOR TO THE ELECTION.
COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE SOUTHERN HEALTH PARTNERS?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT AT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE?
[H.14 To approve Budget Amendment #01 moving $11,832.17 from Contingency 001-6510-4860 to Professional Services 001-6510-4110. Speaker: Judge Haden/Danie Teltow; Backup: 10; Cost: $0.00 ]
DISCUSSION ACTION APPROVED BUDGET AMENDMENT 01. THAT SOUNDS SO WEIRD.I'M SO USED TO HAVING A BUDGET AMENDMENT 40701.
MOVING $11,832.17 FROM CONTINGENCY 00165-104-8602 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0016-510-4110. AMY.
>> GOOD MORNING, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS.
THIS WAS AN INVOICE FROM AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT AND THE AMOUNT OF $38,410.
WE DIDN'T QUITE HAVE ENOUGH BUDGETED LAST YEAR, SO WE ARE REQUESTING THAT WE MOVE THE 11,000 FROM CONTINGENCY TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICE FOR THAT INVOICE, AND THAT WAS FOR THE SERVICES PROVIDED FOR THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND PROGRAM.
THE SIP. THAT WAS FOR THE SERVICES FROM SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2024 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2024.
>> OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 14?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS TO APPROVE. WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE?
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES. ITEM H15.
[H.15 To approve American Structurepoint invoice #182168 in the amount of $38,410.00 Speaker: Judge Haden/ Merari Gonzales; Backup: 8; Cost: $38,410.00]
DISCUSSION ACTUALLY APPROVE AMERICAN STRUCTURE POINT INVOICE 182168 IN THE AMOUNT OF $38,410. MARY.>> GOOD MORNING, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS.
JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON DANNY, THAT MONEY DIDN'T NEED TO GET MOVED AROUND IN ORDER FOR US TO GET THIS INVOICE SPACE.
WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR THAT APPROVAL.
>> OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM H15.
>> MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT. SECOND?
>> OKAY. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE?
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM H16, DISCUSSION ACTION APPROVED BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER 2 TO
[H.16 To approve Budget Amendment #02 to Fund 010 for unallocated Capital Murder Trial Grant expenditures. Speaker: Judge Haden/Danie Teltow; Backup: 7; Cost: $0.00]
FUND 10 FOR AN ALLOCATED CAPITAL MURDER TRIAL GRANT EXPENDITURES.>> FOR THIS ONE, IT WAS PRETTY HARD TO PREDICT.
THEY HAVE THE CAPITAL MURDER TRIAL GOING ON WITH THE HAYNES CASE, AND WE DO HAVE THAT IS BEING REIMBURSED AND FUNDED BACK TO US THROUGH A GRANT, AND THOSE INVOICES HAVE STARTED COMING THROUGH.
SINCE WE DIDN'T BUDGET FOR IT THIS FISCAL YEAR, WE'RE JUST REQUESTING FOR THE APPROVAL TO MOVE SOME MONEY AROUND AND IT'S GOING TO BE $83,660.34 FROM CONTINGENCY, AND IT'S GOING TO BE PLACED IN THAT FUND 10,
[00:40:02]
WHICH IS OUR GRANT FUND.INTO THE CAPITAL MURDER MEDICAL EXPENSE AND MURDER TRIAL EXPENDITURE LINE ITEMS. WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO REQUEST TO PLACE THAT REVENUE IN THE CAPITAL MURDER GRANT REVENUE LINE ITEM.
>> THIS IS STILL CLEANING UP STUFF FROM LAST YEAR, OR IS IT [OVERLAPPING]
>> OKAY. COMMISSIONER'S MOTION TO APPROVE H16?
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND. SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE.
>> ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE?
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THE MOTION CARRIES.
[H.17 Approval of payment by Toshiba for pay-off of Xerox contract. Speaker: Judge Haden/Merari Gonzales; Backup: 1; Cost: $84,567.60]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE PAYMENT BY TOSHIBA FOR PAYOFF OF XEROX CONTRACT.>> WE FINALLY RECEIVED THE CHECK FROM TOSHIBA, AND SO WE'RE JUST SEEKING THAT APPROVAL TO ACCEPT AND GET THAT XEROX CONTRACT PAID OUT.
>> OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, AND THAT WAS THE AMOUNT OF 84,567.60.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM H17?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE?
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE MOTION CARRIES.
[H.18 To approve Evaluation Committee for RFQ24CCP03Q Caldwell County PID Administrator Services Speaker: Judge Haden/Merari Gonzales/Danie Teltow; Backup: 1; Cost: $0.00]
DISCUSSION ACTION APPROVE EVALUATION COMMITTEE FOR RFQ24CCPO3Q CALDWELL COUNTY PIT ADMINISTRATOR SERVICES. WHERE ARE YOU?>> [OVERLAPPING] I CAN COVER. [OVERLAPPING] FOR THIS, THE RFQ IS CURRENTLY OUT RIGHT NOW, AND BEFORE THAT SUBMISSION DEADLINE, WE'D LIKE TO REQUEST THE APPROVAL FOR THE SELECTION COMMITTEE.
THE COMMITTEE THAT'S BEING RECOMMENDED IS GOING TO BE COUNTY JUDGE HOPPY HADEN, COUNTY ATTORNEY, RICHARD SITTON, FINANCIAL ADVISOR, JENNIFER RITTER, COUNTY AUDITOR DANIE TELTOW AND THE COUNTY PURCHASING AGENT, MERARI GONZALES.
>> OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM H18?
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THERIOT. DO WE HAVE SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMAS.
ANY DISCUSSION? NOT ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE?
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
[H.19 To approve Evaluation Committee for RFP24CC03P Caldwell County External Audit Services. Speaker: Judge Haden/Merari Gonzales/Danie Teltow; Backup: 1; Cost: $0.00 ]
DISCUSSION ACTION TO APPROVE EVALUATION COMMITTEE FOR RFP24CCP03P CALDWELL COUNTY EXTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES.>> FOR THIS ONE, OUR CONTRACT TERM HAS COME UP FOR EXTERNAL AUDITOR SERVICE, AND WE'RE JUST RECOMMENDING, AGAIN, THE SAME THING FOR THE SELECTION COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE CANDIDATES THAT'LL BE SUBMITTED.
THE CANDIDATES ARE COUNTY AUDITOR DANIE TELTOW, FIRST ASSISTANT AUDITOR GABI SALDANA, AND THE COUNTY PURCHASING AGENT, MERARI GONZALES.
>> OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM H19.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORELAND. SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE?
>> OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
[H.20 To approve submitting grant application(s) to the Texas General Land Office (TxGLO) for the Disaster Recovery Reallocation Program (DRRP). Speaker: Judge Haden/Amber Quinley; Backup: 36; Cost: $0.00]
DISCUSSION ACTION APPROVED SUBMITTING GRANT APPLICATIONS TO THE TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE, TXGLO FOR DISASTER RECOVERY REALLOCATION PROGRAM, DRRP. AMBER?>> THEY HAVE TAKEN ALL OF THE FUNDS THAT WERE ISSUED OUT FOR ALL OF THE MOST RECENT DISASTERS AND ANYTHING THAT WAS NOT USED OR DIDN'T END UP GETTING ALLOCATED, THEY HAVE PUT THOSE BACK INTO A COUPLE OF POTS OF FUNDS THAT THEY ARE OPENING FOR APPLICATIONS.
UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S VERY QUICK TURNAROUND THAT WE'VE GOT TO DO THIS.
THE APPLICATION IS DUE BY NOVEMBER 21ST.
IF WE DO WANT TO APPLY FOR ANY OF THIS FUNDING, WE DO HAVE TO MAKE SOME QUICK DECISIONS.
WHAT'S ELIGIBLE IS ANYTHING THAT'S A FLOOD OR DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT, WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT, STREET IMPROVEMENTS, REHABILITATION, RECONSTRUCTION, OR NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND PERMANENTLY AFFIXED EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT.
WE QUALIFY FOR A COUPLE OF THE DIFFERENT POTS OF FUNDS BECAUSE WE WERE AFFECTED BY THE ORIGINAL DISASTERS SO FOR THE 2015 FLOODS, THE 2016 FLOODS, AND THEN THE HURRICANE HARVEY.
FOR THE TWO FLOODS, WE CAN APPLY FOR UP TO TWO MILLION IN CONSTRUCTION WITH A MINIMUM OF 500,000.
THEN THE HARVEY ONE IS BIGGER.
THAT'S A MINIMUM OF 500,000, BUT UP TO 20 MILLION.
[00:45:02]
WHAT WE DID, WE PULLED THE LIST OF ALL THE PROJECTS THAT WERE APPLIED FOR BACK WHEN THE EVACUATION SHELTER WAS APPLIED FOR.WE DIDN'T GET FUNDED FOR THESE PROJECTS.
IT WAS RECOMMENDED TO US BY A REPRESENTATIVE AT CAPCO THAT THESE WOULD BE GREAT PROJECTS TO GO FORWARD WITH BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY DONE THE WORK.
WE'VE GOT ALL THE BIDS AND EVERYTHING ON THEM.
OF COURSE, WE'D HAVE TO GET SOME UPDATED NUMBERS, BUT WE'VE GOT AT LEAST A PRETTY GOOD LIST OF PROJECTS TO LOOK AT.
WE WOULD JUST HAVE TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS ON WHAT PROJECTS ALL WOULD LIKE TO SEE APPLIED FOR.
THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT WE'VE GOT TO KEEP IN MIND AS WE SELECT PROJECTS IS THAT, THERE IS A TWO YEAR TIME-FRAME.
IT HAS TO BE A PROJECT THAT CAN BE COMPLETED FROM START TO FINISH WITHIN TWO YEARS, SO NOTHING SUPER CRAZY.
>> THERE'S NO MATCH ON THESE FUNDS, SO WE CAN GO AS HIGH AS WE WANT ON THAT ONE POT OF MONEY, BUT WE JUST HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING CAN BE COMPLETED WITHIN THAT TWO YEAR TIME FRAME.
IN THE BACKUP, YOU DO HAVE A LIST OF ALL THOSE PROJECTS THAT WERE APPLIED FOR AND FURTHER IN THE BACKUP IS A BREAKDOWN OF EACH ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS AND WHAT THE COST ENTAILED.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'LL HAVE HAD TIME TO REVIEW ANY OF THOSE, IF ANYBODY HAS IDEAS OF WHICH ONES YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO SEE MOVE FORWARD, BUT WE DO NEED TO TAKE ACTION TODAY BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ANOTHER COURT DATE BEFORE THE APPLICATIONS HAVE TO BE DUE.
FOR THE APPLICATION, I WILL SAY THIS IS JUST A PRE APPLICATION.
THESE ARE THE PROJECTS WE KNOW WE CAN DO WITHIN THAT AMOUNT OF TIME.
THEN THEY WILL COME BACK SOMETIME IN FEBRUARY OR MARCH, AND THEY'RE GOING TO WANT MORE THOROUGH BACKUP AND INFORMATION ON THOSE PROJECTS.
RIGHT NOW WE JUST HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON WHAT PROJECTS.
>> COMMISSIONERS, IF IN YOUR BACKUP, THERE'S A LIST OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE SUBMITTED BACK WHEN WE WERE TRYING TO GET $50 MILLION.
THEY'RE SPREAD AROUND THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY. THERE'S A MAP.
IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR BACKUP, THERE'S THE LIST OF PROJECTS AND IT HAS SITE NUMBER 1 THROUGH.
THEY'RE SCATTERED AROUND THE COUNTY, THERE'S A MAP IN YOUR BACKUP THAT SHOWS WHERE EACH OF THESE PROJECTS IS.
WE NEED TO HAVE A COUPLE OF PROJECTS THAT I THINK IS TWO MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE FIRST TWO POTS OF MONTH.
>> THAT'S WHAT THEY SUGGESTED.
LET'S DO A COUPLE OF SMALL ONES IN THE 2015 FUNDING, AND THEN DO A COUPLE OF SMALL ONES IN THE 2016 FLOOD FUNDING.
THEN IF WE WANT TO PICK ONE OR MAYBE TWO OF THE LARGER PROJECTS THAT WE COULD COMPLETE WITHIN THAT HURRICANE HARVEY FUNDING SINCE THAT'S THE BIGGER, WE'VE GOT A BIGGER MAXIMUM ON THAT.
>> IF YOU LOOK AT ALL OF THEM, BY AND LARGE, THEY'RE 2-3 MILLION DOLLAR PROJECTS.
THERE'S ONE THAT'S FIVE MILLION.
BUT FOR THE MOST PART, THEY'RE IN THE TWO MILLION DOLLAR RANGE.
MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE TO FIND A COUPLE OF THEM IN PRECINCT 1, 2, 3, OR 4, THEY'RE TWO MILLION, AND THEN COMBINE SEVERAL OF THEM MAY GO ON THAT THIRD POT OF MONEY.
I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY THE BEST WAY TO GO.
IF THERE'S ALMOST 20 MILLION AVAILABLE, BUT I THINK WE GO FOR 20 MILLION, WE WON'T GET IT.
I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO SPLIT THE BABY AND GO FOR 10 ON THAT POT AND THEN GO FOR A COUPLE OF MILLION ON THE FIRST TWO POTS.
>> I THINK THAT THEY WANT TO SEE BIG NUMBERS, BUT NOT QUITE THAT BIG BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO JUST GIVE IT TO A FEW PEOPLE.
OUR THINKING WAS MAYBE SOMEWHERE AROUND 10 MILLION.
>> THERE'S THERE'S SOME THERE'S SOME REALLY SMALL ONES THAT ARE $350,000 EACH THAT THAT ARE WEST FORK PLUM CREEK TRIBUTARY.
>> I'VE GOT SEALS AND WEST BURN RIGHT HERE AT 495, BUT I DO SEE THE DATE.
[00:50:03]
>> THAT'S A GREAT POINT, COMMISSIONER.
>> FOR THE RISING COST. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'LL HAVE TO ADJUST FOR INFLATION ON THESE NUMBERS BECAUSE THESE ARE FOUR-YEAR-OLD NUMBERS.
>> WHAT TIMELINE ARE WE UP AGAINST RIGHT NOW?
>> WE GOT TO PICK. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE'RE REALLY GOING TO NEED TO [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE ONLY THING I COULD SAY IS WE DO HAVE OUR SPECIAL SESSION ON FRIDAY. I DON'T KNOW.
WE WANT TO DISCUSS MAYBE MEET ON IT, AND THEN WE CAN BRING IT BACK IN A FEW DAYS, BUT THAT'S. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU WANT TO TAKE MORE TIME TO LOOK AT THIS, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE HERE ANYWAY FRIDAY MORNING.
>> THEN YOU CAN MAKE WE COULD PUT THIS.
WE CAN STILL GET SOME ON FRIDAY.
>> YEAH. WE HAVE TO ADDRESS TODAY AND POST IT AGAIN.
>> IF WE FILE AN AMENDED AGENDA FOR FRIDAY.
>> WAS THERE EVER A RANKING OF THESE? NO, I SEE ON THE MAP, THERE'S A LIST ONE THROUGH 28, BUT THAT'S A NO SPECIAL ORDER.
THIS WAS ONE ENTIRE PROJECT, AND SO THIS LIST CAME FROM THAT HUGE PROJECT.
IT'S NOT IN ANY IT'S NOT RANKED AT ALL.
IT'S THE LIST THAT WE SUBMITTED WHEN WE SUBMITTED FOR THE 50 MILLION.
>> IF IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO GET IT ON FOR FRIDAY, I'D LIKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO LOOK AT IT.
>> SOME OF THIS IS ON THE ROAD.
>> SOME OF THESE PROJECTS ARE ON THE ROAD BONDS, SO WE COULD GO THROUGH AND HIGHLIGHT THOSE BECAUSE THOSE ARE ALREADY SPOKEN FOR.
BUT THERE'S THE VAST MAJORITY OF THESE.
MOST OF THEM ARE STILL OUT THERE, BUT WE DO HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION FAIRLY QUICKLY BECAUSE EVEN WAITING A WEEK, THAT'S GOING TO REALLY PUT A LOT OF PRESSURE TO GET.
>> WELL, CAN WE MAKE THE MOTION FOR HER TO GO OUT OR TO GO AHEAD AND THEN BACK AND SAY, HERE'S OUR LIST?
>> NO. SHE'S GOT TO FILL OUT THE APPLICATION.
>> I'LL HAVE TO DO IT TODAY, BUT IT IS GOING TO BE DUE VERY SOON.
THEY'LL NEED TO KNOW IF WE WANT TO BRING IT BACK ON FRIDAY.
>> IT'S ON FRIDAY. IF WE POST IT TODAY AT NOON.
>> TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY, 72 HOURS.
>> SEVENTY TWO HOURS IS THREE DAYS.
WE COULD POST IT IF WE AMEND IT TODAY FOR NINE, TUESDAY AT NINE, WEDNESDAY AT NINE, THURSDAY AT NINE, WE'RE NOT HAVING COURT TILL FRIDAY AT NIGHT.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. I KEEP THINKING IT'S MONDAY.
WE'LL HAVE TO CHANGE THE TIME OF THE MEETING TO DO IT.
OR WE CAN GO THROUGH THE LIST AND TALK ABOUT IT.
>> JUDGE, I THINK YOU SAID IT ALREADY.
I'M SORRY IF YOU DID, BUT ONE WAY TO APPROACH IT WOULD BE FOR US TO EACH IDENTIFY A PROJECT WITHIN OUR PRECINCT.
WE NEED TO DO TWO MILLION IN THE FIRST TWO POTS, AND THEN 10 MILLION IN THE THIRD POT.
GETTING ALL FOUR PRECINCTS REPRESENTED IN THE TWO MILLION DOLLARS POTS MAY BE DIFFICULT.
I THINK A LOT OF THE SMALLER ONES ARE ALREADY REPRESENTED IN THE ROAD BOND.
WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL GO THROUGH AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THESE ARE ALREADY IN THE ROAD BOND AND TAKE THOSE OFF THE LIST AND SEND YOU A NEW LIST TODAY IF WE NEED TO OR WE CAN RECESS AND DO IT RIGHT QUICK AND COME BACK.
BUT THAT'S THAT'S WE GOT TO GET IT GOING PRETTY PRETTY QUICKLY.
WE WON'T WE WON'T BE HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO GET THE SUBMISSION.
FOR INSTANCE, I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO PAY ANY ATTENTION TO WHAT PRECINCT THESE THINGS ARE IN, BUT I'LL JUST LOOK AT DOLLAR AMOUNTS.
LET ME GET RID OF MY BOOKMARK HERE.
LET'S JUST SAY, FOR INSTANCE, WE PROJECT NUMBER 1 FOR POT 1.
IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE PROBABLY 2.5, 2.6 MILLION.
WE REALLY NEED TO STAY IN THE TWO MILLION DOLLAR RANGE FOR THE FIRST TWO POTS.
[00:55:08]
THEN THERE'S A BUNCH OF STUFF ON OAK GROVE ROAD, BUT THOSE ARE ALL 350,000 EACH, OBVIOUSLY ALL IN ONE PLACE.IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT TO GET ALL FOUR PRECINCTS IN THE FIRST TWO POTS OF MONEY.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DECIDE WHICH PROJECTS ARE THE MOST PRESSING AND NOT SO MUCH PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT PRECINCT THEY'RE IN.
ON THE THIRD POT OF MONEY, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET ONE FROM EACH PRECINCT IN THAT THIRD POT.
>> IF WE JUST LOOK AT THE TWO MILLION DOLLAR PROJECTS, WHEN THAT'S LIST, WE'VE GOT ITEMS 1 AND 2, THAT'S ON COUNTY ROAD 140, WATTSVILLE, AND OLD LITTON SPRINGS.
THEN YOU HAVE TO GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO PROJECT 21, WHICH IS CROOKED ROAD IN LITTON SPRINGS, 224M CREEK OR NORTH BLANCO STREET, TOWN CREEK.
>> THERE'S A HOPES ROAD THERE THAT'S TOO MANY.
>> AT THE VERY BOTTOM. THEN NORTHWEST.
>> [INAUDIBLE] RIGHT THERE FOR PLUM CREEK.
>> NORTHWEST RIVER ROAD, BUT I THINK I NEED TO GO BACK AND LOOK.
THAT ONE MAY BE IN THE ROAD BOND THAT VERY LAST ONE. I CAN'T REMEMBER.
>> WE CAN NOT PAY ATTENTION TO THAT ONE, BUT THAT LEAVES US 1, 2, 03, 4 OR 5 PROJECTS IN THE TWO MILLION DOLLAR RANGE THAT WE COULD THROW INTO THE FIRST TWO POT.
>> IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN THAT NORTH BLANCO STREET TOWN CREEK, THAT'S IN LOCKHART.
I THINK THEY GOT SEPARATE FUNDING TO REPLACE THAT ONE.
I DON'T THINK THAT ONE SHOULD BE.
I'M 95% SURE THEY GOT THEIR OWN MONEY TO REPLACE THAT.
>> GET RID OF THAT ONE. THAT LEAVES US WATTSVILLE, OLD LITTON SPRINGS.
>> DRY CREEK ROAD IS TWO AND A HALF.
THEN WE GO DOWN, WE'VE GOT CROOKED ROAD, HOLTS ROAD.
>> WE DID HOLT ROAD BRIDGE WITH THE OFF SYSTEM.
THAT'S RIGHT. TECH STOP MONEY.
>> NOW WE'RE GETTING NARROWED DOWN.
WATTSVILLE ROAD AND OLD LITTON SPRINGS ROAD WOULD FIT THE BILL PRETTY WELL FOR THE FIRST TWO POTS OF MONEY.
>> ARE YOU ALL OKAY WITH THAT? MR. HORN?
>> FIRST TWO WATTSVILLE AND OLD LITTON SPRINGS.
THAT WOULD BE POT 1 AND POT 2.
>> BUT THOSE ARE GOING TO PROBABLY BE MORE EXPENSIVE THAN TWO MILLION.
>> WE DON'T HAVE ANY [OVERLAPPING] THAT ARE MUCH LESS THAT HAVE THAT AREN'T EITHER.
I THINK WE'LL JUST HAVE TO DO WHATEVER THEY ARE.
PUT IT IN. BECAUSE IT'S FIVE MILLION IN THE POT FOR THOSE FIRST [INAUDIBLE]
>> WELL, THE MAXIMUM YOU CAN APPLY FOR IS TWO MILLION. IT IS.
THEN WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO DO.
WE'VE GOT WASHBURN AT SEALS CREEK, IT'S 600,000, AND THAT ONE WILL PROBABLY BE APPROACHING A MILLION.
>> I'D LIKE TO SEE SOUTHEAST RIVER ROAD THAT MOORS AND CREEK PUT IN THERE BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A FATALITY THERE.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. WE HAD A DROWNING THERE SOME YEARS AGO.
THAT ONE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO GO IN THE THIRD POT.
>> LET'S TRY TO GET THE FIRST TWO POTS KNOCKED OUT FIRST.
WE GOT ONE THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE THAT WAS PROBABLY BE CLOSER TO A MILLION.
I WISH I COULD HIGHLIGHT ACROSS THIS THING.
IT'S HARD TO. IT'S 205 AT SEA WILLOW ROAD.
THAT ONE'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE CLOSE TO A MILLION.
WOULD Y'ALL BE OKAY IF PUTTING THAT UNDER POT 1?
WE GOT A COUPLE OF MORE DOWN HERE THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SQUEEZE IN.
THERE'S A 600,000 ON ITEM 10 AND 11 OR 600,000.
WE COULD PROBABLY PUT ONE OF THOSE UNDER POT 1 AND THEN THE OTHER UNDER POT 2.
WOULD Y'ALL BE OKAY WITH THAT? TEN UNDER POT 1,
[01:00:02]
AND 11 UNDER POT 2.>> THAT LEAVES US ONE MORE THAT WE COULD GRAB THAT WE COULD PROBABLY DO IT.
THERE'S ANOTHER $600,000 ONE. WHERE IS IT?
>> ON COUNTY LINE ROAD THAT PROBABLY COULD GO UNDER POT 2.
>> THAT'S NUMBER 20. NOW LET'S LOOK AT POT 3.
WE CAN GRAB ONE FROM EACH OF PRECINCTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF TWO MILLION BECAUSE BY THE TIME WE GROSS THAT UP FOR INFLATION, IT'S GOING TO BE TWO AND HALF.
WE COULD PROBABLY DO NUMBER 1, WHICH WOULD BE WATTSVILLE.
I WISH WE HAVE WHICH PRECINCTS ALL OF THESE ARE IN.
>> WATTSVILLE IS IN TWO, I THINK.
>> NUMBER 1 WOULD GET US PRECINCT 2?
>> NUMBER 2 IS OLD LYTTON SPRINGS ROAD.
>> NUMBER 17 WOULD GET US PRECINCT 3.
>> NUMBER 17 GETS THREE, AND SO WE NEED TO TRY TO FIND ONE AND ONE.
>> NUMBER 2 IS PRECINCT 4, CORRECT.
>> THE ONLY ONES THAT ARE LEFT IN PRECINCT 1, YOU'RE GOING TO GET UP OVER THAT TWO MILLION NUMBER.
>> WE'VE GOT SOME $2.5 MILLION ONES THERE.
>> YOU'VE GOT NUMBER 16, WHICH IS BOGGY CREEK AT CLEAR FORK PLUM CREEK, BUT IT'S OVER AT TWO.
>> WHAT PRECINCT IS OAK GROVE IN?
>> DONALD, DO YOU KNOW WHAT PRECINCT OAK GROVE ROAD'S IN?
>> OAK GROVE IS JUST THE SOUTH-END RIGHT AFTER THE BRIDGE.
>> THAT DOESN'T GET US THERE. I'M TRYING TO GET SOMETHING PUT TOGETHER FOR PRECINCT 1.
>> YES, SIR. POLONIA ROAD, BJ, IS THAT IN YOURS OR MINE?
>> I KNOW THAT SPLITS OUR LINE.
>> THAT'S IN BOTH. THAT'S A BIG ONE, THOUGH.
>> THAT'S FIVE MILLION DOLLARS.
>> THAT ONE WAS TO BUILD A BRIDGE ACROSS THAT WHOLE FLOOD PLAIN.
PLUM CREEK BRANCH AT SEAWILLOW.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S IN ONE OR TWO.
>> NUMBER 4? BUT THAT'S ONE WE DECIDED TO POT 1.
>> WE ALREADY GOT THAT ONE IN THERE.
>> THAT IV SWITCH IS IN THE ROAD BOND. NUMBER 5.
>> JUST LOOKING AT THE MAP, BJ, IT LOOKS LIKE 23, 16, AND 12 [OVERLAPPING]
>> THERE'S JUST NOT A LOT IN ONE THAT'S ON THE LIST, PERIOD.
WE'VE ALREADY CHOSEN ONE AND THE OTHER ONE I'M 95% SURE [OVERLAPPING]
>> IF WE GO A HAIR OVER 10, I THINK WE'LL BE OKAY BECAUSE THAT'S 20 MILLION DOLLAR PLOT.
WE JUST WANTED TO AIM AROUND THAT NUMBER.
>> THE ONLY THERE ONE WILL BE 16, WHICH WOULD BE BOGGY CREEK ROAD AND CLEAR FORK PLUM CREEK.
>> LET'S PUT THAT ONE IN THERE.
THAT'LL PUT US A LITTLE LOWER, BUT NOT MUCH.
>> NUMBER 16, THAT PROBABLY GOES UP TO SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF THREE MILLION.
WILL BE A HAIR OVER, BUT NOT BAD.
I THINK THAT'LL ROUND OUT POT NUMBER 3.
>> I GET A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE SO AMBER CAN WORK ON THE GRANT? DO YOU WANT ME TO READ THEM AGAIN?
>> YEAH. IT PROBABLY WOULD BE A BETTER IDEA TO READ THEM BACK IN THE MINUTES.
POT 1 IS NUMBER 4 AND NUMBER 10.
>> POT 3 IS NUMBER 1, NUMBER 2, NUMBER 17, AND NUMBER 16.
>> EVERYBODY GOOD WITH THAT? I'M GOOD.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE PROJECTS FOR ITEM 20.
[01:05:01]
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORN. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WESTMORE.
ANY DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
>> OPPOSED. HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS.
>> CAN I JUST ASK A QUICK QUESTION FOR MY OWN REFERENCE? ON NUMBER 4, WHAT PRECINCT IS THAT?
>> WE DIDN'T EVEN PAY MUCH ATTENTION TO PRECINCTS.
>> NUMBER 4, THAT'S PRECINCT 1.
>> JUST IN CASE I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I WANT TO KNOW WHO TO REACH OUT TO.
THEN SAME FOR 10 AND 11, WHICH PRECINCTS ARE THOSE?
>> TEN IS 672, SO THAT'S FOUR.
>> THEN THE ONLY OTHER ONE I DIDN'T HAVE IS NUMBER 20.
>> THAT'S GOING TO BE EITHER TWO OR FOUR.
WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK TO SEE WHERE THAT'S AT EXACTLY.
WE CAN DO SOME MORE IN ADDITION TO THE ROAD BOND.
WE'RE GOING TO GO TO DISCUSSION ONLY, ITEM I1.
[I.1 To discuss an Ordinance prohibiting the placement of signs on a right-of-way of public roads and imposing criminal prosecution for violation. Speaker: Commissioner Thomas/Richard Sitton; Backup: 17; Cost: $0.00]
WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS THE ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE PLACEMENT OF SIGNS ON A RIGHT OF WAY OF PUBLIC ROADS AND IMPOSING CRIMINAL PROSECUTION FOR VIOLATION.I WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER THOMAS FOR DOING THIS DISCUSSION ONLY SO WE CAN HAVE A MINUTE TO CONSIDER ALL THIS BEFORE WE BRING IT BACK FOR A VOTE AT THE NEXT COURT.
COMMISSIONER ASKED ME FOR WHAT MY QUESTIONS WERE.
IF YOU LOOK IN YOUR BACKUP, YOU'LL SEE THAT I HAD A SERIES OF QUESTIONS.
THEN RICHARD HAD A SERIES OF QUESTIONS.
THEN COMMISSIONER THOMAS RESPONDED TO THOSE QUESTIONS.
WE PUT ALL THAT IN YOUR BACKUP, AND I APPRECIATE THE RESPONSE.
THE ONE THING IT DIDN'T ADDRESS, COMMISSIONER, ON YOUR RESPONSE, IS YOU JUST REFERRED TO US BACK AND SAID IT'S ALLOWED BY THE CODE, WHICH I DON'T DISAGREE WITH.
MOST OF THOSE ARE ALLOWED BY THE CODE, BUT WHAT THE CODE DOESN'T ADDRESS IS THE COUNTY'S LIABILITY, FOR INSTANCE.
WE HAVE A VOLUNTEER ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND SOMEBODY RUNS OFF THE ROAD AND RUNS OVER THEM, WHAT'S OUR LIABILITY? WE'RE GOING TO GET SUED.
THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS OR WHO'S GOING TO BE OVERSEEING THOSE PEOPLE? WHAT ARE WE DOING TO PROTECT THOSE PEOPLE FROM THAT HAPPENING? ARE WE PUTTING OUT CONES, ARE WE PUTTING OUT BARRIERS WHILE THEY'RE WORKING? NONE OF THAT WAS ADDRESSED AT ALL.
I'M CONCERNED THAT ALTHOUGH THIS IS ALLOWED BY THE STATE TRANSPORTATION CODE, THAT IT DOESN'T ADDRESS WHAT OUR LIABILITIES ARE UNDER THAT CODE.
I CAN TELL YOU FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, HAVING SOMEBODY SIGN A WAIVER IS NOT WORTH THE PAPER IT'S WRITTEN ON.
YOU CAN STILL GET SUED AND YOU CAN STILL LOSE.
I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT ALL THAT.
>> I CAME BACK AND TOUCHED ON JUST ABOUT THREE CATEGORIES, AND LIABILITY WAS ONE OF THEM.
>> COMMISSIONER, I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
>> I SAID, I CAME BACK, AND THE LIABILITY OF THE LAWSUIT WAS ONE OF THEM DUE TO THE VOLUNTEERISM.
BASICALLY, WE WAS WANTING TO MAKE A VOLUNTEER THING.
>> THEY'RE VOLUNTEER, BUT THEY'RE STILL DOING THE BUSINESS OF THE COUNTY, AND IF THEY GET INJURED, THE COUNTY IS STILL LIABLE AND CAN BE SUED.
>> WHEN THE BURDEN IS PLACED ON LAW ENFORCEMENT, WHAT WOULD BE?
>> THEIR LAW ENFORCEMENT IS NOT GOING TO PICK UP THE SIGNS.
THE CONSTABLES DIDN'T RESPOND AT ALL, AND THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT SAYS THEY DON'T HAVE TIME.
>> BASICALLY WE WAS GOING TO TALK ALSO ABOUT THE VIRTUAL TRAINING.
THE VOLUNTEERS GO INTO TRAINING.
THESE WERE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT BACK TO YOU.
>> YES. I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE'S VIRTUAL TRAINING, BUT I ALSO ASKED WHO PUTS IT TOGETHER, WHAT DOES IT COST?
>> THE VOLUNTEERS PUT THEIR OWN TRAINING TOGETHER?
>> NO. WE WAS GOING TO HAVE A VOLUNTEER.
MAYBE WE COULD HAVE SOMEONE STEP UP AT THE VOLUNTEER TO DO THE TRAINING.
>> THEN DO WE CERTIFY THAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE VOLUNTEER, AND DO THEY SIGN AN AFFIDAVIT SAYING THEY'VE DONE THE PROGRAM?
[01:10:04]
>> ONE OF THE STEPS ALSO WAS, BASTROP GOT ONE THAT'S ADOPT A ROAD, WHERE THEY ADOPT A ROAD PROGRAM.
I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO TALK TO ONE OVER THAT TO GET SOME OF THE INFORMATION.
>> THAT'S A TXDOT PROGRAM, ADOPT A HIGHWAY. THAT'S TXDOT.
>> BASTROP, I REACHED OUT TO THE JUDGE OUT THERE AND HE HADN'T GOTTEN ANY INFORMATION.
THEY DO HAVE ADOPT A COUNTY ROAD.
PROGRAM. I DON'T KNOW HOW SUCCESSFUL IT IS.
HE HADN'T GOTTEN BACK WITH ME ON THAT ON THE INFORMATION ON THAT.
I KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT ON THAT DEAL.
EVEN ADOPTED HIGHWAYS THAT ARE 4H CLUBS, EVERYBODY'S STILL LIABLE.
WE'RE OUT THERE PICKING UP THE KIDS, PICKING UP TRASH LIKE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE ARE STILL LIABLE FOR THAT.
>> THAT'S THAT'S MY CONCERN IS IF THEY'RE ON COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY, THEY'RE PERFORMING A SANCTION FUNCTION WITHIN THAT RIGHT OF WAY THAT THIS BODY HAS APPROVED OR WHATNOT, WE ARE COMPLETELY LIABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS IF SOMETHING SHOULD OCCUR.
I THINK THAT GETS INTO SOME ISSUES RELATED TO COST FOR LIABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE THAT WE DON'T CURRENTLY DO, AS WELL AS OVERSIGHT.
THAT THAT WOULD BE MY NEXT KIND OF 1A,BB CONCERNS AT THAT POINT.
>> THERE'S OTHER AVENUES THAT WE CAN, IF WE WANT TO.
BESIDES THE VOLUNTEER PROGRAM.
I TALKED TO TXDOT WHAT THEY DO WITH THEIR SIGNS AND THE RIGHT OF WAYS.
OF COURSE, THEY HAVE A BIG FILE 13 WHERE MOST OF THEM GOES.
>> WE'RE REQUIRED BY THIS ORDINANCE TO HOLD THE SIGNS SOMEWHERE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.
>> I TALKED TO THEM FRIDAY, SHE WASN'T THERE AND SHE'S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO EMAIL ME ANYTHING UNTIL AFTER.
THEN I TALKED TO BRIAN, THE GUY THAT DEALS WITH IT.
HE SENT ME SOMETHING I'VE GOT OVER HERE SOMEWHERE, BUT A FORM THAT THEY USE TO, BUT IT'S AT SOMEBODY'S EXPENSE.
IT'S EITHER THIS IS WHAT HE DOES RIGHT OF WAYS.
IT'S EITHER WE ASK THE UNIT ROAD IF THEY'RE DRIVING AROUND.
THERE'S A PROCESS. I HAVE A FORM.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL, DEPENDING ON WHAT KIND OF SIGN IT IS THAT THEY CAN PICK UP, EITHER CALL THE NUMBER AND SAY, HEY, YOU'RE IN THERE.
IT'S ALL TIME SOMEBODY'S TIME AT THE COUNTY EXPENSE IF WE ASK THE UNIT ROAD TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT OR ENVIRONMENTAL.
LIKE YOU SAID, THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, THEY'VE GOT THEIR HANDS TIED.
WE COULD TRY TO GET THE CONSTABLES ON BOARD ON THIS, BUT IF WE GET THE UNIT ROAD OR THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND TAKE THE PEACE OFFICERS OUT OF IT, THEN WE'RE NOT LIABLE FOR THESE SIGNS.
I JUST DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION I WAS READING.
>> I'D BE WILLING TO EXPLORE MORE OF THOSE TYPE OF AVENUES AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO PAY FOR THEM IN THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE THAN I AM TO JUST VOLUNTEERS.
I DON'T MEAN TO BE DIFFICULT BUT, THERE IS SO MUCH LIABILITY ASSOCIATED WITH THAT ORDINANCE THAT I'M REAL UNCOMFORTABLE WITH IT.
>> WELL, THERE'S OTHER WAYS TO SKIN A CAT.
>> IF WE CAN FIND A DIFFERENT WAY TO SKIN THE CAT, THAT'D BE BETTER, AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS DURING BUDGET CYCLE IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET YEAR ANOTHER WAY TO DO IT THAT'S WITH EMPLOYEES THAT ARE TRAINED AND UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON.
I'D BE WAY MORE COMFORTABLE APPROACHING IT THAT WAY.
WE PROBABLY HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO PAY FOR IT, BUT IF WE PUT OUR MIND TO IT, I THINK WE CAN.
THEY'RE EVERYWHERE, BUT I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE VOLUNTEERISM PORTION OF THIS.
ALL MY ALARMS GO OFF, AND I'M AFRAID SOMEBODY'S GOING TO SAY, I READ IT, THEY'RE GOING TO SIGN THE AFFIDAVIT, AND THEN SOMETHING'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THEM AND WE'RE GOING TO GET SUED.
I'M JUST REALLY WORRIED ABOUT THAT IN THE LITIGIOUS SOCIETY THAT WE LIVE IN NOW.
I WOULD SAY LET'S EXPLORE SOME OF THE IDEAS COMMISSIONER HORN JUST PRESENTED IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET CYCLE AND FIGURE
[01:15:02]
OUT A WAY TO GET IT PAID FOR WITH THE RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE THAT DON'T EXPOSE US TO SO MUCH LIABILITY.>> I APPRECIATE IT. ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD, COMMISSIONERS?
>> THAT WAS DISCUSSION ONLY, SO WE WON'T BE VOTING ON IT.
WE'RE GOING TO THEN GO AHEAD AND GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
[J. EXECUTIVE SESSION]
I'M GOING TO READ THEM BOTH.EXECUTIVE SESSION J,1% TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.071, CONSULTATION WITH COUNCIL REGARDING PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION OR SETTLEMENT OFFICERS OFFERS INVOLVING NUMBER 210272 IN THE 421ST DISTRICT COURT AND ITEM J, 2% TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.071, CONSULTATION WITH COUNCIL REGARDING PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION OR SETTLEMENT OFFERS REGARDING A PORTION OF PALM STREET FRONTING PROPERTY OWNER BY MELVIN DOBBS.
WE ARE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 10:16.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.