Aug 11, 2026 Commissioners Court FY2027 Budget Workshop Agenda

[Commissioners Court FY2027 Budget Workshop on August 11, 2026.]

[00:00:08]

>> PARKER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT BUDGET AGENDA WORKSHOP ON THE TUESDAY, AUGUST 11TH, 2026.

LET THE RECORD SHOW IT IS 9:02. WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM 1.

AND ITEM A. FY2026-2027.

SORRY. BRIANNA.

>> GOOD MORNING. BEFORE WE DIVE INTO ALL THE EXPENDITURES AND ALL THE REQUESTS, I THINK IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO SEE AN OVERALL PICTURE OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET FROM BOTH THE REVENUE PERSPECTIVE AND THE EXPENDITURES.

SO WHAT I'M GOING TO GO OVER WITH YOU ALL -- AND I'VE PROVIDED A PACKET. JUDGE DEEN, WILL YOU PRESS THE... YEAH, OKAY.

SO, IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE, BUT SO OUR TAX RATE IS BROKEN INTO THREE PARTS. WE HAVE THE GENERAL FUND MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS. SO, AGAIN, THIS IS WHAT FUNDS ARE GENERAL FUND OVERALL OPERATING, AND WE HAVE OUR INTEREST AND SINKING, AND WHAT THAT PAYS FOR IS OUR VOTER-APPROVED DEBT SERVICE, AND THEN WE HAVE A SPECIAL LATERAL ROAD AND BRIDGE TAX. AND SO WHAT YOU CAN SEE IN THIS COLUMN B IS OUR CURRENT RATE, AND THEN THE PROPOSED RATE.

SO THE PROPOSED RATE THAT WAS USED IN THE BUDGET THAT WAS FILED IS THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE.

AND WHAT THAT THAT IS, IT'S THE RATE TO GENERATE THE SAME AMOUNT OF REVENUE AS THE YEAR BEFORE. WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW IS WHEN WE LOOK AT GENERAL FUND, THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN YOUR DEBT SERVICE AND YOUR MNO.

AND SO WHAT WE SAW A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO IS WE HAD DRAWN DOWN THE FIRST TRANCHE OF OUR TRANSPORTATION BOND AND SO WE WERE -- WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE FOR THE GENERAL FUND, IT WAS ACTUALLY NEGATIVE. AND WHAT HAPPENS THERE IS, AT THAT POINT, YOU'RE STILL GENERATING THE SAME AMOUNT OF REVENUE AS THE YEAR BEFORE, BUT YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL DEBT SERVICE THAT YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR. SO WE SAW A FLIP IN THOSE RATES.

AND SO WHAT YOU CAN SEE NOW ON THE PROPOSED RATE FOR THE GENERAL FUND, IT'S ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT EVE OF AN INCREASE, D THEN A BIT OF AN INCREASE FOR DECREASE AND SINKING.

SO WHAT YOU SEE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS SECTION OF THE TABLE, FOR FY26. OUR DEBT SERVICE WAS 16.7 MILLION AND THEN FOR FY27, IT WENT DOWN ABOUT 1.3 MILLION.

SO WE DIDN'T NEED AS MUCH, RIGHT? -- OF THAT NO NEW REVENUE RATE FOR THE TAX RATE TO PAY FOR THAT DEBT SERVICE, AND I'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT.

BUT WHAT DO THESE RATES MEAN? HOW DOES THAT EQUATE INTO REVENUE? AND SO, AGAIN, THIS COLUMN F HERE SHOWS, CURRENTLY, IN OUR BUDGET, WHAT THE REVENUES ARE FROM PROPERTY TAXES, AND THEN... LET ME PUT THIS UP.

AND THEN WHAT THE PROPOSED IS. SO, YOU COULD SEE ON THAT TOP ROW, I'VE PROJECTED IT AT A 98.75 COLLECTION RATE.

WE KNOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME UNCOLLECTIBLE TAXES.

IF WE LOOK HISTORICALLY OF WHAT OUR COLLECTION RATES ARE AND TALKING TO THE CHIEF APPRAISER, THAT SEEMS TO BE AN APPROPRIATE RATE, THE 98.75, AND IN THIS PROJECTION, IT DOES NOT INCLUDE DELINQUENT TAX, SO WE ACTUALLY BUDGET THAT IN A SEPARATE LINE.

THIS IS ONLY FOR NEW LEVY FOR NEXT YEAR.

SO YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENCE HERE.

WHOOP. AGAIN, AT THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE, AND THEN IT ALSO IS GOING TO INCLUDE THAT GENERATION FROM NEW CONSTRUCTION. SO, FOR THE GENERAL FUND, IT'S ABOUT A $4 MILLION INCREASE FROM THE PRIOR YEAR.

FOR DEBT SERVICE, IT'S A DECREASE OF A LITTLE OVER A MILLION, AND THEN FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE, AN INCREASE OF 381,000.

SO, IF WE GO BACK AND LOOK AT THIS FOR THE DEBT SERVICE.

AGAIN, OUR DEBT SERVICE FOR NEXT YEAR HAS DECREASED.

WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THE DETAIL OF THAT, BUT WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE A PRINCIPAL PAYMENT ON OUR UNLIMITED ROAD BOND 2024 SERIES. SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT LOWER.

[00:05:01]

>> ON THAT -- >> OH?

>> LATERAL ROAD AND BRIDGE, THE 381,000.

DID ALL THAT COME FROM PRECINCT 1?

PRECINCT 1? >> WE'LL GET TO THAT LATER IN THE BUDGET SERIES.

>> THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME.

OKAY. SO THE NEXT PAPER THAT YOU HAVE IS JUST A BREAKDOWN OF OUR DEBT AND THE DESCRIPTION OF IT.

SO YOU CAN SEE, AS I MENTIONED, ON THE UNLIMITED TAX ROAD BOND SERIES 2024, WE DON'T HAVE A PRINCIPAL PAYMENT THIS YEAR.

SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A REDUCTION.

AND SO THIS JUST DETAILS WHAT OUTSTANDING VOTER-APPROVED DEBT WE HAVE. AND THEN IF WE LOOK AT THE TABLE HERE, YOU CAN SEE, AGAIN, JUST WHERE OUR DEBT SERVICE WAS, WHERE IT IS FOR FISCAL YEAR '27 AND SO ON.

WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE ATE IN THIS IS WE STILL HAVE AN ISSUED $50 MILLION OF TRANSPORTATION BOND.

SO HOW THOSE MATURITIES ARE SCHEDULED, THAT WILL, IN FACT, IMPACT OUR DEBT SERVICE RATE. OKAY.

SO NOW WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO GOO MORE IN DEPTH ON THE PROPERTY TAX PROJECTION. YOU ALL DON'T HAVE THIS PAPER, BUT I ALWAYS LIKE TO DO -- SO, IN YOUR HANDOUT, I'VE PROVIDED YOU THE CERTIFIED TAX ROLL. AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CERTIFIED TAX ROLL, WHAT IT IS IS IT'S NOW VALUE/OLD RATES.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE NEW TAXES ON THE CERTIFIED TOTALS, IT CAN BE A LITTLE BIT MISLEADING, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE EXPECTED TO COLLECT. AGAIN, IT'S THE OLD RATE, NEW TAXABLE VALUE. BEFORE I ALWAYS LIKE TO DO TO START OFF IS SEE IS MY SCHEDULE CALCULATING APPROPRIATELY? SO WHAT I DO IS I USE THE CERTIFIED VALUE TO CALCULATE -- TO UPDATE MY SPREADSHEET AND CALCULATE -- TRYING TO GET BACK TO THAT SAME TAX THAT IT SAYS ON THE CERTIFIED ROLL.

SO, HERE, AGAIN, YOU COULD SEE NEW VALUE, OLD TAX RATE FOR CALCULATION AND FOR CHECK ONLY. SO ON ABOUT 71 MILLION OF REVENUE, I CALCULATED IT TO THE CERTIFIED TAX ROLL WITHIN $15,000. AND THEN IF WE LOOK HERE ON ROAD AND BRIDGE, I'VE CALCULATED IT WITHIN $41.

SO I FILL WHAT I HAVE IN THERE ININ MY SPREADSHEET IS CALCULATG

EVERYTHING CORRECTLY. >> AS ALWAYS, THAT'S IMPRESSIVE.

>> THANK YOU. I ALWAYS WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M GIVING YOU GUYS, YOU KNOW, ACCURATE INFORMATION FOR YOUR DECISION-MAKING, SO...

>> ABOUT 2.5%. >> YEAH.

SO, THIS IS ABOUT -- YOU ALL HAVE THIS DETAILED CALC HERE.

SO WHAT THIS IS IS JUST TAKING THOSE CERTIFIED VALUES, PUTTING IN THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE AND THEN SEEING WHAT REVENUE GENERATION THAT WE HAVE. AND THEN, AGAIN, AT THAT 98.75 COLLECTION RATE. ONE THING -- AND YOU NOTICE IT IF WE LOOK AT HISTORICALLY KIND OF WHEN WE'RE AT THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE AND HOW OUR RATE HAS CHANGED.

THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE DID NOT DECREASE AS MUCH AS WHAT WE NORMALLY SEE IN PRIOR YEARS, AND SO I DID NOTICE -- SO OUR TAX RATE CALCULATION IS NOW -- I THINK IT'S 82 LINES.

AND SO THERE'S LOTS OF ADJUSTMENTS ON THERE.

AND ONE ADJUSTMENT WHEN YOU'RE CALCULATING THAT NO NEW REFUSE NEW REVENUERATE IS LOST VALUE O. YOU'RE NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT NEW CONSTRUCTION. YOU'RE LOOKING AT THOSE PROPERTIES THAT WERE ON THE ROLL THE YEAR BEFORE.

WHAT THOSE VALUES ARE, AND THEN COMING ONE THE CALCULATION.

SO THERE -- WHEN I COMPARED IT TO PRIOR YEARS, THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT, I WOULD SAY, INCREASE ON LOST VALUE.

SO I'D ASK THE CHIEF APPRAISER, WHAT IS THIS? YOU KNOW... AND SO, OBVIOUSLY IF YOU HAVE PEOPLE FILING IN HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, THAT MAYBE DIDN'T HAVE IT ON, THAT CAN IMPACT IT.

[00:10:03]

SO WHAT THAT DID IS IT INCREASED THE EXEMPTION FOR TANGIBLE BUSINESS AND ALL PROPERTIES FROM 2500 TO 125,000, WHICH IS SIGNIFICANT. SO JUST KIND OF AN ESTIMATE.

PCAD HAD SAID IT WENT FROM ABOUT 4,000 ACCOUNTS THAT WERE BEING TAXED TO ABOUT 700. SO YOU HAD A LOT ON THE ROLL THAT ARE ACTUALLY NOT TAXABLE ANYMORE BECAUSE OF THAT INCREASE. SO AS WE SEE, YOU KNOW, INCREASE IN HOME EXEMPTIONS FROM SCHOOL TAXES AND DIFFERENT THINGS IN THE PAST -- RIGHT? -- FOR YOUR REAL PERSONAL PROPERTY, THIS WAS HITTING MORE THE BUSINESS SIDE, ON THE BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY. -- BUSINESS PROPERTY.

>> WHAT WAS THE THRESHOLD CHANGE? IT WAS WHAT? AND IT WENT TO WHAT?

>> IT WAS 2500 AND THEN IT INCREASED TO 125,000.

>> WOW. >> I JUST THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, WHEN I'M REVIEWING IT -- SO, AGAIN, WE'VE -- THE COURT HAS DESIGNATED THE CHIEF APPRAISER AS THE DOE, WHICH IS THE DESIGNATED OFFICE EMPLOYEE, TO CALCULATE THE TAX RATE, AND THEN I REVIEW IT BASED ON ALL THE FEEDBACK THAT'S GIVEN, AND WHEN I REVIEW IT, I ALWAYS HAVE THE PRIOR YEAR IN FRONT OF ME REVIEWING IT, SO I DID SEE A BIG SWING IN THAT.

SO FOLLOWING UP WITH HIM, THAT'S PART OF THAT SHIFT.

>> -- A LOSS IN VALUE THAT COMPANIES HAD?

>> RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW FOR THAT SPECIFIC PIECE, BUT ON THE CALC, I WANTED TO SAY IT'S 268 MILLION WAS LOST

VALUE. >> YEAH.

>> SO I DID -- ONCE I, YOU KNOW, CALCULATED THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE, SOMETIMES WE EXPECT IT TO GO A LITTLE BIT LOWER, SO PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE LOST VOLUME ON THE ROLL.

>> I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT TO PEOPLE, THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S WITHIN OUR CONTROL. WE LOST VALUE BECAUSE OF A BILL IN THE LEGISLATURE THAT LOWER THE APPRAISED VALUE OF PROPERTIES --

>> YES. >> IT'S NOT THAT IT'S GOOD OR BAD. IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT'S WORTH NOTING. THAT WE LOST ACTUAL VALUE TO THE

COUNTY. >> AGAIN, ON THE PERSONAL SIDE WITH -- ON THE SCHOOL -- RIGHT? -- THAT EXEMPTION FOR PROPERTY TAX RELIEF FOR INDIVIDUALS. THIS WAS TARGETING BUSINESSES.

YEAH. OR THE BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY. IT DIDN'T IMPACT ANY REAL PROPERTY. JUST THE BUSINESS PERSONAL

PROPERTY. >> NOT TO SAY WHETHER IT'S GOOD OR BAD. I'M JUST SAYING THAT IT'S WORTH NOTING. PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW.

>> YES. >> THAT THOSE THINGS HAPPEN OUT OF OUR CONTROL, WHICH AFFECTS OUR TAX REVENUE.

>> CORRECT. AND SO, AGAIN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT PRIOR YEAR AND CURRENT YEAR, NO NEW REVENUE -- IT IS THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE. IT JUST DIDN'T DECREASE AS MUCH BECAUSE OF THAT LOST VALUE. AND AGAIN, YOU'RE TRYING TO GENERATE THE SAME AMOUNT OF TAXES AS THE YEAR BEFORE, BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF LOST VALUE ON THAT.

SO, LET'S SEE... LET ME -- NEXT TIME I MAY PUT THIS IN A DIFFERENT FORMAT SO YOU COULD SEE IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER. SO, THE TOTAL PROJECTED FROM NEW CONSTRUCTION IS ABOUT 2.8 MILLION.

IF WE LOOK AT THAT INCREASE IN PERCENTAGE FROM TOTAL REVENUE BUDGETED FROM THE YEAR BEFORE, AGAIN AT THE ESTIMATED 98.75 COLLECTION RATE, IT'S ABOUT 3.7. AND THEN THE PERCENT OF THAT NEW REVENUE, 92 -- 92% OF THAT IS FROM NEW CONSTRUCTION.

SO, YOU CAN SEE HERE THE BREAKDOWN FOR EACH OF THE PIECES OF THE TAX RATE, HOW THAT BREAKS OUT.

AND THEN WHAT THAT INCREASE LOOKS LIKE.

AGAIN, THOSE ARE THE NUMBERS WE SAW.

AN INCREASE FOR GENERAL FUND. A DECREASE IN DEBT SERVICE.

AGAIN, THAT'S STILL AT THAT NO NEW REVENUE RATE, BUT WE'RE JUST SWITCHING BETWEEN THE TWO FOR WHAT WE NEEDED FOR DEBT, AND THEN A LITTLE INCREASE FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE.

OKAY. ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS ON PROPERTY TAX REVENUE OR ANYTHING WITH THE RATE?

>> SO, THE -- THE ECONOMIC REVENUE RATE, ROAD AND BRIDGE

TAX RATE IS 4.9? >> YES.

YES. AND SO WE WILL -- WE'LL LOOK AT A LITTLE BIT -- NOT TODAY, BUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE ROAD AND BRIDGE ALLOCATION, I'LL PROVIDE YOU WITH THE REST OF THE

[00:15:01]

AND SO WE'LL GO THROUGH THAT IN DETAIL.

SO, AGAIN, THE MOST SIGNIFICANT PORTION, OF COURSE, IS PROPERTY TAXES, BUT I'VE PROVIDED YOU ALL JUST A SUMMARY, AND THIS SUMMARY IS HOW WE -- IT SHOULD LOOK FAMILIAR FROM YOUR CAPTIONS THAT WE -- I KNOW THAT'S HARD TO SEE FOR EVERYONE ELSE.

I'M SORRY. -- IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

SO, AGAIN, WE TALKED ABOUT PROPERTY TAX REVENUE.

AGAIN, I HAD MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT IT, THAT INCREASE OF THE 4 MILLION BEING IN OUR CURRENT, AND THEN IF WE LOOK AT, AS I MENTIONED, DELINQUENT TAXES, AN INCREASE OF 75,000, BUT THE PROPOSED IS 550,000.

AGAIN, THAT'S JUST DELINQUENT COLLECTION, SO IT'S GOING TO INCLUDE, YOU KNOW, INTEREST PENALTIES, ALL THAT SORT OF STUFF. SO WHAT WE DO FOR ALL OF THE -- WHEN WE'RE PROJECTING THE REVENUE IS WE LOOK AT THE THREE TO FIVE-YEAR AVERAGE. SEE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

COMPARE IT TO WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW.

AND THEN GIVE A BEST ESTIMATE OF WHAT WE EXPECT TO SEE.

WE ALWAYS LIKE TO BE CONSERVATIVE.

YOU KNOW. WE WOULD RATHER SEE A POSITIVE VARIANCE THAN, YOU KNOW, SEE SOMETHING WHERE WE HAVE LOTS OF SHORTFALL WHEN IT COMES TO REVENUE THAT'S GOING TO COVER ALL OF THE COUNTY'S EXPENDITURES.

>> THAT SAYS WE'RE PROJECTING 18.9?

>> OH, I'M SORRY. I'M LOOKING AT IT BACKWARDS.

THAT SAYS WE'RE PROJECTING 21.15?

ON SALES TAX? >> YES, THAT IS.

SO WE'LL GO TO THIS NEXT PART. SALES TAX.

SO, IT LOOKED AT -- WE LOOKED AT WHAT WE'VE COLLECTED SO FAR FOR FISCAL YEAR '26. TAKING THE AVERAGE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR AND THEN PROJECTING OUT THE REST OF THE -- THE REST OF THE FISCAL YEAR. AND SO PROJECTED ENDING COLLECTIONS FOR FY26 IS ABOUT 19.9 MILLION.

THEN I LOOK AT WHAT IS -- WHAT IS THE AVERAGE INCREASE YEAR-OVER-YEAR OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN SALES TAX? AND SO THE AVERAGE WAS 6%. AND SO TAKING WHAT WE PROJECTED FOR ENDING AND THEN APPLYING A 6% INCREASE, WHICH GIVES US -- THAT'S THE 21.1 MILLION. IF WE LOOK AT IT, AS I MENTIONED, IT'S 6%, BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S ACTUALLY AN INCREASE OF 12%. AND THAT'S BECAUSE, LOOKING AT BUDGET VERSUS ACTUAL. SO WE WANTED TO ENSURE, YOU KNOW, IN THE PAST, WE'VE ALWAYS HAD -- WHICH IS A GOOD THING -- POSITIVE VARIANCE THERE, BUT IT IS A LARGE VARIANCE, AND SO REALLY TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, PROJECTING THAT MORE ACCURATELY. AND SO THAT'S WHERE THE SALES TAX REVENUE AMOUNT IS COMING FROM.

SO -- AND IN YOUR PACKETS, YOU HAVE THE SUMMARY THAT I'M GOING OVER, AND THEN I'M EXPANDING IT, YOU CAN SEE THE DETAIL.

SO THE PAGES THAT YOU HAVE HAS THAT DETAIL AS WELL.

SO, UNDER INTERGOVERNMENTAL: SO WE HAVE A USDA LEASE, AND AS I GO THROUGH THIS, I WON'T GO THROUGH EVERY SINGLE LINE, BUT IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE ASK.

SO IF YOU RECALL COG, WE USED TO GET A REIMBURSEMENT FOR 911 ADDRESSING, OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, THEY'VE DECREASED IT, SO NOW WE DON'T EXPECT ANYTHING. IN THE LAST AGREEMENT WE HAD, LAST YEAR, IT WAS CUT IN HALF FROM WHAT WE USED TO GET.

AND SO THIS WILL BE THE FIRST YEAR THAT IT'LL BE COMPLETELY PHASED OUT. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING BUDGETED THERE. FEES OF OFFICE: SO, AGAIN, THESE ARE ALL OF OUR FEE COLLECTING OFFICES.

MOST -- ALL OF THIS -- ARE YOU LOOKING FOR THE...? OKAY. -- IS FROM COURT FEES.

ALL THOSE TYPES OF COLLECTIONS. I MEAN, DISTRICT CLERK, OF COURSE. COURT FEES AS WELL.

AND ONE OF THESE -- PASSPORTS. SO, AGAIN, JUST LOOKING AT AVERAGES, WHERE THE COLLECTIONS ARE NOW, AND THEN, OF COURSE, WE ALWAYS TRY TO KEEP IN MIND IF WE HAVE ANY SORT OF CHANGES, IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES TO, YOU KNOW, PORT FEES OR A FEE THAT WE'RE CHARGING, TRY TO KEEP THAT IN MIND GOING INTO THE NEXT YEAR. AND SO ONE THAT YOU CAN SEE WHERE WE HAVE A LARGE DECREASE IS IN THE ELECTIONS FEES OF OFFICE. AND SO IN THE EVEN YEARS DURING THE PRIMARIES, WE ACTUALLY GET MONEY FROM THE STATE, FROM BOTH

[00:20:01]

SO THAT'S WHY YOU'LL SEE A SHIFT EVERY OTHER YEAR IN THE ELECTION FEES OF OFFICE, AND THAT'S WHAT THAT'S RELATED TO.

NO OTHER SIGNIFICANT, I WOULD SAY, CHANGES FOR JUST YOUR FEES OF OFFICE. INTEREST: WE KEPT THAT AT THE 3 MILLION. THAT HAS, YOU KNOW -- AS YOU'VE SEEN, HAS BECOME A GREAT REVENUE STREAM.

OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, WE -- EVEN JUST HOW BECKY HAS HER LADDER.

WE OF COURSE EXPECT TO JOINT A LOT OF INTEREST.

BUT AS WE'RE SPENDING THE FUNDS AND ALL THAT SORT OF THING, OBVIOUSLY THE INTEREST GOES DOWN.

SOMETIMES IT'S ALSO DIFFICULT WITH THE GENERAL FUND AND BEING CONSERVATIVE THERE. SO GENERAL FUND, OF COURSE, RECEIVES AN INTEREST ALLOCATION, AND THEN ALL OF OUR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS, IF IT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY REQUIRED BY STATUTE THAT THAT FUND KEEPS THEIR INTEREST, THEN, AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, WE DO A TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL FUND.

SO, LIKE YOUR FORFEITURE FUNDS. INSURANCE ESCROW.

THERE'S A COUPLE OF THE CLERKS FUNDS.

BY STATUTE, THEY RETAIN THEIR INTEREST.

SO, OF COURSE, THEY KEEP IT. ANYTHING ELSE, WHICH IS A LOT OF YOUR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS FOR, YOU KNOW, COURT COLLECTIONS, WE -- WE ALLOCATE THE INTEREST AND THEN MOVE IT TO THE GENERAL FUND. ON THE ROYALTIES: WE STILL RECEIVE SOME OIL AND GAS REVENUE.

AGAIN, IT KIND OF FLUCTUATES FROM YEAR-TO-YEAR.

SO JUST KIND OF LOOKING AT WHAT WE'VE RECEIVED, WHAT WE'VE RECEIVED SO FAR THIS FISCAL YEAR.

THAT'S WHERE THAT PROJECTION IS COMING FROM.

IN OUR MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE: SO INSURANCE SETTLEMENTS.

OF COURSE, WE DO NOT BUDGET THAT.

IF WE HAVE AN EVENT WHERE WE RECEIVE INSURANCE PROCEEDS, THAT ALLOWS US TO THEN CERTIFY THAT REVENUE AND THEN USE THOSE FUNDS TO, YOU KNOW, FIX WHATEVER MAY HAVE -- IF WE HAD, YOU KNOW, A BUILDING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THEN WE HAVE THOSE FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR THAT INSURANCE EVENT.

SO WE DO NOT BUDGET THAT. ONE SIGNIFICANT DECREASE THAT I WANTED TO CALL TO YOUR ATTENTION IS THE GEL TELEPHONE REVENUE.

IF YOU RECALL EARLIER THIS YEAR, THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE CAME AND WO THAT CONTRACT FOR THE TABLETS AND THE MESSAGING FOR US TO RECEIVE A PORTION OF THE REVENUE FOR THAT.

BUT YOU SEE IT'S A LARGE DECREASE, AND SO WHAT THAT IS IS FCC PASSED RATE CAPS ON WHAT YOU CAN CHARGE INMAY WA INMATES FORE OF A TELEPHONE AND THEN REMOVED THE REVENUE SHARE PORTION FROM THE JAILS. SO INITIALLY THAT WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO GO INTO EFFECT UNTIL APRIL 1ST OF 2027.

HOWEVER, ART WE STARTED THE FISCAL YEAR, THEY ISSUED AN UPDATE TO THAT EXECUTIVE ORDER, SAYING THAT THAT WAS GOING TO TAKE EFFECT APRIL 1ST OF THIS YEAR.

SO WE WILL BE SHORT IN THAT LINE THIS YEAR.

I THINK LOOK -- LOOKING AT OUR SALES TAX AND INTEREST, WE'LL BE FINE TO MAKE THAT ONE UP, BUT I DID WANT TO CALL THAT TO YOUR ATTENTION. WE LOOKED AT WHAT WE'VE RECEIVED SO FAR ON THE TABLETS AND MESSAGING, AND SPEAKING TO MARK GARNET, WHAT WOULD BE A CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE TO BUDGET THERE. SO WE HAVE IT AT 30,000.

WE MAY GET MORE. WE CAN LOOK AT THAT NUMBER AS WE GO THROUGH THIS CLOSER TO ADOPTION, IF WITH WE NEED TO WET

THAT AT ALL. >> SO, THAT WAS LEGISLATION THAT

CHANGED ON THAT REVENUE? >> YES.

>> AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, I GUESS?

>> YES. AND SO HOW THEY CAME ONE THE RATE CAPS, TOO, IT LOOKED AT POPULATION SIZE OF THE JAIL, AND WHERE WE FIT IN THE TIER, AND THEN WHAT THEY CAN CHARGE ON THAT.

SO WE WILL BE BRINGING A CONTRACT AMENDMENT JUST TO KIND OF CLEAN ALL THAT UP, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, CURRENTLY, OUR CONTRACT SAYS THAT WE SHARE REVENUE, BUT, OF COURSE, NOW BECAUSE OF THIS FCC ORDER, THAT CHANGES THAT, SO...

>> I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER: DID THE COUNTY PURCHASE THOSE IPADS, OR IS THAT PART OF THE JAIL CONTRACT?

>> IT'S PART OF THE CONTRACT, THAT THEY PROVIDE ALL OF THE EQUIPMENT AND THE SERVICE FOR THAT.

AND THEN WE RECEIVE -- IS IT 20% ON THE TABLETS?

>> SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> I THINK SO.

[00:25:03]

>> WELL, YOU JUST MAYBE MAKE THOSE DECISIONS AND WHAT IT COSTS US TO HAVE THOSE OR PROVIDE 'EM OR WHAT WE HAVE TO PROVIDE. THINGS LIKE THAT?

I DON'T KNOW. >> SO, WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE TABLETS, BUT WE ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SOME KIND OF

PHONE SYSTEM. >> OKAY.

>> AND IN ORDER FOR US TO -- A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY TO HIRE A COMPANY TO BASICALLY INSTALL THAT.

>> YES. >> AND SO WE'RE CAPPED AT 10¢ A MINUTE BY THE FEDERAL RULE. SO THE COMPANY BASICALLY USES THAT AMOUNT TO RECOVER THEIR COST.

WHEN I TALKED TO THEM, THEY SAID THEY ARE -- IT HAS REDUCED THEIR

REVENUE. >> MM-HMM.

>> BUT IT'S NOT TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY NEED TO COME TO US FOR MONEY. SO THEY CAN STILL MAINTAIN OUR SYSTEM BASED ON WHAT THEY'RE RECEIVING.

>> THEY'RE ABLE TO STILL MAKE ENOUGH MONEY OFF THE BILL TO

PROVIDE THE IPADS OR WHATEVER. >> YES, SIR.

AND THEN THE CONTRACT SAYS THEY PROVIDE THE IPADS.

THEY PROVIDE THE SOFTWARE, THE INTEGRATION, AND THEY PAY FOR ANY BREAKAGE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK. I THOUGHT THERE WAS MORE HERE SO... I JUST DIDN'T SCROLL UP.

I'M MISSING SOME STUFF. OKAY.

SO, GOING BACK TO -- IN THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL SECTION: AGAIN, JUST KIND OF LOOKING AT WHERE WE HAVE SOME INCREASES OR DECREASES, SIGNIFICANT. SO I WORKED WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE ON SOME OF THESE INTERGOVERNMENTAL CONTRACTS.

SO OUR DISPATCH, PATROL. SO YOU CAN SEE OUR DISPATCH HAS INCREASED. AND SO PART OF THAT IS, 1, JUST -- SOME OF THEM HAVE ALREADY COME BEFORE YOU.

THEY'LL ALL GET APPROVED, BUT WHAT I DID IS I ADJUSTED TO WHERE THEY SHOULD BE FOR THIS NEXT COMING YEAR.

AND SO THIS WILL BE THE FIRST YEAR THAT, MARK, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT ALEDO WILL BE DOING THE DISPATCH.

YES. BECAUSE WE CAME IN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE YEAR TO DO THAT, SO THAT'S WHY YOU SEE THE INCREASE THERE ON DISPATCH SERVICES. AND THEN HERE ON THE PATROL REVENUE, WHERE YOU SEE A DECREASE THERE, IS -- AGAIN THAT CAME BEFORE YOU ALL BECAUSE ALEDO STARTED THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND SO EVERY OTHER YEAR, WE WOULD GET A REIMBURSEMENT FOR A CAR AND THEN IT WAS TWO FULL-TIME DEPUTIES?

>> ORIGINALLY IT WAS THREE. NOW TWO.

>> THAT'S WHY YOU SEE THE DECREASE THERE.

SO BUDGETING WHETHER THAT COMPLETELY GETS PHASED OUT DURING FY 27. WE JUST TRY TO THINK HOW LONG THAT WILL BE AND WHILE WE PROVIDE THE SERVICE, SO THAT'S WHY YOU SEE THE DECREASE THERE. THE FRO CONTRACT, SAME THING.

WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE: THOSE INCREMENTAL INCREASES TO COVER THOSE INCREASES IN DEPUTY COSTS.

A DECREASE JUST ON THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE OVERTIME REIMBURSEMENT.

SO WHEN THEY PERFORM TASKS WORK FOR DEA OR U.S. MARSHAL OR THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. THOSE HAVE DECREASED.

SO AGAIN, JUST WORKING WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A DECREASE. ON THE AUTO CRIMES TASK FORCE...

WE'RE WAITING ONER RENT COUNTY TO SEND US THAT CONTRACT, SO THAT WAS USED FOR PURPOSES OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS WHAT WE RECEIVED, WHAT OUR APPROVAL WAS FOR LAST YEAR.

SO WE WILL UPDATE THAT ONCE WE GET NEW AMOUNTS FROM TERRENT COUNTY. A COUPLE OF TH THESE INDIDEPENDT DEFENSE GRANTS. JUST LOOKING AT WHAT WEE WHAT WD

LAST YEAR. >> YOU'RE STILL WAITING ON '26?

>> WE USED TO GET THE APPROVAL AND THE QUARTERLY PAYMENTS, AND THE LAST COUPLE YEARS, FOR SOME REASON, WE DON'T GET IT UNTIL A LOT LATER AND THEN ACTUALLY GET OUR PAYMENT UNTIL, LIKE, AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER. SO I HAD REACHED OUT.

AND SO I BELIEVE THEY SAID THAT WE SHOULD GET AT LEAST OUR

LETTER IN AUGUST. >> WOW.

>> THIS MONTH, SO... AND THAT'S REALLY JUST KIND OF FROM SIGNIFICANT CHANGES. SO, OVERALL, HERE, IT LOOKS LIKE A 10% DECREASE IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOTAL REVENUE.

OF COURSE, THAT INCLUDES FUND BALANCE, SO I DON'T LIKE TO LOOK AT THAT NUMBER. SO I THINK A MORE MEANINGFUL NUMBER IS WHAT IS OUR TRUE REVENUE WITHOUT FUND BALANCE.

FROM PROPERTY TAX, SALES TAX, EVERYTHING THAT WE WENT THROUGH,

[00:30:02]

SO I KNOW THAT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION, BUT, OF COURSE, WE, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT ALL THE OF THE EXPENDITURES, BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHERE OUR SOURCES OF REVENUE COME FROM, SO... ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. WELL, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO BIANCA TO GO OVER THE PROPOSED BUDGET EXPENDITURES, WHAT WAS INCLUDED, AND THEN A SUMMARY OF WHERE THE REQUESTS ARE AT.

>> THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME.

>> AND, BRIANNA, I DIDN'T HAVE THAT PACKET.

OR THAT SHEET. IF YOU HAVE AN EXTRA, W COULD YU

GIVE IT TO ME? >> THE DETAIL?

OH. >> I DON'T KNOW WHY.

>> SORRY. I THINK I MIGHT DO A POWER POINT NEXT TIME OR SOMETHING, SO THAT EVERYONE ELSE CAN SEE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN MAKE ANY OF THOSE FIGURES OUT.

>> GOOD MORNING. >> GOOD MORNING.

>> JUST WANTED TO SAY THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS FILED YESTERDAY, AND IT IS POSTED ON OUR TRANSPARENCY SITE.

AND THE TAX RATE WORK SHEETS ARE ALSO ATTACHED AT THE BOTTOM.

SO YOU HAVE YOUR BUDGET COVER, THE REPORT, THE BUDGET, AND THEN THE TAX RATE WORKSHEETS. IT IS POSTED ON THE TRANSPARENCY SITE, ON THE PARKER COUNTY WEBSITE.

AND ALL THE DETAILS. THE AMOUNT, THE PROPOSED BUDGET, WAS FOR THE OPERATING, AND IT'S THE SAME AMOUNT THAT WE -- THAT I SAID YESTERDAY, WHICH IS THE 90 MILLION, 261,878.

THAT DOES INCLUDE A CONTINGENCY. THAT'S -- IT'S IN CONTINGENCY.

SO WITH THE PROPOSED OR REQUESTED FUND EXPENDITURES, IT'S ALSO AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT SHEET, WHERE BRIANNA WAS GOING OVER. FOR CAP, NON-CAP AND I.T. ITEMS. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. 432,841.

SALARY AND BENEFIT REQUESTS. AND THE NEW EMPLOYEE CAP/NON-CAP IS 22,000, 880. SO THE SALARY AND BENEFITS DOES NOT INCLUDE ACOLA. THAT IS JUST THE BASE, WHAT IS REQUESTED FROM THE DEPARTMENTS. SAME THING.

AND THE NEW EMPLOYEE CAP/NON-CAP QUESTION DOES INCLUDE SOME OPERATING COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE REQUESTS THAT KIM'S FILE MAY NOT HAVE. THE TOTAL REQUEST COMES OUT TO ABOUT 5 MILLION, 438,$023, AND THAT GOES INTO THE PROJECTED USE AND FUND BALANCE WOULD BE 1.7 MILLION.

SO, TODAY, WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER MAINLY THE FUND 10 AND SALARIES. SALARY REQUESTS.

SO THE TEXAS COUNTY & DISTRICT RETIREMENT.

ACTIVE EMPLOYEE AND INSURANCE RATES.

LONGEVITY, AND SALARIES AND BENEFITS FOR ALL.

JUST AN OVERALL SUMMARY. ANY QUESTIONS? I'LL TURN IT OVER TO BECKY. THANK YOU.

>> Y'ALL READY? >> NOPE.

SO LET'S TALK ABOUT FCDRS. THIS IS THE EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT, OBVIOUSLY, THAT WE LOVE TO TALK ABOUT SO MUCH.

I KNOW A QUESTION THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT WILL ALWAYS GET IS TALKING ABOUT RETIRE ECOLA RAISES.

I KIND OF SUMMARIZED EVERYTHING FOR YOU TO SHOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A 1, A 2, A 3% FLAT RATE TO RETIREES.

[00:35:05]

IT'S 3% BASED ON WHAT A RETIREE ALREADY GETS.

THAT'S WHETHER IF THEY RETIRED LAST YEAR OR WHETHER THEY RETIRED BACK IN THE '80S. SO OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF THAT'S GOING TO HAVE VERY LITTLE IMPACT TO A RETIREE FROM A LONG TIME AGO, GO BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT THS VERY EXPENSIVE TO DO SO.

NOW, THESE ARE LUMP SUM PAYMENTS TO COVER THESE RAISES, IF THE COURT WAS TO APPROVE THAT. SO UP TO CLOSE TO $2.5 MILLION TO A 3% RATE. AND THAT IS MONEY THAT WE WOULD JUST CUT A CHECK FOR AND SEND DIRECTLY TO TCDRS.

THE OTHER WAY THAT YOU CAN DO IT, AND I DIDN'T PROJECT IT.

I CAN GO BACK AND DO THAT IF YOU WANT ME TOO.

WE CAN ALSO BUILD IT INTO OUR REQUIRED RATE THAT WE PAY.

IT TAKES 15 YEARS TO PAY THAT OFF.

SO, THEY BUILD THAT IN TO OUR REQUIRED RATE EVERY YEAR, SO THAT'S WHY, TYPICALLY, I DON'T SUGGEST DOING THAT, BUT IT IS AN OPTION IF THE COURT WANTED TO GO DOWN THAT ROAD.

>> JUST FOR REFERENCE: AREN'T WE STILL PAYING OFF

SOME? >> NO, WE ACTUALLY HAVE PAID THEM OFF. WE HAVE PAID THEM OFF.

THE LAST ONE WAS 2009. SO WE HAVE ACTUALLY PAID THEM ALL OFF, BECAUSE THEY WERE DONE KIND OF LIKE -- IT'S LIKE PEELING BACK AN ONION. THEY WERE DONE SEVERAL YEARS IN A ROW, SO YOU HAD SEVERAL YEARS OF FINANCING, JUST ONE YEAR ON TOP OF THE OTHER, BUT THEY HAVE ALL BEEN PAID OFF.

THE OTHER WAY THAT YOU CAN DO A RETIREE RAISE IS THROUGH A CPI, TO TRY TO BRING IT UP TO THAT CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.

BRING THEIR DOLLARS BACK TO WHAT IT IS TODAY, SO I DID PROJECT A 10, A 50 AND A 100% CPI. AGAIN, ANYWHERE FROM 1.8 MILLION TO $20 MILLION. AGAIN, THERE ARE OTHERS -- THERE'S ALL KINDS OF ESTIMATES THAT I CAN RUN FOR YOU.

I JUST GAVE Y'ALL A FEW OPTIONS. IF ANYONE WANTS ME TO TAKE A DEEPER DIVE OR RUN SOME DIFFERENT SCENARIOS, I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT. AND I DID BRING BACKUP FOR TCDRS SO EVERYONE CAN SEE I DIDN'T JUST MAKE THESE NUMBERS UP,

WHERE THEY ACTUALLY COME FROM. >> THANK YOU.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME. NOW, THE OTHER PORTION OF TCDRS IS OUR REQUIRED RATE THAT WE ARE TO PAY TO -- TO PAY FOR OUR CURRENT -- FOR OUR EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT.

THE COURT HAS BEEN VERY GENEROUS IN THE LAST YEARS OF PAYING AN ELECTED RATE. SO WE'VE BEEN PAYING MORE THAN WE'VE BEEN REQUIRED TO PAY IN, TRYING TO HELP OUR FUNDING RATIO GET CLOSER TO 100%, BECAUSE ONCE WE CAN GET TO 100% OR ABOVE, WE CAN START PROVIDING RETIREE ECOLAS WHERE IT DOESN'T REQUIRE A LUMP SUM PAYMENT. SO THAT'S THE REQUIREMENT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET TO. IN NOVEMBER, WE GO BACK AND WE DO AN AUDIT OF THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR, AND WITH FUND 10, ANY FUNDS THAT ARE STILL AVAILABLE IN THOSE RETIREE BUDGET LINES, THEN WE BRING IT TO COURT, GIVE YOU ALL A REPORT, AND YOU ALL HAVE BEEN APPROVING THAT LUMP SUM PAYMENT TO GO TO TCDRS. AND ON, AGAIN, WE ONLY TAKE IT M FUND 10. WE CURRENTLY PAY 13.39 WITH A LIFE RATE OF .23. SO, THE ONLY REQUIRED CHANGE THAT'S AN INCREASE IS THE LIFE RATE IS GOING FROM .23 TO .24.

WE DO NOT HAVE AN OPTION IN THAT.

WE HAVE TO PAY. WE CAN'T OVERPAY THAT.

WE CAN'T UNDERPAY THAT. .24 IS THE LIFE RATE.

SO IF WE WERE TO STAY AT CURRENT RATE, 13.39 FOR THE RATE, .24 FOR A TOTAL RATE OF 13.63. IT'S IN THE HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS THAT IT AFFECTS THE GENERAL FUND.

SO I DIDN'T EVEN PUT THOSE NUMBERS IN HERE, BECAUSE IT IS SO MINIMAL. WHAT I DID WANT TO POINT OUT, THOUGH, IS BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN DOING THAT OVER THE YEARS, WE HAVE BUILT SOME CUSHION IN OUR TCDRS RATE.

SO THE TOP, WHERE IT SAYS "REQUIRED," 11.92.

THAT IS WHAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO PAY IN.

WITH THE .24 FOR THE LIFE RATE, FOR A TOTAL OF 12.16.

I DID ALSO PROJECT A SECOND OPTION OF GOING TO 12.5.

IT'S STILL OVERFUNDING, BUT NOT AS MUCH, OF -- WITH THE LIFE RATE OF .24 FOR A TOTAL RATE OF 12.74.

BUT WHAT I WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION: THE FUNDING RATIO DOESN'T CHANGE.

[00:40:01]

SO FOR THOSE POSITION THAT IS HAVE BEEN OPEN, THEN THAT MONEY HASN'T BEEN GOING TO TCDRS. IT'S BEEN HITTING IN THEIR BUDGETS. SO IF WE WERE TO DROP ALL THE WAY DOWN TO OUR REQUIRED RATE, AND THIS IS BASED ON SALARIES RIGHT NOW. SO THIS WILL CHANGE AFTER COLA'S NEW POSITIONS, THINGS LIKE THAT GET APPROVED.

THESE ARE TODAY NUMBERS. BUT IF WE DROPPED IT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THAT 11.92 TOTAL RATE OF 12.16, THAT'S OVER HALF A MILLION DOLLARS TO FUND 10 SAVINGS.

SO I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT.

IF THIS IS A YEAR THAT, HEY, WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOME EXTRA MONEY SOMEWHERE, THIS IS A WAY THAT WE CAN DO IT.

THIS ISN'T A DECISION THAT HAS TO BE MADE TODAY.

SO AS WE MOVE THROUGH THE BUDGET CYCLE, MAYBE IT'S A CONVERSATION WE COME BACK TO. EVEN IF WE DROP IT DOWN TO WHAT I CALL OPTION A, TO THAT 12.74 TOTAL FUND, IT'S STILL ABOUT A $300,000 SAVINGS TO FUND 10. I ALSO LISTED OUT HOW IT WOULD AFFECT YOUR PRECINCT BUDGETS AS WELL.

>> IT DOESN'T REALLY TWEAK THAT VERY MUCH.

ON THE DOCUMENTS BEHIND IT, YOU KIND OF SEE THAT 87.4, 87.5 IS PRETTY STANDARD ACROSS THE BOARD.

SO THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TO SEE.

BUT THIS COULD BE A YEAR THAT WE SAY, HEY, LET'S DO A LUMP SUM PAYMENT AND ONLY PAY IN WHAT WE HAVE TO PAY IN AND WE CAN USE THOSE DOLLARS ELSEWHERE. OKAY?

>> OKAY. >> DO YOU ALL WANT TO WAIT ON ACTION FOR THAT UNTIL WE GET FURTHER IN THE BUDGET, OR...? IT CAN BE. THIS IS NOT A DECISION THAT HAS TO BE MADE TODAY, BECAUSE, AGAIN, IT'S NOT -- EVEN IF YOU DECIDE TO KEEP IT, WHAT WE ALREADY PAY, THE .24 IS SO INSIGNIFICANT, THAT IT'S GOING --

>> I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DO IT AS EXPIRING.

HOWEVER, I WOULD MAKE THAT MOTION DOING IT AS EXPIRING SUBJECT TO I DO THINK WE SHOULD DISCUSS THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE.

AS THE BUDGET GOES ON. BUT JUST SO THAT WE CAN START

CHECKING SOME THINGS OFF. >> THAT'S FINE.

>> A MOTION -- >> MY MOTION IS THAT WE STAY AT

THE CURRENT RATE. >> THE 13.39.

>> CORRECT. >> WOULD BE THE RATE.

THE LIVE RATE OF .24 FOR A TOTAL RATE OF 13.63.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> AND I JUST -- FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE LISTENING, THIS IS NO IMPACT ON WHAT COMES OUT OF AN EMPLOYEE'S CHECK. WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR ANY SORT OF CHANGES TO THEIR -- WHAT THEY CONTRIBUTE TO TCDRS, VESTING, RETIREMENT PLANS, ANYTHING LIKE. THIS THIS IS JUST THE FUND RATE

THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO PAY IN. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES 5-0.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE AND WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT MEDICAL. OKAY.

THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THIS YEAR, BECAUSE PBC BOARD HAS YET TO MEET TO VOTE ON PLAN CHANGES.

WHAT I CAN SEE IS WE DO EXPECT PLAN CHANGES FOR 2027.

AND WHEN I SAY "PLAN CHANGES," FOR ANYONE LISTENING, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT YOUR PRESCRIPTION MAYBE IS GOING TO CHANGE FROM $10 TO $12. THAT IS NOT A PLAN CHANGE.

PLAN CHANGES ARE DEDUCTIBLE CHANGES.

OUT-OF-POCKET CHANGES. WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT ABOUT PBC AS A WHOLE AND PARKER COUNTY INDIVIDUALLY IS A BIG INCREASE IN SPEND, AND THAT INCREASE IS DRIVEN BY PHARMACY COSTS.

NOW, IT'S AMAZING THAT PEOPLE CAN TAKE PILLS AND -- FOR CERTAIN THINGS, AND IT IS LIFE-CHANGING.

THAT IS A GREAT THING. IT IS ALSO EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE.

OKAY? SO, 62% OF OUR PHARMACY SPEND IS

[00:45:08]

SO WE ARE REALLY SEEING THAT IMPACT OUR PLANS.

SO, WE HAD A VERY ROUGH 2025. AND WE DID -- WE ARE VERY LUCKY WITH INSURANCE ESCROW. WE HAVE WATCHED A FUND BALANCE GROW OVER THE YEARS. WHEN I THINK I FIRST STARTED BACK IN 2009, I WILL ALWAYS TELL THE STORY, IT WAS MY JOB TO PAY THE INSURANCE BILLS. I PUSHED THE BUTTON ON THE WIRE, AND I CAN REMEMBER GOING, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY IN THE BANK TO PAY THIS BILL. AND THE TREASURER AT THAT TIME WAS, LIKE, WELL, THERE'LL BE ANOTHER PAYROLL.

THERE'LL BE A DEPOSIT, SO JUST HOLD THE BILL.

AND I REMEMBER THINKING, WOW, WE HAVE TO HOLD OUR BILLS HERE IN PARKER COUNTY UNTIL PAYDAY. SO THERE'S NO ONE YOU'RE GOING TO MEET THAT'S MORE PROTECTIVE OF INSURANCE ESCROW FUND BALANCE THAN ME, BECAUSE NOW WE'RE SITTING ON A FUND BALANCE OF ABOUT $10 MILLION. NOW, A YEAR OR SO AGO, THAT WAS OVER $11 MILLION, SO WE DID TAKE A FUND BALANCE HIT LAST YEAR.

THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE FUND BALANCE; IS TO ABSORB THAT. SO I AM GOING TO ASK FOR A PREMIUM INCREASE ON THE EMPLOYEE SIDE.

I CAN'T ASK FOR APPROVAL ON THAT TODAY, BECAUSE, UNTIL THE PBC BOARD APPROVES THOSE PLAN CHANGES, THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT REALLY WHAT I WILL RECOMMEND FOR A PREMIUM INCREASE.

AND I'LL GO OVER THAT, WHAT MY RECOMMENDATIONS, AS THEY STAND RIGHT NOW, WILL BE. HOPEFULLY THERE'S A BOARD MEETING SET FOR FRIDAY AFTERNOON.

SO WE'RE HOPING THAT DOES NOT GET CANCELED, TO WHERE WHEN WE HAVE BUDGET COURT NEXT WEEK, I'LL BE ABLE TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT. WE ALSO DID A DENTAL RFP, AND, AGAIN, I'M AT ABLE TO SAY THE RESULTS OF THAT YET, UNTIL THE BOARD TAKES FINAL ACTION. IN THE PLAN CHANGES, WHAT I WILL SAY IS, FOR HIGH DEDUCTIBLE PLANS, THE IRS MANDATES CERTAIN THINGS. SO MY HOPE IS THE HIGH DEDUCTIBLE JUST GOES ALONG WITH WHAT THE IRS MAKES US DO.

FOR PBO, I DO BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO SEE A DEDUCTIBLE GO FROM AN INDIVIDUAL OF $500, WHICH IS CURRENT, TO 625.

AS WELL AS YOUR OUT-OF-POCKET MAX WILL INCREASE.

THIS WAS BEEN A TOPIC OF MUCH DEBATE.

THIS HAS BEEN A REALLY BIG FIGHT.

IT'S BEEN VERY STRESSFUL, TO SAY THE LEAST, BUT PARKER, DENTON AND DALLAS COUNTIES -- AND I'VE BEEN VERY HONEST WITH DALLAS.

I THOUGHT I WOULD NEVER SAY I'M ALIGNED WITH DALLAS COUNTY, BUT HERE I DID. WE AGREED THAT IT NEEDED TO BE A MORE MODERATE APPROACH AND POSSIBLY THIS COULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE SEE FOR PPO PLANS GOING FORWARD, IS EVERY YEAR SEEING SOME SORT OF ADJUST. MENT TO THEM,JUST LIKE WE HAVE H DEDUCTIBLE. NOW, I DID PRESENT -- I'M FANCY, SO I CALL THEM PLAN A AND PLAN B, IN YOUR BOOKS.

SO BASICALLY THE FIRST PLAN IS R BIMONTHLY, PER PAYCHECK, WE'LL SAY THAT. IF YOU'RE PPO, IT COULD BE A $20 INCREASE EVERY PAYCHECK. BASED ON PLANS THAT PEOPLE ARE IN NOW. EVERY YEAR DOING OUR OPEN ENROLLMENT, THAT CHANGES. PEOPLE FLIP BACK AND FORTH.

SO AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A PROJECTION.

I'M NOT TRYING TO GET BACK THE MILLION DOLLARS THAT WE LOST IN FUND BALANCE LAST YEAR, BUT AS I SAY, I JUST KIND OF AM TRYING TO PUT A BAND-AID ON IT TO SLOW THE BLEED A LITTLE BIT.

AND I'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT IN A LITTLE BIT.

MY PLAN B IS PRETTY MUCH TRYING TO PUT MORE OF AN INCREASE OF WHERE WE'RE SEEING THE SPEND COME FROM.

SO, THE SECOND OPTION WOULD BE O EMPLOYEE HOME HIGH DEDUCTIBLE PLANS. $15 INCREASES TO THE EMPLOYEE SPOUSE PLANS. A $20 INCREASE TO HIGH DEDUCTIBLE FAMILY AND/OR JUST HAVING CHILDREN ON YOUR PLAN.

THE PPO WOULD SEE A $20 BIWEEKLY INCREASE FOR EMPLOYEE HOME.

SPOUSE, A $30 BIWEEKLY INCREASE. AND A PPO FAMILY WOULD SEE A $40

[00:50:10]

>> SO, WE'RE -- THE HIGHER COSTS THAT WE'RE INCURRING THIS YEAR?

>> WE'RE SEEING IT IN PPO FAMILY.

>> PPO FAMILY. OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> AND WHEN WE DO OPEN ENROLLMENT, YOU KNOW, AND YOU'VE HEARD ME GIVE ME SPEECH OF COMPARING OF HOW DEDUCTIBLE VERSUS PPO.

I DO WHOLEHEARTEDLY BELIEVE THERE'S SO MANY MORE EMPLOYEES THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM A HIGH DEDUCTIBLE PLAN: THEY JUST HEAR "HIGH DEDUCTIBLE," AND GO, A, NO.

THAT'S FOR THE NEAR. I WISH THERE WAS A BETTER NAME WE COULD CALL IT. WE DO A LOT OF ONE-ON-ONE COUNSELING WITH EMPLOYEES DURING ENROLLMENT.

BECAUSE WHEN PEOPLE SEE THOSE GUARANTEED DOLLARS COMING OUT OF YOUR CHECK, SOMETIMES IT'S REALLY WORTH TO MAKE THE SWITCH.

THE NEXT PAGES I PROVIDED JUST BECAUSE WE ARE LOOKING AT SOME PLAN CHANGES FOR DEDUCTIBILITY. THESE ARE SOME BENCHMARKING TO SHOW WHAT OTHER COUNTIES OFFER. SO YOU CAN SEE, QUEER GOING TO O BE IN THOSE TOP TURQUOISE SECTIONS.

WHEN WE ARE SITTING AT 500, MANY OTHER PLACES ARE SITTING AT 750, 1,000. MAX OUT OF POCKET IN MORE IN LINE, LIKE, 8,000, 9,000. SO WE STILL HAVE WHAT IS CONSIDERED A GOLD STAR CADILLAC PLAN, BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME TWEAKS TO IT. SAME WAY WITH HIGH DEDUCTIBLE.

I PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION AS WELL.

THE THING THAT SCARES ME THE MOST ABOUT NOT MAKING A PREMIUM CHANGE OR NOT MAKING A PLAN CHANGE IS THIS NEXT PAGE.

SO, TYPICALLY, I WOULD COME TO YOU ALL, AND SAY, OH, AT THE END OF LAST YEAR, WE WERE RUNNING AT A PPO DEFICIT OF A MILLION DOLLARS, BUT OUR HIGH DEDUCTIBLE PLAN RAN A MILLION DOLLAR SURPLUS. THEY WASH EACH OTHER OUT.

WE'RE ABLE TO KEEP RATES THE SAME.

THESE SLIDES ARE 2026 SLIDES. THIS IS THROUGH JUNE OF 2026.

OUR PPO PLAN IS CURRENTLY RUNNING ABOUT A 1.5 MILLION DEFICIT, WHEN OUR HIGH DEDUCTIBLE IS RUNNING AT A 500,000 SURPLUS. SO WE'RE ALREADY BEATING EXPECTATIONS IN JUNE. AND TYPICALLY CLAIMS GO HIGHER THE MORE -- THE CLOSER YOU GET TO THE END OF THE YEAR.

PEOPLE HAVE MET THEIR DEDUCTIBLES.

THEY'RE -- YOU KNOW, LIKE, OH, WHAT ELSE CAN I GET FIXED THIS YEAR? I'VE MET MY OUT OF POCKET.

IT HAPPENS. THAT'S WHY I JUST WANT TO SHOW WHY -- WHAT IS CONCERNING ABOUT SPEND.

SOME PEOPLE WON'T FEEL LIKE THAT'S A SMALL STEP, HUGE, FOR , FOR THOSE INCREASES, BUT WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING FOR AN INCREASE.

BECAUSE OF THE PHARMACY SPEND THAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING, WE ARE GOING BACK OUT, EVEN THOUGH WE JUST DID AN RFP FOR PHARMACY A COUPLE YEARS AGO, WE ARE GOING TO GO OUT AND LOOK AT IT AGAIN, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THERE'S OTHER PROGRAMS OUT THERE THAT WE COULD DO THAT WOULD HELP US ON THAT PHARMACY SIDE.

AGAIN, I'M NOT ASKING FOR ACTION TODAY, BECAUSE I DON'T -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO YET.

>> FOR SURE. >> OKAY.

I STUCK THIS IN YEAR BECAUSE THIS NEXT ONE WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT, SICK POOL, IT DOES COME ALONG WITH AN INSURANCE POLICY. THAT'S WHY I STUCK IT HERE WHERE I DID. LOTS OF CONVERSATIONS IN OUR SICK POOL COMMITTEE THIS YEAR ABOUT HOW CAN WE TWEAK THE PROGRAM A LITTLE BIT? I'VE GOT TWO COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN HERE THAT ARE WELCOME TO SPEAK IF THEY WANT TO.

REALLY, FIRST AND FOREMOST, I WANTED JUST TO COMPLETELY DO AWAY WITH SICK POOL AND ASK THE COURT TO PAY FOR A COUNTY-PAID SHORT-TERM DISABILITY POLICY FOR EMPLOYEES.

I HAVE THAT SLIDE IN HERE AS WELL, SO YOU COULD SEE THAT.

IT IS HARD FOR ME TO SAY THAT, BECAUSE I'VE HAD A FRONT ROW SEAT TO HOW SICK POOL HAS HELPED A LOT OF EMPLOYEES THROUGH THE YEARS. I'VE ALSO HAD A FRONT ROW SEAT TO SEE HOW SOME PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF TRY TO WORK THE SYSTEM, THINGS LIKE THAT. JUST TWEAKS TO POLICY.

I WOULD BE ASKING FOR -- YOU HAVE TO HAVE CURRENTLY -- CURRENTLY THE RULE IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE 24 HOURS ON THE BOOKS TO SICK POOL. I'M ASKING TO INCREASE THAT TO 40 HOURS ON THE BOOKS. RIGHT NOW, DO WE AN OPEN POOL FOR SICK POOL SEPTEMBER TO OCTOBER, BUT THEN WE ALSO ALLOW YOU TO JOIN WHENEVER YOU WANT TO.

SO THAT'S OTHER POLICY THAT I WOULD LIKE TO TWEAK.

[00:55:05]

AGAIN, THE NEXT PROPOSAL IN THERE IS FROM THE STANDARD.

THIS IS FOR TWO DIFFERENT SHORT-TERM DISABILITY PLANS IF THE COUNTY WAS TO ADOPT ONE. THIS WOULD BE COUNTY-PAID.

IT WOULD BE ON EVERY PARKER COUNTY FUNDAMENTAL EMPLOYEE.

TO WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PLAN 1 AND PLAN 2. PLAN 1 IS A LITTLE BIT BETTER BENEFIT AS FAR AS THE MAX SALARY GOES UP THAN PLAN 2 DOES.

TOTAL SPEND, PLAN 1, WOULD BE ABOUT 139,000 A YEARS, WHEREAS

PLAN 2 WOULD BE ABOUT 111. >> SO, QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU: WE HAVE A BUNCH OF HOURS IN OUR SICK POOL RIGHT NOW.

>> WE DO. >> WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE? IS THERE A TAX IMPLICATION IF WE MOVE AWAY FROM THAT PLAN?

>> NO. THEY WERE VOLUNTEERED TIME IN.

SO THEY WOULD JUST BE REMOVED FROM THE BOOKS.

>> OKAY. SO IT GOES AWAY, AND NO ONE IS OWED ANY MONEY? IRS ANY MONEY?

NOTHING? >> NO.

>> OKAY. >> SO THE SHORT-TERM DISABILITY

INSURANCE...? >> YEAH.

>> WHAT DOES THAT PROVIDE COMPARED TO --

>> IT'S 60% OF SALARY. SO WHILE THEY WERE ON SHORT-TERM DISABILITY, THEY WOULD NOT BE RECEIVING THEIR COUNTY PAY ANYMORE. WE WOULD NOT BE PAYING IN TAXES.

WE WOULD NOT BE PAYING IN RETIREMENT.

THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO PAY THEIR PROPORTION OF THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE, AS LONG AS THEY WERE ON FMLA LEAVE.

WE STILL HAVE TO COVER THEIR BENEFIT, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY THAT FOR US, WHICH EMPLOYEES DO THAT NOW IF THEY'RE GOING UNPAID. PAYROLL SENDS THEM AN INVOICE, AND THEN THEY HAVE TO CUT US A CHECK.

I KNOW 60% ISN'T 100%, WHERE SICK POOL CAN BE, BUT IT'S BETTER THAN NOTHING, AND THIS IS SOMETHING WHERE, AS PEOPLE ARE PLANNING ON OH, HEY, I NEED TO HAVE THIS SURGERY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THEY CAN PLAN ON THIS BEING THERE FOR THEM, WHERE SICK

POOL IS NOT A GUARANTEE. >> SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE SICK POOL COMMITTEE, WAS TO MOVE AWAY FROM SICK POOL AND MOVE TO THIS SHORT-TERM DISABILITY?

>> IT WAS. >> I MOVE WE DO THAT.

PLAN A. PLAN NUMBER 1.

>> MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER WADDEN.

WALDEN. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CONLEY.

ANY DISCUSSION? >> I WOULD ASK FOR MORE TIME TO CONSIDER THIS. I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE REALLY HAD ENOUGH TIME TO DIGEST THIS YET.

>> ONE THING I WANTED TO CLARIFY, THIS CHANGE WOULD BE EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1ST. ANYONE WHO WAS ALREADY IN SICK POOL FOR 2026 WOULD STAY IN SICK POOL.

THIS WOULD BE EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2027.

>> I'LL BE REAL HONEST: I'M NOT READY TO COMMIT TODAY, BUT I DO THINK THIS IS A DIRECTION WE SHOULD GO; MY LEANING RIGHT NOW, BUT I'D JUST ASK THE COURT FOR SOME TIME. BECAUSE THIS IS -- THIS IS A HUGE DECISION. I'D REALLY LIKE TO THINK THROUGH

IT A LITTLE BIT MORE. >> I THINK THE REASON I MADE THAT MOTION IS BECAUSE I PROBABLY SERVED ON SICK POOL COMMITTEE MORE THAN ANYBODY IN THE ROOM.

>> SEEN SOME OF THE -- >> THANK YOU! SEEN SOME OF THE ABUSES OF THE SYSTEM.

SHERIFF, AM I CORRECT BACK THERE?

>> YES. >> THAT'S WHY I MADE THE MOTION.

HOWEVER, I'D -- YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT TO WAIT, THAT'S FINE.

>> AND I KNOW WE'VE HAD THAT CONVERSATION BEFORE.

YOU KNOW, HOW CAN YOU -- YOU KNOW, WE DID SOME TWEAKS TO SICK TIME, ALLOWING, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF A SICK TIME MAX, IT MOVES INTO A FMLA BANK. IT'S THE ABUSERS OF TIME.

HOW DO YOU KIND OF -- HOW DO YOU PUNISH 'EM? AND NOT EVERYBODY THAT GOES TO SICK POOL IS AN ABUSER OF TIME.

YOU KNOW, MAYBE THEY'VE HAD SOME BAD CARDS DELEGATE AND THEY'VE JUST GONE THROUGH THEIR TIME. BUT IT IS INTERESTING TO SEE HOW IT'S CHANGED THROUGH THE YEARS. BUT IF YOU HAVE AN EMPLOYEE THAT IS SOMEBODY THAT, YOU KNOW, LIKES TO CALL IN SICK EVERY MONDAY... AND THEN THEY -- OH, I'LL JUST GO TO SICK POOL ONE DAY AND THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE ME TIME FOR IT. MAYBE WE'LL SEE THAT SLOW DOWN A

LITTLE BIT. >> SO, A COUPLE QUESTIONS: DO WE HAVE A WAY THAT TELLS -- I'VE GOT SOME FOLKS WHO HAVE BEEN AT THE PRECINCT 2 BARN FOR 30 YEARS.

>> MM-HMM. >> DO WE HAVE ANY RECORD OF WHO'S GIVEN WHAT THAT STRETCHES BACK ANY AMOUNT OF TIME?

>> YEP. >> BECAUSE ONE SCENARIO I CAN KIND OF THINK OF, IS LET'S SAY SOMEBODY'S DONATED A THOUSAND HOURS OVER THE COURSE OF THEIR MULTI-DECADE CAREER HERE.

AND THEN WE DO AWAY WITH SICK POOL, AND THEN THEY GET POPPED WITH SOME TYPE OF LIFE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO NEED IT. THEY'VE BEEN A GOOD ACTOR THIS WHOLE TIME. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I'D LIKE TO JUST REALLY THINK THROUGH BEFORE I MAKE A DECISION

[01:00:02]

LEAST. >> YEAH.

WE CAN. THAT -- AND I'VE HAD THAT CONVERSATION WITH SOMEONE ALREADY.

KIND OF, HEY, WHAT'S THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE? YOU KNOW, WHAT ABOUT MY TIME I'VE ALREADY GIVEN OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS? AND, YOU KNOW, MY RESPONSE IS, YOU KNOW, I PAID LIFE INSURANCE ALL YEAR LAST YEAR, AND I DIDN'T USE IT. THANK GOODNESS.

BUT I DIDN'T GET A REFUND EITHER.

>> RIGHT. >> OR MY HOMEOWNER'S.

AND THAT'S WHAT SICK POOL IS. I MEAN, IT'S AN INSURANCE POLICY, BUT, AGAIN, THERE'S NO GUARANTEE OF WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET BACK, IF YOU GET BACK ANYTHING AT ALL.

>> AND THE OTHER SIDE IS YOU CAN'T -- YOU CAN'T ACCUMULATE OVER -- YOU CAN'T ACCUMULATE SICK LEAVE TIME.

IN OTHER WORDS, THAT'S TIME THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN LOST.

>> YES. >> SO THE TIME THAT THEY DONATED WOULD HAVE BEEN LOST OVER TIME IF THEY HAD NOT DON'T KNOW DONA.

YOU CAN ONLY ACCUMULATE A YEAR AT A TIME.

IT'S NOT LIKE OVER 30 YEARS YOU CAN ACCUMULATE SO MUCH TIME PER

YEAR. >> I THINK WE UNDERSTAND THE SHORTFALLS GIVEN THE HISTORY OF THIS.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER, FOR ALL YOUR TIME BEING ON THAT SICK POOL, BUT I THINK, COMMISSIONER HOLT, JUST OUT OF RESPECT, WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION TODAY.

COMMISSIONER WALDEN AND COMMISSIONER CONLEY, IF YOU WANT

TO HOLD THAT. >> OKAY, I'LL WITHDRAW THAT MOTION. THAT'S FINE.

>> OKAY. PROCEED.

>> APPRECIATE THAT. >> AND THE NEXT TAB IS WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT LONGEVITY. I DID NOTE: I DID WRITE IN HERE THAT I ATTACHED THE LONGEVITY POLICY.

THAT IS A FALSE STATEMENT. I FORGOT TO PUT IT IN THERE, BUT WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A CHANGE TO LONGEVITY POLICY.

JUST TO UPDATE YOU: IT IS $75 A YEAR AFTER AN EMPLOYEE'S FIFTH YEAR OF EMPLOYMENT, AND THAT DOES GO BY FISCAL YEAR. SO IF YOU HAVE SOMEONE THAT MAYBE IT IS THEIR FIRST YEAR TO QUALIFY, THEIR CHECK WOULD BE $375. ACTUALLY, FROM WHAT IS IN THE JUDGES PROPOSED IS THE LONG-TERM LONGEVITY FROM 26.

THE LONGEVITY PROJECTION IS ACTUALLY MINUS 525.

SO MY PROJECTION FOR 2027 IS $297,000.

>> IS LONGEVITY REQUIRED FOR ACCOUNTING?

>> NO. >> I GUESS EVER SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, I'VE SEEN THAT. I'VE TRIED TOO UNDERSTAND IT BETTER, AND I'VE TALKED TO OTHER COUNTIES THAT WHETHER THEY DON'T HAVE IT OR... WHAT IS THE OBJECTIVE OF HAVING THIS? WHAT IS THE GOAL TO HAVE THIS?

>> WELL, EMPLOYEES DO LOOK AT IT AS PART OF THEIR COMPENSATION PACKAGE. IT IS A "THANK YOU" TO 30 YEARS OF SERVICE. AND WE DO.

I MEAN, WHEN WE LOOK AT -- YOU KNOW, MR. ARNETT, WHO HAS 33 YEARS OF SERVICE, THAT'S $75 TIMES --

>> ARE YOU CARRYING A WEAPON BACK THERE?

JUST CURIOUS. >> THAT'S AN EXAMPLE IN THE ROOM.

NOW, THEN. I'M JUST ASKING.

>> I THINK -- I THINK, YOU KNOW, LOOKING BACK -- TO TRY TO EXPLAIN WHY THIS IS HERE: I BELIEVE IT CAME FROM A TIME WHEN THE COUNTY THOUGHT IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO GIVE AN EXTRA BENEFIT TO PEOPLE THAT REMAINED EMPLOYED HERE, RATHER THAN GOIN' OFF FOR EMPLOYMENT ELSEWHERE, SUCH AS OILFIELD, YOU KNOW, BACK IN THOSE DAYS, OR BACK IN A TIME WHEN THE COUNTY PROBABLY COULDN'T AFFORD TO GIVE A PAY INCREASE OR A COLA INCREASE, THEY SAID, HEY, LET'S DO THIS INSTEAD, TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT BONUS TO PEOPLE WHO DID REMAIN EMPLOYED WITH THE COUNTY, RATHER

THAN LEAVING. >> YEAH.

>> IS THAT RIGHT? >> I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'S BEEN. LONG BEFORE I GOT HERE.

>> YEAH, IT'S BEEN AROUND A WHILE.

I MEAN, IT WAS WAY BEFORE MY DAY AS WELL.

I DO THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT THE EMPLOYEES, YOU KNOW, LOVE TO HAVE. ESPECIALLY THE TIMING OF THE YEAR THAT WE TYPICALLY GIVE THAT OUT.

BUT EMPLOYEES DO LOOK AT THAT AS THEIR TOTAL COMPENSATION.

AND SOME COUNTIES DO IT DIFFERENTLY.

SOME COUNTIES DO IT BY PAYCHECK. WE DO A LUMP SUM.

I PERSONALLY LIKE OUR WAY BETTER.

BECAUSE EVEN KNOW, THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THIS REPORT THAT I KNOW THEY ARE RETIRE BEFORE THAT CHECK IS EVER GOING TO BE ISSUED, SO WE WON'T GIVE OUT THAT MONEY.

WE'LL ONLY PAY WHOEVER IS AN ACTIVE EMPLOYEE WHEN THE CHECKS

ARE CUT. >> SO THIS WAS ACTUALLY CREATED BECAUSE, WHERE WE DON'T GIVE COLAS, A YEAR, THEY WERE

GETTING THIS. >> IT WAS TO RETAIN EMPLOYEES AND GIVE SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT WHEN THEY PROBABLY WEREN'T ABLE

TO GIVE A COLA IN YEARS PAST. >> I DO BELIEVE THE RETENTION OF TALENT IS CRITICAL. PROFESSIONALIZATION OF YOUR

[01:05:02]

I WAS JUST ASKING THE QUESTION OF WHAT THIS IS, BECAUSE, AGAIN, IN THE CORPORATE WORLD, I DON'T SEE THIS IN THE CITY.

WE OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE THAT, BUT I WAS JUST ASKING THE

QUESTION, SO -- >> I WOULD VENTURE TO GUESS THAT THIS IS PROBABLY -- IF THIS WERE TO BE ELIMINATED, THIS WOULD

CREATE MORE COMPLAINTS. >> NO, HE'S CARRYING A WEAPON BACK THERE. I'M GOING TO LEAVE IT ALONE.

>> BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE TO GET THIS, AND THEY LIKE TO GET IT AT THANKSGIVING AND SPEND IT FOR CHRISTMAS, IS WHAT A LOT OF FOLKS DO. AM I RIGHT?

>> YES. THE TIMING OF THE ISSUE OF THE

CHECK IS -- >> YEAH.

YEAH.

>> MOVE ON. NEXT ITEM.

IN YOUR PACKETS IS THIS IS THE -- JUST A LIST OF ELECTED PROVISOFFICIALS AND THEIR CURRET SALARIES.

I KNOW THERE HAS BEEN SOME REQUESTS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS, THAT YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD ABOUT. A COUPLE OF THEM ARE HERE.

THAT MAY BE WHAT THEY'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT.

THIS IS CURRENT SALARIES, AND THEN COURT CAN DISCUSS AS YOU WOULD SAY LIKE. WE DO NEED TO VERIFY A FEW THINGS BASED ON THE SUPPLEMENT PAYS OF THE COUNTY JUDGE, COUNTY ATTORNEY. JUST NEED TO DOUBLE CHECK SOME NUMBERS, SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THIS AT ANOTHER DATE, IF YOU SEE ANY OF THAT CHANGE, I'LL BE SURE TO HIGHLIGHT IT, BUT AS OF TODAY, THIS IS WHERE THESE SALARIES STAND.

>> OKAY. >> THE NEXT THING I DID WAS RUN SOME COLA PROJECTION, JUST AS Y'ALL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BUDGET PROCESS. I DID A THREE, A FOUR, A FIVE AND A 6% PER PROJECTION ON FUND. THIS FUND 10 DOES NOT INCLUDE THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. AT LEAST NOT THEIR COMMISSIONED OFFICERS. I DID INCLUDE THEIR SUPPORT STAFF. THEIR COMMISSIONERRED OFFICERS ARE HANDLED ON A DIFFERENT SCALE.

I DID NOT INCLUDE THEM IN THOSE NUMBERS, AND I DID INCLUDE A PRECINCT BREAKDOWN AS WELL FOR YOUR REVIEW.

>> LAST I SAW, THE INFLATION RATE LOOKED LIKE IT WAS 2.7, I WANT TO SAY, FOR KIND OF COMMON HOUSEHOLD GOODS, ET CETERA?

>> I WAS LOOKING AT SOCIAL SECURITY CPA AS WELL.

I THINK THAT WAS 3.6, 3.7. IT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF DAYS SINCE

I LOOKED AT IT. >> I'D ENCOURAGE THE COURT, WE NEED TO BE AT 3, AT LEAST. WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION.

>> ALL RIGHT. THEN THE FINAL PIECE OF MY PRESENTATION FOR TODAY IS THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE STEPPEN GRADE SCALE. THIS IS A DIFFERENT VERSION THAN WHAT Y'ALL WERE ORIGINALLY PRESENTED WITH.

THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS A GROUP EFFORT THROUGH COMMITTEE THAT WE TOOK THE CURRENT SCALE AND HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS AND ASKED SOME QUESTIONS AND CAME UP WITH A MODIFIED SCALE.

OKAY. THE ORIGINAL SCALE THAT THEY SUBMITTED WAS A TOTAL COST VALUE OF ABOUT $1.6 MILLION.

THIS SCALE IS RIGHT UNDER 1.3. SO IT'S ABOUT A 330,000-DOLLAR

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SCALES. >> I WAS JUST THINKING WE NEED ANOTHER PIECE OF PAPER. THANK YOU.

>> DO YOU WANT TO? OKAY.

>> JUST RIGHT BEFORE YOU START, IF YOU DON'T MIND: SO WE LOOKED AT THIS HEAVILY. SPENT MORE THAN TWO HOURS, I THINK, ON THIS ONE ITEM ALONE. THE BUDGET COMMITTEE, IF YOU LOOK ON THE BUDGET COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO RIGHT NOW. I CAN TELL YOU THAT I BELIEVE THIS WAS A 5, WITH 5 BEING A 1-5 SCALE.

5 IS WHAT WE RECOMMEND AS THE -- >> THE NEW PAY SCALE IS A 5.

>> THE NEW PAY SCALE, BASICALLY FOR ALL OF IT, EXCEPT -- ACTUALLY, YEAH, ALL OF THE STEPPEN GRADE SCALE WAS A 5 FOR THAT TOP BRACKET. SO NOT THE COURTHOUSE SECURITY OR THE EX EXTRADITION OR THE TRAINING COORDINATOR, BUT FROM DEPUTY DOWN TO CHIEF DEPUTY, THE BUDGET COMMITTEE VOTED THIS TO BE A 5. 5 BEING HIGHEST RECOMMENDATION.

1 BEING LOWEST RECOMMENDATION. >> YEAH.

>> SO THE FIRST PAGE THERE IS THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMITTEE. THE SECOND PAGE IS JUST TAKING THOSE SAME RECOMMENDATIONS AND PUTTING 'EM IN OUR SCALE.

AND YOU'LL NOTICE A COUPLE OF THEM ARE, LIKE, $1 LESS.

THERE'S ONE THAT'S A DOLLAR MORE.

THAT'S JUST THE WAY I DO MY MATH.

>> I DO WANT TO SAY THAT THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN COMMITTEE AND THE SHERIFF MAY WANT TO MAKE THE POINT THAT THIS IS A SCALE FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE COMMISSIONED OFFICERS, SO THERE ARE SOME DEPARTMENTS THAT, IN THE PAST, HAVE JUST FOLLOWED ALONG WITH THIS SCALE. THIS IS FOR THE SHERIFF'S

[01:10:03]

OFFICE. >> OKAY.

>> OKAY. >> GOOD.

IS THERE ANOTHER COPY OF THIS? DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER COPY OF

THIS? >> I DO.

>> CAN YOU GIVE IT TO BRIAN? JUST HAND IT TO BRIAN BACK THERE. AND, BECKY, CAN YOU REPEAT THE TWO NUMBERS OF THE REVISED SCALE? I THINK YOU SAID REPRESENTS 1.3 MILLION INCREASE?

>> YEAH, IT'S ABOUT 1.265. THE ORIGINAL SCALE WAS RIGHT AT 1.6. THAT IS A TOTAL COST.

IT ALSO BRINGS IN THEIR LATERAL PAY POLICY, WHICH IS SEPARATE, BUT I DID BUILD IT IN BECAUSE IT AGAIN GOT A VERY HIGH SCORE FROM COMMITTEE. SO THIS SCALE IS ABOUT $330,000

LESS THAN THE ORIGINAL. >> FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, THE 5, OR THE LATERAL, WAS A 5 ON THE COMMITTEE A AND THAT WAS PROBABY ONE EVER THE EASIEST 5S WE HAD.

>> SO THIS ADDRESSES THE ISSUE OF ATTRACTING AND MAINTAINING

OFFICERS. >> THIS IS A VERY STRONG SCALE.

>> THIS WILL GET PEOPLE BACK IN OUR DOOR.

>> GREAT. >> I THINK WORD'S KIND OF ALREADY OUT AND WE'VE ALREADY SEEN AN UPTICK IN APPLICATIONS ALREADY BEFORE IT'S EVEN PASSED. THIS WILL SAY THAT, YES, WE'RE VERY STRONG IN OUR PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE HERE AT PARKER COUNTY.

>> AND THAT WAS REALLY THE STARTING POINT OF THE CONVERSATION TO REVISE THE SCALE; WAS WE DIDN'T CHANGE THAT STARTING PAY FOR SOMEONE TO GET IN THE DOOR. AND THEN EVERYTHING ELSE BASICALLY IS GOING TO FLOW OFF THAT NUMBER.

IT WILL MAKE THEM EXTREMELY COMPETITIVE WITH EVEN OUR BIGGER COUNTIES OF DENTON, TERRENT, DALLAS.

I DID ALL OF THEIR SCALES AS WELL.

>> AND I DO WANT TO MAKE ONE MORE POINT.

YOU ALL HEARD LAST YEAR THE MENTION OF -- WHAT WE'VE HEARD OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS IS THIS IS ANOTHER BITE AT THE APPLE, I THINK IS THE PHRASE THAT'S BEEN USED.

THERE'S THE REQUEST TO JUST LET'S EAT THE WHOLE APPLE THIS YEAR. SEE WHAT IT WOULD BE LIKE TO EAT THE WHOLE APPLE. THAT'S WHAT THE SHERIFF PROPOSED ORIGINALLY. I'M NOT TRYING TO PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH, BUT IF I RECALL YOUR WORDS CORRECTLY, YOU SAID THAT WHAT WE DID WAS PROBABLY 90% OF BITING AT THE APPLE.

>> THIS IS A VERY LARGE PORTION OF THAT APPLE, CORRECT.

>> SO WE HAD -- THE COMMITTEE HAD, THROUGH A BUNCH OF BACK AND FORTH, WANTED TO GET TO A PLACE WHERE WE COULD BE GOOD FOR THIS FOR A WHILE. NOW, THAT BEING SAID, WE CAN'T CONTROL THE SHERIFF IF HE WANTS TO PROPOSE SOMETHING DIFFERENT NEXT YEAR. THAT'S OBVIOUSLY HIS RIGHT AS A DEPARTMENT HEAD AND AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, BUT THIS WAS WHAT WE CAME UP -- WHAT WE CAME UP WITH WAS SOMETHING THAT THE COMMITTEE FELT LIKE WAS REFLECTIVE OF THE NEEDS.

WE TOOK IN THE ADVICE OF THE SHERIFF, THE CHIEF DEPUTY.

WE ADDRESSED THE COMPRESSION ISSUE, ET CETERA.

WE FEEL LIKE THIS IS A PRETTY DARN GOOD PLAN AS IT STANDS.

>> IT IS DARN GOOD AS IT STANDS, YES.

>> I ONLY GET NERVOUS WHEN WE, YOU KNOW, START BITING AT OUR -- HOW MUCH WE'RE SPENDING AND WHERE WE ARE ON THIS.

I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THIS. HOWEVER, A REMINDER THAT ONCE WE CAN OVERRIDE TOMORROW. IT'S NOT GOOD UNTIL WE ADOPT THE COMPLETE BUDGET, BUT I THINK WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB OF

PRESENTING WHERE WE ARE. >> AND I HAVE IT -- I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND THAT OBLIGATION TO CALL THIS OUT.

I'M JUST ALLOWING A LITTLE BIT OF -- I'M KIND OF GOING THE BACK WAY, OF ALLOWING SOME DISCUSSION HERE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING. BECAUSE THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A CONTRADICTION OF WHAT WE NORMALLY WOULD DO.

>> IT IS, BUT, AGAIN, IF WE GET IN A BIND SOMEWHERE DOWN THE ROAD, WE CAN ALWAYS CIRCLE BACK AROUND.

>> AND DON'T GET ME WRONG, SHERIFF.

IT ALL -- JUST THERE'S A LOT OF INTERFERENCE ON THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, ONE, MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE COMPETITIVE, WE'RE FILLING THOSE POSITION, WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN.

WELL, IT IS, BUT MAKING GOOD DECISIONS AND MAKING THINGS THAT'S -- WE HAVE TO HAVE AND TO COMMISSIONER WALDEN'S POINT, THE HAVE-TO-HAVES, AND THE COMMITTEE HAS DONE A GREAT JOB AND DUE DILIGENCE IN RESEARCHING THIS.

AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO COME BACK AND REVISIT JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT

WE'RE DOING -- >> EVERY TIME WE MEET, WE CAN REVISIT EVERYTHING THAT WE APPROVE TODAY.

>> I DO HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU, BECKY.

BECKY, ON WHAT YOU POSSESSED, DOES THAT REFLECT -- WHAT YOU PROVIDED, DOES THAT REFLECT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE COURTHOUSE SECURITY, EXTRADITION AND SECURITY

COORDINATOR. >> YES.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION. >> I THINK BRIAN HAS A QUESTION.

>> BRIAN, IF YOU WOULD COME UP. JUST FOR IT TO BE ON RECORD FOR

[01:15:01]

THIS. >> JUST SO I'M -- I JUST GOT THIS: WHAT'S THE TOTAL BURN FOR THE FY? ONE TWO? THANKS.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM BEFORE WE VOTE?

>> AND -- OKAY. NEVER MIND.

WE'LL DO SOMETHING ELSE SEPARATE.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? CARRIES 5-0.

>> WE KIND OF DID IT AS PART OF THAT, BUT JUST FOR THE SAKE OF BEING EXTREMELY CLEAR: I'M GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE LATERAL POLICY, THE LATERAL STEP, LATERAL RAISE. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO CALL IT?

>> LATERAL POLICY, PROBABLY. PEOPLE UP TO FIVE YEARS PRIOR CREDIT SERVICE, THAT THEY HAVE THAT WHEN THEY APPLY, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD GIVE THEM.

IT RECOMMENDED A HIGHER RATE. >> THE MOTIONER SECONDED BY COMMISSION EVERY WALDEN. COMMISSIONER, CAN I ASK YOU WHY

WE'RE DOING THAT RIGHT NOW. >> IT'S JUST PERTINENT TO THIS.

IT GOES HAND-IN-HAND. >> OKAY.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR.

CARRIES 5-0. >> THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.

>> THAT'S ALL I PUT IN MY PRESENTATION.

WE CAN MOVE TO THE SCORING. I KNOW Y'ALL HAVE HEARD THIS INFORMATION A COUPLE OF TIMES ALREADY.

I KNOW COMMITTEE HAS MOVED THROUGH IT NUMEROUS TIMES.

I KNOW WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT MAYBE WOULD

LIKE TO SPEAK, SO... >> ACTUALLY, THIS IS -- THIS MORNING IS THE FIRST TIME I'M SEEING IT, SO...

>> THE OFFICIAL SCORES? OKAY.

I'M GOING TO ASK THAT WE TAKE A BREAK.

HOW ABOUT THAT? >> WE'LL RECESS AT 10:19 AND

TAKE A -- IS TEN MINUTES GOOD? >> SURE.

>> FOR THOSE OF YOU LOOKING THE SCORES, I BUNCH THEM THE WAY

>> CONVENE 10:28 AND MOVE BACK TO BECKY, WHERE WE AT HERE? >> I KNOW Y'ALL JUST RECEIVED THAT REPORT OF THE RANKINGS THIS MORNING, SO I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO TAKE TIME TO DIGEST THAT, MAKE YOUR NOTES AND THEN MAYBE WE TALK ABOUT THAT ON THURSDAY?

JUST SOME DIRECTION. >> WHY DON'T WE DO THIS, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE HERE THAT MIGHT WANT TO SPEAK, WHILE Y'ALL ARE, NOT THAT WE WILL NOT LISTEN, BUT LET'S MULTI TASK HERE AND IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND COME UP AND SPEAK. LET ME ASK, SO WHAT DO WE HAVE TODAY? CAP AND -- WHAT ELSE HAVE WE GOT?

YOU'RE DONE? >> YES. >> SO YES, I WAS JUST TRYING TO

OUTLINE HOW MUCH MORE WORK WE HAVE TODAY. >> SHOULDN'T TAKE MORE THAN

FOUR OR FIVE HOURS. >> I HAVE ALL DAY AND HALF THE NIGHT, DON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT.

JUST TRYING TO SEE WHAT WE HAD. >> UNDERSTOOD. >> IN THAT SAME VEIN, ON

THURSDAY, WHAT DO WE HAVE? >> I THINK PRETTY MUCH AN OVERVIEW OF TODAY, ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO TAKE ACTION ON WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER AND PUBLIC SERVICE REQUEST, THAT IS NEW ON THERE. I WILL NOT HAVE ANY UPDATE TO INSURANCE ON THURSDAY, THOSE UPDATES WILL NOT COME UNTIL HOPEFULLY MONDAY OR WHATEVER NEXT WEEK.

>> THAT IS TWO OR THREE ITEMS THERE. >> SPECIAL REVENUE, PRECINCTS.

>> WE NEED TO GO OVER NUMBERS WE GOT TODAY AND THURSDAY WOULD BE GOOD FOR ME ON THESE.

>> TO VOTE ON RANKINGS. >> YOU SAID PUBLIC SERVICE -- >> LIKE LIBRARY.

>> THINGS LIKE THAT? >> ANY OF THE ENTITIES THAT -- >> OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> OPPORTUNITY TO DIGEST. OKAY.

SO WITH Y'ALL'S PERMISSION LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND -- >> WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO ASK.

>> I THINK SO, ANYBODY LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK? THIS IS OPEN FORUM, COME ON UP.

>> WONDER IF I CAN HAVE ANOTHER HANDOUT. >> I CAN CREATE MORE.

>> THANK YOU, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> GOOD MORNING, I WOULD LIKE

[01:20:06]

AND LOOKS LIKE JP'S REQUEST EXTREMELY LOW, GO OVER COUPLE THINGS IN REGARD TO THAT, THREE POINTS SET OUT IN THE HANDOUT. FIRST AND FOREMOST, NOT FOREMOST, POINT NUMBER ONE PRECINCT PARITY, GRANTING THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE OR EXCLUDING JUSTICE OF THE PEACE FROM RAISES INCLUDING THE CONSTABLES IN OUR OWN PRECINCTS, WHICH IS LAW ENFORCEMENT ARM OF THE OUR COURTS CREATES A SIGNIFICANT EQUITY ANOMALY THAT I THINK BASICALLY POINTS TO THE FACT THAT SOMEHOW CONSTABLES ARE GIVEN MORE IMPORTANCE WITHIN OUR COUNTY THAN THE JP'S.

I WOULD COUNT TO STATE COMPTROLLER AS AN EXAMPLE. I KNOW THAT DOESN'T APPLY TO COUNTIES, STATE COMPTROLLER MAINTAIN SALARY EQUITY BETWEEN AGENCY EMPLOYEES AND SIMILAR POSITIONS, SALARY ADJUSTMENT FOR STATE AGENTINGLY EMPLOYEES IS THE NAME OF THAT PROGRAM.

I BELIEVE THAT IS AN EXAMPLE OF A BEST STATE BEST LEVEL BEST PRACTICES THAT THE COUNTY COULD AND SHOULD FOLLOW IN THIS CASE. FURTHERMORE, POINT NUMBER TWO WHEN TALKING ABOUT OUR SALARY COMPARED TO DISTRICT AND COUNT CLERK. JP HAVE 24/7 MANDATE UNLIKE OTHER 9-5 ELECTED OFFICIALS JP'S REQUIRED TO PROVIDE AROUND THE CLOCK STATUTE ORY DUTY, ARREST AND SEARCH WARRANT, CONDUCTING MAGISTRATI MAGISTRATION, SOME OF US DO BLOOD WARRANTS 24/7, AS WELL, THAT IS ONE REASON WHY WE SHOULD BE ACTUAL LY EITHER EQUAL TO OR MORE THAN SOME OF THOSE OTHER POSITIONS THAT GOT SIGNIFICANT RAISES.

SECOND, IF TALKING ABOUT CASE VOLUME REALITIES, BOTTOM LINE AND I SPOKE TO THIS, DID NOT GIVE EXACT NUMBERS LAST TIME I WAS HERE. PARKER COUNTY DISTRICT COURTS HAVE COMBINED AS OF MAY OF THIS YEAR, HAVE COMBINED TOTAL OF 2618 CASES.

PARKER COUNTY COUNTY COURT HAVE COMBINED CASE OF 2256 CASES BETWEEN TWO COURTS.

MY COURT ALONE JP PRECINCT 4 HAS COMBINED TOTAL CASE NUMBER OF 5748 CASES.

OKAY. NEARLY THREE TIMES THE AMOUNT OF COMBINED DISTRICT COURTS OR COUNTY COURT, MORE SIGNIFICANTLY, THE DISTRICT COURT AND COUNTY COURT HAVE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE AND A COURT OFFICE. COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE HANDLE APPROXIMATELY 10 EMPLOYEES IN EACH OF THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICES HANDLE INTAKE, THE FILING, THE MONEY, THEY HANDLE ALL OF THOSE THINGS. THEN THE COURT'S OFFICE HAVE TWO COORDINATORS PER COURT, SO THERE IS FOUR THERE, TWO COORDINATORS PER COURT THAT HANDLE SCHEDULING, HEARINGS AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 14 EMPLOYEES AT THE DISTRICT COURT LEVEL, 14 PLUS AT COUNTY COURT LEVEL, HANDLING A THIRD OF THE CASES THAT JP COURT'S CASE HANDLE. WE HAVE IN MY COURT, FIVE CLERKS, I'M SORRY, FOUR CLERKS, A COORDINATOR AND MYSELF AND WE HANDLE ALL, NOT ONLY INTAKE, THE INPUT, HANDLING THE MONEY, HANDLING AUDIT AND ALL THAT HANDLED IN OFFICE AND HANDLE CASES, THE MANAGEMENT AND ALL OF THAT. JP COURTS ARE THE FACE OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN TEXAS, THAT IS WHERE THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE FIRST SEE THE COURT SYSTEM. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE TREATED THAT WAY. AT THAT POINT, WE'RE ON BOTTOM RUNG IN PARKER COUNTY.

YET WE'RE HANDLING THREE TIMES THE CASELOAD, JUST IN MY COURT, JP 3 HAS MORE CASES THAN WE DO.

AND THEY HAVE MORE CLERKS, ET CETERA, BUT BOTTOM LINE, IF THE COUNTY IS BASING RAISES ON

[01:25:01]

COUNTY COMMISSIONER 20%, FOUR TIMES HIGHER THAN JP. COUNTY CONSTABLE, 15%, THREE TIMES HIGHER THAN JP'S. COUNTY TREASURER 13%, 2.6 TIMES HIGHER, TAX ASSESSOR 13%, 2.6% HIGHER, SHERIFF 11%, 2.2% HIGHER. JP'S GOT A COLA RAISE, OKAY.

MARKET RATE ADJUSTMENT SALARY INCREASES TO EVERY ADMINISTRATIVE PRECINCT ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL IN COUNTY WHILE LEAVING JUSTICE OF PEACE WITH ONLY COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT COUNTY COMMISSIONER COURT CREATED SEVERE INTERNAL EQUITY DIVISION, ESTABLISHING UNTENABLE PREZ DENSE AND STRUCTURALLY DEVALUED, COMPARTED TO CONSTABLE WHO SERVE AS JUSTICE OF PEACE LAW ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM AND THE CLERKS ADMINISTRATIVE ARM OF COUNTY AND DISTRICT COURT. JP COURT IS SIMPLY ASKING REQUEST TO EQUAL STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT BASED ON STANDARD INTERNAL PARITY, WORKLOAD AND FAIRNESS.

THAT'S IT. I MEAN, I KNOW IT'S GOT A ONE AND SOMEBODY PROPOSE 15,000 RAISE, WHICH IS MUCH LESS THAN WE'RE ASKING TO BE EQUAL TO COUNTY CLERK, TAX ASSESSORS, THE TREASURER, ET CETERA, THAT GOT 2.2 RATING, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ARE BEING PUSHED TO THE BOTTOM OF THE RUNG BUT AGAIN, THIS IS OUR PLEA TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO THIS COMMISSIONER'S COURT TO JUST SIMPLY HAVE US EQUAL TO THE OTHER ELECTED COUNTY OFFICIALS IN THIS COUNTY.

>> JUDGE, I WANT TO TRY TO BE DELICATE HERE, I DON'T WANT MY COMMENTS TO OFFSET THE IMPORTANCE OF WHAT THE JP'S DO, I THINK THEY ARE THE WORK ARM OF THE COUNTIES THROUGHOUT THIS NATION. I THINK THAT YOU TAKE THE BRUNT OF OFFENSES, NUMBER OF CASES THAT YOU HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY SHOWS THAT YOU HAVE A VERY BUSY STAFF.

YOU ARE VERY BUSY OFFICE, THE CHALLENGE I THINK IS LIKE IN MY COURT WE HANDLE PROBATE AND WHEN IT IS REQUESTED THAT IT BE APPEALED OR MOVED UP THEN WE AUTOMATICALLY MOVE TO CCL.

SO THEN THAT PROBATE OR GUARDIANSHIP CASE HAS BEEN MOVED UP TO CCL, SO THE CASES THEY HAVE, REASON THE NUMBER IS DIFFERENT THERE IS COMPLEXITY OF THE CASE VERSUS WHAT COMPLEXITY IS THERE. THAT DOES NOT OFFSET, I'M MAKING A FAVOR IN YOUR POINT, AS WELL, YOUR CASELOAD, YOU ARE GETTING EVERYTHING ELSE. AND THAT IS OVERWHELMING TASK FOR YOUR STAFF TO STAY UP ON THAT. BECAUSE THEY'RE BUSY, VERY BUSY.

AND SO, IT IS KIND OF DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND AND ORANGES AND APPLE OF WHAT CASELOADS ARE CCL AND DISTRICT COURT LEVEL. YOU CERTAINLY WITH THAT CASELOAD, I CAN'T IMAGINE WITH NUMBER OF PROBATE CASES I HAVE AND GUARDIANSHIP CASES IN MY COURT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE BEEN THERE, I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT NUMBER YOU HAVE.

>> AND THAT NUMBER -- >> YOUR POINTS ARE WELL TAKEN. >> THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE NUMBER OF CASES THAT RETAIN IN OUR JURISDICTION AS MAGISTRATE UNTIL SUCH TIME THE COURT TAKES THE CASE. I MAGISTRATE APPROXIMATELY ON OR AVERAGE 500 CASES PER YEAR. MAY TAKE SIX MONTHS TO BE BROUGHT INTO COURT.

DURING THAT TIME, MY COURT, ANY CASE THAT I MAGISTRATE MAINTAIN JURISDICTIONS, WE HEAR MOTION TO MODIFY BOND CONDITION ON THOSE CASES, THOSE NUMBERS DON'T REFLECT THAT.

>> I AM GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP, THAT IS ANOTHER THING YOU AND I SHARE, I WAS AT THE JAIL THIS MORNING, EARLY IN THE MORNING NUMBER OF CASES WE SHARE, WE SHARE THAT

[01:30:03]

AGAIN, I THINK THAT SEPARATES CLEARLY AND THAT SHOULD BE ADDED TO CONSIDERATION HERE OF THE MAGISTRATE PART OF YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES, AS JP'S BECAUSE WE'RE ON ROTATION OF THAT. AND WE'RE OBLIGATED AND HAVE ROTATION ON THE WEEKEND WHICH

REALLY IS WONDERFUL, AS YOU UNDERSTAND. >> AND I'M NOT SETTING MYSELF APART BECAUSE I'M THE ONLY JP THAT DOES BLOOD INNER WARRANT, I BELIEVE THERE IS TALK OF HAVING JP'S POSSIBLY PICK THAT UP, AS WELL. SO I'M NOT SINGLING THAT OUT, SINGLING ME OUT, IT IS JUST A DUTY THAT I AM ON 24/7 CALL FIVE MONTHS OUT OF EVERY YEAR.

LAST MONTH ON CALL AS PRIMARY I RECEIVED 25 CALLS THAT MONTH. >> MY POINT IN THIS WAS TO SIMPLY ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES THAT SOMETIMES WE DON'T CONSIDER

IN THE BODY OF THIS COURT. >> I WOULD INVITE ANYBODY ON THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO COME AND SIT IN OUR OFFICE. I KNOW EVERYBODY THINKS THE MAJORITY OF THESE ARE TRAFFIC TICKETS, TRAFFIC TICKETS TAKE INORD NAT AMOUNT OF TIME. WE CAN SHOW WHOEVER SHOWS UP TO LOOK, SHOW ENTRIES ON EVERY TRAFFIC TICKET, IT IS APPROXIMATELY 20 ENTRIES PER TICKET, THAT MEANS 20 DIFFERENT TIMES FOR ONE TICKET SOMEONE WITHIN OUR OFFICE HAS TOUCHED THAT FILE AND DONE SOMETHING WITH THAT FILE AND THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE MONEY SIDE OF IT, WHEN MONEY IS COLLECTED IN, WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MONEY. END OF EVERY DAY WE HAVE TILLS THAT HAVE TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR, AUDITS WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH, MONEY SIDE.

IT IS COMBINATION OF WHAT COUNTY CLERK AND COUNTY COURTS DO, OURS IS COMBINED AND DO SAME THING AS ONE COURT AND SAME AS DISTRICT COURTS, MUCH MORE CASES, MUCH LESS STAFF.

>> UNDERSTOOD. JUDGE, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> IF I COULD INTERJECT A COUPLE THINGS HERE. WE PUT, WE KIND OF PUT THE CART IN FRONT OF THE HORSE EARLIER WE TYPICALLY DON'T DEAL WITH ANY SALARIES PRIOR TO ADOPTING OUR CAPITAL REQUESTS BECAUSE WE ALWAYS RECOGNIZE THAT THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE AND SALARIES COME ALONG LATER IN OUR BUDGET PROCESS. WE DID SOMETHING BACKWARDS TODAY WE NORMALLY DON'T DO, WE CAN UNDO THAT ANY TIME. I RECOGNIZE YOUR PASSION, BUT NOW IS NOT THE TIME IN MY DEAL, WE TYPICALLY HANDLE THOSE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE FIRST, THE BULLET-PROOF VESTS, VEHICLES AND THOSE THINGS AND THEN COME BACK TO SALARY AND BENEFIT UPAS LASTE DO IN BUDGET PROCESS EVERY SINGLE TIME. THIS TIME WE, GEORGE STICKS IT OUT THERE, SO WE DID THAT, HOWEVER, IN OUR TYPICAL PROCESS WE GO THROUGH EVERYTHING WE HAVE TO HAVE AS FAR AS REQUESTS FOR CAPITAL ITEMS AND NONCAPITAL ITEMS BEFORE WE EVER ADDRESS THIS, I SUGGEST THAT IS PROCESS WE FOLLOW THIS TIME, AS WELL. WE HAVE A POT OF MONEY HERE TO SPEND AND AGAIN I GO BACK TO MY CIRCLES, WHAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE, WHAT IS NICE TO HAVE, ALL THOSE KIND OF THINGS.

NOT PUTTING YOU OFF. >> NO, NO -- >> JUST TELLING YOU WE'RE OUT

OF SORT HERE IS WAY WE TYPICALLY SORT THINGS OUT. >> UNDERSTAND ALL WE'RE GOING BY, WE ARE NOT NOTIFIED OF PROCESS, WE WERE LISTED ON THE AGENDA.

>> I'M TELLING YOU WE CAN TAKE INPUT, MY SUGGESTION IS THAT WE DELAY, NOT MANAGE THAT TODAY,

THERE WILL BE MANY OTHER -- >> IF THERE IS TIME WE CAN COME BACK, I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW IN

ADVANCE SO WE CAN DO THAT. >> AND YOU WILL. >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> I'M NOT PUTTING YOU OFF, NOBODY IS PUTTING YOU DOWN, NOBODY IS DOING ALL THAT, WE'RE NOT, MY SUGGESTION IS WE DON'T TAKE ACTION TODAY WE GO THROUGH THE CAP AND NONCAP ITEMS AND

MAKE SOME DECISIONS THERE AND SEE HOW MUCH WE HAVE LEFT. >> YOUR POINTS ARE VERY WELL

TAKEN TODAY. >> POINTS ARE WELL TAKEN. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> AND I KNOW YOU FOLLOW SAME

COURSE, APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE TODAY. >> MOMENT TO SPEAK?

>> SURE. >> ALL RIGHT. I WANT TO STATE I DID EXTEND TO

[01:35:01]

WE'RE AN EXTREMELY, ANOMALY COMPARED TO OTHER COURT DISTRICT COURT COUNTY COURT, HOWEVER LEGISLATION HAS BEEN PASSED THROUGH THE STATE OF TEXAS TO RECOGNIZE THE JUSTICE COURT SAYS AND TO THE EXTENT THEY HAVE TAKEN CASES, TYPES OF CASES AND AMOUNTS OF CASES OFF COUNTY CLERK AND PUT ON JUSTICE OF THE PEACE COURT SO WE ARE EVEN RECOGNIZED THROUGH STATE OF TEXAS AND LEGISLATION IN THE STATE OF TEXAS AS BEING A VERY IMPORTANT ENTITY WITHIN THE JURISDICTIONAL LIMITS AND NEEDS FOR THE JUSTICE COURT. AGAIN THEY HAVE TAKEN STUFF AWAY FROM COUNTY COURT AND PUT ON US TO EXPAND OUR CASELOAD AND MONETARY VALUE AND THE AMOUNT, YOU SPEAKING OF THAT POT OF MONEY, WE CONTRIBUTE QUITE A BIT TO THAT POT OF MONEY THROUGH OUR COURT PROBABLY TO THE TUNE OF -- IN ONE COURT, MY COURT, WE'RE CONTRIBUTING TO THAT POT OF MONEY THE COUNTY HAS TO WORK OFF OF. I HEARD THIS MORNING MULTIPLE TIMES COMPARISON TO DENTON COUNTY AND AS JUDGE MENDOLA, TESTIFIED TO LAST TIME WE WERE HERE LOOKING AT DENTON COUNTY, COLIN COUNTY AND PARKER COUNTY, SALARIES MIRROR COUNTY JUDGE, COMMISSIONER, SHERIFF, DISTRICT CLERK, COUNTY CLERK, TREASURER, TAX ASSESSOR, PRETTY MUCH MIRROR THOSE TWO COUNTIES UNTIL YOU GET TO JUSTICE OF PEACE AND THERE IS A HUGE DISKCREPANCY WHERE THOSE COUNTY JUSTICE OF THE PEACES ARE VERSUS US AND ALSO THROUGH TALKING TO JUDGES IN THE COUNTIES THEY DON'T DO MAGISTRATION, WHICH WAS JUST A BIG TOPIC OF DISCUSSION, THEY RUN THEIR COURSE, HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE JAIL. THEY DON'T GO AND MAGISTRATE.

WHEN I LEAVE HERE, I HAVE TO GO TO THE HOSPITAL AND GO MAGISTRATE A PERSON, THEY ARE NO LONGER ON THE COUNTY DIME FOR BEING TAKEN CARE OF UP THERE. SO WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR EQUALITY, ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR. WE WORK VERY HARD. I HAVE SEEN IN THE LAST TWO YEARS A JUMP IN MY CASELOAD IN MY COURT AS I GAVE NUMBERS OF 155%, I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS COURT FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS, 2006 WHEN I STARTED GETTING INVOLVED WITH THE JUSTICE COURTS AND IN AND OUT OF THEM, SAME STAFFING TODAY IN THAT COURT AS WE HAD 20 YEARS AGO, SAME AMOUNT OF EMPLOYEES. SO WITH NUMBERS WE'RE PROBABLY AN INCREASE IN THE LAST 20 YEARS OF 250%, JUST GUESSING, I DON'T HAVE NUMBERS,IVE NOT LOOKED AT CASE NUMBERS, WE'VE SEEN SIGNIFICANT INCREASE, AS Y'ALL KNOW AND I THINK IN THE LAST YEAR THERE WAS A HUGE JUSTIFICATION FOR SALARIES AND MENTIONED ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS WOULD GET CERTAIN RAISES TO CERTAIN LEVELS, WE WERE EXCLUDED. NOBODY EVER EXPLAINED TO US WHY WE WERE EXCLUDED, WE NEVER HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, IT WAS JUST ALL DONE AND OVER WITH AND MR. MENDOLA SAID WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO SHOW UP AND CONTINUE TO PROVE UP AND GIVE MR. WALDON MORE HANDOUTS TO PROVE TO THE COURT THAT WE DO, WE ARE DESERVING OF THE SAME PAY SCALE AS SOME OF THESE OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS. WE'RE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL AND I DON'T THINK IT IS FAIR FOR US TO BE JUDGED BY A BUDGET COMMITTEE THAT WE DON'T GET TO COME TO PUT FIRST AND FOREMOST WE ARE ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE PRECINCT TO FULFILL A JOB.

I WAS ELECTED BY PEOPLE, VOTERS OF PRECINCT 3 TO BE PRESIDING JUDGE FOR JUSTICE OF PEACE OF PRECINCT 3. THAT MEANS I TAKE CARE OF THE CASES, OF THE OFFICE, OF THE STAFFING, I'M CHARGED WITH THAT, NOT A BUDGET COMMITTEE. I'M CHARGED WITH THAT.

SO I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY ELECTED OFFICIAL AROUND THAT WANTS TO WASTE TAX PAYER MONEY, I THINK WE'RE ALL VERY CONSCIOUS OF TAXPAYER MONEY AND IM00 CONSCIOUS BECAUSE I PAY THAT MONEY JUST AS WELL MYSELF. AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, WE ARE CHARGED WITH RUNNING OF OUR

[01:40:05]

ESPECIALLY WHEN WE DON'T GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE THAT COMMITTEE AND SHOW AND POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONS OR WHATEVER, WE DON'T GET THAT OPPORTUNITY.

>> LET ME STOP YOU RIGHT THERE, I WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING, I'M NOT ON THAT COMMITTEE.

THAT COMMITTEE IS ENTITY THAT IS A SCORING MECHANISM WHERE INTERVIEWS COME IN HERE, WE'RE THE ONES NOT COMMITTEE MAKE DECISION ON BUDGET WHERE YOU HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN, WHICH YOU ELOQUENTLY DONE VERY WELL, AS WELL AS THE JUDGE.

THIS IS THE DECISIONMAKING BODY THERE, NOT THAT COMMITTEE THAT MEETS AT ALL.

THEY ARE TRYING TO GIVE US THE BEST POSITION IN TERMS OF TRYING TO RATE OR GIVE ADDITIONAL

INFORMATION TO MAKE A DECISION. AM I CLEAR WITH THAT? >> I THINK IT IS ALSO WORTH POINTING OUT WE HAD TWO PUBLIC FACING COMMITTEE MEETINGS WHEN WE ALL SAT UP HERE AND OF THE SIX MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE AT LEAST FIVE HAVE BEEN HERE WHEN Y'ALL HAVE PRESENTED WHETHER IT WAS TO REGULAR COURT OR TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE COURT. WHEN YOU ARE SAYING YOU DID NOT GET A CHANCE TO TALK TO THE COMMITTEE, ON THE DAY WE DID THE ACTUAL SCORING WE DID NOT HAVE ANY DEPARTMENTS COME SPEAK WITH US BUT THE COMMITTEE DID HEAR YOUR PRESENTATION IN PERSON

BEFORE THAT. >> YEAH, THAT WAS JUST A SMALL SNAPSHOT SIR OF WHAT WENT ON THAT DAY, THERE WERE A LOT OF DISCUSSION. WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE ONE ON WITH THEM TO PRESENT. WE HAVE A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, FIRST TIME UP HERE TALKING, JUDGE DEEN TOLD ME TO END IT, I DID NOT FINISH EVERYTHING, THAT IS NOT FAIR. IT WAS NOT FAIR THE WAY THAT WHOLE THING WENT DOWN AS FAR AS BUDGET COMMITTEE. WHEN I SAT THERE AND LOOK AT SCORES AND WE'RE GETTING 1.0 ON THINGS WE KNOW FOR A FACT THERE IS NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION OR AGAINST NOBODY ON THAT COMMITTEE THAT UNDERSTANDS OPERATIONS AND HOW THE JUSTICE COURT WORKS. I GAVE Y'ALL A HANDOUT LAST TIME WITH A BIG OLD LONG SHEET OF EVERYTHING THAT THE LEGISLATURES MANDATE WE HAVE TO DO AND IT IS VERY EXTENSIVE. I COULD SPEND TWO DAYS GOING THROUGH EACH ONE, WE DON'T HAVE THAT TIME AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. IT GOES BACK TO WHAT AM I CHARGED WITH AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL? WHAT IS THE PEOPLE THAT ELECTED ME EXPECT ME TO DO? THAT IS TO REPRESENT MY OFFICE AND RUN MY OFFICE ACCORDINGLY, MAKE SURE IT IS STAFFED ACCORDINGLY, AND WE MEET THE DEMAND OF WHAT TODAY'S SOCIETY IN, PAER COUNTY IS PUTTING ON

US. >> JUDGE, THANK YOU. YOU ARTICULATED YOURSELF WELL, APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. IS THERE EXHIBIT ELSE THAT WOULD

LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK? >> -- THE BUDGET SCHEDULE BECAUSE OF THE POSTINGS WE REQUIRE TO POST IN NEWSPAPER AND TIMELINE, WE ANTICIPATE TO HAVE A VOTE ON ELECTED OFFICIAL SALARY ON THE 17TH, WHICH IS ON MONDAY. THAT GIVES US ENOUGH TIME FOR

GRIEVANCE PROCESS. >> THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO COME UP AND

SPEAK? >> OKAY, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC SPEAKING.

IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS AGENDA WE NEED TO SPEAK TO? BIANCA?

>> CAP AND NONCAP. >> CAUGHT ME ON THAT ONE, DIDN'T YOU?

>> PAYING TOO MUCH ATTENTION OVER THERE. WHAT SHEET GOING TO START WITH?

[01:45:01]

>> DETAILED CAP -- FIRST OF ALL, LET'S DISCUSS THIS PAGE, THE SUMMARY SHEET.

I GOT AN UPDATE A MINUTE AGO. >> DO YOU NEED THESE THINGS? >> NO.

>> OKAY. >> I NEED THESE. I NEED TO UPDATE A NUMBER FOR Y'ALL ON THE IT CAP, NONCAP. THE TOTAL NUMBER FOR ON THE SECOND LINE THAT SAYS IT CAP, NONCAP, 6660, 074. OTHER THAN ARE AND THEN THE TOP LINE, THE CAP, NONCAP IT SHOULD

BE 1 MILLION 155, 960. >> 960? >> YES.

>> THAT IS WHAT IT SAYS. >> THAT IS WHAT MINE SAYS. >> OKAY.

>> DID YOU SAY 1 MILLION 55? THAT WOULD TAKE OFF 100,000. >> GIVE ME A SECOND, LOOKING AT A PREVIOUS SPREADSHEET. SORRY. CLOSE THIS ONE.

BACK UP HERE. CLOSED OUT SO I CAN E-MAIL THE ONE.

JUST A THE MINUTE.

OKAY, CHANGE THAT, TOP LINE 1 MILLION 155, 960. SECOND LINE 520, MUCH BETTER, 837. AND THEN THE OTHER LINES ARE CORRECT.

SO REGULAR CAP AND NONCAP WE HAVE 1 MILLION 155, 960. IT CAP, NONCAP AND NEW EMPLOYEE 246. NEW EMPLOYEE IT CAP AND NONCAP 47,858.

CAP TAP IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AMOUNT 492, 841, I HAVE NOT CONFIRMED, NOT BEEN ABLE TO SPEAK WITH MARK LONG ABOUT THAT, THAT NUMBER IS NOT VERIFIED AND 5PECH FOR IT TECHNOLOGY FUND FOR JP COURT IS 22,000. BOTTOM LINE IN BLUE, AFTER SPEAKING WITH SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND IT, WE HAVE PULLED OUT 2 MILLION 324,626 WORTH OF ITEMS FUNDED THROUGH 287 G PROGRAM, MORE THAN HALF THE CAP AND NONCAP SUBMITTED THIS YEAR, THAT IS A GOOD THING.

>> THAT IS REAL GOOD. >> THAT IS VERY GOOD. SO IF YOU WANT TO GO TO THE FIRST SPREADSHEET, SAYS CAP, NONCAP, I DO HAVE THERE WAS A COUPLE OF THE VEHICLES, WE GOT NEW QUOTES FROM CALDWELL COUNTRY THAT CHANGE DOLLAR AMOUNTS VERY LITTLE BUT THERE WAS A CHANGE.

AND THEN THERE IS ADDITIONAL VEHICLE THAT MIGHT CHANGE AND QUOTE THE DEPARTMENT SUBMITTED DON'T ADD UP, NEED TO DOUBLE -CHECK AND MAKE SURE OPTION AND OUTFITTING IS THE SAME AS WHAT QUOTES WERE THAT CALDWELL SUBMITTED AGAIN. DO YOU WANT TO GO THROUGH THESE PAGES AS THEY ARE RANKED AND START APPROVING OR DISCUSSING THOSE OR?

>> I THINK THAT IS PROBABLY A GOOD THING. >> I THINK GO LINE BY LINE,

STARTING OFF. >> OKAY. SO EOC HAS AED 3000 IN COMMITTEE

RANKED IT 4.8. >> LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HOLT AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER, ANY DISCUSSION?

ALL IN FAVOR? >> I DID NOT SECOND THAT, BUT --

>> YOUR NAME AT THE TOP, SORRY. ARE YOU SECONDING IT? >> I AM FINE, I DON'T KNOW HOW

MY NAME GOT THERE. >> ALL IN FAVOR? >> I DID NOT MEAN TO PRESSURE

YOU. >> IS SOMETHING MESSING UP HERE OR WHAT?

>> THE NEXT ITEM IS FOR COUNTY COURT AT LAW 2 REQUESTED BULLETIN SIGNBOARD OUTSIDE OF

[01:50:05]

COURTROOM $1200, COMMITTEE RANKED IT 3.8. >> DO YOU HAVE MOTION OR NO?

>> I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THOSE ITEMS WE WERE NOT SURE ABOUT AND GAVE RANKING, I THINK WE LIKE TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT ONE. Y'ALL RECALL?

>> I THINK WE WERE WONDERING IS THIS REPLACING SOMETHING OR ADDITIONAL BULLETIN BOARD OR --

>> COME BACK TO THAT ONE. >> UH-HUH. >> ANYBODY HAVE INFORMATION OR

CAN WE WAIT ON THAT PROBABLY? >> COME BACK. OKAY.

>> OKAY. >> OKAY. NEXT ITEM IS FOR JP 1, IT WAS QUANTITY OF THREE DESK, CONTINUED IMPROVEMENT OF ANNEX REM

REMODEL -- >> I'M GETTING ABOUT THIS ITEM A BIGGER PICTURE.

IF WE DO THE REMODEL, WHAT IS THE CHANCE IF WE'RE BEING HONEST THAT IS GOING TO BE OPEN? IF WE ALLOCATE MONEY AND THEY START BUILDING IT, IN THAT FISCAL, PROBABLY NOT GOING TO OPEN, THAT WILL TAKE TIME. SO SOME OF THE, REASON I BRING THIS UP, THERE ARE THINGS WE LOOK AT AND OBVIOUSLY, IF WE DO THE REMODEL WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE DESKS AND EMPLOYEES AND ALL THAT STUFF, OUR THOUGHT THAT IS PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE ELIGIBLE TO BE SPENT UNTIL FOLLOWING FISCAL YEAR, YOU WILL SEE SOME RANKINGS ARE A LITTLE LOW.

>> I AGREE. THAT IS WHY. YEAH.

>> MAYBE SUGGEST THAT YOU ALL PUT THAT IN THE CONTINGENCY, WE NEED TO DO, WE HAVE RFQ ALREADY DONE FOR QUALIFICATION FOR ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT, HAVE TO GET PROPOSAL FOR THIS PROJECT

AND RFP FOR THE COP INSTRUCTION AND IT TAKES A WHILE. >> I THINK CONTINGENCY FOR THE SALARY ITEMS AND NECESSARY DESKS AND THAT STUFF, RECOGNIZE YOU HAVE TO HAVE THEM, RECOGNIZE YOU DO THAT IN CONTINGENCY INSTEAD OF APPROVING AN SIALERT STUFF. BECKY, YOU GOOD? REMODEL, IT WILL NOT HAPPEN THIS FISCAL, CAN WE DO THE AMOUNT AND FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH TOTAL AND

SEE IF WE NEED TO ADD CONTINGENCY FOR THAT? >> YEAH, SO --

>> IT DOES SAY CONTINGENT UPON, SEEM LIKE. >> CORRECT.

IF YOU HAVE APPROVE SPRING-TIME ANNEX REMODEL WE CAN PUT THIS IN CONTINGENCY AND IF IT HAPPENED

TO BE READY TO MOVE IN BEFORE END OF FISCAL YEAR HAVE FUNDS. >> THAT WAY IT IS NOT EATING UP

THE FUND. >> AND NOT USING IT FOR SOMETHING ELSE.

>> YEAH. >> SO MOVING ON, DO YOU WANT TO APPROVE THAT OR WAIT UNTIL YOU

TALK ABOUT IT? >> I THINK WE NEED TO WAIT AND IF WE DO APPROVE THAT, WE NEED

TO ADD TO LSZ IN CONTINGENCY, THAT IS WHAT WE WERE ASKING FOR. >> COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS A P5 MILLIMETER BALLISTIC SHIELD 24 BY 14 STEEL ARMOR PLATE HSI FUNDS, $715.

CAN THAT BE -- >> I BELIEVE ALL THEY ARE INVE

INVESTING IN SO THEY CAN -- >> I DID NOT KNOW IF THEY COULD ALLOCATE IN THIS BUDGET.

>> AND THEN --

>> YOU THINK THAT IS FUNDED ALREADY? >> AS LONG AS THE PERSON PURCHASING IT FOR IS UNDER 287

>> OKAY. >> SO THAT WAS TAKEN CARE OF? >> YES, SIR, UPDATING MY SPREADSHEET.

>> SAME THING FOR CREDENTIAL INVESTIGATOR TO

>> I BELIEVE THAT IS WHY WE RANKED IT WHERE WE RANKED IT. >> A ONE.

>> WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE NOP APPLICABLE TO GENERAL FUND. >> I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO

WE SHOULD REMOVE IT BASED OFF OF -- >> OKAY.

[01:55:03]

>> THAT IS MY RECOMMENDATION. >> OKAY. ALSO HAD $600 FOR OFFICE EQUIPMENT, FURNITURE AND NONCAP, UNEXPECTED BREAKAGE AND $750 FOR TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT UNEXPECTED

BREAKAGE OR REPLACEMENT? >> WE FEEL THAT SHOULD BE IN CONTINGENCY.

>> OKAY. ALL OF THOSE. BOTH OF THOSE.

>> OKAY. >> APPROVE TO GO AHEAD -- >> WE DON'T WANT TO APPROVE THE LINE ITEMS BUT FEEL LIKE THAT IS TYPE OF THING THAT SHOULD COME OUT OF CONTINGENCY.

THAT IS $600 AND $700, DON'T KNOW WE NEED TO ITEMIZE THAT OUT OF CONTINGENT.

IF IT WERE 500,000, THAT IS DIFFERENT. RECOGNIZE NEED, PAY FOR OUT OF

CONTINGENCY SO NO HERE. >> OKAY. SO SKIPPING DOWN TO BUILDING AND GROUNDS, REQUESTED HVAC EQUIPMENT CAPITAL FOR $100,000 AND COMMITTEE RANKED

THAT FIVE. >> COMMISSIONER HOLT AND WALDON.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? >> THAT IS SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN DOING EVERY YEAR SEVERAL YEARS HAVE THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY IN TINNING I THINK ITTY TO BE USED

FOR THAT REPLACEMENT OF EQUIPMENT DURING THE YEAR? >> YES, SIR, THEY REQUESTED

ZERO TURN MOWER FOR $10,000, RANKED FIVE. >> MOTION MADE, ANY DISCUSSION?

ALL IN FAVOR? CARRIES 5-0. >> REQUESTED TWO CHEVROLET CREW

CAB TRUCKS $47, 950 EACH, 95,900 AND COMMITTEE RANKED THAT A ONE. >> SO WE HAVE ANOTHER COMMITTEE MEETING THAT IS GOING TO DISCUSS VEHICLE REPLACEMENT POLICY FOR THE COUNTY FOR ENTIRE COUNTY.

SO WE CAN PUT CRITERIA FORWARD AS FAR AS MAKING DECISION ON VEHICLE REQUESTS RATHER THAN JUST I HAVE TWO VEHICLES, I WANT TWO NEW VEHICLES EVERY YEAR, WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHAT THE CRITERIA IS BEFORE YOU PUT IN YOUR BUDGET. LIKE TO PASS THOSE.

>> ON THAT NOTE, COMMISSIONER HALE, JUDGE CONLEY, JUDGE DEEN, IF YOU HAVE PRELIMINARY THOUGHTS ON WHAT POLICY OR POLICIES SHOULD BE IN PLACE FOR VEHICLE REPLACEMENT, IF YOU DON'T MIND SHOOTING A NOTE OVER TO ONE OF US AND THAT WAY WE CAN MAKE SURE YOUR POINTS OF VIEWS ARE CONSIDERED IN THERE. WHATEVER WE COME UP WITH WON'T BE BINDING IN THAT ROOM, NEED TO BE APPROVED IN HERE, WOULD LIKE YOUR INPUT. THAT IS IN A COUPLE WEEKS, YOU

HAVE TIME TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER. >> A STRONG FEELING THAT WE NEED POLICY THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY FOR VEHICLE REPLACEMENT BASED ON CRITERIA RATHER THAN

THESE ARE OLDEST TWO IN MY DEPARTMENT. >> IS HE REPLACING TWO VEHICLES

OR WANTS TWO MORE? >> WE DON'T KNOW. HOWEVER --

>> DO YOU HAVE THAT INFORMATION? >> REPLACE OLDER VEHICLES.

>> WE WON'T HAVE STANDARDIZED CRITERIA FOR REPLACEMENT OF OLDER VEHICLE PERTAINING TO MILEAGE AND AMOUNT OF MONEY SPENT ON THEM FOR REPAIR WORK AND WE WANT STANDARDIZE THE VEHICLE THAT REPLACES THEM AND MAKE CRITERIA FOR THAT, AS WELL, SO THAT WE ENSURE ALL COUNTY

VEHICLES ARE UNIFORM. >> DO WE HAVE, I KNOW IN OUR PRECINCTS WE MAINTAIN RECORDS AND SERVICE RECORDS AND ALL OUR EQUIPMENT, ON SOME OF THESE OTHER COUNTY DEPARTMENTS --

>> PRECINCT ONE, YOU HAVE SOME TYPE OF RECORD MANAGEMENT. >> WE DO IT ON VEHICLES WE WORK

ON FOR THE COUNTY, WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION. >> I THOUGHT THAT MIGHT BE THE CASE, MIGHT BE NICE TO INCORPORATE THE RECORD, SOMETIMES YOU GET A LEMON OR

HAVE ISSUES THAT CAN BE A PROBLEM. >> SOME DISCUSSION CENTERED AROUND IF YOU REQUEST A VEHICLE, YOU NEED TO PROVIDE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION AS TO WHY.

WHETHER IT IS HIGH MILEAGE, AGE OR -- >> TELL YOU HOW OFTEN WE WORK

ON THESE. >> THAT IS GOOD. >> OR AMOUNT SPENT ON THEM, LIKE WE KEEP. INSTEAD OF ASKING FOR THEM, WE'LL NEED DOCUMENTATION FOR

[02:00:04]

THAT. >> GOOD. >> GREAT.

THESE VEHICLES ARE HIGH MILES AND IN NEED OF COSTLY REPAIRS. >> YEAH.

I NEED, I'M SURE THEY WILL QUALIFY, HOWEVER, ONE DEPARTMENT'S IDEA OF HIGH MILEAGE IS NOT THE SAME AS OTHERS. I REQUEST WE HAD PREVIOUSLY FROM

ONE THAT HAD NEED TO REPLACE IT, IT HAD 70,000 MILES ON IT. >> SHERIFF'S VEHICLES ARE RODE HARD, COMPARED TO OTHER VEHICLES. SO DEPENDS.

AS I SAID BEFORE, PRECINCT 3 WE'RE HAPPY TO GET ONE OF THOSE OLDER HIGHER MILEAGE VEHICLES BECAUSE WE USE THEM FOR WHEN WE CHASE BAD GUYS DOWN. WE HAVE CHIEF BARNETT'S OLD PICKUP THAT WE USE AND USE IT ALL THE TIME. THAT IS JUST AN EXAMPLE.

THERE NEED TO BE CRITERIA. >> YEAH. NEXT ITEM.

>> SO ADVISE REQUEST OF $10,000 OF UNEXPECTED EQUIPMENT TO REPLACE UNEXPECTED EQUIPMENT LOSS, THIS IS NONCAP SO IT WOULD BE LIKE LAWN EQUIPMENT, WEED EATER OR LEAF BLOWER, CHAINSAW,

THOSE ITEMS THEY REPLACE QUITE REGULARLY. >> WHAT NUMBER DO YOU HAVE?

>> RANKED ONE, BUT I THINK IT IS BECAUSE IT WAS UNEXPECTED EQUIPMENT.

>> ANY TIME WE HAD SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT CLEAR AS TO WHAT IT WAS, WE MOVED, SUGGESTED THAT BE MOVED INTO A CONTINGENCY LINE. SO THAT THE MONEY IS THERE IN CASE THAT NEED TO BE REPLACED, WHICH WE KNOW IT DOES, NOT THAT NEED TO COME BEFORE COURT AT THAT TIME.

>> OKAY. I WONDER IF THIS IS FOR ANY OTHER EQUIPMENT? THEY HAVE MONEY BIANCA SAID 11,000 IN SMALL TOOLS LINE, THIS MAY BE SOMETHING ELSE.

>> MAY VERY WELL BE. ANYTHING NOT CLEAR LIKE THIS WE'RE GOING TO NEED REPLACING

STUFF, WE SUGGESTED THAT MOVE INTO CONTINGENCY LINE. >> OKAY.

>> YEAH. >> SO NEXT ITEM IS FOR CONSTABLE 1, THEY HAVE REQUESTED TWO VESTS TOTALING 3172 DOLLARS BULLET PROOF VESTS AND COMMITTEE RANKED THAT FIVE.

>> QUESTION BY COMMISSIONER COLLINS AND COMMISSION HALE. ANY DISCUSSION?

ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0. >> OKAY.

CONSTABLE 2 GAVE REQUEST TWO BALLISTIC SHIELD FOR TOTAL OF $7500, COMMITTEE RANKED THAT 5.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR?

>> NEXT ITEM IS VEHICLE RELATED AND SO I WILL WAIT AFTER VEHICLE AUDIT TO DISCUSS THOSE LATER.

THEY REQUESTED EIGHT GLOCK 19 NINE MILLIMETER 4268 DOLLARS RANKED AS ONE.

>> SO THE PISTOLS WERE SOMETHING WE DISCUSSED BRIEFLY THE OTHER DAY, THE IDEA WAS

HISTORICALLY WE HAVE NOT PROVIDED HANDGUNS. >> STANDARDIZED.

>> HAVE NOT PROVIDED THAT, THE SHERIFF HAD COMMENTS ABOUT THAT, IF HE WANT TO SPEAK FURTHER, HE HAS INTENDED EFFORT ON LONG GUNS, LET FOLKS GET THEIR OWN FIREARM, KEEP THAT POLICY SAME

AS IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN. >> OKAY. >> SO THAT -- THIS WOULD GO FIREARMS IN GENERAL? IS THE THOUGHT TO PUT -- ON THEM?

>> IN THE PAST, I DON'T BELIEVE THE COUNTY PROVIDED OR BOUGHT FIREARMS FOR THEM.

>> NOT SURE. >> CONSTABLES ARE USING THEIR OWN PISTOLS?

>> YES, JUST LIKE DEPUTIES DO, TOO. SHERIFF OFFICE PROVIDES LONG

GUNS. >> THE LONG GUNS. >> NEXT ITEM.

>> OKAY. THEY HAVE REQUESTED TWO MOTOROLA 8000 RADIO FOR $18,000,

[02:05:07]

COMMITTEE RANKED THAT FIVE. >> MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY YEA.

>> HOW COME RADIOS KEEP COMING UP? >> THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED IN ORIGIN ORIGINAL ARPA FUNDS LIST, RIGHT?

>> YES. >> THESE ARE ADDITIONAL ON TOP OF THOSE.

THOSE ON LIST FROM 2023. >> WE KEEP GETTING HIT BY MOTOROLA THIS OR THAT.

>> I BELIEVE IT WAS TO REPLACE

IT IS SUPPLIED. >> FOR NEW. >> OKAY.

>> CONSTABLE 3. >> MOVING TO CONSTABLE 3. THEY REQUESTED NEW PATROL UNIT RADIO 8500 AND HAND-HELD RADIO FOR 8315, AND COMMITTEE RANKED BOTH ITEMS ONE.

REQUESTED REPLACEMENT 1500 RADIO AND UNIT 8500 AND COMMITTEE RANKED THAT FIVE BECAUSE IT WAS

EXISTING UNIT. >> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION?

ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0. >> THEY HAVE VEHICLE AND

OUTFITTING THAT WE WILL HOLD OFF AND WAIT UNTIL AUDIT. >> BALLISTIC SHIELDS?

>> NEXT ITEM IS BALLISTIC SHIELD 8500, COMMITTEE RANKED FIVE.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR?

5-0. >> AND THEY REQUESTED SAFE EVIDENCE LOCKER, THE COMMITTEE

RANKED THAT A TWO. >> I HAD IN MY NOTES THAT WE'D LIKE MORE EXPLANATION ON WHAT IT IS FOR, BIANCA, DO YOU MIND GRABBING THAT FOR US? BECAUSE FOR ME, I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT I RANK THIS, BUT I THINK THE GENERAL QUESTION WAS WE DON'T KNOW WHY WE NEED THIS.

IF YOU CAN GET THAT FOR US, WOULD BE GREAT. >> DOES EVERY CONSTABLE HAVE A

SAFE FOR EVIDENCE? >> I DON'T KNOW. >> SEVERAL HAVE SAFES TO HOLD AMMO IN. THEY HAVE CONNIE SCOTT STABL 3. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT EVIDENCE.

>> OKAY.

>> THAT IS FOR TWO. >> OKAY. CONSTABLE 4 BODY ARMOR $3000 AND

COMMITTEE RANKED THAT FIVE. >> MAKE A MOTION. >> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HOLT.

>> MY SCREEN WAS LOCKED UP, I COULDN'T. >> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HALE

AND SECOND IS -- >> I SECONDED IT. >> I'M SORRY, CONLEY, YOUR NAME UP HERE. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR?

CLEARS 5-0. >> FOLLOW-UP WHEN (INAU (INAUDIBLE) -- COME TO THE COURT PROGRAM AGAIN CREDENTIALED COULD USE THIS FOR THAT, MAY JUST ASK --

>> OKAY. >> TIMING OF WHEN THEY NEED IT AND EXPECT.

>> THAT'S GOOD. >> THANK YOU. >> OKAY, KIM, INVESTIGATIONS.

>> OKAY, CID, HAS REQUESTED A DIGITAL MEASURE KIT FOR $530 RANKED AS FIVE.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HOLT AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HALE. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?

ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0. >> REQUESTED ADVANCE LASER

TRAJECTORY KIT FOR 841 DOLLARS, RANKED FIVE. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? >> CARRIES 5-0. >> PATROL REQUESTING 10 AXON VEHICLE TRANSFER FOR 2400 EACH FOR TOTAL OF $24,000, THIS IS THROUGH CONTRACT SERVICES, THAT WAS RANKED FIVE. > MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CONLEY AND HOLT, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0.

>> REQUESTED 15 BULLET RE RESISTANT VESTS, RANKED FIVE. >> MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER

[02:10:05]

>> REQUESTED -- SORRY. REQUESTED 20 GAS MASK FOR TOTAL OF $11,500, RANKED FIVE.

>> MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER WALDON AND HALE. ANY DISCUSSION?

>> HOW LONG DO THESE GAS MASKS, HAVE A LIFE SPAN ON THEM? WE GET SOME EVERY YEAR SEEMS

LIKE? >> I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THEY LAST, IF THEY ARE LIKE HELMETS OR WHAT, THIS IS LAST AMOUNT WE NEED FOR REPLACEMENT, THIS WILL PUT ONE IN EVERY PATROL CAR.

I CAN GET THAT. >> YOU JUST DON'T HAVE ENOUGH IN EVERY PATROL CAR UNTIL NOW?

>> YES, SIR. >> IF YOU NEED SOMEBODY TO TEST THOSE, COMMISSION ER IS AVAILABE

TO SEE IF THEY WORK. >> APPRECIATE YOU VOLUNTEERING FOR THAT.

>> ANY TAKERS? >> I DON'T REMEMBER, ALL IN FAVOR.

CARRIES 5-0. >> THEY HAVE REQUESTED TARGET POINTER ELIMINATOR FOR SWAT JUST

ONE FOR 1310. >> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HALE AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER

CONLEY, ALL IN FAVOR? PROCEED, 5-0. >> REQUESTED EXPLOSIVE BREACHING SUPPLIES FOR SWAT $2 $2000, RANKED FIVE.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER AND SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR?

5-0. >> LONG RANGE ACOUSTIC DEVICE, $20,808, RANKED FIVE.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSION AND SECOND, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR?

5-0. >> REQUESTED THREE MOBILE RADIOS FOR RESERVE UNIT 15,336,

RANKED A FIVE. >> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HALE, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0.

>> MOVING ON TO DISPATCH, REQUESTED TWO HEAVY-DUTY TASK CHAIR FOR 1034, RANKED FIVE.

>> MOTION AND SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR?

5-0. >> SO OUTFITTING OF VEHICLE, WAIT FOR THE AUDIT.

THEY REQUESTED, THIS IS ANIMAL CONTROL, REQUESTED CRADLE POINT FOR 1144, ALL OF THEIR REQUESTS ARE RELATED TO VEHICLES, CAP AND NONCAP, DO YOU WANT TO HOLD OFF ON ALL THAT?

>> YES. >> OKAY. TR

TRANSPORT. >> IF YOU DO FUGITIVE TR TRANSPORT, HAND-HELD DOCKING

STATION, RANKED FIVE. >> MOTION AND SECOND, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?

ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0. >> IT REQUESTING TWO VERCOTTA TRA TRAILER, ONE RANKED FIVE AND THE OTHER THREE.

>> MOTION FOR FIRST ONE AT FIVE. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0. >> I WILL MAKE THE MOTION FOR

SECOND ONE, AS WELL. KNOWING WE CAN COME BACK AND -- >> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HOLT

AND WALDON. >> CURIOUS WHY IT WAS THREE AND OTHER FIVE?

>> WAIT AND SEE IF WE HAD ENOUGH MONEY, WHICH IS ALWAYS THE CASE.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0. >> OKAY.

>> OKAY. >> AGEXTENSION. >> SO THE RADIO CONTINGENCY,

DID YOU VOTE ON THAT? >> YES, IT PASSED. >> SORRY.

AG EXTENSION REQUESTING 2026 FORD EXPLORER FOR 37, 450, RANKED ONE AND I'M GUESSING

AUDIT? >> YES. >> LET'S SEE.

SO MOVING TO IT CAP AND NONCAP, BLOW THAT UP. THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE REQUESTING SEVEN RECO DOCUMENT SCANNER $1000 EACH FOR TOTAL OF 6993.

COMMITTEE RANKED FIVE. >> WHERE YOU AT NOW? >> ON IT CAP AND NONCAP.

[02:15:03]

ON THE SECOND PAGE. >> YEAH. >> LITTLE SHORT SYNOPSIS.

>> THIS HERE. >> I'M SORRY, I'M BEHIND. WHERE ARE WE AT?

>> COUNTY CLERK. >> MOTION MADE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HOLT, ANY

DISCUSSION? >> SEVEN SCANNERS FOR $7000? >> YES.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? >> 5-0. >> COUNTY CLERK REQUESTING FIVE

TIGER MODEL 4840S FOR $7475. >> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0.

>> DISTRICT CLERK REQUESTING EIGHT RECO SCANNERS TOTAL $8000, RANKED FIVE.

>> MOTION AND SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR?

5-0. >> CID REQUESTING DOCUMENT SCANNERS FOR $930, THAT IS A

FIVE. >> MOTION AND SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION?

ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0. >> SO I MENTIONED AT THE LAST COURT THAT WE WERE WAITING ON A QUOTE BACK FROM THE AV COMPANY FOR THE UPGRADE FOR ALL FOUR MAJOR COURTROOMS AND THIS COURTROOM AND IT CAME BACK THIS MORNING 265,250 DOLLARS.

THE PREVIOUS ESTIMATE ABRAHAM AND I TALKED ABOUT WAS $250, SO WE WERE CLOSE.

>> WHAT IS NUMBER? >> MAKE MOTION TO APPROVE. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> I THINK THIS IS ONE WE COULD COME BACK AND SHARPEN OUR PENCIL

AT THE END IF WE NEED TO. >> IF YOU RECALL, WE HAVE THE COURT FACILITY FUND FEE AND SINCE THIS IS IMPROVEMENT TO COURT, WE CAN UTILIZE SOME OF THOSE FUNDS FOR THIS PURPOSE, EVEN IF WE DO A PORTION FROM GENERAL FUND AND PORTION FROM THAT FUND, WE CAN DO THAT.

>> WHAT IS THAT CALLED? >> COURT FACILITY FUND. I BELIEVE COULD BE WRONG LIKE SB41 THAT CREATED IT IN I BELIEVE JANUARY OF 2022, ACCUMULATION.

WE HAVE USED IT ONCE, I BELIEVE IT WAS IN DISTRICT COURT BUILDING FOR SOME REMODELING.

>> CAN YOU GET US THE AMOUNT AVAILABLE IN THAT, IF YOU DON'T MIND?

THANK YOU. >> SO THE IN THE SCALE OF IMPORTANCE, AS FAR AS HAVING GOOD EQUIPMENT IN THESE COURTS, IT BECOMES SOMETHING THAT IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANCE AND THAT IS WHY THAT RECEIVED HIGH SCORING THAT IT DID. EVEN THOUGH IT SOUNDS LIKE A LOT OF MONEY, TALKING FIVE DIFFERENT PLACES THAT GET IT AND TO BE ABLE TO HEAR, I SEE HEADS SHAKING, IT IS CRITICAL WHEN YOU HAVE ANY LEGAL CASE SPECIFICALLY SOME OF THE HIGHER PROFILE CASES

THAT GO THROUGH OUR COURT SYSTEM. >> ALL IN FAVOR?

5-0. >> SO THAT MOTION WAS TO PAY OUT OF GENERAL FUND, WE CAN COME BACK, THOUGH, AND CHOOSE TO ADJUST HOW MUCH WE PAY FOR OUT OF GENERAL FUND VERSUS COURT FACILITY FUND? ? I THINK PROBABLY MOTION IS ENOUGH NOT TO CHALLENGE WHAT YOU SAID, MOTION TO APPROVE IT AND THEN THEY CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO

PAY IT. >> ADJUST IT. >> ANYTHING ELSE WE CAN THINK OF WE WOULD NEED TO USE COURT FACILITY FUND FOR? IF THERE IS NOTHING ELSE TO USE

IT FOR, MIGHT AS WELL, I WOULD SUGGEST -- >> THERE IS PORTION IN THERE, BUT I MEAN, IF YOU HAD, IT CAN PAY FOR LIKE PRINCIPLE AND INTEREST FOR LIKE IF YOU SAY YOU HAD A BOND THAT WAS FOR LIKE A JUSTICE FOR THE COURT AND AMOUNT IN THERE VERSUS WHAT THAT WOULD BE, I THINK IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE FOR IMPROVEMENT OF IT, PRETTY SPECIFIC SO I CAN READ IT

AGAIN. >> THIS IS PRETTY EASY HERE. THIS IS PRETTY EASY PLACE TO USE

IT HERE. >> THAT IS GOOD. >> NEXT ITEM, IT REQUEST ING

FORD REPLACEMENT 85,877 AND THAT RANKS FIVE. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

[02:20:03]

>> FOR SECURITY SYSTEM. 40,000 DOLLARS. THAT IS FOR ADDITIONAL -- CAMERAS. WORKING ON GRANT, OKAY. CAN YOU ACCEPT THAT?

>> MOTION AND SECOND, DISCUSSION? >> NEED TO DISCUSS THAT?

>> NO ACTION. CONTINGENCY? >> IT IS CONTINGENT ON GRANT.

>> 40 GATE CONTINGENT. >> OKAY. AND SECURITY SYSTEM IS SECURITY

CAMERAS. >> I'M GOING TO MOVE WE APPROVE THE SECURITY CAMERAS.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. DISCUSSION PHASE? ALL IN FAVOR?

5-0. >> THE NEXT ITEM IS 400 UV KEYS, THAT IS THE LITTLE

THINGS THAT GO IN YOUR DESKTOP FOR AUTHORENTICATION SECURITY. >> MOTION AND SECOND, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? OKAY.

RIGHT NOW WE HAVE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE BILLS -- >> THEY ARE DIFFERENT.

>> OKAY. PROCEED. >> SO THE FIRST IS

DELL PRORUGGED LAPTOP, QUANTITY OF FOUR OF THOSE. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0.

>> WE HAVE DELL PRO 16 LAPTOPS, QUAN QUA

QUANTITY 19 OF THOSE. >> MOTION AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CONLEY, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0.

>> QUANTITY OF 10 DELL DESKTOP, 22, 240 DOLLARS. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION?

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HALE. ALL RANKED FIVE. >> MOTION AND SECOND, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0.

>> REQUESTING DELL DESKTOP, MORE SOUPED UP VERSION FOR THE 43RD DISTRICT JUDGE FOR $3000.

JUDGE TOWSON. >> WHY DOES HE NEED A SOUPED UP VERSION?

>> HE CAN HAVE A CHROMEBOOK. >> I'LL MAKE THE MOTION. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? >> LET'S MOVE ON.

>> 5-0. >> AND THEN WE NEED TWO DELL ALL IN ONE DESKTOPS FOR

CCL 1 AND 2 COURTROOM FOR TOTAL 4344, RANKED A FOUR. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? 5-0.

>> AND THEN THE AG EXTENSION, THEY RECEIVE FUNDS AND THEY PAY FOR HALF OF THEIR TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT AND THEY HAVE REQUESTED TWO LAPTOPS, COUNTY PORTION WOULD BE 1500, THAT WAS

RANKED A ONE. >> NEXT ITEM. >> WHILE WE'RE STILL ON THIS, SO COURT FACILITY FUND SPECIFICALLY THE PURPOSE TO FUND CONSTRUCTION, RENOVATION OR IMPROVEMENT OF FACILITY THAT HOUSE COURT OR PAY PRINCIPLE OF INTEREST ON AND COST OF ISSUANCE BOND FOR CONSTRUCTION, RENOVATION OR IMPROVEMENT OF FACILITY AND CURRENTLY WE HAVE HIGH BECAUSE THAT INCLUDES ABOUT $7000 OF INTEREST THAT WILL GET MOVED TO THE GENERAL FUND.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION, HAS THERE BEEN ANY COURTS WHO HAVE00 USEDS FUNDS ALREADY?

>> COURT TWO YEARS AGO APPROVED I THINK REMODELING, I COULD BE INCORRECT.

I KNOW IN DISTRICT COURT BUILDING, WORK THAT BUILDING AND GROUNDS WAS OVERSEEING, MAYBE

[02:25:01]

>> OKAY. THAT WOULD BASICALLY WIPE THIS OUT?

>> YES, SO THAT IS WHERE MAYBE YOU PAY FOR HALF OF IT WITH GENERAL FUND AND HALF HERE AND YOU STILL HAVE FUNDS TO UTILIZE IN TIME WHERE MAYBE YOU NEED TO UTILIZE THOSE FUNDS AND NOT HAVE

TO HIT GENERAL FUND. >> ON COURT LAST YEAR, IT WASN'T THESE FUNDS BECAUSE HE HAD A REMODEL EXPANSION TO HIS -- I DID NOT KNOW IF THESE FUNDS WERE USED FOR THAT?

>> IT WAS NOT, NO. IT WAS NOT. >> BEFORE YOU WERE TO UTILIZE THAT IT WOULD BRING GENERAL FUND DOWN TO 26,000ISH. LIKE SHE SAID, IF YOU WANT TO

SAVE SOME FOR ANY OTHER UNKNOWN -- >> I THINK MY OPINION WE CAN SPEND IT HERE IF WE NEED EXPENDITURE WE CAN PAY THAT OUT OF GENERAL FUND ANY TIME, RIGHT? YEAH, WE ARE ABLE TO UTILIZE THIS FUND NOW, SAVE THAT MONEY AND IF WE NEED TO SPEND IT SOMETIME LATER WE CAN. NOT OUT OF THE FUND, OUT OF GENERAL FUND OR CONTINGENCY.

>> THAT STARTED IN 22, ADDING 50 GRANT A YEAR? 60?

>> WE BUDGETED 95,000. >> A YEAR? >> YES.

>> I WOULD SAY WE WIPE IT OUT, THEN -- >> LET IT BUILD AGAIN.

>> IF WE HAD TO SPEND SOMETHING, WE COULD TAKE IT OUT OF GENERAL.

>> WE'LL COME BACK WITH A -- >> IT IS NOT CRITICAL. >> IF WE SPENT 50 OUT OF IT, THAT 95 MAKES SENSE. SORRY, THE 95,000 WE BUDGET CONTINGENCY AND THAT WAS FUND BALANCE AND BUDGET ING I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER WALDON, WIPE OUT WHAT IS THERE AND PAY FOR AV STUFF, THAT WILL BUILD BACK. YOU SAID THAT WOULD MAKE IT 25ISH?

>> 27 OR SO. 27, OKAY. >> DEPENDING, YOU SAID 7000

TAKEN OUT FOR SOMETHING ELSE? >> YES. >> WE'LL FIGURE THAT OUT, OKAY.

>> WHAT ARE WE ON NOW? WE ARE CAN WE GO BACK TO THE BOTTOM OF DETAIL FOR CAP AND NONCAP BIGGER SPREADSHEET? BACK PAGE EOF THAT, THE YELLOW, HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE LEFT?

>> SOME WE CAN COME BACK TO DISCUSS ROLLOVER, SOME YOU SEE ELECTION PARKING LOT, THERE WAS

FUNDS BUDGETED THIS YEAR FOR RENOVATIONS 1105 SANTA FE. >> THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE

500,000. >> OKAY. WHAT IS NOT ON THE SHEETS INCLUDE CHANGE ORDER FROM YESTERDAY ON THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM CURRENTLY ROLLOVER 181,099. IF WE HAVE ANY OF OUR SESSIONS FOR ANY REASON THAT HAVE TO BE CANCELLED AND MOVED UPDATE THAT NUMBER AND IN THE EVENT SOMETHING RIGHT BETWEEN ADOPTION AND BEGINNING OF YEAR SOMETHING CHANGES, WE'LL HAVE TO COME BACK AND HAD TO DO THAT THIS YEAR IT WOULD HAVE ROLLED OVER, ASKED FOR CONTINGENCY ON THAT. THE OTHER THING THAT WAS INCLUDED IN TINNING I THINK ITTY THIS YEAR AND WE SHOULD REVISIT THAT AND WHETHER WE WANT TO BUDGET AGAIN OR CHANGE THE AMOUNT IN THE CONTINGENCY 3.2 MILLION ALLOCATED FOR LAND USE AND FACILITY, NOT SURE WHERE THAT IS AT AND IF THAT NEED TO BE BUDGETED THIS YEAR IN CONTINGENCY AND IF THE NUMBER NEED TO BE ADJUSTED BASED OFF INFORMATION YOU HAVE.

>> OKAY. >> I THINK THAT WAS -- I WANT TO BRING UP.

>> 894,000 FOR PROPERTY CLAIM, PORTION SPENT AND WE NEED TO UPDATE THAT NUMBER TO REPAIR A

[02:30:02]

NONCAP SINCE YOU HAVE NOT DECIDED THOSE. >> I THINK WE ARE DONE ON THAT.

>> I THINK WE ARE DONE ON THAT. I DON'T HAVE PHONE NUMBERS ON CAPITAL PROJECT LIST, THESE ARE JUST AMOUNT INCLUDED IN THE DEPARTMENT BUDGET, THIS IS NOT A LIST I GOT FROM BUILDING AND

GROUNDS. >> ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CAP AND NONCAP, WE HAVE AP

X KIT, RADIO CONTINGENCY, THE CX 300, ALL THOSE? >> THAT IS ITEMS, I DID NOT

PRINCE ON THE SHEET. >> JAMES, ARE WE KILLING THOSE? >> 287 G.

>> OKAY. AP X KIT, THE VIA CX 300, 4500? THOSE GOT MOVED TO 287 G?

>> ALONG WITH THE DELL PRO MAX DESKTOP COMPUTER, MEGACOMPUTER 8387 UNDER IT CAP AND NONCAP AND THEN SPECIAL HAS -- DATA DUMP AND THROUGH DOCKING STATION TOTAL $390 AND SO HAD SOME DELL PRO RUGGED LAPTOP, 34,677 PULLED OFF AND ONE DESKTOP 1,000 PULLED OUT.

THAT IS FOR IT CAP AND NONCAP AND THAT NUMBER IS INCLUDED ON SUMMARY PAGE THAT 2.3 MILLION.

DOWN HERE. >> YEAH, I THINK I MOVED THAT OVER ALREADY BUT I HAD NOT DONE

THOSE I WAS ASKING JAMES ABOUT, SORRY ABOUT THAT. >> THOSE WERE LATER IN THE

DISCUSSION THE OTHER DAY. >> KIM TOUCH SAID ON SHE WASN'T SURE BASED ON CONFIRMATION FROM BUILDING AND GROUND THIS LIST, I RECOMMENDED IT SEVERAL YEARS, I REALLY THINK LIKE WE APPROVE CAP AND NONCAP, IT WOULD BE REALLY IMPORTANT TO BASICALLY HAVE A LIST OF HERE ARE PROJECTS, THINGS ARE GOING TO CHANGE, I KNOW YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER START OF BUDGET I'VE HAD DEPARTMENT SAYS COME AND ASK ME, WAS THAT APPROVED, THEY MAY HAVE REQUESTED IT, THERE IS NOT NECESSARILY APPROVAL SO TO SPEAK FROM COMMISSIONERS COURT, AGAIN, SOMETIMES WE HAVE THRESHOLD CAPITAL BIGGER PROJECTS PUT IN A SPECIAL LINE AND REASON WE PUT IN THE SPECIAL LINE, BECAUSE IT IS IMPROVEMENT WE CAPITALIZE AND DEPRESHIATE FOR FINANCIAL REPORTING PURPOSES.

A LOT OF PROJECT THROUGH REGULAR REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE LINE AND IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT LIST, BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS CAN GO THROUGH HOWEVER THEY PRESENT TO YOU BASED ON SAFETY, PRIORITY, WHAT CAN BE DONE, BUT I KNOW THOSE QUESTIONS HAVE COME UP SEVERAL TIMES AFTER THE FACT AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND FROM THIS LIST SOMETIMES IN THE PAST, WHAT WE'VE ASKED FROM BUILDING REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE WE CAN GET PROJECTS DONE PLUS REGULAR MAINTENANCE AND THINGS COME UP VERSUS ASKING ADDITIONAL FROM BUDGET FOR PROJECTS AND I DON'T THINK THAT IS CLEAR HERE.

THAT NEED TO BE CLARIFIED. >> NEED TO REQUEST THAT LSZ FROM BUILDING AND GROUNDS?

>> YES. >> WHO IS GOING TO DO THAT? >> I CAN, I THINK IT

MIC] -- >> SO WE NEED TO REQUEST IT FROM THE TOTAL THEY ARE BEING ASKED FOR RENOVATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WHAT A LIST OF ITEMS ARE AND LIST THAT IS PRIORITIZED AND THAT WAY WE WILL KNOW IF APPROVED HERE AND THOSE FOLKS WILL KNOW THEIR PROJECT GOT APPROVED RATHER THAN APPROPRIATING A SUM OF MONEY AND IT FALLS INTO WHERE ARE WE GOING

TO SPEND IT AT THAT LEVEL? >> CORRECT. >> I CAN ASK FOR THAT, KIM, I

WILL GET WITH YOU ON DETAIL OF THAT, I CAN HANDLE THAT. >> ALSO JUST WHAT THEY HAVE INCLUDED OR FROM THAT LIST WHAT THEY FEEL THEY ALREADY HAVE IN REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE LINE THEY

[02:35:03]

THEY PUT TOGETHER. >> MY BRAIN AND NOT BRAINING ANYMORE, I WILL GET WITH YOU

ALSO ON WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR. >> PRIORITY ORDER THEY WOULD BE ADDRESSED IN, AS WELL, SO WE KNOW YOUR PROJECT IS APPROVED, IT IS IN THIRD PLACE. IT WILL BE DONE, BUT NOT FIRST.

HOW IS THAT? >> JUDGE GREEN, YOU ARE A LITTLE LATE.

>> I WAS HELD UP BY THE NEEDS OF THE STATE. >> I WANT TO COME UP?

>> WE HAD HEARINGS TODAY SET WEEKS IN ADVANCE. I COULDN'T RESET THOSE ON SHORT

NOTICE THAT I -- >> I KNOW YOU ARE NOT HERE JUST TO --

>> JUDGE, YOU WANT TO COME UP AND SPEAK? >> I MIGHT HOLD OUT UNTIL

THURSDAY AND COME BACK, SEE HOW THINGS ARE GOING. >> OKAY.

>> REACHED END OF ROAD FOR TODAY? >> I HOPE.

>> GIVE ME FIVE MINUTES, GIVE UPDATE -- >> UPDATE ON THE AMOUNT APPROVED? I CAN WAIT UNTIL THURSDAY ON THAT.

>> OKAY. >> MOVE TO ITEM FOUR. MOTION.

>> SO MOVED. MOTION AND SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR YEA.

>> I WAS -- WHAT WAS THAT? >> ITEM THREE. DISCUSS POTENTIAL RADIO SUBSCRIBER FEE POLICY AND I WASN'T SURE IF THAT WAS ON THURSDAY'S COURT, IF YOU WOULD

LIKE TO DISCUSS IT NOW WOULD BE THE TIME. >> YOU SAID YOU WILL BE HERE

THURSDAY? >> IS THAT ON THE AGENDA FOR THURSDAY?

>> SHOULD BE IDENTICAL? RICH IS NOT HERE. >> IT IS NOT ON THURSDAY.

>> IT IS NOT ON THURSDAY. >> IT IS NOT. >> DO WE HAVE ITEMS ON

THURSDAY? >> I MEAN, I THINK THE AGENDA IS PROBABLY -- NOT GOING TO

SAY -- TO DISCUSS IT EVEN IN NOT TAKE ANY ACTION TO DISCUSS IT. >> I AM ACTIVELY LOOKING AT WHAT ARE OTHER AGENCIES DOING BASED OFF SERVICES OFFERED, TRYING TO FIND HAPPY MEDIUM.

IF INFRASTRUCTURE IS BROUGHT IN, GOING THROUGH STEPS TO PRESENT AS MUCH INFORMATION AS I CAN TO

THE COURT. >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE THAT USE OUR SYSTEM THAT ARE NOT IN COUNTY. AGENCIES THAT USE OUR RADIO SYSTEM, WE HAVE PAID FOR AND SHERIFF BROUGHT UP IN MEETINGS, IT IS GENERAL, GENERALLY ACCEPTED PRACTICE TO HAVE A SUBSCRIBER FEE AND USER FEE FOR THAT, THAT IS WHAT HE'S STRUGGLING WITH.

>> HELP OUR ANNUAL MAINTENANCE WE PAY WHICH IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT COUNTY EXPENDITURE.

>> THE SECOND ITEM SAYS PRESENT, DISCUSS, APPROVE GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOR 2026-2027 FISCAL YEAR INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THAT FALLS UNDER THAT.

>> WE'RE GOOD. >> RECORD SHOW WE'LL ADJOURN AT 11:50, WE HAD THE VOTE ALREADY.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.