[0:02] Okay, let's go ahead and get our meeting started. This is a regular call meeting of the Johnson County Commissioner's Court. Notice was properly and lawfully posted on the Texas Open Meetings Act on August 4th of 2022. Today's date being Monday, August 8th of 2022 at 9.01 a.m. Prior to the start of our court, I'd like to

[0:29] do our immigration. I'd like to ask Mr. Hal for the Texas flag and

[0:34] Commissioner Bailey for the United States flag. If you could all please rise

[0:37] with me. My prayer may be a little longer. We need, we've got a lot to pray about in

[0:43] this country. Father God, we humbly approach you this morning, Father. Thank

[0:51] you for Jesus. Thank you for that promise, Father God, that was delivered to us

[0:57] years ago, and we thank you and we honor you, Father God. The Father we pray today, that you

[1:05] will guide this court and all of this decisions that it makes. And Father, we also pray for our country,

[1:15] for all the turmoil that's going on. And Father God, we know that you are in control of all,

[1:22] And we pray for the God that good minds will come together and work together, whether

[1:31] be our country or other countries' father.

[1:35] So Father, just give us your mercy, your love, your patience.

[1:43] So God, all moral leaders in Washington, God, their thoughts, may they work together as representatives

[1:51] of the people of this country.

[1:55] And may those results be for the betterment of our country?

[2:00] What are those may be, Father God, but you know, the Father, we thank you for that.

[2:07] We are glad that you're in control and sighting seems to think he is, but we know who's in control.

[2:15] We thank you for that, Father God.

[2:17] Father, be with us now as we go through this agenda for our citizens of Johnson County.

[2:25] May we respect each and every person here today.

[2:30] Father, thank you for your love.

[2:32] Thank you for Jesus.

[2:33] But give us what we pay you for our prayer and Jesus' name.

[2:38] Please join us.

[2:39] I

[3:09] welcome all our guests. We have quite a few guests with us today. I think each and every one of you are coming.

[3:17] Judge, if I could, I don't know. Yes, sir, you may have got them.

[3:19] Speaking of the housema. Guests here in our audience today, we have a gentleman with us today that may have to leave before their time on the program.

[3:28] But I want to introduce and honor Mr. Barney McClure.

[3:32] It was inducted into the Ag Teachers Association of Texas Hall of Fame two weeks ago.

[3:39] Quite an honor.

[3:44] Barney taught here in Johnson County in the Grandview and Clebron and then went to work

[3:49] for the Ag Teachers Association of Texas and has been an icon in that family and I just wanted

[3:59] to publicly congratulate him on behalf of the commission's court and thank you for what

[4:04] you do now with prairie lands and solar water conservation and those things

[4:08] Barney we appreciate you. New vet Barney.

[4:14] Barney has always been a very

[4:16] progressive person for our community and the good part about it Barney. We hope

[4:21] we leave good seeds for our kids you know and you've got something coming behind

[4:27] and they're excellent, so we're excited about that

[4:33] for the future of our county.

[4:35] We have a very, very special presentation this morning.

[4:42] It's a presentation, the 2021 Texas Historical Commission

[4:46] Distinguished Service Award

[4:48] to the Johnson County Historical Commission.

[4:52] All the executive committee members are I believe are present.

[4:58] They don't really get their salary so large and they give them sales for the betterment

[5:08] of the history of our county.

[5:11] And so we're quite honored to even have you here, thank you for coming.

[5:15] And we'd like to present this Texas Historic Commission Distinguished Service Award.

[5:22] I'd like to ask the court to come with me if we may and we'll

[5:27] Senator y'all can come all come up and we'll present this

[6:33] I know all these people, this is a great group of people here that give their time for

[6:44] the betterment of the history of our county.

[6:48] They spend quite a bit of time doing it too and so we want to honor them with this Texas

[6:56] the Historical Commission as presents the 2021 Distinguished Service Award to the Johnson County Historical Commission

[7:04] and recognition of its active and well-balanced preservation program.

[7:11] This is signed by the Executive Director of the Texas Historical Commission,

[7:15] I know him personally, no found man, and this is a really nice award.

[7:22] So Sandra I'll present who I'm going to present this to you Sandra. She's the chair of our commission

[7:30] I want to say something for y'all talk

[7:34] We we've lost some fight a lot

[7:37] That among ourselves sometimes, but these people are exceptional people

[7:44] Native and I go back in so many years and worked with us on a hundred year

[7:50] and genuinely that took a lot of time, too, didn't it?

[7:53] And it was very successful, I think.

[7:56] And so thank all of y'all for what you do

[7:59] and for your participation in our county.

[8:03] So...

[8:03] Thank you for your service.

[8:05] Well, thank y'all.

[8:07] It's, I loved it.

[8:08] So it's been a good thing.

[8:10] So, all right.

[8:12] Senator, I'll turn it over.

[8:13] You can kind of get, say what you want to say.

[8:15] And then Bob, if you want to make some comments,

[8:19] Yes.

[8:20] All right.

[8:20] In the court members.

[8:21] Thank you.

[8:22] Thank you very much.

[8:23] We're very proud to have this award.

[8:25] It's the first one that we believe that we're aware of since prior to 20 2004, I think it's pardoned the pun right now.

[8:34] It's so dry, but it's been a long dry spell, we think.

[8:38] And we've enjoyed working with the judge all these years.

[8:41] Some of us have been on the commission since prior to that, and we remember how long it took us to get a second award.

[8:47] and we're very proud of it. I'd like to introduce everyone if I may. This is James Neely,

[8:54] Melvin Bert. This is Vice Chair Bob Rubel, Danny Doggett,

[9:01] Anita Redmond, and Luanne Rubel. Some of our executive committee was unable to attend today,

[9:09] but we wish they were here to share this honor with us and we're very proud of this and we are

[9:16] We're glad that they recognize that we have a well-balanced program and we invite all of you to take a look at some of the things that were involved in and there is on the county website and attend a meeting whenever you can, we encourage anyone to come so we're very grateful for this and we hope that you will enjoy it as much as we do and know that it's for all of us in Johnson County, we're very proud to represent the other citizens.

[9:40] Does anyone else

[9:45] just want to say it's an honor and a privilege to be here and to work with this fine group of people and hope that we can continue to do the good work.

[9:55] Anybody has any suggestions or comments please contact Santa or one of us.

[10:01] Thank you.

[10:09] I just like to thank the Commissioner's Court and Judge Harmon for working with us

[10:14] and inviting us on how to win this award and again Judge Harmon, congratulations.

[10:22] Thank you.

[10:28] Yes.

[10:29] Right.

[10:30] Yes.

[10:31] Yes, our long-time marker chair, Wilma Reed, has developed some affirmities of her 93 plus years of age and is unable to be with us.

[10:42] Nita has accepted the appointment as marker chair and we're so blessed to be able to still, as I tell Nita, pick Wilma's brain and ask her for advice and help and we're so blessed that we still can do that and she will visit with us and attend our meetings when she's able.

[10:59] She stays quite a bit these days with her daughter in Waco.

[11:09] Let's give it up here.

[11:19] I'll get that in on the air.

[11:21] Rick's got it.

[11:22] That's Rick's job.

[11:23] You're taking him away from me.

[11:24] Hey, these kind of western things.

[11:25] Thank you, ma'am.

[11:27] There's two kinds of muted country and with them.

[11:31] What's it here?

[11:32] I

[11:57] brought that back on that one.

[11:59] Thank you, Ruth.

[12:08] Oh, I know.

[12:09] It's just me too.

[12:18] Okay.

[12:23] We've had three sign-up this morning for public participation. Let me just mention

[12:29] our rules. We have a three-minute rule on presentations to the court and public participation.

[12:35] and the court normally does not respond to the participation part.

[12:45] So, I'll call these in the order that I've received them and the first is Craig.

[12:52] Craig, kind of a hi, Craig, good morning, sir.

[12:55] And I want to appreciate you coming to Grandview last week, it's wearing in K that mental

[13:01] lock does.

[13:02] Well, thank you for saying that.

[13:05] Okay, my discussion today is on the, just say hello to the ladies and everybody else.

[13:12] But my discussion today is over the raises.

[13:17] Okay, we've had two and a half years of COVID, non-essential, essential workers, people

[13:24] losing their jobs and businesses, massive unemployment, Californians fleeing their corrupt state

[13:31] to ours driving property values to the moon through our, and I want to say it, our corrupt

[13:37] ad-belorm tax system. Everybody knows it's got to go. And not one time have I heard anyone

[13:45] of our elected condemning CAD for what they have done to their citizens.

[13:51] Republican platform values and everybody is a Republican setting up here.

[13:58] Low taxes, smaller

[13:59] less intrusive government and on property during the primary elimination of property

[14:05] tax. You have the power to change everything. It doesn't matter how high appraisals are.

[14:14] If tax rate is zero, then property tax is zero. I'm not asking you to do that. I know

[14:21] elimination isn't going to happen yet, but you can make change. People are suffering and

[14:26] you the elected are wanting a raise. Now, you should get a raise, but who really needs

[14:34] the raises or the employees? My employees, your employees, but I'm not judging anybody,

[14:42] but I know I, and a lot of you, we could go without a raise.

[14:50] It's time for change.

[14:54] I want

[14:57] say give the employees a better rate.

[15:00] Please, and y'all cut your percentage down. We need to leave a clean slate for our new incumbent county judge.

[15:10] That's it. Thank you.

[15:15] Okay. The next person that has signed up to speak is David Hurn, Jr. David.

[15:30] Morning, buddy. I'm here to talk about y'all's wording on your resolution. Yes, sir. Number 13, I guess it was out of action.

[15:44] Basically, I'd like you all to change that.

[15:48] I really would like you all to change that.

[15:50] A resolution really doesn't do anything other than just talk.

[15:56] We need you all to be more actionable.

[15:59] Walk the walk, talk the talk.

[16:02] And so I'm requesting you all to stand together,

[16:05] stand with citizens of the border counties,

[16:08] to change it to a declaration of invasion because that's what it is.

[16:15] I invite every one of y'all to come with me down there and see what's going on firsthand,

[16:21] know that the people are scared to death, because they don't know whether they're going

[16:26] to have somebody break into their house, rob them, steal from them, or even assault them in

[16:33] one fashion or another.

[16:35] People down there carry everywhere they go, especially on their own property.

[16:42] And it's very unfortunate that that's happening.

[16:46] There are actual people trying to break in to low-girls rooms.

[16:51] Luckily, the parents had put screws in the window gyms

[16:56] to keep that individual from breaking into that low-girls room.

[17:00] I want you all to think about that and put yourself in that position.

[17:03] We need to support our Texas counties on the southern border and I'm asking you to

[17:11] re-assess that and change that to a declaration.

[17:15] We need to force the governor to declare it, declare an invasion because that is exactly

[17:21] what it is.

[17:23] It's not just people looking for work.

[17:26] We're dealing with criminals.

[17:27] I deal with those individually when I'm down there.

[17:31] And I'm begging you, changing, please, and I appreciate you all's time, thank you.

[17:39] Thank you.

[17:40] Thank you, sir.

[17:42] Next person signed up to speak is Becker Hughes.

[17:49] Becker.

[18:05] Thank you all for your work.

[18:10] Is this better?

[18:11] Yes, sir.

[18:11] All right.

[18:12] I won't contact ADA on the, it's not going to come.

[18:18] Well, you're a bit short like I am.

[18:20] Now, thank you all very much for the attention you all've given this matter.

[18:24] I do appreciate what you are doing.

[18:25] Resolution does show that it's on your radar.

[18:30] But like Mr. Hurn, I also believe that a resolution is inadequate for what's taken place.

[18:36] It should be a disaster declaration as seven other counties, eight other counties now.

[18:41] I have also passed in the state of Texas, those aren't just border counties, Parker County passed this two weeks ago as a disaster declaration, and I don't think that we're in any different situation in Parker County is in here.

[18:55] I did crimes statistically reporting for Louisville Police for four years, and the stats that were presented to me by my commissioner Kenny Howell, from what I heard, this is an inadequate picture of what y'all have collected

[19:08] to decide that this is not a basis for a disaster.

[19:13] I think it's, I don't think you've looked at all the stats.

[19:16] And so I ask you, have you talked to the coroner?

[19:20] Have you asked how many fentanyl deaths there'd been in this county?

[19:24] Have you asked how many traffic accidents, traffic fatalities have been, as a result of an unlicensed illegal alien operating motor vehicle in our county?

[19:33] Those are questions I'd like to answer by this court when you take up this proposal, number 13.

[19:40] Article 1, Section 10 of the United States Constitution is your basis for this disaster declaration.

[19:47] We are in the midst of a full-on invasion, and we all know this has been propagated and

[19:53] condoned by the Federal Government.

[19:55] When the Federal Government does not act, the Governor himself has the authority to act

[20:00] into declaring invasion, into mobilized all of the military departments of the State of

[20:06] Texas as its disposal.

[20:07] So our governor sadly has not taken that step to declare disaster and invasion in this state.

[20:17] So it now behooves our individual counties to put the adequate pressure on the governor's

[20:22] office.

[20:23] And to be honest gentlemen, this resolution will not even get their attention.

[20:28] I appreciate it.

[20:29] We appreciate it in this county.

[20:30] I hope that the papers recorded what action you have taken.

[20:33] I do thank you for it, but I'm asking you to take subsequent action after this date and to actually pass a disaster declaration for Johnson County.

[20:44] There are two corridors of human trafficking that pass through this county.

[20:50] I-35, we could probably sit up here if the old strippers convention or settlers grounds, and we could probably, if we had binoculars in the right intel in the right surveillance, we could probably surveil a number of human traffickers passing right through our county.

[21:04] But it behooves them to keep themselves on the down low to maintain a low profile.

[21:09] And so no, our crime stats are not going to report how many human traffickers are passing

[21:14] through our county.

[21:15] 67 is coming right up from Mill Paso.

[21:18] That's also a human trafficking corridor.

[21:21] And if we had eyes to look inside those vehicles, we could see the same thing.

[21:26] We need to take action, gentlemen.

[21:28] This is our moment of our generation.

[21:32] We've got to put a stop to this. Thank you.

[21:34] Thank you, sir.

[21:39] Okay, I believe that's all that's signed up to speak.

[21:43] We'll move on to proceeding business and the first item is consideration of the minutes of the commission's court on June 13th of 2022, which was a regular call session for a correction and July the 8th of 2022, a regular call session.

[22:03] How do you maintain a motion to approve those?

[22:07] Move to approve, Ted.

[22:12] I have a motion on commercial y.

[22:14] Second by Commissioner Howe to approve the minutes.

[22:19] Any further discussion?

[22:21] All in favor, aye.

[22:23] Any opposed?

[22:25] No one opposed, is that motion does carry.

[22:27] Item two is consideration, questions to pay our bills.

[22:31] Steve?

[22:32] Nothing to add.

[22:33] Okay.

[22:33] Move to approve, Ted.

[22:34] Okay motion

[22:42] to have second. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't hear you there

[22:47] Motion of commissioner Bailey second my commercial woolly to approve the bills any further discussion

[22:54] All in favor. I in it pose no one opposes

[22:58] Motion does carry

[23:00] Item three is our acknowledgement the receipt of the county auditors report to the commission's court that the director of

[23:07] reflect that we acknowledge

[23:12] the county auditors report.

[23:18] We have some other people here in the audience, there's going to make a presentation on this,

[23:24] which one it was.

[23:26] It was in workshop in Perilins.

[23:28] Yeah, Perilins.

[23:30] Okay, so you won't have to sit here with us all day.

[23:33] We'd love to have your presence all day, but at this time, the Johnson County Commission's Court

[23:39] from a regular session will go into workshop session.

[23:44] And for that is under the discussion

[23:47] of with Prairie Lands Groundwater Conservation District.

[23:53] Concerning the current groundwater issues.

[23:55] Good morning.

[23:56] Good morning.

[23:58] How are you?

[23:58] I'll tilt the stand for the.

[24:00] There you go.

[24:01] First of all, thank you for allowing us to be here.

[24:04] We did receive a call from Commissioner Woolie

[24:06] wanting the Prayland's groundwater district to maybe come before the court and talk about the status of the water in the county and what's going on with this drought.

[24:15] So a couple of things real quick. I'd like to introduce two directors that are here with me, both of these gentlemen represent Johnson County.

[24:23] We had Barney McClure, which many of y'all know as well as Paul Tishler. And I want to thank them for taking the time to come.

[24:30] I've also brought a consultant in our attorney to visit with y'all should this conversation.

[24:36] You'll have questions regarding some of the things we're doing.

[24:39] But first of all, I'd like to introduce Wade Oliver.

[24:43] He's with Intera.

[24:44] He has some slides.

[24:45] He's going to talk about a drought study that we recently did and was approved by our board

[24:50] in May, as well as some other factors affecting lot sizes and so forth.

[24:55] So if you don't mind, I'll have Wade come forward right now.

[24:59] Thank you.

[25:04] Good morning, sir.

[25:16] This works on the first try.

[25:18] That'll be a first for me.

[25:33] Okay.

[25:35] So, first of all, Kathy, thank you for the introduction on that.

[25:38] And it's a pleasure to be with you all today.

[25:41] As Kathy said, my name is Wade Oliver.

[25:43] I'm a hydrogeologist.

[25:44] I have the pleasure of working with Prairie Lange, GCD.

[25:48] And so, we work on groundwater issues in Johnson County here quite a bit.

[25:53] My presentation is actually very, very quick, which I know you all will be thankful for.

[25:57] The districts and I came prepared to talk about several topics related to drought so we weren't really sure what is going to be of most interest to you guys but we've got drought and that's the status of the current drought.

[26:12] Recent study that we did related to drought in Brayland's GCD and how that led to some rule changes at the district to help with water supply issues in the area.

[26:25] We're also prepared if you're all interested to talk about groundwater availability certifications

[26:30] and a potential interlocal agreement that is being considered and then track size requirements

[26:36] and how that all plays into all of this.

[26:40] So briefly on the current stage of the drought, as a big takeaway here, the dark red colors

[26:47] are the worst part of the drought.

[26:50] And so Johnson County is in an exceptional drought right now.

[26:55] It's about about 20% of the state is, so this is not quite as bad as the worst single year drought on record, which was 2011 for the state as a whole, but this is the worst drought category.

[27:08] It's been a rough year for Johnson County and we're starting to hear some of that and people's responses and wells.

[27:16] So, the district actually kicked off the study of drought before it was this bad, and so it was timely that it came out when it did, but the real purpose of the study was to answer what the district's appropriate response would be to drought.

[27:37] We looked at the 2011 drought and the reservoir responses, and I'm not going to get into the reservoir responses here in our discussion today, but there's two different ways that a regulatory agency can respond to drought.

[27:52] One is to, depending on the aquifer characteristics, one is to say we need to protect this aquifer during this critical time of drought, and so it's time to pull back pumping.

[28:02] Okay?

[28:03] That's option number one.

[28:04] Our first with different characteristics aren't as susceptible to the impacts of drought,

[28:11] and so the response is actually the reverse.

[28:14] Its surface water supplies are being really hit during this time of drought.

[28:18] We need to draw on this savings account, so to speak, of groundwater resources, and so we

[28:25] will allow more pumping during times of drought.

[28:27] So the purpose of the study was to answer that question.

[28:32] What is the appropriate response?

[28:34] Less pumping to protect the aquifer

[28:36] or more pumping to rely on it temporarily

[28:40] as an additional resource,

[28:44] whenever surface water supplies are tough.

[28:48] So as part of the evaluation,

[28:50] we looked at available drought on all the aquifers.

[28:53] This, we're just focused here

[28:54] here on the Polluxy portion of the Trinity Opera here, which is very prevalent in Johnson

[29:01] County. So, you can see as you move to the southeast in the county, the available drawdown

[29:06] in the Polluxy can be, you know, two or three hundred feet, but as you move closer to

[29:12] Fort Worth, as you move in the northern part of the county, you'll have less than a hundred

[29:17] feet of available drawdown. And if you available drawdown is just the height of a water column

[29:22] I'm going to well in it, it relates to how much you're able to pump the rate that you're able to pump.

[29:30] So, looked at that for all the units here.

[29:33] And the big takeaways were that in prayer lands, that it is reasonable to rely on the aquifers during a time of throughout within some parameters.

[29:49] The district has long-term management goals called desired future conditions that they're required to manage towards.

[29:58] And so the

[30:00] The district actually implemented some rule changes that I'll touch on briefly here that allow for increased pumping in the district during a time of extreme or exceptional drought so long as that production does not put at risk the desired future conditions and those long term management goals. The other takeaway here, which I've underlined, is that there are a lot of goals that are, excuse me, a lot of wells that are exempt from permitting requirements.

[30:29] of the district, I think of these as house wells on small

[30:34] tracks of land, those are typically the shallowest wells in

[30:39] the district. They are because of that because they are the

[30:45] shallowest, they have the least available drought down, usually

[30:47] the least expensive to drill and because they're just for

[30:51] single family homes. And for that reason, they're the most

[30:54] susceptible to the impacts of drought. And so if you've heard,

[30:58] if you've heard from people within the county that there are some shallow

[31:04] wells that have gone dry, it's typically that. So there there are some

[31:09] requirements within for new wells at the at the district to complete at least

[31:15] 50 feet into into some of these aquifers to try and make sure that there's enough

[31:20] available drought down so that they're not going dry during during a bad

[31:26] drought like we have now but those are going to be the ones that are that are

[31:30] hit hardest in the first. One other note on that public water supply wells are

[31:35] typically drilled deeper and into if not different formations over across much

[31:42] more of the formation and so there's not often a lot of impact of public

[31:47] water supply wells on local wells, local like domestic wells. So keep that in

[31:54] I already talked about the rule changes and I believe the district just implemented that

[32:06] and declared it because the drought is so bad right now so I think we're working through

[32:10] the additional pumping that could be allowed under existing permits to make sure that everyone

[32:16] has enough water.

[32:17] That's a takeaway from my presentation.

[32:20] I'm certainly happy to answer any questions or hand it back over to Kathy or anybody else.

[32:26] Well, thank you for your information.

[32:28] I think water right now is on everyone's mind because of the drought that was undergoing.

[32:35] I just had a question, maybe you'd be the person on the gas.

[32:40] I had read an article here all back where, you know, none of us see any new reservoirs being

[32:50] planned.

[32:51] I think there was a few, but it's very, very few.

[32:54] you, reservoirs, and from what I understand from time that the inception of the thought

[33:00] of creating a new reservoir to 20-year process.

[33:06] With that said in this one article I read that the because of the operation rate of surface

[33:17] water is so tremendous, I've heard that one thing they can go to is a injection process

[33:25] So will they start injecting during heavy rains, excess water, injecting that water into the aquifer?

[33:34] Is that a true statement or?

[33:37] It is a true statement and I'm glad you brought that up.

[33:39] So that process is called aquifer storage and recovery.

[33:43] So there is, and that's related to a separate process called managed aquifer recharge.

[33:48] So these are two ways that you can actively get additional water during times of plenty.

[33:54] as they're in a flood, like you mentioned, into an underground reservoir either to protect

[34:00] the health of the reservoir, which is what managed our free charges, or to pull out

[34:05] later on as a water supply source, which is what our first origin recovery is.

[34:10] And the benefit that you mentioned is key.

[34:14] It's that there is not a big straw called evaporation pulling water out of the groundwater

[34:19] reservoir, like there is in a surface water reservoir.

[34:22] And there's other benefits as well where you don't have to take over all of the land and go through all that environmental permitting and everything.

[34:32] So that is something that is gaining traction in the state.

[34:36] Our company was involved in both an aquifer storage and recovery study for the district and for the state as a whole.

[34:44] And the city of New Bromples has just done an aquifer storage and recovery well, it's called ASR.

[34:50] So that is, like I said, gaining traction in the state and I think it's going to be an important water supply source in the future.

[35:01] It's not new water, it's just a new way of storing existing water but it's saving it when you have it so that you can use it when you need it.

[35:09] Did the Co-Mail County participate in the cost share along with that project, for the New Bronfels project?

[35:16] The short answer is I don't.

[35:17] Edwards, I guess that's on the hook over there, the plateau.

[35:21] The, so, are you talking about the new Bronfels?

[35:26] Study, I don't know if the county participated in that.

[35:32] Certainly the main client that we were working with

[35:35] and that was the city of New Bronfels.

[35:37] I could find that out and get back to you if you could.

[35:39] That would be good information.

[35:40] You know, Kathy and I've discussed, you know,

[35:43] And we're in a proximity of a different region here that would certainly supply with cost of utilities to bring water to us from the region G, I think it is, you know, we're, I mean, we border that, you know, so I don't know this went into legislative year, they're certainly going to have their plates full going forward, but it's time to have that dialogue and get that discussion going with our local representatives.

[36:11] And I would encourage support on that from from prayer lands to how do we how do we get that in gear to have that conversation?

[36:24] Any ideas on that going forward?

[36:27] Well, even a little closer than come out county is Bell County has done an offer for storage and recovery study recently that would.

[36:35] And I do know that the county was involved in that, and that's over the Trinity Opera as well.

[36:40] So, sorry, were you going to say something?

[36:43] Well, the report's better than what we've been anticipating as far as, you know, basically replenishing, you know,

[36:50] when we're setting up here with so much development growth and so many, we won't be responsible if you will for consumer protection some level.

[37:01] But, you know, when you have developers that come in or folks come in and just drill that shallow well,

[37:09] everything's good until it's not, you know, when you have this drought situation that we've got.

[37:14] But how do we, you know, the discussion here has been to do an expensive and extensive process for the developer.

[37:26] But when you have individuals that are just going to purchase maybe the two acres and drill their own well

[37:34] How do we address that because

[37:37] That that seems to be the issue. I think Commissioner Woolie's got some that basically are new home new construction and

[37:46] They're dealing with they're having they're having a significant problem. So I mean as far as this court goes how do we navigate?

[37:54] Any recommendations or suggestions other than what's going on the obvious you know that study is 60 or $70,000 on top of the drilling the drill.

[38:03] So any guidance or ideas on anything to do with how do we navigate that?

[38:10] I want to make sure that I'm clear about the question.

[38:12] When you say this study you're talking about the ground water availability certifications for plating.

[38:17] So do you like me to take that catheter and you guys want to pick up on this one?

[38:21] Okay, I'll take a stab at it and then we've got clean up duty here when I mess things up.

[38:27] So, the Crown Water Availability Certifications aren't cheap, as you just mentioned.

[38:34] But they're designed to address the key issue that you just mentioned, which is someone's

[38:40] coming in and doing a, you know, sometimes it's a 50 or 200 home development on all on minimum

[38:49] track two acre lots and not a lawyer, but the water code allows for people putting a domestic

[39:01] use well on their own property to be exempt from permitting. It allows them to produce

[39:05] up to 25,000 gallons per day. That's the equivalent of 17.36 gallons per minute. So if you

[39:12] You have 100 of those, or 200 of those, all in a relatively small area.

[39:18] That's the equivalent of a very large well, or several very large wells in a small area.

[39:24] And so, the impacts to the aquifer at the point are large.

[39:31] Track size requirements is a tool in the toolbox, the rule that the district has related to how

[39:37] much of the aquifer that you have to complete through to give yourself a buffer for drawdowns

[39:42] is a tool and a toolbox, and those certifications are a tool in the toolbox, but that's if there's unique tools beyond that, I don't know them yet.

[39:54] Well, we haven't, as I said, we haven't had a problem passing that cost analysis onto the developer, especially for multiples, but

[40:03] we're getting folks that come in, got a two or three acre piece of ground that they want to do,

[40:12] and

[40:12] I mean, they're going to build it and flip it a lot of times, so that's the concern that we're facing up here is how we regulate that, but we can't put that kind of a burden on somebody simply want to build a home for their child or something on their property.

[40:31] That we've talked about this internally, not to share internal discussions.

[40:37] I mean, there could be a threshold for how many lots are being subdivided that would go into that.

[40:44] What you don't want to do is create a loophole through which a large development can go.

[40:50] So we changed our planning requirements on people who are buying or developing land that's not next to a rural,

[41:02] John's County water supply or something like that.

[41:05] We're building access they have as well water.

[41:08] And with your recommendation, Kathy, we went from one to two acres.

[41:18] and that's why I think, Larry, thank you for asking for this presentation this morning

[41:24] because it's something that's on everyone's mind right now, cause of the dryness.

[41:29] And the growth.

[41:30] And the growth.

[41:31] Yeah, that's another factor, Rick, our growth is phenomenal right now.

[41:35] And so I don't know if y'all are playing on looking at maybe going to three acres versus

[41:46] the two or not, but I'm sure that's been a thought in your mind, so can you elaborate

[41:54] on that a little bit?

[42:02] Hey Brian, I don't know about these people in Austin Tech.

[42:06] I don't know.

[42:08] For the record, my name is Brian Sledge, and I'm a service legal counsel for the

[42:13] district.

[42:14] You know, on the outside, I got to say it's a pleasure to see you, Judge, and all of

[42:19] you commissioners.

[42:20] Good to see you, too.

[42:21] I was noting to myself mentally, one of the amazing constants in the world is that Judge

[42:30] Harman never ages. He looks exactly like he did about 20 years ago on the first

[42:35] met him and got hired by the county to work on water issues. I heard you're

[42:42] finally hanging up your talks at the end of the year and December 31. I'm not here

[42:46] to celebrate with you. Well, thank you. What a great job of public service. Yeah,

[42:51] something that's loved. Anyway, we have talked about, you know, from time to time,

[43:01] increase in the minimum practice as our

[43:04] challenges that whatever we do we have to do for all four counties.

[43:09] And so, you know, it was a pretty big struggle going from one to two.

[43:16] In different counties have different different feelings on the topic.

[43:19] You know, we also have Ellis Hill and some reveal counties.

[43:23] And I don't know that we're going to do that or not.

[43:25] We are currently looking at because we've just got our new

[43:29] water budget, so to speak, or we're fixing to get it from the state for the next five year planning period on how much

[43:36] groundwater can be pumped both through our permitted wells and our small registered exempt wells. We are going to look at our

[43:43] rule for permitted wells, which currently is 50,000 gallons per raker. That has a nice tie-in for the two-acre tract

[43:52] size for us because that typical family uses about a hundred thousand gallons per year. And so

[43:58] So if you put them on two acres, they've got the requisite amount of land pump about if we have a 50,000 per acre limit to pump about 100,000 acres per year, but it's something we could always, always discuss.

[44:13] One of the things we'd really like to talk with the county about is we have the board asked us to develop a template interlocal agreement to enter into with counties and

[44:25] cities in our 4 county district who have plating authority and who have exercised their authority

[44:33] for y'all in the chapter 232 of the local government code to require ground water certification

[44:37] statements.

[44:40] I think this is a great deal. Some of

[44:42] Vell county had reached out to us initially and I think we've inked the deal with them

[44:46] on last month maybe on the first interlocal agreement we've had and basically how that

[44:51] That would work, if you guys choose to exercise your authority under Chapter 232 and require developers that are-

[45:00] We're coming in, proposing to subdivide land, plat it, with ground water as a source of supply, whether they're going on public water supply, or their proposed and put in individual wells on two-acre lots, we have another local agreement with you that you'll require the ground water certification statement that you can require. And if you do so, they have to comply with TCQ's rules on those, which were very detailed in what they have to provide. And then we have the expertise through our hydrogeologist and

[45:29] his team to review those and what the interlinked local government provides is that

[45:34] Joel would require $1,000 fee to be paid to the district.

[45:39] And we will have a five business day turnaround time to review once we get their certification

[45:45] and the supporting data to have our hydrogeologist review that and make a recommendation, one whether

[45:53] they agree because you know it's hard to tell you get the people that put those

[45:59] things together sometimes you know it's like a lot of smoke and mirror sometimes

[46:05] and it's hard and he's really most counties of cities aren't in a position to

[46:10] grade and evaluate the technical calculations that are going to those things

[46:15] but wait in his team are I mean they're the best hydrogiologists in the state

[46:20] And I've worked with all of them, I think, when I say that.

[46:24] So you get the best hydrogeologist in the state who have said that on average,

[46:29] you know, they're going to charge us, this is just the pass-through cost, for $1,000 flat fee,

[46:33] they could get it evaluated and turn it around with a recommendation on whether there's

[46:38] groundwater going to be available to those homeowners or making the biggest investment in their lives 10 or 20 years from now.

[46:45] And two, whether if you approved the plat, whether they're also going to be able to comply

[46:50] with our rules, it's just that coordination.

[46:53] Some, you know, one, it just promotes coordination between what are you guys doing and looking

[46:58] for, and if y'all were to approve a plat, could they come over and get a permit or a registered

[47:04] well from us because sometimes they can't, you know.

[47:07] And unfortunately, sometimes it's the smaller ones that do it, you know, you get somebody

[47:12] with ten acres wanting to carve off an acre for a kid or a grand kid, but they carve it where they,

[47:20] where the subdivision line is right up against the existing well so that there's a short

[47:25] easement getting to the new property and now they don't comply with our well-spacing

[47:28] requirements. So just promote and coordination on those things and Commissioner Bailey raised

[47:34] the question of, you know, do we want to adopt these 232 GAC requirements and put that bill on the developers?

[47:44] You know, well, if it's a big subdivision, that doesn't seem to be too egregious, but if it's somebody wanting to carve an acre off for the grand

[47:51] kid, that seems a little tougher. I don't know what folks are charging for those smaller ones, and I'd refer to the county attorney on this, but I think you could

[48:02] probably if you pass the resolution adopted in 232 requirements, you could probably

[48:07] put some restrictions on how big it has to be before they have to engage and do it

[48:13] to Chapter 232 analysis, which necessarily means hiring a professional geoscientist

[48:19] or an engineer to do that certification in sealing.

[48:23] To your question on cost, it's the same for an individual as it is for a developer

[48:27] for developing many.

[48:28] That's the issue.

[48:34] For its weaving, prairie lands, and Jennifer closely.

[48:39] And, you know, I have to, excuse me.

[48:43] I have to applaud her and her staff.

[48:45] They are reaching out to us continuously

[48:48] on these same little situations we just taught.

[48:51] Brian mentioned, mom has the property.

[48:54] Carving off the sun for the kids.

[48:56] And we're making sure those property lines stay

[48:59] within the proper distance of the well.

[49:01] So I do think there's opportunity to carve those out

[49:04] and not require that cost because of the threshold.

[49:09] It's so small, the impact overall is not going to be like we've heard

[49:15] on multiple wells going in.

[49:17] It's just ensuring that they maintain current rules and regulations.

[49:22] I agree with what you just said.

[49:23] I mean, we can't expect every family member

[49:27] or individual seeking to drill a water well to incur that?

[49:32] Right. Where we see more problems are in areas and not necessarily in Johnson County where

[49:37] someone has 100 acres and they're starting to carve off the front, 50 acres and 10 acre

[49:44] lots, and then they're going to move on back. They sell five, plan for five more once they sell those.

[49:49] But I'm not really seeing that occurring in Johnson County, it's more developments coming

[49:54] And the high-impact density, or the high density impact that's going to be occurring.

[50:02] I have to commend the county again for being a very proactive to the Jennifer's Department.

[50:06] Working on that, I wish all of our planning authorities had the grass she does.

[50:14] We're seeing situations where even though the plant requirements call for,

[50:20] is it going to be ground water wells or public water.

[50:23] There's no assurance that the follow-through that this is happening, and we've had situations where

[50:28] residents, or property owner has bought a piece of property, the public water is not there.

[50:34] It's the cost to the developers too much, so it said go drill it well.

[50:38] The lots aren't big enough now, so it now turns into attorneys have to get involved,

[50:42] and it's been very tenacious on that situation.

[50:45] And so, you know, I think y'all have put in steps that are required,

[50:50] I'm proof of that water before they'll finish processing permits or something.

[50:56] Some of our cities, they simply don't want to relinquish their pletting authority.

[51:01] But I will come in, Jennifer, as well, for reaching out and trying to at least be on the same page.

[51:08] We know what their developments are going to look like.

[51:10] We know what's coming, though it's not.

[51:13] So yeah, that has been a proactive move.

[51:14] And I think in time, hopefully, those that some are, some of them came back to us in the last year or two to allow us to take over the

[51:22] bledding. I don't expect all ever to say that they does help.

[51:26] It's letting us work with them a little more. And I think that, you know, Jennifer, again, it's helped coordinate that.

[51:31] We're looking over those. But we still do see a lot of flights going in that there's no

[51:37] confidence that that water's going to be there because what the cost is to Johnson County

[51:43] I said, it's pretty enormous.

[51:47] Jennifer was about to say, thank you for that.

[51:49] I was just going to point out that we do have language in our subdivision book where

[51:55] people who wish to subdivide smaller numbers of lots can ask the court for

[52:02] a variance on that ground water certification requirement if they can present the facts

[52:10] that it would be too great a cost if it's just one lot or two lots instead of 50 lots.

[52:16] So we do have that option for some of those smaller developments.

[52:20] And it would still meet our rules, minimum spacing, minimum lot size, all of that.

[52:25] Correct.

[52:26] And then we also have, as Kathy mentioned, the enforcement side of things that if the developer

[52:31] says they're going to have public water, we ask for verification that that infrastructure

[52:36] put in place before they begin permits, because we do have currently a situation where another city flat

[52:43] of the subdivision, the developer didn't put in the water, the people began building their home,

[52:48] and then found out there wasn't a water.

[52:51] Yeah.

[52:52] They got very good.

[52:53] Yeah, that's the good way.

[52:56] So we're making sure on iron through public works that we were trying to work with prairie lands

[53:01] and the developers and property owners that every person.

[53:04] on board with that, that's going to be key.

[53:08] I was going to add, you know, as the huge developments coming out of the Metroplex South

[53:16] and concentric circles of growing population, it's unquestionable from a scientific standpoint

[53:23] and water planning standpoint that the future's surface water and the additional extension

[53:30] of surface water lines coming out of the big regional water providers in the

[53:34] Metroplex or, you know, in some parts of our district coming up south from

[53:38] the regional water providers to the south but it's better for everybody if we

[53:46] have rules and regulations in place that encourage the use of development on

[53:51] public water systems. They're more regulated, it's punching last holes in the

[53:56] ground. Typically, they'll have two sources to apply for a lot of our users. They'll have

[54:01] surface water and groundwater backup or some combination, which we see a lot of in the

[54:06] north and eastern part of Johnson County. It's better for the developers on how much,

[54:13] how many units they can get on a particular light. If you've got a 100 acre tract and take

[54:19] off 20 acres for common areas, that leaves you 80. You can only sell 40 homes on a 100 acre

[54:24] But if you put them on public water systems, you might sell three or four times that many.

[54:29] It's just a more complicated analysis on the front end to work.

[54:34] And if we were to adopt those practices, our surface water suppliers, whether that's Johnson County,

[54:41] or Sardis Lonellum, whoever it is, especially in the Ellison in Johnson County region,

[54:49] they can plan to bring additional surface water on line if they know that the governmental

[54:54] mental entities that are controlling development in those counties are going to be pushing

[54:58] folks towards surface water and public water systems because we always see, not always,

[55:05] but 95% of the problems we see like the well and godly or whatever, it's small,

[55:11] individual wells that are drilled to shallow because they went with the lowest bid on

[55:15] the well-driller and that was the driller who bid to drill the well to hit the water table

[55:20] people in five feet further and ten years later, they're sucking air instead of water.

[55:25] So you don't have those problems on public water supply wells because those folks have

[55:29] TCEQ right and rush out over them and making sure their supply is going to be adequate.

[55:34] So we think this interlocal agreement would be a great step in the right direction to promote

[55:39] further coordination between the district and the county and we'd be happy to work with

[55:44] any of you guys on that front.

[55:45] You

[55:50] forwarded that over, I guess, let Bill take a look at it.

[55:52] Absolutely.

[55:53] Yeah.

[55:57] Well, guys, one thing to keep in mind on, you know, the groundwater certification, which I believe is, I mean, the possibility

[56:05] that's already in your regulations now, let's say the people coming in to do to purchase a home and a

[56:11] subdivision is going to have individual wells for every, every home, they're going to 30-year mortgage.

[56:17] And the assumption is there's going to be water there for 30 years.

[56:21] But if they knew, there was five years worth of water on a 30-year mortgage, they're never

[56:25] by the home.

[56:27] And you know, you hear advertisements on the radio, different services coming in.

[56:31] No water bill.

[56:34] You know, that's one of the selling things.

[56:35] You don't have to pay for public water.

[56:37] You have your own well.

[56:38] But if it pumps air, it's no use to anybody.

[56:44] So it's real important to keep that in mind, the longevity.

[56:49] and the groundwater certifications help, they help to ensure the longevity of that supply.

[56:57] And if it's not going to be there long enough, it will help determine, hey, it will last

[57:01] X. It might last Y, but it won't last X plus Y.

[57:06] So that's my two cents.

[57:09] That's good two cents.

[57:11] Thank you, Paul.

[57:12] For your cents, you've got to put in the inflation factor.

[57:18] You all have any more questions for us?

[57:20] No, I just want to thank Paul.

[57:22] And I was on the court when we first birthed the Franklin

[57:28] and groundwater district with all the other local county

[57:31] judges.

[57:33] Paul thank you.

[57:34] I mean, Brian thank you.

[57:36] He let us very well, really had a good board.

[57:42] And early on, we wanted to make sure we had an excellent board.

[57:47] to start this crime water district.

[57:50] Originally, we kind of thought the government

[57:53] because being Republican, though I was saying is less government,

[58:00] it's the best government.

[58:02] Tell you needs.

[58:03] Yeah, until you need it.

[58:04] But in relationship to this, this is so critical

[58:08] and so important to our people.

[58:11] Because everyone, when they get up in the morning,

[58:14] and we were about this up in the godly area

[58:16] and they turn their share on and take share of that water to come on, you know.

[58:21] So we had one gentleman tell us that he actually had to bathe in his swimming pool a couple

[58:26] of times, so hopefully he's got some of that.

[58:28] Yeah, I think John's kind of real waters are that I think they're going to start publishing

[58:33] where all their lands are and that's something Jennifer that I think we can use in our

[58:41] planning too. I won't be here, but the future courts can. And how far is surface water that's

[58:51] available to them from from on the co-ops, you know? So one of the things we're also seeing in

[58:58] the district is while there may be the subdivisions within certain cities, boundaries, or CCNs, that

[59:05] That agility does not have sufficient water, so they're allowing some of these areas to desertify.

[59:13] And that's another concern in mind is the lack of ability to get water to some areas.

[59:19] So as we talk about these public water systems, I think a big concern is these rural areas that are

[59:25] soon to be developed, is there even potential for public water supply to be there in time?

[59:31] And is that part of that planning period for those public water systems?

[59:35] I think that's a good process.

[59:37] I was just curious in the other districts north of us in that region G or they don't

[59:42] water rationing up there as of yet.

[59:44] Are you talking region C out of that?

[59:46] Yeah, yeah, I'm sorry, I said G, but C.

[59:51] Well, the groundwater districts don't ration.

[59:54] I'm not aware of any of them that do, at least in this part of the state.

[1:00:00] I know the retail water suppliers are the ones that are required by the TCQ to have drought contingency plans that typically have various trigger levels that go from, you know, please start conserving educational campaigns to water restriction, mandatory water restrictions. They're back in only water on one day. And I think some of the Metroplex providers have now started that down those DCP, including some mandatory watering restrictions. And those will get tighter.

[1:00:29] as we move forward. I don't know, Paul, Claiborne just implemented one and possibly

[1:00:37] going to go to level stage two on that soon today.

[1:00:41] Where is the baddest shape as we've been in since the 2011 drought, which was,

[1:00:48] I think, probably the worst for this area. I wasn't here in the 50s to know whether

[1:00:52] that one was worse or not, but was it worse?

[1:00:57] And I want to echo what Judge Harmon said, thank you to the Court for sending Prairie

[1:01:05] Layers good directors.

[1:01:06] Y'all have y'all and the other three commissioners' courts have sent us such good individuals

[1:01:13] who have a lot of folks who have a lot of experience in the water industry or they're just good,

[1:01:19] level-headed folks who can listen and learn like Barney, and that's really helpful.

[1:01:25] I mean, I represented, I think, 23 of the 100 districts in the state, groundwater districts.

[1:01:31] And this is hands down the best level headed board I've worked with.

[1:01:35] Yeah, we lost one real good board member, the Kenny Howe, had on.

[1:01:39] Dennis.

[1:01:40] Dennis, thank you.

[1:01:41] Aaron, I guess.

[1:01:42] Yeah.

[1:01:43] He was a good guy.

[1:01:44] Sure was.

[1:01:44] Yeah, I think he had water background.

[1:01:46] He did.

[1:01:47] He was the old NRCS guy.

[1:01:48] Yeah.

[1:01:49] Some lot of experience with water.

[1:01:50] So back to track size and well-spacing.

[1:01:55] just some history. I guess it's about six years ago when we went to the two-acre

[1:02:00] mental and then that was in coordination with you guys and you did that

[1:02:05] district-wide, correct? Yes, sir. So if there were consideration to go to

[1:02:10] beyond that to a three-acre spacing, the county could and our subdivision

[1:02:15] rules do that but but it wouldn't necessarily would we have to to coordinate with

[1:02:22] You guys you don't why you could adopt a more restrictive requirement than we then we have based on and all those I think the rest of the counties in our district are still at two or

[1:02:34] I think all

[1:02:42] are but hill county and theirs is very complicated. They have a 10 acre but it's based on septic it's we're still working with them to try to get them to a two acre

[1:02:54] minimal on that. So regardless of what they've adopted, they still have to

[1:02:59] meet our two acre before they can drill. So we're the more restrictive than the

[1:03:03] camp is. But I think Judge Lewis, he's often said he'd like to get to 9.9 acres

[1:03:09] or something like that. So he I think he'd be receptive to it. But I don't think

[1:03:12] they have a blanket rule like that. I think it's tired of the receptive program.

[1:03:19] Well, that's always fascinating to me how you can drill a whale at one acre.

[1:03:22] a shallow one and have a septic tank right out there next to it and people think that's

[1:03:27] going to be okay.

[1:03:29] Well, in last two weeks ago or four weeks ago we had a plant that has access to public

[1:03:41] water but in the event that they drill wells they've got some lots that end up being 30 feet

[1:03:46] wide at the back at the back of those lots.

[1:03:49] They've got 150 foot of rope frontings, they've got 30 feet in the back, and it's narrow

[1:03:55] as 50 feet in the middle.

[1:03:57] So whenever you think about in the event that they put, and they were over two acres

[1:04:03] weren't they Jennifer?

[1:04:04] Correct.

[1:04:05] Yeah, they were two acre well, two acre tracks which would conform to our well spacing, but

[1:04:11] whenever you think about the actual geographic layout of that, it's not going to work.

[1:04:17] Well, they wouldn't be able to get a well from us under that proposal, because we've got two separate

[1:04:23] requirements. One's a two acre total track size minimum, and the other is minimum space for

[1:04:29] requirements, which for the small wells are 50 foot off the property line, so you've got to

[1:04:35] have at least 100 foot wide, and that's, you know, and hopefully better, and nobody wants to

[1:04:40] put their well right where their house is going to sit in the middle of the property.

[1:04:43] So, that's the type of coordination we can, you know, and it's all about protecting innocent

[1:04:51] people buying homes who don't ever think about water, they don't think about the showers

[1:04:56] not going to come on, and they don't think about, oh, I'm fixing the hand over this money

[1:05:01] for this lot, my biggest investment in my life, and when I go to build next year or 10 years

[1:05:07] from now, because this is my retirement line, I'm not going to be able to have water on

[1:05:10] property, and then they're out of luck. And so we just want to promote a little better

[1:05:16] coordination on the front end.

[1:05:17] Well, six years ago when we went to the, or whatever year it was when we went, it's about six

[1:05:22] years ago when we went to the two-acre track, two-acre spacing, we're well-north

[1:05:29] population-wise now than what we were then. And the amount of, the amount of,

[1:05:35] a platted developments that come through this court are staggering and that's, that is,

[1:05:40] that was my concern, what triggered the call to you, Kathy, and asked for this

[1:05:44] presentation because I just personally think that we're up against a wall on a two-acre

[1:05:50] spacing. I'm very concerned about that and would strongly urge the rest of our court to

[1:06:00] consider moving to a three-acre spacing.

[1:06:03] So kind of back on what your statement was, Commissioner Woolie, and I think I've

[1:06:08] showed you a diagram of the lots around the godly area that were too acre.

[1:06:13] They went in and built and placed a well, but the well was not good.

[1:06:18] And the ability to re-drill that well did not exist because of how everything was already

[1:06:22] situated with their septic field, the driveway, the head all that right away at the front

[1:06:28] that they couldn't even use.

[1:06:29] The people didn't realize they had that much right away gone like I'm paying taxes for

[1:06:36] something I can't use and the wife was hysterical because she needed the well so it was crazy.

[1:06:43] Yeah.

[1:06:45] It's just like that when we had the other day that it met our regulations so we were bound

[1:06:53] to approve it. But it just spells disaster. And we're getting down to those, and I've said it

[1:07:02] several times, we're getting down to smaller tracks, and they're becoming more and more challenging

[1:07:08] to subdivide, and developers are getting more and more, and I'll use the word creative loosely.

[1:07:16] And it's whenever you think about plugging water wells in septic in on those tracks,

[1:07:22] It is not a good situation for the future.

[1:07:27] Well, I was going to make comment.

[1:07:30] I like the thought of maybe looking at a developer having a $1,000 study done for the

[1:07:41] plan.

[1:07:42] It's not a $1,000 study.

[1:07:43] That's $1,000 to review the study that they paid for, $1,000 to the district for a review.

[1:07:51] if they do a true groundwater availability certification those can cost

[1:07:57] anywhere for $50 to $70,000 depending on the

[1:08:00] Well, everything has to be reasonable.

[1:08:07] Maybe a little less depending on who.

[1:08:09] Yeah, when you start doing all this high cost stuff when you start going through

[1:08:16] through yaker, minimums, you're going to start killing growth.

[1:08:23] Now I'm okay with that if it warrants it, but if it doesn't warrant it, I'm not just

[1:08:29] as one court member, I'm not favorable going through yakers, but I

[1:08:37] think Governors

[1:08:38] getting too involved there.

[1:08:40] So we're just here to present information for y'all's benefit and some of these decisions

[1:08:47] need to be the courts, like somebody said,

[1:08:49] Jocke had to adopt something more restricted

[1:08:51] than the district, but I think if we look at managing

[1:08:56] that resource better through the studies,

[1:08:59] the identify, is that water resource there

[1:09:01] and to what level.

[1:09:03] And sometimes it might mean that we're going to make

[1:09:05] a recommendation well to be drilled deeper,

[1:09:08] where there's more water availability,

[1:09:11] but it's going to be a greater cost on that homeowner

[1:09:14] to drill deeper, but at the same time

[1:09:16] that assurance that they have long-term water might be the value that's received there.

[1:09:21] Well, you think they'd want that, you know. They may say no at the time. And again,

[1:09:27] it may be that same thing came back. You just drove development away, but.

[1:09:32] I know my son when he drove the house, I think he went down 647 and to the second

[1:09:37] We have the first second trendy, the one over in some county.

[1:09:49] What's the shallower?

[1:09:51] Plugsy.

[1:09:52] And then what's the other one?

[1:09:54] Woodbind.

[1:09:55] So basically there's four, probably more if you want to go deeper, but there's four primary.

[1:10:02] Right, but as you go, Jay, the water quality gets less.

[1:10:05] doesn't okay so you know the very and

[1:10:12] I believe it's where the well went

[1:10:14] dry and the gentleman was having the baby is swimming pool you know that

[1:10:18] subdivision out there spring range was sort of what brought this to everybody's

[1:10:22] attention certainly the commissioners court you know they had 70 acres out there

[1:10:27] or 70 lots one acre lots every lot out there has its own individual well so in

[1:10:35] And at one area, you got 70 straws out there, drawing out of one.

[1:10:39] Yes, there's swimming pools, and a lot of amenities used in the coastal water.

[1:10:44] And I say that to say that I believe those people that live out there, those homeowners

[1:10:50] that have spent their life savings and still making payments on that 30-year mortgage, those

[1:10:56] homeowners would have probably appreciated that developer having to do some sort of a

[1:11:05] study to be able to guarantee water for them because of just what Paul said

[1:11:13] a while ago, you know, they went in there, they spent everything they had for

[1:11:16] down payment or making huge payments and now they can't even and now they're out of

[1:11:20] water. But when they bought those homes, they were they bought them as if, hey,

[1:11:26] we're on well water, you know, all we're having to do is play the electric bill, we

[1:11:30] don't have water bill and we got water from now on and it didn't happen.

[1:11:34] So I think, Commissioner, how that was another situation where they had an opportunity to participate within Johnson County's side, but the developer chose not to go into the Wales and so probably market it, advertise it to them, you know, no mud tax, no water tax, you know, so made it a little more appetizing.

[1:11:56] So, you know, when Kathy mentioned the potential cost of the water certification study,

[1:12:02] the, I mean, it seemed like a lot of money, you know, she, I think she said $40,000,

[1:12:07] or $50,000, but, you know, could be quite a bit less, could be 40, could be 30,

[1:12:11] depending on the situation for that study to be done, the certification to be done,

[1:12:18] but think about the cost of the subdivision.

[1:12:22] And so to install a 12-inch water main today, in 2022, you're looking at roughly $80 a foot.

[1:12:31] And five years ago, it was $40 a foot.

[1:12:35] So, yes, that cost is astronomical.

[1:12:38] So, you know, see, if water wells go in for each lot, well, those water mains are not going in.

[1:12:45] So, it's wrong to think that the cost of the study is an additional cost for the

[1:12:53] developer because there's a lot of other costs that he's not going to be participating

[1:12:58] in, because he's not putting in water means he's not putting in fire hyders.

[1:13:01] So, which is something else to think about, if the subdivision is going in with all water

[1:13:06] There are no firewills, there is no firewires, there is no water system.

[1:13:11] So let's know they're down side there too.

[1:13:13] But the cost can level out, but the security comes from the people buying that law or

[1:13:19] building that home knowing that they have a longevity in their water supply.

[1:13:25] They don't have water, they don't have anything.

[1:13:27] Yeah.

[1:13:29] So I'd hate to let the cost of the water supply certification study deter anything from

[1:13:37] Yes, the smaller the mom and pop, put a mobile home in the backyard from a kid.

[1:13:43] Yes, that's apples and oranges.

[1:13:46] Yeah, I agree.

[1:13:47] I'll make two final statements.

[1:13:50] All right, we'll get out of here.

[1:13:51] I know we've got budget discussions, but the other benefit that we've seen in other parts

[1:13:56] of the state, if you go in on public water systems is just, you have plumbing in place.

[1:14:01] So if your water supply in the future, if one of them dries up or goes bad,

[1:14:06] And you can secure another one at a regional level and you can still have the pumping and

[1:14:11] distribution system move it if they go in on individual wells.

[1:14:16] And after everything's developed, you want to talk about bringing in and plumbing a community

[1:14:20] after it's all developed and everybody's living there in the schools are built.

[1:14:24] And you're digging up roads and stopping traffic.

[1:14:27] It's just cost prohibitive.

[1:14:29] And the final thing is growth's coming to you guys no matter what.

[1:14:34] It doesn't matter, you can be the most responsible water folks on the planet of the most

[1:14:39] irresponsible, but the growth is coming because you haven't got something that the

[1:14:44] Metroplex doesn't have anymore on this land, and all those people are coming your way

[1:14:48] and you know.

[1:14:49] So we're here to help any way we can and we appreciate y'all hearing us out this morning.

[1:14:54] Well, thank you've done a good job.

[1:14:55] Thank you.

[1:14:56] We appreciate our relationship, working relation.

[1:15:00] Chair. Waters kind of lock that land. You can't make it. And they're not making any more land. We can't make water. So it's a, it's a cripple situation. Thank y'all. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Kathy. I know this was fairly short notice and appreciate you rounding all these guys up.

[1:15:29] Oh, good.

[1:15:32] Take a quick break. You're going to keep going.

[1:15:43] Okay. Let's go and get a main back.

[1:15:45] in session.

[1:15:51] At this time we'll come out of workshop session and we'll go back into regular session.

[1:15:57] We're down to unfinished business. Josh is not going to be here today. I told him I'd cover it.

[1:16:03] There's no reporting unless the sheriff's update is on his administration building.

[1:16:11] Thank you.

[1:16:13] Sure for you in making comments.

[1:16:18] Yes, it's moving but it's moving slowly. We're waiting,

[1:16:21] We're told middle August, we're going to get our membrane that we need to seal the roof.

[1:16:26] Once that gets done, we should move pretty quick.

[1:16:29] I think the supply chain issues for the rest of it are going to be better.

[1:16:35] But that is one thing that's held us up, but other than that, it seems to be going well.

[1:16:39] Okay, good deal.

[1:16:41] There'll be no action.

[1:16:43] Anyone else having comments on ARB?

[1:16:51] Okay, next item is a workshop item.

[1:16:55] The

[1:16:59] new business items will deal with that if we get through our budget workshop.

[1:17:08] Let's go down to number five, under new business.

[1:17:14] That's consideration to advertise for business proposals, right?

[1:17:19] Nothing good, Judge.

[1:17:21] Okay.

[1:17:22] Item six is consideration for the 2022 chief funds very redirected to the Northern

[1:17:31] in a competent services to replace the wireless power technology with true fiber to the home

[1:17:37] technology for the Southwest portion of Johnson County.

[1:17:42] Landy has submitted a request just to update the court.

[1:17:47] I'm sure the court remembers, boy, you've always taken this cheap money and used it as county

[1:17:54] funds.

[1:17:54] There's Landy still be right there.

[1:18:00] You see him over there?

[1:18:00] I'm sorry.

[1:18:02] Come on up to the mic.

[1:18:03] Come on up in the mic, Mandy.

[1:18:07] I didn't want anything, I just want you to feel pressured.

[1:18:15] I thought you were tired, I thought you was already gone and you're sitting right here.

[1:18:19] Soon, very soon, very soon.

[1:18:22] Yes, sir,

[1:18:25] every year the Court has the ability to pull its chief funds that comes from the

[1:18:30] member dividend capital credit checks that we have to unfortunately send back to the state

[1:18:36] every three years for those who have the move addresses that are not available.

[1:18:41] So there's a group of checks, if you will, that are sheeted, held for three years, and

[1:18:47] then we have to sheet that back to the state.

[1:18:49] The county has the ability to pull those monies back into the county, and

[1:18:54] they're from United Co-operative Members from Johnson County.

[1:18:58] So each county can have access to these cheetah checks for the members in their county.

[1:19:04] So it's just one of those things that we wanted you to consider.

[1:19:08] Don't know if it's possible, I do not know the path that those cheetah funds take when they make it back to the county.

[1:19:15] But this is about the time of the year, I think Judge, when y'all send the request in on annual basis.

[1:19:21] And we made a presentation earlier about taking the fiber technology and replacing the fixed wireless tower technology

[1:19:32] because the fixed wireless technology works well if you got a line of sight.

[1:19:37] If you don't have a line of sight, you just don't have the good service that it's going to solve some problems for some people,

[1:19:43] but it won't close that digital divide that everybody keeps talking about.

[1:19:48] Not truly close at digital divide.

[1:19:50] A person two miles down the road can have a gig service or 500 megabit service, but

[1:19:56] because it's fixed wireless, they only have access to 100, it's better, 100 is better

[1:20:02] than zero, but you're still not closing that digital divide that's out there.

[1:20:06] So it was just a thought, we were discussing one day, the funds that are available.

[1:20:11] That gap between doing fiber to the home and fixed wireless is one that creates problems

[1:20:17] for the Feasibility Study, it pushes the Feasibility Study further out into the future.

[1:20:22] So we've applied for grants, still waiting on that word by we waiting for a while.

[1:20:28] Larry, I may not be able to see whether we get an answer on that, if in on my retirement

[1:20:32] day.

[1:20:33] But it was just a consideration at maybe this year we use these Ascited funds that are from

[1:20:39] the members of the United, plow it back in, reinvest it back into United members through

[1:20:45] this program, just for y'all's consideration, but keep the money in our counties,

[1:20:50] suppose to send it to that dark hole that y'all know is live and well in Austin,

[1:20:53] Texas. You said that, I didn't. Now, we've all used to request the money and just put it in our general

[1:20:59] fund, but I remember correctly. But any question you have, but yeah, what I'd love to have Johnson

[1:21:08] County be known is the first county in the state of Texas that fiber to the home, everywhere,

[1:21:12] were unavailable to the area, had a question while I go,

[1:21:16] when are we going to get to P.K. Lake?

[1:21:19] When are we going to get to Somerville County?

[1:21:21] When are we going to get to E.W. Rath County?

[1:21:23] So the draw and the pool for that information,

[1:21:26] the pool for that new service is there.

[1:21:30] They told us in the very beginning that the hardest thing

[1:21:32] to manage would be the members' expectations,

[1:21:35] and that has turned out to be the true.

[1:21:37] You've got all kinds of problems between water and sewer,

[1:21:40] and I get all that streets, the internet thing is really expanded in this COVID year,

[1:21:47] it kind of blew it up, if you will, but it's a good thing, if we're filling that gap.

[1:21:56] Roughly $275,000 is the funds.

[1:22:02] In the years passing for $272.80, this year should be a little bit more because more

[1:22:07] We got us cheated back to the state this year, so somewhere in that range, yes sir.

[1:22:13] We did an estimate a while back, the cost to replace fiber to the home in this southwest

[1:22:19] part of the territory with, to replace a tower is about $474,000, $50,000 per tower.

[1:22:28] So if we can get rid of those towers, and it's not going to do much, but at least it'll get

[1:22:32] rid of half a wand or get rid of some.

[1:22:35] But-

[1:22:35] Well, you're still on all your current customers playing on fire, just regular in-gram, fiber, or-

[1:22:43] Poe.

[1:22:43] Yeah, but there were originally eight towers planned for the Southwest part because of the low density.

[1:22:51] Matter of fact, the retreat was one of those examples of- there was going to be- try to be a fixed wireless-

[1:22:56] our planned, a fixed wireless tower and know the retreat.

[1:23:00] We're going to have to go with fiber to the home and that- and it's- we hope we can find the same

[1:23:04] and trenches that we dug several years ago,

[1:23:06] because you know how much rock there is out there

[1:23:08] in that area.

[1:23:09] You come across an I-16 upon my hill.

[1:23:11] Yeah, no, no, we're not thinking of that.

[1:23:13] That's another call off.

[1:23:15] That's Hill Co.

[1:23:17] Actually, that's a good question, because we have had

[1:23:21] several co-ops, neighboring co-ops come to us say,

[1:23:24] can you get to our members as well?

[1:23:27] And we have to serve our members first,

[1:23:30] but then we will move out into others.

[1:23:31] We've had City of Cleveland, City of King, City of Godly come to a city can y'all serve in the city and we will eventually, but we're going to get our members serve first.

[1:23:42] Well, I know my son loves his fiber.

[1:23:45] He was one of the fortunate ones.

[1:23:47] He was lucky to be right next to the backbone as it's being built from Burleson all the way over to Stephenville.

[1:23:53] He was right there along that way, so that was a good spot to be in.

[1:24:01] I thought I'd put on the agenda like I say in the past, we've just used it to offset

[1:24:07] other expenses the county has, but out of all fairness, I put on the agenda for the

[1:24:14] court to make that decision.

[1:24:16] We, uh, Steve, this, this, uh, this dollar amounts as far as what we've done thus far,

[1:24:23] were these already encumbered or, or they projected to come to?

[1:24:29] No, they're not encumbered.

[1:24:31] They're not encumbered.

[1:24:36] Now, this is just money that helps us in our budget process and everything else.

[1:24:44] And the numbers that you've been working up, though, in the last few days, is this part of it?

[1:24:50] Yes.

[1:24:50] Okay.

[1:24:51] Glenn, you brought in a question to my mind.

[1:24:54] You said this is just, this money is just, you got a copy of customers only?

[1:25:01] Yeah, but what about the others cheap money that other agencies have?

[1:25:06] Yeah, the local property code that allows the county to go back and

[1:25:10] pull these dollars back down from the state is limited to the electric cooperative capital credits.

[1:25:17] We call them member dividends that are cheated back.

[1:25:22] And if it would help the courts, we can, just like we were talking with the opera

[1:25:28] funding, we can turn in expenses of money spent on the actual fiber and turn in

[1:25:35] and get a reimbursement.

[1:25:37] That works well to, if that helps the y'all side and the bookkeeping side of the one.

[1:25:43] And this is based on three years.

[1:25:45] Yeah, basically, this is from three years ago, that is correct.

[1:25:49] Rick, we have to hold it for three years in case someone comes back to claim those checks.

[1:25:54] Those that are unclaimed, after the three-year period goes back to the state each year.

[1:25:58] So the request is for the three-year toll?

[1:26:02] Well, each year, y'all will get from what we submitted three years ago.

[1:26:07] So this summer, when y'all turn in your request, they will go back to that three-year period that we turned in and they will pull those monies down.

[1:26:15] So next year, I think y'all, well, y'all've done this for the last three years.

[1:26:19] The 2020 check was 278.047.

[1:26:23] The 2021 was 286.243.

[1:26:27] That is correct.

[1:26:28] And I'm assuming it'll be at least 280 if not for the next year.

[1:26:32] Do you say 252?

[1:26:33] Yes sir.

[1:26:41] Anyway, thank you all for your time.

[1:26:43] You bet, Landy.

[1:26:43] Thank you sir.

[1:26:44] I appreciate you.

[1:26:48] You bet.

[1:27:15] If we come out of workshop or something, come back to this or you want?

[1:27:19] Well, I mean to, well, we go in further as far as

[1:27:28] the budget we need to see where we're

[1:27:30] at with this.

[1:27:32] When you say that we submit that to the state to draw down, does that mean they're going

[1:27:38] to come back and draw down out of our General Fund for the last three years for these $2.

[1:27:43] Well, I think in the past, Steve, you might correct me on this, but we've just taken

[1:27:49] in the seat funds and put into our general fund account.

[1:27:55] Well, they are recorded as revenue from, yeah.

[1:27:59] That's one of the revenue streams and

[1:28:06] I'm not sure

[1:28:07] that when we get those from the state,

[1:28:09] are there other electric co-ops in the county?

[1:28:13] Hill co.

[1:28:14] So we would get all, we would get that would come together.

[1:28:18] You know, I have never since I've been here,

[1:28:21] can we recall receiving anything on Hill co?

[1:28:26] They're providing our county. I'm certain there's something there somewhere.

[1:28:29] Well, that money gets us cheated to the state and they send it back.

[1:28:34] Yeah, I know.

[1:28:35] Still, I don't know how we would differentiate unless the...

[1:28:38] I mean, I haven't actually looked at the check.

[1:28:42] But we don't have to make a decision on this today,

[1:28:44] but I wanted to present it to the court.

[1:28:48] I think there's maybe just a little bit of a discrepancy on these numbers.

[1:28:53] So,

[1:28:56] I would think that the auditor needs to verify those funds and either co-op and come back later.

[1:29:03] Okay, all right, so go ahead, Laney.

[1:29:07] Confirmary what you're saying.

[1:29:08] So, I mean, what y'all can do, the check probably has already, the process has already started.

[1:29:14] Now, whether you've gotten your check this year or not, it's probably any day now, then the next month or so.

[1:29:19] So could you all usually get it about this time of the year, the check back from the state?

[1:29:23] That go direct to your office state or the county treasurer.

[1:29:29] So the idea would be, let's wait and see what the state allocates back to y'all.

[1:29:34] And then y'all make a decision at that time, whether you wanted to birth those funds, to be used specifically for replacement of that.

[1:29:42] Because it fits within the guidelines of what you can use it under the property code for,

[1:29:45] for economic development, a sustainment for the county, so it fits the purposes.

[1:29:52] Okay, thank you, Laney.

[1:29:54] All right, we'll just pass on it.

[1:29:57] Let's go to item seven.

[1:30:00] At 67, fire 4, county road 3, 19, in person for, Jennifer. Thank you, Judge. This is a piece of property that was previously landlocked, had been for quite a bit of time, had not been platted. And the current owners were able to purchase 60 foot, frontage to get back to the piece of property. They're just asking for a variant since it's not 150 foot.

[1:30:31] This is kind of one of those unique situations.

[1:30:33] It's been the case for, I think, 60 years, something like that.

[1:30:41] What about red?

[1:30:42] And otherwise these folks are not going to be able to, without a variance, they're not

[1:30:48] going to be able to get a building permit on that property.

[1:30:53] They did, this is not an easement, it's a deeded owned tractor land that provides them with

[1:31:01] the 60-foot roadway and 60-foot road of road friends.

[1:31:06] They plan on just building one house on it for.

[1:31:10] It's my understanding that it's for single-family use,

[1:31:13] but at least at 60-foot wide so that if a future owner should decide to subdivide it,

[1:31:18] they would have the right-of-way width required for a road.

[1:31:24] But they're right now. They're not wanting to develop it in the subdivision.

[1:31:27] They're just wanting access to build their house.

[1:31:30] Otherwise, I got 17 acres, not worth much.

[1:31:33] Correct.

[1:31:34] And you said it's been landlocked back there for years.

[1:31:37] For quite a while, yes, sir.

[1:31:38] This is an example of one of those pieces of property that was mentioned early that,

[1:31:44] without making some exception to the rule, we're trying to let them do something,

[1:31:47] it's undevelopable, never be able to do anything with it.

[1:31:53] Since it's 60 foot, that's the width of a road.

[1:31:56] Correct.

[1:31:56] So

[1:31:59] I'm going to move that we approve this variance at 67-44-Caneroed 319 for 60-foot road

[1:32:08] frontings.

[1:32:10] I'll second.

[1:32:11] Motion, commercial.

[1:32:13] Who will be second by commercial value to give a variance at 67-44-Caneroed 319?

[1:32:19] And again, I think this is just an exceptional situation that is worthy of a variance.

[1:32:27] We all see them from time to time that aren't, but I think given the circumstances here.

[1:32:33] Well, that's why I'm glad we can have a variance individually, you know.

[1:32:37] Yes, sir.

[1:32:38] We looked at the individual case by case base.

[1:32:41] Okay.

[1:32:42] The motion, commission, the second, commission, belly, all in favor, aye?

[1:32:45] Aye.

[1:32:46] Any opposed?

[1:32:47] No one opposed that motion carries.

[1:32:50] Next one is consideration.

[1:32:51] question and variance, request the 40-foot road front.

[1:32:53] Each one can road 1107A and 120.9 road frontage on can road 12.5.

[1:33:05] It's pretty simple.

[1:33:06] And pretty simple.

[1:33:07] Yeah, I, 0.678 acres.

[1:33:10] Well, this one is not the same scenario.

[1:33:13] This basically is, they don't have the 150 foot on the frontage,

[1:33:17] but they've got two and a half acres here coming off of the 12.5.

[1:33:21] But they basically just want to be able to go out on to 1107 on the backside of the property.

[1:33:29] It basically just gives them a complete path through their two-and-a-half acres to go out onto 1107A.

[1:33:38] And I

[1:33:42] thought it would be up.

[1:33:44] When we're looking at this survey here, it's the 2.67 acres is that the track in question?

[1:33:55] Yes.

[1:33:56] It was previously subdivided without being platted, the plack requirement, how it wasn't

[1:34:03] in place at that time or given certain circumstances it wasn't required.

[1:34:08] And so this piece of property hasn't changed size or shape in a number of years, but

[1:34:13] But now they're ready to ask for permits for this piece of property, so that's why they've

[1:34:19] requested the variance since they don't meet the 150 foot on either side of this semi-corner

[1:34:25] lot.

[1:34:26] And got into that kind of a flag lot that we dealt with in the past, and it looks just like

[1:34:32] a flag, doesn't it?

[1:34:34] Yeah, but the difference is this flag, part of it actually goes into another row.

[1:34:38] They do have for sure.

[1:34:39] Oh, that's right.

[1:34:39] Yeah, there's access on two. That's the only reason we're here. Yeah, he's got access

[1:34:44] 120 foot access on another county road on county road, 1205. Well, can we stipulate the

[1:34:53] I guess worry takes his road in?

[1:34:59] He's got the 120 foot frontage there. That's what I mean. Yeah, well that's where the road

[1:35:04] that is defined as where the road will go in and then it'll go out on the 1107A

[1:35:11] as one parcel not is broken up for two acres or split it up, or what have you.

[1:35:16] Again, at this point in time, I don't believe their intention is to further subdivide

[1:35:20] the property, and there may already be an existing driveway from either of these points

[1:35:24] of access, they just need it recorded, that they have permission to ask for permits

[1:35:29] since they do not have 150 foot-of-frontage.

[1:35:31] Okay.

[1:35:35] As I said, this one's a little different than the last one, but certainly it's a cleanup,

[1:35:40] up if you will, but it gives them two accesses on two separate county roads, and it's not

[1:35:45] an obstruction there, and it's not a watershed flow in the drainage side of that, on the

[1:35:51] other side.

[1:35:52] Well, actually they have, if you take the 120.99 plus the 40, they actually have 100 feet

[1:35:59] foot road for each.

[1:36:00] It's just a few different locations.

[1:36:02] Two different roads.

[1:36:04] Yeah, but I think it's got to be specific on variance.

[1:36:06] Oh, yeah.

[1:36:06] Yeah, yeah, that's a little bit of a stretch and I'm together. It's 160.99 feet of road

[1:36:14] front. It's just in two different spots. Yeah, but this is one that also got kind of painted

[1:36:19] into the corner prior to the subdivision rules. Yeah, it did. Judge, I moved to prove these

[1:36:25] There's a variance is 11 or 7, 8, 12 or 5.

[1:36:29] Okay, thank you.

[1:36:30] I have a motion, Mr. Bailey, seconded by Commissioner Woolley

[1:36:34] to approve the variance any further discussion.

[1:36:38] All in favor, aye.

[1:36:40] Anyone oppose?

[1:36:41] No one opposes that motion carries.

[1:36:44] Thank you.

[1:36:44] All right, thanks, Jennifer.

[1:36:46] Number nine, consideration of ad service request number two,

[1:36:51] the Johnson County 9-1-1 call center

[1:36:54] for a geo-tech engineering services performed on June 14, 2022, the amount of $2,600 to be paid

[1:37:03] to rob a Durham architecture facility.

[1:37:07] I'm just going to go ahead and recommend that we get

[1:37:09] this paid. Robert went ahead and out of his funds and paid for it so this would be a reimbursement

[1:37:15] to him.

[1:37:18] Steve, you see any issues with that?

[1:37:20] But do you say that again, please judge, I was thinking about that.

[1:37:25] This is a Robert Durham, one head and ordered a geotechnical engineering service performed

[1:37:34] on the property that we're going to build our 911 dispatch center paid for it out of his

[1:37:41] pocket in the amount of $2,600.

[1:37:44] So this would be a reimbursement to Robert Durham.

[1:37:47] Was it in the scope of work?

[1:37:50] Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Here in time motion.

[1:38:04] Well, Judge, we've got to get that 9-1-1 center

[1:38:06] under way and he's already taken care of it. I'll make the motion that we approve it. Okay.

[1:38:13] I'll second it with a question. Okay.

[1:38:18] We're using ARK for that. So that should probably be

[1:38:23] in the motion. I'll restate the motion as we go through with paying the $2,600 to Mr. Durham,

[1:38:29] from our architect and it will be taken out of our performance.

[1:38:32] And I'll be in my second.

[1:38:33] All right.

[1:38:34] I have to amend the motion of commission of how?

[1:38:36] Minus a second by commission of what?

[1:38:38] To pay the $2,600 to be paid out of our befunding.

[1:38:43] For the 9-1-1 district center.

[1:38:46] All in favor, aye?

[1:38:47] Any opposed?

[1:38:49] No one opposed to that motion carries.

[1:39:01] OK.

[1:39:02] Item 10 is consideration of adoption agreement

[1:39:04] for the health reimbursement arrangement,

[1:39:08] and now to us client information farm implementation.

[1:39:12] Tell us, how are you, sir?

[1:39:14] Thank you for coming.

[1:39:16] Thank you.

[1:39:16] Awesome.

[1:39:17] So just a couple of weeks ago on the July 25th,

[1:39:20] we had Paula join us.

[1:39:22] She's our representative from Alaris.

[1:39:24] You all were able to prove through the HRA.

[1:39:27] So we are in the implementation phase right now,

[1:39:29] and we're on track for a 10-1 implementation of this HRA.

[1:39:33] In front of you, I've got two forms, the client information form and the adoption

[1:39:38] agreement. A lot of this, the client information form is indicating who's going to be

[1:39:43] responsible for getting portal logins with the county. It's also giving a little bit

[1:39:48] of information on the specifics of what's included in our HRA, like how it's going

[1:39:54] to be paid out, how it works with the duct bull and the medical plan.

[1:39:58] the adoption agreement is a little bit longer, and that goes through the more detailed

[1:40:04] specifics of what the plan is going to cover.

[1:40:06] So, just a refresher for you, our deductible is going to go up this year from medical

[1:40:12] from 1,000 to 2,000 for individuals, the way that we're going to kind of take that cost

[1:40:18] away from the employee's responsibility is by implementing an HRA.

[1:40:23] What that means is our deductibles are now going to be 2,000 as of October 1st.

[1:40:27] Once an employee has met $1,000 towards their deductible, they can start getting

[1:40:31] reimbursed for the other $1,000.

[1:40:34] So effectively, employees are going to have no impact to the amount that they're

[1:40:38] going to be spending on health care through the deductible.

[1:40:41] There are a couple minuscule updates that we've made since the version that we handed

[1:40:48] out beforehand.

[1:40:48] I think Laura has handed out the newest ones.

[1:40:51] And that's just, I've got highlighted here that on the claim are the client information

[1:40:55] form. We added the date of first payroll deduction. That's about halfway down the page.

[1:41:01] Towards the bottom of the page, we added in a little bit of information on the RX drug

[1:41:05] copays. And then on page two of the client information form in the section that's marked

[1:41:11] HRA information, we did make a slight adjustment to how that is worded. But that's just because

[1:41:17] of how the deductible is embedded. That's really just technical things. That one will need

[1:41:22] signature on the very last page.

[1:41:24] The adoption agreement doesn't need a signature from you all.

[1:41:27] I don't believe it just needs to be approved through.

[1:41:30] And it's just laying out, once again, how the HRA is going to cover medical expenses

[1:41:36] towards the end.

[1:41:38] What's your name again?

[1:41:39] My name is Adam.

[1:41:40] I apologize for coming.

[1:41:41] It's okay.

[1:41:42] I don't think.

[1:41:45] Okay.

[1:41:45] I didn't tell you in motion.

[1:41:50] I had a question, but I'll ask it after I make the motion.

[1:41:53] I'll go ahead and pull it.

[1:41:53] I'll need to get a second.

[1:41:55] I have to prove your authorization to sign it, yeah.

[1:41:58] Okay.

[1:41:58] Well, my question was, did you say it doesn't need a signature?

[1:42:02] Did you give a signature?

[1:42:02] The client information form does need a signature.

[1:42:05] It's absolutely asks for one on the very last page.

[1:42:08] I don't see a signature form for the adoption agreement, but once we send this into

[1:42:14] a Laris, this will be paid into a contract which you'll need to sign.

[1:42:19] So, this one just needs your blessing to move forward in the process.

[1:42:22] Yeah, we set aside, I think, 140,000 to kind of supplement that.

[1:42:29] You know, I'm just curious if this pushes more to seek a PPO as opposed to an HMO where we're going to be covered there.

[1:42:38] Can you ask the question again, sorry, I couldn't quite get it.

[1:42:40] We set aside $140,000, correct or?

[1:42:44] I'm just, I'm just wanting to make sure that, you know, so many are, or may opt to go to get that supplement through a PPO, as opposed to dealing with the HMO, that we have, is that going to be adequate, you think going forward?

[1:43:00] Because I know we did it on trends, is how many people are actually using that now to kind of give us the formula, but just if that increases, do you think we covered ourselves there?

[1:43:11] I think that 149,000 is a really good initial investment into it, just to remind everybody the last two years we took the average of how many people met their deductibles on the plan and it was about 149 people, so we've got $149,000 set to be funded into this HRA.

[1:43:29] Now, if you wanted to see the maximum exposure to you all, let's pretend the absolute worst is happening, and I'm knocking on what as I say this.

[1:43:38] If all 700 employees of Wood County met their deductible and started getting reimbursements, that fund would have to be 700,000.

[1:43:48] But we don't expect that to happen, we expect the normal amount of people to be meeting their deductibles and seeking reimbursement.

[1:43:54] The PPO, I don't think is going to make a vast difference, but we will have utilization reports coming in monthly.

[1:44:01] So if we are getting up to that 149,000 amount and we may need to fund more, we'll bring that to your attention when due time.

[1:44:10] All right. Any other questions?

[1:44:14] I think we're probably going to recommend budgeting a little bit more than 149,000.

[1:44:19] But that-

[1:44:19] I'm sorry, Steve, could you pull that back?

[1:44:20] I think we're going to recommend budgeting a little bit more than a hundred and forty-nine thousand, but

[1:44:26] The hope would be that we would have some seed money already in that fund to

[1:44:34] Self-funded next year. Yeah, there you go. Okay. Yeah, well, that's kind of the mission here

[1:44:39] Thank you. Thank you

[1:44:40] And the money will roll over year over year. So adding additional money would not hurt at all

[1:44:46] And you motion the second give me authorization to sign it. Okay

[1:44:51] I want to have a motion from Commissioner Bailey, a second by Commissioner Wolley to approve

[1:44:55] and to give me all the results.

[1:45:00] No one opposed that motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Item 11 is consideration, authorize the purchasing agent to advertise and request proposals for RFP 2022-230 for a construction manager at risk services for the construction in Johnson County 9-1-1 call center, second step of a two-step bidding process. Right. The first step was a request for qualifications.

[1:45:31] which we finalized, and the second step we're asking for authorization for is to go out to the companies that made the finals on the qualifications for pricing, and we'll be sending them the final drawings.

[1:45:49] Good deal. Now, this is where I want to get those, so this is a good thing.

[1:45:56] I'd entertain a motion.

[1:46:02] I'll move to approve, Judge.

[1:46:06] Motion, Commissioner Howell.

[1:46:08] Seconded by Commissioner White,

[1:46:10] to go out for the RAP 2022-DAS-230

[1:46:15] for a construction management risk for our new 9-1-1 call center.

[1:46:21] This is exciting to me.

[1:46:24] This is something we've needed so long.

[1:46:27] Sure, if I know you'd have to be elated about it

[1:46:30] And this is a big step to the county, being paid for out of the Harper funding, it's not becoming our regular, we didn't have to go out and borrow money.

[1:46:41] That's a good thing.

[1:46:43] Don't like the borrow money if we don't have to borrow it, so that's a blessing.

[1:46:48] And you're exactly right, Judge.

[1:46:50] Just stand along this back center.

[1:46:52] The call center has been something this county has lacked for many years.

[1:46:55] And it's been brought up several times and there just never was the money to do it.

[1:47:03] Our proposal was available.

[1:47:06] And this is a huge step, as I've said once before in this court, the one phone number

[1:47:13] that everybody wants somebody to answer is 9-1-1 because when you make a call to 9-1-1,

[1:47:21] you're either you know her or somebody you know is hurting or possibly trying to pass away on

[1:47:30] you or you're in danger or you need a police officer or you need you're at you're in a you're

[1:47:35] in a bad point when you got a call 911 and that's those dispatchers, those call takers, I'll hand to

[1:47:42] them because they're always at the other end of the phone. Brad, have you seen the plans? Yeah. Yes,

[1:47:48] have and it's very impressive. I'm not seeing them. I heard that it was very impressive.

[1:47:53] Yeah. Looks good. It's going to be a stellar facility. Good. All right. Any other comments?

[1:48:01] All in favor, I? All right. Any opposed? No one opposes that motion does carry. All right. We'll

[1:48:08] see who comes out to bid on that rascal. Item 12 is approval and confirmation of appointing James

[1:48:17] Williams, M. Lenore, as a full-time pay deputy council

[1:48:21] pressing to fill in a vacant position in council, too.

[1:48:27] Good morning, sir.

[1:48:29] Good morning.

[1:48:30] I come to you this morning to ask for the approval and confirmation of

[1:48:34] appointing Michael Lenore as a deputy council.

[1:48:37] He's filling a vacancy that was left by Deputy Bauer-Ryzen, who retired.

[1:48:42] And I am lucky enough to have Mr. Lenore come to us

[1:48:47] from the city of Willow Park where he's just retired after 20 years of service in the fire industry where he was fire chief

[1:48:55] arson investigator in state fire marshal who a good addition to your staff. Yes

[1:49:03] Here in time motion for approval. I'll make a motion to approve

[1:49:08] Motion will commission how second my commission badly to approve any further discussion

[1:49:17] It says here no bond required one correct paid employees are covered by the county reserves are bonded but paid employees are not if he was a reserve deputy you'd be getting a copy of his bond.

[1:49:34] Yeah,

[1:49:36] carry it under your commission.

[1:49:38] Yes, sir.

[1:49:41] You going to bring him by and let me swore him, man?

[1:49:43] I'm sorry.

[1:49:44] I said, you're going to bring him by and let me swore him, man?

[1:49:46] We're actually going to have a ceremony tonight

[1:49:48] where his wife, who is also a peace officer,

[1:49:51] is going to be pinning his badge.

[1:49:53] Good deal.

[1:49:53] That's good.

[1:49:54] All right.

[1:49:55] All in favor, aye?

[1:49:57] Any opposed?

[1:49:59] Anyone opposed?

[1:50:01] No one opposed is that motion carries.

[1:50:03] Thank you.

[1:50:04] Thank you, Councilor.

[1:50:05] Item 13 is consideration and resolution by John Scouting Commission's Court in support

[1:50:11] the Texas Governor's actions to prevent and are removed illegal aliens from the State

[1:50:17] of Texas pressing to.

[1:50:19] Can you how you presented this?

[1:50:22] Yes, sir.

[1:50:22] I had this put on there after some discussions with some of the gentlemen that are in the

[1:50:27] crowd today.

[1:50:28] Some of the other counties have been doing it, and I know, you know, certainly it was mentioned

[1:50:34] and they had hoped that it could be a, you know, disaster of invasion or declaration of invasion.

[1:50:42] And I'll, what little of the, and I want to take up for Sheriff's Department and

[1:50:50] David, if he's still in here, because simply the information I got was just on the arrest that were made

[1:50:56] in the county, in 2021 and in 2022, the amount of arrests that were actually made and housed in our facility that turned out to be illegals.

[1:51:11] The rest of the information, from their back, you just can't hardly find.

[1:51:17] And any of the welfare health type things, all of that's protected.

[1:51:23] nobody's gonna let you know because of HIPAA and other regulations you're not

[1:51:26] gonna be able to find that information and I didn't know where to seek but I

[1:51:30] did seek that out through David and talk to the sheriff and what a little bit I

[1:51:34] had but so therefore we made it to resolution but the reason we didn't make

[1:51:41] the the declaration and I'll let Bill Moore if you don't mind Bill kind of tell

[1:51:46] me what you had told me earlier about the declaration of invading some of those

[1:51:52] The boarder counties have declared a declaration based on the boarder counties had declared an invasion and did a declaration based upon they were on the boarder and they could readily document the number of illegal aliens crossing the boarder.

[1:52:15] And so based on the information I received from the Commissioner, rather than try to make

[1:52:25] us a declaration, we thought it best just to do the resolution.

[1:52:30] Specifically, if there are certain numbers coming in, then under the government code it

[1:52:37] kicks over to certain criteria, but we didn't feel like we could have the documentation to

[1:52:44] show that there was an excellent invasion.

[1:52:47] Okay, let me hear it in our county.

[1:52:49] Let me read this resolution.

[1:52:51] I think it's pretty strong.

[1:52:52] And by the way, I don't know if you watched the news last night.

[1:52:55] Governor Abbott chipping all those illegals up to New York City.

[1:53:03] And

[1:53:06] I think it sent a strong message to, and by the way,

[1:53:11] the governor, our governor invited him down to the border

[1:53:15] He declined as typical, but

[1:53:22] I think Governor Abbott has done such a good job in dealing

[1:53:29] with these based on law, based on these illegal aliens, and I certainly agree we are under

[1:53:37] a attack, invasion, and more needs to be done.

[1:53:47] But let me read this resolution.

[1:53:49] It's a resolution of John's County Commissioner's Corps in support of the Texas Governor's

[1:53:53] Actions to prevent and remove illegal aliens from the state of Texas, whereas the health

[1:54:01] Health and safety and welfare of Texas residents is under eminent threat from their unprecedented

[1:54:08] levels of illegal immigration, human trafficking, and drug smuggling come across the U.S. border

[1:54:15] from Mexico.

[1:54:17] And whereas since October 1 of 2020, more than 3.2 million illegal aliens have been apprehended

[1:54:26] after unlawfully entering the United States.

[1:54:29] more than 800,000 illegal aliens have avoided apprehension while unlawfully entering the

[1:54:38] United States to remain unaccounted far within our nation.

[1:54:42] So far this year CBP has identified more than 59 terrorists who have unlawfully entering

[1:54:51] the United States through unsecured border with Mexico.

[1:54:55] The unprecedented amount of human trafficking combined with the smuggling of fentanyl and

[1:55:05] other opus and infiltrating our border with Mexico has killed over 71,238 American citizens.

[1:55:15] The sophisticated human smuggling and drug trafficking organizations that facilitate these

[1:55:23] criminal acts are spearheaded by violent international drug cartels who have operated, who have

[1:55:32] operational control over our unsecured U.S. border. Whereas the formended recitation of facts

[1:55:41] is heard by adopted as findings of fact related to the resolution. And whereas the unformed

[1:55:48] from mentioned facts constitute an invasion of the state of Texas and whereas the ongoing

[1:55:56] immigration crisis on the Texas border is now accepting and has resulted in a security

[1:56:04] threat and human humanitarian disaster with overwhelming consequences to the residents

[1:56:11] of Texas.

[1:56:12] Texas.

[1:56:13] Now therefore be it resolved that with the Commissioner's Court of Johnson County, Texas

[1:56:18] support the Governor of Texas as Commander-in-Chief of the Military Forces of the State, take in necessary

[1:56:26] actions to preserve and protect the sovereign tree and territorial integrity of Texas and further

[1:56:34] support the Governor of Texas acting under constitutional authority, granted unto him under

[1:56:41] Article 4, Section 7, the Texas Constitution, and Article 1, Section 10,

[1:56:48] close three of the U.S. Constitution to immediately prevent and remove all

[1:56:55] illegal aliens invading the sovereignty of Texas and that of the United States.

[1:57:02] So I think it's a pretty strong resolution and it's showing our governor that we

[1:57:10] certainly support what he's doing there. He's one of the field governors on the border of all

[1:57:17] the states that is done this. There's taken the strong stand and I admire him for it and I think

[1:57:26] most Texans admire him for it. Bill? There's a lot of this language from this resolution was taken

[1:57:36] from another county's declaration of disaster, but for example, that particular county on the border they were able to document in one month over 4,000 illegal aliens who avoided apprehension coming in that border there in Mexico and their county.

[1:57:56] And so that's the reason for the resolution rather than a local state of disaster.

[1:58:00] sure we didn't feel like that we had the numbers to basically prove up that we had the declaration

[1:58:10] of disaster that would be successful.

[1:58:13] You know, I recognize your point based on numbers of what we have here.

[1:58:20] Sheriff has shared, you know, the fentanyl is on the rise that the human trafficking is on

[1:58:24] the rise.

[1:58:25] It certainly comes to our county.

[1:58:26] I think there's no one out there that would argue the fact that it's not just state of

[1:58:32] Texas or Johnson County being in this state, it's being invaded, it's our whole country.

[1:58:38] Everybody recognizes that.

[1:58:40] Where do we go from here in regards to building a wall or whatever the answer is on the border?

[1:58:49] It's only going to shove it to Arizona and California, it's going to be a continuing

[1:58:53] in crisis. Governor has certainly done what he can do and going into an election year

[1:59:01] where the numbers are running closer than he probably wants to. Here, it's a, it's a

[1:59:11] crisis that when you, when most people think of the border or illegal, they're only thinking

[1:59:16] of the Hispanic population leaving Mexico. That is not the problem. It might be a portion

[1:59:22] of that problem. The problem is all of the other countries and the terrorists and the

[1:59:27] evil around the world. And the, frankly, the king pins of the drug cartel that know

[1:59:34] how to work our system, making money on both ends of it. I've had many discussions with

[1:59:41] our local game wardens who've been on the border. And I'm friends with a lot of the

[1:59:48] hospitals and sheriffs along those borders.

[1:59:51] I mean, they're not even stopping people in vehicles anymore.

[1:59:53] They know the vehicles stolen.

[2:00:00] But somebody is going to get a new car or a new truck. I mean, it's just gotten to that point. It's overwhelming. And to David's point this morning, people are afraid. I mean, but what is happening there is coming here. It's coming here. I mean, you, you know, you're already here. You're talking about millions of people that have been processed, quite frankly processed. In the same day, they were apprehended, given a bus ticket.

[2:00:29] getting $1,600 in cash and tax payer money to go wherever they want to go, guys.

[2:00:34] I mean, to simply say that it's not an invasion.

[2:00:41] When you start talking about declarations, you start talking about the relief becoming

[2:00:44] then state dollars to federal dollars.

[2:00:47] Well, we know the federal dollars are not going to fund this.

[2:00:49] They've already sold that.

[2:00:50] But the message is not to ask them for the money, the message is to stop the invasion.

[2:00:57] And I respect your analysis of what numbers are here, but do we truly really know?

[2:01:04] I mean, there are so many people that go through this county every day that are stopping and living in this county.

[2:01:12] And what are they bringing here?

[2:01:14] So I don't know that you adopt this language to be as specific as saying the invasion,

[2:01:21] but I think the word invasion incorporated in this letter somewhere needs to be

[2:01:28] inclusive. I think that that, because following a declaration of any kind,

[2:01:37] strings attached to, we're not asking for relief, it's not like we're following a declaration

[2:01:42] because of a fire or a tornado or a flood, but this is a greater tragedy. I just feel like if there

[2:01:51] There is a way to incorporate this word in this language that gives that teeth to the

[2:01:57] governor to recognize, because so many other counties are going to do this.

[2:02:02] We need to let him know that we do see it as not only an invasion to the border crisis,

[2:02:08] but an invasion to all counties within Texas and the United States for that matter.

[2:02:13] I'm just going to say the last sentence on the first page says the four-sentient, four-amission

[2:02:18] in fact constitute invasion of the state of Texas.

[2:02:23] I mean, if you don't want to do this resolution,

[2:02:26] that's what I was asked to draft was a resolution.

[2:02:29] And that's what was drafted.

[2:02:30] If you want something stronger or something different

[2:02:32] than both against it, and we'll...

[2:02:34] I think this is...

[2:02:36] No, I just think...

[2:02:37] I think it's a good resolution.

[2:02:38] I just got a text from a friend who says,

[2:02:43] my friend was at a wise county commission meeting

[2:02:46] what they are doing and what you are in Johnson County are doing and on her way

[2:02:52] back to Parker County, she saw the, um, was how it, you know, it's how it

[2:02:58] looked like. Stopped a van full of vehicles on 114 and there's a whole bunch

[2:03:06] of picture. So, so all

[2:03:13] Governor Abbott must do and of course now the

[2:03:16] I remember back up, the Governor of New York is asking for federal funds to overcome that.

[2:03:24] I thought that was hilarious, but Governor

[2:03:31] Abbott is stood pretty strong in this issue.

[2:03:39] We've all seen it on news recently, and I think this is a good resolution now, I would

[2:03:45] to entertain the motion for approval.

[2:03:47] I'll make the motion different.

[2:03:51] I'll second it.

[2:03:52] Motion motion.

[2:03:53] How?

[2:03:54] Seconded motion.

[2:03:54] Why?

[2:03:55] Any further discussion?

[2:03:57] We do have the language.

[2:03:58] One quick comment.

[2:04:00] You know, when you think the words, what if, you know, Texas was awarded $5.2 billion in

[2:04:09] of funds.

[2:04:12] What if every county in Texas would have given 25 or 30% all those

[2:04:20] funds to the governor said build wall. I believe we could have made a big

[2:04:27] impact on that. Well you know I think that came up once they know. I actually had a

[2:04:33] conversation with Duane Burns about it our state represented and of course

[2:04:37] there's a lot of caveats to that stipulations how our

[2:04:41] funds can be utilized and that certainly wasn't one of them.

[2:04:45] But just what if that would have been a priority for the

[2:04:48] feds?

[2:04:48] Yep.

[2:04:49] Could have been done.

[2:04:51] Yeah.

[2:04:51] Could have been done.

[2:04:52] You've got all the urban and rural counties, but you would

[2:04:54] not have gotten Tarrant and Dallas and Harris and more.

[2:05:00] You never got them on board.

[2:05:05] I think it still could have been done.

[2:05:07] Oh yeah.

[2:05:09] Well, I think there are a lot of, even a lot of your other states have been giving Texas

[2:05:18] funds to help build that wall too.

[2:05:23] And finally there was a Democrat and Arizona that decided, well, we only got a little

[2:05:28] small narrows portion there.

[2:05:32] They were getting embarrassed because there was so many oligos coming through that little

[2:05:36] there are a portion he even recommended that they finish it up there so that was quite

[2:05:43] humorous.

[2:05:45] Thank you.

[2:05:45] Any further comments?

[2:05:48] All in favor, aye.

[2:05:49] Any opposed?

[2:05:50] No one opposed is that motion will send that to the governor's office.

[2:06:01] Thank you.

[2:06:03] Okay.

[2:06:04] Item 14 is consideration to apply for the Edward Burns grant funding in the amount of $15,827

[2:06:11] dollars to purchase so comprehensive medical kit for patrol unit serving the

[2:06:19] community, Constable Precinct, when it says four, but what will take you?

[2:06:25] All right well you're gonna have to I get for what he's been dealt. So Troy's out

[2:06:31] of pocket. Troy was working on this grant. I know a little bit about it. What I do

[2:06:40] You know is, he's asking for the 15, 8, 27.

[2:06:46] It is a, let me get the wording right,

[2:06:55] it does not require a match.

[2:06:59] So what he's advocating on purchasing is old medical kits, which are kind of dummy proof

[2:07:06] kits, if you will.

[2:07:08] Honestly, it could be used as we go forward in training that we're doing or there's going

[2:07:13] to come out, they're doing SROs, people that come in law enforcement officers doing even

[2:07:23] the fire guys that come in are doing, I can't remember exactly what they call it, but

[2:07:27] to me, it kind of a hot zone, three odds, if you will, but this is kind of a, if you

[2:07:33] follow the buttons, you can't mess up, I think.

[2:07:35] So, anyway, so Troy was just asking to submit that grant and I think it, I'm not sure if it needs the county judge's signature also, but I just in case, is it on there?

[2:07:51] Yeah. So anyway, he was just asking to, to this is just to submit it not to accept it.

[2:07:57] And it's no match, you said.

[2:07:59] Are you ready to

[2:08:04] move forward?

[2:08:04] Is that a motion?

[2:08:05] Sure.

[2:08:06] Second.

[2:08:09] Motion on commercial white.

[2:08:11] Second by commission Bailey.

[2:08:12] To approve.

[2:08:13] Any further discussion?

[2:08:15] All in conversation to say.

[2:08:17] I don't want to.

[2:08:17] Yes, I can give the Kennedy Georgia authorization.

[2:08:20] Thank you.

[2:08:20] I'd like to ask you.

[2:08:21] To say I am ready.

[2:08:22] We got a cover in the line.

[2:08:24] OK.

[2:08:25] Thanks.

[2:08:26] All of them by right.

[2:08:27] In your pose.

[2:08:29] Thank you.

[2:08:30] Thanks.

[2:08:31] Thanks.

[2:08:31] Council. Item 15, consideration contract with MP2 shell on energy for utility. Electrical

[2:08:41] utility services for the Hal Avenue building.

[2:08:48] Bill you were making comments on this.

[2:08:50] Judge, on the new property that the County bought on Hal Avenue, this is a contract. It's

[2:08:55] It's just for five months, the other contracts, we have five other buildings, which includes our jail on three different meters.

[2:09:07] They're coming up in January to be renewed.

[2:09:10] And so, this thought it best attacked us on to that in the worst.

[2:09:15] This is a contract for five months, and then it will be grouped with all those others that will need to renew in January.

[2:09:21] Okay.

[2:09:22] Yeah, but this is for the property on how that we bought that from cities,

[2:09:26] tire paying the bills on it.

[2:09:28] Yeah, we need to get the water to electricity changed over.

[2:09:34] Move, approve, give the county judge the authorization sign.

[2:09:40] Second.

[2:09:41] Motion, commission, will you second by commission, how to approve and give me

[2:09:45] authorization sign?

[2:09:47] Any further discussion?

[2:09:49] All in favor, aye.

[2:09:51] Any opposed?

[2:09:52] No one opposed that motion carries.

[2:09:55] Item 16 is consideration of the Convali M.H.M.R.

[2:10:00] Region DBA Convali Center for Behavior and Developmental Health Care and Local Corp.

[2:10:08] Contract with the Sheriff's Office, Sheriff King.

[2:10:12] This is the same contract that we executed last year and it's for a total not to exceed $25,000 for the transportation of mental health patients.

[2:10:20] No

[2:10:27] brinder. Me. Identity motion. It's approval. Judge, give your authorization a稻.

[2:10:36] Motion. Committee secretary secretary secretary's second by.

[2:10:38] Commissioner, how? How?

[2:10:44] And given me authorization. Two

[2:10:46] Sign. Any further comments. All in favor. I. Any opposed? No one opposed.

[2:10:52] That motion carries. Item 17 is consideration, but the greater

[2:10:57] Dallas fat worth region of law enforcement, mutual aid, task force agreement.

[2:11:02] with John's County Sheriff.

[2:11:05] In the court to enter into an agreement with the

[2:11:09] Greater Dallas Regional Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Task Force for

[2:11:16] the purpose of being able to share manpower and equipment resources for major incidents.

[2:11:23] Such as disasters to include floods, tornadoes, things like that.

[2:11:31] rights, so forth and so on,

[2:11:36] was just outlines basically the responsibilities of each party

[2:11:42] and outlines the cost to be absorbed by each agency.

[2:11:50] Bill, did you look at this?

[2:11:52] Yes.

[2:11:52] Under the amenity not waived, item 15, so that agreement.

[2:11:59] Hold on just one second.

[2:12:06] What's your question, Judge?

[2:12:07] Well, it says, amenity not waived.

[2:12:11] Right.

[2:12:12] That means that Johnson County by entering into this is not waiving our immunity.

[2:12:16] So Johnson County, I'm sure it's far more than that.

[2:12:18] I'm thinking, obviously, I'm waiting the wrong way, I'm sorry.

[2:12:22] It's good.

[2:12:23] Okay.

[2:12:26] I realize.

[2:12:26] This is a new agreement we haven't had this prior.

[2:12:30] We've never had one.

[2:12:32] Now, this agreement, they've been entering in these agreements up in the Metroplex

[2:12:36] for several years.

[2:12:37] I know that several years ago, Cleveland entered into it with them.

[2:12:41] Johnson County never did.

[2:12:43] What brought this up for us in Johnson County is this recent school shooting we had down south.

[2:12:48] And the need to bring in outside resources for a major incident like that.

[2:12:53] So we started looking at this again and explored this and wanted to go ahead and

[2:12:57] enter into that.

[2:12:58] And there is quite a long list of agencies that have already entered into this agreement.

[2:13:04] Well, I think we support our neighbors, you know.

[2:13:09] Yeah, in any return they support us.

[2:13:12] Correct.

[2:13:12] That's right.

[2:13:12] Well, we need you.

[2:13:13] Amen.

[2:13:14] Thank you.

[2:13:15] Yes.

[2:13:15] All right.

[2:13:16] Move to approve.

[2:13:17] Judge, give me the authorization, sir.

[2:13:18] Second.

[2:13:19] Motion by Commissioner Bailey.

[2:13:21] Second by Commissioner Wally.

[2:13:23] To approve and to give me authorization, sir.

[2:13:25] Any further discussion?

[2:13:28] All in favor, aye.

[2:13:29] Aye.

[2:13:29] Any opposed?

[2:13:31] No one opposes that motion does carry.

[2:13:34] Item 18 is consideration of a resolution for the Commissioner's Court of John's County

[2:13:40] Texas authorizing the John's County Sheriff's Office to form a regional law enforcement

[2:13:45] mutual aid task force agreement with other area law enforcement agencies for the purpose

[2:13:51] of providing and receiving law enforcement assistance.

[2:13:57] This is by resolution.

[2:13:58] motion.

[2:13:59] In this resolution, it's just in support of the previously mentioned agreement.

[2:14:04] Yep.

[2:14:06] Interim, motion.

[2:14:07] I had that motion.

[2:14:08] No need.

[2:14:08] I'll move to approve this.

[2:14:10] Exactly.

[2:14:11] Motion, motion, body.

[2:14:12] Second, motion.

[2:14:13] Move.

[2:14:18] Any further discussion?

[2:14:20] All in favor, aye?

[2:14:21] Aye.

[2:14:22] Any opposed?

[2:14:23] No one opposed that motion does carry.

[2:14:26] Item 19 is consideration of an interim jurisdictional pursuit policy agreement.

[2:14:33] Sure.

[2:14:34] What this does is it just formalizes some good common sense practices for when we are

[2:14:40] in a pursuit outside of our jurisdiction, or if another jurisdiction comes into our area.

[2:14:45] And it just outlines the things that are expected, the protocols that are expected to happen.

[2:14:49] And who's in charge, whenever this thing comes through our county, are we going to another

[2:14:55] other county so that we're not trying to make these decisions on the side of the road or already.

[2:15:00] And I think it's a good common sense and I think that it'll be very beneficial to us whenever we're in the heat of the moment to know what our responsibilities are and what the other agencies' responsibilities are.

[2:15:14] And Judge, on these agreements and so forth like this, each entities responsible for their own employees. In other words, if we have Johnson County employees going into Tarrant County, we're responsible for their actions, but by the same token of Tarrant County.

[2:15:31] has some of their employees coming in Johnson County, they're responsible for their

[2:15:35] actions. And that paragraph that you mentioned a minute ago just means that everyone's

[2:15:41] responsible for their own actions, but we're not wiping any immunities that we may have.

[2:15:45] Okay. How many entities be participating in this year?

[2:15:50] I didn't count them, but there's quite a few. It was quite a long list of them.

[2:15:54] I would say probably the majority of the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex area law enforcement

[2:16:00] The enforcement agencies are involved and have signed this agreement already.

[2:16:07] I move to approve and give, so this only needs the sheriff's signature?

[2:16:12] Yes.

[2:16:14] I move to approve and authorize the Chair, Madam King's Secretary.

[2:16:20] Second.

[2:16:22] Motion, motion, motion, woolly, second, my motion, why?

[2:16:25] To approve and give the Sheriff King authorization sign.

[2:16:29] Any further discussion?

[2:16:31] All in favor, aye.

[2:16:32] in a pose. The motion does carry.

[2:16:39] Okay, item 20 is consideration for any good

[2:16:43] load to attend the 2022 tea close training conference and because story I can't

[2:16:50] say that word. So sorry meeting in the Sheriff's Office. What has been brought up is

[2:16:58] she attends a lot of these meetings but she's mandated to do so if she has to go

[2:17:03] 20 times she has to go, or she can have a representative that goes, but the fact is

[2:17:09] the last few years with COVID, they didn't have any meetings, so they're trying to catch

[2:17:14] up on this, and I got you all a form here, so you can see it is mandated, and we are, when

[2:17:22] you're certified to host these T-close classes, like we are in Johnson County, you have to have

[2:17:29] You have to have that representation and everything.

[2:17:33] I'm going to give you all,

[2:17:37] sure, thank you.

[2:17:39] Throw

[2:17:42] this out there, that's a pretty small sum compared to sin and

[2:17:46] everybody to train.

[2:17:47] And when they can come here and get trained and not have to send

[2:17:50] everybody to individual trainings.

[2:17:55] Well, normally we put this on the consent.

[2:17:59] But because the dollar amount was so high.

[2:18:05] That's why I thought the whole Court need is to really discuss it and look at it.

[2:18:10] And if it's something that's mandatory?

[2:18:13] Yes, it is definitely mandatory, and it tells you the rules, the T-close rulebook,

[2:18:20] and the text commission on law enforcement contract training provided,

[2:18:25] provider contract, and it says, trainer is obligated, it has to,

[2:18:31] under the requirements and obligations and all that's there to say they have to be there

[2:18:38] because we're teaching these courses she has to be there every time. We can't miss one. We can

[2:18:44] lose. We can lose our certification to teach classes and that would be a bad thing for John

[2:18:51] Scenic because we do teach a lot of classes.

[2:18:54] Well there was another I'm looking for. There was

[2:18:59] In that original email,

[2:19:04] is it T-close train conference and a T-close meeting?

[2:19:08] Is that all tied together or what is that?

[2:19:11] You know, Judge, I'm not sure on that, but I just know that any training she has to go to, you've got to go.

[2:19:17] There's two separate hotel confirmations attached.

[2:19:21] Yes, I can answer that if you want.

[2:19:23] There's a consortium meeting T-cl as an agency was audited this year and they are under review by the Sunset Committee.

[2:19:30] And so they're having these bi-monthly meetings now to decide the direction of TCO going forward.

[2:19:37] There is a real possibility that they will be dissolved or be sunsetted and DPS will take over their role.

[2:19:45] So that's why they're having these consortium meetings.

[2:19:46] And they're having them in DFW, they had an Abilene, they had Lampassis, they've had an Austin, they're having them every other month.

[2:19:53] And it's a pretty serious situation, honestly.

[2:19:57] Yeah, and she's already going to be down there, so that's why they did it.

[2:20:01] Yeah, that Suncut said commission.

[2:20:03] I don't know if I'm sure you all know about it, right?

[2:20:06] Yeah, they're pretty tough on stuff when I was how it chose Art and whatever they really

[2:20:12] look at DPS.

[2:20:14] They look at everybody and they make their own decision on it.

[2:20:17] I don't have any thing other than that.

[2:20:20] Okay.

[2:20:21] I'm good.

[2:20:22] Okay.

[2:20:25] Okay. I entertain the motion.

[2:20:32] Motion to approve any further discussion.

[2:20:38] All in favor, aye? Any opposed? No one opposed? Is that motion carries? Thank you.

[2:20:44] Chief.

[2:20:48] Okay. The next one is consideration for Eric McDonald to attend the certified fraud exam review course.

[2:20:58] This is another high price and $3,200, $30,000.

[2:21:07] Okay.

[2:21:20] These are microphone, I'm sorry.

[2:21:25] These are not just sales, these are fraud.

[2:21:28] In our country is under more fraud than we've ever had in our lives.

[2:21:33] These frauds go into money laundering.

[2:21:36] They go into trafficking of people.

[2:21:39] It is so out of hand.

[2:21:40] And if Randy was here today, I wanted him to be here, but I saw he didn't show up.

[2:21:46] But the workplace that we, the Texas Work Commission, there were so many people in Johnson County,

[2:21:53] and our county here that got hacked or whatever, that people were sending in applications trying

[2:21:58] to get unemployment in what even our people.

[2:22:01] We did a big background of those, but I think we already have like 288 cases this year of fraud,

[2:22:09] But this is, this is cost our United States 5.8 billion is what we've lost by people doing, you know, fraud.

[2:22:20] It's a big thing that's come up.

[2:22:22] We need somebody that understands that.

[2:22:24] It's just not a game of, oh, somebody took something.

[2:22:27] When you have fraud, it might go from one day, from one person.

[2:22:31] And at the end of the cycle, when you do your investigation, it could be 18 or 20 people involved.

[2:22:37] The other day, we had one, Erin is really good about this, and I'm telling you, she can go into court and testify as an expert witness now, which we can't now.

[2:22:49] This is a very unique group, and it's worth the money.

[2:22:54] I promise you, I've looked into this.

[2:22:56] When you start knocking people down, we've got four cases right now with the federal government we're working on.

[2:23:00] They came down and, like I said, 18 people were arrested in one of our cases in Johnson County.

[2:23:07] And we're working with the U.S. Treasury, we're working with people we didn't ever work before.

[2:23:11] This is some serious stuff that has come up in our, in our lifetime.

[2:23:16] I mean, fraud is everywhere.

[2:23:18] People got to sit home for two years and figure out how to rip everybody off.

[2:23:21] That's the truth.

[2:23:22] So, I'm just saying, the money's worth it.

[2:23:25] I would not be here today to say she wasn't a professional to do that.

[2:23:28] But with this extra work and this extra training she's going to be willing to elite and Johnson County has come up a long way since I've been here to make the elite of, you know, our cases and stuff like that with our other parts of our, you know, of our CID division.

[2:23:49] This is one of a million and it is the best class there is taught in the United States, telling you that.

[2:23:55] And you got you got funds in your budget for yes, yes, or I do the one the very first time I ever heard of that

[2:24:05] The unemployment and I'll or remember it and it was it was one of my guys. Yes

[2:24:11] my supervisor and

[2:24:15] When the paperwork he had already and my not my guy that somebody had applied for unemployment in his name with his

[2:24:22] so security number and everything and even knew who his employer was, he had it all listed

[2:24:28] as Johnson County and everything. And when it come across Randy's desk, Randy immediately

[2:24:34] called me and this was his question. Kenny, my goodness, when did you let Don go? And

[2:24:42] I said, I didn't. What are you talking about? And he said, I just got paperwork across

[2:24:49] my desk that he's trying to draw on employment. And you guys worked on that.

[2:24:54] Yes sir. We worked on that. There was, I think, ended up being 24 different people

[2:24:59] that they had applied for unemployment in Johnson County, and actually some of them had already

[2:25:06] received unemployment payments, even though all those people were gainfully employed and still working,

[2:25:12] but, and of course it creates a huge problem for the real person because then they had to get that all

[2:25:20] straight with their social security, with the FICA, with everything that goes in.

[2:25:25] It took my guy six months to finally get it all straight and out, and it was a big deal.

[2:25:32] Thank you, sir.

[2:25:33] And when you get finished with those cases, you got papers that thick to go through and you've got to know what you're doing.

[2:25:39] It's not just, right, oh, I'm going to write a fraud.

[2:25:42] If you write a fraud and you don't do anything good about it, don't even take a report, that's the way I look at it, because you're letting the citizens of Johnson County down when you say, oh, we'll take a report and then not know how to do that kind of business.

[2:25:56] It's a specialized business, I'm telling you.

[2:25:58] That's why I waited three years to come before you to get this, because she's asked me and asked me, I turned it down every time until I could see that she was dedicated enough to do this.

[2:26:08] This is a hard job.

[2:26:09] Yeah, so, thank you.

[2:26:11] So, me, thank you.

[2:26:15] You're tired of motion.

[2:26:17] Thank you, commissioners.

[2:26:18] Now, I move to approve, Judge, I'll second.

[2:26:21] Motion, commissioners, how I'll second my commission?

[2:26:23] Bailey, to approve any further discussion.

[2:26:27] All in favor, aye?

[2:26:28] Any opposed?

[2:26:30] No one opposed, is that motion carries?

[2:26:33] All right, we're going to do some more drawing here.

[2:26:36] consideration of the second composition drawing and

[2:26:40] appointment of a sorry grievance committee for local government code chapter 152.

[2:26:47] So,

[2:27:12] okay, for court record I'll draw these and the first one is Philippi.

[2:27:22] Oh wow, MONCIB AIC.

[2:27:26] the, uh, lives in Burleson. Second one is

[2:27:36] Michael, excuse me, is Mitchell Edwards,

[2:27:39] Mansfield, Texas.

[2:27:44] The third is

[2:27:49] Troy Stollings in Burleson. That's three.

[2:28:02] The fourth would,

[2:28:03] What do these

[2:28:07] names come from?

[2:28:09] Debacumur, Mar, Day, and Burleson.

[2:28:23] The next is Bruno Jimenez and King.

[2:28:30] The next is Glen Up, Heart, and Burleson.

[2:28:41] The sixth.

[2:28:50] Give me a motion to approve those sixth.

[2:28:53] We'll send them out.

[2:28:54] Move to approve, six has drawn.

[2:28:59] Second.

[2:29:00] Motion will commercially second my question for how

[2:29:03] to approve the six has read in the drawing.

[2:29:07] He's

[2:29:12] when I did, you know, well,

[2:29:14] how would we say that?

[2:29:17] In body in hand, all

[2:29:23] in favor, I thank you.

[2:29:25] We can.

[2:29:26] Yes, sir.

[2:29:30] But thank you.

[2:29:30] Motion carries.

[2:29:31] Yes, sir.

[2:29:33] Thank you for serving, yeah.

[2:29:35] No, no kidding.

[2:29:36] I don't do that.

[2:29:37] If they're served, may have brought some more.

[2:29:39] Yeah.

[2:29:40] Of course, we don't have any salary agreements.

[2:29:43] Twenty-three is acknowledged by the purchasing age appointment board's order and oath of office

[2:29:50] appointing Ralph McBroom.

[2:29:52] Oh.

[2:29:53] Oh, Lee, what do you think about that?

[2:29:55] Oh.

[2:29:56] As purchasing age in Johnson County Texas.

[2:30:02] This is just an acknowledgement, and I certainly acknowledge that, and highly recommend it. So, uh, for court, facial record, we're acknowledging yours are purchasing. How many years now you've been doing it, Ralph? Actually eight years, you can believe it. And we're just not acknowledging the fact that you two are purchasing correctly six weeks.

[2:30:29] He had a unanimous decision over in the Judges Court, so we're glad to have you.

[2:30:38] We are glad and we would love you to have you.

[2:30:41] Thank you very much.

[2:30:42] It's great to be here.

[2:30:43] You bet.

[2:30:43] Thank you, Ralph.

[2:30:45] Okay.

[2:30:48] Adam 24 is a ratification.

[2:30:50] and first amendment of the grant contract OAG contract number 2219061-06, which is the

[2:31:01] FY227's contract amendment, vendor name, chain for the county judge.

[2:31:07] We might air out just need your approval on here,

[2:31:18] entertain the motion.

[2:31:20] Move to approve and give the county judge authorization to sign.

[2:31:24] Okay.

[2:31:27] Second.

[2:31:29] A motion by commercial white, second by commercial out, to approve and give me authorization

[2:31:33] sign.

[2:31:34] All in favor.

[2:31:34] Aye.

[2:31:35] Any opposed?

[2:31:37] No one opposed.

[2:31:38] That motion carries.

[2:31:40] Item 25 is consideration of the appointment of James Camp, Grandview Fire Chief, as Fire

[2:31:47] Marshal for the Big Ranch Promotions, LLC to be held on September 4th of 2022.

[2:32:00] I should have that address memorized, but now, I think I've proved 17 of these for him.

[2:32:10] And I'll love your word about this as far as for the horse race out by Sam Flatt.

[2:32:16] to

[2:32:22] chief camp, I'll move to approve.

[2:32:25] Thank you.

[2:32:30] Washington Commissioner Wolley second my commissioner

[2:32:33] how to approve.

[2:32:35] He's just almost begun the full time

[2:32:41] same I volunteer fire chief.

[2:32:45] We certainly do appreciate your services.

[2:32:55] All right, all in favor, I, in your pose.

[2:32:58] He does a good job, by the way.

[2:33:00] He's a good guy.

[2:33:02] Okay. We'll do number 26 after workshop. Next item is our consent agenda.

[2:33:11] On the consent agenda, on item 2K, the form says 2021 and it should say 2022.

[2:33:25] On 2K? Okay.

[2:33:32] I'd like to attend a motion for approval.

[2:33:35] move to approve, Judge.

[2:33:40] Second.

[2:33:41] Motion for motion White. Second by

[2:33:43] Commissioner Woolley to approve to consent. Any

[2:33:46] further discussion? All in favor, aye?

[2:33:50] Aye. Any opposed? No one opposed?

[2:33:52] Is that motion carried?

[2:33:58] Okay, we have two.

[2:34:09] Well, we're still going to, when we've done the

[2:34:12] pertinent and so we've got two workshop sessions.

[2:34:16] And the budget workshop is going to be a

[2:34:18] a while. So it currently is 1148. I think I'll recess the court to 115 that give us time

[2:34:27] to go grab back and eat and come back and then tackle that budget. That good with everyone.

[2:34:36] All right. We stand recess until 115.

[2:34:44] Okay. We'll go ahead and get our meeting back in

[2:34:48] session. This is a continuation of a meeting. We do have an executive session item but we

[2:34:54] We cannot hear it until 1.45 p.m. because of the posting requirements.

[2:35:02] So just by the attorney's office requests.

[2:35:14] So we're in a regular session,

[2:35:18] pardon me.

[2:35:20] We'll come out of regular session, we'll go into our workshop session down here to it.

[2:35:29] There's

[2:35:35] really not anything that I'm aware of and we don't have anyone here from grant works.

[2:35:43] Yes.

[2:35:44] Gary here.

[2:35:45] Was that something to do with that?

[2:35:48] Gary did you have all one workshop session we can talk about the budget because that's

[2:35:54] what we were handed.

[2:35:56] Did you have, you want to go ahead and come on up?

[2:36:00] Whenever we get to the ARPA section I do have some.

[2:36:03] Okay. Well, that comes to be on the arpeggio.

[2:36:11] And so, we'll go to Constitience with Grant Works regarding proposals, projects from

[2:36:16] our con Rescue funding.

[2:36:18] So, I think yours is in regards to your pickup truck.

[2:36:23] Yes, sir.

[2:36:25] We're just looking to replace that 2011.

[2:36:28] Surely that we had, we bought that used, I don't know if you remember that.

[2:36:33] Jeff England. Yeah, I remember. Hard over about 160,000 miles on now. We spent 3,000 in repairs

[2:36:43] on the last two years. Or because another 30,000.

[2:36:49] But we're also starting to have some

[2:36:53] issues with the transmission on it. So I don't know. I mean, it's not acting up all the time,

[2:36:58] but it's got electrical issues to it too, so and I guess it has been out there long enough on

[2:37:07] by board through purchasing some of the bids that we've gotten are way up there.

[2:37:13] They're too high, they're 8,000 hour.

[2:37:18] We've been spending and getting a lot less, so keep looking and see what's coming up with.

[2:37:27] If you want to give me a ballpark figure, we know what a used one would go for.

[2:37:34] Yeah.

[2:37:36] This was a reasonable budget request that Gary had made, and so it's not anything new.

[2:37:43] Right.

[2:37:46] There's not a dollar amount budgeted right now, though.

[2:37:48] Yeah, no.

[2:37:49] Well, we purchased several vehicles too for just Josh's department and

[2:37:57] Pemptro cars.

[2:37:58] I mean, we've used that ARPA money to do immediate purchases.

[2:38:03] And how would we look at this when Ralph about the same?

[2:38:08] Well, we need to, if it's not on by-board or if it's not on a co-op, then we need to

[2:38:14] prove emergency purchase again.

[2:38:17] I think you could probably find something on by board or the co-op.

[2:38:22] We found several, you know, might want to just get with Hogan or somebody that just, you know, did that on a medical call.

[2:38:32] You know.

[2:38:33] Are you going to need four or drive?

[2:38:35] I don't necessarily have to have it.

[2:38:38] It's one of those deals, you know.

[2:38:39] You don't need it, you do, you know.

[2:38:44] I have it, you need it.

[2:38:45] when needed lately have we unless you're getting Sandy first one we had I had to

[2:38:52] drive four acres back to a stock tank in the mud to get to I think you need

[2:38:58] for a driving for what you do you never know where you're going you never know

[2:39:02] where you're going people aren't going real cheesy about where something might

[2:39:07] happen and pass away and that's the time where it's got to get there you got to get

[2:39:12] whether there was ice on the road or whatever.

[2:39:15] That's right.

[2:39:16] That's another point.

[2:39:17] You can go to there where with the death occurs.

[2:39:20] And the only bit close we've gotten so far too will evidently

[2:39:24] there's, I got an email that C forwarded to me that

[2:39:30] one of the fleet guys centers that they were like

[2:39:34] 1900 trucks short.

[2:39:37] Wow.

[2:39:37] Yeah.

[2:39:40] Not checked with Hogan, because he was a sheriff.

[2:39:44] You got any input on that, you don't have a problem with getting Hogan to see if he

[2:39:50] can find another vehicle for MED?

[2:39:53] Oh, definitely.

[2:39:54] Yeah, definitely reach out to Hogan, he's always on the phone trying to find something.

[2:40:00] Okay.

[2:40:01] Yeah.

[2:40:02] We'll do that.

[2:40:02] Yeah.

[2:40:03] If we can find it on a cooperative, then we don't really need an emergency per authorization.

[2:40:12] We need to verbally communicate in here whether we're going to do it or not.

[2:40:17] Right.

[2:40:20] Does that $1 amount?

[2:40:22] No, we don't have a $1 amount, and it sounds like.

[2:40:25] So we need to come back to court if it's not a co-op.

[2:40:29] This is where the amount is to them.

[2:40:30] Yeah, but I just I just know there's better deals out there than what we're receiving in so far

[2:40:36] Yeah, well Gary. Here's the deal. I guess

[2:40:41] Court does not meet officially again until

[2:40:45] To weeks from today

[2:40:52] Just keeps option you find something. Yeah, I'll just keep looking

[2:40:56] We'll do that. We'll get on the agenda ASAP. All right that works. Thank you. Thank you Gary

[2:41:11] Is there anything else we need to talk about for ZAR, for funding?

[2:41:15] I know you have anything.

[2:41:17] I had a City Council person from the City of Greenview contact me last week about, I guess

[2:41:24] if they assume a proposal to what we did for City of Rio Vista in doing some expansion work

[2:41:31] or increasing the capacity of their sewer treatment plan.

[2:41:38] And with the request of our fund to help fund that, and I explained that that kind of awarding process

[2:41:49] had already passed.

[2:41:50] However, the possibility of supposed, Mr. Bailey has been referring to some of that money coming back.

[2:42:01] I think with the new leadership now with grant works that I think the odds of that are greatly

[2:42:09] reduced. But anyway, I told her that I would bring it up today and then it'd be

[2:42:17] something that we'd have to look at down the road in the event that there was, you

[2:42:21] know, money available. I think she was going to try to pursue maybe estimates or

[2:42:30] some kind of documentation in as far as need, that kind of thing. I know that

[2:42:36] plants you know it's probably seen it's better days and I never did live in the

[2:42:43] city of Greenview but I know that there's some issues with that anyway I told

[2:42:50] her I bring it up that's about all we can do at this point and just so that

[2:42:56] there's a level of awareness among the court. She didn't give you any indication

[2:43:03] No, not at all.

[2:43:05] Gloria, an operation blessing, you had contact with me.

[2:43:08] She said, I wasn't wearing that.

[2:43:10] We could even smell anything.

[2:43:12] I said, Gloria, we've already had a cutoff date on that.

[2:43:17] So, we opened that door.

[2:43:20] You got a band-door box back open.

[2:43:25] Well, it's a given, yes.

[2:43:28] We pretty much have awarded and have earmarked.

[2:43:32] the lost revenue portion tremendously.

[2:43:36] More so than I thought, even.

[2:43:38] Yeah.

[2:43:39] And the process isn't over, and there's still a lot of time left going forward.

[2:43:49] I brought up some issues that were found after the fact that we did set a deadline,

[2:43:57] but we didn't stick to the deadline, so there's some controversy out there.

[2:44:01] But there will be probably an opportunity, and at least going forward, if the City of

[2:44:08] Grandview is in the proactively getting bids or estimates or a real number, and it ends

[2:44:18] up having some money left there to do that with.

[2:44:22] You know, we've talked about building roads, we've talked about doing a lot of things with

[2:44:25] the lost revenue portion, but because of contractors or because of supplies or because of simply

[2:44:33] just there is a time limit on this, that might be an option to explore once those numbers

[2:44:41] come in because everything that we do, that impacts that many people, we probably should

[2:44:48] reconsider it or at least if there's something there, whether it be a portion of it or whether

[2:44:54] be all living. I need to look at it. So I agree.

[2:45:03] All right, let's come off a one. Let's go to two discussion of budget and tax rate, and then we'll go back to because we'll kind of have to take a record, not a record vote, but a vote affirmative direction. The courts are going to go on this tax rate.

[2:45:25] I went over all the revenues that we have projected for next year. This last statement, I guess this is still correct, Steve.

[2:45:35] We were 32,890 in the negative, but you got a new one.

[2:45:43] Okay.

[2:45:53] Oh, good.

[2:45:54] We're throwing 32, 549 to the good.

[2:46:00] And that's lower than the tax rate, a penny, down to 41 cents from

[2:46:09] 42.

[2:46:13] That's about a million seven in revenue or given back to the public.

[2:46:30] I

[2:46:37] don't want to jump in ahead of you, Steve, so you don't look like the villain here.

[2:46:42] I mean, you're always the villain.

[2:46:44] I called on Steve last Friday, and thank you, Steve.

[2:46:48] He worked hard over the, obviously, that rest of that day and summing it into the weekend

[2:46:55] to kind of gather some numbers up, and we discussed several different factors.

[2:47:00] we discuss what the actual dollars are to do the new hiring, to do the raises that's been proposed.

[2:47:07] Look at the tax rate that's been proposed.

[2:47:10] Also look at the FMLR numbers that are certainly that we have to discuss further.

[2:47:17] We are experiencing a lot of overhead that we didn't have last year for the amount of work that we're doing.

[2:47:25] I know that Mr. White, Mr. Howell and myself, after looking at the numbers that Steve provided on some of that,

[2:47:33] we're going to have to go back and re-address, pulling that money some of it, at least back into FMLR, and I'm just led into that, Steve,

[2:47:43] so you don't look like the villain here. Go ahead.

[2:47:46] I certainly understand that I do not walk in yellow shoes as being elected representatives of the voters.

[2:47:56] But I think the way that the state has

[2:48:05] limited us in being able to have flexibility with future tax rates.

[2:48:13] And given that

[2:48:17] the road and bridge, the FMLR hasn't changed in several years.

[2:48:23] I think it would be a good public policy to consider adding a half-cent to the FMLR rate at least.

[2:48:34] Yeah, at least, I agree.

[2:48:36] And we gave up a cent years ago to help balance a budget during the leaner times,

[2:48:43] trying to retain employees and go on and on about why we did it.

[2:48:48] that has been brought up for the last four or five years to talk about when do we put

[2:48:54] it back in. Well, we were there.

[2:48:59] Anything any of you guys have to say on it, I'll let

[2:49:01] you talk, but I'm just, I made the recommendation that we recapture that.

[2:49:08] Who are you going to come up with money? We're not going to, we're going to leave that tax

[2:49:12] right on the front.

[2:49:14] I'm not going to vote on budget and leave that tax right at the same. We don't lower that

[2:49:18] budget, and I'm not going to vote. I'm already told you all that.

[2:49:22] One cent on a $40,000 house makes about $40.

[2:49:26] I don't care. If we don't lower taxes for our citizens, I'm not voting on this budget.

[2:49:32] I'm one person, but I think I got more support than myself.

[2:49:37] I hope so, but I don't mean that.

[2:49:41] We're just trying to, it's not about this year's budget, it's about next year's budget.

[2:49:45] It's about this year's budget.

[2:49:47] That's what we're working on.

[2:49:48] Yeah, but this year's budget is going to be a direct impact

[2:49:52] to next year's.

[2:49:57] Better to integrate.

[2:50:00] Great calculations and all based on that.

[2:50:04] I mean, we're trying to retain and keep employees.

[2:50:09] It is a market place out there for people to steal

[2:50:13] our employees.

[2:50:14] Turn county and I get that.

[2:50:16] I'm not questioning the raise that our employees deserve

[2:50:19] wherever need, rents going up, utilities going up,

[2:50:22] groceries going up, anybody can see that.

[2:50:27] But we are under a, I'll just throw some numbers out here

[2:50:31] and then I'm gonna shut up.

[2:50:35] We got 20 new employees proposed.

[2:50:43] That will be an increased $824,500.

[2:50:49] Rodent bridge, the two positions that I want

[2:50:51] on top of that, because it's different out of the budget, is 175,000, 176,000, I'm sorry,

[2:50:59] there's a million, we got for the positions of just changing position numbers and such

[2:51:10] as another 254,000, where I'm going with this, as you get over here to the bottom line,

[2:51:20] current

[2:51:21] operations $75,692,000 with all the adjustments that we're talking about is going to be $85,608,000,

[2:51:29] if I'm reading Steve's numbers, if I'm wrong, Steve. The thing about it is, is that revenue

[2:51:36] kept that we're all living under. We can balance this year's budget and lower them taxes

[2:51:41] is two cents, we can do a lot of things and certainly need to do, but the impact of income

[2:51:51] that we're going to receive off a new growth that wasn't declared this year going forward

[2:51:56] is not going to be as much as what we experienced in this last year.

[2:52:02] Construction costs have gone up, interest rates have gone up so there's a curve, it's slowing,

[2:52:07] But a lot of the properties that were built that came on the tax road are there.

[2:52:13] There's a lot of new development out there, but not near the amount of what we brought

[2:52:18] in this last year, a billion half year before last, two billion this last year, those numbers

[2:52:23] are about to tank.

[2:52:24] But I would remind you, about six years ago, when Halliburton left here, and we had so

[2:52:30] many other things, we lost three billion dollars, lost three billion dollars that year.

[2:52:35] This is equitable.

[2:52:37] You're talking about a $3 billion increase.

[2:52:39] We're just still capturing back what we lost.

[2:52:45] And we are one of the, and Larry, I won't chime what you had brought up earlier on in this.

[2:52:51] In the state of Texas, 254 counties, we're not in the top 25%, we're in the top 18% for the lowest tax rate in the state.

[2:53:00] And that comes from good governing up here.

[2:53:02] It does.

[2:53:03] We have had lean times and we've had good years.

[2:53:05] We got a good year this year, but we're hiring 20 new employees and proposed 8% increase.

[2:53:13] It is a lot of money that's going to affect next year's budget with a revenue cap, and I'm just going to stop.

[2:53:26] Leave that tax rate where it works at.

[2:53:33] Well, Commissioner, I'm just sitting here calculating your budget's going to be $2,95,000 more because all the new property values this year.

[2:53:44] I don't disagree with that. My house went up about a hundred percent.

[2:53:49] I don't want to do it when you're a house. I'm going to tell them about it.

[2:53:58] Percent two is up to 72.

[2:54:02] But how much of the, how much of that are the raises taken out of?

[2:54:10] Well, I don't know. I mean, because I haven't calculated that. But I'm just saying.

[2:54:14] I'm looking over all numbers. Right.

[2:54:16] Well, me, my, my precinct personally, I didn't request anything extra added into my line

[2:54:24] items.

[2:54:24] I had to cut to make my balance.

[2:54:27] I didn't have enough in the fund balance to cover it.

[2:54:30] So we were doing some research this morning looking back over the past few years and I'll just

[2:54:40] give the combined total fund balance for each of the four precincts.

[2:54:44] So this is all y'all together, not one precinct in particular.

[2:54:50] But at the end of fiscal year 18, the four precincts had

[2:54:55] 7.1 million in fund balance at the end of 19, 6.4.

[2:55:02] At the end of 25.3, at the end of 21, 5.2.

[2:55:10] and we are projecting the end of fiscal 22 that the 4 precincts combined fund balance will be 3.7.

[2:55:22] You know Judge several years ago you and I met and I showed you this pattern on paper and the fact that

[2:55:31] with current taxation and road and bridge the function of the road and bridge departments isn't sustainable financially

[2:55:42] And I think those figures that I appreciate you bringing that forward, Steve, because that's never been since I've been sitting here.

[2:55:50] That's never been presented.

[2:55:53] And I think that tells all we're at our fund balance.

[2:55:58] And Rodin Bridge has dropped 50 percent.

[2:56:02] It's half what wasn't in 2018.

[2:56:05] We've not kept up.

[2:56:06] But they have not kept their hands.

[2:56:10] They tell people that Rodin Bridge for the entire county is funded with a force in

[2:56:15] attacks, usually I get, you know, their mouth falls open.

[2:56:19] Like, how does that work?

[2:56:21] Well, obviously it's going to catch up with us.

[2:56:24] I think we're there.

[2:56:27] Well, I'm not for, I'm not for, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm not saying you don't need some

[2:56:33] increases Larry but I'm just saying you're getting some increases already. We can add some additional

[2:56:42] there in our estimates of our reserves. I mean of our revenues are very conservative. We can

[2:56:54] to help that. But I'm just saying if we don't know this, we owe it to the tax payer.

[2:57:03] And I'm not saying that because you gentlemen sitting here, I said this for a year of a

[2:57:07] cane. If we don't know that tax rate, and I'm total agreement that the problem of our

[2:57:15] tax rate is Austin, Texas, putting pressure on their central

[2:57:21] praise or districts. Well, we don't have any cloud. They

[2:57:26] come in, they do those samplings, they call our school

[2:57:31] taxes killing. People will get where they can't even

[2:57:36] afford to buy home. If they do, they can't afford to stay

[2:57:40] in it. And Judge, I don't disagree that we need to reduce

[2:57:44] the tax rate but we've got to do some balancing here like this thing or well I'm I'm y'all

[2:57:50] show me hand I'm all for it. You ask us the other day or yes in my response was that

[2:57:56] I thought we needed to reduce the tax rate of scent and I still stand with that today but this

[2:58:03] this rodent bridge deal will not sustain itself. No next year there won't be any fun balance and

[2:58:10] And that being said, guys, if I'm out, you know, you give up that scent this year.

[2:58:17] And there's a falloff coming forward.

[2:58:22] We ain't even talk about next year's expenses.

[2:58:24] We know we're going in curve, such as vehicles.

[2:58:26] It's been talked about earlier on.

[2:58:28] You talk about just inflation of all commodities, even our electric bill.

[2:58:34] At the end of December this year, we're going from a 3 cent kilowatt hour at the county

[2:58:40] to possibly a 7.5 cent kilowatt.

[2:58:43] I've talked about that.

[2:58:46] That's astronomical numbers, guys.

[2:58:49] And when you start talking about the unknowns, it's a real great cloudy crystal ball.

[2:58:58] We don't know, but we do know there's going to be changes.

[2:59:01] We do know that there's going to come with a cost.

[2:59:03] But if we're just trying to stay flat here this year, we're going to pay for it next year.

[2:59:08] We're going to pay for it next year.

[2:59:09] If we give it up this year, we're going to pay for it.

[2:59:12] If you're going to get it back in, you're not.

[2:59:14] I totally disagree with you.

[2:59:15] I know you're not looking at what are the tax roles going to be in this county next year.

[2:59:22] They're going to be substantial.

[2:59:24] We hope.

[2:59:26] There's no hope.

[2:59:27] Well, it's going to happen.

[2:59:28] I'll be one way your own side with you.

[2:59:42] If Rodenbridge doesn't get their portion of this back

[2:59:44] this year, we're all going to be in the red next year,

[2:59:47] you're saying.

[2:59:48] Steve, what you said, if that would be a start,

[2:59:54] and I'm just putting this out there.

[2:59:56] Everybody's going to welcome to discuss it.

[3:00:00] What if we set the tax rate at 41.5 and then put a nickel, take that nickel that I'm adding to it, put that in F.M. I want.

[3:00:12] If it were me, and again, I'm not, I'm not sitting in yours, shoes, and I don't vote, but that's what I would do, because if I add a, well, that's going to generate. I'm sorry. I didn't let you think I apologize. That if the tax rate was.

[3:00:30] of 0.415, then we'd have 1.1, almost 1.2, to split up between the precincts.

[3:00:43] Well, a penny generates about a million, seven.

[3:00:47] Yeah, 1.688.

[3:00:51] Well, half of that is roughly

[3:00:56] 800,000.

[3:00:58] Well, that's for general fund.

[3:01:00] It's a little bit, it generates a little bit.

[3:01:01] Yeah, a little more often, because the tax abatement is down to

[3:01:05] apply for road and bridge tax, but it's a negligent.

[3:01:10] I mean, it's a V1.701.

[3:01:15] You know, if our tax base made the difference that the school tax

[3:01:19] base made, it'd be real simple.

[3:01:22] But when you figure a cent on a half a million dollar property equals

[3:01:29] over the course of that loan on a year, about 60 or 70 bucks,

[3:01:33] looks. What have we really done? I mean, that's, I mean, that's a

[3:01:37] faxable value. What they're going to collect on that for that, for that

[3:01:40] dollar amount of property, one cent, two cents. You know, we lowered it

[3:01:45] on nickel. If you remember last year, we lowered it five cents

[3:01:49] last year, because we were anticipating all of this growth, was it

[3:01:54] year before? Well, we were half a cent last year. Okay. We were

[3:01:57] participants. We were, we were thinking that we were going to have all

[3:02:01] and you grow the next year you're right, thanks for clarifying.

[3:02:04] But if you look at it, all we could do last year was at half-sense.

[3:02:08] We did five cents, it really equated out to about closer to 10

[3:02:13] when you get right down to it, but to the taxpayer itself

[3:02:16] it was about a five-cent cut.

[3:02:19] Last year we didn't have it.

[3:02:21] This year we got it next year, I'm afraid we may not.

[3:02:24] And I don't, it's not an argument point.

[3:02:26] It's just where we're at here with these numbers,

[3:02:28] is about nine and a half million dollar deficit here.

[3:02:31] We got a three and a half cent cap.

[3:02:33] We're going to be looking at next year.

[3:02:35] Where are we going to come up with the money?

[3:02:37] And as far as the pre-sanks don't for years

[3:02:40] without that increase, I can tell you just in my field budget,

[3:02:43] I spent 50 grand more this year.

[3:02:45] Every one of you did.

[3:02:47] You know, and not to mention the hot oil

[3:02:49] where it was $12,000 of tanker loads, 18 to 20 now.

[3:02:53] I mean, come on.

[3:02:54] Well, hot mix asphalt went from $58 to $90 a ton, but I put that out there and this is

[3:03:02] the way I'm sitting here doing my math on my big chief notebook again and at 41 cents,

[3:03:09] we had this budget completed and looking good with an overage of $332.99 and road bridge

[3:03:19] is definitely in trouble because I had to cut mine way back.

[3:03:22] There wasn't enough money to fund my budget, Stephen, I worked it out and we got it done.

[3:03:28] But we had this budget completed and in good shape, 41 cents with that extra and that

[3:03:35] nickel, or not not nickel, I'm sorry, that half a cent would, would I think be a good

[3:03:43] start to correct in FMLR and then maybe with the possibility of getting another half a

[3:03:51] percent in the next budget, which would be our penny back that we gave up way back.

[3:03:56] But I'm just kind of looking at it in simple numbers, and if that half a cent works to

[3:04:01] get the FMLR back in, and the 41 cents funds this budget exactly the way we have it written,

[3:04:09] then that's why I just felt like, you know, said it at 41.5 cents, but the nickel, but

[3:04:15] of pardon me, I keep saying that the half of Penie would go strictly to FM LR, strictly

[3:04:23] to the road and that would, Steve, don't you think, be enough to make a good correction

[3:04:29] to what we lost?

[3:04:33] Yes.

[3:04:38] I got a better plan.

[3:04:42] Now get your smiles.

[3:04:48] I'm laughing too.

[3:04:51] Sometimes you're playing's warriors, judge. We mean sometimes. I've been doing this

[3:04:58] 28 years, we've come a long ways, guys.

[3:05:04] Okay,

[3:05:09] and I'm going to put my conservative approach back here

[3:05:15] a little bit. Let me give you a good example. We budgeted, if you look at our budget revenues

[3:05:21] for the sales tax revenue, from the sales tax issue. From, well, I'll take a second

[3:05:31] I'll take, is from the highway

[3:05:37] tax fees. And I'm going to explain something to all of you.

[3:05:41] We talked a little bit, Steve and I bill at lunch.

[3:05:48] We budgeted for this coming year, how it takes face to me in 5,000.

[3:05:59] This year, from the State Comptroller's office, we received a check for 2,000, 714,000.

[3:06:09] Now, Steve and I were both on board about being conservative about this number, and I'll

[3:06:17] tell you why.

[3:06:18] The Texas legislature changed the process of tax revenue on the purchase of cars and

[3:06:28] mobile homes and travel trailers to

[3:06:34] the purchaser wherever if he lives in Fort Worth and buys

[3:06:39] it in Johnson County, the sales tax revenue goes to that county.

[3:06:46] Now what concerns Steve and I was RV fun time RV and the other RV places throughout

[3:07:01] Johnson County.

[3:07:03] A lot of those purchases are from people that do not live in Johnson County.

[3:07:09] So we're going to lose some there but and and and and really this is kind of

[3:07:17] guess and we've tried to check out and we can't come up within concrete

[3:07:21] numbers. I talked with Scott Porter on this and Steve on this and most

[3:07:28] vehicles that are purchased on the majority bases are not purchased I'm saying

[3:07:35] in Johnson County probably purchase outside Johnson County.

[3:07:40] So we're going to get that revenue back.

[3:07:44] Now we cut this budget $700,000 in revenue that we could have left in there because I really

[3:07:55] think, but I can't prove it right now, proof that all the saying is, proofs in the pudding,

[3:08:02] proof won't be in pudding until we get those results from next January.

[3:08:07] but I think that we could put

[3:08:14] 400,000 of that back into revenue, take this

[3:08:21] 332,000 that were already, divide that among you commissioners, leave that

[3:08:29] tax rate at 41 cents and go down the road.

[3:08:33] It was January, what was January's number on that income that was just ready?

[3:08:40] Well, we tried to find out and we can't.

[3:08:42] It actually comes in March and that's when our law went into effect and March won.

[3:08:48] We haven't, Scott has contacted the State and tried to get good data on the commission

[3:09:00] that would be generated from March through July, and only, hopefully, he could compare

[3:09:07] it to last year's, but he, because we only get that payment once a year.

[3:09:10] So it's not like we're getting monthly payments from the State for that, but he's not

[3:09:14] being able to get that.

[3:09:16] Well, it's not an argument, but it's just a thought.

[3:09:19] In the same principle, same breath, the income that comes off those RVs or stationary

[3:09:24] here, but that option also is to our dealers in Burleson, all the major players are there,

[3:09:32] whether or not they're actually doing their business in Johnson County or Tarrant County

[3:09:36] or Ellis County.

[3:09:37] Where are they going?

[3:09:37] Some are in Tarrant, some in Johnson.

[3:09:40] That's my point.

[3:09:41] But I mean, you're going to sell a heck of a lot more vehicles.

[3:09:45] The population in this county is going up dramatically.

[3:09:49] It has, but I'm just saying, if we've lost that revenue stream without having those numbers

[3:09:53] Because it's going to reflect, you know, without those, I mean, it's, yeah, we

[3:09:59] may be getting this much in on these RVs, but we may be losing as much or more on

[3:10:03] these vehicles.

[3:10:04] That's exactly, that's true, but I don't, you know, I'm the one who's, that's my shoes,

[3:10:10] I have to certify the revenue projection, and I'm not super comfortable with being not

[3:10:17] conservative with that estimate, because I'm the one on the hook for that.

[3:10:22] So basically judge you the existing quick numbers are $732,549 that would and it's not but could

[3:10:34] be a well available for FML or and there's other items in here that that give us a little

[3:10:41] cushion. I don't I don't know what Becky's done with her County clerk phase. Asher we budgeted

[3:10:49] a million four hundred thousand. For next year we raised that to a million five, just

[3:10:57] a hundred thousand. I really would be surprised if it wasn't a lot more than a hundred thousand.

[3:11:13] If you drove by the courthouse today and saw all the cars that was over there on the way

[3:11:18] to work, just tell me that place was packed. They're back doing business full time.

[3:11:31] I think it's I'm just telling y'all

[3:11:36] and this is nothing to do with political. I'm not running for office.

[3:11:41] I think what we need to do as much as we can for the taxpayers by cutting the taxes also.

[3:11:49] So, and there again, I'm not saying that because you're sitting here, but we got to,

[3:11:57] and that's the fine line.

[3:11:58] We have to walk here.

[3:12:00] I mean, the state tells us how to fund our deal, and that's our only option.

[3:12:05] And all the new growth, it's a blessing, but it's also a curse because with all that new

[3:12:10] growth, we got to provide more services, cause more money, or it's kind of a fine line to walk,

[3:12:17] And it's we don't have a crystal ball to figure it out. I don't know how much we can cut it, but I I think I

[3:12:27] Think we need to bring it down as much as we can, but still provide the services that they're expecting and

[3:12:33] Then I thought we kind of had that figured out and then

[3:12:37] Yeah, here's here's a deal right now Rick. He's up

[3:12:41] For next year about two and a half thousand more

[3:12:44] Kenny, you're 272, my cuter 295, but area 319,

[3:12:54] and you know something I'm fixing to say,

[3:12:56] Kenny.

[3:12:59] He's already negative this year, so you can't get on it.

[3:13:03] If we take a break because I'm sick, you can't get picked on real.

[3:13:08] We can just use an area just to act straight, just a little bit, and move it over to these

[3:13:13] other two commissioners and help them out.

[3:13:15] I want to I want everybody to work to you. I had it. You know we we do have a lot. We just went through

[3:13:21] We different than you road miles just went down to nothing. Yeah, but my but I could not meet my budget take care of the road miles I got

[3:13:31] We've got lots of folks out there watching and listening so here it is guys. Hey, I'm not gonna miss this job a bit y'all

[3:13:38] The taxpayer needs relief from property taxes. Amen. Yes, amen

[3:13:44] How is $40 on a $400,000 on a cent going to make a difference? Tell me how. How is what

[3:13:54] we do up here?

[3:13:56] That's the tax payer.

[3:13:57] The tax payers are seeing a number. They're not seeing. You can sit here and say, we lowered

[3:14:04] property taxes all day, but I guarantee you that the tax rate, not the taxes.

[3:14:08] Yeah, that's right. Thank you. I mean, it has not it is a misguided misconception that if we lower the taxes here

[3:14:16] two cents or one cent or even that nickel we did two and a half years ago

[3:14:21] it does not bring their tax bill down enough to justify it. We have to have operating money here

[3:14:30] we are behind on our road and bridge. We trying to retain employees. We're trying to make new

[3:14:36] We're trying to provide services for more people as Mr. White just eloquently laid out.

[3:14:45] It is a time that we can celebrate that there's enough growth here to justify it.

[3:14:54] But we've seen good years and we've seen some real bad years sitting up here.

[3:15:00] I did not so pretty. Our refunds is muddy to water because we can go buy things. We can get things this year. But guess what? Next year, we're not going to have those monies. Hopefully, we're going to have give them where they need to go and do projects, whether it be the nonprofits or whether it be sewer plants. We have got to look ahead to next year with a revenue cap. And hopefully, pray to God, it didn't go any lower than that. But if you look at all the numbers that are proposed here,

[3:15:29] There's a real good chance next year.

[3:15:31] We're going to be coming back to the taxpayers and say,

[3:15:34] oh, we want to raise taxes because guess what?

[3:15:37] Our rodent bridges are down.

[3:15:39] We can't keep up with the growth.

[3:15:40] We can't keep up with what we've got to do here.

[3:15:43] I'm not saying take nothing away from our employers.

[3:15:45] They've won them deserve it.

[3:15:47] But we do not need to lower this tax rate.

[3:15:50] It's going back.

[3:15:51] It's going to haunt us next year, Judge.

[3:15:53] No, it's not.

[3:15:54] Rick, you're not looking down the road.

[3:15:56] Yeah.

[3:15:57] I am looking down the road.

[3:15:58] You are not.

[3:15:59] I am.

[3:16:00] You really?

[3:16:01] I don't believe it.

[3:16:02] I'm not trying to be ugly with you.

[3:16:04] No, I know I'm not.

[3:16:05] We've been through a lot up here.

[3:16:07] Let me finish.

[3:16:09] Let me tell you.

[3:16:10] So you don't want you to look at it on this basis, if you would.

[3:16:16] We had $2 billion of new tax base issue.

[3:16:21] This county has never in the history of this county had that type of an increase.

[3:16:27] and we're going to be at it again next year. Now, this year we've had to deal with it because

[3:16:33] that ugly word called inflation. And that's what basing, that's what John was talking about.

[3:16:39] And your budget is inflationary trends that's hit your budget and it definitely has.

[3:16:46] Because a lot of your budget is in your all that you put on your road bases

[3:16:53] and then you feel that you use for all maintenance of your equipment to run your equipment.

[3:16:59] So inflation next year, and I don't have a crystal ball, but I'm going to tell you it's

[3:17:05] not going to be like it is this year,

[3:17:10] and not only is it your budget, it's a budget in

[3:17:15] the county, it's going to be effective because the revenues are going to be high enough that

[3:17:23] you're going to have to lower that tax rate not only this year but next year too if you do what's

[3:17:29] right. Let's not misguide the public. I'm not misgrick. I've done this story. I know sir but it's

[3:17:36] not two billion dollars in our coffers. It's a crude value so how much of that goes to the school

[3:17:42] says how much that goes to the state. You got city taxes. The county portion of that money that

[3:17:49] that increases all we're talking about here,

[3:17:51] we didn't get that $2 billion.

[3:17:53] We got our portion of that.

[3:17:57] And it's just when you're doing 20 new hires

[3:18:01] and giving those kind of raises,

[3:18:03] I just say that we have to be mindful

[3:18:06] that we wouldn't for that revenue cap.

[3:18:10] Man, we'd all be saying it in dancing,

[3:18:11] but it is there.

[3:18:13] Well, we're okay there.

[3:18:15] But we're okay there now, I agree.

[3:18:18] And we will be next year too.

[3:18:19] But let me read to you. This is last year's budget book. This budget will raise more revenue

[3:18:29] from property taxes than last year's budget by the amount of $5,716,303 dollars.

[3:18:45] That's

[3:18:45] a lot. This year is going to be substantially higher than last year's and next year is

[3:18:53] going to be equal to this year's, if not more. So what I'm saying is, look down that

[3:19:00] road, don't paint yourself in a hole before you get to it, because it's going to be there.

[3:19:10] You can look at the last four or five years in this one. We've got an increase because

[3:19:18] of population and let me give you another good example. Let me back up just

[3:19:24] a second. The states budget this year, when they adopted it, they were

[3:19:30] projecting a five billion dollar loss in revenues. They covered ever been

[3:19:37] that because the growth of the state and then some. So we all know that you can

[3:19:47] You can't hear it all the new homes going up.

[3:19:50] A lot of them, they might have a lot of foundations poured but the house is not built.

[3:19:56] And this is not just here in Cleaver's throughout the whole county.

[3:20:01] We have 27,000 new lots that homes are going to be built on.

[3:20:07] And more to come,

[3:20:10] Wall Street investors are investing in these houses are going to sell

[3:20:15] because Wall Street investors are buying them, and they're going to rent them.

[3:20:19] A lot of them, and people are upset about that too, by the way, if you've been watching

[3:20:24] the news, but guys, I try to look down the road a little further because I don't ever project

[3:20:35] past two years.

[3:20:37] As a matter of fact, there's no expression I got caught with a little foresightedness

[3:20:47] on inflation this year.

[3:20:49] I never dreamed inflation would be like it was.

[3:20:54] I don't think any of us did, but what I'm just trying to get across to you, your budget

[3:21:01] next year is going to be strong.

[3:21:04] so don't worry about just the next year is going to be good I think even the

[3:21:13] next year is going to be good so I think that not only should you lower the

[3:21:21] tax rate this year you should lower and that'll be up to the court I won't be

[3:21:25] here but the court next year should lower the taxes again next year and possibly

[3:21:33] I can see far enough down the road to lower another half cent to a penny year after that.

[3:21:41] This tax rate, Tarant County is a good example.

[3:21:44] Of course, they're sent with a million population, well in excess of the million population.

[3:21:52] They have, I think it's a 26 cent tax rate.

[3:21:59] This county is going to, if we can get to, the lowest I've seen this tax rate was 36 cent

[3:22:07] cents. That was during the oil and gas boom that it was much we had $3.6 billion of additional

[3:22:17] revenues due to this gas boom. We'll have

[3:22:24] 600 million I think this year got down to

[3:22:28] 400 and something million but because natural gas is up it's back up that numbers back up.

[3:22:36] But the future of this county looks good.

[3:22:40] Tarrick County's population, too many of you.

[3:22:42] Yeah, I was thinking it was quite a bit more than a million now.

[3:22:45] Ten times our county.

[3:22:47] And they think that even in ten years it would be greater than Dallas County.

[3:22:54] And Judge, I'm going to have a tendency to agree that I think I'm not going to go any further

[3:22:58] than next year, but like I've said earlier in this court, I think next year will be up

[3:23:03] simple because everything that's going on the ground right now is not on the

[3:23:06] tax road. This what we're seeing is not on this tax road and Texas is very

[3:23:13] famously known for being the very last state to be affected by recession. It was

[3:23:19] that way back in 86 you know 10 2010 but I remember back in 1986 when

[3:23:27] everybody thought the world come to an end with all the mortgage companies went

[3:23:31] out of business for all of those loans they had made and the shutting out apartment complexes

[3:23:37] you know people were just fleeing their not employed and there are but and it was it was 18

[3:23:44] months before we felt it here and say the Texas we continued just going right on like there was

[3:23:50] nothing to it and I think we're much said in that same position that there's so much going on and

[3:23:55] so many new developments going in and so many new things coming to Johnson County that I think this

[3:24:01] next year we will see another good number. Now, I'm not going to pass that because then you're

[3:24:11] getting into that 18-month period that we may begin to feel it, but I don't think it's going to be

[3:24:15] an effect a year for me.

[3:24:22] One thing that I would point out based on a question that Commissioner White

[3:24:26] asked me last week was about the unused increment which the state has given us the opportunity to use in

[3:24:34] future years, to do anything that we've talked about doing,

[3:24:41] we would be using the part of the 2020 unused increment.

[3:24:45] But the 2021 unused increment is 0.00601, so there's not much there if it was needed next year of the year after that's a rolling three year.

[3:25:03] So, that's 2021, so we'll be able to use that for a couple more years.

[3:25:16] My recommendation, one ago, I think, is very sound.

[3:25:21] I don't think it's stretching anything.

[3:25:24] Take your additional revenues that you're going to get by this other $400,000 up for

[3:25:32] the precincts, and I think you're going to be okay.

[3:25:38] but it doesn't solve. Because next year you're going to be up again but that doesn't solve

[3:25:43] the problem of road and bridge being behind and staying behind. But the commissioner road

[3:25:50] bridge is being affected by there again. You've got to look at what's going on right now

[3:25:56] not what's going on next year. Right now you've been affected by inflation dramatically and

[3:26:02] the numbers, y'all were throwing out their gasoline in diesel was a dollar to dollar and

[3:26:09] a half higher than what it is right now is coming down.

[3:26:12] I don't see asphalt coming up back down.

[3:26:18] That's the majority of what we're not going to come down.

[3:26:22] Gas lane's got cheaper but diesel hasn't, but it doesn't, it doesn't have to come down.

[3:26:27] I'm just using that as, as so.

[3:26:30] But I'm saying where does he want to get farther and farther behind?

[3:26:34] Well, and this is not an order none if you take the influx of this dollars

[3:26:39] I just told you and give me almost well we can get we can come up to 800,000 dollars a

[3:26:45] different 200 for each one of you

[3:26:48] Kenny doesn't need that much

[3:26:56] I'm begging on Kenny. Oh

[3:27:00] Eventually, when we do get back to it, you need a little bump because you have more road

[3:27:07] miles.

[3:27:08] I've been practicing since we sat out here a little week ago.

[3:27:13] I'm telling the truth.

[3:27:16] It all sounds good.

[3:27:18] We're going lower the taxes.

[3:27:20] Man, if we were really lower in taxes, it made a difference.

[3:27:24] It would be substantial.

[3:27:25] but to say that this is going to make a huge difference in the day-to-day lives of our

[3:27:30] public.

[3:27:31] Our portion is nothing compared to school districts.

[3:27:35] And what we're going to look at here is if that rosy painted picture is not good and accurate.

[3:27:46] We've been up to 48 cents, we've started at 36 cents, we've bought that down, we're at 42

[3:27:51] cents.

[3:27:54] Everybody's talking about what if it's good, what if it's bad, but the thing about it

[3:27:58] is, is we don't want to start lowering it, we don't need a goal of having so much that

[3:28:03] we're coming in here and getting down to that 36-cent tax rate, because we are going

[3:28:08] to have to provide services, and nothing is cheaper, nothing is cheaper, and it won't get cheaper.

[3:28:17] I just don't want us to paint ourselves into a position of all our focuses here, and

[3:28:23] I'm sorry, and it's not directed at anything,

[3:28:26] but we can set up here and say we're lowering taxes all day long,

[3:28:29] but until the state does something on the area and down

[3:28:31] every regarding schools, what we're doing is,

[3:28:34] I mean, you're not going to notice it.

[3:28:36] On a half a billion dollar home, $100 a year,

[3:28:40] you're not going to notice that.

[3:28:42] I mean, so the idea of we're lowering taxes up here,

[3:28:49] when we talk about dropping a penny or two pennies,

[3:28:51] that we're helping the taxpayers, I'm sorry, I'm a taxpayer, it's not going to make one

[3:28:56] out of me, it's not a difference in one tank of gasoline for a week. But we have to,

[3:29:04] we have to protect that we can hire people that we can keep them retained, we have to protect

[3:29:10] that we've got the vehicles for the services and everything that we do here.

[3:29:19] Lowering

[3:29:19] be the difference of us coming back to the taxpayers next year because when you raise taxes,

[3:29:25] it's always noticed. Even if it's $20, you raise my taxes. We're not raising taxes

[3:29:32] by remaining the same. We're building ourselves a safety net here that we don't have to do that

[3:29:37] next year. And I'm just based on the numbers that Steve has given. The unknowns that we don't

[3:29:43] know about, sure it'd be great to get half a million or seven hundred thousand dollars

[3:29:47] on his collections on his RVs, but we may lose Adam Lauer on the vehicle sold in Burleson.

[3:29:53] So it's anyway, Judge, I just feel like...

[3:30:00] 2 cents or 1 cents, really made a difference, really made a difference. And what those numbers actually reflect over that. But it makes the difference on higher end to retain and keep people. We have to keep it. Rick, we've in the past. This county has lost employees over $40 a month. Pay difference. Come someplace else. You make, you know, we make good enough money.

[3:30:29] we've got flexibility, but you lower income, don't have that flexibility. So yes, that

[3:30:37] one percent may make a difference, will they, by their proper taxes, or would they do

[3:30:43] without their medicines?

[3:30:47] There's the big picture here, y'all, y'all, looking at it.

[3:30:54] I'll say this and I'll direct towards what Mr. Buddy said, that it's not a big number

[3:31:01] and it doesn't make a lot of difference in the tax bill.

[3:31:05] So with that point, once again, what if we set the rate at 41 and a half cents but move

[3:31:12] that nickel to

[3:31:16] that MLO?

[3:31:19] I will again get that nickel covered for you.

[3:31:21] and half a cent.

[3:31:23] Yeah, half a cent, quit saying nickel.

[3:31:25] Half a cent, half a cent.

[3:31:27] Quit saying nickel.

[3:31:28] I corrected myself earlier when I did that.

[3:31:31] Which is not a half a cent.

[3:31:32] Well, it's a half a penny, not a nickel.

[3:31:36] But if we move that half a cent too,

[3:31:38] and not permanently, but certainly help,

[3:31:41] I guess what I'm getting at is,

[3:31:43] we're sort of accomplishing both things

[3:31:44] because the half a cent compared to a cent

[3:31:47] is going to be, have my new very little effect on the taxpayers, but that half a cent will

[3:31:56] be able to balance FMLR. It'll give us, did I get pretty clear there like a half a cent

[3:32:03] very little, give us a little bit of cushion. Home owners, but it gives FMLR just enough to be able

[3:32:10] to continue to do work. Well, I already presented a thing. You know, I'm beginning to find out what

[3:32:16] lame duck means.

[3:32:22] I'm giving you the money in just in a different way. Well, you're thinking it's

[3:32:26] there but we don't know. It's there. Oh gosh, it's there. Well, after December 31st, you won't be

[3:32:33] here to have to worry about it. No, that's that's true and that's my none of my bless.

[3:32:40] I think the

[3:32:41] I don't know if you've got a bless that, now I can tell if he's not looking like he's

[3:32:46] like in that.

[3:32:46] He's a little queasy over here.

[3:32:48] Well, yeah.

[3:32:49] No disrespect to the Army.

[3:32:51] The Army helps the county judge set the budget.

[3:32:55] That's true.

[3:32:57] I just taught two budgeting classes in the statutory responsibility.

[3:33:02] Two of the statutory responsibilities are certify revenues and certify fund balance

[3:33:08] at the end of the year.

[3:33:09] Yeah, so what I presented to you I'm going I'm going to just try my best to shut up

[3:33:17] What I presented to you is sound policy it helps the tax payer

[3:33:25] Out there

[3:33:29] So I'll just leave it that and

[3:33:41] there has been no

[3:33:42] Sorry to be not talk

[3:33:45] There has been no time since I've been canning judge that I've not

[3:33:51] conservatively looked at this budget, not one time. And today is no different than

[3:34:00] any pre-budgets. It's really more brighter to look at for the future than what

[3:34:07] my past budgets have been.

[3:34:19] Now what I would prefer to do before we talk about

[3:34:23] going 41 and a half, I start over with all these departments and go through them

[3:34:28] cut again. I'm going to cut before I'm going to increase.

[3:34:42] But that's not, that's not, that's not going to help road and bridge.

[3:34:48] Well, no, you're right, Commissioner.

[3:34:50] We can go through there and cut and cut and cut and cut and cut.

[3:34:51] No, well, in the, in the indirect way of we can, but like I said, it from what I'm looking

[3:35:01] at with what we've got or had proposed, the 41 cent tax rate, we've

[3:35:08] funded the entire budget, done everything we need to do with this excess of $3.32, $5.49.

[3:35:22] So if there was any possible way to simply move a half a cent of that to road and bridge,

[3:35:36] everything else is taken care of as what I'm getting at. It's just to road and bridge funds that are

[3:35:41] and don't appear to be the original.

[3:35:44] And I don't know Steve, the 3.32, 5.49, I have no idea what that breaks down to as far

[3:35:49] as a decimal number.

[3:35:54] I mean, it'd be tiny, but

[3:35:59] that could be moving the road and bridge.

[3:36:03] I went over to ask Steve a question then, go guys, just based on the numbers.

[3:36:08] Just to kind of give you a picture, we're $9.5 million more to fund this budget than what

[3:36:17] we funded in last year's budget,

[3:36:21] $90.5 million. So $1,000 equals a million, $700,000.

[3:36:30] I'm just saying

[3:36:31] that's where we're at, passing this budget. You talking about lowering taxes? We're going to be

[3:36:38] backing in next year raising taxes to break even. $90.5 million here, Steve. That accurate.

[3:36:44] As far as I know,

[3:36:48] to answer your question, Commissioner Howell, to make that 332-549-B0, it's

[3:36:58] the difference is .001970.

[3:37:07] I know it would be small, but it's not intended to move that .001792 FMLR to start.

[3:37:21] I think we could.

[3:37:21] I think we have a balance, but I think we could find a little bit of revenue, including the sales tax commissions to the tax office.

[3:37:35] I don't know that we could find a half cent worth,

[3:37:42] we could find, I don't like to, that one especially makes me uneasy.

[3:37:50] And most of these fee offices, I mean, together they add up to quite a bit,

[3:37:55] but any of them individually are pretty negligible.

[3:38:01] I mean, you're talking about district clerk fees or quarter of a million dollars a year.

[3:38:13] Sheriff fees or $100,000 a year.

[3:38:16] I mean, there's none of these things are really material when you're talking about a $90 million budget.

[3:38:25] it. Right.

[3:38:37] No, I would just like said, that was,

[3:38:42] you know, if you could, if we could

[3:38:43] leave the tax rate right where it is, but if there was enough to simply designate just

[3:38:48] a smaller portion of that to road area and to it. It would be, it would be at a very

[3:38:55] minimum. It would be helpful because y'all, it is, and this has nothing to do with

[3:39:00] inflation. It has, because we're talking about going back to 2018 when you had a

[3:39:09] $7.1 million collective fund balance.

[3:39:12] That's 18, that's not just what's happened in the last 12 months.

[3:39:20] And it's half that now, yes.

[3:39:23] So it's been coming.

[3:39:24] It's been, yeah, I mean, it's slowly coming.

[3:39:29] We may have to slowly bring it back, FMLR.

[3:39:34] Every year, just try to get a small portion back in FMLR.

[3:39:41] Yeah, something's better than nothing exactly. I just want to get in that you've got to start somewhere and

[3:39:47] then you know

[3:39:49] Also a lot of that of those expenditure, especially that out of ARPA funds

[3:39:56] And this is just I'll take a note from the judge. I'm just one person on the court

[3:40:02] A lot of that was one-time expenditure

[3:40:06] Even as far as a lot of the cars and I've said this earlier

[3:40:09] Yes, we will have requests for cars next year. I mean, there's no doubt, but certainly after buying

[3:40:17] 10 brand new chargers and

[3:40:21] They've and we've still got seven Tahu's left to be delivered to the sheriff's department

[3:40:28] And then the other cars we bought for different departments those are cars that we bought should last

[3:40:36] Those those should last for four or five years

[3:40:40] You know, it should be several years before we have to replace, you know, the van for public

[3:40:43] works or, you know, a truck for the medical examiner.

[3:40:50] So you know, something I would put out there is a year from now when we're in here, our

[3:40:55] request for vehicles should be, should be minimal.

[3:41:00] Because unless a lot of them get wrecked or tore up or something, those vehicles will still

[3:41:05] We'll be, that's the most cars we've ever purchased, and we had to, because we can't

[3:41:11] get the thawes, I understand, but that's the most cars we've ever bought to Sheriff's

[3:41:15] Department, even though the thawes come out of last year's budget, had none to do with

[3:41:20] this year's budget, and then we've bought the others from the ARPA funds, but still, that's

[3:41:25] a lot of automobiles when I first came on the court, we had to cut those cars back to 8.

[3:41:31] We've been buying 10 and we had to cut them back to eight for a year or two or six or six because we just couldn't afford

[3:41:39] them. And now we've bought our essence. We're we've bought 10 and waiting on the other seven. That's 17. That they will receive

[3:41:48] hopefully in this this year, this time. I think the charges are available right now. Now the tow's I'm not sure that still missing ships probably

[3:41:58] But that plus another is is these new new Howard hires and new positions we've put.

[3:42:08] I would hope that these positions are going to last us for a little bit.

[3:42:14] We can't we can't put on 20 new employees this year and then come back and ask for 20 more

[3:42:18] next year.

[3:42:19] I think there's going to be some breaks put on new hires and I know everybody always is

[3:42:25] need help, but that's a lot to do in one budget. And I just don't think that's going to

[3:42:30] be there either. I just think we're taking care of a whole lot of areas in this budget

[3:42:37] that we won't have to next year, especially those ARPA funds that are generally a one

[3:42:44] time with the exception of. And I'll repeat it again. Yes, we will have to buy a few cars.

[3:42:50] But for me, setting right here, it'll be a few, because we shouldn't need them.

[3:42:56] All

[3:43:01] the precincts, but if

[3:43:06] we zeroed that out and

[3:43:10] made the total tax rate 41 and put that difference into the FMLR that would give precinct one an additional 83,000 and change.

[3:43:23] change.

[3:43:29] We don't need it split his up with the other three.

[3:43:32] The nearest commissioner. Why? Yes, split his up with the other three.

[3:43:36] We actually work in precinct once. So yes, I'm spending some money.

[3:43:44] Something else. I haven't been the same as he is.

[3:43:46] Not to muddy up the water here, gentlemen, but in addition to some one-time purchases, we've

[3:43:54] We've also got a additional

[3:44:00] juvenile teaching service,

[3:44:03] the teacher position,

[3:44:08] two full-time teachers,

[3:44:12] attorneys for county attorney and district attorney,

[3:44:14] district clerk, got a million five SRO personnel

[3:44:22] in the operating for juvenile services

[3:44:28] that are not going to be one that we're paid for

[3:44:31] in the initial year with ARPA funds that have been carved out of the budget, carved into

[3:44:39] the budget in the following year.

[3:44:46] Kenny, I agree with the amount of vehicles that we've purchased, we should be in the

[3:44:54] best shape we've ever been because we're getting basically two years worth of vehicles in one

[3:45:01] So, but these personnel, that's a different story. It's going to come around every year.

[3:45:33] Juvenile teachers, $172,846, attorneys, a million five SRO. That was all lumped in together,

[3:45:48] It's showing $280,000 that's operating.

[3:45:54] That sounds like too much money.

[3:46:04] In Commissioner Woolley, like the attorney that was paid for in my office with

[3:46:10] ARPA, I was about six months getting that attorney, so it won't be a full expenditure

[3:46:14] this year.

[3:46:15] And I think the one, one of the ones that Dale got, I don't think he's filled it yet.

[3:46:20] In fact, I think that's one of the positions that's on executive session today, so

[3:46:24] it's not been filled yet either.

[3:46:26] So there is some savings, I'm not saying they're not going to be continuing, but there has been some savings because those positions haven't been filled.

[3:46:33] So at the end of the year, we'll go back to those positions that were budgeted out of ARPA funds this year and look at what was actually spent and reduce the incumbrance.

[3:46:46] So

[3:46:50] Commissioner Howell doing that would get you the 77-078-58, and Commissioner Woolie, you get 90-4835.

[3:47:03] That goes along with the three vacancies I've had that I've saved three salaries off.

[3:47:09] Oh, you're in the pink fine pink.

[3:47:29] No, I actually stole one of the data.

[3:47:34] Judge, there was an accident item that needed to be happened on the new business regarding

[3:47:41] the United Co-O with that sheet money as well.

[3:47:47] The commission, did you say that revenue was dependent on sheet money?

[3:47:52] That is sheet money.

[3:47:54] The plaintiff then it was talking about this morning.

[3:47:57] That may be somewhat avenue there.

[3:48:03] I'm sure they could use it and would use it for the broadband, but here's my thoughts, sir.

[3:48:10] That is cheap money helps all taxpayers.

[3:48:15] If we give it to them, it helps a limited amount, just their customers primarily.

[3:48:22] And maybe some of you that might get on Wi-Fi.

[3:48:26] And that's, that gets back to originally when, during the

[3:48:30] art of funds and, you know, and I kind of made a statement and I said,

[3:48:34] I hope I don't make anybody open to co-op, man.

[3:48:37] But that's a for-profit company.

[3:48:39] Yeah.

[3:48:39] They, they charge for that in and that.

[3:48:42] So did they.

[3:48:43] Yes, they do.

[3:48:44] It's a, that's a for-profit company.

[3:48:47] And I, since Judd said what he did, I would certainly think we could put that money to use Countywide.

[3:48:53] I would just say that in the business world people try to get internet, but I'll just tell you their cost have gone up significantly.

[3:49:01] Their supply chain has been interrupted.

[3:49:03] So however big they are, whether it be their affected.

[3:49:09] So I can certainly see of them coming and asking for it because I'm sure that their budgets have been interrupted as well.

[3:49:15] Their cost has gone up.

[3:49:16] Their profit's gone up, but their cost has gone up equally.

[3:49:20] So, I can understand the ask, but my point is, I

[3:49:28] mean, it wouldn't really behooves us

[3:49:33] to give up money based on what we're facing right now.

[3:49:38] If it wasn't such a, this is not a lean year, it's easier when there's no money.

[3:49:44] It's easier when there's no money, but there's still that amount of dollars to certainly

[3:49:53] And I go a long ways towards,

[3:49:56] I'll go ahead and say it, the whole thing.

[3:49:59] As you're talking about three years there, $270, $280, $260,000, you got $6,000, $200,000.

[3:50:06] If I could, if I could add something about the unclean capital credits, and

[3:50:11] you know, I've only been here 14 months, but I am familiar with that.

[3:50:16] And I was not aware and not aware, was not aware until today that just goes into the general

[3:50:24] fund, but the local government code 381-004 limits what those funds can be expended for.

[3:50:36] You have to have a program specific for the use of those dollars.

[3:50:42] And what he was saying earlier does fit into that.

[3:50:46] When I was in Palo Penteau, we gave it to the CAC and CASA.

[3:50:51] That's one of the specified expenditures as well.

[3:50:56] So we can't actually use it to remove an engine,

[3:50:59] an health care too.

[3:51:01] That's the direct effects on budget.

[3:51:06] Steve, in regards to how it would impact us based on what their ask of it was for,

[3:51:15] it was for the connectivity, but you're saying that I can re-act.

[3:51:22] How exactly what that money can be used for in regards to, if we use it in general fund,

[3:51:26] can it actually be used to help balance the budget?

[3:51:28] No.

[3:51:30] It can be used for state or local economic development, small or disadvantaged business

[3:51:36] development, stimulate and encourage business location and commercial activity to

[3:51:42] promote or advertise the county and its vicinity or conduct a solicitation program

[3:51:47] to attract conventions, visitors, and businesses to improve the extent to which women and minority businesses are awarded county contracts to support comprehensive literacy programs that benefit county residents for the encouragement promotion improvement and application of the arts and to support a children's advocacy center.

[3:52:12] We used economic developments, it could not be another good place, you can put it.

[3:52:18] We fund that right now, 140,000 year.

[3:52:24] We can add

[3:52:27] that money to that, take the other portion of the way, still fund 140, and

[3:52:35] use that money.

[3:52:39] We really have, this budget is large enough, there's lots of flexibilities in different directions

[3:52:46] that we can take, but I'm just, I'm going to take a sign of workshop, because I'm not

[3:52:53] going to talk anymore about it, but it's

[3:52:58] everybody okay coming out of workshop.

[3:53:04] Where are we headed?

[3:53:05] Yeah, what did we make a decision?

[3:53:08] Call Mary.

[3:53:09] Tell her we talked about our executive session, Adam.

[3:53:19] And then we can go back up here to a new business,

[3:53:28] because I'm ready to, I don't care what

[3:53:33] but it didn't seem to be doing any good.

[3:53:37] Consideration agreement between none, not that one.

[3:53:40] First item one, under new business,

[3:53:44] first action, of course, Scots already presented

[3:53:47] that portion to us.

[3:53:51] So item two is consideration of record vote

[3:53:56] of the proposed, not the tax rate,

[3:54:00] but they propose tax rate for 2022 tax share.

[3:54:05] Judge, should we look at item six before we do that?

[3:54:08] In regards to whether we are or not going to do that money

[3:54:12] or the sheet money?

[3:54:13] We are already passed on that.

[3:54:16] We're going to come, we either need to.

[3:54:20] Well, I'll say we'll keep it.

[3:54:22] We'll keep it, we can help all of our taxpayers

[3:54:26] instead of just pushing.

[3:54:28] It's got to be your mark for some specific avenues.

[3:54:33] No, I think it's easy to do, and it's in health care.

[3:54:36] It's not listed.

[3:54:38] Not listed?

[3:54:38] I think we bill and I probably need to rub our heads together and

[3:54:42] we'll get with you and see what we need.

[3:54:44] Economic development.

[3:54:46] That is.

[3:54:47] And I think that's what Landy was the guy's under which he

[3:54:51] was requesting the money.

[3:54:53] Yeah, but you cannot vote, that we find.

[3:54:55] I

[3:54:58] don't want to be about half of it, what we budget for anything.

[3:55:04] Oh, no.

[3:55:04] And I'm just saying that you can move money around there and take care of that.

[3:55:17] Okay.

[3:55:18] Let's go back to item two.

[3:55:19] And that's consideration and record vote for the proposed tax rate for 2022 tax year.

[3:55:26] I'd entertain a motion.

[3:55:45] Well, I'm going to jump right in here and do something that's probably unheard of

[3:55:48] have never been done in Commissioner's Court before in their lifetime.

[3:55:53] And will you see where it goes?

[3:55:56] But I'd like to make a motion we make.

[3:55:58] We set the tax rate at 40, one and a half cents and then move and have that half a cent

[3:56:03] go road and bridge.

[3:56:04] I'm

[3:56:13] scurrying the

[3:56:18] raises and all the above.

[3:56:46] I have a motion to set the tax rate at 41.5.

[3:56:58] Anybody else cared to take a shot at you?

[3:57:03] I'm

[3:57:08] trying to look at what this personnel, you know, we talked about these vehicles.

[3:57:15] The ARPA impact is what I'm concerned about.

[3:57:17] You don't have a second yet, right?

[3:57:19] No.

[3:57:20] So, Judges, are you going to make a comment?

[3:57:24] Well, we need, we're going to motion on the floor.

[3:57:27] You don't have a motion without a second.

[3:57:29] You've got them.

[3:57:30] And I thought in Robert Rooz of order, you have a motion.

[3:57:36] You don't discuss it until you get a second, then it goes open for discussion.

[3:57:40] My discussion in the motion, my discussion is related to funding.

[3:57:45] You want to give me a new motion?

[3:57:52] Judge, I think his motion dies for lack of a second and you get into the discussion about

[3:57:57] other items.

[3:57:58] Okay.

[3:57:59] Right, Commissioner Woolie?

[3:58:00] Well, I didn't know that it had died, but it

[3:58:07] can die, yes.

[3:58:08] Yeah, yeah, I know it can,

[3:58:13] but it wouldn't presented that way as being dead.

[3:58:21] I'll call it one more time then if I don't get a response then and we'll consider dead.

[3:58:26] Okay, do I have a second that motion?

[3:58:30] And kind of that motion is dead, so we'll back open.

[3:58:34] Sorry, Commissioner.

[3:58:38] That motion is dead.

[3:58:39] I had to try, Judge.

[3:58:40] Well, sure.

[3:58:42] Hey, you guys, there's no hard feelings up here about anything.

[3:58:48] It's just, we all have certain views and I admire everybody standing on their own views.

[3:59:04] Okay, now we'll open for, since there's no motion on the floor, we'll open for discussion.

[3:59:12] Go ahead, Commissioner.

[3:59:15] Oh, okay.

[3:59:17] Still working on his big chief notebook down there.

[3:59:42] So those figures that I was referring to a while ago related to these personnel that we

[3:59:49] funded on a one-year program for out of ARPA funds, almost $2 million.

[4:00:00] That is equipment for the SRO assigned to the JJAEP.

[4:00:11] I'm not sure what that breakout is. It's got it lumped all together.

[4:00:17] Given Commissioner House comments about the vehicles that we may not have a significant impact, as far as vehicle cost goes next budget year. But we're going to have to pay this out of our pocket next year, not out of our pocket.

[4:00:35] So, there's $2 million vehicles,

[4:00:46] $661,000,

[4:00:52] might as well say $662,000 for the sheriff's office,

[4:00:59] $59,000 for a constable's vehicle,

[4:01:10] another $66,000 for another constable vehicle.

[4:01:13] So,

[4:01:16] 120, you're about 800,000 there on vehicles that hopefully,

[4:01:24] you know, like you said,

[4:01:26] we're going to have to replace some of those, but let's say that we buy with half that

[4:01:32] amount next year or less, you're still looking at $2,000, $2,000,000 that we're going to have

[4:01:40] in plain terms, pay out our pocket,

[4:01:45] which is about

[4:01:49] a penny on the tax rate.

[4:01:54] We're hoping to sell fun, our insurance next year, looking forward to.

[4:01:58] We took on our jail with the unknowns, and that's going to be another one that's going to come with some growing pains.

[4:02:04] Yeah, we've already seen some growing pains there.

[4:02:14] You know, Judge, I thought early on, I really thought we might be able to reduce this budget by three cents,

[4:02:20] But that ship sailed, they won, yeah.

[4:02:24] I thought we were going to be able to try to be a team, but there's still room to cut.

[4:02:37] It just depends on whether you all willing to do that or not.

[4:02:58] You know, I made that motion because I'm hoping that I haven't really heard any other guys

[4:03:03] say what we've talked about it and talked about it, but nobody's ever really said what

[4:03:09] you want to send the text right now.

[4:03:11] You know, with so many new hires and the colors that we're trying to give and the added

[4:03:17] expenses that we know we're going to incur, I would rather leave a flat tax rate this

[4:03:23] year and go into next year with the hopes that what we've talked about up here comes true.

[4:03:29] It would be great to go to the taxpayers next year and lower five cents like we have done

[4:03:35] in the past then to do all of these new positions, all of this money and just to go in at a flat

[4:03:49] right next year because this court will proactively if the money is there and we're not hiring 24-20

[4:03:56] people. We're not, you know, who knows what the inflation will do, hopefully it's going to taper,

[4:04:00] hopefully we don't have a crystal ball. But I would rather go in and look at the tax payers in the

[4:04:06] this year and say you understand inflation, you understand that our county has grown.

[4:04:12] We have to hire more people, we have to give our people more money to retain them.

[4:04:18] And then next year, look at this, and if the money is there and we're not hiring an

[4:04:23] additional 20 people and we're not buying an additional 10 cars, we make a significant

[4:04:28] impact next year of dropping more than two, maybe three, maybe four, maybe five senses.

[4:04:33] as we've done in the past, it's a plan and it's a good one, guys, because we don't know.

[4:04:42] And we've got a nine and a half million dollar increase in this budget compared to last

[4:04:47] year's budget.

[4:04:49] We're already in the red next year.

[4:04:54] Let's see if that money comes true.

[4:04:56] Let's hope that money from those RVs comes true.

[4:04:58] Let's lower the tax.

[4:04:59] You know, you make a significant difference on a half million dollar property.

[4:05:03] maybe if it's $200 a year and they feel they're going to have a 10% cap going forward to the

[4:05:10] cash up to whatever the value is on the homestead. So it's a given whatever we give them they're

[4:05:16] going to lose anyway to the state. But we we can make some sort of a difference then let's keep

[4:05:24] that let's kick that down the road the next year and do all we can for our taxpayers we're doing all

[4:05:31] we can for our employees and to serve the people we serve now and I'm done. I'm gonna stop.

[4:05:39] I'll make a proposal that we give the raises as presented. We'll leave the tax rate as presented

[4:05:47] and that amount of these people. Is that a motion? That's motion, Judge. Okay.

[4:05:53] I have a motion on the floor to adopt a 42 cent tax rate.

[4:06:00] I thought we...

[4:06:03] I'm not flooring the tax rate this year. We can look at that next year.

[4:06:07] That's what I'm saying.

[4:06:08] That's what I'm saying.

[4:06:10] I have a second.

[4:06:13] And that one may die too, but that's where I'm at.

[4:06:27] I'll ask one more time then it'll die after.

[4:06:30] I have a second for that motion.

[4:06:34] Being no second for that motion is dead.

[4:06:38] You're not saying any motion.

[4:06:40] What

[4:07:00] was your motion, Kenny?

[4:07:06] 40-1 and a half, that's going to be the end of the law.

[4:07:10] Set the tax rate to 41 and a half.

[4:07:12] You

[4:07:16] know, this person, El Dio, Barb sent me this, I asked her, like, Friday to send

[4:07:23] me this updated spreadsheet from ARPA and I had my spreadsheet wasn't updated.

[4:07:34] like Hershey is and this personnel is a glaring, it's a glaring

[4:07:40] predicament we're going to be with is permanent. Those are not one-time hires or

[4:07:47] one-time permanent. No, the permanent. Pardon? The permanent hires. They're not one-time

[4:07:53] hires. To what I said, they're not one-time purchases. They're perpetual. So we're

[4:07:59] going to be faced with that.

[4:08:05] Thursday when we got done, I was at the 41

[4:08:08] one cent, but can you feel off of that motion again? I'll second it.

[4:08:14] Now that I've looked

[4:08:15] at all this. Well, but his, his motion is not good. So you want me to restate my

[4:08:20] regional motion. He wants put in a half a cent on that. With his motion or we go in the

[4:08:29] we can do what he ought to with. His motion was 41 and a half. But my but that half a

[4:08:35] sent was going to FML or yeah no that's that half sent is in that. It was from

[4:08:44] 41 to 41 and a half. It wouldn't 42. Right. I mean we can get some consensus

[4:08:55] because there's no sense to me making a motion it's not going to get a second. He

[4:08:59] just said it. He just sent us to the 41 and a half cents then I will just make a

[4:09:04] the motion was to include that have a half a cent of that to be added to the FMLR rate.

[4:09:15] Yeah, but coming from a 41 cent tax rate.

[4:09:19] But we can back that out if we get some consensus that the 41.5 cent tax rate will work for the general fund for the entire budget.

[4:09:31] Then maybe between what we've got here and what Steve's looking at, maybe we can find a way to bump the FMLR up a little bit.

[4:09:42] That lead. So basically we're talking about General Fund still at 41 cents.

[4:09:47] Yes.

[4:09:49] We've got to have a balanced budget. What are you going to do with that 3,000, 3,000?

[4:09:53] You've got to sit and above a balanced budget.

[4:09:58] It's been tours versus revenue in

[4:10:10] the HRA fund, put it in fuel contingency,

[4:10:18] changed the

[4:10:19] rate to put it in FMLR.

[4:10:27] I mean,

[4:10:46] I'm waiting on the side of the line where

[4:10:52] we can hear.

[4:10:56] We may not need to hold half a cent for FMLR.

[4:10:59] Yeah, we know we could take just a tiny quarter. Yeah, I want to hear what I'm saying.

[4:11:07] I'm about adding. Well, let me. Yup, picked a bad time to go. Let me let me read. Let me read. Let me read.

[4:11:15] Discuss it. Newt rediscusing. We may not need the entire half a cent to go to FMLR if we're

[4:11:22] to use this 332-549 so we can set the tax rate of 41.5 cents and then whatever tiny portion

[4:11:31] or fraction we needed pull out of that with the 332-549 and help whatever it takes even

[4:11:40] if it's not the whole half a cent if it's whatever but at least yet these ones of us that

[4:11:47] It had to do some significant adjusting to our budgets.

[4:11:51] So you're saying set the rate overall at 41 and a half and whatever we have left after

[4:11:58] balancing the budget, shift the two rates to give that all set to no more?

[4:12:03] The FMLR.

[4:12:04] And it may not get it all back.

[4:12:06] I mean, some of the precincts were hurt worse than I was.

[4:12:09] I was pretty good kicking.

[4:12:12] But some of them I know what Mark was and I think Rick was.

[4:12:15] I don't know Larry if you were not as good, but at least that way there could be some minor

[4:12:22] adjustment to the FMLR.

[4:12:25] I'm there today for $100,000, but you're the budget for the next section.

[4:12:33] So am I pretty good?

[4:12:35] I make that clear, Steve.

[4:12:36] Do you understand what I'm?

[4:12:41] So maybe just a small portion of the half of any would have to go to

[4:12:48] help correct the FMLR.

[4:12:51] It's not going to fix it this year.

[4:12:52] No.

[4:12:53] It's not going to fix it.

[4:12:55] but then next year we could do a little as I said earlier we lost it a little bit

[4:12:59] at the time we may have to regain it just a little bit is that to use an

[4:13:07] auditor seat is that make and we can we can we do that yes yes I'll

[4:13:16] make a

[4:13:17] motion set the overall tax rate of 41 and a half cents second I have a most

[4:13:23] First of all, Commissioner Howe, second by Commissioner Woolley, to set the tax rate

[4:13:30] it proposed, this Y'all keep in mind this is still a proposed tax rate of 41.5.

[4:13:40] So we're open for discussion.

[4:13:44] I want to read something to you.

[4:13:47] In 2021, tax revenue, the tax social collector was $2,164,000, and $22,000.

[4:14:02] 2022, tax revenue was $2,719,000.

[4:14:08] Our county auditor set

[4:14:15] that right next year at $2,000,000.

[4:14:21] And so he's decreased revenue every year and we've had

[4:14:25] From tremendous increases in revenue. That's because the law changed that's right, but and and we've already discussed that

[4:14:33] harder

[4:14:41] but

[4:14:45] I'll a little bit of common sense to it, but

[4:14:50] You're decreasing instead of increasing. It's always increased substantially

[4:15:01] We should probably just call it a dip, change the account number and rename it then because it's totally different. You can do what you want to do. Revenue is revenue. Call it what you want to call it. It's still revenue. But it is, but unless the people, unless the people revive RVs that all those big RV lots are from Johnson County, we do not get any of that anymore. Yeah. But our populations increase probably,

[4:15:32] I'm bet you 10,000 people.

[4:15:33] or more.

[4:15:36] So it's certainly not going decrease and you've decreased it $700,000. That's huge.

[4:15:46] I don't know why that's going to happen. But like I said, the proof is in the pudding.

[4:15:52] I won't be here. I'll be retired and young worry about it. But I'm telling you, the money's

[4:15:59] going to be there, and you're not, you're not

[4:16:07] looking at the right numbers here. And

[4:16:12] no one is in a plight of that one. All your numbers on every line item that you put

[4:16:18] in here have either decreased or stayed about the same. And that's not going to happen

[4:16:24] either. But a lot of those revenues have been flat or stagnant. Well, that's because

[4:16:33] But now we'll come out of the COVID and like I said if you drove by the Gwen Justice Center this morning, that place was packed with people.

[4:16:44] We're on the man we're going forward.

[4:16:47] Our increases next year will be just like they were this year.

[4:16:53] And no one's taking that in consideration.

[4:17:00] But I've got a motion and I'm going to call for a vote.

[4:17:03] On the proposal, I have a motion of $415 for tax rate, and the second by Commissioner Howell.

[4:17:15] How do you, I vote nay.

[4:17:18] How, howell made the motion in the second, I'm sorry, I'm going to vote nay against the budget.

[4:17:26] Commissioner Bailey?

[4:17:28] I don't want to vote no on an assumption the money's there.

[4:17:33] Still a nay.

[4:17:34] Okay, Commissioner White?

[4:17:37] I vote yes.

[4:17:41] Commissioner O'Reilly?

[4:17:42] Yes.

[4:17:48] I made the motion, so I'll vote yes.

[4:17:51] Okay.

[4:17:52] That motion does carry.

[4:17:54] Phew.

[4:17:55] At least got past it.

[4:17:57] For now.

[4:18:00] Okay.

[4:18:00] The item 3 is consideration to schedule public hearing on the tax rate for the 2022 tax

[4:18:07] year. It's got your public hearing to be set 926 or 22 in a motion of approval of

[4:18:15] that.

[4:18:16] Raise your approval.

[4:18:18] Second.

[4:18:19] Motion of Commissioner Uli, second by Commissioner White, in discussion. All in favor

[4:18:28] I?

[4:18:28] Any opposed?

[4:18:34] Okay, that's

[4:18:38] somehow this got backwards.

[4:18:43] Because our first public hearing is set to be

[4:18:47] the 9-6 of 22, so that's a different thing.

[4:18:55] That's on the proposed budget.

[4:18:58] Okay, I'd entertain a motion for that.

[4:19:02] So moved you.

[4:19:04] Second.

[4:19:11] Motion from Commissioner Bailey.

[4:19:12] Second from Commissioner Howell.

[4:19:14] To approve the public hearing for the proposed budget on 9-6 of 22.

[4:19:20] two. All in favor, right?

[4:19:23] All right.

[4:19:24] The motion does carry.

[4:19:29] Okay.

[4:19:31] I believe that's everything. Our

[4:19:33] record business was something I'd miss them number two under under new

[4:19:41] business. Oh, I'm finished business. I'm sorry.

[4:19:46] Yes, the ESD thing. Oh, I was

[4:19:49] wondering why you was still hanging around here.

[4:19:54] Well, listen, all this fun that's

[4:19:56] been going on.

[4:19:59] All right, let me read that motion. The consideration of a proposal for

[4:20:03] and projects of American Rescue Plan for our funding. And that is a consideration of

[4:20:10] agreement between Johnson County and Johnson County Emerges and Service District number

[4:20:15] one for the distribution of our funds. Tom, you want to address any of that?

[4:20:23] Judge, I can address that. We're mentioning this the other day when the representative from Grant Works was here, but this is the first agreement that the Court is going to enter into. It's with the SD to provide them opera funds. And I've reviewed it. And I think Tom's legal counsel reviewed it as well. And this one is for 100% funding up front.

[4:20:48] Okay.

[4:20:49] This is good.

[4:20:50] To approve, Judge, give you authorization to sign.

[4:20:53] I'll second.

[4:20:54] Motion, commercial wire, second, and commercial baili, to approve, and to give me authorization

[4:21:01] sign.

[4:21:02] Any further discussion?

[4:21:03] This also, if there's an extension of this for a year, Tom, you want to explain that a

[4:21:10] little bit just so the Court has a record of it.

[4:21:12] And also, Tom.

[4:21:14] I changed the one year and extension to two year extension because I'm pretty positive that my one get my vehicles in one year.

[4:21:22] Yeah, yeah, so I just want to be on the way it's been going anyhow.

[4:21:25] Yeah, and that's thank y'all for that.

[4:21:27] Hopefully you will, but most of all.

[4:21:29] And that's still before the deadline of December 31st of 2006.

[4:21:34] Yeah, hey, Tom.

[4:21:35] You might also make comment about the savings that you're realizing purchasing those,

[4:21:41] some of those items through AMR?

[4:21:44] Yes, we're making a large savings in the monitors that we're purchasing,

[4:21:49] but then we're going to have to spend that savings that we're saving because the vehicle's

[4:21:52] went up 30,000 a piece.

[4:21:54] Okay.

[4:21:54] So, we still should have some leftover but going by through the AMR contract,

[4:22:02] they were saving almost $40,000 a monitor.

[4:22:08] So yes, and then I'm beneficiary side of it, we were allowed to do this, and if we

[4:22:15] wasn't, then it was, we were going to have to, uh, the Amar couldn't bid on it, or I couldn't

[4:22:20] purchase to them. So it's a great savings, and with the increase of the vehicles, there's still

[4:22:24] maybe some money left over that I could turn back.

[4:22:27] Court of this doesn't look like her to hold on.

[4:22:32] I'm trying to save the money, so I hear y'all don't have the ARPA funds, I'll try to get back what I can get back.

[4:22:39] Thank you.

[4:22:40] Thank y'all.

[4:22:41] And Steve, paragraph number three says that there'll be funds in two weeks of the approval of this agreement if you look at paragraph number three.

[4:22:49] So we can cut it on the next bill run, only two weeks from today.

[4:22:59] All right, any further comments?

[4:23:00] All in favor, aye?

[4:23:02] Any opposed?

[4:23:04] Motion carries.

[4:23:06] Okay.

[4:23:07] What

[4:23:16] are you doing, Judd?

[4:23:17] Oh, I'm about to tear this thing up.

[4:23:22] Okay, on item 26, there'll be no action for us.

[4:23:26] Yeah, there is concern.

[4:23:29] So this time, the Johnson County Commissioner's Court will come out of

[4:23:33] a regular session.

[4:23:34] We'll go into close executive session under government code section 551074

[4:23:40] on the personnel, open position, number B03-023,

[4:23:48] attorney two in the district attorney's office.

[4:23:51] This court is now in closed executive session.

[4:24:05] At 3.36 p.m. Johnson County Commission's court

[4:24:08] come out of closed executive session

[4:24:11] back in the open regular session.

[4:24:19] First off, I'll tuck in motion in regards

[4:24:21] to our executive session, Adam.

[4:24:23] Judge, I move to approve the hiring of a law student extern to fill position B03-023

[4:24:35] as an attorney to at the rate of $24 an hour funded by Harper funds and that this position

[4:24:45] be effective and the hiring be effective Monday, August 15, 2022.

[4:24:52] I

[4:24:55] have a motion by Commissioner Woolie, second by Commissioner White to approve the motion

[4:25:02] that was just made by Commissioner Woolie at

[4:25:08] the dollar amounts set is there any other

[4:25:11] discussion? All in favor, aye? Any opposed? No one opposes that motion carries.

[4:25:20] Okay, let's go back up to a new

[4:25:29] business, 14,

[4:25:34] we approve, let me get to it.

[4:25:37] I

[4:25:43] need to go back to the new business, too, too, just so I can state these.

[4:25:46] Yeah, those numbers.

[4:25:54] Going first, good.

[4:25:56] Oh, let's, I'm already back up to those numbers, so let's go back to the new business, too.

[4:26:02] And I had a motion by Commissioner Howell, second by Commissioner Mouli, so let's state the

[4:26:08] the numbers that need to be put into their.

[4:26:12] Okay, this is just to make sure we have the record straight and state this, as the state

[4:26:18] asks to make the motion to approve the proposed tax rate, which will now be the 2023 tax

[4:26:29] year, 2022 tax year, as follows.

[4:26:33] no new revenue tax rate of point three seven five three nine zero per

[4:26:44] hundred dollars valuation the debt tax rate of point zero zero seven four five

[4:26:55] five, per $100 valuation, and the voter approval tax rate of 0.431325, per $100 valuation,

[4:27:11] and a total proposed tax rate of 0.41500, per $100 valuation.

[4:27:30] Second.

[4:27:30] I have a motion in the second for the red,

[4:27:40] no new revenue rate, the just new revenue rate, M&O.

[4:27:46] Voter approval, M&O, debt rate, and voter approval tax rate at 41, 141500.

[4:28:00] And we took a record vote on that.

[4:28:02] But in my vote is still nay, Commissioner Howell, made the motion, Commissioner Bailey is more

[4:28:12] to your vote.

[4:28:16] I'm voting for vote against the nay.

[4:28:19] Okay.

[4:28:25] Commissioner White.

[4:28:28] It's still yes.

[4:28:29] Commissioner Woodley.

[4:28:30] Yes.

[4:28:31] Okay.

[4:28:32] That motion carries on three to vote,

[4:28:38] and then we had one other cleaned up deal to do on

[4:28:42] the.

[4:28:42] I'm

[4:28:46] finished business number two and it was last quarter, 720.

[4:29:01] Under the proposal projects for the American Rescue Plan, we had talked about that, I think we purchased three vehicles that correct.

[4:29:15] We approved one of the three to be purchased for our funding, but I think we wanted to purchase the

[4:29:27] upfitting was not specified.

[4:29:29] whether it would be paid under ARPA or not.

[4:29:32] So I guess we need an emotion in regards to that.

[4:29:42] Upfitting is to be paid by ARPA funding.

[4:29:46] No, which vehicle are we talking about this for?

[4:29:51] I came for X-AN and followed back there.

[4:29:55] I couldn't recall.

[4:29:56] It's one of the Ford responders.

[4:30:00] Right. That's what I'm talking about. I thought we'd do it too. One in the minutes, they said,

[4:30:10] so just single F-150.

[4:30:18] And the

[4:30:18] regime motion was by commercial white and second by commercial Bayley.

[4:30:27] That was on, that's the, that's today's. What number are we on, gentlemen? New business two unfinished business two days. My motion was on the ESD deal.

[4:30:41] today. This was from last, last court. Yeah.

[4:30:50] But we can still address this court because

[4:30:52] it still falls in Arpa funding. Right.

[4:31:06] So I actually all I need, I think if I got

[4:31:09] it correctly, my man is in motion to approve the upfitting to come out of Arpa. To come

[4:31:17] out of Arpa. Well, I mean, we've already approved the vehicle, so I make the motion that we

[4:31:22] approves using arpefines to upfit the vehicle.

[4:31:26] Second.

[4:31:30] We have a number on that.

[4:31:32] They didn't do we not.

[4:31:33] Yeah, it wasn't.

[4:31:33] We approved.

[4:31:36] Okay.

[4:31:38] That probably needs to be in your motion.

[4:31:40] Commissioner.

[4:31:40] Oh, okay.

[4:31:41] That's five more vehicle.

[4:31:43] Do we have a number?

[4:31:50] It must be on 26.

[4:31:51] That's it.

[4:31:51] Pull up.

[4:31:52] Last week's agenda.

[4:31:54] Did you say?

[4:31:56] I mean, our person thanking me when we approved the vehicle,

[4:32:02] I actually thought we did.

[4:32:04] I thought we did.

[4:32:05] The vehicle and the upfitting it might not have got working that way.

[4:32:08] I'm sure we did.

[4:32:10] Well, and this is for one of the four responders that the Sheriff's Office is getting.

[4:32:16] I don't know what that is.

[4:32:20] 478432.

[4:32:23] 478432.

[4:32:24] It's your motion.

[4:32:25] That's my motion.

[4:32:25] Should I have a second?

[4:32:29] Second.

[4:32:29] Commissioner Bailey. All in favor aye. Any opposed? No one opposes that motion carries.

[4:32:38] Yeah.

[4:32:49] Okay.

[4:32:53] I think that completes our agenda for today.

[4:33:01] Look there and just to be sure.

[4:33:18] All right. Being no further business of this meeting, this court is adjourned.

Aug 08, 2022 Commissioner's Court

Agenda

Transcript