[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:07] I told you Christmas is coming around the corner. I didn't believe me. I'm telling you,
[0:12] it's super fast. Anyways, we're at 1000 Euston Street, Laredo, Texas. We're here at approximate
[0:17] time it's nine o'clock. The meeting starts at nine o'clock. The approximate time for
[0:22] us right now is nine o' three, so we're in good shape. We're going to go in and call
[0:25] this meeting to order, and we're going to have the office of the Marjita Miri Ciwata,
[0:29] our Webb County clerk, with roll call, please. Good morning, Judge Commissioners. Leslie
[0:33] on behalf of the Honorable Marjorie Ramirez Ibarra,
[0:35] Webb County Judge, Donald Tijerina.
[0:37] Present.
[0:37] Commissioner Jesse Gonzalez.
[0:39] Present.
[0:39] Commissioner Rosauro Oahui Tijerina.
[0:41] Present.
[0:42] Commissioner John C. Galo.
[0:43] Present.
[0:43] Commissioner Ricardo Jaime.
[0:45] Present.
[0:45] Thank you.
[0:46] There is a quorum.
[0:47] We're going to start.
[0:48] If we could all stand,
[0:49] we're going to ask Commissioner Gonzalez
[0:51] to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance speech.
[0:53] I'd like to speak to the flag
[0:54] of the United States of America
[0:57] and to the Republic for which it stands,
[0:59] one nation under God,
[1:01] individual or liberty and justice for all.
[1:05] Very good.
[1:08] Let's go ahead and get discussion
[1:11] and possible action for approval of bills, paper and monthly reports. We'll start
[1:14] as always with our treasurer, Mr. Mayor Raúl Reyes.
[1:21] Good morning, honorable judge and commissioners. Raúl Reyes, county treasurer
[1:25] for the record. Good morning. Judge and commissioners, this morning I have two
[1:28] items, the presentation of bills and disbursements and my monthly report for the month
[1:33] ending September 30th, 2025. This period for the bills and disbursements is from October 10th
[1:41] through October 23rd, 2025. You'll see there that we do have 267 checks ready to be printed
[1:50] and released for the payment of 492 invoices. That disbursement total, Judging Commissioners,
[1:56] is $3,432,522.86. We also have 136 electronic fund transfers ready to be processed for the
[2:09] payment of 446 invoices and that disbursement amount, Judge and Commissioners, is $1,968,405.56.
[2:20] As per general order released prior to today's meeting, we had 109 checks that represented
[2:29] the payment of 285 invoices.
[2:32] That disbursement total was $203,671 with 63 cents.
[2:40] And for electronic fund transfers, and that was the disbursement was $400.
[2:47] Not sure if you have any questions regarding this first portion.
[2:49] Questions?
[2:50] We'll move to approve the checks done by, I mean released by General Order and the pending
[2:56] ones.
[2:57] I second that.
[2:57] Motion seconds.
[2:58] Any opposed?
[3:00] Motion carries.
[3:01] We did have some special requests.
[3:03] We had four checks processed for the payment of 14 invoices.
[3:06] You'll notice there that they were request by departments.
[3:10] In the next slide you'll see there those requests and that totaled $36,917 with three cents which would need ratification.
[3:26] Very good. So moved to ratify those four checks.
[3:29] Second.
[3:29] Motion second, any opposed? Motion carries.
[3:32] And then we were notified last week on Friday of a retention for the Quad City fire station.
[3:41] It is pending auditor's approval, and it's one invoice, and that disbursement amount
[3:46] judging commissioners is $40,065. That would need also to be approved.
[3:52] I have a motion. I don't have a second.
[3:54] Second.
[3:55] Motion seconds, any opposed?
[3:57] Motion carries.
[3:58] Thank you.
[3:58] And then the next item is for informational purposes only.
[4:02] You'll notice there for the pay period of October 3rd to October 16th,
[4:07] the total net wages, county contributions, and payroll deduction for that pay period
[4:12] was $5,715,425.56.
[4:18] Last but not least in this first portion of my presentation
[4:21] is the Casa Blanca Golf Course Requirement of Funds.
[4:25] The prior pay date of the 17th of October, the estimated amount was 45,000.
[4:31] The actual amount was $41,791 with 4 cents.
[4:37] For this upcoming pay date of the 31st, we're estimating once again $45,000.
[4:46] So move to approve the estimated payroll not to exceed 45,000.
[4:50] Second.
[4:50] Motion seconds.
[4:51] Any opposed?
[4:53] Motion carries.
[4:55] All right, and then the recap of the end of the fiscal year.
[4:59] This is the September 2025 monthly report, our cash and investment balance.
[5:05] We had $249,590,477 with 75 cents.
[5:13] Our investment portfolio was $74,987,260 with 68 cents.
[5:21] Our total portfolio was $324,577,738, with 43 cents.
[5:34] In terms of our interest rate of returns, you'll notice that, you know, rates have been stable.
[5:41] You'll notice that also within our cash and investment pools with Falcon, our weighted average is 3.1.
[5:48] One, our tax polls are doing significantly higher.
[5:51] That is a given.
[5:53] And of course, our investment portfolio, you'll notice there all of the weighted average for
[5:58] each of our tools that we have at our disposal.
[6:02] You also notice that for the month of September, the total interest earned was $755,935.
[6:10] $5. So year for the entire fiscal year was $9,769,739. Although you do notice also on
[6:22] that slide that the previous fiscal year was $11.2 million, rates were a lot higher during
[6:29] that fiscal year, more up in the fives this year. So we're still doing significantly
[6:34] well.
[6:35] file. In terms of our checks issued report, Judge and Commissioners, the total checks for
[6:41] accounts payable payroll and payroll liabilities during the month of September total $19,692,723
[6:51] with 49 cents. A full recap you'll find on page 16 of the monthly report that's also
[6:59] available online. Our sales tax revenue, we did exceed this month's budget by $81,674.
[7:12] The total revenue for a sales tax was $2,248,341. If you look at the detailed report on page
[7:21] page 18, you'll see that within the actual fiscal year, we were above budget $2,156,446,
[7:34] which was an increase of $1.3 from the previous fiscal year.
[7:38] In terms of our mixed beverage and tax revenue, as indicated on page 19, for September that
[7:45] that amount was $59,207.23. The total for the fiscal year 2425 was $701,126.39. All rents
[8:02] and leases have been paid. You'll notice a full detail on page 21 through page 27. Rent
[8:09] received of course the rents paid and leases paid. In terms of the permanent
[8:15] school fund as indicated on page 29 of the monthly report we did receive from
[8:21] highway 44 a hundred and thirteen thousand one hundred and thirty six
[8:25] dollars with forty five cents from highway 59 two thousand eight hundred and
[8:29] thirty dollars with fifty three cents that's in terms of royalty no damages
[8:35] is no hunting and grazing.
[8:37] So that amount was $115,966 with 98 cents.
[8:44] And then last but not least is our text mix parking lot.
[8:47] As you know, we have still had issues with the server.
[8:54] Rather than sending it back to Canada,
[8:56] we ended up just not sending it anymore
[9:00] because the court approved the new system.
[9:03] and we're hoping that we get that by next month to be fully operational. Nonetheless,
[9:12] we're still generating funds, right? So we did have $1,359 tickets paid. You'll see there that in
[9:25] terms of the ticket revenue, which was $6,844 plus the contract revenue, which was $2,100.
[9:36] That total revenue for the month of September was $8,944.
[9:42] For this fiscal year, granted it should have been more, but we had some months where the
[9:48] system was inoperable.
[9:50] That generated $57,042 with zero cents.
[9:56] Last fiscal year was $48,860.
[10:00] So we did $8,182 more this fiscal year than the previous.
[10:08] And as indicated in the email that I sent regarding the projections,
[10:13] We could hypothetically start seeing, with a new operational system, revenues anywhere
[10:22] between almost hitting $9,000 to $10,000 monthly.
[10:28] If you public don't know by now, we get really excited with parking lots.
[10:35] Maybe it's an indication that we should build more parking lots, I don't know.
[10:43] Judging commissioners, that's all I have this morning. Thank you so much.
[10:45] Motion to accept report. Second.
[10:47] Motion second. Any opposed?
[10:49] Thank you, sir. I appreciate it.
[10:50] You'll have a blessed day.
[10:51] Thank you. Likewise.
[10:52] Mr. Petta, you can keep your seat.
[10:54] No, that's fine, sir.
[10:55] Are you sure?
[10:56] Yes.
[10:56] All right.
[10:57] Mr. Petta, come on up.
[11:02] He asked me if he could keep his seat and do the report from his seat.
[11:04] I said absolutely, and now he's walking up here.
[11:08] Thank you, Judge.
[11:09] Hope you're feeling better.
[11:10] I am feeling better.
[11:11] I am feeling better, but I need to follow up.
[11:15] He kicked the TV when he was watching the Cowboys this day.
[11:20] I always, for the record, Rafael Perez,
[11:23] Web County Auditors, Honorable Judge and Commissioner's Court,
[11:27] we did deliver the report on Friday morning,
[11:30] and it represents the whole year,
[11:34] and I do want to mention that the,
[11:38] Because of the audit, we still have to wait for invoices to come in in October, November,
[11:45] for all the funds.
[11:47] And of course, we matched, if there were revenues applicable to September, we're also going to
[11:54] recognize them.
[11:55] So the first set of funds is the Advolorant Funds, which are the General Fund, Rotem
[12:02] Bridge, and Dead Service, starting on page 3, Judge.
[12:05] I do want to emphasize that this is un-audited, but we're looking at revenues over expenditures
[12:12] $8,032,371.
[12:16] The next Avalorant Fund is on page 5, which is the Rotem Bridge Fund, and that one shows
[12:22] revenues over expenditures $1,776,996.
[12:28] dollars. The next one is a debt service fund used to pay all the county obligations, principal
[12:35] and interest. That one shows expenditures over revenues 159,262 but I do want to emphasize
[12:45] when I work with the tax assessor during the truth and taxation they always identify
[12:52] if we over collected or under collected and there's an adjustment in the formula and
[12:57] And for the last couple of years, we've been over-collecting, so that's how they compensate
[13:02] for the truth in taxation.
[13:05] We are expecting at least another $30,000 through November 30th, but it is not a problem.
[13:13] Moving on to the enterprise funds, the first one would be the Casa Blanca, where we
[13:20] We show the operating loss that represents expenditures or revenue, 481,153, and moving
[13:32] on to the water utility, page 17, that one.
[13:37] You don't mind, just real quick, for the public to know that 481,000, that's with
[13:41] all the improvements and everything else, is that correct?
[13:44] We segregated the improvements further down where you can see capital expenditures for
[13:52] $121,000.
[13:53] I have segregated them.
[13:54] So it is not included in the operation, but it's further disclosed in the bottom.
[14:01] And there, of course, there were significant increases to the golf course.
[14:05] Yes.
[14:06] Page 17, in reference to the water utility, where we have also an operating loss for expenses
[14:14] or revenue of $644,096.
[14:19] Moving on to the equity, especially because of the end of the year, I do want to emphasize
[14:25] on page 30, the first fund, 10-01 is your encumbrances.
[14:30] The last report, I believe we had 12 million, and it has gone down.
[14:38] The possibility of having invoices in October, November should reduce this amount for carryover
[14:45] for next year.
[14:46] But we do, as of September 30th, when we downloaded the report, we did have 10,582,821 dollars
[14:56] in encumbrances.
[14:57] Further down, I do want to reflect the
[15:00] Rotem Bridge where we do have encumbrances of $1,628,524, and on page 31, the big emphasis
[15:12] is the ARPA, the ARPA where we have to spend all our money by December 31st, 26th. That
[15:19] one shows encumbrances of $28,626,993. And that's something that I need to report every
[15:29] month for the only reason we have to liquidate all those encumbrances for the ARPA so we won't
[15:35] have to return any money.
[15:37] Moving on to the jail, skipping over to the jail, page 55, actually it's 53, I'm sorry
[15:45] I misquoted the page.
[15:48] The jail revenue was 113 percent over the estimated revenues and then on the expenditures
[15:57] are at 90%. I do want to point out on page 55, that's the page as to the number of U.S.
[16:05] Marshals, BOP, and the state prisoners. We are having a capacity of 90%. And the emphasis
[16:17] is that for the month of September, we had for inmates Billing 16. Just to point it
[16:25] out, it might be a trend that we will be reporting more in the next monthly report.
[16:32] As mentioned by the county treasurer, page 56, we are receiving more, we're above budget,
[16:40] and that was $2,156,449.
[16:45] On the next page, 57 is a summary of the general fund operating statement where you
[16:52] We can see the components of the enterprise, I'm sorry, of the encumbrances.
[16:58] How much is the operating expenditures, encumbrances, $2,165,578, and on capital expenditures, which
[17:09] will probably be most of the money that we're going to carry over, is $8,417,242.
[17:17] dollars. I do want to point out, Judge, on this page, Judge, just so you can see the
[17:24] budget was, the adopted budget exceeded the revenues by 21 million, but we're showing
[17:32] a profit for the general fund as of September 30th of 8 million. So we did not realize
[17:39] that loss that was in the budget. I do want to point that out.
[17:43] Well, it wasn't a loss, right? It was capital expenditures.
[17:45] It's capital expenditures, right?
[17:46] Have you had programmed how much in capital expenditures?
[17:50] Capital expenditures just with a 17 million five, yes.
[17:55] So really we've predicted a loss of four million.
[17:58] And when we do the government wide financial statements,
[18:01] which these are on the current resources,
[18:04] governmental fund, we have to show everything going out.
[18:07] When we do the government wide,
[18:09] will show a profit or a bigger fund balance on that particular statement. But that's a
[18:18] statement that is only for year-end audit, you know, for the year-end. Yeah.
[18:24] So we're going to end up net four, I guess. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. And again, I should emphasize
[18:32] that that's a different statement. And we take out all the capital expenditures.
[18:36] but it's a set another set that we have to report moving
[18:49] on page 58 where we show
[18:51] the revenues at 106 103 percent road and bridge at 98 percent and on the debt
[18:59] service 99 percent and of course we're expecting revenues for the
[19:04] delinquent taxes for the next 60 days. Moving on to the internal audit reports for the fourth
[19:12] quarter, judged by statute, the county auditors required to report the monthly financial reports
[19:18] and the internal reports that we conduct. For the fourth quarter, we did have, we
[19:26] did review deposits, daily cash reports and cash counts, and we tested 11 departments
[19:33] And I'm going to go one by one on the departments that we did conduct a internal audit.
[19:42] The Casa Blanca, I do want to point out that this is a real core in finding and what we
[19:47] require is a supporting documentation for corrections and events.
[19:52] It's not consistently included.
[19:55] Supporting documentation to assist to reconcile the funds and review deposit so they can
[20:01] agree with sales. Moving on, when there are corrections, we respectfully request the reason
[20:09] why we have corrections. And on, let's see, on the third finding that the Department included
[20:20] reports of payments and scheduled charges for most of the events tested and the documentation
[20:26] was not consistent. Moving on to another finding for the golf course, the change fund had a
[20:34] shortage of $126.50. We are recommending that they replenish that change fund like they did
[20:44] some time ago. And so that's another finding. Moving on to the fairgrounds where it's similar
[20:51] Similar to the first finding, the supporting documentation needs to be consistent.
[20:57] For JP, Precinct 2, Place 2, it's in reference to the daily cash reports not coming in timely.
[21:05] And the only reason I mentioned this, this will impact the treasurer and myself in recording
[21:10] cash reports for the monthly report.
[21:12] So I need to point that out.
[21:15] Medical examiner, although I know that she's shorthanded currently, we're recommending
[21:21] And then once the staff is available, that they start having a mail log for all the receipts
[21:26] for all the 15 counties that she provides services for.
[21:30] Under the pre-trial services-
[21:32] Give me real quick.
[21:32] How many did you say?
[21:34] Excuse me.
[21:34] How many counties did you say?
[21:35] I believe there are 15 counties that she's doing.
[21:39] Okay.
[21:40] Yes.
[21:40] Thank you.
[21:42] Pre-trial services.
[21:43] services. The Tyler financial does have the credit card fees, but we're recommending that
[21:52] the pre-child services include the credit card fees also in Odyssey, so they'll be identical
[21:58] records. Moving on to the tax assessor, when we did our cash counts, they were short $600
[22:06] dollars for the only reason they couldn't get two lock boxes open and they're contacting
[22:16] the vendor so they can open up those two boxes.
[22:21] And so we just needed to point it out that it's short because we didn't have access to
[22:25] those two.
[22:27] Also in their receipts for the previous day, they had an overage of $736.25.
[22:34] and we're asking them to record them accordingly in that fashion.
[22:39] Ralph, I'm sorry.
[22:41] Yes, please.
[22:42] Is there any way you can do an analysis to see if it would just be better to go cashless and absorb the fee?
[22:52] And I would need to work with the credit card company to see that.
[22:59] And how much we're charging.
[23:02] I feel that when we did lower the charge, we are absorbing a little more of the expense.
[23:10] It should be, we need to come back and give you a report on that.
[23:14] Well, like I said, it's going to be whatever the credit card company is charging you, you
[23:20] know.
[23:21] Now, I understand they have gone up on their fees.
[23:23] You know, used to be, I think, VISA used to be in the 1.5, 1.7, 1.7 percent.
[23:29] I think they're up in the 2.9s or whatever, but again, I think it's the cost of doing business.
[23:37] You have no cash to deposit.
[23:38] You have no cash for these reports.
[23:40] I mean, obviously you're still going to generate a credit card report, but that's done by
[23:44] the machine.
[23:45] Does it for you?
[23:48] I think it's just a lot cleaner and safer, and like I said, it's the cost of doing
[23:52] business.
[23:53] We don't need to hire a lot of the other truck to come pick up the deposits and
[23:58] things that I. Yeah, yeah. We need to follow up on that just to see how we can at least have
[24:08] the recoup the expenditure and then to consider. Even if you don't recoup the expenditure it's
[24:15] a cost of doing business and you're saving money in the long run because you're not
[24:20] having the you're not having money sitting there and you're not having a potential
[24:23] loss, you're not having potential theft, and I think it just makes things cleaner.
[24:28] And Raúl Reyes, county treasurer for the record, commissioner, you're absolutely right.
[24:32] It is something that is worth looking into.
[24:36] However, I think the preliminary discussion should be with our depository because we do
[24:43] have a contract with them, and it's stipulated in our contract is they are the sole providers
[24:50] for credit card processing.
[24:52] Okay, well, let's talk to them and see if that maybe they can give us a better rate if we don't cash this thing. Absolutely
[25:00] Very good. Thank you. Thank you
[25:03] Moving on
[25:05] last year I initiated this closing departments pending responses for internal odd reports and
[25:12] for the current year we have a the
[25:15] the CSCD, the Adult Probation, Bending and Response, and we have the tax office that hasn't
[25:22] responded to our audit findings for 24.
[25:27] The following entries or the following on page 73, we do still have four former employees
[25:35] that owe money to the county, which is $9,311.
[25:39] dollars historical payments with the county clerk we are working with the
[25:45] county clerk the digital collections to identify those monies that belong to us
[25:50] and to the state it's an ongoing project line burger we've done a significant
[25:55] improvement where we're where we had meetings with them and now they're
[26:01] comparing the reports from the JPs versus there to reconcile and give us
[26:06] a right invoice amount. And then finally the internal audit report does a lot of assistance
[26:11] in reference to the JPs and the digital collections on a monthly basis. Judge, that concludes my
[26:18] reports unless there are any other questions. And we'll be following up on the, on that
[26:24] concept.
[26:25] I'll be filled better, my friend. Motion, second, any opposed? Motion carries. Thank
[26:30] Thank you, sir. Appreciate you very much. Okay, let's move on to Human Resource Rest
[26:37] Management,
[26:42] Monica Flores, please.
[26:46] Good morning, Judge Commissioners. Monica
[26:48] Flores, Human Resources. Today I have the Wage and Pace Scale Budget Amendment Report.
[26:55] For this past pay period, we had a total of 60,939.40 in reverted salaries. And we
[27:03] We had a total of 19,960 indiscretionary step changes.
[27:08] So there was a total transferred into the wage study of $41,033.80.
[27:13] Very good.
[27:14] Move to approve the evasion and pay scale amendments.
[27:18] By order.
[27:19] Second.
[27:20] Motion seconds.
[27:21] Any opposed?
[27:23] Motion carries.
[27:24] Thank you.
[27:24] Thank you.
[27:24] Appreciate you.
[27:25] Thank you.
[27:26] Okay, next we have public comment and we do.
[27:28] We have...
[27:29] I'm sorry.
[27:33] Oh, I'm sorry.
[27:36] Yes, I apologize, we have our new director, my apologies.
[27:40] Good morning, good morning, Samantha Sanchez for this management.
[27:43] I wanted to inform the court that today is the first day of open enrollment.
[27:48] So we do have an open enrollment from October 27th through November 9th.
[27:53] This is the opportunity for all employees to update their information, to update benefits,
[27:59] to verify information for their dependents.
[28:02] We also have enrollment assistance, so employees that don't have access to a computer or need
[28:08] assistance with their open enrollment, we will have computers available.
[28:12] It is by appointment only, so they do have to call risk management to set up their appointment
[28:16] and somebody from benefits will be assisting them.
[28:19] Now we also have an open enrollment contest.
[28:23] So if you complete your open enrollment between October 27th and November 2nd, your
[28:30] their name will be entered into a raffle
[28:32] to win one of the prices listed,
[28:35] which is the walking pad, Fitbit, and gift cards.
[28:38] We have gift cards from $25 to $100.
[28:41] So all those employees that complete their open enrollment
[28:44] within the first week,
[28:46] their name will be entered into a raffle.
[28:49] And I have three benefits coordinators.
[28:53] Should you have any questions
[28:54] as far as your current options,
[28:57] please go ahead and reach out to them.
[28:59] And we'll be available to us for any calls. Thank you, Samantha. I'm so sorry that I failed to say that this is one of your first times coming up here
[29:07] in it. Yes
[29:08] Once I this has about 10 questions commissioner
[29:13] You're not nervous are you not at all
[29:16] Thank you, Samantha. Thank you. Great job. Great job
[29:19] Motion except report
[29:26] Okay, next now we go into public comment
[29:28] to which we have four of them. I'm going to go ahead and read them. And I'm sorry, I just
[29:39] I'm having a hard time with LC Hernandez. I think that's what it is. My apologies if
[29:44] I didn't get it and you get to state your name for the record. And by the way, if you
[29:47] don't mind, I'm just going to go ahead and tell you all you'll have three minutes and
[29:51] you could utilize your three minutes. The only thing that we cannot do for the public
[29:54] comment is we cannot engage. So this is your time and you guys hopefully
[29:59] Hopefully.
[30:00] You know, whatever you all want to say.
[30:02] Thank you. Good morning, commissioners. Hi, my name's Ylsa Hernandez. I'm the Texas
[30:08] regional organizer with the immigrant legal resource center and resident of
[30:12] precinct two. As an organizer who works with families directly, I'm deeply
[30:16] concerned about Web County entering in a 287G jail force, jail enforcement model
[30:22] agreement with ICE. Programs like this turn our local jail into part of the
[30:28] immigration system, putting pressure on our county staff and increasing fear in our communities.
[30:34] In the decades of 287G more often than not, ICE doesn't cover the real cost and the county
[30:39] would end up paying with local tax dollars, taking resources away from things families
[30:44] truly need like clean water, safe roads, services for our communities.
[30:50] Other counties have tried these programs and learned the hard way that it's expensive,
[30:54] in effective and hurts our community trust. A recent ACLU study in 2022 found that 65% of
[31:04] participating law enforcement agencies in Texas engaged in discriminatory practices. We deserve
[31:10] policies that keep our families safe and support it, not ones that separate us. And before moving
[31:16] forward, Webb County should be honest about the financial and human impact of this agreement.
[31:21] Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Appreciate you.
[31:24] I'm looking for my clock. Did I lose my clock up here or what?
[31:30] You don't have one up there, though, don't you?
[31:32] Okay. I just, for some reason, Larry, did my clock disappear somewhere?
[31:39] Maybe, um...
[31:40] It's because Commissioner Duganina has a bunch of mess up here.
[31:45] Two boxes of peanuts.
[31:49] Alright, don't worry about it. We're at work right now. Thank you. Maximiliano Prado. I believe Prado.
[32:00] Good morning. Good morning. By the way, these agenda items that they're going off of is 17 C.
[32:08] Just for everybody tonight. 17 C. Yes. Thank you. You may proceed, sir.
[32:12] Alright. Good morning, Judge Tejirina. Good morning, sir.
[32:16] So commissioners, my name is Maximina Prado.
[32:18] I'm an organizer with the Lerator Immigrant Alliance
[32:20] and I'm a constituent of person number three.
[32:24] I'm here today to speak on agenda item 18C.
[32:27] We have some concerns with the possible approval
[32:29] of a memorandum of understanding
[32:31] with the Department of Homeland Security,
[32:33] Immigration and Conservation Enforcement,
[32:35] also known as ICE.
[32:36] I'm sorry, can you pull that mic closer to you?
[32:38] It'll move, you just pull it.
[32:40] Is that better?
[32:41] Yeah, a lot of that.
[32:42] You could move the, you could move it to you.
[32:45] Oh, got it, got it.
[32:46] I thought I was like fixing the table.
[32:47] Okay, perfect.
[32:49] Lot better?
[32:50] Perfect.
[32:52] Yeah.
[32:54] Yesterday, the memorandum is going to be signed,
[32:56] being discussed today here with ICE
[32:59] that's being considered today.
[33:01] To give some background context for those if needed,
[33:03] Senate Bill 8, that was passed earlier this year
[33:05] by the Texas Legislature,
[33:07] requires officers to enter into what is known
[33:09] as 2017 agreements with ICE.
[33:13] This type of agreement will give
[33:14] if some immigration enforcement powers
[33:15] to law enforcement personnel,
[33:17] in this case it would be either
[33:18] shared deputies and or jailers.
[33:21] There are three main kinds of 287 agreements,
[33:23] we each type being different than the other
[33:25] in what kind of immigration enforcement powers
[33:27] are given to personnel.
[33:29] Well, this is the simplest way I can explain it
[33:31] for a sake of time.
[33:32] It is a lot more complex than that.
[33:35] There are so many implications,
[33:40] whether, but right now we're talking about financial ones
[33:42] behind different kinds of 287 agreements.
[33:45] The one being until today,
[33:47] but in the agenda item is a jail-enforced model.
[33:51] I, well, there are going to be some trainings behind
[33:56] for deputies and jailers,
[33:59] and while they will pay for the lodging
[34:01] and transportation,
[34:04] they will not cover salary,
[34:06] benefits of any overtime expenses per personnel
[34:09] for the four-week in-person training.
[34:11] This means that only what the country had to pay for the salaries, but also while they
[34:15] are for training, but also have to pay for other personnel to cover the shifts it needed,
[34:19] which might lead to some, be way more expensive, especially if they go to overtime pay.
[34:24] The jail enforcement model will also give personnel, whether it's jailers or deputies, the power
[34:29] to issue ICE detainers, which would then require the county jail to hold poor people
[34:32] for up to 48 hours before transferring them to ICE on a disagreement.
[34:36] agreement. This means that people who would have otherwise been released on bail or let
[34:41] go if charges were dropped will not have to stay in the jail for longer, which also means
[34:45] that the county is going to have to pay for the expenses that come with the detention
[34:49] and also for the transportation to ICE. There are a lot more factors to consider
[34:53] when deciding what kind of 27G agreements the county should enter with ICE, including
[34:58] in community trust, personal capacity, legal liability, and potentially overcrowding
[35:03] issues, especially with a certain proposition that is currently on the valid passes.
[35:08] We understand that this is required by state law, and that the county, whether it is today
[35:12] or something, next year, is going to have to enter into an agreement soon.
[35:19] Hopefully we can discuss this further.
[35:20] Thank you for your time.
[35:21] Thank you.
[35:22] Next we have Karen Munoz.
[35:27] This is also on 17C.
[35:32] Good morning, Judging Commissioners.
[35:33] My name is Karen Munoz.
[35:34] I'm an attorney with criminal defense and civil rights experience.
[35:38] I'm here to encourage you to table item 17c to allow time to hear from community about
[35:43] why it's important to mitigate the harms of 287g.
[35:46] The jail enforcement model of 287g will allow certain officers within the county jail to
[35:50] interrogate anyone who they suspect to be immigrants and question them about their
[35:55] immigration status.
[35:56] This will inevitably lead to racial profiling and significant financial costs for our county.
[36:01] Those officers, deputized, will then be able to issue ICE detainers or ICE
[36:05] holds to those who believe are non-citizens. An immigration
[36:14] detainer or an ICE detainer is an administrative request from ICE to a
[36:17] local law enforcement agency to hold a person for up to 48 hours after they
[36:21] would typically be released from the jail. So importantly, again, an ICE
[36:25] detainer is an administrative request. It's not a criminal warrant, it's not
[36:31] of paper from ICE to a local agency to asking that they hold a person past their scheduled
[36:36] release date.
[36:37] ICE has even wrongfully placed detainers like these on U.S. citizens, and if local law enforcement
[36:41] agencies are allowed to enter into the jail enforcement model, we know that it will be
[36:45] more of the same.
[36:46] Detainers wrongfully placed on community members, and this will mean that more community
[36:50] members will end up in deportation.
[36:53] In addition to the human impact, the financial impact is also significant.
[36:56] Entering into the jail enforcement model would mean certain jailers on top of doing
[37:00] their job every day will also be doing ICE's job. These 287G programs are costly and Harris
[37:05] County, who had a gem program specifically until 2018, spent $600,000 a year in salaries
[37:12] alone while their program was in place according to their sheriff. Finally, commissioners,
[37:17] I urge you to pause this discussion and table it for a later date. While I understand
[37:21] that state law is tying your hands here, SB8 does not require you to rush this
[37:25] decision. It doesn't require you to rush into one of these contracts. SBA
[37:29] specifically states quote not later than December 1, 2026 are you required to
[37:34] join into one of these. I would love the opportunity to talk with any of you or
[37:38] with the sheriff of course about the different types of 287G models and about
[37:42] ways that you might be able to mitigate the harm that this program is bound to
[37:46] cause. I strongly urge you again to consider the ways that you can help
[37:49] best protect immigrants in Webb County before you enter into any of these
[37:53] programs. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have Priscilla Lugo.
[38:04] Hi everyone. Good morning.
[38:06] Good morning. So I want to introduce myself. I'm Priscilla Lugo. I'm the policy and communications
[38:11] manager at the Texas Immigration Law Council. And I was born and raised here in Laredo
[38:15] and I'm a current resident of Precinct 4. And I'm here specifically to talk about
[38:20] Webb County entering into the 287G agreement and specifically the jail enforcement model.
[38:24] While the agenda for today's hearing states that there is, quote, no impact to the general
[38:31] fund, end quote, entering into a 287G jail enforcement model agreement with ICE absolutely
[38:36] carries financial and operational costs for Web County.
[38:42] Under this program, like some of my colleagues have said, local jail staff are deputized
[38:46] to perform federal immigration enforcement and duties, but ICE provides no reimbursement
[38:51] for personnel time, benefits, or detention costs associated with that work.
[38:56] The only available support comes from limited state grants, which are based off of county
[39:01] population size, meaning that Webb County would only receive about $100,000 in state
[39:06] reimbursement, which would not cover the full cost of implementation of the jail enforcement
[39:10] model.
[39:12] And with experience from other counties, shows that the jail enforcement model is
[39:16] costly and an ineffective use of local funds.
[39:19] Harris County spent over $675,000 in just a few months while counties in North Carolina
[39:25] like Mecklenburg and Wake have lost millions of dollars more than ICE ever reimbursed them
[39:32] before they had to end their agreements due to cost overruns and community harm that
[39:36] they were noticing.
[39:37] So this means that Web County taxpayers would be subsidizing a federal program instead
[39:42] of investing in the priorities that matter most to our residents.
[39:45] things like ensuring access to clean water,
[39:48] improving infrastructure in our colonias,
[39:50] and even expanding services to our veterans here.
[39:54] So with so many pressing local needs,
[39:56] it makes little sense to divert limited county resources
[39:59] towards enforcing immigration, federal immigration laws,
[40:02] like 287G, and even Operation Lone Star,
[40:04] that do not make our communities safer or stronger.
[40:08] So before approving any agreement,
[40:10] I encourage the county to conduct a full fiscal
[40:13] school and operational impact analysis to ensure transparency about what the true cost
[40:17] of this program will be because claiming that there will be no impact to the general fund
[40:22] does not make those costs disappear. And I'm happy to make myself available to any of
[40:27] the commissioners, the judge or the sheriff to discuss this further. Thank you for your
[40:30] time.
[40:30] Thank you.
[40:31] Thank you.
[40:32] Thank you.
[40:32] Thank you.
[40:33] Thank you.
[40:34] Thank you.
[40:36] Thank you.
[40:47] Thank you.
[40:48] Thank you.
[40:48] Thank you.
[40:49] I'm sure as a citizen of Webb County in Laredo I just got informed about this item.
[40:56] I was not aware of it and just discussing with the people at the jail,
[41:00] I believe is important for us to approve this in order for
[41:04] us to continue to receive grants to house these people and
[41:09] to use those monies for whatever is necessary to do the job.
[41:13] So I am for the item, thank you.
[41:17] very good thank you sir okay let's go move on we have at this point in time I
[41:25] would like to we're going to go ahead and court to discuss and act on the
[41:30] following but I would like to go ahead and pull out the 17 C and maybe the
[41:38] sheriff's if you all have something to say about this but for right now
[41:41] everything other than 17 C is on the court to discuss and I'm an act on
[41:46] a second motion second any opposed for the for the consent agenda any other
[41:52] questions comments any opposed motion carries very well 17 C if you guys would
[41:58] like to discuss this
[42:01] 17 C I guess let me read it just for the record discussion
[42:05] impossible action to enter an agreement between Webb County for the benefit of
[42:09] the Webb County Sheriff's Office and the Department of Homeland Security
[42:12] Immigration and Customs Enforcement for the 287G program jail enforcement model
[42:19] GEM, beginning upon court approval until either party terminates with written
[42:26] notice. Any other management? Good morning, Judge and Commissioners. Commander Federico
[42:31] Calderón for the record, along with Chief Alejandro Gutierrez. So we carefully
[42:36] chose that specific model because it is at least intrusive to the community.
[42:41] The other models, there's three, are active enforcement and warrant enforcement out on
[42:46] the streets, identifying people in the streets.
[42:48] This one is only affects people who have been arrested and who will be going to the
[42:53] jail.
[42:53] It's not an active community project.
[42:56] And in as far as impact to the budget, we mean that we will not be asking the commissioners
[43:01] court for any more money to operate as we already have.
[43:05] It will be absorbed, if you will, into the daily duties of people who are working
[43:09] there.
[43:09] So, while it will take extra effort, it's not going to be another position we're asking
[43:15] for.
[43:15] How many years have we had this?
[43:17] Have we had this before?
[43:18] We have not.
[43:19] It's a new – it's been around for a while, but it's a new legislative mandate on the
[43:23] Sheriff's Office, on Sheriff's Offices in Texas.
[43:26] So, we are just doing what we need to do to comply with the legislative mandate.
[43:31] Judge, if I may?
[43:32] Yes, please.
[43:32] I'm just curious.
[43:34] So, ICE would send a retaining order, right?
[43:37] As it stands now, if we have an identified deportable alien, they send a detainer.
[43:44] We process a detainer, hold the person.
[43:46] Well, again, I'm just trying to get the steps so the public would understand.
[43:52] So if you identify, you are identifying or ICE is identifying?
[43:57] Go ahead.
[43:58] On that Commissioner, every inmate that goes to the Webb County Jail gets fingerprinted.
[44:03] We have a machine that's called an identics machine.
[44:06] It's been around for about 20 plus years.
[44:09] As soon as somebody goes into the Webb County Jail and we fingerprint them,
[44:14] that automatically goes to ICE, FBI, Austin.
[44:18] So immigration gets it.
[44:20] So even regardless with this program that machine's kind of already doing the work for the county,
[44:26] it automatically will put an immigration detainer on every inmate,
[44:29] whether they've been deported before or that check goes all over the place.
[44:35] It's not picking out people at random, it's picking out people that either have a deportation
[44:41] order or a warrant somewhere else or something like that.
[44:44] So you're not actively going out on the streets and racially profiling or doing anything.
[44:49] No, we're not.
[44:49] It's people that have been arrested, that are incarcerated and hopefully trying to
[44:55] prevent a release because they were picked up on a minor.
[45:00] And you say that, you know, they could have had two or three, you know, we have examples
[45:06] every single day in the news about somebody that got let out of jail and goes and, you
[45:11] know, does harm to somebody else and had a retention order. And they just refuse to enforce
[45:17] it and that person does. So if they already have a deportation order or something else,
[45:23] then by all means I think we need to detain them, you know, and let ICE do their job.
[45:27] Now, I guess there is a cost of saying, you know, they were going to be released one day
[45:33] and you keep another week, there is a cost there.
[45:36] But I'd rather pay that cost than have another individual murdered.
[45:43] So as long as that's what we're doing, and like I say, it's because they're already
[45:48] scheduled for deportation or have another charge pending somewhere else, then fine.
[45:54] I have no problem with that.
[45:55] like I tell you Commissioner, every inmate that gets fingerprinted, they don't have to
[45:59] come and see them in person anymore.
[46:01] That system automatically flags them, whether it be immigration, it's customs, it's a charge
[46:06] from another county or state.
[46:09] So automatically instead of immigration coming in and interviewing the inmates, that machine
[46:14] is already doing it for us.
[46:15] Well, and then you let them go and then they find out they're working at Home
[46:18] Depot and then they have to go chase them over there or wherever else they're
[46:21] working.
[46:21] So you're not picking or choosing actually the machine as a one that identifies the individual
[46:27] right and automatically sends notice.
[46:30] As it stands now, yes.
[46:35] So the current system has been in practice for the last at least 20 years.
[46:41] Yes, sir.
[46:41] And so for the process and I'm saying this to inform the public right, but we
[46:49] We used to have a system in where immigration would go to the jail twice a day, right?
[46:54] They would get there at 8 in the morning and then 5 o'clock in the afternoon in the 2000s,
[46:59] right?
[47:00] And then we transitioned in where immigration started going to the jail Monday through
[47:05] Friday at 8 in the morning, correct?
[47:07] That's correct.
[47:08] And then so there's two forms of immigration detainers.
[47:12] one is they would go ahead and do that I guess when they would interview the
[47:18] persons that were detained while their visit and then I guess when you start it
[47:24] with this system the system would with a fingerprint the system would put an
[47:30] automatic detainer on the persons right that's correct okay and so with this
[47:35] new Senate bill or House bill how is that the practice at least for the
[47:40] last 25 years in the county. How is it different than what you're now mandating or proposing?
[47:47] Commissioner, so the difference now is ICE will be training certain officials that we send,
[47:56] certain jailers or deputies that we send, and they will have what somebody called limited
[48:02] immigration authority to issue detainers. So instead of getting it automatically from
[48:07] someone visiting the jail, which will still happen, or electronically from an automatic
[48:12] fingerprint read, instead of those which can still happen, it will be the addition of
[48:17] a third layer, a physical person there, a deputy or a jailer, issuing that detainer
[48:24] to somebody they've identified as a criminally deportable or somebody they need to issue
[48:30] a detainer for.
[48:30] Now, the question I have is that let's say if you do have a U.S. citizen that has a detainer
[48:39] because that has happened and, you know, I could give you some examples like Ms. Pedraza
[48:48] Hernandez that is a U.S. citizen came into the county jail. She was given an immigration
[48:56] detainer from San Antonio at the time, but it wasn't until Monday that her family could
[49:03] go ahead and show that she was a U.S. citizen.
[49:06] There has been a practice and there has been some cases in where a person is given a detainer
[49:13] when immigration picks him up because they don't visit the jail on a daily basis.
[49:20] when they're taken to immigration for the process scene center, they'll realize that
[49:26] the person's a citizen and they'll release them. And I guess the question that I have
[49:31] is, let's say if you have a person that you place a detainer and then all of a sudden
[49:37] they'll bring evidence that the person's a U.S. citizen, are you going to be able
[49:42] to go ahead and lift up that detainer?
[49:45] Not as Commissioner, it would have to be immigration or customs, where they take them there, they
[49:51] take them, and they talk to the federal counterparts, and they're the ones who report back to us
[49:55] that they took off the hold, or they released them from the processing center, but it's
[49:59] them who make that determination.
[50:00] I know some families have gone to the processing center with immigration specifically,
[50:05] and they would go ahead and take documentations, they'll go ahead and, you know, at least
[50:11] in the past they would verify that they were U.S. citizens and then they would call the
[50:16] county jail to go ahead and lift up those detainers. I know that that has been the practice
[50:21] at least for the years. Are we liable, I guess is the question that I have for legal,
[50:29] or would we be liable if a person, I understand that this is mandated by the state and I
[50:40] we it would be implemented until the end of next year right 2026 and I guess the question is
[50:48] would we be except until then if let's say if a person does get arrested it is a US citizen
[50:55] and you detain them past the 48 hours and it happens to be a US citizen and given that our
[51:02] county employees placed that detainer, would we be liable? I guess Mr. Treviño?
[51:10] Not in the course of duty.
[51:14] Well, we need to put a cushion.
[51:17] Mr. Treviño is right behind you. I'm sorry, it's happened before.
[51:21] Jorge Luis Treviño Jr., Assistant General Counsel for Webb County. Liability as far
[51:28] as state rules should not be confused with federal rules. If there is a lawful
[51:32] detainer because it's based off on the system. All officers on the detainer are commanded
[51:37] to enforce it. They don't have that discretion. So we would not be responsible. You're asking
[51:43] him to violate the law by doing the otherwise, which is why if a law has a duty, it cannot
[51:48] be held accountable.
[51:50] Mr. Trevino, so, Ken, is it possible for us to say if somebody actually makes a
[51:57] claim, because I've seen this several times in the process and you've seen what the Supreme
[52:03] Court has been doing, so they're always asking for that window of to be able to have what's
[52:14] the term, to be adjudicated or whatever, to be able to prove, you know, another hearing
[52:20] or whatever to say, all right, I am a citizen, I need to be released.
[52:24] So can we give them like say you can't can't deliver anybody they get rested on the weekend
[52:30] Don't let them go on Monday morning. You know if they make a claim, right?
[52:33] You know give them another three days or whatever if we have to hold them three more days and say till
[52:37] Give them the chance to prove only the ones that claim that they're US it right because I'm sure it can happen
[52:42] The beauty of our system state and and federal again
[52:47] Federal says you release in 48 hours. So if they're released on state charges that doesn't mean they can leave on federal
[52:52] They can still be held.
[52:53] So they're under federal at that point.
[52:55] That's a misconception of a lot of people have,
[52:57] is it why aren't they out?
[52:58] Because you're no longer on state charges.
[53:00] State charges you 48 hours.
[53:01] Beyond that, it's federal anyway.
[53:03] They're in by federal, not by state.
[53:05] I understand that, but what I'm saying is.
[53:06] What they have in the federal system
[53:08] is another beautiful program that we even have in the state
[53:10] that was called the Rida habeas.
[53:12] But I'm just the example of what the commissioner
[53:15] and hotman gave.
[53:16] So somebody gave me over the weekend.
[53:18] They claimed that they were a US citizen.
[53:20] and how can they be deported?
[53:22] And so they need several days to be able to prove it.
[53:27] They can file what's called a red-a-habis,
[53:29] even in federal court, saying, Judge, I have to prove it.
[53:33] Several of those people that got deported to Venezuela
[53:35] or whatever, they didn't get their chance in court.
[53:40] They can have a chance in court.
[53:41] All they have to do is file a red-a-habis in federal court.
[53:43] Because under state law, we're not holding them anymore.
[53:45] So do we have that form or whatever they need?
[53:49] If we can ask the federal government, they want to provide a form they can, but they can
[53:53] also ask for a federal public defender because they do have them.
[53:56] So I know that at least for our county, we've been bearing that expense for a long time.
[54:04] And so, yes, an argument could be made and you could state and say, you know what, he
[54:10] is on a federal detainer.
[54:13] But the thing is, is that if a person doesn't meet their obligations within the state
[54:18] first, you're going to go ahead and now bottleneck a bunch of inmates because they're not going
[54:26] to be able to go ahead and pay for bail because a person is not going to be transferred over
[54:34] to the federal system until they meet their state obligations first, right?
[54:39] That is true.
[54:40] But if the feds have placed a detainer, the DAs, I know because I did this too,
[54:45] We would issue a rid of, not a rid, but actually the determination saying that we're going to dismiss the case so he can be processed federally.
[54:56] So we would release the state charges.
[54:59] I've seen that practice and practice isn't happening at least right now.
[55:04] And I'm saying because we reviewed, I guess, the 500 persons that are detained.
[55:12] There's 150 persons that are awaiting court and a big dilemma there is the detainer, federal
[55:21] detainer with persons that are appending court.
[55:26] I think it's a little bit more delicate given that there's a rising amount of persons that
[55:33] are being detained at the county jail.
[55:35] Well, I am curious to hear about the grants that we receive and how this would jeopardize
[55:46] those grant applications, so without a doubt.
[55:50] Can you explain that?
[55:51] It's on that documentation that came from the Governor's Office, so we'll go ahead
[55:56] and forward it to you so you can go ahead and read it how it would affect the grants
[55:59] for the county.
[56:00] We're going to have to send three either jailers or peace officers to get trained through a training through the federal government
[56:07] But on that letter that they send to the county will send it to you. I don't understand the training
[56:12] So they're going to be trained in what it's because you're saying they can issue a retainer
[56:17] How do they specifically our jailers right now or in our peace officers are only acquainted with state statutes, correct?
[56:24] They provide a training so that they can be acquainted with federal statutes and how to
[56:31] properly document, process, and interview detainees in our jail to determine whether
[56:39] or not a detainer needs to be issued for them.
[56:42] So that's where the limited immigration authority comes from, when they would turn off their
[56:47] deputy sheriff hat and put on an ICE hat for the time being while they're in front
[56:52] of that terminal processing that person?
[56:54] I know that's what the bill requires, but is that really necessary?
[56:58] I mean, if you – let's just say the person is trained, he does an interview and he says,
[57:04] I think this person should be detained for ex-reasons, even though ICE doesn't have
[57:09] it, but he's already been deported once from the country.
[57:14] You know, he's back here illegally.
[57:15] ICE doesn't know that, you know, until now or whatever until I guess the system.
[57:20] call ICE and say, hey, I got this person instead of him personally making that, that declaration
[57:27] saying I'm going to detain you. Well, let make the phone call to ICE, let them detain you.
[57:32] Well, the 287 program is what it's about. It's a jail enforcement and the two field
[57:38] enforcement type warrant service and the other one where you're actively enforcing
[57:42] in the community. So we opted not to do that. And we're doing the jail where we're
[57:48] or just processing people who've already been picked up?
[57:49] Again, I mean, we don't want to let people out on the street that shouldn't be on the street.
[57:56] We're not going to go out there and be pulling people over,
[58:00] and I don't think anybody has that authority.
[58:03] These raids are looking for targeted people.
[58:06] They have a warrant to arrest somebody.
[58:09] Now, when they find other people with them,
[58:11] that's the problem because they're all hanging out together.
[58:13] But when we have somebody in the jail, like Tom has said, don't let them out on the street because then they have to say nice to go find them.
[58:23] And that's where you have the disruption. So much easier to have them come pick them up quietly in the jail and take them, like again, only if they have deportation orders or if they have some kind of arrest order of perpetters.
[58:37] So I think the system already does that. I think that if they have a history of deportation
[58:42] to fingerprints, it's an automatic hold. I guess it's for the first time offenders.
[58:47] It's, I guess, that delicate.
[58:48] I think the problem is the automatic hold, you have cities that are going ahead and releasing
[58:53] them anyway.
[58:54] At least within our counties, that practice has been going on for at least 20 years.
[59:00] And I think, Commissioner on that, there's other county jails in Texas that don't
[59:03] have that luxury of that machine.
[59:05] Right.
[59:05] I'm thinking maybe you're guessing that's why maybe the governor put it because I don't have that luxury, but maybe this is focusing on rural Texas, not so much on border communities.
[59:15] I guess that half the means to provide that machine to probably judge.
[59:20] I would want to go ahead and push a motion to go ahead and table this for the next meeting.
[59:24] I would hope to go ahead and get more information.
[59:27] I understand that we have this obligation to move forward and I don't have an issue with it, given that we are already doing this.
[59:35] I just want to review the three options, so I can go ahead and make a decision.
[59:40] Do you have a motion? I have a second. I have a question, though.
[59:43] I don't know. You have a second.
[59:44] Yeah, I have a motion. I have a second. I have another discussion.
[59:47] We have no discussion on that.
[59:48] On the table?
[59:49] Yeah.
[59:50] I mean, this is time-sensitive. That's all I want to know.
[59:54] Yeah, of course.
[59:55] Can you go ahead and...
[59:56] Is it time-sensitive? We tabled this to get more clearance.
[1:00:00] And George, or the end of next year, I think.
[1:00:04] The program takes time to set up, and the training takes time to set up, and we'd have to coordinate
[1:00:11] that. But whatever your will is.
[1:00:15] I want to ask George.
[1:00:19] I'll get through it again for the record. I've done some work in this area, and I've
[1:00:24] helped. I was general counsel at the Bellbomb Board, a former DA, former county attorney,
[1:00:29] and I have seen what happens, okay?
[1:00:33] So we're not really changing too much.
[1:00:34] The training will also help them identify
[1:00:36] if someone's a U.S. citizen, which is somebody's forgetting.
[1:00:39] And so they're trained, they know.
[1:00:41] But I will tell you that if we wait,
[1:00:43] nothing's gonna change,
[1:00:44] the statute still makes it mandatory.
[1:00:45] Yeah, very good.
[1:00:46] Well, bring it back.
[1:00:48] So I mean, it's already tabled.
[1:00:49] Anyway, motion seconds for table.
[1:00:51] Table to this.
[1:00:54] Your opposed to table to this?
[1:00:55] Oh, we could do that?
[1:00:56] Mm-hmm.
[1:00:57] We could be opposed?
[1:00:57] Okay.
[1:01:01] Thank you. Thank you.
[1:01:05] We're not going to release anybody
[1:01:06] intro in the meantime, right? It's not going to change the process. No.
[1:01:12] Very good.
[1:01:14] We're not changing the process. What are we doing?
[1:01:20] All right. We're going to bring it back though, I guess.
[1:01:23] Yeah, next meeting. Yeah, next meeting we'll bring it back.
[1:01:25] Very good. I'll get to vote then. All right.
[1:01:28] Regular agenda, engineering. Oh, yeah, I'm sorry.
[1:01:32] Can I bring up a agenda item 27, please?
[1:01:35] Second.
[1:01:36] Motion seconds.
[1:01:37] Any opposed?
[1:01:39] Motion carries.
[1:01:41] Commissioner Hyman?
[1:01:43] Thank you, Judge.
[1:01:44] Agenda item 27 reads proclamation,
[1:01:48] designating the month of November as pancreatic
[1:01:51] Cancer Awareness Month and November 20,
[1:01:55] 2025 as pancreatic Cancer Awareness Day
[1:01:59] and commemorate it by lighting up
[1:02:02] the Web County Courthouse purple all of November, along with the presentation of Ms. Padivella
[1:02:07] on behalf of the pancreatic cancer action network, PAN-CAN.
[1:02:13] Ms. Vela.
[1:02:14] Good morning everyone.
[1:02:16] Good morning.
[1:02:17] Good morning.
[1:02:17] Good morning, Judge Commissioners.
[1:02:19] Thank you once again for allowing us to be here.
[1:02:22] My name is Padivella.
[1:02:23] I'm a care giver for a pancreatic cancer warrior.
[1:02:26] I'm here again requesting your assistance to make a difference in the fight against cancer.
[1:02:33] Over the past six years, our journey has been marked with numerous ups and downs, yet we
[1:02:38] remain steady and determined to be positive and to make an impact in the lives of others
[1:02:45] affected by this horrible disease.
[1:02:47] Our mission is to make their journey somewhere easier, more bearable, and more hopeful.
[1:02:55] With November approaching, we need your help in raising awareness about pancreatic cancer,
[1:03:02] the third leading cause of cancer death currently.
[1:03:05] My husband is among the fortunate few.
[1:03:08] Recently we lost a 38-year-old mother of three, a Web County Head Start teacher assistant
[1:03:16] that served our community for 15 years, Ms. Vanessa Contreras, who bravely fought
[1:03:22] for three years.
[1:03:24] Unfortunately, due to Laredo's limit, medical research, several of us have to seek medical
[1:03:30] attention outside of our community to fight this terrible disease.
[1:03:34] That's why I'm so thankful for American Cancer Society, PANCAN.
[1:03:39] These two organizations made our journey and is helping others make their journey just
[1:03:45] a little bit easier.
[1:03:47] year. Presenting with me is an exceptional caregiver who would like to share her experience
[1:03:52] also. Good morning. Good morning. My name's Josario Cardenas and my husband, David Sanjay
[1:04:02] Jr., was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, stage three pancreatic cancer in April 12th
[1:04:09] of 2023.
[1:04:13] My David was a healthy person. He ate well. He would go to the gym. He enjoyed
[1:04:20] running and would never skip his annual physical. It was after his 2022 physical result that
[1:04:29] he said the results are not correct because my stomach is still not well. He went back
[1:04:36] to his doctor and went through several other exams and all his exams would come back normal.
[1:04:46] It was then when his doctor told him, there is just one last exam to do, but you are young,
[1:04:51] healthy and there is no cancer history in your family. Then it was that exam that came
[1:04:58] back with a normal result. The doctor told my David, you need a biopsy, but I have to
[1:05:05] I refer you to a doctor in San Antonio as Laredo does not have a doctor that can perform
[1:05:10] this procedure.
[1:05:12] And this is when my David's cancer journey began.
[1:05:15] Two different types of chemotherapy, 14 rounds of chemo, and 10 sessions of radiation.
[1:05:23] And in December 2023, doctor tells my David the medicine is not working and I don't have
[1:05:29] anything else to give you.
[1:05:31] This is when my David was referred to a trial treatment doctor.
[1:05:35] On January, January 2024, my David began his trial treatment,
[1:05:40] but like the doctor told us, this is an experimental medicine
[1:05:43] and we do not know if it will work.
[1:05:47] My David did everything his doctors told him.
[1:05:50] He did all the treatments, took all the medications,
[1:05:53] but his body was not able to beat this horrible monster.
[1:05:57] On February 4th, 2024, my David went back to heaven.
[1:06:03] It was 10 months of traveling back and forth from Laredo to San Antonio.
[1:06:08] We would drive up to San Antonio on Tuesday afternoon because we had to visit with the doctor on Wednesday morning before going to the second floor to get treatment.
[1:06:18] treatment. Every two weeks we had to get a hotel for three days because after a Wednesday
[1:06:25] chemo treatment, my David had to take a medicine machine home for 48 hours, then go back to
[1:06:31] the cancer center on Friday to have medicine machine removed. We did this for about four
[1:06:38] months then my David tells me that his friend has a house in San Antonio and has offered
[1:06:44] to stay at his house while he's going through his treatments. We saw this as a huge blessing
[1:06:50] because after five months of treatments, traveling got difficult for my David and we were basically
[1:06:56] now living in San Antonio. We were blessed to have somewhere to stay in San Antonio but
[1:07:02] many other patients and families do not have what we had. Cancer patients should not
[1:07:08] not be worried about how to pay for gas, hotel and meals. Their priority is to be there
[1:07:14] for every doctor visit, every single chemo treatment and give it their all to beat the
[1:07:19] cancer in their body. This is where Pankin comes and this is why it is so important
[1:07:25] to donate. Pankin provides patients with gas cards and hotel stays. So many people
[1:07:31] are going through cancer and have to travel for treatment like we did because our city
[1:07:37] does not have the doctor or type of treatment that patients require. Please donate and spread
[1:07:43] the word to your friends and family and even to your bosses so they can become part of this cause.
[1:07:51] I want to say thank you to all our family and friends for being there for us when my David was
[1:07:55] going through his treatments, for calling, texting and showing up to check on us. And to Miguel
[1:08:01] Stone Salads, thank you so much for offering your beautiful home to us. Cancer sucks and
[1:08:08] we have to help in any way we can, so please donate and join the cause.
[1:08:14] Very sorry and thank you for your strength right now to be able to do that, what you
[1:08:19] just did. Thank you.
[1:08:22] If you could all just come on up that everybody that's here, I'm going to go ahead and
[1:08:26] read the proclamation if you don't mind.
[1:08:27] Oh no, go ahead.
[1:08:29] Whereas in 2025 an estimated 67,440 people will be diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in
[1:08:36] the United States and 50,550 people will die from the disease.
[1:08:41] Whereas pancreatic cancer is the third leading cause of cancer death in the United States
[1:08:46] and it is projected to become the second leading cause before 2030.
[1:08:51] Whereas pancreatic cancer is the only major cancer with a five year relative survival
[1:08:56] rate or at just 13 percent. And whereas these symptoms of pancreatic cancer present themselves,
[1:09:04] it is generally late stage with the average patient living for about one year after diagnosis,
[1:09:09] while only 10 percent of patients with an early diagnosis become disease free from treatment.
[1:09:15] And whereas pancreatic cancer is the fourth most common cause of cancer, the death in women
[1:09:21] and men across the world.
[1:09:23] And whereas disparities by race and socioeconomic status exist in the diagnosis of treatment
[1:09:31] of pancreatic cancer and prove understanding of underlying causes could inform interventions.
[1:09:38] And whereas the good health and well-being of the residents of Laredo are enhanced as
[1:09:42] a direct result of increased awareness about pancreatic cancer and research into early
[1:09:48] detection cause of effective treatments.
[1:09:50] Now, therefore, I don't think it's enough by virtue of the authority vested in me by
[1:09:53] the State of Texas Web County Judge and on behalf of the Web County Commissioners Court,
[1:09:57] I hereby proclaim the month of November 2025 as pancreatic cancer awareness month and November
[1:10:02] 20, 2025 as pancreatic cancer awareness day.
[1:10:07] Thank you and congratulations.
[1:10:09] Thank you.
[1:10:10] Judge, if I may ask some questions, please, I've had some friends that have died from
[1:10:15] that.
[1:10:15] And from what I understood, there's, again, early detection,
[1:10:18] there's several forms that are treatable.
[1:10:21] And there's one, is it non lymphoma or lymphoma,
[1:10:24] one that I guess is not treatable?
[1:10:26] It's because there's different cancers.
[1:10:28] Right now, pancreatic cancer, there's no testing.
[1:10:31] So we encourage, there's no testing to detect it.
[1:10:34] So that's why we encourage people to, you know,
[1:10:38] get their yearly physicals,
[1:10:39] get the exams that are out there available.
[1:10:41] Right now is breast cancer awareness month.
[1:10:43] there's mammograms. There's no testing, what can we do. That's why you have to
[1:10:49] get your yearly physicals, but don't just go get a physical where the doctor
[1:10:52] asks you, how do you feel? And you say, I'm doing good, so he signs off and you're
[1:10:57] great. You need to ask for complete blood work. Get your scans, get whatever a
[1:11:03] complete physical is pain for.
[1:11:08] Again, you know, I'm concerned. I go to
[1:11:11] Oncology, I have complete blood work several times a year and I get elevated, high blood
[1:11:18] cells, high red and white, so what can I do to look?
[1:11:24] The best thing is that you know your body.
[1:11:27] So if you're not comfortable, as Rosario is saying, you can ask for another specialist.
[1:11:33] Unfortunately, we are medically underserved here in Areto.
[1:11:36] I would commute to San Antonio and get another, a second opinion.
[1:11:41] You have that right in San Antonio. That's why I'm asking well in San Antonio. There's no test specifically for that
[1:11:47] How do you how do you figure it out? Well at what point do they figure it out? Well, unfortunately sometimes it's it's at a very late stage
[1:11:54] That's why it's very crucial like you're doing the only by biopsy or what? Yes
[1:11:59] That's that's what can give you the actual
[1:12:03] diagnosis and
[1:12:04] That's why we we urge everyone eat healthy
[1:12:11] But, you see, you're the lucky one.
[1:12:13] You can communicate to San Antonio.
[1:12:15] We have so many families here on the rails that they can't.
[1:12:18] And if I may, I think, Judge, I think what makes this yearly proclamation important is
[1:12:25] that for the people that do get a positive hit on their biopsy or in any of the labs
[1:12:35] that they take, I think families are clueless when it comes to care.
[1:12:40] And I think these support groups have helped our community because it will point them to
[1:12:46] the right direction.
[1:12:48] There are some aggressive processes that families can't take.
[1:12:54] But I guess the feeling of feeling useless or not, you know, clueless within the process,
[1:13:05] I think these support groups do a tremendous work for our community.
[1:13:09] so I want to thank you Ms. Vela and your group for always, you know, informing the public
[1:13:16] and at least utilizing your time to go ahead and point them at the right direction.
[1:13:21] Laredo has an amazing, amazing group of volunteers. Our leader is here, Ms. Nyanyas. I don't
[1:13:27] know how she does it. I do a very small part, but she has a really good group and
[1:13:33] everybody does 110 things. Luckily, we have people like Commissioner Hyman's that support
[1:13:40] us 110%. And still, we run into people that have never heard of American Cancer Society,
[1:13:47] that receive the diagnosis and don't know what to do. I mean, I hope you're never at
[1:13:54] that point, but just hearing the word cancer, believe me, it throws you back. You don't
[1:13:59] what to do at that moment. But there is help. There is help and we want the
[1:14:04] community to know that there is help. There's a 1-800 number that you can call
[1:14:07] 24 hours a day, seven days a week, even on holidays. And there is someone at the
[1:14:12] other end. We, my family, we were fortunate enough to know and we called
[1:14:16] and they were with us every step of the way. And thanks to them, we were
[1:14:20] introduced to another program which is called Pancan that helped us
[1:14:24] throughout our journey, making it just a little bit more bearable. But it is
[1:14:29] very hard. So that's why we need your help to inform the community. I know there
[1:14:33] was beautiful purple pins at the entrance. If you took one, please take the
[1:14:37] initiative to every day remind someone. Just ask them, when was your last
[1:14:40] screening? Do you know that there's an organization out there that can
[1:14:45] help? I always tell everyone write the number on your phone as a friend that
[1:14:49] I hope you never have to call, but if you do believe me that friend will
[1:14:53] be there now locally is there someone you can donate or unfortunately no
[1:15:00] We're all volunteers. Okay, so there's nothing, there's no group here that helps with transportation
[1:15:05] or anything. I know that there's people that had got certified because there's a program
[1:15:09] through American Cancer, but since no one uses it. The Ronald McDonald House? We don't
[1:15:16] have a Ronald McDonald House here. Well, I know in San Antonio. There's some in San
[1:15:20] Antonio. Do they accommodate? Yes, if you call American Cancer Society, they just
[1:15:28] started a hope launch there in San Antonio, it's part of American Cancer Society, but if
[1:15:33] you call the 1-800 number and tell them that you need transportation, they will guide you
[1:15:36] on how to obtain transportation, whether it's purchasing a bus ticket for you or hopefully
[1:15:41] there's someone here that's already trained on how to provide the services to either
[1:15:46] San Antonio or Houston, Dallas.
[1:15:47] I'll put out a new run out of funds as well, though.
[1:15:49] I'm sorry?
[1:15:50] They do run out of funds.
[1:15:51] I know.
[1:15:52] They run out of funds as well.
[1:15:53] That is the sad part.
[1:15:56] Okay, well very well, thank you all very much. Would y'all like a picture? Yes, please? Yes. We need to brag.
[1:16:01] Let's stay back here. That way, everybody can fit.
[1:16:15] Can I share the number? Please. It's 1-800-227-2345.
[1:16:23] Again, 1-800-227-2345. Very good. Thank you. Hope you never need it. Hope you never need it, but if not, it's there.
[1:17:15] There's still a couple more coming for the pick.
[1:17:18] You're fine.
[1:17:20] Yes.
[1:17:57] Thank you all very much.
[1:17:58] God bless you.
[1:17:59] Thank you.
[1:17:59] God bless you all.
[1:18:00] Thank you.
[1:18:01] Good to see you.
[1:18:01] Good to see you.
[1:18:01] Good to see you.
[1:18:02] Thank you.
[1:18:09] Do you do what you want to do?
[1:18:11] Yes.
[1:18:11] Like what I am doing.
[1:18:13] We do.
[1:18:14] We do.
[1:18:14] Yes, we do.
[1:18:16] I do too.
[1:18:18] Yeah.
[1:18:20] But it is scary. There's no test.
[1:18:22] Oh, that's a thing. There is no test.
[1:18:26] All
[1:18:29] right, let's move on to item number 18.
[1:18:33] Discussing the possible action to approve change order 001.
[1:18:37] In the amounts of $70,738.48,
[1:18:41] as a credit for a stoddard general contractor
[1:18:45] for the Webb County Dean Senator Judith Zafferini Justice Center Building
[1:18:55] motion seconds any opposed wait wait hold on then I do have a question yes I
[1:19:00] understand he's saying so are they going to use something that they already had or
[1:19:06] what morning I get them away for the record they're just substituting from
[1:19:11] one vendor to another vendor and $70,000 less correct okay all right motion
[1:19:18] motion second. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Item 19 discuss an
[1:19:24] impossible action to approve the use of a contingency allowance as stipulated
[1:19:29] under four three allowances under the construction agreement between Webb
[1:19:32] County and Midas contractors LLC in the amount not to exceed $29,605.
[1:19:38] Motion second. Any opposed? I mean I'm sorry question. The $29,000 is just for the
[1:19:44] redesign or that's including construction? No just for the redesign.
[1:19:47] So that's just for architectural fees to say, I need a architectural engineering fees just to redesign to design the parking lot for the meals on wheels.
[1:19:58] The whole parking lot is just the one, the handicapped section. No, no, it's an additional parking of spaces.
[1:20:05] Oh, okay.
[1:20:08] So we're doing a $300,000 parking lot.
[1:20:12] No, it's going to be a little bit less, but it will be more than 200.
[1:20:20] That's usually a ballpark figure, but yeah, I'm not too sure what price they're going to come up with.
[1:20:25] Let me ask you how many parking spots are you putting on?
[1:20:28] I believe he has scheduled about 10 parking spaces.
[1:20:32] 10 parking spots with $300,000?
[1:20:34] No, it's not $300,000. We don't have the exact number yet.
[1:20:37] No, but that's what Commissioner Gay-Losane, for $30,000, 10% contingency, that's $300,000,
[1:20:45] and we're only getting 10 parking spots?
[1:20:46] No, sir.
[1:20:47] No way.
[1:20:47] How much was it?
[1:20:48] Good morning.
[1:20:49] You have the walls for the record, CAA director.
[1:20:52] We've been talking to the architect, we do have contingency funds available right now.
[1:20:59] About 209,502 is what we have available, minus this 29,605 gives us a balance of $179,000.
[1:21:07] Let's not talk about, I appreciate you bringing up the money, we'll bring it up in a second.
[1:21:10] My question again, still, I'm still asking, how many parking spots are we getting for
[1:21:16] this amount of money?
[1:21:16] So it would be directly behind the building, 20, in that straight line directly behind
[1:21:23] the building, and out to the side, there's a return to, we're going to try to get
[1:21:29] nine.
[1:21:29] But I'm saying, so how did the architect come up with this price?
[1:21:31] How did the architect, he came up with just an estimate of what it would cost him to build
[1:21:39] what is possible 20 parking spaces.
[1:21:42] I know we were excited about parking lots but this is getting a little too excited about
[1:21:46] this.
[1:21:46] So $10,000 a parking spot?
[1:21:49] Well he's telling you, the architect is telling you it's going to cost $300,000.
[1:21:54] He is estimating but he still won't know until he gets an actual cost from the contractor.
[1:21:59] But he wants to charge you $29,000.
[1:22:01] Yes. That's an estimate to do. The design work is $29,000, but the actual cost for construction
[1:22:07] won't come in until the contract.
[1:22:08] Okay, and you only have $209,000.
[1:22:11] Correct.
[1:22:12] And now you'll have a little bit less because of it.
[1:22:15] You'll have $180,000.
[1:22:17] So it's still-
[1:22:18] Mr. Cuellar, are these ARPA monies?
[1:22:21] These are ARPA monies.
[1:22:22] And so I have a question. If the price comes up higher, then how are we planning
[1:22:28] to fund this?
[1:22:29] If the price comes higher, then we would have to reduce the scope for the parking.
[1:22:34] So right now he's going to come up with a design, if the contractor says it's going to be too much, then he would have to cut back the scope.
[1:22:43] You're going to go from 20, okay, you're going to cut back, so you're going to get 15 maybe.
[1:22:47] It's still an enormous amount of money.
[1:22:51] The parking lot is going to cost you that much.
[1:22:53] $10,000 for a parking spot. Listen to what we're talking about.
[1:22:58] Estimate, yes. But the exact number we want to know.
[1:23:00] I just can't. I can't.
[1:23:02] Judge, if I may, before we even started looking into this project, I talked to Midas and asked
[1:23:07] for an estimate how much would it cost to build 20 parking spots directly behind the building.
[1:23:12] He came back with 89,500 for 20 spots.
[1:23:16] Okay, then. So why are we giving the architect 29,000?
[1:23:20] The architect is basing it off of the remaining funds.
[1:23:23] Again, off what?
[1:23:25] of the remaining available funds to get a new architect in so he's just saying
[1:23:32] well you got money I need it yeah and and still like again he's they're
[1:23:38] estimating but don't you do that didn't you do that estimating yes and we can do
[1:23:42] that and you can't do the drawings we could but there's some surveying that's
[1:23:47] involved with this particular area of work we don't have the surveying it's
[1:23:50] open land no there's some areas where you can have to build and you
[1:23:56] That's another thing, there's a retaining wall that the engineers are going to have to create.
[1:24:02] There's no wall there.
[1:24:03] There's a slope in the back where they're proposing the parking space.
[1:24:08] So they're going to have to do a retaining wall to elevate the water from eroding.
[1:24:13] I'm not an engineer, but I did stay at the Holiday Inn Express last night and I guarantee you it doesn't cost $10,000 a spot.
[1:24:19] There's no way.
[1:24:20] I know Mr. Walls, you and I have spoken about this.
[1:24:23] I'm 100% for the parking spot, but not for this amount of money.
[1:24:27] How did we come up with this engineer or contractor?
[1:24:34] We had a deadline, right, last year in December for the appropriations of the any ARPA monies?
[1:24:41] Yes, but this is a contingency fund, so it wouldn't increase anything.
[1:24:45] So these are ARPA funds?
[1:24:47] Yes, correct.
[1:24:48] But again, going back to Commissioner Hernandez, let's just say it does come out of $300,000.
[1:24:52] And then what are you going to do?
[1:24:54] I would reduce the scope of the parking
[1:24:57] and reduce the amount of parking spaces.
[1:24:58] And so when we assigned these architects
[1:25:04] and didn't we have a budget to go ahead and, you know,
[1:25:07] let's say if they came in overpriced,
[1:25:08] we could go ahead and go on to the next.
[1:25:12] Not on this one.
[1:25:13] The contractor is already awarded, right?
[1:25:15] And he has continuity funds that we haven't used yet.
[1:25:19] So we figured that we can use it in parking.
[1:25:21] right so he gave an estimate of based off what's available on what he thinks but
[1:25:28] he still needs to design it and still come up the contractor still needs to
[1:25:32] give a good number of what it's going to be based off his design because this is
[1:25:38] why I guess it's baffling me because Mr. Walls and I I'm a hundred percent for
[1:25:43] this project it's actually very easy there's a curve right there what they're
[1:25:47] going to do is they're going to cut a little bit into and the retaining wall
[1:25:51] I don't see how it's that close, but that's fine. You want to call it the retaining wall
[1:25:56] No, it's already has a retaining wall right
[1:26:02] So they're gonna build what you're making a retaining wall for if it's a parking lot so that the water doesn't come correct
[1:26:08] It will you have tires. You're not gonna get wet. I mean it doesn't make every thing there. They're off site to keep the off-site erosion
[1:26:16] Yeah, correct. I mean
[1:26:18] Nathan, what else can we do here? Can we go those contingency funds used for a separate bid or can we do with Midas a design build on this thing?
[1:26:30] So we don't cut this. Let him get an architect and give us a package price.
[1:26:39] You cannot you cannot go to a design build because you already have one contract and you've got the funds encumbered in that contract and it's inside the construction contract.
[1:26:51] What you can do, what you can do is you can find another architect and use the same methodology
[1:27:00] that they're using to take those contingency funds out of the construction contract for
[1:27:06] another architect.
[1:27:07] You could do that.
[1:27:08] Well, let me ask you this.
[1:27:09] Okay.
[1:27:10] Or like you suggested earlier, you can have the thing designed in-house.
[1:27:14] Well, I mean, that's an option, but the other option is these are contingency funds,
[1:27:18] right? They're going to be left over. We take them out of that project and create a new project.
[1:27:23] You can't because I think once the commitment was made to use all the ARPA funds and commit
[1:27:29] them, that happened in December of last year. We can always use those funds anywhere in
[1:27:35] the ARPA stuff. I don't think we can. I think they have to stay within each project.
[1:27:43] So because they're ARPA funds, we have to just say yes to $300,000?
[1:27:48] No, no you don't.
[1:27:49] You don't have to use it.
[1:27:50] You can do a bunch of different things.
[1:27:53] They can be used somewhere else in ARPA, and even non-ARPA.
[1:27:57] That I would have to defer to Mr. Palacios with.
[1:28:01] Again, I'm tired of being taken advantage of by these architects.
[1:28:07] That's $29,000 to do 20 spaces.
[1:28:11] Pretty much. And that includes also engineering, architectural engineering firm.
[1:28:15] One other thing that I'm curious about is why you're using an architect to design a parking lot when that's usually the...
[1:28:24] Civil?
[1:28:25] Civil engineer.
[1:28:26] He hires a civil since he's a prime civil engineer.
[1:28:29] Just be the other way around. We need the civil. And if he needs an architect, then I'm fine.
[1:28:33] But George did all the parking lot at the thing. He didn't hire an architect.
[1:28:36] Well, he's, I think, looking at topside also to be the sub for him, to do the parking
[1:28:43] area in that facility.
[1:28:45] Why not let Midas use topside by himself, or whoever?
[1:28:50] Can't you just ask Midas for, give me a design and build, I mean, and a bid?
[1:28:56] It seems, well, seems that we're going to come in over budget, right?
[1:29:03] Well, we're under budget now.
[1:29:04] We're under budget, I'm sorry.
[1:29:06] We're within budget, I guess, right now.
[1:29:07] But we have friends or under budget. No, we're then we're within budget. So everything is good on this project
[1:29:14] We just have some contingency funds that have not been used and we're trying to use them in some needed
[1:29:20] Project, which would be additional. Let's go to if if I'm you can
[1:29:24] Nathan, let's just go to Midas and say give us a proposal
[1:29:30] And let him get an engineer
[1:29:32] We need a proposal for an engineered parking lot. Here's the 20-speed you're going to come out with $209,000 you watch
[1:29:41] Okay, we can do that. All right
[1:29:44] Do we table?
[1:29:47] Well, that would be no action. We could just bring it back. But is that all right Nathan? I
[1:29:53] Need to look at that
[1:29:54] Motion to table
[1:29:58] Motion next next meeting
[1:30:00] Label.
[1:30:11] Discuss an impossible action to enter into a demolition agreement with Midas contractors
[1:30:15] LLC for the demolition of improvements on county owned real property located at 918.
[1:30:20] Motion to approve touch. And 920 Houston Street. Motion second. Any opposed?
[1:30:27] This will be awarded, we've already. Yes, we've got you and everything. Thank you.
[1:30:35] Pre-chall
[1:30:35] services. Discuss an impossible action to approve the 2025-2026 formula grant indigent
[1:30:42] Defence Resolution and do authorize a Webb County judge to sign all relevant
[1:30:46] Opportunity to approve for a minute. Yeah, he left motion second. Any opposed?
[1:30:52] Any opposed?
[1:30:54] Motion carries very good
[1:30:57] item
[1:30:59] 22
[1:31:01] Discussing this purchasing discussion impossible action to accept the rankings in the award
[1:31:06] Uh, 20 25 dash if y'all could just wait on the motions, please on this one
[1:31:10] Web County GPS tracking devices and high-ranking respond respondent
[1:31:16] Acquitting total security LLC
[1:31:19] Judge I'm gonna I'm gonna go ahead and move a motion. I
[1:31:23] I've already got into this extensively the only the only one that is from Laredo is monarch trucking and
[1:31:31] Monarch trucking tracking. I'm sorry monarch tracking and
[1:31:34] They they're the only ones here locally if we're gonna do this in-house
[1:31:38] I think there needs to be somewhere. We could just take them in and out. They're
[1:31:43] Absolutely incredible. We all haven't seen what they could do. It actually comes out a little cheaper like about 51 cents cheaper
[1:31:52] Is that correct Joe 51 cents cheaper than the highest one the thing about it is that also
[1:31:58] Monarch
[1:31:59] tracking also has three levels that we could go into I think the base levels
[1:32:04] was 1999.
[1:32:07] And then it goes all the way up to like $26. Is that correct, Joe? I think
[1:32:10] I remember looking at it.
[1:32:14] Judge, and I was just looking at this and those re-ranking, I mean, looking at-
[1:32:19] But they're not from the only ones?
[1:32:21] No, I understand. And, you know, I usually like to give the locals a chance. But what
[1:32:26] I'm concerned about is the reoccurring subscription. Because the one-time fee is no, you know,
[1:32:33] is not the problem. It's what you're going to pay annually. Now, you have a rank here,
[1:32:37] but we don't have access to those reoccurring fees. And it may be 50 cents could be 25 cents
[1:32:43] could be a dollar. But I noticed you have forward thinking systems is ranked on a clamp
[1:32:50] wireless or column is 19. You got 19 out of 20 points forward got 17. Then 18 mobility
[1:33:00] and who else? And Katie in total. So I just wanted to know if you have the documents there,
[1:33:07] what's the difference in the reoccurring fee? Because that's what we're going to pay every year,
[1:33:10] and it's $20,000, $30,000, $100,000 difference.
[1:33:15] Judge and commissioners, good morning. Joe Lopez for the record purchasing agent.
[1:33:19] Commissioner, on that, I would need more time to come back and give more detail on the pricing.
[1:33:25] But on the judge's note, aside from Monarch being locally, they did provide in their proposal
[1:33:31] a fixed fee.
[1:33:32] And I think the base rate there was right under $20.
[1:33:36] Yeah, but you gave them a fourth point.
[1:33:38] Not you, but the scoring committee gave them a 14 out of 20.
[1:33:44] Yeah.
[1:33:44] And a 25 on that.
[1:33:45] Right.
[1:33:45] And the wages go anywhere from $20 all the way to $100, depending on the packages.
[1:33:51] But on your point, Commissioner, I think that's a good point.
[1:33:55] one of the concerns I have, too, that when we start getting to the terms and the quantities
[1:33:59] and all that, and all those other factors, but I will tell you, Monarch is providing
[1:34:03] a fixed rate.
[1:34:04] I read, well, again, but is somebody else giving a fixed rate, a cheaper fixed rate?
[1:34:10] But if you want more of an analysis, I'll be happy to come back, but I think we need
[1:34:14] it.
[1:34:14] I think.
[1:34:15] And again, the scoring system, I don't understand.
[1:34:18] So you have price-per-unit recurring fees and stuff and a total of 25 points,
[1:34:24] yet the highest person only gets a 19.
[1:34:29] We have an evaluation committee?
[1:34:32] I understand, but I think there needs to be some review of that evaluation
[1:34:37] and how you're instructing them to or whoever is on how they're instructing
[1:34:41] because you would think the person that has the best is going to get the most points
[1:34:46] and then down.
[1:34:48] But if you're still the best and you don't even get the top number of points, it makes
[1:34:54] me suspicious.
[1:34:55] If I may judge, I agree with the judge.
[1:35:00] I think that there has to be something that separates local vendors from out-of-town vendors.
[1:35:09] I think in general, I think there's an added value there because we're keeping
[1:35:14] in Web County tax dollars here in Web County, and I guess the item here specifically, it
[1:35:22] refers to possibly 777 moving county vehicles. I think there has to be a relevance between
[1:35:32] having a local person that could go ahead and attend to any of the issues because
[1:35:37] if I was informed correctly, I think that the system is not just a GPS system, but it
[1:35:45] comes with the ability to go ahead and monitor the speed of the vehicles, the routes that
[1:35:51] they're taking. And when we're seeing, I guess on occasion, a high number of vehicles
[1:35:59] and settlements that we're agreeing to, I think it's going to make driving here
[1:36:06] and Web County safer because now we're monitoring and keeping accountability to the driver and
[1:36:13] we're giving that public assurance that they're not deviating from work that they should be
[1:36:20] doing or spending time or et cetera, right? But monitoring the speed is, to me, I guess,
[1:36:28] the interest in this investment. So I'll go ahead and second the judge's motion on
[1:36:33] and re-ranking Monarch tracking to number one.
[1:36:37] Well, again, I have no problem with GPS.
[1:36:41] I think we've talked about this sometimes,
[1:36:44] but, and I have, we usually, like I said,
[1:36:48] we've done it before, it's acceptable to do within 10%
[1:36:53] for local, I think that's a good number.
[1:36:57] But I don't know, is it 10%?
[1:36:59] Is it 20%?
[1:37:01] Well, it doesn't tell us let me ask you so we move the motion right now all we're
[1:37:05] going to do is go into a contract like we're going to try to get into a contract
[1:37:10] agreement is that correct if I may it doesn't work out then we could bring
[1:37:16] this back if I may add to that this delivery method that was used we still
[1:37:21] have to have the authority to request best and final offer to negotiate we
[1:37:25] still have to approve the contract and everything so yes we don't like it we
[1:37:29] We can go ahead and cancel it out.
[1:37:30] We can return with those details prior to executing the contract.
[1:37:34] Well, I mean, what I would like is the details to say, you know, all right, you know, maybe
[1:37:38] the one negotiating point would be, hey, your reoccurring fee, can you, can you come down
[1:37:43] a dollar?
[1:37:44] You know, whatever.
[1:37:45] That's even, we would have been number one.
[1:37:47] Yeah.
[1:37:48] So, so if you're going to rank monarch one, who's two?
[1:37:52] You might as well do one, two and three.
[1:37:54] or then I'll just leave it out to Katie and Calabra.
[1:37:58] And I will, for the public,
[1:38:00] in my 11 years that I have been County Judge,
[1:38:02] I think this is like probably my third time
[1:38:05] that I've ever re-ranked the proposal.
[1:38:09] I just, I know this,
[1:38:13] well, it's not even the individual.
[1:38:14] It's what he's done, a company.
[1:38:16] I mean, it's all over the,
[1:38:17] I mean, he's putting commercials out.
[1:38:19] It's really, really impressive and incredible.
[1:38:21] And more than anything beyond that,
[1:38:22] I think what's more impressive is that or what we really need is that we could be here locally
[1:38:27] They don't have to be responsible to be taking response time. We don't have to be taking our vehicles, too
[1:38:33] I don't know where I don't even know where I
[1:38:37] Cadian total. I don't know they're gonna be coming all the time
[1:38:40] They're gonna be charging us every time they come down
[1:38:42] These are the kind of questions that are really big and that's what starts help. That's what starts hurting us after a while
[1:38:48] So and that should have been taken into the ranking that should have been taken consideration
[1:38:52] That's why I'm very rare, like I said, on 11 years, this might be my third time ever
[1:38:56] doing this.
[1:38:58] And so...
[1:38:58] I know, Commissioner, I came up with a list of 772 vehicles or something that Newen County,
[1:39:06] which to me seems crazy, because that's one for every two people that we have in their
[1:39:09] employment.
[1:39:10] And I will say that if we do, when we bring this back and we finalize the contract,
[1:39:16] I will be stipulating this for everybody to know.
[1:39:19] this is for every vehicle of the county owns anything that's under the
[1:39:25] insurance of the county this will be for every vehicle there's not going to be
[1:39:29] any exceptions because I'm already hearing that oh I don't want this vehicle
[1:39:32] out no no no no it's not the way it works it's for every vehicle this is
[1:39:36] going to cover our bases all the way through we're going to make this kind
[1:39:38] of expense we're going to cover every vehicle yes sir very well but if you
[1:39:44] could get us those numbers, I mean, just to, I can say, if it 25 cents, 50 cents, you know,
[1:39:51] it's not a big deal. But if it's a couple of dollars, I mean, they need to know to be
[1:39:55] able to negotiate.
[1:39:56] Yes, sir. We'll bring that back prior to the court finalizing the execution of the contract.
[1:40:02] Give it to whoever's negotiating with Nathan or whoever. He needs those numbers.
[1:40:05] He needs all those numbers.
[1:40:06] I'll work with legal on this. Yes, sir.
[1:40:08] Very good. I have a motion. I have a second. Any other questions, comments?
[1:40:10] This is to put monarch tracking first and then Acadian total security LLC number two, and then obviously
[1:40:18] Yeah, and on the order other than monarch. I have a motion. I have a second. Any questions comments? Any opposed
[1:40:25] Motion carries if you all do not would not mind I
[1:40:29] Don't know how it works when it's table to stable. They have to bring the table back
[1:40:32] Yeah, we it's table time certain table time time certain time sensitive or time certain how we get them both time certain
[1:40:42] because okay I just got a text right now basically saying that what we just
[1:40:47] tabled it says that October 2025 no counties are exempt from this mandate
[1:40:52] mandate but it's not until 2026 25 that's what I just got so if somebody
[1:41:00] one of the my legal minds could look into this please as soon as possible
[1:41:05] before the meetings over you text okay because I would not want to be in a
[1:41:08] situation where we're going to be thinking it's 2026 and it's 2025 of October. So this
[1:41:13] will be the last meeting of October. So please look into that. All right, let's move on.
[1:41:19] Item 23 and 28, House 22. This would be 23 risk management discussing the possible action
[1:41:29] to renew the Webb County Stop Loss Assumptions and Caveats Agreement of the Aetna and selecting
[1:41:35] in renewal option 1 for the performance period of January 1st, 2026, December 31st, 2026 as
[1:41:41] recommended by Webb County's insurance consultant in authorizing the Webb County Civil Legal
[1:41:46] Division to review the renewal agreements.
[1:41:48] Hi.
[1:41:49] Hi, good morning.
[1:41:50] You should have saved me.
[1:41:53] We don't even have a hospital consultant, do we?
[1:41:58] I mean, the legal consultant.
[1:41:59] We have our consultant here and...
[1:42:02] No, I don't know.
[1:42:03] But I'm saying the legal...
[1:42:04] legal consultant because it says having legal review what are they going to
[1:42:08] review if they don't you don't deal with with health care every day right you
[1:42:13] don't know what you're leaving out come on up you're good come on up good
[1:42:17] morning morning how is everybody today well so far so good yeah it's been fun
[1:42:27] all right let's go ahead hub international for the record excuse me
[1:42:31] Elizabeth with hub international very good miss Liz
[1:42:35] Go ahead and I guess any questions on this
[1:42:39] So we don't even know what that we are
[1:42:42] Introducing the stop loss the consultative is recommending to increase the stop loss as it was approved previously by commissures court from 225 to 250
[1:42:52] Etna was able to reduce their premium from 24 percent to a
[1:42:57] 15.8
[1:42:59] So it is within a budget and we just need the court to approve renewal option 1.
[1:43:06] So it went from 20 to 50?
[1:43:09] No, from 225 to 250.
[1:43:12] 250,000.
[1:43:13] Very well, motion to approve.
[1:43:17] I'll second it.
[1:43:18] Motion seconds.
[1:43:18] Any opposed?
[1:43:20] Motion carries.
[1:43:21] Thank you.
[1:43:22] Appreciate it, Joe.
[1:43:24] Water utilities discussion of possible actions to proceed with task number 1.
[1:43:28] scope of work will include consultant focusing on personnel and resources to
[1:43:33] assistant county staff and technician operational maintenance design concerns
[1:43:37] and as well as preparation for the county commissioners court
[1:43:41] presentation on task number two scope well you are doing good morning
[1:43:51] any Georgian commissioners.
[1:43:54] Cabe, let's work with utilities.
[1:43:58] Come on up.
[1:44:00] Good morning, Georgian commissioners.
[1:44:03] So, task number one is going to be staff augmentation,
[1:44:06] on-call services, technical support,
[1:44:08] and operational support to the plant staff.
[1:44:12] And task number two is going to encounter updating the SOPs
[1:44:16] from A through Z at the plant to make sure that we're,
[1:44:18] you know, more efficient and that we're compliant
[1:44:20] with everything per GCEQs.
[1:44:25] What's the time line on so the task number one is on call. It's time of material so we're
[1:44:31] not even you know as much as they need us will be there so that's for the duration you
[1:44:36] know till we take over the funds. Task number two we we're looking at wrapping it up by
[1:44:41] February of next year. We'll take the first two months to assess the plants operationally
[1:44:48] Make some quick adjustments. I know our biggest issues are DBPs at the plants
[1:44:52] So we're going to tackle that first and and by the quarter the first quarter of next year
[1:44:56] We should have a resolution for that and and bring it down
[1:45:00] I guess in plain English. In the next four months we'll have the SOPs updated.
[1:45:06] All right. And then let me ask, have the sludge pits been taken care of?
[1:45:10] What?
[1:45:10] The sludge pits have they been taken care of?
[1:45:13] No, commissioner.
[1:45:16] Oh, what's the problem?
[1:45:17] Well, I spoke with Mr. Quayer and this week we will have the meeting for the notice to
[1:45:30] proceed.
[1:45:31] What?
[1:45:32] The notice to proceed.
[1:45:35] Now are you aware of what we're doing there?
[1:45:37] Yes.
[1:45:38] So ideally at the plan you'll need a solid handling facility, a solid handling facility
[1:45:44] And that would be a press to basically dewater all the solids that will be produced from the water plant.
[1:45:51] And then just haul them off instead of having them sitting at the drying bed.
[1:45:56] So there's some improvements related to the recycle system to the solids handling coming up at the water plant.
[1:46:02] If I may touch.
[1:46:03] Yes, please.
[1:46:06] Can you include in your assessment, I guess, a plan so we won't have to contract out for
[1:46:12] the sludge that we did, and that way we could.
[1:46:16] That's what he just said, right?
[1:46:17] Yeah.
[1:46:18] They're going to put in a press machine.
[1:46:19] Yeah, a press machine, and then it'll be much easier to transport that to, you don't
[1:46:23] have to dredge or anything.
[1:46:24] You just transport dry sludge like you do for wastewater to the landfill, I think
[1:46:30] essentially.
[1:46:31] Yeah, because, like I said, this is...
[1:46:33] Yeah, it was a little expensive.
[1:46:35] Well, not only expensive.
[1:46:36] I mean, what bugs me is that, you know, that was one of the first things I did when I came in.
[1:46:42] We addressed that problem and we talked about, you know, how to prevent that from the future.
[1:46:48] You know, obviously, you know, yearly maintenance, vacuum trucks, you know, it was very simple.
[1:46:53] and then we I know there's a lot of transition between those these years that
[1:47:00] have passed but so we just don't want to have that happen again where we come you
[1:47:05] know five ten years down the road and saying all right now we got to drain the
[1:47:07] such bits and now it's a million dollars I mean it's crazy yeah and those
[1:47:11] things are designed to where you could get a tractor in there you know so I
[1:47:15] mean skid steer or whatever you know you drain the pond let it dry and you
[1:47:20] I mean, even if you haul it out of there, and like you said,
[1:47:24] but the press will help a lot.
[1:47:26] So it's going to be the press process will be in line then.
[1:47:30] So you'll never use a sledge bit.
[1:47:31] Correct.
[1:47:32] You'll eliminate sledge bit.
[1:47:33] All right.
[1:47:34] Very good.
[1:47:35] Appreciate it, Joe.
[1:47:36] So moved.
[1:47:37] Second.
[1:47:37] Any opposed?
[1:47:38] Motion carries.
[1:47:39] Now, I'll go on back onto the table.
[1:47:41] Thank you.
[1:47:42] I'd like to thank you all very much.
[1:47:44] I just got, so it's not till December 1st,
[1:47:48] I'm reading the bill right here.
[1:47:50] Okay, so we still have a little time.
[1:47:52] Thank you.
[1:47:55] Thank you.
[1:47:57] Thank you.
[1:47:57] I'm very good.
[1:47:59] So it's the 2026 December 1st.
[1:48:02] All right, water utilities, that was it.
[1:48:05] Commissioner's Court discussing the possible actions
[1:48:06] to enter into an architectural service agreement
[1:48:10] in B10-2017
[1:48:11] standard form
[1:48:13] of agreement between owner and architect
[1:48:14] with Stephen Land.
[1:48:17] to land to solicit architect PLC for plan specifications as mentioned
[1:48:23] contract construction administration services for the Web County Courthouse
[1:48:26] rehabilitation project and the amounts not to exceed six hundred eighty five
[1:48:32] thousand dollars all right morning let's hear it good morning
[1:48:36] you do judge commissioners doing well yourself judge this is it one of those
[1:48:42] Again, I have a little heartburn with, and you know, I know there's some inflation built
[1:48:48] into the price already, and what's even more concerning is we're waiting on grants.
[1:48:55] And so we don't know if we're going to get a grant, and so we're committing to a price
[1:49:02] without knowing we're going to get it.
[1:49:05] And so I don't know how we do it otherwise.
[1:49:08] Yeah, I'm sorry.
[1:49:09] I didn't mean to interrupt, Mr.
[1:49:10] No, I'm just saying.
[1:49:11] So there's got to be another way to skin this cat.
[1:49:13] How can we do it?
[1:49:16] Well, first of all, the work is really, truly needed.
[1:49:22] And I believe that the pricing that we're looking at now
[1:49:28] is the best ballpark we have at the moment
[1:49:30] before we get a contractor to take a look at it,
[1:49:35] how prices are and the supply and everything like that.
[1:49:38] So it's difficult to manage.
[1:49:40] But let me just say that the way that the grant works is that it's on a reimbursement
[1:49:46] basis.
[1:49:47] So you have to, the county would need to earmark or dedicate the fund, the full funding before
[1:49:58] you can actually be accepted.
[1:50:00] They need to know.
[1:50:01] It has to be 95, also 95% complete.
[1:50:04] Yes.
[1:50:05] And in order to be reimbursed by March of 2026, is that correct?
[1:50:09] No, it's only for the construction. The reimbursement is only for construction and only for architectural
[1:50:18] services insofar as it's during aiding the construction.
[1:50:23] Yeah, but the financial plans need to be submitted to the THC by the March 13, 2026.
[1:50:29] Yes, yes, the final 100% plans. So the big deadlines are first we can February for
[1:50:36] 95% and then the the first week in March for I'm sorry April for okay so
[1:50:44] a hundred percent what if this gets passed with this would these dates be
[1:50:49] any problems no where are you at right now with no no we're actually we're
[1:50:54] submitting a simple way we've been working on this project we want to keep
[1:50:58] it moving so we're submitting two weeks from today will be submitting us a
[1:51:02] of schematic design 100% that will be reviewed by the Historic Commission.
[1:51:08] 100%.
[1:51:09] That's that, well, the completion of schematic design because in addition to having to have
[1:51:17] the 95% and the 100% reviewed by the Historic Commission, they want to be able to see progress
[1:51:26] at least up to design development prior to that so that they can weigh in.
[1:51:34] So we have scheduled at this point an advanced schematic design project
[1:51:40] that really defines all of the work that needs to be done
[1:51:43] so that really the important things that they're going to be looking at,
[1:51:48] the character defining features, you know,
[1:51:52] they want to make sure that the design is headed in the right direction.
[1:51:56] They're not going to care, you know, how much in how many tons of air conditioning we're having to replace or things like that.
[1:52:04] They want to make sure that the historic fabric is being cared for.
[1:52:10] I guess for the public's sake and I'm going to act like I have no clue on what you're talking about, which some parts I do not.
[1:52:17] And so exactly we're going to pay almost $700,000 to refurbish the courthouse.
[1:52:24] or what exactly will we be making you of?
[1:52:29] Like the windows, the doors, what are we doing?
[1:52:32] For the public's sake.
[1:52:33] It's preservation work on virtually every window
[1:52:37] and most of the doors on the exterior.
[1:52:42] And you've got 116 windows.
[1:52:46] And about half of them are in pretty bad shape,
[1:52:50] especially on the third floor.
[1:52:51] and where you get, they're just falling apart.
[1:52:55] Some of it is actually not just the historic windows
[1:52:58] from 1999, it's also windows that were replaced
[1:53:03] that just haven't, you know, in 1997,
[1:53:07] but just haven't been maintained.
[1:53:09] So there is a lot of labor intensive,
[1:53:12] expensive, skilled work that has to be done
[1:53:14] for the windows.
[1:53:15] All the masonry, we have deterioration
[1:53:19] of limestone cornice in a number of places.
[1:53:23] We had deterioration of the limestone incest.
[1:53:26] That all has to be done.
[1:53:28] The bisonry itself is about 30 to 40%.
[1:53:31] Needs to be repointed.
[1:53:34] Needs to be cleaned.
[1:53:36] There's scaffolding.
[1:53:38] You have to go up for different trades.
[1:53:41] There's a lot of expense to just getting that done.
[1:53:43] And then all of the interior floors.
[1:53:45] I was about to say the floor.
[1:53:46] Freshly got all the floors, walls, ceilings.
[1:53:49] The third floor is really bad.
[1:53:51] Yes, yes.
[1:53:54] Lalo's white hair is not actually white from his, from old age.
[1:53:57] It's actually from the Kali chair and the dirt that comes in from his windows.
[1:54:03] I have a question.
[1:54:05] What is this contract or proposal any different?
[1:54:08] Because you have an existing contract in agreement, right?
[1:54:11] I mean the contract is for estimating only at this point and so the the first estimate was
[1:54:19] That we was done about a year and a half ago has been updated to
[1:54:24] What is the present?
[1:54:26] Best rough order of magnitude, you know make sure that we're in the ballpark something manageable
[1:54:35] Again, I still have the heartburn on
[1:54:39] You know, why you, you know, the amount of work that you're performing shouldn't be based
[1:54:45] on somebody else's price.
[1:54:48] You know, because if you did the same job four years ago, it'd probably be half this
[1:54:55] number.
[1:54:56] And you're doing the same work, but since inflation, prices going up or, you know,
[1:55:02] one window may cost $1,000 or it may cost $5,000.
[1:55:08] You're just designing the window profile you're saying here is this historic window it's got to be a double-hung sliding window with you know I
[1:55:17] Did that kind of work for a while so I understand and you know there's limited number of people out there that would make that window
[1:55:26] But so the price goes up and you get a benefit and it's not right for me you know they're saying
[1:55:33] I mean, for the county thing to do that, and you already included a 15 percent inflationary
[1:55:40] cost in your estimate, and I was like, why do you benefit from that?
[1:55:46] Well, I, my answer to that is that, you know, everybody's costs go up as well.
[1:55:53] Let's see.
[1:55:54] I mean, your workload doesn't go up.
[1:55:56] It was certainly getting, you know, making sure that there's skilled people working
[1:55:59] on it and subcontracting some of the soldiers.
[1:56:02] You have but it five years ago. I know
[1:56:07] It's something that costs five hundred dollars five years ago is now a thousand dollars
[1:56:11] He said well, I'm gonna I'm gonna make more money because it costs a thousand dollars now
[1:56:16] And by the time we finish, you know, maybe the windows double
[1:56:20] Well labor goes up again, you know, there's things there's things from a just about professional
[1:56:26] of community business, that there's costs that go up for us as well. I'm not trying
[1:56:37] to say that it's absolute, that it's 10 percent, but it's based upon really looking at what
[1:56:44] are all of the other fees for the consultants that need to be involved with this, and putting
[1:56:51] that together as a complete package.
[1:56:55] I am concerned. I just have a question. Excuse me, your commission. Mr. James Flores. Is this
[1:57:01] time sensitive? And I guess my question is to you if we do not pass this right now, Mr.
[1:57:05] Tillson, if you don't mind. Can you share with us a little bit about what your concerns are?
[1:57:13] Honorable Judge, Honorable Commissioners, James Flores, for the record, economic development.
[1:57:17] Yes, this is very time sensitive, we need to be able to have this master plan, the draft
[1:57:28] of it 95% complete and submitted by the 23rd of January 2026 for us to get maximum points
[1:57:37] as shovel ready.
[1:57:38] And we're going to need every point we can get so that we are competitive and do the
[1:57:42] best we can to ensure we get funded.
[1:57:44] How likely is it that we're going to be awarded this grant and if we're not awarded that means
[1:57:55] we're getting I guess the design built cost I guess from the general fund?
[1:58:02] Sure, before you give your opinion I'd like to give them mine.
[1:58:06] So back in the 90s when the renovation was going on we were probably the only courthouse that
[1:58:13] actually paid full for the construction and the renovation of this courthouse versus you
[1:58:19] know that's when Barbara Bruce came on she was first lady of Texas she was you know governor's
[1:58:24] wife and so she after that then they started having all these these grants to be able to
[1:58:33] do all over the state of Texas so if you ask me what my thought process and I hope that I'm
[1:58:37] correct that I think they're gonna give us pretty much everything because we were the only
[1:58:42] ones that did not pay during those 90s. Am I correct by saying that?
[1:58:47] With grants, there's no guarantees. There's no guarantees whatsoever. However, we want
[1:58:52] to be able to maximize our opportunities by putting in the best product we can on time.
[1:58:59] And is there any criteria? How do they score them, judge them, whatever?
[1:59:05] Yes, they have. They provide everything that we need. The scoring break down.
[1:59:09] I'm saying, when it goes in for the submittal for the grant, how do they decide yes or no?
[1:59:15] Well, they go through a series of items, they have a listing of how they will score it,
[1:59:25] and so we can review that and try to maximize on each of the different items and do our
[1:59:32] best to be able to submit the most competitive application.
[1:59:35] This has to be submitted by Mark, right?
[1:59:38] Okay.
[1:59:38] You have a February deadline and then a March deadline?
[1:59:40] The 95% draft needs to be submitted by March for us
[1:59:44] to maximize our points as shovel ready.
[1:59:47] But it needs to be to be, I mean by January,
[1:59:50] by March we need to submit the final one, March 13th.
[1:59:54] And then they'll look at it.
[1:59:55] January when?
[1:59:57] January 23rd, we have to submit
[2:00:00] 95% complete the draft for it to be considered shovel ready to get maximum points. And then
[2:00:09] on May 8th is that's when the grant application is due. But we can't do anything until we have
[2:00:14] a approved master plan. Now I do want to note that as part of the grant, as part of the budget
[2:00:24] But to fund this project, architectural services is an eligible expense, but it's not eligible
[2:00:33] if it's done beforehand.
[2:00:35] We're going to have to pay for it.
[2:00:37] Okay.
[2:00:37] What do you mean it's not eligible if it's done beforehand?
[2:00:38] If we do it now before the grads fund it, it's not going to be an eligible expense
[2:00:43] with grad funds.
[2:00:45] Now we can't.
[2:00:46] That makes no sense.
[2:00:48] How do you submit plans without architectural services?
[2:00:50] Well, according to the guidance, what they want, and it says here, to submit a good master
[2:00:57] plan has to be based on estimates.
[2:01:01] It doesn't have to be, and we do that with a lot of our grant submissions.
[2:01:06] We have preliminary plans that we submit for review, and then once we are funded, then
[2:01:13] we go out for professional services and hire an architect or an engineer, and they come
[2:01:18] up with final plans.
[2:01:20] right right that there's going to be an estimate well they should be an
[2:01:23] estimation for this and then if we get funded then it'll be budgeted for us to
[2:01:28] have professional services there now if we do this action now and we and we
[2:01:34] funded now well we can cover or this expense could be covered as part of the
[2:01:42] match towards the grant if funded so I'm trying to understand so we're going to
[2:01:51] actually need to set two different contracts that we're going to have some
[2:01:55] kind of submittal for the grant well we had a we had a contract earlier that we
[2:02:02] we did for the estimate we've done the whole contract when we're doing the
[2:02:06] whole package here so the 700,000 or 600 whatever it is it's for the whole
[2:02:10] package I'm aware of that but but that's a that's not what we need to submit that's
[2:02:16] not good if we do it now it's not going to be able to be paid with
[2:02:20] grant fund that's all I want to make sure that we need a package for the
[2:02:25] submittal of the grant estimates they're saying whether good package has
[2:02:30] estimates so it doesn't have to be the complete plan it's not drawing no not
[2:02:35] until, well, yes. It has to be estimates. And once...
[2:02:40] But it's estimates. It's not balance.
[2:02:42] Yes. Yes.
[2:02:44] So we need to break this up into two pieces, then. We need to have a grant submittal portion.
[2:02:50] Right.
[2:02:51] And then if and when we get the grant, we'll have the other portion.
[2:02:56] Yes. That would make sense, because then we could pay for that portion with the grant funds
[2:03:00] because it will be funded or we'll go into that contract if, indeed, we're funded.
[2:03:07] And one shouldn't be, I mean, the second part is pending.
[2:03:11] It has to be until we get the grant.
[2:03:14] Right.
[2:03:15] Because then, if not, we'll say, okay, well, we're just going to do the windows
[2:03:18] or we're just going to do the roof or we're just going to do this for that.
[2:03:23] That's what I have reviewed and come to my conclusion.
[2:03:29] I need to break it up in the two pieces.
[2:03:33] Well, they already are.
[2:03:35] Just to clarify, Mr. Florez is perfectly right that.
[2:03:40] Will you speak into the microphone, please?
[2:03:42] My agreement initially was for a preservation master plan.
[2:03:50] So we are submitting.
[2:03:51] I think Preservation Master Plan is basically an historical review, an assessment of conditions.
[2:04:01] It's all of the things that basically the design and the work and drawings are based
[2:04:08] on and all of the documentation that goes into that portion of it.
[2:04:15] So that master plan we're submitting our draft, our next draft on that actually on the 7th
[2:04:23] of November in two weeks along with our schematic design for the actual construction grant.
[2:04:33] The master plan needs to be approved before they can award any kind of construction grant.
[2:04:41] So those are the two items. So both of them are tracking at the same time currently.
[2:04:51] That's not what he said.
[2:04:53] No, no. Mr. Flores did say that in effect.
[2:04:59] The plan that he was referring to is the master plan.
[2:05:05] That is a planning document, not a design and construction document.
[2:05:09] document. So that will be completed before the end of this year, and then the contract
[2:05:19] for that will be basically ending at that point with the preservation plan, but the contract
[2:05:26] for the construction, the design and the preservation work, that will be ongoing to
[2:05:33] meet the deadlines for that package.
[2:05:37] But the deadline for the grant is May, you said?
[2:05:45] And we need the planning plan, the planning plan needs to be submitted, which is a portion of whatever, you know?
[2:05:56] We're going to submit a book that says, look, we're going to redo windows, we're going to redo floors, we're going to do this, we're going to do this.
[2:06:02] in accordance with all the historical guidance and everything, and they'll review it, and
[2:06:10] they say yay or nay. If they say yay, then we move ahead with full plans. But I'm not
[2:06:17] going to do full plans and pay for it, and then not get reimbursed and say, well, now
[2:06:22] we're going to cut this scope down.
[2:06:26] Well, I don't think that's going to happen. They don't say nay to it. It just, I guess
[2:06:31] they review it. Any comments that they have, those are incorporated in a response.
[2:06:37] Well, is there going to say yay or nay on the grant, right?
[2:06:40] On the grant that it's yay or nay.
[2:06:42] Yes, sir.
[2:06:42] And that's the part I'm talking about. So let's do this in two portions.
[2:06:46] I have a question.
[2:06:47] No, sir.
[2:06:47] If I please, may I finish? So we do this in two portions. You're going to say
[2:06:51] say we have the planning document or the grant submittal document, you know, why should
[2:06:58] we lose out on architectural fees so we can get that reimbursed?
[2:07:02] So we do.
[2:07:03] Sure.
[2:07:03] We do.
[2:07:04] I will, I will, I will look into that.
[2:07:09] And we need a number for that portion.
[2:07:13] Well, that's, you know, a large part of that's already been, it's already been
[2:07:17] part of the work that's been earned so far. So that's nearly complete.
[2:07:22] That's the math, the preservation plan is nearly complete.
[2:07:27] Again, but I'm not going to give you the second half until we know we got the first half.
[2:07:34] Do what I'm saying?
[2:07:35] Well, Commissioner, the thing to keep in mind is that in order to have a 95 percent
[2:07:44] complete set of construction documents by January 23rd.
[2:07:49] That's not what he said he needs.
[2:07:52] We don't need construction documents for the 23rd.
[2:07:57] James?
[2:07:57] Mr. Flores?
[2:08:00] Because there's no way you can have construction documents if architectural fees are...
[2:08:06] The January 23rd, that is for the preservation plan or for the 95% construction document?
[2:08:20] For the master plan, and it states we're a good master plan that should include a history of the building, historic photos and drawings, a thorough evaluation of existing conditions and a plan for the future with an estimated budget for all the proposed work.
[2:08:37] The master plan must be submitted to the Texas Historical Commission for review and may either be accepted with suggested changes made and resubmitted or rejected.
[2:08:46] The proposed work must comply with standards for the treatment of historic properties.
[2:08:51] The document is a general plan of action and does not include detailed construction plans and specifications.
[2:08:57] I can read more, but as it, to summarize it, they do say that on the January date,
[2:09:06] we must have 95% complete, the draft, for,
[2:09:13] No, just what I just read, it has to be 95% complete for us to get maximum points and
[2:09:20] I must reiterate that because we need to be able to get as much points as we can to be
[2:09:27] complete.
[2:09:27] But he's saying the plan is done basically.
[2:09:30] And then on March it has to be finished.
[2:09:36] Now at that point they review it, they tell us okay the master plan has been accepted
[2:09:41] And then we can submit our grant, and that will happen on May 8th, by May 8th.
[2:09:46] I'm sorry, can I say just one more thing?
[2:09:50] That that is true, that the master plan can go to that deadline.
[2:09:59] It goes beyond what we were anticipating.
[2:10:02] We were wanting to get it done before Christmas, before this in December.
[2:10:07] That's great.
[2:10:07] but, and have it adopted, but in order to meet this 2026 year for the construction
[2:10:20] grant, which is the big reimbursement, you still have to have 95 percent construction
[2:10:29] documents done by the end of January.
[2:10:33] No, that's not what he said.
[2:10:35] No, no, wait, please. I know that's not what we're talking about, two different
[2:10:39] things that are getting confused. And you can't.
[2:10:43] He said a master plan.
[2:10:44] You can't, you can't put a master plan out for bid.
[2:10:49] It's not for bid, it's estimates.
[2:10:51] Right. You have to have the construction documents. But if there's 95 percent
[2:10:55] construction documents aren't ready meeting that deadline by the end of January, then
[2:11:04] you're going to be knocked out.
[2:11:05] We would be knocked out.
[2:11:07] That's enough.
[2:11:07] Well, it's very simple.
[2:11:07] James, if I may, please.
[2:11:09] The Commissioner.
[2:11:09] Can you make a phone call?
[2:11:10] James, can you make a phone call to the granting agency and ask if they need 95% construction
[2:11:17] document?
[2:11:18] Well, we had made these telephone calls with them before when this was proposed
[2:11:22] earlier.
[2:11:22] and we had spoken with them as to if this is something that we can be
[2:11:26] reimbursed over. But this is your typical grant process. If we do a grant
[2:11:31] application. So what do you recommend that we do if it's your typical grant
[2:11:34] process? You're the pro at this. Yeah. What do you recommend for the
[2:11:40] court to do that? What's your recommendation? I recommend that we
[2:11:44] get in the master plan with as design or as designated by the funding
[2:11:50] agency, turn in the estimates, get the master plan approved, have us submit the grant, and
[2:11:56] in our grant budget, which is part of the estimates, it will be professional services,
[2:12:01] and we'll be able to come up with the final plans, with the specifications for us to
[2:12:08] go out for bids in the next step.
[2:12:13] So are you saying to approve this or break it up in two?
[2:12:15] I
[2:12:18] It should be broken up into
[2:12:22] Okay, if if if we want to pay for this with grant funds if we want to pay for it with general funds
[2:12:29] Well, then we can do it now
[2:12:31] No, any other
[2:12:33] Counter that I have for that is that I'm going to go off your recommendation if you want to break it up in two
[2:12:37] We break it up and see that
[2:12:38] All right
[2:12:40] So how would we how would I move the motion to be able to break it up in two James?
[2:12:44] Well, we just need to be able to contract to do the master plan to have a complete master
[2:12:52] plan.
[2:12:53] And for the grant submittal.
[2:12:56] For 95 percent complete on January 23rd?
[2:12:59] That would be my emotion.
[2:13:01] And that's under a separate contract right now, as we speak.
[2:13:05] We've already done that?
[2:13:06] Two years ago.
[2:13:07] And that was how much?
[2:13:08] Yes.
[2:13:08] We're almost complete with that.
[2:13:10] And how much of that contract?
[2:13:11] there. 75,000 I believe. Okay. So then we already got that. So we're about 80% finished
[2:13:20] with that. Perfect. Okay. So then we're going to go ahead and do it the way James is asking
[2:13:24] us to. Do I have a motion? I have a second. Any other questions, comments? There's no
[2:13:28] action on this item. That one's already approved. So then do we move on this item? Well,
[2:13:35] he wants you to. Here's the problem. Mr. Stills and I get it. I mean, we're
[2:13:40] I know you're defending your position, but I guess I'm asking James. Go ahead.
[2:13:44] Oh, I was going to say the for the for the 2026 there is that what they call a
[2:13:51] first round and we would have to have 95% and a January 100% end of March that
[2:13:59] is but but but but if we don't there is still a second round that is a year
[2:14:08] later. And that could be considered then. And I can see what kind of submittal would
[2:14:17] be considered if you really want to look at a second round on this. So it could move down
[2:14:27] the road.
[2:14:28] There's no requirement for 95 percent construction documents in that grant application.
[2:14:35] And
[2:14:36] I'll ask James to make another phone call.
[2:14:38] Okay, but we should we should and and if it does we'll put it back on the agenda for next week okay next meeting
[2:14:44] We're also include that in the email. So we have it on right. Okay, very good. We have it already
[2:14:49] But we can get it but I mean they're telling you that it's just a submittal and a
[2:14:55] Guestimate because they want to know how much the grants going to be right
[2:14:58] correct, and I would
[2:15:00] We'd really like to get it in this round.
[2:15:02] Well, you already have that portion. I had forgotten we did that, so we already have that portion going.
[2:15:09] Right.
[2:15:09] So once we get that approved, then we'll deal with the rest of it.
[2:15:14] Very good.
[2:15:14] All right.
[2:15:15] Thank you.
[2:15:15] Thank you very much.
[2:15:17] I'm going to skip 26 because I want to bring it into executive session. Item 27.
[2:15:22] You know what? Excuse me. I know I have some people here.
[2:15:24] I'm sorry, we did 27.
[2:15:26] I'm going to go ahead and bring up item 32 and 33.
[2:15:31] I'll second it.
[2:15:33] Motion second.
[2:15:33] Any opposed?
[2:15:35] Motion carries.
[2:15:36] Item 32, yes, sir.
[2:15:38] Very good.
[2:15:40] Presentation by Webb County Heritage Foundation
[2:15:42] to provide commissioners court with an update
[2:15:44] on the Viantiua phase 2 project.
[2:15:47] Yes.
[2:15:48] You all want to come up?
[2:15:50] So, sir.
[2:15:56] Morning.
[2:15:57] Good morning.
[2:15:58] Good morning, judge commissioners.
[2:15:59] Thank you so much for your time.
[2:16:00] No, thank you all for being patient.
[2:16:01] It's actually Mr. Tillitson that's going to do the presentation for the Web County Heritage
[2:16:05] Foundation for the face to a Vientiva.
[2:16:09] We are really looking forward for you all to see this.
[2:16:12] I'm going to give the microphone to Mr. Tillitson and there are long yes for the record.
[2:16:17] Yes, no worries.
[2:16:18] Thank you.
[2:16:18] Okay.
[2:16:19] Very good.
[2:16:19] Thanks, Annie.
[2:16:20] Go ahead, Mr. Tillitson.
[2:16:22] So there should be a PowerPoint that comes up.
[2:16:25] Yes.
[2:16:26] Thank you.
[2:16:27] So you can see that on your screens.
[2:16:29] It's basically a scan of the building itself.
[2:16:33] But the project, if you go to the next slide,
[2:16:37] this is for the buildings that are at 801 and 805 Grant Street.
[2:16:43] You see in this aerial, you're on the northeast looking Southwest.
[2:16:49] It's really kind of an L-stool part of several parcels
[2:16:53] for the Border Heritage Museum.
[2:16:56] There's a parking lot that is owned by IBC
[2:16:59] and then the building's there front on Grant.
[2:17:03] The next slide.
[2:17:06] It's a little bit burned, but this is,
[2:17:09] that shows the project location
[2:17:11] there at the corner of Grant and Santa Ursula.
[2:17:15] It is in a block that is part of the original
[2:17:21] 1767 Townsite and also one of the buildings that is part of the San Augustine de Laredo
[2:17:30] National Register Historic District.
[2:17:34] If you could go to the next slide, please.
[2:17:38] This, of course, is a view a lot of you were familiar with from 1894, but you can see the building,
[2:17:46] It's marked number one, and the kind of the right-hand side goes to the Board of Heritage
[2:17:52] Museum is right next to it.
[2:17:53] The Furious, the building that is the Veterans Project is just up on San Bernardo.
[2:18:00] So there's a grouping, and of course Casa Ortiz is just down Grant's or Zaragoza Street.
[2:18:07] So, there is this grouping, really, of web properties in the hope that downtown area.
[2:18:14] Next slide.
[2:18:16] There's also some interesting things that the original courthouse for 18-for-Web County
[2:18:23] was the Casa Constitucional, there circled on the left on the south side of the plaza.
[2:18:30] And there are a couple of really important and interesting judges that lived in the
[2:18:33] houses just opposite on the plaza. So there's a lot of kind of county
[2:18:38] associated history with the place. Next slide. And we know a lot about the
[2:18:43] buildings just from the previous sand orange maps. I won't get into all of the
[2:18:47] detail on this, but occupying two lots in the block 11 on that northeast corner.
[2:18:54] The building is L-shaped. It was actually kind of two buildings recorded as
[2:18:59] being there as early as 1847. They'd probably go back to the 1830s, the original stone walls,
[2:19:08] and then, of course, there was a wing added on. It was surrounded by an eight-foot high
[2:19:14] masonry wall. Next slide. And it was one of the Benavides House. Jose Referrio Benavides,
[2:19:22] That was his home site, and I don't have to try to tell anybody about the history of the
[2:19:30] Benavitas in Laredo, but 801 and 805 actually has a name and a history to it, and somebody
[2:19:39] that was part of the development of Laredo.
[2:19:43] Next slide.
[2:19:43] red. And circled in red is the two lots of the property, the property that is the Heritage
[2:19:54] Museum showing kind of staggered off. And then of course that the parking lot dashed
[2:20:00] in where the IBC parking lot is as shown there as well. And of course this is showing
[2:20:06] a little bit later development on the right hand side. You can see the L-shaped blue
[2:20:10] stone building. It has some kind of red brick additions and kind of a gallery at that point
[2:20:16] in that courtyard. Next slide.
[2:20:19] What's the difference in the coloration? What does that signify?
[2:20:22] Can you go back please? The blue stands for stone masonry. The red is for brick masonry.
[2:20:29] The yellow is for wood frame. And then sometimes you'll see brown for adobe as well.
[2:20:39] And so
[2:20:39] So just an aerial view of the site, there's quite a few historic properties in various
[2:20:46] shades of improvement.
[2:20:49] I think probably every building needs a lot of work in this whole section, especially the
[2:20:56] Benevitas House.
[2:20:58] There are a number of other assets around, but it's a very busy part of Santa Ursula
[2:21:05] and kind of at the end of downtown so it feels lost next.
[2:21:11] And really the goals at this point, this is not a formal, final announcement of it, but
[2:21:19] it's really about conservation of those buildings, to save those historic buildings with respect
[2:21:26] to historic fabric.
[2:21:28] It's also about placemaking, all of the activities that the Heritage Foundation will
[2:21:35] be programming there that's really important. And I think one of the interesting things
[2:21:42] about the way that the state of Texas charged counties in their duties was to provide a
[2:21:50] gathering place for people. So already kind of an indication for these kinds of places.
[2:21:57] That increase, that activation for visitors, locals, basically you're looking for more
[2:22:02] more customers, more sales, and some economic development, so that it's a really important
[2:22:08] project.
[2:22:08] Next slide.
[2:22:10] In being able to address some of those things on its own level.
[2:22:14] The project challenges, I don't have to get into a lot.
[2:22:17] You probably heard a lot about how difficult it is to deal with stone masonry that doesn't
[2:22:23] have any kind of concrete foundations, you have rising damp, you have peeling plaster,
[2:22:27] you have all those things.
[2:22:29] The roofs are in very difficult shape, so there's a lot of work that has to be done on them,
[2:22:35] pretty much what you would see with the furriests over at the Veteran's Center.
[2:22:39] That level of work is very similar.
[2:22:42] One of the things, though, about it is that it's a really noisy place,
[2:22:47] but it's also a place where you get a nice breeze,
[2:22:50] and that's really important for doing something to make it a very interesting development
[2:22:55] for having some outdoor courtyard or patio type of space.
[2:23:01] Next slide.
[2:23:03] Just some views on Grant looking towards Santa Ursula.
[2:23:07] You can sign to see the difference between the two buildings.
[2:23:11] The second floor was added on about the early 1930s or so.
[2:23:15] So it changed the architecture of that building.
[2:23:19] Next slide.
[2:23:21] There's a scan of that.
[2:23:22] next slide. Another scan for elevation. You can see all the utilities coming in
[2:23:28] there. It's a real mess. The folks next door like to put their trash cans in
[2:23:34] front of the building. So it's not very pleasant at the moment. Next. And the
[2:23:40] usual problems with, you know, deteriorating mortar, stone, plaster
[2:23:46] water peeling, wood deterioration. It's all over the whole envelope of the building. Next.
[2:23:55] And you can see just from the roof scape, it's just ruinous in many places. And so there
[2:24:01] needs to be not just new roofing, but a new wood structure to fix those penetrations.
[2:24:08] next. Next slide. It has a wonderful lozia gallery, very classical. Unfortunately, those
[2:24:17] wood columns are in great shape. Just a miracle. Next. Another view of that lozia. Next. It
[2:24:27] looks into a great courtyard, but there are some kind of additions that were scabbed
[2:24:32] on. And those are in very poor condition. We'll probably be removing those. Next slide.
[2:24:40] So this is our existing floor plan. You can see the Grant Street at the top, and then
[2:24:45] the L, the west wing going down along the west end of the property. And it was surrounded
[2:24:53] by an eight-foot wall all at one time. Next slide. This illustrates the roof scape and
[2:25:00] In the second floor, that's a little over 500 square feet.
[2:25:04] And the second floor is a brick, not a stone.
[2:25:07] Next.
[2:25:09] And then when you look at the areas and what type of conditions that the construction
[2:25:14] types are, really the total enclosed area here is 3,800, 860, and the total covered
[2:25:24] area is 1,057.
[2:25:26] So very comparable to Farias, a little less enclosed area, but a lot more outdoors covered area.
[2:25:33] Next slide. And you can see some of the conditions on the interior.
[2:25:38] Next slide.
[2:25:40] Next slide. Next slide.
[2:25:45] And so that's what we basically entered. Frank Briscoe from Briscoe Conservation,
[2:25:51] Architectural Conservation, has been in the building.
[2:25:54] He has cleared out a lot of this debris, next slide, and will be shoring up, such a temporary
[2:26:03] basis, places where the joists are actually failing and dangerous.
[2:26:09] So the work is ongoing now to basically get all of the documentation, clear this out,
[2:26:15] get all the scans in.
[2:26:18] And this shows what would be demolished, the frame buildings that were scabbed on,
[2:26:23] on the various fences and walls around it, next.
[2:26:28] And we kind of approached this from the standpoint of how do we start thinking about utilizing
[2:26:34] this building, and we can't do all of it at one time.
[2:26:41] We're looking at really having a mothballing or shelling out a certain portion of this
[2:26:48] just to keep this in some sort of a budget that's maybe available.
[2:26:55] So in terms of the rehabilitation, it's a total of 1,342 square feet,
[2:27:00] total covered area 1,000.
[2:27:02] And then not developed entirely would be for the future 1,656 square feet.
[2:27:11] And in this idea, you're drawing the absolute minimum.
[2:27:15] You're putting everything in on the left-hand side.
[2:27:17] side, including toilet rooms, mechanical, and then doing something with the little catering
[2:27:23] kitchen there, then developing a nice courtyard.
[2:27:28] And then that 1600 square feet, you just have it behind walls.
[2:27:33] You work, you fix the repair of the windows, restore doors, but you don't do any improvements
[2:27:39] in there until you have the money to be able to do it.
[2:27:42] And in a situation like this, you really want to look at getting some sort of tendency or
[2:27:50] even, you know, paying tenants in there.
[2:27:53] So then that becomes the trigger to be able to put some money into the rest of it.
[2:27:57] Next slide.
[2:27:59] Now, that kind of a courtyard needs to be wonderful.
[2:28:03] I mean, when you think about cost authorities, you know, with how it was 100 years ago
[2:28:08] in the black and white. It's very similar today. Very wonderful place to go and has
[2:28:14] that wonderful entrance of the Zawan. Next slide. But this courtyard is a little bit different.
[2:28:21] It's smaller. You're not going to be able to grow a lot of big trees real quick, so
[2:28:26] it might be something that's more of a shaded pergola. Next slide. So this other
[2:28:31] Another approach looks at a little bit more scope, which is all of those 1830s, 1840s buildings,
[2:28:42] rooms along the side.
[2:28:44] It's ashamed to put mechanical and toilet rooms and everything in them.
[2:28:48] Those are great rooms.
[2:28:49] So why don't we just build the toilet rooms and janitors and service.
[2:28:55] all of that on the west side help block some of the sound and then really just go
[2:29:02] through and have a set of wonderful rooms that are restored on that West Wing.
[2:29:07] What is noisy over there? You said it's very noisy. What is noisy over there?
[2:29:12] The traffic. People are just blowing down Santa Ursula and then going down
[2:29:18] the ramp and trucks and cars are really loud right there. Now a lot of traffic comes in
[2:29:28] and turns right and goes on Zatagosa. But they're going slow at that point. That's the
[2:29:35] ones that are just going through. And so to have an outdoor area where you're not
[2:29:41] attenuating or blocking that sound in some way is I think going to be a really key
[2:29:47] to making this outdoor space really functional and desirable place to be.
[2:29:52] But you're going to block the air pollution, wouldn't you block the wind as well?
[2:29:58] That's a great point, because the cha-
[2:30:00] The challenge here is to do something to block sound, but not necessarily block the breeze.
[2:30:05] So there needs to be some sort of resolution on how you're able to do that.
[2:30:10] How about a traffic device just to slow the traffic down?
[2:30:13] How about just a speed bump?
[2:30:15] Well, that's what we know people across the street.
[2:30:20] Yeah, yeah, yeah.
[2:30:24] So that's essentially where we are. We've actually done, you know, we've completed
[2:30:28] that a lot of the field work and documentation, actually getting the shoring done as we speak
[2:30:34] so that it's bracing those things that are about to fall. Everything's cleared out quite
[2:30:39] a bit more than it ever was. And then we're just now starting to look at the idea of
[2:30:46] concepts and what to do.
[2:30:48] If I may, Lalo. We have 1.8 for this project. We used, we had 2 million at 1.8, is the
[2:30:57] 1.8 still there yes we start the whole 2 million I thought we had 1.8 but if
[2:31:11] you don't mind checking from between 1.8 and 2 minutes okay
[2:31:16] so what do you need
[2:31:19] from us today because this is something that needs to be done presentation
[2:31:29] I would have wanted action. I look at this thing and I'm trying to understand, you know,
[2:31:36] I see big dollar signs there. Two million. You know what? No. No. Too many gets you nowhere.
[2:31:43] No, no, no, no. He's telling us we have two million. No, I'm sorry. Two million gets
[2:31:49] is nowhere. There's a push downtown. You've got private developers, you've got individuals,
[2:31:56] a lot of properties changing hands. I think we need to have a comprehensive plan. And
[2:32:01] in that plan needs to be a lot of parking. That is the general problem in most urban
[2:32:11] areas. And we have no parking. You can have a greatest facility in the world,
[2:32:17] but if you have no parking, it's very hard to get people there.
[2:32:20] So I think we really need to identify the homes or buildings that we want to keep.
[2:32:28] And then, sorry, some are going to have to be sacrificed.
[2:32:31] Some of these need to be knocked down and make some parking places.
[2:32:35] So the ones that are left can have accessibility.
[2:32:39] And I think we need to get together with all the developers that are looking at downtown
[2:32:44] and saying all right let's get a master plan you know semi if nothing's gonna be
[2:32:49] written in stone and say how do we make this project work because otherwise it's
[2:32:54] not gonna work. $10,000 a parking spot? Yeah. So 1.8 will go pretty far. But I mean
[2:33:07] you know like I said you know some of these three quarters of the block may
[2:33:10] need to be demolished, you know? Maybe we save just part of that building, front of parking lot,
[2:33:16] and at least it has a chance to survive. Because otherwise, it's just going to be an empty building
[2:33:22] there that with a beautiful courtyard that nobody goes to, for what reason. Maybe it's
[2:33:26] rented once a month, who knows. So, I think John's shaking his head back there or something.
[2:33:32] Let's all get together. Let's get a plan. Like I said, let's get some of these developers.
[2:33:37] I know there's several.
[2:33:38] We got something on the agenda today and say,
[2:33:41] all right, how do we make this work for all of us?
[2:33:43] Because the tourism from normal Laredo
[2:33:48] is not coming back.
[2:33:49] The tourism that's going to Mexico
[2:33:50] is not coming back anytime soon.
[2:33:53] So we're going to have to create our own.
[2:33:56] So it's going to have to be an environment
[2:33:58] that Laredo ones are going to want to go down.
[2:34:00] And I've had these discussions with people
[2:34:02] across the street and saying, you know,
[2:34:04] it's going to have to be restaurants.
[2:34:05] It's going to have to be music, and it's going to have to be some of the arts, whether it's crafts, you know, leather goods, whatever.
[2:34:12] Glass blowing, who knows. You know, it has to be something where we'll go, and some locals will go.
[2:34:18] And some tourists that are in town, hey, let's go check it out.
[2:34:22] You know, if you go to a lot of these major cities, you see how that urban area is turned into a kind of an artsy, you know, where crafts people basically, you know,
[2:34:32] Whether it's leather goods, purses, dance classes.
[2:34:36] Well, I don't know about that, but art is folk,
[2:34:39] all kinds of things, you know.
[2:34:41] But yeah, it's gotta be something that we're gonna.
[2:34:45] We're very much wanting to do something.
[2:34:47] Let me just put it that way.
[2:34:48] I think it's very important,
[2:34:49] it's just a matter of getting the community involved
[2:34:50] as well and figuring out what we want.
[2:34:53] Not every building's gonna be safe.
[2:34:54] Yeah, and we understand that.
[2:34:56] And what we want to do,
[2:34:57] the Web County Heritage Foundation wants to do,
[2:34:59] is basically we want to build community.
[2:35:02] I know in the past we have focused a lot on tourism, but tourism isn't what it used to.
[2:35:07] So we are focusing on the people from Laredo and Webb County.
[2:35:11] We want them to come down to this really wonderful facility that we have that has been used or
[2:35:18] underused and we want people to just come.
[2:35:21] This past month we've had over a thousand people visit the museum and we're very grateful
[2:35:25] to you all for letting us use the museum.
[2:35:28] we've had a very successful pumpkin patch with Lovato Main Street and we've also had
[2:35:35] movies on the patio that are very very successful so we are working into bringing more of the locals
[2:35:41] and if we build that interest people will continue to come down with county has proven time and
[2:35:46] time again this commissioner's court has proven time and time again that we are wanting to make
[2:35:51] sure to re uh establish ourselves downtown to be able to you know read you downtown we've
[2:35:56] spent a lot of money here downtown. So we're very proud of that and we're going to continue
[2:36:00] doing that. So this will be no, it just needs to get done. I guess our concerns are there's
[2:36:09] priorities and there's priorities and then there's priorities, right? But this is definitely
[2:36:14] one of those and we just got to do it. So thank you.
[2:36:17] Thank you very much. Thank you for your time and thank you for your support.
[2:36:20] Appreciate it. Kendra.
[2:36:22] Just one quick comment. The one thing we want to distress and I know you know
[2:36:26] this already, is the location of this butts up with the Border Heritage Museum, so the
[2:36:30] synergies there of what we were going to do is work towards turning this into a larger
[2:36:35] area, because the Border Heritage Museum, as you know, we have movies on the patio and
[2:36:39] outside activities, we've just increased the footprint. So it's not just one building
[2:36:43] or two buildings here, but adding all the – in addition with that. So that type
[2:36:50] of thing, what we were really requesting was a release of the first branch for the
[2:36:53] planning and cleaning up this area as you see it's a mass potential for
[2:36:58] homelessness and destruction so looking for a first tranche of stabilization
[2:37:03] funds. We've been going through that with Commissioner Heim has been very
[2:37:07] instrumental as well on helping out with the actually spearheading a lot of
[2:37:11] it too. The veterans so we understand what's going on. I want to think
[2:37:18] I think Andrea has done an excellent job.
[2:37:22] She has brought a lot of our youth into downtown and so the Heritage Museum has been utilized
[2:37:30] more than it has been.
[2:37:32] I know that I think the court moved to stabilize the building so that I think that we're in
[2:37:40] that point.
[2:37:41] point. I agree with Commissioner Galo's comment in where we have to understand where we have
[2:37:50] to be moving towards a master plan for not just this building but the county's interest
[2:37:56] in downtown. I think that there is an aggressive position by a developer to go ahead and create
[2:38:04] work space downtown and I think it'll increase and complement the need for
[2:38:10] housing and restaurants and then after that we will go ahead and see the
[2:38:17] arts and crafts. So I see a public benefit in investing in downtown. I think
[2:38:24] the option that we have if we don't take any action is that we'll go ahead
[2:38:29] and just keep buildings into a certain standard
[2:38:33] that is subpar with the code, right, city code.
[2:38:38] We have a lot of old buildings
[2:38:40] that don't have sprinkler systems.
[2:38:44] I have personally responded to a whole bunch of fires
[2:38:48] around the area.
[2:38:49] So there is an interest, like the judge said,
[2:38:52] and thank you for your presentation.
[2:38:54] Thank you very much.
[2:38:55] Thank you for your time.
[2:38:56] Thank you.
[2:38:56] Thank you, Adriana.
[2:38:58] Item 33.
[2:38:58] This one is, I think they're going to take about 10 minutes as well, presentation by
[2:39:05] London Consulting Group representatives with further discussion and possible action to
[2:39:10] conduct a feasibility study to determine Webb County, Webb County's most pressing
[2:39:15] needs and potential inefficiencies to include strategic priorities, operational bottlenecks,
[2:39:21] financial relevance, constituent impact, digital readiness, and leadership commitment
[2:39:28] and any other matters instead of there too.
[2:39:30] How are you all?
[2:39:32] Thank you all for being patient.
[2:39:33] Good morning.
[2:39:34] Good morning.
[2:39:35] Good morning.
[2:39:36] Yes, good morning.
[2:39:37] Commissioners, good morning.
[2:39:39] Good morning.
[2:39:39] Thank you very much for taking the time
[2:39:41] and we prepared a slide deck
[2:39:43] so we would like to present you
[2:39:45] and our objective today is to answer a simple question
[2:39:49] which is full of different intricacies
[2:39:52] and that is how can we deliver a better constituent.
[2:39:55] Excuse me, can you say
[2:39:55] two names for the records please?
[2:39:57] of course I'm Enrique Cervantes and I'm Carlos Martinez thank you so how can we
[2:40:05] deliver a better constituent experience by operating more efficiently leveraging
[2:40:10] technology and people and that's what we've done across different countries if
[2:40:16] you could change to the next one I would like to start with this phrase
[2:40:20] briefly about system will be the good person every time because in terms of
[2:40:26] organizations systems are what allows people
[2:40:29] to operate in their best possible way.
[2:40:32] More efficiently, but also in terms of
[2:40:34] how can you improve employee engagement.
[2:40:36] And sometimes if you have a bad system,
[2:40:39] that system ends up even beating a person
[2:40:41] that wants to do things differently.
[2:40:44] If you could change to the next one please.
[2:40:47] So this is a brief overview of who we are.
[2:40:50] We are a consulting firm that has been in business
[2:40:54] for more than 35 years, operating across 25 countries and helping more than 2,000 clients,
[2:41:02] both public and private organizations, and we focus on delivering value across four practices.
[2:41:12] Strategy, which is defining what's the vision of an organization and translating that vision
[2:41:18] into a roadmap for execution.
[2:41:19] operational excellence, which has to do with how can we operate in a way that's more efficient
[2:41:25] so that we generate savings that can be used in other critical aspects of the organization.
[2:41:33] The third one is people and culture. In the end, all the organizations are the people
[2:41:37] that man them, and the organizational culture, as Mr. Porter would say,
[2:41:42] strategy every day, and that's because culture is where people are able to develop themselves
[2:41:49] and to deliver a service or approach better for their constituents.
[2:41:54] And finally, digital, which has to do with how can we leverage technology.
[2:41:59] But technology has to work for a purpose.
[2:42:02] It's not just technology for technology's sake, but technology so that you can operate
[2:42:07] in a better way and provide a better experience in this case for your constituents.
[2:42:11] So in a nutshell, that's who we are, and our process always starts with first a discovery.
[2:42:19] Where are those opportunities?
[2:42:22] I said those opportunities so that then we can go into a transformation phase.
[2:42:26] How can we transform the organization so that it can operate more efficiently?
[2:42:31] It can use technology and also give the elements for people to operate in a better way.
[2:42:36] And once that transformation goes and we help working shoulder-to-shoulder throughout the whole length of a project, ensure that it's continuity.
[2:42:48] Ensure that that transformation continues after we leave.
[2:42:52] In the end, we want to give you the tools and the elements to operate in a better way, not that we operate for you.
[2:42:58] That's why we work shoulder-to-shoulder to ensure that after we leave you have sustainable results
[2:43:04] and you go into a continuous improvement culture.
[2:43:09] And if you could change the next one,
[2:43:12] it all starts with the discovery.
[2:43:15] And for us to engage in a project first,
[2:43:18] we want to understand where those opportunities lie,
[2:43:20] and that's what we're proposing today,
[2:43:22] a feasibility study, and I'll let my colleague Carlos
[2:43:25] go more profoundly into it.
[2:43:28] Thank you, Ricky.
[2:43:30] Yes, so the whole process is about the risking
[2:43:33] the processor. I was listening to you, I was hearing how you were talking about how can
[2:43:38] we mitigate that risk and understand ahead of time before jumping into a large investment
[2:43:43] what are we going to get, what are the opportunities. So that's how our process is drafted. The
[2:43:48] first part is to do what we call a feasibility study and that feasibility includes a maturity
[2:43:55] assessment of processes, technology, people on culture, organization and with that
[2:44:02] you get a very good glance of how the county is currently operating.
[2:44:07] We do a matriculation assessment.
[2:44:08] We do some data analytics to put some numbers into it and data points.
[2:44:13] As you're going to jump into making a decision of where to tackle how to what to prioritize,
[2:44:18] we need to have the numbers clear so that's where we run those analytics.
[2:44:22] And we also do the constituent journey.
[2:44:25] So we map out the counties all about providing a service to the county itself, to the
[2:44:30] constituents.
[2:44:30] So we map out the journeys in the processes that we evaluate and tell you potential gaps
[2:44:35] in those, in that journey.
[2:44:38] We'll help you with the next one, please.
[2:44:41] As we're doing this analysis, we use this framework that's called SPDC, SPCD for me,
[2:44:47] which stands for automation, service, processes, the cost, and digital and technology.
[2:44:54] So these are the aspects that we evaluate in the, in the county's operation.
[2:44:58] and at the end of the day
[2:45:00] We're able to deliver you with a very comprehensive roadmap and gaps on each of these elements so
[2:45:07] that you can create a strategy moving forward.
[2:45:12] So these are the outcomes from this feasibility study. We take all the analysis. At the end
[2:45:18] of the day, you get a timeline. You get the methodology. You get the gaps in the aspects
[2:45:23] that I mentioned. And you're able to or we're able to build a roadmap on what to
[2:45:27] to execute on next.
[2:45:32] So the outcomes from a process like this
[2:45:34] of doing a transformation will come in different flavors,
[2:45:37] I'm gonna say.
[2:45:39] We have management improvements, operational excellence,
[2:45:43] financial outcomes and cost savings as well,
[2:45:46] technology and data, and the constituent experience.
[2:45:51] And talking about the timeline,
[2:45:53] what we're proposing as I said is the first step,
[2:45:55] which is a feasibility study,
[2:45:57] taking account to the department
[2:45:58] and analyzing all the perspectives that I mentioned.
[2:46:02] So these last two weeks, so it's a two-week engagement
[2:46:05] to understand these elements.
[2:46:07] And then after that, we can make a definition
[2:46:09] of whether we want to tackle some of those opportunities
[2:46:13] or what do we do next.
[2:46:14] Is this your standard two weeks?
[2:46:16] Because I don't see it happening in two weeks, but anyways.
[2:46:19] Yes, the standard two weeks is for the feasibility study.
[2:46:22] Minimum two weeks.
[2:46:24] Yeah, it starts with two weeks.
[2:46:25] And after those two weeks, we make a definition
[2:46:28] issue of what are the products that we want to take on and those products could last anywhere
[2:46:32] from three months to eight months. But first we want to look at what's the potential and
[2:46:39] then once we have that we're going to have more elements to make a decision.
[2:46:44] So if I may, please, like here in Webb County, so what would you look at? We'll look at
[2:46:50] the processes we'll map out the processes for the county. For example, the procurement
[2:46:56] process. What are the different steps? What are the gaps? What are the tools and technology
[2:47:01] that are being used? If you use the template, the format, what are the metrics that you use
[2:47:07] to evaluate those processes? Cycle times, productivity, things of that nature that
[2:47:13] we rely on?
[2:47:13] That's just one example, because there's a whole bunch of them. That's what I was
[2:47:16] trying to tell you at the office the other day. Webb County, I mean, it's basically
[2:47:21] It's actually an open statute, though.
[2:47:24] We can only follow what the statute said.
[2:47:27] Yes, but I guess what I wanted to see, not just,
[2:47:30] I mean, he brought that example up,
[2:47:32] but there's a lot of other examples that I think
[2:47:33] that we could look into to see how we could streamline things.
[2:47:36] That's a feasibility.
[2:47:37] Absolutely, yes, and actually.
[2:47:39] Give me one second.
[2:47:42] So, I appreciate the concept of having
[2:47:47] I mean, like a nodded within our system, but, you know, we do follow a lot of
[2:47:55] statue and I guess the subject experts are the department heads, right?
[2:48:00] And so for me, I know that Mr. Uribe oversees the budget every year and I think
[2:48:10] that, you know, I've been witness on the hard work that he and his team kind
[2:48:16] to put everything together so they could go ahead and present it at least to the court.
[2:48:22] And I've been a witness to that for the last three years.
[2:48:26] I think that they're very frugal with a lot of the systems.
[2:48:30] We are designed where they put a system in where they'll go ahead and inform department
[2:48:38] heads within the county to submit items that might be considered during budget.
[2:48:44] it. And I think that they take a very extensive dive within the subject matter experts' requests,
[2:48:53] right? And so to me, I think that we already have a system that kind of oversees each other
[2:49:01] because we have the auditor that would chime in to make sure that we are following, I
[2:49:08] guess, either the procurement process or the expenditure. And so there's a checks
[2:49:13] and balance system that's already in play and I appreciate your presentation you
[2:49:20] know but for me I have reservations because I think that Mr. Odevan and his
[2:49:25] team are doing a good job and you know but that's the comment I wanted to go
[2:49:30] ahead and make. Okay again I'm just trying to figure out where you know I'm not
[2:49:36] doubting you can help us I'm just saying how would you focus where do you
[2:49:40] luck because like I said you know we the purchasing problem. That was one of the
[2:49:44] questions that they asked me because they're just giving you an example of
[2:49:49] what they can do what they wanted from this court that's the reason why they're
[2:49:52] doing a presentation is he asked me where do you want to see us focus and I said
[2:49:56] well that's something I think the question for the commissioners court so
[2:49:59] it'd be where where do you where would you like to see them focus on and I
[2:50:03] think that's what they could try to do. Yes thank you so trying to to
[2:50:07] address the comments and questions. Absolutely. You have, I think, over thirty-four departments
[2:50:13] in the county, so we'll have to focus on those efforts, and that will be based on where
[2:50:19] you think that you have the more opportunities, right? And of course, we'll work on the
[2:50:24] process with Mr. Uribe. He's going to be the one leading the process. What we bring
[2:50:29] to the table, it's the expertise, the methodology, and also resources to execute the analysis
[2:50:35] is based on that methodology, right, and then give Mr. Rive and you as commissioners and
[2:50:40] judge give you the information and the tools so that we can create that roadmap of improvements,
[2:50:45] right?
[2:50:46] Well, I can tell you right now, for me, if there was, I don't know how you would do
[2:50:53] it, but I'm saying a process really to empower our directors, because I think you
[2:50:59] sat through the meeting, you know, we had directors up here.
[2:51:01] I want solutions that's what you know the directors are there not to say well we got this here guys
[2:51:08] What do you want to do? No, I want to plan saying here how we can approve our system
[2:51:13] Commissioners court I would like you to you know vote on it or to give them incentive to to you know
[2:51:19] Go above and beyond. I mean
[2:51:25] Yes, and and I don't answer that so if you remember one of the studies that I presented there is a
[2:51:30] that constituent journey and the digital maturity, right?
[2:51:34] So we map the processes and identify
[2:51:36] what those solutions are,
[2:51:38] because it will be dependent on what are your current systems
[2:51:43] and what's the technology that you have in place, the data.
[2:51:46] And then once we map that out,
[2:51:47] and that's why we wanna propose that feasibility first,
[2:51:51] instead of telling you we're selling this tool
[2:51:53] or we're selling this process
[2:51:54] and we want you to implement it,
[2:51:56] we don't know yet until we do the feasibility.
[2:51:59] That's the first step to de-risk the process.
[2:52:02] Again, we kind of don't know really what we need.
[2:52:06] We kind of almost need somebody to tell us what we need.
[2:52:08] What's the feasibility?
[2:52:10] What's the cost of the feasibility?
[2:52:12] Yes, so the feasibility study, it's $15,000 plus expenses,
[2:52:17] which is for just covers lodging and local transportation
[2:52:20] and for the two weeks.
[2:52:23] So that's about it.
[2:52:24] And with that, even if you don't move forward
[2:52:27] with any of the solutions, you already have a very comprehensive report that allows you
[2:52:31] to create a strategy, right, and a path forward with the department.
[2:52:35] The report would consist at all departments?
[2:52:39] No, the 15,000 will cover one department that you will have to select.
[2:52:43] Oh, one department?
[2:52:44] Yes.
[2:52:47] And if I could ask Mr. Medford, would you recommend certain departments?
[2:52:53] Not 25.
[2:52:54] Because in the end of the day, I mean, we have an established chain of command, right?
[2:53:02] And so for the most part, it becomes very tricky because a lot of department heads are
[2:53:08] elected officials, right?
[2:53:09] And so if they, you could, well, I guess within the departments that the county sees,
[2:53:18] right?
[2:53:18] But the department heads, they fall under Mr. Medford's realm, right, within the
[2:53:23] chain of command.
[2:53:23] And so all sectors in the county, right, at least most of them that have, I guess, I guess a, if the
[2:53:39] constituents going to have an experience, they're going to have it with most elected officials.
[2:53:43] And so they are held accountable to their experience, right? And I guess their directives
[2:53:51] come from them, right? By statute. Within the other ones, I mean, I think Mr. Medford
[2:53:57] is the one that oversees them, you know, and I think that he's doing a good job, right? I
[2:54:03] think that he oversees those departments. If there are issues, I guess the checks and
[2:54:07] balances is the relationship we have with him, but I think that since I've been here,
[2:54:13] I think he has a healthy relationship with those departments. So, I mean.
[2:54:19] I think what he said we have I think what is it 23 or 28 elected officials not
[2:54:26] Anyway, we have like the tax office the district attorney the county attorney, you know those things work
[2:54:34] I'm sure all of those departments could use improvement, but we have no supervision over there
[2:54:39] So only the departments, you know road and bridge
[2:54:43] You know part what?
[2:54:45] Planning, engineering, the other big department is building maintenance, you know, those type
[2:54:55] of things really where we have direct influence over them.
[2:54:58] Yes, so the process, the first thing we wanted to get done is to present you with the methodology
[2:55:05] and the potential of the things that we do so that you can, we'll have an understanding
[2:55:11] of what's our methodology, but then the next step, and actually on the timeline
[2:55:14] that we had there up on the screen. The next step is to agree on how to focus those efforts,
[2:55:19] but if you agree with doing something like this, now it's where do we do it and how do
[2:55:24] we focus those efforts.
[2:55:25] Have you performed any work for any counties in the state?
[2:55:30] Yes, in the, yeah. We have done it for many private companies and also public entities.
[2:55:35] But which county?
[2:55:37] A county?
[2:55:37] Which county government?
[2:55:38] Specific counties. I'll have to check on our database. I'm not sure about that.
[2:55:43] Like I said, because we operate very different from the city.
[2:55:46] The city, you know, there's a lot more processes there that you could, you know, I think, dig your teeth into.
[2:55:53] Here, like I said, we're so restricted by statute, you know, they tell us, you have to do this, this, and this.
[2:55:59] Whether it makes sense or not, we still have to do it, you know?
[2:56:01] Yes. And our expertise is in that understanding the operating model, regardless of the industry and the entity, the organization.
[2:56:11] But it's operating that model and that the concept that I talked about technology processes people and organizations
[2:56:17] So that's what we will analyze and understand. I guess judge what we need to do
[2:56:21] I mean like our biggest budget a part of our budget is
[2:56:25] The sheriff in the jail, you know, obviously that would I think be good
[2:56:29] I think we need to reach out to the public officials and say would you like your department analyzed?
[2:56:34] Maybe they can do so you guys are understanding that when they brought this to me
[2:56:37] I mean, it's been there twice, and I just, it's, you could really open this up.
[2:56:42] I mean, it just depends on how much we want to.
[2:56:43] Well, ask the public officials to see if they would like, you know, to participate.
[2:56:47] Would I agree with the sheriff and the jail?
[2:56:50] Those are very...
[2:56:50] But we can't do it on our own, I don't think.
[2:56:52] No, we can't.
[2:56:53] We have to bring them on.
[2:56:53] I mean, I guess we could, but I mean, you know, to implement whatever the changes,
[2:57:00] they would have to buy in.
[2:57:01] So, I'd rather have them buy in first.
[2:57:04] Leroy, can you just, can we, you know, I think we already have an idea.
[2:57:07] idea of what's going on here, maybe we could continue working with the London group and maybe
[2:57:12] bring them on in a couple of weeks to be able to see what exactly we're wanting to do.
[2:57:18] How's that?
[2:57:19] Judge Commissioner Leroy Medford for the record, I'm intrigued by the item.
[2:57:23] I wasn't aware of the details of what they would be presenting this morning or this
[2:57:27] afternoon now, but certainly I could easily prioritize departments that I would think
[2:57:33] would be the best beneficial in having them you know review or go through the
[2:57:40] processes we have priority service departments but elected officials is a
[2:57:45] whole nother ballgame as you know I'm saying reach out to them just say offer
[2:57:49] this service and I'm not expecting you ought to come back by the way I mean you
[2:57:53] are fine and we could just bring it back on you know we had to we could do
[2:57:56] it on WebEx you've already been here presentation you don't have to be
[2:57:58] coming every often but that's just if you don't mind let's do that
[2:58:01] Are they right?
[2:58:02] Y'all don't believe that?
[2:58:04] I mean, I would hope to go ahead and get more information on your county government experience
[2:58:09] within the state.
[2:58:10] I would hate to explore such an inquiry with someone that hasn't done any work within the
[2:58:19] county government.
[2:58:21] Absolutely.
[2:58:21] We could get his experience, Leroy.
[2:58:24] Thank you.
[2:58:25] Yes, sir.
[2:58:25] Thank you.
[2:58:26] Thank you so much.
[2:58:27] Thank you all very much.
[2:58:28] Appreciate it.
[2:58:28] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Next we have item 28 commissioner. Thank you. I'm going to have Mr. Pena. He's going to present.
[2:58:44] Well, discussing the possible actions to approve a permanent exemption of the maximum of $15 part-time hourly rate of $22 maximum of all Web County constables. This is kind of what I would second that. And I would like to ask, I don't know if the sheriff.
[2:58:58] That was easy enough, don't you think?
[2:59:02] They've left.
[2:59:03] Does the sheriff have any people?
[2:59:04] Does he ever do part-time peace officers?
[2:59:06] Jesse, do you know?
[2:59:07] I'm not sure if he still does.
[2:59:09] I know if he's had in the past.
[2:59:11] During COVID, the court went ahead and hired
[2:59:15] the for-daiders, if I'm not mistaken.
[2:59:18] Well, I would just go ahead and add, you know,
[2:59:21] I guess anybody that we have,
[2:59:23] I know at the fairgrounds we use people also,
[2:59:25] so as long as they're certified peace officers, right?
[2:59:28] Exactly.
[2:59:29] They would have to be certified.
[2:59:30] But this goal for everybody?
[2:59:31] That's a key word, certified peace officers.
[2:59:34] So I would add blanket everybody
[2:59:37] that's a certified peace officer at $22.
[2:59:39] That works, no, part time.
[2:59:42] For part time.
[2:59:43] Yeah.
[2:59:43] It was easy.
[2:59:44] Honorable George, members of the commission of support
[2:59:48] for the record, Javier and Venya
[2:59:51] under Ricky Hyman's office, but it's.
[2:59:54] We got a motion. We got a second.
[2:59:56] Motion second. Any opposed?
[3:00:00] Your first one, you're batting a thousand right now. All right, item 29, discussion of possible
[3:00:07] action to enter in amendment number one for the consulting services agreement with McWilliams
[3:00:12] Governmental Affairs Consultant, Inc., and it goes from, I think it's $10,000 a month.
[3:00:19] Is this increasing monthly sum to $10,000 for additional consulting support? Is this,
[3:00:25] Who was on my speaking with?
[3:00:28] Nathan?
[3:00:30] Is this on the off season as well or just peak season or on season of the year or what?
[3:00:36] It's for three years.
[3:00:40] So consistently $10,000 a month for three years?
[3:00:44] Yes, and it also, the original was $6,500 a month?
[3:00:49] For the state of Texas, and now that they're adding Washington.
[3:00:52] But the amendment that they submitted to us dates back to January 1 for 10,000.
[3:00:58] I don't think we could do that, can we?
[3:01:00] No, I don't believe it.
[3:01:01] But going forward, we can.
[3:01:03] I don't think we could go back.
[3:01:04] If you just give me a starting date, we can put that in there.
[3:01:06] If you want to understand, after November, whatever it is.
[3:01:10] I'm OK with it.
[3:01:10] I just know.
[3:01:11] I mean, if y'all are OK with this, I know we don't.
[3:01:13] What they've done for the state of Texas, I mean, y'all saw.
[3:01:17] Yeah, no, it's completely different.
[3:01:19] But above and beyond.
[3:01:19] And didn't we pay Johnson $100 and something down there, Johnson Brothers?
[3:01:27] I think it was $7,500 during the peak time and $5,000 in the off time.
[3:01:34] Would that be the state or federal?
[3:01:36] That would be for these states.
[3:01:37] And they didn't do anything.
[3:01:38] We've never really had anybody else.
[3:01:40] We never talked to them.
[3:01:42] We went to their office.
[3:01:43] We got barbecued.
[3:01:45] Barbecued?
[3:01:46] Yeah.
[3:01:48] I'm going to move this motion.
[3:01:49] Second.
[3:01:49] I just think they're worth it.
[3:01:52] I think what they bring to the table,
[3:01:55] the amount of people that they bring,
[3:01:57] the doors that they're opening are incredible.
[3:01:59] And then I think, did you all like what you all saw this year?
[3:02:05] I appreciate it, the trip and the experience.
[3:02:09] I know that three years is a long commitment,
[3:02:13] and I'm hoping to see if you guys get amended
[3:02:15] to at least two years for a year,
[3:02:17] and that way we could go ahead and see where,
[3:02:18] Yeah, we can do it. We can terminate it anytime. Yeah, you want to do two years? Yes, you give a three month
[3:02:26] something like a 90 day 90 day notice or something and now then I'll remove my amendment
[3:02:32] Good. I have a motion. I have a second. Any opposed?
[3:02:37] Motion carries. Yes, use for clarification. Did you want that new fee the 10,000 to start November 1?
[3:02:47] So it's going from $6,500 a month to $10,000 a month?
[3:02:51] Yes, starting November 1st.
[3:02:53] Starting November 1st.
[3:02:56] Very good.
[3:02:57] And let's go ahead and go into Executive Session, Item 26, which was Item 26,
[3:03:04] discussing the possible action to consider a Chapter 381 Economic Development Agreement
[3:03:08] between Webb County and Kilham Development, LTD,
[3:03:10] by approving the annual grant payment to kill them development LTD in the amount equivalent to 100% of uncommitted M and O and
[3:03:17] business personnel property portion of the Valorium
[3:03:21] Advalorum, this is
[3:03:24] Typical at Valorum property tax generated by 32 downtown properties inside downtown tours
[3:03:30] And then it goes on for item 30 just possible action
[3:03:34] We're invoking section 551.087 to go into closed session for that item.
[3:03:41] You're good.
[3:03:42] You're good.
[3:03:43] And discussion of possible actions to settle the claim presented by the law office of Eduardo
[3:03:47] A. Castillo, PLCC for the client Teresa Hernandez, TriStar claim, and then item 31,
[3:03:55] discussion of possible actions to approve the second amendment of solar, solar,
[3:03:58] energies, lease, and the easement agreement between Webb County and the benefits.
[3:04:03] we're going to go into the executive session the approximate time and he's
[3:04:07] abstaining from the back
[3:04:23] and let's go ahead and move on item 26 first
[3:04:29] item 26 discussing impossible actions to consider chapter 31 economic development
[3:04:35] agreement between Webb County and Killham development mr. Braden
[3:04:51] judge I
[3:04:51] think we're recommending that you send this to outside the council to mr. James
[3:04:55] Allison and for feasibility analysis by bond and financial advisers and table to matter
[3:05:05] until we can get that.
[3:05:07] So we're looking for feasibility.
[3:05:08] What was the other thing?
[3:05:10] Financial.
[3:05:10] Financial.
[3:05:11] And Judge, I would like to add to that that we – if they could help us with guidelines,
[3:05:17] like we had for all the wind and solar, you know, or regular economic development
[3:05:21] where you say, you meet these criteria, anybody would qualify.
[3:05:24] Similar to what you have for the chapter 312 tax abatements. You need to have a guidelines in place to
[3:05:32] Establish the basis for any of these 380 on agreement so we could help the killings properties and everybody else's as well
[3:05:38] Downtown so we're just trying to figure that out or anywhere for that matter. Yeah, the line they meet that criteria
[3:05:45] Yeah, no problem at all. So move
[3:05:47] You have second already. Oh motion sec motion second any opposed
[3:05:51] motion carries
[3:05:53] and then that's item 26 so then give us one second and then item 30 discuss in
[3:06:00] the possible actions to settle the claim presented by law officers over to
[3:06:03] what the Castillo motion second any opposed at the terms discussed in the
[3:06:08] we're just asking for authority to settle within the terms is discussed in
[3:06:13] executive session very good second motion second any opposed
[3:06:22] I am 31 discussing the possibility to approve the second amendment of Solar Energy, Gran
[3:06:30] Solar, that's what it's called, and it doesn't say Gran, Gran Solar Energy lease and easement
[3:06:36] agreement between Webb County and the benefit of the Webb County school lands, Cochillas
[3:06:40] and Las Lomas pastures.
[3:06:41] I'm going to go ahead and I move, I so move to approve the second amendment on the
[3:06:46] So on the grand solar lease easement agreement on the first amendment of the tax abatement
[3:06:50] agreement between Webb County and Grand Solar, Texas to LC as presented, I should say solar
[3:06:57] lease.
[3:06:58] I'm sorry.
[3:06:59] I move to approve the second amendment to the solar lease and easement agreement and
[3:07:03] the first amendment of the tax abatement agreement between Webb County and Grand
[3:07:07] Solar, Texas.
[3:07:08] That's my move.
[3:07:09] Second.
[3:07:10] second motion seconds any oppose and commission is obscene motion carries
[3:07:16] thank you all very well communications I do have one yes Friday afternoon there
[3:07:23] was a trailer rollover at the 21 mile mark oh yeah I was and I have never seen
[3:07:32] such a terrible traffic jam and really I don't want to say incompetence but
[3:07:38] But there was no traffic control, oh, that's when I say no, there was traffic control.
[3:07:44] But it, from my house to the checkpoint was two hours and 58 minutes.
[3:07:53] And the person that was behind me, I think it was almost five hours to get to the checkpoint.
[3:08:00] They had one DPS officer at the tourist bureau exit and one on the other side.
[3:08:06] had, cars were going, taking both lanes of the frontage road, you know, ongoing traffic,
[3:08:13] people were cutting everywhere, going across the grass, driving down shoulders.
[3:08:17] If they weren't doing anything, two other DPS showed up two hours later, and I had already
[3:08:22] text dollars to get us, the sheriff said, please send deputies, this thing is out
[3:08:26] of control, and they never got there. And like I said, the two other deputies got
[3:08:33] there and we're standing outside just I mean the DPS typically and we're just
[3:08:38] talking nobody really you know getting in their directing traffic and it was it
[3:08:46] was just really terrible and then you know they routed us around all the way
[3:08:50] to 255 you know get made us get off on 83 go north and go back to 255 and then
[3:08:55] no no traffic control at 255 I don't know what they were all doing but there
[3:09:00] was nobody on site. It was just the accident between 83 and 21 mile marker.
[3:09:05] They see Wheeler by himself. I don't know what happened,
[3:09:07] but he fell over across both lanes. And so they had to close the highway.
[3:09:13] And like I say, whoever was in charge of the situation didn't do a very good job.
[3:09:18] And I don't know anybody at DPS anymore.
[3:09:21] Was County involved at all? Like they never showed up.
[3:09:25] DPS is the one that takes control of the highways, right? Yeah.
[3:09:29] But I mean, I thought just deputies could have helped with traffic control is
[3:09:34] Everybody half the time they were sitting in the car
[3:09:37] you know
[3:09:38] They weren't I could see it was it was literally I
[3:09:42] Think the accident happened at two o'clock, and it did not clear up to almost midnight. I think 11 30s
[3:09:48] That's how that's how that's how crazy I was
[3:09:51] So okay
[3:09:54] Seconds any opposed
[3:09:59] I can keep talking if you want.