Okay, let's bring the court order, please. Let's stand for the opening prayer and the pledge of allegiance. Richard O'Neill, you join me in the prayer, please. You're having a father. We thank you for the many blessings that you give us each and every day, Lord, for those that we recognize and often those that we don't. We ask Lord that you keep your hand on our young men and women overseas and those here that are protecting the great freedoms that you've given us. We ask Lord that you would be with this court, like our decisions, pleasing in your eye, for all you made blessings. We give you thanks in your name. Amen. I meet it. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of of our America. And we're just going to be a republic for which it stands, one nation, undervalid, and the only difference of its liberty and justice for all. On our second slide, I pledge allegiance to the United States, one thing they underval mind, we're going to move a few things around today because of some schedules. Let's take the TCDRS presentations. Good morning. Good morning, sir. How are you? If you don't mind, you're on our lecture passies out to you. Sure. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You're on our commissioners. I appreciate this opportunity to talk to you today. I do know that you all have a full agenda. So I'll try to keep this as brief as possible, but please feel free to stop me at any time if you have any questions. I'd like to first address the plan itself, how the plan works. Review some of the information that is, my opinion needed to make sound judgements for the benefits for the employees of Montgomery County. If we have time, if you would like for me to answer any questions regarding House Bill 958, I'd be more than happy to also. By the way, are you all for that or gets that bill? Well sir, we can't take a stand like that. We are simply the administrators of the retirement plan. So all that we can tell you that we're going to do is that we're going to create a study based on the bill itself and give the employers the outcome of it. We're going to rely upon you, the employers as the owners of the plan, if you oppose it or in favor of it, to contact your representatives. Okay. All right. Go ahead. Thank you, sir. Again, I'm starting to talk about the retirement system. We've been doing the retirement business for over 40 years, and the reasons that we feel like we've been doing this retirement right is simply because we are a savings-based benefit. We are responsibly funded. And one thing that is key that most of the other state requirement retirement plans don't have is flexibility and local control over the benefits that they offer. We partner with more than 620 counties and districts throughout the state of Texas. In fact, every county except for Ford and Motley are a member of TCDRS and we serve more than 225,000 members in over 40,000 retirees within this plan. The benefits of Texas, this plan actually paid out more than $797 million in benefits in 2011 and it supported about $1.2 billion in economic output, created over 9,000 jobs, and added about $675 million to the Texas GDP. One of the statistics I saw somewhere was the percentage of the money you pay out in benefits that was related to interest earnings. Yes sir. It was around 76% is that correct? Of 77%. Yes sir. I've got a slide specifically, specifically to paying to that if you can hold on for just one second. I can motor through this. What's interesting to me is that Montgomery County, this study was created for Montgomery County. Montgomery County paid out in 2011 about $19 million in benefits through the TCDRS. We were created in 67 through the Texas legislature, managed by an independent nine member board of trustees. What people need to understand is that we do receive absolutely no state funding. Our funding comes through investment earnings, our employers and our employees only. As of December 2012, we manage an assets of about $19.7 billion. We are a low cost provider of benefits. It goes back to the responsibly funded plan. We can provide basically the same benefit as a defined contribution or 401k plan at about half the cost. And the reason is that we involve professional investment managers. They do this for living and their returns on an annual basis has shown to be about 2% greater than the individual. So over the career or lifetime of a person, that's a huge difference in earnings. We also have an optimally balanced portfolio or work forever young. As a 401K plan, we never have to draw back as we get older for fear that we might take a hit in the market. We have a continual surplus of people in there so we can always continue to strive after that 8% return goal that we have. And then finally we have pulled on Jevvety Risk. We don't have to ever worry about over-saving for our retirement like an individual might because they don't know how long they could possibly live. With TCDRS we can identify how long a group of people will live with great accuracy and never have to over save to provide that maximum benefit. And people always ask, well what kind of a fun or what kind of shape is this plan in? And if you look at this graph here from 2002 to the end of 2011, we averaged right around 90%. And now, taking consideration that during this period of time and right before it, we had the tech bubble crash, we had the 9-11 incident. Of course, we had the recession of 2008, and then the recovery in 2009 and 2010. Throughout that entire decade, we still maintained right at about a 90% funded ratio. And funded ratio simply is kind of a gauge as to the well-being or the health of this plan. In fact, rating agencies like standards, poor, and fitch will say that a plan at 80% funded or better is an indicator of a good, well-funded plan. At TCDS, we're a little right at about 90%. As I said earlier, we're savings-based programs. This is the easiest plan to understand, is because simply your employees are saving for their own retirement. So each paycheck that they receive, a percentage of that goes into their retirement fund, and they earn 7% on that money annually. And then when that person, if and when they become best and eligible to retire, will receive a benefit based upon what they have saved plus the employer match. Okay? Now that employer match is part of the benefit. A lot of people tend to confuse the match with the funding. It's not. The funding is separate from this 250% match. And it's estimated from Montgomery County only about 20 or 25% of your employees will actually invest and receive or receive a retirement through the plan. Because remember, if you withdraw from the plan and get a different job, if you withdraw your funds, you lose the match. If you roll your funds over, you lose a match. So the only way that that 250% match is going to be involved is if they retire. A real quick snapshot of Montgomery County, your currently paying six, the employees are depositing 6%, your employee to match is at 250%, you have a vestig of eight years, and then your retirement eligibility is 60 years of age of eight years, the rule of 75 and 30 years of service at any age. A quick snapshot of the employees of Montgomery County, the average employees about 44 years old, they have 10 years of service and on average about 44,000 in salary. On the other hand, your retirees with Montgomery County retired about 61 years old, they have about 16 years of service with the county and earn about $18,800 as an annual retirement benefit for this plan. Replacement ratio is simply replacing what you were replacing retirement as you were an employee or your current salary as an employee. As you can see here, again, as a savings-based program, their benefit is going to be based or determined on how much they save. So if you have somebody that's working ten years, they're going to replace about 20% of their current income in retirement. On the other hand, when you have somebody that's worked here over 30 years, they're going to be able to replace about 87% of their current income. So again, a savings-based program makes a lot of sense. And how do we find this? And we asked a little bit earlier. Basically, because we have a career of an employee who are able to put money into save money, and based up simply upon that, that the majority, or 77% of every benefit dollar that is paid out, comes through investment earnings. Likewise, through the employer contribution, which is the monthly payment that the county makes to fund these benefits about 13 cents of every benefit dollar comes from that, and then finally, the employee through their deposits pays about 10 cents of every benefit dollar. So if you want to take a look at this, when we're talking about our retirement, we're talking about long-term horizons here. We're paying, we're not only saving wilder, we're, there are career employee, but we're also paying out a lifetime. So as you can see, our long-term investment horizon over a 30-year period of time is about 9.2 percent. When you consider that the average employee works 15 to 17 years for the county is retired another 15 or 20 years. That's 30 plus years. Our goal for that long term horizon is 8% return every single year. So over 30 years we've achieved 9.2%. So we have been able to sustain this goal. Our returns are measured against market benchmarks and it's growths or net-a-fees. No. Our benchmarks are measured through the market. I'm sorry, I've got that messed up. We measure our performance through benchmarks and it is evaluated and reviewed by our board on a quarterly basis. Now granted if we have a long-term investment horizon of 8% and we can count on that every year this is kind of what it would look like. We would receive 8% every single year but the reality is that that doesn't occur. There's always ups and downs in the market which we call volatility or risk. And in any given year, we can depend upon a range of 10 percent, either greater than that 8 percent or below that 8 percent. So that means on any given year, we can achieve up to 18 percent or down to a negative 2 percent and still expect or maintain that 8 percent return assumption. And in fact, since 1977, if you take a look at this graph, other than the great recession in 08 and the recovery in 09, our long-term investment goals have been right on that range. A quick snapshot of the asset allocation, asset allocation determines about 90% of our returns. We do this to maintain that 8% assumption horizon and also to mitigate any volatility or risk in the plan. This information is readily available on our website and again every quarter when the board reviews this, we update this information so it is a constant evolving thing. Now I talked to you earlier about the plan, the investment horizons, the money that you're receiving. Now we're going to talk about the employer rates and how they're determined. The employer rate represents simply the percentage of payroll that the county pays to fund in advance for this retirement for their employees. And what we do is that our actuaries look at this plan and they look at your workforce. They look at the age of your workforce. They look at the age of your workforce. They look at the payroll growth. They look at deaths. They look at retirements. They look at investments. All this information. And they look at the value of future benefits in today's dollars. And then these actuaries get together. And they come up with your plan's rate or what we call the actuarial evaluation. This evaluation will become available to you at the end of April or early part of May. It will be on the website also. Currently right now in 2013 your rate is 11.24%, which is calculated. The county has taken the appropriate steps to actually pay more than what is actually actually necessarily necessary to fund these benefits. You're currently paying 12.27. So what that means is that you're paying more to pre-fund this benefit than just by paying the required rate. But understand that by paying this required rate you are investing or saving for the employees future benefits while you're paying down the unfunded liability or the cost of this plan. We have a 20-year closed amortization schedule so no matter what your unfunded ratio is or the dollar amount is over that 20-year period of time this required rate will save for your retirees benefits but will also work down that unfunded liability. And again, unfunded liabilities, I think people assume that unfunded liability is something that's not being paid. It's simply not true. Liabilities are simply the difference of the estimated plan liabilities and the plan assets. It's the cost of doing business. A COLA will increase your unfunded liabilities. Benefit changes will increase unfunded liabilities. Benefit changes will increase unfunded liabilities. But understand, with the closed year 20 amortization schedule, that will be paid down to zero. Any plan changes, such as COLA's or any benefit changes, will be paid in a 15 year amortization. This is a quick snapshot of the 2013 rates. This is basically the actuarial valuation that the actuar is working on today for the 2014 rates. And this is a projection of your rates in the upcoming years. Now, what I want you to understand is that these are just trends. Every year is a new year. Investments earnings are increased or decreased, but understand or try to use these rates as a trend for your rates. And as you will notice, the trend is that your rates are going to continue to go up. We are still recognizing the losses from 08, even with the recovery in 09 and 10 and last year we earned a 12.4%. What it's doing is we're recognizing these losses over 10 years so that the market can correct herself and that we can reduce and stabilize rates. In this example here, this was the trend of your rates after 08 and you can see that your rates were going up right at about 16% and then in 09 and 010 your rates reduced dramatically and decreased dramatically because of that positive investment return. In 2011, we did have a negative 1%, which still fell within that range of 10% below that 8% return assumption, but it did cause your rates to go up just a little. But understand that each year your rates are still scheduled or projected to go upwards because of that 2008 loss. Your plan is assets versus liabilities. If you want to get kind of a clear picture of it, the green is your assets, the red is or the watermelon color is your liabilities. As you can see through that closed amortization period, your unfunded liabilities will be paid off. Last thing I want to talk about is that this plan has local control and flexibility. You every single year as a the Commissioner's Court can look at the benefits that are being offered and determine if this is a benefit that you can afford. In this example it can show you that you can reduce benefits if you need to. Right now you're at a 250% and a 6% employee deposit rate. If you had to drop that down to 200 and 6%, you could see that it would go from 11.22 to 9.32. Now these are just random numbers. These aren't numbers reflecting on your county. But this gives you the idea that if you have to do it, you can. And that's what separates us from the state employees retirement system and teachers retirement system because every single county owns their benefits and their plans. You can do what you're currently doing last year. You paid a lump sum dollar amount to reduce that unfunded liability. You're also paying a higher elected rate. We can't ask for any more than that, but what you're doing is that you're getting to that fully funded status as quickly as possible. Any questions? Okay. Let's go ahead and take the resolution commissioners. It was a bill filed in the House House bill 958 that wanted to reduce the contribution from 7% to 5%. I think everybody here is opposed to that and I move that we oppose House Bill 958. The one thing I would do want to add to that is just that I'm all for the state working with the county and with other entities to try to make certain that they're spending their money wisely but for them to mandate what our rate should be when the county has ultimate responsibility to make that decision and each an individual county can decide for themselves what their rate should be. The way our plan is designed, I too will oppose this. You mean you're your favorite of the motion, which was supposed to be. Yes, yes, yes. I oppose the bill. Great. All right, all in favor say aye. Motion passes. Thank you very much. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Okay. Commissioner dole has to we move up the firing range situation. What numbers that commission Dull, H13, Adam and number of 40, it's public hearing today. We have to recess this public hearing. Okay, let's recess this court and convene the public hearing. Commissioner Dull, it's all yours. Say, first time's on the application of cancellation of a portion of Coleman Estates Section 1 of Subdivision located in Montgomery County, Texas filed by Terry Porter and Jennifer Porter. I know there are several people here that want to speak about that. We'd ask that, and a lot of the comments are going to be very similar. If there are a limited number of you that would like to express your thoughts and concerns I have a number of letters and a number of emails but certainly would like to hear from you so if you want. Yeah if we could let's limit the speakers to normally five we probably have a hundred that could speak again it's probably the same message, but it's your turn to speak now as citizens of the public. The source is not just like this, and you don't mind me going through that. Thank you, or I'll take a couple of comments. What we provide to you is on the first few pages as they list that shows the petition, And then the names and properties associated with the objections. And, excuse me. And we did receive one more objection today. So I believe we have 193 objections. Excuse me, 96 objection to this following the list of the petition and the objections as a copy of the plat of Coleman the State which should show the lots and question based on the application with your reporter and how it situates with the rest of the loss. Then following that is brief memos that are section prepared and stored in the office there, giving you the law and the basic facts of this matter. And then following that is the copy of the actual staff that you are to be applying in this instance. Now I will say this is Mr. Bay earlier, he's one and what time come. I think he was going to arrive around 10-15 to 10-3. No one met at the end of the session. I just passed that along to you. And at this point, I don't know if you have any questions of our office or if you want to wait. I'm glad you're here. I'm still in the position of the other office. Can you give just a real brief summary of the law and what your office is recommending? Certainly. Basically, this is a rarely used statute and it is C. And the application was actually prepared by Mr. Bayes, a non-application that came from our office. As an application prepared, Mr. Porter's behalf by their private attorney. It seeks the cancellation of a portion of a platted subdivision, Coleman Estates. All of the lots in Coleman Estates are less than 10 acres. The statute basically provides that a person who seeks a cancellation of part of the plat must apply to Commissioner's Court to cancel all or part of the plat. The application does contain not only the Porter signature, but actually at that point of signature or of declaration by every other property owner I think except of one in Coleman the state that said they had no objection to the plaque. Subsequent there too though after notice, even before but after notice of the hearing which is required by the statute to be the notice required to be published we did It's received several objections From property owners in Coleman of states Then had originally signed Yes, they had originally signed and that would be missur Smith Mr. Dan Isbell, John Wayne Lewis, Brian Bullock, at least five from Coleman State and I believe there are total of about 15 lots in Coleman State of which Mr. Porto, Mr Mr. Miss Porter on four I do believe. The statute provides that if at least 75% of the people affected by the plaque, affected by the request cancellation request that then the court shall grant it unless 10% of those affected by the request for plaque cancellation object and then Commissioner's Court has discretion whether to grant cancellation or not. And based upon what we have found, based upon the application, the number of objections or research on the plaque and the property ownership. That 10% threshold has been met. So it's our opinion that this court has discretion whether to grant the application or to deny the application. Great. Thank you. You're welcome. I'm going to have a technical discipline here. Okay. I don't need it on either. I need to get for the other work. Okay. Hello, commissioners and dead sadler. I am Catherine Page. I'm a resident with three young children, two girls and a boy whose home is only 406 yards for Mr. Porter's frying ranges that he has constructed and used on his land. I'm here because I fear for my life and the lives of my children. On days, Mr. Porter uses the firing range, we are prisoners in our own home. On multiple occasions, while I was outside during the use of the firing ranges, I heard bullets cracking through the trees in my direction. I distinctly noticed sound based on my experience with firearms. My children and the neighborhood children love to play in my yard and on the nature trail near my home, but were not allowed to do so when the firing range is in youth, which was every Saturday and Sunday from morning until dark and most afternoon. For the past 13 years I've worked in education, but previously I served as a Harris County Sheriff Deputy for eight years where I have experience with firearms, ranges, and gun safety. Almost every member of my family is an avid hunter into sports shooting. My children have completed their hunter safety courses. They know how to use firearms. They are well educated and gun safety as any gun owner's children should be. I wanna say adamantly that this is not an anti-second amendment issue. I am pro-ownership and safe use of guns. I'm like I'm being portrayed by shadow industry. Give me a hand on my packets to them. In fact, something that makes me very upset is when the second amendment is abused because that abuse causes infringement on all of our rights. I'm against unsafe gun use and placing a firing range in the smack middle of a residential area, and my opinion is not safe gun practice, especially when it's located to 250 to 400 yards from homes and four subdivisions, which are Coleman Estate Section 1, Magnolia Pines, Indigo Lake Estates, and Alfred Road. The established and plated nature trail used by families for hiking, biking, and horseback riding is located only approximately 100 to 150 yards from the firing ranges. You can see maps in the shadow industry information and Magnoia hunting supply information in the packet. All are well within the ballistic range of any caliber firearm. These private outdoor ranges located in Coleman Estate Section 1 on the Fort Lott's owned by Mr. Terry Porter and Jennifer Porter are to be used by magnolia hunting supply and shadow industry's training academy for the commercial purpose of teaching a variety of beginner to advanced firearms and combat classes. This issue is about the location and proximity of these firing ranges to surrounding residents affecting their safety, quality of life, and property values. Over the past two years, my neighbors and I have feared for our safety and called in multiple complaints to Constable Precinct II office and Montgomery County Sheriff's Department to know of L. Every time, no matter how many shots were fired, no matter how many bullets we heard cracking through the trees in our direction, and even though Mr. Porter and others were clearly discharging firearms in the direction of buildings, habitations, vehicles, animals, and people. We were told that there was nothing law enforcement could do until one of us are something with struck by a bullet from Mr. Porter's property. It wasn't until October 24, 2012, when David Walker, the county attorney, took the initiative to research the law and determine that Mr. Porter was in fact in violation of law. Today I'm hearing court because Mr. Porter is attempting to bypass this law. He is requesting to cancel his portion of land from Coleman Estate Section 1 in an effort to create unrestricted 10 plus acres flat which will legalize his firing ranges aimed toward the close by homes and the nature trail. If you could show us Coleman estate in relation to this firing range, I can't tell from this map. Yes. And this is the firing range. This will be Coleman estate right here. This map is a little bit blurry. This many departments of this map this will show you the mileage range of the distance and some of these separate firearms is traffic. But right here would be Coleman estate and then right in here would be my home. And then they go like a thing. So this is Coleman estate. This would be in the go like a safe right here. And then this way is Magnoia Pines. Okay. thank you. Okay, in addition, if he's successful once again, it will cause us to fear for our lives making us prisoners in our own home and stripping away the use of the nature trail. The loss of the nature trail affects 706 properties and indigo-like estates. In addition to the safety issues and quality of life for me and my family, I also have concerns about the effects this would have on property values. All of the values of the homes surrounding this land are based on the established deed restrictions of these properties. As of now, Mr. Porter's land is deed restricted to single residential use only. Although there has definitely been a lack of enforcement by the responsible parties, Mr. Porter is in violation of multiple deed restrictions in Coleman Estates section 1 at this time. Based on similar cases in Texas, the negative impact on property values near firing ranges was more than 30%. My husband and I have worked all of our lives to provide and build our family a safe home. It is not fair that one man should strip this away from us and other families. In addition, the negative impact will reduce the taxable income for our county and our school district. Even if Mr. Porter pays commercial taxes on his property, it will not equal the loss reduce the taxable income for our county and our school district. Even if Mr. Porter pays commercial taxes on his property, it will not equal the loss of tax dollars. Another issue we are facing is the possible environmental impact of let-abatement, being so close to our homes and in the creek that feeds our lake and other watersheds, because his firing ranges are located in the floodway and the floodplain. The bottom line here is that I am respectfully asking you not to approve the cancellation of plants or any type of replanting on Mr. Porter's land and Coleman Estate Section 1, any approval impact the safety, quality of life, and property value for my family and so many others. Thank you very much. Thank you. I think Holman and States residents wanted to come up and say something. You're too. And then I just want to get this from you. We're going to death while you do that. I have a lot of things. You can talk. Go ahead. She can do it. She's not using that. I can talk. Go ahead. Go ahead. If you're ready, you have to see Conduver. She's not using that as one thing. Morning. Morning. My name is Misty. I live in Holman estate on lot 4 and lot 7. I live there with my husband and my two children, Lane and Caden. We built our house in May of 2006 and when we were 25 years old. And we always wanted to raise our children on acreage where they can run and be kids and have plenty of room to do the sorts of things that all of the children should do. We love where we live. We're way out there but still close enough to all of the amenities that we need but we love where we live. My family and I are strongly opposed to Terry Reporter removing the deed restrictions and returning as lots to the original status as they existed prior to Coleman culmination which would allow him to use the land for any purpose. We believe a heavily populated neighborhood is not the appropriate place to construct a firing range. We recently learned to Mr. Porter's intention to conduct AR-15 combat courses and many nighttime shooting courses which makes me fearful for the safety of my family. Let me be clear we're gun owners, we're hunters. I'm not opposed to anyone owning or owning guns or any recreational shooting. However, we are opposed to anything to put our home and our family in jeopardy. I do not believe that anybody here today would want a firing range constructed this close to their house. Great. Thank you, Miss Senior. Good afternoon. My name is K Ross Purvis. And I live at 21202 4C Drive, my husband and I. And my mother, my elderly mother is 80 years old. I'm representing her today. She does live in Coleman State. She purchased the first two acres that was available during this time. And at the time, my father was very ill and he wanted her to be close to us. He passed away shortly after clearing the property and never got to see the home there, but my mother purchased a home and put their income in the states. She is fearful to stay there. My grandchildren will not come and visit her. She lives three doors down from this gun range and she actually thinks that Pasadena is safer to live so she has kept her home in Pasadena and she comes and visits occasionally but she's 80 she's very ill and she doesn't want to live there. Thank you ma'am. My name is Wayne Lewis. I'm oner in Lot 3 and colon of states when I originally found that he wanted to consolidate the four plots. I had no objection because I was told that he was going to build a house on it. Subsequently, I found that he wanted to put a shooting range in there instead. I believe he's trying to establish a business at this location, which includes classroom time and field exercises. Some at night were flashlights and live ammo. My properties are probably 650 feet for Mr. Porter's proposed range. There are others much closer, including the nature trail on the east and Alper Road on the west, which is about 30 feet. An accidental shot in any direction with certainly land, either on the road or on somebody's property. And hasn't it pervaded? Not injured, anybody. However, accidents still happen. No matter how much safety is installed. People are still killed with unloaded guns. The United States has lost a nuclear bomb in Mexico, somewhere off the coast of Mississippi, Louisiana. He can't find it. A shooting range at this location is dangerous. It comes to be, and I want to sell my property. What potential buyers say when I tell him a shooting range is less than 650 feet? I think that all properties in the area will be devalued. Probably not the taxes, but that's the irrelevant. I think when the classes are held, only residents will become very concerned, being so close to the possibility of a straight bullet. I know what I was during the October class that he held out there. Let's not let the residents in this area be constantly worried of a stray bullet. Let's not let that purchase as an investment for their children and heritans lose that value. Let's have a safe neighborhood. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Good morning. Thank you for seeing our petitions. I am Dr. Dorothy Murray. I'm a local veterinarian. My home for the past 16 years, right here, share this family. I'm a local veterinarian. Good morning. Thank you for seeing our petitions. I am Dr. Dorothy Murray. I'm a local veterinarian. My home for the past 16 years, right here, shared this boundary with Mr. Coleman for the deporous property here in Coleman and state along Alpergrab. This is the nature trail, which is also a portion of that boundary for indigual age and state residents, used by hypersipers and horses. I want you to know what it's been like to live here, go to Latin for a year. I'm not afraid of guns. I started shooting with my father when I was seven. I've been hunting for 43 years. I shot man-guy competition. I shot hospital weapons competition. But I am afraid in this reporter, and I am very afraid of this use of this property as it unranked. I've been in here for my life every day for the last three years. I was walking on my barber here before he built his fence, and I can't give you an exact date when I pull it. Struck a tree right in front of me, right here. I'm afraid that I was going to be the next thing struck by a bullet I called 911. A constable called me through our lab and said he's broken in Mr. Porter. And Mr. Porter had assured him that he had a pitch which he didn't have to be on. I'm about to show you a video of shooting in that hit done on February 11th, 2009. Notice that the weapon is aimed at a small dirt mound along the edge of the bridge. Right here, there are no firewalls. I can see a bundle of the weapon. This worm he's shooting at is too short. For that gunfire and bullets, come down over it and proceeding uphill, down this road, and potentially impacting any of these homes, along to bridge port. Kathy, can you use my video for me please? Okay. And as we draw out in the next section of the video, you can see that he is shooting new ease in this video. You will see his fence and you can see from the line of his fence here, he is shooting perpendicular to it directly in this direction. I'll do that to pin out now. As you draw out, you can see the fence and the lower portion, and the T-post, and the the wire and that fence is along your riding trail. That fence is on his side of the riding trail I just And you can see them looking at me in the video. There's my There's my neighbor's house Commission is that's taking up I agree Well, yeah, there's a couple other questions. I had Pushed many I got a call from Ross about some of the berms that have been placed in the firstothogel that the farm was not. The floodplain, the system, these farms were done and that's the one that raw has started this case on wheat and the product has been built. I'm ready to adjourn the public hearing. Commissioner, unless you want to continue. No. I'll ask there's someone here to support the gun range. Is that okay? Okay, can you set up the phone? I'll give them that order. Good morning, gentlemen. Good morning. My name is Kristen Bayes. I work with my husband Randy Bayes. We represent Harry and Jennifer Porter who are your applicants in this case. As I know you are well aware. The application that's on the agenda is to permit Mr. and Mr. Porter to remove their four lots from the plat of Coleman estates where those lots are situated. And I tell you that because I know that you've heard an awful lot about gun ranges. This is not a public referendum about a gun range. This is not a referendum about how people feel about having a gun range. The only issue that you will be voting on today is the question of whether Mr. and Mrs. Porter can remove therefore lots from the plat of Coleman Estates. Now what's brought us to this point is unquestionably the gun range. It's important for you to understand some background. This isn't anything new. Mr. Ms. Porter purchased this property in January of 2008. It's been more than five years and they opened the gun range really fairly shortly after that. They are in their fifth year of operation, half a decade. So this isn't something that's just popped up and has created some public uproar. This is something that's been out there. And I'd point out to you, no ambulance calls, no coroner calls, no injuries, no accidents, no shootings. It's been safe. Having said that, however, the county, as you know, has an ordinance. And that's what has started this request. The ordinance that's in place for Montgomery County says that the discharge of firearms is hereby prohibited Montgomery County on lots, plural, of 10 acres or smaller. Now, every law enforcement officer who uses this range, and we're talking about Montgomery County Sheriff's Deputies, Constables, DEA agents, FBI agents Agents, ICE Agents and Federal Marshals has taken the position that they're on 22 acres because they are. These four lots are treated as one single piece of property. It is fenced all around the perimeter, not within the lots themselves. The lot lines are really treated as imaginary lines for Mr. Ms Miss Porter and have been for half a decade. They treated as one parcel and it's 22 acres, far greater than the 10 acre prohibition number. That's in place. But for the first time last October, our former county attorney, David Walker, sent a letter to Mr. Miss Porter. And what he said in that letter is, they're in violation of the ordinance. And what we said in response is, no, they're not. No, they're not. The ordinance speaks in terms of law's plural. In fact, what your ordinance says is it defines the term lawt singular as being a lot in a plated subdivision that is 10 acres or less. And then the prohibition speaks to lot plural of 10 acres or less. That is to say the ordinance expects that each of the lots of issue would be fewer than 10 acres. But when you put the whole thing together into one parcels land as the the porters have always treated this part of land're way over 10 acres. It's 22 acres of land. But your former county attorney took an opposite position. He said, no, we're going to look at each lot individually. Never mind that they're used together. Never mind that they're fenced around the perimeter. Never mind that it has always been treated as one piece of land. We're going to use those imaginary lines. And not one of those lots is greater than 10 acres. And so here we are. We are here under local government code 232.008. And the only question before you is whether Mr. and Mrs. Porter should be permitted to remove their four lots from the plaqueatt of coalmen in states. Basically will you erase those imaginary lines and let them treat this property as they have always treated it, a 22 acre parcel of land. Now we're going to start with Section 232-008-SUB-E because what that provision of the statute says is basically your decision is made for you. If we have at least 75% of the property owners and coalmen estates joining in our application consenting to our application, then you have to grant it. If you look at our application, we have 96%. There is one couple that owns two acres out of this 49 plus acre subdivision who didn't join. That's it. All the other acreage joined. 96%. Now admittedly, some of those folks have since balked and they have filed written objections with this court. And that's fine. If we take those out of our application, we're at 75%. We still have the requisite number to compel the result that you would grant the application and remove these lots from the subdivision plat. But to the extent that it's a discretionary call, it becomes important to look at Subsection B because that tells you what the standard for your decision must be based upon. And it's not about how all the neighboring people feel about the use of the land. It's not even about the use of the land. It's not about how anyone feels about a gun range or a petting zoo or a knitting house. The question on the table is defined by statute. If we can show you that a property rights established by the plaque for people who own property in coal-manestates are not interfered with, then you grant the application. That's easily shown. And it's important to keep that standard in mind for two key reasons. First, the vast majority of people here, all about one, I understand, don't own property and coalman states. I understand that they have strong feelings about the use of that land, but their strong feelings cannot inform your decision. The statute tells you, if we show you no interference with the rights established by the plaid for people who own property and coalmen estates, then the decision is yes on our application. So it's certainly acceptable for the court to hear from those people and get a feel for what they think, but it cannot inform your decision. The second reason it's important to keep in mind is because we're not talking about how property owners feel about the property. Their concerns, their fears, their skepticism, we're not talking about that. We're talking about what property rights are established by the plat for Coleman estates and does removing these four lots interfere with that in any way. That's it. That's what the decision is. This is not a referendum on a gun range. So having said that, can you hold on one second? BD, are the attorneys representing the portals? Are they correct? I mean if property rights are zit on the side of the owners in this case? Owners in this case The initial I didn't agree that they today And again if there have been no objections related to the objection that's correct We have no discretion to set the camp for the plan But the fact that they're at least 10%, persons affected by the proposed cancellation have objectives. Then this gives court discretion that does not limit the court's discretion. Does not limit the court's behavior and does not limit it to that narrow application termination for further property right for our patient. Okay, thank you. Bottom line is the court has discretion. I think that we've heard enough, at least I've heard enough. I would say we adjourned the public hearing in Rikavid, Commissioner's Court. I would move that we deny the uh... re-plat the decommunistates of division discussion on favor say i I'll take the second judge and let everybody get even. Okay. Thank you sir. You bet. Sorry, I didn't get a chance to speak. I'm not on the sheet of my work. Thank you, sir. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Okay, let's proceed with, uh, Commissioner's Court. Judge, while we're getting that signed, there are a couple of people I'd like to recognize in court today, one of them being Mark Mooney, had a birthday on Sunday, had the birthday mark, and then Darren Bailey, I think your birthday is today, so happy birthday Darren. I love New York. I think you've forgotten another birthday. No that one's all right. No back turned 40 either Saturday or Sunday. Which was it? Saturday. Saturday. So happy birthday, come back. Thank you. I'd rather celebrate Daring and Mark's birthday. Okay, let's proceed with the agenda. We need a motion on the quarter agenda. Vote. All in favor say aye. Dr. Joanne Beacon Day. I move. Second. All in favor say I. I'm a kidney clerk. We need to prove the minutes for February 11, 2013. All of the favor, C.I. Under a county judge we need to prove the 2013 annual membership fee of $125 in the Texas County Judges Association. All of every see ya. Ninth District Court. Yes, sir. Judge. A little Kelly case. Very simply. We're requesting funding, I believe, in the amount of $80 a month for a cell phone for my court administrator. And the reason this is necessary is because we've increased our number of dockets to three a week. While she's sitting in court handling matters with attorneys, rescheduling matters, the phone is constantly ringing and unfortunately she spends half of her day responding to inquiries they could have been handled in court. The reason this will not be any increase in cost of the county is because I've managed in her salary alone to cut it to cut it by the from my predecessor by 15,000. I've also cut out a position in the court that was bringing, I believe it was $55,000 a year. I don't know commissioners remember, but one of my promises to the taxpayers was I was gonna cut $100,000 out of this court, and we're pretty close to doing that. You'll see that in the next budget, it's gonna be reflected. So I am asking for an $80 a month stipend, I guess is what it's called for this cell phone for my quarter administrator. Jim motion move. Thank you. And we would need a funding source gentleman. Can we not move it from his one-his-sourry line items? That salary line has already been affected and part of it was considered during the budget process last year if you'll recall the ninth district court was the one that lost some positions and they went to the waiting for it. Was it slept? The contingency? Was all of it yet, sir? Yes, sir. Okay, there's a motion. We'll move this from contingency. Is there a second? Second. All of the favor, Sarah. Hi. Thank you. Thank you judge. District Attorney. Morning gentleman. Good morning. This is Michael Coleman. She's currently our domestic violence prosecutor. This is the third year of our domestic violence prosecutor project. We began with Judge Blair. It's been highly, highly successful. We originally heard the grant. We said we were going to have a lot 250 cases. Now we're handling an excess of 350 cases. We're coming before you to ask for the approval of this third year of the grant. I'd like to let you know that your new grant administrator, Rebecca Antley, figured out a way to use this thing on for our match, which will actually allow us to utilize about 35,000 dollars more to stay on and save the county that match, which you guys put in last year. So we've brought up the Herb. Highly successful program, we've expanded it to two prosecutors, about 80% conviction rate on the methew final cases right now which is excellent if you know how difficult the cases are. So we're asking for your approval of the application for the criminal justice division grant domestic violence project here. I talked with Judge Laird about this and I know you guys do a great job in that court and it worked very hard on it so I move. Thank you sir. Second. All in favor, see I? Thank you very much. Sheriff. Good morning, Judge and commissioners and 13A. We ask that you consider and accept the return of $214,837.38 in salary funding previously advanced to the sheriff's office on October 22, 2012. Please withdraw these funds from the three budget lines listed. This is the repaying of the loan. paying a little. Second. All there. In 13 B we ask you to consider and approve not sweeping unused salary funding for the sheriff's office budget during the fiscal year. General, yeah, we did take that approach. We would have a problem with contingency funding. It would probably run out throughout the course of the year and in fact without a 200,000 that's cheap to mention the balance today was $11,000 and then before we prepared budget amendment funding the two bail institutions that were already in print in the national support. Well we can get on a schedule basis. If you need money, come back. We'll talk about it on an individual basis. I think we need to sweep. It's been the policy for this court for 22 years. Well, I just find it difficult to believe that the contingency balance is based upon whether or not we have excess salary funds? Something that has traditionally been used in the past. So for instance, one thing that contingency had this year was an unanticipated $700,000 that J.R.R.M. were brought. But those funds were anticipated before that fourth day because we helped with the audit and the tax office, but then they were reallocated to a different purpose. These particular funds were indeed provided by the court during the budget process for salaries, but knowing the history of turnover in an organization as big as the sheriff's office, it's reasonable to anticipate that there will be some turnover in the funds that could be flipped. I agree with Chief. I know we used to put a contra account in the shares department for this very purpose, but I think back then we allowed those funds to stay there all year. But I mean, I don't think we should sweep them until they're through with them, like with everybody else. That's a matter of dollar and dollar needs to be returned to contingencies or what needs to happen. We... That matter down, not it needs to be returned to contingencies or what needs to happen. We just want to... It's about to agree with you. It's valuable for contingency, not for construction. Obviously, you know... Wait, I agree with Chief, and the letter that you're not in make a motion. Identifying it, you know. We have an unfunded liability that we face every year, and you know, we try to utilize the funds as best we can and when they're swept. So early in the year, it's impossible to assist in creating an efficient budget. I think the money that swept is after the budget years over, after they've done their, whatever they do with their salary. Actually, we had the first go around, I think it was swept in March of last year, or June. What's been swept are the funds that we anticipate that they won't need for the remainder of the year for attrition. We're gonna do that, we just need not budget. I mean, if we're gonna do that, we need to put a contract account in the budget for it. I mean, like we used to, but Commissioner, let's address the salary money to do with until we gave it to them. We allowed it to them in the budget. Sorry, but there are money. Those are the few. It feels like we did give it back. I was convinced. Yeah. Anyway, Commissioner, all I'm saying is if the chief needs some money, we'll give it. But this has always been a major source of revenue. This is a source of money that Sheriff has not needed historically for 22 years. Actually, and I don't know the exact numbers of the years, but we have utilized unused salary in the past for that unfunded liability that you're aware of. But, for what purpose do you put? Paydown compensatory overtime that we have. Well, I would favor doing that on a case by case basis. And that's what we had started doing. The problem is when we have people earn time, they might earn it at a certain level, a salary level, and as they remain with the sheriff's office, there is the potential for them to promote up. As an example, we have a lieutenant who earned virtually all of his compensatory time as a deputy. But when he retires as a lieutenant, we're going to have to pay him at the rate of a lieutenant. In addition, we still have... And Chief, we face those things. we face those issues all the time Every on any given money. It's just not to the extent that I make the motion. We vote against 13b. Okay, hold on just one second. I am so how much is usually swept from the sheriff's budget of the salary Annually here between the sheriff's all the sheriff's departments inclusive of the jail it was $1.8 million. And is this something that occurs year over year? I mean you able to say generally we're sweeping a million dollars a year from the sheriff's budget? We have performed sweet for a number of years now and it would not surprise me at all if we did some research and it was over. I mean you know this may be more appropriately addressed during the budget hearings when we just fund the sheriff's department more appropriately rather than take money Throughout the year or if we decide to move forward with a sweep I think it should be done at least in consultation with the sheriff's office So they know that this is coming in complain for it I think that's been part of the issue And the past is the money swept and you're not really made aware of it Got a budget for those positions in case in the event that they are filled. We can't just cut 1.8 out of that but if every, it's obviously overfunded if every year we're returning one and a half million dollars. Some degree. But that's all part of attrition, the attrition process. Correct. The process is that you fund at the beginning of the year as if every position were filled the entire year. They're not. But of course that doesn't happen. There is turnover. So what we sweep is what has already existed for vacancies and what we think will happen for vacancies. And Chief of Underpants, directly, you just would like to use some of that money to pay off some contact. That is correct. We'd like to use it all. Second, Commissioner commissioner matters motion. Which motion is that commissioner matters to Approved to approve not sweeping salaries Is that also include moving these funds into your his overtime line? Which is what he would use to pay this cost time off. If he pays off cost time for food here, if we do, if we move them into his overtime line at the end of the year, they're not used. We could sweep them at the end of the year and it's the same. If it were not used as the end of the year, yes, they're, it would roll into your fund balance. But what you'll run into is throughout the course of the years you won't have funding for items like the item that was just approved that was funded from contingency. And where do we stand if we fund those two bailiffs out of contingency? Well currently you don't have an ability to fund those out of contingency. I would need to bring that item back to you on the next court day. Boy the 217 just moved in. There were a couple of other items that couldn't go through, but that was one. And one of the other things that we try to do with this unused salary, as we have done, as they promote, we pay them off before they promote, and that's what you saw as a line item last court. We were able to pay over $22,000 to individuals who were being promoted from civilian detention officer to Sergeant and a deputy from deputy to sergeant so we could pay that off They come into that and so eventually at some point in time if we can get to it the unfunded liability as what T.C.D.R.S. Goes away But you can pay them off that they come into that new position with a clean slate with no outstanding. That is correct. I'd like to see it's due. Yeah, and that's what you guys did with Matt Beasley when he came over to the department. Yes, sir. You paid him off and I think it's great. I'm not a fan of having unfunded liabilities on our balance sheet. I'd rather go ahead and clear that up and move on. When did you plan on the funds from that $740,000 in the contingency to? Yes, sir. Of course we did. We had anticipated that those funds would be there at the time. Commissioner, no, I had talked about the balance and contingency and how low it was. And I had let him know that I have. All right. Now that's only earmarked. We need to reverse that. That might need to be in contingency in continuous. I'm glad to see your concern about that money I said I'm glad to see that you're concerned about how we spend our money in the county Okay, okay, let's go back to the sheriff's item There's a motion by commission matters that correct To not sweep any sheriff funds or to move them to their overtare a lot of time and I seconded the motion so I'm assuming then that what you mean is that Carol Thompson will give us on a question and on a position that position basis how long those positions have been vacant and how much would get moved over time to the bed? This would follow. So. Okay, that's not the way the motion reads. Well. I believe that the fact that the application judge in that the motion would get that done still. The agenda item that the chief brought the motion would get that done still. The agenda item that the chief brought would probably still get that done. Okay. All in favor of the motion see aye. Those opposed aye. Motion. The commission no I'm trying to have you save the county money. Okay. Motion fails, I mean, fail a sport of one. Motion passes. Passed a sport of one. You all will regret that motion. Thank you, commissioners. In 13C, we ask you to consider and approve the grant application for FY 2014 radar enforcement project for the precinct to constables office in the amount of $35,915 with no matching funds. The sheriff's office will submit the grant application on behalf and in cooperation with precinct to Constable's Office. This is an HGAC requirement that as I guess as the sheriff's office we have to do it in lieu of the Constable's Office which I don't understand but we've done this before and we're more than happy to. I'm very very sad. Thank you. Most of the passes. Thank you. Motion passes. Thank you. Grinchy Services. Morning, your honor and commissioners. Morning. We are simply asking with us because there's some problematic cases that have recently arisen to be able to provide an external examination in lieu of an autopsy for our outside counties and to amend or make an addition to the interlocal agreements pursuant there too. Not all bodies need to be autopsy. We do some external examinations here in this county, require body fluids and so forth without actually performing an autopsy document photographically the body and so forth and that's what we'd like to be able to do. We would charge 900 bucks which is about half the cost of our performance of an actual Yeah, much to pass. Thank you all. Thank you. DWA and drug court. Good morning. Masking you please consider and approve the 2013-14 drug court application and resolution. Move. Move. Second. All in favor, say aye. I'm also asking you to consider approved the 2013-2014 DWI court grant and application and resolution. Move. Second. All in favor, say aye. I just have one question on it. Are we as far as one of these funds dry up. They're no longer available. So county still have to continue. We apply for a grant each year. OK, so if we were not to get the grant funding, we don't have to continue the program. You do have to continue the program. Any county that has over 200,000 in population has to have a direct court. So it's basically an unfunded mandate that we found some money for the state to have here. Just while we're clear up, thanks. Thank you very much. Thank you. Infrastructure. You did that. Hello, George. the on Judge commission morning. Consider discussed and appropriate take action establishing a light item for an animal shelter building fund and procedures a deposit future donations that may be received as as an item B and C. I'll get with the county attorney's office. The county office offers to establish if it's approved, it'll just be a building fund, such as where they donate specifically for that. Absolutely. I'll have a favor say hi. Thank you. Already. Any clerk? Judge, I'm going to need to ask you to further this item. All right. Already. Any clerk. Judge, I'm going to need to ask you to further this item. It's come to my attention this morning. We only received 12 names of citizens when actually there were 48 members of the grand jury last year. So we're going to have to get those other names before we actually draw for the grand jury members. Okay. Everyone, the committee. All right. Thank you patient Good morning. I asked that you prove the juvenile drug court application in resolution the cash match does exist in the budget Second, say aye. Library. Good morning, gentlemen. We're asking you to allow us to apply for a grant from the Texas State Library and Archives Commission. Our size library population is eligible to apply for up to 15,000 for the development of a mobile app. This would put your library in your pocket where talking about making it accessible for you to be able to search the library catalog on your smartphone, your iPad, your tablet. The state would fund all of this. there would not be a matching grant. We would be asked but not required to maintain this as long as it is feasible. I've approached the South Montgomery County friends and the concept would be that they are interested in funding special projects with us. If by chance we were not authorized, be that they are interested in funding special projects with us. If by chance we were not authorized originally and did not get a renewal of the grant, they would be willing to help us look into those funds. The costs we believe would be in the neighborhood of $2,500 to maintain the app after the original development. I'm also asking that you allow me to sign the documents and forward them in a timely way to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission. We have submitted the application to the grants administrator and the cover form does bear the signatures of the appropriate parties. Move. On the grant application, you do have the box checked County MUST continue project when the funding ends. And I'm not in a little bit leery of grants that require us to continue with it after the funding may dry up. And you have a very large budget from a county perspective as it is. And I don't think I'm interested in this grant. So are you saying this as an evergreen grant? You continue song that the applicant has been on? What they're saying is that we should continue this as long as feasible. I'm saying that the South Montgomery County friends, if the county budget were not to cover it, that I've already had verbal commitment that the South Montgomery County friends would be willing to look at it and to assist us. We do not have in the budget the $15,000 that the state would grant us to develop this app. Once the app is developed, we would only have to maintain it. And the approximate cost from one of the vendors that we've already received is about $5,000. Do you have that in writing or is that just a verbal commitment? It's just a verbal that they have funds available and they're willing to support projects with us. At $2,500. I'd write a check for it myself. I think that we have the need to be mobile and well here's an opportunity for it. What in this event? I mean couldn't you have you addressed this during the budget hearings or wait until this next budget hearing and address those then? No, no. The state has a timeline. We have to apply for this by March the 4th. So do we need a mobile app or did you put the mobile app? I mean, because there's grant money, do you want a mobile app? I mean, if you have the need for one, you could have addressed it during last budget hearing or this budget hearing, correct? We would love to have a mobile app. We think that it is in keeping with our being in the cutting edge of technology, but because of the expense, it's just like many of the other applications for grants when the opportunity comes along, this is an avenue to fund the development of that app. I'm happy to come back and ask you for the funding, I have a new to fund the development of that app. I'm happy to come back and ask you for the funding, but if there's resistance now to maintain it at a modest amount, I'm seeking ways for us to enhance what we're able to offer to the citizens of the county. More and more, we are doing electronic books. We are doing electronic access. In my 15 years, we've gone from, you must come into the library and look at the card catalog to a card catalog that is now a digital catalog that is easily accessible. You helped us and the friends have helped us to develop an electronic access system to reserve rooms at our meeting rooms. We're all about serving the general public and making the library more accessible to get the value added services that I believe you've asked me to look into. And this is one of those value added services that the opportunity just came along. You may already have the vote for this, but can you get it in writing between now and two weeks? Bring it back. And bring it back. I could, but then we would miss the deadline to file for this application. Why did we wait till the last minute to present it to Court? Because we have to go through the grants process and we've submitted it to our grants administrator after it's been provided. I believe I could get it in writing. They have a meeting this afternoon, but again I would ask you to consider this even if you want to put a contingency that there be some commitment for the ongoing funds, I would ask you to approve it even with the contingency that we bring that back to you. As I said, I'm willing to write a check for it. I'll vote for it. I think there's a motion in a second. I'll vote for it. But if you would, please bring that second. I'll vote for it. But if you would please bring that back. I'll be happy to. All of the favor say aye. Oh, and there's one opposed. Commissioner Noah. Thank you. Okay. We're going to be counting mental health treatment facilities. Mr. Metter? Considering except for farmer syndicator reports for the month ended January 31, 2013, is required by agreement between Montgomery County, Texas Department of State Health Services recommended by the mental health treatment facility advisory board I move. Second. All there is. Yeah. Item B, concern approval, revisions, the table of organization. The management plan is recommended by the treatment facility advisory board, set forth and pay the work on file. I move. Second. All in favor, yes. set forth and pay for work on file. I move. Second. I'll have papers here. I see considering except nursing services staffing plan is required by the management plan. For the facility recommended by the Tribal Facility Advisory Board, set forth and pay for work on file. I move. Second. All in favor say elections. Good morning. Good morning. We have voting precinct 58. The current polling place is a church that's no longer available to us for use as a polling place. And we have been unable to find a suitable replacement in that precinct. However, just adjacent to the precinct are the offices of Lone Star College and they are willing to allow us to use that area as a polling place, but we would have to change the precinct boundary. So I have a request to consider an approved order for the changes of the precinct boundaries of precinct 58 and also 62, which is the precinct where the college offices are currently located. Move and thank you for your contact and we've got this. All in favor, yeah. And I also have a request for you to consider an approved order changing that election day polling place in precinct 58 and also the precinct 52 polling place that the request of the New Canis School District. What did you say, the New Canis School District? Yes, the polling place in prec increasing 52s currently in the Transportation Center and they've remodeled and there's not really space there anymore. So they've asked us to move to the New Canis DNX instead, which is just a mile away. Is the motion by Commissioner Wacklenow about the parking there? Do you want to defer that request until we give you more information? Yeah, I'm going to go to the parking there. You probably get six parking places. Okay. Well, I had somebody go out and survey it, So I haven't seen it myself, but we can get some more information. They do survey for everything from suitability for space to ADA compliance. I don't know. I have not looked at the parking. I can check into it and report back to you and then bring it back. I can just amend it to 58 only. If you want I can just amend the motion to just approve. No, that's fine. We'll go ahead to 52 and we'll talk to them when election day comes and about rearrange the parking. Okay. This motion is your second. Second. All in favor, see how? I got it. Thank you. Auditor. Before you as a request from the ninth district court to use $1,945.18 from the Court Reporter Service Fund, this is for two laptops. Move. Second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Thank you. Motion passes. Purchasing. Good morning, Judge commissioners. On 23 a. This is no action at its time. Item B. Conceal and approved the proposal from by unassociates. Inc to provide the signwork on the league land road extension in the amount of $69,915. Okay. On favor say, item C, acknowledge and accept Reveitchev from Banco for America for fuel credit card program in the amount of $8,596.40 purchasing. Move. Second. I'm sorry, Garcia. On C, I'm sorry on D, considering the approved the term contract with care corporation for the privatization of Montgomery County Animal Shelter as follows. To pay for the additional increase of animal forecasted from 24,246 to 25,018 in the amount of 41,749 and after the shelter reaches the maximum cap of 25,018 animals, the county shall pay for each additional animal, the or after a Sepita item and the contract. Is that something that you would bring up every time or was this would improve it for all each or any? You're asking for 41,000 right now. Yeah, 41,000 right now. What they project with the more than that is000 animals. Actually, 25,000. I'm going to be able to recognize what they're projected. The next year is going to be 27,000. This way it'll be accurate. We know what we did. We'll pay it for what we did. And then we can keep up as we go. Do we have a funding source for that, Philus? Dars. It was not anticipated during the emergency budget, but this contract would go into 14. Okay. There were asking for $18,000. So, if they were asking for compensation for the projections, $27,000, we'd ask for an insurance bill. I mean, this contract is a year old, correct? It is. Just started. Are they interested in just keeping the same terms for another year just to keep. Probably not because of the. The best trade has ever been in long time. It's not really a job with. Definitely we are the only people. 41 thousand. At and that is that for out of this year's budget bills or next year? If it ongoing budget is this new contract, in other words, they're taking 40, 24,000, and the annual class year. Yeah, my question is do we have money in contingency to cover that 41,000? What's the start day of this contract? I think the work is hard to work with. What's the start day of this contract? Yeah Part of this contract will go into your next year your next fiscal year 2014 and so we can budget it appropriately on the 2014 side of your Budget, so you're not asking for that 41,000 out of this year's budget The business is okay What's going to happen? What's going to happen? They're building on the basis. They have a contract in place. Right. And as I think it's down to the new budget years, they'll just start getting a bit of a new. Okay. Okay. Second. On favor, sir. Thank you. Kennedy attorney. And I'm 24 a arresting the court to approve a restated agreement with the US Marshal Service. The reason for this restatement is to incorporate new federal detention standards into the original agreement. I'll have a favor say. And in 24b, we're asking the court to approve two amendments to the agreement that was just approved in 24a. The first amendment incorporates an increase in the federal wage determination, or anything. and the second amendment provides a lump sum payment amount to cover that increase in the wages back to July of 2012. Second. All in favour? Yes. 24 C arrest in the court to approve a first amendment to a library consortium agreement. In 2006, this agreement was put in place to allow to share resources between the library system listed on the agenda. This amendment, all the others in corporate changes made by the Department of Education related to the privacy of students identification information that may be accessible by our library staff. I move. It incorporates a change that we have to protect students identifying information. And because this library consortium involves the Loans Start College, there's potential that our staff call library cost. No, it's just a change. And some of the policies and the agreement. Home of Avery, see how? D is a motion to support the Buffalo Manor Housing Development. It's a senior housing. I have Vernon at Elizabeth Young here today. And also a loan like we've done before. I'm not sure if this should come from CDBG or the county backed by CD. Is Joanne here Do I should this come from CDB Jeege or the county? Department on the application for the final one slide. This is finally in delicate with the state thing I've already had a issue once in a minute of misgivings. I submit a letter of failing and they have a lot of good time. And that goes with an application today. And then we go to our normal processes, which one were in the slide? Is this one applied with you? They have not applied this name. I have very little information about the project that I'm going to connect. The other panel, we have six applicants this year, three, and the foundation was going will listen to one of the questions by supporting the court this way you award one extra point to this project over what the projects that are going through the presentation. If we ever done it in a resolution course, I don't recall. It's usually a letter sent for them for that I, if't recall. It's usually a letter sent for them for that. I if I recall Can you say we had done one time when we did the the project On a phrase of racer for the long we did but we did the resolution in court for that we did the resolution I remember the long But I thought it was done through And we I moved that we approve this and I'll write the letter Supporting the project and it will be backed by CD and the line the loan will come from where the here you say you don't have $7,500 What's the timeline on this? Do you know, Judge? I already have been on the website since the end of January. And all of this is your DMG. Our process and the fact that I got a call from one of the important countries that I've been, is because they need their letters from me, stating that they have a fly, by not sure. They think that they're a process, by my word, first. They think they're a process which I believe, and they find out that they've been working and they've been working in such a large, we're doing a different process, but that whether they've been a work fund, which, as we just said, is budgeted, but it's not sufficient for the process. We usually know what to do with this demand. But if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but if you have a budget, but We're competing because on the board Approval This one's actually in the city limits of Montgomery This is actually in the city limits of Montgomery. Yes Part of the bill is probably up there. Yeah, I know we're going to close the money. The senior project makes one that we've just finished one. That's what we specialize in. We've just finished one and one again. It basically does like that. Everyone's story down there on this area. We're doing it on 12 acres. It's extremely low. The information is going to have an order for that. All of our conversation is family. I don't have a prior, I'm familiar with it. I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I don't have a prior, I'm familiar with it. I'm certainly not opposed to it by any means because it is a senior, it is a senior facility which is, which is good. I just don't know about this money situation. I don't think we've ever done it direct from the county. Let's just say the money either comes from the county or CDBG, either one, back fully by 100% CD, that the youngs will be putting up. But don't they need to apply with you, Joe Ann, and you're going to prove that, Lon? up but don't they need to apply with you Joanne and your board approve that one? Yes sir, we have to ask all the veterans come to my department for the set project and try to check from their initials. By filling this report today you award this project one additional twenty and OOO all the other. is the resolution that awards on the point or the money? The resolution says to be that we are a New Yorkers project and in the state of New York already funded, whereas the other developers were coming through my process and I'm going to let her that says they fly in the fund so it's a different one. I'm wondering if you're doing it this way. I think if I'm right this is the only tax credit facility that seniors on the list that correct in Montgomery again. I want to point out that what we're asking for is alone. The main interest from the loan. I got back in five years and we're just meeting the technical requirements. Yeah, I understand. You know, I think the same thing every year and we're back in it with a little city to do those from all the money. We don't have save me 500. and of the tuition and johan when your department provides a loan that comes from grant money correct not county money okay i would like for the commission to approve this. I make the motion. I would very greatly appreciate the senior project for fill up and for Vernon. And I move. When does the money have to be delivered? Actually, what we need is a commitment to die and as far as the delivery died quite frankly, I can't say anything to you. I don't know, but that has to be four March first. I think it has to be four March first. The money does not have to be the support March first. The statement that has been signed to the county has to be delivered to four March first. Okay. So it's not too late for them to apply through you and then if they receive the funding for the loan in the court could pass a resolution or sit too late at that point. Absolutely not. Right now. And then that puts everybody on the same plane. the I'm going to go right straight into the floor. Okay, you got some band. Yeah, if I can just comment here, we first found out about this little electric four-block last Tuesday, one in the only in the gym, and of course, if you know the agenda deadline is 10 o'clock the next morning, so we scrambled right away. I hadn't heard of it in the evening, didn't I? So we got a communication with Mr. Sharp, depending on that, what we want to hear about this. the other one is just making sure everybody in this competition is the only thing is, you don't do it today You lose this one point because you got to get it in Well, I don't go through the application. We'll call a special session. I Be available We get to do that and they do it that Friday morning And they get it done by Friday. Go in I Might be We do it this way we don't get that point because I'm seeing here We're at a three point deficit in scoring when there's where we're considered rural This project There's 13 counties and there are only big one rural project and all of 13 That's all the funding areas to the ICTS But I thought Friday meant your deadline for an in. We have to have it. Friday is the first. Well Friday is the first. Is that adequate? That's where our final application goes in. And for us to get this scoring, we have to have it before the end. What she's talking about is it's a whole different process. I've got it and they just that process. You go through there's no interest play back. And the money does get recycled when it does get back. But there's no guarantee it's getting paid back. We're putting up to see the guarantee this for paying 2.99% interest, which is maximum paid, it might just worth it. And it's simply a matter of, you know, do we want to send your project and send the government, you know, like that's it? If I recall that last loan was collateralized, wouldn't it? Yes. Yeah. In your past, we've loved the Merino arch. But last time we did this, 270,000, and we wondered where that was. So we're just 80,000. This year, we're in the three. And there's calculations for both buying it and the numbers are quite low. We have 1,000. It takes 3,000, and we're 70,000. This is a 75 If I were a call we were That would be what what you just said Been soon over this before, if I recall. Yes, sir. I don't know why straight street people were sued. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I don't know, good, sorry. I guess I don't understand this. We've done this before. It's been a very successful project. We need senior housing and Montgomery. I mean, this is a no-brainer to me. I agree with that. Who hardly? I certainly agree with you. It's backed by CD and Eddell and Friday is too late. I'm going to go over this. JD, do you think there will be a lawsuit over this? Well, all I can do is discuss with Daniel Jones here. And he can speak to a better than I can. There was a prior incident when we said that all your showing up is like in all sorts of threats or somebody you know perceived or're not getting a favorable treatment but if you if you if you've seen I think all the paperwork is in by Thursday and we get a special session in Thursday. is a great project. Is that enough time? I don't think Thursday is enough time. Or is it? You remember all the problem we had with that one, two and a half to go in over and my freezer? The audience, great project. I support 100%. I'm just confused about the process here. Create a problem. I don't want to do that. But the answer would have been go through the system, have a special session and do it that way. Rob, we do it by March 1st. Okay, if we do it, if we do it after a noon session, Thursday, would that be adequate, JD? I think that's right, Virginia. I think that would set us on the open meeting and notice requirements that these are our two or three different. And I think that Mr. Sharpen can get the letter out the same day the application comes in. If that would cover all the places if we could just do that. Commissioners with that status value. Yeah. Okay, let's do an afternoon session, Thursday afternoon. It's say, uh, 3 o'clock. Okay, E. In 24 E, we're asking the court to approve a letter to the general land office. This letter would just acknowledge February 28 as the end date for the Hurricane I-Cowsing Grant Program. And it also would identify the amount of grant funds that we're going to de-obligate, has calculated by the Otter's office. Move. Sorry, I got a little nervous, yeah? Hi. I would like to point out that there's a very hard working lady who is going to be losing her job due to this. She's a fantastic woman, and if anybody in the county has an opportunity, I'd suggest that you get in contact with Miss Haley. They fill the room. We believe they're right. I think that's the total. The HJ thing in their early specials is the state is that the point is that the team will use the year to change the line. They want to show you that HJ is currently being considered to do that. But she will not accept the she even is not taking it on. And I'm getting excited because we're not approve the termination of the employment contracts with Miss Haley and Mr. Reeves related to the termination of the grant program. Move. Second. I'm very, very, very. Yeah. Okay. In 24G, arresting the court to approve an amendment to the temporary employment contract with Michael Huddle. He's going to be earning the same hourly rate. However, he's going to drop from being a full time to up to 20 hours a week. He's going to continue to work with CDBG and other grant programs. Move. I just want to clarify a bit. We have those. How do we grant any infrastructure rates? 30Is. I'd like to work in those numbers. Can we need to be a rapid, yes, infrastructure? Is that correct? You want to be working on federal? Okay. Move. Seconds, I can. I'll have All very received. In 24-A, addressing the court to consider and discuss payments to persons providing contract services to the county for attending commissioner's court and related tasks and if the court finds appropriate to authorize a amendment of any contracts as necessary. Commissioners, it was brought to my attention that we pay a particular vendor for her time to sit in court and to download the agenda. And I have verified with the county auditor that in fact we do pay this individual for those activities. And I know that all of us agree that we need to be good fiscal stewards of the taxpayers' dollars. And in my opinion, it's a waste of taxpayer dollars to pay a vendor to sit and court and download the agenda. When you look at her last time sheet, you'll see there's three and a half hours dedicated to those activities at $125 an hour, which equates to $437.50. If we were to estimate the same time sitting in court and downloaded in the agenda over the life of the contract, that'd be paid over $50,000 for those activities. As far more than a deputy makes, when he or she risks their life every day for our county, and I just find it to be a slap in the face to our county employees to pay somebody to do this type of activity. It's also important that we note that for this particular vendor over the last four years we've seen about 3.4 million dollars in cash flow revenue to the county on the projects that she worked on. I would kind of question to the amount of time and money that was spent on one of your staff employees at a commissioner's conference in Austin this last week. Well, I think that my staff need to be at a commissioner's conference so they understand how to work and never several other staff members at that conference in the invitation was for commissioners and staff. This consultant here is here because of her contract with County. She's working. She's not here, planning to finger now. She's here working. She's doing her work. And she's here to answer questions that might be necessary to provide questions for Mr. Court. And I certainly don't have a problem with it. We have plenty of vendors that work for the county. I don't know of any others that we pay to sit and court and download the agenda. We have a lot of taxpayers who do that for free. You know, why don't we I Know JD's gonna be amending this contract. Yeah, please go ahead right. Yeah, please go ahead. Myself as well as Daniel Jones and Beatty Griffin. We met with Miss Brazil last Friday morning in our offices. I thought it was a very cordial, very informative meeting and I think Miss Brazil would agree with that. And in this, and so we're looking at the contract and we discussed each of the kind of clauses that I think are noticeably absent from the contract that typically would be in most any contract the county would want to be airing into. This particular item though is you notice there's no reference made to Miss Moseal here. We're just seeking general guidance on any of the consultants or other people, the county employees because I think there are other ones that come to court and are billing for that time. Some of those may be many multiples of the $125 an hour that Miss Brazil makes. Now what we explain to her is, again, this is you guys call not not our call, but just to raise the awareness of it. If someone is invited to come to court, either needs to be an open session for some discussion or attend executive session, of course that's a different matter. But it's just any of these consultants, whether or not in their contracts, that it's stipulated where they can get paid just for attending court. And again, it's not meant to single miss Brazil out at all. Thank you, JD. As far as he minutes of the commission's court agenda, that's all recorded I mean I'm not sure if we need to have a two and a half hour contract session Well you would agree it is recorded. Yes, they're recorded. If I want to read them, I'd read them at home. But that's not what I'm charged with. Right. JD, are we needing to take action on restricting these types of activities from being paid? Are you looking for a motion on this to keep that from happening? We were looking for guides, but what we're doing, we are working on that contract now, and our plan is prior to the submission's court, we'll submit to the court for those contracts He proposed contract for this present and this is one of the things that we need to know how to handle him that contract. It's going to be a specific language. Now, I want to be in line. That's a different matter of the commissioner request that she or any other contractor be here. Of course, they can be taken. Move. Move what? Well, to restrict that for being from paying benders to sitting court. I think that if any two court members request an item from this consultants, I think it'll be honored. Two or three. Now what's he's working on now? Some kind of a policy you're playing for that? Or let's just... No, we got a gin to item and we got a motion. I just carried forward with it. Please. We have a motion we can pull it or we can defer it. Let's carry forward, please. We have a motion we can pull it or we can defer it. We don't need to defer it. So I'll make a motion we restrict payment for these type of activities. I'll second. All in favor say aye. Posed. Motion fails 3d2. I'll second all the favor say I post most of them fail 32 Would though put in the contract JD Language to the effect that It takes at least two commissioners to It takes at least two commissioners to give this consultant work. Would you agree to that commissioners? Yeah. It does. I don't want to get too far off of the agenda item that we've got noticed. Yeah. I'm afraid if we get too far into other details of the contract contract it may steer away from the item that we have on the agenda. Okay. I think you can write in there contract whatever you feel appropriate and the contract will either be accepted or not accepted correct. Well you've had a direction from the court right now. I'm sorry. You have had a direction from the court right now. Not much. Like part of the contract. I think what we have to need is because you've got contract with Leonard Brazil. Yeah, he may use whistle and my ability issue. She's great. And something else I've got what this is not I think it's good age You mean it's actually a judge Yeah, my prize Considering discuss a requirement for the Montgomery County mental health advisory Board to submit minutes of their meetings on a monthly basis. Move. Second. I'm very sure you're getting a way. Commissioners are I mean actually there's we're sort of looking on guidance on this one as well. There's no action. But we'll probably have to do as amended by laws for the advisory board. If that's the direct. I don't think the other advisory board should admit their minutes. Make sure the bylaws of the advisory board don't include any reference to the minutes being submitted. It does or a leadership standard under the joint commission. And they're asking them any time, what it's meant to include, what required you all to say you wanted out a monthly budget. Each month as a order proves their minutes from their previous meeting, I can have included along with the other report. Yeah, that's not right. Already under commissioners precinct one. Consider the proof request by Montgomery County, Seoul and Water Conservation District number 452, annual funding in the amount of 15,000. Then we budget this, Phyllis. Of course, you met her last year in the budget hearing that did go reference mine as the new stated that you would pay that out of your budget. No, I did the same thing this year. I'll move. Second. I'll have a very rare. Considered approved the reappointment of Walter Houser for another term as hasn't finished for the Montgomery County housing authority. I move second. All of favorite CIA. Bricin to Renee Hancock, the Montgomery County housing authority board. I move second. All in favor. CIA. Okay. Bricin for I'm going to have a good time. I'm going to have a good time. I'm going to have a good time. I'm going to have a good time. I'm going to have a good time. I'm going to have a good time. I'm going to have a good time. I'm going to have a good time. I'm going to have a good time. I'm going to have a good time. I'm going to have a good place. I move. Second. All in favor say aye. Director, we're going to defer our executive session items today. Both? Yes. Okay. Alrighty, do we have any citizens who would like to address the court today? You need resources. Good morning. Please continue to approve the payroll change request forms. Move. Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. And I believe we have already done the public hearing. I'm precinct 2. Anything else commissaries? So we adjourned. Okay. Second all the favourites to you.