Okay, this is Brent's Court order, please. The State of the Open New Prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Dull, who's about to be pleased? They're having a father with thank you for the many blessings that you give us each and every day. And we'd ask Lord the Tud, place your hand over those families and communities across this state, across this nation, the experienced tragedies over this last week. We'd ask Lord the T you'd be with each and every business and family and individual that's represented in this room today as they travel back to their respective homes. Ask Lord that you watch over this court and have our actions be pleasing in your eye. In Jesus name. Amen. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic, who always stands on one nation of your God in one is the law, with the liberty and justice for all. Armageddon, Ted Ted's flag, on the other side of the league, is the defense. On one state, on one God, one in the business. on any of this. For the record, all members of the court are present. We need to motion on the agenda commissioners. Move, second. Favorite say. I have. The wishes we have quite a few resolutions this morning. One is employee of the month for March. I'm not going to be a person who is a employee of the employees. I'm not going to be a employee of the employees. I'm not going to be a employee of the employees. And I would like for Dr. B. C. to come forward. Judge Commissioner, please, please, please, pardon. Good. The letter that I wrote nominating Heather Reyes is as well as. Heather has been an employee in our department since its inception in 2010. This past year she became the supervisor of the secretary of technical staff. She works in an unpredictable schedule that she carries our own call phone one-third of nights and weekends and frequently response to those responsibilities in the middle of the night. She's the go-to person in our office and either knows the answer or promptly finds it out. She works with grieving families frequently, always with considerable raise and empathy. There are technical skills in assisting with all topses or excellence. She's a superb typist. She's becoming an excellent supervisor. I've never asked her before I'm a task that she has not tried to accomplish and usually is successful. We work with a number of agencies in the county and she maintains a wonderful working relationship with each of them. She is emblematic of the type of person that I believe the employee of the month program in January. Great. Thank you very much. Congratulations. You here? Thank you. Congratulations. Number two, United Way Volunteer Appreciation Day. I move. All right. Crime Victims Week. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning, gentlemen. My name is Nancy Geinand. I'm Director of Victim Assistance with the DA's office. Our proclamation is for Crime Victims Rights Week, whereas this year's theme celebrates the local champions of Crime Victims Rights and the progress these true heroes have achieved on behalf of victims. 30 years ago, crime victims had no rights, access to crime victims' compensation or services to help reveal their lives. They were often excluded from the courtrooms, treated as an afterthought by the criminal justice system, and denied an opportunity to speak at sentencing. Through decades of advocacy and determination to make the criminal justice system accessible, crime victims discovered their voice. Today, all states have enacted crime victims rights laws and established crime victims compensation funds. Advocates are now faced with challenges that strive to provide culturally competent services for increasing diverse populations and victims of newly prevalent crimes such as human trafficking and technology related stocking and identity theft. A new vision, a new direction is necessary to expand resources and tools to crime victims without compromising the work and commitment of so many of us before. Justice requires our commitment. This month, we honor and recognize those outstanding individuals and programs that serve crime victims and recognize their services and their resilience. Crime victimization leaves victims and families in a state of turmoil. Victim advocates make the difference through voice reassurance, unwavering commitment to serve victims experiencing pain and unimaginable loss. Therefore Montgomery County proclaims the week of April 21st is a 27th 2013 to be National Crime Victims Rights Week, which I think is incredibly poignant in light of things that happen in Massachusetts which just my home state. I'd like to recognize today other advocates in our community. From children's age harbor, Kerry Perot, if you please withstand Rachel McConnell, Myridge Mingus, Gina Waller, Christopher Valkovic, Tawila Harvey, from the Montgomery County Women Center at Debbie Edge Tatiana Finchum and Dolores Dolatores Susan Krabs and from my own DA's office Shirley Williams Pam trailer Ilder Rupert and Danielle Murray. Thank you. Thank you I'm moved I move, Joe. Second. I'll favor sale. Next, I'll abuse awareness and prevention month. There's a motion. I'll favor sale. motion move okay on favor say out. Scholar athlete day. It's your motion. Second on favor say out. Okay. Missions we need to approve the minutes for April the 8th and April 15th. Move second. All favor say out. April the 8th and April 15th. Move. Second. All favor say. Uh-huh. Ministers, I have no changes on consent. I move. Second. All favor say. Uh-huh. OK. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Okay. We need to defer number nine. Excuse me, number 10a. 10b. Consider and approve of appropriate authorization for the purchasing. Okay. Okay. We need to defer number nine. Excuse me, number 10a. 10b. Consider and approve of appropriate authorization for the purchasing. Okay. Okay. Okay. Number nine, excuse me, number 10a, 10b. Consider and approve of appropriate authorization for the purchasing and information technology to negotiate a contract in Memphis and change order number PO-2013126. We're telling our technologies for the Ancillary JP software and professional services services to bring all justice to peace into the existing integrated justice system. Judge I think JD did you want to speak at this time? You're given me an opportunity to follow the screen. Just be clear, we were not advocating any deferred completely. Just deferred until half of the exact exact installation. Of course we need to do whatever we want. Well, let's go ahead and do it now. And, recently, gentlemen, circulated the letter or at least had your names on it and went around all departments that you were highly encouraging if not demanding that all department heads and elected officials operate their offices through, we efficiently as possible. Would you all agree with that? I'll take that as a yes. For the last 10 years, that's what I've done over in precinct four. We'll be able to do that. I'll take that as a yes. For the last 10 years, that's what I've done over in pre-sync 4. As well as other JPs, to try to operate our office as freely and officially as possible. And we were here today to discuss about a collections contract that was voted on by you gentlemen. And accepted we were approved it. It went before. Let me back up in sometime last year we were encouraged since there were a lot of problems and still is with the collections in Montgomery County. The JPs were encouraged to go out and get an RFP, which we did that. We went to Mark Bosman's office, purchasing department, and I believe there were seven people that responded. The JPs like GHS collections, there's a number one collection agency in the state for JPEG. Purchasing the Department approved it, recommended it to you. You guys voted on that as well. And also along with the collections contract that you voted on and approved that we did as well, we get the software that we need to run our offices with. We believe is top of the line and we're getting that for zero cost. The software that we're getting in the collections program we're getting for free at no risk to Montgomery County. Zero cost Dallas County paid 1.2 million dollars for that. And I hope you gentlemen will consider that today in your questions. What is on the table here? I'm going to have a difficult time explaining to the people in precinct four when we had a very good program here for zero dollars and zero risk to the county to get our collections in line. They provide the reports that we need to be in compliance with the Office of Courage Administration versus going and spending possibly up to a million dollars if we don't go with them. I don't. I can't figure out why you can get something for free, why you won't go spend a million dollars somewhere else. Maybe someone can explain that to you. And they offer the solutions that we need. As far as I know, nobody on the court has ever been a justice of the peace. It is difficult in demanding jobs as I'm sure that yours is as well. I don't think anybody in this building, maybe with the exception of J Moore here, there has been a just piece understands just what it is that we do. And the challenge that we face, we know better than anybody what we need to run our offices as frugally and efficiently as possible. And we would request any help that you may give us to do that. That's it. to any help that you might give us to do that. That's it. You know, Judge, we've been talking about this since 2010. Sure. And, um, because you know this court has done everything we can to help your department, in any way we can. Then reason. What we need is an integrated justice system that we're paying big dollars for. Yes you are. And that includes all the courts, law enforcement, all the district judges, the county court judges, the J.P. courts, everything down to the patrol cars. and Tyler is the only system that really meets those goals. How do you know that, Judge? That's wrong. Your information is wrong, sir. The reason I know that I spent $5,000 to find that out at the time you were misleds or at the time that was brought about there were three people in a state of Texas that could do that and the multiple two-to-people nationwide you have to understand that there's 254 counties in Texas with all the courts and all the municipalities in here plus all the other houses now multiply that time-sifty states and you're gonna speak me believe that Tyler technology is the only one that can provide software solutions to all those people. I don't buy. It's the best one that Marshall Shirley could find for the price. Oh yeah there there you go. And we trust Marshall. I think this entire court does. I'm glad that you do because I do not. And what do you base this on? I'm not going to let you stand up here and disparage Marshall Shirley. If you got facts, spit them out if not sit down. Oh, any of the facts. I've already laid them out. I sent a letter out. You're new to the court. No, actually, you're not going to be familiar with the letter that I sent out last year to everybody laying these spikes out of the problems that they had. The lawsuit that they're in nationwide with others. And by using Tyler Technology, we'll catapult the JP also into the stone age and I won't stand by and let them do that either, sir. You ever been a JP? No, you haven't, sir. I hope that you would be able to make a decision. There's a lot of things I haven't done that I can decide on what's going to work. We've got people in this county that are prepared to help us make decisions. There's no doubt we need an integrated justice system and everybody needs to be part of it. And I haven't seen anything that's come from your desk that has proven to me that Tyler technologies is not going to work for you or the rest of the JP. Well, you're not looking very closely. I'm laid it out for you and we'll continue to lay it out. It won't work for us. Now, you won't hear from someone else that's fine, but it will not work for us. And I will not support it. Nor will one, two, and five support it. It's kind of like that's kind of like. That's kind of like. We've talked a lot of money here. Does anybody know how much money is out there outstanding right now? At least five million. We're comfortable with that. And there's another one collection agency in the state. You say you got 1.7 million out? 1.7 million outstanding in my quarter. In Delinquent fees? Yes. All Delinquent.. Yes, all Delinquent. And I'm pretty good at collecting. I'm doing about 76% right now. I do my own collections in house. So I'm not an Einstein about it. I know a little something about collections. I'm very successful at it over there. But yet I want to use these people because they're even better than me. And with them coming on board, it's going to free up two people in my office to do other duties that I need so desperately by that I can't county according to the court doesn't have the money to get additional help. Judge Spikes needs another clerk way worse than I do. I don't think anybody on the court is arguing the fact that collections are important. J.P. is one of our biggest fundraisers and we know that one of our biggest revenue producers. But the problem that I've got, I think maybe some of the court does, this collection agency that you're looking at will not interface with the Tyler system that the county is committed to do. Well, last year in the neighborhood. Let me finish, Judge. I apologize for the answer. There are collection agencies out there that will interface with Tyler. That's an avenue. I think we need to explore very quickly. And Mr. Turnbull and his office has done the best they can of collections. He kind of took that when we had some problems with the collection agency that we had the in-house agency and Mark's done a great job but he's got limited resources that he can rely on in his office to do that and I think he probably needs some help with it also and I would never problem With a collection agent said I have problems at all, but it needs to be something we're moving forward with The integrated justice system At Marshall Shirley's Recommendations and that's what the court stands on and if we have a collection agency that can interface with Tyler, I'd be on board. I'm patient. Can we let Justice Conley speak? She's standing here patiently. Just, I would like to address this question. In an April 5th meeting with you, Commissioner Ryan Hart last year, Marshall Shirley said that nobody was going to force Tyler Technologies on us. Judge Satterer has told me that, even you commissioner at all, that nobody's going to force this on us. And Marshall Shirley, Mr. Shirley in the meeting last year with Commissioner Ryan Hart on April 5th, you told me that that wouldn't be a problem. That there was something called middleware that these would join together and you were going to go out and check that out for us and research that. But here we are today. That's what was said over there. Brian Stanley, my chief of staff there. Will there delinquent collection system integrate with the Tyler system? And the other question is, are you want to use this system just for delinquent collections or for all of your collections? For my entire office, for all my collections. You have to have a history there when you start from the beginning. If I could. Judging commissioners, if you let me address you, I need to speak for myself instead of you trying to speak for me or others to try to speak for me. This court task me and the committee to bring to this county and integrate justice system. It's a long process that we've gone through. There were two ways to start this process. One was to directly go to an RFP. One was to look at what the other counties in Texas had already done. I in this committee discussed that at length and we made a determination as a group to bring Tyler into the county and look at a demonstration of that product. We did that. At that time Judge Trace Bikes told me that there had been counties that had issues for JP courts with tire technologies. And I said, that's fine. I want to hear that. And I said, let's go address that with Tyler while they're here. And we discussed that with Tyler. And yes, there had been issues with counties with Tyler's early implementations. Judge Spikes also told me he was having that data come to make a presentation of them. We were talking two and a half years ago. And he wanted me to attend. I attended that presentation and went through it with him. At the end of that process of looking at Tyler's demonstration and after having attended that data demonstration to the J.P.s, our committee discussed, you know, what is our next step? Did anything Tyler show you as a group, convince you that that was the best solution for you as for our county and we made a determination at that point time that it wasn't compelling that they were absolutely a slam dunk situation that we should just move into contract negotiations with Tyler. So subsequent to that we prepared and if I could do it over again, I would do it differently in that I would have issued an RFP at this time. We did not know what the market conditions were for integrated justice across the nation and across the state. We issued an RFI through purchasing to do that. Request for information to see what the market looked like and to provide budgetary information for an integrated solution. We didn't currently have a budget. We didn't know what it was going to cost. Numbers had been thrown around for years here. We conducted that RFI and got the results back. Those documents were made available to all the committee members. We prepared a summary of those documents, and we looked at that, and truly, of those that responded, Todd was the only vendor that responded with an integrated system. There was another vendor named Amcad that responded with what they, at that point called an integrate system but was incomplete. They had modules that weren't complete. They did not have a reference site for an integrate system. Tyler at that time had several counties. We put together, I put together a budget for you and presented to you a $6.9 million. That $6.9 million was based upon some base-toler products and then some products that we didn't know whether it would be taller or not because we didn't yet have made a selection but we needed a budget. The DA's office, law enforcement and the JPs, we smooth those numbers based upon the numbers that were given to us and took kind of an average in print as a budget. And I explain that to you at that time. You authorize them a budget and you place $1.57 million a year into my budget line item for that purpose the intent was a five-year payout Knowing that we yet to have to make decisions and we yet to have to make selections From there we moved into We continued to make trying to make a decision based upon what Tyler was doing and what, and what we thought was the best for the county. All of these decisions were reviewed and looked at by the committee. The next step in our process was to move into what we called a project planning business process review with Tyler. Where they came to our site to review our system and what we're currently doing to make sure that at a minimum we were meeting those requirements with Tyler to verify that and to produce any gaps in that process that that would need to cost out and tell us where the additional dollars that we needed in our project. It's at the end of that process that we fractured at some point with law enforcement and law enforcement said we're not ready to move forward with Tyler. We want to back off from that and issue an RP for our processes. At that conversation we have and we judge Conley will speak for herself in a minute but she's always been a proponent of the Integrated Justice Project and she believes that Tyler will work for her. She has been the representative for the JPs on our project. The other JPs have participated in those early stages of the project, particularly Brian Stanley from JP4, and Judge Spikes himself participated. They continue to raise issues with whether they thought that Tyler could meet their needs to the degree that they would like for them to. They continue to look at net data as an alternative solution. And our subsequent conversation judge that you took place in, and I tried to keep all of you abreast of what was going on. I was the chair of the committee. I'm the one that actually visited with all the elected officials that were affected and tried to move them to an integrated system. It's been said that I tried to bully them into it. What I tried to impress upon all of them is that your expectation was for an integrated system. I've discussed with you in this group different models for building an integrated system. And I will honestly and sincerely tell you, I do not believe building it is the proper way to go. I think that is substantiated by the 30 something other counties in Texas that have chosen Tyler as their integrated justice solution. I have told you repeatedly I do not have issues with net data. I think they're software for what they do and what it does for JPs is good software. The software issue and delinquent collections issue are two separate issues. And I understand they're being bundled together. And if you choose that, then there are some issues for you that you need to address. If you were to let them go to net data, there are software issues, contract issues that need to be dealt with. And I'm sure that net data would deal with those for you. If you decide to do that. Integrate justice, if you want to build a model of Integrate justice that the other counties and Texas are building, and what I think should be built You start with us at the database level and you build it out the only question is ever been and what I've told the JP's when I visited with them The issue that they will face and what I try to get them to clearly see and join the project is that our DA Our county attorney our county clerk district clerk our DA, our county attorney, our county clerk, district clerk, district courts and county courts, we're going to choose the premier product in the nation for courts. Has it had issues in JP courts in the past? Yes. Are those issues still there today? I do not think so. As evidenced by Travis County choosing the JP Court module from Tyler as a standalone system outside of an integrated system for their personal use in their courts. And you could say the same, Pranette Data in Dallas County. My understanding is they've landed that contract. It's a non-integrated system and Travis County they're not looking at an integrated system today. So you know the issue for the JPs has always been if our other courts are buying Tyler's case management system to integrate with a DA. It is functional for a JP's office. The question is, is it good enough? And I tried to describe to them the maturity of a software package and the maturity of modules that are integrated and how quickly you get them to market and who's using them. And the JP module has been a slower module to mature than their case management system. The adult supervision module has been slower than that, and it's just becoming adopted. But at the court, they are integrated, and I believe they will work. It is not my decision to dictate to this court or to these individuals what software product they use. I make a recommendation to this court. I'm not the only member of this committee that is acting on behalf of this court and choosing Tyler's integrated system. But as elected officials and department heads, they all have their individual roles and responsibilities. And I don't believe they all want to do what's best for Montgomery County. I don't question that whatsoever. I certainly hope that no one is questioning my desire and ability to do what's best for my government county. If they are, they should step forward and show how I'm not. So you've got all the information that I know to give you. I think, and I'll turn it over to my and if you have questions to make to Judge Conway. OK. Judge Conway, you're up. Jill Maniz, you know I've done the justice piece for 25 years. And since the time we first left our docket books behind and had a simple little computer, I've hope someday we would have a really professional, integrated computer system. I believe it is the way not just for the future, but for the present. If we're going to be able to keep up with the technology advances that are coming at us fast and furious, we need to have the best possible technology system. I was a member of the committee. We've been working on this for a long, long, long time and I've wanted it for even longer than that. I sincerely hope that Montgomery County can become integrated and we can take advantage of all the benefits that that will bring to us. I want to say just a quick word about collections. I am really pleased with our internal collection office. I think Mr. Turnbull has done an excellent job and I think if you just look at the figures on our monthly reports, you'll see that I don't believe I'm slipping behind on collecting funds that are due to Montgomery County. It is your decision. It's a difficult decision, but that's the responsibility that you have. And I hope you make the right one. Thank you. Thank you. This is kindly. Okay. I appreciate that. JP1, 2, 4, and 5 are the hemp lia pose to using the Tyler software package. And you're going to find also that the sheriff department strongly opposed them as well and they're not on board either. I'm not speaking for them, they'll speak for themselves when the time comes. Sure decision gentlemen. So what you choose today but we're opposed to using the tire. We have a contract in place for GHS collections at a zero cost that I mentioned earlier to Montgomery County and zero risk. And if you choose to go with Tyler or somewhere else then you're going to have to spend upwards of probably a million dollars when you don't have to spend the time. Let these people go to work and do what they do best and let the J.P. officers go to work the ones that wanted to do what they do best. Dallas County, as Marshall said, is not causing a problem up there for them to use net data. Let us go to work and do our jobs. We're elected to do, gentlemen. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Judge. All righty Marshall do you see a problem with the the GHS contract for collections of delinquent contracts and the integration into the tolerance? Just given them the collection data just the collection. Jim and as I've told you I have no purview over the collections contract whatsoever. The only issues I have with that contract deal with the underlying software and the conditions when they are not adequately addressed in the contract. If you were to give them all of the JP data to protect the JP's and the county, I don't know. the JP's and the county. I don't know, you know, I certainly have a list of items that need to be addressed if you were to do that. But just give them the collection data and let them collect the link. If what they had asked me for for the link with collection data the day after they signed that contract they would have had that date within weeks. Not a problem. It would have been no issue whatsoever. But what has been requested to me to date and is still being requested to me that I think only you can decide for me is to give them all of their data. I currently do not believe that the contract actually spells that out and calls for that, nor do I think you as a court understood what was underneath that contract. Let me ask you this. If we say we cancel that contract. Yes sir. We go out for collection agencies to collect the link with debt for just a piece of stuff. Yes sir. Would they want all of the JP data? Well I think well what you sent out was a delinquent collections RP, not a software RP. What has been provided to you is a bundle of collection services with, quote, free software. I understand that, but I'm just saying that. And if you did a collections only, RIP, then no. Okay. You should not bundle that together. And set something straight you might have said earlier too. Whether net data and Tyler interface or with collections, I don't think is an issue. I think if you wanted them to, they would. Both parties. It's a matter of exchanging a subset of data for collections purposes. And you asked a question about building the integration. Let me address that too. There are middleware products out there. And if you look at state level implementations, where you have monolithic type agencies that have invested in significant dollars and have software in place and multiple places, it's very difficult to move those agencies significant dollars of and half software in place in multiple places. It's very difficult to move those agencies to an integrated system. Much much more difficult than our project as difficult as it has been. We I think we're in control of the solution set that we provide to Montgomery County. And it to me is a it's a much more complicated picture to try to build it and maintain it even if there are third parties out there and I do not see that model in Texas and I do not see that model at the county level across the nation as a whole so Okay, Mayor, should you have a minute to come in? You don't. Okay. Judge Spikes, this. I'm going to wait until next gen die. I'm going to wait until next gen die. We're going to defer that select for second session. How are the how are all just Spikes? How are the other JPs doing collections on your current? Commissioner, I couldn't answer that. I don't know. Mark. Mark is not doing all the collections for everything other than Delinquent. I'm talking about other than Delinquent assessments out there. How are those collections being done? What do you mean, Howard? Judge Metz says you're at 76% on your collection. Well, he's collecting in-house. In-house. Okay. How are you collecting? Last time I checked, I was somewhere in the 20% range. And you're doing it in-house? No, I'm doing it through collections through the county. Through the county. Okay. And back what a year and a half ago when they deem was running collections, I was at 51%. So it has dropped off substantially over time. And I know we've kind of gotten into some other issues here today. But does one of the things that I would like to bring up is we're talking about an integrated system. None of us are against integration. That is of the utmost importance. But what we have here is multiple elected officials who don't want to go that direction for one reason or another. And I don't know what those reasons necessarily are. But how are we ever truly going to be integrated if everybody doesn't come along? That's a concern and that's something that we've been looking at from the beginning. If it's not just JPs that are having issues here, there are some other elected officials that are having some problems. So integration doesn't work if everybody's not on board. So maybe we're doing the wrong thing. Maybe we all just pull the money back and forget it. I don't know. I mean, it's just amazing to me. You know, the court made a big step. I'm going to make sure for an integrated justice that will help and everybody in the system. To and obviously it's a big fight. I mean and I just don't see I don't see a good future for it behind us with the way things are going. I don't think we can step back away from it. I think we've got to move forward with an integrated justice system and either too. People are going to have to you're going to have to get on board. I think I think we've got to move forward with an integrated justice system. Either or two. People are going to have to get on board. I think once you're willing to sit here on the fort today and tell the JP that they're going to have to go a certain way because it's integrated. When we for two years now have been saying it's cumbersome, it's hard on us, it's going to require more staff. There's a lot of issues there and you're willing to say you're going to go with it anyway. I think what it is is it's just going to be different. It's going to be a change and you may not like all changes that come through the county but we cannot operate like we're in the Stone Age any longer. We have to be able to communicate department by department from the jail to the jp's to adult probation to juvenile probation and for you to stand here and you have not given us any solid facts on what you don't like about this system what does it not do that you need to have done let's let's use one example how about five nearly five minutes to enter citation that we enter thousands of them a month, five minutes on Tyler technology's done by someone at his staff saw it. 30 to 45 seconds on the system we work with now. That's not efficient to be five minutes to enter one thing. Mark, will something give anything to say on that? I can I'm assuming we're going to visit to New Waverly. Uh, J.P. office. I can tell you in your Waverly model, and bought a software in the service model. And Tyler and servers and Plano texas. I do not know the statistics on the bandwidth at that core. I suspect that it is certainly not what we have to our core processes. I can tell you now that I do not believe that the JPE offices today they're using Tyler would put up with a five minutes per entry process. Now is it as fast as their existing application? I doubt that it is. What the right number is? I don't know that number commission. I believe that Tyler's product is going to force them to enter some additional data that's required for OCA reporting in others as they enter, not after the fact. So I can tell you that I sent a stab to the JAPU's conference for Tyler last year to see if there was a huge cry from that group. What is wrong with the JP Court? I call it a day after process was the next point. I think we would see a huge, huge improvement in the JP office at the US time. Is there currently any effort by the Tyler system to work toward a better process for the JP courts? I know Tyler has through their user community established a JP steering body for directing that project. I know they've made many, many, many enhancements to that project to bring that project up to the level where it needs to be viewed as a enterprise-wise product for JP's. And I think that is happening. So, you know, I, that's mine. We've got one JP court that's willing to use the Tyler system right now. Yes. What would be the problem with allowing the GHS to continue the delinquent collections for the other four? Give us some time to watch what happens in JP3, maybe some upgrades in the Tyler system that would make it more user friendly for your operations. And then revisit this six months or a year from now. I think I want to respond to, again, the only issue I have with the GHS contract is to be underlying, moving the whole thing. I'm talking about just the link with collections. That's where our contract says. Just give them collections data. Give them only the collections data. How long is it going to be before Tyler's on board to do all this? We've been what two years into it now and are we any further into it and we were a woman of starting? We started the project in terms of implementation just in March. So we've begun that project. The first phase will be all civil cases. Countywide with the exception of J.P. Fortes right now, is there not in the project? None of the JVs are currently in the scope of work. Okay, we have an executive session. I think the balance of this conversation, why don't we cut off a debate today and let's finish this after executive session. You better not share from board to this Tyler system. That's likely not telling you. Commissioners, I can tell you that the sheriff has met with the Tyler representatives and we have also been looking at other possible avenues to go. We have certainly not committed to Tyler. The discussion was that we would create our own RFP board. In fact, fairly soon we are going to a county in Florida, Orion County to look at their system. The kicker for us is we don't know necessarily everything that's out there. As one individual said, you know the courts and the DAs picked the premier system. My understanding is that the systems that are for the sheriff's office are the weakest links of the whole integrated system, cumbersome, etc. I'm not part of that, but we're sending our resident experts if you will to O'Reyan County in Florida to look at their system to see if there is something. What is their system? Is it Tyler? No sir it is not Tyler. Why would you go look at something that's not going to work with Tyler? I won't understand. Again it goes back to the discussion that about middleware and being able to create an integrated system using unlike software packages. And that was part of the whole discussion, I believe, in law enforcement going out for our own RFP. I can fill you in a little bit, can we share that thing? And unlike the JPs, where you already own the case management system that would work for them, in law enforcement, they need two separate systems. At a minimum, they need a law enforcement records management system in a jail package. The integration between jail and the case management system is needs to be essential. The site visit that Chief Dave Rhandy is mentioning is to a county in Florida who uses our existing CAD vendor, a computer-aided dispatch vendor, which is Enroute. We use Enroute's dispatch and mobile data terminal program in the cars. Typically what you see in the integrated counties in Texas is that the CAD and mobile and records management system have been from one vendor and the jail management system forward to case management has been Tyler. Do they are they able to interface with each other? Well, and you say interface and what they do is they build a level of direct integration not to the degree that you might expect from a fully integrated system. But the integration between jail and your case management system needs to be dynamic in that charges, warrants, bonds, person file, it's a single file. So when we talk about an integrated system and we say, well, not everybody's on board, there are different families of product just like there are families of administrative software. I know, it's difficult to communicate to you the different pieces and the alternatives for them. I Do believe that that The sheriff's office is actively looking at Enroute, which is our current CAD and mobile vendor and they are also going to actively look at Tyler's solution as well and They could end up with a split system in that our CAD and mobile and records vendor from one from in route and then jail is from the other. They have not made that determination. They've been open to look at both of those. And we've certainly been working with them to look at that. There is a group from the SO that's going to 10 Tyler's user conference in May and they'll be looking at that really closely and visiting with the other clients, the other counties are using Tyler's jail product. There are less clients using Tyler's records management product. It's a maturity issue for that product product much like it was for JP's using case management several years ago. But there's not been the demand there from the counties. They have chosen to go with records with their CAD vendor versus the other. Any other questions for me on that? Well, they own board.. They are on board. The DA is in our program and our belief is that the constables need to do what the SO does in terms of record management and what they do in the field. Okay. We've got to limit further debate on this. So after his accusation, Sheriff, number 12 A. We ask you to consider and approve paying travel expenses pertaining to mandatory training in the amount of $165. The requisition was denied due to exceeding the 30-day time limit referenced in the travel policy. The requisition was laid due to the employee completing the requisition incorrectly twice and it had to be returned. Move. Move. Second. On favor of say. on favor say in 12b we ask you to consider and approve the 2013 agreement for interim funding between Montgomery County and the Westwood Magnolia Improvement District on favor say hi thank you thank you thank you thank you Council appreciate three good morning good morning Judge you guys I know we've been at it quite a while this morning, but I've got a real quick PowerPoint presentation I would like to show you before I ask for your consideration in our position. I don't know if we can turn the big screens on. I wanted to give you an update on Internet crimes against children. I've dedicated one of my employees and Vestigator J.J. Stead who I'd like to recognize today. Part time into handling these types of crimes with the assistance of Constable Hayden's office and the District Attorney's Office. We've been very successful in doing this so I want to go through a little bit for you. I'll make it quick. Give you kind of some of the statistics but not only the statistics the impact that this has in our county out here. National Center for Missing and Exploiting Children, we're gonna call Nick Mick from here on out. Current research shows that there's correlation between the people that collect and disseminate child pornography to those same people becoming offenders. Okay, the children that are violated, that are assaulted, their future is more likely that they'll they'll offend, they'll purchase, they'll disseminate, they'll traffic things that nature. So I'm going to go through a couple of different studies with you. Study 1, US Postal Inspection Service Studies says the percent of purchaser, child porn, who are actively child molesters or 80 percent and percentage of viewers of child porn, who are active child molesters, 40 percent. Another study which was a director of Nick Mink testifying in front of the U.S. Senate said more than 1,500 people arrested for child pornography, the number who were molesters out of 1,600 or 620, 620 people. From the 620 molesters in the study, the number of children victims found right, 139 children. Study 3, the federal Bureau of Prison interviews with prisoners incarcerated for child porn, percentage of child porn offenders Study three, the Federal Bureau of Prison Interviews with Prisoners and Carcerated for Child Porn. Percentage of Child Porn offenders who admitted to molesting children were 76%. The average number of child sex victims for each porn prisoner were 30.5. The day I put this presentation together was April 15th. This is a map of Montgomery County, and you can see that there were 28 different IP addresses online, either bringing in child pornography, sharing, or trafficking child pornography. So in one day, it's pretty serious impact or counting. Let's talk about my department. I can effectively report to you a huge success in this type of action that we've committed part-time. The Montgomery County Council's Pre-Sync 3 office has investigated charge and assisted in over 80 felony charges in the past seven months. Prior to taking office, I did a presentation for the Woodlands Township. The Woodlands Township got up in front of and discussed this this type of criminal offense going on in the community and prior to taking office, I conducted an investigation with a division that used to be mine in Harris County on internet crimes against children And we put a couple people in jail up here in the woodlands The presentation I did was from January 2012 to July 2012 and we were able to identify 179 different computers that were identified as possessing images of child pornography The same presentation I'm giving you today, we took current statistics. August 2012 to present, we were able to identify 214 new computers have been identified. What's even there is what we're doing has a law enforcement community out here and putting these people in jail. It results in a 19.5% increase in pedophiles online either assaulting or looking at child pornography. Just part time in precinct three we've worked with and assisted Montgomery County Constable's office precinct four Montgomery County Constable's office precinct The county council office is pre-sanked for the county council office pre-sanked five, the county police department, the county district attorneys, the sheriff's department, the county council pre-sanked four home land security, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville PD, Walker County Sheriff's Department, Grimes County Sheriff's Department, the Houston Police Department, and DPS. Out of those 80 felony charges that we've assisted with or filed ourselves, I want to display that investigator Stit and Captain Mark Seals with the Constable Hayden's office have really been the two that have focused on these crimes and these statistics here I can show you that if you look highlighted and read the case agent possession of child pornography second degree felony We filed four charges where investigator's it was case agent Promotion of child pornography 11 11 different felony charges. He was case agent on. Third degree felony charges of possession. Ten different charges, possession of child pornography. Third degree. One charge where we assisted another agency. Online solicitation of a child. Seven charges where we were the case agent. Or we assisted another agency. Real quick to tell you about online solicitation of a child. That's where these people are trying to come out and meet our children. So we've effectively handled seven charges, felony charges against people coming out to try and pick up our kiddos. Sexual assault of a child, one charge where we assisted another agency, an injury to a child, one chart where we were the case agent. That's the end of my little presentation I've got for you to finish it up. Gentlemen, I'd like that you consider and approve the creation of a position for investigator two. This position to be funded by Commissioner Precinct III and with that said, I hope can consider this request. Ryan, I can't be more proud of you in what your office has done for our community. When you were running for office, you showed me a stack of papers about this thick, of different IP addresses that traffic this kind of crap in our county. And knowing that you have followed through on your promise and you are taking these guys to task, means a lot. I know that I never I don't really like making decisions like this outside of the typical budget hearings and adding to staff, but the statistics that you've shown me and that you've shown this court today, I'd be honored to approve this. And I wanna make certain that you have the tools and the resources to get these guys off our streets. So thank you very much, I move. Thank you. All in favor say aye. Motion passes. Thank you very much. Thank you, Council. All truth test force. I'll throw a fifth test for us. And JJ, thank you for what you do. You're welcome. Morning, Judge commissioners. I'm here this morning to ask you out to consider and approve the ABTP-8 2014 grant and also consider and approve the interlocal agreements between the City of Conrown Grimes County for 2014. Move. Again. All the favor say aye. Aye. Thank you. We're at the services. Judge, it was requested that I present this. This is only a request to have the authority to accept certain fees as they're paid. Currently the county has a fee schedule where for a subpoena fee we collect $25 through the forensic department. The federal rate to pay for that is $40 and it's problematic to give them back the $15. So if y'all would authorize whatever whatever is paid if it happens to pay outside of a regular $25 we would appreciate that. Move second. All in favor. Yeah. Hi. Thank you. Infrastructure. the process. On Judge commission. All right. It's just appropriate to take action, accepting the proposed budget amount required to remodel the precinct three office to you to ask the pastor for us to put a number together with maintenance and we did. $135,000 to do with the of a precinct three commission. Art, thanks for working hard with us to get that done and the Paul case and Keith as well. We were able to come in substantially less than we were anticipating at $200,000. We're just doing the basics that we need to get this facility and a better operational state for our employees and to better serve the county. So I move and fill us as far as naming a funding source content. This is with maintenance doing the work. I think. And what about the 110 that we already just the we use that toward this? We want we want to look at your generator before you commit to that. So the generator our facility has some issues and it's it's old and it's not able to keep up yet with the demand for the entire office so we're gonna hold that until we get that resolved so for now contingency 135,000 I move Second on favor. See you. Hi One-star convention center Good morning, judge commissioners morning I asked you to consider approve and execute the agreement between Montgomery County Texas and Texas Bass Classic Foundation LLC for the rental of the Loamstark Convention Expo Center facilities. This is the same thing we've done over the past four years. The only thing is change in the days. Lou. That's a good one. All the favors to you on. Hi. Good job. Thank you. Elections. We've had obviously population growth in the county and that growth has caused some of the voting precincts to exceed the maximum allowed of 5,000 voters, so we're required to change the boundaries in those areas. So I ask you to consider and approve the order for the changes to those voting precinct boundaries and the creation of three new voting precincts, 87, 88, 89, and those polling locations in those new precincts. Second. All in favor, sir. Thank you. Mental health. Concerned except minutes of March 19th from the advisory board meeting. I move. Second. All favor say aye. Item B, considering approved revisions to three position descriptions in the management plan, is recommended by the advisory board. I move. Senator Noproo revisions to three position descriptions in the management plan as recommended by the advisory board. I move. Second. All the favourable staff. Item C, consider Noproo revisions to a policy in the management plan as recommended by the advisory board. Move. Second. All the favourable staff. by the advisory board. Move. Second. All of the favor say, uh, uh, uh, concern approved medical staff appointment and granting of additional privileges for three physicians is recommended by the advisory board. I move. Second. All the favor say, uh, uh, uh, I have a life extension. Good morning. I'm Amy Restlow, honey extension agent for family consumer sciences. This is Laura Jorriganson. She's our better living for Texans program assistant. And as you know, Extension is one of your best bangs for your buck because of the other funding that gets put into Extension. So the county puts in some funding, other funding comes from the state of Texas and from USDA. One of the best values that we have is our better living for Texans program. It is part of this supplemental nutrition assistance program and it provides nutrition education for families who are on a SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, or those who are potentially eligible. So we're talking about some of our low income families here in Montgomery County and we provide nutrition education, helps them learn to eat more nutritiously, helps them learn to stretch their food dollars, and helps them keep their food safe, so their family doesn't get sick, medical bills don't go up, those kinds of things. So what we are here to ask for today is approval of some match funding. This is a reimbursable contract, and so there's no direct dollars that are put in from the county, from the county to this project. It's just matched. So we have county funded personnel who do things to help us with that project and in return the federal contract will match those funds and that allows us to employ a full-time staff member, Laura. It also gives us a lot of resources to provide nutrition education in the family and for families and then it also increases our educational outreach significantly. Laura has been with us about three and a half months. She's done 26 classes. She's made over 40 contacts including health-based clinics and she's also done some series of classes and this is where folks come back to three classes and we consider those graduates because they've learned several things through that and that helps us reach our goals. So what we're here to ask for today is that approval of the match funding for personnel and for space, the office space that we have in the extension office that Laura uses. And that's all we're asking for. We've got some brochures here that's a little bit more about the Better Living for Texans program that we'd like to share with you. I move. Sorry. All the papers here. All right. Thank you. I would like to present the recommendation for approval item number four, an RFPQ for Internet service provider, various, to wave media and consolidate communications. Second. Hello, Povercia. Hi. Item B, considering to prove the following discretionary exemption as per local government code 262.024A7A. Number one, in fuller public sector for the purchase of upgrade and conversion of CAD software in the amount of $156,000 and $40. Move. All fairer, see out. C, consider and approve the proposal from Edmister, Hinchaw, Russ, and Associates Inc. for the professional engineering services for the Lake Light and Road extension from US 75 to F-M 1484 in the amount not to exceed $219,537. Thank you. Thank you. So I should have to move to change the room. Sure. To move in. You ready? OK. Yeah, attorney. An item 22A, we're asking the court to approve several amendments to occupancy agreements for the county community centers The YMCA amendment increases the monthly rate $750 or two two seven hundred and fifty dollars and extends that term seven years All the remaining amendments on the agenda are the standard annual renewals extending the term for one year Move amendments on the agenda are the standard annual renewals extending the term for one year. Second. All the fairers say aye. All right, you can take a session. We need a motion to dismiss the lawsuit under A&B. All the members here? I Didn't do one emotions to non-suit the yes judge Most non-suit see Second, well, there's yeah They under e we need a motion to set 4343,000 from developer's certainly and then to have the and the person in the developers in connection with the balance move. Second. All in favor say. Uh huh. Excuse me. Did you want additional F? Yes, Judge. We had a resolution in order to encourage expenses in the fence of that suit. I move. Second. Well, there we go. Uh-huh. Okay, under G, considering it's good as a determination of the agreement between the county and grave and the county's health redevelopment is or the electric flexor service. I move. Second. I'm served. Yeah. Aye. OK. We have one citizen of this town that I believe bill. Good morning. Item concern obviously was from the last meeting. There was a $16 million agol length laid in the middle of this room, which is kind of sitting there. And what I wish that the court would do would be to have a full investigation of that, including if possible, subpoena and testimony under oath in in regards to the investigation to find out if in truth, there was $16 million that went out that Chitna got out. And I would, you know, it's something I think, it's just kind of laying out there since it's been mentioned. And I don't know if it's good, it would be done by the county attorney's office and reviewing in the contacts, reviewing all the approval procedures and if it's $6 million or $2 million or it might not be even anything I don't know but it's just something that laid out there and it's kind of a pretty shocking thing. So you got to work it out. Yes, we are. In fact, we were starting to let us sleep. Of course, we will have subpoena power, people with another oath in this. I think one different, maybe, to what I do is maybe this whole thing in the middle of the words about the number of the four or else where it obviously will be done through the court system. We're already coordinating the development from the Red Liggins office to get some of their data from our boss on the highway. In this morning's talk, we're looking at it from the civil science. What did any of you think of being there? Look at it. Any in all options. We look at the evidence of the civil silence and what did any of the things that were mentioned by the grand jury in their letter that there were ethics violations, questionable ethics, or things that shouldn't have been done. And those are the things that need to be brought forth. Don't need, you know, I don't think it's a care about names as much as practices, so things can be put into policy and procedure that those practices are lined out as totally forbidden and should not happen again other than relying on you know the own good judgment of somebody that well I don't think this is right but I don't see anything against it well I want to see something against so that's my concern. Okay. Thank you. Do we hear anything else in the comments there? Okay. We had one item that was left off. or 11, take the three-stank two, you should consider any of that. Judge, you already voted on, or what I would say to speak for. I never did. But I just give you your chance. This is from the agenda. It's disappointing that the county as a whole doesn't have an opportunity to use a free program to benefit not only Commissioner's Court but to benefit the elected officials as well. And the vote's been made, so I guess my comment would be it's just disappointing, because the opportunity for something to benefit you tremendously has been negated. Well, it would not necessarily benefit totally because it's not for the any greatest justice system. Okay. And what harm would it have done being free to the county to a state on that program until we were ready to quote-unquote and quote, integrate. We will get on more term goals, more term goals, but like to use them and stuff them into this collection services, I think this course is important as you do that. Okay. All right, Jess, thank you. Mr. D. O'Reilly with that. Yes. Do you feel like you can keep up with collections along with the link with collections or do you feel like we need an outside contract or the link with collections beyond what you all do? be like we need an outside contract or delinquent collections beyond what you'll do. Well to give you a little more perspective prior to the RFP that they put out and made the selection from, we had put one out probably six to eight months or maybe even a year prior to that. One of the first things I did when I got into that office or in that position of oversight for the collections group, not because I got any feeling about it really one way or the other, but simply wanted to have the information available so that we got to a point where we were prepared to make a decision along those lines that we would have information available to us. They rejected that RFP at one point and reissued it. The reason that got to that point is I felt like it when we first entered into it that we were looking at something that would be used for the county level, the district level, and the JP level combined as potentially. As it turned out, we began to talk to the various court levels. The district court and the county courts were not interested in anyone doing third party, the Lincoln collections for them. And so what I saw later is to the JP group because they don't want to have many interests. Are the county and district courts doing their own delinquent collections? The collections group is doing that for them currently. You're office. Yes. OK. So we were prepared to look at and investigate it a long time ago and then it was re-looked at the proposal was reissued and got some additional responses and some people didn't respond the second time, it did the first time and some responded the second time, it didn't participate the first time. There's certainly value to it when I guess to that point. It just a matter of the comfort level. The offices that will be performing that service are they going to do it correctly? Are they going to do it well? Are they going to be courteous and kind and all the things that protect the office holders image? You know some people feel that the percentage that the third party to link with tax on in addition to that 30% fee is a little bit excessive. But that's something each one would have to decide whether they think that's appropriate or negotiate for something that's better or perhaps more reasonable. So there's benefit to it. It's just a matter of approach realistically. It makes no difference to us, like I say, we've considered from the very beginning prior to these things coming along that we thought it might have value in America. We're not, let me understand this. We, I don't know, the 10, 12 largest counties in Hill, let's see, Hillbago would not be one. But Colin County, Rosaria counties, when we use oftentimes, Williamson County, a lot of collections groups will be district only, there will be another group for county only, and then some combination of JPs is a group for the JPs each having their own collection group. If they want to go do their own thing, then that's fine, but actually in some respects, my car lives a little bit easier than trying to deal with people that are located simply at the courthouse that are with the collections group anyway. So the models exist all different kinds of ways and so it's not a matter of us trying to cling onto it or hang onto it other than just trying to have, you know, present you guys with the information so that you can see what is the best decision over home. Judge, if I may. Guys, part of the point collection issue is they do a good job at the upper levels because they're collecting larger sums of money. And then we're dumping all of this data onto them for $100, $105, whatever the case it may be, and it's taking a lot of time and a lot of effort out of their department to try to collect for us. So in turn, when the RFP went out, what came about of this was, is if we go with an outside collector, I have to have staff in my office basically bundle that stuff together and send it to them. Okay? They have to physically do that to get it to. The company that you approved back in January, because of the software, they call in every nut to our system and they pull that stuff out automatically. So it puts two people at least in my office and y'all all know I have a very small office, I've four and a half staff, but if it's two people in my office able to do something else that they need to be doing, then working on this data batch to send to another collector. But it promotes better business for them not to have to mess with the JP. Would you agree or disagree with that? With the amount of numbers and the amount of money. I don't know I have to think about it in terms of. So that's what we were looking at when this collections thing came out is we've got a very good business that collects a lot of money for a lot of counties. And we were fortunate enough that it comes along with technology that allows my staff to do their day to day stuff and not have to be bundling to get it sent to one of these other folks. That's ultimately where we sit. And then on top of it, it being free. And the percentage that Mark brought up, the percentage is just that's towards. That's written in statute that they can charge up to 30% on the link list. Up to 30%. You can actually go shake or something. I would assume, but I don't know. I've never been into that conversation. Okay. So that's our concern is, you know. I don't see why we couldn't go ahead and talk about the elected link with taxes to find the benefits out there. But let me add one thing to that, Commissioner. The reason that my request today was for all of the data. There's an underlying issue here which is the Office of Court Administration. We are reporting to them or supposed to be reporting to them as of now. I have zero reports into the Office of Court Administration. The only two courts that are reporting to them, precinct for JP and for tent district court. If they audit Montgomery County and we are not in compliance with the Office of Court Administration, they will levie all of the money that we collect on our fines and they're gonna keep it until we get in compliance. Marshall, we talked about this. You're looking at me, but the collective system on the image responsible for that, and Mark and Vivian. Mark, I mean, I'm under the impression we're in good shape on this issue. We've collected between 71.9% in precinct 4 is 75.72% in precinct 1, 2, 3, and 5. Our collection percentages are adequate. This is hard data. Well, if you'd like detailed behind it, I can share that with you as well. But to the point of reporting, the reports, when again, I got involved with it, had some problems and some errors. They have been submitted in totality to the Office of Court of Administration, two, if not three times, since the middle of last year. In each of those occasions, we would enter all the required data, all the information off the reports that we had. A Bernie shift with the Office of Court Administration is a, I guess, the person responsible for collecting all that, but more importantly, he's responsible for analyzing the data and is being able to discuss it with the Supreme Court of Texas and those people that care about it at that level. And those occasions, he would put all the information in and he reviewed the reports and found things that were outside the trends that you see in every other county across the state of Texas. In some cases, there were situations or circumstances where he would say this number is not possible that cannot be that. Or he would say this is outside the trend or outside the norm of what they see throughout the state of the Texas of all the counties and entities that are required to report. In those instances, they have deleted all the information. We've gone back to Marshall and his group and made the points of the assertions that Mr. Schiff made to us and they have made corrections or attempted to make corrections to reports on three different occasions to get those things back right again. We've submitted at this point in time the information for the county court at level, I'm sorry, the JP level and the district court level. For all the court of those levels. Yes, well, not for four obviously. Four in the four, ten through their own things so they have their own individual reporting requirements. But you're reporting for all the rest of the courts. That's correct. And it's zero as of today. As of today, your stuff is out entered. Now the reason for that, again, we had submitted one year's worth of reports to Bernie three weeks ago. He reviewed JP levelP. level and the district level and said they looked good. And so we completed running the reports for those years. 36 individual reports and typing those numbers into their website for them to look at for the entire time. And once they look at the subset, they were satisfied with the data three years worth of information for 10, 11, and 12. The county ones, the subset that we've given them, still has something funny looking at it, and they're reviewing that, and the county is continuing to look at that particular report. What Mr. Schiff indicated to us, and I think what they're talking about is when they attended a JP thing where this reporting and not reporting came up, they were correct. At that point in time, there was no information in either levels because the Office of the Court of Administration through Bernie had deleted all the information because there was errors and problems and if there was sufficient enough that there was no point in keeping any of it there. So I think that's what raised the flag and the concern that what Mr. Schiff told us and has repeatedly told us over the last year year and a half that we've been working on this problem. He says as long as we know you're working on it and he knows we're working on it. Clegg D. Walt talks to him probably once every two weeks if not once a month for sure about the status of where we are providing him sample reports, allowing him to evaluate and we've gone through this iterative, iterative process on numerous occasions trying to get it narrowed down to something that fits the norms across the state and the accurate reporting. So, it's been an ongoing problem, but it's under resolution and there's no thread at any time because when they did a sort of spot check type pre-audit in January, I think it was, maybe it was 1st February. We disclosed all that to our ever representative, Carolyn Williams, in total the situation and she said the same thing as long as you're working on it, there's no problems. And we know you're working on it. It's only when you fail to take any action, any effort whatsoever. That becomes a problem of risk. We appreciate you. We did that for us. This is a definition. We did that for us. any other questions? Anything else does? Thank you. Please consider an approved appeal to change request forms. Move. Second. All fair. We see that. Thank you. The motion is adjourned. Yes, move. Second. Fair. Yeah. Ah. Yes. Yes. We'll be there. We'll be there. We'll be there. All right. In 22b, we're asking the court to approve a resolution in order that would authorize the county employee committee to use the parking garages during the Conno cash festival. As in past years, this would begin on Friday, October 11th, starting at 6 p.m. and continue through the weekend, ending on Sunday evening. They will be restricted to no more than a $5 fee. They cannot charge a fee before $11 on Sunday to accommodate the church parking. And there will be restrictions included as part of that resolution that would prohibit certain activities in the parking garages. Move. Second. All on favor, say it. And item 22C, that we wanted to present the court with some information an update on where we stand with the Linda Brazil contract and see if the court has any guidance as how they want to move forward with that contract Morning judge commissioners. Morning, JD. If you recall, I think it was back in January. The court had asked us to take a look at Miss Brazil's contract for the professional services she had been involved in for the last six plus years, I believe it is. And if you recall, it was stated at that time by best best presale that she had drafted that contract and not the county attorney's office. And I think over the years, the only time the county attorney's office had been asked a way in on that was to say whether or not it was enforceable. So at the courts direction, we have looked at that whole contract and provided a proposed draft in that. And I should say we met myself in two attorneys in my office. We met for consideration the time a few months ago with Ms. Prasil. And that's what's in the item one here list the duties and responsibilities. That was from our discussions with her the kind of thing she's been doing over the last few years because if you recall the contract really was so dated it really didn't address anything other than the transition from her as auditor to the new auditor. One thing obviously the part of this that seems to get the most publicity is about the dollar amount which is not something my office has control of or is not making recommendation, or how many hours the county youth is misprozile or whether they use her or not. But so we left the dollar rate the same as it was under her existing contract, which is 125 an hour. I know one or more members on the court had mentioned about some sort of limits to the contract because it was completely open-ended for us how much work could be performed. And so we put in the contract that's under paragraph 4,000 hours per year, 1,000 billable hours, which we then cap it out at 125,000. Again, that's not my recommendation. That's just a point for the court to look at and consider if they continue to use Ms. Rousille and if so, what number they'd want to put in there. Now, knowing during our discussion with Ms. Rousille, she had some concerns about that, but it's clear, and I think it's clear in the contract, that if the court chooses to continue to use her services and wants her to do additional work, the court can approve that and of course the Miss Presilla would be paid for it. So that's not trying to short change her in any way if you continue to use her under the contract. Our focus though was really on the contract itself. And in our opinion, the contract was so bare bones, it really didn't do anything to protect the county. As I said, it was never drafted by the county attorney's office. And that's been the focus of my office is to put those terms and conditions in there that we think should be in any professional services contract where there was misprozile or anyone else. So those things, one of those is in paragraph eight a confidential clause in there. There was nothing like that in the existing contract. This one says the contractor shall keep information accessed by the contractor and performance of this agreement strictly confidential. We think that's imperative of any professional services contract that that information that she glends from the county not be shared with others. Also part of that same paragraph is a conflict of interest clause. Again I think that's extremely important that you can't be working for the Montgomery County and then be engaged in any other sort of business or practice where that would put you in conflict with Montgomery County whether that's in a business relationship or any other kind of relationship Also in that same paragraph is any work product generated under this contract would be the exclusive property of Montgomery County. Another area we addressed in there, there was no insurance requirement in Brazil's contract and we have been put in there in paragraph 9. A malpractice and professional liability insurance. Our proposal was to make that $1 million per claim occurrence or $2 million in the aggregate. Again, those are quite normal terms in contracts of this nature. And then also on paragraph 10, an indemnity clause in there that was really missing from the previous one. And this is really a two-way street that works both ways. One, Ms. Rizzo would be indemed to buying the county from anything that arose from her willful misconduct and neglect, negligent act or emissions or any other breach of these duties to the county. But on the flip side of that, in that same paragraph, in Montgomery County would indemnify Ms. Brazil for any will, the same kind of acts, Montgomery County. So it really is just protecting both entities. Again, these are such usual and customary clauses that we firmly believe they ought to be there. We did forward this proposed contract after our meeting to Miss Brazil back on about March 15th and was hoping to have heard some detailed comments back from her, hopefully in writing. And to my knowledge, the word, in Daniel Jones here, my staff has talked to her a couple of times. In the word, we understand as her insurance agent was reviewing it, and I guess in terms of the professional ability insurance portion, and her attorney was reviewing the contract as well. In that point does cause us a bit of a problem. If we don't know this, we've never been contacted by an attorney if Miss Brazil has retained council, then it causes us some difficulty of being able to communicate directly with her if she's represented. But we don't know that for a fact. So my position as county attorney would be if the county is going to continue to do business with Miss Preseild and at what rates and what sort of caps and that's you guys call not not my call is that any such work be performed under this new contract because it has all the adequate protections in there for the taxpayers that I that need to be there. And JD, this is something, this management advisory service has contract you would extend as to any consultant. Absolutely. These terms and conditions, my office could not recommend we sign any professional services contract. They did not have these basic terms and conditions in there. And it really protects us and protects the contractor as well. I have a concern about a little elected officials that deal with this Brazil on a regular basis. I'm happy. The court said or addressed from that too. I mean, how do we know what she's allowed to do and nothing allowed to do with the auditor when we're looking at bond issues and debt service the next year. We'll do this every year. Well, my recommendation would be to work with the county auditor on that. I don't know why we would need Ms. Brazil involved in those functions whatsoever. Whatever I'd like to do, gentlemen, is start winding this contract down and limit this contract to the winding down of the Joe Crowley Center and the mental health center and the excluded for just those purposes. The existing contract that's in place? Yes sir. Yeah, it's worked for six years. We've never had an issue. Judge not a contract? Mr. Rezel is dedicated to Montgomery County. She's very, very've never had an issue. Judge, not a good contract? Mr. Rezile is dedicated to Montgomery County. She's very, very good at what she does. Very, very few people realize what Linda does and how important she is to those two facilities out there. I mean, I certainly don't have any problem, Judge, and leaving her contract as is. And I think this is glad to get out of it as it is about it so. What I want to know if you do JD is to redraft this contract where it's basically I'm not sure whether you should we need to allow London to do a job. I agree. We don't need it as restrictive. I have an attorney that I'm actually paying money to, to rat, to read this and to give me feedback. I don't want to encourage more additional expenses for a second draft. I've already visited with Daniel a couple times, but I tell him so found just giving him some highlights about what my attorney has said to some of the concerns. I will be prepared to come back to the county attorney's office with the wording that I was before in that contract because there are some of those clauses in there that actually according to my attorney might actually put me in a position being your employee rather than your contractor and we need a one of us to do that. It is my intent to finally retire from the Greenery County and all of its contracts. To measure, Metter had asked me if I would work on the wind down of these facilities. I said yes, I'd be glad to do that. That's an important thing. We need to do that. And the draft that I will work with on the county attorney's office and the language that my attorney will propose anticipates that it's a wind down of my contract to be ended in the near future. So I don't want another draft from my attorney look, yeah, wait for my attorney to give me back that line. Well, as long as my two points or in the contract, whether it's this contract or another contract, I don't care, but we need to wind this contract down to exclude your services only for these two projects until their conclusion. Yeah, absolutely. And though I think if JD is a county attorney that he's been elected to serve this role, if he's stating that we need to have the end-indemification clause in there, the conflict of interest clause, confidential information clause and insurance clause, I don't think that it's a court we should accept his recommendations. We'll see what Linda comes up with. You think you'll have something by next court, Linda? Oh sure. Yeah, I move we defer this item to the next court. I would like to weigh in on that. It would cause me considerable concern of any contractor, any professional services contractor. If they have a problem with these terms and conditions because these are very standard. She's had that contract for six, seven weeks now. We've heard nothing from any lawyer on it and all we have to do is amend the first paragraph up there to include just those two items that you said about the Joe Corley and about the mental health facility. And I think the rest of these if if she's gonna continue doing that work, we ought to just sign it under this new contract. It's a very simple, very straightforward contract. I think this is the intention of the court and how will we get there? We'll leave it a few days. I'll let's defer it until next court. I make a motion that way deferred. Well, I don't think that JD is interested in reviewing her attorney's contract when he is put forth what he believes is the work and document for this governing body. And I don't think that I want to allow any contractor to walk in here with their contract and try to supersede what our county attorney's asking to be done. Every consultant that we have gives us a contract. Every consultant that we ever hire. And that may have been how it was. I know. I'm sure my attorney is reviewing JD's proposed contract and it will give me back the wording for the changes that I would like to see. It's not riding an in contract There will be a national contract. Okay, and we'll be happy to take a look at that. Be nice if we had some time for him because it was Sentinus, Brazil, in March 15th. And here we are five, six weeks. We said she'd have my next call. Okay, well, I'll second your motion. Okay. We'll do all the favor. Yeah. Hi. Alrighty. And finally, an item 22D we're asking the court to approve and amended and restated land lease agreement between the county and Carland Dowell. This document revises the description of the lease property, provides for a transfer of responsibility for pavement maintenance to the county at a future date, and would also establish a pavement maintenance assessment once the county assumes responsibility for the pavement maintenance. Move. Second. I'm in favor. Okay, and present to this recess the court and convened public hearing. Senator Proof is establishing a 20 mile for our spin limit on doors lanes. Anyone here to discuss that? Let's just join the public hearing and convening commissioners court. I move. Second. All in favor, see that? Commissioners, present to. Senator Proof request from Eagles and S. Ministries of Conroad to Participate in the Adopted. The second is the Board of Trustees. The second is the Board of Trustees. The second is the Board of Trustees. The second is the Board of Trustees. The second is the Board of Trustees. The second is the Board of Trustees. The second is the Board of Trustees. The second is the Board of Trustees. The second is the Board of $21,965 from TCEQ. Move. Second. All there is now. Present four. Senator and the approval of the resolution to order between Montgomery County, Commissioner Prudent and Eason Montgomery County Improvement District, for Commissioner Prudent and Prync 4 to submit a community development funding obligation for an improvement district for an additional add-on to the Friendship Center and South Park in New Canary. I move. Okay. All in favor, say aye. Okay, under the county attorney, Rodin Bridge, precinct three. Good morning. Morning. This is Senator and approved the interlocal agreement between Conor and and Pim School District and Montgomery County for the placement of traffic signal lights at the intersection of RISE, the coastal road and burnwoods drive. I believe the ISD is going to contribute $50,000 for the installation of traffic signals. Absolutely, and I do just want to publicly thank the ISD for working so closely with the precinct three commissioners office and agree into funness And we're gonna we're gonna build it. They're gonna fund it and it's gonna be It's gonna improve traffic in that immediate area. So I move Second all of favorites. Yeah Okay, I'm a Article 551.071 of the government code list is this recessed, this court-presented session. Please. Please, the court-backed order, please. All right, you can take second session. We need a motion to dismiss the lawsuit under A and B. All the perverse, yeah. Edmund, do you want a motion to non-suit at C? Yes, Judge. Second. from the developer's security and identity and the board's in connection with the balance. Move. Second. On the favor, say. Okay. Excuse me. Did you want additional F? Yes, Judge. We had a resolution in order to incur expenses in the fence of that suit. I move. Second. Well, there we go. Okay, under and G, considering this good-ass determination of the agreements between the county and grave summary of all limited or the lengthy collection of services, I move. Second. Thirds, yeah. All right. Okay. We have one citizen that signed up of leave billed. We have one citizen that signed up I believe bill. Good morning. Item concern obviously was from the last meeting. There was a $16 million dollar egg length laid in the middle of this room which is kind of sitting there and what I wish that the court would do would be to have a full investigation of that including if possible subpoena and testimony under oath in in regards to the investigation to find out if in truth there's there was $16 million that went out that Chitnik got out and I would you know it's something I think it's just kind of laying out there since it's been mentioned and I don't know if it's good it would be done by the county attorney's office and reviewing in the contacts, reviewing all the approval procedures and if it's six million dollars or two million dollars or it might not be even anything I don't know but it's just something that laid out there and it's kind of a pretty shocking thing. Katie, you got working on that. Thank you. You're working on that. Yes, we are. In fact, we was signing the review of the year we started to mention last week. Of course, we will have subpoena power, people who have opened this. I think one different maybe to what I do is maybe this whole thing and definitely more is about the number of levels or levels where obviously anything leads to be done through the court system and we're already coordinating with the Red Liggins office to get some of their data or boss on an ad or a bet in this motion. So we're looking at it from the civil side of the system. What is any range of opinion there? Look at it. Any in all options. And one of the things that was mentioned by the grand jury in their letter, there were ethics violations, questionable ethics, or things that shouldn't have been done. And those are the things that need to be brought forth. They don't need, you know, I don't think it's a care of names as much as practices so things can be put into policy and procedure that those practices are lined out as totally forbidden and should not happen again, other than relying on, you know, the own good judgment of somebody that, well, I don't think this is right, but I don't see anything against it. Well, I want to see something against. So that's my concern. Do we hear the system coming today? Okay. We had one item that was not, it was left off, for the fact that there's a contestant that was number 11, J.P. I'm just giving you your chance. This is from the agenda. It's disappointing that the county as a whole doesn't have an opportunity to use a free program to benefit not only Commissioner's Court but to benefit the elected officials as well. And the vote's been made, so I guess my comment would be it's just disappointing. Because the opportunity for something to benefit you tremendously has been negated. Well, it would not necessarily benefit totally because it's not for the integrated justice system. It's not for the integrated justice system. I can't believe that. And what harm would it have done being free to the county to estate on that program until we were ready to quote and quote integrate. We will get on more term goals, more term goals, but like to use them and stuff them into just collection services. I think this course is more than expected. All right, just thank you. Mr. D. Aldrin, do you feel like you can keep up with the collections for the records along with the link with collections, or do you think we need a contract for the link with collections outside of your office? Do you feel like you can keep up with collections along with the link with collections, or do you feel like we need an outside contract for the link with collections beyond what you all do? I'll do it. Well, to give you a little more perspective prior to the RFP that they put out and made the selection from, we had put one out probably six to eight months or maybe even a year prior to that. It's one of the first things I did when I got into that office or in that position of oversight for the collections group, not because I had any feeling about it really one way or the other, but simply wanted to have the information available so that we've got to a point where we were prepared to make a decision along those lines that we would have information available to us. They rejected that RFP at one point and reissued it. The reason that got to that point is I felt like it when we first entered into it that we were looking at something that would be used for the county level, the district level, and the JP level combined as potentially. As it turned out, when we began to talk to the various court levels, the district court and the county courts were not interested in anyone doing third party the Lincoln collections for them. So I so lighter to the JP Group is they don't want many interest are the counting district courts doing their own delinquent collections the collections group is doing that for them currently your your office. Yes. Okay. So we were prepared to look at and investigate it. You know a long time ago and then it was re looked at A long time ago, and then it was re-looked at, the proposal was reissued and got, like, say, some additional responses, and some of us people didn't respond the second time that did the first time, and some responded the second time that didn't participate the first time. There's certainly value to it, when it gets to that point. It's just a matter of the comfort level, the offices that will be performing that service, are they going to do it correctly, are they going to do it well, are they going to be courteous and kind, and all the things that protect the office holder's image. Some people feel that the percentage that the third party delinquent tax on in addition to that 30% fee is a little bit excessive, but that's something that each one have to decide whether they think that's appropriate or negotiate for something that's better or perhaps more reasonable. So there's benefit to it. It's just a matter of approach realistically. It makes no difference to us. Like I say, we've considered from the very beginning prior to these things coming along that we thought it might have value in merit. We're not, I mean understand this. We, I don't know, the 10, 12 largest counties, if you'll see, if I'll go, would not be one, but Colin County, Rosaria counties, one we use oftentimes, Williamson County, a lot of collections groups will be district only, there'll be another group for county only and then some combination of JPs is a group for the JPs each having their own collection group. If they want to go do their own thing then that's fine, in some respects my car lives a little bit easier than trying to deal with people that are located simply at the courthouse that are with the collections group anyway. So the models exist all different kinds of ways and so it's not a matter of us trying to cling onto it or hang onto it, other than just trying to have, you know, present you guys with the information so that you can see what is the best decision overall. Judge, if I may, guys, one collection issue is they do a good job at the upper levels because they're collecting larger sums of money. And then we're dumping all of this data onto the end for $100, $105, whatever the case it may be, and it's taking a lot of time and a lot of effort out of their department to try to collect for us. So in turn, when the RFP went out, what came about of this was, is if we go with a outside collector, I have to have staff in my office basically bundle that stuff together and send it to them. They have to physically do that to get it to them. The company that you approved back in January, because of the software, they call in every night to our system, and they pull that stuff out automatically. So it puts two people, at least in my office, and y'all all know I have a very small office, I've four and a half staff, but it puts two people in my office able to do something else that they need to be doing than working on this data batch to send to another collector. But it promotes better business for them not to have to mess with the JP's. Would you agree or disagree with that? With the amount of numbers and the amount of money? I don't know, I'd have to think about it in terms of. So what you did that. That's what we were looking at when this collections thing came out is we've got a very good business that collects a lot of money for a lot of counties. And we were fortunate enough that it comes along with technology that allows my staff to do their day-to-day stuff and not have to be bundling to get it sent to one of these other firms. That's ultimately where we sit. And then on top of it, it being free. And the percentage that Mark brought up, the percentage is just that's towards. That's written in statute that they can charge up to 30% on the link list. And that's up to up to 30%. You could actually go shape for something. I would assume but I don't know. I've never been into that conversation. Okay. So that's our concern is, you know. I don't see why we couldn't. We're heading to the link with taxes. Define the benefits out there. But let me, let me add one thing to that, Commissioner. The reason that my request today was for all of the data. Okay. There's an underlying issue here, which is the office of court administration. Okay. We are reporting to them, underlying issue here, which is the office of Board Administration. We are reporting to them or supposed to be reporting to them as of now. I have zero reports into the office of Board Administration. The only two courts that are reporting to them, precinct for JP and for tent district court. If they audit Montgomery County and we are not in compliance with the Office of Court Administration, they will levy all of the money that we collect on our fines and they're going to keep it until we get in compliance. Marshall, we talked about this. If you're looking at me with collections system, one, if it's responsible for that, who aren't in good hands? Mark, I mean, I'm under the impression we're in good shape on this issue. We've collected between 71.9% and free state. 4 is 75.72% and free state. 1, 2, 3, and 5. Our collection percentages are adequate. This is hard data. Well, if you'd like detail behind it, I can share that with you as well. But to the point of reporting, the reports, when again, I got involved with it, had some problems and some errors. They have been submitted in totality to the Office of Court Administration, two if not three times since the middle of last year. In each of those occasions we would enter all the required data, all the information off the reports that we had. A Bernie Schiff with the Office of Court Administration is a, I guess, the person responsible for collecting all that, but more importantly, he's responsible for analyzing the data and just being able to discuss it with the Supreme Court of Texas and those people that care about it at that level. And those occasions, he, when we put all the information in, he reviewed the reports and found things that were outside the trends that you see in every other county across the state of Texas. In some cases, there were situations or circumstances where he would say this number is not possible that cannot be that. Or he would say this is outside the trend or outside the norm of what they see throughout the state of the Texas of all the counties and entities that are required to report. In those instances, they have deleted all the information. We've gone back to Marshall and his group and made the points of the assertions that Mr. Schiff made to us and they have made corrections or attempted to make corrections to reports on three different occasions to get those things back right again. We have submitted at this point in time the information for the county court at level, I'm sorry, the JP level and the district court level. For all the court? As a couple of weeks ago. For all the court of those levels. Well, not for four obviously. Four and the four tent through their own things so they have their own individual reporting requirements. But you're reporting for all the rest of the courts. That's correct. And it's zero as of today. As of today, your stuff is all entered. Now the reason for that, again, we had submitted one year's worth of reports to Bernie three weeks ago. He reviewed JP level and the district level and said they looked good. And so we completed running the reports for those years, 36 individual reports and typing those numbers into their website for them to look at for the entire time print. Once they look at the subset they were satisfied we gave them three years worth of information for 10, 11 and 12. The county ones, the subset that we've given them still has something funny looking at it and they're reviewing that and the county is continuing to look at that particular report. What Mr. Schiff indicated to us and I think what they're talking about is when they attended a JP thing where this reporting and not reporting came up, they were correct at that point in time there was no information in either levels because the Office of the Court of Administration through Bernie had deleted all the information because there was errors and problems and if there was sufficient enough, there was no point in keeping any of it there. So I think that's what raised the flag and the concern that what Mr. Schiff told us and has repeatedly told us over the last year year and a half ago working on this problem. He says as long as we know you're working on it, and he knows we're working on it. Clegg D. Walt talks to him probably once every two weeks if not once a month, for sure, about the status of where we are, providing him sample reports, allowing him to evaluate. And we've gone through this iterative process on numerous occasions, trying to get it narrowed down to something that fits the norms across the state and the accurate reporting. So it's been an ongoing problem, but it's under resolution and there's no thread at any time, because when they did a sort of spot check type pre-audit in January, I think it was, maybe it's first February, we disclosed all that to our ever representative, Carolyn Williams, in total the situation, and she said the same thing as long as you're working on it, there's no problems. And we know you're working on it. It's only when you fail to take any action, any effort whatsoever, if it becomes a problem of risk. We appreciate you. We did that for us. This is definition. We did that for us. This is a decision. Anything else does? Anything else does? No, I'm done. Okay. Human resources. No, Dodie. Good morning. Please consider an approved appeal to change request forms. Move. Second. All fair. You see that? Thank you. The motion goes you. Yes, move. Second.