All right, let's bring the court to order, please. Let's stand for the opening prayer and the flesh of allegiance. Chef, I'm engaged. Please, please, the prayer. The last thing, yeah. Our most gracious Heavenly Father, we're thankful for this day and all the blessings of the Church. We ask that you bless our country, bless our troops. We ask that you be with country, bless our troops. We ask that you be with this court that the things that are said and done here today would be pleasing to you. We ask that you be with those who have been affected by these fires, be with them, watch over those who have lost their homes. Our special prayer today would be for the rain. We ask the Jews to give us of our sins, watch over all these things we ask in Jesus' name. Amen. States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God and under Israel for every Indian justice for all. Honor and Texas fire, I have a way to please do to the Texas one state under God, one. So the record all members of the court are present. We need a motion on the agenda, please. Thank you. I appreciate it. See ya. Before we get started on the agenda, Martha Gustafson asked that we let two wood forest reps come talk. I know one very well, Jay. Good morning. Good morning, Commissioner. Good morning. I don't have to tell you all what kind of a catastrophe we had on Friday with our pay road. I have to apologize with Forest has stepped up to the plate and taken full responsibility for what happened. And we are meeting this afternoon in my office. I'm meeting with Villas-Rainey, Villas-Martin, Phyllis Martin, the bank's representatives, and we're going to work out a plan of how the county employees can get back there. NSF charges that may have incurred or any unforeseen problems that they have incurred that maybe we don't even know about. A letter has been drafted, but we will be reviewing that letter and updating it for release to the county employees. Jay would like to address the court. I will tell you I've had emails from Robert Marling. Friday was my 50th wedding anniversary boy. What a celebration. Bob and I were on the road in Mississippi and I get this phone call but no but anyway we got back yesterday and we were ready to be back you know road trips are I know Ed said he took a two-week road trip it was glorious well ride with Bob for a while anyway we got home yesterday afternoon and I knew we needed to address this issue. So, and you all ask any questions you want. I used to grab a bottle of little league on par games. I don't do that anymore either. I don't blame you. Well those employers got their money. Yes, they are all paid. They are paid? Yes, they are. As of this morning, pay to clock. Because of the ACH processing in plate payroll, whenever it didn't go Thursday night, you're subject to the Fed and their calendar as some of the other bankers in the room and former bankers know. So they actually would not receive credit until this morning required by natural rules to actually post that by to clock this morning. So they were all paid and we confirmed that. We figure out what the problem was and if we found a way to make sure it doesn't happen again. Yes, are we certainly have identified quickly on Friday what the problem was we put a new processing system in place but the actual errors that occurred were human errors and we have multiple stopgaps to catch those and we failed to do that. I mean, just quite honestly, it was a human error. We put additional safeguards in place and we're going to be working with Martha and the other rest of the Treasury Department and county attorneys to make sure that we have systems in place to ensure that this never happens again. We value the business that we have with the county and the most important thing that we do is to process the payroll for your employees. And we failed to do that accurately. We take full blame and we'll do whatever is needed to make sure that those employees are made whole. And that we restore the confidence that you've had with us in the past. And I assure you that personally and on behalf of the board, management will be forced. Great. Jay, well thank you for coming this morning. I know Jay since the 80s. And I trust every word you say. We appreciate you coming. Thank you. Again, my apologies and we'll make it up. If you would give your business card to Anne Carr, I need to tell you another matter. Not related to this. Well, before you leave, great. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you, commissioners. And thank you for allowing us to go first and now we've got business back in the office We're going to leave great. Thank you Okay, we have a proclamation homes for heroes We're here to represent Homes for Heroes. Homes for Heroes is a national program that was formed shortly after 9-11-2001. It's a program designed to help our heroes, and we're here locally to the police, firemen, educators, medical, and the, I know I left off military, doctors, nurses, to help them when they wanna buy a home, to get discounts on the real estate services. We've also expanded that to the local businesses to get day-to-day discounts on everything from car washes, haircuts, eating out, things like that. So it's a great discount program for people that are very deserving of it. So thank you very much. Great. Thank you for coming today. Thank you. Sir, motion. Move. I want to favor. See. I'm the county clerk who need to approve the minutes. For June 6th. Move. Second. I'll favor. See. Uh-huh. Missors, I have no change on consent. Move. Second I have no change on consent. All of every say. Number 10, consider discussing appropriate takeness to your action from Montgomery County to withstand primacy, segment G and H, the Grand Parkway, and return authority to develop this project to the state of Texas. We've talked about this commission, as you know, for a number of months. Personally, I would like to see the traffic and revenue study before we give it back, but there are reasons, very legitimate reasons to give it back. Now I understand that also. So whatever your pleasure is, back but there are reasons very legitimate reasons to give it back now I understand that also so whatever your pleasure is we could vote on that today or for I think we got gentleman here David Garnett is here David would you mind stepping up we have had meeting that the meetings with David and we have pretty much I think aren't out everything that we wanted to get you know last week Mr. Chancellor myself. What do you think? I mean you know that Montgomery County is just about, I don't think that the textiles is just about satisfied our wants and needs. Is that your opinion? Commissioner, Judge, we've met also here in the last couple weeks and also with Commissioner Chants. A textot has agreed to the issues that you all discussed with them regarding access to the Montgomery County Parkway. I agree with the judge that as of yet text dot does not have a final traffic and revenue study that shows what it is but part of the primacy issue relates to that all the monies that would come from the project would stay within the project and unlike certain projects that Harris County has where they're able to share revenues within from their toll system onto other county projects. The monies in the Grand Parkway project will stay with that whether TechSdot develops the road or whether Montgomery County develops the road. And TechSdot is more than willing to partner with Montgomery County develops the road. And text-iters more than willing to partner with Montgomery County. Should you all choose to step up and do that? But they also have significant resources that they can bring. They're working to bring forward on segments E, F1 and F2. And again, they can advance that into segment G. Their timetable is consistent with the timetable that you all have requested and they would welcome the opportunity to to work with Montgomery County to advance the project for segment G as quickly as possible. It should Montgomery County choose to give My understanding currently that no matter what the government county does, we have in our agreement with Section 9 today. There's no way we can get any portions of that revenue at any time from the Grand Parkway, most remain within that project. That is my understanding also, sir. I basically was sent a commitment, was the center for ways both in the gorge and that same answer I got. What is the definition of the sub account and then a pro-radish air for future revenues? What is that to stay within the Grand Parkway or you can come here with that agreement? I would have to go back and read that again, Commissioner Doyle. Why don't you let him look at that letter? Do you get that letter from Brendan? I like to get your opinion of this letter and then we'll come back and vote. Two and eighty-fourth judicial court consider for the following. Do we have anyone here from that court? Two way open positions, 438, 85, 20, 01, coordinate or level, coordinate or 1, grade level 12, close position, 438, 7704, 1, legal assistant, grade level 10. Transfer by Mr. Sauer from the closed position of the opposition and transfer the 1655 from 4382308500 to the upper position. Back in y'all reviewed a PDQ for all those. I move. All in favor say I've committed. The very same thing is under the four hundred and tenth word a little bit differently. And I move on that also. You'll review that one. Second. Morning, Judge. Good morning. Good morning. On 13 a b and c I would ask that you consider to approve the following transfers and budgets salary and associated longevity certification in our other associated pay with following position changes. These transfers do not increase the approved salary budget and there's a total of 10. All of them are set up. On D, as you consider reviewing approved the Sheriff's Office to apply for a grant from the missing Alzheimer's disease patient assistance programs. If awarded these fund will provide starter equipment for receivers, transmitters and other equipment that can be used to help locate individuals and suffer from cognitive functions and may wander away from the caretaker. There are no matching funds required. All the papers, yeah. I'll surpass it. Then on the EASU, considering the prerequisites for additional funds in the amount of $346,000 to be funded from contingency and transferred to $56,017,735411 for the shortfall in the Sheriff's V ever maintenance budget. Now, we projected this thing out for in our 2011 budget. We asked for a million, 35,000. We received 825,000 in our budget. We projected this out for the next three months. And that's the way it looks. It's going to be probably what we really, we're around 200,000, but the 146,000, we have to pay in advance for the fuel, but we'll get reimbursed that, like through juvenile hospitals and other people that use fuel there. This is just an estimate. Whatever it's gonna take is, and whatever we have to use, whatever we're in, first, to go right back into the business. Are you shorting it, line out and measure? Well, not today, but we're gonna be, yes. What point do you think would be short if you have that number? Hey. Yes. What? Yeah, right now. Yes. When are we going to be sure? By the end of July, we will definitely be sure. May not even back be able to back to the end of July. I mean, obviously when we prepared a budget, we all knew it was short and probably knew you would come back. Obviously, if somebody got to do, I move. Second. What does this thing we can do to set this up as a restricted line? The sheriff and I talked about it so that whenever those reverses come in, they go Second Just do that It's a restricted line a fuel budget is restricted On pepper share oh some passes make very much. Thank you, sir Mental health facility Yeah Working a considering set performance indicator report for the month ending 111 required by agreement from the drum again section part of the state jail service and recommended by the drum again a middle deal right off every say hi the considered to prove the minimum to a emergency operation plan is recommended by the advisor for moving thanks for the favor say hi consider an approved forward. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. Yeah. Morning. Go busy this week. Yes, sir. Busy weekend. He will refire true. Yes, sir. It's a pretty interesting times yesterday. We didn't think we'd see some fire like we did. Well, we knew the predictions were going to be bad, but it's cropping up. Right now we've got Montgomery County units just a quick update. We have partial containment on fires in Walker County and Grimes County. Sheriff's Department and I'm sure probably the Council's route to well in Grimes County. I know the Sheriff's Department's units are supporting operations along with our people in Walker County. So we got quite a few fire units that are here there, rotated in from the lines last night, are going back out today. So we're keeping some resources in our area. They're also bringing in strike teams from the Galveston area. Harris County, they hadn't been hit as hard. So we're bringing in resources in case we have one crop up in Montgomery County. Right now, the thing that's helping us is we've got a lot of resources on the ground. The fire departments are staffing up and they're jumping on these things with three, four, five units real quickly. We're getting them under control because we're seeing in other areas where they don't have the resources once it gets beyond 10, 15 acres. It's very difficult to control. So we'll go right into our first recommendation. The first thing that we have on the agenda is to consider an approved extension of the restrictions on outdoor burning. We passed the original burn ban almost 90 days ago and it's good until July 11th, but I think it's prudent at this time to go ahead and it will expire and I believe that's our next court date. So we would ask if we go ahead and extend the burn ban for another 90 days or until conditions improve. And then again, we'll lift that whenever conditions do improve, but certainly that's an action that needs to be taken today. So I'd ask that you prove that at this time. Move. Thank you. All of a favor, sir. The second item and one that we need to discuss is considering the take appropriate action on our recommendations. We respect to a local disaster declaration under chapter 418 of the Texas government code. This is something that we've really never done before I think in our area as we're using a section of state law to allow the county judge to declare a disaster situation and take actions that he normally wouldn't do except in extreme situations and obviously we'd agree at this time that we're there. We started in May meeting with the fireworks industry. We met with folks from Montgomery County, our counterparts in Harris County met with the vendors there. And I've got some folks from the industry here, but correct me, I think we're talking probably 600 locations between the two counties. There's a good estimate of the number of people. We met with the fireworks industry, started talking about what our options were 600 locations between the two counties. It was a good estimate of the number of people. We met with the fireworks industry, started talking about what our options were if this drought continued. At that time it was fairly bad, but we wanted to focus on what happened if it kept on going. And I'll be honest with you, I don't think any of us thought that it would get to this point before July 4th. We thought it might get bad if we didn't get rain, but not this early. We really expected it to give us a few rain showers and give us a little bit of a break. What we came up with is the recommendations that we're putting forth today, and we're basically talking about two levels in the drought index. The first one that we talked about was the Institute, a disaster declaration when the drought index for the average reached 700 from Montgomery County. And our original plan there was when we crossed 700, the disaster declaration would trigger a short sale season July 1st to July 4th. Obviously we've blown through 700 a couple of weeks ago and pretty much what we expected when we pass that 700 level, our fire behavior becomes very extreme very erratic and almost to the day that we cross that level we started having the major fires and that's when you really have a danger zone so initially that was a short sale season we blew past that the second threshold was seven fifty on the Keach Byron drought index and at that point it was agreed that it was simply too dangerous at that time to have anything that could ignite a fire We talked about you know all the different things that are calls and fires right now My understanding is the Grimes County fire most likely to trace that back to a barbecue pit We've heard stories we actually verified stories somebody moan their yard hit a rock started their yard on fire, a very simple thing like that. So we've had some fires from folks cutting and welding outdoors, so we're taking steps. We've actually had some operations shut down because of the danger right now. So with the fireworks industry working with us in the two counties, we came up with these recommendations. Initially, they were slightly apart. The two groups met. We met our county, the representatives from our county industry and the representatives from Harris County and the Texas Fireworks Association Harris County chapter president. And we came together with the recommendations that you have today. And that was once we reached 750 on the drought index that we would restrict the sale and use of all fireworks until conditions improved. What we have built into the recommendations today is on the drought index that we would restrict the sale and use of all fireworks until conditions improve. What we have built into the recommendations today is basically a clause that if we do get sufficient rainfall to drop the index back below 700, back below that extreme level, then the disaster of the declaration itself will expire. So that will give us an out. We have that ability if we get sufficient rainfall between now and July 1st, that will bring it down below 700. That will expire. That'll give the opportunity for a short sale season if those conditions approve. If they don't improve or if we just get some rainfall, we have options we've been talking with. And we've talked to anything from a 36 hour sale season. if we got some rainfall all the way up to a four day. There's certainly some options but without further rainfall I think that everyone would agree that at this point the recommendation has to be that no further sales of fireworks you know are used in our county. We're going to see that action taken by other counties around us. I think that's going to help us some because we won't have the ability for someone to go purchase them and bring them back in the Montgomery County as well. What is the number today? I don't have the updated number today, but it's well over 750. We and 753 right now. I thought they have not updated today. And we're going up. Mr. Jones, we're going up about two to three days Yes, we spent the night out on the fire lines. We didn't get the updates this morning But so what kind of rain would it take to take us from 7 60 say to below 700 we don't have a good estimate nobody really has because we the problem we're having is we've just never really been at these drought levels. So the folks even at the Forest Service, they can predict fairly well at 6, 5,700 how it affects it. We're so dry. Everything that we can get best estimates is 2 to 3 inches of rain minimum, even start dropping it to hell. The problem that you can have is if we just get a half inch rain or a 1 inch rain, you can lose two tenths of a day to evaporation. So in five days for all intents and purposes, the effect of a one inch rain fall or gone. So we really need three inches, four inches, something like that to even really start affecting it. So we get out of this, we're talking 10 inches. It would have to be driven below the 700 index level to even consider removing the declaration. Well, and the declaration itself is set to expire upon reaching under 700. Once it goes under 700, that's the expiration clause. And we didn't put a physical date because at this point, we keep the thing in effect as long as we stay in that extreme range. Right. And then it goes below that extreme range. Then if it does that before July 1st, we have the opportunity to do a couple of things. We could let it expire. If we get a lot of rain, it drops back, just let it expire, and then let them go in and do what they can, depending on how many days are left. If it drops just below 700 and we expect, or the forecast is going to be this going to be hot, dry and windy, then we'll work with the guys and we'll come up with, do we need to open for 36, 48 if it drops down. So we have the ability to issue another disaster declaration for a limited short season. All we could do nothing if it goes back all the way to 650. We could do nothing and let it go back to a normal sales season. So those are the options. The automatic expiration is once we go under 700. Have you heard from Grimes Walker or St. Jacinda? St. Jacinda County has banned a restricted to use and sale of all fireworks by this same disaster or they did it last Monday. Walker County has the last conversation that I had, I met with the county judge up there. They were contemplating it. They were a little bit wetter than we were. I would imagine after the fire they had yesterday that there probably going to be some pretty drastic action. They the problem that they have, they're good folks up there, but they just don't have the resources that we do. And we saw that yesterday. We sent them a lot of help and they were overwhelmed. They had so many fires. Some aren't literally didn't get responded to for a while. So I think they're going to probably take some drastic action. Harris County, I don't want to speak for them but obviously they're working with us. They have the same plan. Their industry down there agrees with them. So I would expect and Mr. Plansky or Mr. Jones, I would expect that we're going to see the same thing from Harris County. I think the Texas chapter's not changed their opinion from down there. From the Texas fire. So we'll see the same action there. Have not heard from Liberty County yet. And I would expect that Grimes County is going to be considering what they're going to do. Right now they're still in emergency management mode trying to contain their fire. So what is the status of the Grimes County fire right now? It's they had containment on it last night. The problem we're going to have today is the winds flare back up. We saw this. A good example is the Trinity Pope County Fire. 4,000 acres till yesterday afternoon. It blew up. It's 15,000 acres. So we could see the Grounds County Fire or the Walker County Fire go anywhere. They're two to three now. We could see them go to 10,000 acres today if the containment lines don't hold we could see more houses lost and the thing we have to consider is we could see the same thing here we're hitting the government resource we got the minute it comes in every available firefighter's responding but that doesn't mean that it's not going to get out of that once it gets beyond that first 10 acres, 15 acres, you really, yesterday as far as you could not attack them, you could not do anything with them. We literally had to wait for the winds to die down last night. It was just too dangerous to get in there. How many homes have been destroyed in Graham's County? So the last we had, and the number of acres that they had. The last we had was approximately 3,000 acres, 30 homes and 20 outbuildings, but there'll be a better assessment of that today. So a lot of that was pretty much in flux last night. I know we have at least one Montgomery County Sheriff's Deputy that lost a home I understand last night to a fire in Grimes County. So I'm pretty serious situation for those folks. What's your recall or see all the fire worst association members order that group is shut down and somebody decides they're going to open up and independent what's your recourse on them? Can you shut them down? Yes, sir. Obviously the first thing we'll do is make them aware of the disaster order and I can tell you that with the scrutiny out, if anybody tries to open up, we had 40 folks in attendance and we met here in commissioners court one evening. We met with the industry and we had 40 which is most of our vendors here in the county. We do have one or two that come in and try to open up what will happen initially is we'll warn them. If they fail to comply with the disaster declaration it's a Class B misdemeanor so that could be jail time or a find up to a thousand dollars we would seek. If necessary we would seek charges through the district attorney's office and they could be filed on for violating the disaster declaration I don't think we'll get to that but we'll probably have a couple that will be unaware but we'll be there authority shut them down immediately yes we'll have the authority under the disaster declaration and shut them down immediately. Okay, I move on to fire marshal's recommendation and the disaster declaration. Thank you. All in favor, say aye. Thank you, Jimmy. Good work. Thank you, Jimmy. Hi, thank you, sir. Threat court. drug court. Good morning. I'm here to ask you to please consider an approved additional funds for the drug court in the amount of $23,000. The additional funds for the DWI court in the amount of $46,000. Last year during budget hearings you asked me to come back if I needed this additional money so I'm here today to ask for it. Kristen, what? How are we going to control the expenses on this? I met with Phyllis. I believe it was week before last and Robert also and we're looking at different ways in order to be able to cut these expenses in the next budget year. The only way we can do it is not have as many people referred to the program. That's one thought and then also trying to cut back on some of the drug testing and the treatment. I mean this is a very law, this is a staggering number. I did not expect this kind of a number. This early is a budget. President, does this mean that you do more to figure out? Right. And does this mean that you could ask for? No, this does not actually see what I do. Actually, the drug court amount is less than what I had initially asked for. We did go live and watch the operation of the court. It is heavily driven by the primary driven by the population of who in order to protect the ten support. I have a meeting scheduled with Judge May to go to his drug court self-arranged and we're all brainstorming and I don't know that we would have any recommendations within coming budget years. And I don't know if it's going to be a recommendation to then come in budget gear, though. Yeah, because right now we prepare a budget, but the budget obviously doesn't mean anything, you know, with drug court. You know, no reflection on what you're doing. Sure. Obviously, you're receiving people from a judicial system that you have to deal with. And I mean, I don't know what the entry is. people from a judicial system that you have to deal with. And I mean, I don't know what the entry is. I'm trying to come up with something that's so far we don't have any. Well, let me ask you this. What are Judge Mase's court costs per person as related to this drug court court cost per person on average? How does it relate? I have invented court yet just from a conversation with him I would have found that things like are worn through adult probation that are through the court itself. Is that where the state of Texas pays for it? The state would pay for some of it but the bulk of it is done by the probationers themselves. So they have probation? So he had revenue in his court offset this experience. I believe that they're in. She's revenue directly in adult probation. They don't show it in the court. This court has the revenue to show up in the court. And they don't go through probation. So the revenue is just from provisions. We do anticipate being able to recognize the additional revenue to prevent the cost she's asking for today. They have brought in more than we thought they would. But they don't come to co-college the course. How much of your total budgets might up with these type of expenses? Probably, it's a large bulk base. I would say probably $20. Probably 80% of it. Is the drug testing? That's the big expense. It's drug testing and therapy. And therapy, yes, correct. Which are driven by the number of participants in the group? Do we outsource all the testing? Or are we set up in our facility next door? Or we could do any of that? We outsource that to... We outsource it, yes. And we recently, I don't know exactly the range of testing, maybe two kind of reduction in the drug safety. Correct. They're the lowest they've ever been in the 12 years that drug court... Prevenue for a participant, do you collect? 83 dollars a month. 83 a month? Yes. What is their average testing cost? 4.4. In the beginning of the phase, in the beginning of the program for the first month, it's probably $350 because they drug tests so often. What does that money got that revenue go? The revenue is reported in her court. There's one that was talked about earlier where we had a survey for revenue and business data originally anticipated. They just, by how many, because it's whole cost of the court, if they paid $83 and it costs 300. What's the process for raise their fee? There is a procedure that was initiated from the state of Texas that most participants can pay a year or $1,000 in fees. And so... If they can be ordered to pay for the cost of the bill. Right. If they test positive for a direct test and they pay for that direct test. I think when you have less drug tests or more fees, it's like Commissioner Chan said. Does that come in budget year? Okay. One of the other. You know, we're in a cost cutting mode and. While we're all for the court system This is a big big number All the papers here Thank you for passes. Thank you, Christopher risk management Judge commissioners. Arne. Consider it approved of the post-reference to e911 for workers' conversation. We have had them build at a wrong rate. Now build at a correct rate. This will not impact your current budget or roll of pack next year's budget. I right. All right. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you I received notifications from the district, which is the entity to be the grant with the transit district. They've paid half of the auto-allowable for your veterans services director for the past couple of years now. They've been effective September first because of subject reductions. They will not be able to pay the county for that. So I need you to name a funding source for that or to try to do something to eliminate the half of the state in the past. How much will it make? Two and a half for a year is six thousand dollars. I'm a contingency of funding source. But I'd like to readdress this during budget sessions. I won't have everything to say. Right now. The last item that I have is on the last Christmas report date, you'll recall a vote for the retirement rate to make some retirement funding mechanism to maintain its current rate. I would ask you to please the firm that you'd like to also keep a plan at the same plan level that you had in the past, which is a 6% contribution level from employees with a 250% care we mentioned. Move. We have two many employees up set and maybe we can get people back on the right track by doing this. First thing. Morning, Judge. Good morning. Good morning. Item 1A, I would like to present the recommendation and contract for approval for the following. Two, three, five, and seven, all in one motion. Move, take it. All favor, say aye. Thank you. Great. Get an attorney. And at one of the ways we have to do a through our ability to transfer $4,000 from the Dallas High School of the Netherlands. We are able to keep $4,000 from the Dallas Exhibition out of the blue and other ones. My reason for this is we also want to bar field litigation in terms of hiring the new one. We have had litigation skills, but they don't have that same number of years experience. And another one of our employees is going to take along some of the litigation that she had a time number of people here and the news are coming to a high rate, so we're trying to be quite to be outweighed for these number of years. Move. Did you all review a PDQ on that one, Becky? Did you all review a PDQ on that one? We will be doing that. Not effective to July the 11th, but we'll have it in July. Well, I move to do it after we review the PDQ. Yeah, let's make the motion subject to the PDQ being appropriate. So move. Just a second. All the favourites See. I have. 20 days. The president of the resolution order. The nearly confirmed. Your intent and. Your organizational chart that was pending on April 25th. And on the number. For. The. The. The hearing court to have a written responsibility for the control of the day-to-day operation of the blinch of the court. I move. Sorry. All fairers here. Remember. In a 20-seat... We have to do approve the authority for the county search to authorize the purchase of 20,000 flood and to be approved. Second. All favor? Yes. of the line. If I long start taking air force, this is an assignment from the Albert report. The city of Andrew. The assignment will be under the same time conditions as the couple has currently, but mission report will be pertaining to the assembly. So until we get the ball, it turns to the system. So, second. All the papers. Yeah. Okay. All in favor, she has. 28, we have to do a review of a revised speech schedule for the comprehensive form radio system. You'll note on here that there's really just some additional charges with the global data We don't really have the information to say whether that is adequate or not. I know that there is County Regional Radio, so we are talking more. But we think that in the county of New York, we are the user on the radio in terms of that we should keep those rights as they are. Well, here's the manager. Well, I believe right now. Right there. There's a right now. Now, the We were doing it with Montgomery County House of District. Is that correct? These are the same prices we had when we had the old system. Yes, it was a seven-digit. The credit is the charge. The New York County charge. No one's real payed in the next conference. The three-comer with the charge is back in common. The number of cases. And the pop-up is the recommendation on this number E? It's to approve the revised and received federal and I couldn't copy of the news. Okay, from what to what? All that we've built here, all that's coming up is the seven speaking rights of the mobile bank. And then, yeah, please, all the other rights, they the same. I move. I can, all of the favor see out. Yeah. Okay on 20F we have to do a proven amendment to be released with a lean aviation and airport. The wing is in a suddenly 40 West government. The government has the clearances that they be allowed to have a release. It's different from the existing lease that they be allowed to have a meeting. Every time the listing leaves that we have, so we are going to try to accommodate them by putting in amendments to the wing leaks that says that they are sub-leads would not be subject to the same terms and conditions as long as the county has right to be released to review andapproved. They're sub-leaf. So if the government wants additional term immediately, that's the time to move with proof. I move. Second. All favour? Yes. 20D, we ask you to approve a land lease with Blackboard ventures. This is a lease of 50 Nagers at the airport. It's a 40-year term for a year renewal option. Black Forced will be building a large hanger office space and restaurant. The rent is based on their bid award of 12th, 12th, and 12th. They will be prepaid for 40 years and upon extra time in their option of 20-year renewables, they will also free-pay that. And we didn't have a provision in there for a subcharge on the restaurant business, but that is to be determined, based on the break point on how much money will be made. I move. Second. All favor? Yes. 28. We have to go through a short- lease agreement with the society of the American. They're going to be using their temporary office space at the old JDP for now. The term is a short term and only run between now and August 31. And they've gone to the US and this bank for their back to school programs and the lease for next month is $10. I want to favor to see how. In the 21A, we have to do a proven amendment to the text.agreement for the project participation. And also in 21B, we'll take that together because the book is the same thing. We need you to authorize the judge to sign the agreement. And what this does is it relates to the runway extension and changes the allocation of funding between the Fed and the Fed. The county sheriff does not change. I move on, 21 A and B. Second. All of the papers here. And 21B, we have to be through an amendment to the 2011 rent agreement with TechSat and authorized Judge Kableh to sign this. This will add a purchase of a small base station radio to the scope of services. There's no increase in the county. Matt, obligation is just a change in the scope. Move. Second second. All the paperwork's done. I'm sorry. Move. Second. All of our members. Yeah. Mr. Smith, we have several public hearings. Let's recess the court and convene those public hearings in precinct one, two and four. Precinct one. Consider the partial rate flat of that certain, certain code, .7 acre water plant site and lots, 24 and 26 block one seven coves to be known as Montgomery County Utility District number two water plant number one, replat number one. Do we have anybody here to discuss this this morning? here to discuss this. I would like to make an mention of the possibility. I may. Yes, that's very, very, very concerned. I'm a homeowner directly across the street. And so I'm very concerned about what this would do to property values. And my look and add a $50,000 decrease in property values. As well as traffic, I'm not sure what the intent or what type of construction could be available here or what that, but we do have small children running through. And there is, of course, some commercial traffic coming through there at this current time. And at right now, it's at an acceptable level. But I am also concerned about the disturbance of the neighborhood. As if it's very very common I hasn't happened it a few months but to have alarms going off at two o'clock in the morning with the existing site And so my concern very very concerned about the expansion of number one aesthetics property values and safety for the neighborhood So those are my concerns that I haven't seen anything necessarily addressed. It did receive a letter in the mail saying that this was going to be the hearing date and those folks are going to be happening, but what does that mean to me? And those are my concerns. Julie, you want to address somebody? Just by way of some background information that Montgomery County Utility District 2 is the owner of these two residential lots. The existing water plant site, they're proposing to incorporate two residential lots, which they recently acquired. They'd like to incorporate these two lots into their existing water plant site in order to expand the site and construct a new well. According to some correspondence I received from the utility district, one of the whales has failed and the other well is not sufficient to meet the current water supply demands. So they would like to construct a new well on these two lots. The existing plant site, as you mentioned, is .7 acres. The two residential lots are restricted to residential development, but the utility district did receive a letter of no objection from the Seven Cove Association. I am not sure I can't speak to the effect on property values in the area around this water plant site, but the existing water plant site, according to the utility district, is not appropriate at this time to meet the water supply demands in that subdivision. And it doesn't necessarily mean that there would be any more traffic in there. All are doing it really new well. Well, I would anticipate increased traffic for the construction of the new well, but as far I don't believe that adding additional acreage to the existing site would increase traffic in my opinion Yeah, the did you go to the homeowners meeting when they approve this or I Okay Okay Okay. Okay. We've received donations from areas of course the water tower is currently there. There was in the same area and additional water tower which has been removed. My concern is will this mean additional water tower on one of these other two plots? Would it be a building? Will it reflect the aesthetics of the homes in the area? We got somebody. Okay. Would you tell us your name? I'm Pam Madrigal. I'm with AEI Engineering and I'm the district engineer for Montgomery County 82. As the young lady mentioned, the district is in dire need of another well. They have two wells and at the current water plant site, one well is over 30 years old and is reaching its service life. And we don't anticipate it to last. probably maybe five, seven years. Its second well has deteriorated significantly and we're hoping it can make it through the summer. They don't have any interconnects, so they're in dire need of drilling in new wells. They purchase these two residential lots to expand the current water plant site in order to construct this new well. So right now there aren't any plans to add another GST to the two residential lots that were purchased. There are a lot of them. Part of me? You said add of GST. Yes, ground storage tank, excuse me. There isn't an elevated tower. There is a ground storage tank that's probably about 24 feet tall. They did demolish their existing ground storage tank about two years ago and replaced it with a new one adjacent to it. So they probably have plans in the future to add another GST in order to meet their water supply demands as the development grows out in that area. Are the two wells you mentioned on this site? Yeah. in that area. For the two wells you mentioned on this site and currently. So basically all they're doing is turn two residential lots into lots that they can use to drill a new well. Correct. Basically. The district also has plans to construct an enclosure structure around this well in order to help with the aesthetics. Okay. They've worked with the HOA Department or Association, excuse me, to make sure that the fencing and the landscape that will be needed will be coordinated with the requirements of the home or association. So. Shouldn't affect the aesthetics any more than it already does. No, obviously. We also are going to be meeting with TechStyle this property of butts against 830 FM830. I can't guarantee that we're going to get a second access from TechStyle but we have plans to meet with them and communicate with them about obtaining access so that during construction we can do the construction from the back from FM830 versus having to come or minimize the disturbance to the community. Thank you for being here this morning. Did you have anything else, sir? No, thanks. That really, that really helps. My concern of course is number one, thank you for the community. I never choose that. I'm the guy who don't decrease and if we're not looking at, of course, bring the eye sore. don't decrease and if we're not looking at, of course, bring the eye sore in because of that. Right across the street, there's one there. We're very, very happy with the service that they are already till the district provides for our comforts for our neighborhood. And I guess one of my questions, are if a well-hanned failed or is inadequate, where I'm sure a service in the same reservoir could have been drilled adjacent to the existing. I didn't hear that last part. She can answer your question. I will have better not. The requirement is 300 foot minimum spacing from an adjacent well while you're drilling a well. And so that is what the anticipated location and structure is based on that requirement of that. So we're drilling it as close as we possibly can based on the current regulations and guidelines. Okay. Are the existing towers going to stay unoportunal? The current ground storage tank is brand new. Like I said, it's been constructed within the last two years and there probably will be plans maybe five, ten years from now to construct another GST ground storage tank where the old one was demolished in order to meet the water demands of the subdivision and any future development that's anticipated in that area. Okay, would this new tank be on the back lots for the 830 size? It would be where the old tank was removed. It would be right there. Okay, so it's the same one where the old tank was removed. Yes, correct. You spoke to old tank was removed. It would be right there. So it's the same one where the old tank was removed. Correct. You spoke to another tank as well. Well, the current tank that's there right now is a brand new tank. We removed the old tank, and we would replace that with anyone in that same location. So there wouldn't be ground storage tank on the lot. So like a year ago, there were two tanks. Right. We're only going to be talking about two things. Correct. And you can use them in the same area in the locations in which they were previously. Correct. Is there going to be a structure building in the rain and any other buildings over? The only buildings that would be out there would be a motor control facility. There's already a small building right now that houses all the electrical and chemical facilities for the water well. That probably will need to be expanded some, but we're talking about maybe a 10 by 10 buildings at the most. Okay. And I don't anticipate the traffic or vehicle to increase any more than what you're currently seeing. If it's being used at the same time too, and the same thing, I would proceed anything else. It definitely wouldn't help if there was a construction access from 830. I personally feel I'm pretty positive that text out will be cooperative in that. Need some help on that. Let me know when I will with your talk to them. I will. I would appreciate that. Okay. Okay. Thank you for being here. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Commissioner, this work kind of running overtime. What I'd like to do is go ahead and address the 10A under county judge, regarding the Grand Parkway, and they go directly to the workshop. We have the judges waiting. I know they have dockets waiting on them. So let's go ahead and quickly go ahead and move on that public hearing. Let's go ahead and do the public hearings. Okay. And then the judges work. Yeah. Yeah. Now, precinct two. All right. So the partial reply of Lakewood Estate Section 1 to be known as Lakewood Estate's commercial. I know that we have some people here to talk about that. Yes, I'd just like to offer a brief background statement regarding this report. The proposed report is of an area that is labeled as a park on the plot of Lakewood Estate Section 1. It's the report itself is 11.323 acres, which fronts on FM 1488. It was originally a park in 1961 as a 12-acre park. It contained a seven-acre lake. In 1992, one acre of that park was conveyed to the county, and it currently has the Needham volunteer fire department station located on that one acre. In 2002, the Lakewood Estates Homeowners Association released and relinquished all rights that had to that park area. And in 2003, that Homeowners Association deeded the remaining 11.323 acres to an individual. Currently the 11.323 acres is owned by First National Bank which is proposing to re-plot that remaining portion of the park into one unrestricted reserve. This re-plot has been reviewed by the County Attorney's Office and the County Engineers Office and it meets all the requirements under the statute and the Montgomery County subdivision rules and regulations. And I know that First National Bank has some representatives. If it's okay with the court, I'd like to call Mr. Reed Wilson to address the court. And I know that there are several members of the public who would like to address the court as well. Good morning. If you don't mind, I'd like to let the engineer say a couple of words first. Thank you. If you don't want to let the engineer say a couple of words first. As the attorney's office had mentioned we have done the work that's necessary to put together the plat and also the background information that's required by the county in the city of Conroe as well. We've had a hearing at the city of Conno that has passed and it's been passed on this way. So we've done what we needed to. Bob, is this first national bank of Claim you're talking about or some of the first national bank? No, it's here locally. Well, the first national bank locally is associated with first national bank Claim. James, is that C? Edinburg. Edinburg. Edinburg, okay. Sorry. Commissioner, my name is Reed Wilson. I'm working with First National Bank of Edinburg, owner of the property, and we've been asked to address the issue of whether the revision of the plot affects any established rights of owners. And apparently this is something that hasn't come to the court very often. So I just want to spend a couple of minutes talking about it because the local government code when it talks about the approval of a replat says that a revision will not interfere with the established rights of any owner of any part of the subdivided land. And what that means is that the replat won't compromise any clear legal rights of any owner of any part of the subdivided land. And what that means is that the replat won't compromise any clear legal rights of any other owners. In a municipal setting, what they talk about is that a replat will not amend or remove covenants or restrictions. And that's a little I think a little clearer. And since the plating process is based upon rules that are established by the county and if the rules are satisfied then the commissioner's court is obligated to approve the plat. The real issue is whether what this language does and this language basically says that the court could deny a plat if itself itself on its face compromises some other clear ride that's been derived from a prior plant. And so I think the concern is that the prior plant set on its face, lake and park. But this isn't all that unusual. I mean there's lots of things to get shown on some of these old plants that are descriptive in many ways. And this is not a dedicatory language in and of itself. The area shown as Lake or Park has not been dedicated to the public. It is in a public park, has been accepted by the county as a public park. So really, there is no dedication that has occurred. And this is just sort of some loose language from an old plat that really doesn't rise to the level of establishing any rights in any third parties. So we're here today to answer any questions that you may have about that particular issue, but this area is clearly not dedicated. Clearly is not a public area of any type and the language is the plat, doesn't create any restrictive covenant or deed restriction. And so I'd be glad to elaborate on that a little bit more. I know y'all are pushed for time. And so I don't want to take any more of that time, unless you have any questions on this particular issue. OK. Is there anyone else who has anything that they'd like to add? A couple folks in the back. Step forward. Howdy. My lot backs up to the lot we're talking about and I'm unsure if it's replatted as commercial if it will go to industrial our neighborhood is on a well system and my concern is if it is commercial and then does go to industrial that there will be some kind of chemicals or anything on the land. I don't know obviously because I'm assuming that they want to go commercial to sell it because it's adjacent to 1488. Let me ask the attorney what is the intent of the bank with this replanted property if in fact this court approves it? Judge, the intention is to get the property in saleable condition to be sold for a typical kind of commercial use that would be appropriate for the 1488 area. There are negotiations ongoing with the use that is residential and character or recreational and character that would be really consistent with that area, a particular basically recreational facility that would support family recreation indoor soccer facility something along those lines. So it would clearly be consistent with what's Going on in that neighborhood would not be industrial at all, but you wanted unrestricted which means anything Yes, that's the request. I think we could call it commercial if that was important to the court Have it a commercial reserve Go ahead, Chris. Any other, yes, or in the back? Yes, my name is Clarence Cherwinski. I live in that subdivision and we got the letter about two weeks ago, the registered letters as you have a court hearing. With this property, if they're talking about, was a lake up to about six, seven months ago. They come in there and start covering the lake. The lake was deeded to the subdivision up to ten years ago. We've got another lake in the middle of the subdivision. What they can cover, this one and take it, that means the lake in the middle of the subdivision. What they can cover this one and take it, that means that they can enable the subdivision, they can cover and take it too. They're actually just taking the property from the subdivision because it was as a park and there was a clubhouse there. But when they built the fire station, the clubhouse got knocked down because the fire station needed it. Well, I agree with that because you know the fire station we needed it. But for them taking this land and just covering it up, you know, I don't agree with that. And there's a lot more in this subdivision people that won't agree with their elderly people that cannot get up here. I've got a list of names of those that want to be just to come speak for them too because they had doctors appointments and everything. It's an old subdivision that's been there. I guess in the late 60s. I remember when the clubhouse was torn down. It was a pretty bad disrepair and then the five-year-old had to go from meeting room to accommodate. Well the fire station is more important than the clubhouse in my opinion. The ownership of that property has changed hands how many times that you're aware of. At least four. And is there any indication of the ownership of the lake in the middle of subdivision has ever changed hands out of the HOA ownership so it still belongs to them. So there's no chance that that property could be taken or covered or removed? No, it's still owned by the come-on association and it's not being made. I have one more question. How did the bank get ownership of this property? First of all, the bank doesn't claim any ownership in the other piece property that the gentleman's talking about. So we'd be happy to clarify that. The bank came through ownership because it made a loan. Loan went into default property was foreclosed. My understanding is that as Julie said, there's four conveyances from the owners association, out to someone, out to someone, out to the borrower, and then it was foreclosed. So we're just trying to do the best that we can. The bank felt like the condition of the land, at the time it took it over, was unsafe and unhealthy. I think this is an old borrow pit. It wasn't that deep, didn't have an outfall. And so basically, they hired the engineer in firm to come in, try to clean it up, make it useful. Really wasn't useful. It was really an unsafe condition. So that's the situation as we see it today. Okay, and Julie, what is the recommendation of the county attorney's office to approve the plan? Yes, there are the county attorney's office to approve the plan? Yes, the county attorney's office would recommend that the replat be approved because is my opinion based on my research that when the Home Under Association quit claimed and signed affidavits relinquishing all their rights in this particular park and lake area and then conveyed it out that any park restriction or if there ever was one was released. It was never used as a park. It was never developed as a park, never maintained as a park. And what I understand it was basically a swampy area and because of its location I've had him 1488 I believe that what the applicant is proposing is a desirable use. Thank you. Any other comments? Okay, precinct four. Judge is in front of the good tease. Quick as possible. Consider closing, abandoning, vacating, a portion of county road right away known as Mets Road. Does anyone here discuss that? Two is consider and approve and installing of a no truck sign with a supplemental sign reading no through trucks at Harper's Landing Residence Subdivision Intersection of South Trade Center Parkway with Harper's Landing Drive and Dunwick. Anyone here to address that? I don't understand thoroughly what number two I need to look at that to see exactly what what they're going to do there because I don't know why they're going to divert some trucks in there that may not need to be there so I'd like to prefer number two. Number two The paperwork is as it's rose a but a commercial property and they have trucks going in and out and they don't want them going through the neighborhood It will be going straight to the main road That's what the paperwork says I mean They've always went through there, right? I think so I'd go with I mean, you know, I don't Are we to stop them going through there now and bring them down to 42 that you've got to turn on Donwick. There's no traffic. Sign the Larry. I don't know if there are. I'm not the one that wrote it up. I like it. I'd like to look at this before we make this this. We'll defer to let's adjourn the public hearing or we can meet commissioners court. Are there motions on these items? I move on to a one, V one, and C one. Second. All according to fur that number two there. Yeah, so I'm deferred to C1. Second. All according to the firm. That member to you there. Yes. I'm the first to see to his motion. Second. All the papers. Yeah. Hey, very quickly. Let's go back to 10. Whatever it is. 10 a. I remember the commissioner of oil regarding the sub-account issue. I did speak with the administration that the current primacy requirement definitely is required to have a sub-account by for the Grand Parkway project as a whole and they are agreeable to creating sub accounts for each individual county so that revenues collected and expenses incurred in each county can be identified so that at the end of the project or as the project goes towards end should revenues, excess revenues be available that aren't otherwise allocated to issues within the Grand Parkway project as a whole that they may be available for the counties to utilize them. So there is a potential to collect revenues at the end of the project once the whole project is complete? But once the whole project is completed and as you continue with the operations and maintenance costs that will be a project cost that there are if there are revenues available at that end those revenues would then be allocated into these sub-accounts. Well, if that's the case, I may be outvoted on this, I probably will be. I think we have to wait for the traffic and gravity study. We don't know how good this project is. And we've got language be put in our agreement together by our promisey that that sub-academy, any excess funds that qualify for this sub-account type money be allocated back to Montgomery County and see if they would take it. Could we not do that? Certainly, sir. Your own primacy, your decision could include whatever language the court chooses to require. But text out is required to put all of these into sub-accounts. I believe they were indicating they need to get HGAC approval of this and I'm sure that y'all would work with HGAC to make sure that's available for text out to do. Commissioner, I think we ought to defer it to get the right wording to make sure that we do get those sub-account revenues. Even if we give up prophecy, I think that's what you're saying. If we give up primacy, we can still get these sub account revenues. The sub account revenues would still be there. Should you choose to resend primacy, yes sir? Or if we approve it today, if we give up primacy today, I would want it subject to. The conditions we've talked about the past two months. Well I think to me, I of them today is for them to give a promise or not. What negotiations occur then with TechStyle can be done after the fact that we vote to give a promise. I think we should negotiate those agreements out first before we give a promise. I agree. I think they're already negotiated by TechStyle. We're going to get whether this Subaccount Exist or not that money would come back into the Grand Park with a hole or to a subaccount to Montgomery County I think we should move forward with that the way it is David. It's my understanding they will create subaccounts for each individual County So you're saying it doesn't need to be in the negotiations It's gonna happen anyway. It's going to happen anyway. It's going to happen. Certainly you could put that as a whatever letter or act you all take you could say subject to it being to sub accounts being created for it. Any point any money goes back in there is after the completion of the entire Grand Parkway the full 180 mile circle including Liberty County including Liberty County we have no revenue and we'll be a actually a negative loss to the Grand Park Way for a number of years when they're built. I would not expect there to be any net project revenues coming in there for a very long period of time. Probably not. You know 20 years from now they may be told viable 20 years ago segment G wasn't told viable Hey, was that a change a lot to it could change a lot if history were to We would look at history the beltway on the west side of town has been there for a long time being viable and it took them some 25 years to get the the North East portion of the Beltway built. It may be significantly long period of time before segment H and I-1 or BNC on the south side are brought online and that they become viable and they'll continue to be expenses to the overall project system. to be expenses to the overall project system. I'm going to make a motion. We give the primacy back with the stipulations that when funds come available 75 years from now, that somebody will get part of it. I agree with Mr. Reinhardt. And I think we need to include in that motion that TechDOT will develop a segment G in a priority ahead of or concurrent with segments F1 and F2 in accordance with the current available schematics for segment G. They'll guarantee the Montgomery County Parkway that TechDOT will design and construct those stub outs in that initial project. And TechDOT will provide an environmental gation project for that port of segment G within the government county, which would be for the Supreme Greek Greenway for mitigation purposes. And it is, initial project complete in government county will receive program to share the Grand Park revenue for enhancement connecting roadways as it finds, which would be in that sub-account. The language that was provided by Delwin Dennis with text dot and emotion that he said we need to rescind this would be as follows. The Grumman County hereby lacks to rescind the September 2009 action under section 228.0111G of the transportation code to exercise the county's primacy option over that portion of the segment G and H of the Grand Parkway located in Montgomery County. The county further elects pursuant to section 373.055 with the transportation code as added by Senate Bill 19 in the 82nd legislative session of 2011 to wave and decline to exercise the county's option to develop, construct, finance, and operate that portion of the Grand Parkway Project located in Montgomery County. Now, second, Commissioner Ron Hortz motion. That's, I would like to maybe refine Commissioner Ron Hortz motion a little bit in that. We will add to Commissioner Chancellor's motion. Montgomery County will get the sub accounts as for Brandon Cretan's letter. And any no monies do after completion of the Grand Parkway. They could be used for other projects other than the Grand Parkway. I think that's already in there, isn't it? I believe Commissioner Chances language- Niff and project- Niff and project- The Cleveland Grand Mechanical will receive the pro-radish air of the Grand Parkway revenue for enhancement and connecting roadways as defined in the terms of the condition, which would be that sub-account. This will make sure that's, you know, worded properly. It means I get so ready there. Obviously, the impact that we're going to have from the Grand Parkway, I think, will be on economic impact rather than any monies that we receive in the next hundred years or whatever it is but I don't know if we have a motion we have a second where are we? I think ad ballorm tax is going out way anything we'll ever get off of that benefit I think. Well that's today we don't know 75 years. You know, we just don't know. But you can be left in July, right? Sir. E. July 7th and 8th are the letting dates for segment E, yes sir. So if we keep fooling around with G, we could get on the back burner. We are advancing segments F1 and F2 in that portion of G that is in Harris County, targeting a letting date in early 2013, January 2013, targeting opening date to be July 2015. targeting opening date to be July 2015. We would put segment G in in that same schedule for a letting date in January 2013 and opening date July 2015. At the same time that you're opening F1 and F2. You didn't answer my question. I said if we keep fooling around with this primacy, we get subject to get on the back burner. Sir, unless Montgomery County were to decide to do it themselves, which the current, currently according to the agreement with the record decision on G being signed in December of 2010, according to the terms and conditions, there's a two-year window to let a contract for construction. Montgomery County is certainly open to do that, but TechSdot is ready to add segment G-N and we'll put segment G-N with these two. And yes, if Montgomery County were to take significantly more time in looking at this than it could be delayed because text dot is preparing documents to advance the F-1, F-2 in that portion of G and Harris County right now. Are we in a critical point? Are we in a critical point in time right now? Are we in a critical point in time right now? For in a fairly critical point, those documents are being written and drafted such that if the court were not to act by probably end of July it would not be included in that. And it would be delayed. Okay. We're ready. Thank you. Okay. I have a question for John Holesworth. Mr. Holesworth, you've been dealing with text.for a long time. You've been involved in the negotiations on the Grand Parkway. This issue about the sub-accounts and over at a shares of dollars, are you comfortable that that's that we're covered with this motion or we're covered in that possibility of those funds coming back to Montgomery County? Well, in the terms and conditions, well, David talked, I couldn't hear everything said, but I think what you're talking about is that the state in our caveats is that the sub-account will be set up. Is that what we're talking about? I couldn't hear a little bit. But in the terms and conditions, the last paragraph of the terms and conditions addresses excess revenue. But I don't know what happens when you actually resent primacy, what happens to the terms and conditions. But with your caveat, I think, saying that it's done in terms of the, with the terms and conditions, and along with specific language of the sub-account, I think you got it covered adequately. That's what we've got in here. And then the other thing is that your concern was, is the state getting started with segment G concurrently or before EF1 and F2 further guarantees that you get it done. I think that's what y'all have always said. You want to get it done. That's in the motion. And so if all of that is in there and you've got this sub account playing in the clarification of the language is what it is about the terms and conditions about sharing the money. And textot is still bound by those same terms and conditions. Those do not go away. Textot is bound to act according to those, just as Montgomery County would be bound to act according to terms and conditions. So having it in the caveats is okay. Is it? Yes sir. Okay. Okay. There's a motion. You can go like we're covered everywhere we can. Yeah. I think the three or four things we got there plus adding the, what is going on? So we can. We can. We're ready to carry the subway. We're ready to carry the subway. We're going to find it. And they've all come currently with the other projects. Thank you. We're good to go. Okay, there's a motion in a second on all these issues. And Phil is will write the letter on favor. So yeah. Hi. Can I post? Okay. I'll post. Okay. Okay. favor so yeah. May I post? Okay. Alrighty. Let's go commissioners into the indigent defense workshop. We have judges waiting. So let's, uh, feel like somebody to recess the court or just keep on keeping on. Okay, let's recess the court and adjourn a workshop for integer defense. Okay, let's re-coming the court. Let's start the workshop. I'd like to start out by introducing the new director of the Office of Court Administration, Dr. Mitch McCalsky. Mitch F you would come up for just a minute. You all supported us almost this time last year when we asked to find a director for our new office. It was our desire at that point in time to find a leader in court management. And Dr. McCalsky is certainly that. I want to just take a moment to tell you a little bit about his background. He comes to us from Maricopa County, Arizona, which is one of the third largest judicial districts in the country. Maricopa County has a population of about three and a half million, about 25 superior courts and correct me if I'm wrong, Mitch. Dr. McCalsky was in charge of the Civil Division over 24 superior courts and 20-some JP courts. He managed the jury system for the superior courts, the Justice Courts, and about 14 municipal courts. He sat on the Arizona Supreme Court Complex Litigation Committee as well as the Arizona Supreme Court jury committee. Prior to Maricopa County, he worked for the Justice Project, which was affiliated with American University. It worked on various projects involving courts and court administration. So we feel very lucky to have Mitch here and I wanted to introduce him to you. He started last week. I think he's still working on his map quest of the locations for the courts. So he won't be actively involved in our presentation to you this morning but I did want to introduce him to you. Welcome to the Vagammu County. Thank you for coming. Thank you, Ronner. And thank you. It's a pleasure to finally be here with the citizens and the leadership of this county. I hope to make quite a contribution in the types of issues that are before the courts. And for the very first time, I feel very confident that your leadership team with the presiding judges of the county and district courts here, you're all in good hands. And I think if you give us some time and under your leadership in direction as well, we will keep you informed on every step of the way. We think we are gonna make quite a contribution to the courts in this community. So I look forward to my tenure with you. And again, thank you for inviting me here this morning. Great. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioners and judges, you know the Office of Court Administration, the Director, reports to a steering committee, which is comprised of the two current administrative judges, myself on the CCL side and Judge Siler on the district court side, as well as the two former administrative judges Judge Wood and Judge Watson. We do not come to you with any recommendations today. I am not speaking on behalf of the Board of Judges with any recommendations, but we are here to give you information. I'm going to speak with you for just a few minutes about the Judges' legal responsibilities under various laws that bind us concerning those issues related to Indigenousigent defense. I'm also going to give you some historical data which you may not be aware. I'm going to tell you a little bit about projects that we're currently working on, what I project as far as cost year end fiscal year 2011 and where I think we're headed into fiscal year 2012. So if you bear with me for just a few minutes, I do have a slide presentation and I do have copies if any of you are interested. Of course our judge's legal responsibilities begin with, give me just a moment. Under the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution, of course, all defendants have a right to counsel. That right is necessary to ensure to all citizens what has been considered a fundamental right, the right to have counsel without it, justice cannot be done. It is guaranteed in all criminal prostitutions, and that has been interpreted to apply to both appeals, at least the first stage of appeals, probation, revocation proceedings, and juvenile proceedings. Where the right attaches, it is immediate. Defenders are entitled to counsel at the first appearance before a judicial officer. Our statutes interpret that to be within 48 hours in Montgomery County. The process works a little bit like this. I apologize for the slide above the screen, but essentially there's two ways to get to registration in Montgomery County. First there's the DA files a case and then there's an arrest or there's an arrest and then the district attorney files the case. The defendant is immediately brought to a magistrate. As I said, our statute says without a necessary delay within 48 hours. Here in Montgomery County, we bring defendants before the magistrate generally within 24 hours. The magistrate then informs the defendant of their rights, including their right to counsel. So is it a law that they have to be there within 48 hours? They have to be there in not less than 48 hours. And we try and get them to imagine straight within 24 hours. It's rare that they don't. Within if the defendant indicates to the magistrate that they want a court appointed attorney, we have to make a determination of indigence by the next business day. That's an important factor to know our window to determine indigency at the first stage is rather narrow. So the first factor in the indigent defense process is really the number of cases filed by the district attorney's office. That's where the inflow begins. A little historical background. I've looked at the numbers from 2005 through 2010. You can see that we have filed approximately 90,000 cases over the past six years, 67,000 misdemeanors, 23,000 felonies. Average is about 15,000 cases a year. This is a little historical line graph of the cases since 2005. You can see that we peaked way above the screen in 2007. There was a drop in 2008 and we've continued to climb since 2008. What was the reason for that significant drop? It's a good question. Primarily, Commissioner Doyle, it's a result of a reclassification of some previously class B misdemeanor offenses to class C offenses, which are citations run through the JP courts rather than through the county. And that represents the bulk of that drop. This is a breakdown of just the felony cases. Over the past five, six years, you can see that they were fairly stable through 2006, 2007 and 2008 there was a drop in 2009 and we have continued to climb in every year since 2009. Based upon the filings that we have through the first eight months of this year I project using simply that average that we will end at about 4500 felony cases. However, Mr. Ligon has recently stated in one of his publications that he expects that it will be closer to 5,000 cases. With the project in a 4500, that will be an increase in this year of 15%. If it ends up being 5,000, it will be an increase from the prior year of 25%. And as you know, the misdemeanor cases are the most expensive as far as ingent offense costs. On the misdemeanor side, again you can see that it climbed through 2005, 2006 to 2007 and then the drop that I already explained. And we have really flattened out, at least over the last two, three years, and I project that there won't be much difference in the misdemeanor filings in this fiscal year. So the first factor that we've talked about is the DA filings, the next factor that contributes to the cost. And now I'm really going to turn away from our legal responsibilities and talk about costs because I know that that's what you are concerned about. We of course, as the judges, we feel that we have two responsibilities, our responsibilities under law, to provide an engine counsel, to an engine defendants. We also have a duty of stewards over the fiscal end of the Injuredance process. I'm going to turn to that at this point in time. The next factor is the determination of indigency. This graph compares in the blue line on the top. You can see the total felony cases filed. It's just a repeat of the line that you saw a few minutes ago. And the second line shows the number of appointed cases paid. So you can see that we really spiked up in 2010. That spike is a little bit misleading because the data leading up to 2010 was reported in a different context. We used to report the data in terms of a defendant, regardless of the number of cases that a defendant had filed against him at a given time through a same transaction. Now we report those as individual cases. And so to see that jump is a little bit misleading, but there has no doubt been an increase in the indigency rate over the last couple of years. We are, however, projecting that to decrease in fiscal year 2011, we think that it will decrease significantly. We believe that the reduction in the indigency rate is in large part to the appointment designee. As you know, we hired Mr. Paul Domingo as our magistrate in November. November of this past year and at the same time, we made him the appointment designee. Under the statute, the judges can appoint someone to determine indigency on their behalf. As you know, it was Ms. Perez before she left. We appointed Mr. D'Amico when he became our magistrate. Paul has done a phenomenal job over at the jail and in the Office of Indigent Defense introducing new procedures and new standards for the qualification of indigency. We have a long way to go on that issue. We're still working on that issue but as you can see progress has been made. If at the same time that an increase in your total caseload spikes by 15% that we can deliver a decrease in the appointment rate by 20%, I think that that reflects that we are doing something differently and better. And I do attribute most of that to Mr. Domingo and his staff. On the misdemeanor, so this just simply repeats, we expect an appointment rate, fiscal year ending, 11, a 61%, last year, it was over 80%. This is the same sort of slide, but on the misdemeanor side, I'm sorry that you can't see the blue line, but again, that was the total number of cases filed, and the red line shows the number of appointed cases. Again, it spiked up last year. Again, I think the spike was not really as dramatic as the line graph expresses. It was a difference in reporting data. But that's the data we have, and so it's what we have to live with. But we do have a reduction going forward. We expect that there will be approximate 7% reduction in appointed cases on the misdemeanor side by the time we conclude fiscal year 11. All right, so we've talked about the DA case filings, and we've talked about the determination of indigency. The next factor that contributes to the cost of indigen defense is the fee structure. As you all know, the Code of Criminal Procedures dictates an appointment structure. It is a rotating public wheel. It is the structure that we use in all our proceedings except juvenile. As you know, we have recently gone to a contract defender structure for juvenile cases. And hopefully in the very near future we will be up and going on what we call a managed assigned council program for mentally ill defendants. But all other defendants are appointed an attorney through a public appointment wheel that is the default program under the Code of Criminal Procedure. It does require that we pay attorneys a reasonable fee, and that that fee shall be published in accordance with the schedule adopted by the judges, either a fixed rate or a minimum, maximum hourly rate schedule. At the current time, the felony courts operate under an escalating hourly rate, depending upon the services provided, and the misdemeanor courts work on a flat fee, depending upon the services provided. In the misdemeanor courts, attorneys do have the ability to be paid an hourly rate if they demonstrate in affidavit form that their case posts unusually complex factual issues or legal issues. It is rare anymore that we get an hourly request for payment. I would guess that less than 1% of our current misdemeanor cases are paid on an hourly basis. This is a comparison of the titles of these columns over the numbers or you can see on the ceiling is fiscal year 2010, comparing it to where we were through the first eight months of fiscal year 2011 as far as the amount paid per case. Felenies in 2010 we paid an average thousand thirty eight dollars per case. It has gone up through the first eight months of this year to a thousand one hundred hundred just under 1,150. The misdemeanor cases last year were paid an average of $316 per case. It is dropped slightly to $302 per case. The juvenile cases last year were $756 per case. It is almost double to about $1,600 a case. I do believe that the doubling in the juvenile cost per case is the result of introducing the new contract defender program while we still have cases in the pipeline that are paid under the old rotating wheel system. We still pay the monthly fee to the contract defender while those cases that were appointed under the old system are still being prosecuted and running through the system. From what Judge Stewart tells me, we expect that most of those will phase out by the end of this year. And I really think that by the end of fiscal year 2011, the cost per case will fall. We're suffering most of that at the front end of fiscal year 2011, but I think it will significantly decline towards the end of it. What was the total number of cases in juvenile? Do you have to have that? Last year's I recall a commissioner chance that was just under 300 cases. We do expect that there will be a significant drop in the juvenile cases. One of the things that Judge Stewart and Judge Turner tell me is that our contract defenders are being able to resolve many juvenile situations before a case is filed against that juvenile. And so we're going to see the case of fall. Case count in juvenile cases, I don't think our is accurate demonstrating the cost of the program as in the misdemeanor and felony because so much work is done in advance of filing. So it's difficult really to look at the entire cost of juvenile on a case basis. And that's another reason why the number seems so skewed. With the current system we have now with 300 cases I believe that contract was 165. I believe that's correct. We just down below the 5535. 30 mark. It should bring us down significantly. All right so we've said that the number of cases have gone up. The percentage of indigent has fallen and the amount paid per case has risen. This is where I expect we're going to end at the end of fiscal year 2011. 2010, our cost of indigent defense, excluding administrative costs, was at $5 million. I expect fiscal year 2011. We will end at about $4.5 million. Most of that reduction is, of course, the percentage of cases, indigent cases. The change is expected going into 2012. On the misdemeanor side, I anticipate again a reduced program cost. I think that we will end this fiscal year at about $1 million on the misdemeanor side. I expect that that willings to remain constant approximately 10,000 cases. Maybe Mr. Grant will give us additional information about that, but historically we've been flat over the last five years. We expect the indigency rate to remain at about 35%. We expect the cost per case to drop about $50 per case. That's a result of a new system that we have implemented at the jail starting this past month. I've spoken with you about it before where we pay a flat rate to the attorneys who are appointed that day at the jail. Thus far, since we started the program in the beginning of May, we have had a reduction on the average of $5,200 per week in what we previously paid. But since we just started that program, the reduction has not yet reflected in the total cost or in the average cost per case in 2011. We expect reimburses from the defendants to increase. As you know, we received reimbursements from defendants last year of just about $600,000. In addition to that, we received grant monies in excess of $600,000. I can't comment on the grant monies, but the people from the task force are here to speak to you this morning. But we do expect reimbursements on mismainerside to increase going forward in 2012. What we are unsure about on the mismainers side is the effect of the Manage Assign Council Program from the mentally ill. We do not know if that will increase, decrease or keep our costs per case the same. We do however feel that the other fiscal advantages to the Manage Assign Council Program will be seen in other parts of the criminal justice process. We believe it will reduce the number of the amount of recidivism from mentally ill patients. We are defendants. We won't be bringing them back into the system over and over again. And while the costs per case may rise for those defendants, we think the overall costs will reduce. On the juvenile side, again we expect as I've said a reduced program cost, I've heard to the fact that we are facing out the prior appointment program and continuing the contract defender program. On the felony side, the future program costs are uncertain. The filings continue to increase on the felony side. We have no reason to believe that that will not change. We expect the appointment rate to remain stable. I think the task force will confirm to you that if we can keep the appointment rate to what it is now, about 60% that that is consistent with what's going on across the state. I'm not optimistic that it will drop much below that in fiscal year 2012. I know that the district judges are discussing a new fee schedule. I know some of them are here to talk with you about their discussions. I don't know what they will decide in the upcoming weeks or months about that. And again, the same caveat exists on the Managed Assign Council program. I know you're interested in alternatives. I think on the misdemeanor side, the county court law judges are pleased with our existing program of the public rotating wheel. I don't see any momentum or change in that regard in the near future. I think that by and large, the quality of the attorneys appearing before the county court to law is great. We're pleased with the quality of representation. We've had very few complaints about the new fee schedule. We do think it's resulted in a reduction of cost to the county and we're likely to stay with that program into the near future. We have the contract defender on the juvenile side. We will be continuing to watch that program and to collect data and monitor its success along with the Managed Assign Council program. We will be interested in the data and the information that the implementation of that program brings to us. There is also the public defender program. I know that that is an interest to some of the commissioners. I'm not here to talk with you about that program this morning or the possibilities of it, but perhaps there are those in the audience that are here. Any countywide alternative program does require formal action of two-thirds of vote of the judges. And whether or not that will happen in the near future, of two-thirds of vote of the judges. And whether or not that will happen in the near future, I think we'll depend upon the discussions that are ongoing. That's all I have to this morning to report to you. I'm here to answer your questions if you have any or just sit down and be quiet. Judge, could I ask you one quick question? Now, I know we have basically three categories. We've got families, we've got misdemeanors, and we've got juvenile. Could you see handling indigent care in different ways? Are would it all need to be handled through the same program? No, it doesn't have to be handled through the same program. And in fact, as you pointed out, we have gone to a different program with juvenile, and we have gone to a different program where we're going towards a different program with mentally ill defendants. My personal preference is what we want to avoid is a different program in every court. And I think that the statute makes clear that we can't have a different program depending upon the will of a particular judge. But certainly there are counties that have mixtures of programs and I'm not an expert on those and hopefully there are members of the audience who are who can talk with you about the success of counties who have introduced a public defender program. I think that there are very few counties that have a public defender program across the board in all their processes. I think it works more successfully in more limited areas like a PEO or juvenile, etc. Okay. Thank you. Right. Thank you. Okay. Are there any district court judge comments on this issue from Judge Woodard, Judge Edwards. She is. Morning Judge Commissioner. Morning. I feel almost like a broken record. I've been here so many times on the manage to sign council and the grant, but Judge McDonald did speak briefly to that. We are constantly trying to improve the system. It affects us, it affects you, it affects all the citizens of this county. And the managed design council, we are looking forward to implementing that. And the wonderful part about that implementation, of course, is the grant process and the fact that we are required to study and report the results. So we will have immediate feedback on that program and how it affects our costs, how it affects recidivism. And we're anxious to get that up and going and give us an alternative to look at. And Lubbock County has just adopted that program for their entire criminal case load. So we're anxious to see what their results are. We continue to work with the task force and monitor changes and things that we can implement to make services that we are required to provide better and more cost effective. And we do have Brian Wilson and Wesley Shackleford from the Task Force on Indigent Defense here today and they have information for you. You guys want to go now? Judge commissioners, you want to hear from? We'd love to hear. Sure. Come on, man. Uh, Judge McDonald already discussed a lot of the information. Uh, personally, not put together. There's a quite bullet point, uh, having to elaborate on the different representations against it. on the different representations again. I think just current things appending, the Management Science Council program is one that indicated Lubbock has gone to for their mental health cases. They're starting this fall to handle all cases. So, in the court, they've been, there's been legislation pending for two sessions that would specifically authorize those types of programs. They've been kind of using a little bit of a work around to implement it so far. Happy to report the governor signed the legislation on Friday that specifically authorizes and manages the signed council program. So I think it will be a lot more straightforward for your county and future counties to implement that kind of a system. The materials I just I think Judge McDonald really covered a lot of it. We didn't coordinate but it just turns out we have some of the same statistics in terms of your expenditures and case loads. I did include just a little bit of definition for the types of models that you have available to you. The Sign Council, the traditional court appointed method, managed to sign a Council System Public Defender and Contract Defender. You know I guess you have a perspective, a state level perspective is that correct? Yes sir. Where's your opinion on where we're headed of a five million two-budget Greenwich and Defense for county of our size? You may have a little more I don't have all the data right now. I've been here before you judge and commissioners is good to be here again I'm gonna get a temporary apartment down the road somewhere here between Vastroff and I appreciate coming here on this managed design council. But the reality is, you know, the judges are clear, you know, what the presentation we just heard, they're looking at models and managing their appointment process. But the reality, this is a fast growing county. And over the 10 years since the task force has been in effect, what we've seen is when counties are growing fast, that they tend to have much higher growth in indigent defense costs. There's just more and more people moving in. There's more activity. There's different processes that are being impacted in faster growing communities. That's what the data has consistently shown. Well, we're growing it about 5% per year, but that does not reflect these numbers. I'm looking at. I think that's true. I mean, I'm not saying that it's even, but I'm saying that in the faster growing counties, if you go to Fort Bend and many of the counties around Harris counties that are growing, Harris counties gone from 11 million to 27 million. They're fairly fast growing. They're not growing as fast as the suburbs, but they're still the processes change. What has sport been, County's spin on Indian defense per year? They have a population of about what 700,000 now? I don't have that right here in front of me. Are they a public defender? They did start a public defender a couple years ago for mental health. They were in the same position that we did on our strategic planning with y'all a few years ago. The cost of the mental health cases of how often they come to court, how often they eat up the jail's resources and special custody arrangements that have to be held, the transport, the same kind of things that have been affecting y'all. And so they took at it with a public defender model for those mental health defendants. Judge Wood and several community leaders from the Sheriff's Office years, you know, about a year and a half ago, Matt and decided that maybe the managed assigned council method and that's how y'all got that $567,000 grant before that profit. To begin that process. Our percentage of total number of cases that pointed over There are a lot more with the total number of cases of pointed out of Montgomery County is somewhere in the 80% Now you're right about state average, I think. I thought it was 60. But the state, yeah, the state average in the past. And it paid to be 61 and 11. I think it was 80% in 2010. But isn't that far higher than any other county in the state of Texas? 65% is the statewide average for felonies and about 35% for misdemeanors. So the misdemeanors sounded like you were right up, the state average, and I guess the felony has moved around a little bit. Maybe it was 80% last year. That's on the high end, but I don't think it's the highest. And 65, like I said, is average. Well, we didn't get, you know, that's a good question for me to chance. You know, what is the answer to that question? question. Are we in 80 or we are 60? Which is it? The, as far as the appointment range. Last year we were in 80 percent on the felony side. It's expected to be a little over 60 percent. It's felony only. On the felony side only. It expected to be about 36 percent on the felony side. That's pretty constant. We're at 42% last year. Anything else, gentlemen? I did want to point out that there's also in that sheet on the front page. You do get some grant funds on that. And everywhere I go, I know it's not enough. We're sending out as much money as we can get. Our appropriation was not cut this year. But you also do a very good job. I will compliment this county on one of the highest collection rates from defendants who have gone through if you'll notice you collect about 10% from the defendants who are coming through courts, which is way above most other counties in your country. So there are no alternatives to those there are alternatives. Thank you. Judge Ivers. The problem with that collection ending with that note, there was a case out of this county, one of the Court of Appeals, nice, uh, Court of Appeals of appeals, a nice court of appeals. And in that, the district judge ordered the defendant who had indancy counsel to repay to the county the attorney's face. Court of Appeals reversed him and said, no, you cannot do that. This happened just this year. You have to have a hearing to determine whether, if he is no longer indigent. If you don't do that, then the county can I collect funds? So what we are doing in the past, we didn't do that. We're gonna be forced to do it now. And that's just gonna be a great reduction in that reimbursement. The different alternatives that are before you are not going to work, none of them are, unless we get control of the number of people who are getting appointments. So that OID, the Office of Indigent Defense, that right now we have assigned to the magistrate the decision as to who's indigent and who's not. If that is not brought under the control, this is pointless. If you go to a public defender, you go to a contract, you go to a management system. If we stay at where we are or we increase, there's no way that we're going to be able to afford this. That's got to go back. Well, it kind of reminds me of the story that Lincoln told of a pig farmer. Had a lot of pigs, and they generate a lot of pig manure. He didn't know what to do with all the manure. He never occurred to him. He needs a slaughter a few pigs. And that's what we need to do. We needs a slaughter a few pigs. And that's what we need to do. We need a slaughter a few pigs. And that means raise the bar on who gets these appointments to make sure they're qualified, quit helping creating a cottage industry of court-appointed attorneys, reinstate a concept of public service that was there at one point, and not just public greed. And we're gonna do that by reducing the number of appointments. And these projections that I don't know what they basis on, but, and I hope to come true. But I don't think they're going to come true. I think that each felony district court needs to take the responsibility of who is appointed indigent and who is not. This is what we did for years. So what I did for years, I think that that's what we need to do now. I think the felony judges need to take over that afforded process, revoke that does any to the magistrate or to the OID. And we need to be held responsible individually as judges for those appointments. That's my opinion. I could be wrong. I agree. Just let me ask you this. Maybe you don't know the answer to this. But to get you to some bottom lines, what will be the budget request for indigent defense counsel for 2012 budget. Do you have that number of fillers yet? Does anybody know what that number is going to be? It's going to be the same. If I mean to? It's got to be. We haven't, we've done nothing except some minor changes to reduce that. The county courts along have been very aggressive under the steering to Judge McDonald to try to reduce that. The county courts along have been very aggressive under the steering to Judge McDonald to try to reduce that. But reducing how much money they pay attorneys isn't, that didn't, it didn't go to work. That's, that's the farmer who is too much manure and I'm not referring to the defense councils as all a bunch of pigs shit. But the point is is that you have to cut down the number of pigs. And that's really not happening. Not in a misminter level and not in the felony level. They're hoping that it's going to go down, but with just a return even aggressive about their indictments, it's going to go up. It has to. And the cost is going to go up. So I think that there are some really good ideas here about the public defender system. I favor that too because it gives you a fixed cost. The commissioners can say, we're going to spend $1,200 on this. This is what we're going to pay. And we're going to control it. Right now you have no control. The only thing that you can do is sign the check. The control is with us. Yet, with a public defender system, I think allows you that leeway. Sorry. Quick question. The government dial in your presentation want to go. I saw one of the bullet points about any change to infant has to be approved by 2, 3rds of the judges. To go from one program structure to another. So if the court, commissioners court decided they wanted to do a public defender for energy defense, it would take a 2-thirds improvement or 2-thirds vote by the judges. Is that correct? I think he can answer this. The way we read the statute is alternative appointment systems do require two-thirds vote of the judges. However, public defender isn't considered an alternative model. So that would be a contract system is under the alternative vote. That would be under the court. The majority vote of the judges. No, there's one thing you've seen is we can create a public defender department. This court is on agreement of at least one judge could create a public defender program. Of course, from our perspective, and we, at the highest level or funding public defender offices, our board is asking for unanimity among the judges or close to it, that's certainly what they demanded in Harris County before they'll consider it because you could create a resource that the judges aren't willing to use, right? I mean, if you only have one judge, which is the minimum required by statute, agreeing to it, that the judges still determine the plan for appointing counsel. We can create public defenders office, but they wouldn't have to use it. That's correct. For real. That's why you really have to... It's a little bit of a marriage. Okay. The counting's that have done it have gone all over the globe. We're not worth commissioners, judges. Okay, judges, we got here. We got judge Edwards and judge Woodson, Judge McDonnell. Are y'all strictly opposed to the public defender? I don't think it's really been discussed in detail with the judges. I think that there's not been a definite claim yet for like the contract concept. We actually implemented this. They came forward with the contract. We worked on the contract. We're not even near that on a contract concept. It hasn't been put up to a vote. It hasn't been really presented to us. On the public defender, it's fairly new. We need a lot more information. I can't speak for the Board of Judges. I serve them. I can try. Why would a judge be opposed? Would it be the level of service or what? You know, no matter every program has its attributes and its deficiencies. And the public defender program certainly has its share of both. When I was here a year ago, we all saw that we had a problem. I felt that we did not have the time, the talents and the skills, to be able to gather all the data, do all the analysis, and come to you with a recommendation that we could support for specific documented reasons. You gave us the office of the Joint University of Strait and we couldn't agree anyway. And you gave us a court administrator who's just come on board. He's taken the last nine months to hire a magistrate an appointment to designate, a court administrator. We have spent the last nine months tweaking, at least some of the misdemeanor side, and I think there's been tweaking on the felony side our existing program to make improvements in some of the areas that it's deficient. We now have some expertise on board. We would like some time. And I think that that's our next step. Is to study in detail are there alternative programs that would be an improvement for Montgomery County? I'm just not here to recommend any of them to you at this point in time. But my question again, is the majority of the judges against the public defender? There's no I don't think that we've even been asked questions. Okay. Okay I mean not. Let me tell you. Let me tell you. I'm talking about cutting down another case. That's a perfect job for the new cases. That's a perfect job for the new OCA. It's a perfect job for him to step in, look at the programs, see if he can initiate the new things that cut down those numbers and set up the direction for the appointments, and to do that. And I think that that should be the OCA's first task. And I agree with you. I think the number of cases that we have has got to be a huge part of our issue here. I mean, I think a lot, and you know, a lot more about not there, but, you know, I'm thinking that a lot of the indigent defense cases are indigent lawyers that are provided might possibly not need to be provided if the proper background is done on these these prisoners. I'm thinking. I think what's pointed out earlier was the smallest time frame. You got to do it the next day. Is that what you said, Judge? One business day. One business day. Yeah. That's a very strong fight. Well, they have to be here. They don't have to grant it. He doesn't have to appoint them now. He just has to hear it. He just has to make a decision. And that decision can be known. And that's a decision. No, you know they will see Joe Devin about this. That decision could be yes. You're obviously in here. You can't make lines. You've got an ice hold. Yeah, you need an intern. But it's just that the decision has to be made. He can always be served his indigency. So I think that that's that is the root none of the problem. The solution doesn't lie and getting rid of the manure. And again, it gets rid of the pigs. And I think that we can make a decision down the line after we give the OCA a chance to come up with some answers about the indigenous lands, about the public fender system, or about the case management system, or the contracts. There are a great things to happen with the contracts that you know, so you're doing a great job, just doing some very happy things. When do you think the OCA will be able to have an educated opinion? I'd say probably six months. By the way, if you all see Mark Bosmos, that line of cost for the creation of in this defense department. No, I'm not. It's right here. I'll give you my copy. Basically, first year is 3 million 35 thousand. Starting the second year because you don't have your startup expense. It's 2 million 822 but you would really need to add to that office space rent, even though we're not paying it. So it's essentially three million dollars a year, bottom line going forward. Here's my copy, Judge. You want to take it? Yes, I will. But let me point out something. What we learned from juvenile is that we went with this big contract. And at the same time, we, in our heads and in our assumption, with the same number of juveniles that we had right now. So for this last year, people who've got the contract are, have the deal with all those cases, because they're still being handled by individual attorneys. For, actually, the next year, that cost per case will go down, but they've kind of got some gravy here. So in a public defender system or in a contract system, you need to take a consideration that they're not going to have all those cases at one time. It's going to take a time period to build up to those numbers. We understand that. So we shouldn't just give them a flat contract on what we estimate will be there in three years. And we also are way ahead of ourselves if we really don't know how many cases we're going to wind up with. And so we get to the OID together and OCA has time to come back to us and we really can say, all right, this is how much we're really dealing with and not in a limited number. That way, I think that we'll save money along. My suggestion is, let's give the OCS a chance to get the OID under control. But in the meantime, there are some felony district judges. They're contemplating taking that authority of determining indesee away from anyone and letting it rest of the deal. And that is what I'm going to take it back. And I'm going to take it over for my court. We have the judges, the district judges being in Wednesday. And that is something that's going to be. Thanks for hearing us. Thank you. Mike, you want to say a word? I know you have a plan that you would just use before? You guys know, I would like to say that the task force on the indigent dissents provides technical support to examine and raise the knowledge of indigent defense and taxes. We just gave Bell County about a $237,000 award just two weeks ago to look at performance evaluation in some of the, what good the attorneys are doing. We're currently working with Williamson County on examining their processes. We'd entertain certainly at our next August 25th meeting. If you needed assistance and doing some analysis, detailed analysis on what the issues that you're facing from the issues just raised. Why is our population going up one rate and our coughs going up another? We would entertain certainly any application to help you examine that or provide funding to help you examine that. Thank you. Commissioner, is anything else? The quick question for our new core administrator. What have you seen in your past experience as it relates to Montgomery County? Is the public defender's office been effective? Has there been a way to reduce the number of indigent cases or to better determine indigency. If you had some experience in those areas, you could kind of give some guidance and direction for us. I put you on the spot right off the bat, but here you are. In Maricopa County, as in many other large urban counties in the United States. They have long since gone to a public defender system. It is a more of a way to stabilize funding for that kind of entity. However, in smaller counties, even fast growing counties, there are other alternatives, the managed of the contract, the wheel system. So these entities do exist. That's in fact what you have now in the wheel system. The concept that defendants are afforded by six amendment rights is in fact something that really kind of rudders this program into a somber to an eternal process. So you have to understand that the the scope and magnitude in terms of volume of cases that will be brought is far outside the stretch of the quirk system where the district attorney has a hand in that. These cases will spring forward. And as your population increases, and I've noticed in the last comparison years, from the defense folks, the population from 2000 to 2010 produced almost exactly the same sort of increases in terms of cost in population. So those sort of link up together. I think the big question is, what's gonna happen in the future in terms of expectations for this county in terms of its population, in terms of its case filings, in terms of its costs in the serena. And once I have a better understanding of that, I can come back to this body and present maybe one or two different options for the vaccination. And finally, the judges themselves want to be unified on this process. And since they need to really come up with that decision or recommendation on their own, I would like some time for them to develop this. So that's it. to develop those symptoms of activity. So to answer your question of commissioners and judges, directly I do not have experience in indigenous defense on this particular aspect of service delivery. I'm very familiar with it. But again, in a larger counties that I have consulted with, they've here and largely so do fall into the public defender system. But I'm not saying to you this morning that that is an option that I would support. I take all of those under consideration at this point. But again, some time like Judge McDonald said, the study days and bring back plausible recommendations to this body I think would be Thank you for your feedback. Thank you. One last comment I have judges. When you think you'll be a budget number available for fill us When do you think you'll be a budget number available for fill us from 2012 budgets? Does anybody know? You projected I just need to clarify though that whenever you look at the budget worksheet that reflected for court operation, it has other costs and it's just cost that are on the projection of $8.5 million. I understand. Okay. Well, I'd like for the judges to keep in mind when you meet, but you can meet this Wednesday, I think you said. This suggests that we have a $3 million solution of a public defender office on the table for Martin Bosma. And obviously we don't want to create it if you're not going to use it. But that's the solution that we have to look at that we've created. And if anybody wants to take a look at that, get with Mark Bosmer. He has all the numbers. He has the staffing, the square footage, the whole nine yards. So anything we can do to help you make that decision, whether you can support or not let us know. Pardon? I work with public leadership. What's that forward? I do see, I'm doing, and yes, I have a lot of very own things to do with the University. I work in the public defender system. I'll buy it with statewide, but it worked well. It worked very well. Our clients got some of the best representation. In fact, the private attorneys would tell them that you couldn't afford us on the outside. They give you your name. My name is Janice Schwager. That's the HWA-G-E-R. Thanks. Thanks. And like I said, I do have a lot of grief from San Luis University. I have with Masters and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a federal government and the federal government is a In fact, there's a couple of other reasons too. Because the judges have no input. You don't appoint one public defender to a judge. If they come in, if the cases come in, you have a misdemeanor section, you have your felony section, and like in the state, why we also had an appellant in a cabal division. But I may go in for four U-1 day, I may come before U-1 day I may come before you one day. So there's no favoritism. And you also have all these other attorneys in the office that you can feed off of. Look at this and see what's going on. Do you see something? And a lot of times they do. You know, can you look at the ME report and see if you see something? But I found it was a very cost effective. Now, course they said you're going to have startup cost. I know in the city of St. Louis we used the bottom of the courthouse where we had our offices and that's what they're doing now. So you didn't have the rent for there. You've already got the courthouse. You used the basement, you know, verably that's where we went with the basement. But it worked. And you didn't have this piecemeal. And you didn't have where, if one attorney was in a very serious case, and they're running over, where your client now has to put his court date back. You know, we did all the preliminary hearings. They went to all the grand jury stuff. It worked very, very well. And I mean, I'm not saying advocate go to the Missouri system, but if you want numbers, how it works, how effective it is, I can give you those numbers, I can give you the contacts. You know, will it translate to Texas totally? No, but they can say look at this how much we say in a percentage basis. And if you have any questions, I will be more than happy to answer. Great. Thank you. You're welcome. All right. Anything else from the audience, commissioners before we move on. Okay, let's join the public hearing, the public workshop and re-conveying commissioners court. Time to stay. Thank you, Judge. That's my care. Thank you. Hey, just. Can you? County Attorney, Rick Breige, precinct two. Senator, you restrict the easement agreement between quad-vast L.F. and the Montgomery County Texas. What is that? Waterline. This is a connection with the Magnolia Lake, the wastewater-chimney plant. Oh, yeah, yeah, okay. Does that one enough for you to leave a quad-vast wastewater too. Oh, yeah, okay. Does that mean I'm going to have a quiet bet? Second. All the favourites here. I know. Precinct four. We don't done that. Okay. Precinct two under county engineer. Everybody's done that one too, Judge. All right. He under Article 551-071 and point 07-4. Let's recess for executive session. Let's bring the court back to order. There's no action from executive session. Do we have any citizens who would like to address the court today? I'm going to be real short. I'm hard. You want Jimmy to come up here and say, oh hell. I'm going to wear a suitably from the South of the world. Appreciate y'all giving me the opportunity. Judge, Commissioner, if my name's Paul Dewejones. I am in the Firework business. We have been working with the county state officials for the past two and a half months concerning the drought that's upon us that we haven't had in over 50 years. Earlier this morning, y'all had spoken about the bringing the introducing the 418, which is at the judge's discretion to do at any time he wishes to do. Under the 418, the only recommendation that our industry would like to suggest is that instead of the original 699, was to if it got down to 699, stayed below 699 we would have a complete selling season with everything except the rockets and this the 750 number came in or at war once it got above the 700 then with our industry had basically agreed to cut down to just a four-day selling season. Friday, Saturday, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th. And with the rains coming up, hopefully Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and it scheduled the rain all the way up till July 1st this year, we're hoping that that KBDI will drop. And the only thing that we would like to see in that order is that the drop dead instead of being something like 699, if it would be somewhere around 737 25 or 730, owner before July, June 29th. So if we didn't get any more rain after that, it only goes up like two. So it wouldn't have an opportunity to ever get back up to that, everything else we'd agree 100% with. I mean, there's just no question about it. We realized that we've known for two months. That was a dangerous situation. And that's why we've been trying to come up with some solution. You know, for the public safety and for our industry to be able with some solution, you know, for the public safety and for our industry to be able to continue on, if we don't accept responsibility and we allow something to happen ourselves willingly, then the entire state is going to come down on us. I mean, we're not stupid, we understand that. And that's basically all on days or as. Were there any questions? Any whatsoever? The author was there. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any other citizen comments today? You mean resources? Good morning. Consider and approve the payroll change request forms. Move. Second. All the papers see out. All right. Anything else? Good measures. Move. We adjourned. Second. All the papers see out.