I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm kind of Commissionerers court for Tuesday, March 10th, is now in session. This morning, an invocation is being given by Jack Taylor, our construction coordinator, and our pledges will be led by Kevin Carr, our chief information officer. Will you please stand? I'm going to go right to the right. I'm going to go right to the right. I'm going to go right to the right. I'm going to go right to the right. I'm going to go right to the right. I'm going to go right to the right. I'm going to go right to the right. I'm going to go right to the right. I'm going to go right to the right. I'm going to go right to the right. I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to say that I'm going to invite the United States of America to the Republic for which it's aimed one nation under God one in the division? Thank you, gentlemen. We've got some people that need to get to some other things. So we're going to jump around in the agenda a little bit. First, I want to go to item 8C on the agenda. 8C is approval of revisions to personnel policy 3.1 attendance. And I'm going to call on Commissioner Eads. Thank you, Judge. Back in the winter, you had requested that we take a look at this policy and how it deals with inclement weather and equity issues among employees and so forth. And so we had, I was trying to pull up my packet here, I was going to go over the list of the committee members, not going to do that in just a second. But last week we had a great meeting and it was about two hours long and it was widely represented from different elected officials and department heads and the different user groups. And I want to express my appreciation to our county treasure. Cindy for being there and gotten us through some of the technical challenges. We worked hard to create a policy that encourages equity among all employees. And also preserve our precious tax dollars and minimize comp time and the accruals there because we want to be ever mindful of those balances and try to do everything we can to minimize additional accruals. I think this policy is equitable. I think that it does reward employees for coming in and putting their vehicle and their life and limb in jeopardy as they serve the public in all types of weather conditions. And we thank our employees for their diligence to our Ditton County residents. I'll have Amy and Cindy go over some of the particulars if court members have questions. I will say that when we met in the discussions, we looked at a basic accrual that has happened in the past as far as a usage and a number of hours that it can't be closed. It's traditionally been about 24. And so we as a group, it was unanimously agreed upon in the discussions, our basic concept and framework, and we did in the meeting discuss 24 hours as far as putting an initial accrual bank there. In subsequent conversations with Amy and Cindy, since we had our committee meeting, it was suggested that maybe we do 40 hours as a starting basis. And so it was 24. It was 24 as a as in the committee. But in consultations with Amy and Cindy via email, it was suggested that we go ahead and start with the 40 hours. So we can obviously adjust the policy however we see fit. But that was I wanted to go ahead and present it as 24 because that's what we had agreed to in the committee. You know, I think it's based on a recognition from Amy and Cindy. It probably be 40. It might be a better overall recommendation. So with that, I'll let Cindy come on up and I appreciate your continued advocacy for it. Equitable, incumbent weather policy. Thank you and good morning, commissioners and judges. I believe that the proposed policy that the committee reviewed is a viable, but yet, this clear responsible policy to for us to consider and hopefully approve as a viable option for meeting the concerns and needs that have been expressed for our consideration in a policy revision. As such, what the committee is recommending is that we have a new a new accrual called County Closure Pay Tom-Off. The policy before you today does include for that to be 24 hours. However, Commissioner Ead said Amy and I are both would like to see that raised to 40 hours to meet any of the unanticipated closures that we may have. And the reason why we decided to request 40 hours is because we had been advised by legal that we could not retroact a policy. And while we decided to request 40 hours, is because we had been advised by legal that we could not retroact a policy. And so historically, since we've been on Cronos, and I was able to go back and pull historic information, we have on average used 23 hours a year. So the 24 barely meets an average expectation. But with the concerns of us not legally being able to retroact a policy, we think a inclement weather day on a Thursday Friday before court can meet next Tuesday to approve an award of more paid time off. So that's why the 40 hours was considered and we would like for you to consider that as well. What this policy does is it would work very similar to what we have for like funeral time. So each year we would award X number of hours to this balance. As the county judge closes the county. Grudgingly. I'm sorry. Is it begrudgingly? Yes, yes. As the county judge issues a formal closure to the county, then employees who do not report for work on that day would draw down upon that balance and use it to make their time card whole. Employees that are required to work would also get this balance. And when they don't draw down upon it, then they can use that in the future as benefit they offer. This balance is not paid upon termination. The balance is hidden, so employees don't see what they have available. Just like funeral time employees don't see what's there. And as the closures are initiated, the employees who are required to work have 12 months to take that time off or it is lost. So what this does is it does not create a liability to our compensated balances, to accrual balances. Employees use it or lose it, and it is not paid upon termination. There's no way to make this retroactive to what's happening. We were advised that retroactive activating a policy is not a legal action. Thank you more research that for us. Rants. legal action. Thank you more research that for us. Rats. Okay. It is what it is. I'm sorry to hear that. But other than that, I think it's a great idea and I appreciate the committee guidance on coming up with something that's very negligible for everybody, whether they're somebody in road bridge that gets called out to help us get across dangerous roads or whatever department they're in. And this pay code could only be used when official closures occur, so it's not something that, it would be something my staff and I would monitor every payroll to make sure that that pay code is not being used unless an official closure occurred. So employees would not be able to use that balance unless that the county judge issued a closure. Couldn't use it in advance and it used it after the fact. And this policy also has a statement too that our previous policies did not reference and that is if another official closes their office outside of the official closure that their employees would be required to use their own approved benefit time. They would not be allowed to use this pay code for that type of closure. All right. Are the questions from members? How much time would we head off this year? Isn't it roughly 30 hours? It exceeds, I believe, 28 hours, I believe. I think we were at 22 before last Thursday's closure I guess it'd be 30 or 30 hours, right? Yeah, I guess one of my concerns is that we have clerical personnel That even if they chose to tend to work they couldn't because the county would be closed And if they had exhausted their lead bank they would be short on there they need to be forced to use vacation If they had exhausted their lead bank, they would be short on their feed, either be forced to use vacation or something else. Or if they had no vacation or anything, they would be short on their paycheck. If they exceeded this accrual, if they used all of this accrual, and exceeded it. If they yes, if we had to be over three days. Like if we were closed for a week and they had no vacation they would be short on a paycheck due to no fault of their own. No, not if they exceeded over 24. If it's 24, they'd have to use their base, they'd have to use their vacation to make a difference. the my motion if we get to that point would be that there be for 40 hours. So it would exceed our average. And so in our dialogue in the committee meeting it was what's our average. Post. Post. The hours and it was 24. We went with that as an average. And I think it's prudent to exceed the average because you never know what the weather would do. And so that's why we're making, I'll make another motion for 40 hours instead of the 24, which we presented. But I didn't want to change the recommendation of the written recommendation of the committee. I wanted to respect the committee process. And so. And the court can always come back. If we start to approach 40 hours having been taken in a calendar year, then the court can always consider granting additional amount. But the policy would be written as such that 40 hours be your consideration and obligation every year. And if we had a major apocalypse of snow one year and we needed to consider more grants, then the court has the consideration to do that. So as to avoid the situation that you're suggesting. To quote an attorney who's a predecessor to John Felt, you know, county policies, whatever the commission report says it is at 10. Oh, so I guess on one hand, you know, I actually talked to after I talked to India, I talked to Ken Metcath over juvenile probation quite a bit. And you know, I haven't worked in the operations portion of the Sheriff's Department for a long time. You know, I understand that there's a huge need to give people incentive to show up to work and avoid having employees who did the right thing and show up to work to avoid them having work doubles and not be compensated like the people who chose not to come to work and still get compensated. I understand there's an inequity there. On the other hand I'm reluctant to create another lead bank that just makes things more complicated. I know there's problems with the current system but on the other hand I don't want to ordinately punish people who are not essential personnel who, due to no fault of their own, have the county clothes like an event for the snow event that we had. So, I'm on defense about this stuff. One of the things when I was talking to Ken and some other people, you know, I didn't know if we could change the policy to only apply to essential personnel. Because the problem is if you have essential personnel who fail to show and you would people at the juvenile department would be essential personnel. People at the sheriff's department would be essential personnel. People at road bridge would be essential personnel. But obviously people who are not designated as essential personnel in the clerk's office, maybe in the auditor's office, in IT or whatever. This policy would not apply to them and if the county was exposed they would get paid. I think where the inequities take place is where we have people who are essential personnel who Due to their own choice have chosen to live in white sparrow or Way they heck out and instead of close to work and then they say they can't make it That's a big difference than an essential personnel employee who chose and lived close and can make it to work and wind up working a double or something like that. I think one thing that this policy addresses is I think the definition of essential personnel depends on which week of the or what you day of the week that you call and I would think that there would be 100% agreement that payroll our essential employees the week of payroll. And so that if Cindy and her staff needed to come in and prepare payroll during a closure, this would cover incidents such as that. So that they would, they would, the hours worked, they would be realized as hours worked. And then those direct hours would be in a leave, making the future. And so I don't know, I think the clerical staff, which you reference, I think that they would abundantly be prepared and covered and protected as far as their hours on, as well as all the other essential personnel. You know, I think it really kind of depends on, and we've talked about that before, about what is essential personnel, but I definitely think it, if we have a closure, and there is an instance with our servers and our computers, obviously our IT staff would be essential personnel. So I think it really depends on that. Correct me if I'm wrong, we don't only designate once a year, who are, We've already designated I can hear you I think we've already designated who are essential personnel on you know I like getting paid so I would say a good portion Essential your correct in that we had a great deal of conversation about that but ultimately the conversation ended in conversation about that, but ultimately the conversation ended in Department heads and elected officials saying exactly what commissioner is just said that it depends on the day and the week That something closes whether somebody's essential or not and that it's left up to the department had me elected official because we do have functions like payroll elections the department had me elected official because we do have functions like payroll elections, IT, different things that are essential sometimes and not others. And so I think the court left it up to the official at the time to determine so we didn't have a list or code or anything like that that would help Cindy to identify a essential person now. or anything like that that would help Cindy to identify essential personnel. Didn't we go through an exercise where we, through your department, or through Cindy's department, and we had every elected official, or department head is named who their essential personnel were? Didn't we go through that exercise? I just think it would be more equitable if you tried to do that but a lot of departments said it depended on when it happened whether they needed to be essential or not. But we're compensating everybody whether they're essential or not. You know with that thing. In this policy we are. But with those policies we are. Yeah, policy. Yeah, we propose policy. We're discussing all of them. I think what's being proposed is a really fair system. I think it's less confusing. There's a good way to track it in chronos. It does not count against our compensated time that we would have to face somebody should they leave the county's employment. And I think the suggestion of going to 40 hours is a good suggestion. If there's no further comments or questions on ready for a move. I have additional comments, but I'll let Ron if you have some. Yeah, I was just gonna say that this is, I think it's fair and I think it's generous as well. You know, I have a family member, a son that worked for the City of Louisville. He's not a salary employee. He's an hourly employee and he had to show up every single day of the... on ICE, he's in the department, he had to show up for that, and as well as their policy was everybody's essential. And I may get this all wrong, but my understanding was everybody's essential, and everybody was required to show up if they chose not to show what they had to use personal time or that use vacation time. So I think this is very fair of any of the things that formulas that I have ever seen for the last eight years and generous as well. Well I guess my comments I would like to refer back to the committee to consider whether or not it should be specific to essential personnel or not and have the committee consider that. I think it would also get people to reconsider who they think are essential personnel because personal because that's really who this policy is addressing is the essential personnel who have chosen to you know not show up when they were requested and the people who did show up not receiving being adequately compensated for doing the right thing and I think we're painting with two bit two broader brush. I think, I think it addresses every employee and essential employees and you know how, I only know how I feel about that, you know, when you take a job, you know what job you're taking or your supervisor should explain to you. And if you choose not to share up in your essential employee, then you'll supervise and need to take care of that. But I think this policy addresses everyone and as Ron said, up in your essential employee, then you'll supervise and need to take care of it. But I think this policy addresses everyone, and as Ron said, it's most generous that goes in the public arena. You know, you're required to show up for work. If you don't show up for work, you have to use personal time or you don't get paid in case for something everything is closed then sometime in some instances you still require to use your personal time and so I put you know I'm you know I have some questions about why we should do this or whatever but I'm okay with this policy you know there have been some in the past that I haven't been okay with and Cindy and I've discussed that. But I think this addresses the issues that I have concerned about it because, you know, if the county is closed, you can draw down on the money. If the county is not closed and you choose to not come to work, you need to use your personal time so you don't get paid. And I'm all for the head. If the county is currently, if the county is already closed, people would be receiving paid leave. So what this does is acknowledge the efforts of those who are working during the closure. That's how this is different. Mr. Is Mr. Emergent? Yes. Is it still discretionary for the supervisor, the department head, or the elected official to get that essential or non-essential personnel that PTO? There is a statement in there that says that the department head or elected official still has the final pay discretion provided it stays within politics. So if you have an essential personnel that showed up, I mean didn't show up, it's at the discretion of that supervisor elected official or department, whether to give them the PTO or make the decision because you didn't show up then you're going to be penalized because of it. Yes. And in fact, this last series of inclement weather, there were some essential personnel who were required to work who called in and said they just couldn't make it. And that department had a final pay decision that required them to use their accrued benefit time instead of increment weather time. I only regret in this is that we can't think it retroactive but other than that I'm very happy with what the committee's come up with. I appreciate your efforts. Go ahead. When you said that if it becomes necessary and any kind of catastrophic event to where we exceeded the 40 hours that the commissioners court at their discretion could come in we can't lower that but we can raise it and if we raise it does it become the new floor? Only temporarily. I mean I believe if you did that within a year it would temporarily if you made a temporary grant for certain circumstances but unless you formally approve the policy from that point forward. But I mean wasn't the whole idea that if the reason why we're going to 40 is because we can't go back or we can't go forward and add to it legally or. Right so if we granted 24 and then before court could meet again to grant additional times we needed 30 hours then you can't go back and have those differential hours covered. Does that make sense? Dichorn, I would move that we send this policy back to the committee in light of my comments about creating an additional lead bank and having it for them to consider whether it should apply only to the central personnel. We have a motion. Is there a second? Is there a second to the motion? Motion dies for lack of a second. I move the approval of the policy with the edit to the written policy to say 40 hours. The motion is there a second? Second. Seconded by Commissioner Marchant for the discussion. Well I think that's an issue that's been discussed and looked at in the past and I without asking and I would assume that the city the committee took a look at that in your discussion too. So with that, we have a motion. That's the court. As has this court. As is court, correct. We have a motion. Second, hearing no further discussion on here. In the motion, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Motion carries. Thank you, Cindy. Thank you. Let's also go to 8A on the agenda, which is approval of revision to the tobacco usage policy 2.12. You've got information in your packet in the back up. I will just say that I have a problem with this. I understand why Amy put this on the agenda and it's something new, certainly. But I don't want to discourage anyone from getting off of cigarettes and using the e-says. Because it works. It works. Because it works. It works. Absolutely, it works. I'm not advocating that everybody get on e-sigs. I'm not saying that they're good for you. I'm just saying that I don't want to discourage somebody from going that route. It should be helpful to them as it was me. So the table is. You want to take a look at it some more? I would. Well, I'm personally okay with it. I think it's a good policy ever. Because I don't smoke. Well, I've never had a husband smoke. But I don't see a problem in us having... Oh, my. Not having these products inside county cars inside county buildings. Do you quit? Okay. And I don't think you should make it. I'm sorry. His courage. But you know there are some people that they quit, they quit. And some may have to have a little bit of help. A whole lot. Yeah, but I still think, you know, it's like when before that you could not smoke in county building, you can't smoke cigarettes in county buildings and in county cars, not supposed to. buildings and in county cause and not supposed to. It's the same thing. This, you know, you couldn't smoke those in county buildings. So you can't use this vapor in county buildings. I get a definition just. Could someone give me a definition of between a vapor and an e-sig? Because I think those are two distinct, they're not. No, actually the reason we use vapor delivery devices is because today there are E-SIGs and there are other vapor delivery devices as well. It's one of the, an E-SIGRA is one of the devices in a category of vapor delivery devices. And so what this policy says is that if you're using either cigarettes or well any tobacco product or a vapor delivery device, including E-SIGRA that you would need to do that outside and not inside the building. And that's just like if you were smoking you couldn't do it outside or inside. So, you know, I guess I don't see the difference in it because you're not able to smoke inside the county call or the county building. And so not being able to have these cigarettes, I guess I don't see the difference in it. Well, I would say also would say also you know just like cigarettes we didn't know what the health risk of cigarettes were and then we subsequently found out we don't know what the health risk of think probably so it's a different way to ingest nicotine and other products without the hazards of the smoke but I still think it's in our public interest or in our county's interest not to have them smoke cigarettes or do e-cigarettes. So I'd move we adopt the policy and just move forward. We've got to request a whole list by Commissioner Eves. I understand but I'm going to make a motion to adopt it. We have a motion for adoption. I'm going to second the discussion and then I will, because I feel we need to adopt the policy. But in the past we have allowed each other the discretion to the tables come in. I certainly would not want something that I'm doing if I asked the table that you all would not honor that. So I'm going not honor that. So I'm gonna honor that. And so I do think I am okay with the policy. And I, you know, bringing it back with the different saying that you can smoke, you can use these vapor products in the building, it's not gonna change my mind. I'm still gonna say that we don't need to use them in the building because I think if you, you can do it without using to baton. and I know how hard it is to not smoke my husband's smoke and you know he quits and he starts bag he quits and he starts bag but if you can not smoke you cigarette in the building and in the county called then you cannot use these and so that's where I am with that but you know in light of the table and if there's additional information I certainly want to listen to that. I guess I should ask the table the inclement weather policy. I said, I guess I should have asked the table the inclement weather policy. I'll call it that also, because we need to certainly, on each other's request, if possible. Okay, if I'm understanding correctly, I'll remove my commission. Or you're removing your second. You're removing second. If you're gonna take it back and look at it, there's questions that I have that fight for those who want it. Okay, for clarification purposes, he made the motion, she seconded it for discussion. She's seconded. She has removed her second of the motion. Is there another second for the motion? Hearing none, the motion fails. Under discussion now, Mr. Marche. I guess I have a, it's such a lack of understanding of that product. I guess would be my questions. And the reason why I'm at conflict with it has nothing to do. Well, maybe it does, but why are other governmental entities taking a position, a lot of municipalities have taken a position of not allowing these types of places to even sell these. They're disallowing them. I know the city of Perleton has banned the sale of these types of products in stand-alongs. I don't understand what that ban is all about. And we have one that I see every Tuesday morning over here often that coming up. You know what I'm talking about right before you get to a panoron on the left hand side. Yeah, that looks like it's been shut down for a while. So has the city ban those? Yeah, they have it? So my research and if anybody could help me with that, understanding why one would ban it over the other is there something that I'm not seeing? I'm not understanding. I don't know. So. Certainly I can't speak for the city of Carrollton or any other city. There are, you know, an increasing number of studies, but I would not say there's a definitive study. There are a lot of distinct studies that claim to show that there are a lot of carcinogens when people use these products, including formaldehyde. I'm not an expert in that area, so I can't really say, but that is one of the concerns I think that's causing more and more employers to at least include them in their tobacco policy. That is making this way to the H.A.D.A.D.A.D items, one of the concerns about indoor use is that it is a vaporization or an aerosolization of a nicotine substance, which is addictive. And so the exhalation of that substance around, say, small children, other people, we don't know the effects of secondhand vapor. The secondhand vapor, which in this case is the air salization of liquid nicotine. So I do concur very much with the judge in that the carcinogens, the known carcinogens in cigarette smoke, we've got decades, if not centuries, of understanding what's exactly happening to the body. I mean, I think it's been published in the last four decades, but everybody I think now retroactively sees what smoking is done to so many people. That's the cigarette smoke, and that obviously is a known carcinogen and a known risk, a known danger. There are lots of unknown things about e-sigs. What is known is there are several chemicals from how the hide has been noted as a trace chemical, propylene glycol. So another chemical that has been noted as a carcinogen and has some questionable effects on the body is also a byproduct of the vapor. So yes, long answer, I just wanted to highlight, there are some risks, some of those risks are being researched right now. The nicotine as a stimulant in a drug, it is classified as a drug, that exhalation indoors, many believe there is some risk to that. So, that was the perfect, I don't think. Mr. Marchins said earlier, he doesn't know anything about these. I don't know anything about these. And that's why I wanted to wait and do some more research. And this is the first time it's been on this agenda. And I appreciate Amy bringing it forward because we want to help you workplace. Absolutely. That's all I want to do a little bit. I've spent time and attention on our Inclimate Weather policy and I just wanted to do a little bit more fact finding on that In addition to it for him. Judge, first of all, you know, I'd like to know, amen, to this policy is the elected official and the person in charge of road bridge. I can go ahead and just say, look, in my area, we're not going to have it. And that wouldn't be valid in the county policy. to the official and the person in charge of road bridge. I can go ahead and just say, what in my area, we're not going to have it. And that wouldn't be valid in the county policy, would it? That would not be violating. And that's part of the reason I put this on the agenda is because not only are other employers trying to answer these questions, but we're being asked these questions by a lot of departments. Some people find it annoying. Some people, some of the younger people don't remember much about when it was common to smoke in the workplace. So their perception is different than some of ours. Some of them tell me it looks unprofessional in the workplace. I look back and I think about all the CEOs I won't mention all the corporations here in the Metroplex where that was done by many, many, many professionals but their perception is a little bit different. So there are a lot of different concerns among our departments and I have just kind of said you know we don't address it in our policy so you can have whatever policy you want in your own department. The reality is sometimes they're complained on employees in other departments and you know so I wanted to kind of get the commission get the commissioners courts taken direction and suggestions on how you feel about this. There is a section so to answer commissioners comments obviously you can always, there's nothing in here that says an employee has an absolute right to use these in your workplace and you can always set rules that don't conflict with this policy. To clarify it, you know I usually drive and check out the work crews about once or a week and I rolled up several years ago on somebody who was operating them at some of our machinery. He was vaping and I said you know what the heck are you doing? You go, well, I'm not smoking. That's prohibited. So anything that interferes with your job, you can't do. And vapings, in my opinion, it's the same thing. The other deal is, you know, I worked for Sheriff Lucas for six years. Okay? And I got exposed to smoke. And I probably still exhaling it. Re-king of cigarettes. And you know, it used to really hack me off, but there was absolutely nothing I could do about it. And I just really did not like it. And I personally do not like being around people who smoke. And I don't think you should be forced to. Now, if it's a bar or something like that, you can choose to go to that restaurant or not. But if it's at work, you shouldn't be forced to close other people whether it's vaping or smoke and then I don't think you know it's different like than an area of public accommodation if like a restaurant or bar or something like that but it work we shouldn't have it. Any other comments? I wish we'd pass the policy. We'll take no action on 8A today. Was there anything else Amy that you needed to address before you needed to? Oh 8B. Amy's got to go someplace so we're trying to take care of all this HR stuff right now. 8B is approval combining two part-time GIS technician positions, pay grade 8, into one full-time position and upgrading the position to a GIS analyst pay grade nine. You hit. Good morning. This is a very similar request that we had back in April of 2013. Back in 2013, we had four part-time GIS technicians. The GIS technicians are difficult to keep. The GIS technicians typically go off to find full-time employment elsewhere. So back in 2013 we had both or two of those technicians, part-time technicians move off for full-time employment. So we combine those two part-time positions into a full-time slot at that time. That full-time position still with us today. Today we're in the same position again where back in February, both the remaining part-time positions have left. So we're again in a position where we're asking for those two part-time positions to combine that into a full-time position just like we did back in 2013. So why do we need to up the pay grade though? The existing full-time position that we have is also a GIS analyst. So it's basically the same job position that we have now. But there were different titles, weren't they? The part times are the GIS technicians and then the full times the GIS analyst. So you want to make this an analyst? The part times are the GIS technicians and then the full times the GIS. And. Right. So you make you want to make this an endless. Right. Right. Yeah, that's a full time position. How many more of these positions do you have over there that you're going to be bringing to cooler that you know? These are the only two part time positions remaining. And can we not do this at budget time? We can, but we would either have to leave the position vacant for the rest of the year or if we fill the position now and then we'd have to terminate the employees in order to fill them again, which I prefer not to have to let someone go. And also, there really isn't any financial impact. In fact, I mean, what I saw was actually paying less for a full time. Right. Yeah. There's a financial benefit to doing it now. There's a savings of $1,911 if we actually proceed with that now. And there's a future savings also in future fiscal years. The budget impact statement says $653 next fiscal year. That was actually based on an estimated, I think, The budget impact statement says $653 next fiscal year. That was actually based on an estimated salary increase. So that's why it looks a little bit less than this fiscal year. I'm going to make a motion to approve. Thank you. We have a motion for approval by Commissioner Marchin. I'll second for purposes of discussion. Seconded by Commissioner Coleman. Go ahead. Kevin, I think the GIS department is a great job. I use it pretty much every day, trying to figure out who's annexed and who has and figuring out our roads. But you know, I really wish we would, and I know the counties, you know, influx all the time, but I really wish we would just kind of settle on what we're going to do for the year and then kind of lump it until the next budget year because piece million you don't know what's going on. We really bear people out during the budget year about you know you need to apply everything during the budget and that I feel like I'm kind of talking up all sides of my mouth when I wear people out during the budget process about you need to bring it then and then we let people split positions, mold positions, put them, you know. Right. I totally agree with you but I don't know when employees are going to come and go. I don't want to let good part-time people go. And the part-time positions work well for us for a long time. I think the economy has improved. Keeping part-time employees have been a lot more difficult because people find jobs a lot easier than they used to. So keeping the part-time positions have become a lot more difficult. So I think that's part of our struggle. I think we're starting the budget process. How can a couple of weeks, right? I mean, so here. Yeah, but like as his point is, it doesn't take effect until the next fiscal year begins, which is October 1. I understand. Okay. Keeping those positions vacant for six months would be very, very difficult because that department is fairly small. I like to be able to call them good stuff because that's something I'm I deal with every day and you know, have bigger discussions with cities about whether they Vannext in a road, whether we're allowed to maintain it whether we're not to maintain it and You know Rachel does a great job being able to produce the documentation the annexation papers and They do excellent service. I definitely think that's one of the vital services Trying to lead by Does your second to the motion stand all right for the discussion You're not on favor please say aye I'm sure Kevin would have done last. I have to do it but I think it makes an awful lot of sense to do it. Well there's not a person in that slot. I don't have to terminate somebody that that's cruel. So I don't want to see another one. She'd rather not. Okay. Thank you. It will be an all-belated agenda number one, which is for public input. For items not listed on the agenda, I'd like to remind anybody that would like to address commissioners court to please complete a public comment form if they'd like to address us. They're available on the side table. Little late, but I want to also remind you to turn off cell phones and pages. Members, item two is a consent agenda. Do we have items on the consent agenda? I need to pull two B because there are no intro departmental transfers. We have a motion. The motion by Commissioner Mitchell. Seconded by Commissioner Marchin. On favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Motion carries consent agenda today consists of two A, which is approval order making appointments. Looks like HR's been really busy. We have a new hire on the kind of clerk's office and a motion in print mail. We have a rehire in the district clerk office. We have 14 new hires in the county jail. We have two new hires in jail health. One new hire in the Sheriff Department Communications Communications Division, Promotion and Sheriff's Department, new hire in road and bridge east, a new hire in adult probation, and a lateral transfer in juvenile probation. Two C is approval payroll. Three A is approval of proclamation encouraging citizens and community leaders to participate in the development of a countywide community wildfire protection plan. We have Jody Gonzalez with us this morning. Good morning, Jody. Morning, Judge and commissioners. Really wanted to be able to provide this proclamation for you today. This is the ongoing plan of wildfire protection that we've been working on for about six months now. And we've got a lot of effort into it. And I've got to deputy Fire Marshal Mark Dodd here's kind of going to give some coverage of what's taking place so far into the development of this county wildfire protection plan but I'll start with reading the proclamation. Whereas Denton County has experienced a growth and development in areas that were once rule coupled with regular occurrence of wildfires. Whereas it is in these areas where developments meet vegetation or the wild land urban interface that the greatest risk of public safety and property from wildfire exists. Whereas the best offense is preparedness and public education concerning the dangers that wildfire poses to the residents and natural resources of Denton County. Whereas the community wildelfare Protection Plan is authorized under the provisions outlined in Title I of the Healthy Force Restoration Act of 2003, whereas the County Welfare Protection Plan is a written document mutually agreed upon by local state and federal representatives and stakeholders that identifies how communities will reduce the risk of Welfare. Whereas the Community Wfire Protection Plan addresses structural inodibility and prioritizes hazardous fuel reduction efforts on property and public and private lands and is developed collaboratively. Whereas the development of the Community Wildfire Protection Plan gives a community an opportunity to influence the manner in which hazardous fuels are reduced on federal lands and proximity to communities. Whereas communities with a community Welfare Protection Plan offer the best solution for communities at risk from Welfare to mitigate said risk. Now therefore be it resolved that the DIN County Commissioner Court urges all citizens of this county and the community to participate in the development of a countywide community while fire protection plan and accordance with the Health Healthy Forest Restoration Act. Chair also knew seconded by Commissioner Marchant on favor please say aye. Aye. I oppose any motion this carried. Thank you for bringing that. say aye. Aye. Opposed? Any motion? This carried. Thank you for bringing that. Thank you, Judge. And what we want to do is really quickly present some of the efforts has taken place so far in the development of the plan. I think that this is a long way that we've come from with our growth, with the experience of growth in this county, tripling over a 10-year period really and looking at how a lot of our neighborhoods and subdivisions are getting closer and closer to some of these urban interfaces. So with that, Mark, good morning. So we had a last year in March, we had a wildfire that threatened a trophy club. And then 19 days later, we had another wildfire that threatened the Highland Village. And so Chief Gonzalez asked us to work on on planned addresses. So we started working with the Texas Forest Service. This, the community wildfire protection plan is a program that's used around the country and they kind of directed us toward that. So we started off by building a group of local, state, county county federal stakeholders agencies that are involved with the public that we needed to work with. And from that we did an assessment of the county based on satellite information from the Texas Forest Service and worked very closely with Rachel and GIS to take that information overlay it onto a map of the county. That information looked at where we have the wild land urban interface. That's where these structures and people are intermixing with the fuels. And I'm sure you're very much aware of seeing the video of fires moving through neighborhoods. And that's what we're trying to address. So Rachel's office broke that down into individual neighborhoods for us to go out and re-assess because some of this satellite information is 2005, 2012. There's been a lot of development. So in order to do that, we identified initially 254 neighborhoods. And we wanted to involve the fire departments in this process. So we offered training to the fire departments to learn how to do those assessments. And 15 of the 19 departments based in the county participated in that. And at this point, have completed 279 assessments. So they've identified additional areas that they're concerned about. But out of that, 65% of that was actually had been developed, was urbanized, and we rated as a moderate to low risk. But we have another 35% that's extreme in a high risk. So that helps us focus where we're going to go from here. In this process to help facilitate this, I can't say enough good things about Rachel and Herkroot because of her own initiative, she developed a phone application for the firefighters to use to go out and do these assessments and download the information directly to us. Texas Forest Service has done backflips over that. They just, they taught me the contact of the US Forest Service and as far as I know, it's for signing somebody in the country who's done that. And they've moved up, they've come up and met with us and tried to figure out how they can offer that statewide copy of what she's done. So a lot of good buzz for Denton County from that. The fire departments have also really embraced this. They recognize a lot of areas that they need to focus on. And as a result, they've planned training for wild land firefighters. And wild land firefighters, you don't just get certified and you're done. They have taskbooks where they have to demonstrate skills in lifefire situations. So working with the Corps of Engineers on public land, there's areas that they want to reduce the fuel load through prescribed burning. The fire departments need to get the training. So they've been working very closely with the Corps to do training for firefighters and get fuel reduction done at the same time. I've seen some of the control burns up by Lake Ray Roberts. That's actually was the state that's Texas Park and Wildlife and a TFS Texas Forest Service. There's a site and we're calling it the Cleveland Gives area. It's North Lake, it's in the Toronto Park District. It's about 15 acres, we're going to start with that. There's another site called Queens Point that's a peninsula near Party Cove and Pickery Creek area. About 200 acres and they're going to do three different days where because firefighters work ABC shift to be able to offer that training doll three shifts and We just need the weather to cooperate at this point. So we're hoping that that's going to continue be a continual opportunity for the firefighters to get that training on the annual basis because the core of engineers have been very collaborative and cooperative in this whole thing. They're behind it. So the other thing that we're trying to push the fire departments to do is to get involved with the public education program and I think you have a letter that was with the proclamation. And we're trying to get this particular program's Rayset Go program is from the International Fire Chiefs Association. It's a grant-funded program so the materials are free and it's, in my opinion, it's very good. The state's adopted it. It's comprehensive and it gets everybody singing the same songs so the citizens get a consistent message. So let's where we're at. Great questions from the members of the clerk. Very important to be proactive on this. Yes, it's something you know we've been lucky this year not to have a burn ban. You know we've paid very close but know, to not have restrictions on outdoor burning, that I think it hails to having public education out there and citizens' understandings for the government's not, you know, intervening and creating a burn ban, but, you know, their public educated understanding when times are dangerous and things like that. This is part of a public education campaign. burning. It's part of that, you know, with one of the number one reasons why we have wild landfires outdoor burning, you know. So I think that this public education mixed with that is key. I want to thank all the departments, especially information services for their work on this. It's been long underway and it's still going. It's probably another six months to put this plan together and overlay all the maps and to get it out to our mayors. And that's our target audience right now. So we'll be kind of asking that some of the court members to help get the mayors involved. This is a county wide effort. So all of those 279 zones include municipal inside all the municipalities, as is county, all the way from Carrollton to Justin and Pilot Point to Coppail, you know, so everyone is included in that and a lot of times we had really the help of the fire departments to make this happen. So I want to thank them too. Thank you. Hey, well, whatever we can do that be helpful, Jody. Be glad to do it. Commissioner Martin. And just a point of interest. If any of you have, I always see smoke coming out of DFW Airborne. And I turn back to flight, Delta flight, and I just found out recently that's a training center for wildfires and a fire training center. That's why there's smoke here. They have an international school that they bring in folks from all over the nation for fire service training there. They actually have an air bus simulation there. The biggest airplane for passenger they have an air bus simulation training that's outside and that's what they're burning all the time. It's propane gas. So. It certainly understands why they're doing it there, but for people landing from other areas are like, oh no. Thank you. John. Judge, we have a motion by Judge Warren's second by Commissioner Marksett, but I don't think we voted. We never actually voted on the proclamation. Correct. Thank you for the clarification. So on the proclamation we have a motion and a second, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye, post, any motion. Does Carrie thank you? Okay. 5A is approved of the Bell Report payments from CSED, Community Corrections DIP. Sheriff's Training, Sheriff's Forfeiture, VIT Interest DHEC, D&D. Forfeiture funds are all presented for recording purposes. Only good morning, James Wells. Good morning, Judge and commissioners. I ask approval of bills as presented with one deletion noted on separate page. Are there any questions that we have a motion? So, we have a motion by Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner Marchand. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to any? Motion carries. 6A is approval of appointment of Robin Davis. Project coordinator Roden Bridge West has did kind of representative on the Dallas Fort Worth Clean Cities program through the North Central Texas Council of Governments and the Regional Transportation Council. We have a motion by Commissioner Eads, back in the back Commissioner Marchant. Hearing no questions, all in favor, please say aye. Aye, aye. Opposed, aye. Motion carries. Six V is approval of adoption of the North Central Texas Council of Governments. In the Regional Transportation Council's revised clean fleet policy, which supersedes the clean fleet policy adopted by Commissioner's Court in 2006. You've got all kinds of information in your back up, old policy, new policy, and the changes pointed out, are there questions or best do you need to add anything else? The only thing I'd like to add is that the changes are a little bit more requirements on Denton County and I am recommending that we bring back that I work with Robin Davis now pointed to this committee that we bring back a suggested committee to start working on some of the idle reduction policies that will be required to implement some training materials for both the drivers and the fleet mechanics. That Cog has put together training materials for us but we've not actually been using those and we need to start working on those requirements. And so we'll bring that back at a later time. Thank you. Do we have a motion? those requirements. And so we'll bring that back at a later time. Thank you. Do we have a motion? Certainly. Motion by Commissioner Margin. Seconded by Commissioner Eads. Further questions or comments? Any none? In favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the need? Motion is carried. Seven a is approved. But a budget amendment request 1007,000, they're transfer funds from different kind of courts building to your modeling expense to facilities, management, professional services, any amount of $1,060. Second. Third. We'll say that Commissioner Mitchell made the motion, and Commissioner Marchant made the second discussion. Here none. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Motion does carry. Okay. 10A is approval of CAA that be contingency allowance authorization. Number 19 for any amount of $8,578.98 for the Denton County jail expansion project for work completed and changes done during construction previously approved with construction change directors. Other questions? We have a motion for approval by Commissioner Mitchell, approval by Commissioner Mitchell seconded by commission. How much is the amount again? It's 8,578 dollars and 98 cents. Not 85,000. How did I say it? No, I was just a few look at the agenda. There are a couple extra zeros. No, okay. Yeah, I have a motion. And the second, if there's no questions, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, Cine? Motion is carried. 10b is approval of CAA 21 for the amount of $5,884.59 for the Denton County jail with Spanchen project for work completed and changes done during construction previously approved with construction change directors. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell. Seconded by Commissioner Marchant. Any questions on favor please say aye. Aye. Puzzle in a motion is carried. Tensey is approval to use excess funds from the administration complex phase two project auditor line item 6153809010 and the approximate amount of $6500 to create the bid specifications for the additional. I'm sorry for the addition of snow ice clips to various dent county buildings with metal ruffs. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell. I'll second I'll second commotion. I want this done ASAP. I know hopefully we're passed our IC weather, but wow. Do you have it? You get to remember Frisco's coming online and it has a metal roof. So you need to include. I think that should be already included. They were made aware of this a year ago. Okay. And I'm pretty sure that included in all the new buildings from this point forward. Got it. But thank y'all. It's all I got to say. Sorry, I wouldn't have sooner. Okay. We have a motion in a second hearing no further discussion All in favor please say aye aye a post in a motion does carry 12 a is approval of donation of digital network Avertising from clear channel outdoor to get in kind of Texas on behalf of Constable precinct to to promote awareness of the 2015 warrant roundup We have a motion by Commissioner Eads of the 2015 warrant roundup. We have a motion by Commissioner Eads. Seconded by Commissioner Marchand, are there questions? You're none on favor, please say aye. Aye, a opposed to the name. Motion carries. 12 be is presentation of the Denton County Sheriff's Office 2014 Racial Profiling Report. This is recording purposes only. Chair, I'll move for approval. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. No questions or comments? All in favor, please say aye. Aye, opposed, aye. Motion is carried. 13A is approval of legislative policy statements and or resolutions in discussion or approval of other matters relating to the 84th legislative session. That a couple of them for you here today. These, well first of all, we have House Bill 790, Denton County opposes House Bill 790 which relates to noise abatement procedures on certain turnpites. House Bill 790 would require NTTA to conduct a sound study following petition by the neighborhoods and to erect a sound barrier wall if the study finds that certain decibel levels aren't seated. This legislation would also require 5% revenue set aside for such requests. Compliant with this legislation would establish for policy, would create a special benefit for one community, and would set an open-ended financial precedent that would be difficult to overcome, all contrary to ideas of good government, in my opinion. Local control over fiscal responsibility and accountability to all NTTA drivers. NTTA takes its responsibilities under the federal and state environmental guidelines very seriously. The environmental process is long and deliberate with many opportunities for public input. NTTA already ensures all projects meet each federal and state environmental guideline in the process and in doing so if those guidelines determine that there's a decibel level that a song wall is required they do it so I consider this unnecessary legislation and I oppose it and I'm asking for y' all to do so also? So my motion is, can we not just say that we, it sounded to me, but we didn't, I didn't get it. I usually give us an email with this stuff beforehand and I'm wondering the agenda. I like to read. I know what you're talking about. I'll tell you where this generated from. There was a house member, obviously the one that's carrying this bill that heard from a neighborhood that wasn't happy with, I guess, the sound wall that went up in a certain location. NTTA boarded directors, even though they didn't have to because they'd already done the sound study. And I'd already agreed to a sound wall paid an additional roughly $300,000 for an outside firm to do another sound study that came up with the same results as the first study. And whoever in this neighborhood didn't consider that to be enough and got the legislator to file this bill. I'd like to use the 300 grand to build a wall. Well, they already built the wall. Yes. So I can see us opposing them using additional study. I mean, pants additional studies. But is it in them, County? No, it's not. It's within the NTTA. It's in Dallas. I know word of you. I've read about it. I just, I don't know about it. It sounds good to me, but do you have any other legislation? I have one more. Let me, let me read this to you too. This is House Bill 572, and what I'm suggesting is that it kind of opposes House Bill 572, which relates to the sunset review of regional tollway authorities, NTTA. Another local authorities would be negatively affected by passage of this legislation. NTTA was formed to ensure local control by and for the North Texas region. NTA roads are separate from the state highway system and receive no state funding from the state general revenue fund. The 2011 independent financial performance review conducted by its regional county commissioners courts and all the judges served on this review committee. is served on this review committee. It continues to serve as a benchmark for NTTA to track transparency, procurement, organization, and finance. Local review is consistent with NTTA's founding principles, which include local focus and operation. These principles ensure that NTTA retains use of local funds for regional transportation needs, then that transparency continues to remain a priority. The key thing here is, NTTA was established in 1997, Senator Nelson was co-sponsored of the bill. Buying for the four creating counties with local control, there's no state funding and to suggest that the state of Texas should oversee that and make us pay NTS as a member of NTTAPay for the review also. There was an attempt to do this last session and I opposed it then and I opposed it today. So those are the only two that I have today. And one whereas in the first resolution that you wrote, it says that we support the federal and state of our middle clearance process and that they should go through that same. Sure. Processed. I think I think I want to emphasize that. And different standards is where we get in trouble. And I think that the county has maintained a, has a history of partner with textile and using the federal highway. And in the city else. And environmental clearance, yes, the environmental clearance. So I think we would, we desire one environmental clearance process regarding sound abatement. So I. Good point. So if we could- We can add that. The court members agree with that. I think it's about consistency. Do you agree, Commissioner? It's not an emergency, is it? It's not sensitive. It's not real time sensitive. Do you know how it is? You're not real sure when they come up though. There's so I just, we can have that language. Can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can we, can court members and we can take action on it after executive session. How about that? Okay. I mean, is there any additional paragraph? Is that for the first? The first resolution. So it could be somewhere in that. The first. No, on 790. The, the county support. Have you ever given the language? the first no on 790. The county support. Have you let me give her the language? It was part of the series of bills that was filed by representative Shatine. I talked to him about it and I told him some of them I didn't like but the one I did like was and I got stuff I want to read through it. There was a one bill that said before the NTTA could build a tollway. They had to get the commission. Yeah. There was a one bill that said before the NTTA could build a tall way to get the commissioner. Yeah, the there's about four of those that had to get the commissioner for permission. I believe this is a different representative than what you're talking about. Well, they received about some other stuff that I didn't like. You know what I mean? They probably signed on to each other. It's never, you know, it's never. Never clear. Is it? That's why I just kind of wanted to, if she could email on the second read and real quick that would be good. I'll be glad to give you this new actual copies of the book attached. Thanks. Okay, we'll come back to this after executive session and we've had a chance to massage that statement a little bit. 13b is approval of the reappointment of Mr. Dan Joarski to the building and property committee. The chair also moved. Seconded by Commissioner Eads. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. A opposed to the name. Motion does carry. 13C is approval of reappointing Constable Michael Truett, pressing two to the building and property committee. The chair also moved. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the name. Motion does carry. 13D is approval of the Reappointed at joining Gonzales to the Environmental Advisory Board. Cheryl also moved. Seconded by Commissioner Marchant. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the need. Motion does carry. 13 E is approval of reappointing doctor Nicole Bryan to the Social Service Committee. Motion by Commissioner Marchant. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the need. Motion does carry. 13 F is approval of 2015 building used requests for mothers against drunk driving to use the Denton County Courts Building Grand Central of Jury Room Denton, Texas from 6th and 9 p.m. on March 19, May 21, July 16, September 17, and November 19. Also, I want to point out that they have requested the $25 per hour fee be waived with this approval, but they are paying for security. And they have put down the deposit. We have a motion for approval by commission. With approval with the. We are approving the building use request with waive of the $25 per hour fee, but they have put up the deposit. Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Eves. Seconded by Commissioner Marchant. Questions or comments? Very none on favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Motion does carry. 13G is approval and I just want to clarify that motion did include waving the feet. Okay, I just want to make sure. 13G is approval and filing of the Dantle County Emergency Service District number one annual audit report for fiscal year Indian September 30th 2014 is presented and accepted by the The committee is presented and accepted by the emergency service district number one board of commissioners on January 30th, 2015. This is for recording purposes only. I move for approval. Motion by commissioner Eads. Seconded by commissioner Marchin. On favor please say aye. Aye. Poussin a motion does carry 13 H's approval of completion of continuing education credit hours for 2014 our commissioner Andy Eads and according to section 81.0025 of the Texas local government code Motion by commissioner Coleman seconded by commissioner Marchin on favor. Please say aye Opposed to I oppose to name. I passed. What was that? You're voting against that, Bonnie? I got a whole new paycheck. So that brings you up to goodwill. You need a business call, sir. That's a new state for you, too. Exactly. Rotary humor. OK. 14 A is approved of the interlocal cooperation agreement between Denk County, Texas, and the city of Denk, Texas Texas for the Hickory Creek Road Pavement, marking project located entirely within the City of Denk, Texas, Denk County Commissioner, Pristinct 1 with the county agreeing to contribute an amount which will not exceed $13,875 of funding in the amount of $13,875. To be transferred from a road bridge, precinct one out of appropriate contingency, auditor line in of 2068, 108510 to contract road work, auditor line item 2052, 508510. This is on Commissioner for Sird 1. I move her approval. You don't remember this portion of Hickory Creek? If you go down Country Club Road and you take a left off the railroad tracks, that's that flood plain that's within the city again. It's a donut hole that they won't take in. They strived everything and left our portion unspriced. Of course. Bain them to stripe the rest of it. Second. They have a motion by Commissioner Coleman, seconded by Commissioner Eads. Hearing no further discussion on favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Hearing no further discussion on favor please say aye aye opposed any Motion is carried 14 v is a provo agreement between the shared mechanical solutions I'll see in them county for construction services Devin County courts building jury assembly room AC bid number one zero one four two two seven three in the amount of 1275 dollars with funding for this project to come from Repairs and maintenance, courts building, line item zero, one, six, six, zero, zero, five, zero, one, five. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell. Seconded by Commissioner Marchant. Hearing no questions, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Close to name. Motion does carry. 14 C is approval of lease agreement extension number one. Between them County, Texas and the Frankfurt class and corporate rental of office space used by the dem county juvenile probation department. In Carrollton at a cost of $4,880.41 per month. With funding to come from auditor line item 0167-0805091, office rent, Carrollton, lease is recommended by the Denton County public facilities department Members real quick We are if you remember we're doing a renovation at the Carroll to government center and bringing juvenile probation back into that building. This is a year lease, but it has a 90 day knockout clause. We're gonna go ahead and sign the lease rather than going month and month. At that 90 day knockout clause. And so I move for approval. Thank you. We have a motion by Commissioner Margent. Sayon and back Commissioner Mitchell, are there questions or comments? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to any? Motion is carried. Item 15a is executive session. For soon to text this government code 551.0711A. Consultation for Attorney in a close meeting. When the government bodies seeks the advice, it's attorney about potential or contemplated litigation in regard to the claim of Jennifer Warley. city of the city of the city of the city of Under agenda item first of all we're reconvened from executive session under item 15A. There'll be no formal action. We're going to go back to our legislative statement under 13A in the additional language that's been added or recommended to be added. She wrote it out. I don't know if I did one role edit. Okay. We're following one. We're clearing. Okay. Process. Okay. So under House Bill 790, it'll essentially be the same, except the closing remarks will be Denton County advocates following one environmental clearance process. Outline by federal and state guidelines. NTTA already ensures all projects meet each federal and state environmental guideline in the process. I got a question that says, you know, we oppose House Bill 790, and which would require NTTA to conduct the sound study, following petition by the neighborhood, interreg the sound barrier wall, if the study finds that certain decibels levels are exceeded. Why would we oppose that? What am I doing? Why would we oppose that thing? Because they already do. It's redundant. They already do. I don't think it needs to be in there because it sounds like we're opposing them. In the proposed legislation it says that the neighborhood just petitions for a sound study. Over and above the sound study that's already done and before they construct the, or after the construct I should say or during the construction of the project, as you know, state and federal guidelines mandate that they do. This would be an additional sound study that the neighborhood just petitions for the sound study. But it sounds like we're opposing anti-TA to conduct the study. And I don't think it's worded right. Commissioner, where are you? On 790, the first paragraph, if you read the proposed legislation, it doesn't acknowledge that they already do sound studies in further projects. It's just saying that the neighborhood basically at any time can require another sound study at NTTX fans. What if we say that this process is already- Okay. Okay, that's what we're saying at the bottom there. I know what you're you're it acts like we're we're opposed to the language. We realize that they already have to do one. Yeah. We need to um the legislation doesn't acknowledge that they already do and that's part of the problem. I'm mirroring the language in the proposed legislation exactly, which to me doesn't. Okay, why don't we? I've got to say that HB790 would require NTTH to conduct. It's lookative. And that is already being done. An additional. Yeah, so we oppose additional sound study. Well, I understand this part of my state and federal guidance. HB790 would require NTT-8 to conduct a sound study, following petition by the name, and to erect a sound law very well if the study finds a certain decibel levels exceeded, which is already being done, which would be the process is already required and completed by NTTA. That's what we're opposing. We're not opposing that they do the sound study. Right. But we're opposing the fact that they want us to do it additionally. So I think that needs clarification. How do you want to say it? Finally, Petitionment of Neighborhood and a Recktoff sign barrier. Well, if the study finds in certain municipal levels are exceeded, we're saying that we oppose all that. Since this is already mandated by state and federal guidelines. Okay, then you know that makes it better. Yeah, at the end of the period what says exceeded, which is all you know, because it looks like we're opposing it being done at all. Okay, and so if you can say what exactly you'd like at that Senate. I don't know if it was or exceeded, which is already to be amended. It's already mandated by, in combined with, in accordance with state and federal guidelines. I think we should also put a census as didn't county does advocate for construction of sound walls where they are required. Where they are required. Where they are? Commissioner, if I can just... Interject. Yes, that's what I was saying. They're really noted in the... But that's what state and federal guys already do. I already know. I'm acknowledging that. But what I'm not acknowledging is that we're opposed it in this first sentence. You generally, when I have written these for the judge to review, and then to ring forth, and again, I apologize for not doing that with this one. The first paragraph says, you all are supporting or opposing, and this is the language taken from the bill itself. Then any follow-up is why the court is supporting or opposing. So when I drafted this one, the bill itself is, it relates to noise abatement procedures. And in the bill itself, it requires NTTA to do this additional thing. But it doesn't say additional and it doesn't say, didn't county's position one way or the other. Or, so if I can have direction as to how you all would like me to draft it, then it will help. I can't support something that says, right, that I oppose the erecting a sound variv when the decibel levels were exceeded. I can't support that. If I can have an additional centi-cin that, that says, which is already being mandated by State and Federal guidelines, missionaries. Why don't we do this in the last paragraph, or third sentence, versus Ditton County? Let's bump that down to the new paragraph. This is Ditton County advocates following one environmental clearance process outlined by federal and state guidelines in an period. And it's a, and then, you've got to capture it in this paragraph. You've got to capture it in this paragraph. You've got to capture it in the first paragraph. What? You've got to capture it, the language in the first paragraph, that acknowledges it that it's already being done. Because what this is in the first paragraph is that, you know, I'm against the senator old being, what I can do is to take that sentence that we added in about that you all added in about Benton County Supports The federal is not have to be done today. Can we work this up and do the sentence that starts off in TTA takes this responsibility It's how about both didn't county and and NTTA take the responsibility of the federal and state environmental guidelines very seriously. And so, and police supports constructing sound walls where they are required. And the hearing from state and federal guidelines. Yes, here. I don't think that's the problem as much as I think. Okay, let's begin. I do want to put that in there, though. The end paragraph. Well, we'll rework this and come back. The beginning paragraph. But in the meantime, I would like to take a position on the proposed sunset legislation. I don't think this is going anywhere, but I'd still like to take a position on it. We have a motion for approval by Commissioner Marchor and I. A which one, Judge? This is on 5.72. No, we have a motion by Commissioner Marchandt. I'll second the motion. Is there further discussion? We can take that up with our NTTA board. Okay. We have a motion in second for the discussion. We can take that up with our NTTA board. Okay, we have a motion in second for the discussion. You're not on favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed to me. Motion does carry. Okay. I jumped around quite a bit. Make sure that I've covered everything. Didn't miss something. You looks like it. Want everyone to pay attention to the additional notations about future meetings that Cheryl has plugged in here. Give all the budget process on your schedule. And with that, we're adjourned. Next Tuesday. Okay. Understand. With that, we're adjourned. Everybody have a great day.