Good morning ladies and gentlemen, Denton County Commissioner's Court for Tuesday, February 5th is now in session. This morning, an invocation is beginning by Mr. Jim Heath and our pledges will be led by Rowan and Abisato. You please stand. I have a new father. We thank him this day, this country, this state, this county, this court. The father made the actions of his court being your favorite today, anything they may do. And father, we ask that you please bring all of us to the people home from throughout the world. They stand in harm's way. Now name your prey, amen. If you would please join me in a pledge of allegiance, a pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Texas flag. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Texas flag. On the Texas flag. one state under God. One in any division. It looks like John you made it safely. One kind of a treacherous morning out there this morning. Item one is for a public input for items not listed on the agenda. If there's any member of the public that would like to address Commissioner's Court, we ask that you please complete a public comment form. They're available on the side table and once we're in mind, everyone, please turn off your cell phones and pages. Members, item 2 is a consent agenda or the items on the consent agenda that you need to pull for discussion or do we have a motion for approval? I'm looking for approval. Motion by Commissioner Eads. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Marchand. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed say name. Motion does carry. Consent agenda today consists of 2A which is approval of order making appointments. We have a rehire in the criminal district attorney's office. We have a new hire in the Criminal District Attorney's Office. We have a new hire in the County Jail. We have a new hire in Public Health and Jail Health. We have one new hire in the Sheriff's Department, a lateral transfer in the Sheriff's Department, two promotions in the Sheriff's Department, Promotion in Mental Health in the Sheriff's Department, Promotion Emergency Services and a new hired Rogue Bridge West. Two B is approval of the Intro Department of Transfers, 2C is approval of specifications and authority to advertise for the Worsham Road Project. This is bid number zero 9122163. 2D is approval of specifications for FlexBase Grade 1 type A road bridge east, bid number 01, 132180. Two E is approval of award of bid 1-0, 1-2-1-7-2 for Memorial Island landscaping and lighting to Denali construction services in the amount of $112,500. With funding to come from administrative complex phase two construction and budget line item 6175209010 2009 permanent improvement bonds to F is approval renewal for flex base grade one type A road bridge west. This is bid number zero to one to two one to seven with Hanson aggregates 2G is approval renewal for Moein. Lots and fields bid number zero for 1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 9 with Firehouse 22. And lastly, 2H is approval of building use requests from the city of Denton to reserve the courthouse on the square lawn for concerts. On the square may 1, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 just for a discussion. Two G. Two G. Two G. Go ahead. I think Commissioner Morshanton. Yeah. That's something he wants to say. Yep. We've got a schedule closing date of February the 20th on acres in the Newland in Biscoe. Is that in this bid? I'm not sure, I'll find out. We will have to start mowing that. Okay, yeah. The... And it's not. In our specifications, even if it's not in the bid, we have the ability to go back, because they base it on a cost per acre, and we can add it on a cost per acre and get a quote from them and add it to the bed Even if we're awarded, but we can go ahead and get that included before this actually goes out If you don't have the legal on it I mean Let me acres or whatever and John can either give it to you or I can give it to you Right, okay, thank you. Any other comments? All right. 5A is approval of the bill report payments from CSCD, Community Corrections, TAI, P-E-Series, Streamshers, Fulfiture, VIT, Interest, DA, Check V and DA, Fulfiture Funds are all presented for recording purposes. Only good morning, James Wells. Good morning, Judge Commissioners. I've asked approval to bills with the two editions noted on separate page. Other questions for our auditor? The approval. I'll second. Thank you. We have a motion by Commissioner E. Seconded by Commissioner Coleman. Comments all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Posting, aye. Motion does carry. 9 a is approval of an amendment to the immunization contract with the DSHS specifying use of staff during a declared emergency. This is just an amendment to an existing contract, correct? It is and we had to do it with one other contract and you know we have lots of contracts. I don't know if they're intended to do this for all of our contracts but if they do I would ask the court is it okay with you if just approve it, if there's no change in any of the regulatory change. Yes. This is just, okay. Well, this contract amendment allows us to use 5% of our staff to respond to an emergency if there were an emergency. And this is the second one of our contracts that they've done this to, which is... Apparently, they left some language out of their original contract talking about the declared emergency situation. That's why we've got these amendments coming through. You're just wanting to approve them yourself and not come to the COW. Is that what you're saying? If they just ask for this thing, but I don't have to do that. I don't mind bringing it to court. It's amended. I wanted to come to court personally. I don't know how the other will fail. We'll do. Somebody else, you know, just one vote just to clarify, Dr. Burton, like you're asking the court to authorize you to execute the agreement on our behalf. For any subsequent amendments, I was, but similar happy to bring it to court. I just thought it was troublesome to you. It would be nice if they'd submit them all at one time, but they're not doing that. But we'll bring them all to court and there won't be any question about it. And I'm happy to do that. I think that's called trusting your teeth and thought in your eyes. Okay. We have a motion in a second. We don't. We need a motion. I'll move for approval. I'm going to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee 13A is approval of legislative policy, savings and or resolutions and discussion or approval of other matters relating to the 83rd legislative session. Just have a couple for you today. First one is House Bill 738. Didn't county supports House Bill 738, which relates to the review of the creation of certain proposed municipal utility districts by commissioners. County commissioner courts, this bill will help you have a county government a voice regarding the creation of special districts in municipalities, extiterritorial jurisdiction. Commissioner Collin, did you wish to comment on this? Yes, I drafted this bill and requested representative crown over to file it. Under the Water Code chapter 54, there's a provision which a developer can send a request to a city. They either have to bring utilities or enter into a development agreement. If they do neither, there's implied consent to the TCU. And I think that's kind of a deal where it maybe puts undue pressure on the municipalities to either extend large amounts of money on bringing utilities or being forced to enter into an agreement. This bill would allow us to provide commentary to the TCEQ whether we like the bill or not or what demands it might you know bring on our resources and I think it's a good idea for us to be able to have input to the TCK regarding these districts seeing that these districts when they issue their bonds they basically in essence extend the ability for a city to annex them for the length of the bond and that's going to be the responsibility of the county. And just the mere fact that they would have to notice us is a good idea. In the past, you just really have to comb the newspapers to see that they're even creating one in the county within an ETJ. So I'm very supportive of this bill, and I would request y'all's help with it as well. So I'll move for approval on this. That may end. I was helped with it as well. So I'll move for approval on this. Let me ask. Yes sir. Just a couple of, and I agree with the bill. I just for clarification. Let's say that this bill was put in place, and we have the ability to review NA, would it be like in a public hearing or a response time with the TQ, I never can say that word right anyway the acronym yeah and would they take our testimony or our comments in consideration whether to approve the district or not or you know I believe so yeah or would they take any uh... any provisions that we may our stipulations that we might put upon the developer into consideration when they approve it and they can prove it with those from what i understand it's kind of like a permit by real. And when the city consents to it, you pretty much have to prove the studies and all the stuff for the necessity of it. And this would allow us to have input into that process. The city, generally what happens is they make a, if you read the statute, the developers allowed to petition the TCQ for the district and in that petition they include all their data that shows the necessity of it. It would just be one of them. Now they would have the county's input in deciding whether or not to grant the district. When they grant those districts, do they follow the letter of the legislation that empowers them to create the district. Or can they put some restrictions on the district beyond what the law says? Do you know what I'm saying? Well typically there's three ways to create a district. It can be done through the commissioner's court. It can be done by consent with the city through the TCEQ or it can be done by the commissioners court. It can be done with by consent with the city through the TCEQ or it can be done by legislative enactment. If it's done through the TCEQ, I don't believe there's any legislation that's necessitated. So what I'll, I mean that. I mean, the TCEQ only gives districts water in sewer authority. If you want to have water sewer in road authority, you have to go to the legislature. Is it going to make any difference opinion one way or the other you think? I think it would be good because it would allow us to express the fact that you know municipalities typically when they make a fire call it costs them upwards of two fifteen hundred to two thousand dollars and we only reimburse the counties $245. I mean the city's $245. And for instance, there's several big districts that are gonna be up near pilot point. I think pilot point's roughly 6,000 people. And when I was at these meetings for the place, which is they got some AIA people to go up there and do some urban planning for pilot point, they're considering the build up of over 60,000 people. And that's going to be an unincorporated area that's primarily going to be us contracting with pilot point to provide services for them. It's something that you want to have people in my opinion consider before we make these long-term decisions? I agree wholeheartedly, but I also, I mean that is where I was going with my questioning. What teeth do we have within, if there is no teeth within the legislation as you're written, it for us to make, for instance, if it comes to the commissioners' court, we can say to them, we're going to approve this as long as you enter into an ICA with a municipality or certain services that we can't cover at the level that you want us to cover through the Sheriff's Department or through our emergency services department. And we can put that on them right through ours. Yes. I know we'll be able to have input if it goes through the TCEQ. But will they take and do they have the authority to take those same kind of provisions that we may put on a District and put that on top of it. Well not to not to paint you find a brush on it but from what I understand is gonna happen and Mr. Felt if he wants to jump in because I don't want to you serve his authority, but From what I understand is gonna happen is we get this statue promulgated. Okay. It's a grant of authority to the TCEQ They will promulgate Texas administrative code provisions that will be reviewed through the Texas Register and Promulgate administrative regulations and and that will dictate the manner in which they take the county's input So from I can't really tell you how they will promulgate their administrative procedures at this point, but you know they'll get the statute decide what they need to do. Propose, you know, administrative regulations. We read the Texas Registrar at that point. I'll probably be talking to y'all and say, hey, I think the tax should read like this. Let's pass the resolution suggesting it to them. But it's just baby stamps right now. Yeah. I think I'm not ready to take action on this today. I wanted to look at it another week, and maybe get with Commissioner Coleman and talk through some of the finer points. I think one thing to always remember is that when we do have these developments, whatever the creation would be, would type of fresh water district, that those, yes, we are providing services to them, but we are generating an enormous amount of tax revenue off of those, off the increased property values that are there. And so I just think it's very important as we deliver services to our unacorporated part of the county, many times farms and ranches that are homesteaded, plus have agricultural exemptions. The values that we receive off of those are down in comparison to some of our big master plant communities that we're getting that, the Lorm Taxes off of that. So I do always want to, as we talk about the districts and the good and the bad and ugly of districts, I think it's very important that we do keep in mind the fact that the tax revenues generated off of those districts is enormous. It truly is enormous. I'm not prepared to... Well let me ask you this thing I mean, it's enormous, but it's a dollar for the district. It's roughly 28 cents for the county Right, okay, and I think the same four of yours in municipality I know you have a background in municipal government, but a municipal tax rate is not typically the same as the counties, right? It's a lot higher and to get municipal type services is a lot higher than what they can. You're not talking about municipal type services. What I'm talking about is the county needs to realize as projects grow and develop that we are realizing a tremendous amount of revenue off of these districts. I understand, but I think a lot of it. Regardless of the creation of it. I agree, but I think a lot of regardless of the creation of it. I agree but I think the services that are expected are hard to provide at our low county tax rate as opposed to a higher municipal tax rate. Now I think that's what drives the special districts to enter into those interlocal agreements with another municipality and provide lease and emergency services like Lantana does and like Casfield does and what Providence tried to do and Savannah tried to do and then Providence got fed up with it and then I think Savannah got fed up and Providence was okay, and then but um regardless You know, I think this is a good thing and I wanted to point out fresh water supply districts are typically outside of you NeTJ and Municipal utility districts are the ones that are put within the ETJ and this only refers to MUDs it doesn't refer to Wicked's or fresh water supply districts that are put within the ETJ. And this only refers to muds. It doesn't refer to wickets or freshwater supply districts, which is a different chapter of the water code and are typically created outside of a municipal ETJ. And those entities, if you read the statute, have to come to the commission's court already if they're outside an ETJ. So we're only referring to ones in this that are being placed within the ETJ. I think the ones you're talking about were already outside the county and not within the city's. I'm just saying I don't think time is pressing for an action this morning if we could wait and give me some more work to make. That's all I'm saying, just like I said, shall we raise a legislative policy statement yesterday? And I didn't ask for it to be on. I just want you to have it when we talk about it next week. If I'd be loved to talk to you about it later. Okay. Then there will be no action on 13A today. And yes, we have this and other proposed resolutions that will be discussed next week. 13V is approval of the appointment of a county representative to serve on the West Park Tax Inc. Reinvestment Zone City of Denton and then we also have 13C which is approval of the appointment of Everton Nullen to the City of Denton, West Park tours. Those are the same. The aid to the court as well as Miss Walker both people's on there so I would as I'm going to say aren't these one in the same we did one and y'all's office did one and I would move the we've poured Everett Newland to the tourist district. Okay so Commissioner Ead says move for approval of 13c and Seconded by Commissioner Marchant So essentially 13b is being taken care of by the action of 13c Whoever to your nominee handy Residant of these are residents of the city of Ditton and Is interested in serving. All right, we have a motion to second. It's all in favor. Please say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Motion is carried. I just wanted to make sure that I didn't think we were authorized more than one appointment and I'm going to wait a minute. Okay. The balsam suspenders. You're right. 13D is approval of the reappointment of Charles Numery to the Dent and County Housing Finance Corporation, it's Commissioner Bobby Mitchell's appointee. The motion by Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner Eads. Here are no questions. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, Senate. Motion is carried. 13E is approval of pointing Joshua Maumberg Brad Doater and David Roof who is that to the Dent County historical Commission? I'll move to approve and I have some comments. Thank you motion by Commissioner Ead seconded by Commissioner Mitchell I'll in favor please say aye. I oppose the name Motion does carry I think we can take 14 a and b together I'll in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? In a motion does Carrie. I think we can take 14 a and b together. Mary, I was going to mention something about that. Sure. The members that you'll remember back in December, we did a large group of appointments to the DCHC. And those are not designated by any particular commission or precinct. Those are just people. If they have an interest in serving on the commission, we welcome them. Throughout our practice in the past has been to accept members throughout the year. If you wanted at any time of the year, if you wanted to be member of the commission, we'd use one or two appointments throughout the agenda postings if you go back and look. Trying to work with the Texas Historic Commission, they really request that we try to do this on an annual basis and get them all into their system on a one grouping. Our local commission is implementing that. We did a big, large group of appointments back in December. And then we're going to be doing this quarterly for this first year as we phase in people. And then we'll be getting back on an annual basis. The DCHCs and the process are revising their bylaws and the committee working to revise their bylaws and how do they work in future appointments. But I just want to kind of give you on that. Are they going to do it geographically because I've noticed that, you know, it seems like you and the historical commissioner, the people who proper appointments. I do not proper appointments. A lot of them are from precinct floor because a lot of our people are here in the city of Ditton. You know, we would love it to be strictly volunteers. They're volunteers. They're strictly volunteers. I think they're strictly volunteers. If I have someone from precinct one who's interested, I'd send them to the office and they do. Absolutely, absolutely. I don't recruit anybody. We, we, specifically, we were always recruiting member. I don't have individual appointments. None of the commissioners have individual appointments to the DCT. So this is the volunteer group of people who want to volunteer and have an interest, absolutely. And let me ask you something. Now we could, if the court had a desire to do that, we could say there's so many members and there's a equal, there's five per commission of precincts. I mean we could model it that way as we move for, but I have been, lends on a lot of our committees with me and she can testify that I have for years been saying we need to get our committees diversified. We need to get people from outside of the city I didn't, a lot of people here locally in the city of Dittin proper we try to get people from throughout the county. I think we don't let people know enough in the other areas that they are wondering do they have one reason I mentioned this so that Phoenix was watching we would love to have you be a part of the deal. I mean I there I mean Lestell I'm sure has a historical commission, don't they? Don't have one. And do Marquette call it? The City of Carlton has a historical commission. I mean, I just wonder about the other historical commissions as represented as to this. I don't know how many there are. Yeah, I don't know either. So I'll welcome the joins. OK. All right. We just need to let people know that this is available. We could always ask all the different cities if they have anybody they'd like to recommend to it. Because I think that would help. An idea. Every city, you know, obviously has a history and get them to get somebody to participate. Okay. We need to take another one. Okay. the All right, the microphone is on. And the finding that the donation serves a public purpose. 14B is formal declaration that four ballot cabinets and surplus property, our surplus property and approval of interlocal cooperation agreement between Dan County, Texas and Tom Green County, Texas for donation of the four ballot cabinets to Tom Green County, Texas. And to finding that the donation serves a public purpose, this is again, belts as suspenders. We are crossing our teeth and doubting our eyes to make sure that we comply with the law in making the donation of these old ballot cabinets. Are there any questions or do we have a motion? So moved. Motion by Commissioner Marchant. Okay. So moved. Motion by Commissioner Marchant. Okay. Excuse me. Seconded by Commissioner Coleman here. No questions. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, say aye. Motion does carry. That was for both 14 A and B. 14 C is approved of the 2013 Salphan Murphaux Trust USA. So the 2013 Salfan Murpho Trust USA, this is 01 identity solutions maintenance agreement at Dendom between Dendom County, Texas and Salfan Murpho Trust USA for juvenile electronic fingerprinting in the amount of $8,192 with funding to come from the juvenile probation software maintenance line item 266666040 Do we have questions or is there a motion? shall move motion for approval by commissioner marchand Seconded by commissioner Coleman on favor please say aye aye opposed senain motion is carried 14d is approved of interlocal cooperation agreement between Common on favor, please say aye. Aye, opposed, aye. Motion does carry. 14D is approval of interlocal cooperation agreement between Denton County, Texas and the town of North Lake, Texas for the effort road improvement project located entirely within the town of North Lake, Texas and Denton County Commissioner Pristinct IV. You have motion by Commissioner Ead, seconded by Commissioner Marching. Do other questions? On favor, please say aye aye Oppositing Motion does carry 14 E is approval of interlocal cooperation agreement between Denton County, Texas and the North Texas Toeway authority for the Dallas, North, Toeway extension phase 4b project with Denton County green to contribute in amount which will not exceed 21,500 $21,500,000. Funds in the amount of $1,500,000 will come from Commissioner precinct 1, AAA, Dallas North-Towell-Wake Extension Project funds, auditor 6675329035. The remaining balance in the amount of $20 million will be due in 14 months and further formal action regarding funding will be required by the Denton County Commission's Court with the funding source to be identified at a later time. John poster. The $20 million was in the bond election approved by the voters. Correct? Yes ma'am. After that road though. No it was. There was $20 million for the end. For the PNC. All of it wouldn't prove for that road. 20 million is 20 million is 20 million was approved in the bond election. We had 20 million from DNT and then back when we were doing the negotiations with the NTTA related to the boundary alignment Commissioner Marchant committed some additional funds there. So that's the 21.5. I don't know if you've looked at the interlocal, but the center of local is different than most interlocals. We only have the 21.5 million dollars and we're not sure with the NTTA's design standards, what they're going to come up with and we're doing this the same way we did late Louisville Tolbridge. NTTA will take the lead on the project and what we have is three cut points it's go-no-go go-no-go go-no-go and the first cut point is the engineering will be done to 60% plans and then there will be an estimate done and then if the estimate falls within the costs that we have, we will give them a go-no-go ruling. If it's outside or beyond what we have, then we will do value engineering and we will drop back down to more reasonable design standards and pavement thickness and whatnot and try to get that budget back down to the cost that we have for the project. If we agree, at that point, then the county has to say we agreed, and we authorized NTTAA to move forward. At that point, when before they issue the RFP and have a contractor signed, that's when the NTTAA requires us to have the remaining dollars for those funds. We anticipate that go-nogo process based on the information we got from NTTA to take about 14 months and we should be able to stay within the dollar amounts we have currently issued. When in talking to James, I'm going to have liberty and then you can create and then I go wrong. The thought is that we have the $20 million. We can go several different ways. One is, as we go through the CIP process, consolidate all of the remaining dollars that we have for D&T into FY 14 and issue it then. We don't want to, I think it'd be not a good idea to issue it now because we'd be setting on the $20 million for two and a half years or so. And it would, you'd have to make the decision either. Issue more debt now or to push other projects out. And either, both of those are not what we consider a good alternative. Additionally, and this is where James will have to step in, one of the things we're looking at is there is BSRP funds available and triple four funds available that going forward with a little bit of homework, we think we may be able to clear those accounts out, which will help us from a cash flow standpoint that may offset any need to issue debt going forward on this project until they were, as they are already in the program, they're already in certain years to issue. We may not have to deviate from that original plan if we can spend a little bit of time on O4 and BSRP. The reason we're here today is that our representatives, Dave Denison, are saying they're ready to move out with negotiations with propioners and they're going to act on this in February at their NTTTA meeting and they need us to act first so they can already have a signature on the ICA. So that's the reason for the timeline and the wording of the disinterplacement. Correct me if I'm wrong that Mr. Wells, if we consolidate the 2004 and the BSRP, I would make it where we don't have to go out for as much of a bond in the upcoming months. That's partially correct. Trying to drill it down to the basic terms. No, the... What I would like, I would favor looking at very strongly is using only triple four money that we have on hand. We have all triple four. Authorized debt is issued and we have a tremendous amount of money in hand now that is primarily idle. Idle in fact that we're not got any projects going for it. Being from it, we is not idle in fact that we're paying for it every six months. What I would like to look at is basically switching the DNT to a trip 04 taking the use of the money in hand already to fund this project, the project other than the engineering part that we have funds for. It's been different precincts isn't it? Well we did look at that. It's something funny. Well I was going to say that if we flip the or if we transfer the NT to TRIPPO4 it would only make sense we would transfer any triple four projects remaining or the funding as allotted to triple eight. And it really, it really, you have money in different pots but you don't have any projects unfunded or any funding from one precinct to another. But you know of? Well, we know there's no, there's no that you know of. There's not it's not powerful. One of the commissioners could have already planned to use some of that money so. If there's a plan to use that money a significant amount of that money then it's not a good plan. And that's what we were saying is different precincts so I think we need to take that into consideration. If I could elaborate on that we track all of our bond programs by precinct by project. Oh, do I? We track, I know you. I do absolutely. So you don't need to elaborate on that for me, okay? Not going to elaborate for you. I'm going to just tell you the logic that I have going forward. We went, when we noted, we were notified that there was triple four funds that are idle. We went back individually by precinct by project and allocated what we understood to be what was the remainder, because we basically put, if the project had $5 million in it, we track it with $5 million in it. If there's any transfers in and transfers out, we track that, that's a total amount available, and then all the deductions for any contractor, any incumbents, and it shows you either a remainder. It's unencumbered, and then we track internally, whether those, for example, just one that we're working on right now, is the Stonebutt Parkway and Frisco, that project's done. We're doing a fight-alonet on that, and there's going to be money coming back to the county. So we track not only what's incombred and not incombred, but what's been incombred and what's incumbent and not incumbent but what's been incumbent and what's not going to be spent. And we spent probably better part of a week going through all four precincts and what's available on TRIPO4 and roughly speaking, there's about 76% of that money that's in precinct 1, about 17% in four, about 7% in three, and you're overdrawn by about 2%. And when were you planning on letting the commissioners could know that? Going forward through the CIP, the, what I was going to have the conversation is that DNT4B needs to move because that's what our board representatives are telling us. But you still need to convey that information to the committee. I was going to come to see how I pay and say, look, we've got this to wait. It's too late. We've got something on the agenda to vote on today. All you're all, all this agenda out in the day is authorizing you to expend as the million five MD and T that is in precinct one available for the project. It's not touching any other funding source outside of the 1.5 in precinct one. The next- But it's the mid-nust of the 21 me. Excuse me? The mid-nust of the 21 me, 2125. If you look at the interlocal, we have, at the end of 60% plans, we can walk away from the project and not go forward. It's the county's authority. Only the county makes that decision. So why would we do that? If they say it's $42 million, we're going to have a problem. Either we're going to have to get an NTT to agree to help us build the road. Or we're going to have to walk away because we're going to have any of the money. Now put this in perspective. D&T is a very critical project to the county. Not just the Precinct One. If you look at the tax revenue that's generated along the D&T south of that area, it's massive. And when we, the court as a whole fought hammer and tongue against all commas over the last 10 years to get that road Alain men stayed on the county line and so what Dave Dennis and Mike now is telling us is that we've got to get this We they wanted it on the January 15th agenda, but there was no way we were gonna figure out the finances by them and so we had to push it a week and and That's why we're here today. The only thing you're in covering today is the million five. And we've got time for lack of a better word to figure out what we all think is the best next step. And I want to have all that information for us as a CIP meeting this morning. I can. All the financial information that you talked about that you've found out. Yeah, well, I was planning on doing today. It's come to you and tell you that it may not be a smart idea to issue all the $20 million for DNT right now because eight pushes stuff out or it makes you issue debt that you don't need right now. And then I was going to let you know that there's alternatives in TRIPO 4 and there's some liquidity in BSRP. If there were projects that you had in TRIPO 4 that you wanted to move forward on, there is liquidity in BSRP that could give you that time you need until we figure out what we're going to do on the 20 million for D&T. I know it's a lot to swallow, but this is pretty much what I do. I would say in late term for basically using old money first. That's good stewardship of our funds. And then we sorted out one of the things I'd proposed to John is that we do it in proportion with the new bond issues. The vast majority of the old bond money is attributed to precinct one. If we can use the old money. I want in writing whatever you, whatever you discuss, your James discuss. I want it in writing. I've got spreadsheets and I have not, I've not shown anybody that spreadsheet because it's, to me, today all we're doing is doing the million five. I thought the appropriate time to talk about triple four use was during the CIP because that's kind of where it's pressure. Absolutely. And so that's I planned on communicating that whatever today's bring. I want to question. Christopher Coleman you said what was the old issuance was primarily precinct one? The balance. The balance is at her cash and hand, I think, or three, when I kind of did it in my mind, it was about three quarters of the money in hand in balance or precinct one. Issued and not spent. And not spent. It's not spent. The other money that Mr. Wells is saying is in TRIPO 4. What I went did, and I went back and forensically, financially went through the process. Do we have any questions or comments? Did I not hear? I'll move for approval. Thank you. We have a motion by Commissioner Coleman. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Marchand. Hearing no further questions or comments. I'll in favor of the motion. Please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Motion carries. Four in favor. One opposed. 14F is approval of supplemental agreement number three to the engineering services contract between Duke and County Texas and half associates incorporated for FM 2499 section 5 improvement project in the additional amount of $199,486 for a total revised contract amount of $1,821,201 dollars with funding to come from Commissioner Prisnett 1 B.S.R.P. FM 2499 Section 5 funds audited or line item 8574539090. A move for approval. Second. Motion by Commissioner Coleman, seconded by Commissioner Marchand other questions. Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the name. Motion does carry. 14G is approved of the law line system utility agreement between Dan County Texas and Southwestern Bell telephone company doing business as AT&T. In the amount of $1,936,723,774 cents for reimbursable utilities associated with the FM 1171 improvement project between Interstate Highway 35W and Chalo Road with funding to come from Commissioner Pristing for BSRP, FM 1171 funds, other than line nine, and eight, five, seven, three, six, zero, nine, zero, nine, zero. This is Commissioner Pristing for. Motion by Commissioner Eid, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell, questions or comments. Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, Cine? Motion is carried. We want to remind everybody that February 15th, Commissioner's Court will be a special meeting on Friday because the following Tuesday, the 19th, we have counseled that meeting to take part in the Denton County Days in Austin. So with that, we are adjourned. Everybody have a great day.