. . . . Thank you. County Commission's Court for Tuesday, February 7th is now in session. This morning, an invocation will be given by Dr. Bing Burton, director of our Health Department and our pledges to be led by Lynn Yurgen. Will you please stand? Would you pray with me, or we thank you for this day, a day that you have made. We pray, Lord, that you would help us to use the resources that you have given us to build a highway. May every valley be exalted, and every mountain and hill made low. The rough places be made plain plain and the crooked places straight Help us to build a highway fit for a king at the king of glory and come into our hearts Lord we ask your blessing upon this meeting of the Commissioner's Court May all that is said and done be pleasing to you our Rock and our redeemer. Amen. Please join me in a pledge to the United States flag. Literally, this is the flag of the United States and America. And to do it with all of it, we're going to stand one nation under God in the visible. We're here already in the Justice House. And now the Texas plan. I think it is one one one one one one one one one one one one one one one Item one is for public input. For items not posted on the agenda. If there's any member of commission, any member of the public that would like to address commissioners, Court, we ask that you please complete a public comment form. We'd be glad to hear from you. I want to remind everyone to please turn off your cell phones and pages. And in commissional march and it's not running late. He's actually in school today, so he won't be joining us. Members item 4a is a public hearing so we'll go to that item first. 4a is a public hearing to consider discuss approve and or take any appropriate action on the request for revising the speed limit on Schluter Road. This is in Commissioner Precinct Ford. We have a motion for the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Ead, seconded by Commissioner Coleman. All in favor, please say aye. Aye, opposed, aye. Motion does carry. Good morning, Bennett. Morning, Judge, morning commissioners. This is a traffic studies for Schluter Road. Schluter was reconstructed last year, and under state law were supposed to conduct traffic studies to see if the speed limits need to be changed based on the design. The traffic study done on Schluter, the average speed was 38 miles an hour, and the 85th percentile was 51 miles an hour. The design speed of Schluter was 45 45 and based on all the criteria, the speed limit on Schlooter can be raised to 45 miles an hour. Thank you. Is there anyone in attendance who would like to address Commissioner's Court on this issue either in favor of or opposed to the proposed speed limit change? Anyone in attendance who would like to address commissioners court on this issue? Very none. Do we have a motion to close the public hearing? Opposed the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Ead, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, Cine? Motion does carry. Commissioner, would you like to make a motion? I would like to tell Bennett thank you and to our road bridge staff. There's three significant road projects that we did this last couple of years that would require a speed study to evaluate a new proposed speed limit. on those initially, there were tens of thousands of dollars to have those three studies done out privately. And we actually bought the equipment internally. It came through commissioners court. We bought that equipment internally just for a couple thousand dollars. Did these speed studies inside the county and Bennett evaluated them and used his seal to seal them, his engineering seal, and it's a considerable savings to the didn't county taxpayers. So I want to thank the Court for your support in that and Bennett, you and your team. So with that, I'll move for approval of the new speed limit. 40 for the. Thank you. We have a motion by commissionaries for a 45-month speed limit the second of by commissioner Mitchell Here you know further comments all in favor please say aye aye Opposed say name motion this carry thank you Bennett Members item two is a consent agenda are there items on this agenda that you need to pull for consideration or do we have a motion? Motion by commissioner Mitchell seconded by Commissioner Eads. On favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, Sen. Motion is carried. Consent agenda today consists of 2A, which is approval of the order-making appointments. We have a new hire in the Sheriff's Department. It promotion of road bridge east and it promotion in juvenile probation. 2B is approval of the interim departmental transfers. 2C is approval of the Intra Departmental Transfers, to see is approval of specifications and authority to advertise for FM 1173 Turn Lane Project, this is in Commissioner Pristinct IV, bid number 0112212. Item 5A is approval of bill report payments from CSCD, Community Corrections, T A I P, Shares, Training Shares, Forfeiture, D-I-T, Interest, D-A-Check, The N-D-A-Forfeiture funds are presented for recording purposes only. Good morning, James Wells. On Judge Commissioner, I ask approval bills with one deletion and three editions now that we're set. Thank you, are there any questions from members of court? Do we have a motion? For approval. Thank you. We have a motion for approval by commission Reans. Second. Seconded by commissioner Coleman. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, Senine? Motion does carry. Six A is approval of specifications and authority to advertise for sale of real property located at 306 North Loop 288 that in Texas establishment of minimum bid amount to me in 500,000. Well, do we have any more debt on this? Is there any more? Is this piece of property fully paid off? No, no, no, no, Commissioner, we don no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no we used for well-retired. Was it permissible for us to designate the proceeds of this to be put into the CIP funds? OK. I didn't, because if we have debt on something, we have to make sure that we pay the debt. Yeah, it was very good point. If you are who did from selling property that you actually have acquired with the exempt debt, unless that debt's already paid off, or you ask Crow amount of the proceeds to ensure, you know, they've got to be sure that that's going to be paid off, so will not be concerned with this at all. And just to confirm that it's the consensus of the court that we're going to throw this, if this building sells as many as to be put into the CIP for additional building projects like your building, Andy, and your building. Just wanted to make sure we're all on board and that's the way. I believe so. Okay, well then I'll move believe so. Okay. Well then I'll move for approval. All right. We have a motion by Commissioner Coleman seconded by Commissioner Ease. Is there any further discussion or any other questions? Any none? I'll in favor. Please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Sainine? Motion does carry. as Carrie. Bear with me. Just a minute here. We have some guests with us today. I'd like to go to a couple of items so that we can take care of these things and they can go back to work. I'd like to go to item 13 H and 13 I. First, let's take up item 13 H. This is approval of the Building UC request from Linda Lourish Political Action Committee for a setup outside the Texas Sessor Collector Offices at the Marion Gimheon Building in Denton. Lee Walker, Government Center in Losville, Stephen Copeland, Government Center Crossroads, Sandy Jacobs, Government Center Carol Lynn, the Colony Government Center on February 8th through the 10th, 2012, from 8am to 4.30pm for purposes of distributing political literature. Members on the 27th of January, these folks showed up at the Horn Government Center on McKinney Street and were very disruptive. My office received calls from citizens who felt harassed. They did not appreciate being followed to their car. They had their signage taped to the windows of the building and just citizens weren't happy and yet you have to remember the end of January that's a very busy time in that building because the deadline for Pain Taxes is January 31st plus it's into the month and there's a very busy time in that building because the deadline for Pain Taxes is January 31st. Plus, it's into the month and there's a lot of people coming to get their registrations done. So they were very busy. But we were getting complaints and bottom line, I ended up calling the Sheriff Department and asking them to please escort them off the premises because they were bothering citizens. So this fellow came over to my office to complete a building use request, which he has done, and that's what's on the agenda today. Item, the next item is actually 13i, 13 I which is I I'm going to ask is for Run Marchant to pull his committee together concerning the building use we need to tighten up our Verbiage on the policy for the building usage request For example for example, it doesn't really say that the policy is applied only to date with county residents, but that's kind of how it's always been interpreted. So I'd like a clear distinction there on what we intend. And is the policy applied to all county facilities or you know it doesn't really it's not specific and I think it needs to be tightened up. And then also we've got another function coming up here in March. It's a called 35, Denton or something and there's questions about people coming on the courthouse on the square after midnight. So anyway, I'd like for the committee to get together and see if we can't get some. Yeah, get the policy tightened up and be more specific and list all buildings. What we do or do not expect. I am in no way wanting to restrict somebody's freedom of speech. That's fine and dandy but at the same time if you're harassing people to the point that they don't feel comfortable coming to a county facility to conduct the business they need to take care that's not right either. So first let me take just a minute please. First let me just take up item 13i and request if it's okay with y'all for a round of pull that committee together and address some of these issues. So really this is posted this discussion and approval of any revisions but we're not ready to approve any revisions. I'm going to hold that and not take action just simply to ask Ron to pull the committee together to address some of these issues. All right. On 13-H concerning the building usage request, well like I stated, my office received complaints from citizens who felt harassed and did not appreciate being followed to their vehicle. So I believe that these folks have already demonstrated their behavior, which in my opinion is not good and not. Does not allow the citizens to take care of the business for which they come to the building in the first place. And Bobby, would you put up that picture please? This is a picture that somebody took of the front of the office in email to me. And I found it interesting that I've got this email from the gentleman making the request for the building request, who in his email say that it's alleged that they had signs attached to the facility. In other words, he's denying that he did. So I guess we've not only established their behavior, we've established they don't tell the truth. And with that, I'm going to be making a motion that we deny the request Other than that I have no opinion Yeah, is there any other comments or questions? I'd like to ask John Felt about this Okay, you know I would agree with you Dutchhorn that these fellows are not of my political favor But I know the issues of prior restraint on first-minute speech have been well-litigated But I know the issues of prior restraint on first amendment speech have been well-litigated. They're a pretty extensive body of law that's been before the Supreme Court. And generally from what I understand, and I'm sure Mr. Felt and his sidekick, Michoky will be more aridied than I am regarding this. But you know, prior restraint means that you can't prohibit somebody from having speech that you've had. If they show up and then they engage in activity which is offensive, then you can send somebody out there to send them away. But generally you can't, you know. I understand what you're saying, Commissioner. And it's my understanding that, you know, they can stand out in the sidewalk, see and do anything within the confines of law and that's just fine but when they start harassing people that are coming to that building and we not only have the right we have a responsibility to take care of county facilities so I'm with you 100% but I mean I also want to be able to say that we allow girls' gouts to come sell cookies and have people have a lemonade stand and have us to have other functions that, you know, I guess. But, you know, I'm not questioning the content of the material and they have every right to stand out in the sidewalk there and say whatever they want. That's, you know, public facility. But we do have a policy and we also have a responsibility so that's why I brought this to everybody's attention. Hey I'm with you 100% but if you look at our policy it basically says equal access shall be given to all groups. Right. Applying no group or individual shall be denied access because of consideration of race sex religion or political persuasion or because of the political religious or social aims expressed by an individual or group. That's right. I would like to hear what Mr. Bell. That's not my point in denying them, sir. I'm not saying, I haven't voted yet. I'm just asking. Okay. What's your opinion, John? I mean, given the extensive body of law regarding pirate restraints on First Amendment speech and our given policy. Judge and commissioners and commissioner Coleman, we did go ahead and take a look at this issue and test painting that there might be some questions about it and more silky from my office did quite a bit of research on it. She's prepared to tell you what we have come up with in terms of our opinion. And I'm gonna let her speak. Pretty good. Hello. Yeah, I looked at the the applicable spring court cases and whatnot and basically sidewalks are generally public forums, but when it is a public sidewalk, but certain public sidewalks are not considered public forums and those would be sidewalks that lead from a parking lot to a business or to a post office. That was the case that I looked at. And because the purpose of that sidewalk is that narrow purpose of facilitating entry into that building for that business, they're considered non-public for them. So the threshold is a lot lower. And since we hadn't, well, my understanding is that it hasn't been used previously for expressive activity. And so it hasn't designated a public forum. Therefore it is reasonable to prohibit this kind of activity on the tax office grounds, even if it's not really, really disruptive. It's okay because it's still interfering to some extent with people doing their business at the tax office. Good. And so that's not gonna interfere with like, because I mean I, I'm often up on the square on the weekends myself on this building, you know, because those fellows play bluegrass and stuff and I'm gonna take my kids up here to listen to them. This isn't gonna send any kind of precedent against. Yeah, I didn't hear the first part. You were talking would say the court has on the square. I would imagine that that is a traditional public forum and that's going to be a lot more wide open to activity and it's probably going to, you know, the higher threshold is going to probably apply there than to like the tax officer, any other government buildings. And so if in fact we tell, we did neither permit. I mean, do you think we're in a safe ground to do that? I do, I do. Are there any other questions or comments? Any questions? Eventually, I think it's the right thing to do that have the committee evaluate this and send it to the committee. A policy. A policy review. I'm not so sure about a requirement. First I want to be a dent in county resident. I'm not. I agree. I'm not usually comfortable with that. But the. Just last. not comfortable with that but the just last one. But I think what I think one thing that we might want to do is look at our policy that if people have a previous history of, that the event has not gone well, that's something that we obviously take into consideration. I don't know if that's in the language of Barbara reviews what she's doing. It's really not. Because obviously, obviously we've had a lot of problems. That policy tightened up. Okay, we really have two issues before. So let's first take the question of which there's already motion in second on the floor concerning the application for the building usage and all those different facilities which is 13-H and my motion was to deny the request. Are there any other comments concerning that item? Here none all in favor of the motion please say aye. Aye. Opposed to any? Motion does carry unanimously and. And then on 13 I, if you've got specific thoughts concerning how the policy should be tightened up, please email them to Kate or Ron so they can be communicated to the committee and they can discuss it. And I'm sure we have the civil division involved in their discussion. And in case we get challenged, I mean, we should discuss a little bit just to make sure that we do have a record of what is going on. So Commissioner, you're basically saying you don't know if you want to limit it to just didn't count your residents. Is that what your point was? I need to look at the application process instead of understanding my needs or reactions. I'm not. I agree. I mean, if there was a national petition drive something going on that was a national movement I'm not so sure we want to say if you're not from different county you can't Don't you think of as a national movement somebody who didn't kind of I mean does it mean that they have to be the sponsor applicant or yeah That's my point is that they need to be Didn County resident needs to be dispenser applicant otherwise you know these are Dyn County taxpayers dollars and to have any and everybody just come into the facilities that are not paying the Dyn County taxpayers dollars I don't agree with that and I mean if you check with all your city policies they'll do the same thing if you live in that city, you have a right to the facilities there. If you don't, you have to have somebody to sponsor that meeting for you. And I think that's just what I feel the same way. If you want to use something you need to have someone that's lived there, come out and say, yeah, I'll sponsor. In other words, I vouch for this person because I may not know him. Okay. Well, I mean, I just thought we should facilitate the discussion. Yeah. We're acting in our legislative capacity. We need to make sure that we've expressed that we've given input and consideration towards me. I think what we need to do is we make a need to make a different tation between the courthouse on the square and then other ancillary buildings because they like missh, shokie stated. I think there's a big difference between the tax building, the Copeland Center, your buildings and the courthouse on the square. I think the policy should consider that. I also think that we should consider that. I also think that we should make a policy regarding, you know, the policy should definitely make a differentiation between whether you want to use the outside of the building or whether you want to use one of the community rooms. I think that's something that should, there should be a difference in that. Or at least that should be considered. I don't know if we should put something in there about past history or anything like that because that's um what's that? It's just something to consider. Yeah. Okay. I'm still undecided whether you want to be a Ditton County resident or not. We also have a question concerning rental fee because we and people reserve our facilities and it's after hours does that apply to each building? I mean if they do one request but they're requesting to use this facility and maybe the Carroll facility is there a building usage fee for each building or just one fee to cover both? We need to be specific. I think we need to consider. Be specific. What are our actual costs? Thank you. You got to have somebody at all all of the buildings. But that's what I'm saying. It's not clear in the policy and we need to make it clear. If it didn't cost us anything, we shouldn't charge. If it does cost us something, we should make sure that our overhead is charged. I agree. The policy will be set. I think we're looking for- I think when Commissioner Marcheck comes back with his- we need to have a- He didn't show up so- Oh, discussion. And we need to have a workshop or an extended- I'm talking over. Or the one who went have a workshop or extended talk it over or the willing to designate him since he's not here. It's already his committee. Okay so we'll do that. Thank you. Gentlemen you go back to work if you want to. Thank you. All right And members, item, let me get, let's go to item 7. Item 7a is approval of budget and member requests 100540 for mobile phone expenses for shares for future funding the amount of $3,115. This is for recording purposes only. I move for approval. Motion by Commissioner Coleman, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Motion is carried. 7B is approval of budget member requests 100550 during whose revenues and allocate expenditures for a freshwater district over time, Paloma Creek benefits and vehicle-related line items for sheriff's department in the amount of $76,139. I'll move for approval. Motion by Commissioner Coleman, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor, please say aye. Aye, opposed, senain? It's hard to understand all these different law enforcement contracts. I'd just like to say I'm glad that we have the Sheriff's Department is willing to extend to helping hand to those communities and to those agencies that need additional law enforcement. It's a great way for us to partner with these unincorporated areas and these agencies and meet the community needs that definitely are out there. So I applaud them for be willing to cooperate with those agencies. I agree and I appreciate Sheriff Parkie taking it on. 7Cc is approval budget amendment quest 100560 during whose revenues now allocate expenditures for salary assistance benefits and various operating light on this Redempt County Transportation Authority DCTA in a local contract in the amount of $83,025 I'm open for approval motion by commissioner Coleman seconded by commissioner Eadson favor please say aye aye opposed Cine motion does carry 7d is approval budget amendment quest 100570 to increase revenues now allocated expenditures for salary assistance benefits and various offering and line on line items for Northwest ISD school resource officer in the amount of $330,000, $16. I move for approval. Motion by Commissioner Coleman. Seconded by Commissioner Eads. I'll in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed,聲ee. Motion does carry a seven E is approval of Budget Amendment Class 100580 to increase revenues and allocate expenditures for salary assistance benefits in various operating line-on-its for Copper Canyon interlocal contract in the amount of 174,851 dollars. I'll second approval motion by Commissioner Ead seconded by Commissioner Coleman on favor please say aye Aye opposed to the name motion does carry a seven F is approval budget man request Area 7F is approval budget member quest 100590 to increase revenues, now we get expenditures for salary, assistance, benefits, and various operating line items for a Denton County Freshwater contract, Providence Village in the amount of $158,868. I move for approval. Motion by Commissioner Coleman. Seconded by Commissioner Eads. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, Cinean? Motion to carry. Am I going too fast for you? OK. 7G is approval of Budget Amendment Class 1006000 for consultant fees, including the transfer of funds from non-departmental and appropriated regular contingency for non-departmental in the amount of $6,000. If I have a comment about this, generally, under the provisions of open government and open meetings, you're supposed to be able to tell from the agenda a lot from the agenda posting what the item, a normal person without prior knowledge is supposed to know what the agenda posting is supposed to be for. I had to drill deep to figure out this is for appraisals, for buildings. And this is supposed to be for. I had to drill deep to figure out this is for appraisals. Yeah. And this is in the back up material. Yeah, but the agenda item is kind of, I would say, awkwardly worded to say at least because there's not even anywhere in there. Didn't really say what it's for. Yeah, the money was spent on. I noticed that too. Given that, I'll move for approval, but I hope in the future we kind of do a little better or descriptive. Yes We have a motion by commission Paulman seconded by commissioner Mitchell. I'll in favor please say aye Aye Opposed Cine motion does carry seven H is approval of recommendation from the Capitol improvement committee to proceed with the issues of debt for the fiscal year 2012 including a list of all projects, road project revisions, proposed calendar of events and any other appropriate action done that you wish to make come in. I'll be happy to, as you all know, the Capitol Improvement Committee has met and discussed the issuance of debt to comply with our CAPT on Improvement Program. In this packet, you'll see proposed list of projects. This complies with our CAPT on Improvement Plan with a few minor exceptions. You'll see the changes have been highlighted on page 213 of your agenda packet. There were some road projects that John Polster met with each individual court member To make sure those projects are still ready There were a few minor adjustments in the county judge section for trip await in Commissioner precinct one and Commissioner precinct for We also discussed the issuance of tax notes in our meeting We also discussed the issuance of tax notes in our meeting and in order to issue the level of debt that can be issued, we did add a little bit, $261,054 to the Pre-Sync 4 Government Center in order to maximize the tax note issuance. There are on page 215 is the list of revisions we received from John Polster. We also asked and requested and received a list from them for the TRIP-04 project funds. We wanted to have kind of a spending plan so that we could share that information with our bond council. You'll see that the project's total $13.1 million and that's on page 217. Our total issuance that we can proceed with is $10 million, $360,000. So once all the funding has been expended, some of the projects will have to be funded from another source. There's information in your packet from John Martin discussing the project as well. He's included a proposed schedule of advance. This would require some action from the court on February 21st, which you would consider in the approved bond resolutions and pricing certificates. And with that schedule, around April 17th would be the date. Funds would be in hand to be expended. You'll also see that there is a schedule of that debt history on page 221 as well as he's discussed with James and myself the possibility of refunding some bonds at a lower interest rate with the significant savings as well as issuing tax notes with our voter approved projects as well. He has indicated to us that it's a great time to issue debt. The rates are good and with the combination of all these debts and one issue, we can save over $100,000 in issuance cost if we combine these together. So I'll be happy to answer any questions that you have, but we wanted to go ahead and get this on the table so that you could be looking at it and thinking about it and be prepared to proceed with, we can let John Martin know that you're in agreement. And then we'll have follow up agenda items later. Thank you. Commissioner Mitchell. Done. I assume that you've talked to all these cities about these projects especially the one that has been pushed out of I'm speaking for our mountain loose wheel because I know I had Kurt Patrick on there and and then the Keelian loose wheel which is the commissioner Coleman's nail but I guess I'll have to finish the project one these days. But you got the money. Yes ma'am, I know. Okay, so. Yes ma'am. So you've talked to the cities in there, okay? Yes ma'am. Okay, that's all I asked. When I, they're very important point that I missed was that this, I mentioned it was a good time. We have a lot of debt that will be going off. I will be paid for this fiscal year. So the impact of issuing debt this year is minimal compared to what it normally would be. It would be about one-third of one penny increase in our debt service portion of our tax rate. And any other given year when we didn't have that dropping off, you'd be looking at about a 1 cent increase in our tax rate. So again, that just reaffirms that it's an excellent time for us to proceed this. Good point. Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments? Okay. Do we have a motion for approval of the recommendation? Motion by Commissioner Mitchell. The chair will second the motion. Are there further questions or comments? Any none? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, Cine? Motion does carry unanimously. Thank you, Donna, for all your hard work on this. And John Martin, and I think it's excellent planning. Seven I is consideration of request for an adjustment in a judicial longevity pay from the judges of county criminal court number one and county criminal court number two pursuant to a revision of the government code section 659.0445B1, including any requests for back pay and we'll call them down the street. Thank you Judge. By statute, we're required to pay our statutory county courts as well as our statutory probate court, the same salary as our district judges. We also have received an AG opinion regarding that as well. We currently pay judicial longevity pay to judge Valencamp and Judge Crouch. And that's because Judge Shipman has been on the bench for over 16 years. Judge Garcia will become eligible to receive the pay in September of this year. Again they must complete 16 years of service in order to receive the pay. There's a section in the government code that addresses this and that code was amended effective September 1 2009 from a sat rate of $320 per month to a formula which is the district judge's state salary which is $125,000 a year times a formula of .031. Our office wasn't aware of the change but Judge Fallon camp brought that to my attention in late December. The formula made a small difference from $320 per month to $322.91 per month, which is a difference of $35 per year. We did receive a request from Judge Falling Camp and Judge Crouch requesting that that pay be adjusted. And in that request, Judge Fallen Camp requested back pay since he was eligible and received that pay back in 2009. You'll see we've also received information from our civil DA's office that because Judge Shipman is the only one that receives that pay. Once he is no longer in office, that pay will need to be decreased from their pay as well. Until such time as another district judge completes 16 years of service. And that will be assuming Judge Shipman leaves office before 2017, Judge McFarland would then be eligible in 2017. So I have discussed that by email as well with Judge Crouch and Judge Valencamp, and they're aware of that change as well. So the total impact of this request is $162, and if approved, our office will process a budget amendment and coordinate with the Treasurer's Office for them to receive or for Judge Valentant to receive the back pay. Judge Crouch could be eligible to receive it as of September of 2011, but he decided to forget that one month and just make it effective with this budget year. And so we consulted with legal and we're all in agreement that they are entitled to receive this pay. Thank you for the explanation. Any questions from members of court? We have a motion. Second. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner Eads Hearing no comments all in favor. Please say aye I post a name motion does carry Okay 12 a is approval of the 2011 2012 interlocal cooperation agreement for shared governance communications and dispatch service system for the following agencies. This is our God, Police Department, Aubrey Police Department, Point Police Department, Devil Oak Police Department, Crom Police Department, North Lake Police Department, Pilot Point Police Department, Sanger, Trophy Club, Argonne Fire Department, Aubrey Fire Department, Justin Fire Department, Crom Fire Department, Lake City Fire Department, Justin Fire Department, Crom Fire Department, Lake City Fire Department, and Pilot Point Fire Department, and Ponder Fire Department, and the Sanger Fire Department. Let me tell you that was a lot of contracts to sign. I'm not kidding, I think I signed for two days. I'll move for approval. We have a motion for approval by Commissioner Coleman. I'll second the motion. Are there questions from any members of court hearing none? All in favor please say aye aye opposed any motion does carry 13 a is a approval of the appointment of Michael L. Fraga Always stumble on that name to the environmental advisory board. This is a appointment from Commissioner precisnet 1. Move for approval. Motion for approval by Commissioner Coleman. Seconded by Commissioner Eads. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries. 13b is approval of the appointment of Mr. Paul Knipple to the Transportation Committee. This is all so Commissioner 1. I'll move for approval. Motion by Commissioner Coleman. Chair, we'll second the motion. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the motion does carry. 13C is approval of Dr. Albert Payne's reappointment to the House Advisory Board. This is in commissioner precinct to the chair will move for approval. Seconded by commissioner Mitchell. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the Senate. Motion does carry. 13D is approval of the reappointment of Barbara Russell to the Building and Property Committee. This is a Commissioner Wooden appointment. I move for approval. Seconded. Motion by Commissioner Coleman. Seconded by Commissioner Eads. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the Senate. Motion does carry. 13D is approval of the reappointment of Dr. Benny Mayors to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the committee. I opposed to the appointment of Mr. Howard Martin to the Transportation Committee. We for approval. Second. Motion by Commissioner Coleman, second and by Commissioner Eans. I'll in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Motion does carry 13G. It's approval of the reappointment of Mr. Johnnie Hunter to the Building and Property Committee. I'm in for approval. Motion by Commissioner Eans. Second and by Commissioner Mitchell. I'll in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, Cine? Motion does carry. 13J is discussion and approval of any possible action regarding the Senate Bill 1420 Committee and the proposed interstate highway 35 E-manage lean project. We haven't had a meeting, so there's really not anything to discuss in concerning the committee's work, but I think it's worth while John to go ahead and make the announcement concerning the North Section, Fonzie. Yes, ma'am, I was gonna tell you that the Northern section of I-35E from 2081 to US-380 was environmentally cleared last week. We have that letter in the packet, and that now means that all of I-35 from 635 to US 380 is environmentally cleared. So that's a huge roadblock to working off the years to accomplish. And Mountain of the Time, huh? So though, unless anybody else has got anything else to be knew action on that item today. Thank you. 14A is approval of the Amendment 1 lease of the State of Texas registration and Title System RTS information resources and support to the agreement for the use of State of Texas automatic equipment, remote sticker printing system, RSPS for Jameswood, Zuzu, automobile dealership, And the point of sale subcontract for motor vehicle license renewal between Dan County, Texas and the motor vehicle dealership, James Wood, is Zuzu. The chair will move for approval. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. On favor please say aye. Aye. Opposing here. Motion does carry. 14V is approval of the 2011-2012 Vambolin service agreement between Denton County, Texas and the Argyle volunteer fire district ambulance services. Motion by commission, Eid, seconded by commissioner Coleman. All in favor, please say aye. I, opposed in Eid. Motion carries. 14 C is approval of the 2011-2012 fire protection service agreement between Denton County, Texas and our final volunteer fire district. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner Eans. All in favor, please say aye. Opposed to the need? Motion does carry a 14D is approval of one. Amendment number six to the health plan terms and conditions between Pacific care of Texas and corporate in the Dent County for Medicare Advantage with prescription drug benefit and two amendment number nine to the group health insurance senior policy senior supplement plan F group agreement between Pacific care life insurance and Dent County Judge our office reviewed this but I would have to defer to Amy if the court has any questions. Any questions from members of court? I assume you're recommending approval. She is. We have a motion by Commissioner Ease. The chair will second the motion hearing the questions questions, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, the name? Motion does carry. 14E is approval of the online utility agreement between Dan County, Texas, and the town of Flyer, and Mount Texas, and the amount of $90,266.28. For a reimbursable utilities associated with the 1171 improvement project between Interstate Highway 35W and Shiloh Road. The funding to come from Commissioner Prissing 3, BSRP funds, this is Auditor line item 857360900. We'll be, we haven't fight him yet for the Reimpact utility movement that had been contracted with with all the utility companies, so never said we won. So I'll move approval. Thank you. We have a motion by Commissioner Mitchell, second and by Commissioner Ian. Are there questions? Here none. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, senene. Motion does carry a 14-f as acceptance of the $1,000 donation by the Historical Park Foundation of Denton County to Denton County, Texas and approval of gift donation and memorandum of understanding between Historical Park Foundation of Denton County Incorporated Denton County, Texas Motion by Commissioner Eid seconded by Commissioner Mitchell other questions? I want to thank our members of our historical park foundation. Yeah. We have a motion in second hearing no further questions or comments. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Oppositing. Motion is carried. 14G is acceptance of the $175 and $14. Donation by the Historical Park Foundation of Denton County. Two Denton County, Texas and a plural of gift donation and memorandum of understanding between Historical Park Foundation and Denton County, Incorporated and Denton County, Texas. Motion by Commissioner E. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Motion does carry. 15a is the executive session under Texas Government Code 551.072 deliberation regarding real property close meeting to deliberate the value of real property where a deliberation in open meeting would have a detrimental effect on the position of governmental body. In negotiations with a third person regarding the value of real property located in then kind of commissioner precinct for for think we can do this. It should take about 35 seconds. Yeah, this is going to be really quick just as something to tell us all. So with that we're an executive session. I'm going to be in the next session. Being from executive session, there will be no action on item 15A today. So, with that, we are adjourned. Everybody have a great day.