Good morning ladies and gentlemen, Denton County Commissioners Court for Tuesday, July 21st, 2009 is now session this morning our invocation of be given by Roland Assebedo who is our assistant chief of emergency emergency services and our pledges will be led by Tom Reese who is the department supervisor In the county clerk's office. We please stand. I'm not afraid of the things that I do. So I can move my voice. You want to go up to me. You have to be happy. You know, you can go up to me. And so, um, I'm looking for a way little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. I'm going to give you a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit and the United States of America into their republic where we should change our nation under ground, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. I want to take this flag and pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under ground, one in indivisible. Thank you, gentlemen. Item one is for 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 available from the court on the side table over here. Once also remind everyone to please turn off your cell phones and pages. Although we have a timed agenda item at 915 for our retirees since everybody seems to be here and I hope your guests are here too. We're going to go to that item first. Okay. Kathy Elcorn. Come on up here. We want to look at your smiling face when we read your resolution. Good morning. Resolution honoring Kathy L. Corn for 25 years of service to Denton County. Denton County Commission's Court, Denton County, Texas during a regular session on the 21st of July 2009, considered the following resolution. Whereas Kathy Alcorn Planning Manager will be retiring on July 31, 2009, after completing more than 25 years of exceptional service to the Denton County Planning Department, Kathy plans to enjoy her retirement years by sending quality time with her family and shopping. I know I like this girl. Whereas Kathy Alcorn was hired by Denton County on June 14, 1984 as a mapping clerk. In 2000, she was promoted to a planning manager. Whereas Kathy Alcorn, a devoted employee, has provided an outstanding level of valuable service, especially with regard to upholding the integrity of the subdivision rules and regulations and flood-played development ordinance of Denton County. She has used her personal affability to generate trust and all who worked with her. And Kathy was always a year to find every bit of information pertinent to the task at hand and made herself available to assist others in times of need. Whereas during the time of the said service with the Planning Department, Kathy Alporn has faithfully and diligently discharged the duties and obligations of the office and trusted to her, worked well with her co-workers, and conducted herself in a responsible manner for the well-being of the entire department. Whereas Kathy Alporn's dedication to Dent County Planning Department has been appreciated and respected by all, she frequently made the workplace fun and educational. She has been dependable, trustworthy, and a hard worker who will be greatly missed. And now therefore, be it resolved that Denk County Commissioner's Court didn't county Texas. Does hereby extend to Kathy Alcorn a sincere and grateful appreciation for a dedicated service to Denk County? We congratulate Kathy on her well-earned retirement and extend our best wishes to her for continued success, happiness, and good health in the years to come. Down in open court on this 21st day of July 2009, Cheryl Samu. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Eid. So I'll in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed, Cindy. Motion does pass unanimously. Congratulations and thank you, Kathy. Thank you very much. Welcome on the wash off. Thank you very much. Welcome on to our show. I have a lot of good work to do with this show. All right. I had to write it down. Just a little bit. First of all, I was on a bank, John Roberts. I was not here today because I was, planning ahead just for many years, and he gave me a lot of job right back in 1994. No one can speak well, and I don't miss the world's deep gratitude, or it's been challenged me to be my best, and then again, to be a place for management and to come in and not really appreciate it, all of that to be a step from me. I want to place the management and the camp on Memphis and that really appreciate it all that the system did. I would like to thank the commissioners for support for having the confidence in making this big enough to promoting to manager at a planning department. I'd really appreciate your support over the years. I would like to thank my colleagues, all the Canada employees of New York that have gathered me and helped me to do my job. I get to the courts often, where I'm in the polls. The audit or budget, civil terms office, talent bar, purpose, and pressure, all these are, and all the rest, talent points are in my job. I feel like, to help me learn, understand, and grow in all aspects of my job. And I feel like that is definitely the best thing I've ever seen. I'd like to thank my director, David Bell. But most of all, I would like to recognize and thank you for all my hard work. They have made a perfect shine and they're getting a good, very simple film. They've been constantly spending up to years, and they've been constantly working to see and how those things can be used there. I've heard you work on how to start and it's just a bit different film. You know how the following just didn't much time, it's not family, it's not the one I've been part of, I don't want to do it. Thank you, Kathy. Commissioner Eads. I would just like to take a second to say, you know, each of us have different departments that we deal with more closely and we have have over 1,000 employees, and it's hard to get to know everybody. But it was my real privilege to get to know Kathy very well the last couple of years. And a couple years ago, Commissioner White and I worked really hard on doing a reorganization of the department at planning and engineering everything. And I just want to say Kathy, that was a very stressful time for Kathy and her department, her employees. And she handled that with such class and dignity and was so cooperative to all of us as we work through that together. And I said, I know it was a stressful time. And Kathy is like so many of our employees. It has great institutional knowledge of the county and all the The neighborhoods and the subdivisions and she did Kathy had the ability to recall from memory What the story was and how the deal went down years ago with Farmer Joe when he First subdivided the farm, you know, and she had that great recall and And because she enjoyed and she took it to heart and I just want to tell her thank you Kathy for all your years of service and I was I was thinking I was in eighth grade when you when you came on the county so don't go there commission thank you okay well we have two more people we'd like to honor today. We have Ronnie Ferris. There he is. Come on up here, Ronnie. People want to see who we're talking about. Good morning. This is a resolution honoring Ronnie Ferris for 23 years of service to Denton County. Whereas Ronnie L Ferris Chief Jebadi Constable for Denton County, whereas Ronnie L. Ferris, Chief Deputy Constable for Denton County Constable Precinct One Office, assigned to Constable Precinct One since January 1986, retired on June 16th, 2009, after a 23 year career in law enforcement, and whereas during all the time a said service with Constable Precinct One office, Ronnie L. Ferris has safely and diligently discharged the duties and obligations of the office interested to him. Worked well with his co-workers and conducted himself in a mature and responsible manner with vigilance for the safety and security of citizens of Constable Precinct One and co-workers. And whereas the citizens of Denton County are grateful to Ronnie Alferris for answering the call to service, for his commitment to duty and for the service he has rendered during his law enforcement career in 10 years chief deputy constable constable for the Dent County Constable precinct one. Therefore it be resolved the Dent County Commission's court, Dent County, Texas does hereby extend to Ronnie L Ferris. I sincerely grateful appreciation for his dedicated service on his well earned retirement and their best wishes to him and his family for continued success happiness and good health in the years to come. And an open court on this the 21st day of July 2009. The chair also moved. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Marchand. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the name? This Gary Nanom sleeping. Aye. Aye. Opposed to say aye. The scary nan of sleep. Congratulations, Ronnie. Applause. I'd like to say a few words. Thank you for the opportunity of working for Dean County. I got a lot of friends. I enjoyed it. I enjoyed my bulk. Jim Dawton, he's a very good bulk and appreciate everything he did. We appreciate you. Congratulations on your retirement. Barbara, do you have their resolution is framed is it or is that what you're working on? Yeah. these resolutions are being appropriately framed and with the county seal on for safe keeping and in a little treasure for them. Okay. Go into the top for the help. Okay. Mark Cockro. Here is. Go into the top for the help. Okay Mark Cockro There is did you come on up, please we want to see you too Good morning This is a resolution honoring Mark D. Cockrell for eight years of service to Dyn County, the Dyn County Commission's Court, Dyn County, Texas during the regular session on the 21st of July 2009, considered the following resolution. Whereas Mark D. Cockrell, detention officer in the Dyn County Sheriff's Office, is retiring at July 17, 2009, after serving in such capacity since November 2000 and wears during the time and said service with the sheriff's office, Mark II Cochrole has faithfully and diligently discharged duties and obligations of the office entrusted to him. Work well with his co-workers and conducted himself in a mature and responsible manner with vigilance for the safety and security of inmates and co-workers. And whereas the citizen of Denton County are grateful to Mark D. Cockrell for answering the call to service, for his commitment to duty and for the service he has rendered during his law enforcement career and tenure with the Denton County Sheriff's Office. Therefore, it will be resolved Denton County Commission's Court, Denton County, Texas does hereby extend to Mark D. Cockrell, a sincere and grateful appreciation for his dedicated service to Denton County. We congratulate Mark on his well-earned retirement and extend our best wishes for him for continued success, happiness and good health in the years to come. And in open court this 21st day of July 2009, Cheryl Samu. Check it. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed to say nay. Motion does carry unanimously. Congratulations. the chain of command to the bottom of the chain of command, Tintin County has later deep impression in my spirit. I'm going to especially thankful for Captain Danger, Lieutenant Ellis, Elzy, and Sergeant Garcia. These men made me strong. That's all I got to say. We thank you for your service, sir, and have a good time. We thank all of you and we congratulate you on your retirement. We thank all of you and we congratulate you on your retirement. We thank all of you and we congratulate you on your retirement. We thank all of you and we congratulate you on your retirement. We thank all of you and we congratulate you on your retirement. We thank all of you and we congratulate you on your retirement. You know, retirement is an exciting time and it's a happy time but you won't be as connected to your friends that you worked with and so in that way it's kind of a sad time too but you're right. We are blessed to have a great team here at Denton County and I'm proud of everyone on them. Thank you for being here this morning. Okay. In consideration of everybody's time, I'd like to move now to item 3B, which is a presentation of the State of the Authority by the North Texas Tollway Authority. Carrie, are you going to speak to us first? Are we going to bring Alan Clemson up? Mr. Nal is coming up. I'm like Nal's, okay. All right, Judge, you get stuck with me to start with. Oh, no, don't apologize. Well, just so everyone knows when we're looking down, we really are paying attention. We're seeing the same thing down here as you've got up there. So aren't electronics great? Yes, great. I just want you to think we're ignoring you. Oh, thank you, Judge Horn and commissioners, for allowing us to come and present the state of the art of the Toeway Authority to you. My name's Mike Nowls. I'm one of your appointed directors, Director of Dennis and was unable to be with us this morning. Excuse me, just a second. Are you getting your presentation on your screen? Mine's not coming through. It's not coming through. A little technical problem here, oh my second. I'm just reading from notes at the oven. here. Okay. All right. You go ahead with your part and maybe by the time we get to the hall along that presentation we'll get it up and running. Okay. I'm Mike Niles of one of your appointed directors and director Denison was unable to be here this morning. He's got a conflict with some of our property owners working on some of our future plans this morning. This is the only time they were able to get together. So I'll bring up director or executive director Clemson here in a little bit and he'll kind of go through some of the minutia and details. But I'd kind of like to give you just a working overview or a little bit of an overview of all that we're doing. To ensure the success of the NTTA over the last five years, we've basically implemented our authorities mission, which is to enhance mobility through reasonable and responsible and innovative tolling solutions. And this plan basically sets out six goals that to ensure sound and vibrant financial system to execute innovative tolling and toll road solutions to continue to be a customer-driven organization, to retain a highly qualified energized and focused team to advance the mission, to provide respected leadership and partnership in the region's transportation network, and to encourage and uphold open, honest honest and communication. This focus guides the authority with clear sense of purpose and serves as a road map to addressing the region's mobility needs. This morning I'm joined by executive director Alan Clemson, who will take and provide some of those details to you. It's an understatement to say that 2008 was a year of unprecedented economic change. Markets, collapse, businesses shut down layoff seem to become the norm. At the same time, transportation and mobility issues remained in the overdrive in the North Texas region, along with Austin and across the country. As you well know, public funding to support expansion is limited, stretch beyond capacity. Yet, the transportation needs of our region continue to grow more and more people, continue to move into North Texas and motorists simply need relief from traffic congestion. In 2008, NTTA addressed the harsh economic realities head on. We streamlined our organization structure to deliver projects more efficiently. We revised our business rules to effectively pursue toll violators and dust boost revenue. We addressed immediate shortfalls and revenue projections by stripping about $108 million from our own nine budget. In the capital improvements, reserve maintenance and the feasibility studies portions of it mostly. We also have slowed our progress in a few projects including the Trinity River corridor, the northernmost segments of the DNT 4 and 5, and then on State Highway 170 and on 360. If the NTTA did not waver in its commitment to create workable mobility solutions for North Texas. In the face of tumultuous financial markets, the NTTA showed resourcefulness by financing new and existing roadways and operations to provide the region with viable transportation solutions. This ingenuity will allow projects such as the Lake Lewisville toll bridge to open up on time. The Eastern extension of the President George Bush turnpike and construction of the SRT to remain on schedule. Also $400 million in capital improvement funds remain intact for the 161 in the southwest Parkway and Chisholm Trail project. Still the authority faces difficult choices as we take additional steps to maintain a viable financial position in order to meet the region's transportation needs. The NTTA recently announced plans to increase toll rates by implementing a new distance-based toll infrastructure for our roadways beginning September 1. We realize these are difficult economic times to raise rates. And Allen will provide the details and reasons supporting some of this complex decision. No matter the circumstances, though, we continue serving our customers by maintaining the highest level of safety, sustainability on the NTTA system. In fact, the NTTA Sustainability Initiative garnered the IBTTA's 2009 Excellence Award in Social Responsibility. Our initiatives address safety, efficiency as well as long-term environmental accountability, which enhance the quality of life for our customers and the region. From the safety of our roads to our transition to all electronic toll collections, we do everything better to serve our customers. The motorists of North Texas, we know they have a choice of how to get around town. We strive to ensure that the NTTAs roads provide value for safe driving experience, long time savings that they provide. As long as the North Texas drivers need additional mobility choices in the region,ps for funding them. NTTA will be the place to where mobility and the solutions merge. What I'd like to do is introduce Alan Clemson now and turn the podium over to him. For those of you who have not had a chance to meet Alan yet, let me allow me to tell you a little bit about him. Alan's a lifelong public servant who served as county administrator for Dallas County from 1985 to 2009. As the highest ranking non-elected official, he was responsible for planning, organizing, developing, implementing actions and directives for the Dallas County Commissioners Court. In other words, he brings personal insight in the needs of our regional partners. He brings 37 years of experience in supervising large staffs with proven record of bringing them together as a team. As the NTTA expands to address the growing needs of the region, his leadership will help guide and keep us on track and on target for our goals. Alan's most recently served as special assistant to the Vice Chancellor and President Designate of the University of North Texas Dallas campus, where he oversaw the finance and administration and assisted with the institution's transition to an independent university in the University of North Texas system. And with that, I'll turn this over to Allen. Thank you. Thank you. He also carries young schoolgirls books up to the courtroom also. Thank you, Mike. We're not going to talk about that our way. Well, thank you very much for letting me come and speak. And while I was sitting to the courtroom I'm used to, it's really an honor for me to be back in a commissioners court and before county judge and commissioners. We do have some excellent support staff that's here today. We have Kim Jackson, our director of communication, Elizabeth Malhoes, our director of project development and the one that has the answers to all these questions I think you might ask. And Carrie Rogers, our governmental affairs coordinator. And we're glad, that's one thing I've seen as the entity A staff is just truly remarkable, dedicated, and I think you'd be proud if you had a chance to have some real close exposure to them. If I can work this technology, I know that sometimes agencies and boards that come before Commissioner's Court are much more interested in telling a story than you may be about hearing it. So I'm going to watch and if I see some glazed eyes and I'm going to move forward real quickly. So our revenue for 2008 was $261 million and as you obviously would think 92% of it comes from tolls. We do have other revenue that's somewhat significant and it's somewhat growing in 2008, our other revenue which comes with fees and administrative costs and invoicing charges made up about $9 million and is projected to be $26 million this year. As all agencies have, we take our revenue which in 2008 will be $261 million and we fund our operations. And that's going to be, that was $80 million in 2008. In 2009, it was projected to be $96 million, but we have cut that back in two different initiatives. The first was $6 million, the second was over $4 million. So we have had about a 10 million, so we've had about a ten million well We had we have had over a ten million cut in our operating budget But from that that revenue we take our operations we end up with what they call our net revenue for debt service and The thing that it was surprising to me when I got there is that our net revenue for debt service has to be at least 1.5 times our debt service. So that means that we have to plan, we have to organize to always have 50% more of net revenue than our debt service payment. That money we use to do other things, but it has to be above and beyond our debt service amount. And that's what they call our coverage. And we strive to, and we have maintained that and it is a major driver for us when we talk about rate increases and and issuing additional debt and managing additional road projects. To kind of show you the importance of our situation is that we show you a graph that the green line is our net revenue. That revenue once again is our revenue less our operating expenses and that shows you debt service. And it draws the picture that says that in our 2009-2011 our relationship to our debt service is pretty close. It still maintains our coverage that we have to have. And I believe this is, including the new rate increase, but it kind of draws the picture that we have a trust fund agreement, we have bond covenants that says we must maintain this coverage and to achieve that, sometimes toll rate increases become very important. But it does show that we're strong, that we're solid, we have the amount of money that we need to address our projects that are on the table and it tells you that we're going to meet our bond covenants, pay our debts and run a quality operation that this county would be proud of. Like I, Director Niles and I have mentioned, we had a 9.9% overall reduction in our operating budget. That was taken in two different parts. We will continue to look at that budget for next year and we're in our budget process. I envision that the budget that we'll present to the board directors and later this year will be, it will be a very, we called an evaluating budget which is what you do each and every year. You're evaluating the quality of the expenditures and you're justifying those and making sure that that's the way you should spend the money. And that will be done in a very aggressive manner this year. The rate increase aligns the North Texas Toeway authorities toll rates to the regional toll rate. That is the rate that was adopted by the RTC. It does include a 2.75% inflation trigger that every odd year, that numbered year that the rate would go up automatically 2.75. I was talking with Commissioner Mitchell this morning while that toll trigger is in our resolution and our toll rate setting policy, we will look at that amount every year in our budget process. We will evaluate our revenue and our projected revenues and the board will be giving the picture if these automatic triggers, you know, when they come into play, if it is necessary and they will have an opportunity to look at that each year. So while some may be disappointed in that, I think the Board acted very aggressively to put in place a mechanism to consider it each year. We've gone to a structure per mile based rate before there was no really equity or consistency in it. We've established that. And the interesting thing is, and we mentioned, it does allow us to keep our debt service coverage. It allows us to keep our bond rating, which is very important to our issuance of debt. Our financial advisors have showed us that a downgrade in our AA bond writing to a triple B could be anywhere from 2 to 3 percent in interest, which is just unacceptable from a financial standpoint. projected annual revenue is $298 million. We have 80 center line miles, center lane miles, and we have more than 40 miles coming on. And we have 1.6 million tow tanks. The number of employees is 750. And I think that number we feel will absolutely decline as we move to the ETSO elect electronic tolling component which is a very effective and efficient way for us to move forward. The all electronic tolling collection it we transitioned the president George Bush on July 1st and the staff did an outstanding job of planning that. It went off without a hitch. Our image capture rates are in the 98, 99 percent rate. We did it with no disruption to traffic, no backlogs to the toll gate. There were a few exciting moments when people got a little confused but we managed to avoid any major problems. As you know, the San Marivan toll road is also all electronic, and as it moves forward, that technology is getting refined and is doing an outstanding job. We are looking forward to moving towards the George, I mean, the Dallas, North, Norway to be all electronic, that will be a little larger challenge. It has a significant capital investment with it of about $75 million. We will be planning for that in 2010 and encouraging the board to adopt a plan to allow us to make some progress in that in the next year or two. The revenue collection and is a thing we continue to work on. I think we were lucky to get a few issues in the legislative session. As it addresses our ability to collect revenue, I hope to reach out to Denton in the next few months to talk about some of the issues that we were not successful with and talk about lessons learned on how to approach some of these issues and see if we can do a better job in a partnership moving forward in maybe future legislative sessions or maybe we can come up with more innovative ways in which to try to address that. You've heard a lot, I assume, on the radio about out-of-state drivers. Well, it is a big deal, but it is one tenth of one percent of our zip-cash transaction, which is about 30 percent of our total transactions. So it's significant. It's a very, very small percentage. It's important. We've got to go after it. We have to put in mechanisms. But what they call our leakage or our non-collected revenue for out of state is not a major problem, a major dilemma. We do have a third party vendor that we work with to, when we have an adequate number of transactions that makes it financially feasible, we go get that information, we pursue that bill. We are working on a agreement with the State of Oklahoma that allows to be interoperable with their toll tag and they represent 60% of all of our out of state. And that relationship is being finalized. We think it will be complete in the next 12 months. I hope to have it complete before the Texas OU football game, but I'm not sure that can happen. Rental cars are another issue, and we continue to make progress with that industry as a whole. And many of the rental cars give their patrons an opportunity to pay a flat fee, and they pay us all the tolls. The other ones, they will send them a bill. They'll send it to their patron to get paid. In other cases, they send us the information and we bill it. We are looking for an industry-wide standard and through the various associations of tollways and such, we hope to come up with a uniform way to capture that revenue. The other issue that's very serious in that, that this agency and this authority's taken very seriously as a wrong way driving, there's been some very tragic sad events that happened at the hands of people that had poor judgment due to driving while intoxicated. And we understand that it's gonna be hard to stop that problem, but we are committed to giving our best effort to make progress on it every day. We have done a few things such as putting in reflective devices that are more creative and more dominant than might be on other roads. We continue to look at our signage, and we are going to improve some signage areas. And we are also looking statistically to see if our roads are different than let's say 35 or 75 the parallel roads moving north to south. We have less than 4% of the accidents involving one way drivers were trying now to determine if the Dallas, North, toway has more or less than 4% of the traffic and to see how that compares. We don't have this problem on our other toll roads. The George Bush, the Sam Raverin, those facilities, we don't seem to have the same issue that comes up. So, we are pursuing it aggressively and we spend, you know, we have 26 full-time Department of Public Safety Officers that patrol these roads, that ride these roads. We have you under surveillance, video surveillance. When you drive our roads, we have a lot of technology in place to help us. But it's really hard when we see you drive the inner arch hallway, the wrong way for us to get somebody out there to stop you. We've actually had a patrol officer put himself at risk, his life at risk, to stop someone and they literally drove around him and ignored the warning and moved forward into an accident. So it's a tough, tough problem that we have to deal with. Business diversity is a major issue with the North Texas Toll Authority. We're moving into a very aggressive update on modernization of that process. We are going to be an amyra of our partner in counties, then in our sponsoring agencies. And we have reached out as we start talking about the Southwest Parkway and the Chisholm Trail doing seminars and educational programs in South Fort Worth as we move into other projects we will continue to bring forward a very prudent effective business based approach for diversity in business. We think, if done correctly, it's just a good business. We think I've done correctly it's just a good business. The North Texas Highway system we are continuing to plan and develop the system. We potentially over the next several years could actually grow the system into Johnson, Grayson and Cook counties. That's much larger than the four original original partners but as we make those considerations and we'll have to we'll be reaching out to those counties and and discussing the impact of those roads into their communities and keeping them involved. The Sam Rayburn Toei it's the construction continues on segments three and four, the Toeway, which will reach from Hillcrest Boulevard to Northern Holland County to just east of the US-75 in McKinney. Segment three south of Custer to Hillcrest will open September 1, three months ahead of the current schedule. The remainder of segment three is scheduled to open in October. So you have major openings and developments that will take place in the next few months. Segment four from hardened to east of the US 75 is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2011. So that road, while it's not fully open and operational, it will be very soon. Staff, through in a few gratuitous photographs, I don't know that we need to talk about, but yeah, concrete drawings, an exciting thing, is it not? Lake Lillisville Bridge is a very exciting project, very dynamic. It's just a beautiful structure on the lake. I just commend staff and the board of directors for how well the job they've done on that. I wish I could take credit for that. But they started that before six weeks ago. And we were excited to have our Grand Opening July 30th. We invite everyone here to come. We're working hard with Judge Horne and your offices to make sure that you're welcome to be there and with this event to focus on it and counting and how you worked with us to present this really great asset to the region. Some of the staff said it saves on average 25 minutes and 16 miles and you're going to pay a dollar across cross that bridge and It's gonna save you a gallon of gas, which is $2 and 50 cents So it's a it's a not only a great asset. It's a great bargain to the people that drive the roads The bridge is beautiful like we said The Dallas North towway something I'm sure you're not very interested in. It continues to move north. We think it, and we continue to study the final alignment for 4B and 5A, and we have an expanded study area. I think that I've been told that that project is advancing on the environmental and the schematic traffic and revenue numbers now and I think it's maybe a few months behind or slower than we originally anticipated but it is still moving along aggressively. I have some milestones that I don't really think we need to discuss that how we have progressed on phase 4 and 5 because I think you've lived that every day and know it as well as we do. The next steps we're going to complete the feasibility study for A and when we say feasibility that means that determines the marketability, the financial capacity of that project. It tells us how much debt we can issue and it's amazing your authority, your North Texas Toe Authority is just a debt machine. We're an entity that's created to leverage an asset to issue some debt to provide a service and it's much different and to some extent a little dynamic, but we're doing that. The environmental study for Phase 4B and 5A continues to move on. And we hope to be back before everyone reporting the results of those two initiatives very soon. And that's the end of the presentation and we can answer any questions that are I think this probably the staff can answer any questions that might come up. I heard discussion on the news about raising the speed limit. Has that decision been made yet? It has not been made. We will present to the board in August a recommendation from staff or company with recommendation from Macog and our engineering consultants that in certain segments of the towway we will be recommending to raise the tow, I mean they raised the speed limit, everyone advises that if 80, 85% of the traffic drives the same speed. You read drastically reduced accidents. There's a major decline. And I think our experience, my experience from driving some of these roads on a regular basis, is that people are driving a lot faster than the speed ones close to them. But last weekend, they're all going 70 at least. We have been very, very, work very close with the Council of Governments to make sure that what we did was environmentally appropriate because the electronic tolling systems and such. We have been able to generate some of you know some environmental efficiencies that support our direction in that. Any questions from members of the court? I just have a statement. I welcome and welcome to a different form of public service. And I had the opportunity to meet and take nourishment with you and was impressed with our meeting and I welcome you. And I hope that some of the discussion that we had in that meeting, I've already heard things that encouraged me and communication, communication, communication is what I like to see and would appreciate that and in respecting communication of all the appropriate parties. I got a couple of questions if I could ask if you can answer them that's great if not then whoever can. I was in a meeting, oh I'd say two maybe two years ago to talk about the enforcement along specifically George Bush at that time 121 had not opened and I Bush at that time, 121 had not opened. And I believe at that time, you guys were in negotiations with DPS to extend their contract, their enforcement contract. And some of the issues that were in that, I don't know how that new contract, can't, what the terms of it is. You said that there are 26 DPS officers. Let me tell you what I'm hearing within Denton County from the courts and as well as some of the constables office, mainly the courts is that DPS has kind of not shut down. They have trimmed down their enforcement along the I-35 corridor. Now those that have been pulled over and been ticketed by a DPS, triple probably would argue with that. But they are seeing a decline of the DPS through, and we've already looked at that through budget impacts of decline of the tickets that are along I-35. And the troopers are telling us that they're being pulled off to work the new toll road, to work the new contract is a new contract stipulate that there are 2060PS troopers there. And are those 26 troopers there all at once with the rotating every eight hours? I mean, how many are on the road at a time? They can correct me, but typically you have five, just like in your jails, you will have five officers, five officers will let you cover seven days a week, 24 hours a day. And certainly, and I can get some information to you, but I don't think we evenly distribute those people, you know, seven days a week, 24 hours. We may have more during peak traffic periods, less night when the traffic demand is less. But our contract with the DPS is an appropriation in the appropriations bill and it allocates a specific number for us. It only lets DPS fill it above a certain amount when their full staffing complement for the state is at a certain amount when they're full staff and compliment for the state is at a certain amount. So it's set up where we should not be a drain on the DPS local. And it's addition to what their normal compliment should be. Our officer should not be being pulled off except for extreme situations to respond to the I-35 corridor. It should be different. It should be different officers. So we can check into that and see and get you in a response, but we should not be putting a drain on the I-35 officers. I'll get a so. Okay. And that's, again, that's just what I've heard. Also does that contract with DPS exclude any other arrangements that you have with any other law enforcement agencies on the enforcement of the long those corridors? I do not, I don't think it does. I know that we have some of the cities erving, I think, Carrollton. Occasionally, we'll be on the roads and they will work traffic and such and then we do have When we have an accident we have various different groups respond either through their emergency or responder crew or with additional police so we we like to kind of coordinate other law enforcement people that are gonna be active on our roads and we've actually not myself but my predecessors have actually met with cities when we've had what we felt was a too aggressive or an excessive appearance. So it's a balancing act. The reason we like the Department of Public Safety, it has jurisdictions over our entire complement of traffic. We can dispatch them and we are the dispatching authority for our officers and then we can dispatch them and it doesn't matter if they're in parent or Colin or Denton or Dallas because they do have that jurisdiction regardless of. Thank you. Yes. Okay. I think you made this move to the electronic tolling area you seen increase in toll-tag purchase. We have we've seen I think we had our largest days we've jumped I think Kim knows the answer to that. And here yeah I'm sorry if you'll come on up to the microphone please. I'm sorry. If you'll come up to the microphone, please. About 30% in one month, which is a significant number. And I think it's attributed to stepped up enforcement and to the transition to all electronic claims. We think another benefit is when you're drive down, you see the toll tag rate, the amount of money, and you'll see the zip cash rate. And it's going to be a 50% spread. So you're going to pay 150% of the toll tag rate, the amount of money, and you'll see the zip cash rate. And it's going to be a 50% spread, so you're going to pay 150% of the toll tag rate if you choose to use another electronic. And that we think that is going to push even more people to toll tags. Toll tag transactional costs is a savings. We need to pursue it aggressively. I think every commissioners' court will make it a requirement that every one of their citizens get a toll tag. We'll draft that resolution if y'all will pass. Have one more question. You have one person. I got about four of them. I don't know about you. But we're still working on you. Commissioner Merchant. And one more question. And I promise no more. I know in the last legislative session there were aggressive attempts by NTTA to step up through legislation enforcement. enforcement and understand with understanding the entity was losing revenues because they were not able to push through enough violations through a system to get those toll tag violators or toll violators. And I know that did not work. Is there anything that, and the reason I'm asking this, because a lot of that enforcement has a lot of impact on our court systems within our county that has those offenses. And then the filing of those offenses, is there anything that you're gonna be doing differently today than you did a year ago and trying to enforce to try to increase your revenues and push those through maybe our system that we have in place? I know talking to some of your staff that there was a desire to do that. Is there programs that you're looking at to do that? Is there any change? Should the judges, the constables, whoever serve those warrants and those that prosecute those cases, do they need to expect an onslaught of new cases being filed, or is the same volume that they expected in the future? I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I to collections and to my knowledge they've not changed anything I've not authorized them to change anything and I will say that if we change something it's going to impact our patterns of filing cases in your courts then we will be out here and let you know that so we can plan together how to respond to it and I know what happens in an justice court when you dump an unusual large number of cases without some advance notice. Those cases are not going to get filed quickly. It's going to create confusion and we'll be if we do change that and we may we are going to look at the business case that supports these administrative courts. Then it's kind of what we're talking about. We are going to look at that to see if that makes business sense. It makes intuitively it makes sense from an enforcement standpoint. But we're going to look at that to see if that makes business sense. It makes intuitively it makes sense from an enforcement standpoint But we're going to look at that a little bit and then and if we change it will be out here and and sit down with you And let you know what we're planning and we can plan together on how to respond to that Jake that thank you One final question for me in that concerns Dasmerk to the road extension Faces four and five you said that slowed down a little bit. How much? What kind of time do we look at? I started the environmental phase on that. It wasn't, I believe, an 18-month duration, and it'll be about a 24-month. So about six months additional for that. And that's to come up with, so two years to come up with a full schematic, a preferred alignment and environmental clearance. So the board won't actually be making a decision on the alignment until after all that's complete? I know, correct. Now we will do intermediate steps to keep them informed and will about halfway through they'll make a almost a push to go with one or the other if you will will narrow it down. So about half and about a year and say year and a half you'll see a push towards an alignment. I think alignment. Any other questions or comments from members of the court? Thank you appreciate you being here this morning. Thank you, mate. Okay. Is that your laptop or... We got plenty. Carrie might need that today. Something to work for him. Thank you again for being here. Appreciate it. All right. Members, let's go to item two on the, which is a consent agenda. Are there items on the consent agenda that you need to pull for discussion? Or do we have a motion for approval? I'll move for approval. Motion by Commissioner Coleman. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor, please say aye. I have a discussion. I think you're pulling one off. I had some questions about one of them that I'd like to put. All right, which one? G. And this is for education for me. Okay. So the... Is it the same one? Yes. Okay, so 2G is being pulled for further discussion. And I'm assuming your motion is for approval of the remainder of the consent agenda? Sure. Yes, and the second also. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. I apologize, you need motion does carry. The consent agenda today consists of two A, which is approval of the order making appointments. We have New Hire in the County Clerk's Office, or I'm sorry, it's a rehire in the County Clerk's Office in the Collection Division, rehire in criminal district attorney's office, a New Hire in County Jail, a rehire in the County Jail, a promotion in Const considerable piercing to one and a new hire and adult probation. Two B is approval of the Intradiv departmental transfers to C is approval of payroll, 2D is approval of renewal of contract for office furniture. This is bid number 06071840 to Texas furniture source, 2E is approval of award of bid for emulsified asphalt bid number 06091979 to Ergon asphalt and emulsions incorporated to F is approval of renewal for cold mix asphalt pavement. This is bid number 10081942 to unique paving. We'll come back to 2G. 2H is approval of budget amendment request 101 480 for computer supplies for shares department in the amount of $2,500. 2I is approval budget amendment quest 101 510 for car allowance mileage for geographic information systems in the amount of $500. And 2J is approval budget amendment quest 101 530 for arbitrage compliance service for non-departmental in the amount of $3,235. Now we will take up 2G which is approval of specifications for engineering design services for road and bridge east in appointment of evaluation committee. Commissioner Murray. Commissioner Mayer? Yeah, I had, I just need information. Tell me what this is, why this is necessary, and what is it accomplished? Both Brodenbridge, East and West have had several small projects over the last year that require engineering services. I talked to both Commissioner Eads and Commissioner Coleman that I thought it would be best if we pre-qualified some firms to simplify the process of hiring firms once the project's become ready. The policy allows that. We've done it in the past so that the intent would be to pre-qualify three to five firms and have them have master service agreements then when a project comes up then we then we send the letter to those firms and then we select a firm per project and we can move forward with design. The selection process to hire engineering services is very difficult and time-consuming. So this will make their projects move forward faster. It will be less confusing for all the engineering firms. Don't know you've already gone through the process and will comply with statute ETA. When you use the definition small, define that for me. What would small be is that in relation to the scope of the work or the price tag? Yes, I'm not sure your microphones on either that or turn the speaker towards your face a little bit more. The buttons not working. Working them? Okay. I'm not sure that maybe I've characterized that correctly. I guess I'm thinking of actual county road projects. So some of them may be larger projects. I tend to think of our trip away projects, trip of fours being our large on system road projects. I made the small may not have been the right word to use. Maybe the commissioners could explain better what type of projects we use the engineering services for. So there is no criteria other than what the acting commissioner at the time would determine if it was, I'm going to use the word small because I don't know any other, what the small project is. I'm just trying to understand the process. It could be anywhere from a culvert design for drainage issues all the way to reconstruction of a road, but there would all be county roads within each precinct. I stated my memo that I'll have an RFQ for Commissioner Eads as well, but they may be able to help me out here, but it would all be county roads in their precincts. So it would be within budgeted funds. The design contracts would come back to Commissioner's Court for approval. This is just the prequalification process. And then as we get ready to design each one, you would approve a contract. My next question is- My name is respond? I might be able to- I got two other, one other, that- I'd like to respond to that first question. But because I think Beth, you know, she's done a good adequate job of entering it, but the way I was looking at it is- I'd ask Beth, first of all, I'd ask Beth for us to go out to bid on some projects that were non-bon projects. Okay. And we have a large amount of money, you know, we have professional services. And I know Andy may have used Tig-Nall in Perkins through the surveying contract, which didn't go through purchasing to do some engineering work. And what I wouldn't wanted to do, and you know, best suggested that, she thought that this was the best way to go through purchasing. But I originally, every time I have a small project like I'm working on Bernard and Davidson right now, which is a little, you know, rode out in the west part of the county, I'll generally go and talk to Bennett, the county engineer and say, look, you know, my road and brood and true need engineering designs to do this very small county road. Can you do it? And he'll say, well, either I can do the engineering or I can't. So then if he can't do the engineering, then I would say let's go to this group of engineers in which best suggested and let them have an opportunity to bid on it after we've pre-qualified on them. These in my opinion, Andy may have a different idea, are road projects they're going out on existing county funds. In other words, it's not going to be using bond money or anything like that. It's just real small county roads that I'll be working on out of my current budget to work. When we need engineering services for my road bridge crew to go out and either repair roads or if it's where we need a small or we need to go out and get a contractor to go do it. If it's outside the capability of our engineering or our construction crew, you're an I construction crew. I really didn't have any idea for this to go out for any bond project whatsoever. These are only for projects that are coming out of my existing budget So when you say how big it could be I guess I could potentially do one and use up my old budget But I really don't think it's gonna be that you know, I mean these are You know things that might be on the edge of you know What's the purchasing act now 50,000 now they switched it? I really don't see it being anything more than 50 or maybe a little more. It can't exceed 50. Is that what? Well, if we bid it out it could. But the way I work it is I always give Bennett the first opportunity to do it for free. If he says he can't do it, then I think we need to go out and find somebody else who can. But it's limited by the yearly budget that I would have. we would not be using bond funds so if If if this I'm trying to educate myself if this Went forward then what would happen in other words if there was you qualify three to five is that what you said and then based upon whatever criteria that you might set up. What was that criteria set up? Does that lie with the commissioner? Does it lie with this evaluation committee? I mean, what is that decision lie? We're doing this exact same thing right now with Trip 04. When we did Trip 04, we sent out one RFQ and pre-qualified firms for 17 work categories. When a project is ready to move forward, John Postor has let me know that. I have sent letters to all pre-qualified firms describing the project and then they respond back with the specific key staff that they would assign to the project, their availability and their specific qualifications for that type of project. Then the committee would reevaluate based on their original submittal and their second submittal is usually limited to like five pages, very specific to that project. The firms are re-ranked and then the highest firm is recommended to Commissioner's Court as the most qualified and we move forward. So this would- How that group of three to five, right? Yes. Okay. Now on that RFQ, we did not limit it to three or five. Everyone that scored over 85 points out of 100 was pre-qualified. So some categories we had up to 10 firms. For this type of project, we felt it was more efficient to qualify three or five. The three, two, five. And the reason that it's open is because we're looking for a good break in the evaluation. You could have a firm score 98, 196, 194, and then drop to 70. You know, so that may be the best break. So we'll look for the best, whatever's in our best interest to do that. But it would work exactly the same way as the trip of four. The trip of eight, we are working on an RFQ for it right now that will be for all the bond projects and it will include it right now that will be for all the bond projects and it will include sections for all of the on system projects and then the off systems. And I'm working with both Bennett, Hal and John Postor on that RFQ right now. But and what I was going to refer to is it's in the background the last period, which is by policy to recommend the recommended the evaluation committee includes besides myself and I'm sure that's you Beth. Hugh Coleman, Commissioner Prisink, one Bennett Howe, Director of Public Works Engineering, John Felt, what policy are you referring to? We have a policy that was approved by Commissioner's Court several years ago for the hiring of architects and engineers. I brought it back to court last year and modified it. A couple of little changes because we added Bennett Hall to a couple of the committees. It establishes the basic format of those of valuation committees. It also allows for the format we're talking about about pre-qualifying firms. But then it also says the user departments can be added. So that's kind of the basic format that we follow when we when we recommend to Commissioner's Court evaluation committees and then of course it's up to Commissioner's Court how they appoint those. Is it also part of the policy that the sitting commissioner at the time be part of that committee? There is nothing said about it. What it says is the using department can also serve on that committee. You know, when I do, I just did one for Juvenile and Peggy Fox is on it, Matt Merrick's on it, Danny Brummley's on that one because it's a facility. So really that's up to Commissioner's Court, how you want to appoint those. Would any of these projects be included, I mean since I utilize very small amounts of the time of road bridge east, would some of my projects be subject to the same thing? If I have projects. I'm issuing it as a road and bridge east RFQ. So it would be inclusive that. So if would it be appropriate that I would join that evaluation committee at the same time that my projects would come up? Well would you would have to be joined the committee now. Yeah, Ron. I mean, Ron. Which I think is a bad policy for any of us to set on committees that we're awarding to the engineering firm. It's that's the precedent for when these engineering firms that we choose the ones that we want. And I know Beth is real strict about it, but at the same time we are the commissioners that are in the room. And I think it's a bad policy for any of us to sit on these committees and select these engineering firms. That's my opinion. You can do what you want to do, but I will not be setting up a committee to select the engineering firm because it does set the precedent that you choose engineering firm you won't, rather than the one that's qualified and needed to be chosen. Well, first of all, I would welcome you, Ron, to be on the committee. And if you want Ron, you can have my spot on the committee. I mean, that doesn't really bother me. I mean, you know, I've mentioned to you several times I know it's both of ours, Ron Bridge. And that wouldn't bother me whatsoever. But I'll tell you, I think I don't know about the rest of y'all, but as part of my campaign, I didn't take any money from engineering firms. I know they're big political players in our county business. I didn't take any money. And Dan, what do you think of mine? I know, but I think a lot of times that provides access to the public generally thinks it provides influence. So I don't think there'd be any problem with me sitting on this, but I have no problems with Ron Roshant. I have no problems on us mutually appointing a representative from our road and crew bridge crew to sit on it. I mean, I think somebody who's going to be dealing with him on a regular basis needs to be on it. Whether it be your assistant or my assistant or our administrative form in or you or me, none of that really bothered me, but I just want to say it the record that you know I didn't ask to be on the committee Beth put this together. It was her suggestion to Put this together and get these bidding in this manner Beth is you know very well schooled in the manner of purchasing I've much much rather doing this way than perhaps use like a surveying Contracting that we have with an engineering firm and use that to go out and get engineering services. I think that's defeating as regards to the purchasing department and the purchasing act. I don't have a problem with the committee at all. I have a problem with commissioners sitting on the committee and I will not be voting for any of you to sit on the committee including myself. I think that needs to be as transparent as it can be. I know with us on it it's not transparent. I don't think it has anything to do with transparency because it's been publicly disclosed that anyone of us would be sitting on it. All right, Commissioner Ead's has been waiting to speak. I don't have much to add. The addition of what Beth had to say, and we're going to be moving forward with a similar process with the Rodenbridge West. And so I may go ahead and need to determine what you want to do. You're right. What's on the agenda today is for design services for road and bj's. So gentlemen, you are road and bj's. What would you like to do? And why don't you make a motion to that effect? Well, it's too, Mary. It says the form and evaluation committee. Right. We need to take that and set the votes and take a separate vote and come. What can we take it as a single vote by excluding any commissioner on that committee? Well, that would be my motion. I'll second that. Okay. We have a motion for approval specifications for engineering design services for red and bribes and the appointment of the valuation committee consisting of Bethlehem, Bennett Powell. Who am I leaving out? Bounfell. Bounfell. Sir, any further discussion? the best lane, Bennett Powell, who am I leaving out? Bounfell. Bounfell, is there any further discussion? Well, I think you need to have at least five people, so that way there can be, you know. Are you on the Hudson? Yeah, and they're concerned. So I mean, I would suggest that Ron, do you want to point our, one of our road and bridge for them? Yeah, who would you make? Who is, um, either Bruce or Gary? Bruce Dordier. I'm removing my second. So we have a motion that has been amended to add Bruce to the evaluation committee. We are in need of a second to the motion. Oh, a second if for purposes of discussion. Bob, what would what would make you support this? Because you generally need an odd number. Do you want to cut it down to three? Or do you want to cut it down? Or you want to cut it down to five? That committee, but if we add a form and one of you guys form and you know adding down to a committee is just like adding me. I generally don't try to put point out a problem without offering a solution. Yeah but I mean I you know this is you all you all's committee and I'm not saying that you don't need a committee I'm fully aware of it but I think staff should be able to take care of that committee without us letting the water. Ms. Fleming, who do you recommend for the fifth person? I would recommend that someone from Rodenbridge serve on each of the committees. And I'd suggest this with Andy on his RFQ, he indicated he did not want to serve. And I suggested someone from Rodenbridge and he wasn't sure if he wanted to do that, he was going to think about it. But here's our dilemma, is by our policy, our committees are very small. And we do need enough to have a good, diverse review of those responses. I've been talking to Kim Gillis and John Felt about bringing the policy back to court possibly within a week or so because we're discussing whether or not the Civil De A needs to serve on all those. The Civil De A was added because we deleted so many other people off those committees that we needed to fill. They're very important to the process. they add a lot to the process, but they're probably more involved in the contracting then and can address the responses to the contractual questions more than the full review of all of the responses. They sit on every committee just like I do, so all of the building narf cues and all the road in engineering. And so we were recommending to, or planning on recommending to add them as advisory members to the committee, but not necessarily full review that adds to my dilemma that reduces the committee. So I'm not real sure what the best solution is. I do think it needs to be discussed by court. Over the years, we've had commissioners court members serve on these committees, and we've had years spans where no one served on them. But it's changed back and forth in my 23 years here. It's changed many, many times on the philosophy of commissioners court on whether or not they need to serve. It does not matter to me one way or the other. But I do think you need adequate representation on the committees or they become too focused on just a couple of people reviewing them. And that's not good either for the whole process. Two things Beth, I didn't ask to be on the committee, did I? No, I did call Steve Rollins and ask what he thought, because that would be my first thought is that you'd want to serve on it, just like I asked Andy the same question, and he indicated that that would probably be acceptable. Okay, and then the other thing is that generally has a good purchasing practice. It's generally a good idea to have people who are using the service beyond the committee to evaluate it. Not for a repressor. Okay, so I'm offering either Ron to it because I think he would be an objective person because I mean he does use a little bit but he wouldn't be using majority of it. So that would be, you know, if there was any in-propride, I mean I'm sure you're not suggesting that, Andy. Okay, I would think that Ron would be a good person. I don't think I have a problem with it, but to me, I just want to get the engineers together because I would like to get the projects done. Like I said, I give Bennett the first bite at the apple because I would like to have it done for free. It's possible, but if he can't get it done, then we have to have a group of engineers. I mean, I think this is the best way to do it. I don't like having, you know, I know we've got teagnalling perkins as our surveyor and that, you know, perhaps we kind of twist the rules and use, or get him to do engineering when they have, when he hasn't been through the engineering RFQ. I think that's improper. So that's why I want to do it the right way. And I would like just to get it done. I mean, I don't know if we need to Gary, who's our foreman, if we got Bruce, if we went wrong, you're assistant to do it. I mean, it's about a comedian. I would like to have whatever makes you happy, Bob. No, no one makes me happy because this is going to be your project. But, you know, we have citizens and other engineers or somebody that has served the county that wouldn't be voting on the project. How many from planning? Well, don't let me hold up the project. Okay. I've stated my preference in. Well, you know, and my motion, my motion is that we accept the, we approved the specs case for engineering design services with the appointment evaluation committee that would include on road bridge east of what's this title? You have to put a name. Administrative form and administrative form and a road bridge east. I'll second that. All right we have a motion and a second under discussion I'll just simply say that I think it's imperative that the Department directly involved have representation on the evaluation committee and that they are most knowledgeable in the scope of work that we're looking for and I think it would be heroic and our duty if we didn't have that representation on the committee. So sometimes we just have to agree to disagree, Bobbi. That's all right. We've done that many times. All right. We have a motion to second on the floor. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, on favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, any? Aye. Motion carries, four in favor, one opposed. Moving right along to item number five. We have approval of the bill report, payments from CSCD, Community Corrections TAIP, Shares Training Shares, Forfeiture of the IT Interest, DA Check P and DA-4, which are funds presented for recording purposes only. Good morning. Good morning. I have two deletions both from General Fund. One was to the wrong vendor. One was per department, we're waiting for an updated invoice. And I have two additions. They're both from the debt service fund and their sizable amounts for principal and interest on debt service payments. Thank you. Are there any questions or members of the court? Do we have a motion for approval? No, motion by Commissioner Mitchell. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Marchant. Hearing no discussion on favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye, opposed, favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed to the seat. Nene. Volcindos Kiri. We're going to come back to 6A. 7A is approval of Budget Amendment request 101-490 to increase revenues and allocate expenditures for salary assistance, benefits, and various operating line items, including the creation of new line items for grant purposes for fiscal year 2008 2009 for Sheriff's Office vehicle emissions enforcement grant in the amount of 427,275 dollars. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell seconded by Commissioner Marchand other questions. You're none on favor please say aye aye. Opposed in the name? Motion is carried. 7B is approval of budget amendment quest 101-500 for office supplies for Lynn Flynn's surveillance grant in the amount of $13,978. Chair, I move for approval. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Marchant. Questions? Chair, I move for approval. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. for a wooden bridge precinct one in the amount of $115,793. I move for approval, second. Motion by Commissioner Coleman, seconded by Commissioner Marchin. Other questions? You know, no in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed to the name? Motion carries. 7D is approval of budget amendment class 101 540. To increase revenues and allocate expenditures for radio repairs for department of emergency services in the amount of $6,000. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell. Seconded by Commissioner Marchant. Questions? On favor please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say aye. Motion does carry. 7E is approval of budget amount of costs, 101, 55-0, 23-3 revenues, and allocating expenditures for overtime, OCD, task force benefits for criminal district attorney, in amount of $29,000. approval. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Marchand, are there questions? Okay. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Signing motion does carry seven F is approval of budget amendment quest 101 560 for various line items, including the transfer of $15,000 from non-departmental and appropriated regular contingency for print mail department for a total amendment of $16,200. Could Mr. Merchant? It's just going to ask what is this most related to? I mean, it's unappropriated contingency. What do we have an increase of? For copier supplies, this department provides all the copy paper, countywide. It's all purchased out of this one line item and there's typically a shortage every year. We've tried to enhance that line item a little bit each year, but this is projected to get them through the rest of the year to continue that. There are a couple of other line items on here that they're transferring within their own budget to cover a postage and vehicle repair shortage as well. So 15 of the 16,200 is requested from contingency for this purpose. Are those copying services not backbilled to the appropriate departments? department. And this is copy paper that's typically ordered and used in individual departments not just from the print mail room. So when you order copy paper for your department or I do it all gets charged to that one budget. Okay. I've got a comment. Okay. We have the same item request last year. So I want to know Frank. I wonder if we're going to get this fix where we don't have to come out of inappropriate contingency. Can we not forecast it a little closer than what we're doing? Don't know. You cut in the budget where they don't get them the funds in that particular line item. I'd have to look back, but typically I think I recommend what's been requested and I think we've tried to increase it over time. It's just that it's hard for that department to gauge how much copy paper or departments are used. Unfortunately, we do do this every year and this amount is actually far below what we've done in the past. I believe in the past we've done up to about $80,000 because it is just a shot in the dark. Donna, she doesn't cut the budget on that. She has tried to increase it every year, but again, it's just a guess. But it's guess. And this is something we've batted around back and forth for a couple of years about charging it back to the departments, but we need some history on that. And it's something that you're interested in us doing maybe not this year, but next particular year we could certainly pull together some historical data and have departments be accountable and budget their own funds for copy paper. It's just really right now it's kind of late in the process to spend a lot of time analyzing that. But if it's something you're interested in the future, we'll be happy to work on that. But that's why I brought it up. I don't want to talk about the minutiae of that. But the philosophy of why in the world we're doing that and not back charging it to the departments that are actually using it and dispersing that over several departments rather than that- It may make departments a little more accountable about what's purchased. Right. It's right. We've discussed that for the last couple of years. It's something we need to follow. Let's take a look at it. I make for more budget amendments at the end of the year by department. I think actually the problem is is most departments don't because of the way we have it set up. They don't realize how much they use. They'll be fine. Exactly. And better I do think you would find it then in the year you probably have several of these instead of one big. Director Singh does track that on the PO and he is certainly they can do a report and for a couple years back we can gauge what their usage is and hopefully we can get fairly close and if we have a few amendments after a couple years we'll we'll have it down. Well let's just look at it to see so I will be all right over here. I can thank you. Okay. Okay we need... Take a motion to approve. Thank you. We have a motion by the Commissioner Marchant, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. Are there further questions? Here in NONO, in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Motion does carry. 7G is approval of the designation of the Tax Assessor Collector to calculate and publish the effective enrol rate tax rates for DEMC, and for tax year 2009. This is statutorily required in the property tax code to officially designate somebody to do the calculations for each tax inger restriction. Chair, I move for approval. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. Are there questions? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, in any motion does carry. Posting in motion does carry. 9A is approval of contract with the Department of State Health Services for pre-neil care services. We have Dr. Burton here with us this morning. There's questions. Approval. Thank you. We have a motion for approval by Commissioner Mitchell. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Marchand. Hearing no questions, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the Senate. Motion is carried. 10A is a public hearing request for July 28, 2009 to revise the ex officio road policy and the subdivision roles and regulations. Excuse me just one second. Do we need to designate a time? Just for clarification this is a public hearing request for July 28, 2009 at 910 AM. A move for approval. Thank you. We have a motion by Commissioner Eads. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Marchand. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say aye. Motion to scary. 12A is to approve the 2009 amendment to a frequency reconfiguration agreement. Chair, a move for approval. Second. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. Are there questions? Hearing none, on favor please say aye. Aye. Opposing name. Motion is carried. 13A is approval of appointment of David Dryden to the Dent and County Citizen Transportation Committee. Motion to approve. Motion by Citizen Transportation Committee. O should you approve. Motion by Commissioner Marchion. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. On favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, Sainin? Motion does carry. A 14A is approval of the amendment to the contract for engineering services between Tignala Perkins and Corporate and Dent and County of Texas for those Silver Spurs. Court drainage improvement project in the additional amount of $16,900. between Tignol and Perkins and Corporate and didn't county Texas for the Silver Spurs, Court Drainage Improvement Project and the additional amount of $16,900 for a total contract price of $20,200 with funding that come from didn't county engineering professional services funds. This is audited number 2053018550. This is Commissioner precinct two. Oh, should you approve? I have a question. I was a Tignon Perkins or in the selected miswimming. I apologize. I was read my email. Which item are we on? 14 A. This is one that we did. It's under the statutory amount. When we started this project and we sent by policy letters to several firms and most qualified, the decision determined to was most qualified. And we did that by policy. Right. I understand, but this is the kind of thing that would come in under the item we just talked about. Exactly. If we had an RFQ in place, that's exactly what we would do. I noticed that the original contract was $3,000 more or less. Yes, and it was for some extra. Our mental, hydraulic, yeah. Hydraulics or something. Okay. And now it's additional $17,000. Yes. And we knew that when we started the project, that it would be in two phases. And it did a commissioner, Micheal, and ask if you could do this work before they went out for a bid? Yes. And did it. Yes. The first phase of the project was a drainage study because we're having some localized flooding and a subdivision. And then we knew that it was going to be in two phases probably depending on what we found. So that's why it was divided up into two phases. The second phase is actually the design of the solution to correct the drainage. There for the questions? They run, so hopefully we could solve a lot of your problems by getting generalized beds like we're pointing out. Okay, we need a motion and a second. Okay, Commissioner Marche, it makes a motion. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell for their discussion. Very none all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, say aye. Motion to carry. 14b is approval of IBM customer agreement, Master Service Attachment for Service Elite. favor, place aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? A name? Motion to carry. 14b is approval of IBM Customer Agreement, Master Service Attachment for Service Elite and Schedule for Service Elite for Justice System Server Maintenance is recommended by the Director of Information Services. Motion to approve. Motion by Commissioner Margin. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. Are there questions? Here are none. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Close to your name. Motion to carry. 14C is approval of one. The memorandum of agreement for purchase of right away by Dyncannie, Texas from Delores Hancock for parcel 38 of the Copper Canyon Road Project 2. Grand authorization to proceed with closing and approval for the Den County Judge's design on necessary closing documents to purchase the right away and 3 direct the Den County Auditor to issue a warrant in a amount of $13,793 plus any applicable fees for the purchase of the right away with funding to come from Commissioner Priestford for a triple for Copper Canyon Road Funds. This is Auditor number 767 7673-879010. Approval. Motion by Commissioner Eads. Seconded by Commissioner Marchandr, are the questions? In none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the name? Motion carries. 14D is approval of one. Memorandum of agreement for purchase of a right away by Denkani Texas from Leda Foster, Lyndon Foster, Carol Lynn Holtz and Becky Ann Swank in the amount of $198,274 for parcel 36 of the Copricanian Road Project, two grant authorization to proceed with the closing of the approval for the Denkani Judge to sign on necessary closing documents to purchase the right away in three Directed in County Auditor to issue a warrant in the amount of $198,240 $74 plus any applicable fees for the purchase of the right away the funding to come from Commissioner precinct for Triple for copper Canyon Road funds auditor number 7673879010 approval for Canyon Road Funds Auditor Number 7673879010. Approval. Motion by Commissioner Ead, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell, or other questions. You're none on favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? You're none on motion carries unanimously. 14E is approval of one memorandum agreement for purchase of a right away by Dean County, Texas, from Michael L. Scroves and wife Melanie A. Scroves in the amount of $98,134 for parcels $32, I'm sorry, $31, $32, $34 of the Coppercane Road Project II, grant authorization to proceed with the closing and approval for the Dyncannie Judge's sign on necessary closing documents to purchase the right away in three direct Dyncannie Auditor to issue one in the amount of $98,134 plus any applicable fees for the purchase of the right away if I need to come from Commissioner Prussing for triple four copper canyon funds auditor number 7673-879010. Report. Motion by comm- excuse me, Commissioner Eads. Second. Seconded by commissioner Marchant questions You're none on the favor please say aye aye aye posting aim motion carries 14 F is approval of one memorandum of agreement for purchase right away by Dink County, Texas from Opportunity Regional Water District for Proc. 37 the Copic and Road Project 2 Grand Authorization to proceed with the closing and approval for the DENCANI just to sign on necessary. Closing documents to purchase the right away in three direct the DENCANI Auditorate as show warned in the amount of $736.16 plus any applicable fees for the purchase of the right away, the funding to come from Commissioner Prissing for Triple IV, Copper Canyon Road canyon road funds auditor number 7673879010 Take most to prove thank you. They all motion by Commissioner Marchin second by Commissioner Eads questions You're none on favorite place. They say aye aye opposed a name Motion does carry 14g is approval of the mile our title sheet between Texas to find transportation and damp kind of Texas for installation of railroad warning signals and gates at the crossing of New Hope Road and the Union Pacific Railroad. If we're approval. Motion by Commissioner Cullman, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. Are there questions? Hearing none all in favor please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed to the name? Motion does carry. 14H is approval Are there questions? Any none? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the name? Motion does carry. 14H is approval of Numerous Software Professional Service Master Agreement with State of work for the immigration of the footprint system authorization for Director of Information Services to sign engagement statement of work is recommended by the Director of Information Services to sign engagement statement of work is recommended by the Director of Information Services. We have a motion by Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner Coleman, other questions. Your none on favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Motion does carry 14 eyes approval. Supplemental agreement number one for Dreenage improvements to the easement for Old Alton Road in the Equestrian parking area located at Lucille Lake in County Texas from the United States Army of Corps of Engineers. We have a motion by Commissioner Eads. I have a question. Let's have a second, please. Second. Second by Commissioner Marchin. Commissioner Coleman. Commissioner Eads. Is that the parking area? I'm trying to figure that out because we sent... I sent a Ron and I, I guess, sent down a crew to go clean that area up and I was trying to figure it's right on the edge of the precinct. Is this... We couldn't figure it out. We went ahead and did it anyway but I think yours is across the creek. Is that the deal? We're on this side of the creek. The parking, the question in parking area is what road and bridge west built. It's in precinct four. It's just it's in the core of engineer property. We did that last year. What was it this year? Two spots and then real close to issue this year. I Guess I'll talk to you about it afterwards, but I think we probably need to drive down there and kind of figure out what the heck is going on down there problem Okay, we have a motion to second other If y'all cleaned it up, I'll you thank you, but that's but that was our precinct, but Thank you, but that's that was our precinct but You know for the questions on favor the motion. Please say aye. Aye Pussy name motion is carry 14 J is approval the software license and professional service agreement and Amendment to the maintenance agreement between Dent County and Tyler technologies this Texas conference of urban counties for the Odyssey local reports designer is recommended by the director of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the Let's take care of the executive session. Item 15 is consultation with Attorney Potential litigation, which is soon to section 551.0711A of the Government Code, claim of Mary Kubasek. With that, we are an executive session. We'll call on Hydeburg. We're asking to just sign this claim from a law firm branch in Dell NPC for their client Mary Kristiel, Clark Kubicech, alleging a hearing loss in her ear, left ear I believe, and that would ask that that be assigned to the district attorney's civil division specifically me at this time. Thank you. The chair will move that we assign this to the district attorney's office, Supertripor, Hardy Burke to handle. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Motion does carry. Thank you, Herty. Members, I know we have six a. The workshop on the consulting services are a queue. But we have a possible and some employees here in consideration of their time. Why don't we go ahead and take care of that appeal and then they can be on their way and we'll come back to item 6A and the agenda. How does that sound? Okay? Yep. Donna? Everybody had a chance to set up your book or this isn't maybe new for Commissioner Coleman, but we have packets that we distribute to. Morning as well as we emailed it to you last week to kind of give you heads up of all the appeals. You'll see a packet of material that's called reference tab. We have a tab in our book for you to include that information with the table of contents as well as an appeals tab with that backup information as well. Throughout the workshop we'll be referring quite a bit to page numbers. So if we say page R it's in the reference section. If we say page A it's in the appeals section. The first we also have a changes sheet as well that we'll refer to throughout our workshops that have everything that's being appeal summarized here on this spreadsheet and this is where we track the motions and seconds that the court make as far as the specific items. Typically during the appeal process or today, we typically hear all appeals before any motions are made. Of course, that's up to the court on how you choose to proceed. But typically, we hear from all departments before motions are made. We also typically wait until we have the tax rate information, which is expected next week. And with that, our first appeal on the agenda is Constable Precinct IV. They submitted a request. There's backup in your packet under the Appeals tab, page A26. They're appealing the Sergeant Classification and Printed Material. As far as the Sergeant Classification, you'll notice there's no budget impact statement in your packet. That's a position that's not been ranked by evergreen. So we don't have any basis to work up an impact statement at this point because we don't know what that ranking would be if the court was so inclined to approve that request, that's something we'd have to work on, depending on action or direction we receive from court. But with that, Tim Birch is here to address the court and state his case. Morning. Morning members of the court. Once again, I want to John wanted to issue his apology that he couldn't make it. And I don't know if this is the form for it, but this year in particular, he's he's going through a basically a life threatening illness he's being treated for. And he is on vacation and he's resting, but it has taken pretty good toll on him. So if y'all keep him in your thoughts and your prayers, I'm sure appreciate it. Okay, the first item, once again, I know it's becoming redundant, but it's the Sergeant classification. And I just wanted to bring it to y'all's attention that even if we were not, you know, okay, the Sergeant's position in itself as far as the title goes. I know John didn't address it with the study. He did not give it the consultants. I did as far as at my level I did address it with them. But if the gentleman that was in the sergeant position would have received his 4% increase if we would have left him in that classification last year. He didn't receive the 4% increase. He was left basically with no raise whatsoever like all the other county employees received. If you were to take that into consideration, the step increase that he would have received last year would have amounted to $2,000 and $9 putting him at the sergeant classification is only $2,000 and $9 putting them at the Sarge classification is only $2,059. So basically what we're talking about just a few dollars and differences as far as the title goes. Y'all can take that under advisement. I still feel like I need that position and it is an important part of our office, but Y'all can... I'm open any questions. I know we've discussed this a number of times and I know y'all probably are getting tired looking at me, but always until I come up here once in a while, give y'all fits. I'm glad you do. And the other items that we appealed... Well, it was nice, it don't know. It was the amount of $6.25 needed for door hangers. Those are the hangers that you hang when you go, make it an attempt on a warrant, civil papers, things like that. We ask for the increase because in providing due diligence for our courts, we do make quite a few attempts back and forth. And, as you know, when people are avoiding service, they'll pull those tags down. You keep putting them up. If you all have any other suggestions, you know, I'm open to that. But if you were to just go to print on those, they're not made sturdy enough to where you can slide them in between the doors. So I think that's a difference on that one. The peel and stick labels, I think we've got a, I think we've got a, I think we've got a total messed up on that. I don't think I know it looks like for the door. Angers we've got one on here that's going to be 25,000. We're, I'm going to address that with I'm a private jet. I'm just probably going to pull that one. But the peel and stick labels are for a long 114 and 377 and our precinct. We've been approached by a lot of our of our supporting municipalities, a lot of parking violations. Those are dangerous in themselves. We've been trying to get those roads increased to four lanes for many years, but we've been helping the different municipalities out as far as, you know, nobody's allowed to park. There are a lot of them like to park there, go down in the issue and do things like that. It's basically illegal, so we're putting out quite a few peel-in stick labels on that. That's why you see an increase on that. On the traffic tickets, we requested more on that particular item because in 08, we exceeded those projections because I think we wrote 286 tickets that particular year. We see more because the speedway is naturally becoming a problem because they're having an event over there almost every day every week they're having something over there and we're helping out as well with traffic enforcement along with other responsibilities and the tickets that we order are basically they have a warning in there as well so we don't necessarily have to cite them but it does include a warning on that so that's basically all we're asking if I know we're in a tight budget crunch so you know I would just appreciate any consideration from you that we can get. I'm not going to give you much of a deal. Donna so is the total $1,650 is that correct? That was the printed material request. I did include some office summaries in your packet on page A29 and A30. A29 kind of gives a comparison of the history of printed material expense for this department since 2006 and what was requested and what was recommended. You'll see that what we've recommended in their printed material is actually about $400 more than they spent in the previous two years. I think based on the door hangers that Tim was just talking about, they had requested $25,000 at a cost of $2,250. We had reduced that to half that amount of $6,25. The others were the abandoned vehicle and parking violation stickers. We had included about $150 or so in the budget for those. And I guess that's the one you're most concerned about. So we would actually relate to the figures they're requesting how much additional 400. What's not 1650 or it is. We're asking for $400 for the labels. $625 for their traffic tickets, and $625 for door hangers. So you could be scratched in the door hangers at $625, but you're still requesting $400 for labels in $625 for traffic tickets. That needs to be adjusted, I think. in 625 for traffic tickets. That needs to be adjusted I think. Mary, we might be. We're at 1025. Yes. Any answer? That should do it. Questions for may I just quote? Leave that. Thank you. Appreciate you. Thank you. Thank you, Tim. Next on our agenda is Constable Precinct 3. Jerry Rayburn is here to appeal the request for a new deputy constable that would be used in the area of warrant service. Information in your packet is on page A. The initial request for this position, including a vehicle with $93,800 and $1.00, the revised request that Jerry's presenting today is $58,821 and it's my understanding they would use a surplus vehicle that they have currently signed to their department in lieu of any vehicle request this next year. So the revised total is 58. Okay, good morning Jane. I know that it's been a long time since I've stood here. I know that we have to look at costs and that we have to look at revenue, although law enforcement was never meant to turn to profit, we still have to look at those numbers. But my main concern is, and you have numbers there. Jerry has cleared up to that through today from January 1, 431 warrants. The total fines are about $65,4400. Not all of that goes to the county. We went up and talked to James Wales about what does and what comes out that goes to the state of the school district or whatever and it's, I'm glad he understands it, I don't. It's fairly complicated. But my main concern is safety. For the people that we have to deal with as well as officer safety and Don't take this the wrong way. I'm certainly not knocking the sheriff's office for doing it. They have free warrant officers per unit as often as they can to for sure and sure and I have every month Jerry gives me a report at the end of the month on what she does. In your package you have the investigative process, all kinds of information in there about what we do and how we do it. But my main concern is I know this is a class C. Mr. Meanor Warren probably, a traffic ticket, and I didn't I didn't put these in your packet, but I want to to go over some things that when we get a warrant on somebody and we run a criminal history, here's one for sexual assault, has a hold on for eyes. It's a truancy warrant. Another one, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, it's a traffic offense. Aggravated assault with bodily injury, traffic fine. These are just class C warrants, but look at the offenses aggravated robbery. It's a traffic ticket that we had the warrant on. Engage an organized criminal activity traffic ticket, assault with bodily injury, traffic ticket. Four cases of assault family violence with bodily injury, it's a Parks and Wildlife War. Aggravated assault family violence with a weapon traffic ticket. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven cases. Robbery, burglary, possession of control substance, evading arrest, traffic ticket. Injury to the elderly, Parks and Wildlife ticket. Burglary, possession of control substance. This guy has 21 times in jail, nine prior felonies. We arrested him on motor traffic mort. So it's not, and if we go to arrest someone and we don't have this history, fine. It's a pretty good chance that this person has not been involved in anything, but when we find somebody like this, we need to send two people. And that's my main concern is the safety of the person we're dealing with and the safety of the officer. I am simply by having people on my staff so long with three and four weeks vacation, I am about five months out of the year, one person short, with vacation training time that is mandated and sick leave and things like that. I'm about five months short, one person. And those are my concerns is that I have the personnel to send to back somebody up when we have an individual like this that we have to arrest. And the other constable's offices basically say the same thing. Can't the other constable offices basically say the same thing about the orange they serve? Officies? Other constable offices. Can they not make the same claim about the orange that they serve? I could. I know that Frank Phillips has talked to Constable Rayburn's son about the possibility of doing a backup for Dwayne that's doing our pick up from all the offices for you know, gathering up many from the county clerk on the tax office and just the different offices in the different locations. But at some point in time Dwayne's gonna need a vacation or be sick or you know whatever. And we're thinking about a plan B right now Frank's doing back up but you know what if something, And we're thinking about a plan B. Right now Frank's doing back up, but you know what if something, what if what if Dwayne calls and sit on a day that Frank is not here? He's off doing some training or whatever. So I know that he had talked to Constable Rayburn about the possibility of providing some back up. If in fact this position was approved, we asked him to consider that possibility of being planned B for Duane should he be out for some reason. And I just wanted you to know that that discussion took place and he was receptive to the idea. And you're talking about a surplus vehicle for this person. Great. These two people would not be working together all the time. But when we have somebody like this that has nine prior felonies, probably that was going to be my next question. Do you plan on sending them out together all the time or just in the particular instance? Just in this particular instance, if we if we run a criminal history and there's nothing there, chances are pretty good that we wouldn't have a promise. They would not work together all the time in the same car. All right. Other questions from members of the court? The only question I have is Donna, what was the reasons for rejection other, I mean. I felt I had a pretty clear directive from Commissioner's Court not to recommend new hars this year. But I also look at this statistical information and I provided a copy of that report for you as well in the packet under the reference section on page R3 and R4 as well as R5 gives you some estimates based on 2009 figures again. Data that we pull from the Abel term system through April and project from that figure. And you can look at all the numbers including forceables, protective orders all the way through warrants received and served. We've also that summary page on page R3 shows you the current staffing and what that number would be per deputy as well as the proposed staffing with the addition of the deputy. What that would mean in papers per deputy as well. Those numbers on the label term as far as warrant are not correct, but because she physically went through and counted every warrant that she has. It's 1,000, 1,600 now. She physically counted every warrant we have. This report only shows the warrants received and warrants cleared or recalled. It does not include their total number of warrants they have on hand. Questions? The only question, Constable, it's, it's very, very apparent that you're not a traffic cop, if you would, through your office because based upon this report here, and you may reference to all of those cases that those were based upon traffic warrants, where do you get the traffic warrants from? Generated from Judge Carboh's office through DPS. That's what I needed. Parks and Wildlife, Dart. Any she asked if we would serve all the warrants out of our office? That's it, sure. Any other questions? Thank you. Thank you. Fissions on this today, we're going to hear all appeals first and wait for the certified values to come in too. Thank you. Okay. The next thing we had on the agenda was an ASCO presentation and that's going to be postponed for August the 4th at 11 o'clock. Our next appointment is not until 11.30. Okay, will we still need to go back to our transportation or Q on here? That gives you enough time. We can take that break or we can fill in whichever you prefer. Go back and take care of item 6A on the agenda. And we'll break for some lunch and come back. Thanks first. Okay, 6A on the agenda is workshop approval special occasions for transportation consulting services. This is our Q07091985 and appointment of evaluation committee. And it does say any inappropriate actions. So we can take action on any discussion or decisions we make today. Okay, Beth. Okay. After Commissioner's Court last week, I did tell you that I would send an email with my recommendations on the best portions of each RFQ. I did send that out on the 21st. Just to kind of touch on a few of those. The RFQ that was drafted by purchasing request of Commissioner Coleman. There were several things in there that I thought were very important. I really prefer my RFQ format. Both of them do the job, both of them are adequate, but it is consistent with the way I typically do business and I do recommend that we stay with that. It list out the evaluation criteria and I do believe that the submittal requirements are more specific and I would prefer to stay with that. However, both are adequate so whatever you decide on that. Task 10 was added by Commissioner Coleman regarding monthly detailed accounting of services. I do think this is a significant deliverable that should be added to either RFQ. Section 3C3 was added by the Commissioner at the Disclosure Section, so the evaluation committee could better understand the qualifications of the consultant. And for, so we could see what other types of work that they are doing. But all of Section C is something that's in every one of our RFQs and I do recommend that it be in there. It includes language identifying, terminated contracts, litigation or regulatory actions in the last five years. So I do recommend that. The RFQ presented by Mary Horn, which I've seen already some amendments to. My first bullet there is talking about the title. The title may be more appropriate, but that's certainly a decision for Commissioner's Court. It seems to outline better maybe what the services are at this time. I sent that on June 21st and I'm sorry I don't have extra copies with me. June 21st at 9.24 am that might help you locate it. Okay. Oh sorry July 21st. I'm in the wrong month. July 21st. It would have been last Thursday you sent out. You're right. I sent it to myself again. July 16th, at 3.22, I apologize. I sent it to myself this morning so I could get it printed. I have a mobile office now. So the title you may want to look at instead of just transportation consultant. Page 4, fourth paragraph, included language regarding an independent contractor and I do recommend that that stay in there. Page 5, section 2. The background information was good. Of course, it can be changed as you all want it to change, but definitely that's a good thing to add to the RFQ. And then the pre-submitted conference. Typically for RFQs, we do not have one because they're usually for design type services and they're not necessary to have one, but I do feel like this is a good addition and I would recommend doing it in this case. Because these services are so unique, that's probably a good idea to have discussion with the firms responding on what our expectations are. Also, Kim Gillis added several things to the contract side of it. The first one being the term. It's a specific term so that everyone knows what the expectations are and it would also trigger a new RFQ at the end. We've typically just had renewable contracts over many, many years and what's suggested in there is probably a five-year term. You want to make sure that you've got long enough for them to have some results, but I would suggest that you do set a term if you want to do it on an annual term with renewals, you can think about that as well. And then she also added lots of contract language, which is critical to protect the interest of the county and all of those paragraphs are typically in our other contracts, and I do recommend that those stay as well. I just kind of followed up with a goal is to have a basic outline and then request the middle information on the qualifications and experience and their proposed methodology. So when we start talking about task and what we want them to do, we want it also to be open enough to have their ideas come back to us on how they can deliver what our services are. So we don't want to be so specific that we tie everything down because firms will have some good ideas that we want to certainly listen to and consider. Also listed at the very end of that email, what I felt like the items of contention were after the discussion last week. Most of the things I've already discussed, I think we pretty much agree that those were acceptable changes. So with that, I'm ready to take notes. Okay. I think a good place to start is always at the beginning. Let's first go and I'm using best email as kind of a guide here like she did. The RFQ, drafted by purchasing is requested by Commissioner Coleman, best comments concerning that she preferred to use her basic RFQ format for consistency. I think that's a good idea. Are we in agreement or anybody have a problem with that? I see all heads shaking. Yes, so we're okay there. Task 10 was added by Commissioner Coleman regarding monthly detail, the county and the services? She says I believe this is a significant deliverable that should be included in the final version. Question. We currently get a monthly bill that outlines the monthly bill that outlines the time spent, a detailed list of the time spent, and then we have our monthly status reports as far as the projects. I think we all have test force meetings. What do you all have in mind as far as what would be different than those two things? Commissioner Coleman. I Not only been a commissioner for what six months I said I've only been a commissioner for six months You know, although I've done counting work for a long time, and you know, it's a different position But one of the things I've noticed through my tenure as an employee and now as a county commissioner is that we have a problem with Follow-through That is one of our problems, just not anybody in particular, but it's just as a organization as a whole. I find myself asking for things, and then forgetting that I'd ask for it, and then wondering if it'd been delivered or not. And one of the things I would like for somebody whoever is doing this is so well paid, right? I would like to know not just necessarily what you asked him, but I would like if he's been assigned a task or whoever gets his contract to say, look, I was awarded or told to do, A through Z task, all right? And then I completed A through Z task. And then by him providing those reports, I can find, A, I asked for this, He didn't produce it, or he did, right? And it puts the onus on the person providing the services to keep track of it and to be able to hold, be able to held accountable as opposed to just a billing statement. Plus, I think that if I find out that, you know, Judge Horn or Commissioner Mitchell has assigned a lot of work, it's basically going to go well I understand why he hadn't got back to me because there's a lot of stuff that's been assigned to him at this point. Yes, and I mean, I don't think this is something that's provided for by the transportation report or the billing statement. And I think it's very important that you know, because this contract, I mean I still haven't decided whether it's a luxury we can afford particularly when we're facing such a financial you know shortfall in this budget right but it is basically a we're buying relationships okay we're buying that sort of thing okay so one of the complaints I have about the general art. I don't agree with that statement. Go ahead. Well, I mean, I think we're buying somebody who's going to go and advocate for us, but it's not really a formalized, you know, yeah. And so I would like to know objectively, you know, what's been produced. I think it would help people in the future evaluating this thing. This, you know, whether we go, I would like to have it, an initial deal with three one year terms, with options every year. But I think the person who gets his contract could objectively use this deliverable statement by saying, look, this is all the stuff I produced for you. You know, instead of, you know, I mean, you can, you know, I mean, I'll take, you know, it's like, you're actually able to say, look, this is what I did, A, B, C, D, F, and these are the tasks that I were assigned and I completed everything that I did or I didn't complete it or I only got 75% or look at the workload that I was given. And I think it's a good deliverable to have. I mean, my transportation report is generally for public consumption. You know, it's not really geared towards me. And, you know, one of the things that Judge Horn has taught me very eloquently is that, you know, there's R years, there's regular years, and there's text out here. Exactly how it's been written. Having an monthly transportation report, I mean, not much change is month to month. I like the fact that if I tell whoever our transportation consultant is, I would like for us to find the easement or transportation agreement regarding the new county park that we've entered into in exchange for right away on the Lake Louisville Bridge. To say look, I requested it on this day and I asked, you know, it was done on this day, but it wasn't produced the next month, it wasn't produced the next month, and I can look at it and say, gosh, you know, Bobby Mitchell is loaded up, I'm up for stuff. That's an understandable reason why he hasn't gotten to my project, or that he hadn't been loaded up with stuff, why hasn't it been I think that's some of our, I'm not just agreeing with you. I was just wanting clarification and then the, what was the difference between the billing statement showing the activity of work? Right. At which tells us a work load for one thing. And then, then you see projects moving forward or not moving forward, as you say, as through our, through our updates. And so how do we, what is the difference there? And I guess we need to kind of decide what level of detail. If we say to the consultant, will you call takes dot about this thing? Does he journal that? Does the consultant journal request a decal takes dot? Call takes dot, I mean is that the level of specificity that we want in detail on all the stuff? I mean, we need to have the deliverables. I'm totally with you, Commissioner. I'm not disagreeing with you. I was just curious what level we wanted to do. Well, you know, we need to keep in mind too that when you call, text out or whomever, there's other extenuating circumstances a lot of times, majority of the time on these projects are certainly certainly in a legislative year. We can have projects that can only go so far in development until legislative process is done for, you know, which takes five months. Like the CDA question that was part of the legislative session that kind of vanished. Would you, yeah, more than kind of vanished, but, you know But what we can and can't do, or our person who advises us on transportation, what they can and cannot accomplish, sometimes is really out of the control. So are you going to say, well, gee, we actually get this done by such and such a date, and you didn't get it done. Well, there's reasons it didn't happen. So I'm just saying take that into consideration. Now I agree. I mean, you would say, you know, he'd put in their look, you know, I was assigned regarding that CDA project, though I just later didn't pass it or got beat out by the governor. I mean, my question is, are you thinking more of administrative more administratively as far as processing ICAs and so forth like that? You're thinking more of the paper pushing component. And the problem is, I'll be honest with you, I've done billing, okay? And I have reviewed, I've done billing before as a lawyer, and you know, I have reviewed the current bills that are being submitted and as a client, okay? I know that it's a different animal, but I would have a hard time submitting to a client those type of bills because they are not very descriptive. And I can see why the bills aren't very descriptive because we pay a lump sum. And I mean, that's just the way it's... If I was getting paid a lump sum, I know I would gradually drift off in the detail of my bills. I mean, that's just human nature. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that I think we need a little clarification here. And I was guilty of this, certainly when I first came to the position of county judge, we keep referring to John Polster, the person that's getting- It's his company, ITS. It is his company, ITS, which is a team of people that are behind him, too. John is good as he is, cannot do everything. So we are paying ITS this summer each month. It's not just one person. And I will tell you from talking to individuals that they are under the impression that it is just one person. And I don't really have a big problem with billing statement. I'm familiar enough with all the projects identified in the billing statement that maybe it means more to me or something. I don't know. But if you want to see more, especially, thank you. I can get the word out. You need to be specific as to what you want to see. I just need some clarification because the task seven, whatever the task is I apologize. Task ten that you had put in there, it says monthly accounting services. And so I would have immediately go to a financial report. Will reporting financially be a part of negotiations within a contract? Or is it within the scope of work? Now I want to separate the two. I want to, the financial report, I've got ITS's June Bill in front of me. And I'm just wondering if you're talking about two deliverables within this task. One has to do with accounting for services rendered, our wise, not necessarily. What do I say? I mean, when you do reporting on yours as an attorney, and let's say, and I don't know that you do or don't, let's say that you're handling a divorce court, you're overall, yeah, your overall task is to getting a successful divorce. Do you bill it according to that task and say this is what I have accomplished towards getting this divorce? I mean that's your overall task. I'm trying to define that. Or are these two separate documents, excuse me, documents that you're expecting? One's an accounting document. Do you want that accounting document, financial accounting, for hours billed, if you would, are to meet whatever the requirements of the contract is, along with how that correlates to the task or those two different documents. I think it would be two different documents. I think if we're going to pay a monthly fee for a, you know, it's like you go to the amusement park, you know, you pay one price, get all the rides you can ride. All right. I think I would much rather have a statement of deliverables, OK, what was completed and asked, you know, what was completed this month, what was asked for this month, as opposed to the amount of time that was apportioned per project. Because unless that's required by the auditor and you know, I'm not going to get in his business whatever he details is what's going to be paid, but I would like to know that, you know, he was asked to work on this project by Ron Roshan with the NTTA regarding this legislation. Okay, and this is what he progressed on that. project by Ron Rashon with the NTTA regarding this legislation. And this is what he progressed on that. Now, it was not able to be completed due to legislative measures or that the fact that I asked him to, you know, consider the expansion of, you know, 455 from downtown, saying or out to FM 2450 as a possibility. And you know, he can say, you know, these are the three things I did in regards to that project. It's difficult in my opinion to kind of read that from his billing statements. What how do we then? How do we then how does the auditor then know? Went okay I'm trying to I'm trying to separate. I agree with you. I think it's a. I know what those tasks are in order to approve a billing that's related to that task. Let's say that I give a task to that consultant of such and such and such and I say I've got this date as a deliverable date. I'm just trying to get in my wrap my mind around how do you do that? That would be too different. It is too and under compensation terms, the part of the contract which is on page 13 of 20, that discusses how the itemized bill invoice shall come in and how it will be approved by the auditor. And I think the word accounting and test 10 is probably a little confusing but it's detailed accounting of services, not accounting of records. So they are two separate documents. The bill will come in with the, just as it's been requested in the past with the itemized services listed but it is a lump sum payment and then Task 10 is a report that would come to commissioners court on the services that have been Promoted who negotiates that we do that through the through the scope of the work or do we do that? negotiation of the contract and negotiates what I'm sorry the negotiation on that particular task and negotiates what I'm sorry. The negotiation of that particular task and how it's structured, how it's to look. What we are at our stage. I have a suggestion on that as well. We could add a deliver for them to give us a couple of sample reports. And then once we select the firm most qualified, then commissioners court can negotiate anything they want with that firm. That's what I'm saying. This is just a qualification statement, so, but we could have it deliverable so they could suggest us some formats for types of reports that you'd like to look at. The best part about that is if you have five firms respond, you get to see five different versions of reports and pick which one you like. You know. Thank you. The way I think this would play out is we would have three reports. One would be a transportation report which kind of gives a, we would all receive which would be a more project specific obviously and the milestones and accomplishments which happened or didn't happen that last month. One would be a billing statement which would be kind of an activity of time to include discussions with text-docs and discussions at RTC and meetings attended and kind of more of a time and allocation. And then one would be more of a detailed accounting as far as deliverables, as far as paperwork process, agreements reached, terms negotiated, etc. Is that we all have a clear vision? Is that what we all want? I agree. I mean, like for me, one of the things that I'm with you on that, I think an excellent example is the Denton County thoroughfare plant. Okay, that's one of the things I would have liked to see. I know we haven't had really an updated one. I can't sure if it's the late 80s or early 90s. But that's something that is specifically requested as a deliverable, okay, in our current contract. I got a letter from the entity, I mean from the organization you're on the board. I always get what they are to say. Yeah, the cog, RTC, and they basically said, hey, we sent you stuff in 2005. We haven't heard from you guys. Do you still plan on updating your thoroughfare plan? And it got sent to me because I took over for the past person who is our RTC person. I was like, yeah, you know, I want to do that. because I took over for the past person who is our RTC person. I was like, yeah, I want to do that. And how do we get this done? Well, they sent me this stuff. And they said, basically, I need to work with our transportation consultant to get that completed. Now, to me, this is not something I can say, ITS, we don't deserve to have you anymore, because I don't believe it's their fault that this got kind of pushed to the side, okay? I think it's our fault, but it goes back to the thing where you know I talked about we're great at getting projects started, but we're horrible at completing them. I mean that's just you get in county. I mean that's something you know that's one of our problems, But if we could have that in our room. It's a awful broad statement for all these officials and staff. But go ahead. What my point is is that if we had a statement of deliverables, we would say, look, we're going to do that. The RTC plan has been out there. And we would have it out there every month saying, look, this hasn't been completed. It's been requested. It hasn't been completed. It's been requested, it hasn't been completed. Well why hasn't it been completed? Well, the commissioner who chose to make that as their project really didn't provide the follow-through. And I think that would be something that would remind all of us, because I think a thoroughfare plan for the county is something that's important to all five of us as members of the commission's court. I'm with you. I don't want to suggest some language change on that test 10, provide a monthly detailed statement on status of deliverables for that first sentence and that my clarify one page at the packet. That's on page six of 20 test 10, provide a monthly detailed statement on status of deliverables. Okay. That suffice. That would be fine by me. monthly detailed statement on status of deliverables. Okay. That suffice? That would be fine by me. Okay. And then I would recommend adding on page 8, a number 5 under B that has a sample report to match that test 10 so we can see what they would recommend. A.J. Quatt. At the very top, at a five and have them submit, this is the submitter section, have them submit and they're response to a sample report to meet the requirements of task 10. Now, we're still referring to the proposal that you put before the court. Is that correct? Right. We're working through it. I see. I'll say that at the end we'll have a combined version, but I'm trying to just, those points might be different to ask or whatever, but okay. Okay. Then the RQ presented by me as amended by purchasing. She's there first comment there about depending on the final scope agreed upon the title of the RQ may be more appropriate as transportation strategic planning funding and project management services. Okay, everybody. I think we skipped one. Yes, yes. The last bullet on section three. Very right. And that's the disclosure section. The way it reads is identify all other government entities for whom you currently represent what project you represent them on and to what extent your representation in compasses. And that's in the disclosure section and that's a submittal for review. I'm on page eight, the very last time. I'm on page eight, eight of 20. Eight of 20. Eight of the RFQ and it's the very last item. Identify all other government entities for whom you currently represent what project you represent them on and to what extent your representation in cuts is. I'd like to say don't work for any other government entities. You know I feel about that. So that's going to be a sticking point for me on all of them. Well, and this is a submittal though. So before you select them, they will have other contracts. So depending on how you do that. So you want to see, this is who are you currently doing business with? That's part of the evaluation process. It's a submittal to us. It's not a contract requirement. It's a submittal. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm an engineer. Whoever, Bobby, if you're going to hear somebody that didn't work for anybody else, you're going to spend a whole heck of a lot of money. I mean, I don't need any other work. I was talking about after they were hired, Mary. So government entities. All right. So we're okay with section three that eight through 20 is best recommendation recommended. Okay, now go on to the next page of best email. And that's where she recommended what she believed to be a more appropriate title. Same transportation strategic planning, funding and project management services. Seeing transportation strategic planning funding and project management services 16. I hold up. I'm like email timed out and I have her deal on there. I can't get it to come up Okay, sorry got it That's the language that was in the RFQ submitted by Mary, but it may be more appropriate at this time. I just wanted to suggest that. Obviously, I like it. Are you all okay with that? Again, would you provision the title of it? What Beth said in her email is depending on the final scope agreed upon, the title of the RFQ may be more appropriate as transportation strategic planning, comma, funding, and project management services. We're just trying to find a- Find with that. For all encompassing appropriate title, heads not very well going up and down Beth. The next point, page 4, fourth paragraph includes language regarding an independent contractor and she says, I recommend this being included. And just real quick, the agenda book got put together a little bit funny and so we're on page, that items on page 132 of your agenda book. If you're looking at that, they put the second contract in front of the RFQ, so there's a lot of documents in there. That's just standard contract language that wasn't in the previous that I recommend, actually Kim recommended it and I added it. So, comments? We okay with that? Okay. Then page five, section two, the background information is good to include and should be included once the, verbally just read upon. This is where I needed help getting background information. the first one. The first one is the first one. The first one is the first one. The first one is the first one. The first one is the first one. The first one is the first one. The first one is the first one. The first one is the first one. The first one is the first one. The first one is the first one. The first one is the first one. The first one is the first one. The first one is the first one. The and we've not really explained that. Is that the title we want to use? Or is it transportation manager? I think you probably ought to agree on that because that's how it will be referred to probably from here on out. So, they should manage it. What are we going to do? Just contractor or consultant? I mean, it's pointed out by Judge Horn. We're not contracting for one person. We're contracting with an entity. Oh, okay. Yeah, you're right. Yeah, and I think we can just put the word consultant there because that's just unfamiliar. So there's a couple of places in that. But otherwise, I think it looks good and I'll recommend just keeping it. Okay, and then in her next paragraph, we're talking about, well, she says I also want to recommend that you keep term a bridge that was presented by Kim Gillis in both contracts. The county has a comprehensive contract plan where all contracts are reviewed on a regular schedule. This contract has not been processed by purchasing since its inception and was renewed in visions of the Professional Procurement Act by Commissioner Cork. While this is legal, it is always in the courts best interest to contact for specific terms with the expectation to recalicit at the end of the term. And I don't have a problem with that, but like Commissioner Coleman just said, and I've said it many times, we have human years, dog years, and textile years. It takes a long time, takes too long to get projects done. And to have somebody on a one-year agreement, I don't think it's long enough. I don't think that's an approach. I think we have need to have a contract for a longer period of time, but review at annual is what I'm trying to say. He's just like the tax collection contracts number of years ago for the Link with Tax Collection to give a Link with Taxet tax firm a one or two year contract when they don't even give the Lincolet accounts turned over to them till July 1 and you don't know what kind of job they did with what was given to them until June 30th of the next year to just have a two year contract doesn't give you a whole picture of what they are or are not capable of doing. And I think a certain degree this applies here so I would recommend a longer contract but perhaps with like an annual review so that it comes up for discussion. So I mean my dad we do have several contracts that are like three years with two renewals. And those fall only on those contracts where there is a significant startup cost or long deliveries of services so that we can actually realize the results of that contract. And also we don't burden the company with a one-year contract. If you do a one-year only, even though there's renewals out there, they know at the end of that year you can terminate for any reason. If they have significant upfront costs to start that service, their cost to you will be higher. If you spread it out and it's a two-year or three-year term, they will amortize their cost over that period of time. It'll be less cost to the county because they they hold the risk of all their upfront cost in that first term so so I really recommend a two year three year renewals and but I do I would recommend a very specific renewal end date I mean the maximum term of the contract is five years or six years. Whatever you want to do, but I do recommend that you have two or three years as your initial term. And I think that's the best interest to the county for this type of contract. I think three years with annual evaluations. Well, then a renewable, what, one or two times, what are you comfortable with? I think five years is acceptable. So if you do a three-year term with two renewal options that's a maximum of five years, then you automatically recelicit. What is our contract currently now? Does it, are we in to renewable every year, past the initial date of it? This term and a new contract submitted each year. Is that correct, Kim? I would like two years with three one-year renewals or three one-year options. We've had a year-to-year for the past 12 years. Three years with one year option or two with how many options? Two years. Two with three one year options. Two year initial term with three one year options. Yes. So we would have it if we did a two and three one years would have two, two year contract and they would be up for review would we go out to this RFP process on year three or five? We would have the option to if commissioners, that would be solely commissioners court decision on whether or not you wanted to take the renewal options. If you didn't want to, then you certainly could just be reissue on RFQ. But if services satisfactory, it's usually in our best interest to renew them. And of course you have the provisions in the contract. If services not satisfactory, you have provisions to terminate for default and those would be handled that way. If we go off for the RFQ and we recommend you to us the three years, is that because if a new vendor was awarded that contract, it a start up not the initial expense of the start up but the initial methodology or getting brought up to a certain point would it be fair to enter into a short two-year contract to that vendor? Two or three years, I believe would be acceptable. I don't think it'd make a lot of difference. The both of them are cost effective for the firm and which in reality comes back to the county but also in the deliverables. You're not going to see results the first week. You're just not going to see it for a period of time. You're fine with a three-year, for this type of contract, a three-year, with two, one-years. I'm fine with that, but I'm also fine with two-years and three renewals. Either way, I believe, is acceptable. I think it would be better if we did a two-year term reviewed after two years and determined whether we want to exercise the option for three more years. For three more years? I don't get that. Get that. So, we have to have a point is we have three one-year options. So, we do it for two years. For three more years, say the right one for five years. We do it for two years and then they get up to, you know, they want you to get up to speed one year to do it. And then on that third year we decide when are the weather now we want to continue with them for another year. Up to three times before we go off. Out to the RFQ. That's correct. I'm thinking in my head. I'm sorry. I apologize. We just had a church vote on our pastor and I'm trying to think this electing for two years with an option of three. I'm sorry. I'm just Well, we need to make a decision on this so Beth knows which way to put it in the proposed contract So what's your pleasure? Two years three year. that's really a question. Either one is fine with me. Either wheels turning. I'm okay with either one. I'm okay with either one too. So if he has two or three. He'll desire for the two. Okay, negative two year contract with option two. I'm doing it for three more years. One year at a time, I'm assuming. Right. And then there's always an escape clause and all good contracts. And at the end of five years, we do another RQ. All right. All right. Moving right along. Mary, I think we skipped one. The presumiddle conference. It's a middle. What presumiddle conference? It would be. Okay. I did that. Objection on this. I don't think there's any objection to them. Okay. Okay. The next section is just all the contract one. Yes. Hopefully we can get done with this pretty quick and Sherry we're going to squeeze you in before we go lunch so you can tap. Okay. Moving right along here, all the contract language Kim added is critical to project two projects. Yeah, protect the interests of the county for all of our contracts and I recommend these provisions remain. Find with me. The next section I've already gone over, it's just kind of reminders on the submittal. Then those last four bullets are what I identified as things that need to be decided. Yeah. Because I do have two full scopes of work. So we've already got a refined scope of work. I have two. I mean, well, yeah. We did agree on that one task, but all the other task, I don't know which ones you want to go with. That's horn and run. I would think that, I mean, even though I think the scope of work that you submitted is extremely detailed, which lends itself to restricting them out of bidders, I'd be fine with that as long as the two additional scopes of work or task that were suggested by Ron, which would be the deliberables and the thoroughfare plan. I think it's very important that we have as a deliverable, as you know, that we have a thoroughfare plan included in that may have not been included in yours as an oversight. But it is and I got it. And that's when the one that I think that's what you included in your. Yeah. And and and. And for those that what I did was to I took. I took your document, your initial RFQ proposal. I took Mary's. It's just an exercise that I do to help me with discussion and combined your comments with those two documents and took the scope of work which I agree with Commissioner Coleman, the scope of work that was in marriage document to me better defines what we are expectation of that job to be and then added the two tasks out of your initial which was task I believe 10 and added that as task I apologize either that one with the accounting services and the other the third-fair plan so the maximum task that was in my hybrid is eight, I believe. And I have copies of those. I printed one out. Yeah, hard copies of those. Or if you don't have those. But did you get the one from Commissioner Richon? I have an email from him. Let me. Is your. Yeah. I'll sorry. I have others. I understand sorry. What I understand Commissioner Vershon, you included the engineering requirements. Yes. Well, which engineering pharmacy you talked about that they that they are their principal be a registered engineer with the Let me give you the exact. I thought you had put that on there. Let me see what the language I think, let me get it in there. All selected firms will be registered on 412. Right in the middle, under scopa services. Under scopa service, all selected firms will be, this is my hybrid. All selected firms will be registered with the Texas Board of Professional Engineers, the SEK Electric Consultant would be ineligible for consideration and need to design roll within the Kent Dink County Transpiration Program or project submitter directly by the count. So that's Mary's language. I can see. That's one. Who's gonna beat them if they can't work on other projects in the county? I think that's a restriction that should be removed. I would want them to work on work on any accounts in the county, but y'all are telling me I can't do this. I think that's a restriction that should be removed. I'm getting there. I would want them to work on any counts in the county, but y'all are telling me I can't do that. But I mean, I think this is some of the same restrictions that I want. So do you accept that language or do you do not accept that language? Well, I accepted if you're talking about Everybody I mean everybody I mean if it if it says that you don't work for any cities either Well, I'll say and you don't want to accept it, so What I thought is a healthy compromise would be and This was more in the language of the contract that was brought forth, but we don't... what we would do is say, look, if you're going to be our consultant and you want to do additional engineering or design work for the county, you have to ask us to waive the prohibition on you doing it. And if you, we waived it, then we have it allow you to bid it. That would be similar to the situation like our current company, I guess, ITS from what I believe has a consulting contract with the City of Denton. The way our current contract would be written is I would propose that we don't want to, we don't want the same consultant work in both ends of the deal. I have a bond project, which is May Hill, that I'll be working soon on the city of Denton with. And I think it would be a conflict of interest to have him deciding how much the city would be putting in. And if it's a two person deal, you really don't want to have the same consultant working both ends, knowing what the finances are both and what, you know, apportioning the cost, basically on his decision. And if he was going to do that or if the company was going to do that, I'd like to have us, you know, fully disclosed in the commissioners court say, all right, we think that you're, you know, both the city and the county's interests are aligned in that matter. So, you know, go forth and prosper in both representatives both on the matter or we can say look the county really wants to spend as less money as possible you either represent us in this matter but you don't represent the city to me you don't want to foreclose either possibility I think you know there's a situation where our interest would be aligned you know what I mean and then there'd be an interest there'd be a situation where our interest weren't aligned line. I don't think we should wholesale prohibit the practice but I think as a general idea we should say this is a bad idea but we recognize there might be circumstances where this might be needed and if you fully disclose that to us we will waive that conflict and tell you to proceed. I want to, can I ask? Let me just say something, and I'll be glad to call on your commissioner. And that is, Commissioner Cullen, you've not, I mean, I know you sat in on the transportation meetings and stuff in putting together the bond package. I think we need to be real careful here and not cause ourselves trouble, because when you put together the bond election, every single commissioner is talking to every city within their precinct to see where we can work together to collectively advance a project as expeditiously as we possibly can. So to limit, whether it's ITS or whoever it is, to limit this person or company from, this is what we were talking about earlier about navigating the waters, not only legislatively, but you've got to be able to work with these cities. It's in their best interests, in the residence best interest to team up, to draw your funds from COD from the state, from whatever, you know, how we're going to get this project done and where a city might give you more on this deal, we may put in more on this deal because the timing is right to do it. We have to be careful to not tire on hands here Come on is exactly right you cannot serve to masters. I have a problem with it. He's exactly right and he's stated exactly what I have a problem with Going into all the details, but he's exactly right Okay, and he asked us he was patient with me. I'd like to call him in the next one. Okay. I, I, I don't know where it went arrive, but I don't know that this statement that I just read has anything to do with what you guys are just arguing. Although I'll point out in the contract on 19 of 20, the, and I didn't draw up a hybrid contract, but I would point out in those that document which is a conflict of interest and disclosure. It says, let me remind everybody of this consultant of firm, I'm starting 18 of 20. Now this is, I'm sorry, this is the original contract sample. In the agenda of a compite to 112. It's consultant of firms that it has no potential or actual conflicts of interest in providing service to Denton County. Under this agreement agrees that it shall not enter into other contractual agreements that could reasonably create an appearance in propriety, nor potential or actual complex of interest consultant degrees that when representing Dint County on a Transposure Matter it shall not represent a municipality or other governmental entity on that same matter without providing a full disclosure of such representation and acquiring written consent, excuse me, and a waiver conflict from the Dint County. It also, if you want to take it out of context, look at that last paragraph, it says, not abstaining the language set forth in this provision, consultant shall not represent Denton County on one side of a transaction and another entity on the other side of said transaction. I mean, we already have it in the potential language of the concern that you have within that within the confidentiality. This particular paragraph, all selected firms will be registered with Texas Board of Professional Engineers. The selected consultant will be ineligible for consideration any design role within Denton County Transportation Program on projects administered directly by the county. Those are two to me are two separate items. That says that whoever bids on this cannot turn around and then bid on engineering services as a derivative of this agreement. I agree with your point, but to me I think that would limit the amount of people who had been on that. Which one? Which one of you? I don't know. The one that says if you are consultant, you don't get to bid on any engineering projects. And that's why I thought that, and I like the second, I like the provisions that are in the contract that you read out. But I also could see a situation where there might, you know, where our interests might be aligned. And that's why in the contract it says that if you want to participate in representing two clients, you would provide full disclosure of separation and a choir written consent and a waiver of conflict from Denton County. In other words we would our consultant who in this contract owes us a high fiduciary duty would say look you guys you're about to jump off into that pool with no water. I want to let you know that I am also representing the city of Denton in their negotiations on Mayhale because I'm their paid transportation consultant and I'm also your paid transportation consultant and I think your interest are aligned because I'm getting some state and federal money will you allow me to represent both on the same matter and we say yeah you're doing a great job go get a federal money you you know a rising tide raises all ships move forward but I like you know I think and you know in regards to open government and stuff that's a good idea to have that discussed. I would just like that same standard be applied to our transportation consultant being able to bid on other county business because I think we would defeat the purpose of going out for our FQ if we had such detailed and prohibitive restrictions that nobody else would bid. I think we would defeat ourselves if we wind up only having one bidder on this contract. I think we should leave us the option of saying look if you get our consulting contract, generally you're not going to be able to bid on other county business. But if you obtain a waiver, we will let you do it. Just like if you sign onto this, we don't want to, we want to be here. If we're going to pay you almost $400,000, we owe you OS your high duty of loyalty, but we understand that you may be able to get other governmental entities that may interact with us, and if we think those interests are aligned, we'll let you also get money from those governmental entities. But we just want to know about it. That's what the contract says. Yeah, but the thing is, you know, I think we should express that in the RFQ, because we don't want to scare off potential bidters. What would you rather have a $360,000 transportation contract or a $10 million engineering contract? I mean, people who are in that... Well, and people who are more in the question... Thanks for chasing the $10 million engineering contract may not bid on it on the smaller consulting contract if they know that they are always prohibited for fitting on other business. Now they think- I'm going to talk. I'm saying if they pay for the money they pay for the money they pay for the money they pay. The question that I have the floor, thank you. The question that no one has asked, and I asked you last week, I guess, is when we talked about this, is if you have a firm that has the consulting managerial role, which reviews engineering statements, reviews engineering, their bills, their quotes, and all that, and then you also have them doing the design work. You've got the fox guarding the hen house. And so if you have all this wonderful rhetoric about open government and all this and I agree with you. But it's not consistent with then turning around if People have heartburn with him working a firm working for a public agency Then we're going and if there's heartburn with that and there's no heartburn with a private firm Working for the county and also reviewing their own bills and their own their own internal stuff. I I don't I don't understand it if you can sell me on the safeguards there You I'll be open to that. I'm just not understanding how a firm if review Reviewing their own cost estimates and all that kind of stuff And I mean I know how this position holds those firms to the fire and beats them up on calls and everything is our review statements and say this doesn't look right This seems high and we go back and we hammer it out and so I'm supposed to do that with one of these firms and Dallas or whatever and then they go beat Themself up on their own deal. I mean I You've got to you've got to help me with that Only if they've come to the commissioners port and said look I want to I want to, you know, I'm your transportation consultant, but I want also bid on, you know, the re-selecturing of this TechStyle project, which is, you know, 1383, FM 1383. And I'm going to be at TechStyle, you know, that's a TechStyle project where the county is providing funding, and I would like to be able to bid on that. All right. We would say, I mean, you're not answering my, you're not answering my question about how is the firm going to negotiate against himself on bills and so forth and and and and provide safeguards there. I'm not, I'm not, I'm open. I've been open to this. I'm talking. I'm talking. I'm talking. I'm talking. You're not listening. What's new? I am saying you have not- Commissioner Coleman, please. Andy Eads has the floor. Commissioner Eads has the floor. Let's let him out. Thank you, Judge. Appreciate the sidebar comment. Go ahead, Andy. But I'm saying is I've been open to this whole process Looking just looking at all these proposals that your proposal at Mary's at Ron's hybrid approach looking at that I'm totally in support and in favor. I think now is the time to do this RFQ I think this court realizes this we have more projects and we've ever had it We were issuing more money than we've ever had. I think the timing is right. I support it. I think everyone member of this court supports it as your RTC representative. I realize in great detail the financial challenges that Ditton County and Texas and the nation is facing and we can go into that in greater detail later time, but the the necessity or luxury item of this, you know, I think that this is This is an important contract we need to do That I believe in doing this for two and a half years There is value in these type of services whoever does the services and again, I'm open to that, that's where we're going through this process. I'm just, and I understand Commissioner Mitchell and her heartburn, and she's been consistent with that about public agencies, any firm representative public agencies here in the county. And I understand that I'm a strong advocate for the private sector in these firms. I don't, I think they're very efficient. That's why I didn't mind doing away with some of our engineering that we had in house here and farming that out to the firms. I don't mind that and because they can get things done in a fast manner, which we had a pattern. As you said, Commissioner Coleman, not getting things done. We had some challenges there. I'm all supportive of the firms. What I have a problem with is them monitoring the contract. Just in my experience of a couple of years, we all have different experiences on this court doing projects, looking at statements that come forward and the role that I've played, the role our consultant has played and I'm saying seeing that in practice I think there's going to be a challenge with them negotiating against themselves or them managing themselves. And so and if you have you've expressed you know we have a maybe a tough time with follow through and getting things done and everything. I mean that happens right now with somebody managing them much less without that the managing itself if y'all can convince me that I'll be able to when I yield the floor Mr. Common And I think the position that you are putting out there is a situation that is unlikely to pass. Because, and I have explained before, and as you so eloquently said, I'm not listening, well, I would attribute that to you as well. The only way that that conflict of interest would come to pass that you describe is if they first came to the commissioners court and said, look, I'm your transportation consultant, I want to bid on these other projects. Will you let me do it? And I'm sure as you've stated, you'll say no. And then we move on our merry way. But I think it's a bad policy. And I think you know what you're doing to put that in there to restrict the number of bidders. I think it would be very defeating if we draft our RFQs so tight that we guarantee we only have one company bid. Let's not let them say him. Well that, my point is, is if you would listen, is that the only way that your situation would come up is if for some reason the commissioners court granted a waiver. So as my grandmother would say, you're borrowing trouble for something that doesn't exist. All right? And I've tried to explain that to you. Now, if you don't understand, that's fine. But the situation that you describe will very unlikely come to pass. But I think in the interest of full disclosure, we make well-informed decisions. You make informed decisions by having information. If we're going to pay a lot of money, it's not a bad idea to have these people come before us and say, look, I'm about to enter into a transaction, will you let me do it? If they do it without informing us, the way this proposed contract is drafted, the contract immediately ends. Let's do this, folks. It's 10 after 12. Cherries been sitting here waiting patiently and let's hydrate this over lunch. Let's take Cherry's information up and take a break for lunch and come back and finish this. Okay. Thank you for waiting patiently, Shane. For not so patiently. I haven't said no, I'm patient. Okay. That's the time I go for a patient. Okay. That's the vinaigrette for receiving. Oh, of course. Here are a couple of requests here. There are two new hires being appealed, which is a senior deputy clerk and assistant department supervisor. The impact of both of those positions would be $106,248. There's information beginning of A2 of your packet for those two positions. And then after that, we'll hear a second appeal that has funding source is the District Clerk Records Management Fund. And we'll skip to page A32. Hey, ready? Ready? Good to go. All right. The first one is the out of the district clerk's budget, the two new positions. One's the assistant department supervisor, which would be in the criminal department over the felony records, and the other one would be a senior deputy clerk, which would be more in the civil and the family. Obviously, we're all aware that the caseload has increased dramatically over the past 10 years. Since I've been in office, I think I have been extremely conservative over those past 10 years asking for new employees. I haven't the last two years when I probably should have. And it's really come back to bite us at this point. We know we're getting this new court based upon the rise and the increase in the caseload and just the number of documents have been filed and I've told you know, whenever they call to ask me, what are you gonna need for this court? And I'm like, well, I don't need anything for in the new court. My caseload is high now. This is what I'm gonna ask for anyway. I've got a chart in there about the to show the increase. We've added 3.5 people in 10 years. The half person is a 20 hour for criminal for the felony records is one part time, 20 hour a week position in 10 years in the felony records department. And they're dying. They need some help. I know the situation is not good this year. the felony records department. And they're dying. They need some help. I know the situation is not good this year. I've held off and been conservative. And when push comes to shove, and I need these people, the economy goes down. And it's hurt in this. But I had to ask that the people in my office have stepped up admirably. The staff has. But I had to come and ask on their behalf you know not just in appeal I thought I'd put the word beg in here you know almost so anyway I'd love for you to take a look at the numbers and see that we can't keep on like this handling this case load it you know it really doesn't matter how many courts there are. If I've got six judges up there to hear these cases or if they're 16, it doesn't matter. I've got this many number of cases, this many case filings, this many documents being filed that have to be processed. And I don't care what kind of technology you put in place. At some point you need hands on. People have got to look at the documents and interpret what they are, figure out where they need to go, who needs to see them. And I just need more people to help with that. Especially, I need both, but man, especially in criminal. They're really hurting there. The other appeal is out of the records management fund. This has to do. It was a part time position that I'd asked for for 20 hours a week for one year to pay for a web developer for the jury system. We are on our second vendor with the jury application where jurors can go in and complete their questionnaire. They can file for a disqualification or an exemption or postpone themselves. The first vendor we had for like four years wasn't that great. Their support was horrible. We've gone with a second vendor now. And although it's better and it has helped us more, it's still not where I would like it to be. And I really would like to look at having a customized jury web application. Just it's kind of like this is what they have, and this is what they'll support. And if you want to customize it in any way for your county or they allow some, but not as much as I would like. And I would love to have that more in-house where I'd have more control of it. Yes, ma'am. Well, I don't know a man's good. I had talked to Kevin about this several years ago because this is what I wanted to do many years ago and he just didn't have someone to do that. So now this records management fund is there that can only be used by the district clerk and there's enough funding there that you can use it for employees. So this is an ideal situation. So what I put in was like I said one year for 20 hours a week to come in and write the application, spend the time learning our system, write it like we need get it customized like we want, and then Kevin's department would oversee it and support it at that point. Now Donna's worked up some numbers I guess has talked to Kevin also and has an alternative. Can you tell me about that? We actually don't have a number at this point in time, but I ask Kevin, you know, what would our approach be, or would it be feasible to hire someone on a contract basis versus an employee that's only here for a year and part time with that? And he thinks that we can probably find someone that would do that. We just have to make sure that we include, when we contract with someone like that language that indicates that this programming they're doing for us becomes due in county property lots of times when they program they have rights to it. So we just have to make sure we had a specific contract. Now as far as an hourly rate, you know that they would charge, we're not exactly sure what that would be, but we can do some further research if the court is interested in that. If I could, there's some information in your packet as well on page A36 and A37. And what this is is a fund analysis report that shows based on the budget that we recommended that this fund would end with a total of $54,992 with the appeal that Sherry has submitted, it would take that fund balance down to $483, which concerns me in that if our revenue estimates are low, the auditors are usually pretty conservative, but if for some reason it's low, we could really have a situation where we'd run out of funds and I talked with Sherry about that this morning and she had indicated we could even lower what is their inappropriate contingency line item that's in the budget now. About twenty thousand dollars in the inappropriate contingency line item you know that can we can lower that to 10 or five and you could I just have concerns when you're really close to that prior years. I'm sorry. What's been the history of going into her unappropriated contingency in prior years? We have used it on occasion but not not not a lot. It's simply it's there there for emergencies. It's the revenue and the is there. I mean, this money is coming in every year, you know? And so I've put it in the line item just in case. If it's there, I'm able to, and for some reason, we need something, something that it's expected comes up, the money's there. And I'm not coming and saying to you to say, can I get somebody from the general fund on appropriated contingency, you know, it's already there, it's available for the clerk to you. So lowering it, that's its purpose is to be there for things that we need. The fund generates about $45,000, $46,000 a year in fees. So typically we wouldn't really want to expend more than we generate in a given year. This being a one-time situation, where it'd be a contract or an employee, I wouldn't really hurt the fund that much. I'd rather see a contract to me. And you guys like to see that? I'll certainly get with Kevin, and we'll see what he can help me do some research on what we might, could find someone on an hourly rate and compare it to the two options, have two options for you to consider. This money is there, this money will be there and is there. That'll sting, would you prefer the part-time employee as opposed to the contract? It really doesn't, it doesn't matter to me. I'm good with it and Kevin has said that he will assist, you know, especially in interviewing and hiring someone because he's a person that's a lot more about that than I do. So, which dreams? Cherry, did you say you currently have a program and it's just not working for you? Or you've done it in the past? Or what? It works. Okay, but not as good as what he could you know that the point is is to have the juror to go online and complete their questionnaire and if you've got a juror if it's not As easy to use as it could be they're calling us The head of yeah, if saving us time if I'm spending time online walking them through it, you know, I'm with you. Okay Mr. Martian did you have something else? All right Thank you decision now. Thank you. have something else? No. All right. We won't be making a decision now. Thank you all. Thank you for your time. All right. Let's break for lunch. The time you'll come back is 130, time enough. And next appointment is at 130. Okay. We are recessed to 130. Court is reconvened. We'll go back to our budget workshop and our appeals. We'll call on Donna again. Thank you, Judge. Commissioners, we have Danny Brumley's here today to talk about a new position that he has requested. I know that you've all kind of been made aware He Brumley is here today to talk about a new position that he has requested. I know that you've all kind of been made aware of the situation of the need for construction manager with all of our major building projects that are on schedule. On page A9 of your packet, you'll see some information that Danny has put together. The impact of adding this position would be $91,787. So Danny, if you're ready, hey. That's on A19. Thank you. Hello, Danny. Hello, how are everybody doing today? I told the judge that, you know, I've been with the county I've been with the county for 20-something years and I believe this is the first time I've appealed anything. So please be gentle. I've given you between Kevin and I in the Sheriff's Office, we've given you quite a bit of information on this position. I feel like that this would be very beneficial to Denton County, my department, best department, Kevin's department, and the Sheriff's Office to have this position. We've got a lot of projects that are coming on and are already on board that we could dedicate one person to overseeing and running these projects. We have questions from court members. Tell me what the management structure would be. The management structure, the hierarchy, who persons answer will to, what is exactly their job description, what would they be doing, what their scope of work would be, is this a liaison person between facilities, between facilities, between facilities construction projects directly answerable to us. Does this person answerable to a committee? Is it answerable to you? I mean, what kind of structure? I think what we discussed was that it would answer to a committee which would make up of Kevin, Beth, myself and possibly to someone from the Sheriff's Office. But that person I believe would report to court. It would answer and report to court, not to the committee. Well, yeah. I think we'd give them direction as far as our projects, but they would report to court if that makes sense. I believe HR can use the existing job description to come up with a ranking for the position. I'm sorry. I'm lost here. As far as this position goes, I think the question was, what would this position do for... Here it is. Here it is. What I would ask this position to do would be like on the face too of the administration complex, that person would take that project from the beginning and meet with the architects, meet with the contractors, meet with the users of those facilities and coordinate all that. There would be certain functions that he would work with Kevin and Brian on, and they would be certain functions that he would work with Beth on as far as the bid package and things like that. Sorry. I'm sorry. You think it might be appropriate to put this position under Bennett? No, I say the position beyond the commission is cool. That's just my... I know. My opinion is we need this position. I don't really have a position as to where it should be placed. Yeah, but they're going to be whoever it is is going to be working with all the departments who named because they've got projects going on. This region needs to go in the commission school. So we're going to be coordinating with all these different departments to make sure nothing falls through the cracks, but I think they need to report to the court. Okay. I didn't. Well, I did. Thank you. I'm sorry. No, no, Ronald. Well, my other questions is this. My other questions would be this. My correct in that this person would have to, if they're reporting to the court, where are they funded out of? Well, I funded as an employee of the Facilities Department, is a new creative position that has a new creative budget that they would have to maintain or, you know, some, let me give you an example. And, you know, with the Veterans Memorial, we agree that funding the Veterans Memorial and coordinating that budget wise would come through facilities. So, any expenditure that I make with the Veterans Memorial comes from a recommendation or a notation or whatever the requirement is through the facilities and then they would put it on the body that puts it on the agenda and would facilitate that. I'm trying to understand if it's part of facilities. I think what I can't was and I may have said this wrong is that this position would be under the facility's umbrella. But he would make his or hers reports to Commissioner's Court as far as projects. Then who gives him task day to day or is it independent? I mean, is he an independent person that answers to nobody other than the commission courts every Tuesday? Or where does he get his task from from you from this committee? I'm just trying to figure out the organization. I would say he would get it from me and with but with the understanding that the committee we all agree this is what we want him to do. It wouldn't be because we're all asking for it, but we think the best place for it is under the facilities department. So what we would like to do in Beth and Kevin and I talked about it and I think that Lee wouldn't have an issue with that because somebody has to assign what we want him to do and prioritize that. We would do that as a committee because he's doing things for all four of our departments. Well, so are you. I mean, I'm just trying to establish who that person would directly answer to and you're telling me it would answer to the committee that we appoint of department heads but any expenditure or any line item that would facilitate that person would come out of the facilities budget. facilities budget. How about purchasing? Generally all these projects are re-engineered out of there. Maybe not. I'm back here. I don't mind. Our thought was in the job description that we proposed that Amy Ranked was that it would report directly to director of facilities and that the committee is just advisory committee because we want to have weekly meetings so that we know what our projects are doing and so it's really more advisory not reporting to us but we would all be on the same page with every project right now they're kind of piece milled and we're not getting things done as efficiently as we could as we believe we could with someone coordinating those activities. Did I say that correctly? I have no problem at all with the position and I think it's needed. I think that it would be remiss of us of not within the establishment of this having in front of us a Structure where this person answers to who they're accountable to how we would use it how that person would be used I Think we would. I mean, I'm thinking this person is going to need, first of all, a little time to meet with the committee or as a whole or even individually and the architect to get a status of where everything is on each project. And from that point, I think there can be like a, I don't know, weekly or bi biweekly, it depends on how fast things move, report to the court on where everything is. If they need to bring, you know, maybe we can just do a standing agenda item and if we need to bring something up and take action on it, we'll have something posted. But we can do that after the person's been here a little while and to get the status of all the projects. That's kind of what I envision. And they can do their own agenda placements. If there's something needed over and above, the standing agenda placement. They do those agenda placements through facilities though, right? Yeah. You have budget amendments or something like that. But it's going to take them a little while to get up to speed on everything in regardless who it is. But once they get to that point, hopefully they can do a report court kind of recap where everything is and what their plans are for the future. This week we'll be working on this and then the next week give us a status report on that. Is the court give them direction directly from the court or do they give them direction through Dany and he directs them? That's what I'm talking about, what's unclear in life. I think on a day-to-day basis it would be Danny, but you know, if so we have an ascending agenda and an issue comes up, we can deal with it. I would think that if this person is coming to court, you know, we've given you all updates and talking about the changes and talking about the changes or whatever it may be, whether it's my department or You know the Sheriff's Office or Kevin's or best if court as a whole wants him to do something that's related to that project. I don't See that that's an issue I'm not creating an issue. I'm just saying that I just need it to be defined on what the parameters are. But the position would be under the facilities umbrella. The separate line item, so there's an accounting. As it was presented, only includes funds for a computer, software, and telephone unit. Everything else for the position would be funded through the existing vegetative facilities with the exception of they would need a surplus vehicle and some furniture, but they've agreed to try to locate something used in the county. All right. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you, Dean. She's okay. Okay. Mixed on our agenda, Cindy Mitchell's here to talk about the county clerk records management fund. In this department, her request was for a new assistant records manager position. The cost of that position overall was salary and benefits is $66,691. Page 838 of your packet, you'll see the backup data that was included. And just as a friendly reminder, Cindy worked extremely well with us throughout the budget process. And we actually transferred four and a half positions from general fund budget to be funded with the same fund. So I wanted to just, I know you all are all aware of that, but we're talking about the same funding source. I know y'all are all aware of that, but this is the, we're talking about the same funding source. Thank you, Donna. Just to let you guys know, obviously, as the record keeper of just about everything that goes on in the courthouse, we have a lot of information and records to manage. And Ashley is currently the only permanent full-time position paid out of this fund. She handles not only commissioners court but also all of our bulk data sales for real property and those accounts and maintaining those accounts and the information on a weekly basis that's going out. There is so much more that needs to be done, and I couldn't possibly put it on one person to do. Retentions, absolutely, a nightmare in the courts. Usually you get a book of receipts from the auditor and the auditor says, hey, the retention schedule, after you use the last one's three years. Well that's easy. Criminal files, you know, we box them up a year at a time at the end of the year. And of course you have to box them in numerical order because that's the only way you can find them. However, their retention schedules are, you know, on these cases it's ten years after the data conviction. These cases it's three years after the date of conviction. These cases it's three years after the date they finalized probation and I mean it is absolutely there's no way we've got records in every area that need to truly be managed on a more regular permanent basis by an expert and our county records management department just is not equipped with the personnel the time or frankly the responsibility they're my records. I'm a records manager. In addition to this there's a lot of information in the office that I would like to be able to have someone point guard. And so I think between having Ashley and another permanent full-time records manager, I think that we would have the right team in place to handle all of the responsibilities. And then also provide Ashley some backup other than the assistant department supervisor with commissioners court as well. Do you all have any questions for me? I had a question for you. Cynthia, a number of years ago, I worked with not only the Dink County Tax Assessor, not test, but the Lincoln Tassetry, but other law firms too. And you might say a property tax code cleanup to do some standardizing of when certain things happen, you know, it's going to be this percent and it used to be all over the prep. We took a couple years to get it all done, but we finally did. Has there been an effort by your association to do some standardization and records retention, or is there just too much backlash from the judges? Well, at this point, I don't really think it's the judges. The only backlash we have has ever received, and it's only on two pieces of information, the fingerprint card, and the, I lost the word. The DA likes us to keep those. And so we've even worked out an arrangement where, hey, we'll go pull those two pieces of paper and have a file just for those two for future enhancements, but the rest of the record, once it's actually met it's retention schedule needs to go. And you know, Judge, honestly, I think that the association is really now to a point where everyone's at in a position where we're having to look at some standardization, you know, we're out of room. Everybody's out of room. Trees is out of room. And, you know, until we can start meeting our obligations with the current laws that we have, you know, it's it's certainly like you said, two and three years of an effort to get that standardization going. And so I think, you know, we're probably ready for that. It's just we're not able to get there without extra help. Jim Mitchell. How are you going to pay for this person? The Records Management Fund will pay for this just as, you know, the $250,000 that we moved out of the general fund this year probably won't forever stay in the records management fund but however Ashley and this position would remain permanently in this fund and it would continue the fund pays for itself and then some It would continue. The fund pays for itself and then some. And that's why Donna and James and I totally thought that the 250,000 this year with the fund balance and the accrual rate that it wouldn't harm the fund, but it would also, I mean, quarter of a million dollars really help the general fund. And so I think that's, but the fund can easily pay permanently to positions without- Right now, I mean, it wouldn't be- I think about future revenue. I mean, from day one, October 1st, you could pay for the foe and all the benefits. Oh, yes, ma'am. And we currently pay for our entire land recording system, the granicus system. We pay for just about all of the operating expenses, postage, printing, toner, good grief. I mean, if we could have a toner budget, like we have paper budget, we'd really be happy that. But we pay for all of that for the recording department department because of all the property records that we manage, the marriage records that we manage and then the birth and death all have records management fees on those. I just wanted to interject just so you have an idea that this fund has been generating money over and above what our expenses have been for quite a while. In fact, when we had the Records Archive Fund a few years ago, that surplus balance was transferred over and that project was complete. So this fund has over $3 million in it and it's a very appropriate use for those funds. have some questions. We can come back and say two years and say, could we need to borrow? No. Okay. Any other questions? Thank you. Thanks. Let's skip ahead if you'd like. The JP was originally scheduled for 2.15 that they had to change to 3 o'clock. So if you don't mind, we'll go on to the Health Department appeal on page A42 of your packet. You'll see a request for a new hire which is a health technician position. Ostevept positions $58,365. And as you'll see too on your changes sheet, if you look on page 2 of 4 of your legal size changes sheet. I'm sorry, about three or four. You'll see that with this request also we have been made aware that there will be some additional revenue received for the area of immunization and TB services. So we'll be offering revenue of $104,950 with this request. And in turn, Dr. Burton would like to request that $58,365 be allotted for this position. So it's a revenue that is $100,000 in 4,000. I'm sorry. I had a lot of work to do. I had a lot of work to do. I had a lot of that to fund. That's correct. That's correct. Do you have that revenue on hand now? Or you say and you're going to get it? We've been advised by the state. We will have it. The contract is not here. Like a state grant. It is state grant. It is the immunization funding. We've had immunization grant for 15 years. It's never declined. It has always been steady. Or We've had immunization grant for 15 years, it's never declined. It has always been steady or it's even increased to start out at 50,000, it's up to 223,000 now, but next year, we'll be 280,000, and so part of the funding for this position is coming from that. The TB funding, we've only had for a couple of years. This year we finally qualify for statewide assistance. And to do that, we had to have 15 cases, we have to average 15 cases a year for five years. So I mean, that's kind of, it's a mixed blessing. It's good news that we qualify for a lot more funding. It's bad news that we've had a number of cases. It's not that cases are spreading within Denton County. It's about people moving here from Mexico and from China and from Vietnam. And when they come, some of them have TB. And when they have TB, we get out there and we treat them. But it takes a lot of staff time to do that. We have to see them every day for about the first six months. If they can come to us, that's great. If they can't, we're going to go to them and make sure that they take their medicine so that all of us are safe and are not exposed to TB. But the good news is the state's going to provide us with about $108,000 or maybe close to $105,000. But they're providing the funding for it and so that's all good news. You said that the grant has never decreased, but is this? It's just a lump sum of the grant or is it like some of our other grants that's by position and you have it for three years fully funded and it declines. I mean, it's not like that. The immunization grant has never declined. Okay. The type of grant is reimburse for the dollars that we spend they will reimburse. Okay. Any other questions? Believe not, thank you. There is a second request here that we just want to touch base on its project access reallocation. Currently, there are specific line on them set up for this project project but Dr. Burton would like to reallocate $18,000 within that budget. It's basically a zero increased request but since the recommended budget has already been published it will require court approval. There's information on page A46 of your packet. This is kind of a partnership between the Health Department, the hospitals, and the Denton County Medical Society. And in fact, for this year, the medical society has done the administrative work and they're a secretary as part time and she has informed us she just can't do that anymore. And so we've asked to move $18,000 into a contractual line item so that we can contract with someone to take care of that portion of it and help us to be more effective in this program. It won't cost us anything though. It's already in the recommended budget. Well, since it's a zero budget impact and it's already in the recommended budget, I think we're safe to take action on it today if the court members so desired. We have a motion to approve by Commissioner Marchant. Chair will second the discussion. Not adding anything. This is just not adding a zero budget impact. Any no discussion on favor please say aye. Aye. Opposite. Any no discussion on favor please say aye aye. Opposite a name. Motion carries. Thank you. We'll take up the other issue later. Item number nine on our agenda. There are a couple of reallocation requests that were submitted. Court has on the Square Museum grant on page A1 of your packet. Basically the grant was requested at a higher level than was recently approved. So we have this funding included in the budget. So we're actually asking the court to reduce the funding in the grant. By $31,078. Some of this information is summarized on page 104 of your changes sheet. The third department down, court has on the the square, Bayless Selby grant, you'll see the reduction. With that, the county would be picking up a portion of the salary for the assistant that runs the museum, the Bayless Selby House. There would be no salary increase involved with this employee. It's just basically, the is going to be funding. The same level it did in the past, we just thought we were going to get more grant funding to help pay for the position. Also when we were reviewing the appeal, we noticed that the revenue that we had budgeted for this grant was less than it should have been, so we can actually increase revenue by $12,907. We can reduce the expenditures by $31,078 and add $5,753. So we'll be actually giving money back to the court to use through this budget process if you approve this action. But again, this is just to reallocate the money based on the grant that was awarded. There will be no salary increases involved for any employee, even though it looks like removing $4,000 is basically paying that employee's current salary fully with between the grant funds and county budget. Are there questions from members of the court? I mean, is that going to affect our bottom line? Actually, I'll give you more money to work with, because it will be reducing the budget by 31,000, adding five to it and then increasing revenue by 12,907. So it's actually a good situation we're able to bring to you. Questions from members of the court? You want to do it next week? Okay. What's the thing about it? Get back on for next week. The second item that's a reallocation was Probably more of a request from me than it is from Jody and it's to reallocate some money within the emergency management recommended budget on page A31 You'll see that he currently has a line on him that's called vehicle parts. It's for a thousand dollars You'll see that he currently has a line item that's called vehicle parts. It's for $1,000. When in essence, it's really not repairing vehicles. It's to repair generators and some of our homely and security equipment. So we thought it would be more appropriate to create a new line item for him that's called equipment maintenance at $1,000. So it's really just reducing one line item and creating a new one that I think is more appropriate allocation. Approval by Commissioner Eads. Second of that Commissioner Coleman are there any questions? Here none, all in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. You have some information in your packet under the reference section page R8. We just wanted to, we always like to make you aware of what's included in the budget for retirement rate. We'll page on page R8. You'll see that this gives some history of our retirement plan in order to continue the current plan that we have which is employee deposit rate of 7% of the matching ratios staying the same at 220%. Vesting provision is eight years or the rule of 75. We received all the rates from the retirement system that show in order to keep our plan the same. Our rate is going to increase this year. You'll see an effective January 1 to 10.07%. We'll pro-rate that, of course, because three months out of the year, we'll be able to budget for the lower rate. The other point I wanted to make was there's a 20, the COVID increase for retirees shows zero. Typically we try to include 80% of the consumer price index for retirees. This year there's just the cost of living is zero percent. So that's why you're seeing no cost associated with that this year. That's what we've included in the recommended budget. Typically there could be other provisions if you wanted to increase the benefits in this area but because this was impacting our budgets by 3-4 million dollars this year, Amy and our both recommending that we continue the plan that we currently have. This is something that we don't really want to ask for action from you today. We just wanted to update you. There will be a separate agenda posting probably in a few weeks that we will be asking for action on, but I want to just for you to be aware of what was included in the recommended budget. The next item, number 16 on the agenda, I know you had all asked for some turnover history information from me. On page R71 of your packet, you'll see information. I think she shared this with you as well in an email, but I thought you may want to talk about it. Everyone to understand what our turnover rate has been. I also think I emailed you some information about turnover rates and some of the larger departments yesterday afternoon. I have hard copies of anybody needs it, but I think you received it. Yeah, we got it. I have any questions on that or are you just looking at it? One of the things I'm going to ask is Ms. Gillis, I'd ask you yesterday or last Tuesday for legal opinion regarding the ability of us to impose the hiring freeze. Have a that one. There's a little bit of a problem. You're not able to get that one. You just have to get that one. This is the house for that. This is the place. This is the house. This is the house for that. This is the house for that. This is the house for that. This is the house for that. This is the house for that. I'm sorry. Is your mic on? Up. Okay, that's hard to hear. I'm sorry. I don't know. I don't know how it would be if you had a problem that you would be doing. Ask for freezes, but I'll make it mandate. Yeah, that makes a difference. Sorry. It was pretty much all the way. I know we've all seen stuff in the media regarding counties implementing firing freezes. So have you inquired is it purely voluntarily, voluntarily in those areas, or you know, how they've been able to complete those tasks or know those policies? So far, I've talked to one county, it's been voluntary. I mean, if you, you could, the commissioners could can initiate a Pres if we don't vote for any near employees It's actually you're Excuse me, you know, I mean I think the impact that maybe Commissioner Coleman's looking at is those slaughtered those slotted jobs that are not filled now that could be filled in a potential budget year. And what you're saying, if that's what you're talking about is once you allocate the budget amount for that employee and it goes into elected officials' budget, you, based upon opinions, cannot tell them whether to fill it or not. So what would you have to do? Take at a certain point in time, as of this day, any unfilled position we have to eliminate the position before the budget went forward in order to you to fill it. That's, I mean, you would have to do that, wouldn't you? I mean, in essence. That's a good point. I mean, I'm not thinking about it. Ron. I have to eliminate the position. My point is, Ron, is I'm not planning on doing anything right now. But I know from, you know, just anecdotal discussions that I've had with people and friends that I have over at the tax and praise will district is that, you know, we had, you know, what we're facing at 10 million more or less shortfall right now or so, you know, I mean, just anecdotal. I'm not the exact figures, but it's supposedly it's going to get worse than the upcoming year, right? So it's a big planer that I think we need to be prepping for not this budget, but for the next budget, I don't know how our tax revenues are going to go. Obviously we hope for the best, but if we like some of these other counties, have to make provisions for it in the future, based on the legal cases I've read, like Vondi, Vondi1 and some of the attorney general opinions, you can't after the budget is set. Generally, make people comply. And that's the reason I asked Miss Gellist to come up with an opinion that said, look, if we come up during the budget process with a plan where we might have to implement a hiring freeze, because we don't know what kind of budget shortfalls we might have at the end of this year or in the upcoming year, you know, now's the time to plan. You know what I mean? We can't do it, you know, Mary, after we have already adopted the budget and stuff has come for it. And I'm not saying we do it. I'm just saying, look, we need to explore the contingency option, the possibility. In the debate would be, if the only way that you can accomplish that is to eliminate the job slot, then when the economy turns around that same department or elected official would have to come in to argue for that slot being re-initiated in the following I see it. In my discussions with one of the counties, they are leaving the, I'm not saying that this is advisable and it's something that I have to talk to James and Donna about. We can do it here if you want. They're under, they're leaving the positions the same, but they are intentionally underfunding the salary line items to the tune of about 85% of what they believe that the costs will actually be betting on turnover and other things. I know. I know. So that's why you don't have a finished, I mean there are some options and I haven't looked at that. The cleaner approach would be the one we just discussed. But it leaves the problem that Commissioner Marchant just defined, which is that the department is thin without help during that budget year. So that's as far as I've gotten in talking to other counties on how they're creatively, shall we say, managing this problem, not recommending it, just putting it out there. I'm just seeking information for us to so we can add a good, good. That's why I was asking if you could get us some sort of, you know, opinion that we could base our future opinions on. Yes sir, I will. Okay, I'll go one extra. I kind of do things that I'm not so it's a good idea. No, I just think we need to explore the possibilities. That's fine. And we do it, but you know, I'd rather have all the boards and leave them unused than not even look at it. Thank you. Okay. Let me ask. So is kill me. You're going to be between now and next week you'll visit with Donna and James and then I'll work up some options. So that's where we're at. Is that right? There's the walk away. Okay. Our nine of your packet, Commissioner Coleman had asked for some various numbers on raised projections. You'll see this report. I want to make you aware of a couple of changes that you might want to make on your sheet, if you would. At the bottom of the sheet where it says scenario number one, if you're scratched on page R9, nine. Close to the bottom where it's list out three scenarios. The word says scenario number one. If you'll scratch through that and show it to be number two. And scenario number two, if you'll change it to number one. And I'm not finished. Hang on the bottom. Area number three. If you'll scratch through where it says does not include scale adjustment all the way through to evergreen. not include scale adjustment all the way through to Evergreen. So the first scenario here shows you what it would cost to bring all of the employees to the minimum salary scales that were recommended by Evergreen. That cost is $384,000. The second scenario was what Commissioner Coleman had asked was what would it cost for a 2% raise for everybody? That cost is 1.476, $1,476,000. We prepared a third scenario which basically gives a 2% raise first and then puts everybody at minimum which is 1.7 million dollars. So it basically saves you $150,000. It's $150,000 less if you do it in that manner because a lot of your positions would be brought up to minimum with a 2% increase. I know what was that first dollar amount that gave you a scenario to 2% raise for all positions does not include scale adjustments to recommendation of every green most of dollar amount. At 1.7 million dollars 1 million 713 thousand. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That's included in the sheriff. That Members are less than what you saw before provided by Evergreen because that was to put everybody also on step. So now that we don't have a step planned for law enforcement, this is the impact of doing it this way. I think now we have one that's 1.746 and one that's 1.476. Restate the numbers. Okay. I wrote it down wrong. three- three-state numbers you get to my wrote it down wrong about three-quarters of the way down on the spreadsheet ill-sized scenario versus recommended zero percent the first three hundred eighty-four thousand is the cost for bringing everybody to minimum the one million four hundred seventy-six thousand two ninety-five brings gives everybody a two percent and the third scenario one 1 million 713550 puts everybody, gives everybody a 2% and then puts everybody that's not at minimum at minimum. It brings them up to minimum if the even if the 2% if they're below 2% in what recommendation got you. I guess. Okay, wait a minute. So no, you changed those scenarios. The scenario number two is 1476. All these is 1476. All these is 1713. One one million 476,000. The proposed tax that you are based upon the recommended budget, what would that, let's say, here on number one, to bring all the minimums up, what would that increase our tax rate by, and then what would the other scenarios relative to how much more we would have to add to the increased taxes. Okay. Okay. Hanna, if for some reason, I mean, okay, the ITS contract, that's paid for with bond money, correct? But that's interest off the bonds. Correct. It's not a part of our budget document. You decided not to enter into that contract with that free up because we could then use that money to pay bond money correct. We could pay bond debt with that money out of the interest. Turning this to pay the consultant. You could use it to pay off your debt service or you could do more projects. At free up, general fund money that we're using to pay debt. We couldn't, we couldn't propose to not have the transportation consultant and then propose to use some offset money to bring up everybody to minimum. Legally you can't do that. I would thought that if we don't, I know you can't use the bond money for M&O. You can only use it. But I thought that it might offset it or if we use't, I know you can't use the bond money for M&O. You can only use it. But I thought that it might offset it or if we use that money it would free up other money that's unrestricted. But have to use it to either pay down your debt service or you could do more rows. You could not. I understand. But I mean if we're using that money to pay off debt service, are we using any just general revenue money to pay off debt service? We're using, there's a significant, most of the money that pays off debt services tax money, property tax. That's unrestricted debt money. That's unrestricted funds, right? That we're using to pay debt service. Following you, I'm saying. General Advalorem funds to pay off our debt service, correct? We use yes, Advilor and tax money. It's not really General Fund, but... It's unrestricted funds, correct? To pay off the debt? Well, it's not like through our road and bridge tag, right? I mean, it's money that we could use for anything, correct? I think when we adopt a budget and we have the information from our auditor of what our debt service payments are going to be, we have to put that much tax money into that fund. Just saying I think we could use it as an offset. I mean, we wouldn't use this money to pay the ITS money to pay for the employee raises, but if we use that money to pay off debt to- You're saying, we would free up other monies in another account that would be- You may not have to live as much tax money. I agree. That's just kind of the way I figured it is my math. I guess I was off about $24,000, but I kind of, when I originally was thinking about this with offset, we could not do the transportation consultancy and you know have that money as an offset to perhaps bring our employees up to minimum. I just thought throwing out as an idea. I hope so. Here what I said. Okay. I have an answer to the question to bring everybody to minimum would take our tax rate that we're looking at from 4.05% to 4.36%. Look. 4.36%. From 4.05, which is what we have in the recommended budget to 4.36. Now if you'll give me a minute we'll give you the next few numbers here. I mean in layman's terms what would that represent? 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 one tenth of a tenth of a penny. from point two five seven to two point five point two five seven seven six seven to two point five seven seven six six. So almost one tenth is it. Oh gosh, I'm terrible at this. I'm going to get the one from 0.257 to 0.25776. It is. It's like, it's pretty small. I was just thinking if we could realize some savings from if we didn't have the transportation contract we might be able to push that off and meet the requirements of the Evergreen Study. And we also had some discussion the other day about rather than doing the 2% across the board, just doing an adjustment to law enforcement and bringing those people that were a low range up to the minimum of the range. That's what scenario one would do for everybody. Mm-hmm. Everybody. For everybody. To implement that would be less than one tenth of a cent on the recommended Everybody to minimum right right that and And I understand that there may or may not be money to do any of these scenarios and but I do want to say that there are some problems associated with the adjusted ranges that we have. Having people below the minimum, administrative problems. And I think I emailed you probably a month or so ago and told you that we would probably have to make exceptions when we hire people this year and it creates issues in posting minimums on jobs. Scenario 3 and Scenario 1 both would address those problems. Scenario 2 would not fully address those problems. 1.7 million would have addressed it in the... That would be a 5.42% increase or the tax rate would be 0.26038. three eight. 303. Yes. Scenario 2 would be a 5 and hopefully we will have a presentation of the role next week by Steve Mossman and hopefully we will have the effective and rollback tax rate projections as well. So that will give us a final number of what we're working with. But this is again based on our preliminary numbers, based on what we think the effective rate may be, and what kind of new property value we may be receiving as well. Our next timed item is vehicle usage policies. As you all know, I sent an email out last week at the request of court to ask all of our departments what their policies or practices are as far as vehicle usage. I did receive responses from everyone that has a vehicle assigned to them and all that information is provided in your packet. Most of the departments that report to commissioners court, non-elected officials do not allow the use of their vehicles for part time employment outside or even inside the county. The Sheriff's Department and the constables all do allow that typically for security type jobs. I'm sorry. The information starts on page R11 of your packet. That's the email that I sent. I've also included a copy of the vehicle use policy that the court adopted some time ago starting on page R12. There's also provided you with a copy of the Attorney General opinion that we talked about last week with regard to Deputy Sheriff's and being able to require them to pay back for the usage of those vehicles and And then beginning on page R23, you'll see each individual's response. And we can go through that. I've notified everyone involved that this would be discussed at 2.30 today. So they'd be available for any questions that you might have about their policy. And then you'll see through here, run bridge precinct one and precinct four, do not allow the employees to use their vehicles for a part time employment. They do have some take home vehicles for the people that are on call for emergency. Information services follows to the county policy as well as the health department. They indicated in their email that they might occasionally take a vehicle home with their driving to Austin for a trip. The next day and it would be more cost effective to leave from their residents. On page R27 is the response from our engineering department. They have two vehicles of sun. They basically follow policy. Both positions are on call and they use the vehicles on a daily basis. Neither vehicles use for personal use or secondary jobs. Being burdened on page R28 responded for the medical investigators. They do not drive vehicles home. They are used for official county business, no other function. On page R29 there's a response from the judge's office that print mail records management and the judge's office do not use county vehicles for secondary jobs. And the one for the depository officer is taken home so that he can start his job when he leaves home. Page R30 is a response from human resources. The vehicles basically used by the risk manager to travel to accidents. It's not a take home vehicle and they follow our current county policy. Facilities management, that information is included, they have their own in-depth policy as well, but basically they're used, they are not used for secondary jobs, but the techs do take the vehicles home periodically during inclement weather or or if they're on call in some situations. And there's a lot of information that he's included. On page R34, Saul Moore responded for vehicle maintenance that they have one take home vehicle that is assigned to him and he follows the policy of the county. and he follows the policy of the county. Same thing for juvenile probation, juvenile detention, and post-education. They have a very in-depth policy and procedure that I won't go through. That it basically, they use it for transporting juveniles only. They use it for transporting juveniles only. Emergency services on page R45. They basically follow the county policy is set forth by the court. They do have take home vehicles because they're required to respond to emergency incidents. They also use the vehicles while they're on call. They are allowed to take them home. And I believe they are allowed to take their vehicles to part time employment only if they're on call. Is that correct? That rotates from one employee to the other. Okay. HR 46, Steve Mossman's response. No one's allowed to take the tax office vehicle home or use it for anything other than official business. The Sheriff's Department responses on page R47. They say as a matter of internal policy, off duty employment requests were employees will be acting in a security or law enforcement capacity, potentially using their authority as a piece of our only approved within Denton County. Generally employees are not allowed to use their vehicles in off-duty or extra duty assignments and they give some examples as well as for us working the Texas Motor Speedway events and that sort of thing. Constable precinct 1's policies on page R 49. Actually on page R 50 extra duty employment. It's basically they basically have to submit their request for Department approval. They have a form that they are required to fill out They can will not use the vehicle Any employment including self employment will not require the use or potential use of law enforcement authority by the Off-duty employee regular off- employment requires the employees to submit for approval. On page R53 they also state they may not be used in the normal course of regular off duty or extra duty employment except on the assignments contracted through the county or officers may drive to and from work assignments within Ditton County. And they're all here so if I'm not stating things correctly, no, please stand up. This is just a quick snippet. Constable precinct 2, basically on page R65, Mark vehicles will not be taken out of the county except for official business. Epidies assigned to take home vehicle may use the vehicle for transportation 2 and from a part-time job that is police related such as security inside Denton County. Deputies assigned to take home vehicle may use the vehicle for transportation to and from a part-time job that is police related, such as security inside Denton County. Constable precinct three. They allow deputies to use the vehicles for off-duty jobs as they usually, they are usually traffic related or are for security purposes. They basically have to be approved by the Constable or the chief deputy and almost all of these have provisions where they're not allowed to work where alcohol is served. Constable four, vehicles. where alcohol is served. Constable 4 vehicles for off-duty security as public service providing for conservation of peace also adheres to the Dinten County guidelines. So they do allow take home vehicles and allow for off duty employment. Constable precinct five deputies may use a county vehicle for off duty employment with several exceptions. Off-duty employment must be approved by a supervisor. Cannot be used out of the county and no off duty employment where alcohol is served. On page R70, Constable precinct 6, vehicles may be used to travel to off duty work if and when it's been approved by the constable and will be based on a distance factor of the off duty work be near their home and or the off-duty work would be located on their way home from the Constable precinct's six office. No vehicle shove used any time for patrol of any type associated with and or for off-duty work when employees receiving compensation. And then there's a response from Don Alexander as well on page R70a. He doesn't have a written policy but there are no vehicles that are taken home and they do drop their vehicles for election purposes and for transportation to training events. So we have several people here. They may want to address the court or answer any questions that you may have on this. They have quite a crowd here today. Court members, do you have specific questions for anyone that is in attendance on this issue? The only question I would have when the elected officials are putting together your budget and specifically your gasoline budget, how much of that consideration of secondary off-duty jobs and the use of that vehicle that enters into how much money you're allocating for the gas line item in your budget requests. I mean, let's say that you have a, you're accepting and you're allowing an off duty use of a vehicle and it may or may not Push the boundaries of the the The counties policy of 43 miles is that right 43 miles and You know that it's a it's a continuing thing over a certain period of time How much of your gas budget are you're allotting, are allocating that goes specifically to gas that would be put in those vehicles for secondary jobs? Is that 10% of your gas budget? Is that 15% of your gas budget? I mean, are you even looking at that way? Commissioners, in regards to any off-do the employment out of our office, I know what the AG's opinion is, you can't force them to pay for their mild for their gas. It's always been an unwritten policy out of our office. It's voluntarily, totally voluntary. The guys keep tracking whatever miles they use and they'll put a tank of gas in them that their own expense. I mean, I've never stopped them from doing it if I'm doing something that's wrong. Let me know. But I cannot force them to use their own money to pay for gas. But if they're using it, they'll keep track of it and everyone's willing to put a tank in their self. And so I never allowed anything as far as for the off-duty employment. But you had the discretion or your boss's discretion to allow it or not allow it. Yes, sir. And like I said, we've John is of the mindset that when they have their vehicles on off duty when they're providing security, it keeps them safe as well as if you look at a hole as far as Denton County goes that you know when you're having the vehicles in the neighborhoods that they're taking home as well as the off duty employment, it keeps your crime rate down. I mean, if you were to actually do a survey, I would imagine when those guys are working, whether it's at a hospital, whether it's at a grocery store, whatever you have to do to make ends meet if they need that. If somebody's got their vehicle parked out in front of a grocery store, the chances are somebody's going to come in and try and rob that grocery store is nil, because you've already got it sitting there. And so it helps the guys as far as officer safety and they're gonna have to work Because it goes back to the turn of the century that law enforcement officers work the off duty gigs Yeah, well I don't argue with that We don't argue with that at all. I argue with the point that you're using a county vehicle In a secondary job that's not your main to your job description as a deputy constable and you're using it for your own personal benefit. Well it's also providing a public service as far as the visibility of that of that of your vehicle out there Commissioner Marchant. I mean it's a week of put dummy cars up all over the county that aren't driven anywhere and achieve the same thing Be up before you know be up for the session So You got any other questions? Is there a reason why you don't have a written policy that like the other constables have we pretty much adhere to what you know You all have said forth in the past and we try and stay and we try and stay within as far as to take on vehicles. But we assign them they have to live within the 43 miles and if they're going to use their vehicles for off duty whatever the offset of the policy we've we've pretty much tried to adhere to so that's why we never found it necessary for that and like said gas gasoline never had been an issue because of basically the unwritten, but the constable or myself do not require them to pay for the gas, but that's probably why we don't have it. But do you understand why the concern came up last year because there were different departments coming to the commissioners court when the gas was skyrocketing, coming to the commissioners court when the gas was skyrocketing, coming to the missioners court and they were asking for there may be some rare instances. They were asking for inappropriate contingency funds to boost up their gasoline so that they could supposedly do the job that they were hired to do or constitutionally required to do. Yes, sir, I understand that. You that on some highways, DPS just put an empty vehicle out there just a slow traffic down. I think I've seen that. Not a totally fictitious, ideal commissioner. Jim Dassen, council, good morning good afternoon That's the reason that To my knowledge, I've never gone back to the court in Astrid Extra funds for we get any gas overage as I did this last year I've done it every year. I've been in office. We just go into our budget and try to absorb whatever over which we have in gas usage. But we do not, in fact, I would say the majority of hours is to and from, plus the ones that my folks are involved in, the county, they issue tickets that show up in the JP Court for shoplifting and that sort of thing. They make a rest, the county gets revenue from that. So I don't see that it's a waste of time. But the idea, and back in the old days, when the idea came along about having take on vehicles and law enforcement in general was that you prevented a lot of things from having that vehicle sitting in the community, driving to and from work and what have you. The other thing that I think we gain in it is that the individual that's assigned a vehicle rather than use one out of a pool and I've done both. You get into the pool vehicle and it's not been to maintenance and not been to have anything done to it and They last a lot shorter period of time matter of fact when I did this with the city we had to take home vehicles We used the take home vehicle after that we were on a lease purchase with the city and vehicle after we were on a lease purchase with the city. And that after that three year lease was up, we transferred that car to the pool instead of having to go buy a pool car. A person that you take better care of your vehicle than your child that gets into it to drive it, right? You don't spend the tires, you don't slam on the brakes. You know what I'm saying? That's what happens when the vehicle is assigned. Okay? I appreciate it. Thank you. I'm just, I don't think Karen is at all. I'll slow it in. Hello again. How about you, Steve, first? Most of the afternoon work that my staff does is pretty close to home. I never thought about tracking it, but I can. I can get some miles there and back and how often they do it. I'm going to let you know about what, you know, we can come up with a figure about what it costs. As far as take home vehicle, that, to me, is more important than the other. I have no concern about that. But we work. We may come back out at night, you know, several times during the week to get somebody at home or Jerry may come back out to either serve a warrant or confirm a warrant. So the take home is important, at least to our operation the way we do it. The other frankly is so close to home I never thought about it much. But if you want to figure out I can come up with one. Constable, some of my concerns not only come from me but and I hate to say this because I always say I wouldn't, but I've had constituents that have questioned me about it. Seeing a patrol car in a place that you wouldn't imagine that patrol car being. I had an email that a lady sent me, this doesn't have to do with the patrol vehicle, but a company vehicle that was parked every day and over the weekends at the Collin County courthouse every day. And they couldn't imagine why in the world is parked there every day. And they sent me an email. They were one of my consistent. They lived in my precinct. Then I had to think, well, who in the world is that? What, you know, back and forth, why does the vehicle, well, it's with our planning department, our public works. It's the gentleman that lives in... Terrell? He lives in Terrell, drives there because he's abiding by... He drove as far as the policy set by the county allowed him to drive and that's where he ended up and he parked that every Every day and this constituents is what in the world are our county vehicles in another county sitting in a county facility And had other people question why a certain Patrol car from another precincts in another precinct. I mean what do you answer to them? You know that's at the discretion of elective official. That's a very hollow answer. Not an answer that will satisfy them. No, no. We've been in politics long enough to know that. Thank you. I just I don't think it's a problem with take home cause. The problem that I have is that when they own duty and work on second jobs and as Ron said, Commissioner Marchin says when they come in asking for more money for gay ass Elaine when they're driving from one precinct over to another precinct, which they don't need to be, I'll do the job. And you're asking for gas to go around in your precinct. And I understand that in the day you go on, especially with the precinct that you have, you certainly are not going to stay in Holland Village in Louisville. You're going to have to go through Florida on a somewhere else. So, you know, you understand that. But when you have somebody come away from Denver somewhere all the way to Curlton or something, after hours, you know, I think that's a problem. And when you're, I've gotten a complaint about people directing traffic during the day when they should be on duty. So I think that's where we have the problem with. My department? I'm a member of the board. Yeah, I have someone from your department. Well, when they should be on duty is I have two people that are off on Friday and do all right and I know that but the citizens don't know that. I understand. Yeah I know when he was off. Yeah. Okay. Any other questions or comments from court members? Okay. And there's also some another off duty job that-the-job that people do, that get money, that the JPE's do weddings. And I'm doing county time, that money don't go into the caucus too. If we're going to hit one department, because I have to be fair about it, I have to hit everybody. So, you have to think about that also. Got quiet, I'm sorry. But the pin dropped. I'm sorry, I mean, if we're going to hit the constables and the sheriff, we've got to take it to everybody. And I don't know any other department, but if I find out, I will talk about them also It'd be easy for me to say as a retired judge. That's great. Let them do that For many many times not only through policy within the county about the JPs, but through legislation Which the JP the Constable Association fought tooth and nail. So it's not a new idea. Yeah, but it's not, to me, it's not anything different from the constables. Except you don't use gaze. You don't want me to go there. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Well, I mean, you went there. I said fine, but we got so okay, so we need to get done with there. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry We do a lot of things that y'all don't know. When we get off work and we're driving our car home, we are still on duty 24 hours a day as a police officer. There has been times that I've left my house in Louisville that they've had something go down in Lantana, double oak, no other county unit was even close and I have responded and assisted as a backup officer. We all do that. It never precinct even the Sheriff's Department because we take pride in what we do. We're police officers and we're here to help anyone that needs to help and be seen. The more officers we got out of the street, the safer people feel and maybe the crime will go down. That's all I have to say. I also want to address this on the subject. We've met. on the subject. Leave that. Okay. Our next timed item is 3 o'clock. I noticed Judge D. Piazza is here to address this. The appeal is for additional funds for computer supplies and office supplies. Information is in your packet on page A9. The request, sorry. HAA, about halfway through, they're discussing their office supply line item and they've asked for an additional $1,535 for a total of $3,200 or basically the least amount they think they could get by with is $935 additional. They've also asked for $291 in their computer supply line on them. Judge D. Piaz, if you'd like to address the court. As you commissioners, I think you have the letter in front of you. It's very clear by what we've done between October 2007 to July of 2008 and between October 2008 and July 2009 that we've increased revenue in the court by $100,000. And today we've spent $1,785.90 in office supplies. And what the recommended budget has for us is $1,165 for next year. To date this year, we've already spent more than the total that budgets willing to give us for next year. We anticipated a continued increase in the number of toy violations, citations that we're getting. And to tell us that we have to do more work next year with less money. We have a great chief clerk and she's real good. She orders the cheapest stuff she can. Stuff that she doesn't like that she wants to use herself. She pays for herself. So it's not like we're spending frivolously and I just think it would be very difficult for us to be able to maintain. All of the office supplies needs at the $1665. We were willing to accept the $2600. So that $600 less than we initially requested and trying to cut more than what we're already cutting. And the other issue we have is with toners. Today we've spent $856 in toner and what was recommended to us is $803. So again we're not even all the way through this budget year and we're expected to use less printer materials than what we've used this past year total and or next year total we were expected to use less than what we've used this year and're on an increased number of again cases that are coming to the court. We've had 1700 and six cases increase over that time period and again we do expect that to continue to go up as the troopers are given opportunity for over time on 121. And also with the Toei violations coming through, I've had to pay toll. Those numbers are going up also. So I'm just requesting the commissioners court to give us the funding that we need to run the court. And again, with the increase of $100,000 in revenue that we have given back to the county over the last nine months, I don't think asking for an additional $1,000 is much to ask for. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer it. If I can't answer, I'm sure Diane will be able to. No one were. Actually worked on some information. I'm going to say something first about the money you've given back to the county. It's the county dollars anyway. You're not giving the county back anything. It's those are the county dollars. I understand what I meant was that we've increased the revenue that's coming through and we need the money in order to be able to sustain the course so that we can get that money. I want to make that clear. I understand that it's not my money. It's the county. Not your money anyway. Okay, Donna. Let me say when we're going through the recommended budget, if you look at the office supply line, and of course the expenditures were significantly more in the past because we paid for all furniture and all those other line items that we now separate out. So when we went through and analyzed office supplies, we pulled out all those one-time expenses for headsets or armored car service or shirts, those things that are tracked differently. The average expense was about $14 to $1,500 if you took those expenditures out, which reflects the reason for the recommended budget of $16,65. Since we were reviewing that, their expenditures have increased as far as their actual expenses. And I will say for the computer supplies, I will say that I would certainly recommend the court consider that. Toner cartridges have gone up. I guess I got a little happy with the red pin on that one. But on the office supplies, I've provided you a report and I'll share this with Judge D. Piazza. Again, I worked on that and didn't get a chance to get it out to you today. But as far as office supplies, typically what we try to use as a rule of thumb of like 300 or $333 per employee assigned to JP courts, which is what we applied. You'll see that JP2 and JP4 have the same budget based on the number of staff that they have. So that was kind of our rule of thumb on that. It may be a little tight. It's a tight budget year. I've got a lot of departments office supplies. I certainly don't want a department not to be able to operate. That's not our goal at all. Some of the departments have more staff members. Some departments have two locations which might require having some stock on hand with a little bit more than the $333. But I certainly understand his concern and agree with him on his computer supply request and office supplies. Again, they'll be up to the court, but there's some history there for you to look at as well. Questions from the news. This is new to judge the DPS. I was going to let you know that typically we don't take action during our budget workshops until we've heard all appeals and we have our tax rate information. So it may be next week if the court's selling climb to start making decisions next week. Thank you for being here, appreciate it. Then. I would just say members, this all goes to my line of questioning to people like NTTA. What are you projecting on your enforcement? Because based upon their aggressiveness and their enforcement of payment, a non-payment of tolls or whatever is in direct, I mean, direct result of that, if they're aggressively, they're going to increase the amount of activity within the court and the constables office and because of that, that increased activity affects something as what we might think is small amount as a line item in a supplies. And so when I ask those questions, I mean, you have to take those considerations because I mean Judge D. Piazza, this is what the first full, it's not even a full year that 121 has even been in place to where they even have enough data to track what that's going to be, you know, even in the future. And I will say, based on the report that's in for JP statistics you will see clearly that their criminal cases Their traffic cases in particular have are over a hundred percent increase from this time last year I knew that when when in my court when we opened up George Bush It dramatically increased and everything went up everything went up and increased and everything went up and not only revenues but expenses as well to do the job that we had to do. Okay. Next. Any questions you read in the on? Any music? Okay. What are the other things left on our agenda for discussion? I'm sure we're not going to be ready to take action, but we'll keep these on the agenda for the next couple of weeks is to talk about the new hires that were included in the recommended budget. Also, the positions that we've transferred, we talked about most of those today and there were three slots that were recommended for a deletion as well. For next week's agenda, we have items include the Red and Bridge reorganization that Commissioner Coleman would like to present. We have a financial forecast, the county auditor, when he was making his presentation the other day. We'd like to come back and talk about, of course, we'll have discussion on our tax rate. Hopefully, we'll have the final numbers and know where we stand. And then we'll be asking for any action that you have on any of these specific appeals. August the 4th, we have the NASCO presentation. They'll be here and I believe Commissioner Marchant would also like to discuss all of our countywide association dues. At that point in time, so I'll have a report prepared to show all those associations we belong to. Is there anything in between now and next week the court would like to see that our office could prepare for you or any other departments or are we good to go. I ask just another question. I mean now that they're gone, I'm not that I need to talk to them exactly but visiting this vehicle use policy. It also goes to my line of questioning and reason why it becomes somewhat important to me in a budgeting process. You also realize with the ability to take vehicles home at the discretion of an elected official and to use a vehicle in a secondary job at the discretion of elected official, it not only impacts a line item of gasoline, but it impacts the use of that vehicle over a certain period of time. and all these extra miles that can or cannot be associated with the job that they're doing adds takes life away from that vehicle. So I would love for the vehicle committee, assessment committee to look at and taking consideration what type of off-duty miles are being put on a vehicle to and from work as well as secondary jobs when they assessed the life of that vehicle. I mean, if you're going to allow that to happen and you're shortening the life of the vehicle for what, what, and again I say the job description or a constitutional requirement of that position is there ought to be some consideration of that within the vehicle committee on whether to give an entity a new vehicle or not or extend the life of it. Okay. Oh, may I say something? Yeah. You know, my background is in working and providing legal advice to law enforcement. And you know, this whole thing about take home cars and setting policies and all that has always been problematic in my opinion, because I think it goes against basic nature of using public items or you know for a private purpose. The inherent problem is that traditionally we have underpaid our deputy constables and deputy police and deputy sheriffs. I mean just in general, if you look at the salary surveys, compared to municipal police officers, and one of the attractive items that these deputy sheriffs and deputy constables get to do is that they get to take a take home car and do private off-duty work. That's something that's been, you know, it's something that attracts them to this type of work, and we have allowed through kind of not acts of commission but rather out acts of omission to allow private industry to subsidize a law enforcement that we paid here in Denton County. I think your points are very valid. It's a problem we need to address. But until we really start paying the deputies probably enough money to where they don't want to do off-duty jobs, it's going to be a problem. And it's very problematic. We hold hardly, we've allowed the safeways, the banking, the grocery stores to subsidize our salaries. And as a casualty of that, we have allowed them to use off-duty cars and gasoline. I remember meeting with Evergreen and one of the conditions that I, one of the motivations behind asking back consultant to do a benefits, evaluation of what kind of benefits that our employees get was to pinpoint that that take home vehicle vehicle is truly a employee employment benefit to that person and should be evaluated within a consideration of how much money they are being paid. I mean how do you take that out of the equation? I mean it'd be like taking the the car allowance out of the equation. I mean, it'd be like taking the car allowance out of the equations that we have. In fact, that's a real amount. If you take that out, it's a real dollar amount to us. And so it's a benefit to us in that car. It should be a take home vehicle is a benefit to the employee. Consider taking it away in order to keep and attract the kind of officers we have, we'd have to consider paying them a lot more. Well, but would the law enforcement be willing to give up that benefit in order to get more pay? Yeah. And it's all about choices. Yeah. Yeah. And it's all about choices. Found anything else for us to. Not today. Okay. I have a lot to mull over here. We have some unfinished business here concerning our transportation consulting services. RFQ. Okay, well, yeah, we're gonna take about a five to 10 minute break and then come back. Don't stray too far, but we are recessed for 10 minutes. 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 going to go to the Okay. Okay, Commissioner Sward is reconvened. We're going back to the workshop and the specifications for transportation controls. And yeah, transportation consulting services are Q and I believe Beth had a clarification for us. Actually, Commissioner Coleman and I were just talking and with Bennett about clarification on 2G. 2G. Oh, 2G. We could have been. I wanted to, I mean, I don't mean to interrupt, but I just wanted to say it's, I was pointed out to me by Bennett and Miss Fleming and it's my, I guess, you know, it was my confusion. When I think of County bond projects, I think of like 377 FM 455 and all money for county roads for which the RFQ would be used. All right, and I just thought that, you know, it'd be coming out of the operational money, but I was corrected and I'm sorry, it's my mistake. And I wanted to clarify that to y'all. If y'all want to take additional action on it, that's fine. I mean, but I just wanted to clarify that that RFQ for rodent for our stuff run, okay, will include CIP stuff. Even though I am also including non-CIP small room room. I have a problem with that. I'm fine with that. I just wanted to clarify it. It's probably good to clarify it. Yeah. Okay, one further clarification because what what been it now we're talking about was that there will be an RFQ come out that the NTN is a two-part RFQ for everything in TripO8. TripO8 is not necessarily everything or you know all the CIP projects so the issue is we're gonna have all these RFQ cues out there and all the same firms are going to respond to every single one of them. So it's getting real confusing on how to do that. And I know I said that it would be for the operational budget type things. But if I plan on issuing one next week for county road projects in the bond program. Yeah, I think that would be the same people same evaluation groups. It might be simpler for the firms and the county if we did we allowed the triple eight in those projects as well. So we do one RFQ for everything for road and bridges. That's what we were talking about, Commissioner. And I'm not sure we got that clear few minutes we had to talk, but and we'll do the same thing over here. You're saying to me again. One RFQ for Tribal 8 period County roads. County roads. All of the on-system projects would be in a major RFK. That's our big one. But we were going to tack a section on it for county road bond projects that would be a multi-year pre-qualified firms the same way we're doing this one. But then you're going to have two sets and you'd have two sets and it might be easier to just include all of Brodenbridge East projects, it's a term of up to five years. And just as those projects come up, you've got these pre-qualified firms, whether it's a trip away to CIP or just an operational budget. So instead of this just being Broden Bridge East, you're saying change it to the triple eight CIP and Road and bridges is that what you're saying? I want to make sure I'm understanding you are you saying you're doing it at all west needs one two correct me if I'm right wrong Right you all were fixing to do that right Andy This county roads County roads County owned roads. Like for example, hand bridges. Do we need to repose this? Because it's just said road and bridge east. Do we need to repose this and make it all? No, we still have an east and a west. My preferences have one, but I think the commissioners want to have separate RFQs. I don't care. But I just would like because I have some projects I'd like to get working on area that I'd like to have this go through this. I mean I'm not opposed. Next week we could do a posting that would add road and bridge west and the CIP. We cover all the projects. Just briefly how that would work is that would pre-qualify firms or so and then when Commissioner Eats had a project he would be able to select the most qualified for that project, you'd be able to select the most qualified for your projects and would move those forward. And all that would be handled under our policy but instead of having a list for small projects, a list for CIP, a list for the others. You have one list of pre-qualified firms and if you want to do it in two precincts we could do that or we could do all one countywide. So if you want to do all these, you'll have to see the list. Plus, when we do our projects then you need to do it kind of wide. And then we do need to repost it because uh... Beth, are you thinking to do two? One for the trip, LHCIP, and one for the trip. That's what I'm trying to clarify is that I think all your projects would be in the large RFQ that's in the bond projects. I'm not recommending anything for on-system. These are just county-owned roads. Then you said when we get ready for the engineer, we choose one of those qualified that you've already qualified. Free Qualified. They're not selected for any specific project. Prequalifying. OK, but what I'm saying, if you're going to prequalify, are you prequalifying for just one in four? Are you prequalifying for the whole county? Because if I'm going to have to use one of those that you prequalify, yeah, we need to change what we just need. Mr. Mitchell, I think she's. I guess I'm confused and I'm not familiar enough with their projects that might come up. But I'm assuming that you probably don't have a county road. I don't have a county road. See, then that would not affect you. The RFQ that would be county-wide for on-system projects, those that you have a list of projects that would that's a whole separate RFQ that's a major RFQ. Okay, that's what I'm talking about, county roads only. But we do separate those off the major ones because there's different types of companies that respond to those. Yeah, if I can... And that's fine. As long as I don't have to... We're going to do another RFQ to go out for the countywide. The other... The as long as I don't have to, we're gonna do another RFQ to go out for the countywide, the other big project. Big triple weight on system projects. Generally a lot of those big companies will not bid on a project that I have is that's $15,000. Right. Okay. I'm fine with that. Is a different set of companies. I recommend that maybe we repost it and let me make sure with both commissioners that they agree and That we reward up these projects. He wants to go forward with we've already approved this I don't object to post doing another posting next week in making it road bridge west and the triple eight CIP County road projects CIP County Road Projects. That would allow Commissioner Coleman to go forward with whatever he's anxious to get a gun or can we can we do that or can we can we amend the posting today to include the CIP in road and bridge west. A better way to do it would be to put it on next week and rescind if what you're doing is changing this scope, just rescind this order and pass it again or vote on it again next week with because what I think I'm hearing is that you really are wanting to add not just West, but you're wanting to add some additional things to the ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. The ability for East. is fine with me. My deal is I would like to encumber some funds out of this year's budget that need to be done through the, and been trying to, you know, get this done the right way through the purchasing act. And we're getting close to the point where by policy we can encumber any funds for professional services, something. And I would like, you know, these are the roads I'm actually working on. I think the actual construction will be paid for at a CIP funds, but the actual engineering design is going to be paid out of that operational funds. Do you understand? Now, this budget and we're anticipating using when we sell bonds to UCI. The way it's posted today, I could go out for Commissioner Coleman with the RFK that I have because there's nothing in there that says what funds. It's what I told you the funds would be used for. It's for road and bridge county projects for East and then I could come back and do one for West probably cleaner. Thanks, I just want to make it clear that we would use it for other projects besides just the ones that we told you earlier. Okay, good idea. Okay, members. Now we're back on the transportation RQ posting, which is 6A. And I've had Bobby put up on the screen and you have hopefully at your desk. This is actually a PowerPoint that I did for another purpose a while ago. Obviously talking about what competition can do. I have major issues in the DFW region. Traditional financing resources are not sufficient to achieve congestion reduction. DFW region total transportation needs will be $115 billion by 2030. That's just the DFW region. Conjection costs region $6.7 billion annually anticipated to be a $11.5 billion annually by 2025 under current funding. We have a $70 billion funding gap which I think that's gone up to $78 billion now because this PowerPoint is a little bit old. Transportation funding issues. Texas legislature has not raised the gas tax in more than 15 years. Construction inflation is increased by 10% or more per year over the same period. And textile predicts that by 2014 all are most of their budget will be devoted to maintaining the existing system. The 78 Texas legislature passed House Bill 3588, which gave the state and local government's new tools to address their own mobility needs. The 79th Texas Legislature passed House Bill 2702, which expanded and clarified new tools for transportation funding, and these tools were aggressively implemented in the North Texas region. Where would North Texas be today without the competition fostered by public private partnerships. We hear some talk about this in the news, especially with the last legislative session in our CDAs comprehensive development agreements. The answer is clear if you just review the recent history of State Highway 121. Chronologically of State Highway 121, January 2000, and TTA feasibility study for 121 in County indicates the need for $149 million of text that support. Junival three Texas legislature passes House Bill 3588 giving us those tools. May of 04 text that stretch sketch level traffic and revenue study indicates that the total of 121 and colony dent counties can fund construction of 121 and generate 650 seven million dollars in excess revenue September of 04 colon county request text that cog and NTTA to perform fee is ability study for 121 and colon county November of 04 text that request in TTA to submit proposal for financing 121 Collin County. No proposal was received from NTTA. They weren't interested at that time. January of 05, SCAN's gonna submit an unsolicited proposal to text that to develop and finance 121 quarter through Denton Collin Counties, which was turned down. February of 05, text that, requests for competing proposals and qualifications to develop and finance the 121 corridor through Denton County Counties, June of O5, Texas Legislature Passes House Bill 2702 providing additional tools to local governments. July of O5, TechStyle short lists for proposing teams to finance and develop in 21. November of 2005, Colin County requesting TTA to propose and finance 121 in Colin County, February of 2006. The Regional Transportation Council rejects the TTA's proposal on 121, Colin County, and differs any action on 121 until submission of private sector bid. NTTA's proposal was 550 million net present value, 80% of which would have been paid in the last 25 years of a 50 year term. June of 2006, NTT authorizes preparation and submission of proposal to develop and operate 121 in Denton County counties. 06, the NTTHA changes mine, and approves the textile NTTHA regional protocol, whereby NTTHA supports the comprehensive development agreement process for 121-Dentment Collin Counties. August of 06, textile issues, the final request for detailed proposals for 121. In February of 07, selection of centros highest bidder with a 2.1 billion upfront payment in $717 million out your payments. March of 2007, the NTTA submits a letter to Senator Corona stating that NTTA could propose anywhere between $2 billion to $4.8 billion for the 121 Denton Collin Project. It supports legislation that voids the regional protocol it just signed in August of 2006. March of 2007, that request was sent to Toronto, the RTC sends letter to NTTA, giving them until May 25 of 2007 to deliver a proposal. May of 2007, they delivered their proposal. The proposal is 2.5 billion up front and 833 million outlier. June of 07 RTC votes to recommend that the Texas Transportation Commission give NTTA the 121 Denton Collin Project June of 07 commission accepts RTC's recommendation gives NTTA 60 days to execute textiles agreement in 45 days from date of environmental clearance of 121 in Colin to Financial Clothes. October of 171, Colin County was environmentally cleared in November of 178 TTA delivers $3.1 billion to text that. Well, obviously my point here was, this is what competition will do for you. They went originally from wanting to charge Denton County, like $175 million to build $121 to the region, getting $3.2 billion. And then county in particular, ending up with $1.6 million, I'm sorry, billion of that 3.2 billion. My point in going through all this, and particularly Commissioner Coleman, is to point out the value of a transportation consultant. When Commissioner Eads and I were talking about navigating the waters and all this legislative action and the work with NTTA and and the work with textile and with Cod. And we had so many moving targets here with the legislation being proposed on past. Of course what kind of gummed up that did gum out the workforce was the governor's discussion about trans-Texas corridor and the public, Bernanis and all that, which I still think is a good idea, but that's another subject. But my point in going through all this is to say that an engineer is not right for this job in my opinion. An engineer has certainly their place, but But I view them more as a project manager and a project manager tells you how they think it'd be best for you to spend your money, whereas a transportation consultant, in this case, shows us how to leverage the county money. When we went out for the bond election, this last bond election, the $495 million bond election of which, by the recall, correctly, $310 million of that was for road projects. The PowerPoint presentation that we did when we gave specific projects in every precinct at the bottom of that PowerPoint, we'd say, okay, the estimated to cost X number of dollars for this project, we're gonna have so much from the bond election, we're okay, they estimated to cost X number of dollars for this project. We're going to have so much from the bond election. We're going to get so much from COG. We're going to get so much from CheckStyle and RTR, regional toll revenue. That's out of the $1.6 billion that didn't county got off of $1.21 to do all these projects, including a lot of projects and, well, every person. But my point is, you're is a tremendous value in having a transportation, consultant firm that is helping us to navigate these water and leverage these funds so that we can do more. There's, I do not know a one county in the state of Texas that is financially as far as transportation is concerned and is going to shape as Denton County is. You can disagree with me if you want to, but I totally attribute that to the services of ITS. I do not believe that we'd be in the position, the inviable position that we are in today without their services. Now, the discussion or the remarkable little while ago about possibly taking their, the amount that's paid to ITS on an annual basis and offsetting that in such a way that we could give employees increases. That sounds, you know, nice and it's a thought, but in my view, it's not a very good thought. ITS, in my point of view, has more than earned their pay. They have, I'm sure that Denton County is, I said, the envy of other counties. Nobody else has the funding leverage capability that Denton County does as far as I know, with the exception of possibly Harris County because they've got toll roads all over and it's a one toll authority that's controlled by their commission's court so they have the the revenue stream off of that to keep you know to keep their projects going but as outside of Harris County which is anytime you watch the legislation there's legislation for Harris County, then there's legislation for the rest of the state of Texas, that kind of like a world all their own. And all kinds of bills have been bracketed for Harris County. But in my point of view, it is just so important for us to have the expertise of ITS or somebody in that same category as ITS to not only advise us but to help us go through all this process like I was just telling you or showing you here on 121 in the legislative process and the relationships that these people have with text art to help us get things done. Yes, it's very exasperating because things don't happen as quickly as we'd like to see them happen. But I think it's invaluable to have ITS or a firm like ITS and not an engineer to oversee these projects. I think an engineering firm certainly has its place, but this isn't it. So thank you for letting me speed through this. Here's some projects that are funded with a 121 regional toll revenue. Okay, the rest of this is... Go through there. I think you gave a good overview of one project in particular, which was the 121 Tauwei and how that became told in the process that the region went through, wasn't just didn't county, it was the region as a whole. Notice that it took more than one or two years. It did. And what I'd like to say is just as your RTC member and I appreciate this court allow me to represent didn't county at the RTC. I compiled some information and I can get you all the actual literature it's based out of RTC and out. About four areas, four challenges that are facing Ditton County, Texas, the region, the United States. One in particular for the Metriplex is population growth. And according to COG, estimates that Texas will reach a population of 30 million by 2020, with the North Texas region, nearly 8 million by the same time. So we have more people coming to our area. Number two is our fuel consumption and efficiency. And as I've gone out and talked to Republican groups and other civic organizations, I talk about this and I say how technology influences public policy. And the way that is is because cars are becoming more fuel efficient every year. And so more people driving more miles paying fewer gas taxes are because their car is more efficient. It's an equation there that we have to resolve. And so the time we have additional decrease in a fuel consumption and with the volatility of gas prices, those two factors have impacted the federal trust fund for highway funding. And it's the first time, two years ago, the annual vehicle miles traveled, began to draw for the first time since World War II. And so we've got that issue in addition to the fuel efficiency standards that are being increased every year in Washington. Number three is our federal funding. Federal A for transportation funding is accomplished through appropriations that takes place every six years at the federal level. Recently, the Federal Highway Administration has reduced to Texas their funding through recisions of $1.7 billion. And again, Texas is a donor state. We donate through our gas tax. We only get about 85 cents on the dollar back. And then we have another trend that's not favorable to public entities is, you know, in the inflation and the cost to maintain our current system. And over the past five years, transportation infrastructure, inflation has skyrocketed by 62%. So we have more people driving more fuel efficient cars, paying less on the gas tax, we're decreasing the federal funding and then you have inflation in maintaining your system and expanding your system. So I just wanted to present those facts to us today because I think it's important for us to realize the tough transportation climate that we're operating within as a county and as a region. And I will say that didn't county, I'm proud, Tribes and didn't count into RTC, and we have a very long history, the county officials in working hard, not only within the boundaries of this county, but on a regional level. And we are not asking our consultant, we haven't had a past, we are not asking them right now or in the future to do all the heavy lifting. The elected officials have done their fair share and worked hard and that's been acknowledged through Takeda, because not only has Commissioner Sandy Jacobs, the county judge Mary to the officials have done their fair share and worked hard and that's been acknowledged through TechStyle. Because not only has Commissioner Sandy Jacobs, the county judge Mary Horn have received the road hand awards for their leadership at the regional level, that doesn't happen through consultants. That happens because our elected officials are getting down to the trenches and working hard. It's not about passing the buck or having someone else do the work. And our officials have demonstrated that. Commissioner Mitchell has represented Louisville on RTC and been active in transportation issues. Former Commissioner Cynthia White has done the same thing. She chaired the RTC. I'm active on the RTC. So our elected officials have taken the lead with the assistance of our consultant to expand our infrastructure and to allow, didn't count, and the Metroplex as a whole to increase the growth and accommodate the growth. I was thinking about this this morning. We were talking about this. I really think that we have two components or values you could say that we have to balance out. You could call it competing or balancing and we could debate on the nomically, but I believe as we go through this RFQ process, number one, a value of mine would be to attract multiple vendors to apply. I think that's something that's a value that I think we share. And number two is to reduce or minimize the conflicts or perceived conflicts which may occur. I think those are two values that I personally have, I'm not going to speak on behalf of the court, that I'm balancing out as Commissioner Coleman articulated this morning talking about engineering firms and who could do work and who the conflict and the appearance of conflicts and I sympathetic to the calls. And here is his argument. But I think we have to, as we go through this RFQ process and craft this language, those are two things that I want, which is again, number one, attracting multiple vendors to apply and to reduce or minimize the conflicts. And I think as we go through here, we need to start with a baseline of the services we currently receive plus. And there's other services on, in addition to that, I'm open to that. But I think we don't need to take a step backwards as we go through this RFQ process. I think we need to have a baseline of what we are receiving now and add to that if it's court-so-desires. And so those are some positions that I think as we move forward this afternoon through this RFQ process that does my position. Beth, I think where we left off, we need a decision on, let's see here. The last discussion was the restrictions on other design work. So this is where I differed from Commissioner Coleman and his proposed RFQ. Remember exactly how I stated it. Yep. What did you put in yours? Commissioner Marchin. Oh, Twil. You also, when your document listed that you wanted them to be in. Right. I'll select it. Texas Board of Professional Engineers. The selected consultant will be ineligible for consideration in any design role within the Denton County Transportation Program and projects administered directly by the county. Does that meet your needs? That's statement. Page 412 of Commissioner Martins. Oh, I don't don't have done meet my needs but That's what I was after which one body task on the three scope of services that second paragraph This is all selected firms will we register to the Texas Board of Professional Engineers the selected consultant will be Ineligible for consideration in any design role within the Dent County Transportation Program on projects administered directly by the county. I think that's a big problem with that but that wasn't what I was. It didn't go far enough. I think yours is covered in the code. What's in the contract? It was my concern. Yeah. Who said didn't? And that's. I didn't meet my concern. Yeah. Who said didn't and that's. I didn't need money. Yeah. Gentlemen. I'm I interject something. I'm I'm anticipating what questions will have at that pre-bid conference and when it says on projects administered directly by the county, what about funding sources that we transfer funding to another entity and they are going to solicit those projects? I know we still do some administration on the project as a whole, but that may be a question. Do you mean anything that our money touches or those that we are procuring the services and holding the contract? Because we do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. We do. I can see your point is but I mean if it's a textile project and textile beds it and he's our transportation consultant I think he should be allowed to bid on that But if it's anything if we're prohibiting them from dealing with anything our money touches I think we're not gonna have very many bitters That's my concern is that if we did that, that nobody would bid on this because you're shutting them out from any project because we're being fired. There's already two other firms that do exactly what ITS does, Deener and National and prime strategies that do that. We're not looking at a soul-source vendor here. And I think that's a fear of the we need to go through this brain damage. It didn't happen to say in the same place where we're at, just for an exercise. I think we need to be sure that there's vendors who would be eligible to apply. And I'm at the opinion that there's a lot of people who are going to be able to do that. And I think that's the reason why I think we need to be able to do that. And I think that's the reason why I think we need to be sure that there's vendors who would be eligible to apply. And I'm at the opinion that there will be. Commissioner Eads, you defined what your parameters were, were attracted the greatest number of vendors and reduced the conflict. And I think we also need to recognize that this is not an engineering contract. Right. This is a consulting, transportation consulting contract as its primary scope of services and not engineering. That's secondary. That's secondary to anything that we should expect out of this company. That's mine. That's why I have no problem with the ineligible statement. Because my prime scope of work has to do with consulting has not to non-engineering services. I think the big, if you want to get one of the big firms interested, they have a lot of engineers on staff and most of them are registered. The reason I like to have it registered is because when you have a consultant, a consultant means a whole bunch of different stuff. You can't ever lose your consultant's license if you engage in bad behavior. One of our conditions for the bids is that identify adverse sanctions by any regulatory authorities over the past five years. If we just let, if we live, if we just are saying we're hiring a consultant, I mean we shouldn't even have that on there because there is no regulatory agency for consultants. And part of the reason I suggest we put in there that they be a registered engineer is that they have a regulatory agency overlooking them. That's in yours, Ron, correct? Yes, should it. Okay, but do you have something in base to speed it up? I think I'll let you on that. That's my point is that I'm not saying that they're out to do. I was looking for some regulatory agency that would have some sort of professional oversight. Okay. And that's why I suggested that. I mean, I can tell you this. I mean, you know, I saw the nice PowerPoint and I agree, I mean, we've had great success. But I mean, some of that success hasn't come without a cost. I know we had a huge conflict with the city of Frisco that almost came to blows at one point, which didn't create regionalism for which our current consultant was involved in. I know that there was a lawsuit over the I-35 interchange over there with the speedway, where we entered, we got a letter for right of entry, and nobody came in with the combination proceedings or anything and we wound up building the I-35 interchange without owning it, and that caused the county a fairly good amount of money. And I know our current transportation consultant was involved in that matter. But you know, I mean, it's not. It's going to be involved in everything because these are transportation. I understand. But my point is, is that good stuff comes with bad stuff. And that's, you know, if you have an unregulated type deal, that's, you know, it's hard to make objective decisions. And when I was talking to Ms. Fleming and other people, I was trying to grab and make suggestions of objective criteria to bring into this RFQ. Other than just, you know, we like somebody, you know, the reason why we would like somebody is because you can check these boxes, you get your ticket punched to qualify. Okay, I guess where we are is that paragraph that begins also like to, firms will be registered with the Texas Board of Professional Engineers. Selected consultant will be ineligible for consideration in any design role within the Dictant Transportation Program on projects administered directly by the county. Are we approving that in our Q? You suggest different language for clarification?, I did but it has a whole different meaning so I'm not I'm saying if that's the meaning that you want I would say procured and administered versus just administered if you leave it administered I believe it's anything involving our funding Hey, do you want me to please procured and and administered? I would be pleased to procure and administer. That would be when we actually select the engineering firm, we hold the contract, we make payments. I don't want to sway your, I'm just thinking that's the other. To me, that's a fair compromise. That makes good sense and hopefully in the pre-bid conference that'll meet more sense than or two. Members, are you okay with that? So if a firm does work for immiscibility and we're giving the money to the municipality for them to do that project that firm would be eligible because we're not administering it. We're cutting the check, correct? The eligible and Kim helped me here but I believe this disclosure would require them to tell us about it. Right. And get our permission, wouldn't it? And our permission. That's why I wrote it trying to just look at the two. So you could just hold this closure to everybody in those areas. Even on that level. But again, that was me just trying to figure it depends on your intent if that's how you want that language to stay. I would agree. I think that's good for other government entities. I think that would that would satisfy my intent for transparency. I don't think it would be a difficult procedure because I see a litany of enterprises where our interest would be aligned with our municipalities in our area. But on you know there's going to be the situation where they're not. aligned with our municipalities in our area. But there's going to be the situation where they're not. And what I don't want to happen is a firm, most of these big projects, most of these projects are on system projects. And the firm designing and having to be in an advocacy row with TechStop, because so much of what the position of this consulting role is is to encourage TechStop to get off dead center to move the ball down the field and everything and to kick them in the pants. And if you, and if how can that firm who's designing and managing that into another text.work, how can they do that to a text out who they're getting their business from? You see them saying so they're conflicted. They would be conflicted there. You are comfortable with this language? Yeah. Everybody's head going up and down. So it's procured administer and administer and administer directly. Rather than just administer directly by the county that answers your questions. Hey, are we there? The only thing I didn't hear a final on was the third fair plan language. Was that a yes leave all that language in there and in their submittal as well yes that'd be a deliverable yeah yes then I believe I'm okay here except for the evaluation committee okay we need to make a decision on the evaluation committee. That was the other one. That was the other one. This one does not really fall within policy because it's not engineering design services. Last week I did recommend Bennett Hal, sorry, James Wells, Kim Gellis, or one of her representatives and myself and any other set you want to appoint. The problem is that only four? There's not a, we really don't have to have an odd number because I average scores. It's not a vote one way or the other. Everybody scores independently. The scores are averaged and never one way or the other. Everybody scores independently. The scores are averaged and never who falls to the top. That's the ranking that we present. I think that's fine with me for that community. James. James Wells. Kim, would that be you or John or? Didn't just guessing that, I think it will be John Fell. Just because of how much he uses it. It's hard to know whether that's a good or a bad thing. I mean, you know, he's so involved. And I had this conversation with that, similar to the one you all had earlier today. I see the public purpose in having someone who is an end user being on the committee. This one is odd because generally when we pick engineers and the legal serves on it, we're pretty much out of the picture after that, other than contract. This one, so much of the work, is driven by the transportation consultant. Can I... I would say... I let you know a little bit later in the day. I mean, I really... I would say that it even makes it more important that he served on it. That was best position. People interact quite a bit. That was best position. That was best position. That was best position. And he has told me he's willing to do that. I just wanted to, I mean, I really did have this discussion just because I do see a difference in this particular situation versus just when we're normally on the engineering ones. I don't know if the court is going to have a problem with it. I'll move to adopt it with the proposed amendments and with the committee is suggested by Ms. Fleming. It's hybrid one. It is your hybrid one. The only changes I went back and made were the ones we just talked about, the term, and then we added some language on the, we changed the language on the accounting that it was a detailed statement of deliverables. I believe this. So I've written all those down, but those are really the only changes. Those changes will also mirror the contract that Kim will need to attach to it. It will take us a couple of days to get all that together, then we will post that on our website. And if you know interested, firms think to our website and download the documents. I don't include the thoroughfare plan though, right? That's include thoroughfare plan. And that was in here, so. Beth, let me ask a question. And I may have just missed it, so I apologize, trying to make sure I'm following. On the asks and all of the language there it's the direction of the court that we use Commissioner Marchance version. Okay. Marchance version with changes with the changes that we have today. Yes, I'm sorry. Whatever his motion was. Second, it wasn't moving. I'm sorry whatever his motion was Second It wasn't okay Most of my commissioner colon second and commissioner martian say for the discussion or other further questions Five o'clock okay all in favor the motion. Please say aye This is carry thank you. All right, I think we did it folks. Please help. We're adjourned to have a great, what's left of the day. Thank you.