Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one state under God one and indivisible. Okay item one is for public input for items not listed in the agenda. There's any member of the public that would like to address commissioners court on any item not listed on the agenda. We ask any member of the public that would like to address Commissioner's Court on any item not listed on the agenda. We ask that you please complete a public comment form available from the aid to the court on this side table over here. And we'd like to hear from you. I'd like to remind everyone, please turn off your cell phones and pages. I will find you if they go off. She says with pleasure. Okay, we have some time to agenda items, public hearings. First, we will go to item 4A, which is a public hearing to approve the replat of lots one through four of Mary out of village one at Savannah, phase nine. We need a motion for the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Ead, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor, please say aye. Aye, opposed, aye, nay. Motion does carry. We'll call on Kathy Elkorn, good morning Kathy. Morning, Judge, commissioners. The owners of this property, which is basically a 19 and a half Iker track located at the corner of 380N Magnolia. They are resigning to break this down now into smaller lots to start commercial development in that corner. So this re-plat is basically to adjust the lot lines to create these lots, these lots are one acre or larger. They have met all the requirements and planning and public works would recommend approval. Have you received communication from anybody? We did send a number of our email and we have received no comments. Anyone in attendance would like to address commissioners court on this issue concerning the proposed reply Anybody either in favor of or opposed to the proposed reply that would like to address this Hearing none do we have a motion to close the public hearing motion by commissioner marchand Seconded by commissioner eans on a favor. Please say aye I oppose the name Motion does. Now need a motion for approval. Motion by Commissioner Marchand. Seconded by Commissioner Eans to approve the replant. On favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the name. Motion does carry unanimously. Okay. We have another public hearing here in just a couple minutes but let's go ahead with the consent agenda. I need to pull to I So we will not be taking action on that today Donna you'll be reposting that as I correct. Yes, ma'am. It'll be reposted next week Other than pulling that one do we have any questions about the consent agenda? Is there a motion to approve? Oh, I'm sorry. Any. Wait a minute. No, it's a separate agenda item. Isn't it for the employee in the constables office? It's a separate agenda item. I think it's a payroll item. Okay, we can talk about that later. All right. No further problems. And we have a motion. Second for approval of the consent agenda. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Motion does carry. The consent agenda today consists of two a, which is approval of the order making appointments to Newhire and the County clerk's office, Newhire and the County jail, Newhire Road and Bridge precinct one, New Hire and Records Management. 2V is approval of the Intra-Departmental Transfers 2C is award of bid for lubricants and oils. This has been number 06081918 to JCP Taylor Oil Incorporated, I'm sorry, JCP Taylor Oil Company. 2D is approval of Board of Bid 0808 1928 Spectrum Analyzer to Test Equity LLC 2E is approval to declare miscellaneous computer printer equipment furniture office supplies equipment cell phones vehicles road and bridge equipment and shares forfeiture property is surplus and to place the items in online auction auction number 0808 1936 to be held in September 2008 and to advertise that. Two AF is approval of budgetment request 102220 for various line-in-its for department information services and justice information systems for a total $1835 to G is approval of budget amount of cost 102 to 3 0 for ammunition for kind of jail in the amount of $1,488 to H is approval of budget amount of cost 102 to 2 4 0 for various line-out-of-the-road bridge precinct 1 in the amount of $21,050. 2J is approval of budget amount of cost 102 to 2 6 0 for visiting judge expenses for a probate court in the amount of $3,000. 2K is a provo budget amount quest 102 280 for diesel for road and bridge precinct for total amendment of $35,000. 2L is a provo budget amount quest 102 300 for office supplies for county planning in the amount of $8,037. To the end, the Provo Budgeting Act Quest 102-310 for training education and legal advertisements for purchasing department in the amount of $800. To end, is the Provo Budgeting Act Quest 102-320 for contract labor bridge construction for public works administration engineering in the amount of $9,000. To O is approval of Budget Map Quest 102-340 for various line-on-its for county-wide technology and telephone department in the amount of $55,156. To P is approval of Budget Map Quest 102-350 for court appointed attorneys for 16th District Court and the amount of $43,389 to Q's approval budget amount of Quest 102 390 for psychiatric services 158 District Court in the amount of $2,678 to our approval budget amount of Quest 102 4000 for psychiatric services for 360 second district court in the amount of $2,4441 to S is acceptance of the continuing education provisions of the Texas local government code articles 81.0025 Commissioner Boba J Mitchell for 2008. To T is approval building usage request for Denton County Friends of the Family on Saturday, October 4th, 2008. From 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. for fall festival benefiting Debt and County Friends of the Family. Okay, we will go now to our public hearing for B. For B is the public hearing to approve the reply of Lot 5, Marietta Village 1 at Savannah Phase 9, precinct 1, in a motion for the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell. Seconded by Commissioner Marchand. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, say aye. Motion carries. We're calling Kathy again. This is the saying 19 and a half acres additional lot, a different owner. The same request, they are dividing it up to create commercial properties. is a larger than one acre lot they have met all the regulations we did since certified mail and received no request public work and planning would recommend approval. Is anyone intense would like to address commissioners court concerning the proposed replant? Anybody in either in a favor of or opposed to? They would like to address commissioners court. And none do we have a motion to close the public hearing? Motion by commissioner Ead, seconded by commissioner Mitchell, on favor, please say aye. Aye, opposed, sinning, motion does carry. You need a motion for approval. Motion by commissioner Marchance, seconded by commissioner Mitchell, On favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, any? Motion does carry. Okay. Let's go to item 3B, which is presentation to commissioners court by the Huffine's group and the City of Loso, Colin Bobby Mitchell. Judge and commissioner, this is a terrorist project that the City of Luisville and Huffine groups are doing down in the City of Luizville. It's approximately 1,750 multifamily units, a city park and a recreational facility over 60 acres of commercial development. Draning facilities and lakes and a new hike and bike trail system. This area that in the city of Luiz was in the flood plain area. And so we're glad to have the Hubfides group come in and develop that area. There's gonna be some great projects there. And my only problem with it is not going to be done before 2009 because I've got an event coming up that I think that would be a great project that would go in with our Texas Association of Judges and Commissioners Convention and we'll head our call on Mr. Huffines. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning commissioners. Thank you very much for your time today and thank you Commissioner Mitchell for that intro. This is a great project for Lewisville. It's in the south part of Lewisville down in the flood plain area of the M4C of the Trinity River at South of Heapen Parkway and do east of I-35. It's the old nursery area down there. There was 220 acres and Nika was going to be here with the city of Louisville. No, she's tied up in traffic or not, but she was going to come and give the presentation from the city's perspective. But we're welcome to I'm going to fill in for her too. How much detail do y'all want me to go into on it? I didn't know if you want me to give a lot of detail. Just for the public's knowledge, there's some information on the little counter there. If anybody would like to have a copy of this for their own informational purposes, their extra copies for the public here, help yourself to those. I would like to add a couple things. One being that included in all the great plans for this area is a rail station DCTA that needs to be pointed out. And I think it's pretty common knowledge that I'm not big on abatements, rebates, things like that, and very protective of the county tax dollars, of course. I don't mean to insinuate that there's art, but I just have a real thing about abatements and rebates. And to me, after visiting with these good folks, this project makes good sense because of the location that it's in. It's in flood plain. Total taxable value of this area at this time is approximately $10 million. Without the development that they are proposing, it's always going to stay at the same value. It's not going to change. There's a lot of work that needs to be done because of the same value. It's not going to change. There's a lot of work that needs to be done because of the floodplain. So ultimately what this does is it develops the land. It solves the floodplain issue. It makes useful Makes good use of the land area. It's proximity to interstate 35 taking into consideration the widening of 35 of course. Provides the rail station for DCTA but ultimately it's going to have much greater than a $10 million value taxable adding to the county's tax base and certainly to the city of Louisville also. and the council council also, as the value increases what this agreement does is the county essentially has agreed to give 80% of the increased tax dollars that we receive back to the Louisville for an investment in this project. At some point, it is a 30 year agreement, which curls my very straight hair, but actually, and it has happened in other projects, I know in other parts of the state that I've looked at, where if you go ahead and invest, the, I say you, meaning the county, if we go ahead and invest the 80% back into the region to complete the development pay off the debt It doesn't have to take 30 years it can be paid off before that point in time But as it increases in value a 20% of that increased tax taxable value continues to be added to the county tax base until completion and pay off and then the entire taxable value is added to the county's tax base. Which we don't have now and we would not have anything more than we have today without the investment. To me, this is a completely different situation than a reinvestment zone in an area that is already established. It's already built out. I think this not real-long go was a tree farm. Yes. Agriculture. Herstery. Herstery. Yes. The favorite thing? Yeah. So anyway, that's my reason for supporting it. I'm going to go to the other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other other That's where I made the big distinction and why I supported it. Speaker, it's just coming in. The City of Louisville, I'm going to make it. Good morning. Just for the record, you'd identify yourself, please. Absolutely. My name is Nika Rainiki. I'm the Director of Economic Development for the City of Louisville. Judge Horne's commissioners, thank you this morning for your time. And consideration of our project, Commissioner Mitchell, thank you for your time in meeting with us. We really appreciate the partnership between the city of Louisville and Denton County. We've had a very successful tip already in place and we believe that this one is going to be just as successful or more. Cynthia, I just... I love it. Well, we just want to thank you. Hello. Well, we've been working with this development for about over two years now. We would like to create a very dynamic and unique development in this section of Louisville. It's a gateway into the city of Louisville at the intersection of 121 and 35. So it's going to be a project that as you come into the city of Louisville, this is going to be what the city is all about with the rail station there. It's going to provide a lot of opportunities for us for transit-oriented development for an area of live workplace, which is right now the buzz everywhere in the nation. This is what we want to create with the price of gas as high as they are. We want to have areas where people can have everything all encompassed in one place. So again, we truly appreciate your support. And if you have any questions for us, I'd be happy to answer questions. I don't want to take too much of your time. Yeah, other people who are making presentations or giving you a little more overview. So with that, I'd like to introduce our audience. Bill is going to. Okay, Bill, I'm sorry. To go over some of the financial aspects of the project, I would like to reiterate that the TIFF will support only infrastructure projects, basically. This is a very large project, but the infrastructure part of it is about $43 million. And that's the only piece that the TIFF will participate in, the infrastructure piece that's essential to both the city and the county. We also have a piece in there that we would like to allocate towards a very large major regional tourism draw that we're working on. So again, that would be a particular interest to the county because this is going to be something that's unique for the area, not only Denton County and Lewisville, but also the whole region, the Dallas-Four Worth Metroplex. So that's another aspect of the project that we're working on. Thank you again. Thank you. Good morning, Judge. Commissioners, my name is Bill Calderon. I'm with the firm of Haas Hill Calderon. We're a Houston-based economic development consulting firm and other contract to help with this project. It's a pleasure to be here this morning with you. Much of the project details have already been discussed so I won't go into a lot of a repeat of that information. We did circulate by email copies of the project plan as well as a briefing document that basically gives you all of the essential elements of the project. We're proposing this as a joint city county project. We are not asking you to take any action today. We do expect to come back to the court with a formal interlocal agreement once the reinvestment zone is created. I think as many of you all are aware of the city issue, the letter of notice back in the April or so time frame. We're well beyond the 60 day period. We're expecting to go before the school district in the April or so timeframe. So we're well beyond the 60 day period. We're expecting to go before the school district in the next coming weeks to get that presentation completed. And very shortly here, the city council, Denton will contemplate the ordinance to create the reinvestment zone after public hearing. I'm sorry, forgive me, Louisville, forgive me. Too many cities in one week here in England. After the ordinance to consider the reinvestment zone is approved, then we will come back and introduce an interlocal agreement that sets forth the particulars, participation by the county and the TERS. As proposed, this is a 30 year reinvestment zone. The cost of the infrastructure pretty much is split between the developer and improvements made by the developer as well as the city. City actually is bearing a little bit higher burden, but we're hoping that the reinvestment zone will take out the bulk of those costs prior to the development cost being financed by the TIFF. Again, we do contemplate coming back to the court and we're open to any questions that you might have at this time. And there is a court who have questions on this issue. I guess there's a question Mr. Huffman's I was looking at page four here. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Okay. I'll just walk through the civic space here. The civic space, I'm curious what is the center of the communities. The center is a, I'm Howard Bortes, I work for Huffline's communities. That center is basically the amenity package for the community. None of the public funds will be used to develop that. That is actually the clubhouse and all of the rec facilities for the actual apartment units, et cetera. This is on the commercial page. So these are the commercial along the first floor. H4. Which page can it be pulled up from this room? H4 commercial. Got it right there out from Mr. H4 commercial Daddy right down the side Why am I not finding the trimmer? Yeah see I'm not finding my book On the right-hand side. What that is demonstrating is the actual commercial locations which aren't in the center. They're around the outside of it. In the zoning that we have for this project, there's the ability on the front facing that center village green to put commercial as well as apartments. We can go either direction if the market will allow us to put commercial in. So the center court isn't what's being shown relative to the commercial part. It's the brown shaded area that's on the outside of the street. That's what I'm asking. So that's, you said it's not definitely commercial. It is not definitely commercial. The concern we have with that project, there is designated commercial within this project, but the problem with that particular location, it's not a drive-through location, there's not direct traffic, it's a destination only. So if there is enough market support to be able to rent those, we would happily make them commercial. In addition to this particular location, there is another location on the other side of the tracks, which it does develop into about 200,000. Should we look at that? One might help us not sleep. If you look at this picture right here. It's fine. That shows the location. That is on the east side of the tracks over adjacent to Hebron. And that is part of what we're talking about this property currently is totally floodplain and it's part of the the the Teres There would be some work done with the city is relative to a swap and this would be reclaimed out of the floodplain and create about 50 acres of Developable commercial property How many total residential units are? 1726 residential units. There's 25,000 for sure designated in the first portion, and there's approximately 230,000 for a feed of commercial on the other side. What's your percentage of commercial to residential? I'm just curious. Is that in here? I don't know that I have broken out relative. There's also another 14-A for piece to the south, which will go to the city, which is relative to the facility that NICA mentioned. So are y'all, this is a lot of new units for the city of residential units, for the city of Luswold to absorb, are you all working at any partnerships for us fire stations or is that the new station down there? We've gone through all the I mean we're working we have a big residential I was just curious if it's not been raised an issue I mean we've met with all of them we've gone through the zoning process with the city of Louisville. It is currently zoned MU90, which is a mixed use, 98 for parcel zoning. I think you can speak to that. So we are providing all the facilities. We believe that we have the capability to provide all the infrastructure for the project, including water, sanitary sewer, police and fire. We do have a long range plan in place for our growth and so that will include building our new facilities for increased growth. We have a new fire station under construction on 35 that would probably be the one that would respond to this project. Action six is down there also in that area up a little bit. Hey, are there any other questions or comments? Thank you for your time everyone. We look forward to seeing this come back to Commissioner Scort and we can begin. All for your time. Thank you very much. Thank you. I members in consideration of the time of our architect's HGR, I'd like to go to item 6C. Six C is approval of award of construction services for RP 06081913 Denton County Administrative Complex phase one to Thomas S. Burnin limited for 15 million 763,100 for the base bid and alternates one and two Will calm Beth Lane. Good morning. We're very excited this morning to bring this Good morning. We're very excited this morning to bring this recommendation for a ward. The valuation committee included myself as well as Danny Brumley, Kevin Carr and Holden Talley. We met and reviewed the proposals. As you remember, this is an RFP and not a straight bid. So we did look at qualifications and experience and other factors in their proposals. Fortunately the best price was also the most qualified and so we are bringing you a recommendation within our budget and we are also recommending the ward of Alternates 1 and 2. The process at the statute lays out does require that we go ahead and rank the firms based on the proposal evaluations and that's based on the criteria that was pre-selected in the RFQ itself or RFP itself. So we're recommending Thomas S. Fern limited as number one, satafilled in Pontox, this number two, and RAC Cliff constructors as number three. If we cannot reach a final agreement with number one, then we formally in that process and move to number two. The RFP also included some value engineering nodems that the contractor could suggest back to the county. And now that we've ranked the firms, our architect will be able to work with them and see if there's any of those that are, you know, ones that we might be interested in and want to work into the final contract. Both Richard Martinez and Holden Talley are here and I believe they'd like to say a few words and kind of give you an update on the status of some of the other aspects of the project. Hi, gentlemen, who wants to speak first? Holden? Good morning, Holden. Good morning. I? Holden? Good morning, Holden. Good morning. I'm Holden Talley, the HDR architecture. Just to re-emphasize what Beth described. We did have a very successful bit, a very competitive bit. And we're always glad to see when the proposals come in and they're this close. It really helps us to have confidence that we've got a good set of documents out there. And also, I think it gives us confidence that the county's really gotten a good value. We believe that the pricing submitted really does present a very good value to the county. We can really recommend this to you with great confidence. We have fortunate to have very many very qualified companies and Thomas S. Byrne did come out as the number one ranked company in a very close evaluation. From here we would go ahead and proceed with the preparation of contract documents and working this in with the other aspects of the project. So Mr. Martinez tell you about. Morning, Judge and Commission members. On a personal note I've had a chance to work with Thomas S. Burns with Taren County on a number of development projects and John Avel, who's the president CEO, has always been a highly responsive and very effective manager of that company. So I think you've got a great contractor on board. They're very aggressive and they'll move forward and I think deliver a superb project to you. So I'm glad to see they were the ones that made the cut. We have a couple of outstanding items as soon as you as as Beth can negotiate a contract with the general contractor. We have already got our zoning approved for the property. The next big issue of course is getting our building permit. We have submitted all of our paperwork to them. The city did require that we come back and modify the Traffit Impact Analysis since we made the decision to phase the project. So we had to come back this last week and modify some documents. We've shipped received final comments from the city this Friday and pending no major issues between now and Friday. We think that we probably move forward with a grading permit pretty quickly. And then the final construction permit will be following after our project is finally approved with the subdivision and plating process by the PNZ board for city of Denton in sometime in October. members of the court. It's exciting. Okay I thought I heard somebody wanted to say something. We need a motion for approval of award of construction services for the Sardin. Approval. Motion by Commissioner Eads, the chair will second. I'm getting excited. We're getting closer to, we're getting going on this. This is great. Here and no further comments. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed to say name. Motion does carry. Thank you. Appreciate your time, gentlemen. OK. Okay. Let's go to item 3A, which is approval of a proclamation, naming October 9, 2008, is retired and senior volunteer program day in Denton County. Okay. The proclamation reads, whereas the retired senior volunteer program serving Denton County RSVP is a national program which provides meaningful opportunities for persons of 55 and over to participate more fully in the life of their communities through volunteer service. And whereas the retired and senior volunteer program serving Dem County also identifies and addresses issues that impact older adults. And whereas Dem County with genuine appreciation sincerely recognizes the valuable services, resources, and energy contributed by more than 1000 DEMC County RSVP volunteers of significance worth up to 192 nonprofit and governmental agencies. And where's the County of Denton and its residents have benefited for more than 123,000 hours of service? And where's the retired and senior volunteer program serving Denton County provides older persons with opportunities to give up themselves and assist them to maintain active and involved in their communities so they may share with us the benefits of their many years of experience and wonderful resources. Now therefore the Denton County Commission's Court does hereby proclaim this day, October 9, 2008, is retired in Senior Volunteer Program Day. In Denton County, an urged government officials, leaders of volunteer organizations, and residents of Denton County to recognize all older adult volunteers for the valuable contributions, and to encourage older adults to provide leadership in their community through volunteer service, and to assist by improving the quality of life for Dan County. Chair Wilson Moon, Seconded by Commissioner Eans, I'll in favor please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Sinning. Motion goes carry. We do this every year and I'm glad we do. These people do wonderful work and I'm glad we recognize them. Okay. We're going to not take any action on 3C today. Mr. Setser will be rescheduling with us for this presentation. He had a family emergency come up. So we'll be no action on 3c today. Okay we'll come back to the budget items at the posted times. So item 5a which is approval of the bill report payments from CSCD, Community Corrections T.A.I.P. shares, training shares, forfeiture, V.A-I-P, Shares, Training Shares, Forfeiture, V-I-T, Interest, D-A, Check B, and D-A-4, Forfeiture Funds are presented for recording purposes only, good morning, James Wells. Morning, Judge, commissioners, I asked the court to approve the bills as presented with the two additions from the General Fund. Actually, there are two deletions from the general fund and one from the law library fund that we need to do not need to be processed. That's all corrections I have. We have questions of James Wells. Is there a motion to approve? Motion by Commissioner Eads. Seconded by Commissioner White. On one favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, sen. Motion does carry. 5B is approval for the county treasure to pay 32.50 hours to employee, Wingate, Williams deputy constable for hours' work prior to the effect of data that order make an appointment. Good morning, Cindy Brown. Morning, Judge commissioners. Last payroll, my office received a time sheet on behalf of an employee who Hours had been worked prior to his formal approval by commissioner's court Being that Malthus has received that I am bringing to you today for your consideration of payment of those hours This employee is in a position that is funded through a contract The contract was in place and effective for the hours that he has worked. His appointment to the position had not been timely appointed. This person worked and I, you know, needs to be paid for the time that he put in. I don't know issue with that. What I do have an issue with is the fact that this person was put on basically a week prior to when the order-making employment was approved. Amy, is this not the second time that this has happened? Yeah, we had a similar situation a year ago. and yeah, we had a similar situation a year ago. Same office. Same office. It was, I believe for two days, last time this time it was for four days. They, who, sit in the order maker and who actually told this person to come to work? Almost a week early. The council would have to answer that. I don't know the answer to that. I said, I don't know the answer to that. The council's office will have to answer that. Morning. Thank you for being here. Your honor and members of the court. What happened with this particular case is the contract was due to that that's when North West Independent School District wanted it to start on the 20th. The office manager is very efficient, she is very knowledgeable in these areas, but Mary, it's going through her husband right now, is going through three life-threatening injuries that he's been on his deathbed, three separate times. She's had a lot of things on her mind. Being the chief deputy I should have, or John should have followed up to make sure we never have had in the past. The issue that you're referring to prior to this, I don't have any knowledge of that, Your Honor, so I can't speak to that. I can assure you that it won't happen in the future. I'm throwing myself before the court, y'all can have managed me as far as being the chief deputy if you want. But what had happened, like I said, I instructed Wynne Gate to come to work because the contract stated that he was to be employed starting on the 20th. I was not aware that the ordermaker was turned in late. So I had him come to work and started paying him from the 20th on. So in my fault, if you can't arrange it there, I can add hours to him after he had previously started. But I did, you know. The gentleman did the work. I have no problem paying him for what he did. It's the issue of the order maker being effective one day and when he actually started another and I wanted to know who... Well. I'm loud, but I'm not as loud as a siren so... I just wanted to have it clearly understood that this is outside of policy and it really does not ever need to happen again. Understand people get a lot on their mind because of personal issues and stuff and you are correct the contract specified a specific date for the North Coast-Sciestate coverage. But somebody dropped the ball here and I wanted to make sure that it didn't happen. And like I said, you're on our off take. I'll take four responsibilities as being the chief deputy basically running the office when the council was absence. I should have followed up on that and that's my fault. So I can assure you and the court that it won't happen again. Thank you. I mean, I feel the same way you feel about that. I'm really having some hot burns about even paying employee. I'll be real honest with you. Thank you for coming out of the Constable's pocket. If we all make mistakes, and that's even myself, but sometimes we have to... I self-craft eat the mistakes that we make. And I'm having real, real hard burns with the fact that we put a person to work a whole week. And nobody goes back and check to see if this exactly what should have happened. I accept your explanation and when I looked at this I was, my decision was made to not even vote for it. And I'm still struggling with the fact that, you know, what happens if every department decides that they're going to put an employee on before they're actually hired? What is the liability of that? There are several issues and I'm struggling with having to vote yay for something, I mean, there's important issues. We've got, you know, several employees that are ready to go to work, but they can't go. Maybe the drug test didn't come back or whatever. And I think we have to be aware of this in our offices. And I understand I'm certainly empathetic to Marion's problem, her situation. And I'm free for that, but the fact that we are employed and put an employee on payroll a whole week before it should be, that's concerned to me. And I just can't just, I'm sorry, say, okay, you've got to, we made a mistake and move on. I'm torn with that. It's hard for me to accept it. And I can understand that commission Mitchell. But in this particular, in this particular employee with the school district, and I have, I'm fighting this battle with Mr. Grasswich and the board over at North Weth Independent School District because every, they only pay him for the 32 hours. They refuse to pay him for the additional eight hours because when schools out, that's when they want to end the contract instead of keeping him on to do residual work that he could possibly be doing. And I'm in the process of working through that. That's why we have a, maybe if we had a problem in the past with that, it's because of. He has to come in, terminate his employment at the end of the school year, be rehired and go through everything. Every year that we hire him back over there for that contract. So I'm proposing some things right now to maybe alleviate that to where he'll be a full time employee and we won't have that problem in the future. But that's why some of this happens because you have to terminate re-hire. Terminate re-hire, sending back over to get its physical and then fight that battle. Maybe they need to decide how important it is to have the employee working for them. Exactly right. And maybe your decision for the school district to make. Yeah, there are questions or comments? Okay. Here no further questions or comments. Do we have a motion for approval to authorize the county treasure to pay the 32.50 hours to this employee? We have a motion by Commissioner Ead seconded by Commissioner Marchant on favor please say aye aye opposed the name aye I will make let me tell you I voted for this but next time this comes up since we went through this and put brought it to the attention of everyone the next time something like this happens again unless the situation begs a different response from me. Then I won't be voting for that. I think that the, I just think that we need to take care of our business just a little bit better. And. We all agree. Thank you. All right, we'll move on to item 6A. We have a new ordermaker here. I'll read what this is. This is approval of Board of Bid, 08081933, Mulsified Asphalt to Martin Asphalt for items 1, 15, 17, 18, and 19, Section 1, into Jaggle Public for item one, section two, reject all bids on item seven and 16, section one and two, two through 17, 15 and 16, section two. Did I say that right? Two through seven and 16. Two through seven. I've got 15 and sixteen in here. Is that correct? You knew one? You bet that on your new one? Oh, you got one thing and so on. It'd be just sixteen on the rejection. I'm sorry for that confusion. That's all right. Legal gave me the new order. This was what we needed to pass. Okay. This was a very complicated bid. We did not receive bids on all the items. One of the things that we were looking for, the product we were most interested in was the AEP. We did not receive any AEP destination bids. We did receive one origin bid which we would have to go pick up and it was in Houston. Donna Riley, Senior Byer and myself met with Bruce Stodder and Mike Burton, the administrative formants for Rug and Bridge last Friday and went through all of these, discussed all of our options. And the recommendation before you, they're in agreement with. They both agreed that the AEP origin to go to Houston and pick it up was not cost, you know, in our best interest to do that is cost prohibitive. A full tanker load is 5,500 gallons but we typically only need a thousand gallons at a time. AEP has temperature controls so it's very difficult for us to travel that far and keep the temperature. So we are rejecting that part of the bid. Even if we decided to accept that and we did find an alternative through a calling county and a Tarant County contract for AEP, we still have the same problem. They're the product, there's a shortage. So even if we place an order, there's no guarantee we would ever get it. My understanding from the administrative foreman's is that they are substituting a product that they're calling TAC and it's a deluded CSS1 product that will work. They have to lay it on, I believe, a different way, but that's their process right now. So the bid that we're presenting to you does have that product that they can get. The destination will be from Martin Asphalt which is out of Houston and the origin will be from Jacob Public locally. So that is our recommendation. We are continuing to look for both hot mix which is a different contract and demulsified through the cooperatives that the shortage problem has to do with the emulsified. The hot mix we have, but we did have some contract issues on how those wind contracts play out and how we can place the orders to take care of the current projects this year. I believe we have all those issues resolved. It will cost us some extra money just to the increased cost for the hot mix asphalt prior to the end of the year. October 1, we expect to see about a 35% increase in our contracts anyway. But to finish out this year's we're going to need to buy one or two projects from what I understand from the administrative foreman's off of a Tarant County contract at a higher price than what our current contract is. Finance from Commissioners Court or do we have a motion for approval? Motion by Commissioner Margin. I'll give you the comment. Right ahead. Motion by Commissioner Margin. With a comment. Right ahead. Well, first of all, Beth, I'd like to thank you for working with our admin forum on this. And I'd like to, of course, have already expressed this to Bruce, but to both the admin forum and Mike and Bruce for coming up with these alternatives. It's not the best case scenario, but there was some thinking outside the box to be able to address these very critical needs. In the most cost effective manner that we can given the parameters that we're looking at. So I appreciate that. Thank you. I'd like to second Commissioner White's comments and think that I'd inform it and and thank the admin for him and Beth and Donna Riley for working hard to get that. And to help find us a solution of this is, you know, Mike Burton has done this row building business a long longer than I have and he's never experienced this in his career. And I'm sure you'll have an either and so this is a real challenge that the counties experience. And I know we've had several roads delayed because we've had, we've had them set up ready to go. Don't have the product material. Have to stop redirect our efforts onto another road to get that one going, get the drainage prepared and everything. And then start to go, if we can get material go back to the other one. And it's what our work is, the work that we just did is deteriorating, got to start over. So it has been a lot of redirecting efforts and delayed us because of the shortage, which is unforeseen by the county. And so I appreciate their diligence. Well, I didn't see you back there at all. And I know she's spent a lot of time on this. So thank you for your efforts too. All right. We have a motion and a second, I believe. And here, no further comment. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to name? Motion carries. 6B is approval of committee recommendation for selecting bridge farmer and associates incorporated as most qualified firm to provide services for the Triple Four Project work category E Urban Railway Design identified as Memorial Drive Project. Project is one of the Triple Four Projects in Commissioner Precinct II. The Evaluation Committee included myself, John Felt, Assistant District Attorney, Bennett Hal, Director of Public Works. We also had two funding partners on this project. So Jason Brodigan, he's a Senior Civil Engineer with the City of Frisco, and Steve View Banks with the Public Works Director with the colony. We sent out letters to the 10 pre-qualified firms. We received nine back, and we shortlisted that to the top four firms. We interviewed those firms on August 18th and the final evaluation is before you today. We are recommending that the firms to be ranked as number one bridge farmer and associates. Number two is healers, dollars. Number three is HNTV and number four is half. The committee agrees with this recommendations. Have a bridge farmers very qualified for this project. There's a lot of new challenges on this one that we've not seen before and they came up with some good proposed solutions that the county can start to look at as well as the city of the Colme and Frisco. We're recommending approval of the ranking today. Thank you. We have a motion by Commissioner Marchen. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. 6D is approval of award for voice and data cabling Rp 0800 I'm sorry 06081911 to superior fiber and data services. Again we'll calm Beth let me. This is a contract that we use on an ass-needed basis throughout the county for cable drops and other projects required by the information services department. Both Kevin Carr and Brian King reviewed these proposals with us, and we are selecting superior, fiber and data services as the most qualified based on evaluation criteria and RFP. Your questions? Motion to approval by Commissioner Marchant. Seconded by Commissioner Eads, questions? Any none? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, sen. Motion does carry. Thank you, Beth. Let's go item on to item 70, which is approval of budget amendment of quest 102-270 for deso fuel, including the transfer of funds from non-departmental and appropriated regular contingency for facilities management in the amount of $500. I'm sorry, Chair, I'll move for approval. Seconded by Commissioner Marchion, are there questions? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, Senane? Motion carries. 7B is approval of budget amendment with quest 102 290 for computer supplies and computer software, including the transfer of funds from capital replacement fund on appropriated contingency for capital replacement fund in the amount of $398,447. Motion by Commissioner Eans. Seconded by Commissioner Marche. Another question. Motion by Commissioner Eans. Seconded by Commissioner March. Any other questions? On favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed to the name? Yes. I just see the Treasury left. I was going to ask for a little bit of update on her on that process of moving that system into place and if she had any response from the letters that she put out from people Telling people about the the conversion. I'd just be interested in that in the future Yeah, I'm not really gonna be able to answer that question. I know she's right in the middle of it But I couldn't tell you what response she had or exactly I'll just maybe call her myself. Thank you. That'd be good first to all have an update on that. Thank you. 7C is approval of budget amendment quest 102-330 for burial expense including the transfer of funds from non-departmental and appropriately conregular contingency for non-departmental in the amount of $4,000. Chair, I move for approval. Seconded by Commissioner Eads. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, in any motion does carry. 7D is approval of Budget Amendment Request 102-360 for Court appointed attorneys, including the transfer of funds from non-departmental and appropriate court order contingency for the 360 second district court in the amount of $50,000. The chair will begrudgingly move for approval. The seconded by Commissioner White, all in favor, please say aye. I oppose the name. Motion is Gary. It's just that every year at the end of the budget year, we have to transfer all this money due to court appointed attorneys. So nothing against that particular court. Just wait is. 70 is approval. Budget amendment requests number 102, 370 for court appointed attorneys, including the transfer $23,000 from non-departmental. appropriated court order contingency for the 158th District Court for a total amendment of $37,500. Approval. Motion by Commissioner Ead, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. On favor, please say aye. Aye opposed, sitting. Motion does carry. Seven F is approval, budget amendment of quest 102-380 for court appointed attorneys, including the transfer of funds from non-departmental and appropriated court order contingency for 367th district court and amount of $28,000. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner White. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed sitting. Motion does scary. Okay. Other than our... Oh, I beg your pardon? Let's see if we can't take care of this too. 14A is approval of a change order number three to the contract between Denton County, Texas, and Jaggle Public Company for the lowest road, East east and lowest roadway improvement project in the additional amount of $93,691.25 with funding to come from Better Safety Roads program, auditor number 7673669020, which increases the current total amount of the contract to $1,531,377.35 is in Commissioner Prucington. Motion made Commissioner White, seconded by Commissioner Eads, other questions. Any none on favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, sen. Motion is carried. 14b is approval of one. Contract for purchase of right away by Denton County, Texas from Blue Star Land Limited Partnership for Track A phase two parcel two of the FM 1171 Improvement Project two grand authority grant authorization to proceed with the closing and approval for the Denton County Judge to sign on necessary closing documents and three direct the Denton County Auditor to issue a award in the amount of $95,000 plus any applicable fees who are funding to come from the FM 1171 Improvement Project. This is Auditor number 70736920. This is in Commissioner precinct 3. Prove them. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner Eads, questions. You're none all in favor please say aye aye opposed a name motion does carry okay now We'll go back to Tannock Public hearing on the proposed Denton County budget for fiscal year 2008 2009 We need a motion to go into our public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner Eves. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, sen. Motion to scurry. We'll call on Donna Sturt. Good morning, Judge and Commissioners. I do have a short slide show for you today and for the public as well. There are handouts here available if anybody would like to follow along with that. Public notice for this public hearing on the proposed budget was posted in the Dintenric Chronicle according to the provisions of the local government code on August the 18th. We also posted that notice on the main page of our website the same day. And also we filed the budget with the county clerk County Auditor and Budget Office on September 3rd for public inspection. We also made available the entire document on the website on September 3rd as well. The next slide is just a recap of the main page of the website so you can see all those notices were posted according to the provisions of the law. Organizational goals of the county were approved back in February where the county is going to remain physically responsible and conservative. We have to plan for change and growth. We have safety and security of our citizens to be mindful of maintaining the lowest possible tax rate, preserving and upgrading public infrastructure, developing economic and industrial growth, maintaining a high quality workforce, providing support for mobility and transportation needs in the county, having an effective and efficient judicial system, retaining and expanding our partnerships to improve health to our citizens, of course fulfilling legislative obligations, developing long-range strategic plans, preserving and adequate fund balance, and enhancing e-government solutions and technologies. I believe that the proposed budget that's being presented to you today meets all of the requirements of the organizational goals approved by this court. Just a recap of our budget calendar. The process starts for us, actually in January, but we provide information to the court in February, where the commissioners court established the goals and provides departments and our office with direction on what type of budget you'd like to see presented. We hold workshops with the departments, where we provide onsite training to assist them with the budget application. Deadlines for budget requester due into our office by the first part of May. And we work through May and June and present a recommended budget to the commissioners court mid July. We held budget workshops in July and August for a four weeks, a four week period. We also held a public hearing on our proposed tax rate on August the 26th at 10 a.m. As well as a second public hearing on September 2nd at 7 p.m. As I mentioned earlier, we filed the budget for public inspection on September 3rd. And of course, we're here today to consider the public hearing on the budget, adoption of budget and tax rate as well. The proposed budget that's being presented today totals $181.6 million. The initial request that were submitted by departments total about $186 million. So the budget office recommended about $5 million in cuts to the commissioners court. The increase in the proposed budget is $11.6 million. The current tax rate is 0.23589 cents per $100 of value. The tax rate that we're proposing today is just under that at at .23577. It's a decrease of the rate of .12% or an increase above the effective rate of 3.46%. The tax rate is actually 23% less than it was 10 years ago. Oops, sorry. 3% less than it was 10 years ago. Oops, sorry. The next chart just shows you a quick recap of our major funds within the budget. General fund is our main primary operating budget where most of our expenses fall. That budget is $114.4 million. Red and bridge is proposed at $13.2 million. juvenile probation at $10.1 debt service at $28.9 and all of our other funds to combine total $15 million. The next chart shows you our 10-year population history and you'll see that the counties experienced a 53% growth over the last 10 years. What is that percentage? 53%. The next chart shows our tax rate history and you can see that's remained fairly constant. Even with the growing demands we've met you'll see our rate still proposed at 0.25757. This next chart we've seen the last couple weeks that are public hearing on the tax rate but I think it's an important chart to show as it relates to our budget as well. The average home value on a home in Denton County is now $211,710. 62% of taxes paid on that house for school district, 28% for city, and only 10% for Denton County. This is the same chart on a monthly basis showing that you would pay $263 per month for school district, $117 for city, and $42 per month for Denton County. This next chart shows comparison of the top 10 counties with the county wide tax rates. You'll see that Denton County, of course, is at the bottom of the list at 2.25777. In Cullen County, they pay 41% more in taxes. Dallas County, 141% more. Terrent County, 178% more. And Hadogo is 233%. So I think the Commissioner's Court can be proud of our budget and our tax rate. This next chart shows the top 15 counties I think that's important to see as well. It includes a lot more data, it includes population estimates, the revenue, derived from property taxes, they're combined countywide tax rates, total county budget, number of employees, and number of employees per capita. It's very difficult to obtain this information from other counties they don't like sharing. They're overall countywide rates, so there is one area on Hidalgo County where we just found out checking their website last night that their budget is actually $230 some odd million compared to the 137 listed here. They only reported their general fund total to us, but when we went and verified that last night, we found that was incorrect. So we'll be trying to check their websites a little bit more closely as well. They don't like it when we ask for this information. They don't like it when we ask for this information. Revenue changes in the budget, we have included $5 million in taxes from new property added to the role for the first time. We have increased taxes built in for a voter approved debt projects and road projects of $3.5 million. Missilaneous transfers of $2.3 million. fees are up about $800,000. Inner governmental, which are grants and contracts, have increased about $400,000. Fines are up $300,000. Auto registrations are up $200,000. Unfortunately, our interest is down about $1 million. But that in itself shows you how Ditton County is growing when we have increases in our fees and fines and our user fees. The next chart shows you a breakdown of that same revenue situation in a pie chart showing property taxes at 67%, fees at 8%, and so on. The next chart shows how much of our property tax revenue comes from residential at 75% manual value at 3.6% and commercial at 21.3. Expenditure changes that have been included in this proposed budget include increased debt service payments of approximately $3 million. We have included salary increases for employees and officials. The cost is about $2.9 million. Capital equipment is included at $2.5 million. New computer assisted dispatch, software and other capital needs. New hires include 34 and a half positions. Costs have $1.6 million and we'll go over the details of that just shortly. We have increased red and bridge funding by $1.1 million. Health insurance and other benefits are increased $1 million. Rental and lease payments are up $600,000. We have a telephone refresh, new instruments included for a $450,000 increase. Of course, utilities are at $340,000. Quarterpoint attorney fees, unfortunately, continue to rise $270,000. Health and prisoner expenses, $230,000. Reclassification and equity adjustments as recommended by human resources total about $200,000. The prezel district portion of their budget that we fund as well as any other countywide association dues are up about $160,000. Gasoline products of $115,000. Fire and ambulance funding, we've included an increase on the fire calls in uncooperated dent in county, total about $103,000. Insurance expense is a little down, $89,000. I think that occurred during the budget process and we were glad to present a reduction to you at that town. Other reductions are included. Missilanias contingency repairs and maintenance are down because we've completed the lower level of the courts building project. So total expenditure changes included in this budget are $11.5 million. Included in the figures I just mentioned are two major projects that are included in the new hires and other expenses and that is for opening 48 new jail beds for adult prisoners and 18 new juvenile beds in the juvenile detention center. The total cost of those two projects were about $1.2 million. This is a quick recap of that summary by function. You can see our budget broken down that way. Out of our budget, 52% of our budget is for personnel, 46% for operations, and 2% for capital. New employee request, as you know, in the initial request, departments requested 72 positions. The proposed budget includes 35. And the proposed budget includes 35. There were no new hire appeals approved during our budget workshops so that number remain constant. This is a breakdown of all the new positions that are included in the budget. For information services, we've included an application development manager and a system support specialist. In JP precinct 6, their part-time court clerk has been recommended at full time Taxicester collector would have one new deputy clerk position In the legal division or criminal district attorney there are two Physicians approved for the intake division that being a misdemeanor prosecutor and administrative specialist In public facilities there is one new hire for the correction facility technician that is again based on the expansion of our jail. Red and British precinct 4 received a new driver equipment operator. In county jail there are eight detention officers. In jail health there are two health service specialists. Those are all tied to jail or juvenile expansion. In the Sheriff's Department, there's an animal control deputy and a forensic technician, and Constable precinct to a new deputy constable. And 13 positions combined for detention and post adjudication for juvenile and one position for the fire code enforcement division. This next chart shows that we have 1458 county-funded positions with the majority of that of course being in public safety and the other breakdown follows. The tenure employee history report is here for you. You'll see we had 1192 positions 10 years ago and we have 1458 positions in the recommended budget. I think we're only able to do this because we've got a lot of hardworking, dedicated employees and with also with the cutting edge of technology that we have here in DIN County, I think our department has an elect officials do a great job of keeping the new hars down to them. Employee growth over the past 10 years is 22 percent compared to what we talked about earlier just on our population was 53%. A number of employees per capita, this is always one we like to show as well. This chart reiterates what was noted on the previous chart and compares employees per capita to our population for the past 10 years. So that our employees per capita declined from 2.97 per 1,000 to 2.37. That's the end of my presentation. I think it's a good sound physical budget that allows departments to provide the necessary services in order to meet the needs of the citizens and taxpayers. Again, at the most, and I believe at the most economical cost, and a very efficient tax rate. But at this point, I would like to invite any public to participate in the public hearing. Would be happy to do that. Anyone in attendance that would like to address Commissioner's Court concerning the proposed budget in favor of or opposed to anyone in the sense that like to address commissioners court on this issue. I believe not. We need to close the public hearing to take formal action on the budget. So with that, the chair will move to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Eads, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Motion does carry. 4D is to approve the adoption of the 2008-2009 Dent County budget in the amount of 181,638,305 dollars. Chair will move for approval. Seconded by Commissioner Marchand, are there questions or comments? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye, opposed, sitting. Motion carries. Four in favor. One opposed. For E is the approval. It's also a time to agenda item is approval the adoption of the Denton County Tax rate. It's a time item, but it's not really a public hearing is it? It's really not. I think Barbara just chose to put all of our budget items together under this posting. I'll make sure I wasn't missing something. That's correct. We had our two public hearings the last couple of days. So we completed all our statutory requirements. So for E is approval of the adoption of the Denton County Tax Rate of 0.2357 per 100 dollar evaluation. A taxable value for tax year 2008. Also on page 333 of your packet, our court order has to be very specific. So the information listed here needs to be read into the record of specifically as it stated on that page. 333. I will make the motion and I'll read this exactly as it's required by law and be stating. Move that property taxes being increased by the adoption of a tax rate of 0.23577 the adoption of tax rate of $100 of taxable value for didn't county for tax year 2008 increases 0.18447 for the purpose of maintenance and operation and 0.05134 for the payment of principal in interest on debt service for a total county tax rate of 0.23577. This tax rate will raise more taxes for maintenance and operations and last year's tax rate. The tax rate will raise taxes for maintenance and operation on a $100,000 value home by approximately 60 cents. That is my motion is there a second. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell, questions or comments. Hearing none, on favor, please say aye. Aye, opposed, aye. Motion carries four in favor, one opposed. Okay. Yes, sir. I want to thank Donna and your budget office for the great work again in my second year. I guess it makes it easier when we have a praise value rather than values that have gone down and we have more revenue that we're able to collect. And I'm sure that even in those times, when that is not the case, that because of your professionalism and the professionalism of the people that are working in your department. And the departments of everyone in the county, as well as elected officials, help make this process one that is not as measurable as it could be. And I thank you very, very much for that. For your dedication and your hard work for this county and the citizens as well as the employees. So thank you. Thank you. I appreciate that. There are a lot of people that help with the process and if I could take just a quick second, of course my staff, you know, I think the world of them, they've all gone above and beyond. They are all very knowledgeable in the areas that they oversee and I appreciate each and every one of them in the job that they do. They make my job much easier. There are a lot of other people too. All the officials in department heads, the auditor, James Wells and his staff, director of purchasing Beth and her staff, human resources, Amy Phillips and her staff, Kevin Carr and his staff and information services. Steve Mossman and Michelle Franschen, the tax office. They assist us with our tax rate information and public notices. County clerk's office, Erin Kirby does a great job. She got all the quarters to us timely. And I know we have to go through that one time, but she has to go through that twice to hear all that. So she deserves a special compliment. Criminal DA's office Kim Gillis and her staff they've always been available on legal issues and questions and I appreciate their prompt responses. We have a vehicle assessment committee and social service agency committee I've it do a great job as well So I appreciate the job that everybody does and especially the commissioner's court Y'all didn't credit the job the book stops here and You you make all the hard decisions. We try to give you a sound recommendations But you're the one that has to vote on the budget and the proposed tax rate. It's not always popular to provide for a small tax increase. But my hat's off to you for making this, I think, the number one counting in the state. Thank you again. There is some information as well on our website for anybody that's interested in a copy of the budget. It will be available for anybody to see from now on. And again, thank you all for the job that you do. Well, having been through this process several times now, I just have to say that it gets better and better every year. The process is refined. Each office refines their procedures. Certainly with the help of Kevin Carr and taking advantage of technology. We have workings at our fingertips and certainly at the fingertips of the department heads and elected officials that are working on their individual budgets. There certainly have been times commissioner that we started the budget process and we had nine or ten pages of changes to go through. And so Donna and her staff and certainly all the other staff of the county, they took an awful lot of, for lack of a better term, grief off of the members of the court and researched these things to see if there isn't another way to do something. Maybe we can work something into this new budget instead of next year's budget and go through a lot of that process. So those decisions and for that matter, just the discussion doesn't even have to come here. So yes, the buck does stop here quite literally and we ultimately take the vote. And I will say that I am proud of this budget. I think it's a very fiscally responsible, conservative budget and appreciate all your help. And anybody that wants to question it, I'll be glad to defend it, because I think it's the fiscally conservative, but very responsible thing to do in a fast growing county like that in county. And certainly when I've talked to people that their commissioners court doesn't get along, or they don't get along with their auditor. Now that's really dumb. But we are all in this together and we may have our differences from time to time but I'm glad that didn't county we enjoy a really good working relationship with all the different departments and I'm appreciative of that fact for sure. Okay with that we have one item left on the agenda and that is executive session item 15. 15 is consultation of attorney pending litigation pursuant to I'm sorry did I skip one? Yes. Okay. Yes you did actually item 4 F. This is a new step in the process of adopting a budget. The court is required to ratify. Okay. The adoption of the budget will raise more property, total property taxes than last year's. By the point. No, we did that in what I read and the. It's just stated a different way as well. They did a different way. Let me do this in the form of a motion then. 4F and the chair will move for approval of ratifying the adoption of the 2008-2009 didn't kind of budget that will be raised from new property added to the tax role this year with a total tax rate of .2357 per $100 evaluation of taxable value. That is my motion. Second by Commissioner Marchand, are there questions? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, city? Motion carries. Foreign favor, one opposed. Okay. Yeah, they make us do that twice now. They change the law. So you're basically saying the same thing in two different ways. We haven't really lost our minds. It's just the way we're required by law to say it. OK. We'll go to item 15, which is executive session consultation with attorney pending litigation, pursuant to 551.071A of the government code. Willie Ivory versus Denton County in the 393rd District Court and 15B's consultation of attorney pending litigation for certain to the same government code claim of deraul wager. And before we go into executive session, we want to all wish Commissioner Ron Marchant last Saturday. A happy birthday. And there is cake in The room over here. So with that we Decay session. Let's go eat cake Thank you.