In ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to call Dan County Commissioner's Court for Tuesday of the 27th order. This morning, our prayer will be led by Mr. John Colser of ITS and our pledges will be given led by Sherry Adelston, our district clerk. Please stand. and Let's pray By the God of the Duke come to you this morning did he thank for the state and this opportunity to serve you to pray Lord That we would remember that your son died for our sins We stand before you to intercede on our behalf To pray Lord that we would seek that intercession and then we would have a courage To now and seek your will for to obey we would have the courage to now seek your will for to obey. We have to be sleeping in your son's name. Amen. Amen. Thank you for joining us last year. May the ladies to the flag of the United States of America and to the stands on the nation under God, the end of Israel with liberty and justice brought. Honored Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas is on the union of Israel. Thank you, John and Sherry. First, I item on the agenda is public input for items not listed on the agenda. I do not have any public comment forms this morning. If there's any member of the public here that was just to address Commissioner's Court, please complete the public comment form that's on this side table and give it to our A to the Court Ms. Farber Loper. Item number two is a consent agenda. Members, I have two items that need to be pulled. The first is item 11a, which is the county clerk's minutes. We've got a couple corrections there and 13p. Are there any members of the court that that need to be pulled. Mr. Jacobs? You're on I'm not showing 13 C of vacancy by him. That's my, my error. I beg your pardon your right. It's not a content out of your credit. I have a motion for approval of the other items on the consent agenda. Second. Always too much. I made them. Okay. Motion by Commissioner Carter. Need a second, please. Second. Seconded by Commissioner White. Any discussion? Yep. Your honor, since I was not here last week because of illness, I was not here for discussion, so I'll be abstaining on the motion. Thank you. Any other discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye, opposed, aye, nay, extension, aye. Thank you. That's foreign favor, none opposed, one abstention. Judge. Yes. I'm sorry I failed to pull an item that I should have pulled if we could go back. If I'm sorry you pulled a couple of items. I pulled 11 a and then I was corrected on 13 c. It was not on the consent agenda. 14 B. Yes, I'm sorry. 14, which one? 14 B. B, I can go. All right, first let's take up 11 A under the minutes from August 1 and August 5. Page 306, number 12. Following the $1,000 deletion from training for county planning, this should include delete mobile phones for planning in the amount of $960. In page 309, these notes came from Donna Stewart and she stated that the deletion of 1 to 12 vehicle in the amount of $23,500 for license and wait should be removed from the motion. This small paragraph immediately above number 23 indicates that this vehicle was voted on separately and resulted in a tie vote that was discussed and voted on at a later meeting. So with those two corrections, I would move for approval. Need a second? Motion by the County Judge, seconded by Commissioner Carter, is there any further discussion? Hearing none all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Name. Motion carries unanimously. 14D Commissioner Carter is approval of Road Reconstruction Agreement between Denton County Texas and is that Devon next to the NicarOE Energy Operating Company LP commission of Carter? Yes, thank you, Judge. Let me just say a couple things about this. I'm sorry the Kelly's not here and the Bob Shales not here and Brody's not here because they have had a tremendous amount of work involved in this. This is probably an ongoing at least two year project, maybe even longer than that. About three and a half years ago, about the time I became county commissioner, they started drilling extensively for natural gas in the western part of the county. Some of this is in white's precinct as well. When they drill a well, there's a tremendous amount of traffic to that drilling site. They have to take a drill there that weighs an excess of 100,000 pounds on county roads. And then they have to take approximately 200 water trucks that weigh over 80,000 pounds. Our county roads have a standard of about 25,000 pounds construction. So these have become real problems for residents in the Western County. For us keeping roads repaired and in shape in that area. And some of some extent now even to the North. They try to follow a logical path so they can hook up their natural gas production on the pipelines. They build those in sequence. But it's a very difficult situation, and we have approached the energy companies. We've had several meetings with these back dating back to maybe a couple of road bridge superintendents back to the past. And I know Ms. White has talked to some of these people in the past to Davon, which is formerly an energy, a Mitchell Energy Company, which drills about 50% of the wells in the county. It's the one that we went on and we've had numerous meetings with them to try to get them responsibly responsible for road damage. If we can prove damage, then they're responsible, but they can buy permits from the state and drive all the way vehicles on our county roads without any penalty. They can put $200 and I don't think that these have been increased. They can buy permits that will allow them to pick 20 counties to drive a truck on. So that's a really ridiculous thing. We can't keep a road's repaired and I had the objective of getting all the kind of roads repaired when I came into office. The day we're just trying to keep them in shape is a pretty good job. Again, Devon is the largest of Trola in our area. So we weren't very hard with him to try to get a agreement in place where they would repair the roads. We've got a program and this is a combination of a lot of work, a lot of people, a long period of time, and it's sort of a landmark occasion. And I want to give credit to those people that worked on it. I've met with Mitchell on the number of occasions on Schirmes White House as well. But Bob and Brody Shanklin, Bob early on and Brody took it over at the last and our own bridge department, Leva Kelly, has been very much involved. This landmark decision, landmark contract and we want to move this contract now from from Devon and take it to the other the energy companies that develop our area and use it as a model to have them sign it and have the road through pair by the people that damage the roads and not by the tax payer. So this is a combination of a lot of work for a lot of people and they just want to acknowledge it and with that job, I'll move for approval. Thank you. Do we have a second? No, she made my commissioner a carder's seconded by Commissioner White. I would just, under discussion, like to add my congratulations to having this agreement finalized. It certainly is in the best interest of the taxpayers and those citizens that are driving the roads. And everyone involved is to be congratulated and I would also like to thank Devon Energy, formerly Mitchell Energy for being a good corporate citizen in Dentland County, I guess, is a good way to put it. Have any other comments? Hearing none all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, aye nay. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Item number three is resolutions and awards presentations. It's approval of resolution honoring LT Hensley for his years of service to Jettel County Texas. Mr. Hensley, if you wouldn't come up here we'd like to appropriately honor you, sir, and constable, precinct one if you would escort him up here. Thank you. I'd like to read the resolution. It states resolution honoring LT Hensley for his years of service to Denton County, Texas. The Denton County Commission's Court of Denton County, Texas meeting August 27, 2002. Excuse me, consider the following. Whereas the Denton County Commission's Court commandsends LT Hensley who years the service as a reserve deputy for Denton County Council, precinct one. And whereas LT Hensley has faithfully volunteered his services to Council one and the citizens of Denton County from the summer of 1976 till the end of 2001 and whereas LT Hensley was and still is a businessman operating a current state successful restaurant and presently successful sporting goods store on the downtown square of Denton, Texas. He gave up what free time he might have had to see that the work of the Constable's office was done. Had it not been frailty and enslaved during Constable Gregory's wife, illness the office would not have been kept open in the work done. And whereas LT Hensley has been a great help to Demon County, he has saved the county thousands of dollars by his volunteered services. His found time also to be a good citizen involved in civic and community functions. He has a wonderful family and could not have volunteered his time if not for his business partner and love of his life, Melderick. And now therefore it be a result that the Denton County Commission's Court, Denton County Texas, commands and recognizes LT Hensley for his years of loyal service as a reserve deputy constable and for dedication to the citizens of Denton County, Texas. Commissioners do have a motion for approval. So moved. Motion made by Commissioner White, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye opposed, by name, motion carries unanimously. The resolution states passed and approved by the commissioners court of Denton County taxes. Texas, this is the 27th day of all this 2002. Well, I think we didn't do this quite the way it was stated because it says motion made by Commissioner White's Second Amendment Mary Horn and upon unanimous approval I said red further I'm sorry. We'll change that to motion by Commissioner White's Second Amendment County Judge Mary Horn and upon unanimous approval by the court. Mr. Hensley, thank you very much. We appreciate you very much. And, uh, how's the full if you'd like to say if you were to this time? Yes, we certainly do appreciate your doing this for family health. I think it's been a great help to our office. Long before I took office in 1977, and I just wanted to just reserve the retired baggage for Mr. Binsley, the honor of his service barrel. That's great. I'm going to bring this resolution down in the meantime, Commissioner Jacobs, if you'd like to speak. Yes, thank you. Mr. Ninsley, I would just like to give my thanks to you as well. You know, it's not often that we find really good volunteers to help the county. And when we do, we realize how special they really are. You have devoted an enormous amount of time to us. I hate to even think about trying to put a dollar figure on it. But more important than the money is your devotion and your dedication and your community spirit to spend that much time. And me personally, I wish more people were like that. I'd rather people be out serving in their country in this manner, in their community, in this manner. A lot of times I see young people ask, well, line 11 happened, what can I do about it? Well, you can follow Mr. Tindley's leadership and you can volunteer your time in your community. And I thank you very much. Thank you. I'm going to. Stay up. On the day of the first meeting, thank you very much. Okay. Let me thank the commission today. I appreciate it greatly. And I appreciate being here and being honest. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. Thank you all for being with us today. It certainly is a pleasure to have the honor to honor the great people like Mr. Hensley. Okay. Moving on to item number five. Approval of bill report payments from adult probation, community corrections, pretrial services, and district attorney check fee funds are presented for recording purposes only. And let's see here. We also have the auditors monthly financial report that were put in into the record officially. Good morning, James Webb. Good morning, Judge. Not had to have time to pass out your list of corrections and the relations to the record. I'll read them out and pass this out at a break. But in addition to the bill report, we do have, I'd have one bill that's would be deleted. It's payment of the journal fund on page 16, vendor 4239, Tom McMurray's billed for two invoices for its court of point attorney work that total $1478 and that's to delete those that amount is incorrect. that total $1,478 that's the delete those that it's in correct. We have four editions we've asked court to approve. Two out of the general to find one from the underage drinking grant. A payment to Kevin Bragg, who's probably one of the county deputies, $100, $190 for A hundred dollars for by money from the grant. Payment for a costful four. Two costful John Hatson-Duter, $68 to repay check stock charges for his bank account. Payment out of adult probation to Tony Bobo for $66.69 conference expenses and a payment out of the bioterrorism grant in the health department to MCA total of $100 for registration fees for two employees. There are four additions and one donation and that's the corporate printout. On page 22, Mr. Wales, gendered number of 75, 33, on JP3, there's two items there for 60, 95. And they have the same invoice number and one says two and one says one. And you're at the same, we're paying the same thing. Is that... No, it's two different items. Probably, it's stationary or employee cards, but they're two different items on the P.O. Listing. You see the next item have P.O. item one and two, so there are two different entries. Okay. Maybe the same item, maybe business cards for two different people or something like that. I can't say for sure. Okay. It might be the same item, it might be business cards for two different people or something like that. I can't say true. Okay. Are there any other questions from members of the court? Can you do motion for approval? Some move. Motion by Commissioner Carter. Seconded by Commissioner White. Any other questions or discussion? Here in NANO, in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye opposed, say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, aye. Aye. It's vengeance. Here in NANO, motion carries four in favor. One opposed no attention. I need to go back and take care of a little business that I keep getting to do. And that is to read all items on the consent agenda. 5A was approval of payroll. 5C is approval of the Denton County Investment Report for the quarter in June 30, 2002. 5D is approval of the following one that is specific amount of excess funds in the form of unneeded funds of $5,942 from the unspecified Pricing Four project and of $9,836 from South and Wolfrose Project is available in the 1992 road-bodd funds too. That the excess funds are not needed to fund any of the other existing projects. And three, then identifying the King's Row project is a new project of which the remaining SS funds in the amount of $16,450 are allocated. To pay, approval of specifications for RFQ 0802-1508, the Civil Engineering Services for FM 2499 Section 3, a point of elevation to include, I'm sorry, evaluation to include best-fliming common repair warly, Kelly's wiggy, Jack Dreyer, and a representative from ITS Incorporated. 60 is approval of Renewal of VIT0701, 1440 for genital paper products to empire paper company for item number one, INEPAC Corp for items number five and six. 60 is approval of Renewal of RFP 0300-1324 for tax payment preparation and mailing service to the mail box incorporated. 6-B is approval of renewal of the General Liability Insurance Policy with Texas Association of Counties for the Term of October 1, 2002 through September 20, 2003. 6-E is approval of renewal of lubricants and oils bid number 0701 1439 to Jesse Petailer for items number 234 and 7 and Knight Oil Company for items 1 and 5. 6F is approval of renewal of the at 0601 1432 for office furniture to test this furniture's course and cooperating. 7B is approval of budget amendment request 101-7000 for computer software for records management in the amount of $5,675. 7C's approval of budget amendment request 101-740 for microphone equipment for records management in the amount of $3,735, 7D is approval budget amendment request 101-1810 for institutional care for juvenile probation, including the transfer of funds from juvenile detention unappropriated contingency. In the amount of $60,103 and various other benefit line items. In the amount of $9,851 for a total amendment of $69,954. Seven I is approval of budget amendment requests 101-880 to increase revenues and allocated expenditures from state indigent defense grants, including auditors certification of revenue as stated in transfer funds to non-departmental and appropriately contingency, court-ordered contingency in the amount of $132,455. 7J's approval of budgetment requests 101.910 for various line items for law enforcement facility in County jail in the amount of $16,000. 7K is approval of budgetment at request 101-900 for office supplies, for justice to the piece printing four. 7L is approval of budgetment at request 101-940 for gasoline for sheriff reserves in the amount of $850. 7M approval of budgetment at request 101-950 for various line items for shares department in the amount of $17,853. 7-AM is approval of budgetment requests 101-960 for various line items for Department of Information Services in the amount of $1,199. 7-Os approval of budgetment and request 101-980 for volunteer fire department pledges for emergency services in the amount of $5,027.7P is approval of Budget Management and Request 102-01-0 for computer software for county operations in the amount of $41,495.7 Q is approval of budget amendment request 102040 for law reference books and office supplies for county jail amounted $13,000. 8A is approval of order-making appointments which today includes a new hire in adult probation, a promotion in the county clerk's office, a new hire for the WIC program, new hire and juvenile detention, new hire and justice of the Peace Pracate 5, promotion in the county jail, and a lateral transfer that's the bioterism preparation grant in the health department. 9-8 is approval of Texas Department and the Health Contracts Attachments, including the County Auditors' Advocation of Revenue for the Immunization Grant in the amount of $92,975. And for the Office of Public Health Practice in the amount of $66,000 to the Dentment County Public Health Department at a total of $158,979. 9B is approved. The reappointment of Dr. Victor Alvarez is then County Health Authority. 11A, we voted on separately. 11B is approved, I'm sorry, we didn't. 11A is approved, trans I'm sorry we didn't 11 a is approved the county close minutes from Commissioners Court formal agenda Budget work session for others won 11b is approved the transcribes minutes the county close office and I believe that's what we took a separate motion on correct All right Okay, 14B. We also took a separate motion on 14C as approval of an amendment to the agreement between the county and the engineer Lopez Garcia Group Incorporated. This is Garcia Nussocius, Engineering Incorporated for Engineering Services on Rosemead Parkway. Got so many abindos here, I'm trying to make sure I am not missing something. I think that is everything. I believe it completes the agenda. I mean the consensus agenda. Commissioner Carter? Yes, Judge, you read 9 a. I believe it is a consensus. It is not, I don't believe it's a consent item. I beg your pardon, you're right. Thank you for the correction. Good for you to wait there. Okay. That completes the consent agenda. I believe we're back to item 6G approval award of RFPO 402-1481 for Meele Services to Mid-America Services and Any Appropriate Action. Beth Fleming? Good morning. Mr. President, here comes. We are recommending awards this morning to Mid-America Services Incorporated as the best proposal based on the criteria established in the RMC. They give us a substantial decrease over the current contract and two additional employees. We received five proposals. We interviewed the three most successful awards. We requested additional information and spent a whole afternoon interviewing these companies. The committee unanimously recommends awards to Mid-America and I'll be available for any questions that you have. Any members of the court that have questions, move from approval year. Motion for approval by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell, any further discussion. Any man, all in on favor please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? A name? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Item 7a is approval of any action related to County 2002-2003 Budget Commissioner Mitchell. As you know, Judge, I broke this forward last weekend. Commissioner White reminded me that Commissioner Jacob was out and we needed to wait until she was here before we considered this item. When I first got on call, I knew that I would have to be voting on a salary for myself and which I don't have any problems with. As I always tell my kids, you knew the job was dangerous when you took it. But in consideration for the economic downturn that we have, I am moving that we take the commissioners salary out of the vote for the raised, the super spent, raised that we have allocated or we have indicated that we will be vote known for the rest of the elected officials and our employees. So with that I move that we remove the commissioners salary and the judges from that equation. So I got motion by Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner Carter, comments by Commissioner Jacobs. Yes. Good morning everybody. I like to ask Donald, what is that amount total? What are we talking about here? How come I didn't anticipate that question? I'm sorry. See, I'm gone one week and you forgot to anticipate. I'm that's my phone. I think I'm just saying. I mean, what grade of's okay. I'll wait. Well, we're waiting by the way and just inform members. I don't know how things are in the cities in which you came from, but we have the majority of our traffic lights out in the Carrington area, which you know are constables around directing traffic and doing a really good job in the rain, downpouring rain. And we got power lines down and three limbs down. And it was harder to get out of Carrollton. And then once I got a 935 to get here, it was pretty tough. Dangerous stuff there. Yeah, listening to the sirens now. Don? Looks like about $8800. $8800. $8800. Yeah, I'm listening to the sirens now. Don? Looks like about $800, $800, $800, $800. Okay. Then let me ask the commissioner, you're proposing this, Commissioner Mitchell, and the last time we discussed this, this is not the first time we've discussed this, I know as many moons ago, we talked about the fact that any one commissioner who wanted to, because Commissioner Army had done this on several occasions. Donna, why don't you talk about what Commissioner Army used to do? I think in the statute, the elected officials and Carmen can't correct me if I'm wrong, has the option of signing an affidavit to not accept the raise and then has to be done within a certain parameter after this salary has been established. So there is an opportunity for any elected official to not accept their raise. So since we're talking about around $8,000 which is what's our total budget looking like? It's going to be approximately 115,000. It's 115,000. I think 115 million. Which is pretty insignificant when you look at this. I have found over the years that taking two separate votes on elected officials or two separate votes on the commissioners court and then elected officials and then the press of employees is more damaging than it is anything else. And because this option is there where Commissioner Mitchell if you wanted to you could take the option that Miss Stewart has provided so that your funds for your 2% raise out of the 8800 could certainly be turned back to the county. I can only conclude that this is for campaign reasons, and which I hate to use the budget for. So I'll be voting no on the motion. First, let me say, this is not for campaign reasons for me, Commissioner Jacobs, and I can certainly respect your use in that. I don't believe I'm up for a lecture this year. I've got a couple of more years, but even so for me, it's the principle of the thing. And maybe it seems like a arbitrary amount to you and it may be, but to me, it's a commitment to the citizens, but this conservative government, and I don't certainly don't have a problem with your voting against it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm it? Thank you. Commissioner, why not take the option of returning your funds instead of taking a position which separates us from the other elected officials and puts all in a position which makes it look like we are either voting for or against based on some kind of campaign or future election decision because you have that option to do that. I'm just amazed that as your statement on this this morning, when you voted against raising the rate in the beginning, so what's it to you if we don't do it? You did well. Because I think it's very, very damaging to separate. You vote against it. That's well. Because I think it's very, very damaging to separate. You vote against it. That's... Well, I'm... I'm questioning your motivation. I'm not going to get into an argument with you. I'm not arguing with you. I'm just questioning your motivation. I'm not sure if the vote no. Just like I do. We have a choice to vote yes. and the judge to do that? Well, I understand that commissioner, but I have time on the floor as well. And I'm saying that I'm questioning your motivation because I think these type of motions do nothing, but make our budget process look very flaky and look very campaign oriented. Up to this point, I don't think any of us have done that. And I'm just sorry to see that it's come up again because I thought we had this problem resolve when we addressed it originally. You certainly have a right to vote the way you want to vote. So I only have a right to make the motion and I certainly have a right to make the statement and question your motivation. And that's all I want to say on this right now. for the record this did come a pleasure or commission of court of office of last year we discussed it and decided not to do it and for the record this year I have a motion on the floor and a second on the floor and if you decide not to vote for it I have no problem with that and what I'll do respect let me remind you again that I don't do campaigns deals from the dice. Thank you. Is there any other comments from members of the Court? Judge Avivodi against this motion because I do think it appears to be campaign motivated and I see absolutely no benefits since there are other alternatives to take in which to not accept your salary as an individual. Commissioner Carter? Yes, Judge and Commissioner Mitchell, it's not last year, it was not the first time it's been brought up. I brought it up every year that we've had a budget process. And my, I've always wanted to separate the commissioners and the courts members, salaries from other elected officials and have some kind of index that we utilize and study the court setting. In many government organizations, like Charter and that sort of thing, the voting members do not set their own salary. And in the private industry, that doesn't work very often either unless you have the chief executive officer, the company consists of John Sauer. And then that's the philosophical problem I had with it is that we both are on Sauer. It's always we would, and we would suggest it a program in the past that we tied to something else and where we don't have any control over it. And I have, I think, consistently brought this up at every budget year since I've been on the court. And I will be supporting the motion. I think every commissioners court in the state of Texas tumbles over this one every year because it is constitutionally our responsibility to set salaries in the county. I would just mention that should this motion pass today, our budget director does have additional paperwork for court members to be signing an acceptance of their salary, I would ask court members to make a notation on that document as to whether or not they plan to read their salary, per statute, so that we don't start the 30-day clock over again, which would delay setting our tax rate on September 17th. Commissioner White, you have to speak next. Well, I just wanted to state for the record that I will be voting for it and the reason is because I voted for against the budget as it stands to begin with. So that would be keeping with consistent with my prior vote. However, I do understand at this sensitive situation regarding the setting of our own salaries. But I would agree with Commissioner Carter. I think there needs to be some outside slum line or parameter by which we're looking at when we're coming to these. This issue, and we're gonna come to it every year. So I think that that might be something that, we should look into something like the CPI or whatever that benchmark may be versus, you know, not necessarily the comparison that we always do. But anyways, those are my thoughts on the issue. Thank you. Commissioner Jacobs. Yes, let me make my statement to also clear on the signing of the salary and whether or not to be a salary grievance. I have never requested a salary grievance for myself personally. I will never request a salary grievance. We're talking about $1,500 a year per Commissioner here. This is not the money. The point I'm making is simply that I think this is very damaging way to handle the budget process. I know this is difficult. Mr. Carter has a good idea. I wish we could tie it to something. But since we don't, that's not a reason to separate a diviner. So I want members to know a front that I have no intention to do that. My reasons for stating that were simply to make sure everybody had an understanding about the 30-day statutory required process and the grievance process so that we don't delay our adoption of the tax rate. I'm agreement. Thank you. If there's no other comments, we'll call the question. All in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, then a. Aye. You vote it, aye. Okay, let me show you. Motion does carry four in favor, one opposed. Thank you. Moving on to item seven, E is approval of budget amendment request 101-830 for statement of facts for county criminal court number 4, including the transfer of funds from non-departmental unappropriated contingency, regular contingency and the amount of $3,779. I think these were on the agenda last week and were maybe told for separate votes. I have some updated information. It's a court's interested on item 7E. I just wanted to let you know that the line item in question is actually over budget by the exact amount of the amendment. Thank you. And I'll touch on the other ones individually if you'd like. All right. Commissioner Jacobs. Senator, I would ask, I know you had sent me a copy of a letter that you had recommended, which I thought was very good, by the way, to send out to the judges, try to get some input as to whether or not they were considering one or more of the recommendations from Mr. Allison, who happens to have studied Senate Bill 7, a great length, and has made recommendations to many counties in which to try to save some funding, has that letter gone out and have we received any response and can you kind of update Mr. Wilkinson? have we received any response and can you kind of update me as to where? Sure. Well first of all I drafted the letter and I sent it to primarily David Garcia, George David Garcia and Judge Ellie Shipman. And even before I sent the letter I wanted to run it by them to get their feel on it and they were two steps ahead of me at least. It has been well discussed among the judicial world as I was speaking at the courthouse and they collectively and through Judge J. Garcia primarily are addressing each point in Mr. Allison's letter and drafting what's going to be a lengthy response. The process got interrupted by a conference this week of which a lot of our judges are out of town. So suffice to say that it is being work on and you're going to have a lengthy response addressing each item sent to each member of the court and anybody else that wants to see it too. I will say that I had a long meeting in discussion with Judge Garcia last week. He's come up with what I think is a great idea as far as helping us to say some money here, Denton County, but you can't just go do it. You have to get approval. And so that's the process that he is going through and attempting to address this week at conference. So I'm keeping my fingers crossed that in not the two distant future we're going to have a positive response on his idea and something that we can implement hopefully by the beginning of the next budget year. But we do have to go for those approvals too. So at this point, I don't have something concrete to hand you you, but it is forthcoming. Judge, first of all, let me thank you for your leadership on this. But let me also ask you, you said it was Judge Vercea and who is the other judge? Aldi Shipman. Aldi Shipman. Okay, great. I think it's great that they are trying to make some progress and trying to address this and that shows me a lot here. So I'm ready to make a motion to approve this. Thank you. We have a motion for approval by Commissioner Jacobs. Thank you. Need to say, secondly, by Commissioner Carter, is there any further discussion? Commissioner Mitchell? I guess I don't have, I do have problems with it, but it won't do any good. Every problem. I was just concerned about all the funding from where these items were coming from. It's several of them on the agenda, and that's the reason that I pulled them because I was concerned that the funding, I understand that has been taken care of, misdeed with you explain that to us please. Yes, the court did include $200,000 in the budget this year for Senate Bill 7 contingency. At this point, the majority of that has been depleted. There's only a few thousand dollars left. Also, the Images Defense Grant that we received will help assist with the overages that we're anticipating. With the amendments that are on the agenda today for approval, we will have amended the budget by $327,254. We also have a separate account, a contingency account of that is the Denton-Tarrant County Line lawsuit contingency account that is the Dint and Terrent County line lawsuit contingency that Ryder Scott is indicated will not be needed for that lawsuit. And those are the funds we'll be using for any additional overages that come about over the next few weeks. We have received a couple more amendments that you haven't seen yet that will be turned in today that amounts to somewhere around $35,000. And we're expecting a few more. You know, our budget amendment deadline is this week, so hopefully we'll have all that information in and have a clear picture of where we're at by the end of the week. Good. Well, we'll all read. You have a mind. Thank you. Any other court members have questions or comments With that we'll call the motion on favor. Please say aye aye opposed a name motion curious unanimously Well, we have item seven FG and H which are Pretty much the same things. 7F is approval of budget amendment request 101-850 for court appointed attorneys for a 158-distant court, including the transfer of funds from non-departmental and appropriated contingency, court order contingency, any amount of $15,000 commissioners with your approval. I think we can maybe take all three of these together. 15G is approval of HUDGEM and Memor requests 101-860 for court appointed attorneys for 211th District Court, including the transfer of funds from non-departmental and appropriately contingency, court owner contingency in the amount of $20,000, seven age approval budget member requests 101 870, for court appointed attorneys for 367th District Court, including the chance for earphones from non-departmental, unappropriately contingency, court order contingency in the amount of 125,000 Commissioner Jacobs. That's your, and I just have one question for Donna. Are all these the amount are over or do these amounts include additional funds? The first one 7F for 158 district court they're actually over budget as of this morning's bill report 15,000 for 8966 so it actually they'll still be sure over 500 about 500 dollars. And then let me ask before you finish I'm I'm sorry, I'm just a very, very worthy. Can we change that amount since this is posted to the $15,489.66 as opposed to the $15,000? Or do you have to, no, can't do that. Okay. Then seven G, done. This is for the 211th District Court. It's currently over budget, 14,066, 566. So that would give them an additional $5,000 for the remainder of the year. Can we do this or less than the amount that's posted? Can you speak? Can you speak? So no, you're voting to the commissioners. I think that the notice that has gone to the public, which is your agenda that has been posted, I think you can take action to grant a budget amendment in a amount less than the amount that's posted, but not. I don't think it'd be a bicycle to go over the amount that you've posted as noticed to the public. Thank you, Mr. Rivera-Werley. I didn't think it would be too difficult to show your shaking head in the minute, so I thought it'd be good if you heard your sweet voice. And on 7-H. This is the 360-7th District Court. They're currently over budget 26,725-90. However, this is the Court that just finished the capital murder case and we are anticipating what happened the last time we had one in the early 90s. There were two attorneys to find and they received over $50,000 a piece. So we're anticipating that all those funds will be needed for that court as well as the 2011. If we do change that, we'll just have to do another amendment and more. I know. I know. Work later. Members, I have mixed emotions on this. I feel we I feel what strongly that we should be consistent. Either we should vote for what has been spent and even though it may require more paperwork. Not vote for anything more than what they're over or vote for all of them for what's anticipated to be over. And I don't know how members feel. I like to hear from other members of the court. I just think we should be consistent with all of them. We shouldn't take one court and only vote for what they're over and take another court and vote for what's being anticipated to be over. If I'm not being clear, please let me know. But I'd like to hear what members feel which way they feel we should go on this. Commissioner White. Well, first of all, we have to pay these. Yes, ma'am. Okay. So, I mean, I hear what you're trying to do but quite frankly I think what they're submitting I'm I say we approve it as they're submitting that they're they're looking at their budget They're seeing what they need to cover and so they're making their budget amendment accordingly The bottom line is we're gonna have to cover the cost at some point And they all expect to run over. I mean we've been discussing this for I don't know how long and so you know it's all I'm saying is I say we just go ahead and approve what they've submitted but I also don't have a problem going either way that you, but the bottom line is that we're going to have to cover costs. Right. And if I might say that I agree with that statement, the question is if we overestimate what they need or they overestimate what they need, then we're spending more money out of contingency fund than we need to. So there's that other side of that coin as well. If I could, we do have part of our budget amendment policy restricts the line-up. They can only be transferred from one court order to line-up into another based on our policy. So I think there's some protection built in as far as them using the money. No, I'm not worried about them misusing the money. Let me clarify that. We have very little money left and contingency fund. As we get to the end of the year, every dollar is gonna matter for what we're trying to do. So if we inadvertently put $5,000 more in each one of these court appointed attorney fees, which we've got what eight, ten of them, you're talking about a lot of potential money that could have been spent for maybe a project in the health department or a project in another department that's needed, but we've already committed the contingencies somewhere else. That's my point. Donna, I was just asked on the determination of an item G and H of requesting 20,000 or 125,000, I'm assuming that the estimated future expenses come from data that is I guess the one I'm trying to say is it's a really good educated guess. These projections are made by the judges. In fact, on the 158th District Court, when we prepared this amendment, they were only $5,000 over budget. As of the last two weeks with the bills coming in, they're already over budget again. So it is, you're exactly right. It's an educated guess on the part of the judges as best they can. Okay, thank you. Commissioner Codan. Yes, thank you, Judge. Let me just agree with both Ms. White and Mrs. Jacobs. But I believe that we, but as far as I'm going to suggest that we use Ms. Jacobs suggestion that we keep only, or make legitimate amendments to the exact amount of our spendatures. I think there are several different one of which you've addressed that it isn't educated. Yes, the other is, I think this is a real problem and we need to keep it before us and we need to keep it before the judges. So I think every time we go global, we ought to make a budget amendment just to keep it in front of us. And so, Mr. Jacobs, if you were ready to make that motion, I'll certainly be back. Good. Can I just, in defense of the judges, they're trying to comply with our budget amendment deadline, which is that timber first. So I wanted y'all to be aware that that's what they're trying to do. Is, is get everything in our office by the required deadline and our policy. So it's compliance with our policy to get budget amendments in this, or why they went to a projection, if you take away early in the 211th and 367th Corps. Thank you. Any other comments? Yes, what would it would is your position. I'm going to be voting in favor of the motion to to approve as submitted as they're submitted. Yeah, let me try to address what you're saying because I think what you're saying is they're having problems keeping up with the deadlines required due budget amendments. That was your telling me. I think they're trying to comply with our deadline. Okay. What happens if we added in our motion that because of their time constraints and dealing with this that we loosen up our time constraints on this. Would that be helpful? It's up to the court, Harry. Harry, you choose to do that. We'll comply and we'll follow free with the judges. Okay. Then I'll make a motion that we, as a general rule, approve only what the line item is over each week and that we loosen up the time requirements and making these budget amendments for the judges so that it doesn't restrict their workday. I'll second it. I'm, we have a motion by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Carter. Under discussion I just want to clarify that we are talking about the quarter-pointed attorney funds to pay for quarter-pointed attorney's only. We're not opening this up to any wide correct? Yes correct. Okay. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, on favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye, opposed, aye, nay. No. Motion does carry three in favor to oppose. So that would, do we need clarification then on FG and H? If we could just round those out to the nearest dollar, that we can only process an amendment in whole dollar. And then on our all move that we approve on 7F, all move that we approve $15,000. As we must, if $15,000, you can't go up. So that'll be $15,000, even. Or I know what. And then the mayor will come and say, okay, we proved the $15,000 for $7,000. Excuse me, just one second. Commissioner Jacobs, did you want to address G&H also? I'll be happy to. And on G, it would be $15,000 from the number you gave me. And on H, it would be $27,000 for the number you gave me and on age it would be 27,000 for the number you gave us. Actually we could amend support 10,000, 69, 67. No, we were going to round up. 15,000 and then on age it was a 20,000. Okay. Commissioner Mitchell. Could you do those separately? Sure, I'd be happy to. All right. Then I'll stay with my... Let me start all over again. And let me first apologize to the ladies doing the transcripts and the lady doing the minutes. All right, 7F. Move to approve the $15,000. Sorry. Motion by Commissioner Jacobs. Seconded by Commissioner Carter. Any further discussion Here none all in favor please say aye aye opposed a name Motion carries unanimously thank you 7G and H. I think and go together 8 7G would be the amount for 15,000 court appointed attorney fees and District Court to 11 and H would be 27,000 for Court of Point and Attorney fees in the 367 District Court. Welcome. Welcome. My Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Carter, any further discussion? Very none all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, the name? Aye. Motion carries three in favor, two opposed. Judge, could I ask in the future, can we put any appropriate action with that based sufficient press to revise the amendment for future? Actually emailing that very suggestion right now to court members to put it at the top of the agenda for any items so that you can take appropriate action on any item. So then we can change the dollar amount. Yes, no. Still can only go down, can't go out? Probably. Probably. Okay. I won't put you on the spot there. That big sense. Okay. Item number 9 is approval of the Texas Department of Health Contract, attachments including the County Auditor's Certification of Revenue for the Immunization Grant and the amount of $92,975 and for the Office of Public Health Practice and the amount of San Diego. The city of San Diego. The city of San Diego. The city of San Diego. The city of San Diego. The city of San Diego. The city of San Diego. and criminalizations is our seventh year. Both of those are wonderful supplements, I believe, to the work that we do in public health and help us to minimize cost of taxpayers and instill accomplished important services. The 66,000 is not really part of the anyone program the 92,975 supports our immunization program. It doesn't cover all of our immunization costs, but certainly the first portion of it. And there weren't a lot of opportunities, and we're happy to put that before you today. Move approval. Second. I'm motion for approval by Commissioner Mitchell, second and by Commissioner White. Is there any further discussion? Hang on, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Aye. Naye. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you, Dr. Burton. 10A is approved Tuesday, October 1, 2002 at 9.0.5 a.m. as date and time to conduct a public hearing to consider and approve the replat of Heritage, Lentana Phase 1, R, LOT 52, LOT 31 B, Pricing 4. Did you have any comments for us or self-explanatory? Okay. Need a motion for approval from commissioners. Commissioner Carter, did you want to move for approval? And then I'm sorry, 10 a. Can I excuse me, Joe? Jim, sorry. He's reading. Yeah. Thank you. Move for approval. Thank you. We have a motion for approval by commissioner Carter, seconded by commissioner Jacobs saying they further discussion. Ain't none all in favor, please say aye. Opposed, say nay. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Item 13a is approval renewal of contract between Denton County and University of North Texas dispute resolution system and Commissioner Jacobs. You're on our, I think we have someone here from the organization that may want to speak to this. Good morning. For the record, if you would please state your name and address. address is PO box 310-429-7503. Thank you. I don't know if anybody has any questions. I'm here to answer if anybody has any or if you would like to have to, I would be happy to give you that too. I think that an update would be good. We have a lot of new court members. You might want to just give a brief history, how you got here, what you're doing, and what's been accomplished. Okay. What are organization-in-the-resolution system of Ditton County? And what we offer is mediation services to the residents of Ditton County, as well as occasionally assisting other counties that don't have the Ditton-resolution centers. Most of our cases are coming from the courts at this point. Our judges are all regularly referring cases. We went through a transition period of coming into Denton County and trying to have some opposition from the community. And I think we're very integrated at this point into the court and this community. We have grown unbelievably in the last two years. We have, I think, at our state, our budget. We need more money, like everybody around here does. But we came in, we ran maybe 20 cases the first year. We are already over 200 cases for 2002, and it's a tight run in somewhere between 360 and 400 cases through the center. I think something that's important to note is that our settlement rate is over 98%. So these are not just cases that are being mediated. These are cases that are being settled in Denton County, which means they're staying out of the courts a lot of cases that probably would have to have been tried or not having to be tried. Everybody's paying money. And it's a better way of settling some of these cases in Denton County. We are doing a lot of family. That's probably 70% of what we're doing are family cases. That's the child's poor disputes, child cuts to the modifications, divorces, property settlement. It is a more annotable way, a more peaceful way of settling these disputes in Denton. And we're really excited for having a great time for bringing the community in. And we hope to grow if we have plenty to do so. Thank you very much. Any foot members? Yeah, let me just ask one other thing. You and I have worked together for some time. And I would just like to note that, and this are very early, as you know, who was the head of our civil division of the district attorney's office, just now received some contact from you yesterday on renewing this. And I tried to call I think it's a try to call you this morning, but I don't even know if you've seen the revisions in this contract. And nobody from UNT as far as I know is saying this. And it's my understanding that no one from the university because of lack of communication on the university's part to Mr. Vera Wurley has really reviewed the contract. Now I don't have a problem with proving the contract because I trust Mr. Vera Wurley implicitly. She has shown me nothing but the best work from her. So if you don't have a problem with that, I'll do that now. Well, I've actually heard of it with one change in it. Is that correct? Or what? Probably last year's not wrong, because it's not. I don't know who you might have spoken to. The only changes that I've made to this year's agreement is changing the dates and that it's two additional years. You can count it can renew instead of three. The contract amounts are still the same. I assume the exhibits would be the same A and B. I don't know that. But as far as I don't know when, at UIT, it's had an opportunity review. And I'm not discussing changes that I made with anyone. Let me suggest this, if you want us to go ahead and approve this today, which because we do have some deadlines here, I know we're tied on. That's why they're both on the formal and the breaking session. I would urge you to talk to Dr. McKee. I love Dr. McKee, but I think that there was some things built for the cracks here. And if you all want to get your contract renewed before we get out, it's your responsibility to get that information into us as soon as possible. Okay. And that means at least a month in advance, at least. Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you. You're on. I don't know if there's any other questions. I think there's a like link. Yes. Mission Mitchell had a comment. I guess my question was, what is the cost of this contract and can it be bit out? I think I put that in my email. Miss Leningen probably helped us in answering your question, but we saw proposals I believed two years ago. Is that correct? That's correct. And the agreement we have with UNT was that we would sign a one-year contract with an option to renew it through more time. Certainly it's the discretion of the court in the discretion of the court to decide to renew during those three years, now two years left. The cost, let me refer you to, if I say I'll let the cost numbers as they were from last year. I believe that somewhere around 15 on dial thing. I think we might add something to the commissioner. UNT offers and having a contract going for UNT is opposed to a private entity or someone like that coming in. What UNT provides is a financial assistance way of and beyond probably what any other organization will be able to provide. We have free office space, we have free students, the administrative health, all of our supplies, almost all come through the university. We get capital equipment almost every year from the university between $5,000 and $8,000 has been that they have given us generously, giving us on almost a yearly basis since we had the plentiful $16 since we had the contract. So it could be open up, but I think we could be extremely competitive with what anyone else would be able to offer. I'm not talking that because my administrative side should do a very good job. So what I'm just asking, should it be beaded out to other... other. Yes, we did that and this is just a renewal of that process. Okay. You did bid it out. Two years ago. That should have not be it's more than one year at agreement. The original contract had terms in it so the bidspublication had renewal terms and that's what we're doing is just activating us. Okay, so when would it be bid of evidence again if you think it's got two more years? Two more years. That's right, unless the court chooses to not renew and seek proposals again. I didn't want to make that the way commission of the causes $5,824 per month. Okay. Per month? Per month. Okay. Thank you. And then, sorry, go ahead and the university has insane the contrary. As far as I know, no man. Okay. I'm going to take the contact day. I'm going to go to fit with from all those hours in our legal department right now and we will bring you that together in time. You don't think the head would have any problems with it? Head. Okay. Just want to make sure. Thank you, any other questions from members of the court? I'm trying to remember if we have a motion before. I know. I haven't. I don't think we have the admission or Mitchell to answer. All right. I'll move for approval. Thank you. We have a motion by Commissioner Jacobs. Is that going to be a motion or Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner White, any further discussion. Very none all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye opposed, aye nay. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you for being here. We appreciate your patience. Please let Dr. McKinnell, I sit high. All right, 13V is approval. Public members drawn from the 2001 grand jury to serve in the Denton County Satellar Agreements Committee for 2002 in any appropriate action. We don't need to draw any more names today. Okay? 14C is approval resolution to call for the Dent County Transportation Authority confirmation election in any appropriate action. We need to delay this one week at the request of Ryder Scott. And actually we're going to have it posted on both agendas next week so that we can go forward with it. OK. Trying to make sure I'm not missing anything. Members, we've got so many addend those here. Okay, 16A is approval of specification and approval of advertised before fire suppression. I'm sorry. Could I skip one? Sure did. Back up, 14D is approval of reimbursement agreement between Denton County Texas and Walter Smith and Smith and Harris incorporated collectively. Commissioner White. I was going to so refer you back to. 14D, thank you. Is there any member that has questions or comments concerning item 14D? Prove of the reimbursement agreement. Move our approval. Approval of the reimbursement agreement. Move our approval. Thank you. We have motion for approval by Commissioner White. Thank you. It's a thank you by Commissioner Carter. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye opposed to a motion carried unanimously. All right. Now we are on to item 16A. Approval specifications, approval to advertise for Fire Suppression System, DCCDB Communications Room, BID, 0802, 1514, and any appropriate action comments from our purchasing department? We are recommending approval this morning of the specifications. We're estimating that it's 35,000. Are you even on? I didn't think so. The estimated cost is 35,000 for this project, both Kevin Carr and Sherry Annals Singh. I'm sorry, Sherry's not here. I'm just one. Kevin Carr is here to answer any questions that you have about the project. I did forward some email to you with some additional information just to find the request. You're on our way to make a motion to approve. That's my name, Glen. So moved. Motion for approval by Commissioner Jacobs. They're going to be by Commissioner White. Is there any discussion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, the name? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. 16D is approval specifications and approval to advertise for online jury responses to the Marathi 0802-1515 in any appropriate action. Would you wish to address this? We had great backup on it. I think it's exciting. I'm glad to see it. Sure. Would you bring your mic down to your level? Thanks. There we go. Perhaps did you have any comments for us? The SMA cost of this project is $45,000. It does interface with the existing during management system. There are two other components to the whole project. One of them is a module that we have to purchase from the during management company, and then some license software that will be purchasing from the state of Texas. So when the whole project will be about $60,000, we have worked with Kevin and Sherry to prepare the specs and we'll reach go out to the end. Okay, Commissioner Jacobs. Sherry, for just for the record, why don't you just briefly tell us how this is gonna benefit the tax commissioners? What we're looking at is the interactive web response system. Her manager received the summons. Presently, if they are disqualified or have an exemption, they have to find that on the form, put Pussu-Johnate on it and send it back to it. Our clerk did it. They didn't have to open up that mail. See what this qualification exemption is going to the system and make that notation on our jury's software. If a juror is going to serve, I fill out the questionnaire, and again, put the puzzle on it and send it back to us. I have to open it up. Of course, it has to do all the data entry. I don't know if we've got a seven to two year year have one there. There's quite a few questions on that mandated questionnaire. What this would do would allow the juror to either claim the disqualification, payment exemption, complete the questionnaire I'm going to give you a, it's a good luck. This car will all interface and will this all work and do you feel like it's going to save some time and money? Yes, I've worked with Sherry a lot and we've actually been looking at the system for about a year, not the same exact thing. This is a type of e-government project that I think would be very beneficial. Sherry stands out, I think, over 1,000 Sherry summons a week. We did it out 1,357 a week, 47 weeks a year. Labor intensive. Labor intensive. Yes, I shoot fast. So it gets kind of tight from time to time, because I do call and stick around and they take it with a question time. This would enable us, you know, if I had seven to eight hundred of the jurors respond online and I think they will and didn't count it. Definitely. You know, I would be able to go with two staff for years. Well, hold your hand. Hold your hand. Get down and big letters. Got that done. Donna, Donna should note. A led cherry, and put. Let me say, I know that there's another light blinking that I'm ready to make a pledge that Mr. Mitchell. What about the jurors that did not have a computer? Can they still do the manual? They would still be able to do it manually. But they also have an interactive voice response to come in. And I'm not looking at that right now. I still want jurors that they are going to call in. If they're not going to get the answers that they need on the web, they still be able to call in and get a human being. Some of the vendors that we talked to really pushed that jury phone, they call it, or that IVR. And we want part of the, the next thing we're going out, part of the photos, we're asking for maybe the ability for whoever we end up going with to be able to add that on later. And then as you were to do that, you know, 24 hours a day, if they wanted to, if they didn't have a computer, wanted to do it over the phone. But in the meantime, you know, like I said, I want someone to call in and get a human being to talk to that customer service. It's still very important to me. So I can still do it. I can tell you to fill it out, fill it, and mail it into it. And I'll have a little wheel of support. And there are still computers available and I'm probably glad for us for people to communicate on some. What about the data? I was told. I just want to make a good melody. Wait, sure. I was told, so I just wanted to give them a little bit of a deal. Thank you. They have options. What about, how much more is this money coming from? Different light items that we already have, there's some out of Kevin's budget that we're looking at and then there's several light items on our request for our budget. Just a little here, a little there. The majority of it would be the jury fee where we pay the jurors, we still have a little bit left there. I've cut that down for next year's budget. I dropped it 10,000. I think that'll be adequate for next year. We've really brought that down over the past several years in different ways. We're paying less than we had. I know five years ago. That's what the majority of them are. Thank you. We're not going to have to compare anymore. Thank you. Thank you. Any other members of the court have questions or comments? You're on our move for approval. Thank you. We have a motion for approval by Commissioner Jacobs. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Say nay. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Appreciate all your hard work on this. It's definitely going to be a benefit to this resident who didn't count me and the cost savings. I appreciate your effort. It's good. It's good. It's also a lot of fun to lead the way in technology. I would just ask surrounding counties, Dallas, Tarrant, Collins, do they have anything like this? I think the only two counties in Texas that really are looking at this right now, love it, county has started it in Travis County. The Travis is a little different because they talk to jurors for all the county and all their cities also, so that's a whole different ball game. There's more based on email though, the jurors have sent the note online, and it sends an email to the clerk. The clerk then has to print out like six pages per juror and copy that thing to the court. So we're going to be kind of the head of the ballgame here than the other counties. That's kind of fun to do. I know that when we went online with our vehicle registration I started getting telephone calls from surrounding county disasters and they were like, well I leave her to David. Let me know when you're going to do something. I'm here with everybody. That's great and excited to hear it. Commissioner Jacobs. Judge, I don't I don't know if you recall, but a couple of years ago I was on another state committee they had to do with e-computers and expanding it to the controller's office. And they picked only four counties as their sample counties to work with us. And while I'll tell you, Kevin Carr along with Beth Fleming did a bang-up job in not only trading information, but gathering information, sharing what we have from the state. And I can tell you that we are in a leadership role when it comes to technology and doing county business. And we have a lot to be proud of and with Kevin and his group and Beth and hers and keeping us forward and on top of everybody else. And I can tell you it's those guys who are doing the work, making it good. If I recall, Commissioner, the final report from the State Comptroller's office had what they call best practices awards. And then having say, didn't come to cash all of a sudden that that's right. It's that, you know, and it's really great. And Kevin was just mentioned, Kevin, come up here and tell us about your awards just real quick. You were just in the county progress. Why don't you tell us what they said in our county progress magazine? And the Texas County Progress Magazine, I had an article about Nettton County providing us commission and support videos on the internet, which we've actually provided pre-recorded videos for years with real player and recently we just opened it up on the internet so they can watch it live now too with Windows Media Player which kind of the Microsoft Windows. So we're being recognized in a lot of different places you're honored and it really pays. Which usually the first one in Texas to do a lot of things and a lot of the bigger families follow us. It's kind of a nice place to be. Kevin, you've done a great job. Thank you. I appreciate it. It's not only providing better service to our taxpayers, it's highly cost effective. Moving along to item 16C is approval of acceptance of up to 13 weather radios donations from the city of Denton to be distributed by the Denton County Fire Marshall to county facilities and sign placement in the lobby of county facilities. This is on both agendas because the, my understanding of, if we want to move forward with this as soon as possible, Kevin, did you want to address this? All right, I'm not really sure why I'm involved in this project. I got your name, Kevin, did you want to address this? All right, I'm not really sure why I'm involved in this project. I got your name, Kevin. That's because you got into County Progress. I'm a member of the safety team at the Joseph A. Carroll Building. I've been working with Pratt Simpkins in the Fire Marshal Office to do that. And somehow I got a email from the city of Denton and they're wanting to offer up to 13 weather radios to Denton County and Jody's here His office is really the one right Brad. He's been working directly with the city emergency management office to to give these for Denton County Good morning, Juddine. Did you want to address this issue, though? I think Kevin was doing a good job. Really the City of Denton and the County's Office of Emergency Management work with Channel 8 to have these donated to the City of Denton and to Denton County and we're looking forward to obtaining more so we can have 100% with all of our county facilities with each one of these radios. So, like that's something we're looking forward to. Thank you, Commissioner Mitchell. I'd just like to thank the city of Gen for their generosity, so maybe these radios and hopefully that have fostered some giving from the other cities to their communities. Thank you. Thank you. If there's no other comments other comments needed motion for approval. Motion made by Commissioner Mitchell Seconded by Commissioner White any further discussion I'm not on favor please say aye aye opposed and a motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. 16G is approval of amendments to the Dislin agreement between the city of Tangard and County Texas and Walmart store east and corporate. This is on both of the genders. Anyone here that needs to address this or wants to address? I'm going to approve approval. Thank you, motion for approval, but commissioner White. Seconded. I'll second the motion. Seconded by Commissioner Jacobs. But I wouldn't like to discuss this. Yes, Commissioner Jacobs, go ahead. I'll call the commissioner Carter. Can we talk a little bit more about the cost involved in this? I don't know who could best address this as a. Well, I can tell you. Okay. Excuse me, I'm coming in. That's all right. Sorry. This is actually a project that originated before my tenure on the court. Mm-hmm. Probably Tideberry can come up and explain this project she's been involved with since its inception. Part of our original agreement with Walmart when they chose to locate and sang her their distribution center was that we would improve lowest road for the truck traffic. It subsequently became involved in litigation, and we were unable to make those improvements. We now have an agreement, we'll amend our first agreement to allow us to acquire the right of way, which Walmart will reimburse us for the cost of, and we've capped our expenses for the road at a million dollars before our previous agreement had no cap on how much that would cost in the last two years the cost has probably gone up to what it would have been two years ago so we're actually in a better position now with this amended agreement because we're still responsible for improving that road for so much of our first agreement from June of 2000. The money, there's $800,000 from precinct one discretionary funds and $200,000 from precinct four discretionary. Thank you, Commissioner Cohn. Yes, and that's a misstatement and the letter is correct. It must be a mistake. It says, $200,000 will come from precinct four. Wait, I come from. Did you all time to start? I asked Mr. Schell that and Mr. Schell indicated that there's a clear why John poster and Tideberry each told him that it was due in the thousands from years. Thank I would think somebody would talk to me about this. Commissioner Carter this was the agreement we made when you said that you'd get $250,000 or one fifth of the total. It's a million bucks, one fifth is $200. I don't recall that conversation. John, when did that occur? It's occurred about three times over the last 12 months. Each time we've met. I have never committed to give any money to this project. I can probably produce some documents if we need to. Well, I wish you would. OK. Is this a time-sensitive matter change? Yes, it is. And it was my understanding. As I said, this was a project that was committed to before. I got on court and committed to discretionary funding in precinct one. I was told that you had committed that amount of money, but in the essence of time, the rest can come from precinct one with the caveat that if we can do if we have some supporting documents that confirm those conversations, I'd like to be preaching for one discretionary comes to be reimbursed. Wait, you're going to wait in line for when I get reimbursed for boy growth. This is a specific, so is this. This is a specific commitment that was made by Commissioner Carter apparently. And now you're saying that you don't remember. I don't recall the, I've called a discussion, I don't ever recall any commitment. And if there is some documents, if there is a commitment, then I'll change my opinion. But right now, if you'll go ahead and prove this and if there is documentation then it will be reimbursed. Commissioner, Commissioner and Jacobs, Commissioner's obviously we have a standstill here. I certainly appreciate your generosity in getting this approval going forward. It sounds to me like we have a commitment from Commissioner Carter that's certain if there's documentation that shows you made that commitment then this exchange will take place. And look at it, Commissioner, if you don't mind. Right, but if there is documentation from Commissioner Carter that says that you agree to this, then what you're telling me... Commentation, that's what I said. Yeah, then your tell, I just want to make sure I got that clear. Then you're telling the court that you would make that whatever commitment you had made and pass you on. I know what the conor idea is. That's what I'm looking for. And if you wanted to remake your motion again, commission. My motion is that approval of the agreement with the money coming from precinct one discretionary funds with the caveat that if we have documentation of the conversations that have transpired between Mr. Polster and Commissioner Carter regarding his commitment of $250,000 or a fifth whichever was greater to the project that would be reimbursed to discretionary funds for precinct one. And we have a second to that. I would ask that it be 200,000 if that's what's in the document here. That's what it would be. That's what it would be. That's what it would be. That's what it would be. That's what it would be. That's what it would be. That's what it would be. That's what it would be. I mean, nice for him. And I like to add the caveat that I'm also still waiting on the boy road funding. But OK, OK. What's other motions been reshaded? And our second was by Commissioner Jacobs. OK. Any further discussion? No, no. In favor of the motion is reshaded. Please say aye. Aye. Aye opposed the name. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. I'm sorry. I'm starting from one extension. Foreign favored no opposed one extension. Thank you. I believe that's correct. Our add-ins were almost as thick as our formal agenda and briefing today. So it's a little hard to keep up. I appreciate your help. Okay. With that, Commissioner's Court will, as there's the right to exercise that its discretion to convene an executive session, authorize the Texas Government Code 551.071. We'll be convening an executive session under 15A's real property. 15B's deliberation regarding security, procedures and devices. 15C, consultation with attorney pending litigation, Luther Joly, individually. Gosh. I'll give a hung up on this this because there's so many names. We'll say town of North Lake, Dan County, Texas, and then the 360-second district court. 15D is consultation with attorney concerning pending litigation. Terrent County, the Dan County, 15E is consultation with attorney, concentrated litigation, denailing to see in Denton County, Denton County Sheriff's Office, 15F is consultation with attorney, pending litigation with Weldon Lucas, the Denton County Commission's Court, 15G is consultation with attorney pending litigation, Texas Properties Partnership, the County North Lake, Denton County, and Texas Department of Transportation. 15-H is personnel matters, Texas Government Code, Session 551-074. To deliberate the annual performance reveal of a public employee director of the Economic Development, 15-H is personnel matters deliver an annual performance review of the public employee, director of information services, 15J's consultation with attorney pending litigation, resort, reality company, the city of Lake Dallas and then county, cause number four, or two, CV00148, United States District District Eastern District of Texas Sherman Division. You've got agenda. State that we state these I'm trying to say. If you stated them all, I guess I'm right. Is emotion in order now? I've linked with language just to say. Yes, we stated them all. Okay. Oh, so we'll be hearing motion to meet. To recess one formal to meet an executive session by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner White on favor, please say aye. Aye. I'm motion carries. And as we are now recessed in the executive session. And under 15A real property no action, 15B deliberation regarding security procedures and devices, no action, 15C consultation with attorney, ten pending litigation, Luther Joly, trying to go North, North Lake Denton County No Action, 15B, consultation with attorney, concerning pending litigation, Chair County B, Denton County No Action, 15E, consultation with attorney, kind of play the litigation, Denton County, I'm sorry, Danielle Ducci against Denton County, I'm sorry, Danielle Gucci against Denton County, Denton County Sheriff's Office, no action, 15F consultation with attorney, pending litigation, well-dumbed, and Lucas V. Denton County, no action, 15G consultation with attorney, pending litigation, Texas Properties Partnership, the town of North Lake Denton County, and Texas Department of Transportation. And in the probate court of Denton County Texas writers, guts, upga, I'm sorry, thank you, Carmen. Thank you, Judge. On this matter, Mr. Scott has asked the court approve this court order and I'll read it into the record. Under the authority of minute order, 106745 adopted by the Texas Transportation Commission on February 29, 1996. The county of Denton was authorized to act as the agent for the state of Texas to acquire a certain right of way required for state of Texas Department of Transportation Project CSJ number 0081-13-032. Generally an interchange in North axis road from State Highway 114 North 1.6 miles on the east side of Interstate out 35 W, specifically parcel to E and 2 of the project. Ditton County acting as an agent for the State of Texas. Hereby authorizes Thompson Co. Cousins and Irons, LLP previously approved as outside counsel to make an offer for the required right of way of fair market value for the parts taken parts to and to E in damages to the remainder if any based on an appraisal. Should the county or its attorney in property owner be unable to agree to the fair market value in damages if any for the required right of way there, authorize to initiate eminent domain proceedings or take other appropriate action in Texas Properties Partnership versus the town of North Lake, Denton County and the Texas Department of Transportation. Cost number ED-2002-00729, in the probate court of Denton County, Texas or elsewhere as may be necessary to acquire the described right of way Yeah Okay, we need a motion on Thank you. Need a second Mr. Carter We'll second the motion to approve the this was the resolution was it not? It is a court order. A court order, I beg your pardon. Any further discussion? The motion made by Commissioner Jacobs, Secondary by Commissioner Carter. Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Nay. Motion carries three in favor, one opposed for the record Cynthia had to leave a little bit early. 15-H is personnel matters to deliberate annual performance review of public employee direct or economic development to simply state that that was done. Same with 59 to deliberate annual performance review of the public employee director and information services given car. 15J is consultation with attorney pending litigation, resort reality company, the city of Lake Allison, Denton County, no action. 16D under the addendum is consultation with the 30-thending litigation. Hardy Burr plaintes the Joe Hicks Oliver defendant and Sharia Edelstein. Grinichy calls number 2-0-02-20201-158. Pending in 158 due to support. Carmen. Judge, we just answered the commission's court of funds matter to the civil division of the DA's office. So motion by commissioner Jacobs second in. By commissioner Mitchell. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries unanimously. 15, I'm sorry, 16 E, consultation with attorney pending litigation. Janet, I feature a plaintiff of the United States of America, John Ash Cross, at all cause number ED-CVO2-691-RTSGLX pending the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Eastern District, Carmen. Judge, we'd ask that the commission's court assign this matter to the DA's health and civil division. So moved. The motion by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell, Alan Cavor-Plee-Faye. Hi. Hi, opposed by name. Motion carries unanimously. 16F is consultation with attorney pending litigation. Getting county Texas the Philipips swagger and associates and corporated. He was a hunt and Nichols and corporated, a hunt construction group and RC's fallen associates. No action. I covered everything. I think I have. We will recess from a formal and convene in our briefing agenda. I think we can handle this pretty quickly. So we are recessed from formal. We are back in the formal agenda and I'm looking for a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn by Commissioner Jacobs, by the name of our Commissioner Carter, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, say name. We are adjourned.