May 04, 2021 Regular

>> COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER JONES. YES.

>> JUDGE BECERRA. >> I DON'T CARE HOW IT PASSES AS LONG AS IT PASSES, YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYONE THAT'S WORKED ON THIS FOR ALL THIS TIME.

GENUINELY GRATEFUL. AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE'LL OPEN NUMBER 8 BECAUSE IT'S SO SIMILAR.

NO, NO, I'M SORRY, NUMBER 11 BECAUSE IT'S SO SIMILAR AND THEN

[11. Authorize the execution of a resolution and the submission of a renewal grant application to the Texas Indigent Defense Commission for the Indigent Defense Coordinator grant project in the amount of $77,292 where the County will provide a cash match of up to 60%. SHELL/INGALSBE/T.CRUMLEY]

WE'LL TAKE A SHORT RECESS. >> 11, A RESOLUTION AND SUBMISSION OF A RENEWAL GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE TEXAS INDIGENT DEFENSE COMMENT FOR A GRANT WHERE THE COUNTY WILL PROVIDE A CASH MATCH UP TO 60 PERCENT.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER INGALSBE.

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH.

>> YES. >> COMMISSINER

[23. Discussion and possible action to form a Citizens Advisory Commission on Redistricting. BECERRA]

[01:22:07]

>> YOU OF COURSE KNOW THE CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY NEED TRANSPARENCY. YOU STATED YOUR COMMITMENT TO THIS MANY TIMES. WE ARE ALL HUMAN AND HAVE OUR BIASES BUT A COMMITMENT TO A FAIR AND TRANSPARENT PROCESS TO HELP US HAVE LOCAL CONTROL OVER OUR VOTING DISTRICTS IS CRITICAL. A PROCESS WHERE ALL VOICES CAN BE HEARD. AND THIS COMMISSION IS AN EXCELLENT START. I'M THANKFUL TO BE PART OF THE LEAGUE OF VOTERS WHICH SUPPORTS THIS ACTION WHICH HAS AT ITS HEART THE 14TH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION. THIS WILL GIVE THE CITIZENS OF HAYS COUNTY CONFIDENCE THAT THEY ARE FAIRLY REPRESENTED AND THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THEIR VOICES WILL BEEA REGARDLESS OF STATION, POLITICAL AFFILIATION, OR LOCATION WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THIS COUNTY. OUR DEMOCRACY STARTS HERE.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MS. LINDA CAL

CALVERT. >> GOOD MORNING, JUDGE, COMMISSIONERS. I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS WHOLE BUSINESS OF THE REDISTRICTING.

YOU'RE NOT REAL FAR DOWN THE LINE.

YOU'VE BEEN BUSY WITH OTHER THINGS, I THINK.

THE LEAGUE HAS BEEN BUSY WITH OTHER THINGS, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE BEEN DOING IS WORKING ON EDUCATING OURSELVES AND SETTING UP PLANS FOR REDISTRICTING.

WE'VE ACTUALLY, MOST OF US ON THIS COMMITTEE HAVE UNDERGONE SOME TRAINING ON MAPPING AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING AT THIS FOR A WHILE. WE HAD OUR FIRST PUBLIC MEETING TO BEGIN TO EDUCATE PEOPLE, GET THEM TO THINKING ABOUT THIS ON THE 29TH. WE HAD A MAN FROM EL PASO, WHO'S DONE A LOT OF REDISTRICTING, EDUCATION ADVOCACY WORK.

JESUS VALDEZ, WELL-KNOWN AMONG THE LEAGUE MEMBERS IN EL PASO.

AND WE'RE GOING TO AGAIN DO A PROGRAM ON THE 18TH OF MAY TO WHICH I REALLY WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO COME.

WE'RE INVITING YOU. IT'LL BE A ZOOM MEETING.

WE'LL GET YOU ALL THE PROPER INFORMATION.

THE SPEAKER THAT DAY WILL BE DAVID STOUT.

HE ACTUALLY WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN THE FORMATION OF A CITIZENS COMMISSION IN EL PASO. HE IS, AS I SAID, A COMMISSIONER. AND WE'VE ASKED HIM TO JUST COME

[01:25:02]

AND TALK ABOUT HIS EXPERIENCES, WHAT HE'S LEARNED ABOUT DOING THIS KIND OF COMMISSION WITH THE COMMISSIONERS COURT.

AND I THINK THAT THE WAY THEY WORKED IT WAS THAT THE CITIZENS COMMISSION BASICALLY OFFERED THE MAPS TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT.

I'M NOT PROPOSING THAT RIGHT OFF BECAUSE I THINK WE ALL NEED TO TALK ABOUT WHAT IT NEEDS TO LOOK LIKE.

BUT I WAS REALLY CHEERED WHEN I HEARD JUDGE BECERRA THE OTHER DAY FORCEFULLY PROMOTE THIS COMMISSION.

AND I MY UNDERSTANDING IS ALL OF YOU HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS FOR A WHILE. SO I'M REAL GLAD TO HEAR IT.

OUR INTERESTS ARE NON-PARTISAN. WE WANT FAIR AND OPEN.

I THINK THAT YOU NEED TO JOIN US.

AND WE WOULD LOOK FORWARD TO THAT.

I APPRECIATE IT. WE WANT BROAD REPRESENTATION, WHICH ENSURES A FAIRER PROCESS. PUBLIC INPUT THROUGHOUT.

IN OTHER WORDS, THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO KNOW THE TIMELINES.

THERE NEED TO BE PUBLIC HEARINGS.

AND THEN ONCE THE MAPS ARE DONE AND READY FOR US TO ACCEPT THEM, THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE INPUT ON THE FINAL MAPS.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MS. CALVERT. NEXT UP IS MR. LARRY CALVERT.

>> THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME TIME TO SPEAK TO ALL OF YOU.

I APPRECIATE ALL THAT YOU'RE DOING.

AND I WANT TO TO -- WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT HAVING NON-PARTISAN INPUT IS A VALUABLE RESOURCE FOR YOU AND US.

BY BROADENING YOUR INPUT INTO THE PROCESS, WE ANTICIPATE THERE WILL BE A MUCH GREATER CONSIDERATION OF THE MANY COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST REPRESENTED IN THE COUNTY.

COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST ARE GROUPS WITH COMMON INTERESTS OR BONDS THAT SHOULD BE HONORED IN THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS.

PAND IT'S INTERESTING TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHO COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST ARE. AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE LEAGUE HAS BEEN WORKING ON. HAYS COUNTY HAS BEEN RAPIDLY GROWING RECENTLY, RESULTING IN COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST FAR DIFFERENT THAN THOSE FROM THE REDISTRICTING JUST TEN YEARS AGO. OUR WORLD IS A VERY DIFFERENT PLACE TODAY, AND THIS CALLS FOR BROADENING CONSIDERATIONS WITHIN THIS PROCESS. JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU A LITTLE INSIGHT TO SOME THAT WE'VEHOUG OF, SOME OF THE COMMUNITIES' INTERESTS ARE THINGS LIKE SCHOOL DISTRICTS, CONCERN FOR WATER RESOURCES BOTH NOW AND IN THE FUTURE, TRANSPORTATION WITH DIFFERENT NEEDS FOR CENTRAL CITIES, SUBURBAN AND URBAN, RURAL AREAS. SEPARATE KINDS OF COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST. BROADBAND THAT RECOGNIZES THE HARD-TO-REACH AREAS AS WELL AS UNDERSERVED AREAS.

I LIVE IN ONE OF THOSE HARD-TO-REACH AREAS.

SUPPOSEDLY WE OUGHT TO HAVE GOOD SERVICE.

WE DON'T HAVE GOOD SERVICE. THE NEED FOR EMS AND HOSPITAL SERVICES THAT ARE READILY AVAILABLE COUNTYWIDE.

FEEDBACK TO D.O.T. ON PLANS THAT REPRESENT THE TOTAL POPULATION, NOT JUST THE DEVELOPERS. SPECIAL NEEDS FOR HANDICAPPED.

LOW-INCOME HOUSING WIDELY AVAILABLE.

SO THAT'S JUST -- KIND OF A VIEW FROM A HIGH LEVEL.

THERE ARE LOTS OF COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER IN THIS PROCESS. SO ARE HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU IN THIS PROCESS AND DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO END UP WITH A REALLY SOLID REDISTRICTING PROCESS. WE WISH YOU GOOD LUCK.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CALVERT. COMMISSIONERS, I KNOW THAT EVERYBODY, AS MS. CALVERT SAID, IS BUSY AND A LOT OF THINGS ARE ON OUR PLATES. AND I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF THE COMMISSIONERS HAD NAMES FOR THIS EFFORT OR WOULD YOU LIKE MORE TIME. I CAN START WITH COMMISSIONER

SMITH. >> I THINK FIRST WE NEED TO DECIDE WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO DO IT OR NOT BEFORE.

I MEAN, MY POINT IS THIS, IS THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. AND WE JUST WENT THROUGH AN ELECTION PROCESS HERE WHERE TWO OF OUR COMMISSION MEMBERS WERE

[01:30:05]

RE-ELECTED OR STOOD FOR ELECTION WITHIN THE LAST THREE YEARS, EVERYBODY ON THIS STOOD FOR ELECTION.

WE WERE ELECTED TO DO A JOB ON BEHALF OF OUR CONSTITUENTS AND THOSE WHO PUT US IN THIS POSITION.

AT A CERTAIN POINT, I FAVOR PUBLIC INPUT.

I THINK THIS SHOULD BE AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT PROCESS FROM START TO FINISH. IF THAT MEANS MULTIPLE WORKSHOPS, IF THAT MEANS MULTIPLE PUBLIC COMMENT, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

BUT AT A CERTAIN POINT, WE ALSO CAN'T NOT DO OUR JOBS.

WHILE I WAS VERY SUPPORTIVE ON THE CITIZENS ADVISORY PANEL ON APOLOGY LOCATIONS, I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY WE FOUND OUT IN THE LAST TWO TO THREE MEETINGS THEY CONDUCTED, THEY DID NOT -- WHILE I MAY HAVE AGREED WITH THE FINAL PRODUCT, THE PROCESS DID NOT WORK WELL. AND I THINK THOSE WHO HAVE SAT IN THOSE MEETINGS, I WENT BACK AND WATCHED ALL THOSE MEETINGS.

I WOULD SAY THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS IN THOSE PROCESSES WHO WOULD SAY THEY DIDN'T WORK WELL EITHER.

I HAVE A CONCERN THAT AT A CERTAIN POINT IF WE DON'T DO OUR JOB, WE CAN'T PUNT IT TO ANOTHER GROUP TO TELL US HOW TO DO OUR JOB. FOR ME IT'LL TAKE CONSIDERATION.

AND I'LL GO WITH WHATEVER THE VIEW OF THE COURT IS.

IF WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMISSION, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT AND APPOINT MY TWO PEOPLE TWO IT. IF IT WAS A TEN-PERSON BOARD.

BUT I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE DIRECT ATRI -- ATTRITION BACK TO

US. >> COMMISSIONER INGALSBE.

>> THANK YOU, JUDGE. SO I -- THIS WILL BE THE THIRD REDISTRICTING PROCESS THAT I'VE BEEN IN AAND...

I RECALL THE VERY FIRST ONE I WAS IN, WE FORMED A GROUP TO -- AND WE WENT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE COUNTY AND HAD MEETINGS IN ALL AREAS OF OUR COUNTY. IT GOT A LITTLE ROUGH AT TIMES BUT I THINK WE WERE ABLE TO ALL COME BACK TOGETHER AND THIS COURT IS THE ONE WHO MAKES THE ULTIMATE DECISIONS.

BUT I THINK IT'S, FOR ME -- AND I'VE GOT MY TWO NAMES IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT TODAY. I AGREE AND BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE PUBLIC INPUT. I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT TO ENSURE THAT WE GET THAT INPUT AND HAVE IT BE AN OPEN PROCESS BECAUSE I THINK THE LAST THING THAT WE WANT IS TO NOT HAVE THAT AND THEN HAVE CONCERNS ONCE WE'RE EXTREMELY CLOSE TO VOTING ON SOMETHING. AND SO, I THINK THE COMMITTEE CAN WORK WELL. I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THEIR CHARGE IS GOING TO BE.

I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY OF THAT OUTLINED YET.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO -- I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HAS ANY THOUGHTS, OR JUDGE, I KNOW THIS IS YOUR ITEM, IF YOU HAVE SOME THOUGHTS ON WHAT THIS COMMITTEE WOULD BE DOING, WHAT THE CHARGE

IS, YEAH. >> WELL, I'LL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. FIRST, I APPRECIATE YOU SAYING THAT THIS COURT MAKES THE ULTIMATE DECISION BECAUSE THAT IS EXACTLY RIGHT. THERE IS NO USURPING ANY COURT ACTION BY CREATING A COMMISSION. THE INTENT BEHIND THIS AGENDA ITEM IS TO CREATE THAT VERY CRITICAL EXACT THING YOU'VE JUST SAID, AN OPEN PROCESS. I LITERALLY WROTE IT DOWN BECAUSE YOU'VE NAILED IT, IN MY OPINION, RIGHT ON THE HEAD.

AND WHAT BETTER WAY TO CREATE AND ENSURE AN OPEN PROCESS, IF NOT JUST AS MS. CALVERT SO ELOQUENTLY STATED, THROUGH A FAIR AND OPEN AND COMMUNICATIVE AND ENGAGING OF COMMUNITY, EVEN IF IT'S SHEPHERDING MEETING DIALOGUE AND HELPING TO DISSEMINATE INFORMATION, BECAUSE IT IS WHAT IT IS.

WE HAVE, AS COURT MEMBERS, WE HAVE A FULL-TIME JOB DOING THIS.

IT IS A BONA FIDE FULL-TIME JOB. FOR ALL MY YEARS SERVING MY HOMETOWN'S MANY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, I KNOW THAT THE CITY COUNCIL BENEFITED GREATLY FROM MY INPUT.

MY LAST WAS THE PLANNING AND ZONING.

THEY BENEFITED GREATLY FROM THE SUGGESTIONS AND RESEARCH WE DID.

[01:35:02]

WE'RE A TEAM. AND I NEVER THOUGHT ON A BOARD OR COMMISSION THAT I WOULD TAKE THE PLACE OVERA COUNCIL MEMBER OR A MAYOR. THESE ARE GREAT LAYERED SUPPORT FOR THIS COURT AND IT IS AN OBVIOUSLY, CLEARLY OF HIGH INTEREST TO OUR CITIZENRY. AND IT IS ALL TOO EASY TO HAVE A COUNTY OF OUR SIZE, WITH OUR COMPLEXITY, TO OVERLOOK A SPECIFIC SPACE. AND SO I BROUGHT THIS AGENDA FORTH SO THAT WE COULD THANK YOU FOR HAVING YOUR TWO NAMES -- SO WE COULD HAVE THE CONVERSATION BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY IS, TO ME, WHO'S GUIDING THIS CONVERSATION. THEY'RE SAYING, "THIS IS WHAT WE WANT." AND I'M SIMPLY BEING THE CONDUIT AND SAYING, "IF THIS IS WHAT YOU WANT, COMMUNITY, IT'S MY JOB TO GIVE YOU THE FEELING THAT THIS GOVERNMENT WORKS FOR YOU." WHEN I FIRST BECAME A JUDGE, THEY SAID, "HOW DO YOU WANT THE COURTROOM TO BE?" I SAID, "I JUST WANT THE BLINDS OPEN. LEAVE EVERYTHING ELSE THE SAME." I'M NOT SAYING THE PEOPLE BEFORE ME WERE BAD, BUT THAT'S MY APPRECIATION FOR IT. NO WAY DO I MEAN THAT AS A NEGATIVE POKE ON ANYBODY, BUT THAT'S JUST LETTING LIGHT IN.

AND DEPARTMENT HEADS LIKE I WAS TALKING ABOUT, LIKE MIKE JONES, TELL YOUR STORY. MOST PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING IN A SPECIFIC ISSUE.

AND SO WE AS A COUNTY GOVERNMENT HAVE A LONGSTANDING HISTORY OF DOING LOTS OF THINGS AND PEOPLE ALWAYS SAYING, "WELL, WHAT ARE YOU DOING? YOU HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING," OR WHATEVER. AND SO I THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY ON SOMETHING SO SIGNIFICANT, SO IMPACTFUL, TO ENGAGE THIS VERY COMMUNITY IN A -- MY HOPE IS A MOST COMPLETE AND HOLISTIC WAY. AND IF I COULD GET COURT SUPPORT AND MOVE FORWARD WITH ENGAGING ANOTHER LAYER OF OUTREACH, THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. AND WE SHAPE HOW THEY WORK AND WHAT THEY OPERATE IN, JUST LIKE AS I TOLD COMMISSIONER SHELL TODAY, WE DISCUSSED HERE IN COURT, I SAID, "JUST IN MY OPINION, JUST LIKE THE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION." TRULY TO CREATE MORE ARTICULATION FROM FOLKS WHO DON'T HAVE THE TIME TO BE HERE OR DON'T HAVE THE DESIRE TO BE HERE AND SPEAK AT THE PODIUM, BUT YET THEIR VOICES COULD STILL BE CAPTURED IN AN IDEA AND ULTIMATELY BACK TO US.

WE ARE THE ULTIMATE DECISION-MAKERS.

YOU ARE 100 PERCENT RIGHT. THERE IS NO REASON TO THINK OF THIS AS NOT DOING OUR JOBS. THERE IS NO REASON FOR US TO THINK THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT ANOTHER GROUP IN CHARGE OF DOING OUR JOBS. YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT.

IT IS MERELY A TOOL TO HELP US ENSURE THAT EVERYONE'S CONCERNS ARE MET. AND THE ULTIMATE VOTE IS OURS

AND OURS ALONE. >> AND ALSO IN, I GUESS A QUESTION FOR MR. KENNEDY, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE ALLISON BASS AND ASSOCIATES AS THE FIRM WHO IS HELPING US THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

AND I REALLY HAVEN'T RECEIVED A WHOLE LOT OF INFORMATION.

I KNOW THAT THE PROCESS HAS BEEN DELAYED SOME.

AND YOU KNOW THAT'S GOING TO BE A REALLY IMPORTANT FACTOR IN MY MIND, THAT WE'RE ALL WORKING TOGETHER ALONG WITH THIS LAW FIRM. AND SO I GUESS THE QUESTION, MARK, IS HAVE YOU HEARD FROM THEM AND WHERE ARE THEY AT IN

THE PROCESS? >> I HAVE NOT CHECKED IN WITH THEM IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS, BUT WE DID A FEW MONTHS BACK CORRESPOND AND WE PROVIDED THEM WITH SOME MAPPING INFORMATION, PUT THEM IN TOUCH WITH OUR GIS MAPPING FOLKS.

SO THEY'VE BEEN ACTIVELY ANALYZING THE CHANGES IN HAYS COUNTY THAT MIGHT DICTATE SOME OF THE REDISTRICTING ISSUES.

AND I KNOW THEY'RE WORKING ON IT.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT THEY HAVE PLANS TO PARTICIPATE IN A CITIZEN COMMISSION OR CITIZEN COMMITTEE IN PART -- AS PART OF THE PROCESS, BUT I'M CERTAIN THAT IF THE COURT OR ANY BODY WANTS TO PROVIDE THEM WITH MORE INFORMATION, THEY'LL RECEIVE IT.

>> OKAY. WELL, I THINK WE ALL KNOW STEVE FLOYD HAS BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN THE PROCESS ALSO PROVIDING AND CREATING THOSE MAPS FOR US. AND HE'S, I WOULD IMAGINE, WOULD CONTINUE TO PLAY A BIG PART IN THIS PROCESS.

>> COMMISSIONER, I WOULD SAY THAT EARLIER THIS YEAR, I ATTENDED AN EVENT WHERE MR. ALLISON SPOKE ON THE TIMING.

AND AT THAT TIME, THEY WERE HOPING THAT THE PROCESS THAT

[01:40:04]

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THOSE SUBMISSIONS AS FAR AS WHAT -- THEY WOULD HOPE ANYWAY, IN ORDER TO HAVE ALL THE PERTINENT INFORMATION READY FOR THE FILING DEADLINES IN DECEMBER WOULD BE DONE BY THE END OF AUGUST. AND SOME OF THE BACK AND FORTH, I KNOW I'M PART OF THE LISTSERV OF ALL COMMISSIONERS WITH ALLISON AND BASS. THEY'VE STATED THAT UNTENABLE, THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET CENSUS NUMBERS UNTIL THE BEGINNING OF AUGUST AT LEAST, IF NOT LATER.

AND SO THEY'RE ANTICIPATING THEY WILL NOT START ON A LOT OF THOSE COUNTIES THEY'RE WORKING WITH. THEY PROBABLY WON'T EVEN HAVE TO START REVIEWING THOSE MAPS UNTIL AFTER THAT, WELL AFTER THAT, BECAUSE IF WE DON'T GET THOSE NUMBERS UNTIL OCTOBER, IT MAY BE DIFFICULT FOR US TO TURN THOSE AROUND IN SHORT ORDER.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER JONES.

>> THANK YOU, JUDGE. I'VE BEEN UP HERE FOR 12 YEARS AND THROUGH ONE REDISTRICTING, AND THAT WAS PROBABLY THE WORST TIME I'VE HAD AS A CAN COMMISSIONER IS GOING THROUGH REDISTRICTING BY FAR. IT'S THE LEAST FUN I'VE HAD.

AND I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT MY COLLEAGUES ARE SAYING.

WHAT I WOULD ASK THAT IF WE -- TO CONSIDER THIS COMMITTEE MOVING FORWARD, THAT WE GO AHEAD AND COME BACK WITH SOME TYPE OF SCOPE OF WHAT THEIR GOAL IS AND WHAT WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH.

IS IT JUST LOOKING AT COMMISSIONERS' PRECINCTS OR IF WE'RE ALSO GOING TO LOOK AT JPS AND CONSTABLES AT THIS TIME, WHICH WE HAVEN'T DONE IN A WHILE.

I DON'T THINK I'M READY TO PUT ANY NAMES FORWARD UNTIL WE GET CLOSER TO THAT DATE. TOO MUCH CAN HAPPEN UNTIL NOW AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING UNTIL PROBABLY, WHAT, SEPTEMBER. I WOULD LIKE TO GET CLOSER TO THAT DATE IF THAT'S HOW WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD.

THE OTHER CONCERN I HAVE ABOUT DOING THE COMMITTEE IS, LIKE COMMISSIONER SMITH MENTIONED EARLIER, THE LAST ONE WE HAD, WE HAD PROBLEMS WITH PEOPLE SHOWING UP.

WE'LL HAVE SUCH A SHORT TURN TYPE, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH PCO AND GETTING THE PUBLIC INPUT FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC WE'RE GOING TO HAVE WITH THAT SHORT TIMELINE BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE THAT DONE 30 DAYS BEFORE THE NOVEMBER ELECTION.

SO THOSE LINES CAN BE DRAWN. THOSE ARE THE CONCERNS I HAVE.

I'M NOT SAYING I'M AGAINST IT OR FOR IT EITHER WAY, BUT THOSE ARE CONCERNS I WOULD HAVE ABOUT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE

COMMITTEE. >> THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER SHELL. >> SOME CLARIFICATION.

I KNOW WE DID RECEIVE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE FIRM BACK IN LATE FEBRUARY. I THINK THE CENSUS REPRESENTATIVES WE HAD MENTIONED SEPTEMBER 30TH AND THAT'S WHAT OUR FIRM HAS SAID THAT THEY'RE PREPARED TO DO SOME KIND OF A MAYBE EVEN AN ONLINE OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS.

THEY OFFERED THAT, WHICH I THINK WE COULD MAYBE SET THAT UP TOO JUST KIND OF WHAT IS THIS GOING TO LOOK LIKE TYPE OF A DEAL AND MAYBE A WAY TO KICK THINGS OFF. HOWEVER, THEY HAVE SAID THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO START UNTIL AFTER SEPTEMBER 30TH.

THE PROCESS WILL LIKELY BE MODIFIED AND THEY'LL PROCEED ONCE THEY RECEIVE THE REQUIRED DATE IN SEPTEMBER.

UNTIL THEN THEY'LL BE UNABLE TO ACTUALLY DRAW BOUNDARIES OBVIOUSLY IF YOU DON'T HAVE INFORMATION.

THAT DOES GIVE US SOME TIME IF WE WANT TO SET UP SOME TYPE OF THEM TO DO KIND OF AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT THEY WILL DO.

I'M ASSUMING SINCE THEY'VE OFFERED THAT, THAT'S IN THEIR CONTRACT. MR. KENNEDY, IF NOT, WE PROBABLY WANT TO CHECK AND SEE. AND I THINK WHAT COMMISSIONER JONES MENTIONED OF SOME SORT OF OUTLINE OF EXACTLY HOW THIS WILL WORK. WILL THERE BE ANY REPRESENTATION FROM THE COMMISSIONERS COURT. I WASN'T UP HERE FOR THE LAST ONE. I WITNESSED IT FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DIOCE. I REMEMBER US HAVING MAPS SPREAD OUT ON TRIPODS AND WORKSHOPS AND I DON'T REMEMBER HOW MANY THEY WERE. BUNCHES OF THEM.

>> AT LEAST SEVEN. >> WITH DIFFERENT LETTERS, NUMBERS, AND EVERYTHING ELSE, M1, M2 AND THINGS.

KIND OF WATCHING IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, I COULD SEE WHERE A LITTLE MORE ORGANIZATION WOULD BE GOOD, OR A TIMELINE AND SOME INVOLVEMENT OF, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, IF WE KICK IT OFF WITH SOME SORT OF EDUCATION INITIATIVE AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS AT THIS TIME, IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MEMBERSHIP OF THE TEN-BODY, IF IT'S GOING TO BE TWO REPRESENTATIVES, WHAT IS IT THEY'RE GOING TO DO, WHAT'S REQUIRED OF THEM, HOW MANY TIMES ARE THEY GOING TO MEET, ARE THEY GOING TO ACTUALLY -- IS IT GOING TO BE MR. FLOYD AND GIS SITTING AT A COMPUTER WITH -- UP ON A SCREEN AND, YOU KNOW, THE MEMBERS WATCHING AND, AGAIN, SOMEONE REPRESENTING THAT'S COMMUNICATING WITH THE

[01:45:01]

LAW FIRM, SINCE I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT -- THAT'S NOT WHAT THEIR CONTRACT IS FOR IS FOR THEM TO DO THAT.

SO WE WOULD NEED TO DO THAT. IT WOULD NEED TO COME FROM MM MR. KENNEDY'S OFFICE, I'M ASSUMING. THOSE ARE IDEAS OF HOW IT CAN BE DONE. AND ARE THEY TELLING STEVE, "MOVE THAT LINE THERE, MOVE THAT LINE THERE," AND THEN DO THEY PRESENT OPTIONS TO THE COURT? DO WE THEN -- I STILL THINK THE WORKSHOP THING, ALTHOUGH LIKE COMMISSIONER JONES SAID, IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN FUN, IT'S NECESSARY AND IT DID -- I MEAN, WE GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE COMING UP WITH DIFFERENT IDEAS, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO DECIDE HOW TO MANAGE THAT AND MAYBE THIS IS A GOOD WAY TO GET EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDING WHAT THIS PROCESS IS GOING TO BE, WHEN IT KICKS OFF, WHAT IT MEANS, WHAT THE PARTICIPATION IS, WHO ASSISTS THAT GROUP TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE DOING WHAT WE ALL WANT THEM TO DO AND WHAT COMMISSIONER JONES, TO ALLOW THEM THAT IF WE ASK THEM TO DO SOMETHING, TO ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT. OBVIOUSLY, MEETINGS CAN BE PUBLIC AND THERE CAN BE PEOPLE AND PUBLIC COMMENTS, BUT THAT THEY ACTUALLY ARE ABLE TO DO WHAT THEY'RE BEING ASKED TO DO.

I KNOW THAT'S KIND OF WHAT -- I HEARD THE STORIES FROM THE ONE BEFORE THEN AND IT GOT REALLY CHAOTIC.

MAYBE THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT STRUCTURE TO IT

>> AND WE NEED TO INCLUDE MARCUS ON HOW MUCH TIME STEVE CAN DEVOTE TO THIS AND COMMIT TO DOING.

>> THAT'S GOOD. YES, MA'AM.

>> JUST REAL QUICK. AND I KNOW THERE WAS AN ISSUE.

I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE REALLY NOT DIFFICULT BUT WE HAD INDIVIDUALS STOPPING BY MR. FLOYD'S OFFICE AND ASKING HIM TO CREATE MAPS. AND I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S

SOMETHING THAT -- >> NOT A GOOD IDEA, RIGHT?

>> NO, YEAH. >> HE WAS A VERY DEDICATED LONG-SERVING COUNTY EMPLOYEE. I BELIEVE AFTER THE LAST ONE, HE MADE IT FAIRLY CLEAR THAT HE MIGHT FIND THE TIME TO RETIRE

BEFORE THE NEXT ONE. >> HE DID.

>> WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T DO ANYTHING TO CAUSE THAT.

>> YEAH. SO HE COMMITTED HIMSELF.

I KNOW HE STUCK AROUND. HE DOES KNOW THE PROCESS.

HE'S DONE IT. IT'S A GOOD QUESTION FOR MARCUS TO MAKE SURE THAT -- AND THAT NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED TOO, WHAT TIME WILL BE REQUIRED AND FROM OUR CITIZENS, EXPECTATIONS.

>> COULD I BASED ON THE FEEDBACK -- AND THIS IS VERY USEFUL AND I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO FEEL RUSHED, BUT I DO BELIEVE WHOLEHEARTEDLY IN THIS EFFORT AND AGAIN, I THANK COMMISSIONER INGALSBE FOR HAVING HER TWO NAMES, AMAZING.

COMMISSIONER SHELL, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO WORK WITH ME TO ARTICULATE SOME OF THIS FORMATION SO WE COULD BRING IT BACK, I'LL GO CRAZY AND IS AN IN TWO WEEKS OR IN A MONTH, SO WE CAN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT SOMETHING FORTH THAT EVERYONE IS CLEAR AND CONCISE WITH? BUT FIRST GOAL AS A MOVING BODY HERE, THAT WE ALL HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT IT IN OPEN COURT FOR EVERYONE TO SEE AND HAVE THE CONVERSATION.

AND THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE. I SEE YOU NODDING.

>> YEAH, I THINK MAYBE WE COULD GET IN TOUCH WITH THE FIRM THAT'S HELPING US AND SEE WHAT THEIR TIMELINE LOOKS LIKE, WHAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO DO WITHIN THIS PROCESS OUTSIDE OF WHAT THEY PROBABLY ALREADY ASSUME THEY'RE GOING TO DO, GET THEM TO OFFER SOME ADVICE ON MAYBE EVEN HOW THAT PROCESS MIGHT WORK, COME UP WITH SOME OUTLINE IDEAS OF WHAT THIS COURT COULD CONSIDER. WE DO HAVE TIME.

AND ALSO INCLUDE MR. KENNEDY'S OFFICE AS WELL SINCE I KNOW THAT WILL BE PART OF THAT AND MR. FLOYD.

>> AND I'LL BRING IT BACK TO COURT ONCE WE'RE SQUARED AWAY.

>> AND THE COURT WILL MAKE THE DECISION OF WHO SHOULD DO THE REPRESENTING AND WHAT THE PROCESS SHOULD LOOK LIKE.

>> THAT WAS THE POINT I WAS GOING TO MAKE.

TWO OF US AREN'T GOING TO BE ON THE BALLOT THE NEXT YEAR AND A HALF POSSIBLY, AND WHENEVER THIS IS BROUGHT BACK AND WE LOOK AT IT, I THINK IT WOULD BE THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COURT IF THE TWO PEOPLE WHO AREN'T GOING T BE IMMDIATELY ON THE BALLOT WERE THE PEOPLE WHO WORKED ON IT AND WITH THE COMMISSION.

THAT'S MY PERSONAL VIEW, BUT WE CAN LOOK AT THAT LATER.

I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE BECAUSE I JUST WANT TO REMOVE MYSELF AND ANY OF MY OTHER COLLEAGUES FROM ANY TYPE OF QUESTION AS TO ANY UNDUE INFLUENCE ON THAT.

>> THAT'S HOW IT WORKED OUT LAST YEAR, LAST TIME, COMMISSIONER

INGALSBE WERE ON THAT. >> ONE AND THREE ALWAYS FALL IN

LINE OBVIOUSLY THE WAY IT WORKS. >> THERE YOU GO.

>> I'M NOT NECESSARILY VOLUNTEERING.

BUT THIS PROCESS, IF DONE RIGHT, WE'RE NOT TOUCHING IT UNTIL IT'S TIME TO VOTE FOR IT. WE'LL FRAME THAT NARRATIVE.

[38. Discussion and possible action related to proposed bills in the 87th Regular Session of the Texas Legislature and to consider adoption of resolution(s) regarding proposed bills. The Court may opt to withdraw to Executive Session during this item to consult with legal counsel pursuant to Texas Government Code 551.071. SMITH]

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SHELL, FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH ME AND BRING IT BACK FOR ARTICULATION FOR THE COURT

[01:50:03]

MEMBERS. PLEASE OPEN AGENDA 38

>> 38, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION RELATED TO PROPOSED BILL THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE AND TO CAN BE ADOPTIONS OF RESOLUTIONS REGARDING PROPOSED BILLS. THE COURT MAY ACT TO WITHDRAW TO EXECUTIVE SESSION DURING THIS ITEM TO CONSULT WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE.

>> WE HAVE FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON NUMBER 38.

FIRST UP, MR. AMAYA. >> THANK YOU.

ON THIS ITEM LAST TIME WE WERE HERE, THAT ALLIANCE WAS ASKING COMMISSIONER SMITH ABOUT THE BILLS THAT HE'S MONITORING OUT OF THE CAPITOL UP THERE. I REPEATEDLY HEAR COMMISSIONER SMITH TALK ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANS TRANSPARENCY. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY IS IT SO DIFFICULT NOT TO COME UP HERE PREPARED AND TO -- WHEN ASKED ABOUT THESE BILLS, WHY ARE YOU NOT ABLE TO RECITE THEM IN VERBATIM, WHY DIRECT US HERE AND THE VIEWING PUBLIC IN CYBERSPACE TO GO TO A WEBSITE. IT'S NOT ANYTHING THAT WNKISENE.

PREPARATION HAS ALWAYS BEEN ONE OF MY BIG PET PEEVES, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE IN OFFICE POSITIONS. AND AS FAR AS THIS, WE WOULD APPRECIATE A LITTLE BIT MORE TRANSPARENCY AND PREPARATION SO THAT WHEN WE ASK SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, AND, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE REPEATEDLY HEAR COMMISSIONER SMITH TALK ABOUT COMMITMENTS TO DO THIS AND TO DO THAT. WELL, WE THINK YOU SHOULD FOLLOW YOUR ADVICE AND WHEN ASKED HAVE YOUR MATERIAL PREPARED FOR US.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. AMAYA.

I THAT HAD SUSAN RAYBUCK IN THE STACK OF 38.

SO I -- >> (INAUDIBLE).

>> RIGHT, BUT IT WAS UNDER THE STACK OF 38.

WOULD YOU STILL LIKE TO SPEAK ON 23?

>> NO. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU AND I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT.

AND OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MS. LOUIE BOND, IF YOU'LL PLEASE

APPROACH THE PODIUM. >> GOOD MORNING, JUDGE BECERRA.

GOOD MORMORNING, COMMISSIONERS. GOOD MORNING, MR. KENNEDY.

IT'S GOOD TO SEE EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS LOUIE BOND, HEAR TO SPEAK ABOUT HOUSE BILL 618. I WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT IT, WHAT'S LEFT OF IT. SHE HAS TAKEN AN INTEREST IN GROUNDWATER SINCE BEFORE THE DAY SHE TOOK OFFICE AND I APPRECIATE THE TIME AND CARE SHE'S TAKEN IN CRAFTING THIS BILL.

I'VE TRIED TO BE A GOOD CITIZEN, NEIGHBOR, AND STEWARD OF THIS PRECIOUS PLACE, BUT LATELY IT IS NON-STOP WAR IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THROUGHOUT THE VALLEY AGAINST MARAUDERS.

FIRST ELECTROPURIFICATION. WE HAD TO PASS A BILL TO EVEN FIGHT THEM AT ALL. OUR NEIGHBORS THROUGHOUT THE AREA CAME TOGETHER -- [BUZZER]

>> YOU'RE FINE. >> THANK YOU.

OUR NEIGHBORS IN OUR AREA CAME TO BE TOGETHER IN A BIPARTISAN WAY TO PROTECT OUR WATER. THEY SPENT $3 MILLION IN SIX YEARS AND HAVEN'T GOTTEN A DROP TO SELL.

THAT'S THE POWER OF THE PEOPLE YOU REPRESENT.

MANY THANKS TO THIS COURT AND COMMISSIONER SHELL FOR BEING A HUGE PART OF THAT TEAM. AND MR. KENNEDY AS WELL.

COMMISSIONER SHELL AND OTHER COUNTY OFFICIALS STEPPED IN TO GIVE US GREAT ADVICE TO STOP A BAR FROM OPENING AMONG OUR HOMES JUST WEEKS AGO. WE FOUGHT KINDER MORGAN WITH YOU AS WELL. WE FOUGHT THEM TRYING TO SNEAK A BILL FROM SOUTH TEXAS BECAUSE IT WAS CREATED WEAKER THAN BARTON SPRINGS EDWARDS AQUIFER CONSERVATION DISTRICT.

I LIVE ON THE IMAGINARY LINE BETWEEN THOSE TWO DISTRICTS BUT I SPEND MY THE TIME SUPPORTING THE DISTRICTS RATHER THAN TRYING TO BREAK THEM FOR MY OWN SELF-INTEREST.

IT'S NOT ABOUT POLITICS. IT'S NOT ABOUT THEM SCREAMING IN YOUR EARS. IT'S ABOUT LOUIE BOND AND HER

[01:55:04]

NEIGHBORS THROUGHOUT THE VALLEY AND THIS WHOLE COUNTY.

IT'S ABOUT WATER, THAT'S ALL. IF YOU GET TURNED SIDEWAYS BY FOLKS SCREAMING ABOUT SOME REALLY REASONABLE REQUESTS FOR SUPPORT AND SUSTAINABILITY FOR OUR GROUNDWATER DISTRICTS, PLEASE DIG WAY BACK AND THINK ABOUT WHY YOU'RE HERE.

WHEN I FEEL BAD ABOUT TEXTING MY COMMISSIONER IN THE EVENING OR ON A WEEKEND, HE TELLS ME THE FOUR MOST BEAUTIFUL WORDS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL CAN SAY: "I WORK FOR YOU." SO HERE I AM. I'M THE BOSS TODAY.

PLEASE KNOW THAT I HAVE NOTHING TO GAIN.

I JUST WANT YOU TO HELP ME PROTECT MY RIGHTS TO OUR MOST PRECIOUS NATURAL RESOURCE. DO THE RIGHT THING, DO IT TODAY, DO IT TOMORROW, DO IT WHEN I'M NOT LOOKING, BECAUSE WE'RE ALL COUNTING ON YOU. SO I ASK YOU TO RESCIND YOUR PROCLAMATION AGAINST 4618, LOOK AT THE NEW BILL, AND PLEASE LEAD UP A SUPPORT PROCLAMATION TO HELP US.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MS. BOND.

AND NEXT, MS. SUSAN PEARLY GATES, IF YOU WILL START HER

THREE-MINUTE TIMER. >> THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND THANK YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU AS A COURT DO.

I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. THE REASON, THE STORM, THE BIG FREEZE TAUGHT PEOPLE A HUGE LESSON, MANY PEOPLE, MANY RESIDENTS OF HAYS COUNTY, ABOUT HOW PRECIOUS WATER IS, THAT WATER IS LIFE. I ALSO APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THE HAYS TRINITY GROUNDWATER DISTRICT DOES.

THEY COLLABORATED TO PROTECT JACOB'S WELL.

THEY WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH THE BARTON SPRINGS THEIR FUNDING TO SCIENCE, TO SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S GOING ON WITH WATER IN OUR AREA.

THEY WANT TO HAVE THE BEST INFORMATION POSSIBLE IN MAKING DECISIONS FOR THE PROTECTION OF THIS LIMITED RESOURCE.

THEY NEED SECURE LONG-TERM FUNDING.

IT'S VITAL TO THE FUTURE OF OUR GROUNDWATER PROTECTORS.

WATER IS LIFE. I WAS VERY DISAPPOINTED WHILE DRIVING HERE THIS MORNING TO FIND OUT THAT HB 4618 HAS BEEN THROUGH THE DENTIST'S OFFICE AND LOST ALL ITS TEETH.

BUT STILL, I ASK THE COURT TO RESCIND THE COUNTY'S RESOLUTION AGAINST HB 4618. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. GATES.

OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MS. LINDA ROG

ROGERS. >> GOOD MORNING, I'M THE DISTRICT 4 DIRECTOR AND VICE PRESIDENT OF THE HAYS COUNTY GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT.

I'M HERE ALSO TO ASK YOU TO RECONSIDER YOUR OPPOSITION TO HOUSE BILL 4618. THAT BILL NO LONGER EXISTS AS IT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU AT THAT TIME.

AS MS. GATES INDICATED, IT'S LOST ITS TEETH.

OUR MOST IMPORTANT OBJECTIVE IS TO GET STABLE FUNDING BECAUSE OUR FUNDING IS BASED ON GROWTH. AND FOR THE FACT THAT WE ARE SOON RUNNING OUT OF WATER TO EVEN PERMIT FOR THAT GROWTH, THAT FUNDING IS GOING TO DECLINE OVER TIME.

95 PERCENT OF WESTERN HAYS COUNTY IS SERVED BY GROUNDWATER AND IT IS THE LEGISLATIVE MANDATE THE GROUNDWATER DISTRICT PRESERVE, CONSERVE, AND PREVENT WASTE OF GROUNDWATER.

IT TAKES MONEY TO DO THAT. WHAT IS LEFT IN THIS BILL IS THE REQUEST THAT Y'ALL MADE THAT YOU WOULD BE REMOVE FROM REPLACING ANY DIRECTOR VACANCIES ON THE BOARD, THAT WE GET IN LINE LEGALLY WITH THE REDISTRICTING LAWS THAT WE DON'T HAVE.

THOSE ARE HOUSEKEEPING THAT ESSENTIALLY HAVE TO BE DONE.

THE OTHER THING LEFT IS WE ARE CHANGING HOW WE DETERMINE OUR CONNECTION FEES. WE'VE BEEN DOING THEM BY LUES.

ALL THE PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY PROVIDERS ASKED US THREE YEARS

[02:00:03]

AGO TO PLEASE SWITCH TO THE AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS METER EQUIVALENCE.

THAT IS WHAT IS IN THIS BILL. SO HAD THE ABILITY TO GO UP TO A THOUSAND DOLLARS PER CONNECTION. HOWEVER, THIS BILL IS GOING TO LIMIT US AFTER WE GO BEYOND THE RESIDENTIAL-SIZE METER.

SO INSTEAD OF GIVING US BETTER FUNDING, IT IS DECREASING OUR FUNDING. THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE.

REPRESENTATIVE HAS WORKED HUNDREDS OF HOURS WITH US, WITH OUR STAFF, TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT WE BELIEVE WILL GET THROUGH THE HOUSE. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN THE SENATE. BUT WE TRULY NEED YOUR SUPPORT.

I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO CHANGE AGAIN EXCEPT THE HOUSE COMMITTEE. I REALLY DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO CHANGE THERE. WE HAVE WORKED CLOSE WITH YOU ON A NUMBER OF THINGS AND I'M VERY THRILLED TO BE A PART OF THE COLLABORATION THAT HAS HAPPENED THE LAST THREE TO FOUR YEARS WITH THE COUNTY INCLUDING SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PROJECTS, WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH COMMISSIONER SHELL AND COMMISSIONER SMITH. AND AGAIN, WOULD JUST ASK YOU IMMEDIATELY SINCE THIS IS BEING HEARD POSSIBLY TODAY IN HOUSE COMMITTEE, IF NOT TODAY, PROBABLY THURSDAY.

SO WE NEED TO KNOW THAT YOU'VE GOT OUR BACK, THAT YOU'RE GOING TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH US IN PROTECTING GROUNDWATER IN WESTERN HAYS COUNTY, AND THE ONLY WAY TO DO THAT IS TO CONTINUE IN EXISTENCE AND THE ONLY WAY TO DO THAT IS HAVE SOME KIND OF FUNDING IN THIS BILL. I THANK YOU AND OPEN TO

QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MR. JEFF SH

SHAW. >> THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.

THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR SERVICE.

MY NAME IS JEFF SHAW AND I'M A MANAGING PROTECTOR OF PROTECT OUR WATER. WE'RE A HAYS COUNTY GROUNDWATER GRASSROOTS ASSOCIATION. WE HAVE MEMBERS IN ALL OF YOUR DISTRICTS, BOTH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS.

BOTH SIDES CAN AGREE WE NEED CLEAN WATER AND ENOUGH OF IT TO DRINK, WHICH IS A REAL PROBLEM OUT HERE.

AND WE ASK THAT YOU SUPPORT THIS NEW HOUSE BILL 4618.

WHEN I WAS ASKED TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD SEVERAL YEARS AGO, I DID THE BEST I COULD. I SERVED WITH INTEGRITY.

I TRIED TO BRIDGE GAPS. I THINK I TRIED TO LEAVE THIS HAYS COUNTY TRINITY DISTRICT IN A BETTER PLACE THAN I FOUND IT.

I GOT TO SEE THE INNER WORKINGS FROM THE DISTRICT AND DETRACTORS FROM THE OUTSIDE. WE ALL NEED THIS DISTRICT TO BE STRONG. OUR GROUP IS BASED OUT OF DRIFTWOOD AND DRIPPING SPRINGS. THE HOUSES KEEP COMING AND COMING AND COMING. THE DISTRICT HAS A GREAT NEW MANAGER, HAS A VERY HIGHLY QUALIFIED NEW PRESIDENT.

THIS IS NOT THE OLD HAYS TRINITY DISTRICT.

THIS THING COULD BE STRONG AND WE NEED IT TO HAVE THE FUNDING THAT'S JUST IN LINE WITH EVERYBODY ELSE'S.

WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING SPECIAL.

LIKE LINDA SAID, THE NEW BILL WILL PUT LESS MONEY IN THE DISTRICT'S COFFERS FOR NOW BUT IT'S DONE RIGHT TO BUILD A FUTURE IN THE RIGHT AWAY. I WAS SUPPOSED TO GO TO THE CAPITOL LAST WEEK AND SPEAK ON BEHALF OF SUPPORTING THE BILL.

BUT THE TYPO THERE AND THE BACKDATING, I WASN'T GOING TO GET BEHIND THAT AT ALL. OUR GROUP IS MEASURED, WE'RE CONSERVATION-MINDED, BUT WE'RE NOT AGRO JUST GONE CRAZY.

WE REALLY THINK ABOUT THESE THINGS THAT BENEFITS EVERYBODY.

THIS IS A VERY SCALED-DOWN NEW BILL.

ANYONE THAT WOULD TRY TO FIGHT THIS NEW BILL IN ITS SIMPLE FORM I WOULD THINK HAS SOME SORT OF AGENDA.

THERE'S REALLY NOT MUCH TO IT. THE BIGGER THE METER, THE BIGGER THE CONNECTION FEE. BUT NONE OF IT IS REALLY HIGH.

IT'S ALL MEASURED AND REA REASONABLE.

IT'S NOTHING AT ALL WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT.

1250 FOR A ONE-INCH METER. IF WE CAN'T GET BEHIND THIS LOCALLY, I GUESS I HAVE TO THROW UP MY HANDS AT THE STATE LEVEL BECAUSE YOU KNOW HOW THIS GOES DOWN.

THIS IS A SIMPLE THING WE CAN DO RIGHT HERE TO GET BEHIND TO PROTECT AND PRESERVE THE WATER. IF WE DON'T WANT THE NEW AND

[02:05:02]

IMPROVED GROUNDWATER DISTRICT DO WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO, I CAN'T IMAGINE THE DISTRESS ALL OF YOU WILL HAVE VERY SOON HAVING TO DEAL WITH WHEN THE WELLS ALL GO DRY.

THIS IS REAL SIMPLE. LET'S GET BEHIND IT AT A LOCAL LEVEL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU, MR. SHAW. COMMISSIONER SMITH.

>> THANK YOU, JUDGE. JUST TO ADDRESS A COUPLE OF ISSUES OR A COUPLE OF COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE, MR. AMAYA, I COULDN'T AGREE WITH YOU MORE. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE BEEN BETTER PREPARED TODAY WITH WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

I CAN A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS COULD TELL YOU THIS IS THE VERSION OF THIS LEGISLATION THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT TODAY, WE GOT AT 7:30 THIS MORNING FROM REPRESENTATIVE AND THIS IS THE FIFTH VERSION I'VE SEEN SINCE YESTERDAY MORNING.

THAT BEING THE CASE, I AM REMISS, I AM NOT GOING TO PUT SOMETHING BEFORE MY COLLEAGUES THAT I KNOW IS GOING TO CHANGE LIKE THAT. I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY IS VERY, VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHEN WE FIRST CONSIDERED IT EVEN THREE WEEKS AGO.

WHAT I WILL TELL YOU IS THAT WHILE I APPRECIATE THE STATEMENTS OF SEVERAL OF OUR SPEAKERS TODAY SPECIFICALLY ON THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION, I STILL HAVE A CONCERN BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THIS SAUSAGE IS BEING MADE.

AND I HATE TO SAY THAT, BUT AGAIN, FIVE VERSIONS WITHIN TWO DAYS IS CONCERNING TO ME. AND EVEN THOUGH THE STATEMENT THAT MS. ROGERS MADE AS TO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE WHEN IT COMES OUT OF COMMITTEE TODAY, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. TO ADDRESS THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST SOMETHING, AND THIS IS CAN ACTUALLY EXACTLY WHAT WE DID TWO YEARS AGO AS A COURT WITH THESE SAME COURT MEMBERS.

THE COURT ACTUALLY GAVE -- BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE AS WRITTEN TODAY, I CAN TELL YOU PERSONALLY I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF.

I THINK IT'S FINE. I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH IT WHATSOEVER. BUT AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS COME OUT OF COMMITTEE AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE WHAT THAT VERSION LOOKS LIKE. TWO YEARS AGO, WHAT OUR COURT DID WAS GAVE DIRECTION TO COMMISSIONER SHELL AND I TO WORK ON BEHALF OF THE COURT ON THIS SPECIFIC LEGISLATION AND TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COURT AS IT MOVED FORWARD IN THE PROCESS. IF Y'ALL REMEMBER THAT, WE DID SO AT THAT TIME AND IN THE END WE COULDN'T FIND A PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT WE COULD SUPPORT BECAUSE THERE WERE SO MANY DIFFERENT PERMEATIONS LAST TIME.

WE ACTUALLY CAME UP WITH SOME DIFFERENT CONCEPT THAT IS THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE SUPPORTED, THAT THE GROUNDWATER DISTRICT ACTUALLY SUPPORTED, AND THAT WE WERE ACTUALLY ABLE TO BROKER A DEAL FOR THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS TO SUPPORT AS WELL.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE VERSION THAT IS SITTING IN FRONT OF US THAT WE GOT, LIKE I SAID, THIS MORNING AT 7:30, I HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO THE DRIPPING SPRSPRINGS WATER SUPPL CORPS AND THEY ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AS WELL.

I DON'T KNOW REALLY. I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK WITH THEM. I WOULD BE REMISS WITHOUT SPEAKING TO THOSE STAKEHOLDER GROUPS TO CHANGE MY STANCE TODAY. I CAN TELL YOU I'M MORE THAN WILLING TO CONSIDER IT AND I'M VERY OPEN TO THAT.

BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT IN A SITUATION WHERE WE PASS OR REPEAL WHERE WE'RE AT THIS WEEK AND THEN NEXT WEEK BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENS IN COMMITTEE TODAY OR ON THURSDAY, THAT WE'RE BACK HERE AGAIN FLIPPING OUR STANCE.

THAT'S NOT A GOOD WAY TO RUN GOVERNMENT, I DON'T THINK.

AND SO, I MEAN, IT'S UP TO Y'ALL.

I WOULD LOVE TO DISCUSS THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE AND HEAR Y'ALL'S INPUT, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I AM ON THIS SPECIFIC PIECE OF LEGISLATION. THERE IS ONE OTHER PIECE OF LEGISLATION I WANT TO DISCUSS AFTER THIS AND WE WILL HAVE A POSSIBLE RESOLUTION ON. THAT BEING THE CASE, I WOULD

LOVE TO HEAR FROM MY COLLEAGUES. >> 4618 HAS GONE TO THE DENTIST.

THAT IS THE FUNNIEST THING I HAVE HEARD.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. I THOUGHT THAT WAS AWESOME.

WELL-SAID. SUPPORTING THE REVISED 4618, HOW DO WE NOT BOUNCE BACK AND FORTH? MR. KENNEDY, HOW DO YOU SUGGEST WE HAVE A STANCE AS A COURT FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE IN YOUR YEARS

OF EXPERIENCE ON THIS FRONT? >> WELL, MY USUAL RECOMMENDATION IS THAT YOU ATTACH THIS SPECIFIC LEGISLATION TO ANY RESOLUTION YOU PASS, THAT WAY THERE'S NO QUESTION WHAT YOU'RE VOTING UPON. THE ONLY PROBLEM THERE IS THAT IT CAN BE REMOVED AND YOU HAVE A RESOLUTION FLOATING AROUND THAT HAS NOTHING ATTACHED. OF COURSE, IT DOES STILL REFERENCE AN ATTACHMENT. SO THAT SHOULD TELL THE READER THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG IF THEY SEE A RESOLUTION WITHOUT THE SPECIFIC PROPOSED LEGISLATION THAT YOU VOTED ON.

WE HAVE IN TIMES PAST VOTED ON THE IDEA OF SOME LEGISLATION AND

[02:10:01]

I THINK WE EVEN DID THAT WITH THIS PARTICULAR BILL EARLIER THIS YEAR WHEN IT WAS NOT SUBMITTED AS A BILL AND WOUND UP -- THE COURT WOUND UP CRITICIZED FOR SUPPORTING SOMETHING THAT IT HADN'T VOTED ON AT ALL. SO THAT'S THE RISK WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LEGISLATION IS ULTIMATELY GOING TO LOOK

LIKE. >> COMMISSIONER INGALSBE.

>> HMM. WELL, JUDGE, I JUST PULLED UP THE EMAIL THAT WAS SENT THIS MORNING.

SO I HAVEN'T EVEN -- IT'S VERY SHORT WHAT WAS SUBMITTED TO US.

AND SO I GUESS I WOULD LIKE A LITTLE MORE TIME TO -- WELL, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A RESOLUTION, IN FACT, TO SUPPORT TODAY.

AND SO, I'M NOT SURE HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.

>> WOULD WE GIVING COMMISSIONER SMITH AUTHORITY LIKE WE DID LAST TIME TO ACT ON OUR BEHALF TO SUPPORT OR NOT SUPPORT ANY BILL THAT COMES OUT? THE COURT CAN DESIGNATE SOMEONE TO SPEAK ON ITS BEHALF. THE ONLY RISK THERE IS THAT I'M NOT SURE -- I THINK THERE'S A LEVEL OF TRUST YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOR ANYONE YOU'VE DELEGATED THAT RESPONSIBILITY TO BECAUSE THEY MAY HAVE TO ACT IN A FLUID ENVIRONMENT WHERE THINGS ARE CHANGING AND YOU MIGHT RUN INTO SOMETHING YOU HAVEN'T ANTICIPATED. SO JUST BE PREPARED FOR THAT.

>> AND THIS GROUNDWATER DISTRICT LIES TOTALLY IN THEIR TWO PRECINCTS. I DON'T THINK ANY OF IT, I DON'T

THINK. >> NO.

WHAT WAS IT? >> THIS GROUNDWATER DISTRICT LIES COMPLETELY WITHIN THOSE TWO PRECINCTS, NOT IN OURS AT ALL, SO I WOULDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM GIVING THEM AUTHORITY TO ACT ON

OUR BEHALF CONCERNING THAT. >> COMMISSIONER SHELL.

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO GIVE A LITTLE BACKGROUND.

SO ON THE 9TH OF FEBRUARY, THE COURT PASSED THE RESOLUTION MR. KENNEDY MENTIONED. I REMEMBER SOME ADVICE MR. KENNEDY GAVE ME IS DON'T PASS A RESOLUTION WITHOUT ATTACHING THE ACTUAL DRAFT OF THE LEGISLATION.

WE HAD A DRAFT. IT HAD NOT BEEN FILED.

SO WHAT I THOUGHT WAS GOOD WAS TO EXPLAIN WHAT AT LEAST I WAS WILLING TO SUPPORT REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE LEGISLATION NECESSARILY HAD AS FAR AS TECHNICAL LANGUAGE.

THAT WAS IN OUR RESOLUTION THAT WE PASSED.

AND THE FOUR THINGS WE RESOLVED TO SUPPORT WERE DEFINING CONNECTION FEES ACCORDING TO THE AWWA SCHEDULE, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THIS, ALLOW FOR COMBINATION OF CONNECTION FEES AND REASONABLE PRODUCTION FEES, THE IDEA AGAIN, ONCE WATER IS FULLY PERMITTED, THE DISTRICT IS NOT GOING TO HAVE CONNECTION FEES TO FUND ITS OPERATION. ALMOST EVERY OTHER DISTRICT IN THE STATE OF TEXAS USES THAT AS ONE OF ITS REVENUE SOURCES.

OR HAS THE AUTHORITY TO. SO THIS DISTRICT, AGAIN, DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO WHAT ALL THE DISTRICTS AROUND US HAVE, INCLUDING THE DISTRICT THAT'S RELATIVELY NEW.

THEY HAVE PRODUCTION FEE AUTHORITY AND ACTUALLY HAVE RESIDENTIAL WELL FEES ASSOCIATED.

THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT.

DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY INSTITUTED THOSE, BUT THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO IT. SO I THOUGHT HAVING SOME WAY FOR THE DISTRICT TO TRANSITION INTO A DIFFERENT WAY TO BE FUNDED WAS A GOOD IDEA KNOWING THAT WE'RE NOT THAT FAR AWAY, IN MY OPINION, OF FINDING OUT THAT ALMOST ALL THE WATER IS PRETTY MUCH ALLOCATED. AND SO THERE WILL BE NO NEW CONNECTION FEES FOR MY GROUNDWATER WITHIN THE TRINITY'S DISTRICT AND HAVE NO REVENUE STREAM WHATSOEVER AT A TIME WHEN I WOULD ARGUE YOU NEED THE MOST. THOSE STATUTES ARE SORT OF A PREAMBLE TO CHAPTER 36 WHICH EPLAINS WHY THEY ENCOURAGE THE USE OF GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS.

I AGREE WITH THAT. IT'S A BALANCE.

IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS WE'VE HEARD FROM DIFFERENT SIDES ALL OVER THAT WAY, BUT THERE IS A BALANCE TO PROTECT, IF WE WANT TO LOOK AT IT JUST INDIVIDUAL, OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY, I LIVE ON 5 ACRES WITH A WELL. IF THERE'S NO AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER, SOME WOULD ARGUE IN SOME CASES, I WOULD ARGUE THE VARIOUS WAYS GOVERNMENT GETS IN THE WAY OF OUR LIVES, THAT MEANS SOMEBODY COULD DRILL A WELL AND I'M SITTING THERE WITH NO WATER.

I WOULDN'T PROPOSE TO DO THAT. THAT'S ONE EXTREME AND I'VE HEARD THAT EXTREME. TECHNICALLY IN THIS COUNTY FOR A WHILE WE HAD THAT. SO TO PROTECT MY PROPERTY RIGHTS, THERE HAS TO BE SOMEBODY THAT MAKES SURE THAT THE PERSON ACROSS THE FENCE FROM ME DOESN'T DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THAT'S ONE THING I BELIEVE. AND TO DO THAT, TO HAVE SCIENCE

[02:15:03]

TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS, BECAUSE TO ME THAT'S WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT, THIS COURT IS COMMITTED TO FUNDING FOR SCIENCE AND I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT OVER THESE YEARS.

THIS COURT HAS ALWAYS SUPPORTED THAT IN THE WESTERN PART OF THE COUNTY AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO T THAT. IF WE DON'T HAVE A DISTRICT THAT'S FUNCTIONAL AND HAS REASONABLE FUNDING TO PROVIDE TO PROPER SCIENCE TO MAKE THE SOUND DECISIONS, THEN WHENEVER WE HAVE ALLOCATED THE WATER, WE'LL BE IN BIG TROUBLE.

I WOULD LIKE TO NOT SEE THAT HAPPEN.

THAT WAS TWO OF THE THINGS. THE OTHER WAS THE PROVISION ABOUT APPOINTING DIRECTORS FOR VACANCIES. I ALWAYS FELT AN ELECTED BODY SHOULD FOLLOW THE RULES OF ANY OTHER ELECTED BODY ON HOW TO REPLACE VACANCIES. AND I DON'T THINK A COMMISSIONERS COURT OR CITY COUNCIL SHOULD TELL AN ELECTED BODY REPRESENTING PEOPLE THAT VOTED FOR THEM.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS REASONABLE. THE OTHER WE MENTIONED WAS THE MONITORING OF AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATION WELLS.

JUST THE MONITORING TO HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW MUCH WATER IS BEING USED OF SOMETHING THAT IS EXEMPT AND NEVER ASKED TO NOT BE EXEMPT. AN EXEMPT WELL, NOT PERMITTED WELL, THEREFORE WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH IS USED IN THAT INDUSTRY IN HAYS COUNTY. I THINK WE RAN INTO DEFINITIONS OF WHAT'S THE DEFINITION OF THAT, WHAT DOES THAT INCLUDE.

WE WEREN'T TALKING ABOUT WATERING FOR CATTLE OR PRIVATE FARMING OR RANCHING ON YOUR PROPERTY.

IT'S MAINLY COMMERCIAL. I WOULD LOOK AT CROPS, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE ANY HAYS COUNTY, HAY, WHICH I THINK WE DON'T HAVE IN HAYS COUNTY. THERE MAY BE ONE OR TWO BUT NOT MANY. PROBABLY MAINLY WAS GOING TO BE GRAPE GROWING, JUST VINEYARDS. IT'S A BOOMING INDUSTRY IN THE HILL COUNTRY. WE KNOW THAT.

MAYBE THEY DON'T USE ANY, I DON'T KNOW.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS REASONABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH WATER THEY'RE USING TO BE CALCULATED INTO THE WORK THE STATE DOES IN WATER PLANNING AND INTO THE DISTRICT LEVEL OF WHAT THEY DO IN WATER PLANNING. I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING REASONABLE. NOT CHARGING FOR IT, NOT PERMITTING FOR IT, JUST A WAY TO UNDERSTAND.

THOSE WERE THE FOUR WAYS WE SUPPORT IT.

THERE WAS A LEGISLATION THAT GOT CHANGED WHEN IT WAS FILED.

PUTTING A DATE OF 2001 THAT ANY WELL DRILLED THEN WOULD BE A PERMITTED WELL. I DIDN'T SUPPORT THAT.

WE SAID WE CAN'T SUPPORT THE BILL AS WRITTEN.

NOW WE HAV THE PROCESS WHERE WHAT HAS PRETTY MUCH BEEN CHANGED IS THE TIME FOR AFTER A REDISTRICTING FOR THE YEARS OF THE TERMS, TWO-YEAR TERMS INSTEAD OF ONE-YEA FOR TWO DIRECTORS AND FOUR-YEAR TERMS INSTEAD OF TWO YEAR FOR THE OTHER DIRECTORS. THAT'S BEEN CHANGED.

THAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL. IT REMAINS IN THIS.

THE ISSUE OF THE CONNECTION FEES WHICH WE DID AGREE AS A COURT EARLIER THAT WE BELIEVE THEY SHOULD BE DEFINED BETTER.

ONE REASON IS IT'S VERY VAGUE IN THE CURRENT ENABLING LEGISLATION WHAT IS A CONNECTION FEE AND IT'S CURRENTLY BEING ARGUED.

PEOPLE DON'T AGREE WITH HOW THAT HAS BEEN DONE AND THERE'S AT LEAST ONE WATER SUPPLY COMPANY THAT SAID WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT A CONNECTION FEE IS. WHAT A GREAT OPPORTUNITY DURING A SESSION, LET'S DEFINE IT SO WHEN HE KNOW WHAT IT IS AND TALK ABOUT IT WITH EACH OTHER. THAT'S BEEN HAPPENING NOW.

COMMISSIONER SMITH TALKED WITH FOLKS FROM DRIPPING SPRINGS WATER SUPPLY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT NEEDS TO BE BASED ON SOMETHING THAT WE CAN LOOK AT A CHART AND SAY THAT'S IT.

AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DISTRICT, THAT AS THE FEES ARE APPLIED CURRENTLY, IF THESE FEES WERE TO BE CHANGED ON THE SCHEDULE THAT'S INCLUDED IN THIS, I'M GOING TO CALL IT A PROPOSED COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE, THE DISTRICT WILL TAKE IN LESS REVENUE FROM THOSE CONNECTION FEES IF THIS CHANGE IS MADE.

I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR EVERYBODY WATCHING.

THE WAY THEY'RE APPLYING CONNECTION FEES TODAY WILL CHANGE AND ACTUALLY RESULT IN LESS REVENUE FOR THE DISTRICT.

SO I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

THEY'RE SAYING, "HEY, WE'VE GOT TO CLEAN THIS UP.

WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS." WE'RE WILLING TO DO THAT AND WE'LL ARE TO TACKLE THE ISSUE OF WHEN CONNECTION FEES GO AWAY AND WHAT REPLACES THEM SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE READING WHEN WE SEE ALL WE'RE GOING TO TOUCH ARE CONNECTION FEES AND WE'RE GOING TO PUT A SCHEDULE IN THE BILL.

AND THAT'S THE MAXIMUM THAT WE CAN CHARGE FOR EACH ONE AND OUR COLLECTIONS WILL GO DOWN BASED UPON THAT.

THE OTHER CHANGE WAS THE REMOVAL OF THE VACANCY ISSUE WITH THE COMMISSIONERS COURT APPOINTED A VACANCY.

SO TO ME IN THIS FORM RIGHT NOW, I UNDERSTANDSS

[02:20:03]

SMITH'S CONCERN THAT IT CAN BE CHANGED.

IT'S NOT IN THE TEXT. IT'S STILL THE ORIGINAL BILL LANGUAGE. I UNDERSTAND COMMISSIONER SMITH DOESN'T WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE THE COURT IS IN SUPPORT OF 4618 AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. I DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH THAT AGAIN. I WILL SAY IT PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME DISCUSSING WHY I BELIEVED IN SOME OF THESE THINGS WITH PEOPLE I'VE HEARD FROM OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS. ONE OF THE UNFORTUNATE THINGS WAS I REALLY DID SOME IN-DEPTH EXPLAINING OF WHAT MY OPINIONS WERE WITHOUT SEEING WHAT WAS ACTUALLY FILED.

AND THEN THAT MADE IT EVEN WORSE AND I HAD TO START OVER, REEXPLAIN AGAIN THESE FOUR ISSUES THAT WE SORT OF FOCUSED ON BEFORE NOW TURNING INTO REALLY JUST TWO OF ISSUES BEING THE VACANCY ISSUE AND THE CONNECTION FEES.

FOR ME I CAN SUPPORT WHAT HAS BEEN SENT TO US AND WILL BE OFFERED AS A SUBSTITUTE. WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHEN IT COULD BE TODAY OR LATER THIS WEEK.

I'M WILLING TO SAY I SUPPORT THIS.

I UNDERSTAND EVERYONE'S CONCERNS THAT IT CAN CHANGE.

I'M WILLING TO SAY I SUPPORT THIS AND ONLY THIS AND IF SOMETHING CHANGES, ASK THE COURT TO ALLOW COMMISSIONER SMITH AND MYSELF TO MAKE A DECISION WHERE WE THINK THAT IS SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THIS COURT DID SUPPORT AND THEN MAKE IT CLEAR THAT EITHER, NO, WE DO NOT SUPPORT IT IF THAT CHANGES OR, YES, THAT IS NOT SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE THINK THE VIEWS OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OR AND WHAT COMMISSIONER JONES SAID. I WANTED TO OFFER HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, TAKE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO THANK THE COURT FOR WHAT WE HAVE DONE AND ACCOMPLISHED.

MS. BOND MENTIONED SOME OF THOS THIS COURT WAS RIGHT THERE ALONGSIDE OUR CITIZEN. BY THE WAY, YOU ARE ONE OF MY FAVORITE BOSSES, MS. BOND. WE DID WORK REALLY WELL TOGETHER IN REALLY TOUGH TIMES. AND IT TOOK ALL OF US TO BE TOGETHER TO ACCOMPLISH THOSE THINGS.

SOME OF US REALLY INVOLVED IN THAT AT THE TIME AND SOME OF US JUST PAYING ATTENTION, IT TOOK EVERYBODY HAVING TO AGREE.

AND THERE WAS CONTROVERSY ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

IT WAS AN EXPANSION OF SOME REGULATION AND THERE WAS HESITANCY. AND IT HAD A MESSY PROCESS TOO.

THERE WAS NOTHING PERFECT ABOUT IT.

I REALLY THINK WHAT'S BEING SHOWN TO US TODAY IS EXTREMELY REASONABLE. WE'LL CLEAR UP SOME EXISTING ISSUES. AND WHAT I WANT TO TRY TO DO IS CONTINUE TO BUILD THE TRUST OF ALL THOSE WE REPRESENT ON THIS ISSUE. THAT'S WHY THAT INITIAL FILING OF THAT BILL, IT ERODED SOME OF THAT I THOUGHT HAD BEEN BUILT UP. NOT ON PURPOSE.

IT'S JUST THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED. I WANT TO GET BACK TO WHERE WE CAN START UNDERSTANDING. THERE HAS TO BE SOMEONE RESPONSIBLE TO MAKE SURE THAT WATER IS THERE FOR ALL OF US HERE AND ALL OF US THAT CONTINUE TO MOVE HERE AND THE STATE OF TEXAS HAS SAID THAT IS UP TO GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS. AND THERE IS NO FAIR TAX, THERE'S NO FAIR WAY TO TAKE REVENUE IN FROM THE PUBLIC.

IT'S PROPERTY TAXES. THERE'S DISTRICTS WITH PROPERTY TAXES. ALL AROUND US THEY HAVE PROPERTY TAXES. IS CONNECTION FEE THE FAIREST WAY, PRODUCTION FEE THE FAIREST WAY, A TAX THE FAIREST WAY? I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T SUPPORT THE TAX.

CAN WE AT LEAST CLARIFY THE ONE WAY THE DISTRICT MAKES MONEY SO IT'S WELL DEFINED AND UNDERSTOOD AND ALL THE COMPANIES AND MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLIES CAN SIT DOWN AND AGREE.

I THINK THAT'S A GOOD FIRST STEP AND I THINK IT'S ENCOMPASSED IN THE DRAFT WE'VE SEEN TODAY. THANKS, JUDGE, SORRY.

>> NO, NO PROBLEM. IT'S VERY IMPORTANT AND GROUNDWATER IN OUR COUNTY BECAUSE THE WESTERN PART OF THE COUNTY IS ALSO MY PRECINCT. DON'T FORGET THAT REALITY.

AND I'M A HUGE SUPPORTER OF THE THINGS THAT ARE MOST USEFUL TO ITS RESIDENTS. AND IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE DON'T HINDER THE PROCESS AND AT THE SAME TIME BE BAMBOOZLED IN SUPPORTING SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY DON'T.

AND SO IF THIS COURT NEEDS TO DELEGATE SOME AUTHORITY TO TURN ON A DIME, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE DO.

BUT IF MEETING ONCE A WEEK WILL SATISFY IT, THEN WE MEET ONCE A WEEK ANYWAY. AND SO...

>> I WOULD THINK IF WE HAVE -- I THINK THIS HAS TO BE -- THIS SUBSTITUTE HAS TO GET IN THERE THIS WEEK OR PROBABLY IT'S DEAD, THERE'S NO CHANCE OF IT EVER GOING ANYWHERE.

THAT'S EITHER TODAY OR IF THEY HAVE ANOTHER SCHEDULED COMMITTEE MEETING. SO I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY LOOKING AT JUST THIS WEEK, JUDGE, MORE THAN LIKELY.

>> OKAY. >> I DOUBT THAT WILL HAVE --

[02:25:03]

AGAIN, IF SOMETHING DOESN'T GET SUBMITTED, HEARD BY COMMITTEE AND PASSED THROUGH THAT COMMITTEE THIS WEEK, THEN WE'RE PROBABLY ALL NOT GOING TO BE ANOTHER -- THIS ISSUE FOR -

>> SO DO YOU FEEL IT NECESSARY, COMMISSIONER SHELL, TO AR

ARTICULATE SOME REPRESENTATION? >> I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD

IDEA. >> THE NEXT TWO WEEKS EVEN JUST

TO GIVE EXTRA TIME? >> TO PROTECT THE INTEREST OF THE COURT, ASSUMING THAT THERE'S A CONSENSUS ON WHAT THAT IS, I BELIEVE SAYING THE COMMISSIONERS COURT SUPPORTS THIS IN A MOTION AND AUTHORIZES COMMISSIONER SMITH AND COMMISSIONER SHELL TO WORK WITH OUR REPRESENTATION IN THE CAPITOL IN THE EVENT THIS CHANGES AND OUR SUPPORT IS ONLY FOR THIS RIGHT NOW, UNDERSTANDING THERE'S A CONCERN IT COULD GET CHANGED.

I'M FINE DOING THAT AND PUTTING IT IN WRITING SO THAT'S CLEAR AND IF SOMEBODY CAN READ IT AND EASILY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE

COURT'S DECISION WAS. >> AND DO WE HAVE ON THAT RESOLUTION YOU'RE HOLDING, MR. KENNEDY, DO WE HAVE A TERMINATION TIME, DATE? LIKE YOU SAID, IT'S ENDING

ANYWAY. >> I DID NOT INCLUDE IT.

>> I'M OKAY WITH IT AND IF WE PUT A TERMINAL PIECE ON IT, COMMISSIONER SHELL, FOR THE NEXT TWO WEEKS.

>> TWO WEEKS IS FINE. TWO-WEEK PERIOD OF TIME.

>> IF IT DOESN'T HAPPEN BY TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK, IT'S DEAD.

I BELIEVE THERE'S A COMMITTEE HEARING TODAY AND THURSDAY AND TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK. LAST WEEK, YOU WILL REMEMBER I RUSHED OUT OF COURT HERE TO GET THERE FOR THE HEARING ONGOING AT THAT TIME AND IT STILL HAD BEEN HEARD THAT MORNING.

THIS PORTION HAD BEEN HEARD THAT MORNING -- OR PARDON ME, THIS BILL HAD BEEN HEARD IN THAT MORNING WHILE WE WERE IN COURT AND THEY HAD ALREADY CLOSED THAT PORTION OF THE HEARING.

AND SO, I THINK IF WE EVEN RAN THROUGH NEXT WEEK, IT WOULD BE

FINE. >> OKAY.

SO MR. KENNEDY. >> JUDGE, IF I MAY, I DRAFTED THIS PROPOSED RESOLUTION THIS MORNING IN ANTICIPATION OF THIS

CONVERSATION. >> IF THE CAMERA WANTS TO ZOOM IN ON WHAT WE WERE JUST HANDED, I'LL HOLD FOR A MINUTE.

>> I REFERENCED A SUBSTITUTE OF HOUSE BILL 4618.

I THINK AFTER COMMISSIONER SHELL'S COMMENTARY, I THINK WE WOULD PROBABLY ADD THE WORD "PROPOSED" IN THREE PLACES.

>> ANDE NO PROBLEM DELEGATING THAT AUTHORITY FOR A TWO-WEEK WINDOW TO COMMISSIONER SHELL AND COMMISSIONER SMITH WITH THE REPORT BACK. OF COURSE, THEY'LL GIVE IT WHEN

THEY RETURN ANYWAY. >> AND, JUDGE, THIS RESOLUTION DOES NOT PROPOSE TO DELEGATE ANY AUTHORITY.

IT'S JUST A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE. IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT AS WELL, I WOULD SUGGEST YOU DO THAT THROUGH SEPARATE MOTION.

>> SEPARATE MOTION, OKAY. I MOVE THAT WE FOR THE NEXT TWO WEEKS GIVE COMMISSIONER SHELL AND COMMISSIONER SMITH THE AUTHORITY TO REPRESENT THIS COURT IN THIS ISSUE AS LONG AS THE SUBSTANCE REMAINS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THIS COURT HAS SHOWN SUPPORT FOR FOR THE NEXT TWO WEEKS AND COME BACK AND REPORT

ANY CHANGES OR FINDINGS. >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE CALL ROLL. >> YES.

>> AND I MOTION TO ACCEPT THIS RESOLUTION.

>> AS AMEND. A MOTION AND SECOND.

PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH.

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER JONES.

>> JUDGE, I WANT TO THANK ALL THE FOLKS THAT ARE HERE THAT SPOKE AGAINST THIS HOUSE BILL. I KNOW THAT, AS WAS STATED, AND I APPRECIATE THE RECOGNITION THAT WE REALLY HAVE TRIED TO SUPPORT THE HAYS TRINITY GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT. AND FOR LOTS OF YEARS WE SUPPORTED FINANCIALLY THE DISTRICT.

AND THE COURT WANTED TO WEAN OURSELVES OFF OF THAT.

AND I KNOW IT'S A DIFFICULT SITUATION BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO GIVE YOU THE AUTHORITY. AND I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERING OPINIONS AND -- BUT HOPEFULLY WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER AND GET Y'ALL WHERE YOU NEED TO BE.

THANK Y'ALL. >> THAT'S RIGHT.

THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO COME OUT HERE.

WE CARE ABOUT YOU. YOU ARE OUR BOSSES.

WE KNOW THIS. OKAY.

WE'VE GOT ONE MORE. >> AND I APOLOGIZE.

[02:30:02]

MARK, YOU HAVE THAT RESOLUTION ON HB 2805.

COURT MEMBERS, AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, WE ARE FOUNDING MEMBERS AS HAYS COUNTY OF THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUA.

WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS A RESOLUTION REGARDING HB 2805.

WHEN THE PUA WAS FOUNDED OR WHEN WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITY AUTHORITY WAS FOUNDED, THERE WERE THREE ENTITIES WHO CAME TOGETHER TO PROVIDE THE WHEREWITHAL AND THE ENERGY BEHIND FORMING THAT OPERATION. IT WAS HAYS COUNTY, THE CITY OF BEE CAVE AND WEST TRAVIS COUNTY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT 5.

THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE WHEN THIS ENTITY WAS FORMED, ONE THING THEY HAD TO DO WAS TRY TO ASSUME THE DEBT FROM LCRA AT THAT POINT AND THEY ASSUMED ALL OF THE DEBT RELATED TO THAT SYSTEM AND TO CREATE THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUA.

WHILE WE AS A COUNTY AREN'T PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT DEBT, OUR RATE PAYERS ARE. ANY OF THOSE RATE PAYERS IN HAYS COUNTY THAT GET THEIR WATER SERVICE FROM PUA EITHER ON A RETAIL LEVEL OR AS WE WERE DISCUSSING EARLIER, ON A WHOLESALE LEVEL TO ANY OF THOSE ENTITIES WHICH PUA PROVIDE THAT IS FUNDING TO, THERE'S A DIRECT THERE HAD TO BE A COMMITMENT THAT OUR CITIZENRY HAD TO BE PARTICIPATING IN THAT DEBT LOAD. CURRENTLY THERE'S OVER $100 MILLION IN DEBT ON THE PURCHASE OF THAT SYSTEM AND THE IMPROVEMENTS DONE. THANKFULLY ON BEHALF OF OUR CITIZENS, PUA HAS ACTUALLY DROPPED THEIR RATES TO OUR CITIZENS FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS IN A ROW.

I SERVE ON THAT BOARD AS WELL AS SCOTT ROBERTS WHO HAS BEEN APPOINTED AS RECENTLY AS LAST YEAR.

THERE IS A GROUP OUT OF TRAVIS COUNTY THAT IS PUSHING TO HAVE TWO REPRESENTATIVES ADDED TO THE BOARD BY THE TRAVIS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT, WHICH IN THEORY WOULD HAVE BEEN GREAT AT THE INCEPTION OF THE ACTUAL -- OR THE ACTUAL FORMULATION.

AND THERE IS ACTUALLY IN STATUTE A FORMULA BY WHICH IF NEW PARTICIPANTS WANT TO PARTICIPATE, THEY CAN JOIN THE PUA AS A MEMBER BUT THEY HAVE TO TAKE THEIR PORTION OF THE DEBT LOAD SHOULD THEY DO THAT. HOWEVER, THERE'S A GROUP FROM TRAVIS COUNTY ATTEMPTING TO HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL BOARD SEATS WHICH WOULD BE TRAVIS COUNTY BOARD SEATS, NOT HAYS COUNTY BOARD SEATS, WITH NO SHARING OF THE DEBT LOAD, WHICH WOULD DIRECTLY IMPACT INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS WOULD PAY AND DIRECT IMPACT ON THEIR CURRENT DEBT AUTHORITY AND BONDING AUTHORITY, A VERY DETRIMENTAL ONE TO US. AND TALKING TO OUR RATE AND BOND FOLKS, I HAVE A REAL CONCERN AS TO WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.

THE PUA ITSELF AND MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS WITHIN THE PUA HAS COME OUT AGAINST THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

I'VE SPOKEN TO SOME COMMITTEE MEMBERS ON THIS COMMITTEE.

THEY DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT MAY NOT HAVE LEGS TO MOVE THIS SESSION OR AT LEAST IN THE NEXT WEEK.

IT WASN'T SET FOR A HEARING TODAY.

IT COULD BE FOR THURSDAY OR TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK.

THAT BEING THE CASE, I HAVE A REAL CONCERN THAT OVER TIME WITHIN THE NEXT THREE WEEKS, AGAIN, THE THREE WEEKS OR ARE MONTH, THERE'S A LOT OF SAUSAGE-MAKING GOING ON UNTIL CAPITOL, A LOT OF THINGS FLUID AND MOVING.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE THESE PROVISIONS STUCK IN SOMETHING ELSE WITHOUT OUR COUNTY ACTUALLY TAKING A STAND AS TO WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE ON OUR CITIZENS. AGAIN, THE CITY OF BEE CAVES OPPOSES THIS LEGISLATION. THE MUNICIPAL -- THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT NUMBER 5, THE OTHER PARTICIPATING ENTITY, HAS OPPOSED THIS.

THE PUA ITSELF ADOPTED A RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION TO THIS. AND I WOULD ASK THAT WE LOOK TO DO THE SAME THING TODAY. WITH THAT, MR. KENNEDY, WOULD

YOU LIKE TO READ THE RESOLUTION? >> NOT YET.

>> OH, I'M SORRY. >> THAT'S OKAY.

MY FIRST QUESTION TO YOU IS WHY IS TRAVIS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT TRYING TO GET TWO SEATS ON THERE?

>> IT'S NOT THE TRAVIS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT SPECIFICALLY. IT'S NOT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT THAT CITIZENS UP AND DOWN HAMILTON POOL ROAD WHO FEEL AS THOUGH WHENEVER IT WAS FORMED, THERE WERE THREE ENTITIES FORMED THERE AND EACH WERE GIVEN A VERY DISTINCT CONSTITUENCY.

HAYS COUNTY IS REPRESENTED BY THE TWO REPRESENTATIVES FROM

[02:35:02]

HAYS COUNTY WHICH THIS COURT APPOINTS.

THE CITY CITY OF BEE CAVE IS REPRESENTED BY THE APPOINTEES OF THE CITY COUNCIL. THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY UTILITY DISTRICT IS REPRESENTED BY ONE INDIVIDUAL APPOINTED BY THAT BOARD. THERE ARE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE NOT CUSTOMERS OF THIS SYSTEM, WHO DO NOT HAVE A FINANCIAL STAKE IN THE SYSTEM, WHO WANT A VOICE ON THAT BOARD EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE RATES OR SUBJECT TO THE INFLUENCE OF THAT SYSTEM AS DICTATED BY STATE STATUTE.

>> WHY DO YOU THINK? >> WELL, THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY TRYING TO PREVENT ANY TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IN WESTERN TRAVIS COUNTY. AND IN ORDER TO DO SO, THEIR ONE ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE UNDER OUR STATUTE IS THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM MUD NUMBER 5. AND THEY WOULD LIKE ADDITIONAL INDIVIDUAL REPRESENTATION, EVEN THOUGH AS I STATED, MANY OF THEM ARE NOT ON THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUA SYSTEM.

LET ME PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE. IT WOULD BE LIKE YOU LIVING IN SAN MARCOS AND GETTING YOUR ELECTRICITY FROM THE SAN MARCOS -- FROM THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS AND SAYING, "BUT, YOU KNOW WHAT, I WANT TO VOTE FOR A SEAT ON THE PEC BOARD." EVEN THOUGH YOU DON'T PURCHASE YOUR POWER FROM PEC, EVEN THOUGH PEC ISN'T PROVIDING POWER IN YOUR AREA NECESSARILY RIGHT NOW, IT WOULD BE LIKE SAYING, "WELL, FROM NOW ON WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A DIFFERENT -- A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ENTITY, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF HAYS COUNTY APPOINTING SOMEONE TO THE

PEC BOARD." >>I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'VE SAID. AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. MY QUESTION WAS SPECIFICALLY AS TO WHY YOU THINK THEY'RE TRYING TO DO THAT.

>> THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY TRYING TO DO THAT --

>> BOTH? >> YES.

THERE IS A GROUP CALLED HAMILTON POOL MATTERS THAT IS VERY INTERESTED IN PREVENTING GROWTH IN WESTERN TRAVIS COUNTY.

PUA RECENTLY SETTLED A NUMBER OF LAWSUITS UP AND DOWN HAMILTON POOL ROAD TO WATER TO ENTITIES THERE AND THERE'S A CONCERN ON THEIR PART THAT IF -- WITH THOSE LAWSUITS SETTLED NOW AND WATER BEING PROVIDED TO THOSE ENTITIES, THAT THERE COULD BE ADDITIONAL GROWTH THERE. THE ISSUE THAT I HAVE ON A VERY PERSONAL BASIS ON BEHALF OF OUR COUNTY AND THE ISSUE THAT I THINK THAT ALL OF US SHOULD BE CONCERNED WITH IN A VERY LARGE WAY IS WE JUST HAD A LARGE DEBATE ABOUT GROUNDWATER IN WESTERN HAYS COUNTY. THE ONLY SURFACE WATER PROVIDER, THIS ONLY ENTITY THAT CAN PROVIDE WATER TO REPLACE THOSE WELLS IN WESTERN HAYS COUNTY IS PUA.

AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT, TO GET TO TAKE THOSE WELLS OUT OF SERVICE TO GET WATER TO THOSE FOLKS, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO GET PIPES AND LINES TO THOSE ENTITIES.

THE PURPOSE OF -- BEHIND MUCH OF THIS RHETORIC THAT WE'VE HEARD IN THE PAST IS SPECIFICALLY NOT TO BRING WATER LINES TO WESTERN TRAVIS COUNTY BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE WATER LINES WOULD COME INTO WESTERN HAYS COUNTY. IT WOULD HAVE A DIRECT IMPACT INTO OUR COUNTY WHENEVER THIS MOVES FORWARD BECAUSE WHEN THERE'S ANTI-GROWTH, IT EQUATES TO FEWER SERVICES TO OUR CONSTITUENTS IN WESTERN HAYS COUNTY.

AND THAT'S WHY I HAVE A REAL CONCERN OVER THIS.

>> MR. KENNEDY, BEFORE YOU READ THAT RESOLUTION, COULD YOU WEIGH IN ON THE IDEA JUST TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ANOTHER LENS?

>> I'M NOT SURE WHAT TO ADD, JUDGE.

IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.

>> MY POINT IS JUST TO -- FOR THE VIEWING PUBLIC, I COULD READ THIS RESOLUTION AND YOU'RE ABOUT TO READ IT OUT LOUD.

BUT JUST TO PROVIDE, LIKE A KALEIDOSCOPE, WE HAVE MANY SIDES, AND AS IT IS DESCRIBED AS COMMISSIONER SMITH HAS SAID OR IF THERE'S SOMETIMES ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE THAT CAN BE FURTHER EXPANDED ON, JUST GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON IT.

IF THERE'S NOTHING, THAT'S OKAY TOO.

>> WELL, I WILL SAY THAT WE DELIBERATED QUITE A BIT WHEN THE PARTICIPANT ENTITIES FORMED THE WTCPUA.

AND A LOT OF THAT DELIBERATION WAS ABOUT FINDING BALANCE IN OUR REPRESENTATION. AND THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE IS SOME DIFFERENCE IN PRIOR TO BETWEEN THOSE ENTITIES. I THINK EVENTUALLY HAYS COUNTY WILL PROBABLY SEVER ITS SYSTEMS FROM THOSE OTHER SYSTEMS SO THAT

[02:40:01]

IT CAN DICTATE ITS OWN TERMS FOR ITS OWN SYSTEMS. AND I THINK THERE ARE PROBABLY OTHER FACTORS THAT ARE GOING TO DICTATE A DIFFERENCE OF PRIORITIES.

THE SYSTEMS IN HAYS, FOR INSTANCE, ARE NOT BUILT OUT LIKE THEY ARE IN TRAVIS. AND THERE ARE OTHER FACTORS TOO.

SO MAINTAINING THAT BALANCE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT REALLY ULTIMATELY.

>> OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE HAVE MR. KENNEDY READ THE RESOLUTION? COMMISSIONER SHELL, NO? OKAY, MR. KENNEDY.

OR WE CAN HAVE A REALLY AMAZING READER ACROSS FROM YOU, NOT THAT

YOU'RE NOT, READ IT. >> BY ALL MEANS.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. >> OKAY.

RESOLUTION OF THE HAYS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT IN OPPOSITION OF A SUBSTITUTED VERSION OF HOUSE BILL 2805.

WHEREAS THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCY WAS CREATED ON MARCH 19TH, 2012, THE CITY OF BEE CAVE, IN WHEREAS VICKY GOODWIN INTRODUCED THE BILL ON MARCH 4TH 2021 RELATING TO PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCIES AND WHEREAS HOUSE BILL 2805 OPPOSES TO ALLOW THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS BY ENTITIES OTHER THAN THE PARTICIPATING ENTITIES AND WHEREAS HOUSE BILL 2805 PROPOSED TO ADD LANGUAGE REGARDING THE QUALIFICATION OF DIRECTORS AND ADOPTED A RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION TO HOUSE BILL 2805 ON MARCH 18TH, 2021, WHEREAS HAYS COUNTY HAS STRONG CONCERNS THAT THE BILL COULD IMPACT THE GOVERNING STRUCTURE OF THE WTCPUA WHICH IN TERM COULD IMPACT THE BONDED INDEBTNESS AND RESULT IN HIGHER CUSTOMER WATER AND WASTE WATER RATES AND WHEREAS AS PARTICIPATING ENTITY, HAYS COUNTY HAS DETERMINED THAT IT MUST TAKE AN OPPOSITION TO OPPOSE HOHOUSE BILL 2805.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONER COURT OF HAYS COUNTY THAT ONE, HAYS COUNTY OPPOSES THE BILL INTRODUCED IN THE REGULAR SESSION, TWO, THE HAYS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT AUTHORIZES COMMISSIONER SMITH TO PROVIDE THIS RESOLUTION TO THE WTCPUA REPRESENTATIVE VICKY GOODWIN AND ANY OTHER ENTITY OR INDIVIDUAL TO CONVEY THIS OPPOSITION TO HOUSE BILL 2805 PASSED AND APPROVED VOTING ON THIS DAY IN RESOLUTION, THE 4TH

DAY OF MAY 2021. >> JUDGE, I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT NUMBER TWO WHICH SPECIFICALLY REFERENCES MYSELF, THAT WAS IN EACH ONE OF THE OTHER RESOLUTIONS AS THEIR APPOINTEE TO THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUA AND THIS RESOLUTION WAS ACTUALLY EDITED BY THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUA.

SO I APOLOGIZE IF THERE'S A QUESTION OR CONCERN REGARDING

THAT. >> THANK YOU FOR READING THAT.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE CALL ROLL. SORRY, YES, SIR.

>> IN THE TITLE IT SAYS IN OPPOSITION OF A SUBSTITUTED VERSION OF. IS THAT JUST A REMAINDER OF THE LAST ONE? I DON'T SEE A SUBSTITUTE.

SO JUST REMOVE "OF A SUBSTITUTE VERSION"?

>> YES, THANK YOU FOR THAT. .

>> PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER JONES.

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH.

>> YES. I'M GOING TO ASK THAT WE GO 5,

[Items 5 - 7]

6, AND 7. >> I'M GOING TO HAVE TO APOLOGIZE. IN ABOUT 15 MINUTES I HAVE TO RUN UP FOR ANOTHER HEARING GOING ON.

AND SO I APOLOGIZE. >> FIVE, APPROVE PAYMENTS OF COUNTY INVOICES, 6, IMPROVE HEALTHCARE CLAIMS, 7.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. CALL ROLL.

>> COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> YES.

[26. Discussion and possible action to adopt Hays County Employee Personnel Policy revisions. INGALSBE/MILLER]

PLEASE OPEN NUMBER 26. >> 26, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO ADOPT HAYS COUNTY EMPLOYEE PERSONNEL POLICY

REVISIONS. >> SO MOVED.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. WE HAVE TWO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

[02:45:02]

MR. RODRIGO AMAYA. >> JUDGE, COMMISSIONERS COURT, ON THIS AGENDA ITEM, IT TALKS ABOUT TRUST.

HR DIRECTOR'S DUTIES TO BE RESPONSIBLE PROVIDING SAFE AND HEALTHFUL ENVIRONMENT. AGAIN, COMMISSIONERS COURT, COUNTY JUDGE, THE CURRENT HR DIRECTOR DOES NOT POSSESS THAT.

THERE IS A LENGTHY QUESTIONABLE CONDUCT OFF DUTY.

>> MR. AMAYA, I HATE TO INTERRUPT YOU, BUT PLEASE SPEAK

SPECIFICALLY ON THE AGENDA ITEM. >> THE CONCERN IS WHY WOULD Y'ALL ALLOW AN HR DIRECTOR WHO HAS QUESTIONABLE BACKGROUND PARTICIPATE IN AUTHORING OR PROMOTING AND ACCEPT SOMETHING WHEN THEY'RE NOT QUALIFIED? THAT'S A BIG CONCERN OF MINE.

I HAVE SEVERAL FORMER COUNTY EMPLOYEES THAT CURRENTLY ARE SEEKING LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN SUING THE COUNTY AS A RESULT OF ISSUES SUCH AS HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENTS, RETALIATORY ACTION. THESE ARE SOME OF THE STANDARD PRACTICES. YOU CANNOT HAVE SOMEONE WHO HAS A HISTORY OF THAT TELLING YOU HOW TO AND WHAT TO ADOPT AS FAR AS HR POLICIES. THAT'S COUNTER PRODUCTIVE.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MR. DAN LYON.

>> THANK YOU, JUDGE BECERRA. I HAVE SIMILAR CONCERNS AS MR. AMAYA. I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING SPECIFIC, SO I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY ACCUSATIONS AGAINST ANYONE.

BUT IT SAYS HERE "REQUESTED CHANGE TO SECTION," I BELIEVE THAT'S 2A 103. IT MAY BE ZA 103.

THIS WAS THE PART IN YELLOW WHICH IS EITHER THE PROPOSED CHANGE OR IT'S PROPOSED TO BE CHANGED.

AND I'M NOT SURE WHICH. ANYWAY, LET ME GO THROUGH THIS AGAIN. ELECTED OFFICIALS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS MAY REQUEST SALARY EXCEPTION AND THEN IN YELLOW FOR NEW AND REHIRED APPLICANTS AND DOT, DOT, DOT IN GRADES 113 AND ABOVE. THE WAY THAT'S WRITTEN, I DON'T REALLY LIKE IT BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING THE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, YOU FOR EXAMPLE, COULD REQUEST A SALARY EXCEPTION FOR NEW AND REHIRED APPLICANTS.

I CAN SEE FOR REHIRED APPLICANTS YOU MIGHT WANT TO GIVE THEM MORE THAN A STARTING PERSON WOULD MAKE BECAUSE THEY HAVE MORE QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE JOB. BUT FOR NEW APPLICANTS, DEFINITELY NOT. EVERYBODY SHOULD START AT THE SAME IF THEY'RE NEW, BASICALLY. AND A NEW EMPLOYEE MAY NOT BE HIRED ABOVE MINIMUM WITHOUT COMMISSIONERS' COURT APPROVAL FOR GRADES 112 AND BELOW. GETTING COMMISSIONERS COURT APPROVAL -- AND HOW DO I PUT THIS DELICATELY? IT'S LIKE SOMETHING GOING THROUGH REALLY QUICKLY.

IT'S VERY EASY TO DO. I DON'T REALLY NECESSARILY TRUST THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ON A LOT OF THIS STUFF.

SO I DON'T SEE WHY WE SHOULD CHANGE THAT.

I DON'T THINK Y'ALL SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPROVE POSITION THIS IS GRADES 112 AND BELOW.

AND AGAIN, MAYBE I'M TOTALLY OFF ON SOME OF THIS STUFF AND I'LL BE GLAD TO LISTEN TO WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MS. MILLER TO COME TO THE PODIUM, INTRODUCE HER NAME AND TITLE, AND LET'S GO ONE BY ONE.

[02:50:02]

>> THANK YOU, JUDGE, COURT. SHERRY MILLER, HAYS COUNTY HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR. THIS ITEM WE DISCUSSED A FEW WEEKS AGO WITH QUESTION ABOUT THE -- WHAT HAPPENS WITH AN EMPLOYEE THAT IS CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY FOR 30 DAYS OR MORE.

AND SO IN THIS COUPLE OF WEEKS GAP, WE HAVE CONDUCTED QUITE A BIT OF RESEARCH ON WHAT IT TELLS US THAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO WITH EMPLOYEES AND THEIR HEALTH BENEFITS.

I THINK I COMMUNICATED WITH EACH OF YOU THAT I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT OUR OWN EMPLOYEES THAT HAVE BEEN ON MILITARY SERVICE FROM 2018 TO CURRENT. AND NONE OF THOSE EMPLOYEES OPTED TO TAKE THE COBRA COVERAGE OFFERED TO THEM.

FOUR OR FIVE EMPLOYEES HAVE BEEN ON SERVICE FOR 400 DAYS.

>> HOW MANY DAYS? >> 400.

THEIR ORDERS DO NOT INDICATE WHETHER OR NOT THEY WILL RECEIVE TRICARE COVERAGE FOR THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS WHILE

THEY'RE ON ACTIVE DUTY. >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HEAR YOU RIGHT BECAUSE THERE'S GOING TO BE A BUNCH OF WHYS COMING OUT OF MY MOUTH. CAN YOU REPEAT THAT ON THE TRICARE PIECE BECAUSE I'M TAKING NOTES ON WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

>> THEIR ORDERS FROM WHAT WE RECEIVE FROM THE EMPLOYEE DO NOT INDICATE WHETHER THEY RECEIVE TRICARE COVERAGE THROUGH THE ARMED FORCES FOR THEMSELVES AND/OR THEIR FAMILIES.

THAT'S SOMETHING NOT DISCLOSED ON THEIR MILITARY ORDERS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING FROM COMMUNICATING WITH THESE EMPLOYEES THAT HAVE BEEN ON MILITARY LEAVE AND OTHER COUNTIES -- SO I TOOK OUR JOB MARKET COUNTIES AND CONTACTED THEM TO SEE WHAT THEIR POLICIES WERE. AND OF THE RESPONSES THAT I RECEIVED, I DID NOT RECEIVE A RESPONSE FROM EVERY COUNTY, BUT OF THE RESPONSES THAT I RECEIVED, ALL OF THOSE COUNTIES MOVE THEIR EMPLOYEES OFF OF THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE AND OFFER THEM CONTINUED COVERAGE THROUGH COBRA JUST AS OUR CURRENT POLICY DOES. SOME OF THOSE COUNTIES INDICATED THAT THEY HAVE VERY FEW EMPLOYEES THAT ACTUALLY ENROLL

IN COBRA. >> OKAY.

I'M GLAD YOU TOOK A PAUSE BECAUSE I CAN ASK A QUESTION THERE. OF THE RESPONSES THAT YOU RECEIVED FROM OUR MARKET ANALYSIS, HOW MANY ACTUALLY

RESPONDED? >> OH, I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER RIGHT NOW. I CAN LOOK IN MY EMAIL IF YOU

WOULD LIKE ME TO. >> TELL ME 1 OR 20, BALLPARK.

>> THERE'S 10 OR 11 MARKET COUNTIES I QUERIED AND RECEIVED

SEVEN OR EIGHT. >> THAT GIVES ME A BALLPARK.

OKAY. AND NOT KEEPING COBRA IS JUST FOR THE VIEWING PUBLIC. FOR ME, PEOPLE CHOOSE NOT TO GET ON COBRA IS NO SURPRISE TO ME BECAUSE IT'S USUALLY LOOSELY SPEAKING, AT LEAST DOUBLE THEIR NORMAL PREMIUM PRICE OF HEALTH

INSURANCE COVERAGE, RIGHT? >> COBRA IS THE RATE -- IT'S CONTINUED INSURANCE. THE EMPLOYEE THAT BECOMES INACTIVE BECAUSE OF THIS SITUATION OR OTHER SITUATIONS, IF WE HAVE EMPLOYEES THAT BECOME INACTIVE OR RUN OUT OF LEAVE PAST FMLA, THEN THEY'RE OFFERED COBRA IF THEY'RE STILL EMPLOYED BUT INACTIVATED. COBRA IS CONTINUATION OF INSURANCE. AND THE PRICE THAT YOU PAY FOR IT AS AN EMPLOYEE INCLUDES THE PRICE YOU PAY ALL THE TIME FOR YOUR SHARE OF THE PREMIUM PLUS THE COUNTY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS YOUR PREMIUM. IT IS MORE THAN DOUBLE THE PREMIUM THAT YOU PAY. THE COUNTY IS PAYING AT A MINIMUM $969 A MONTH FOR EACH OF OUR EMPLOYEES' COVERAGE FOR THE

EMPLOYEE ONLY. >> THANK YOU FOR ARTICULATING THAT. I KNOW IT'S MORE THAN DOUBLE.

I WANTED TO REACH THIS IN A CONSERVATIVE APPROACH.

AND SO I'M GLAD YOU SHARED THAT TRUE IMPACT ON OUR VETERAN

[02:55:03]

FAMILIES IS THAT IT'S MORE THAN DOUBLE TO OPT IN TO THE COBRA.

>> CORRECT. THE OTHER SHOULD ALLOW EMPLOYEES TO STAY ON OUR INSURANCE AS IF THEY'RE ACTIVE OR GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO ELECT WHETHER TO STAY ON OR NOT.

AS I UNDERSTOOD COMMISSIONER SHELL'S INTEREST WAS TO LET'S SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE IF WE GIVE THEM A CHOICE.

IS THAT THEY WILL LIKELY HAVE TRICARE.

IF THEY'RE ON ACTIVE DUTY UP TO 400 DAYS, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ON ACTIVE DUTY LIKELY WITHOUT ANY HEALTH INSURANCE THROUGH THE ARMED FORCES FOR THEMSELVES OR FAMILY MEMBERS.

THAT MEANS THEY WILL BE FULLY COVERED BY TWO INSURANCE COMPANIES. AND THOSE INSURANCE COMPANIES WILL DO WHAT WE CALL A COORDINATION OF BENEFITS.

IF THEY RECEIVE SERVICES, THEN THEIR TRICARE WILL ACTUALLY BECOME THEIR PRIMARY INSURANCE BECAUSE THEY ARE AN INACTIVE EMPLOYEE WITH US. SO IT WOULD BE COORDINATION OF BENEFITS THAT THE INSURANCE COMPANIES WOULD DECIPHER THROUGH THEIR CLAIMS. AND THE EMPLOYEE WOULD STILL BE REQUIRED TO PAY THE PREMIUMS FOR THEMSELF AND/OR THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS IF THEY HAVE FAMILY MEMBERS COVERED.

>> SO THEY WOULD HAVE TWO INSURANCES AND ONLY USE THE TRICARE AND PAYING FOR COUNTY HEALTH INSURANCE?

>> IF WE ALLOW THE EMPLOYEES TO STAY AS IF THEY'RE ACTIVE, THE COUNTY WOULD STILL MAKE THE COUNTY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS

THEIR PLAN. >> JUST AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, YOU'VE SAID ACTIVE, THE EMPLOYEES REMAIN ACTIVE TWICE ALREADY. AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE YOU ARTICULATE ACTIVE COUNTY EMPLOYEES OR MILITARY FOR THE VIEWING PUBLIC. I KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN BUT...

>> IF WE KEEP THEM ON OUR HEALTH INSURANCE DURING THEIR TIME OF ABSENCE, WE HAVE TO KEEP THEM CLASSIFIED AS ACTIVE IN OUR HEALTH SYSTEM. THEY WOULD REALLY BE INACTIVE EMPLOYEES, BUT FROM THE EMPLOYEE PERSPECTIVE, THEY WOULD BE INACTIVE; FROM OUR HEALTH INSURANCE PERSPECTIVE, THEY

WOULD BE ACTIVE. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SUMMARIZE THIS SO WE DON'T SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON IT.

MY PERSONAL GOAL -- AND I'M NOT SPEAKING FOR THE COURT AT THIS MOMENT, MY PERSONAL GOAL IS TO SEE A MILITARY FAMILY PROTECTED BY THE COUNTY'S INSURANCE POLICY AFTER THE 31 DAYS THAT THE SPOUSE, FAMILY MEMBER, PRIMARY EMPLOYEE IS OFF IN MILITARY BECAUSE MY SINGULAR CONCERN IS, LET'S SAY I GO NOT NAVY.

I'M OFF TO THE NAVY AND MY WIFE AND SONS ARE AFTER 31 DAYS IN POTENTIAL LIMBO. YOU'VE ALSO SAID THAT WE DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S TRICARE COVERAGE FOR MY WIFE AND SONS.

AND SO NOT KNOWING IS NOT GOOD IN MY SEAT, FROM MY VANTAGE POINT. MY HOPE IS, SIMPLY PUT, JUST SO WE DON'T WORDSMITH THIS THING TO DEATH, MY HOPE IS THAT WHEN AND IF I GET CALLED OFF TO SERVE OUR COUNTRY IN THE NAVY, AND I'M CHOOSING NAVY BECAUSE (INAUDIBLE) IS IN THE NAVY AND WATCHING, THAT MY WIFE AND SONS WILL CONTINUE TO BE PROTECTED HEALTH-WISE, HEALTH INSURANCE-WISE BY THE COUNTY.

I DON'T WANT US TO SIDESTEP BECAUSE OF ME LEAVING TO SERVE OUR COUNTRY. AND I WANT TO SEE, AND WE CAN ASK THE COURT MEMBERS, I WANT TO SEE THAT FAMILY, WHILE I'M AWAY, MY WIFE AND SONS, TAKEN CARE OF BY THE COUNTY.

IF WE COULD CREATE A MECHANISM WHERE YOUR OFFICE WERE EQUIPPED TO ASK ME BEFORE I LEAVE, "WHAT IS YOUR PLAN?" AN EXIT INTERVIEW OF SHORTS. "WHAT IS YOUR ROADMAP FOR PROTECTING YOUR FAMILY WITH HEALTH COVERAGE WHILE YOU'RE GONE? WILL YOU BE ACCEPTING TRICARE FOR WIFE AND KIDS? WHAT'S THAT COST ON YOUR FAMILY'S BUDGET AND INCOME? AND WOULD YOU LIKE US TO KEEP YOU ON THE COUNTY'S PROGRAM FOR YOUR FAMILY?" BECAUSE THAT IS SUCH A BIG DEAL. IT JUST REALLY IS.

I DON'T WANT TO GRILL YOU ABOUT IT.

I JUST WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU WHAT MY END GOAL IS: COVERAGE FOR THE FAMILY WHILE THE PARENT IS AWAY.

>> WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT. IT DOES NOT DISALLOW US FROM

[03:00:01]

KEEPING EMPLOYEES ON OUR HEALTH INSURANCE.

IT'S OUR PLAN. IT'S OUR HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN.

WE CAN WRITE IT LIKE WE WANT TO. >> BEAUTIFUL.

>> WHAT I NEED YOU TO KNOW IS THAT FOR THAT EMPLOYEE THAT CHOOSES TO STAY ON OUR HEALTH INSURANCE, IF WE DO THAT AND DON'T REQUIRE THEM TO GO THE COBRA RIGHT BUT KEEP THEM ON AS IF THEY ARE COMING TO WORK EVERY DAY, WE'LL STILL BE MAKING THAT MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION FOR THAT EMPLOYEE FOR THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE. AND WE HAVE LOTS OF EMPLOYEES THAT WE MAKE THAT MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION FOR AND THEY DON'T UTILIZE OUR HEALTH INSURANCE. SO THAT'S THE RISK IS THAT WE WOULD BE -- FOR THOSE EMPLOYEES OFF ON 400-DAY LEAVE SINCE 2018, I CALCULATED BASED ON THE COVERAGE THEY HAD WHEN THEY LEFT US FOR THEIR LEAVE, WE WOULD HAVE SPENT $54,000 APPROXIMATELY ON THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE FOR JUST THE COUNTY'S CONTRIBUTION.

SO JUST SO YOU KNOW. AND WE'RE TALKING FOR -- I THINK THERE WERE FOUR EMPLOYEES, FOUR OR FIVE EMPLOYEES.

>> AS LONG AS WE HAVE THAT CONVERSATION IN MY MIND TO GIVE THE CHOICE AND THAT ENGAGEMENT POTENTIAL, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A KEY COMPONENT. COMMISSIONER.

>> MY CONCERN IS FOR SURE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE COVERED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, BUT I DON'T WANT US TO BE DOUBLE COVERING ANYBODY. I DON'T WANT TO SPEND $54,000 AND THE COVERAGE GOES TO TRICARE TO BE THEIR PRIMARY ANYWAY.

I THINK YOU KNOW WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.

IS THERE A WAY TO SIMPLIFY THAT? IS THERE A QUESTION OF SAYING ARE YOU GOING TO BE COVERED BY TRICARE, AND IF NOT DO THEY HAVE

THE OPTION? >> CERTAINLY I CAN ASK THAT.

I FIND RISK IN THAT IN THAT WHY WOULDN'T I OFFER THE HEALTH INSURANCE TO YOU THAT'S GOING TO BE COVERED BY TRICARE.

THAT EMPLOYEE MIGHT WANT OUR COVERAGE VERSUS THE EMPLOYEE THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE COVERED FOR WHATEVER REASON.

I THINK CONSISTENCY IS VERY IMPORTANT HERE.

AND IN WHAT WE OFFER, WHAT TYPE OF BENEFITS WE OFFER AND TO WHO AND HOW WE OFFER THEM. AND IF WE DO AN "IF THIS THAN THAT..." WE DON'T KNOW IF THEY'LL BE

COVERED BY TRICARE? >> I DO NOT KNOW FOR SURE.

THEY TALKED A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO ABOUT IF YOUR ORDERS ARE THIS TIME OF ORDERS THEN THEY'RE COVERED AND IN THIS -- THAT INFORMATION IS NOT ON THOSE ORDERS.

WE CAN CERTAINLY ASK THE EMPLOYEES.

I THINK IF WE GIVE THEM A CHOICE, THEN WE AT LEAST HAVE OFFERED THE BENEFITS. WE HAVE TO OFFER THE BENEFITS TO EVERYONE. IF WE OFFER TO ONE, THEN WE HAVE TO OFFER IT TO EVERYONE IN THAT SAME CATEGORY.

WHAT I WROTE ALLOWED FOR THAT LANGUAGE TO GIVE THE EMPLOYEE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE THEIR INSURANCE AS IF THEY WERE ACTIVE OR NOT. IF THEY CONTINUE THEIR INSURANCE, THEY STILL HAVE TO PAY THEIR SPOUSE'S PREMIUM AND

DEPENDENT PREMIUMS. >> AND THIS WOULD BE THEIR SECONDARY SO THEY'RE PAYING FOR AN INSURANCE THEY PROBABLY

WOULDN'T USE. >> THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT THAT YOU JUST ASKED ABOUT IS EXACTLY WHY I BELIEVE THE MILITARY FAMILY WOULDN'T JUST SAY, "WELL, I'LL SAY DOUBLE COVERED AND FEED THIS EXTRA MONEY NEEDLESSLY." COMMISSIONER INGALSBE.

>> YEAH.

[03:05:03]

WE HAVE THE CO-PAY BUT THE PROBLEM WITH SWITCHING OVER TO TRICARE FROM UNITED HEALTHCARE IS THAT THIS PROVIDER THAT I'VE BEEN WITH FOR YEARS UNDER UNITED HEALTHCARE, WHATEVER OURS IS, MAY NOT ACCEPT TRICARE AND THEN IT'S A MATTER OF HAVING TO FIND ANOTHER PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIAN AND A WHOLE NEW NETWORK.

THAT'S THE ISSUE THAT I WOULD HAVE.

>> THAT DOESN'T EVEN COVER THE COST PART YET.

IT'S JUST TALKING ABOUT RELATIONSHIPS.

>> WHEN MOST OF OUR EMPLOYEES, THEY GOT CALLED OUT TO DUTY, THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE IN THIS AREA TO KEEP THE SAME

PROVIDER ANYWAY. >> SPOUSE, THAT'S WHAT IT'S

ABOUT. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE COUNTY IS NOT DOUBLE PAYING FOR SOMETHING WE DON'T NEED TO PAY

FOR. >> RIGHT.

I THINK IN MY OPINION, JUST GIVEN THE OPTION TO THE SERVICE MEMBER BECAUSE HE KNOWS WHAT HIS SITUATION IS WITH HIS FAMILY AND THE DOCTORS, I THINK THAT IS THE BEST OPTION IN MY OPINION.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. SO IT IS COVERED.

TRICARE IS COVERED IF IT'S OFFERED TO -- I DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE SOMEBODY IS COVERED UNDER TRICARE OR SOME ARE OFFERED OR NOT OFFERED, AS SHERRY MENTIONED, MS. MILLER MENTIONED. DID YOU MENTION THAT MIKE JONES AND (INAUDIBLE) SAID IF YOU'RE CALLED OUT FOR SOMETHING --

>> THEY INDICATED DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATIONS OF ORDERS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT CAUSE DIFFERENCES IN THE TRICARE COVERAGE.

THEY WEREN'T 100 PERCENT SURE ABOUT THAT.

TO SPEAK TO ANITA'S CONCERN, I TOTALLY THINK THAT THAT IS A HUGE CONCERN. IF YOU ESTABLISHED YOUR CHILD WITH A PEDIATRICIAN AND THEY GO ON TO TRICARE, IT IS MAYBE UNLIKELY THAT IN THE HAYS COUNTY VICINITY, THERE MAY NOT BE PEDIATRICIANS THAT TAKE TRICARE, LET'S SAY.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE CLOSE ENOUGH TO SAN ANTONIO, WHICH I THINK A LOT OF OUR SERVICE MEMBERS UTILIZE THE MEDICAL SERVICES IN SAN ANTONIO AND IN AUSTIN.

>> YOU START TO SEE THE RIPPLES, RIGHT?

NOW YOU'LL HAVE TO RELOCATE. >> THE OTHER RIPPLE I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE OUT IS THAT IF WE GIVE EMPLOYEES THIS OPTION, THE MILITARY SERVICE MEMBERS THIS OPTION, THEN WE ALSO HAVE OTHER EMPLOYEES THAT GO ON LEAVE WITHOUT PAY FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, MOSTLY MEDICAL REASONS. THEY MAY HAVE EXHAUSTED THEIR FMLA. THEY MAY BE IN A SITUATION WHERE THEY DON'T QUALIFY OR RUN OUT OF SICK LEAVE POOL, WHICH KEEPS THEIR INSURANCE GOING. IT KEEPS THE COUNTY'S CONTRIBUTION COMING. BUT AT SOME POINT THERE COULD BE A TIME WHERE WE HAVE AN EMPLOYEE THAT IS ON LEAVE WITHOUT PAY, THEY'RE STILL EMPLOYED, THEY'RE GETTING BETTER, LET'S SAY, AND GOING TO RETURN TO WORK, BUT THEIR FMLA IS OVER.

THEY'RE NOT GETTING PAID OR GETTING SICK LEAVE POOL, AND THEIR INSURANCE HAS ENDED. I HAVE TO THROW -- I HAVE TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT THAT -- I WOULD LOVE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER SOMETHING IN THAT SITUATION AS WELL.

IF WE'RE GOING TO GIVE ONE CATEGORY OF EMPLOYEES OPTIONS, WE PROBABLY SHOULD EXPLORE CATEGORIES.

IT'S AS FEW AS THIS MILITARY SITUATION.

>> AND AS MS. MILLER HAS JUST POINTED OUT -- THANK YOU, MS. MILLER -- THERE IS NO REASON, THERE IS NO REASON FROM MY VANTAGE POINT AS ONE OF THE BUDGET OFFICERS HERE, RIGHT, THERE'S NO REASON FOR ME IN MY HEAD, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE YOU'RE HIGHLIGHTING HOW FEW IT ACTUALLY IS, THAT IN A TIME OF SUCH DIRE NEED, THAT WE WOULD TURN OUR BACKS ON OUR STAFF BY SAYING, "SORRY, YOUR COVERAGE IS GONE." I FULLY SUPPORT ADDING THAT COVERAGE AND HELP AS OUR COUNTY FAMILY TO THEM AS WELL.

>> CAN I THROW ANOTHER WRENCH IN THIS? I THINK WE'RE A LOT CLOSER WITH THE LANGUAGE I'M SEEING, THE OR LANGUAGE. I THINK THAT'S TRYING TO GET WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT LAST TIME.

>> YES, SIR. WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DO IS THE FIRST PARAGRAPH IS THE POLICY AS IT EXISTS NOW, JUST WITH THAT CLARIFIED LANGUAGE. OR THE SECOND PARAGRAPH.

NOT BOTH OF THEM BUT -- >> ONE OR THE OTHER.

>> ONE OR THE OTHER, IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION YOU --

>> AND I GUESS WHAT I'M ABOUT SO ASK IS, IS THERE A WAY WE CAN HAVE JUDE OR SOMEONE GET WITH SOMEONE TO EXPLAIN HOW IT ALL

[03:10:06]

WORKS FROM BEING ACTIVATED, THE TYPE OF ORDERS, HOW THINGS CAN CHANGE, SO THAT WE MAKE SURE WHEN WE CHANGE THIS, WE AREN'T DOING SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY ENDS UP HURTING THEM? AND ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE IS IF YOU'RE -- LET'S SAY YOU WORK FOR THE COUNTY. YOU HAVE A HUSBAND AND A FAMILY.

YOU ARE ACTIVATED BY THE ARMED FORCES AND YOU HAVE THE ABILITY, WHICH I THINK THE REASON WE ALL STARTED TALKING ABOUT THIS, IF YOU HAVE A CHILD THAT'S GOING TO A PEDIATRICIAN, YOU NOW HAVE THE ABILITY FOR THE CHILD TO STAY ON THE PLAN, WHICH WE'RE ALL SUPPORTIVE OF, AND THEN YOU THEN HAVE TO TAKE THE COUNTY'S INSURANCE, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T PUT SOMEONE IN A SITUATION WHERE THEY'RE OFF SOMEWHERE WHERE OUR INSURANCE DOESN'T REALLY HELP THEM MUCH BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO PICK IT FOR THEIR FAMILY AND SOMEBODY DOESN'T STEP UP AND SAY TO THEM, "YOU GOT ACTIVATED AND YOU'RE GOING TO GEORGIA AND NOW YOU HAVE TO PAY MORE FOR SOME SERVICES BECAUSE THE COUNTY'S PLAN IS WHAT YOU ARE ON." BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED THAT COVERAGE, COMMUNICATION OF THE TWO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T PUT SOMEONE IN A POSITION THAT THEY MAKE A CHOICE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS BEST FOR THEIR FAMILY, THEN THEY GET DEPLOYED SOMEWHERE AND ARE TOLD, "OH, I'M SORRY, IT'S GOING TO COST YOU A HECK OF A LOT MORE BECAUSE YOU'RE IN GEORGIA AND SOMEWHERE ELSE, NOT HAYS COUNTY."

>>UNITED HEALTHCARE HAS COVERAGE ONLY IN THE UNITED STATES. NO INTERNATIONAL.

IF THEY GO TO IRAQ, IRAN. IF THEY GO OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES, THERE IS NO UNITED HEALTHCARE COVERAGE.

>> AND I GUESS THAT'S WHAT -- I DON'T KNOW IF JUDE COULD MAYBE GET SOME UNDERSTANDING FOR US OF HOW THOSE DIFFERENT SITUATION WILL WORK, SOMEWHERE IN THE U.S. DEPLOYMENT YOU'RE ACTIVATED AND SENT SOMEWHERE AND SOMETIMES THOSE PERIODS OF TIME MIGHT BE FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING OR GO OVERSEAS, DIFFERENT TIMES OF WHAT THAT PICTURE LOOKS LIKE.

WE MAKE SURE WHEN WE CHOOSE TO DO THIS, WE HAVE TAKEN INTO SOME REAL-WORLD SITUATIONS AND THOUGHT THEM THROUGH.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN IF I CHOOSE TO DO THIS AND GET SENT SOMEWHERE.

SOMEONE ASKED THE MILITARY OF THAT QUESTION, GET HELP FROM SOMEBODY. I'M SURE WE COULD GET SOMEBODY IN THE ORGANIZATION TO TRY TO GIVE US SOME SCENARIOS SO WE MAKE SURE WHEN WE CHANGE THE LANGUAGE, WE GIVE OUR EMPLOYEES THE BEST ABILITY TO NOT BE PUT IN A SITUATION THAT HURTS THEM.

>> I'LL GET WITH JUDE SO SEE IF HE CAN FIND OUT CLEARER WHAT THE TRICARE COVERAGE GUIDELINES, WHATEVER ELSE THEY GET.

>> JUDE WAS DEPLOYED IN IRAQ. WHAT WAS HEALTHCARE LIKE FOR SOMEONE THERE OR SOMEONE WITH A FAMILY BACK HOME? HOW DID IT WORK? AND THEN IF WE WERE ABLE TO DO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN TO THE SERVICE MEMBER AND THEIR POTENTIAL USE OF HEALTHCARE IN THE UNITED STATES SOMEWHERE ELSE, IN A DIFFERENT CITY, AT A BASE THEY'RE SENT TO PRIOR TO OVERSEAS DEPLOYMENT JUST TO BE

ACTIVATED. >> YEAH, BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY ISN'T OVERSEAS, THEN THE EMPLOYEE WOULD NOT BE ON OURS, HOPEFULLY WOULD BE UNDER TRICARE SOMEPLACE.

BUT THEIR DEPENDENTS STILL COULD BE COVERED BY OUR INSURANCE.

>> YOU CAN ONLY COVER DEPENDENTS IF THE EMPLOYEE IS COVERED.

>> THEY CAN'T SPLIT.P>> AND THE. AND COMMISSIONER SHELL INTRODUCED THE SCENARIO OF THE WHOLE FAMILY RELOCATING WITH A DEPLOYMENT. AND IF IT'S OVERSEAS, THE POINT IS MOOT AND IN THE CONVERSATION I'M ASKING OUR HR DEPARTMENT TO HAVE, THEY WOULD CHECK THE BOX AND SAY, "PLEASE SUSPEND MY COVERAGE FROM THE COUNTY BECAUSE WE'RE GOING OVERSEAS." BUT IF THE FAMILY STAYS BEHIND, MY HOPE IS WE DON'T LEAVE THE FAMILY BEHIND IN COVERAGE AND THEY CAN CONTINUE THEIR PLANS OF WHATEVER THEY'RE DEALING WITH. TWO SCENARIOS AND I FEEL THE WHOLE DEPLOYMENT PIECE, AS MS. MILLER POINTED OUT, OVERSEAS THE POINT IS MOOT BUT OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY STILL SOMETHING TO CONSIDER AND ALLOW THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO DECIDE VERSUS AS IT SITS TODAY, AUTOMATIC EJECT BUTTON.

>> WE'RE A LOT CLOSER, JUST A FINAL FOR QUESTIONS.

MAYBE JUDE COULD HELP US GET ANSWERS.

>> COULD WE LEAVE THIS PART FOR ANOTHER TIME TO HAVE THAT

CONVERSATION? >> YES.

I WOULD LIKE TO BRING IT ALL BACK.

I WANT TO ADOPT THE CHANGES TO THE POLICY AT ONE TIME.

>> BEAUTIFUL AND THANK YOU. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE I DON'T APPRECIATE SOMETIMES THE PACE AT WHICH GOVERNMENT MOVES AND I DON'T WANT TO BE THAT HINDRANCE.

[03:15:03]

IS THERE ANYTHING CRITICAL, PENDING THAT GIVING YOU MORE

TIME WOULD HINDER, HURT? >> NO.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE STRIVE FOR THE BEST AND HIGHEST USE OF OUR EFFORT HERE. THANK YOU FOR PULLING THAT.

WE'LL PULL THAT AGENDA ITEM FOR NOW.

>> SHE HAS THE NEXT TWO ALSO. >> WHICH?

[Items 27 & 28]

>> 27 AND 28. WILL YOU PLEASE OPEN 27 AND 28?

>> 27, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT 3 TO THE STOP LOSS POLICY BETWEEN HAYS COUNTY AND UNITED HEALTHCARE INSURANCE COMPANY.

28, AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF THE FINANCIAL RENEWAL IN TERMS AMENDMENT BETWEEN HAYS COUNTY AND UNITED HEALTHCARE INSURANCE

COMPANY. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR 27 AND 28.

MS. MILLER. >> THANK YOU.

ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU SCOTT FOR BEING HERE.

SCOTT IS OUR BENEFITS CONSULTANT.

HE'S HERE AS BACKUP IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS ABOUT THESE TWO DOCUMENTS. THESE ARE FINALIZATION DOCUMENTS PLAN YEAR 2021, OUR CURRENT PLAN YEAR.

SO UNITED HEALTHCARE GENERALLY GETS THESE WITHIN THE FIRST FEW MONTHS OF THE YEAR. THE STOP LOSS AGREEMENT, IT'S TITLED AMENDMENT NUMBER 3. SO SINCE OUR BEGINNING WITH UNITED HEALTHCARE AND A FEW MONTHS YEARS AGO NOW, THIS IS THE THIRD STOP LOSS AGREEMENT THAT WE'VE HAD IN PLACE WITH THEM. AND THE DOCUMENT OUTLINES OUR RATES AND OUR COVERAGE. SO REMEMBERING THAT IN OCTOBER, THE COURT VOTED TO CHANGE OUR STOP LOSS AMOUNT FROM $165,000 TO $200,000, WHICH ADJUSTED OUR RATES A LITTLE BIT.

SO THAT'S THE FIRST ITEM. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT --

>> HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THAT ONE?

>> HOW DO I FEEL ABOUT THAT? YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION.

>> WELL, IT'S WHAT THE COURT ADOPTED ALREADY AND AGREED.

THIS IS JUST THE FINALIZATION OF THE DOCUMENTATION.

>> AS A PROFESSIONAL, I FEEL FINANCIALLY THAT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA, BUT I'M JUST ASKING YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION AS THE HR

DIRECTOR. >> SO AT THIS TIME WE DON'T HAVE ANALYTICS FROM OUR PLAN FROM 2021.

SO WE DON'T HAVE A REALLY GOOD PICTURE OF CHANGING FROM 165 TO 200 THOUSAND. WE'LL HAVE THAT IN ABOUT A YEAR FROM NOW. IN A FEW WEEKS WE'RE RECEIVING OUR ANALYSIS INFORMATION FOR 2020.

SO IN TERMS OF CHANGING THAT AMOUNT, I THINK THAT WAS A WISE MOVE AND IT WAS OUR RECOMMENDATION, ALONG WITH HIS RECOMMENDATION. IT ADJUSTED OUR RATE DOWNWARDS AND ALTHOUGH IT PUT OUR RISK UP A LITTLE BIT MORE BETWEEN 156 AND 200 THOUSAND, WE WON'T REALLY SEE THE IMPACT UNTIL THE

END OF THE YEAR. >> AND THAT'S EXACTLY TRUE, BUT I WAS WONDERING TO SPEAK ON -- BUT YOU'VE ANSWERED IT, TO SPEAK ON THE ANALYTICS PERSPECTIVE THAT DREW THAT CONCLUSION OF

SUPPORT. >> I THINK THE ANALYSIS OF THE DATA LOOKING BACK, I THINK IT WAS THE RIGHT DECISION.

OF COURSE, YOU NEVER KNOW. YOU HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL OR TWO, THE UNFORTUNATE SITUATION THAT PEOPLE GET OVER THAT.

WE WON'T REALLY KNOW UNTIL THAT HAPPENS.

BUT IT DID REDUCE THE RATE. WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF LIABILITY. BUT FROM OUR HISTORY, IT LOOKED LIKE THAT WOULD BE THE RIGHT DECISION.

>> IT WAS SOMETHING WE HAD THOUGHT ABOUT IN 2020.

SO I THINK IT WAS THE RIGHT TIME TO DO IT.

>> GOOD DEAL. >> AND THEN THE SECOND DOCUMENT IS OUR -- WHAT WE CALL OUR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AGREEMENT. BECAUSE WE ARE SELF-FUNDED IN OUR HEALTH PLAN, WE PAY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES FEES.

THIS DOCUMENT COVERS THOSE FEES FOR 2020 AND 2021.

UNITED HEALTHCARE DID NOT FINALIZE THEIR DOCUMENTATION FOR 2020 UNTIL THE PUBLICATION OF THIS DOCUMENT BEFORE YOU.

THE CHANGES FOR 2021 THAT THE COURT VOTED ON AND WE PUT INTO PLACE FOR OUR PLAN YEAR INCLUDED THE STOP LOSS CHANGE, PREMIUMS FOR OUR ADMINISTRATIVE FEES WERE ADJUSTED FOR 2021.

WE IMPLEMENTED A PROGRAM CALLED NAVAGUARD.

SOME OF US MAY HAVE RECEIVED IF WE'VE HAD OUT OF NETWORK SERVICES, THEN WE MAY HAVE RECEIVED COMMUNICATION FROM NAVAGUARD ALREADY TO HELP US COORDINATE WHAT WE END UP PAYING AN OUT OF NETWORK PROVIDER. OUR PHARMACY PLAN CHANGED TO WHAT WE CALLED A FLEX STANDARD, WHICH IS A LITTLE -- A DIFFERENT

[03:20:07]

DRUG LIST OR A PREFERRED DRUG LIST.

I THINK THAT'S RIGHT. AS WELL AS STEP THERAPY RELATING TO SOME USE OF SOME MEDICATIONS. WE CHANGED OUR VIRTUAL VISITS.

I HOPE LOTS OF PEOPLE ARE USING THE VIRTUAL VISITS AT NO COST.

YOU SHOULD NOT BE PAYING ANYTHING AS A USER.

THE COST TO THE COUNTY REMAINED STILL $49.

SO I HOPE A LOT OF US ARE USING THAT SERVICE FOR PHYSICIAN VISITS. AND THEN REBAIT -- REBATES IN OUR PHARMACY PROGRAM. THOSE ARE CHANGES YOU ADOPTED AND WE IMPLEMENTED. THIS DOCUMENTATION JUST OUTLINES

THOSE CHANGES. >> I REMEMBER WE HAD A LONG CONVERSATION ABOUT THE PHARMACEUTICALS IN AND OUT OF THAT LIST. I REMEMBER VERY VIVIDLY ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU WENT THROUGH AND EXPANDED ON.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> YES, SIR.

>> COMMISSIONERS. >> I THINK I'M GOOD.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS MUCH -- THIS TIME. AND THANK YOU FOR BEING A LONGTIME SMALL BUSINESS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

EVERY CHANCE WE HAVE TO SUPPORT LOCAL, I REACH FOR IT.

AND I'M JUST GRATEFUL TO HAVE YOU HERE AS ONE OF OUR HELPERS

IN THIS EFFORT. >> YES, SIR, THANK YOU.

>> SCOTT'S BEEN GREAT. OBVIOUSLY, HAYS COUNTY RESIDENT.

BUT HE KNOWS OUR SYSTEM VERY WELL AND THE EVOLUTION OF OUR SYSTEM. GOING BACK TO THOSE QUESTIONS WE WERE JUST HAVING ABOUT THE MILITARY AND STUFF, IF THAT WAS A QUESTION ABOUT GENERAL HEALTHCARE OR INSURANCE, HE

WOULD GIVE US THOSE ANSWERS. >> TRUST ME, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT

IT. >> HE'S BEEN VERY VALUABLE IN ANSWERS THOSE TYPES OF QUESTIONS AS WE'VE EVOLVED INTO WHAT WE

HAVE BEFORE US TODAY. >> WELL THANK YOU.

OKAY. DO WE NEED A MOTION? WE HAVE OUR MOTION AND SECOND. SO LET'S CALL THE ROLL.

>> COMMISSIONER SMITH. COMMISSIONER JONES.

>> SHELL. >> YES.

NOW WE'RE GOING TO CLEAN THROUGH THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. IF YOU WILL PLEASE OPEN NUMBER 10.

[10. Authorize the County Judge to execute liability coverage for storage tank systems with Commerce and Industry Insurance Company. BECERRA/MILLER]

>> 10, AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY JUDGE TO EXECUTE LIABILITY COVERAGE FOR STORAGE TANK SYSTEMS.

>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND A SECOND. PLEASE CALL ROLL.

[Items 13 - 15]

13, 14, 15. >> 13, APPROVE UTILITY PERMITS 14, AUTHORIZE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE WITH ACCESSORIES UTILIZING THE JUSTICE COURT TECHNOLOGY FUND AND AMEND THE BUDGET ACCORDINGLY, 14, AUTHORIZE THE OFFICE TO REPLACE ONE DELL LATITUDE 5420 VALUED AT $1,243.45 AND AMEND THE BUDGET

ACCORDINGLY. >> SO MOVED.

>> SECONDED. >> PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

THAT CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS.

[16. Discussion and possible action to authorize the County Judge to execute Change Order #1 to the Professional Services Agreement (PSA) between Hays County and LJA Engineering related to Right of Way (ROW) services on an as-needed basis and authorize a discretionary exemption pursuant to Texas Local Government Code 262.024(a)(4). SHELL/BORCHERING]

AND WE'LL MOVE ON NOW TO ROADS. PLEASE OPEN 16.

>> 16, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY JUDGE TO EXECUTE CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 1 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN HAYS COUNTY AND LJA ENGINEERING RELATED TO RIGHT OF WAY ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS.

>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> COMMISSIONER. >> THIS PROJECT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE SEVERAL PARCELS TO ACQUIRE AND I AM OFFERING US TO ENGAGE

WITH LJA ENGINEERING. >> COMMISSIONER INGALSBE.

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER JONES.

[17. Discussion and possible action to authorize the execution of Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $108,632.76 to the Construction Contract between Hays County and Jordan Foster Construction, LLC for the Dacy Lane (IFB-2021-B02) project as part of the Hays County Road Bond Program. JONES/INGALSBE/BORCHERDING]

>> 17, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO AUTHORIZE THE XECUTION OF CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 1 TO THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT BETWEEN HAYS COUNTY AND JORDAN FOSTER CONSTRUCTION FOR THE PROJECT AS PART OF THE HAYS COUNTY ROAD BOND PROGRAM.

>> YES. PLEASE OPEN 17.

>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> COMMISSIONERS. >> JUDGE, THIS IS FOR ADDING SOME MORE ROAD SIGNAGE FOR THIS PRO

PROJECT. >> THEIR MESSAGE SIGN BOARDS TO GET WORD OUT TO RESIDENTS IN THE AREA THAT THE CONSTRUCTION IS GOING ON AND AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED, THOSE SIGNS WILL BE OWNED BY HAYS COUNTY.

>> GOOD, THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THAT BECAUSE THAT'S $108,000.

[03:25:03]

THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> RIGHT.

AND I JUST WANT TO -- MR. BORCHERING SENT US AN EMAIL I BELIEVE AND HE SAID IT WAS TO ADD GEO GRID TO THE PAVEMENT STRUCTURE BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS A PART OF THIS.

>> NOT THIS ONE. >> OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? >> THOSE PORTABLE SIGNS WILL COME IN VERY, VERY HANDY BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE MORE THAN THREE OR FOUR PROJECTS GOING ON AT A TIME.

>> THAT'S RIGHT, EXACTLY. AND THAT'S VERY GOOD NEWS.

PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER JONES.

[18. Discussion and possible action to consider the acceptance of road construction & drainage improvements, release the Letter of Credit #1041 in the amount of $287,381.45, accept the 2- year maintenance bond #PB03016800710 in the amount of $61,623.61, accept the 1-year revegetation bond #PB03016800710M in the amount of $26,929.65, and accept the 5-year pavement maintenance bond #30114352 in the amount of $14,659.30 for 6 Creeks subd., Phase 1, Section 5A. SMITH/BORCHERDING]

>> 18, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO CONSIDER THE ACCEPTANCE OF ROAD DESTRUCTION AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE LETTER OF CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF $287,381.45, ACCEPT TWO YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND PB030168007 IN THE AMOUNT OF $61,623.61, ACCEPT THE ONE YEAR REVEGETATION BOND NUMBER PB03016800710M IN THE AMOUNT OF $26,929.56 AND ACCEPT FIVE YEAR PAVEMENT MAY NOT IN A MINUTES BOND 30114352 IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,659, 30 FOR 6 CREEKS SUBDI

>> YES. 18 PLEASE.

SUBDIVISION. >> MOTION.

>> SECOND. >> PLEASE CALL ROLL.

[19. Discussion and possible action to accept fiscal surety for the street and drainage improvements in the amount of $372,201.25 for Trails at Windy Hill, Phase 4 Subdivision (Bond No. 7901063583). JONES/BORCHERDING]

>> 19, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION FOR THE STREET AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR $372,825.25 FOR TRAILS AT WINDY

HILL. >> THIS IS OUR NORMAL PROCEDURE TO SET THESE BONDS AND WE HAVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THIS.

>> THANK YOU. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

[20. Discussion and possible action to accept fiscal surety for the street and drainage improvements in the amount of $863,725.25 for Trails at Windy Hill, Phase 5 Subdivision (Bond No. 7901063582). JONES/BORCHERDING]

PLEASE OPEN NUMBER 20. >> 20, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO ACCEPT FISCAL SURETY FOR THE STREET AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $863,725.25 FOR TRAILS AT WINDY HILL PHASE 5 SUBDIVISION. BOND NUMBER 7901063582.

>> PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER JONES.

[21. SUB-1239; Discussion and possible action to approve the final plat for the Delgado Subdivision. JONES/MACHECEK]

PLEASE OPEN NUMBER 21. >> 21.

SUB1239, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT

FOR THE DELGADO SUBDIVISION. >> I'LL LET OUR NEWEST

DEPARTMENT HEAD SPEAK ON THIS. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER AND JUDGE. THIS ITEM IS FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE DELGADO SUBDIVISION, A ONE LOT PLAT.

APPROXIMATELY TWO AND A HALF ACRES.

WATER SERVICE WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY CREED MMORE.

THIS HAS FULL STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

>> OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

[22. Discussion and possible action to adopt and order authorizing the sale of fireworks beginning the Wednesday before the last Monday in May and ending at midnight on the last Monday in May, 2021. SHELL]

>> COMMISSIONER JONES. YES.

PLEASE OPEN YOU NUMBER 22. >> 22, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO ADOPT AND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF FIREWORKS BEGINNING THE WEDNESDAY BEFORE THE LAST MONDAY IN MAY AND ENDING AT MIDNIGHT ON THE LAST MONDAY IN MAY 2021.

>> SO MOVED. SECOND.

>> COMMISSIONER SHELL. >> THANK YOU, JUDGE.

THE COURTS HAVE DONE THIS IN THE PAST.

I RECEIVED A REQUEST FROM A VENDOR ASKING FOR US TO CONTINUE THIS. I DON'T BELIEVE MOST VENDORS ACTUALLY UTILIZE THAT PERIOD OF TIME BUT A FEW DO ACROSS THE

COUNTY. >> OKAY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>> COMMISSIONER SHELL >> YES.

[24. Discussion and possible action to accept a 1,080 square foot easement valued at $1,000 from the Hays Consolidated Independent School District located off FM 967 as part of the 2016 Road Bond Safety Improvement Project. JONES]

PLEASE OPEN 24. >> 24, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO ACCEPT A 1,080 SQUARE FOOT EASEMENT LOCATED OFF FM

967. >> AND THIS IS FROM THE 2016 ROAD BOND AND I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> AND THIS IS JUST A DONATION FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO HELP FACILITATE SOME RIGHT-OF-WAY WE

NEED FOR TURN LANES. >> PERFECT.

PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> COMMISSIONER JONES.

[25. Discussion and possible action to execute a contract for RFQ 2021-Q06 CDBG Engineering Services between Hays County and TRC Engineers, Inc. for contracts procured by the Hays County Purchasing Department. SHELL/T.CRUMLEY (Part 1 of 2)]

[03:30:02]

YES. >> COMMISSIONER SHELL.