[a. Examination, consideration, and action on approval of all claims against San Patricio County Pursuant to section 113.064, Texas Local Government Code.]

ON THE FINANCIAL AGENDA THIS MORNING. EXAMINATION, CONSIDERATION OF ACTIONS. ALL CLAIMS AGAINST THE COUNTY MOVE TO PAY THE BILLS. SECOND, GET A MOTION BY GILLESPIE. SECOND BY YARDLEY TO PAY THE BILLS. ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY ONE PRESENTED? THE BILLS PRESENTED THIS MORNING HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION

[b. Consideration and action on Budget Line Items, Transfers, and Amendments.]

CARRIES. NEXT ITEM IS OUR BUDGET LINE ITEM TRANSFERS. AND WE DO HAVE A FEW OF THEM THIS MORNING.

GETTING CLOSE TO THE END OF THE YEAR OUT OF THE VETERANS SERVICE OFFICES, TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION DUES INTO OVERTIME OUT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM FURNITURE, VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT INTO GENERAL SUPPLIES OUT OF THE GRANTS DEPARTMENT.

TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM VEHICLE EQUIPMENT RENTALS, SOFTWARE LICENSE AND SUPPORT INTO TRAVEL AND ALSO TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES AND CHARGES. OTHER SUPPLIES INTO NCO FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN OFFICE TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM SOFTWARE LICENSE AND SUPPORT INTO OVERTIME. OUT OF JUSTICE OF THE PEACE. NUMBER TWO TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM NCO FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION DUES INTO TRAVEL INSURANCE BONDS AND PREMIUMS AND OVERTIME OUT OF MY OFFICE. TRANSFERRING A CONTINGENT CONTINGENCY TRANSFERS AND A TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES OUT OF THE E911 GIS DEPARTMENT TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM NCO FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION DUES INTO OVERTIME AND OUT OF THE SAN PATRICIO COUNTY PARKS DEPARTMENT, TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM VEHICLE REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE INTO PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS. I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE BUDGET LINE ITEM TRANSFERS. WE NEED TO. WE NEED TO MAKE A CORRECTION ON ONE OF THOSE.

OKAY. WHAT'S ONE. WHAT'S THE CORRECTION? SUNTAN DEPARTMENT 472 FROM CONTINGENCY. SEVEN 2 OR 7 TWO IS NOT YOUR OFFICE. WHAT OFFICE IS IT, JP TWO. ON THE PRECINCT TWO. DEBORAH I THINK 472. DAVID. WHO'S THAT? YEAH. JP TWO I HAVE A QUESTION. TWO. WHAT WHAT OVERTIME IS THE FLOODPLAIN OFFICE DOING? AND THE GIS, I MEAN, BESIDES THE OBVIOUS, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I GUESS. BE THE JP YOU'D HAVE TO ASK THEM. I GUESS. DAVID, YOU GOT SOMETHING ON. SO HOLD ON A MINUTE. I'M.

ALL RIGHT, SO THE ONE THAT'S LISTED AS DEPARTMENT 472. ARE WE SAYING THAT'S NOT DEPARTMENT 472. IT IS DEPARTMENT 472. IT IS NOT THE COUNTY JUDGE'S OFFICE. IT'S THE JP TWO OFFICE. IT WAS ANNOUNCED AS THE COUNTY JUDGE'S OFFICE. OKAY, OKAY, SO IT'S JUST A LABELING THING. IT'S A LABELING THING, RIGHT? THE SECOND 472 SHOULD BE OUT OF MY OFFICE. 400. RIGHT? RIGHT. BUT YOU DON'T HAVE ONE THIS TIME. SO THERE'S TWO OF THEM LABELED 472 SECOND ONE 400. THEY THEY ARE CORRECT. I THINK THE CONFUSION IS THAT THE COUNTY JUDGE SIGNED THAT ONE BECAUSE IT WAS COMING FROM CONTINGENCY. SO IT IS DEPARTMENT 472 FOR THE TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE. SO THE OKAY TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE FOR JP TWO. CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO DO WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE COUNTY JUDGE'S OFFICE. OKAY. WELL I AMEND MY MOTION TO COVER WHAT WE JUST SAID. THEN WHATEVER IT WAS.

OKAY, I WILL SECOND THAT AMENDED MOTION. OKAY. AND NOW I BELIEVE THE COMMISSIONER LOPEZ HAS A QUESTION. IF I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE FLOODPLAIN AND THE GIS, I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING FOR OVERTIME. BESIDES THE OBVIOUS. I CANNOT ANSWER THE QUESTION FOR THE FLOODPLAIN, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE E-911 GIS IS THE COUNTY HAS AN AGREEMENT THAT HE WILL RESPOND TO EMERGENCIES OR DISASTERS IN OTHER AREAS. AND I BELIEVE HE DID. AND WE PAID HIM OVERTIME FOR THAT. I BELIEVE

[00:10:06]

WE'VE RECEIVED SOME REIMBURSEMENT FOR THAT. BUT OBVIOUSLY, FROM AN ACCOUNTING STANDPOINT, WE HAVE TO RECORD THE EXPENDITURE AND THE REIMBURSEMENT. WE CAN'T NET THEM OUT AGAINST EACH OTHER. NOW. THERE MAY BE SOME OTHER OVERTIME THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF, BUT I BELIEVE THAT'S PROBABLY THE VAST MAJORITY OF IT ON THE GIS. YES. WHEN HE WHEN HE RESPONDED, WE DID GET REIMBURSED FROM THAT. BUT FOR THE DAYS HE WAS OUT AND WORKED OVER THERE, WE PAID HIM OVERTIME AND IT DEPLETED HIS OVERTIME. WE DID GET REIMBURSED FOR IT, BUT IT DIDN'T GO STRAIGHT BACK INTO THAT GL CODE. CAME BACK TO THE COUNTY, JUST NOT STRAIGHT INTO THE GEO CODE AND FLOODPLAIN. I DON'T KNOW. I KNOW SHE'S WORKING OVER THE WEEKENDS GETTING CAUGHT UP ON STUFF AT TIMES. WE TRIED TO GET HER HELP, BUT IT HASN'T GONE THROUGH SO. ALL I CAN, THAT'S ALL I KNOW. WE DIDN'T APPROVE SOMETHING FOR HER FOR JANUARY. I THOUGHT WE WERE TRYING. I THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS DONE. SHE IS A ONE PERSON OFFICE AND IS AN EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY BUSY OFFIC.

THEY THEY HAVE BEEN AUTHORIZED FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT TO HELP, BUT THAT DOESN'T TAKE EFFECT UNTIL JANUARY 1ST. AND THEN THAT WILL FREE HER UP FROM ALL THE ADMIN, JUST GENERAL PAPERWORK AND BECAUSE SHE'S IN THE FIELD A LOT, BUT THEN SHE STILL HAS TO COVER EVERYTHING IN THE OFFICE AND DO ALL THE PAPERWORK AND EVERYTHING AFTERWARDS AND STUFF. YEAH, I THINK THERE'S 4 OR 5 PLATS THAT I THINK SHE'S EVEN WORKING ON TWO AT THE SAME TIME. SO. OKAY.

THANK YOU. OKAY. GOT A MOTION IN A SECOND FOR THE BUDGET LINE ITEM TRANSFERS ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. NEXT WE

[c. Consideration and action on accepting bank reconciliation, investment reports, and related matters by County Treasurer. ]

HAVE CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON OUR BANK RECONCILIATION STATEMENT. MISS GARCIA. GOOD MORNING JUDGE. GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. THIS WEEK'S HEALTH TRANSFER IS $85,400. OUR SECTION 125 TOTAL IS $1,611.45. WE HAVE SIX ASSERTED CLAIMS FOR $20,984.44. OUR ESCROW TOTAL IS $721.15, AND OUR NOVEMBER 2024 SALES TAX IS $331.96. MOVE TO ACCEPT TREASURER'S REPORT.

SECOND, I GOT A MOTION BY THE LAST BY COMMISSIONER YARDLEY. ANY QUESTIONS? MISS GARCIA? TREASURER'S REPORT. HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. OKAY. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. WE GOT SOME CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS

[3. Consent Agenda: All Consent Agenda items listed are considered to be routine by the Commissioners Court. Members of the Commissioners Court have been furnished documentation on each item, and all such items may be acted upon by one vote without being discussed separately unless requested by County Judge or a Commissioner:]

THIS MORNING. 2.3 A IS CONSIDERATION ACTION ON AN ORDER FOR THE COMMISSIONERS COURT.

REGULAR MEETING TO BE EACH MONDAY MORNING BEGINNING AT 9 A.M, EXCLUDING COUNTY HOLIDAYS OR CLOSING. AND SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE ANNEX BUILDING AT 1301 EAST CENTRAL STREET, SUITE C AND THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ROOM EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1ST, 2025, PURSUANT TO SECTION 81.005 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, AS AMENDED, 2.3 B CONSIDERATION ACTION ON A REQUEST FROM GARY DAVIS, AIRPORT MANAGER, INGLESIDE REGIONAL AIRPORT, TO ENTER INTO A FIELD HANGAR LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAN PATRICIO COUNTY AND THE FOLLOWING PERSONS C FIVE TONY PENNINGTON DECEMBER 1ST, 2024 TO DECEMBER 31ST, 2024 AND 2.3 C CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON A REQUEST FROM GARY DAVIS, AIRPORT MANAGER, INGLESIDE REGIONAL AIRPORT, TO AUTHORIZE THE ASSESSMENT OF GROUND LEASE BETWEEN SAN PATRICIO COUNTY AND WILLIAM ARCHIE BARRON AND STEPHEN WORCESTER, SIR, TO BILL WILSON, DBA DON QUIXOTE AVIATION LLC IN 2.3 D ACCEPT AND RECORD TAX ASSESSOR COLLECTORS MONTHLY STATEMENT OF COLLECTIONS FOR THE MONTH ENDING NOVEMBER 30TH, 2024. MOVE TO APPROVE 2.3 A THROUGH D SECOND A MOTION GILLESPIE SECONDED BY YALI. ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THE CONSENT AGENDA? YEAH. HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES GOING INTO INDIVIDUAL

[a. Consideration and action on reappointing Mr. W. Wes Hoskins to serve as San Patricio County's appointment on the Port of Corpus Christi Board of Commissioners for a fourth three-year term effective January 1, 2025, through December 31, 2027.]

ACTION ITEMS. THIS MORNING 2.4 A CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON REAPPOINTING MR. WES HOSKINS TO SERVE SAN PATRICIO COUNTY DEPARTMENT ON THE PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR A FOURTH THREE YEAR TERM, EFFECTIVE JANUARY ONE, 2025, THROUGH DECEMBER 31ST, 2027. I MOVE TO APPROVE SECOND. GOT A MOTION BY GILLESPIE, SECONDED BY YARDLEY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. WES, WOULD YOU AND DAVID LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING? DAVID, WHY DON'T YOU SAY SOMETHING? BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T GET TO SEE YOU TOO MUCH ON THIS SIDE OF THE BRIDGE AND STUFF. YEAH. WELL, IT'S AN HONOR TO BE HERE, AND

[00:15:07]

I'M GLAD THAT WES INVITED ME TO COME AND JUDGE AND COMMISSIONER, THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO. YOU KNOW, Y'ALL ALL KNOW THAT WES AND I WENT TO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, GRADE SCHOOL, JUNIOR HIGH AND HIGH SCHOOL TOGETHER. AND AS I SAID, IF YOU WEREN'T THERE BECAUSE YOU WERE STRANDED SOMEWHERE IN THE BAHAMAS, BUT AT THE STATE OF THE PORT, I MENTIONED THAT WHATEVER WES SAYS ABOUT ME DON'T BELIEVE. BUT I WILL TELL YOU, THIS IS THAT WES IS A BIG ADVOCATE FOR SAN PATRICIO COUNTY ON THE PORT COMMISSION AND WHENEVER ANYTHING COMES UP REGARDING YOUR COUNTY, WES IS THERE. HE'S KNOWLEDGEABL. HE'S AGAIN, HE'S PASSIONATE. HE'S A GOOD REPRESENTATIVE FOR YOUR COUNTY. AND THE OTHER THING I WANT TO SAY, THAT'S SO IMPORTANT IS CONTINUITY. I'M IN MY STARTING IN 2025. IT'S MY LAST YEAR. I'LL SERVE OUT MY LENGTH OF TERM WOULD BE MY 12TH YEAR. AND HAVING WES COMING IN BEHIND ME IS PROBABLY AS AN OFFICER IS VERY IMPORTANT.

REPRESENTS SAN PATRICIO COUNTY, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE'VE GOT SO MANY THINGS GOING ON AT THE PORT LONG TERM, HAVING THAT CONTINUITY AND THAT EXPERIENCE AND THAT HISTORY IS SO IMPORTANT, AND I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR REAPPOINTING HIM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DAVID.

CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU DAVID. YES, SIR. I WANT TO THANK MY WIFE FOR GETTING UP AND COMING IN EARLY THIS MORNING TO SO MANY. IT'S AN HONOR TO SERVE SAN PATRICIO COUNTY. AND DAVID, IT'S GOOD WORKING WITH YOU. I'VE ALWAYS SAID I'VE TEASED HIM A LOT AND SAID THAT WE SET HE SET BEHIND ME IN CHEMISTRY AND I'VE ACCUSED HIM OF CHEATING ON ME AND CHEATING WITH ME ON CHEMISTRY IN HIGH SCHOOL. BUT KNOWING MY GRADES AND CHEMISTRY, I DON'T THINK YOU DID. SO BOTTOM LINE. YEAH, YEAH. SO I MADE, YOU KNOW, THE PORT IS WORKING BETTER THAN IT'S EVER WORKED. I MEAN, WE ARE FUNCTIONING MUCH BETTER. I THINK ALL OF YOU KNOW THAT. I FEEL THAT WITH DAVID'S LEADERSHIP, YOU KNOW, WE ARE MAKING SOME GREAT STRIDES IN DOING SOME THINGS THAT WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOING SIX YEARS AGO. TEN YEARS AGO. I REALLY FEEL LIKE WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. WE IMPORT $444 MILLION A DAY INTO THE STATE OF TEXAS. SO WE'RE NOT ONLY JUST SUPPORTING OUR REGION, WE'RE SUPPORTING THE STATE OF TEXAS. ALL THAT PERMIAN OIL, ALL THAT NATURAL GAS COMING DOWN HERE. IT'S BEING DISSEMINATED. ALL THAT MONEY IS BEING DISSEMINATED ALL THROUGHOUT TEXAS. SO IT'S A BIG DEAL. I MEAN, THE PORT REALLY IS THE ECONOMIC ENGINE FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS. WE ARE. AND I DO BELIEVE THAT OUR COMMISSION IS VERY AWARE OF SAN PATRICIO COUNTY AND OUR NEEDS AND OUR VOICES BEING HEARD. AND I AND I THANK DAVID FOR LISTENING. YOU KNOW, WHEN I WHEN I SPEAK UP FOR SAM, PAT DAVID IS RIGHT THERE WITH ME. SO I THANK YOU GUYS FOR THE REAPPOINTMENT. IT'S AN HONOR TO SERVE YOU GUYS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO FOR US. DEFINITELY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OKAY. IF. YEAH IF Y'ALL WANT TO GO, YOU'RE FREE TO GO. YOU TOO. OKAY. THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING.

[b. Discussion, consideration and action on request from Heather Marks, District Clerk, and Oscar Rivera, County Sheriff, to send an official letter requesting the decommissioning of the Victim Information and Notification Everyday (VINE) Interface Software.]

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY, OKAY. NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS 2.4 B IS DISCUSSION CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON A REQUEST FROM HEATHER MARX, DISTRICT CLERK AND OSCAR RIVERA, COUNTY SHERIFF, TO SEND AN OFFICIAL LETTER DECOMMISSIONING THE VICTIM INFORMATION AND NOTIFICATION EVERYDAY INTERFACE SOFTWARE. SHERIFF HEATHER IS NOT HERE, SO YOU MIGHT EXPLAIN WHY WE'RE DOING THIS. GOOD MORNING. FOR MANY YEARS, A COMPANY CALLED VINES HAS BEEN IN CONTRACT WITH OUR SOFTWARE PROVIDER, WHICH IS TYLER TECHNOLOGY WITH ODYSSEY. AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SOMEONE GETS ARRESTED? THAT INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE TO THE VICTIM TO FOLLOW THROUGH. WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE VICTIM? THE PROBLEM WE'VE HAD FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS IS THAT VINES KEEPS GETTING SOLD TO OTHER COMPANIES, AND NOW WE HAVE A PRIVATE COMPANY OWNING IT. BUT THE WORST OF THAT IS THAT A LOT OF INFORMATION GETS RELEASED THAT GETS IN THE WRONG HANDS. AND A GOOD EXAMPLE, THIS WEEKEND WE HAD ONE OF THE VICTIMS SAYING, I DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU MY ADDRESS BECAUSE YOU IT BECOMES PUBLIC AND IT DOES BECAUSE WHEN YOU GET THROUGH VINES, EVEN THE BAD GUY HAS ACCESS TO THAT INFORMATION. AND UNTIL TYLER FIXES THE PROBLEM, IT'S A PROBLEM FOR US. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T SORT OF. HEATHER. SHE'S WORRIED ABOUT HER DEPARTMENT WHERE INFORMATION ABOUT COURT RECORDS IS BEING RELEASED PREMATURELY AS SAME WAY WITH US. WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE VICTIM'S RIGHTS AS WELL, AND JUST SUSPENDED UNTIL THEY GET FIXED, WHICH THAT DIDN'T COST US ANYTHING. IT'S A GRANT PROGRAM THAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR MANY YEARS, AND WE JUST WANT TO SUSPEND IT UNTIL WE GET THIS PROBLEM FIXED. SECOND, THANK YO.

[00:20:02]

OKAY. GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GILLESPIE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOPEZ. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. THAT LETTER HAS ALREADY BEEN CREATED AND IT WILL BE GOING OUT TODAY.

[c. Discussion, consideration and action on request from John Hernandez, P.E., County Engineer, to coordinate a traffic study on County Road 1144 West of Sinton by Maldonado-Burkett in the amount of $1,584.65 located within Precinct 3. Tabled from the Commissioners Court Meeting on December 2, 2024.]

VERY GOOD. 2.4 C IS DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON A REQUEST FROM JOHN HERNANDEZ, COUNTY ENGINEER, TO COORDINATE A TRAFFIC STUDY ON COUNTY ROAD 1144 WEST OF SINTON BY MONALDO BURKETT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,584.65 LOCATED IN PRECINCT THREE. THIS ITEM WAS TABLED AT OUR LAST COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING ON DECEMBER 2ND. SO I NEED A MOTION TO BRING IT BACK TO THE TABLE. SECOND MOTION BY GILLESPIE, SECOND BY YEARLY TO BRING BACK TO THE TABLE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES ITEM IS BACK ON THE TABLE, MR. DAVIS. THANK YOU. SO THIS THIS IS A TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THE END OF RUNWAY THREE TWO, WHICH YOU'LL SEE RIGHT HERE SITS ABOUT 18FT OFF THE EDGE OF THE ROAD.

THERE'S SOME SAFETY CONCERNS WITH THAT. BASED ON FAA PART 77. BUT WE'VE HAD OTHER SAFETY ISSUES AT THE AIRPORT. WE TOOK CARE OF FIRST. AND NOW WE'RE TO THIS ONE. AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF OPTIONS. THE SAFETY STUDY IS GOING TO TELL US THE TYPE OF VEHICLE, THE SPEED OF VEHICLE AND THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC AND WITH THAT INFORMATION, THEN WE'LL DETERMINE THE NEXT COURSE OF ACTION, WHICH CURRENTLY WE DEEM THREE, WHICH IS DO NOTHING, WHICH IS NOT THE RIGHT ANSWER.

WE OWN THIS FIVE ACRE STRETCH RIGHT HERE. THE COUNTY. SO ONE OF THE OPTIONS IS WE CAN REROUTE THE ROAD AROUND IT, GIVE IT MORE ROOM OFF THE END OF THE RUNWAY, OR YOU COULD CLOSE THE ROAD HERE AND CLOSE THE ROAD HERE. NOW, THAT'S GOING TO MAKE WHOEVER OWNS THIS PARCEL, WHICH IS TYPICALLY IS UP FOR SALE RIGHT NOW, WOULD HAVE TO COME DOWN TO IS IT GOING TO. IT'LL GET THERE.

COME DOWN TO 23, 67. AND THEN FROM 2367 YOU CAN EITHER GO LEFT OR RIGHT AND THEN COME DOWN TO 188, THEN TO THE INTERSTATE. I DON'T HAVE THE MILEAGE JUST BECAUSE I DIDN'T BRING THAT UP, BUT MORE SO IT'S JUST A STUDY TO SEE WHERE WE'RE AT WITH TRAFFIC TYPE AND SPEED AND THEN JOHN COULD SPEAK TO HOW LONG THE STUDY LASTS AND WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT AND WHEN WE'LL START IT. AND THAT. BUT THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS LOOK AT WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE WE MAKE THE NEXT DETERMINATION, WHAT WE DO TO THE ROAD. OKAY, JOHN. OKAY. LET ME HAVE ALL THE FUN. YEAH. THESE TYPES OF TRAFFIC STUDIES ARE USUALLY PERFORMED LIKE A TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY, ALWAYS DURING NON-PEAK TRAFFIC DAYS. IT'LL PROVIDE LIKE A AS GARY HAD MENTIONED, THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THE NUMBER OF CLASSIFICATION AT THE TOP OF THE VEHICLES WOULD BE TRUCKS, TRAFFIC, CARS, THINGS LIKE THAT. AND ALSO FROM THE STUDY, WE'LL GET TO THE SPEED, THE AVERAGE SPEED GOING THROUGH THE AREA. ALL RIGHT. I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE SECOND AND A MOTION BY LESLIE, SECONDED BY YEARLY FOR APPROVAL. COMMISSIONER GARY, I GUESS ONCE Y'ALL GET TO TRAFFIC STUDY, THEN WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP AFTER THAT? IS THERE ANOTHER STUDY THAT YOU'RE ALL GOING TO DO OR WHAT WE WOULD DO THEN IS WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE COURT ONCE WE GET THE STUDY DONE. AND WE'RE THE END OF THE RUNWAY AND THE ROAD CURRENTLY MEET UNDER PART 77. IT'S A HEIGHT ISSUE WITH THE AMOUNT OF INDUSTRY COMING INTO THE COUNTY. IF WE START GETTING A LOT MORE SEMIS AND STUFF ON THAT ROAD, IF IT'S HOT AND HUMID OUT THE AIRPLANE DOESN'T PERFORM AS WELL. AND IF THE PILOT WOULD OVERLOAD THE AIRCRAFT, IT TAKES LONGER TO MEET THE CLIMB GRADIENT. SO THEREFORE THE POTENTIAL IS TO HIT A VEHICLE EITHER LANDING OR TAKING OFF. AND THAT'S WHY WE WANT TO SEPARATE THAT PIECE. AND I DON'T KNOW WHICH WHICH CAME FIRST. THE AIRPORT WAS BUILT IN 45, AND I'M NOT SURE WHEN THE COUNTY ROAD WAS PUT IN, BUT RULES HAVE CHANGED A LITTLE BIT. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THAT SEPARATION ONCE WE FIGURE OUT WHAT KIND OF TRAFFIC WE'RE HAVING AND THEN WHAT THE POTENTIAL IS WITH WITH THE INDUSTRY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S 125 ACRES FOR SALE RIGHT ON THE ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE AIRPORT. SO AND THERE'S AN INDUSTRY RIGHT THERE. 11 OR. YEAH. 1144 AND 77 THAT'S GOT SOME VEHICLE TRAFFIC IN THERE.

SO WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WHAT KIND OF TRAFFIC WE'RE HAVING AND SEE WHAT WE NEED TO MAKE THE NEXT STEP AS SOON AS IT JUDGE, AS SOON AS THE STUDY IS DONE, WE'LL COME UP WITH SOME OPTIONS AND PRESENT THE COURT AGAIN. OKAY. SO SAY WE DO HAVE TO GO AROUND THE FIVE ACRES. HOW HOW MUCH DISTANCE IS THAT? BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING WE MAY NEED TO BE PLANNING. YOU KNOW IT

[00:25:05]

WOULD BE A PLANNING PROJECT. WOULD HAVE TO GO AND FIGURE OUT. I'D HAVE TO GET WITH JOHN AND SEE FROM A FROM A ROAD STANDPOINT BECAUSE OUR PROPERTY ON THE LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET THIS TO GO. THE WEST SIDE I DON'T BELIEVE WILL BE A BIGGER ISSUE AS FAR AS THE RADIUS. BUT THIS PIECE RIGHT HERE IS THE LAST STEP IS THE LAST HOUSE. SO OUR PROPERTY STARTS RIGHT HERE.

SO WHATEVER RADIUS THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE COMING OFF OF HERE. COMING OUT OF THE EAST BE A NICE, EASY GRADUAL TURN. I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO A FOUR WAY STOP HERE AND MAKE IT GO UP AND AROUND. I MEAN, THAT'S SOMETHING WE'LL HAVE TO DETERMINE BASED ON THE STUDY.

AND THEN WE'LL GET WITH JOHN FROM A ROAD STANDPOINT OF HOW WE NEGOTIATE THIS EASTERN PIECE RIGHT HERE. IF WE MOVE TO MAKE IT GO AROUND, THAT'LL BE A WHATEVER THE CURVATURE OF THE ROAD NEEDS TO BE. AND THAT BASED ON HOW MUCH WE OWN. BUT WE DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF LEEWAY BECAUSE THE RUNWAY IS HERE. SO BETWEEN HERE AND HERE WE CAN MAKE THAT A LITTLE BIT OF ADJUSTMENT TO MAKE AN EASY TRANSITION FOR TRAVEL WISE. DAVID, DO YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? YEAH. I CAN SEE YOU THINKING ABOUT SOMETHING. YEAH. I MEAN I'M JUST CURIOUS. THE ROAD AND BRIDGE, THREE COMMISSIONERS NOT HERE. HAS SHE EVEN BEEN CONSULTED ABOUT THIS? DOES SHE? WE HAD SPOKEN ABOUT IT BEFORE. OKAY. SO SHE'S AWARE OF THIS? OKAY. YEAH. WE'VE TALKED TO HER SEVERAL TIMES, DAVID, ABOUT THIS. OKAY. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. AND ONCE AGAIN, THIS ITEM IS JUST TO DO THE STUDY. IT'S NOT TO DO ANYTHING ELSE. THERE'LL BE NO CHANGES MADE UNTIL WE PRESENT THE COURT AGAIN AFTER THE STUDY AND WHAT OUR PROPOSALS ARE. OKAY. SO THE STUDY WILL BE WITH THE FFA. I MEAN, NOT THIS STUDY, BUT ONCE WE GET THIS STUDY BACK AND THEN IT GOES TO THE FAA, RIGHT. ARE WE GOING TO. WE WEREN'T GOING TO SEND THIS TO THE FAA, WERE WE.

WE WON'T HAVE TO SEND IT TO THE FAA. BUT WHAT IT DOES, THE STANDARD FOR PART 77, A NAVIGATIONAL PIECE THAT WILL DETERMINE HOW FAR WE NEED TO MOVE THE ROADWAY. OKAY. RIGHT NOW IT'S TOO CLOSE BASED ON THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS. THERE'S A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN LAY OUT WHEN WE DO THE WHOLE ROAD PRESENTATION. AFTER WE GET DONE WITH THE STUDY, OKAY. WE'LL GET WHEN WE GET TO THAT, THEN WE'LL. YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. OKAY. 2.4 D IS

[d. Discussion, consideration and action on request from John Hernandez, P.E., County Engineer, on accepting King & Petrus's documentation of Davis Plat and private road easement.]

DISCUSSION CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON A REQUEST FROM JOHN HERNANDEZ, COUNTY ENGINEER, ON ACCEPTING KING AND PETER'S DOCUMENTATION ON DAVIS, PLATT AND PRIVATE ROAD EASEMENT. JOHN.

YES, THIS IS A REQUEST FROM THE COMMISSIONER. OKAY. YEAH. SORRY. LET ME DO SOME OF THE HISTORY ON THIS. THERE WAS AN OLD RADIO STATION OFF OF COUNTY ROAD 35. BEFORE YOU GET TO 136, SET UP DURING WORLD WAR TWO OR BEFORE. AND THERE'S A PRIVATE LANDOWNER THAT OWNS A ROAD THAT PEOPLE WERE USING AS A PUBLIC ROAD THAT IS NOT A PUBLIC ROAD, IT IS A PRIVATE ROAD. SO WE ENGAGE KING AND PETRUS TO GO AHEAD AND RESEARCH THIS. AND WHAT THEY FOUND IS IT IS INDEED A PRIVATE ROAD. SO IT'S FINE FOR THIS GENTLEMAN TO SHUT IT DOWN. IT'S HIS IT'S HIS. THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS. I THINK JOHN. WELL, I JUST WANT TO JUST ADD THAT THIS, THIS IS LIKE A TYPICALLY LIKE A LONG DRIVEWAY, RIGHT? IT'S APPROXIMATELY 1600 FEET AND THE WIDTH OF THE ACCESS IS APPROXIMATELY 30FT. SO IT'S BASICALLY TO KEEP THAT PARTICULAR LANDOWNER FROM BEING LANDLOCKED. AND HE HAS ACCESS, DIRECT ACCESS TO THE PUBLIC ROAD. YEAH, IT'S HIS PRIVATE EASEMENT. OKAY. ALSO, WE RECEIVED A CORRESPONDENCE FROM MR. PETRUS STATING THAT IT IS JUST JUST VERIFYING THE MAP. SO I RECOMMEND ACCEPTANCE AND THAT I MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND. OKAY.

YOU GOT A MOTION BY GILLESPIE. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER YARDLEY FOR APPROVAL. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.

[e. Discussion, consideration and action on request from John Hernandez, P.E., County Engineer, on approving Resolution for CR 1214 TxDOT's Off-System Bridge Replacement Program. County's 10% match is in the amount of $62,400.00. ]

MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. TWO POINT FOR DISCUSSION. CONSIDERATION. ACTION ON A REQUEST FROM JOHN HERNANDEZ, COUNTY ENGINEER, ON APPROVING RESOLUTION FOR COUNTY ROAD 1214 TEX DOTS OFF SYSTEM BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM. COUNTY'S 10% MATCHES THE AMOUNT OF $62,400. JOHN. YES, SIR.

THIS. IN THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, THE COUNTY HAS BEEN VERY, VERY FORTUNATE OF GETTING A VERY

[00:30:06]

DECENT MATCH TO THE PROGRAM. THE COUNTY IS STILL CONSIDERED AN ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED COUNTY, BUT APPARENTLY WITHIN THE DISADVANTAGED COUNTIES, THERE'S VARIOUS REIMBURSEMENT RATES. THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, THE REIMBURSEMENT RATE OR MATCH HAS BEEN AROUND 95%. BUT THIS COMING YEAR, FOR FY 2025, THE REIMBURSEMENT MATCH IS ABOUT 52%. SO THAT'S WHY THE MATCH.

THE 10% MATCH IS ABOUT $62,400, AND IT WILL BE COMING OUT OF THE PRECINCT ONE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET. OKAY. MOTION. WE ACCEPT. OKAY. YOU GOT A SECOND? YEP. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER. IT'S NEEDED OKAY. SO IF I UNDERSTAND RIGHT IN THE FUTURE NEXT YEAR WHEN WE'RE DOING PROJECTS LIKE THIS, OUR MATCHES WILL BE MUCH GREATER. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THERE'S A POSSIBILITY.

IT'S VERY VALUED BY TEX DOT EVERY YEAR. AND LOOKING AT THE MAP YOU PROVIDED, WHAT DOES THIS ROAD HAVE ACCESS TO? WHAT DOES IT SERVE? IS THERE HOW MANY HOUSES DOES THIS THING SERVE? THAT ONE, I CANNOT SAY, BUT I JUST KNOW EVERY EVERY TWO YEARS WHEN TEX DOT EVALUATES THE COUNTY BRIDGES, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A COUPLE OF TERMS THEY THROW OUT, YOU KNOW, STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT OR INADEQUATE FOR VARIOUS REASONS. COULD BE A TIMBER LOADED TIMBER TYPE BRIDGE, REALLY NOT UP TO STANDARDS. THINGS LIKE THIS. BUT I WOULD STILL CONSIDER THIS A VERY GOOD PROGRAM BECAUSE TEX DOT THEY'LL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DESIGN. THE CONSTRUCTION AND THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND ALL. BASICALLY THE COUNTY HAS TO DO IS PROVIDE THE MATCHING TO THE ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION FUNDS. EVENTUALLY WE NEED TO GO CONCRETE ON ALL OF THEM BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A LOT OF WOODEN BRIDGES THAT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE ANY MORE. AND THIS ONE, I ASSUME, IS A WOODEN BRIDGE. I'M NOT SURE. I'M NOT SURE ON THAT ONE. THEY JUST THEY JUST CAME UP AND SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ELIGIBLE. AND WE WELL, THERE ARE SEVERAL OF OUR OTHER CONCRETE BRIDGES THAT ARE AGING AS WELL. THE COMBINATION CONCRETE AND WOOD. SO WE'RE WORKING ON A SMALL ONE RIGHT NOW. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO DO THE OTHER BIG BRIDGE ON 100. AS SOON AS THIS PROJECT'S DONE. SO THIS WAS SELECTED BASED ON TXDOT SELECTED. YES. THAT'S CORRECT OKAY. YEAH OKAY. YEAH. THEY DO ALL THE OFF SYSTEM BRIDGE INSPECTIONS ALL THE TIME. A LOT OF THEM ARE WOODEN BRIDGES IN THIS COUNTY. YES. OKAY. GOT A MOTION IN A SECOND. ANY OTHER QUESTION HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SAME

[f. Discussion, consideration and action on request from Commissioner Gillespie, Commissioner Pct 4, to enter into a Contract between San Patricio County and Western Steel for the new maintenance workshop/equipment barn in Precinct 4.]

SIGN. OKAY. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. 2.4 F. DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON A REQUEST FROM COMMISSIONER GILLESPIE. COMMISSIONER PRECINCT FOUR, TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH SAN PATRICIO COUNTY AND WESTERN STEEL FOR THE NEW MAINTENANCE WORKSHOP SLASH EQUIPMENT BARN IN PRECINCT FOUR. I MOVE TO APPROVE SECOND. OKAY, I GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GILLESPIE. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LOPEZ. ANY QUESTIONS ON THE MOTION? SO IF YOU DON'T MIND REMINDING ME, I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT WE'VE SEEN ON THIS BEFORE, BUT DID YOU HAVE THREE BIDS ON THIS? HOW DID WE ARRIVE AT THIS? THREE BIDS? I MEAN, I'M SORRY FOR THE BIDDING PROCESS. THIS THE ONE WE'RE LOOKING AT IS $752,000. DO WE HAVE THREE BIDS ON THIS PROJECT? AND IS THIS THE BEST BID? I JUST DON'T REMEMBER. THEY WERE SEALED BIDS. THEY WERE THREE, THREE COMPANIES THAT DID THE BID ON I. AND WE WERE OPENED HERE WHEN ALONZO WAS STILL HERE. IT WAS 752 AND THE OTHER TWO WERE 852. AND 842. I BELIEVE THE WESTERN STEEL CAME IN AND GOT THE BEST PRICE. OKAY. AND IT WAS APPROVED. THIS IS JUST THE ACTUAL CONTRACT. OKAY. THANK YO.

OKAY, OKAY. GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER QUESTION HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. 2.4 G

[g. Consideration and action on renewal of Automobile Liability, Automobile Physical Damage, General Liability, Law Enforcement Liability, Privacy or Security Event Liability, and Public Officials Liability coverages.]

CONSIDERATION AND ACTION ON RENEWAL. AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY. AUTOMOBILE PHYSICAL DAMAGE.

GENERAL LIABILITY, LAW ENFORCEMENT LIABILITY. PRIVACY OR SECURITY EVENT LIABILITY AND PUBLIC OFFICIALS LIABILITY COVERAGE. WHO'S. DAVID, ARE YOU GOING TO LOOK AT ME? I'M NOT THE INSURANCE GUY. YEAH, I'M NOT EITHER. BUT HOW ABOUT OUR PRICES CHANGING OR. OR IS THIS JUST AN

[00:35:07]

ANNUAL RENEWAL? RIGHT. YEAH, I'M TRYING TO GET IT TO PULL IT UP. BASICALLY, THIS IS AN ANNUAL RENEWAL WITH THE COVERAGES THAT WE HAVE THROUGH THE TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES, WHICH ARE PRIMARILY OUR LIABILITIES AND OUR AUTO COVERAGE. WE HAVE WE USE MCGRIFF FOR THE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY BUILDINGS AND EQUIPMENT. THE QUOTE IS UP A LITTLE BIT. I CAN JUST TELL YOU FROM EXPERIENCE, OUR AUTO LIABILITY IS PROBABLY DRIVING A LOT OF THAT. AND THEN WE'VE HAD SOME PUBLIC OFFICIALS LIABILITY CLAIMS AS WELL. RECENTLY. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THERE'S A NEW THEY'RE CALLING WHAT USED TO BE CYBER SECURITY AND CYBER CRIME WAS PART OF IT.

THEY'VE SPLIT IT OUT INTO A SEPARATE POLICY NOW. AND THAT'S THAT PRIVACY OR SECURITY EVENT LIABILITY AND EXPENSE. SO THAT'S BEEN SEPARATED AS A SEPARATE DEAL BECAUSE THAT'S BECOMING A BIGGER AND BIGGER ISSUE AS WE MOVE FORWARD. AND AS YOU WILL RECALL, OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, WE'VE HAD SEVERAL EVENTS THAT WE'VE HAD TO REPORT TO TECH AND THEY'VE HAD TO HIRE SOME ENTITIES TO HELP US RESOLVE THOSE ISSUES. I MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND, OKAY, I GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GILLESPIE. SECOND, BY COMMISSIONER LOPEZ. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. WENDELL, OTHER THAN THE PREMIUMS GOING UP SOMEWHAT, IS ANY OF THE COVERAGE OR ANYTHING ELSE CHANGED? NO, I DO NOT RECALL ANY MAJOR COVERAGE CHANGES THIS TIME AROUND OTHER THAN THE THAN THE CYBER CRIME BEING PULLED OUT INTO A SEPARATE, SEPARATE POLICY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAME

[h. Discussion, consideration and action on 2025 San Patricio County employee salaries.]

SIGN. MOTION CARRIES 2.48. DISCUSSION CONSIDERATION. ACTION ON THE 2025 CENTURY OF COUNTY EMPLOYEES SALARIES. MR. RIVERA, ARE YOU GOING TO TRY TO GET THROUGH THIS? OKAY. I'M SORRY ABOUT MR. WINDOW CAN HELP ME OUT. OKAY. SO WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON THE SALARIES FOR 2025. AND IT CAME TO OUR ATTENTION WHAT THE COURT WANTS. I NEED SOME DIRECTION FROM THE COURT ON WHAT THEY WANT ME TO DO. WE HAVE DISCUSSED ABOUT THE 5% COST OF LIVING, BUT THE DISCUSSION CAME UP ALSO ABOUT A STEP INCREASE WITH THE SALARY STRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE BEEN USING OFF AND ON THIS YEAR. MAINLY WE'VE BEEN USING IT FOR NEW EMPLOYEES COMING ON BOARD AND FOR RECLASSIFICATION OF EMPLOYEES INTO NEW POSITIONS OR INTO OPENINGS THAT HAVE COME INTO PLACE. AND I WAS NEEDING TO GET DIRECTION FROM THE COURT AS TO HOW Y'ALL WANTED ME TO HANDLE THE EMPLOYEES THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE. MOVING FORWARD. IF WE WERE DOING ANYTHING WITH THE STEP AT THIS TIME AND WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THAT, MR. WENDELL AND I DISCUSSED THE FINANCIAL PART OF IT. IT DOES NOT REFLECT IN THE ACTUAL GENERAL BUDGET ON EACH PERSON'S DEPARTMENT, SPECIFICALLY, BUT MONEY WAS SET ASIDE TO HANDLE THIS IF IT WAS NEEDED OUT OF CONTINGENCY.

CORRECT. DAVID. YES, THAT IS CORRECT. WE BUDGETED THE 5% COST OF LIVING INCREASE IS BUDGETED IN EACH DEPARTMENT. THE RECLASSIFICATIONS THAT WERE REQUESTED, WE ESTIMATED AT $85,000 COST. THAT IS BUDGETED IN CONTINGENCY AND THE STEP INCREASES WE ESTIMATED AT HALF $1 MILLION. AND THAT IS ALSO BUDGETED IN CONTINGENCY. SO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE COME UP IS BECAUSE WE HAVE THE SALARY COMPENSATION PLAN THAT WE ARE OFF AND ON USING THE COURT IS USING AT TIMES, DEPENDING ON WHAT ELECTED OFFICIAL IS REQUESTING. WHAT I DO JUST NEED SOME DIRECTION. NEXT MONDAY I WILL HAVE A LIST OF RECLASSIFICATIONS THAT WERE REQUESTED AT BUDGET TIME FOR THE COURT'S APPROVAL, AND SEE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THOSE.

ALSO. NOW, COST OF LIVING AUTOMATICALLY. EVERY EMPLOYEE GETS THAT. SO THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE. CAN YOU USE CAN YOU DO AN EXAMPLE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY ANYBODY'S NAME, BUT CAN YOU TRY TO TRY TO LIKE GUIDE US ON WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO TALK ABOUT, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? OKAY.

SO WHEN WE WHEN WE DID THIS COST OF LIVING, I MEAN, WHEN WE DID THIS SURVEY IN 2022, WE DID A MASSIVE INCREASE FOR EVERYBODY IN MAY. WE DID NOT DO ANYTHING IN 2023, 2024. WE DID DO THE

[00:40:02]

INCREASE IN THE SCALE ITSELF, WHICH WE INCLUDED THE COST OF LIVING AS THAT ENTRANCE, BUT WE DID NOT DO ANYTHING WITH EMPLOYEES OTHER THAN COST OF LIVING IN THE STRUCTURE ITSELF.

IT TALKS ABOUT DOING A STEP INCREASE FOR EMPLOYEES IN THE POLICY OR THE MANUAL THAT'S TALKED ABOUT IT TALKS ABOUT JULY FOR WHATEVER REASON. I'M NOT SURE WHY IT USES A MID-YEAR INSTEAD OF WE'RE A JANUARY THROUGH DECEMBER. SO THIS YEAR IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION.

ARE WE GOING TO EVER START DOING THE STEPS TO ACTUALLY GO WITH THE PROCESS THAT WE ACTUALLY LOOKED AT IN 2022? THAT'S WHAT HAS COME UP. BUT IN LOOKING AT THAT, THE WORDING ON THAT, IF ANYONE GOT A RECLASSIFICATION, WENT FROM A CLERK ONE TO A TWO OR MOVED POSITIONS AND THEY RECEIVED THE 4.15, THEN IT'S ALREADY IN PLACE THAT THEY RECEIVE THE 4.15. THEY WOULD NOT GET IT IN JANUARY. SO I NEED DIRECTION FROM THE COURT. DO YOU WANT ME TO EXCLUDE THOSE BECAUSE THEY ALREADY RECEIVED IT, OR DOES EVERYONE ACROSS THE BOARD GET A 4.15 PLUS THE 5%? THAT'S FOR ANYBODY IN A GRADE TEN AND BELOW. IF THEY'RE AN 11 AND ABOVE, THE INCREASED STEP IS 4.5, WHICH IS NORMALLY DEPARTMENT HEADS. THE OTHER THE CONCERN THAT CAME INTO PLACE IS IF YOU HAD ANYBODY THAT HAD A COUNSELING FORM OR WAS REPRIMANDED FOR ANY PARTICULAR REASON, THEY WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR THE STEP INCREASE. SO THERE'S A FEW LITTLE QUIRKS THAT ARE IN THERE THAT I JUST NEED SOME DIRECTION. HOW DOES THE COURT WANT ME TO ADDRESS IT OR DO Y'ALL JUST WANT ME TO DO EVERYONE ACROSS THE BOARD? DEBBIE, DEBBIE, I THINK THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION IN IN HOW THE STEP INCREASES WERE SUPPOSED TO BE APPLIED.

ACCORDING TO THE PLAN. ACCORDING TO THE PLAN, STEP INCREASE IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS TO BE DONE ACROSS THE BOARD BECAUSE OF LONGEVITY OR HOW LONG SOMEBODY'S BEEN IN EVERYTHING. THE PLAN, THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE SALARY REVIEW AND EVERYTHING THAT WE DID WAS ALSO FOR RETENTION. AND, YOU KNOW, FOR DEPARTMENT HEADS TO RECOGNIZE THOSE PEOPLE THAT HAVE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND. IF YOU DO STEP INCREASES ACROSS THE BOARD EVERY YEAR FOR EVERYBODY JUST BECAUSE OF HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN HERE, THAT'S SEPARATE FROM YOUR LONGEVITY. THE STEP INCREASES ARE TWO. AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, RECOGNIZE PEOPLE THAT HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB. IF YOU DO IT ACROSS THE BOARD, THEN YOU'RE TAKING AWAY ANY INCENTIVE FOR ANYBODY TO TRY TO DO BETTER OR IMPROVE THEMSELVES OR ANYTHING.

SO THAT'S KIND OF SEPARATE. AND IT'S COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM A RECLASSIFICATION. WE'VE BEEN DOING A LOT OF RECLASSIFICATIONS SINCE THIS STUDY WAS DONE, BECAUSE SOME OF THE POSITIONS, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE TITLES WERE JUST KIND OF ARBITRARILY GIVEN TO PEOPLE. AND THEN IN ACTUALLY LOOKING AT WHAT DIFFERENT POSITIONS DO, THEY'RE FINDING OUT, WELL, THAT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE SENSE. SO THEN DEPARTMENT HEADS WOULD COME IN AND SAY, HEY, WE NEED TO RECLASSIFY THIS POSITION OR THAT POSITION TO BE MORE IN LINE WITH THE DUTIES THAT THE JOBS ARE, THAT THE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY DOING. SO THE STEP INCREASE, THE OTHER THING WAS IT WAS ADOPTED IN JULY. SO THAT'S WHERE THE JULY THING CAME FROM. AND IT WAS REDONE IN OCTOBER. EXCUSE ME.

SORRY. ALLERGIES. NOW I FORGOT WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. YEAH, YEAH. THE OTHER THING THAT'S IN THE PLAN WAS THAT PEOPLE WERE TOLD THAT THEY HAVE TO INCLUDE A STEP INCREASE IN THEIR BUDGET.

SO THIS YEAR, DURING THE BUDGET TIME, EVERY DEPARTMENT WAS TO PUT INTO THEIR BUDGET WHO THEY NEEDED TO GIVE STEP INCREASES T, WHO THEY WANTED TO BE REEVALUATED OR RECLASSIFIED AND HAVE IT IN THEIR BUDGET. AS FAR AS I KNOW, THAT WAS DONE BY THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS. IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE EACH DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET THING, IT SHOULD BE IN THERE WHICH EMPLOYEES THAT DEPARTMENT HAD WANTED TO GIVE A STEP INCREASE TO AND WHICH EMPLOYEES THERE NEEDED TO BE A RECLASSIFICATION. THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING OF IT AS WELL. AND THAT ALIGNS WITH WHAT THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD IT AS WELL. WE DO A COST OF LIVING INCREASE ACROSS THE BOARD FOR EVERYBODY. THE STEP INCREASE IS BASED ON PERFORMANCE OR MERIT, AND THAT'S BASED ON THAT ELECTED OFFICIAL OR DEPARTMENT HEADS DISCRETION ON WHO THEY SELECT FOR THAT. RIGHT. AND IT'S REQUESTED THROUGH BUDGET TIME. THAT'S CORRECT. WHICH I DID RECEIVE THAT ONE THIS MORNING

[00:45:03]

FROM HOMER AS BECAUSE HE WENT THROUGH ALL OF THOSE THAT WERE REQUESTED DURING BUDGET TIME, JUST AS LONG AS IT'S CLEAR THAT IT'S ONLY DONE DURING BUDGET TIME AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO COME BACK TWO MONTHS AFTER THAT, OR TWO MONTHS AFTER THAT, AND TWO MONTHS AFTER THAT, SAYING, I WANT TO RECLASSIFY THIS PERSON OR RECLASSIFY THIS PERSON, BECAUSE THAT WAS WHAT WAS HAPPENING. ALL THE TIME. WELL, YOU PUT THE MONEY IN YOUR BUDGET DURING BUDGET TIME, BUT YOU CAN MAKE THE STEP INCREASE WHENEVER YOU NEED TO PULL IT FROM CONTINGENCY ANYWAY. THEY'VE DONE IT ALL THE TIME. OKAY, SO I DO KNOW THAT WE PROBABLY WILL HAVE SOME RECLASSIFICATIONS COMING INTO NEXT YEAR AS WE DID THIS YEAR. YOU HAVE A CLERK THREE THAT'S GOING TO BE LEAVING. SO OF COURSE YOU HAVE SOMEBODY IN HOUSE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE. THAT'S A RECLASS. I MEAN, THIS IS KIND OF A PROMOTION. IT'S THE WAY THAT THE WORDING IS SET UP. IT KIND OF INTERJECTS ITSELF BECAUSE YOU LEAVE PROMOTION, YOU HAVE A RECLASSIFICATION, SO YOU HAVE A TRANSFER. SO YOU'RE GOING TO SEE SOME OF THOSE HAPPENING AND YOU ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THAT 4.15 AS MOST OF THOSE POSITIONS ARE IN THOSE TEN AND UNDER. NOW, IF YOU HAVE THOSE IN THE DEPARTMENT HEADS, OF COURSE, THOSE ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. WE HAVE TO REVIEW THOSE DIFFERENT. THAT DOES GO THROUGH THE COMMITTEE. BUT AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT, IT'S WHAT THE COURT IS WANTING TO DO ACROSS THE BOARD. WHAT IS IT YOU WANT ME TO START PLUGGING IN. AND THEN OF COURSE NEXT WEEK BRINGING THESE ADDITIONAL THAT WERE REQUESTED DURING BUDGET AND THEN THE ONES THAT WERE REQUESTED FOR THE RECLASSIFICATIONS. I THINK WE JUST STAY THE COURSE ON THE LEVEL AND STEP, JUST LIKE YOU KNOW, DEBORAH SAID, I, I AGREE, I THAT'S WHAT I THINK. SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NEED MORE THAN THAT, BUT YOU KNOW, NO ACROSS THE BOARD LEVEL, YOU KNOW, STEP INCREASES. THAT'S NOT THE WAY WE DECIDED TO DO IT. UNLESS THEY WERE SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED DURING BUDGET TIME. EXACTLY. YES. YOU KNOW, AND FOR MY EMPLOYEES, I SUBMITTED A LETTER OF REQUEST, ACTUALLY. SO FOR THOSE. SURE. SO WOULD IT MATTER IF WE DID. YEAH. SO EVERYBODY CAN HEAR ME. IT'S A GENERAL QUESTION. YES. PART OF THE SALARY SURVEY WAS TO HAVE US BE COMPETITIVE WITH THE MARKET. WHEN ARE WE EVER GOING TO GO BACK TO CHECK TO SEE IF OUR SALARIES ARE COMPARABLE TO THE MARKET OUT THERE, AND ARE WE GOING TO DO THAT OR. OKAY, SO WOULDN'T THAT BE WOULDN'T THAT BE CONSIDERED THE STEP INCREASE FOR ALL THE EMPLOYEES AS WELL? I MEAN, THAT WOULD THAT WAS THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE SALARY SURVEY. AND IT WENT GREAT AND WE DID IT. BUT ARE WE GOING TO LEAVE IT TO WHERE IT WHERE IT IS AND JUST DO THE COLAS, OR ARE WE EVER GOING TO GO BACK TO THE MARKETPLACE AND SEE WHERE WE. I THINK THAT'S AN AGENDA ITEM FOR ANOTHER TIME. OKAY. BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO REVIEW THIS STUDY IN 25. AND IS THE JUDGE JUST SAID WE ARE LOOKING AT LOOKING AT WE DID THIS IN 2022. WE ARE LOOKING AT DOING EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING. THREE YEARS. SO I GUESS WE WILL BE LOOKING AT THIS AGAIN IN 25 FOR OF COURSE, JANUARY OF 26. WE DON'T ANTICIPATE DOING ANY MIDYEAR LIKE WE DID IN 2022. THAT WAS A CATCH UP AFTER COVID AND ALL THAT MESS, RIGHT? OKAY. SO OKAY, I WANT TO MAKE THAT A MOTION OKAY. I MOVE THAT THE LEVEL AND STEP INCREASES ARE KEPT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, AS DETERMINED BY DEPARTMENT HEADS OR THE JUDGE, AND THEY NOT BE ACROSS THE BOARD ALSO TO THAT, THAT THE COLA IS ACROSS THE BOARD AND WHAT ELSE YOU NEED. WHAT ELSE WE NEED AND I DON'T I THINK THAT'S ABOUT IT. SECOND, HOW ABOUT THE RECLASSIFICATION. RECLASSIFICATION IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE DONE CASE BY CASE WHENEVER THEY'RE NECESSARY. AND YES SIR. AND I'M BRINGING THAT TO Y'ALL NEXT WEEK FOR INDIVIDUAL VOTES BECAUSE THERE'S A THERE'S A LIST THAT I NEED Y'ALL TO LOOK AT. OKAY. SO RECLASSIFICATION CASE BY CASE. THAT'S MY MOTION OKAY. AND I SECONDED THAT. YES I'VE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GILLESPIE SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. ONE OTHER QUESTION. SO I KNOW A YEAR AND A HALF AGO OR SO, WE STARTED DISCUSSING THE FACT THAT WE HAD ISSUES WITH OUR CURRENT PAY SCALE IN CERTAIN AREAS. HAVE WE EVER GOTTEN THOSE ISSUES RESOLVED? WE HAVE GOTTEN SOME OF THE ISSUES RESOLVED. WE'RE HOPING TO GET THOSE SAME ISSUES REVIEWED AGAIN, AND THEN THE OTHER ONES LOOKED AT WHEN WE DO THE 2025 REVIEW NEXT YEAR. YEAH, FOR NEXT YEAR. OKAY, OKAY. GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANYTHING ELSE? HEAR NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED. SAME SIGN. OKAY.

MOTION CARRIES OKAY. CONCLUDES AGENDA ITEMS. WE GO ON INTO PERSONNEL 3.1 A WE DO HAVE.

[3. PERSONNEL-Employment and current employee status changes in accordance with the current personnel policies, County Budget, and State law with notification of such changes to the payroll division of the Treasurer's office.]

[00:50:05]

HOW'S THAT PRONOUNCED ACTIVIDAD ACTIVIDAD. WHAT BURGALAT OKAY. THE BERTHELOT LOT OKAY A SALARY CHANGE. DEPUTY CLERK TWO TAX ASSESSOR COLLECTOR FULL TIME REGULAR GRADE 104 NONEXEMPT AT $3,038.03 PER MONTH. STEP THREE PLUS TO DEPUTY CLERK TWO TAX ASSESSOR COLLECTOR. FULL TIME, REGULAR GRADE 104 NONEXEMPT AT $3,164.10. STEP FOUR EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 1ST, 2024 3.1 B LEONARDTOWN RESIGNATION COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR COMMISSIONER'S COURT ROAD AND BRIDGE ONE FULL TIME REGULAR NONEXEMPT GRADE 109 STEP TEN PLUS AT $5,727.68 PER MONTH, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31ST, 2024 AND 3.1 C MARCELLUS SALARY RESIGNATION. COUNTY CLERK ONE COMMISSIONERS COURT, ROAD AND BRIDGE ONE PART TIME TEMPORARY NONEXEMPT GRADE 102 STEP SIX AT $18 AN HOUR, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31ST, 2024. MOTION TO APPROVE 3.1 A THROUGH C SECOND A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GILLESPIE. I HAVE ONE QUESTION. NOT THIS, NATIVIDAD BERTHELOT. WE'RE GOING TO GIVE HER A RAISE, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO GIVE HER ANOTHER RAISE IN JANUARY. WELL, THIS ONE IS FOR HER DUTIES. CAN WE GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION SO I CAN EXPLAIN? IT DOES HAVE TO DO WITH MY ACCOUNTING. SO. IF YOU WANT MORE QUESTIONS, THAT'S WHAT Y'ALL WANT. MORE INFORMATION TO DISCUSS. I DON'T NEED ANY MORE QUESTIONS. WHY I'M GOOD. NO, I JUST WANTED TO I'M JUST ASKING THE QUESTION. THE ACCOUNTING SPECIALIST. OKAY. ACCOUNTING SPECIALIST WHEN SHE'S OUT. SO THAT'S A LOT MORE REASON. OKAY? OKAY. OKAY. GOOD. SO I GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE? AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. OKAY. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. ITEM FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE DO NOT HAVE EXECUTIVE. SO LET ME GO BACK UP 3.2 IS ACCEPT AND RECORD EMPLOYEE STATUS CHANGES AND HAVE NONE. THIS MORNING EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE HAVE NONE THIS MORNING. MOTION TO ADJOURN, YOUR HONOR. SECOND I GOT A MOTION BY GILLESPIE, SECONDED BY YEARLEY TO ADJOURN ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAME

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.

2. DELIBERATE AND CONSIDER ACTION ON THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:

2. Financial Agenda:

4. Individual Action Agenda:

Dec 09, 2024 Commissioner's Court

2. DELIBERATE AND CONSIDER ACTION ON THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:

2. Financial Agenda:

4. Individual Action Agenda:

Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download Selected Item