[2. Presentation and discussion regarding: a. The FY 2024-25 - FY 2029-30 Long Range Financial Forecast for the General Fund. b. A Debt Management plan ]

AGENDA ITEM TWO PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING THE F.Y.

2024, 25 F.Y.

29 TO 30.

LONG RANGE FINANCIAL FORECAST.

DEBT MANAGEMENT PLAN.

I'LL ASK OF THE COURT.

AS WE BEGIN THESE ITEMS, I WOULD KINDLY ASK COLLEAGUES TO IF WE REALLY COULD WAIT UNTIL THE PRESENTATIONS ARE FINISHED.

I THINK THE STAFF HAS ASKED THAT THEY BE ABLE TO PRESENT THEIR PRESENTATION, AND OBVIOUSLY, I WILL OPEN UP THE FLOOR FOR ALL QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS OF STAFF.

I THINK THIS WILL HELP THEM TO COMPLETE THEIR PRESENTATION AND TO BE ABLE TO, BEST ADDRESS YOUR QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

MISS TINA SMITH DEAN.

GOOD MORNING. THE FLOOR.

GOOD MORNING. TINA SMITH DEAN WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE TO PRESENT TO THE COURT THE FIVE YEAR LONG RANGE FINANCIAL FORECAST FOR THE GENERAL FUND.

IT'S OUR BEST ESTIMATE BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW NOW OF WHAT OUR FINANCIAL FUTURE WILL LOOK LIKE OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

AND WE'LL USE DEFINITELY BE USING THIS AS A, AS, AS WE PLAN FOR THIS YEAR'S BUDGET PROCESS.

THIS YEAR'S LERF IS BASED ON PROJECTIONS.

BASED ON OUR SECOND QUARTER ESTIMATES, WE'RE CONTINUALLY UPDATING OUR ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DURING THE FISCAL YEAR.

AND SO THIS IS AS OF THE SECOND QUARTER, OF COURSE, WE'LL CONTINUE TO REFINE THESE AS WE GET MORE INFORMATION.

AND IT'S ALSO BASED ON YEAR TO DATE REVENUES COLLECTED.

FUTURE PROJECTIONS ARE BASED ON HISTORICAL REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE PATTERNS.

SO GIVING YOU A PICTURE OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THIS FISCAL YEAR 2324, WE STARTED OUT THE YEAR WITH A BEGINNING FUND BALANCE THAT WAS $32.8 MILLION MORE THAN WHAT WAS BUDGETED.

I JUST NEED TO MAKE A NOTE HERE THAT'S NOT AVAILABLE FOR SPENDING.

WE'RE GOING TO NEED THAT AS WE GO OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS TO MAINTAIN OUR 15% FUND BALANCE.

IN 2223, WE RECEIVED AN ADDITIONAL $30.1 MILLION REVENUE.

AND THAT WAS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES, MOSTLY INVESTMENT INTERESTS, BECAUSE, AS WE ALL KNOW, INVESTMENT.

I'M SORRY INTEREST RATES HAVE INCREASED.

WE DID GET SOME USE, SOME ARPA REVENUE, AND THEN MIXED BEVERAGE TAXES INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY.

AND THEN IN TERMS OF ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES, THEY CAME IN $1.7 MILLION LESS THAN WHAT THE BUDGET TEAM ESTIMATED FOR FISCAL YEAR 2223. SO FOR THIS YEAR, WE ARE ESTIMATING REVENUES WILL BE ABOUT 55.7 MILLION HIGHER THAN CERTIFIED 12.9 MILLION.

OF THAT IS PROPERTY TAXES.

AND AGAIN INVESTMENT INTEREST WAS SIGNIFICANT $28.4 MILLION.

AND THEN 3 TO 4 MILLION IN THOSE OTHER REVENUE CATEGORIES.

WE ARE ESTIMATING EXPENDITURES TO BE 11.3 $11.3 MILLION LOWER THAN BUDGETED.

SOME OF THAT IS FROM TURNOVER PERSONNEL SAVINGS JUST ACROSS THE COUNTY GENERALLY.

1.5 MILLION IN OPERATIONAL SAVINGS.

THAT'S ELECTRICITY AND THOSE KINDS OF EXPENDITURES.

WE'RE ESTIMATING WE'LL HAVE $4 MILLION REMAINING IN DESIGNATED FUNDS AND THEN 3 MILLION IN CONTINGENCIES.

AND THAT, AGAIN, IS DUE TO COMPRESSION TURNOVER SAVINGS.

PROPERTY TAXES ACCOUNT FOR ABOUT 80% OF GENERAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE.

[00:05:03]

WE RECEIVED THE FIRST PRELIMINARY REPORT FROM THE BEXAR COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT IN APRIL.

WE WILL RECEIVE THE FINAL REPORT BY JULY 25TH, 2024, WHICH WILL BE THE BASIS FOR THE TAX RATE CALCULATION.

AND WE'LL CONTINUE.

WE CONTINUE WEEKLY TO GET THESE UPDATES FROM BCAD ON A WEEKLY BASIS.

SO WE'LL AGAIN CONTINUE TO REFINE OUR REVENUE ESTIMATES BASED ON THAT.

SO FOR OUR REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS IN THE LONG RANGE FINANCIAL FORECAST, WE'RE ESTIMATING PROPERTY TAX REVENUE TO GROW BY 5.5% FOR FISCAL YEAR 2425, AND THEN WE'RE ESTIMATING 3.5% THEREAFTER.

JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME CONTEXT, WE REVENUE PROPERTY REVENUE GREW BY 7.7% LAST LAST FISCAL YEAR.

SO WE'RE ESTIMATING ABOUT A 2% DECREASE.

AND THEN WE'RE ANTICIPATING INVESTMENT REVENUE WILL DECREASE.

WE WE'RE NOT SURE IF THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OR NOT.

BUT THERE'S TALK ABOUT LOWERING INTEREST RATES.

AND THEN ALL OTHER REVENUES ARE EXPECTED TO GROW AT HISTORICAL RATES.

IN TERMS OF EXPENDITURES, BASELINE PERSONNEL COSTS ARE PROJECTED TO BE FLAT.

FUTURE BASELINE EXPENDITURES.

WE'VE ESTIMATED THOSE BASED ON HISTORICAL EXPENDITURE TRENDS AND THEN SIGNIFICANT UPCOMING EXPENSES ARE INCLUDED.

AND THOSE ARE CONTRACTS AND THINGS THAT THAT THE COUNTY HAS TO PAY THAT WE'VE ALREADY COMMITTED TO.

AND THEN WE ALSO ADD SOME ASSUMPTIONS AND ESTIMATES FOR EMPLOYEE PAY RAISES, SHERIFF'S OVERTIME, HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM CHANGES AND THOSE KIND OF EXPENDITURES. SO BASED ON THAT, THIS IS A PICTURE OF WHAT THE GENERAL FUND WILL LOOK LIKE OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

YOU'LL SEE THAT IN FISCAL YEAR 2829, THAT RED LINE AND BLUE GREEN BLUE LINE CROSS, WHICH MEANS WE'RE PROJECTED TO HAVE A SHORTFALL AT THAT POINT.

FISCAL YEAR 2627 IS WHEN WE BLESS YOU WAS WHEN WE ARE GOING TO NEED TO USE THAT $38 MILLION THAT I REFERRED TO EARLIER SO THAT WE CAN MAINTAIN OUR 15% FUND BALANCE.

AND HOW TO BALANCE.

WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND IS WE REDUCE RECURRING EXPENDITURES AND OR INCREASE RECURRING REVENUES IN THE AMOUNT OF $26 MILLION ANNUALLY, BEGINNING IN FISCAL YEAR 2425, AND THAT WILL BRING US INTO BALANCE BY THE END OF THE FORECAST TERM.

SO IN TERMS OF OUR TIMELINE, THIS IS TENTATIVE AT THIS POINT.

WE DID WE HAVE RECEIVED ALL OF THE BUDGET SUBMISSIONS.

THERE ARE MEETINGS GOING ON RIGHT NOW WITH OFFICES AND DEPARTMENTS.

LOTS OF MEETINGS GOING ON TO DISCUSS REQUESTS, GET MORE INFORMATION FROM THEM.

WE ARE ANTICIPATING THAT WE'LL SEND THOSE BACK OUT TO OFFICES AND DEPARTMENTS JULY 26TH.

WE'LL HAVE SOME MORE DISCUSSION WITH THEM, AND THEN WE'LL FINALLY PROPOSE THE BUDGET AUGUST 20TH.

AND AFTER THAT, WE WILL PROPOSE ADOPTING THE BUDGET ON SEPTEMBER 10TH.

AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

ALL RIGHT. QUESTIONS.

COMMISSIONER KELLER. THANK YOU.

JUDGE. TINA, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.

VERY ILLUMINATING.

IN TERMS OF THE $26 MILLION REDUCTION WHEN WE LOOK AT THE ARPA FUNDING, HOW MUCH MONEY IS THE ARPA FUNDED? LET'S SAY COUNTY OBLIGATIONS OR LIABILITIES? IS STAFFING MAINLY THAT? WHAT DOES THAT AMOUNT EQUAL? THE ROUGHLY? YOU MEAN AT THE END THE AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE FUNDING AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE PROGRAM? IS IT 33 MILLION, 14 MILLION? AND THEN I THINK THAT SO ARPA ENDS IN A MID FISCAL YEAR.

SO THE FIRST YEAR IT'LL BE PROBABLY ABOUT 14 MILLION.

AND THEN WE'LL WE'LL REALIZE THE FULL YEAR'S EXPENDITURES, WHICH IS ABOUT 21.

IS THAT SO 21 MILLION.

YES, SIR. OKAY. SO OF THE 26 MILLION THAT WOULD NEED TO BE CUT, THE SIMPLEST THING FOR THE COURT, RATHER THAN MAKE CUTS IS JUST SAY THAT THEY ARE FUNDED, POSITIONS WILL NOT CONTINUE OR, YOU KNOW, YOU MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO HOW THEY CONTINUE.

I WOULD SAY THAT'S 21 OUT OF 26 MILLION IS PRETTY.

THAT WOULD BE ONE WAY. YES.

YEAH, THAT'S ONE WAY. SO THAT THAT'S THE FIRST THING I WOULD SAY IS TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT ARE THESE POSITIONS SO THAT WE KNOW WHAT WE SHOULD BE BUDGETING FOR, OR IF WE HAVE TO SCALE THOSE PROGRAMS IN SOME WAY THAT IS BITE SIZED, REASONABLE FOR US.

SO IF WE COULD BRING THAT BACK FOR BUDGET CONSIDERATION JUST TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ARPA OBLIGATIONS ARE, AND THEN WE CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS AS WE SEE LONG TERM, I WOULD THINK A LOT OF THEM ARE, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE I MEAN, MY EXPECTATION WAS ONCE THE FUNDING IS ENDED, IT ENDED.

NOW, THE OTHER THING FOR OUR INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT TO LOOK AT IS WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN FIND ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT OR OTHER KINDS OF FEDERAL

[00:10:06]

FUNDS, MANY OF WHICH ARE NOT BEING SPENT TO BRING HOME THE BACON TO CONTINUE THOSE PARTICULAR THINGS WITH OBVIOUSLY A CAVEAT THAT IT'S NOT FOREVER. YOU KNOW, THESE THINGS MAY BE YOU KNOW, A NET YOU KNOW, JUST STOPPAGE IN 2 OR 3 YEARS.

AND THEN, OF COURSE, TO EVALUATE FOR THE COURT TO EVALUATE THESE ARPA PROGRAMS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO KNOW WHAT DID THE STAFF PUT FORWARD AS THE OBJECTIVES, WHAT DID THE STAFF PUT FORWARD AS THE GOALS FOR THOSE FUNDS? AND WHERE ARE WE, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THOSE THINGS? YES. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MOONEY.

WELL, THANK YOU, TINA, FOR WALKING US THROUGH THAT.

A FEW QUESTIONS AND SOME COMMENTS HERE.

I'M NOT SURE WHICH SLIDE IT'S ON, BUT UNDER REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS, JUST WANT TO TO CLARIFY FOR THE COURT, THE 5.5% ESTIMATED GROWTH.

THAT'S BOTH THE COMBINED APPRAISAL GROWTH AND NEW CONSTRUCTION.

CORRECT? CORRECT. THAT'S THE ALL IN.

OKAY. AND SAME THING WITH THE 3.5% THEREAFTER.

CORRECT. ON THE NEXT SLIDE, I'D LIKE TO PUSH BACK A LITTLE BIT ON THE BASELINE. PERSONNEL COSTS ARE PROJECTED TO BE FLAT.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT? OBVIOUSLY, OVER TIME, YOU KNOW, PERSONNEL COSTS HAVE HAVE ALWAYS GROWN.

AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SPECIFIC AREAS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE TO INVEST AS A COUNTY.

CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? YES, SIR.

SO WE DON'T WANT TO ASSUME IN OUR FORECAST THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT WILL BE APPROVING PAY RAISES.

WE DON'T WANT TO PUT THAT IN THE BASELINE, I GUESS.

SO IN THE OTHER, THE SIGNIFICANT UPCOMING EXPENSES ON THAT SLIDE, WE MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT WHAT WE THINK THE COURT MIGHT APPROVE REGARDING SALARIES.

MAY WE AS WE, I THINK WE ESTIMATE A COLA EVERY YEAR, AND THEN WE HAVE SOME ESTIMATES IN THERE FOR THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING CONTRACT.

SO WE DO HAVE SOME IN THERE.

IT'S JUST WE DON'T WE DON'T INCLUDE THOSE IN THE BASELINE.

COMMISSIONER. WHAT BASICALLY OUR METHODOLOGY IS WHEN WE SAY BASELINE, WE'RE TAKING WHAT'S ON THE BOOKS TODAY AND WHAT WE BELIEVE AND NOT MAKING CHANGES TO THAT AND JUST PROJECTING IT FORWARD WHERE WE ADD THERE'S SOME $7,080 MILLION WORTH OF ADDED ADDITIONAL ASSUMPTIONS ABOVE AND BEYOND THE BASELINE, NOT JUST IN PERSONNEL BUT ACROSS THE BOARD.

RIGHT. WE DON'T PUT OUT THE LIST BECAUSE I DON'T WANT PEOPLE OUT THERE SAYING YAY, COLA, BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T MADE THAT DECISION YET, BUT WE ASSUME IT IN HERE FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PROJECTION.

OKAY. WELL THAT'S THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW BECAUSE I WAS CONCERNED.

RIGHT. IF WE'RE NOT FACTORING IN ANY OF THIS AND I'M NOT SPEAKING SPECIFICALLY TO ANY KINDS OF RAISES OR SPECIFIC AREAS OF ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT, BUT THE REALITY IS YEAR OVER YEAR THAT THAT CONTINUES TO GROW.

SO I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU MENTION 15% FUND BALANCE.

SO IS THAT A RESERVE FUND? THAT'S OUR TARGET.

THAT'S OUR TARGET FUND BALANCE.

AND THAT'S 15% OF OUR OUR GENERAL BUDGET.

YES. OUR OPERATING EXPENSES.

YES, SIR. OKAY.

AND THEN ON THE NEXT SLIDE, HOW TO BALANCE.

SO FIRST OF ALL, I'D JUST LIKE TO, TO, YOU KNOW, STATE THE OBVIOUS.

I GUESS THAT ON THE INCREASING RECURRING REVENUE SIDE, I WOULDN'T SUPPORT THAT.

I THINK WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO REDUCE THOSE RECURRING EXPENDITURES AS A COURT.

I THINK COMMISSIONER CALVERT BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT IN THE THE 21 MILLION OUT OF THE 26.

SO YOU KNOW, WE'VE SPOKEN AT LENGTH IN THIS COURT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THESE THESE ARPA FUNDS AND HOW THEY ARE TEMPORARY, THEY'RE TRANSIENT AND THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO EXIST BEYOND THE THE CUTOFF IN 26.

AND SO I THINK THAT'S THAT'S A PLACE WHERE WE HAVE TO START.

WE HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, HOLD THE LINE ON THAT.

AND THEN BY EXCEPTION WE CAN HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT ANYTHING THAT WE FEEL IS NECESSARY TO GRANT AN EXCEPTION TO YOU AND CONTINUE.

BUT I MEAN, THAT WAS THAT WAS WHAT THIS COURT VOTED ON.

AND THAT'S WHAT THIS COURT SUPPORTED.

AND WE MADE IT VERY CLEAR, YOU KNOW, DOZENS OF TIMES THAT THESE FUNDS WOULD NOT CONTINUE IN PERPETUITY.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE NOTE THAT YOU KNOW, I WOULD JUST ALSO LIKE TO, TO COME BACK AND SAY, I THINK WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT REFOCUSING ON PRIORITIES AS A COURT.

[00:15:04]

AND SO THERE ARE GOING TO BE AREAS THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND MORE MONEY IN GOING FORWARD.

AND THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, A TRADE OFF SOMEWHERE ELSE IN ORDER TO TO KEEP OUR BUDGET IN BALANCE.

BUT I BELIEVE OUR CONSTITUENTS AND OUR CITIZENS IN BEXAR COUNTY, YOU KNOW, EXPECT PUBLIC SAFETY AND EVERYTHING THAT COMES WITH THAT, AND THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE CONTINUED INVESTMENTS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT IN OUR SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND OUR CONSTABLES IN OUR COURTS, WHICH WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT DISCUSSION HERE PUBLICLY, BUT, YOU KNOW, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL COURTS.

DISPATCH HAD A DISCUSSION WITH WITH THE CONSTITUENT YESTERDAY REGARDING A TERRIBLE FAILURE ON ON THE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF DISPATCH TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN PROVIDE FIRST RESPONDERS.

AND THERE'S ALWAYS SOMEBODY TO ANSWER THE PHONE.

WE HAVE TO GET THAT RIGHT.

AND I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME MORE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT.

I, EXPECT THEM TO COME TO COURT AND SPEAK ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCE SPECIFICALLY ALSO THE CRIME LAB.

I'VE HEARD THAT THE THE CRIME LAB NEEDS ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT THAT TODAY THEY CAN'T THEY CAN'T TEST ALL THE, THE DRUGS AND, AND EVERYTHING THAT ARE BROUGHT TO THEM BY THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE OR BY OUR CONSTABLES OR SAPD BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES IN ORDER TO DO THAT.

SO I THINK HOLISTICALLY WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT WITHIN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, WHERE ARE THOSE KIND OF CHOKE POINTS THAT NEED ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT? AND I THINK I JUST MENTIONED A FEW OF THEM, BUT I HOPE THAT THAT THOSE ARE THE FOUNDATIONAL THINGS THAT THE THE BASICS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT THAT WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO INVEST IN AND MAKE SURE WE DO RIGHT.

AND WE DO WELL.

AND THEN EVERYTHING ELSE WE CAN, WE CAN SORT OUT AFTER THE FACT, BUT I WANT TO FOCUS ON THOSE BASICS FIRST GOING FORWARD.

THANK YOU, MR. RODRIGUEZ. THANK YOU.

JUDGE. TINA, THANK YOU FOR THAT OVERVIEW.

A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

LET ME START WITH, I GUESS IT'S THE DIFFERENT REVENUE SOURCES.

I KNOW, AS WAS STATED, THAT WE PREDOMINANTLY RELY ON PROPERTY TAX REVENUES.

AND I WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION SPECIFICALLY ABOUT, I THINK ONE OF THE LINE ITEMS YOU MENTIONED IS MIXED BEVERAGE TAX.

THAT'S SEPARATE THAN SALES TAX, I WOULD GUESS.

YES. CORRECT. OKAY.

WHAT WHAT PERCENTAGE DOES THAT MAKE UP OF OUR OF OUR REVENUES? I'M SURE IT'S SMALL, BUT YEAH.

IS IT PROBABLY 6 OR 7 MILLION? IT'S NOT IT'S NOT MORE THAN 10 MILLION OKAY.

AND NOT OKAY.

YEAH. AND THOSE JUST IN TERMS OF A TREND, YOU'RE SEEING THOSE NUMBERS COME UP YEAR OVER YEAR.

OKAY. YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT.

SO I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS WITH RESPECT TO THE, I GUESS, THE ESTIMATED GROWTH NUMBER, I THINK YOU SAID 5.5% LAST YEAR WAS 7.5%.

IS THAT RIGHT? 7.7.

7.7 OKAY.

I'M WONDERING IF I KNOW THAT WE STILL HAVE TO KIND OF WAIT FOR THE APPRAISALS TO BE FINALIZED AND FOR THOSE THAT ARE CONTENT PROTESTING THEIR APPRAISALS.

BUT I'M WONDERING IF REGIONALLY, YOU ALL LOOK EVER AT HOW OUR REVENUE GROWTH COMPARES TO EITHER SURROUNDING COUNTIES OR OTHER URBAN COUNTIES IN TEXAS.

WE HAVE NOT. OKAY.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING I MEAN, IT'S NOT MAYBE NOT NECESSARILY IMPERATIVE FOR OUR DISCUSSIONS, BUT I THINK IT'D BE GOOD TO HAVE A BIG PICTURE WHEN FOLKS TALK ABOUT WHERE PEOPLE ARE MOVING IN TEXAS.

AND HOW THOSE GROWTHS ARE TRENDING, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE AT SOME POINT.

SO I WANT TO JUST MENTION THAT AS A SIDE NOTE THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD, I THINK THAT WE'VE ALREADY TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ARPA CLIFF, SO TO SPEAK.

I KNOW THAT THE COURT, IN MAKING A LOT OF THOSE DELIBERATIONS, ACKNOWLEDGED THE FACT THAT THAT WAS ONE TIME DOLLARS.

AND WE TRIED TO I THINK, BE PRUDENT IN PUTTING THOSE DOLLARS INTO ONE TIME EXPENDITURES.

BUT THAT DIDN'T NECESSARILY HAPPEN, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT CAME TO SIGNIFICANT PROGRAMING INVESTMENT.

THE ONE THAT COMES TO MIND IS THE SMART INITIATIVE THAT WE, THAT WE EMBARKED ON WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT DOING MORE MENTAL HEALTH TYPE CALLS AND RESPONSE AS OPPOSED TO UNIFORM OFFICERS.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE'LL HAVE TO PRIORITIZE.

AND EVEN THOUGH WE MADE, YOU KNOW, SOME COMMENTS ABOUT THIS BEING ONE TIME DOLLARS THOSE ARE I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME DISCUSSION ON PROGRAMS THAT YOU JUST CAN'T

[00:20:03]

SIMPLY PULL THE RUG OUT FROM UNDER THAT ARE DOING GOOD WORK.

AND I THINK THAT'S THE IMPORTANCE OF SOME OF THE THE REPORTS WE'VE BEEN GETTING ON A REGULAR BASIS ON HOW THESE ARE IMPACTING OUR COMMUNITY, HOW THE SHIFT IN RESPONSES TO CALLS HAS CHANGED, NOT JUST HERE, BUT ALL OVER THE STATE AND COUNTRY.

SO I CAN'T IMAGINE I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NUMBER.

I THINK IT WAS LIKE 13 MILLION OR SO THAT WE PUT INTO SMART THAT, THAT FIRST TRANCHE OF ARPA DOLLARS.

AT ANY RATE, I THINK WE NEED TO BE READY FOR SOME TOUGH DISCUSSIONS ON HOW WE CONTINUE TO PROGRAM.

THOSE CALLS, BECAUSE I THINK IT HAS SHIFTED TO SOME DEGREE HOW WE'RE RESPONDING, HOW OUR FIRST RESPONDERS ARE RESPONDING TO THOSE WHO NEED HELP THAT MAY NOT REQUIRE NECESSARILY A CRIMINAL TYPE.

STATUS. RIGHT. IT'S JUST A MENTAL HEALTH STATUS.

SO I THINK THE MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ARTICULATED HOW WE NEED TO PRIORITIZE THOSE BIG PROGRAMMATIC ARPA INVESTMENTS SO THAT WE CAN BE READY FOR THOSE IN THE COMING YEARS.

I KNOW YOU'VE ALREADY CONTEMPLATED THAT IN SOME OF THIS, BUT IF YOU COULD DO THAT FOR US AT SOME POINT, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL AS WELL.

AND THEN I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE COMMISSIONER MOODY MADE SOME GOOD POINTS, I THINK.

THERE ARE TRADE OFFS ALWAYS IN THESE BUDGET PROCESSES.

AND I KNOW PUBLIC SAFETY IS ALWAYS A HIGH PRIORITY FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS.

I WANTED TO JUST UNDERSCORE THE FACT THAT THE COURT HAS MADE SOME SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENTS AT THE SAME TIME.

WHAT'S WHAT'S MAYBE NOT SUSTAINABLE IS WHEN WE LOOK AT YOU KNOW, I THINK IN I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT BUDGET YEAR IT WAS TWO YEARS AGO, MAYBE.

I THINK WE REDUCED THE TAX RATE VERY, VERY SMALL AMOUNT.

BUT WHEN YOU TAKE DOLLARS OFF IN THAT REGARD, IT'S HARD TO THEN HAVE THE DOLLARS TO PUT INTO COMMUNITY BASED POLICING AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. SO I THINK WE NEED TO BE COGNIZANT OF THE FACT THAT WE'VE I THINK WE'VE MADE SOME VERY IMPORTANT DECISIONS RELATED TO NOT JUST THE TAX RATE CUT, BUT THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION. AND THOSE MAY NOT JUST BE SOMETHING THAT IS SUSTAINABLE YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT.

AS WE LOOK AT GROWING A GROWING COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS, IN ADDITION TO WE HAVEN'T EVEN TALKED ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS.

SO I THINK THAT SO FAR THINGS ARE SHAPING UP OKAY, BUT I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME, SOME FLAGS THAT WE NEED TO BE COGNIZANT OF, THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE ON TOP OF.

AND BUDGET AND FINANCE STAFF ALWAYS DO A GOOD JOB.

I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THEIR WORK BECAUSE THEY'RE GETTING READY TO GO INTO THE HEAVY SEASON OF THE SUMMER.

BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT OVERALL, THE COUNTY I THINK IS IN GREAT FINANCIAL SHAPE, BUT THE WARNING SIGNS NOT OF OUR OWN DOING. BUT I THINK JUST BECAUSE GROWTH IS MAYBE SLOWED A LITTLE BIT AT LEAST THAT'S THE WAY IT'S TRENDING, BUT ALSO TO THE INFLUX OF DOLLARS FROM OUR FRIENDS IN WASHINGTON AND OTHER PLACES IS SLOWING DOWN.

AND SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE MAKING THE USE OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS HERE LOCALLY AS BEST WE CAN.

SO I APPRECIATE THAT, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE CONTINUING DISCUSSION THIS SUMMER.

AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR WORK.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JUDGE.

COMMISSIONER CLAY-FLORES.

ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD.

COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU.

JUDGE. A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT THOSE OF US IN GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE MINDFUL OF A COUPLE OF YEARS.

GEORGE HERNANDEZ CAME HERE AND I DON'T KNOW, REMEMBER HOW MANY OF US WERE ON THE COURT.

MAYBE NONE OF US EXCEPT ME.

AND HE HAD A $51 MILLION DEFICIT THAT HE WAS COMING INTO, I THINK, BECAUSE THE DISTRICT PROGRAM WAS BEING TAKEN AWAY AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL INSTEAD OF CUTTING EVERYWHERE.

HE INVESTED IN CARDIAC THINGS THAT WOULD GET THEM HEART SURGERIES AND JUST DIFFERENT STUFF AND DIFFERENT AREAS.

AND HE CAME OUT FINE.

HE DIDN'T HAVE ANY ISSUES.

THEY CREATED MORE REVENUE BECAUSE THEY THEY INVESTED IN THEMSELVES IN THE SAME WAY, THE COUNTY IN THESE CONVERSATIONS HAS RARELY THOUGHT THROUGH THE WAYS THAT YOU CAN ACTUALLY CREATE MORE REVENUE FOR THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT.

AND TO ME, 80% OF OUR REVENUE, AS YOUR POWERPOINT INDICATED, IS FROM PROPERTY TAXES.

SO THE LOGICAL SOURCE THERE IS BUILDING MORE HOUSING.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, FROM WHAT I REMEMBER WHEN I WAS TAKING, YOU KNOW, GOVERNMENT 303 OR WHATEVER IT WAS, YOU CAN EITHER HAVE AUSTERITY OR YOU CAN HAVE STIMULUS.

AND SO I WOULD SUGGEST TO THE COURT THAT WE WORK WITH THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY TO FIGURE OUT HOW DO WE CREATE MORE THINGS LIKE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DISTRICTS, HOW DO WE MARRY OURSELVES WITH THE FEDERAL DESIRE TO CREATE 2 MILLION MORE HOMES, WHICH THE PRESIDENT ANNOUNCED RECENTLY THAT HE WANTS TO DO TO HELP LOWER THE COST OF

[00:25:03]

HOUSING, WHICH WOULD BE EVEN MORE IMPORTANT TO A POOR COUNTY WHERE THE BIGGEST COUNTY OVER A MILLION WITH THE POOREST POPULATION.

HOW DO WE DO MORE OF THAT SO THAT OUR REVENUE INCREASES? I THINK THAT IS REALLY VITAL FOR AREAS WHERE WE DON'T HAVE SEWER BECAUSE THAT SEWER COST IS WHAT IS PROHIBITIVE FOR A LOT OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY TO DEVELOP MANY AREAS.

SO I DON'T WANT US JUST TO THINK ABOUT AUSTERITY BECAUSE, TO BE HONEST, GOVERNMENTS THAT GO THROUGH AUSTERITY PROGRAMS ALMOST ALWAYS COME OUT WORSE, ALMOST ALWAYS I'VE RARELY, RARELY SEEN A GOVERNMENT THAT DOES AUSTERITY HAVE GOOD JOB CREATION, LOW UNEMPLOYMENT? IT USUALLY JUST MAKES THINGS WORSE BECAUSE IN THE GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT, GOVERNMENT IS 10% OR WHATEVER IT IS OF THE WHOLE ECONOMIC ACTIVITY.

AND IF GOVERNMENT STARTS CUTTING POSITIONS AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF, THAT MEANS LESS TAXPAYERS AS EMPLOYEES OF THE COUNTY WHO ARE TAXPAYERS, ETC., ETC.

SO WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT WALKING INTO AUSTERITY AND LOOK AT THAT IN THE CONTEXT OF OUR PROJECTIONS.

SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS REMINDED ME OF GOVERNMENT 303.

IN TERMS OF THE BONDING AGENCIES AND THEIR THEIR DESIRE FOR RESERVES FOR A COUNTY, IT'S ABOUT 15%. CORRECT.

CORRECT. SO WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE HAVE IN OUR RESERVE? IN EXCESS OF 15%.

LIKE WHAT DO WE HAVE? WE'VE GOT MORE THAN THAT IN OUR RESERVE.

I THINK IT'S 28 BASED ON THESE ESTIMATES.

YEAH, THAT'S ANOTHER AREA. YOU COULD STIMULATE THE BUDGET BY LOOKING AT THAT 28% THAT YOU HAVE AND HELPING TO COVER SOME OF YOUR COSTS THAT, THAT THAT HELP SERVICES NOT DECREASE.

I MEAN, THE ISSUE THAT COMMISSIONER MOODY BROUGHT UP OF THE DISPATCHERS, I MEAN, THAT IS REAL LIFE AND DEATH THAT WE'VE GOT TO ADDRESS.

I THINK THE ISSUE FOR US IS WHERE WE HAVE SMALLER COUNTIES WHO HAVE RAISED THE WAGES.

IT COULD BE A DOLLAR MORE AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE VOLUME.

SO SOMEONE SAYS, YOU KNOW, I'M RACKING MY BRAINS OUT WITH ONLY SIX OF THE 15 DISPATCHERS HIRED, WHICH IS LITERALLY WHAT WE HAVE 6 OR 7 OF THE 15 POSITIONS, AND I CAN GO TO ATASCOSA COUNTY IT'S FULLY STAFFED AND MAKE MORE.

RIGHT. SO WE JUST NEED TO, TO TO THINK ABOUT THOSE CORE PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES AND SHORE SHORE THEM UP AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE YOU KNOW, WE'VE SORT OF BEEN, YOU KNOW, WHEN I FIRST GOT IN HERE, I SAT DOWN WITH BECAUSE I DON'T I'M NOT TRYING TO THROW SHADE, BUT I SAT DOWN WITH HENRY CISNEROS AND HE SAID, YOU KNOW, SAN ANTONIO, BEXAR COUNTY, THEY DON'T DO HOUSING PARTICULARLY WELL.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, IT'S A FORMER HUD SECRETARY WHO TRAVELED THE COUNTRY AND HE SAID, LOOK, WE JUST DON'T DO IT LIKE OTHER COUNTIES DO IT.

AND I THINK WE NEED TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE, NOT BECAUSE TOMMY CALVERT LOVES HOUSING.

I LOVE HOUSING FOR A REASON.

IT'S BECAUSE IT HAS A LOT OF BENEFITS TO OUR PEOPLE AND EVERYTHING FROM MENTAL HEALTH TO PHYSICAL HEALTH TO WEALTH BUILDING TO COMMUNITY INTEGRITY OF RENTERS. SO VERSUS A HOMEOWNERS AND AND KEEPING NEIGHBORHOODS GOOD.

BUT THEN THERE'S A SELFISH REASON IT'S THE COUNTY BUDGET WILL IMPROVE.

IT WILL DEFINITELY IMPROVE.

SO SOMETHING TO MARINATE ON.

IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT AUSTERITY COURT.

IT'S ALSO ABOUT STIMULUS.

AND I KNOW THAT THERE HASN'T BEEN FEDERAL, YOU KNOW, REALLY STRONG FEDERAL FUNDING FOR THE PRESIDENT'S CALL FOR $2 MILLION.

HOWEVER, THERE'S STILL A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING THAT COULD HELP HOUSING, LIKE THE WATER FUNDING.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S SEWER STUFF WE DON'T HAVE.

THERE'S DIRTY PIPES THAT WE HAVE HERE, AND I'M NOT SURE WE'VE WE'VE APPLIED FOR SOME OF THOSE THINGS, SO I JUST WANT TO THROW THAT OUT.

THANK YOU. JUDGE. YEAH.

COMMISSIONER MOONEY. JUST A COUPLE FINAL COMMENTS.

FIRST OF ALL UNDERSTAND MY COLLEAGUES COMMENTS.

I DO WANT TO SAY THAT IN TERMS OF BUILDING UP THE RESERVE WITH FORESIGHT ON, YOU KNOW, THIS IMPENDING CHALLENGING FINANCIAL TIME.

I APPLAUD THE PROGRESS MADE ON THAT FRONT.

HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, I DO THINK THERE'S JUST SAY I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HERE IS ADVOCATING FOR A TRUE AUSTERITY CONDITION.

RIGHT. BUT I THINK WITH SOME FISCAL CONSTRAINT.

AND, YOU KNOW, I WOULD PUT IT MORE IN THE CATEGORY, AS I SAID EARLIER, A REFOCUSING ON THE BASICS, THE DISPATCH SERVICES, LAW ENFORCEMENT, PUBLIC SAFETY, CRIME LAB COURTS WHAT ALL OF OUR CITIZENS EXPECT AND DESERVE FROM FROM US AS A COUNTY, I THINK IS JUST THE THE WAY WE SHOULD WE

[00:30:07]

SHOULD TRY TO GO HERE AND PUT THOSE BIG ROCKS IN THE BUDGET BUCKET FIRST, AND THEN WE FIGURE OUT WHAT WE WHAT WE HAVE AND THOSE REMAINING ITEMS. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO ASK OUR CITIZENS TO PAY FOR, OR IS IT, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT THAT CAN BE LEFT OUT OF THE BUDGET BUCKET GOING FORWARD? SO THAT'S JUST WOULD BE MY APPROACH TO TO THE BUDGET AS WE GO FORWARD HERE.

THE ONE THING I WANTED TO MENTION TOO, IN TERMS OF ADDITIONAL REVENUE I DO THINK YOU MENTIONED HERE ON THE SLIDE UNDER REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS OTHER REVENUE PROJECTED TO GROW AT HISTORICAL GROWTH RATES, COURT COSTS AND FINES.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THAT CATEGORY AND WHETHER THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES TO ENSURE THAT THOSE INTERFACING WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM UTILIZING THESE SERVICES ARE PAYING MORE FOR A GREATER PERCENTAGE OF THOSE SERVICES GOING FORWARD. AND I THINK THAT THAT'S THAT'S FAIR.

AND IT'S FAIR TO THE MAJORITY OF TAXPAYERS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

SO IF WE COULD GET SOME MORE INFORMATION ON WHAT THOSE FEES ARE AND HOW THEY'VE CHANGED OVER TIME AND WHETHER THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY THERE, I THINK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THAT I COULD LOOK AT.

THANK YOU. SURE. TINA, LET ME LET ME LET ME WEIGH IN AS COUNTY JUDGE.

FIRST, LET ME THANK THE COURT, MY COLLEAGUES, FOR PARTICIPATING IN TODAY'S WORK SESSION.

I THINK THIS IS THE PURPOSE OF THE WORK SESSION IS TO HAVE EVERYBODY EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS, VIEWS, THE DIRECTION TO STAFF.

WHAT I TAKE AWAY FROM THE DISCUSSION ON THE DIAS IS THAT EVERYBODY HAS SOME UNIQUENESS TO THEIR PERSPECTIVE.

I DON'T THINK NOBODY'S HEARING IS ZERO.

SOME OF IT'S GOT TO BE THIS WAY OR THAT WAY.

SO I THINK THE CHALLENGE TO THE BUDGET OFFICE AND TO THOSE THAT HELP PUT THE BUDGET TOGETHER FOR THE COUNTY IS TO FIND A BALANCE, A BALANCE OF HOW DO WE LOOK AT THE REVENUES? WHAT DOES THAT PROJECTION LOOK LIKE? OBVIOUSLY, TO THE EXPENDITURES, TO THE WHAT? WHAT'S THAT? WHAT'S THAT ACCOUNTING TERM, THE SUNK COST, THE COSTS THAT ARE ONGOING EVERY YEAR, PLUS THE COSTS THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE INCREASED IN ORDER TO MEET THE DEMANDING NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY.

SO I BELIEVE WE'RE HAVING A HEALTHY DISCUSSION.

BUT LET ME LET ME ASK SOME QUESTIONS AND GIVE YOU GIVE THE BUDGET OFFICE SOME FEEDBACK FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.

FIRST LET'S LOOK I THINK IT'S SLIDE SEVEN THE REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS.

AND SO I WANT TO KNOW A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE FROM WHAT WAS THE GROWTH PRIOR TO MY TAKING COUNTY JUDGE? OBVIOUSLY, THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN PRE-COVID, COVID AND NOW POST COVID.

AND NOW, AS WE ARE OBVIOUSLY MOVING FORWARD, WHAT WERE THOSE PROJECTIONS AT THAT TIME AS COMPARED TO WHAT IT IS NOW AS COMPARED TO WHAT YOU'RE PROJECTING.

BECAUSE WHAT I PRESUME AND I'LL JUST.

TINA SO YOU CAN HELP ME.

I ASSUME IT WAS AT A HIGHER LEVEL AND IT'S NOW SIGNIFICANT.

IS THE WORD SIGNIFICANTLY GONE DOWN ON THE DOWN SLOPE ON PROJECTION PROJECTED TAX REVENUE? CAN YOU CLEAR THAT UP.

SO IT GIVES ME A PERSPECTIVE OF WE GOT LESS MONEY COMING INTO THE BUDGET DO WE NOT.

YES. SO THE YEAR BEFORE LAST, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, PROPERTY TAX REVENUE GREW AT 13%.

YES. 13%.

THEN IT WENT DOWN TO 7.7.

AND NOW WE'RE PROJECTING 5.5.

AND IS IT EVEN. AND IT OBVIOUSLY MAY BE EVEN LOWER WHEN WE GET THE IN FUTURE REPORT FROM THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT.

IT MIGHT BE.

I DON'T THINK SO.

WE'VE RECEIVED THEY HAVE RECEIVED 180,000 OR SO APPEALS.

THEY STARTED WORKING ON THE COMMERCIAL BIG DOLLAR AMOUNTS.

AND SO THAT'S THAT, THAT ANY LOSS FROM THAT IS ALREADY INCORPORATED INTO OUR 5.5% ESTIMATE.

SO NOW THEY'RE FOCUSING MORE ON THE SMALLER DOLLAR AMOUNTS, THE HOMEOWNERS.

SO WE FEEL LIKE WE'RE GOING TO BE PRETTY CLOSE TO WHAT WE'RE ESTIMATING 5.5%.

BUT DECREASING REVENUE MEANS WE WE NEED TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS SOMEWHERE THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS.

YES, SIR. YES, SIR.

ALL RIGHT. ALSO TWO AND LET ME JUST GIVE CONTEXT TO COMMISSIONER MOODY IN REGARDS TO THE FOCUS ON COURT COSTS AND FINES.

AND I'M BRINGING A PERSPECTIVE OF HAVING BEEN ON THE COURT AND HOW OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM IMPACTS OUR COMMUNITY.

[00:35:06]

IT'S MY BELIEF AND OPINION THAT UNFORTUNATELY, THE JUSTICE SYSTEM AFFECTS THE PEOPLE OF COLOR DISPROPORTIONATELY.

THAT'S JUST MY OPINION AND VIEW.

SO I AM KIND OF PUTTING A CAUTION SIGN OF SAYING, LET'S PUT COURT COSTS AND FINES ON THIS JUSTICE SYSTEM BECAUSE UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK IT IMPACTS PEOPLE THAT ARE MOST AFFECTED BY THIS.

I'M CERTAINLY NOT ASKING THAT WE NOT HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE, HOLD PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE, HAVE THEM PAY THEIR COURT COSTS AND FINES.

BUT I THINK WE NEED TO. IT'S THE OLD ISSUE I THINK THE LEGISLATURE HAS DEALT WITH IN THE PAST OF TRAFFIC COURTS, MUNICIPAL COURTS, USING THEIR COURTS AS REVENUE GENERATORS.

I THINK THE LEGISLATURE HAS QUITE CLEARLY.

COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, I THINK YOU WERE THERE WHEN THEY SAID THEY DON'T WANT CITIES PUTTING TRAFFIC TICKET FINES AS A MEANS OF RAISING MONEY.

SO I WANT TO WHAT I WANT TO BRING TO THE ATTENTION TO THE PUBLIC ESPECIALLY, IS HOW DELICATE AND HOW SENSITIVE WE NEED TO BE IN ORDER TO MAKE THE DECISIONS.

I CERTAINLY AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER CALVERT IN REGARDS TO THE EFFECT OF HOUSING AND HOW IT CAN POSITIVELY IMPACT, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I'M ALSO FULLY AWARE, HAVING NOW BEEN ON THE COURT FOR A YEAR AND A HALF, THAT THOSE HOUSING PROJECTS ARE BIG TICKET.

THEY COST A LOT AND WE HAVE TO BE VERY CONSCIOUS OF HOW MUCH THOSE COST, WHETHER IT'S THE DEBT SERVICE OR HOW MUCH CONTRIBUTION WE HAVE TO PUT IN TO THESE HOUSING PROJECTS THAT I BELIEVE ARE SUSTAINABLE AND A WAY TO BUILD OUR COMMUNITY AND GROWTH.

AGAIN, IT'S A BALANCE, CORRECT, MISS SMITH? CORRECT, SIR.

SO LET ME ALSO GO INTO.

SOME OF THE AND I BELIEVE SOME OF THE COMMENTS.

AND LET ME GO OFF SOME OF THE COMMENTS I HEARD WITH COMMISSIONER MOODY.

I TOO AGREE THAT WE REALLY SHOULD LOOK AT THE BASIC RESPONSIBILITIES AND NEEDS.

AND SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO KNOW, MISS TINA, IS ARE YOUR PROJECTIONS TAKEN, IN EFFECT, SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT COMMISSIONER MOODY HAS BROUGHT UP, NAMELY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PROBABLY GIVE MORE RESOURCES TO CRIME LAB.

WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GIVE MORE RESOURCES TO THE JUSTICE SYSTEM ALL THE WAY FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT TO THE COURT.

HAVE THOSE PROJECTIONS BEEN BAKED IN OR OR IS THERE? ARE YOU GOING TO WAIT TILL THE BUDGET REQUESTS ARE MADE BY THOSE RESPECTIVE DEPARTMENTS OR ELECTED OFFICIALS? THEY ARE BASED ON WHAT WE ESTIMATE THE COURT MIGHT APPROVE.

THEY ARE IN THERE. SO WE DO HAVE SOME ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT NEW COURTS.

WE DO HAVE SOME ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT PATROL DEPUTIES.

WE HAVE NOT NECESSARILY CARVED IN SPECIFIC TO THE CRIME LAB, BUT WE HAVE SOME ESTIMATES AS TO PROGRAM CHANGES THAT MIGHT BE APPROVED COUNTYWIDE, ASSUMING SOME OF THAT WOULD BE IN THE CRIME LAB. SO YES, WE DO HAVE SOME ASSUMPTIONS IN THERE BECAUSE JUST RECENT WE HAVE A JAIL POPULATION ISSUE, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY NOBODY'S FAULT, SO TO SPEAK.

BUT WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE THERE WAS A BUDGET REQUEST FOR NEARLY $4 MILLION TO PUT JAIL POPULATION IN OTHER COUNTIES.

ARE THOSE TYPE OF PROJECTIONS PUT INTO YOU, OR YOU CAN'T REALLY EVER PROJECT WHETHER WE'RE IN THOSE TYPE OF SITUATIONS? WE DIDN'T WE HAVE NOT PUT IN A PROJECTION FOR THAT SPECIFICALLY, BUT WE DO HAVE PROJECTIONS FOR SHERIFF'S OFFICE OVERTIME IN THE JAIL.

WE ALSO HAVE PROJECTIONS FOR THEM FILLING FILLING THE VACANT ADULT DETENTION POSITIONS.

SO, YOU KNOW, OVER THE FORECAST PERIOD WE'RE ASSUMING A LITTLE BIT LESS OVERTIME, A LITTLE BIT MORE DIRECT PAY TO EMPLOYEES.

SO BOTTOM LINE IS YOU CAN'T ALWAYS ANTICIPATE THE PROJECTIONS.

YOU JUST DO THE BEST YOU CAN AND TRY TO MAKE IT SO THAT YOU CAN HAVE A BALANCED BUDGET THAT'S SENSITIVE TO THE NEEDS OF THE COUNTY.

WOULD THAT BE A CORRECT STATEMENT? YES, SIR. OKAY.

ALSO TWO, AND I THINK THE COURT HAS DISCUSSED IT.

I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE'VE HAD THAT ONCE IN A LIFETIME CIRCUMSTANCE FROM COVID OF WHAT CARES MONEY.

THAT'S AN ACRONYM ARPA MONEY ARPA WHICH HAVE GIVEN US SOME REALLY UNPRECEDENTED FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUR LOCAL INSTITUTION, NONPROFITS, COUNTY SERVICES ONE.

THE AREA THAT I KNOW AND I THINK, COMMISSIONER CLAY-FLORES, YOU TAKE A SPECIAL INTEREST FROM MENTAL HEALTH, WE PUT, WHAT, OVER $20 MILLION INTO MENTAL HEALTH FOR SCHOOL DISTRICTS, CORRECT? CORRECT.

AND I BELIEVE MOST, IF NOT ALL SCHOOL DISTRICTS HAVE NOW IMPLEMENTED AND ARE PROVIDING DIRECT SERVICES TO STUDENTS, PARENTS, TEACHERS OR

[00:40:07]

ANYBODY THAT THEY SERVE.

CORRECT? YES, SIR.

AND I HAVE ASKED AND MAKING THESE AWARDS TO THESE SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT THEY COME BACK AND REPORT BACK AND TO SEE THE DATA, THE METRICS, THE ANALYTICS, TO SEE HOW EFFECTIVE THESE PROGRAMS ARE.

HAVE WE CONSIDERED THAT WE MAY HAVE TO PICK UP THAT BILL AND TO CONTINUE THOSE PROGRAMS, IF INDEED THEY PROVIDE THE SERVICES THAT WE HOPE THAT THEY'RE PROVIDING, HOPEFULLY KEEPING LESS VIOLENCE IN THE SCHOOLS, DEALING WITH THE TEENAGE SUICIDES, DEALING WITH THE BULLYING, DEALING WITH WHATEVER ISSUES THOSE SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

BECAUSE, AS WE KNOW, IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT, THEY ARE FACING SIGNIFICANT, PROBABLY EVEN MORE SIGNIFICANT BUDGET CRISIS THAN OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE AT THIS TIME.

SO I JUST NEED TO KNOW, HAVE WE BAKED, FOR LACK OF BETTER TERM, THOSE TYPE OF PROJECTS THAT ARE BIG AND MAYBE BIG TICKET REQUESTS, NOT THE SCHOOL MENTAL HEALTH.

SO WE'VE GOT WE'VE GOT A, A PROCESS PROBABLY IN THE NEXT YEAR OR TWO YEARS PROBABLY.

I THINK IN TWO YEARS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A REPORT BACK WHEN THE ARPA MONEY NEEDS TO BE ALL EXPENDED.

AND I PRESUME COMMISSIONER CLAY-FLORES, SOME OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS WILL BE COMING IN AND ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING, AND WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AND FIGURE OUT WHAT'S BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITY JUST IN REGARDS TO THE MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAM IN SCHOOLS.

SO WHEN I STARTED PUSHING FOR THIS AND TALKED TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS, AT LEAST IN MY PRECINCT, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS IS MORE OF A SEED FUNDING SO THAT THEY CAN SHOW METRICS AND EVALUATIONS, AND HOPEFULLY THIS WILL HELP THEM TO DEVELOP RELATIONSHIPS WITH FOUNDATIONS SO THAT HOPEFULLY OTHER FUNDING CAN CONTINUE IT.

BUT YEAH, THOSE ARE DEFINITELY HARD DECISIONS.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE. ANOTHER BIG TICKET THAT WE'VE DONE WITH THE ARPA MONEY IS PUBLIC HEALTH, CORRECT? CORRECT. DIDN'T WE PUT ABOUT $30 MILLION INTO PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE CREATION OF NEW PUBLIC HEALTH AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT? THAT DOCTOR GUERRERO IS LEADING QUITE ADMIRABLY AT THIS TIME? THE COMMENT I WOULD MAKE IS THAT WILL ALSO HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED IN FUTURE BUDGETS.

HAS THAT BEEN BAKED IN TO THE PROJECTIONS AT THIS TIME? BECAUSE THAT'S ANOTHER BIG TICKET.

NOT ALL OF IT HAS NOT THAT.

NO. RIGHT.

YES, SIR. AND OBVIOUSLY WE'RE WE'RE FORTUNATE TO HAVE ARPA MONEY WHICH IS NOT TAX LOCAL TAX REVENUE.

SO BUT AT SOME POINT WE WILL HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS WHETHER TO MAINTAIN THOSE PROGRAMS AT THE CURRENT LEVELS, IF NOT INCREASE LEVELS, BECAUSE I CAN SEE AN ISSUE OF WHAT WE JUST DID IS ANIMAL CONTROL.

WE HAVE MADE A SIGNIFICANT AND THIS IS A EXAMPLE THAT WE MADE A SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT IN ANIMAL CONTROL WITH THE NEW FACILITY OVER ON CANYON ROAD, CORRECT? YES, SIR. AND SO OBVIOUSLY THOSE ARE GOING TO HAVE ADDITIONAL OPERATIONAL COSTS.

AND QUITE FRANKLY, I WOULD ASSUME THAT I THINK THE DISCUSSION THERE WAS WE MAY NEED TO EXPAND THAT OUT AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE IF WE'RE TO DEAL WITH THE ISSUE OF ANIMAL CONTROL, STRAY ANIMALS, DANGEROUS ANIMALS, ALL KINDS OF ANIMALS THAT UNFORTUNATELY PEOPLE DON'T TAKE CARE OF, AND THAT FALLS UPON US AS BEXAR COUNTY TO TAKE CARE OF, ESPECIALLY THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS, WHICH UNFORTUNATELY, WE SEE JUST AS IT IS IN THE INCORPORATED AREAS.

THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS HAVE SIGNIFICANT ANIMAL CONTROL ISSUES TO CORRECT.

CORRECT. SO HAS THAT HAVE WE KIND OF LOOKED AT THAT ISSUE IN PROJECTION THAT'S NOT INCORPORATED INTO THIS FORECAST? SO THERE I AM BRINGING UP SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF WHERE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER WE CONTINUE THESE INVESTMENTS.

IT CONTINUES THESE EXPENDITURES OR DO WE START CUTTING BACK, IF NOT CUTTING THE PROGRAMS? AND IN ITS ENTIRETY, THOSE ARE TOUGH DECISIONS.

CORRECT. THAT YOU NEED DIRECTION FROM THE COURT? YES, SIR. OKAY.

LET ME KIND OF JUST CLOSE WITH THIS.

SO. I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT THAT SOME OF THE COMMENTS MAY BE CONSTRUED AS AUSTERITY OR NOT AUSTERITY.

I DON'T LOOK AT THAT.

I LOOK AT IT JUST THAT FROM A BELT TIGHTENING PERSPECTIVE OF JUST LOOKING AT EVERY EXPENDITURE AND LOOKING AT EVERY REVENUE OPPORTUNITY THAT WE CAN. WE CERTAINLY WANT TO MAKE THE INVESTMENTS TO KEEP ECONOMIC GROWTH.

THAT'S WHY WE GIVE BIG CORPORATIONS LIKE TOYOTA SOME TAX ADVANTAGES, BECAUSE WE KNOW IN RETURN, THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT IS GOING TO BE MORE THAN THE ABATEMENT OR TAX INCENTIVE THAT WE PROVIDE TO THEM.

[00:45:05]

ISN'T THAT THE ESSENCE OF WHAT WE DO FOR THOSE PARTICULAR MAJOR CORPORATIONS? YES. YES, SIR.

AND SO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO IS CONTINUE TO ADJUST TO THE PROJECTIONS.

IT IS QUITE CLEAR TODAY THAT THOSE PROJECTIONS ARE ON A DOWNWARD SLOPE, AND I BELIEVE THE MOST TELLING GRAPH IS THE TWO LINES THAT SUGGEST THAT IN 4 OR 5 YEARS, IF WE'RE ON OUR CURRENT GROWTH, WE I THINK THAT. SLIDE NINE.

CORRECT. YES, SIR.

THAT IN ABOUT THE YEAR 2820, 27, 28, 28, 29, THOSE LINES NOW, IF REVENUES GO DOWN MORE WITHOUT ADDITIONAL OR EXPENDITURES GO UP AT THIS TIME, WE'RE ADVANCING THAT CROSS SECTION OF THOSE TWO LINES MUCH EARLIER.

YES, SIR. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.

AND WHAT WILL HAPPEN WHEN THAT WHEN THAT TWO LINES INTERSECT.

WHAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO HAPPEN AT THAT TIME IF WE WAIT, THERE WILL BE WE WILL NEED TO SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE REVENUES OR SIGNIFICANTLY DECREASE.

LET'S CUT TO THE CHASE.

YOU'LL HAVE TO INCREASE TAXES, OR YOU'LL HAVE TO LAY PEOPLE OFF.

IT'LL BECAUSE 66% OF YOUR OPERATING COSTS ARE SALARIES AND BENEFITS, WHICH IN ESSENCE ARE REALLY DRASTIC MOVES.

WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT? YES. YES, SIR.

SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK AT THE BUDGET SO THAT WE CAN KEEP THOSE TWO LINES FROM INTERSECTING, EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY WELL COME CLOSER SO LONG THEY DON'T INTERSECT AND OBVIOUSLY DON'T OVERLAP EACH OTHER AS YOU DO IN 2728.

THAT'S THE KEY TO FINANCIAL STABILITY THAT WILL MINIMIZE THE IMPACT ON SERVICES OUR EMPLOYEES.

BECAUSE AT THE SAME TIME, DO WE NOT ALSO HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO TAKE CARE OF ALL EMPLOYEES? AND HAVE WE DONE THAT IN THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF WITH THE AND I UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS COULD WITH THE PAY STUDY, BUT THE PAY STUDY DID ITS VERY BEST TO ADJUST SALARIES FOR THE COUNTY EMPLOYEES, CORRECT? YES, SIR. AND OBVIOUSLY, WE HAVE A DUTY TO TAKE CARE OF THEM AND SEE IF WE CAN HELP PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PAY RAISES FOR THEM.

I'M NOT PUTTING THAT ON THE RECORD, BUT JUST SAY THAT'S SOMETHING WE MUST CONSIDER, CORRECT? YES, SIR. AND THEN WHEN WE DO BENEFIT PACKAGES LIKE WE DID FOR THE PARKING GARAGE AND PROVIDED FREE PARKING, THAT WAS A BIG TICKET ITEM.

IT WASN'T CHEAP, WAS IT? NO. SO WHEN WE DO INCENTIVES AND IF WE PROVIDE CONTINUOUS INCENTIVES FOR EMPLOYEES, WHETHER IT'S SUBSIDIZED HOUSING OR SOME TYPE OF TUITION WAIVER OR WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO INCREASE RETENTION AND INCREASE RECRUITMENT FOR OUR COUNTY EMPLOYEES, ESPECIALLY THERE AT THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE IN NEED OF OF NEW RECRUITS AND NEW EMPLOYEES.

THOSE WILL ALSO BE SOME OF THE SET EXPENSES, OTHER THAN ADDING MORE DEPUTIES OR ADDING MORE STAFF.

OBVIOUSLY, HERE AT THE COURTHOUSE, WE'RE CONTINUALLY UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE MORE SPACE FOR ALL THE COUNTY DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING THE COURTS, WHICH WE MAY ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT FINDING.

AND I THINK WE'VE HAD THAT DISCUSSION OF THE SPACE NEEDS AND THAT WE BASICALLY, AT LEAST IN THIS HISTORIC COURTHOUSE, WE'RE PACKED UP, RIGHT.

WE'RE WE HAVE A NO VACANCY HERE.

AND I THINK WE'VE GOT THAT AT THE PET TOWER AND AT THE JUSTICE CENTER.

SO WE'RE HAVING TO LOOK AT OTHER SPACE IN ORDER TO MEET THE INCREASING NEEDS OF THE COUNTY DEPARTMENTS.

THAT'S ANOTHER TRUTH, ISN'T IT? YES, SIR. SO, IN CONCLUSION, MISS MADINE, WHAT WHAT'S YOUR OVERALL VIEW? IS IT I TAKE IT WE'RE WE'RE IN GOOD SHAPE, BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS.

AND I THINK THESE WORK SESSIONS ARE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE YOU DIRECTION.

CAN I ASK, HAVE YOU GOTTEN ENOUGH DIRECTION FROM THE COURT TODAY, OR ARE WE GOING TO NEED MORE DISCUSSIONS TO HELP YOU COME WITH A BALANCED BUDGET? I THINK WE'VE WE'VE GOT ENOUGH TO GET STARTED AND WE'LL CONTINUE TALKING TO THE COURT AND HOPEFULLY GET SOME MORE FEEDBACK ON PRIORITIES.

ANY FINAL COMMENTS? I GOT I GOT IT. GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER.

I WANT TO HELP YOU WITH YOUR IDEA ON THE SCHOOLS.

I THINK THAT WE CAN WORK WITH OUR LOBBYING TEAM AT THE LEGISLATURE BECAUSE ON THE SCHOOLS, IT'S REALLY TO AND THE STATE'S OBLIGATION AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S OBLIGATION ON THAT MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELING CONTINUATION.

THEY DO HAVE SOME NEW BILLS THAT ARE COMING FORWARD ON MENTAL HEALTH FOR THIS SESSION, AND I THINK WE CAN LOBBY TO BE IN FAVOR OF OUR

[00:50:07]

SCHOOLS KEEPING THESE SERVICES GOING SO THAT IT DOESN'T FALL ON THE COUNTY, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE A PRETTY PRICEY OBLIGATION LONG TERM, I WORRY I'VE SEEN A LOT OF REQUESTS FROM SCHOOLS, WHETHER THEY'RE PUBLIC OR CHARTER OR EVEN PRIVATE, COMING TO THE COUNTY FOR FUNDING.

AND IT'S HARD FOR US TO KEEP UP BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF SCHOOLS.

AND I THINK IT'S BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER THE STATE HAS TO, YOU KNOW, REALLY PULL THEIR WEIGHT IN TERMS OF THAT OBLIGATION TO MAKE SURE OUR KIDS ARE HEALTHY IN ALL WAYS.

AND SO I WANT TO JUST SAY THAT AS OUR LEGISLATIVE TEAM GETS READY, WE CAN PUT A HIGH PRIORITY FOR THE COUNTY TO LOBBY TO HAVE THOSE POSITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN FUNDED BY THE COUNTY NOW TAKEN OVER, REALLY IN FUNDING FROM THE STATE.

SO I WANT TO I WANT TO MAKE THAT SUGGESTION TO HELP US, BECAUSE I HOPE YOU'RE RIGHT, COMMISSIONER COWARD.

I'LL I'LL TAKE WHATEVER I CAN GET FROM THE STATE AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

I CAN, BUT I HAVE NOT.

I DON'T HAVE AN OPTIMISTIC VIEW ON SOME OF THOSE COMMENTS.

YOU KNOW, I HEAR YOU. I AGREE, I AM NOT COMPLETELY OPTIMISTIC, ALTHOUGH I KNOW THEY'RE CASH RICH.

YEAH. THEY GOT THEY GOT BILLIONS IN RESERVE AND THE RAINY DAY FUND AND IT'S A RAINY DAY FOR OUR KIDS.

SO I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE MENTAL HEALTH, SOCIAL MEDIA AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT CONVERSATION.

IF WE'RE GOING TO GO IN THAT DIRECTION TO THINK ABOUT, REALLY, HOW DO THE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS MODEL FOLLOW? BECAUSE WE COULD HAVE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CENTER FOR HEALTH CARE SERVICES OR ANY NUMBER OF OTHER DELEGATE AGENCIES WE FUND AS PART OF THAT CONVERSATION, ESPECIALLY WITH SCHOOL CLOSURES, READJUSTMENTS AND THEIR FOOTPRINTS.

THEN BUT BUT IT'S A BIG FINANCIAL OBLIGATION FOR THE COUNTY TO TAKE ON FUNDING SCHOOLS IN ANY KIND OF LONG TERM WAY.

I WOULD BE VERY CAREFUL.

THAT'S A STATE OBLIGATION.

SO ONE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I DO WANT TO INFORM THE COURT AND THIS IS JUST BECAUSE THIS IS WITH MY ACADEMIC EXPERTISE. WHEN I SAY THIS, IT'S GOING TO JAR YOU.

BUT IF YOU GO TO THE FEDERAL OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET AND YOU ASK WHAT ARE THE MOST STIMULATIVE THINGS GOVERNMENT CAN DO TO RAISE REVENUE? ACTUALLY, IT'S NOT CORPORATE TAX ABATEMENTS.

IT'S ACTUALLY UNEMPLOYMENT, EXTENSION OF UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS, HELPING THE POOR, HELPING THOSE ON THE MARGIN.

WHY? I MEAN, I DIDN'T IT WAS KIND OF IT WAS ODD TO ME WHEN I READ THAT.

BUT THE REASON IS WE'RE A CONSUMPTION ECONOMY.

SO THE ECONOMY DOES BEST WHEN PEOPLE ARE BUYING MILK, PAYING RENT, TAKING CARE OF THEIR BASIC OBLIGATIONS.

SO THAT'S AN INTERESTING LIGHT BULB THAT I'M NOT SURE HAS EVER BEEN WAGED IN OUR BUDGET THOUGHT PROCESS.

IF WE HAVE THAT DATA AND WE THINK ABOUT FOLKS ON THE MARGINS SPENDING MORE IN THE LOCAL ECONOMY BECAUSE THEIR, THEIR, THEIR SAFETY NET, OR THEY'RE EITHER WORKING OR DOING BETTER OR JUST TAKING CARE OF.

SO THAT'S A THOUGHT.

THIS THE SECOND MOST STIMULATIVE THING IS HOUSING.

IT'S NUMBER TWO.

SO I JUST WANT A DATA DRIVEN KIND OF THING.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE MY WORD FOR IT.

YOU CAN GO TO THE FEDERAL OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET AND LOOK AT THE THINGS GOVERNMENT CAN DO TO GET MORE REVENUE.

AND YOU'LL FIND THESE THINGS IN ORDER.

THANK YOU. JUDGE.

THANK YOU.

ARE WE GOING TO THEN DEBT MANAGEMENT OR WHAT'S.

COMMISSIONER MOODY, I'M SORRY.

GOT A QUESTION? JUST JUST A COUPLE FINAL COMMENTS.

I APOLOGIZE, BUT BASED ON JUDGE'S COMMENTS, I WANTED TO TOUCH ON SOMETHING.

JUDGE BRINGS UP A GREAT POINT ABOUT THE THE ADDITIONAL COSTS FOR HOUSING THOSE INMATES.

RIGHT. AND ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, THAT WAS GOING TO BE $4 MILLION, I BELIEVE.

SO HOPEFULLY IT IS NOT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.

AND HOPEFULLY THIS IS, YOU KNOW, A BUMP IN THE ROAD.

BUT, YOU KNOW, IN CONVERSATIONS WITH, WITH BRANDON WOOD AT THE STATE JAIL COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, THESE THINGS NEVER GO IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION.

WE ARE A A LARGE COUNTY, AND WE'RE CONTINUING TO GROW.

I THINK WE WOULD WE WOULD LIKELY ALL AGREE THAT THE CONSENSUS IS THAT SOME OF THE LOW LEVEL OFFENSES HAVE HAVE ALREADY BEEN REMOVED FROM THE JAIL.

MOST OF THE FOLKS IN THE JAIL NEED TO BE IN THE JAIL, AND THERE'S WIDESPREAD AGREEMENT ON THAT.

SO WHAT CAN WE DO IN THE FUTURE AS WE GROW AS A COUNTY, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE MORE INMATES.

WE MAY BE ABLE TO BUY SOME TIME WITH MORE EFFICIENCY IN OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AND OUR COURTS REDUCING THE, THE,

[00:55:08]

THE, THE RESETS AND EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE COURT SYSTEM.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION AS A COURT AND WITH THE SHERIFF ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO GOING FORWARD.

AND I KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK AND TALK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THESE TWO COUNTIES AND THOSE INMATES THAT THAT WENT THERE.

BUT OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, TEN YEARS, IS THAT GOING TO BE ENOUGH? ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL CONTRACTS THERE, OR ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A VERY NEW CONVERSATION AROUND ANOTHER ANNEX, ANOTHER JAIL.

AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S COME UP IN COURT IN A LONG TIME, BUT I THINK AS THE GOVERNING BODY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO START TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS BECAUSE WE'RE AT, YOU KNOW, 2.1, 2.2 MILLION PEOPLE TODAY.

I MEAN, LOOK AT ALL THE PROJECTIONS.

WHEN WE'RE AT 3 MILLION, DO WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO FIT IN IN A 5000? CAPACITY JAIL? I DON'T SEE HOW IT'S POSSIBLE.

WE'RE AT 4 MILLION. ARE WE GOING TO FIT? ABSOLUTELY NOT.

SO WE KNOW WE'RE WE'RE HEADED THAT WAY IN TERMS OF POPULATION.

WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE INMATES.

SO WHAT IS THE SOLUTION GOING TO BE IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO TO MOVE THOSE INMATES AROUND OR BE ABLE TO HAVE ANOTHER FACILITY OR LOCATION? AND I JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S IT'S MY RESPONSIBILITY TO TO PUT THAT ON THE TABLE, GIVEN SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE TALK ABOUT THE EXISTING BASELINE BUDGET AND, BUT THERE'S THESE OTHER INJECTS THAT ARE COMING THAT WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT.

AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE THAT OUT IN SOME WAY TO GET IT, GET IT IN TO THE BUDGET AS WELL.

SO I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT AND THE VERY LAST THING WE I THINK WE ALL AGREE ON THE PROBLEMS THAT, THAT WE'RE FACING.

SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF OF WHAT THE SOLUTION IS.

IT'S NOT THAT WE DON'T AGREE ON THE PROBLEM, BUT I THINK IF WE WANT TO SOLVE AND ADDRESS ALL THESE PROBLEMS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT NEW WAYS TO DO IT IN AN INNOVATIVE, COST EFFECTIVE OR MORE COST EFFECTIVE WAY.

JUST LIKE WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES, WE ALL KNOW THAT'S A PROBLEM.

WE ALL KNOW WE NEED TO PROVIDE FOR THAT SERVICE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, AS I SAID AT THE TIME, YOU KNOW, ARE THERE WAYS TO PARTNER WITH NONPROFITS? ARE THERE WAYS TO PARTNER WITH THE CITY VALUE ENGINEER THE BUILDING, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IF IF IF WE DON'T, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WHAT OUR SOLUTIONS HOW WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE SOLUTIONS TO ALL THESE PROBLEMS WITHOUT BREAKING, BREAKING THE BANK GOING FORWARD.

SO THAT'S ALL.

APPRECIATE YOU AND APPRECIATE YOU SHARING THIS WITH US.

THANK YOU. JUDGE DAVID.

JUDGE. OH SOME MORE.

I APOLOGIZE. I KNOW WE'RE GOING.

THANK YOU. TO COMMISSIONER MOODY'S POINT, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS TO INFORM US I'VE RECENTLY JUST SKIMMED.

I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT DEEPLY IN THE THE DETAILS, BUT THERAPEUTIC JUSTICE AT BEXAR COUNTY HAS LED OVER THE YEARS, HAS BEEN PART OF THE REASON OUR NUMBERS HAVE GONE DOWN.

AND I THINK THAT THE PROBLEM IN OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IS THE SYSTEM.

IT'S WE'VE BEEN DOING IT A PUNITIVE WAY FOR A LONG TIME, AND THAT NOT A HOLISTIC DEEP DIVE INTO THE INDIVIDUAL SITUATION, WHAT WE CALL WHAT GOVERNOR PERRY CALLED GETTING SMART ON CRIME BACK, BACK IN THE DAY.

AND I THINK LOOKING AT LIKE THE NORDIC COUNTRIES AND NORWAY AND SWEDEN AND HOW THEIR WHOLE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IS REALLY A THERAPEUTIC SOLUTION RATHER THAN YOU KNOW, KIND OF THE BALL AND CHAIN SITUATION THAT THE US SYSTEM HAS BEEN. I'M NOT I'M NOT CLAIMING TO, TO KNOW HOW TO DO ALL THIS, BUT I, I DO KNOW THAT THEY HAVE A LOT LESS RECIDIVISM ISSUES AND OTHER KINDS OF ISSUES BECAUSE THEY'RE THEY'RE DOING IT DIFFERENTLY.

THE SCARLET LETTERS AREN'T AS MUCH AROUND HINDERING PEOPLE.

THEY JUST TRY TO GET PEOPLE WHERE THEY NEED TO BE.

SO I DO THINK IF WE'RE IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE BUDGET THINGS YOU'RE RIGHT, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS.

FOR EXAMPLE, ARE WE INVESTING ENOUGH IN YOUTH SUMMER JOBS? I LOOKED LAST NIGHT AT THE GUN VIOLENCE PLAN OF TRAVIS COUNTY, STARKLY DIFFERENT THAN THE MARKETING PLAN WE HAVE.

AND IN TRAVIS COUNTY THEY WERE INVESTING IN YOUTH, SUMMER JOBS, THERAPY FOR GUN VIOLENCE GROUPS TO HAVE THERAPY AND COUNSELING FOR PEOPLE, ROOT CAUSE KIND OF STUFF.

[01:00:03]

NOT JUST THE $5,000 WE WANT TO GIVE GUN VIOLENCE GROUPS TO DO RESEARCH FOR THE MARKETING AGENCY, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, HAVING DONE A THOUSAND MARKETING PLANS.

WE'RE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, MANY CONSULTANTS I'VE EVER HIRED AT $5,000 TO DO MY MARKET RESEARCH, WHICH IS BASICALLY WHAT THE PROPOSAL THAT I SAW COMES ACROSS.

IT'S A ONE OF THE MOST BACKWARDS PROPOSALS I'VE EVER SEEN IN PUBLIC POLICY IN 30 PLUS YEARS OF BEING INVOLVED IN PUBLIC POLICY.

BUT HERE WE ARE.

ANYWAY, THANKS VERY MUCH, DAVID.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

GOOD MORNING, JUDGE COMMISSIONERS, AND I'LL BE TALKING TO YOU ABOUT OUR OUTSTANDING DEBT AND SOME IDEAS ABOUT HOW TO MOVE FORWARD.

AS ALWAYS, I NEED TO THANK OUR VERY GOOD FINANCE STAFF, AS WELL AS OUR CONSULTANTS, OUR FINANCIAL ADVISORS WHO HAVE HELPED WITH THIS ANALYSIS. BUT THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE MINE, WHICH IS WHY I'M HERE.

AND IF YOU LOVE OR HATE THIS PLAN, I'M YOUR GUY.

SO. A QUICK AGENDA FOR THIS DISCUSSION.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SIMILAR.

YOU JUST SAW THE GENERAL FUND LONG RANGE FORECAST.

WE'LL GIVE YOU AN EVEN LONGER RANGE DEBT FORECAST FOR OUR DEBT SERVICE FUNDS.

WE'LL TALK ABOUT OUR BOND RATINGS, WHICH ARE TRIPLE-A AND SOME OF OUR COMPARISONS TO OUR OTHER COUNTIES IN TEXAS.

WE'LL TALK ABOUT CAPITAL PROJECTS GOING FORWARD, AND YOU'LL HEAR MY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HOW TO MOVE FORWARD.

NUMBER ONE, THIS IS OUR LONG RANGE DEBT SERVICE FORECAST.

WHEN WE DO DEBT SERVICE, WE GO OUT MUCH FURTHER THAN SIX YEARS BECAUSE THESE ARE CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS.

YOU'RE BASICALLY LOCKED IN.

AND WHAT YOU HAVE HERE ARE SIMILAR GROWTH ASSUMPTIONS IN PROPERTY TAXES TO THE GENERAL FUND, IN FACT, ARE THE SAME.

IT ONLY INCLUDES OUR CURRENTLY BUDGETED CAPITAL PROJECTS.

IN OTHER WORDS, I'M NOT ADDING A PAD AMOUNT FOR FUTURE CAPITAL, AND IT ASSUMES OUR DEBT SERVICE REMAINS LEVEL AT 4.25% DURING THE FORECAST PERIOD.

THE REAL PURPOSE, AND I WISH WE COULD HAVE GOTTEN THE SCALE A LITTLE BETTER HERE.

BUT THE REAL PURPOSE IS OF THIS GRAPH IS TO SHOW YOU OUR DEBT IS AFFORDABLE.

WE ARE NOT AT RISK OF NOT BEING ABLE TO PAY OUR DEBT.

IN FACT, YOU COULD ISSUE MORE DEBT AND WE WOULD STILL BE AFFORDABLE.

BUT THE ISSUE THAT HAS COME UP IN THE LAST 6 TO 12 MONTHS HAS BEEN A CHANGE IN RATING AGENCIES METHODOLOGY, AND I WANT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THAT.

WHAT WE'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND, JUST GIVE AWAY THE PUNCH LINE HERE IS THAT WE FOCUS ON THE NEXT 18 TO 24 MONTHS SPENDING THE DEBT YOU'VE ALREADY ISSUED, WHICH IS OVER $400 MILLION IN THE LAST THREE YEARS, AND BEGIN PLANNING FOR AFTER THAT, 18 TO 24 MONTHS TO IMPLEMENT WHAT WILL HOPEFULLY BY THEN BE SHOVEL READY CAPITAL PROJECTS, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM. AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A NEW WAY, NOT A NEW WAY, BUT A DIFFERENT WAY OF APPROACHING FINANCING THOSE CAPITAL PROJECTS.

SO I'LL GET TO ALL THAT.

FIRST OF ALL, JUST AN OVERVIEW OF OUR EXISTING PORTFOLIO.

AS YOU CAN SEE, BY FAR THE LARGEST TRANCHE OF OUR DEBT IS PROPERTY TAX SUPPORTED CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION.

SECOND BIGGEST ARE OUR HOTEL OCCUPANCY AND MOTOR VEHICLE RENTAL TAX, WHAT WE CALL THE VENUE TAX.

WE DO HAVE OUTSTANDING FLOOD CONTROL CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION.

AND FINALLY THERE'S A SMALL PORTION SUPPORTED BY THE MOTOR VEHICLE TAX.

OUR BOND RATINGS I'M SURE YOU'RE WELL AWARE.

BUT FOR THE PUBLIC, WE ARE TRIPLE A FROM ALL THREE MAJOR RATING AGENCIES MOODY'S, STANDARD AND POOR'S AND FITCH.

WHY DOES THAT MATTER? NUMBER ONE, IT'S A SIGNAL OF THOSE AGENCIES CONFIDENCE IN THIS COURT'S ABILITY TO MANAGE OUR FINANCES.

AND ALSO, IT LOWERS JUST AS YOUR PERSONAL CREDIT SCORE IS HIGHER, YOU GET LOWER BORROWING COSTS.

THE SAME IS TRUE FOR THE COUNTY HOOPS.

[01:05:06]

WE WERE INFORMED, I GUESS, LAST DECEMBER THAT MOODY'S WAS REVISING REVISING ITS RATING METHODOLOGY FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, AND WE WERE INFORMED THAT WE WERE ONE OF ABOUT 300 LOCAL ENTITIES WHOSE RATING WAS BEING PLACED IN, QUOTE UNQUOTE, REVIEW STATUS.

AGAIN, NOT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T THEY WERE WORRIED ABOUT OUR ABILITY TO MAKE OUR DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS.

THEY SIMPLY WERE LOOKING THEY HAD HAD A NEW RATIO, LONG TERM LIABILITIES RATIO, AND COMPARED US TO OTHER COUNTIES, AND WE WERE HIGH.

I WANT TO COMPLIMENT OUR BUDGET.

TINA'S BUDGET AND TONYA'S BUDGET AND FINANCE TEAM, AND OUR FINANCIAL ADVISORS AND BOND COUNSEL, BECAUSE THEY WORKED REALLY HARD WITH OUR MOODY'S REPS TO TRY AND PUT OUR BEST FOOT FORWARD.

AND INDEED, THEY MAINTAINED OUR TRIPLE A STATUS.

BUT THEY DID INFORM US THAT ON THIS PARTICULAR RATIO, WE WOULD NOT HAVE OTHERWISE QUALIFIED AS TRIPLE A JUST BECAUSE OF THIS RATIO AND THE WEIGHT THEY HAVE CHOSEN TO ATTACH TO IT.

AND AGAIN, THE REAL POINT OF THIS IS IT'S THEIR CONFIDENCE IN THIS COURT'S ABILITY TO MANAGE OUR FINANCES LONG TERM THAT REALLY GIVES THEM THE COMFORT TO REAFFIRM THAT TRIPLE-A RATING AND OUR GROWTH LOCALLY.

FITCH RATINGS DID NOT PLACE US IN REVIEW STATUS, AND THEY MAINTAIN THEIR TRIPLE-A.

BUT THEY DID NOTE THAT IF THEY SEE DECLINING FUND BALANCES CONTINUED INCREASES IN LONG TERM LIABILITIES, OR IF OUR ECONOMY WEAKENS, THOSE WOULD BE FACTORS FOR CONCERN.

STANDARD AND POOR'S IS DOUBLING THE WEIGHT OF LONG TERM LIABILITIES RATING IN THEIR ASSESSMENT.

AND THEY ALSO INCLUDE IN THAT NUMBER ARE LONG TERM PENSION AND RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS AS WELL, NOT JUST OUR OUTSTANDING DEBT. AND THIS IS JUST A PAGE THAT GIVES YOU MORE WORDS AROUND WHAT I JUST THE LAST THREE SLIDES I SHOWED YOU. SO HOW DO WE COMPARE WHEN YOU LOOK AT OUR TOTAL LONG TERM DEBT.

OUTSTANDING. AND THIS IS PRINCIPAL NOT INTEREST.

IT'S ABOUT $2.5 BILLION.

THAT IS LESS THAN ONLY HARRIS COUNTY.

HOWEVER, AND THIS IS THE REAL CRUX OF THE MATTER WHEN YOU LOOK AT DEBT PER CAPITA, WHICH IS DEBT DIVIDED BY THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN BEXAR COUNTY.

WE'RE THE HIGHEST IN TEXAS, MUCH HIGHER THAN HARRIS COUNTY.

OBVIOUSLY, BECAUSE HARRIS COUNTY HAS MUCH HIGHER POPULATION THAN WE DO.

AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT OUR TREND LINE AND DEBT PER CAPITA, YOU'LL SEE IT'S THE RED LINE THAT I'M LOOKING AT.

AND YOU'LL SEE THERE IT PLATEAUS.

THEN IT GOES UP, IT PLATEAUS, THEN IT GOES UP.

THOSE ARE.

THE GRAPHIC IMPACT OF POLICY DECISIONS.

THIS COURT, THIS AND PREVIOUS COURTS HAVE MADE.

FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU LOOK AT 2007 2008, THE FIRST SIGNIFICANT BIG INCREASE WE SAW THAT WAS A CONSCIOUS INTENTFUL DECISION BY COMMISSIONERS COURT AFTER THE HOUSING CRASH.

THEY HAD INSTRUCTED US THE SUMMER BEFORE THE CRASH TO HAVE A PLAN ON THE SHELF FOR HOW THE COUNTY MIGHT RESPOND TO AN ADVERSE PROPERTY TAX AND HOUSING MARKET HERE LOCALLY.

AND SO WE HAD A PLAN AND THE COURT IMPLEMENTED IT.

AND THAT PLAN WAS TO ACCELERATE OUR CAPITAL PROGRAM, BECAUSE AT THE TIME, YOU MAY RECALL, THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY WAS REALLY HURTING.

PEOPLE WERE GETTING LAID OFF, PROJECTS WERE GETTING CANCELED.

THE COUNTY CHOSE TO TRY AND HELP FILL THAT VOID AND PRESERVE SOME OF SOME OF THOSE CONSTRUCTION JOBS AND THE MULTIPLIER EFFECT THEY HAD. BUT THAT MEANT ISSUING SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF DEBT BECAUSE WE ACCELERATED OUR CAPITAL PLAN.

THEN THEREAFTER, EVERY TIME THERE'S A MAJOR PROJECT, FOR INSTANCE, I THINK SOME OF THESE ARE LIKE SPC OR INVESTMENT IN ADDITIONAL VENUES, AS WELL AS SAN PEDRO CREEK.

AND AND THEN IT KIND OF LEVELS OUT FROM THERE.

BUT THESE ARE ALL INTENTIONAL DECISIONS.

THEY COST MONEY IF THEY ARE FUNDED BY ISSUING DEBT.

[01:10:06]

OOPS. SORRY ABOUT THAT.

THE GOOD NEWS, OR BETTER NEWS I SHOULD SAY, IS THAT IF WE CAN NOT CONTINUE, CONTINUE ADDING TO OUR DEBT LOAD, THE SCHEDULE OF OUR NATURAL DEBT RETIREMENT IS FAIRLY STEEP.

IN OTHER WORDS, FOR EVERY YEAR THAT WE DON'T ADD TO OUR EXISTING DEBT, WE COULD RETIRE JUST NATURALLY ABOUT MASSIMINO'S $100 MILLION WORTH OF EXISTING DEBT.

SO THE MORE YEARS YOU GIVE YOURSELF, THE MORE WE CAN BUY THAT NUMBER DOWN, JUST NATURALLY, WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING ELSE.

THE OTHER THINGS WE'LL POINT OUT IS SINCE THE HOUSING CRASH FOR, IN MY OPINION, AN ABNORMALLY LONG PERIOD OF TIME. INTEREST RATES HAVE BEEN VERY LOW, LONGER THAN I EVER THOUGHT THEY WOULD BE THAT LOW.

SO IN A SENSE IT MADE SENSE TO BORROW AT INTEREST RATES AROUND 3.2% FOR 30 YEAR DEBT.

THAT'S. I'M OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER.

JUDGE A, YOU AND I WERE BOTH PROBABLY CAN REMEMBER JIMMY CARTER AND INTEREST RATES BEING INFLATION BEING 18%, I MEAN INTEREST RATE OF 3.2%.

WE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF IT WHILE IT WAS THAT LOW.

AND I THINK FUTURE COURTS WILL LOOK BACK AND SAY THAT WAS WISE, THAT WAS PRUDENT, ESPECIALLY IN AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE INFLATION IS OVER THAT AMOUNT.

THAT'S IN EFFECT IN REAL TERMS, FREE MONEY WE BORROWED AT ZERO REAL INTEREST.

BUT THAT RATE THAT IS CHANGING, THAT ENVIRONMENT IS CHANGING.

AND FINALLY, IF WE WERE DOWNGRADED FROM TRIPLE-A TO THE NEXT LEVEL, WHICH IS AA PLUS, THAT WOULD ADD WE, OUR FINANCIAL ADVISORS, ESTIMATE ABOUT TEN BASIS POINTS TO OUR INTEREST COST, OR ABOUT $2 MILLION ON A $100 MILLION ISSUANCE. SO CAPITAL PROJECTS, JUST TO REMIND THE PUBLIC, IN 21 AND FY 2122 COMMISSIONERS COURT ADOPTED A $620 MILLION TEN YEAR CAPITAL PROJECT PLAN THAT INCLUDED FLOOD CONTROL, CREEKS AND TRAILS, ROADS AND PARKS.

THIS WAS THE OUTLINE OF THE PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED.

THERE WERE SHOWS YOU HOW MANY PROJECTS IN EACH CATEGORY AND THE TOTAL DOLLARS AT THAT TIME WE THOUGHT THEY WOULD COST.

SINCE SINCE ADOPTING THAT PLAN, THE COURT HAS ISSUED OR THE COUNTY HAS ISSUED DEBT TO INITIATE AND FUND THOSE PROJECTS.

SO FAR IN THE FIRST THREE YEARS, WE'VE ISSUED ALMOST $200 MILLION.

IN ADDITION, THE COURT HAS CHOSEN TO ADD OTHER PROJECTS TO THAT LIST.

AND SO IN 2122, THE COURT ADDED 72 MILLION FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECTS.

AND THOSE THOSE BONDS HAVE ALL BEEN ISSUED AND THOSE WERE TYPICALLY FACILITIES AND TECHNOLOGY RELATED INVESTMENTS.

AND BASICALLY YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT COMMISSIONER MOODY, THE POTENTIAL NEED FOR A NEW JAIL.

OUR CURRENT JAIL IS VERY OLD, AND IT'S BASICALLY GOING TO BE AN ANNUAL.

IT'S GOING TO NEED ANNUAL INVESTMENTS JUST TO KEEP IT IN OPERATION.

SINCE THAT YEAR, 110 NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS HAVE BEEN AUTHORIZED BY COMMISSIONERS COURT.

IN ADDITION, ANOTHER 22 MILLION TO FUND SHORTFALLS IN 10 MILLION PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECTS, ADDING 172 MILLION.

AGAIN, THAT DEBT HAS BEEN ISSUED.

SO IN TOTAL, BETWEEN FUNDING THE TEN YEAR PLAN FOR THE FIRST THREE YEARS, AS WELL AS THE PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED, YOU HAVE ISSUED ABOUT $400 MILLION OVER THESE LAST THREE YEARS.

NOW, AS THIS SLIDE SHOWS, THERE ARE CONSIDERABLE CASH BALANCES OR UNSPENT MONEY OUT OF THAT.

WHAT WE RECOMMEND THE COURT CONSIDER, AND I REALIZE YOU'RE NOT AGENDIZED FOR ACTION TODAY, BUT WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING YOU BEGIN TO CONSIDER IS WHAT I LAID OUT BEFORE.

LET'S CONCENTRATE IN THE NEXT 18 TO 24 MONTHS ON SPENDING THE CASH WE'VE ALREADY HAVE IN THE BANK.

[01:15:02]

YOU CAN BEGIN PLANNING FOR TWO YEARS FROM NOW TO BID OUT THE NEXT WAVE OF PROJECTS.

BUT EVEN IF YOU DO THAT, WHAT I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT THE COURT CONSIDER INTO THE FUTURE IS THE INSTEAD OF ISSUING THE DEBT RIGHT UP FRONT WHEN YOU START THE PROJECT.

INSTEAD YOU INITIATE THE PROJECT USING SOMETHING CALLED A REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION.

WHAT A REIMBURSEMENT, WHICH THIS COURT HAS USED FREQUENTLY BEFORE.

WHAT IT ALLOWS YOU TO DO IS TO UTILIZE YOUR CASH FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE THAT IN YOUR BUDGET, AND YOU'VE GOT AT ANY GIVEN TIME, BETWEEN 800 AND 1.2 BILLION IN YOUR BANK ACCOUNT, UTILIZE THAT EXISTING CASH TO INITIATE THE PROJECT AND INDEED EVEN FINISH IT. AND THEN ONCE IT'S FINISHED, YOU HAVE A PERIOD OF I THINK 12 MONTHS TO REIMBURSE YOURSELF BY ISSUING THE DEBT FOR THAT NOW COMPLETED PROJECT.

THERE ARE TIMES WHERE YOU WOULDN'T CHOOSE TO DO THAT.

IF YOU KNOW THAT INTEREST RATES ARE GOING TO BE HIGHER, SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER IN 20 AND 12 TO 24 MONTHS, THEN YOU MIGHT CHOOSE NOT TO USE THAT. BUT IN GENERAL, I WOULD SUGGEST USING THAT APPROACH BECAUSE NUMBER ONE, ON YOUR OWN INVESTMENTS, IF YOU INVEST DEBT PROCEEDS, THE IRS WILL NOT ALLOW THOSE PROCEEDS TO EARN MORE THAN THE SCHEDULED INTEREST PAYMENT ON THAT DEBT WAS.

SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE MONEY BY INVESTING YOUR DEBT PROCEEDS, WHEREAS.

SO YOU'RE GIVING UP YOUR OPPORTUNITY COSTS BY USING YOUR EXISTING CASH SO YOU WON'T BE EARNING IT.

BUT YOU'RE ALSO NOT PAYING DEBT SERVICE ON MONEY THAT'S NOT SPENT.

AND SECONDLY, WHEN IT DOES COME TIME TO ACTUALLY ISSUE THE DEBT, IT'S A FIXED KNOWN COST BECAUSE YOU'RE DONE WITH THE PROJECT.

THIS THE THIRD PRONG, SHOULD THE COURT WISH TO CONSIDER, IS WHAT'S CALLED CALLABLE BONDS.

WHEN WE ISSUE DEBT, TYPICALLY IT HAS A 9 OR 10 YEAR CALL PROVISION, WHICH MEANS A 9 OR 10 YEARS.

WE CAN OF OUR OWN CHOOSING CHOOSE TO RETIRE OR CALL AWAY THOSE BONDS FROM INVESTORS.

THIS IS A SCHEDULE OF YOUR PROPERTY TAX SUPPORTED CALLABLE BONDS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, AS WELL AS YOUR VENUE TAX, WHICH IS YOUR HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX CALLABLE BONDS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

AND THIS SLIDE SHOWS SOME OF THE POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES, SHOULD YOU CHOOSE TO DO THAT.

FIRST OF ALL, COMPLETED PROJECTS, IF THERE IS LEFTOVER FUNDING THERE, YOU COULD USE THAT.

ALSO, WE HAVE MANY ROAD PROJECTS WE HAVE DONE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH TXDOT WHERE WE, IN EFFECT, PROVIDE THE FUNDING UP FRONT FOR THE PROJECT, AND TXDOT PAYS US BACK A PORTION OVER TIME.

WE CURRENTLY HAVE OVER 24 MILLION IN CASH FROM THOSE REIMBURSEMENTS AVAILABLE.

ALSO, WE PARTNER WITH MPO AND THE MPO PAYS US BACK IN SOME CASES FOR THEIR SHARE OF PROJECTS.

WE JOINTLY WORK AND WE HAVE OVER 16 MILLION THERE.

AND FINALLY, THERE'S OVER 80 MILLION IN THE VENUE FUND BALANCE.

SO IF THE COURT WERE TO BE INTERESTED IN MOVING FORWARD TO TRY AND ADDRESS, LET ME BE REAL CLEAR.

YOU'VE GOT SEVERAL OPTIONS.

NUMBER ONE, YOU CAN SAY NO, DAVID, THE CAPITAL PROJECTS WE STILL NEED TO DELIVER ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN NECESSARILY MAINTAINING A TRIPLE-A RATING. AND WE'LL TAKE THE RISK OF POTENTIALLY AND I'M NOT PROMISING YOU YOU WILL BUT POTENTIALLY BEING DOWNGRADED.

OR IF YOU WANT TO TRY AND ADDRESS THAT ONE SPECIFIC LONG TERM DEBT PER CAPITA MEASURE AND TAKE SOME OF THESE STEPS.

I'M NOT I'M NOT SAYING YOU NEED TO CANCEL PROJECTS, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING THE NEXT STEPS PROBABLY I WOULD THINK YOU'D WANT TO SEE IS, OKAY, LET'S SAY WE DID THIS PROGRAM, DAVID, WHAT WOULD THAT DO TO THE NEXT TWO YEARS IN TERMS OF CAPITAL PROJECTS? HOW WOULD THAT LOOK? THIS, THIS UNSPENT MONEY WILL GET US HOW FAR DOWN THE ROAD.

AND I WOULD BRING THAT BACK TO YOU AFTER WORKING WITH OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS TEAM.

THAT'S PARKS, FACILITIES, ROADS, PUBLIC WORKS AND SAY THIS IS HOW FAR THAT MONEY WOULD GET YOU AND WOULD IT CAUSE DELAYS IN FUTURE PROJECTS.

AND WE'D LET YOU SEE THAT AND YOU CAN MAKE YOUR DECISIONS.

ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER CLAY-FLORES.

THANKS, DAVID. SO WHEN ARE WE GOING TO BE REVIEWED AGAIN FOR OUR RATING?

[01:20:02]

WHEN WOULD WE KNOW? SO THE NEXT TIME YOU ISSUE DEBT, FOR SURE, YOU'LL BE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO REQUEST A RATING FROM ALL THREE.

IT THEY HAVE IN THE PAST JUST CHOSEN TO REVIEW US, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT ISSUING DEBT.

IT'S NOT IT'S NOT LIKE AN ANNUAL THING THAT HAPPENS.

IT HASN'T IN MY EXPERIENCE.

OKAY. AND THEN ALSO YOU TALK ABOUT THE VENUE FUND BALANCE OF $80 MILLION IN THERE.

IS THAT IN THE BUDGET EVERY YEAR THAT IT CHANGES EVERY YEAR BECAUSE WE ACCUMULATE MONEY THERE EVERY YEAR.

SO YES, IT IS BUDGETED, BUT IT IS PART OF THE BUDGET EVERY YEAR.

YES. OKAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ.

THANK YOU. JUDGE.

DAVID, THANK YOU FOR THE THE DISCUSSION.

I THINK IT'S CERTAINLY HEALTHY TO HAVE THESE AND WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE, FIRST OF ALL I KNOW YOU'RE LIKE A, LIKE, A GOOD STAFFER AND COUNTY MANAGER.

YOU GIVE THIS COURT A LOT OF CREDIT.

BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT WHEN IT COMES TO THE RATING AGENCIES, AND I THINK ONE OF YOUR BULLET POINTS THAT YOU GLOSSED OVER, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE AND ACKNOWLEDGE IS HAVING AN EXPERIENCED MANAGEMENT TEAM WITH A LONG HISTORY OF PRUDENT FISCAL PRACTICES.

THAT'S THE LAST SLIDE, THE SLIDE EIGHT.

LAST LINE.

THEY DO LOOK AT OUR INTERNAL STAFF AS WELL AND HOW WE ARE MANAGING THOSE DOLLARS.

SO I WANT TO JUST ACKNOWLEDGE YOU AND YOUR TEAM AS PART OF THAT.

I MEAN, THE TRIPLE A RATING DOESN'T COME BY ACCIDENT.

IT'S A IT'S A TEAM EFFORT.

SO I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND THANK YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR THAT.

LET ME ASK ON THE OUTSTANDING DEBT.

SLIDE 12.

JUST SO I'M CLEAR THAT THAT 2.2.

5 BILLION ROUGHLY IS JUST THE COUNTY'S OBLIGATIONS.

IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT.

IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE VENUE TAX OR IT DOES.

IT DOES INCLUDE VENUE, BUT IT DOES NOT THE HOSPITAL.

NOT HOSPITAL. OKAY.

AND SINCE COMMISSIONER CLAY-FLORES ASKED ABOUT THE THE VENUE TAX FUND BALANCE THAT $80 MILLION THAT'S THERE.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS CANNOT BE SPENT ON OTHER PROJECTS.

THEN YOU TAX PROJECTS WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL.

THAT'S CORRECT.

WE COULD HOWEVER PAY DOWN SOME OF THOSE VENUE TAX BONDS TO CREATE MORE CAPACITY.

IF WE WENT OUT TO VOTERS FOR FOR MORE PROJECTS.

CORRECT. OKAY.

AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD YOU KNOW, I GUESS RELATED TO, TO THE INTEREST, INTEREST COST.

I MEAN, I KNOW THAT WE'RE IN A, I GUESS, AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE INTEREST RATES ARE IN STAY UNSTABLE.

THEY'RE RISING.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE EVER GOING TO GET BACK TO WHERE WE WERE IN 2014 TO 2019, WHERE IT WAS A 3.28 TICK.

BUT I THINK THAT KIND OF THE NEW NORMAL SEEMS LIKE IT'S IN THAT, THAT 4 TO 5 TICK AREA WHICH IS STILL NOT TERRIBLE.

I MEAN, IT'S NOT AS GOOD AS, AS THREE, BUT WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CONSCIENTIOUS OF IS.

AND I THINK SOME OF YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE GOOD.

AND WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION. I THINK CERTAINLY IF WE CAN PAY DOWN SOME DEBT AND WE CAN GET TO A MORE MANAGEABLE PLACE WITHOUT ISSUING MORE DEBT I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT IN THEORY, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE MAINTAINED SOME FLEXIBILITY ON THE CAPITAL SIDE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AND I'VE BEEN THERE BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE ALWAYS HAS SOME GREAT IDEA ON REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF DEBT THAT, THAT MUNICIPALITIES OR COUNTIES CAN ISSUE.

SOMETIMES THEY LIMIT THE TYPE OF PROJECTS, OR AT LEAST THEY HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT.

AND I AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE MAINTAIN SOME FLEXIBILITY AND ABILITY TO BE NIMBLE IN THE EVENT THAT SOMETHING LIKE THAT OCCURS NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

SO I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE TEE UP ANOTHER ISSUANCE, BUT I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE KEEP THAT IN MIND BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO PREDICT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE MAINTAIN THAT FLEXIBILITY.

YOU KNOW, ALSO, I KNOW IT'S HARD TO NECESSARILY CORRELATE WITH A DIRECT LINE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE PUT INTO THE COMMUNITY.

BY, I THINK, PRUDENTLY MANAGING OUR DEBT.

BUT THOSE PROJECTS ARE ALSO EXPANDING OUR TAX BASE.

I THINK PART OF THAT 2.5 BILLION SIGNIFICANT PART IS SAN PEDRO CREEK.

AGAIN, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, YOU KNOW, EVERY FIVE YEARS, EVERY TEN YEARS, MAYBE EVER AGAIN.

BUT THAT IS CERTAINLY A SHOT IN THE ARM TO THE LOCAL COMMUNITY.

AND I THINK WE'RE STILL I THINK IN THE EARLY STAGES, FINDING OUT WHAT THAT'S GOING TO DO FOR OUR TAX BASE HERE IN BEXAR COUNTY.

[01:25:08]

SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THAT.

WE'RE NOT SPENDING MONEY.

I THINK FRIVOLOUSLY, I THINK WE'RE PUTTING SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENTS.

IN WHAT, IN PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING TO, NUMBER ONE, HELP OUR COMMUNITY FLOOD CONTROL INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT ALSO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TYPE PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING TO INCREASE TAX BASE AND HELP OUR ECONOMY AS A WHOLE.

YEAH. LET ME JUST BE CLEAR.

IF I WASN'T ALREADY, I'M NOT SAYING THAT ANY OF THOSE PROJECTS SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN FINANCED, AND IN SOME CASES, BUT FOR THE COUNTY ISSUING DEBT, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED.

MISSION REACHES A CASE IN POINT.

YEAH. OKAY. YEAH.

AND I THINK WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T MISS THAT POINT.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE WE TEND TO GET INTO A NARRATIVE THAT THAT ALL DEBT IS BAD.

THE REALITY IS SOMETIMES IT'S A NECESSITY FOR DELIVERING PROJECTS IN A TIMELY MANNER.

AND I THINK AS LONG AS THE COUNTY IS PRUDENTLY AND RESPONSIBLY PAYING BACK THOSE DOLLARS, JUST LIKE YOU DO AT HOME, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, USE YOUR CREDIT CARD.

BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE ALSO SAYING THAT THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE.

WE HAVE A VERY STABLE HISTORY OF PAYING OUR DEBT ON TIME, AND WE'RE NOT IN DANGER OF OF DEFAULTING IN ANY WAY.

NO. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ON THAT.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK I THINK THAT MIGHT BE ALL THE QUESTIONS I'VE GOT.

DAVID, I APPRECIATE THIS OVERVIEW.

AGAIN. I THINK FOR ME, THE OVERARCHING THEME IS LET'S LET'S NOT BOX YOURSELF IN A CORNER.

LET'S BE FLEXIBLE.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S PROJECTS THAT YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF THIS COURT HAVE NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO CHIME IN ON THE LONG TERM CAPITAL PROGRAM.

THERE'S STILL SIGNIFICANT FLOOD CONTROL NEEDS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

THAT MAY BE SOMETHING WE HAVE TO LOOK AT DOWN THE ROAD.

AND I THINK THAT AS LONG AS WE HAVE THIS DISCUSSION AND WE'RE AWARE OF THE BIG PICTURE I THINK HAVING THAT IN THE BACK OF OUR MIND WITH RESPECT TO THE RATING AGENCIES AND HOW THEY MAY LOOK AT OUR OUTSTANDING DEBT IS IMPORTANT, BUT I THINK ULTIMATELY WE GOT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE DELIVERING WHAT WE CAN WITHIN OUR MEANS TO THE COMMUNITY THAT EXPECTS IT AND DESERVES IT, FRANKLY.

SO I APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION AND THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT FOR NOW.

JUDGE. THANKS, MR. MOODY. THANKS, DAVID.

I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS FOR FOR SOME TIME, AND I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT CONVERSATION FOR, FOR THE COURT TO HAVE.

YOU KNOW, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT OUR DEBT LEVEL, AND I THINK THAT THIS IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO TO BEGIN TO ADDRESS.

AND I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING IT FORWARD SO WE CAN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AS A COURT ABOUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT.

YOU KNOW, AND FIRST OF ALL, I'LL JUST SAY I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, NOT NOT ALL DEBT IS BAD.

AND WE'VE, YOU KNOW, OVER THE COURSE OF TIME THOUGH, BUILT UP A SITUATION WHERE WE ARE FAR OUT OF LINE WITH OUR PEER COUNTIES IN TEXAS.

AND I THINK THAT THAT'S SAYS THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS IT.

WE NEED TO TO MANAGE THAT AND WORK ON THAT DEBT TO CAPITAL RATIO AND GET IT DOWN.

BUT LET ME GET INTO A FEW QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS HERE.

FIRST OF ALL, YOU KNOW, THE I'M GOING TO CALL IT A BACKLOG, BUT THE THE KIND OF CASH BALANCE THAT HAS BUILT UP.

HOW DOES THAT COMPARE TO HISTORICAL TRENDS? IS THAT BEING BASED ON A SLOWER ABILITY TO, TO GET PROJECTS COMPLETED, OR IS THAT BASED ON TOO MANY PROJECTS OR IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE DRIVING THAT? SO I'M TRYING TO THINK HOW TO BE POLITE ABOUT THIS.

BUT ENGINEERS AND FINANCE PEOPLE COME FROM MARS AND VENUS.

IT'S THE ENGINEERS ARE CONVINCED THAT THEY CAN GET THEIR PROJECTS OUT THE DOOR AS SCHEDULED.

AND GENERALLY SPEAKING, THEY WANT TO LOCK IN THE FUNDING.

AND IN THIS COST ENVIRONMENT, I DON'T BLAME THEM BECAUSE FRANKLY, THE LONGER YOU WAIT TO BID OUT A PROJECT, THE MORE LIKELY IT'S GOING TO BE OUT OF BUDGET.

THAT'S JUST THE INFLATIONARY ENVIRONMENT WE LIVE IN, WHEREAS THE FINANCE GUYS LIKE ME ARE LIKE WHEN WHEN YOU ACTUALLY ARE READY TO SPEND THE MONEY IS WHEN I WANT TO BORROW IT.

SO THERE'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO PROPOSE HERE IS KIND OF LIKE A HAPPY MEDIUM.

IT'S LIKE, GO AHEAD AND DO YOUR PROJECTS.

FIRST OF ALL, LET'S SPEND THE MONEY WE HAVE.

GO AHEAD AND DO THE ENGINEERING PLANNING, THE UPFRONT COST FOR FUTURE PROJECTS.

AND THEN WHEN YOU BID THEM OUT, LET'S USE REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTIONS.

AND WHEN WE'RE FINISHED WITH THE PROJECT AND IT'S A KNOWN COST, THAT'S WHEN YOU LOOK AT ISSUING.

[01:30:07]

YEAH I TEND TO AGREE.

AND YOU KNOW, COMING MORE FROM A FINANCE PERSPECTIVE VERSUS ENGINEERING, SOMETIMES I TRY TO PLAY ENGINEER, BUT I'M REALLY NOT ON IT MAKES TOTAL SENSE TO ME THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE ALL THESE BONDS THAT YOU'RE PUTTING OUT IN THE MARKETPLACE FOR WORK THAT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, IMMINENT IN TERMS OF BEING CONSTRUCTED AND BEING REIMBURSED.

AND TO BE FAIR, THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF REASONS THINGS GET DELAYED.

YOU FIND A CAVE SPIDER ON A ROAD PROJECT THAT'S 18 MONTHS, TWO YEARS DELAY RIGHT THERE.

UNFORESEEABLE, RIGHT? YEAH, BUT I LIKE THE THE SOLUTION YOU BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTIONS.

THAT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD HELP ADDRESS THAT IN A SIGNIFICANT WAY IN TERMS OF KEEPING THAT CASH BALANCE FROM BUILDING UP OVER TIME WITH WITH THESE PROJECTS.

YOU KNOW, I WANT TO KIND OF TALK TO THE SCENARIOS YOU MENTIONED ABOUT WORKING THROUGH THAT CASH BALANCE VERSUS ISSUING ANY MORE BONDS AND KIND OF THE SCENARIO THERE, THAT SCENARIO VERSUS USING THE CASH AVAILABLE TO TO PAY OFF THOSE CALLABLE NOTES THAT YOU MENTIONED THERE.

AND I KNOW THERE'S I MEAN, THIS ISN'T A COMPLETE PICTURE.

THERE'S A LOT OF GREAT DATA HERE, BUT I THINK WE DISCUSSED IT'S KIND OF HARD TO NECESSARILY SEE WHAT WHICH OF THOSE PROJECTS IN THE TEN YEAR ARE CURRENTLY FUNDED UNDERNEATH THAT CASH BALANCE.

RIGHT. AND THEN ULTIMATELY, IF WE WORK THROUGH THAT CASH BALANCE AND DIDN'T ISSUE ANY MORE BONDS, THEN WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE IN TERMS OF OUR DEBT TO CAP DEBT PER CAPITA RATIO? GOING FORWARD, HOW WOULD THAT IMPROVE IT VERSUS GOING A STEP FURTHER? AND I WOULD SAY ONE OF THOSE BEING, YOU KNOW, COULD WE PAY OFF SOME OF THESE CALLABLE BONDS WITH THAT CASH BALANCE THAT'S AVAILABLE? SO IF YOU DO JUST THE DON'T ISSUE MORE DEBT FOR BASICALLY FOUR YEARS.

LOS HERMANOS USE REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTIONS AND SPEND THE CASH YOU HAVE.

IF YOU DO THAT, AS THE GRAPH SHOWED, YOU'LL JUST NATURALLY RETIRE ABOUT 100 MILLION A YEAR.

SO THAT'S 400.

AND THEN WE'RE CLOSER TO 2 BILLION IN TOTAL DEBT.

AND THEN WE START TO LOOK A LOT MORE SIMILAR TO SOME OF OUR COUNTERPART COUNTIES.

NO. AND I THINK THAT THAT'S A GREAT OPTION.

THAT'S A BIG STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

I WOULD ALSO JUST, YOU KNOW, CHALLENGE STAFF AND THIS COURT TO POTENTIALLY LOOK AT OTHER SCENARIOS THAT COULD GO EVEN FURTHER IN TERMS OF OF TRYING TO ADDRESS THAT.

AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, THAT'S PROBABLY A BOND COUNSEL QUESTION WHETHER YOU CAN USE ISSUED DEBT TO RETIRE OTHER DEBT.

I'LL HAVE TO ASK.

OKAY. YOU KNOW, SO THERE'S THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES HERE.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE THE TEN YEAR CAPITAL PROJECT PLAN, THE 620 MILLION.

BUT THERE'S ALSO THE WHAT DID YOU SAY 140 MILLION THAT THAT THE COURT HAS APPROVED OVER THE LAST 3 OR 4 YEARS.

OUTSIDE OF THAT, IT'S MORE THAN THAT.

IT WAS 140 THE FIRST YEAR, I THINK.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE GRAPH SAYS IT IN TOTAL YOU YOU'VE ISSUED ABOUT 200 MILLION AND YOU'VE ADDED ABOUT 200 MILLION MORE IN PROJECTS OVER THE THREE YEARS.

GOT IT. AND, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CAPITAL PLAN, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THIS OBVIOUSLY FLOOD CONTROL AND ROADS ARE ARE IMPORTANT PART OF THAT.

BUT AS, AS I'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS, YOU KNOW, FROM THIS DAIS BEFORE ON THE ENGINEERING SIDE, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE RIGHT BAR FOR FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS, RIGHT? I MEAN, THE 100 YEAR FLOOD VERSUS 50 YEAR VERSUS A 20 YEAR, WHAT ARE THE THE TRADEOFFS IN TERMS OF RISK? I KNOW WE HAVE TWO OF THESE PROJECTS COMING BACK FROM PRECINCT THREE, AND I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH PUBLIC WORKS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE.

YOU KNOW, DO WE NEED TO PAY $12 MILLION FOR TWO FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS THAT WE COULD REALLY ASSUME VERY LITTLE ADDITIONAL RISK AND CUT THE COST IN HALF? YOU KNOW, SO I THINK THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE NEED TO TO LOOK AT ROAD PROJECTS.

OBVIOUSLY ROADS ARE, ARE IMPORTANT TO OUR COMMUNITY, GROWING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

BUT ARE THERE CERTAIN ROAD PROJECTS THAT COULD BE DELAYED BY A YEAR OR TWO AND WOULDN'T NECESSARILY HAVE ANY REAL IMPACT.

I MEAN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT.

[01:35:02]

CREEKS AND TRAILS IS A HUGE PORTION OF OUR 620 MILLION, ALMOST A QUARTER BILLION DOLLARS IN CREEKS AND TRAILS.

AND I'VE SAID BEFORE, FROM UP HERE, I GO DO BIKE RIDES WITH THE FAMILY ON ON THE THE TRAIL SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE.

BUT HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH? HOW MANY TRAILS DO WE HAVE TO HAVE TO REACH A BAR FOR RECREATION AND QUALITY OF LIFE FOR OUR COMMUNITY? I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A QUARTER BILLION DOLLARS THERE.

SO MAYBE WE TAKE ANOTHER ANOTHER LOOK AT THAT AND WHAT WHAT WE FEEL IS NECESSARY.

WHAT'S ABOVE THE BAR? WHAT'S BELOW THE BAR? SO I'LL JUST JUST MENTION THAT.

BUT THE SECOND CATEGORY, THE INJECTS THAT YOU MENTIONED 150 MILLION, 140 MILLION, WHATEVER IT IS.

I MEAN, WE HAVE TO THAT'S ON US AS A COURT, RIGHT? WHEN WHEN SOME OF IT I MEAN, SOME OF IT IS US SAYING, HEY, WE NEED 50 MILLION OR 5 MILLION FOR CHILLERS AT THE JAIL, AND YOU APPROVED IT, BUT YOU DIDN'T INITIATE THAT DISCUSSION.

WELL. AND AND OBVIOUSLY SCHILLER'S AT THE JAIL IS IS DIFFERENT THAN MANY OF THE OTHER INJECTS FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES THAT THAT SEEM TO BE BE NICE TO HAVE, BUT NOT NECESSARY FOR THE FUNCTION OF, OF THE COUNTY OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

BUT ULTIMATELY, I THINK THAT THAT COMES DOWN TO US AS A COURT BEING WILLING AND ABLE TO TO SAY NO OR BE ABLE TO AT LEAST SAY NOT RIGHT NOW IN TERMS OF OUR PRIORITIES.

AND MAYBE THAT'S JUST DELAYING SOME OF THESE, THESE PROJECTS.

BUT I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO TO LOOK AT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, LET'S NOT LOSE SIGHT OF WHY WE'RE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION. THE THE TOP RATINGS AGENCIES HAVE SAID THAT THEY WERE I MEAN, THEY REVIEWED PUT OUR OUR STATUS UNDER REVIEW.

AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME OF THESE FACTORS.

YOU KNOW, MAYBE OUTSIDE OF OUR CONTROL, RIGHT? I MEAN, YOU LOOK AT ON WHAT IS IT SLIDE 11, SOME OF THE THE STRENGTHS AND CHALLENGES.

AND YOU KNOW, WHAT POTENTIAL ISSUES COULD POP UP THAT THAT WOULD AFFECT US GOING FORWARD AND, AND REALLY HIT OUR BOND RATING.

I WOULD JUST MENTION UNDER THE STRENGTHS, THE FAVORABLE OPERATING RESERVES RIGHT FROM OUR PREVIOUS CONVERSATION, MAKING SURE WE DO HAVE KIND OF A RAINY DAY FUND AND RESERVES IS IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF OUR RATING ON THE BOND SIDE.

I WOULD ALSO JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THE STABILIZING PRESENCE OF MILITARY BASES AS THE CO-CHAIR OF THE THE MTF MILITARY TRANSFORMATION TASK FORCE HERE WITH THE CITY, COUNTY AND JBSA OUR MILITARY BASES, JBSA BRINGS OVER $50 BILLION TO BEXAR COUNTY. AND THESE RATINGS AGENCIES RECOGNIZE THAT.

I THINK THAT THAT'S JUST IMPORTANT TO HIGHLIGHT.

AND ALSO HIGHER EDUCATIONAL, HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS.

RIGHT. SO OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH WITH UTSA AND AND, AND OUR OTHER SCHOOLS HERE LOCALLY IS IMPORTANT WHEN IT COMES TO THESE BOND RATING AGENCIES.

AND SO WE SHOULDN'T DISCOUNT THOSE FACTORS IN TERMS OF JUST LOOKING THROUGH THIS, AND AS YOU WELL KNOW, THE COURT HAS MADE INVESTMENTS IN THOSE PARTNERSHIPS MOSTLY DEBT FUNDED.

YEAH I UNDERSTAND.

AND THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I WAS I WAS HIGHLIGHTING THERE.

SO AGAIN, JUST FLIPPING THROUGH THE SLIDES HERE.

SLIDE 12.

WE HAVE $1.5 BILLION MORE DEBT THAN ANY OTHER COUNTY IN TEXAS EXCEPT HARRIS COUNTY.

WE ARE NOT, YOU KNOW, IN LINE WITH WITH OUR OUR PEERS YOU KNOW, DALLAS COUNTY, TARRANT COUNTY, TRAVIS COUNTY ARE NOT EXACTLY PILLARS OF OF FISCAL RESTRAINT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE'RE WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING AT THIS POINT AND TRY TO ADDRESS THIS AND BRING IT DOWN.

THE SLIDE JUST TO FOR THE RECORD, JUST TO BE FAIR, THOUGH, THOSE OTHER COUNTIES WEREN'T STEPPING IN AND FUNDING WHAT WERE NON COUNTY OBLIGATIONS FOR THE GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY.

THE MISSION REACH WAS NOT A COUNTY PROJECT.

THAT WAS AN ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PROJECT, BUT THE MONEY WASN'T AVAILABLE AND THE HISTORY WAS THE MUSEUM REACH WAS BEING COMPLETED AND YET THE MISSION REACH GOT IT GRAND TOTAL, I THINK, AT THE TIME OF $2 MILLION FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND IT'S A $200

[01:40:02]

MILLION PROGRAM.

THE COURT MADE THE DECISION TO STEP IN AND ADVANCE FUND THAT AND GET REIMBURSED OVER TIME FOR PART OF IT FROM THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS.

AND I.

I WOULDN'T ARGUE THAT THAT WAS A BAD DECISION, BECAUSE THAT LED ALMOST DIRECTLY TO OUR WORLD HERITAGE STATUS, NOMINATION AND APPROVAL.

SO THAT'S A GREAT TOURIST BENEFIT.

THERE ARE PLENTY OF ROAD PROJECTS WHERE TEX DOT IF YOU LIVE BY TEX DOT SCHEDULED BUDGET, YOU'D BE WAITING YEAR EIGHT.

THE COUNTY HAS CHOSEN TO DO DEALS WITH TEX DOT WHERE WE PROVIDE THE FUNDING UP FRONT.

WE GET PAID BACK LATER, SO THERE ARE VALID REASONS WHY OUR DEBT WOULD BE MORE THAN SOME OTHER COUNTIES OF SIMILAR SIZE.

AND I'M NOT ARGUING WHETHER OUR DEBTS ARE TOO HIGH OR TOO LOW.

I'M NOT. I'M JUST SAYING IT HAPPENED FOR A REASON IN SOME CASES.

AND THEY WEREN'T TRIVIAL PROJECTS EITHER.

THE MISSION REACH AT THE TIME, OTHER THAN THE SBC CENTER ORIGINALLY, WAS PROBABLY OUR LARGEST CAPITAL PROJECT EVER.

SO. SO AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S THERE'S HISTORY ON ALL THESE PROJECTS.

I MEAN, I COULD OBVIOUSLY BRING UP A LOT OF PROJECTS, IN MY OPINION, THAT THAT WEREN'T NECESSARY, THAT I VOTED AGAINST IN THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF.

BUT I'M NOT GETTING INTO THE DETAILS OF ALL THESE INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS.

I THINK YOU JUST LOOK AT THE DATA, THOUGH, AND CLEARLY I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, INDICATING THE FACTS FROM YOUR SLIDES, RIGHT? THAT THAT WE DO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT HIGHER DEBT LOAD THAN ANY OTHER COUNTY IN TEXAS EXCEPT FOR HARRIS.

AND THEN YOU LOOK AT OUR DEBT PER CAPITA.

WE'RE WE'RE LEADING TEXAS BY A LOT.

SO I THINK THAT THAT'S SOMETHING AND, YOU KNOW, DAVID, I DON'T WANT THIS TO BE SEEN AS AS AN ATTACK ON YOU OR YOUR STAFF AND TEAM.

NO, YOU'RE ACTUALLY MAKING US AWARE AND MAKING US HAVE THIS CONVERSATION RIGHT NOW, AND IT'S WELCOME.

I'M THE WEATHERMAN.

I'M TELLING YOU, IT'S 100 DEGREES OUTSIDE.

YEAH, YEAH. THE DATA IS THE DATA.

SO I THINK IT'S IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE WE TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THIS AND FIGURE OUT WHAT WE CAN DO.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THOSE SCENARIOS WE TALKED ABOUT IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU KNOW, IF WE HOLD OFF FOR TWO YEARS ON ISSUING NEW BONDS OR FOUR YEARS WHAT DOES THAT DO IN TERMS OF OUR DEBT PER CAPITA OVER THAT TIME PERIOD? I KNOW YOU SAID, HEY, YOU CAN LOOK AT THE THE DEBT RETIREMENT SCENARIO AND AND REALIZE WHAT YOUR TOTAL DEBT WOULD BE.

BUT IN TERMS OF DEBT PER CAPITA, WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S ANY OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO TO IMPACT THAT EITHER WITH, WITH YOU KNOW CUTTING SPECIFIC PROJECTS OR, YOU KNOW, DELAYING CERTAIN TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT WE DON'T SEE AS, AS NECESSARY OR TIME SENSITIVE FOR THE COUNTY.

THAT WOULD I MEAN, I THINK HELP US MAKE MAKE DECISIONS ON THAT GOING INTO THE BUDGET SEASON.

THE LAST THING I'LL JUST MENTION AND, AND I HOPE THIS RESONATES WITH OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COURT.

IN OUR DISCUSSIONS, I'M PERFECTLY OKAY.

AND I WOULD ADVOCATE FOR IF WE NEED TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS AS MUCH AS WE CAN TO PUT THEM ON INDIVIDUAL PRECINCTS.

RIGHT. WE HAVE A LONG LIST OF CAPITAL PROJECTS WITHIN OUR PRECINCT, AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE'RE IN THE BEST POSITION TO TO PRIORITIZE THOSE AND OR TRADE THEM OUT.

IF THERE'S ANOTHER CAPITAL PROJECT THAT THAT IS A BETTER FIT OR A HIGHER NEED FOR OUR COMMUNITY THAN IT IS TODAY.

SO THAT IS JUST SOMETHING THAT THAT I WOULD SUGGEST TO THE COURT TO IF THERE'S A A BAR THAT NEEDS TO BE SET ACROSS THE BOARD IN TERMS OF A LIMITATION ON SPENDING OR, OR A CERTAIN LEVEL OF REDUCTION IN SPENDING, THAT, THAT WE COULD SET THAT BY PRECINCT AND THEN WE COULD JUST KIND OF TURN THAT OVER TO INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONERS TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT THE PRIORITIES SHOULD BE FOR THEIR PRECINCT.

DURING THAT TIME. SO I HOPE THAT WE TAKE SOME SOME SERIOUS STEPS ON THIS IN THIS BUDGET CYCLE AND GOING FORWARD. I APPRECIATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

I JUST, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE DATA TO SEE IF, IF THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE ADDRESSING ARE MOVING THE NEEDLE TO THE LEVEL THAT WE EXPECT OR WHETHER WE POTENTIALLY NEED TO TO GO FURTHER IN TERMS OF TRYING TO MOVE THE NEEDLE ON THOSE RATIOS.

BUT AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR FOR BRINGING THIS UP AND LOOK FORWARD TO TO CONTINUING TO, TO MAKE PROGRESS ON THIS.

THANK YOU, MR. CALVERT. THANK YOU.

JUDGE. DAVID, COULD YOU GO TO SLIDE THREE, PLEASE? DEBT SERVE AS FORECAST?

[01:45:01]

YES, SIR. THE ASSUMPTIONS AT THE BOTTOM TALK ABOUT THE 5.5% GROWTH IN 2024, 2025 AND 3.5% THEREAFTER.

IS THAT REVENUE OR DEBT GROWTH THAT YOU'RE PROJECTING? I THOUGHT IT WAS REVENUE. TAX REVENUE.

YEAH. OKAY. SO I CAN'T YOU KNOW, I HEARD THE CONVERSATION IN THE LAST POWERPOINT WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT KIND OF A NEW NORMAL.

AND I WANT TO DISAGREE FOR A MOMENT.

I THINK THAT INTEREST RATES ARE WHAT CAUSED THIS REVENUE DECREASE.

AND GREAT PART, THE FACT THAT INTEREST RATES WERE DRIVEN TO A POINT THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN SINCE, YOU KNOW, THE 80S 90S THEREABOUTS HAS MEANT THAT, YOU KNOW, LESS HOUSING IS BEING BOUGHT AND SOLD, RIGHT.

WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT? YES.

OKAY. SO MOST ECONOMIC FORECASTERS ARE INDICATING THAT THEY THINK IN THE NEXT YEAR, INTEREST RATES WILL PROBABLY COME DOWN.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE HEARING, TOO? I AM, AND IF INTEREST RATES ARE COMING DOWN, OSTENSIBLY THERE WOULD BE MORE HOME BUYING ACTIVITY, RIGHT? THAT'S THE THAT'S THE HOPE.

THAT'S THE HOPE. RIGHT.

OKAY. SO IS IT IS IT BASED UPON THAT? DON'T YOU THINK THAT YOUR FORECAST FOR REVENUE GROWTH WOULD PROBABLY INCREASE GREATER THAN THE 3.5%? I HOPE IT DOES, COMMISSIONER, BUT I'M NOT.

IF I KNEW THAT FOR A FACT, I WOULDN'T BE HERE.

I'D BE ON MY PRIVATE ISLAND IN THE BAHAMAS OR SOMETHING.

WELL, THE STATE GOVERNMENT AND THEIR REVENUE CAPS YOU KNOW, CAPTIVES, I THINK.

WAS IT? THEY'VE DONE TWO OF THEM.

I THINK THE LAST ONE WAS 6% OR THREE AND A HALF.

WHAT IS IT? IT'S SO THE FIRST ONE WAS MAYBE SIX.

THE SECOND WAS THREE AND A HALF.

YEAH. THAT'S RIGHT. SORRY I CAN'T YOU KNOW, WE DEAL WITH WE ALL DEAL WITH A LOT OF NUMBERS AROUND HERE.

SO, SO AND WE HAD BEEN, WE HAD BEEN MORE IN THE 9% GROWTH RATE PRIOR TO THOSE CAPS.

CORRECT? I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS FOUR YEARS AGO, BUT IT WAS 13 THEN.

SEVEN. RIGHT.

AND FIVE.

AND SO I HOPE I'M WRONG, COMMISSIONER, BOTH FOR THE GENERAL FUND AND FOR DEBT SERVICE.

SO JUST FOR THE EDUCATION OF EVERYONE HERE WHEN THE INTEREST RATES WENT UP, THE REAL ESTATE COMMUNITY INDICATED THAT ABOUT $75,000 WORTH OF BUYING POWER FOR THE AVERAGE SAN ANTONIAN WAS TAKEN AWAY.

IN TERMS OF HOMES, THEIR ABILITY TO GET A LOAN ON A HOME.

AND SO WITH THAT, THE MARKET SLOWED DOWN AND OUR REVENUE DECREASED.

SO I THINK IT LOGICALLY FOLLOWS THAT ONCE THOSE INTEREST RATES COME DOWN WE WILL HAVE GREATER GROWTH.

AND SO THAT MAY HELP US NOT HAVE TO BE AS CONCERNED.

BUT JUST TO BE CLEAR, THAT WILL HELP THIS GRAPH IMMENSELY A LOT.

WHAT IT WON'T DO IS CHANGE OUR DEBT PER CAPITA.

UNDERSTOOD. I'LL GET THERE IN A SECOND.

OKAY. SO LET'S GO TO SLIDE FOR THAT SERVICE FORECAST AGAIN.

SO IN LOOKING AT NOT DOING NEW ADDITIONAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, DOES THIS MEAN THAT YOUR BUDGET IS INCORPORATING THE INCREASES JUST BECAUSE OF THE NATURAL INFLATION AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE TO TELL THE COURT, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW WE SAID IN 2021 OR WHATEVER IT WAS THAT THE PROJECT COST X, BUT TODAY, SEVEN, FIVE, WHATEVER NUMBER OF YEARS LATER IT ACTUALLY IS GOING TO COST.

SO ARE YOU CALCULATING THAT IN THESE MODELS WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING WITH OUR CAPITAL STAFF, BUT BASICALLY NOTHING'S COMING IN AS BUDGETED TWO YEARS AGO.

GOT IT. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THE COURT AWARE THAT WE CAN'T REALLY FINISH THE TEN YEAR CAP OR EIGHT YEAR, WHATEVER IT WAS.

CAPITAL PROJECTS WITHOUT SOME ADDITIONAL REVENUE FOR THOSE PROJECTS IS EVERYTHING IS COMING IN AT NO.

ABSOLUTELY. YOU'RE NOT EVEN HALFWAY THROUGH THAT TEN YEAR PLAN.

AND I'M NOT SAYING THERE WON'T BE THE NEED FOR FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECTS.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS, LET'S CONCENTRATE ON THE NEXT 18 MONTHS ON SPENDING THE MONEY THAT'S ALREADY IN THE BANK, WHICH IS ABOUT 200 MILLION, AND THEN YOU CAN PLAN FOR EXECUTING OR BIDDING OUT THE NEXT WAVE OF PROJECTS IN 18 TO 24 MONTHS.

ARCHITECTS ENGINEERING ALL THE STUFF YOU DO BEFORE YOU PUT A BID ON THE STREET.

THEN IN 24 MONTHS AFTER THAT BUDGET, THE COURT WOULD APPROVE A LIST OF PROJECTS TO BE BID OUT.

PRESUMABLY, THEY'LL BE BID OUT AND INSTEAD OF ISSUING DEBT, IMMEDIATELY USE A REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION TO FINANCE THAT PROJECT THROUGH COMPLETION. ALL RIGHT.

[01:50:01]

SO ONE OF THE FACTORS THAT HAS INCREASED COSTS IS JUST THE TIME IT TAKES TO GO THROUGH THE CONTRACT PROCESS, THE DRAFTING OF THE CONTRACTS AND THE LEGAL REVIEW AND THE AUDIT REVIEW AND ALL THE MANY DEPARTMENTS AT THE COUNTY HAS TO GO THROUGH.

HAVE YOU GIVEN ANY THOUGHT TO KIND OF A TASK FORCE OR BEEFING UP OF THE OF THE ACTUAL STAFF TO HELP EXPEDITE THOSE THINGS? BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME CONTRACTS THAT ARE TAKING A YEAR OR MORE TO GET EXECUTED FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, BUT IT'S JUST A LOT OF TIME.

IS THERE ANY THOUGHT? BECAUSE IF WE CAN GET THOSE CONTRACTS EXECUTED FASTER, THEN, YOU KNOW, FOR EVERY, WHAT, 90 DAYS, WE SAY THE COST GOES UP, RIGHT? SO SO IF, YOU KNOW, CONTRACTS TAKEN 11 MONTHS TO GET DONE YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD ABOUT MAYBE THREE INCREASES IN THE PRICE.

ANY THOUGHT TO HOW WE CAN MAKE THAT MORE EFFICIENT? WELL. IN POINT OF FACT, I'M MEETING WITH THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY ON HIS BUDGET TOMORROW, I THINK, SO I'M SURE HE'LL BRING UP ANY NEEDS LARRY AND HIS CIVIL SHOP HAVE.

I DON'T THINK IT'S JUST THE.

I DON'T THINK IT'S JUST THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

I THINK WHETHER IT'S PUBLIC WORKS, WHETHER IT'S YOU KNOW, ANY DEPARTMENT THAT'S DOING CONTRACTS, PARKS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES, ALL THOSE DEPARTMENTS COULD PROBABLY USE SOME CONTRACT ASSISTANCE, IF YOU WILL, TO AUDITOR, ETC., TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COST ESCALATIONS AREN'T HITTING.

SO I JUST WANT TO BRING THAT. OKAY.

CAN WE GO TO SLIDE NUMBER EIGHT.

SLIDE NUMBER EIGHT WAS RELATED TO BOND RATINGS.

AND WE DIDN'T REALLY HEAR A LOT OF I MEAN I READ THE THE, I THINK SLIDE 11, BUT WHAT ARE THESE NEW CRITERIA THAT THE RATINGS AGENCIES ARE LOOKING AT? BECAUSE JUST BECAUSE THEY GAVE US THIS PASS TODAY DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY WON'T TIGHTEN UP TOMORROW.

SO SO THAT WE CAN BE PREPARED.

WHAT ARE SOME OF THOSE NEW THINGS THAT THEY THOUGHT THEY'RE ASKING OTHER GOVERNMENTS TO LOOK AT THE REAL THE TWO DIFFERENT AGENCIES IN RELATION TO US EX EXPRESS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THEIR METRICS, WE'RE TRIPLE A OTHER THAN THE METRIC INVOLVING LONG TERM DEBT PER CAPITA.

BUT THEY DID APPROPRIATELY NOTE SOME OF THE STRENGTHS THE COUNTY HAS THAT LED THEM TO MAINTAIN THE TRIPLE A STATUS, FITCH, IN PARTICULAR, SAYS HERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT IF THESE CHANGE COULD LEAD TO US REVIEWING AND OR DOWNGRADING THE COUNTY, A DECLINE IN YOUR FUND BALANCES, AN INCREASE IN LONG TERM LIABILITY THAT ONE AGAIN, AND OR WEAKENING ECONOMIC OR DEMOGRAPHICS.

AND THAT'S NOT UP TO BEXAR COUNTY.

THAT'S THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.

OKAY. I DO WANT TO HIT THE WEAKENING DEMOGRAPHIC BECAUSE I DO THINK WE HAVE A NASTY STORM ECONOMICALLY, POTENTIALLY, THAT COULD HIT US.

AND THAT IS IN PROPERTY TAXES.

WE ARE SEEING RENTAL RATES GO UP TO A POINT THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT A LOT OF PEOPLE'S RENTS AND, AND, YOU KNOW, JUST HOUSING COSTS ARE, ARE, ARE STILL ESCALATING, EVEN IN SPITE OF THE NEW WHAT DO YOU CALL IT? TAX DECREASES THAT I'M NOT USING THE RIGHT WORD THAT THAT THE STATE GAVE THE EXEMPTIONS, THE VARIOUS EXEMPTIONS THAT THE STATE GAVE.

THAT'S THE RIGHT WORD.

AND I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THAT IN YOUR FORECASTING, YOUR TEAM REALLY SHOULD BEGIN TO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW WHAT IS THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING INTO NONPROFIT HOUSING? AND THAT'S THERE'S A REASON I'M SAYING THAT I THINK IT'S GOING TO EXPLODE.

I THINK IT'S GOING TO INCREASE. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU HEARD THE DIRECTOR OF HAVEN FOR HOPE COME TO THAT DAIS AND SAY THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE 6000 MORE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE HOMELESS IN WE'RE IN 20, 24 AND SIX YEARS, THEN THE 3000 WE HAVE TODAY.

SO WE SEE A BEGINNING OF HOUSING AT SAM SHELTER.

SO THEY'RE A NONPROFIT ENTITY LOCATED ON A NONPROFIT, BROOKS PROPERTY, WHICH, YOU KNOW, THAT WE DON'T GET THOSE TAXES.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A LARGER NUMBER OF PEOPLE MOVING INTO NONPROFIT HOUSES.

AND I WOULD I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THAT THE THAT THE PROJECTIONS ON PROPERTIES THAT ARE GOING TO BE RENT.

[01:55:03]

YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME DEVELOPERS, A LOT OF DEVELOPERS WHO ARE GOING INTO HOUSES THAT ARE GOING TO RENT.

I THINK THAT THE RENT PRICES ARE GOING TO GO UP SO MUCH RELATIVE TO THE INCOME OF OUR POPULATION THAT IT WILL CAUSE PEOPLE TO GO INTO EITHER, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC HOUSING OR SOME SORT OF NONPROFIT HOUSING WHERE THEY NEED A REDUCED COST.

I THINK WE'RE GETTING TO A POINT WHERE SAN ANTONIO IS NOT AFFORDABLE FOR THE POPULATION.

AND I REALLY THINK THAT'S A DANGEROUS IT'S A DANGEROUS SPOT IF, IF, IF WE AREN'T DOING MORE THERE. SO I JUST SO, YOU KNOW, IN 20 IN SLIDE 21, YOUR CAPITAL PROJECT DISCUSSION.

I HAD JUST NOTED, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN GET AN ACCURATE INFLATION AMOUNT ON THE TEN YEAR PLAN, OBVIOUSLY, THESE NEXT TWO YEARS, I WOULD SAY ARE AS ARE GOING TO BE OUTLIERS, I THINK I THINK THINGS ARE GOING TO STABILIZE AS WE COME OUT OF THE PANDEMIC. I MEAN, AS LONG AS WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER PANDEMIC, WHICH WE PROBABLY WILL ANYWAY.

BUT BUT IT WILL BE A LOT MORE STABLE THAN, THAN THAN THE PAST YEARS.

BUT I SUPPOSE YOU'LL HAVE TO USE CONSERVATIVE INFLATION AMOUNTS.

I MEAN, THAT'S, IT'S WE'LL WORK WITH OUR CAPITAL TEAM.

THERE'S NO SENSE IN UNDERFUNDING APPROVED PROJECTS.

YEAH. OKAY.

WELL, IN ANY EVENT, THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THINGS THAT I THINK IF WE'VE GOT TO RUN THIS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND A LOT OF OTHER CONTRACTUAL STUFF, LOOKING AT THE PROCESS, THE BUREAUCRACY, AND HOW DO WE HOW DO WE EXPEDITE THE THE PROCESSING, I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE HELPFUL TO US, KEEPING COSTS DOWN SO THAT, THAT THAT COULD EQUATE TO LITERALLY MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

SO I'LL ASK STAFF ON SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON TO ANALYZE WHAT HAVE BEEN THE INCREASES IN THE TIME SINCE THE COURT APPROVED THE PROJECT TO THE PRESENT, SO THAT WE CAN GET A HANDLE, AT LEAST ON OUR LAST, LET'S JUST SAY NINE, TEN YEARS OF OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS.

AND THEN THAT HELPS US WITH SOME PROJECTION OF WHAT THE FUTURE MIGHT BE.

I MEAN, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ACCURATE.

I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE MORE GOING.

WELL, OBVIOUSLY THERE'LL BE MORE GOING INTO THE FUTURE ANYWAY.

THANK YOU. JUDGE. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? DAVID, LET ME LET ME MAKE THESE COMMENTS.

AS COUNTY JUDGE, OBVIOUSLY YOUR PRESENTATION FOR OUTSTANDING DEBT IS, AS I'VE HEARD, IS VERY MUCH IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE LONG RANGE FINANCIAL FORECAST THAT TINA SMITH DEAN HAS PRESENTED TO THE COURT.

AND TO DISTILL THAT COMMENT WOULD MEAN THAT IF WE'RE TO INCUR ADDITIONAL DEBT, WE MUST BE VERY INTENTIONAL, STRATEGIC, AND WE MUST LOOK AT THE INTENDED AND UNINTENDED COSTS THAT GO WITH INCURRING ADDITIONAL DEBT.

WOULD THAT BE A CORRECT STATEMENT? YES. WE WOULD LOOK AT THE LONG RANGE FINANCIAL FORECAST AS TO WHATEVER BUDGET REQUESTS WE GRANT, DENY OR HOLD IN ABEYANCE.

YES, SIR. CORRECT, CORRECT.

YOU SAID SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO GET CLARIFICATION ON.

YOU SAID THAT IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE, WHAT THE PREVIOUS COURT HAS DONE, ESPECIALLY IN REGARDS TO THE BIG PROJECTS.

MISSION REACH.

WHAT WAS THE OTHER ONE? SAN PEDRO. SAN PEDRO CREEK.

THAT THERE WERE COST INCURRED ON THESE HUGE PROJECTS, ONE SUCH AS MISSION REACH.

AND I THINK COMMISSIONER MOODIE TOUCHED ON THAT DISCUSSION WHERE THE COURT NEEDED TO INCUR GENERAL FUND OBLIGATION IN ORDER TO EITHER ADVANCE THE PROJECT GAP COVER GAP FUNDING.

AND SO, IN OTHER WORDS, THOSE NOT WERE NOT NECESSARILY TOTAL CAPITAL SPENDING BY BEXAR COUNTY, BUT THERE WERE NEEDS FOR BEXAR COUNTY TO STEP IN TO COMPLETE THAT PROJECT.

AND IT DID I CATCH THAT? YES. SO SO AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN ON THE BOOKS AND APPROVED BY THE COURT, AND THE COURT CAN

[02:00:06]

CORRECT ME.

WE ALSO HAVE SOME BIG PROJECTS.

WEST SIDE CREEKS.

CORRECT CORRECT. THE VILLA EXPANSION OF THE VILLA ADVANCED RAPID TRANSIT, NAMELY THE SILVER LINE, WHICH ARE NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO BE COVERED BY CAPITAL PROJECTS MONEY.

BUT THERE COULD BE SITUATIONS WHERE THE COUNTY MUST STEP UP IN ORDER TO MAKE THESE PROJECTS COME TO BE.

WHETHER WE NEED ADDITIONAL GAP FUNDING, OR WE HAVE EITHER INTENDED OR UNINTENDED COSTS THAT MAY COME UP THAT COULD AFFECT GENERAL FUND OBLIGATIONS, WOULD THAT BE CONSISTENT AS FROM A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE, WHEN THE COURT IN IN AND TAKES IN THESE BIG PROJECTS, I'M JUST TRYING TO ANTICIPATE THAT EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE SUBMITTING TO THE COURT, WE NEED TO BE CAUTIOUS.

THE THING IS, IS THAT WE ARE GOING THERE ARE GOING TO BE DEBTS INCURRED, ALTHOUGH MAYBE NOT OUT OF CAPITAL FUNDING.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND MY COMMENT AND QUESTION? WELL, MAYBE NOT, MAYBE I DON'T, BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IS DEBT.

AND DEBT IS PAID FOR THROUGH A SEPARATE TAX PROPERTY TAX LEVY IN ITS OWN FUND.

IT'S NOT PART OF THE GENERAL FUND.

WHERE THE TWO INTERSECT POTENTIALLY IS IF YOU HAVE A GENERAL FUND NEED.

IN THEORY, IF YOU HAD AN EXCESS TAX RATE IN DEBT SERVICE, YOU COULD MOVE THAT, OH, SORRY.

YOU COULD MOVE THAT TO THE GENERAL FUND TO HELP ADDRESS THAT NEED.

SO THAT'S WHERE THE THERE IS KIND OF A DANCE BETWEEN THE TWO.

RIGHT. BUT I'M LOOKING AT THE BIG PROJECTS THAT THE COURT HAS APPROVED THAT WE WILL AT SOME POINT, CONTINGENT ON ALL THE OTHER FUNDING MECHANISMS THAT LIKE SUCH AS WEST SIDE CREEKS, SUCH AS THE VIA ART PROJECTS THAT ARE ON THE BOOKS THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE POSSIBLE, BUT THEY WILL IMPACT OUR BUDGETS IN SOME FORM OR FASHION.

THEY WILL DEFINITELY IMPACT YOUR BUDGET, BUT THEY I'M NOT SURE VIA, FOR INSTANCE, WOULD BE DEBT FUNDED.

CORRECT. BUT IT WILL DEFINITELY IMPACT YOUR BUDGET.

CORRECT? IT SHOULD YOU CHOOSE TO PURSUE IT.

ALL RIGHT. AND THEN IN REGARDS TO YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS AND MEETING THE NEEDS, ESPECIALLY FROM A BASIC RESPONSIBILITIES THAT COMMISSIONER MOODY HAS ALLUDED TO, WHETHER IT'S THE JAIL, WHERE IT'S THE BUILDING, THE SPACE NEEDS FOR OUR COUNTY EMPLOYEES, THOSE ARE THOSE SITUATIONS BAKED INTO YOUR CAPITAL PROJECTS.

BECAUSE AS I, I'M, I'M B I'M TRYING TO GET A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE WHERE WE'RE, WE'RE WORKING OFF A TEN YEAR BUDGET CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET THAT WAS OBVIOUSLY APPROVED PRIOR TO ME TAKING TO THE COURT.

CORRECT. SO I'M I'M CURIOUS AS TO HOW DO WE ADJUST OR HOW CAN WE ACCOMMODATE SPECIFIC NEEDS, ESPECIALLY FROM A CAPITAL PROJECT PERSPECTIVE, IF WE IF IF IT GOES TO THOSE BASIC SERVICES, HOW HOW DOES THE BUDGET OFFICE ADJUST OTHER THAN DEALING IT IN A CRISIS MANAGEMENT? I'M TRYING TO GET AHEAD OF THE GAME.

I'M TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE.

I WANT THE COURT AND I WANT THE BUDGET OFFICE.

SAY, JUDGE, YOU GOT YOU GOT SOME BIG ISSUES HERE THAT WE MUST TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.

YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T JUST HAVE.

WELL, WE DON'T WANT TO ISSUE NEW DEBT.

WE MAY HAVE TO ISSUE NEW DEBT IN ORDER TO MEET BASIC SERVICES OR TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND WELFARE OF OUR COMMUNITY.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION? SURE. SO EVERY PROJECT CAPITAL PROJECT THAT YOU HAVE ALREADY APPROVED IS IN OUR FORECAST.

NOW WE MAKE ASSUMPTIONS BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T ISSUED ALL THAT DEBT YET.

SO WE'RE ASSUMING THE INTEREST RATE IS GOING TO BE 4.25%.

MAYBE IT WILL BE LOWER, MAYBE IT'LL BE WORSE, I DON'T KNOW.

BUT THERE ARE SOME. BUT THEY ARE IN THAT FORECASTED GRAPH YOU SAW.

SO WHEN I SAY YOUR DEBT IS AFFORDABLE IT IS.

YOU'RE FINE.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO MISS A PAYMENT.

WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THEM COMFORTABLY.

IT'S JUST THAT ONE MEASURE NOW NOW FUTURE PROJECTS.

I'M NOT SAYING DON'T DO NEW PROJECTS, I'M JUST SUGGESTING LET'S CONCENTRATE ON SPENDING THE MONEY WE'VE ALREADY ISSUED FOR PROJECTS YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED BUT HAVEN'T BEEN COMPLETED YET.

FIRST, IF THE COURT CAN ALWAYS AND USE YOUR JUDGMENT AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE JUST HAD A FIRE AT THE JAIL ANNEX.

[02:05:01]

WE NEED TO FIX IT.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU'RE GOING TO NEED TO FIX IT.

AND WE WILL DO WHAT WE ALWAYS DO.

WE'LL BRING YOU OUR RECOMMENDED FUNDING STRATEGY TO DO THAT.

AND IF IT INVOLVES DEBT, IT WILL INVOLVE DEBT.

DOES IT GO IN ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT COMMISSIONER MOODIE SAYS FROM A PRECINCT PERSPECTIVE, THEN, THAT PERHAPS THE COURT NEEDS TO, AT SOME REGULAR INTERVAL, REVIEW THE CAPITAL PROJECTS AND HAVE FEEDBACK FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE OF WHERE THOSE PROJECTS ARE, WHERE ARE THEY IN LINE OF THE WHOLE LIST OF PROJECTS, AND PERHAPS GIVE THE BUDGET OFFICE A BETTER PERSPECTIVE DIRECTIVE? OR DO YOU ALL FEEL INTERNALLY THE CURRENT PROCESS OF HOW YOU ALL HANDLE THAT? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? SO YEAH, SO I OBVIOUSLY AM KEPT ABREAST OF PARTICULAR CAPITAL PROJECTS AND ISSUES AS THEY COME UP. EVERY BUDGET THAT I'VE BEEN A PART OF, I CAN'T THINK OF ONE WHERE THIS DIDN'T HAPPEN.

THE COURT HAS HAD A WORK SESSION DEVOTED PRETTY MUCH TO CAPITAL PROJECTS.

TYPICALLY IT'S ABOUT EVALUATING NEW PROJECTS MORE THAN IT IS ABOUT HERE'S WHERE WE'RE AT.

SO WE CAN CERTAINLY SCHEDULE.

WHAT I INTEND TO DO AFTER THIS IS, AS I SAID, SIT DOWN WITH OUR MY CAPITAL PROJECTS.

PEOPLE GET THAT ASSESSMENT OF WHERE YOU'RE AT NOW WITH WHAT PROJECTS AND WHAT DO YOU NEED TO FINISH THE PROJECTS YOU'VE STARTED AND WHAT IS THE POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACT OF NOT STARTING SOME YOUR NEXT WAVE OF PROJECTS FOR 18 TO 24 MONTHS OTHER THAN ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE, AND THEN HAVE THEM PRESENT IT TO YOU.

YOU MAY SAY, WHOA, NO, WE NEED THOSE PROJECTS MUCH SOONER THAN THAT.

SORRY. WE'LL TAKE WE'LL DO SOMETHING ELSE.

OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONER MOODY? WELL, I APPRECIATE WHAT THE THE JUDGE WAS SAYING THERE.

I DO HOPE THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO ENGAGE AT A PRECINCT LEVEL, WHETHER THERE'S A BAR SET OR NOT, IN TERMS OF REDUCTIONS OR DELAYING PROJECTS.

YOU KNOW, I, AT LEAST FROM PRECINCT THREE WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT.

FOR MY MY PRECINCT.

BUT THE JUDGE MENTIONED SOMETHING ELSE IN TERMS OF THESE INJECTS THAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT JUST FOR FOR THINKING ABOUT ADDRESSING THIS.

YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE YOUR ESTIMATES, YOUR, YOUR STANDARD RUN RATES AND TRAJECTORY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, AS WE HAVE HAD LOTS OF DISCUSSIONS AND WE HEAR ABOUT IN THE NEWS, ALL THE POTENTIAL INJECTS, BIG TICKET INJECTS IN THE COMING YEAR OR TWO.

YOU KNOW, IN ORDER TO TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO, TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THOSE AS A COURT OR BE ABLE TO TO SUPPORT THOSE, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD FURTHER SUGGEST WE NEED TO BE AGGRESSIVE OR AT LEAST INTENTIONAL IN TRYING TO BRING DOWN OUR CURRENT DEBT LEVEL. BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS THAT THAT ARE OUT THERE, SOME WE KNOW ABOUT, SOME WE MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT, BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO STEP IN IN A CRISIS SITUATION OR BE ABLE TO YOU KNOW, HELP IN A SIGNIFICANT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, THEN WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THAT BREATHING ROOM. AND I THINK BY GETTING AHEAD OF THIS AND ADDRESSING IT DIRECTLY, THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO GET THERE.

SO THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT, MR. CALVERT? COMMISSIONER MOODY, WHICH PROJECTS ARE YOU REFERRING TO THAT ARE UPCOMING? I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE TO GO INTO ALL OF THEM.

I MEAN, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THEM HERE TODAY.

WHETHER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE THE ART THAT THE JUDGE MENTIONED, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE JAIL, THE ARC, THE THE VA PROJECT. OH, OR WHETHER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE THE YOU KNOW, BASEBALL DISCUSSIONS THAT YOU HEAR FROM, FROM THE, THE CITY AND FROM NEWS SOURCES OR WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE JAIL, WHICH I BROUGHT UP EARLIER.

THERE'S THERE'S GOING TO BE WHETHER THAT'S A NEW FACILITY OR WHETHER THAT'S ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT FIXING THE EXISTING FACILITY, THERE ARE GOING TO BE HUGE INJECTS.

I MEAN, I THINK THAT THAT'S PROBABLY PRETTY, PRETTY EXPECTED AT THIS POINT.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S DISCUSSIONS ABOUT, YOU KNOW NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CONVENTION CENTER RENOVATIONS TO THE ALAMODOME, RENOVATIONS, THE FROST BANK CENTER.

YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THERE'S THERE'S NO SHORT LIST OF BIG TICKET PROJECTS THAT I THINK WILL CONTINUE TO PERCOLATE OUT THERE AND ULTIMATELY COME FORWARD TO THIS COURT.

[02:10:03]

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

LET'S GET TO AGENDA ITEM THREE.

[3. Discussion and appropriate action regarding an Outside Agency Funding and Sponsorship process. ]

DISCUSSION APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDING AND SPONSORSHIP PROCESS.

MISS NICOLE. GOOD MORNING.

SO NICOLE ERFURT, OFFICE OF THE COUNTY MANAGER.

I MANAGE THE OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDING PROGRAM IN WHICH COMMISSIONERS COURT PROVIDES FUNDING TO VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS TO SUPPORT INITIATIVES THAT IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES IN BEXAR COUNTY.

SO I'LL TAKE A MINUTE.

Y'ALL ARE KEEP GOING, KEEP GOING.

NICOLE. SO LET ME DO THE NEXT SLIDE.

SO A LITTLE BACKGROUND IS THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAYS THAT IN ORDER FOR A COUNTY TO PROVIDE FUNDING TO AN ORGANIZATION, IT MUST MEET A PUBLIC PURPOSE, AND WE MUST HAVE ADEQUATE CONTROLS TO TO ENSURE THAT THE PUBLIC PURPOSE IS ACCOMPLISHED.

AND SO PREVIOUSLY BEGINNING WITH BEFORE FY 21, WE HAD A SYSTEM WHERE THROUGH A COUNTY WIDE BUDGET APPLICATION PROCESS THAT THE THAT WE WOULD GO FOR A PROPOSAL FOR PEOPLE TO SUBMIT THEIR FUNDING REQUEST.

WE WOULD SCORE THEM THROUGH COUNTY STAFF, WE WOULD PRESENT IT TO COMMISSIONERS COURT, AND THEN THE COURT WOULD MAKE A MAKE THEIR APPROVAL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OR CHANGES. AND BEGINNING WITH THE FY 21 BUDGET THIS PROCESS WAS HALTED AND CHANGED TO THE CURRENT DISCRETIONARY FUND PROCESS, IN WHICH EACH COMMISSIONERS COURT OFFICE RECEIVES 400 K.

SO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF FUNDING THAT IS ALLOCATED.

THE FIRST IS PROGRAMMATIC.

SO THIS IS FOR PROGRAMS, PROJECTS THAT SERVE A PUBLIC PURPOSE AND HAVE THIS AGREEMENTS FOR OPERATIONAL EXPENSES OF THAT PURPOSE.

IN SPONSORSHIPS IS TO SUPPORT AN EVENT OR SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM THAT STILL MEETS A PUBLIC PURPOSE, AND THAT THE FUNDING IS UNDER 50,000.

SO I GIVE EXAMPLES OF DIFFERENT PROGRAMS AND SERVICES, AND ALSO EVENTS THAT WE'VE ALLOCATED FUNDING FOR BEFORE.

JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT THE USES HAVE BEEN.

AND SO WE COME TO THE PUBLIC PURPOSE.

THIS IS CRUCIAL BECAUSE WE HAVE TO SHOW IT IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO GIVE THIS MONEY TO ORGANIZATIONS FOR THEIR PROGRAMS OR PROJECTS.

SO I GIVE A FEW OF THE COMMONLY USED EXAMPLES OF THE STATUTES THAT WE USE.

SO PUBLIC HEALTH, YOU KNOW, TO TO SUPPORT LITERACY PROGRAMS, TO SUPPORT ART TO SUPPORT THE ARTS, AND AND THEN, YOU KNOW, TO SUPPORT INDIGENT INDIVIDUALS.

AND SO WE COME TO NON-ELIGIBLE USES.

SO THIS IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THIS FUNDING THROUGH THIS PROGRAM.

SO ANY PROJECTS OUTSIDE OF BEXAR COUNTY, POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS OR ADVERTISING.

WHEN IT COMES TO RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS, IT WE CAN PROVIDE FUNDING TO A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION AS LONG AS THEIR PROGRAM MEETS A PUBLIC PURPOSE. IT CANNOT BE JUST, YOU KNOW JUST TO A RELIGIOUS ACTIVITY.

IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO MEET THE ENTIRE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, PROVIDE SERVICES OR FUND OR RESOURCES TO THE PUBLIC.

TRIPS AND TRAVEL.

WITH EXCEPTIONS FOR OPERATIONAL EXPENDITURES, FOR A FOR A PROGRAM OR PROJECT AND THEN ANY OTHER EXPENDITURES UNRELATED TO PUBLIC BUSINESS.

SO FOR PROGRAMMATIC FUNDING, THERE'S CERTAIN CONDITIONS THAT ARE SET FOR THIS.

SO USUALLY WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT IS EXECUTED AND HAS DIFFERENT EXHIBITS THAT REFERENCE THE PROGRAM, THE INSURANCE LEVELS.

AND SO ALL OF THESE FUNDS ARE DISPERSED ON A REIMBURSEMENT BASIS.

SO THEY HAVE TO SPEND THE MONEY UP FRONT.

THEY PROVIDE AN INVOICE WITH THE RECEIPTS AND A PROOF OF PAYMENT, AND THE COUNTY PROVIDES PAYMENT TO THEM FOR THAT.

SO USUALLY ALL THE FUNDING IS AVAILABLE TO THEM FOR THEIR EXPENDITURES FROM BEGINNING OF THE FISCAL YEAR.

SO OCTOBER 1ST THROUGH THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, SEPTEMBER 30TH.

AND SO WE HAVE TO HAVE AN AGREEMENT EXECUTED FOR THESE PROGRAMS IN ORDER TO GET THIS FUNDING DISBURSED TO THEM.

FOR SPONSORSHIPS, THE PROCESS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

AND SO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS I NEED IN ORDER TO GET THE THE SPONSORSHIP PROCESSED.

[02:15:01]

SO THEY HAVE TO BE REGISTERED AS A COUNTY VENDOR.

USUALLY I'LL BE ABLE TO CHECK AND LET THE ORGANIZATIONS KNOW I WORK WITH YOUR OFFICES TO ENSURE THAT THIS IS DONE BEFORE THE FUNDING GETS ALLOCATED TO THE SPONSORSHIP. THIS APPLIES TO BOTH PROGRAMMATIC AND SPONSORSHIPS.

THEY HAVE TO BE A VENDOR IN ORDER FOR US TO PROCESS A PAYMENT TO THEM.

I NEED DOCUMENTATION ON AN EVENT OR A SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM.

SO I NEED TO SEE IF THIS IS A VALID PROGRAM THAT MEETS PUBLIC PURPOSE ELIGIBILITY.

THERE'S DIFFERENT VARIETY OF WAYS THAT I'VE RECEIVED DOCUMENTATION LIKE FLIERS OR LETTERS OF SUPPORT.

IT'S JUST THIS HAS TO BE INCLUDED.

SO THAT WAY WE CAN GET IT PROCESSED.

AND THEN I NEED AN INVOICE FOR PAYMENT.

SO ONCE IT'S THROUGH THE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THE PROCESS AND I CAN SUBMIT IT TO THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE, I NEED AN INVOICE.

SO THAT WAY WE CAN GET IT THROUGH AND THE PAYMENT CAN BE ISSUED TO THEM.

OOPS. GO BACK.

SO MY FOR MY RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PROCESS THIS WOULD JUST HELP US GET THIS STREAMLINED.

AND SO THAT WAY WE CAN GET THIS MONEY OUT THE DOOR TO THESE ORGANIZATIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING FUNDING $1 MILLION IN THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOR COUNTYWIDE OUTSIDE AGENCIES.

SO THIS WOULD BE SEPARATE FROM YOUR DISCRETIONARY FUNDS.

SO WE WOULD GO THROUGH AN APPLICATION, THEY WOULD SUBMIT IT AND WE WOULD STAFF WOULD PROVIDE COMMISSIONERS COURT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW THE $1 MILLION SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED AMONGST ALL THE APPLICATIONS.

SO THE APPLICATION WOULD HELP US PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, A UNIFORM SYSTEM FOR COUNTY WIDE.

YOU KNOW IF PEOPLE HAD AN ISSUE WITH THE APPLICATION, THEY WOULD HAVE ONE PERSON POINT OF CONTACT THAT THEY CAN TALK TO AND HELP THEM WITH ANY QUESTIONS THEY MAY HAVE.

AND THIS WOULD ENSURE THAT ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION IS SUBMITTED FOR US TO REVIEW.

BY THE TIME WE DO RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COURT AND WOULD ALSO HELP LATER ON WHEN ONCE ANY FUNDING HAS BEEN APPROVED, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GO AND EXECUTE AGREEMENTS AND GET THE FUNDING AVAILABLE TO THESE ORGANIZATIONS.

SO FOR THE BUDGET PROCESS TIMELINE.

SO TO START IT OFF, WE WOULD SUBMIT A NOFA NOTICE OF AVAILABLE FUNDING.

THIS WOULD HELP NOTIFY ORGANIZATIONS ACROSS BEXAR COUNTY THAT THEY CAN SUBMIT THEIR FUNDING REQUESTS.

SO IT WOULD INCLUDE DETAILS ON HOW TO SUBMIT THEIR APPLICATION, THE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS, AND IMPORTANT DATES FOR THE PROCESS.

WE WOULD RECOMMEND TO OPEN THE APPLICATION FROM JULY 8TH AND CONCLUDE ON AUGUST 2ND.

AND SO, LIKE I MENTIONED BEFORE, WE WOULD DO A REVIEW OF ALL APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED, AND WE WOULD SUBMIT THIS TO COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR YOUR APPROVAL.

SO FOR THE NOFA THERE'S A VARIETY OF WAYS THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ANNOUNCE THIS.

YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE COUNTY WEBSITE, WE WOULD HAVE A DEDICATED WEB PAGE FOR OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDING.

THAT WAY THEY CAN GO TO SEE RESOURCES, GUIDES IMPORTANT DATES, AND THEY CAN ACCESS THE APPLICATION.

WE COULD POST THIS ON THE COUNTY SOCIAL MEDIA.

WE WOULD PROVIDE RESOURCES TO YOUR OFFICES IF YOU WANTED TO POST INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROCESS TO YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA, WE COULD SEND OUT MEDIA RELEASES. AND WE CAN ALSO SEND OUT EMAILS TO BOTH A LIST OF PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDEES AND ANY LISTS THAT COMMISSIONERS COURT DEEMS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE FOR THE DISCRETIONARY FUNDS THAT EACH COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE RECEIVES.

WE ARE ALSO RECOMMENDING TO IMPLEMENT AN APPLICATION FOR ALL PROGRAMMATIC FUNDING REQUESTS, SO APPLICATIONS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED AND REVIEWED BY COUNTY STAFF FOR ELIGIBILITY PRIOR TO PLACEMENT ON THE AGENDA, AND SPONSORSHIPS CAN BE ALLOCATED ANY TIME DURING THE FISCAL YEAR BEFORE THE FISCAL YEAR END REQUISITION DEADLINE OF AUGUST 31ST.

WE ARE ALSO RECOMMENDING THAT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS REMAIN INELIGIBLE FOR THIS FOR FUNDING THROUGH THE OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDING PROGRAM.

THERE'S THERE ARE DIFFERENT PROCESSES THAT HAPPEN BETWEEN THE TWO.

YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT THE OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDING PROGRAM IS FOR PROGRAMMATIC TYPES OF THINGS, BECAUSE WHEN YOU GET INTO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, THERE'S ISSUES SUCH AS OWNERSHIP ISSUES.

THE COUNTY HAS TO HAVE AN OWNERSHIP PART IN THE PROJECT.

IT HAS TO HAVE PUBLIC ACCESS FOR TO THE FACILITY AND THROUGH BOND COUNCIL WHEN YOU HAVE YOU ALLOCATE 100,000 FOR A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, THE COST JUST OF HAVING BOND COUNCIL REVIEW IT IS AN ADDITIONAL 20,000.

[02:20:02]

SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER THE EXTRA COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

WE ARE ALSO SO FAR OUR RECOMMENDATIONS.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING FUNDING $1 MILLION FOR COUNTYWIDE ARTS AGENCY FUNDING AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A FORMAL APPLICATION DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS FOR THE COUNTYWIDE OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDING.

SO AND THEN EACH COMMISSIONERS COURT OFFICE WOULD CONTINUE TO RECEIVE YOUR 400 K FROM FOR YOUR DISCRETIONARY FUNDS FOR SPONSORSHIPS, PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS. WE WOULD ALSO RECOMMEND TO DISCONTINUE THE PRACTICE OF CARRYING OVER FUNDS FOR ALL OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDING.

THIS HAS CAUSED NUMEROUS ISSUES WITHIN DEPARTMENTS AND EVEN JUST PROCESSING THE FUNDS, BECAUSE THERE'S SOME FUNDING THAT'S ON THE BOOKS TWO YEARS AGO THAT WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PROCESS BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MEET ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS, BUT IT'S STILL BEEN CARRIED OVER.

WE ALSO RECOMMEND THAT ALL OFFICES AND DEPARTMENTS, EXCLUDING COMMISSIONERS COURT WHEN THEY ARE REQUESTING SPONSORSHIPS IN THE NEW FISCAL YEAR, THEY MUST SUBMIT THESE ITEMS AS PART OF THEIR PROPOSED BUDGET, SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO GIVE BUDGET A LINE ITEM OF EACH SPONSORSHIP.

SO THAT WAY WE CAN DETERMINE IF THEY MEET THE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR SPONSORSHIPS.

OKAY. QUESTIONS? QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER CLAY-FLORES.

FIRST OF ALL, NICOLE, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING ORDER.

I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A LONG PROCESS TO YOU AND YOUR TEAM.

SO THANKS FOR THE WORK ON THIS.

SO A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

SO THE NEW APPLICATION PROCESS IS GOING TO BE FOR THE MILLION DOLLARS, BUT OUR DISCRETIONARY FUNDS, YOU'RE ALSO WANTING TO IMPLEMENT AN APPLICATION PROCESS? YES. RIGHT. AND IS THAT TO JUST TAKE CARE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE MIGHT DESIGNATE, ALLOCATE SOME FUNDING AND THEN IT TURNS OUT THEY DON'T QUALIFY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

IT WOULD GIVE US LIKE A WAY TO GATHER THE DATA THAT WE NEED TO DO, REVIEW AND MAKE SURE IT MEETS ALL GUIDELINES.

SO THAT WAY WHEN YOU ALLOCATE THE FUNDING, AS SOON AS IT'S GET APPROVED WE CAN GET IT OUT THE DOOR AS FAST AS POSSIBLE.

SO THEN ORGANIZATIONS WOULD ACTUALLY BE RECEIVING THEIR FUNDING QUICKER? YES. OKAY.

AND SO THAT APPLICATION PROCESS FOR THE DESIGNATED FUNDS THAT WE ALLOCATE, I'M HOPING OR ASSUMING THAT APPLICATION IS GOING TO BE LESS STRENUOUS THAN THE ONE YOU GUYS ARE PUTTING OUT FOR THE NOFA IT WOULD BE ABOUT THE SAME.

IT WOULD HAVE THE SAME INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD REQUIRED.

GENERALLY, THE INFORMATION THAT I ASK ALL AGENCIES RIGHT NOW IS THE BARE MINIMUM THAT I NEED TO GET AN AGREEMENT EXECUTED.

SO IT'S INFORMATION THEY WOULD NEED ANYWAY TO GET THE FUNDING.

YES. OKAY. AND I JUST SAY THAT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS, BUT I TEND TO ALLOCATE FUNDING TO SMALLER NONPROFITS AT TIMES.

A LOT OF THEM TO SMALLER NONPROFITS WHO MAYBE DON'T HAVE THE HISTORY OR THE BACKGROUND TO APPLY FOR LARGER GRANTS.

AND SO SOME OF THEM ARE RUN BY VOLUNTEERS OR JUST A COUPLE OF PEOPLE, AND THERE'S JUST A LOT OF WORK.

BUT IF IT'S WORK THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO ANYWAY TO GET THE FUNDING, THEN THAT MAKES SENSE.

THANK YOU. MR. ROGERS, THANK YOU, JUDGE NICOLE, THANKS FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS.

I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN SPENDING QUITE A BIT OF TIME ON IT.

APPRECIATE IT. I HAVE A QUESTION, I GUESS REALLY MORE RELATED TO IMPLEMENTATION.

SO AND REALLY MORE ON THE 1 MILLION GENERAL FUND DOLLARS.

I'M ASSUMING THIS IS GOING TO BE PROPOSED TO BE IMPLEMENTED AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS THIS SUMMER.

AND SO IN JUST TO KIND OF, I GUESS, PLAY IT OUT.

BUDGETS APPROVED SEPTEMBER GOES INTO EFFECT OCTOBER 1ST.

THEN THE THE APPLICATION PROCESS WILL BE OPENED SOMETIME AFTER THAT.

ADOPTION. IS THAT THE WAY IT'S GOING TO WORK OR SO FOR THE APPLICATION? WE WOULD RECOMMEND STARTING IT NOW FOR THE $1 MILLION FOR COUNTYWIDE.

AND SO BETWEEN JULY 8TH AND AUGUST 2ND, WE WOULD OPEN UP THE APPLICATIONS FOR ORGANIZATIONS TO SUBMIT THEIR FUNDING REQUESTS.

OKAY. AND THEN ONCE IT CONCLUDES ON AUGUST 2ND, WE WOULD TAKE A BRIEF PERIOD OF TIME TO REVIEW ALL APPLICATIONS, MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO THAT WAY BUDGET CAN INCLUDE THEM IN THEIR NUMBERS FOR WHEN THE BUDGET GETS PROPOSED TO YOU.

SO YOU CAN MAKE APPROVALS OF THE FUNDING ALLOCATIONS AT THAT TIME.

GOTCHA. OKAY.

LET ME ASK ABOUT AND THIS MAY BE MORE FOR YOU, DAVID.

IN YEARS PAST WE'VE HAD I GUESS CALL IT ONE OFF ALLOCATIONS TO ARTS ORGANIZATIONS. WHAT COMES TO MIND IS CMI, THE PHIL, THE BALLET.

AND THEY'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT I WOULD THERE WERE SIX FIGURE COMMITMENTS, I THINK.

[02:25:01]

SO IS THE INTENT THEN TO NOW FUNNEL THESE TO THIS APPLICATION PROCESS BECAUSE THAT WOULD THAT $1 MILLION UP PRETTY QUICKLY OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE THROUGH BUDGET DISCUSSIONS.

AND IF THERE'S A CONSENSUS OF THE COURT, THOSE KIND OF ALLOCATIONS CAN STILL BE CONSIDERED OUTSIDE OF THIS PROCESS.

I DON'T KNOW IF I'M MAKING SENSE, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK IT THROUGH.

YEAH, YOU ARE. AND IT WASN'T WASN'T WAS NOT MY INTENTION TO HAVE THEM TRYING TO VIE FOR THOSE GENERAL FUND DOLLARS.

OKAY. THEY'RE NOT CURRENTLY FUND THE ORGANIZATIONS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE NOT CURRENTLY FUNDED THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND.

SO THOSE ALLOCATIONS WERE WERE FROM WHERE THEN LAST BUDGET CYCLE.

OH FROM VENUE BECAUSE THEY PERFORMED IT IN ONE OF OUR VENUES.

SO SOME OF IT WAS DISCRETIONARY FROM THE COMMISSION.

I THOUGHT SOME OF IT WAS WAS WAS WAS GENERAL FUND.

YEAH. OVER 600,000 FOR THE PHILHARMONIC.

SO THE APPLICATION IS JUST THE MOTIVE OF, OF OUR VEHICLE TO GET INFORMATION TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER ALLOCATIONS THAT THE COURT DECIDES THAT IT'S ELIGIBLE FOR THE FUNDING AND WE CAN GET IT OUT THE DOOR.

IT'S JUST JUST THE WAY WE CAN GET INFORMATION, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, SOMETIMES I HAVE A HARD TIME GETTING INFORMATION FROM AGENCIES AFTER THE FUNDING HAS BEEN APPROVED.

OKAY. YEAH.

I'M JUST TRYING TO CONTEMPLATE HOW WE'RE GOING TO HANDLE SOME OF THESE.

I MEAN, I GET IT WITH OUR WITH OUR DISCRETIONARY DOLLARS.

A LOT OF TIMES IT'S FOR A SPONSORSHIP OR SOME PROGRAMING DOLLARS 25, $50,000, MAYBE SMALLER THAN THAT.

BUT THOSE ORGANIZATIONS WHO WHO REQUIRE ARE ASKING FOR A BIGGER NUMBER, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S IF IT'S $100,000 PLUS THAT $1 MILLION IS GOING TO GO PRETTY QUICKLY. SO WE WOULD HAVE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT STAFF, YOU KNOW, LOOKING OVER THROUGH THE LIST OF ALLOCATIONS, THERE MIGHT BE SOME FUNDING THAT WE RECOMMEND THAT GO THROUGH THE VENUE FUND OR SOME OTHER METHODS OF GENERAL FUND.

YEAH, I KNOW WE HAVE A LOT TO FLUSH OUT STILL, BUT BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE AND ACKNOWLEDGE NICOLE, YOUR WORK ON THIS.

THANK YOU. I THINK IT'S A IT'S A GOOD STARTING POINT AND I THINK WE CAN GET THROUGH IT.

I KNOW THE FIRST YEAR OF IMPLEMENTATION IS A LITTLE BIT BUMPY, BUT WE APPRECIATE YOUR WORK.

THANK YOU. NICOLE. COMMISSIONER MOODY.

YEAH, I WANTED TO TO PIGGYBACK OFF SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE ALREADY MADE.

FIRST OF ALL, COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, I HAD THE SAME QUESTION.

RIGHT, BECAUSE WE HAVE A WIDE SPECTRUM OF, YOU KNOW, THESE MID SIX FIGURE ASKS TO DOWN AT, YOU KNOW, $2,000 FOR A LUNCHEON AT THE NORTH SIDE CHAMBER. RIGHT.

SO HOW WE THINK ABOUT THAT AND WHETHER THERE'S, THERE'S A A DOLLAR CUTOFF FOR, FOR THIS FUND AND ANYBODY WHO'S GOING TO REQUEST, YOU KNOW, A LARGER FIGURE IS GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH A SEPARATE PROCESS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, BUT I THINK WE'D REALLY HAVE TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE BOX IT IN AND CLEAR CONSTRAINTS ON WHAT QUALIFIES FOR THAT MILLION DOLLAR FUND.

THE THE OTHER KIND OF QUESTION THAT'S RELATED WAS SO TODAY FOR MEMBERS OF THE COURT.

FIVE MEMBERS OF THE COURT AND THE 400 K, RIGHT.

$2 MILLION. NOW WE'RE ADDING ANOTHER MILLION DOLLARS ON THAT.

DO WE SEE THAT AS DISPLACING OTHER SPENDING THAT WAS ALREADY TAKING PLACE IN THE GENERAL FUND OR WERE, YOU KNOW, INCREASING OUTSIDE AGENCY SPENDING 50%? I HOPE IT'S THE FORMER.

BUT WELL, GENERALLY THROUGH THE YEARS JUST OUTSIDE AGENCY SPENDING HAS INCREASED BECAUSE THERE'S NEEDS IN THE COMMUNITY.

LIKE, RIGHT NOW WE ALREADY HAD FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR, WE ALREADY HAD ALLOCATED 500,000 THROUGH FOR COUNTYWIDE.

SO THIS WOULD JUST INCREASE IT.

BUT I HAVE OTHER PROJECTS, YOU KNOW, THROUGH A DIFFERENT AVENUE OF THE GENERAL FUND THAT ARE STILL OUT THERE.

I STILL CONSIDER OUTSIDE AGENCY THAT WE'VE HAD TO PROCESS.

SO THERE'S NEED DEPENDS ON HOW MUCH THAT YOUR OFFICES CAN SEE THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY AND ALLOCATE THE FUNDING TOWARDS BUT YOU'RE WELCOME TO MAKE ANY DIRECTION TOWARDS THE FUNDING.

IT'S JUST THERE NEEDS TO BE CLEAR GUIDELINES ON HOW WE PROCESS THIS FUNDING AND HOW WE GET INFORMATION IN TO GET IT OUT THE DOOR.

SO PART OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IS, OR WHAT WE'RE TRYING RECOMMENDING IS YOU'RE FOR THE HISTORY OF YOUR DISCRETIONARY FUNDS THEY USED THAT DIDN'T EXIST FIVE YEARS AGO.

THERE WAS ONE COUNTYWIDE LINE ITEM.

IT WAS 2 MILLION AT THAT TIME.

BUT THE VARIED YOU ALL HAVE DIFFERENT PRIORITIES ABOUT HOW WHAT YOU THINK SHOULD BE FUNDED.

AND IT'S REALLY HARD FOR ME TO EVEN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON SOME OF THOSE, BECAUSE, I MEAN, YOU'RE PICKING BETWEEN AN ARTS ORGANIZATION

[02:30:08]

AND SOMEONE WHO PROVIDES, YOU KNOW, OUTREACH TO HOMELESS.

I MEAN, WHAT'S THE RATIONALE THERE BOTH NEEDS.

IT WOULD BE GOOD TO DO BOTH.

SO THAT'S WHERE AT SOME POINT THE COURT CHOSE TO DIVIDE THAT 2 MILLION UP.

SO YOU GUYS HAD MORE FLEXIBILITY.

BUT WHAT HAS CONTINUED TO HAPPEN SINCE THAT IS WE CONTINUE TO GET REQUESTS THAT GO OUTSIDE OF YOUR DISCRETIONARY FUNDS.

AND SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DIPPING OUR TOE BACK INTO THE WATER OF HAVING A COUNTY WIDE PROCESS.

SO YOU AS PART OF THE BUDGET, YOU CAN EVALUATE THE WHOLE LIST OF PEOPLE WHO APPLIED.

THE OTHER CONCERN I'VE THAT FOR ME HAS BEEN GROWING IS IN PART BECAUSE OF CARES ACT AND IN PART BECAUSE OF ARPA. I BELIEVE THE EXPECTATIONS OF PEOPLE ABOUT REVOLVING AROUND COUNTY FUNDING.

I WANT TO TRY AND GET THEM TO LEVEL SET BACK TO BACK IN THE DAY.

WHEN IT WAS A $2 MILLION FUND, 100 GRAND WAS A WIN.

THAT WAS LIKE A BIG WIN.

MOST OF THEM WERE IN THE FIVE DIGITS.

WELL, THOSE DAYS ARE GONE.

THE REQUESTS ARE IN THE MILLIONS, IN SOME CASES, NOT ALL, BUT SOME.

AND WE JUST I DON'T REALLY HAVE A PROCESS TO DEAL WITH THAT.

AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO PROPOSE ONE.

I GET ALL THAT, DAVID.

I APPRECIATE THE CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND.

ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK ABOUT, CAN WE USE THIS PROCESS TO HELP BETTER EVALUATE AND FILTER THOSE THOSE LARGE REQUESTS, WHICH WOULD MAKE SENSE AND FROM A TOTAL BUDGET PERSPECTIVE, MAY ACTUALLY BE BE A POSITIVE THING OR, YOU KNOW, ARE WE JUST THROWING OUT ANOTHER MILLION DOLLARS INTO THIS BIG POT OF MONEY, WHICH, IF YOU DO THE MATH, THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

I HOPE IT'S THE FORMER AND IT PROVIDES US A LITTLE MORE STRUCTURE.

AND IF IF THOSE OTHER ITEMS WERE BEING SUPPORTED SEPARATELY OUTSIDE THE, YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE AGENCY UMBRELLA BEFORE AND NOW THEY'RE UNDERNEATH THIS $1 MILLION COUNTY FUND, THEN, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE.

SO JUST THE OTHER THING, THIS THIS THE OLD PROCESS WHERE PEOPLE DID APPLY DURING THE BUDGET FOR THEIR SHARE OF THE 2 MILLION IS IT ALLOWS ALLOWED US TO DELIVER BETTER INFORMATION TO THE COURT, SUCH AS ARE YOU GETTING FUNDING FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE? AND A LOT OF MANY OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT REQUESTED FUNDING WOULD GET CDBG FUNDING FOR OR SOMETHING, SOME OR CITY FUNDING OR FEDERAL FUNDING.

SO YOU GET TO SEE WHERE OUR CONTRIBUTION LIES IN THE IN THE OVERALL CONTEXT.

OKAY. WELL I'M SURE WE'LL WE'LL GET TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THE THAT PROCESS GOING FORWARD.

LAST TWO THINGS I JUST WANTED TO MENTION TO COMMISSIONER CLAY-FLORES COMMENTS.

I ALSO HAVE SOME VERY, YOU KNOW, SMALL NON-PROFITS.

I MEAN, I THINK A SCOUT TROOP WHO, YOU KNOW, NEEDS HELP WITH A CAMPING TRIP OR WHATEVER.

THEY'RE NOT SET UP TO GO THROUGH THAT MORE DETAILED PROCESS THAT IS PROBABLY IN PLACE FOR LARGER NONPROFITS THAT ARE ESTABLISHED AND KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

AND SO IN ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT WHAT SHE OFFERED, I WOULD JUST SEE IF THERE'S A POSSIBLE SIMPLER PROCESS FOR REQUESTS. YOU KNOW, UNDER $5,000 SOME SORT OF THRESHOLD WHERE WE START TO REDUCE KIND OF THE, THE BARS AND BARRIERS TO ENTRY FOR, FOR THOSE FOLKS WHO HAVE A NEED, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE THE, THE STRUCTURE AND THE HR SUPPORT AND EVERYTHING ELSE TO, TO FILL OUT, YOU KNOW, APPLICATIONS AND EVERYTHING. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YES IT DOES. BUT FOR THE PROGRAMMATIC TYPES OF REQUESTS THAT WE RECEIVE, THERE'S LIABILITIES THAT ARE ATTACHED TO THOSE PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS.

AND SO GENERALLY YOU WOULDN'T GET $5,000 TO AN ORGANIZATION THAT CAN'T EVEN PROCURE INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT PROJECT.

SO GENERALLY, I'VE BEEN TALKING TO YOUR OFFICES THAT IF THEY HAVE AN EVENT.

WE'VE GIVEN SMALLER EVENTS THAT THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A BETTER AVENUE FOR THEM TO GET FUNDING TO HELP THEIR PURPOSE AND HELP THE COMMUNITY.

THEN A PROGRAMMATIC REQUEST.

I UNDERSTAND. NO.

AND I APPRECIATE YOU HELPING TO TO WORK WITH THOSE GROUPS IN ORDER TO SEE THAT.

BUT I SHARE THE SAME CONCERNS WHEN IT COMES TO SOME OF THE SMALLER ORGANIZATIONS OUT THERE.

LAST THING I JUST WANT TO MENTION, AND, AND THIS IS I THINK REALLY IMPORTANT IS, YOU KNOW, AS YOU MENTIONED, IN PREVIOUS YEARS,

[02:35:07]

WE'VE ALLOWED FOR THE ROLLOVER CARRYOVER FUNDS.

YOU KNOW, THAT HAS BEEN THE STANDARD PRACTICE.

AND SO IF WE ARE GOING TO MAKE A CHANGE WITH REGARD TO THAT, I THINK IT ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE NEXT YEAR AND NOT THIS YEAR, BECAUSE NOW WE'RE INSIDE 90 DAYS. AND AND WE CAN'T JUST CHANGE THE RULES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE THE RACE HERE.

AND WE'RE, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WORKING THROUGH OUR OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDS, BUT WE DID NOT EXPECT A DEADLINE AND CUT OFF IN 90 DAYS.

AND THAT WOULD DRAMATICALLY SHIFT, YOU KNOW, OUR PRIORITIES AND AND FORCE US TO, TO MAKE DECISIONS IN A TIME THAT THAT WE'RE NOT PREPARED TO.

AND SO I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THE, THE ARGUMENT, BUT I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT, IT NEEDS TO BE IN FUTURE YEARS.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE EVERY OFFICE HAS THE ABILITY TO ADJUST, WORK THROUGH THEIR BACKLOG OF OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDS AND THEN IMPLEMENT THE POLICY.

SO THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY FOR CONSIDERATION OF THAT IS THAT PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT I PROCESS IT.

THERE'S BEEN TIMES WHERE THERE'S AUDITING ISSUES, BUDGET ISSUES, TRYING TO RECONCILE ALL THE AMOUNTS.

THERE'S BEEN TIMES FOR THE AGREEMENT AND JUST THE NORMAL PROCESSING WHERE LAST FISCAL YEAR, THERE WAS A BUNCH OF ALLOCATIONS ALLOCATED AUGUST. AND SO THAT DOESN'T ALLOW ENOUGH TIME TO GET THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BEFORE THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR SO THEY CAN GET THEY CAN GET REIMBURSED FOR THAT FUNDING FOR THAT FISCAL YEAR.

AND WE'VE BROUGHT IT OVER TO THIS FISCAL YEAR.

THERE'S BEEN ISSUES WHERE WE HAVE TO I'VE TRIED TO BRING A LOT OF THEM TO WHERE THEY USE THE FUNDING FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR, BUT YET THEY STILL WANT TO USE THE FUNDING FROM LAST FISCAL YEAR. AND SO THERE'S ISSUES TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THE FUNDING AGREEMENTS SET FOR THE LAST FISCAL YEAR SO THEY CAN PROCESS.

IT'S JUST THE THE PROCESS WHEN IT TAKES USING THIS CARRYOVER, IT GETS VERY COMPLICATED AND CONFUSING TRYING TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY STAYS WITHIN THE THE REALMS OF THEIR TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT.

WELL, I THINK YOU JUST KIND OF REINFORCED MY, MY ARGUMENT.

IF EVERYONE WHO HAS REMAINING FUNDS, WHICH PROBABLY MOST OF US DO WAS GOING TO TRY TO SPEND ALL OF THAT IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS AND GET IT OUT THE DOOR.

YOUR TEAM WOULD BE OVERWHELMED.

A LOT OF THAT WOULD CARRY OVER ANYWAY.

SO I THINK THE WISE CHOICE WOULD BE TO GO AHEAD AND KEEP THE CURRENT POLICY IN PLACE UNTIL NEXT FY, AND THEN WE CAN CAN SET THAT AND CHANGE THE RULES GOING FORWARD.

YEAH. SO JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S EASIER LIKE GOING FORWARD AFTER THIS CARRYOVER IF YOU, IF ALLOCATIONS ARE MADE BEGINNING IN THE FISCAL YEAR SO WE CAN GET THE, THE MONEY OUT THE DOOR, THAT WOULD HELP ALLEVIATE A LOT OF THE CARRYOVER IN THE FUTURE.

SO GOING FORWARD IF YOU MAKE THAT POINT TO THAT'S WHY YOU DO THE COUNTYWIDE AS PART OF THE BUDGET BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE THE ALLOCATIONS APPROVED AND THEN WE CAN START GETTING THE AGREEMENTS OUT THE DOOR OCTOBER 1ST.

SO THAT'S JUST I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO KEEP THAT IN MIND, BECAUSE SOMETIMES I HAVE PROJECTS THAT IT JUST EVERY TIME I TURN AROUND, THEY I HAVE ANOTHER DELAY, ANOTHER ISSUE, AND IT'S HARDER TO GET THESE AGREEMENTS OUT THE DOOR IF WE CAN'T GET THOSE ISSUES.

YOU KNOW, I WANT TO SAY NO.

UNDERSTOOD? UNDERSTOOD. YEAH.

SO IT'S JUST. IF YOU WOULD.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU KEEP IN MIND THAT YOU LIKE THE FUNDING.

GETTING ALLOCATED EARLY ON HELPS TOWARDS THE END, WHERE YOU WON'T HAVE SO MUCH TO CARRY OVER.

I UNDERSTAND. YEAH.

GOOD, GOOD FEEDBACK FOR ALL OF US THAT THE SOONER IN THE FY WE CAN MAKE THOSE DECISIONS, THE EASIER IT IS ON EVERYONE.

WHICH WHICH IS THE MAIN REASON FOR AN APPLICATION.

IF THEY PROVIDE ALL THE DATA TO US, YOU CAN SEE IT.

YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU WANT TO FUND, WHAT LEVEL OF FUNDING YOU WANT FOR, FOR EACH OF THE PROJECTS OR PROGRAMS. AND WE CAN GET THAT FUNDING OUT THE DOOR EASIER.

IT'S JUST IT TAKES A LITTLE BIT, YOU KNOW, AND I KNOW I WORK WELL WITH YOUR OFFICES AND WE CAN GET THIS FUNDING OUT THE DOOR.

IT'S JUST WE GOT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP IN MIND.

CERTAIN PROCESSES AND HAVE THE ORGANIZATIONS KEEP IN MIND THAT, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY TRIES TO DO A QUICK TURNAROUND, BUT WE HAVE THINGS IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE THAT WE HAVE TO BE MINDFUL OF TO GET THIS FUNDING OUT THE DOOR.

YEP. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CALVERT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, NICOLE, FOR A GREAT REPORT.

GREAT UPDATE. LET ME HONE INTO THE ROOT CAUSES OF THE DELAYS WITH NONPROFITS.

CAN YOU GO THROUGH SOME OF THOSE? IS IT IS REIMBURSEMENT ONE OF THE BIGGER ISSUES THAT CAN'T FRONT THE MONEY SO THEY HAVE TO DELAY IT? IT'S VERY RARELY HAS THE REIMBURSEMENT BEEN TOO MUCH OF AN ISSUE WHEN IT COMES TO ORGANIZATIONS.

[02:40:06]

I'VE HAD ONE WHERE THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE FUNDING UP FRONT, SO THEY TOOK OUT A LOAN.

AND WE DID A SERIES OF LIKE PROCESSES WHERE THEY WOULD GO AND USE THAT MONEY TO PAY FOR THEIR ITEMS. THEY WOULD SUBMIT THE INVOICE TO THE THE COUNTY.

WE WOULD PROCESS IT, GIVE THEM THE FUNDING BACK, AND THEN THEY WOULD GO AND USE THAT TO SPEND DOWN THE AMOUNTS THAT THEY WERE ALLOCATED.

GENERALLY THE COURT HAS ALLOCATED SMALLER AMOUNTS TO SOME OF THESE GROUPS BETWEEN THE 20 TO $50,000 RANGE.

AND SO THAT'S BEEN GENERALLY THE THE CONSENSUS THAT THE ORGANIZATIONS CAN MANAGE.

ANY HIGHER AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN LARGER ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE ABLE TO KEEP UP WITH THAT SPENDING AND PROCESSING.

SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT I'VE SEEN IS THE ORGANIZATIONS CAN'T PROCURE INSURANCE, WHICH THE VERY BASIC INSURANCE THAT THE COUNTY REQUIRES FOR PROGRAMMATIC REQUEST IS GENERAL LIABILITY ASSISTANCE TO ENSURE THAT THE COUNTY HAS SOME YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, IN CASE OF LIABILITIES REGARDING THE PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE SOME INSURANCES FOR THAT.

IS THAT LIKE $1 MILLION OR IS THAT A $2 MILLION? THAT'S $1 MILLION.

THERE'S SOME AGGREGATE COST.

DEPENDING ON THE PROGRAM, THEY WE MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL TYPES OF INSURANCES, LIKE AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY.

THERE'S PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY FOR, LIKE MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES OR LEGAL SERVICES, TYPES OF THINGS.

THEN THERE'S ALSO WORKER'S COMPENSATION IF THEY EMPLOY EMPLOYEES, PART OF THE PROGRAM, WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WERE ITEMS IN PLACE FOR THEM TO.

SO GENERALLY, LET ME ASK YOU REAL QUICK ON A LET'S JUST TAKE AN EVENT.

AN EVENT I HAVEN'T I USED TO PRICE A LOT OF INSURANCE FOR EVENTS BECAUSE I WAS IN PR, BUT I HAVEN'T.

I MEAN, I REMEMBER THEM BEING, YOU KNOW, LIKE $600 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

DO YOU, DO YOU RECALL, LIKE, WHAT ARE WHAT ARE SOME OF THE COSTS THAT WE'RE PAYING FOR? SO FOR EVENTS GENERALLY, AS LONG AS THEY'RE UNDER $50,000 THOSE GO THROUGH A SPONSORSHIP WHICH THERE'S LESS RESTRICTIONS IN TERMS OF DOCUMENTATION THAT WE REQUIRE.

SURE, I UNDERSTAND THAT PART, BUT JUST IN TERMS OF DO YOU RECALL COMING ACROSS ANY RECEIPTS WHERE YOU SAW HOW MUCH THE PRICE OF THESE INSURANCES ARE FOR THESE GROUPS? I DON'T SEE ANY COST OF IT.

LIKE, I THINK MAYBE JUST A HANDFUL HAVE EVER DID REIMBURSEMENT FOR INSURANCE COSTS.

I'M NOT AN INSURANCE TYPE OF PERSON.

I JUST KNOW IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT, THAT'S OKAY.

I JUST KNOW I THINK ONE TIME THEY TRIED TO REIMBURSE FOR, LIKE, $1,000 OUT OF THEIR BUDGET OF 50,000.

IT WASN'T A VERY LOT THAT THEY WERE THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT IN TERMS OF REIMBURSEMENT FOR THEIR PROGRAM.

AND GENERALLY, WHEN THEY HAVE SOME OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS, ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE LARGER, THEIR INSURANCE GETS DIVIDED OVER NUMEROUS PROJECTS.

SO THEY PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE CONCERNED ABOUT INSURANCE COSTS FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING FUNDING FOR.

OKAY. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET TO AN UNDERSTANDING OF YOU MENTIONED THAT A LOT OF THESE THINGS ARE HELD UP FOR VARIOUS REASONS.

IS THERE OTHER THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE AWARE OF, THAT MAYBE WE COULD BE OF ASSISTANCE TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS DOESN'T HANG THEM UP ANYMORE? TYPICALLY IT'S IT'S JUST THE TIME THAT THAT ARE TAKEN TO PROCURE THE DATA THAT WE REQUIRE.

SO I USUALLY ASK THEM A LOT OF THE THE FORMS THAT I, I PROVIDE TO THE ORGANIZATIONS ARE VERY SIMPLE.

THEY'RE IT'S A WORK STATEMENT.

IT PROVIDES DETAILS ABOUT THE PROGRAM.

THERE'S A PROGRAM BUDGET.

YOU KNOW, IT'S THEY JUST TELL US WHAT FUNDING THAT THEY'RE RECEIVING, WHAT FUNDING THAT THEY HOPE TO USE FOR EXPENDITURES.

IF THEY'RE REQUESTING SALARY, THEY WOULD DETAIL THE POSITIONS THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING SALARY FOR AND THEN THEY WOULD ALSO DETAIL PERFORMANCE MEASURES. SO WHAT, WHAT THEY, WHAT THEIR GOALS ARE FOR THE PROGRAM, HOW THEY HOPE TO ACHIEVE THEM, AND WHAT'S THE OUTCOMES THAT THEY'RE GOING TO SHOW AT THE END OF THE PROGRAM. OKAY. AND GENERALLY THOSE IT SEEMS TO TAKE ORGANIZATIONS SOME TIME TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION.

OTHER THAN THAT IT'S JUST INSURANCE, WHICH IS JUST WE BASE THE BASIC LEVEL IS GENERAL LIABILITY THAT WE REQUIRE.

THEY MAY HAVE ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF PROGRAM THAT THEY, THAT THEY HAVE.

AND THEN THE NEXT ONE IS THE TEXAS ETHICS FORM 1295, WHICH IS FOR US TO DO AN AGREEMENT WITH THEM.

WE USUALLY REQUIRE THAT. SO THAT WAY THE AUDITORS HAVE IT AND THROUGH THE THROUGH THE PROCESS.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE CAN PROBABLY DO BY WAY OF PROCESS IS TO FRONT LOAD THAT INFORMATION, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I LOOSELY KNEW ABOUT IT, BUT IT REALLY WASN'T FRONT OF MIND FOR ME. I'M SURE IT'S FRONT OF MIND FOR AMY.

[02:45:02]

SO. AND I'VE, I'VE PUT TOGETHER A GUIDE THAT I GIVE OUT TO ORGANIZATIONS SO THEY CAN SEE THE TYPES OF INFORMATION WE REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, EXAMPLES AND HELPFUL LINKS.

AND IT'S A PDF.

I'VE SHARED IT WITH YOUR OFFICES SO THEY CAN SHARE IT WITH THEIR ORGANIZATIONS AS THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THIS REQUEST.

WHAT I MEAN IS NOT THAT YOU HAVEN'T PREPARED THOSE, BUT I MEAN, IN TERMS OF, WHEN WE MEET ABOUT THESE THINGS, WE SIT DOWN AND WE SAY, YOU KNOW, BEFORE YOU COME AND MEET WITH ME ABOUT THIS, I'D LIKE TO SEE THESE THINGS.

RIGHT. IT WOULD JUST BE I MEAN, SOMETIMES WE JUST HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A BUDGETARY WAY TO KIND OF PUT A MARKER THERE.

BUT I'M JUST SAYING A PROCESS.

IT MAY NOT BE FOR YOU, BUT IT COULD BE FOR THE COMMISSIONERS THAT BEFORE WE ACTUALLY SIT DOWN AND TAKE THEIR REQUESTS, WE MIGHT WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE A BUDGET AND MAKE SURE THEY HAVE THESE THINGS IN THAT WAY.

NONE OF US WASTE EACH OTHER'S TIME.

AS PART OF THE ONLINE APPLICATION.

WE WOULD ALSO HAVE A WEBSITE TO COMPLEMENT THE APPLICATION.

SO THAT WAY IT WOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, ALL THE INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE THAT UP NOW.

IT'S NOT IT'S NOT UP RIGHT NOW.

BUT I HAVE IT. YES.

OKAY. GOOD. THAT'S GREAT.

OKAY. I THINK THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL.

I AM A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE SORTING THROUGH ON THE KARAOKE.

I'M NOT A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED.

I'M A LOT OF BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THE CARRYOVER FUNDS ISSUE.

I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER MOODY.

I THINK WE NEED SOME TIME TO WORK THROUGH IT.

I THINK WE NEED TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH THE PROGRAMS HAVE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DO THINGS. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, I HAD A, A SPORTS PARK.

IT'S A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT KIND OF THING.

AND THEY ARE THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT THE LANGUAGE THE COUNTY USES WITH RESPECT TO THE LIENS AND RESPECT. THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, THE COUNTY HAS NEVER REALLY CALLED IN ANYBODY'S PROJECT.

LIKE THEY ARE CONCERNED THAT THE COUNTY WOULD OWN THAT PROJECT AND TAKE IT OVER.

AND IF FOR SOME REASON WE REALLY DON'T DO THAT OR THAT'S NOT OUR INTENT.

OUR INTENT IS JUST TO HAVE THE LEGAL STRUCTURE IN PLACE THAT COVERS OUR LIABILITY, RIGHT? SO WE HAVE TO PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, IT'S A IT'S A HARD BALANCE FROM THE LEGAL EASE INTO THE COMMUNITY.

BUT WE MAY HAVE TO WE MAY HAVE TO JUST KIND OF GIVE SOME ASSURANCE OF KIND OF WHAT OUR INTENT IS, RIGHT? IT'S A LEGAL INTENT.

BUT THERE'S ALSO A PRACTICAL CUSTOMARY LAW WAY THAT WE'VE OPERATED.

SO ANYWAY, I WANT TO MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE SOME OF THESE GROUPS, THEY RUN AWAY FROM US BECAUSE THEY THINK WE'RE GOING TO JUST TAKE THEIR BUILDING OR TAKE THEIR SPORTS PARK OR WHATEVER.

SO FOR FOR THE OUTSIDE AGENCY PROGRAM, THE AGREEMENTS THAT ARE STRUCTURED ARE DIFFERENT THAN THE CAPITAL AGREEMENTS.

JUST BECAUSE, YOU KNOW WELL, SOME OF THEM YOU SAID COULD BE USED FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT.

NO, I SAY WE WE RECOMMEND THAT IT REMAINS INELIGIBLE.

OH, FOR FOR CAPITAL I MISUNDERSTOOD.

SO BECAUSE THE STRUCTURE FOR THE OUTSIDE AGENCY PROGRAM, IT'S VERY SIMPLE.

THEY TELL US WHAT PROJECT OR PROGRAM THAT THEY WANT US TO FUND.

THEY GIVE DETAILS.

THEY STAY IN LIKE THEY PROVIDE GOALS.

IT'S A VERY SIMPLE STRUCTURE.

IT MIGHT SEEM KIND OF DAUNTING TO ORGANIZATIONS AT FIRST, BUT IT'S VERY SIMPLE THAT THEY SHOW US THEY'RE LIKE THEY SUBMIT WHEN THEY SUBMIT AN INVOICE, THEY PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION ON WHAT THEY USE, THOSE FUNDING, THAT FUNDING FOR.

THEY SHOW US PROOF OF PAYMENT THAT THEY PAID IT, AND THEN THEY GIVE US PERFORMANCE MEASURES THAT HOW MANY PEOPLE THAT THEY SERVE FOR THEIR PROGRAM.

OTHER INFORMATION TO SHOW THAT THEIR PROGRAM IS WORKING, THAT IT'S HELPING THE COMMUNITY.

IT'S A VERY SIMPLE STRUCTURE.

I'VE NEVER HAD ANYBODY THAT HAVEN'T THAT HAD AN EXACT ISSUE WITH THE END RESULT OF THE AGREEMENT.

IT'S JUST IT MAY SEEM DAUNTING TO THEM AT THE BEGINNING, BUT ONCE WE WORK THROUGH IT AND KIND OF HELP THEM THROUGH ANY ISSUES OR QUESTIONS THEY MAY HAVE, THEY SEEM FINE WITH IT. AND THEY'RE THEY'RE ABLE TO MOVE ON.

SO LET ME JUST THIS IS NOT THIS IS NOT IT'S NOT A COMMENT REALLY DIRECTED AT YOU AT ALL.

I THINK THE COURT IS MAKING THEIR LIVES HARDER BY ONLY PUTTING $1 MILLION TOWARDS IT.

AND I'M GOING TO EXPLAIN WHY.

THE NUMBER $1 MILLION, YES, WAS MORE JUST A FEW YEARS AGO, BUT IT'S BEEN BASICALLY $1 MILLION FOR, LIKE 30 YEARS.

MAYBE 40.

SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF GROWTH AND COST AND, AND AND I ALWAYS SAID, ARE WE KIND OF AUDITING WHAT WE'RE DOING IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY, OUTSIDE AGENCIES TO MAKE SURE THAT IT ACTUALLY IS IN CORE LINE OF JUSTICE AND HEALTH? AND CAN YOU REALLY DO ANYTHING?

[02:50:02]

I MEAN, AS A AS A NONPROFIT DIRECTOR MYSELF YOU CAN'T YOU YOU'RE I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY THIS OTHER THAN YOU WILL PUT TOGETHER A PROPOSAL TO AN ENTITY, BUT YOU'RE DOING YOU'RE DOING WHAT YOU NORMALLY DO. YOU MAY THINK AS A COUNTY, YOU'RE GOING TO DIRECT THEM IN A CERTAIN DIRECTION, BUT THEY'RE NOT REALLY GOING TO DO ANYTHING THAT YOU NEED THEM TO DO.

SO WE'VE EITHER MADE A DECISION THAT WE'RE STANDING BACK AND SAYING, THIS IS LIKE A, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GIVE, AND THAT'S ALL WE'RE GOING TO GIVE.

AND WE DON'T REALLY WANT TO BE BOTHERED BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF THE MESSAGE WE'RE SENDING TO THE NONPROFIT COMMUNITY.

WE JUST DON'T REALLY WANT TO BE BOTHERED WITH THAT MANY REQUESTS.

OR WE CAN USE THE DOLLARS TO TRY AND BE TRANSFORMATIVE IN SOME WAY AND BE STRATEGIC IN SOME WAY, AND BE COLLABORATIVE WITH THE COUNTY IN SOME WAY.

SO I JUST I JUST QUESTION KIND OF OUR WISDOM AS A COURT IN KEEPING THE AMOUNT THE SAME FOR THIS MANY DECADES.

I THINK WE REALLY DO NEED TO LOOK AT IT AND THINK ABOUT WHAT IS THE IMPACT THAT WE'RE HAVING.

YEAH, WE'RE KEEPING MAYBE SOME PEOPLE ON LIFE SUPPORT, MAYBE JUST BARELY KEEPING SOME THINGS GOING, BUT ARE WE MOVING THE BALL? AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ALWAYS WHAT I THINK WE WANT TO DO IN PUBLIC SERVICE IS TRY TO MOVE THE BALL IN SOME DIRECTION.

SO IT'S NOT IT'S NOT YOUR CALL.

THAT'S OUR CALL.

BUT THERE ARE, I THINK, SOME, SOME LEGITIMATE REASONS FOR CARRYOVER COSTS FOR OUTSIDE AGENCIES FROM TIME TO TIME.

THEY'RE, THEY'RE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES.

AND I THINK I THINK WE MAY NOT NEED TO BE TOO HARD ABOUT IT IN TERMS OF POLICY.

WE YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD ALWAYS TRY TO MAINTAIN SOME LEVEL OF FLEXIBILITY WHEN WE MAKE THESE DECISIONS IF WE NEED TO MAKE A CARRYOVER CALL.

BUT THE WAY THE CITY DOES IT, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THEIR BUDGETING, IS THINGS THEY CALL A MID-YEAR ADJUSTMENT.

SO YOU ACTUALLY GO THROUGH AND SAY, OKAY, WHAT WAS ALLOCATED AND, YOU KNOW, FOR OCTOBER 1ST, AND THEN YOU COME BACK IN JANUARY AND SAY, YOU KNOW, OR NOT IN JANUARY, BUT LET'S SAY MARCH, AND YOU SAY WHAT HASN'T BEEN ALLOCATED AND LET'S SEE IF I SHOULD MAKE ADJUSTMENTS OR IF WE CAN GO BACK TO THE ORGANIZATION TO GET WHAT THEY NEED TO GET GOING.

SO I THINK THAT'S KIND OF MAYBE A MORE ROBUST WAY OF ADDRESSING THE CARRYOVER ISSUE JUST AS A CHECK IN.

SO IF WE HAD A MORE ROBUST REAPPROPRIATION PROCESS, I THINK THAT MIGHT HELP.

I DO PROVIDE YOUR OFFICES WITH REPORTS SO THEY CAN SEE THE HOW MUCH FUNDING THEY'VE ALLOCATED SO FAR, HOW MUCH MONEY HAS BEEN EXPENDED THROUGH AGENCIES AND HOW MUCH Y'ALL HAVE THAT IT'S BEEN UNALLOCATED PART OF YOUR DISCRETIONARY FUNDS.

YEAH. SO SO YOU KNOW, IN IN MY CASE WE'RE LAST YEAR, FOR EXAMPLE, WE HADN'T BUDGETED IN THE REGULAR ORDER OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE ROAD ON THE SANTEE 51 PROJECT, I SET ASIDE ABOUT $5 MILLION BECAUSE THE PROJECTS TAKEN SO LONG $5.5 MILLION, TO BE EXACT. AND SO, YOU KNOW, OSTENSIBLY, WHAT SHOULD BE DONE IN ORDER TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE MASTER PLAN OF THE CITY OF CONVERSE AND THE COUNTY HAVE AGREED TO, IS TO PUT THAT INTO, I GUESS, A BUDGET OF PUBLIC WORKS, I THINK, IS GOING TO BE MANAGING THE ROAD PROCESS.

SO WE JUST HAVE TO FIGURE OUT, I MEAN, IT'S JUST A BUDGETARY TRANSFER CODE KIND OF ISSUE.

BUT THOSE, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, WE JUST NEED TO KIND OF FIGURE OUT, DO WE GIVE THEM TO A DEPARTMENT TO HANDLE FROM HERE ON OUT OR, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE BIT BETTER INTO REGULAR, REGULAR ORDER OF BUDGETING, BUT WE ALSO HAVE OUR OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR STAFF REQUESTS THAT ARE COMING IN AS WELL.

SO I JUST WANT TO POINT THOSE THINGS OUT TO THE COURT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION OF DAVID.

YOU INDICATED THAT WE, THE PRIOR COURT, ALLOTTED THIS 400,000 OUTSIDE DISCRETIONARY MONEY.

WAS THERE ANY POLICY PROTOCOL PROCESS PUT INTO WRITING AT THAT TIME, OR IS THIS THE FIRST ATTEMPT TO DO SO? THIS IS THE FIRST ATTEMPT SINCE YOU'VE EACH GOTTEN YOUR OFFICES, HAVE GOTTEN THEIR OWN ALLOCATIONS.

AND A WHILE AGO, WELL BEFORE THIS COURT, WHEN IT WAS ALL A COUNTY WIDE PROCESS, THERE WAS AN APPLICATION THAT WAS GENERALLY SUBMITTED, BUT THERE WAS NO REAL RHYME OR REASON AS TO HOW IT WAS.

WELL, AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY I WANT TO GO FURTHER ON THAT FROM THAT RESPONSE THAT DAVID GAVE ME TO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO NOW.

FIRST, I, I THINK COMMISSIONER CALVERT HAS HIT WHAT I THINK IS WHAT WE REALLY SHOULD BE DOING IS THERE'S TWO DISTINCTIONS HERE, AND I'M GOING TO KIND OF BREAK IT UP TO SEE IF IF MY COLLEAGUES CAN UNDERSTAND OR IF NOT, I'LL TRY TO EXPLAIN IT.

[02:55:05]

WHAT I THINK WE'RE DOING HERE IS LOOKING AT THE PARAMETERS, THE GUIDELINES OF HOW WE APPROPRIATE THE MONEY, WHATEVER FUNDING AMOUNTS OR WHAT WHAT WHAT STIPULATIONS WE WANT TO PUT ON AS FAR AS LIMITS OR NO LIMITS OR WHATEVER.

I BELIEVE THAT'S A DISCUSSION THAT THE COURT MUST MAKE BY MAJORITY VOTE AS TO WHAT THOSE STIPULATIONS CONDITIONS SHOULD BE.

AND THEN OBVIOUSLY WE MAY HAVE DISCUSSION AND DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT THAT SHOULD BE.

WHAT I WANT TO GO FURTHER WITH THIS DISCUSSION, WHICH I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER CALVERT AGAIN, YOU ASKED, YOU TOUCHED IT, BUT AND YOU HIGHLIGHTED IT. BUT I WANT TO MAKE IT REAL CLEAR.

I DON'T SEE CLARITY IN THE PROCESS OF HOW APPLICANTS COME IN, APPLY, WHETHER THEY COME DIRECTLY TO COMMISSIONERS, WHETHER THEY COME DIRECTLY TO THE COUNTY JUDGE, WHETHER THEY GO THROUGH WHOMEVER THAT MAKES CONTACT, WHETHER TO STAFF OR DIRECTLY TO UNICO.

SO I WOULD LIKE IN FURTHER DISCUSSION AND FURTHER PROCESS.

AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT I'M THE WORD THAT COMMISSIONER CALVERT IS PROCESS AND I WANT TO KNOW PROCESS OF I WANT TO SEE THAT IN PROTOCOL AND IN STIPULATION OF HOW A PERSON, GROUP, ENTITY COMES INTO THE SYSTEM AND THEN GETS THE INFORMATION THEY NEED.

I FIND THAT IN REGARDS TO INDIVIDUAL ASK OF MY OFFICE, MANY TIMES WE'RE HAVING TO EDUCATE TO HELP ASSIST ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE BEEN PUT THAT WE'VE BEEN ASKED FROM THE DAIS HERE.

SO, NICOLE, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS PROTOCOL IN WRITING AS TO HOW A REQUEST BY WHOMEVER IS PROCESSED.

THE OTHER ISSUE AND PROCESS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, THAT I'VE SEEN IN THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF, IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THIS PROCESS AS IT IS NOW, IT'S A BIT DISCONNECTED.

I'VE SEEN WHERE I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER COWARD.

IN ONE PARTICULAR MEETING WE WERE DISCUSSING ALLOCATIONS TO ONE PARTICULAR PROGRAM.

I THINK IT WAS THE SENIORS IN PLAY AND WHAT IT BOILED DOWN TO IT, WE ALL AGREED.

AND I THINK AT THE END OF THAT MEETING, WE ALL END UP PUT ON EQUAL AMOUNTS OF OUR OUTSIDE DISCRETION MONEY, BUT WE HAD TO SPEND WHATEVER AMOUNT OF TIME, I THINK IT WAS IN A BUDGET MEETING THAT WE DID THAT I WOULD THINK IT'D BE MORE PRUDENT, MORE PRACTICAL, MORE EFFICIENT IF THAT THOSE ENTITIES WOULD COME THROUGH A PORTAL PROCESS, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH YOU OR WHETHER IT'S THROUGH THE COUNTY GENERAL OR WHOMEVER OR POINT OF CONTACT.

AND THEN THOSE COMMUNICATIONS AND MOST RECENTLY COMMISSIONER MOODY, YOU HAD YOUR OFFICE HAD ALERTED THAT THERE'S A UTSA FUNCTION COMING UP, AND WE BASICALLY BOTH AGREED TO JOIN AND TO SHARE THAT EXPENSE EQUALLY THROUGH OUTSIDE DISCRETION.

BUT WHAT WE NEED IS A PROCESS IN ORDER TO COMMIT, CREATE A COMMUNICATION.

AND SO THAT IF I'M HAVING AN ASK THEN AND IF TECHNICALLY IF THEY ASK EVERY COMMISSIONER, I'D LIKE TO KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY THEY GOT IN TOTAL, THEY MIGHT HAVE JUST HAD A REGULAR ONE REQUEST OF ME KNOWING THAT THEY MADE SIMILAR REQUESTS TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS.

SO GOD HELP THEM IF YOU KNOW THAT THEY'RE ENTITLED TO WHATEVER THEY CAN COLLECT OFF THE COURT.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A MORE THOUGHTFUL PROCESS.

SO DO YOU ALSO UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IN DEVELOPING THE PRACTICE PROCESS IN ORDER SO THAT ALSO TO DEALING WITH THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE COUNTY INSISTS.

AND I GET IT. THERE ARE LIABILITY ISSUES.

THERE'S TAX ISSUES, THERE ARE WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH STATUTE AND LAW.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY WHO IS ASKED OF MONEY OF THE COUNTY GETS EITHER A PACKET OR THEY KNOW OR THEY KNOW WHERE TO GO.

AND ALSO I BELIEVE AND I BELIEVE THE WE'VE INVESTED IN OUR WEB COUNTY WEBSITE, THAT'S INFORMATION THAT NEEDS TO BE IN THE WEBSITE.

AND IT NEEDS TO BE CLEAR, IT NEEDS TO BE CONCISE.

IT NEEDS TO BE USER FRIENDLY SO THAT PEOPLE KNOW WHERE TO GO TO GET THE INFORMATION THEY NEED.

SO DO YOU GET WHAT I'M TRYING TO ESTABLISH? SO HOW DO WE DO THAT, NICOLE? I'VE ALREADY DRAFTED A WEBSITE.

WE JUST HAVE TO MAKE A FINAL REVIEW, AND IT WOULD BE ABLE TO BE IMPLEMENTED ON THE WEBSITE.

I DRAFTED AN ONLINE APPLICATION.

[03:00:02]

IT'S VERY USER FRIENDLY.

I'VE TESTED IT NUMEROUS TIMES.

YOU KNOW, THEY WOULD GO THROUGH EACH OF THE STEPS, INPUT THE INFORMATION THAT THEY HAVE AVAILABLE TO THEM, AND THEY COULD SUBMIT IT AND IT WOULD SEND IT TO US AS A PDF, OR WE CAN GET IT EXCEL TO MAKE IT EASIER TO GO THROUGH THE INFORMATION.

I HAVE NUMEROUS GUIDES THAT WE ARE ABLE TO PUT ON THE WEBSITE SO THEY CAN GO THROUGH, AND IF THEY WANT TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON THE WHAT INFORMATION WE REQUIRE ABOUT THEIR PROGRAM, IT WOULD SHOW UP IF THEY WANTED MORE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW TO INVOICE.

IT WOULD PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT, DIFFERENT TYPES OF PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS THAT WE'VE HISTORICALLY GIVEN.

WE CAN PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT.

I HAVE STUFF THAT I PUT IN PLACE.

IT'S JUST I NEED DIRECTION FROM THE COURT ON HOW YOU WANT ME TO IMPLEMENT IT.

SO HOW DO WE DO THAT? WELL, NOT I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO DO IT RIGHT NOW, BUT, WELL, I THINK I THINK WE DO NEED TO DO IT NOW.

SO LET ME LET ME BACK UP.

SO WE PROPOSE IMPLEMENTING THE $1 MILLION IN GENERAL FUND TOWARDS THE COUNTY WIDE.

AND SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A DIRECTION, YOU KNOW, TO FUND THIS $1 MILLION AND FOR US TO IMPLEMENT AN APPLICATION NOT NOT REALLY.

NICOLE. WHAT THEY NEED TO DO IS TELL US, YES, WE WANT THIS APP, CENTRALIZED APPLICATION PROCESS.

THEY'LL DECIDE WHETHER IT'S A DOLLAR 1 MILLION OR 10.

THAT'S FINE. CORRECT. BUT AND THEN THE I'LL GIVE YOU MORE.

FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AS COUNTY JUDGE, I REALLY WANT TO SEE THAT THAT PROCESS THAT YOU'VE ASKED FOR, THAT YOU NEED TO BE EITHER MEETING OR OR OR ELSE WE NEED ANOTHER.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED ANOTHER SESSION TO DISCUSS THIS, BUT I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE WORK THAT YOU'RE COMMUNICATING WITH ALL THE OFFICES OF THE OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT, GETTING THEIR STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO WHAT THEY WANT OF THIS PORTAL.

I WILL JUST CALL IT A PORTAL THAT YOU ARE CREATING, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S USER FRIENDLY AND PEOPLE KNOW WHERE TO GO.

AND THAT WAY STAFF, OUR STAFFS DON'T AND WILL GIVE CONSISTENT INFORMATION BACK AS TO WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE.

I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE CAN LESSEN THE FRUSTRATION, BECAUSE I DO GET REPORTS THAT PEOPLE ARE FRUSTRATED ABOUT HOW TO NAVIGATE, ESPECIALLY WITH THESE ASKS, AND IF THEY'RE VETERANS OF THE PROCESS, THEN THEY KNOW WHO EXACTLY WHO TO CALL.

BUT IF THEY'RE NOT, THEY TEND TO GO AROUND.

AND THEN I ASSUME THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WITH ORGANIZATIONS THAT DO GET FUNDING.

THEY DIDN'T GET ALL THE INFORMATION THEY NEEDED, OR THEY HAVEN'T ANSWERED THEIR QUESTIONS, OR THEY HAVEN'T FOLLOWED THROUGH AND GETTING FEEDBACK.

THAT'S THE OTHER PROCESS I ALSO WANT TO CALL IS WHAT FEEDBACK DO YOU GIVE TO THESE ENTITIES THAT ARE NOT FOLLOWING THROUGH AND ARE THEY GIVEN? INSTEAD OF US PUTTING A DEADLINE, DO WE PUT A DEADLINE TO THEM THAT THEY NEED TO DO THESE THINGS OR ELSE IT'S SUBJECT INSTEAD OF TO SAYING IT'S AT THE.

IT ENDS AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR.

NO, IT COULD BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW OR BROUGHT BACK TO COURT FOR DISCUSSION.

AND THAT WAY, COMMISSIONERS, Y'ALL WOULD THEN MAKE A DECISION WHETHER THAT A THAT ALLOTMENT EXPENDITURE STAYS OR YOU REPURPOSE IT BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT SITS THERE.

AND I THINK THAT'S THE FRUSTRATION YOU HAVE.

YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF PRIOR ALLOTMENTS, EXPENDITURES THAT ARE JUST SITTING THERE AND NOBODY MOVED.

NOBODY'S MOVING IT. RIGHT.

SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY INSTEAD OF PUTTING DEADLINES ON THE COURT I SAY NO, LET'S PUT DEADLINES ON THESE RECIPIENTS TO GET WHATEVER THEY NEED OR ELSE IT COMES BACK TO THE COURT FOR RECONSIDERATION.

I'M NOT TRYING TO ADD ANY MORE, EXCEPT TRYING TO GIVE YOU SOME FEEDBACK AS COUNTY JUDGE AS TO HOW I THINK THE PROCESS COULD BE MORE ON POINT AND TO ADDRESS THE YOUR NEEDS AND FRUSTRATIONS THAT YOU HAVE.

IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ? JUDGE, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ON THIS.

I THINK THAT IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S SOME CONSENSUS ON SETTING UP A PROCESS FOR OUTSIDE AGENCY AN APPLICATION PROCESS. AND I THINK JUST FOR CLARITY SAKE, WE SHOULD PROBABLY AT LEAST HAVE A MOTION DIRECTING STAFF TO SET UP THAT PROCESS, BECAUSE YOU WE TALKED EARLIER ABOUT WANTING TO GET OUT OF THE GATES HERE MAYBE THIS MONTH.

RIGHT. AND SO I THINK A DELAY WOULD PROBABLY HINDER US A LITTLE BIT.

SO I KNOW THERE'S STILL SOME DISCUSSION AND IT'LL BE, I GUESS, IN THE BUDGET ON, ON THE AMOUNT, WHETHER IT'S A MILLION OR MORE.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DIRECT STAFF TO SET UP A PROCESS FOR COUNTYWIDE, OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDING.

[03:05:01]

ALL RIGHT. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MOODY.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER CLAY-FLORES? NO. JUST TO THANK NICOLE AGAIN.

I KNOW THIS IS REALLY TEDIOUS.

SO THE WORK YOU GUYS HAVE DONE.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MOODY.

COMMISSIONER CALVERT. ALL RIGHT.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SIGNIFY BY SAYING I, I ANY OPPOSED, ANY ABSTENTIONS? MOTION CARRIES.

COME UP WITH THAT PRACTICE AND PROTOCOL, AND WE'LL PROCESS AND WE'LL GIVE YOU FEEDBACK SOME MORE.

ALRIGHT. WE ARE GETTING TO AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION REGARDING A REQUEST TO AMEND COMMISSIONERS COURT ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY 1.2 AGENDA, POLICY,

[4. Discussion regarding a request to amend Commissioners Court Administrative Policy 1.2, Agenda Policy and Procedures, and adoption of Robert's Rules of Order.]

PROCEDURES AND ADOPTION OF ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER.

MR. THOMAS GUEVARA THANK YOU.

JUDGE. COMMISSIONERS.

JUST A REMINDER, ON MARCH 26TH COMMISSIONERS COURT DIRECTED STAFF TO BRING BACK TO REVIEW AND BRING BACK RECOMMENDATIONS.

FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY 1.2, ALSO REFERRED TO AS THE AGENDA POLICY, TO ENSURE THAT THE AGENDA SETTING PRACTICES ARE CONSISTENT WITH TEXAS LAW, AND TO DEVELOP REASONABLE PROCEDURES TO PLACING ITEMS ON THE COURT'S AGENDA.

JUST AS A REMINDER, THE CURRENT POLICY WAS LAST REVISED IN 2005.

THE CURRENT POLICY, WHILE GENERALLY ADHERED TO BY OFFICES AND DEPARTMENTS, DOES REQUIRE CLARIFICATIONS TO BRING THAT DOCUMENT UP TO DATE.

THIS POLICY AND I WANT TO THANK LARRY AND HIS TEAM FOR THEIR ASSISTANCE IS CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE LAWS.

SO JUST A REMINDER FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

COMMISSIONERS COURT, YOU KNOW, AS THE GOVERNING BODY FOR COUNTY OPERATIONS, COMMISSIONERS COURT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR AN ARRAY OF IMPORTANT DECISIONS, INCLUDING SETTING THE TAX RATE, ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR, COUNTY BUDGET, APPOINTMENT OF CERTAIN POSITIONS, AND APPROVAL OF CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS.

THE COURT'S AGENDA PROCESS IS THE PRIMARY VEHICLE BY WHICH COMMISSIONERS COURT CAN REVIEW, DEBATE, AND APPROVE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM OFFICES AND DEPARTMENTS.

THEREFORE, AN ADOPTED POLICY AND PROCEDURES NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT THE COURT HAS COMPLETE, ACCURATE AND CURRENT INFORMATION TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS.