Sep 16, 2025 SPECIAL SESSION AGENDA

[00:00:02]

GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. IT IS TIME.

[1. Call to Order.]

WELCOME TO OUR COURTROOM, AND THANK YOU TO THOSE WHO ARE JOINING US VIA LIVE STREAM. PLEASE BE ADVISED WE HAVE A PRESENCE OF A QUORUM.

ADDITIONALLY, THIS NOTICE OF THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT HAS BEEN POSTED ONLINE UNDER LEGAL NOTICES FOR AT LEAST THREE BUSINESS DAYS PURSUANT TO TEXAS OPEN MEETING ACT, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551.

[2. Public Comments regarding the Agenda.]

AND OLGA, PLEASE CALL THE NAMES.

YES. THE FIRST ONE IS SAEED JAZZAR WAS ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE.

PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF.

AND ALSO YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.

SURE. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS SAEED RACEME.

I'VE BEEN A FORD VENDOR FOR ABOUT 25 YEARS.

I ALSO DO SERVE ON THE MUD 25 DIRECTOR AS ONE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OVER THERE.

I DO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE MAPS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED, WHICH DO NOT REFLECT THE COMMITTEE THAT I CURRENTLY SERVE AND ARE ON IN SUGARLAND.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE NEIGHBORHOODS ON THE MAP LIKE NEW TERRITORY, TELFAIR AND ILLIANA. THESE ARE JUST A FEW TO NAME.

THEY'RE BEING SEPARATED. WE, ME, MYSELF AND MY FAMILIES, WE LIVE LIVE IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS.

WE'VE PRAYED TOGETHER.

WE SEND OUR KIDS TO THE SAME SCHOOL.

I DON'T SEE A REASON FOR THESE REASONS TO BE SEPARATED AT THIS TIME.

OUR MUSLIM AND SOUTH ASIAN COMMUNITY MAKES UP ABOUT 25% OF THE FORT BEND COUNTY.

YET THESE MAPS DO DIVIDE US, AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE OUR REPRESENTATION OUT. THE COUNTY ITSELF SAYS THAT THESE MAPS WOULD RESPECT REAL COMMUNITIES, BUT INSTEAD THEY BREAK OUR APART.

WE ARE TAXPAYERS FAMILIES AND WE ARE BUSINESS OWNERS IN FORT BEND.

AND ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR YOU TO BE FAIR, WHEN YOU GUYS THINK ABOUT THE MAPS OR DO ANY TYPE OF DRAWING. I DO FEEL OUR COMMUNITY DESERVES THE BEST REPRESENTATION THAT WE HAVE, AND THE BOARD, COMMISSIONER OR ANY ELECTED OFFICIAL SHOULD LOOK AT THE COMMUNITY AND THEY SHOULD REPRESENT US.

I DO APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME.

THANK YOU. NEXT PERSON.

THE NEXT SPEAKER IS CYNTHIA GINYARD ON AGENDA ITEM THREE.

GOOD AFTERNOON, CYNTHIA GINYARD, PRECINCT THREE.

COMMISSIONERS, I'M HERE TO ASK YOU TO CONSIDER RESETTING THE BUTTON WHEN WE MAKE A DECISION. AND THAT HAPPENS TO ALL OF US SOMETIMES.

AND IT ENSUES A DOMINO EFFECT OF BREACHES OF POLICY AND OR PROTOCOL.

THEN WE HAVE TO STOP, RESET THE BUTTON AND SAY, WAIT A MINUTE. NOW, IF WE WANT TO DO THIS REDISTRICTING, WHICH WAS NOT ON THE TABLE IN THE VERY BEGINNING, IT WAS ABOUT SOME PRECINCTS THAT WEREN'T RIGHT IN NUMBERS, BUT IT MUSHROOMED INTO THIS.

THERE WAS A BREACH. THERE WAS NO CONTIGUITY IN THE MAP.

AND SO THAT HAD TO BE WITHDRAWN.

AND THAT CAME AROUND MEMORIAL DAY, WHICH WAS A RUSH JOB.

AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE ARE WINNING BY THE SEAT OF OUR PANTS.

AND GUESS WHAT? THERE WILL BE MORE, BECAUSE IF WE TRY TO IMPLEMENT THIS FOR THE 26 ELECTION THE FILING DATE IS DECEMBER 8TH.

HAVE WE CONSIDERED WHAT THIS WILL DO TO THE ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT.

THERE'S A LOT THAT GOES ON IN MAKING THE CHANGES AND WE BLUNDER, AND RIGHTFULLY SO WHEN WE ARE DOING THIS.

SO IF WE ARE SO STEADFAST ON DOING THIS REDISTRICTING DURING AN INTERIM DECADE, ONCE AGAIN OUT OF PROTOCOL, THEN WHY NOT MAKE IT EFFECTIVE 28 AND THEN THAT TAKES ALL THE RUSH OFF OF EVERYONE AND THE ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT.

I HAVEN'T TALKED TO THEM.

I JUST KNOW FROM MY END WHAT WE DEAL WITH WHEN WE MAKE MASSIVE CHANGES.

AND OF COURSE WE'LL HAVE TO DO IT AGAIN IN 2030.

ANOTHER NON PROTOCOL IT WAS TO REDUCE JUDGES.

AND WE DON'T HAVE A PROBATE COURT.

BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYBODY SAY, WELL LET'S CHANGE ONE OF THOSE COURTS TO A PROBATE. I HAVEN'T HEARD THAT USURPING THE AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.

I READ THE LETTER FROM THE GENERAL.

ATTORNEY? WHAT'S HE CALLED?

[00:05:01]

BUT ALL IT SAID TO ME IN MY INTERPRETATION WAS, YOU CANNOT DO THAT. YOU CANNOT USURP THE AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.

YOU HAVE A COMMITTEE? LAST TIME WHEN WE DID REDISTRICTING, IT WAS MORE PUBLIC INPUT BECAUSE I WAS A PART OF IT, AND I WAS NOT ON A COMMITTEE.

WE PUT OUT THE RULES TO BE VOTED ON TODAY.

WELL, THERE ARE MAPS ALREADY.

DID THEY NOT FOLLOW THE RULES? THERE WERE NO RULES IN PLACE THEN.

ARE WE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE HERE? AND THEN I SAW AN ISSUE OF RELIEVING THE ATTORNEYS THAT WE HAVE STATED ALREADY.

DO YOU SEE A DOMINO EFFECT ON AND ON AND ON.

BREACHES OF POLICY AND PROTOCOL AND WE NEED TO RESET THE BUTTON.

THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS SARAH ROBERTS ON AGENDA ITEM THREE.

HELLO, I'M SARAH ROBERTS.

I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF.

I'M A CONCERNED CITIZEN OF OVER 40 YEARS FOR THIS COUNTY OF FORT BEND.

I CHOSE TO RAISE MY KIDS HERE BECAUSE OF THE BEAUTIFUL DIVERSITY THAT WE HAVE HERE.

I WAS BROUGHT TO THIS COUNTY BY MY PARENTS FOR THAT VERY SAME REASON AS WELL.

ONCE AGAIN, 40 YEARS AS A RESIDENT, AND I'VE NEVER BEEN SO APPALLED BEFORE TO SEE WHAT IS GOING ON NOW, THIS CIRCUS THAT'S GOING ON, THE REDISTRICTING, THIS IS JUST A WAY TO PANDER TO THE PRESIDENT.

THIS IS NONSENSE. IT IS WRONG.

IT SHOULDN'T BE HAPPENING.

WE ARE TAKING GOOD, HARD EARNED TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

WE'RE STRESSING OUT OTHER DEPARTMENTS FOR THIS COUNTY.

FOR WHAT? JUST SO YOU CAN SAY THAT YOU'RE IN GOOD WITH THE THE MAN.

IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

I WILL ONCE AGAIN REMIND EVERYBODY ABOUT THE FELONY CHARGES THAT ARE BROUGHT UP THAT HAVE A HUGE ROLE TO PLAY IN WHAT'S GOING ON DIRECTLY RIGHT NOW.

THIS SHOULDN'T BE HAPPENING.

WE SHOULDN'T BE WASTING TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

WE SHOULDN'T BE FIRING JUDGES BECAUSE WE'RE SHORT ON MONEY.

IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE.

THINK ABOUT YOUR LEGACY AND WHAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY LEAVING FOR THIS COUNTY AND THE PEOPLE OF THIS NATION.

THIS IS WRONG. TREATING PEOPLE THIS WAY DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

WHY DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT? INSTEAD OF STANDING FIRM BY YOUR COMMITMENT AND STANDING TO THE CONSTITUTION, STANDING WITH THESE MAPS.

YOU HAVE SECRET MEETINGS GOING ON.

DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

THESE SECRET MAPPING COMMITTEES THAT WERE HELD.

NO MEETINGS, NO. NO MINUTES.

IT'S WRONG. AND I THINK THAT A LOT OF THE RESIDENTS OF THIS COUNTY WILL AGREE WITH ME.

IT IS WRONG. IT MAKES NO SENSE.

THE THE TAXPAYER FRAUD, THE WASTE OF THE THE.

I'M SORRY. I'M JUST REALLY STRESSED RIGHT NOW THAT YOU'RE WASTING MONEY AND TIME.

WHY DON'T WE LOOK AT IMPROVING OUR COMMUNITY, THE PEOPLE THAT NEED HELP.

TAXES ARE GOING UP EVERY DAY.

INSURANCE IS GOING UP EVERY DAY.

OUR SCHOOL CHILDREN ARE LOSING OUT.

OUR GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES AREN'T GETTING PAID WHAT THEY DESERVE. AND YET WE'RE SITTING HERE, SITTING HERE WASTING MORE TIME AND MORE TAXPAYER MONEY.

WHAT ARE YOU GETTING OUT OF IT FOR SWITCHING SIDES.

THIS SHOULD BE A BIPARTISAN DEAL.

IT SHOULD NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT.

BUT I REALLY WANT TO KNOW, WHAT ARE YOU GETTING OUT OF THIS DEAL BY SWITCHING SIDES AND TAKING THIS? EXCUSE ME, MA'AM, YOU'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT YOUR.

I AM TALKING ABOUT. NOPE.

YOU DON'T GET TO CUT ME OFF, SIR.

I'M PRACTICING MY FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.

YOU DO NOT GET TO CUT ME OFF.

I'M RECLAIMING MY TIME FROM LAST TIME YOU CUT ME OFF.

IT'S WRONG. THIS IS NOT RIGHT AT ALL.

OKAY. THANK YOU. YOUR TIME IS UP.

THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MEGAN BROWN SCOGGINS ON AGENDA ITEM THREE.

GOOD AFTERNOON, GENTLEMEN. MANY OF YOU KNOW ME.

I ACTUALLY PREPARED SOME REMARKS.

AND THEN I FOUND THE ADDENDUM TO THE AGENDA TODAY, WHICH ACTUALLY SHOWS HOW QUICKLY THIS PROCESS IS MOVING.

AND SOME OF MY REMARKS ARE NO LONGER APPLICABLE.

I'M GOING TO SHARE THEM WITH YOU ANYWAY.

MY NAME IS MEGAN BROWN SCOGGINS AND I'M HERE TODAY AS A CONCERNED RESIDENT OF FORT BEND COUNTY. I AM A I AM A CONSTITUENT OF COMMISSIONER MORALES.

FORT BEND COUNTY IS ONE OF THE MOST THE FASTEST GROWING COUNTIES IN TEXAS.

WHEN I TALK TO MY NEIGHBORS, NEW AND OLD, THEY'RE ASKING FOR RELIEF FROM TRAFFIC CONGESTION AS THEY ALL COMMUTE TO THEIR HIGH PAYING JOBS IN HARRIS COUNTY.

[00:10:03]

THEY'RE ASKING FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE.

THEY'RE ASKING FOR QUALITY JOBS LOCATED IN THIS COUNTY THAT PAY QUALITY WAGES.

INSTEAD, OUR TAX DOLLARS ARE BEING FUNNELED INTO A REDISTRICTING EFFORT THAT SOLVES NOTHING FOR OUR FAMILIES.

LET ME BE CLEAR. THIS REDISTRICTING EFFORT IS RECKLESS, UNNECESSARY, AND FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE.

I HAD ACTUALLY DONE A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH ON THE LAW FIRM THAT WAS HIRED IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR. YOU GUYS APPROVED $60,000 TO FIX THE VOTER PRECINCTS, VOTER PRECINCTS THAT MANY OF YOU VOTED FOR JUST THREE YEARS AGO.

WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE LAW FIRM AND HOW A WASTE OF MONEY THAT WAS BECAUSE $60,000 IS THE FULL TIME SALARY OF A COUNTY EMPLOYEE.

WHILE YOU ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT CUTTING JOBS FOR ASSOCIATE JUDGES, BUT APPARENTLY, AS OF TODAY, THAT THAT CONTRACT IS IS GOING TO BE RESCINDED. POSSIBLY. BUT HERE'S THE THING.

THE COSTS DON'T STOP THERE.

OUR ELECTIONS ADMINISTRATOR AND COUNTY CLERK NEED TO REPROGRAM EQUIPMENT, REPRINT EVERY SINGLE PRECINCT NOTICE, RENEGOTIATE POLLING LOCATIONS, AND LAUNCH OUTREACH CAMPAIGNS TO UNTANGLE VOTER CONFUSION.

NONE OF THESE EXPENSES HAVE BEEN PUBLICLY ITEMIZED.

IF, AND LET'S FACE IT, WHEN THIS PROCESS INVITES LAWSUITS, THE LEGAL BILLS AND SETTLEMENT COSTS COULD DWARF THE MAPPING BUDGET.

LITIGATION WILL TIE UP STAFF AND COURT RESOURCES FOR YEARS, NOT TO MENTION DRAIN ANY FINANCIAL RESERVES THIS COUNTY MAY HAVE.

SO I ASK YOU WHY? WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS? THE CURRENT MAPS THAT MANY OF YOU VOTED FOR HAVE NOT BEEN STRUCK DOWN BY ANY COURT.

NO JUDGE HAS ORDERED THIS COUNTY TO ACT, AND NO JUDGE HAS ORDERED THIS COUNTY TO ACT AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS YOU ARE TRYING TO DO.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT COMPLIANCE OR NECESSITY.

THIS IS A POWER PLAY, PURE AND SIMPLE, AND IT COMES AT THE EXPENSE OF TAXPAYERS LIKE MYSELF AND ALL THE PEOPLE STANDING BEHIND ME THAT EACH OF YOU ARE SWORN TO SERVE. EVEN THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS PACKED WITH PARTIZAN AND UNQUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS, ONLY TWO OF WHICH HAVE EVER BEEN BEEN INVOLVED IN DRAWING LEGISLATIVE MAPS.

GENTLEMEN, YOU ARE GAMBLING WITH THE INTEGRITY OF OUR DEMOCRACY AND ONCE AGAIN VIOLATING THE PUBLIC'S TRUST.

I KNOW THAT MY PLEAS TO STOP THIS MESS WILL FALL ON DEAF EARS FOR MANY OF YOU.

SO IF YOU INSIST ON MARCHING FORWARD, DO IT WITH TRANSPARENCY.

PUBLISH A CLEAR, ITEMIZED ESTIMATE OF EVERY ANTICIPATED COST, ATTORNEY FEES, STAFF FEES, ELECTION ADMINISTRATION, PRINTING, POLLING, LITIGATIONS, ALL THE FALLOUT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN ON OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND OUR LEGAL SYSTEM.

WE DO NOT HAVE 15 DAYS TO DO THIS.

FORT BEND COUNTY FAMILIES DESERVE ACCOUNTABILITY AND INVESTMENT IN REAL PRIORITIES, NOT WASTEFUL POLITICAL GAMES.

THE NEXT SPEAKER IS RODRIGO CARRION.

ON AGENDA ITEM ONE A AND B, EXCUSE ME.

GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS RODRIGO CARRION.

I'VE COME TO SPEAK TO OPPOSE THIS MAP.

WE KNOW WE GOT TO PLAY BY THE RULES.

REDISTRICTING TAKES ONLY ONE TIME.

A DECADE, EVERY TEN YEARS.

SO WE NEED TO FOLLOW THOSE RULES.

PLAY POLICY. NOBODY IS ABOVE THE LAW.

AND NOT EVEN IF THE PRESIDENT WANTS IT NOW.

HE CAN'T GET IT. WE GOTTA PLAY THE RULES OVER HERE LOCALLY AND FAIRLY TO ALL PEOPLE.

AND WE AS PUBLIC OFFICIALS WE GOT TO SERVE THE PEOPLE TO STAY IN OFFICE, TO STAY, KEEP OUR SEAT, DO OUR WORK AND AND TO MAKE SURE THE DUTIES BEING DONE TO SERVE EVERYBODY.

AND THAT'S WHY. AND THAT'S WHY LET'S WAIT UNTIL 2030 TO DO REDISTRICTING LEGALLY.

AND I SPOKE TO REPRESENTATIVE MATT MORGAN.

LET HIM KNOW. CAN WE CHANGE ANYTHING? LET'S END GERRYMANDERING FIRST.

LET'S END THE STATE OF TEXAS OR IN THE US ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

AND THAT WAY, WE'LL HAVE A VERY COMMITTEES BE SPOKEN.

THAT WAY THE PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO DRAW, DRAW, DRAW THE DISTRICTS AS THE WILL AND, AND TO ELECT ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT WILL SERVE. BUT WOULDN'T YOU END GERMANY FIRST AND STATE TEXAS THAT IT CAN BE DONE AND ON THE USA ALSO IT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT FOR ALL OF US.

AND THAT'S WHY WE AS ELECTED OFFICIALS, WE WON'T BE ELECTED.

BUT WE'VE GOT TO SERVE THE PEOPLE AND THEY'LL BE HAPPY AND WE'LL CONTINUE NOW.

WE'LL BE VOTED OUT. SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO TO SERVE EVERYONE AND IN AUTO TEXT APPEARS.

MAKE SURE THEY'RE SATISFIED AND WHERE THEY LIVE AND WHAT THEY'RE PAYING FOR IN TEXAS.

OKAY, MY FRIENDS, THANK YOU.

THE NEXT SPEAKER IS DIANA WATERS ON AGENDA ITEM THREE.

GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS DIANA.

I'M A MEMBER OF FORT BEND COUNTY PRECINCT TWO.

I'VE RECENTLY COME TO YOU BEFORE ASKING, REQUESTING MORE MONEY FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF FORT BEND COUNTY. AND IT SEEMED LIKE THERE WAS NO MONEY IN THE BUDGET.

[00:15:02]

AND I'M JUST STILL SCRATCHING MY HEAD BECAUSE WE'RE STILL STRUGGLING WITH BASIC NECESSITIES. AND. AND THEN EVEN WITH THESE RAISES THAT WE'RE REALLY NOT GETTING YOU GUYS HAVE GIVEN YOURSELF SUBSTANTIAL RAISES ON TOP OF SUBSTANTIAL MONEY, BUT YET THE REST OF US ARE STRUGGLING TO MAKE ENDS MEET AND TO JUST BE ABLE TO AFFORD BASIC NECESSITIES. I WANTED TO SAY, I PERSONALLY FEEL THAT THE WHITE HOUSE WITH THIS PRESIDENT IS PURE EVIL.

I WANT TO SAY IT'S TRICKLED DOWN TO GREG ABBOTT THAT I FEEL IS PURE EVIL.

AND IT BRINGS US DOWN, DOWN TO THE FORT BEND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT, WHERE I'M WONDERING, WHERE ARE WE HEADED? I FEEL THAT IF THE WHITE HOUSE ON DOWN HAD THEIR WAY, PEOPLE OF COLOR WOULD BE BACK PICKING COTTON.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S HOW WE FEEL.

BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE WE'RE EVERYTHING THAT MATTERS.

IF WE'VE STRUGGLED FOR AND FOUGHT FOR AND DIED FOR HAS BEEN TAKEN AWAY.

SO AGAIN, I MIGHT HAVE A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE THAN SOME PEOPLE WHO MIGHT HAVE WHAT I CONSIDER WHITE PRIVILEGE.

BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I JUST THINK IT'S REALLY SAD WHERE WE ARE TODAY.

THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO FIGHT FOR TODAY, IT'S LIKE WE'VE GONE BACK, WE'VE GAINED 60 YEARS AND NOW WE'RE GOING BACK 100 YEARS.

BUT UNLESS I'LL JUST SAY THIS, I JUST FEEL LIKE I'M WONDERING IF YOU GUYS JUST WANT POWER. YOU WANT TO BE DICTATORS.

IS IT ABOUT GREED AND CONTROL? WHAT IS IT THAT'S CAUSING YOU, OTHER THAN TRUMP, TO REDISTRICT LIKE YOU'RE DOING? WE KNOW IT'S GOING AGAINST WHAT THE RULES HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR YEARS, SO WHY DO WE HAVE TO GO BACKWARDS HERE? AND WHAT'S CONSIDERED THE ONE OF THE RICHEST COUNTIES IN IN THE STATE OF TEXAS? IT'S LIKE WE KNOW WE'RE THE MOST DIVERSE, BUT IT'S JUST I FEEL WE'RE GOING BACKWARDS AND IT'S THE WRONG DIRECTION. AND LASTLY, I'LL JUST SAY I FEEL THAT YOU'VE JUST SOLD YOUR SOUL, AND I JUST I'M JUST PREDICTING THAT YOUR CAREER IS OVER.

TAKE CARE. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS CAROL WETTER.

ARE ON AGENDA ITEM THREE.

HI. I'M CAROL WETTERAUER, AND I AGREE WITH WHAT EVERYBODY HAS SAID SO FAR. SO I DON'T HAVE MUCH TO ADD.

AND I SAID ALL THIS BEFORE, BUT I'LL SAY IT FROM THE DAYS OF JIM CROW SEGREGATION, REDLINING, LACK OF TRANSPARENCY AND POLITICS, LACK OF ADEQUATE HEALTH CARE, LACK OF GUN CONTROL, INSUFFICIENT FUNDING FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

THESE ARE JUST A FEW ISSUES THAT SHOULD BE CHAMPIONED BY THE LEADERS OF OUR COMMUNITY.

INSTEAD, THE MAJORITY OF THIS COURT HAVE CHOSEN TO FURTHER DIVIDE OUR COMMUNITY AND ATTEMPT TO SWAY THE RESULTS OF THE 2026 ELECTION.

DEMOCRACIES ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO WORK THIS WAY.

THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS TAJUANA BRYANT ON ADDENDUM AGENDA ITEMS ONE, A AND B. GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN.

MY NAME IS TAJUANA BRYANT AND I AM A RESIDENT OF PRECINCT TWO.

I COME BEFORE YOU, STANDING ON THE SHOULDERS OF MANY WHO STOOD IN THE GAP FOR ME SO THAT I WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE HERE TODAY PETITIONING FOR SOMETHING AS BASIC AS FAIRNESS, OPENNESS, AND ACCOUNTABILITY.

THIS MOMENT FEELS LIKE WE ARE MOVING BACKWARDS, UNRAVELING PROGRESS THAT WAS FAR, FAR WITH BLOOD, SWEAT, AND SACRIFICE. AND YOU UNRAVEL IT NOW.

WHO KNOWS HOW LONG IT WILL TAKE US TO RECOVER? MR. GEORGE, I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR UNDIVIDED ATTENTION. I THINK I PAY ENOUGH TAXES TO. CAN YOU PLEASE GIVE ME THAT MUCH RESPECT? THANK YOU SIR. THIS IS NOT ABOUT ONE POLITICAL PARTY VERSUS ANOTHER.

IT'S ABOUT WHETHER THE PEOPLE OF FORT BEND HAVE A FAIR SEAT AT THE TABLE.

IT'S ABOUT WHETHER THE MAPS WE DRAW, THE COMMITTEES WE FORM, THE RULES WE WRITE WILL HONOR THE DIVERSITY AND THE DIGNITY OF THE COMMUNITIES OF OUR COMMUNITIES, OR WHETHER THEY WILL BE TWISTED TO CONSOLIDATE POWER AND SILENCE VOICES.

WHEN YOU MOVE DECISIONS INTO THE SHADOWS INSTEAD OF THE DAYLIGHT, WHEN YOU LOCK THE PUBLIC OUT OF PROCESSES THAT SHAPE THEIR LIVES, YOU BETRAY THE VERY TRUST THAT GIVES YOU THE PRIVILEGE TO SIT IN THOSE SEATS.

THAT IS SELF-INDULGENT.

IT IS SELF-CENTERED, AND IT IS SELF-DESTRUCTIVE.

TO OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS, SEARCH YOUR HEARTS, YOUR CONSCIENCE. LEADERSHIP IS NOT MEASURED BY HOW SECURELY YOU HOLD ON TO POWER, BUT HOW FAITHFULLY YOU SERVE YOUR CONSTITUENTS.

[00:20:03]

THERE WILL COME A DAY WHEN YOU MUST GIVE AN ACCOUNT.

MAYBE IT'S TODAY. MAYBE IT'S BEFORE YOUR MAKER.

BUT DON'T LET GOD HAVE TO TAP YOU ON THE SHOULDER AND REMIND YOU OF WHAT MATTERS MOST.

DOING WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE AND NOT CLINGING TO POWER FOR YOURSELVES AND TO EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM.

SILENCE AND MOMENTS LIKE THIS IS COMPLICITY.

COMPLICITY. WE CANNOT BE COMFORTABLE.

WE CANNOT BE COMPLACENT IF WE LET THIS STAND.

IF WE ACCEPT SECRET MANEUVERS, HIDDEN PROCESSES, THEN WE ARE HELPING TO UNRAVEL OUR OWN FUTURE.

I IMPLORE YOU, DO WHAT'S RIGHT.

REJECT SECRECY. REJECT SELF-INTEREST.

STAND FOR TRANSPARENCY AND FAIRNESS.

DO NOT LET OUR COUNTRY SLIP BACKWARDS.

OUR COUNTY, I'M SORRY, SLIPPED BACKWARDS BECAUSE HISTORY WILL NOT ONLY REMEMBER WHAT YOU DID, BUT WHAT YOU REFUSED TO DO WHEN IT MATTERED THE MOST. THANK YOU. JUDGE.

SOMEONE JUST TEXTED ME AND SAID THAT THE AUDIO FOR THE LIVE STREAMS NOT WORKING.

YES, WE JUST GOT A NOTE THAT FOR IPHONES THERE SEEMS TO BE AN ISSUE.

SO IF YOU CAN GIVE US LIKE TWO MINUTES FOR US TO REBOOT TO TRY TO GET THAT FIGURED OUT.

OKAY. THAT WOULD HELP.

LET'S DO THAT. IF SOMEBODY IS WATCHING, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY CAN LISTEN.

SO IT IS 322. GIVE US THREE MINUTES.

YEAH. TAKE IT FIVE MINUTES.

IF WE COME BACK FIVE MINUTES BREAK.

AND IF YOU COME BACK EARLIER, THEN WE WILL.

WE WILL COME BACK. IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE LIKE 5 OR 10 MINUTES BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO RESET THE SYSTEM. OKAY.

OKAY. THEN IT WILL GO.

OKAY. SO FIVE MINUTES.

AND THEN IF WE NEED MORE FIVE MORE MINUTES WE'LL TAKE IT.

YEAH. SO SO WHERE MY REMARKS.

WE WILL INCLUDE IT OR NOT.

FIVE MORE MINUTES AND THEN FIVE MINUTES AND THEN COME BACK.

AND IF YOU'RE STILL NOT UP, THEN WE WILL GO ANOTHER FIVE.

SO WHATEVER THAT IS. SO THE RECORDING KEEPS GOING.

IT'S JUST THE AUDIO. YEAH.

THE RECORDING. YEAH. IT'S NOT FOR WINDOWS OR ANDROIDS.

AND ALSO, I WANTED TO LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT THERE IS A RECORDING OF THIS.

IT WILL BE POSTED. SO ALL THIS GOING TO BE DOCUMENTED.

I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT.

YES, WE'RE IN RECESS. YEAH, WE ARE ON 323 FOR FIVE MINUTES.

CHECK. GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN.

IT IS 328, AND I HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT THE PROBLEM IS BEING CLEARED.

SO WE ARE UP AND RUNNING.

EVERYTHING IS GOOD. AND SO WE WILL CONTINUE WITH PUBLIC SPEAKERS.

PLEASE GO AHEAD. SORRY.

THE NEXT SPEAKER IS JONATHAN MARCANTEL.

HE IS SPEAKING ON REGULAR SESSION AGENDA ITEM THREE.

IN ADDENDUM, AGENDA ITEMS ONE, A, B AND C.

OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.

I'M JONATHAN MARCANTEL.

I LIVE IN PRECINCT THREE.

RISE TO SPEAK AGAINST THE ORDER ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES FOR THE 2025 FORT BEND COUNTY CITIZENS ADVISORY REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE.

AS IT IS A MOTION MADE OUT OF ORDER.

AND UNLESS YOU ARE PLANNING TO DISSOLVE AND DISMISS THE ENTIRELY OR, EXCUSE ME, THE CURRENTLY CONSTITUTED COMMITTEE, IT IS A POOR ATTEMPT TO DIAPER OVER THE LOAD OF MILORGANITE AFTER IT'S ALREADY BEEN THROWN. THIS ORDER SHOULD HAVE BEEN CREATED IN MAY, WHEN THE SPARKS WAS INITIALLY CONTEMPLATED, AND I AND MANY OTHER CITIZENS STOOD HERE AND DEMANDED PROPER ORDER, BUT THIS COURT REFUSED.

NOW WE FIND OURSELVES HAVING WASTED 2 OR 3 MONTHS IN PURSUIT OF ONE COMMISSIONERS FLIGHT OF FANCY, AND HAVING EVERY PIECE OF UNDEVELOPED LAND TAKEN FROM THE OTHER THREE COMMISSIONERS AND GIVEN TO HIM BECAUSE HE PRESSURED OTHER MEMBERS OF THIS COURT TO VIOLATE NOT ONLY BLACK LETTER LAW, BUT ALSO THE OPINION OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WHO IS CHARGED IN THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 45.179, PARAGRAPH A, IN PART TO REPRESENT FORT BEND COUNTY IN ALL CIVIL MATTERS PENDING BEFORE THE COURTS OF FORT BEND COUNTY, WHICH INCLUDES THIS COURT, AND PARAGRAPH B, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY SHALL REPRESENT THE FORT BEND COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT AND ANY OTHER COUNTY ENTITY CREATED BY LAW, WHICH INCLUDES THE REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE.

I WILL END WITH THIS. THE CURRENT CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE HAS VIOLATED SECTIONS 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 AND 3.4 OF YOUR PROPOSED ORDER ALREADY.

[00:25:02]

IF YOU DEMAND YOUR EMPLOYEES DONATE THEIR TIME TO YOUR CAMPAIGN TO GET THINGS DONE OFF THE BOOKS LIKE YOUR MEMORIAL DAY FIASCO, IT STILL COUNTS TOWARDS DEFINING HOW MUCH THIS WASTE OF TIME COSTS US.

AND THAT WAS YOUR FEMALE EMPLOYEE THAT WAS RUNNING YOUR UNIVERSITY BRANCH MEETING THAT TOLD ME THAT WHEN I ASKED HER HOW MUCH IT WAS COSTING THE COUNTY FOR THAT MEETING ON A HOLIDAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THE NEXT SPEAKER IS ANNA, AND SHE IS SPEAKING ON A REGULAR AGENDA NUMBER. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE.

AND THEN ON ADDENDUM AGENDA ITEMS ONE, A, B, AND C. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS ANNA LAKUTIS.

I LIVE IN THE PRECINCT FOR DEXTER MCCOY ZONE.

I'M HERE TODAY. I THINK WE SHOULD GO BACK TO THE BASICS BECAUSE I THINK GREED, POWER, HUNGRINESS, LIES, DECEIT AND WINNING AT ALL COSTS HAS OVERTAKEN SOME OF OUR COMMISSIONERS.

AND THIS IS A GREAT DISSERVICE TO THE RESIDENTS OF OUR COUNTY.

I DON'T KNOW IF MANY ARE YOU AWARE.

MAYBE IT'S THE PRIVILEGE.

MAYBE IT'S THE FACT THAT COMMISSIONER MYERS, I AM SPEAKING.

THANK YOU. MAYBE IT'S THE FACT THAT YOU'RE DOING SO GREAT THAT YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND. BUT THERE ARE COUNTY EMPLOYEES THAT ARE GOING TO FOOD BANKS AS WE SPEAK.

THERE ARE COUNTY EMPLOYEES WHO ARE ON THE BRINK OF HOMELESSNESS AS WE SPEAK.

AND THAT IS A SHAME THAT WE ARE NOT.

YOU ARE NOT PRIORITIZING PAYING LIVING WAGES TO THE PEOPLE THAT WORK HARD AND SERVE OUR COUNTY. THAT SHOULD BE YOUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY KEEPING OUR RESIDENTS SAFE AND SERVING OUR RESIDENTS, AND PAYING THOSE EMPLOYEES LIVING WAGES WHERE THEY CAN LIVE WITH DIGNITY AND PRIDE IN SERVING OUR COUNTY.

BUT WHAT THE PRIORITY IS IS RETALIATION.

GREED AND ARROGANCE. ACCORDING ACCORDING TO SOME, THE CLAIMS ARE TO DEFAME OUR COUNTY COMMISSIONER, DEXTER MCCOY, THAT HE WAS THE ARCHITECT BEHIND THE 2021 MAPS AND THEIR ILLEGALLY DRAWN BASED ON RACE. AND YET THERE IS NO PROOF AND NO COURT OF LAW THAT HAS SUBSTANTIATED THIS FALSE CLAIM.

AND BASED ON THIS FALSE CLAIM, SOME OF YOU HAVE DECIDED TO CRAM DOWN SOME ILLEGAL CONCOCTED REDISTRICTING SCHEME AIM IN ORDER TO GAIN POWER, PRIVILEGE, LAND AND STATUS AT THE EXPENSE OF WHO? AT THE EXPENSE OF DEFAMING OUR COUNTY.

COMMISSIONER. AT THE EXPENSE OF DEFAMING OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY AS INEPT.

WHERE YOU ALL HAD NO BUSINESS APPOINTING AN OUTSIDE FIRM BECAUSE THAT WAS AN ILLEGAL ACTION IN CASE THE LAW MATTERS IN THIS ROOM AND AT THE EXPENSE OF THE RESIDENTS, THE TAXPAYERS, AND THE HARDWORKING COUNTY EMPLOYEES THAT ARE DOING WITH LESS.

SO YOU ALL CAN WASTE OUR MONEY ON NONSENSE LIKE YOU DON'T KNOW.

THE CENSUS HAPPENS EVERY TEN YEARS.

MR. GEORGE, WHY WASTE OUR MONEY? WHY PUT THROUGH THE THE THE COMMUNITY THROUGH SECRET MEETINGS AND LEAVING OUT AN APPOINTED COMMUNITY MEMBER TO THAT SPECIAL COMMITTEE THAT WAS AN AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMAN, SO SHE COULD NOT CAST HER VOTES ON YOUR MAPS.

YOUR MAPS ARE DILUTING AND CRACKING COMMUNITIES.

THIS IS UNFAIR. THIS IS UNJUST.

THIS IS RETALIATION. AND IT'S SIMPLE AND PURE GREED.

YOU SHOULD BE DOING YOUR JOBS, NOT SCHEMING AND LYING TO THE TAXPAYERS.

SHAME. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

SHAME. IS RICHARD MORRISON ON AGENDA ITEM THREE? GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR HONOR. MEMBERS, WE SPEAK AGAINST THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE. ON THE REGULAR AGENDA.

[00:30:02]

AND WHAT I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT.

AND I BROUGHT A LITTLE BIT OF LAW WITH ME AS TO HOW I THINK THAT THE MEETING OR THAT THE COMMITTEE IS GOVERNED BY BOTH OF THOSE ACTS.

FIRST, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE OPEN GOVERNMENT ACT AND JUST A SITE OF THE COURT TO SECTION 555.01. AND THAT'S THE DEFINITIONS.

AND I BELIEVE THAT THE COMMITTEE IS A GOVERNING BODY BECAUSE UNDER THE ACT ON SECTION 551001 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE, SUBSECTION THREE, SUBSECTION CAPITAL D. A DELIBERATIVE BODY THAT HAS A RULE MAKING OR QUASI JUDICIAL POWER AND THAT IS CLASSIFIED AS A DEPARTMENT, AGENCY OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF A COUNTY OR MUNICIPALITY.

SO WE'RE CERTAINLY A DELIBERATIVE BODY.

YOU CAN'T ARGUE THAT. AND WE HAVE RULE MAKING POWER.

AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE WE MADE RULES.

THE RULES THAT WE MADE ARE THE CITIZENS COMMITTEE.

HAVE A COPY OF THEM HERE. I'M SURE YOU ALL HAVE A COPY AS WELL, BUT I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER WHAT THEY CALL THEM.

THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REDISTRICTING STANDING RULES.

SO WE'RE A DELIBERATIVE BODY.

WE HAVE RULEMAKING AUTHORITY.

OR WE CAN ALSO HAVE QUASI JUDICIAL POWER, AND THAT'S CLASSIFIED AS A DEPARTMENT AGENCY OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF A COUNTY.

SO WE'RE CERTAINLY A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION BECAUSE I MEAN, THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING IS POLITICS. AND WE HAVE QUASI JUDICIAL, JUDICIAL POWER. AND YOU KIND OF WONDER, WELL, WHAT IS QUASI JUDICIAL POWER? I BROUGHT WITH ME THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT THAT ACTUALLY DEFINES WHAT A RULE IS. BUT RATHER THAN RELY ON THAT OUR GOVERNOR, CURRENT GOVERNOR GREG ABBOTT, WHEN HE WAS ATTORNEY GENERAL, WROTE AN OPINION ON JUST THIS ISSUE.

AND IT'S ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION.

GA 0361. AND HERE'S WHAT OUR GOVERNOR HAD TO SAY ABOUT IT.

AND I GUESS HE PROBABLY STILL BELIEVES THIS THE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT, WHICH IS IN THE GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 2001, PRESCRIBES THE PROCESS A STATE AGENCY MUST FOLLOW IN ADOPTING RULES AND ADJUDICATING CONTESTED CASES. I CERTAINLY WOULD ASK FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME SINCE I USED TO BE A COMMISSIONER ON THIS COURT, I WOULD WONDER IF THE COURT WOULD GRANT ME THAT. GO AHEAD SIR. THANK YOU.

BUT THEN THE PROBLEM IS WE HAVE TO GIVE THAT TO THE OTHERS, TOO, RIGHT? WELL, THEY.

IF THEY WERE, IF ANOTHER COMMISSIONER SHOWS UP, HE CAN SPEAK AS LONG AS I DID.

I DON'T THINK IT'S. IT'S FAIR TO OTHERS.

SO. THAT'S THE CASE IF EVERYBODY OKAY.

YEAH. GO AHEAD. ALL OPPOSED.

SO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ABBOTT AT THE TIME REFERENCED THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES CODE, AND HE SAID, QUOTING THE CODE, THAT A STATE AGENCY RULE MEANS A STATE AGENCY, WHICH WE'RE CLEARLY NOT.

BUT HE'S TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT A RULE IS.

A RULE IS WHEN A STATE AGENCY IMPLEMENTS, INTERPRETS OR PRESCRIBES LAW OR POLICY, DESCRIBES THE PROCEDURE OR PRACTICE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE AGENCY, AND WE CERTAINLY DO THAT.

WE IMPLEMENT, WE INTERPRET AND WE PRESCRIBE POLICY.

AND WE DO THAT BY CHOOSING THE MAPS, BY VOTING EACH ONE OF US, WE VOTED ON THE MAPS AND WE WE ACCEPT THESE MAPS FROM CITIZENS AND WE LET THE CITIZENS EXPLAIN THEIR MAPS. WE GATHER FACTS FROM THE CITIZENS.

AND SO CLEARLY WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO ADOPT A RULE.

NOW, WHAT IS A QUASI JUDICIAL ACTION? WELL, THE GOVERNOR, BACK WHEN HE WAS ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALSO TALKED ABOUT THAT.

AND A QUASI JUDICIAL ACTION IS AN ACTION WHEN THE COMMITTEE CAN QUASI JUDICIAL POWER MEANS THE POWER TO EXERCISE JUDGMENT AND DISCRETION.

WELL, WE CERTAINLY HAVE THAT POWER.

WE CAN ACCEPT SOME MAPS AND WE CAN NOT ACCEPT OTHER MAPS BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T COMPLIED WITH THE RULES THAT YOU GUYS HAVE GIVEN US AND THAT WE HAVE ADOPTED.

[00:35:03]

DID THAT LAST NIGHT WHEN WE REVIEWED ALL THE MAPS, DECIDED WHAT THEIR RACIAL MAKEUP WAS, WHAT THEIR POLITICAL MAKEUP WAS, AND WE DECIDED AND VOTED ON WHICH MAPS WE LIKED BEST.

ALSO IT HAS THE POWER TO MAKE BINDING ORDERS AND JUDGMENTS.

AND YOU THINK, WELL, THAT THAT COMMITTEE DOES NOT HAVE THAT POWER, BUT THE COMMITTEE DOES HAVE A POWER TO MAKE BINDING ORDERS, BECAUSE IN THESE RULES IT SAYS IF THERE IS A SPEAKER THAT IS OUT OF LINE, THE CHAIRMAN HAS THE ABILITY TO KICK HIM OUT OF THE MEETING.

AND SO KICKING SOMEONE OUT OF A MEETING IS A VERY, VERY JUDICIAL POWER. AND YOU CAN BE KICKED OUT OF THE MEETING AT THE CHAIRMAN'S DISCRETION IF THAT PERSON IS NOT COMPLYING WITH WITH BASICALLY THE RULES OF DECORUM.

AND SO WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT KICKING SOMEONE OUT OF THE MEETING AND INTERRUPTING THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, THAT IS A VERY SERIOUS POWER THAT OUR CHAIRMAN HAS UNDER THESE RULES.

THE POWER TO EXAMINE WITNESSES.

OF COURSE, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT EARLIER. WE CAN EXAMINE THE MAPS, WE CAN EXAMINE THE PEOPLE.

WE CAN ASK THE PEOPLE THAT THAT BROUGHT THE MAPS QUESTIONS.

AND WE WE CERTAINLY HAVE THE POWER TO ENFORCE DECISIONS AND IMPOSE PENALTIES AND NOT MONETARY PENALTIES, BUT PENALTIES OF BEING EXCLUDED FROM THE MEETING.

AND THERE ARE OTHER POWERS IN THAT, BUT THAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE.

AND SO I REALLY CAME HERE TO URGE THIS COURT TO PROTECT US, THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, BECAUSE THE DA AND I'M I MEAN, I GUESS PEOPLE CAN HEAR ME.

THE DA MAY BE WATCHING.

HE IS NOT A FRIEND OF MINE, AND I WORRY THAT THIS DAY MAY PROSECUTE THE MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, AND I DON'T WANT THAT TO OCCUR TO ME OR TO ANYBODY ON THAT COMMITTEE.

AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE SAFEST WAY TO WORK IN THIS COMMITTEE IS TO FOLLOW THE OPEN MEETINGS AND THE OPEN RECORDS ACT, SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THIS COUNTY COME AND TELL US THAT WE HAVE VIOLATED THE CRIMINAL PROVISIONS OF THESE STATUTES AND HAVE TO GO THROUGH.

GOD BLESS YOU. JUDGE WHAT YOU'RE GOING THROUGH.

I WOULD NOT WISH THAT ON MY WORST ENEMY.

AND SO I'M HERE TO BEG THIS COURT TO.

RECOGNIZE THAT. LET'S JUST COMPLY WITH THOSE RULES, AND WE'RE GOING TO GET THE MAPS THAT THE CITIZENS WANT AND THAT YOU GUYS WANT.

EVEN IF WE COMPLY WITH THOSE RULES.

I MEAN, I DON'T IT'S NOT I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S A.

BAR IN ANY WAY FOR US TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES AND THE STATUTES UNDER THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT AND THE OPEN RECORDS ACT.

I DON'T THINK IN ANY WAY IT WILL PREVENT THE MAJORITY OF THIS COURT FROM DOING WHATEVER THEY WANT. IT'S NEVER PREVENTED Y'ALL IN THE PAST.

WE'VE HAD EVERYBODY UP HERE HAS SAID HOW GREAT FORT BEND COUNTY IS, AND MOST OF Y'ALL DID ALL THAT WORK, AND Y'ALL COMPLIED WITH THOSE RULES EVERY TIME. NOT ONE PERSON HAS EVER GOTTEN IN TROUBLE FOR IT.

AND Y'ALL HAVE MADE THIS COUNTY ONE OF THE GREATEST IN THE STATE, IF NOT THE WHOLE COUNTRY.

SO I'M JUST ASKING YOU, IT'S A BIG DEAL TO SERVE ON THIS COMMITTEE.

I'M HONORED, BUT I DON'T WANT TO GET IN TROUBLE FOR TRYING TO DO MY JOB.

THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR THE EXTRA TIME.

THE NEXT SPEAKER IS SUMITA GHOSH.

ON AGENDA. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM TWO AND THREE.

NO REGULAR SESSION. SHE WROTE TWO AND THREE.

SORRY. YEAH, I WAS. OH, SORRY.

THOROUGHLY CONFUSED. SUMITA GHOSH, LONG TIME RESIDENT OF TEXAS AND FORT BEND COUNTY PRECINCT THREE FOR NOW.

PRECINCT FOUR, FORMERLY I ALL OF MY NEW FRIENDS.

I AGREE 100% WITH WHAT THEY ARE SAYING, AND ESPECIALLY IT WAS TELLING.

I DID NOT KNOW MR. MORRISON WAS GOING TO SAY WHAT HE DID, BUT I DID ONCE AGAIN, I WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO THE GREAT BSL.

I FORGOT MY PIN TODAY BECAUSE HONESTLY, I TOLD YOU SO.

SHE TOLD YOU SO AND I JUST.

IT BLOWS MY MIND AFTER I LOOKED AT THE AGENDA TODAY.

HOW RIDICULOUS THIS WHOLE THING HAS BEEN.

[00:40:02]

WHY ARE WE HERE ON A TUESDAY AT 3:00? 04:00? NOW ARGUING ABOUT THIS RIDICULOUSNESS.

THE WHOLE PROCESS STARTED AS A LIE BASED ON THAT BRILLIANT LEGAL MIND.

MATT MORGAN. WHO SAID, OH, YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING WRONG, AND THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS WITH OUR CURRENT MAPS.

IT WAS ALL BASED ON A LIE, WHICH CAN BE EASILY VERIFIABLE BECAUSE THIS IS ALL RECORDED. WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED AND WHAT WAS SAID IN 2022 BE UTTER GARBAGE.

TRASH PAID FOR BY A COMMISSIONER BECAUSE HE COULDN'T FIND COMPETENT COUNSEL USING FLAWED LAW. AS THE ACLU, WHICH I ASKED TO COME IN HERE, TEXAS CIVIL RIGHTS PROJECT POINTED OUT, PETTAWAY IS NOT SUPREME COURT LAW.

IT WILL BE CHALLENGED.

I'M MAKING SURE OF THAT.

IT WILL ALSO NOT APPLY RETROACTIVELY.

SO YOUR BASIS OF LIKE LIE UPON, LIE UPON LIE TO CHALLENGE THE EXISTING MAPS IS JUST AN UTTER AND COMPLETE DISGRACE AND A WASTE OF ALL OF OUR TIME AND OUR TAXPAYERS MONEY. AND THIS CLEANING UP AFTER THE FACT WHEN YOU HIRE RIDICULOUS COUNSEL WHO AGAIN BSL TOLD YOU IT'S WITHIN HER AUTHORITY, NOT ONCE, NOT TWICE, BUT PROBABLY TEN TIMES.

AND TO YOUR MISOGYNY AND RACISM AND PETTINESS IN THE WAY YOU BEHAVE WITH HER IS JUST GALLS ME AND GALLS ME. AND I DO AGREE.

WE'RE GOING BACKWARDS.

I'M LIKE, HOW IS THIS EVEN APPROPRIATE? IN 2025, LAST YESTERDAY WAS THE DAY WHEN THOSE FOUR LITTLE GIRLS DIED IN THAT EXPLOSION IN BIRMINGHAM.

AND IT'S JUST TERRIBLE THAT THE FIGHTS THAT THEY WERE INVOLVED IN ARE GOING ON RIGHT NOW.

AND IT'S JUST WRONG. AND YOU NEED TO LOOK INTO YOUR HEART FOR THE EVIL THAT EXISTS IN THERE RIGHT NOW, AND THAT YOU ARE DOING THIS TO OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR PEOPLE.

SO I'M SORRY, BUT YOU DESERVE AN APOLOGY.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS RAY TWO ON AGENDA REGULAR SESSION, AGENDA ITEM THREE. AND THEN AGENDA AGENDA ITEMS. ADDENDUM TO AGENDA ITEMS ONE, A, B, AND C.

HI, MY NAME IS RAY AND I'M A PRECINCT ONE RESIDENT.

AND HOW DO I FOLLOW THAT? OH MY GOSH. I'M LIKE SHAKING NOW.

BUT SO I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT ALL THE LEGAL ISSUES THAT THE LEGAL MIND SO ELOQUENTLY PLACED BECAUSE I CAN'T I CAN'T DO IT. I'M NOT A I'M A LAYPERSON AND I SO APPRECIATE THEM TELLING THE STORIES ABOUT IT.

AND I APPRECIATE OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY TO STILL BE HERE DOING HER JOB WHEN SHE'S DENIED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT TO DO HER JOB.

SO IT APPEARS TO BE THAT FROM WHAT I HEAR, THAT THIS WHOLE REDISTRICTING EXERCISE IS ILLEGAL, IMMORAL, AND A COMPLETE WASTE OF MONEY AND TIME.

SO LAST I CHECKED, MY MY MORTGAGE STATEMENT.

I WAS AGHAST BECAUSE MY ESCROW ACCOUNT MY ESCROW PAYMENT MONTHLY IS ACTUALLY HIGHER THAN MY MORTGAGE NOW. AND PART OF IT IS THE PROPERTY TAX.

AND ANOTHER PART IS THE HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE.

LIKE A LOT OF Y'ALL ARE HOMEOWNERS, AND EVEN IF YOU'RE RENTING, YOU'RE PAYING FOR THAT TOO, BECAUSE LANDLORD'S NOT GOING TO PAY OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS. SO THIS WHOLE REDISTRICTING, I WAS WONDERING, HOW MUCH DOES IT COST? DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATE? LIKE HOW MANY MILLIONS, MAYBE.

I'M GUESSING HERE. AND I DON'T MIND PAYING PROPERTY TAX TO HELP THE SCHOOLS TO BE BETTER, TO EDUCATE THE STUDENTS.

I DON'T MIND PAYING PROPERTY TAX TO FIX THE ROADS, TO HELP MY NEIGHBORS, TO PAY FOR THE COUNTY EMPLOYEES, TO PROVIDE THE EXCELLENT SERVICES.

BUT I DO MIND WHEN IT'S WASTED.

WASTED ON THIS EXERCISE.

OUR MONEY IS HARD EARNED.

AND WITH CURRENT ECONOMIC, YOU KNOW, IT'S.

EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON. YOU KNOW, WE SAW THE JOBS NUMBERS.

WE SAW THE INFLATION NUMBERS.

AND AND IT'S WE'RE LIKE A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE JUST BARELY HANGING THERE AND AND WITH YOU WASTING THIS MONEY AND THE REDUCING SERVICE, PEOPLE COULD BE PUSHED OUT OF THEIR HOMES.

JUST TEXT OUT OF THEIR HOMES AND AND I THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ACTUALLY BROUGHT ON BY THIS EXERCISE BROUGHT BY THE REPUBLICAN COMMISSIONERS. AND I THOUGHT YOU ALL ARE FOR LOWER TAXES.

RIGHT. SO I BEG YOU, PLEASE JUST STOP IT RIGHT HERE.

LET'S CUT THE LOSS. LET'S NOT WASTE ANY MORE OUR TAX MONEY ON THIS MEANINGLESS EXERCISE.

[00:45:06]

THAT'S WHAT THE LAW SAYS.

WE DO IT EVERY TEN YEARS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.

AND AGAIN, NOBODY WANTED THIS.

NOBODY. NO COURT WANTED SAID WE SHOULD DO IT.

AS FAR AS I KNOW, NOBODY I KNOW WANTED THIS.

AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A COMPLETE WASTE OF MONEY FOR POWER GRAB.

THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS SANDY IBANEZ ON REGULAR SESSION AGENDA ITEM THREE.

GOOD AFTERNOON, JUDGES AND COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS SANDY IBANEZ, AND I'M A LIFELONG RESIDENT OF FORT BEND COUNTY. ABRAHAM LINCOLN ONCE SAID A HOUSE DIVIDED AGAINST ITSELF CANNOT STAND.

DIVISION WEAKENS OUR OUR COUNTY.

BUT FAIR REPRESENTATION CAN BRING US TOGETHER.

I RECOGNIZE THAT THIS RESOLUTION DOES SOME VERY IMPORTANT PROTECTIONS, LIKE KEEPING THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND COMMUNITIES TOGETHER, MAKING SURE EACH PRECINCT HAS ABOUT THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE SO THAT EVERY VOTE CARRIES EQUAL WEIGHT AND PREVENTING RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN HOW THE LINES ARE DRAWN.

THESE PROTECTIONS ARE ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO KEEP THE PROCESS FAIR.

BUT I URGE YOU TO GO FURTHER ONE.

TRANSPARENCY AND TRUST.

WE DESERVE OPEN MEETINGS, ACCESSIBLE DATA, AND REAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMUNITY VOICES TO BE HEARD.

REPRESENTATION OVER POLITICS.

LINES SHOULD REFLECT THE PEOPLE OF FORT BEND COUNTY, NOT PROTECT INCUMBENTS.

COMMUNITIES DESERVE FAIR MAPS, NOT POLITICAL MAPS.

REAL ACCOUNTABILITY. THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE SHOULD BE EMPOWERED, NOT SYMBOLIC. THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS MUST GENUINELY SHAPE THE FINAL OUTCOME.

SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS THIS WILL YOU CHOOSE TO DRAW THE LINES THAT UNITE US OR LINES THAT DIVIDE US? VITUS. REDISTRICTING IS NOT JUST ABOUT MAPS.

IT'S ABOUT TRUST, FAIRNESS, AND THE FUTURE OF OUR COUNTY.

I URGE YOU TO PUT THE PEOPLE FIRST.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU. OUR LAST SPEAKER THAT I HAVE IS JESSE MATTHEW ON AGENDA ITEM THREE.

GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS COURT, COUNTY JUDGE.

MY NAME IS JESSE MATTHEW.

I LIVE IN PRECINCT THREE.

WHICH IS YOUR PRECINCT, MR. MYERS? SO. I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO START.

I GUESS I'M AGAINST THIS REDISTRICTING.

IT'S UNNECESSARY. IT'S WASTING TAXPAYER MONEY, WHICH I KNOW, YOU KNOW IT'S A PLOT THAT WAS HATCHED BETWEEN YOU, YOU GUYS, WHICH I FOUND OUT ACTUALLY, I HEARD ABOUT THIS SEVERAL MONTHS AGO.

I DIDN'T BELIEVE IT THOUGH, BECAUSE I FIRMLY SUPPORTED YOU AS A MALAYALI.

I WAS PROUD KNOWING THAT KP GEORGE MALAYALI WAS REPRESENTING THE MALAYALI COMMUNITY SEVERAL MONTHS AGO. HI, I'M STILL TALKING.

SEVERAL MONTHS AGO I HEARD YOU GUYS WERE HATCHING A PLOT FOR YOU TO GET REELECTED BECAUSE YOU WERE WORRIED THAT YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE SUPPORT OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

AND IN THIS MEETING, YOU GUYS, HAD YOU HATCHED THIS PLOT TO, YOU WERE LIKE, OH, WELL, I'LL HELP YOU GET REELECTED IF YOU SWITCH TO OUR PARTY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, AND YOU WILL GET YOUR REDISTRICTING.

SO NOW THAT WE'RE HERE, I WANT YOU TO STOP YOU THERE BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT HERE TO. I'M HERE AS A CITIZEN.

FIRST AMENDMENT. RIGHT.

HOLD ON ONE SECOND. YOU DON'T HAVE A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT HERE IN THIS COURTROOM.

YES I DO. EVERYBODY HAS A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT WITH THE CONSTITUTION.

WITH THE CONSTITUTION? IT'S IT'S MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT.

FIRST AMENDMENT. I'VE READ THE CONSTITUTION.

MAYBE YOU SHOULD READ IT. GO AHEAD AND FINISH IT OFF. OKAY. AS I'M SAYING, WHEN I HEARD THIS WAS GOING ON, I STARTED COMING TO THE MEETINGS, WATCHING IN PERSON. AND IT IS DISGUSTING TO ME WHAT?

[00:50:02]

AND MY PARENTS. JUST SO YOU KNOW, MY COMMUNITY.

THEY TELL US ALL THE TIME, DON'T SPEAK OUT AGAINST ANY MALAYALI.

BUT I FEEL THE NEED TO SPEAK OUT BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS CORRUPTION AND IT'S JUST DISGUSTING. AND AND IT DOES NOT REPRESENT THE MALAYALEE COMMUNITY.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO SAY.

I'M AGAINST THIS REDISTRICTING.

IT WILL DILUTE THE MINORITY VOTE.

IT WILL DILUTE THE VOTE.

THE DAISY VOTE. AND YOU KNOW THIS.

AND YOU'RE DOING THIS TO STAY IN POWER.

AND WE ARE NOT FOOLS. WE'RE PAYING ATTENTION.

WE SEE IT. SO YOU NEED TO PUT A AND YOU NEED TO STOP THIS.

JUST STOP IT. MY LAST COMMENT I'M GOING TO SAY IS IN MALAYALAM, THAT MEANS GOD IS WATCHING EVERYTHING THAT YOU'RE DOING.

SO AS A CHRISTIAN, YOU NEED TO KEEP THAT IN MIND.

HE'S WATCHING EVERYTHING YOU DO.

APPRECIATE IT. EXCUSE ME.

[3. Discuss and consider taking action on Fort Bend County's redistricting effort and Citizens Advisory Redistricting Committee. ]

AGENDA ITEM THREE. YES I HAVE.

I HAD ONE MOTION. I SPLIT IT INTO TWO.

I MOVE THAT THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT REITERATE, CLARIFY AND REESTABLISH THAT THE FORT BEND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FORT BEND COUNTY CITIZENS REDISTRICTING ADVISORY COMMITTEE, IT IS ADVISORY ONLY AND MAKES NO DECISIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS BINDING ON FORT BEND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT AND IS THEREFORE NOT SUBJECT TO THE OPEN MEETINGS OR OPEN RECORDS ACT.

SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? WE HAVE SOME LEGAL GUIDANCE THAT THE COURT WOULD PROBABLY BENEFIT FROM, BECAUSE I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE MOTION RAISED.

YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXCUSE YOURSELF INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER ATTORNEY CLIENT CONSULTATION, OR WE CAN ADVISE YOU FROM HERE.

OKAY. SO YOU CAN ADVISE FROM HERE.

OKAY. I DO NOT THINK THE COURT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE A MOTION THAT IS NOT LEGAL, AND TELLING THEM THAT THEY ARE SUDDENLY BY COMMAND OF THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT, NOT REQUIRED TO FOLLOW STATE LAW IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I THINK THE COMMISSIONERS COURT IS AUTHORIZED TO DO.

OTHERWISE, YOU COULD SUSPEND ALL KINDS OF RULES AND LAWS AND JUST CONTINUE TO DO HOWEVER YOU WANT TO. UNCHECKED.

OKAY. THANK YOU. LET ME ALLOW ME TO RESPOND TO THAT, PLEASE. AND I I CONTACTED BRIAN GASTON BECAUSE HE WOULD BE THE OFFICIAL. WHO? BRIAN. I'M SORRY.

BRIAN MIDDLETON, I APOLOGIZE.

BRIAN MIDDLETON. HE IS THE INDIVIDUAL OBVIOUSLY THE OFFICIAL WHO WOULD ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. CRIMINAL CHARGES.

YES. YOU'RE RIGHT. RIGHT. AND I DID ASK HIM ABOUT THIS.

HE DIDN'T GIVE ME HIS OPINION.

HE. WHAT HE DID IS HE REFERRED ME.

IS HE HERE? IS BRIAN MIDDLETON HERE BEFORE HE'S QUOTED, HE DID NOT GIVE ME HIS OPINION.

LET ME FINISH, PLEASE. YES, SIR.

THANK YOU. HE DID NOT GIVE ME HIS OPINION.

HE REFERRED ME TO A AN ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION, JOHN CORNYN, OPINION NUMBER 60.

AND HE SAID WHAT THE OPINION SAYS SPECIFICALLY IS THAT IF THE THANK YOU, IF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS ADVISORY ONLY AND THAT THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT, OR ARE THERE DECISIONS, THEIR ADVICE OR THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS IS NOT BINDING ON COMMISSIONERS COURT.

THEY ARE NOT A PUBLIC ENTITY SUBJECT TO THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

SO THAT IS THE OPINION FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, MAY I? YES. COMMISSIONER MYERS, WE DON'T DISAGREE ON WHAT THE CRITERIA IS FOR WHAT SUBJECTS AN ENTITY TO OPEN MEETINGS.

I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT CRITERIA.

WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS, WAS EXPLAINED BY THE FORMER COMMISSIONER RICHARD MORRISON IS WHY THEY EXCEED JUST ADVISORY.

THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO SHUT PEOPLE OUT OF MEETINGS.

THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS AS TO WHETHER THE CRITERIA THAT IS LEGAL IN NATURE HAS BEEN COMPLIED WITH BEFORE IT EVEN GETS HERE, BEFORE IT EVEN GETS HERE.

THAT IS A GATEKEEPING FUNCTION THAT SHUTS PEOPLE OUT.

YOU CAN ONLY JUST SIT HERE AND LISTEN TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS TELLING YOU THAT VERY FACT.

ADDITIONALLY, THERE ARE AG OPINIONS THAT SAY ONCE SOMETHING HAS BECOME YOUR CUSTOM AND PRACTICE, YOU NEED TO KIND OF EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DEVIATE.

AND THAT IS OPPOSITE RIGHT NOW.

WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS OPPOSITE OF 2021 WHEN EVERYTHING IS ACTUALLY STILL POSTED ON THE INTERNET. THEIR THEIR RECOMMENDATION ACCORDING TO THE AG'S OPINION AND ACCORDING

[00:55:02]

HE'S WILLING TO SWEAR TO THAT. HE SIMPLY HE SIMPLY HE DID NOT GIVE ME HIS OPINION.

HE SIMPLY REFERRED ME TO THE AG'S OPINION.

HE SAID THAT SAID SPECIFICALLY THAT IF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS ARE NOT BINDING ON COMMISSIONERS COURT, THEY'RE NOT A PUBLIC ENTITY SUBJECT TO THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT. COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONER, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, HAS BEEN TELLING YOU ALL ALONG, WE DON'T DISAGREE WITH THE CRITERIA.

IT'S HOW IT'S BEING APPLIED.

AND THIS COURT HAS THE ABILITY TO COMPEL SOMEBODY TO SWEAR TO THEIR TESTIMONY BEFORE THIS COURT. I WOULD REALLY CAUTION ANYONE TO RELY ON WHAT SOMEBODY ELSE SAYS.

SOMEBODY SAID, BECAUSE I THINK YOU CAN CHECK THE RECORD, AND IT IS A FAIR STATEMENT THAT THE MEMBERS HAVE DISAGREED ABOUT WHAT THEY BELIEVE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TOLD DIFFERENT MEMBERS.

IN ADDITION, I RAN THIS MOTION.

LET ME FINISH. I RAN THIS MOTION SPECIFICALLY BY THE THE LAW FIRM THAT WE THAT THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT, THE SCHOOL BOARD LAWYER. I'M SORRY, MR. MORRIS. MR.. MORRIS.

THAT'S CORRECT. YES, SPECIFICALLY RAN THIS MOTION BY HIM TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT IN HIS OPINION, THAT THE MOTION WAS OKAY AND FINE AND COMPLIED WITH THE LAW.

SO I'M, I'M, I'M TAKING THE LEGAL COUNSEL'S ADVICE THAT WHO WE HIRED TO GIVE US DIRECTIONS AND AND MAKE CERTAIN THAT WE FOLLOW THE PROPER PROCEDURES PROCEEDINGS AND PROCEDURES WITH REGARD TO REDISTRICTING.

THAT'S WHAT WE HIRED HIM TO DO.

THAT'S THE ADVICE HE GAVE ME.

SO AS TO THE OTHER MEMBERS OF COURT, OF WHICH COMMISSIONER MYERS IS SIMPLY ONE IT STILL REMAINS THE AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AS BRIDGET SMITH LAWSON HAS TOLD YOU, UNDER 45.179, WE ARE ONE OF NINE COUNTIES IN 254 THAT HAVE THE EXPRESS EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO REPRESENT THE COUNTY IN ALL MATTERS.

THOSE OTHER RULINGS WILL ASSUME 245 COUNTIES IN TEXAS AND NOT FORT BEND, WHICH IS WHERE WE LIVE.

AND THE REFUSAL FOR THE COURT TO RECONCILE WHERE WE LIVE VERSUS WHERE WE DO NOT LIVE IS A IS A BIG MISUNDERSTANDING AT THE VERY LEAST OF HOW THE LAW WORKS.

YOU MAKE THE MOTION. IT IS AGAINST THE LEGAL ADVICE OF THE DULY ELECTED COUNTY ATTORNEY, AND IT WILL EXPOSE THIS COUNTY TO RISK.

OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR OPINION.

I, I WAS GOING TO OPEN UP AND ASK, WHY ARE WE EVEN HERE? BUT NOW IT'S CLEAR. YOU SAID IT IN YOUR MOTION.

AND QUITE FRANKLY, I'M APPALLED BECAUSE AS MUCH AS IT WAS PREACHED FROM THIS DAIS THAT THERE WAS A PROCESS THAT WASN'T OPEN, AND THERE WAS A PROCESS THAT THE PUBLIC DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE, WHICH IS NOT TRUE.

YOU'RE NOW MAKING A MOTION WHERE YOU WANT TO REMOVE THE VERY COMMITTEE THAT YOU'VE APPOINTED TO DO THIS WORK.

REMOVE THEIR ABILITY TO DO THEIR OR THEIR THE THE MANDATE THAT THEY DO THEIR WORK IN THE OPEN AND IN THE PUBLIC.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.

THAT IS EXACTLY. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT? I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. I'M COMMISSIONER. I DIDN'T SPEAK WHEN YOU WERE SPEAKING.

AND SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND, PLEASE LET ME FINISH WHAT I'M SAYING. I'LL RESPOND WHEN YOU AND I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU. SO THEN YOU CAN RESPOND THEN AS WELL. BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

FOR AS MUCH AS YOU TALK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY AND OPENNESS, WHY NOW WE ARE COMING BACK TO RESEND OR ACTUALLY WE HAVEN'T EVEN TAKEN ACTION TO RESCIND. WE ARE TAKING ACTION TO ENACT A NEW ORDER.

SO I'M ACTUALLY NOW TALKING MYSELF THROUGH THIS.

IF WE EVEN HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THIS, IF WE DON'T RESCIND THE PREVIOUS ORDER, WHICH I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS ORDER CALLS FOR.

SO THAT'S ONE. BUT WE'RE HERE ON A TUESDAY WHERE COURT WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO MEET ON AN AFTERNOON AT A TIME WHERE WE DON'T TYPICALLY MEET FOR A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING.

AND I'M STILL CURIOUS WHY THIS IS A PRIORITY FOR OUR TAXPAYERS TIME AND DOLLARS.

BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TAKING UP THE ISSUE OF HOW PEOPLE ARE FINDING IT INCREASINGLY LESS AFFORDABLE TO LIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY. WE DIDN'T CALL A SPECIAL MEETING TO TACKLE THAT AND WORK TOGETHER TO TACKLE THAT.

THE SHERIFF RECENTLY PRESENTED A REQUEST PUBLICLY FOR US TO LOOK AT AND STUDY AND ADDRESS LAW ENFORCEMENT SALARIES.

WE DIDN'T CALL A SPECIAL MEETING TO TO DISCUSS, TO DO ANY RESEARCH OR WORK TOGETHER, ROLL UP OUR SLEEVES TO ADDRESS THAT.

WE DIDN'T EVEN CALL A SPECIAL MEETING TO ADDRESS.

THE MOST PRESSING ISSUE IN PEOPLE'S LIVES TODAY IS HEALTH CARE. WE GOT A PRESENTATION LAST YEAR THAT OF THE UNINSURED POPULATION IN FORT BEND COUNTY.

70% OF THEM ARE WORKING AND STILL DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE. WE DIDN'T CALL A SPECIAL MEETING ON THAT. INSTEAD, WE DECIDED TO WASTE TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO HAVE SWAGIT TO BE ABLE TO BROADCAST THIS MEETING.

WE DECIDED TO WASTE TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO HAVE.

[01:00:03]

AND I KNOW THERE ARE A COUPLE MORE OUT THERE TO BE HERE.

I'M NOT SURE WHY THERE'S A NEED FOR THAT MUCH OF A FORCE, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE PRIORITIZE TODAY TO MAKE THIS PROCESS MORE SURREPTITIOUS IN THE BUSINESS, TO NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE LAW.

SOMETHING ABOUT THAT SEEMS OFF.

AND IF THIS PROCESS IS LOOK, Y'ALL HAVE THE VOTES TO DO WHATEVER THE HECK Y'ALL WANT TO DO. THAT'S CLEAR NOW, BUT WHY DO YOU CHOOSE TO USE THAT POWER FOR THIS OF ALL THINGS? I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT.

AND SO I'M CURIOUS THOUGH, WITH THIS ORDER, WHICH AGAIN, I THINK IT ISN'T PROPER BECAUSE IT'S NOT RESCINDING PREVIOUS ORDER ON THE SAME MATTER NOW THAT I THINK ABOUT IT.

BUT WITH THE OPEN MEETING OR THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, THE WHOLE POINT OF IT IS TO BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.

I AM FLOORED AT WHAT HAPPENED YESTERDAY WITH THIS BODY BECAUSE AS MUCH AS Y'ALL KEPT ARGUING ABOUT, YOU NEED TO APPOINT SOMEBODY.

IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, YOU NEED TO HAVE YOUR PEOPLE IN THE ROOM AND POINT THEM, WELL, WHAT THE HECK DID WE DO? WE APPOINTED THEM. AND THE CHAIR APPOINTED BY THE COUNTY JUDGE REFUSED TO LET ONE OF MY APPOINTEES JOIN THIS MEETING.

HE HAD NO BASIS TO DO IT, BUT THAT'S WHAT HE DID.

IS THAT THE ESSENCE OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE? IS THAT THE ESSENCE OF THE WORK WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE? LOCK PEOPLE OUT FOR WHAT? WHAT DO WE GAIN? WHAT DO WE GAIN? ON ONE HAND, YOU SAY WE'RE NOT SUBJECT TO THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

AND ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU SAY WE ARE.

AND THAT'S YOUR BASIS FOR EXCLUDING SOMEBODY FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE MEETING.

AND I CALL FOUL ON THAT.

I SPENT SOME TIME EDUCATING MYSELF THE LAST TWO DAYS ON WHAT THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT SAYS, PARTICULARLY ABOUT THE VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION OF PARTICIPANTS.

AND LET ME EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED YESTERDAY. THERE WAS A MEETING ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8TH, OF THIS REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE.

IT WAS CANCELED AND THEN RESCHEDULED.

MY APPOINTEE, BOTH OF THEM APPOINTEES, WERE AVAILABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING ON THE EIGHTH. AND THEN WHEN THE MEETING WAS RESCHEDULED TO THE 14TH, ONE OF THOSE APPOINTEES HAD A PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED BUSINESS TRIP AND IMMEDIATELY ASKED THE CHAIR TO MAKE ACCOMMODATIONS FOR HER TO JOIN VIRTUALLY.

HE DIDN'T RESPOND FOR A WEEK.

NO RESPONSE. SHE EMAILED HIM AGAIN.

HE STILL DIDN'T RESPOND.

AND SO SHE TOLD ME. AND THEN I INTERVENED.

AND THEN FINALLY HE RESPONDS, SAYING THAT THIS MEETING WAS NOT NOTICED AS A VIRTUAL MEETING. AND SO THEREFORE WE CANNOT ALLOW VIRTUAL LINK TO BE CREATED FOR A MEMBER TO JOIN. HE'S WRONG ON THE LAW, AND WE HAD A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HERE YESTERDAY TO TELL HIM HOW WRONG ON THE LAW HE WAS, AND THAT CHAIR WOULD NOT LET THAT MEMBER SPEAK.

TWO THINGS THERE. ONE, WE ROUTINELY JOIN MEETINGS OF COMMISSIONERS COURT VIRTUALLY WHEN ONE OF US IS SICK OR ON THE ROAD FOR A CONFERENCE LIKE I WAS LAST YEAR WHEN I HAD TO GET MY REQUIRED EDUCATIONAL CREDITS.

AND IT'S NO PROBLEM. WE SET THAT MEETING UP.

IT'S A MEETING WHERE THE QUORUM IS PRESENT IN HERE, AND ONE OF THE MEMBERS JOINED VIRTUALLY. IT'S IT'S ALLOWED, BUT FOR SOME REASON, TO EXERT POWER OR BRAVADO OR WHATEVER THE HECK IT WAS TO TRY TO USE WHATEVER PERCEIVED POWER TO LOCK SOMEBODY OUT OF A PROCESS THAT WAS PURPORTED TO BE FOR THE CITIZENS TO PARTICIPATE IN.

SEEMS WRONG, BUT THE ALSO DISRESPECT OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, WHICH I'LL GET TO LATER IN HER OFFICE, AND NOT ALLOWING THE DULY ELECTED COUNTY ATTORNEY THAT'S PAID FOR BY THE TAXPAYERS TO BE ABLE TO GIVE AN INTERPRETATION THAT THEY FELT SO BOLD TO DO THAT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT Y'ALL DO HERE.

AND THAT'S NOT RIGHT. HOW WE BEHAVE IS HOW THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY BEHAVE.

HOW WE BEHAVE IS HOW THE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND EMPLOYEES OF THIS COUNTY BEHAVE.

AND WE HAVE SAID, BECAUSE WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH SOMETHING IN REDISTRICTING AND IT DOESN'T. THE ADVICE THAT WE RECEIVED DOESN'T FIT OUR EFFORT TO DO THAT.

WE HAVE SAID, OH, THE ENTIRE OFFICE IS INCOMPETENT, AND THAT'S NOT RIGHT. AND I'LL GET TO MORE OF THAT LATER.

BUT AGAIN, THE BASIS OF THIS IS THAT WE ARE NOW TRYING TO, RETROACTIVELY OR NOT RETROACTIVELY GO BACK AND SAY THAT THIS COMMITTEE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SUBJECT TO TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

I HAVE A COUPLE OF MORE POINTS, BUT I WOULD LIKE THAT ONE ADDRESSED, SINCE YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT IT. COMMISSIONER MYERS, JUDGE, YOU HAD TOLD ME THAT YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE A STATEMENT, AND I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE A STATEMENT BEFORE WE STARTED THE MOTIONS.

DID I MISS YOU? DID YOU NEED TO RESTATE? SPEAK INTO THE MIC. TO THE MIC? I'M SORRY. CLOSE TO THE CLOSE. TALK TO THE MIC, PLEASE. YOU WERE.

[01:05:02]

DID I MISS THE STATEMENT ABOUT THE OPEN? SORRY ABOUT THE CITIZENS COMMITTEE MEETING.

RIGHT. OKAY. SO, NO, IT IS NOT REALLY ABOUT IT.

IT IS ACTUALLY WHAT SO FAR WE ACCOMPLISHED.

OKAY, LET ME LET ME CLARIFY SOMETHING.

I, I HAVE ADVOCATED OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT WE HAVE OPEN MEETINGS FOR EVERYBODY.

I OBJECTED PERSONALLY TO THE CHAIR THAT I DIDN'T AGREE WITH HIM HOLDING A CLOSED SESSION. I DIDN'T THINK THAT THAT WAS APPROPRIATE.

THAT WAS MY OPINION. AND I AND I ALSO MY OPINION WAS THAT YOU YOU SHOW EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE, ALL THE MAPS THAT YOU HAVE, MAKE CERTAIN THAT EVERYBODY CAN SEE THEM.

EVERYBODY CAN HAVE AN INPUT.

THIS IS A THIS IS AN OPEN PROCESS AS OPPOSED TO WHAT WE DID IN 2021, WHICH I WILL REMIND YOU, WE NEVER HAD A PUBLIC MEETING.

WE NEVER HAD THE PUBLIC PROVIDE ANY INPUT.

WE NEVER HAD NEVER GAVE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ADEQUATE TIME TO REVIEW THE PLAN BEFORE IT WAS SUBMITTED AND VOTED ON AND PASSED.

SO LET'S LOOK AT THE ESTABLISHED PRECEDENT, WHICH WAS WE'RE NOT GOING TO SHOW THE PUBLIC ANY MAPS. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET THEM ANY INPUT.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ADEQUATE TIME TO REVIEW AND AND DO IT. I THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS WRONG THEN.

AND I THINK IT'S WRONG NOW TO NOT ALLOW PEOPLE TO COME TO THE MEETING AND GIVE THEIR INPUT, OBSERVE WHAT'S GOING ON AND GET ALL THE INFORMATION NECESSARY.

NOW COMMISSIONER MORRISON, I'M STILL CALLING HIM COMMISSIONER.

I STILL CONSIDER HIM ONE IS CONCERNED ABOUT HIS LIABILITY.

I'M TRYING TO CLARIFY THAT FROM THE STANDPOINT THAT I DO NOT BELIEVE, BASED ON THE OPINION THAT I JUST READ THAT THE COMMITTEE, WHICH IS ADVISORY ONLY WE DO NOT HAVE TO TAKE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS.

WE DO NOT HAVE TO ADOPT ANY MAP THAT THEY RECOMMEND OR SAY WE SHOULD.

I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK. I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK WITH ONE MAP OR COME BACK WITH THREE THAT THEY SAY THESE ARE THREE MAPS THAT MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENT OR WHATEVER, BUT IT'S STILL THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT DECISION OF SELECTING, APPROVING OR NOT SELECTING AND APPROVING ONE OF THOSE MAPS.

AS SUCH, THE COMMITTEE UNDER THE AG'S OPINION, IS ADVISORY ONLY AND IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE OPEN COMMISSIONER CAN I CAN I SAY, CAN I SAY SOMETHING? HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANTED TO SAY A FEW THINGS.

THERE'S NOBODY TRYING TO.

I HEAR ALL THE TIME PEOPLE SAYING, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE HIDING SOMETHING AND HIDING BEHIND.

THERE'S NOBODY LOOKING TO HIDE ANYTHING.

FIRST OF ALL, I LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY PRECEDENTS ON A CITIZENS COMMITTEE.

WE ARE PUTTING ALL THESE HOOPS AROUND THEM TO BEGIN WITH.

THEY ARE NOT A BINDING BODY.

OKAY, LET ME FINISH. THAT IS, THEY ARE NOT A BINDING BODY.

THEY ARE APPOINTED BY THIS COURT, WHICH WE DO ALL THE TIME.

ALL THE TIME. AND ALSO THEY HAVE NO DECISION MAKING.

THEY COULD DECIDE. WE WILL PRESENT IT TO THE COURT, CERTAIN OPINION OR MAYBE A FEW MAPS OR SO ON AND SO FORTH.

THEY ARE NOT A DECISION MAKING BODY.

AND I CHECKED WITH OUR ATTORNEY AND OTHERS.

THAT IS, THEY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO OPEN MEETING ACT, BUT WE WILL. I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT COMPLETELY AGREE.

WE NEED TO KNOW AND THE CITIZENS NEED TO KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON.

AND THE ONLY REASON YESTERDAY'S INCIDENT HAPPENED BECAUSE IT WAS NOT DULY POSTED.

AND WHEN THE NEXT MEETING HAPPENED, IF A MEMBER CANNOT JOIN IN PERSON, IT IS GOING TO BE THE ZOOM OR WEBEX OR SOMETHING IS GOING TO BE AVAILABLE FOR THAT COMMITTEE MEMBER TO JOIN.

AND I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER MCCOY. AND WHEN WE APPOINT PEOPLE, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO JOIN AND THEIR VOICE NEED TO BE HEARD.

OTHERWISE THERE IS NO POINT IN ALL THIS STUFF.

I JUST WANT TO I JUST WANT TO HEAR PEOPLE I WANT FORT BEND COUNTY RESIDENTS TO UNDERSTAND THIS, YOU KNOW, AND ALSO, I KEEP HEARING REDISTRICTING IS 1 MILLION, $2 MILLION. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY CAME UP WITH THESE NUMBERS.

THAT IS NOT THE NOT A FACT.

AND IF YOU WANTED TO REALLY KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON IN FORT BEND COUNTY, CHECK. GO CHECK OUR BUDGET.

GO CHECK HOW WE ARE SPENDING MONEY.

AND AND YOU KNOW WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT SOMETIMES A LOT OF ACTION WE TAKE IN FORT BEND COUNTY. AND I COULD IF WE WANTED TO PERSONALLY WANTED TO KNOW.

AND I WILL SIT DOWN AND TALK TO YOU.

AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THIS.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT SOMETHING WE WANTED TO ASK.

IT IS PRESENTED. WE WANTED TO COME AND WE WANTED TO DO SOMETHING BEHIND THE DOOR AND BEHIND THIS AND BEHIND THAT.

NO, AND I APPRECIATE IT.

I DON'T LIKE MAYBE CERTAIN PEOPLE TALK TO ME A CERTAIN WAY, BUT I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE EXPRESSING YOURSELF, AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.

AND I ALSO WANTED TO TELL YOU THIS IN, IN, IN FUTURE, WHATEVER THAT COMMITTEE MEETING, WHENEVER THAT COMMITTEE MEETING HAPPENS, IT IS GOING TO BE POSTED, IT IS POSTED, AND IT IS GOING TO BE POSTED IN

[01:10:04]

AND ALSO ANOTHER THING, AN OPINION IS ONE THING WHEN THE LAW IS EXACTLY MAYBE DIFFERENT.

AND ALSO YOU ALL KNOW THAT WE COULD INTERPRET WHATEVER WE ARE SAYING SO MANY DIFFERENT WAYS AND WE NEED TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF IT.

AND ALSO I WANT YOU TO KNOW THIS, THIS IS ALL THIS, ALL THESE OPINIONS WE ARE HEARING WHEN WE GO AND TALK TO SOMEBODY ELSE.

IT IS MAYBE THEY COULD LOOK AT THINGS DIFFERENTLY AND ALL THIS, YOU KNOW, AG OPINION AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE WE ARE REFERRING TO.

THEY ALL THEY'RE THEN IT'S NOT A LAW.

YOU ALL KNOW IT. SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THIS.

THERE IS. NOBODY IS LOOKING TO HIDE ANYTHING FROM ANYBODY.

THERE IS NOBODY WHO'S TRYING TO CREATE SOME MAP PRODUCE IN THE BACK ROOM AND BRING IT AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WE HAVE A DUAL PROCESS HERE AND IT IS NOT MY FAULT.

ON ON TIMELY THESE SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS DIDN'T APPOINT THEIR PEOPLE AND WE WERE NOT ABLE TO HOLD PROPER MEETING AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

I DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER IT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO CONTINUE TO CONTINUE.

I'M SICK AND TIRED OF PEOPLE JUST COMING BACK AND SAYING WE ARE HIDING SOMETHING, AND WE ARE JUST HOLDING PRINTING PAPERS BEHIND THE DOOR AND ALL THAT STUFF.

THAT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE.

THAT IS NOT TRUE. AND ALSO ONE THING I WILL TELL YOU THIS I UNDERSTAND AND I APPRECIATE YOU ARE PROVIDING YOUR LEGAL ADVICE AND BUT BUT MAKE SURE THAT LEGAL ADVICE IS FOR ALL OF US, ALL FIVE PEOPLE. YOU SERVE FIVE MEMBERS AND AND I, I WANT YOU TO CLEARLY, CLEARLY UNDERSTAND, BECAUSE ONE THING ABOUT IT IS YOU KNOW, I REQUESTED SOMETHING FROM YOUR OFFICE.

YOU SAID I NEED A COMMISSIONER'S COURT APPROVAL TO DO THAT.

AND SO THE POINT IS, ALL I'M SAYING IS THERE IS A TRUST ISSUE HERE.

THAT'S WHAT IS HAPPENING. AND SO WE NEED TO WE NEED TO STOP.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY TIMES COMMISSIONER PRESTIGIOUS, MAYBE THE LONGEST SERVING COMMISSIONER HERE. HOW MANY? COMMISSIONER, I WILL ASK YOU HOW MANY TIMES YOU SAT THERE AND VOTED OR NOT VOTED ON ISSUES YOU DON'T AGREE WITH AT ALL? YOU DID THAT A MILLION TIMES.

I DON'T KNOW A MILLION TIMES, BUT FOR A LONG, LONG TIME YOU HAVE DONE THAT.

WE COULD AGREE. WE COULD DISAGREE ON THINGS.

AND BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE COULD MAKE THE DECISION.

AND AND YOU KNOW WHAT? UNFORTUNATELY, FORTUNATELY, FORTUNATELY, ACTUALLY IN OUR COUNTRY, THE MAJORITY, WHATEVER THAT IS, END OF THE DAY, YOU DON'T AGREE WITH IT. BUT WE WILL GO HOME WITH THAT. AND SO I WILL ASK, I WILL ASK LET'S LET'S STOP ALL THIS YOU KNOW, THIS PERSON IS BREAKING THE RULE AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE DA IS GOING TO COME AND ARREST YOU AND ALL THIS STUFF IS JUST LITERALLY CREATING PROBLEM FOR THESE PEOPLE WHO WE APPOINTED THEIR CITIZENS, AND THEY DON'T WANT TO GO TO JAIL FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

AND WE ARE NOT DOING ANY OF THAT STUFF TO MAKE THESE PEOPLE IN, YOU KNOW, PUT THESE PEOPLE IN DANGER. AND THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY AT THIS TIME.

AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I JUST WANT TO THERE'S A MOTION MADE ON THE FLOOR AND IT RECEIVED A SECOND. AND I WANT TO APPEAL TO THE MAKER OF THE MOTION AND THE SECOND TO RECONSIDER THIS MOTION AND WITHDRAW IT.

I'LL TELL YOU WHY. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO PLAY RUSSIAN ROULETTE WITH THIS PROCESS.

OKAY? THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

IT'S A ROLL OF THE DICE, AND YOU'RE HOPING THAT IT COMES UP YOUR NUMBER. THAT IS NOT THE HISTORY AND THE LEGACY OF THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT.

YES, JUDGE. I'VE BEEN ON OCCASIONALLY ON THE LOSING END OF VOTES.

OKAY. OKAY. AND I WAS A LOSER IN A VOTE ON REDISTRICTING IN 20.

I MEAN, 2011. YEAH. OKAY.

IT WAS THREE TWO VOTE ON COMMISSIONERS COURT.

COMMISSIONER PATTERSON AND I WERE OF THE OPINION THAT WE WERE FRACTURING THE FRESNO COMMUNITY, AND WE WERE FRACTURING QUAIL VALLEY BY MOVING ME FROM FRESNO AND ARCOLA AND GIVING ME QUAIL VALLEY.

AND THE INTENT WAS TO SOMEHOW OR ANOTHER PUNISH ME OR MAKE MY DISTRICT LESS DESIRABLE FOR ME IN TERMS OF MY CANDIDACY FOR REELECTION.

BUT I WENT WITH THE PROGRAM, BUT IN THE FOUR DIFFERENT REDISTRICTING PROCESSES THAT I'VE BEEN A PART OF, NEVER HAVE WE.

PARTICIPATED IN RISKY BEHAVIOR.

OKAY, I THINK RIGHT NOW WE HAVE TO STAND BY THE OPINION OF OUR COUNCIL AND OUR OFFICIAL COUNCIL BY STATUTE. HE'S A COUNTY ATTORNEY.

OKAY. IT WOULD BE EASY IF YOU JUST FOLLOW THE OPEN MEETINGS AND OPEN RECORDS ACT.

[01:15:04]

IT GETS IT DONE. IT TAKES US OFF THE TABLE.

COMMISSIONER MCCOY POINTED OUT, RIGHTFULLY SO, THAT THE MAJORITY OF THIS COURT CAN VOTE ON ANYTHING YOU WANT, BUT TO ROLL THE DICE ON WHETHER THIS IS LEGAL OR NOT AND PUT US IN HARM'S WAY WHEN IT COMES TO LITIGATING THIS PROCESS, IT'S JUST A WASTE OF TIME.

IT'S LIKE, WHY ARE YOU EVEN DOING THIS? THE THE OTHER RESOLUTION THAT THAT POINTS OUT LEGAL STANDINGS HERE AND THERE.

I THINK THAT'S ALSO UNNECESSARY.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE IS NOT GOING TO VOTE ON REDISTRICTING PLAN.

IT'S THE COMMISSIONERS COURT. I'M NOT TRYING TO CREATE PROBLEMS FROM ANYBODY.

I WAS SIMPLY TRYING TO TO INDICATE PROBLEMS AND CLARIFY THINGS.

I KNOW WHAT I THINK, WHAT YOU'VE BEEN SAYING, YOU KNOW, PART OF IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT? ANDY'S GOING TO GO THERE. ANDY'S GOING TO GOING TO BACK OUT AND JUST JUST LET THEM DO BY OPEN RECORDS. AND YOU HAVE MADE COMMENTS THAT YOU KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO DO THIS AND THIS IN THE FUTURE. WHY DON'T WE JUST JUST MEMORIALIZE THAT AND MAKE THAT HAPPEN.

AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE ISSUE. YOU CAN TALK ABOUT MAPS OKAY.

I DON'T WANT ANY MAPS. I THINK THE MAP WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS FINE.

IT WAS DONE LEGALLY AND IT SHOULD STAND.

BUT I WAS RECOGNIZED. THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, AND BEING PRAGMATIC ABOUT IT, YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE ON SOMETHING.

OKAY. AND SO AS MUCH AS I'D LIKE TO BOYCOTT THE PROCESS, AND I DID FOR A WHILE, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

AND SO I'VE SAID THIS MANY TIMES AND I'LL SAY IT AGAIN, I LOVE THIS COUNTRY. I MEAN, THIS IS A PERFECT COUNTY.

THIS IS A WONDERFUL PLACE.

BUT WE'RE JUST DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO DESTROY IT.

OKAY. WHY DO WE CONTINUE TO DO THAT TO OURSELVES? IF YOU WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION, FIRST OF ALL, THE TEMPERATURE IN THE ROOM WILL GO DOWN PRECIPITOUSLY.

OKAY. IT WILL. IT WILL GO DOWN.

IT WILL GO DOWN. AND THERE'LL BE MORE OF A SPIRIT OF COOPERATION. OKAY.

BUT THIS MOTION JUST FANS THE FLAME EVEN MORE UNNECESSARILY SO.

OKAY. AGAIN. COMMISSIONERS CAUGHT THREE VOTES.

PASSES ANYTHING? OKAY.

THREE VOTES. PASSING ANYTHING. WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT, WHETHER YOU'RE A MAJORITY OR YOU'RE IN A MINORITY ON THAT VOTE.

BUT THIS OTHER STUFF IS JUST AN UNNECESSARY RISKY.

YOU MADE YOUR POINT. RISKY.

ROLL OF THE DICE. DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION? I'M LISTENING. OKAY. AND ALSO, I'M.

I'M WRAPPING UP. I JUST WANT TO, I WANT TO I DIDN'T WANT TO SIT HERE AND NOT COMMISSIONER, I. I HEAR YOU LOUD AND CLEAR.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE ONE MORE.

ONE MORE POINT. BECAUSE LET ME MAKE ANOTHER POINT.

RIGHT NOW. COMMISSIONER ONE ONE SECOND.

I WILL BE QUICK. AND ONE THING WHAT IS WE ARE SEEING HERE IS A COMPLETE DISCONNECT.

AND AND YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GOING TO AGREE WITH YOU.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO AGREE WITH ME. AND I'M GOING TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING.

YOU ARE LEGALLY BREAKING THE LAW AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

MANY TIMES IT IS AN OPINION.

OKAY? WE ALL I MEAN, LEGALLY, MAYBE YOU ARE.

YOU UNDERSTAND I DID NOT GO TO LAW SCHOOL.

BUT IF WE COULD TONE DOWN ALL THAT STUFF.

REALLY? I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM IN WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

AND I THINK, LIKE YOU SAID, IF WE CAN WALK OUT OF HERE WITH THE UNDERSTANDING. OKAY. END OF THE DAY, PEOPLE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THIS COMMITTEE CAN BRING ANY MAP, AND ONE OF THIS MEMBER CAN BRING A MAP SAYING THAT I DON'T LIKE ANY OF THAT STUFF. WE ARE GOING TO VOTE ON THIS.

THEN WHAT'S THE POINT? THERE IS NO.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. THEY HAVE NO POWER.

AND WITH THAT, COMMISSIONER AND I WILL ASK EVERYBODY BECAUSE YOU.

I WAS COMING TO A CLOSE, BUT YOU PUSHED ME TO THE CLOSE. BUT LET ME JUST HAVE ONE MORE CLOSE.

JUST, JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S A STRANGE THING TO BE SO.

INTO WHAT THIS COUNTY HAS BEEN AND CAN BECOME OKAY.

AND THAT REQUIRES SACRIFICE ON EVERYBODY'S PART.

OKAY. THERE ARE PEOPLE IN MY CIRCLES WHO ARE SAYING, YOU KNOW, FIGHT LIKE HELL, RAISE HELL, STAND UP ON A DESK.

AND MAO MAO MAU, AND I DON'T DO THAT.

OKAY, YOU SEE, RIGHT THROUGH THAT RIGHT AWAY.

BUT WHAT I CAN DO IS TALK PLAINLY TO EACH OF YOU INDIVIDUALLY AND SAY.

IF YOU GO THROUGH WITH YOUR MOTION, YOU JUST GIVE AMMUNITION TO THE LITIGANTS THAT ARE GOING TO COME BEHIND.

IF YOU WITHDRAW THIS MOTION, LET IT GO.

IT'S A DEAD ISSUE AND WE'LL ALL BE MUCH BETTER OFF FOR IT.

SO CONSIDER THAT. JUST CONSIDER THE DAMAGE THAT YOUR MOTION YOU KNOW WILL CAUSE AND THE

[01:20:04]

OKAY. AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'LL BE A VOTE OF THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT TO DO SOMETHING OR DO NOTHING.

THOSE ARE OUR CHOICES. BUT RIGHT NOW, THIS IS AN UNNECESSARY SITUATION.

AND BECAUSE I CARE ABOUT THIS COUNTY AND WHERE WE'RE GOING, I WANT TO BE ABLE TO GO TO THE GROCERY STORE AND NOT GET ASKED ABOUT, WHAT THE HELL ARE Y'ALL DOING DOWN HERE? IT IS TOTALLY EMBARRASSING.

IT IS TOTALLY EMBARRASSING. I MEAN, IT REALLY IS.

AND I PUT I PUT A BRIGHT FACE ON IT.

I SAID, OH, WE'RE JUST GOING THROUGH A LITTLE PHASE, YOU KNOW? YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, BUT THAT HURTS. IT HURTS. IT HURTS A LOT.

OKAY. AND SO I ASK THAT YOU JUST WITHDRAW THAT MOTION AND JUST LET'S JUST LET THE COMMITTEE MEET. IT'S VERY EASY TO PLAY BY THE RULES OF OPEN MEETINGS.

WE DO IT EVERY TWO WEEKS.

IT'S EASY. JUST DO IT.

TAKE THE DRAMA OUT OF IT.

AND LET'S GO ON ABOUT SERVING THIS COUNTY.

IF YOU WANT TO PASS REDISTRICTING AND THERE'S A MAP THAT GETS THREE VOTES, SO BE IT. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THERE WON'T BE LITIGATION, THINGS THAT HAPPEN BEHIND THERE, BUT AT LEAST WE WON'T BE COMPLICIT IN IT.

WE WON'T GIVE THEM AMMUNITION TO QUESTION THIS PROCESS, ITS LEGITIMACY AND ITS LEGALITY.

SO I ASK YOU, COMMISSIONER MYERS, JUST, YOU KNOW, CONSIDER THAT OR TABLE IT FOR RIGHT NOW SO YOU CAN THINK ABOUT IT.

WE HAVE OTHER MEETINGS.

OKAY. I THINK IT'LL BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF FORT BEND COUNTY.

THANK YOU. OKAY. NUMBER ONE, I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE PUBLIC MEETINGS ALREADY BEING SET TIMES AND PLACES, ETCETERA, THAT THEY ARE GOING TO DISPLAY ALL THE MAPS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED.

FULL DISCLOSURE, FULL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, OPEN MEETINGS.

I'VE ALREADY SAID THAT I'VE OBJECTED TO HIDING THE BALL.

AND I PAINFULLY REMEMBER 20, 21 WHEN WE SIT IN HERE.

WE HAD COMMITTEE MEETINGS. WE HAD COMMITTEES THAT AND WE HAD PUBLIC MEETINGS.

ET CETERA. ON MAP AFTER MAP AFTER MAP.

EXCEPT FOR THE MAP THAT WAS ACTUALLY APPROVED, AT NO TIME DID WE HAVE A PUBLIC MEETING.

AT NO TIME DID WE ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE ANY INPUT.

AT NO TIME DID THIS THE THE DEMOCRAT MAJORITY AT THAT TIME.

I DISAGREE WITH YOU ON THAT, COMMISSIONER. OKAY.

YOU GOT YOU GOT I JUST GOT TIME AT THE TIME.

YOU GOTTA UNDERSTAND THE CIRCUMSTANCES. PANDEMIC.

OKAY, I'LL BE QUICK. I'LL BE QUICK.

I'M SORRY. PANDEMIC. PANDEMIC.

YEAR SINCE THIS CAME OUT VERY, VERY LATE.

WE ONLY HAD ENOUGH TIME TO DO IT.

THE TECHNOLOGY. I'M NOT BUYING. I'M NOT BUYING YOUR EXPLANATION, COMMISSIONER. I'M SORRY. I'M NOT HERE. I WAS HERE TO COMMISSIONER MYERS.

CAN I CAN I READ? LET ME, LET ME LET ME LET ME FINISH MY POINT.

OKAY. AT NO TIME. AND WE HAD NUMEROUS PUBLIC MEETINGS.

WE HAD NUMEROUS OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE TO REVIEW MAPS, INCLUDING THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT, EXCEPT FOR THE MAP THAT WAS ACTUALLY APPROVED. THAT MAP WAS PRESENTED WITHOUT ANY PUBLIC REVIEW, WITHOUT ANY PUBLIC INPUT, WITHOUT ANY PUBLIC, WITHOUT ANY INPUT, BASICALLY FROM COMMISSIONER MORALES AND MYSELF.

AND IT WAS APPROVED. YOU REDISTRICT ME OUT OF MY HOME AND YOU TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WE YOU KNOW, YOU THOUGHT YOU PUNISHED YOU.

NOBODY HAS EVER REDISTRICTED YOU OUT OF YOUR HOUSE.

THAT THAT WAS A DIFFICULT TIME FOR ME.

COMMISSIONER I TAKE COMMISSIONER AND YOU'VE AIRED THIS OUT A NUMBER OF TIMES, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. I REGRET THAT.

OKAY, I APPRECIATE I REGRET THAT, AND THERE WERE TIMES WHEN YOU AND I HAD SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT FIXING IT OVER YEARS, BUT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

OKAY. AND I REGRET THAT IF I COULD DO IT OVER AGAIN, THAT I WOULD CHANGE. OKAY.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE 2021 VOTE WAS A32 VOTE BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT, WHICH HAD THE SOLE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THAT DECISION.

THEY DID A NUMBER OF MAPS.

THERE WERE A NUMBER OF MAPS PRESENTED BY A LOT OF DIFFERENT. I PRESENTED A MAP.

I PRESENTED A MAP THAT WAS A22 MAP.

OKAY. AND IT COULDN'T GET THREE VOTES.

COMMISSIONER THE MERCHANT HAD A MAP.

IT COULDN'T GET THREE VOTES.

THE MAP THAT WE VOTED ON WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT GOT THREE VOTES. I MAKE A POINT ON THAT BECAUSE HE MADE A MOTION AND I MADE A SECOND IN.

OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY SAID IT WAS OUT OF ORDER.

IT WAS. IT WAS NOT. I MADE THAT CALL.

YES, SIR. I'M SORRY. IT WAS.

SO WE NEED TO BE FAIR.

I WON'T SIT HERE BECAUSE I MADE THAT CALL WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY FAIRLY WELL.

EXCUSE ME. THE MOTION WAS REMAINED AND IT WAS INAPPROPRIATE.

I WOULD ASK YOU, COMMISSIONER PRESTAGE, AS THE SENIOR MEMBER OF THE COURT, PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW HIM TO GIVE FALSEHOODS WHILE WE'RE SITTING RIGHT HERE.

AND WHAT I WANTED TO CORRECT EARLIER WAS I MEANT THE 2011 MAPS, NOT 21. WHEN I SAID BEFORE, COMMISSIONER MYERS, THAT'S UNGENTLEMANLY AND UNFAIR.

YEAH. HEY, HE MADE A MOTION.

I MADE A SECOND. THE MOTION WAS GERMANE, SO THE MOTION WAS THE OPPOSITE.

[01:25:04]

I JUST WANT IT TO BE SAID.

IT'S A MOOT POINT. IT'S A MATTER OF INTEGRITY.

WHAT HAPPENED IN 2021 HAPPEN.

OKAY, WE'RE JUST A BUNCH OF OLD GUYS REMINISCING ABOUT THE PAST.

THAT'S WHAT THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S WHAT. THAT'S HOW MUCH IT'S WORTH. SO RIGHT NOW THE MATTER AT HAND IS THAT IS THAT WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND I'M WITH YOU THAT I'M ASKING THAT IT BE WITHDRAWN FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTY AND WITHDRAW IT AND COMPEL, COMPEL. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION, JUST, JUST, YOU KNOW MEMORIALIZE IT BY MAKING A MOTION THAT, THAT AUTHORIZES WITH THAT, THAT DIRECTS THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE, FIRST AND SECOND, TO CONDUCT THIS MEETING BY THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

AND I THINK I THINK WE'RE GOOD.

ONE SECOND, ONE SECOND. THERE IS A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO RESPOND TO THAT.

LEGAL OTHER LEGAL COUNSEL THAT I'VE SPOKEN TO SAYS THAT NO COMMISSIONERS COURT CAN MAKE AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE SUBJECT TO THE ACT IF THEY'RE NOT UNDER THE LAW, SUBJECT TO THE ACT. SO WHETHER WE MAKE THAT MOTION OR NOT, WE I DON'T THINK WE CAN LIVE WITH THAT SAME LEGAL COUNSEL.

ABSOLVE HIMSELF OF ANY LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOU AND THE COMMISSIONERS COURT.

MEMBERS. HE SAID IT BACK THERE.

HE SAID I'M JUST HERE.

I'M NOT STANDING BEHIND THIS THING.

YOU TRUST THAT? OKAY. SO I'M SAYING IT AIN'T.

IT AIN'T WORTH THE ROLL OF THE DICE.

WHY DON'T WE JUST DO THIS BY THE ESTABLISHED RULES AND THEN IT'S A MOOT POINT.

COMMISSIONER. IF I'M. I'M STILL ASKING COMMISSIONER MYERS.

NO. BEFORE. BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING.

SEE, I JUST WANTED TO SAY.

WHAT ARE WE? YOU KNOW, WHAT IS COMING FROM THIS COMMITTEE COMING UP.

AND THEY'VE ALREADY VOTED OUT, I BELIEVE, FOR MAPS, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. AND THERE ARE PUBLIC HEARING IS BEING SCHEDULED.

AT LEAST THE FIRST ONE IS ALREADY DECIDED.

THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING IS GOING TO BE ON AT SUGARLAND LIBRARY SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 20TH, 11 TO 1.

AND THERE IS TWO OTHER PUBLIC HEARINGS.

WE DON'T HAVE A LOCATION FINALIZED.

WE WILL ANNOUNCE IT AS SOON AS IT IS AVAILABLE.

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 29TH.

THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ROOM HERE.

THE COMMITTEE IS GOING TO COME BACK AND RECONVENE, AND THEN THEY WILL VOTE WHATEVER THEY VOTE OUT OF THIS COMMITTEE AND THEIR COMMITTEE.

AND SO THE POINT I'M JUST SAYING IS I'M NOT DISAGREEING WITH ANYTHING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, COMMISSIONER, BUT WE NEED TO QUIT THIS.

YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT RIGHT.

THAT IS NOT RIGHT. IF WE COULD ALL AGREE ON LET THE COMMITTEE DO THEIR JOB, AND AND THEY THEY ARE AND I, I COMPLETELY CONTINUE TO SAY THIS DISAGREE WITH THE POINT THAT THEY ARE SUBJECT TO OPEN MEETING ACT AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

THEY ARE SIMPLY A CITIZENS COMMITTEE.

AND HOW MANY TIMES COMMISSIONER 36 YEARS OF YOUR EXPERIENCE IN THIS COUNTY? AS A COMMISSIONER? WE HAD A CITIZENS COMMITTEE WENT THROUGH ALL THIS THING.

WE DID IT FOUR TIMES. NO, NO, NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE ONLY THE ONLY ONE THAT WAS ABBREVIATED WAS 2021 BECAUSE OF THE LATENESS OF THE CENSUS.

AND WHAT I'M SAYING IS WHAT I'M SAYING IS THE CITIZENS COMMITTEE MET AND THEY'RE NOT A BINDING BODY. THEY ARE NOT MAKING ANY THEY'RE NOT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S THE COMMISSIONERS COURT EVERY TIME. EXACTLY. SO THE POINT IS, IF WE CAN AGREE ON WE COULD GO BACK, LET THE COMMITTEE DO THEIR JOB AND BRING BACK WHATEVER THEY ARE BRINGING BACK EVEN AT THAT POINT.

BUT UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE IN BACK THEN WE HAD NOBODY QUESTIONING THE AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ACQUIESCED AND MADE THINGS HAPPEN FOR THE GOOD OF THE COUNTY. RIGHT NOW YOU'RE PUSHING BACK ON YOUR COUNCIL, WHICH IS THE PART THAT MAKES THIS ONE SO MUCH CRAZIER.

BUT IT'S RECKLESS. OKAY.

I'M SORRY. I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR A SECOND HERE.

THE I IT IS NOT. THERE'S MANY ISSUES WITH THIS RESOLUTION AS IT STANDS.

ONE TO ADDRESS SOMETHING THAT COMMISSIONER MEYER SAID ABOUT, AND THAT THIS RESOLUTION ACTUALLY TRIES TO MAKE A CLAIM ABOUT, IS THAT THE RESULTING COMMISSIONER PRECINCT BOUNDARIES FROM 2021 REDISTRICTING DO NOT COMPLY WITH ALL RELEVANT FEDERAL AND STATE STATUTES, WHICH IS NOT TRUE. AGAIN, THERE IS NO LAW.

THERE'S NO COURT THAT HAS SAID THAT IT VIOLATES ANY FEDERAL OR STATE STATUTE.

AND SO AGAIN, AGAIN, AS I THINK EITHER COMMISSIONER MYERS OR THE JUDGES SAID, AN OPINION FROM A LAWYER THAT YOU HIRED ISN'T LAW OR A JUDGMENT FROM A COURT OF LAW.

AND SO WE CANNOT PUT IN HERE SOMETHING SO CALLOUS AND SO DANGEROUS AS TO SAY THAT THE MAPS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE DO NOT APPLY, OR THEY DON'T COMPLY WITH RELEVANT FEDERAL

[01:30:04]

THAT'S DANGEROUS. THAT ALONE IS OPENING US UP TO LIABILITY, WHICH OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS SAID, WHICH AGAIN, AS I REITERATED THE LAST TIME, THIS WAS ATTEMPTED TO BE PUT IN IN AN ORDER WHICH AGAIN, IS WE'VE ALL AGREED WAS COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY, WHICH IS WHY IT WAS REMOVED THE LAST TIME, IS THAT EVEN OUR BOND COUNSEL SAID NO LAWYER WORTH THEIR SALT WOULD EVER SIGN OFF ON LANGUAGE LIKE THAT BEING PUT IN TO A PUBLIC DOCUMENT WITH THEIR CLIENT, MAKING A PUBLIC ADMISSION OF VIOLATING THE LAW, PERIOD. AND SO THAT'S CALLOUS.

IT'S IT'S IT'S I CAN'T REMEMBER THE WORD YOU USED, COMMISSIONER PRESTIDGE. IT'S RECKLESS.

IT'S RECKLESS. AND SO BUT IT CONTINUES.

AND IT SAYS. AND THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS DID NOT ALLOW PUBLIC MEETINGS OR ALLOWED THE PUBLIC, NOR ALL MEMBERS OF COMMISSIONERS, COURT ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE INPUT TO THE FINAL, ADOPTED REDISTRICTING PLAN.

I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND THIS COURT THAT THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 26TH, 2021 THAT TOOK PLACE AT 10 A.M.

THERE WAS A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 26TH THAT TOOK PLACE AT 6 P.M..

THERE WAS ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 4TH, AND THAT MORNING IS WHERE THAT MAP WAS PRESENTED BY THE COUNTY JUDGE.

AND THEN ON NOVEMBER 5TH, AND SORRY, ON DURING THAT MEETING ON NOVEMBER 4TH, THERE WAS A LOT AND I WENT BACK TO THE MEETINGS AND THAT LIKE REFRESHED A LOT OF MEMORY ABOUT WHAT THAT DAY WAS LIKE THAT MORNING WAS LIKE.

BUT IT IS WRITTEN THERE IN THE MINUTES.

WHAT WHAT TRANSPIRED. THERE WAS A WHOLE CONVERSATION ABOUT IT.

COMMISSIONER MYERS, YOU COMMENTED THAT YOU DID NOT HAVE TIME TO REVIEW THE MAP. THAT'S A QUOTE. AND THEN THE COURT RECESSED AT 11:45 A.M.

AND RECONVENED FROM THAT RECESS AT 2:04 P.M.

EACH MEMBER OF COURT WAS PROVIDED WITH DEVICES TO REVIEW THE MAP THAT WAS PRESENTED THAT MORNING. AND YOU HAD WHAT WAS THAT? TWO HOURS AND 19 MINUTES TO REVIEW THAT MAP.

THE COURT RECONVENED AT 204, RECEIVED MORE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THAT PARTICULAR MAP THAT WAS PRESENTED, DECIDED TO CONVENE AGAIN THAT AFTERNOON, AND IT VOTED. IT WAS DONE.

AND THEN IT DIDN'T STOP THERE.

IT CAME BACK BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME AFTER THE VOTE HAD OCCURRED, COMMISSIONER PRESTAGE HAD A LIST OF ADJUSTMENTS THAT NEEDED TO BE MADE. I THINK SOMEBODY ELSE MIGHT HAVE ADDED SOMETHING. AND THEN ON NOVEMBER 9TH, THAT MAP CAME BACK UP FOR FINALIZATION, AND THE PUBLIC HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THEIR COMMENTS DURING THE OPEN PUBLIC MEETING.

SO WE CAN'T PUT IN A DOCUMENT SAYING SOMETHING THAT IS NOT FACTUAL.

IT'S NOT FACTUAL. AND SO IT IS RECKLESS FOR US TO PUT THAT IN WRITING.

AND IT'S ALSO CALLOUS FOR US TO MISLEAD THE PUBLIC IN THAT WAY, AND CONTINUING TO REITERATE THAT THE PUBLIC DID NOT GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE IN THE PROCESS. I, IN MY PREVIOUS PHONE CALL WITH ATTORNEY BOB BASS, ASKED HIM, HOW HAVE YOU DONE THIS IN THE PAST? AGAIN, BECAUSE HE'S DONE THIS FOR THE COUNTY FOR SOME 30, 40 ODD YEARS. AND HE SAID, TYPICALLY THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS STARTS IN JANUARY BECAUSE THE CENSUS DATA COMES OUT IN JANUARY.

IT'S PUBLISHED. THE COMMISSIONERS COURT HAS ESTABLISHED A CITIZENS REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE, AND THEY TAKE MONTHS TO DO THIS.

AND THEN BY EARLY FALL, AFTER WORKING FROM ABOUT FEBRUARY ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE SUMMER AND THE EARLY FALL, THERE'S A MAP THAT'S PRESENTED, IT'S PASSED, IT'S ADOPTED, AND THEN THE ELECTIONS OFFICE HAS SOME TIME TO GO AND DO THEIR WORK AND MAKE IN ALIGNING VOTER PRECINCTS TO THE ADOPTED PLAN, AND THEN PRINTING UP ALL AND ASSIGNING PEOPLE TO THOSE VOTER PRECINCTS, AND THEN PRINTING UP ALL OF THEIR VOTER REGISTRATION CARDS.

WELL, IF YOU RECALL, THIS WAS AT THE TAIL END OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.

PRESIDENT TRUMP HAD ALL SORTS OF OPINIONS ABOUT WHAT QUESTIONS WERE BEING ASKED IN THE CENSUS. HE WANTED TO AMEND THE CENSUS ITSELF.

AND SO THAT WAS THAT DELAYED THE CENSUS GETTING OUT.

THEN THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT HOW WOULD THE ACCOUNTS BE TAKEN BECAUSE WE WERE IN COVID AND THERE WERE CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS WITH HOW WE COULD ENGAGE WITH EACH OTHER.

AND SO THE CENSUS WAS ALREADY LATE GETTING OUT THE DOOR TO EVEN PERFORM THE COUNT.

AND THEN THE DATA WAS VERY LATE IN GETTING BACK TO THE, THE, THE COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

AND IF MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECT, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ACTUAL DATA UNTIL THE SUMMER. AND SO THAT PUSHED BACK EVERYTHING.

AND THIS COURT MADE THE DETERMINATION THAT AS OPPOSED TO DELEGATING IT TO A CITIZENS REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE, THAT Y'ALL WOULD BE THE REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE, THAT YOU WOULD YOURSELVES HOST THE PUBLIC HEARINGS IN THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT, WHICH YOU DID, AND ALLOWED AMPLE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO COME EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS ABOUT WHAT THEY FELT SHOULD BE IN THE MAPS.

[01:35:04]

BUT WE HEARD FROM PEOPLE WHO WERE VERY UPSET WITH WHAT HAPPENED WITH REDISTRICTING AT THE STATE LEVEL. THAT'S HOW ALL OF THIS PROCESS GOT KICKED OFF.

PEOPLE WERE MAD, PARTICULARLY THE ASIAN VOTERS, WHERE WE SAW THE HIGHEST GROWTH IN POPULATION AT THAT TIME WERE VERY UPSET THAT THEY, IN THE STATE HOUSE AND STATE SENATE REDISTRICTING AND CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING PROCESS WERE BEING CRACKED AND SPLIT, SO THEIR VOTES WERE BEING DILUTED.

JUDGE, I REMEMBER YOU WERE VERY UPSET ABOUT THAT.

RIGHTFULLY SO. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAME AND SAID, THAT'S NOT RIGHT. WE WANT TO SEE FAIR REPRESENTATION.

AND SO WHEN MAPS WERE BEING ANALYZED AND DISCUSSIONS WERE HAPPENING ABOUT MAPS.

THAT'S HOW Y'ALL TALKED ABOUT THEM.

TO ASSURE REASSURE THE PUBLIC THAT YOU WEREN'T GOING TO DO WHAT YOU SAW IN AUSTIN, THAT YOU WERE ACTUALLY GOING TO BE FAIR TO PEOPLE AND NOT SPLIT VOTERS.

THAT WAS THE NATURE OF THE DISCUSSION. SO ALL THE PLANS WERE DISCUSSED IN THAT SORT OF LENS AND PURVIEW AND WHAT THE LAW, THE THE LAW SAYS ABOUT USE OF RACE AND REDISTRICTING IS NOT THAT RACE CAN'T BE A FACTOR IN CONSIDERATION.

IT ACTUALLY PLAINLY SAYS RACE CAN BE FOR THE PURPOSES OF ENSURING THAT MINORITY VOTERS AREN'T SPLIT UP. BUT RACE CANNOT BE THE PREDOMINANT FACTOR, WHICH IT WASN'T. THE PROCESS STARTED FROM THE ONSET, WITH THE JUDGE BEING VERY EMPHATIC ABOUT THE FACT THAT HE WANTED THREE BLUE COMMISSIONER PRECINCTS. PERIOD. AND THEN THESE OTHER THINGS WERE THE ANCILLARY BENEFITS THAT OTHER MEMBERS OF THIS COURT SOUGHT.

THAT'S FACT. THAT'S WHAT WAS DISCUSSED HERE.

AND WE HAVE TO BE GENUINE ABOUT WHAT THAT IS.

AND SO TO PUT IN A PUBLIC DOCUMENT, SOMETHING THAT IN ESSENCE REWRITES HISTORY.

THAT'S NOT RIGHT. AND IT'S GOING TO OPEN THIS COURT UP TO LIABILITY.

SO AGAIN, AS COMMISSIONER PRESTIDGE SAID, THIS COMMITTEE HAS ALREADY BEEN FOLLOWING TO WHATEVER EXTENT THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

WHY WOULD WE COMPEL THEM TO NOT FOLLOW TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, WHICH IS WHAT THAT MOTION EXPRESSLY SAYS IT DOES.

IF YOU READ IT AGAIN, OBVIOUSLY IT IS NOT THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO COMPLY WITH TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT BECAUSE THEY'RE AN ADVISORY BODY.

IT DOESN'T COMPEL THEM.

CAN I ALSO. SO SO THAT'S IT.

BUT THERE'S A IT'S NOT A LIE.

IT IS. YOU JUST READ IT.

SO THE LAST POINT I WILL MAKE IS THAT EVEN YOU DO THIS.

SAY YOU PASS THIS TODAY.

THAT COMMITTEE HAS TO MEET AGAIN BEFORE IT DOES ANY OTHER BUSINESS BECAUSE AS I LOOK AT THEIR RULES, THEIR. THEIR THEIR RULES AND PROCEDURES, IT ACTUALLY LAYS OUT THAT THEY WILL FOLLOW.

TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT THAT NO RULE THAT THEY PASS IN THIS WILL SUPERSEDE THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. IN FACT, THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT IS MENTIONED HERE, I BELIEVE, FOUR TIMES.

FOUR TIMES. THEY COULD FOLLOW WHENEVER THEY WISH. SO SO THAT'S ONE.

THE OTHER THING HERE IS THAT, AS WAS POINTED OUT BY COMMISSIONER MYERS, THEY MAKE DECISIONS. IT WAS EVEN JUST SAID, SORRY MORRISON.

FORGIVE ME. DID I SAY MORALES? YES. YOU SAID MYERS. MY APOLOGIES.

MORRISON. SORRY. AS COMMISSIONER MORRISON SAID YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU HAVE DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY THAT SUBJECTS YOU ON BEHALF OF THE COURT, THAT KIND OF SUBJECTS YOU TO TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

WE ALWAYS EVEN JUST SAID JUDGE THAT THEY WILL VOTE, MEET AGAIN, VOTE ON WHATEVER FOUR MAPS TO BRING TO THE COURT.

THAT'S A DELIBERATIVE IT'S JUST A RECOMMENDATION THAT IS A DELIBERATIVE BODY.

RIGHT. AND SO THAT HAS TO BE CHANGED IF THAT IS WHAT WE ARE PASSING AND SAYING THAT THEY AREN'T SUBJECT TO THIS, THIS, THESE GUIDELINES AND RULES HAVE TO BE AMENDED. THEIR PROCEDURES HAVE TO BE AMENDED, WHICH BY ALL MEANS, IF THAT'S WHAT Y'ALL FEEL IS A PRIORITY OF THIS PROCESS, TO NOT COMPEL THEM TO FOLLOW THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, THAT'S YOUR PREROGATIVE. BUT AGAIN, AS OUR ATTORNEYS HAVE TOLD US, AS OUR COMMISSIONER NOT CALLING THEM, IF YOU IF IF YOU COMMISSIONER NOT COMPELLING THEM TO DO ANYTHING, IF YOU LISTEN TO WHAT I SAID, I SAID IT. NO, NO. HOLD ON. NO, NO. IF YOU LISTEN TO WHAT I SAID, I SAID IT DIFFERENTLY THIS TIME. I SAID, IF YOU WANT TO PASS A MOTION TO NOT COMPEL THEM, THAT'S A DIFFERENCE. THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SAYING WHATEVER YOU CHOOSE TO DO WHATEVER, BUT TO PASS A MOTION TO NOT COMPEL THEM.

COMMISSIONER PRESTON SAID, LET'S COMPEL THEM TO FOLLOW IT. YOU ARE SAYING, NO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO COMPEL THEM TO FOLLOW IT, RIGHT? SO THAT'S WHAT I SAID THIS SECOND TIME I SAID THIS THEN AGAIN, WE THAT THAT IS LIABILITY.

WE'RE OPENING THEM UP TO AS OUR REPRESENTATIVES.

THAT IS LIABILITY THAT WE'RE OPENING THIS COUNTY UP TO.

AND I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S REASONABLE OR RESPONSIBLE.

LET ME SHOW YOU THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HERE. BY THE WAY, IF ANYONE HAS ANY

[01:40:02]

THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS HERE. THAT'S IT.

FIRST OF ALL, HOLD ON. HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

COMMISSIONER. DID YOU FINISH YOUR COMMENT? OKAY.

SO LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION.

YOU MENTIONED YOU GAVE ME THAT.

I DON'T WANT TO GO BACK TO 2021.

BUT THE THING ABOUT IT IS THERE IS A LOT OF CONVERSATION HAPPENING HERE, YOU KNOW, LEGAL AND ILLEGAL AND ALL THAT STUFF.

WE ARE TALKING EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE RECORDED.

SO I WANTED TO I WANTED TO ASK YOU A QUESTION.

YOU THIS COMMITTEE IS DOING SOMETHING PROPERLY WORKING WITH OF COURSE YOU AGREE, YOU DISAGREE WITH THE ATTORNEY. BUT WE ARE TRYING TO DO EVERYTHING, POSSIBLY LEGALLY WE CAN.

CAN YOU SAY THIS ON THE RECORD.

THAT MAP I PUT UP AND I DID THAT.

DO YOU THINK THAT WAS CLEARED BY A LEGAL FIRM? AND ALSO, THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME WE ARE HIRING AN OUTSIDE LEGAL FIRM IN 2021.

THERE WAS A LEGAL FIRM BEFORE THAT.

BOB BASS AND HIS TEAM WAS THERE AND THEY WERE BUILT ZERO.

THEY HAD NO INPUT IN IT.

BUT MY QUESTION TO YOU IS THAT BEFORE THE COMMISSIONERS COURT APPROVING THAT MAP, THE MAP APPROVED, WAS ANYBODY REVIEWED IT CLEARED THAT IT IS LEGALLY GOOD.

CAN YOU SAY I CAN SAY EMPHATICALLY THAT THAT MAP WAS REVIEWED BY LEGAL COUNSEL AND LET'S, LET'S. NO NO NO WAIT WAIT WAIT LET'S BACK UP, LET'S BACK UP, LET'S LET'S LET'S TALK ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED DURING THAT PROCESS.

IF YOU RECALL THE EVENING BEFORE, THE DAY BEFORE THAT MAP WAS PASSED, COMMISSIONER OR JUDGE, YOU HAD A MEETING WITH COMMISSIONER DEMERCHANT WHERE YOU SAID TO HIM BECAUSE HE WAS UNWILLING TO FOR THE SAKE OF GETTING THREE COMMISSIONER THREE BLUE COMMISSIONER PRECINCTS, HE WAS UNWILLING TO WEAKEN PRECINCT FOUR.

THAT WAS THE NATURE OF THE DISCUSSION. AND YOU TOLD HIM, WELL, YOU GO BACK AND YOU DRAW A COMPROMISE, RIGHT? NO, NO, HOLD ON. WAIT. BECAUSE I WANT TO WALK THROUGH WHAT THIS PROCESS LOOKED LIKE.

RIGHT. AND SO AND I ASK YOU THROUGH THE NIGHT.

THROUGH THE NIGHT, YOU'RE CALLING TEXTING WHERE'S THE MAP? WHERE'S THE MAP? I DON'T KNOW.

I CALL HIM HE SAID HE'S HE'S WITH HIS DAUGHTER.

HE'LL GET BACK TO ME. AND THEN AT 8:01 A.M., 08:01 A.M.

ON NOVEMBER 4TH, I THINK IT WAS, HE EMAILS A MAP THAT IS THE MAP THAT EXISTS TODAY WITH. SO YOU HAVE NO CHANGES.

YOU HAVE NO INPUT IN IT.

EXCUSE ME? YOU HAVE NO INPUT? ACTUALLY, NO. ACTUALLY, NO.

OKAY. NONE WHATSOEVER.

AND SO AT THE TITLE OF THAT MAP WAS P FOUR EQUALS 56.5.

SO WHAT DOES THAT TELL US IF THAT IS THE TITLE OF THE MAP.

THAT IS THE NAME OF THE MAP.

THEN THAT TELL US, TELLS US IS THAT THE PREDOMINANT MOTIVATING FACTOR WAS A PRECINCT, FOR THAT WAS 56.5% BLUE.

LIKE COMMISSIONER, THE MERCHANT HAS SAID TO YOU THE EVENING PREVIOUS, HE WAS NOT WILLING TO COMPROMISE ON.

AND SO AGAIN THE MAP WAS SUBMITTED.

THE YOU ALL HAD Y'ALL RECESSED TO REVIEW.

IT CAME BACK. THEN THAT MAP WAS SHARED WITH BOB BASS AND VIS A VIS THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE ANALYSIS THAT IS ON THAT COURT, COMMISSIONERS COURT ON NOVEMBER 9TH GIVES A FULL ANALYSIS OF THAT MAP, AND IT WOULD BE NO DIFFERENT THAN SINCE WE'RE DISCUSSING IF THIS CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMES AND PRESENTS SOMETHING AND WE SAY, NO, WE DON'T AGREE WITH THAT HERE.

WE WANT TO VOTE ON THIS MAP.

AND THEN WE PASSED THAT MAP HERE IN THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT. IT'S LITERALLY THE EXACT SAME PROCEDURE. YEAH, LITERALLY THE EXACT SAME PROCEDURE.

THAT IS THE WAY THE PROCESS WORKS.

OKAY. LITERALLY. OKAY.

SO IS THIS DISCUSSION IS OVER AT THIS TIME.

AT THIS TIME I WILL I WILL IF COMMISSIONER I WILL WITHDRAW HIS MOTION.

I WILL CALL FOR A VOTE.

I WILL CALL FOR A VOTE ON THIS ITEM.

I WILL CALL FOR A VOTE.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES THREE, TWO.

LET'S MOVE ON. ALL RIGHT.

MY SECOND MOTION IS SO WE I'M TRYING TO CLARIFY.

YOU KNOW WHO'S IN CHARGE? SO I MOVE THAT THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT REITERATE AND CLARIFY AND REESTABLISH THAT THE LAW FIRM OF ROGERS, MORRIS AND GROVER IS TO PROVIDE LEGAL ADVICE ON THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS TO FORT BEND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT AND TO THE FORT BEND COUNTY CITIZENS REDISTRICTING ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND THAT THE FORT BEND COUNTY ATTORNEY IS TO HAVE NO INVOLVEMENT IN ANY ASPECTS OF REDISTRICTING MATTERS INVOLVING THE FORT BEND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT OR THE FORT BEND COUNTY CITIZENS REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE.

YOU LACK THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO MAKE A MOTION TO LEAVE OUT AN ELECTED OFFICIAL FROM THEIR DUTY. THAT IS CLEARLY ESTABLISHED.

[01:45:01]

I NEED A SECOND, PLEASE.

OKAY, WE HAVE A SECOND. I HAVE A SECOND.

DO WE HAVE A. IS THERE A SECOND? IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

YEAH. ALL RIGHT. AND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS.

ARE WE ABLE TO. AND ANY DISCUSSION THAT IS OVER THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.

OBJECTION. LET ME CLARIFY.

LET ME CLARIFY MY POSITION.

OKAY. WAIT. SORRY. BEFORE YOU DO THAT, ARE WE ABLE TO MAKE A MOTION ON SOMETHING THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA. YOU JUST TOOK ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM THREE.

AGENDA ITEM THREE COVERS REDISTRICTING AND REDISTRICTING.

COMMITTEE, THIS IS ON POINT. THIS IS THE.

SO THAT IS THIS IS CONSIDERED TAKING ACTION ON THE REDISTRICTING EFFORT AND CITIZENS REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE.

WE CAN MAKE MULTIPLE. YOU CAN.

OKAY. IF THAT IF YOU CAN.

I DIDN'T COMPLETELY ANSWER.

IF YOU CAN THEN FINE. BUT SO YOU CAN IT SAYS ALL APPROPRIATE ACTION.

BUT I DON'T THINK YOU PUT THE PUBLIC ON NOTICE THAT YOU'VE USURPED THE POWER OF AN ELECTED OFFICIAL. I THINK THE PUBLIC WOULD BE ON NOTICE THAT YOU ARE DISCUSSING THE BEHAVIOR OF THE COMMITTEE, AND NOT THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO PREVENT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY FROM DOING HER JOB.

AND IT IS IT IS IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW.

IN FORT BEND COUNTY, THERE ARE NINE COUNTIES IN TEXAS THAT HAVE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO REPRESENT THE COUNTY IN ALL MATTERS.

THAT'S THE 2010 CASE. I SEE YOU SHAKE YOUR HEAD.

I'M SORRY. LET'S STOP THIS.

I'M SORRY. YOU WILL NO MORE CHANGE OUR MIND ON SOMETHING THAT THE LAW CLEARLY SAYS IN BLACK LETTERS. EXCUSE ME, MA'AM. MAKE YOUR POINT.

HOLD ON ONE SECOND. I'LL MAKE YOU A POINT. BEFORE I WAS RUDELY INTERRUPTED, WE HAVE THREE OPINIONS FROM THREE DIFFERENT ATTORNEYS THAT SAY THE NO COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS ANY ROLE IN REDISTRICTING PERIOD.

THAT THAT IS A SOLE AUTHORITY OF COMMISSIONERS COURT.

I HAVE JOHN DAY HILL WITH THE QC, OBVIOUSLY, OUR ATTORNEY THAT WE HAVE ENGAGED ON THIS ISSUE, AND THE ATTORNEY THAT I HIRED, ALL THREE OF THEM, AS WELL AS OTHER ATTORNEYS THAT I SPOKE TO, SAID THAT A COUNTY A COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS NO ROLE IN REDISTRICTING, THAT IS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, UNDER STATUTE AND UNDER OPINIONS.

THAT IS THE THAT IS WHAT THE STATUTE SAYS.

THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS NO ROLE.

NO COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS ANY ROLE IN REDISTRICTING.

THAT IS WHAT THEY HAVE STIPULATED.

COMMISSIONER MYERS, CAN YOU READ THAT MOTION ONE MORE TIME? THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS NEVER SAID SHE HAD A VOTE ON REDISTRICTING.

IT IS YOUR RIGHT TO VOTE ON REDISTRICTING, BUT YOU DON'T GET TO BE THE COUNTY'S ELECTED LEGAL OFFICER OR FIND ANOTHER ONE FOR HIRE.

MICHELLE. MADAM. I'M GOOD.

PLEASE, PLEASE. OKAY. CAN YOU READ THAT MOTION ONE MORE TIME FOR CLARITY.

I MOVE THAT THE THIS COMMISSIONERS COURT REITERATE, CLARIFY AND REESTABLISH THAT THE LAW FIRM OF ROGERS, MORRIS AND GROVER IS TO PROVIDE LEGAL ADVICE ON THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS TO FORT BEND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT AND TO THE COUNTY, TO THE FORT BEND COUNTY CITIZENS REDISTRICTING ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND THAT THE FORT BEND COUNTY ATTORNEY IS TO HAVE NO INVOLVEMENT IN ANY ASPECTS OF REDISTRICTING MATTERS INVOLVING THE FORT BEND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT OR THE FORT BEND COUNTY CITIZENS REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE.

WE NEED TO CLARIFY WHO'S IN CHARGE.

THE THE LAW FIRM THAT WE HAVE APPOINTED IS IN CHARGE.

WELL, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? SO I'M CONFUSED.

NO INVOLVEMENT IN ANY REDISTRICTING MATTERS.

I THINK COMMISSIONER PRESTON JUST SAID THAT THIS COUNCIL SAID THAT IF ANYTHING WERE TO HAPPEN, IF THIS WERE TO GO TO THE LITIGATION, IT WOULD BE THAT OFFICE THAT HAS TO DEFEND THIS COUNTY IN MATTERS OF.

AND THAT IS SO AGAINST HER LEGAL ADVICE.

AND I'M SURE SHE MAY REFUSE TO DEFEND YOUR ACTIONS HERE, BECAUSE I'M GOING TO BE VERY CLEAR. I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT SOMETHING. I'M GOING TO LEAVE THE ROOM WHEN YOU TAKE THIS VOTE. EXACTLY. BE IN HERE.

SO YOU ARE GOING TO BE PERSONALLY LIABLE BECAUSE YOU OVERTURNED THE LEGAL AUTHORITY AND OPINION. YOU WENT AGAINST THE OPINION OF THE ELECTED COUNTY OFFICIALS, SO YOU CANNOT PUT THE COUNTY AT RISK.

I DID NOT DO. YOU CANNOT PUT THE COUNTY AT RISK AND NOT BE PERSONALLY LIABLE IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE PROTECTION OF ADVICE FROM YOUR LEGAL COUNSEL.

LOOK, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND IS WHY ARE WE CREATING THIS ACRIMONIOUS RELATIONSHIP WITH ANOTHER ELECTED OFFICIAL? BECAUSE ON THIS MATTER, SHE GAVE US ADVICE THAT THIS IS NOT ADVISABLE. AND THEN YOU DON'T LIKE THAT WE RELY ON HER FOR ADVICE ON OUR CONTRACTS, FOR MOBILITY PROJECTS, WHICH, BY THE WAY, I WOULD MUCH PREFER Y'ALL BE DOING THAT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE GOT A LOT OF PROJECTS THAT STILL NEED TO MOVE FORWARD ON PARKS. OUR AGREEMENTS WITH THE FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENT NEVER DO WE QUESTION WHEN SHE TELLS US AN INTERPRETATION ABOUT THE PURCHASING PROCESS FOR HIRING CONSULTANTS.

[01:50:05]

SORRY. LET ME NOT SAY WE.

EXCUSE ME. NOBODY SAID SHE WAS INCOMPETENT.

NO, BUT THAT'S WHAT Y'ALL SAID BEFORE IN A PREVIOUS MEETING IN JUNE AND JULY.

NO, NO. NO, JUDGE. ACTUALLY, YOU SAID THAT YOU HAVE NO CONFIDENCE IN HER LEGAL OPINION. YOU SAID THAT ON THE RECORD, JUDGE.

CONFIDENCE AND COMPETENCE IS TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

I DON'T HAVE CONFIDENCE IN PEOPLE.

THAT OR THE LEGAL OPINION OF SOMEBODY WHO I DON'T BELIEVE IS GIVING ME A COMPETENT OPINION. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER WAY AROUND THAT.

SO AGAIN, AGAIN, I DON'T SEE HOW IF Y'ALL ARE WILLING TO OPEN YOURSELVES UP TO THAT LIABILITY Y'ALL HAVE AT IT.

BUT AGAIN, YOU'RE SAYING ON THE RECORD THAT YOU'RE OKAY DOING THAT.

I THINK THE OTHER POINT, AND WE'VE BEEN DULY ADVISED MULTIPLE TIMES THAT THE STATUTE THAT GOVERNS THE OTHER TWO, YOU SAID YOU USED THE NUMBER 245 COUNTIES.

YES, WE HAVE 254. AND THERE'S NINE OF THEM THAT ARE UNIQUE BY HAVING AN EXPANSIVE STATUTE. AND SO MOST PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT USED TO READING LEGAL DOCUMENTS AND DOING RESEARCH, AND THAT'S NOT AN OFFENSE THAT'S NOT BEING OFFENSIVE. WE HAD TO GO TO SCHOOL FOR IT. WE'LL READ THINGS.

AND WHEN IT SAYS THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT CAN HIRE OUTSIDE COUNSEL, THAT'S TRUE FOR 245 COUNTIES IN FOUR AND IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.

BUT EACH IF YOU GO TO 45, THE DIFFERENT COUNTIES HAVE DIFFERENT STATUTES, AND CASE LAW INTERPRETS WHAT THAT MEANS.

THERE WAS A CASE IN 2010 WHICH IS CASCOS, AND IT LITERALLY SAYS THE COUNTIES THAT HAVE AN EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO REPRESENT IN ALL MATTERS.

IT LISTS NINE IN FORT BEND IS LISTED FIRST, PROBABLY BECAUSE IT'S ALPHABETICAL, BUT I THINK THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE A POINT. VERY GOOD.

AND SO AND SO ON THAT THEN THAT'S NOT MY OPINION THAT'S WRITTEN IN THE LAW AND SO ON THAT. SO THAT THAT'S ONE AGAIN, IT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO THIS COURT THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO SUPERSEDE HER AUTHORITY ON LEGAL REPRESENTATION OF THIS COUNTY. AND, AND AND AGAIN, I THINK I MENTIONED THIS BEFORE, AFTER THAT MEETING WHERE I CALLED ATTORNEY BOB BASS.

BUT THE WORD I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT WORD HE USED IS LIKE, IT'S THE GOLDEN GOOSE OF STATUTES THAT CREATED THE FORT BEND COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BECAUSE IT GIVES RIDICULOUSLY BROAD, RIDICULOUSLY, APPROPRIATELY. EVERY EVERY ATTORNEY I'VE SPOKEN TO DOESN'T AGREE WITH THAT.

SO HERE'S THE THING. THEY DON'T OPERATE UNDER THAT STATUTE. WE DO.

WE KNOW IT VERY WELL. SORRY IF I COULD.

AND I ASKED A CLARIFYING QUESTION BECAUSE LEGITIMATELY I WANTED TO KNOW IF THEY'RE WRONG. I WANT TO KNOW THAT THEY'RE THAT THEY'RE WRONG.

AND I THINK I RESPECT SOMEBODY WHO THIS COURT HAS HIRED FOR 40 YEARS TO ADVISE IT.

BUT I SAID, YOU KNOW, THE KEY POINT THAT WAS POINTED OUT BY MULTIPLE SPEAKERS, I BELIEVE, BY YOU, COMMISSIONER, IS THAT AND I THINK EVEN RICH WHAT'S HIS NAME? MAURICE. RICH. MAURICE.

MAURICE. MAURICE. RICH.

MORRISON. HE SAID IN AN OPINION HE SUBMITTED TO THIS COURT YESTERDAY THAT MAURICE.

SORRY, RICH. MAURICE, HE SAID THAT YOU KNOW, HIS INTERPRETATION WAS THAT THAT AG OPINION OR THAT OR THE STATUTE OR WHATEVER GAVE THE, COUNTY ATTORNEY THE RIGHT TO REPRESENT THE COUNTY IN ALL MATTERS.

BEFORE THE COURT. BEFORE COURT.

RIGHT. CIVIL MATTERS BEFORE COURT. RIGHT. AND SO I ASKED WELL.

SO. WELL, IT DOESN'T SAY LITIGATION.

IT SAYS CIVIL MATTERS BEFORE COURT. RIGHT. AND SO I ASKED WELL BEFORE COURT SO CLEARLY SAYS I CAN READ DIRECTLY FROM THE OPINION IF I, IF I COULD FINISH MY POINT.

IT WAS INSIGHTFUL BECAUSE WHAT HE SHARED IS THAT, WELL, COMMISSIONERS COURT IS A COURT.

IT IS A COURT. AND SO ALL MATTERS THAT COME BEFORE THIS COURT ARE CIVIL AND MATTER, RIGHT. AND AND SO BEING THAT GIVES THAT REAFFIRMS THAT AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. BUT THE REAL KICKER HERE IS THAT WHY.

BECAUSE ULTIMATELY WE CAN'T HIRE WE'RE NOT HIRING SOMEBODY ELSE TO GO DEFEND THE COUNTY.

IF WE GO TO LITIGATION, IT'S HER WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR VETTING AND SO ON. THAT POINT OF THIS.

THIS DOESN'T NEED TO BE CONTENTIOUS. I WILL ASK THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WHAT IS IT THAT YOU REQUIRE TO APPROPRIATELY VET THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THIS PARTICULAR ATTORNEY? AS STATED BEFORE, IN OPEN COURT, I ASKED YOU ALL COMMISSIONERS TO PROVIDE ME THE EXPERIENCE AND CREDENTIALS OF THE SCHOOL BOARD LAWYER RICH MORRIS EXPERIENCE IN REDISTRICTING FOR A COUNTY.

YOU ALL REFUSED, IGNORED THE REQUEST AND DIDN'T RESPOND.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT HE KNOWS.

I DO KNOW THAT WE HAVE I'M TALKING I DO KNOW THAT WE HAVE ONE INSTANCE WHERE THERE WAS AN ADMISSION, IN AN ORDER WHICH WAS CONCERNING TO EVEN OUR BOND COUNSEL, WHICH YOU RAISED EARLIER.

[01:55:01]

THE STATUTE IS CLEAR. THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN THIS COUNTY AND NINE OTHER COUNTIES HAS THE SOLE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT AND DUTY TO PROVIDE LEGAL REPRESENTATION TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT. THE DEPARTMENT HEADS, ELECTED OFFICIALS, ETC. THAT IS NOT MY OPINION.

THAT IS THE LAW. AND CASCO VERSUS CAMERON, WHICH IS A CASE THAT I REFERENCED ON TUESDAY, APRIL 22ND WHEN YOU, COMMISSIONER MYERS, CONFRONTED ME ABOUT THE AUTHORITY OF MY OFFICE RIGHT HERE. THAT CASE SAYS THAT OUR RIGHT AND OUR DUTY TO REPRESENT THE COUNTY IS EXCLUSIVE. IT'S NOT SHARED.

YOU DON'T HAVE A DEPUTY COMMISSIONER THAT CAN COME IN YOUR PLACE.

COMMISSIONER MORALES OR ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER THAT'S BEFORE US ON THIS DAIS.

FURTHERMORE, THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION DEFINES WHAT A COURT IS, AND THAT INCLUDES THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT, THE APPELLATE COURTS, THE DISTRICT COURTS, THE COMMISSIONERS COURT, COMMISSIONERS COURT, AND THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE COURTS.

IT'S NOT UP FOR ARGUMENT THAT'S APPLICABLE IN THIS COURT AS WELL.

SO I UNDERSTAND AGAIN THAT WE'VE GOT THIS THREE TWO VOTE.

BUT I'M TELLING YOU THIS VIOLATES THE LAW.

IT VIOLATES THE AUTHORITY OF MY OFFICE AND IS AKIN TO A CONSTRUCTIVE REMOVAL THAT YOU ARE ATTEMPTING. YEAH. MADAM.

ONE SECOND. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

WELL, TO FOLLOW UP, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT.

HOLD ON ONE SECOND. WAIT, WAIT.

IT'S GERMANE TO THAT BECAUSE I WANT TO GET US TO SOLUTIONS TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT.

WHAT IS A PROCESS THAT YOU WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH IN ENSURING THAT THE COUNSEL THAT THEY GET ADVICE, BECAUSE IT IS STANDARD PRACTICE.

AND I THINK YOU ALL HAVE ADMITTED THAT Y'ALL DON'T HAVE THE EXPERTISE IN-HOUSE TO DO REDISTRICTING, AND THAT'S WHY WE ROUTINELY HIRE SOMEBODY ELSE OUTSIDE, AS WAS THE CASE WITH MY PREDECESSORS.

YES. IS THERE A PROCESS TO APPROPRIATELY VET COUNSEL THAT YOU WOULD FEEL AMENABLE TO, RECOGNIZING THAT THEY HAVE ELECTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROCESS AND REQUIRE COUNSEL TO ADVISE, AS IN MANY PROJECTS THAT THE COUNTY HAS BEFORE IT, WHEN YOU ALL HAVE AN IDENTIFIED COUNCIL THAT YOU BELIEVE HAS THE EXPERTISE.

IF WE AGREE WITH THAT, WE WON'T OBJECT.

PRIME EXAMPLE BOND COUNCIL.

WE DO IT ALL THE TIME.

YOU ALL HAVE FIRMS AND YOU ALL PRESENT THAT TO US.

AND WE SEE THAT THEY HAVE THE RECORD SKILLS AND ABILITIES TO TO NAVIGATE THE FINANCIAL AND LEGAL MARKET TO HELP YOU ALL WITH YOUR PROJECTS.

WE DON'T GET IN THE WAY OF THAT.

BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, IT STARTED WITH MR. MCDONALD, AN ATTORNEY THAT MOST PEOPLE DID NOT KNOW WHO DID NOT HAVE THE EXHIBITED EXPERIENCE IN REDISTRICTING.

I OBJECTED, THAT WAS ON APRIL 22ND.

THEN SOME KIND OF WAY ALL NAVIGATED AND LANDED ON THE SCHOOL DISTRICT LAWYER AND AGAIN IN OPEN COURT. I SAT RIGHT THERE AND I SAID, GREAT SCHOOL DISTRICT LAWYER.

SHOW ME HIS EXPERIENCE IN REDISTRICTING AND SPECIFICALLY FOR A COUNTY, BECAUSE REDISTRICTING FOR A SCHOOL DISTRICT IS QUITE DIFFERENT THAN A COUNTY.

AND MIND YOU, FORT BEND COUNTY IS NOT THE SIZE OF MATAGORDA.

IT'S NOT THE SIZE OF PALO PINTO, HARDIN, OR ANY OTHER COUNTY.

IT'S ONE OF THE LARGEST COUNTIES IN THE STATE, AND WE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN A COUNCIL THAT KNOWS HOW TO NAVIGATE.

MR. MORRIS WAS SELECTED BY YOU ALL OVER MY OBJECTION.

BUT AGAIN, TO YOUR POINT, COMMISSIONER, THE PROPER RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COMMISSIONERS IN RECOGNIZING THE AUTHORITY OF THIS OFFICE, WHETHER IT'S MY POSITION, ME IN THIS ROLE OR ANYONE ELSE, IS TO CONSULT WITH THAT ELECTED OFFICIAL REGARDING THEIR SPHERE OF AUTHORITY AND THEN GET THEIR BLESSING OR APPROVAL AS TO WHAT LAWYER WOULD BE AN EXTENSION OF THE LEGAL SERVICES OR THE LEGAL EXPERTISE THAT THE THAT THE ELECTED OFFICIAL ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE HAS BEEN PUT INTO PLACE TO DO SO? I KNOW THAT FOR BOND COUNCIL, THERE WAS A LIKE A RFP PROCESS AND SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND THERE WAS A MINIMUM SET OF QUALIFICATIONS THAT WAS PUT OUT FOR THAT.

IS THIS THE ONLY ON. AND I'M ASKING MY COLLEAGUES, ARE THERE NOT OTHER PEOPLE THAT Y'ALL WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH CONSIDERING THAT ACTUALLY HAVE THE EXPERIENCE IN DOING THIS? BOB BASS IS AVAILABLE.

WE CAN MOVE ON FROM THIS CONFLICT.

ATTORNEY BASS HAS INDICATED HE'S NOT GETTING INVOLVED WITH.

WELL, NOW, YES, BUT LIKE, IS THERE SOMEONE ELSE THAT Y'ALL CAN BRING? NO. WELL, AND AGAIN, I THINK THERE'S SOME CONCERN EVEN IN HOW WE GOT HERE WITH THE ORIGINAL ORDER, WHICH I THINK I HAVE CONCERN WITH.

I KNOW COMMISSIONER PRESTAGE HAS EXPRESSED CONCERN WITH THAT.

WE AND I MEAN, AGAIN, I TALKED TO OTHER LAWYERS AROUND COUNCIL OTHER PEOPLE WHO THE UNPROMPTED UNCOMPELLED PUT AN OPEN ADMISSION OF VIOLATION OF THE LAW IN AN ORDER OPENING THIS COUNTY UP TO LIABILITY.

[02:00:01]

AND SO I THINK THAT'S DUE SOME REAL CONSIDERATION FOR HOW WE'RE GETTING ADVICE TO STAY OUT OF TROUBLE. BUT AGAIN, THERE ARE OTHER LAWYERS WHO CAN DO THIS WORK.

CAN WE NOT ASK THEM? WE'RE NOT DELAYING.

WE GOT A WE GOT ATTORNEYS.

CAN WE CAN WE CONTINUE? AND SO ONE THING, MADAM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THIS.

I'M THE PRESIDING OFFICER.

I WAS ABOUT TO ASK YOU A QUESTION.

AND I'M A DULY ELECTED OFFICIAL.

GET INTO CONFRONTATION.

I'M A DULY ELECTED OFFICIAL.

AND YOU CUT ME OFF, SIR.

WITH ALL. WITH ALL DEFERENCE.

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, MADAM, WE ARE ALSO DULY ELECTED OFFICIALS.

YES, SIR. WE ALSO HAVE SPECIFIC AUTHORITY.

YES, SIR. AND THAT SPECIFIC AUTHORITY INCLUDES THE EXCLUSIVE AUTHORITY WITH.

WITH REGARD TO REDISTRICTING. EVERY SINGLE ATTORNEY, EVERY SINGLE ATTORNEY I'VE SPOKEN TO SAID THAT IS THE CASE.

NO OTHER ELECTED OFFICIAL HAS ANY AUTHORITY WITH REDISTRICTING PERIOD UNTIL IT CALLS FOR LEGAL COUNSEL. THEN IT INTERFERES WITH THE SPHERE OF MY AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO 45.179 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. AND ALSO, MADAM, I JUST YOU SAID A SCHOOL BOARD ATTORNEY, IF YOU DID THE HOMEWORK ON THAT FIRM AND THAT PERSON, HE GOT 35 YEARS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT EXPERIENCE.

THANK YOU. THAT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE GOTTEN ANY INFORMATION ABOUT HIM FROM THIS DAIS.

OKAY. 35 YEARS, AND I'VE ASKED YOU TO CHECK HIM OUT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YOU DID NOT SHARE THAT WITH ME WHEN I ASKED THE QUESTION.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT. IT'S NOT JUST ONE SCHOOL OR THIS OR THAT.

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WE HAVE SEVERAL PUBLIC MEETINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SET. WE HAVE FOR PUBLIC INPUT, FOR PUBLIC REVIEW OF THE MAPS AND PUBLIC.

ET CETERA. ET CETERA. WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF ALL OF THIS.

WE'RE MOVING FORWARD. MANY MAPS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED.

COMMISSIONER. MORRISON ASKED ME.

I POINTED OUT TO ME THAT NONE OF THEM ARE FAVORABLE TO ME AS AS A AS AN INCUMBENT ELECTED OFFICIAL. I HAVEN'T SEEN THE MAP, SO I'M TAKING HIS WORD FOR IT.

I'M WAITING TILL WE NARROW THEM DOWN TO SOMETHING THAT THAT WE CAN LOOK AT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I'M ALWAYS BEEN PREPARED TO ALLOW THE PROCESS TO WORK.

I'VE ALREADY STATED MY POSITION.

IN FACT, THE THE SPECIFIC MOTION THAT I MADE WAS THAT THEY SHOULD THAT THE COMMITTEE SHOULD FOLLOW GENERALLY ACCEPTED PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURES THAT COULD INCLUDE OPEN RECORDS IF THEY SO CHOSE HOWEVER THEY WANT TO, IF THAT'S THEIR CHOICE.

I DON'T THINK THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO PUT A ADVISORY COMMITTEE UNDER THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT OR OPEN RECORDS ACT IF THEY DON'T IF THEY IF THEY DON'T PROVIDE IF THEY IF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT IS NOT OBLIGATED AND THERE'S NO RECOMMENDATION THAT IS BINDING THAT THEY MAKE TO US.

THAT IS THE THAT'S THE CONCLUSION THAT THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION SAID.

SO. MY DEAL WAS YOU CAN OPERATE HOWEVER YOU WISH.

IF YOU WANT TO OPERATE UNDER THAT BASIS, THAT'S YOUR CHOICE TO DO SO.

I SIMPLY WANT TO MAKE CERTAIN AS OPPOSED TO WHAT WE DID, DESPITE WHAT COMMISSIONER MCCOY SAID THERE WAS, THERE WAS NO REALLY OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE MAP THAT WAS APPROVED.

NONE WHATSOEVER WASN'T PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC IN A TIMELY MANNER ETC..

IT WAS IT WAS BROUGHT IN AT THE LAST MINUTE AND VOTED ON AND SO ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS HAVE A PROCESS THAT WE AT THE END OF THE DAY, DESPITE ALL THIS DISCUSSIONS THERE IS A AN OPINION AND THE ONLY LEGAL OPINION THAT I FIND WRITTEN THAT ADDRESSES SPECIFICALLY THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE BY THE COUNTY JUDGE WITH REGARD TO THE USE OF RACE IN DRAWING THESE MAPS.

SO THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO THIS POINT.

I DIDN'T HAVE A CLUE THAT THAT WAS THE CASE.

ALL I WAS TRYING TO DO WAS FIND SOMEBODY THAT WOULD HELP US FIGURE OUT, BECAUSE WE ALL ADMITTED THAT WE DIDN'T COMPLY WITH THE STATE LAW BECAUSE WE DID HAVE MULTIPLE VOTER PRECINCTS THAT EXCEEDED THE 5000 LIMIT.

SO WE KNEW THAT WE WERE IN VIOLATION OF THAT.

SO ALL I WAS TRYING TO DO WAS COME UP WITH YOU KNOW, MAKE CERTAIN WE COMPLIED WITH ALL THE LAWS.

AND HIS OPINION WAS WE DIDN'T.

SO THAT'S THE WHOLE BASIS OF THIS.

THANK YOU FOR THAT CONTEXT, SIR.

I DON'T DISAGREE WITH WELL, I DISAGREE WITH SOME OF WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, BUT MY PERSPECTIVE AND THE PERSPECTIVE OF MY OFFICE IS NOT ABOUT THE SELECTION OF MAPS.

IT'S THE SELECTION OF COUNCIL.

WE UNDERSTAND THE STATUTORY DUTY AND AUTHORITY OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT IN VOTING ON THE MAPS. BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU START REACHING OUT FOR LEGAL SERVICES,

[02:05:02]

AND OVER THE PAST SEVERAL WEEKS, OVER THE COURSE OF THIS SUMMER, THERE HAS BEEN AN OVERSTEPPING OF THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY OF THIS OFFICE, AND THAT IS CLEAR. AND AS A DULY ELECTED OFFICIAL PUT HERE BY THE PEOPLE, I HAVE THE RIGHT AND THE AUTHORITY TO STAND IN THE POSITION THAT I HAVE BEEN PUT IN BY THE PEOPLE TO ENFORCE.

NOW, AS IT RELATES TO THE THE MAPS, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY MAPS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT ANY MAPS LOOK LIKE.

I'M NOT TRYING TO GET INTO THE BUSINESS OF THE MAPS UNLESS AND UNTIL SUCH TIME COMES.

AND THERE IS A TRIGGER FOR MY OFFICE TO GET INVOLVED FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. APPRECIATE IT. AT THIS TIME, I CALL FOR A VOTE. I DON'T WANT TO PARTICIPATE.

OKAY. THAT'S FINE. I'LL WAIT FOR YOU TO.

YEAH. SHOOT YOURSELF. OKAY, SO I, I CALL FOR A VOTE.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? AND THE MOTION CARRIES 310.

HE OBVIOUSLY ABSTAINED. 031.

ALL RIGHT. YEAH. OKAY.

NOW WE WILL MOVE. THE REST OF THIS MEETING IS POINTLESS.

I WITHDRAW ALL OF MY ITEMS AND I'LL DISMISS MYSELF.

OKAY. SO AT THIS TIME, WITH NO FURTHER BUSINESS, WE HAVE. DON'T WE HAVE THE THE RESOLUTION OR IS THAT.

WAS THAT HIS? NO. THAT'S HIS.

OKAY. YEAH. ALL RIGHT.

AND THANK YOU. AND I APPRECIATE DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? TO ADJOURN? DO YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY BEFORE YOU ADJOURN? BECAUSE SOME OF YOU INVOKED HIM AND HAD OPINIONS ABOUT WHAT HE SAID.

BUT HIS ACTUAL REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE.

NO, WE DON'T NEED TO. YOU DON'T WANT THE PUBLIC TO HEAR EITHER.

IT'S ALREADY BEEN PASSED, AND WE ARE MOVING ON.

THANK YOU. AND THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.

THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.