Nov 06, 2025 REGULAR SESSION AGENDA

>> AND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW I WILL MOVE ONTO DISCUSSION ITEMS STARTING WITH THE THE ITEM FROM CONSENT AGENDA ITEM

14B. >> YES, THANK YOU,

JUDGE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE WAS AWARDED $4.2 MILLION OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD. THE MATCH REQUIREMENT WHEN WE CONSIDER OFFICERS ARE EARNING

[00:20:01]

101,000 A YEAR, THAT ALLOWS THE MATCH TO BE ABOUT 58. 1% OR 59,000 OUT OF THAT 101,000. SO THE TOTAL GRANT AWARD OVER THE THREE- YEAR PERIODS AND MATCH COST IS $3. 04 MILLION. SUBTRACTING THE 1. 25 FROM THAT LEAVES A BALANCE AND THE MATCH AMOUNT OF 1,790,498.80. THAT'S OVER THE THREE- YEAR PERIOD. SO THAT AMOUNTS TO ANNUAL COST OF 596,832. THAT'S THE MATCH AMOUNT.

AND SO THE FOCUS ON THE GRANT IS CREATIVE AND INNOVATIVE WAYS TO ADDRESS CRIME PROBLEMS. AND WE SELECTED AN AREA IN PRECINCT 2 TO WHICH WE RECEIVED A LOT OF COMPLAINTS REGARDING GUNFIRE, GUNSHOTS BETWEEN GANGS AND OTHER CRIME AND DISORDER PROBLEMS, DELINQUENCY. THIS ALLOWS THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTNER WITH VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS IN THE COMMUNITY, COMMISSIONERS IN THAT AREA AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS TO COME UP WITH VIABLE INTERVENTION PROGRAMS THAT GET TO THE ROOT PROBLEM OF CRIME.

THAT'S WHAT WE LIKE TO ACCOMPLISH WITH THIS. BUT THE CORRECTION HERE IS WITH RESPECT TO THE TOTAL AMOUNT WHICH IS $3. 04 MILLION A GRANT AWARD OF $3. 125 MILLION, AND THEN THE MATCH AMOUNT OF

$1,790,498. >> THANK YOU, CHIEF.

THIS IS FOR THE FRESNO COMMUNITY, THE OLD FRESNO COMMUNITY, BEEN WORKING FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS TO TRY TO MAKE SOME SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS TO THE FRESNO COMMUNITY. THE GROUNDBREAKING YESTERDAY WAS JUST ONE PART OF THAT. IN JANUARY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A RIBBON CUTTING FOR A BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB. AND PART OF MY PREZ FRESNO PLAN WAS TO BRING LAW ENFORCEMENT TO THAT COMMUNITY, A DEDICATED SQUAD, IF YOU WOULD, FOR THAT COMMUNITY. THIS GRANT WE NEED TO ACCEPT IT AND I ASK ACTION FROM COMMISSIONERS COURT. BUT IN THE SUBSEQUENT MEETING WE WILL IDENTIFY THE MATCH. IT'S MORE THAN EFFICIENT ENOUGH TO HANDLE THIS AND NO ENCUMBRANCES ON IT.

IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I'D LIKE TO ENTERTAIN THEM.

IF NOT, I'D LIKE TO MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM 14B AS CORRECTED.

>> MOTION AND A SECOND. THANK YOU, SIR.

ASSUMING THERE IS NO OTHER QUESTION, PLEASE.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ASSUMING THERE IS NO

[19. COUNTY JUDGE: ]

FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL IN FAVOR.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. AND NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO THE REST OF THE DISCUSSION AGENDA ITEM.

ITEM NUMBER 19A. I STARTED WITH ONE ITEM, TAKE ALL APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPOINT.

I READ THIS BECAUSE IT IS -- I JUST WANT TO MENTION APPOINTMENT TO KATIE CLAYTON TO THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR A TWO- YEAR TERM EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 6, 2025. IT'S PURELY KATIE'S BEEN SELECTED BASED ON HER EXPERIENCE, AND ALSO SHE ALREADY ATTEND GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY MEETINGS, AND HOPEFULLY YOU'LL BE ABLE TO WORK WITH OTHERS, AND ALSO SHE'S HIGHLY RECOMMENDED BY CITY OF SUGAR LAND AND ALL THAT.

WITH THAT DO I HAVE A MOTION? >>

MOVE APPROVAL. >> SECOND.

>> SO SHE'S REPLACING ALAN BOGUARD? DID HE STEP DOWN?

GOT IT. >> AND ALSO THE CITY OF SUGAR LAND RECOMMENDED KATIE, AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE MOVING FORWARD. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM 19B. DO I HAVE A

MOTION? >> MOVE APPROVAL FOR ITEM19 B.

>> THERE WAS NO BACKUP WITH THIS ITEM.

WHAT WAS THIS FOR?

>> IT IS AN AMENDMENT TO A PREVIOUS LEGAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE.

[00:25:02]

>> WHAT IS IT FOR?

>> IT'S FOR THE LEGAL SERVICES THAT THE

FIRM PROVIDED. >> FOR WHAT? YOU'RE INCREASING A CONTRACT AMOUNT FOR WHAT? THAT'S MY QUESTION.

>> FOR THE LEGAL SERVICES THAT THEY PROVIDED WITH REGARD TO

REDISTRICTING. >> THIS IS FOR WORK ALREADY DONE? OR ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO BE PERFORMING ADDITIONAL DUTIES?

>> NO, THIS IS FOR THE WORK QUALITY --

>> THEY HAVE NOT BILLED US FORFOR IT.

>> SO WE'RE ABOUT TO -- SO THEY PERFORMED WORK OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF THEIR CONTRACT, AND WE'RE INCREASING THE CONTRACT AMOUNT TO PAY THEM FOR STUFF THAT THEY'VE ALREADY DONE? I'M TRYING TO GET CLARITY HERE ÷÷BECAUSE --

>> THE CLARITY IS THAT THEY PROVIDED THE SERVICES, THEY EXCEEDED THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT THAT WE STARTED WITH FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS, WHICH WE CAN GO INTO IF YOU WISH, BUT I'D PREFER NOT TO. AND SO WE'RE SIMPLY COVERING -- HE HAS NOT BILLED US FOR ANY OF THIS YET.

WE ARE ADJUSTING THE AGREEMENT SO THAT HE CAN BILL US FOR THE

SERVICES. >> AND ALSO THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME WE HAVE DONE THIS. WE STARTED WITH THAT AMOUNT. WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW MUCH TIME AND EFFORT IT MAKE. AND FEEL LIKE IT IS MORE THAN $60,000 BUT NOT TO EXCEED $110,000, THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

AND SO THAT'S --

>> TYPICALLY WE DON'T -- WHEN WE'RE AMENDING CONTRACTS, WE'RE AMENDING CONTRACTS SO THAT VENDORS CAN GO AND DO THE WORK. NOT HEY WE DID THIS, WE'RE GOING TO NEED MORE MONEY AND BILL YOU FOR IT BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY DONE IT.

THAT'S WHY -- AND I'M JUST GOING TO EXPRESS SOME CONCERN.

BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE WITH EACH OF THESE ITEMS EVERY TIME THIS COMES ON THE AGENDA WE'RE NO LONGER FOLLOWING WHAT IS THE STANDARD THAT WAS PUT OUT BY THIS COURT AND REALLY PUSHED BY THIS COURT. THESE THINGS SOMEHOW END UP ON THE AGENDA AT THE VERY LAST MINUTE AND WE DON'T SEE IT UNTIL THE AGENDA IS PUBLISHED.

WHY IS THAT HAPPENING?

>> SO IT IS JUST YOUR OPINION.

>> NO, NO, IT IS NOT MY OPINION. IT IS ACTUALLY

FACT. >> WE CAN STOP THIS CONVERSATION HERE.

>> IT IS ACTUALLY FACT THAT THIS ITEM, THE LAST TIME THERE WAS AN ITEM ON LEGAL SERVICES, THOSE ITEMS WERE NOT PUT ON THE AGENDA IN ANY OF THE PREVIOUS DRAFTS, AND THE ONLY TIME THAT WE'VE SEEN THESE ITEMS IS AT THE VERY LAST MINUTE -- NO, ACTUALLY AFTER THE AGENDA HAS BEEN PUBLISHED. IF WE ARE DOING THINGS IN GOOD FAITH AND WE FEEL LIKE WE'RE STANDING ON SOLID GROUND WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING, WHY WOULD WE NOT HAVE BACKUP? BECAUSE WHEN WE DO CONTRACT AMENDMENTS FOR EVERYTHING ELSE, WE SUBMIT THE BACKUP THAT'S BEEN REVIEWED BY PURCHASING COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WHOEVER ELSE. NOT THAT WE'RE GETTING HERE TO COURT AND WE HAVE NO INFORMATION. WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE SERVICE THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED THAT YOU'RE SAYING TAXPAYERS NEED TO SPEND AN OFFICIALS $60,000 FOR, AND WE'RE JUST SUPPOSED TO NOT HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT

IT? >> THAT'S A GOOD ARGUMENT ABOUT TAXPAYER DOLLARS YOU KEEP MAKING. AND OKAY, THIS IS ABSOLUTELY WHEN THE BILL COMES THE AUDITOR AND COUNTY WILL GO THROUGH ALL THE PROCEDURES.

THIS IS NOT SAID NOT TO EXCEED. IF YOU SEE THIS KIND OF AGENDA ITEM FIRST TIME WE HAVE -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT, BUT WE HAVE DONE THIS KIND OF AGENDA ITEMS PROVING NOT TO EXCEED AND GOING ALSO INCREASING THE AMOUNT.

IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME WE HAVE DONE THIS.

SO YOU MADE YOUR POINT, AND WE --

>> IS ANYONE GOING TO ANSWER THE QUESTION? WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE ITEMS YOU ARE REQUIRING THAT WE INCREASE A DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR?

>> SAID IT ALREADY BECAUSE THE WORK --

>> YOU ACTUALLY HAVEN'T. YOU SAID SERVICES RENDERED

ALREADY. >> WE HAVE EXPLAINED IT TO YOU SEVERAL TIMES. YOU'RE SIMPLY TRYING TO BE ARGUMENTIVE WHICH IS FINE.

IT'S YOUR RIGHT TO DO, BUT WE CAN IGNORE YOUR

ARGUMENT. >> OKAY, YOU CAN IGNORE MY ARGUMENT, BUT AGAIN WE'RE HAVING A PUBLIC DISCUSSION ABOUT THE USE OF MONIES FOR SERVICES YOU'VE PROVIDED NO BACKUP FOR, THAT÷÷ YOU HAVE PROVIDED --

>> NOT TRUE. >> IT IS ACTUALLY TRUE.

WE'VE MADE IT CLEAR THAT IS ACTUALLY VERY

TRUE. >> WE'VE MADE IT CLEAR THIS IS SERVICES FOR REDISTRICTING THAT WE WENT THROUGH, PERIOD. THAT WAS AN AGREEMENT

WE HAD -- >> WAS THERE AN ITEM ATTACHED TO THIS WHEN THIS AGENDA WAS

PUBLISHED? >> SORRY, I DO NOT HAVE THE AMENDMENT, NO.

>> I DON'T HAVE A BILL FROM THEM

YET. >> SO, AGAIN, WHEN I MADE THE COMMENT ABOUT THERE'S NO BACKUP, THERE IS NOTHING THAT'S BEEN PUBLISHED ONLINE AS BACKUP FOR THIS OR PROVIDED TO MEMBERS OF

COURT. >> THE BACKUP IS THE AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE WHERE WE HAVE ENGAGED THIS FIRM TO

[00:30:02]

PERFORM -- PROVIDE LEGAL COUNSEL AS WELL AS DEMOGRAPHICS -- DEMOGRAPHERS EFFORTS FOR REDISTRICTING. THAT IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.

YOU KNOW THAT FOR A FACT. YOU STILL ARGUE THE CASE.

>> BECAUSE, AGAIN, WE HAVE --

>> ARGUMENTIVE.

>> IT'S NOT JUST TO BE ARGUMENTATIVE. AGAIN, WE HAVE A PROCESS IN THIS COURT IT SEEMS ON EVERY ITEM WE FOLLOW BUT ON THIS ONE THINGS ARE SNUCK INTO THE AGENDA WITHOUT A BACKUP.

>> WHAT'S THE POINT YOU'RE TRYING TO

MAKE? >> WHERE IS THE BACKUP? THERE IS NOT AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE COURT. THERE IS NO AMENDMENT TO THIS CONTRACT THAT HAS BEEN

SUBMITTED. >> I'M DONE WITH THIS, AND SO --

>> I JUST WANT THAT POINT TO BE

MADE EXCLUSIVELY. >> YOU MADE YOUR

POINT. >> AND THEN AGAIN I WANT TO ADDRESS THE FACT THIS COURT IS NOT FOLLOWING ITS PROCEDURES BY PUTTING THESE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA CONSISTENTLY WITHOUT IT GOING OUT IN ANY PREVIOUS DRAFT FORM.

THAT I'M NOT ASKING FOR FEEDBACK ON, BUT I WANT THAT TO BE NOTED I THINK THAT IT IS INAPPROPRIATE. AND ONCE MORE, YOU ARE PROCEEDING ON AN ACTION THAT YOU HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF IS NOT WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE LAW, AND THERE IS STILL AN ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION THAT IS PENDING THAT Y'ALL ARE CHOOSING TO IGNORE. THAT IS NOT AN OPINION.

NO, THAT IS NOT AN OPINION. IT IS FACT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION HAS NOT COME.

>> YOU MADE YOUR POINT. I CALL THE

QUESTION. >> AND THAT COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS NOT APPROVED FOR THE SERVICES YOU'RE TRYING TO SUPERSEDE --

>> COMMISSIONER, AT THIS TIME I CALL THE QUESTION.

ALL IN FAVOR. ANY OPPOSED?

[20. CONSTABLE, PCT. 1:]

THE MOTION CARRIES 3-2. WE WILL MOVE ONTO NEXT ITEM, ITEM NUMBER 20. CONSTABLE PRECINCT 1 PRESENTED BY CONSTABLE PRECINCT 1.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> YES, I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR?

[21. CONSTABLE, PCT. 4: ]

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDAAGENDA 21, CONSTABLE PRECINCT

4. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 21 AS PRESENTED.

>> AND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR?

[22. COUNTY ATTORNEY:]

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW, WE WILL MOVE ONTO COUNTY ATTORNEY NUMEROUS ITEMS. IT IS GOING TO BE APPROVED BY RECORD VOTE. SO OLGA, GO AHEAD AND READ EACH ITEM. ITEM NUMBER 22A, AND THEN WE WILL TAKE A

RECORD VOTE. >> 22A, THAT'S ME.

I MOVE THAT THE --

>> HOLD ON, COMMISSIONER. LET OLGA, READ

THE ITEM. >> 22A, TAKE ALL APPROPRIATE ACTION DECLARING REQUISITION OF TO BE FOR THE WEST AIRPORT BOULEVARD PROJECT NUMBER 20402, PRECINCT 3, FUND MOBILITY BONDS.

>> I RECOGNIZE AUTHORIZE THE USE OF IMMINENT DOMAIN TO REQUIRE ALL RIGHT-OF- WAY FOR THE WEST AIRPORT BOULEVARD PROJECT PROPOSED TO BE SITUATED ON LANDS GENERALLY HIGHWAY 6 FORT BENDBEND COUNTY, TEXAS, BY ADOPTION IN ORDER TO CREATE THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY TO BE PUBLIC NECESSITY AND AUTHORIZE FOR COMPENSATION FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE OF LOCATION, IMPROVEMENT ALIGNMENT, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, AND MAINTENANCE FOR THE FORT BEND -- FOR THE WEST AIRPORT BOULEVARD PROJECT 20402 INCLUDING A PERTINENT DRAINAGE DETENTION REQUIRED FOR SAID PROJECT THAT THIS MOTION APPLIES TO ANY AND ALL PARCELS OF LAND AND ARE ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS THAT MAY BE CONDEMNED OR EXAMINED FOR POTENTIAL CONDEMNATION ALONG THE WEST AIRPORT PROJECT NUMBER 20402.

>> YOU HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS ITEM.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, I WILL ASK, OLGA, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE

RECORD VOTE. >> COMMISSIONER MORALES, HOW DO YOU VOTE.

>> COMMISSIONER PRESTAGE. >> YES.

>> COMMISSION COMMISSIONER, MCCOY, HOW DO

YOU VOTE? >>

YES. >> JUDGE, HOW DO YOU

VOTE? >>

YES. >> MOTION

PASSES. >> NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO 22B.

>> B, TAKE ALL APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION AND ORDER DECREEING THE ACQUISITION BE A PUBLIC NECESSITY AND AUTHORIZING

[00:35:02]

THE ACQUISITION AND PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION BY RECORD VOTE FOR THE WEST BELLFORT AT HIGHWAY 6, PROJECT NUMBER 20401, PRECINCT 3, MOBILITY BONDS.

>> I MOVE STATE HIGHWAY 6 PROJECT 20401 PRECINCT 3 PROPOSED TO BE SITUATED ON LANDS GENERALLY PERTINENT TO WEST BELLFORT AT STATE HIGHWAY 6 TO A POINT APPROXIMATELY EAST OF STATE HIGHWAY 6 IN FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS, BY RECORD DECREEING ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY TO BE PUBLIC NECESSITY AND RECOGNIZING ACQUISITION OF PAYMENT FOR NUTESSY OF IMPROVEMENT, ALIGNMENT, OPERATION, AND MAINTENANCE FOR THE WEST BELLFORT AT STATE HIGHWAY 6 PROJECT NUMBER 20401 INCLUDING PERTINENT DRAINAGE AND RETENTION REQUIRED FOR SAID PROJECT. THIS MOTION APPLIES TO ALL PARCELS OF LAND AND ANY ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS THAT MUST BE CONDEMNED OR EXAMINED FOR POTENTIAL CONDEMNATION ALONG THE WEST BELLFORT AT STATE HIGHWAY 6 PROJECT 20401.

>> YOU HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, OLGA, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE RECORD VOTE.

>> COMMISSIONER MORALES, HOW DO YOU VOTE?

>> COMMISSIONER PRES STJ.

>> COMMISSIONER MCCOY, HOW DO

YOU VOTE? >>

YES. >> JUDGE GEORGE, HOW DO YOU VOTE?

>> YES. >> MOTION

PASSES. >> NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA

ITEM 22C. >> C, TAKE ALL APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION ORDER FOR THE OLD RICHMOND ROAD PROJECT NUMBER 205409 PRECINCT 4, FUND MOBILITY

BONDS. >> I MOVE THAT FORT BEND COUNTY BY RECORD VOTE AUTHORIZE THE USE OF POWER OF IMMINENT DOMAIN TO REQUIRE OLD RIGHT-OF- WAY FOR THE OLD RICHMOND ROAD PROJECT NUMBER 20409 PRECINCT 4 PROPOSED TO BE SITUATED ON LANDS GENERALLY PERT INDEPENDENT TO OLD RICHMOND ROAD BEGINNING ON BOSS ROAD TO THE INTERSECTION BY ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION AND ORDER DECREEING THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY TO BE A PUBLIC NECESSITY AND AUTHORIZING FOR THE PUBLIC PURPOSE OF LOCATION, IMPROVEMENT, ALIGNMENT, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, AND MAINTENANCE FOR THE OLD RICHMOND ROAD PROJECT NUMBER 20409 INCLUDING PERT INDEPENDENT DRAINAGE AND RETENTION FOR SAID PROJECT. THIS MOTION APPLIES TO ANY AND ALL PARCELS OF LAND AND/OR ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS THAT MUST BE CONDEMNED OR EXAMINEDEXAMINED POTENTIAL CONDEMNATION ALONG THE OLD RICHMOND ROAD PROJECT NUMBER 20409.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE

RECORD. >> COMMISSIONER MORALES.

LOW DO YOU VOTE?

>> COMMISSIONER PRESTIGE.

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER MEYERS, HOW DO

YOU VOTE? >> YES.

[23. DISTRICT ATTORNEY:]

>> COMMISSIONER MCCOY, HOW DO YOU

VOTE? >> YES.

>> JUDGE GEORGE, HOW DO YOU

VOTE? >>

YES. >> MOTION PASSES.

>> WE WILL MOVE ONTO ITEM 23 PRESENTED BY FORT BEND DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. DO I HAVE

A MOTION? >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF AGENDA ITEM 23 AS PRESENTED.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. WE WILL MOVE ONTO ITEM NUMBER 24 A AND B. PRESENTED BY FORT BEND COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK'S OFFICE.

[24. DISTRICT CLERK:]

>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF AGENDA ITEMS 24 A AND B AS PRESENTED.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON AGENDA ITEM 24 A AND B, ANY DISCUSSION?

>> YES, I NEED SOME CLARIFICATION. THIS CAME UP AT -- I DID -- BEVERLY DID CALL ME LATE LAST

NIGHT. >> MS. WALKER, PLEASE COME

FORWARD. >> I DID ASK HER IF SHE WOULD KINDLY EXPLAIN WHAT'S GOING ON, WHAT'S HAPPENING, AND PARTICULARLY HOW LONG YOU'LL YOU'LL NEED THESE ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES.

>> WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO HIRE THREE FULL- TIME EMPLOYEES TO COME IN AND REDACT DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN FILED SO WE CAN MAKE THEM AVAILABLE TO ATTORNEYS ESPECIALLY WHO ARE HAVING A DIFFICULT TIME GETTING UN-REDACTED DOCUMENTS ONLINE.

AND THEY CLAIM THAT IT IS IMPACTING THEIR PRACTICE NEGATIVELY.

THAT IS THE FIRST PHASE. THE SECOND PHASE IS BRING ON ABOUT 14 TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES TO GO BACK AND REDACT DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN REDACTED BECAUSE WE SIMPLY DID NOT HAVE THE STAFF TO DO SO.

[00:40:05]

AND TO BRING THOSE DOCUMENTS TO A POINT WHERE THEY CAN ALSO BE VIEWED BY ATTORNEYS ONLINE. WE THINK IT WILL TAKE US THREE MONTHS WITH THE NUMBER OF DOCUMENTS WE ANTICIPATE, AND WITH 14 PEOPLE WORKING 8 HOURS A DAY, IT'LL TAKE US THREE MONTHS.

WE HAVE SPOKEN TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY OVER THIS ISSUE.

WE'VE SPOKEN TO THE AUDITOR. WE'VE SPOKEN TO THE BUDGET OFFICE. WHERE ARE THEY? AND WE'VE SPOKEN TO HUMAN RESOURCES AND

PURCHASING. >> AS I UNDERSTAND ITIT THERE SOFTWARE THAT IS GOING TO BE POTENTIALLY AVAILABLE IN THE

FUTURE? >> WELL, WE ARE TRYING TO BUY A BOT, GET A BOTBOT THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE AND THE DISTRICT CLERK'S OFFICE WITH EACH ONE OF US INVESTING $500,000.

ONCE AGAIN THAT HAS TO BE VETTED BY IT, AND WE'RE WAITING ON THAT. AND WE'RE ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF PORTAL FOR ATTORNEYS ONLY, GIVING THEM A LOG-IN OR SOME WAY TO GET INTO THE SYSTEM SO THEY CAN SEE DOCUMENTS.

BUT I'VE BEEN TOLD BY IT THAT THAT COULD BE SEVERAL MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD, MAYBE EVEN EIGHT, AND THAT THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PAY ATTENTION TO THAT UNTIL AFTER WE GET THROUGH

REDISTRICTING. >> SO ONCE YOU GET THE SOFTWARE, THAT SOFTWARE DOES WHAT?

>> WELL, ONCE WE GET A BOT BECAUSE A BOT IS NOT -- I UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT REALLY SOFTWARE, BUT WE WILL BE ABLE TO GO BACK AND AS SOON AS WE TAKE DOCUMENTS OFF THE E-FILE SYSTEM, THE BOT WOULD BE ABLE TO REDACT.

>> OKAY. SO YOU'LL HAVE --

>> IF, IN FACT, YOU GUYS APPROVE OUR

$500,000 PURCHASE. >> OKAY.

ESSENTIALLY YOU'LL HAVE SOFTWARE THAT DOES THE WORK YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE THESE 17 PEOPLE

DO. >> HOPEFULLY A BOT AT SOME POINT, AND HOPEFULLY AN ATTORNEY PORTAL AT SOME POINT DOWN THE

ROAD. >>

I'M SORRY. >> HOPEFULLY A BOT AND HOPEFULLY AN ATTORNEY PORTAL DOWN THE ROAD AT SOME POINT.

>> OKAY. SO ONCE YOU GET THAT, THE NEED FOR EMPLOYEES IN YOUR OFFICE TO MANUALLY REDACT THIS SENSITIVE INFORMATION GOES

AWAY? >> WE HAD STOPPED IT ANYWAY BECAUSE REALLY REDACTION IS A FUNCTION THAT ATTORNEYS SHOULD DO BY LAW. BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE STARTED THE PRACTICE BEFORE I GOT HERE EVEN OF REDACTING DOCUMENTS, BUT WE JUST DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH STAFF TO TO HAPPEN.

AND SO -- BECAUSE WE COME HERE AND ASK FOR STAFF BUT YOU GUYS TOLD US NO. AND SO NOW WE'RE BACK TO IT.

WE HAVE TO DO IT. WE HAVE TO TAKE IT FROM A RECORDS MANAGEMENT.

>> WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IS THE DISTRICT CLERK'S OFFICE SHOULD NOT BE DOING THE REDACTION.

THE ACTUAL ATTORNEY SHOULD BE DOING IT.

>> I'M SAYING THERE ARE LAWS THAT SAY THAT SOME ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE REDACTED SHOULD BE DONE BY ATTORNEYS,

YES. >> OKAY.

SO ONCE -- SO THE ATTORNEYS SHOULD BE REDACTING MOST OF THIS INFORMATION, CORRECT, NOT YOUR

OFFICE? >> WELL, ATTORNEYS ARE THE PUBLIC, RIGHT? AND WE ARE HERE TO SERVE THE

PUBLIC. >> YEAH, BUT IF THEY'RE REQUIRED BY LAW TO REDACT IT, SHOULD THEY NOT BE FOLLOWING THE LAW AND REDACTING THE DOCUMENTS BEFORE THEY GET TO YOUR OFFICE?

>> WELL, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED, COMMISSIONER MEYERS.

A LOT OF TIMES ATTORNEYS HAVE STAFF, RIGHT? AND SO STAFF ARE FILING SOME OF THESE DOCUMENTS, AND THERE'S AN ICON ON THE E- FILE SYSTEM THAT YOU CAN PUSH THAT SAYS "CONTAINS SENSITIVE DATA. " SO WHEN YOU PUSH THAT, YOU'RE TELLING US THAT THERE'S SOMETHING IN THIS DOCUMENT THAT IS SENSITIVE BUT IT'S NECESSARY FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CASE.

AND SO THEN WE LOCK THAT BECAUSE WE CAN'T ALLOW THAT INFORMATION TO BE THERE FOR THE PUBLIC.

ALL THOSE DOCUMENTS DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE "CONTAINS SENSITIVE DATA." SOMETIMES PEOPLE PUSH IT SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO REDACT. SO THEN WE END UP WITH A LOT OF DOCUMENTS THAT ARE LOCKED BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN TOLD THEY CONTAIN SENSITIVE

DATA. >> OKAY, I APPRECIATE THE DETAILED INFORMATION. I'M STILL TRYING TO GET TO THE POINT OF --

>> THAT WAS THE POINT.

>> YOU'RE ASKING FOR 17 PEOPLE. YOU INDICATED THAT 14 WILL PROBABLY BE THERE FOR APPROXIMATELY THREE MONTHS AND THEY GO

AWAY. >> 62 DAYS,

YES. >> I'M SORRY?

>> WE FEEL 62 DAYS, YES, THREE

MONTHS. >> ALL RIGHT.

THE FULL- TIME THAT YOU ARE ASKING TO HIRE TO DO THE SAME THING.

>> THREE ONGOING.

>> ONGOING. WHEN YOU GET TO THE POINT YOU HAVE EITHER PORTAL FOR THE ATTORNEYS OR YOU HAVE A T THAT YOU KEEP TALKING ABOUT --

>> WE WILL BE ABLE TO RELEASE THE THREE PEOPLE WE ARE

HIRING -- >> DO YOU HAVE A TIME FRAME FOR

[00:45:01]

THAT? >> I DON'T BECAUSE YOU ALL HAVEN'T APPROVED IT YET AND IT HASN'T FINISHED THE WORK.

>> COULD YOU GIVE US AN

ESTIMATE? >> WELL, KEEP IN MIND THAT ALL SOFTWARE AND ALL PROJECTS YOU ALL HAVE SAID MUST BE APPROVED BY IT.

>> OKAY.

>> SO, I MEAN, THAT'S VERY

DIFFICULT. >> ROBIN HERE, MAYBE SHE CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION OR SOMEBODY FROM

IT. >> THAT'S VERY DIFFICULT BECAUSE MY DESTINY IS NOT IN MY HANDS.

IT'S IN THE HANDS OF IT.

>> I'M JUST ASKING FOR IT, IF THERE'S SOMEBODY FROM IT HERE.

SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME WE DON'T HAVE AN IDEA OF HOW LONG IT'S GOING TO TAKE IT TO GET EITHER THE PORTAL OR THE OTHER INFORMATION,

CORRECT? >> I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT THE PORTAL COULD BE UP TO EIGHT

MONTHS. >> EIGHT MONTHS.

SO POSSIBLY IN EIGHT MONTHS --

>> AFTER WE FINISH REDISTRICTING BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S TAKING PRIORITY.

IS WHAT I'M TOLD.

>> OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH YOUR MAILING YOUR NOTICES TO THE POTENTIAL JURORS,

ET CETERA? >> NO, NO.

THIS IS CASE MANAGEMENT.

>> I'M SORRY?

>> THIS IS CASE MANAGEMENT.

>> SHE'S TALKING ABOUT THE IT SIDE OF

IT. >> IT WILL BE INVOLVED IN REDISTRICTING, RIGHT, THE IT SIDE. AND SO THEY HAVE TOLD ME THEY WILL NOT BE LOOKING AT THIS PROJECT OR ANY PROJECT WE THE

REDISTRICTING. >> THANKS FOR THE

CLARIFICATION. >>

YES. >> SO DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'S GOING TO TAKE, SO AT LEAST EIGHT MONTHS AT A MINIMUM AT THIS POINT,

CORRECT? >> THAT'S WHAT I'M TOLD.

>> ALL RIGHT. AND WHENEVER THAT OCCURS, WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE THREE PEOPLE YOU'RE ASKING

FOR? >> HOPEFULLY WE WILL NOT NEED

THEM. >> OKAY, SO IF THERE'S SOME VACANCIES IN YOUR OFFICE --

>> COMMISSIONER MEYERS, ORT BEND IS GROWING BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS. WE FIGURE THAT IT'S 410,000 DOCUMENTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REDACT.

WE'RE NOT THE SAME LITTLE- BITTY COUNTY WE USED TO BE.

THAT MEANS MORE PEOPLE ARE FILING

MORE CASES. >> I'M SORRY, I WAS ASKING YOU A QUESTION ABOUT IF WE'RE GOING TO HIRE THESE PEOPLE FULL- TIME, AND THEY'RE GOING TO WORK FOR A MINIMUM OF EIGHT MONTHS, YOU KNOW --

>> NO, NO, THE PART-TIME PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WORK FOR A MINIMUM OF THREE MONTHS. THAT'S WHAT I JUST

SAID. >> AND YOU SAID IT WOULD TAKE EIGHT MONTHS TO GET THE PORTAL, SET RATE YOU, AT WHICH POINT IN TIME YOU DON'T NEED THE OTHER THREE PEOPLE.

>> HOPEFULLY THAT WILL BE THE

CASE. >> IF WE HAVE THEM ON STAFF AND HAVE VACANCIES, IS THAT AN OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE THEM INTO YOUR VACANCIES?

>> THE THREE FULL- TIME PEOPLE WE'RE ASKING FOR WILL BECOME

FULL-TIME PEOPLE. >> WHAT HE'S ASKING IS ONCE THAT TIME THEY'RE NEEDED FOR THIS PURPOSE IS DONE, COULD THEY BE ROLLED INTO PERMANENT POSITIONS WHERE YOU MIGHT HAVE EXISTING VACANCIES?

>> YES, THAT'S A POSSIBILITY.

>> OKAY. I GOT CLARIFICATION.

THANK YOU.

>> ANYTHING ELSE?

>> YEAH, AND THEN WILL THIS HAVE ANY IMPACT ON HELPING TO MOVE CASES FORWARD? FOR INSTANCE, ARE ANY CASES WAITING TO PROCEED, OR ANY OF YOUR RECORDS THAT YOU NEED -- PEOPLE NEED FOR CASES AND

STUFF. >> EVERY CASE THAT IS E- FILED EVERY DAY, MY PEOPLE DO NOT LEAVE UNTIL THEY FINISH EVERYTHING THEY HAVE TO DO WITH THIS. THIS IS PULLING CASES FROM THE E-FILE AND REDACTING THEM AS SOON AS WE DO, IF THAT ANSWERS

QUESTION. >> ESSENTIALLY WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS WILL HAVING THIS ADDITIONAL CAPACITY HELP YOU TO HAVE CAPACITY ON THE OTHER SIDE TO PROCESS THE DOCUMENTS NECESSARY?

>> ABSOLUTELY BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO USE THE PEOPLE WE HAVE NOW. WE HAVE OTHER PEOPLE DEDICATED TO THAT FUNCTION.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> AT THIS TIME WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

[25. ELECTIONS ADMINISTRATION:]

NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM 25.

I'LL TAKE ONE ITEM AT A TIME. 25A, PRESENTED TO THE COURT.

>> MOVE 25 A AS PRESENTED.

>> WASN'T -- SO WE'RE HAVING A -- JOHN, YOUR TEAM DID THIS RIGHT NOW I UNDERSTAND FROM YOUR PREVIOUS POINT, THIS MOVING HAD TO GO BACK AND CHANGE ONE VOTER PRECINCT TO ANOTHER?

>> AFTER WE GOT THE SHAPE FILE FROM THE ATTORNEY THAT REPRESENT THE REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE, WE STARTED GOING OVER IT LINE BYLINE TO MAKE SURE THERE WASN'T ISSUES LIKE THIS 1. WE FOUND THIS ONE WHICH THEN WOULD REQUIRE EITHER THE CREATION OF A PRECINCT BETWEEN THAT RED LINE AND SNAKE CREEK OR MOVING IT BACK TO WHERE THE ORIGINAL

[00:50:03]

BOUNDARY WAS. >> GOT IT.

>> AND THAT WAS -- WE FOUND A COUPLE OTHER THINGS I DIDN'T LIKE, BUT THIS WAS THE ONLY ONE IN LEGAL

VIOLATION. >> OKAY.

ON THAT POINT PART OF WHAT THIS COURT WAS ADVISE FROM THAT LAW FIRM IS WHAT THEY PRESENTED TO US COMPLIED WITH ALL STATE AND FEDERAL LAW, BUT WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS THAT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY

TRUE? >> THAT GREEN AREA TO THE LEFT IS A CENSUS BLOC. IT'S KIND OF A FUNNY SHAPED CENSUS BLOCK BUT IT IS A CENSUS BLOCK. WHEN THEY TRIED TO USE DAVE PS REDISTRICTING THEY TRIED TO SNAKE THAT LINE OUT BUT DID NOT REALIZE IT WAS CROSSING A BOUNDARY HERE.

>> IT'S A SIMPLE OVERSIGHT?

>> PROBABLY SO. AND, AGAIN, MAYBE THEIR INTENT WAS THAT WE CREATE A NEW PRECINCT.

BUT I DON'T SEE CREATING A NEW PRECINCT FOR 26

PEOPLE. >> YEAH, BECAUSE THAT WOULDN'T COMPORT WITH STATE LAW.

>> THAT WOULD -- AS IT STANDS NOW, IT DOES NOT CONFORM WITH STATE LAW.

>> GOT IT. AGAIN, I AM MAKING THIS POINT BECAUSE THIS WHOLE FIASCO AROUND REDISTRICTING STARTED AROUND A CONVERSATION AROUND VOTING PRECINCTS -- I'M SORRY, I'M MAKING A POINT. BECAUSE YOU SPENT SEVERAL MONTHS MAKING THIS POINT AND THEN IT MORPHED INTO SOMETHING ELSE. THIS THAT HAS HAPPENED IS VOTING PRECINCTS THAT ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW AS HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO THIS COURT AND REPRESENTED BYBY LEGAL ATTORNEY THAT THEY OBTAINED, AND YET DO YOU THINK THAT THIS WARRANTS OR REQUIRES A WHOLE -- AND I'M NOT -- ACTUALLY DON'T ANSWER THAT.

MY POINT IS AS MUCH AS THERE WAS THIS WHOLE FIASCO OVER VOTING PRECINCTS FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS A SIMPLE OVERSIGHT, NOW YOU'RE HAVING TO DO THE JOB THAT AN OUTSIDE PERSON WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE HANDLED FOR THIS COUNTY. $60,000 THAT WAS ORIGINALLY ALLOCATED TO YOUR OFFICE THAT WAS FOR THIS PURPOSE, RIGHT? IN GETTING HELP WHEN DOING THIS ACROSS THE ENTIRE COUNTY.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. AND I DON'T THINK WE SPENT ANY OF THAT. ALL OF THAT INCURRED OVERTIME ON THIS PROJECT.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. AND ALL IN FAVOR?

ANY OPPOSED? >>

ABSTAIN. >> THE MOTION CARRIES 3, ONE AGAINST, AND ONE ABSTAINED.

>> I ABSTAINED.

>> OKAY, TWO ABSTAINED. AND I WILL MOVE ONTO 25B.

COMMISSIONER, YOU NEED TO MAKE THAT MOTION OF CONSTABLE PRECINCT LINE AND ALSO JP

LINE. >> THIS HAS TO DO WITH VOTING PRECINCTS.

>> YEAH.

OH, OKAY. GO AHEAD.

>> I'LL MOVE APPROVAL OF THE NEW VOTING PRECINCT LINES.

I WILL MAKE THE NOTATION THAT THIS HAS NO AFFECT ON ANY ELECTED OFFICE -- CHANGING ANY --

>> LOCATION.

>> -- LOCATION EXCEPT FOR 22. ACTUALLY, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT. IT'S NOT CHANGING ANYTHING RELATED TO ANY ELECTED OFFICIAL OR ANY ELECTED -- ANY CURRENT

OFFICE. >> YES, SIR, WE HAVE A

MOTION. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTAIN? OKAY, THE MOTION CARRIES

[26. ENGINEERING:]

THREE, AND TWO ABSTAIN. AND NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO ITEM NUMBER 26 PRESENTED BY ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT. >> PRECINCT 1.

>> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE 26 1 AND 2.

>> I SHOULD HAVE SAID THAT. BEAUTIFUL.

WE HAVE MOTION AND SECOND ON AGENDA ITEM 26 1

[27. GRANTS ADMINISTRATION:]

AND 2. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM 27 PRESENTED BY GRANTS ADMINISTRATION. IT IS COMING FROM FORT BEND COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

>> MOVE APPROVAL OF 27 AS

PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING

[28. HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES:]

NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM 28, A, B, C, AND D, PRESENTED BY HEALTH AND HUMAN

SERVICES DEPARTMENT. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF AGENDA ITEMS NUMBER 28 A THROUGH D AS

PRESENTED. >>

SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON AGENDA ITEM 28 A THROUGH D.

>> YES, IS DR. GAYLE HERE? THERE

[00:55:01]

YOU ARE. I JUST HAVE QUESTIONS ON A AND B. ON "A," THIS IS THE PARTNERSHIP WITH THE TEXAS AND FERTILITY PREVENTION PROJECT.

CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN TO THE PUBLIC A LITTLE BIT WHAT THAT PROJECT IS?

>> ABSOLUTELY. THE WORD INFERTILITY KIND OF MAKES IT SEEM LIKE WE'RE DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT, BUT THIS IS DHS INITIATIVE WHERE THEY PARTNER WITH LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS ALL ACROSS THE STATE, AND IT REALLY IS A FOCUS ON STI PREVENTION, RECOGNIZING THAT STI'S CAUSE OR A BIG CAUSE OF IF FURLT. THIS IS ABOUT STI PREVENTION AND THE WORK WE DO AROUND STI

PREVENTION. >> WE ARE SEEING SOME INCREASES OF TRANSMISSION OF STIS PARTICULARLY IN OUR YOUNGER POPULATION. SO THIS WILL HELP ADDRESS AND CURB SOME OF THAT.

>> YES, AND THEY PROVIDE THE TESTING MATERIALS, SO IT'S NOT A COST TO THE

COUNTY. >> WONDERFUL.

AND ON ITEM B, CAN YOU JUST TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THIS ITEM AND THIS FUNDING IS GOING TO HELP US TO DO? THIS IS ON THE AIR QUALITY MONITORING

SYSTEM. >> THANK YOU.

SO TO BE REALLY -- SO THIS IS REALLY ABOUT THE ASSESSMENT OF AIR QUALITY IN FORT BEND COUNTY.

THIS IS ABOUT OBTAINING SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS TO PERFORM AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT TO GIVE FORT BEND COUNTY A TRUE BASELINE OF AIR QUALITY. CURRENTLY WE DON'T TEST FOR AIR QUALITY. WE NEVER HAVE.

WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT OUR AIR QUALITY IS BASED ON OUR APPROXIMATION OR PROXIMITY, RATHER, TO HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY. SO IN ORDER FOR US TO REALLY KNOW WHAT WE ARE, WHERE OUR AIR QUALITY IS, THIS IS OUR WONDERFUL EFFORT, THANKS TO YOU ALL TO INITIATE AN ASSESSMENTASSESSMENT AIR QUALITY IN FORT BEND COUNTY.

>> GREAT. AND ESPECIALLY WE'VE TAKEN ON SOME OF THESE CONCRETE CRUSHING PLANTS AND THE CONCRETE BATCH PLANTS AND ALL OF THAT ACROSS THE COUNTY, ESPECIALLY AS THEY'RE LOCATING NEAR SCHOOLS AND RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES.

I KNOW YOU'VE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE IMPACT ON- AIR QUALITY ON THINGS LIKE CARDIOVASCULAR HEALTH.

CAN YOU JUST SPEAK TO THAT JUST IN GENERAL?

>> THERE ARE IMPACTS IN AIR QUALITY. THERE ARE CERTAIN PARTICLES IN OUR AIR, IF THEY ARE AT CERTAIN LEVELS CAN CAUSE CHRONIC ILLNESS OR CAN EXACERBATE ILLNESS THAT PEOPLE CURRENTLY HAVE. SO THOSE WITH ASTHMA, THOSE WITH CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE.

AND IF MANY OF YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH THE, THAT WE GET, WELL, HOUSTON HARRIS COUNTY GETS ALERTS THEY DO FOR THEIR COMMUNITY MEMBERS ON- AIR QUALITY DAYS.

DON'T GO OUT IF YOU HAVE THIS OR DON'T GO OUT IF YOU HAVE THAT. THIS IS JUST A WAY TO HELP INFORM PUBLIC SO THAT IF YOU DO HAVE A PARTICULAR CHRONIC ILLNESS, YOU KNOW HOW TO PROTECT YOURSELF.

>> I JUST WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER PRESTAGE FOR PUSHING THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. REALLY IMPORTANT.

AND I DIDN'T REALLY APPRECIATE THE IMPACT OF AIR QUALITY UNTIL MY FAMILY AND I WERE CARING FOR MY GRANDPA WHO SUFFERED FROM COPD AND US NEEDING TO KNOW WHAT THE NATURE OF OUR -- THE QUALITY OF AIR WAS LIKE WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS GOING OUTSIDE.

SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS.

>> IT'S OUR PLEASURE. THANK

YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

AND WITH THAT, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

[29. HOMELAND SECURITY & EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT:]

NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM 29 PRESENTED BY HOMELAND SECURITY AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.

>> MOVE APPROVAL OF 29 A AND B

AS PRESENTED. >>

SECOND. >> AND SO I WILL ASK IS GREG, GREG, ARE YOU HERE? ANYBODY FROM HOMELAND SECURITY? OKAY, WE WILL MOVE ON THEN. I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE THAT YESTERDAY WE HAD A TEST ON OUR AIR BRIDGE SOLUTION, THE COMMUNICATION. WE HAVE 963,000 PEOPLE ON THAT SYSTEM. AND THAT IS -- I WAS SO IMPRESSED BY COMMUNICATION IN CASE THERE'S AN EMERGENCY.

AND OTHER STUFF WE'RE MOVING ON WITH AN UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN ALL THE JURISDICTIONS IN FORT BEND COUNTY IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY HOW TO OPERATE, AND I THOUGHT IT IS SOMETHING TO HIGHLIGHT. SO WITH THAT, ALL IN FAVOR?

[30. HUMAN RESOURCES:]

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 30 PRESENTED BY HUMAN RESOURCES.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM 30 AS

PRESENTED. >>

SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A

[01:00:02]

SECOND. >>

[31. PARKS & RECREATION:]

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM 31 PRESENTED BY PARKS AND RECREATION. YES, SIR.

>> OKAY, MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM 31 AS PRESENTED.

>> SECOND. >> I KNOW IT IS -- ANXIOUS TO GET IT GOING, YEAH.

>> EXCITING. THE WHOLE

$800. >> WE'VE JUST BEEN PUTTING IT FROM ONE POCKET INTO ANOTHER

[32. PURCHASING:]

POCKET. >> NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM M -- SORRY, AGENDA ITEM 32 A THROUGH M BY PURCHASING

DEPARTMENT. >> THERE IS A CORRECTION, JUDGE.

>> AND WILL YOU PLEASE READ THAT CORRECTION ITEM

32B? >> THANK YOU.

THE CORRECTION TO AGENDA ITEM 32B SHOULD BE AS FOLLOWS.

TAKE ALL APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ADDENDUM TO AGREEMENT UTILIZING DR-CPO-5347 FOR THE PURCHASE OF -- AND IT SHOULD SAY SOFTWARE PORTION OF THE LIBRARY PHONE CONVERSION IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED 219,422. 02 EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 5, 2030, FUNDS OF

OBLIGATION. >> OKAY, SO WE WILL REDO IT -- AGENDA ITEM 3 IT A THROUGH M WITH

CORRECTION. >> MOVE APPROVAL OF 32 A THROUGH M WITH NOTED CORRECTION TO B.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND

[33. ROAD & BRIDGE:]

SECOND ON THIS ITEM. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM 33, A, B, AND C ROAD AND BRIDGE

DEPARTMENT. >> MOVE APPROVAL.

>> WE HAVE SAMOTION AND SECOND ON AGENDA ITEM 33 ARB, B, AND C. ALL IN FAVOR?

[34. TAX ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR:]

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES UNIONMOUSILY. WE WILL MOVE ONTO ITEM 34 PRESENTED BY TAX ASSESSOR COLLECTOR BY FORT

BEND COUNTY. >> MOVE APPROVAL AS PRESENTED.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

[35. TEXAS AGRILIFE (EXTENSION):]

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM 35 PRESENTED BY TEXAS AGRILIFE EXTENSION.

>> MOVE APPROVAL OF 35 AS PRESENTED.

[36. Approve Bills.]

[37. Ratify the release of time-sensitive disbursements made on October 30, 2025.]

[38. Ratify the release of time-sensitive disbursements made on November 13, 2025, to be ratified by Commissioners Court on November 20, 2025. ]

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. AT THIS TIME WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM 36, 37, AND 38 APPROVING BILL AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. COUNTY AUDITOR, PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>> ALONG WITH THE TIME SENSITIVE BILLS TOTALING $39,651,549. 21 SUBMIT APPROVAL WITH ROUTINE DISPERSEMENTS OF

5,369,080.73. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND FOR ITEM NUMBER 36, 37, AND 38.

[39. Meet in Closed Session to deliberate the following matters as authorized by the Texas Government Code:]

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. AT THIS TIME WE WILL MOVE ONTO CLOSED SESSION ITEM. OLGA, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND READ IT. AND SINCE THERE IS A NUMBER OF CASES, JUST READ THE CASE

NUMBER. >> 39, MEETING CLOSED SESSION TO DELIBERATE THE FOLLOWING MATTERS AS AUTHORIZED BY THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE "A" SECTION 551. 071 CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY. 1, FORT BEND COUNTY POLICY 712, 225- # CCV-07783. 3, CAUSE NUMBERNUMBER -- 4 CAUSE NUMBER CCV-076475. 5, CLAUSE NUMBER-CCV-07763.

B, SECTION 551. 072 DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY. BARBARA GARDEN PARK, 2 MUSTANG PARK. C HAS BEEN PULLED.

D, SECTION 551.087. DELIBERATION INVOLVING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS GRANT PARKWAY SEGMENTS C1, C2.

>> OKAY, AT THIS TIME FORT BEND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT GENERAL SESSION OR REGULAR MEETING IS GOING TO BE STANDING IN RECESS FOR CLOSED SESSION AND OTHER ITEMS. AND NOW WE WILL PAY OUR ATTENTION -- TURN OUR ATTENTION

[01:05:02]

TO FORT BEND COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING. NOW TIME 2:05.

I CALL TO ORDER FORT BEND DRAINAGE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTOR'S MEETING. TODAY IS THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2025. NOW I PRESENT TO THE COURT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2, APPROVE MINUTES.

>> MOVE APPROVAL OF MINUTE.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3.

>> MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM 3 AS

PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> ANY DISCUSSION?

>> HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO ITEM NUMBER

4. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF AGENDA NUMBER 4 -- OOH, THAT'S NOT MINE. OF AGENDA ITEM AS PRESENTED.

HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER

5. >> MOVE APPROVAL OF 5 AS PRESENTED.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION?

>> WE'RE STILL NOT DONE WITH THIS? THIS IS THE MUSSEL SURVEY

RELOCATION DEAL? >> MARK, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

YOU'RE THE MAN WITH THE ANSWER.

>> THE STATE HAS CHANGED THE RULES ON HOW YOU CAN PICK THESE MUSSELS UP, WHEN YOU CAN DO THE SURVEY. WITH THE RULE CHANGES AND THE TIME CONSTRAINTS, WE'RE REALLY BEING TAXED ON IT. WE'RE WORKING AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN. AND NO, WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN IN THE RIVER AND MOVE THE MUSSELS. YOU'RE WELCOME TO GO DOWN THERE AND PICK THEM UP YOURSELF IF YOU HAVE FREE TIME TO DO THAT, BUT IT IS ONGOING, AND WE DEFINITELY HAVE SOME REALLY TIGHT TIME CONSTRAINTS THAT WE HAVE TO DO THIS MUSSEL EXCAVATION AND REPLACEMENT. AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO MEET THOSE DEADLINES AND THE TIME REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY'VE GIVEN US.

>> THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE DOING ON THE

WEEKENDS? >> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A MUSSEL

FRY. >> THANK YOU,

MARK. >> I WILL USE THIS OPPORTUNITY ACTUALLY TO THANK MARK, HIM, RUSS, POPPY, AND LAUREN, MY PROJECT MANAGER FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND PLANNING ACTUALLY GOT IN A BOAT WAS THAT LAST FRIDAY, MARK? AND WENT DOWN THE BRAZIS RIVER TO LOOK AT THE EROSION THAT'S DOWN THERE ON THE OTHER SIDE FROM MY OFFICE.

BUT THEY ACTUALLY HAD TO GET OUT THERE AND PUSH THE BOAT BECAUSE THE RIVER IS -- THE LEVEL OF THE RIVER IS SO LOW. BUT THANKS FOR GETTING DOWN AND DIRTY FOR

OUR TAXPAYERS. >> ASSUMING NO OTHER DISCUSSION, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

WITH THAT DO I HAVE A MOTION TO

ADJOURN? >> WE WILL

ADJOURN. >> WITH NO OBJECTION THIS FORT BEND COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTOR'S MEETING IS ADJOURNED. NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTOONTO JOINT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING FOR FENLD COUNTY ASSISTANT DISTRICTS NUMBER 1, 7, 10, AND 11. IT IS TIME 2:08.

I CALL TO ORDER THE FORT BEND COUNTY ASSISTANT DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS - - JOINT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING FOR FORT BEND COUNTY ASSISTANT DISTRICTS I REPEAT AGAIN 1, 7, 10, AND 11. TODAY IS THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2025. AND NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2, APPROVE MINUTES OF MEETINGS HELD AS PRESENTED BECAUSE THIS IS DIFFERENT DATES HERE.

APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.

>> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

>> AND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NOW WE WILL MOVE ONTO AGENDAAGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3.

>> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. WITH THAT, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN?

>> YES, MOVE FOR ADJOURNMENT.

>> WITH NO OBJECTION FORT BEND COUNTY ASSISTANT DISTRICT NUMBER 1, 7, 10, AND 11 MEETING IS NOW ADJOURNED. FORT BEND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT STANDS IN RECESS FOR

[40. Reconvene Open Session and consider taking action on the following matters:]

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. IT IS TIME 2:52. WE'RE BACK IN OPEN SESSION. GO AHEAD.

>> RECONVENE OPEN SESSION AND CONSIDERING TAKING ACTION ON THE FOLLOWING MATTERS. A, SECTION 551. 071 CONSULTATION WITH THE COUNTY. FULL LEAVE.

>> ALL RIGHT, I HAVE THE MOTION HERE.

I MOVE THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT ADOPT THE ATTACHED ORDER AUTHORIZING SUPPLEMENTAL

[01:10:02]

PAY DURING THE USE OF COURT APPROVED SHARED SICK LEAVE POOL HOURS AND RETROACTIVE PAYMENTS OF SUPPLEMENTAL PAY DURING THE USE OF COURT APPROVED SHARE SICK LEAVE POOL HOURS DELEGATING THE ADMINISTRATION OF SUCH PAYMENTS TO THE HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR, COUNTY AUDITOR, COUNTY TREASURER, AND DIRECTING THAT ALL PAYMENTS BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. APPLICABLE FEDERAL AND STATE WAGE AND OUR LAWS AND THE

COUNTY'S BUDGET. >>

SECOND. >> WE AND A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS ITEM. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

ITEM NUMBER 2.

>> CLAUSE NUMBER 25-CCV-07083.

>> I MOVE THAT IN AGENDA ITEM 482 BRIDGET SMITH LOSS AND COUNTY ATTORNEY FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS, BE AUTHORIZED TO INCUR LITIGATION EXPENSES FOR ANY AND ALL COST OF PRETRIAL, TRIAL, APPEAL AND INCIDENTAL COSTS INCLUDING POTENTIAL AD LITEM FEES, CITATION BY PUBLICATION FEES AND OTHER EXPENSES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED 15,000 AND NO CENTS AND THAT MOBILITY BONDS BE DESIGNATED AS THE FUNDING SOURCE.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS ITEM. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

ITEM NUMBER 3.

>> 3, CLAUSE NUMBER 25-CCV-07825.

>> I MOVE THAT THE CAUSE OF ACTION REFERENCED IN AGENDA ITEM 483 BRIDGET SMITH LAWSON COUNTY ATTORNEY FOR FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS, BE AUTHORIZED TO INCUR LITIGATION EXPENSES FOR ANY AND ALL COSTS OF PRETRIAL, TRIAL, APPEAL, AND INCIDENTAL COSTS INCLUDING POTENTIAL PUBLICATION FEES AND OTHER EXPENSES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $20,000 AND MOBILITY BONDS BE DESIGNATED AS THE FUNDING SOURCE.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS ITEM. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

ITEM 4.

>> 4, CAUSE NUMBER 25-CCV-076475.

>> I MOVE THAT IN THE CAUSE OF ACTION REFERENCED IN AGENDA ITEM 40 A. 4 BRIDGET SMITH LAWSON COUNTY ATTORNEY OF FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS, BE AUTHORIZED TO ACCEPT FOR THE COUNTY NEGOTIATION BETWEEN COUNSEL AND OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES VIA LETTER AND OTHER AGREEMENTS DATED MAY 1, 2025, JUNE 30, 2025, OCTOBER 17, 2025, AND OCTOBER 22, 2025, IN RESPONSES THERETO TO RESOLVE THE SUIT AND ASSOCIATED TAX COLLECTION ACTION AND FUND AND CLOSE THE ACQUISITION FOR THE TOTAL SUM OF $38,500 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ORDER DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION.

AND MOBILITY BONDS BE DESIGNATED AS FUNDING

SOURCE. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS ITEM.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

>> 5, CAUSE NUMBER

25-CCV-077763. >> I MOVE THAT IN THE CAUSE OF ACTION REFERENCED IN AGENDA ITEM 48. 5 BRIDGET BRIDGET SMITH LAWSON COUNTY ATTORNEY FOR FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS, BE AUTHORIZED TO INCUR LITIGATION EXPENSES FOR ANY AND ALL COSTS OF PRETILE, TRIAL, APPEAL AND INCIDENTAL COSTS INCLUDING POTENTIAL AD LITEM FEES, CITATION BY PUBLICATION FEES, AND OTHER EXPENSES IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $20,000 AND THAT MOBILITY BONDS BE DESIGNATED AS A FUNDING SOURCE.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS ITEM. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES

CUREMOUSILY. >> B, SECTION 551.

072 DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY, 1, BARBARA JORDAN PARK.

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE THE ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR APPROXIMATELY 6. 0 ACRES IN NEVILLE, TEXAS FOR BARBARA JORDAN PARK. I FURTHER AUTHORIZE FORT BEND COUNTY CLERK OR HER DESIGNEES TO RECORD THE DEED AND OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS IN THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS AT NO COST, FUNDING PARKS PONDS.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND ON ITEM B1. ANY DISCUSSION?

[01:15:01]

HEARING NONE ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES

UNANIMOUSLY. >> 2, MUSTANG

PARK. >> I MOVE TO APPROVE THE ORDER FOR FOUR PARCELS CONSISTING OF . 22 ACRES EACH IN MUSTANG PARK. I FURTHER AUTHORIZE FORT BEND COUNTY CLERK OR HER DESIGNEE AT NO COST FUNDING FROM COUNTY DISTRICT NUMBER 4 FUND BALANCE.