[1. Call to Order.]
[00:00:09]
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. IT'S ALWAYS GREAT TO SEE YOU ALL. TODAY IS WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2026. AND THE TIME IS NOW 5:30 P.M.
I CALL TO ORDER THIS PUBLIC HEARING OF FORT BEND COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S COURT. WELCOME TO THE COURTROOM AND THANK YOU TO THOSE WHO ARE JOINING US.
WE'RE LIVE STREAMING. PLEASE BE ADVISED WE HAVE THE
[2. Conduct a public hearing on the proposed FY2027 budget for Fort Bend County, pursuant to Texas Local Government Code Section 111.067. ]
PRESENCE OF A QUORUM. PLEASE PROCEED.>> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PRO HE POSED FY2007 BUDGET FOR FORT BEND COUNTY PURR SUNLTS TO TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 111.067.
>> ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANYONE IN THE AUDIO I DON'T THINKS TODAY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON TODAY'S PUBLIC
HEARING? >> WE DO, JUDGMENT WE HAVE ONE
PUBLIC SPEAKER. >> PLEASE, COME UP.
>> HER NAME IS MISS FELISHA YOUNG.
>> FANTASTIC. PLEASE COME FORWARD.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I SPOKE THE LAST TIME WHEN
YOU -- >> WILL YOU DO US ALL A FAVOUR
AND LIFT THE MIC UP TO YOU? >> IS THAT BETTER?
>> THERE YOU GO. EVERYBODY CAN HEAR YOU THAT'S
LISTENING ONLINE NOW. >> OKAY.
THANK YOU. AS I WAS SAYING, GOOD AFTERNOON.
I'M FELISHA YOUNG. I'M AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE FOR THE 328 JUDICIAL COURT. I WAS HERE LAST TIME AND I SPOKE WHEN YOU ALL DECIDED TO GO AHEAD AND ELIMINATE 3 ASSOCIATE JUDGES, AND I'M HERE TO ASK YOU ALL TO RECONSIDER THAT POSITION.
THERE WASN'T ANY WORKSHOPS DONE ON THAT.
AND SO THERE WASN'T AN OPPORTUNITIES AS WE HAD LAST TIME TO COME IN AND INFORM YOU ALL ABOUT WHAT ACTUALLY GOES ON IN OUR COURT. WE'RE NOT INTERCHANGEABLE.
THERE ARE TWO STATUTORY FAMILY LAW COURTS THAT CENTRE ASSOCIATE JUDGES. THOSE COURTS CENTRE NEVER SHARED ASSOCIATE JUDGES. MY COURT IS THE FIRST COURT THATS HAD HAD AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE AND THAT'S BEEN FOR 42 YEARS.
THAT'S NOT A TEMPORARY POSITION. THE 387TH IS A GENERAL JURISDICTION COURT, BUT IT IS MANDATED TO HEAR FAMILY LAW CASES. AND THE NEW COURT, WHICH IS A 501EST IS ALSO A JURISDICTIONAL COURT MANDATED TO HEAR FAMILY COURT CASES. THE 387TH WAS THE SECOND COURT TO GET AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE AND THAT'S BEEN ABOUT 27 YEARS AGO.
I DON'T HAVE MY PAPERWORK BECAUSE I WASN'T AWARE.
I'M GIVING YOU AN APPROXIMATE MAKES.
THE 505TH WAS THE THIRD FAMILY COURT TO BE CREATED IN IT AS AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE. SO THERE'S NEVER BEEN A TIME IN THE HISTORY OF FORT BENDS COUNTY WHEN THE FAMILY COURTS HAVE SHARED AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG EACH OF YOU ALL HAVE BEEN PRESIDING HERE AS COMMISSIONERS, BUT IN 2015 WAS THE LAST TIME THAT I THINK THAT WAS WHEN THE 505TH WAS CREATED, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS 2016 WHEN THE ASSOCIATE JUDGE WAS GIVEN AT THAT TIME. EACH TIME THIS ISSUE HAS COME UP, WITH REGARDS TO AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE, UNTIL RECENTLY, THERE'S BEEN ONE THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED. AND THERE'S NEVER BEEN A MANDATE FOR US TO SHARE. AND IT IS NOT A GOOD IDEA.
THE CASE LOAD IS SUCH TO WHERE WHERE WE ARE WORKING.
WHEN WE'RE NOT IN COURT WE ARE REVIEWING ORDERS.
THERE'S TWO REPORTS THAT I'VE HEARD A LOT OF TALK ABOUT.
AND THERE IS THE OCA WORK STUDY REPORT.
AND AS I'VE TOLD YOU ALL BEFORE, YOU ALL ARE USING THAT FOR A PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS NOT INTENLDZED.
THAT REPORT, ALTHOUGH THE NUMBERS ARE STILL THERE, WAS NOT MEANT TO SHOW THAT ACCOUNTING HAD TOO MANY JUDGES.
I READ LAST TIME SPECIFICALLY, NOT WHAT I THOUGHT, BUT WHAT THE OCA WORK STUDY, WHAT THEY SAID IT WAS INTENDED FOR.
AND THEY ACTUALLY WELCOMED COUNTIES TO HAVE EFFICIENT COURTS, SO THAT THEY COULD SERVE THE COMMUNITIES THAT THEY SERVE.
AND I'M JUST -- IT'S THE FACT THAT WE WERE HERE LAST YEAR AND WE ARE HERE AGAIN. AND IT WAS A SHOCK AND A SURPRISE BECAUSE WHEN THE BUDGET CAME OUT, IT HAD ME IN MY COURT'S BUDGET. YOU ALL MADE THE DECISION TO CUT THREE. DIDN'T SAY WHICH THREE.
BUT AT 501, THAT VERY SAME DAY, THERE WAS AN E-MAIL THAT WAS SENT OUT THAT ALL OF US HAD BEEN REMOVED FROM THE BUDGETS OF OUR COURTS. BECAUSE WE'RE NOT INTERCHANGEABLE, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS AND HOW THAT'S SUPPOSED TO LOOK. THE COURTS OF GENERAL JURISDICTION, THEY'RE MANDATED TO HEAR CRIMINAL LAW CASES FIRST. THEY HAVE A LOT OF SPECIALTY COURTS. THOSE SPECIALTY COURTS ARE RUN BY THE ASSOCIATE JUDGES. WHEN YOU GET RID OF ASSOCIATE JUDGES, WHAT YOU'RE GETTING RID OF ARE SOME OF THOSE SPECIALTY
[00:05:01]
COURTS. I'VE SEEN THE ARTICLES THAT SAY THAT IT'S SAVING THE TAX PAIRS BY CUTTING THE JUDGES.THAT'S JUST NOT CORRECT. I WOULD HAVE YOU ALL LOOK AT THE BUDGET THAT YOU ALL PUT OUT FOR WITH 2027 AND LOOK AT THE AMOUNT IT COSTS FOR JUST ONE COURT. IT WAS OVER , LIKE, $600,000 FOR ONE COURT WITHOUT AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE.
THAT'S NOT INCLUDING THE ADDITIONAL STATUS FROM OTHER ENTITIES. AS I RECALL, WHEN YOU WERE ALL DISCUSSING CREATING COURTS LAST YEAR, I WAS TOLD YOU ALL HAD TO FACTOR IN NEW OF BAILIFFS, NEW NDA'S, THAT YOU HAD TO FACTOR IN NEW CLERKS. SO IT'S DEFINITELY NOT A COST SAVINGS IN TERMS OF MONEY. BUT THE OPPORTUNITY COSTS THAT YOU'RE NOT LOOKING AT ARE THE PEOPLE THAT WE ALL SERVE.
YOU HEARD NO ONE COME UP HERE THE LAST TIME AND TELL THAT YOU IT WAS A GOOD IDEA. AND IT'S BECAUSE IT'S NOT.
IT'S JUST NOT A GOOD IDEA. KNOWN HOW YOU ALL EXPECT FOR US TO DO IT WHEN WE'RE WORKING AND WE'RE WORKING HARD FOR THE COURTS THAT WE SERVE, BUT ALSO THE COMMUNITY THAT WE SERVE.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE NOT INTERCHANGEABLE.
AND SO I WOULD ASK RESPECTFULLY THAT YOU ALL WOULD RECONSIDER YOUR POSITION. IN 2025 THERE WAS 7,612 NEW FAMILY LAW CASES THAT WERE FILED.
THAT WAS IN 2025 ALONE. THAT IS NOT INCLUDING THE CASES THAT ARE ALREADY PENDING. WHAT THE OCA REPORTS THAT COME OUT MONTHLY SHOW, IT'S A CLEARANCE RATE.
NEW CASES COMING IN AND CASES THAT ARE DISPOSED.
WHAT IT WILL NEVER SHOW, BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO SHOW, ARE ALL THE OTHER HEARINGS THAT WE HEAR.
WE HEAR TEMPORARY ORDER. I JUST GOT OUT OF A TEMPORARY ORDER HEARING THAT LASTS MORE THAN A COUPLE OF DAYS.
THAT'S LONGER THAN SOME TRIALS, YOU KNOW.
WE HEAR MOTIONS. WE'RE DOING RESEARCH.
WE'RE IN THE BACK LOOKING AT ORDERS, SIGNING ORDERS, THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF THAT GOES ON IN OUR CHAMBERS SO I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU ALL EXPECT AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE TO HAVE TWO BOSSES AND HOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO SERVE THEM. I DO KNOW AT ONE POINT IN TIME THE GENERAL JURISDICTION JUDGES HAD AN ASSOCIATE THAT THEY SHARED. BUT AT THAT TIME FORT BEND LOOKED VERY DIFFERENT TMENT POPULATION WAS NOT WHAT IT IS.
THE CASE LOAD WAS NOT WHAT IT IS.
AND THERE WERE NOT THE SPECIALTY COURTS THAT THEY HAVE.
AND SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT OUR COURT AND OTHER COUNTIES, IT'S COMPARING APPLES TO ORANGE S. YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT, 1, WHAT TYPE OF COURT IT IS. BECAUSE A FAMILY COURT IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN A GENERAL JURISDICTION COURT.
I'LL USE HARRIS COUNTY. EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE A BIGGER POPULATION. IN HARRIS COUNTY THEY HAVE CIVIL COURTS AND THEY HAVE CRIMINAL COURTS.
THEY HAVE FAMILY COURTS. AND THEY HAVE PROTECTIVE ORDER COURTS. THEY HAVE TAX LAW COURTS.
IN FORT BENLDZ GENERAL JURISDICTION THEY HEAR CRIMINAL, CIVIL, TAX. WHAT I'M BEING TOLD BY THE ASSOCIATE JUDGES THAT HEAR THOSE CASES IS REVENUE FOR THE COUNTY.
THEY'RE THE ONES WITH YOU THAT ARE HEARING THAT.
THEY'RE THE ONES THAT ARE DOING THESE SPECIALTY COURTS THAT CUT DOWN ON PEOPLE BEING OVER IN THE JAIL.
BECAUSE EVERYDAY THEY'RE IN THE JAIL, THAT COST, EVERY TIME SOMEBODY HAS TO RESET, THAT COST.
SO THERE'S COSTS THAT YOU ALL ARE NOT ADDING IN.
SO WHILE I WILL AGREE WITH THE ARTICLE THAT I SAW THAT, YES, THE STATE DOES PAY FOR THE DISTRICT COURT JUDGES, THE DISTRICT COURT JUDGES, THEY DO NOT PAY FOR THEIR STAFF.
THEY DON'T PAY FOR THE ADDITIONAL STAFF.
AND YOU LOOK AT YOUR OWN NUMBERS IN YOUR BUDGET.
IT DOES NOT SUPPORT THAT YOU'RE SAVING MONEY.
AND IF YOU'VE HEARD THE OUTCRY FROM THE PUBLIC, AND FROM THE PEOPLE WHO TALK TO YOU, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU AT LEAST TABLE THIS AND LOOK AT IT NEXT YEAR. WHAT IS THE HARM.
BECAUSE WE WERE ALREADY IN THE BUDGET.
THERE'S NO HARM IN KEEPING US. AND IF YOU'RE REALLY CONCERNED, ACTUALLY LOOKING AT IT, ACTUALLY TAKING THE INVITATION THAT WAS GIVEN LAST YEAR AND CONTINUES TO BE EXTENDED, WHICH IS COME OVER AND SEE WHAT WE DO. UNDERSTAND WHAT WE DO.
AND NOT JUST LOOK AT US ON PAPER.
I GET SOMETHING PRETTY MUCH EVERY MORNING FROM YOU, MR. WONG, THAT SAYS THAT YOU VALUE THE EMPLOYEES OF FORT BEND COUNTY. WELL, I'M AN EMPLOYEE OF FORT BEND COUNTY. AND SO ARE THOSE OTHER ASSOCIATE JUDGES. YOU SAY YOU VALUE THE COMMUNITY.
YOU ALL SAY YOU VALUE THE COMMUNITY I WANT TO BELIEVE YOU.
[00:10:04]
BUT IF YOU VALUE THE COMMUNITY, WHY DON'T YOU ACTUALLY TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND NOT MAKE A SWIFT JUDGMENT.BECAUSE LAST TIME WHEN WE WERE HERE, LITERALLY I DIDN'T SEE ANYONE. IF YOU DO, I APOLOGIZE.
BUT I DIDN'T SEE ANYONE TAKE THE TIME TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE PAPERS THAT WERE GIVEN TO YOU ALL.
WHAT I SAW WAS JUST A SWIFT MOVE TO SAY ACCESS.
AND AS I SAID, I ASKED LAST YEAR, WHEN IN THE HISTORY OF FORT BEND COUNTY HAS JUDICIAL POSITION EVER BEEN DEFUNDED.
AND I WAS TOLD NEVER. AND THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT.
YOU KNOW, NO ONE LIKES TO BE IN THAT POSITION.
LIKE I SAID, I HAVE A VESTED INTEREST.
BUT I HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN A LOT OF WAYS.
BECAUSE I'VE BEEN ON THE OTHER SIDE WHERE I'VE BEEN AN ATTORNEY AND I KNOW WHAT IT IS TO HAVE A PRESIDING JUDGE AND AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE. WE ARE ESSENTIAL STAFF.
I WANT YOU EACH TO THINK ABOUT YOUR STAFF.
AND TO THINK ABOUT YOUR BUDGETS. AND IF SOMEONE JUST CAME IN AND DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT ANYBODY IN YOUR OFFICE DID, AND SAID WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT, I THINK WE CAN HAVE A COST SAVINGS. YOU SHARE SOME OF YOUR ESSENTIAL STAFF WITH ONE OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS.
WE DON'T SAY WHICH STAFF. OR WHICH ONE.
OR IF SOMEONE JUST SAID, MR. WITHINING WOULD, WE'RE JUST GOING TO TAKE OUT A COUPLE OF THESE THINGS BECAUSE WE DON'T THINK THEY'RE ESSENTIAL. YOU ALL WOULD BE SAYING, WELL, HOLDEN. WE NEED OUR STAFF.
THERE'S A REASON WHY WE HAVE OUR STAFF.
WHY ARE YOU MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT OUR STAFF AND WHAT'S ESSENTIAL TO MAKE OUR OFFICES RUN ARE.
WE'RE NOT JUST PIECES OF PAPER. WE'RE ESSENTIAL STAFF.
WE'RE CORE MEMBERS OF THE COURT. AND AGAIN, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU ALL RECONSIDER YOUR POSITION AND WHEN YOU SAY THAT YOU CARE ABOUT THIS COMMUNITY, THAT YOU SHOW IN YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING.
DO WE HAVE ANYMORE SPEAKERS? >> NO, SIR.
>> ALL RIGHT. LET ME ASK AGAIN.
IS ANYONE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON TODAY'S PUBLIC HEARING? HEARING NOW, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY REQUESTS, I'LL NOW CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? >> MOTION TO ADJOURN.
>> SO MEET SOMETHING ADJOURNED. NOW LET'S GO TO THE ATTENTION OF FORT BEND COUNTY DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
GOOD AFTERNOON. TODAY IS WEDNESDAY WITH, SEPTEMBER 9, 2026. TIME IS NOW 5:42 P.M.
I CALL TO ORDER THIS PUBLIC HEARING OF FORT BENDS COUNTY DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS. O LGA, PLEASE PROCEED.
>> TO CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED 2027 BUDGET FOR THE FORT BEND COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT, PURSUANT TO TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 111.067.
>> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANYONE IN THE AUDIO YEJS TODAY WHO WITH WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON TODAY'S PUBLIC HEARING? I WITH WOULD LIKE TO ASK AGAIN, IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON TODAY'S PUBLIC HEARING? SEEING NONE, I WILL NOW CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN?
>> MOTION TO ADJOURN. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THANK YOU FOR COMING. AND HOPEFULLY --
>> MEETING ADJOURNED, RIGHT? >> YES.
MEET SOMETHING ADJOURNED, SIR. YES, SIR.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.