Jul 21, 2026 Commissioners Court

[00:00:10]

WELCOME. I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND CALL TO ORDER THIS REGULAR MEETING OF THE ELLIS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT. NOTICE OF THIS MEETING HAS BEEN PROPERLY AND LEGALLY POSTED PURSUANT TO THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, WHICH IS FOUND AT THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551. UNLESS THERE'S AN OBJECTION, I WILL GO AHEAD AND DECLARE THE MEETING OPEN. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL ON COMMISSIONER RANDY STINSON TO LEAD US IN THE INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PLEASE STAND. BY, LORD. PRAISE THE LORD. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO FOR US. LORD, JUST PRAY TODAY THAT YOU WOULD JUST WATCH OVER THIS COURT, LORD, THAT YOU WOULD HAVE US IN THE BUSINESS THAT WE HAVE AT HAND. LORD, THAT WE ALWAYS PUT YOU FIRST IN EACH AND EVERYTHING WE DO, BUT WE KNOW WE'RE NOT IN CONTROL OF THIS WORLD, LORD, AND GIVE US THE PEACE THAT WE KNOW BOTH TOMORROW. AND WE KNOW THAT THE INFANTRY GOD, I JUST THANK YOU FOR EACH AND EVERY FORCE THAT WE HAVE HERE IN THE COUNTY.

THANK YOU FOR THE PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR US HERE. WE PRAY, LORD JESUS, BLESS THEIR LIVES THAT WE'LL WATCH OVER THEM. KEEP YOUR FAMILY SAFE. I PRAY FOR THOSE THAT SUPPORT US, LORD.

FIRST RESPONDERS, PRAY GOD THAT YOU WOULD JUST KEEP THEM SAFE ON THE ROADS. LORD, WE DO HAVE THEM TO ALWAYS PUT CITIZENS FIRST. GOD, I PRAY THAT IN EACH AND EVERYTHING WE DO TO THIS POINT, AT ALL. AND YOU RECEIVED THE LORD, PRAY AND ASK THESE THINGS, MY LORD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST. AMEN. AMEN. AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR TEXAS FLAG. PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO TEXAS. TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER STINSON. AND AGAIN, WELCOME, EVERYONE. IF YOU'RE JOINING US ONLINE, EITHER LIVE OR LATER, WE WELCOME YOU AS WELL. OKAY. BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THE AGENDA, I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT WE HAVE A PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. IF YOU'D LIKE TO COMMENT ON A, ON ONE OF THE POSTED AGENDA ITEMS, IF YOU'D PLEASE FILL OUT OUR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FORM. IT'S AVAILABLE OUT IN THE LOBBY.

THAT WOULD BE THE DOOR BEHIND THE DOORS TO MY RIGHT, THE DOORS TO YOUR LEFT, IF YOU WILL THEN FILL OUT THAT FORM AND HAND IT TO OUR OR OUR COUNTY CLERK. SHE WILL BE SURE TO GET

[CONSENT AGENDA]

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY I I IS ANYONE OPPOSED HEARING NO OPPOSITIONS OPPOSITION ITEMS A ONE THROUGH A 17 AND F ONE THROUGH F SIX PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY, COMMISSIONERS, WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEM 3.4 AND 3.5. IF

[1.1 Discussion, consideration, and action on a variance request to Volume I, Section IV (A) regarding the minimum paved public road frontage requirements for Parcel ID 181743 - Weakley Branch Road Phase 2. This 34.726-acre site is located + 1,270 feet north of the intersection of FM 66 and Weakley Branch Road, Maypearl, Road and Bridge Precinct No. 3. (Part 1 of 2)]

THE DEVELOPER WAS LOOKING TO BUILD AND DEVELOP EIGHT LOTS. BECAUSE WEEKLY BRANCH IS NOT A PUBLIC PAVED ROAD. EMPHASIS ON PAVED. THEY NEEDED A VARIANCE TO DEVELOP THAT PROPERTY. SO HENCE NOW THEY'RE TRYING TO DEVELOP THE NORTHERN 34 ACRES FOR TEN LOTS AND ASKING FOR THE SAME VARIANCE REQUEST. AS A PART OF THAT THEY WILL ALSO THERE'S ALSO A ROAD AGREEMENT

[00:05:03]

YES. I THINK I'D LIKE TO PULL IT FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION. IF WE COULD DO THAT THREE TWO OR THIS ONE. WELL THIS 1 IN 3. OKAY. BOTH OF THEM COINCIDE. SO I'D SAY, OKAY, OKAY. COMMISSIONER STINSON HAS REQUESTED TO PULL THESE BACK UP AFTER THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER STINSON HAS SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE LAWYERS RELATIVE TO BOTH ITEMS. 1.1 AND ITEMS ITEM 3.2 WILL COME TO 3.2 LATER, BUT WE WILL NOT TAKE ACTION AT THIS PARTICULAR MOMENT. WE WILL ASK THE LEGAL TEAM QUESTIONS AS ALLOWED UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071, AND THEN WE WILL. WHEN WE COME BACK INTO THE OPEN SESSION, WE WILL TAKE UP 1.1 AND 3.2 AGAIN.

[1.2 Discussion, consideration, and action on a variance request to Volume I, Section IV (A) regarding the minimum public road frontage requirements for Parcel ID No. 180419 & a portion of 180418. This ± 1.30-acre site is located + 1,345 feet southeast of the intersection of Honeysuckle Trail and Saralvo Road, in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) of the City of Waxahachie, Road and Bridge Precinct No. 4.]

THIS IS AN APPROXIMATELY 1.3 ACRE SITE THAT. THAT IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1345FT SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF HONEYSUCKLE TRAIL AND CERRALVO ROAD, IN THE EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF WAXAHACHIE ROAD AND BRIDGE. PRECINCT NUMBER FOUR. ALBERTO.

YES, JUDGE AND COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR ONE LOT. THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO SUBDIVIDE THIS ENTIRE TRACT, THE ONE THAT YOU SEE OUTLINED IN RED UP THERE INTO FIVE LOTS.

ONE LOT WILL BE FACING OFF OF A HONEYSUCKLE TRAIL, WHICH DEAD ENDS RIGHT INTO THE PARCEL.

THAT'S REQUESTING THE VARIANCE. RIGHT NOW THEY ONLY HAVE ABOUT 19FT OF ROAD FRONTAGE AND IT'S ABOUT 1.3 ACRES. SO THE VARIANCE WOULD BE JUST FOR THAT LOTS WITH ROAD FRONTAGE ON THAT PARCEL I GUESS UP THERE. IT ALSO INCLUDES I GUESS A CELL TOWER AS WELL. SO STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS VARIANCE SUBJECT TO THE THREE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT. WELL I'M I'M REAL FAMILIAR WITH THIS AREA AND THAT THE AREA THEY'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE THAT HAS BEEN THAT WAY FOR 50 YEARS. SO I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD CHANGE WHAT'S WHAT'S THERE NOW. AND IT ACTUALLY DEAD END DEAD ENDS INTO THAT ONE ACRE LOT.

THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS, IS THEY THEY SUBDIVIDED IT INTO FIVE NOW. RIGHT. SO I'M OKAY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE VARIANCE. I'LL SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 1.2 FROM COMMISSIONER BUTLER AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER PONDER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY I I IS ANYONE OPPOSED HEARING NO. OPPOSITION ITEM 1.2 PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

[2.1 Discussion, consideration and action to purchase one (1) Caterpillar Model 926 Wheel Loader from Holt Cat for Road and Bridge Precinct 2 through the Sourcewell Cooperative Purchasing Contract No. 020223, in an amount not to exceed $225,629.00.]

[00:10:03]

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE STARTED DOING SINCE I GOT IN OFFICE WAS KIND OF LOOKING AT SOME OF THE EQUIPMENT AND SEEING WHAT'S COSTING US THE MOST MONEY TO WORK ON WHAT WE'RE SPENDING THE MOST MONEY ON MAINTENANCE TO KEEP IT RUNNING. AND THIS IS ONE OF THE PIECES OF EQUIPMENT THAT'S AT THE TOP OF THE LIST, BECAUSE IT IT IS EATING OUR LUNCH AND IT IS CAUSING THAT THAT REPAIRS AND PARTS BUDGET TO SKYROCKET, THAT WE'VE ALREADY HAD TO MOVE MONEY IN TWICE THIS YEAR, I BELIEVE. SO IT'S REALLY JUST TRYING TO REPLACE EQUIPMENT THAT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. I THINK THE CURRENT ONE WE HAVE IS 20, 24 YEARS OLD. I THINK THAT'S RIGHT. SO MUCH. NOTHING WRONG WITH OLD EQUIPMENT. WE'LL RUN IT THAT LONG UNTIL IT STARTS GIVING ISSUES. AND THAT'S WHERE WE WHERE WE'RE AT NOW. OKAY, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? REPLACEMENT FOR YES. DOES IT SAY IT'S COMING OUT OF. OH YEAH.

THAT WILL COME OUT OF OUR BUDGET, NOT OUR BUDGET. OKAY, SO THE SOURCE OF THE FUNDS WOULD BE THE BUDGET. YES. OKAY. WHICH WE HAVE THE MONEY BUDGETED THERE TO DO THIS.

COMMISSIONERS. ANY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM 2.1. SO MOVED. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 2.1. AND COMMISSIONERS, I ASSUME WITH THE CAVEAT THAT THE SOURCE OF THE FUNDS WOULD BE THE BUDGET. IS THAT CORRECT? WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONERS IKE TO THAT EFFECT. WE HAVE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER STINSON. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY I, I IS ANYONE OPPOSED HEARING NO.

OPPOSITION ITEM 2.1 PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY. THANK YOU. WE'LL NOW. THANK YOU. EJ WE'LL

[3.1 Discussion, consideration, and possible action to enact a burn ban order for Ellis County, effective immediately. - Fire Marshal Tim Birdwell]

NINE IN THE NEXT TEN DAYS ARE GOING TO BE OVER 100 DEGREES. SO AS OF NOW, WE ARE REQUESTING A BURN BAN BE IN PLACE. OKAY, SO THE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE PUT AN IMMEDIATE BURN BAN BAN INTO EFFECT. COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I KNOW WE'VE HAD A LOT OF FIRES ALL OVER THE PLACE HERE LATELY. SO ANYBODY TO SPEAK ON IT IN THE LAST NO. 45 DAYS SINCE SUNDAY, 45 POINTS SINCE SUNDAY? YES, SIR. ON AVERAGE I'LL MAKE IT FROM 401 TO 4, 64, 46 ON AVERAGE, AND WE'RE UP TO 583 ON THE MAX. OKAY, SO COMMISSIONER PONDER HAS MADE A MOTION TO ENACT AN IMMEDIATE BURN BAN. AND COMMISSIONERS IKE HAS SECONDED IT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. IS ANYONE OPPOSED HEARING NO OPPOSITION.

THAT ITEM 3.1 BURN BAN IS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU SCOTT. THANK YOU.

[3.2 Discussion, consideration, and action authorizing the County Judge to execute a road improvement agreement for Weakley Branch Road between Ellis County and Legacy Land MG, LP through their authorized agent, Travis Tekell. - Ellis County Engineer Zach Gerich (Part 1 of 2)]

[3.3 Discussion, consideration, and action authorizing an amendment to the existing Ellis County Drainage Master Plan to increase the study area to North Grove Creek and adding additional detailed study areas to the existing South Prong Creek to revise from FEMA zone A to zone AE. - Ellis County Engineer Zach Gerich]

[00:15:03]

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY I, I IS ANYONE OPPOSED HEARING NO. OPPOSITION ITEM 3.3 PASSES

[3.4 Discussion, consideration, and possible action on an update from the joint meeting with potential city partners for a regional animal shelter and potential direction on future discourse. - County Commissioner Precinct 3 Louis Ponder (Part 1 of 2)]

AND THAT WAS NUMBER ONE, WE NEED A SHELTER, BUT WE REALLY NEED IT NOW. AND WE CAN'T WAIT GENERALLY TWO AND A HALF TO THREE YEARS FOR SOMETHING TO GET BUILT. I WOULD REALLY HOPE THAT WE HAVE ANIMAL SERVICES BUDGETED INTO THE FISCAL YEAR 2027. ONE ABLE TO ATTEND THAT WORKSHOP. I ASSUME THAT YOU WILL ALSO HAVE THAT IN YOUR CONSIDERATION OF PUBLIC FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET. SO THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT POINT AND WE'LL BE LOOKING FOR THAT. AND WE'RE HERE TO SUPPORT A REGIONAL SHELTER AND THOSE NEEDS. I BELIEVE WHEN SPCA WAS HERE THAT YOU HAD NINE OTHER CITIES WITHIN THIS COUNTY THAT WERE PART OF THAT JOINT AGREEMENT WITH THE SPCA. SO SPCA, BUT THAT DID NOT TAKE THE NEED FOR ALL THESE PARTNER CITIES AS WELL. SO THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF WHAT WE DO. SO I WOULD ASK AT THIS POINT THAT, NUMBER ONE, COULD WE LOOK AT AT LEAST OUR EARLY IMPLEMENTATION SATELLITE SHELTER USING PART OF THOSE FUNDS FROM THAT 15 MILLION? I BELIEVE THE CITY OF FERRIS AND FLYING BEE HAVE SOME FACILITIES THAT COULD BE USED FOR THAT ALMOST IMMEDIATELY, BUT THERE COULD BE SOME SHORT TERM IMPROVEMENTS THAT COULD BE MADE AND EVEN GIVEN CONSIDERATION FOR THE FULL, REASONABLE SHELTER PART, ULTIMATELY, THAT WE NEED A LOCAL STAKEHOLDER INPUT AS WELL. SO I THINK AT THIS POINT, I KNOW YOU ALL HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITIES, AND THOSE MIGHT HAVE BEEN JUST MORE ONE ON ONE MEETINGS. I THINK WE ARE HERE AS STAKEHOLDERS THAT WE WOULD REALLY LIKE TO HAVE THAT POINT, AND NOT JUST US, THE CITIZENS

[00:20:02]

SO THEY'LL TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE STATE LEGISLATION THAT'S BEING PROPOSED. AND THEN. WHY AM I HAVING A SENIOR MOMENT HERE? WE HAVE ONE OTHER SPEAKER, BUT I DO APPRECIATE YOU ALL BEING THERE. I HOPE THAT I THINK, COMMISSIONER, IF YOU'RE THERE AND LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS AS WELL, ANY OF YOU ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO ATTEND AND SAY A FEW WORDS AT THE BEGINNING OF THAT AS WELL. SO WITH THAT, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU, MR. GREG. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT. SO WE ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE ANY ACTION ON ITEM 3.4 AT THIS TIME. WE. COMMISSIONER PONDER HAS SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE LEGAL TEAM, THE LAWYERS, WHICH WE WILL TAKE UP IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AS ALLOWED BY SECTION 551.07, ONE OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. AND WE WILL NOW MOVE TO ITEM

[3.5 Discussion, consideration, and action concerning compliance with Ellis County Tax Abatement Agreements. - Chief of Staff Erik Test (Part 1 of 2)]

SURE, MISS STEVENSON COME ON UP. AND I KNOW YOU'VE SPOKEN WITH US BEFORE, SO YOU MAY REMEMBER.

IF YOU'LL JUST PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. THANK YOU. CINDY STEVENSON, 328 PIERCE ROAD, RED OAK. I KNOW YOU KEPT THIS A VAGUE ITEM ON THE AGENDA, SO WE DIDN'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE ITEM WAS. SO SINCE YOU'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH FIVE OF YOUR 14 ACTIVE ABATEMENTS, I HIGHLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONSIDER NOT CONTINUING TO DO THESE HUGE ABATEMENTS, ESPECIALLY FOR THE DATA CENTERS. I MEAN, WHERE DOES IT STOP? WE'VE ALREADY GOT 3 OR 4 DATA CENTERS GOING ON IN RED OAK, RED OAKS ALREADY GIVEN THEM TAX ABATEMENTS. THEY'RE GOING TO COME TO YOU AND WANT MORE ABATEMENTS. THEN THERE'S 2000 AN MIDLOTHIAN AND THAT UP. THAT'S

[00:25:01]

ERIC, I WASN'T SURE IF YOU HAD ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD. OKAY. VERY, VERY GOOD. OKAY. WE'LL

[3.6 Discussion, consideration and action to move an approved easement, Minute Order #133.26 for Alpine Development and the City of Waxahachie located at the Ellis County Farm. - Chief of Staff Erik Test]

THE ENGINEER AND SURVEYOR. WELL, THE SURVEYOR WHO SURVEYED THE COUNTY FARM FAILED TO NOTE ON THE SURVEY A DRIVEWAY THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR SOME TIME, AS WELL AS A TREE LINE. AND SO THE ENGINEER THEN JUST DREW THE EASEMENT THE MOST EXPEDITIOUS WAY BY HUGGING THE PROPERTY LINE. AND WHENEVER THE CONSTRUCTION CREW GOT OUT THERE, THEY REALIZED THEY WERE GOING TO DIG UP THIS ROAD. SO I BELIEVE WE HAVE A NEW ALIGNMENT FOR THE EASEMENT. SO WE JUST NEED TO CHANGE THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR THE EASEMENT, WHICH CHANGES THE ALIGNMENT FOR FOR THE SEWER LINE. YEAH. THE AMOUNT OF LAND IS STILL STAYING. THE SAME EASEMENT STAYED THE SAME, JUST SHIFTING OVER ROUGHLY 30FT TO CLEAR THAT TREE LINE. AND THAT HOMEOWNER'S DRIVEWAY IN THAT EASEMENT. RIGHT. THE COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? WORKS FOR ME. ALL RIGHT. WE GET IT RIGHT. THIS TIME. WE'LL RECEIVE, YOU KNOW, FULL SURVEY DRAWINGS AFTER THEY'RE CONSTRUCTED. SO WE'LL HAVE THAT PORTION OF THE COUNTY FARM ACTUALLY SURVEYED PROPERLY. RIGHT. OKAY. CLARIFY THAT THE PORTION THAT THE DRIVEWAY THAT'S SHARED ON THE COUNTY FARM BETWEEN THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO THE EAST AND TO THE NORTH OR TO THE SOUTH, THAT WILL STILL BELONG IN THE COUNTY EASEMENT, CORRECT? CORRECT. IT DOESN'T CONVEY OVER TO THE NOTHING'S BEING SWITCHED OVER, SLIDING IT OVER. SLIDE IT OVER. RIGHT. YEAH, JUST A CORRECTION. SO COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 3.6. SO MOVED. OKAY. WELL I BELIEVE WE HAD A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER PONDER. YEAH. EVERYBODY DID. WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER PONDER AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER BUTLER TO APPROVE ITEM 3.6. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY I, I DOES ANYONE OPPOSED HEARING NO. OPPOSITION ITEM 3.6 PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY.

[3.7 Discussion, consideration, and action to propose increases for salaries, allowances, and other expenses for elected county and precinct officials in Fiscal Year 2027 for publication in accordance with Local Government Code §152.013. - Chief of Staff Erik Test and Budget Specialist Amil Spencer-Berry]

SECTION 152.013. WE HAVE OUR BUDGET SPECIALIST, AMEL SPENCER BERRY, HERE TO SPEAK TO US.

I'LL JUST MAKE A COUPLE OF OPENING COMMENTS. ONE IS AS AS COMMISSIONERS, YOU AS YOU KNOW, THIS IS PART OF THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. WE HAVE TO VOTE TO PROPOSE SALARIES AND BENEFITS AND INCENTIVES FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS. BUT WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY ENACTING THOSE TODAY. BUT WE DO HAVE TO TAKE AN OFFICIAL VOTE TO PROPOSE THEM. AND. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, AND KEITH AND TEAM CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. BUT WHEN WE DO ACTUALLY ADOPT THESE SALARIES, WE CAN ADOPT SOMETHING LESS, BUT WE CANNOT ADOPT SOMETHING MORE THAN WHAT THAN WHAT WE PUT IN THE PROPOSAL. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, AMEL, DO YOU WANT TO KIND

[00:30:01]

COMMISSIONERS. SO FOLLOWING UP, AS YOU MENTIONED, APPROVING THIS ITEM PROPOSES THE SCHEDULE AND IT BEGINS THE REQUIRED PUBLICATION AND NOTICE PROCESS. SO THE AMOUNTS ARE NOT FINAL OR THE AMOUNTS WILL BE FINALIZED WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET. SO THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW DISTRICT JUDGES, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, THEY'RE ALL GOVERNED BY THE GOVERNMENT CODE. SO THEY APPEAR ON THE SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETENESS, BUT THEY CARRY NO CHANGE BECAUSE THOSE AMOUNTS ARE FIXED BY STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE MEAT OF THE PROPOSED EXISTS WITHIN A 3% COST OF LIVING INCREASE OR COST ACROSS THE COUNTY ELECTED POSITIONS. THAT WILL BE THE TREASURER'S OFFICE, THE AUDITOR DISTRICT CLERKS, THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS, ALL OF THOSE SIT AT A 3% COST OF LIVING INCREASE. THE SAME WITH THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, WITH THE MINOR EXCEPTION OF THE JUSTICE OF THE PEACE PRECINCT THREE. OUTSIDE OF THE COLA, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR THE AFTER HOURS MAGISTRATE TO BE ABLE TO SIGN THE BLOOD DRAWN WARRANTS. THAT JUSTICE OF THE PEACE IS A LICENSED ATTORNEY, SO THERE EXISTS A $6,000 FLAT STIPEND IN THAT PROPOSED SCHEDULE THERE. IF I COULD JUST JUMP IN ON THAT REAL QUICK FOR BOTH THE PUBLIC AND THE COMMISSIONERS. SO BLOOD DRAW WARRANTS BY STATUTE. THE MAGISTRATE WHO SIGNS A BLOOD DRAW WARRANT HAS TO BE A LICENSED ATTORNEY. THAT'S KIND OF OBVIOUS. IT'S A VERY INVASIVE THING TO TAKE SOMEONE'S BLOOD. SO. SO WHEN SOMEONE'S PULLED OVER FOR DUI OR DWI AND THE, THE, THE AGENCY, THE POLICE AGENCY NEEDS THAT BLOOD DRAW WARRANT, THEY HAVE TO GO TO A JUDGE OR OTHER MAGISTRATE WHO IS A LICENSED ATTORNEY. OF COURSE, A LOT OF TIMES THIS HAPPENS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, AS YOU MIGHT SUSPECT. AND WE NEED A PERSON THAT THAT IS WILLING TO TAKE THOSE CALLS AT 3 A.M. IN THE MORNING TO SIGN THESE WARRANTS. IT HAS BEEN TRADITIONAL THAT A CITY ATTORNEY OR CITY JUDGE, ONE OF OUR CITY JUDGES AND ONE OF FOR ONE OF OUR LOCAL CITIES WHO IS A LAWYER, WAS DOING THAT. HE IS RETIRING. AND JUDGE COX IS TAKING ON THIS ROLE. AND THIS IS A STIPEND CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE THE CITY JUDGE WAS RECEIVING FOR THIS SERVICE. SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF EXPLANATION ON THAT. OKAY. AND WE'LL GO AHEAD. YEAH. OUTSIDE OF A UNIFIED 3% COST OF LIVING INCREASE ACROSS A MAJORITY OF THOSE ON THE SCHEDULE, YOU WILL NOTICE THAT THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW JUDGE TWO IN JANUARY WILL BE A NEW JUDGE TAKING SEAT THERE. AND SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS THAT THE CURRENT SALARY HAS BEEN PARADED, THE THREE YEARS FROM OCTOBER TO DECEMBER, AND THEN THE JUDGE WILL BEGIN AT THE THE BASE SALARY THAT'S SET BY LAW. AND SO WE PRORATED FROM JANUARY TO SEPTEMBER. AND SO THAT NUMBER THERE REFLECTS THE COUNTY'S OBLIGATION FOR THAT POSITION. OUTSIDE OF THAT, THE CONSTABLE'S AND THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, THEIR ADJUSTMENT IS ALIGNED WITH THE STEP PLAN. AND SO FOR CONSISTENCY WITHIN THOSE OFFICES, THEY DO NOT SIT AT THE 3%, BUT MORE SO THEY'RE ALIGNED WITH THEIR STEP PLAN. RIGHT.

AND I'LL JUMP IN ON THAT AS WELL. AND BY THE WAY, FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, THIS WILL BE POSTED ON THE WEBSITE. I APOLOGIZE IF IT'S A LITTLE BIT HARD TO READ. SO TO KIND OF CAP WHAT WE'RE DOING THERE TO SORT OF SUMMARIZE, THERE'S A FEW THINGS THAT ARE, ARE DIFFERENT. ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE GETTING A 3% COLA. THE TWO EXCEPTIONS TO THAT ARE THE SHERIFF AND THE CONSTABLES, AND THAT RELATES TO THE STEP PAY PLAN. WE'VE GOT THAT PUT UP ON THE ON THE SCREEN HERE NOW. SO I'LL KIND OF GIVE YOU THE BACKGROUND ON THIS. SO LAST YEAR THERE WERE SOME SIGNIFICANT ADJUSTMENTS TO THE STEP PLAN, STEP PAY PLAN FOR OUR SWORN LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS. THIS WAS NECESSARY TO KEEP OUR SALARIES FOR FOR LEOS IN LINE WITH THE OTHER AGENCIES FOR WHOM WE'RE COMPETING TO HIRE THESE FOLKS. SO BECAUSE WE HAD A LOT OF OPEN POSITIONS, DEPUTY POSITIONS THAT WE WERE UNABLE TO FILL, AND WE FELT IT APPROPRIATE TO MAKE A STEP PAY ADJUSTMENT. LAST YEAR. THE TOP THE TOP PORTION THAT YOU'RE SEEING, IF YOU LOOK ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE TABLE, IT SHOWS THE ACTUAL STEPS. SO WHEN YOU HAVE WHEN FOR PERSONS WHO WORKED FOR THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, WHICH IS FROM DEPUTY TO

[00:35:03]

SO THAT'S WHY THE SHERIFF IS RECEIVING MORE THAN A 3% COLA. AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, IT'S MY OPINION. OPINIONS MAY MAY VARY THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT, PUBLIC SAFETY IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT THING THAT WE HAVE TO REMAIN COMPETITIVE BY HIRING APPROPRIATE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO KEEP THE KEEP THE FOLKS SAFE. SIMILARLY, A SIMILAR THING IS HAPPENING AT THE CONSTABLE LEVEL. THE DEPUTY CONSTABLES ARE BEING PUT INTO THE SAME STEP PAY SYSTEM, WHICH IS WHICH IS PUSHING THE ELECTED CONSTABLE SALARY A LITTLE PAST THE 3% COLA. SO THAT'S THE BACKGROUND ON THAT. COMMISSIONERS. ANY COMMENTS OR. NO. I'M OKAY. THANK YOU. WE'VE WE'VE WORKED REALLY HARD TO KIND OF PUT THIS TOGETHER AND APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS AND, AND ERIC AS WELL. ERIC, JUST SO THAT, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO KIND OF RUN THROUGH ON THAT? I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THIS SHOULD COMPLETE THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AS FAR AS.

YEAH, I BELIEVE WE'VE COMPLETED FROM OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. YEAH, IT'S BEEN A THREE YEAR PROCESS TO INCREMENTALLY IMPROVE, GRADUALLY SWORN LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER PAY. YEAH. AND THIS IS THE THIS COMPLETES THE CYCLE.

AND WE'VE GOTTEN THE RANK AND FILE DEPUTIES UP. WE'VE GOTTEN THE BRASS LEVEL DEPUTIES UP AND EVERYONE'S KIND OF ON PAR OR PARITY WITH, WITH THE SIZE OF THE STEPS AT THIS POINT, RIGHT? SO WITH THE COURT'S APPROVAL, WE'LL MOVE FORWARD TO PUBLISH THE NOTICE. COMMISSIONERS, I'M HAPPY TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION. BUT AGAIN, THIS IS JUST THE PROPOSAL THAT WILL BE OFFICIALLY PUBLISHED AS REQUIRED. AND THEN WE WILL VOTE AT A LATER TIME, I BELIEVE, POSSIBLY ON AUGUST 18TH OR POSSIBLY LATER. WE WILL VOTE. I THINK IT'S ON THE 18TH. WE WILL VOTE TO ACTUALLY ENACT THE ELECTED OFFICIAL COMPENSATION. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT, I WOULD TAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 3.7. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT ITEM.

OKAY. WE HAVE WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 3.7 FROM COMMISSIONER PONDER AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER STENSON. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY I. I IS ANYONE OPPOSED HEARING NO. OPPOSITION ITEM 3.7 PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO THE

[MOTION TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION]

REGARDING A LETTER FROM SELCO SERVICES FOR ELLIS COUNTY JAIL FOOD SERVICES. WE ALSO HAVE ITEMS. 1.1, 3.2 AND 3.4 FOR WHICH WE WILL. WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION UNDER TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. SECTION 551.071, SUBSECTION TWO, TO CONSULT WITH LEGAL COUNSEL.

AND I WON'T READ THAT WORD SALAD OF WHAT THE LAWYER RULES ARE CALLED, BUT LEAVE IT TO LAWYERS TO BE REALLY WORDY IN HOW THEY DESCRIBE THEIR RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT. BUT

[00:40:06]