Quorum Court - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. I want to call to order the August meeting of the Washington County Quorum Court. It's good to see everyone here, colleagues and citizens. Welcome. Tonight, I'd like to start with a prayer and pledge. So if you'll stand with me, we'll get underway. Dear Heavenly Father, we come to you this evening and just ask for your hands and your blessings on this meeting tonight. Please be with us as we listen and decipher and make the most efficient and effective decisions for the people of Washington County. We ask this in Jesus' name. Amen. Thank you. With that, we'll move to the adoption of the agenda. Do we have any changes or amendments to the agenda? If not, I'll entertain a motion to adopt the agenda. Motion by Justice Lemming, second by Justice Dennis. All those in favor?

Aye.

Those opposed? The agenda has been adopted. Item number four, preliminary motions. Are there any preliminary motions this evening? Justice Dean.

Thank you, Judge. I'd like to make a motion that all ordinances and resolutions be read by title only.

I have a motion by Justice Dean to read ordinances and resolutions by title only, and I had a second by Justice Rios-Stafford. All those in favor? All those opposed? That passes. Ordinances and resolutions will be read by title only. Number five is a citizen's comment period. We have a 15-minute public comment period with a three-minute limit per individual. Are there any public comments this evening before we start the business?

Thank you for the instructions on the pad too, I appreciate that. Sarah Moore, Fayetteville, Arkansas, the Executive Director of the Arkansas Justice Reform Coalition. Tonight you're gonna be hearing about accepting funding for, I think it's $100,000 for the SCAP program. I know we've had this conversation ongoing in these chambers and in the community about the impact that this really has to the community. When we voluntarily participate in programs that have bias towards parts of our population, this one, when you look at the reporting and the numbers of who's impacted, It's mostly been our Marshallese neighbors. These are folks that are here in a legal immigration status because of damages that we actually, as the United States, did to their islands. They face, unfortunately, oftentimes, deportation right away from their US citizen children. We know when we voluntarily participate in programs like this that we don't have to participate in. We know that folks that are victims of crime often don't report that crime. People stay in situations of domestic violence where families and children often are in peril. And so I'd really ask that you consider to not accept these funds and not to continue to participate in this program so that it tells all of our community members across Washington County that they matter, that we care about them, and that we want to protect their safety alongside everyone else in our community. I appreciate you hearing my comments tonight. I hope we'll also continue to think about the fact that our jail continues to be dangerously overcrowded with 160-plus sleeping on the floor. And when we're participating in programs like this, they're contributing to that overcrowding and are creating unsafe conditions, which can ultimately lead to the death of individuals or can cause injuries or harm to staff members. So I really think we'll consider those things as we go to vote tonight on this program. Thank you.

Public comments.

Good evening. Good evening, Judge. Good evening, Mr. Lester and members of the court. I'm Kristen Pawlik. I'm just here today to remind you that there is one judicial race that's still on the ballot. I'm in a runoff, November 3rd. There were three candidates, and the two that got the highest number of votes are continuing on. I was very fortunate to carry Washington County, but I am asking for your vote and for y'all to come out and vote again on November 3rd. The third candidate was Mr. Seth Creed, and I'm happy to announce that he's given me his support. So if you voted for him, and I know many of you did, I would ask you to give me a look and visit with me so that I can earn your vote as well. Thank you so much for your service to this county. And I live at 4106 North Brushstroke Lane. It's County Road 2101. Thank you.

Thank you. Public comments.

Hi, Andela Hines for District 7 here in West Fayetteville and West Farmington. Speaking today, I just want to bring up something that I think we've seen happening in our community in Washington County and statewide and even nationwide that I've really appreciated. And I want to commend the police departments that have recently been listening to the public that have told them that flock cameras have been eroding trust between them and the public. And I'm really hopeful. This happened just recently in Farmington in my district. I'm very hopeful that tonight, as we visit SCAP funding and other criminal justice issues, that you listen to your community members and understand that they want to also have trust with their departments. No matter what the intent of a program is, that the community impact is very clear. I also want to commend the organizations that came before those. We've recently seen a lot of flock information in mainstream media and even right wing media like Conduit. But I also want to commend the people that came before our immigrant rights organizations a year ago were talking about this being an issue that could affect all of us. So I want to make sure that we are prioritizing our immigrant voices as well today. So when they tell you that something erodes the trust that they have in their police departments and their communities, that we listen to them as well. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Laura Vishegas, and I have lived at 5005 Bonita Place in Springdale for a quarter of a century. Imagine that. So I want to raise two points. Why is the appropriation for these SCAP program monies being rushed through, even though there hasn't yet been any announcement of the amount the federal court is willing to reimburse? you guys, so I just don't understand why the need is to do it so quickly tonight. Although there, and my second point, although there are certainly other nationalities that are affected when Washington County makes the choice, and this is a deliberate choice, as SCAP is a totally voluntary grant, and I repeat, participation in SCAP is voluntary, our Marshallese neighbors are by far the ones who are the most impacted. The Marshallese, the same Marshallese who are here legally and who are officially considered as non-immigrants. They're not even considered immigrants and they have no easy path to citizenship either. the Marshallese who are here because we, the United States, dropped 67 nuclear bombs on their islands, including the largest nuclear detonation ever. We even conducted experiments on them afterwards without their consent in order to study the effects of radiation, arguing that, quote, human subjects were more useful than mice, unquote. We destroyed the ecology of their islands and affected their health for generations, and that's continuing now. Even as a teacher in our Springdale Public Schools, the nurses would tell me of illnesses that were particularly high in the Marshallese, and they believed this was because of genetic transference of the effects of radiation. Okay. So how are we compensating for these sacrifices? How are we compensating these people? Well, 1,196 persons actually received some money out of the whole population, and the rest were later given the right to come here freely and work in low-paying and physically demanding jobs and to be treated as second or third class citizens. Not citizens, but residents. And now, because of SCAP, if they are charged with as little as two misdemeanors, we turn their information into the government and ICE, subjecting them to detainment, incarceration, and potential deportation. Is this by any stretch of the imagination any way to treat, much less repay, a population for making such a huge sacrifice for us Americans? How can you justify the harm this causes to them?

Thank you, ma'am. That's your three minutes. Time has expired. Public comments.

Just quickly, I urge you to not pass the appropriation and to withdraw from staff.

Thank you.

How can you sleep at night if you do pass it?

My name is Abigail Hendricks. I live in District 6. I'm pretty lazy about this kind of government stuff, if that gives you any idea how far this has gone. I'm making sure that all of my friends and family know how all of these city council meetings are going. And they're not going to stop hearing from me until they've cast their ballot in November. Because I've been trusting all of you to be doing a good job for me, blindly and stupidly. But if we want to continue choosing voting over violence, we need to start seeing some integrity. My Marshallese and Latino neighbors have consistently been the backbone of our community and pursuing this aggression towards them, let alone anyone, is a stain on our humanity. I want less people in jail because it's no secret that our justice system isn't very just and it doesn't work that great. We're not cavemen. We don't need more ban with big stick. We're smarter than that. I don't want more money going towards the police and jails, expanding all of that. It's just such a waste, especially now. Yeah, stop wasting our money on this stuff.

Public comments, come on.

Good evening, I'm Kendi Skocke, retired history teacher and literacy teacher of 40 plus years in Farmington, Fayetteville, and elsewhere. 2231 East Revere Place in Fayetteville, lived there for over a quarter of a century, so happy to call Arkansas my new home. I am also here to urge you, everyone, to be on the right side of history. Okay, what's going on right now in our country is not gonna last, but the repercussions will. If you look on the Washington County website, which I do every day, which is a bad habit, you can see the people have been arrested, JoJo, 10, 15, 20 times, and then you see a fellow Hispanic, zero, zero prior arrests, And then release, no, because ICE has taken him. Release, no, because of ICE. Fayetteville was the first school to integrate after the civil rights decisions. I'm urging you to all do the right thing, to be on the right side of history. So please, please follow your conscience and do the right thing, and I thank you.

Hi, good evening. My name is Basil Branham. I'm from District 11. I hope everyone's been staying hydrated today. I am here in opposition to accepting SCAP funding. And I'm here because I have spent the majority of my adult life working in agriculture or in medicine here in Fayetteville or in Springdale. And so most of my adult working life has been centered around Latina and Marshallese communities. And the damage and impacts of SCAP and of working with ICE is far worse than any sort of benefits we get out of it, just because of the destabilization that it causes within families. I'll reinforce what Ms. Moore said earlier regarding people being afraid to call the police. I've had multiple conversations with people going through domestic violence situations who point blank will never call the police no matter how bad it gets because they're afraid of what would happen to them because of their immigration status. And this just further makes that issue worse. And I think there's ways that we can help people by not accepting this money. Additionally, the loss of income for families who might have had a primary breadwinner removed from the country because of this can cause more crises that will lead to more misdemeanors that will cause more violence. It just keeps on going. So examples of misdemeanors, DWIs, DUIs, petty theft, right? So if your dad has been deported and your mom is now working two shifts and you're in charge of your younger siblings and oh, she didn't get to go to the store, you might go to the gas station and steal some food. And if you get caught, that's a misdemeanor. One more, you're out of here. And most of these people would not want to be in that situation ever. And we should do our best as a community to support each other and say, no, this amount of money is not worth ripping families apart, causing childhood trauma, causing trauma for the whole family, when in the long run, we could do other things to make up for that funding. I appreciate your time and I hope you have a good evening.

Thank you, public comment.

Hello there, I'm Sally Ganim and I live in Washington County. Like the other lady, I've never been to anything like this before because honestly, I never felt like I had to. Stuff is out of control. You guys all participated in a prayer to imply that you have Christian morals, ethics, beliefs, values. SCAP is not any part of that. ICE is not any part of that. And you all know it, and you know it deep down. And the other thing, you pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. We're built on immigrants, hello. None of us are natives. Last time I checked, I mean, Maybe some of you guys are natives. I don't know. But anyway, in Benton County, where they are fully cooperative with ICE, my daughter of a mixed race won't go and protest with me against ICE because she says, I present black, mom. I'm not going to go out there. I have the curly hair. I have the thick lips, the big nose. It's not safe for me. Do you guys realize that that's the county that's right over there? That's what's going to happen here if we participate with that. It's not OK. And as far as the flock cameras go, I don't want any part of that. When I was 16, you can look it up on my driving record and see how many times I got pulled over by one police officer. He stalked me. He followed me. This block crap is not okay either. What's going on? Why are we living in such a police state? Why is the military controlling our society? Why is it not controlling our borders? Our interior was fine.

I heard the timer go off.

Thank you.

I'm pretty disgusted.

And with that, our public comment period has expired. Next, item number six is approval of the minutes. The minutes were sent out with the agenda packets. If there's no corrections to be noted, I'd entertain a motion to accept those minutes. Motion to accept the minutes by Justice Ecke. Justice Lemon, can we consider yours as second? All those in favor? Those opposed? The minutes from the July 16th minute have been accepted. Item number seven is the county judges report. We'll keep this pretty short this evening. First of all, always have to appreciate and thank the hospitality provided by the Washington County Extension Office. Tonight, the snacks were provided by the Butterfield Extension Homemaker Club. We certainly appreciate that. Some very fine homemade snacks back there this evening. We appreciate that. Those people coming in and giving us a little bit of love through this. The only thing I have to mention this evening is, as we're probably all aware, summer's coming to an end, even though it's hard to imagine that right now. But I say that because, keep in mind, school children, all the schools, the universities are back in session. Please be careful. Be children aware as we're trying to commute. The commutes get busy again. Also, keep in mind all the men and women across all of our society, especially in the Washington County, who have to be out in these elements day to day, working and completing their jobs. Of course, to me, I always think of the Washington County Road Department, who's out on that asphalt every day, regardless of the triple-digit heat. Safety is a big issue. Hydration is a big theme for us right now within the road department. I know there's countless other county employees, city employees, countless other citizens around this county who go in and clock in every day in these adverse conditions, and I really appreciate them. With that, I have two appointments to recommend this evening. Those were sent out earlier this week. First of all, I would like to nominate Emily Pluckett to the West Fork Library Board and William Watts to the Washington Water Authority Board. Justice Ecke?

Thank you, Judge. I'd like to make a motion that we accept your nominations for these boards.

I have a motion to accept. Do I have a second? Justice Koeger, I'm sorry.

Thank you, Judge. I would like to, if Mr. Lester could answer or address the question that I raised in my email about a possible conflict of interest with having a county employee serving on the Washington Water Authority Board. I brought up the thing that might happen, like if there were policies or infrastructure or matters that came before the WWA, that might conflict with what the quorum court or the county judge wanted.

Wouldn't.

Absolutely. Councilor, will you just answer that question?

sure i mean i think there's a potential conflict in anything that goes on with the county albeit from businesses and family members of elected officials to anything i mean i think that'd be up to the individual to recuse if there was some sort of major conflict but we put county there's a lot of county employees that have been put on boards county boards in the past so i don't see that as some large overlying issue like i explained in the email that i responded

Oh, I haven't seen it, okay. I can't get my county emails.

So we have a motion. And a second.

And I want to comment on this really quickly because this is some of my fear that's taken over with these appointments. First of all, I want everybody to understand these are not my appointments personally. These are not my political appointments. First of all, I'm sure Ms. Emily Pluckett's a very nice lady. I've never met her. These come from the reprimandation of the other library board members in West Fork and from the mayor in West Fork. What I consider my job to do at that particular moment is to do minimal basics to make sure Ms. Pluckett's not a convicted felon or murderer or something like that. If she's in good standing as a citizen, I put her forward to you, ladies and gentlemen. mostly because she's willing to serve and she's apparently got the credentials to do it, but also because we love for people to come and volunteer for these boards. What I caution you against is bringing people's names up in public and making up stories or scenarios or debating their qualifications. We have a hard enough time for these boards as they are. With that, are there any logical discussion points on this, Justice Pond? And I'll go through the...

From what little discussion we've had so far, I would like to entertain a notion, maybe a motion, to separate these two appointments to separate boards.

OK. I'll take that as a friendly amendment. Would you take that, Justice Hickey?

Yes.

OK. Any other discussion? This will be on first. Ms. Pluckett, Mr. Allen, will you please call the roll, Mrs. Pluckett? This will be Mrs. Pluckett's confirmation to the West Fork Library Board.

Justice Pond. Yes. Justice Bruns. Yes. Justice Wilson. Yes. Yes. Justice Massengill? Yes. Yes. Justice Rivera-Lopez? Yes. Yes. Justice Lyons? Yes. Yes. Justice Ecke? Yes. Yes. Justice Dean? Yes. Yes. Justice Washington? Yes. Yes. Justice Koger? Yes. Yes. Justice Dennis? Yes. Yes. Justice Hiers? Yes. Yes. Justice Rios-Stafford? Yes. Yes. Justice Lemming? Yes. Yes. Justice Ricker? Yes. Yes.

It's confirmed. Mr. Allen, will you please call a roll? This will be on the nomination acceptance of William Watts to the Washington Water Authority.

Justice Pond. No. Justice Bruns. No. Justice Wilson. Yes. Justice Massengill. Abstain. Abstain. Justice Rivera-Lopez. Abstain. Justice Lyons. Yes. Justice Ecke. Yes. Justice Dean. No. Justice Washington. Yes. Justice Koger. No. Justice Dennis. Yes. Justice Hires. Abstain. Justice Rios-Stafford. Abstain. Justice Lemming. No. Justice Ricker. No.

All right. That fails. With that, we'll be moving on. Unfinished business. Sir, we didn't cue your mic.

I thought we split them.

We did.

So we're not going forward on the other?

We did that one beforehand.

Oh, okay. Thank you.

Item number eight. Counselor, you read that by title only.

An ordinance authorizing Washington County, Arkansas to join the Arkansas Property Assessed Capital Expenditure Improvement District, approving and incorporating the Uniform Participation Agreement, authorizing the county judge to execute the Participation Agreement and for other purposes.

Justice Rhea Stafford. Oh, I'm sorry.

Thank you, Judge. Thank you. I wrote up a little something because it's been a few months since we first heard this in committee, I think about three months now. Just to give us all a reminder of what this is, why we're doing it, or why I'm bringing it forward and what it would do. This ordinance would allow Washington County to join the Arkansas PACE Improvement District. By joining, we would make PACE financing available here in Washington County. PACE can be used by owners of businesses, industrial properties, farms, nonprofits, mixed-use properties, and apartment buildings with five or more units. It can help pay for certain improvements to existing buildings or as part of new construction. Those improvements can include things like heating and cooling systems, insulation, lighting, roofing, water-saving systems, which we know right now in weather like this is important, and other qualifying upgrades. There's already a proposed apartment project in Fayetteville that would like to use this program. Pace Equity is considering up to $14 million in private financing for a roughly $60 million project. Washington County has to join the Arc Pace before that financing could move forward. Since we first heard this ordinance back in May, Benton County has also started talks about joining the statewide ARCPACE program. Taking part is completely voluntary. A property owner chooses whether to apply. The money comes from private lenders, not county tax dollars. The financing is tied to the property through a special assessment, which is where the assessor's office comes in. When this was in committee, we heard from Assessor Hill. He said he expects this program to be budget neutral for the county, and he does not expect it to add any meaningful workload for his office. If a property owner defaults, the county's collection process could come into play, but the private lender and not Washington County is the one who takes the financial risk. Washington County would also have a voice in how the program is run if we pass this. The county judge would appoint one member to the ArcPACE board. The quorum court confirms the appointment, just like all our other board appointments. The board oversees the program, including how PACE applications are reviewed and approved. The ArcPACE district is legally and financially separate from Washington County. PACE debt does not become county debt. and under state law, public tax dollars cannot be used to repay PACE financing. So by joining ArcPACE, we can give Washington County property owners another way to pay for improvements if they choose to use it, we get a voice in how the program is run, and county taxpayers will never be on the hook for the PACE debt or financing. So for those reasons, I encourage a yes vote on this ordinance, and I make a motion to pass.

We have a motion to pass by Justice Rios-Stafford. I heard second by Justice Rivera-Lopez. Any further discussion on item number eight? Justice Ricker. I just have one question. Does this apply to private property or just commercial property?

It doesn't apply to private homeowners. Does not. It does not apply to private homeowners. It only applies to commercial properties.

It does apply to apartment buildings if they have at least five units.

Justice Bruins.

Thanks, sir. It's been so long since we've gone over this. So help me if I'm wrong on this. But isn't this run and decided by a board in Little Rock? And all we get is one vote to the board, which would be the judge has the opportunity to recommend, and then we confirm. So we will only have one voice. on whether that money's given out or not. And the second thing I'm asking is, is this just about money? That these people have projects that are trying to get money, like a loan? Is that what I remember?

Yeah, so Mr. Jonathan Raspberry's here and he's prepared to answer questions. He's come up from Little Rock to answer questions about the program.

If you will, sir, you punched that bottom right button on that microphone. You should be good now.

Yeah, hi, Jonathan Rasberry with Arkansas Advanced Energy. I've been up here a few times, so thanks for letting me come back, address any of your questions or concerns. So, Justice Bruns, just to hit at your first question, the reason Pulaski County has the majority of seats right now is because we had to keep the board operating to keep the program operating while we transition adding all these new counties. So we've added Arkansas County. They will appoint the first empty board seat. There's not one yet, so they haven't appointed one yet. If Washington County joins tonight, then you guys will appoint the next board seat, and Pulaski will be down to five. If a new county joins, they'll appoint Pulaski down to four. So we had to keep the board intact. But I also think it's important to point out, when we say Pulaski County, we don't mean the county government in any way. So the ARCPACE board is a completely separate entity The people that are on the board now, we've got one board member who owns a restaurant. We've got one who owns a roofing company. We've got one who is retired. They're just citizens. It has nothing to do with the county government. So your second question, is it just about money? What we're trying to do is add a tool to the toolkit for people who want to finance these types of projects. We're trying to give people access to this particular mechanism because sometimes equipment that increases efficiency can be more expensive equipment. And we don't want to limit what someone wants to do to their building because they can't pay for it. So we're trying to offer this tool if they want to take advantage of it. But again, like Justice Rios-Saffa said, it's completely voluntary. And it does go through that board approval process. Yes.

Well, my question on the money was that basically what they're um the board would be doing is granting the money they're not granting policies and all that stuff for correct um the the like our county have have has a cup and so they wouldn't have anything to do with that that's what i was asking yeah justice massengill

Yeah. So I had a couple of questions. Can this money be used to install solar panels?

It can, yes.

What about a solar field? Somebody wants to put in a large solar installation?

Theoretically, it could, yes. That'd be a pretty big and pretty expensive project. So we'd have to go find a big national lender to do that. But if it's there, property and it's zoned agricultural or industrial or, I mean, I doubt a property that big would be commercial, but if it was, they can do that if they want to, yes, sir.

What about a wind farm? Can it be used to fund a wind farm?

I think it could. I think that would be rare. I think people who are going to install that kind of project probably already have their capital laid out, so they probably wouldn't need to come to us, but it would be eligible under the program guidelines, yes.

Sorry, I thought I had another question. So I guess I'm still trying to understand the relationship between, is it Arkansas Advanced Energy Association? Foundation.

Foundation? Yes, sir.

Okay.

So we are the administrator of the ArchPACE district. The state statute for PACE outlines the ability of the ArcPACE board to name a third-party administrator to take the administration off of their plate. So that's what our role is. So we help the potential projects through the application process, and then once a project is completed, we make sure that they pay their money back like they're supposed to, and we do measurement and verification on each project to make sure that the project they did is doing what they expected.

Okay. And then the board, the board actually creates, I guess, the rules and approves the projects.

Yes, sir. They govern the handbook, the guidelines that govern the district on how projects get approved, what kinds of projects get approved. And then they review applications, which when they review an application, it's mostly to review the energy or water savings to make sure that that all checks out according to the guidelines and then look at the they The project would have their lender already lined out before they come before the PACE Board, so they would review the lender's loan terms and how much they want to give out and make sure that all checks out. So in the program guidelines, there's some details about what kinds of projects can and can't be approved, both from a scope standpoint and from a financial standpoint.

One final question. I guess if there was a default on this loan, then the county would be responsible for, I guess, taking possession of the property and selling the property in order to get recovery?

I'm not positive that they would be responsible for taking possession of the property, but we would activate the collections mechanism on the tax roll, yes. And then once the property does sell, whether it's in the county's control or whether the lender takes it over, which is probably the more likely scenario, especially from these bigger lenders, that they would take over ownership of the property. Once that property sells, the PACE portion can either carry over with the new owner or the new owner can choose to just pay it off at that point.

Okay, thank you. Yes, sir.

Justice Leeming.

Thank you, sir. When are we going to see a guideline book to know what we're working out of, what we're working for?

We have the guidebook online on our website, and I also believe I might have sent you guys a preliminary copy back in April or May when we first came up here.

And a little bit more to what he said about if it goes to default, whenever the county would just put a lien against it until it sold it. If it never sold again, if it just like sat there, the county wouldn't, nobody would sell it. It just sat there blank. What would happen there?

The PACE portion of the loan would be due every year with the tax roll. So however the property owner was handling the, their debt process. If when that portion came through, then the county would remit it to whoever it is owed to. But like I said, I believe most cases, the lender would be the one who would kind of include that in their underwriting process. I don't work on the finance side. That's why we have lenders to do that for us. So I'm not 100% positive on that process. But if the lender was the one who'd take over the property, then it would just know they'd be stuck with it that's why we're trying to make such an emphasis on that the county really has no financial risk in this situation it's all falls on the lender and on the arc pace district the county will be taking the money it's kind of a program like our fire department's work that goes in our taxes and they get shipped out the

But our fire department has to pay a certain percent of that to our collector to do that. Yes. And this program, as far as I've seen, don't pay nothing.

No, it will. Yes, sir. So the county has the ability to negotiate up front what that fee costs.

Has the ability. Is it in the guidelines now?

Yes. Okay. How much? And it's also in the state. How much? That's up to the county. Okay. So you guys set the price, and if we think it's fair, we're good with it. If not, then we'll come back with something else, and we'll get it sorted out. But, yeah, we would never expect the county to work for free.

Yeah, but we're going to pass this, and we haven't got it guidelines. The county's going to set that before we pass this to go?

The assumption is that the county would set it once they even had to do any work. The hope is that no projects will ever go into default in a perfect world, right? And you would never have to do the work. But once that process happens, then...

I'm just talking about... Collecting your money and sending the check to the pace to pay them every year That money is going to be collected as our taxes and then our people's going to take it out and send it straight to y'all That percent are to be they are to be somehow they can get a little percent of that to do the handling of the money We only expect to activate that mechanism when a project goes into default So when that happens, we are happy to pay the county what a fee is that they think is fair.

Thank you. Yes. I

Justice Lyons. Thank you, Chair.

So the only really power the board has is to approve the favorable financing based on its criteria, one of which is they identify whether they believe they're going to be successful or not. Is that correct?

Yes, that's their main responsibility, yes.

And just to remind, I think everybody knows this, but to say the obvious, if whatever... is approved and they get financing for, if it's not agricultural or residential, comes through us as a cup. So if it's a wind farm, if it's a solar farm, it still has to come through the cup process, so we still have control of what goes into our county. Thank you, sir.

Any further discussion?

Public comments on item number eight? Thank you. Thank you, sir, appreciate you. Good evening.

Good evening, Judge and Quorum Court members. My name is Peter Nearingarten, and I'm a Washington County resident. I'm also the environmental director for the city of Fayetteville. In that role over the past 13 years, I've led the city's investment in a number of energy efficiency and clean energy projects that have helped save the city of Fayetteville and our taxpayers over $500,000 per year in avoided utility costs. In the spirit of full disclosure and transparency, I'm also the chair of the Arkansas Advanced Energy Foundation Board. We're a statewide nonprofit energy policy and advocacy group. that advocates for greater choice in utility ratepayer programs that provide clean, reliable, and affordable energy solutions for Arkansans. And as you just heard, we're also the sponsor organization, or the administrator for Arkansas' Property Assessed Capital Equity Program, or PACE. PACE gives property owners a smart, affordable way to upgrade their buildings with no upfront cost. By financing improvements through a long-term property assessment, owners can immediately reduce their energy utilization, they can lower their utility bills, and they can boost their property values, all while spreading out payments in a predictable and manageable way. PACE also fuels local economic growth. Every project from a new roof to HVAC system upgrades creates demand for contractors, installers, and suppliers. This drives job creation, strengthens local businesses, and supports the broader economy here in Washington County. Most importantly, PACE empowers property owners to make critical improvements that they might otherwise postpone. Whether repairing aging infrastructure or installing modern, efficient systems, PACE removes that financial barrier to help make those necessary upgrades achievable for those property owners. Please support this ordinance and allow Washington County property owners the option to access PACE financing so they can make common sense and affordable investments in their property. Thank you very much.

Thank you, sir. Public comments? Seeing none, we'll take up the question. I have a motion to pass item 8.1 by Justice Rio Stafford, a second by Justice Rivera-Lopez. Mr. Allen, will you please call the roll?

Justice Pond. Yes. Yes. Justice Bruns. Yes. Yes. Justice Wilson. Yes. Yes. Justice Massengill. No. Justice Rivera-Lopez. Yes. Justice Lyons. Yes. Justice Ecke. Yes. Justice Dean. Yes. Justice Washington. Yes. Justice Koger. Yes. Justice Dennis. No. Justice Hires. Yes. Justice Rios-Stafford. Yes. Justice Lemming. No. Justice Ricker. No. No.

Item 8.1 passes. Item 9.1. Counselor, will you read this by title only?

Thank you.

An ordinance anticipating and appropriating additional revenue in the amount of $100,000 in the law enforcement grant fund for 2026. Justice Ricker? Motion to pass.

Motion to pass by Justice Ricker. I heard second by Justice Pond. Any further discussion by the body? Justice Koger?

Yes. Thank you, Judge. So to participate in SCAT, Washington County has to give the federal government personal information on certain people who are incarcerated in our jail. And we can't just hand that information over and pretend that it simply disappears in a file somewhere or that it's not used. That's just not logical. Last week, there was a discussion about SCAP, and the sheriff was asked about whether or not it was harmful. And as I recall, he said he, I don't remember his exact words, but he couldn't really answer that. But I think that he actually did answer that. The information that we submit to the Department of Justice is reviewed by the Department of Homeland Security. to determine immigration status. And I'm just not making that up. It's in the actual grant application. And that's not just some harmless administrative transaction. It makes Washington County a willing link in an immigration enforcement process that can lead to detention, family separation, and deportation. And we're not just talking about numbers in the grant application. We're talking about real human beings. We're talking about parents, spouses, workers, and members of our community. And what happens to them after we provide that information? They just want what we all want. They want a better life for themselves. They want a better life for their children and their grandchildren. I'm just not able to separate the money from the process that we use to obtain it. If Washington County chooses to participate in scat money, to take the scat money, then we must also take responsibility for what our participation helps make possible. We cannot accept a check, deny the consequences, and then claim that we have clean hands. I'm done.

Justice Rivera-Lopez. Thank you, Judge. I share similar sentiments to J.P. Koger in this. I am tasked with representing the most diverse district in the entire state of Arkansas, and I am consistently told by constituents who live in my district that participations in program like this make them less likely to call the police. it becomes a matter of public security and public safety when our people who live residents of our county do not feel secure in the institutions that they're supposed to trust in furthermore i i understand that this is disproportionately affecting members of the marshallese community it appears this year that they renegotiate their their Compact a free association with the United States those talks have stalled for the last two months They have not received a response from our federal administration I understand that we cannot litigate that here at our level But I do know that we can set a better example than what has been done at the federal level Which is neglect of people that we have to live hand in hand with every day I think that it is It is reprehensible. I understand that we're not litigating whether we participate in this process or not today, but I do think that it is not the correct thing to do to accept these funds, understanding what they do. They lead to a decay of trust and I believe a moral decay in our community. So I will not be supporting us continuing or accepting these funds. Thank you.

Justice Lyons. Thank you, Chair. I disagree with what my colleagues have said and a lot of what the citizens have provided during the citizens' comment. This ordinance basically is a mechanical means to receive the anticipated $100,000 in federal SCAP revenue, which is really just reimbursement for costs that we've already incurred in the jail. SCAP paid for county. back for correctional officer salaries, correct costs tied to individuals the Sheriff's Office has already lawfully booked, convicted, and held under separate state and local criminal proceedings. As has been stated, it is based on a felony or two misdemeanors and four more days in custody. The information being sent under this program is not just sent for the program. The facts are this information, the identification of a person's immigration status is identified at booking does not depend on SCAP. Under the secure communities fingerprint interoperability framework that has been standard nationwide since 2008, fingerprints taken at booking are automatically submitted to the FBI for criminal history and warrant checks and automatically forwarded to DHS for an immigration status check. So a routine baseline process that runs on every booking in every jail in the county, independent of whether we accept these funds or not. It's going to occur. It's going to continue to occur. The Sheriff's Office is not making a special SCAP-driven disclosure. The data is already provided to the federal systems. Additionally, state law mandates ICE Corporation for Arkansas Act 654, which is the Defense Against Criminal Illegals Act, requires every county sheriff to maintain a detention center to apply to participate in the ICE Warrant Service Officer Program, or alternatively, the 287 jail enforcement model, and it bars any Arkansas local government from adopting a sanctuary policy. Washington County signed their new 287 agreement with ICE in July. under this mandate means the county's cooperation with ICE on in custody individuals is a matter of state law. Basically not accepting this grant will not change the fact that the information about detainees, all detainees, doesn't matter who they are, what their status is, all detainees are delivered to the federal government at booking. Forfeiting this reimbursement for jail costs that has already been incurred does not align with our fiduciary responsibility that we carry to the Washington County citizens when evaluating how public funds are spent, especially when it will help offset the single largest line item in the county budget, which in 2026 was $29,915,455. Ordinance simply lets the county keep money it has already earned for costs it has already paid and restricts that money to jail operations. The county is just torturally obligated to fund regardless of how we decide to accept or not accept this $100,000 that's anticipated. I have in the past supported this. I will continue to support it in the future. I do not believe it is morally inappropriate and I encourage my colleagues to join my support of passing this ordinance. Thank you, Judge.

Justice Vaughn? Yes, I had a question for the county attorney, Mr. Lester. Let's say we've had suggestions here that the jail not disclose records of adult detainees, would our jail still be operating under complete transparency? You know, it's just my question. Would they be if we just refused to cooperate with the federal government?

I guess I don't understand what you're asking.

If they're operating, you know, if we've got transparent government. Right. And if the sheriff, you know. operating a transparent operation would it still be transparent if we just refused to disclose records on adult detainees at the county jail I mean if I guess if you would if you refuse to disclose anything it's not being transparent okay and and so also To do this, according to state law, I mean, to refuse to do this, would we still be in compliance with state law or the state constitution or the Constitution of the United States of America?

To refuse to accept this grant?

No, to refuse to disclose the records of detainees.

I don't know. I don't know what US code we're talking about. I mean, that's a question for the sheriff. My office doesn't disclose this. I'm not sure what federal code or federal law requires or if it even does requires that we provide information.

OK. I'm just asking the question.

I mean, we provide that information to the public under FOIA. Anybody can get the information who's been arrested. Now, I'm sure there's a lot of information that the sheriff's office gathers that is not subject to FOIA. We don't give out Social Security numbers and things like that.

I'm obliged. that the federal government is reimbursing us for what we've already done. It's like JP Lyons has said already. I don't believe any of those folks would be there had they not broken the law some other way. I don't think we've had people. like it's been indicated, people are not being profiled and then arrested. They're detained because they've broken some kind of law and they've been arrested and they've been brought to our county jail. And I'm for one not happy with the, such a bad light being shed on our law enforcement, whether it be city, county, state, or federal. Thank you.

DAVID BURRAGE.

Justice Bruins. DAVID BURRAGE. Would you mind if we had Sheriff Cantrell come up here and answer a couple questions? DAVID BURRAGE. Sorry to put you on the spot, sir. Is this, it's my understanding that this program is mandated if somebody has been convicted, not arrested, convicted of a felony or two misdemeanors. Is that correct or incorrect?

That's the only way they can be eligible to be submitted.

That's the only way they can be out. So not just arrested for jaywalking, but they have been arrested for twice and convicted twice of a misdemeanor and have been convicted once of a felony. And then we are, and you correct me if I'm wrong,

mandated to report that no we're not mandated but to be eligible for the grant they have to be convicted of two misdemeanors or one felony and serve four consecutive days in jail how much would this cost us a year if we didn't get this grant then a hundred thousand dollars Well, the federal government appropriates a sum of money, and then they distribute that out to the people who apply. Not every agency applies for this grant, so I don't know what, if only.

We won't know that until the end of the year.

Right, well, until the federal government determines who is eligible and what names that were submitted are actually eligible. All the names we submitted may not be eligible. But they'll sort that out at the federal level.

So the difference is two convictions or one conviction. But the convictions is the issue.

Yeah. Two misdemeanors, one felony, and four consecutive days in jail.

OK. Thank you.

Any other discussion?

Justice Rhea Stafford. Thank you, Judge. I just wanted to clarify something because I feel like I've heard maybe conflicting information. Regardless of this grant or not, are we required under state and federal law to report the immigration status of people who are in the jail or have been convicted and are in the jail outside of this grant?

We aren't required to report that, but that information is transmitted through the federal fingerprint identification system or automated fingerprint identification system to the FBI, and then they distribute it to, I'm sure, a wide variety of different entities for checks. I'm pretty sure they submit it to the terrorist list to see if there's anybody, any fingerprints submitted that someone might be on the terrorist list They submit it, those fingerprints are submitted to see if there's outstanding wants or warrants for someone across the nation. I think it's transmitted to the Homeland Security folks and maybe various other people get those fingerprints once they're submitted to the FBI.

And that's something that happens automatically for everyone who's booked into the jail and fingerprinted?

Correct.

Okay, and is that mandated under federal law?

Yes, everybody comes in, gets fingerprinted, and all the felonies that come in get DNA samples. Those are all required.

Okay, thank you. Justice Coger?

Yes, thank you, Judge. Sheriff Cantrell, do you remember, I think it was last year when I was meeting with you, and we had several community people there, and we were in the annex at your office, and one of the things that came up, well, we were there to ask you not to participate in SCAP, but one of the things that came up was that you used some SCAP money to buy flashlights.

Is that correct? That was one of the expenditures from one of the previous grants is to buy flashlights. all the detention officers, flashlights, so that if the power goes out, the generator doesn't pick up, that they're not in total darkness.

Okay. So for the public and people listening at home, I just want to say that this grant is completely voluntary. We choose whether or not to do it and we don't have to do it. So all this other stuff that's mandated, that is not, SCAP is not mandated. Thank you.

Justice Hickey?

Thank you, Judge. I just wanted to make things clear that was brought up that if accepting this money was harmful And if you have any questions about what exactly was said, I invite you to go to YouTube because all of our meetings are on YouTube. That's what makes Washington County number one, the most transparent county in the state. And at about a minute and 45 seconds, 47 seconds, we had this exchange because it was stated that this is harmful. Accepting this grant would be harmful. So I was asking you that question. I just wanted to make that clear. And also, we made it clear that it's our constitutional duty to provide citizens public safety for all citizens. I don't care who you are. You live in the community. we are responsible to provide public safety for all. And we had that exchange, and that's all it was. So I just wanted to make that clear. If anybody wants to know, or if they take it out of context, we'll know immediately what was said because it's on YouTube. And it's there for everybody to know. I support this grant because those flashlights that you received in years past were not just flashlights. They were highly specialized flashlights. They're very costly flashlights, and it helps offset our costs, your costs, for things that you need. And if the federal government wants to give us this money to help offset our costs, I'm all for it. But I think this is a very interesting point of history. This act, I believe back in 1994, was the violent criminal act law that was signed into law by President Bill Clinton. He's the one who started it. And then, of course, it's evolved into the SCAP grant or a SCAP program. And now they are offering this money to us because they realize the burden that this place is on on the county. And that's why this grant is offered. So anyway, I want to commend you on the work that you do and your team and let you know that I'm supporting you in accepting this grant. Thank you, sir.

JUSTICE GINSBURG. Thank you, Judge.

We have debated this grant for many years now. Every year this comes up. Every year I voted against it. And the reason I voted against it is because this, my main problem with it, because it doesn't just apply to felony convictions. It applies to folks who have been convicted of two misdemeanors, who've never been convicted of a felony at all. And I think that there's a significant portion of our population who has a problem with that. You see polling, 80% of people support cracking down on people who've been convicted of felonies, especially violent felonies. murder, rape, abusing children, things like that. Those things are fortunately rare. They happen, which is sad. But they're more rare than other kinds of crime. What we've heard is, and I want to set expectations with the public who are opposed to this as well as I am, unfortunately voting against this isn't going to stop other programs that require the county to report this information to state and federal authorities. That will, it sounds like, still continue to happen regardless of whether this grant goes through or doesn't go through under other programs, other laws that are in place. But I'm going to be voting against this yet again. Justice Lyons.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sheriff, I think we've had this conversation before. Given our situation in the jail, how much of what you report are due to two misdemeanors staying for four consecutive days or more? Or is it mostly felonies that we're seeing? Because the misdemeanors with our situation, I believe our discussions has been we don't keep them in the jail for four consecutive days in most cases. Is that correct?

Yeah, that's the normal procedure is a misdemeanor doesn't stay in jail very long. We'll release those folks to community service and have them work on Saturdays. to work off their sentence. The judges know, the district judges know that we have very little room for committed misdemeanors, so not very many of them get sent to jail to serve a commitment. So to get four days on a misdemeanor commitment's gonna have to be a pretty serious misdemeanor.

So given our jail overcrowding and we release those misdemeanors, before the four consecutive days, the majority of those that are included are those that are convicted of felonies.

I'd say that the majority are felons.

Thank you, sir.

Further discussion by the board? If not, public comments on item 9.1.

Hi everyone, I'm Scarlett, I live in Fayetteville. I just came across some data when researching this subject. From 2014 to 2025, the GDP of Springdale went from $18 million to about $36 million.

I'm so sorry to interrupt you. Will you move that mic down a little closer? Thank you. We have some auditory issues up here.

Did everyone hear that first part? Okay. Okay. In that same amount of time, the market cap of Tyson grew from $5 billion to $25 billion. One of the things that happened during those 11 years is that 160,000 immigrant visas were provided to Tyson because of the workers in the poultry industry. And that was not just in Arkansas, that's across the US. So I cannot sit here and believe that Americans are going to enjoy the fruits and the wealth created by immigrant labor, and then not treat immigrants with dignity and respect and human rights and equality, just like everybody else. Now, when immigrants come to work in this country, like, I don't know if you all know the history of immigration in this country, but everybody's from somewhere else. Now, are we going to discriminate against immigrants because they come from brown countries, or are we going to treat immigrants with respect from everywhere, because they all create wealth? recent immigration, all immigration was based on what a company corporation has needs for, whether it was the railroads, whether it was the factories in the 1800s, whether it's agriculture. So having cooperation with an agency that right now is a rogue agency. They are under investigation for human rights violations. There are allegations of women and girls being sexually assaulted by the same officers that claim to be federal law enforcement. There are elderly people who don't have access to their medication that are dying in ICE detention facilities. And it's apparent to most people with ICE that this is just a way to funnel taxpayer dollars into the private prison system and the ICE contractors that donated to the current administration. A little bit of research will back up everything that I just said. I voted for Sheriff Cantrell. I've met him, not directly, but been around him. I think that the Washington County Sheriff's Office is here to provide protection to residents of Washington County. Last I checked, Springdale was part of Washington County.

Thank you, ma'am. Your time has expired. Thank you. Appreciate you. Public comments.

Thank you.

Hi, Andela Hines, District 7. I first of all wanted to bring up that we were talking about covering part of the budget. It's important to know that that is 1 third of 1% of the Sheriff's Office budget. $100,000 when it comes to the Sheriff's Office budget, 1 third of 1%. Now, I also want to mention that someone mentioned making citizens safer. I am a citizen. But what I'm going to tell you here is that this does not make me safe. This erodes community trust, because despite what we think the intent is in recuperating some funds, People in this community are not listening all of this discussion. They're not listening to all of the nuances and the arguments that we're having here tonight. All they know is that Washington County is willing to sell your data or treat you differently because of your status. This makes me less safe. I'm married to an immigrant. 14 years ago, I met my husband. Seven years later, we got married. This entire time, we have been less and less safe. the more and more we have been together because his status has never been enough and he's done everything quote unquote the right way and every single time it's not enough i'm less likely to call the police he's less likely to call the police if i am hit by a car out here i hope an undocumented immigrant is feels safe enough to call the police we are not safe He and I in this community and the way that we want to be. We've not gone home despite family emergencies. And when I say home, I say his home because we've been advised it's not safe for us to travel, but he's got his documentation, but it's not enough. There are places in this county that he will not go because it's not enough. It's not safe enough for him. We were lucky enough to actually find community. We went to a World Cup game. And we got tickets to go celebrate with his country. And we found our family and our community there because we're not able to go home to his family. And what started out as a phenomenal experience, as we were leaving, we were out the gates, and I realized when we briefly celebrated a goal that got called back for offsides, his wallet fell out of my pocket. At that point, we were so far away, we couldn't get back into the stadium. I was not worried about the credit cards. At that moment, for 45 minutes, he was undocumented. And we had to go beg police officers to let us back into the facility. And I sat there thinking how hard I tried to keep him safe in this community, and I did not feel safe. asking somebody to help us find his wallet. Luckily, we were able to find the wallet. We're back here, but we were two flights away and we were not safe. And that's the reality that people face in this community every single day.

Thank you, ma'am. Public comments.

Hi, Basil Branham from District 11 again. I appreciated Sheriff Cantrell mentioning that they try to make sure that people who are charged with and convicted of misdemeanors don't spend more than four days in jail, but wouldn't that also require them to pay some form of bond or charge or fee of some sort? And we all are very aware of the fact that there's a lot of... low-income individuals who are getting stuck in the jails just because they can't afford to pay bail and i'm concerned that that's going to continue to affect people who are low income who might have been again i'm going to use the analogy of you get picked up because you stole some food you get charged with and convicted of a misdemeanor because you stole some food you do it again that's your second misdemeanor and say you don't have enough money or bail or something doesn't work and you can't get out of jail within four days, you're on the list. So even if the worst thing you ever did was steal ramen from a gas station, you could still be penalized in a way that could kill you. For many immigrants in our communities, returning home is not safe. Returning home means going back to someplace that's either ecologically safe or socially unsafe. For a lot of immigrants, I'm queer. A lot of my immigrant friends are also queer and left their spaces because of unsafety due to their identity. And so if they're having to make difficult choices that might lead them to have a misdemeanor, like having to steal food because they're starving, I want us to be considering the fact that not everyone has enough money to not commit crimes. There's an issue of poverty here, of deep poverty. And to just say, oh, that's too small of a population to care about is really callous and I think does not represent good Christ-like manners. I just want to remind everyone that, unfortunately, that is where we're still at in the country. And in Arkansas, we have the highest rate of child hunger. I work for a child horticulture and nutrition education program. And I can tell you firsthand experience, most people do not have the food that they need. More people than we realize. So please also remember that no matter what money we get out of this, you get compensated for it. That money isn't worth what we're continuing to be connected to. Even if the state says this is mandated, you have to do it, okay, we have to do it. But we don't have to opt into programs that are optional. and continue to align ourselves with this sort of environment and continue to say, no, we endorse doing this to our community. We endorse terrorizing queer immigrants. We endorse terrorizing young immigrants who are just trying to restart their lives. So I would encourage you.

Thank you, ma'am. Time's expired. Public comments.

My name is Ralph Lamping. I live in District 15. And I feel that many of us do not trust the ICE agency. We feel it's like a rogue agency. And I understand the law. It requires us to cooperate with them. But the law does not require us to accept the money. When you accept money for something like that, you're approving, there's an element of approving their behavior, and I do not want our county to take on the bad karma of accepting money from an agency such as this. Thank you.

Thank you.

Laura Villegas, 5005 Bonita Place, Springdale. I just want to point out that the names on the list that are submitted to DHS and ICE are put under increased scrutiny because they're coming under their eyes through this particular program, not just under, for example, fingerprints that you say are mandatory and sent. But this is a smaller list, and they're coming under increased scrutiny by agencies that are eager to arrest and detain and feed the private prisons, eager to make quotas of arresting, detaining, and deporting immigrants. So there are also a number that are not deemed... Qualified to be you know for their reimbursement, but they're also put under increased scrutiny and This has to be harmful.

Thank you Thank you public comments We have 14 seconds left in our 12-minute period I have a motion to suspend the rules and add three minutes by Justice Pons, second by Justice Coker. All those in favor?

Thank you very much for the extension. My name is Sally Gannon. I talked a minute before. I'm from Washington County, and this whole having law enforcement that is guaranteed immunity is not okay. I would never feel safe riding handcuffed in a car with somebody that had... guaranteed immunity and none of you should either or you're one of them and just as bad like that's I don't see how any of you could ever think that it's okay to give guaranteed immunity to people that have less training than anybody on our sheriff's department like that's pretty disgusting to me and I have a question for our sheriff actually I want to know so do we not get paid for all the detainees that we are housing for ICE anyway

Ma'am, your comments are just public comments.

Oh, we can't ask a question, but you guys can ask questions?

You can address the quorum court. This is what this time's meant for.

Okay. Well, I'm sorry I didn't understand. Like I said earlier, it's my first time to come here. Thank you. Okay.

Thank you. With that, we're going to take up the question. This is a motion to pass item 9.1, a motion made by Justice Ricker, second by Justice Pond. Mr. Allen, will you please call the roll?

Justice Pond. Yes. Justice Bruns. Yes. Justice Wilson. Yes. Justice Massengill? Yes. Yes. Justice Rivera-Lopez? No, sir. No. Justice Lyons? Yes, sir. Yes. Justice Ecke? Yes. Yes. Justice Dean? Yes. Yes. Justice Washington? No. No. Justice Coger? No. No. Justice Dennis? Yes. Yes. Justice Hiers? No. No. Justice Rios Stafford? No. No. Justice Lemming? Yes. Yes. Justice Ricker? Yes. Yes.

That item passes. Item 10.1. Counselor, you read that by title only.

An emergency ordinance amending ordinance number 2025-74, the annual appropriation ordinance establishing the Washington County annual budget for the fiscal and calendar year 2026 to amend article four budget controls to restrict the use of appropriated capital outlay funds to the project or purpose for which the appropriated for which appropriated to require quorum court approval for any other use to apply this restriction to all capital outlay appropriations currently outstanding, declaring an emergency and for other purposes.

Justice Lyons, I accidentally deleted the microphone. Will you queue up again? Did you have your microphone queued? Justice Lyons.

Thank you, Chair. So Arkansas Code 141433-1102-B2BII requires the county judge before approving any voucher for the payment of county funds to determine that expenditures is in compliance with the purpose for which the funds are appropriated. Additionally, Arkansas Code Title 14-20-106 indicates that no county court or agent of any county shall make any contract on behalf of the county unless an appropriation has been previously made, therefore, and is wholly or in part unexpended. In no event shall any county court or agent any county make any contract in excess of any appropriation made and the amount of the contract should be limited to the amount of the appropriation made by the county quorum court we we had approval of funds and a signature of a contract with paragon architecture for architectural services in the 2026 budget you will find no appropriation for architectural services The funds, my understanding, the funds that are being used for this were appropriated based on the justification to repair storm damage to our buildings. That was done, evidently there was some left over. Again, that entire amount, the justification, the appropriation from my point of view in reading these laws and what I believe we appropriate based on the justification was for repairing of, storm damage to our buildings. And that's what it should have been used for, in my opinion, unless it came back and modified the justification to get appropriation specifically to do architectural design. It was not done. Therefore, I decided to offer this amendment to our budget, which I plan to roll over into next year's budget as well, which basically stipulates that for the capital outlay funds, the justification presented during the budget for those funds is what that money is appropriated for. That is what that money is used for and all that that money can be used for unless a new justification comes back to the quorum cut and give us our opportunity to do our job in the appropriation of funds to appropriate money for a different reason. And that's basically what this amendment does and goes through. And I move that we pass this amendment.

I have a motion to pass by Justice Lyons, second by Justice Secchi. If there's further discussion amongst the body.

Justice Rios-Stafford. Thank you, Judge. Well, I wanted to thank JP Lyons for bringing this forward. I'll be voting in favor of this. I agree with this. I think the one thing, and I appreciate your explanation of it, I think the one piece of context that is missing that we may need to give the public is this all came forward after getting some concerned letters from our judges and some of our county elected officials about some changes in construction going on in the courthouse and in various county buildings that they felt like maybe didn't necessarily match the intention of the funds that have been appropriated by this quorum court during our annual budget process. And so I feel this just adds some additional controls to that, which is completely within our right as a quorum court. And so I'll be supporting this.

Further discussion? Public comments on item 10.1? Seeing none, Mr. Allen, will you please call the roll? This is on a motion to pass, item 10.1, motion by Justice Lyons, second by Justice Ecke. I'm sorry, I forgot for a minute. There you go.

Justice Bruns. Yes. Yes. Justice Wilson. Yes. Yes. Justice Massengill. Yes. Yes. Justice Rivera-Lopez. Yes. Yes. Justice Lyons. Yes. Yes. Justice Ecke? Yes. Yes. Justice Dean? Yes. Yes. Justice Washington? Yes. Yes. Justice Coker? Yes. Yes. Justice Dennis? Yes. Yes. Justice Hiers? Yes. Yes. Justice Rios-Stafford? Yes. Yes. Justice Lemming? Yes. Yes. Justice Ricker? Yes. Yes.

Yes. That item passes. Next item up, items 11 through 15 are on the consent agenda. Counselor, will you read those by title only?

Item 11 is an ordinance appropriating professional development recognition payments. Item 12 is an ordinance appropriating $22,950 to the core import budget for 2026. Item 13 is an ordinance anticipating and appropriating additional grant revenue in the Drug Court Grant Fund for 2026. Item 14 is an ordinance recognizing additional revenue in the amount of $55,222.26 and appropriating $55,222.26 from the unappropriated reserves in the general fund to the line item in the sheriff's budget for 2026. Item 15 is an ordinance recognizing additional revenue in the amount of $278,908.35 and appropriating $278,908.35 from unappropriated reserves in the general fund to the jail fund to various line items in in the sheriff and jail budgets for 2026. I have a motion to pass.

I have a motion to pass the consent agenda by Justice Ricker, second by Justice Lyons. Any further discussion on the consent agenda? Any public comments on any items on the consent agenda? Seeing none, oh, I'm sorry.

Justice Burns? Thanks, sir. Is this where you want me to go? OK, thank you, . I appreciate that. This $22,950, was that on the budget, in the budget meeting? OK, I missed that. Sorry, what's that forward? What was it forward?

Late raising raising that building. Raising the building out there in your district and Sonora.

I got you OK. I got you thank you.

We're good now? Yes, sir. Public comments on the consent agenda? Seeing none, we'll take up the consent agenda. I have a motion to pass by Justice Ricker, second by Justice Lyons. Mr. Allen, will you call the roll?

Justice Pond? Yes. Justice Bruns? Yes. Justice Wilson? Yes. Justice Massengill? Yes. Justice Rivera-Lopez? Yes. Yes, Justice Lyons. Yes, Justice Eche. Yes, Justice Dean. Yes, Justice Washington. Yes, Justice Coger. Yes, Justice Dennis. Yes, Justice Hires. Yes, Justice Rios-Stafford. Yes, Justice Lemming. Yes, Justice Ricker. Yes.

The consent agenda passes. The committee reports are in your packet